Archaeological Journal/Volume 3/Archaeological Intelligence (Part 2)
Archaeological Intelligence.
Primeval period.
The Rev. J. Graves, of Borris in Ossory, Local Secretary, forwarded the following communication: "Some time since the proprietor of the lands of Cuffborough, situate in the parish of Aghaboe, and Queen's County, ordered a mound of earth in one of his fields to be removed. After his labourers had cleared away a considerable portion of the hillock, they exposed to view a beehive-shaped structure of rough stones, three or four of which being removed gave entrance to a chamber within, which proved to be sepulchral. This chamber, measuring about five feet in diameter, had been formed by placing a circle of large stones on edge, at the back of which clay and small stones seemed to have been carefully and compactly banked up; the upright stones measured about three feet and a half in height from the floor of the chamber. On the upper edge of this circle, and with a slight projection over its inner face, was laid, on the flat, another circle of tolerably large stones, above these another row also projecting, and so on until the dome was closed at the apex by a single large stone. The floor of this chamber, which was perfectly dry, was covered by about an inch in depth of very fine dust; and in the centre, lying confusedly, were the bones of two human skeletons. The bones were quite perfect when first exposed to the atmosphere, but in a short time crumbled away. From their position when discovered, it would appear as if the bodies had been placed in a sitting posture, and that the bones, in the process of decay, had fallen one upon the other. One of the skulls was probably that of a female, being considerably smaller than the other, but on this point I cannot speak positively. The sepulchral chamber just described had evidently been built over the bodies of the deceased persons, there being no door, or other aperture by which they could afterwards have been introduced. The bones shewed no sign of cremation, and the impalpable dust covering the floor of the chamber, proved that the dead bodies had been placed there entire, and had undergone the process of decay after being enclosed within the rude stonework of their tomb; around and above which, earth had been heaped up, thus forming a regular sepulchral tumulus.
Were there, at the present day, any doubt as to the purpose for which the well known tumuli, existing at New Grange, Dowth, and Knowth on the margin of the Boyne, near Drogheda, had been constructed, the tumulus and sepulchral chamber above described, would serve to indicate that purpose; for, although on a very diminutive scale, it is identical in principles of construction with the former ones, presenting only such differences in detail as may be accounted for by its far inferior size. The tumuli on the Boyne were royal sepulchres, each comprising many chambers connected by passages, whilst the Cuffborough tumulus was most probably the burial place of a petty chieftain of the district. Mr. Petrie in his recent able work has proved beyond a doubt that the tumuli on the Boyne were erected as the burial places of the Irish monarchs of the Tuatha De Danann race: in proof of which he quotes, in the original Irish, a passage from the "Dinnsenchus" (contained in the Book of Ballymote, fol. 190) descriptive of that royal cemetery, of which the following is his translation:
'Of the monuments of Brugh (Brugh-na-Boinne) here, viz., the bed of the daughter of Forann, the Monument of the Dagda, the Mound of the Morrigan, the Monument of (the monster) Mata; . . . . the Barc of Crimthann Nianar[1], in which he was interred; the grave of Fedelmidh the Lawgiver[2]; the Cairn-ail (stone carn) of Conn of the Hundred Battles[3]; the Cumot (commensurate grave) of Cairbre Lifeachair[4]; the Fulacht of Fiacha Sraiphtine[5].'—Petrie s Eccl. Architecture of Ireland, &c., pp. 100, 101.
From the above passage we are enabled to assign the tumuli on the Boyne to a date from about B.C. 100 to A.D. 200; from its similarity of type the tumulus at Cuffborough must be considered of the same period. This tumulus presents an example of the disuse of cremation. Whether or not the remains originally deposited in New Grange, and the other tumuli on the Boyne, were subjected to the action of fire, has not, that I am aware of, been certainly determined. If we may credit Ledwich, no remains of ashes or marks of cremation were observable there in his time: and he mentions having seen it stated in the MS. additions to the Louthiana, made by Mr. Wright, and then in possession of a Mr. Allen of Darlington, that on first entering the dome of New Grange two skeletons were found[6]. However this may have been, the modern condition of the royal tumuli on the Boyne cannot be depended on with the same certainty as that of the small tumulus under notice; for whilst the latter from its very insignificance escaped violation, and remained undisturbed until accident at the present day caused its discovery, the former, being the well known burial place of the Irish kings, were at a very early period broken open in search of plunder; the annals of Ulster, as quoted by Mr. Petrie, relate this act of spoliation as follows:
'A.D. 862. The cave of Achadh Aldai, and of Cnodhba (Knowth), and the cave of the sepulchre of Boadan over Dubhad (Dowth), and the cave of the wife of Gobhan, were searched by the Danes, quod antea non perfectum est, on one occasion that the three kings, Amlaff, Imar, and Auisle, were plundering the territory of Flann the son of Conaing."—Eccl. Architecture of Ireland, &c., p. 102.
I regret to state that shortly after the discovery of the tumulus at Cuff- borough, some persons proceeded to excavate beneath the upright stones which formed the base of the chamber, in search of that much desired object, 'a crock of gold,' by which the entire structure was reduced to an undistinguishable mass of ruin; and the very stones are, I believe, now removed. But in order that so interesting an example of ancient Irish pagan sepulture may not be lost, I trust that this hurried notice of it may be deemed worthy of a place in the pages of the Archæological Journal."
Sir Philip de Malpas Grey Egerton, Bart., M.P., communicated the following note on the discovery of a sepulchral urn in a tumulus on Delamere Forest, Cheshire.
"In Ormerod's History of Cheshire the following description is given of a group of tumuli on Delamere Forest:—
'A mile south-east of the foot of the hill, (of Eddisbury,) at the lower end of a small natural lake called Fish Pool, are the tumuli known by the name of the Seven Lows, undoubtedly the 'VII Loos' alluded to by Leland as the marks of 'men of warre,' and much spoken of in his time. They are ranged in a form nearly semicircular, and are of different sizes, varying in diameter at the base from 105 to 40 feet.' In a note at the foot of the page the measurements are detailed thus. 'Beginning at the highest tumulus in the annexed plan, and following the semicircle, the tumuli measure in diameter at the base 105, 4512, 40, 105, 66, 68 feet. The seventh has been carried away to form a road. The plans of these tumuli have been reduced from the great map of the forest, by permission of the commissioners.' The text continues ; 'One has been removed in the recent alterations on the forest, and another was opened at a former period, both of which were composed of the dry gravelly soil of the forest, and contained a black matter, similar to that which appeared on opening Castle Hill Cob.' The latter is a tumulus also on Delamere Forest, in connection with a second called Glead Hill Cob, and is stated to have contained 'a quantity of black soil, which might be supposed to be either animal matter, or produced by the effects of fire.' By an act of parliament, which received the royal assent June 9, 1812, two commissioners were appointed for allotting the waste lands on the forest, and that portion including the Seven Lows fell to my share. From that period until very recently the tumuli remained undisturbed; but, in February last, a tenant employed in cultivating the adjoining land, being in want of materials to level an old road, opened for that purpose the tumulus referred to in Ormerod's plan as No. 6. On digging into it he found, that so far from being composed of the 'dry gravelly soil of the forest,' as the others were, with the exception of the superficial covering, it was composed entirely of fragments of the sandstone rock, derived apparently from an old quarry between the tumulus and the lake on its north, called Fish Pool. On my return from London some days after this, having received information that an urn, containing bones, had been found, I proceeded to the spot, and obtained what information I could from an examination of the remainder of the tumulus, and the account given by the workmen of the portions they had removed. On digging into the mound on the east side, they arrived at a single layer of stones; on advancing a little further they found two layers; still further the stones were three, four, and five deep. The urn was found on the north-east side, where the stones were two in depth. It was reversed on a flat stone, and had no covering further than the superficial soil. Fragments of charcoal and earth, discoloured by fire, were found over a great part of the floor of the mound. From this description obtained from the workmen, (and which I believe to be substantially correct,) and from the appearance of the portion of the tumulus remaining at the time of my visit, it appears that the modus operandi in its construction was this: a circular area of a definite diameter was first selected, and floored with a layer of stones; on this the funeral pile was constructed. When the fire was extinguished, the ashes and bones were collected and deposited in the urn, and the latter reversed in such a position near the circumference of the area that there should be no danger of its being crushed by the superincumbent structure. This being arranged, the tumulus was formed by piling up stones, and finally completed by a covering of soil. The quantity of stones in this tumulus cannot have been less than fifty tons. Its circumference was rather more than sixty yards, and the height in the centre 6 feet.
"The urn is of earthenware, apparently slightly baked or sun-dried. The marks of the lathe are visible in the interior, but for lack of support while soft its form is far from symmetrical. Its dimensions are as follows: circumference at the rim, 2 feet 7 inches; largest circumference, 2 feet 11 inches; diameter of the foot, 5 inches; height, 1 foot 1 inch. At four inches below the rim a raised fillet surrounds the urn, and the portion between the rim and the fillet is rudely ornamented with parallel lines drawn diagonally in various directions, but never decussating. They appear as if formed by pressing a piece of twisted cord on the soft clay."
The annexed interesting examples of the fictile vases of the primeval period were exhibited by Edward Strutt, Esq., M.P. They were discovered on a rising ground in the parish of Kingston upon Soar, Nottinghamshire. Numerous fragments of urns were found dispersed over about an acre and a half of ground, formerly ploughed land; they were deposited about 12 to 18 inches under the surface of the soil, generally two or three urns together, surrounded by small boulder stones, and fragments of bone appeared amongst their contents. A bead of bone, some fragments of metal, and a few small portions of a coloured vitrified substance, apparently beads, which had been exposed to fire, were found with the urns. The vases are drawn to a scale of two inches to the foot. The first discovery of urns in this place occurred in making a plantation, during the year 1840; about three years after, further researches were made; twelve or thirteen were found tolerably perfect, but the number deposited must have been large, the quantify of fragments being very considerable. The urns differed considerably in dimension; the Specimens here represented being the most striking varieties. A considerable number of vases, very similar in form, were found some years since, at Caister, in Norfolk.
FICTILE VASES, FOUND NEAR KINGSTON UPON SOAR.
Another example of the curious ornamental collars, to which the name of "beaded torc" has been assigned by Mr. Birch[7], has been communicated by Mr. Thomas Gray. It was found by a labourer, while cutting turf in Socher Moss, Dumfriesshire, about two miles north of the Border Tower, called Cumlongan Castle. It lay in a small bowl, which measured, in diameter, 612 in. and 3 in depth: this vessel was formed of thin bronze plate, very skilfully wrought. The collar, although similar in general design and adjustment to the curious specimen in Mr. Dearden's possession, and the one communicated to the Institute by Mr. Sedgwick, differs from any hitherto found in the details of ornament. The beads are boldly ribbed and grooved longitudinally, each bead measuring about an inch in diameter: between every two beads there is a small flat piece, formed like the wheel of a pulley. The portion of this collar which passed round the nape of the neck is flat, smooth within, chased on the outer edge, in imitation of a cord, corroborating Mr. Birch's conjecture that this kind of collar was fashioned originally in imitation of a row of beads strung upon a cord. Socher Moss appears to have been a forest of great extent, and large trunks of trees are frequently found in it: numerous ancient coins, seals, and other remains of various periods, have been brought to light in cutting peat in this great morass, and the neighbouring heights are crowned by encampments, supposed to be of Roman origin. Mr. Gray sent impressions from two seals discovered in this moss: one of them appeared to be an antique intaglio, representing Mars, the other was a personal seal of late medieval date, bearing an eagle displayed.
Roman period.
The Rev. W. H. Gunner, Local Secretary for Hampshire, reported the discovery of a large quantity of Roman coins, and the remains of a Roman villa, in Mitcheldever Wood, about six miles from Winchester, on the road to Basingstoke. Mr. Gunner stated that on proceeding to the spot he was informed that about two years ago the game-keeper found a few coins scratched out of the ground by the rabbits, and as this occurred from time to time, he was induced to dig in order to discover if there was any hoard concealed there. He thus exposed the foundations of a wall composed of flint and slates. The lower layer was of flint placed upon the chalk soil; on the flint was laid a coating of mortar, and on the mortar a course of slates. In this matter, mixed up with it, were the coins, of which at least 1400 were found. Those which Mr. Gunner saw were all third brass, the only one he could decipher was of the Emperor Gratian. The excavations were continued under the direction of the bailiff of Sir Thomas Baring, the owner of the estate. Foundations of walls were discovered in all directions round the spot; and fragments of Roman bricks and flue-tiles, some pottery, and two or three pieces of the so-called Samian ware, had been turned up. Mr. Gunner added, "There can be no doubt that these are the remains of a very considerable Roman villa. The site may be very distinctly traced by means of inequalities in the ground, which, from being buried in the recesses of a very large wood, have hitherto escaped notice. The people employed in the wood had long observed that in the immediate neighbourhood of this spot the soil was very different from that of the rest of the wood. Such is certainly the fact. It appears to be artificial, and, I should think, brought from a distance; for it seemed to be a black loam, whilst the surrounding soil is that which prevails in the Hampshire Hills, a thin light vegetable mould upon chalk. I will take an early opportunity of visiting the spot again, and should anything of interest occur I will inform the Institute of it."
At the present time, when the study of the vestiges of the Roman occupation of Britain has received a fresh impetus, the following remarks on the authenticity of the treatise "de Situ Britanniæ," attributed to Richard of Cirencester, may be acceptable to our readers. They are communicated by Mr. Macray, of Oxford. In 1747, Charles Julius Bertram, an Englishman who held the office of Professor in the Naval School at Copenhagen, pretended to have discovered an old manuscript which, he said, came into his possession "with many other curiosities, in an extraordinary manner." He sent an extract from it, together with a facsimile of three lines, to Dr. Stukeley, who, deceived by its apparent antiquity, subsequently published an analysis of the work, founded on a series of letters from Bertram. The treatise first appeared in a complete form at Copenhagen in 1758; a translation of it was published in London in 1809. From the date of its publication up to the present time it has been referred to by the best writers on English History. Whitaker, the historian of Manchester, dated from the discovery of Richard's work a new era for the elucidation of the earliest period of British history; Lingard, Lappenberg, and others have appealed to its authority. Nevertheless there has long been a suspicion of its authenticity; and in 1838 the council of the English Historical Society issued a paper stating the doubtful character of Richard's work, and explaining the reasons which led them to reject it from among the received materials of English history. M. Charles Wex, a German critic of distinction, has recently published[8] an essay to prove that this treatise was fabricated by Bertram. The points on which M. Wex relies are these: I. In the passages quoted from Tacitus readings are often found taken from later editions, readings arising either from accidental errors of the press in those editions, or from the conjectures of scholars. II. Where did the English monk of the fourteenth century get the fifteen Greek and Latin writers whom he quotes? Where did he obtain Tacitus, and above all, where did he find his Agricola? Whatever treasures the ancient monastic libraries in England of the seventh and eighth centuries may have possessed we know were destroyed by the Danish invaders. But even in the most flourishing period of the earlier ages, there was no Tacitus in England. Alcuin, who in his poem 'de Pontificibus' celebrates the riches of the English libraries, knew of no copy of this author. Of Roman historians he names only (v. 1549.)
'Historici veteres, Pompeius, Plinius, ipse
Acer Aristoteles, rhetor quoque Tullius ingens.'
The British historians of that period, Gildas, Nennius, Asserius, Beda, do not betray the slightest knowledge of the events of their native land as narrated by Tacitus. The advocates of Richard would seem to have in some degree anticipated this objection, as Stukeley remarks that Widmore had communicated to him a certificate from which it appeared that Richard received a license from his abbey, in 1391, to make a journey to Rome; but M. Wex observes that it is questionable whether in the 14th centurv a manuscript of Agricola was to be found even in Rome. Bertram would have managed the matter more skilfully if he had sent his monk on a journey to Fulda, and Corvey, where some knowledge was preserved, by the scholars of Rhabanus, of those works of Tacitus which were still in existence there, although they had almost disappeared in the middle ages; but there is as little trace of the Agricola to be discovered among them as in other writers. The Agricola seems to have been unknown to Orosius, and M. Wex doubts the assertion of Becker, that Jornandes had used that treatise. The first editor of Tacitus, Vendelin de Spira, did not possess a MS. of the Agricola, and it is yet unknown where Franciscus Puteolanus obtained a copy. It is remarkable, that where the information of writers whom we know ceases, there also ends, not the work of Richard, but the MS. of Bertram. At the conclusion a new paragraph commences with 'Postea . . .' and breaks off with 'reliqua desunt,' by the editor; thus the manuscript presents an artificial hiatus precisely at that point where new disclosures might have been desired, but could not be anticipated. In conclusion, M. Wex points out the palpable fabrication of the map of 'Britannia Romana' accompanying the Treatise, which Bertram in his preface states to be of still greater "rarity and antiquity" than Richard's work, although it has been obviously compiled from authorities long subsequent to Ptolemy.
Mr. James Talbot communicated, by permission of Lord Rayleigh, two remarkable gold rings, of Roman workmanship, elaborately ornamented with filigree. They were found in March, 1824, at Terling Place, near Witham, Essex, with a large hoard of gold and silver coins. The discovery occurred under the following circumstances: some workmen were engaged in forming a new road through Colonel Strutt's park, and, the earth being soaked by heavy rains, the cart-wheels sunk up to their naves. The driver of the cart saw some white spots upon the mud adherent to the wheels, which he imagined to be small buttons: at that moment Colonel Strutt's steward came to the spot, and perceived coins upon the wheels. Not fewer than three hundred were picked up at that time. Three days after Colonel Strutt's steward made further search, and found a small vase, almost perfect, in which had been deposited the two gold rings, and thirty aurei, of the size of a guinea, with several silver coins, all as bright as if recently struck. Several other vases, in which no coins or other objects were found, lay near the spot; they crumbled to pieces on removal; the perfect vase was carried to Terling Place. The gold coins comprised eight of Valentinian, one of Valens, one of Gratian, nine of Arcadius, and thirteen of Honorius. The silver pieces were thus enumerated; Constantius, ten; Julian, not laureate, one; Julian, twenty-three, including one bearing a second head; Jovian, one; Valentinian, twenty-one; Valens, forty-three; Gratian, thirty-eight; Magnus Maximus, thirty-six; Victor, five; Valentinian, junior, five; Eugenius, seventeen; Theodosius, twenty-seven; Arcadius, forty-five; Honorius, thirty; with two silver coins, uncertain, and two of bronze, ranging from about A.D. 335 to 445. The rings, of which, by Lord Rayleigh's kind permission, representations are here given, are interesting examples of late Roman work: one of them is set with a colourless crackly crystal or pasta, uncut, and en cabochon; the other with a paste formed of two layers; the upper being of a dull smalt colour, the lower dark brown.
A notice of the discovery of numerous antiquities in the part of Cheshire which lies at the mouth of the Dee, was communicated by the Rev. Abraham Hume. L.L.D., Local Secretary of the Institute at Liverpool. These vestiges of the various races which peopled the shores of that river in succession, present the greatest variety, both as regards their nature, and the period to which they may be assigned. The collection formed by Dr. Hume comprises numerous ornaments of dress or personal use, implements, and curious specimens of ancient workmanship, chiefly in metal: fragments of earthenware, and a few objects evidently of modern date. A number of Roman and Saxon coins have been found, the latter being generally subdivided into halves and quarters. We hope to be enabled to give, at some future occasion, a more detailed account of some of the curious antiquities which had been accumulated in the alluvial deposit at the mouth of the Dee.
SAXON PERIOD.
In the second volume of the Archæological Journal, p. 239, we gave a short account and plan of the remarkable crypt beneath the site of the nave of Hexham church, Northumberland. We then observed that it might probably be the identical subterranean oratory constructed by St. Wilfrid, and suggested the propriety of comparing its plan with that of the crypt of Ripon cathedral, originally one of Wilfrid's foundations. Mr. Fairless, of Hexham, to whom we were indebted for the materials of that notice, has since re-examined the Hexham crypt, and obtained a plan of that at Ripon, from which it appears that the design is the same in both buildings. Mr. Fairless remarks, that almost all the stones of which the Hexham crypt is constructed are sculptured, and, as we suggested, of apparently Roman workmanship. This circumstance induced him to examine the church at Corbridge, about four miles from Hexham. half a mile to the west of which is the supposed site of the Corstopitum of Antonine's Itinerary; at any rate, the site of a Roman station, and probably that from which the materials for the crypt were obtained. He found in the walls of the tower of the church, both externally and internally, ribbed and variously sculptured stones similar to those in the crypt at Hexham, of which we engraved three examples in our former notice (vol. ii. p. 240.) A few of the largest carved stones in the tower of Corbridge have the lewis hole, like those covering the passages of the crypt. Mr. Fairless expresses an opinion that the whole of the tower is built of Roman materials, as he found carved stones in the inside of the top walls, and throughout all the stages in ascending. Since the date of our previous notice the walled-up passages of the crypt have been further explored, consequently extending their dimensions, but not so as to alter the general plan we have engraved.
Incised slab, Hexham.
PERIOD OF GOTHIC ART.
Mr. Fairless forwarded a sketch and rubbing of the curious decorated cross here represented. It is placed in the angle formed by the side aisles of the choir and north transept of the abbey church at Hexham, and has long been popularly regarded as the tomb of Alfwald, king of Northumbria, who, according to Richard, prior of Hexham, was murdered by his uncle Sigga, A.D. 788, at a spot called Cithlechester, near the Roman wall. It is scarcely necessary to observe that this monument is not more ancient than the fourteenth century. The slab on which the cross is sculptured is 6 feet 9 inches in length, 2 feet in breadth, and 7 inches in depth: it rests on a moulded basement rising 3 feet from the ground.
Mr. Du Noyer communicated a drawing and account of the monument of the Butler family, in the Franciscan Friary at Clonmel, of which an engraving is annexed (see next page). Mr. Du Noyer observed that the camail is not usually seen of such a length in English effigies of the same period, and was probably copied from a relic of much older date.
Tomb of the Butler family.
Amongst the numerous matrices of official and personal seals, communicated on various occasions, may be noticed the following, now in the possession of Colonel Barne, of Sotterley Park. Two leaden matrices, of pointed oval form, one of them bearing a fleur-de-lys, with the legend, ✠ SIGILL' WILL'I MOLENDINARII. A brass lozenge-shaped matrix, with a regal head issuant from a ship, as the principal device; on either side of the head a star, above it a star within a crescent. Legend, ✠ Sigillum balliuorum de donewico. Date, the time of Edward III. A circular seal, apparently Flemish, upon which was represented an ecclesiastic, kneeling before the Blessed Virgin and infant Saviour, with the following legend, ✠ S' G P'PITI ЄCCЄ PPEND' (ET) DЄBЄQ'GN'. A round privy seal, bearing the Holy Lamb; legend, ✠ SIGILLVM: SЄCRЄTI. These interesting seals were all found at Dunwich, in Suffolk, and were kindly sent for examination by Miss Gascoyne.
We regret that the difficulty of engraving the numerous illustrations required for many communications of interest received during the last quarter, obliges us to defer them until the next number.
- ↑ Crimthann Nianar became monarch of Ireland, A.M. 4021, and reigned 16 years.—Keating's History of Ireland. Table of Kings.
- ↑ Fedelmidh the Lawgiver became monarch of Ireland, A.D. 113, and reigned 3 years.—Ibid.
- ↑ Conn of the Hundred Battles became monarch of Ireland, A.D. 122, and reigned 7 years.—Ibid.
- ↑ Cairbre Lifeachair became monarch of Ireland, A.D. 254, and reigned 27 years.—Ibid.
- ↑ Fiacha Sraiphtine became monarch of Ireland, A.D. 282, and reigned 30 years.—Ibid.
- ↑ Ledwich's Antiquities, 2nd ed. p. 44. New Grange was first opened in modern times in the year 1699. Ibid.
- ↑ Archæological Journal, vol. iii. p. 32.
- ↑ M. Wex's essay is printed in the 'Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, Neue Folge, Vierter Jahrgang, Drittes Heft, 1845.'
- ↑ Archæologia, vol. xxx. pl. xii. p. 137.
- ↑ Gough's Camden, vol. i. p. cxx.