accompaniments. The implements include all the ordinary forms of the
period: arrow, javelin and spear-heads, daggers, knives, scrapers,
fabricators, and chisels, of every grade of workmanship down to
nondescript-worked fragments of uncertain use. The majority of the
flint objects are, however, mere shapeless fragments and chippings, and
the frequent presence of these seems to indicate that the placing with
the dead of things useful in life had already begun to degenerate into
a merely symbolic ceremony.
Bronze objects follow next, but a long way behind. Of these the most
numerous by far are knife-daggers, the rest consisting of awls, pins,
axes, or celts, etc., and mere fragments. The first are of the early
form, in which the blade was attached to the handle by two or three
rivets, and the axes are of the early flat or slightly flanged form.
Next come objects of bone and deer-horn; the former consisting mostly
of pins and borers, and the latter of hammers. Then follow jet and
Kimmeridge—coal beads, studs, and necklaces, several of these being of
elaborate character. Besides the above, drilled and polished basalt and
granite axe-hammers, whet-stones, rubbers, quartz pebbles, red ochre,
and iron ore are occasionally met with. The animal remains associated
with the interments are those of species still existing in Europe, and
they include the present domesticated animals—the ox, sheep, goat, pig,
horse, and dog. So frequently has a tooth, described as that of an ox
or a horse, been reported that there is little doubt its introduction
had some ceremonial import; perhaps, here again, it was a food offering
reduced to a representative symbol.
Besides the various objects actually found with the interments, others
often occur amongst the materials of the mounds. Some of these may have
been unwittingly gathered up with the materials, and thus be of much
greater age than the barrows in which they are found; others may have
been casually dropped in after times, and have gravitated into the
interior. But a more fertile source of the scattered objects is the
disturbance of the earlier interments by the introduction of the later
ones.
The objects described above fall into two, but not easily separated,
classes—those which were introduced with the wearing apparel of the
deceased, and those with ceremonial import. The vessels are a good
example of the latter, as they differed in a marked degree from those
used for domestic purposes. So also the animals’ bones, especially the
teeth just referred to, as they evidently (as also the drinking-cups
and food-vessels) imply offerings of food to the dead. The absence
of Roman influence is noteworthy, as also is the absence of articles
characteristic of the later Bronze Age, as swords, palstaves, and
socketed axes. The objects indicate in the aggregate a time when stone
implements were going out of use, and bronze was confined to a few
light implements. But it must not be assumed in consequence that the
barrows we are considering were confined to the earlier Bronze Age.
The remarkable differences in the mode of interment, which have been
only sketchily described on the foregoing pages, present a highly
interesting problem to be solved. The prevailing view is that these
different modes were practised simultaneously by different tribes,
and even by the same people. The double interments, in which an
unburnt skeleton is associated with a deposit of cremated remains,
may seem to countenance the latter view, while the distribution of
the interments favours the former. For instance, in certain districts
certain modes prevailed. On and around Stanton Moor, and throughout the
country between Eyam, Castleton, and Sheffield, cremated interments
predominate, while in many parts of the west of the county the
interments are exclusively unburnt. Then, again, in barrows containing
many burials there is a decided partiality for like rather than unlike
interments. But if the phenomena are subjected to a careful and
systematic study, it will be found that these differences are neither
local nor tribal, but in the main consecutive.
The problem is solved by the superposition and other evidences of
sequence of the different interments in those barrows which contain
several, with the comparison of the associated objects, and then by a
general correlation of the results derived from the individual barrows.
It is by a similar process that the geologist establishes the sequence
of his formations; the fossils playing the part of the associated
objects. The pottery is a peculiarly valuable factor in the enquiry,
as in spite of the conservatism of half-civilised people, the ease
with which the plastic clay can be modelled into any desired shape
resulted in comparatively rapid changes in form and decoration. In this
respect the pottery contrasted with the flint and stone implements,
the intractability of the materials of which limited the workman to a
narrow range of forms; hence these forms continued unchanged through
long periods. We will now give a few illustrations.
[Illustration: Fig. 12.—Typical Examples of Bronze Age Burial Vessels,
Derbyshire.
A—Incense-Cups. B—Cinerary Urns. (Scale = 1/5 size of originals.)
]
In a barrow at Parcelly Hay[18] Mr. Bateman found a skeleton in a
vault, and immediately above its cover-stones was another, accompanied
with a bronze knife-dagger and a polished granite axe-hammer. Here
is a case of simple superposition, in which the older interment was
not disturbed by the later one. But frequently the later introduction
disturbed or quite displaced the earlier. At Gray Cop,[19] near
Monsal Dale, for instance, the original interment consisted of the
skeletons of a woman and a child; but at a later date the cremated
remains of another body had been buried so deeply that the woman’s
pelvic bones had been dispersed in the process. The havoc wrought by
the introduction of secondary interments is sometimes very confusing,
and has given rise to erroneous conclusions on the part of the
barrow-digger. In the two examples just cited, the earlier interment
was the primary one—the one over which the mound was raised in the
first instance—and it occupied the normal position, the centre of the
site. The secondary interments may or may not be in the centre. In a
small barrow at Lidlow,[20] near Youlgreave, for instance, the primary
interment was a skeleton in a cist, while near the margin of the mound
was a later deposit of burnt bones under a cinerary urn. In another at
Blakelow[21] a central grave contained the skeletons of a woman and
infant with a drinking-cup, while in a cist at a higher level near the
edge were six more skeletons with a food-vase. In another on Hartle
Moor[22] was a deposit of burnt bones with a food-vessel in the central
cist, and near the margin a cinerary urn with its contents.
[18] _Ten Years’ Diggings_, 23.
[19] _Reliquary_, 1867.
[20] _Vestiges_, 33.
[21] _Ten Years’ Diggings_, 41.
[22] _Vestiges_, 72.
It has occasionally happened, however, that no central interment has
been recorded. In some cases we may suspect that the explorers had
forgotten that the primary interment is sometimes in a deep grave below
the natural level. On the other hand, carelessness on the part of those
who originally raised the mound may account for the interment being out
of the centre. The same result has been brought about by additions to
the original mound upon the occasions of new interments, for the Bronze
folk were not always content with merely inserting these into an old
mound. Sometimes the additional matter formed a capping. A barrow on
Ballidon Moor[23] furnishes a good example of this; it had an inner
cairn containing several interments, and was surmounted with a thick
layer of earth, at the foot of which was an ashy stratum representing
the site of a funeral pile, while in the earth above were the cremated
remains derived from it. It was evident, therefore, that this capping
was added on this occasion. More often the later mound was thrown
up against the side of the old one. The smaller chambered cairn at
Mininglow[24] was found to have had a mound of earth cast up against
its side, and this had been raised over the spot where a man had been
cremated, with whose remains were a bronze dagger, part of a bone
implement, and some “good flints,” all of which had passed through the
fire with their owner; and at Five Wells, Mr. Salt found a secondary
interment of Bronze Age type, consisting of a contracted skeleton in
a small cist, which had been constructed against the podium of the
chambered cairn, and covered with stones and earth—two interesting
proofs of the greater age of the chambered tumuli. These additions are
not easily detected if their materials are similar to those of the
parent mounds, but their effect may be apparent in the superficial
irregularities they give rise to. Not a few Derbyshire examples could
be given which probably owe their irregularities to this cause.
[23] _Ten Years’ Diggings_, 57.
[24] _Ibid._
These illustrations will have given the reader an idea how the
sequence of interments is determined. Many years ago the writer
tabulated the sequences in all the Derbyshire (including the
Staffordshire) barrows containing more than one interment each, of
which reliable information was obtainable. When those associated with
vessels, other than cinerary urns, were classified, some significant
results were obtained. The distribution of the vessels was as follows:
Twenty-nine drinking-cups, all associated with unburnt interments;
Sixty-five food-vases, of which forty-eight were associated with
unburnt and seventeen with burnt interments, but none of these in
cinerary urns; and
Eleven incense-cups, all with burnt interments, and nearly all in
cinerary urns.
It is a question whether the smaller food-vases associated with the
burnt interments should not be classed as incense-cups, as the two
forms often approximate; but this does not vitiate the general results.
That this table represents a sequence is proved by the fact that in
no barrow containing a number of interments has one associated with a
drinking-cup been found under conditions to suggest that it may have
been of _later_ introduction than a neighbouring food-vase or cinerary
urn, nor is there an example of a food-vase interment _succeeding_ an
inurned one; whereas the contrary has frequently been noted.
If we apply the test of horizontal position, we find that, compared
with the other interments, a much larger proportion of those with
drinking-cups were central, while those in urns were as markedly
lateral, indicating that the first were predominantly primary
interments, and the last secondary. But the vertical position gives
even more definite results. The normal position of a primary interment
is on or _below_ the old natural surface; that of a secondary, on or
_above_ that level.
The following table gives the percentages of these positions when
ascertainable:—
Interments with Below. On. Above natural level.
Drinking-cups 83 17 0
Food-vessels 43 31 26
Cinerary urns 36.5 36.5 27
It will be observed that in descending order the proportion of those
_below_ the natural level decreases, and of those _above_ increases,
the inference being that the ratio of primary to secondary interments
decreases.
These groups are further differentiated by the implements and other
objects associated with them. These are, as a rule, more numerous in
the drinking-cup interments and least so in the inurned. The flint
implements of the former are usually the more carefully wrought. Two
other peculiarities of the drinking-cup interments may be noted. With
five of them was an instrument described as a mesh-rule or a modelling
tool, made from the rib of some animal; but these instruments have not
been found with other Bronze Age interments in the county. The other
peculiarity is that in all these interments, the body, when it has
been recorded, lay on its left side. Both these peculiarities are also
characteristic of the drinking-cup interments of Staffordshire.
From these various data it is evident that very early in the Bronze Age
inhumation was the normal mode of sepulture. The body, probably clad
in the clothing of life, was laid on its side in a contracted attitude
on the natural surface or in a grave, with or without a fencing or
protection of some sort, which in its highest development took the
form of a cist. Food was certainly often, if not invariably, placed
with it; but all we know of this, as also any other articles which
were present, are the less perishable portions that have survived the
withering hand of Time—the bronze blade of a dagger-knife, the head
of an axe, or the flint point of an arrow. Now and again a vessel of
clay was also placed with the deceased—the vessel familiar to us as the
“drinking-cup.” Later, but still early in the age, and while as yet the
mode of burial was unchanged, this gave place to the food-vase. Whether
this vessel was derived from the former is uncertain. Derbyshire
provides no intermediate forms, and this seems to be general throughout
the country. But the period of transition may have been short, and
transitional forms may yet be forthcoming.
We have guardedly spoken of inhumation as the _normal_ mode of
sepulture at this early period, for cremation was both known and
practised, perhaps from the very first. The occasional presence of
a deposit of burnt human bones with these contracted interments has
already been noticed. Whether, as was then suggested, it represents
the immolation of a slave on the occasion of the burial or not, there
is little doubt that it should be regarded as a subordinate feature,
and the skeleton, as the interment proper. Fire certainly played an
important part in these early funerals, as the frequent presence of a
little charcoal indicates. Why? We can only guess. It must have had a
religious import—the ceremonial purification of the grave, perhaps; and
this might well have now and again included a human sacrifice.
There is little doubt that the drinking-cup was introduced from the
Continent,[25] and one is tempted to connect its introduction with
the brachycephalic newcomers, as also the introduction of bronze.
The immigration seems to have been of a peaceful nature, and however
much the powerfully-built “round-heads” may have influenced and even
dominated the native population, they were numerically only a small
element in it, and were ultimately—perhaps before the close of the
Bronze Age—absorbed by it.
[25] _Journal_, Anthropological Institute, 1902.
Before the food-vase ran its course, cremation, in the proper sense of
the term, made its appearance, and soon became the general fashion.
Perhaps it would be going too far to say that it _supplanted_
inhumation. For anything we know to the contrary, the latter still
continued in vogue in some parts of the country to the Roman period.
At first, it would seem, the cremated remains were deposited in cists,
or otherwise entombed after the manner of unburnt bodies; but soon
the more appropriate cinerary urn made its appearance, as also the
changeful and enigmatical little incense-cup. That the cinerary urn
was derived from the food-vase is almost beyond doubt, for although
Derbyshire has not supplied examples bridging the two, vessels of
intermediate form and associated with burnt remains, but not containing
them, have been found in the north.
Meanwhile, the objects placed with the dead became fewer and more
meagre in character, until at length they were reduced to little more
than fragments of flint, representing a rite, perhaps, with a lost
meaning. Less care was expended on the sepulchral vessels as time went
on, but the delicacy of some of the incense-cups proves that this was a
rule with exceptions. The general trend of evidence goes to show that
the later mounds raised over the dead were smaller and less stereotyped
in form than those of old. Ringed barrows and the smaller “circles”
are associated with cremated interments, especially those of the
cinerary-urn stage, in Derbyshire.
“Late” Prehistoric Barrows.
The interval between the last barrows and the Roman period presents
many difficulties to the student of the ancient sepulchral remains
of Derbyshire. A few—barely two dozen—barrows have been opened in
the county which had certain features in common that markedly
differentiated them from those of the Bronze Age on the one hand and
from the post-Roman or Anglo-Saxon on the other. Some of these, perhaps
most, can certainly be assigned to this interval; and of the rest,
several seem to as conclusively belong to the Roman period. As these
differ much from the typical Romano-British barrows, they may be held
to prove that the Romanization of the natives of the district was a
slow and retarded process. From the extremely ruined condition of these
barrows and their usually meagre contents it is only by comparing them
together, and especially with the larger number of the same type in
the adjacent parts of Staffordshire, that anything conclusive can be
learned of their original characteristics.
The mounds are sometimes of considerable size, and are wholly or
largely built up of fine materials, as earth, clay, sand, and
gravel; and if large stones enter into their composition, they are
not intermixed with the finer constituents, but form a platform or
pavement, a layer, or a capping. Occasionally they disclose the curious
constructional feature of two or more different materials arranged
in alternate layers. Such a barrow was opened at Gorsey Close,[26]
near Tissington, in 1845; its soil was found to be interspersed with
alternate layers of moss and grass. Another at Roylow,[27] near Sheen,
gave very similar results. It is also noticeable that these barrows are
often found in comparatively low-lying places.
[26] _Vestiges_, 80.
[27] _Proc._ Soc. Ant., 1895.
In every known instance, the interment over which the mound was
raised had undergone cremation, and this applies to the few secondary
interments which have been noticed. The bodies had invariably been
burned on the spot, and the hard-baked floors, strewn with charcoal and
ashes, are a notable feature of these “late” barrows. The excessive
heat of the funeral pile has so completely reduced the bones that they
have often escaped detection altogether. There is reason to think that
these calcined remains were sometimes left as they were deposited by
the fire; but in a few instances they were found occupying a shallow
circular hole in the natural surface into which they had been swept
after the fire was extinguished. This may have been a common practice,
for the presence of a small depression of the kind might easily be
overlooked by the explorer. On the other hand, there was evidence
that in some of these barrows the human ashes had been collected and
placed near the summit of the mound; and the large stones which have
occasionally been observed in this position may have been the relics of
the receptacle which contained them. We thus seem to have a “low-level”
and a “high-level” type, but whether this indicates a difference of
period is by no means certain. The general trend of evidence shows
that some effort was made to seal down, so to speak, the site of the
pyre and its contents by a layer of puddled clay or earth, which was
hardened by a fire upon it, or by a layer of large stones instead.
The articles associated with the interments, or, rather, the sites
of the piles, consist mostly of potsherds and rude implements and
chippings of flint, which are usually described as burnt. The potsherds
appear in every case to have been introduced as _potsherds_, and they
also appear to have belonged to the ordinary domestic vessels of the
time. That the introduction of these and the flints, together with
the pebbles which have occasionally been observed, had a religious
significance can hardly be questioned; and doubtless it is to this
custom, which was widespread and not confined to our shores, that the
passage in _Hamlet_ refers, anent the burial of Ophelia, that “sherds,
flints, and pebbles should be thrown on her.” Ophelia was supposed to
have perished by her own hands, and this pagan rite, reversed under the
Christian _regime_ into a symbol of execration, was deemed more fitting
in such a case than “charitable prayers.”
Other objects than these rarely occur in these barrows, and they mostly
relate to the personal attire of the deceased. Two bronze daggers and
a pin, and a bone pin or two, have been found—all burnt; but the most
remarkable “find” consisted of twenty-eight convex bone objects, marked
with dots and described as draughtsmen, and two ornamented bone combs,
which also had passed through the fire. Fragments of iron, a coin of
the lower Empire, and the upper stone of a quern, have also been found.
The coin is a valuable link in the chain of evidence as to the age of
these barrows. It was found associated with wheel-made potsherds and
calcined bones on the site of the funeral pile, under a small mound,
near Mininglow, under conditions which left no room for doubt that
it had passed through the fire with the body and the potsherds. The
terms in which the potsherds found in these barrows are invariably
described, as “wheel-made,” “hard,” “firmly-baked,” “compact,” and
“Romano-British,” all suggest the period of the Roman occupation or
its near approach. Querns and the use of iron are admittedly of late
introduction. The bone combs referred to above have a distinct Iron Age
_facies_. The two bronze dagger-blades, one of which was found in the
earth extension of the smaller Mininglow chambered cairn, are both of
later type than those associated with the Bronze Age burials.
On the other hand, a notable “find” near Throwley,[28] in
Staffordshire, provided a link between these “late” barrows and the
inurned interments of the Bronze Age. The barrow there, “wholly
composed of earth of a burnt appearance throughout,” was of the
“low-level” type previously referred to, and its cremated deposit was
in a circular depression in the natural soil. Among the burnt bones
were two pieces of flint and a quartz pebble; below them, the shoulder
blade of some large animal; while resting upon them were a small
bronze pin and “a very beautiful miniature vase of the incense-cup
type, ornamented with chevrons and lozenges, and perforated in two
places at one side.” This is the only complete vessel hitherto recorded
as from these “late” barrows of the two counties, and in its shape,
decoration, and other particulars it is a thoroughly typical Bronze
Age incense-cup. The circular depression was “of well-defined shape,
resulting from contact with a wooden or wicker-work vessel, in which
the bones were placed when buried, the vestiges of which in the form of
impalpable black powder intervened between the bones and the earth.”
Clearly, we have here a wooden or a basket-work equivalent of the
cinerary urn. It is probable that these circular holes were generally
similarly provided with such receptacles, for in another example, under
a barrow of the type we are considering, at Cold Eaton,[29] there were
indications that its contents had been “deposited in a shallow basket
or similar perishable vessel.” It was from this interment that the
bone draughtsmen and combs already alluded to were obtained, as also
some fragments of iron. It is interesting that in two barrows which
resemble one another too closely to be dissociated by more than a
short lapse of time, there should be objects which, _per se_, would be
relegated to two different archæological ages, for apart from the iron,
the combs were of a type found with Late-Celtic, Romano-British, and
even Anglo-Saxon remains. The inference, therefore, is that these two
barrows belonged to the overlap of the Bronze and Pre-Roman Iron Ages.
[28] _Ten Years’ Diggings_, 130.
[29] _Ten Years’ Diggings_, 179.