37
Views
13
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Pages 1-68 | Published online: 18 May 2016

NOTES

  • Ancient Monuments Laboratory, Department of the Environment.
  • Professor of Archaeometallurgy, Institute of Archaeology, University of London.
  • V.C.H. Wills., 11 (1955), 27–30.
  • The excavation was supported by the Department of the Environment through the Wiltshire Archaeological Committee. The excavator (J.H.) is grateful to the officers of both bodies (in particular Christopher Young and Desmond Bonney) for support given during the excavation. He also thanks the Libraries and Museums Department of the Wiltshire County Council, and Bill Ford and Mike Corfield, for help during the excavation and for the supply of materials and conservation work on the finds on its completion. Further help and advice at various stages has been generously given by Henry Cleere and David Crossley. Supervisory assistance was provided by Fiona Cameron, David Nicholson and Keith Ray. Plans and sections were drawn by J.H. and by Claudia Haslam; the finds were drawn by Nick Griffiths.
  • Finds and excavation records are deposited in Devizes Museum.
  • P. Barker, ‘Some aspects of the excavation of timber buildings’, World Archaeology, 1, no. 2 (1969), 233.
  • M. Biddle and B. Kjolbye-Biddle, ‘Metres, areas and robbing’, World Archaeology, 1, no. 2 (1969), 212.
  • This will be described elsewhere.
  • H. Cleere, ‘Cyclical operations at Roman bloomeries’, Bull. Historical Metallurgy Group, 5, no. 2 (1971), 74–75
  • Ibid.
  • These are deposited with the excavation records in Devizes Museum.
  • This clay appears to contrast visually with the dull brown colour of the natural Clay-with-Flints, though the analysis of a sample of furnace lining (Section 2 below) shows it to have been made from this local clay. The possibility remains that two sources of clay were utilized, a non-local clay probably without chalk being used for some of the furnace linings.
  • This corresponds well with the model deduced from practical experiments in bowl furnaces of this type and described by Tylecote (R. F. Tylecote, Metallurgy in Archaeology (1962), 185–86). The use of clay relinings within iron-smelting furnaces of this type has been recorded from Iron Age and Roman examples (A. Fox, ‘Excavations at Kestor’, Trans. Devonshire Assoc., 86 (1954), 21–62; Tylecote, ibid., 228; D. A. Jackson and T. M. Ambrose, ‘Excavation at Wakerley, Northants. 1972–75’, Britannia, 9 (1978), 151–66).
  • This is demonstrated particularly well in the colour slides taken at all stages of excavation of the furnaces (see note 11, above).
  • Microscopical examination by Justine Baylev at the Ancient Monuments Laboratory showed this material to have had a significant content of flint, the rest comprising some quartz sand, some clay in lumps or aggregates, and finely divided charcoal. Part of the clay component was reduced-fired, but much was hardly heated at all. It seems probable that the flint, in particular, was chosen (and even crushed) and incorporated to improve the refractory properties of the furnace linings.
  • The term ‘dome’ in this context means a shell, self-supporting when fired, with a hole at the top, which covers the furnace like a matching inverted bowl.
  • Observations on present-day primitive furnaces and on the firing of experimental examples have shown that such furnaces will only work if the top hole is not too large, and if they are built with a certain minimum ratio of height to diameter.
  • Tylecote, op. cit. note 13, 201; H. Cleere, ‘The classification of early iron-smelting furnaces’, Antiq. Jnl, 52 (1972), 8–15.
  • In Roman furnaces, where the bloom and furnace bottom were removed from the front, the frontal arch was always the most vulnerable part of the furnace, and often rebuilt (cf. Jackson and Ambrose, op. cit. note 13). Although in this furnace at Ramsbury the bloom and furnace bottom were probably removed after each firing from the top aperture, this area was restructured twice (see below, p. 26).
  • See comments in note 19 above.
  • Tylecote, op. cit. note 13, 241, 254, 266; Cleere, op. cit. note 18, 20.
  • I am grateful to Caroline Washbourne who has kindly discussed this material with me.
  • This contrasts with the end date of the late 7th-early 8th century for this pottery from Saxon Southampton and southern Hampshire (P. E. Holdsworth, ‘Saxon Southampton, a new review’, Medieval Archaeol., 20 (1976), 51). Further groups from Wiltshire of the same general type, one from Ogbourne St George, only 7 km NW. of Ramsbury, have been described by Fowler (P. J. Fowler, ‘Two finds of Saxon domestic pottery in Wiltshire’, Wiltshire Archaeol. Mag., 61 (1966), 31–37). The Swindon finds are to be published by Caroline Washbourne.
  • M. Biddle, ‘The excavation of a Motte and Bailey Castle at Therfield, Hertfordshire’, J. Brit. Archaeol. Assoc., 27 (1964), 82. See also J. Parkhouse, ‘The Dorestadt Quernstones’, Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek, 26 (1976), 181–89.
  • B. Almgren, Bronsnycklar och Djurornamentik (1955), tables 1–111 and plates.
  • Ibid., 106, fig. 7–8, E25, E33 and E34, table 11, G6; Archaeologia, 89 (1943), 66, figs. 17, 2, and 5.
  • Almgren, op. cit. note 25, 28; D. M. Wilson, Anglo-Saxon Ornamental Metalwork 700–1100 in the British Museum (London, 1964), 57.
  • Ibid., 27–29, 62–63.
  • Records of Buckinghamshire, XX, pt. 2 (1976), 247–48, fig. 39, 1, pl. v, lower left.
  • E. Bakka, ‘Some English decorated metal objects found in Norwegian Viking graves’, Årbok for Universitetet i Bergen, Hum. Ser. (1963), 1, 40, figs. 38–39; Archaeologia, 97 (1959), 77, fig. 10, 2.
  • Archaeologia, 89 (1943), 57, fig. 11, 1,9, 10 and 14.
  • Ibid., fig. 11, 5 and 6–12.
  • Report of the Colchester and Essex Museum 1947/8, 27, pl. IX, 5.
  • Antiq. Jnl, XXLIX (1969), fig. 3, 1.
  • Proc. Cambridge Antiq. Soc., i.xiv (1973), 95, fig. 18, 8.
  • Archaeologia, 89 (1943), fig. 11, 2.
  • Berkshire Archaeol. Jnl, 61 (1963–64), 28–36.
  • Antiq. Jnl, XXII (1942), 221, fig. 32; Archaeol. Jnl, CXIX (1962), 186–87.
  • Trans. Hist. Soc. Lancashire and Cheshire, 112 (1960), 12, fig. 4c.
  • Wilson, op. cit. note 27, pl. XVII, 12.
  • In the Yorkshire Museum, York.
  • K. Eldjarn, Kuml og Haug fé (1956), 337, fig. 155; H. Arbman, Birka, 1 (1940), taf. 86, 4 and taf. 87, 2.
  • Trans. Hist. Soc. Lancashire and Cheshire, 112 (1960), fig. 4, 6.
  • Arbman, op. cit. note 42, taf. 86, 6.
  • T. Capelle, Der Metallschmuck von Haithabu (1968), taf. 24, 3–5.
  • Ibid, taf. 24, 4.
  • H. Jankuhn, Die Ausgrabungen in Haithabu (1943), 114, abb. 43b; Capelle, op. cit. note 45, 75, taf. 24, 3–5.
  • P. Rahtz, The Saxon and medieval palaces at Cheddar (B.A.R. British series 65, 1979), fig. 95, 90.
  • B. Cunliffe, Excavations at Portchester Castle. 11, Saxon (1975), 216, fig. 136, 52; Medieval Archaeol., 8 (1964), 62, fig. 17, 1.
  • R. G. Collingwood and I. Richmond, The Archaeology of Roman Britain (1969), pl. XX, V; J. Petersen, Vikingetidens Redskaper (1951), fig. 61, 5; J. Graham-Campbell and D. Kidd, The Vikings (1980), fig. 71.
  • A. C. C. Brodribb et al., Excavations at Shakenoak, in (1972), fig. 42, 192; B. Faussett, Inventorium Sepulchrale (1856), pl. XV, 2); D. M. Wilson (ed.), The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England (1976), 264, fig. 6, 6.
  • Cf. W. H. Manning, A catalogue of Romano-British ironwork in the Museum of Antiquities, Newcastle upon Tyne (1976); fig. 14, 51
  • R. E. M. Wheeler, London and the Vikings (1927), fig. 1, 15.
  • P. V. Addyman, ‘Archaeology and Anglo-Saxon Society’, with a note by I. H. Goodall on iron tools, Problems in Economic and Social Archaeology, ed. G. de G. Sieveking, I. H. Longworth and K. E. Wilson (1976), 319–20.
  • Brodribb, op. cit. note 51, fig. 52, 315.
  • R. A. Hall (ed.), Viking Age York and the North (C.B.A. Research Report, No. 27, 1978), fig. 26, 3 and 4.
  • M. Claus, W. Haarnagel and K. Raddatz, Studien zur europäischen Vor- und Frühgeschichte (1968), 148, fig. 2, g; Wilson, op. cit. note 51, 257, fig. 6, 2g.
  • Petersen, op. cit. note 50, fig. 116.
  • A. C. C. Brodribb et al., Excavations at Shakenoak, IV (1973), fig. 59, 416.
  • Ibid., fig. 59, 409–12.
  • Archaeol. Cantiana, LXX (1956), 132, fig. 13, 2.
  • T. C. Lethbridge, A Cemetery at Shudy Camps, Cambridgeshire (1936), 23, fig. 11.
  • Petersen, op. cit. note 50, 419–21, fig. 223; Graham-Campbell and Kidd, op. cit. note 50, 193, item 42.
  • Brodribb, op. cit. note 51, 90, fig. 39, 166.
  • R. Bruce-Mitford, The Sutton Hoo Ship-burial, 1 (1975), 121, fig. 80.
  • Ibid., fig. 27g.
  • G. Baldwin Brown, The Arts in Early England, III (1915), 150, pl. XI, 6.
  • B. Hope-Taylor, Yeavering. An Anglo-British centre of early Northumbria (Department of the Environment Archaeological Reports No. 7, 1977), 193, fig. 91.
  • S. E. West, ‘Excavations at Cox Lane (1958) and at the Town Defences, Shire Hall Yard, Ipswich (1959)’, Proc. Suffolk Inst. Archaeol., XXIX (1963), 274, fig. 54, 16.
  • P. V. Addyman and D. H. Hill, ‘Saxon Southampton: a review of the evidence, part 2’, Proc. Hampshire Field Club, XXVI (1969), 65, fig. 24, 5.
  • Cunliffe, op. cit. note 49, 197, fig. 130, 8.
  • Ibid., 88–89.
  • Manning, op. cit. note 52, fig. 22, 131, 135 and 137.
  • Yorkshire Archaeol. Jnl, 34 (1939), 273–81.
  • K. Lamm, Jnl Hist. Metallurgy Soc., 7 (2) (1973), 7.
  • Tylecote, op. cit. note 13, 55, table 7.
  • G. Beresford, The medieval clay-land village (Society for Medieval Archaeology, Monograph No. 6, 1975), 81.
  • Tylecote, op. cit. note 13, 180 and table 64. See also Section 8.
  • J. Bourdillon and J. Coy, ‘The animal bones’, P. Holdsworth, Excavations at Melbourne Street, Southampton, 1971–76 (London, C.B.A. Research Report No. 33, 1980), 79–121.
  • A. von den Driesch, Das Vermessen von Tierknochen aus vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Siedlungen (University of Munich, 1976).
  • Available from S.A.R.C., 25A Oxford Street, Southampton.
  • N. J. L. Griffith, The animal bones from Knight's Enham, Andover (Report to the Ancient Monuments Board Laboratory, no. 2430, 1976).
  • J. Coy, ‘The role of wild fauna in urban economies in Wessex’, Environmental archaeology in the urban context, eds H. Kenward and A. Hall (C.B.A., forthcoming).
  • The only remains of wild animals were red deer (4 fragments), roe deer (2 fragments), badger (1 fragment) and peregrine falcon (1 fragment).
  • H. Reichstein und M. Tiessen, ‘Materialen zur Kenntnis der Haustiere Haithabus’, Berichte über die Ausgrabungen in Haithabu, 7 (1974), 9–101.
  • R. A. Harcourt, ‘The animal bones’, G.J. Wainwright, Gussage All Saints, Dorset (London, DoE, 1979), 153.
  • J. A. Boessneck, ‘Die Tierknochenfunde aus dem keltischen Oppidum von Manching’, Die Ausgrabungen in Manching, 6 (Wiesbaden, 1971), 201.
  • Using Joest's method described by K. H. Habermehl, Die Alterbestimmung bei Haustieren, Pelztieren, u. beim jagdbaren Wild (1961).
  • For example the All Canning's Cross skull: P. L. Armitage and J. Clutton-Brock, Jnl Archaeol. Science, 3 (1976), 333
  • Ibid., 331.
  • T. Hatting, ‘The influence of castration on sheep horns’, Archaeozoological Studies, ed. A. T. Clason (1975), 345–51
  • R. A. Harcourt, Jnl Archaeol. Science, 1 (1974), 151–75.
  • Tooth eruption and wear data are taken from Habermehl's work, op. cit. note 88.
  • For a detailed discussion of Saxon geese, see Bourdillon and Coy, op. cit. note 79.
  • Coy, op. cit. note 83.
  • Miss Jane Hassall excavated these from levels which mostly produced 11th and 12th-century pottery, but with an admixture of residual material which makes the dating of the beaver bones far from sure: T. C. Darvill and J. P. Coy, Proc. Somerset Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Soc. (forthcoming).
  • P. E. Damon, A. Long and E. I. Wallick, ‘Dendrochronological calibration of the carbon-14 time scale’, Proc. Eighth International Conference on Radiocarbon dating, 1972.
  • I am grateful to Bernard Philips for examining this material and giving me the benefit of his advice.
  • The coins, of c. A.D. 268–70, and c. 307 are in the possession of Mr Blunt. I am very grateful to him for this information.
  • H. J. Osborne-White, The Geology of the Country around Marlborough (Mem. Geol. Surv. Eng. & Wales, 1925), 80.
  • G. W. Lamplugh, The Geology of the country south and east of Devizes (Mem. Geol. Surv. Eng. & Wales, 1905), 12. The deposits at Seend were quarried both in the Roman period and more recently (V.C.H. Wilts., IV (1955) 250–52). Recent pits at NGR ST 937610 and ST 941611 show these outcrops clearly.
  • W. J. Arkell, ‘The Upper Oxford Clay at Purton, Wilts., and the zones of the Lower Oxfordian’, Geol. Mag., LXXVII, no. 3 (1941), 161–72; W. J. Arkell, The Geology of the Country around Weymouth, Swanage, Corfe and Lulworth (Mem. Geol. Surv. Eng. & Wales, 1947), 34.
  • Tylecote, op. cit. note 13, 261–64.
  • Parkhouse, op. cit. note 24, 187 and fig. 7.
  • J. Parkhouse, ‘Anglo-Saxon commercial connections with the continent with special reference to… basalt quernstones…’ (unpublished M.A. thesis, Dept of Archaeology, Univ. of Manchester, 1977). I am grateful to Mr Parkhouse for allowing me to read his thesis.
  • Addyman and Hill, op. cit. note 70, 81.
  • A. and C. Fox, ‘Wansdvke reconsidered’, Archaeol. Jnl, 115 (1960), 16–18, 42.
  • R. R. Darlington, ‘Introduction to the Wiltshire Domesday’, V.C.H. Wilts., 11 (1955), 42–112.
  • OG and P on Fig. 25.
  • Darlington, op. cit. note 107, 62; H. C. Brentnall, ‘The origins of the parish of Preshute’, Wiltshire Archaeol. Mag., 53 (1950), 295–310. See however comments about the possible Roman origin of Aldbourne parish below.
  • M on Fig. 25. Land in both Mildenhall and Bedwyn was given by Cynewulf, king of the West Saxons, to his thegn Bica, between 757 and 786 (H. P. R. Finberg, The early charters of Wessex (1964), 71).
  • B. W. Cunliffe, Iron Age Communities in Britain (1974), 262, fig. 13, 23; F. K. Annable, ‘A bronze military mount from Folly Farm’, Wiltshire Archaeol. Mag., 70/71 (1975–76), 126–27.
  • B. W. Cunliffe, ‘Iron Age and Roman periods’, V.C.H. Wilts., 1, ii (1973), 440.
  • F. K. Annable,’ A late bronze buckle fragment from Cunetio’, Wiltshire Archaeol. Mag., 70/71 (1975–76), 128.
  • Cunliffe, op. cit. note 112, 448.
  • R. Reece, ‘From Corinium to Cirencester—models and misconceptions’, Studies in the archaeology and history of Cirencester, ed. A. McWhirr (B.A.R. British series 30, 1976), 70–71.
  • Cunliffe, op. cit. note 112, 455–57.
  • M. Biddle, ‘Winchester, the development of an early capital’, Vor- und Früh-formen der europäischen Stadt im Mittelalter, ed. H. Jankuhn, W. Schlesinger and H. Steuer (1973), 239.
  • See comments and further references in T. Dickinson, ‘British Antiquity’, Archaeol. Jnl, 134 (1977), 407–408 and 135 (1978), 339–40.
  • Annable, op. cit. note 113, 127–29.
  • M. Gelling Place-Names of Berkshire (English Place-Name Society, vols XLIX-LI, 1973), 800–12.
  • For Roman remains, see V.C.H. Wilts., 1, I (1957), 22–23; for later discoveries: Wilts. Co. Council Sites and Monuments Record; belt buckle: V.C.H. Wilts., 1, ii (1973), 462; deserted medieval tillage: W.C.C. Sites and Monuments Record; placename: The Place-Names of Wiltshire, ed. J. E. B. Gover, A. Mawer and F. M. Stenton (English Place-Name Society, vol. XVI, 1970), 293.
  • Aninteresting parallel is the association on another nearby hilltop site (Round Hill Down, Ogbourne St George—RHD on Fig. 25) of the remains of a Roman building or settlement (WCC Sites and Monuments Record) and Saxon chaff tempered pottery (Fowler, op. cit. note 23, 31–32).
  • C. J. Gingell, ‘The excavation of an early Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Collingbourne Ducis’, Wiltshire Archaeol. Mag., 70–71 (1975–76), 93–98.
  • See Section 7.
  • For instance the shift from Cambridge to Chesterton, Great Casterton (Rutland) to Hambleton (C. Pythian-Adams, ‘Rutland reconsidered’, Mercian Studies, ed. A. Dornier (1977), 75), Caistor-by-Norwich to Thorpe, near Norwich (J. Campbell, ‘Norwich’, Historic Towns Atlas, ed. M. Lobel, vol. 2 (1975), 2 and note 18), and, nearer to hand, Ilchester (Somerset) to Somerton.
  • Similar survivals of Roman and earlier estates into the Saxon and later periods occur in Wiltshire for instance at Bradford-on-Avon and Westbury (J. Haslam, ‘Saxon Towns in Wiltshire’, The Development of Anglo-Saxon Towns in Southern England, ed. J. Haslam (forthcoming)) and in several instances around Cirencester (T. Slater, ‘The town and its region in the Anglo-Saxon and medieval periods’ in McWhirr (ed.), op. cit. note 115, 86–89). Several of these were the centres of early Hundreds, the sites of both Iron Age hillforts and early minster churches, and situated on royal estates. See other examples cited in P. J. Fowler, ‘Agriculture and rural settlement’, Wilson (ed.), op. cit. note 51, 31–44.
  • O. G. S. Crawford, ‘The Anglo-Saxon bounds of Bedwyn and Burbage’, Wiltshire Archaeol. Mag., 41 (1932), 282–92.
  • Ibid., 292–97.
  • H. C. Brentnall, ‘Bedwyn in the 10th century’, Wiltshire Archaeol. Mag., 52 (1948), 363.
  • H. Cam, ‘Mancrium cum Hundredo: the Hundred and the Hundredal manor’ (1932), reprinted in Liberties and Communities in Medieval England (1944), 68 and note 14.
  • F. M. Stenton, The early history of Abingdon Abbey (1913), 17–18.
  • Ibid., 18; Gelling, op. cit. note 120, 841. A contrary opinion was given by Gover, Mawer and Stenton (op. cit. note 121, 335), who stated that ‘this story does not belong to the older stratum of Abingdon tradition, and has no historical value'. It is quite clear, however, that Stenton himself (op. cit. note 130, 18) regarded the outlines of the story as reflecting historical realities.
  • Fox and Fox, op. cit. note 106, 18–20.
  • Cunliffe, op. cit. note 112, 431, 436.
  • Gelling, op. cit. note 120, 809; D. J. Bonney, ‘Early boundaries in Wessex’, Archaeology and the Landscape, ed. P.J. Fowler (1972), 168–86. Further instances have been reviewed by Fowler (op. cit. note 23, 36–44). That the Bedwyn estate outlined in Fig. 25 more or less corresponds with the catchment area of the Bedwyn stream suggests that it is of some antiquity, like similar early estates which followed natural watersheds—for instance around Cirencester (Slater, op. cit. note 125, 87), in Rutland (C. Pythian-Adams, op. cit. note 124), and like the kingdom of the Hwicce (W.J. Ford, ‘Some settlement patterns in the central region of the Warwickshire Avon’, Medieval Settlement, ed. P. Sawyer (1976), 278–79).
  • V.C.H. Berks., IV (1924), 156, 206–207.
  • M. Gelling, ‘English place-names derived from the compound wicham’, Medieval Archaeol., 11 (1967), 89, 96; Gelling, op. cit. note 120, 802–803.
  • Ibid., 804.
  • Op. cit. note 135, 207.
  • Gelling, op. cit. note 120, 810.
  • Cam, op. cit. note 129.
  • G. Astill, Historic Towns in Berkshire: an archaeological appraisal (1978), 37.
  • An opposite view is put forward with regard to the villa estates around Cirencester, where Recce postulates (op. cit. note 115, 74–75) that the run-down of the villas led to a dispersion of the farmworkers, leading in turn to a break-up of single estates into smaller units. However, the evidence for the survival of large estates does seem to be strong (see note 112), and it seems probable, in explanation, that political forces concentrating estates into large units, were more powerful than economic forces leading to the fragmentation of estates into smallholdings.
  • N. P. Brooks, ‘The unidentified forts of the Burghal Hidage’, Medieval Archaeol., VIII (1964), 75–78.
  • J. Haslam, Wiltshire Towns, the archaeological potential (1976), 23. Brooks has suggested (op. cit. note 143, 76–79) that Bedwyn became a town because of its proximity to the burghal hidage fortress at Chisbury. However, both the construction of the fortress and the development of the town must be seen as being a direct result of the presence at Bedwyn of a villa regalis which was already ancient by the late 9th century, rather than that the presence of the burh was the cause of the growth of the town.
  • Gelling, op. cit. note 120, 313, 923.
  • Op. cit. note 135, 251.
  • Gover, Mawer and Stenton, op. cit. note 121, 287–88.
  • Brooks, op. cit. note 143, 83.
  • The same inference can be made in the case of Bucklebury, Berks., an important villa regalis, the centre of a Domesday Hundred (V.C.H. Berks., III (1923), 275–76) and a probable centre for late Saxon trade (Astill, op. cit. note. 141, 6–7; J. Richards, The archaeology of the Berkshire Downs (1978), 55); its name is one of the five in Berkshire containing the -bury name element which Gelling regards (op. cit. note 120, 923) as having the meaning of ‘fortified dwelling’. Other instances in the area of the -bury element referring to royal dwellings include Kingbury Street, Marlborough, Kingsbury Square, Wilton (Haslam, op. cit., note 144, 41 and 67), and Kingbury, Old Windsor (Medieval Archaeol., 2 (1958), 183–85; Astill, ibid., 70).
  • Astill, op. cit. note 141, 37–38 and fig. 13.
  • P. H. Sawyer, From Roman Britain to Norman England (1978), 144–49.
  • A further example of such a concentration at this period is shown by the mills and buildings at Old Windsor attached to an important royal residence and estate (Medieval Archaeol., 2 (1958), 183–85).
  • J. Tait, The Medieval English Borough (1936), 50; H. Loyn, ‘The origin and early development of the Saxon borough with special reference to Cricklade’, Wiltshire Archaeol. Mag., 58 (1961), 7–15; D. Hill, ‘Trends in the development of towns during the reign of Ethelred II’, Ethelred the Unready, ed. D. Hill (B.A.R. British series 59, 1978), 222.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.