Professor Leslie Alcock

After the war he won a scholarship to Oxford, where he read modern history at Brasenose College, 1946-49. Archaeology was not taught at Oxford, so like many of his generation he pursued this interest through the Oxford Archaeology Society of which he served as president. At Oxford he met Elizabeth Blair, who was reading English and also had archaeological inclinations. They were married in 1950 and she become his most important scholarly collaborator.

It was back in India that he gained his most valuable archaeological training, working as Sir Mortimer Wheeler’s deputy on the large excavations at the ancient city of Mohenjo-Daro on the Indus river. On the basis of this experience he was appointed the first director of the Archaeological Survey of Pakistan in 1950, but he returned to Britain after not being paid for some time. In addition to providing an apprenticeship in fieldwork India also contributed to his lifelong love of hill-walking and mountaineering.

He worked as curator at the Abbey House Museum, Leeds, for the year 1952, before being appointed to a junior lectureship in archaeology at University College of Wales, Cardiff in 1953. There he developed a fluent and engaging lecturing style. He was to remain for 20 years, eventually becoming Reader, during which time Cardiff developed into the leading archaeology department in Britain. His first significant archaeological breakthrough came at the department’s training excavation at the small hill fort of Dinas Powys, Glamorgan. His report, published almost single-handedly in 1963, has become a classic of archaeological reporting. The clear analysis of the stratigraphy and insightful assessment of the finds, particularly the imported pottery and glass and metalworking evidence, were supported by a robust assessment of the social and political significance of this early medieval (5th-7th centuries) stronghold. Particularly innovative was his use of historical evidence including the early Welsh law tracts. So compelling was discussion of the archaeology that traditional historians took notice.

After this success Alcock launched an ambitious assault on South Cadbury, an Iron Age hill fort in Soomerset identified by Tudor antiquarians as King Arthur’s Camelot. Five seasons of excavation began in 1966 with the support of the British archaeological establishment. The excavations were astonishingly productive and revealed a sequence of British Celtic archaeology spanning 1,200 years, including an important post-Roman phase. The dig was conducted on an unprecedented scale involving hundreds of volunteers attracted from around the world. The excavations were covered widely in the media, not least because of the deliberate emphasis on the Arthurian connection. Methodologically, the scale of the open-area excavations marked an important advance from the Wheeler method, as did Alcock’s early use of geophysical survey methods. A popular account, By South Cadbury is that Camelot (1972), appeared at the conclusion of the dig, but the richness of the excavations exceeded all expectations and the final publication did not appear until 1995.

Alcock’s most influential book, Arthur’s Britain (1971), appeared at the height of interest in South Cadbury and offered an archaeologically informed account of British society in the post-Roman centuries. It dealt in detail with the historical evidence for Arthur, which attracted some resentful criticism from historians, but the most remarkable feature was the balanced discussion of both the native British and the invading English. The confident command of a range of source material, the effective integration of the historical and archaeological evidence and, above all, his willingness to cut across the Celtic/Anglo-Saxon divide have ensured that it remains in print today.

In 1973 Alcock was appointed to the new chair in archaeology at Glasgow University. While the move to Scotland allowed him to shift the focus of his research northwards, he could never escape Arthur, and throughout his Scottish career was pestered with inquiries about Arthur. He certainly lost enthusiasm for the topic; not only did he refuse to revise Arthur’s Britain, but his prefaces to the later editions were increasing disparaging about the contents. He did, however, revisit some of the themes and material from Dinas Powys and Arthur’s Britain in Economy, Society and Warfare among the Britons and the Saxons (1987).

Once in Scotland he initiated a series of reconnaissance excavations at places in the north mentioned in early historic sources, including Dumbarton, Dundurn, Dunottar Castle, Urquhart Castle and Forteviot. These targeted, small-scale excavations had a deep impact in Scotland, where there had been relatively little scholarly interest in “Early Historic” archaeology. The material was similar to that which he had been examining in western Britain, but he invested it with a Scottish resonance by emphasising that the archaeology complemented Scotland’s earliest contemporary historical sources.

In addition to the fieldwork programme, he set about building up the department and revitalising Scottish archaeology. He was a great champion of archaeological science and made it an important feature of the Glasgow curriculum. He was also instrumental in establishing a radiocarbon laboratory in Scotland. It was his personal reputation that did the most to elevate Glasgow’s position, particularly through attracting research students — many of whom have gone on to occupy key posts in universities and the heritage services.

Alcock played a larger public role in Scotland than he had while in Cardiff and helped to redefine Scotland’s leading archaeological institutions. He served on the Ancient Monuments Board for Scotland, on the Commission for the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland and as president of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 1984-87.

He took his leadership responsibilities seriously and instigated significant changes in all these institutions. Much, of course, took place behind the scenes, but his belief in the value of open, frank debate led the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland to open up the lectures for questions and discussion during his presidency.

In the year before his retirement he drew the results of his Scottish research together in the Rhind Lectures for 1989, which had much of the synthetic character of Arthur’s Britain, although they were less confident in tone. The publication of these lectures was delayed by health problems and by caring for his wife in the years before her death.

Always scrupulous about publishing his fieldwork, he placed his outstanding excavation reports before the Rhind lectures, which did not appear until 2003 as the much expanded overview of the early historic North, Kings & Warriors, Craftsmen & Priests, which included his most sustained discussion of the early Church.

In many respects Alcock lived for archaeology. He found it endlessly stimulating and long after his retirement was a welcome and lively figure in the Glasgow archaeology department.

He continued to indulge his love for hill-walking and mountain climbing. Apart from his family, his main social contacts were scholarly. He was fond of early jazz and a good dram. He was devoted to Elizabeth, who made substantial contributions to the Scottish work.

Alcock accumulated numerous honours and in 1991 was appointed OBE. Perhaps his main intellectual legacy is that he dragged scholarship on early medieval Britain out of the Dark Ages through his willingness to bridge the Celtic/AngloSaxon divide and his facility for integrating historical and archaeological evidence. There is no question that his work redefined the archaeological scholarship of the period and it is hoped that the Leslie and Elizabeth Alcock Centre for Historical Archaeology founded in 2005 at the University of Glasgow will be an effective memorial to his scholarly vision.

His wife predeceased him and he is survived by his daughter and son.

Professor Leslie Alcock, OBE, archaeologist, was born on April 24, 1925. He died on June 6, 2006, aged 81.