Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent: Networks of mobility, exchange and belief in the third and second centuries BC 9781407316840, 9781407355542

Citation preview

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Networks of mobility, exchange and belief in the third and second centuries BC

Greta Anthoons BAR BRITISH SERIES 666

2021

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Networks of mobility, exchange and belief in the third and second centuries BC

Greta Anthoons BAR BRITISH SERIES 666

2021

Published in 2021 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR British Series 666 Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent isbn  978 1 4073 1684 0 paperback isbn  978 1 4073 5554 2 e-format doi https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407316840 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library © Greta Anthoons 2021 cover image View of the partially excavated chariot burial of Ferry Fryston. Image courtesy of Oxford Archaeology Ltd. The Author’s moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher. Links to third party websites are provided by BAR Publishing in good faith and for information only. BAR Publishing disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website referenced in this work.

BAR titles are available from: BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, ox2 7bp, uk email [email protected] phone +44 (0)1865 310431 fax +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

Of Related Interest Arts and Crafts in Iron Age East Yorkshire A holistic approach to pattern and purpose, c. 400BC-AD100 Helen Chittock Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2021

BAR British Series 660

Equids and Wheeled Vehicles in the Ancient World Essays in Memory of Mary A. Littauer Edited by Peter Raulwing, Katheryn M. Linduff and Joost H. Crouwel Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2019

BAR International Series 2923

Neolithic and Bronze Age Funerary and Ritual Practices in Wales, 3600–1200 BC Geneviève Tellier Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2018

BAR British Series 642

Chariots in Early China Origins, cultural interaction, and identity Hsiao-yun Wu Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2013

BAR International Series 2457

Investigating Animal Burials Ritual, mundane and beyond James Morris Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2011

BAR British Series 535

The Iron Age in East Yorkshire An analysis of the later prehistoric monuments of the Yorkshire Wolds and the culture which marked their final phase John Strickland Dent Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2010

BAR British Series 508

Acknowledgements This book and the original PhD have benefited greatly from the input of a wide range of people. My first thanks go to my supervisor, Raimund Karl (and his wife Sonja), and to my examiners, Melanie Giles and Kate Waddington. Over the years, I have had stimulating exchanges with many different people, while several others generously provided me with images, drawings or other material; Kate Dennett even made a drawing of a yoke with a five-terret system especially for me! I am very grateful to Peter van de Broeke, Anne Cahen-Delhaye, Herman Clerinx, John Collis, Peter Cosyns, Guy De Mulder, John Dent, Paula Gentil, Nathalie Ginoux, José Gomez de Soto, Adam Gwilt, Peter Halkon, J.D. Hill, Fraser Hunter, Véronique Hurt, Bart Jaski, Mandy Jay, Sarah King, Bernard Lambot, Thierry Lejars, Hubert Lepaumier, the late Rod Mackey, Rena Maguire, Nick Mason, Gerry McDonnell, Vincent Megaw, Emilie Millet, Harold Mytum, Peter Ramsl, Nico Roymans, Ian Stead, Claude Sterckx, Paula Ware and Emilie Tureluren. Furthermore, I am indebted to the following museums and institutions: the LVR-LandesMuseum Bonn, the Rheinisches Landesmuseum Trier, the National Archaeological Institute with Museum at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Hull and East Riding Museum: Hull Museums, York Museums, the British Museum, the National Museum of Scotland, the Musée des Celtes (Libramont), the Musée archéologique du Val-d’Oise, the Musée de Normandie and the Institut national de recherches archéologiques préventives (Inrap). Finally, I would also like to express my gratitude to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback, and to the editors at BAR Publishing for their unrelenting patience.

v

Contents List of Figures................................................................................................................................................................... xiii List of Tables...................................................................................................................................................................... xv Foreword.......................................................................................................................................................................... xvii Abstract............................................................................................................................................................................. xix 1. Introduction................................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. A decade of new discoveries and research............................................................................................................. 1 1.2. The Arras Culture................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3. Methodology........................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4. Use of historical sources......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.5. Terminology............................................................................................................................................................ 6 1.6. Chronology............................................................................................................................................................. 6 2. The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire.................................................................................................................... 7 2.1. Eastern Yorkshire in its British context.................................................................................................................. 7 2.2. Yorkshire and the Arras Culture............................................................................................................................. 7 2.3. Geographical study area......................................................................................................................................... 8 2.4. Funerary practices in eastern Yorkshire.................................................................................................................. 8 2.4.1. Inhumation...................................................................................................................................................... 9 2.4.2. From round to square barrows........................................................................................................................ 9 2.4.3. From isolated barrows to large size cemeteries?.......................................................................................... 11 2.4.4. The large cemeteries of the Yorkshire Wolds............................................................................................... 12 2.4.5. Burial types................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.4.5.1. Type A burials.......................................................................................................................................... 16 2.4.5.2. Type B burials.......................................................................................................................................... 20 2.4.5.3. Type B and C warrior burials.................................................................................................................. 20 2.4.5.4. Type C burials with mirrors..................................................................................................................... 24 2.4.5.5. Type C burials with vehicles and horse harness...................................................................................... 26 2.4.5.6. Type D burials......................................................................................................................................... 26 2.4.5.7. Animal burials......................................................................................................................................... 27 2.4.6. Organic grave goods..................................................................................................................................... 27 2.4.7. Location of cemeteries in the landscape....................................................................................................... 27 2.5. Chariot burials...................................................................................................................................................... 28 2.5.1. Location........................................................................................................................................................ 29 2.5.2. Barrows and grave pits................................................................................................................................. 30 2.5.3. Complete versus dismantled chariots .......................................................................................................... 30 2.5.4. The interior organisation of dismantled chariot burials................................................................................ 33 2.5.5. Coffin or vehicle body?................................................................................................................................. 34 2.5.6. Vehicle parts and horse harness.................................................................................................................... 37 2.5.7. Weapons........................................................................................................................................................ 42 2.5.8. The deceased................................................................................................................................................. 43 2.5.9. The horses..................................................................................................................................................... 43 2.5.10. Other animal bones..................................................................................................................................... 44 2.6. The start of the Arras Culture............................................................................................................................... 44 2.6.1. Overview....................................................................................................................................................... 44 2.6.2. The earliest brooches.................................................................................................................................... 44 2.6.3. The chariot burials........................................................................................................................................ 46 2.6.4. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates........................................................................................................ 46 2.6.5. Heirlooms and antiques................................................................................................................................ 47

vii

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 2.7. Natural sciences and the population of East Yorkshire........................................................................................ 47 2.7.1. Radiocarbon dating....................................................................................................................................... 47 2.7.2. Isotope evidence........................................................................................................................................... 48 2.7.3. Skeletal evidence for engendered violence................................................................................................... 48 2.8. Non-funerary features of the East Yorkshire landscape....................................................................................... 49 2.8.1. Linear earthworks......................................................................................................................................... 49 2.8.2. Settlements.................................................................................................................................................... 49 2.8.3. Means of subsistence.................................................................................................................................... 50 2.9. A few preliminary conclusions............................................................................................................................. 50 2.9.1. Burials: a reflection of social status?............................................................................................................ 50 2.9.2. Import of ideas and luxury materials from the Continent............................................................................. 51 2.10. British chariot burials outside Yorkshire............................................................................................................ 51 2.10.1. Scotland...................................................................................................................................................... 51 2.10.2. Wales........................................................................................................................................................... 52 2.10.3. Other regions.............................................................................................................................................. 53 3. The Middle Rhine – Moselle region......................................................................................................................... 55 3.1. Chariot burials and general funerary practices..................................................................................................... 55 3.1.1. Location and history..................................................................................................................................... 55 3.1.2. Disposal of the dead...................................................................................................................................... 55 3.1.3. Superstructures and enclosures..................................................................................................................... 56 3.1.4. Grave pits...................................................................................................................................................... 56 3.1.5. General arrangement of chariot burials........................................................................................................ 56 3.1.5.1. Position of the vehicle............................................................................................................................. 56 3.1.5.2. Position and orientation of the deceased (inhumations).......................................................................... 57 3.1.5.3. Dismantled chariot burials....................................................................................................................... 57 3.1.6. The deceased................................................................................................................................................. 57 3.1.7. Vehicle parts and horse harness.................................................................................................................... 59 3.1.8. Grave goods.................................................................................................................................................. 60 3.2. The Middle Rhine – Moselle region versus the Arras Culture............................................................................. 62 4. The Netherlands......................................................................................................................................................... 63 5. The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions........................................................................................................... 65 5.1. General funerary practices.................................................................................................................................... 65 5.1.1. Data............................................................................................................................................................... 65 5.1.2. Disposal of the dead...................................................................................................................................... 67 5.1.3. Position and orientation of the deceased...................................................................................................... 67 5.1.4. Multiple burials............................................................................................................................................. 68 5.1.5. Disturbance and reopening of graves........................................................................................................... 68 5.1.6. Enclosures..................................................................................................................................................... 68 5.1.7. Superstructures: barrows and mortuary houses............................................................................................ 69 5.1.8. Grave pits...................................................................................................................................................... 70 5.1.9. Cemetery organisation.................................................................................................................................. 70 5.1.10. Grave goods................................................................................................................................................ 70 5.1.11. The funerary scene in LT B2....................................................................................................................... 72 5.2. Chariot burials – southern Champagne and northern Burgundy (LT A1)............................................................ 73 5.3. Chariot burials - Marne, Aisne, southern Ardennes and Meuse (LT A-B)........................................................... 74 5.3.1. Location and history..................................................................................................................................... 74 5.3.2. Chariot burials and cemeteries...................................................................................................................... 75 5.3.3. Disposal of the dead...................................................................................................................................... 75 5.3.4. Superstructures and enclosures..................................................................................................................... 75 5.3.5. Grave pits...................................................................................................................................................... 76 5.3.6. General burial arrangement.......................................................................................................................... 76 5.3.7. The deceased................................................................................................................................................. 76 5.3.8. Vehicle parts and horse harness.................................................................................................................... 77 5.3.9. Grave goods.................................................................................................................................................. 79 viii

Contents 5.4. Chariot burials - Aisne and northern Ardennes (LT C-D1).................................................................................. 80 5.5. The Aisne-Marne during LT B2............................................................................................................................ 83 5.6. The Aisne-Marne region versus the Arras Culture............................................................................................... 85 6. The Belgian Ardennes............................................................................................................................................... 87 6.1. Chariot burials and general funerary practices..................................................................................................... 87 6.1.1. Chariot burials and cemeteries...................................................................................................................... 88 6.1.2. Disposal of the dead...................................................................................................................................... 88 6.1.3. Superstructures and enclosures..................................................................................................................... 88 6.1.4. Grave pits...................................................................................................................................................... 88 6.1.5. The deceased................................................................................................................................................. 90 6.1.6. General arrangement of chariot burials........................................................................................................ 90 6.1.7. Vehicle parts and horse harness.................................................................................................................... 91 6.1.8. Grave goods.................................................................................................................................................. 93 6.2. The origins of the La Tène culture of the Belgian Ardennes................................................................................ 95 6.3. The Belgian Ardennes and the origins of the Arras Culture................................................................................. 96 6.3.1. Demographic fluctuations in the Belgian Ardennes..................................................................................... 96 6.3.2. ‘Poor grave goods’ and ‘plain vehicles’?...................................................................................................... 97 6.3.3. Other issues................................................................................................................................................... 97 6.3.4. Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................... 97 7. The Luxembourg Ardennes...................................................................................................................................... 99 8. The Paris area.......................................................................................................................................................... 101 8.1. Chariot burials and general funerary practices................................................................................................... 101 8.1.1. Chariot burials and cemeteries.................................................................................................................... 101 8.1.2. Disposal of the dead.................................................................................................................................... 102 8.1.3. Superstructures and enclosures................................................................................................................... 103 8.1.4. Grave pits.................................................................................................................................................... 104 8.1.5. The deceased............................................................................................................................................... 105 8.1.6. General arrangement of chariot burials...................................................................................................... 105 8.1.7. Vehicle parts and horse harness.................................................................................................................. 107 8.1.8. Grave goods................................................................................................................................................ 112 8.1.9. Settlements.................................................................................................................................................. 115 8.2. The origins.......................................................................................................................................................... 115 8.2.1. A new population of mixed origins?........................................................................................................... 116 8.2.2. A local development?.................................................................................................................................. 117 8.2.3. Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................. 118 8.3. The Paris area versus the Arras Culture.............................................................................................................. 118 8.3.1. The Parisi and the Parisii............................................................................................................................ 118 8.3.2. The burial tradition..................................................................................................................................... 119 8.3.3. Vehicle parts and horse harness.................................................................................................................. 121 8.3.4. Art style....................................................................................................................................................... 121 8.3.5. Settlements.................................................................................................................................................. 121 8.3.6. Same origins?.............................................................................................................................................. 121 8.3.7. Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................. 122 9. The ‘Groupe de la Haine’ (Belgium)...................................................................................................................... 123 9.1. Sites.................................................................................................................................................................... 123 9.2. Disposal of the dead........................................................................................................................................... 123 9.3. Vehicle parts and horse harness.......................................................................................................................... 123 9.4. Types of chariot burials...................................................................................................................................... 124 9.5. Grave goods........................................................................................................................................................ 124 9.6. Sanctuary............................................................................................................................................................ 125 9.7. Origins and connection with Arras Culture?...................................................................................................... 125

ix

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 10. The Aisne valley in the Oise department............................................................................................................... 127 10.1. The 1926 chariot burial..................................................................................................................................... 127 10.2. The 2009 chariot burials................................................................................................................................... 127 11. Normandy................................................................................................................................................................. 129 12. Burials with parts of vehicle and/or harness in northern Gaul........................................................................................................................................ 133 12.1. Geographical distribution................................................................................................................................. 133 12.2. Origins and dating............................................................................................................................................ 134 12.3. Complete and pars pro toto chariot burials...................................................................................................... 134 12.4. A special composition....................................................................................................................................... 136 12.5. Northern Gaul versus the Arras Culture in this period..................................................................................... 136 13. Eastern Yorkshire versus Northern Gaul.............................................................................................................. 137 13.1. Dating............................................................................................................................................................... 137 13.1.1. Iron wheel tyres........................................................................................................................................ 137 13.1.2. Supporting evidence................................................................................................................................. 137 13.1.3. Rationale behind and disproof of traditional dating................................................................................. 138 13.2. Comparison of funerary practices.................................................................................................................... 138 13.2.1. Inhumation versus cremation.................................................................................................................... 138 13.2.2. Position and orientation of the body......................................................................................................... 138 13.2.3. Chariot burials.......................................................................................................................................... 139 13.2.4. Complete and dismantled chariots............................................................................................................ 139 13.2.5. Square barrows, square enclosures........................................................................................................... 140 13.2.6. No perfect match… ….............................................................................................................................. 141 13.2.7. … so no migration?.................................................................................................................................. 141 13.3. Conclusion and further questions..................................................................................................................... 142 14. Third century BC: Changes in long-distance networks....................................................................................... 143 14.1. Social networks theory..................................................................................................................................... 143 14.2. Closer contacts in the third century BC............................................................................................................ 144 14.2.1. Northern Gaul in the fifth and fourth centuries BC.................................................................................. 144 14.2.2. Northern Gaul in the third century BC..................................................................................................... 146 14.2.3. Internationalisation................................................................................................................................... 146 14.2.4. Evolution of elite networks between the fifth and the third centuries BC................................................ 147 14.2.5. New connections....................................................................................................................................... 148 14.2.5.1. Culture-historical hypothesis............................................................................................................... 148 14.2.5.2. Alternative theory................................................................................................................................ 148 14.2.6. The Arras Culture: part of the Gaulish networks?.................................................................................... 149 14.3. Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................ 149 15. Functioning of elite and religious networks.......................................................................................................... 151 15.1. Mechanisms and strategies of elite networks................................................................................................... 151 15.1.1. Strategic marriages................................................................................................................................... 151 15.1.2. Clientship.................................................................................................................................................. 153 15.1.2.1. Base and free clientship....................................................................................................................... 153 15.1.2.2. Competition and status........................................................................................................................ 156 15.1.2.3. Archaeological evidence...................................................................................................................... 157 15.1.3. Fosterage................................................................................................................................................... 157 15.1.4. Hostageship............................................................................................................................................... 158 15.1.4.1. Different types of hostageship............................................................................................................. 158 15.1.4.2. Selection of hostages........................................................................................................................... 161 15.1.4.3. Treatment of hostages.......................................................................................................................... 161 15.1.4.4. The role of hostageship in the formation and maintenance of social networks.................................. 162 15.2. A well-connected evangelist............................................................................................................................. 163 15.2.1. The druids................................................................................................................................................. 163 x

Contents 15.2.1.1. The sources.......................................................................................................................................... 163 15.2.1.2. The druids’ knowledge........................................................................................................................ 163 15.2.1.3. Ritual, religion and burial.................................................................................................................... 164 15.2.1.4. Connections and privileges.................................................................................................................. 165 15.2.1.5. Counsellors of kings............................................................................................................................ 165 15.2.2. Druids and the Arras Culture: a possible scenario.................................................................................... 165 16. Conclusion................................................................................................................................................................ 167 Bibliography.................................................................................................................................................................... 169 Classical texts............................................................................................................................................................ 169 Modern sources......................................................................................................................................................... 169 Appendix A. Catalogue: Chariot burials of the third and second centuries BC....................................................... 187 Appendix B. Non-exhaustive inventory: Chariot burials of the fifth and fourth centuries BC.............................. 251 Appendix C. Glossary: vehicle and horse harness terminology................................................................................. 259 Appendix D. Glossary of Continental terms................................................................................................................ 261 Appendix E. Translations of classical texts quoted in section 15.2............................................................................. 263

xi

List of Figures Figure 1.1. Chariot burials (with inhumations) of the third and second centuries BC......................................................... 5 Figure 2.1. Isometric reconstruction of Cowlam barrows following proportions identified for the Wykeham Forest barrows................................................................................................................................................................................ 11 Figure 2.2. Wetwang Slack cemetery.................................................................................................................................. 13 Figure 2.3. Necklace from the Queen’s Barrow at Arras.................................................................................................... 18 Figure 2.4. Hilt of the Kirkburn sword - burial K3............................................................................................................. 22 Figure 2.5. Front and back view of the chalk figurine from Withernsea............................................................................ 23 Figure 2.6. Sword from North Grimston............................................................................................................................ 24 Figure 2.7. Shield from the chariot burial at Pocklington, The Mile.................................................................................. 25 Figure 2.8. Copper-alloy box from Wetwang Slack chariot burial 2 (WS 454)................................................................. 25 Figure 2.9. Chariot burials with complete or dismantled vehicles..................................................................................... 29 Figure 2.10. Wetwang Slack chariot burials....................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 2.11. Chariot burials: height of the barrow versus depth of the grave.................................................................... 31 Figure 2.12. View of the partially excavated chariot burial of Ferry Fryston..................................................................... 32 Figure 2.13. Wetwang Slack chariot burial 1 (WS 453)..................................................................................................... 34 Figure 2.14. Wetwang Slack chariot burial 2 (WS 454)..................................................................................................... 35 Figure 2.15. Wetwang Slack chariot burial 3 (WS 455)..................................................................................................... 36 Figure 2.16. Danes Graves chariot burial........................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 2.17. Wolds/Humber site chariot burial................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 2.18. Nave band from Wetwang Slack chariot burial 2........................................................................................... 38 Figure 2.19. Wheel tyres from the LT A1 chariot burial of Pernant (Aisne)...................................................................... 38 Figure 2.20. Wheel tyres from the LT B2 chariot burial of Beine/Prunay (Marne)........................................................... 39 Figure 2.21. Wheel tyre from the Ferry Fryston chariot burial.......................................................................................... 39 Figure 2.22. Linchpins, terrets and strap-unions from the Kirkburn chariot burial............................................................ 40 Figure 2.23. Reconstruction of a yoke with five terrets...................................................................................................... 41 Figure 2.24. Terret from Wetwang Slack chariot burial 2................................................................................................... 41 Figure 2.25. Horse bit from the King’s Barrow at Arras.................................................................................................... 42 Figure 2.26. Chariot burial with standing horses discovered at Pocklington, The Mile..................................................... 45 Figure 3.1. Middle Rhine-Moselle: Location of main sites mentioned in the text............................................................. 55 Figure 3.2. The dismantled chariot burial of Bescheid 6.................................................................................................... 58 Figure 3.3. Reconstruction of the yoke from Waldalgesheim............................................................................................. 60 Figure 3.4. Terret or yoke mounting from the yoke from Waldalgesheim......................................................................... 61 Figure 5.1. Cemetery of La Neuville-en-Tourne-à-Fuy (Ardennes)................................................................................... 69 Figure 5.2. Bourcq, la Pierre de Rome : enclosure 9.......................................................................................................... 76 xiii

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Figure 5.3. Phalera from the chariot burial at Semide (Ardennes)..................................................................................... 79 Figure 5.4. Later chariot burials in the Aisne-Marne-Ardennes regions............................................................................ 81 Figure 5.5. Warcq chariot burial: horses and yoke with six terrets..................................................................................... 82 Figure 6.1. Cemeteries with chariot burials in the Belgian Ardennes................................................................................ 87 Figure 6.2. Isolated barrow with palisaded enclosure at Sberchamps, Au Fersay.............................................................. 89 Figure 6.3. Chariot burial of Neufchâteau - Le Sart........................................................................................................... 90 Figure 6.4. Barrow plan and sections Neufchâteau Le Sart barrow II................................................................................ 91 Figure 6.5. Chariot burial 1 of Sberchamps, Au Fersay..................................................................................................... 92 Figure 6.6. Grave goods from the Neufchâteau - Le Sart chariot burial............................................................................ 94 Figure 6.7. Yoke trimming from chariot burial 1 of Sberchamps, Au Fersay.................................................................... 95 Figure 6.8. Alternative reconstruction of the bead chain from the Neufchâteau - Le Sart chariot burial........................... 95 Figure 8.1. Cemeteries of the third century BC in the Paris area..................................................................................... 102 Figure 8.2. Le Plessis-Gassot cemetery............................................................................................................................ 103 Figure 8.3. Le Plessis-Gassot chariot burial: reconstruction hypotheses.......................................................................... 104 Figure 8.4. Roissy chariot burial 1002 (‘bronzes’)........................................................................................................... 106 Figure 8.5. Roissy chariot burial 5002 (‘warrior’)........................................................................................................... 107 Figure 8.6. Le Plessis-Gassot chariot burial plan............................................................................................................. 108 Figure 8.7. Linchpin from Roissy chariot burial 1002...................................................................................................... 110 Figure 8.8. Linchpins from the chariot burial of Mal Tepe at Mezek, Bulgaria............................................................... 110 Figure 8.9. The six terrets from the chariot burial of Le Plessis-Gassot...........................................................................111 Figure 8.10. Le Plessis-Gassot: grave goods from the warrior burial.............................................................................. 113 Figure 8.11. Spearhead with openwork decoration from the chariot burial at Le Plessis-Gassot.................................... 114 Figure 9.1. Linchpins from the chariot burial of Leval-Trahegnies.................................................................................. 124 Figure 10.1. Chariot burial 2009/1 of Attichy................................................................................................................... 128 Figure 10.2. Chariot burial 2009/2 of Attichy................................................................................................................... 128 Figure 11.1. Orval chariot burial plan............................................................................................................................... 129 Figure 11.2. Orval: square-ditched enclosure with chariot burial and secondary cremation burial................................. 130 Figure 11.3. Horse bits from the chariot burial at Orval................................................................................................... 131 Figure 11.4. Linchpins from the chariot burial at Orval................................................................................................... 131 Figure 14.1. Schematic presentation of interaction during the fifth and fourth centuries BC.......................................... 147 Figure 14.2. Schematic presentation of interaction in the third century BC..................................................................... 147

xiv

List of Tables Table 1.1. La Tène period chronology systems.................................................................................................................... 6 Table 2.1. Main burial types............................................................................................................................................... 15 Table 2.2. Subdivision of type C burials............................................................................................................................. 15 Table 2.3. Warrior burials.................................................................................................................................................... 21 Table 2.4. Burials with mirrors........................................................................................................................................... 26 Table 2.5. Chariot burials: enclosure and grave pits measurements. No ditches were recorded for the Arras chariot burials, nor for Beverley and Danes Graves; for these burials, measurements refer to the size of the barrow.................. 31 Table 2.6. Interior organisation of dismantled chariot burials............................................................................................ 33 Table 2.7. Linchpins............................................................................................................................................................ 40 Table 2.8. Terrets................................................................................................................................................................. 40 Table 2.9. Horse bits........................................................................................................................................................... 41 Table 2.10. Age and gender of the people buried with a chariot........................................................................................ 43 Table 5.1. Continuity of the burial tradition in LT B2 - C1................................................................................................ 66 Table 5.2. Subregions of the Aisne-Marne versus the Arras Culture.................................................................................. 85 Table 8.1. Chariot burials of the Paris area....................................................................................................................... 109 Table 13.1. Formal burial rites in northern Gaul during the La Tène period.................................................................... 139 Table 13.2. Chronological overview of the chariot burials of the La Tène period by region........................................... 140

xv

Foreword This book is largely based on my PhD thesis ‘Migration and elite networks as modes of cultural exchange in Iron Age Europe: a case study of contacts between the Continent and the Arras Culture’, completed at Bangor University in 2011 under the supervision of Raimund Karl. Chariot burials are the most notable but not the only archaeological phenomenon that links eastern Yorkshire with the Near Continent; therefore, a wider range of funerary practices were analysed and compared. When I started my research, the chariot burials of eastern Yorkshire were commonly believed to be earlier than we know today, and as such the study also covers to a certain extent the chariot burials of the fifth and (earlier) fourth centuries BC, but during my research it turned out that the focus should be on the much smaller number of chariot burials of the third century BC in northern Gaul as comparative evidence for the Arras Culture. The brief overview of the older chariot burials, however, allows us to ascertain how the reappearance of chariot burials in the third century BC ties in with the earlier burials and helps to distinguish changes in practice, material culture and technology. Even though the conclusion of the comparison was in favour of long-distance networks, well-known migration debates, such as ‘the coming of the Belgae’ and the origins of the continental Parisii, are also briefly discussed. Since the completion of my PhD, several new chariot burials of the third and second centuries BC have been discovered, and a large number of studies have been performed and published. The aim of this book was to incorporate this new material and the new insights gained from research. The main conclusions of my PhD have not changed, but there is a wealth of new data and new ideas worth further contemplation.

xvii

Abstract Chariot burials are commonly associated with the Aisne-Marne-Ardennes region, which is not surprising, since the largest number of burials with two-wheeled vehicles has been discovered in this area. The Marne department alone already counts over 100 chariot burials, almost all belonging to the fifth and the earlier fourth centuries BC. Significant numbers of chariot burials of this period were also excavated in the Belgian Ardennes and the Middle Rhine – Moselle area. Thereafter, chariot burials almost completely vanished from the archaeological record: only a few chariot burials can be dated to the second half of the fourth century BC. In the course of the third century BC, however, chariot burials reappear, in much smaller numbers than in the fifth and early fourth centuries BC, but over a much larger, though discontinuous area: chariot burials of this ‘second wave’ have been attested north of Paris, in the French Ardennes, the eastern Oise department, the Belgian province of Hainaut and in Lower Normandy, while in the former locations they re-emerge sporadically in the Aisne and in the Belgian Ardennes. At this time the chariot burial concept is also adopted in eastern Yorkshire, where more than 20 chariot burials have been excavated (with an outlier in western Yorkshire), more than in any of the areas with contemporary chariot burials. The eastern Yorkshire chariot burials reveal a strong link with the Continent, but the precise nature of this connection is the topic of debate. Were the chariot burials and other funerary practices introduced by immigrants from northern Gaul? If so, then why is the local British component so strong and why have features been adopted from different regions in northern Gaul, so that it is impossible to identify the immigrants’ homeland? Migration was not the only type of mobility in Iron Age Europe; certain individuals travelled long distances and not necessarily for economic reasons. Social networks, and more specifically elite networks, were created through mechanisms like strategic marriages, clientship, hostageship and perhaps fosterage. When comparing the archaeological data from eastern Yorkshire with the evidence from the various regions in northern Gaul, it becomes clear that these networks offer a more satisfactory explanation. Moreover, the start of this ‘second wave’ of chariot burials can be linked with an increase in connectivity; in the earlier third century BC, internationalisation is the keyword: ideas and technologies disseminate rapidly over very long distances; social networks become more complex, and the world has become a smaller place. The evolution to more complex long-distance networks must have substantially affected the local political and social situation in the various regions. Those factions or lineages who were the best connected, through ties of marriage, fosterage, hostageship or clientship, succeeded in developing, consolidating or extending their power. By reverting to the ancient, prestigious tradition of the chariot burial they put themselves on a par with their perceived illustrious ancestors of the fifth and earlier fourth century BC. In uncertain political times, imitating the burial rites of a heroic ancestor could help to legitimise their own position. It is not clear to what extent eastern Yorkshire was engaged in the spirit of internationalisation and innovation mentioned above: the exchanges with the Continent primarily took place in the field of ritual, and much less in other aspects of life, like weaponry or art styles. This raises the question to what extent druids and other learned men, and their networks, had a part in the introduction of new funerary practices in eastern Yorkshire.

xix

1 Introduction 1.1. A decade of new discoveries and research

conventionally referred to as the ‘Arras Culture’, named after the type site Arras, a deserted medieval village near Market Weighton in East Yorkshire. The name ‘Arras’ was derived from ‘Erg’, which developed into ‘Herges’, ‘Erghus’ and finally into ‘Arras’ in the 16th century, and as such has no connection with the town of Arras in northern France (Stead 1979: 7) which is a phonetic evolution of the name of the Gaulish people of the Atrebates. The barrows at Arras were explored in the period 1815-1817 by a group of local gentry, which led to the discovery of the first chariot burials. The most renowned ‘barrow diggers’ in East Yorkshire, however, were active in the second half of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century: John Robert Mortimer (1825-1911) and Canon William Greenwell (1820-1918).

Not long after the completion of my PhD, Melanie Giles’s major monograph on life and death in Iron Age East Yorkshire was published (‘A forged glamour: landscape, identity and material culture in the Iron Age’ - 2012), followed in 2013 by Peter Halkon’s book on ‘The Parisi’, covering both Iron Age and Roman East Yorkshire. Another paramount publication for our understanding of Iron Age mortuary practices was Dennis Harding’s ‘Death and burial in Iron Age Britain’ (2016). In addition, Bayesian modelling (Jay et al. 2012) and new isotope studies (Jay et al. 2013; Jay and Montgomery 2020) have provided invaluable information on dating and mobility, respectively. Furthermore, several PhD theses have been devoted to or have drawn on the East Yorkshire material, many of which will be cited below.

Mortimer and Greenwell had opposing opinions as to the identity of the people who were buried in Arras and in other large cemeteries like Danes Graves and Scorborough. Mortimer (1898: 125-26) was inclined to believe they were ‘invaders of a comparatively recent period, say a few centuries before the Roman occupation of this country, who settled in little communities along the east coast’; he argued that there was ‘too great a leap in the advance of ornamentation and the art of working in metals between the barrows containing bronze only and those which contain iron, rather than a gradual transition from one stage of culture to the other.’ Greenwell (1877: 212), however, was of the opinion that the Iron Age burials he excavated at Cowlam were not unlike those from the Bronze Age, apart from the pieces of jewellery. He therefore concluded that ‘no new people had come in with iron, but that acquaintance with and use of this metal were gradually developed amongst an originally bronzeusing people, either according to the natural process of improvement characteristic of man, or through knowledge gained by contact and intercourse, in whatever way, with people who had already attained to a higher grade of civilisation’. Although Mortimer believed in gradual progress (Giles 2006: 302), he insisted that no transitional stage of development was visible in the Iron Age burials of East Yorkshire; to him the ‘sudden introduction of iron and its accompanying greater advance in mechanical skill and the decorative arts’ could not be of ‘independent native origin’ (Mortimer 1905: 364). This ‘great advance in civilisation’ was brought about by ‘settlers from over the sea’ (Mortimer 1911: 315-16). By this time, Greenwell (1906: 307) had become more circumspect in his statements; although he warned that the similarity in burial rites with countries overseas does not necessarily point to an ‘identity of race’, he left open the possibility that the people of East Yorkshire were ‘united by the affinity of blood’with people in northern Gaul.

Both in Britain and in northern France several new chariot burials have been excavated in recent years, and it is remarkable that the share of instances where the horses had been buried with the vehicle is unusually high as compared to the corpus of chariot burials known hitherto. The most astonishing find was that of the two standing horses ‘pulling’ the chariot at the site of The Mile in Pocklington (East Yorkshire), but equally intriguing and unique was the presence of four horses in Warcq (French Ardennes). For both sites, only preliminary reports are available at this stage, but the publication of the Pocklington cemeteries of The Mile and Burnby Lane is imminent (Stephens in press). Finally, the discovery of a chariot burial in Wales, dating to the second half of the first century AD, demonstrates that chariot burials had a wider geographical distribution than previously believed, and that the concept lasted longer than commonly thought. 1.2. The Arras Culture Iron Age mortuary practices in eastern Yorkshire were remarkably different from those in the rest of Britain. Although inhumations are increasingly attested in other regions, this is still by far the area with the highest concentration. Of a more exclusive nature are the chariot burials: apart from finds in West Yorkshire, Scotland and Wales, all chariot burials are from the eastern part of Yorkshire; reports of alleged chariot burials in other regions remain unconfirmed (Stead 1965: 8-9). Another typical feature are the square-ditched enclosures surrounding the burials. All in all, these funerary customs are strikingly similar to burial rites practised in northern Gaul, so naturally questions arose regarding their adoption in eastern Yorkshire. The burials became to be 1

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent While in the colonial period identity was closely related with race, in the 20th century the concept of ‘culture’ to define group identity gained ground. Childe (1929: v-vi) wrote: ‘We find certain types of remains – pots, implements, ornaments, burial rites, and house forms – constantly recurring together. Such a complex of regularly associated traits we shall term a ‘cultural group’ or just a ‘culture’. We assume that such a complex is the material expression of what would to-day be called a people.’ Archaeological cultures are usually named after a type artefact or a type site and so it happened that in his Prehistoric Communities of the British Isles, Childe (1940: 216) entitled one of his subchapters ‘The Arras Culture’.

‘rigid geographical limits’ and claimed that cultural boundaries should be ‘defined by the distribution of typefossils and not by fixed “Provinces” or “Regions”’. Based on such a distribution of type-fossils, Hodson (1964) distinguished three main cultural divisions: two La Tène cultures (the Early La Tène ‘Arras Culture’ and the Late La Tène ‘Aylesford Culture’) and an indigenous ‘Woodbury Culture’, consisting of a series of regional groups which formed the continuity of native Bronze Age traditions; he pointed out that although continental influence is not absent in these regions, many types of objects reflect local inventiveness. Indigenous evolution versus continental influence became the topic of another discussion in Antiquity, this time between Clark and Hawkes. Clark (1966a) mocked the tendency of British prehistorians to ascribe every change or innovation to overseas contact, or even to straightforward invasion from the Continent; he even accused Hawkes and others of suffering from ‘invasion neurosis’. He argued that it was normal for leaders to adopt foreign fashions and import foreign luxury goods, and that such prestige products, even when of continental inspiration, often show insular features. But even he made an exception for East Yorkshire: ‘The invaders with La Tène culture for which a reasoned case has been made (…) were the offspring of the Parisi who introduced the Arras culture to East Yorkshire’ (Clark 1966a: 186). Many years before, Clark (1941: 6970), already referred to the ‘overlords of East Yorkshire’ who were ‘frequently buried with their chariots, like their cousins in the Marne district of France’; they were ‘immigrants’ who introduced metal horse bits into Britain in the third century BC.

Fox (1938: 32, 68), an advocate of environmental determinism, claimed that a country’s vulnerability to invasion depends on its nature and personality. He divided Britain into a highland and a lowland zone, whereby eastern Yorkshire, although it ‘fluctuated in its allegiance’ between the two zones, was considered susceptible to invasion. The invaders were ‘Parisii and culturally related groups’. Not long before, Hawkes (1931) had laid the fundamentals for his Iron Age A, B and C cultures system (referring to successive waves of migration from the Continent), which was further developed and geographically and chronologically subdivided throughout the following decades, resulting in the well-known article in Antiquity, in which the ‘Arras Culture’ was categorised as Eastern Second B (Hawkes 1959: 180-81, fig. 4). Within the framework of culture history, migration was one of the key concepts to explain cultural change; it was especially called upon when this change seemed sudden. Although Hawkes (1959: 172) allowed for a component of internal development in his ABC system, he was particularly clear with respect to East Yorkshire, which was colonised by ‘newcomers’, ‘La Tène chiefs (who) ruled their followers and the native population with an absolutism that allowed them to maintain more of their Continental habits and standards’; they were ‘an offshoot of the people whose name has been so conspicuously preserved in that of the French capital’ (Hawkes and Hawkes (1958: 127).

Clark’s article elicited a prompt reaction from Hawkes (1966: 298), who claimed that indigenous evolution had to be demonstrated rather than assumed. Clark (1966b: 299) responded that although he agreed that British prehistory had to be studied in its European context, more attention should be paid to the study of ‘inherent dynamism of economic and social life’. Manifestly, Clark’s views did not accord with the traditional principles of culture history, which considered culture as mainly conservative, with internal cultural evolution being slow and sudden changes being attributed to external influence, be it through diffusion or migration (Jones 1997: 24). Clark’s opinions illustrated a growing unease with the culture-historical paradigm.

The ABC system was widely adopted amongst British archaeologists. Like Hawkes, Brailsford (1953: 4849) discerned two Iron Age B migration movements of Marnians into Britain as from the third century BC, one to Sussex and one to Yorkshire, whereby the absence of fine Marnian pottery in East Yorkshire suggested that the ‘invading chieftains’ came over ‘without their womenfolk’ (!). Childe (1940: 212) on the other hand assumed that highly skilled potters would not be easily lured into joining the overseas adventures of the invaders whom he saw as ‘warrior-bands, seeking new lands, perhaps the younger sons of Gaulish chiefs with their junior tenantry for whom no room was left on the ancestral farm’.

Shortly before, Ian Stead (1965) had published his PhD thesis, The La Tène Cultures of Eastern Yorkshire. In his introduction he dismissed the ABC system and supported Hodson’s call for ‘the identification of cultures defined by recurring groups of type fossils’. Based on this system, Stead identified two distinct cultures in East Yorkshire, one with vehicle burials (the ‘Arras Culture’) and a much smaller one with sword burials (the ‘North Grimston Culture’) (Stead 1965: 84). Only the Arras Culture he considered intrusive. Stead’s problem, however, was that the issue of the intruders’ area of origin remained

In spite of its success, the ABC system also encountered opposition. In Antiquity, Hodson (1960) objected to the 2

Introduction unsolved: the name of the later ‘Parisi’ of East Yorkshire suggested a link with the Paris area, but vehicles burials were mainly known from the Champagne, and certain practices and artefacts might point to a link with Burgundy and Switzerland. In an attempt to reconcile all these elements, Stead suggested the possibility that a tribe originating from Burgundy or further east travelled to Paris, whereby an offshoot headed for East Yorkshire and that perhaps another tribe, associated with the Marnians in the Champagne, was also involved in the migration.

to an historically known ancient people. Yet it became clear from anthropological research that ‘the relationship between culture and peoplehood is not so straightforward, and that the idea that ethnic and national groups are fixed, homogeneous, bounded entities extending deep into the past is a modern classificatory invention. On the contrary it has been shown that ethnic and national identities are fluid, dynamic and contested’ (Jones 2000: 448). Furthermore, the traits or types that were considered appropriate to define a given archaeological culture were often chosen intuitively or were too limited in number: Hodson’s Woodbury Culture, for example, was only based on three type fossils, the permanent round house, the weaving comb and the ring-headed pin (Jones 1997: 18, 108, 119).

New finds and further research compelled Stead to review his position with regard to the dual culture issue. In the preface to his next major publication, The Arras Culture (1979), he stated that all the material belonged to a single culture. In his conclusion, Stead (1979: 92-93) still deemed this culture the product of migration, but perhaps of only a small group (adventurers, mercenaries, evangelists, farmers), who did not dominate the community but had a strong influence in matters of death and funeral ritual. Their place of origin remained obscure, largely on account of the local evolvement of the Arras Culture which led to substantial differences with the Continent. In Iron Age Cemeteries in East Yorkshire: Excavations at Burton Fleming, Rudston, Garton-on-the Wolds, and Kirkburn, Stead (1991: 184) suggested that perhaps the new burial rites were introduced by a single immigrant, a ‘wellconnected evangelist’.

In the 1960s and early 1970s, terms like ‘tribe’ and ‘race’ were replaced by ‘ethnic groups’, and the focus of research in social sciences with regard to cultural differentiation shifted to ethnicity (Jones 2000: 448). Barth (1969) emphasised the importance of self-identification; he argued that there is ‘no simple one-to-one relationship between ethnic units and cultural similarities and differences’, since actors consider only certain differences significant. In the footsteps of social scientists, archaeologists started exploring new approaches to identity, and often turned to ethnographic analogies instead of historical sources to explain Iron Age phenomena (Giles 2008b: 336-45). In the last decades of the twentieeth century, British Iron Age archaeology mainly focused on regional diversity, trying to understand smaller regional units each in their own terms; during this process, broader perspectives generated less interest, but more recently attention has returned to the larger scale, whereby interregional commonalities are ‘investigated on the basis of detailed examination of local cultural traditions and comparisons between them’ (James 2007: 20).

A few years earlier, Van Endert (1986: 280-82) had argued that the Arras Culture was founded by immigrants from the Belgian Ardennes, whereas Higham (1987: 5) thought that mercenaries or warriors who returned from Gaul or the Rhineland ‘brought back imperfectly absorbed elements of the sepulchral traditions of their employers and hosts’. These conflicting opinions potentially reflected different theoretical frameworks: migration as the key explanation for cultural change survived much longer on the Continent than in Britain.

The last comparisons between eastern Yorkshire and northern Gaul in terms of Iron Age burial traditions go back a few decades (Stead 1965, 1978; Van Endert 1986, 1987); new data have become available since and new insights have been gained. This is perhaps the right time to revisit the issue. The hypothesis of a small-scale migration of an influential elite still persists (see e.g. Bradley 2007: 266; Cunliffe 2005: 84-86) despite the apparent inability to identify the alleged immigrants’ homeland. The aim of this new comparison, which will focus on both spatial and temporal variation and similarity, is to shed new light on the case.

Similarly, the concept of an ‘archaeological culture’ already came under pressure in the Anglo-Saxon world towards the end of the 1960s. Where originally the culturehistorical paradigm had seemed a convenient system to order archaeological information, it turned out inadequate to incorporate the ever-expanding body of data; Hawkes’s system, for example, proved to be over-simplistic (Giles 2008b: 336). The awareness grew that an archaeological culture in the sense of a strictly defined entity does not reflect the complex archaeological reality. Also anthropologists criticised the idea that humanity ‘can be parcelled up into a multitude of discrete cultural capsules’ as Ingold (1994: 330) described it, who also stated that: ‘What we do not find are neatly bounded and mutually exclusive bodies of thought and custom, perfectly shared by all who subscribe to them, and in which their lives and works are fully encapsulated.’

1.3. Methodology The purpose of my research was to establish which hypothesis is more plausible. Were the new burial rites introduced into eastern Yorkshire by a small group of elite immigrant from overseas, and if so, where did they come from? Or was the Arras Culture a local development, initiated by the contacts of the local rulers with their peers

One of the central ideas of culture-historical archaeology was that a given material assemblage could be attributed 3

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent on the Continent through elite networks? In order to achieve this, it was necessary to make a thorough comparison of all the relevant funerary practices in all the regions where twowheeled vehicle burials were attested in Western Europe in the La Tène period. The aim was also to narrow down the time frame within which the transmission of the burial rites took place, as this could possibly deliver precious information about the circumstances of this transmission.

burials of the third and second century BC (Figure 1.1) were individually examined; a detailed catalogue is provided in Appendix A. For sake of completeness, an inventory of all the chariot burials of the fifth and fourth century BC can be found in Appendix B. As mentioned above, the chariot burials of this period have already been studied in detail. Apart from the catalogues included in the above-mentioned studies by Verger and Haffner, all the chariot and wagon burials west of the Rhine (including the British ones) were catalogued by Van Endert (1987) and discussed by region in a separate paper (Van Endert 1986). The inventory in Appendix B also includes bibliographic sources, but these are not exhaustive; additional source material can often be found in the catalogues of Haffner (1976), Van Endert (1987), Verger (1994) and others.

The reason why the comparison is restricted to funeral data is twofold. First, in most other respects, the archaeology of eastern Yorkshire is perfectly consistent with that of the rest of Britain; only the burial rites stand out and suggest a connection with the Continent. Secondly, the quantity of funerary data available from northern Gaul is enormous. The Aisne-Marne region alone counts no less than 250 chariot burials, although some of them are only known from aerial photography (Chossenot, Chossenot and Neiss 1985).

In the later third century BC, a new rite emerged in the wake of the change from inhumation to cremation, consisting of cremation burials containing certain parts of a chariot and/ or horse harness, either as a pars pro toto (whereby one or a few parts represent the vehicle as a whole) or because the vehicle was burned on the pyre; these occur in large parts of northern Gaul and the practice continues into the Roman period. Since this rite is unattested in eastern Yorkshire, it will only be briefly discussed here; a comprehensive study, including a catalogue, can be found in the doctoral thesis of Schönfelder (2000).

The chariot burials of northern Gaul can be divided in two groups, not because they are basically different, but because they occur in different regions and periods. The first and largest group, located in the Aisne-Marne and the Middle Rhine – Moselle regions, and in the Belgian Ardennes, mainly date from the second half of the fifth and the first half of the fourth century BC. The phenomenon revives in the third century BC; this second group is much smaller but covers a large, discontinuous area: chariot burials of this period were attested around Paris, the French Ardennes, the eastern Oise department, the Belgian province of Hainaut and in Lower Normandy, while in the former locations they reappeared in the Aisne and in the Belgian Ardennes.

The outcome of the comparison between the Arras Culture and the various regions in northern Gaul was in favour of the hypothesis that the new burial rites in eastern Yorkshire were developed locally, as the result of contacts with the Continent. As such, the remainder of this study concentrates on the phenomenon of social networks. It will start with a short introduction to the theory of social networks and will subsequently trace a change in network structure in northern Gaul, which will embrace the emergence of the Arras Culture. The question also arises of what mechanisms and strategies are at the base of social networks and help to maintain them. The examples that will be discussed are of particular relevance to longdistance elite networks: strategic marriages, clientship, fosterage and hostageship.

The first group is well-known and has been extensively studied. For the Aisne-Marne region, for example, around 200 chariot burials were thoroughly re-examined and described in detail by Verger (1994) in his doctoral thesis, while the chariot burials (and other rich burials) of the Middle Rhine – Moselle were catalogued and discussed by Haffner (1976). The 19 chariot burials of the Belgian Ardennes, all excavated between 1966 and 1994, were the subject of a synthesis by Anne Cahen-Delhaye (CahenDelhaye 2013), following on earlier papers discussing the main characteristics of funerary practices in the region (Cahen 1998a, 1998b). Given the quantity of primary data, it was decided to draw heavily on the existing high-quality and comprehensive syntheses, especially in the case of the Aisne-Marne region; naturally, primary source material was consulted in case of doubt, need for further detail, or when addressing issues of particular importance.

Finally, since the first part of the study has demonstrated that the closest link between eastern Yorkshire and northern Gaul is at the ritual level, it was imperative to investigate the potential role of religious and spiritual leaders, such as the druids, with regard to the transmission of religious ideas and belief systems over long distances. 1.4. Use of historical sources

During research it became evident that the chariot burials of eastern Yorkshire belong to the second period. These later chariot burials were never studied as a separate group, and as such any possible similarities became obscured. Some of them are from old excavations with proper context often lacking, whilst several others are from recent excavations and are not yet fully published. Therefore, all the chariot

Concern for the pitfalls of culture history has led archaeologists to turn away from historical sources. In the past, Roman and Greek texts were too often believed to provide true reports of Gaulish or British society, and Irish medieval texts were presented as ‘a window on the Iron 4

Introduction

Figure 1.1. Chariot burials (with inhumations) of the third and second centuries BC

that the Irish monks borrowed heavily from the Bible and from Homeric epics. The general consensus now seems to be that especially the heroic tales are creative writings reflecting the medieval monks’ views of the pagan past (Karl 2005a; 2008: 70). However, Raimund Karl (2003) has demonstrated that chariots (which figure frequently in the heroic tales) and how they were used in Iron Age Europe had much closer affinities with medieval Irish texts than with both biblical sources and Homeric epics.

Age’ (Jackson 1964). Many archaeologists (e.g. Collis 1994; Hill 1996; James 1999) have warned against the use of written sources to explain Iron Age societies. The issues with the classical authors are known: they are outsiders and do not fully grasp the subtleties of the society they describe, they write from a Roman or Greek perspective, their information is often second-hand and most of them have a hidden agenda. In addition, some authors are ‘historians’: they relate events that happened several centuries earlier. Furthermore, the question arises to what extent social institutions that are historically attested for, say, the first century BC can be extrapolated into the past. When using classical sources, it is, therefore, important to identify their shortcomings with regard to the information extracted from them.

As Raimund Karl (2005a) has written, ‘societies develop from older societies’, and ‘conserve information about former states of their development’; he also claims that social organisation and social practices ‘remain surprisingly stable over long periods’. As such, social practices outlined in early medieval Irish texts that are strikingly similar to practices described for Iron Age Gaul in classical sources, are meaningful and cannot be ignored. Comparable practices are often attested in other early European societies like the Italic or early Germanic societies.

Given the large chronological and geographical gap, the use of early medieval Irish texts for understanding aspects of Iron Age society in Britain and Gaul is deemed even more controversial. Archaeologists claim that written sources can only be applied to the societies they describe (Collis 1994: 35); they contest the use of later historical sources for the study of Iron Age society because it falsely implies the existence of a uniform ‘Celtic society’ and is reminiscent of assumptions made in culture history (Hill 1996: 96-97). Objections have also been raised by antinativist scholars of Irish medieval literature, who argue

In addition, medieval Celtic languages have preserved cognate terms for certain practices and offices that already existed in Iron Age Europe. The best examples is that of the Irish words ‘druïd’, ‘fáithi’ and ‘baird’, which are the equivalent of the ‘druides’, ‘vates’ and ‘bardi’ in classical literature (Birkhan 1997: 896). However, caution is 5

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent required here, since the meaning of a term can be subject to modification: under influence of Christianity, the role and status of the druids in early medieval Ireland changed substantially, as discussed in section 15.2.1.1. This also illustrates that in many cases it is possible to determine the influence of Christianity and the Bible in the writings of the monks; of course, there will always be room for scholarly debate, since other issues may prove much harder to identify.

has not been abandoned. In France, archaeologists make a distinction between fancy, ceremonial vehicles (‘chars d’apparat’, ‘chars de parade’) and ordinary vehicles which they often refer to as ‘chars de guerre’ or ‘chars de combat’. Both types occur on the cemetery of Roissy near Paris: one chariot burial with an ordinary vehicle and weapons, and another one with a luxurious vehicle and no weapons (Lejars 2005: 80). Yvonne Inall (2020: 79) argues that even though chariots were (also) used in non-martial contexts, the presence of a chariot in chariot burials with weaponry would reinforce the martial identity construction for the individual concerned.

The similarities between social practices in classical literature and those that emerge from early Irish medieval texts are often striking. It is clear that a high level of caution and critical thinking is imperative, but when these conditions are met, there is no reason to avoid written sources, since these can provide useful analogies in the same way as, for example, ethnographic sources do. The a priori rejection of documentary evidence deprives us of the valuable additional insights that can be gained from an integrated approach.

There is no doubt that this construction of a martial identity was the purpose of depositing weapons in burials. Fraser Hunter (2005: 50) has rightly argued that ‘whether the individuals wore arms in life is irrelevant: this is the image they took to the grave’. Therefore, there is no reason for avoiding the term ‘warrior burial’. Technical terms with regard to vehicle parts and horse harness are assembled in a glossary (Appendix C), as are a number of typically continental terms (Appendix D).

1.5. Terminology As discussed above, the concept of an archaeological culture is not an adequate device to study the complex world of past societies. It should be clear, therefore, that the use of the term ‘Arras Culture’ in this study is not to be read in that sense. Finding an alternative name remains a challenge: in recent books on British prehistory the term is still widely used, with or without quotation marks (see e.g. Bradley 2007: 263-70; Cunliffe 2005: 84-86; Pryor 2003: 344-47); in other publications it is carefully circumvented, by referring to ‘East Yorkshire cemeteries’ (ParkerPearson 1999: 43) or ‘East Yorkshire Iron Age burials’ (Hill 2002: 410), aiming to avoid both the loaded term ‘culture’ and the reference to a type site. The convenience of ‘Arras Culture’ is that it combines time and space in just two words. A good alternative might be ‘Arras burial tradition’ (see for example Harding 2016: 144), but cleaned of its wrong connotations, the conventional ‘Arras Culture’ should still be acceptable. Another reason for using it here is to serve as a tribute to Ian Stead, for his major contributions to our knowledge of the Iron Age burial tradition of eastern Yorkshire.

1.6. Chronology Reinecke’s chronology, now also generally used in France, will be followed as much as possible (Table 1.1). However, when no detailed chronological information is available or is not quoted in the sources, reference will be made to Early La Tène (ELT), Middle La Tène (MLT) or Late La Tène (LLT). The use of LT I, II and III (Viollier) will be avoided. Other abbreviations used in the text are EBA (Early Bronze Age), LBA (Late Bronze Age), EIA (Early Iron Age), LIA (Late Iron Age), LH (Late Hallstatt). Ha A, B, C and D refer to subdivisions of the Hallstatt period. Table 1.1. La Tène period chronology systems (based on Brun 2002: 312, fig. 11). Reinecke LT A1

Another term that needs explaining is that of ‘chariot burials’, which Ian Stead (1965: 5) replaced by ‘cart burials’ out of concern that the vehicles would be wrongly seen as war chariots. There is quite a range in the type of two-wheeled vehicles found in burials, but many of them have beautifully decorated parts and are often associated with colourful harnesses, so that it is difficult to define them as ‘carts’, as if suggesting they were heavy-duty vehicles used in agriculture (Piggott 1983: 23). The vehicles attested in the burials are lightweight; they were destined for the transport of people. As already argued by Piggott (1983: 23), chariots were also, and probably mainly, used in peaceful circumstances for travel, ceremonial and parade, and hence ‘chariot burials’ should be considered the more appropriate term. However, the connection with warfare

ELT

MLT LLT

6

LT A2

Viollier LT Ia

Dating BC 475-430 430-400

LT B1

LT Ib

400-325

LT B2

LT Ic

325-250

LT C1 LT C2 LT D1 LT D2

LT II LT III

250-175 175-130 130-75 75-30

2 The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire 2.1. Eastern Yorkshire in its British context

preferences. Within a particular region, the specific form of inhumation adopted by a lineage or community may also have been shared by other groups, giving rise to an apparent regional pattern, but even here the practice may never have been the only or even the dominant form of treatment.’ Also for northern Gaul archaeologists have demonstrated that in spite of the abundant evidence for formal burial (both inhumation and cremation), a large part of the population was not represented in the burial record. Chossenot (1997: 245-46, 299-309), for example, has made estimates of the size of the population and the evolution through time, based on which he has claimed that even when taking into account pit burials and human bones found in settlements and sanctuaries, there was still a significant number of deads who must have been disposed of in an archaeologically undetectable way, such as cremation followed by scattering of the ashes. Parker Pearson (2016: 5) suspects that inhumation and cremation ‘may only ever have been minority rites in European prehistory from the Palaeolithic onwards’.

For a long time, attested chariot burials in Britain were confined to the Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire, covering the county of East Yorkshire and adjacent parts of North Yorkshire. Vehicle parts have been reported from several other regions in Britain but none of them could be proven to belong to a burial. However, in 2001, a chariot burial was excavated in Newbridge, near Edinburgh (at least 250 km away from Yorkshire, as the crow flies). In 2003, another chariot burial was found outside the traditional Arras Culture area, this time in West Yorkshire, in Ferry Fryston near Pontefract, about 55 km from the type site of Arras. Given its clear affinities, the Ferry Fryston chariot burial is generally studied in conjunction with the chariot burials of the Arras Culture. The most recent discovery of a British chariot burial outside Yorkshire is from an undisclosed site in Pembrokeshire, Wales, in 2018, about 425 km from Arras. Eastern Yorkshire does not only stand out for its chariot burials, but except for southern Dorset, it is also the only region in Britain where inhumation in a cemetery has been attested as a regular, recurrent burial rite during at least part of the Iron Age. This does not mean that inhumation was not practised in other areas of Britain; in fact, a growing number of previously undated inhumations (for lack of grave goods and stratigraphy) are now being assigned to the Iron Age by radiocarbon dating (see e.g., Champion 2020 for southern England). However, the evidence for inhumation (and cremation for that matter) in large parts of Britain remains scant, given the abundant evidence for settlements; these ‘elusive dead’ were, therefore, disposed of in a different way. Archaeologically less visible practices such as excarnation or primary burial followed by exhumation and redeposition could account for the presence of (fragmentary) human bones in settlement contexts, and scattered ashes would hardly leave any trace at all, although one would expect to find funeral pyres. As argued by Harding (2016: 7), there may have been a range of ways in which past societies disposed of their dead, and it is a basic misconception ‘that past societies should have buried their dead according to a regular and recurrent convention, that is, that each period should be characterized by a recognizable burial rite and grave type that represents the dominant convention’. In fact, it is very likely that in the Arras Culture other ways of disposal of the dead occurred next to inhumation, and in general, certain practices seem to have been short-lived. Champion (2020: 168) explains the volatility of funerary practices as follows: ‘Inhumation could be adopted for an individual person or an individual lineage within a community, but such preferences may have lasted only one or two generations and were in most cases only minority

A captivating idea that has been advanced with regard to the ‘elusive dead’ is the one of hoards as surrogate burials (see Harding 2016: 49-50). In that respect, it is interesting to mention a deposit uncovered by archaeology students on the hillfort of Burrough Hill, near Melton Mowbray in Leicestershire. The deposit consisted of decorated copperalloy chariot fittings of the third or second century BC, gathered in a box, which was placed in the ground on a layer of cereal chaff and was subsequently burned (ULAS News 2014). As to the characteristic square enclosures, several are known - though often only from aerial photography - in various parts of Britain; they are morphologically similar to those of eastern Yorkshire, but their funeral nature has mostly remained uncertain. In 2003 an inhumation was found in the ditch of a square enclosure excavated in Nosterfield, near the Thornborough Henges in North Yorkshire. The central burial was missing but may have been ploughed away (Dickson and Hopkinson 2011). Some older finds of square enclosures are known from Scotland, one from Inverkeilor, Angus and another one from Ayton, Berwickshire (Whimster 1981: 412) and the presence of further square enclosures with definite central graves has been detected through aerial photography (Stead 1979: 30). More recently discovered examples in southern England are discussed by Champion (2020: 166-68). 2.2. Yorkshire and the Arras Culture Typical features of the Arras Culture are the square funerary enclosures, inhumations and chariot burials, rites 7

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent that made eastern Yorkshire stand out against the rest of Britain, while disclosing a connection with the Continent, where these practices are well-known elements of La Tène cultures. At the same time, the Arras Culture is deeply rooted in local British traditions, as comparisons with the continental material will demonstrate. Radiocarbon and other evidence suggest that the different features may not have been adopted at the same time, as will be discussed throughout this chapter.

but a pattern of natural and manmade drainage indicates a tendency to water logging. On the other side of the Wolds is the Vale of Pickering, which separates the Wolds from the North Yorkshire Moors, another upland region. The Vale of Pickering has important resources of sands and gravels; it is cultivable but subject to drought. Only the most southern part of the Yorkshire Moors belongs to the Arras Culture. To the northwest of the Wolds, the Arras Culture is traditionally considered to be bounded by the limestone Howardian Hills. The western and southwestern border of the study area is formed by the Vale of York, a region which is again lower and wetter than the Wolds. In the southern part the Humber area water was 2.7m higher in the first millennium BC than at present and a system of estuarine creeks was in use (Stoertz 1997: 1-3; see also Halkon 2008: 12-42).

The identification of contemporary settlements remains a challenge. No sudden break can be discerned in the local settlement pattern of the last millennium BC, although Peter Halkon (2013: 89) has argued that in the MIA ‘there does seem to be an element of change through time in the morphology of settlements and the design of houses’. 2.3. Geographical study area

The traditional area of the Arras Culture seems to correspond with the land ascribed by Ptolemy to the Parisi. Ptolemy’s Geographia was written between 130 and 170 AD, but he used older sources, some of which go back to Flavian or even pre-Flavian times. After listing the towns of the Brigantes, Ptolemy records ‘prope quos ad sinum Opportunum Parisi et oppidum Petuaria’. Petuaria could be identified with Brough, and the ‘sinus Opportunus’ is usually thought to refer to Bridlington (Stead 1965: 78-81; Ramm 1978: 21-25).

The Arras Culture is named after the type site Arras, a deserted medieval village near Market Weighton in East Yorkshire, where early in the nineteenth century the activities of the so-called barrow diggers revealed the first Yorkshire chariot burials. Geographically, Arras is situated on the Yorkshire Wolds, an area which is considered as the heartland of the Arras Culture. In the last decades of the twentieth century the Wolds produced no less than seven chariot burials, which explains to a certain extent the concentration of archaeological research in this part of East Yorkshire. Furthermore, the soils of the Wolds show greater responsiveness to aerial photography than those of the surrounding areas, thus creating an image of the Wolds as being the main focus of habitation in the last few centuries before the Roman Conquest. However, the distribution of the Arras Culture extends beyond this one region.

2.4. Funerary practices in eastern Yorkshire Between the EBA round barrows, which were a prominent feature in the landscape, and the rise of the Arras Culture, formal burial (in the sense of inhumation or cremation) is rare. For the LBA, Manby (1980: 319-20) refers to a number of cremation cemeteries, either with flat graves or with barrow burials, and to cremation burials in secondary positions in barrow mounds. In the EBA barrows, both inhumation and cremation occurred, but cremation seems to have been the continuing (formal) burial rite into the later Bronze Age. According to Manby, many unaccompanied cremations in small barrows may belong to the later Bronze Age.

The Wolds form a raised crescent of rolling chalk land, from the northern bank of the Humber to Flamborough Head, with a steep escarpment on the northern edge and the northwestern corner. The highest point is near Wilton Beacon (243m), but most land is between 50 and 200m, which is higher than the surrounding Vale of Pickering and the plain of Holderness. The chalk downland is cut by a network of dry valleys known as dales or slacks. The valleys on the western side and the northwestern corner are deep and steep sided, but to the south and east the land slopes away more gently and the valleys are shallower. The largest and broadest is the Great Wold Valley (Stoertz 1997: 1-3). There are not many streams in the Wolds and they are often intermittent, fed by springs locally known as gypseys (with a hard g). The largest, the Gypsey Race flows through the Great Wold Valley, which, thanks to the presence of water, has always been a focus for settlement, but gypsey races have also played a role in the location of burials (Ramm 1978: 3; Bevan 1999).

The lack in formal burial evidence in the LBA and EIA may be partly due to a lack of datable artefacts, but the main explanation no doubt lies in different mortuary practices with regard to the larger part of the population, as is the case elsewhere in Britain. The distinctive features of the Arras Culture, inhumation and square barrows, are mainly attributed to the third and second centuries BC, and the chariot burials to an even shorter stage within that period, but the multi-period site of Melton, just north of the Humber and on the southern edge of the Wolds, contained both a number of flat grave inhumations which predated the Arras Culture by a few centuries and inhumations which can be dated to the first century BC or the first century AD, as will be further discussed below. All the dating elements that can contribute to a closer dating of the start of the Arras Culture will be assembled and discussed in a separate chapter below.

To the south and east of the Wolds, along the North Sea, lies the plain of Holderness, an area which is lower and wetter than the Wolds. The soils are well suited to cultivation, 8

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire 2.4.1. Inhumation

correspond with EBA burial rites where coffins were primarily reserved for men. However, burial 2721 was radiocarbon dated to 800-500 BC, and was, therefore, at least 1200 years later than burial 2631. The fact that it cut into the earlier grave, and to a certain extent copied the ancient burial rite is believed to be intentional. This would imply that the Iron Age inhabitants were aware of the exact location of the EBA burial, which may have been marked by a standing post or a mound. It should be noted that there is a possibility that grave 2631 was only dated to the first millennium BC and that the Beaker sherds came from the backfill of an earlier grave which was disturbed and completely removed by grave 2631, but also in that case, the intention of the community was to create a link with an ancestor when they buried the man in grave 2721 (Fenton-Thomas 2011: 46-9, 373; Giles 2012: 63). Another interesting feature of burial 2631 was that distinctive layers suggested that ‘the grave may not have been backfilled in a single event but over a period of time. The silting layers may reflect a period when the body was laid out on the wooden structure in the bottom of the grave pit before the grave was backfilled.’ (FentonThomas 2011: 46). Such a ritual may have contributed to the emergence of an ancestor cult, which would explain the desire of the later community to bury one of their deceased so close to the venerated forebear.

The normal position of the corpse in the Arras Culture was flexed, crouched or contracted. The prevalent orientation was north-south, facing east, but other orientations occur, and no clear correlation with other burial features can be established. The east can be connected with the rising sun and may refer to regeneration and cyclical renewal, while the west can be seen as a metaphor for death (for a further discussion, see e.g. Giles 2012: 73-74). This position and orientation reflect indigenous Bronze Age traditions and is very different from the continental rite, where corpses were extended and orientated westeast. Even if the re-adoption of inhumation was triggered through contacts (of whichever type) with the Continent, it was local customs that dictated how the deceased was placed in the grave, which implies that these customs had been passed on in one way or another. One possibility is that if excarnation was practised during the long period when archaeologically visible burial rites were lacking, the body was placed on a platform in a crouched position (see Bevan 1999: 124), in the same way as it was placed in the grave in the EBA. Alternatively, and maybe additionally, ancestor veneration may have brought about a certain knowledge of Bronze Age burial traditions. There are several examples of Bronze Age barrows that formed a focal point for Iron Age cemeteries, such as those of Wetwang Slack (see below) and Pocklington, Burnby Lane (Stephens and Ware 2020); the Iron Age cemetery of Garton Station in turn attracted burial activities in the Anglo-Saxon period (Stead (1991: 1724). Later generations may have deliberately opened and investigated earlier graves, which in combination with social memory would explain why knowledge of ancient burial traditions was not lost, and how the practice of inhumation could emerge again after centuries of absence. Strategic motives may even have compelled Iron Age inhabitants to seek close association with the burial of a revered ancestor and to imitate the ancient burial rites. This is what is believed to have occurred on the small linear cemetery of Melton, consisting of eight flat inhumations, of which three have been radiocarbon dated to between the 8th and the 5th century BC, and probably towards the latter part of that range. One of the burials (2631), however, is thought to be considerably older: it produced a large number of sherds from seven different Beaker vessels, which could place it in the EBA. Such an early date would be corroborated by the large grave cut: the grave was deeper and broader than the other graves, and linear soil stains pointed at the presence of a wooden coffin, or a wooden stretcher on which the adult male had been laid, on his left side, in a tightly crouched position, with his head to the east. Grave 2631 was cut by another grave (2721), with the burial of the only other male adult of the cemetery. The position and orientation of the body was different (flexed, orientated north-south, facing east), but the deceased had also been buried in a wooden structure, probably a tree trunk or log coffin; none of the other burials on the cemetery were coffined, which would

In the current state of research, the EIA inhumations from Melton are exceptional, but as stated by Melanie Giles (2012: 63), ‘a lack of systematic dating of other flat grave crouched inhumations may mask analogous early Iron Age examples (a point made by Brewster in 1980)’. Future radiocarbon dating may assign further inhumations to the EIA and adjust the current image, but as yet, there is no evidence for the widespread use of inhumation before the rise of the Arras Culture. Notwithstanding the large and growing corpus of Arras Culture inhumations, the possibility should be considered that not all the dead were buried in this formal way. Part of the population may still have continued to be disposed of in a manner that left no distinctive archaeological traces (Harding 2017: 7). 2.4.2. From round to square barrows Based on the present state of research, evidence of a continuous tradition of barrow building is at the least very thin and does probably not exist at all. If, however, Mortimer’s barrow 108 in Aldro can indeed be dated in the seventh or sixth century BC, the gap is narrowing. This date is based on an alleged link with the continental Hallstatt wagon grave of Hohmichele on the Upper Danube (Challis and Harding 1975: 42-43). Stead (1979: 38), however, warned that ‘until this Aldro collection has been studied in detail it would be unwise to hazard a guess as to its date or its significance’. Such a detailed study will not be possible as, according to Challis and Harding, the objects have been lost for a long time.

9

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Even if there was a break in the tradition of barrow building, the large EBA barrows were still present in the landscape and, as mentioned above, sometimes they even seem to have formed a point of attraction for the barrows of the Iron Age. The evidence in the presentday landscape for the existence of barrows in the Iron Age, and certainly of square barrows, is minimal. Excavation and aerial photography have demonstrated the existence of square enclosures, but most barrows have been ploughed away, to a point that one could question whether they were ever there at all, as indeed square enclosures need not necessarily have been accompanied by a barrow. However, a few elements are in favour of barrows. To start with, it was the presence of barrows that attracted the attention of the nineteenth century antiquarians and lead to the disclosure of the Arras Culture. The long tradition of the use of the land as pasture preserved the barrows until the agricultural revolution, and the transformation to arable land in the last couple of centuries caused the gradual levelling of the land, which sufficiently explains their almost complete disappearance ever since (Ramm 1978: 6-7). Secondly, at least 120 round and square barrows survive in Scorborough (Stead 1975) and square barrows are known from several places in the Yorkshire Moors and the Vale of Pickering; the highest concentration of upstanding square barrows can be found in Wykeham Forest (Mytum 1995: 31). Finally - but this is rather a matter of proof by negative demonstration - the fact that most enclosures have no causeways seems to suggest that they were no Grabgärten stricto sensu and therefore could have had a raised interior.

Based on a detailed survey of the surviving square barrows of the Moors and the excavation data available from the Wolds, Mytum (1995: 33) identified regularities in the design and construction in terms of size and proportions, both of plan and elevation: ‘The square barrow took the form of a truncated pyramid, with sizeable square tops placed more or less centrally and with four slopes running down to the four lengths of ditch. The sharpness of the corners are still clearly seen, and so very careful construction methods must have been employed to produce this effect; …’ (Figure 2.1). Square barrows are not always exactly square but never diverge far; the deviation would certainly not have been noticeable visually. Mytum could demonstrate that the square barrows have a ‘closely defined set of expected proportions’. The dimensions of the barrow top have a close correlation with those of the base and can be expressed as Pearson’s r = 0.87. Also the height of the barrow is strongly correlated with base measurements, Pearson’s r = 0.85. It is generally believed that the idea of square barrows was adopted from the Continent. ‘Identical barrows can be found in their thousands in the Champagne and Marne regions in France, throughout the La Tène period’ (Stoertz 1997: 34, to quote just one source). At a first superficial examination of the facts, this statement seems correct. When looking at a plan of a Yorkshire cemetery and comparing this with a plan of one of the Aisne-Marne cemeteries, the same square-ditched enclosures catch the eye, the only difference often being that the Yorkshire cemeteries usually look neater and better organised. At a second examination, however, the continental square enclosures turn out not to show the same uniformity as those in eastern Yorkshire (see section 5.1.6). Many of them for example house several equally important burials which were never covered by a barrow. As early as 1961, Stead (1961: 55) pointed out that only one type of enclosure, which seems to have been a simple, early type from the ELT period, is similar to the Yorkshire enclosures, and this opinion still seems to hold.

Dent (1984: 22) noted for Wetwang Slack that in general the most substantial ditches enclosed some of the largest barrow platforms, but there were exceptions. He discerned an evolution from large barrow platforms with shallow graves to smaller platforms with deeper graves (Dent 1982: 446-47). This seems to be confirmed elsewhere (see for example type B burials below). Barrow platforms could have sides from about 2m to sometimes more than 10m. The large ones are often connected with chariot burials, as for example in Garton Station (11.2 x 12m.) and Kirkburn (11.8 x 13m) (Stead 1991: 219, 224). In Pexton Moor, however, the enclosed area only measured 5.2m across (Stead 1979: 22).

The Aisne-Marne is an area of heavy agriculture, and no barrows survive. The only indication that they may have existed is the silting material found in some of the ditches, as for example in a rich LT C cemetery in Proviseux (Lambot 2000: 155, fig. 14), but it is impossible to say whether this barrow was round or square; the silting may even originate from an inner wall rather than a barrow. On the Continent, a square enclosure does not necessarily surround a square barrow: the rich LT D burial of Clémency in Luxembourg for example, was set in a large square-ditched enclosure, but it was covered by a round barrow (Metzler et al. 1991: 36, fig. 27). In fact, the concept of a square burial mound is alien to most Iron Age archaeologists on the Continent. It should be noted, however, that Lambot (2018, 27, note 7; 122) argues that in Bourcq (French Ardennes) in three instances, a wall (consisting of vertical posts and horizontal planks) had been constructed on the inner side of the square-ditched enclosure to support a burial mound, implying that the mound had been square in shape.

It is remarkable that enclosures with causeways only seem to occur in Garton Station and Kirkburn. In Garton Station, two of the warrior burials are surrounded by a circular enclosure with a causeway (GS4 and GS10), and also a few of the square enclosures have an entrance. The Garton Station cemetery is special in that among the Iron Age burials there are also several Anglian graves, placed within square enclosures which Stead (1991: 17-24) claims to be from the Iron Age. In Kirkburn, the two male graves (one with weapons) next to the chariot burial were situated in a circular enclosure with a causeway (Stead 1991: 24-27). 10

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire

Figure 2.1. Isometric reconstruction of Cowlam barrows following proportions identified for the Wykeham Forest barrows (Mytum 1995: fig. 3.4) (Reproduced courtesy of Harold Mytum)

Regarding East Yorkshire, it is believed that the material that became available from the digging of the ditch was used to construct a square barrow which covered not only the grave but (almost) the whole enclosed area, although this has been questioned by Harding (2016: 73), who would expect a circular ditch for a conical mound if the ditch was simply a quarry for the mound material. He argues that the enclosure was designed ‘to demarcate the sacred burial precinct and to segregate the dead from the living’ and suggests that perhaps the barrow enclosure had ‘served as a mortuary enclosure prior to interment, even if this meant double handling of the spoil from the ditch to create a mound over the grave’. No doubt the ditch was perceived as a demarcation between the living and the dead, but since the barrows had the shape of truncated pyramids, as discussed above, it is not illogical for the enclosing ditch to be square. Could the enclosure have served as a mortuary enclosure prior to interment? It is not impossible, but it does not seem very practical. Moreover, there may be indications of the existence of ‘mortuary houses’ in Garton and Wetwang Slack, which may have been used to for laying out the corpse, for viewing by the mourners. These structures could, however, be abandoned roundhouses, built

over by the cemetery as it was expanding. Considered to be more convincing is the ‘mortuary platform’ from Sewerby Cottage Farm, near Bridlington, a square enclosure adjacent to an isolated square barrow with the central burial of an adult male with weapons and pig bones (for a discussion, see Giles 2012: 123-24). 2.4.3. From isolated barrows to large size cemeteries? Many isolated enclosures or small groups of enclosures are known from aerial photography (see for example Whimster 1981), but not many have been excavated, certainly not under modern conditions. Larger cemeteries have of course also once started off as small groups, but the question remains whether isolated barrows were still erected when larger scale cemeteries were in full development. The isolated square barrow from Melton, with a central burial of a female, accompanied by part of a skeleton of a male piglet, is believed by Fenton-Thomas to date to the 1st century BC; in the fill of the ditch, a Corieltauvian coin of the early 1st century AD was found, but since the coin was located in the top layer of the ditch fill, Fenton-Thomas admits that the barrow, which is 11

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 2.4.4. The large cemeteries of the Yorkshire Wolds

located near the small linear cemetery of flat inhumations discussed above, could in principle be a few centuries older. Another square-ditched enclosure was found in a different area of the Melton excavation, but no surviving burial could be attested. In both cases the sides of the barrow platform measured around 7m (Fenton-Thomas 2011: 99-103, 110-12, 373-74).

Large cemeteries have only been closely studied in the Wolds, although they may have existed in other areas. Aerial photographs show the presence of a substantial cemetery in Slingsby in the Howardian Hills / Vale of Pickering (Whimster 1981: 89, 103, 112, 114, 335, fig. 3536) with perhaps as many as 100 enclosures.

Dent (1982, 1984, 1995, 2010) set up a chronological sequence for enclosure sizes and grave depths, based on stratigraphical sequences and grave goods from the large cemetery at Wetwang Slack. This sequence could be of help as a first chronological indication for those enclosures that are only known from aerial photography. The three types of square-ditched enclosures distinguished by Dent could also be discerned by Halkon (2008: 83-86; 2013: 70-74) for his study of the various barrow cemeteries revealed by aerial photography. The earliest enclosures (group 1) are of the Cowlam-type; they are large, with rounded corners, and generally lack a central grave, because the grave had been shallow, or the burial had been placed on the old ground surface. The barrow platform mostly measures between 12x12m and 15x15m, but some are over 20m square. Group 2 includes enclosures of varying size, with shallow, medium depth or occasionally deep graves; their internal measures range between 8 and 11m square, and they have sharper corners. This group has been found to occur during the early and middle stages of a cemetery. Group 3 enclosures are small and can sometimes be curvilinear; they typically have deep graves (0.6m and over) and they always belong to the later stages of a cemetery. It should be noted that some of the latest enclosures of the cemeteries of Rudston and Burton Fleming are circular, with shallow ditches and deep graves, generally connected with type B burials (see below). Circular enclosures do also occur with earlier (type C) burials in Garton Station and Kirkburn, so next to chronological factors, social factors may have determined the shape of the barrow.

In the Wolds, one of the largest concentrations of burial sites excavated in modern times was discovered in the valley of Garton and Wetwang Slack. An even larger concentration was revealed through excavation and aerial photography in the valley of the Gypsey Race, between Rudston and Burton Fleming, where in an area of 2 km by 3 km, at least 800 people must have been buried during the period from late in the fourth century BC to the first century AD. The largest cemetery of the valley is in the locality called Makeshift; others are referred to as Argam Lane, Opposite Argam Lane and Bell Slack. All these sites were excavated between 1967 and 1978 (see Stead 1991), but several more are only known from aerial photography. The Makeshift cemetery is laid out in the shape of a reversed L, its eastern boundary probably being the original course of the Gypsey Race and its southern limit formed by a dyke following the bottom of a subsidiary dry valley known as Springdale. The Makeshift cemetery covers the full period of the funerary history of the valley. The excavation and study of the material showed that in spite of its linear arrangement, the cemetery did not gradually develop from one end to the other but started off from scattered nuclei - not necessarily all created at the same moment - which in the course of time grew closer to each other. This is also illustrated by the occurrence of several unused areas, which is most apparent at the northern end of the cemetery.

The small cemetery of Cowlam, situated 158m high on the top of the Wolds, is generally considered to be one of the oldest sites of the Arras Culture, because a brooch of Marzabotto type inspiration was found in one of the burials (see also section 2.6.2). Five barrows were opened by Greenwell in 1867 and the site was re-excavated by Stead in 1969 and 1972. It produced another two barrows and also two flat graves. The square enclosures had an interior width between 7 and 15m and they were between 30 and 75cm high. One enclosure had a berm between the barrow and the ditch and a second one had a slight berm. Only one barrow had a (very shallow) grave; the other burials were on the old ground surface (Stead 1979: 99; 1986). This is one of the reasons that burials on the ground surface or in very shallow pits are considered characteristic for the early phase of the Arras Culture, but it was confirmed in Wetwang Slack and Rudston / Burton Fleming (see sections 2.4.2 and 2.4.5.2).

Following the study of the bones (Stead 1991: 126-39) several family relationships could be established between people in adjacent burials, based for example on variants of the skull. This enhances the idea of different nuclei belonging to different families, although some caution is required since apparently heritability of these traits may also be influenced by environmental and social factors (Giles 2012: 118).

Some of the funeral sites never grew beyond the size of Cowlam, but others developed into large cemeteries.

All the cemeteries in the valley, apart from the earlier Opposite Argam Lane also have a number of flat graves

Some of the other cemeteries in the valley cover a shorter period of time, like the two smaller cemeteries some 300m north of Makeshift, with about 20 graves each. The site of Argam Lane, just east of the Gypsey Race, produced seven involuted brooches, dated by Stead (1991: 83-92) in LT II (= LT C). The cemetery west of the Gypsey Race, Opposite Argam Lane contained fifteen brooches which were all preceding the introduction of the involuted brooch (Stead 1991: 81-83).

12

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire time the gaps were filled in. Sometime in the late third century BC, a linear earthwork was constructed along the middle of the cemetery, following which all further burials were made to the north of this feature. The general trend was then to spread across the valley floor towards the north, although some of the later burials were made in gaps among existing enclosures.

which are not surrounded by a square ditch. A fairly large number of flat graves were discovered in Burton Fleming Bell Slack (Stead 1991: 19, 216-19). The other large-scale excavation in the Wolds took place in the Great Slack, in advance of gravel extraction. In 1975, when Brewster wound up the excavations in Garton Slack, Dent continued the work into Wetwang Slack. In Garton Slack, many burials had been destroyed before Brewster and also C and E. Grantham could save them (see for example Dent 1983b), but in Wetwang Slack the entire cemetery was systematically excavated.

The most recent excavation of a large Iron Age cemetery was that of Pocklington, Burnby Lane, by MAP Archaeological Practice in 2014-2017, which in its final phase brought to light a chariot burial with two horses. The site, located in a valley bottom at the edge of the Wolds, produced a total of 86 barrows (or at least their enclosures), three of which were large, round barrows of the Bronze Age. The square and rectangular and occasionally circular Iron Age enclosures formed two distinct groups, separated by a trackway, one group in the southwest, the other in the northeast. The three types of enclosures as distinguished by Dent and Halkon (see above) were represented in Pocklington, and stratigraphic relationships confirmed the evolution from large enclosures (the largest ones measuring 7m across) where often a central burial was lacking, to smaller, curvilinear and circular enclosures (just over 4m diameter) with deep graves (Stephens and Ware 2020).

Dent (1984: 30-40) studied the development of the Wetwang cemetery in great detail, applying theoretical models of cemetery development to the local situation and he set up relative chronological sequences by establishing stratigraphical relationships among graves and enclosures, using the Harris Matrix system. The Wetwang Slack cemetery is not as spacious as the cemeteries in Burton Fleming and Rudston. It has many intersections, which provide much stratigraphical information (Figure 2.2). Dent concluded that the earliest burials were those at the western end, at the focal point provided by the junction of two linear features. The major feature is a ditched trackway running from east to west through the valley, coming from Elmswell and passing through Garton Slack, Wetwang Slack and further on to Blealands Nook. The other feature is a subsidiary trackway which seems to link the major trackway with another larger trackway further north (see Stoertz 1997: fig. 36). Subsequently, the main bulk of burials developed along the valley trackway over a distance of 400m up to a Bronze Age round barrow. In the beginning, the burials were probably spaced out, but with

2.4.5. Burial types The excavation of Rudston, Makeshift introduced an importance stage in the study of the Arras Culture. A large number of burials in the cemetery did not fit the standard burial tradition: different position and orientation of the corpse, different grave goods, and different type of barrow enclosure.

Figure 2.2. Wetwang Slack cemetery (Reproduced courtesy of John S. Dent).

13

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent The new type of burial (Stead’s ‘type B’) exactly matched the position and orientation of the continental burials, although on the Continent the head was normally to the west, while in eastern Yorkshire, it could be either to the east (predominant) or to the west; at the time of discovery, it must certainly have been considered as some kind of ‘missing link’. This possibility was, however, quickly dismissed: the burials turned out to be of more recent date than those in traditional Arras style. Stratigraphical evidence for this was found at the southern end of the Makeshift cemetery, where a type A burial (R9) was cut by a type B burial (R8). Type B burials do by definition not contain brooches, but there is one exception, and this was one of LLT construction (Stead 1991: 89, burial R175).

A further category, type D, was added by John Dent (1995: 74) for relatively poor, secondary burials, which represented a large part of the cemetery population of Wetwang Slack. The characteristics of each burial type are summarised in Table 2.1. Stead (1991: 181) has tried to order the different types of graves chronologically and came to the following conclusions. The dating of artefacts suggests that: – some type C burials belong to the ELT period; – most type A burials belong to the second century BC; – some type B burials belong to the first century BC or even to the first century AD. He points out that this does not necessarily mean a simple progression from one type to the other as:

Another characteristic of the new burial type was the presence of weapons in the grave. Iron Age burials with weapons had been found in eastern Yorkshire before, but they had been considered as belonging to a different ‘culture’. This is amply illustrated by the fact that in The La Tène Cultures of Eastern Yorkshire (1965) Stead distinguishes two different ‘cultures’, whereas in 1979, they have all become part of The Arras Culture.

– some type A burials with ELT brooches could be earlier than type C; – burial of pork (specific cuts of pork) is a factor that links C and B. Dent (1995: 73-75; 2010: 64), however, argues that, whereas type B may be a later development, the difference between A, C and D is social rather than chronological. This would explain the difficulty in establishing a chronological sequence and it would also better reflect social stratigraphy. It should even be possible to refine the typology further, but the lack of decent individual burial data for the cemeteries excavated in the more distant past presents a serious handicap for a more detailed study, at least for type A.

Even though both types co-existed in the Makeshift cemetery, the possibility was still investigated that the east-west burials belonged to a different population group. That idea was finally abandoned, when family connections could be established between the two groups, based on dental characteristics and bone anomalies. The most impressive example can be found in the group of burials from R139 to R147, where three type A (the traditional type) and three type B (the new type) burials were variously linked by three different bone anomalies and one dental feature. The change from type A to type B is assumed to have taken place during the first century BC, and type B may have survived into the first century AD (Stead 1991: 134 fig. 83; 181). This dating may have to be slightly reviewed in the light of the Bayesian modelling applied to a selection of burials from Wetwang Slack (Jay et al. 2012, see section 2.6.4 below), but in any case, type B burials are a later development. As mentioned above, some caution is required regarding family connections, as apparently heritability of these dental and bone traits still needs further investigation and that environmental and social factors may also play a role (Giles 2012: 118), but even so, type B burials were not spatially segregated.

On the basis of the information available at this date, it is, however, possible to refine the typology for type C burials (Table 2.2). Type C represents the higher classes of society and variations within this type most certainly reflect different levels within high society and different roles within the hierarchy. There are good reasons to exclude the female burials of Garton Slack and Kirkburn from type C. They do as a rule not contain bones (nor sheep bones for that matter), not even burial K6 from Kirkburn, with its relatively rich pieces of jewellery, whereas female burials with mirrors always have pig bones. The only exception is burial K8, the oldest (45+) female attested in Kirkburn; apart from the pig bones there were no other grave goods, nor dress accessories. The type of animal bones associated with a burial is clearly a distinctive social factor. About the occurrence of two types of animal bones in Arras Culture burials Mike Parker Pearson (1999: 56) writes: ‘… we appear to have two species being used as status markers. In structuralist terms, this opposition forms a totemic system in which the human relationship between rulers and ruled is mirrored by the ceremonial distinction between pigs and sheep’. On this basis it does not seem unreasonable to set the presence of pig bones as a requirement to qualify as a type C burial.

In the mid-1980s the excavations of Garton Station and Kirkburn necessitated the addition of a third type of burial. This type C combines characteristics of types A and B: the orientation of the skeleton follows that of type A burials, although in a more relaxed position (predominantly flexed), but the grave goods are those of type B burials. Stead (1991: 179) noted that all the males got special treatment (chariot, weapons) but not so the females, though he still classified them as type C.

14

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire Table 2.1. Main burial types BURIAL TYPES

A

B

C

D

Body position

Contracted, crouched or flexed

Extended or sometimes flexed

Contracted, crouched or flexed

Both but mostly similar to type A

Body orientation

N/S facing E

E/W

N/S facing E

Both but mostly similar to type A

Type of enclosure

Square

Circular, superficial depth

Square

In ditch or secondary in enclosure

Primary / secondary position

Primary and secondary

Primary and secondary

Primary

Secondary

Coffin

Sometimes

Never

Not usually

Never

Brooches

Yes

No

No

No

Bracelets

Yes

No

No

No

Glass beads

Yes

No

No

No

Other jewelry

Yes

No

No

No

Mirrors

No

No

Possible

No

Pottery

Yes

No

No

No

Animal bones

Sheep

Pig

Pig

None

Vehicle parts / horse harness

No

No

Possible

No

Weapons

No

Yes

Common

No

Tools

No

Yes

No

No

Spindle whorls

No

Yes

No

No

Table 2.2. Subdivision of type C burials TYPE C - subdivision

C1 chariot

C2 chariot & weapons

C3 weapons

C4 mirror

Body position

Contracted, crouched, flexed Contracted, crouched or crouched on back or flexed

Contracted, crouched or flexed

Contracted, crouched or flexed

Body orientation

N/S facing E

N/S facing E

N/S facing E

N/S facing E

Type of enclosure

Variable

Variable

Mostly circular but Square? can be square

Primary / secondary position

Primary

Primary

Primary

Primary

Coffin

Possible

Possible

Probably not

Possible

Gender

Male / Female

Male

Male

Female

Brooches

No

No

No

No

Bracelets

No

No

No

No

Glass beads

No

No

No

No

Other jewelry

No

No

No

No

Mirrors

Yes with female

No

No

Yes

Pottery

No

No

No

No

Animal bones

Pig

Pig

Pig

Pig

Vehicle parts / horse harness

Yes

Yes

No

No

Weapons

No

Yes

Yes

No

Tools

No

No

No

No

Spindle whorls

No

No

No

No

15

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent It is difficult to classify the group of female burials with jewellery and no animal bones, so that until further notice they will have to remain with type A.

R27 was narrower, with a thick top about 0.4m above the grave floor, and this one may have been a hollowed-out tree trunk (Rod Mackey, personal communication). Coffinlike structures were also attested in Pocklington, Burnby Lane, in 12 primary burials (16.4 per cent) and in five flat graves (12.5 per cent), but in none of the secondary burials (Stephens and Ware 2020: 22-23).

2.4.5.1. Type A burials In a typical type A burial the skeleton is flexed, crouched or contracted, orientated north-south and lying on its left side, facing east. There are, however, a considerable number of burials where this scheme is reversed, i.e., south-north facing west, but south-north facing east and north-south facing west do occur as well. No pattern can be discerned as to the reason behind these different orientations: there is no correlation with age, gender, type of grave goods or position in the cemetery, and it does not seem to be a chronological factor as the skeletons in double burials often have opposite orientations, although Dent (1984: 74) found indications for a higher degree of conformity to the standard orientation in the later years of the Wetwang Slack cemetery.

There is some slight evidence that the coffins were cushioned: a brooch from burial 34 in Wetwang Slack contained in its corrosion fibres of rush or sedge and in one of the graves excavated in Garton Slack in 1965, material appearing like matted grass or straw was preserved as a lime impression. Dent (1984: 26) points out that such a lining need not be confined to the inside of a frame and that a plain grave pit could have been furnished in this way as well. As far as grave goods in type A burials are concerned, brooches seem to be the most common artefacts: 63 brooches were found in the Rudston and Burton Fleming cemeteries and 43 at Wetwang Slack. Stead (1991: 180) points out that 91 of these are distinctively British versions derived from MLT forms, whereas only eight have typical ELT forms although even these are probably of British manufacture: they have a hinge mechanism instead of the spring used on the Continent. Only a few brooches with true springs are known, for example one from Burton Fleming Opposite Argam Lane (BF20) (Stead 1991: 81) and a couple from Wetwang Slack (an ELT arched bow from burial 89, an ELT flat bow brooch from burial 275 and a LLT flat bow brooch from burial 117) (Dent 1984: 160-65). Many of the brooches of ELT construction already have three-coil mock-springs.

Some of the skeletons in Wetwang Slack were so tightly contracted or bound that the bodies must have gone through a range of post-mortem treatments to achieve this position. They are believed to have been defleshed or mummified, not in the sense of formal mummification, but rather as desiccation through wind-drying, smoking or freezedrying. The reasons for this treatment may be manifold (perhaps they died when the ground was frozen), but since an exceptionally large proportion of these burials were women, it has been suggested that they had been married outside their community and had been returned for burial in their native place. Several of these women were buried with glass bead necklaces and some of them formed the epicentre for later burials, often also of women (maybe relatives?), with or without glass beads. A paper-based study suggests that the demographic and gender profile of these ‘curated’ bodies is not the same all over eastern Yorkshire; a detailed osteological and thanatological study of these burials by Marthe (Emma) Tollefsen is expected to shed more light on this phenomenon (Dent 2020: 43; Giles, Green and Peixoto 2020: 60-61).

For Wetwang Slack, Dent (1984: 48) came to the conclusion that the three traditional stages in construction techniques of La Tène brooches are recognisable in the cemetery and that they are, to a certain degree, supported by the stratigraphical relationships. Although the general sequence suggests that changes in construction took place along similar lines to those on the Continent, the ELT method (where the spare foot end of the brooch is turned back towards the bow) appears to have remained in use during the MLT stage. Therefore, he feels that the construction of the foot alone cannot be used as a rigid basis for a typological sequence and the construction of the bow, as well as ornaments, should also be taken into account. Both Dent (1982: 439-45; 1984: 45-55) and Stead (1979: 64-73; 1991: 80-90) have worked out fairly similar and complementary typologies for Arras Culture brooches. These types, which are based on the shape of the bow, also occur in the rest of Britain: arched, flat bow, long flat bow, long involuted, short involuted and pennanular. Sophie Adams (2013: 60), who studied all EIA and MIA brooches from Britain, considers the typologies of Stead and Dent beneficial for regional studies, but preferred the classic Hull and Hawkes typology for a nationwide study.

Coffins have only been reported with type A burials. None of the burials with weapons, be it type B or C, seems to have been accommodated in a coffin. In several of the chariot burials, however, a box-like structure is present, although opinions differ (and may perhaps be different case by case) whether this structure is a coffin or the body of the vehicle. In Wetwang Slack, the occurrence of coffins was, for example, suggested by rectangular stains in the gravel or in a few cases substantiated by a lime crust which preserved the face of timber planks (Dent 1984: 25). The largest coffin in Wetwang Slack was 1.75m long and in Makeshift the largest one was 1.50 by 0.70m, but average measurements were 1.20 by 0.60m (Stead 1991: 36). Most coffins in Makeshift were wide rectangular boxes, probably constructed from wooden planks, but the one in 16

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire According to Stead (1991: 83), involuted brooches do not occur before MLT, but Dent (1984: 160-5) mentions several involuted brooches of ELT construction from Wetwang Slack, proportionately more of the long involuted than of the (chronologically later) short involuted type. Very few LLT brooches are reported: in Wetwang Slack, there is only the brooch from burial 117 (Dent 1984: 161), while in Makeshift, a LLT brooch was attested in burial R175, a west-east burial of a young male (Stead 1991: 89, 208).

remarkable example is the copper-alloy swan’s neck pin, with a ring head in the form of a wheel and with coral inlay, from Danes Graves 41, although Stead (1979: 77) suspects that this one was not a cloak fastener but rather a hair- or hatpin, as it was found behind the skull. The female chariot burial of Wetwang Slack contained the head of a broken iron and gold pin, decorated with what appears to be coral (Dent 1985). This is only the second gold item found in an Arras Culture context; the first one was the gold ring from the Queen’s Barrow in Arras.

Stead (1991: 180) points at the imbalance between the numbers of ELT and MLT brooches and he mentions three possible explanations. A first possibility is that type A burials only started in the third century BC but that some contained brooches which dated from early in the fourth century and were kept as a heirloom before being deposited in the grave. Another explanation could be that initially the rite was confined to a small number of people and that it gradually spread to the larger population in the second century BC. Finally, it is also possible that the rite was practised by all, starting in the fourth century, but that brooches were only worn by a few and later became much more common.

Brooches may have been part of the deceased’s clothing, but they may also have been used to fasten a shroud (see Giles 2012: 129-31), and in the Wetwang Village chariot burial, the decomposed iron involuted brooch that was revealed by X-rays, is believed to have secured the bag that contained the mirror (British Museum s.d., object 2001-0401-19; Cooper et al. 2019: 236). As such, brooches attested in burials may not necessarily have been intended as grave goods (see also Adams 2013: 218-22). Many of the burials with brooches also produced pottery. In Makeshift, 29 pots were found; 21 of these were associated with brooches and six were found in barrow ditches (Stead 1991: 185-208). In Wetwang Slack, however, pots were few (Dent 1982; Dent 1984), as in Pocklington, Burnby Lane, where only one of the deceased was buried with a (complete) pot, an adult female in a secondary burial (Stephens and Ware 2020: 24). In the Wolds/Humber site, however, a relatively large quantity of pottery was found (as well as animal bones – see below), but only one complete brooch and part of a second one (Stephens and Ware 2020: 28-29).

Based on what will be discussed below in section 2.6, the first explanation is likely to be the most appropriate. If the Arras Culture only started in the early third century BC, it is not surprising that the proportion of brooches of ELT construction is relatively low, as by the middle of the century they will be replaced by those of MLT construction. Even if a few brooches possibly pre-date 300 BC, these could easily be heirlooms. The existence of heirlooms was demonstrated in Wetwang Slack, where ELT type brooches were found in burials which were stratigraphically later (Dent 1984: 48).

None of the pots examined by Rigby (1991: 101) are wheel thrown, and presumably that situation has not changed in the meantime. They are all fairly coarse and indistinctive, and no chronological development can be discerned in the typology. In Rudston / Burton Fleming, a difference in quality can be seen between erratic-tempered ware (2/3 of the pottery) and calcite-tempered ware (1/3). Erratic refers to a mixture of rocks of non-local origin (for example encountered as pebbles and boulders in the glacial drift deposits of the region and therefore readily available), whereas calcite from the local Chalks required some shallow quarrying. In general, erratic-tempered ware was ‘minimum input pottery’, while calcite-tempered ware was usually of better finishing quality. Both types were almost mutually exclusive, which may imply significant chronological or functional differences (Rigby 1991: 94118; Rigby et al. 1999). One pot that stands out from the rest, is a pedestalled pot from burial R143, burnished and nicely finished although erratic-tempered; it was associated with an involuted brooch which was at the time thought to be of the late second or early first century BC and as such the pot could be the latest one of the cemetery, although the first pedestalled pot in an Iron Age burial in Britain (Rigby 1991: 115). However, since the finds of the chariot burials of Wetwang Village and Ferry Fryston, the brooch in R143 is thought to be no later than the second

The typo-chronology of the brooches may also have to be partially reviewed based on the Bayesian modelling study discussed in section 2.6.4. Moreover, Jay et al. (2012) question the assumption that the Arras Culture continued well into the first century BC. They claim that the LT D brooch from Wetwang burial 117 is as early as any continental brooch of the same type, and attribute it to the beginning of the second century BC, while the brooch from Makeshift burial R175 is from ‘an horizon post-dating the main Arras rite’, i.e., an east-west burial. The cemetery of Pocklington, Burnby Lane, produced 16 bow brooches, three in copper alloy, the remainder in iron, with a date range from the third to the first century BC. Most brooches were of a familiar type, but one copper alloy brooch had a wide H-shaped frame, decorated with coral. Another brooch was also decorated with coral, and two others had glass beads. Furthermore, there were three copper alloy penannular brooches, which can be broadly dated between the mid-third century BC and the first century AD (Stephens and Ware 2020: 23). In a few cases a pin rather than a brooch was used as a dress fastener. There are different types of pins, but a 17

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent century BC and the pot is dated as MLT (Stead 2006: 69). Pots are not evenly spread over the cemetery; the most noticeable cluster is at the southern end of the Makeshift cemetery (R1-R25) (Rigby 1991: 101).

long-standing cultural tradition rather than a lack of skilled potters in the region’ and pleads for the reintegration of pattern (decorative metalwork) and plainness (pottery) into a holistic study that should lead to new insights. She refers to Niall Sharples, who has juxtaposed the role of patterned metalwork - used to dazzle the onlooker against the role of pottery - ‘used to establish and maintain social relationships through the cooking and consumption of food’ - although both must have had a whole range of functions (Chittock 2016: 96, 115; 2020). While this difference in role is interesting as a concept, the fact remains that pottery is systematically absent in burials with richer grave goods.

In marked contrast to earlier funerary vessels from the late Neolithic and Bronze Age in the area, not much time or effort seems to have been spent. There is also a limited size range, which seems deliberate: the role of the pot is to be the container of a sheep foreleg. As to the six pots in enclosure ditches, all these burials were probably females and apart from one they were all associated with a brooch. One could wonder whether the presence of the pot in the ditch had a function in the burial rites. There might also be some evidence for ritual breaking of pots before or during burial, but as there is no such systematic rite for other artefacts, this could be coincidence. There is no link between vessel shape and gender, although there are more incomplete pots with males (Rigby 1991: 94-118).

Another type of grave good linked with type A burials is jewellery. Although the association of jewellery with brooches and pottery is not completely inexistent, it is by no means the rule. The copper-alloy brooches from Wetwang Slack are all three associated with jewellery, whereas only five out of 40 iron brooches have been found in a burial with jewellery (Dent 1984: 158-74).

The ceramics in Arras Culture burials are of a different order than pottery from Iron Age burials on the Continent, which comes in large quantities (at least in certain periods and in certain regions) and is often fine presentation ware. In comparison, the Arras Culture pottery is mainly coarse kitchen ware, certainly not intended to be put on display to impress distinguished guests. There must be a reason why pottery never occurs in richer graves like chariot or weapon burials.

An abundance of jewellery was encountered in the Queen’s Barrow in Arras. The ‘queen’ was lavishly adorned with a copper-alloy arched bow brooch, a pendant in the form of a copper-alloy disc with coral inlay, two copper-alloy bracelets, a gold ring (now lost), an amber ring, a copperalloy ring and a necklace of about 100 blue glass beads of different types (Figure 2.3); she had also been given a set of tweezers (Stead 1979: 98). The gold finger-ring is one of only two gold objects found in an Arras Culture context and it is one of the few items that show a close connection with the Continent. A similar ring was found in burial 12 at Münsingen-Rain in Switzerland and in Saint-Memmie in

Helen Chittock (2016: 115) has criticised references to Iron Age East Yorkshire pottery as ‘shapeless jars’. She claims that the ‘continued production of similar vessels over almost a millennium could be seen to represent a

Figure 2.3. Necklace from the Queen’s Barrow at Arras (Image courtesy of York Museums Trust)

18

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire the Marne department in France. The ring from the Queen’s Barrow is discussed in detail by Jope (1995) and Megaw et al. (2007). The large LIA coin hoard of Le Catillon II in Jersey, discovered in 2012 and detached between 2014 and 2017, produced a gold ring that was almost identical to the Arras ring. The hoard mainly consisted of first century BC Gaulish coins, but also included coins from Hampshire dated around 40 BC, and as such post-dated the Conquest of Gaul. This means that the ring was about 200 years old at the time of its caching, which in itself is not exceptional, given that the hoard even contained a Bronze Age spearhead (Giles, Green and Peixoto 2020: 51-52).

in or after the second century BC. Henderson emphasises that glass beads can change hands and be traded easily, so that it is not possible to prove where beads are made unless the manufacturing centre specialising in that particular type is known, which is not the case for the types found in Burton Fleming and Rudston. Similar types of bracelets are known from Arras, Wetwang Slack, Danes Graves, Cowlam and Burton Fleming. Bracelets can be in iron or copper-alloy, but also in shale or jet. In Wetwang Slack there were six copper-alloy and seven iron bracelets. The copper-alloy ones tended to be from the earlier period and had ornamental features, whereas the iron bracelets were mostly late and were plain, but this could be due to corrosion (Dent 1984: 59-62). In Rudston, the Makeshift cemetery produced only three bracelets, in copper-alloy, shale and jet. In comparison, four bracelets were found in the much smaller neighbouring cemetery Opposite Argam Lane where all the graves are relatively early. According to Stead (1991: 90-91), bracelets were relatively popular in the earlier stages of the Arras Culture and then went out of fashion.

Also in Arras, in burial A5, a copper-alloy torc was found - the only torc of the Arras Culture - but it got lost and was never illustrated (Stead 1979: 80; Greenwell 1906: 301-02, quoting Stillingfleet’s notes). This absence of torcs is remarkable in comparison with the Aisne-Marne, where torcs were very popular grave goods in the ELT period (afterwards they disappear from the burials, see section 5.1.10). Stead notes that there are other areas where torcs are comparatively rare: ‘On the Swiss plain, at Münsingen, and on the southern side of the Alps, in the Ticino cemeteries, torcs were not worn but occasional bead necklaces are found instead and it is to this tradition that the Arras Culture seems to bear some affinity’ (Stead 1979: 80). When Stead wrote this, there were not that many bead necklaces known from the Arras Culture, but the number increased significantly with the finds from Wetwang Slack, which lead Dent (1982: 445-46) to develop a typology for beads, elaborating on the original typology of Guido. Most beads are plain blue glass beads, but some have different colours or special patterns. Apart from glass beads, there are also single glass, copper-alloy, amber or jet beads. Dent suspects that beads of organic substances have also existed but have not survived (Dent 1984: 171). In Wetwang Slack, most of the bead necklaces seem to pre-date the linear earthwork, whereas single beads tend to belong to later burials (Dent 1982: 445-6). A necklace of 70 beads was also found in one of the Cowlam burials, where it was associated with a copper-alloy arched bow brooch (Stead 1979: 64, 80-81, 99). In one of the Garton Slack burials Brewster found 35 glass beads (Brewster 1980: 251-52; Dent 1983b, Appendix B n°23). Single beads have for example also been found at Arras, Danes Graves, Garton Slack and Burton Fleming, where they could have been used as pendants, many perhaps as ear pendants (Stead 1971: 35; Dent 1983b, Appendix B n°17; Stead 1991: 93).

In Pocklington, Burnby Lane, where over 100 burials were excavated, only five bracelets were found, in four graves. A mature woman in a central burial, which also contained the H-shaped bow brooch mentioned above, wore a copper alloy bracelet on each wrist, one of which with coral inlay. A female over age 26 was given a bracelet in combination with a bead and an iron bow brooch. The other bracelets were from a female age 26-35 and from a probable female age 18-25 (Stephens and Ware 2020: 23-24). One of the few items found in Arras Culture burials that are considered as possible imports (Stead 1991: 92-94) is a copper-alloy hollow ring from burial K6 in Kirkburn, a small but exclusive cemetery, which also houses a chariot burial (K5) and a burial with weapons (K3). The ring is made from two semi-tubular halves joined together by three copper-alloy rivets. It has a diameter of 38-39mm, and organic material was found both inside and out. The burial also contained a jet ring shaped for suspension, an amber bead and a copper-alloy double-stud. The hollow ring could have been a pendant, an amulet or it could have been attached to a cap or another garment. Hollow rings have regularly been found on the Continent. Based on its construction and the number of rivets used, the Kirkburn ring belongs to Raftery’s type 1, in use by the end of the fifth century BC, but obsolete towards the end of ELT. Although many of these rings have been found with male burials with swords, they also often occur with female burials. There are three German examples where this type of ring was suspended on torcs (Raftery 1988: 4-6; 26, 28). The female buried in grave K6 was aged between 17 and 25, and her death can be associated with childbirth: a newborn infant of 10 lunar months was buried between her pelvis and her heels. In the filling of the grave was a secondary burial of a female with a near full-term infant of eight lunar months in utero. The nature of the death of K6 must still have been known when K2 was buried (Stead 1991: 92; Stead

Chemical analyses by Henderson (1991) revealed that two early MLT cobalt blue wave decorated glass beads from Rudston, Makeshift (from burials R2 and R16) probably came from the same workshop as similar beads from Wetwang Slack, or that at least the source of the raw material was the same. In Burton Fleming, Opposite Argam Lane (BF19), a fragment of an opaque yellow globular glass bead was made of glass that was probably imported from the Continent (northwestern Europe), manufactured 19

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 1991: 136). As a matter of interest, the secondary burial is orientated east-west (Stead 1991: 224), and the deceased did not share the family link (a non-metrical variant of the skull) that possibly existed between the primary burial and K3, K4 and K5 (see Stead 1991: 135).

The possibility of a different population group could be considered, but then certainly not as a ‘group of male warriors’, as at least half of the burials are women. Furthermore, they must have mingled quite easily with the type A population, as the type B burials in Makeshift are spread all over the site, although there is a concentration at the northern end, and at a few instances, both rites can be seen within the same alleged family. None of the type B burials is younger than 15, whereas in type A, child burials are perhaps not frequent, but they do occur, sometimes even in primary positions, although usually secondary for example in enclosure ditches. This would fit in with the observation made by Dent (1984: 146) that towards the LIA, many infant burials are located in domestic enclosures which seems to suggest that young children were no longer buried with adults.

Some of the burials with jewellery also have animal bones, normally from sheep, but in Wetwang Slack animal bones are totally absent from graves with jewellery, apart from burial 277, which actually just contained one glass bead. Animal bones in Wetwang Slack are associated with pots or occur on their own; both pig and sheep are reported, but the information is not always consistent (see individual descriptions per type of grave goods in Dent 1984: 15879). Unfortunately, for the larger cemeteries which have not been excavated under modern conditions, like Arras, Danes Graves and Eastburn, information on animal bones is not always available or is not reliable.

Type B female burials are clearly less rich than male burials. Female burials occasionally produce pot sherds (not totally absent but less frequent than with type A burials, at least in Rudston and Burton Fleming), pig bones and chalk spindle whorls. This last item exclusively occurs in type B burials; also tools are confined to type B burials. All burials with weapons are male, apart from R163, which is a possible female.

Barrow 403 from the Wolds/Humber site contained a male burial with six goats and a possible dog. The burial was also special in that the deceased was aligned east-west, facing south, whereas most burials on the cemetery followed the typical ‘north-south, facing east’ position; also remarkable was the discovery of several neonates in the northwestern corner of the barrow ditch. The human skeleton was radiocarbon dated to 330-204 cal BC. Another interesting feature were five shallow pits with animal bone deposits, located near the ditch of barrow 1473 of which the central grave was that of a juvenile. The bone deposits were very compact, which suggests that they had been placed in an organic container; possible interpretations are that they were the remains of a feasting, or individual offerings over a period of time. Overall, the Wolds/Humber site cemetery contained a striking quantity of animal bones (Stephens and Ware 2020: 28).

The absence of brooches from type B burials is remarkable. Stead (1991: 180) considered the possibility that the wearing of brooches became unfashionable in Yorkshire in the first century BC. The only type B burial with a brooch is R175 from Rudston; the brooch, which has parallels on the Continent that belong LT D2, was included in the Bayesian modelling study discussed above, and is believed to be deposited after 50 BC, although a date in the later second century BC cannot be excluded; the article also brings up the issue of a chronological gap in British brooches and other metalwork (Jay et al. 2012: 184). Brooches are also rare in type C burials: fragments of a brooch were attested in the Danes Graves chariot burial (Stead 1979: 100), and the chariot burials from Ferry Fryston (Brown et al. 2007: 147) and Pocklington, The Mile (Ware and Stephens 2020) each included a decorated brooch.

Type A burials are far more numerous than type B and C burials and show a greater variety. Maybe future additional information will allow the typology to be refined. 2.4.5.2. Type B burials Most type B burials are from Rudston, Makeshift (54), but there are also two from Rudston, Bell Slack, one from Kirkburn, one from Garton Slack and one from Wetwang Slack; Dent (2010: 64) also mentions a possible one from Huntow (Grindale). Type B burials are most probably a later development. The graves are deep, the enclosure ditches insubstantial or non-existent. Assuming that the soil from the ditches was used to construct a barrow, this barrow cannot have been very high. These burials may represent the last phase of the ‘Arras square barrow Culture’. Stead (1991: 184) and Dent (1995: 96) are convinced that the culture ended in the last century BC and that only in Rudston did it exist for a while longer. There is, however, no reason why type B burials should not have existed in greater numbers on other sites: in flat graves or under low barrows they would be much harder to locate, especially when not mixed with older type A burials.

2.4.5.3. Type B and C warrior burials Weapons occur both with type B and type C burials (Table 2.3), and although they have certain features in common, they also differ. Firstly, where the information is available, type C burials are surrounded by enclosures with fairly deep ditches, whereas the type B burials with weapons have insubstantial or no ditches. Secondly, the scabbards of type B burial swords are made of organic material, usually wood and leather; most scabbards from type C burials are of metal and they are often lavishly decorated (Figure 2.4). Arras Culture burials almost never have a complete panoply (sword, shield and spearheads) but often only one of these. The most usual combination is that of a sword and spearheads, but it should be pointed out that many 20

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire Table 2.3. Warrior burials (grey shading refers to ‘speared corpses’; scabbards can be in organic material (O) or metal (M). Shield parts

Spearheads

Bone missile

Dagger

Knive

Toe ring

Animal bones

Tools

Bone toggle

Age Scabbard

Type

Sword

Burial n°

Chain mail

Site

Makeshift

R24

B

17-25

 

1

O

 

1

 

 

 

 

P

 

 

Makeshift

R50

B

17-25

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

Makeshift

R57

B

25-35

 

1

O

 

1

 

 

 

 

P

 

 

Makeshift

R87

B

17-25

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

x

 

Makeshift

R107

B

45+

 

1

O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Makeshift

R139

B

17-25

 

1

O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Makeshift

R144

B

25-35

 

1

O

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Makeshift

R146

B

25-35

 

1

O

 

1

1

 

 

 

P

 

 

Makeshift

R148

B

17-25

 

 

 

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Makeshift

R153

B

25-35

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

Makeshift

R154

B

17-20

 

1

O

?

2

 

 

 

 

 

x

 

Makeshift

R163

B

25-35

 

1

O

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Makeshift

R170

B

25-35

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Makeshift

R174

B

17-25

 

1

O

?

7

2

 

 

 

 

 

2

Makeshift

R182

B

25-35

 

1

O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bell Slack

BF63

C

25-35

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

Garton Station

GS4

C

17-25

 

 

 

x

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Garton Station

GS5

C

17-25

 

 

 

?

4

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

Garton Station

GS7

C

25-35

 

 

 

 

11

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

Garton Station

GS10

C

25-35

 

1

O

?

14

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kirkburn

K3

C

17-25

 

1

M

 

3

 

 

 

 

P

 

 

Kirkburn

K5

C

25-35

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P

 

 

Wetwang Slack

WS98

C

 

 

1

 

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WS1 chariot

WS453

C

 

 

1

M

x

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WS3 chariot

WS455

C

 

 

1

M

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Grimthorpe

 

C

 

 

1

M

x

1

16

 

 

 

 

 

 

Acklam

 

C

30

 

1

O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bugthorpe

 

?

 

 

1

M

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eastburn

?

?

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

North Grimston

 

?

 

 

2

M

x

 

 

 

 

 

P

 

 

Thorpe Hall

 

?

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Burstwick

 

C

26-35

 

1

 

x

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pocklington Burnby L.

barrow 34

C

18-25

 

1

O

 

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pocklington Burnby L.

barrow 37

C

18-25

 

 

 

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pocklington The Mile

chariot

C

46+

 

 

 

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pocklington The Mile

?

C

18-25

 

 

 

x

5

3

 

 

 

 

 

shields may have consisted of organic material only and as such were less likely to be preserved; specimens such as the bark shield from Enderby, which was composed of different wood species and proved to be highly effective, were probably more common than shields with metal fittings (see Inall 2020: 75).

The weapons in these burials are, however, not always intended as traditional ‘grave goods’. Most spearheads are in fact considered to be the remains of a ‘killing’ ritual that took place during the burial ceremony. The spearheads and bone missiles shown in dark and bold in the table belong to what Stead (1991: 33-35, 74-78) has called ‘speared 21

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 2.4. Hilt of the Kirkburn sword - burial K3 (Courtesy of Gary Lee Todd, PhD)

corpses’. He stated that they are not carefully placed in the grave, but are scattered around the skeleton, and they are pointing towards it. Some spearheads are driven into the filling just above the level of the skeleton. Stead claims that all spearheads were insubstantial weapons which may have been intended solely for the burial rite. Some of them were bent or broken, probably when they hit a wooden shield during the ceremony (Stead 1991: 33-35, 74-78); in fact, several of these spearheads showed traces of wood, suggesting the presence of a wooden shield without metal fittings (Stead 1991: 63-64).

speared corpse burials where some of the spearheads were just deposited in the grave, while others were scattered, and considers this as variations in practice. For the speared corpse in the chariot burial of Wetwang Slack 2, Dent already claimed that the spears had been laid in the grave, not thrown. In Burnby Lane, traces of wood in the sockets suggest that the shafts had been broken before deposition (Inall 2015: 263; Ware and Stephens 2020). Another speared corpse was discovered in Pocklington, The Mile; it was of a young man, buried in a deep pit within a circular ditch, and included five spears and a shield with a metal rib and boss (Ware 2020 and Stephens). The meaning of the ritual has been the topic of much debate; after discussing various interpretations, Inall (2015: 265) concludes that it is a rite of separation ‘perhaps akin to the modern military salute in which weapons are fired during a funeral’.

Speared corpse burials have been re-examined by Yvonne Inall as part of her doctoral thesis (Inall 2015). All the spearheads found with speared corpses were throwing spears; in fact, only one thrusting and four versatile spearheads were found in the Arras Culture burials as a whole, unlike in other parts of Britain where these represent over half of the dataset (which is, however, much smaller in numbers). As Inall argued, this may indicate ‘that the throwing of spears formed a significant role within the construction of martial identities for certain members of Arras communities’. Throwing spears are light and small-bladed (Inall 2020: 71) – perhaps this is why Stead considered them as insubstantial, ceremonial weapons. Inall detected some variations in the speared corpses rite. A speared corpse from Pocklington, Burnby Lane included an iron sword in a wooden scabbard, five iron spearheads and a possible ferrule. One of the spearheads and the ferrule may have been thrown into the grave, but the other four spearheads were carefully placed in a row along the spine of the deceased young male; they could not have been thrown into this position. Inall states that there are other

The speared corpses are a feature of both burial types, thus pointing at a close ideological connection between the two groups, which again raises the question how they were related in time. The study of the swords and scabbards has not resulted in any decisive answer on the dating of type B burials. The swords from burials R107, R139, R144 and R182, with straight hilt-ends are, according to Stead, no earlier than LLT and might belong to the first century AD. For the other swords, which have a campanulate hiltend, there is no secure typology, as these were common on the Continent in ELT and MLT but survived into the LLT period (Stead 1991: 181). Type C burials are slightly easier to date, as they provide more datable material: the decorations on the scabbard, the shape of the chape, associations with other grave goods (Stead 1979: 60-64; 1991: 64-74, 180-84; Dent 1984: 176). 22

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire There are also examples where spearheads have been given as normal grave goods, as in R24 and R57, where the arrangement in the grave looks very much alike: the body is extended, the sword lies over it and the spearhead is in the corner of the grave near the left foot, pointing away from the body. The arrangement in BF63 is similar, but here the sword is replaced by a knife. In other cases, the skeleton is laid face down with the sword on top (R144), or the skeleton is face up with the sword underneath it (R107) (Stead 1991: 185-227). This may be an indication that swords were worn on the back, which is supported by technological and iconographic evidence. The scabbards found suggest that the sword suspension system in eastern Yorkshire (and the north of Britain in general) differed from that on the Continent and in southern Britain: the position of the suspension loop is not at the top of the scabbard, but between a third and halfway down. This could indicate that the sword was worn on the back, and not slung on the right side, with the sword handle at the waist, as would be customary on the Continent and in the south (and in Roman times); both types are illustrated on the chalk figurines found in East Yorkshire, but the majority of these show the sword on the back (Stead 2006: 61-63, pl. 9; for more on chalk figurines see Stead 1988) (Figure 2.5).

was found with a spearhead in the ribs which had probably penetrated the heart. These people were presumably victims of traumatic deaths (Stead 1991: 33-35; 136-37). Corpses with spearheads have also been found in Garton and Wetwang Slack. A male skeleton in one of the Grantham’s graves in Garton Slack had an iron spearhead on the chest (Dent 1983b: Appendix B n° 8), which sounds as if it could be a ‘speared corpse’. Burial 211 from Wetwang Slack, however, is probably rather a case of a violent death: a spearhead was found in the stomach region of a female of 25-35 years old, with the point against the spine (Dent 1984: 176). Another ‘killing ritual’ was the bending of a sword, of which there are only two examples in East Yorkshire. Until recently, the only known occurrence was the sword from Acklam which was bent in antiquity while in a wooden scabbard, shown by traces of wood remains on the blade on the inside of the bend. The back of the man’s skull exhibited signs of severe wounding, probably sword cuts (Dent 1983a). Since there are no signs of healing, these injuries must have occurred around the time of his death; maybe his sword was considered having failed to protect him, and was therefore ritually killed and buried with him; alternatively, it may have been the very sword that killed him, e.g., in a dual, and ‘damaged beyond use, to prevent further feud’ (Giles 2012: 169-70). In 2016, another bent sword was discovered with an adult male (aged between 26 and 35) in Burstwick, buried in a crouched position, on

In Makeshift there are three cases where the person had been hit by a spear while alive, rather than during a ‘killing ceremony’. The males in type A burials R94 and R140 were wounded by a spearhead, in the back and the pelvis respectively, whereas another male in type B burial R152

Figure 2.5. Front and back view of the chalk figurine from Withernsea (Image courtesy of Hull and East Riding Museum: Hull Museums)

23

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent his left side. The sword is believed to have been removed from its scabbard before being bent; it was placed at the back of the deceased, which may reflect how swords were worn in East Yorkshire. The burial also included a shield and a small spearpoint (Turner and Cooper 2018; Britton s.d.). Bending an iron sword without breaking it requires considerable skill, which infers that it was probably performed by a smith (Giles 2012: 170). Apart from the sword bending and the spear casting ritual, other practices can be discerned. In the Wetwang Slack chariot burials 1 and 3, the iron parts of a wooden shield were found in such a position that the shield must have been placed in the grave boss downwards (Dent 1985: 88, 9192). This ‘rite of reversal’ is referred to by Parker Pearson (2003: 26) as a common ritual in funerary practices: ‘The eschatology is that of a world of the dead being inverted to that of the living … Reversal reinforces the normality and naturalness of everyday practices by defining their opposite in ritual time. It also serves to separate the dead and their realm from the living’. Turning the clothing on a corpse inside out is mentioned by Parker Pearson as a common practice in many societies. The mail tunic found in the chariot burial K5 from Kirkburn, is unique for the Arras Culture. It is 0.92m long and 0.48m wide. Each link is a ring constructed from iron wire; each is butt-jointed and linked in a fourin-one arrangement, which is the normal practice in other periods too. The only other mail in Yorkshire is from the Stanwick hoard, which was deposited in the middle of the first century AD. There are a few examples from southern England, but all dated British mails are from the end of LLT, whereas the one from Kirkburn is two centuries earlier. Together with mails from Denmark, Slovakia and Romania, the Kirkburn mail tunic dates from the latter part of ELT (Stead 1991: 54-56).

Figure 2.6. Sword from North Grimston (Image courtesy of Hull and East Riding Museum: Hull Museums)

the ‘Yorkshire Scabbard Style’ and the ‘Irish Scabbard Style’ both stem from a common source; in an earlier publication (Stead 1991: 183) he argued that the origins are in southern Britain and ultimately on the Continent. Garrow and Gosden, however, reject the assumption that British and Irish material was largely derivative of continental prototypes, and claim that Britain was in step with the Continent (Garrow and Gosden 2012: 308; Garrow et al. 2009); for Fraser Hunter (2020: 148-49) the ‘Yorkshire Scabbard Style’ is a good example of the ‘mix of local and international in Celtic art’.

The mail tunic had been draped over the corpse, face down and inverted. On the underside of the chain mail shirt, where it had been in contact with the man’s body, there was some mineralised textile which turned out to exist of two layers, an outer tunic or cloak and underneath a tunic or a gown, both of very fine weaving (Crowfoot 1991: 122-23).

Metal parts of shields, such as boss and spine covers, were, for example, identified in Rudston (R148), Garton Station and Grimthorpe (Stead 1968; Stead 1991: 61-63), but the most magnificent find was the highly decorated copper-alloy shield from the chariot burial excavated at Pocklington, The Mile, with an ovoid raised boss, two crescent-shaped plates with repoussé decoration, and a scalloped border (Figure 2.7) (Ware and Stephens 2020).

The short iron sword from North Grimston (Figure 2.6) could possibly qualify as an import. It has a fine copperalloy hilt, figuring a human head. According to Stead (1979: 60-64) this sword fits very well into a continental La Tène context: it is very like an example from ChâtenayMâcheron (Haute Marne) which was also found with a long sword in an inhumation burial.

2.4.5.4. Type C burials with mirrors

Overseas contacts were perhaps not limited to the Continent, but may also have existed with Ireland, given the close similarities between the decorations on the scabbards from the two male Wetwang Slack chariot burials, and on the ‘bean-tin’ from the female chariot burial. However, Stead (2006: 59-63) is of the opinion that

Five mirrors have been found, three of them with chariot burials (Table 2.4). All mirrors were with females and all burials had pig bones, assuming of course that this also counts for Arras burial A7 for which the information is incomplete and where the mirror had already gone missing in Greenwell’s day (Greenwell 1906: 294, note a). 24

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire

Figure 2.7. Shield from the chariot burial at Pocklington, The Mile ((Image courtesy of MAP Archaeological Practice Ltd)

While bearing in mind that the sample is very small, a certain pattern emerges from these data. In several respects these females are linked with the type C male burials who qualify as ‘rulers’. Incidentally, all skeletons also meet Stead’s description of type C burials as being ‘more relaxed’. The similarity is not limited to the chariot burials or to the presence of pig bones. None of these women wore a brooch or jewellery (apart from the pin in Wetwang Slack 2), just like the ‘ruling’ males, whereas in general female burials with jewellery are not uncommon. Was it the intention to make them look as masculine and as powerful as possible? Three elements plead against this assumption. Firstly, while it is correct that men are not buried with jewellery, they can wear brooches, although only in type A burials. Secondly, a mirror would usually be considered a female attribute, even though it may have had a different connotation than the obvious one. Finally, there is the mysterious cylindrical box (Figure 2.8) in the Wetwang

Figure 2.8. Copper-alloy box from Wetwang Slack chariot burial 2 (WS 454) (Image courtesy of Hull and East Riding Museum: Hull Museums)

25

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Table 2.4. Burials with mirrors Burial

Orientation and Gender position of the skeleton

Age

Vehicle Coffin Brooch Iron parts mirror

Other grave goods

Pig bones

Arras Lady’s Barrow

contradictory information

F

?

Y

?

N

Y

Wetwang Slack Chariot burial 2

N/S, facing E flexed

F

young adult

Y

Y

N

Y

pin, copper-alloy case with chain

Y

Wetwang Village

S/N, facing W flexed

F

35-45

Y

Y

N

Y

 

Y

Garton Slack Mirror burial

N/S, facing E flexed

F

25-30

N

Y

N

Y

possible chalk figurine

Y

Arras A7

?

?

?

N

?

N

Y

 

?

Slack 2 chariot burial. This copper-alloy box, about the size of a small baked bean tin, has a small handle to one side, while a chain of some 15cm long is attached to the middle of the bottom and ends in a small ring. The box is decorated with red enamel and with incised curvilinear ornaments, similar to those on the Witham scabbard and shield. This box is unprecedented in the Iron Age but in appearance it is very similar to the ‘work boxes’ found with Anglo-Saxon graves, which contained a woman’s needles, thread and wax (Current Archaeology 93, 1984: 305; Dent 1985: 90). A cylindrical box from an Anglo-Saxon cemetery in Garton Slack is illustrated by Mortimer and the similarity is striking (Mortimer 1905: 248 and fig. 643). Miranda Aldhouse-Green (2006: 98) has suggested the box contained healing substances or consecrated oil. Since its discovery it was believed that, unlike the Anglo-Saxon boxes, the box from Wetwang Slack could not be opened, but at the Arras 200 conference in 2017, Melanie Giles announced (based on information received from Ian Armitt and Sonia O’Connor) that not only was the lock mechanism detected to open it, but was the canister found to contain a substance believed to be organic. It could be medicinal, culinary or for use of tinder, or it may relate to craftwork (similar to the Anglo-Saxon ‘work boxes’), and the possibility is also considered that it could be human: ‘an eviscerated organ, kept either as a trophy or ancestral relic’ (Giles, Green and Peixoto 2020: 61-62).

Y

2.4.5.5. Type C burials with vehicles and horse harness Chariot burials will be discussed separately below in section 2.5. 2.4.5.6. Type D burials This type of burial was defined by John Dent (1995: 74; 2010: 64). Out of the 446 burials that he excavated on the Wetwang Slack cemetery, more than 200 were secondary graves. More than 170 of these were found in the enclosure ditches but some others were from the barrow platform. The corpses were contracted, crouched or flexed, without coffins and often in cramped grave pits. They were mostly orientated north-south, but on occasion followed the lines of east-west enclosure ditches. Grave goods were almost non-existent and most of the children were buried in this type of grave. Secondary graves are also known from Danes Graves, as for example that of a child in the mound of barrow 15 (Stead 1979: 100) and several were found in Garton Slack, where there was even a secondary child grave in the ditch of the chariot burial (Brewster 1980: 38-39). In the Rudston and Burton Fleming cemeteries, secondary burials are rather rare, but this could be due to the method of excavation. In Makeshift only in certain years were the ditches completely emptied and then several secondary burials were located, but in other years the ditches were only sectioned (Stead 1991: 7).

Tracing the meaning of the binding factor – the mirror – is certainly essential in establishing the role of these females in society. The mirror must have been a symbol of power, perhaps in the religious or magical atmosphere. Its significance certainly stretches far beyond that of the commonplace symbol of female vanity. As related by Melanie Giles and Jody Joy (2007), ethnography has produced examples to illustrate that with their reflective surfaces, mirrors are prominent implements in the fields of augury and prediction. A mirror allows the viewer to look back into the past but also into the future, it can heal but also cast spells etc. As such it must have been powerful and intimidating (Giles 2008a: 72). A detailed study of Iron Age mirrors and their life-histories, their production and decoration and their role in burials was carried out by Jody Joy (Joy 2010; 2011).

Although in general secondary burial seems to be connected with a low social status, Dent (1984: 99) suspects that there may have been other reasons for burying someone in a secondary position. Ties of kinship could have overridden other influences. In Wetwang Slack, three individuals sharing a rare congenital abnormality of the spine were buried in the enclosure ditch of burial 219. Dent assumes that maybe they settled for poor graves because they wished to rest close to relatives even though they may have been entitled to a better-quality burial further away. Furthermore, there are two examples of burials with necklaces (336 26

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire and 376) in secondary graves inside an enclosure (Dent 1984: 91, 99).

Bronze Age, when some nicely decorated pottery was produced in the area, like for example the pottery from the fortified settlement of Staple Howe (Brewster 1963).

It can be assumed that many secondary burials in barrow mounds have been lost. This could be one of the reasons for the relatively small number of child burials. A cemetery with 29 infant burials was found in area 10 at Garton Slack, mostly buried in small circular graves. There were no accompanying grave goods, and the cemetery cannot be dated, but it lay beneath the Roman levels (Brewster 1980: 301-10). Brewster mentions other infant and child burials amongst the adult burials in other areas of the Garton Slack site.

This seems to suggest that some other type of vessel was used by the higher classes, of much higher quality than the crude ceramics. The richer burials may have contained several wooden bowls and beakers, which were perhaps nicely carved and decorated. None are known from eastern Yorkshire, but in Lincolnshire, a wooden bowl ‘as thin as glass and beautifully made’ was found on a Late Bronze / Early Iron Age site, located on a flood bank on the River Witham near Washingborough (BBC 2005).

2.4.5.7. Animal burials

The necessary skills and tools were certainly available. Wood working tools like socketed axes, tanged chisels and socketed gouges already occurred in later Bronze Age hoards like the one from Westow, and pieces of worked wood in the form of a wooden strip and an ox collar from the Iron Age settlement of North Cave suggest the use of spoon bit drills and chisels (Dent 1995: 52-3). The construction of chariots and boats - like for example the Hasholme logboat (Millett and McGrail 1987) - certainly required the skills of specialist craftsmen, whereas simpler items could have been home-made.

In the area of the ‘infant cemetery’ in Garton Slack, there were also three animal burials. For the Garton Slack site as a whole, Brewster (1980: 310-12, 613-14, 767) reports animal burials of oxen, calves, sheep and a dog; the burials were deliberate interments placed in a properly excavated grave and not the dumping of a carcass. In Pocklington, Burnby Lane, two complete cow burials were excavated just beyond the north-eastern margin of the cemetery; both animals, one a young cow and the other a more elderly one, were buried in deep, rectangular graves, and what is remarkable is that they shared similar alignments to the human burials of the cemetery (Stephens and Ware 2020: 27).

In the Kirkburn chariot burial, some copper-alloy fittings were found, arranged within a D-shaped frame. The fittings had been attached to a base, probably of wood, and the distance between this base and the floor (sloping down from 200mm on its straight side to 120mm on the curved side) would fit with the base being the lid of a box or a basket (Stead 1991: 56-57, fig. 47).

Two horse burials were found in Kirkburn (site 2), next to an Iron Age square enclosure and within the area of a large oval Neolithic enclosure. The horses were buried in large shallow graves which were surrounded by circular enclosures, about 4.5m in diameter, but the ditches only survive as stains. It is not clear whether the horse burials are contemporary with the square enclosure. The horses were radiocarbon dated to around 100 AD. One horse was about 13 years old, the other between seven and nine years old. Given the evidence for bit wear, they were almost certainly riding horses. Both horses were laid out on their right side, in an east-west orientation. There were no artefacts in the graves (Stead 1991: 25-27; Legge 1991: 144-47).

Textile is another product that is only preserved when conditions are favourable, for example when corroded to a brooch. Several mineralised fibres adhering to brooches from Rudston and Burton Fleming have been examined and one of them (from BF20) was of particularly fine weaving. All the observed weaving techniques seem to have a long and wide distribution in Europe, even though the textiles are local products. Finer and more varied textiles were found in the Wetwang Slack chariot burials, but this may be partly a result of their preservation on copper-alloy objects, which is more favourable for flax survival, whereas in less ideal conditions finer flax fabrics may have completely disappeared (Crowfoot 1991).

Horses buried with chariots will be discussed in section 2.5.9. 2.4.6. Organic grave goods The burials may have contained many items of organic nature which were not preserved. One of the striking differences with LT burials from the Continent is the lack of fine service ceramics, although, as Stead (1979: 84) already pointed out, not in all continental La Tène cultures were the dead accompanied by luxury pottery. It is, however, remarkable that in the Arras Culture pottery does occur with more modest burials but is systematically absent from the richer graves. The pots are always fairly crude cooking ware, never fine table ware. Little energy and effort were invested in ceramics, in contrast to the

Many textiles which were not in direct contact with metal objects will have been lost. Coffins and/or grave pits may have been lined with fine textiles. Indications for furnished coffins and grave pits exist, as was already discussed above. 2.4.7. Location of cemeteries in the landscape About 70 per cent of the cemeteries are located next to boundaries which can be seen to be chronologically earlier where burials respect or are aligned on them. These 27

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent boundaries can be land boundaries or track boundaries. Four times as many cemeteries are next to the longer through-routes, which run along the valleys, than next to shorter settlement-routes which for example join two enclosures. The tenurial claim to the land was probably experienced as being more effective on a long-distance road than on a local trackway (Bevan 1999: 138-39). In Arras, there was a clear cluster of group 1 barrows at the head of Sancton Dale, which ‘forms a route way between the Humber Lowlands and the Yorkshire Wolds’ (Halkon 2013: 71).

dubious record, in the form of an unpublished note in the Yorkshire Museum and referring to a possible chariot burial in Hornsea, was spotted by Stead (1965: 93-4). For the most recently excavated chariot burials, i.e., those of Pocklington, Burnby Lane, Pocklington, The Mile, and the undisclosed Wolds/Humber site, only preliminary results are available. Of the remaining 15 burials, only the seven in and around Wetwang (Wetwang Slack and Village, Garton Slack, Garton Station and Kirkburn) have been excavated under modern conditions. Most of the others came to light following the digs of nineteenth century antiquarians like John Mortimer and Canon William Greenwell to name the most active ones (see Stead 1979).

There is also a strong preference for burying the dead near to water. In the Wolds, the gypseys have certainly played an important role in the choice of location, because of their cyclical and intermittent nature, as Bevan (1999: 137, 141) explains: ‘By being above ground for part of the year and underground the rest, gypseys do not hold a permanent place in this world. Instead they may be conceived as being between two worlds, appearing in the above ground world of the living for part of the year and disappearing into an underground world for the other part. Cemetery association with water, boundaries and trackways may also be related to a desire to place the dead in liminal areas of the landscape where the rite of passage from living to dead could occur’. The location of cemeteries and the journey of the dead to the land of the ancestors has been further elaborated by Melanie Giles (2012: 216-23).

The chariot burial from Ferry Fryston in West Yorkshire, in spite of its distance from the classic Arras Culture area, clearly belongs to the same tradition. Finally, a possible chariot burial was located by geophysical prospecting in 1984 in Slingsby, on the northeastern edge of the study area, in the Howardian Hills / Vale of Pickering, but the site was never excavated (Stead 1991: 158-61; ADS Record ID - EHNMR-1066694). In the tables below, the following abbreviations have been used:

The Garton Station chariot burial was located almost in the course of the Gypsey Race, in an area that had been intermittently flooded in the recent past and presumably for many centuries. The nearby Kirkburn chariot burial, however, was on higher ground, away from the Gypsey Race (Stead 1991: 29-30). Stead (1991: 179) is convinced that the cemeteries were grazed, for example because droveways lead into cemetery areas between Burton Fleming and Rudston. He feels this would be an obvious use: it maintains the cemeteries and it makes them productive without unduly disturbing their sanctity. Examination of molluscs from Garton Station and Kirkburn confirmed that the barrows were set in short-turf grassland. As Bevan (1999: 137) points out, this would have had a bearing on the visibility of the square barrows, which was already reduced by the location of the cemetery on lower ground. If the barrows were maintained as bared chalk after their construction, they would have stood out more than when they were deliberately returfed or allowed to grass over naturally. 2.5. Chariot burials Currently, 22 chariot burials are known from eastern Yorkshire (Figure 2.9), but four of them are hardly documented: for the alleged chariot burials of Middletonon-the-Wolds, Seamer and Huggate, all we have are second-hand accounts given by Mortimer (1905: 358-60), published several decades after their ‘discovery’; another 28

ARC

Arras Charioteer’s Barrow

ARK

Arras King’s Barrow

ARL

Arras Lady’s Barrow

BEV

Beverley Westwood

CAC

Cawthorn Camps

DGR

Danes Graves

FER

Ferry Fryston

GSL

Garton Slack

GST

Garton Station

HOR

Hornsea

HUG

Huggate

HUN

Hunmanby

KIR

Kirkburn

MID

Middleton-on-the-Wolds

PEM

Pexton Moor

POB

Pocklington, Burnby Lane

POM

Pocklington, The Mile

SEA

Seamer

WHS

Wolds/Humber site

WS1

Wetwang Slack 1

WS2

Wetwang Slack 2

WS3

Wetwang Slack 3

WVI

Wetwang Village

WHS

Wolds/Humber site

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire

Figure 2.9. Chariot burials with complete (square) or dismantled (circle) vehicles (© Greta Anthoons) 1. Arras (x3); 2. Beverley; 3. Cawthorn Camps; 4. Danes Graves; 5. Ferry Fryston; 6. Garton Slack; 7. Garton Station; 8. Hornsea; 9. Huggate; 10. Hunmanby; 11. Kirkburn; 12. Middleton-on-the Wolds; 13. Pexton Moor; 14. Pocklington, Burnby Lane; 15. Pocklington, The Mile; 16. Seamer; 17. Wetwang Slack (x3); 18. Wetwang Village; 19. Wolds/Humber site

2.5.1. Location

with the ditch continuing under Burnby Lane (Ware 2017; Stephens and Ware 2020).

Many of the chariot burials occur in groups, like those of Arras and Wetwang Slack. The Wetwang Slack ones almost seem to form a chariot burial cemetery (Figure 2.10), but they may belong to a larger group (Dent 1985: 85). This cemetery is situated a few hundred meters west from the main Wetwang Slack cemetery, along the same track that ran through the valley.

Although most chariot burials (and burials in general) in eastern Yorkshire are located in valleys, the chariot burial on the east side of Wetwang Village was situated on the prominent hill above Wetwang Slack (Hill 2002: 410). Some of the chariot burials appear to have been totally isolated, like for example the one from Pexton Moor in the Limestone Hills (Stead 1965: 21). Also the Ferry Fryston chariot burial in West Yorkshire appears to have represented the only Iron Age feature on the site (next to Beaker and Bronze Age burials and monuments), although excavations revealed Iron Age inhumations on other sites in the vicinity (Boyle 2004; Brown et al. 2007). In Pocklington, The Mile, 93m to the north of the chariot burial, a speared corpse burial was found in an Iron Age barrow surrounded by a circular ditch, as well as a burial of a young women, one metre beyond the ditch. These were the only Iron Age features that came to light on the 3.2 ha excavation of an Anglo-Saxon settlement.

Along the same valley, but further to the east, lay the chariot burial of Garton Slack, surrounded by several ‘ordinary’ burials. Many of the Garton Slack burials were destroyed without investigation (Dent 1983b), so the possibility of further chariot burials cannot be ruled out completely. In the gravel valley of Danesdale, only one chariot burial was discovered from a total of 212 burials, but the Danes Graves cemetery appears to have extended considerably beyond the excavation area (Dent 1984). The same applies for Garton Station and Kirkburn, where only certain parts of the cemetery were excavated (Stead 1991: 17, 24). The Burnby Lane chariot burial in Pocklington was situated at the southern edge of the excavated area, 29

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 2.10. Wetwang Slack chariot burials (Reproduced courtesy of John S. Dent) The larger enclosure to the west was empty, suggesting that the (shallow) burial had been ploughed away. The small enclosure in between the empty large one and Wetwang Slack 2 contained an unaccompanied inhumation.

Finally, it is astonishing that the area of Rudston and Burton Fleming, which has been examined so thoroughly and where several hundreds of burials have been excavated, as yet has never produced a chariot burial.

barrow and the depth of the grave. Where the barrow was ploughed away, the height has been estimated on the basis of the potential volume of soil available from the ditches. An overview of the available grave and enclosure measurements can be found in Table 2.5.

2.5.2. Barrows and grave pits

The most impressive chariot burial is obviously the one from Kirkburn: the grave is one of the largest and deepest, it is situated in an enclosure of 12 by 12.5m, surrounded by a ditch with an average width of 3.2m, and it may have been covered by a barrow of almost 1.20m high. This is in marked contrast with the chariot burial of Pocklington, Burnby Lane, where the surrounding ditches were insubstantial and the grave very shallow (only 10-15cm below ground level) (Ware 2017).

Most of the chariot burials found in Yorkshire so far were accommodated in a grave and the area around the grave was enclosed by a square ditch. Square barrows have already been discussed above (section 2.4.2), so suffice here to refer to the consensus that chronologically there is an evolution from shallow graves with substantial barrows, which are often found in an isolated position, to deeper graves with smaller barrows as part of a cemetery. Applied to chariot burials, this would mean that the Pexton Moor burial would be one of the oldest. There was no grave - apart from two 25cm deep slots to accommodate the wheels - and the chariot was covered by a barrow with a preserved height at the time of excavation of 1.35m, which is much higher than average (although the barrow platform in Pexton Moor is much smaller than for example the one in Garton Station (see section 2.4.2).

2.5.3. Complete versus dismantled chariots The feature that is always quoted as characteristic for the chariot burials of the Arras Culture is that – unlike on the Continent - the vehicles had been dismantled before they were placed in the grave. This is, however, only true for the chariot burials of the Wolds. The two chariot burials found on the fringes of the main study area, Pexton Moor and Cawthorn Camps, both situated on the limestone hills of North Yorkshire, appear to have been buried intact. There was no sign of a grave: when the barrows were opened, the

The chart in Figure 2.11 illustrates that there is a possible but not a general connection between the height of the 30

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire

 

Height barrow vs. depth grave 1.50 1.00 0.50 Depth grave

0.00

Height barrow

-0.50 -1.00 -1.50 GSL

FER GST DGR

BEV CAC ARL

KIR

PEM

Figure 2.11. Chariot burials: height of the barrow versus depth of the grave (© Greta Anthoons)

vehicles were found at the level of the old ground surface. In the case of Pexton Moor, the wheels had been buried in two shallow pits, some 25cm deep (Stead 1959; Stead 1979: 22). No wheel pits are mentioned for Cawthorn Camps (Mortimer 1905: 361). In the case of the Hunmanby burial (Stead 1979: 22-23) the wheels were found upright

in the grave, but there are not sufficient details recorded to decide if this means that the vehicle was buried intact. Unfortunately, none of these burials were excavated in modern times, so that a lot of information was lost or not recorded. This makes the more recent discoveries of Ferry Fryston (Boyle 2004; Brown et al. 2007) (Figure 2.12) and

Table 2.5. Chariot burials: enclosure and grave pits measurements. No ditches were recorded for the Arras chariot burials, nor for Beverley and Danes Graves; for these burials, measurements refer to the size of the barrow. Grave size (m2) Arras, Charioteer’s Barrow

Depth of the grave (m)

Internal size of the enclosure (m2)

Width of the ditch (m)

Depth of the ditch (m)

 

 

4.91

 

 

Arras, King’s Barrow

9.62

0.45

50.24

 

 

Arras, Lady’s Barrow

10.17

1.00

14.51

 

 

Beverley

2.14

0.84

33.17

 

 

Danes Graves

5.75

0.75

52.78

 

 

Ferry Fryston

18.00

0.86

62.00

1.00

0.50

Garton Slack

9.00

0.90

108.16

1.37

0.45

Garton Station

10.20

1.35

134.40

2.40

0.70

Kirkburn

17.68

1.25

150.00

3.20

0.90

 

 

27.04

0.75

 

Pocklington, Burnby Lane

Pexton Moor

9.36

 

 

 

 

Pocklington, The Mile

10.56

 

42.25

 

 

Wetwang Slack 1 (WS 453)

6.23

0.85

45.50

 

 

Wetwang Slack 2 (WS 454)

7.59

0.73

92.16

 

 

Wetwang Slack 3 (WS 455)

4.70

0.70

36.00

 

 

Wetwang Village

10.84

 

 

 

 

Wolds/Humber site

10.92

 

 

 

31

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 2.12. View of the partially excavated chariot burial of Ferry Fryston (Image courtesy of Oxford Archaeology Ltd)

Pocklington, The Mile (Ware and Stephens 2020) chariot burials even more interesting. In both cases the vehicle was intact, but - as opposed to Pexton Moor and Cawthorn Camps - the chariots were buried in a grave pit. Both in Ferry Fryston and in The Mile, the deceased was placed on the vehicle with his head towards the yoke. Unfortunately, no bones have survived from Pexton Moor and Cawthorn Camps.

At the current state of knowledge, it would appear that the variety is of regional character rather than chronological, especially since based on Bayesian modelling (Jay et al. 2012) the Ferry Fryston chariot burial is believed to belong to the same period as the chariot burials of the Wolds. It is unfortunate that the Pexton Moor and Cawthorn Camps chariot burials were not excavated in modern circumstances and cannot be more closely dated: the fact that they were placed on the old ground surface would normally point to an earlier phase of the Arras Culture (see section 2.4.3). It is, therefore, possible that the dismantling of chariots before placing them in the grave is a later development, but one which was not followed everywhere. It should also be specified that dismantled vehicles are not unique to East Yorkshire: they do occasionally occur on the Continent also (see for example section 3.1.5.3), so the concept was

It is remarkable that in Pocklington both a complete (The Mile) and a dismantled (Burnby Lane) chariot burial was found at just over a kilometre apart. Pocklington is located at the foot of the Wolds, on the edge of the Vale of York; maybe this is where both traditions met: the dismantled chariots of the Wolds and the complete chariots from the outskirts of the study area and in West Yorkshire. 32

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire not new; in fact, it was already practised in the LH period (see also Stead 1979: 29). In the Paris area, the complete vehicles were placed in the grave, but for some of the chariot burials there are indications that the box had been lifted from the axle (section 8.1.6).

seven chariot burials of the Wolds, excavated in modern times (before 2017), the yoke had been placed to the west of the body, behind its back. The three adjacent chariot burials from Wetwang Slack (Figures 2.13, 2.14 and 2.15) (Dent 1985) all belong to this pattern, as does the chariot burial from nearby Garton Slack (Brewster 1975) and the one from Kirkburn (Stead 1991: 30-33) just a few km to the southeast. From the descriptions available of the Arras burials (see Stead 1979: 20-2), it would appear that the King’s and Charioteer’s Barrows were arranged along the same lines; the deviating number of terrets might be put down to the incompleteness of the surviving grave goods. The descriptions of the Lady’s Barrow are vague and sometimes contradictory. Garton Station (Stead 1991: 29-30) and Wetwang Village (Hill 2002) certainly have a different arrangement. In Wetwang Village, the body is even orientated towards the south, which is unusual but not unique in an Arras Culture context. In Wetwang 1, the body was orientated northsouth, but it was laid on its right side rather than on the left, so that it was facing the yoke. The Danes Graves chariot burial is special in that it is the only chariot grave with a double burial (Figure 2.16). The wheels were placed next to each other on the west side of the grave and the bodies on the east side, with most of the harness parts arranged between the northwestern wheel and the northeastern body.

2.5.4. The interior organisation of dismantled chariot burials It is not clear what incited this development to manipulate the vehicle parts before entrusting them to the grave, but it is certainly meaningful. The practical execution of the principle perhaps reflected local fashions or regulations which could also change over time. Dismantled vehicles are the most easily recognisable by the position of the detached wheels (Table 2.6). In most cases, the wheels of dismantled chariots are laid flat on the floor of the north-south orientated grave, one on the west and one on the east side of the grave, and the body of the deceased is placed over the wheels. In a number of occasions, however, the body is laid down beside the wheels, which are then not necessarily arranged in the east and west pattern. The chariot burial of Garton Station is special, in that the wheels were placed upright against one of the sides of the grave (Stead 1991: 29). It is not always clear to what extent the other parts of the vehicle have been taken apart. Axles and poles have often left soil stains or voids which can help to reconstruct the arrangement of the vehicle parts in the grave, but the stains are not always complete, thus preventing a full reconstruction. The position of the yoke, on the other hand, is easier to establish, as it is often represented by a line of terrets, most often five in number, with the central terret being larger than the other four. In six out of the

Pending the full publication of Pocklington, Burnby Lane and the Wolds/Humber site, the exact interior organisation of these chariot burials remains to be confirmed. None of the preliminary reports for Burnby Lane (which included the skeletons of two horses) mention a yoke or terrets. The horses were laying down, heads to the north and facing each other. The one surviving wheel (the eastern one) was lying

Table 2.6. Interior organisation of dismantled chariot burials (f = facing). Wheels upright against side of grave Wheels on floor, skeleton over wheels Wheels on floor, skeleton not over wheels Yoke

Terrets

Body orientation

ARL

?

1

?

DGR

?

5?

SW/NE f SE

WVL

N

5

S/N f W

POB

?

?

?

WHS

N

4

N/S f W

GST

Yoke

Terrets

Body orientation

W

5

N/S f E

Yoke

Terrets

Body orientation

ARK

?

5

N/S f ?

ARC

?

0

N/S f ?

GSL

W

5

N/S f E

KIR

W

5

N/S f E

WS1

W

5

N/S f W

WS2

W

5

N/S f E

WS3

W

5

N/S f E

N/S f E

33

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 2.13. Wetwang Slack chariot burial 1 (WS 453) (Reproduced courtesy of John S. Dent)

flat, partly covering an iron horse bit; of the western wheel, only the lower nave band remained. The pole (soil marks) extended northwards from the eastern wheel and passed between the legs of the horses. The truncated remains of the deceased were placed over the southern part of the pole, between the hind legs of the horses. In the Wolds/ Humber site (Figure 2.17), the wheels were laid flat on the floor, between the yoke and the chariot platform (suggested by soil marks), on which the deceased was placed, head towards the yoke. The pole (stain marks) was divided in two parts, one behind the back of the deceased, the top part close to the yoke; the pole was not attached to the axle. Amongst the organic remains of the yoke, four copperalloy terrets were found, as well as three other yoke fittings.

and some of the grave goods in a chariot burial. The most popular explanation at the moment is that this structure is the inverted bodywork of the vehicle. This possibility is, however, rejected by Karl (Karl and Stifter 2002; Raimund Karl, personal communication), who claims the box-like structure is a wooden burial chamber like the one described by Metzler (1986: 171-72, fig. 4) for the chariot burial of Grosbous-Vichten in Luxembourg (see chapter seven). The Grosbous-Vichten chamber does not seem to have a floor part and the pole of the vehicle sticks out on one side. The chamber was large enough to have covered the actual body of the vehicle, of which, however, no trace was found. The arrangement in the eastern Yorkshire chariot burials looks quite similar. Besides, a vehicle of the size and robustness suggested by the dark traces does not correspond with the light type of vehicle that would normally be expected.

2.5.5. Coffin or vehicle body? Today in Britain there is no consensus on the exact nature of the box-like structure that is suggested by the presence of a darker filling surrounding the body of the deceased

Coffins and cists are known from several burials in Rudston / Burton Fleming and Wetwang Slack, so it would 34

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire

Figure 2.14. Wetwang Slack chariot burial 2 (WS 454) (Reproduced courtesy of John S. Dent)

not be so unusual for them to occur in chariot burials as well. Stead (1991: 32) finds the idea of a coffin reasonable when considering the graves in plan, but less convincing in section, especially in Garton Station, where the axle at the end of the pole had been suspended above the floor of the grave and the box shape was observed well above them, but the skeleton was on the very bottom. To him this proves that at least in the case of Garton Station the boxlike structure cannot have been a coffin but rather points in the direction of an inverted vehicle body. The Wetwang

Village chariot burial (see Appendix A) was arranged in a similar way, again suggesting that the box-like structure did not contain the corpse. Both in Garton Station and Wetwang Village, the corpse was laid on the floor; in the case of Wetwang Village it was placed in a small hollow, probably on a mat, hide or sheet (Hill 2002: 410). In the Wetwang Slack chariot burials and in those of Garton Slack and Kirkburn, the corpse was laid over the wheels. Rod Mackey (personal 35

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 2.15. Wetwang Slack chariot burial 3 (WS 455) (Reproduced courtesy of John S. Dent)

communication) rightfully dismisses this arrangement as uncomfortable and disrespectful. He thinks that some kind of separation must have existed, which at Garton Slack, Wetwang Slack and Kirkburn could be the base of the ‘box’ noticed in the fill above. To him the ‘boxes’ could be either upright cart bodies or coffins. In his experience the outlines usually first appear about 0.5m above the skeleton as rather amorphous shapes and gradually become clearer and more rectangular towards the bottom. They must have been created by a solid-sided structure (at least three sides, if not four), but he specifies that this does not necessarily mean they were made entirely of wood: wickerwork, leather or even strong textile could have separated the different fills, provided the inside and outside were filled simultaneously. This, together with the sharper definition at the base, led Mackey to believe that the structure may have been the right way up with an open top. Maybe the arrangement was not necessarily the same everywhere, but a recurring feature is the box-like structure, whatever its position with respect to the pole and axle. The box is always between 1.5 and 1.9m long, between 0.90 and 1.2m large and on average 0.5m high (Stead 1991: 32, tab. 1). This is much larger than continental chariots. Stead claims that two-wheeled vehicles of different designs were used by the Celts, in Yorkshire and elsewhere. To him the vehicles in the Yorkshire burials are

Figure 2.16. Danes Graves chariot burial (Mortimer 1897: pl. ii; 1905: 359)

36

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire

Figure 2.17. Wolds/Humber site chariot burial (Image courtesy of MAP Archaeological Practice Ltd)

Stephens 2020). The shield itself is considered of utmost importance for British Celtic art, but its position, carrying the body of the deceased, is hitherto unique.

light carts which were not designed for speed – they lack the double eyebolts typical of the continental suspension mechanism – but as the bodywork could be removed so easily, perhaps the T-frame (pole and axle) and the wheels might on occasion have been attached to a much lighter body, thus turning it into a chariot proper (Stead 1991: 61). Different suggestions for suspension systems have since been developed, but these will not be discussed here.

2.5.6. Vehicle parts and horse harness The vehicle parts most prominently visible in the chariot burials are the tyres. These are always of iron, but their diameter can vary considerably, from about 700mm in Cawthorn Camps to 900mm in Garton Station, Kirkburn and Wetwang Village, with the majority exceeding 800mm. In several cases, there were still traces of wood preserved on the inside of the iron tyre. There is not much evidence with regard to the construction of the felloe. In the case of the Charioteer’s Barrow in Arras, there are indications for a multiple felloe construction, whereas in Danes Graves, certain elements rather point to a single-piece felloe. On the basis of soil marks or mineral deposits, it would seem that most wheels had twelve spokes. The naves of the wheels were made of wood but bound on each side by metal bands. A complete set would thus consist of four nave hoops, made of iron, copper-alloy, or iron with a copper-alloy casing (Stead 1979: 40-47; 1991: 40-44; Hill 2002).

An interesting addition to the discussion is offered by the Ferry Fryston chariot, which is the best preserved so far. The skeleton was lying on a round-ended stain, measuring approximately 1.52 by 0.76m. The excavators (Brown et al. 2007: 144) argued that if this was the box of the vehicle, it was not in its original position. However, they also allow for the possibility that the stain represented a litter or bier on which the body was laid out and carried to the grave; the oval frame may have held some kind of hide. They admit, however, that the shape of the stain recalls the bowfronted superstructure depicted on Mediterranean and Near Eastern chariots. In the complete chariot discovered at The Mile in Pocklington in 2018, the deceased male had been placed on top of a wood and copper-alloy composite shield that was laid face down on the vehicle platform (Ware and

Some of the nave hoops have close parallels in the Paris region. The elaborate copper-alloy nave hoops of Cawthorn 37

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent In addition, in eastern Yorkshire, the tyres are flat in crosssection. They may occasionally be slightly curved at the edges, covering the felloe, like for example in Ferry Fryston (Figure 2.21), but it is not clear whether this was deliberately designed this way to protect the wood, or that it was the result of use (see Brown et al. 2007). In any case, in cross-section these tyres are entirely different from the early ones in the Aisne-Marne, which are completely curved in section and much narrower (often only 2.5cm), but again they compare very well with the continental LT B2 and LT C1 vehicles which are of similar width (3.5 to 4cm) and basically flat in cross-section (Verger 1994: 50409) (see section 5.3.8). In Ferry Fryston, one of the wheels was a replacement. Metallurgic analysis showed that the tyres were made from significantly different metal stocks. Moreover, the wheels were unequal in size: the western wheel had a diameter of 870mm against only 850mm for the eastern wheel. Apparently, this would not have rendered the chariot unusable, but it would certainly have affected its stability when in motion. The western wheel is believed to have originated from a grander vehicle; two decorative strips in copper-alloy were attached to the outer nave hoop (Brown et al. 2007: 133-38; 144-46). In Garton Slack one of the wheels was new and the other heavily worn (Brewster 1975: 111).

Figure 2.18. Nave band from Wetwang Slack chariot burial 2 (WS 454) (Image courtesy of Hull and East Riding Museum: Hull Museums)

Camps (Stead 1979: 41, 44, fig. 11) and Wetwang Slack (Figure 2.18) (Dent 1985: 88) are very similar to those of Nanterre in Paris (Stead 1979: 41, 44, fig. 11). Whereas the LT A and B1 vehicles of the Aisne-Marne region usually had iron nave bands, those from LT B2 and C1 from the Paris region and elsewhere (see section 8.1.7) were often in copper-alloy or in iron covered with copper-alloy.

The wheels were secured to the axle by means of linchpins (Figure 2.22, Table 2.7). These were mostly made of metal, but there are a few examples in antler and sometimes they are absent altogether, in which case they either got lost during the discovery / excavation or later, or they were made of hardwood (Stead 1979: 45-47; 1991: 44-47) (cf. section 3.1.7).

The tyres were always shrunk onto the felloe by contraction, and they are never secured to the wheel by means of nails. As such they fall in the later stages of the evolution described by Verger (1994: 504-9) in his major study of chariot burials. In the Aisne-Marne region, the tyres were also heat-shrunk onto the felloe, but the use of multiple nails offered extra security against the tyre falling off (Figure 2.19). Tyres without nails only appear with the latest (LT B2) burials of the Aisne-Marne (Figure 2.20) and they are standard in the Paris region where all chariot burials are LT B2 or later.

As mentioned above, the location and shape of the yoke can often be reconstructed from the position of the terrets (Table 2.8). Each of the seven chariot burials of the Yorkshire Wolds excavated under modern conditions had five terrets (Figure 2.23), although in Wetwang Slack 3 the most northern terret was lost (the northern part of the grave was removed by the quarry machine). The central terret is always larger. As noticed by Stead (1991: 50), the spacing between the terrets is fairly uniform, demonstrating that they were firmly attached to the yoke in the grave. The two pairs at the side were for the reins – one pair for each horse – whereas the larger central terret ‘presumably housed the straps or thongs that helped to secure the yoke to the pole’ (Stead 1991: 50). The chariot burials of Garton Slack, Kirkburn and Wetwang Village, also produced copper-alloy strap-unions, one at each end of the yoke; presumably they were used to adjust the girth. The strap-unions of Garton Slack and Kirkburn look very similar; they are both in the form of a figureof-eight (Stead 1991: 49) (Figure 2.22). The strap-unions of Wetwang Village have a different design and they are decorated with coral studs. Also the terrets of the Wetwang

Figure 2.19. Wheel tyres from the LT A1 chariot burial of Pernant (Aisne) (© Greta Anthoons)

38

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire

Figure 2.20. Wheel tyres from the LT B2 chariot burial of Beine/Prunay (Marne) (© Greta Anthoons)

Figure 2.21. Wheel tyre from the Ferry Fryston chariot burial (© Greta Anthoons)

39

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 2.22. Linchpins, terrets and strap-unions from the Kirkburn chariot burial (Image courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum)

Village burial are ornamented with coral studs; in at least one case, red glass ‘enamel’ inlay was used in place of, or to replace, a coral stud. Scientific analysis by the British Museum identified the use of birch-bark tar as an adhesive in the harness fittings (Stacey 2004). Similar coral studs adorned the terrets of the Wetwang Slack 2 chariot burial (Figure 2.24). Noteworthy are the five terrets from the Ferry Fryston chariot burial. They are hollow rings consisting of two strips of a thin sheathing in leaded tin bronze; each sheet had been worked into a ring closed with an iron rivet. The terrets have a silt core, which must have been inserted in the two halves before these were joined together. Given their fragility, it is considered unlikely that the terrets were ever intended for prolonged use. The two outer terrets

do show some signs of wear/damage, but this occurred over a relatively short space of time, perhaps during the funerary procession to the grave. Careful examination of the evidence demonstrated that some care had been taken to hide the riveted joint when binding the terrets onto the yoke; as such the terrets would have looked more solid than they actually were. Organic remains were attested on the terrets, possible from reins and/or binding. Below the central terret, there was an iron link filled with a black organic material, probably from leather or rawhide; it is believed that the link was bound between the yoke and the pole, to allow some movement and prevent the pole from slipping out. A small decorative mount with five large circular perforations, found just north of the line of terrets, may have been a rein connector (Brown et al. 2007: 13840, pls. 32-33, figs. 98-101).

Table 2.7. Linchpins

Table 2.8. Terrets

Linchpins

Iron

Iron and Copper-alloy

Antler

?Wood

Terrets

Copperalloy

Vase headed

ARK - KIR

Circular plain

Vase headed with ring

MID

D-shaped plain

HUN

D-shaped with lip ornaments

ARK – ARL – KIR

Curved shanks DGR – WS2 with square head WS3 Curved shanks with ring Antler curved Unknown

D-shaped with ?coral bead

FER - WVL GST ARC – WS1 GSL

40

FER

Iron and Copper-alloy

GSL – WVL

DGR

WS2

D-shaped knobbed with domed knobs

GST

D-shaped ribbed

WS1 – WS3

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire

Figure 2.23. Reconstruction of a yoke with five terrets (Reproduced courtesy of Kate Dennett)

D-shaped terrets, with a curved shank and a straight attachment bar, are the classic British type of terret in the Iron Age. They have not only been found in the East Yorkshire chariot burials, but also in other contexts, such as votive deposits, in large parts of Britain (for an overview, discussion and comparison with continental terrets, see Lewis 2015; for an interpretation of the equine imagery in D-shaped terrets and other horse-related equipment, see also Lewis 2020). All chariot burials had a pair of horse bits. Table 2.9 below shows the main types of bits occurring in the Yorkshire chariot burials. It should be noted that there are several subtypes, depending for example to what extent the different components of the bit can be moved. It would appear that the earliest form is the one which has all components moving freely. Stead (1979: 50) refers to the fifth century BC chariot burial of Somme Tourbe, La Gorge Meillet in the Marne where this type is represented. Several attempts have been made to set up typologies of British horse bits, but none of these offer any conclusive information as to how all the different types are related in time and place (see for example Palk 1984). Until the finds of Wetwang Slack 1 and Wetwang Village, none of the horse bits from Arras Culture chariot burials were twolinked. Palk points out that three-link or ‘double jointed’ bits have never been dated AD and two-link or ‘single jointed’ bits have never been dated BC (Palk 1984: 83). This seems to be refuted by the horse bits from Wetwang Slack 1 and Wetwang Village, and also by one of the Newbridge bits.

Figure 2.24. Terret from Wetwang Slack chariot burial 2 (WS 454) (Image courtesy of Hull and East Riding Museum: Hull Museums) Table 2.9. Horse bits Horse bits 3-link, central link = simple ring

41

Iron

CopperIron and alloy Copper-alloy

CAC

DGR

PEM

3-link, central link = GSL double loop with collar

HUN

ARK – ARL – WS2 - KIR

Loop linked

GST

2-link

WS1

Chain

BEV

Type unknown

FER – WS3

WVL

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Some of the bits were beautifully decorated, like for example those from the two female chariot burials from Wetwang (Wetwang Slack 2 and Wetwang Village). In Wetwang Village the two-link horse bits each have a raised domed projection on the outer ring, decorated with inlaid glass enamels in a four-part design. This type of design is only known from the Battersea Shield (Hill 2002).

have been in less danger of falling apart during the transit (Brown et al. 2007: 145). A glimpse of a different ritual was granted in Garton Slack, where one of the horse bits was deliberately cut in two prior to the burial and placed between the two parts of the cleft skull of a pig on top of the body. The other bit was intact (Brewster 1971: 290). This phenomenon is also known from horse bits from the hoards of Ringstead and Polden Hills (Palk 1984: 71).

Many horse bits and vehicle parts show signs of wear, but the one surviving horse bit from the King’s Barrow in Arras (Figure 2.25) was never used, which was hardly surprising, as a technical mistake was made during manufacture (Stead 1979: 49) which rendered the bit uncomfortable and unfit for use, although according to Palk (1984: 25) it was corrosion that fused the rein rings to the side links at non-functional angles. If Stead is correct, then the bit must still have been seen fit for burial.

2.5.7. Weapons Until the mid-1980s it was generally believed that by definition the Yorkshire chariot burials did not contain weapons, in contrast to those from the Continent. Burials with weapons were known from the Arras Culture, but never in combination with a chariot, although possible shield fittings were mentioned for Hunmanby (Greenwell 1906: 312; Stead 1979: 57) and dubious records from the Yorkshire Museum refer to spearheads for Hornsea (see Stead 1965: 93-94).

Not only a horse bit, but sometimes the entire vehicle as it was buried in the grave was not or no longer fit for everyday use. This is amply illustrated in Ferry Fryston, where the wheels were not of the same size and the terrets were shiny but not intended to last. It is very likely that this was especially (re)assembled for the funeral, with used parts. Brown et al. (2007: 156-57) suggest that this may even have been part of the ritual, with different individuals, families or social groups providing different component parts. They also stress that the assembling did not happen in great haste, given that the terrets were probably made especially for the occasion. Finally, they mention the possibility that the chariot was pulled to the grave by humans rather than by horses, as it would

This changed completely with the discovery of the two male chariot burials Wetwang Slack 1 and 3 (Dent 1985) which both contained an iron sword in an iron and copperalloy scabbard. These swords are virtually identical. The design of the hilt is similar to the anthropoid type with arms and legs outstretched, except that here there is no head and the ‘arms’ and ‘legs’ are formed by knobs. Each of the swords was secured on the baldric by means of copper-alloy discs which had been attached to the belt on

Figure 2.25. Horse bit from the King’s Barrow at Arras (Image courtesy of York Museums Trust)

42

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire either side of the suspension loop. The discs in Wetwang Slack 3 had central studs of coral. Both scabbards have circular open chapes which were in use during the earlier La Tène period, but in Britain there is no evidence of how long these remained in fashion (Dent 1985: 92). Based on their campanulate scabbard mouth, Stead (1991: 65, fig. 50) places these swords in the third century BC, together with a scabbard with relatively high campanulate mouth from grave K3 from Kirkburn (not the chariot burial).

Table 2.10. Age and gender of the people buried with a chariot

Strap fittings from Wetwang Slack 1 are similar to some continental hollow rings associated with scabbards, which have been interpreted as belonging to the scabbard suspension. Stead (2006: 61) agrees with Raftery (1988: 14-18) that these hollow rings are too delicate to have taken such a weight. Since these hollow rings were also found with female burials, like in Kirkburn (see section 2.4.5.1), it is indeed much more likely that these were pendants on a belt (Stead 2006: 61).

Chariot burial

Male

Arras, King’s Barrow

Old

Arras, Lady’s Barrow

Age unknown

Danes Graves

Adults

Ferry Fryston

30-40

Garton Slack

30

Garton Station

35-45

Kirkburn

25-35

Pocklington, Burnby Lane

Mature

Pocklington, The Mile

Over age 46

Wetwang Slack 1 (WS 453)

Young adult

Wetwang Slack 2 (WS 454) Wetwang Slack 3 (WS 455) Wetwang Village

Both chariot burials from Wetwang Slack also contained some iron items which point to the presence of shields: two iron spine covers of a wooden shield in Wetwang Slack 1 and some iron fittings which have been interpreted as reinforcement for a wooden shield boss in Wetwang Slack 3. In both cases the shield had been laid in the grave with the boss downwards (Dent 1985).

Female

Young adult Young adult 35-45

was over 46 years of age and suffering from osteoporosis; he had a fractured rib that was healing at the time of death and there was muscle damage to his left thigh (Ware and Stephens 2020). The lady from Wetwang Village was taller (1.72cm) than the average male in the Rudston and Burton Fleming cemeteries. A problem with her right shoulder, combined with a temporomandibular trauma could be evidence that she was involved in an accident a few years before her death. Perhaps she had fallen off her horse or her chariot. The marks on the right side of her face, however, which were originally diagnosed as haemangioma, were later ascribed to post-mortem skewing (personal communication Rod Mackey).

Seven iron spearheads were found in Wetwang Slack 1, around and over the body, which classifies this burial in the series of ‘speared corpses’ occurring rather frequently in the cemeteries of Rudston and Garton Station and which were already discussed above. The Kirkburn chariot burial did not produce any weapons, but the male corpse was covered by a mail tunic (see section 2.4.5.3). In Pocklington, The Mile, the deceased was buried on top of a shield that was placed face downwards, as if he was holding it in a defensive position on his right arm (Ware and Stephens 2020).

A second result of the study of the skeletons was the family link suggested between the Kirkburn chariot burial K5 and the adjacent burials K3 (burial with weapons), K4 and K6: all have the same non-metrical variant of the skull, i.e., parietal foramen (Stead 1991: 135).

2.5.8. The deceased

2.5.9. The horses

In some of the chariot burials no bones survived, due to the acidity of the soil, and in other cases the excavation was not well documented. The available information on age and sex is summarised in Table 2.10.

The only other type of animal appearing in a chariot burial is a horse, although this is by no means standard practice. The King’s Barrow in Arras is the only occurrence of horses in a chariot burial for which some kind of proof is available. Stillingfleet (Stead 1979: 22) mentions how ‘Inclining from the skeleton, on each side, had been placed a wheel… each of these wheels had originally rested on a horse… the head of each horse being not far from that of the charioteer’. Since the find in 1816, most of the horses’ bones have been lost, but a few still remain (Legge 1984). Apart from the King’s Barrow, parts of two teeth of a horse were found in the Hunmanby chariot burial (Stead 1979: 23).

Osteological analyses have revealed a few interesting facts. The first one is that physical perfection was apparently not a condition to be eligible for chariot burial, although the deceased tend to be taller than average. The 30-year-old male from Garton Slack was robust and 1.73m tall, but his left leg was somewhat shorter than his right (Brewster 1971: 291). The male from Ferry Fryston measured 1.71m, which is taller than the mean stature of 1.68m for males in the Iron Age, and he was more robust than other Iron Age and Romano-British males found in pits and ditches on sites nearby (Brown et al. 2007: 315). The male from Pocklington, The Mile was 1.74cm tall; he

None of the chariot burials excavated to modern standards revealed any horses, until the discovery of the 43

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent chariot burials of Pocklington, Burnby Lane (2017) and Pocklington, The Mile (2018). In Burnby Lane, where the chariot had been dismantled, two horses were laying down on their sides and facing each other. They had been buried intact, but certain parts were later removed by ploughing; both were mature animals, and one was a male (the other could not be determined). It would be more appropriate to call them ponies, because their estimated height (at the withers) was about 1.29m, just a few centimetres smaller than the horses from Kirkburn (see section 2.4.5.7) and the King’s Barrow at Arras. One of the Burnby Lane horses was radiocarbon dated to around 250 BC (Stephen and Ware 2020, 26-27).

AD; isotope studies showed the animals were not raised locally but elsewhere in Yorkshire or further afield. The site had obviously become the focus of much activity in the Romano-British period, which gives food for thought about how this was linked with the chariot burial (Brown et al. 2007: 148-50, for a discussion see 158-59). 2.6. The start of the Arras Culture 2.6.1. Overview Fine dating is a problem in the British Iron Age in general and in the Arras Culture in particular. An extra element hindering the dating of the chariot burials is the lack of pottery and brooches.

In Pocklington, The Mile, two horses had been buried standing upright, as if they were pulling the chariot (Figure 2.26). Unfortunately, their heads had been truncated by ploughing, but the fused bones indicate that they were not juveniles (Ware and Stephens 2020). This was a unique find for East Yorkshire, and for all western Europe for that matter. Coincidentally, a few years earlier, a similar chariot burial with standing horses was found in Sboryanovo (in the northwest of Bulgaria); the burial is also dated to the third century BC (Anastassov et al. 2017).

Traditionally, the Arras Culture was considered to have started at the end of the fifth or the early fourth century BC (see for example Cunliffe 2005: 85), because the presence of chariot burials naturally drew archaeologists’ attention to the near Continent, and especially to the Aisne-Marne region, where square-ditched enclosures are as typical as they are in East Yorkshire, and where a few hundreds of chariot burials were discovered, all dating to the fifth and earlier fourth century BC. Less well known are the third and second century BC chariot burials from other parts of France, no doubt because they are much smaller in number and several of them have only been excavated fairly recently. In ‘The Arras Culture’, Stead (1979) drew parallels with third century BC chariot burials such as those from Nanterre (near Paris) and Attichy, but most of the other chariot burials of this period had not yet been discovered at that moment, and as such most of his comparative material came from the earlier chariot burials of the Aisne-Marne. In the meantime, the repertoire of third and second century BC chariot burials on the near Continent has expanded, and these have proven to offer a better chronological context for the study of the origins of the Arras Culture.

2.5.10. Other animal bones Pig is clearly the animal associated with the high-status people buried in a chariot. When animal bones are reported, these are always pig bones and never sheep bones. There is not always a detailed description available of the pig bones found or of their position in the grave, but a certain pattern seems to emerge. The bones are always from the forequarter of a pig (skull and forelimbs) and the skull is often split in two. Split skulls are mentioned for Garton Slack (Brewster 1971: 290), Wetwang Village (Hill 2002: 410) and Ferry Fryston (Boyle 2004: 20; Brown et al. 2007: 148), and for Garton Station and Kirkburn (Legge 1991: 142-44). Also the precise position of the bones seems to have been important. In Kirkburn, for instance, the left half-head was placed near the head of the human corpse and the right half-head near the stomach; the pig’s left leg lay on the human’s left side and the right leg on its right. Cut marks on some of the bones lead Legge (1991: 143-44) to presume that the bones were already defleshed when they were placed in the grave and that, therefore, they were symbolic rather than actual food offerings. This was confirmed by the finds in Ferry Fryston where the pig skull and forelimbs proved to have been cooked (Brown et al. 2007: 148).

Apart from the traditional focus on the Aisne-Marne, there was the fact that a few early brooches were attested in East Yorkshire, which were taken as an indication that the Arras Culture started at least in the early fourth century BC, but as discussed below, this does not necessarily need to be the case. Not long after the completion of my PhD, an article was published that confirmed the later dating of the Wetwang cemetery and the chariot burials of the Wolds, based on Bayesian modelling (Jay, et al. 2012), details of which will be summarised in section 2.6.4 below.

Apart from the pig bones inside the grave of Ferry Fryston, numerous cattle bones were recovered from the ditched enclosure surrounding it. Radiocarbon dating showed these cattle bones to be from different periods. The remains of 25 cattle in the lower ditch fill may be contemporary with the burial; they were presumably deposited on top of the barrow and later eroded into the ditch. The cattle bones (of at least 162 cattle) from the upper ditch fill are dated between the late first and early fourth centuries

2.6.2. The earliest brooches The copper-alloy brooch of Marzabotto type inspiration from barrow L in Cowlam (Stead 1979: 64-65; 1991: 180) is generally seen as the earliest artefact of the Arras Culture. It has a mock spring, like native British brooches. According to Stead it could be a crudely repaired version 44

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire

Figure 2.26. Chariot burial with standing horses discovered at Pocklington, The Mile (Image courtesy of MAP Archaeological Practice Ltd)

of a British variety of a continental brooch. The brooch is generally dated to the early fourth century BC. However, brooches with proportions similar to the Marzabotto type still occur in Gaul late in the fourth and even still in the third century BC (Charpy 1998: 215). Furthermore, not only had the Marzabotto type brooch been repaired, but

the bracelet from the same burial was also very worn (Stead 1979: 73) which would indicate that both could have been considerably older than the burial; perhaps they were heirlooms. Another early example, similar to the one from Cowlam, is a copper-alloy arched bow brooch from burial BF 61 of Burton Fleming, Bell Slack. Stead (1991: 45

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 81) thinks it may have had a genuine spring originally but if so, it was given a replacement pin.

– same interior arrangement of the grave; – vase-headed linchpins, but of different metal and the King’s Barrow linchpin is undecorated; – D-shaped terrets with lip ornaments but of different metal; – three-link horse bit where the central link is a double loop with a collar, but of different metal.

In Wetwang Slack, there are a few brooches which appear to have a genuine spring. In general they are from graves that are stratigraphically early (Dent 1984: 46) although many of the earliest brooches have hinges, like the one from burial 327, a burial that ranked amongst the earliest burials of the cemetery, based on Bayesian modelling, producing a date between 270 and 200 cal BC (posterior density estimate – 95 per cent probability), or between 245 and 205 cal BC (posterior density estimate – 68 per cent probability) (Jay et al. 2012: 172, table 2). The radiocarbon dates on which the modelling is based were obtained on human bone, and as such reflect the time of death; the brooch may have been worn for a long time before ending up in the grave, and if it was an heirloom, it may have been significantly older.

Another close link exists between the two swords and scabbards from Wetwang Slack 1 and 3, classified by Stead (1991: 181-83) as Yorkshire Scabbard Style, to which he also classifies the sword and scabbard from K3, a burial adjacent to the Kirkburn chariot burial. According to Stead, there are stylistic links between the three Wetwang Slack burials, the small group of Kirkburn burials and the Garton Station chariot burial which to him suggests that these burials might be contemporary. One of these stylistic links is a recurring ‘S’ or reversed ‘S’ motif, which can be found on the Wetwang Slack 1 and 3 scabbards but also on the ‘bean-tin’ and the outer terminals of the bits from Wetwang Slack 2. Also the outer terminal of each of the horse bits in Wetwang Slack 2 was decorated with cast ornament in the shape of an ‘S’. Stead suggests that the scabbards from Kirkburn and Wetwang Slack should be dated no later than the third century BC.

2.6.3. The chariot burials Stead (1979: 42) himself pointed to a difference between the continental vehicles and those of East Yorkshire, a difference which would prove to be significant to achieve a closer dating of the Arras Culture chariots burials: in the Aisne-Marne and the Middle Rhine - Moselle regions, the tyres are secured to the felloe by multiple nails, while in East Yorkshire, nails are lacking. As it happens, nails are also absent from the third century BC chariot burials from the Paris area, such as those from Le Plessis-Gassot (1998) and Roissy (1999), and there are other similarities, as will be further discussed in section 8.3.3.

In fact, chariot burials may have been used over a relatively short period, perhaps not more than a century, from the early third to the early second century BC. The iron wheel tyres do not support a date much earlier and there is no evidence for any of the chariot burials to be later. Bayesian modelling suggests that the chariot burial rite was even shorter-lived.

Since on the Continent, most ELT chariot burials have complete vehicles, the idea could be advanced that the dismantled vehicles of the Wolds are a later development. The chariot burials in the northern periphery (Pexton Moor and Cawthorn Camps) cannot be closely dated, but the fact that they were placed on the old ground surface would normally point to an earlier phase. However, based on Bayesian modelling, the Ferry Fryston chariot burial (complete) is believed to date to the same period as the dismantled chariot burials of the Wolds, and the chariot burial distribution map shows that burials with complete vehicles are still a phenomenon of the outskirts of the study area, with Pocklington as the place where the two types meet.

2.6.4. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates Radiocarbon dates for eight chariot burials (Ferry Fryston, Kirkburn, Garton Station, Garton Slack, Wetwang Village and the three from Wetwang Slack) were analysed using a Bayesian approach; the study also comprised radiocarbon dates for 18 burials from the main Wetwang Slack cemetery as well as seven radiocarbon dates for five burials from the Garton Slack cemetery (Jay et al. 2012). The modelling produced so-called posterior density estimates, which, as the authors emphasize, are not absolute: ‘They are interpretative estimates which can and will change as further data become available and/or as other researchers choose to model the data from different perspectives.’

In spite of all the different types of terrets, horse bits and linchpins represented in the chariot burials, it turns out quite impossible to set up a sequence. When looking at the above tables, it becomes clear that one element may link burial x and y, but not z, whereas in another respect there is a close link between x and z which is absent in y. A possible explanation is that many of these types have existed at the same time and/or remained in use for a long period.

The analysis demonstrated that the chariot burials started in 255-195 cal BC (95 per cent probability) or in 225-200 cal (68 per cent probability) and ended in 210-165 cal BC (95 per cent probability) or in 210-185 cal BC (68 per cent probability), and as such only lasted 1-70 years (95 per cent probability) or 1-25 years (68 per cent probability). While in theory the rite could have started in the midthird century BC and have lasted well into the second century BC, the authors seem to favour a briefer period, referring to ‘a short-lived horizon centred on 200 cal BC’ and ‘no more than a few decades around 200 cal BC’.

At first sight, the highest number of links exists between Arras, King’s Barrow and Kirkburn: 46

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire They presume that within this narrow period some chariot burials are earlier than others, but they rightly argue that if some chariot burials included objects that were already old when deposited while other burials contained more contemporary objects, the impression may be created that the chronological spread was more significant than it was in reality. Even so, their model shows that the first chariot burials may have been introduced as early as the mid-third century BC.

the handle and several signs of repair (Stead 1991: 66-68, 224-25; Stead 2006; Giles 2012: 188, 241; Garrow et al. 2009: 103). Chittock (2019) has argued that repairs (and modifications) of swords and also chariot fittings in East Yorkshire were not concealed and were in fact meant to be seen. Rather than heirlooms (passed between people and the lineages they represent), these objects should be seen as antiques, of which the power ‘derives from their age, or at least from the appearance of age’, and ‘these objects were important in the materialisation of histories providing mnemonic devices in oral traditions at a time when written histories did not exist in Britain’.

The results of the study also indicated that the Wetwang Slack cemetery spanned a shorter period than previously thought (i.e., between the fourth and the first century BC), starting in 295-205 cal BC (95 per cent probability) or in 255-210 cal BC (68 per cent probability) and lasting for 5-130 years (95 per cent probability) or 10-75 years (68 per cent probability). The analysis suggests that regular use of the cemetery ended in 210-140 cal BC (95 per cent probability) or 200-170 cal BC (68 per cent probability). This model included the three chariot burials, which are not part of the main cemetery. When omitting the chariot burials, the earliest start date would be a decade earlier and the earliest end date a decade later. The authors’ conclusion is that the main Wetwang Slack cemetery was in use in the third and earlier second century BC, for a period not longer than 150 years. A start date before 300 BC is not considered impossible, because the analysis only included one burial that was thought to belong to the earliest phase, but regular burial beyond the third quarter of the second century BC is claimed to be unlikely. For Garton Slack, the model was imprecise due to the paucity of results (Jay et al. 2012).

If these objects were antiques – and the idea is convincing – this could imply that they were not as old as they would have been if they were heirlooms (handed down over a few generations); they only needed to look old. 2.7. Natural sciences and the population of East Yorkshire In recent years, natural sciences have addressed a few issues which could be of interest to the present study: – How old are the earliest skeletons? – Is there any evidence for immigrants in the earliest population? – Is there any correlation between dietary variation and status of the burials? – What is the level of violence in society? Is it endemic?

The Bayesian analysis showed that the eight chariot burials belonged to a later phase of the Arras Culture as compared to the Wetwang Slack cemetery, but they only represent just over a third of all chariot burials attested in eastern Yorkshire. There is still a possibility that chariot burials with a complete vehicle placed on the old ground surface (Cawthorn Camps and Pexton Moor) are earlier than the chariot burials of the Wolds. Likewise, the later starting date of the Wetwang Slack cemetery as suggested by Bayesian modelling should not be generalised for the Arras burial tradition as such. As argued by Halkon (2013: 69), ‘it is almost certain that the Wetwang cemetery was not the earliest of its type in the region’. There is, however, no evidence for a start in the fifth or early fourth century as was believed in the past.

The majority of the studies referred to below concern the population of Wetwang Slack, including the chariot burials. 2.7.1. Radiocarbon dating Conventional radiocarbon dates were acquired on human bone from Kirkburn, Rudston and Wetwang in the 1970’s and 1980’s (Dent 1982: 437-39; Stead 1991: 169-70), but the results were often erratic, or the range so broad (from the fourth to the first century BC) that the study could merely confirm the dating already indicated by the grave goods. Since then, the technique of AMS Dating (Accelerator Mass Spectrometry) has improved the degree of precision and it can be applied on a larger range of materials. AMS was used for the ‘Dating Celtic Art’ project which included a number of burials from the Yorkshire Wolds, mostly chariot burials (Garrow et al. 2009). The project also incorporated existing AMS dates for Ferry Fryston (Brown et al. 2007: 132, table 12; 152-53) and Newbridge (Carter, Hunter and Smith 2010). Another project, a few years later, analysed a series of new (Wetwang) and existing radiocarbon dates applying Bayesian modelling, in an attempt to establish a date range for the Wetwang Slack cemetery and to determine how chariot burials are chronologically related to the Arras burial rite in general (Jay et al. 2012), as discussed above.

2.6.5. Heirlooms and antiques The difficulty in dating a burial based on typology only is that it is hard to establish the time lapse between the production of a certain grave good and its deposition in the grave. Signs of wear and evidence of repair would obviously show that the object was not new, but even so it remains difficult to state its exact age. The sword from Kirkburn burial K3, e.g., is believed to be older than the young male (age 17-25) with whom it was buried; its scabbard has an open-shape end (a LT B feature), but it was well-used, as suggested by the worn decoration of 47

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 2.7.2. Isotope evidence

at the extreme eastern end, behind the Bronze Age barrow, and burial 431 at the extreme western end. All in all, the picture that emerged from this study confirmed earlier findings that the majority of the Wetwang Slack people lived and died on the Wolds. The researchers point out that this picture of a settled community is in contrast with that of Wolds communities of the Late Neolithic and EBA, whose lifestyle involving considerably more mobility, though possibly between local regions. This difference would reflect a change from a pastoral subsistence pattern to a more agricultural way of life (Jay et al. 2013; Jay and Montgomery 2020).

An analysis of the carbon and nitrogen stable isotopes in human and animal bone collagen from Wetwang Slack by Mandy Jay and Michael Richards (2006) offered some interesting results. The diet of the Wetwang population was shown to be high in animal protein, with no significant level of marine input. The diet was unusually consistent during the lives of the individuals examined and it did not vary significantly over the period of use of the cemetery. Moreover, no significant differences could be detected across the population: there are no age or gender related differences, and the social distinction as it appears from the burial rites is not reflected in the diet, where the levels of animal protein are alike for an individual buried in a chariot and one from a secondary burial without grave goods. However, the researchers point out that a similar level of animal protein intake does not necessarily mean that the individuals’ diet was physically identical; the analysis cannot distinguish between the consumption of dairy produce and meat, let alone between different cuts of meat or different mammal species. The study produced two individuals with deviating isotope levels (burials 14 and 431), but these do not fit the image of an immigrant from overseas bringing along a new burial rite. Neither of them are from primary barrow burials, nor do they have any grave goods.

Another interesting study (Jay et al. 2008) aimed at establishing breast feeding practices among the Wetwang population through the analysis of skeletal remains of infants and children below six years old. The carbon and nitrogen values lacked the enrichment pattern which would normally be expected for exclusive breastfeeding during the year following birth. The infant diet was possibly significantly supplemented by animal milk and/ or plant gruel. Strontium isotope analysis was undertaken on the man buried with a chariot in Ferry Fryston, in West Yorkshire, but it was not conclusive. A Scottish or even Scandinavian origin is possible, but also a childhood spent in East Yorkshire would conform to the results of the analysis. This would explain the strong cultural connection. It is equally possible that he was still living in East Yorkshire and died unexpectedly during a visit to the Ferrybridge area; perhaps members of his family journeyed to Ferry Fryston especially for the funeral (Brown et al. 2007: 154). Along with the man in the chariot burial, other Iron Age inhumations from sites in the vicinity of Ferry Fryston, as well as cattle from the ditch around the chariot were the subject of isotope analysis (see Jay et al. 2007; Jay and Montgomery 2020).

In a subsequent study, Mandy Jay, Janet Montgomery, Olaf Nehlich, Jaqueline Towers and Jane Evans (2013) combined multiple isotope analyses to investigate mobility levels and subsistence practices. Using only strontium (a typical mobility indicator) would be problematic, since the geology of the Paris Basin (the putative origin of migrants) is the same (chalk) as in Yorkshire. To overcome this problem, the study combined carbon, nitrogen and sulphur isotope ratios (collagen of bone and dentine), and strontium and oxygen isotope ratios (from tooth enamel). The dataset included the seven chariot burials of the Wolds (Garton Slack, Garton Station, Kirkburn, Wetwang Village and the three Wetwang Slack chariot burials) and 25 non-chariot burials from Wetwang Slack. The study has demonstrated that the individual from the Kirkburn chariot (with the mail tunic) did not spend his childhood on the Yorkshire Wolds, but that he may have lived there for a number of years later in his life, before he died aged 25-35 years. However, the values also do not point to a childhood in the Paris Basin, but rather to a location elsewhere in Britain; geological conditions further to the north and west would correspond with the values obtained here. The multiple isotope study confirmed a certain degree of mobility for the individuals from Wetwang Slack burials 14 and 431. While the majority of the population had rarely left the Wolds, these individuals either travelled back and forth between two locations during the course of their lives, or they spent most of their lifetime at the other location but were buried in the Wolds. Unlike the Kirkburn chariot burial, burials 14 (male) and 431 (female) are unremarkable, secondary burials, with no grave good, although it is interesting that they are located at opposite ends of the cemetery: burial 14

2.7.3. Skeletal evidence for engendered violence Research by Sarah King (2010) has demonstrated that interpersonal violence was present in the Wetwang Slack community, though only on a small scale. Most of the population would never get involved in violence, but some obviously had: weapons were certainly not purely ceremonial but were actually used. The evidence for violence that is present is mainly sharp force and penetrating trauma to the cranial bones, which is consistent with the type of weapons found at the cemetery, i.e., swords and spears. In most cases, the injury had healed or was healing at the time of death. Only the individual in burial 114 showed evidence for peri-mortem trauma: he may have died from the blow to his skull. There is no indication that people who had been injured as a result of violence were buried in a special way, except for the individual in one of the chariot burials of Wetwang Slack. The man, who died at age 25-35, showed a healed sharp force trauma to the occipital and a segmental fracture of the right humerus. In conclusion, the Wetwang Slack group does not seem to 48

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire have experienced high levels of conflict-induced injuries. The possibility exists, however, that those who died during violent encounters were not buried in the cemetery but were disposed of in a different way, which would obscure them from the archaeological record.

the earlier monuments (i.e. the round barrows) changed the role of the past in the present, with the earthworks laying specific claim to particular monuments: the ancient dead and traces of their works were being used as strategic resources. When later the square barrow burial rite was introduced, it was set within the existing discourse on rights of place and ancestry.

2.8. Non-funerary features of the East Yorkshire landscape

2.8.2. Settlements

For a long time, the Arras Culture was a culture of the dead. However, in the last few decades, more attention was paid to the organisation of the landscape in general and to settlement and activity areas in particular. Aerial photography has revealed the presence of many settlements that might be linked with the Arras Culture cemeteries and has even allowed a few hypotheses to be proposed for a relative chronology of the organisational structure of the land and of settlement developments in certain areas. Although many of these studies focused on the Wolds, other regions, like the Vale of York, produced information on possible sources of wealth other than agriculture and animal husbandry.

For a long time, no settlements were known that could with any reasonable level of certainty be assigned to the Arras Culture. The so-called ‘hillforts’ of eastern Yorkshire, like for example Grimthorpe (Stead 1968) and Castle Hill, Scarborough (Stead 1965: 71) as well as the smaller palisaded hill settlements like Staple Howe (Brewster 1963; Powlesland 1988) and Devil’s Hill (Brewster 1981) all turned out to be of earlier date; contemporary unenclosed settlements like the one at Heslerton site 1 (Powlesland 1986) must have been far more common, but are less easy to detect. For the latter half of the first millennium BC, aerial photography has provided a relative sequence of settlement development, from open settlements over single rectilinear enclosures to linear enclosure complexes (known as ladder settlements). Open settlements are very difficult to date. From the excavations in Garton and Wetwang Slack (Dent 1982; 1983b; 1984; 1988; 1995), where the evolution can be followed from an open to an enclosed settlement, it seems that the open settlement was contemporary with the earliest stages of the Wetwang Slack cemetery. During the late third and the second century BC, the open settlement evolved into a nucleated settlement. When the cemetery was abandoned, part of its area was used for the construction of a ditched farmstead, but the site never developed into a ladder settlement as was the case elsewhere.

2.8.1. Linear earthworks The aerial photography survey of the Yorkshire Wolds, which culminated in a synthesis by Stoertz (1997), has shown how an extensive system of linear earthworks emerged throughout the area from the Late Bronze Age onwards. These linear earthworks post-date the Bronze Age round barrows, which are used as landmark foci: the earthworks are laid out towards them. The linear earthworks are often interpreted as dykes, enclosing large blocks of land, but many of them must be ditched trackways, and a combination of both functions is certainly to be envisaged. In their capacity of ‘dykes’, these earthworks would probably be boundary markers rather than physical barriers, representing the limits of territorial or functional blocks of land. The practice of allocating land by means of physical boundaries continued and the resulting network of land blocks and trackways was extended and developed throughout the Iron Age and the Roman period.

The increasing division and enclosure of the land has been explained as the result of demographic pressure (Dent 1984; 1995). However, other factors may have been at play. Mick Atha (2004) has argued that since ladder settlements occupy the same blocks of landscape as the earlier cemeteries, they represent a rearticulation of household-community-landscape ties through settlement architecture rather than burial practice. Mel Giles (2007b) stated that the division and demarcation of land are related to social transformations in concepts of community, tenure and inheritance.

The linear earthworks remain a source of continuous debate. One of the discussion points is whether their construction was an act of communal cooperation or an arrangement between neighbouring elites (Fenton-Thomas 2003). Furthermore, the earthworks are often seen as the result of strategic intervention. Peter Halkon (2008: 159), for example, writes: ‘If prestigious grave-goods are an indication of the presence of social élites, the positioning of Beaker burials at South Cave and Brantingham, at the mouths of the valleys which form routes between the lowland and the southern Wolds suggests élite manipulation of landscapes’. Mel Giles (2007a: 113-15) has suggested that ‘the architectural relationships between the earthworks and other features represent attempts creatively to re-describe the world as it was perceived in the Early Iron Age, redefining people’s relations with it’, one of the consequences being that the incorporation of

John Dent (1995: 67, 104; 2010: 80) has claimed that there is no real evidence for the homes of a ruling elite, and that it is difficult to reconcile the settlement evidence with that from the burials, where the variety in quality is apparent. However, the information that he provides on the size of the houses on the Garton-Wetwang site shows a noteworthy large range. While the large majority of roundhouses (71 per cent) had a diameter between 6.5m and 9.5m, there were also outliers at both ends of the scales, from just over 49

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 4m to almost 13m. Different degrees of wealth and comfort may be harder to establish in houses than in burials, but the variety in size is already quite meaningful.

and anthropologists have developed a number of new approaches for the study of burial and social organisation (for an overview, see Parker Pearson 2003, chapter 4). The observation that ostentatious burial rites often appear in periods of political instability or when new political structures emerge, while in a stable society grave goods tend to grow fewer and poorer, was already made by Childe (1945). In fact, death creates a possibility for the mourners to gain prestige and authority (Giles and Joy 2007: 18). Rather than reflections of social order, funerals are opportunities to re-order the structure of power (Parker Pearson 2003: 86), and it is very plausible that the introduction of chariot burials is to be understood in this sense.

2.8.3. Means of subsistence Agriculture and animal husbandry must have been the main drivers of the rural economy in eastern Yorkshire, but while households were to a large extent self-sufficient, certain production activities required specialised skills and some materials had to be imported from overseas (Dent 1995: 100-01). Peter Halkon (2008: 170-73, 208-09; 2013: 107-08) has argued that there is a strong link between the chariot burials and the production of iron. Experimental archaeology and other research have shown that the production of iron was complex and time consuming. Since it took between eight and 25 person days to produce a kilogram of bar iron, iron products must have been highly valued, and early iron production was likely to be closely controlled. He points at the geographical contexts of the Arras and Garton/ Wetwang Slack cemeteries and says it is no coincidence that the Arras cemetery is situated at the head of Sancton Dale, a dry valley, linking the iron-producing lowlands of the Foulness Valley to the Wolds uplands; in a similar way Garton/Wetwang Slack leads down to the headwaters of the River Hull, near Elmswell, where iron smelting took place also. The iron industry was particularly important in the Holme-on-Spalding Moor area, where there is a concentration of iron smelting and working sites (see also Halkon and Millett 1999). Halkon (2008: 208-09) also stresses the importance of the Humber estuary and suggests that perhaps it was by this route that the idea of square barrows and iron technology arrived, given that there are close parallels between the iron technology of northern France and that of the Foulness Valley, as there are in burial forms. In a further article (Halkon 2011), he elaborates on the connection between iron, landscape and power in East Yorkshire.

Apart from profane motives, there was obviously a complex spiritual dimension to funerals. Some grave goods may simply have been personal possessions of the deceased, but others were gifts from the mourners (Parker Pearson 2003: 85) and may have served a range of purposes. Gifts can express affection for the deceased (Brück 2004: 314) and also concern: amulets and other items were presumably deposited with the deceased to ensure a safe passage to the afterlife. Different aspects of the deceased’s identity may be symbolised in the grave or evoked during the funerary rites: these may be related to political status but also to age, gender or skill (Parker Pearson 2003: 73). It has been argued (Parker Pearson 2003: 84; Brück 2004) that grave goods were aimed at illustrating the relationship of the mourners with the deceased, and animal remains may have been ‘employed to comment metaphorically on the identity of the deceased’, to describe his/her character or to refer to the totem or symbol of his/her family or clan (Brück 2004: 322-25). This is of particular relevance to East Yorkshire, where the opposition between pig bones and sheep bones ‘forms a totemic system in which the human relationship between rulers and ruled is mirrored by the ceremonial distinction between pigs and sheep’ and where ‘animal bones, rather than grave goods, are the key indicators of élite or commoner ascription’ (Parker Pearson 1999: 56).

Mel Giles (2007c: 395) has claimed that specialised ironworking was not necessarily associated with hierarchical chiefdoms, supported by full-time craft specialists, but that there are ‘more complex ways in which social and political authority might have been associated with craftwork, through metaphorical associations with fertility, skill and exchange’.

In a society where gift exchange may have played an important role, death breaks the cycle; this way certain grave goods were possibly intended to close an outstanding debt (Lucas 1996: 104). Other gifts were perhaps deposited to assist the deceased in mediating with the ancestors on behalf of the living. Mirrors may have fulfilled such a role, the women buried with them being perceived as individuals who could be entrusted with such a task on account of their affinity with the other world (Giles and Joy 2007: 18, 26-27). Furthermore, an ancient artefact with a known biography and a powerful reputation may be considered strong enough to deal with a bad death (Giles and Joy 2007: 18). The ‘speared corpses’ may be examples of such a bad death, although Parker Pearson (1999: 56) prefers to interpret them as ‘the metaphorical killing of royalty’.

2.9. A few preliminary conclusions A few preliminary comments can be made regarding burials and social status in the Arras Culture, and to the nature of the contacts with the Continent. 2.9.1. Burials: a reflection of social status? The assumption that the social order of a given society can be directly read from its burial evidence has proved to be too simplistic. Since the 1960s, archaeologists

Conversely, certain restrictions may have applied. Raimund Karl (personal communication) has suggested 50

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire that perhaps inheritance rules limited the amount of wealth that was allowed to be taken into the grave (cf. Kelly 1988: 123 on ancient Irish laws limiting the share of his property a man could bequeath to the Church).

objects in Arras Culture graves are considered as straight imports. For many, however, the raw material could be coming from across the Channel and many stylistic novelties originated on the Continent. Both Dent and Stead detected an evolution in the availability of materials like for example glass beads and coral. In general, they seem to suggest that there was a close contact at the beginning of the Arras Culture and a renewed contact towards the end, but typo-chronology is so volatile that it may be wise not to accept this by definition. As far as style and craftsmanship is concerned, the general opinion seems to be that the initial impetus came from the Continent in the ELT period, but that the later development was mainly of a local nature. Again, the study of the continental chariot and other burials may throw some light on these statements.

It is clear that the presence of prestige items in a grave may have had many reasons and is not necessarily a reflection of social status. Of course, the presence of prestige goods does not exclude social status either: in order to consider a deceased woman able to intervene in the other world on behalf of the living undoubtedly implies that she was of high social status while alive. Interesting to consider though is that in East Yorkshire not all high-status individuals appear to have been given grave goods, since the distinction between pig and sheep bones implies that burials which contain pig bones but no other grave goods are still of high status (Parker Pearson 1999: 56).

2.10. British chariot burials outside Yorkshire

Apart from type B burials, which appear only late in the sequence, all the other burial types distinguished by Ian Stead and John Dent are contemporary, which suggests that the difference between them could be social, as John Dent already concluded (1995: 73-75), but criteria such as the presence of rich grave goods should be re-examined in the light of alternative explanations as discussed above. The possibility should also be considered that there may have been a social order of people even lower than type D who did not qualify for formal burial and were disposed of in a different way. However, absence from the cemetery could also be independent from social status but associated with the type of death.

2.10.1. Scotland The chariot burial of Newbridge (Edinburgh), located at 250-300m from the Bronze Age barrow of Huly Hill, was excavated in 2001 by Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd and the National Museums Scotland. There were no other Iron Age features found on the site, although the excavators consider it feasible that a cluster of small (undated) ring ditches some 150m to the northwest of the chariot burial are in fact Iron Age circular funerary enclosures of which the central burial was on the old ground surface and has disappeared, and they believe that these features may be linked with the chariot burial (Carter, Hunter and Smith 2010: 35-36). The chariot burial itself was not surrounded by a ditched enclosure, but it may have been covered by a mound, as suggested by significant soil compression attested in the backfill of the burial pit; such a mound would have been destroyed by extensive rig and furrow cultivation during the medieval period (Carter, Hunter and Smith 2010: 34).

The perception of British Iron Age societies as chiefdoms has been strongly criticised in Britain (for an overview and discussion, see Giles 2012: 24-24), although Sharples (2010: 242-43) has argued that the ‘Yorkshire burials in particular personify what is felt to be the classic warrior chief’. Giles (2012: 27) does not contest that the burials express social differentiation, nor that they show evidence of ‘power and political strife’, but she adheres to a different approach, claiming that ‘our task is to unpick the complex aspects of identity which such differentiation might represent: age, gender, relations with kin and community, leadership and authority, life-history and achievements, or even the manner of people’s death’.

Due to the unfavourable preservation conditions for bone, no body of a deceased could be attested, but given the parallels for burials of this form, there is no doubt that this was an inhumation (Carter, Hunter and Smith 2010: 35). The chariot was buried intact, not in a rectangular grave pit (as in Ferry Fryston and Pocklington, The Mile), but in one that follows the shape of the vehicle, forming a north-south figure of eight, with separate slots for the wheels, and an extension to accommodate the pole and the yoke. The pole was 3.15-3.45m long and the yoke about a metre long, while the gauge between the wheels was 1.35m; similar grave pits are known from the ELT chariot burials in the Champagne/Aisne-Marne and in the Belgian Ardennes. The yoke trench (at the southern end of the grave) included the yoke and horse harness. There were four plain iron terrets, one of which is thought to be a replacement. The inner terrets may have had organic decorations tied to them, and all terrets had remains of a strap for fastening to the yoke. The two iron horse bits were simple and undecorated, and of different types, one

Of importance to the present study is that in any case the higher echelons of society were in a position to interact with other elite groups around Europe. Giles (2000: 162) has suggested that the decorations of the horse gear and vehicle fittings embodied the distant relations that the individuals who were buried with a chariot were able to maintain. 2.9.2. Import of ideas and luxury materials from the Continent For certain grave goods matches can be found in various geographically diverging places on the Continent, but this will be further investigated at a later stage. Only a few 51

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent two-link (of which one link had been removed before burial), the other with a single bar. Again, one of the bits may be a replacement. Both horse bits show evidence for the presence of a leather strap for the horse to chew on: the saliva makes the bit feel easier in the mouth and so relaxes the horse (Carter, Hunter and Smith 2010: 37-41).

the two wheels, the chariot could still be used in a normal way, and as such may have been buried as it was; they do not think that various worn-out elements were brought together for the burial, as was perhaps the case in Ferry Fryston, although they do not rule out the possibility (Carter, Hunter and Smith 2010).

Like the horse bits, also the wheels are remarkably different, and again one is considered to be a replacement, although contemporary. The eastern wheel has a diameter of 90cm, 12 or 13 spokes, iron nave bands and an iron clamp to secure the felloe, while in the western wheel, which has a diameter of 90cm, and 12 spokes, nave bands are lacking. Iron analysis has demonstrated that the iron used to produce the eastern tyre was derived from different sources. The tyres are shrunk onto the onepiece felloes, without nails, which is remarkable given the early date of the vehicle: radiocarbon dating of preserved organic material from the wooden fittings of the wheels produced dates between the middle of the sixth and the fourth centuries BC, but statistically they are likely to date between 540 and 380 BC. No metal linchpins were found, so presumably the wheels were held to the axle by organic linchpins (Carter, Hunter and Smith 2010: 48-55). In East Yorkshire, where chariot burials were originally believed to be earlier, Bayesian modelling has now confirmed what I had already argued based mainly on the technology of the wheel tyres (by comparison with northern Gaul), i.e., that they are not earlier than the third century BC (Anthoons 2011: 59-60, 209-10). Based on the radiocarbon dating of the vehicle from Newsbridge, Fraser Hunter (2020:139) claims that the technology existed in Britain two centuries earlier and he considers it feasible that it remained a living technology over this period, i.e., that the Yorkshire vehicles need not necessarily have been influenced by the Continent. In fact, I did not state that the technology came from the Continent; I was merely using the technological evolution that can be discerned in northern Gaul as a means for a closer dating of the East Yorkshire chariot burials. Hunter is correct that chariots were widely used ‘beyond the rare areas which practised this rite’, and that we should not focus on vehicles from graves only. However, it is striking that certain characteristics (e.g., the East Yorkshire five-terret system that has also been attested in Roissy near Paris) and vehicle parts (e.g., decorated nave bands – see section 2.5.6) are present in regions that are far removed one from another, which may be an indication that they were widespread and not restricted to the areas with chariot burials.

No grave goods were found with the chariot burial, which is unfortunate, since it would be interesting to see how these would fit with the radiocarbon dating. Furthermore, any possible evidence of animal bones would have been lost, due to soil conditions. 2.10.2. Wales In February 2018, decorated horse fittings were found by a metal-detectorist in the vicinity of a hitherto unrecorded Iron Age promontory fort in Pembrokeshire, Wales; a preliminary excavation in 2018 and a full excavation in 2019 confirmed that the artefacts belonged to a chariot burial, the first known in Wales and southern Britain. The following summary is based on information received from Adam Gwilt, Principal Curator of Prehistoric Archaeology, Amgueddfa Cymru – National Museum Wales. The vehicle had not been dismantled but was buried intact in a large subrectangular grave pit, with separate pits for the wheels. The chariot burial was the central feature of a circular, ditched enclosure with a diameter of about 9m and a wide south-east facing entrance. The enclosure may have had a mortuary function around the time of the burial, but the grave was probably mounded over, to form a circular burial monument near the entrance way into the fort. The iron wheel tyres were standing upright but had been crushed. The excavations also revealed copperalloy nave bands, iron axle-rings and a matching pair of ring-headed linchpins of copper alloy and iron, as well as iron rings and other fittings that are possibly related to the vehicle platform. The deceased, whose bones were not preserved, had been buried with an iron sword, iron ferrules and shaft bindings from two spears, whose blades were missing. It is probable that the person buried was male, as weapon graves in Britain tend to be male, where surviving skeletons have been independently sexed. Three further satellite burials were discovered, probably placed soon after the central grave: two inhumations blocking the ditch entrance way and a probable crouched pit burial just outside the enclosure on the northwestern side. The most remarkable finds are the copper-alloy horse fittings with red glass infill decoration in late La Tène art designs. These fittings, which form an associated group, include a large horse brooch, a large (central) terret, a matching pair of bridle-bits with decorated terminals, a complete strap-union and fragments of a second one of identical form and decoration and three rectangular harness mounts. This elaborate and matching set was probably made around 25-75 AD, while the burial event is thought to date between 50-100 AD, at around the time of invasion and campaigning by the Roman army in western Britain

For the reconstruction of the Newbridge chariot, a D-form with a closed front was chosen for the body, as this was hinted at by the grave form, but Carter, Hunter and Smith (2010: 59) stress that it is by no means certain that the original vehicle was designed this way. Given the connection with the Continent, they also point out that no suspension fittings were found. The evidence of repair and replacement shows that the vehicle had been intensively used for a long time. The authors claim that even with the imbalance caused by the difference in diameter between 52

The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire or perhaps up to a generation or two after the Roman occupation had been secured. This makes the chariot burial at least two centuries younger than the Yorkshire chariot burials. The horse brooch, presumably used to secure a horse blanket, is an artefact that is unknown from the earlier chariot burials discussed above, but it has been attested elsewhere in southern Britain in the first century AD. For example, the chariot fittings are contemporary and stylistically very similar to items found in the Polden Hill, Somerset hoard held by The British Museum. Both the location and the dating of this chariot burial are exceptional; they demonstrate that the concept of burying a person with a chariot was transmitted through time and space, and that further chariot burials and Iron Age burial monuments near forts may be discovered elsewhere in Britain. 2.10.3. Other regions Apart from the chariot burial of Newbridge in Scotland, excavated in 2001, and the one discovered in Pembrokeshire, Wales in 2018, there are mentions of chariot burials from several other places in Britain, but generally from old, poorly documented excavations. Recently, Anna Lewis (2015: 238-240) made an overview of all the alleged chariot burials in Britain, and she argued that in two cases there is reasonable evidence for the existence of a chariot burial, i.e., for Hunsbury Hill (Northampton) and Ballindalloch (Moray). Sometime between 1880 and 1885, the skeleton of a man and a horse, buried with a horse bit, part of a wheel tyre and other pieces of metal, were found in the centre of the hillfort at Hunsbury Hill, during extraction of iron ore. Lewis claims that the ‘historical significance of the site was known’, that ‘the workmen were rewarded for any ‘relics’ they handed in’, and that ‘Baker’s report is carefully written and thorough, and there seems no particular reason to doubt the account given by the diggers’ (Lewis 2015: 238). The case of Ballindaloch is described in a letter by a J. Stewart to the Secretary of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. In 1829, a labourer who was digging for stones on the moor, discovered a human skeleton and the skull and bones of a horse, together with a number of items that would point at a chariot burial, such as at least one tyre, a horse bit and rings which may have been terrets. Unfortunately, the objects are lost, and the only illustration accompanying Stewart’s letter is that of a shield boss. Carter, Hunter and Smith (2010: 57) claim that this shield boss is of an unusual, spiked form, which could possibly be Iron Age, but then late into the period (similar ornate bosses are found among Germanic material of the Roman Iron Age); they doubt that it is Anglo-Saxon or Pictish, but all in all their conclusion is that the existing data are too vague to be sure.

53

3 The Middle Rhine – Moselle region 3.1. Chariot burials and general funerary practices

inhumation burial in Spiesheim; based on the brooches, this burial can be dated in the transition phase of LT B to LT C; unfortunately, the Spiesheim burial was disturbed in antiquity and no information is available on the layout of the grave (Stümpel 1986; Haffner and Joachim 1984: 76; Van Endert 1987: 38-39).

3.1.1. Location and history Around 500 BC, under the influence of the West Hallstatt centres, people in the Middle Rhine – Moselle region adopted the idea of vehicle burials. Most vehicle burials are concentrated in the eastern part of the older HEK and most of them are four wheeled. This area, however, also boasts the oldest two-wheel chariot burials; they are from the final phase of Ha D (Haffner and Joachim 1984: 71-74; Van Endert 1987: III-IV).

The tradition of chariot burials continues during LT C and LT D in the Rhine-Mosel-Nahe core area, but changes appearance: the chariot was burned on the pyre and was only represented in the grave by a few parts, in accordance with the pars pro toto principle that was also visible in the allocation of the other grave goods (see chapter 12). Towards the end of the La Tène period, chariot burials come to an end, and are replaced by horse-rider burials. This chapter will only deal with Late Hallstatt and Early La Tène chariot burials.

The largest group of chariot burials is from the Early La Tène period, with a distribution spreading all across the Rhine-Mosel-Nahe area, covering parts of RhinelandPfalz, Hessen, Sauerland and the northeastern corner of the Lorraine (Figure 3.1). Most of these chariot burials are from the LT A period, although LT B has produced some of the more illustrious examples. The Waldalgesheim chariot burial, dating to the transition from LT B1 to LT B2 was traditionally considered the latest of its type, until the find of two terrets and possible vehicle fittings with an

3.1.2. Disposal of the dead Both inhumation and cremation are practised during this period, but most of the chariot burials are inhumations. An example of a cremation is Hillesheim (Haffner 1976: 182-

Figure 3.1. Middle Rhine-Moselle: Location of main sites mentioned in the text (© Greta Anthoons)

55

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 85). In the case of a cremation, only the deceased is placed on the pyre during this period, never the vehicle.

largest wooden chamber is the one from Theley, measuring 5.0m x 3.5m, but this size is fairly exceptional.

3.1.3. Superstructures and enclosures

The chambers of cremation burials are generally smaller but still large enough to contain the vehicle, although in the case of Besseringen, this must have been very tight (1.50 x 0.79–0.90m) (Van Endert 1987: 14). Haffner (1976: 145) points out that the evolution of cremation graves during the Hunsrück-Eiffel Kultur went from small to larger, in order for their outer form (layout, orientation) to resemble the more frequently occurring inhumation graves. The (selected) cremated bones are placed in a beaked flagon or on a pile on the chamber floor.

There are in this period a few isolated chariot burials, but most are part of a larger cemetery with ordinary burials. The largest number of chariot burials (eight) came to light in Mülheim-Kärlich, a cemetery covering an area of 25ha and spanning a period from Ha D to LT B (Joachim 1979). Other chariot burials, like the two from Bescheid, Bei den Hübeln, belong to a smaller elite burial cemetery (Haffner 1977; Haffner and Joachim 1984: 75; Van Endert 1986: 250; Van Endert 1987: 12-13; Haffner and Lage 20082009).

3.1.5. General arrangement of chariot burials

The chariot burials are covered by large round barrows, with a diameter between 20m and 25m and a preserved height at the time of excavation between 0.80m and 2.00m. The barrow covering the chariot burial of Theley is exceptionally large, reaching a diameter of 60m and a height of 5m. Also the isolated chariot burials of Besseringen and Dörth have barrows close to 5m high (Van Endert 1986: 250). Only a few barrows are surrounded by a (circular or oval) ditch, like chariot burials 2 and 4 from Mülheim-Kärlich (Joachim 1979: 516, 518, 520, fig. 11) and burial 34 from Kobern, Chorsang (Van Endert 1987: 30, tab. 9). On top of the barrow of Freisen, a sandstone stèle was reportedly found in 1849 (Haffner 1976: 174; Van Endert 1987: 17).

3.1.5.1. Position of the vehicle The rectangular, almost square shape of the grave gives few indications of the size and shape of the vehicle, but this is to a large extent compensated for by the finds of metal parts. Unfortunately, detailed burial arrangement descriptions and grave plans are only available for a very limited number of chariot burials. The general tendency seems to be for the vehicle to be put in the grave intact. It is not entirely clear what happened to the pole and the yoke. In the early stages, the horse harness seems to be absent and separate yoke ditches are unknown, which would suggest that the yoke was not placed in the grave. As to the pole, however, there are indications that it may have been customary to put part or all of it in the grave. In a few cases, there was an extension to the grave pit, possibly with the purpose of allowing the pole to stick out. This extension was less deep than the main grave pit and it was outside the chamber.

3.1.4. Grave pits Grave pits are broad rectangles, measuring between 2.35m x 2.00m and 4.00m x 3.80m. They are usually between 0.50m and 1.50m deep. Their orientation is primarily west-east, but some are northwest-southeast or northeastsouthwest and there are even a few north-south ones (Van Endert 1986: 251). Only a couple of graves have additional wheel pits (Gransdorf, Kobern 34), although this phenomenon already occurred in the area during the LH period, for example in the four wheeled wagon burials of Bell and Bassenheim. In Bassenheim there are even two barrow graves with four wheel pits but no traces of a wagon. Haffner assumes that the vehicle was removed from the grave before it was closed (Haffner 1976: 141, 404).

A good example is the chariot burial of Gransdorf, where the grave pit measures 3.2m x 3.0m, but the chamber does not fill the whole pit. On the east side there is a gap of some 0.50m between the chamber and the side of the pit. This space may have been destined for the pole. In profile it looks like a step; the pole was probably curved, and its end would have stuck out into the mound (Schindler 1970: 30; Haffner 1976: 178). The vehicle was pushed against the east wall, which means that if the pole was sticking out through this wall, it was the back of the vehicle that was facing the centre of the burial, which may seem rather strange, although it would save a lot of space within the chamber; the same arrangement was observed in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, in Grosbous-Vichten (Metzler 1986: 171) (see chapter seven).

Burial chambers are a widespread phenomenon in the Middle Rhine area. There are two main types, wooden chambers without stone cover and stone chambers with a wooden lining. In comparison to the wooden or stone coffins of the ordinary burials, the chambers of the chariot and other elite burials are always much wider, sometimes almost square, and they are considerably higher. Some of the wooden chambers were standing on the old ground surface, like the ones in Theley, Dörth, Freisen and possibly others, although most of the wooden chambers and all of the stone chambers seem to be built into a grave pit (Haffner 1976: 138-39; Van Endert 1986: 250-52). The

Other possible cases of pole extensions can be found in the two LH chariot burials of Hundheim. In Hundheim 1, there was an extra space between the wooden lining and the stone wall in the east-northeast side. In Hundheim 2 there was an extension to the south side of the wooden chamber; this extension was shallower than the main pit. In both these cases, the vehicle wheels were placed at the 56

The Middle Rhine – Moselle region opposite side of the extension, so that the vehicle was facing the centre of the grave (Haffner 1976: 188-96, figs. 41, 43; Van Endert 1987: 5-7).

chariot burials (Haffner 1977: 127); it should be specified, however, that according to a more recent publication, the wheels in Bescheid 4 had been dismantled and placed against the chariot box (Haffner and Lage 2008-2009: 56).

For other graves, like for example the one of Hillesheim (2.2m x 2.2m), it was physically impossible to have contained the pole at full length; either part of the pole was cut off or it had been completely removed (Haffner 1976: 182-84).

The main orientation of the body is west-east, although other orientations do occur (northwest-southeast, northsouth, northeast-southwest). Sometimes the body was placed with the head in the driving direction, sometimes with the feet; in Mülheim-Kärlich, both practices were attested. It seems that a body position with the head in the driving direction was typical for the Ha C-D (Joachim 1979: 549, note 25); an example is the four-wheeled wagon of Bell (Van Endert 1987: 3).

The yoke and other parts of the harness appear to be totally absent in the earliest (Ha D and LT A1) chariot burials and still exceptional in LT A2. There are no special yoke trenches and none of the metal parts can confidently be identified as part of the horse harness. Some chariot burials contained a number of fairly plain copper-alloy or iron rings, which could possibly be interpreted as rein rings, although this interpretation has lost support since the discovery of Bescheid 6, where the position of five iron rings implied that they had been fitted to the vehicle box (Haffner and Joachim 1984: 75; Haffner and Lage 20082009: 81).

3.1.5.3. Dismantled chariot burials While most vehicles were put in the grave intact, some have been (partially) dismantled. The prime example is the LT A2 chariot burial of Bescheid 6, which was excavated in modern times and for which a plan is available (Figure 3.2). The vehicle box was taken off and was deposited by the feet of the deceased in the eastern part of the grave. Both wheel tyres stood upright leaning against the vehicle box. All the iron parts of the chariot have been found in situ. The skeleton was extended on the back. The pole was placed to the left of the deceased; it could be located thanks to the iron pole mountings, for example the iron mounting that was used to reinforce the attachment of the pole to the yoke. To the right of the dead man lay a sword and a golden disk with coral inlay. There were also remnants of his belt: iron hooks and two decorative discs in Durchbruchtechnik. At his feet were the metal remains of his shoes: nine copper-alloy buttons and two iron heels. The burial also contained three lance heads and three iron arrowheads, a knife and the gold foil of a drinking horn (Haffner and Lage 2008-2009: 59-87; Van Endert 1987: 13).

The first elaborate terrets with yoke mounting are from the LT A2 chariot burial of Laumersheim. Unfortunately, the grave was destroyed, and the inventory is not complete (Van Endert 1986: 257, 259, 260; Van Endert 1987: 31-32, figs. 13-14). The position of the two copper-alloy terrets in the grave is not known, so that there is no information on the yoke. With the chariot burial of Waldalgesheim (LT B1/ B2), yoke and horse harness demonstrate having become an important part of the burial arrangement through the presence of yoke caps, luxurious yoke mountings with coral inlay and even two horse bits (Joachim 1995). Unfortunately, yet again no plan is available, and the position of the various parts is unknown. 3.1.5.2. Position and orientation of the deceased (inhumations)

The chariot burials of Freisen and Kärlich 5 were also possibly of the disassembled type, but both are from old excavations. In Freisen, the tyres are described as ‘zwei eiförmige, ineinanderliegende Reife’ (‘two eggshaped tyres lying within each other’) in a note written by J. Schmitz at the occasion of the excavation (Haffner 1976: 174). This could indicate that the vehicle had been taken apart before placing it in the grave. The chariot of Kärlich 5 is listed by Van Endert (1986: 252; 1987: 26) as disassembled, although she admits that the position of the tyres could be due to subsidence, which seems very likely (see fig. 25.1 in Joachim 1979).

Most bodies have dissolved, and their position can often only be derived from the position of the grave goods. Van Endert (1986: 251-52, tab. 5; 1987: VI) states that the deceased is placed beneath the vehicle but to what extent is this a general rule? It is often a mere assumption, based on arguments of lack of space and comfort: with regard to Gransdorf, for example, Schindler (1970: 31) points out that it is not possible to lay out a body in an extended position on a vehicle box that is only a meter wide and of which the front is reinforced with wicker work or with a wooden construction. One of the few places where the skeletons were reasonably well preserved was in Kärlich. Skeletal remains, particularly of the skull, were found between the wheels in Kärlich 3 (Joachim 1979: 516), but it is not specified at what depth. Even though a position beneath the vehicle could possibly be argued for some of the chariot burials, there are also examples where the body of the deceased is reported to have been placed on the vehicle, as in the case of Bescheid 4, a burial that was excavated in more recent times than most of the other

Incidentally, the chariot burials of Bescheid 6 and Freisen are the only two ELT chariot burials of the Middle Rhine area which contained a sword. 3.1.6. The deceased As most skeletons have been dissolved, the available anthropological information is limited, and the sex of 57

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 3.2. The dismantled chariot burial of Bescheid 6 (Reproduced courtesy of the Rheinisches Landesmuseum Trier, drawing by F.J. Dewald)

the deceased can usually only be inferred based on the presence of gender specific grave goods. There are no indications for multiple burials.

The earlier chariot burials belonged exclusively to males. Even less can be said about the age of the deceased, although the examination of the skeletal remains of Kärlich 4 and 5 led to some interesting results: the body in Kärlich 4 is that of a male between age 40 and 60, but the one in Kärlich 5 is a youth (of undetermined sex), between 12 and 14 years old (Czarnetzki 1979).

Some of the richest chariot burials, like Bad Dürkheim (LT A2, Besseringen (LT A2) and Waldalgesheim (LT B), are female burials, but overall, more males can be identified. 58

The Middle Rhine – Moselle region 3.1.7. Vehicle parts and horse harness

already occur in four-wheeled Hallstatt wagons (Haffner 1989a: 36).

Two main types of vehicles were used for burial, a plain and a more luxurious type. For the plain type, the metal fittings used are iron, whereas the more luxurious chariots have copper-alloy parts and ornaments. From a technical point of view, however, all chariots are largely similar.

None of the LT A1 chariot burials produced a linchpin. The copper-alloy linchpin from Bad Dürkheim (LT A2) is not very well documented. In Dörth (LT A2) there were two similar, straight copper-alloy linchpins (11.7cm and 12.1cm long), with the top part decorated; Joachim (1998: 257, figs. 10, 18) demonstrated how they were integrated with the axle caps. In LT B, the typical linchpins of this period, with rectangular head and curved shanks were found in the Waldalgesheim chariot burial and as an isolated find on the LT cemetery of Niederweis. The head of the iron linchpin from Waldalgesheim was decorated with a copper-alloy disk with coral inlay (Joachim 1995: 101-103, fig. 91.6). The linchpin from Niederweis was in copper-alloy; it was decorated with a mask and spiral motifs (Haffner 1976: 281-82; tab. 57.12).

The wheels have a diameter between 0.80m and 0.95m and presumably had seven to eight spokes. The wooden naves were held together with rings with a diameter of 0.13m to 0.17m; they were heat-shrunk and only rarely nailed. The tyres were 2-3cm wide and 0.60-1.00cm thick. They were heat-shrunk onto the felloes and fixed with nails. The wooden felloes were in one piece and the endings were connected with iron clamps. In Kärlich 4, the naves and spokes were decorated with a pattern of copper-alloy and iron clamps (Haffner and Joachim 1984: 76). When the cross-section of the tyres is mentioned, this is described as curved (see for example Van Endert 1987: 22-26). Two lost iron nave bands from Waldalgesheim were decorated with tendrils and swastika motifs (Joachim 1995: 100-01, fig. 90).

Pole mountings have possibly been identified for Kärlich 4 and 8 (Joachim 1979: 550) but the example of Bescheid 6 looks more convincing: one of the pieces is an iron mounting to reinforce the connection of the pole with the yoke (Haffner and Joachim 1984: 75 and 78, fig. 7; Van Endert 1987: 13).

The distance between the wheels would usually range between 1.35m and 1.45m (Haffner and Joachim 1984: 76). On several of the more luxurious chariots, the axle endings were covered with copper-alloy axle caps. Axle caps are often completed by an axle buffer disk, as Joachim (1998: 267, fig. 18) was able to reconstruct for the Dörth chariot. Other copper-alloy axle caps were found in Theley, Bad Dürkheim, Kärlich 4, Kärlich 7 and Kärlich 8. Iron axle caps were present in Bescheid 6, a burial with an extensive number of metal fittings, but all in iron (Haffner and Lage 2008-2009: 76-77; Van Endert 1987: 10, 25, 28-29, 39).

As metal linchpins are rare, it is generally assumed that the majority were made in wood although many inventories are reportedly incomplete. A reconstruction of the axle cap of Theley, with a wooden linchpin, was presented by Haffner. The wooden linchpin used for the reconstruction was inspired by the one found in a settlement context in Porz-Lind near Köln (Joachim 2002: 37; tabs. 86, 100); Haffner 1989a: 35, fig. 9).

The vehicle box is generally estimated to have been c. 1.20m long and 0.80–1.00m wide. Several chariot burials contain copper-alloy decorated fittings originating from the vehicle box. Some bow-shaped copper-alloy fragments from the Besseringen chariot burial could possibly be from the side of the vehicle box; they might reflect the bow-shaped sides of a chariot as depicted on the Padua stèle and on Celtic coins (Haffner and Joachim 1984: 76). The two small copper-alloy horses found in Freisen, one of which is lost, were probably part of the vehicle box (Haffner 1976: 174-75; Van Endert 1987: 17). There is also a small copper-alloy sheet figurine of a horse and rider, with the image of an ELT sword, from Kärlich 3 that must have been nailed onto an arched object of organic substance (Joachim 1979: 517-18, 555, figs. 9.4, 10; Van Endert 1987: 24). In a number of cases, several iron or copper-alloy rings were found which possibly belonged to the vehicle box, as demonstrated in Bescheid 6 (Haffner and Joachim 1984: 75; Haffner and Lage 2008-2009: 81). In Theley there were six heavy, cast copper-alloy rings with rib decorations; they have a diameter between 5.2cm and 5.5cm and a polygonal profile. All rings have a notch for a strap. The rings may have been fixed to the vehicle by means of an iron socket (like those in Bescheid 6 probably were) or alternatively perhaps by a leather strap that was fixed onto the box with an iron pin. The actual purpose and function of these rings remains open to question (Haffner 1989a: 38).

The virtual absence of metal linchpins was certainly not caused by an inability to produce them, as is made clear by several chariot burials containing multiple copper-alloy parts and ornaments but no metal linchpins. Neither does it seem to be a matter of chronology, as metal linchpins

The substructure of axle and wheels was elastically connected with the superstructure with strong straps or strings that were tied to eyebolts (Haffner and Joachim 1984: 76). The typical double eyebolts (Doppelösenstifte) used for the suspension system occur in two types: a plain iron

In order to prevent the wooden axle from breaking, it was sometimes strengthened by means of an iron bar. In the Middle Rhine - Moselle area, a few LT A examples are known, whereas in France these strengthening rods only make their appearance towards the end of LT B1. In Germany they are also more numerous in MLT. This technique of axle construction was subsequently discontinued, as there are no longer any strengthening rods in the LLT period.

59

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 3.1.8. Grave goods

type (Hillesheim, Bescheid 4/6, Gransdorf and Armsheim) and a more elaborate, heavily decorated copper-alloy type (Langenscheid-Horhausen, Kobern 35, Kärlich 4, Dörth, Bad Dürkheim, Schwarzerden and Besseringen) (Haffner and Joachim 1984: 76; 79 fig 8; 86-87).

Brooches do not occur as a rule and also belt buckles and belt ornaments are only found in a few cases, although of course many grave inventories may not be complete. In Bescheid 6, the metal remains of the dead man’s shoes were found in situ: nine copper-alloy buttons and two iron heels (Haffner and Lage 2008-2009: 66; Van Endert 1987: 14). Gold torcs are only found in the richest female burials, which also produced copper-alloy vehicle fittings and one or more imported copper-alloy vessels. Other pieces of gold jewellery, mainly bracelets, tend to appear together with imported copper-alloy vessels and copper-alloy vehicle parts. Beads do not occur in large quantities. They can be in amber, gold, copperalloy or glass and are again found in the richest burials. They are not exclusively for females: the deceased of Kärlich 4, who was buried with six amber beads, was anthropologically defined as male (Joachim 1979: 524; Czarnetzki 1979).

As the yoke was only included in the grave in the later stages of the ELT period, there are only a few examples of yoke mountings. As mentioned above, the earliest terrets are those from Laumersheim: one is richly ornamented, with lyre motifs and coral inlay, and may have been the central terret (124mm high), whereas the second terret is more modest (80mm high); both rings have a diameter of 36mm (Kimmig 1944-1950). The most extensive source for copper-alloy yoke mountings was the Waldalgesheim chariot burial dating from the transition from LT B1 to B2. Both ends of the yoke were strengthened by means of a copper-alloy yoke cap (Figure 3.3). In the middle of the yoke was a central copper-alloy terret decorated with bird motifs. A bust of a female (?) figure in copper-alloy sheet was fixed onto the yoke just below the central terret (Figure 3.4). Both the terret and the bust are believed to have had coral inlay. Four copper-alloy trefoil pendants with coral inlay were presumably fixed to the horses’ headgear. Several other pieces of copper-alloy, like buttons, rings and the like may have belonged to the yoke, the horse gear or the vehicle box (Joachim 1995: 80-108). Furthermore, two sturdy copper-alloy terrets are known from Spiesheim (Stümpel 1986: 215, fig. 3).

The only kind of weapons appearing on a regular basis are spearheads, usually two to three per burial, but occasionally as many as five (in Kärlich 4, Joachim 1979: 524). Furthermore, there are a few knives and/or arrow heads (Van Endert 1986: 257, tab. 10). Swords are only attested twice, in Bescheid 6 (Haffner and Lage 20082009: 66-69; Van Endert 1987: 13) and in Freisen (Haffner 1976: 174-75). Both were in iron and were found together with their scabbard. No further details are known of the Freisen sword, which seems to be lost, but the sword from the more recently discovered Bescheid 6 burial has an anthropoid pommel and a copper-alloy hilt (Frey 2004: 126; Haffner and Lage 2008-2009: 66-69). Bescheid 6 is no doubt a rich burial, with the vehicle, the sword, the gold foil of a drinking horn, the gold disk and the shoe buttons, but it lacks a few of the characteristics of the very rich chariot burials: the vehicle has iron fittings, not copper-alloy, although admittedly the set of iron parts is extensive; there are no imported copper-alloy vessels and there is no gold jewellery. On the other hand, none of the richer male burials contains a sword. Most burials with weapons seem to co-occur with vehicles with iron fittings, rather than copper-alloy, although there are cases where

Horse bits are rare and, like the yoke, only seem to be part of the grave inventory towards the later stages of the period. There may have been two bits in the LT A2 chariot burial of Freisen (now lost), but these are possibly wrongly identified (Haffner 1976: 34). The earliest undisputed bits are from Waldalgesheim (LT B1/B2); again, these are lost, but drawings were preserved (Joachim 1995: 96, 102, fig. 91.1). Horse-rider burials become frequent in LLT but were unheard of for the ELT period, until the find of the horse-rider burial of Wintrich, with a horse bit and horse adornment (Schönfelder 2000: 336, 347).

Figure 3.3. Reconstruction of the yoke from Waldalgesheim (Image courtesy of LVR-Landesmuseum Bonn)

60

The Middle Rhine – Moselle region

Figure 3.4. Terret or yoke mounting from the yoke from Waldalgesheim (Image courtesy of LVR-Landesmuseum Bonn)

copper-alloy vehicle parts, imported copper-alloy vessels and spearheads were part of the same burial.

with other markers of prestige like imported copper-alloy vessels, copper-alloy vehicle fittings, gold jewellery and beads (compare for example Van Endert 1986, tabs. 9 and 10). Drinking horns appear as part of the drinking service of both males and females (Van Endert 1986: 257, tab.10). They may have been a much wider spread item on the grave goods inventory, as nothing would survive from drinking horns without metal decorations (Joachim 1998: 266).

The most typical piece of copper-alloy vessel showing up in the rich Middle Rhine burials is an Etruscan beaked flagon, but sometimes another type of vessel is present, like a bowl or even an Etruscan tripod, in Bad Dürkheim (Van Endert 1987: 11). Copper-alloy vessels of local origin are less frequent: there is the occasional bowl or situla (Van Endert 1986: 257, tab.10). Pottery appears to have been produced locally, does not occur in great quantities and seems to be connected with chariot burials at the lower end of the prestige scale. It is, therefore, hardly surprising that copperalloy vessels and ceramics are mutually exclusive. The only exception to this rule is the amphora from Bescheid 4, but this is an unusual piece of pottery, and is considered either an import from Italy or a local imitation of an Italian example (Haffner 1977: 127). An iron band found in Kärlich 1 may have been the metal rim of a wooden bucket (Joachim 1979: 514, fig. 8.14; Van Endert 1987: 22).

The Hillesheim chariot burial is the only one with an iron toilet set (Van Endert 1986: 257; Van Endert 1987: 21). A small gold disk (diameter 2.1cm) with coral inlay was found in Bescheid 6; its function is unknown (Van Endert 1987: 13), but it was found underneath the sword, and it had been attached to some organic material, probably leather (Haffner and Lage 2008-2009: 63, 86). Animal bones are rarely reported. This may be due to the poor preservation conditions for bone in general and/ or to the fact that most chariot burials are from older excavations. Van Endert (1987: 39, 41) mentions animal bones for Theley and Waldalgesheim without further specifications.

A number of chariot burials produced gold foil ornaments originating from drinking horns. These seem to be connected 61

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 3.2. The Middle Rhine – Moselle region versus the Arras Culture The chariot burials of the Middle Rhine – Moselle region fully predate those of the Arras Culture, which explains some but not all the differences. Grave pits and superstructures are more grandiose in Germany: stone or wooden chambers are unheard of in the Arras Culture and the British barrows are square and much smaller. Likewise, the grave goods of the Arras Culture are no match for the luxury found in some of the Rhineland burials. In the Middle Rhine – Moselle region, inhumation and cremation co-exist, whereas in the East Yorkshire cemeteries only inhumations are attested in this period. The position of the body in the Rhineland, like everywhere in northern Gaul, is extended on the back, against crouched, flexed or contracted in East Yorkshire. Square enclosures, one of the main features of the Arras Culture, only appear in the Rhine region well into LT C; the classic example for these Grabgärten is the cemetery of Wederath-Belginum (Haffner 1989b). One of the striking similarities between the two regions is the occurrence of dismantled vehicles. In any case the disassembled chariot burials of the Yorkshire Wolds are much later than Bescheid 6 but given that some of the Hallstatt vehicles (for example that of Vix) were already (partially) dismantled when lowered into the grave, this seems to be a recurring feature. Around the time when chariot burials and inhumation are introduced in East Yorkshire, the tradition of chariot burial completely transforms in the Middle Rhine – Moselle region: cremation becomes the only formal burial rite, and the vehicle is either burned and/or only partially represented in the grave (see chapter 12). Altogether, if there were contacts between the Middle Rhine – Moselle region and East Yorkshire, these are less perceptible than those with areas in northern France and southern Belgium. Therefore, it is more appropriate to study those areas in more detail. However, for the sake of completeness, a few early outliers in the Netherlands will be briefly discussed before turning to northern France.

62

4 The Netherlands as well as two horse bits, several copper-alloy phalerae and other decorative elements of horse harness. Grave goods included a sword, spear- or arrowheads and a bronze situla; a ceramic drinking vessel held the cremated bones of the deceased. Apparently, the grave goods and vehicle had been burned on the pyre together with the deceased. They were deformed by the heat and the metal objects had been bent. Several grave goods are believed to be imports from more southern regions (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam 2020).

Until recently, the chariot burial of Nijmegen was the only one of the La Tène period in the Netherlands, but in 2018, a similar burial was discovered in Heumen, just south of Nijmegen, and not far from the River Meuse. Given their geographical position, they can really be considered as outliers, although worth noting is that in 1897, horse bits and metal parts of a four-wheel vehicle were found with a LH cremation burial in Wijchen, just west of Nijmegen (Vissers 1996). The La Tène chariot burial from Nijmegen was part of a small cemetery consisting of a few scattered cremation burials, situated on the summit of a push morain overlooking the place where the rivers Waal and Rhine break through the morain; it has been described and discussed by Bloemers (1986). Cremation was the standard formal burial rite in the Netherlands during this period (the Urnfields). Any potential traces of a mound were levelled during the Roman occupation of the site. There are no enclosures. The chariot burial, which has been dated between 450 and 350 BC is remarkably different from the contemporary chariot burials presented above, not because the deceased had been cremated, but because the grave pit, which only measured 70 by 80cm, only contained part of the vehicle (only the wheels), as well as horse harness (two iron horse bits, four copper-alloy phalerae, a copperalloy boss, two copper-alloy and five iron rings). None of these objects showed any traces of fire, so they had not been placed on the pyre. The tyres are believed to have been deliberately bent and even broken, which implies that they had been removed from the wooden wheels; perhaps only the naves with their metal parts were put in the grave intact. The tyres could then be flattened to fit in the pit. They were 2.4cm wide and 0.9-1.0cm thick, and their estimate diameter is between 80cm and 90cm. They had been nailed to the felloe. Also three U-shaped felloe-joints were found. The chariot burial contained a few weapons: a spear, an arrow or small spearhead and the shaft of probably another spearhead, none of them burned. In one of the other burials, a pot was found.

Both the Nijmegen and the Heumen chariot burials are different from contemporary chariot burials in Germany and France. In the Middle Rhine – Moselle region, even when the deceased is cremated, the grave pit is large and accommodates the entire vehicle. The Nijmegen chariot burial can in fact be considered a pars pro toto, since it only contained the metal parts of the vehicle (and the horse harness) and these showed no traces of fire. Admittedly, the remainder of the vehicle could have been placed on the pyre, with the platform acting as a bier for the deceased; any small iron parts of the vehicle body, such as nails, were perhaps not collected for burial. A possible argument against this scenario is the fact that, like the metal vehicle parts and horse harness, the weapons were not burned. In Heumen, the vehicle was placed on the pyre and also the grave goods were burned. This is reminiscent of a type of chariot burial that becomes fashionable in northern Gaul in LT C and D (see chapter 12), but the tradition is older. Cremation was the formal burial rite in the Netherlands in this period, which easily explains the local application of the chariot burial concept, but the difference between the Nijmegen and Heumen burials also shows that different interpretations could co-exist. According to Nico Roymans (personal communication), the team that is studying the Heumen burial will also re-examine the finds from the Nijmegen chariot burial, and more in particular they will check for traces of fire and investigate how the wheel tyres had been bent or broken.

In 2018, a chariot burial was discovered by chance in Heumen during an illegal excavation, later followed by an official excavation by the National Cultural Heritage Service (Rijksdienst voor Cultureel Erfgoed) and Nico Roymans of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Conservation of the finds is still ongoing, and only a press release is currently available. The chariot burial (dated to the fifth century BC) is similar to the one from Nijmegen in that the deceased had been cremated and that all the grave contents had been squashed into a small pit (50cm in diameter). The burial contained the metal remains of a chariot, with iron tyres, linchpins and bronze nave bands, 63

5 The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions well-known individual archaeologists or archaeological societies, or, in more recent times, of major road works. Nevertheless, there is little doubt that more or less substantial oscillations in cemetery population density have taken place. The most well-known drop in burials dates from the early fourth or even late fifth century BC (when chariot burials were most abundant), which is traditionally associated with migrations to northern Italy. A further decline in funerary evidence can be noted towards the end of the fourth century BC.

The Aisne-Marne region mainly covers the middle valleys of the Marne and Aisne rivers, around the cities of Reims, Epernay, Châlons-en-Champagne and Soissons. In regional terms this roughly corresponds with the northern part of Champagne and the southern part of the French Ardennes. Administratively, it comprises the Marne department and the southern parts of the Aisne and Ardennes departments. However, the southern part of Champagne is often included in studies of the Aisne-Marne region. Although different in certain ways, this area, south of the River Marne, shows many parallels with the North. It will be referred to as the southwest of the study area. Finally, a few chariot burials of the northern part of the Ardennes, dating to the third and second centuries BC, will be included in this chapter.

A study of the phenomenon was carried out by Demoule (1999: 199-212) and focused on the area between the Vesle and Retourne rivers, a territory forming roughly a quadrangular with sides of 30km, to the north-east of Reims. This area is better prospected than most others, although it also suffered heavily from looting. By applying the Thiessen polygon technique, Demoule came to the following conclusions. After a period of dense cemetery population, a decline in burials becomes noticeable during Demoule’s AM IIC and perseveres strongly during AM III period (roughly the fourth century BC). This decline was more at the level of the number of burials than that of the number of cemeteries, suggesting that it was not a matter of whole territories being deserted, but of a demographic decline in each community. In any case, the drop in burials had no effect on local funerary customs. At the beginning of LT B2 (Demoule’s AM IV, starting c. 325 BC), there was a new, less steep decline, this time, however, at the level of the cemeteries. Whereas before each polygon contained one large cemetery with at least one chariot burial, as well as some smaller cemeteries and isolated burials, now only 40 per cent of the polygons were occupied. Demoule sees this as a reorganisation of space.

A number of comprehensive studies have been published over the last decades: Jean-Paul Demoule (1999) has developed a chronology based on funerary practices in the Aisne-Marne region during the LH and ELT period, while Marian Diepeveen-Jansen (2001) has concentrated on elite burials of the same period; Michel Chossenot (1997) has covered both settlement and funerary issues for the MLT and LLT period. Unfortunately, Stéphane Verger’s PhD thesis (1994), an extensive study of all the chariot burials of the Aisne-Marne, has not yet been published. The Aisne-Marne region boasts the highest number of chariot burials of all the regions under discussion and almost all of them belong to the ELT period. In eastern France, a progressive restriction of the distribution area of chariot burials can be discerned. During Ha D3, the area stretches from the Franche-Comté, over northern Burgundy and southern Champagne to Lorraine and, to a lesser extent, to central Champagne. In the early phases of LT A, the distribution area moves north and covers the départements of the Aisne, Aube, Meuse and Ardennes. In the later phases of LT A, chariot burials are concentrated in the Aisne and Marne departments, and in the southern Ardennes (Verger 1999: 286). Chariot burials are still common in LT B1, but almost disappear in LT B2, as will be further discussed below. The small number of chariot burials from LT C are confined to the Aisne and the northern Ardennes.

Due to a lack of documentation, it is hard to say whether this model can be applied to the remainder of the study area. A large part of the region studied by Demoule is generally claimed to be one of the few areas where the drop in population is less severe (Charpy 2006: 138). Despite the disparity of the data, most researchers agree that the decline in cemetery population is to a certain extent genuine, although not necessarily the result of a population exodus (for a discussion, see Villes 1995).

5.1. General funerary practices

In the southwest of the Aisne-Marne, a number of new cemeteries in the area around Fère-Champenoise were established towards the end of LT B and often continued right through to the Gallo-Roman period (Chossenot 1997: 168-69; Demoule 1999: 137-38). These sites are fairly well documented and are therefore often extrapolated to describe the situation in the whole of the Aisne-Marne area during LT B2 and LT C1, when data are scarce.

5.1.1. Data The availability of mortuary data is very uneven, both from a chronological and from a geographical point of view. Antiquarians were more interested in periods when rich grave goods were customary, and distribution maps are often an illustration of the geographical work area of 65

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent In the centre of the study area, funerary data for this period are few, but they exist. In the area to the east of Reims, some of the cemeteries that were already in use during LT B1 or earlier, continued into LT B2 and a few even into LT C (listed in Table 5.1 below). Unfortunately, most of the data are from old excavations. In her chapter on ‘La Tène Ic en Champagne’, Bretz-Mahler (1971: 24548) mentions a few other cemeteries in the Reims area that continued into LT B2, but mostly without further references. As part of a project by Bernard Lambot to reinvestigate chariot burials that were excavated in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the new excavation at the site of Prunay, La voie de Baconnes (near Les Marquises) not only revealed the existence of cork-shaped enclosures surrounding the chariot burials (dating to the end of the fifth or the early fourth century BC) but also demonstrated that in the early third century BC, the entrance of one of the enclosures was extended to accommodate a burial of a male, accompanied with a shield, a spearhead and a bent shield in its decorated scabbard. Two contemporary female burials were found just on the outside of the entrance, one on each side, and a grave pit with a child burial was located along the ditch, to the left of the male. This reuse of the burial site would, according to Lambot, point at the return of small groups of mercenaries from the Mediterranean and the Balkans to their ancestral lands, and a desire to bury their dead near the prestigious tomb of an ancestor, of which the monument was still visible in the landscape (Lambot 2018: 246-64).

Compared to the new cemeteries that were established in the southwest during LT B2, the few that are known in the centre and north had a shorter lifetime, as for example Liry, La Hourgnotte (LT B2-C1) (Chossenot 1997: 332; Demoule 1999: 138; Pion and Guichard 1993: 188), but several that were founded in LT C also continued into Roman times, like Hauviné, Ménil-Annelles and Ville-surRetourne (Chossenot 1997: 169). Tables with overviews of all Iron Age cemeteries of the Aisne-Marne per region and subperiod were published by Charpy (2009) in an attempt to illustrate their continuity or discontinuity. New burial sites and/or the new rites have traditionally been associated with ‘the coming of the Belgae’ in the course of the third century; these Belgae are also seen as the founders of the large cult sites like Gournay-surAronde and Ribemont-sur-Ancre in Picardy, in the very beginning of the third century BC (Brunaux 1996). Many new features have been attributed to them, like for example the reintroduction of cremation in the Aisne-Marne, but as will be further discussed below, this was not a sudden event, but rather a slow process, the development of which can be followed chronologically and geographically. Moreover, a study of rural settlements north of the River Loire has demonstrated that only in the Somme department an increase in new settlements can be discerned in the beginning of the third century. Elsewhere, the increase in settlement creation is rather a phenomenon of the second

Table 5.1. Continuity of the burial tradition in LT B2 - C1. (based on Demoule 1999: 194, 203-5, 268-95, tabs. 11.6, 11.14) (Aisne-Marne IIIC: c. 325-300 BC; Aisne-Marne IV: c. 300-250 BC) Commune

Local place name

AM IIIC

AM IV

LT C

Manre

Le Mont Troté

 

 

Tinqueux

Mont-Saint-Pierre

 

 

Vienne-la-Ville

Le Bois d’Haulzy

 

Aure

Les Rouliers

 

(x)

 

 

Beine-Nauroy

Le Montéqueux (Domaine des Commelles)

 

 

 

Beine-Nauroy

Quartier Saint-Basles (Les Commelles)

 

 

 

Beine-Nauroy

Tomois-de-Mouchery

 

 

 

Beine-Nauroy

La Motelle

 

 

 

Berru

Les Flogères, La Côte-entre-les-Monts

 

 

 

Cernay-lès-Reims

Mont-Epié

 

 

 

Lavannes

Mont-Fruleux

?

?

 

Lavannes

Mont-de-la-Fourche

 

 

 

Lavannes

Mont-de-Bury

 

 

 

Les Grandes Loges

Les Monts de Châlons, Les Mortes Vaches

 

?

 

Puisieulx

La Cuche et Gare du CBR

 

 

 

 

Witry-lès-Reims

La Voie Carlat

 

 

Sillery

Le Champ-de-la-Guerre

?

 

Beine-Nauroy

Les Bouverets

 

 

Liry

La Hourgnotte

 

66

 

The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions half of the fourth century BC. The authors dismiss the theory of ‘the coming of the Belgae’ in favour of a model of local population growth with cultural diffusion that is not based on migration (Gaudefroy, Gransar and Malrain 2013: 118).

elsewhere, for example in Wederath (Haffner 1989b: 96; Kunter 1991: 349) and in Mory-Montcrux (Blanchet 1983). Interesting in this respect is that Pliny stated that small children should not be cremated, as pointed out by Chossenot (1997: 247). A growing number of child burials can be noticed during LT C and D; in the Gallo-Roman period, there are even separate cemeteries for children, for example in Sommesous, La Côte d’Orgeval (Chossenot 1997: 289, 358). This recalls the infant cemetery found in Garton Slack (Brewster 1975: 116).

LT C and D are marked by a steady increase in cemetery population, probably as a result of real population growth, but perhaps in addition more people were ‘entitled’ to a place in the cemetery. Once cremation became predominant, it was more widely practised than inhumation had been. The opposite trend is seen south of the Marne, where the number of burials decreases as from LT D (Chossenot 1997: 245-46, 299-313).

Cemeteries in the Ardennes which do not extend beyond LT C1, like for example the LT B2–C1 cemetery of Liry, La Hourgnotte, consist of inhumations only (Demoule 1999: 138; Pion and Guichard 1993: 188).

5.1.2. Disposal of the dead

Cremation was firmly established in the north by the end of LT C. As from LT D inhumation is no longer practised, as illustrated in Acy-Romance, La Croizette, founded in the mid-second century BC (Lambot, Friboulet and Méniel 1994: 17-76) and will only appear again in the GalloRoman period – see for example in Ville-sur-Retourne (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 162-64). A strikingly late example of an inhumation was the chariot burial of Warcq in the northern Ardennes, dating to the transition from LT C2 to LT D1 (see section 5.4).

Some authors have called upon the rise of cremation – harder to trace archaeologically - to explain the significant drop in burial evidence in the LT B period (see for example Diepeveen-Jansen 2001: 188, 191, 209). Although it is correct that cremation has never been completely absent in the study area, it remains very rare and is mainly confined to the periphery zone of the Aisne department. The only ELT cremation cemetery (43 burials) is the one of Oulchyla-Ville, La Bayette, covering Demoule’s AM II period (c.475-375 BC). The other cases concern exceptional occurrences of cremations within cemeteries where inhumation predominates (Demoule 1999: 179; Chossenot 1997: 167-68).

In the centre and southwestern part of the Aisne-Marne region, inhumation persists much longer; cremation was only introduced in LT D. In the centre, the transition can for example be observed in the cemetery of Bouy, Le chemin de Vadenay, in use from LT C to the Augustean period. All the LT C burials are inhumations; some of these have no grave goods and could even be LT D, given their position on the site (Chossenot 1997: 170, 341).

Marian Diepeveen-Jansen (2001: 188) has claimed that Bucy-le-Long is an exception, in that inhumation persists for a longer time there, but in fact the sites form a clear illustration of the evolution from inhumation to cremation as it took place in the northern part of the study area. The cemeteries of Bucy-le-Long (2km apart) are successive in time, with a gap of two to three generations: the cemetery at La Héronnière was in use from LT A to LT B1, whereas Le Fond du Petit Marais covers the period from LT C1 to the beginning of LT D1. The change from inhumation to cremation took place in phase B of the second cemetery, i.e., in LT C2 (Pommepuy, Auxiette and Desenne 1998).

In the southwest, inhumation remains in use alongside cremation right into the Gallo-Roman era, as is amply demonstrated in the cemeteries of the area to the southeast of the Marais-de-Saint-Gond (Fère-Champenoise, Normée and others) several of which were established in the last phase of LT B (see Chossenot 1997: 169-70). In summary, the change from inhumation to cremation was fairly rapid and complete in the north of the study area and much slower and incomplete the further one moves away from the Aisne, towards the south. The most plausible explanation is that the impulse came from the region of the (future) Belgae: cremation was firmly established in Picardy since the fourth century BC. From there it was probably disseminated via the valleys of the Aisne, the Aube, the Seine, the Yonne and (probably) the Marne. This would explain why the area around Fère-Champenoise adhered to the old inhumation rite much longer (Chossenot 1997: 289-90).

This reflects what is seen elsewhere in the north, like for example in the Ardennes, where the transition of inhumation to cremation is illustrated in the cemetery of Ménil-Annelles which was in use from the early second century BC until shortly after the mid-first century BC. The three adult inhumation burials on this site are from the earliest phase of the cemetery but also one cremation burial belongs to this early period, with all the other cremations post-dating 150 BC (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 161-62, tab. 75). The LLT burials of the cemetery of Ville-sur-Retourne, founded in the late second century BC, are all cremations, apart from the inhumation of two young children with an adult cremation, dating to the period 15 BC – 15 AD (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 161, 297, tab. 75). The practice of inhumating children in times when cremation was the rule has been noticed

5.1.3. Position and orientation of the deceased During the whole La Tène period, the normal position of the body is extended on the back. There are, however, a 67

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 5.1.6. Enclosures

few rare exceptions, which are not confined to a particular site or phase. Examples of flexed or crouched inhumations, with the body lying on the side, are, for example, known from the cemeteries of Bucy-le-Long, Pernant, Manre, Villeneuve-Renneville, Bouy, Montépreux and Dormans (Chossenot 1997: 248-49; Demoule 1999: 36, 184; Guillaume 1964: 51-52, fig. 3). Whatever the reason for this ‘unusual’ position, these burials can look perfectly normal in other respects. In at least one case (Manre burial 153) the deceased was buried with several pieces of jewellery (Demoule 1999: 258). There are also examples of bodies buried face down, as well as several occurrences of posthumous body manipulation, for example the abscission of part of the legs in Bouy (Chossenot 1997: 248-49, fig. 149) or the removing of skulls in Manre (Rozoy 1987: 55-65). The flexed or crouched inhumations are reminiscent of the position of the bodies found in pit burials (for the Aisne-Marne, see for example Chossenot 1997: 250-53; Bonnabel 2010).

Many different types of enclosures have been attested in the Aisne-Marne. The ditches still visible in the ground today can be the remains of an open ditch, but some of them were dug to hold a palisade. The ditch may have surrounded a barrow, long since disappeared, in which case silt of the barrow may be found in the filling of the ditch; this silt, however, may equally well originate from a bank. Ditches may also have enclosed a Grabgarten, accessible via an interruption in the ditch and/or wall. Even these Grabgärten may have had small barrows inside them. The enclosures come in different shapes - circular, square or even cork-shaped (bouchon de Champagne) - and sizes. They can be designed for individual burials (which often attracted several secondary burials) or they can be large and surround entire cemeteries. Many enclosures with shallow ditches must have been lost and in the same way enclosures marked by hedges left no traces. On some ELT cemeteries without enclosures the burials seem to be grouped in square plots of land (Demoule 1999: 181).

The main orientation in the ELT period is west-east (head to the west), usually varying between southwestnortheast and northwest-southeast, depending on the area but also on the period, as demonstrated in Bucy-le-Long (Pommepuy, Auxiette and Desenne 1998: 89-90, fig. 4). As from LT C orientation can vary, and interestingly enough this abandonment of a preferred orientation is linked with another rite going out of fashion: that of the deposition of pots and animal offerings. In the group with pots and animal bones, 90 per cent of burials adhere to the traditional orientation, whereas in the group lacking these grave goods only 50 per cent follow the old rule. This ‘disorganisation’ seems to be intensified by the establishment of square ditches, as grave pits tend to orientate themselves along the sides of the enclosure rather than in relation to a privileged direction (Demoule 1999: 182-83).

On the other hand, the link between enclosures and burials is often uncertain; some of the enclosures of the Manre and Aure cemeteries are believed to belong to an earlier period than the cemetery (Lambot 2000: 150; Rozoy 1987: 76-77). In the Aisne-Marne region, square enclosures occur in the Hallstatt period and in LT A, but are certainly not predominant then, although in the marshlands of SaintGond (south of the Marne) circular LBA enclosures were often re-dug in the EIA to become square in shape (Lambot 2000: 150). As from LT B2, cemeteries with exclusively square enclosures were established in this same region, many of them in the area of Fère-Champenoise. These cemeteries consist of a small number of square enclosures, with sides measuring some 10m on average. The oldest enclosure of the cemetery is often associated with a central inhumation burial, often with weapons or jewellery, of LT B2 or in some cases LT C, with the head generally in the northwest. Multiple secondary inhumations with various orientations, as well as later cremations are added subsequently. Most of these cemeteries exist well into the Gallo-Roman period. In the case of Fère-Champenoise, Faubourg de Connantre, during the times of Augustus, a large trapezoid ditch (38.30 x 29.50 x 39.30 x 38.60m) was constructed enclosing the cemetery as a whole (Brisson and Hatt 1955; 1960; 1969; Brisson, Hatt and Roualet 1970). The principle of square enclosures around a central inhumation, with several secondary burials with various orientations is also witnessed in the neighbouring marshlands of Saint-Gond, as well as further south, in the Nogentais-Sénonais (Lambot 2000: 153, 155).

5.1.4. Multiple burials Several examples of double graves occur, either juxtaposed or superposed. They usually but not always consist of two people of opposite sex. In certain cases, it could be demonstrated that they were buried simultaneously. In the case of superposed graves, there is often only a short interval of time between the two burials (Demoule 1999: 184). Cremations can also contain the bones of more than one individual (Chossenot 1997: 183). 5.1.5. Disturbance and reopening of graves A large proportion of the ELT graves were disturbed. Although there are examples of ordinary grave robbery, in many cases it is believed that the graves were re-opened just a few weeks or months later, as part of a ritual; it is not clear why some graves were not given this treatment. The practice seems to have ceased before the end of the ELT period (for a discussion see Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 158-59). Furthermore, as discussed in section 5.3.1, chariots were occasionally re-used for later burials.

In the north, in the Aisne Valley, the transition from circular to square enclosures probably also took place during LT B2, the missing period in Bucy-le-Long, where the enclosures of La Héronnière were circular or cork68

The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions but never south of the Marne, suggesting that the river functioned as a cultural frontier, as stated by Lambot (2000: 155); they neither occur in the Sénonais, nor in Picardy. Another difference is that the square enclosures around Fère-Champenoise are carefully cut out, with clean cut angles, whereas those in the Ardennes and in Bouy are more irregular and with rounded corners. This may have something to do with the different type of subsoil, but it could as well be culturally determined (Chossenot 1997: 216).

shaped and those of Le Fond du Petit Marais square. On the small LT B2 cemetery of Orainville, La Croyère, further along the valley, a square enclosure with a central burial was found, with no sign of secondary burials. The Y-profile ditches originally held a palisade, but this was later replaced by an open ditch. In the last phase of Bucyle-Long, Le Fond du Petit Marais square enclosures were replaced by four post constructions (Pommepuy et al. 2000: 207-12). In the Ardennes, square enclosures occasionally occur in ELT, sometimes in association with a chariot burial (see section 5.3.4), but during LT C they become the norm, with the odd exception, for example in Ménil-Annelles, where different shapes and combinations of shapes were united in one cemetery (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 6, fig. 2). The neighbouring cemetery of Ville-sur-Retourne, established at the transition from LT C to D, mainly consists of square enclosures, which tend to be larger in the early phases and smaller later, maybe due to pressure of space (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 10-12, fig. 5). The cemetery of La Neuville-en-Tourne-à-Fuy is even more densely packed (Lambot 2000: 155, 157, fig. 17) (Figure 5.1).

Although overall most square enclosures in the AisneMarne region are associated with cremation burials, the early phases of several cemeteries consist of inhumation burials set in square enclosures. Both in the north and the south, square enclosures were definitely introduced at an earlier stage than the rite of cremation. Compared to eastern Yorkshire, the Aisne-Marne region has a larger variety of enclosures, in size, shape and function; some of the square enclosures in cemeteries are believed to have played a different role, linked to the funerary cult (see for example Chossenot 1997: 225-33). 5.1.7. Superstructures: barrows and mortuary houses

These cemeteries of the French Ardennes with their joint enclosures look very similar to those from East Yorkshire, although they never reach the size of the Wetwang Slack or Rudston - Burton Fleming cemeteries, and they also differ in that most of the enclosures were constructed in the period when cremation was predominant.

There is very little evidence for barrows in the AisneMarne; if they were present, they have been thoroughly ploughed away. There are indications that the quasiabsence of barrows may indeed be the result of strong agricultural erosion, as barrows have been preserved in wooded areas at the periphery of the study zone (the only wooded area in the centre being the Montagne de Reims), for example the barrow cemetery of Haulzy in Viennela-Ville (near the Lorraine). As pointed out by Demoule (1999: 183), barrows are abundant in the Lorraine and other areas to the north and east.

Joint square enclosures are occasionally also found in the central part of the study area, for example in Bouy,

In the north of the study area, in the French Ardennes, 70 barrows were located in the Forêt des Pothées, covering an area of 15km2. In 1938-1939, ten barrows dating to LT C were explored in the commune of Tremblois-lès-Rocroi, one or possibly two of them covering a chariot burial. The barrows have diameters from 4m to 15m and are no higher than 1.50m. Apparently, the construction of a barrow was preceded by deforestation (Chossenot 1997: 171-74, 33334). References to barrows can sometimes be found in nineteenth century excavation reports, for example for a small ‘aristocratic cemetery’ near La Cheppe (Lambot 2000: 158). Even in areas where no barrows were preserved, their silt could occasionally be attested in the enclosure ditches. This is even visible on aerial photographs, as demonstrated for Aulzineux (Marais de Saint-Gond), Proviseux (Aisne), Thugny-Trugny (Ardennes) and Malmaison (Aisne) (Lambot 2000, figs. 11, 14-15, 18). Modern excavation techniques and sense of detail sometimes reveal indirect evidence for a barrow, for example when the taphonomy of the deposits in the pit indicate that the chamber was

Figure 5.1. Cemetery of La Neuville-en-Tourne-à-Fuy (Ardennes) (Image courtesy of Bernard Lambot)

69

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent protruding above ground level, as for example in Bucyle-Long, La Héronnière (see section 5.3.4). Another indication for the existence of barrows was found in Villesur-Retourne, where the bases of two secondary Roman burials seem to follow the slope of a disappeared mound in enclosure P (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 12).

from Gourgançon in the southwest of the study area, but also near Châlons-en-Champagne, in Saint-Memmie (Bretz-Mahler 1971: 245). However, coffins and wooden linings may well have been made without using hooks or nails. Many large rectangular graves were probably lined with wood or had a wooden ceiling. Crushed pottery often hints at the collapse of such ceilings.

No information is available regarding the shape of these barrows when combined with a square enclosure. On the Continent, unlike in eastern Yorkshire, barrows are considered to have been round, even when set in a square enclosure, as for example in Clémency, in the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg (Metzler et al. 1991: 36, fig. 27). This does not mean that square barrows did not exist. Archaeologists with digging experience in the Aisne-Marne region like Lambot do not rule them out (personal communication Bernard Lambot). (As a matter of fact, Lambot later found evidence that in Bourcq, a square walled enclosure had been constructed to support an earthen mound (see section 5.3.4); even though this implies that the mound itself had been square, the concept differs from square barrows in eastern Yorkshire). In theory, the filling in the ditches should give information about the shape of the barrow, as a circular mound would obviously leave less silt in the corners of the ditches.

Rich cremations burials are often accommodated in large quadrangular wooden chambers, but many secondary cremations were found in small round or oval pits, or in the filling of the enclosure ditch (Chossenot 1997: 17582). 5.1.9. Cemetery organisation Most cemeteries count a few tens of graves and large cemeteries with more than 100 burials are rare. Small groups of burials, apparently isolated, occur regularly. Burials are usually organised in family groups – see for example osteological analysis in Manre (Demoule 1999: 79) - and rarely according to sex (as was common in the LH period). Within each group the burials are often organised in rows and enclosures can play a part in the organisation of a cemetery. An interesting feature is the location of warrior burials at the outer edge of these groups: a sign of protection, distrust, prestige? (Demoule 1999: 132, 181, 188).

‘Mortuary houses’ are attested in several places across the region. On the LT A cemetery of Pernant in the Aisne valley several grave pits had adjacent post holes, of varying numbers. They do, however, not always seem to form a building and may often have had a different function, as for instance marking the site of the grave (see Demoule 1999: 37, 183). In Bucy-le-Long, a roof type of structure was found on the early cemetery of La Héronnière but a much higher number of mortuary structures covered the burials of the neighbouring LT C/D cemetery of Le Fond du Petit Marais (Pommepuy et al. 2000: 208-13). Also in the Ardennes postholes, either belonging to mortuary houses or independent pillars, are becoming more frequent towards LT C and especially LT D, as for example in Ménil-Annelles (for a discussion, see Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 166-67) and Acy-Romance (Lambot et al. 1994: 131-38). At the end of the La Tène period, individual enclosures are often replaced by post structures, real mausolea of differing size (Lambot 2000: 155). Post structures, either mortuary houses or funerary sanctuaries, are also known from the southwest of the study area (Chossenot 1997: 229-33).

The cemeteries founded in LT B2 or later tend to be smaller; they never count more than 50 burials, and usually far fewer. An old road often passed in the vicinity of the cemetery or went across it (Chossenot 1997: 211-15). 5.1.10. Grave goods Fibulae are rare during the ELT period, even in rich burials, and they are almost absent in the Aisne valley. As from LT B2 and LT C, brooches become more frequent; in the few LT D inhumations, usually rather poor, they are sometimes the only object. In cremation burials fibulae are the most widespread type of grave good, especially in the northern part of the study area. In the centre, and especially in the southwest, they are rarer. The number of fibulae strongly decreases from north to south, together with a general impoverishment of grave goods. Almost 90 per cent of fibulae are in iron, the remainder in copper-alloy. In burial 3 of Orainville, La Croyère (Aisne), an exceptional piece was found on the sternum of the deceased female: a large anthropomorphic copper-alloy brooch in Plastic Style, encrusted with carved coral. She was also wearing a remarkable torc of a type that is typical for the Middle Rhine region (Desenne et al. 2005). The cemetery belongs to LT B2 and the transition to LT C1. The brooch could be slightly earlier than the objects in Plastic Style from the Paris region.

5.1.8. Grave pits During the ELT period, grave pits were on average 220cm long, 70cm wide and 60cm deep (Demoule 1999: 183). There is not much information on possible coffins, although it has been suggested that the famous terre noire in the filling of the pit (standing out against the white chalk) originated from the decay of wood from a coffin (BretzMahler 1971: 177-81; see also Buckland et al. 2006). Typical for LT B2 is the appearance of iron hooks assumed to have held together the planks of a coffin, as are known

Other (parts of) dress accessories are more or less elaborate belt hooks in copper-alloy or iron. Fully metal 70

The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions belts make their appearance towards the end of ELT. Some belt elements are associated with male burials with weapons, whereas for example chain belts are typical for female burials (Demoule 1999: 24, 190, 340, fig 2.11). Female burials with chain belts become more frequent in LT C (Chossenot 1997: 189). An earlier example is the female in LT B2 burial 47 from enclosure V in FèreChampenoise, Faubourg de Connantre wearing an iron chain belt that shows many signs of repair; on the same cemetery, but in LT C, two young males were buried with a full panoply of weapons (burials 56 and 58 in enclosure VII), each including a twisted chain belt for the suspension of the sword (Brisson, Hatt and Roualet 1970: 16, 18, pls. V, IX).

the length of time considered. A list of cremation burials with weapons is given by Chossenot (1997: 194-98, fig. 103); the swords are sometimes deliberately bent and are almost always burned. The information on LT C weapons for northern Gaul in general mainly derives from cultual sites, like for example the sanctuary of Gournay-surAronde (Lejars 1998). Swords gradually become longer, such that by LT D they can measure more than 1m (Chossenot 1997: 198). ELT copper-alloy vessels are almost exclusively found with chariot burials (Verger 1994: 487-91; Demoule 1999: 174). Also in later periods metal vessels are not abundant, but a rich collection was found in the LT D burial with vehicle parts from Hannogne in the Ardennes (Flouest and Stead 1977; Chossenot 1997: 317).

During ELT the canonical ornament for women consisted of a torc and a pair of bracelets (or a single bracelet in LT B), possibly completed with fibulae and beads. Torcs and weapons are mutually exclusive in the Aisne-Marne, but a few warrior burials also contained a single bracelet. Towards the end of LT B2, torcs tend to disappear, and only a few examples are known from LT C inhumation burials, like burial M3 from Ménil-Annelles. Torcs were sometimes replaced by necklaces of blue glass beads. Anklets and rings are rare but become more frequent as from LT B2. During LT C and D single bracelets occur both in inhumation and cremation burials; they are less frequent than in the ELT period and they are now often in glass rather than copper-alloy or iron (Demoule 1999: 140-1, 188-91; Chossenot 1997: 188-92; Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 82, 212).

Of all the pottery available in the Aisne-Marne during the ELT period, only the finest ware was deposited in burials. Wheelthrown pottery does not seem to have existed, or only exceptionally. Whereas pottery was not very frequent in LH burials, it was abundant in the ELT period, but it became rather rare towards the end and remained so during LT C (Demoule 1999: 26, 185-86). The lack of pottery grave goods in this later period may be biased by the shortage of data for LT B2 and the beginning of LT C. These mainly come from the southwest of the study area, where ceramics are typically missing. In FèreChampenoise, Le Faubourg de Connantre, for example, pottery is absent in the inhumation burials, apart from the occasional few sherds in the filling of the grave pit; the LT D cremation burials of the same site contain one or two pots and often sherds of amphorae (Brisson, Hatt and Roualet 1970).

Although many ELT burials with weapons were found in the Aisne-Marne, these only form a minority of all the male burials on a given cemetery. Within the warrior burials there seems to be a certain hierarchy, with at the top the men with a chariot, a sword, multiple spears and sometimes a helmet, in second position those with a sword and one or more spears, and finally, the largest group, without a sword and only one or a few small spears. Swords, although used in battle, rather seem to have been prestige objects. Shields with metal parts are only with certainty attested as from the end of the ELT period (Demoule 1999: 187-88).

In contrast to the general situation, the area to the east of Reims (the Beine-Suippes region) from which relatively more burial data are available for this period, is particularly well known for its painted pottery; especially pottery of the type ‘Prunay’ can be linked with LT B2 and LT C (Corradini 1991). Charpy (2001: s.p.) claims that the production centres in the Beine/Suippes region remain active well into the third century BC (see also BretzMahler 1971: 246-47).

In LT B2 and further in LT C, the full panoply of a sword with a large spear, a shield and a belt becomes the standard (Demoule 1999: 188). This is clearly demonstrated in the southwest of the study area, with for example the LT C inhumations with weapons of Fère-Champenoise, Faubourg de Connantre (Brisson, Hatt and Roualet 1970) and Fin d’Ecury (Brisson and Hatt 1960). In Villesur-Retourne, in the Ardennes, the four LT D cremation burials with weapons all contain a sword, but only one was combined with a shield, and another with a spearhead (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 84-85). However, indeed swords seem to have become more ‘casual’, in that most warrior burials include a sword. Overall, the number of LT C and D weapons from funerary contexts is rather limited given the vastitude of the study area and

In the west of the Marne, in Dormans, most burials have one pot throughout the history of the cemetery, both the LT A through LT C inhumation burials as the LT D cremations (Guillaume 1964: 51-52). In the Ardennes, in Ménil-sur-Annelles, the inhumation burials contain one or exceptionally two pots, but with cremation burials the number varies between one and 21; in burial V1 of Ville-sur-Retourne no less than 32 pieces of ceramics were found with a single cremation (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 209, 254, tabs. 82, 84). Chossenot (1997: 186-87, 276-77) links this major increase with the introduction of wheelthrown pottery in the mid-second century BC and its generalisation in the course of the first century BC. It seems especially characteristic for the 71

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent north, and already much less so for the centre of the study area. The high number of pots in the north forms another link (next to that of cremation) with the area of the Belgae, where the cemeteries of Tartigny (Oise) and Allonville (Somme) are extremely rich in pottery, although these particular cemeteries are earlier (LT C).

Chossenot 1997: 191) but is still occasionally attested, as for example in inhumation burial M1 at Ménil-Annelles (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 208). Also in the French Ardennes, in an isolated LT B2 inhumation burial, there was half a pig’s skull and some vertebrae and ribs; this type of deposit becomes a regular feature in LT D cremation burials in Ménil-Annelles (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 117, tabs. 40, 125) and elsewhere in the area and further east in the cemetery of La Madeleine near the Titelberg (Metzler-Zens and Méniel 1999: 261-69). It was also common among chariot burials in eastern Yorkshire (see section 2.5.10). Cremation burials can contain both burnt (as an offering?) and unburnt animal bones. There are indications that, as in Yorkshire, these unburnt skulls and vertebrae were already defleshed when they were placed and re-assembled - in the grave (see Lambot, Friboulet and Méniel 1994:187-95).

The question when the fast wheel was actually introduced in the Aisne-Marne is the cause of much debate. According to Saurel (2007: 28) the use of the wheel developed in stages, with the initial phase at the end of the fourth century and the first half of the third century BC, i.e., during LT B2. Wooden buckets from the ELT period have occasionally been identified through metal handles, for example in Les Grandes Loges (Verger 1994: 490). Most examples of metal bands from wooden buckets are LT D, but some go back as far as LT C, as for example the one of Villessur-Retourne burial V15. None of the metal bands are decorated, although a bucket escutcheon was found in Hauviné (Chossenot 1997: 203-06; Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 88, 286-87, fig. 135). Some cremation burials contain metal fittings of wooden boxes (with personal objects), burned on the pyre with the deceased (Chossenot 1997: 192).

5.1.11. The funerary scene in LT B2 From the above observations it becomes clear that in many respects the major break is not between LT B and C, but rather between LT B1 and B2. Most cemeteries come to an end in LT B1; the list of cemeteries where burials could be identified as belonging to LT B2 is rather limited. This could relate to a general decline in grave goods. The wealth in fine pottery and torcs, so typical for LT A and B1, gradually disappears. At the same time the disturbance of graves seems to stop: because graves are becoming less attractive for potential grave robbers or, when thinking in terms of ritual, as part of a general shift in belief systems? A change in ritual can also be noted regarding the reduced deposit of animal offerings. Chariot burials, so high in numbers during the previous phase, become exceptional; only a few can be dated to LT B2.

Knives are fairly common during the whole La Tène period but can be denser in certain cemeteries than others. Certain types of knives are particularly associated with animal bones, others can, for instance, be used as tools (Demoule 1999: 25, 186; Chossenot 1997: 192). Some examples of burials with tripods and firedogs, in the tradition of Goeblingen-Nospelt, Arras and Welwyn, are given by Chossenot (1997: 199-206). The tools found in burial M17 of Ménil-Annelles may have belonged to a shoemaker (Chossenot 1997: 193; Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006: 223, fig. 79). Scissors and razors are often associated in male burials. Toilet sets occur both with males and females (Demoule 1999: 187; Chossenot 1997: 192-3).

On the other hand, there are some novelties in grave goods, like the appearance of anklets and fully metal belts, together with an increase in the number of brooches. In warrior burials, swords are now standard equipment, and the first shields with metal parts are attested. Square enclosures are not entirely new, but they become more customary in LT B2. Small groups of detached square enclosures are typical for the newly established cemeteries in the southwest of the study area. Attached enclosures are only found north of the Marne and they seem to be no older than LT C.

In the ELT period, the frequency of animal bones can vary both regionally and chronologically, but also according to the location on a specific cemetery. Pig is often found with male burials and sheep with females, although this is not a general rule. Whole pigs are usually associated with male (notably chariot) burials, but also the female chariot burials of Bucy-le-Long, La Héronnière contained remains of pig. Occasionally a whole deer (Villeneuve-Renneville) or a dog (Chassemy) are deposited with the deceased. Many pots must have contained food - animal bones were often found in them and apart from pig and sheep, there were occurrences of bovines and poultry. In Bucy-le-Long, the proportion of pig was higher in the cemetery than in the neighbouring settlements, and the animals were much younger (Demoule 1999: 185; Pommepuy, Desenne and Demoule 2004: 270-73).

One of the major changes in funerary practices – the change from inhumation to cremation – is not to start until well into LT C. The way of disposing of the dead is thus unaffected by whatever caused the changes described above. This leads us to the question of what provoked these changes that announce the end of the ‘Aisne-Marne culture’. Are we looking at a collapsed society, with a large proportion of its inhabitants dead (and their bodies disposed of in a non-traceable way, or gone elsewhere, and those staying behind no longer able to invest in wealthy burials? The only exceptions in this scenario would be the region east of Reims (mainly the Beine and Suippes cantons) and

In LT B2 and LT C, animal material in burials strongly decreases along with pottery (Demoule 1999: 140-41; 72

The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions the Marais-de-Saint-Gond / Fère-Champenoise area, where the population maintained a relatively comfortable standard of living.

an inhumation and a cist cremation in Bouranton, where at a later time a copper-alloy vessel with cremated bones was placed on the inhumated body that rested on the chariot. In the case of inhumation, the body was extended on the back. The head and shoulders were oriented towards the front of the vehicle, with the legs between the wheels. The orientation of the chariot is different in each case (northsouth, south-north, east-west).

Alternatively, what we may be facing here is a change in belief systems, expressed in new mortuary customs, where material wealth in burials is considered unimportant or inappropriate, and where funerary banquets or food for the afterlife plays only a limited role. In such a model, it could be envisaged that the Beine/Suippes area was more conservative and faithful to the old traditions for a longer time. The southwest of the study area, however, shows in this period more affinities with the ‘SénonaisNogentais’, and would be less affected by the changes in mortuary practices further north. The question remains what initiated such changes.

The Estissac chariot is built according to local Champagne tradition, whereas the Bouranton and Molinons vehicles are so close to the Rhineland chariots, that Verger (1999: 278-81) suspects that either they have been imported, they were made by a wheelwright of Rhineland training who established his business in South Champagne or they were built by a local wheelwright who was heavily influenced by the Rhineland model; Baray and Sarrazin (2013: 49) even suggest that the Molinons chariot may come from the same workshop as the vehicle from Kärlich 4. The axle caps, the rod to reinforce the axle and the single and double ring-headed pins (Ösenstifte) for the suspension system are not present in contemporary chariot burials in central Champagne, but they are typical characteristics of the Middle Rhine - Moselle region (Verger 1999: 27881). A local feature, however, would be the iron linchpins with hollow, straight shanks, which were not only found with the Estissac chariot, but also with the one from Bouranton (Verger 1999: 281; Verbrugghe and Villes 1995; Deffressigne and Villes 1995; Sarrazin and Villes 1995). It is, therefore, unlikely that these were imported vehicles. Perhaps they were assembled by a wheelwright of Rhineland origin, who established his business in the area, but the most plausible scenario is probably that of a local wheelwright who was strongly influenced by the Rhineland model, because he received (part of) his training in the Middle Rhine – Moselle region. In fact, the combination of local elements and external innovations is a clear illustration of the master-apprentice model described by Karl (2005b).

5.2. Chariot burials – southern Champagne and northern Burgundy (LT A1) This study area roughly covers the Aube and Yonne departments. It was in this region that during excavations in 2014-2015 a most spectacular chariot burial was discovered in Lavau, near Troyes, which probably dates to LT A1. It will be briefly discussed at the end of this chapter. Three chariot burials excavated in the period 1985-1991 are from an early phase of LT A: Bouranton, Michaulot, Estissac, La Côte d’Airvaux and Molinons, Les Craises. No later chariot burials are known from this area (Verger 1999). Typical for these three early LT A chariot burials is that they are situated in dominant topographical positions and surrounded by multiple circular or square ditches, with diameters between 35m and 50m. The square enclosure of Bouranton was fenced off with a palisade on the inner side of the ditch. Villes (1999: 64) states that it is beyond any doubt that the burials were covered with a barrow. Such a circular mound within a square enclosure of the type ‘Bouranton’ became visible during the excavations of Barberey-Saint-Sulpice, Les Gravières, in the Aube (Rolin and Villes 1999: 220-21, fig. 40). The chariot burial of Molinons was integrated into an earlier (probably LH) enclosure in a secondary position (Baray and Sarrazin 2013: 8, 10, 48). The grave pits are large, from 2.10m to 3.00m wide and from 2.50m to 3.90m long, and they contain a wooden chamber. There are no wheel pits, nor a separate yoke trench. The chariot is standing upright in the grave. There is no sign of the yoke, and the pole was probably also dismantled; certainly in the case of Estissac there would not be enough space within the chamber (Deffressigne and Villes 1995: 61). Maybe the pole was put separately in the chamber or perhaps it stuck out, as can occasionally be discerned in other regions. In Molinons, there was a slight notch in the northern wall, which was presumably for the pole (Sarrazin and Villes 1995: 69-70).

Another characteristic shared with the Middle Rhine – Moselle, and distinct from the rest of the Aisne-Marne, is not technological but ritual in nature: the absence of horse harness. There is no evidence for horse bits, terrets or phalerae. The Bouranton and Molinons burials each contain eight iron rings, some of which could in theory be part of the harness, but could equally well belong to the vehicle box, as was also attested in the Rhineland (see section 3.1.7). Another element in common are the wooden chambers (Verger 1999: 286-88). None of the chariot burials contain any pottery (Baray and Sarrazin 2013: 47-48). Those with cremations have one or more copper-alloy vessels, which are used as urns for the cremated bones. Also absent are animal bones. The Bouranton burial is the richest in grave goods: dagger, spearhead, golden bracelet, copper-alloy bracelet, copperalloy remains of a belt, chain, nine blue glass beads and a toilet set (Verbrugghe and Villes 1995). In Molinons, only a copper-alloy fibula and belt hook were found but

Both inhumation and cremation were practised, inhumation in Molinons, cremation in three copper-alloy vessels and one of organic material in Estissac and a combination of 73

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 5.3. Chariot burials - Marne, Aisne, southern Ardennes and Meuse (LT A-B)

the burial was heavily disturbed (Sarrazin and Villes 1995; Baray and Sarrazin 2013: 14), the Estissac burial contained five amber beads (Deffressigne and Villes 1995).

5.3.1. Location and history

The chariot burials in this area reveal a close connection with those in the Middle Rhine - Moselle region. Where the vehicle itself already points to a connection between craftsmen, there is also a connection in rite: the wooden chamber, the orientation of the deceased, the absence of horse harness and the composition of the grave goods. There are also influences from other regions. The monumentality of the construction evokes the fourwheeled vehicle burials of the Mont-Lassois area, and the presence of several enclosures is also typical in north and west Burgundy. Cremation in copper-alloy vessels also occurs in Burgundy in this period, as well as in central Gaul. The deceased carrying a dagger, on the other hand, is a local tradition. The Aisne-Marne is the only region where chariots and daggers occur in the same burial in the LT A period (Verger 1999: 287-88).

The region of the Marne, Aisne and the southern part of the Ardennes is the area with the highest number of La Tène chariot burials. Geographically rather removed from this area is the only chariot burial known from the Meuse (Amel-sur-l’Etang). The oldest vehicle burial of the region is the four-wheeled wagon burial 16 from the cemetery of the Jogasses in Chouilly (Marne); it belongs to the end of the Hallstatt period (Verger 1999: 286). A comprehensive study of the ELT vehicle burials of this region was carried out by Stéphane Verger (1994), who restudied all the old source material, including archives and museum reserve collections. His thorough analysis of the available material has revealed a number of interesting internal developments in the tradition of chariot burials in this area. These developments touch on various aspects of culture: they can be technical, artistic or ritual in nature. Verger discerns three main periods:

The chariot burial of Lavau, Zac du Moutot (near Troyes) is located only 2 km from Bouranton. Its wooden chamber with a surface of 14 m2 was covered by an ellipsoidal barrow, measuring up to 43m across; only the chalk base of the barrow was preserved, at almost a meter high. The barrow was surrounded by a square-ditched enclosure with sides of 55m, its angles oriented on the cardinal points. The monument was very similar to that of Bouranton, except that in Lavau a second (even larger) square enclosure was attached to the first. The deceased, whose sex could not be determined there and then, but who turned out to be male, was placed on the chariot box, extended on the back (but slightly on his side), head to the south, and was wearing a solid gold torc, decorated with winged monsters, two golden bracelets with zoomorphic decorations and an armband in a fossil organic material; at the level of the neck, several amber beads were found. In addition to these pieces of jewellery, several costume elements were attested, such as iron clasps and coral, as well as lace eyelets and copper alloy clasps from the man’s shoes. Only one of the wheels of the chariot was reasonably well preserved, with a tyre, nave bands and a linchpin; it had been taken off the vehicle and placed against the southern wall of the chamber but had partly fallen over the deceased. Of the second wheel, only a felloe clamp and some tiny metal parts remained. The contours of the vehicle box were marked by six copper alloy rings, distributed symmetrically on either side of the skeleton. There was no horse harness present. The dead man was accompanied by some spectacular grave goods, such as a copper alloy cauldron of almost a meter in diameter, with four circular handles, each adorned with the horned and bearded head of the Greek river god Acheloos. Inside this cauldron, which is an import (probably Etruscan), there were several other vessels, including a black-figure Attic oenochoe. Against the eastern wall of the chamber, a knife in its scabbard was found that was originally hanging on or leaning against the wall (Dubuis et al. 2015; Dubuis and Garcia 2015; Inrap 2015).

• Early LT A • Late LT A and Early LT B1 • Late LT B1 and LT B2 Some 15 chariot burials in this area can be dated to the early phase of LT A. The majority (perhaps as many as 200), belong to the Late LTA – Early LT B1 period. Only a few can be attributed to the final stages of the ELT period. The distribution area of chariot burials is already very large in the earliest phase of LT A. It extends from Soissons (for example Pernant) to the southern part of the Ardennes (Hauviné) and to Châlons-sur-Marne (for example Bouy). Since Verger’s study of 1994, several new ELT chariot burials have been examined in the Aisne-Marne region, and in 2006 Lambot and his team even re-excavated the famous chariot burial of La Gorge Meillet in Somme-Tourbe (Marne), originally excavated by Fourdrignier in 1876, and two further chariot burials were discovered at the same site. The excavation campaign also revealed new chariot burials in Bourcq (Ardennes), as well as in Prunay and other sites in the Marne department (Lambot 2018). A few years later, the 1876 chariot burial of La Gorge Meillet was the subject of a comprehensive collective study, including re-assessments of the grave goods, vehicle parts and horse harness, as well as a wide range of new scientific analyses providing a wealth of new information (Olivier 2016). Special mention should be made of the chariot burial of Somme-Bionne, L’Homme Mort (Marne), dated to the transition from LT A1 to A2, which shows major affinities with the chariot burials of the Middle Rhine – Moselle region, of which it has embraced certain traits. Instead of a dagger (until then the standard type of weapon), the deceased was buried with a sword. Other grave goods, most of them unknown in the Aisne-Marne but typical for 74

The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions the Rhineland, were a golden ring, a drinking horn, an Attic vase, a copper-alloy jug, a decorated belt and a copper-alloy scabbard. Some of these (golden ring, Attic vase, drinking horn) are not seen again in the Aisne-Marne, but others remain customary for a while after (Verger 1994: 654-56).

height of 1m (Verger 1999: 288). The possible barrows of Epoye and Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe were dismissed by Verger (1994: 402) as natural features. At the time when Verger compiled his study, even circumstantial evidence was rather limited. There were for example no ditch sections available that could possibly show filling from a barrow. A possible indication for the presence of a barrow is the shallowness of the pit compared to deeper pits of ordinary burials (for example Arcy-Ste-Restitue), but this does not occur very often, and some pits are deep enough to make the use of a barrow unnecessary (Verger 1994: 403).

Typical for the Aisne-Marne chariot burials is that so many of them are looted. There can be several reasons for this, from grave robbing in antiquity to partial ‘excavations’ in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century and illegal digs in more recent times. In some cases, however, the grave disturbance may have been of a ritual nature (Verger 1994: 44-47, 495), as already mentioned above in section 5.1.5. The re-excavation of the chariot burial of Evergnicourt by Lambot (2005) demonstrated that the original chariot was recovered some time after the burial and was re-used in reversed position, with the pole pointing towards the west rather than to the traditional east. There are several other cases where the vehicle is missing (Lambot 2006: 59). As a result of these various manipulations, many vehicle parts and grave goods are lost. Demoule (1999: 169) reckons that only 10 per cent of the chariot burials of the AisneMarne can be considered intact.

However, more recent excavations may provide additional evidence for the existence of barrows. In Bucy-le-Long, La Héronnière, three of the four chariot burials were set in circular enclosures and seem to have been covered by a barrow: various indications from the filling of the grave show that the chamber rose above ground level (Pommepuy et al. 2000: 206). Even the concept of a square burial mound may possibly not be as alien for northern Gaul as previously thought: in Bourcq (Ardennes), Lambot (2018: 27, note 7) identified a wall (consisting of vertical posts and horizontal planks), that had been constructed on the internal periphery of a square-ditched enclosure to support the burial mound. The postholes, which occur on two other enclosures of the site, were first interpreted as traces of a palisade or portico, but the third case demonstrated that it was actually a wall. If this wall was indeed built to uphold an earthen burial mound, this implies that the mound had been square in shape. Each of the three enclosures surrounded an ELT chariot burial (Figure 5.2).

5.3.2. Chariot burials and cemeteries Chariot burials are usually found in or near cemeteries. In more than half of the cases there is only one chariot burial per cemetery, but there are several examples with two or more. The highest number of chariot burials per cemetery occurs in the immediate surroundings of Châlons-enChampagne, with no less than 14 in Sogny-aux-Moulins, Moulin. The majority belong to cemeteries with less than 60 burials, but Verger (1994: 494-99) mentions seven examples of cemeteries with more than 200 burials, the largest one being Saint-Rémy-sur-Bussy, La Voie Jean le Verger with some 500 burials. Where multiple chariot burials occur together, these can be contemporary or extend over a longer period. Sometimes they are concentrated in one area, but they can equally well be spread over the cemetery; they can occupy a central position or can be situated at the periphery or even just outside the cemetery. No regional or chronological pattern can be discerned in these variables.

Enclosures are not always attested, but they must often have remained unobserved as a result of lack of interest from the part of the excavators. Also erosion must have played a major part, as illustrated by the case of Manre. However, the example of Sogny-aux-Moulins, Le Moulin proves beyond any doubt that chariot burials were not necessarily surrounded by ditches as a rule (Verger 1994: 401-02). Verger (1994) inventoried some 40 cases of chariot burials with enclosures from the area. For some of them no details were reported by the excavator, but the majority are circular (27 cases). At the time when Verger was compiling his information, only three cases of square enclosures were known: in Quilly (Ardennes), in Vert-Toulon, Charmont (Marais de Saint-Gond) and in Sogny-auxMoulins, Le Moulin (Marne). In the meantime, however, two chariot burials with square enclosures have come to light in Bourcq, and several more were revealed by aerial photography (Lambot 2018: 445-47). Square enclosures do not seem to be linked with any particular subregion, and different types of enclosures can be combined on one cemetery, as for example in Sogny-aux-Moulins, Le Moulin (Verger 1994: 401-02). Noteworthy are the cork-shaped enclosures, for example those surrounding the tree chariot burials of Prunay, La voie de Baconnes. These bouchons de Champagne mainly occur with AisneMarne chariot burials in the fifth and fourth centuries BC (Lambot 2018: 384).

5.3.3. Disposal of the dead During the whole period, inhumation is the rule, apart from the Early LT A chariot burial from Amel-sur-l’Etang in the Meuse department (i.e., geographically rather removed from the core area), which is a cremation (Verger 1999: 288-89). As such, this is reminiscent of the ELT chariot burials with cremations in the Middle Rhine / Moselle region. 5.3.4. Superstructures and enclosures The only barrow visible at the time of excavation was the one covering the chariot burial of Amel-sur-l’Etang mentioned above; it had a 6m diameter and a preserved 75

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 5.2. Bourcq, la Pierre de Rome : enclosure 9 (Image courtesy of Bernard Lambot)

Most circular enclosures have diameters between 8.80m and 17m, apart from a few larger exceptions. The square enclosures are similar in size: between 10m and 15m across. None of them appear to have had a causeway (Verger 1994: 235, 276, 315, 317, 399-402). The two square enclosures of Bourcq measured about 17m across (Lambot 2018: 24, 77).

was not only cut out in the bottom but also in the side of the grave pit and also the axle is sticking out (Flouest and Stead 1985). An overview of the different sizes and shapes of the grave pits can be found in Verger (1994: 381-90). Most graves seem to have been covered by a wooden ceiling and sometimes also the sides were lined in wood. Some of the chariot burials had postholes in the middle or along the sides; these would have carried a roof, sometimes with two slopes, like in the case of Bucy-le-Long (see above). In general, the complexity of construction seems be correlated with the size of the grave. Another remarkable fact is that in Bucy-le-Long, the pole must have protruded from the chamber (Verger 1994: 390-94). This last characteristic is also typical for some of the chariot burials in the Middle Rhine – Moselle region.

Apart from barrows and enclosures, a burial could also be marked by a post structure, like for example chariot burial BLH 114 of Bucy-le-Long, La Héronnière where the burial chamber was covered by a double-sloped roof of which the ridge was supported by three posts (Thouvenot and Pommepuy 2009: 157), and in Bourcq, a wall (consisting of vertical posts and horizontal planks) had been constructed on the inner side of the square-ditched enclosure to support a burial mound, as discussed above.

5.3.6. General burial arrangement

5.3.5. Grave pits

The chariot is always standing upright in the grave and the wheels are never taken off. As mentioned above, the pole and yoke may have been dismantled in the earlier period.

In the earlier period, grave pits are rather small, scarcely more than 2m long and wide. Wheel pits occur in some of the graves and sometimes there are extended trenches for pole and yoke. In other cases, the pole and yoke may have been dismantled and put alongside the vehicle, or perhaps they protruded from the grave pit and rested on the surface, where they would have been covered by the barrow. In the latter part of LT A, there are some fairly large grave pits which are almost as long as a complete chariot, say some 3.90m. In this case there would have been no need to dismantle the pole or the yoke. Average size pits occur during the whole ELT period.

During the whole period the standard position of the body is extended on the back, with the head to the west, but southwest-northeast or northwest-southeast orientations do also occur more or less frequently. The deceased is placed on the box of the chariot, with the head on the axle and the feet on the pole (Verger 1994: 398-99). 5.3.7. The deceased None of the LT A1 chariot burials were identified as belonging to a female. The first female chariot burials appear in LT A2, but even then, males are still predominant. Verger (1994: 408-09) mentions seven chariot burials that certainly belonged to females; six of these are from LT A2

In contrast to the chariot burials of the Middle Rhine Moselle region, where rectangular pits are the rule, in the Aisne-Marne the grave pit sometimes follows the shape of the chariot. In some cases, like Quilly, room for the wheels 76

The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions and one is from late LT B1 or LT B2. There may be three other cases where the deceased was female, but these are rather uncertain.

Tyres are always in iron and in one single part. Precise measurements were rarely possible, but the standard diameter seems to have been some 95cm, although this could range between 87cm and 100cm. Verger (1994: 504-09) discerned a very interesting evolution in the tyres as a result of which these have become important dating elements. He discusses several types of tyres, but the overall evolution is from narrow and curved tyres which were secured to the wooden felloe by many nails, to flat and wide tyres without any nails at all. Verger does not specifically mention it, but this evolution is bound to reflect a progress in mastering the technique of shrinking the tyre onto the felloe by contraction. Only the very latest (LT B2) of the Aisne-Marne vehicles have flat and wide tyres with no nails.

Most of these female chariot burials seem to be concentrated in the north and east: – Aisne, east of Soissons: two in Bucy-le-Long, La Héronnière – Southern Ardennes: Juniville, Rethel, Saint-Clément-àArnes – Marne, east of Reims: Berru, Beine, Saint-Basles – Marne, near Suippes: Saint-Rémy-en-Bussy More recently, a female chariot burial was identified in Vasseny (east of Soissons) on a cemetery with some 40 burials, including also two male chariot burials, while in Livry-Louvercy (Marne, north of Châlons-enChampagne), an adolescent of 15-16 years old was buried with a chariot (Inrap 2007). The deceased in the LT A chariot burial of Semide was between 12 and 14 years old (Lambot and Verger 1995). Female (chariot) burials in the ‘Champagne’ have been studied from a gender perspective by Bélard (2014).

Typical for the Aisne-Marne are the iron fittings to join single-piece felloes. They are attested in this region between Ha D2-3 and Early LT B1, but they are not systematically found with all chariot burials and according to Verger (1994: 509-12), who analysed the various types, they are not even essential for the construction of the wheel. However, it does not seem fortuitous that these fittings disappear around the same period that wheel tyres experience an important evolution; again, this could possibly be linked with technical progress. Another possible explanation is that single-piece felloes were replaced by multiple-piece ones, but there is no evidence for their existence at this time (see also Stead 1979: 44).

Multiple burials occur, as for example in Vrigny, where a male and female were found next to each other on the vehicle box, but other combinations are also possible, like for example an adult and a child or adolescent in Manre (Chossenot, Chossenot and Neiss 1985). In some cases, secondary burials were found in the filling of the grave pit, like for example in Pontfaverger, La Wardelle. The custom of reusing ancient chariot burials for secondary burials seems to be confined to the period from the end of LT B1 to the beginning of LT C (Verger 1994: 496). In the case of Beine, Sint-Basles 30, Verger (1994: 408-09) argues that there is no reason to suspect a secondary burial and that the jewellery can be directly associated with the person buried with the chariot.

There is no clear chronological evolution in the different types of nave bands (Verger 1994: 512-16) and most types are also attested in the Middle Rhine - Moselle and certainly in the Belgian Ardennes. In the Aisne-Marne, nave bands are normally in iron, but in Somme-Tourbe, La Gorge Meillet the naves were covered by copper-alloy sheet (Verger 1994: 513-4) and in Condé-sur-Marne, the naves bands were in solid copper-alloy (Legendre and Gomez de Soto 1990). It should probably come as no surprise that it is precisely the LT B2 chariot burial of Condé-sur-Marne that is equipped with copper-alloy nave bands. The same applies to contemporary chariot burials elsewhere, like those of Waldalgesheim (Joachim 1995: 100-01), Roissy (Lejars 2002a; Lejars 2005; Olivier 2012) and Nanterre (Hubert 1902; Olivier and Schönfelder 2002: 114).

5.3.8. Vehicle parts and horse harness In the early period, chariots are usually of local production, unlike some of the LT A1 chariots further south (Bouranton, Molinons) which have more affinities with the Rhineland chariots (see Verger 1999). The metal parts are restricted to the wheels and how to keep them attached to the axle, but as from LT A2, there are also metal parts which are aimed at fixing the box onto the frame. The richest chariot ornaments are from the LT A2 – Early LT B1 period, but the degree of luxury varies.

As to the distance between the wheels, not much changed between Ha D and LT B1: the wheel-track was always between 126cm and 140cm, with an exceptional 155cm in Livry-Louvercy (the 1955 chariot burial). This wider size became more frequent as from LT B2; both in Bouqueval and Tremblois-lès-Rocroi the distance is 150cm (Verger 1994: 501).

During the whole of LT A there were not many contacts between the cartwright tradition of the Aisne-Marne and that of the Middle Rhine - Moselle, but as from late LT B1 there is less regional diversification. The two techniques join, and the new chariots seem to be the synthesis of the innovations of LT A2 in both regions; they have at the same time iron bars to reinforce the axle and curved linchpins (Verger 1994: 541).

Based on various metal parts (friction rings, strengthening bars), the diameter of the axle at its ends is 5.5cm on average. Iron bars to reinforce the axle were already known during LT A in the Middle Rhine - Moselle, but in the Aisne-Marne they do not appear until the end of LT B1. 77

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Examples can be found in grave 30 in Beine, Saint Basles (lost) and in Pontfaverger, La Wardelle. In the Paris area, the same type of reinforcement bar was found in the LT B2 chariot burial 11 from Bouqueval (Verger 1994: 523-25).

2006: 55) or sagged following the collapse of the burial chamber. Vehicle boxes in general left little or no trace, although certain metal parts are sometimes assumed to have been part of the box (see Verger 1994: 537-38). In this respect, the copper-alloy chariot decorations found in situ in Prunay, La Voie de Baconnes will certainly help to reinterpret certain objects from older finds (Lambot 2006: 55).

Linchpins can be useful chronological markers. In the early LT A period, they are straight and hollow, whereas in LT A2 they are straight and moulded. These straight linchpins are sometimes attached to an iron disc with a hole in the middle. The upper part is often decorated with various motifs. In the beginning of LT B1 the abandonment of the metal end of the axle probably led to the development of linchpins with a curved shank and a ring head, to prevent the friction disc from rotating. This type of linchpin is not very widespread (Montéqueux, Jonchery-sur-Suippe). Towards the end of LT B1 and during LT B2, another type of linchpin with a curved shank is in use: it has a rectangular head that is plano-convex in section. The linchpin of Condé-sur-Marne was of this type and so was one from Prunay and the pair attributed to grave 30 of Beine, Saint-Basles. Outside the Aisne-Marne region, the same type was found in grave 11 of Bouqueval in the Vald’Oise and in Waldalgesheim, but also further east. These linchpins often have coral inlay. This type continues to develop in LT C, when the plano-convex head becomes quadrangular in section and the shank is less strongly curved (Verger 1994: 516-23; 652-59).

Different types of iron parts have been identified as having played a role in fixing the box onto the frame and as part of a suspension system: single eyebolts, double eyebolts and tiges rivetés. The double eyebolts are like the plain Doppelösenstifte in the Rhineland, whereas some of the tiges rivetés are similar to the fancier German Doppelösenstifte, but nowhere do they reach the same level of decoration. An overview of the various types and a discussion of a number of theories on the function and the assembling of these parts are given by Verger (1994: 526-37). In a number of cases, copper-alloy or iron rings are present that could be terret rings, but that may equally well have served other purposes (harness rings, rings belonging to the box, etc.). When these rings were located in the yoke trench, as for example in Somme-Bionne, chances are that they were part of the yoke. However, Schönfelder (2003: 245-49) argues for Châlons-en-Champagne that the yoke trench would not have been long enough to accommodate the yoke, and that the yoke with the terrets was deposited in the main grave. In Semide, the function of the yoke was taken over by a harness pad with undecorated copper-alloy terret rings, two for each horse (Lambot and Verger 1995: 77-78; 84-91). Terrets like in Yorkshire or the Rhineland are not attested in the Aisne-Marne until LT B2, with the chariot burial of Pontfaverger, La Wardelle. The terrets belonging to this burial consist of a large open iron ring, with one of the ends being prolonged by a point which was driven into the wood of the yoke (Verger 1994: 224-26, 538, fig. 135.2). Yoke caps and coatings were identified for Somme-Tourbe, La Bouvandeau and Somme-Bionne (Van Endert 1986: 243, fig. 20; Verger 1994: 281-91, 62728, 654).

The length of the pole varies between 325cm and 350360cm; the 390-400cm long pole of Bucy-le-Long is rather exceptional. Metal parts that can be attributed to the pole are rare, but there are a few examples. In Somme-Tourbe, La Bouvandeau several parts were found which were in some way linked with the pole (e.g., for the connection with the yoke or for decoration). In Somme-Bionne, six juxtaposed half-discs of copper-alloy, reinforced by a thin iron pad were found at the end of the pole (Verger 1994: 285, 503-04, 538, 624-28). In a few cases the grave pit was cut in such a way that there was no space behind the axle, indicating that the vehicle box was pushed entirely in front of the axle. This feature is also confirmed by the position of the head of the deceased which in general rests on the axle, as if this were a clear limit. The chariot burials of Vrigny and Quilly allow an estimate to be made of the dimensions of the box as approximately 120 by 80cm, which would be similar to Grosbous-Vichten in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Verger 1994: 503). Perhaps the possibility should be considered that the platform had actually been disassembled and put forward, along the reconstruction proposed by Nathalie Ginoux for Plessis-Gassot near Paris (see section 8.1.6). The platform, with the body of the deceased was not resting on the bottom of the pit but on a raised bank of earth. This reconstruction would also offer an explanation for those instances where the body of the deceased was situated below the level of the axle; it is generally assumed in those cases (see for example Verger 1994: 398 on Chassemy) that either the body was placed below the vehicle (see in this respect also Lambot

The ELT horse bits from the Aisne-Marne are particularly varied, covering the whole range of types known in Europe at that time. Snaffle bits are the most numerous but do not seem to occur until LT A2. There are various subtypes (single-link, two-link, three-link, and others). Curb bits appeared in continental Europe at the end of the Bronze Age. In the Aisne-Marne, they are no longer attested after early LT B1 (for a detailed analysis, see Verger 1994: 548-74). In the early period, the bits were often placed by the feet of the deceased, but as from LT A2 the bits are located in the yoke trench (Verger 1994: 652-59). Bits are normally found in pairs (but see below). Several metal parts were found that were used to assemble the various belts of the head harness and to adjust these belts on the head of the animal: buttons, discs, plaques. 78

The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions rather rare. The best known is probably the copper-alloy openwork belt terminal from Somme-Bionne (Verger 1994: 283, fig. 187.5; 421). A few pieces of golden jewellery are attested with males, but not that many. Females in chariot burials, however, have the richest jewellery in the Aisne-Marne; from the moment female chariot burials make their appearance, gold earrings are even exclusively found in association with chariots. Compared with jewellery from ordinary tombs, it is not so much the type of jewellery but rather the use of rare material (gold, coral) that is remarkable. However, jewellery in general cannot stand comparison with that from the Middle Rhine - Moselle region (Verger 1994: 452-54, 457-63; Demoule 1999: 173). Torcs are a typical feature of rich female burials in general during the ELT (as from MLT they disappear from burials altogether – see section 5.1.10); a few decorated copper-alloy torcs were found in female chariot burials. About 65 of the chariot burials studied by Verger contain weapons, mostly offensive (dagger, sword, lance and spear heads) but also defensive (shields, helmets). Daggers are typical for LT A1, while swords cover the whole period, although many cannot be dated. A typical LT B2 sword, however, supplied a terminus post quem for the chariot burial of Pontfaverger, La Wardelle. Weapons also occur in ordinary burials, but fuller sets are usually found with chariot burials, and helmets were even restricted to these (Verger 1994: 410-44).

Figure 5.3. Phalera from the chariot burial at Semide (Ardennes) (Image courtesy of Bernard Lambot)

These are often lavishly decorated, for instance with compass-designed openwork or coral inlay (Figure 5.3). These are again thoroughly analysed by Verger (1994: 575642). Pieces of horse harness are usually found in the yoke trench or near the bits. Towards the beginning of LT B, a large part of the investments and of technical innovation is concentrated on the production of horse harness (Verger 1994: 667). Verger noticed, however, that luxury harness tends to have been confined to males, as the harness found in female chariot burials is rather modest (1994: 658).

Metal vessels are not widespread and there are only a few imports (Demoule 1999: 174; for an overview, see Verger 1994: 487-91). Verger (1994: 464-87) has also analysed the pottery found with the chariot burials of the AisneMarne. Pottery is attested in some 80 chariots burials of the Aisne-Marne (i.e., in just over half) and the precise number of pots is only known in about 20 cases. Verger believes many diggers did not pay much attention to pottery and in reality, a higher percentage of chariot burials contained ceramics. Still the absence of pottery in certain cases is undeniable, but the reason for this is usually of a chronological and/or geographical nature. As discussed above, pottery is absent from the three early LT A chariot burials of southern Champagne and northern Burgundy, all from recent excavations, although ceramics were attested in the contemporary chariot burial of Lavau including a black-figure Attic oenochoe (Dubuis et al. 2015; Dubuis and Garcia 2015). Also the early LT A chariot burials of the Aisne-Marne do not have pottery as a rule. From LT A2 onwards, ceramics are on the uprise: most chariot burials have between six and twelve pots but the one of Saulces-Champenoise had as many as 20. Ceramic and copper-alloy vessels are possibly mutually exclusive (like in the Middle Rhine Moselle area), although some caution is required here as pottery is often ill documented and the Saulces-Champenoise chariot burial that is rich in pottery also comprised a decorated copper-alloy basin. Different sizes and shapes of ceramics are represented. The highest numbers of pots are from LT A2 and in this period they

Several examples of male burials with horse harness only are known from LT A1. Apart from horse bits, these burials generally include a short dagger and sometimes fairly large spears. Later this type of burial is less frequent but, like chariot burials, is no longer restricted to males (Verger 1994: 459-62, 567-68, 653-57). There are also some examples of burials with two horse bits for the draught horses and a third one (of a separate type) for a mounted horse. Such combined chariot and rider burials were in recent years excavated in Prunay, La Voie de Baconnes and Bourcq, although the two horse bits for the draught horses were missing (Lambot 2006; 2018). 5.3.9. Grave goods A number of copper-alloy fibulae are known from female chariot burials. Brooches are also found with a few males, but then they are more often in iron. The most recent fibula is a late type of Münsingen brooch with copper-alloy discshaped foot from the LT B2 chariot burial of Pontfaverger, La Wardelle. From the same burial is copper-alloy pin with coral inlay. Some burials contain shoe trimmings like buttons, hooks and needles (Verger 1994: 445-52; 45763; Demoule 1999: 172-73). Suspension rings for swords and knives occur fairly frequently, but belt fasteners are 79

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent are also of a higher quality, lavishly decorated and of graceful shape. The influence of the Hunsrück-EiffelKultur (Middle Rhine - Moselle) can be noted in several cases and in turn ceramics of Aisne-Marne signature can be found in the HEK. An Attic red-figure cup of the fifth century was found in Somme-Bionne (Verger 1994: 46487). It is possible that as from the end of LT B1, the burial rite does not favour ceramics anymore. This would explain the lack of pottery in the Condé-sur-Marne chariot burial (late LT B1 or LT B2) (Legendre and Gomez de Soto 1990). The same phenomenon can be seen a few decades later with chariot burials from other areas, such as those from Bouqueval in the Val-d’Oise near Paris (Guadagnin 1984). On the other hand, LT B2 pottery was reported for the chariot burial of Pontfaverger, La Wardelle (Marne) (Verger 1994: 486). A few examples of metal remains indicate the presence of wooden vessels. These are not specific for chariot burials but can also be found in other (rich) burials (Verger 1994: 490).

chariot burials of La Gorge Meillet at Somme-Tourbe (burial 1), a foal was deposited in the filling of the grave. The bones were radiocarbon dated to the period LT B2-C1, several generations after the initial burial which is dated to LT A2). Horse bones are, relatively speaking, less present in chariot burials during LT A-B1), but several were found in the enclosure ditches in Bourcq, Prunay and SommeTourbe (Lambot 2018: 421-27). 5.4. Chariot burials - Aisne and northern Ardennes (LT C-D1) In the Marne department, no more chariot burials are attested after those of Condé-sur-Marne and Pontfaverger, La Wardelle of the later fourth century BC, and just a handful of later chariot burials are known from the Aisne and Ardennes departments (Figure 5.4). Two of them can be dated to LT C1, one from Bucy-le-Long, Le Fond du Petit Marais (Aisne), the other from Tremblois-lèsRocroi, Les Pothées, barrow 1/1938 (Ardennes). Both are inhumations, like their predecessors of the fifth and fourth centuries BC, but later stages of the cemeteries of Le Fond du Petit Marais and Les Pothées show the rise of cremation. Chariot burials were not new to Bucyle-Long, but more than a century separates the LT C1 chariot burial from the four female chariot burials at La Héronnière (Pommepuy, Auxiette and Desenne 1998). Tremblois-lès-Rocroi is situated in the northern part of the Ardennes department, from where no chariot burials of the earlier phase are known. In 2014, a spectacular chariot burial, with four horses, was excavated in Warcq, near Charlesville-Mézières, also in the north of the Ardennes; it is even later, from the transition from LT C2 to LT D1, around the middle of the second century BC.

The Somme-Bionne chariot burial, that was strongly influenced by the Middle Rhine - Moselle chariot burials, contained the gold sheathing of a drinking horn like those known from rich German burials (Verger 1994: 490; 65456). Like in ordinary graves, the most common utensils are knives; animal bones are often accompanied by an iron knife. A real toolkit was found in Somme-Tourbe, La Gorge Meillet, with a small iron hammer similar to those of modern goldsmiths, a series of iron chisels and a small iron borer (Verger 1994: 493). Only a few razors, scalptoria and tweezers were found (Verger 1994: 454-56). Not much information on animals is available. The most frequently occurring is pig; sometimes the complete animal was placed in the grave, sometimes only parts. There are also instances of sheep bones, beef, cock, pigeon, duck, small birds, hare, frog legs and eggs. Complete pigs are placed next to the deceased, between the knee and the hip, so in front of one of the wheels of the chariot. Legs and quarters are systematically deposited next to the right leg of the deceased, in front of the chariot (Verger 1994: 49293; Van Endert 1986: 244). In Châlons-en-Champagne, a boar was buried in a separate small rectangular grave next to the grave of a male chariot burial; it was lying on its left side, orientated towards the man (Van Endert 1986: 244). As Demoule (1999: 175) points out, this does not look like a simple food offering. There are a few references to the presence of horse bones in chariot burials (Van Endert 1986: 243) and the horse-rider burial of Chassemy contained horse bones, horse harness and a sword, but no human bones (Verger 1994: 140, 559). While many of these cases may seem rather doubtful, horse bones have now also been identified in recent excavations. Originally Lambot and Verger (1995: 92) reckoned that horses were too valuable to put in the grave, but since the find of horse bones in the enclosure of Prunay, Lambot argues that the value of horses is not a valid criterion for their absence in chariot burials (Lambot 2006: 58-59). In one of the new

The chariot burial of Bucy-le-Long, Le Fond du Petit Marais, was excavated in 1991 but is not published in full detail (Pommepuy, Auxiette and Desenne 1998; Demoule 1999: 318; Gransar 2009). It is believed to have been the tombe fondatrice of the cemetery. The deceased was given weapons and pottery, but as happened to many chariot burials of the ELT period, the grave was looted in antiquity, so the inventory was presumably not complete. The burial was surrounded by a square enclosure with a palisade, which had an entrance on the northern side. Four postholes indicated the presence of a four-post structure above the grave. The second chariot burial was part of the barrow cemetery of Tremblois-lès-Rocroi, Les Pothées (barrow 1/1938) (see section 5.1.7). Its barrow measured 13m in diameter and was preserved at a height of 1.25m; it consisted of local pink clay and was covered by a layer of pebble stones and pieces of schist. The vehicle was complete and there were separate wheel pits. Fragments of tyres are preserved, seemingly pointing to a diameter of 67cm which is fairly small compared to the vehicles from the ELT burials. The tyres are 4cm wide and some 4mm thick and there are no nails. According to the original plans, the distance between the wheels was 1.47 to 1.51m. 80

The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions

Figure 5.4. Later chariot burials in the Aisne-Marne-Ardennes regions (© Greta Anthoons)

Furthermore, two two-link horse bits were found, as well as some unidentified pieces of metal which could be part of the vehicle. The deceased was given three weapons (long sword, spear, shield), five pots and a (possible) knife (Flouest 1984: 61-66).

chamber, measuring 5.50m by 2.80m was preserved to a depth of more than a 1.0m and followed an east-west axis, with the yoke to the east. The deceased, wearing a gold torc and an iron fibula, was placed on a vehicle (head between the wheels) that was covered in gold leaf and decorated with pieces of copper alloy, in places set with dark blue or yellow glass paste. Four harnessed horses were buried with the deceased, two behind the chariot (in the northwest and southeast corners of the chamber), the other two, with the yoke on their shoulders, in front of the chariot. South of the vehicle, food offerings had been deposited, with six pieces of pottery, two buckets, meat (probably half a pig) and a long iron knife. Next to these was a fur bag with personal equipment: tweezers, shears and a lunula-shaped razor (Millet, Bernadet and Nicolas 2018).

The chariot burial of Warcq, La Sauce is located in the Meuse valley, in a transition zone between the Ardennes Massif to the north and the chalk plains of the Champagne to the south. It was excavated in the summer of 2014, after its unexpected discovery three years earlier during the excavation of a Gallo-Roman building. Several parts of the chariot burial were lifted in soil blocks to be excavated in controlled conditions in the laboratory, and different technologies were used to examine the finds (CT scans, photogrammetry and 3D printing). The wooden 81

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent The (mineralised) wood of the yoke was covered with a copper alloy trimming, consisting of nine different pieces, shaped by hammering and attached to the wooden base of the yoke by small nails. There were six terrets on the yoke, of two different types. The two in the middle had a base and they were attached to the trimming, while the other four, with a fastening ring underneath, were directly inserted into the wood (Figure 5.5). Each of the horses that were carrying the yoke were wearing an iron horse bit, found in situ in the horse’s mouth. On the skull of one of them, a head harness could be identified, composed of leather straps with tiny metal rivets (Millet, Bernadet and Nicolas 2018; Nicolas et al. 2018). The presence of six terrets (large) is exceptional but is reminiscent of the chariot burial of Le Plessis-Gassot (see section 8.1.7), which also contained six terrets, but where unfortunately, the yoke was not laid out in position. Moreover, in Le Plessis-Gassot, five terrets formed a set (each with a base) and the sixth one was different (larger than the other five, and with a fastening ring underneath). The terrets on the Warcq yoke look very large and are placed very closely to one another.

the horses on the outside (the funales) were attached to the central pair by reins. Most of the burden of pulling and stabilising the chariot fell on the iugales, while the funales were responsible for security and speed in taking bends (Junkelmann 2000: 99; Bell and Willekes 2014: 486). Could the two additional horses in Warcq have had a similar function, or were they representing a spare pair? Against this last option pleads the fact that although one of the horses was harnessed for driving, the other was harnessed for riding (Millet, Bernadet and Nicolas 2018). A number of ELT chariot burials are known from the Aisne-Marne region where in addition to the two customary horse bits, a third bit was present that is considered to be intended for a riding horse, as for example in Bourcq and Prunay (Lambot 2006; Lambot 2018). Single bits of this type were also found in contemporary horsemen burials, but these are not very numerous (Demoule 1999: 89); horse-rider burials become more prevalent towards the end of the La Tène period, and especially in the Middle Rhine – Moselle region (see section 3.1.7). The vehicle from Warcq was very luxurious. The openwork wooden sides of the box were covered in gold leaf, and other parts had been decorated with pieces of copper alloy and dark blue and yellow glass paste. Also the hubs of the wheels, the two linchpins and an axle cap were in copper alloy and decorated with glass paste (Millet, Bernadet and Nicolas 2018; Nicolas et al. 2018).

A number of chariot burials with horses have been found in recent years (see section 2.5.9), but four horses is unique and even intriguing, since only a span of two horses is needed to pull the chariot. In Roman chariot racing, only the two central horses of a quadriga were beneath the yoke and were, therefore, called iugales;

Figure 5.5. Warcq chariot burial: horses and yoke with six terrets (© Inrap, photograph by Denis Gliksman)

82

The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions Due to unfavourable preservation conditions, the bones of the deceased and of the animals were degraded and only appeared as a brownish sediment; only the teeth were suitable for post-excavation analysis (Millet, Bernadet and Nicolas 2018: 2). It is quite remarkable to have an inhumation burial as late as the mid-second century BC in this area, unlike in the Marne, where inhumation is only abandoned in LT D, or in some places even co-exists with cremation until the Gallo-Roman period (see section 5.1.2). On the other hand, the latest chariot burial of the Belgian Ardennes, that of Sberchamps, Au Fersay (early second century BC), about 70km to the north-north-east is also an inhumation (see chapter six below).

When disregarding issues like the unevenness of the data and a lesser visibility following a decrease in grave goods around the turn of the fourth to the third century BC, there are some other elements to be considered, the most important question being how the cemetery population related to the actual population. This, however, touches on the very problem that archaeology is facing in this region: the general lack of settlement data. In a paper on settlements of the earlier Iron Age in the eastern Paris Basin, Haselgrove (2007) refers to the multiplication of settlement evidence for the Iron Age as a result of rescue excavations in advance of roads, railways or gravel extraction, but admits that the number of settlements that continued into LT B2 is still extremely limited. Many locales that were inhabited during the fifth century BC were abandoned in LT B1 and only very few were founded in LT B2. An interesting phenomenon was noted in the Aisne and Vesle valleys, where the gap in settlement is partially filled by the appearance during LT B of a different type of site: that of isolated batteries of grain silos. Haselgrove refers to Gransar (2002), who has argued in his unpublished PhD thesis that these batteries were not for domestic storage or for storing seed-corn, since there were no nearby settlements; Gransar proposes that the batteries were used to store grain destined for exchange and that they were shared by groups of settlements (Haselgrove 2007: 417-18). These fairly large storage structures, which are typically a phenomenon of the period LT B - LT C1, were also attested in the Marne and Aube departments. Desbrosse et al. (2013: 88) believe they are linked with an agricultural development that is marked by a concentration in the management of resources and perhaps in land tenure.

When in the Aisne and Ardennes departments from LT C2 inhumation clears the way for cremation, the same evolution can be seen as in the Middle Rhine - Moselle area (and further west in France as well): the vehicle parts found are burned and sometimes the vehicle is only partially represented (pars pro toto) (see chapter 12). Such a cremation burial with burnt parts of a vehicle was also found in the cemetery of Les Pothées in Tremblois-lèsRocroi (barrow 1/1939) (Schönfelder 2000: 407), although Flouest (1984: 67-68) has cast doubts on the presence of vehicle parts. 5.5. The Aisne-Marne during LT B2 The fourth and third centuries BC are the cause of much debate in northern France. As mentioned above, the fluctuations in cemetery population during this period are fairly widely accepted, but the explanations are diverse. The general conclusion of researchers who moved away from the traditional migration model, is that more data are needed to make any valid judgements as to the demographic evolution in the area.

When settlement data are available, these cannot always be matched with funerary data, as was demonstrated by Villes (1995) based on the settlements of Suippes, Camp Militaire and Saint-Gibrien, Au-dessus du Vieux Pont. Suippes was only partially investigated (1ha), but in SaintGibrien the complete site (4ha) was excavated. SaintGibrien was permanently occupied from LH to LT D, with no marked decline. In Suippes, the continuity is harder to establish, maybe due to the partial excavation, but is certainly attested for LT B2. Intersections are few and only concern the oldest and most recent phases. The Suippes settlement is located in an area with a certain continuity in funerary evidence, but it is remarkable to find a large and flourishing settlement as Saint-Gibrien on the left bank of the Marne, where funerary data are sparse.

The period of LT B2 (325-250 BC) is especially interesting in the context of the present study, since it is in the course of this period that the Arras Culture developed. Based on Bayesian modelling (section 2.6.4), eight of the Yorkshire chariot burials have been dated to LT C, but there is a strong possibility that chariot burials with a complete vehicle placed on the old ground surface (of which there are only a few, and all from old excavations) predate the chariot burials of the Wolds. The same Bayesian analysis demonstrated that the eight chariot burials belonged to a later phase of the Arras Culture; the appearance of inhumation burials and square enclosures can in all likelihood be traced back to the earlier third century BC.

Both Suippes and Sint-Gibrien were hamlets, with a multitude of structures, including dwellings, granaries and silos. On both sites there was a large building (200– 250m2) with a more sophisticated architecture (chief’s house, meeting house, collective store?). In Saint-Gibrien, during ELT, there were two phases with an enclosure, the first one a palisade, the second one a ditch with an internal bank. The large building is central to the new arrangement, but it is not clear whether it predated the enclosure. In both

LT B2 covers Demoule’s phases IIIC and IVA and corresponds with LT Ic in the older Viollier chronology (see Brun 2002: 312, fig. 11). A thorough study of all the available material – the majority poorly documented (old excavations or new, unpublished excavations) – would certainly allow further fine-tuning of the chronology for this 75-year period.

83

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent phases there were pits and small buildings outside the enclosures.

demographic pressure cannot have been very high and cannot have been the explanation for migration. He also states that the settlement pattern that is starting to emerge does not contradict his calculations.

For neither Suippes nor Saint-Gibrien could the density for each phase of occupation be determined exactly. In spite of the mass of information obtained from these sites, they are not representative enough; to recognise fluctuations in population, more research is required. Furthermore, the question is what happened to smaller sites in the area. During periods of decline, perhaps only the core population in for example Saint-Gibrien remained, as the site was better situated. If Saint-Gibrien was the nucleus of an area, demographic fluctuations may remain unnoticed there. Several smaller isolated settlements – sometimes at a long distance from any current water point - were revealed during emergency excavations preceding the construction of the A26 motorway from Châlons to Troyes. As from the end of the Bronze Age there were periods when the chalky plateau was used for agricultural establishments and for shorter period outbuildings. Other short period settlements were found in the alluvial valleys, as a result of the monitoring of earthworks in quarries. All these settlements were less durable and dense than those of Suippes and SaintGibrien, unless perhaps only the edge of a larger site was discovered (Villes 1995: 130-33).

Although Demoule is allowing for the fact that children are generally underrepresented, his population estimates are purely based on funerary data, reflecting substantial demographic fluctuations. He claims that compared to the previous period the population in AM IIB had doubled, and this in the time of one generation only, to be subsequently followed by a major downsizing of the population as discussed above in section 5.1.1. While one can question the reliability of funerary data as sole criteria for demographics, and dispute the representativeness of the available settlement data, the image of a sparsely populated land, maybe already during the fourth but certainly during the third century BC, now seems to be backed up by a different type of study. This study is based on an extensive number of dendrochronological and radiocarbon data, collected in recent decades in the southern Ardennes, in a zone situated between the chalky plain of the Champagne and the Ardennes Massif. The data were not only collected for dating purposes but also for measuring the degree of human impact on the landscape. Recurrent marked resumptions of growth found on tree rings, for example, were found to coincide with construction phases. They are assumed to be the result of clearings in the forest: when neighbouring trees were cut down, more sunlight would result in more rapid growth of the remaining trees. The study showed a high degree of human activity in the period from 800 to 400 BC, and a second one, very dense and sudden, from the second century BC onwards. There are indications of possible activity in the period in between, but these are minimal (Laurelut, Tegel and Vanmoerkerke 2007).

The concept of core sites remaining populated when (smaller) neighbouring sites fall to decline is not unlike the situation of cemeteries in Demoule’s study area in the early fourth century BC (see section 5.1.1). At the end of the fourth century BC, certain polygons are entirely void of cemeteries, and this may also have been the case for settlements, but the state of research does not permit making such a statement. A link between climatic change, population decline and centralisation of the population was also put forward by Krausse (2003) for the mountain areas between Middle Rhine and Meuse during LT C. Fluctuations in settlement occupation in the fourth and third century BC could also be established in Bohemia, for example in Radovesice (Waldhauser 1993: 405-06). These are usually also linked with population movements, either small-scale or in mass.

It is interesting to combine these results with those of a palaeoenvironmental study, also situated in the southern Ardennes. This study demonstrated that towards the end of LT B and during LT C, the existing grassland cover was seriously disturbed by ploughing and that the soil was subject to severe erosion. This major disruption was followed by ‘a renewed phase of stability, presumably again under a dominantly grassland regime’ (Buckland et al. 2006: 154-56). The authors do not discuss the impact of these phenomena on the population, as they feel this would require further and more detailed integrated palaeoenvironmental research.

Apart from the shortage of data, when comparing settlements and cemeteries, one should realise that these do not necessarily stand in a symmetrical relationship with one another. A small cemetery is usually assumed to belong to a small settlement, whereas in the case of a large cemetery, the possibility of a limited representation of the living population is rarely considered (Villes 1995: 136). Therefore, making demographic estimates can be a precarious exercise. Based on funerary data, Demoule (1999: 210-11) reckons that during AM IIB - when the number of burials is the highest - the population of the Aisne-Marne must have been around 50,000 for an area of some 15,000 km2. He calculated that three per cent of all the land would suffice for producing enough cereals to feed the whole population. His conclusion is that

In any case, both studies seem to corroborate the image previously composed on the basis of typo-chronological studies. However, thanks to the progress that has taken place in typo-chronological studies in recent years, a certain continuity has now been established, but there may still be local hiatuses. Valuable new data originate from the excavations preceding the construction of the ‘TGV Est’ railway. These have brought to light a number of settlements that were occupied in LT B2, especially south 84

The Aisne-Marne and neighbouring regions Table 5.2. Subregions of the Aisne-Marne versus the Arras Culture Subregion

In favour

Against

Southwest (Marais-de-Saint-Gond Fère-Champenoise)

• inhumation persists longer • early occurrence of enclosures • no pottery in graves

• enclosures are not attached • no chariot burials in this period

Southern Ardennes

• joint enclosures in LT C2/D • possibly barrows

• early appearance of cremation

Reims, Beine/Suippes

• still occupied in LT B2 and still inhumation • LT B2 chariot burials • joint enclosures

• still fine pottery in LT B2

Aisne and northern Ardennes

• LT C1 and LTD C2/D chariot burials • change from round to square enclosures in LT B2

• early appearance of cremation • no joint enclosures

5.6. The Aisne-Marne region versus the Arras Culture

of Reims but also further along, south of Suippes; some of them could be traced back to LT A or B1. The study of these sites leads to some interesting results. The area seems to have been very dynamic in the production of fine ceramics at the turning of the fourth to the third century, more in particular in the diversity of decorative techniques, which are all in use at the same time. Wheelthrown pottery developed in stages, but the initial phase could be placed at the end of the fourth and the first half of the third century BC (Saurel 2007). This area was already renowned for its pottery from funerary contexts from this period (see section 5.1.10).

Apart from a few exceptions in the Aisne and northern Ardennes, the chariot burials of the Aisne-Marne are not contemporary with those of eastern Yorkshire, where the tradition only starts when in the Aisne-Marne it has already gone out of fashion. However, there are many similarities with the Aisne-Marne in its last phase, and these will be summarised below. The Aisne-Marne region is much larger than East Yorkshire and it shows many regional differences. Therefore, each of these regions have been tested to determine to what extent they have possibly influenced the Arras Culture. Table 5.2 sets out the elements in favour and those against for each of the subregions.

A thorough study of all the material available, with more attention for micro-regional and fine-chronological differences, could possibly lead to a better insight. The Aisne-Marne region should not be studied as a monolith, and it should be broken up in smaller time slots. This was the only way to demonstrate the gradual adoption of cremation and it will be the only way to judge the universality of certain statements as to issues like: who left, how many left, which areas were deserted or remained occupied, which layers of the elite were represented in the cemeteries, how did settlement patterns evolve and how did social structures change (see for example Villes 1995; Diepeveen-Jansen 2001: 203-06; 2007; Charpy 2006; Charpy 2009). Meanwhile, one should be aware of the pitfall of focusing on rich and visible burial rites and linking these with social complexity and stability; similarly, simple or less visible rites do not necessarily reflect disintegration and instability (Diepeveen-Jansen 207-09).

While there are similarities with each of these subregions, there are also considerable differences. The Beine-Suippes area may certainly have been a source of inspiration for the Arras Culture, especially as it is still very much in the picture at the time that inhumation, square enclosures (and possibly chariot burials) appear in eastern Yorkshire. However, its fine pottery, which is also well-represented in the funerary contexts, stands in stark contrast to the undistinctive pottery of the Arras Culture. This may indicate that contacts and exchange only took place in certain fields, i.e., in ritual but not in craftsmanship. As such, actual migration from this area to East Yorkshire is rather unlikely.

Apart from the issue of the population exodus, there is also the traditional model of an incoming population in the course of the third century BC, the Belgae. This model is still generally accepted, although John Collis (1999) has claimed that there are good reasons to believe that the later Belgae (Remi, Bellovaci, Suessiones) were already living in the area in the fifth century BC, and that hence the chariot burials of the Aisne-Marne should not be called ‘Celtic chariot burials’ but ‘Belgian chariot burials’. Also a study of rural settlements finds no evidence for ‘the coming of the Belgae’ (Malrain, Blancquaert and Lorho 2013). 85

6 The Belgian Ardennes 6.1. Chariot burials and general funerary practices

(for a comparative overview, see Draily, Vrielinck and Hanut 2021: 124, table 1). This chapter will focus on the southern group, with occasional references to the northern group.

The chariot burials of the Belgian Ardennes cover an area of 17.5 x 13.5 km, more or less centred on Neufchâteau (Figure 6.1). This area belongs to the southern group of Ardennes barrows, which extends further north to Bastogne. Until recently, it was believed that there was a gap of 12 km between this group and the northern group of barrows in the Houffalize-Gouvy area, but LiDAR surveying in 20132014 has revealed the presence of numerous barrows in this zone that was previously considered no man’s land. It is not certain that all these barrows can be attributed to the Iron Age (some could be Roman or Merovingian) – only excavations will be able to tell – but the researchers are confident that there is a geographical continuity between the two groups (Draily, Vrielinck and Hanut 2021). Differences in funerary practices, however, remain, and no chariot burials have as yet been found in the northern group, which is also much less investigated, and is generally poorer in grave goods

In the southern group, 21 chariot burials were excavated, the majority of them under modern circumstances, and the last one in 1994 (see Cahen-Delhaye 2013). They are generally dated to the second half of the fifth century BC, except for two MLT chariot burials, one from NeufchâteauLe-Sart, Bourzi (middle of the third century BC), the other one from Sberchamps, Au Fersay (beginning of the second century BC). Verger (1994: 667) points out that chariot burials in the Belgian Ardennes do not start until a more recent phase of LT A. This corresponds with Demoule (1999: 152) who claims that the datable chariot burials all belong to AM IIC (the last decades of the fifth century BC), although the burial tradition in general goes back as far as AM IIA (as from 475 BC).

Figure 6.1. Cemeteries with chariot burials in the Belgian Ardennes (© Greta Anthoons)

87

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Most burials date to the period 450-390 BC, but a number of cemeteries were reoccupied in the third and the beginning of the second century BC, after an apparent void of approximately a century (Cahen-Delhaye 1998a: 17). Although a change in the type and typology of grave goods could be perceived, mortuary practices as such were not affected by this ‘interruption’. In the cemetery of Neufchâteau-Le-Sart, Bourzi, new barrows were erected next to the older ones and one of the later burials was incorporated in an existing barrow; an isolated barrow in Saint-Pïerre-Sberchamps, Au Fersay, contained burials from both periods (Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 64; CahenDelhaye and Gratia 2015; Cahen-Delhaye, Hurt and Gratia 1989). Excavations in the last decade have demonstrated that some of the cemeteries in the northern group are older and even go back to the LH period (Draily, Vrielinck and Hanut 2021: 124, table 1; Draily and Vrielinck 2017). The later period does not seem to be represented (CahenDelhaye 1998a: 17).

80cm (in woods); their original height is estimated between 50cm and 150cm. The barrows with chariot burials are usually but not necessarily larger than those with ordinary burials (Cahen-Delhaye 1998a: 16, 21; 2013: 36). One of the Hamipré-Offaing chariot burials was even discovered in a flat grave (Cahen-Delhaye 1974: 27; 2013: 37). While the barrows in the northern group only have a central burial, those in the south can accommodate as many as six burials (Cahen-Delhaye 1998b: 59). One barrow occasionally covered two chariot burials, as for example in Léglise, Gohimont, barrow IV, where the central feature was a large cremation pyre (Cahen-Delhaye 1981: 21-36), and in Sberchamps, Au Fersay, with the central chariot burial of the fifth century BC and a secondary one from the early second century BC (Cahen-Delhaye and Gratia 2015) (Figure 6.2). (It should be noted that the burials have been re-numbered as compared to the older publications. The chariot burial of the second century BC is now burial 1.) For the third century BC chariot burial of Neufchâteau-LeSart, a new barrow was constructed on a cemetery that was originally established in the fifth century BC (but there are no chariot burials of the earlier period) (Cahen-Delhaye 1997) (Figure 6.3).

Most finds derive from modern excavations. Many more barrow cemeteries have been mapped but have not been excavated (see map Cahen-Delhaye 1998a: 15, fig. 1), and more recently, LiDar surveying added even more (Draily, Vrielinck and Hanut 2021).

The barrows are reminiscent of those in the Middle Rhine - Moselle region; another similarity is the absence of ditched enclosures. There are, however, three examples of quadrangular enclosures formed by a palisade consisting of thin, detached poles, considered inadequate to have carried a roof. The one of Sberchamps, Au Fersay was surrounding a group of five inhumation burials, including the two chariot burials (Cahen-Delhaye 1998b: 61, 63, fig. 5; Cahen-Delhaye and Gratia 2015: 26-28) (Figure 6.2).

6.1.1. Chariot burials and cemeteries The barrow cemeteries are all located near or on the top of a hill. Cemeteries are small: they rarely number more than 12 barrows but can exceptionally have as many as 60. The proportion of chariot burials is high: 21 chariot burials were found on a total of 12 cemeteries. In the cemetery of Léglise, Gohimont four chariot burials were excavated against 15 ordinary burials and two pyres. In Hamipré-Offaing there were three chariot burials for 20 ordinary burials. There does not seem to be a general rule as to the place of chariot burials on a cemetery, but in Hamipré-Offaing they form the centre of a group of several ordinary burials. Two roads were identified in the cemetery of Sibret-Villeroux: wheel ruts were attested in association with hoof prints (Cahen-Delhaye 1998a: 16, 18-19, fig. 4-5; 1998b: 59, 61, 65; 2013: 31), and also in Sberchamps, Au Fersay, wheel ruts were clearly visible (Cahen-Delhaye and Gratia 2015: 29-30).

6.1.4. Grave pits Inhumation grave pits could be up to 2.75m long and up to 1m wide, with a maximum depth of 1.60m. Their size reduces considerably in the third century BC. CahenDelhaye (1998b: 62) also mentions the existence of burials placed on the old ground surface, but without examples or further references. The grave pits for chariot burials are larger and deeper than those of other tombs, 1.90m to 3.45m long and 0.56m to 1.66m wide. The shape of the grave pit is adjusted to the vehicle and can be trapezoid, triangular or ovoid and in one case almost square. The bottom is often less deep at the side of the pole. Half of the chariot burials have no pole or yoke trench or just a small extension; others have a pole trench, less deep than the main pit, and some even have a yoke trench; wheel pits are always present (CahenDelhaye 1998b: 65-66, fig. 8; 2013: 39-44). When no pole and/or yoke trench was present, the pole (and yoke?) may have protruded from the grave pit, as they would still have been covered by the barrow. This seems to be confirmed by the find in Warmifontaine, barrow III, where the horse harness was found outside the grave pit (Hurt 1995: 43). The yoke trench in barrow III at Léglise is not connected with the main grave pit, which also has a small extension

6.1.2. Disposal of the dead As in the Rhine Moselle region, the majority of burials are inhumations, but cremations are not uncommon. Both rites can occur together on the same cemetery and even within the same barrow. All of the chariot burials are inhumations. This may be a coincidence; in the Middle Rhine Moselle area most but not all chariot burials are inhumations. 6.1.3. Superstructures and enclosures Typical for the Belgian Ardennes are the tombelles, low circular barrows, with diameters between 8m and 28m and a preserved height between 5cm (in cultivated fields) and 88

The Belgian Ardennes

N Tombe 4

Tombe 1

d f

(silex)

e e b

c

O

E

Tombe 6

e

Dépôt romain 5

a Tombe 2

e Tombe 3 romain

S

IIe siècle IVe siècle

Limite de la fouille

2m

0

V e siècle période non déterminée

N

O

Tombe 4

a

b

c

Souche

d

a

b

c

d

e

Souche

S E

c

Figure 6.2. Isolated barrow with palisaded enclosure at Sberchamps, Au Fersay (© Centre de Recherches Archéologiques en Ardenne – CRAA. Courtesy of Anne Cahen-Delhaye). Burial 6 is the chariot burial of the fifth century BC, while burial 1 is the chariot burial of the second century BC

89

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 6.3. Chariot burial of Neufchâteau - Le Sart, after Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 22, fig. 15 (©Musées royaux d’Art et d’Histoire, Bruxelles / Agence wallonne du Patrimoine; drawing by Myriam Ansseau et Françoise Roloux)

for the pole. The distance between the two is from 1.05m to 1.40m (Cahen-Delhaye 1981: 14-17, fig. 6). The presence of a pole and/or yoke trench does not seem to be a chronological factor: yoke trenches already occurred in the early phase, for example in Hamipré-Offaing, whereas the third century BC chariot burial of Neufchâteau-Le-Sart Bourzi has neither a pole nor a yoke trench (Figure 6.4); the second century BC chariot burial in Sberchamps, Au Fersay, however, has a pole trench, which also contained the yoke (Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 22-3, figs. 15-16; CahenDelhaye, Hurt and Gratia 1989: 27, fig. 5; Cahen-Delhaye and Gratia 2015: 43-46) (Figure 6.5).

From the type of grave goods, it can be derived that both males and females were buried in chariots, but there is no information on the ages of the deceased. A number of children’s burials could be identified based on the small size of personal adornments and/or the position of these adornments in the grave (Cahen-Delhaye 1998b: 64-65), but children’s burials are rare (Cahen-Delhaye 2013: 26, 38). The only double burial known is that of two children in Neufchâteau, dating from the third century BC (CahenDelhaye 1997: 66). The deceased were buried extended on the back, with the head to the west, as in the Aisne-Marne and Middle Rhine - Moselle regions, although there are some exceptions. Some of the bodies have been disturbed by bioturbation, but in certain cases post-mortem body manipulation is suspected to have taken place (CahenDelhaye 1998b: 67). Given the bad preservation of the bones, this manipulation is hard to detect, but at least two cases of chariot burials are known where the grave was reopened at a later stage: in Sberchamps, Savenière an organic container with cremated bones was placed on the chariot, and in Sberchamps, Au Fersay a deposit with a variety of items, but no cremated bones, was added in the second century AD (Cahen-Delhaye 2013: 46-47).

Many inhumation burials had a wooden lining or coffin (without nails) and sometimes the deceased was placed in a hollow tree trunk. In other cases, the deceased was resting on a bed of oak chips or leaves, grain seeds or similar (Cahen-Delhaye 1998b: 67-69; 2013: 44-45). The grave pit of the chariot burial of Sberchamps, Savenière was surrounded by 23 postholes. The posts must have carried a chamber or coffin with a lid (Cahen-Delhaye 1998a: 20-21, fig. 7; 2013: 44). Both MLT chariot burials of Neufchâteau-le-Sart and Sberchamps, Au Fersay had been covered by a wooden lid (Cahen-Delhaye 2013: 44) (see wooden remains shown in grey in Figure 6.5).

6.1.6. General arrangement of chariot burials The vehicles are complete and standing upright in the pit. Where no separate pole and yoke trenches are found, the pole and yoke may have been disassembled. Based on the position of the dress accessories, the deceased rested on the

6.1.5. The deceased Due to the acidity of the soil, none of the skeletons have been preserved. Only their coloured shadow remains. 90

The Belgian Ardennes

Figure 6.4. Barrow plan and sections Neufchâteau Le Sart barrow II (burial 1 = chariot burial), after Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 20, fig. 13 (© Musées royaux d’Art et d’Histoire, Bruxelles / Agence wallonne du Patrimoine; drawing by Myriam Ansseau and Françoise Roloux)

platform, with the torso between the two wheels and the feet on the pole. In one case the corpse was laying parallel to the axle (Léglise, Gohimont, IV-2) (Cahen1998b: 65; 2013: 45-46). More than two centuries later, the chariot burial of Sberchamps, Le Fersay (Cahen-Delhaye 1993), is still arranged in the same traditional style of the fifth century BC, while by this time everywhere in northern Gaul only partial or pars pro toto chariot burials are the norm (see chapter 12). The discovery of the midsecond century BC chariot burial of Warcq in the French

Ardennes, however, suggests that the practice of old-style chariot burials with inhumations has persisted longer than previously thought, and more later examples may be discovered. 6.1.7. Vehicle parts and horse harness The vehicles were not new and sometimes show signs of repair, as for example in Juseret-Bercheux (nave band) and Warmifontaine (eyebolt). In Sberchamps-Savenière, 91

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Tombe 1 6 1a 3a 6

5b

1

1b 3a

3a 5a 2 3b 3b

4

21 3b

3b 3b

5c 5d

20

7b

7b

7a 7a 19

16

7d 15 9h 7c

8 7a

0

1m

Figure 6.5. Chariot burial 1 of Sberchamps, Au Fersay (© Centre de Recherches Archéologiques en Ardenne – CRAA. Courtesy of Anne Cahen-Delhaye)

92

The Belgian Ardennes the two wheels are completely different, suggesting one of them was a replacement. As the grave pits are rather shallow, half of the metal parts are missing, and when they have not disappeared, they are often not in position; for example, only one in six tyres have survived (CahenDelhaye and Hurt 1994: 47-48). Other reasons for missing chariot parts may be bioturbation (of which traces are found) and the rough grubbing of trees; where no tyres were preserved, their former presence was visible as rust stains in the wheel pits (Cahen-Delhaye 2013: 31).

platforms found in several instances, the sides of the platform are believed to have measured maximum 0.80m to 1.00m. There is no information on the superstructure of the box (Cahen-Delhaye 1991b: 78; Cahen and Hurt 1994: 48), but maybe the front could be opened or removed, given the position of the corpse (Cahen-Delhaye 2013: 50). The vehicle parts with a function in the assemblage of the chariot and in the suspension system are similar to those in the Aisne-Marne: single Ösenstifte, plain Doppelösenstifte and more elaborate Doppelösenstifte. These parts were sometimes found in situ, which allowed to reconstruct the chariot and its suspension system (Cahen and Hurt 1994: 48).

The tyres are usually 0.85-0.88m in diameter but can range from 0.80m to 1.10m. The majority have a width of 25mm, although this can vary between 22mm and 38mm. They are between 2mm and 9mm thick. Their exterior profile is more often rounded than flat, whereas the interior part is usually concave. The tyre is often secured with several nails (Cahen-Delhaye 1993: 19; Cahen and Hurt 1994: 48). Unfortunately, the information on the tyres of the two MLT chariot burials is scarce: no tyres were present in Neufchâteau, while in Sberchamps only some small fragments were preserved, which indicate that the tyres were at least 24mm (left wheel) and 27mm wide (right wheel) (Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 68-69); Cahen-Delhaye and Gratia 2015: 46-47). In both cases the wheel-track was 1.31-1.32m, which fits well with the early chariots which generally have wheel-tracks of 1.32-1.35m (but ranging from 1.08m to 1.45m) (Cahen-Delhaye 2013: 49). Typical are also the felloe joints, of which one was even attested in Neufchâteau-Le-Sart, Le Bourzi near the left wheel pit (see Figure 6.6, item 1), which makes the vehicle look rather outmoded: by this time they had long fallen out of use in the Aisne-Marne (see section 5.3.8); in addition, one of the nails found in the right wheel pit may have served to secure the tyre, which is also an unexpected feature for a third century BC vehicle (Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 24-26). Nave bands are in iron and are often found isolated. In one case the whole body of the nave was covered. There is much variation in size and shape. No nave bands were found in the later chariot burials (Cahen-Delhaye 1993: 19; Cahen and Hurt 1994: 48; Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 24, 68-69; Cahen-Delhaye 2013: 49).

A complete yoke trimming was retrieved from the MLT chariot burial of Sberchamps, Au Fersay (Figure 6.7); there was no special yoke trench: the yoke had been detached and deposited in the pole trench (Mathieu 1993; Cahen-Delhaye and Gratia 2015: 48-52). Yokes could vary in length from 1.00m to 1.20m and possibly even 1.72m (Cahen and Hurt 1994: 48). Several plain rein rings were discovered, of various sizes and numbers. The highest number was attested in Witry: two large rings were presumably terrets from the yoke and four smaller ones were probably from the head harness (Hurt 1991: 8283). Two large copper-alloy terrets were found in Léglise barrow III, in the yoke trench (Cahen-Delhaye 1981: 19). Horse bits are usually found in pairs, but occasionally only a single bit was retrieved. They are always two-link, exceptionally one-link, snaffle bits, made in iron. Their position is generally in the front of the grave, but some were found at the back, in the right-hand wheel pit (CahenDelhaye 1998a: 28; 2013: 48). No horse harness was found in the third century BC chariot burial of Neufchâteau-LeSart; it is presumed to have disappeared, given that the grave pit was very shallow at the level of the yoke (CahenDelhaye 1997: 68). Two of the chariot burials of Léglise produced several copper-alloy openwork plaques and phalerae (CahenDelhaye 1981: 16-29, figs. 8, 12-13). Similar plaques are known from the Aisne-Marne and the Middle Rhine - Moselle (Cahen-Delhaye 1991b: 78, figs. 11-12). According to Verger (1994: 667), the harness decorations from Léglise were certainly produced by the same craftsman who made the yoke sheathing of SommeBionne.

Cylinder-shaped iron axle caps, 35-60mm in diameter, were sporadically found near the wheels. Linchpins were probably in wood, as no metal linchpins have been discovered (Cahen and Hurt 1994: 48). Judged by the shape of the grave pits, the lower part of the poles probably had a swan’s neck profile. The few pole trenches that existed allow to estimate their length at 2.20240m in one case and 3.30m in two others (Cahen and Hurt 1994: 48).

Iron and copper-alloy phalerae came to light in Sberchamps, Au Fersay, Sberchamps, Savenière (Hurt 1987) and Warmifontaine barrow III (Hurt 1995: 42-43), and decorative buttons in Warmifontaine barrow I (Hurt 1993: 15). Many pieces still show the remains of the leather thongs to which they were attached.

In a few cases, traces of consumed or mineralised wood from the vehicle box were identified. The suspension system seems to suggest that the box rested on the pole. It cannot have extended much beyond the axle, as otherwise the weight would be on the platform behind the wheels, which would create an imbalance. Based on traces of

6.1.8. Grave goods In general, the grave goods deposited in chariot burials are similar to those found in ordinary burials, although a 93

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 6.6. Grave goods from the Neufchâteau - Le Sart chariot burial, after Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 25, fig. 17 (©Musées royaux d’Art et d’Histoire, Bruxelles / Agence wallonne du Patrimoine; drawings by Myriam Ansseau and Françoise Roloux)

few exceptional objects were discovered in chariot burials. Several burials contained a copper-alloy or iron brooch. In the third century BC, the range of brooches broadens to include for example Münsingen brooches. Belt buckles are attested both with males and females, but those found in warrior burials are usually more elaborate (openwork) (Cahen-Delhaye 1998a: 26).

In the fifth century BC, the standard set of jewellery in a female burial is a copper-alloy torc and two identical copper-alloy bracelets, sometimes combined with a pair of copper-alloy earrings. In the third century BC torcs are less common and bracelets no longer come in identical pairs. Both are now equipped with plastic reliefs. New materials in the third century are glass, jet and probably also coral 94

The Belgian Ardennes (Hurt 1995: 44). The sword from Warmifontaine is the only one attested in the Belgian Ardennes. It was found in its scabbard, with six suspension rings (Hurt 1995). Spears and lances, generally between one and three per burial, are more common: about a quarter of all burials excavated in the southern group of the Ardennes contains a weapon. In the third century BC, the deposition of weapons in the grave decreases considerably. When found in male burials, large knives may have been weapons. Both large and smaller knives in female burials are perhaps more likely to be of domestic use; they were perhaps associated with animal offerings (Cahen-Delhaye 1991b: 73-74; 1997: 69-71). A very long spearhead (59cm) was deposited with the deceased in the MLT chariot burial of Sberchamps, Au Fersay (Cahen-Delhaye and Gratia 2015: 55, 72).

Figure 6.7. Yoke trimming from chariot burial 1 of Sberchamps, Au Fersay (© Musée des Celtes, Libramont)

Most but not all deceased were given a good quality pot, that was sometimes even painted. Very typical are vases which imitate copper-alloy situlae. Strong links exist with the ceramics of the Aisne-Marne region, as far as shapes and decorations are concerned. This link still exists in the third century BC, although with regard to the number of pots, the trend is opposite: in the Aisne-Marne the presence of pottery in graves strongly decreases at this time, while in the Belgian Ardennes some burials now have as many as five pots. In this respect, the Ardennes show more affinity with the Oise region. Most pottery is handmade, but two third century BC pots from Neufchâteau-Le-Sart are apparently wheel-turned; one of these was found with the chariot burial. The second century BC chariot burial of Sberchamps, Au Fersay did not include any pottery; in fact, second century BC burials in general did not have pottery (Cahen-Delhaye 1991b: 70-71; 1997: 83, 86-89; 1998a: 27-28).

(traces on Münsingen brooches) (Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 78-79, 87; Cahen-Delhaye 1998a: 26). Beads are very rare in the Belgian Ardennes, but an exceptional piece of jewellery consisting of 24 beads was found in the third century BC chariot burial of NeufchâteauLe-Sart. Too short to be a necklace, the hypothesis is that the beads formed a chain, connecting two symmetrically worn brooches (Figure 6.8) (Cosyns and Hurt 2007). Two small annular blue glass beads are common enough, but the other, oblong beads are more unusual: 10 of them are of a translucent brown colour, the remaining 12 are opaque black. The raw material comes from the Near East, and maybe the beads themselves were produced in an oriental workshop (Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 73-74; Cosyns and Hurt 2007; Gratuze and Cosyns 2007). From the same cemetery are two bracelets in lignite or sapropelite which are presumably imports from central Europe, perhaps from Bohemia (Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 75).

Toilet sets occur in a number of female burials but are also attested in at least one male burial (for an overview and discussion, see Hurt 2007).

Weapons and jewellery are often mutually exclusive, but there are exceptions, as for example in the chariot burial of Warmifontaine, barrow III, where a hollow copper-alloy bracelet was associated with weapons, including a sword

There is no indication for animal offerings in the graves, but this may be the result of the unfavourable soil conditions. The presence of knives possibly suggests that burials also contained animal food offerings. 6.2. The origins of the La Tène culture of the Belgian Ardennes Traditionally, the Belgian Ardennes are believed to have been colonised by people from the Eifel (the northern group) and from the Aisne-Marne (the southern group) (see for example Cahen-Delhaye 1991b: 65, 69, 79). The reasoning behind this is based on two factors. Firstly, until the appearance of barrow cemeteries in LT A, the area does not show many signs of occupation; the schistose high plateaus were probably not very attractive for prehistoric populations. As a result of this sparse occupation, new settlers would experience little resistance. Secondly, until recently, the northern and southern groups were thought to be divided by a 12km wide strip of land. Even though LiDAR surveying has now demonstrated a geographical

Figure 6.8. Alternative reconstruction of the bead chain from the Neufchâteau - Le Sart chariot burial (Cosyns and Hurt 2007) (© Peter Cosyns)

95

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent continuity, the differences between the two groups remain. The northern group shows many affinities in material culture with the Middle Rhine - Moselle region, whereas in the south, both the ritual and the finds link the area with the Aisne-Marne. Both groups remained in touch with their alleged homeland: for example, the ceramics of the third century BC in the southern group are still influenced by those in the Aisne-Marne. Also Verger (1994: 668) envisages the possibility of a Marnian colonisation. He mentions three elements that are in favour of this theory: the strong similarities with the Aisne-Marne, the chronological shift (chariot burials start slightly later in the Belgian Ardennes), and the relatively poorer ‘founder’s’ burials.

This prestige of the local Iron Age elite may have been based on the presence of gold; several recently discovered gold mines were apparently exploited in the Iron Age. However, the assumed wealth extracted from this exploitation is not reflected in the burials; apart from the vehicles themselves, few prestige objects were found. Moreover, the only gold attested in a burial is a pair of golden earrings from Wibrin, in the northern group. A possible explanation is that all the gold was exported (Detaille and Van Eerdenbrugh 2014). Also interesting is the broadening of the horizon in the third century BC: the provenance of items like the chain of glass beads, lignite and sapropelite bracelets and copperalloy torcs with nodosities is to be found in more distant regions. The two traditional core areas are no longer the only source of inspiration (Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 88).

However, the colonisation hypothesis is rather onesided, in that it focuses entirely on the strong link with the Aisne-Marne. While this link can of course not be denied, the southern group is also thoroughly influenced by the Middle Rhine - Moselle region, as is demonstrated both in the ritual and the material field. The low circular barrows and the total absence of ditched enclosures form a clear connection with the Rhinish cemeteries, as does the stronger presence of cremation. Influence from the Middle Rhine – Moselle was already recognised by CahenDelhaye (1991b: 79) on account of certain shapes and decorations of ceramics, and of ornithomorphic fibulae. There are differences as well: the grave pit and the general burial arrangement, for example, are much closer to what is customary in the Aisne-Marne.

6.3. The Belgian Ardennes and the origins of the Arras Culture In 1986, Van Endert (1986: 280-82) argued that the Arras Culture was founded by immigrants from the Belgian Ardennes. Her main grounds for this theory were the alleged disappearance of the Ardennes population at the end of LT A and the relatively poor grave goods and plain vehicles in both cultures. 6.3.1. Demographic fluctuations in the Belgian Ardennes

The La Tène culture of the Belgian Ardennes seems to have emerged from a combination of elements, borrowed from two core areas of the La Tène world, rather than as the result of migration. Verger’s argument of a chronological shift would equally well fit this explanation. Besides, the barrow tradition was probably adopted at an earlier stage (LT A1) than the rite of chariot burial (LT A2) (see Demoule 1999: 152).

Since Van Endert’s publication, the finds of third and early second century BC burials, including two chariot burials, have increased significantly, but the question of the ‘missing’ fourth century remains. In theory it is still possible that the majority of people left the area and that the third century burials belong to the offspring of a small group that stayed behind. There is, however, an alternative explanation. Generally, only the barrows have been investigated and rarely the surface around or in between. As a result, relatively few flat graves have been excavated (for some references see Cahen-Delhaye 1998b: 60, note 5). The numerical potential of flat graves is unknown. If this potential is relatively high, it may conceal the missing link between the fifth and the third centuries BC. Perhaps the barrows should be seen as ancestor cult places, where in a first stage secondary burials were given a place in the barrow but later generations settled for a flat grave near the ancestors’ barrows (cf. secondary burials in ditched enclosures around Fère-Champenoise, see section 5.1.6). Perhaps some of these flat graves contained chariot burials, what would explain why the tradition ‘reappears’ unaltered in the third and in the second century BC (but see also section 15.2). The reason why in the third century BC new barrows were added and secondary burials were incorporated in existing barrows may perhaps be found in the need of certain kin groups to confirm their position in the ancestral landscape. Maybe in the interim period,

The visibility of the occupation of the Belgian Ardennes largely depends on the barrows. Excavations have shown that next to the barrows there must have been numerous flat graves, of which only a fraction has been examined. Furthermore, in the southern group where there are no hillforts, only a handful of contemporary settlements have been detected. As such, any less visible type of mortuary practice from a previous period would easily be overlooked. It is not unreasonable to assume that the area was already populated before. Several Bronze Age weapons were found and the 1878 find of a golden lunula in Fauvillers even points at a high-level connection with Britain and/or Ireland in the Bronze Age (CahenDelhaye 1991a). It should be pointed out, however, that the authenticity of Fauvillers as the finding spot of the lunula is questioned by Warmenbol (1997). Fauvillers is just a few km east of Witry, where the most eastern located chariot burial was found. If the lunula is genuinely found there, it demonstrates that chariot burials were not the first signs of prestige in the area. 96

The Belgian Ardennes 6.3.4. Conclusion

other funerary rites were practised which left little or no traces.

The differences between both cultures are multiple and fundamental. Neither of them reaches the level of luxury attested in the core areas, but this is not a good premise for drawing conclusions of origin.

6.3.2. ‘Poor grave goods’ and ‘plain vehicles’? Compared to the Aisne-Marne and Middle Rhine Moselle regions, where grave goods often include rich Mediterranean imports, the burials of the Belgian Ardennes and the Arras Culture are rather poor. There are, however, important differences between the two cultures. In the Arras Culture, more than 20 swords have been found, against a single sword in the Ardennes. Pottery on the other hand is of good quality in the Ardennes, while in East Yorkshire it is rather crude, so much even that it is never found in chariot burials. As such it is not correct to use the relative poorness of grave goods as an argument to link the two groups. Van Endert also claims that vehicles in both regions were rather plain. In the Belgian Ardennes, not many metal vehicle parts were found. Linchpins for example must have been made in wood. The absence of elaborate terrets is not unusual, given the early dates of the chariot burials. Most vehicles and horse harnesses were indeed rather plain, without decorations, although there are a few remarkable pieces, like the openwork plaques from Léglise, the yoke fitting of Sberchamps and various phalerae. In eastern Yorkshire on the other hand, there is quite a good collection of metal parts, including decorated linchpins and terrets with enamel and coral inlay. This may partially be explained by the later dates of the Yorkshire vehicles. On the other hand, horse plaques and phalerae are unusual in the Arras Culture. One of the major differences between the chariots of both cultures is the suspension system. None of the Arras Culture chariot burials produced any Doppelösenstifte or other device that was typical for the standard continental suspension system. In Yorkshire the suspension problem must have been solved in a different way, but if the ‘founders’ of the Arras Culture originated in the Belgian Ardennes, it seems peculiar that there are no traces of their own technique. 6.3.3. Other issues Major differences in burial customs exist between the Belgian Ardennes and the Arras Culture. The shape of the barrows and the absence of ditched enclosures in the Ardennes is but one example; the difference in the position of the body is another. Van Endert’s theory aimed at explaining two phenomena: the alleged disappearance of the population of the Belgian Ardennes in the early fourth century BC and the ‘sudden’ introduction of inhumation and chariot burials in East Yorkshire, which was, admittedly, generally thought to have taken place around the same time, which is now known to be incorrect. In addition, there are good indications that the population of the Belgian Ardennes did not leave the area at all. 97

7 The Luxembourg Ardennes Until 2006, only one chariot burial was known from the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (apart from one from Flaxweiler which remains unpublished). It was found in 1985 in Grosbous-Vichten, at the southern edge of the Luxembourg Ardennes, on a small barrow cemetery. The finds are described and discussed in a paper by Jeannot Metzler (1986).

This chariot burial shows affinities with contemporary chariot burials of the Belgian Ardennes and the AisneMarne (for example the horse harness) but also with those of the Middle Rhine – Moselle (the wooden burial chamber). Remarkable for the cemetery as a whole is the paucity of grave goods. Pottery is completely lacking and only two brooches were found (in barrows 1 and 4); these date from LT A2 or from the transition to LT B1.

The cemetery did not produce any skeletons, nor cremated bones, but in a few cases, teeth were found, from which can be inferred that the main orientation was west-east, although in one case the head of the deceased – a young child – was oriented to the north.

In 2006, a third chariot burial was discovered in the Grand Duchy, this time in Reuland. Like the one from GrosbousVichten, it had a wooden burial chamber, but the wheels were in position and the pole was accommodated inside the chamber. There was no yoke or horse harness and only one grave gift, a vase. The burial is from the LH or very early LT period (Metzler and Gaeng 2008).

The barrows were low, the highest (0.30m) one being that with the chariot burial (barrow 2), which was also the widest in size, with a diameter of 14m. Like in the Middle Rhine – Moselle region and in the Belgian Ardennes, the barrows were not surrounded by a ditch, although there was one exception: a circular, ditched enclosure was attested for the child burial in barrow 4. The grave pit of the chariot burial was rectangular, measuring 2.50 by 1.90m, but it had an extension in the east, to accommodate for the pole, which was sticking out the wooden burial chamber. A similar arrangement may have existed in Gransdorf (see section 3.1.5.1). Part of the chamber was protruding above ground level, but it would have been covered by the barrow. The vehicle had been partially disassembled, in that the wheels had been taken off. They were not placed against the side of the chamber as is sometimes seen elsewhere, but were placed slantingly over the pole, one on each side. Horse bits, copper-alloy terrets rings and the remains of iron sheet which had probably covered the yoke, were found below the tyres. At the other end of the chamber were two Doppelösenstifte; their position corresponded with the assumed position of the axle. Nothing remained of the skeleton, and there were no grave goods that could have given an indication of the position of the deceased. In any case, since the box of the vehicle (measuring 0.90 x 1.00m) was placed on the bottom of the chamber, the deceased was certainly not placed underneath the vehicle. The iron tyres had a diameter of 0.84m; they were curved in cross-section and between 2.5cm and 2.7cm wide; they had been nailed to the felloe. Also two inner and two outer nave hoops were found, all in iron. Based on differences between the tyres and the two sets of nave hoops, one of the wheels is believed to have been a replacement. 99

8 The Paris area a dry valley river belonging to the Seine drainage basin. The label ‘aristocratic’ is perhaps not very appropriate, as only a few of the burials are genuinely rich, containing a vehicle and/or weapons; an inventory of the burials of Le Plessis-Gassot shows that many of them are accommodated in simple grave pits and have no or few grave goods (see Ginoux 2009: 23, tab. 2).

This chapter will mainly concentrate on the area around Paris, corresponding with the presumed territory of the Parisii in Caesar’s time (Leconte 1990-1991: 43, fig. 1), but when appropriate, reference will be made to neighbouring areas in the Île-de-France. Marion (2004: 204-17) distinguishes several subregions in the Île-de-France; the Paris area corresponds with his ‘central group’. Bearing in mind that the situation in the first century BC cannot be equated with that in previous centuries, the subregions can nevertheless quite easily be linked with different people identified at the end of the Gallic independence: the wellrepresented southeastern group, for example, belongs in the first century BC to the land of the Senones.

The largest burial site, excavated in 2002-2003, is the cemetery of Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne (Seine-SainteDenis, Paris suburbs), with more than 500 burials (almost all inhumations), covering a period from the very end of the fourth to the early second century BC. The final publication of the site is still pending, but according to earlier publications, the cemetery is not completely excavated: it is estimated that between 100 and 200 burials remain to be uncovered (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 1.3.3). Assuming that the cemetery was in use for 125 years (say between four and five generations) and that the whole population was represented, this would give an average living population of approximately 115 people, based on the number of burials currently found. If the non-excavated burials belong to the same time span, the population could on average have numbered as many as 140 to 160 persons.

8.1. Chariot burials and general funerary practices The chariot burials are limited in time and space. They only occur in the northern half of the Paris suburbs and can all be dated to the third century BC. The highest concentration is in the eastern part of the Val-d’Oise department, but older excavations unveiled similar sites in the Hauts-de-Seine and central Paris departments. They are all inhumations and as a rule seem to be part of small, relatively rich cemeteries. The period preceding that of the chariot burials is not very well known. There are almost no funerary data from the earliest part of the La Tène period from around Paris. As this is not the result of a population vacuum, other funeral rites must have been practised, which did not leave a trace in the archaeological record. The situation is different in the southeast of the Île-de-France, around the confluence of the Seine and Yonne rivers, where several funeral sites dating to the fifth and fourth centuries BC were discovered, and where, as illustrated by Marion (2004: 206-17; 2007: 100) a perfect continuity from LH to LT B1 can be discerned. Also in the northwest of the Île-deFrance, in the Vexin region, there are a few cemeteries that were already in use in the fourth century BC (Epiais-Rhus) and even since the LH period (Genainville) (Ginoux 2009: 113-14; Marion 2004: 206-13).

The cemetery is extremely dense, but not evenly distributed; some areas are denser than others. The 10 to 20 cremations are almost all concentrated in one area, but in between inhumations (see Le Forestier 2005: 27, fig. 9). A quasi-blank strip in the middle may represent a trackway (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 20062007: § 1.3.3). Another fairly large cemetery is that of Saint-Maur-desFossés (southeast of Paris) which was (partially) excavated in the nineteenth century. The estimated number of burials lies between 120 and 140; also this cemetery is very dense (Leconte 1990-1991; Marion 2007: 106). It is worth noting that as from the end of the second century BC, funerary data are lacking in the Paris region, while settlements remain occupied, as attested in Bobigny, where the excavators are still hoping to locate burials for the missing period (Le Forestier 2005: 21). In fact, in the Île-de-France as a whole, funerary data become extremely sparse in LT D (Marion 2004: 151).

8.1.1. Chariot burials and cemeteries At the turn from the fourth to the third century BC, many new cemeteries are founded in the Paris region, both small, fairly rich cemeteries and larger, more ‘common’ cemeteries (Marion 2007: 100-08) (Figure 8.1). All the chariot burials are located on small ‘aristocratic’ cemeteries; these have less than 20 burials (see Lejars 2005: 81, fig. 11), including one or two chariot burials, and they are only in use for a few generations. These cemeteries are generally situated on a plateau, dominating

Pit burials in settlement context are regularly found in the southeast of the Île-de-France (Séguier and Delattre 2005). There are no chariot burials in the southeast, but a silo in La Grande Paroisse, Les Rimelles contained a LT B deposit of large fragments of wheel tyres; in the same 101

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 8.1. Cemeteries of the third century BC in the Paris area (© Greta Anthoons)

pit, at a higher level, the body of a male was found, but both were not associated (Delattre 2000: 16; Séguier and Delattre 2005: 251, fig. 11, 255, 257, fig. 16). In Bobigny, Les Stades de la Motte, some iron parts, probably from the box of a chariot, possibly of the third century BC, were found in an enclosure ditch (Atlas de l’Architecture et du Patrimoine de la Seine-Saint-Denis s.d.: image 220; Le Bechennec 2002: 33).

In Le Plessis-Gassot, towards the end of the use of the cemetery in the mid-third century BC, an urn with cremated bones was placed virtually in the centre of the chariot burial (Ginoux and Marti 1999: 20; Ginoux 2003: 35-36). The bones were those of a young adult, but the head was missing; the cremation had taken place on fresh bone (Ginoux 2009: 72-75, 103-04). It is worth noting that just further north, in Picardy, cremation was commonly used at this time and in many other regions, inhumation and cremation were practised at the same time, like for example in the Belgian Ardennes, the Middle Rhine Moselle region and in the Aisne. In the northwest of the Île-de-France, in Epiais-Rhus, cremation is introduced as early as LT C1 and becomes the sole formal burial rite in LT C2. Although geographically close, Epiais-Rhus is different from the Paris region and has more points in common with Picardy, but even in the southeast cremation becomes more customary in the course of LT C (Marion 2004: 214-17).

8.1.2. Disposal of the dead Inhumation is the rule, although in the southeast of the Île-de-France, cremation starts to appear in LT C1. In the Paris area cremation is also attested around that time, but it remains very rare: in Bobigny, for example, only two per cent of all burials are cremations (Marion 2007: 108). The 10 to 20 cremation burials of Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne are concentrated in the southeastern part of the cemetery. They are contemporary with the inhumation burials, they include both male and female burials and the quality of their grave goods is similar to that of the inhumations. It is, therefore, likely that the choice for cremation was rather motivated by family tradition (Le Forestier 2005: 32-35).

Compared to the neighbouring regions, the Paris area maintains a certain originality, which is reflected in the adherence to inhumation. There is as yet no hard evidence 102

The Paris area are not always easy to date, but square enclosures can often be attributed to the end of the ELT period. In this respect, the area is connected with northern Burgundy and the southwest of the Aisne-Marne region (Marion 2007: 104; Marion 2004: 173-75). According to Marion (2004: 173) aerial photography allows one to assume that the existence of square enclosures is not limited to the southeast of the Île-de-France but covers the whole region. Unfortunately, he does not explore this any further.

that the obscuring of the funerary scene at the end of the second century BC was the result of a general transition to cremation, although this could logically be expected, given the changes observed in all the surrounding regions. 8.1.3. Superstructures and enclosures No ditched enclosures were found on any of the small cemeteries around Paris, nor on the large cemetery of Bobigny, Hôpital Avicennes. On the neighbouring site of Bobigny, Les Stades de la Motte, a number of round and square enclosures have been identified, but their dating is not always clear; one seemed connected with a flexed inhumation, but both features are possibly not contemporary (Atlas de l’Architecture et du Patrimoine de la Seine-Saint-Denis s.d.: image 210).

Cemeteries as a whole may have been enclosed in some way or another. In Bouqueval, aerial photography revealed the existence of a rectangular ditch (28m x 17m) possibly surrounding the cemetery, but it was only seen after the excavation and was not investigated (Guadagnin 1984: 13). The small cemetery of Le Plessis-Gassot (Figure 8.2), was surrounded by shrubs, as brought to light by fine sedimentary studies and micro-morphological analyses (Ginoux 2009: 53, 83; Ginoux and Marti 1999: 17).

In the southeast of the Île-de-France on the other hand, funerary enclosures in general have a long tradition. They

Sépultures à inhumation Sépulture à incinération

N

Tombe à char Fosses plantées (chablis)

1118

1122 1110 1104 1105 1106

1001

1112

1008

1005

1107/08 1004 1096

0

1391

1003

1000 1002

50 m

Figure 8.2. Le Plessis-Gassot cemetery (Ginoux 2009: 22, fig. 7; drawing by F. Marti – courtesy of Nathalie Ginoux)

103

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent There are few indications of barrows. Burials are often very close one to another, even on the small cemeteries, so if the burials were covered by barrows, these must have been very small. Sometimes more space appears to have been left around the chariot burials (see Lejars 2005, 81, fig. 11).

that the posts were removed. The burial was probably also covered by a mound, as seems to be suggested by the collapsed burial chamber (Ginoux 2009: 329, fig. 30; Ginoux and Marti 1999) (Figure 8.3). 8.1.4. Grave pits

Two large postholes in the grave pit of the chariot burial of Le Plessis-Gassot point at the presence of a roof structure. The excavation and subsequent analyses have demonstrated that at a certain moment after the decay of the grave contents, this construction was dismantled and

Grave pits are quadrangular, oblong, oval or trapezoidal. Some graves are unlined, but others have a wooden lining, or the pit is covered with a wooden lid (see for example Le Forestier 2005: 29-32, 47-53 and Ginoux and Marti

Faîtière

Hypothèse 1 : un bâtiment

Plancher / entre-sol? Adobes ou pisé

Roue du char

Lambris

0

Corps sur la caisse du char

Vase peint

2 m. Plancher?

Dais de terre

Faîtières

Adobes ou pisé

Plancher / Entre-sol?

Roue du char

Corps sur la plateforme du char

Lambris Timon

Joug

Vase peint

Plancher?

Dais de terre

Toiture et terre végétale

Hypothèse 2 : une structure tumulaire

Faîtière Corps sur la caisse du char Roue du char

Lambris

0

vase peint

2 m. Plancher?

Dais de terre

Toiture et terre végétale

Faîtières

Roue du char Corps sur la plateforme du char

Lambris Timon

Plancher ?

Joug

Vase peint Dais de terre

Figure 8.3. Le Plessis-Gassot chariot burial: reconstruction hypotheses (Ginoux 2009: 36, fig. 30; drawing by F. Marti – courtesy of Nathalie Ginoux)

104

The Paris area 1999: 20). In Le Plessis-Gassot, strangely enough, one of the burials without grave goods was placed in a pit with a wooden lining, while one of the richest burials only had a wooden plank at the bottom of the grave pit (Ginoux 2009: 84).

an adolescent (13-15 years old), in Bouqueval burial 3 (Guadagnin 1984: 44-53). The deceased are buried extended on the back. The prevailing orientation is south-north (head to the south), but the opposite orientation is not uncommon. For Bobigny, Forestier (2005: 29) also mentions east-west and west-east oriented burials. In a few exceptional cases, the body is almost in a lateral position, with flexed legs, like for example in the north-south oriented burial S.440 of Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne (Le Forestier 2005: 136). Sometimes the unusual position can be connected with a disablement (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 2.1.2).

In Saint-Maur-des-Fossés the body of the deceased was often surrounded with stone blocks; once in a while there were even a few blocks laid on the body of the deceased (Leconte 1990-1991: 46-7). This discloses the influence from the Sénonais region, where stone block ‘coffins’ are common (Ginoux and Poux 2002: 229, 231; Marion 2007: 102). This influence is less strong in the cemeteries north of Paris, but it is not absent; examples are known from Bouqueval (Guadagnin 1984: 24-26) and Argenteuil (Amalou and Bulard 1989: 17-18).

8.1.6. General arrangement of chariot burials

Chariot burials are always accommodated in chambers or pseudo-chambers, built into large rectangular or trapezoidal pits with rounded corners. There is never a separate trench for the yoke, but when the vehicle is complete, wheel slots are standard.

The way of depositing the vehicle is not uniform. In most cases, the vehicle was complete when placed in the grave pit. Unfortunately, for the chariot burial of Nanterre (found in 1899 in a quarry), no plan is available. The same of course applies to the finds in the Musée des Antiquités Nationales with provenance Paris, Rue Tournefort, as it is not even clear that they belong to the same burial, although they are fairly homogeneous.

8.1.5. The deceased The degree of bone preservation differs considerably from one cemetery to another. In Roissy and Le Plessis-Gassot, the skeletons were completely or almost completely dissolved, while in Bouqueval they were partially preserved; in the large cemetery of Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne, the human bones were very well preserved. The results of the anthropological examination of Bobigny were remarkable: all age groups were well-represented, including a large proportion of children, close to what one would expect in a pre-Jennerian society (i.e., before the invention of vaccination, after Edward Jenner who discovered the process of vaccination against smallpox in 1796). There is only some deficit in the 0–1-year age group (Marion 2007: 106); these infants may have been buried in the settlement (but none have been found as yet) or perhaps they were buried in shallow pits that were lost (Le Forestier 2005: 65).

Two chariot burials were excavated in Roissy, La Fosse Cotheret in 1999, burial 1002 (generally referred to as the ‘chariot burial with the bronzes’ after the high number of copper-alloy appliques in Plastic Style) and burial 5002 (referred to as the ‘warrior burial’) (Figures 8.4 and 8.5) (Lejars 2002a; 2005). The vehicles were placed in the grave fully assembled, including the pole and associated yoke (Lejars 2002a; 2005). In the chariot burial with the bronzes, the collapse of the chamber ceiling must have broken the yoke, which would explain why the terrets were not found in their original position (Olivier 2012: 84). In the warrior burial, however, the original setting of the five terrets is still visible, with the larger one in the middle, i.e., the same arrangement as in East Yorkshire. In Le Plessis-Gassot, the vehicle was complete, but the excavators discovered that the box had been lifted from the axle and placed more forward, on a layer of soil (Ginoux 2009: 32-39; Ginoux and Marti 1999: 21, reconstruction) (Figure 8.6). Olivier (2012: 86-87) argued a similar set-up for the chariot burial with the bronzes from Roissy. In fact, this arrangement may have occurred elsewhere: the fact that the head and body of the deceased are at a lower level than the axle might offer an explanation for those cases where the body of the deceased is believed to have been placed underneath the chariot (see for example section 3.1.5.2). The yoke does not appear as a clear line of terrets: two terrets were found in the northeastern corner, the other four in the hole of the northern post. Ginoux (2009: 38-39) thinks the yoke was originally attached to this post.

In large cemeteries like Bobigny there is a predominance of burials with few or no grave goods. This seems to suggest that the lower social classes were well-represented (Marion 2007: 106), although it does not exclude the existence of an even lower social class that was not entitled to a place in the cemetery. The question which segment of the population was selected for the pit burials is still pending, although the complex management of these structures seems to plead against the theory that people of inferior social rank or criminals were buried here (see Delattre 2000). A few double burials are mentioned for Bobigny (Le Forestier 2005: 32) and also one for Saint-Maur-desFossés (Leconte 1990-1991: 46); they almost always combine an adult and a child. Both males and females can be buried in a chariot and there is also one occurrence of

In Bouqueval burial 11, the excavators did not note any finds in the southeastern end of the grave pit, where the yoke could have been. However, the grave pit was very 105

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 8.4. Roissy chariot burial 1002 (‘bronzes’) (Lejars 2005: 78, fig. 5)

shallow (less than 50cm below the current surface) and part of the burial had been ploughed away (Guadagnin 1984: 54). In Bouqueval burial 3, a completely different type of arrangement was observed. The chariot had been disassembled. In the centre of the grave pit, there was a rectangular cavity in which the vehicle box was placed, carrying the adolescent and most of the grave goods, including the horse harness. The wheels are believed to have been laid flat alongside the box, whereas the linchpins were deposited in the far northwest and northeast corners

of the grave pit. In fact, only a 35cm long fragment of a tyre was found, but the other tyre may have been ripped out by a plough (Guadagnin 1984: 44-45, 53). The absence of wheel slots seems to sustain the observations of the excavators that the wheels had been taken off. In several cases, not much was left of the human bones, but the position of the grave goods suggests that just like in the Aisne-Marne, the deceased was extended on the back, with the head between the wheels and the feet towards the 106

The Paris area

Figure 8.5. Roissy chariot burial 5002 (‘warrior’) (Lejars 2005: 77, fig. 4)

yoke. In chariot burial 1002 (the one with the bronzes) of Roissy, the deceased had been placed to the right of the pole, according to Olivier (2012: 86-87).

alloy studs, while others only have the basics. Both types can occur on the same cemetery: in Roissy, the chariot burial with the weapons (burial 5002) is fairly plain compared to the other chariot burial (burial 1002), which has 25 copper-alloy ornaments, mostly linked with the chariot and the horse harness. The ornaments considered to belong to the horse harness all have geometric decorations, while the other pieces are anthropomorphic or zoomorphic

8.1.7. Vehicle parts and horse harness Some vehicles are more luxurious than others; they have copper-alloy nave bands and are decorated with copper107

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

0

2 m.

0

2 m.

N

N

TP Tranch e

Tranch e

Palier nord TP Pendage Palier nord Palier sud Pendage Fosses de calage Palier sud Fosses de calage TP

TP

Colonne Micro. US 1 Limons limons argileux Bois ?

Colonne Micro.

Bt US 1 Limonsbouclier d structur limons argileux US 4 gris BoisLimons ? Bt US 7 bouclier Traces verd tres d structur US 4 0Limons gris

US 3 Limons avec agr gats type Bt pe

US 3 Limons avec agr gats type Bt pe

1 m.

US 7 Traces verd tres Figure 8.6. Le Plessis-Gassot chariot burial plan (Ginoux 2009: 34, fig. 28; drawing by F. Marti – courtesy of Nathalie 0 1 m. Ginoux)

(Lejars 2005: 76; Lejars 2014: 100-01). This vehicle, with a wider wheel track than average, and the one from Nanterre (Olivier and Schönfelder 2002), are considered to be parade chariots.

were in leather (Guadagnin 1984: 59). On the other hand, the two more luxurious vehicles of Nanterre and Roissy burial 1002 each have four copper-alloy naves bands. In cross-section those of Nanterre had a rib in the middle (Hubert 1902: 67, fig. 2); those from Roissy are still under study (Lejars 2005: 79, fig. 8). The Nanterre nave bands are very similar to those of Cawthorn (see section 2.5.6) and also those from Wetwang Slack 2 seem very close (Dent 1985: 88). Copper-alloy nave bands are also known from Condé-sur-Marne (Legendre and Gomez de Soto 1990)

Tyres are now always without nails and flat (see section 5.3.8). They are fairly wide, usually 3.5 to 4cm, and in Nanterre even 5cm. They have (reconstructed) diameters between 96cm (Bouqueval burial 3) and 130cm (Nanterre). Nave bands are often missing (see Table 8.1); perhaps they 108

The Paris area Table 8.1. Chariot burials of the Paris area Chariot burial

Complete / Dismantled

Gender

Orientation deceased

Nave bands

Axle bar

Terrets

Linchpins

Suspension fittings

2 iron and copper-alloy

 

1 iron

1 iron

Bouqueval 3

Dismantled

child 13-15 NNE/SSW

 

 

Bouqueval 11

Complete

F

NW/SE

 

1 iron  

Nanterre

 

 

 

4 copper-alloy  

4 copper-alloy

1 or 2 iron and 3 or 4 iron copper-alloy

Paris

 

 

 

 

 

3 copper-alloy

1 iron and copper-alloy

Le Plessis-Gassot

Complete, but box lifted

M

SW/NE

4 iron

 

6 copper-alloy 2 iron

Roissy 1002

Complete, but box lifted

M

E/W

4 copper-alloy  

Roissy 5002

Complete

M

E/W

 

and in Waldalgesheim the iron nave bands were covered with a decorated sheet in a non-ferrous metal (Joachim 1995: 100-01). Felloe-joints that were typical from LT A to B1 in the Aisne-Marne (see section 5.3.8), no longer exist in this period.

 

x copper-alloy

2 iron and copper-alloy

5

2

     

Plessis-Gassot are similar, but they are completely in iron, and they lack the decoration (Ginoux 2009: 41-42; Ginoux and Marti 1999: 22). They are also very similar to those of Bouqueval (Ginoux 2009: 91). In Bouqueval, the two linchpins from burial 3 are almost identical. They are in iron, but the head is covered with an elongated, rectangular copper-alloy sheet case; the shanks are curved and end in a copper-alloy button. The one linchpin found in the burial 11 is completely in iron; it has a curved shank, ending in a button, and a rectangular head that is semi-oval in section (Guadagnin 1984: 52, 58, fig. 43, 51).

An estimate for the wheel-track is only given for Bouqueval 11 (155cm), which seems very wide but there are similar cases elsewhere (see for example section 5.3.8). In Le Plessis-Gassot, the space between the wheel pits was only 100cm; the axle measured 120cm (Ginoux 2009: 37). An iron bar (36mm long) to stabilise the axle, was found in Bouqueval burial 11 (Guadagnin 1984: 58, fig. 52). Similar bars are known from burial 30 in Beine, Saint Basles (lost) and in Pontfaverger, La Wardelle (section 5.3.8).

The grave pit was generally large enough to accommodate the pole. No pole caps or other metal parts from the pole have been reported as yet.

Linchpins are always present, usually in pairs. All linchpins have a curved shank (generally ending in a button) and a rectangular head, which can be quadrangular or plano-convex in section. They are in iron but often have a copper-alloy head or an iron head covered in copper-alloy. The head can be decorated, for example with Plastic Style copper-alloy mouldings, which are typical for the early third century BC in the Paris region. Such a linchpin was already known from the Musée des Antiquités Nationales in Saint-Germain-en-Laye with the label showing as the provenance ‘Paris, Rue Tournefort’ (Duval and Blanchet 1974: 404-05, fig. 5; Ginoux 2002b: 21-22, fig.s.n.; Olivier and Schönfelder 2002); all doubts regarding the accuracy of the label were removed when further chariot and harness parts and other objects with copper-alloy mouldings in Plastic Style were found in recent decades. Roissy burial 1002 has linchpins with copper-alloy mouldings in the same tradition (Lejars 2005: 76) (Figure 8.7). An interesting parallel for these linchpins was found in the early third century BC chariot burial in the Thracian tholos tomb of Mal Tepe at Mezek, in southern Bulgaria (Fol 1991) (Figure 8.8). The linchpin from Nanterre has a different type of ornament: the head is decorated with a cross in enamel inlay (Lejars 2002b; Olivier and Schönfelder 2002: 114). The linchpins of Le

In a few cases, elements belonging to the vehicle box could be identified, for example a copper-alloy openwork corner piece, copper-alloy nails and iron rings in Bouqueval 11 (Guadagnin 1984: 54-55, 57, fig. 48) and copper-alloy decorations from Nanterre (Olivier and Schönfelder 2002). Burial 1002 of Roissy also produced many copperalloy decorative elements in Plastic Style (Olivier 2012: 103-06; Lejars 2014: 100-01). None of the most recently excavated chariot burials seem to have contained any metal parts that could be used for suspension and/or for connecting the box to the frame by means of leather straps (unless perhaps in Roissy? – see comment Ginoux 2009: 41, note 24). Only in Bouqueval burial 11 and in Nanterre metal parts were found that could be identified as such. They are different from the Doppelösenstifte of the Aisne-Marne and Middle Rhine Moselle regions. The item from Bouqueval (Guadagnin 1984: 58, fig. 51) is what Schönfelder (2000: 208-11, fig. 152) would describe as an Ösenstift mit Nietplatte, whereas the finds from Nanterre included three or four Gegabelte Ôsenstifte (Schönfelder 2000: 216-18, fig. 155). Olivier and Schönfelder (2002) point out that a construction with Gegabelte Ôsenstifte would be very heavy, quite different from other LT period chariots 109

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent with a much lighter structure. A detailed overview and discussion of all types of constructional elements for the period from LT B2 to LT D is given by Schönfelder (2000: 207-30). The yoke was presumably buried with the chariot, in the chamber, in its normal position; the missing terrets in Bouqueval may be due to ploughing or in the case of the dismantled chariot, the yoke may have been left out altogether. The only chariot burials that offer a good indication of the number of terrets are those excavated in recent years: those of Roissy and Le Plessis-Gassot. These seem to suggest that, like in East Yorkshire, the standard number of terrets may have been five, rather than four. In Le Plessis-Gassot, surprisingly, a total of six copperalloy terrets was found and it is unfortunate that the yoke was not laid out in position. Five of the terrets clearly form a set, while the sixth one is rather out of place (Ginoux 2009: 42-43, 93, tab. 3, figs. 40) (Figure 8.9) . Each of the terrets of the set of five consist of a ring with a base to fix it onto the yoke; one terret is larger than the others. A possible parallel are two terrets from a LT B2 inhumation burial in Spiesheim, south of Mainz (see Schönfelder 2000: 246-47, fig. 173); this burial was disturbed in antiquity (Stümpel 1986: 213) and there are no context details. The sixth terret is composed of a ring on a flat base, with underneath a ring to fasten the terret to the yoke. This type of terret, with such a fastening ring, is usually found in later burials,

Figure 8.7. Linchpin from Roissy chariot burial 1002 (Lejars 2002a: 18; photograph by P. Gardin – courtesy of Thierry Lejars)

Figure 8.8. Linchpins from the chariot burial of Mal Tepe at Mezek, Bulgaria. These linchpins are part of the Antiquity Collection of the National Archaeological Institute and Museum – Bulgarian Academy of Sciences; photograph by Krassimir Georgiev

110

The Paris area

Figure 8.9. The six terrets from the chariot burial of Le Plessis-Gassot (after Ginoux 2009: 44, fig. 40)

although many samples are from undated settlements (see Schönfelder 2000: 249-60, fig. 175). Meanwhile, another chariot burial with six terrets was found in Warcq, in the French Ardennes; the Warcq chariot burial, which is a century later than the one of Le Plessis-Gassot, has four terrets of the type with a fastening ring, and two with a just a base (see section 5.4 above).

to Hubert (1902: 68), there were four terrets in total. The Nanterre terrets did not show any sign of wear and Hubert believed the vehicle was new. Pairs of horse bits are standard. They are only lacking in Bouqueval burial 11, again perhaps because of ploughing damage, and in the collection of items with provenance Paris, Rue Tournefort. All the horse bits from the Paris area are two-link iron ring bits. They all seem to be of the same type: the two links are connected with a ring and each link has a knob in the middle. The bits (especially the one from Bouqueval burial 3) look very similar to a pair of iron bits from cremation burial 1445 of Wederath-Belginum, a pars pro toto type of chariot burial dated to the second half of the third century BC (Müller-Karpe 1989). In Le Plessis-Gassot, the horse bits were placed on the shield that covered the deceased (Ginoux 2003: 46; 2009: 38, fig. 39) and the same arrangement can be inferred from the plan of burial 5002 in Roissy (Lejars 2005: 77 fig. 4).

In Roissy burial 5002 (the warrior burial), the yoke is clearly represented by a line of five terrets, with a larger one in the middle (Figure 8.5); details are pending publication. For burial 1002 (the one with the bronzes (Figure 8.4), the situation as to the number of terrets is less clear: functional terrets are missing, according to the excavator (Lejars 2005: 78, fig. 5, 80). The burial contained over 20 decorative appliques, mostly from the yoke and horse harness, with anthropomorphic, zoomorphic and geometric motifs, discussed in detail by Olivier (2012: 103-06, 107-10, 112-30), who argues that the growing corpus of Plastic Style objects demonstrates the local origin of the objects and the existence of an École de Paris. Even so it is interesting to note, that as with the linchpins, there is again a connection with the finds from the tholos tomb at Mezek, which included five copper-alloy terrets (one of them larger than the others) with Plastic Style mouldings, as well as two decorated yoke mountings (Fol 1991).

A series of 12 copper-alloy phalerae and a copper-alloy boss were discovered in Bouqueval burial  3. According to Guadagnin (1984: 49-50), the position of these items (surrounding the deceased) suggests that they were fixed onto a leather garment that was placed over the body; however, at the same time he refers, for comparison, to the phalerae from burial 1445 of Wederath-Belginum, mentioned above (horse bits). In Le Plessis-Gassot, an alignment of tiny iron nails and copper-alloy buttons revealed the presence of a harness; like the horse bits, it was placed on the shield (Ginoux 2003: 46; 2009: 72).

Copper-alloy terrets with enamel decoration are known from Nanterre (Olivier and Schönfelder 2002); the circumstances of the find are not clear, and the grave goods came to the museum in different lots, but according 111

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 8.1.8. Grave goods

Hôpital Avicenne, usually in copper-alloy (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 2.2.3).

Brooches are the most frequent and often the only grave good, especially in large cemeteries like Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 20062007: § 2.2.1); they are almost exclusively in iron. In Bouqueval, apart from one exception, all burials contained one or two (different) brooches (Guadagnin 1984). In Roissy, 22 brooches were found for a total of 10 burials; two different brooches were retrieved from the chariot burial with the weapons, marking the transition from LT B2 to LT C1: one of the brooches is of ELT design (free foot), whereas the other is of MLT construction (foot attached to the bow by a collar) (Lejars 2005: 76). The same phenomenon occurs in Le Plessis-Gassot, notably in burial 1005, whereby Ginoux (2003: 39) refers to burial 171 of Münsingen-Rain, which is equally showing the combination of brooches of ELT and MLT construction, and which is dated in the middle of the third century BC.

The number of burials with weapons is fairly high, especially in a few smaller cemeteries. In Nanterre, Avenue Jules Quentin, all five male burials (on a total of 30 burials, all from the third century BC) contained weapons, including at least a sword (Viand 2004). Two other small third century BC cemeteries, contain a high proportion of warrior burials, one in Gonesse, La Fauconnière, where three out of six burials were warrior burials (Pariat and Maret 2011; Pariat, Lefeuvre and Maret 2013), the other in Le Blanc-Mesnil, Chemin Notre-Dame (no report available, see Ginoux 2017: 16-18), with seven warrior burials on a total of 12 burials. The other smaller cemeteries (Bouqueval, Roissy and Le Plessis-Gassot) have only one or two burials with weapons (on a total of less than 20). The large cemetery of Saint-Maur-des-Fossés has relatively more warrior burials (13) (Leconte 1990-1991: 45) than that of Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne (10). In Bobigny, the warrior burials are chronologically evenly spread, so that there must have been one or two per generation, which is rather few (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 2.2.4). Although the proportion of warrior burials may vary (Ginoux 2017: 18, table 1), overall the presence of weapons in LT B2 burials in the Paris Basin is remarkably high; according to Marion (2012: 108), this testifies of a period of instability and local conflicts, during which the elite also reverts to old-fashioned chariot burials and other ostentatious burial rites in an attempt to assert their status; the geographical proximity of the chariot burials demonstrates that the territories where they are seeking to assert themselves are rather small. (For a discussion of the evolution of the presence of weapons in the archaeological record between the fourth and the first century BC, see also Bataille, Kaurin and Marion 2014).

As elsewhere, metal chain belts, typical for LT C, start appearing towards the end of LT B2; they were, for example, attested on six occasions in Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne, probably all from female burials (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 2.2.3). A copper-alloy belt buckle was found with an aged female in the burial 9 at Bouqueval (Guadagnin 1984: 20-21). As in the Aisne-Marne region, torcs gradually disappear from burials during LT B2 and C1. However, where a torc is present, it is no longer exclusively associated with adult females; in fact torcs are more often found in children’s burials, as for example in Le Plessis-Gassot (Ginoux 2003: 39; 2009: 52, fig. 54) and Bobigny (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 2.2.3), but on at least two occasions a torc was present in a male burial, in combination with weapons: in Bouqueval, the young adult male in burial 13 was wearing a copper-alloy torc, consisting of a plain cylindrical ring (Guadagnin 1984: 39, fig. 21), whereas in a burial in Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne, an iron torc was deposited (not worn) in a particularly rich male burial; its meaning is perhaps to be understood as insignia of the deceased’s function, rather than jewellery (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 2.2.3, 2.2.4).

The deceased is usually, but not always, buried with a full panoply of a sword and scabbard, a spear and a shield. Two important novelties appear at the end of LT B and were further developed during LT C: a new suspension system for swords, replacing the leather belt with a chain belt, and the reintroduction of metal fittings on shields (Rapin 1999: 49, 54-58). This does not mean that the old system of suspending a sword disappears immediately and entirely; it is, for example, still illustrated in the two warrior burials from Le Plessis-Gassot (Ginoux 2003: 43, 45). Well-known chain belts are those from Rungis (Ginoux 2003: 40, fig. 4) and Saint-Maur-des-Fossés (Leconte 1990-1991).

Bracelets and armbands in iron, copper-alloy or lignite occur relatively frequently, although not in abundance: from Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne are 39 pieces from 36 burials; they are all from female or children’s burials. In the small cemeteries, however, bracelets and/or armbands are often worn by men, as for example both burials 1004 (the chariot burial) and 1002 (the warrior burial) in Le Plessis-Gassot (Ginoux 2003: 43, 45) and in one of the chariot burials of Roissy (Lejars 2005: 76). In most cases, the deceased only wears one bracelet or armband, but when there is a second piece of jewellery, this is usually in lignite or a similar material, like for example in burial 1002 from Le Plessis-Gassot (Ginoux 2009: 97-98, fig. 83). At least ten finger-rings were attested in Bobigny,

The weapons from Le Plessis-Gassot are remarkable for their fine decorations. Apart from the two scabbards with zoomorphic lyre motifs in relief (Figure 8.10), there is also a spear with openwork (from the chariot burial) (Figure 8.11), which was certainly not apt for fighting, but was perhaps used as a military standard. The wooden shield from the warrior burial (burial 1002) was decorated with four copper-alloy studs, produced using the lost-wax casting technique, and with plastic decorations reminiscent 112

The Paris area

1

0

3 cm

2

2

1 3

0

4

3 cm

3

4 0

Figure 8.10. Le Plessis-Gassot: grave goods from the warrior burial (Ginoux 2009: 94, fig. 81)

113

5 cm

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent of the pseudo-filigree technique used on objects found in the Danubian region (Figure 8.10). Both the spear and the shield studs also have their counterparts in the southwest of the Aisne-Marne, in Fère-Champenoise (Ginoux 2003: 46-62; 2009: 92-99; for the results of a detailed technological analysis of the shield and studs from the Plessis-Gassot warrior burial, discussing the connection with the Danubian region, see Ginoux et al. 2014). Special attention deserves the elaborately decorated hilt of the sword from the same burial, which is chronologically close to that of Kirkburn in East Yorkshire (Ginoux 2009: 70, fig. 63). From a burial in Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne, a special type of iron spear was retrieved, which is alien to the area but is well known on the Iberian Peninsula (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 2.2.4). The deposition of pottery in burials is not very popular. This may show the influence of the Sénonais-Nogentais area, where pottery is not present in burials. It may also be a typical feature of the third century in general, as the same phenomenon is seen in the Aisne-Marne. However, in the Aisne-Marne, many third century BC data are from the southwest, where the influence of the Sénonais-Nogentais is clear in many respects. North of the Paris region, in Picardy, where cremation is practised, rather than inhumation, the situation is different: ceramic grave goods occur in abundance. (Towards the end of the La Tène period, when cremation is omnipresent in northern Gaul in general, large numbers of ceramics are not exceptional). In Bobigny, only about six per cent of the inhumation burials contain pottery, usually one or exceptionally two pieces. In two-thirds of the cases, the deceased is a child (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 2.2.2). An exception to the rule is the small cemetery of Le Plessis-Gassot, where all burials contain one or more pots. A special find was made in warrior burial 1002, where two black varnished vessels (a ciotola and a kylix) of Etrurian import were placed, one in the other, on top of the shield. Nathalie Ginoux (1999: 19; 2009: 29-31, 99-100, fig. 2123) has argued that this is not a simple case of trade, but rather points to someone who has lived long enough in northern Italy to have adopted local table customs. The burial also reflects an acquaintance with funerary customs practised in northern Italy in the last quarter of the fourth and the first quarter of the third century BC, where the same type of combination of grave goods (i.c. a combination of a kylix and a scabbard with a zoomorphic lyre motif) were found. Marion (2012: 105) agrees that this individual may have lived in Etruria as a mercenary, but states that it is equally possible that the choice of these grave goods aim to reflect the deceased’s status as someone who controlled long-distance alliance and exchange networks.

Figure 8.11. Spearhead with openwork decoration from the chariot burial at Le Plessis-Gassot (after Ginoux 2009: 40, fig. 37)

Another exceptional pot was found in the side niche of Bouqueval burial 1, the only burial with pottery, and one of the most recent ones of the cemetery. It was placed as a lid over another pot, as is often seen in cremation

burials. It is a bowl with a singular, very elaborated plastic decoration, and must have been pressed or modelled in a mould starting from a sheet of paste (Guadagnin 1984: 2731) (see also Ginoux 2009: 130-32). 114

The Paris area One of the grave gifts in chariot burial 1002 of Roissy was a Plastic Style openwork copper-alloy ornament (with dragon motifs) for a wooden vessel; it has a diameter of more than 20cm (Lejars 2005: 79); Ginoux (2009: 130) refers to the jug of Brno-Malomerice for a parallel. Olivier (2012: 11013), however, has argued against the interpretation of the ‘dome’ as an ornament for a wooden vessel.

On the other hand, it is remarkable that on the small cemeteries, which are often referred to as ‘aristocratic’, there are always a few men with a full panoply of weapons, while the female pendant, the rich woman with fine jewellery, is hard to find. Most women have been buried with little or no grave goods, and jewellery is often confined to their male counterparts, as mentioned above. At least one female was buried with a chariot (Bouqueval burial 11), but apart from the vehicle with decorative elements, the only grave good was a brooch.

Scissors and a razor were part of the grave goods of the male in chariot burial 1002 of Roissy (Lejars 2005: 76). The same combination was attested in one of the warrior burials in Le Plessis-Gassot (not the chariot burial), where also some textile remains were found of the bag in which these items were kept (Ginoux 2003: 43; Moulherat 2009).

Based on the absence of weapons, the enigmatic iconography of the ‘bronzes’, the amulets and other special grave goods, Olivier (2012: 122-23) has suggested that the deceased in chariot burial 1002 of Roissy may have been a druid.

It is possible that in the chariot burial of Nanterre, the horses were buried with the vehicle. The grave is said to have contained bones from several horses, but these are now lost (Hubert 1902; Olivier and Schönfelder 2002). The presence of other animals, be it as food offerings or otherwise, is equally unclear, as on many sites the soil was unfavourable for bone preservation. However, for Bobigny, where the preservation conditions were good, animal remains are not occurring in great numbers. They seem to be more frequently present in cremation burials; in inhumation burials, the results of preliminary analysis appear to indicate that they are mostly associated with children’s burials, as is also the case with pottery, and both are often found together (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 2.2.2). Two pots in one of the chariot burials of Roissy contained pig teeth (Lejars 2005: 76).

8.1.9. Settlements Like in East Yorkshire, there is no burial information for the period preceding that of the chariot burials, and also settlement data are very sparse, both before and during the period of the chariot burials. The cemetery of Le Plessis-Gassot was adjacent to a settlement area, of which the earliest phase may have been contemporary with the cemetery (personal communication Nathalie Ginoux, and see Ginoux 2009, fig. 2). In Bobigny (La Vache à l’Aise, near Hôpital Avicenne), there is some settlement evidence from previous phases, but it is not until LT C2, around the turn of the third to the second century BC, that settlement structures become abundant in Bobigny; it should be noted, however, that only a part of the site has been excavated (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 4-6). Several settlements are known for the second and first centuries BC, both along the Seine and further removed from the river (for an overview, see Ginoux and Poux 2002: 233-6; Ginoux 2017: 21-25).

A burial from Bobigny held what the excavators believe to be two musical instruments, a sistrum and a drum (Marion, Le Bechennec and Le Forestier 2006-2007: § 2.2.4). Three items from chariot burial 1002 (the one with the ‘bronzes’, the copper-alloy ornaments) from Roissy, found near the head of the deceased, can possibly be identified as amulets (Lejars 2005: 76, fig. 6). Also a small hemispherical object from chariot burial 3 of Bouqueval is identified by Ginoux (2009: 132-33) as an amulet. The same burial produced an object that could be part of the equipment for a hearth; it is an unusual item to find with a chariot burial (Guadagnin 1984: 50, fig. 41). It is not clear whether it can be interpreted as an early reference to the domestic hearth cult, which is more generally associated with cremation burials (see for example various papers in Kruta and Leman-Delerive 2007), but it is noteworthy that the deceased is relatively young (13-15 years).

In 2008, some storage pits belonging to a rural settlement were excavated in Roissy-en-France, Le Château; they were dated to LT B2, and more particularly to the period around 300 BC. One of the pits contained human remains and weaponry (a spearhead and shield fittings). The domestic refuse testified of activities of agricultural and domestic nature, but also of copper-alloy and iron working (Séguier, Ginoux and Méniel 2008). 8.2. The origins The situation in the Paris region is comparable to that of East Yorkshire, in that burial evidence is lacking in the centuries preceding the appearance of chariot burials.

In spite of a few unique pieces, the cemetery of Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne can be considered as relatively poor, given the large number of burials without any grave goods at all and the modesty of many others. The Bobigny cemetery seems to represent all the members of the community. Only the top category – those buried in a chariot – is missing.

Amongst the French researchers who have investigated the issue of what initiated the introduction of a new burial rite in the Paris region, there are basically two schools: one is associating the novelties with the arrival of newcomers, while the other is claiming that local circumstances gave rise to the adoption of new mortuary practices. 115

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 8.2.1. A new population of mixed origins?

cemeteries with the chariot burials, when studied more closely, do not form one homogeneous group; even within one cemetery, varying traditions can be observed. The various traditions and funerary rites can be traced to regions further north (Belgae) or south (Sénonais-Nogentais). [All these differences, which concern funerary practices related with the construction of the grave and the type of grave goods deposited, but also female costume, will not be repeated here but are clearly discussed and summarised in Ginoux 2009: 118-25, tabs. 2, 21-3]. • A number of burials contain decorated objects that are typical for the second phase of the Plastic Style. For these objects, no iconographic tradition nor prototype can be attested locally. While the group of objects is small in number, their manufacture, iconography and homogeneity reveal the presence of people of Danubian origin.

Traditionally, the people of the Parisii are believed to have come from beyond the Rhine and to have settled along the borders of the Seine a few centuries before being cited in Caesar’s De Bello Gallico. The Parisii are distinct from the Belgae, a collective name for the various people living towards the north and northwest of the Parisii. In this same view, the Belgae are also considered immigrants from across the Rhine, their arrival being marked by the establishment of cult places like Ribemont-sur-Ancre and Gournay-sur-Aronde. This high degree of mobility in northern Gaul in general and in the Paris area more in particular is described by Duval (1961: 59-66). In accordance with the spirit of his time, Duval’s question is not whether there is an influx of a new population, but when this new population arrived. In his mind, a long period with sparse archaeological evidence, followed by a relatively sudden multiplication of data in the third century BC, is bound to reflect the arrival of a new people in a formerly sparingly populated area.

The hypothesis based on these elements is that the population of the Paris area north of the Seine is highly composite and consists of groups of different origin: on the one hand, these are groups from neighbouring regions that have been attracted by the availability of land in a lowpopulated area, and on the other hand, small groups that have travelled long distances. The presence of immigrants from neighbouring regions (Belgae and Senones) would explain the mixture of burial rites mentioned above, while transcultural factors like art and warrior ideology represent the share contributed by immigrants from central Europe (Ginoux 2009: 113-38).

However, several decades later, Ginoux and Poux (2002: 232-33) claim that Duval’s assumption of an alien contribution to the population of the Cité des Parisii has been confirmed by recent excavations and by the reevaluation of older finds. Contrary to the times of Duval, the ‘newcomers’ in the Paris region and other parts of northern France are no longer seen as large groups of immigrants, let alone invaders, but rather as small bands belonging to a military nobility with a high degree of mobility, and in their suite a number of talented craftsmen. This view is largely based on historical sources, relating the movements of different ‘Celtic’ groups to Italy, the Balkans and beyond, and sometimes their return home, like in the case of the Senones after the defeat at Sentinum in 295 BC.

It is correct that certain funerary practices attested on the cemeteries north of the Seine echo features that are typical in neighbouring regions. Pottery, for example, is not standard, but in Le Plessis-Gassot all burials have at least one pot, like further north, in Picardy (section 8.1.8). However, these mixed practices do not need to point to an immigrant population but may equally well demonstrate how well these people were connected with other regions, not only in northern Gaul, but way beyond.

On the occasion of the publication of the cemetery of Le Plessis-Gassot, Nathalie Ginoux (2009: 113-38) has resumed the discussion and has formulated a hypothesis, based on a number of facts and arguments, of which the most essential ones are summarised below:

Long-distance contacts with central Europe and the Danubian are very strong, as is amply described by Ginoux (2009: 126-38), but the exact nature of these contacts is harder to disentangle. More in particular the Plastic Style forms a potential issue which needs further examination. According to Nathalie Ginoux (2002b), there is no indication of a local artistic development; when the Plastic Style arrives in the Paris region, it has already reached its mature form. Its development can be followed elsewhere: in Danubian workshops, for example, significant progress was made in perfectionating copper alloys needed to create volumetric shapes; furthermore, the Île-de-France could benefit from several technological assets originating from Moravia and Slovakia, like for example the lost wax technique for casting bronze.

• The absence of burial evidence and the small number of settlements in the period preceding the third century BC cannot all be accounted for by the level of exploration of the area, but genuinely reflect a population that is not very dense or even sparse; the reasons for this are historical in nature (see above). • All the small cemeteries belong to the same period and only last for one or maximum two generations. [She now dates them in the second quarter of the third century BC, whereas before (Ginoux and Poux 2002), a date as early as the end of the fourth century BC was proposed. Other researchers (Lejars 2005; Marion 2007) seem to prefer the earlier date.] • There is a remarkable heterogeneity in funerary rites. The main differences are between the cemeteries north and those south of the Seine, but also the small

Although the Plastic Style is typical for the Paris region, it is not restricted to this area. Varieties of Plastic Style occur 116

The Paris area for example in the Groupe de la Haine and Normandy. A thorough study of the development and diffusion of the Plastic Style, combined with a comparison of funerary rites, settlement data and other features in various regions across temperate Europe between 325 and 250 BC, would certainly allow a more profound judgement in this respect.

reactivation of power symbols of the beginning of the La Tène period is not unusual in the third century BC; it can also be attested in the iconography (see Ginoux 2007). The renewed use of the chariot burial certainly served political ends, but perhaps not necessarily those of an intrusive population.

Another issue to consider is that, as is the case with new customs and rites, new art styles do not necessarily have to be introduced by a new population. The Plastic Style may well have arrived via knowledge networks, as described in Raimund Karl’s master-apprentice model (Karl 2005b). This assumes the existence of specialised, sedentary workshops, a concept believed by Nathalie Ginoux (2002b: 23) not to have come into being before the end of the Iron Age. In her view, specialised craftsmen had to adjust to the mobile lifestyle of their military patrons and follow them around where their services were required.

8.2.2. A local development?

A comparative study between weaponry from burials in the Paris Basin and metalwork from burials in Mannersdorf in Lower Austria demonstrated striking similarities, with the same iconography in scabbard decorations, and the same leaf-shaped openwork spearheads (Ginoux and Ramsl 2014). Other affinities with the Danubian region, and more in particular the western part of the Carpathian Basin, are the close similarities in the shapes of annular jewellery and in the way that, for example, bracelets are worn, not as a matching pair, but as a combination of different types (Ginoux 2002a: 13); furthermore, there are the decorated weapons (see also Ginoux 2003 and 2007) and the associated deposit of scissors.

Marion’s argument loses some of its strength when applied to the Paris region, as this is void of earlier funerary sites, as opposed to other areas of the Île-deFrance, in particular the southeast, where a continuous funerary tradition can be observed as from the LH period, with new features being adopted in LT B2 (see Marion 2004: 206-17, for a chronological overview of the different micro-regions of the Île-de-France). However, many of these new features are also characteristic for the Paris region, so that by extrapolation, one could argue that the new cemeteries and the chariot burials were not introduced by newcomers, but were, for example, the result of a local development, inspired by a neighbouring area and stimulated through long-distance contacts with central and eastern Europe.

A different hypothesis has been presented by Marion (2007: 102-08), who dismisses the idea of an influx of a new population. He points out that many new sites are created, but that the existing sites are not abandoned. Most novelties can be explained through local mutations and moreover it is not possible to identify a particular region where these features were typical in the preceding stage, and which could be the point of departure of such a population (Marion 2004: 211-14; 2007: 104).

It should be noted, however, that many of these elements are not restricted to the Paris area, but are also typical for neighbouring zones, like the Aisne-Marne region – where the Danubian connection is also stressed by several archaeologists (see for example Charpy 2006: 145-46) – but also in the Sénonais-Nogentais. The narrative of the population movements in the fourth and third centuries BC, as related by the various historical sources, is very complex, and the link with archaeological data is not always as clear-cut as is often claimed; for example, the alleged introduction of cremation and square enclosures by immigrants from central Europe proves not to be valid when studied in further detail (section 5.1.2). Jewellery and dress accessories may well reveal individual mobility, for example in the context of marriage alliances (see section 15.1.1), rather than the arrival of a group. Once a contact is established, further marriages may follow.

Marion’s claim that it is not possible to identify a particular area of origin of an assumed new population seems as yet correct. Arguments in favour of population movements usually refer to different regions, sometimes in rather vague terms (‘Danubian’), sometimes more specifically (‘Moravia’), but there is, at first sight, not one region where all features and characteristics can be found united. In a theoretical model where people are constantly on the move, this may perhaps be acceptable, and the current state of knowledge may be another issue to consider, but there are certainly alternative models that can explain long-distance exchange of customs, ideas, rites and objects. As Marion (2004: 350) remarks, the presence of outstanding objets d’art and of imports testifies that the local Parisian aristocracy participated in the great cultural flows of ‘Celtic’ Europe.

Since the primary use of chariots is to travel and move about, Nathalie Ginoux (2009: 123) suggests linking their deposition in a grave with population movements and with first arrivals, symbolising people who have travelled and have just arrived; due to the prestige of chariots, traditionally associated with the elite, chariot burials may have served to unite people of different ethnic origins, including the local population. She points out that the

Marion (2007: 106) states that the sudden appearance of chariot burials in the Paris region reflects the need of the local aristocracy to affirm its territorial sovereignty in a spectacular way, suggesting that its power still required strengthening or legitimation. In this respect, he refers to Caesar’s statement that the territory of the Parisii was established by separation of a part of the territory previously controlled by the Senones. 117

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Caesar (DBG VI.3) writes the following:

phenomenon. Its concept is certainly not to be found in the Danubian region, but closer to home, in the neighbouring Aisne-Marne. The only issue that remains unexplained is the sudden appearance of objects in Plastic Style.

‘ (…) concilium Lutetiam Parisiorum transfert. Confines erant hi Senonibus civitatemque patrum memoria coniunxerant (…) ‘

8.3. The Paris area versus the Arras Culture

which H.J. Edwards translates as:

8.3.1. The Parisi and the Parisii

‘ (…) he removed the convention to Lutetia, a town of the Parisii. These were next neighbours to the Senones, and in the previous generation had formed one state with them (…) ‘

Apart from the similarities in burial tradition, the analogy between the name of the people living in East Yorkshire during the first centuries of the first millennium AD and the population of the Paris region at the time of the Roman Conquest cannot be ignored and compels further examination.

The translation is rather free in certain respects. Based on the Latin original, a few questions can be raised, the first one being that of the exact meaning of ‘patrum memoria’. If this is to be taken literally, the unity of the Parisii and the Senones cannot go back further than about 50 years, whereas the time span between the chariot burials and the Gallic Wars is about 250 years. If, however, ‘fathers’ stands for ‘ancestors’, such a longer time span might be feasible. Another issue is the meaning of ‘coniunxerant’. As pointed out by Duval (1961: 92), this suggests that both people were not originally united, but that at a certain time the Parisii (at their own initiative) linked up with the Senones, maybe to better face a certain threat; once the threat was over, the fusion fell apart.

The British ‘Parisi’ are only mentioned once in classical literature and never in any epigraphic sources. Their name appears in Ptolemy’s Geography which was produced sometime between 130 and 170 AD. However, his work was based on earlier sources, with the records varying in date from Claudian to Hadrianic, and in this particular case probably the first century AD. Ptolemy mentions two towns of the Parisi, one of which was called Petuaria. This could be identified with present day Brough, which was confirmed by an inscription found there in 1937 (Stead 1965: 78-9). If the name of the Parisi was in use in East Yorkshire in the first century AD, it is not that unreasonable to assume that the Parisi can be equated with the people of the Arras Culture.

Marion (2007: 106) claims that, from an archaeological point of view, the period of the appearance of chariot burials is the best illustration of the Paris area emerging as an independent region, although he also warns for the dangers of matching material changes with political realities. In spite of this ‘independency’, the influence of the southeast is still clearly noticeable in the central group (for example the occasional use of stone blocks around the grave pit and the low importance of ceramics and food offerings), even though it is generally less strong north of the Seine (see Ginoux and Poux 2002: 231, tab. 1).

The Gallic ‘Parisii’ are mentioned a few times by Caesar, for example regarding their former alliance with the Senones (DBG VI.3), as discussed above, and as allies of Vercingetorix (DBG VII.4 en VII.75). Their oppidum Lutetia was situated on an island in the River Seine: (…) cum quattuor legionibus Lutetiam proficiscitur. Id est oppidum Parisiorum, quod positum est in insula fluminis Sequanae (DBG VII.57).

At any rate, there is a multiplication of warrior burials in the Île-de-France in general at this time, suggesting to Marion (2007: 106) that this may have been a period of high instability, or at least one with growing tensions, possibly connected with some kind of territorial reorganisation: the appearance of new entities, a change in alliances and/or disruptions within the ruling classes.

Is there a link between the Parisi and the Parisii? The shared burial tradition could point in that direction. Furthermore, the etymology of the name could give an indication. Names of toponymical origin (‘the people of the hill’), can easily come into use independently. This, however, is not the case here. Gohil (2006: 158-59) lists three different etymologies for the name of the Parisii: ‘the people of the cauldron’ (Delamarre), ‘the spear people’ (Lambert) and ‘the efficacious ones, the rulers’ (Isaac). The last etymology could again apply to many peoples, but the other two are more specific. The explanation of Lambert, ‘the spear people’, can even be linked to a special phenomenon observed in East Yorkshire, i.e., that of the ‘speared corpses’.

8.2.3. Conclusion Funerary practices are not spread by migration alone and the absence of burial evidence may simply mean that other rites were practised; the limited settlement traces are more difficult to explain but may have other grounds. It is, in any event, hard to imagine that an area so near to the Seine was so thinly populated. The image of a population with a highly developed long-distance network could certainly account for many of the features encountered in this region. The revival of chariot burials at this stage in prehistory is not limited to the Paris region but is a more widespread

In the Arras Culture, spears in burials are not always intended as traditional grave goods. Most spearheads are in fact considered to be the remains of a ‘killing’ ritual that took place during the burial ceremony, hence the term ‘speared corpses’. The spears are not carefully placed in 118

The Paris area the grave, but are scattered around the skeleton, and they are pointing towards it. Some spearheads are driven into the filling just above the level of the skeleton. There can be as many as 14 spearheads in one burial (Garton Station, burial 10), although several have only one. Some of the spearheads were bent or broken, probably when they hit a wooden shield during the ceremony, which started while the grave was still open and continued while it was being filled. There may be as many as 23 speared corpse burials in East Yorkshire, including one of the Wetwang Slack chariot burials (see section 2.4.5.3).

means certain (see section 2.6.4). The chariot burials that were part of the Bayesian modelling study are presented as belonging to a brief period centred around 200 BC, but the dates actually allow a starting point in the mid-third century BC; moreover, the study did not include any of the sites where a fully assembled vehicle was placed on the old ground surface (which are believed to be earlier). In Britain, typologically earlier grave goods are often explained away as heirlooms, where in fact there are indications that objects are often made to look like antiques (see section 2.6.5). Some of the chariot burials in the Paris area, on the other hand, may be slightly later than they were originally dated. For example, the ‘bronzes’ from chariot burial 1002 from Roissy turn out to stylistically belong to LT C1 (Gomez de Soto et al. 2017: 43-46), and since some of them showed signs of repair (Olivier 2012: 106), some time may have elapsed before they ended up in the grave. The burial, which also included a LT B2 brooch, was originally dated to the first decades of the third century BC (Lejars 2005).

It is tempting to link this phenomenon to the etymology of the name. However, ‘speared corpses’ are not attested in the Paris region, nor in any other region in northern Gaul, where spears are always found in a traditional position. Therefore, no further conclusions can be drawn in this respect, but the possible link between etymology and material culture is nevertheless interesting of its own accord. Also in the Paris region spearheads obviously did not always have a traditional function, as attested in Le Plessis-Gassot (see above). Kruta (2002: 13-14) suggests that this type of openwork spearheads, typical for the early third century BC, and possibly used as a military standard, supports the ‘spear people’ etymology. However, although these spearheads are not very frequent, they also occur elsewhere in France and in Austria, Hungary, Ireland and Switzerland (for an overview, see Ginoux 2003: 60-62); nevertheless, in Kruta’s view of a highly mobile military elite, this in itself does not need to be problematic. Kruta (2002: 14) also refers to the Gallo-Roman Pilier des Nautes, where three bearded and three beardless men are presented with their shield and spear; in his view, these men, ‘supposés être les représentants du collège de la corporation, soient autant un rappel de l’origine du nom de leur peuple que l’insigne de leur statut de notables’.

The total number of burials known from East Yorkshire, where several cemeteries comprise more than 100 burials, substantially outmatches that of the Paris area, but in both regions, a co-occurrence of small and very large cemeteries can be noted. However, in East Yorkshire, inhumation burials are attested well into the first century AD, while in Paris there are no funerary data beyond the second century BC. The type of location chosen for the establishment of a cemetery is seemingly different in the two regions. In East Yorkshire, there is a strong preference of burying the dead on lower grounds, near to water (section 2.4.7). In the Paris area, on the other hand, cemeteries are mostly situated on higher grounds, overviewing a valley. Assuming that this apparent difference in the selection of a funerary site will be confirmed by further data and further research, then the question remains whether practical reasons lay at its base, or rather whether it reflects a difference in funerary belief systems.

If there is a connection between the two names, the probability of a physical move of people from the Continent to Yorkshire is higher than that of someone from Yorkshire having picked up the habit in Gaul. It seems fairly unlikely for a population to adopt another people’s name because they imitate their burial tradition. This physical move may perhaps have involved just a limited number of individuals: maybe the name originally referred to just a few influential people originating from Gaul and was later extended to refer to the population as a whole.

In East Yorkshire, chariot burials can be part of small cemeteries with a high frequency of prestigious burials (Kirkburn, Garton Station, the small Wetwang Slack site with three chariot burials) or they can be located on large cemeteries (Arras and Danes Graves), although it is remarkable that chariot burials are absent on two of the largest cemeteries, Rudston / Burton Fleming and Wetwang Slack. In Paris, chariot burials are only attested in small, often called ‘aristocratic’ cemeteries, because of their high concentration of rich burials.

8.3.2. The burial tradition Eastern Yorkshire and the Paris region have a number of features in common. The first cemeteries of the La Tène period are probably founded around the same time (LT B2, more in particular probably towards the end of the fourth century BC or the beginning of the third century BC) and an archaeologically traceable burial tradition is failing in the preceding phase. In terms of absolute dating, the cemeteries in the Paris area may have been slightly earlier than those from eastern Yorkshire, although that is by no

Considerably more chariot burials are known from East Yorkshire than from the Paris area. This may have various reasons: the size of the distribution area, the current occupation density (rural versus mainly urban) and the presence/absence of barrows and ditched enclosures, enhancing archaeological identification. The concentration of chariot burials in the Roissy / Le Plessis119

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Gassot / Bouqueval zone (just off the Paris urban area) is comparable to that in the Yorkshire Wolds.

with a superstructure, a feature not unusual in northern Gaul in general, but as yet not encountered in the Arras Culture. The presence of barrows (circular or square) is questionable in the Paris area but cannot be excluded (see Le Plessis-Gassot chariot burial).

A certain degree of dismantling of the vehicle can be observed in the Paris region. In Le Plessis-Gassot and Roissy, the box was lifted from the axle (section 8.1.6), but this may have been the case with many ‘complete’ vehicles. More remarkable is chariot burial 3 from Bouqueval, where the vehicle seems to have been disassembled. However, more chariot burials will be required in order to ascertain for the dismantling of vehicles to be a recurrent feature in the Paris region.

Turning to grave goods and their spread across different size cemeteries, it is remarkable that on the small cemeteries with a high concentration of prestigious burials, these are mainly limited to men; this phenomenon can be observed both in the Arras Culture and in the Paris region. Apart from one female with a chariot in Bouqueval, none of the females had any special grave goods, like for example jewellery. The same is seen in Garton Station, where all male burials contain either a chariot or weapons, while grave goods are lacking completely in the female burials; in Kirkburn, one female was buried with a few beads, but the bulk of the wealth (chariot, mail tunic, weapons) was found with the males. This phenomenon is perhaps a mere coincidence, as the number of sites and burials involved is not very high. Furthermore, it should be noted that in another female burial in Kirkburn, two groups of pig bones were placed over the body of the deceased. In East Yorkshire, pig bones are generally known as (high) status markers; females buried with a chariot and/or a mirror always have pig bones, but rarely wear any jewellery (the brooch from Wetwang Village and the pin from Wetwang Slack may have been used to fasten the shroud). From this could be concluded that the women on these small cemeteries may have had a certain status in spite of the absence of (preserved) grave goods. Unfortunately, animal bones are not well documented in the Paris region, either due to poor preservation conditions or because detailed excavation reports are lacking.

All the chariot burials around Paris with a complete vehicle have separate slots for the wheels. In Britain, burials with a complete vehicle are not very numerous and often from old excavations, but wheel pits were present in Pexton Moor and also in the Scottish chariot burial at Newbridge, but are not mentioned for Cawthorn Camps, nor in the preliminary publications of Pocklington, The Mile, and were absent in Ferry Fryston. In Pexton Moor and Cawthorn Camps, the vehicle was resting on the old ground surface, a feature unknown in northern Gaul. Separate yoke trenches do not occur in the Paris region, nor in Yorkshire (unlike in Newbridge, where the grave pit follows the shape of the chariot and the yoke). Inhumation is practiced all along in both regions, with just a limited number of cremations in the Paris area. Although there are a few occurrences of flexed bodies in Bobigny, as mentioned above, the predominant position is in line with local continental customs. It is questionable whether the few exceptions can be linked with the British tradition and/or with an older local tradition of flexed burials, as for example known from the Bronze Age cemetery of Marolles-sur-Seine, La Croix de la Mission (Peake and Delattre 2005).

In both regions, chariot burials are not gender-restricted, although there are more cases of males buried with chariots. The chariot burial of a youngster in Bouqueval does not have a counterpart in the Arras Culture, but that may be coincidental. Children seem more prominently present in the Paris region than they are in East Yorkshire, although this view was developed only in recent years, following the excavation of Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne; until such time, children were also considered to be widely underrepresented on the Continent in general. In East Yorkshire, many more children may have been buried in the burial mound which eroded away with time; unfortunately, the infant cemetery from Garton Slack cannot be dated (section 2.4.5.6). Although some caution is recommended, it seems that, based on the available data, children were buried with more decorum in Bobigny than they were in Wetwang Slack or Rudston / Burton Fleming, where the few children burials found were mostly located in secondary positions or in the enclosure ditch and rarely had grave goods. In Bobigny, pottery and jewellery, only present in small quantities, are equally well represented in children’s burials as in adult burials.

In spite of the difference in the position, the orientation of the body in both regions shows a striking resemblance. As opposed to the fifth and fourth century BC inhumations in the Aisne-Marne, which were oriented west-east, those in East Yorkshire and in the Paris region are mainly northsouth (majority in East Yorkshire) or south-north (majority in Paris). This may be a chronological factor, as in fact in the Aisne-Marne the standard west-east orientation is given up towards the end of the ELT period. The bodies from the chariot burials in the Paris area are not well preserved, but there are enough indications to safely presume that their position was the same as in the AisneMarne, i.e., with the head between the wheels. In Ferry Fryston and Pocklington, The Mile, however, the deceased was placed with the head towards the front of the vehicle, as was the case in the very early LT A chariot burials in the south of the Champagne. One of the major differences with the Arras Culture is the absence of square ditched enclosures in the surroundings of Paris. On the other hand, there are instances of burials

Warrior burials differ in certain respects. In the Paris region, weapons appear as a full panoply of a sword with 120

The Paris area 8.3.4. Art style

scabbard, a shield and a spear, while in the Arras Culture not necessarily all these elements are present in one burial. Typical for East Yorkshire are the burials with multiple spearheads, connected with the rite of ‘speared corpses’, a practice unattested in Paris. Some of the spearheads found near Paris may also have been too delicate and nicely decorated to have served as common fighting equipment. It is suspected that in East Yorkshire (and the rest of Britain north of the Humber) swords were slung on the back (see section 2.4.5.3), while in Paris, they were worn on the right side, with the sword handle at the waist.

No substantial links can be identified between the two regions in the field of art. The Plastic Style, for example, was never adopted in East Yorkshire. The reasons for this may be many, and do not need to include a total absence of contacts between East Yorkshire and the Paris region. It is conceivable, for example, that while the concept of chariot burial could be fitted in seamlessly in the indigenous belief system of third century BC East Yorkshire, this was not the case with the iconography represented in the Plastic Style. Alternatively, it could be envisaged that Plastic Style art was confined to a specific category or kin group of the Gaulish high society to which the East Yorkshire elite and craftsmen had no access; after all, although widely distributed, the total number of items in Plastic Style remains rather limited.

Given the total corpus of burials, burials with jewellery are not very numerous in either region. Large cemeteries usually include a number of female burials with jewellery, but not in large quantities, although some (notably Wetwang Slack) were richer in jewellery than others (Rudston / Burton Fleming and Bobigny). An exceptional set of jewellery was found in the Queen’s barrow at Arras (section 2.4.5.1); no parallel has as yet been found in the Paris area. Torcs are no longer very popular in this period in general (section 5.1.10): only one torc (now lost) was discovered in East Yorkshire, while a few are known from around Paris, where they are not confined to females, but also occur with males and children. Males occasionally also wear bracelets and armbands in the Paris region, whereas there is no evidence for this in the Arras Culture.

8.3.5. Settlements As the funerary data of both regions are largely contemporary, it would be beneficial to extend the comparison to the settlements of the same period, and especially those that coincide with the appearance of chariot burials and inhumations as such. Unfortunately, settlement data for this earlier period prove to be sparse. If there was an initial, short-lived moment of contact between East Yorkshire and the Paris region, it would be almost impossible to capture that moment in the settlement record. If, on the other hand, the relationship was pursued for a longer period, it might still be useful to compare settlement developments in later periods, to see how and to what extent there is any indication of (continued) interaction between the two regions, but that is a different exercise altogether. Besides, the funerary data have already shown that there are marked differences between the people of both regions, which makes it rather unlikely that the people of the Arras Culture were immigrants from the Paris region. As such, a comparison of settlement data of the later periods will not add any information to the question of the origins of the Arras Culture.

Pottery is very rare in the Paris region, but when it occurs, it can be rather exceptional, as described above. In the Arras Culture, pottery may not be abundant, but it is one of the more frequent types of grave goods. It is, however, invariably found in more modest types of burials and it is always rather coarse. None of the richer burials contained any pottery. 8.3.3. Vehicle parts and horse harness Yokes with five terrets, so typical for East Yorkshire, were apparently also used in the Paris region in the third century BC. The larger terret in the middle of the yoke must have had a specific function, presumably connected with a better controlling of the horses. Also the artistic attention for the yoke is likely to be a chronological factor: as opposed to the plain terrets from the earlier period (for example in the Aisne-Marne), as from LT B2/C1, many terrets are beautifully decorated, be it that there are many local differences. The Yorkshire terrets, for example, have nothing in common with the continental terrets with Plastic Style decorations, but rather follow local British styles, with lip or knob decorations and coral or enamel inlay.

8.3.6. Same origins? In The La Tène Cultures of Eastern Yorkshire, Ian Stead (1965: 87) considered the possibility of a joint ancestry of the people of the Arras Culture and those of the ‘ParisNanterre group’ (none of the other sites in the Paris region were known at that moment): ‘The tribe might have moved to Paris along the Seine from Burgundy, with contacts, if not origins, much further east. At some point, perhaps before the Parisii reached Paris, the Yorkshire immigrants left the main tribe. A few square enclosure burials are known from Yonne, which is along the ParisSeine-Burgundy route. The links with the Marnians, so pronounced at Pexton Moor, may indicate that there was another tribe involved in the migration, which had closer associations with Champagne.’

In East Yorkshire, no metal parts for the suspension of the vehicle could be identified. In the Paris region, these parts are not completely absent, but they are not standard. This could imply that in both regions a similar type of suspension was in use, which did not involve the application of metal parts.

Naturally, this theory, suggesting large scale migrations, must be seen within the context of its time - when Stead 121

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent wrote The Arras Culture (1979), he had clearly abandoned it. However, the basic idea, in a much weakened form, is still supported by some of the French scholars, like for example Kruta (2002: 14); they believe that the people who introduced the new burial rites in East Yorkshire belonged to the same flow of small migratory groups coming from central and eastern Europe as those who settled in the Paris region, although they do not deny the existence of indigenous components in the burial rite as such.

This does, however, not imply that there was not a certain level of cultural exchange. In all likelihood, the Paris region has directly or indirectly contributed towards the adoption of new funerary practices in eastern Yorkshire, but the exact nature of this contribution is not easy to uncover. The relationship is almost certainly confined to a specific aspect of society (religion, belief in the afterworld) or it is to be situated at the level of individual kin groups, who belong to the ruling classes but who are apparently not actively involved in warfare.

The problem with this theory is the same as that regarding the Paris region (see above): as long as it is not possible to identify a particular region where the features of the Arras Culture were typical in the preceding stage and which could be the point of departure of such a group of people, it cannot be substantiated. Identifying such a region may even prove to be unachievable if the local component in the Arras Culture burial customs was so strong that it obscured the foreign imported rites right from the start. This would of course apply to funerary practices imported by immigrants from almost anywhere on the Continent. In any event, if the newcomers, if any, in East Yorkshire and those in the Paris region were part of a same flow of small groups of immigrants from central and eastern Europe, it is unlikely that they were closely related, given the many differences, both in the field of burial rites and that of material culture: the nonappearance of the Plastic Style in East Yorkshire, for example, would not fit the scenario. 8.3.7. Conclusion The funerary tradition of the Arras Culture and that of the Paris region are largely contemporary, which probably explains for some of the analogies described above. The presence of chariot burials forms a strong link between the two regions and the alikeness of the ethnic name – although perhaps purely coincidental – should not be indifferently dismissed. Maybe even the persistence of inhumation is more than just a random similarity. There are, on the other hand, several elements that challenge any theory of an exhaustive relationship between the two people. The lack of square enclosures in the Paris region, for example, cannot be neglected. Moreover, in both regions, features can be distinguished which are deeply rooted in local customs, like the position of the body in the grave and – in a different field - the way of carrying a sword and the type of houses, to name just a few examples. When drawing up the balance sheet, the outcome is clear: although at the current state of knowledge, the cemeteries and chariot burials of the Paris region form the most appropriate group of funerary evidence to compare with the Arras Culture, it is it rather implausible for the new burial customs in East Yorkshire to be introduced by immigrants from that part of northern Gaul, nor by immigrants with the same origins as those of the Paris region, assuming these were also of foreign descent. 122

9 The ‘Groupe de la Haine’ (Belgium) Moreover, Baron de Loë, curator at the Royal Art and History Museum in Brussels, referred to the cemetery of Leval-Trahegnies as un cimetière à incinération (a cremation cemetery). However, his colleague at the Royal Natural History Museum, Mr Rutot, made a special note regarding the absence of bones. Bones from inhumations could easily have completely dissolved. Furthermore, the absence of traces of fire would be a further indication that cremation was not the rule in Leval-Trahegnies, or certainly not in the early period. Maybe both inhumation and cremation were practised during LT B2 and LT C, as this was the case in the Middle Rhine - Moselle region and in the Belgian Ardennes (Mariën 1961: 151-52).

The Groupe de la Haine refers to a number of sites situated in an area around and to the east of Mons, south of the River Haine, in the Belgian province of Hainaut. The name was given by Mariën (1952), who published the material (1961) which all resulted from old excavations of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These excavations were not documented: in general, there were no notebooks, no drawings, no plans, and there are almost no attested associations. The provenance of the objects is known from the museum inventories and there is the occasional notice written by the then museum curator providing some background information, but nothing more. In 1985-1987 some further finds came to supplement the existing material (see for example Cahen-Delhaye, Van Pamel and Cahen 1986).

The co-existence of inhumation and cremation was also observed some 100km to the west, in the Artois, during the same period. This is not the only similarity between the two regions, as also their pottery points to mutual influences (Jacques and Rossignol 1998).

It is not clear whether this area really forms a distinct ‘culture’, as Mariën claims, and if it does, it may not necessarily be limited to the area described. Mariën himself considered the possibility that the area extended further to the south (see also Leman-Delerive 2006).

9.3. Vehicle parts and horse harness There are two sites that definitely comprise one or more chariot burials, Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte (excavated in 1905-1911) and Estinnes (excavated in 1986). A third, rather doubtful case is from Mons, Le Mont Eribus I (excavated in 1894).

9.1. Sites The best-known site of the Groupe de la Haine is probably that of Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte, with its remarkable linchpins with human mask decoration and various terrets. The earliest artefacts of the cemetery seem to date to LT B2, and it remained in existence until about the middle of the first century BC. Other cemeteries had a shorter lifetime, like for example the one of Mons, Le Mont Eribus I, which has not extended beyond LT C; another cemetery nearby, Le Mont Eribus II, produced material from the end of the LT period. Another later cemetery is that of Péronnes-lez-Binche, with LT D pre-Roman and Augustean pottery. From some other cemeteries, only a few burials could be recovered, like for an example two LT B2 burials from Ciply, Le Champ des Agaises, where a LT cemetery was almost completely destroyed by a large Merovingian cemetery, and two LT C2/D1 burials from Estinnes-au-Mont (Mariën 1961; Cahen-Delhaye 1990).

The various vehicle and harness parts of the Groupe de la Haine cover a long time span and may belong to different types of chariot burials. The chariot burial with cremation from Estinnes-au-Mont, from the transition LT C2/D1, is clearly a pars pro toto in the tradition of the Middle Rhine - Moselle region and in northern France (see chapter 12) during this period: the chariot was represented by means of three terret rings, with traces of fire, and an iron spiral with thorn from a goad. The grave pit was fairly large (oval, 2.07 x 1.37m) and was marked off with a few stones, but it did not contain any further grave goods, apart from a carinated bowl. The cremated bones were of two people, one of them a child (Cahen-Delhaye, Van Pamel and Cahen 1986; Cahen-Delhaye 1990). The Estinnes type of terret was also attested in Armentières-sur-Ourcq (Aisne) and on several sites in Germany (see Schönfelder 2000: 249-57). In 1987, a Roman type of terret that was quite common in western Hainaut was found on the surface, 125m south of the chariot burial (Cahen-Delhaye 1990: 116).

A multi-period settlement with several Iron Age structures was found in Spiennes, Le Camp-à-Cayaux. The largest structure was a 7.5 x 5m building of the ELT period (Mariën 1961: 93-132). Furthermore, there are a few isolated finds of pots and jewellery (see Mariën 1961).

The vehicle and harness parts from Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte bear no traces of burning. The two linchpins have a curved iron shank and a copper-alloy head in the shape of a human head (without the lower jaw), with eyes, eyebrows and a nose; the back is flat (Figure 9.1). The head shows

9.2. Disposal of the dead Cremation seems to have been practised already during LT B2, as attested in the two cremation burials of Ciply. 123

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent of chariot burial seems to have continued into the GalloRoman times in Hainaut as it did in Haspengouw/Hesbaye (see section 12.2). In 1906, a Gallo-Roman villa and burials with horse harness were found near Mons, Mont Eribus, on the terrain Spitaels (Mariën 1961: 65). 9.5. Grave goods Some cemeteries appear to have been richer than others. Mariën (1961: 152) remarked that Mons, Le Mont Eribus I seemed less rich in grave goods than Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte: decorated (and perhaps all) vehicle parts and jewellery are lacking, and the pottery is much more modest.

Figure 9.1. Linchpins from the chariot burial of LevalTrahegnies (© Greta Anthoons)

Only one brooch is known from the Groupe de la Haine, an isolated find from Mons, Le Mont Eribus I. It is a LT B2 copper-alloy flat bow fibula with a globule and a conical ending (Mariën 1961: 71, 80, fig. 34). A remarkable find from Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte is a copper-alloy chain belt, with fastener and pendeloque, encrusted with red enamel. For the fastener there are good parallels in Witryles-Reims and Châlons-en-Champagne. Chain belts in general are typical for LT C female burials (Mariën 1961: 55, 58-59, 181, fig. 27, 70). Also from Leval-Trahegnies are two sapropelite bracelets which can be dated to the third century BC and possibly have a central European origin, as those from the Belgian Ardennes (section 6.1.8) (Mariën 1961: 58, 60-61, 181, fig. 28; Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 75-76). Isolated finds of copper-alloy bracelets are reported for Epinois and Ciply (Mariën 1961: 64, 91, fig. 31, 43).

remnants of inlay with a blackish substance of carbonised resin (Mariën 1961: 40-44, fig. 15-18). These linchpins in Plastic Style can be dated to LT B2. Three of the terrets from Leval-Trahegnies are in the shape of a human bust. They have a copper-alloy head and an iron pin; the head is divided in two and has resin inlay. An unidentified iron part with decorated copper-alloy cover may be a yoke fitting and possibly formed an ensemble with the three terrets; the pin is of the same type and the same length. A British type of terret or harness loop may also have belonged to the same harness (Mariën 1961: 45-49, 173-78, fig. 19-21, 66). According to Schönfelder (2000: 249, tab. 31) the three decorated terrets can possibly be dated in LT C2. A very different type of terret from Leval-Trahegnies is a large round terret with mounting plate, that becomes very common in the Gallo-Roman period, but already occurred in Attichy in LT  C (Mariën 1961: 51, 178, fig. 22; Schönfelder 2000: 248, fig. 174) (see section 10.1).

An iron sword in its scabbard was found in LevalTrahegnies, but the lower part is missing; it can probably be dated to LT B2 or early LT C1. Badly preserved fragments of a sword and perhaps a ring from a sword belt originate from Mons, Mont Eribus I (Mariën 1961: 55, 79, 179, fig. 25-26, 37). Both cremation burials from Ciply contained a knife; another knife comes from Péronnes-lesBinche (Mariën 1961: 89-90, 179, fig. 40, 42).

The only fragments of iron tyres are also from LevalTrahegnies. They are 3.5 to 3.6cm wide and slightly trapezoidal in section (Mariën 1961: 51-52, fig. 25). There are a few other possible vehicle parts from LevalTrahegnies, but these are hard to identify (Mariën 1961: 49-52, fig. 22, 25; Schönfelder 2000: 392). Some iron items from Mons, Le Mont Eribus I were considered by Mariën (1961: 76-78, fig. 37) to be chariot parts, but they are not very convincing (see also Schönfelder 2000: 391).

The earliest ceramics can be dated to LT B2. These carinated vases with decorations show a strong affinity with those of the Artois, for example in Saint-LaurentBlangy, although these may be slightly older (Jacques and Rossignol 1996). Pottery formed a significant part of the Groupe de la Haine material. Unfortunately, given the missing associations, there is no indication of the number of pots per burial. Where the associations are known, the burial only contained one to three pots; this is the case both in the two LT B2 cremation burials from Ciply (Mariën 1961: 85-90, fig. 40-42) and in the LT C2/D1 cremation burials of Estinnes (Cahen-Delhaye, Van Pamel and Cahen 1986; Cahen-Delhaye 1990). According to Mariën (1961: 172) certain types of pottery may have been used exclusively for funerary purposes, as they were absent from the settlement of Spiennes, Le Camp-à-Cayaux. The LT D pottery from Mons, Le Mont Eribus II differs in all aspects (size, technique, absence of decorations) from the

9.4. Types of chariot burials At least part of the vehicle parts from Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte is likely to have belonged to an older type of chariot burial than the one of Estinnes. According to Baron de Loë, the cemetery of Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte was heavily disturbed (Mariën 1961: 17, 151). In such circumstances, a burial with a complete or partially dismantled vehicle may not have been recognised. Other parts may have come from one or more pars pro toto chariot burials like the one from Estinnes. This type 124

The ‘Groupe de la Haine’ (Belgium) typical Groupe de la Haine ceramics (Mariën (1961: 189, 193). Tools as grave goods are very unusual in the ELT period, but the cemetery of Mons, Le Mont Eribus I produced a chisel (Mariën 1961: 79, 180, fig. 37). Two coins were found in Mons, Le Mont Eribus II; one of them was probably from the Nervii and could be dated to 50-27 BC (Mariën 1961: 192-94, fig. 75). One of the burials from Ciply contained two heads of a pig, the other remains of pig and cattle (Mariën 1961: 87, 89). Both were associated with a knife, as is frequently the case in other regions. 9.6. Sanctuary In the Gallo-Roman sanctuary of Blicquy, some 25km to the northwest of Mons, a linchpin was discovered amongst other La Tène objects that were found scattered throughout a layer of rubble corresponding to the levelling at the end of the Empire. The linchpin appears to be of British origin: it is a vase-headed bi-metallic type, the middle part in iron and the extremities in copper-alloy, and decorated with a triskele. It is not clear if a completed chariot was transported from Britain or if the linchpin was deposited at the sanctuary as a pars pro toto (Demarez and LemanDelerive 2001). The other objects included several vehicle parts and pieces of harness, like horse bits, terrets, studs, tyres, nave bands and linchpins. Furthermore, there were fragments of swords and scabbards, belt hooks, spearheads, knives and an axe. These objects seem to date from LT D2 (Gillet, Paridaens and Demarez 2006). 9.7. Origins and connection with Arras Culture? Based on our current knowledge, the earliest traces of funerary practices in the La Tène period in this region do not seem to go beyond LT B2. The area has strong links with the Artois region across the French border, where some of the burials can already be attributed to the previous phase (Jacques and Rossignol 1996). No chariot burials are (as yet) known from the Artois, although the LT C1 pars pro toto chariot burial of Hordain (see chapter 12) is located about halfway between the Groupe de la Haine and the Artois. It is not clear what gave rise to the adoption of chariot burials within the Groupe de la Haine, but it is significant that the timing, LT B2/C1, corresponds with that of other regions, like the Paris area, with which the Groupe de la Haine shares the occurrence of chariot parts and horse harness in Plastic Style, and with that of the Arras Culture, although no resemblance in material culture can be discerned between the two regions.

125

10 The Aisne valley in the Oise department The other two terrets (one of which is complete) are undecorated hollow copper-alloy terrets, consisting of a base and a ring; they are similar to a terret found in LevalTrahegnies, La Courte (for a discussion, see Duval and Blanchet 1974: 402-05, fig. 2 and Schönfelder 2000: 247). It is not clear how the decorated and the plain terrets were positioned on the yoke.

Three chariot burials were discovered in the village of Attichy, one as a chance find in 1926, the other two during a formal excavation in 2009. All three are dated to LT C. Attichy is located on the Aisne River, some 20km west of Soissons, and as such falls outside the distribution area of the Aisne-Marne chariot burials of the fifth and fourth centuries BC; administratively the village belongs to the Oise department. Chronologically, these chariot burials can be linked with those from Paris and from the Haine group, but there is no geographical continuity between the three regions.

10.2. The 2009 chariot burials In 2009, a team from Inrap (Institut National de Recherches Archéologiques Préventives), headed by Sophie Desenne excavated a small cemetery that was in use around 250 BC. Unfortunatley, the site is not published; the information below is based on an Inrap press release and podcast (Inrap 2009a; 2009b).

10.1. The 1926 chariot burial The chariot burial of Attichy, La Maladrerie was discovered by quarry workers and only part of the material has been preserved; the bones, for example, were thrown in the water for fear of trouble with the police. Hence any information with regard to the burial rite (inhumation?) and gender of the deceased has been lost. The circumstances of the discovery are described by Duval and Blanchet (1974), with a discussion of the preserved finds. Several copperalloy and iron objects were dug up, including 12 copperalloy rings and fragments of copper-alloy trimmings, but the only items rescued were three fragments of iron wheel tyres and three terrets, two of them incomplete (Duval and Blanchet 1974: fig. 2-4).

The cemetery was located on a terrace dominating the River Aisne. Only one burial in the cemetery is set in a ditched (circular) enclosure, peculiarly enough the burial of a young child. In total, eleven inhumations (six adults and five children) and one cremation were identified. The skeletons are extended on the back in a west-east orientation, apart from one that is crouched and that is oriented south-north. The two adult males of the chariot burials are lying on the vehicle, with their head between the wheels. The chariots are placed in the grave intact, with separate wheel pits (Figures 10.1 and 10.2). No reference is made to a yoke, and horse bits are only mentioned for one of the burials. No descriptions are available for any of the vehicle parts, but the chariots are characterised as not being parade vehicles; the axles showed signs of repair. Both chariot burials contained a sword, pottery and animal bones and one of them also produced a razor and a pair of shears. Other grave goods attested in the cemetery include brooches and bracelets in iron, copper-alloy or lignite.

The tyres of the Attichy chariot are similar to those of the Paris region: they are fairly wide (between 36 and 39mm) and no nails have been used to fix them to the felloe. In cross-section they are slightly bulged at each end, forming an edge on the inner side. Two of the three tyre fragments are bent; according to Duval and Blanchet (1974: 404), this was probably done intentionally and would suggest that the vehicle had been dismantled when deposited in the grave. While this theory would offer interesting perspectives, the tyres may equally well have been damaged by a collapsing chamber. This would explain why part of the tyre was bent, while another part remained untouched as it was placed in a separate wheel slot. The most remarkable piece is a copper-alloy decorated base of a terret; the fragment of a ring that fitted into this base is now lost (see Duval and Blanchet 1974: 403, fig. 3). The base consists of the stylised head of a fantasy animal, for which no immediate parallel is available until a few centuries later and then mainly in Britain: escutcheons in the shape of an animal head are known from sites like Ham Hill and Aylesford, but also from Hannogne in the French Ardennes (Duval and Blanchet 1974: 404-05, fig. 3; Stead 1996: 55-56, figs. 58-60; Megaw and Megaw 1990: 223, figs. 372-73; Flouest and Stead 1977: 63). 127

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Figure 10.1. Chariot burial 2009/1 of Attichy (Image courtesy of Inrap, photograph by S. Thouvenot)

Figure 10.2. Chariot burial 2009/2 of Attichy (Image courtesy of Inrap, photograph by J. Lamant)

128

11 Normandy In Normandy, the first chariot burial with an inhumation was excavated in 2006, in Orval, Les Pleines (Manche) on the Cotentin peninsula (Figure 11.1). The chariot burial is dated to the second half of the third century BC and was located at the edge of a settlement, which was established towards the end of the ELT period; the connection with the settlement, which is rather modest compared to the luxurious chariot burial, is not clear (for a discussion see Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2011: 329). The site overhangs the valley of the Soulles that leads to the harbour of Regnéville, a natural port of the Manche (Lepaumier, Chanson and Giazzon 2007: 70).

Chanson and Giazzon 2007: 69; Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2011: 323-25). The vehicle was placed in the chamber intact, with the wheels against the western wall, but in an oblique position as compared to the axis of the chamber; there were no separate pits for the wheels. As can be inferred from the chariot parts and the grave goods, the deceased had been placed on the chariot, with the head between the wheels and the legs on the pole, but nothing remains of the skeleton. Rather exceptional is the presence of two horses, or at least their heads (only their jaws survived). The skull of a five- or six-year-old stallion, wearing its harness, was located in the small space between the left wheel and the southwestern post, which suggests that only the horse’s head had been deposited. Nearby, a small copper-alloy figurine of a bovid’s head with humanoid features was found, which is believed to have been part of the horse harness. A jaw of the second horse (a little older than the first one) was found closer to its functional position, in front of the pole at the fore of the chariot, where there would have been enough space for a complete horse. Its harness, presumably deposited in a leather bag, was discovered closer to the end of the pole. It is not clear if the yoke had also been placed in the grave (Lepaumier, Chanson and Giazzon 2007; Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2011: 323-29; Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2012).

The chariot burial is the central funerary feature of a quadrangular enclosure formed by shallow ditches (Figure 11.2); within the enclosure, a secondary small cremation burial (feature 327) was found which is believed to be contemporary with the chariot burial (Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2011: 329). Postholes were attested in each corner of the large quadrangular grave pit, as well as traces of a wooden burial chamber, which measured 4.75 by 2.5m. The burial is believed to have been covered by a mound. In the filling of the grave pit, a broken and partially shaped block of granite with traces of tool marks was discovered, of which the excavators are convinced that it has served as a stèle for the burial; when the burial chamber collapsed, it ended up in the filling of the grave pit (Lepaumier,

mâchoire et harnachement n° 1

mâchoire n° 2

clavette roue gauche

harnachement n° 2

épée

fer de lance clavette roue droite empreinte ligneuse

1m

N

0

Figure 11.1. Orval chariot burial plan (Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2011, 324, fig. 13)

129

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

443

442

309

444 445 312

319

316

320 318

329 323

333

St 466 327

331

332 334

353 350

466 bis

354

N 0

357

10 m 375

Figure 11.2. Orval: square-ditched enclosure with chariot burial and secondary cremation burial (Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2011, 324, fig. 12)

The two sets of horse harness are identical in terms of technology and decoration. They each consist of a copper-alloy bit, phalerae and harness buttons; all these objects are encrusted with carved coral. The horse bits (Figure 11.3) are unique, not only for their decoration, but also from a technological point of view: the cheek rings are attached to the cannons in such a way that their movement is limited, whereas normally these side rings can move freely (Lepaumier, Chanson and Giazzon 2007; Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2011: 323-29; Gomez de Soto et al. 2017: 42-46). Furthermore, the cheek rings have an additional loop, possibly a rein slot. The Orval horse bits are in a way reminiscent of a horse bit found in Killeevan, Co. Monaghan, Ireland (see pl. 34 in Raftery 1994). Unfortunately, the Killeevan horse bit has proven to

be of early medieval construction, consisting of late Iron Age and early medieval components (Maguire in press). The iron tyres were damaged, but otherwise well preserved; they are flat, wide (4cm) and thick (1cm), and may have had a diameter of more than 1m. Each of the naves had two iron nave bands. The vehicle box was connected to the axle by means of three suspension elements of a type similar to those in Nanterre (section 8.1.7). Remarkable are the two linchpins (Figure 11.4). They are similar to the linchpins in Plastic Style from the Paris area: they have a curved iron shank with a copper-alloy rectangular head, quadrangular in section, and ornamented in low relief, with human faces and a garland of S-motifs (Lepaumier, Chanson and Giazzon 2007; Lepaumier, Giazzon and 130

Normandy

Figure 11.3. Horse bits from the chariot burial at Orval (© Emilie Tureluren)

Chanson 2011: 323-29; Gomez de Soto et al. 2017: 4246). Grave goods were abundant, but pottery is totally missing. The deceased was buried with a sword in its scabbard, connected to a suspension chain; an amber bead may have been part of the suspension system. The burial also contained an exceptionally long spearhead (almost 70cm), which had possibly served as a military standard. In addition to a toiletry bag, with a pair of shears and an iron razor, the deceased was given an axe, two knives, a billhook, as well as a toolkit with a second hammer, a plane, a knife and various rods. Personal adornments include a gold finger-ring and two complete iron brooches of MLT type and part of a third (Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2011: 323-29). For a long time, the Orval chariot burial remained the only one in the region, but in 2019, another one was excavated in Ifs, near Caen. This chariot burial, which was surrounded by a square-ditched enclosure, was part of a small cemetery of inhumation burials, and dated to the fifth century BC. The iron wheel tyres were attested in their upright position, and at the front of the chariot, a horse bit was found. Only small parts of the skeleton were preserved. The deceased was wearing an iron brooch and two bracelets, one in glass, the other in lignite. Near

Figure 11.4. Linchpins from the chariot burial at Orval (Image courtesy of Inrap, photograph by H. Paitier)

131

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent the chariot burial, three horse burials were discovered, in between the inhumation burials (Inrap 2019). No further information of the chariot burial is available at this stage, but it will be interesting to see if the fifth century BC date will be maintained; it is as yet not clear on which basis the burial has been dated. Elsewhere in Normandy there are also examples of later MLT and LLT cremation burials with parts of a vehicle (of the type discussed in chapter 12) (see Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2011: 331). An overview of all the vehicle and horse harness parts from the third through the first century BC attested in Normandy was compiled and discussed by Botté (2019).

132

12 Burials with parts of vehicle and/or harness in northern Gaul Of the earlier chariot burials, the latest ones were from the north.

During the course of LT C, a new type of chariot burial spread across northern Gaul. Typical for these burials was that they contained only part of the vehicle and/or horse harness rather than the whole chariot. The appearance of this new type is closely connected with the change from inhumation to cremation. The vehicle, or part of the vehicle, was placed on the pyre – perhaps as a bier for the deceased - together with some or all of the grave goods. The surviving metal parts were subsequently collected from the pyre, along with the cremated bones and grave goods, and deposited in the grave.

In the Paris area, the chariot burial phase was fairly short, and it is not clear whether an evolution to burials with vehicle and/or horse parts has taken place. The problem is that for a number of chariot burials, like for example the site of Paris, Rue Tournefort, neither the lay-out of the grave nor the burial rite is known (Schönfelder 2000: 405-06), so that in theory, the vehicle parts may just as well come from a partial chariot burial. Furthermore, the iron device found in an enclosure ditch in Bobigny, Les Stades de la Motte and identified as part of a chariot box, is suspected to originate from a burnt chariot (Atlas de l’Architecture et du Patrimoine de la Seine-Saint-Denis s.d.: image 220; Le Bechennec 2002: 33). However, all in all, the evidence is rather thin.

These burials are often referred to as pars pro toto chariot burials, based on the assumption that the deposition of certain vehicle or harness parts symbolised that of a whole vehicle. However, a clear distinction must be made between burials where the chariot as a whole was committed to the fire but only the metal parts survived, and those burials where one or a few parts were separated from the vehicle and laid on the pyre, or directly placed in the grave unburned (not all separate vehicle or harness parts are reported showing traces of burning). Although the archaeological remains may be similar, the funerary ritual was entirely different.

In France, the new type of chariot burials is mainly found in a vast area extending from Higher Normandy to the Nord-Pas-de-Calais, which is rather remarkable, considering that the earlier type of chariot burial was never attested anywhere in this area. The sites (about 10 in total) are concentrated along the major rivers: the lower Seine and the Eure, the Somme, the Canche and the Escaut.

A detailed study of these MLT and LLT chariot burials, with a catalogue and a typology of the various vehicle and harness parts, was published by Schönfelder (2000). Earlier overviews can be found in Roymans (1990: 24451) and Van Endert (1987). An overview of all known chariot burials (complete and partial) from the third to the first century BC in Belgian Gaul was compiled in 2009 (Ginoux, Leman-Delerive and Séverin 2009).

Among the burials of the Groupe de la Haine, that of Estinnes (Cahen-Delhaye, Van Pamel and Cahen 1986) is a clear and well-documented example of a chariot burial of this category. There may have been other and earlier occurrences but given the fragmentary evidence for sites like Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte, this is difficult to judge. It is noteworthy that the Belgian Ardennes do not seem to be affected by the evolution to burning the vehicle on the pyre. The only chariot burial of this period, that of Sberchamps, Au Fersay, dating to the early second century BC (Cahen-Delhaye 1993) follows the tradition of the older chariot burials, in spite of a lack of continuity. This is the second latest (after the one of Warcq) chariot burial with the deposition of a complete vehicle in northern Gaul.

12.1. Geographical distribution The highest number of this new type of chariot burials is found in the Middle Rhine - Moselle region, where they cover approximately the same area as that of the ELT chariot burials. Some were found in the vicinity of the earlier chariot burial sites, like in Plaidt (some 100m south of the ELT burials) and in Urmitz (near the site of Kärlich) (Joachim 1969). They are generally the only chariot burial of the cemetery, although no less than eight were found in the cemetery of Hoppstädten-Weiersbach (Schönfelder 2000: 396-97; Gleser 2005).

Although the chariot burials of this period cover a vast geographical area, they are not very numerous. Part of the reason may be that they are archaeologically harder to trace than those of the ELT period and that certain vehicle parts were perhaps not always recognised as such in the past. Their distribution is likely to have been denser and perhaps wider than is currently assumed based on the available data. Moreover, more may have been found since the latest compilations.

In the Aisne-Marne region, only a few examples of burials with vehicle and/or horse parts are known, and their distribution is confined to the northern periphery. The reason for this may be that further south, the concept of chariot burials was already abandoned at an earlier stage. 133

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 12.2. Origins and dating

an early date for the chariot burial would open interesting perspectives.

In the Middle Rhine - Moselle region, both inhumation and cremation were practised during the ELT period, but the chariot was never burned. The change in treatment of the vehicle may have developed around the time when cremation became the sole formal rite of disposal of the dead. One of the earliest burials with a burnt vehicle is the female burial from barrow 1 in Enkirch, which is dated to an early phase of LT C1 (250-225 BC), but even older is the LT B2 male burial from barrow 16 of Bescheid, Bei den Hübeln, which Haffner and Lage (2008-2009: 130-36) date to the early third century BC; the burial in barrow 16 was probably the latest of the cemetery, which also contained inhumations with a unburnt chariot, such as the one in barrow 6 (see section 3.1.5.3). Gleser (2005: 318) has suggested that the rise of cremation may possibly be unrelated to the practice of placing only parts of a chariot in the grave, because he considers the chariot burial of Spiesheim, a late LT B2 inhumation, as a pars pro toto. However, the burial was disturbed in antiquity, which may explain why only certain parts of the vehicle were preserved. If Gleser is correct, this would be the only inhumation burial of the La Tène period known in our study area with a pars pro toto vehicle.

Cremation burials with remains of vehicles and/or horse harness endure at least throughout LT D, although in the Middle Rhine - Moselle region, there is evidence that towards the end of the LT period, chariot burials were replaced by horse-rider burials, with a single horse bit and/ or spurs (Schönfelder 2000: 347-50; Gleser 2005:331-33). As from the end of the first century AD to the first half of the third century AD, a series of tumuli were constructed in the central part of the civitas of the Tungri, in today’s Hesbaye or Haspengouw region. These tumuli covered rich burials, some of them with vehicle parts and/or horse harness. They are all cremations, and the vehicle is never complete; they consist both of male and female burials (Massart 2000). As these burials are clearly a continuation of the LT C and D tradition described above, they may have occurred in this region already at an earlier stage. 12.3. Complete and pars pro toto chariot burials The vehicle and horse harness parts found with cremation burials of the MLT and LLT period show a considerable variety. There is no standard package that can be expected and there is in fact not a single example with a complete set. As a result, the label pars pro toto has often been used too broadly for any burial with just a few vehicle parts. As argued by Schönfelder (2000: 339) and others before him, one can only speak of a pars pro toto chariot burial when it was clearly the intention for the object(s) placed in the grave to symbolically represent the whole chariot. There may well have been other reasons why only a limited number of vehicle and horse harness parts made it to the list of grave contents, as already discussed by Roymans (1990: 247): many chariot burials were not expertly excavated; vehicle parts may not have been recognised as such and/or have been lost; vehicle and horse harness parts were perhaps incompletely collected after the cremation; and finally, the use of metal in the construction and decoration of the vehicle may have been restricted.

In France, most partial chariot burials are rather loosely dated; as a result, it is difficult to establish when and where they first appeared, and whether there is any connection with chariot burials from the ELT period. The transition from a traditional chariot burial (barrow 1938/1) to a burial with the remains of a burnt vehicle (barrow 1939/1) is possibly illustrated in the cemetery of Tremblois-lèsRocroi, Les Pothées, but Flouest (1990: 67-68) questions the presence of chariot parts in barrow 1939/1. Both burials are dated to LT C, without more precision (Schönfelder 2000: 406-07). The LT C1 burial of Hordain (département du Nord), with two linchpins, three horse bits and the copperalloy decorative remains of a yoke (Séverin, Ginoux and Leman-Delerive 2009), none of them burned (personal communication Germaine Leman-Delerive), could be one of the oldest in France. Although it is the only one ever found in the surroundings, Hordain is relatively close to the Groupe de la Haine in Belgian Hainaut; both regions were part of the Civitas Nerviorum during the Roman period and of the Comté du Hainaut in historical times. Hence the concept of chariot burials was perhaps not entirely new in Hordain.

Different scenarios can be envisaged. In the case of Enkirch, Vorderer Hunseifen, for example, the set of vehicle parts suggests that the wheels had been removed from the vehicle before it was put on the pyre. The burial contained one linchpin, five suspension eyebolts and, putatively, the metal remains - copper-alloy decorations and two iron rings - of the vehicle box (Haffner 1979). Evidently, the vehicle box (with the axle attached to it?), was intentionally placed on the pyre; it presumably carried the deceased female. Horse harness elements were absent, so the yoke, the horse bits and the wheels were still available for future use, but most of the vehicle was entrusted to the fire. Hence, the Enkirch burial qualifies as a chariot burial.

Outside the traditional chariot distribution area, in Abbéville (Somme), part of a linchpin was found in a cremation burial situated in an isolated position on a cemetery with 90 cremation burials. The cemetery spans a period from about 275 BC to 75 BC, but the preliminary publications (Baray 1997a, 1998) do not provide a date for the burial with the linchpin (see also Schönfelder 2000: 402). This region has a longer tradition of cremation burials than for example the Aisne-Marne, and

One of the most complete chariot burials of this period is that from Plaidt, Nesselbüsch, although this seems to 134

Burials with parts of vehicle and/or harness in northern Gaul sanctuary of Blicquy (see section 9.6). For the period and the geographical area under discussion here, there is only one example of a single occurrence of a linchpin, i.e., that of Abbeville, La Sole de Baillon near the Somme (Baray 1997a, 1998). Also in the case of the above-mentioned burial of Hordain, combining three horse bits (one of which for a rider) with two linchpins, it is conceivable that the vehicle itself was kept intact.

have held the remains of two vehicles (possibly from two different burial chambers): there are three linchpins, a pole mounting, remains from two nave bands, two pairs of horse bits and suspension parts (Joachim 1969; Schönfelder 2000: 399). Tyres and nave bands are more commonly found during LT D, and especially in Hoppstädten-Weiersbach, where no less than eight chariot burials could be identified (Gleser 2005: 111-16; Schönfelder 2000: 396-97); oddly enough tyres and nave bands are often mutually exclusive. Only one of the Hoppstädten-Weiersbach burials has a horse bit (only one), but several of them have up to three terret rings.

Pars pro toto chariot burials are spread over most of the regions under discussion, but they are particularly concentrated in an area covering the Somme, Nord-Pasde-Calais and Hainaut. The crucial question is whether at the time pars pro toto chariot burials were considered of equal value and enjoyed the same esteem as authentic chariot burials. The answer to this question may vary according to time and place. In places where both types co-occurred, the motive behind the pars pro toto option can be expected to be economic in nature. On the other hand, the collection of the vehicle and horse harness parts often seems to have happened with a certain ‘carelessness’. Even in undisturbed graves, excavated under modern conditions, there are ample indications of uncomplete collection. There is, for example, never a complete set of terret rings. Maybe the ritual did not require for all the metal parts to be selected from the pyre. In the same way the quantity of the cremated bones present in a burial is often below reasonable expectations. Although this may have other causes (part of the bones may have been kept elsewhere), the most obvious explanation is that the bones were incompletely gathered from the pyre.

In some cases, the evidence that the vehicle as such was burned on the pyre is rather tenuous. If the Enkirch chariot burial had not included the linchpin (for example because it had been in wood), the identification of the other items as vehicles part could possibly have been debated. Eyebolts can have many other functions (see Schönfelder 2000: 213-14) and the sheet ornaments assigned to the vehicle box could have served some other purpose. For the sake of completeness, it should be mentioned that in the case of Enkirch, the eyebolts were convincingly identified as suspension parts (Schönfelder 2000: 210), but there are other examples where just a single eyebolt was accepted as the only remains of a burnt vehicle, like for example burials 50 and 84 of Hoppstädten-Weiersbach, because of the cemetery context and of local comparative material (Schönfelder 2000: 397). From the above it can be concluded that many burials of this period can be considered authentic chariot burials, despite their limited number of vehicle parts. However, there remains a category of burials where there is no indication that the vehicle had accompanied the deceased on the pyre. An example is LT C1 burial 1445 from Wederath, with some phalerae and two horse bits, which generally refer to the two horses that draw a two wheeled vehicle (MüllerKarpe 1989). This is a genuine example of a pars pro toto chariot burial, as the horse bits are deliberately chosen to symbolically represent a chariot pulled by two horses. Alternatively, the picture of a chariot can be evoked by the deposition of a few burnt terret rings and the iron spiral of a goad, like in Estinnes (Cahen-Delhaye, Van Pamel and Cahen 1986).

Schönfelder (2000: 337) points out that the grave goods of the later LT pars pro toto burials are rather modest, as opposed to those of the Hallstatt period in central Europe. Metzler (2002: 179-80) suggests that in the Middle Rhine - Moselle area, pars pro toto burials are poorer in grave goods and grave construction than other contemporary chariot burials, although he wonders how to explain the presence of a melted terret on top of a rich horse-rider burial chamber in Goeblingen-Nospelt. What is often not considered in this whole discussion, is that since LT B2, in many respects the richness of grave goods has been generally declining, whereas towards the end of the LT period, the display of wealth increases again, as demonstrated by the abundance of ceramics, the presence of objects referring to the hearth cult and even a return of Mediterranean imports. Grave contents should be studied within their own time frame, and to be able to judge whether Metzler’s hypothesis holds, and whether it holds for the whole of northern Gaul, a case-by-case comparison needs to be made, taking into account local, regional and chronological elements.

Pars pro toto chariot burials are already known from the Hallstatt period in central Europe (Schönfelder 2000: 336) and also in Gaul (Ginoux, Leman-Delerive and Séverin 2009: 211, note 1). In the Middle Rhine - Moselle region and in northern France they seem to range from LT C to at least LT D1. During the Hallstatt period, also the single occurrence of one or more linchpins is generally considered to act as a pars pro toto (Schönfelder 2000: 336-39). Linchpins must have had a strong symbolic meaning, given for example also the presence of a linchpin in the Gallo-Roman

In the Somme and Nord-Pas-de-Calais region, where only pars pro toto chariot burials occur, these often hold a prominent place. In La Calotterie, La Fontaine aux 135

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Linottes the chariot burial was the central burial of a funerary enclosure, and it was one of the two founding burials of the cemetery (Blancquaert and Desfossés 1998). In Bouchon, Le Rideau Miquet the chariot burial was one of the richest burials of the cemetery (Baray 1997b). In the Middle Rhine - Moselle region, Metzler’s hypothesis is certainly not discernible at first sight; a social distinction between the two types of chariot burials is feasible but should be studied in further detail. If there is evidence for a difference in wealth, the possibility can be envisaged that the deceased involved belonged to two distinct categories of the population. The sex of the deceased is often unknown, but several cases of female burials are attested, and the divide is certainly not gender based. 12.4. A special composition In France, a unique arrangement, accommodating the remains of four chariots, was discovered in La-Maillerayesur-Seine, Fôret de Brotonne, dated to the mid-second century BC. The tyres, distorted by the fire, were placed one on top of the other to form a kind of circular coffin. Apart from the eight tyres, the arrangement included a linchpin, an axle bar, suspension eyebolts, a terret ring, three ring bits and between one and three curb bits. As the glass urn with the cremated bones was stolen from the excavation, it was not possible to determine the number of deceased involved, but the presence of three swords, four shields and five spears could be another indication that this was a multiple burial (Lequoy 1993). 12.5. Northern Gaul versus the Arras Culture in this period As cremation was never practised in the Arras Culture and vehicles were never burned or destroyed in any other way, this comparison is inevitably rather short. All the same, the question remains whether there is a connection between these ‘partial’ chariot burials and the dismantled chariot burials of the Yorkshire Wolds. Chronologically this could be conceivable but from a ritual perspective it seems less likely. In the Wolds, although the vehicle was disassembled, all the parts were placed in the grave. The pars pro toto concept is not noticeably present. As such, this type of burials will not be further included in the next chapter, which will focus on those features and characteristics that are essential for the discussion on the origins of the Arras Culture.

136

13 Eastern Yorkshire versus Northern Gaul has identified the development of a major technological acquirement.

The information collected in the first part of this study allows us to draw some conclusions as to the origins of the new funerary rites adopted in East Yorkshire during the course of the La Tène period. Were these rites brought in by a small elite group of immigrants from northern Gaul or were they initiated by the contacts of the local aristocracy with the upper-class in northern Gaul through elite networks?

Only the very latest (LT B2) of the Aisne-Marne vehicles have tyres of the developed type, whereas all the tyres attested in the chariot burials of the Paris region fall in this category: they are all flat and wide and are never nailed to the felloe. Unfortunately, the two later chariot burials from the Belgian Ardennes did not produce any tyres (or just a few fragments) and there is little information from the Groupe de la Haine, but the tyres of the 1926 chariot burial from Attichy (the 2009 site has not yet been published) and those from Orval clearly fit the pattern. All these burials have been dated to the latter part of LT B2 or later, based on grave goods. It seems there is now enough evidence to accept the type of wheel tyre as a chronological marker.

An important issue to deal with is the timing. In order to assess which alternative is more plausible than the other, it is important to establish when the adoption took place. Moreover, this will allow the investigation of the circumstances of the adoption, or at least place it in a wider context. 13.1. Dating

The tyres from the Arras Culture all belong to this later category, implying that the appearance of chariot burials in East Yorkshire coincides with their spread over large parts of northern Gaul. In the Aisne-Marne region, chariot burials are almost extinct at this stage; only in the northern part are there a few left.

At the time of completing my PhD (2011), the start of the Arras Culture was commonly situated around 400 BC, but in 2012, this view was substantially challenged by the Bayesian modelling study discussed in section 2.6.4. As a matter of fact, this study confirmed the later dating argued in my PhD, which was based on a typological and technological comparison with the more closely dated continental material (Anthoons 2011: 59-60, 209-10). The results of the Bayesian modelling study even allow for a starting date later into the third century BC, and for chariot burials even favours a date in the latter decades, but there are indications that the analysis may not have included the earliest chariot burials of the Arras Culture and that the Wetwang Slack cemetery was not the earliest of its kind. Although there is now no longer a need to demonstrate that the Yorkshire chariot burials are later than those of the Aisne-Marne and should rather be compared to the chariot burials from the Paris area and a few other regions in northern Gaul, it may still be useful to summarise the technological and typological arguments that support this dating.

13.1.2. Supporting evidence Corroborating evidence for this later dating can be found in the five-terret system. While this has always been considered as one of the basic differences between East Yorkshire and the Continent, where four terrets are the rule in the Aisne-Marne – a system with a fifth central terret has been documented at least twice in the Paris region, i.e. in Le Plessis-Gassot (Ginoux 2003: 46; 2009: 42-43, 93, tab. 3, fig. 40; personal observation) and Roissy (Lejars 2005: 77, fig. 4), although in Le Plessis-Gassot there was a sixth terret of a different type. Six terrets were also found with the second century BC chariot burial from Warcq, and one could wonder if this represented yet another evolution. Furthermore, the evolution of the horse harness in chariot burials shows interesting parallels. In the early periods on the Continent, the yoke seems relatively unadorned. The Aisne-Marne chariot burials have produced some of the most beautiful phalerae, but the terrets, if any, are not very elaborate, as is for example illustrated by the chariot burial of Semide (Lambot and Verger 1995). Decorated terrets only appear towards the end of LT B1 or in LT B2, with the Waldalgesheim yoke as the ultimate example (Joachim 1995). The LT A2 Laumersheim terrets are an early exception to the rule (Kimmig 1944). More attention seems to have been paid to the yoke in general in this period, with yoke caps like those from Waldalgesheim (Joachim 1995: 95, fig. 84) and also from Sberchamps,

13.1.1. Iron wheel tyres An important factor in this respect is the evolution of iron wheel tyres, which was illustrated by Verger (1994: 504-09) in his study of the chariot burials of the AisneMarne region. Verger could establish a clear evolution from narrow and curved tyres which were secured to the wooden felloe by many nails, to flat and wide tyres without any nails at all. Verger did not attempt to clarify this evolution, nor did he stress its importance. The logical explanation, however, seems to be that it reflects a progress in mastering the technique of shrinking the tyre onto the felloe by contraction. If this is correct, Verger 137

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent is contemporary to the chariot burials with dismantled vehicles from the Wolds. In fact, all the chariot burials with complete vehicles are located in the periphery of the distribution area. It should be noted, however, that in Ferry Fryston (and in Pocklington, The Mile), the vehicle was buried in a grave, whereas in Pexton Moor and Cawthorn Camps it was placed on the old ground surface, which would indicate an earlier dating. Interesting to note is that the vehicle from Cawthorn Camps has copper-alloy nave bands that are very similar to those from Nanterre in Paris. The chronological spread of chariot burials in eastern Yorkshire is likely to have been wider than the narrow horizon generally claimed on the basis of the Bayesian modelling study, and typological evidence suggests that they were to a large degree contemporary with the later chariot burials from northern Gaul.

Au Fersay (Mathieu 1993), one of the two chariot burials of the second phase in the Belgian Ardennes. The same attention for terrets is characteristic for the chariots of the Paris area and for those of the Groupe de la Haine, but also for the Yorkshire chariot burials, although here the style is different. 13.1.3. Rationale behind and disproof of traditional dating There are a number of reasons for the earlier dating by archaeologists like Ian Stead and John Dent, whose work has been fundamental for the study of the Arras Culture. Until a few decades ago, the repertoire of chariot burials in the Paris area was very small and poorly documented, while that of the Aisne-Marne was vast and widely known. It was, therefore, logical to turn to the Aisne-Marne region for comparative material. However, in the Aisne-Marne, chariot burials, with their heydays in the early fourth century BC, went out of fashion towards the middle of the century, with only a few cases that can be dated to the period 340-320 BC. This may have been at the origin of placing the beginning of the Arras Culture in the early fourth century, even though Stead occasionally also refers to examples in the Paris region (Stead 1979: 26).

13.2. Comparison of funerary practices Some of the typical features of the Arras Culture are strikingly similar to funerary practices in northern Gaul, whilst others demonstrate a large degree of originality. Moreover, regional differences and evolutions over time obscure the comparison. It is, therefore, essential to set a number of features in the right perspective. They have all been discussed in further detail in the various sections above, as have been various elements of material culture, which also illustrated similarities and differences between eastern Yorkshire and northern Gaul.

Another possible reason for focusing on the Aisne-Marne is that joint square enclosures, which are typical for East Yorkshire, also occur in the Aisne-Marne, like for example in the cemeteries of Ménil-Annelles and Ville-surRetourne, sites excavated by Stead in the 1970s (Stead, Flouest and Rigby 2006); both of these sites, however, postdate the chariot burial period in the region. In the area around Paris, only a few isolated cases of square enclosures occur, while joint square enclosures are absent altogether. Square enclosures will be further discussed below.

13.2.1. Inhumation versus cremation The only (still visible) method of disposing of the dead throughout the duration of the Arras Culture was inhumation. In northern Gaul, however, the importance of cremation grows during the course of the La Tène period (Table 13.1). Assessing the prominence of both burials rite, regionally as well as chronologically, results in valuable information as to the possible origins of the Arras Culture.

Furthermore, a few brooches of ELT scheme were found in East Yorkshire, but most of these are from the first half of the third century BC and the others need not be much earlier. The brooch of Marzabotto type inspiration from barrow L in Cowlam (Stead 1979: 64-65; Stead 1991: 180) is often seen as the earliest artefact of the Arras Culture, going back to the beginning of the fourth century BC. However, brooches with proportions similar to the Marzabotto type still occur in Gaul late in the fourth and even still in the third century BC (Charpy 1998: 215), so the Cowlam brooch may be contemporary with these Gallic examples. Even if it is of earlier date, the possibility of an heirloom should be considered. Ian Stead (1991: 180) was puzzled by the relatively small number of brooches of ELT construction scheme in East Yorkshire. A later starting date of the Arras Culture, in the last phase of the ELT period, would explain this.

Although it cannot be fully excluded, the total absence of cremation in East Yorkshire makes it less likely for the impetus for the Arras Culture to have come from a region where cremation was prominently present. Chronologically, the growing importance of cremation during LT C pleads in favour of the adoption having taken place at an earlier stage. Ultimately, cremation is virtually to become the only formal burial rite in northern Gaul during LT D. The Arras Culture was not affected by this change to cremation, which could imply that the close contact with the Continent (be it through migration or networks) was only of fairly short duration; alternatively, there was no need for another change. 13.2.2. Position and orientation of the body

None of the Yorkshire chariot burials that could be dated typologically predate the third century BC. It is possible that the burials with dismantled vehicles represent a later development, but if so, then this is not followed everywhere. The Ferry Fryston chariot burial (with a complete vehicle)

If inhumation was adopted from the Continent, it was not copied in every detail. The most striking difference is that in northern Gaul, bodies were extended on the back, while in the Arras Culture, bodies were flexed, crouched or even 138

Eastern Yorkshire versus Northern Gaul Table 13.1. Formal burial rites in northern Gaul during the La Tène period Region

Burial rite

Middle Rhine - Moselle

Simultaneous practice of inhumation and cremation, most chariot burials being inhumations. General use of cremation as from LT C1.

Belgian Ardennes

Simultaneous practice of inhumation and cremation, all chariot burials being inhumations

Northern Aisne-Marne

Inhumation predominant during LT A/B, with rare cases of cremation following contacts with the northern Picardy region. Gradual change to cremation, which becomes prevalent in the course of LT C2. However, inhumation still occurred in Warcq (French Ardennes) at the transition from LT C2 to LT D1.

Central and southern Aisne-Marne Longer persistance of inhumation; cremation only introduced in LT D. Paris

Inhumation is the rule; some cases of cremation as from LT C1. All chariot burials are inhumations, but the one from Le Plessis-Gassot includes a secundary cremation.

Groupe de la Haine

Perhaps simultaneous practice of inhumation and cremation.

Aisne valley (Oise dept)

Inhumation, but Attichy cemetery includes one cremation.

contracted. In this respect the Arras Culture follows an indigenous British tradition: burial in a cemetery is not that common in the Iron Age, but where inhumation burials are attested, like for example in southwestern Britain, the standard position of the body is crouched (Cunliffe 2005: 551-52).

circular/oval ditches, other types of grave goods), but apparently originated within the same families (Stead 1991: 134 fig. 83, 181). At this moment, inhumation was no longer practised in northern Gaul, nor was it common anywhere else in Britain, so no external influence can be demonstrated there.

Crouched inhumation burials were typical for the Beaker Culture, not only in Britain, but also on the Continent (Benz, Strahm and Van Willigen 1998: fig. 8; Bourgeois, Amkreutz and Panhuysen 2009). Even in the LH period, crouched inhumation still occurred in northern France, as can be seen in the cemetery of Pièce à Liards at Etaples (Pas-de-Calais), where all 12 inhumations are crouched (Henton 2006: 14). Later, this body position becomes extremely rare as a formal burial; a good example can be found in the cemetery of Dormans (Marne) (Guillaume 1964: 51-52, fig. 3).

13.2.3. Chariot burials Table 13.2 gives an overview of the main regions discussed in this study, indicating for which period chariot burials have been attested. 13.2.4. Complete and dismantled chariots Another characteristic of the Arras Culture is the arrangement of the vehicle in the grave pit. As discussed above, typical for the chariot burials of the Wolds is that the vehicles were disassembled before being put in the grave. On the Continent most chariots have been put in the grave complete, although there are examples of (partially) dismantled vehicles. In the LH burial of Vix (Burgundy), the wheels were detached from the wagon and placed against one of the walls of the chamber. Apparently, dismantled wheels were the rule in Burgundian wagon burials (Joffroy 1958: 77; Knüsel 2002: 281, 288). The majority of the two-wheeled vehicles from chariot burials of the La Tène period were complete, but a very clear example of a LT A2 disassembled chariot burial is burial 6 of Bescheid (section 3.1.5.3). More examples of chariot burials that have been dismantled to various degrees can be found in the Paris area: in one of the Bouqueval chariot burials the wheels were taken off, and in Le Plessis-Gassot and Roissy the box was lifted from the axle (section 8.1.6); the last example does not really qualify as a dismantled chariot burial.

Returning to the Arras Culture, if excarnation was practised during the long period when archaeologically visible burial rites were lacking or at least very rare (the LBA and EIA), then presumably the body was placed on the platform in a crouched position (see Bevan 1999: 124), the position in which it was placed in the grave previously. When inhumation was picked up again with the Arras Culture, the body would then continue to be placed in the grave in the same way. It might also be worthwhile investigating at which moment in time inhumation reappeared in other areas of Britain. The main body orientation in the Arras Culture is northsouth, facing east. The extended bodies in northern Gaul were west-east oriented, but towards the end of LT B, this standard rule was abandoned, so that in LT C a prevailing orientation can no longer be discerned (Demoule 1999: 182-83).

In some cases, the reason for the (partial) dismantling of a vehicle may have been purely practical, but the systematic arrangement encountered in the chariot burials of the Wolds is bound to reflect a symbolic intention, which remains as yet unexplained.

Towards the end of the Arras Culture, in the first century BC, extended east-west burials appeared (type B burials, see section 2.4.5.2), which also differed from the northsouth burials in other respects (deeper grave pit, shallower 139

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Table 13.2. Chronological overview of the chariot burials of the La Tène period by region Middle Rhine Aisne-Marne Belgian/French Paris + Oise - Moselle Ardennes (Aisne valley)

Groupe de la Haine

N. France

Arras Culture

LT A1 Vehicle usually complete LT A2

Mainly inhumation Barrows

LT B1

No ditched enclosures

Vehicle complete

Vehicle complete

Inhumation

Inhumation

Barrows ?

Round barrows

Various shapes of ditched enclosures

No ditched enclosures

LT B2

LT C1

Vehicle complete Vehicle burned or

Inhumation

Pars pro toto

Round barrows

Cremation LT C2 LT D1

LT D2

No obvious barrows Squareditched enclosures with causeways as from c. LT C2

No ditched enclosures

Inhumation Barrows?

 

Inhumation ? No info

Inhumation Square barrows

No ditched enclosures

   

Vehicle dismantled (Wolds) or complete (other areas)

Vehicle usually complete

   

 

 

 

Vehicle burned / Pars pro toto Cremation  

Vehicle burned / Pars pro toto Cremation

Square enclosures  

Square enclosures but no special link with chariot burials

in northern Gaul, but there is no material proof. It should be noted, however, that in Bourcq (French Ardennes), Lambot claims that in three instances, a wall (consisting of vertical posts and horizontal planks) had been constructed on the inner side of the square-ditched enclosure to support a (square) burial mound. British square barrows are not supported by walls, so this is a different type of construction altogether.

13.2.5. Square barrows, square enclosures One of the distinctive features of the Arras Culture are the square barrows, surrounded by square ditches. As the Bronze Age burials in East Yorkshire were round, this new square shape is generally seen as a novelty introduced from the Continent, where square-ditched enclosures as funerary monuments are fairly common in the Iron Age. There are, however, a few facts to be taken into consideration.

Another point to be stressed, is the greater differentiation in the Gaulish enclosures. Not only can different shapes of enclosures sometimes co-exist on the same cemetery, but enclosures can also be materialised in different ways, for example by a row of poles rather than a ditch. In addition, not all archaeologically retrieved ditches functioned as an open ditch enclosure; some of them were dug to hold a timber palisade. In eastern Yorkshire, ritual prescriptions seem to have been more rigorous in this respect, leading to a more uniform tradition.

One of the main issues is that in eastern Yorkshire, the square shape of the barrow has been preserved in certain places, whereas in northern Gaul, no material remains of square barrows are attested, possibly as a result of intensive ploughing. Ditched enclosures are common in Gaul, but the evidence that they surround a barrow is rare and purely circumstantial. Even when the possibility of a barrow inside an enclosure is envisaged, it is usually conceived of as round, not square. The reason for this is obvious: all the known barrows (Middle Rhine – Moselle, Belgian Ardennes) are round. All the same, these round barrows belong to a different tradition, one without ditched enclosures. In summary, square barrows may have existed

Given the absence of square barrows in northern Gaul, only square enclosures can be compared. Most square enclosures on the Continent date to LT D. In appearance, the famous cemetery of Wederath-Belginum in the Middle Rhine 140

Eastern Yorkshire versus Northern Gaul Moselle area which covers a time span of no less than 800 years (roughly from 400 BC to 400 AD) looks very similar to East Yorkshire cemeteries like Wetwang and Rudston / Burton Fleming, but the earliest square enclosures in Wederath-Belginum are much later than the first square enclosures in East Yorkshire. If the practice of square enclosures was adopted from the Continent, one should search for areas in Gaul where square enclosures occurred at least as early as the beginning of the third century BC.

of which the contemporaneity is not attested, is reported on the adjacent site of Bobigny, Les Stades de la Motte (see section 8.1.3). While funerary enclosures become a recurring feature in adjacent areas like Picardy and the Champagne-Ardennes, they never seem to experience a breakthrough in the immediate surroundings of Paris. 13.2.6. No perfect match … Despite the absence of square enclosures in the Paris region, many other elements seem to link East Yorkshire with this area, as is discussed in further detail above (section 8.3). Evidently, many of the correspondences can be accounted for by the contemporaneity of their funerary traditions. If more information was available for the other regions with LT B2 or C1 chariot burials, the same, or perhaps even more analogies might come to light.

An area with both chariot burials and square enclosures is the Aisne-Marne region. The typical cemeteries with joint square enclosures date from LT C and D, like MénilAnnelles, Ville-sur-Retourne, La Neuville-en-Tourne-àFuy. They seem to be specific for the Remi as they are unknown south of the Marne, nor in the Sénonais or in Picardy (Lambot 2000: 158). The large Arras Culture cemeteries with joint enclosures would be contemporary with these cemeteries. The question remains whether the development from detached to joint enclosures that can be seen in both these regions illustrates a certain level of interaction, or whether it is just a natural development, resulting from a lack of space, or from a desire to link up with a revered forebear.

There is, as yet, not a single region in northern Gaul that can be shown to form a perfect match for the Arras Culture. Chariot burials were introduced around the same time in East Yorkshire as in the Paris region and a few other areas in northern Gaul, while by that time they had gone out of fashion in the Aisne-Marne. On the other hand, the square enclosures of the Arras Culture seem to form a link with the Aisne-Marne region, especially the variant with joint enclosures.

The initial concept of a square enclosure may have been adopted from the wider Aisne-Marne region, where this structure appears at a fairly early date. In the cemetery of Vouzy (South Champagne), an evolution can be seen from LBA circular enclosures to EIA square enclosures (Lambot 2000: 150). Circular enclosures, however, still remained in existence in the Iron Age. A majority of the chariot burials are set within circular enclosures, but many have no enclosures at all. Only a small proportion of the chariot burials are associated with square enclosures.

One could safely state that the concept of the Arras chariot burial finds its origin on the Continent, perhaps in the Paris region, given the many similarities. The same is probably true for the reintroduction of inhumation, but here the local element is so strong that a certain level of influence from other British regions with inhumation burials cannot be excluded. Square barrows cannot be linked with northern Gaul, but square-ditched enclosures may be inspired by those of the Aisne-Marne.

An area with no chariot burials but with square enclosures is situated around the confluent of the Seine and the Yonne (Senones country in the first century BC). Several examples are attested for the LT B2 period (Lambot 2000: 153, fig. 12; Séguier and Delattre 2005: 247, fig. 5).

In summary, the typical features of the Arras Culture are of various origin and seem to be the result of careful selection; moreover, they are deeply rooted in local traditions. This does not fit the image of elite migration, but rather points at elite networks, with simultaneous contacts with different regions as one of the basic characteristics.

In the Paris region, square enclosures are seemingly absent. In the older excavations (like Nanterre), possible enclosures may have gone unnoticed, but none of the chariot burials examined under modern conditions were surrounded by ditched enclosures. They were all part of small, reasonably rich cemeteries with less than 20 inhumation burials, mostly dating to the third century BC. Particularly in Bouqueval and in Roissy, La Fosse Cotheret the burials were concentrated on a small plot of land, not leaving much space for enclosures, or barrows for that matter; the cemetery of Le Plessis-Gassot had more space, but there were no ditched enclosures (see Lejars 2005: 81, fig. 11). In the large cemetery of Bobigny, Hôpital Avicenne the burials are even more closely packed and there are several intersections. The cemetery covering the third and the second century BC contains over 500 burials, almost all inhumations (Le Forrestier 2005). A flexed burial within a square-ditched (palisaded) enclosure

13.2.7. … so no migration? As some researchers have pointed out, there may be many reasons why the material culture of a migrant population differs from that in their homeland, especially once they have settled and have reached a high level of exchange and intermarriage with the indigenous population (Lamb 2018: 52, with further references). The same will obviously be true for mortuary practices. Cunliffe (2005: 86) ascribes the differences with the Continent to the difficulty of tracking down the first-generation immigrants in the archaeological record: ‘A close study of the Arras culture emphasizes some of the problems involved in recognizing immigrant 141

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent communities by means of the archaeological record. Seldom is it possible to discover material of the first generation; what survives is more likely to belong to subsequent developments, which invariably diverge from the traditions of the homeland. Nevertheless, the Yorkshire evidence is impressive. It suggests small bands arriving, with little more than their personal equipment, and settling down among the natives in whose pottery traditions they shared. When time came for burial they maintained their own rituals, using a mortuary cart to bring the body to the grave and sometimes burying it with the dead. So strong were these religious practices that they remained dominant for several hundred years (Cunliffe 2005: 86).’

Population movements have occurred throughout history, and there is no reason for the Iron Age to be an exception to the rule. Migration is a complex process that is not easy to unravel, especially when it concerns only a limited segment of the population. As argued by Manuel Fernández-Göth (2020: 189), denying the existence of population movements across the Channel would be as naïve as the former theories of mass invasions. It is, however, hard to determine the scale of these movements and to identify them based on the archaeological record. 13.3. Conclusion and further questions All in all, based on current archaeological knowledge, the alternative of elite networks offers a better explanation. Therefore, the remainder of this study will concentrate on this model.

While this theory cannot be dismissed, it suffers from the inconvenience that it can be applied to many similar situations and that it can never be tested. Potentially, it could explain away the differences with the Continent: if there are several small bands arriving, they may have different origins, and each make their contribution to the pool of funerary practices; the local elite may quickly adopt the prestigious new rites but will need to integrate them in their own traditions and belief systems. This may result in a new blend of funerary rites within the time of perhaps just one generation.

Furthermore, another issue needs further investigation. The earliest chariot burials in the Aisne-Marne go back to the third quarter of the fifth century and their heydays in the area can be situated in the decades around 400 BC. Why did it take 100 years or more for chariot burials to appear in the Paris area and in East Yorkshire? Why the sudden and wide distribution? These questions, as well as the role of and changes in elite networks, will be discussed in the next chapter.

However, this narrative does not take account of the renaissance of the chariot burial phenomenon and its distribution across many regions in northern Gaul during the course of the third century BC. Nathalie Ginoux has also referred to small bands as the founders of the cemeteries with chariot burials north of Paris (see section 8.2.1), the alleged origin of these bands being in central and southeastern Europe. However, as discussed, it is more likely that the Paris chariot burials were a revival of a rite practised within living memory in a neighbouring region. Worth noting is that there are several indications that in East Yorkshire, swords were carried on the back, rather than slung on the right side, with the sword handle at the waist, as is the case on the Continent and in southern Britain (see section 2.4.5.3). This is yet another local feature, and one that weakens any potential perspective of explaining the origins of the Arras Culture by the arrival of a continental warband, as in this case one could expect that an immigrant group which was dominant enough to change the funerary scene, would be equally influential in the field of weaponry. If the small bands’ scenario took place, their power and prestige certainly lay in a different field. Small bands and their wanderings do merit further research, but in the context of the Arras Culture, other forces are at work. The early third century BC is a time of growing internationalisation, and this cannot all be imputed to travelling bands, but much more to long-distance contacts and individual mobility which enabled the ruling classes to build a real power base at their local home.

142

14 Third century BC: Changes in long-distance networks paper with Erdös himself but with someone else who has written a paper with Erdös, has Erdös number 2, and so on. No mathematician has ever been found with an Erdös number higher than 17, and most (over 100,000) have 5 or 6 (Buchanan 2002: 34-35).

When discussing Iron Age elite networks, one must be aware that these are not stable, institutionalised or everlasting, but rather ephemeral, volatile and subject to internal and external factors. This chapter aims to illustrate how, based on the archaeological record, it is possible to capture changes in the functioning of these networks. First the theory of social networks will be shortly discussed. Subsequently, the evolution that takes place in northern Gaul in the earlier third century BC will be described and interpreted. Finally, the degree of participation of East Yorkshire in this new development will be examined.

A small-world network usually contains cliques or clusters, which form a kind of sub-network. The degree to which nodes in a graph tend to cluster together is measured by the so-called clustering coefficient, a feature described by Watts and Strogatz (1998). The average minimum number of steps necessary to connect one node with another, they defined as the average shortest path length. Random graphs show a small average shortest path length, along with a small clustering coefficient. Watts and Strogatz measured that small networks can be highly clustered, more highly clustered than random graphs, but what they have in common with random graphs is that they have small path lengths.

14.1. Social networks theory The concept of long-distance elite networks has often been called upon to explain the spread of goods and ideas across a wide geographic area, but like social networks in general, the term has been used rather loosely, while in reality the sets of relationships it refers to are rather complex. In recent decades, however, social networks have been analysed within the framework of network theory, thus providing a theoretical basis for phenomena encountered in today’s society but also applicable to societies of the past.

Ties in a network can be strong or weak. Strong ties are those between, for example, family, friends or colleagues. Strong ties are often parts of triads, because a person usually also knows his friend’s friends. Weak ties, on the other hand, refer to random or long-distance contacts. Granovetter (1973, 1983) has argued that weak ties are extremely important in the rapid diffusion of information. Between strong ties, news does not spread very far, whereas through communication with a loose acquaintance, news escapes the boundaries of one’s own social group. In this way, weak ties can act as social bridges. Diffusion of information via strong ties takes much longer to travel from one side of a network to the other.

A social network consists of nodes and ties or connections. Nodes are the individual actors within the network, while ties represent the relationships between the nodes. Ties operate in various fields (family, friendship, work, trade, travel) and at various levels (neighbourhood, nation, international). When the various nodes and ties that make up a social network are reproduced in a graph (a network of dots connected by lines), this turns out to be very complex.

However, Shi et al. (2007) have argued that the transmission of covert or sensitive information will only make use of ties that can be trusted. Strong ties have a much higher fidelity rate than weak ties and will, therefore, be better transmitters. They also pointed out that the willingness to adopt an innovation requires independent confirmation from multiple sources. In their test case they considered strong ties as those belonging to closed triads (i.e., of three people that all know each other), although in reality there are other markers of strength like frequency and length of contact. By removing the weak ties in the test case, only a few individuals became disconnected, but the network itself was preserved. A network of strong ties, consisting of overlapping clusters, appears to spread the information almost as efficiently as a network linked together with long-distance weak ties.

An important concept in network theory is the small-world phenomenon. In a small-world network, most nodes can be reached from any other node in just a limited number of steps. This is also known as the six degrees of separation theory. In a social network it means that strangers are connected by mutual acquaintances. A typical example of a small-world network, often used to illustrate the principle, is the collaboration network of mathematicians, whose collaborative distance with the Hungarian mathematician Paul Erdös is expressed by the so-called Erdös number. Erdös published a large number of papers, often in collaboration with colleagues. A mathematician who has written a paper with Erdös has Erdös number 1, whereas a person who has not written a

143

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent 14.2. Closer contacts in the third century BC

In reality, a social network is made up of both weak ties and overlapping strong ties, and both transmit information, each in their own way.

The aim of this section is to outline the context in which the spread of chariot burials across a large geographical area took place during the course of the third century BC. In the fifth and early fourth centuries BC, there were two culturally predominant regions in northern Gaul, the Middle Rhine - Moselle in Germany and the AisneMarne in France. They had a strong influence on the material culture of their neighbours, and there is evidence of a mutual exchange of ideas and technologies between the two regions. Both had high concentrations of chariot burials and other rich burials, often with grave goods of Mediterranean origin. However, in the second half of the fourth century BC, their heydays have clearly come to an end.

In a random graph, the distance between any two nodes scales as the logarithm of the number of nodes. Real networks, however, generally have a low number of hubs, nodes with a high number of connections (known as high degree), and a high number of poorly connected nodes. This degree distribution follows a power law, that of preferential attachment: a high degree node will attract ever more connections and ultimately become a hub. Power laws have no characteristic scale, which is why these networks are called scale-free. Compared to random networks, scale-free networks are more robust against random node failures, since this will barely affect the average shortest path length, but they are very vulnerable when hubs are targeted (Albert and Barabási 2002: 49, 63, 71, 86). The importance of preferential attachment in social networks has been somewhat downplayed by Michael Schnegg (2006), who concluded, based on six ethnographic studies, that the development of hubs and power laws is restricted because humans do not always look for the most prominent players; their cooperation is characterised through reciprocity: they tend to give to those from whom they have received in the past.

By the middle of the third century BC, the cards are reshuffled. Chariot burials now appear in many different regions in Gaul, and even in Britain. They are less numerous and generally less rich, but they all seem to serve the purpose of establishing new centres of power and prestige, or alternatively reflect the struggle of an existing ruling class to preserve its power. Other phenomena are characteristic for this period. The earlier third century BC is a time of innovation and standardisation. Novelties, many but not all in the field of weaponry, are quickly spread over a large distance. Contacts are no longer confined to a limited number of neighbouring regions but reach as far as eastern Europe. The world has become a smaller place and internationalisation is the keyword. The picture that emerges is one of more complex long-distance networks, involving a larger number of actors. Via these networks the old concept of the chariot burial is spread and adopted, and innovations in art and technology disseminate at a rapid pace. This chapter will also seek to find an explanation for this evolution from a network with relatively few actors to the more complex system that can be discerned in the early third century BC. Some of the issues touched upon below have already been discussed in more detail in the respective sections above but are repeated here in short with the purpose of examining their importance within a wider framework.

Nevertheless, although the power of hubs to attract links is not unlimited, they do exist in social networks and they play an important role in transmitting information, as they help to reduce the average path length. Not each node in the network is susceptible to new ideas and technologies. To spread information along the best and shortest path, it is important to find the most vulnerable nodes; when these are linked together, they form a percolating vulnerable cluster, which allows information to cascade across it. This process can be rapid or slow; the spread of monotheism, for example, was rather slow. Sometimes, an initially small shock can disseminate and affect a very large system, while most of the time little shocks have no effect at all (Collar 2007: 152-53). When a network is reasonably well-connected, with most nodes having joined up into clusters, and with a few interconnecting links between the clusters, the addition of a relatively small number of new links will cause a phase transition, a transition between disconnection and connection. Hitherto isolated groups will be joined in one interconnected cluster, known as the giant component. The network has undergone a dramatic change. Before the phase transition, events were only felt locally, whereas the giant component allows for information to spread across the whole network. Associated with phase transition is the absence of centrality; the information that disseminates through the network can come from anywhere (Collar 2007: 150; Watts 2003: 45-46).

14.2.1. Northern Gaul in the fifth and fourth centuries BC During the ELT period, two regions, both near major rivers, are generally considered as the core areas of the La Tène culture in Gaul: the Middle Rhine – Moselle region and the Aisne-Marne region. The acknowledgement of these regions as core areas is initially based on the high concentration of rich burials (with artefacts including chariots, weapons, fine jewellery, Mediterranean imports and precious materials), which make these regions stand out from their neighbours. Diepeveen-Jansen studied these with the aim to ‘identify the concepts which are linked to elite identities in these societies’ (2001:15)

Such a phase transition can be discerned in northern Gaul in the earlier third century BC, as will be illustrated below. 144

Third century BC: Changes in long-distance networks and proposed that both regions be considered as cultural unities (2001: 16-17), that can be split up into a number of micro-regions (2001: 74-76, 145-46). However, the importance of these regions surpasses the sole presence of rich burials. When focusing on certain aspects of material culture, the sphere of influence of the Aisne-Marne and the Middle Rhine-Moselle regions extends far beyond their geographical boundaries. The best illustration of this is the so-called Marnian pottery, which is spread over large parts of Gaul, including Belgium and the southern part of the Netherlands, and occurs in burial and settlement contexts alike. Marnian pottery is particularly fine pottery, characterised by its carinated shapes; it is often painted or slipped. The most extensive range of forms is attested in the Aisne-Marne region itself, including the most graceful tulip-shaped vessels, which do not occur further west and north (Hurtrelle et al. 1990: 220-21).

a number of cemeteries were reused in the third and the beginning of the second century BC. The cemeteries of the (far less investigated) northern group do not seem to include burials of the later period. Typical for both groups are the low, round barrows (tombelles), without ditched enclosures. Chariot burials are restricted to the southern group (Cahen-Delhaye 1998a; 1998b; 2013). The traditional viewpoint is that the northern group represented immigrants from the Middle Rhine - Moselle, given the tight resemblance of ceramic and metal grave goods, while the cemeteries in the south were created by immigrants from the Aisne-Marne, again based on a close affinity in material culture (see for example Cahen-Delhaye 1991). However, it is obvious that the situation is not that clear-cut: the southern group presents characteristics of both areas, especially in the field of ritual. Chariot burials, for example, are typical for both core areas, while round barrows without ditched enclosures are a phenomenon of the Middle Rhine–Moselle region only: in the Aisne-Marne, there are no visible remains of barrows, whereas roundand square-ditched enclosures are fairly widespread. In this respect, the southern group has more in common with the Middle Rhine - Moselle. In other respects, for example grave pit and general burial arrangement, the burials are much closer to what is customary in the Aisne-Marne. Typical for the Belgian Ardennes is that grave goods are generally less rich than in the core areas.

It is not always clear to what extent the Marnian pottery found in the various regions of Gaul is either imported or effectively belongs to the same tradition or is simply of Marnian inspiration. Based on the pottery, Hurtrelle et al. (1990: 217-44) have even argued for extending the AisneMarne region to cover most of Gaul, a concept firmly dismissed by Leman-Delerive and Warmenbol (2006: 105) who state that the argument of differing burial rites weighs heavier than the analogy in ceramics. The predominant formal burial rite in the Aisne-Marne region at this time is inhumation, as opposed to most other regions in northern Gaul, where cremation is preponderant or where no archaeologically visible type of burial has as yet been discovered. However, inhumation burials with Marnian-influenced pottery are occasionally found in places where they were least expected, like, for example, in the Dutch Rhine delta: a single inhumation burial dated to the late fifth or early fourth century BC was unearthed in Someren (Noord-Brabant), while in Nijmegen-Lent and in Geldermalsen (Gelderland) small cemeteries with a mixture of inhumation and cremation were excavated. Some of the grave goods from Geldermalsen (a copperalloy and an iron torc, Marnian-influenced pottery and the rim of an imported vessel), as well as the use of inhumation in a region where cremation is the standard formal burial rite, are generally considered as proof of cultural links with the Aisne-Marne region (Van den Broeke 1999; Gerritsen 2003: 135).

There is also evidence of cultural and material exchanges between the two core areas. Some of the earliest (LT A1) two-wheel vehicle burials in the Aisne-Marne were found in southern Champagne and northern Burgundy (Aube and Yonne departments). The vehicles from this region were not all built in the local tradition but revealed strong technological influence from the Rhineland. Apart from the exchange of technology, there are also similarities at the ritual level. One of these is the absence of horse harness, which distinguishes the area from that of the remainder of the Aisne-Marne but brings it clearly in line with the Middle Rhine – Moselle; another element in common are the wooden chambers (see section 5.2). A few decades later, at the transition from LT A1 to A2, and further north, the chariot burial of Somme-Bionne (Marne department) forms another illustration of a partial adoption of foreign burial models (i.c. from the Middle Rhine – Moselle region), which becomes visible in the grave goods. As discussed in section 5.3.1, some of the features of the Somme-Bionne chariot burial have a lasting influence, while others are unique and one-off.

In the same way, the influence of Middle Rhine - Moselle material culture and ritual can be discerned in zones far away from the core area, like, for example, in the burials of Wijshagen and Eigenbilzen (Belgian province of Limburg), which were exceptional for the area, with their metal vessels and phalerae (Van Impe 1998).

The Aisne-Marne and Middle Rhine-Moselle regions are not only considered as core areas because of their chariot burials and other rich burials, but also because of the impact they had on neighbouring and more distant regions. Their pottery was abundantly copied and their burial rites occasionally imitated, but the finest and most extensive range of pottery is only attested in the core areas, and

The region where the influence of the Aisne-Marne and the Middle Rhine - Moselle areas is clearest is that of the Belgian Ardennes, with a northern and a southern group. In the southern group, most funerary data are from the period 450-390 BC; after an apparent gap of almost a century, 145

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent burials outside these areas remain, at best, good copies, however exceptional they may be in their local context.

existing ruling classes to affirm their position, as a result of changes in power relations, with for example the rise of new lineages.

However, the existence of core and periphery areas in northern Gaul in this period does not mean that the periphery regions had a less complex social structure. Gerritsen (2003: 3) rightly criticises that ‘the designation of the West Hallstatt region and later the Marne-Moselle region, as core areas (themselves peripheries in the Mediterranean world economy), automatically implied that the areas further to the north were more peripheral, and consequently less complex and dynamic’. The elite of these regions may not have felt the need for pompous burial rites, or they may have preferred to invest their resources elsewhere. Alternatively, they may simply not have had the means: it is one thing to own a vehicle, but it is another to bury it. As more information becomes available from settlement contexts, it will be interesting to see if and how this could complement or adjust the core-periphery model of northern Gaul described above.

This last possibility would conform to the data available for the southern group of the Belgian Ardennes. After the period 450-390 BC discussed above, there is an apparent gap in the funerary data of almost a century. As from the early third century BC, new barrows are constructed in existing cemeteries and burials are interred in existing barrows. Two chariot burials belong to this second phase, one of which is dated to the earlier part of the third century BC, while the other is probably from the early second century BC. Although a change can be perceived in the type and typology of the grave goods, mortuary practices were not affected by the ‘interruption’. Another region with chariot burials going back to the end of LT B2, is that of the Groupe de la Haine. Unfortunately, most material originates from old, poorly documented excavations, so that all information on context was lost. The linchpins and terret rings in Plastic Style from Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte form a link with the Paris area. Vehicle parts and/or horse harness in Plastic Style are also attested in the 1926 chariot burial of Attichy (Oise) and in Orval in Normandy, which is one of the very few burials of this period to contain a gold object. The presence of Plastic Style terrets and linchpins and of horse bits encrusted with coral (in Orval) is obviously associated with the type of vehicle. In Attichy, the 1926 chariot burials had fancy fittings, while the 2009 chariot burials from Attichy are rather plain. Finally, in the Aisne and Ardennes departments, there are a few occurrences of LT C1 chariot burials (see section 5.4), and surprisingly also one from the middle of the second century BC, at the transition from LT C2 to LT D1 (Warcq). As from LT C2, complete chariot burials with inhumations are replaced with cremation burials with burnt or unburnt vehicle parts and/or horse harness.

14.2.2. Northern Gaul in the third century BC In the third century BC, the Aisne-Marne and the Middle Rhine - Moselle regions are no longer the main or only actors. Other areas now come to the fore. They have contacts all across Europe and adopt the prestigious burial rites of the former core areas. Chariot burials and other rich burials appear in many different regions around this time: Paris, Normandy, the Groupe de la Haine, the second phase of the Belgian Ardennes, the Aisne Valley and Yorkshire. As opposed to the earlier period, the chariot burials are not very numerous; the highest number was found in Yorkshire (about 25). They are also generally less rich than those of the fifth and fourth centuries BC, although there are notable exceptions. The Paris area is, to a certain extent, comparable to eastern Yorkshire, in that there is an apparent gap in the funerary record in the period immediately preceding the establishment of a series of inhumation cemeteries. Some of these are large, but most burial sites are small and typically include a few relatively rich burials: one or two chariot burials and a few burials with (often beautifully decorated) weapons. Many objects, including several vehicle parts and pieces of horse harness, are decorated in Plastic Style. The appearance of chariot burials in the Paris area has been explained in several ways. To some they represent the arrival of small groups of immigrants, who use the chariot as a symbol of elite travellers to justify their presence and to establish their rulership. Others have seen it as an expression of the need of the local aristocracy to affirm its territorial sovereignty in a spectacular way.

Since the number of chariot burials of this period (LT B2b - LT C) in any one region is not very high, there may be other regions with (as yet undiscovered) chariot burials contemporary to those discussed above. Chariot burials were obvious tokens of status and prestige, and must have served a certain purpose. Furthermore, it is remarkable how fast the phenomenon spreads over a relatively large area. 14.2.3. Internationalisation The Belgian Ardennes offer a good illustration of the developments that took place in northern Gaul in the earlier third century BC, by comparing the level of interaction with neighbouring and more distant regions. During the first phase of occupation (450-390 BC), the Belgian Ardennes had a very close and exclusive relationship with the two core areas, the Middle Rhine Moselle and the Aisne-Marne. In the third century BC, however, the people of the Belgian Ardennes broadened

In the other regions, the reason for the introduction of chariot burials may have been similar. As a certain degree of mobility should not be uncritically dismissed, chariot burials may mark the arrival of a new elite that is alien to the area, but it may equally well accompany the emergence of a new local elite, or it may illustrate the struggle of the 146

their contacts and widened their views. Although the former core areas still play a certain role, they are clearly no longer the only source of inspiration; there are now interactions with a multitude of other regions, in northern France (Oise, Somme, Val-d’Oise), but also as far away as central Europe (Cahen-Delhaye 1997: 87-89). The early third century chariot burial of Neufchâteau-Le-Sart even included a piece of jewellery consisting of beads that were probably produced in an oriental workshop (Cosyns and Hurt 2007; Gratuze and Cosyns 2007). This internationalisation is typical for a large part of temperate Europe and goes hand in hand with several technological innovations, for example in the field of chariot building. The evolution to flat tyres, without nails to secure the tyre to the felloe, clearly proves that considerable progress had been made in mastering the technique of shrinking the tyre onto the felloe by contraction (see section 13.1.1). Furthermore, there are a few novelties in the field of weaponry that become characteristic for LT C but make their first appearance at the end of LT B2. One innovation is the introduction of a new suspension system for swords, replacing the old leather belts by metal chain belts, while another concerns the reappearance of metal fittings (umbo, spine and rim) on shields (Rapin 1999: 49, 54-58; Rapin 1991). A further illustration of this internationalisation is the rapid spread of art styles, like the Plastic Style, mentioned above, and the Sword Style. Based on historical sources, this is often interpreted within a context of migration and/or expansion, as for example by Megaw and Megaw (1990: 123) who claim that the presence of ‘near-identical artefacts in this period right across the Celtic world, from Romania to England can be explained by the wanderings of these marauding Celts’. There may, however, have been other processes at work, as will be further discussed below. Perhaps less important but nevertheless noteworthy is the renewed interest, after a relatively long absence, for bracelets in sapropelite or lignite (jet); these bracelets are a recurring item in all the regions studied. Bohemia is known for its large layers of sapropelite, quarried extensively in the third century BC. Specialised workshops were discovered near the quarries, but the raw material was also transported over longer distances (Kruta 2006); the Dürrnberg, for example, is assumed to have had a sapropelite workshop (Karl 2001). The sapropelite or similar material used for jewellery in the Paris region, however, may originate from quarries in France (personal communication Nathalie Ginoux). Also in East Yorkshire the shale or jet (lignite) bracelets were made locally; the source would have been the Whitby area, where jet could have been collected from the beach (Stead 1979: 77). 14.2.4. Evolution of elite networks between the fifth and the third centuries BC

Chapter 14    Third century BC: Changes in long-distance networks Figure 14.1   

    Figure 14.1. Schematic presentation of interaction during   the fifth and fourth centuries BC Schematic presentation of interaction during the fifth and fourth cen     interregional and long-distance contacts in northern   Gaul. The situation of the fifth and fourth centuries BC is   schematically shown in Figure 14.1. There are two core areas, along with several peripheral areas. The interaction   takes place between the core areas themselves and between Figure 14.2  the core and the periphery areas. Chapter 14      Information between the core and the periphery areas may Figure 14.1  have spread in different ways. In the case of the inhumation   burials of the Dutch Rhine delta (geographically distant from the Aisne-Marne), for example, the practice of inhumation and the presence of Marnian (influenced) grave goods may be the result of information cascading through a number of vulnerable nodes, forming a percolating vulnerable cluster, as mentioned above; this process could be either rapid or slow. Alternatively, the network distance between the Dutch Rhine delta and the Aisne-Marne region may have been short: it may have represented a so    called weak tie, a random contact. In modern networks,     weak ties usually refer to social rather than geographical     distance, but the term does not seem out of place in the Schematic presentation of interaction in the third century BC  current context either. Schematic presentation of interaction during the fifth and fourth      Towards the middle of the third century BC, there are     several centres, with no clear core area and with interaction   between the various centres (schematised in Figure 14.2).   What can be perceived here is an evolution from a relatively   Figure 14.2   

    As demonstrated above, between the fifth and the Figure   14.2. Schematic presentation of interaction in the third centuries BC important changes took place in the third century BC Schematic presentation of interaction in the third century BC    147  

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent simple core-periphery structure, with two predominant actors, influencing neighbouring regions, both at a ritual and a material level, to more complex long-distance networks, with many actors of equal preponderance, and multiple streams of interaction. Along these networks, new technologies and ideologies travel fast, and contacts are no longer confined to a limited number of neighbouring regions but reach as far as eastern Europe or even beyond.

have repeatedly been reported by classical authors; hence it is not inconceivable that if an occasion arose causing a substantial increase in the demand for mercenaries, part of the male population became professional warriors for a shorter or longer period of time. Such an occasion may have presented itself when, in the aftermath of the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC, a war for succession was fought between his successors, the so-called Diadochs, during several decades. As a matter of fact, Wells (2001: 80) notes that Celtic mercenaries are mentioned increasingly in the early third century BC in this respect, confirmed by Baray (2016: 288) who lists all the Mediterranean armies employing Celtic mercenaries in the late fourth and third century BC. It is not always clear from the classical accounts where particular contingents of mercenaries came from (Wells 1999: 47), but some of them may have been recruited in Gaul. The increase in mercenaries, in turn, must have boosted the production of weapons, implying that more craftsmen were required to meet the rising demand. Simultaneously, the continuous and rapid evolution of weaponry in a wider international context suggests that at least some of these craftsmen were highly specialised.

This change reflects a kind of phase transition, which occurs when by adding a few interconnecting links between existing isolated clusters, a network undergoes a leap from one state to another, as described above. In the fifth and early fourth centuries BC, there are a number of regional clusters (like for example the Belgian Ardennes) which are only connected with the core areas, but not between themselves, and are as such rather isolated. A few decades into the third century BC, however, the various regional clusters are connected into a giant component, which allows for communication across the whole network. In order for the network to achieve this new state, only a limited number of interconnecting links need to be created between the isolated clusters. What triggered this change in network structure, in other words, how were these new links created, and why did it happen at this point in time?

As pointed out by Marion (2004: 350; 2007: 112), technological innovations, initially focused on reducing the number of man-hours required for the production of food, were a logical consequence of the drop in work forces available in the agricultural sector; in the course of the third century BC, the pressure on food production was to lead to more efficient ways of exploiting the land and to more efficient tools, like, for example, the rotary quern.

14.2.5. New connections 14.2.5.1. Culture-historical hypothesis Proponents of migration theories will argue that the situation described above was brought about by successive population movements, like the exodus to northern Italy early in the fourth century BC, followed by a wave of expeditions to the Mediterranean about a century later, resulting in largely deserted or thinly populated areas, which would in turn attract immigrants from across the Rhine: the Belgae. However, as demonstrated above, changes in the archaeological record can be introduced in ways other than by migration. A certain level of mobility will always have been present, but not necessarily in the form of large-scale migrations. This does not mean that the accounts of the classical authors (on which these migration theories are based) should be completely neglected. In particular, the references to Celtic mercenaries could have a bearing on the developments noted in northern Gaul.

War and fighting together is considered ‘the most powerful force of social cohesion between men’ (Van de Noort 2006: 282) and forms, therefore, an important mechanism in the creation of social networks. Once their mission was accomplished, many mercenaries must have returned to their respective homes (see Wells 1999: 46-47, 54; 2001: 80-81) and it is not unreasonable to assume that the bonds forged during their time as a mercenary resulted in more frequent and more intense contacts between their regions of origin. It is even plausible that mercenaries were recruited via these networks. This would explain why larger bands would often comprise members from different regions and peoples, as, for example, in the case of the Gaesatae (Tomaschitz 2002: 84-85). These were mercenaries from Transalpine Gaul, who were known for fighting naked. They were hired by the Boii and the Insubres in Cisalpine Gaul to fight against the Romans. Despite their reputation as elite warriors, they were defeated by the Romans in the battles of Telamon (225 BC) and Clastidium (222 BC).

Weapons become a characteristic feature towards the latter part of LT B2: they appear on a regular basis as grave goods in the Paris region, and in the Île-de-France as a whole, an increase in warrior burials can be discerned compared to the preceding phase (Marion 2004: 212). The men buried with weapons may have been genuine warriors or were only presented as a warrior, but in any event, weapons were high social status symbols and warfare may have been considered an integrated part of society. If this was the case, it is hard to retrieve the percentage of males involved in war activities; in normal circumstances, warfare was probably local and occasional in nature, and not a full-time occupation. However, Gaulish mercenaries

14.2.5.2. Alternative theory Another possibility is that the increasing complexity of elite networks in northern Gaul came about without any interference from the Mediterranean, but rather as the result of a process inherent to the system. In an initial 148

Third century BC: Changes in long-distance networks phase, the relationship between the centre and periphery is one of asymmetrical reciprocity. However, as stated above, networks are not stable: certain parts of the network may fall in disuse when previously strong ties are loosened, while new relationships are created by the various mechanisms that can be envisaged to underpin Iron Age elite networks, like strategic marriages, fosterage, exchange of hostages and clientship.

Humber estuary) and one in the north (Stead 2006). One of the differences, as mentioned above (see section 2.4.5.3), is that in the north, swords were presumably carried on the back, rather than slung on the right side, with the sword handle at the waist, as is the case in the south and on the Continent. The position of the suspension loop between a third and halfway down the scabbard is not unique for East Yorkshire but applies to all swords from the north, and in East Yorkshire it was not affected by the introduction of a new burial rite. Furthermore, parallels for the design of the Yorkshire Scabbard Style are to be found in Ireland, rather than on the Continent. In conclusion, direct influence from northern Gaul in this field and at this point in time is very scant.

Within the framework of the evolution described above, fosterage (discussed in section 15.1.3) in particular may have played an important role. Assuming that fosterage as an educational practice existed in Gaul as early as the fifth and fourth centuries BC, it is conceivable for the core areas to have attracted many foster children from the nobility in peripheral zones, thus creating a situation where children from different regions grew up in the same families. It is known that in societies where fosterage was customary, the bond between foster-brothers was very strong and lasted for life, as for example in medieval Ireland. It is not unreasonable to assume that this situation gradually created new and more complex networks, bringing about multiple opportunities for other mechanisms like strategic marriages. This may gradually have given rise to changes in local power relations in the periphery zones. The phenomenon of chariot burials, almost completely fallen in disuse in the core areas, was picked up as a prominent status marker, that was considered appropriate to affirm newly acquired political positions.

Differences in material culture in general are substantial. In fact, the only strong link with northern Gaul are the chariot burials and the square enclosures. This suggests that the involvement of East Yorkshire in the Gaulish networks is more likely to be found on the religious and spiritual level, rather than in the ranks of a belligerent elite. 14.3. Conclusion The third century BC is a time of many changes, not only at the level of material culture, with rapid innovations, especially in weaponry, but also in the field of funerary practices, with the establishment of new cemeteries and the spread of the chariot burial phenomenon across several regions in northern Gaul and even into Britain. Contacts are no longer restricted to close neighbours but reach further and are more diverse in nature. These changes reflect an evolution to more complex elite networks.

Ultimately, this will have engendered the rise of several new centres of power in the former periphery zones. The relationship between these centres, and between the new centres and the former core areas, is one of symmetrical reciprocity.

This evolution could be the result of an increased demand for mercenaries, originating from several regions in Gaul and possibly from Britain, creating a highly mobile elite, thus taking existing embryonic, simple networks to a more complex level. Alternatively, the evolution to more complex networks could represent an internal process, inherent to the network system itself, where an initial core-periphery model developed into a model with several centres at equal footing, via the mechanisms that underpin elite networks, like strategic marriages, fosterage, clientship and the like. In fact, both hypotheses may have played a role in the changes that can be observed in the course of the third century BC.

14.2.6. The Arras Culture: part of the Gaulish networks? It is unclear to what extent East Yorkshire took part in the spirit of innovation, standardisation and internationalisation outlined above. Since many of these novelties concerned weaponry and fighting, this is one of the most obvious fields in which to search for cross-Channel correspondences and exchange. Yvonne Inall (2020: 81) writes: ‘It is clear from the presence of chain mail, Coolus type helmets and continental shield forms, that there was ongoing contact between Britain and Continental Europe. This included not only the exchange of equipment but also personnel. All the evidence indicates that the warriors of Iron Age Britain were not isolated but formed part of a wider network in which mercenary service and the movement of warriors, equipment and tactics flowed freely between the island and the Continent’. Such a connection, however, may be clear for southern Britain, but much less so for East Yorkshire.

The appearance of chariot burials in East Yorkshire links the area with the evolution that took place in northern Gaul, illustrating that the ruling classes were part of the social networks that tied their peers on the Continent. The connection is most obvious in the field of ritual and hence the focus of further study should rather be on religious networks. However, these religious networks most probably tie in with and depend on other types of social networks. Therefore, the next chapter will deal with a number of mechanisms that have the potential to underpin elite networks.

Although the swords found in East Yorkshire owe a lot to continental swords, there is no evidence of a direct link; in fact, in Britain, swords of the La Tène period belong to two separate traditions, one in the south (south of the 149

15 Functioning of elite and religious networks 15.1. Mechanisms and strategies of elite networks

Voccio of Noricum (modern Austria), more than 600km away. The political advantages of this move for the kingdom of Noricum are discussed by Rankin (1996: 126), who notes that the new alliance showed a need to counterbalance the combined power of the Helvetii and Boii.

This chapter deals with mechanisms that underpin social networks, and more particularly elite networks. Other processes, like for instance gift-exchange, hospitality and friendship bonds, may have been at work simultaneously, but the institutions discussed here represent the most important formal strategies employed by the elite in antiquity and/or beyond, in order to create and maintain social networks. Basically, these alliance-building institutions fall apart into two categories: those that aim to create artificial kinship (strategic marriages and fosterage) and those that establish hierarchical relationships (clientele system and hostage taking). In practice, however, the line between the various institutions may not always have been so sharp, which is particularly true for fosterage and hostageship. Likewise, it is believed that clientship, which does not seek to construct artificial kinship and typically cuts across kin, rank and political boundary, may also have occurred within a kindred.

Strategic marriages are not necessarily political in nature. They may have served other purposes like the development of commercial networks or the creation of channels to gain preferential access to raw materials (such as e.g., iron or amber) required to produce weapons, tools, ornaments and luxury goods. Furthermore, a connection with a neighbouring or more distant illustrious royal family most certainly enhanced a king’s prestige vis-a-vis his local rivals or competitors. This is especially true when such a king could afford to send his daughter and a large dowry to a foreign king. Under the principle of ‘competitive generosity’, this would gain him additional followers (for a discussion regarding the Merovingian kings, see Crisp 2003: 9). A marriage tie, however, was not invariably successful as a strategy for alliance building, as is amply illustrated by the struggle for supremacy between Indutiomarus and his son-in-law Cingetorix, two Treverian leaders of rival factions (DBG V.3-4, V.56-.57, VI.8).

15.1.1. Strategic marriages Classical and later sources document how in past societies marriage was employed as a tool for alliance building. In late Iron Age Gaul, the master of strategic marriage alliances was Dumnorix of the Aedui (Caesar, DBG I.18): ‘(…) not only in his own but even in neighbouring states his power was extensive. To secure this power he had given his mother in marriage to the noblest and most powerful man among the Bituriges, he had taken himself a wife from the Helvetii, and had married his half-sister and his female relations to men of other states.’ (Translated by H.J. Edwards).

Societies which allow for polygyny offer their members additional opportunities to create marriage alliances. In early Ireland, a man could have more than one wife. This can be inferred from the laws, which refer to primary and secondary wives, but it is also illustrated in the annals and the genealogies, which often list a large number of offspring, although this may sometimes have been the result of serial monogamy rather than polygyny (Jaski 2000: 152).

His Helvetian wife is the daughter of Orgetorix, an important nobleman of the Helvetii. Their marriage was directly connected with the personal alliance that Dumnorix entered with Orgetorix and with Casticus of the Sequani, to seize control of their respective states and finally rule the whole of Gaul between them. The conspiracy was discovered and stopped, and Orgetorix died, but the friendly relationship between Dumnorix and the Helvetii persists: when the Helvetii are in need of a safe passage through Sequani country, they call on Dumnorix for intercession, well aware as they are of his great influence on the Sequani (DBG I.3).

There are some indications that polygyny was also practised in Iron Age Gaul, but it is not clear to what extent. When Ariovistus married the sister of king Voccio of Noricum, he already had a wife whom he had brought with him from home. Caesar (DBG 1.53) mentions that both wives perished while trying to flee from the Romans during Caesar’s battle against the Suebi in 58 BC. Tacitus (Germania 18) writes about the Germans: ‘They are almost the only barbarians who are content with a single wife, except for a very few, who are not motivated by sexual appetite – it is, rather, that they are courted with numerous offers of marriage on account of their noble rank.’ (Translated by A.R. Birley).

Strategic marriages were not restricted to neighbouring states but could range over long distances. In DBG (I.53) Caesar mentions that Ariovistus of the Suebi, who had settled in eastern France, had married the sister of King 151

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent As already suggested by Rives (1999: 201), Ariovistus was one of those ‘very few’, and what Tacitus had in mind here were political alliances like the one between Ariovistus and the king of Noricum. The fact that Ariovistus had two wives does not seem to have roused any commotion amongst the Gauls, which suggests that polygyny was socially acceptable, at least with regard to the higher strata of society. Moreover, Caesar speaks in plural when referring to the ‘wives’ of a deceased Gaulish pater familias (DBG VI.19.3) (for a discussion of the use of the plural, see Lewuillon 1990: 307).

to have moved with the person wearing it (Kristiansen and Larsson 2005: 37, 231-36). Variations in personal ornaments and costume may allow to identify cases of interregional marriage alliance. In this respect, women are more visible carriers of ethnic identity than men (Arnold 2005: 19-20). When a woman of high rank left her home to marry a man in a distant location, she was probably allowed to retain the costume of her natal community, as this would be a visible token of the alliance between the two kin groups. Her personal adornments, some of them possibly heirlooms, would presumably be buried with her, since her daughters, who belonged to their father’s kin, were perhaps more inclined to wear local identity markers (Rowlands 1998: 156).

Charles-Edwards (2000: 112) remarks that although polygyny made excellent political sense in the short term, it was likely to provide too many heirs and it was a potential source of tension between co-wives. He also refers to the consequences for the marriage when the alliance broke down, but perhaps the opposite should be considered also.

Archaeological evidence for interregional marriage alliances has been attested for times long before the period under study here. The distribution of Bell Beakers and associated artefacts and burial practices across Europe has recently been linked with the movement of marriage partners (Vander Linden 2007; see also Brodie 1997). For the Bronze Age, marriage alliances could be established linking Denmark (especially Jutland) with northern Germany (Lüneburg region) and with areas further south, based on the distribution of female accoutrements (Jockenhövel 1991; Kristiansen and Larsson 2005: 234). For the Iron Age, Arnold (2005: 20-21, with further references) argues that the selective distribution of personal ornaments points quite strongly in the direction of female mobility as a result of marriage exchanges and records several examples to support this. One could also wonder to what extent anklets from Bohemia and torques ternaires from the SénonaisNogentais, attested in burials in northern Gaul, are the result of marriage alliance.

Bettina Arnold (2005: 17) has pointed out that traditionally individual mobility in the Iron Age has been presented as a male affair, while in fact mobility patterns varied by gender throughout prehistory. She states that only a small subset of men appears to have travelled very long distances – mainly to acquire prestige items – while large numbers of women probably moved shorter distances to marry outside their natal communities, ‘thereby establishing and maintaining crucial trade contacts and alliances’. This assumes that patrilocal, or rather virilocal residence was the norm in the Iron Age, which was probably the case (but see Arnold 2005: 21-22). Also in early medieval Ireland, virilocal residence was prevailing (Patterson 1994: 29192). For an alliance by marriage to be successful in a patrilocal society, other mechanisms must have been at work to consolidate the ties with the woman’s kin, especially when she originated from another region. One such mechanism may have been that of the avunculate, which refers to the special relationship between a man and his sister’s sons (see section 15.1.3). Also Kristiansen and Larsson (2005: 236-40) have argued that an additional advantage of marrying out one’s daughter to a (distant) alliance partner was the potential for receiving foster-sons, who would be raised by their mother’s brother and become young warriors.

Potential cases of non-native female burials must be scrutinised individually. A combination of personal adornments linking the deceased to a specific foreign region is obviously more convincing than the presence of a single piece, which could be the result of trade or downthe-line exchange. In addition, attention should be paid to funerary practices which deviate from local customs, and possibly reflect traditions from the woman’s country of origin, although the question is to what extent these will be considered acceptable by the local community. Finally, isotope analysis could supply additional information as to the possible foreign origin of the individual concerned.

Marriage transactions like dowries and bride prices are potential sources of material evidence for marriages between spouses from two geographically distant regions. These transactions presumably involved the exchange of land and livestock, but also of household goods, cash, personal adornments and possibly prestige goods. The search for material evidence of distant marriages is hampered by the difficulty to distinguish between the movement of goods and the movement of people. Many prestige items like swords and metal vessels must have turned up in foreign locations as a result of gift exchange. Personal sets of prestige goods, on the other hand, like dress ornaments, found in a foreign context, are more likely

While intermarriage between communities inside a region occurred no doubt rather frequently in the Bronze and Iron Ages, it were the interregional marriages that were important to develop and maintain long-distance networks. Based on his study on mobility in MBA Germany, Jockenhövel (1991) concluded that foreign women always originated from a neighbouring region, and that the maximum distance for exogamy was 250 km. In the Iron Age, the situation may have been largely similar, but if the women with anklets buried in the Marne 152

Functioning of elite and religious networks region had arrived there from Bohemia to marry a local chieftain, the spatial distance overcome by marriage partners was considerably larger, a good 800 km. In the international ambience that reigned in the late fourth and early third centuries BC, this is perhaps not so exceptional. A few hundred years later, marriage alliances are usually forged with neighbouring nations, as demonstrated by the marriage contracts arranged by Dumnorix, but the example of Ariovistus and his Norican wife shows that longer distance alliances are by no means excluded. They are, no doubt, reserved to the highest level of society. Arnold (2005: 17) refers to ethnographic data from which appears that in complex societies, the geographical distance between marriage partners is much greater at the level of the elite.

The earliest reference to Celtic clientship dates to the second century BC and is found in Polybius (Histories, II.17.12), who says about the Celts in Cisalpine Gaul: ‘For them, having followers is of the greatest importance, those among them being the most feared and most powerful who were thought to have the largest number of attendants and associates.’ (Translated by W.R. Paton, revised by F.W. Walbank and C. Habicht). 15.1.2.1. Base and free clientship 15.1.2.1.1. Base clientship Base clientship in early medieval Irish law is reasonably well documented. The main text is the Cáin Aicillne, the ‘law on base clientship’, but several other texts are informative also. From these documents, a wide range of technical terms can be drawn, referring to, for example, the various duties of base clients.

In principle, marriages may have been contracted between partners from different sides of the Channel, although the material evidence for East Yorkshire is scant: only a few objects are possibly of continental origin. One of these is the (lost) gold finger-ring from the Queen’s Barrow in Arras (see section 2.4.5.1). This ‘queen’ is a good candidate as a marriage partner from the Continent, or possibly from the Norfolk area, as Jope (1995) suggested. Some of her other pieces of jewellery, however, were made by local craftsmen, and she was buried according to local customs.

Under Irish base clientship, the fief was considered a fore-purchase on future renders and the relationship was established by formal contract (Charles-Edwards 1993: 346). The fief would generally consist of livestock, but it could also be land or valuables, especially farming equipment. A base client would be given a fief proportionate to his rank: a small farmer (ócaire) would receive fewer cows than a strong farmer (bóaire), which was not unreasonable, since he could accommodate less animals. Next to this fief, a base client would also be given so-called ‘chattels of subjection’; these were goods of equal value to the client’s honour-price; they marked the subordination of a freeman to a lord, although it did not mean that the client lost his legal independence. The annual food renders payable by a base client were proportional to the size of the fief and consisted both of living animals (for example a two-year bullock for an ócaire and a milch cow for a bóaire) and fixed quantities of bread, wheat, bacon, milk, butter, onions and candles. Heavy fines were due by clients who failed to pay their rent (Kelly 1988: 29-30; Charles-Edwards 1993: 337-63).

15.1.2. Clientship Another institution that is bound to have contributed towards the establishment of social networks is that of clientship. The general principle of clientship is that a person (the lord or patron) who has a surplus of mobile goods (usually cattle) or land gives this as a loan to another person (the client) in return for annual food renders, manual labour, military and other services. The lord owes the client legal and physical protection. The arrangement is also beneficial to the lord because his cattle is not all at one location. The risk of disease and cattle raid is spread over various clients. But what is more: the lord’s status is directly related to the size of his clientele. As such, a lot of competition was going on. Different types of clientship existed along one another and no doubt the system altered over time as a result of changes in society. In early medieval Ireland, the main difference was between base and free clientship, and classical texts suggest that a similar distinction existed in Gaul in the later Iron Age. The relationship between patron and client was fundamentally different in these systems: under base clientship, the patron was of higher status and wealthier than the client, whereas under free clientship, both partners could be of equal rank; as such it can be expected that their effect on the coming into being and the type of network was different also. Clientship existed both at a personal and at a group level. For both levels counts that the relationship between the two partners of the arrangement could be either at equal footing or by submission of one to the other, in the same way as with free and base clientship.

Irish base clients also had to offer their lord winter hospitality: between New Year’s Day and Shrovetide, the client had to prepare a feast for his lord, who would bring along his entourage, composed of 20, 40 or 60 followers, depending on his status (Kelly 1988: 30; MacNeill 1923: 296-99). It is very likely that at least part of the lord’s retinue at this occasion consisted of his free clients and their wives (Karl 2006: 316-17). The Irish law tracts also mention a number of manual labour tasks that a base client had to perform for his lord, such as joining a reaping party in the lord’s cornfields and helping with the construction of the rampart around the lord’s dún (fortified dwelling); one of their seven duties when the lord died was to dig a grave mound (Kelly 1988: 30). The client’s duties were, however, fixed and limited. The bulk of the labour on a lord’s land was done by his 153

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent slaves and by semi-freemen, of which there were various types (see for example Kelly 1988: 33-36; Patterson 1994: 152-55); semi-freemen had to carry out any task the lord chose to assign to them.

and client: if the client was in the next inferior rank to his lord, the same rule applied as in the north, but with each additional grade of difference, another generation was added to the period of clientship (Charles-Edwards 1993: 357-60).

Furthermore, clients had to accompany and support their lord in public. This is reminiscent of Iron Age Gaul where Orgetorix managed to assemble more than 10,000 supporters at his court hearing, including all his clients (Caesar, DBG I.4).

Contracts of base clientship could be terminated prematurely, but the penalties were stiff, especially for the client when he took the initiative. The law showed a certain degree of leniency when the client terminated the contract to enter a new relationship with a lord of higher status than his current lord, or when his new lord was more closely related. Engaging in a new client relationship did not, however, necessitate terminating an existing contract, as multiple clientship was acceptable, but the fiefs allowed were progressively smaller (Kelly 1988: 31-32).

Another point of comparison is that clients owed military services to their lord. When Vercingetorix joins the revolt, his first action is to summon his clients and rouse their excitement for fighting the Romans (Caesar, DBG VII.4). Military aid is foremost important at the level of a people. The Irish sources allow a glimpse of what was expected of individual clients in everyday life: base clients had their share of responsibility in keeping the neighbourhood secure, by carrying out the duties of fubae and rubae. Fubae included hunting down pirates, horse-thieves and wolves, where rubae referred to patrolling the borders of the territory and strategic points such as promontories and mountain-passes. Clients also had to assist their lord in prosecution of a blood feud. When a king organised a hosting (slógad) against another túath, each lord presumably acted as commander of his own clients in battle (Kelly 1988: 31).

15.1.2.1.2. Free clientship Compared to base clientship, far less textual evidence is available on free clientship in early medieval Ireland. The main text, Cáin Sóerraith, the ‘law of free fief’, only survives in fragmentary form (Kelly 1988: 32). Where base clientship was formalised by a contract and the fief considered a loan, under free clientship, the fief was regarded as a gift; the mere recognition by the client of having received the gift sufficed (Charles-Edwards 1993: 346).

Caesar mentions protection as one of the reasons for a commoner to become a client: to be protected against the oppression of the more powerful (DBG VI.13). When a lord fails to protect his clients, he loses all his influence (DBG VI.11). Also in early medieval Ireland, protecting his clients was one of the main duties of a lord. This protection was twofold: the lord offered physical protection (with the military support of his clients), but he also stood by his client for legal issues (see also Gerriets 1983: 53-56; Patterson 1994: 168).

The fief received by a free client was unrelated to his rank and its value was much smaller than that of a base client. His rent, however, was markedly higher in proportion: for a fief of three milch cows, a free client had to pay an annual rent of one cow or its equivalent for six years. In the seventh year, no rent was due, but he had to return the same number of cows as in the original fief, and when the lord died, the fief had to be restored to the lord’s heirs (Kelly 1988: 32). If the free client wished to terminate the relationship before the seventh year, he could do so by simply returning the fief; no penalties were due (Kelly 1988: 32-33).

Under base clientship, an Irish lord was entitled to onethird of the compensation his client or his family received in case of the client’s injury or death (Gerriets 1983: 54). This entitlement was linked with the ‘chattels of subjection’ paid by the lord to the client (Patterson 1994: 156). A client could also ask his lord to be surety for a contract (Kelly 1988: 29).

Unlike a base client, a free client would not economically benefit from the arrangement. As such, free clientship was restricted to the nobility and to wealthy commoners, for whom a small fief would not make a big difference to the size of their herd and would thus not substantially add to their requirements for labour and pasture. A free client had no real need of the fief and the fact that he derived no economic reward from it may have been part of the honourable character of the deal (Charles-Edwards 1983: 354-57). Patterson (1994: 158) argues that political security rather than margins of profit was the rationale behind free clientship.

Base clientship contracts ended with the death of the lord. If at that moment, the contract had endured for seven years, and the client had fulfilled all his obligations, the fief became his property (If the client died before the lord, his heirs had to continue to serve the lord until his death). However, by then the various obligations of the client – not in the least the annual winter hospitality – must have considerably reduced his ‘working capital’, so that he probably needed a new fief and was forced to enter a new contract, for example with the heirs of the dead lord. In Munster, base clientship contracts were to a certain extent hereditary, depending on the relative status of lord

Free clientship was considered a more desirable arrangement on account of its greater freedom. Not only could the relationship be easily terminated, but free clients were also not paid ‘chattels of subjection’ and were, therefore, not subordinate to the lord; in fact, they would 154

Functioning of elite and religious networks often belong to the same social class as their lords (Kelly 1988: 32). Since the lord paid no chattels of subjection, he could not claim a part of the reparations made to his client (Patterson 1994: 156; but see also Jaski 2000: 107).

provide their lord or king with means of subsistence, like ordinary clients, but to offer him personal services, either as part of an elite task force in case of war or, for example, accompany him on political missions. An example of the first is the private cavalry of Dumnorix (Caesar, DBG I.18.5). A political mission is described by Appian of Alexandria in his Gallic History (12):

Like base client, free clients owed their lord certain services. Charles-Edwards (1993: 345, note 45) argues that labour duties only applied to base clients while free clients only performed the honourable task of attendance on their lords. According to Kelly (1988: 33), free clients did have to provide a limited amount of labour services, but he assumes that these were performed by a dependant. Perhaps the contradiction and obscurity of the sources in this respect marks an evolution: where the later glosses suggest that there was actual labour due, this may originally not have been the case (see also Patterson 1994: 157). This would conform to the trend observed by Jaski (2000: 1067), that from about the twelfth century, the terms of free clientship came close to those of base clientship, while the position of base clients worsened.

‘The chiefs of the Salyi, a nation vanquished by the Romans, took refuge with the Allobroges. When the Romans asked for their surrender and it was refused, they made war on the Allobroges, under the leadership of Cnæus Domitius. When he was passing through the territory of the Salyi, an ambassador of Bituitus, king of the Allobroges, met him, arrayed magnificently and followed by attendants also adorned arrayed, and by dogs; for the barbarians of this region use dogs also as bodyguards. A musician too was in the train who sang in barbarous fashion the praises of King Bituitus, and then of the Allobroges, and then of the ambassador himself, celebrating his birth, his bravery, and his wealth; and it is for this reason chiefly that ambassadors of distinction take such persons along with them. But this one, although he begged pardon for the chiefs of the Salyi, accomplished nothing.’ (Translation H. White).

One of the duties of free clients that was considered as one of the most burdensome was referred to as airéirge, rising up as a mark of homage. This was the entitlement of every lord and a client who failed to do so had to pay a fine (Kelly 1988: 32). Críth Gablach, a legal poem on status, provides interesting information as to the seating arrangements for a feast in the king’s hall:

Raimund Karl (2006: 323-25) has argued that the Celtic term ambactos refers to these free clients, or perhaps to a selection of free clients, members of the personal entourage of the lord, his confidants, whom he can trust with special missions and who will follow him to death. The emotional bonds involved may indicate that some of them were actually foster-brothers. The term ambactos is used by Caesar in DBG VI.15:

‘On the other side, in the north, a man at arms, a man of action, to guard the door, each of them having his spear in front of him always against confusion in the banquethouse (by attack from without). Next to these inward, the free clients of the lord (i.e. of the king). These are the folk who are company to a king. Hostages next to these. The judge (the king’s assessor) next to these. His (the king’s) wife next to him. The king next.’ (MacNeill 1923: 306).

‘Alterum genus est equitum. Hi, cum est usus atque aliquod bellum incidit (quod fere ante Caesaris adventum quotannis accidere solebat, uti aut ipsi iniurias inferrent aut illatas propulsarent), omnes in bello versantur, atque eorum ut quisque est genere copiisque amplissimus, ita plurimos circum se ambactos clientesque habet. Hanc unam gratiam potentiamque noverunt.’

A similar seating arrangement is graphically illustrated in the Yellow Book of Lecan (Ó Ríordáin 1992: 20). Within a lord’s retinue, which consisted of free and base clients, but also of persons of lower status who owed him allegiance (Charles-Edwards 2000: 112-13), the free clients occupied a special place. They were the only ones present at the banquet and they were referred to as ‘the folk who are company to a king’ in MacNeill’s translation above and as ‘those who are in attendance on a lord’ by Kelly (1988: 33, note 109). They also accompany a lord on his journeys; Críth Gablach describes how many followers each type of nobleman is assumed to have with him in accordance with his status (see MacNeill 1923).

‘The other class are the knights. These, when there is occasion, upon the incidence of war – and before Caesar’s coming this would happen well-nigh every year, in the sense that they would either be making wanton attacks themselves or repelling such – are all engaged therein; and according to the importance of each of them in birth and resources, so is the number of liegemen and dependents that he has about him. This is the one form of influence and power known to them.’ (Translation H.J. Edwards). In Gaul, free clients were mostly recruited from the nobility, not only from the local nobility but also from the nobility of neighbouring states or from even further away. Some of them were young men who tried to win their spurs abroad; others had perhaps lost a struggle for

In the same way in ancient Gaul, a noble’s retinue would also comprise, apart from ordinary retainers, a special class of followers which could be compared with the free clients in early Irish society. They were not expected to 155

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent power back home or had fallen in disgrace. There were, however, also retainers who originated from the broader population, like for example fugitives from abroad, who were trained in fighting. Again others were mercenaries (Karl 2006: 311-12, notes 76-77).

with agricultural activities. Other client people managed to obtain that they could not be forced to fight against peoples in their own province, but only against outsiders (Gerriets 1987: 50). The duty of protection also plays in clientship between two peoples. Caesar mentions that the Remi, who were on good terms with him, saw their clientele grow rapidly as a result, and he specifies that they carefully protected their new client peoples (DBG VI.12). In early medieval Ireland, subordinate peoples were entitled to compensation for damage caused by attacks by third parties or for injuries incurred while they were fighting for the overking (Gerriets 1987: 50).

Gallic patrons invested a lot in these elite followers: they paid for their food and maintenance and in addition they were very generous with gifts (Dobesch 1980: 418; Karl 2006: 313). A question that remains unanswered is whether free clients had to give something in return to their lord (apart from the personal services they owed them), like in early medieval Ireland (Karl 2006: 320-21). 15.1.2.1.2. Clientship at the level of a people

Two political texts, the Frithfolad and the Dál Caladbuig, list types of skilled persons which each of the subordinate túatha had to send to the overking. These include a druid, counsellors (to the king and to the queen), a white smith, a bronze smith and a wright to build the house of the overking (Gerriets 1987: 50-52).

The same principle of fiefs and food renders also existed in patron-client relationships between two peoples. Here the fief could also consist of valuables. Patterson (1994: 150-51) mentions an example from the tenth- or eleventh century Lebar na Cert (‘The Book of Rights’), where the gift from the overking to the underking was paid almost entirely in items that were symbolic of royal office: it included bridles, horses, swords, hunting-dogs, ornamented horns and slave-women. The subordinate people owed tribute to the superior people, and this was largely paid in livestock.

15.1.2.2. Competition and status As mentioned above, a lord’s status was dependent on the size of his clientele. Not only Polybius but also Caesar (DBG VI.15) was very clear in this respect:

The same difference existed between base and free clients, although it is not always very clear. Base clientship at the level of the túath entailed the giving of hostages as a security of future submissiveness. Sóerthúatha, ‘free peoples’, sometimes claimed not to give hostages, or to only exchange them with the overking (Charles-Edwards 1993: 342). In Gaul, the Eburones had given hostages to the Aduatuci as a surety for the tribute they owed them (Caesar, DBG V.27.2).

‘The other class are the knights. These, when there is occasion, upon the incidence of war – and before Caesar’s coming this would happen well-nigh every year, in the sense that they would either be making wanton attacks themselves or repelling such – are all engaged therein; and according to the importance of each of them in birth and resources, so is the number of liegemen and dependents that he has about him. This is the one form of influence and power known to them.’ (Translated by H.J. Edwards).

Military duties are also important at the level of a people. At various occasions, Caesar mentions names of peoples and their clients fighting together. The Aedui fought the Germans with the help of their clients (DBG I.31: ‘Cum his Haeduos eorumque clientes semel atque iterum armis contendisse’). And after the successful slaughtering of the Romans by the Eburones, Ambiorix can convince the Nervii that the time is ideal to chase the Romans. The Nervii send messages to all their subordinate peoples and assemble an army; the Eburones, the Nervii, and the Aduatici and all their allies and clients attack the legion (DBG V.39): ‘His circumventis magna manu Eburones, Nervii, Aduatuci atque horum omnium socii et clientes legionem oppugnare incipiunt.’

Since potential clients were more attracted by powerful lords, who could offer them better protection, this was probably a self-reinforcing process. The competition for clients was also fierce in early medieval Ireland. In the Irish elite families, each heir strove to establish his own clientele. For base clients the penalties for termination were less stiff if the new lord was of higher status or more closely related. Moreover, a man could be a base client of up to three lords at the same time, which made him less reliable because his loyalties were divided. Furthermore, some lords would contract with clients in anticipation of the death of the client’s lord. While the client would continue paying food renders to his old lord, he promised political support and labour services to the new lord. This was a legally recognised contract (Patterson 1994: 16870).

Subordinate túatha in early medieval Ireland also owed military assistance to their overking; the extent and duration of this assistance was clearly defined. The people of the Airgialla owed three fortnights’ military service every three years to their Uí Néill overlords, and they could not be obliged to serve during spring and autumn, presumably because this would interfere

For free clients, changing patron was even easier, since they could terminate the arrangement without any penalty. As argued by Patterson (1994: 161), changes in the allegiance of free clients were a good barometer of political change. 156

Functioning of elite and religious networks (Kelly 1988: 86, note 147); however, this may relate to wet-nursing rather than to fosterage proper (Bart Jaski, personal communication). Given the high mortality rate for infants, the age of seven seems more reasonable (Raimund Karl, personal communication). After all, fosterage is a contractual arrangement, which can even be bound by sureties (Kelly 1988: 88).

15.1.2.3. Archaeological evidence Material evidence for the existence of clientship is evidently not easy to find or at least difficult to prove. Sites with large quantities of food may possibly have functioned as storage facilities for food renders and tribute. In Britain, many defended sites contained large numbers of four- and six-post structures, beyond the capacity necessary for a single settlement (see for example Cunliffe 2005: 256, 426; Gent 1983). Also the isolated batteries of grain silos along the Aisne and Vesle rivers in France may have been for storage of tribute (see section 5.5).

Depending on the source, fosterage lasted until age 14 or 17 (Jaski 1999: 22-23; Kelly 1988: 88-89). The child must remain with the foster-parents until the period of fosterage is complete. If the foster-child is not treated properly, the contract can be nullified, and the fee must be returned to the father. In such a case also the kin of the child’s mother had the right to intervene (Kelly 1988: 88). In fact, the maternal kin could forbid a fosterage contract if it did not approve of the foster-parents (Charles-Edwards 1993: 24).

Other possible examples of food renders are from the Iron Age site on the Dürrnberg, which seemed to receive regular supplies of cattle at slaughtering age, while calves were always lacking, and the high quantities of salt pork and bacon from the site of Hallstatt in the LBA (Karl 2006: 295).

The links between foster-parents and foster-children were strong and remained so even after fosterage was completed. It is significant that in Old Irish, the intimate forms of the words for father and mother (Daddy, Mummy) are used for the foster-parents rather than for the natural parents (Kelly 1988: 86-87, 90); this shows that the relationship was often more affectionate than with the natural parents, whose role lay more in the transmission of legal rights and obligations and in the provision of material resources (Charles-Edwards 1993: 81). The enduring bond of loyalty is amply illustrated in the sagas, not only between foster-parents and foster-children, but also between foster-brothers. There were also some legal provisions: when a foster-son was killed (even in later life), both the foster-father and the foster-brothers were entitled to part of the honour-price. A foster-father was also expected to avenge the death of his foster-son. On the other hand, the links forged with the foster-son’s kin were also meant to be beneficial to the foster-father, so that presumably he could call on them for assistance when necessity arose (Kelly 1988: 89-90). This relates to the other function of fosterage, that of networking and alliance-building. In this sense, fosterage was an alternative for ties created by marriage.

15.1.3. Fosterage Fosterage is the arrangement by which a child is reared in another household. The practice was widespread throughout northern Europe in the early Middle Ages (Patterson 1994: 189) but its roots can be traced back to Indo-European society (Jaski 1999: 29). Fosterage served a dual purpose: education and alliance-building (Charles-Edwards 1993: 79). Fosterage is a well-known phenomenon in early Irish society; it is treated in the ancient law tracts, but it also plays an important role in saga literature, and it is referred to in the annals. Fosterage in medieval Ireland was sometimes for affection, but often for a fee. Fees were laid down in a law, Cáin Iarraith, the ‘law of fosterage-fee’; they were proportionate to the status of the father of the child but were also slightly higher for girls than for boys, perhaps because their education was more expensive or because they were thought to be of less benefit to the foster-parents in later life (Kelly 1988: 87). There were also precise prescriptions as to the education of foster-children, which had to be in accordance with their rank, since the aim was to prepare them for their role in later life. The son of a king had to be trained in horsemanship, marksmanship and swimming, and he had to be taught certain board-games, while the daughter of a king had to learn sewing, cloth-cutting and embroidery. Children of an ócaire (a lower-rank farmer) had to learn farming skills; for boys these consisted of looking after lambs, calves, kids and young pigs, drying corn, combing wool and chopping firewood, while girls had to learn how to use the quern, the kneading-trough and the sieve (Kelly 1988: 87).

In a society with a dispersed population, fosterage was a means of distributing children in the community ‘offering them a wide network of social ties’ (Patterson 1994: 190). Social contacts created through fosterage were also essential for potential candidates for royal succession, as it would help them to acquire followers (Jaski 2000: 142). Moreover, there was no competition between the natural son of a king and his foster-brothers, like there was between agnatic kin (Patterson 1994: 190). A child of high rank could be fostered for consecutive periods by a number of foster-parents (Kelly 1988: 90). This would engender multiple bonds but being fostered by several families was also a sign of prestige (Patterson 1994: 190; Jaski 1999: 25).

The entry age for fosterage is usually considered to be age seven, but this has recently been challenged (see for example Parkes 2006: 362, note 6) because some texts refer to foster-brothers who were reared in the same cradle

Based on literary references, Fergus Kelly (1988: 90) notes that the foster-father was often of lower rank than the 157

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent natural father of the child, but Bart Jaski (1999: 26) claims that they were normally of the same status, as this was necessary to guarantee the appropriate legal protection. A son from the nobility would be fostered by a nobleman or by someone of equal status, like a high-ranking cleric, a poet or a hospitaller.

Parkes (2003: 751, 754) notes that such parental avoidance exactly matches Kovalevsky’s observations of paternal avoidance during fosterage among the Ossetes. 15.1.4. Hostageship The ancient institution of hostageship bears little resemblance to our modern concept of hostage taking. Today, the abduction of hostages is a despicable technique employed by criminals and terrorists; in the Middle Ages and in antiquity, however, hostages acted as living sureties for the fulfilment of an agreement.

It seems that in fact alliance fosterage, or allegiance fosterage, as preferred by Peter Parkes (2003; 2006: 359 note 2), could be patronal allegiance fosterage (childraising by social superiors) or cliental fosterage (childraising by social inferiors). Patronal allegiance fosterage is illustrated in medieval Irish literature. Bart Jaski (1999: 27-28) has pointed out that it was beneficial for a king to raise the children of his clients and allies, since this established bonds between him, his fosterlings and their parents, as well as between the fosterlings themselves. As a matter of fact, the children of clients held hostage by the king could also be fostered by him, as this would reduce the risk of future enmity (Jaski 2000: 142). As such, the line between hostageship, clientship and fosterage was very thin. Furthermore, foster-brothers could even be given as hostages to a superior lord instead of members of one’s own kin, so the bond created by fosterage must have been highly valued.

Societies without a national executive institution like the police or a judicial authority, depend on individual or group initiatives to secure their legal interests. Roman law, as well as early Germanic law, and Irish and Welsh law, all know the principle of ‘surety’ to guarantee that an obligation will be met. Such a surety can be performed in rem, but also in personam. A typical example for a surety in rem is a pledge, whereas a surety in personam would be a hostage (Karl 2006: 211). References to hostages in classical Greek and Roman sources are numerous. The Greek historian Polybius could even speak from experience: as a young man he was taken hostage by the Romans (Allen 2006: 201-23). Many classical authors also talk about hostageship amongst the Gauls, Britons and Germans. The most extensive source is Caesar’s DBG, but also Tacitus (Germania, Agricola) occasionally refers to hostages. In early medieval Ireland, hostageship is treated in the laws but also in narrative literature.

There are also indications for the existence of cliental allegiance fosterage. There were situations in which the fostering of a child of the lord was one of the conditions in a clientship arrangement; the client would receive a fief of fosterage on top of the true fief (Patterson 1994: 169). It is not clear to what extent children were given in fosterage with close relatives, but there are some testimonies in the sagas (Jaski 1999: 24). An important institution in this respect is that of the avunculate, referring to the special relationship between a son and his maternal uncle. According to Tacitus (Germania 20), such a bond was customary amongst the Germans, some of whom valued it higher than the tie with the father, and when demanding hostages insisted on sisters’ sons for preference. The avunculate has been attested in many Indo-European communities; it is considered a more affectionate relationship which contrasted with the formal relationship with the father, who had the patria potestas (Bremmer 1976). In early medieval Ireland, the interest of the maternal kin in a child was subordinate to that of the paternal kin (Charles-Edwards 1993: 23). Fosterage with the maternal kin would ensure that strong links existed with both kin groups. One of the best-known examples in Irish literature is that of Cú Chulainn and his fosterfather king Conchobar, who was his maternal uncle (Ó Cathasaigh 1986; Jaski 1999).

Based on linguistic evidence, it seems that the use of hostageship in the Celtic and Germanic world can be traced back at least to the third or fourth century BC (Karl 2006: 143). 15.1.4.1. Different types of hostageship Based on the circumstances in which persons acted as sureties, different types of hostageship can be discerned. The categories described by Walker (1980: 6-9) for the Greco-Roman world are also applicable here: exchange, unilateral exaction by formal national agreement, private contract and extra-legal seizure. 15.1.4.1.1. Mutual exchange of hostages A mutual exchange of hostages took place between two or more political entities of equal power, to secure an agreement or an alliance.

There is no direct evidence that fosterage was practised in Iron Age Gaul. However, Caesar’s observation in De Bello Gallico (VI.18) that Gauls do not allow their sons to approach them openly until they have grown to an age when they can bear the burden of military service, is often interpreted as an indication for the existence of fosterage.

An example of a bilateral agreement occurred in 58 BC between the Helvetii and the Sequani, as related by Caesar (DBG I.9 and I.19). Cut off by the Romans, the only possible passage for the Helvetii was via a small road through Sequani country, for which they would need permission from the Sequani. Dumnorix, a chieftain of the 158

Functioning of elite and religious networks Aedui, who had good connections with both the Sequani and the Helvetii, mediates between the two people and arranges that they should exchange hostages: the Sequani to guarantee the safe passage of the Helvetii and the Helvetii not to cause any harm while crossing the territory of the Sequani. This agreement, backed up by hostages, seems to have worked, and presumably the hostages were returned. Ironically, the Helvetii later plundered the fields of the Aedui, which provided Caesar with a pretext to interfere with matters outside his province and ultimately to start the Gallic Wars.

As stated by Allen (2006: 77), the mutual exchange of hostages served as the manifestation of a common bond, with coercion being an unlikely prospect: the execution of hostages by one party would be answered in kind by another. Treaty relationships between partners of equal or nearequal status also existed in early medieval Ireland, but it is not clear whether these involved an actual exchange of hostages at the moment when they were concluded. According to Charles-Edwards (2009: 76), it was typical for such a cairde (‘kinship’, ‘alliance’) that neither tribute nor hostages were exacted, whereas Stacey (2007: 39) mentions a ‘mutual exchange of hostages’, adding that ‘hostages taken into captivity in circumstances in which a treaty had been contracted between túatha were treated quite honorably’. Such treaties between equal partners can probably be understood as a relationship of free clientship at the level of the túath (Stacey 1994: 99, 107).

Other examples in DBG of mutual exchanges of hostages are related to Gallic alliances against the Romans. The first one that Caesar mentions is that of the Belgae in 57 BC (DBG II.1). After the Roman victories against the Helvetii and the Suebi in 58 BC, the Belgae started feeling threatened. While in his winter quarters in Gallia Cisalpina, Caesar was informed that all the Belgae were entering into a confederacy against Rome, and that they were giving hostages to one another. The following year, in 56 BC, a similar alliance was forged amongst the Aquitani, who were alarmed at the brisk successes of Caesar’s young general Crassus. They sent ambassadors to all quarters, exchanged hostages and raised troops (DBG III.23).

When at the time of concluding a cairde, each party was sufficiently reassured and no actual exchange of hostages took place, this was surely considered a token of deep trust and friendship. When the level of trust was lower or when a lot was at stake, a solemn oath may not have sufficed. In Gaul, when the Carnutes agreed to start the uprising against the Romans, it was only with reluctance that they accepted the sealing of the alliance by oath only, given the impossibility to exchange hostages, as discussed above.

Caesar (DBG VII.2) relates how a few years later, in 53 BC, another Gallic alliance was in the making while he was attending to his affairs in northern Italy again. The political situation in Rome was such that the Gauls believed that Caesar would refrain from returning to Gaul, as he needed to secure his political career in Rome. At a secret gathering of Gallic leaders, where the possibilities of an uprising were discussed, the Carnutes declare that they are willing to start the war, but that they want to be sure that they will not be deserted by the rest of Gaul. In such a situation, the normal procedure was to exchange hostages, but this was not possible, as the affair was not to be divulged. A major exchange of hostages would probably have aroused suspicion amongst the Romans. The Carnutes require that at least a solemn assurance be given them by oath and plighted honour, their military standards being brought together.

15.1.4.1.2. Unilateral exaction by formal agreement Moscovich (1979: 122) calculated that of the more than 100 Gallic, German and British tribes mentioned by name in DBG, no less than 37 are specifically recorded as having rendered hostages to Caesar or his lieutenants. Most of these hostages were submitted in conjunction with formal surrender procedures. Hostages could be requested as part of a peace treaty after a battle, but in many occasions the threat of a Roman attack would suffice for the Gauls to comply with Caesar’s demands. Sometimes hostages were even offered spontaneously. When Caesar arrived in Gallia Belgica in 57 BC sooner than expected, the Remi hastened to surrender, offering him hostages, and specifying that they had no part in the conspiracy of the Belgae discussed above (see DBG II.3). Also the British promised hostages to Caesar, but they rarely kept their commitment (DBG IV.21, IV.27, IV.36, IV.38).

On the appointed day, the Carnutes slay the Roman citizens of Cenabum. The news spreads quickly and when it reaches the Arverni, Vercingetorix starts the organisation of what was to become a pan-Gallic uprising, ultimately leading to the defeat of the Gauls at Alesia. He sends ambassadors in every direction and quickly attaches several peoples to his interest. The supreme command is conferred on him by unanimous consent. This enables Vercingetorix to impose a number of demands on his allies, one of which is the delivery of hostages (DBG VII.4).

Unilateral exaction of hostages must have been fairly common among the Gauls and Germans before the arrival of the Romans, as a result of one people gaining supremacy over another. In fact, Caesar, mentions a few instances, in the early stages of the Gallic Wars, where he came to the rescue of the disadvantaged party. Such was the case with the Aedui, who had given the sons of their leading men as hostages to the Sequani and to Ariovistus (DBG I.31, VI.12). Later in the war, when the Aedui are turning against Caesar, he reminds them of everything he has done for them (DBG VII.54). A similar situation

For none of the above examples of exchange of hostages to seal an alliance, Caesar gives any further details about the number of hostages, how they were selected, or where they were accommodated. Presumably, they were too young to fight, and were kept under proper care. 159

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent arose with the Eburones, who were paying tribute to theirs neighbours, the Atuatuci, and had given hostages to them, suggesting that the Eburones were vassals, clients of the Atuatuci. With Caesar’s aid, the Eburones were freed of this tribute and Ambiorix’s son and the son of his brother were returned (DBG V.27).

leaders as hostages; the Gauls merely laugh and defeat the Macedonians in a battle, during which Ptolemaeus is killed (Justinus XXIV.5). 15.1.4.1.3. Private contract In 306 BC, Antigonus the One-Eyed of Macedon, former general of Alexander and one of the Diadochi, gave hostages to his Gallic mercenaries in security of payment. These hostages were men and boys of rank and family. After the battle, the Gauls demanded for the agreed sum to be paid to every Gaul (including women and children) and not only to those who bore arms. Antigonus first refused, but of fear that harm might be done to the hostages, he told the Gauls that he complied with their demands and invited them to come and collect their money. When the chiefs of the Gauls arrived at the Macedonian camp, they were seized by Antigonus. They were exchanged against the hostages and the Gauls had no choice but accept the original sum agreed (Polyaenus, Stratagems, IV.6.17). Polyaenus only wrote his Stratagems in the second century AD, and his sources are not known, but if this anecdote is genuine, it demonstrates that in the late fourth century BC the Gauls were familiar with the concept of hostage taking to secure a contract.

In early medieval Ireland, unilateral extraction of hostages was standard practice. A king would demand hostages from his subjects, especially his sub-kings, as a guarantee of their loyalty, and as a security for their paying tribute to him (Charles-Edwards 1993: 341; Jaski 2000: 104; Kelly 1988: 174). It seems that demanding hostages to ensure continued submission was a king’s prerogative (Kelly 1988: 175; Jaski 2000: 104). It was even imperative for a king to have hostages, as is implied by the wellknown Irish aphorism: ‘He is not a king who does not have hostages in fetters, and to whom no royal tribute is rendered, and to whom no fines for breach of promulgated law are paid’ (Kelly 1988: 19). At a lower level, in a clientele relationship, no hostages are given by a client to his lord; it is, therefore, remarkable that the Irish term for base clientship, gíallnae, contains the word for hostage, gíall (for a discussion see Charles-Edwards 1993: 341). A new overking could not automatically assume that all those who had acknowledged the authority of his predecessor would also submit to him, so he had to bring subject kings under his rule. Superior kings often organised a hosting to the territory of an independent or recalcitrant king to collect tribute by force in a cattle raid. As such, a cattle raid was often a political claim, rather than a simple expedition to rob or steal. A lesser king who did not have sufficient power or allies to resist a hosting would come to terms with a superior king, guaranteeing his submission by means of pledges and sureties. Such an agreement was a tribute regulation, a cáin. A hostage (gíall) acted as a guarantee for the fulfilment of the terms of the cáin (Jaski 2000: 102-4). A cáin can be associated with base clientship at the level of the túath (Stacey 1994: 106-07).

Evidently not all private contracts were backed up by hostages. When the personal or financial risk involved was of a more limited nature, a surety in rem would have sufficed. A clear overview of the various types of sureties, referring both to Roman and to early medieval Irish and Welsh laws is given by Raimund Karl (2005a). Hostagesuretyship may also have played a role in private contracts but is not attested for the ancient Celts. 15.1.4.1.4. Seizure The last type of hostages are those taken by ‘extralegal’ seizure, as opposed to the previous three categories, where the exaction of hostages was part of a formal agreement. It is true that at the occasion of a unilateral exaction by formal agreement, the donor party probably had no meaningful choice, but at least there may have been some room for negotiation as to the selection of hostages, which was certainly not the case with extralegal seizures.

As unilateral exaction is inseparably linked with subordination, some nations in antiquity were known never to give hostages. The Romans, of course, would never even consider it, not even as part of a mutual exchange, as they had no need for allies (Ndiaye 1995: 151), but also lesser nations could have their pride: the Helvetians, for example, refuse to give hostages to Caesar, and tell him by mouth of their chief ambassador Divico that they are so trained by their ancestors that they are accustomed to receive, not to give hostages (DBG I.14); ultimately, when beaten by the Romans, they have no option but to swallow their pride (DBG I.27-28). A mutual exchange of hostages, on the other hand, seems to have been considered acceptable by the Helvetians (see above). Another incidence of Gauls refusing to render hostages dates from an earlier period but was from a later source: Justin relates in his Epitome of Pompeius Trogus’ ‘Philippic Histories’, how Ptolemaeus Keraunos, Macedonian king from 281 to 279 BC, upon an offering of peace from the Gauls, asks their

There are not that many examples known from antiquity, but no doubt extralegal seizure occurred fairly frequently. Captives and prisoners of war may have conveniently been turned into human barter when the occasion arose. There are a few examples of captives being taken with the explicit aim of exchanging them against hostages, like in the story of Antigonus and his Gallic mercenaries, discussed above. The same technique was unsuccessfully applied in Gaul by the Veneti, who detained two Roman officers, thinking that they could exchange these for the hostages they had given to Caesar’s general, Crassus; the result was that Caesar undertook a war against them; their whole senate was put to death and the rest of them were sold into slavery (DBG III.8; III.16). 160

Functioning of elite and religious networks Another example of an irregular acquirement of hostages is related in the account of the Aedui, who took possession of the hostages and goods that the Romans had stored in Noviodunum. Rather than releasing the hostages, the Aedui took them to their chief magistrate at Bibracte; by threatening the hostages they intimidated those nations who were still hesitant to join the revolt (DBG VII.55; VII.63).

hostage, ‘presumably to preempt her father exploiting her marriage to constitute a new political alliance’, but there may have been earlier cases, as argued by Preston-Matto (2010). Welsh law also refers to the giving of women as hostages (Kelly 1988: 174, note 124). Female hostages were also known amongst the Germans. An account by Tacitus (Germania 8) infers that exacting girls from noble families as hostages is even more effective when it comes to guaranteeing the donor party’s loyalty. Equally interesting is Tacitus’s comment (Germania 20) that some Germans have a marked preference for the sons of sisters as hostages (see section 15.1.3).

15.1.4.2. Selection of hostages In general, the ideal hostage was a young male from a ruling family, but regional, chronological and circumstantial variations may have existed. From a study by Walker (1980: 15, tab. II), it appears that the Romans had a marked preference for child hostages, while among the Greeks, adult hostages were fairly common also. Percentages also differ according to the type of hostage exaction. In the Roman world, the share of child hostages connected with private contracts is far less substantial than the percentage of child hostages securing a treaty with unilateral exaction. Most hostages are male, but female hostages are occasionally attested too.

Remarkable differences exist with regard to the number of hostages exacted. Caesar takes 100 hostages from the Senones (DBG VI.4), 200 from the Treveri (DBG V.4) and as much as 600 from the Bellovaci (DBG II.15). On the other hand, he settles for only 40 hostages from the Trinovantes (DBG V.20). Walker (1980: 17-19 and appendix 1), who studied numerous cases of unilateral hostage exaction in the Mediterranean world, argues that the number of hostages is directly related to the type of government of the donor nation. Although other circumstances may have influenced the number of hostages, Walker’s statement is convincing: relatively few hostages will be necessary to keep a centrally governed state under control, whereas a looser organised or politically less stable state, with changing political factions, will require hostages from all the important families. Walker already categorised the Gaulish and British examples from DBG into ‘monarchies’ and ‘oligarchies’, but it would be interesting to study these examples in further depth. A certain level of reservation should be observed, however, as to the accuracy of the numbers, which may have been corrupted as a result of scribal error or Caesarean exaggeration.

For Gaul, not enough information is available to apply a statistical analysis, but Caesar’s account of the Gallic Wars provides many clues. Several examples of unilateral exaction illustrate that the hostages were the children of kings and other leading men. When Divitiacos calls upon the Roman senate for help against the Sequani and Ariovistus, he can do so because, unlike the other Aeduan chief nobles, he is not bound by oath or hostages to the Sequani: ‘… non …liberos suos obsides daret’, he had not given his children as hostages (DBG I.31.8). The use of the neutral liberi does not disclose any information of the children’s gender but in any case implies that they are not adults.

During treaty negotiations, the leader of the donor nation may have attempted to use the hostage transaction to sideline his political opponents (Allen 2006: 51; Walker 1980: 21-22). However, when the recipient was familiar with the political situation, this was unlikely to pass unnoticed. Caesar, for example, knew very well who to put on his wish list: the 200 hostages he demanded from Indutiomarus explicitly included Indutiomarus’s son; if the passage is to be taken literally, he even knew the son by name (DBG V.4).

Other examples do clearly refer to male hostages but give no indication of their age. The Atuatuci held hostage the son of Ambiorix and his brother’s son (DBG V.27); Caesar demands 200 hostages from Indutiomarus, amongst these his own son (DBG V.4). The word filius used in both cases does not necessarily refer to a child; it could be an adolescent or even an adult. When the Suessiones surrender to Caesar, they give the first men of the state (primis civitatis) as hostage to him, and even the two sons of king Galba himself (‘atque ipsius Galbae regis duobus filiis’) (DBG II.13.1). This could easily be a mixed group of young adults and children.

At a more local level, or within the context of a patronclient relationship, the number of hostages is likely to have been much smaller. According to the Life of St. Declan of Ardmore, the king of Munster had seven noble hostages, from the strongest and most powerful families in Munster (see further below). However, the Irish annals often mention excessively high numbers of hostages.

Also in medieval Ireland, hostages were usually the sons of kings or lords; exceptionally a daughter was given. For the year 1165, the Annals of Ulster record that the king of Ireland, Muichertach Ua Lochlainn, gave the kingship of Ulster to Eochaid mac Duinnsléibhe. In return, he requested as hostages a son of every chieftain of Ulster, as well as Eochaid’s own daughter (Kelly 1988: 174). According to Flanagan (2003: 932), this was the first known occurrence of a female being taken as a political

15.1.4.3. Treatment of hostages The treatment of hostages in the classical world is reasonably well documented; both Walker (1980) and 161

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Allen (2006) give several examples. According to the classical sources, royal hostages in Rome were treated with proper care. Demetrius of Macedon, son of Philip V, was about 13 years old when he arrived in Rome in 194 BC, where he and a few dozen other Greek hostages were used to grace the triumph of Flamininus, who had defeated Philip V three years earlier. Demetrius was tutored by Flamininus and other senators and developed good relationships with the Romans (Allen 2006: 1-10). Another hostage in Rome, also called Demetrius, was a Syrian prince, of whom is known that he had a large entourage and that a retinue of slaves attended his person. He was allowed, on short notice, to go hunting, and his social life knew few restrictions (Walker 1980: 36-38). Allen (2006: 131) points at the metaphor of a hostage as a son in Polybius’s Histories. According to Polybius, the hostage-taker becomes a father figure, if not through formal adoption, then through attitude and emotion.

1988: 174). There are a few examples of hostages being buried alive, but this may have been caused by the hostages’ improper behaviour (see Walker 1980: 72, note 302). The Irish Annals also report on the killing of hostages (see for example Annals of Innisfallen for the year 1124 §6 (CELT s.d.: T100004)), and on their blinding (for example Annals of Connaught for the year 1250 §3 (CELT s.d.: T100011)), but in proportion to the length of time that hostageship existed as an institution in Ireland, these examples are rather rare. Once hostages are dead, they are no longer of any use, so presumably killing them was the last option. Generally, kings were probably rather concerned about the wellbeing of their hostages. Aongus, king of Munster, was very alarmed when the seven noble hostages that he held in Cashel died of the plague. He begged Saint-Declan (Declán of Ardmore) to raise them back to life, afraid as he was that their fathers, the chieftains of Munster, men of strength and power, would raise war and rebellion against him (Life of St. Declan of Ardmore, CELT s.d.: T201020).

Presumably, also in Gaul, hostages were usually treated well and cared for in accordance with their rank. The way that the son and nephew of Ambiorix were held in chains like slaves by the Atrebates, was obviously not how the Eburones expected their hostages to be treated, even if Caesar may have used the situation to highlight the savagery of the Gauls (DBG V.27). The threat of Ariovistus to torture the child hostages was also considered outrageous (DBG I.31), but nothing indicates that he actually maltreated them.

15.1.4.4. The role of hostageship in the formation and maintenance of social networks At first glance, the reason for hostage taking was simple and primarily practical in nature: it was to ensure that the obligations of a treaty were met. In addition, it symbolised the submission of one party to another. On further reflection, however, other motives must have played a prominent part, such as the opportunity of cultivating valuable political allies.

The Lebor na Cert (‘Book of Rights’), which describes the rights of the Irish kings and the duties owed to them by their subkings, mentions the Airgíalla who supplied hostages to the king of Tlachtga. Not only were the hostages kept without fetters, but they were also entitled to a horse, a sword with guards of gold and befitting clothing; the hostages only had to swear an oath that they would not abscond (CELT s.d.: T102900, section 4, 7485). It is not clear to what extent other hostages enjoyed the same conditions; the fact that the hostages of the Airgíalla are explicitly mentioned in the Book of Rights may suggest that they were granted preferential treatment. Nevertheless, the swearing of an oath not to escape may have been general practice. After all, a hostage was not a mere captive or prisoner, and keeping a hostage in chains was not likely to turn him into a loyal client when at the end of his hostageship he was released to go home. Walker (1980: 40) believes that the same system of parole may have been employed in ancient Rome.

For the Romans, it was part of imperial policy to offer hostages a formal, controlled education (Allen 2006: 149). No doubt, this was a very convenient method to romanise the elite of the conquered territories, who were taught Latin and Greek, and became imbued in Roman mores. Classical sources reveal these practices in respect of the native elite of Gaul, and most probably also of Britain, as discussed by Allen (2006: 149-51) and Creighton (2000: 89-92). The line between hostageship and fosterage is often very thin. In the case of the school for Iberian boys at Osca, for example, the boys’ fathers welcome the opportunity of a Roman education for their sons, as Sertorius leads them to believe that when they come of age, he will give them roles in authority. In fact, the children are hostages, which becomes painfully manifest when later on the Iberians revolt (Walker 1980: 39, 44).

An Old-Irish text on court procedure mentions the presence of hostages in the side-court, probably to mark the prestige of the overking (Kelly 1986: 81).

No doubt also in Gaul, the institution of hostageship was used to form future allies. Like in early medieval Ireland, young hostages were probably treated as foster-children, with the aim to create the same bond of affection, which would last for life.

As a surety in personam, the hostage’s life or physical well-being is presumed to have been continuously under threat. Still, in Rome, for example, the execution of hostages is only rarely attested (Allen 2006: 52-57; Walker 1980: 52-53). In medieval Ireland, forfeited hostages could be killed, blinded or ransomed (Kelly

Incidentally, (adult) hostages may also have played a role in the transmission of skills and knowledge, as suggested by Cameron (2011: 190). 162

Functioning of elite and religious networks 15.2. A well-connected evangelist

Since this section draws primarily on classical texts, an overview with a translation of all the texts concerned is provided in Appendix E.

After Ian Stead’s major publications of 1965 (The La Tène Cultures of Eastern Yorkshire) and 1979 (The Arras Culture), another milestone was Iron Age Cemeteries of East Yorkshire in 1991, the publication of the cemeteries of Rudston and Burton Fleming, Garton Station and Kirkburn. The excavations of these sites (and of other sites like Wetwang Slack) has resulted in an extensive amount of new data and have allowed Ian Stead to formulate a number of new propositions as compared to his previous publications. In the final paragraph of the discussion, he writes:

15.2.1.1. The sources The earliest secure references to druids are those by Diodorus Siculus, Caesar and Strabo (first century BC), all of whom are known to have drawn on an earlier historian, Posidonius, who was writing his Histories at the end of the second century BC (see Piggott 1985: 96-98). The name ‘druid’ was possibly in use much earlier, but the sources are open to debate. In the third century AD, Diogenes Laertius names druids and semnotheoi in his list of barbarian philosophers; as his sources he mentions the Magikos of Aristotle and the twenty-third book of Sotion’s Succession of Philosophers. However, the attribution of the Magikos to Aristotle is doubtful and it has even been argued by Rives (2004) that the work is much later, and that Diogenes cited Sotion through a later, first century BC source, one that added the druids to the list of barbarian philosophers. However, if the lost works of Sotion did name the druids, their existence can be pushed back to at least the early second century BC, and if the Magikos is written by a third century BC follower of Aristotle, as Rankin (1996: 271) sees feasible, druids would have been around as early as the period under discussion here. Of course, druids may have existed much earlier, be it not necessarily with exactly the same functions as in Caesar’s days. In fact, it has been argued, for example by Creighton (1995: 296), that the influence of the druids was already on the wane by Caesar’s time, although this thesis was rejected by Webster (1999).

‘Direct continental influence on the Arras Culture amounts to two aspects of the burial rite, cart-burials and square barrows. Their arrival points to at least one immigrant who had a powerful effect on the religious life of a tightly defined community – perhaps a tribe. The new influence may have affected only a small element in Yorkshire, and there is some suggestion that the early converts were relatively rich. Perhaps the immigrant was a well-connected evangelist ‘(Stead 1991: 184). As discussed above, the cultural exchanges between East Yorkshire and northern Gaul primarily took place in the field of ritual, and much less so in other aspects of life. Stead’s suggestion that the new rites were brought into the region by a ‘well-connected evangelist’ therefore merits further investigation. The concept of an evangelist in the sense of a missionary sent abroad with a view to disseminate his belief system and convert an utmost number of souls is hardly conceivable for Iron Age Europe. However, historical sources describe a category of people, held in high esteem, who were concerned with ritual issues and who were known to travel at least occasionally: the druids. This raises the question to what extent druids and other spiritual, religious and/or intellectual leaders had a part in changes in funerary rites as these can be perceived in the archaeological record in general. More in particular: can the introduction of new funerary practices in eastern Yorkshire in the early third century BC be associated with the druids mentioned a few centuries later by Caesar and other historical sources?

Druids are still present in early medieval Ireland: they figure in numerous tales and are listed in some of the law texts. As specified by Kelly (1988: 59-61), in the sagas and saints’ lives, druids have a similarly high status as in the classical sources, but the law texts (seventh-eighth centuries) already reflect the advance of Christianity: the position of the druid is reduced to that of a sorcerer or a witch-doctor. In Munster, however, druids seem to have preserved their traditional legal status a while longer (Patterson 1994: 4145). Furthermore, some of the functions of the classical druids have apparently been carried over to other learned professions, like poets and lawyers. Charles-Edwards (2005: 352) considers it plausible for some men to have held two offices, for example that of druid and poet. Despite the geographical and chronological distances between Iron Age Gaul and Britain on the one hand, and early medieval Ireland on the other, the analogies are striking. For the argumentation of this section, the classical sources as such already provide adequate information, but it would be an omission to not make use of the early Irish data, as these may offer further details or shed more light on the data drawn from the classical sources.

15.2.1. The druids Although systematic reference will be made to ‘druids’, it should be understood that in the current context this may embrace other spiritual, religious and intellectual leaders. Furthermore, it is not the intention to analyse and describe all the aspects of druidic professional life, nor to acquire insight in the hierarchy or task partitioning of the priestly and learned classes. The purpose is rather to investigate whether druids and related personalities had the means and opportunity, and maybe even a motive, to initiate the revival of an ancient burial rite and its diffusion over large parts of northern Gaul and into Britain.

15.2.1.2. The druids’ knowledge As mentioned by Caesar (DBG VI.14) and Pomponius Mela (De Situ Orbis III.2,18-19), the training to become 163

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent a druid could take up to twenty years. Even if this length of time only applied to the most sluggish students, it can be safely assumed that the learning programme was very extensive; moreover, given the wide variety of fields in which druids were active, this should not be surprising. As discussed in numerous studies (Birkhan 1997: 896934, Piggott 1985, to name just a few), the druids were experts in the science of nature and moral philosophy, they were acquainted with astronomy, they were concerned with divine worship and the due performance of sacrifices, they could interpret the will of the gods, they were knowledgeable in herbal lore and probably worked as medics, and they acted as judges.

15.2.1.3. Ritual, religion and burial According to Caesar (DBG VI.13), the druids are engaged in sacred matters, they conduct public and private sacrifices, and they interpret religious issues. Their authority as mediators between men and gods is also attested by Diodorus Siculus (Library of History V.31.25). While references to the performance of sacrifices are recurrent, a direct or explicit relation between druids and funerary issues does not emerge from the classical sources. Druids are, for example, nowhere presented as the conductors of burial ceremonies. This may simply be due to omission, or assumed common knowledge, but it is equally well possible that the delivery of funerary services belonged to the competence of a different type of priest. The relation between the Irish druids and funerary rites is discussed by Guyonvarc’h and Le Roux (1986: 194-99); the examples they give are perhaps not always convincing, but still offer interesting insights. When Mogh Néid, king of Munster, died in a battle against the high king, Conn Cetchathach, it was his druid, Derg Damsa, who obtained permission from Conn to bury his king. He lamented and made a grave for him; he buried him with his weapons, his pike, his bludgeon and his helmet. Guyonvarc’h and Le Roux are probably right when they state that the participation of a druid in a funeral is essential for the proper passage of the deceased into the Otherworld.

No doubt the large number of verses they had to learn by heart also embraced the history of their people, including their customs and traditions. Ammianus, who lived in the fourth century AD, but who quotes Timagenes, a historian from the first century BC, reports that the druids believed that part of the population (of Gaul) was aboriginal but that another part had come in from the regions beyond the Rhine (Rankin 1996: 277). Correct or not, such a statement illustrates the druids’ interest in history and origins, be it sometimes mythical in nature: also belonging to the druids’ tradition was the belief that the Gauls descended from Dis Pater (Caesar, DBG VI.18). Closely related to a people’s history are their ancestors, whose burial ceremonies may have acquired and maintained a place in the druids’ lore. The conservative learning techniques presumably ensured a relatively stable and unchanging story, handed over across several generations. As a result, a druid may have known, quite in detail, about ancient funerary rites, died out in his own times, but still part of the universal druid knowledge. This type of ‘privileged knowledge’ was of utmost value to the ruling classes, as it could be used as a historical precedence. In uncertain political times, imitating the burial rites of a heroic ancestor could help to legitimise their own position.

Also worth considering is that the line between funerary rites and cult in general is sometimes not very clearcut, as is demonstrated by the incidences of sites with a mixed funerary and cultual function (for a discussion, see Gerritsen 2003: 150-66). Even if druids were not actively involved in funeral ceremonies, the acts and rituals observed during these ceremonies, and the words that were spoken, may have formed part of a set of regulations and customs, embedded in the (secret) religious knowledge handed over from one generation of druids to the next. Several classical authors refer to the druidic belief in personal immortality; some even associate this belief with the Pythagorean theory of metempsychosis. However, most scholars agree that the Celtic concept deviates from the Greek doctrine of transmigration of the soul (see for example Piggott 1985: 113-15). At any rate, the association of the belief in personal immortality with the druidic doctrine, suggests that the correct observance of rituals connected with death and burial may well have fallen under the authority of the druids. Obviously, these regulations left enough scope for regional variability and kin group specific customs; they were part of a community’s traditions and were as such common knowledge. However, unusual circumstances may have required unusual actions, in which case it is likely that the advice of a druid was sought. As the guards of traditional and sacred knowledge, the druids were the best placed to instruct which rites would most certainly offer the hoped-for result.

Apart from knowledge of the past, the druids could also boast a certain expertise in rituals and customs practised in distant lands, as will be further discussed below. Like knowledge of the past, acquaintance with foreign countries was restricted to a privileged group of people, and thus by definition special (Karl 2006: 369). Again this was valuable information for the ruling classes, as their druids could supply them with first-hand information on illustrious burial rites used abroad. Finally, there is another aspect to be taken into consideration. Drawing on Fabian (1983) and Helms (1988), Mel Giles (2000: 160-62) has suggested that distance in space can be constituted as distance in time, ‘such that foreign locales can also be thought of as places of the ancestors or ancestral homelands’. This would imply that the introduction of new burial rites from overseas would be eased, since their adoption would be vindicated by the ancestral connection.

164

Functioning of elite and religious networks It is, in fact, of lesser relevance whether children were sent to Britain or to another distant place. More important is that at least some pupil-druids travelled a long way from home for their education. For parents to entrust their son to a druid or druid school in a land faraway, they must have had certain knowledge of the druid or the school in question, be it directly or through referral. This implies that at least a basic long-distance social network was already in place.

15.2.1.4. Connections and privileges The social status of the druids in Gaulish society is amply illustrated by Caesar (DBG VI.13), who puts them at equal level with the nobility. Student druids were undoubtedly recruited from the noble classes, as remarked by Pomponius Mela (De Situ Orbis, III.2,18-19). Moreover, a lengthy study as that of the druids was no doubt solely reserved for the higher, and maybe even the highest classes. Emanating from the ranks of the nobility, the druids could profit from the existing social and political networks of their kin. In addition, they had ample opportunities to develop their own networks, both during their studies and afterwards.

Renowned druid schools are likely to have attracted pupils from a wide geographical spread. Creighton (2000: 154) compares the situation with that of English public schools, where whatever the background of the pupils, after being educated together for a substantial period of time, they develop a mutual behaviour, including certain speech patterns. Due to the nature of the druidic learning, these speech patterns are prone to have been archaic in character. This way, the druids form ‘a social class which, unlike any other, was marked by a tight linguistic identity’. Creighton’s ‘linguistic identity’ is bound to strengthen and consolidate a social network that developed during education and was in all likelihood largely maintained once its members were qualified druids and returned home or settled elsewhere.

The Táin Bó Cuailnge relates about the many pupils of the druid Cathbad who instructs them in the art of divination. Kelly (1988: 91) points out that a relation between a pupil (felmacc) and his master is similar to that between a fosterchild and its foster-father; Cathbad’s charges are described either as his pupils (felmaicc) or his foster-sons (daltai). This artificial kinship also exists between the ‘classmate’foster-brothers, in the same way as Karl (2005b: 263) describes the ‘boarding schools’ for artisans: ‘This would allow each of them, during their later lives, a much wider area of uninhibited movement – wherever they had a foster sibling, they would be safe to go. The artificial kinship established with their local foster siblings, making them ‘family’ of some member of the local community, would render them “quasi-members” of the local community, and thus provide them with the protection offered by the law.’

15.2.1.5. Counsellors of kings In the first century AD, the Greek orator and historian Dio Chrysostom wrote in one of his Discourses (49) that the most powerful nations have publicly appointed philosophers as superintendents and officers for their kings. For the Celts he names the druids, without whose assistance kings could not do or plan anything.

Druids presumably had a fair level of freedom of movement, but nonetheless the connections forged in their youth must certainly have proven to be useful in their later professional life (see also Kelly 1988: 5-6 on outsiders, and Karl 2006: 250-63 on hospitality).

The king’s druid is also a common character in early Irish literature. Several of these druids are known by name, like, for example, the above mentioned Derg Damsa, druid of Mog Néid, king of Munster. A remarkable fact is known about the Ulstermen: it was taboo for them to speak before their king, and it was taboo for the king to speak before his druids (Birkhan 1997: 926). The sort of advice provided by druids in the early Irish sagas is briefly discussed by Piggott (1985: 112):

Caesar (DBG VI.13) writes that those who want to study the matter (i.e., the discipline of the druids) most diligently travel to Britain for their education. He also claims that Britain was where druidry originated. It may well be that the phenomenon of parents or relatives sending their children to Britain to learn the discipline of the druids, was just a literary device, as suggested by Raimund Karl (2005b: 261): ‘”special” skills, especially “magical” skills, can best be learnt abroad, since skills that are commonly found amongst practitioners of a craft at home cannot by definition, be “special”’. Similar motifs are found in early Irish literature and in Greek epic literature. As such, Britain could have been a synonym for ‘far away’ or ‘abroad’. On the other hand, it is possible that in Caesar’s days, Britain represented a secure base from which to manage a national and religious revival, as is believed by Rankin (1996: 276) who states that ‘the activity of British druids could easily give rise to the impression, or the fabrication, that Britain was the home of druidry’. If indeed Britain played this role, it is not hard to imagine its appeal to druids in the making.

‘They appear as confidential advisers to the chiefs on omens and auguries, or lucky and unlucky days, and they instruct the young warriors of the tribe. They practise magic to confuse or confound the enemy, but it seems probable that it is precisely in the sphere of the Druids’ religious activities that the Christian redaction of the hero-tales would make the most severe incisions, and the texts are almost wholly uninformative on this aspect.’ 15.2.2. Druids and the Arras Culture: a possible scenario During several centuries before the introduction of chariot burials and square barrows in East Yorkshire, the dead 165

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent were disposed of in a way that left no archaeological traces, probably by means of excarnation. This burial rite is not so unusual: most people in Gaul are likely to have been treated in the same way, as inhumation and cremation were restricted to part of the population only. In East Yorkshire, a coincidence of circumstances may have induced an increased susceptibility to change. Perhaps a certain part of the population gained exclusive access to a specific source of wealth (such as iron production or new trading markets), which would bring about fundamental changes in the socio-political landscape, together with a need for distinction and prestige, not only in life, but also, and perhaps even more so, in death.

ancestors of the Bronze Age, whose round barrows were still prominent features in the landscape. The new burial rites of inhumation and square enclosures introduced in East Yorkshire in the early third century BC survived for a few centuries. While in northern Gaul inhumation was gradually replaced by cremation, the Arras Culture did not follow. This possibly implies that the druids of East Yorkshire were no longer connected with their fellow druids on the Continent, but on the other hand it may simply mean that the rites were still fulfilling their purposes and that there was no need for change.

In matters of death and ritual, the new rulers would no doubt have sought advice from the druids, or some learned men akin to these. One or more of these druids were possibly connected to northern Gaul, through a network created during their long years of education and maintained and extended during subsequent exchange visits. As such they would be well informed about the burial rites used on the Continent; the growing success and the expanding distribution of chariot burials in northern Gaul would certainly not have escaped their attention. No doubt the chariot burial concept formed a certain attraction to the new rulers of East Yorkshire, but the new funerary rite also implied a change from (for example) excarnation to inhumation, which certainly necessitated a solid spiritual and theoretical foundation from the part of the druids, but no doubt the secrecy of their knowledge gave them the freedom of a personal interpretation as they saw fit. Inhumation had not been practised to any great extent in East Yorkshire after the Early Bronze Age. Despite this large gap in time, the typical position of the body in the Arras Culture is crouched, like it was in the EBA, and not extended on the back, as was the rule in contemporary northern Gaul. The consensus is that in East Yorkshire, during the period when excarnation was in use, the body was placed on the platform in a crouched position, as a reflection of the past, when bodies were placed that way in the grave. When inhumation was introduced again from the Continent, the typical position of the body that went back as far as the EBA was maintained. By linking up with an existing, local and traditional rite, the druids offered their rulers a means to at least partially legitimise the adoption of the new burial rites from the Continent. If, in addition, distant lands could be conceived as ‘land of the ancestors’, this would form an extra element of persuasion. As discussed above, based on currently available archaeological data, there seems to be a particularly close connection with the Paris area, but joint square enclosures, so typical for the Arras Culture, are absent in Paris. Hence for these, inspiration must have been sought elsewhere, most probably in the Aisne-Marne region. Next to the chariot burials, the square barrows offered the (new) elite of East Yorkshire an additional way to distinguish themselves, and to even put them on a par with their 166

16 Conclusion Parisi in East Yorkshire - is meaningful or coincidental. It also hinders establishing to what extent the various regions interconnected which each other and in which fields these connections were most prominent. It is already clear that, for example, the Plastic Style was not restricted to Paris, but also appeared in other regions of northern Gaul, while it is unknown in the Arras Culture. Weaponry is another field in which East Yorkshire stood apart from its Gallic contacts.

The emergence of the Arras Culture should not be studied in isolation, but as part of a wider trend that can be discerned in large parts of temperate Europe towards the earlier third century BC, i.e. that of more complex and further reaching long-distance networks which accelerate the diffusion of ideas and technologies. This development may have a historical background in that it was perhaps the result of increased mercenary activity. It may, however, also have been triggered by a minor event. Network theory has demonstrated that by adding just a few ties in a network where most nodes are already joined into clusters, the network may change into a giant component, where formerly isolated groups are now interconnected.

Square enclosures, on the other hand, were possibly adopted from the Continent, but not from the Paris region, where they are virtually absent. In the Aisne-Marne region, square enclosures are part of an existing tradition: along with other types of ditched enclosures they occurred together with chariot burials in the Aisne-Marne in the fifth and fourth centuries BC. The typical joint square enclosures, however, did not become popular until well into the second century BC. The question remains whether square barrows also existed on the Continent, since none have been attested (but see section 5.3.4); intensive ploughing, however, may have removed every trace of them.

It is in this spirit of internationalisation that the old tradition of the chariot burial, by this stage near its end in the Aisne-Marne and Middle Rhine – Moselle regions where it used to be one of the most prominent features, is resumed elsewhere, in many different places all across northern Gaul – without forming a contiguous distribution area - and also in eastern Yorkshire. In the past, the chariot burials of eastern Yorkshire were always compared with those from the Aisne-Marne region, which was not unreasonable, given that chariot burials have predominantly been found in this area. However, it is now clear that the Yorkshire chariot burials are more recent than those from the Aisne-Marne and should rather be studied against contemporary third century BC chariot burials, which are mainly found in the area just north of Paris, but in smaller numbers also occur in other regions of northern Gaul. Incidentally, the five-terret system, considered typically British, has also been attested in the Paris area.

The disassembling of the vehicle, as is customary in the Yorkshire Wolds, is often cited as the most significant and most striking difference with the chariot burials from the Continent. It is, however, a recurring feature throughout the Iron Age on the Continent: in the LH burial of Vix, the four wheels of the wagon were removed and placed against the wall of the burial chamber, and in Bescheid 6 (ELT period), the chariot was completely dismantled. In the Paris region, of the two chariot burials from Bouqueval, one is apparently taken apart; in Le PlessisGassot, although the vehicle was presented complete and stood upright in the grave pit, the box was lifted from the axle. The motive behind the (partial) disassembling of the vehicle remains obscure.

While there are many similarities in funerary practices between these new areas with chariot burials, there are also many differences, some of which must be due to local customs. This is the most visible in East Yorkshire, where the foreign burial rites are firmly anchored in British traditions. In northern Gaul, bodies were buried extended on the back, while in East Yorkshire they were flexed, crouched or even contracted, in line with practices attested in Iron Age burials from southwestern Britain; this is presumably part of an older tradition, since crouched inhumation burials were typical for the Beaker period, both in Britain and on the Continent.

The Arras burial tradition shows influences from various regions on the Continent, in combination with a strong local component, and is, therefore, unlikely to be introduced by immigrants, but is much easier explained in an elite network model, where (simultaneous) contacts with different regions would be a basic characteristic. The situation as it was towards the early third century BC would stimulate the exchange of ideas. The evolution to more complex long-distance networks must have substantially affected the local political and social situation in the various regions. Those factions or lineages who were the best connected, through ties of marriage, fosterage, hostageship or clientship, succeeded

Unfortunately, the only region outside East Yorkshire that has a sufficiently large number of contemporary chariot burials to compare with is the Paris area. This makes it harder to judge whether the similarity in the name of the people a few centuries later – the Parisii in Paris and the 167

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent in developing, consolidating or extending their power. By reverting to the ancient, prestigious tradition of the chariot burial they put themselves on a par with their perceived illustrious ancestors of the fifth and earlier fourth century BC. Since the link between East Yorkshire and the Continent is the strongest in the field of ritual, it is highly plausible for druids or a similar class of religious or intellectual individuals to have played a leading role in the introduction and adoption of the new funerary practices. This does not exclude direct contact between the rulers of the Arras Culture and their peers on the Continent, with whom they may have been connected through ties of actual or artificial kinship or otherwise. The period of strong connections with the Continent may have been relatively short, perhaps just a few generations; subsequent new funerary customs in northern Gaul (like for example cremation) are not picked up in East Yorkshire, and certain types of raw materials no longer reach the area. The chariot burials themselves do not seem to survive beyond the middle of the second century BC, neither in Britain nor in northern Gaul, but then surprisingly, at least two centuries later, the survivors of a deceased in Pembrokeshire revert to the traditional concept of the chariot burial in a time of increased stress, while no earlier chariot burials are known from that area. In northern Gaul the underlying concept endures without interruption: in close connection with the transition to cremation, a chariot is sometimes burned on the pyre or represented in the burial by one of its parts. This new type of chariot burial was not adopted in Britain. This book is based solely on funerary data and as such it gives a one-sided view of the societies under study. Future research should integrate many other aspects, like settlement data, means of subsistence and technology. At first sight, settlements in East Yorkshire and in northern Gaul differ considerably, but this image is mainly based on the shape of houses. When settlement structures as a whole are studied, they may potentially offer interesting parallels. More specifically it would be worthwhile investigating to what extent the evolution from open to enclosed settlements on both sides of the Channel can be interrelated. Settlement data for the fourth and third centuries BC in northern Gaul are relatively scarce compared to those of earlier and later periods, but new data are slowly coming to light. Furthermore, exchanges in technologies between Britain and the Continent should be further explored. All the aspects of chariot building in particular are bound to offer valuable insights in terms of knowledge transfer. The picture as it arises from the funerary data only is unlikely to change dramatically following the examination of non-funerary evidence, but such studies would certainly offer additional means of understanding the nature of the relationship between the Arras Culture and northern Gaul.

168

Bibliography Classical Texts

Albert, R. and Barabási, A.-L. (2002). Statistical mechanics of complex networks, Reviews of Modern Physics 74, 47-97.

Ammianus Marcellinus, Res Gestae, translated by J.C. Rolfe (Loeb Classical Library), London: William Heinemann Ltd, 1950 (1963-1964 reprint).

Aldhouse-Green, M.J. (2006). Boudicca Britannia, Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.

Appian, Roman History (IV. The Gallic History), translated by H. White (Loeb Classical Library), London: William Heinemann Ltd; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1912 (1964 reprint).

Allen, J. (2006). Hostages and hostage-taking in the Roman Empire, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Caesar, The Gallic War (DBG – De Bello Gallico), translated by H.J. Edwards (Loeb Classical Library), Cambridge, MA, and London: Harvard University Press, 1917 (2006 reprint).

Amalou, T. and Bulard, A. (1989). Les sépultures laténiennes de «La Grande Tour» à Argenteuil (Vald’Oise), Revue archéologique du Centre de la France 28 (1), 15-21.

Diodorus of Sicily, Library of History, translated by C.H. Oldfather (Loeb Classical Library), London: William Heinemann Ltd; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Anastassov, J., Gergova, D., Desideri, J., Méniel, P., Kottas, G. and Besse, M. (2017). Nouvelles découvertes laténiennes à Sboryanovo (Bulgarie), Bulletin de l’Association française pour l’étude de l’âge du fer (AFEAF) 35, 61-65.

Diogenes Laertius, Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, translated by R.D. Hicks (Loeb Classical Library), London: William Heinemann Ltd; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1925 (1966 reprint).

Anthoons, G. (2011). Migration and elite networks as modes of cultural exchange in Iron Age Europe: a case study of contacts between the Continent and the Arras Culture, Unpublished PhD thesis, Bangor University.

Dio Chrysostom, Discourses, translated by H.L. Crosby (Loeb Classical Library), London: William Heinemann Ltd; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1946 (1956 reprint).

Arnold, B. (2005). Mobile Men, Sedentary Women? Material culture as a marker of regional and supraregional interaction in early Iron Age southwest Germany. In: Dobrzanska, H., Megaw, J.V.S. and Poleska, P. (eds), Celts on the Margin: Studies in European Cultural Interaction 7th c. BC - 1st c. AD. Essays in Honor of Zenon Wozniak, Krakow: Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of the Sciences, 17-26.

Justinus, Epitome of the Pompeius Trogus’ ‘Philippic Histories’, translated by Rev. J.S. Watson, London: Henry G. Bohn, 1853 [http://www.attalus.org/translate/ justin3.html]. Polyaenus, Stratagems, originally translated by R. Shepherd but revised

Atha, M. (2004). Inhumation and inhabitation: exploring the changing expressions of household-communitylandscape ties in the later Iron Age of East Yorkshire, Unpublished paper, delivered at the Iron Age Research Students Seminar 2004, University of York.

[http://www.attalus.org/translate/polyaenus4B.html]. Polybius, The Histories, translated by W.R. Paton, revised by F.W. Walbank and C. Habicht (Loeb Classical Library), Cambridge, MA, and London: Harvard University Press, 1922 (revised edition 2010).

Atlas de l’Architecture et du Patrimoine de la Seine-SaintDenis (s.d.). Image 210 [https://patrimoine.seinesaintdenis.fr/spip. php?page=document&id_document=210] Image 220 [https://patrimoine.seinesaintdenis.fr/spip. php?page=document&id_document=220]

Pomponius Mela, De Situ Orbis, 3.2.18-19 - fragment translated by Ph. Freeman and J.T. Koch (see Koch 2003: 31-32). Tacitus, Agricola - Germania, translated by A.R. Birley (Oxford World’s Classics), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Baray, L. (1997a). Le cimetière protohistorique d’Abbeville «La Sole de Baillon» (Somme): présentation liminaire des fouilles récentes de l’autoroute A16 nord, Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française 94 (2) 274-81.

Modern sources Adams, S. (2013). The First Brooches in Britain: from Manufacture to Deposition in the Early and Middle Iron Age, Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Leicester.

Baray, L. (1997b). Les tombes aristocratiques de la Tène C2 de Bouchon «Le Rideau Miquet» (Somme): présentation

169

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent liminaire des fouilles récentes de l’autoroute A16 nord, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 27 (1), 113-26.

siècle avant J.-C.), Revue archéologique de Picardie 1, 66-73.

Baray, L. (1998). Les cimetières à crémation de la basse vallée de la Somme d’après les découvertes de l’autoroute A16 nord. In: Brunaux, J.-L., LemanDelerive, G. and Pommepuy, C. (eds), Les rites de la mort en Gaule du nord à l’âge du Fer: Actes de la table-ronde de Ribemont-sur-Ancre, 4-5 décembre 1997, Revue archéologique de Picardie 1-2, 211-32.

Blancquaert, G. and Desfossés, Y. (1998). La nécropole gauloise à incinération de La Calotterie «La Fontaine aux Linottes» (Pas-de-Calais). In: Brunaux J.-L., Leman-Delerive G. and Pommepuy C. (eds), Les rites de la mort en Gaule du Nord à l’âge du Fer, les rites funéraires en Gaule Belgique, Actes de la table-ronde de Ribemont-sur-Ancre, 4 et 5 décembre 199), Revue archéologique de Picardie 1-2, 135-62.

Baray, L. (2016). Sociétés celtiques et mercenaires (VIIeIer siècle av. J.-C.). La terre, le pouvoir et les hommes, Paris: CNRS Éditions.

Bloemers, T. (1986). A cart burial from a small Middle Iron Age cemetery in Nijmegen. In: Van Bakel M.A., Hagesteijn R.R. and Van de Velde P. (eds), Private Politics. A multi-disciplinary approach to ‘Big-Man’ systems (= Studies in Human Society 1), Leiden: University of Leiden, 76-95.

Baray, L. and Sarrazin, J.-P. (2013). La sépulture à char de La Tène A ancienne des « Craises » à Molinons (Yonne), Revue archéologique de l’Est 62, 5-52 [https://halshs. archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01105333].

Bonnabel, L. (2010). Dépôt de corps humains en structures réutilisées (ou détournées?) durant la Protohistoire en Champagne-Ardenne: approche comparative avec les sépultures et éléments d’interprétation. In: Baray L. and Boulestin B., Morts anormaux et sépultures bizarres. Les dépôts humains en fosses circulaires et en silos du Néolithique à l’âge du Fer. Actes de la IIe tableronde interdisciplinaire «Morts anormaux et sépultures bizarres: questions d’interprétation en archéologie funéraire», 29 mars -1 avril 2006, Sens, Dijon: Editions Universitaires de Dijon, 99-112.

Barth, F. (ed.) (1969). Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. The Social Organization of Cultural Difference, London: Allen and Unwin. Bataille, G., Kaurin, J. and Marion, S. (2014). Une archéologie de la guerre au second âge du Fer (fin du IVe siècle av. – début du Ier siècle ap. J.-C.). In: Buchsenschutz, O., Dutour, O. and Mordant, C., Archéologie de la violence et de la guerre dans les sociétés pré et protohistoriques, CTHS, Edition électronique [halshs-01517096]. BBC (2005). Iron Age artefacts found in a dig [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/ lincolnshire/4187591.stm]

Botté, A. (2019). La panoplie du guerrier en Normandie du IIIe siècle au Ier siècle avant J.-C.: Typologies et fonctions des armements, La Plaine Saint-Denis: Edilivre.

Bélard, C. (2014). Les femmes en Champagne pendant l’âge du fer (dernier tiers du Vie-IIIe siècle av. J.-C.) et la notion de genre en archéologie funéraire, Unpublished PhD thesis, École Pratiques des Hautes Études, Paris [https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01149698].

Bourgeois, Q., Amkreutz, L. and Panhuysen R. (2009). The Niersen Beaker burial: A renewed study of a century-old excavation, Journal of Archaeology in the Low Countries 1-2, 83-105.

Bell, S. and Willekes, C. (2014). Horse racing and chariot racing. In: Campbell, G.L., The Oxford Handbook of animals in classical thought and life, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 478-90.

Boyle, A. (2004). Riding into history, British Archaeology 76, 22-7. Bradley, R. (2007). The prehistory of Britain and Ireland, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Benz, M., Strahm, C. and Van Willigen S. (1998). Le Campaniforme: phénomène et culture archéologique, Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française 95 (3), 305-14.

Brailsford, J.W. (1953). Later prehistoric antiquities of the British Isles, London: The Trustees of the British Museum. Bremmer, J. N. (1976). Avunculate and Fosterage, Journal of Indo-European Studies 4, 65–78.

Bevan, B. (1999). Land-Life-Death-Regeneration: interpreting a middle Iron Age landscape in Eastern Yorkshire. In: Bevan, B. (ed.), Northern Exposure: interpretative devolution and the Iron Ages in Britain (= Leicester Archaeology Monographs 4), Leicester: University of Leicester, 123-47. Birkhan, H. (1997). Kelten, Wien: Verlag Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Bretz-Mahler, D. (1971). La Civilisation de La Tène en Champagne (= Gallia suppl. 13), Paris: Editions CNRS. Brewster, T.C.M. (1963). The excavation of Staple Howe, Malton: The East Riding Archaeological Research Committee.

der

Brewster, T.C.M. (1971). The Garton Slack Chariot Burial, Antiquity 45 (180), 289-92.

Blanchet, J.-C. (1983). Une petite nécropole du début de La Tène moyenne à Mory-Montcrux (Oise). In: Les Celtes dans le Nord du Bassin Parisien (Vième – Ier

Brewster, T.C.M. (1975). Archaeology 51, 104-16. 170

Garton

Slack,

Current

Bibliography Brewster, T.C.M. (1980). The excavation of Garton and Wetwang Slacks, Malton, East Riding Archaeological Research Committee, published as a microfiche by the Royal Commission of Historical Monuments (English Heritage microfiche 1980J, 43).

Buckland, P.C., Greig, J.R.A., Frederick, C., Wagner, P. and Beal, C.J. (2006). The Iron Age and Roman Landscape. In: Stead, I.M., Flouest, J.-L. and Rigby, V., Iron Age and Roman burials in Champagne, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 133-56.

Brewster, T.C.M. (1981). The Devil’s Hill, Current Archaeology 76, 140-41.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1974). Nécropole de La Tène I à Hamipré, Offaing. I. Trois tombes à char (= Archaeologia Belgica 162), Bruxelles: Service National des Fouilles.

Brisson, A. and Hatt, J.-J. (1955). Cimetières gaulois et gallo-romains à enclos en Champagne. I. Le cimetière de l’Homme Mort, à Ecury-le-Repos (Marne), Revue archéologique de l’Est 6, 313-33.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1979). Nécropole et site d’habitat de La Tène à Longlier-Massul. Fouilles de A. CahenDelhaye, P.-P. Bonenfant et A. Geubel, Archaeologia Belgica 218, 16-21, 27.

Brisson, A. and Hatt, J.-J. (1960). Le cimetière de la Fin d’Ecury à Fère-Champenoise (Marne), Revue archéologique de l’Est 11, 7-23.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1981). Tombelles de La Tène à Léglise. I. Inventaire (= Archaeologica Belgica 245), Bruxelles: Service National des Fouilles.

Brisson, A. and Hatt, J.-J. (1969). Le cimetière de la Tempête à Normée (Marne), Mémoires de la Société d’Agriculture, Commerce, Sciences et Arts de la Marne 84, 21-37.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1990). Sépulture à char gauloise à Estinnes-au-Mont (Hainaut Belge). In: Les Celtes en France du Nord et en Belgique, VIe-Ier siècle avant J.-C., Catalogue d’exposition, Valenciennes, 113-16.

Brisson, A., Hatt, J.-J. and Roualet, P. (1970). Cimetière de Fère-Champenoise, Faubourg de Connantre, Mémoires de la Société d’Agriculture, Commerce, Sciences et Arts de la Marne 85, 5-26.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1991a). L’âge du bronze. In: Archéologie en Ardenne. De la Préhistoire au XVIIIe siècle, Catalogue de l’exposition du centre touristique et culturel de Vresse (9 juin - 29 septembre 1991), Bruxelles: Crédit Communal, 53-56.

British Museum (s.d.). Mirror Wetwang Village chariot burial, object number 2001,0401.19, Curator’s Comments [https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/ object/H_2001-0401-19]. [https://www.northernarchaeologicalassociates.co.uk/ iron-age-sword-0].

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1991b). Les sépultures de La Tène. In: Archéologie en Ardenne. De la Préhistoire au XVIIIe siècle, Catalogue de l’exposition du centre touristique et culturel de Vresse (9 juin - 29 septembre 1991), Bruxelles: Crédit Communal, 65-86.

Brodie, N. (1997). New perspectives on the Bell-Beaker Culture, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 16 (3), 297314.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1992). Deux tombelles de La Tène I à Juseret-Bercheux (Luxembourg). Fouilles de P.-P. Bonenfant en 1966-67, Archéo-Situla 13-16, 23-42.

Brown, F., Howard-Davis, C., Brennand, M., Boyle, A., Evans, T., O’Connor, S., Spence, A., Heawood, R. and Lupton, A. (2007). The Archaeology of the A1 (M) Darrington to Dishforth DBFO Road Scheme, Lancaster: Oxford Archaeology North.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1993). Deux tombes à char du Ve et IIe siècle avant J.-C. à Libramont - Sberchamps (Lux.), Lunula. Archaeologia protohistorica I, 18-20.

Britton, C. (s.d.). Iron Age Sword Burstwick

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1997). Nécropole de La Tène à Neufchâteau-Le-Sart (= Monographie d’ Archéologie Nationale 10), Bruxelles: Musées Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire.

Brück, J. (2004). Material metaphors. The relational construction of identity in Early Bronze Age burials in Ireland and Britain, Journal of Social Archaeology 4 (3): 307-33.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1998a). Les rites funéraires laténiens en Ardenne belge. In: Leman-Delerive, G. (ed.), Les Celtes: rites funéraires en Gaule du Nord entre le Vie et le Ier siècle avant Jésus-Christ. Recherches récentes en Wallonie (= Etudes et Documents, série Fouilles 4), Namur: Direction de l’Archéologie, Ministère de la Region wallonne, 15-30.

Brun, P. (2002). Territoire et agglomérations chez les Suessiones. In: Garcia, D. and Verdin, F. (eds.), Territoires celtiques: espaces ethniques et territoires des agglomérations protohistoriques d’Europe occidentale. XXIVe colloque international de l’AFEAF, Martigues, 2000, Paris: Errance, 306-14.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1998b). Rites funéraires au sud de l’Ardenne belge, Revue archéologique de Picardie, 1-2, 59-70.

Brunaux, J.-L. (1996). Chronologie et Histoire: les lieux de culte dans la genèse du Belgium, Revue Archéologique de Picardie 3-4, 209-21.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (1999). Tombes à char du Ve siècle en Ardenne belge. In: Villes, A. and Bataille-Melkon, A. (eds), Fastes des Celtes entre Champagne et Bourgogne aux VIIe-IIIe siècles avant notre ère. Actes du colloque

Buchanan, M. (2002). Nexus: small worlds and the groundbreaking science of networks, New York and London: W.W. Norton and Company. 171

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Celebrating the Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 16378.

de l’AFEAF tenu à Troyes en 1995, Mémoire de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 15, suppl. to bulletin 4, 391-410.

Charles-Edwards, T.M. (1993). Early Irish and Welsh Kinship, Oxford: Oxford University Press (2003 reprint).

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (2013). Les tombes à char de La Tène en Ardenne belge. Contribution à l’architecture et aux pratiques funéraires, Revue du Nord 403, 25-52.

Charles-Edwards, T.M. (2000). Early Christian Ireland, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2004 reprint).

Cahen-Delhaye, A. (2014). Trois tombelles de La Tène I à Sberchamps-Savenière (Libramont-Chevigny) en Ardenne belge, Archéo-Situla 34, 43-102.

Charles-Edwards, T.M. (2005). Early Irish Law. In: Ó Cróinín, D. (ed.), A New History of Ireland: Prehistoric and Early Ireland, Oxford: Oxford University Press (2008 reprint), chapter X, 331-70.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. and Geubel, A. (1976). Tombelles de La Tène à Hamipré, Namoussart, Archaeologia Belgica 189, 24-6, 32.

Charles-Edwards, T.M. (2009). Celtic kings: priestly vegetables. In: Baxter, S., Karkov, C., Nelson, J.L. and Pelteret D. (eds), Early medieval studies in memory of Patrick Wormald (Studies in Early Medieval Britain), Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 65-80.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. and Hurt, V. (1985). Deux tombelles celtiques à Witry, Archaeologia Belgica I, 82-6, 89-92. Cahen-Delhaye, A. and Hurt, V. (1994), Reconstitution d’un char à deux roues de La Tène, Lunula. Archaeologia protohistorica II, 47-50.

Charpy, J.-J. (1998). Comparaison entre les fibules de Münsingen du site éponyme et celles de Champagne. In: Müller F. (ed.), Münsingen-Rain, ein Markstein der keltischen Archäologie. Funde, Befunde und Methoden im Vergleich: Akten Internationales Kolloquium „Das keltische Gräberfeld von Münsingen-Rain 1906-1996“, Münsingen/Bern, 9.-12. Oktober 1996, Bern: Verlag Bernisches Historisches Museum, 213-25.

Cahen-Delhaye, A. and Hurt, V. (2013). La nécropole de La Tène ancienne à Léglise-Gohimont (= Artefacts 11), Libramont: CRAA, Centre de recherche archéologiques en Ardenne; Treignes: Cedarc. Cahen-Delhaye, A. and Gratia, H. (2015). Une tombelle celtique à deux chars et enclos à Sberchamps-Au Fersay (Libramont-Chevigny, province de Luxembourg, Belgique), Archéo-Situla 35, 21-81.

Charpy, J.-J. (2001). Les Celtes dans la Marne, Exposition réalisée dans la cadre du programme culturel “Marne, Pays d’histoires 2001-2003”, Imprimerie du Conseil Général de la Marne.

Cahen-Delhaye, A., Hurt, V. and Gratia, H. (1989). Une tombelle celtique exceptionelle à Sberchamps, ArchéoSitula 4, 21-30.

Charpy, J.-J. (2006). Les Celtes en Champagne aux IVe et IIIe siècles avant J.-C., questions d’identités et de migrations. In: Kruta, V., Leman-Delerive, G. and Warmenbol, E. (eds), Celtes: Belges, Boïens, Rèmes, Volques…, Catalogue d’ exposition, Mariemont: Musée Royal de Mariemont, 138-52.

Cahen-Delhaye, A., Jadin, I. and Gratia, H. (1987). Tombelle à enclos de La Tène à Tournay (comm. de Neuchâteau), Archaeologia Belgica III, 97-100. Cahen-Delhaye, A., Van Pamel, P. and Cahen, D. (1986) Sauvetage d’une sépulture à char de La Tène III à Estinnes, Archaeologia Belgica II, 41-5.

Charpy, J.-J. (2009). La question de la continuité ou de la discontinuité dans les nécropoles celtiques de la Champagne. In: Pinard, E. and Desenne, S. (eds), Actes de la table-ronde «Les gestuelles funéraires au second âge du Fer» tenue à Soissons les 6 et 7 novembre 2008, Revue Archéologique de Picardie 3-4, 71-83.

Cameron, C.M. (2011). Captives and Culture Changes: Implications for Archaeology, Current Anthropology 52 (2), 169-209. Carter, S. and Hunter, F. (2003a). An Iron Age chariot burial from Scotland, Antiquity 77 (297), 531-5.

Childe, V.G. (1929). The Danube in prehistory, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Carter, S. and Hunter, F. (2003b). The Newbridge chariot, Current Archaeology 178, 413-5.

Childe, V.G. (1940). Prehistoric Communities of the British Isles, London and Edinburgh: W. and R. Chambers Ltd. (1952 reprint).

Carter, S., Hunter, F. and Smith, A. (2010). A 5th century BC Iron Age chariot burial from Newbridge, Edinburgh, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 76, 31-74.

Childe, V.G. (1945). Directional Changes in Funerary Practices During 50,000 Years, Man 45, 13-9.

CELT (s.d.). Corpus of Electronic Texts, University College Cork [https://celt.ucc.ie/].

Chittock, H. (2016). Pattern and Purpose in Iron Age East Yorkshire, Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Southampton.

Challis, A.J. and Harding, D.W. (1975). Later prehistory from the Trent to the Tyne (= British Archaeological Reports, British Series 20), Oxford: BAR Publishing.

Chittock, H. (2019). Iron Age antiques: Assessing the functions of old objects in Britain from 400 BC to AD 100. In: Knight, M.G., Boughton, D. and Wilkinson,

Champion, T. (2020). A view from the South. In: Halkon, P. (ed.), The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire. 172

Bibliography R.E. (eds), Objects of the Past in the Past: Investigating the significance of earlier artefacts in later contexts, Oxford: Archaeopress Publishing.

Crisp, R.P. (2003). Marriage and Alliance in the Merovingian Kingdoms, 481-639. PhD dissertation, University of Ohio [http://etd.ohiolink.edu/send-pdf. cgi?osu1063646754].

Chittock, H. (2020). Pattern and plainness in middle Iron Age East Yorkshire. In: Halkon, P. (ed.), The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 123-32.

Crowfoot, E. (1991). The textiles. In: Stead, I.M., Iron Age Cemeteries in East Yorkshire. Excavations at Burton Fleming, Rudston, Garton-on-the-Wolds, and Kirkburn (= English Heritage Archaeological Report 22), London: English Heritage, 119-25.

Chossenot, M. (1997). Recherches sur La Tène moyenne et finale en Champagne, Mémoire de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 12.

Cunliffe, B. (2005). Iron Age communities in Britain, London and New York: Routledge (fourth edition).

Chossenot, M., Chossenot, D. and Neiss R. (1985). 250 tombes à char en Champagne. In : Les tombes à char des princes et guerriers celtes, Dossiers histoire et archéologie 98, 22-5.

Czarnetzki, A. (1979). Anthropologischer Bericht über die Skelettreste aus den frühlatènezeitlichen Wagengräbern von Mülheim-Kärlich, Kreis Mayen-Koblenz. In: Beiträge zur Urgeschichte des Rheinlandes III (= Rheinische Ausgrabungen 19), Köln: RheinlandVerlag, 557-60.

Clark, G. (1941). Prehistoric England, London: B.T. Batsford Ltd (second edition). Clark, G. (1966a), The Invasion Hypothesis in British Archaeology, Antiquity 40 (159), 172-89.

Desbrosse, V., Moreau, C., Riquier, V. and Saurel, M. (2013). Champagne-Ardennes. In: Malrain, G., Blancquaert, G. and Lorho, T. (eds). L’habitat rural du second âge du Fer. Rythmes de création et d’abandon au nord de la Loire (= Recherches archéologiques 7), Paris: INRAP / CNRS Éditions.

Clark, G. (1966b), British Prehistory: The Invasion Hypothesis, Antiquity 40 (160), 298-9. Collar, A. (2007). Network theory and religious innovation, Mediterranean Historical Review 22 (1), 149-62.

Deffressigne, S. and Villes, A., 1995. Estissac (Aube) «La Côte d’Ervaux», sépulture à char. In: Fastes des Celtes anciens. Catalogue des expositions des musées de Troyes et Nogent-sur-Seine, 59-68.

Collis, J. (1994). Reconstructing Iron Age Society. In: Kristiansen, K. and Jensen, J. (eds) , Europe in the First Millennium B.C. (= Sheffield Archaeological Monographs 6), Sheffield: J.R. Collis Publications, 3139.

Delattre, V. (2000). De la relégation sociale à l’hypothèse des offrandes: l’exemple des dépôts en silos protohistoriques au confluent Seine-Yonne (Seine-etMarne), Revue archéologique du Centre de la France 39, 5-30.

Collis, J. (1999). Tombes à char “belges”? In: Villes, A. and Bataille-Melkon, A. (eds), Fastes des Celtes entre Champagne et Bourgogne aux VIIe-IIIe siècles avant notre ère. Actes du colloque de l’AFEAF tenu à Troyes en 1995, Mémoire de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 15, suppl. to bulletin 4, 411-18.

Demarez, L. and Leman-Delerive, G. (2001). A linch-pin of British type found at Blicquy (Hainaut, Belgium), The Antiquaries Journal 81, 391-5.

Cooper, A., Garrow, D., Gibson, C. and Giles, M. (2019). Covering the Dead in Later Prehistoric Britain: Elusive Objects and Powerful Technologies of Funerary Performance, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 85, 223–50.

Demoule, J.-P. (1999). Chronologie et société dans les nécropoles celtiques de la culture Aisne-Marne du VIe au IIIe siècle avant notre ère, Revue Archéologique de Picardie, special issue 15.

Corradini, N. (1991). La céramique peinte à décor curviligne rouge et noir en Champagne: approche technologique et chronologique. In: La céramique peinte celtique dans son context européen. Actes du symposium international d’Hautvillers, 9-11 octobre 1987, Mémoire de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 5, suppl. to bulletin 1, 109-42.

Dent, J.S. (1982). Cemeteries and Settlement Patterns of the Iron Age on the Yorkshire Wolds, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 48, 437-57. Dent, J.S. (1983a). Weapons, wounds and war in the Iron Age, Archaeological Journal 140, 120-8. Dent, J.S. (1983b). A summary of the excavations carried out in Garton Slack and Wetwang Slack 1964-1980, East Riding Archaeologist 7, 1-14.

Cosyns, P. and Hurt V. (2007). Les perles en verre de Neufchâteau-le-Sart. Arduinna 62, 1–5.

Dent, J.S. (1984). Wetwang Slack: an Iron Age cemetery on the Yorkshire Wolds. Postgraduate dissertation for the degree of Master of Philosophy, University of Sheffield.

Creighton, J. (1995). Visions of Power: Imagery and Symbols in Late Iron Age Britain, Britannia 26, 285301. Creighton, J. (2000). Coins and Power in Late Iron Britain, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dent, J.S. (1985). Three cart burials from Wetwang, Yorkshire, Antiquity 59 (226), 85-92. 173

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Dent, J.S. (1988). Some problems of continuity in rural settlement. In: Manby, T.G. (ed.), Archaeology in Eastern Yorkshire: essays in honour of T.C.M. Brewster, Sheffield: J.R. Collis Publications, 94-100.

(province de Luxembourg, Belgique) (= Artefacts 14), Treignes: Éditions du Cedarc. Draily, C., Vrielynck, O. and Hanut, F. (2021). Nouvelles découvertes dans le groupe septentrional des tombelles de l’Ardenne belge. Lien avec l’HunsrückEifel Kultur. In: Koch, M. (ed.), Archäologie in der Großregion: Beiträge des internationalen Symposiums zur Archäologie in der Großregion in der Europäischen Akademie Otzenhausen vom 12. - 15. April 2018 (= Archäologentage Otzenhausen – Archäologie in der Großregion 5), Heidelberg: Propylaeum.

Dent, J.S. (1995). Aspects of Iron Age settlement in East Yorkshire. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sheffield. Dent, J.S. (2010). The Iron Age in East Yorkshire. An analysis of the later prehistoric monuments of the Yorkshire Wolds and the culture which marked their final phase (= British Archaeological Reports, British Series 508), Oxford: BAR Publishing.

Dubuis, B., Josset, D., Millet, E. and Villenave, C. (2015). La tombe princière du Ve siècle avant notre ère de Lavau « ZAC du Moutot » (Aube), Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française 112 (2), 371-74.

Dent, J.S. (2020). Excavations in Garton Slack and Wetwang Slack 1963-1989. In: Halkon, P. (ed.), The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 33-46.

Dubuis, B. and Garcia, D. (2015). Les contacts entre la Méditerranée archaïque et le monde celtique: le cas de la tombe de Lavau (Aube), Comptes rendus de l’Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres III, 1185-1212 [https://www.persee.fr/doc/crai_00650536_2015_num_159_3_94852].

Desenne, S., Collard, J.-L., Auxiette, G., Martin, G. and Rapin A. (2005). Orainville «La Croyère» (Aisne). Un ensemble attribuable au Aisne-Marne IV. In: Hommages à Claudine Pommepuy, Revue archéologique de Picardie 22, 233-87.

Duval, A. and Blanchet, J.-C. (1974). La tombe à char d’Attichy (Oise), Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française 71, 401-08.

Desenne, S. and Thouvenot, S. (2007). Fluctuations internes de la complexité sociale au sein de la culture «Aisne-Marne», Archéopages 19, 9-13.

Duval, P.M. (1961). Paris antique. Des origines au troisième siècle, Paris: Hermann.

Desenne, S., Pommepuy, C. and Demoule, J.-P. (eds), Bucy-le-long (Aisne, France) : une nécropole de la Tène ancienne (Ve-IVe s. avant notre ère), Revue archéologique de Picardie, special issue 26-1.

Fabian, J. (1983). Time and the Other. How Anthropology makes its object, New York: Columbia University Press (cited in Giles 2000: 160-02).

Detaille, J. and Van Eerdenbrugh, B. (2014). Chercheurs d’or en Belgique: miettes des miettes, s.l. [https://agab.be/orpaillage/indexorpaillage.html].

Fenton-Thomas, C. (2003). Late prehistoric and early historic landscapes of the Yorkshire Chalk (= British Archaeological Reports, British Series 350), Oxford: BAR Publishing.

Dickson, A. and Hopkinson, G. (2011). Holes in the Landscape: the results of seventeen years of archaeological investigations at Nosterfield Quarry, North Yorkshire [www.archaeologicalplanningconsultancy.co.uk/ thornborough/pdf/holes_in_the_landscape.pdf].

Fenton-Thomas, C. (2011). Where Sky and Yorkshire and Water Meet. The Story of the Melton Landscape from Prehistory to the Present, York: Onsite Archaeology. Fernández-Götz, M. (2020). Migrations in Iron Age Europe: a comparative view. In: Halkon, P. (ed.), The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 179-99.

Diepeveen-Jansen, M. (2001). People, Ideas and Goods. New Perspectives on ‘Celtic Barbarians’ in Western and Central Europe (500-250 BC) (= Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 7), Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Flanagan, M.T. (2003). High-kings with opposition 1072-1166. In: Ō Cróinín, D. (ed.), A New History of Ireland: Prehistoric and Early Ireland, Oxford: Oxford University Press (2008 reprint), chapter XXVI, 899933.

Diepeveen-Jansen, M. (2007). Early La Tène burial practices and social (re)constructions in the MarneMoselle region. In: Haselgrove, C. and Pope, R., The Earlier Iron Age in Britain and the near Continent, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 374-89.

Flouest, J.-L. (1984). Les tombes à char de La Tène en Champagne-Ardenne. Résultats des recherches effectuées entre 1938 et 1983. In: Guštin, M. and Pauli, L., Keltski Voz (= Posvski muzej Brežice 6), Brežice: Posvski muzej, 61-69.

Dobesch, G. (1980). Die Kelten in Österreich nach den ältesten Berichten der Antike. Das norische Königreich und seine Beziehungen zu Rom im 2. Jahrhundert v. Chr., Wien and Graz: Böhlau.

Flouest, J.-L. and Stead, I.M. (1977). Une tombe de La Tène III à Hannogne (Ardennes), Mémoires de la Société d’Agriculture, Commerce, Sciences et Arts de la Marne 92, 55-72.

Draily, C. and Vrielynck, O. (2017). Fouilles 2009-2015 de la nécropole celtique à tombelles de Bovigny Hastape

174

Bibliography Flouest, J.-L. and Stead, I.M. (1985). Une tombe à char sans char. In: Les tombes à char des princes et guerriers celtes, Dossiers Histoire et Archéologie 98, 26-27.

Yorkshire. In: Haselgrove, C. and Moore, T., The Later Iron Age in Britain and Beyond, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 235-49.

Fol, A. (1991). The chariot burial at Mezek. In: Moscati, S., Frey, O.-H., Kruta, V., Rafferty, B. and Szabó, M. (eds), The Celts, Milano: Bompiani, 384-85.

Giles, M. (2007c). Making metal and forging relations: ironworking in the British Iron Age, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 26 (4), 395-413.

Fox, C. (1938). The personality of Britain. Its Influence on inhabitant and invader in prehistoric and early historic times, Cardiff: National Museum of Wales and the Press Board of the University of Wales (third revised edition, first published in 1932).

Giles, M. (2008a). Seeing red: the aesthetics of martial objects in the British and Irish Iron Age. In: Garrow, D., Gosden, C. and Hill, J.D. (eds), Rethinking Celtic Art, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 59-77. Giles, M. (2008b). Identity, Community and the Person in Later Prehistory. In: Pollard, J. (ed.), Prehistoric Britain (= Blackwell Studies in Global Archaeology 11), Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, chapter 15, 330-50.

Frey, O.-H. (2004). A new approach to early Celtic art, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy C 104 (5), 107–29. Gaudefroy, S., Gransar, F. and Malrain, F. (2013). La Picardie. In: Malrain, G., Blancquaert, G. and Lorho, T. (eds). L’habitat rural du second âge du Fer. Rythmes de création et d’abandon au nord de la Loire (= Recherches archéologiques 7), Paris: Inrap / CNRS Éditions.

Giles, M. (2012). A Forged Glamour. Landscape, Identity and Material Culture in the Iron Age, Oxford: Windgather Press, Oxbow Books. Giles, M. and Joy, J. (2007). Mirrors in the British Iron Age: performance, revelation and power. In: Anderson M. (ed.), The Book of the Mirror: An Interdisciplinary Collection Exploring the Cultural Story of the Mirror, Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press, 16-31.

Garrow, D., Gosden, C., Hill, J.D. and Bronk Ramsey, C. (2009). Dating Celtic Art: a Major Radiocarbon Dating Programme of Iron Age and Early Roman Metalwork in Britain, Archaeological Journal 166, 79-123.

Giles, M., Green, V. and Peixoto, P. (2020). Wide connections: women, mobility and power in Iron Age East Yorkshire. In: Halkon, P. (ed.), The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 47-66.

Garrow, D. and Gosden, C. (2012). Technologies of Enchantment? Exploring Celtic Art: 400 BC to AD 100, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gent, H. (1983). Centralized storage in later prehistoric Britain, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 49, 24367.

Gillet, E., Paridaens, N. and Demarez, L. (2006). Le sanctuaire de Blicquy «Ville d’Anderlecht» (Prov. Hainaut, Belgique). Itinéraire d’une topographie religieuse dans la cité des Nerviens. In: DondinPayre, M. and Raepsaet-Charlier, M.-T., Sanctuaires, pratiques cultuelles et territoires civiques dans l’Occident romain, Bruxelles: CReA-patrimoine, 181215.

Gerriets, M. (1983). Economy and society: clientship according to the Irish Laws, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies 6, 43-61. Gerriets, M. (1987). Kingship and exchange in pre-Viking Ireland, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies 13, 39-72. Gerritsen, F. (2003). Local identities. Landscape and Community in the Late Prehistoric Meuse-DemerScheldt Region (= Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 9), Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Ginoux, N. (2002a). Les sources du peuplement de l’Îlede-France à l’époque gauloise dans le contexte des nécropoles. In: Bulard, A., Delattre, V. and Séguier, J.M. (eds), Les Celtes en Île-de-France, Dossiers d’Archéologie 273, 10-15.

Giles, M. (2000). ‘Open-weave, close-knit’. Archaeologies of Identity in the later prehistoric landscape of East Yorkshire. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sheffield.

Ginoux, N. (2002b). Les productions iconographiques. In: Bulard, A., Delattre, V. and Séguier, J.M. (eds), Les Celtes en Île-de-France, Dossiers d’Archéologie 273, 20-23.

Giles, M. (2006). Collecting the Past, Constructing Identity: The Antiquarian John Mortimer and The Driffield Museum of Antiquities and Geological Specimens, The Archaeological Journal 86: 279-316.

Ginoux, N. (2003). L’excellence guerrière et l’ornementation des armes aux IVe et IIIe s. av. J.-C. Découvertes récentes, Etudes Celtiques 35, 33-67.

Giles, M. (2007a). Refiguring rights in the Early Iron Age landschapes of East Yorkshire. In: Haselgrove, C. and Pope, R., The Earlier Iron Age in Britain and the near Continent, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 103-18.

Ginoux, N. (2007). Le thème symbolique de la paire de dragons sur les fourreaux celtiques (IVe – IIe siècles avant J.-C.). Etude iconographique et typologie (= British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1702), Oxford: BAR Publishing.

Giles, M. (2007b). Good fences make good neighbours? Exploring the ladder enclosures of Late Iron Age East 175

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Granovetter, M.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties, American Journal of Sociology, 78 (6), 1360-80.

Ginoux, N. (2009). Elites guerrières au nord de la Seine au début du IIIe siècle av. J.-C. La nécropole celtique du Plessis-Gassot (Val-d’Oise) (= Revue du Nord hors série Collection Art et Archéologie 15), Lille: Université Charles-de-Gaulle – Lille 3.

Granovetter, M.S. (1983). The strength of weak ties: a network theory revisited, Sociological Theory 1, 20133.

Ginoux, N. (2017). Organisation et structuration territoriale des Parisii Continentaux. Un état de la recherche, Etudes Celtiques 43, 7-34.

Gransar, F. (2002). Le stockage alimentaire à l’âge du Fer en Europe tempérée, Unpublished PhD thesis, Université de Paris I (cited in Haselgrove 2007: 41718).

Ginoux, N., Leman-Delerive, G. and Séverin, C. (2009). Le dépôt de pièces de char dans les tombes de Gaule Belgique entre le IIIe et le Ier S. avant J.-C. In: Pinard, E. and Desenne, S. (eds), Actes de la table-ronde «Les gestuelles funéraires au second âge du Fer» tenue à Soissons les 6 et 7 novembre 2008, Revue Archéologique de Picardie 3-4, 211-22.

Gransar, M. (2009). La nécropole gauloise de Bucy-leLong «Le Fond du petit Marais» (Aisne). In : Pinard, E. and Desenne, S. (eds), Actes de la table-ronde « Les gestuelles funéraires au second âge du Fer » tenue à Soissons les 6 et 7 novembre 2008, Revue Archéologique de Picardie 3-4, 269-72.

Ginoux, N. and Marti, F. (1999). Deux sépultures de guerriers celtes, Archéologia 358, 16-23.

Gratuze, B. and Cosyns, P. (2007). Les perles en verre de Neufchâteau-le-Sart, Arduinna 63, 1–7.

Ginoux, N. and Poux, M. (2002). Les Parisii, entre Gaule Belgique et Gaule Celtique: peuplement et territoire. In : Garcia, D. and Verdin, F. (eds), Territoires celtiques: espaces ethniques et territoires des agglomérations protohistoriques d’Europe occidentale. XXIVe colloque international de l’AFEAF, Martigues, 2000, Paris: Errance, 226-43.

Greenwell, W. (1877). British Barrows. A Record of the Examination of Sepulchral Mounds in Various Parts of England, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Greenwell, W. (1906). Early Iron Age burials in Yorkshire, Archaeologia 60, 251-324. Guadagnin, R. (1984). La nécropole celtique de Bouqueval, Jeunesse préhistorique et géologique de France 8, 1265.

Ginoux, N., Robcis, D., Leroux, M. and Dussere, F. (2014). Metal craft and Warrior Elites in the Third Century BC: New Sights from the Carpathian Basin to Gaul. In: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Crafts and Craftsmen in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, 10-13 October 2013, Târgu Mureș: Editura Mega, 9-18.

Guillaume, P. (1964). Récentes fouilles du cimetière gaulois des « Varennes » à Dormans (Marne), Bulletin de l’association régional pour l’étude et la recherche scientifique 5, 45-54. Guyonvarc’h, C.-J. and Le Roux, F. (1986). Les Druides, Rennes: Editions Ouest-France.

Ginoux, N.C. and Ramsl, P.C. (2014). Art and craftsmanship in elite-warrior graves: from Boii to Parisii and back again.... In: Gosden, C., Crawford, S. and Ulmschneider, K. (eds), Celtic art in Europe: making connections. Essays in honour of Vincent Megaw on his 80th birthday, Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Haffner, A. (1976). Die westliche Hunsrück-Eifel-Kultur (= Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 36), Berlin: De Gruyter. Haffner, A. (1977). Die Ausgrabung eisenzeitlicher Grabhügelfelder bei Bescheid, Kreis Trier-Saarburg, Kurtrierisches Jahrbuch 17.

Gleser, R. (2005). Studien zu sozialen strukturen der historischen Kelten in Mitteleuropa aufgrund der Gräberanalyse. Die keltisch-römische Nekropole von Hoppstädten-Weiersbach im Kontext latènezeitlicher Fundgruppen und römischer Okkupation (= Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 81), Bonn: Dr. Rudolf Habelt Verlag GmbH.

Haffner, A. (1979). Eine latènezeitlich-frührömische Grabhügelgruppe mit Wagenbestattung von Enkirch, Kreis Bernkastel-Wittlich, Trierer Zeitschrift 42, 63-92. Haffner,A. (1989a). Bemerkungen zum frühlatènezeitlichen Wagen von Theley im Saarland. In: Archaeologia Mosellana 1, Luxembourg: Musée National d’Histoire et d’Art, 27-40

Gohil, A.E. (2006). Ancient Celtic and non-Celtic placenames of northern continental Europe (= Mémoires de la Société Belge d’Etudes Celtiques 27), Bruxelles: Société Belge d’Etudes Celtiques.

Haffner, A. (1989b). Gräber - Spiegel des Lebens. Zum Totenbrauchtum der Kelten und Römer am Beispiel des Treverer Gräberfeldes Wederath Belginum (= Schriftenreihe des Rheinischen Landesmuseums Trier 2, Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.

Gomez de Soto, J., Querré, G., Lepaumier, H., Marion, S., and Seguin, G. (2017). Corail et objets de luxe de La Tène moyenne en Gaule non méditerranéenne: la tombe d’Orval (Manche), les fibules du type de Pleurs, l’enclos de Châteaubernard (Charente), Etudes Celtiques 43, 35-59.

Haffner, A. and Joachim, H.-E. (1984). Die keltischen Wagengräber der Mittelrheingruppe. In: Guštin, M.

176

Bibliography Hill, J.D. (1996). Hill-forts and the Iron Age of Wessex. In: Champion, T.C. and Collis, J.R. (eds), The Iron Age in Britain and Ireland: Recent Trends, Sheffield: J.R. Collis Publications (2001 reprint).

and Pauli, L., Keltski Voz (= Posvski muzej Brežice 6), Brežice: Posvski muzej, 71-87. Haffner, A. and Lage, M. (2008-2009). Die frühkeltische Fürstengrabnekropole von Bescheid, „Bei den Hübeln“, Kreis Trier-Saarburg, Trierer Zeitschrift 71/72, 27-142.

Hill, J.D. (2002). Wetwang Chariot Burial, Current Archaeology 178 (15), 410-12.

Halkon, P. (2008). Archaeology and Environment in a Changing East Yorkshire Landscape. The Foulness Valley c. 800 BC to c. AD 400 (= British Archaeological Reports, British Series 472), Oxford: BAR Publishing.

Hodson, F.R. (1960). Reflections on ‘The ABC of the British Iron Age’, Antiquity 34 (134), 138-40.

Halkon, P. (2011). Iron, Landscape and Power in Iron Age East Yorkshire, Archaeological Journal 168, 133-65.

Hodson, F.R., (1964). Cultural Grouping within the British pre-Roman Iron Age, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 30, 99-110.

Halkon, P. (2013). The Parisi: Britons and Romans in Eastern Yorkshire, Cheltenham: The History Press.

Hubert, M.H. (1902). Sépulture à char de Nanterre, L’Anthropologie 13, 66-73.

Halkon, P. and Millett, M. (1999). Rural settlement and industry: studies in the Iron Age and Roman archaeology of lowland East Yorkshire (= Yorkshire Archaeological Report 4), Leeds: Yorkshire Archaeological Society.

Hunter, F. (2005). The image of the warrior in the British Iron Age: coin iconography in context. In: Haselgrove, C. and Wigg-Wolf, D. (eds), Iron Age Coinage and Ritual Practices, Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 43-68.

Harding, D.W. (2016). Death and burial in Iron Age Britain, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hunter, F. (2020). A northern view of Arras: or, we have chariots too. In: Halkon, P. (ed.), The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 133-62.

Harding, D.W. (2017). The Iron Age in northern Britain: Britons and Romans, natives and settlers, Abingdon and New York: Routlege (second edition).

Hurt, V. (1987). Fouilles dans la nécropole celtique de Sberchamps (Com. de Libramont), Situla Arduennae 3, 5-11.

Haselgrove, C. (2007). Rethinking earlier Iron Age settlement in the eastern Paris Basin. In: Haselgrove, C. and Pope, R. (eds), The Earlier Iron Age in Britain and the Near Continent, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 400-28.

Hurt, V. (1991). La nécropole celtique de Witry. In: Archéologie en Ardenne. De la Préhistoire au XVIIIe siècle, Catalogue de l’exposition du centre touristique et culturel de Vresse (9 juin - 29 septembre 1991), Bruxelles: Crédit Communal, 65-86.

Hawkes, C. (1931). Hill-Forts, Antiquity 5 (17), 60-97. Hawkes, C. (1959). The ABC of the British Iron Age, Antiquity 33 (131), 170-82.

Hurt, V. (1992). Fouille d’une tombelle celtique à Warmifontaine (Neufchâteau, Lux.). Rapport préliminaire, Archéo-Situla 13-16, 3-45.

Hawkes, C. (1966). British Prehistory: The Invasion Hypothesis, Antiquity 40 (160), 297-98. Hawkes, C. and Hawkes, J. (1958). Prehistoric Britain, Harmondsworth: Penguin (revised edition, first published 1944).

Hurt, V. (1993). Fouille d’une tombelle celtique à Warmifontaine (Neufchâteau, Lux.), Lunula. Archaeologia protohistorica I, 14-15.

Helms, M.W. (1988). Ulysses’ Sail: An Ethnographic Odyssey of Power, Knowledge and Geographical Distance, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press (cited in Giles 2000: 160-62).

Hurt, V. (1995). Découverte exceptionnelle dans une tombe à char de Warmifontaine (Neufchâteau, Lux.), Lunula. Archaeologia protohistorica III, 42-45. Hurt, V. (1999). Une nouvelle tombe à char à Warmifontaine (Belgique): fouilles 1994. In: Villes, A. and BatailleMelkon, A. (eds), Fastes des Celtes entre Champagne et Bourgogne aux VIIe-IIIe siècles avant notre ère. Actes du colloque de l’AFEAF tenu à Troyes en 1995, Mémoire de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 15, suppl. to bulletin 4, 419-25.

Henderson, J. (1991). The chemical analysis of glass beads from Burton Fleming and Rudston. In: Stead, I.M., Iron Age Cemeteries in East Yorkshire. Excavations at Burton Fleming, Rudston, Garton-on-the-Wolds, and Kirkburn (= English Heritage Archaeological Report 22), London: English Heritage, 167-69. Henton, A. (2006). Etaples (62). Un important complexe funéraire du premier âge du Fer, Bulletin de l’Association pour la Promotion des Recherches sur l’âge du Bronze 3, 14-15.

Hurt, V. (2007). A propos de trousses et accessoires de toilette à l’époque celtique, Archéo-Situla 27, 34-45. Hurtrelle, J., Monchy, E, Roger, F., Rossignol, P. and Villes, A. (1990). Les débuts du second âge du fer dans le Nord de la France (= Les Dossiers de Gauheria 1), Givenchy-en-Gohelle: Gauheria.

Higham, N.J. (1987). Brigantia revisited, Northern History XXIII, 1-19.

177

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Inall, Y. (2015). In search of the spear people: spearheads in context in Iron Age eastern Yorkshire and beyond, Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Hull.

and Writing Histories. In: Anthoons, G. and Clerinx, H. (eds), The Grand ‘Celtic’ Story? Proceedings of the conference held in Brussels on 19 November 2005 (= Mémoires de la Société Belge d’Etudes Celtiques 28), Bruxelles: Société Belge d’Etudes Celtiques, 11-32.

Inall, Y. (2016). The ‘speared corpse’ burials of Iron Age East Yorkshire. In: Remember Me. The Changing Face of Memorialisation [https://remembermeproject. wordpress.com/2016/09/30/the-speared-corpseburials-of-iron-age-east-yorkshire/].

Jaski, B. (1999). Cú Chulainn, gormac and dalta of the Ulstermen, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies 37, 1-31. Jaski, B. (2000). Early Irish Kingship and Succession, Dublin: Four Courts Press.

Inall, Y. (2020). New light on Iron Age warfare in Britain. In: Halkon, P. (ed.), The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 67-84.

Jay, M. and Richards, M.P. (2006). Diet in the Iron Age cemetery population at Wetwang Slack, East Yorkshire, UK: carbon and nitrogen stable isotope evidence, Journal of Archaeological Science 33, 653-62.

Ingold, T. (1994). Introduction to culture. In: Ingold, T. (ed.), Companion Encyclopaedia of Anthropology. Humanity, culture and social life, London and New York: Routledge, 329-49.

Jay, M., Grimes, V., Montgomery, J., Lakin, K. and Evans, J. (2007). Multi-Isotope Analysis. In: Brown, F., Howard-Davis, C., Brennand, M., Boyle, A., Evans, T., O’Connor, S., Spence, A., Heawood, R. and Lupton, A. (2007). The Archaeology of the A1 (M) Darrington to Dishforth DBFO Road Scheme, Lancaster: Oxford Archaeology North, 351-54.

Inrap (2003). Les «tombes à char» de Vasseny(Aisne) [https://www.inrap.fr/les-tombes-char-de-vassenyaisne-4889]. Inrap (2007). Aristocratic Celtic grave goods discovered by Inrap now being restored by Conservare (Compiègne) [https://www.inrap.fr/en/aristocraticceltic-grave-goods-discovered-inrap-now-beingrestored-conservare-12208].

Jay, M., Fuller, B.T., Richards, M.P., Knüsel, C.J. and King, S.S. (2008). Iron Age breastfeeding practices in Britain: isotopic evidence from Wetwang Slack, East Yorkshire, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 136, 327-37.

Inrap (2009a). Les tombes à char d’Attichy [https://www. inrap.fr/les-tombes-char-d-attichy-5049].

Jay, M., Haselgrove, C., Hamilton, D., Hill, J.D. and Dent, J. (2012). Chariots and context: new radiocarbon dates from Wetwang and the chronology of Iron Age burials and brooches in East Yorkshire, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 31 (2), 161-89.

Inrap (2009b). Deux tombes à char dans l’Oise [https:// www.inrap.fr/deux-tombes-char-dans-l-oise-9383]. Inrap (2015). The prince with the golden torque [https:// www.inrap.fr/en/prince-golden-torque-lavau-12040] .

Jay, M., Montgomery, J., Nehlich, O., Towers, J. and Evans, J. (2013). British Iron Age chariot burials of the Arras culture: a multi-isotope approach to investigating mobility levels and subsistence practices, World Archaeology, 45 (3), 473-91.

Inrap (2019). Une tombe à char, des sépultures d’hommes et de chevaux et un souterrain à Ifs (Calvados) [https:// www.inrap.fr/une-tombe-char-des-sepultures-dhommes-et-de-chevaux-et-un-souterrain-ifs-14773#]. Jackson, K.H. (1964). The Oldest Irish Tradition. A Window on the Iron Age, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jay, M. and Montgomery, J. (2020). Isotopes and chariots: diet, subsistence and origins. In: Halkon, P. (ed.), The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 85-100.

Jacques, A. and Rossignol, P. (1996). La céramique laténienne en Artois: premiers résultats des fouilles des années 1990-1995, Revue archéologique de Picardie 3-4, 23-39.

Joachim, H.-E. (1969). Unbekannte Wagengräber der Mittel- bis Spätlatènezeit aus dem Rheinland. In: Marburger Beiträge zur Archäologie der Kelten: Festschrift W. Dehn, Fundberichte aus Hessen 1, 84– 111.

Jacques, A. and Rossignol, P. (1998). Les rites funéraires en Artois aux IVe et IIIe siècles avant J.-C. Les tombes de Saint-Laurent-Blangy, Les Fontaines. In: LemanDelerive, G. (ed.), Les Celtes: rites funéraires en Gaule du Nord entre le Vie et le Ier siècle avant JésusChrist. Recherches récentes en Wallonie (= Etudes et Documents, série Fouilles 4), Namur: Direction de l’Archéologie, Ministère de la Region wallonne, 63-74.

Joachim, H.-E. (1979). Die frühlatènezeitlichen Wagengräber von Mühlheim-Kärlich, Kr. MayenKoblenz. In: Beiträge zur Urgeschichte des Rheinlandes III (= Rheinische Ausgrabungen 19), Köln: RheinlandVerlag, 507-56. Joachim, H.-E. (1995). Waldalgesheim. Das Grab einer keltischen Fürstin (= Kataloge des Rheinischen Landesmuseums Bonn 3), Köln/Bonn: Rheinisches Landesmuseum.

James, S. (1999). The Atlantic Celts. Ancient People or Modern Invention?, London: British Museum Press. James, S. (2007). Iron Age Paradigms and the Celtic Metanarrative: A Case Study in Conceptualising the Past, 178

Bibliography Joachim, H.-E. (1998). Das frühlatènezeitliche Fürstengrab von Dörth „Wald Gallscheid“, Rhein-Hunsrück-Kreis. In: Müller-Karpe, A., Brandt, H., Jöns, H., Krauße, D. and Wigg, A. (eds), Studien zur Archäologie der Kelten, Römer und Germanen in Mittel- und Westeuropa. Alfred Haffner zum 60. Geburtstag gewidmet (= Internationale Archäologie, Studia Honoraria 4), Rahden/Westfalen: Verlag Marie Leidorf, 245-75.

Kulturentwicklung, Jahrbuch des Oberösterreichischen Musealvereines. Abhandlungen 146a, 129-78. Karl, R. (2003). Iron Age chariots and medieval texts: a step too far in “breaking down boundaries”?, E-Keltoi. Journal of Interdisciplinary Celtic Studies 5, 1-29. Karl, R. (2005a). Neighbourhood, hospitality, fosterage and contracts. Late Hallstatt and early La Tène complex social interaction north of the Alps, Paper presented at Defining Social Complexity Conference, Cambridge, UK [https://www.academia.edu/520419/Neighbourhood_ Hospitality_Fosterage_and_Contracts].

Joachim, H.-E. (2002). Porz-Lind. Ein mittel- bis spätlatènezeitlicher Siedlungsplatz im ‚Linder Bruch‘ (Stadt Köln) (= Rheinische Ausgrabungen 47), Mainz: Zabern-Verlag. Jockenhövel, A. (1991). Räumliche Mobilität von Personen in der mittleren Bronzezeit im westlichen Mitteleuropa, Germania 69, 49-62.

Karl, R. (2005b). Master and apprentice, knight and squire: education in the ‘Celtic’ Iron Age, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 24 (3), 255-71.

Joffroy, R. (1958). Les sépultures à char du Premier Âge du Fer en France, Paris: A. et J. Picard and Cie.

Karl, R. (2006). Altkeltische Sozialstrukturen, Budapest: Archaeolingua Foundation.

Joffroy, R. (1963). La tombe à char de Pernant (Aisne), Gallia 21 (1), 1-9.

Karl, R. (2008). Random Coincidences. Or: the return of the Celtic to Iron Age Britain, Proceedings of the Prehistory Society 74, 69-78.

Joffroy, R. and Bretz-Mahler, D. (1959). Les tombes à char de La Tène dans l’Est de la France, Gallia 17 (1), 5-36.

Karl, R. and Stifter, D. (2002). Carpat - carpentum. Die keltischen Grundlagen des „Streit“wagens der irischen Sagentradition. In: Eibner, A., Karl, R.,Leskovar, J., Löcker, K. and Zingerle C. (eds), Pferd und Wagen in der Eisenzeit. Arbeitstagung des Arbeitskreises Eisenzeit der ÖGUF vom 23.-25.2.2000 in Wien (= Wiener keltologische Schriften 2), Wien: Keltologie der Universität Wien, 152-76.

Jones, S. (1997). The Archaeology of Ethnicity. Constructing identities in the past and present. London: Routledge. Jones, S. (2000). Discourses of identity in the interpretation of the past. In: Thomas, J. (ed.), Interpretive Archaeology. A reader, London and New York: Leicester University Press, chapter 26, 445-57 (first published in Graves-Brown, P., Jones, S. and Gamble, C. (eds) (1996), Cultural Identity and Archaeology: The Construction of European Communities, London: Routledge, 1-24).

Kelly, F. (1986). An Old-Irish text on court procedure, Peritia 5, 74-106. Kelly, F. (1988). A guide to early Irish law (= Early Irish Law Series III), Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies (2003 reprint).

Jope, M. (1995). A gold finger-ring found at Arras, gone missing long since. In: Raftery, B., Megaw, V. and Rigby, V. (eds), Sites and sights of the Iron Age. Essays on fieldwork and museum research presented to Ian Mathieson Stead (= Oxbow Monographs in Archaeology 56), Oxford: Oxbow Books, 111-17.

Kimmig, W. (1944-1950). Ein Wagengrab der frühen Latènezeit von Laumersheim (Rheinpfalz), Germania 28, 38-50. King, S. (2010). Warfare and violence in the Iron Age of East Yorkshire, Poster presentation, presented at the Iron Age Research Students Seminar 2010, University of Bradford.

Joy, J. (2010). Iron Age mirrors: a biographical approach (= British Archaeological Reports, British Series 518), Oxford: BAR Publishing.

Knüsel, C.J. (2002). More Circe than Cassandra: the Princess of Vix in ritualized social context, European Journal of Archaeology 5 (3), 275-308.

Joy, J. (2011). Exploring status and identity in later Iron Age Britain: re-interpreting mirror burials. In: Moore, T. and Armada, X.-L. (eds), Atlantic Europe in the first millennium BC: crossing the divide, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 468-87.

Koch, J.T. (ed.) (2003). The Celtic Heroic Age. Literary sources for ancient Celtic Europe and early Ireland and Wales, Aberystwyth: Celtic Studies Publications (fourth revised edition).

Junkelmann, M. (2000). On the starting line with Ben Hur: chariot-racing in the Circus Maximus. In: Köhne, E. and Ewigleben, C. (eds), Gladiators and Caesar. The power of spectacle in Ancient Rome, Berkeley: University of California Press, 86-102.

Krausse, D. (2003). Cultural change and settlement development in the “Arduenna Silva” from 600 to 50 BC. In: Bourgeois, J., Bourgeois, I. and Cherretté, B. (eds), Bronze Age and Iron Age Communities in North-Western Europe, Brussel: Koninklijke Vlaamse

Karl, R. (2001). Latènezeitliche Gräber aus Frauenstein/ Inn, Oberösterreich. Überlegungen zur europäischen

179

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Academie van België voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten, 151-75.

Lambot, B. and Verger, S. (1995). Une tombe à char de La Tène Ancienne à Semide (Ardennes), Mémoires de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 10.

Kristiansen, K. and Larsson, T.B. (2005). The Rise of Bronze Age Society. Travels, Transmissions and Transformations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2008 reprint).

Laurelut, C, Tegel, W. and Vanmoerkerke, J. (2007). Les IVe et IIIe siècles avant notre ère en Champagne– Ardenne: l’apport de la chronologie absolue. In: Mennessier-Jouannet C., Adam, A.-M. and Milcent, P.Y. (eds), La Gaule dans son contexte européen aux IVe et IIIe s. avant notre ère, Actes du XXVIIe colloque de l’AFEAF à Clermont-Ferrand en 2003 (Monographies d’Archéologie Méditerranéenne), Lattes: Association pour le Développement de l’Archéologie en LanguedocRoussillon, 237-40.

Kruta, V. (2002). Les origines des Parisii, Commission du Vieux Paris, Procès-verbal de la séance du 8 janvier 2002, encart au Bulletin municipal officiel de la Ville de Paris 29, 12 avril 2002, 7-14. Kruta, V. (2006). L’industrie de la sapropélite. In: Kruta, V., Leman-Delerive, G. and Warmenbol, E. (eds), Celtes: Belges, Boïens, Rèmes, Volques…, Catalogue d’ exposition, Mariemont: Musée Royal de Mariemont, 173.

Le Bechennec, Y. (2002). Une bourgade protohistorique en banlieue. In: Bulard, A., Delattre, V. and Séguier, J.M. (eds), Les Celtes en Île-de-France, Dossiers d’Archéologie 273, 30-33.

Kruta, V. and Leman-Delerive, G. (eds) (2007). Feux des morts, foyers des vivants. Les rites et symboles du feu dans les tombes de l’Âge du Fer et de l’époque romaine. Actes du XXVII colloque international de Halma-Ipel UMR CNRS 8164, Revue du Nord hors série, Collection Art et Archéologie 11, Lille: Université Charles-deGaulle – Lille 3.

Leconte, L. (1990-1991). Les nécropoles laténiennes de Saint-Maur-des-Fossés (Val-de-Marne), Antiquités Nationales 22-23, 43-80. Le Forestier, C. (2005). Approches archéologiques et anthropologique de la nécropole gauloise de Bobigny (93), hôpital Avicenne, Diplôme d’étude approfondie, Université de Paris 7, Denis Diderot GHSS.

Kunter, M. (1991). Skeletreste aus eisenzeitlichen und römischen Brandbestattungen des Hunsrück-NaheRaumes und ihre Aussagemöglichkeiten. In: Haffner A. and Miron A. (eds), Studien zur Eisenzeit in Hunsrück-Nahe-Raum. Symposium Birkenfeld 1987 (= Trierer Zeitschrift, suppl. 13), Trier: Rheinisches Landesmuseum, 337-52.

Legendre, R. M. and Gomez de Soto, J. (1990). La tombe à char de Mont-de-Marne à Condé-sur-Marne (Marne), Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 20, 285-303. Legge, A.J. (1984). The horses from the King’s Barrow, Arras. In: Guštin, M. and Pauli, L., Keltski Voz (= Posvski muzej Brežice 6), Brežice: Posvski muzej, 41.

Lamb, A.W. (2018). Later Iron Age Mortuary Rites in Southern Britain: socio-political significance and insular and continental context, Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Leicester.

Legge, A.J. (1991). Animal bones. In: Stead, I.M., Iron Age Cemeteries in East Yorkshire. Excavations at Burton Fleming, Rudston, Garton-on-the-Wolds, and Kirkburn (= English Heritage Archaeological Report 22), London: English Heritage, 140-47.

Lambot, B. (2000). Les enclos funéraires en Champagne; indicateurs chronologiques, sociaux, culturels. In: «Des enclos pour quoi faire?», table-ronde de Ribemont 1999, Revue archéologique de Picardie 1/2, 147-59.

Lejars, T. (1998). Des armes pour l’au-delà. In: LemanDelerive, G. (ed.), Les Celtes: rites funéraires en Gaule du Nord entre le Vie et le Ier siècle avant JésusChrist. Recherches récentes en Wallonie (= Etudes et Documents, série Fouilles 4), Namur: Direction de l’Archéologie, Ministère de la Region wallonne, 88-94.

Lambot, B. (2005). La tombe à chars d’Evergnicourt (Aisne), « Le Tournant du Chêne ». In : Hommages à Claudine Pommepuy, Revue archéologique de Picardie, n° spécial 22, 327-54. Lambot, B. (2006). Les cavaliers de La Tène ancienne en Champagne: découvertes récentes de harnachements dans deux tombes à char, Lunula. Archaeologia protohistorica 14, 45-60.

Lejars, T. (2002a). Le cimetière de Roissy. Une communauté aristocratique du début du IIIe siècle avant J.-C.. In: Bulard, A., Delattre, V. and Séguier, J.M. (eds), Les Celtes en Île-de-France, Dossiers d’Archéologie 273, 16-18.

Lambot, B. (2018). Conducteurs de char et cavaliers gaulois en Champagne aux Ve et IVe s. av. J.-C. Découvertes récentes (= Bulletin de la Société Archéologique Champenoise, t.111-2), Reims: Société Archéologique Champenoise.

Lejars, T. (2002b). Nanterre, un ensemble aristocratique avec char. In: Bulard, A., Delattre, V. and Séguier, J.M. (eds), Les Celtes en Île-de-France, Dossiers d’Archéologie 273, 19.

Lambot, B., Friboulet, M. and Méniel, P. (1994). Le site protohistorique d’Acy-Romance I. Les nécropoles dans leur contexte régional, Reims: Société Archéologique Champenoise.

Lejars, T. (2005). Le cimetière celtique de La Fosse Cotheret, à Roissy (Val-d’Oise) et les usages funéraires aristocratiques dans le nord du Bassin parisien à l’aube du IIIe siècle avant J.-C.. In: Buchsenschutz, 180

Bibliography O., Bulard, A. and Lejars, T., L’âge du Fer en Île-deFrance. XXVIe colloque de l’Association Française pour l’Ếtude de l’Âge du Fer, Paris et Saint-Denis 2002 (= Revue archéologique du Centre de la France, suppl. 26), Tours: FERACF, Paris: Inrap, 73-83.

Lewis, A. (2015). Iron Age and Roman-Era Vehicle Terrets from Western and Central Britain: An Interpretive Study, Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Leicester. Lewis, A. (2020). Perpetual motion: a reading of the artistic and cultural significance of Iron Age vehicle terrets. In: Halkon, P. (ed.), The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 111-22.

Lejars, T. (2014). Images celtiques du Pays de France. Gaulois d’ici and d’au-delà: les Parisii en plaine de France, catalogue de l’exposition, Louvres, ARCHÉA, 27 novembre 2014-17 mai 2015, Roissy-Porte-deFrance: ARCHÉA, 91-104.

Lewuillon, S. (1990). Affinités, parentés et territoires en Gaule Indépendante: fragments d’anthropologie, Dialogues d’Histoire Ancienne 9, 283-357.

Leman-Delerive, G. (2006). La Belgique et le Nord de la France du IIIe au Ier siècle avant J.-C. In: Kruta, V., Leman-Delerive, G. and Warmenbol, E. (eds), Celtes: Belges, Boïens, Rèmes, Volques…, Catalogue d’ exposition, Mariemont: Musée Royal de Mariemont, 179-204.

Lucas, G.M. (1996). Of death and debt. A history of the body in Neolithic and early Bronze Age Yorkshire, Journal of European Archaeology 4: 99-118. MacNeill, E. (1923). Ancient Irish Law. The law of status or franchise, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy section C 36, 265-316.

Leman-Delerive, G. and Warmenbol, E. (2006). Le Ve siècle dans le Nord-Ouest de la France et de la Belgique actuelle. In: Kruta, V., Leman-Delerive, G. and Warmenbol, E. (eds), Celtes: Belges, Boïens, Rèmes, Volques…, Catalogue d’ exposition, Mariemont: Musée Royal de Mariemont: 90–106.

Maguire, R. (in press). Get off your High Horse: An examination of changes in lorinery and equitation in the Irish early medieval period AD 400 to 700. In: Ropa, A., and Dawson, T. (eds), Horses across the Medieval World (= Explorations in Medieval Culture), Leiden: Brill Publishers.

Lepaumier, H., Chanson, K. and Giazzon, D. (2007). La tombe à char d’Orval. Présentation préliminaire, Bulletin de l’Association Française pour l’Étude de l’Âge du Fer 25, 68-70.

Malrain, G., Blancquaert, G. and Lorho, T. (2013). L’habitat rural du second âge du Fer. Rythmes de création et d’abandon au nord de la Loire (= Recherches archéologiques 7), Paris: Inrap / CNRS Éditions.

Lepaumier, H., Giazzon, D. and Chanson, K. (2009). Orval « Les Pleines » (Manche). Une tombe à char en Cotentin. In: Les Gaulois et la mort en Normandie. Les pratiques funéraires à l’Âge du Fer (VIIe-Ier siècles avant J.-C.), catalogue d’exposition, Caen: Musée de Normandie, 25-26.

Manby, T.G. (1980). Bronze Age settlement in Eastern Yorkshire. In Barrett, J. and Bradley, R. (eds), Settlement and Society in the British Later Bronze Age (= British Archaeological Reports, British Series 83), Oxford: BAR Publishing, 307-76.

Lepaumier, H., Giazzon, D. and Chanson, K. (2011). Orval «Les Pleines» (Manche). Habitats enclos et tombe à char en Cotentin. In Barral, P., Dedet, B., Delrieu, F., Giraud, P., Le Goff, I., Marion, S. and Villard-Le Tiec, A. (eds), L’Âge du fer en Basse-Normandie. Actes du XXXIIIe colloque international de l’AFEAF; Caen, 20 au 24 mai 2009 (= Annales littéraires, n° 883; Série «Environnement, sociétés et archéologie», n° 14), Besançon: Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté, 315-34.

Mariën, M.E. (1952). Oud-België. Van de eerste landbouwers tot de komst van Caesar, Antwerpen: De Sikkel. Mariën, M.E. (1961). La période de La Tène en Belgique. Le Groupe de la Haine (= Monographies d’Archéologie Nationale 2), Bruxelles: Musées Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire. Marion, S. (2004). Recherches sur l’âge du Fer en Ile-deFrance Entre Hallstatt final et La Tène finale. Analyse des sites fouillés. Chronologie et sociéte (= British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1231), Oxford: BAR Publishing.

Lepaumier, H., Giazzon, D. and Chanson, K. (2012). Orval. Une tombe à char en Cotentin au milieu du IIIe siècle avant notre ère. In: Les Gaulois. Les plus grands sites. Les plus beaux objets, Itinéraires de Normandie, hors-série n°2, 6-9.

Marion, S. (2007). Les IVe et IIIe siècles avant notre ère en Ile de France. In: Mennessier-Jouannet C., Adam, A.M. and Milcent, P.-Y. (eds), La Gaule dans son contexte européen aux IVe et IIIe s. avant notre ère, Actes du XXVIIe colloque de l’AFEAF à Clermont-Ferrand en 2003 (Monographies d’Archéologie Méditerranéenne), Lattes: Association pour le Développement de l’Archéologie en Languedoc-Roussillon.

Lequoy, M.-C. (1993). Le dépôt funéraire de La Maillerayesur-Seine (Seine-Maritime). In Cliquet D., Rémy-Vatte M., Guichard V. and Vaginay M. (eds), Les Celtes en Normandie, les rites funéraires en Gaule (IIIe-Ier siècle avant J.-C.), Actes du colloque d’Évreux, 1990 (= Revue archéologique de l’Ouest, suppl. 6), Rennes, 121-33.

181

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Marion, S. (2012). Des chars, des armes et du fer: les collections de la région parisienne au MAN: une brève histoire de l’émergence des Parisii au IIIe siècle av. J.C.. In: Le MAN et les Gaulois du XIXe au XXIe siècle, numéro spécial, 99-109.

Eusèbe, S., Nicolas, T, Gouranton, V. and Gaugne, R. (eds), Archéologie : imagerie numérique et 3D: actes du 3e séminaire scientifique et technique de l’Inrap, 26-27 juin 2018, Rennes [https://sstinrap.hypotheses. org/842].

Marion, S, Le Bechennec, Y. and Le Forestier, C. (20062007). Nécropole et bourgade d’artisans: l’évolution des sites de Bobigny (Seine-Saint-Denis), entre La Tène B et La Tène D, Revue archéologique du Centre de la France 45-46, s.p. [http://racf.revues.org//index654. html].

Millett, M. and McGrail, S. (1987). The Archaeology of the Hasholme logboat, London: Royal Archaeological Institute. Mortimer, J.R. (1898). Report on the opening of a number of the so-called “Danes’ Graves”, at Kilham, East Riding, Yorkshire, and the discovery of a chariot-burial of the Early Iron Age, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of London XVII, 119-28.

Massart, C. (2000). Eléments de char et de harnachements dans les tumulus tongres du IIIe s. Les deux harnachements du tumulus de Celles (Waremmes), Belgique, Kölner Jahrbuch 33, 509-22.

Mortimer, J.R. (1905). Forty years researches in British and Saxon burial mounds of East Yorkshire, London: A. Brown and Sons.

Mathieu, S. (1993). Restauration d’un joug de char celtique (Sberchamps, comm. de Libramont, Lux.), Lunula. Archaeologia protohistorica I, 21-24.

Mortimer, J.R. (1911). Notes on the stature etc. of our ancestors in East Yorkshire, The Naturalist, 313-17.

Megaw, M.R. and Megaw, J.V.S., 1990. Celtic art. From its beginning to the Book of Kells, London: Thames and Hudson (1996 reprint).

Moskovich, M.J. (1979). Obsidibus Traditis: Hostages in Caesar’s De Bello Gallico, Classical Journal 75, 12228.

Megaw, M.R., Megaw, J.V.S., Ramsl, P. and Bühler, B. (2007). From Austria to Arras: The Gold Armlets from Grave 115, Mannersdorf a.d. Leitha, Lower Austria. In: Gosden, C., Hamerow, H., de Jersey, Ph. and Lock, G. (eds), Communities and Connections. Essays in Honour of Barry Cunliffe, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 183-216.

Moulherat, C. (2009). Les textiles. In: Ginoux, N., Elites guerrières au nord de la Seine au début du IIIe siècle av. J.-C. La nécropole celtique du Plessis-Gassot (Vald’Oise) (= Revue du Nord hors série Collection Art et Archéologie 15), Lille: Université Charles-de-Gaulle – Lille 3, 75-82. Müller-Karpe, A. (1989). Ein keltischer Streitwagenkrieger des 3. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.. In: Haffner, A. (ed.), Gräber - Spiegel des Lebens. Zum Totenbrauchtum der Kelten und Römer am Beispiel des Treverer Gräberfeldes Wederath-Belginum (= Schriftenreihe des rheinischen Landesmuseums Trier 2), Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 141-60.

Metzler, J. (1986). Ein frühlatènezeitliches Gräberfeld mit Wagenbestattung bei Grosbous-Vichten, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 16, 161-77. Metzler, J. (2002). Réflexions sur les sépultures aristocratiques en pays trévire. In : Guichard, V. and Perrin, F. (eds.), L’aristocratie celte à la fin de l’âge du Fer (IIe s. avant J.-C., Ier s. après J.-C.): table-ronde, Glux-en-Glenne, 1999 (= Bibracte 5), Glux-en-Glenne: Centre archéologique européen du Mont Beuvray, 17586.

Mytum, H. (1995). Iron Age square barrows on the North York Moors. In: Vyner, B. (ed.), Moorland Monuments. Studies in the archaeology of North-East Yorkshire in honour of Raymond Hayes and Don Spratt (= CBA Research Report 101), York: Council for British Archaeology, 31-37.

Metzler, J. and Gaeng, C. (2008). Fouille de sauvetage d’une tombe à char celtique à Reuland, Empreintes. Annuaire du Musée national d’histoire et d’art 1, 3237.

Ndiaye, S. (1995). Le recours aux otages à Rome sous la république, Dialogues d’Histoire Ancienne 21 (1), 14966.

Metzler, J., Waringo, R., Bis, R. and Metzler-Zens, N. (1991). Clémency et les tombes de l’aristocratie en Gaule Belgique, Luxembourg (= Dossiers d’Archéologie du Musée National d’Histoire et d’Art 1), Luxembourg: Musée National d’Histoire et d’Art.

Nicolas, T., Gaugne, R., Tavernier, C., Millet, E., Bernadet, R. and Gouranton, V. (2018). Lift the veil of the block samples from the Warcq chariot burial with 3D digital technologies, Digital Heritage 2018 - 3rd International Congress [https://hal.archives-ouvertes. fr/hal-01875702].

Metzler-Zens, N. and J. and Méniel, P. (1999). Lamadelaine, une nécropole de l’oppidum du Titelberg (= Dossiers d’Archéologie du Musée National d’Histoire et d’Art 6), Luxembourg: Musée National d’Histoire et d’Art.

Ó Cathasaigh, T. (1986). The sister’s son in early Irish literature, Peritia 5, 128-60.

Millet, E., Bernadet, R. and Nicolas, T. (2018). La tombe aristocratique gauloise de Warcq (Ardennes): méthodes d’analyses des objets composites. In:

Ó Riordáin, S.P. (1992). Tara. The monuments on the hill, Dundalk: Dundalgan Press.

182

Bibliography Olivier, L. and Schönfelder, M. (2002). Nanterre (Hautsde-Seine): un char de parade de La Tène moyenne. In: Guichard, V. and Perrin, F. (eds.), L’aristocratie celte à la fin de l’âge du Fer (IIe s. avant J.-C., Ier s. après J.-C.): table-ronde, Glux-en-Glenne, 1999 (= Bibracte 5), Glux-en-Glenne: Centre archéologique européen du Mont Beuvray, 113-18.

Peake, R. and Delattre V. (2005). L’apport des analyses 14C à l’étude de la nécropole de l’âge du Bronze de «La Croix de la Mission» à Marolles-sur-Seine, Revue Archéologique du Centre de la France 44, 5-25. Pichon, B. (2002). Carte archéologique de la Gaule: L’Aisne 02, Paris: Académie des Inscriptions et BellesLettres.

Olivier, L. and Charlier, P. (2008). Masques et monstres celtiques: à propos d’un anneau passe-guide du IIIème siècle av. J.-C. attribué à Paris (anomalies physiques et déformations plastiques, Antiquités Nationales 39, 121-28.

Piggott, S. (1985). The Druids, London: Thames and Hudson (2003 reprint). Pion, P. and Guichard, V. (1993). Tombes et nécropoles en France et au Luxembourg entre le IIIème et le Ier siècle avant J.-C. Essai d’inventaire. In : Les Celtes en Normandie. Les rites funéraires en Gaule (IIIème – Ier siècle avant J.-C.), 175-200, Revue Archéologique de l’Ouest, suppl. 6.

Olivier, L. (2012). La tombe à char aux bronzes d’art celtique de Roissy (Val-d’Oise), Antiquités Nationales 43, 79-138. Olivier, L. (ed.) (2016). Autopsie d’une tombe gauloise. La tombe à char de la Gorge-Meillet à Somme-Tourbe (Marne) (= Cahiers du musée d’Archéologie nationale 2), Saint-Germain-en-Laye: Musée d’archéologie nationale.

Pommepuy, C., Auxiette, G. and Desenne, S. (1998). Rupture et continuité dans les pratiques funéraires de La Tène ancienne et moyenne/finale à Bucy-le-Long (Aisne), Revue archéologique de Picardie 1/2, 85-98. Pommepuy, C., Auxiette, G., Desenne, S., Gransar, F. and Henon, B. (2000). Des enclos à l’Âge du Fer dans la vallée de l’Aisne: le monde des vivants et le monde des morts. In: «Des enclos pour quoi faire?», table-ronde de Ribemont 1999, Revue Archéologique de Picardie, 1-2, 197-216.

Palk, N. (1984). Iron Age bridle bits from Britain (= Archaeological Occasional Papers 10), Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh. Pariat, J.G. and Maret, V. (2011). Gonesse (Val-d’Oise - Îlede-France) : Déviation RD 10-370. Un site funéraire au second âge du Fer. Rapport final d’opération du 04/05/2009 au 31/07/2009, SDAVO / DRAC-SRA Îlede-France.

Pommepuy, C., Desenne, S. and Demoule, J.-P. (2004). Chronologie, société et pratiques funéraires. L’exemple de la nécropole laténienne de Bucy-le-Long «La Héronnière» (Aisne). In: Baray, L. (ed.), Archéologie des pratiques funéraires. Approches critiques. Actes de la table-ronde de Bibracte, 7-9 juin 2001 (= Bibracte 9), Glux-en-Glenne: Centre archéologique européen, 261-78.

Pariat, J.G., Lefeuvre, A. and Maret, V. (2013). Le «Rondpoint de la Fauconnière» à Gonesse (Val-d’Oise): un nouvel ensemble funéraire du début du IIIe siècle av. J.-C. dans le nord-est francilien, Revue archéologique d’Île-de-France 6, 75-108. Parker-Pearson, M. (1999). Food, sex and death: cosmologies in the British Iron Age with particular reference to East Yorkshire, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 9, 43-69.

Powlesland, D.J. (1986). Excavations at Heslerton, North Yorkshire 1978-82, Archaeological Journal 143, 53173. Powlesland, D.J. (1988). Staple Howe in its landscape. In: Manby, T.G. (ed.), Archaeology in Eastern Yorkshire: essays in honour of T.C.M. Brewster, Sheffield: J.R. Collis Publications, 101-07.

Parker Pearson, M. (2003). The Archaeology of Death and Burial, Stroud: Sutton Publishing Ltd. Parker Pearson, M. (2016). From corpse to skeleton: dealing with the dead in prehistory, Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris 28, 4-16 [https://bmsap.revuesonline.com › lvbmsap › pdf › 2016/02].

Preston-Matto, L. (2010). Queens as political hostages in pre-Norman Ireland: Derbforgaill and the Three Gormlaiths, Journal of English and Germanic Philology 109 (2), 141-61.

Parkes, P. (2003). Fostering fealty: a comparative analysis of tributary allegiances of adoptive kinship, Comparative Studies in Society and History 45 (4), 741-82.

Pryor, F. (2004). Britain BC, London: Harper Perennial (imprint; first published by Harper Collins Publishers in 2003).

Parkes, P. (2006). Celtic fosterage: adoptive kinship and clientage in northwest Europe, Comparative Studies in Society and History 48 (2), 359-95.

Rachet, V. (1998-1999). La nécropole celtique de Bouqueval (Val-d’Oise). Nouvelles données et essai d’interprétation, Unpublished Master thesis, Université de Paris 1.

Patterson, N.T. (1994). Cattle Lords and Clansmen. The Social Structure of Early Ireland, Notre-Dame: University of Notre-Dame Press (second edition).

Raftery, B. (1988). Hollow two-piece metal rings in La Tène Europe (= Marburger Studien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 11), Marburg: Hitzeroth. 183

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Raftery, B. (1994). Pagan Celtic Ireland. The enigma of the Irish Iron Age, London: Thames and Hudson.

Schnegg, M. (2006). Reciprocity and the Emergence of Power Laws in Social Networks, International Journal of Modern Physics C 17 (7), 1067-1076 [ h t t p : / / a r x i v. o rg / P S _ c a c h e / p h y s i c s / pdf/0603/0603005v1.pdf].

Ramm, H. (1978). The Parisi, London: Duckworth. Rankin, D. (1996). Celts and the Classical World, London and New York: Routledge.

Schönfelder, M. (2000). Das spätkeltische Wagengrab von Boé (Dép. Lot-et-Garonne). Studien zu Wagen und Wagengräbern der jüngeren Latènezeit, PhD thesis, Philipps-Universität Marburg. [https://archiv.ub.uni-marburg.de/diss/z2000/0093/].

Rapin, A. (1991). Le ceinturon métallique et l’évolution de la panoplie celtique au IIIe siècle av. J.-C., Etudes Celtiques XXVIII, 349-68. Rapin, A. (1999). L’armement celtique en Europe: chronologie de son évolution technologique du Ve au Ie s. av. J.-C., Gladius XIX, 33-67.

Schönfelder, M. (2003). Das Frühlatènezeitliche Grab eines Reiters und Wagenfahrers aus Châlons-enChampagne, dép. Marne, Jahrbuch des RömischGermanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 231-78.

Rives, J.B. (1999). Tacitus – Germania (Clarendon Ancient History Series), New York: Oxford University Press Inc. (2004 reprint).

Séguier, J.-M. and Delattre, V. (2005). Espaces funéraires et cultuels au confluent Seine-Yonne (Seine-et-Marne) de la fin du Ve au IIIe s. av. J.-C.). In: Buchsenschutz, O., Bulard, A. and Lejars, T., L’âge du Fer en Île-deFrance. XXVIe colloque de l’Association Française pour l’Ếtude de l’Âge du Fer, Paris et Saint-Denis 2002 (= Revue archéologique du Centre de la France, suppl. 26), Tours: FERACF, Paris: INRAP, 241-60.

Rives, J.B. (2004). Aristotle, Antisthenes of Rhodes, and the Magikos, Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 147, 35-54. Rolin, D. and Villes, A. (1999). Un monument de type « Bouranton » à Barberey-Saint-Sulpice, « Les Gravières » (Aube). In: Villes, A. and Bataille-Melkon, A. (eds), Fastes des Celtes entre Champagne et Bourgogne aux VIIe-IIIe siècles avant notre ère. Actes du colloque de l’AFEAF tenu à Troyes en 1995, Mémoire de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 15, suppl. to bulletin 4, 187-240.

Séguier, J.-M., Ginoux, N., Méniel, P. (2008). L’habitat de La Tène ancienne du Château à Roissy-en-France (Val-d’Oise), Revue archéologique d’Île-de-France 1, 169-90. Séverin, C., Ginoux, N., and Leman-Delerive, G. (2009). La tombe 4020 d’Hordain (Nord): une tombe d’enfant avec éléments de char de la fin du IIIe s. av. J.-C., Lunula Archaeologia protohistorica XVII, 189-93.

Rowlands, M. (1998). Kinship, alliance and exchange in the European Bronze Age. In: Kristiansen, K. and Rowlands, M., Social Transformations in Archaeology: Global and Local Perspectives, London and New York: Routledge, 142-77 (2005 reprint).

Sharples, N. (2010). Social Relations in Later Prehistory: Wessex in the First Millennium BC, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Roymans, N. (1990). Tribal societies in northern Gaul. An anthropological perspective (= Cingula 12), Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam, Albert Egges van Giffen Instituut voor Prae- en Protohistorie.

Shi, X., Adamic, L.A., and Strauss, M.J. (2007). Networks of strong ties, Physica A 378 (1), 33-47.

Rozoy, J.-G. and Alduc-le-Bagousse, A. (1987). Les Celtes en Champagne: Les Ardennes au second âge du Fer. Le Mont Trote. Les Rouliers, Mémoires de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 4.

Stacey, R. (2004). Evidence for the use of birch-bark tar from Iron Age Britain, Past, The Newsletter of the Prehistoric Society 47, 1-2. Stacey, R.C. (1994). The Road to Judgment: From Custom to Court in Medieval Ireland and Wales, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Sarrazin, J.-P. and Villes, A. (1995). Molinons (Yonne), «Les Graisses», tombe à char. In: Fastes des Celtes anciens. Catalogue des expositions des musées de Troyes et Nogent-sur-Seine, 69-72.

Stacey, R.C. (2007). Dark speech: the performance of law in early Ireland (The Middle Ages Series), Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Saurel, M. (2007). Les IVe et IIIe s. av. n. è. en ChampagneArdennes: apports de l’étude de la vaisselle des habitats. In: Mennessier-Jouannet C., Adam, A.-M. and Milcent, P.-Y. (eds), La Gaule dans son contexte européen aux IVe et IIIe s. avant notre ère, Actes du XXVIIe colloque de l’AFEAF à Clermont-Ferrand en 2003 (Monographies d’Archéologie Méditerranéenne), Lattes: Association pour le Développement de l’Archéologie en Languedoc-Roussillon, 7-33.

Stead, I.M. (1959). A chariot burial on Pexton Moor, North Riding, Antiquity 33 (131), 214-16. Stead, I.M. (1961). A distinctive form of La Tène barrow in Eastern Yorkshire and on the Continent, The Antiquaries Journal 41, 44-62. Stead, I.M. (1965). The La Tène cultures of Eastern Yorkshire, York: Yorkshire Philosophical Society.

Schindler, R. (1970). Das Wagengrab von Gransdorf, Kr. Wittlich, Trierer Zeitschrift 33, 19-34. 184

Bibliography Stead, I.M. (1968). An Iron Age hill-fort at Grimthorpe, Yorkshire, England, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 34, 148-90.

ULAS News (2014). Rare decorated Iron Age chariot fittings found at Burrough Hill hillfort [https://ulasnews.com/2014/10/14/rare-decorated-ironage-chariot-fittings-found-at-burrough-hill-hillfort/].

Stead, I.M. (1975). The La Tène cemetery at Scorborough, East Riding, East Riding Archaeologist 2, 1-11.

Van den Broeke, P. (1999). Een uitzonderlijk grafveld uit de ijzertijd in Nijmegen-Lent, Ulpia Noviomagus 7.

Stead, I.M. (1979). The Arras Culture, York: Yorkshire Philosophical Society.

Van de Noort, R. (2006). Argonauts of the North Sea – a social maritime archaeology for the 2nd millennium BC, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 72, 267–87.

Stead, I.M. (1986). A group of Iron Age barrows at Cowlam, North Humberside, The Yorkshire Archaeological Journal 58, 5-15.

Van Endert, D. (1986), Zur Stelling der Wagengräber der Arras-Kultur, Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 67, 206-88.

Stead, I.M. (1988). Chalk figurines of the Parisi, The Antiquaries Journal 68, 9-29.

Van Endert, D. (1987). Die Wagenbestattungen der späten Hallstattzeit und der Latènezeit westlich des Rheins (= British Archaeological Reports, International Series 355), Oxford: BAR Publishing.

Stead, I.M. (1991). Iron Age Cemeteries in East Yorkshire. Excavations at Burton Fleming, Rudston, Gartonon-the-Wolds, and Kirkburn (= English Heritage Archaeological Report 22), London: English Heritage.

Vander Linden, M. (2007). What linked the Bell Beakers in third millenium BC Europe, Antiquity 81 (312), 34352.

Stead, I.M. (1996). Celtic Art, London: British Museum Press (second edition). Stead, I.M. (2006). British Iron Age Swords and Scabbards, London: British Museum Press.

Van Impe, L. (1998). Nécropoles et tombelles aristocratiques dans le Limbourg belge: Wijshagen et Eigenbilzen. In: Leman-Delerive, G. (ed.), Les Celtes: rites funéraires en Gaule du Nord entre le Vie et le Ier siècle avant Jésus-Christ. Recherches récentes en Wallonie (= Etudes et Documents, série Fouilles 4), Namur: Direction de l’Archéologie, Ministère de la Region wallonne, 41–57.

Stead, I.M., Flouest, J.-L. and Rigby, V. (2006). Iron Age and Roman Burials in Champagne, Oxford: Oxbow Books. Stephens, M. (ed.) (in press). Chariots, Swords and Spears: Iron Age Burials at the Foot of the East Yorkshire Wolds, Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Verbrugghe, G. and Villes, A. (1995). Bouranton (Aube), lieu-dit «Michaulot», sépulture à char du début de La Tène I. Fastes des Celtes anciens. Catalogue des expositions des musées de Troyes et Nogent-sur-Seine, 41-54.

Stephens, M. and Ware, P. (2020). The Iron Age cemetery at Pocklington and other excavations by MAP. In: Halkon, P. (ed.), The Arras Culture of eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 1731.

Verger, S. (1994). Les tombes a char de La Tène ancienne en Champagne et les rites funéraires aristocratiques en Gaule de l’est au Ve siècle avant J.-C., unpublished PhD thesis, Université de Bourgogne, Dijon.

Stoertz, C. (1997). Ancient landscapes of the Yorkshire Wolds. Aerial photographic transcription and analysis, Swindon: Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England.

Verger, S. (1999). Les premières tombes à char laténiennes de Champagne. In: Villes, A. and Bataille-Melkon, A. (eds), Fastes des Celtes entre Champagne et Bourgogne aux VIIe-IIIe siècles avant notre ère. Actes du colloque de l’AFEAF tenu à Troyes en 1995, Mémoire de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 15, suppl. to bulletin 4, 271-94.

Stümpel, B. (1986). Neue keltische Grabgärten aus Rheinhessen. Beiträge zur Latènezeit in Mainzer Becken XV, Mainzer Zeitschrift 81, 211-26. Thouvenot, S. and Pommepuy, C. (2009). Les tombes monumentales. In: Desenne, S., Pommepuy, C. and Demoule, J.-P. (eds), Bucy-le-long (Aisne, France) : une nécropole de la Tène ancienne (Ve-IVe s. avant notre ère), Revue archéologique de Picardie, special issue 26-1, 155-160.

Viand, A. (2004). Une ville des Parisii, L’Archéologue 72, 46-47. Villes, A. (1995). À propos des mouvements celtiques aux IVe-IIIe siècles : confrontation habitats et nécropoles en Champagne, Mémoire de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 9, 126-60.

Tomaschitz, K. (2002). Die Wanderungen der Kelten in der antiken literarischen Überlieferung (= Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommission 47). Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Villes, A. (1999). Entre principautés et chefferies, citadelles et fermes, le Hallstat final en Champagne: données nouvelles. In: Villes, A. and Bataille-Melkon, A. (eds), Fastes des Celtes entre Champagne et Bourgogne aux VIIe-IIIe siècles avant notre ère. Actes du colloque de

Turner, B. and Cooper, O. (2018). Uncovering Bilton Water Main’s ‘warrior burial‘, Current Archaeology 335.

185

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent l’AFEAF tenu à Troyes en 1995, Mémoire de la Société Archéologique Champenoise 15, suppl. to bulletin 4, 11-92. Vissers, P. (1996). Het wagengraf te Wijchen (= Wijchens Meer 6), Wijchen: Stichting Vrienden van Frans Bloemers. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (2020). Rijk ‘Keltisch’ wagengraf uit de IJzertijd ontdekt in bossen bij Nijmegen, News Archive 26 June 2020 [ h t t p s : / / f g w. v u . n l / n l / n i e u w s - a g e n d a / nieuwsarchief/2020/apr-jun/200626-rijk-keltischwagengraf-uit-de-ijzertijd-ontdekt-in-bossen-bijnijmegen.aspx]. Waldhauser, J. (1993). Die hallstatt- und latènezeitliche Siedlung mit Gräberfeld bei Radovesice in Böhmen (= Archeologický výzkum v severních Čechách 21), Praha: CSAV. Walker, C. (1980). Hostages in Republican Rome, Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Carolina. [https://chs.harvard.edu/book/walker-cheryl-hostagesin-republican-rome/]. Ware, P. (2017). An Iron Age chariot burial. Excavating a square-barrow cemetery at Pocklington, Current Archaeology 327, 26-31. Ware, P. and Stephens, M. (2020). Two chariots, 84 barrows, spears, shields and two cows, British Archaeology 173. Warmenbol, E. (1997). Les Ors de l’âge du Bronze en Belgique: reflets et réflexions, Vie Archéologique 48, 25-37. Watts, D.J. (2003). Six Degrees: the Science of a Connected Age, New Yorks: Norton. Watts, D.J. and Strogatz, S.H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks, Nature 393 (4), 440-42. Webster, J. (1999). At the end of the world: druidic and other revitalization movements in post-conquest Gaul and Britain, Britannia 30, 1-20. Wells, P. S. (1999). The barbarians speak. How the conquered peoples shaped Roman Europe, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Wells, P. S. (2001). Beyond Celts, Germans and Scythians, London: Duckworth. Whimster, R. (1981). Burial practices in Iron Age Britain: a discussion and gazetteer of the evidence c 700 BCAD 43 (= British Archaeological Reports, British Series 90), Oxford: BAR Publishing. Xiaolin, S., Adamic, L.A. and Strauss, M.J. (2007). Networks of strong ties, Physics A 378, 33-47.

186

Appendix A Catalogue: Chariot burials of the third and second centuries BC

187

Yorkshire

189

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Arras, Charioteer’s Barrow Site known as

Arras

Location

Market Weighton and Sancton parishes

County / Département

East Yorkshire GENERAL DESCRIPTION

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Barrows explored by local gentry in 1815-1817: Rev. E.W. Stillingfleet, Barnard Clarkson and possibly Dr Thomas Hull.

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 100+ burials. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No ditch recorded. Barrow 2.5m in diameter and 0.60m high.

DECEASED

Nothing recorded about the skeleton, only that the head was towards the north.

GRAVE PIT

No record.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Dismantled vehicle. Description by Stillingfleet (Stead 1979: 22): ‘Inclining from the body of the British warrior, both on the western and on the eastern side, had been placed a wheel and a bridle bit, with iron rings which had belonged to the chariot, or to its trappings’. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Slightly more than half of an iron tyre and smaller fragments, c. 790mm in diameter and c. 35mm wide; no nails. Traces of wooden felloe. Small fragments of iron nave hoops, flat on inside, rounded on top, 18mm wide.

AXLE

Two pieces of antler (only one survives) were possibly used as a linchpin; band of lattice ornament on upper part.

POLE

Open copper-alloy case, up to 140mm, tubular towards one end, was possibly the terminal of the pole (or of the yoke, but since only one present, pole is more likely).

PLATFORM / BOX

Not reported.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Fragments of iron horse bits.

OTHER PARTS

Copper-alloy disc, dished in the centre and cordoned on the flange, 113mm in diameter; possibly a phalera or a shield ornament. Smaller copper-alloy disc with cut-out ornament in central dome (possibly not part of this burial). An iron ring, with traces of copper-alloy cover, 35mm in diameter. Part of a flat iron ring, 45mm in diameter. Short iron strip, 72mm long and 10mm wide, with nail through one end. Short length of a copper-alloy case, 37mm long. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None (but see Other Parts above).

ANIMAL BONES

Not mentioned.

OTHER

None. DATING

Third or early second century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Stead 1979; Greenwell 1906.

190

Appendix A

Arras, King’s Barrow Site known as

Arras

Location

Market Weighton and Sancton parishes

County / Département

East Yorkshire GENERAL DESCRIPTION

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Barrows explored by local gentry in 1815-1817: Rev. E.W. Stillingfleet, Barnard Clarkson and possibly Dr Thomas Hull.

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 100+ burials. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No ditch recorded. Barrow 8m in diameter but almost levelled.

DECEASED

Described as ‘an old man’. Orientation north-south, position crouched or flexed.

GRAVE PIT

Almost circular grave, 3.5m in diameter and 0.45m deep.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Dismantled vehicle. Wheel inclining from skeleton on each side; each wheel had originally rested on a horse. To the west of the skeleton: pair of linchpins, two harness rings, five terrets and two horse bits. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Fragments of one iron tyre, 38mm wide – mounted for display in YM c.870mm, but according to Stillingfleet c.890mm. Fragments of two nave hoops (the more complete one having a diameter of 125-130mm internally): iron bands, D-section, with a casing of copper-alloy of 14mm wide.

AXLE

Only one linchpin survives: iron stem with copper-alloy terminals (vase-headed type of linchpin, but without decoration, unlike the one from Kirkburn).

POLE

No metal remains reported.

PLATFORM / BOX

Not reported.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Two D-shaped copper-alloy and iron terrets (the other three terrets are seemingly lost): the curved copper-alloy part with lip ornaments had been cast onto the iron bar. A pair of harness loops or miniature D-terrets (22 and 23mm across). Similar ones found in Hunmanby and Leval-Trahegnies. A pair of horse bits found, but only one survives. Iron rings encased in copperalloy; the three links are entirely of copper-alloy. As a result of a manufacture mistake the bit would have been too uncomfortable to use, and there are no signs of wear (but see also Palk 1984: 25).

OTHER PARTS

None.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

Skulls of two pigs near skull of the deceased.

GRAVE GOODS

Complete skeleton of a horse on each side of the deceased, the head of the horses not far removed from that of the deceased; remains of a wheel rested on each horse. OTHER

None. DATING

Third or second century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Stead 1979; Greenwell 1906; Palk 1984: 25; Legge 1984.

191

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Arras, Lady’s Barrow Site known as

Arras

Location

Market Weighton and Sancton parishes

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

1876: found during work in chalk pit, subsequently examined by Greenwell.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 100+ burials. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No ditch recorded. Barrow 4.3m in diameter and 0.45m high.

DECEASED

Female. Extended on left side, orientated north-south (or possible west-east – contradictory information).

GRAVE PIT

Circular, 3.6m in diameter and 1m deep.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Dismantled vehicle. Wheels behind back of the skeleton, laid partly the one over the other. Two horse bits in front of the face, mirror underneath the head. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Iron tyres, 36-38mm wide, broken, distorted, diameter of 780-900mm. Four nave hoops, internal diameter of 124-130mm: iron rings with copper-alloy covers, attached to naves by copper-alloy nails, some of which are decorated.

AXLE

No linchpins found.

POLE

No metal remains reported.

PLATFORM / BOX

No metal remains reported.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

One copper-alloy and iron terret with lip mouldings (cf. King’s Barrow). Pair of three-link horse bits, with rings of iron encased in copper-alloy; signs of wear. Type is similar to King’s Barrow.

OTHER PARTS

Copper-alloy cap (now lost), possibly the metal end of a whip.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

Bones from two pigs.

OTHER

Iron mirror with two copper-alloy fittings, one at the junction of the ring and the handle, the other at the top of the handle. Signs of repair.

GRAVE GOODS

DATING Third or early second century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Stead 1979; Greenwell 1906.

192

Appendix A

Beverley Site known as

Beverley

Location

Beverley Westwood

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Two barrows excavated by Greenwell in 1875, one with the chariot burial, the other without finds.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL At least 10 barrows can be identified. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No ditch recorded, but some of the barrows have square-plan ditches. Chariot burial barrow 6.5m in diameter and 0.60m high.

DECEASED

No trace of bone surviving due to soil conditions.

GRAVE PIT

Oval grave pit, north-south orientated, 1.9 x 1.4m wide and 0.84m deep.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Dismantled vehicle. Middle of grave, towards east side: tyres of two wheels, laid flat, side by side. On west side: horse bits. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two tyres in fragments and considerably conglomerated; some fragments are 36mm wide, but others more than 40mm. One iron nave hoop and fragments of two other.

AXLE

No linchpins reported.

POLE

No metal remains reported.

PLATFORM / BOX

No metal remains reported.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

One harness ring: part of a smaller ring (conglomerate with one of the horse-bits. Two iron horse bits, conglomerated. Rings seems very large, c.85 to 90mm in diameter but detailed measurements impossible in present state. X-rays have revealed that the mouthpieces of the bits are composed of a chain of seven circular links (Palk 1984: 58).

OTHER PARTS

Greenwell (1906: 278) mentions the presence of other metal parts, some apparently the remains of rings, but comments that they are too decayed to be identified.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

None (but note soil conditions).

OTHER

None.

GRAVE GOODS

DATING Presumably third or second century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Greenwell 1877: 456; 1906: 278; Stead 1979; Palk 1984: 58.

193

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Cawthorn Camps Site known as

Cawthorn Camps

Location

Cawthorn parish

County / Département

North Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Found c.1849, excavated by T. Kendall, but only published by Mortimer (1905: 361) based on info obtained from Kendall and his foreman. According to the foreman, the barrow was situated very near the SE corner of the most easterly of the three Cawthorn Camps.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Group of barrows near the camps, some of them Bronze Age (Stead 1961: 47). ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Barrow just over 0.90m high. Mortimer mentions seeing a small barrow within a square enclosure close to Cawthorn Camps.

DECEASED

No remains of human bones.

GRAVE PIT

No indication of a grave pit; the vehicle placed on old ground surface.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Complete vehicle, the form of which was clearly visible. One wheel was pressed down nearly flat, while the other stood upright and nearly reached the top of the barrow. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron tyres, with internal diameters of c.700mm and 700-710mm internally (Stead 1979: 40) although Mortimer (1905: 361) writes ‘about 3 feet’. Fragments of nave hoops: copper-alloy cover, but iron core, if any, not visible (according to Mortimer: iron plated with thin copper-alloy). Cf. nave hoop n°37 from Llyn Cerrig Bach and copper-alloy nave hoops from Nanterre.

AXLE

Not reported.

POLE

Shown by dark lines of decayed wood. It reached eastwards about 2.10m from the body of the chariot and at the terminal end were decayed hooks and rings of iron and copper-alloy.

PLATFORM / BOX

Not reported.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Fragments of horse bits and possible harness rings.

OTHER PARTS

Apart from the pole, Mortimer mentions other woodwork that was preserved under the form of black lines of decayed wood. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

None.

OTHER

None. DATING

The fact that the vehicle was placed on the old ground surface may indicate that the burial was earlier than the eight chariot burials that were part of the Bayesian modelling study (see e.g., the Wetwang Slack chariot burials), so potentially earlier than 255 BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Mortimer 1905: 361; Stead 1961: 47; Stead 1979.

194

Appendix A

Danes Graves Site known as

Danes Graves

Location

Kilham and Nafferton parishes (junction of Driffield, Kilham and Nafferton)

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavated in 1897 by J.R. Mortimer, Canon Greenwell and T. Boynton.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION Other barrows on the site were opened much earlier, some as early as 1721. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 400+ burials. No ditch recorded, but square ditches are clearly present (aerial photography) on the cemetery.

ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Barrow 8.2m in diameter, 1m high. DECEASED

In the eastern half of the grave there were two skeletons: • the northern one: crouched, orientated southwest-northeast, on right side • the southern one: also crouched but north-south on left side.

GRAVE PIT

2.5 x 2.3m and 0.75m deep. Main axis north-south.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Western half: iron tyres and nave hoops from two wheels, flat on floor; nearby two linchpins and various harness rings. Eastern half: the two skeletons. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron tyres, one of them complete, 720-760mm in diameter and 35-38mm wide. Second tyre less than half complete, c.37mm wide and 780mm in diameter, mounted with fragments to a diameter of 740mm. Mortimer measured one wheel as 780mm and the other as 740mm and suggested they were not a pair (the nave hoops are also different) (Stead 1979: 40). Two iron nave hoops and fragments of two others of a different type. One iron rod (now 90mm long), possibly part of a cleat, to join a single-piece felloe.

AXLE

Two iron linchpins with long curved shanks and square heads. Type is very rare in Britain but occurs in Prunay and Condé-sur-Marne, two of the latest chariot burials of the fourth century BC in the Marne department. Later versions are more elaborate (cf. Nanterre, Paris region).

POLE

No information reported.

PLATFORM / BOX

Cavity of 5cm close above the wheels is possibly the frame of one of the sides of the vehicle that had gone to decay.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Two iron rings with a copper-alloy casing survive. Mortimer mentions five hollow copper-alloy rings of various sizes. Parts of an iron and copper-alloy horse bit.

OTHER PARTS

Miscellaneous fittings: • an iron ring, ± 50 mm, found near skull, immediately adjoining the harness rings, unlikely to be personal ornament. • a circular disc of thin copper-alloy, 49mm in diameter and 13mm across, with decorations. • two small button-shaped plates of thin copper-alloy (20mm and 25 mm in diameter), one with a faintly engraved representation of a wheel with spokes (objects mentioned by Mortimer but have not survived). GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

An iron and copper-alloy brooch associated with the northern skeleton, surviving only in fragments. According to a description by Greenwell (1906: 277), it had coral or shell inlay.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

Bones of the head and forepart of a pig, including a tusk, were found close to the left shoulder of the northern skeleton.

OTHER

None.

195

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent DATING Presumably rather third than second century BC (iron parts, resemblance of the linchpins to those of the late fourth century BC linchpins from the Marne). BIBLIOGRAPHY Mortimer 1898: 119-28; 1905: 359; Greenwell 1906: 276-8; Stead 1979.

196

Appendix A

Ferry Fryston Site known as

Ferry Fryston (initially referred to as Ferrybridge)

Location

Ferry Fryston

County / Département

West Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Discovered in 2003 during topsoil stripping in advance of an upgrade to the A1 Road between Darrington (West Yorkshire) and Dishforth (North Yorkshire), subsequently excavated by Oxford Archaeology.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The site is referred to as Site D and is situated to the north of the Holmfield interchange. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Seems to have been an area of older ceremonial monuments, including three EBA ring ditches and a Beaker flat grave, but there were no other Iron Age burials. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Surrounding ditch enclosed area of 8 x 8m. The corners lay approximately to the cardinal points. The ditch was up to 1.75m wide and 0.6m deep. The material from the ditch may have been used to build a low square barrow.

DECEASED

Male, between 30 and 40 years old, measuring 1.71m, robust, but with mild spinal degeneration. According to strontium isotope analysis, he may have originated from Scotland or even Scandinavia, but could equally well have spent his childhood in East Yorkshire. Position of the body: neither extended nor crouched; he lay on his back, his arms straight by his sides, and his legs drawn up or flexed. The head was oriented towards the front of the vehicle (cf. very early LT A chariot burials in the south of the Champagne).

GRAVE PIT

Sub-rectangular grave pit, 4.57 x 3.5m; corners approximately aligned on the cardinal points. Between 0.46m and 0.86m deep, sloping down at the southern end to accommodate the wheels; there were no wheel slots. Pit had to be extended slightly to the north to fit in the full length of the vehicle.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle complete, but the box or platform may have been removed and positioned slightly forward of the axle or replaced by a litter or bier on. Body of the deceased perhaps brought to the grave laid out on the platform or the bier and placed on the chariot structure as part of the ceremony. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

The wheels have different sizes: • iron tyre of western wheel: maximum diameter of 870mm • iron tyre of eastern wheel: maximum diameter of 850mm. The eastern wheel is presumably original, while the western one is assumed to have come from another vehicle. The western wheel is better preserved. Both tyres are flat in cross-section, but are curved at the edges, either to enclose the felloes, or as the result of use. No nails were used to fix the tyres to the felloes. Each wheel had an inner and an outer iron nave hoop with copper-alloy sheathing, but of a different type. With the outer nave hoop of the western wheel were found the remains of two decorative copper-alloy hub strips. Wheel-track: 1.37m

AXLE

Wooden axle survived as an exceptional soil stain. J-shaped iron linchpins and associated rings at either end of the axle. Total axle length: 2.06m, with the linchpins set at 1.82m apart.

POLE

Pole identified as a void. It was 3.10cm long, gently curving, and mortised into the top of the central part of the axle. Iron link with black organic material (probably decayed leather or rawhide), probably bound between yoke and pole, to create certain level of flexibility and thus prevent the pole from slipping out.

197

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent PLATFORM / BOX

Skeleton was lying on a round-ended stain of about 1.52 x 0.76m. This could have been the box of the vehicle (but not in its original position), or alternatively the stain could represent a litter or bier. Oval frame could have held a hide and recalls the bow-fronted superstructure depicted on Mediterranean and Near Eastern chariots but could also be part of a bed structure.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Yoke identified as a void and represented by a line of five plain copper-alloy terrets, with a silt core, the central one larger. Fragile and not intended for prolonged use; perhaps especially made for the occasion. Copper-alloy decorative mount or rein connector, just to the north of the line of terrets, on the western side of the yoke. Two parts of an iron horse bit or bits, resting on the man’s body.

OTHER PARTS

None.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Involuted brooch: iron bow and pin, with a large glass stud attached by means of a copper-alloy pin. The opaque glass stud was probably originally red.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

A group of iron and copper-alloy fittings are possibly from a shield.

ANIMAL BONES

Right-hand half of a pig’s skull and a right humerus, placed near the deceased’s upper left forearm. Pig bones show evidence of burning and were probably cooked.

GRAVE GOODS

The ditched enclosure around the burial contained numerous cattle bones. Bones from 25 or more cattle in the lower ditch fill may be contemporary with the burial, but bones (heads and right forelimbs) from at least 162 cattle found in the upper ditch fill dated between the late first and early fourth centuries AD and were from animals which were not raised locally. OTHER

None. DATING

This is one of eight chariot burials for which new radiocarbon dates were obtained using Bayesian modelling. The eight burials are dated between 255-165 cal BC (posterior density estimate - 95 per cent probability); between 210-195 cal BC (posterior density estimate - 68 per cent probability). For Ferry Fryston, more specific dates are given: 225-185 cal BC (posterior density estimate – 95 per cent probability) 210-195 cal BC (posterior density estimate – 68 per cent probability), (Jay et al. 2012: 172, table 2; 177-78, fig. 7; 181). BIBLIOGRAPHY Boyle 2004; Brown et al. (2007); Jay et al. 2012.

198

Appendix A

Garton Slack Site known as

Garton Slack

Location

Garton-on-the-Wolds

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavated in 1971 by T.C.M. Brewster.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 26 barrows numbered by Dent (1983b, appendix B), plus secondary burials and flat graves. Brewster suggested that a round ‘mortuary house’ and a rectangular barrow in the immediate vicinity of the chariot burial were part of the ‘chariot complex’. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Square barrow and ditched enclosure. Size of the barrow: 10.4m square according to Brewster (1971: 290), 8.5 x 8m according to Dent (1983b: 11).

DECEASED

Robust adult male, c.30 years old, 1.75m tall. Left leg shorter than right. Some evidence of abscess or brain tumour. Two teeth removed prior to death, one cavity healed over, the other not healed. Crouched position. Orientation: north-south, facing east.

GRAVE PIT

Large trapezoidal central grave, 3.6m north to south, 3.2m wide on southern end, and 1.8m on the northern end. Depth: 0.90m.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Dismantled chariot. Wheels put flat on bottom of grave, skeleton covering part of both wheels, but mainly on the eastern wheel. Close to and resting on the upper part of the skeleton: decapitated skeleton of pig; pig’s skull cleft in two, one portion near lower chest, other near thighs. Pole-shaft broken in two, one part along southern side, the other towards the northern end of the grave. One horse bit was (deliberately) cut in two prior to the burial and placed between the two parts of the left skull of the pig on top of the body. The other, intact bit was placed on top of the knees. Evidence of collapse suggests vehicle box was inverted over the remainder of the dismantled vehicle complete with the axle beam. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two single piece iron tyres, the eastern one new, the western one worn. 860mm in diameter and 44mm wide, each with 12 spokes Three copper-alloy nave hoops with central cordon. One iron nave hoop from western wheel, probably a repair.

AXLE

No metal linchpins found; may have been of hard wood.

POLE

Pole-shaft survived as stains; broken in two to fit into grave. Surviving length 3.8m but original must have been longer. Iron pole cap.

PLATFORM / BOX

Copper-alloy heading and sheet with portions of attached wood were probably from the vehicle box.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Five copper-alloy D-shaped terrets, one of which is larger; traces of leather or wood were attested on the iron crossbars. The terrets were decorated with a bead of imitation coral (red chalk from Yorkshire). Pair of three-link iron bits. Pair of harness buckles (strap-links) of cast copper-alloy, with a figure-of-eight design, with a bar at each side; these were part of the head harness, used as slip buckles to fasten the gear close to the cheek.

OTHER PARTS

A pommel of copper-alloy and wood, and two narrow copper-alloy cylinders are thought to form part of a whip. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

199

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent ANIMAL BONES

Decapitated skeleton of pig. The skull had been cleft in two: one portion was placed near the lower chest of the deceased, the other near his thighs.

OTHER

None. DATING

This is one of eight chariot burials for which new radiocarbon dates were obtained using Bayesian modelling. The eight burials are dated between 255-165 cal BC (posterior density estimate - 95 per cent probability); between 210-195 cal BC (posterior density estimate 68 per cent probability) (Jay et al. 2012, 177-78, fig. 7; 181). BIBLIOGRAPHY Brewster 1971; Brewster 1975; Brewster 1980; Stead 1979; Dent 1983b; Jay et al. 2012.

200

Appendix A

Garton Station Site known as

Garton Station

Location

Garton-on-the-Wolds

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

1984: barrow cemetery photographed from the air by John Dent

GENERAL DESCRIPTION 1985-1986: excavation by Ian Stead (British Museum) PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL 10 Iron Age burials (and 50+ Anglian burials). The chariot burial (burial GS6) lies almost in the course of the Gypsey Race. Immediately adjacent to the Garton Station barrow cemetery is Kirkburn site 2, with features including two horse burials from c.100 AD, a Neolithic enclosure and an Iron Age enclosure, while Kirkburn site 1 (with the chariot burial) lies some 400m to the south-southeast. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Enclosure R: internal size: 11.2 x 12m, ditch 0.7m deep and 2.40m wide.

DECEASED

Male 35-45 years old. Flexed position, right leg almost crouched, arms extended together, hands towards knees. Orientation north-south, facing east.

GRAVE PIT

Large grave pit, 4 x 2.4m (extended to 2.7m at the southern end to receive the complete axle); 1.3 to 1.4m deep below the gravel surface. Orientation north-south.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle dismantled. Wheels detached and set vertically in the northwest corner. T-plan frame with pole and axle (presumably buried as a single piece) was suspended. The box-like structure (see below) was at a higher level, while the corpse was at a lower level than the T-plan frame. The yoke was placed behind the corpse, on the west side. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Outlines of naves of wheels and all 12 spokes survived as masses of clay. Two iron tyres, c.900mm in diameter, c.36mm wide and 6mm thick; corroded, one tyre broken. Felloes: slight traces of mineral preserved wood on the inside of the tyres, and indication of a butt-joint. Four iron nave hoops: D-shaped in section, heavily corroded, all have replaced wood on inner face. Similar nave hoops found in Charioteer’s Barrow, Wetwang Slack 1 and 3, Garton Slack.

AXLE

Axle partially survived as masses of clay. Two iron linchpins: strongly curved shanks with ring-heads and a perforation through the shank, just below the ring-head. One linchpin is larger than the other. A small iron ring corroded onto the linchpins is assumed to have the same function as the miniature terret in Kirkburn. Mineral preserved skin product with animal fibres on ring and foot of one of the shanks may be the remains of a thong.

POLE

Pole partially survived as masses of clay. Front end about 3m from the axle.

PLATFORM / BOX

Darker filling in immediate vicinity of body and above it suggests box-like structure, different shape at different depths between 0.55 and 1.00m: • at 0.80m: four corners visible (1.65 x 1.05m). • at 1.00m: 1.40 x 0.85m. Soil pattern suggests that the back (as buried) was open.

201

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Overall length of the yoke: 1.00m. Five terrets: - four terrets entirely cast in copper-alloy, slight shallow decoration on loop. - one larger terret: copper-alloy loop cast onto an iron bar; loop has moulded terminals, three settings with applied ornament and two pairs of relief ornament. All terrets had traces of mineral preserved leather/skin thongs on the strap-bars but no hint of wood. Two iron horse bits (loop link snaffles, cf. horse bit from Llyn Cerrig Bach).

OTHER PARTS

None.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

Pig bones: two halves of a skull, forelimbs, a few right ribs.

GRAVE GOODS

The left half of the skull was placed near the head of the human corpse and the right half near his stomach; the pig’s left leg lay on the human’s left side and the right leg on his right (same position in Kirkburn burials K3 and K5). Cut marks on limb bones indicate disarticulation of bones before deposition; placed in correct anatomical orientation but not necessarily in correct anatomical position. Were probably defleshed. OTHER

None. DATING

This is one of eight chariot burials for which new radiocarbon dates were obtained using Bayesian modelling. The eight burials are dated between 255-165 cal BC (posterior density estimate - 95 per cent probability); between 210-195 cal BC (posterior density estimate 68 per cent probability) (Jay et al. 2012, 177-78, fig. 7; 181). BIBLIOGRAPHY Stead 1991; Jay et al. 2012.

202

Appendix A

Hornsea Site known as

Hornsea

Location

Hornsea

County / Département

East Yorkshire GENERAL DESCRIPTION

According to an unpublished note in the Yorkshire Museum, a chariot burial was found near the Old Gashouse in Hornsea by William Morfitt in 1904. Apart from a number of spearheads, Morfitt also found what he identified as the thin wheels of a light vehicle, as well as horse bits. In 1913, an Anglo-Saxon cemetery was discovered in Hornsea, but while horse bits have been found in Anglian graves, iron wheel tyres, assuming these were correctly identified by Morfitt, would rather point to an Iron Age chariot burial. No finds survive. DATING No information. BIBLIOGRAPHY Stead 1965: 93-4; 1979: 24, 102.

203

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Huggate Site known as

Huggate

Location

Huggate

County / Département

East Yorkshire GENERAL DESCRIPTION

J.R. Mortimer was told by one of his labourers that as a boy he worked for Mr R. Holtby of Haywold, near Huggate. He helped to cart away some barrows and to spread them on the land. In one of the barrows, they found the iron tyres of two small wheels, as well as many bones. No finds survive. DATING No information. BIBLIOGRAPHY Mortimer 1905: 359; Stead 1979: 24, 102

204

Appendix A

Hunmanby Site known as

Hunmanby

Location

Hunmanby

County / Département

North Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Chance find from 1907, badly disturbed; the surviving part was excavated by Sheppard.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL No information on other burials. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

A slight mound was still visible.

DECEASED

No information (only a few horse bones are reported).

GRAVE PIT

Basin-shaped (or possibly circular) grave pit, 1.10m deep and 3.50m across the top.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Chariot probably buried in upright position. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Broken iron tyres of two wheels, now lost. Described by Greenwell as ‘nearly 3 feet in diameter and over 1 inch wide, slightly turned over at the edge’. Nave hoops. Portions of wood were still attached to both the tyres and the nave hoops.

AXLE

Greenwell mentions two large, curved articles of iron which he believes are linchpins, but Sheppard says they are of doubtful use. They are now lost.

POLE

No information.

PLATFORM / BOX

No information.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

An undecorated iron and copper-alloy terret; the curved copper-alloy part had been cast onto the iron. Harness loop: a single small copper-alloy ring with two rounded mouldings separating the length on which a leather strap would have pivoted. The relative positions of the terret and the harness loop to the tyre are not recorded. One copper-alloy horse bit.

OTHER PARTS

None.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

Sheppard describes the discovery of a wooden shield with copper-alloy binding and thin plates of copper-alloy ornamenting the upper face.

GRAVE GOODS

Sheppard also mentions the remains of a flattened tube of thin copper-alloy which he thinks may have been from the thin end of a copper-alloy scabbard or of a spear. (He is in favour of a spear since there was no sign of a sword.) ANIMAL BONES

Fragment of bone and parts of two teeth of a horse immediately below the surviving tyre

OTHER

None. DATING

No information. BIBLIOGRAPHY Sheppard 1907; Greenwell 1906: 311-12 (postscript); Stead 1979.

205

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Kirkburn Site known as

Kirkburn

Location

Kirkburn (site 1)

County / Département

East Yorkshire

GENERAL DESCRIPTION EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavated in 1987 by Ian Stead (British Museum). After the excavation of Garton Station, neighbouring sites were surveyed in search of chariot burials. The Kirkburn chariot burial was already photographed from the air by John Dent in 1980.

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Located c.400m south-southeast from the Garton Station site, but on higher ground. Cemetery with five burials (plus a secondary Anglian burial in the chariot burial). ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Square enclosure, 12 x 12.5m, surrounded by a wide ditch (section on western side was 3.2m large and 0.9m deep). Barrow was flattened.

DECEASED

Male, 25-35 years old. Position: flexed on the back, right leg crouched, right arm extended by the side, one forearm folded across the chest. Orientation north-south, facing east. Family link suggested between chariot burial K5 and burials K3 (the burial with the sword), K4 and K5-K6: all skeletons have the same non-metrical variant of the skull (parietal foramen)

GRAVE PIT

Large grave pit, 5.2m long and 3.7m (north) to 3.1m (south) wide, 1.25m deep.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Dismantled vehicle. Wheels laid flat on the floor, almost touching each other. Corpse laid over the junction of the wheels, yoke alongside and to the west of the corpse. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron tyres, 900mm in diameter, one slightly more worn; remains of wood (mineral-replaced). Felloes were probably constructed from a single piece of wood, but there was no trace of metal clamps for joining the two ends. Four copper-alloy nave hoops, one of them re-used. Similar to those from the Lady’s Barrow, Wetwang Slack 2 and Cawthorn Camps.

AXLE

End of axle possibly identified during excavation. Axle was maybe only 1.8m long. Two copper-alloy and iron vase-headed linchpins with triskele and other decoration, both with a copper-alloy miniature terret. Linchpin from King’s Barrow is similar but has no decorations.

POLE

Line of the pole recognised during excavation. There was room for a pole up to 3.8m long.

PLATFORM / BOX

Box-shape measured 1.2 x 1.9m and was c.50cm high.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Yoke deposited west of the corpse, behind its back. Overall length: 960mm. Represented by line of five copper-alloy terrets with a copper-alloy strap union at each end; the central terret was much larger. Two three-link iron and copper-alloy horse bits.

OTHER PARTS

None. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Three copper-alloy toggles are possibly dress-fasteners.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None (but see mail tunic below).

ANIMAL BONES

Pig bones: left and right halves of a skull and left and right forelimb; right side of skull mainly under mail. Bones probably defleshed before being put in the grave. Precise position was important: left half of the pig’s head near the head of the human corpse and right half near the stomach; pig’s left leg on human corpse’s left side and right leg on its right.

206

Appendix A OTHER

The corpse was covered with a mail tunic measuring 0.92 x 0.48m. It was placed face down and inverted. Each link of the mail tunic is a ring constructed from iron wire; each is butt-jointed and linked in a four-in-one arrangement. The tunic had shoulder-flaps which were connected with an iron breast-fastener which hooked into a stud on each flap; one of the flaps had a second stud which was perhaps decorative. Underneath the mail tunic: mineralised textile: two weaves of wool, one from an outer tunic or cloak, the other from a tunic or gown. Copper-alloy fittings, probably from a lid of a box or basket: symmetrical arrangement of three semi-tubular rings, six dome-headed studs and three eyelets in a D-shaped frame; was originally attached to a base, probably of wood. DATING

This is one of eight chariot burials for which new radiocarbon dates were obtained using Bayesian modelling. The eight burials are dated between 255-165 cal BC (posterior density estimate - 95 per cent probability); between 210-195 cal BC (posterior density estimate 68 per cent probability) (Jay et al. 2012, 177-78, fig. 7; 181). BIBLIOGRAPHY Stead 1991; Jay et al. 2012.

207

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Middleton-on-the-Wolds Site known as

Middleton-on-the-Wolds

Location

Middleton-on-the-Wolds

County / Département

East Yorkshire GENERAL DESCRIPTION

In 1888, a possible chariot burial was destroyed during the construction of the Driffield and Market Weighton Railway, between the Middleton and Enthorpe stations. A linchpin from Middleton in Hull Museum, of which there are no records of the circumstances of its discovery, may originate from this chariot burial. It is 135mm long, has an iron shank and copper-alloy terminals; the upper terminal is surmounted by a large ring with ornament and perforation. DATING No information. BIBLIOGRAPHY Mortimer 1905: 358-60; Stead 1979: 24, 45-46, fig. 14.

208

Appendix A

Pexton Moor Site known as

Pexton Moor

Location

Pexton Moor

County / Département

North Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

1911: one tyre excavated by Dr J. L. Kirk

GENERAL DESCRIPTION 1935: the excavation was resumed, and a second tyre and other features were recorded by Dr Kirk’s assistant, Miss A. E. Welsford. 1959: published by Dr I.M. Stead based on Miss Welsford’s notes. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Apparently isolated burial. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Square enclosure, about 5.2m across internally, ditch 60-90cm wide. Barrow was 1.2m to 1.5m high in 1911.

DECEASED

No bones survived.

GRAVE PIT

No grave pit. Vehicle placed on old ground surface, but wheels buried in two shallow slots, c.25 cm deep, orientated almost diagonally to the square-plan ditch.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle complete, in upright position. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

The 1911 wheel is now lost. The iron tyre and the two iron nave hoops of the 1935 wheel are preserved. The tyre (in fragments, mounted for display) is 4cm wide, with a diameter of 80-82cm.

AXLE

No linchpins recorded.

POLE

No information reported.

PLATFORM / BOX

No information reported.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

One three-link iron horse bit; one ring has a copper-alloy casing.

OTHER PARTS

None. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

No bones survived.

OTHER

None. DATING

The fact that the vehicle was placed on the old ground surface may indicate that the burial was earlier than the eight chariot burials that were part of the Bayesian modelling study (see e.g. the Wetwang Slack chariot burials), so potentially earlier than 255 BC. The width of the wheel tyres and the absence of nails suggest that the vehicle did not predate the third century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Stead 1959; 1979.

209

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Pocklington, Burnby Lane Site known as

Burnby Lane

Location

Pocklington

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavation by Paula Ware of MAP Archaeological Practice ahead of a housing development. The chariot burial was examined in February 2017, during the final phase of the excavations, which ran from September 2014 to March 2017 (with an eight-month break in-between).

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 85 barrows and 172 burials. Three of the barrows were large round barrows dating to the Bronze Age. The chariot burial is located at the edge of the excavated area. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Square enclosure. The (relatively insubstantial) ditch continues under the modern road (Burnby Lane), but the burial itself is fully excavated. Not all enclosures in the cemetery were square; some were circular or rectangular. Some significant burials were in circular barrows/enclosures.

DECEASED

Mature man. Half of the body was removed by ploughing and the skeleton was in a very poor condition.

GRAVE PIT

Large (3.6m x 2.6m) but shallow grave, only 10-15cm below ground level. The upper part of the grave and most of its southwestern corner had been removed by later disturbances.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Dismantled vehicle, with two (almost) complete horse skeletons. Horses were laying down, heads to the north and facing each other, the western horse on its left side and the eastern one on its right. The one surviving wheel (the eastern one) was lying flat; it partly covered an iron horse bit. The pole extended northwards from the eastern wheel and passed between the legs of the horses. The truncated remains of the deceased were placed over the southern part of the pole, between the hind legs of the horses. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Iron tyre and lower nave band of the eastern wheel in situ; wheel rim, hub and 12 spokes preserved as soil marks. Of the western wheel, only the lower nave band remained.

AXLE

Possible linchpin but no further information at this stage.

POLE

Represented by a soil mark, extended northwards from the eastern wheel for about 2.6m.

PLATFORM / BOX

No information available at this stage.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

One iron horse bit. No further information available at this stage.

OTHER PARTS

No information. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None mentioned.

POTTERY

None mentioned.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

The horses were intact when they were deposited, but certain parts were truncated later. Both horses were mature; the eastern one was male, the western one could not be determined (crucial part of the mandible missing). It is assumed that they were draught animals used to pull the chariot. Measurable bones of one of the horses indicate a height (at the withers) of about 1.29m (so they were actually ponies).

OTHER

Rye and oat grains. DATING

Based on radiocarbon dating on one of the horses, the burial dates from around 250 BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Ware 2017; Stephens and Ware 2020; Ware and Stephens 2020.

210

Appendix A

Pocklington, The Mile Site known as

Pocklington, The Mile

Location

Pocklington

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Discovered in the early summer of 2018 by MAP Archaeological Practice ahead of a housing development. The site contained a 3.2 ha Anglo-Saxon settlement and two Iron Age barrows.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The chariot was better preserved than the one from Burnby Lane. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL A smaller Iron Age barrow, surrounded by a circular ditch, was located 93m to the north of the barrow with the chariot burial. The deceased, a male aged 17-25, buried on an oval shield and surrounded with spear heads of iron and bone. About 1m beyond the barrow ditch, the burial of a young adult woman was found. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Square barrow. The ditches enclosed an area of about 6.5m across.

DECEASED

Male, over 46 years of age, about 1.74m tall. Bone trauma (fractured rib that was healing at the time of death), muscle damage to his left thigh, osteoporosis, degenerative joint changes (left clavicle, shoulders, wrists, knees and toes), poor oral health (tooth loss, diseased gums, dental abscess).

GRAVE PIT

4.4 x 2.4m and 1m deep.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Complete chariot (apart from the yoke), buried intact. Two horses (heads missing) standing upright, as if they were pulling the chariot. The deceased was buried on top of a shield that was placed face down on the vehicle platform. The deceased was crouched on his right side (legs tightly drawn up), with his head to the north (towards the yoke), facing west. Bones of at least five piglets lay over and around him. Three terrets were found out of position (from disturbed horizon at the top of the grave). VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron wheel tyres, 90cm in diameter, 4mm wide and 1.5m thick. Soil stains revealed six spokes (originally 12) and a wooden rim on the inside of one of the tyres. Two naves, about 30cm long. Four copper-alloy nave hoops; three similar in form, with medial raised bands; the fourth hoop was in iron and much narrower.

AXLE

Some 2m long and 14cm thick, made of ash (metal corrosion inside the nave bands). Two linchpins: tapering iron rods, linked to iron rings, with ornamental knobs.

POLE

Intermittent soil stain, at least 1.35m long.

PLATFORM / BOX

Revealed by soil stains. Fairly narrow and shallow, with a tapered front end. Internal measures: 1.45m long and 65cm wide at the southeast end, reducing to 25cm at the northwest (front). Resting on the axle, but no indication how they were joint.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Two copper-alloy terrets with decorative bosses (probably coral) and one plain iron ring terret. The heads of the horses had been truncated by ploughing, which may explain the absence of horse harness.

OTHER PARTS

None mentioned.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Highly decorated copper-alloy and red glass ‘dragonfly’ brooch.

POTTERY

Not reported.

WEAPONRY

Highly decorated wood and copper-alloy shield with an ovoid raised boss, two crescent-shaped plates with repoussé decoration, and a scalloped border.

ANIMAL BONES

The sex of the horses could not be established (head missing), but the fused bones indicate that they were not juveniles.

GRAVE GOODS

Bones from the heads and forelimbs of at least five piglets.

211

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent OTHER

None reported. DATING

Third or early second century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Stephens and Ware 2020: 30; Ware and Stephens 2020.

212

Appendix A

Seamer Site known as

Seamer

Location

Seamer

County / Département

North Yorkshire GENERAL DESCRIPTION

In 1879, Mortimer was informed by a train guard that around the year 1862, a small horse and cart were found in the ballast pit of Seamer station. DATING No information. BIBLIOGRAPHY Mortimer 1905: 358; Stead 1979: 24, 103.

213

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Wetwang Slack 1 Site known as

Wetwang Slack

Location

Wetwang

County / Département

East Yorkshire GENERAL DESCRIPTION

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Discovered in 1984 by quarry manager Mick Ward and subsequently excavated by John Dent of the Field Archaeology Unit (Humberside County Council) with assistance from the East Riding Archaeological Society and the Royal Corps of Transport.

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Five enclosures were found, of which four contained graves, three of them with a chariot. The site lies in the same valley as the large Wetwang Slack cemetery, some 400m further to the west. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Square enclosure, 6.5m to 7.0m across. The northeastern part is destroyed.

DECEASED

Young adult male. Orientation north-south, facing west. Knees drawn up towards waist level.

GRAVE PIT

Sub-triangular in plan, base at the southern side. Maximum depth: 0.85m. 2.83 x 2.6m at surface level (assuming no extension for pole), 2.25 x 2.0m at floor level.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Dismantled vehicle. Wheels laid side by side on the floor (to the east and to the west), the axle close to the south side. Central rectangular box or coffin had been laid over the wheels and enclosed the area within which lay body, yoke, shield and all spearheads except one. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron tyres and four iron nave hoops. The western wheel had 12 spokes. Two iron dogs or clamps from the hub of the eastern wheel, and a third clamp from the felloe of the western wheel.

AXLE

About 1.81m long. Two antler linchpins.

POLE

If there was a northward extension for the pole, the evidence has been lost, since the northeastern side of the grave and the enclosure had gone (accidental discovery).

PLATFORM / BOX

The central rectangular structure could be the superstructure of the vehicle, or it could be a coffin. It measured 1.51 x 0.94m, and it was at least 0.57m high (upper part truncated by former ploughing and quarry stripping).

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

The line of the yoke (1.04m) was represented by five ribbed copper-alloy terrets, the central one larger. It was laid parallel to the line of the body on its western side. Two iron two-link horse bits.

OTHER PARTS

None. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

Iron sword in scabbard with a copper-alloy front plate and an iron chape and back plate. Hilt similar to anthropoid type, but here there is no head but merely knobs that form arms and legs. Two copper-alloy discs, on either side of the suspension loop and below the sword. Two iron spine covers of a wooden shield (laid in grave with the boss downward). Seven iron spearheads, scattered around the skeleton. Identified by Ian Stead as a ‘speared corpse’.

214

Appendix A ANIMAL BONES

Forequarter of a pig, over the man’s body, between the head and knees

OTHER

None. DATING

This is one of eight chariot burials for which new radiocarbon dates were obtained using Bayesian modelling. The eight burials are dated between 255-165 cal BC (posterior density estimate - 95 per cent probability); between 210-195 cal BC (posterior density estimate 68 per cent probability) (Jay et al. 2012, 177-78, fig. 7; 181). BIBLIOGRAPHY Dent 1985; Stead 1991: 33; Jay et al. 2012.

215

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Wetwang Slack 2 Site known as

Wetwang Slack

Location

Wetwang

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

This second chariot burial was found during the excavation of the enclosures near the first chariot burial.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Excavated in 1984 by John Dent of the Field Archaeology Unit (Humberside County Council) with assistance from the East Riding Archaeological Society and the Royal Corps of Transport. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Five enclosures were found, of which four contained graves, three of them with a chariot. The site lies in the same valley as the large Wetwang Slack cemetery, some 400m further to the west. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Square enclosure, 9.6m across between the ditches.

DECEASED

Young adult female. Orientation north-south, facing east. Flexed position, arms outstretched in front of the body.

GRAVE PIT

Sub-rectangular in plan, with an extension in the centre of the northern side. Length is 3.69m, including 1.05m of the extension; 2.57m wide at cleared surface. Measures at the base (0.73m below cleared surface): 3.58 x 2.34m.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle dismantled. Pole and axle were probably connected when buried. Wheels had been laid on the floor of the grave, to the east and the west. Central rectangular box or coffin had been laid over the wheels and enclosed the area within which lay body, yoke, linchpins and the non-structural grave goods. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron tyres. Traces of four spokes of the eastern wheel suggest that there had been 12 originally. Two pairs of copper-alloy nave hoops. An iron clamp from the felloe of the eastern wheel. An iron nail from the hub of the western wheel survived as mineral replacement close to the metal fittings.

AXLE

Soil stains suggest a length of c.1.95m Two iron linchpins with copper-alloy heads and tails; the heads were decorated with engraved or punched designs. They were laid together next to the line of the yoke. Two iron nails, about 1m apart, along the length of the axle: perhaps from attachment to a superstructure.

POLE

At right angles to the axle but preserved only at the northern end of the grave, where there was a special extension to accommodate it.

PLATFORM / BOX

The central rectangular structure could be the superstructure of the vehicle, or it could be a coffin. It measured 1.82 x 1.20m and it was 0.50m high. If it was the superstructure of the vehicle, it cannot have been fastened to the chassis, given its position.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Yoke represented by a line of terrets of 0.95m long, on the western side of the body and parallel with it. Five terrets made of copper-alloy cast onto an iron core and decorated with engraving and beads of coral. Three sizes: the largest terret in the middle and two pairs arranged symmetrically from it. Also on the line of the yoke: a single ring of iron coated with copper-alloy and two pieces of sheet copper-alloy. A pair of three-link horse bits in iron and copper-alloy; their outer terminals were decorated with a cast S-shaped ornament.

OTHER PARTS

None.

216

Appendix A GRAVE GOODS DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

A plain iron pin. The head of a broken iron and gold pin, decorated with ?coral.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

Two forequarters of a pig, deposited between the arms and thighs of the deceased.

OTHER

An iron mirror: circular; handle with a ring at either end and a swelling in the middle. Copper-alloy box with a chain: closed cylinder made of copper-alloy sheet, with incised curvilinear ornaments and a roundel of red enamel. DATING

This is one of eight chariot burials for which new radiocarbon dates were obtained using Bayesian modelling. The eight burials are dated between 255-165 cal BC (posterior density estimate - 95 per cent probability); between 210-195 cal BC (posterior density estimate 68 per cent probability) (Jay et al. 2012, 177-78, fig. 7; 181). BIBLIOGRAPHY Dent 1985; Jay et al. 2012.

217

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Wetwang Slack 3 Site known as

Wetwang Slack

Location

Wetwang

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Found on 16 August 1984, a month after work on the first two chariot burials was finished, when the quarry machine broke into the grave. More difficult to recognise; machine struck one of the tyres.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Excavated by John Dent of the Field Archaeology Unit (Humberside County Council) with assistance from the East Riding Archaeological Society and the Royal Corps of Transport. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Five enclosures were found, of which four contained graves, three of them with a chariot. The site lies in the same valley as the large Wetwang Slack cemetery, some 400m further to the west. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

The enclosure was found to the south of chariot burial 2, but it was not linked. The northern part has been removed. It measured 6.6m across.

DECEASED

Young adult, thighs drawn up at right angles to the trunk, orientation north-south, facing east. The cranium had been removed by the quarry machine.

GRAVE PIT

Northern part removed by quarry machine. Southern side: 2.35m long at surface, 2.13m at floor level 0.70m below.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle dismantled. Wheels laid on floor of grave, to the east and the west. Western wheel tilted towards body, with rim tyre resting on floor grave on the east. Eastern wheel far closer to horizontal but broken by machine. Yoke, linchpins and horse bits relate to the structure and traction. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron tyres. Soil marks or mineral deposits where felloes, hubs and spokes had been. Both wheels must have had 12 spokes. Iron nave hoops A dog from the hub of the eastern wheel.

AXLE

Based on soil marks: at least 1.83m long and 0.15m thick in middle. Lay beneath, but slightly forward of, the back of the sub-rectangular box structure and parallel to it. Only one linchpin recovered, made of iron, followed a curved pattern.

POLE

No evidence for a northward extension for pole, given that the northeastern corner of the grave pit was missing.

PLATFORM / BOX

Traces of timber structural elements preserved as marks or voids. Rectangular structure around central area, approximately 1.00-1.05m wide at southern end but slightly tapering towards the north. Length: could not be established (damaged) but must have been at least about 1.50m to have contained all the artefacts. This rectangular box structure had been laid over the wheels and enclosed the area within which lay the body and personal possessions. It could either be part of the vehicle or a coffin.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

The most northerly terret was lost. The four remaining terrets were made of copper-alloy cast over iron, with a ribbed decoration. The central terret was larger. Yoke had been decorated or reinforced by narrow fillets of sheet copper-alloy. Two iron horse bits of the so-called ‘Irish type’. An iron ring found on the floor of the quarry may have been a piece of harness.

OTHER PARTS

None.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

GRAVE GOODS

218

Appendix A POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

Iron sword in scabbard with a decorated copper-alloy front plate, deposited diagonally across the body; knobbed hilt and iron chape. Very close to sword from chariot burial 1. Suspension elements: two cast copper-alloy rings or wheels with central studs of coral. Iron fitting found over the thigh of the deceased: perhaps a reinforcement for a wooden shield boss (if correct then shield was laid in ground boss downwards.

ANIMAL BONES

None reported.

OTHER

None. DATING

This is one of eight chariot burials for which new radiocarbon dates were obtained using Bayesian modelling. The eight burials are dated between 255-165 cal BC (posterior density estimate - 95 per cent probability); between 210-195 cal BC (posterior density estimate 68 per cent probability) (Jay et al. 2012, 177-78, fig. 7; 181). BIBLIOGRAPHY Dent 1985; Jay et al. 2012.

219

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Wetwang Village Site known as

Wetwang Village

Location

Wetwang

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Found unexpectedly in March 2001 during the excavation of a medieval manorial complex before building of houses.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Excavated by British Museum and Guildhouse Consultancy. Only preliminary publications available. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Apparently isolated burial, on the east side of Wetwang Village, on the prominent hill above Wetwang Slack. Unusual position for an Iron Age burial in East Yorkshire. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Square ditched enclosure and low barrow mound. The ditch contained a few sherds of pottery and pig bones. Pig bones thought to have eroded into ditch from the surface of the barrow.

DECEASED

Mature lady, around 35 years old and quite tall (1.72cm). Is thought to have had an accident a few years before her death, causing a temporomandibular trauma and the dislocation of her right shoulder. Marks on the right side of her face were first diagnosed as haemangioma but appear to be due to post-mortem skewing (personal communication Rod Mackey). Crouched position, oriented south-north, facing west.

GRAVE PIT

4.25m long and 2.1m wide at northern end to 3m wide at southern end

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle dismantled. Wheels detached and laid on the floor in the northern half of the grave pit. Body of the deceased was laid in a small hollow in the southern half of the grave, probably on a mat or blanket. The axle with the pole attached was placed over the corpse, then followed by the body of the vehicle. Yoke was not attached to the pole. Wheels were placed over pole at the northern end. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron tyres, 900m in diameter and 39mm wide. Wood was probably ash. Probably 12 spokes. Iron nave hoops with copper-alloy sheeting.

AXLE

Most of the axle survived as voids. Axle was tapered and had swellings behind the wheels to act as wheel stops. Two iron linchpins with copper-alloy sheeting, J-shaped with a small ring, decorated and with a shiny finish.

POLE

Partially survived as voids. Was attached to the yoke when deposited.

PLATFORM / BOX

Rectangular structure surrounding the deceased is thought to be the body of the vehicle.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Part of the yoke survived as voids. Horse bits and other parts of the harness probably wrapped around it. Copper-alloy terrets, each decorated with five coral studs. One of the studs was replaced by a red glass ‘enamel’ stud some time before the burial. Seems to indicate the vehicle was old and used. Two-piece iron and copper-alloy horse bits with a raised domed projection on the outer ring; they were decorated with inlaid glass enamels very similar to those on the Battersea Shield. Even the part in the horse’s mouth was decorated. One single copper-alloy strap union was found under the knees of the deceased, two others in position on each end of the yoke (to allow the band that passes across each horse’s chest to be fixed to the yoke). Decorated with coral studs on both sides. Birch-bark tar was used as an adhesive in the harness fittings for the coral beads.

OTHER PARTS

None. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Iron involuted brooch, revealed by X-rays. Being near the mirror and beads, it may have been used to secure the mirror’s container.

220

Appendix A POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

Over the upper part of the skeleton: joints of pig, including several split skulls.

OTHER

Iron mirror, resting against the woman’s ankles. 100+ blue glass beads, so tiny that they could only have been threaded onto horse hairs, as well as metal and coral beads. Beads may be from a tassel tied to the handle, or from a bag in which the mirror was kept. DATING

This is one of eight chariot burials for which new radiocarbon dates were obtained using Bayesian modelling. The eight burials are dated between 255-165 cal BC (posterior density estimate - 95 per cent probability); between 210-195 cal BC (posterior density estimate - 68 per cent probability). For Wetwang Village, more specific dates are given: 215-180 cal BC (posterior density estimate – 95 per cent probability) 210-195 cal BC (posterior density estimate – 68 per cent probability), (Jay et al. 2012, 177-78, fig. 7; 181). BIBLIOGRAPHY Hill 2002; Stacey 2004; British Museum s.d., object 2001-0401-19; Jay et al. 2012.

221

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Wolds / Humber site Site known as

Site X (near southern Wolds and River Humber)

Location

Cannot be revealed

County / Département

East Yorkshire

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Site excavated in 2016-17 by MAP Archaeological Practice.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL To the south: seven round Bronze Age barrows, 3-4m in diameter, with 13 cremations. To the northwest: 10 square Iron Age barrows, all but one with a central inhumation. There are 43 inhumations, including nine neonates. The enclosures measured 8-10m internally and had deep ditches, some up to 70cm. The chariot burial was found in Barrow 720. Several (shallow) pits with animal bone deposits. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Fairly insubstantial ditches as compared to those of the other enclosures on the site.

DECEASED

Skeleton in a crouched position, aligned north-south and facing east.

GRAVE PIT

Large central grave, 4.2 x 2.6m, undisturbed.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Dismantled vehicle. Yoke and vehicle parts visible as soil stains. Wheels laid flat on the floor. Soil stains may suggest that the deceased was placed on the chariot platform. Pole in two parts, one behind the back of the deceased, the top part close to the yoke. Pole not attached to the axle. The linchpins were located on either side of the deceased, and a pig skull was deposited on the shoulder and hips. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two wheels with 12 spokes, 88cm diameter. Both upper and lower nave hoops are present. Iron tyres with fragments of wood.

AXLE

Two iron linchpins.

POLE

Pole (in two parts) preserved as soil stains.

PLATFORM / BOX

Only suggested by soil stains.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Iron double-jointed snaffle bits. Four copper-alloy terrets and three other copperalloy fittings (found amongst the organic remains of the yoke). Two decorated copper-alloy fittings at each side where the yoke would have been attached to the pole; both functional and decorative, copper-alloy front and iron back, some timber surviving in between.

OTHER PARTS

None reported so far.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None reported so far.

POTTERY

None reported so far.

WEAPONRY

None reported so far.

ANIMAL BONES

Pig skull.

OTHER

None.

GRAVE GOODS

DATING Radiocarbon date obtained from the skeleton: 328-204 Cal BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Stephens and Ware 2020: 28-30, fig. 2.12; Ware and Stephens 2020.

222

Middle Rhine – Moselle region

223

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Spiesheim Site known as

Spiesheim

Location

Spiesheim, Lkr. Alzey-Worms, Am Fischbaum

County / Département

Rheinland-Pfalz

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Site detected by K. Hochgesand in 1978 and subsequently excavated by Hochgesand and by the Staatliche Bodendenkmalpflege. The chariot burial was excavated by Hochgesand.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with at least five inhumation burials of the ELT period, one of which is a possible chariot burial (burial Ia); this can be dated to the transition from the ELT to the MLT period. Reason for the discovery of the site was a large Grabgarten (square, with sides of c.17m) with cremation burials of the MLT and beginning of the LLT period. The ELT inhumation burials were found near to this Grabgarten. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No information.

DECEASED

Inhumation burial. No further details known.

GRAVE PIT

No information.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

The burial was disturbed in antiquity and no information is available as to the lay-out of the grave. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

None reported.

AXLE

No information.

POLE

No information.

PLATFORM / BOX

Two iron suspension fittings (Ösenstifte).

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Two copper-alloy terrets (ring with a base to fix it onto the yoke). Phalera-like decorative button in copper-alloy sheet, with iron nail.

OTHER PARTS

Pieces of unidentified ironwork.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Two iron fibulae.

POTTERY

One piece of handmade pottery.

WEAPONRY

Iron spearhead.

ANIMAL BONES

None reported.

OTHER

Iron knife.

GRAVE GOODS

DATING Transition LT B / LT C (middle of the third century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Stümpel 1982-1983: 198, fig. 3D; Haffner and Joachim 1984: 76, 84; Van Endert 1987: 38-39; Schönfelder 2000: 246-47, fig. 173.

224

Aisne and Ardennes departments (France)

225

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Bucy-le-Long Site known as

Bucy-le-Long, Le Fond du Petit Marais

Location

Bucy-le-Long, Le Fond du Petit Marais

County / Département

Aisne

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavated in 1990-1992, in advance of the extension of a quarry. Only two km from the cemetery of Bucy-le-Long, La Héronnière (c. 390-325 BC) which included four chariot burials.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The chariot burial from Le Fond du Petit Marais was looted and ransacked in antiquity. Only preliminary reports are available. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 68 burials, of which 34 inhumations and 34 cremations, and several square monuments (ditched enclosures and superstructures). Three phases: • phase A (c.250-180 BC): 29 inhumations, including two double ones • phase B (c.180-150 BC): 19 cremations • phase C (c.150-120/110 BC): 15 cremations and five inhumations. The chariot burial (burial 258) is believed to be the tombe fondatrice of the cemetery, around which the other inhumations of phase A were arranged. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Square ditched enclosure with palisade, with an entrance in the middle of the northern side. Sides of the enclosure were 8m long. A four-post structure (3.50 x 4.50m) was built over the grave. Presence of a barrow not attested but deemed possible.

DECEASED

Male.

GRAVE PIT

Wooden chamber.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

No information available. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Traces of iron tyres.

AXLE

No information available.

POLE

No information available.

PLATFORM / BOX

No information available.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

No information available.

OTHER PARTS

No information available.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None.

POTTERY

Yes, but no further information available.

WEAPONRY

Yes, but no further information available.

ANIMAL BONES

No information available, but in general there are fewer animal bones present in phase A compared to the later phases (and compared to earlier phases in La Héronnière).

OTHER

No information available, but grave goods in general are very rare in phase A.

GRAVE GOODS

DATING Middle of the third century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Pommepuy, Auxiette and Desenne 1998; Pommepuy et al. 2000: 208-10; Demoule 1999: 318; Pichon 2002: 149.

226

Appendix A

Tremblois-lès-Rocroi (1938) Site known as

La Forêt des Pothées, barrow 1/1938

Location

Tremblois-lès-Rocroi, Les Pothées

County / Département

Ardennes

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavated in 1938.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION Re-studied by Jean-Loup Flouest in 1984. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL

Barrow cemetery with 70+ barrows. Mostly cremation burials of the Hallstatt period but re-used during the La Tène period. The chariot burial with inhumation and a complete vehicle is from barrow 1 and was excavated in 1938. A cremation burial with (possible) parts of a vehicle was found in the following year (1/1939).

ENCLOSURE / BARROW

Barrow: 13m in diameter and 1.25m high, covered with pebbles and pieces of schist.

DECEASED

Only traces of skeleton remain (acid soil).

GRAVE PIT

Circular grave pit, 5.90m in diameter, 0.50m deep, with separate wheel pits, 0.20m below the bottom of the grave pit. In the south-southeastern side: niche of 0.90m long, in which the horse bits were placed. The distance from the edge of the niche to the back of the chariot was 3.5m. Indications for wooden burial chamber, or at least for a wooden ceiling. When the ceiling collapsed, the wheels were crushed. Complete vehicle, standing upright. The distance from the edge of the niche to the back of the chariot was 3.5m

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Grave goods apparently deposited outside the vehicle box. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS WHEELS

Fragments of iron tyres, approximately 4cm wide, edge slightly flattened, no trace of nails; diameter probably 0.67m. Remains of wooden felloe. Wheel-track: 1.47-1.51m

AXLE

Large iron nail, interpreted by excavators as a linchpin, but deemed unlikely by Flouest.

POLE

Possible pole ornament.

PLATFORM / BOX

No information available.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Two horse bits.

OTHER PARTS

No further information. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Fragment of a jet bracelet.

POTTERY

Five pots.

WEAPONRY

Iron sword (originally 0.90m long) and iron and copper-alloy scabbard. Iron rings with disks (for suspension?). Shield boss and other iron fragments from a shield. Spearhead

ANIMAL BONES

Not reported (acid soil).

OTHER

Neolithic flint blade. DATING

Middle of the third century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Flouest 1984: 61-66; Chossenot 1997: 207; Schönfelder 2000: 406-07.

227

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Warcq Site known as

Warcq

Location

Warcq, La Sauce

County / Département

Ardennes (France)

EXCAVATION HISTORY

The chariot burial was excavated in the summer of 2014. It was discovered unexpectedly three years before, during the excavation of a Gallo-Roman building.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Excavation commissioned by the State (DRAC Champagne-Ardenne - Direction Régionale des Affaires Culturelles de Champagne-Ardenne) on the route of the A304 motorway built by the Direction régionale de l’Environnement, de l’Aménagement et du Logement (Dreal) between Charleville-Mézières and Rocroi. Cooperation of the Cellule Départementale d’Archéologie des Ardennes and Inrap (Institut National de Recherches Archéologiques Préventives). PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL No other Iron Age burials reported. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No barrow or enclosure reported but may not have been preserved.

DECEASED

The bones of the deceased were degraded and appeared as a brownish sediment. Only the teeth could be taken for post-excavation analysis.

GRAVE PIT

Wooden chamber (5.50m x 2.80m), preserved to a depth of more than a meter. Walls and ceiling exceptionally well preserved (damp environment), but ceiling had collapsed over time. The chamber was oriented along an east-west axis.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Four harnessed horses were buried with the deceased and the chariot, two in the southwest and northwest corners, the other two in front of the chariot. The yoke was attested in its functional position, placed at the front of the cervical vertebrae of the two horses. South of the chariot: food offerings (pottery, buckets, meat, long iron knife). VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two wheels with iron tyres and hubs in copper alloy, decorated with yellow glass paste.

AXLE

Two copper alloy linchpins and an axle cap, all three decorated with yellow glass paste.

POLE

No information at this stage.

PLATFORM / BOX

Chariot body had been decorated with pieces of copper alloy, in places set with dark blue or yellow glass paste. The openwork wooden sides of the box had been covered with gold leaf.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Yoke: piece of mineralised wood, in a very bad state of preservation, covered with a long, profiled copper alloy trimming. The trimming consisted of at least nine different pieces, shaped by hammering and attached to the wooden base of the yoke by small nails. There were six terrets on the yoke; one pair was attached to the trimming, while the other terrets were directly fixed to the wooden base of the yoke. The six terrets are placed very close to one another. Each of the horses that were carrying the yoke were wearing an iron horse bit, found in situ in the horse’s mouth. On the skull of one of the horses, a head harness could be identified, composed of leather straps, decorated with tiny iron rivets with a copper alloy sheeting (Ø 2 mm). Small copper alloy belt hoops were preserved at the junction of the various straps that made up the harness. No metal parts were found on the head harness of the second horse. The horses buried behind the chariot were also harnessed, but no details have been communicated.

OTHER PARTS

No information at this stage.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Gold torc and iron fibula.

POTTERY

Six pots.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

Degraded bones, appeared as a brownish sediment.

GRAVE GOODS

Food offering: probably half a pig.

228

Appendix A OTHER

Tweezers, a lunula-shaped razor and shears, placed in a fur bag. DATING

Middle of the second century BC (LT C2/D1). BIBLIOGRAPHY Millet, Bernadet and Nicolas 2018; Nicolas et al. 2018.

229

The Belgian Ardennes

230

Appendix A

Neufchâteau - Le Sart Site known as

Neufchâteau - Le Sart

Location

Neufchâteau - Le Sart, Le Bourzi

County / Département

Province of Luxembourg

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Site excavated in 1985 by the Service National des Fouilles directed by Anne Cahen-Delhaye.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Cemetery consisting of six low and round barrows (‘tombelles’) with 16 burials. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL The cemetery originally dates from the fifth century BC and was re-occupied in the third century BC. Barrow II (covering the chariot burial) has a diameter of 22.5m and is 0.35m high. Two secondary burials were added later.

ENCLOSURE / BARROW

None of the barrows is surrounded by a ditched enclosure. DECEASED

Only dental fragments preserved. Orientation W/E, head to the west.

GRAVE PIT

Trapezoidal shape, maximum length 2.45m, maximum width 2.22m (0.38m to 0.44m below surface). Two wheel pits. No separate pole or yoke trench. Orientation WNW/ESE. Front of the vehicle towards the ESE. Complete vehicle, standing upright, but no evidence for a pole or yoke. Deceased placed on platform, head between the wheels, but the position of the dental remains indicates that the skull had sunk towards the southern wheel pit.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS WHEELS

No tyres, but traces of iron (2-3cm wide) attested in wheel pits. Wheel track: 1.31m. One possible nail of a tyre found. One felloe-joint (cf. fifth century BC).

AXLE

No metal remains.

POLE

No evidence for a pole.

PLATFORM / BOX

Nails and other small iron pieces with remnants of wood, possibly from vehicle box. No indication for a suspension system.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

No evidence for a yoke. Two iron rings (diameters of 30mm and 37mm), possibly from horse harness.

OTHER PARTS

Several small unidentified metal parts.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Two copper-alloy and one iron fibula.

GRAVE GOODS Iron belt-buckle. Chain of 24 glass beads, small iron ring, two rings in organic material (bone?). POTTERY

Two pieces of pottery, one painted.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

None, but acid soil.

OTHER

None. DATING

Second quarter of the third century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Cahen-Delhaye 1997; Cahen-Delhaye 2013; Cosyns and Hurt 2007; Gratuze and Cosyns 2007.

231

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Sberchamps, Au Fersay burial 1 Site known as

Sberchamps, Au Fersay

Location

Libramont-Chevigny

County / Département

Province of Luxembourg GENERAL DESCRIPTION

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavated by the Centre de Recherches Archéologiques en Ardenne in 1989.

Isolated barrow with five inhumation burials, including two chariot burials, one PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL of the fifth century BC (burial 6) and this one of the early second century BC (burial 1, in older publications referred to as burial 4). In the second half of the second century AD, a pit was dug into the older chariot burial and filled with a variety of items, some broken and some showing traces of fire, but there were no cremated bones. Large low barrow (tombelle) with a diameter of 24m, surrounded by a quadrangular enclosure (about 15-18m x 19m) formed by a palisade consisting of 24 thin, detached poles, considered inadequate to have carried a roof. Only three such structures are known from the Belgian Ardennes.

ENCLOSURE / BARROW

When discovered, the tombelle, which was erected almost at the top of a plateau, was only about 20cm high, but originally it must have been higher and less spread out. DECEASED

No information reported. Probably no remains due to acid soil.

GRAVE PIT

Trapezoidal shape, with wheel pits and separate pole trench. The maximum length, corresponding with the axis of the pole, was 4.05m, but the main pit was 2.30m long and 2.66m wide. The northern wheel pit (left wheel) measured 1.14 x 0.57m, the southern one (right wheel) 1.14 x 0.58m; the distance between the pits was at least 0.85m. The main pit was 0.78m deep and the wheel pits both 0.39m. The pole trench was less deep towards the front of the vehicle (0.27m) than closer to the vehicle box (0.48m). The main pit was slightly raised towards the front, and its walls were oblique. The grave pit was sealed with a wooden lid. Orientation: southeast/northeast (63°).

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

The vehicle was complete and standing upright. The yoke had been detached and placed in the pole trench, together with the horse bits and phalerae. Based on the location of the fibula, the head of the deceased was located at the rear of the axle. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

The tyres are mainly attested through traces in the wheel pits. Only some small fragments were preserved, which indicate that the tyres were at least 24mm (left wheel) and 27mm wide (right wheel). Several small iron parts were found that are assumed to have belonged to the tyres or naves Wheel-track: 1.32m.

AXLE

No metal remains.

POLE

A series of small decorative iron parts was found at the level of the pole, mainly consisting of cut plaques, fixed with small nails.

PLATFORM / BOX

Some of the iron parts have traces of mineralised wood and could be from the vehicle box. A small iron part, cut in the shape of a horseshoe was possibly a decorative element from the vehicle box.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Complete iron trimming of a wooden yoke. Two iron horse bits and at least two decorated iron phalerae.

OTHER PARTS

Small iron parts. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

A large iron fibula.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

A 59cm long iron spearhead.

ANIMAL BONES

None, but acid soil.

OTHER

None. DATING

Early second century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Cahen-Delhaye, Hurt and Gratia 1989; Cahen-Delhaye 1993; Mathieu 1993; Cahen-Delhaye and Gratia 2015.

232

The Paris area

233

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Bouqueval 3 Site known as

Bouqueval

Location

Bouqueval, Fossé à deux Guëulle

County / Département

Val-d’Oise

EXCAVATION HISTORY

1977-1978: surface and aerial prospections.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION 1978: excavation by voluntary archaeologists of the Jeunesse Préhistorique et Géologique de France (JPGF) PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL

Small cemetery with 14 inhumation burials (one is possibly a cremation), including two chariot burials and two burials with weapons

ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No ditched enclosure, no remains of a barrow. However, since there are no intersections, the graves must have been marked somehow. Aerial photography revealed a rectangular ditch (28 x 17m) which possibly surrounded the cemetery, but this was not further investigated.

DECEASED

Child 13-15 years old. Skeleton only partially preserved. Extended on the back, face turned towards the E. Orientation: south-southwest – north-northeast.

GRAVE PIT

Rectangular, with rounded corners (4.90 x 2.70m, 0.65-0.70m deep). Three blocks of limestone (c.10 x 20cm) just above head of the deceased, but no indication of stone black lining. According to Guadagnin (1984: 44), the wheels had been taken off and placed flat laterally onto the vehicle box.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Centrally in grave pit: +/- rectangular cavity (1.50 x 1m) with vehicle box, deceased and largest concentration of grave goods. Linchpins in NW and NE corners of the grave pit. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS WHEELS

One fragment of a tyre only, 4cm wide, 3-4mm thick; no nails. Based on bend: diameter 960mm. No nave hoops.

AXLE

Two curved iron linchpins of which the heads are covered with a rectangular copper-alloy case with decorations; shanks are square in section and end in a copper-alloy globe, decorated with a collar. Cf. Nanterre

POLE

No remains.

PLATFORM / BOX

Box structure was visible as a thin dark layer. Small objects, thought to be part of the box: nail with moulded copper alloy head; small iron fittings, sometimes with remains of wood

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

No terrets. Two iron horse bits. Copper-alloy ring with traces of leather thong.

OTHER PARTS

None.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Two iron brooches (arched bow).

GRAVE GOODS One lignite bracelet and one copper-alloy bracelet with moulded decorations. One copper-alloy button, decorated with an anthropomorphic motif in Plastic Style. 12 copper-alloy phalerae (32-47mm) and a copper-alloy boss: according to Guadagnin (1984: 49-50), the position of these items (surrounding the deceased) suggests that they were fixed onto a leather garment that was placed over the deceased. POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

Not mentioned.

OTHER

Part of a cauldron suspension chain.

234

Appendix A DATING Third century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Guadagnin 1984; Rachet 1998-1999.

235

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Bouqueval 11 Site known as

Bouqueval

Location

Bouqueval, Fossé à deux Guëulle

County / Département

Val-d’Oise

EXCAVATION HISTORY

1977-1978: surface and aerial prospections.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION 1978: excavation by voluntary archaeologists of the Jeunesse Préhistorique et Géologique de France (JPGF). PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL

Small cemetery with 14 inhumation burials (one is possibly a cremation), including two chariot burials and two burials with weapons.

ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No ditched enclosure, no remains of a barrow. However, since there are no intersections, the graves must have been marked somehow. Aerial photography revealed a rectangular ditch (28 x 17m) which possibly surrounded the cemetery, but this was not further investigated.

DECEASED

Young adult female. Skeleton only partially preserved. Extended on the back. Orientation northwest/southeast.

GRAVE PIT

Large oval pit (max. length 3.50m, max. width 2.30m, 0.42m deep. Two wheel slots, 0.48m deep. The grave pit being very shallow, it has suffered substantial ploughing damage and the excavators believe many grave goods have been lost.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle complete. Deceased was lying on the vehicle box, with the upper part of the body between the wheels and the feet towards the front of the chariot. Most of the grave goods were placed around the body and on the vehicle box. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Left tyre Ø 105mm, straight in cross-section, 3-4cm wide, 2-3mm thick; no nails. Fragment of the other tyre. Wheel track: 1.55m

AXLE

One iron linchpin, curved shank with rectangular head that is semi-oval in section (found in situ). One axle stabilising bar (in situ).

POLE

No metal remains.

PLATFORM / BOX

A decorated, openwork copper alloy angle, probably fixed onto the front or the side of the box. Three or four copper-alloy decorative nails, possibly from leather cover that was nailed to the box Four iron rings, seemingly part of the box, which was then at least 1.15m wide. Single eyebolt: part of the suspension system.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

No metal remains of a yoke, no horse bits recovered.

OTHER PARTS

Tiny bits of iron, incl. head of a nail. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

One iron brooch (arched bow)

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

Not mentioned.

OTHER

None. DATING

Third century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Guadagnin 1984; Rachet 1998-99.

236

Appendix A

Le Plessis-Gassot Site known as

Le Plessis-Gassot

Location

Le Plessis-Gassot, Le Bois-Bouchard

County / Département

Val-d’Oise

GENERAL DESCRIPTION EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavated in 1998 by Inrap (Institut National de Recherches Archéologiques Préventives), directed by Nathalie Ginoux.

Small cemetery with 18 inhumation burials (including one chariot burial). PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL A cremation burial was added at the place of the chariot burial after the roof structure had been dismantled (see below). ENCLOSURE / BARROW

There are no ditched enclosures, but the cemetery as a whole was surrounded by shrubs. Collapsed burial chamber suggests the chariot burial was covered by a barrow.

DECEASED

Skeleton dissolved.

GRAVE PIT

Rectangular grave pit, 4.2 x 2.10m. There was a roof structure, supported by two large posts; this construction was dismantled at a later stage, when the grave contents had already decayed. Orientation south/north, wheels to the south.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Complete vehicle, standing upright. However, the box had been lifted from the axle and placed more forward, on a layer of soil. The yoke may originally have been attached to the northern post. Harness and horse bits were placed on the shield that covered the deceased.

VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS WHEELS

Two flat and wide iron wheel tyres, 120cm in diameter, 8mm thick and 4cm wide. No nails. Iron nave bands found in original position; in one case the linchpin was still attached.

AXLE

Axle deposited in position. Two iron linchpins, with a curved shank and a rectangular head, apparently undecorated (but subject to restauration). Very similar to the linchpins from Bouqueval.

POLE

Dissolved but probably deposited in position.

PLATFORM / BOX

There were no metal parts found that could have been used for suspension.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Six copper-alloy terrets. Five form a series of which one is larger. The sixth is of a completely different type. Four of the terrets were found in the northern posthole, the other two in the northeastern corner of the chamber. Two iron horse bits. Alignment of tiny iron nails and copper-alloy buttons from harness.

OTHER PARTS

None.

GRAVE GOODS DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Iron fibula. Copper-alloy armband.

POTTERY

One large vase, painted red.

WEAPONRY

Sword and decorated iron scabbard. Iron spearhead with openwork decoration. Three hollow copper-alloy suspension rings for the sword. Shield (iron rim and other iron and copper-alloy parts but no shield boss).

ANIMAL BONES

None mentioned, but unfavourable soil conditions.

OTHER

Organic material. DATING

Second quarter of the third century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Ginoux and Marti 1999; Ginoux 2009.

237

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Nanterre Site known as

Nanterre

Location

Nanterre, Sablière Hubert

County / Département

Hauts-de-Seine

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Found during sand extraction in the Sablière Hubert at Nanterre. Grave goods bought shortly after, in September 1899, by the Musée des antiquités nationales (Saint-Germain-en-Laye, Paris). The objects came to the museum in different lots and presumably many were kept by the workers. There was no proper excavation, and it is not sure that the finds are complete. On the other hand, not all objects are thought to have belonged to this one burial; more than one sword, for example, is unusual.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Apparently, there were four other burials, without grave goods. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No information.

DECEASED

No human bones mentioned.

GRAVE PIT

Chariot was found in a grave pit, but no details known.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

No information. Apparently, horses were found in the grave pit. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Only two small fragments of very heavy iron tyres, 5cm wide, no nails. Estimated Ø of wheel 1.30m. Four copper-alloy nave bands with a central cordon.

AXLE

Only one linchpin preserved: slightly curved iron shank and rectangular copperalloy head with decoration of red enamel inlay (now turned white). A second linchpin with a copper-alloy head is not thought to have belonged to the chariot.

POLE

No information.

PLATFORM / BOX

Several copper-alloy openwork decorative elements had been attached to the vehicle box by means of small copper-alloy nails (only one nail preserved). Three or four suspension fittings (Gegabelte Ösenstiften), eyebolts used in combination with leather bands to fix the box to the frame. Is considered to have been a heavy construction compared to other known chariots of the La Tène period.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Four copper-alloy decorated terrets with enamel inlay. Pair of two-link horse bits. A copper-alloy chain thought to be part of harness got lost before arriving at the museum. A copper-alloy button with an eyelet may also have been part of the horse harness.

OTHER PARTS

Three iron eye-bolts of unknown function.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Small fibula, small chain and a bracelet, all in copper-alloy.

POTTERY

No information.

WEAPONRY

Two iron swords (one with a scabbard) and possibly a third one.

ANIMAL BONES

Reportedly, horses were buried in the grave, but the bones do not survive.

OTHER

No information.

GRAVE GOODS

DATING LT C (Olivier and Schönfelder 2002). BIBLIOGRAPHY Hubert 1902; Olivier and Schönfelder 2002.

238

Appendix A

Paris Site known as

Paris

Location

Paris, Rue Tournefort

County / Département

Paris GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The Triantaphyllos collection at the Musée des Antiquités Nationales in Paris (Saint-Germain-en-Laye) includes metal artefacts from a chariot burial with provenance ‘Rue Tournefort 44’: • Four fragments of tyres. • Iron linchpin with copper-alloy head, decorated with a human mask in Plastic Style. • Two copper-alloy terrets with human and animal masks in Plastic Style and hollow copper-alloy head of a third terret. • Sword with remains of a scabbard; one of the tyre fragments could actually be from a second sword. • Spear point (but this is now missing – see Schönfelder 2000: 406). The address ‘Rue Tournefort 44’ no longer exists today. DATING Third century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Duval and Blanchet 1974: 404-05, fig. 5; Van Endert 1987: 125-26; Schönfelder 2000; Olivier and Charlier 2008.

239

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Roissy 1002 Site known as

Roissy

Location

Roissy-en-France, La Fosse Cotheret

County / Département

Val-d’Oise

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Discovered in 1999, in advance of the construction of two new runways on the Charles de Gaulle airport. Excavated by Thierry Lejars.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 10 inhumation burials, two of them with a chariot. Burial 1002 is referred to as ‘La tombe des bronzes’. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

There are no ditched enclosures on the cemetery. Individual barrows are considered unlikely by the excavators given the lack of space between the burials.

DECEASED

Bones almost completely dissolved. Gender could not be identified but some of the grave goods are generally found with males (shears and razor). In both the chariot burials, the deceased is oriented east-west (head to the east), unlike the majority of the other burials of the cemetery, which are south-north.

GRAVE PIT

Rectangular grave pit, approximately 3.5 x 2.4m. Wooden burial chamber, with slots for the wheels.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle complete and in upright position. Deceased placed on vehicle platform with the feet towards the yoke. Platform may have been lifted from the axle. The collapse of the chamber ceiling must have broken the yoke, which would explain why the yoke ornaments were not found in their original position. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron tyres, with a diameter of 1.05m. Each wheel has two copper-alloy nave hoops.

AXLE

Two iron linchpins coated with moulded ornaments in copper-alloy.

POLE

No information as yet available.

PLATFORM / BOX

No information as yet available.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Length of the yoke: probably 1.10m. Over 20 copper-alloy ornaments in Plastic Style, from the yoke and horse harness. Some of the yoke ornaments showed signs of repair. Two iron horse bits.

OTHER PARTS

Some unidentified objects may have been part of the vehicle.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Iron fibula and copper-alloy bracelet.

POTTERY

Two wheel-thrown vases.

WEAPONRY

None.

ANIMAL BONES

Pig teeth (no bones preserved).

OTHER

A series of objects that could possibly be identified as amulets were found near the head of the deceased: a pebble (‘un galet’), an iron ring and a copper-alloy disc.

GRAVE GOODS

Plastic Style openwork copper-alloy ornament, possibly for a wooden vessel. Tools, including a pair of shears and small file for metal working. Numerous indications for the presence of organic elements, fur and textiles, but also of wooden vessels. DATING The style of the copper-alloy ornaments (LT C1) provides a terminus post quem for the date of the burial (Gomez de Soto et al. 2017). BIBLIOGRAPHY Lejars 2002a; 2005; 2014; Olivier 2012; Gomez de Soto et al. 2017.

240

Appendix A

Roissy 5002 Site known as

Roissy

Location

Roissy-en-France, La Fosse Cotheret

County / Département

Val-d’Oise

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Discovered in 1999, in advance of the construction of two new runways on the Charles de Gaulle airport. Excavated by Thierry Lejars.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Only preliminary publications are available. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 10 inhumation burials, two of them with a chariot. Burial 5002 is referred to as ‘La tombe du guerrier’. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

There are no ditched enclosures on the cemetery. Individual barrows are considered unlikely by the excavators given the lack of space between the burials. There is more space around burial 5002 as compared to the other burials.

DECEASED

Bones almost completely dissolved. Gender could not be identified but the presence of weapons might point to a man. In both the chariot burials, the deceased is oriented east-west (head to the east), unlike the majority of the other burials of the cemetery, which are south-north.

GRAVE PIT

Rectangular grave pit, approximately 4.0 x 2.5m. Wooden burial chamber, with slots for the wheels.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle complete and in upright position. Deceased placed on vehicle platform with the feet towards the yoke. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron tyres. No nave hoops.

AXLE

Two linchpins.

POLE

Connection of yoke and pole visible as a soil stain.

PLATFORM / BOX

No information as yet available.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Yoke visible as a soil stain. Line of five terrets, the middle one larger. Horse bits.

OTHER PARTS

No information. GRAVE GOODS

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Two fibulae.

POTTERY

None.

WEAPONRY

Iron sword and scabbard, with solid copper-alloy suspension rings from a leather belt. Spearhead. Metal ornaments of a wood and leather shield.

ANIMAL BONES

Pig teeth (no bones preserved).

OTHER

No information. DATING

Beginning of LT C. BIBLIOGRAPHY Lejars 2002a; 2005.

241

The Groupe de la Haine (Belgium)

242

Appendix A

Leval-Trahegnies Site known as

Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte

Location

Leval-Trahegnies, La Courte

County / Département

Province of Hainaut (Belgium)

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Various artefacts from a cemetery reached the Natural History Museum and the Royal Art and History Museum of Brussels in the period from 1905 to 1911. They were discovered during sand and clay extraction activities.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Both museums claim to have followed up on the works and to have excavated the site during certain periods, but nothing is documented. All that remains are inventories and a few notices. According to Baron A. de Loë (curator of the Royal Art and History Museum), the site had been completely disturbed a long time ago. The harness and vehicle parts may be from different burials. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Part of a cemetery, but no further information. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No information.

DECEASED

Baron de Loé refers to a cremation cemetery, but no bones are recorded, neither from inhumations nor cremations. Mr A. Rutot (Natural History Museum) drew attention to the fact that there were no bones.

GRAVE PIT

No information.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

No information. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Three fragments of iron tyres, slightly trapezoidal in section, up to 3.5-3.6cm wide.

AXLE

Two linchpins, iron shank slightly curved, with copper-alloy head in the form of a human mask in Plastic Style, with inlay (not enamel but a substance of carbonised resin).

POLE

No information.

PLATFORM / BOX

An iron pin that was possibly used to fix the platform to the chassis of the vehicle.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Three terrets with copper-alloy head in the shape of a human bust, with resin inlay, fixed into the yoke with an iron tongue. Unidentified iron part with decorated copper-alloy cover, may have belonged to yoke. May form an ensemble with the three terrets (pin is same type and same length). One smaller British type of terret, with resin inlay, seems to belong to the same harness as the three terrets above. One large hollow copper-alloy terret, similar to one found in Attichy (see Attichy 1926 burial).

OTHER PARTS

Objects in copper-alloy: a button, a decorated boss and an unidentified fragment.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Copper-alloy chain belt, with fastener and pendeloque encrusted with red enamel.

GRAVE GOODS Two sapropelite bracelets. POTTERY

Several pots.

WEAPONRY

Iron sword in scabbard; the lower part is missing.

ANIMAL BONES

No information.

OTHER

None. DATING

LT B2/C. BIBLIOGRAPHY Mariën 1961; Schönfelder 2000.

243

The Aisne valley in the Oise department

244

Appendix A

Attichy (1926) Site known as

Attichy

Location

Attichy, La Maladrerie

County / Département

Oise GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Discovered by quarry workers in 1926. Several copper-alloy and iron objects were dug up, including 12 copper-alloy rings and fragments of copper-alloy trimmings, but only three fragments of wheel tyres and three terrets were preserved. The three fragments of iron tyres were 36-39mm wide, and the suspected original diameter of the wheel was 110-120cm; there were no nails to secure the tyres to the felloe. The terrets consist of a copper-alloy decorated base of a terret with a stylised head of a fantasy animal, and two hollow copper-alloy terrets, of which only one is complete; it is similar to a terret from Leval-Trahegnies. The bones of the deceased were thrown in the water for fear of trouble with the police. DATING LT C. BIBLIOGRAPHY Duval and Blanchet 1974; Schönfelder 2000: 402.

245

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent

Attichy 2009/1 Site known as

Attichy

Location

Attichy, Le Buissonet

County / Département

Oise

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavated in 2009 by Inrap (Institut National de Recherches Archéologiques Préventives), directed by Sophie Desenne.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Only preliminary information available. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 11 inhumations (including two chariot burials) and one cremation, located on a terrace dominating the Aisne River. Only one burial (that of a child) is set in a (circular) ditched enclosure. This chariot burial is burial n°3 of the cemetery. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No remains of a barrow attested. No enclosure.

DECEASED

Adult male.

GRAVE PIT

Rectangular grave pit; there may have been a wooden chamber. Wheel pits.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle complete and standing upright in the grave pit. Deceased laying on the chariot, with the head between the wheels. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Iron tyres and nave bands.

AXLE

Axle shows signs of repair.

POLE

No information.

PLATFORM / BOX

No information.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

No information.

OTHER PARTS

No information.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None mentioned.

POTTERY

Various pieces of pottery.

WEAPONRY

Sword

ANIMAL BONES

Pig and sheep.

OTHER

No information.

GRAVE GOODS

DATING Third century BC. BIBLIOGRAPHY Inrap 2009.

246

Appendix A

Attichy 2009/2 Site known as

Attichy

Location

Attichy

County / Département

Oise

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavated in 2009 by Inrap (Institut National de Recherches Archéologiques Préventives), directed by Sophie Desenne.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Only preliminary information available. PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Cemetery with 11 inhumations (including two chariot burials) and one cremation, located on a terrace dominating the Aisne River. Only one burial (that of a child) is set in a (circular) ditched enclosure. Burial number of this chariot burial is not communicated. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

No remains of a barrow attested. No enclosure.

DECEASED

Adult male.

GRAVE PIT

Rectangular grave pit; there may have been a wooden chamber. Wheel pits.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle complete and standing upright in the grave pit. Deceased laying on chariot, with the head between the wheels. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Iron tyres and nave bands.

AXLE

Axle shows signs of repair.

POLE

No information.

PLATFORM / BOX

No information.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Pair of horse bits.

OTHER PARTS

No information.

DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

None mentioned.

POTTERY

Various pieces of pottery.

WEAPONRY

Sword and spearhead.

ANIMAL BONES

Pig and sheep.

OTHER

Razor, pair of shears.

GRAVE GOODS

BIBLIOGRAPHY Inrap 2009. DATING Third century BC.

247

Lower Normandy

248

Appendix A

Orval Site known as

Orval

Location

Orval, Les Pleines

County / Département

Manche

EXCAVATION HISTORY

Excavation by Inrap (Institut National de Recherches Archéologiques Préventives) in 2006 ahead of the construction of the Coutances bypass; financed by the Conseil général de la Manche. The excavation revealed domestic and funerary structures ranging between the third century BC and the first century AD.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

PART OF CEMETERY OR ISOLATED BURIAL Isolated burial, next to a modest contemporary rural settlement. However, within the chariot burial enclosure a cremation burial was found which is believed to be contemporary with the chariot burial. ENCLOSURE / BARROW

The chariot burial was the central feature of a small (irregular) square ditched enclosure (covering an area of almost 200 m2) and was probably covered by a barrow. A broken block of diorite with traces of tool marks, found in the filling of the grave pit, may have served as a stèle. The enclosure ditch partly coincided with one of the two ditches defining a path to the settlement. The ditch was only a few tens of centimetres wide and very shallow.

DECEASED

Bones have dissolved.

GRAVE PIT

Grave pit measured 4.75 x 2.5m and was 1.80m deep Wooden burial chamber. Quadrangular grave pit, approximately 5.40m long, 3m wide and 1.20m deep. Vertical walls and fairly flat bottom. Postholes in the four corners of the pit and darker soil traces on some of the walls probably indicate the presence of a wooden burial chamber. There were no wheel pits.

ARRANGEMENT CHARIOT IN GRAVE

Vehicle complete, but no evidence of a yoke. The axis of the chariot slightly deviated from the axis of the burial chamber. Based on the arrangement of the grave gifts, the deceased was placed with the head and thorax on the box of the chariot, with the legs towards the pole. One horsehead (that of the stallion – see below), wearing its harness, was located between the left wheel of the chariot and the SE posthole; given the limited space, this may have been a partial deposit only. The second horsehead was found at the other end of the chamber, near the NE corner, in its functional position, but its harness, presumably deposited in a leather bag, was discovered at a distance of more than a meter; the second horse may have been deposited complete. VEHICLE PARTS and HORSE HARNESS

WHEELS

Two iron tyres, 4 cm wide and on average 1 cm thick, with a diameter just over 1m. They were broken and deformed, but not completely flattened. Iron nave bands.

AXLE

Two linchpins, each with a curved iron shank and a copper-alloy rectangular head, quadrangular in section, and ornamented in low relief, with human faces and a garland of S-motifs.

POLE

No information.

PLATFORM / BOX

No information. Three suspension fittings, eyebolts used in combination with leather bands to fix the box to the axle, similar to those from Nanterre (known as Gegabelte Ösenstiften), which is considered to have been a heavy construction compared to other known chariot suspension systems of the LT period.

YOKE and HORSE HARNESS

Each set of horse harness consists of a copper-alloy bit, phalerae and harness buttons, all encrusted with carved coral. The two sets of horse harness are identical. They each consist of a copper-alloy two-link ring bit, phalerae and harness buttons, all encrusted with carved coral. There were also a few copper-alloy rings.

OTHER PARTS

None.

249

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent GRAVE GOODS DRESS ACCESSORIES and JEWELLERY

Remains of three similar iron fibulae of MLT type; two are almost complete, while of the third one only the spring remains. Gold finger-ring, probably worn by the deceased on one of the fingers of the right hand, even though its diameter is only 1.9cm.

POTTERY

No pottery.

WEAPONRY

A sword in its scabbard, about 70cm long, with a suspension chain; an amber bead found in the grave was probably from this suspension system. An exceptionally long spearhead (almost 70cm) with a long and tapered blade with a prominent midrib, and a short socket.

ANIMAL BONES

Acid soil. Of the horseheads, only the jaws remained. Presence of two horses only attested by their teeth. One was a stallion, about five or six years old; the second horse was older.

OTHER

An axe, two knives, a small hammer, a pruning knife, and a tool kit with a second hammer, a plane, a knife and various rods. DATING

LT C1. BIBLIOGRAPHY Lepaumier, Chanson and Giazzon 2007; Lepaumier, Giazzon and Chanson 2009; 2011; 2012 ; Gomez de Soto et al. 2017.

250

Appendix B Non-exhaustive inventory: Chariot burials of the fifth and fourth centuries BC (two-wheeled only) BELGIUM Belgian Ardennes (Province of Luxembourg) Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography Cahen-Delhaye 1999; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Assenois-Nivelet, Liette au Chenu Hamipré-Namoussart, Au-dessus du Fond de Ligne

Barrow 3

Delhaye and Geubel 1976; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Juseret-Bercheux, Baragihet

Barrow 2, burial 1

Cahen-Delhaye 1992; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Juseret-Bercheux, Baragihet

Barrow 2, burial 2

Cahen-Delhaye 1992; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Léglise, Gohimont

Barrow 3

Cahen-Delhaye 1981; Cahen-Delhaye 2013; Cahen-Delhaye and Hurt 2013

Léglise, Gohimont

Barrow 4, burial 1

Cahen-Delhaye 1981; Cahen-Delhaye 2013; Cahen-Delhaye and Hurt 2013

Léglise, Gohimont

Barrow 4, burial 2

Cahen-Delhaye 1981; Cahen-Delhaye 2013; Cahen-Delhaye and Hurt 2013

Léglise, Gohimont

Barrow 11, burial 4

Cahen-Delhaye 1999; Cahen-Delhaye 2013; Cahen-Delhaye and Hurt 2013

Longlier-Massul, Al Vaux

Barrow 16

Cahen-Delhaye 1979; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Longlier-Massul, Ribêmont

Barrow 1

Van Endert 1987: 170; Cahen-Delhaye 1999; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Longlier-Massul, Ribêmont

Barrow 2, burial 4

Cahen-Delhaye 1979; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Offaing, Hamipré, Au Grand Paquis

Barrow 1, burial 1

Cahen-Delhaye 1974: 8-18, figs. 1-8; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Offaing, Hamipré, Au Grand Paquis

Barrow 2, burial 2

Cahen-Delhaye 1974: 19-26, figs. 9-12, 18; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Offaing, Hamipré, Au Grand Paquis

Group of flat graves 3, burial 3

Cahen-Delhaye 1974: 27-33, figs. 13-6 Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Saint-Pierre-Sberchamps, Savenière

Barrow 1, burial 2

Hurt 1987; Cahen-Delhaye 1999 CahenDelhaye 2013; Cahen-Delhaye 2014

Saint-Pierre-Sberchamps, Au Fersay

Burial 1

Cahen-Delhaye, Hurt and Gratia 1989; Cahen-Delhaye 1993; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Warmifontaine, Le Plane

Barrow 1

Hurt 1992; Hurt 1993; Cahen-Delhaye 2013.

Warmifontaine, Le Plane

Barrow 3

Hurt 1995; Hurt 1999; Cahen-Delhaye 2013

Witry, A Rolet

Barrow 1

Cahen-Delhaye and Hurt 1985; CahenDelhaye 2013

251

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent FRANCE Aisne Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography

Arcy-Sainte-Restitue, Vaucelles

Van Endert 1987: 88-9; Verger 1994: 74-6.

Bucy-le-Long, La Héronnière

Desenne and Thouvenot 2007; Desenne, Pommepuy and Demoule 2009.

Four chariot burials (all females).

Chassemy, La Fosse Chapelet

Joffroy and Bretz-Mahler 1959: 34, fig. 14; Van Endert 1987: 102-3; Verger 1994: 13440; 1999: 289-90.

Ciry-Salsogne

Verger 1994: 158-61.

Evergnicourt, Le Tournant du Chêne

Lambot 2005.

Fère-en-Tardenois, La Sablonnière

Van Endert 1987: 110-12; Verger 1994: 186-90.

Burial 31

Joffroy 1963; Van Endert 1987: 126-27; Verger 1994: 219-22; 1999: 290-91.

Pernant, L’Entrée de la Vallée Three chariot burials (one female and two males)

Vasseny

Inrap 2003.

Villiers-en-Prayères

Van Endert 1987: 154; Verger 1994: 321.

Unknown site

Verger 1994: 338.

Ardennes Site Aussonce, Le Mont du Ménil Lépinois Aussonce, Le Mont du Ménil Lépinois

Burial or barrow n° Chariot burial 1

Van Endert 1987: 89-90; Verger 1994: 76.

Chariot burial 2

Van Endert 1987: 89-90; Verger 1994: 76-7.

Aussonce, La Motelle Bourcq, La Banière

Bibliography

Van Endert 1987: 90; Verger 1994: 77. More chariot burials found on the same site Lambot 2006; Lambot 2018 subsequently.

Hauviné, Le Mont de la Neuville

Verger 1994: 192-94.

Juniville, Le Mont de Croupsault

Burial A

Van Endert 1987: 113-14; Verger 1994: 198.

Juniville, Le Mont de Croupsault

Burial B

Van Endert 1987: 114; Verger 1994: 198-9.

Juniville

Van Endert 1987: 114-45.

La Neuville-en-Tourne-à-Fuy, Le Mont de Fosse

Burial 1

Van Endert 1987: 117-18; Verger 1994: 217.

La Neuville-en-Tourne-à-Fuy, Le Mont de Fosse

Burial 2

Van Endert 1987: 117-18; Verger 1994: 217-18.

Manre, Le Mont Troté

Burial 32

Van Endert 1987: 122-23; Verger 1994: 210-15.

Montgon, Le Moulin de la Gracquinette/ Claquinette, Ferme de la Girondelle

Joffroy and Bretz-Mahler 1959: 34; Stead 1965: 98; Van Endert 1987: 124; Verger 1994: 217.

Quilly, Le Fichot

Flouest and Stead 1985; Verger 1994: 235.

Rethel

Van Endert 1987: 134-35.

Rethel, Les Francs Monceaux, Le Milieu du Monde

Chariot burial A

Verger 1994: 238-39.

Rethel, Les Francs Monceaux, Le Milieu du Monde

Chariot burial B

Verger 1994: 239.

Rethel, Les Francs Monceaux, Le Milieu du Monde

Chariot burial C

Verger 1994: 240.

Saint-Clément-à-Arnes, La Motelle de Germiny

Burial 1

Van Endert 1987: 135-37; Verger 1994: 240-43.

Saint-Clément-à-Arnes, La Motelle de Germiny

Burial 6

Van Endert 1987: 135-37; Verger 1994: 243-45.

252

Appendix B Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography

Saint-Clément-à-Arnes, La Motelle de Germiny

Burial 7

Van Endert 1987: 135-37; Verger 1994: 245.

Saulces-Champenoises, Le Mont Renard

Chariot burial of 1911

Verger 1994: 261.

Saulces-Champenoises, Le Mont Renard

Chariot burial of 1912

Van Endert 1987: 141; Verger 1991: 262.

Semide, La Tomelle aux Mouches

Lambot and Verger 1995.

Villers-Semeuses

Joffroy and Bretz-Mahler 1959: 35; Van Endert 1987: 153

Ville-sur-Retourne, Le Chemin d’Imbry

Burial of 1907/1908

Van Endert 1987: 153-54; Verger 1994: 317-18; 1999: 292.

Ville-sur-Retourne, Le Chemin d’Imbry

Burial of 21 January 1912

Van Endert 1987: 153-54; Verger 1994: 318.

Ville-sur-Retourne, Le Chemin d’Imbry

Burial of 11 February 1912

Van Endert 1987: 153-54; Verger 1994: 318.

Voncq, Le Moulin-à-Vent

Joffroy and Bretz-Mahler 1959: 35; Van Endert 1987: 154; Verger 1994: 321.

Vouziers

Van Endert 1987: 154-55.

Aube Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography

Bouranton, Michaulot

Verbrugghe and Villes 1995; Verger 1999.

Estissac

Deffressigne and Villes 1995; Verger 1999.

Lavau, Zac du Moutot

Dubuis and Garcia 2015; Dubuis et al. 2015; Inrap 2015

Calvados Site

Burial or barrow n°

Ifs

Bibliography Inrap 2019

Marne Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography

Beine-Nauroy, Les Commelles, SaintBasles

Burial 3bis (23.06.1908)

Van Endert 1987: 90-91; Verger 1994: 84.

Beine-Nauroy, Les Commelles, SaintBasles

Burial 26 (21.01.1912)

Verger 1994: 84-85.

Beine-Nauroy, Les Commelles, SaintBasles

Burial 30 (12.07.1912)

Van Endert 1987: 91-92; Verger 1994: 85-87.

Beine-Nauroy, Les Commelles, Le Montéqueux

Burial 3

Van Endert 1987: 92-94; Verger 1994: 77-83.

Beine-Nauroy, La Noue d’Aubigny

Chariot burial 1

Verger 1994: 87-88.

Beine-Nauroy, La Noue d’Aubigny

Chariot burial 2

Verger 1994: 88.

Berru, La Noue Bréa

Two chariot burials

Verger 1994: 88.

Berru, Le Terrage

Burial 18

Van Endert 1987: 94-95; Verger 1994: 88-97.

Berru, Le Terrage

Burial 19

Van Endert 1987: 96; Verger 1994: 97-100. Joffroy and Bretz-Mahler 1959: 34; Van Endert 1987: 96; Verger 1994: 194.

Bétheniville, Le Trou Noir Bouy, Les Varilles

Burial 2 ( ? chariot burial)

Verger 1994: 100-01.

Bouy, Les Varilles

Burial 9 (1881)

Van Endert 1987: 96-97; Verger 1994: 10102; 1999: 289.

Bouy, Les Varilles

Chariot burial 1885

Verger 1994: 102-05.

Bouy, Les Varilles

Chariot burial 1888

Verger 1994: 105-07; 1999: 289.

Bussy-le-Château, Le Piémont

Van Endert 1987: 97-98.

Bussy-le-Château, Han-des-Diables

Van Endert 1987: 98.

253

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography

Caurel, Les Vieilles Terres

Van Endert 1987: 98-99.

Cernay-lès-Reims, La Motelle à Barmont

Verger 1994: 120.

Châlons-sur-Marne, Avenue de Strasbourg

Van Endert 1987: 100-1; Verger 1994: 121-33.

Châlons-sur-Vesles, Mont de Châlons

Verger 1994: 133.

Chouilly, Les Jogasses

Van Endert 1987: 103-04; Verger 1994: 152-54.

Burial 7

Van Endert 1987: 104-05; Legendre and Gomez de Soto 1990; Verger 1994: 161-64.

Condé-sur-Marne, Le Mont-de-Marne Courtisols, Le Mont des Charmes

Three chariot burials

Van Endert 1987: 106; Verger 1994: 16466.

Cuperly, ?La Grammonerie

Five chariot burials

Van Endert 1987: 106-07; Verger 1994: 166-74.

Cuperly/Vadenay, Périmètre du camp de Châlons

Four chariot burials

Verger 1994: 175-76; 1999: 290.

Ecury-sur-Coole, Les Côtes-en-Marne

Chariot burial 11

Van Endert 1987: 107-09; Verger 1994: 176.

Ecury-sur-Coole, Les Côtes-en-Marne

Chariot burial 12

Van Endert 1987: 107-09; Verger 1994: 176-78.

Ecury-sur-Coole, Les Côtes-en-Marne

Chariot burial 13

Van Endert 1987: 107-09; Verger 1994: 178-80.

Ecury-sur-Coole, Les Côtes-en-Marne

Chariot burial 18

Van Endert 1987: 107-09; Verger 1994: 180.

Ecury-sur-Coole, Les Côtes-en-Marne

Chariot burial 19

Van Endert 1987: 107-09; Verger 1994: 180-81.

Ecury-sur-Coole, Les Côtes-en-Marne

Chariot burial 154

Van Endert 1987: 107-09; Verger 1994: 181-82. Van Endert 1987: 109-10; Verger 1994: 182-84.

Epoye, La Conge d’Epove Epoye, La Motelle, Le Tumois Pagnot

Van Endert 1987: 110; Verger 1994: 18485.

Two chariot burials

Flavigny, Le Moulin

Van Endert 1987: 112; Verger 1994: 19092.

Heutrégiville, Le Mont Sapinois

Van Endert 1987: 112; Verger 1994: 194.

Jonchery-sur-Suippe, Le Ban Chanteraine

Van Endert 1987: 112-13; Verger 1994: 194-97.

Juvigny/Vraux, Le Mont de Vraux

Burials 83 and 105

Van Endert 1987: 115, 155; Verger 1994: 199.

Juvigny, Les Vignettes

Burial 7

Verger 1994: 200.

Juvigny, Les Vignettes

Burial 46

Verger 1994: 200-01.

La Chaussée-sur-Marne / Pogny

Seven chariot burials from different sites

Verger 1994: 140-44.

Two chariot burials

Van Endert 1987: 115-16; Verger 1994: 144-47.

La Cheppe, Le Buisson de Suippes La Cheppe, La Perrière

Verger 1994: 147-49.

La Croix-en-Champagne

Van Endert 1987: 116-17; Verger 1994: 166.

Laval-sur-Tourbe, Le Haut Mont, La Liberté

Verger 1994: 201.

Lavannes (Caurel), Le Mont de Bury

Chariot burial 4 (1927)

Van Endert 1987: 118; Verger 1994: 11819.

Lavannes, Le Mont Jouy

Burial 3

Van Endert 1987: 118-19; Verger 1994: 201-04.

Le Ménil-les-Hurlus

Joffroy and Bretz-Mahler 1959: 34; Van Endert 1987: 119

Livry-Louvercy (Livry-sur-Vesle), La Provence or Les Echonas

Van Endert 1987: 120-21; Verger 1994: 204-10.

254

Appendix B Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography

Livry-Louvercy

Inrap 2007.

Mairy-sur-Marne / Sogny-aux-Moulins, Le 15 chariot burials Moulin

Van Endert 1987: 121-22; Verger 1994: 269-81; 1999:291-92.

Norrois

Verger 1994: 218.

Omey / Pogny, Les Mottés

Chariot burial of 1900, perhaps a second one

Van Endert 1987: 125; Verger 1994: 21819, 222.

Pontfaverger-Moronvilliers, La Croix Boileau

Burial 20

Verger 1994: 223.

Pontfaverger-Moronvilliers, La Wardelle

Van Endert 1987: 127-29; Verger 1994: 224-26.

Pontfaverger-Moronvilliers, Le Pont Chaton

Van Endert 1987: 129; Verger 1994: 22324.

Prosnes, Les Vins de Bruyère

Van Endert 1987: 129-30; Verger 1994: 226-28.

Prosnes

Verger 1994: 228.

Prunay, Les Marquises (La Mottelle au bracelet d’Or)

Chariot burial with helmet

Van Endert 1987: 130-31; Verger 1994: 228-33.

Prunay, Les Marquises (La Mottelle au bracelet d’Or)

Chariot burial with openwork disks

Verger 1994: 233-34.

Prunay, Les Marquises (La Mottelle au bracelet d’Or)

Chariot burial of 1933

Verger 1994: 234-35.

Prunay

Van Endert 1987: 131-32.

Prunay, La Voie de Baconnes

Lambot 2006.

Puisieulx

Van Endert 1987: 132-34.

Puisieulx, La Pompelle

Several chariot burials

Van Endert 1987: 134.

Récy, La Belle-Croix

Eight chariot burials

Van Endert 1987: 134; Verger 1994: 23536: 1999: 291.

Reims (Cernay-lès-Reims), Le Champ Dolent

Burial 8

Bretz-Mahler 1971: tab. 181; Van Endert 1987: 99-100; Verger 1994: 236. Van Endert 1987: 124-25; Verger 1994: 236-38.

Reims, Quartier de Murigny Saint-Étienne-au-Temple

Five chariot burials

Van Endert 1987: 137-38. But see Verger 1994: 245.

Saint-Hilaire-au-Temple, Mont Gravonne

Two chariot burials

Van Endert 1987: 138; Verger 1994: 24546.

Saint-Hilaire-le-Petit, La Motelle

Verger 1994: 246.

Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe, Le Châtillon, Le Jardinet

Chariot burial of 1866

Verger 1994: 247.

Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe, Le Châtillon, Le Jardinet

Chariot burial of 1876

Verger 1994: 247-48; 1999: 291.

Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe, Le Châtillon, Le Jardinet

Chariot burial of 1877

Verger 1994: 247-51.

Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe, Le Châtillon, Le Jardinet

Chariot burial of 1878

Verger 1994: 251.

Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe, Le Châtillon, Le Jardinet

Chariot burial

Verger 1994: 251-52.

Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe, Le Châtillon, Le Jardinet

Two chariot burials between 1868 and 1883

Verger 1994: 252.

Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe, Le Malinet

Chariot burial of 1868

Van Endert 1987: 138-39; Verger 1994: 252-58.

Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe

Van Endert 1987: 139-40.

Saint-Mard-sur-Auve

Van Endert 1987: 140; Verger 1994: 259.

Saint-Rémy-sur-Bussy, Jean-le-Berger or Le Cour du Roi

Four chariot burials

255

Van Endert 1987: 140; Verger 1994: 25961.

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Site Saint-Rémy-sur-Bussy, La Perrière

Burial or barrow n° Three chariot burials.

Bibliography Van Endert 1987: 140-41; Verger 1994: 259.

Sept Saulx, La Prise d’Eau or Chemin de Livry

Bretz-Mahler 1971: 209-10, tabs. 95.7, 167; Van Endert 1987: 141-43; Verger 1994: 263-65.

Sept Saulx

Van Endert 1987: 143.

Sillery, Le Champ de la Guerre, La Carnasse

Joffroy and Bretz-Mahler 1959: fig. 8.2; Van Endert 1987: 143; Verger 1994: 26569. Van Endert 1987: 143-44; Verger 1994: 268-69.

Sogny-aux-Moulins, Sur les Côtes, Les Terres Brulées

Three chariot burials

Somme-Bionne, L’Homme Mort or La Tomelle

Chariot burial of 1873, and possibly three or Van Endert 1987: 144-46; Verger 1994: four more. 281-86.

Sommepy

Van Endert 1987: 146.

Sommepy-Tahure, Le Blanc Mont

Verger 1994: 286.

Sommepy-Tahure, La Croix Caporal

Verger 1994: 286.

Sommepy-Tahure, Le Mont de Saget

Verger 1994: 286-87.

Sommepy-Tahure, La Nisle

Verger 1994: 287.

Sommepy-Tahure, Les Potèches

Verger 1994: 287.

Somme-Tourbe, La Bouvandeau

Joffroy and Bretz-Mahler 1959: fig. 16; Van Endert 1987: 147; Verger: 287-91.

Somme-Tourbe, La Côte d’Orgemont

Joffroy and Bretz-Mahler 1959: 35; Van Endert 1987: 148. But see Verger 1994: 291.

Somme-Tourbe, La Nau Collet

Chariot burial of 1866, and possibly a second one.

Van Endert 1987: 150; Verger 1994: 29192.

Somme-Tourbe, La Gorge-Meillet

Chariot burial of 1876, but possibly more. Reinvestigated by Lambot in 2006.

Van Endert 1987: 148-50; Verger 1994: 292-313; Olivier 2016.

Somme-Vesle, La Motte des Vignes

Van Endert 1987: 151; Verger 1994: 31314.

Soulanges, Le Merlut

Verger 1994: 314.

Suippes

Van Endert 1987: 151-52.

Valmy, L’Homme Mort

Van Endert 1987: 152-53; Verger 1994: 314.

Vaudemange, Les Epinettes or Le Mont Blanc

Twp chariot burials

Van Endert 1987: 153; Verger 1994: 31415.

Vert-Toulon (Vert-la-Gravelle), Charmont

Chariot burial from enclosure H

Van Endert 1987: 153; Verger 1994: 315-7.

Vraux, Le Buisson des Lapins

Verger 1994: 324-25.

Vrigny, Le Mont de Vannes

Burial 1

Van Endert 1987: 155; Verger 1994: 32528. Stead 1965: 101; Van Endert 1987: 156; Verger 1994: 328-34.

Wargemoulin-Hurlus Wargemoulin-Hurlus, Le Mont de Villers

Two chariot burials

Verger 1994: 328.

Witry-lès-Reims, Fort

Stead 1965: 101; Van Endert 1987: 156; Verger 1994: 334-37.

Unknown sites

Verger 1994: 338-44.

Meuse Site Amel-sur-l’Étang

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography Van Endert 1987: 87-88; Verger 1994: 7274; Verger 1999: 288.

Barrow 2

256

Appendix B Moselle Site Kerling-les-Sierck

Burial or barrow n° Barrow 19 (possibly four-wheeled)

Merten

Bibliography Van Endert 1987: 29-30. Van Endert 1987: 34.

Yonne Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography Verger 1994: 215-17; Sarrazin and Villes 1995; Baray and Sarrazin 2013

Molinons, Les Graisses

GERMANY Rheinland-Pfalz Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography

Armsheim, Lkr. Alzey-Worms

Van Endert 1987: 9-10.

Bad Dürkheim, Heidenfelde

Van Endert 1987: 10-11.

Bescheid, Lkr. Trier-Saarburg, Bei den Hübeln

Barrow 4

Haffner 1977: 126-9, figs. 5-7; Van Endert 1987: 11-12.

Bescheid, Lkr. Trier-Saarburg, Bei den Hübeln

Barrow 6

Haffner and Joachim 1984: fig. 7;

Van Endert 1987: 12-14. Dörth, Rhein-Hunsrück Kreis, Wald Gallscheid

Van Endert 1987: 15-16; Joachim 1998.

Graach, Lkr. Bernkastel-Wittlich

Van Endert 1987: 18; Haffner and Joachim 1984: 83 n°7.

Gransdorf, Lkr. Bitburg-Prüm, Gransdörfer Büsch

Barrow 17

Schindler 1970: 19-34, figs. 1-8; Haffner 1976: 175-81, figs. 28-33; Van Endert 1987: 18-19.

Hillesheim, Lkr. Daun, Staatsdomäne

Barrow A

Haffner 1976: 182-85, figs. 34-36, tabs. 2, 133, 173; Van Endert 1987: 20-21.

Hundheim, Rhein-Hunsrück-Kreis, Kühonner

Barrow 1

Haffner 1976: 188-96, figs. 39-44, tab.5; Van Endert 1987: 5-7.

Hundheim, Rhein-Hunsrück-Kreis, Kühonner

Barrow 2

Haffner 1976: 188-96, figs. 39-44, tab.5; Van Endert 1987: 5-7.

Kärlich (Mülheim-Kärlich), Lkr. MayenKoblenz

Chariot burial 1

Joachim 1979: 509-16, figs. 3-8; Van Endert 1987: 22-23.

Kärlich (Mülheim-Kärlich), Lkr. MayenKoblenz

Chariot burial 2

Joachim 1979: 516; Van Endert 1987: 23.

Kärlich (Mülheim-Kärlich), Lkr. MayenKoblenz

Chariot burial 3

Driehaus 1965: 57-71; Joachim 1979: 51618, figs. 9-10; Van Endert 1987: 23-24.

Kärlich (Mülheim-Kärlich), Lkr. MayenKoblenz

Chariot burial 4

Joachim 1979: 518-36, figs. 11-24; Van Endert 1987: 24-26.

Kärlich (Mülheim-Kärlich), Lkr. MayenKoblenz

Chariot burial 5

Joachim 1979: 536-41, figs. 25-27; Van Endert 1987: 26-27.

Kärlich (Mülheim-Kärlich), Lkr. MayenKoblenz

Chariot burial 6

Joachim 1979: 541-42, figs. 28-29; Van Endert 1987: 27-28.

Kärlich (Mülheim-Kärlich), Lkr. MayenKoblenz

Chariot burial 7

Haffner 1976: 406; Joachim 1979: 542-43; Van Endert 1987: 28.

Kärlich (Mülheim-Kärlich), Lkr. MayenKoblenz

Chariot burial 8

Haffner 1976: 406; Joachim 1979: 544-47, figs. 30-32; Van Endert 1987: 28-29. Haffner and Joachim 1984: 74, note 5; Van Endert 1987: 7.

Kobern, Lkr. Mayen-Koblenz Kobern, Lkr. Mayen-Koblenz

Haffner 1976: 406-07; Van Endert 1987: 30-31.

Barrow 34

257

Kobern, Lkr. Mayen-Koblenz, Chorsang

Haffner 1976: 406-07; Van Endert 1987: 30-31.

Barrow 35a

Laumersheim, Lkr. Bad Dürkheim

Kimmig 1944-1950: 38-50, figs. 1-3, tabs. 3-4; Van Endert 1987: 31-32.

Lonnig, Lkr. Mayen-Koblenz, An den drei Burial 1 Tonnen

Van Endert 1987: 32; Schönfelder 2000: 168 n.474, 182 n.512, 184.

Lonnig, Lkr. Mayen-Koblenz, An den drei Tonnen

Van Endert 1987: 32.

Niederweis-Kaschenbach, Lkr. BitburgPrüm, Flur Graulsbüch

Barrow 3

Haffner 1976: 281-82, tab.57; Van Endert 1987: 34.

Oppertshausen, Lkr. Rhein-HunsrückKreis

Barrow 3

Haffner 1976: 407; Van Endert 1987: 34-35.

Plaidt, Lkr. Mayen-Koblenz

Van Endert 1987: 35-36.

Waldalgesheim, Lkr. Mainz-BIngen

Van Endert 1987: 40-41; Joachim 1995.

Saarland Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography

Besseringen, Lkr. Merzig-Wadern, Müllerküpchen

Haffner 1976: 172-73, tabs. 1, 130; Van Endert 1987: 14-15.

Freisen, Lkr. St. Wendel, Büchelchen

Haffner 1976: 174-5, tabs. 131-2; Van Endert 1987: 16-17.

Marplingen, Lkr. St. Wendel, Auf ‘m Gehemm

Burial 3

Van Endert 1987: 32-33; Haffner 1976: 193-95, fig. 45, tabs. 6, 9-11.

Sitzerath, Lkr. St. Wendel, Im Erker

Group II, barrow 6

Van Endert 1987: 36-38. Haffner 1976: 205-09, fig. 50, tabs. 10-11, 154-55; Van Endert 1987: 39-40.

Theley, Lkr. St. Wendel, Flur Fuchshübel

LUXEMBOURG Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography

Flaxweiler

Metzler and Gaeng 2008: 33.

Grosbous-Vichten

Metzler 1986.

Reuland

Metzler and Gaeng 2008.

NETHERLANDS Site

Burial or barrow n°

Bibliography

Heumen

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam 2020

Nijmegen

Bloemers 1986.

258

Appendix C Glossary: vehicle and horse harness terminology Axle: a single piece of timber, supporting the body of the vehicle; a wheel is attached to each side of the axle; the axle maintains the position of the wheels relative to each other and to the vehicle body.

Terret (ring): ring or loop, fixed onto the yoke, for the driving reins to pass through; there are two for each horse, and there is often a central, larger one in the middle; many terrets are decorated; sometimes the yoke can have additional mountings for decorative purposes.

Axle cap: metal cap to bind the end of the axle, perforated to let the linchpin pass through it; can be decorated or plain.

Tyre: metal part of the wheel, heat-shrunk around the felloe.

Axle strengthening bar: iron plate at each end of the axle, to reinforce the axle at the level of the naves, to prevent rapid wear of the axle and to reduce the risk of fracture.

Wheel-track: the distance between the wheels; synonym for gauge. Yoke: Wooden beam, shaped to fit across the necks of the two horses, and to which their harnesses are attached; the yoke enables the horses to draw the vehicle as a pair.

Clamp: a metallic device used to join or grip two parts. Dog: a hooked or U-shaped metallic device used for gripping or holding two parts together.

Yoke cap: metal binding at the terminals of a yoke.

Felloe: the wooden rim of a wheel to which the spokes are attached and onto which a metal tyre is shrunk; the felloe may be a single piece or consist of separate segments. Gauge or wheel-track: the distance between the wheels, synonym for wheel-track. Linchpin: a pin placed through the axle, to prevent the wheel from slipping off; linchpins are often in metal and can be decorated, but they can also be made from wood or antler. Nave: the central part of a wheel, made of wood; the nave rotates freely on the axle to which it is secured by a linchpin. Nave hoop, nave band: metal band around the nave or hub, to prevent it from splitting; where nave bands are missing, they may have been in leather. Pole: long, single piece of timber, extending from the axle to the yoke, and structurally part of the vehicle box or platform; given that the vehicle platform had to remain horizontal, the pole was curved, to compensate for the difference in height between the yoke and the axle. Pole cap, pole tip, pole sheath: metal binding at the end of the pole, to strengthen it at the point of its intersection with the yoke; can be decorated. Strap-union: metal piece (part of the horse harness) to hold together straps of raw hide, leather or similar; can be decorated.

259

Appendix D Glossary of Continental terms Durchbruchtechnik: German term for openwork, an ornamental technique for metalwork, with patterns of openings or holes. Grabgarten: German for an enclosed area with one or more burials, accessible via an interruption in the surrounding ditch and/or wall. Incinération: French for cremation. Ösenstift: German term for a looped bolt or eyebolt; such suspension fittings are used in combination with leather bands to fix the vehicle box to the frame and function as shock absorbers. There are different versions, including fittings with an eyebolt on each ending (Doppelösenstifte), looped rivets (Ösenstifte mit Nietplatte) or looped rivets with forked ends (Gegabelte Ösenstifte). These suspension fittings can be plain or decorated. Pars pro toto: Latin for ‘a part (taken) for the whole’; in the context of this study it refers to the deposition of one or a few parts of a vehicle to represent the vehicle as a whole. Phalera: Latin for a metal decorated disk, part of a horse harness. Tiges rivetés: French for looped rivets (equivalent of the German Ösenstifte mit Nietplatte above). Tombe fondatrice: French for the first burial of a cemetery, which attracted other burials later; is often considered to be the burial of an important ancestor. Tombelle: French for a low, round barrow, less than a meter high, but with a diameter that often exceeds 20m; typical for the Belgian Ardennes.

261

Appendix E Translations of classical texts quoted in section 15.2 (see Bibliography for full references) Ammianus Marcellinus: Res Gestae

VI.14

XV.9.4

The Druids usually hold aloof from war, and do not pay war-taxes with the rest; they are excused from military services and exempt from all liabilities. Tempted by these great rewards, many young men assemble of their own motion to receive their training; many are sent by parents and relatives. Report says that in the schools of the Druids they learn by heart a great number of verses, and therefore some persons remain twenty years under training. And they do not think it proper to commit these utterances to writing, although in almost all other matters, and in their public and private accounts, they make use of Greek letters. I believe that they have adopted the practice for two reasons – that they do not wish the discipline to become common property, nor those who learn the rule to rely on writing and so neglect the cultivation of the memory; and, in fact, it does usually happen that the assistance of writing tends to relax the diligence of the student and the action of the memory. The cardinal doctrine which they seek to teach is that souls do not die, but after death pass from one to another; and this belief, as the fear of death is thereby cast aside, they hold to be the greatest incentive to valour. Besides this, they have many discussions as touching the stars and their movement, the size of the universe and of the earth, the order of nature, the strength and the powers of the immortal gods, and hand down their lore to the young men.

The Drysidae (Druids) say that a part of the people was in fact indigenous, but that others also poured in from the remote islands and the regions across the Rhine, driven from their homes by continual wars and by the inundation of the stormy sea. Gaius Julius Caesar: The Gallic War VI.13 Throughout Gaul there are two classes of persons of definite account and dignity. As for the common folk, they are treated almost as slaves, venturing naught of themselves, never taken into counsel. The more part of them, oppressed as they are either by debt, or by the heavy weight of tribute, or by the wrongdoing of the more powerful men, commit themselves in slavery to the nobles, who have, in fact, the same rights over them as masters over slaves. Of the two classes above mentioned one consists of Druids, the other of knights. The former are concerned with divine worship, the due performance of sacrifices, public and private, and the interpretation of ritual questions: a great number of young men gather about them for the sake of instruction and hold them in great honour. In fact, it is they who decide in almost all disputes, public and private; and if any crime has been committed, or murder done, or there is any dispute about succession or boundaries, they also decide it, determining rewards and penalties: if any person or people does not abide by their decision, they ban such from sacrifice, which is their heaviest penalty. Those that are so banned are reckoned as impious and criminal; all men move out of their path and shun their approach and conversation, for fear they may get some harm from their contact, and no justice is done if they seek it, no distinction falls to their share. Of all these Druids one is chief, who has the highest authority among them. At his death, either any other that is pre-eminent in position succeeds, or, if there be several of equal standing, they strive for the primacy by the vote of the Druids, or sometimes even with armed force. These Druids, at a certain time of the year, meet within the borders of the Carnutes, whose territory is reckoned as the centre of all Gaul, and sit in conclave in a consecrated spot. Thither assemble from every side all that have disputes, and they obey the decisions and judgments of the Druids. It is believed that their rule of life was discovered in Britain and transferred thence to Gaul; and to-day those who would study the subject more accurately journey, as a rule, to Britain to learn it.

VI.16 The whole nation of the Gauls is greatly devoted to ritual observances, and for that reason those who are smitten with the more grievous maladies, and are engaged in the perils of battle either sacrifice human victims or vow so to do, employing the Druids as ministers for such sacrifices. They believe, in effect, that, unless for a man’s life a man’s life be paid, the majesty of the immortal gods may not be appeased; and in public, as in private, life they observe an ordinance of sacrifices of the same kind. Others use figures of immense size, whose limbs, woven out of twigs, they fill with living men and set on fire, and the men perish in a sheet of flame. They believe that the execution of those who have been caught in the act of theft or robbery or some crime is more pleasing to the immortal gods; but when the supply of such fails they resort to the execution even of the innocent. VI.18 The Gauls affirm that they are all descended from a common father, Dis, and say that this is the tradition of the Druids (…). 263

Iron Age Chariot Burials in Britain and the Near Continent Diodorus Siculus: Library of History

Magicus of Aristotle and Sotion in the twenty-third book of his Succession of Philosophers.

V.28.6

Prologue, 6

The belief of Pythagoras prevails among them [the Gauls], that the souls of men are immortal and that after a prescribed number of years they commence upon a new life, the soul entering into another body.

But the advocates of the theory that philosophy took its rise among the barbarians go on to explain the different forms it assumed in different countries. As to the Gymnosophists and Druids we are told that they uttered their philosophy in riddles, bidding men to reverence the gods, to abstain from wrong-doing, and to practise courage.

V.31.2-5 Among them [the Gauls] are also to be found lyric poets whom they call Bards. These men sing to the accompaniment of instruments which are like lyres, and their songs may be either of praise or of obloquy. Philosophers, as we may call them, and men learned in religious affairs are unusually honoured among them and are called by them Druids. The Gauls likewise make use of diviners, accounting them worthy of high approbation, and these men foretell the future by means of the flight or cries of birds and of the slaughter of sacred animals, and they have all the multitude subservient to them. They also observe a custom which is especially astonishing and incredible, in case they are taking thought with respect to matters of great concern; for in such cases they devote to death a human being and plunge a dagger into him in the region above the diaphragm, and when the stricken victim has fallen they read the future from the manner of his fall and from the twitching of his limbs, as well as from the gushing of the blood, having learned to place confidence in an ancient and long-continued practice of observing such matters. And it is a custom of theirs that no one should perform a sacrifice without a “philosopher”; for thank-offerings should be rendered to the gods, they say, by the hands of men who are experienced in the nature of the divine, and who speak, as it were, the language of the gods, and it is also through the mediation of such men, they think, that blessings likewise should be sought. Nor is it only in the exigencies of peace, but in their wars as well, that they obey, before all others, these men and their chanting poets, and such obedience is observed not only by their friends but also by their enemies; many times, for instance, when two armies approach each other in battle with swords drawn and spears thrust forward, these men step forth between them and cause them to cease, as though having cast a spell over certain kinds of wild beasts. In this way, even among the wildest barbarians, does passion give place before wisdom, and Ares stands in awe of the Muses.

Dio Chrysostom: Discourses Discourse 49.8 Furthermore, since they cannot always be ruled by kings who are philosophers, the most powerful nations have publicly appointed philosophers as superintendents and officers for their kings. Thus the Persians, methinks, appointed those whom they call Magi (…); the Celts appointed those whom they call Druids, these also being devoted to the prophetic art and to wisdom in general. In all these cases the kings were not permitted to do or plan anything without the assistance of these wise men, so that in truth it was they who ruled, while the kings became their servants and the ministers of their will, though they sat on golden thrones, dwelt in great houses, and feasted sumptuously. Pomponius Mela: De Situ Orbis III.2, 18-19 The vestiges of savage customs still remain in the drawing of a victim’s blood while he is being led to the altar, though outright slaughter has been abolished. Still, they have their own eloquence and wise men called Druids. They claim to know the size of the earth and cosmos, the movements of the heavens and stars, and the will of the gods. They teach, in caves or hidden groves, many things to the nobles in a course of instruction lasting up to twenty years. One of their doctrines has become commonly known to the populace so that warriors might fight more bravely, that the spirit is eternal and another life awaits the spirits of the dead. Thus they burn or bury articles useful in life with the dead. For this reason also, in past times, they would defer business and payments of debts to the next life. There were some who would even throw themselves willingly onto the funeral pyres of their relatives so that they might live with them still.

Diogenes Laertius: Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers Prologue, 1 There are some who say that the study of philosophy had its beginning among the barbarians. They urge that the Persians have had their Magi, the Babylonians or Assyrians their Chaldaeans, and the Indians their Gymnosophists; and among the Celts and Gauls there are the people called Druids or Holy Ones, for which they cite as authorities the 264

BAR BRIT ISH SE RIE S 666

‘This will become a cornerstone of new chariot burial research, allowing future scholars easy access to the nearest Continental comparators, and providing for the first time an in-depth summary of the British material as a coherent body of examples. There is no other publication available with this focus and breadth of comparison, and it will make an essential text particularly for students, field practitioners and academics.’ Dr Melanie Giles, University of Manchester ‘The book is a significant contribution in this field of research. It provides a new and interesting suggestion for explaining the similar yet not identical chariot burial traditions in the 3rd-2nd BC Europe, which are separated by considerable distances in space, yet share many commonalities. It also establishes a new and better dating of the chariot burials in question, as well as a typological dating mechanism by make of the iron tyres.’ Professor Raimund Karl, Bangor University

The British chariot burials, mainly concentrated in East Yorkshire, reveal a strong link with continental Europe, which has led some scholars to believe that this burial rite was introduced by immigrants from northern Gaul. Other scholars do not accept migration as the key explanation for cultural changes and argue that new rites and customs may also be adopted through social networks that often stretch over great distances. To determine which model best explains the introduction of new burial rites in East Yorkshire in the third century BC, this book describes the similarities and differences between the British chariot burials and those of contemporary chariot burials in northern Gaul. The comparison shows that elite networks, and possibly religious networks, lie at the basis of the emergence of new burial rites in East Yorkshire. This book also discusses various types of long-distance contacts that can forge and maintain social networks. Greta Anthoons is an independent researcher with a PhD in Celtic Archaeology from Bangor University. She is interested in long-distance social contacts, especially in elite networks as these are reflected in the archaeology of Iron Age Britain and Gaul, and in mechanisms like strategic marriages which create and underpin these networks.

Printed in England