Chapter VIII: The Results of Caesar’s Invasions of Britain (21)

[591] _Ib._, pp. 108, 320, 330. Mr. Romilly Allen is mistaken when he says (_Archaeol. Cambr._, 6th ser., ii, 1902, p. 220) that winged, looped, and socketed celts never have chevron ornament. Several instances are given in _Anc. Bronze Implements_ (pp. 74, 84, 90, 126, 128, 132).

[592] See pp. 181-4, _infra_.

[593] _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 457-70. For details of hoards which have been found since the publication of Sir John Evans’s book, see _Archaeol. Cambr._, 5th ser., i, 1884, pp. 225-7; _Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., xi, 1885-7, pp. 12, 42-51; xv, 1893-5, p. 138; xvi, 1895-7, pp. 96-8, 327-30; xviii, 1900, pp. 285-7; _Archaeologia_, xlviii, 1888, pp. 106-14; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxvi, 1892, pp. 182-8; xxxv, 1901, pp. 266-75; _Papers Hants Field Club_, iii, 1895, pp. 53-66; and _Vict. Hist. of ... Surrey_, i, 241.

[594] _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 457-8; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxviii, 1904, p. 504.

[595] Some hoards of damaged and broken implements, unaccompanied by copper cakes, may have been formed for barter with a bronze-founder (_Vict. Hist. of ... Surrey_, i, 240).

[596] See p. 126, _supra_.

[597] Cf. _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 536, with Greenwell’s _Brit. Barrows_, p. 740, and Pitt-Rivers’s _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 132.

[598] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 110-1; _Archaeologia_, liv, 1895, pp. 110-1; A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 19.

[599] J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 192, 236.

[600] J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, &c., pp. 111-2. See also _Brit. Barrows_, p. 114; and _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxiv, 1904, pp. 392, 396.

[601] See W. Robertson Smith, _The Religion of the Semites_, 1901, pp. 260-1.

[602] See p. 90, _supra_.

[603] Oxen drawing a plough are depicted on rock-carvings in Scandinavia (_Congrès internat. d’anthr. et d’archéol. préhist._, i, 1874 [1877], pp. 454 [fig. 1], 473 [fig. 31]).

[604] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 220, 262; _Archaeologia_, liv, 1895, p. 110; A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 127-8.

[605] O. Montelius, _Civilisation of Sweden in Heathen Times_, 1888, pp. 71-6; _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 141.

[606] J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 399-400, 404. Harness rings have been found, according to Dr. J. Anderson (_Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, p. 168), in Scottish hoards. Professor W. Ridgeway (_The Thoroughbred Horse_, p. 92) argues that ‘the use of the horse by man in the British Isles cannot be placed before the end’ of the Bronze Age.

[607] See p. 221, _infra_.

[608] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 656-7.

[609] _Nature_, Nov. 22, 1894, p. 92.

[610] O. Schrader, _Prehist. Ant. of the Aryan Peoples_, p. 379.

[611] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 139, 591-2, 599.

[612] See pp. 85-6, _supra_.

[613] See _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), pp. 52-3; and p. 467, _infra_.

[614] D. Wilson, _Prehist. Annals of Scotland_, 2nd ed., i, 1863, p. 107.

[615] See p. 87, _supra_.

[616] See B.C. A. Windle, _Remains of the Prehist. Age_, &c., p. 279.

[617] _Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 486. Bronze spear-heads were associated with objects of the Early Iron Age in a hoard found on Hagbourne Hill in Berkshire, which belonged to a period of transition. See p. 267, _infra_.

[618] _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 143. The argument is no doubt generally sound, and no find, as far as I know, refutes it; but I do not think that it is absolutely conclusive. Stone implements were undoubtedly used in the Early Iron Age; and bronze and iron implements have been found together.

[619] _Archaeol. Journal_, xxiv, 1867, pp. 229-35; xxvi, 1869, pp. 301-5, 317; xxvii, 1870, pp. 158-9. The workshops may have been used in the Bronze Age; but one, in which iron slag was found, contained Roman coins. Huts similar to those of Ty Mawr have been explored in Brittany (_ib._, p. 148).

[620] _Archaeologia_, xlv, 1880, pp. 356-8. See p. 86, _supra_.

[621] W. C. Lukis, _Prehist. Stone Monuments of the Brit. Isles,--Cornwall_, pp. 18-9.

[622] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 402; _Reliquary_, viii, 1902, p. 92.

[623] _Vict. Hist. of ... Devon_, i, 350, 352.

[624] _Ib._, p. 349; _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiv, 1902, p. 161.

[625] _Ib._, p. 163.

[626] _Ib._, pp. 161-3.

[627] _Vict. Hist. of ... Devon_, i, 354.

[628] _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxi, 1899, p. 148.

[629] _Ib._, xxxiv, 1902, p. 160. Cf. _Archaeologia_, xlv, 1880, pp. 362-3.

[630] _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiv, 1902, p. 160.

[631] _Reliquary_, N. S., viii, 1902, p. 91.

[632] _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiv, 1902, p. 163. Bronze has been found, though rarely, in graves on Dartmoor (_Ib._, p. 130; _Reliquary_, N. S., vii, 1901. p. 95).

[633] _Ib._, p. 92.

[634] A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 46-8.

[635] _Ib._, pp. 14, 15-6, 20 (preface), 185-90, and pl. 306. See also _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxiv, 1904, pp. 387-97. Mr. J. R. Mortimer (_Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. 365, 369) describes an ‘extensive labyrinth of entrenchments’, which ‘traversed the high grounds of the [Yorkshire] Wolds in every direction, forming a network ... connecting hill to hill and valley to valley’. He states (p. 379) that several round barrows have been mutilated by these entrenchments ‘in a manner which shows that the latter are the more recent’ [but does not show that they are later than the Bronze Age], but that they are ‘at least for the most part pre-Roman, being in several instances crossed by what are believed to be portions of ... Roman roads’; and he concludes, disagreeing with Pitt-Rivers (see p. 441, n. 2, _infra_), that they were intended to protect cattle against robbers. In regard to the entrenchments near Flamborough Head which Pitt Rivers excavated, I prefer his guidance.

[636] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 107-8; J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 179, 185; _Archaeologia_, liv, 1895, pp. 87-114. Canon Greenwell (_ib._, p. 103) conjectures that the disks, which have analogues in France, Switzerland, and Italy, may have been worn as ornaments upon the breast; but their use is uncertain. Cf. _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 401-3.

[637] _Ib._, pp. 408-14; J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, p. 205; _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), pp. 28-30, 84. Cauldrons with ring-handles and rounded bottoms have been found in Ireland and in various parts of Scotland, but, according to Dr. J. Anderson (_Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xix, 1885, pp. 313-5; xxxix, 1905, pp. 14-20) and Mr. C. H. Read (_Guide_, &c., p. 30), not on the Continent. Dr. R. Munro, however (_Lake Dwellings of Europe_, 1890, p. 290), affirms that they have been found in the famous settlement of La Tène. They belonged indeed to the very latest period of the Bronze Age, if not to the Early Iron Age (_Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 410). Only one cauldron of the flat-bottomed type has been found in Scotland (_Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxii, 1888, p. 36). The British cauldrons of this kind differ in details from continental examples, especially in their handles, which are rings, and may be of native manufacture. Anyhow, the Heathery Burn Cave cauldron had been mended with a degree of skill which shows that British workmen knew how to rivet plates together.

[638] Professor Boyd Dawkins (_Early Man in Britain_, pp. 360-2) remarks that if a well-known amber cup, which was found at Hove, was of British workmanship, it proves that the use of the lathe was known in Britain in the Bronze Age. Sir John Evans (_Anc. Stone Implements_, 1897, pp. 445-50), like the professor, thinks that the cup may have been imported; but he points out that cups made of shale, which were certainly turned in a lathe, and were most probably of British manufacture, have been found in round barrows on Broad Down near Honiton. Sir R. C. Hoare (_Anc. Wilts_, i, 122-3) found in the trunk of a tree inside a bowl barrow along with a skeleton an urn which he described as ‘different both in shape and colour to any we have ever found in the British sepulchres’, and which appeared to him to have been turned in a lathe. Still the statement in the text is, generally speaking, true both of the British Isles and of Northern and Western Europe.

[639] _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiv, 1902, p. 125. See also p. 467, _infra_.

[640] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 338-43, and pl. xxix; liv, 1895, p. 110; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 11, 106-8; _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiv, 1902, p. 125; _Proc. Somerset. Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Soc._, 1, 1905, part ii, p. 42; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. lxvii, 9, 82.

[641] See pp. 395-7, _infra_.

[642] _Archaeologia_, liv, 1895, pp. 112-4.

[643] _Ib._, pp. 94, 108.

[644] Sir J. Evans, _Anc. Stone Implements_, 1897, pp. 438-9; _Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 383.

[645] Sir A. Mitchell, _The Past in the Present_, pp. 5-6, 12.

[646] _Archaeologia_, liv, 1895, pp. 108-9.

[647] _Ib._, xliii, 1871, p. 440; J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 191-2; A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 162-3.

[648] ‘So called’, says Pitt-Rivers (_ib._, i, 66), ‘because some of them are found with an edge as sharp as a penknife’. The thought of shaving with a bronze razor is not pleasant; but the negroes of Tanganyika still use razors of this metal (_L’Anthr._, xiv, 1903, pp. 667-75; xv, 1904, p. 116); and everybody knows that the Flamen Dialis might only shave with a bronze knife. See J. G. Frazer, _The Golden Bough_, i, 1900, p. 242.

[649] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 451; liv, 1895, p. 99; J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 217-21, 480.

[650] See p. 156, _supra_. Cf. W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 118, 142.

[651] _Ib._, p. 411.

[652] See p. 189, _infra_.

[653] _Germania_, 17.

[654] _Archaeol. Journal_, ix, 1852, p. 8; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 432-4; liv, 1895, pp. 101, 107; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 15, 31, 33; J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 366-73; J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, p. 168.

[655] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 32-3, 54-6; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 510-2, 519-22; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xli.

[656] Sir J. Evans, _Anc. Stone Implements_, 1897, pp. 452-5; _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 400-1; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxvi, 1902, pp. 473-4, 477, 480-5. One button with a V-shaped perforation, found in a barrow at Winterbourne Stoke, Wiltshire, was associated with glass beads (_ib._, p. 474), which (p. 183, _infra_) appear to have belonged to a comparatively advanced period of the Bronze Age. Cf. _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxvi, 1902, p. 481.

[657] R. C. Hoare, _Anc. Wilts_, i. 99, pl. x; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 524-5.

[658] _Ib._, pp. 490-1, 502-3; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. li, 92.

[659] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 492.

[660] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 55, n. 1.

[661] _Trans. Devon. Association_, v, 1872, pp. 554-5 and pl. ii.

[662] _Anc. Wilts_, i, 202, pl. xxvii, 2. See also _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 459, and _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 51, 232.

[663] _Archaeologia_, xxvi, 1836, pp. 422-31; _Archaeol. Journal_, lviii, 1901, p. 324; _Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., xviii, 1899-1901, pp. 223-4.

[664] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 501. Cf. p. 502, note c.

[665] See _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 395, 481, 487.

[666] _Ib._, p. 481.

[667] _Ib._, p. 395.

[668] _Archaeologia_, liv, 1895, p. 102. Sir John Evans (_Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 402) does not accept them as armlets; but cf. _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 85.

[669] J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 76, 90, 96, 375-9. Cf. W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 55, n. 1, 436. Bronze torques of all these patterns have also been collected. Funicular torques are unknown in Scotland.

[670] J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 283, 381-7; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 489-90, 528; J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, pp. 94-5, 168, 217; A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 6.

[671] _Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., ii, 1861-4, pp. 247-8; J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, p. 224, n. 1; Mr. G. Clinch (_Vict. Hist. of ... Sussex_, i, 320) thinks that the Mountfield hoard probably belonged to the Late Celtic period.

[672] J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, pp. 217, 220-1.

[673] _Archaeol. Journal_, xxiv, 1867, pp. 197, 201; J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 42; J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, p. 222; _Rev. celt._, xxi, 1900, pp. 166-73; _Vict. Hist. of ... Cornwall_, i, 356. Cf. _L’Anthr._, xvii, 1906, p. 135.

[674] See _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxv, 1901, p. 263.

[675] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 470; J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 390-1.

[676] _Ib._, pp. 391-3; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 471, 531; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 117, 223, 324; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. xlvi, 218. A pair of ornaments, which may have been ear-rings, have been found in a barrow in Wiltshire. Cf. _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 94, with _Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 393. Ear-rings of the Bronze Age are equally rare in France (_Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxv, 1901, pp. 267, 273).

[677] J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 392-3

[678] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 514-5, 522; J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, pp. 51-2; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxv, 1901, pp. 270-1; _Archaeol. Cambr._, 6th ser., ii, 1902, p. 209.

[679] See p. 469, _infra_.

[680] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 494-5, 500, 504, 526-7.

[681] _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxvi, 1892, p. 183.

[682] J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 394, 485; _L’Anthr._, xvi, 1905, pp. 173-5. Mr. L. M^cLellan (_Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xl, 1906, pp. 396-402), unlike Mr. Abercromby (_Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxix, 1905, p. 262), argues that the paste beads were made in Britain.

[683] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 492-4.

[684] J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 485.

[685] _Journ. Roy. Inst. Cornwall_, xvi, 1904, p. 103.

[686] _Journ. Roy. Soc. Ant., Ireland_, 5th ser., v, 1895, p. 23; _Report of ... the Brit. Association_, 1896, pp. 912-4; _L’Anthr._, vii, 1896, pp. 688-9; _Rev. celt._, xxi, 1900, pp. 166-75; _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), pp. 29, 145-6; _Man_, v, 1905, No. 7, p. 13. For evidences of intercourse between Scotland and Ireland see _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, vi, 1867, pp. 350-1; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 62; and R. Munro, _Prehist. Scotland_, p. 290.

[687] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 508-9; J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 484; _Journ. Roy. Soc. Ant. Ireland_, 5th ser., vi, 1896, p. 37, n. 1.

[688] This conjecture, I find, has the support of Mr. Coffey (_ib._, p. 39).

[689] See p. 357, _infra_.

[690] _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, iii, 1860, pp. 183, 195.

[691] _Ib._, xxvi, 1892, pp. 186-7; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 55.

[692] _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxv, 1905, p. 261.

[693] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 54-6; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 492, 494-5, 507, 530; lii, 1890, pp. 58-9. A glass bead has been found in one Derbyshire barrow (_Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., xv, 1893-5, p. 425). Gold has only once been found in a barrow on the Yorkshire Wolds (_Archaeologia_, lii, 58-9); and of 379 interments only 10, of which 2 were Late Celtic, were found there accompanied by ornaments (_Brit. Barrows_, pp. 51-2); whereas in Wiltshire 64 were found out of 354 (_Archaeologia_, xliii, 488).

[694] The absence of gold and amber which distinguishes the group of barrows round the great stone circle at Avebury from those associated with Stonehenge (_Crania Britannica_, ii, pl. 11, p. 5, n. 11) is remarkable. Perhaps it may be due partly to the greater antiquity of the Avebury barrows.

[695] In regard to the poverty of the people who, probably in the Early Iron Age, used the stronghold of Winkelbury Hill, 13 miles WSW. of Salisbury, see A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, ii, 236.

[696] Dr. Joseph Anderson assigns these balls, which have been found only in Scotland, to the Iron Age; but Mr. George Coffey (_Journ. Roy. Soc. Ant. Ireland_, 5th ser., vi, 1896, p. 42) thinks that ‘the general character of these spirals appears to be distinctly Bronze Age, not Late Celtic’. It has been pointed out (_Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., xvi, 1895-7, pp. 408-9) that Mr. Coffey’s theory is ‘strengthened by the fact that stone balls of this class have been found associated with cist burials [of the Bronze Age] ... near Ballater, and ... [in] Elginshire’.

[697] Meath, Louth, Fermanagh, Tyrone, and Donegal.

[698] See Mr. G. Coffey’s articles in _Journ. Roy. Soc. Ant. Ireland_, 5th ser., iv. 1894, pp. 349-79; v, 1895, pp. 16-29, 195-211; vi, 1896, pp. 34-69, and especially 40-2, 65; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxi, 1887, p. 144; xxiii, 1889, p. 133; xxix, 1895, pp. 191-4; xxxiii, 1899, pp. 363-4, 368; _L’Anthr._, vii, 1896, pp. 688-9; xvii, 1906, p. 332, fig. 6; _Trans. Cumberland and Westmorland Ant. and Archaeol. Soc._, N. S., ii, 1902, pp. 381-2; Romilly Allen, _Celtic Art in Pagan and Christian Times_, 1904, pp. 50-3; C. H. Read, _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 96; and _Vict. Hist. of ... Lancs_, i, 240. Mr. Read observes (_op. cit._, p. 103) that some of the Scandinavian bronzes have been shown by analysis to have been imported from Britain.

[699] M. Salomon Reinach (_L’Anthr._, iv, 1893, pp. 688-90), if I do not misunderstand him, although he admits that the British Isles in the Bronze Age were connected by trade with Scandinavia, thinks it probable that the spiral reached the former by way of Spain. He observes that among Scandinavian rock-sculptures there are no spirals; that certain designs--for example the boat--are common to sepulchral monuments in Brittany and in Ireland; that there are striking points of resemblance between the bronze culture of Ireland and Spain; and that designs which have been found in the East Riding of Yorkshire represent Aegean types which also appear in the departments of the Marne and the Gard (see p. 200, _infra_). These arguments seem unavailing against those stated in the text, and especially against the almost complete absence of the spiral from Spain, Gaul, and Southern England. If the figure does not appear on Scandinavian rocks, it abounds on Scandinavian weapons and ornaments; and on rocks boats are frequently represented (O. Montelius, _Civilisation of Sweden in Heathen Times_, 1888, pp. 46, 73-6). Nor is M. Reinach’s reasoning sound when he goes on to argue that we have no right to trace the Bronze Age spiral of Western Europe to an Egyptian source because the same design has been found engraved on mammoths’ tusks in the Pyrenaean cave of Espélungues at Arudy (_L’Anthr._, xv, 1904, p. 146, fig. 24; xvi, 1905, p. 5, fig. 4). As Dr. Arthur Evans remarks (_Report of ... the Brit. Association_, 1896, p. 913), ‘the earliest cultural strata of Europe, from the Neolithic period onwards, betray an entire absence of the recurring spiral motive. When we find it later propagating itself as a definite ornamental system in a regular chronological succession throughout an otherwise inter-related European zone, we have every right to trace it to a common source.

[700] See pp. 499-500 and 511-4, _infra_.

[701] See _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxx, 1900, p. 94, and the Hon. John Abercromby’s article in the same periodical, xxxv, 1905, pp. 256-64, especially 262. Mr. George Coffey (_Journ. Roy. Soc. Ant. Ireland_, 5th ser., vi, 1896, p. 40), remarking that Britain and Gaul were on a lower plane of civilization in the Bronze Age than Scandinavia, argues that one cause may have been that ‘the sea-way south of the Elbe was possibly closed to Scandinavian enterprise in the Bronze Age’. But the North Sea was not; and apparently there was nothing to prevent Scandinavian traders from landing on our eastern coasts if they had thought it worth while.

[702] See p. 119, _supra_. Prof. B.C. A. Windle (_Remains of the Prehist. Age_, pp. 153-73) gives a fairly complete list. It would be superfluous to print references for barrows belonging to counties not mentioned in my text; for full lists are being given in the _Victoria County History_.

[703] Long barrows may possibly have been erected in remote districts after bronze had been introduced into Southern Britain. See _Archaeol. Cambr._, 5th ser., viii, 1891, pp. 33-7.

[704] A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 58-9. Cf. _Archaeologia_, xlii, 1869, p. 196.

[705] See p. 108, _supra_.

[706] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 13, 451; _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiv, 1902, p. 111.

[707] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 309, 314, 326; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 12-3.

[708] _Ib._, pp. 31-2; R. C. Hoare, _Anc. Wilts_, i, 52, 122-5; J. Hutchins, _Hist. and Ant. of Dorset_, 3rd ed., i, 1861, p. 100; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 314-5; A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, i, 4; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxix, 1905, pp. 179-81; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xxvii.

[709] J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xxv.

[710] The same degeneration took place in Gaul (A. Bertrand, _Archéol. celt. et gaul._, 1889, p. 104; _Rev. de l’École d’anthr._, xv, 1905, pp. 213-4).

[711] Mr. J. R. Mortimer (_Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xxv) believes that on the Yorkshire Wolds barrows were occasionally erected over the dwellings in which the dead had lived; but the evidence which he adduces, except in one instance (pp. 182-3), appears to me weak. See pp. 155, 328-9, 336-7.

[712] _Stonehenge_, 1740, p. 45.

[713] _Archaeologia_, lii, 1890, p. 63.

[714] _Ib._, xlix, 1885, p. 183.

[715] J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, pp. 3-4; _Trans. Glasgow Archaeol. Soc._, N. S., iii, part ii, 1899, p. 499.

[716] _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxvii, 1902, p. 106.

[717] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 309; lii, 1890, p. 63; _Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., viii, 1879-81, p. 289.

[718] J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xxi.

[719] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 291-2; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 4-5.

[720] _Ib._, p. 3; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 290-1, 301-4; A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, ii, 7-8, 64.

[721] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 291. It has often been assumed that barrows had no ditches because none were visible; but Pitt-Rivers (_Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, i, 4) showed that several barrows on his estate were surrounded by ditches ‘of which no trace was seen before excavating’. See also _ib._, ii, 7-8.

[722] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 302-4; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 3-4. Composite bowl barrows and bell barrows are described in _Archaeologia_, xliii, 297-300.

[723] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 293-5, 303-4; _Folk-Lore_, vi, 1895, pp. 14-5. Pitt-Rivers (_Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 145) suggests that the common form of disk barrows ‘may have arisen through a failure to carry out the original intention’. ‘The first idea,’ he continues, ‘of the mourners ... may probably have been to erect a large monument ... and the ditch in such a case would contain a large area. In the course of a few days, however, the grief may have abated, and laziness supervened, in which case the arrested tumulus would assume the form described. The habit of all primitive peoples ... of lashing themselves up into a frenzy on the occasion of a death, and general excitability upon any uncommon occurrence, followed by a speedy relapse, favours this hypothesis. When, however, a vallum is seen to follow the line of the ditch, this cause cannot be assigned to the particular structure. It may, however, be a form that has become persistent and conventionalized through the cause already mentioned.’ This ingenious theory seems to imply that the motive of laziness only began to operate when disk barrows came into fashion.

The few disk barrows of Derbyshire have no apparent ditches (_Vict. Hist. of ... Derby_, i, 169). That county also contains barrows constructed differently and of different materials from those which undoubtedly belong to the Bronze Age: their date is uncertain, but may be Romano-British (_ib._, pp. 186-9; _Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., xv, 1893-5, p. 427).

Mr. G. F. Tregelles (_Vict. Hist. of ... Cornwall_, i, 358) thinks that in Cornwall the distinctions between conical, bowl, bell, flat, and ring barrows ‘may be little more than differences in height’.

[724] _Journal Brit. Archaeol. Association_, xviii, 1862, p. 39; _Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., viii, 1879-81, pp. 289, 291-2; x, 1884-5, pp. 305-6; W. C. Lukis, _Prehist. Stone Monuments of the Brit. Isles,--Cornwall_, p. 6; _Archaeologia_, lii, 1890, p. 63; _Trans. Cumberland and Westmorland Ant. and Archaeol. Soc._, N. S., i, 1901, pp. 295-9.

[725] _Vict. Hist. of ... Derby_, i. 169.

[726] The ditches of the Cranborne Chase barrows in Dorsetshire, just outside the frontier of Wiltshire, are sometimes incomplete (A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 138).

[727] See p. 104, _supra_.

[728] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 6-8; _Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., xi, 1885-7, p. 434. Canon Greenwell _(Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, vi, 1867, p. 339), speaking of a cairn near Crinan in Argyllshire, surrounded by ‘a double circle of stones’, which ‘stood from 3 feet to 5 feet apart, except for a space ... where, in both circles, four stones were found placed close together’, says, ‘This is not an unusual feature in circles which enclose burials; in fact it is, in one shape or another, almost universal.... The object seems to be to make the circle incomplete.... When the circle is made of stones placed close together, or is formed of earth, then one or more openings occur in it.’ On the other hand, Mr. W. C. Borlase (_Archaeologia_, xlix, 1885, p. 183) found that in Cornwall the stone rings enclosing barrows were almost always continuous.

[729] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 8.

[730] A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 138. Mr. J. R. Mortimer (_Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xxii), referring to the incomplete stone rings or trenches which are found _within_ barrows, suggests that they were intended ‘to mark off ... the sacred spot in which the ceremony and interment were afterwards to be conducted, and that the break in the circle had no other significance than to serve as a place of ingress and egress’.

[731] _Ib._, p. lxxi; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 112.

[732] _Archaeologia_, xlii, 1869, pp. 169-71.

[733] _Archaeol. Journal_, lviii, 1901, pp. 328-31.

[734] _Journ. Derby. Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Soc._, xi, 1889, pp. 39-44; xiv, 1892, pp. 244-7, 250; xv, 1893, pp. 161-2.

[735] In certain cases, however, the mound may have been so worn down by denudation as to escape notice.

[736] A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 148.

[737] J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, pp. 28, 37-8; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xx, 1886, pp. 114, 240-1; xxix, 1895, pp. 46-8; xxxv, 1901, pp. 258-66; xxxix, 1905, pp. 189, 528-32.

[738] _Anthr. Rev._, v, 1867, p. 255.

[739] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 112-3.

[740] J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, pp. 38, 48-50, 63-4.

[741] _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 22-3 (preface). ‘There is no knowing,’ says Pitt-Rivers, ‘how many of these graves without mounds or ditches may exist in the soil; as they show no mark on the surface, they can only be found accidentally’.

[742] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 113.

[743] _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiv, 1902, p. 111.

[744] _Brit. Barrows_, p. 402. For other instances of moundless graves see _Anthr. Rev._, iii, 1865 (_Journ. Anthr. Soc._, p. lxvii); _Journ. Brit. Archaeol. Association_, xlv, 1889, pp. 112-22; _Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., xvi, 1895-7, p. 335; W. C. Borlase, _Dolmens of Ireland_, iii, 1013; _Archaeol. Cambr._, 6th ser., ii, 1902, p. 28; _Wilts Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Mag._, xxxiii, 1904, pp. 410-1; _Archeol. Aeliana_, 3rd ser., ii, 1906, p. 132; and _Vict. Hist. of ... Lancs_, i, 245. Mr. J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. lxxii, suggests that ‘the great number of small cairns which even yet exist on the uncultivated moors of Yorkshire’ may have ‘belonged to the masses’.

[745] See pp. 105-6, _supra_.

[746] _Trans. Lancs. and Cheshire Ant. Soc._, xviii, 1900 (1901), pp. 114-24.

[747] These cists are assigned by the excavators, Dr. W. A. Herdman and Mr. P. M. C. Kermode (_Proc. Liverpool Biol. Soc._, viii, 1894, pp. 159-72), to the Neolithic Age; but the evidence which they adduce is purely negative. Perhaps the people who built them only had stone tools; but the fact that the interments were in cists and accompanied by cinerary urns proves that they were made after bronze had come into use.

[748] A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, ii, 4; _Archaeologia_, lii, 1890, pp. 24-7, 41, 60; W. C. Borlase, _Dolmens of Ireland_, ii, 634; Général Pothier, _Les tumulus du plateau de Ger_, 1900, pp. 28-9. See also _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xv, 1886, pp. 95-7.

[749] J. H. F. Brabner, _Gazetteer of England and Wales_, vi, 31.

[750] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 2, n. 2. Mr. J. R. Mortimer (_Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xviii, n. ||) remarks that ‘it could hardly be expected that these two small openings would be more likely to find the primary grave ... than two rat holes would be likely to come upon the ashes of a mouse placed under a mound ten feet in diameter’.

[751] _Wilts Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Mag._, xxiii, 1887, pp. 245-52. At the foot of Garrow by Hill, on the Yorkshire Wolds, there is another gigantic mound, 50 feet high and 250 feet in diameter, which has not been opened (J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xx).

[752] J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 134, 273-4, 277, 342; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 44, 48-9; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 442-6. See also _Journ. Brit. Archaeol. Association_, x, 1855, p. 8. Dr. Thurnam (_Archaeologia_, xliii, 447 and note b) quotes one instance of the discovery in a round barrow of a socketed celt, which, notwithstanding the doubts expressed by Sir John Evans (_Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 134), appears to have been contemporaneous with the interment; and another is mentioned in _Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 114. On the other hand, Pitt-Rivers, referring to the spear-head mentioned in _Archaeologia_, xliii, 447, says, ‘I am informed by Mr. William Cunnington ... that ... it was found by his grandfather ... immediately under the turf near Stonehenge, and not in a barrow’. The reference given by Pitt-Rivers (_Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 20) to _Archaeologia_ is incorrect.

[753] See J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, pp. 169-70. Canon Greenwell (_Brit. Barrows_, pp. 48-50) asserts that knife-daggers and flat axes--the only bronze implements found in Yorkshire barrows--never accompany swords and spear-heads in hoards, and argues that this proves the early date of round barrows in general. If the assertion were true, the fact would prove the early date of those Yorkshire barrows in which daggers and flat axes were found; but the question is whether many other barrows do not belong to later periods of the Bronze Age. Moreover, flat axes have been found twice in hoards,--one with palstaves (J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 464), another with swords (_ib._, p. 466).

[754] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 463.

[755] The Hon. John Abercromby (_Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxv, 1905, p. 262) affirms that ‘the few bronze swords, spear-heads, etc., of the Bronze Age and Hallstatt Period, that first filtered in driblets into this country, and were then reproduced with variations by native smiths, were too precious to be laid by for ever in a grave, even at the end of the Bronze Age in Britain’. Is not this begging the question? If small bronze weapons were ‘laid by for ever’ in graves in the earlier period, when bronze was scarce, why should not large ones have been laid by when it was common? And if gold ornaments were not too costly to be sacrificed, why should bronze swords have been deemed so precious?

[756] _Anc. Bronze Implements_, pp. 473-4.

[757] See p. 288, _infra_, and Addenda.

[758] See p. 181, n. 2, _supra_; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 447-8; and _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 93. Sir John Evans (_Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 310), referring to the tanged weapons of Arreton Down type and to certain blades found in the Wiltshire barrows, which (see pp. 145, 147, _supra_) he thinks ‘may have been the heads of spears rather than the blades of daggers’, remarks that ‘at the period to which they belong the art of making cores must have been known, as the ferrule found at Arreton Down will testify’. This is significant; but on p. 473 he refers the ‘tanged spear-heads or daggers’ to the second period of the Bronze Age,--earlier than that of palstaves and socketed celts.

Mr. C. H. Read (_Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_, p. 24) observes that cinerary urns ‘possibly represent the period during which swords and spear-heads of bronze were manufactured ... by our population’. It is true that certain urns of overhanging rim type were contemporary with socketed weapons (_Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxv, 1905, pp. 262-4); but the oldest urns were much earlier. Cf. _Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., xviii, 1899-1901, pp. 251-3.

[759] _Archaeol. Rev._, ii, 1889, p. 323. Cf. _Folk-Lore_, vi, 1895, pp. 15-7. Dr. Evans remarks in this article that ‘the characteristic form presented by a spiral ring of bronze found in one urn leads one indeed to believe that these flat disk-barrows of Standlake [in Oxfordshire] belong to a time when iron was coming into use’.

[760] _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxv, 1905, pp. 256-64.

[761] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 366, 369.

[762] See p. 149, _supra_.

[763] See pp. 205-6, _infra_.

[764] Flat bronze celts were found by Canon Greenwell in two only of the multitudes of barrows which he has explored not only in the northern counties but also in Wiltshire and Berkshire (_Archaeologia_, lii, 1890, p. 3); while Mr. J. R. Mortimer (_Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xlvi) never found one with any of the 893 interments which he examined on the Yorkshire Wolds. The canon opened four Late Celtic barrows in the parish of Cowlam, of which he says (_Brit. Barrows_, p. 212), ‘Had the bodies occurred without the necklace, fibula, or armlets, I should not have hesitated the least about classing these four barrows with the other barrows in the immediate vicinity, which were of the time of stone, or more probably of bronze.’ Is it unreasonable to conclude that a few other barrows which contain no relics of the late Bronze Age may nevertheless belong to that time?

[765] _L’Anthr._, xvii, 1906, pp. 321-42. Cf. W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 44, n. 2, and _Rev. de l’École d’anthr._, xv, 1905, pp. 213, 215.

[766] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 21, 333.

[767] _Ib._, p. 21, n. 1.

[768] _Ib._ See p. 185, n. 3, _infra_.

[769] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 19-20; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xxxiv. Canon Greenwell remarks, however (pp. 28-30), that charcoal was almost always found in contact with unburnt bodies; and he was doubtful whether it was merely the ashes of the fire at which the funeral feast had been cooked, or might be regarded as a sign that the corpses had been passed through fire, just as in baptism aspersion was substituted for immersion. But this would of course imply that cremation on the Wolds was earlier than inhumation. Cf. J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. lxxvii.

[770] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 21 n. l, 445; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 310; xliv, 1873, p. 426; lii, 1890, pp. 37-8, 43; _Report of ... the Brit. Association_, 1888 (1889), p. 315; _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxii, 1902, p. 386. In regard to the few interments by inhumation that have been found in Cornwall see _Vict. Hist. of ... Cornwall_, i, 362-3, 366.

[771] _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiv, 1902, p. 119.

[772] _Archaeol. Scotica_, ii, 1822, pp. 76-102; iii, 1831, pp. 40-50; _Nature_, Jan. 13, 1898, p. 236.

[773] O. Montelius, _Sur la chronologie de l’âge du bronze_, 1885, p. 3.

[774] Mr. Abercromby in _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxviii, 1904, p. 364, denies that any drinking-cups were contemporary with cinerary urns; but in _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxii, 1902, p. 385, he affirms that some were.

[775] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 390; A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, ii, 6; _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxii, 1902, pp. 375, 381; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxviii, 1904, p. 364. Five more drinking-cups have lately been found with burnt bones in two cists in Dilston Park, Northumberland (_Archaeol. Aeliana_, 3rd ser., ii, 1906, pp. 142-6, 148).

Mr. John Ward (_Vict. Hist. of ... Derby_, i, 177-8) shows from an examination of the sepulchral pottery of Derbyshire (cf. pp. 191-6, _infra_) that in those districts in which interments of both kinds are found cremation was, generally speaking, later than inhumation. This conclusion is supported by the fact that in Wiltshire, where cremation on the whole greatly predominates, it occurs only about as often as inhumation in bowl and bell barrows (_Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 293).

[776] _L’Anthr._, xvii, 1906, p. 326.

[777] _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxviii, 1904, p. 78. Canon Greenwell (_Ib._, vi, 1867, p. 343, n. 2), speaking of a cairn near Crinan in Argyllshire, which he explored, remarks that ‘in this part of Scotland at all events the earliest interments in the large megalithic chambers are of burnt bodies’.

[778] _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, vii, 1870, pp. 268-70; xx, 1886, p. 252; xxix, 1895, pp. 191-4; _Archaeologia_, xxx, 1844, p. 335; xliii, 1871, pp. 450-1; lii, 1890, pp. 25, 64; J. B. Davis and J. Thurnam, _Crania Britannica_, ii, pl. 1, p. 1; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 20-1; J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, p. 90; A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, ii, 2, 29; iii, 17; _Journ. Brit. Archaeol. Association_, N. S., vi, 1900, p. 10. Secondary interments by inhumation sometimes succeeded primary interments by cremation (_Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 173; _Proc. Dorset Nat. Hist. and Ant. Field Club_, xvi, 1895, p. 50).

[779] _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxvi, 1902, pp. 650-1.

[780] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 312, 450-1; _Journ. Brit. Archaeol. Association_, N. S., vi, 1900, p. 10; _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 16. The two latter authorities only suggest that in cases like that mentioned in the text the unburnt body was that of the chief.

[781] _Archaeologia_, xv, 1806, pp. 340-1. The nine skeletons may have belonged to a secondary interment, but Cunnington inferred from the careless manner in which they had been buried that they were ‘slaves or dependents of the great personage below’. Mr. J. R. Mortimer (_Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xxxii), remarking that ‘in several instances where the body of the chief burial was reduced to ashes the attendants [?] were inhumed’, argues that in some cases cremation, in others inhumation, was considered the more honourable mode of sepulture. Perhaps.

[782] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 20-1. Cf. J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. xxxii, 60, 318.

[783] _Proc. Soc. Ant._, 2nd ser., xvi, 1895-7, p. 304.

[784] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 313-4.

[785] _Ib._, lii, 58-9; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xxxviii. Cf. _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 90.

[786] _Nature_, Jan. 13, 1898, p. 237; J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, pp. 17, 74-5.

[787] _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 48.

[788] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 309; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 12.

[789] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 22-3; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 315-8. Cf. _Journ. Brit. Archaeol. Association_, N. S., vi, 1900, pp. 8-9.

[790] C. Warne, _Celtic Tumuli of Dorset_, 1866 (‘Tumuli opened at Various Periods’, pp. 10-1, 72, 76). The instance mentioned on p. 72 is, in my opinion, doubtful, and no certain pre-Roman instances are recorded in the sections entitled ‘Personal Researches’ and ‘Communications from Personal Friends’. Prof. Ridgeway (_Early Age of Greece_, i, 1901, p. 502), referring to Greenwell’s _Brit. Barrows_, p. 22, states that ‘in Dorsetshire ... the extended position seems to be the prevalent one’, a remark which illustrates the danger of relying on second-hand evidence.

In a few cases in Derbyshire and elsewhere in which the body has been found sitting the posture was perhaps due to some accident in filling up the grave (_Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 318-20; _Journ. Brit. Archaeol. Association_, xxxviii, 1882, pp. 109-10). Two skeletons, however, were found sitting, back to back, in a barrow in Denbighshire (_Crania Britannica_, ii, pl. 23, p. 1).

[791] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 12. In a round barrow on the south of the road between Rochester and Gravesend, and about midway between Chalk Church and the Crown Inn, five skeletons were found in the trench near the bottom (_Archaeol. Cant._, xxiv, 1900, pp. 86-90).

[792] C. Warne, _Celtic Tumuli of Dorset_, pp. 46-9. Cf. pp. 36-7. In Derbyshire ‘secondary interments are found in any position, central or otherwise’ (_Vict. Hist. of ... Derby_, i, 176).

[793] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 12-3.

[794] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 321-3. Cunnington, however, remarks (_ib._ xv, 1806, p. 343) that ‘on the top of barrows we find the skeletons in every direction’.

[795] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 25-6; _Archaeologia_, lii, 1890, pp. 25, 38, 64; _Wilts Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Mag._, xxxiii, 1904, pp. 412-3; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xxxvii; _Vict. Hist. of ... Derby_, i, 173. All the kistvaens of Dartmoor lie at one end between north and west, at the other between south and east of the corrected compass (_Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiii, 1901, pp. 121-2; xxxiv, 1902, p. 164); and the cairns near the Land’s End have ‘an aspect ranging from south-east to south-west’ (_Archaeologia_, xlix, 1885, p. 182). Cf. _Rev. arch._, 4^e sér., v, 1905, p. 307.

[796] _Archaeologia_, xxxiv, 1862, p. 255; xliii, 1871, pp. 314-5; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 31-2; J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, pp. 74-5; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxix, 1905, p. 552; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, p. xli.

[797] _Anc. Wilts_, i, 124.

[798] J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. xxxiii, 15-6, 63, 66, 77; A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 66.

[799] _Ib._, ii, 1-2; E. T. Stevens, _Flint Chips_, 1870, p. 410; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 324-5; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 14; _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiv, 1902, p. 108.

[800] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 294, 310, 325-6.

[801] _Ib._, p. 326. Cf. W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 445; _Nature_, Jan. 13, 1898, p. 236; _Journ. Brit. Archaeol. Association_, N. S., vi, 1900, pp. 8-9; and _Trans. Devon. Association_, xxxiv, 1902, pp. 108-9.

[802] _Trans. Cumberland and Westmorland Ant. and Archaeol. Soc._, N. S., i, 1901, pp. 295-9. Cf. _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxix, 1905, p. 547.

[803] _Ib._, xxxvi, 1902, p. 644.

[804] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 326. On the other hand the urns which Canon Greenwell found in Yorkshire were usually placed upright (_Brit. Barrows_, p. 14).

[805] _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 49.

[806] _Iliad_, xxiii, 254. Cf. xxiv, 795-6.

[807] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 326.

[808] J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, pp. 43-7. An urn only ⅞ inch high, which of course could not have been used for containing ashes, has been found in a cairn of the Bronze Age in Fifeshire (_Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxvi, 1902, p. 641).

[809] J. Anderson, _op. cit._, pp. 51-2, 74-5; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 62, 72-3, 139, 277, 291, 297.

[810] A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, ii, 29. Canon Greenwell (_Archaeologia_, lii, 1890, pp. 63-4) has described in an interesting paragraph ‘the infinite variety, within certain limits, which is found in connection with the burials of the Bronze Age’.

[811] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 331; _Brit. Barrows_, p. 74; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. lv, lix.

[812] See pp. 442-3, _infra_.

[813] Sir A. Mitchell, _The Past in the Present_, 1880, p. 28; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 334.

[814] See p. 159, n. 1, _supra_.

[815] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 63. See, however, _Archaeologia_, xlix, 1885, p. 184.

[816] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 391, 396; _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxii, 1902, pp. 373-97; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxviii, 1904, pp. 323-410; xxxix, 1905, pp. 326-44; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. lxv-lxvii.

Mr. J. P. Gibson, in a paper on a recent find of drinking-cups in Dilston Park, Northumberland (_Archaeol. Aeliana_, 3rd ser., ii, 1906, pp. 126-49) says (pp. 146-7), ‘There appears nothing in the Dilston Park discovery to confirm this suggested [chronological] arrangement. Mr. Abercromby tells me that evidence received since the paper [in _Proc. Soc. Ant._, xxxviii, 1904] was published has convinced him that “the whole question requires a fresh investigation” ... The Dilston Park find ... furnishes two instances in which in the same cist ... vessels are found varying widely both in form and decoration. It also proves the great difficulty of attempting to fix any relative dates of Bronze Age beakers by a comparison either of their shape or ornament.’ Mr. Abercromby, however, in his third paper (_ib._, xxxix, 1905), adheres to his chronological arrangement. See also _ib._, xl, 1906, pp. 32-3, 371.

Handles are occasionally found not only on drinking-cups, but also on the other kinds of sepulchral pottery.

[817] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 378-83; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 83-93; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. lxii-lxv.

[818] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 343-57; xlix, 1885, p. 195; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 66-74; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. lviii-lix; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxix, 1905, pp. 415-6.

[819] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 74-83; _Archaeol. Journal_, xxiv, 1867, pp. 22-5; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 357-77; J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. lix-lxii.

[820] W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 61; _Archaeol. Cambr._, 6th ser., ii, 1902, p. 197. The counties in which drinking-cups have been found are Kent, Sussex, Suffolk, Norfolk, Berkshire, Buckingham, Hampshire, Dorset, Devon, Somerset, Wiltshire, Oxford, Cambridge, Lincoln, Derby, Stafford, the East Riding of Yorkshire, Durham, Northumberland, Westmorland, Cumberland, Monmouth, Anglesey, Carnarvon, Denbigh, Glamorgan, Berwick, Roxburgh, Ayr, Argyll, Stirling, Lanark, Haddington, Edinburgh, Linlithgow, Kinross, Fife, Forfar, Perth, Aberdeen, Banff, Elgin, Nairn, Inverness, Ross, Sutherland, and the island of Mull (_Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxii, 1902, p. 386 and map facing p. 396; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxviii, 1904, p. 329). Their rarity in South-Eastern Britain is doubtless due largely to the destruction of barrows in a highly cultivated region; while their absence from many of the Midland counties may be ascribed partly to the same cause and partly to the fact that the population of those parts in the Bronze Age was probably small. In Cornwall vessels of a peculiar kind appear to have served the same purposes as drinking-cups and food-vessels (_Archaeologia_, xlix, 1885, pp. 186-8). From the frequency with which drinking-cups occur in the east of Scotland it may perhaps be inferred that they were introduced into that country, at least in part, by immigrants from Scandinavia or Denmark.

A gold cup, which in form resembles certain drinking-cups and is ornamented on the bottom with concentric circles, has been found with a bronze dagger at Rillaton in Cornwall (_Archaeol. Journal_, xxiv, 1867, p. 189).

[821] See pp. 408-9, 442-3, _infra_.

[822] _Journ. Anthr. Inst._, xxxii, 1902, pp. 376-85.

[823] _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxviii, 1904, pp. 346-7; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 94.

[824] _Ib._, pp. 93-4, 101; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 386; lii, 1890, pp. 24-5. Cf. J. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times,--the Bronze and Stone Ages_, p. 76, and E. B. Tylor, _Prim. Culture_, ii, 1903, pp. 30-43. Mr. J. R. Mortimer (_Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. lxvi-lxvii) says, ‘If food was essential [to the dead], so would liquid be ... and I do not know of an instance of the remains of animal matter having ever been found in any vase of the true drinking-cup type. That they served the purpose of holding liquid, there can be little doubt’. Mr. Mortimer is more logical than the people of the Bronze Age. His argument would lead to the conclusion that only food or only drink was considered necessary for the dead according as food-vessels or drinking-cups were placed with them. Very likely liquid was sometimes poured into drinking-cups: but for obvious reasons evidence is wanting; whereas evidence exists that they sometimes held food. By ‘the true drinking-cup type’ Mr. Mortimer apparently means the low-brimmed type which Thurnam called γ (see W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 95, fig. 82), and which, as we have seen, is confined to Northern Britain; but he is alone in calling this type ‘true’ to the exclusion of the others.

[825] _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), pp. 44-5.

[826] _Ib._, p. 45; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 378.

[827] _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 44.

[828] _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxviii, 1904, pp. 362-3.

[829] _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), p. 46.

[830] _Ib._; _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 358; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 80. The orthodox view is that incense-cups have never been found with interments by inhumation; but see J. R. Mortimer, _Forty Years’ Researches_, pp. liv-lv, lx, 256 (fig. 724), 259.

[831] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, p. 357; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, p. 80.

[832] The suggestions that they may have been lamps or even small urns intended to receive the ashes of infants have been refuted. See on the whole question _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 374-7; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 81-3; _Nature_, Jan. 13 (with which cf. _Archaeologia_, xliii, 374-5); E. B. Tylor, _Prim. Culture_, ii, 1903, pp. 383-5; and _Guide to the Ant. of the Bronze Age_ (Brit. Museum), pp. 45-6.

[833] _Archaeologia_, xliii, 1871, pp. 388-400; W. Greenwell, _Brit. Barrows_, pp. 65-7, 71, 76-7, 92-102; _Journ. Roy. Soc. Ant. Ireland_, 5th ser., iv, 1894, pp. 378-9; A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 164, 169, 216-39; J. Romilly Allen, _Celtic Art in Pagan and Christian Times_, 1904, pp. 26-39; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xxxix, 1905, pp. 333, 536-7. Mr. J. R. Mortimer (_Forty Years’ Researches_, p. lv) says that he has found vessels of all four kinds which were quite plain.

[834] A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 235-8.

[835] _Ib._, pp. 218-34. ‘General resemblance of ornamental patterns.’ says Pitt-Rivers (_ib._, p. 216), ‘is not enough to prove that they were copied from one another ... when, however, the points of resemblance are very minute, and the distribution limited and continuous, it may be fairly argued that the different kinds of earthworks in which they are found, in the same district, were of the same period’. Mr. Andrew Lang’s remarks on decorative motives (_Custom and Myth_, 1885, pp. 286-9) contain much, but not the whole truth. ‘The conviction becomes irresistible,’ he writes, ‘that all these objects, in shape, in purpose, in character of decoration, are the same, because the mind and the materials of men, in their early stages of civilisation especially, are the same everywhere. You might introduce old Greek bits of clay-work, figures or vases, into a Peruvian collection, or might foist Mexican objects among the clay treasures of Hissarlik, and the wisest archaeologist would be deceived.’ A socketed celt, almost identical in form with some Italian celts and ornamented with the chevron, has been found in Chili (J. Evans, _Anc. Bronze Implements_, p. 145).

[836] A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 216, 227; _Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot._, xix, 1885, pp. 346-8; xxxix, 1905, p. 333; _L’Anthr._, iv, 1893, p. 489; xvi, 1905, p. 2.

[837] Sir A. Mitchell, _The Past in the Present_, p. 28.

[838] A. Pitt-Rivers, _Excavations in Cranborne Chase_, iv, 238-9. Mr. Coffey (_Journ. Roy. Soc. Ant. Ireland_, 5th ser., v, 1895, p. 195) thinks that ‘herring-bone, chevron, and triangle ornament’ may be native in Europe, and (_ib._, vi, 1896, p. 42) that lozenge, chequer, and saltire patterns ‘may be original in Britain’. He holds, however (_ib._), that ‘we have no reason to believe that geometrical forms have ever been spontaneously invented’, and adds that ‘they appear to have been invariably derived by a process of conventionalisation from realistic prototypes’: he cites examples (_ib._, iv, 1894, pp. 364-6) from the pottery of Cyprus to show how ‘the body of the lotus flower is simplified to a triangular form, and the central sepal to an enlarged lozenge, enriched by cross-hatching and chequer patterns’; and he argues (_ib._, v, 1895, pp. 210-1) that ‘the occurrence of chequers of lozenges on Early Bronze Age remains from Scotland, in some instances identical with Cyprian forms, and the close association of lozenge, chequer, and × [saltire] patterns with the spiral in the Bronze Age ornament of Ireland is ... strong evidence that lozenge and chequer patterns travelled northward across Europe on the path of the spiral’.