ۺۣۨۙۗۑڷۗۦۣۨۧۜۙۦێڷۙۜۨڷۣۚڷۣۧۛۢۘۙۙۗۦێ
ېێێۛҖۦۣۘۛۙғۦۖۡٷۗ۠ۧғٷۢۦ۩ۣ۞ҖҖۃۤۨۨۜ
ẽẺẮẰẰắẴẹẲẾΝẺằΝếẳẰΝẽẰẳẴẾếẺẽẴẮΝẺẮẴẰếỄڷۦۣۚڷ۪ۧۙۗۦۙۧڷ۠ٷۣۢۨۘۘۆ
ۙۦۙۜڷ۟ۗ۠Өڷۃۧۨۦۙ۠ٷڷ۠ٷۡٮ
ۙۦۙۜڷ۟ۗ۠Өڷۃۣۧۢۨۤۦۗۧۖ۩ۑ
ۙۦۙۜڷ۟ۗ۠Өڷۃۧۨۢۦۤۙۦڷ۠ٷۗۦۣۙۡۡӨ
ۙۦۙۜڷ۟ۗ۠Өڷۃڷۙۧ۩ڷۣۚڷۧۡۦۙے
ۣۧۢۦۘ۠۩ٷӨڷۢٷۣۡېڷۺ۠ۦٷٮڷۘۢٷڷۙۛۆڷۣۢۦٲڷۃڱۙ۠ۖۖ۩ψڷۣۢۦۘ۠۩ٷӨڷۘۢٷڷۢۦ۩ψڷۙۦٯڰ
ۘۢٷ۠ۙۦٲڷۘۢٷڷۢٷۨۦψڷۣۚ
ۺۣЂڷۺۣۘЂ
ھڿڿڷҒڷۀھڿڷۤۤڷۃۀڽڼھڷۦۙۖۡۙۗۙөڷҖڷڼہڷۙۡ۩ۣ۠۔ڷҖڷۺۣۨۙۗۑڷۗۦۣۨۧۜۙۦێڷۙۜۨڷۣۚڷۣۧۛۢۘۙۙۗۦێ
ۀڽڼھڷۦۣۙۖۨۗۍڷہھڷۃۣۙۢ۠ۢڷۘۙۜۧ۠ۖ۩ێڷۃۀғۀڽڼھғۦۤۤҖۀڽڼڽғڼڽڷۃٲۍө
ڿۀڼڼڼڼۀڽﯥۀۂۀۂۀڼڼۑٵۨۗٷۦۨۧۖٷۛҖۦۣۘۛۙғۦۖۡٷۗ۠ۧғٷۢۦ۩ۣ۞ҖҖۃۤۨۨۜڷۃۙ۠ۗۨۦٷڷۧۜۨڷۣۨڷ۟ۢۋ
ۃۙ۠ۗۨۦٷڷۧۜۨڷۙۨۗڷۣۨڷۣ۫ٱ
ۢۘғٷ۠ۙۦٲڷۘۢٷڷۢٷۨۦψڷۣۚڷۣۧۢۦۘ۠۩ٷӨڷۢٷۣۡېڷۺ۠ۦٷٮڷۘۢٷڷۙۛۆڷۣۢۦٲڷۃڱۙ۠ۖۖ۩ψڷۣۢۦۘ۠۩ٷӨڷۘۢٷڷۢۦ۩ψڷۙۦٯڰڷғۀۀڽڼھڿڷۺۣЂڷۺۣۘЂ
ۀғۀڽڼھғۦۤۤҖۀڽڼڽғڼڽۃۣۘڷھڿڿҒۀھڿڷۤۤڷۃڼہڷۃۺۣۨۙۗۑڷۗۦۣۨۧۜۙۦێڷۙۜۨڷۣۚڷۣۧۛۢۘۙۙۗۦێ
ۙۦۙۜڷ۟ۗ۠Өڷۃڷۣۧۢۧۧۡۦۙێڷۨۧۙ۩ۥۙې
ۀڽڼھڷۗۙөڷۂڼڷۣۢڷہہҢғہڽғڽڽڽғڽڿڽڷۃۧۧۙۦۘۘٷڷێٲڷۃېێێۛҖۦۣۘۛۙғۦۖۡٷۗ۠ۧғٷۢۦ۩ۣ۞ҖҖۃۤۨۨۜڷۣۡۦۚڷۘۙۘٷۣۣ۠ۢ۫ө
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 80, 2014, pp. 327–362 © The Prehistoric Society
doi:10.1017/ppr.2014.7 First published online 28 October 2014
‘Fire Burn and Cauldron Bubble’: Iron Age and Early
Roman Cauldrons of Britain and Ireland
By
JODY JOY1
‘A man can live to 50 but a cauldron will live to 100’ – Old Kazakh saying
This paper presents a re-examination of Iron Age and early Roman cauldrons, a little studied but important
artefact class that have not been considered as a group since the unpublished study of Loughran of 1989.
Cauldrons are categorised into two broad types (projecting-bellied and globular) and four groups. New dating
evidence is presented, pushing the dating of these cauldrons back to the 4th century BC. A long held belief that
cauldrons are largely absent from Britain and Ireland between 600 and 200 BC is also challenged through this
re-dating and the identification of cauldrons dating from 600–400 BC. Detailed examination of the technology of
manufacture and physical evidence of use and repair indicates that cauldrons are technically accomplished
objects requiring great skill to make. Many have been extensively repaired, showing they were in use for some
time. It is argued that owing to their large capacity cauldrons were not used every day but were instead used at
large social gatherings, specifically at feasts. The social role of feasting is explored and it is argued that cauldrons
derive much of their significance from their use at feasts, making them socially powerful objects, likely to be
selected for special deposition.
Keywords: Cauldron, typology, Iron Age, Britain, Ireland, copper alloy, iron, feasting
INTRODUCTION
constructed in layers, each riveted inside the
other. These cauldrons have outward projecting
rims, referred to here as ‘brims’, and the ring
handles are most often attached to the brim.
2. Iron Age/Early Roman (hereafter ‘IA/ER’) – these
cauldrons are most commonly made of copper
alloy with iron components and are non-brimmed.
Large copper alloy bowls are formed from a single
sheet. Upper bands of iron and/or copper alloy are
riveted to the bowl. The band fits on the outside of
the bowl. Where two or more bands exist, the
central band sits inside the bowl and the upperband. Where rims and handles survive they are
made of iron. Handles are generally attached to the
vertical wall of the bowl/band rather than the rim.
Various forms or groupings of cauldrons of this
date are evident, as discussed later in this paper.
Cauldrons are an emblematic class of object. They are
found across much of north-west Europe (Bochnak
2011, fig. 3) and appear in some of the most wellknown deposits of the period for example at La Tène
and Hochdorf (Vouga 1923; Biel 1987). They also
feature heavily in the Irish and Welsh early medieval
literature, which has so often been drawn upon in Iron
Age studies (eg, Green 1998). Yet cauldrons remain
enigmatic and little is known for certain about their
usage and social significance.
A number of catalogues of cauldrons from Britain
and Ireland have been produced (see below). These
identify two broad groups of prehistoric cauldron based
on their technology and their date of manufacture:
1. Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age or ‘Atlantic’
(hereafter ‘Atlantic’) – these consist of multiple
pieces of copper alloy riveted together. They are
1
Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Downing
Street, Cambridge CB2 3DZ, jpj32@cam.ac.uk
There is a long history of research of Atlantic cauldrons
(eg, Leeds 1930; Hawkes & Smith 1957; Gerloff
1986; Briggs 1987) culminating in Gerloff’s (2010)
327
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
comprehensive catalogue. British and Irish IA/ER
cauldrons have remained relatively poorly understood
with most recent discussions confined to chapters
within regional catalogues of Iron Age material culture
(Fox 1946; Hawkes 1951; Piggott 1952–3; Raftery
1980; 1983; Spratling 1972; Macgregor 1976;
Macdonald 2007; Gerloff 2010). The aims of this
paper are to re-examine IA/ER cauldrons from Britain
and Ireland, concentrating on typology, chronology,
and the social significance of cauldrons for Iron Age
society.
IA/ER cauldrons are defined by their difference of
manufacture and technology from the copper alloy
Atlantic cauldrons. Although cauldrons of similar
form are used well into the Roman period (Hawkes
1951, 180–1), different manufacturing techniques
such as casting were employed. The later Roman
examples are also generally made of one-piece. A full
catalogue of IA/ER cauldrons is presented as
Appendix B. This has been compiled from information
derived during museum visits by the author as well as
that provided in various catalogues, in particular
Loughran (1989), but also Spratling (1972), Macgregor
(1976), Raftery (1980; 1983), Macdonald (2007), and
Gerloff (2010).
In total, the catalogue of IA/EA cauldrons
(Appendix B) comprises at least 67 cauldrons from 40
separate contexts. Five cauldrons dating to 600–400
BC (Appendix A) and a further five cauldrons which
are possibly IA/ER, or have surviving elements
that could have originated from IA/ER cauldrons
(Appendix C), are also listed, making a total number
of 77 cauldrons. Many discoveries were made in the
18th and 19th centuries from bogs or other watery
places; consequently the available contextual information is often quite limited. Fortunately, recent
discoveries mean that more data is now available for
analysis. Information from a site discovered in 2004
near the village of Chiseldon, North Wiltshire,
is particularly important and will be drawn upon
heavily in this paper. The Chiseldon find comprises 17
complete cauldrons and fragments from many others
deposited in one episode in a large pit, 2 m in diameter, especially dug for the purpose (Joy & Baldwin
forthcoming). This is the most number of complete
cauldrons from a single context known from Iron Age
Europe. The site was excavated in 2005 by Wessex
Archaeology and conservators from the British Museum.
The cauldrons were block-lifted and have been
carefully excavated at the conservation laboratories of
the British Museum. The high level of available
contextual information means that the Chiseldon
cauldrons represent an unparalleled opportunity to
inform vessel form, function, the technology of
manufacture and social significance.
MORPHOLOGY AND TERMINOLOGY
The terminology used throughout this paper, but
particularly the appendices, is described in Figure 1.
This terminology broadly follows the conventions
set out by Gerloff (2010, fig. 2). IA/ER cauldrons
have been previously catalogued and discussed by Fox
(1946, 42–4), Hawkes (1951), Piggott (1952–3),
Macgregor (1976), Raftery (1980; 1983), Loughran
(1989), Macdonald (2007, 88–97), and Gerloff (2010,
appx 3). There is general consensus that they can
be categorised into two broad groups: ‘Globular’/
‘Battersea’ and ‘Projecting-bellied’/‘Santon’ (Hawkes
1951, 179; Piggott 1952–3, 13; Macgregor 1976,
150–2; Raftery 1980, 57). The first has a globular or
hemispherical-shaped body. The second has a wide
cylindrical neck above a body with distinctive
shoulder carination, hence the name projecting-bellied
(Fig. 2).
328
Fig. 1.
Schematic illustration of a cauldron with terminology
(drawn by Stephen Crummy)
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Fig. 2.
Globular and projecting-bellied cauldrons (drawn by
Stephen Crummy)
Further sub-division has been suggested, particularly
of the globular group. For example, Fox (1946, 43)
splits globular cauldrons into two groups based on
whether the body is made of two pieces (bowl and
band) or a single sheet. Hawkes (1951, 182) and
Raftery (1980, 57) also note differences in size, form,
and the use of materials within the globular group.
Spratling (1972, 235–8) goes further, dividing globular
cauldrons into three groups (his Groups II–IV). Like
Fox, Spratling draws a distinction between cauldrons
made of two or more pieces (Group II) and from a
single sheet (Group III & IV). Groups III and IV are
defined by the attachment of the handles to the body
(III) or the rim (IV) of the vessel. In contrast, Loughran
(1989, 7) stresses the fact that most typologies
encompass cauldrons with globular-shaped bowls and
cauldrons with hemispherical bowls and straight or
slightly in-turned sides within the globular group.
Accordingly, she creates a third type: cauldrons with
hemispherical bowls and straight/slightly in-turned
sides. Her globular group is also sub-divided into onepiece and composite globular vessels ‘made of two or
more parts’.
Macdonald (2007, 88–97) and Gerloff (2010,
appx 3) are the most recent discussions. They take very
different approaches. Macdonald (2007, 92–7) follows
Spratling’s groups with slight refinements. Gerloff
(2010, fig. 9.1) divides the cauldrons into no fewer than
eight separate groups. Projecting-bellied cauldrons are
split between British (‘Type Santon’) and Irish examples
(‘Type Ballymoney’), based on their profiles and the
arrangement of the upper band. Globular cauldrons are
sub-divided into six groups, three more than Spratling
and Macdonald. Gerloff (2010, 375) splits Spratling’s
Group II into ‘Walthamstow/La Tène’ and ‘Spetisbury/
Baldock’ variants. This is done to distinguish between
cauldrons of two bands whose upper band, handles,
and rim is of iron (‘Type Walthamstow/ La Tène’) and
those with two copper alloy bands but with iron rims
Fig. 3.
Cauldron typology. The contrast in shading does not equate
to the use of iron vs bronze but is rather aimed at
highlighting the differences between the groups (drawn by
Stephen Crummy)
and handles (‘Type Spetisbury/Baldock’). Gerloff
(2010, 378) places Kyleakin (Cat. No. 4) into its own
group based on the distinctive profile of the vessel. The
Drumlane cauldron (Cat. No. 2) is also assigned to its
own group.
Of the main classifications of cauldrons, although
Gerloff’s typology is useful, as it incorporates the
considerable typological variation present, because of
the relatively small number of cauldrons known to
date, her classification is probably too complicated.
Loughran’s general categorisation based on vessel
profile has the merit of being simple and it relates to
the whole vessel, but owing to the fragmentary nature
of some of the cauldrons, it is difficult to differentiate
between globular and straight-sided. It is also uncertain
how important this difference was. For example a
recent European typology places globular and straightsided cauldrons side-by-side (Bataille 2008, fig. 18).
Taking all of these factors into account, it is argued
that Spratling’s typology with Macdonald’s (2007,
92–7) amendments most closely fit the current corpus.
This can be summarised as follows (Fig. 3):
329
• Group I – projecting-bellied: Also known as the
‘Santon’ form. Comprise a copper alloy bowl of
one-piece with a projecting belly and distinctive
shoulder carination. This is attached by rivets to
an upper band formed from one or two pieces of
copper alloy sheet. Handles and rim are of iron
and are attached to the upper band.
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
• Group II – globular composite cauldrons: Also
known as the ‘Battersea’ form. Comprise hemispherical or slightly globular-shaped bowls, made
from a single piece of copper alloy and upper
bands of copper alloy and/or iron sheet. Handles
and rims are made of iron and are attached to the
uppermost band.
• Group III – globular cauldrons with narrow
upstanding rims unperforated by rivet holes: Also
known as the ‘Blackburn Mill’ form. Globular,
shouldered copper alloy body with a narrow
vertical rim unperforated by rivet holes. Handles
are attached to the upper-portion of the copper
alloy body.
• Group IV – globular cauldrons with narrow
upstanding rims perforated by rivet holes: Also
known as the ‘Elvanfoot’ form. Globular one-piece
copper alloy bodies with narrow upstanding rims
perforated by rivet holes which can be either evenly
or unevenly spaced. An iron rim was presumably
originally attached. There is no evidence on the
copper alloy body for handle attachment (the
main difference from Group III) so it is thought
handles were attached to the iron rim. The rivet
holes on vessels assigned to this group are much
further apart than those joining bowl and band for
Group II vessels, meaning they are unlikely to be
misidentified bowls of Group II vessels (Macdonald
2007, 96).
A further category of ‘early cauldrons’ is also
identified for a small group which are later in date
than Atlantic and earlier than the main identified
groups of IA/ER cauldrons (see below; Appendix A).
As the group is so small and quite varied, it is not yet
possible to typify them as a group.
A list of fragmentary remains from excavated sites
that may originate from cauldrons and reported finds of
ring handles was also compiled (Appendixes D & E).
FREQUENCY, SIZE, DISTRIBUTION, AND CONTEXT
Frequency
Figure 4 shows the frequency of cauldrons by type
(Table 1). It demonstrates that where they can be
definitively assigned, Group II cauldrons are the most
numerous, although the 17 Group II cauldrons from
Chiseldon clearly skew the data. The second most
numerous group is the projecting-bellied cauldrons
Fig. 4.
Frequency of cauldrons by type (on Figs 4–6 the key begins
at 12 o’clock, working clockwise)
TABLE 1: FREQUENCY OF CAULDRONS
BY TYPE
Early
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
Late?
Unknown
5
12
28
4
5
5
18
77
(Group I), with Group III and IV roughly of similar
frequency.
Context
Figure 5 shows the different contexts IA/ER cauldrons
are found in (Table 2). Complete cauldrons are most
likely to be found in watery contexts or as part of a
hoard, frequently as the container for the rest of the
objects. Again, the large number of cauldrons from
Chiseldon skews the data in favour of hoards. As is
demonstrated by Appendices D and E, fragments
or bits of cauldrons are sometimes also recovered at
settlements, perhaps remnants from dismantling
and/or recycling or alternatively relating to specific
fragmentation practice.
The wide range of different depositional contexts
for cauldrons is perhaps surprising. Figure 6 and
Table 3 provide more detail, showing the different
depositional contexts for each of the specific cauldron
groups. Groups I, III and IV are predominantly found
in watery contexts. In contrast, Group II cauldrons are
found in many more different contexts.
330
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
north-west Norfolk. There are too few examples of
identifiable Group III and Group IV cauldrons for a
meaningful discussion of their distribution. Based on
existing evidence, it is possible their distribution was
similar to Group I cauldrons, but also including Wales.
Discussion
The validity of the cauldron typology is confirmed by
distribution as clear regionality can be identified for
Groups I and II. This regionality also partly explains
differences in the diversity of contexts the cauldrons
are found in. Prestigious or unusual metalwork from
southern Britain (where Group II cauldrons are mainly
distributed) are generally found in a wider variety
of contexts in the later Iron Age than elsewhere in
Britain (see Joy 2011; Gosden & Garrow 2012). This
distribution also has chronological structuring and
consistency (as developed below).
Fig. 5.
Different contexts IA/ER cauldrons are found in
TABLE 2: THE DIFFERENT
DEPOSITIONAL CONTEXTS FOR IA/ER
CAULDRONS
Beach
Burial
Bog/Moss
Hoard
Lake/Loch
River
Settlement
Unknown
1
4
7
19
9
4
10
13
67
DATING
Size
Figures 7 and 8 and Table 4 show the average
maximum diameter, height and volume for all of the
identified cauldrons. They demonstrate that projectingbellied and early cauldrons are the largest. The other
three types are slightly smaller and roughly the same size
with an average volume of around 40 litres, although
the average for Group IV cauldrons is exaggerated by
the relatively large size of Abercairney.
Distribution
Although when looked at as a whole there is a relatively
even distribution of cauldrons across Britain and
Ireland, when viewed by group some very distinct
regional distributions are revealed (Fig. 9). For example,
there is a clear concentration of Group II cauldrons
below an imaginary line drawn between the Bristol
Channel and the Wash. Group I projecting-bellied
cauldrons are mainly distributed in northern Britain
and Ireland. There is also an interesting concentration in
Group I: projecting-bellied
The dating evidence for projecting-bellied cauldrons is
relatively good (Macdonald 2007, 94; contra Macgregor
1976, 151). Radiocarbon dating of carbonised residues
on the Balleymoney cauldron (Cat. No. 8) produced an
uncalibrated date of 1842 ± 25 BP (UBA-10351).1 When
calibrated with reference to the IntCal13 calibration
curve (Reimer et al. 2013) using Version 4.2 of the
OxCal calibration program (Bronk Ramsey & Lee
2013), the determination obtained (at 95.4% probability) was 87–107 cal AD (4.4%) and 121–240 cal AD
(91.0%), suggesting a date from the late 1st–early
3rd century AD.
Two cauldrons can be dated through associated
artefacts: Carlingwark Loch (Cat. No. 16) and Santon
(Cat. No. 56). The Carlingwark Loch hoard is dated
from the late 1st–early 2nd century AD (Manning
1972, 233). Spratling (2009 [1966], 70) has recently
reviewed his dating of the Santon hoard based on the
brooches to AD 40–70 (see also Manning 1972, 232;
Spratling 1975, 207; Macdonald 2007, 94).
There are also strong continental parallels. Fox
(1946, 43, fn. 4) compares the Santon cauldron with
an example from Emmendingen, Baden, illustrated by
Déchelette (1914, fig. 636). ‘Emmendingen’ cauldrons
are also discussed by Raftery (1984, 234) and date
from the 1st century BC into the Imperial period
(Macdonald 2007, 94). As is demonstrated by examples
331
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
Fig. 6.
Context by cauldron group
TABLE 3: THE DIFFERENT DEPOSITIONAL CONTEXTS FOR
IA/ER CAULDRONS BY GROUP
Beach
Burial
Bog/Moss
Hoard
Lake/Loch
River
Settlement
Unknown
Total
Group I
0
0
3
1
3
0
0
5
12
Group II
0
1
0
18
0
5
3
1
28
Group III
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
4
Group IV
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
5
such as the cauldron from Crummackdale, Yorkshire
(Cat. no. 19), or the Wotton hoard, this form continued to be used for a number of centuries to at least
the 4th century AD (Hawkes 1951, 185–8), although
as Macdonald (2007, 94) makes clear, different,
distinctively Roman manufacturing techniques were
used and they are often of one-piece (Hawkes 1951,
188–9).
In summary, projecting-bellied cauldrons date from
the mid-1st to the 2nd century AD (Macdonald 2007,
94) and possibly into the 3rd century in Ireland.
Fig. 7.
Height and maximum diameter of cauldrons plotted by type
Although some continental parallels date to as early as
the 1st century BC, there is no evidence that projectingbellied cauldrons were deposited in the British Isles
before the mid-1st century AD.
Group II: globular composite cauldrons
The cauldrons from Chiseldon have been dated
through radiocarbon dating samples taken from two
cow skulls found with the hoard (Table 5; Barclay &
Grant in Joy & Baldwin forthcoming). The digging of
332
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Fig. 8.
Volume of cauldrons defined by group
TABLE 4: AVERAGE DIMENSIONS OF CAULDRONS BY TYPE
Type
Early cauldrons (range)
Group I (range)
Group II (range)
Group III (range)
Group IV (range)
Average diam. (mm)
521 (375–640)
579 (335–710)
408 (280–680)
375 (315–420)
475 (360–700)
Average ht (mm)
326 (193–432)
420 (270–495)
250 (165–500)
272 (216–309)
272 (210–375)
the pit has been modelled by Barclay and Grant as
occurring sometime between 355 and 270 cal BC
(50.6%) or 265–195 cal BC (44.4%), giving a range of
355–195 cal BC at 95.4% probability and they suggest
that the hoard was deposited at some point during the
mid-4th–early 3rd century cal BC, or the mid-3rd–early
2nd century cal BC. This date is far earlier than
previously thought for this type of cauldron (see
discussion below).
Two other cauldrons of this type can be dated by
association: Baldock (Cat. No. 7) and Letchworth
(Cat. No. 27). The Baldock grave has been recently
dated by Sealey (2007, 14; 2009, 7) to c. 100–75 BC,
but as Stead and Rigby (1986, 60–1) state, it could
date as early as the late 2nd century BC. The dating of
the Letchworth cauldron fragment is based on stratified
pottery which places its deposition somewhere between
the mid-2nd and mid-1st centuries BC (Moss-Eccardt
1965, 177; 1988, 88). Although attributed dates in
Average vol. (litres)
51 (37–68)
66 (42–78)
40 (26–79)
43 (34–49)
43 (33–59)
previous discussions, the dating evidence for Spetisbury
is not secure (Macdonald 2007, 95).
Possible continental parallels to Group II cauldrons
(see Bochnak 2011, fig. 2) have been discussed
most recently by Stead and Rigby (1986, 59) and
Moss-Eccardt (1988, 88–90). Discussing the Baldock
cauldron, Stead and Rigby draw comparisons with the
Brå cauldron, deposited in a pit in eastern Jutland and
dating to the later 3rd century BC (Klindt-Jensen 1953;
Mortensen 1991, 375), as well as a series of cauldrons
found in early Augustan burials in the Rhineland,
Luxembourg, and Belgium (Stead & Rigby 1986, 59).
Moss-Eccardt draws attention to the work of Eggers
(1951, Tafel 2, Karte 10–11) who illustrates a number
of different variants of cauldron which are very similar
in form, particularly Eggers’ Type 5. These are distributed throughout Denmark, northern Germany, and
southern Sweden. Since Eggers compiled his catalogue,
numerous finds have been made in Germany between
333
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
Fig. 9.
Distribution of cauldrons by type (drawn by Craig Williams)
TABLE 5: UNCALIBRATED DATES FROM CHISELDON
Lab. code
SUERC-45221
SUERC-45222
SUERC-45223
SUERC-45224
Object No.
55a
55b
117a
117b
Radiocarbon age (BP)
2197 ± 22
2184 ± 22
2184 ± 23
2223 ± 25
the Elbe and Weser rivers (Moss-Eccardt 1988, 88).
A number of middle La Tène/late La Tène cauldrons
of similar form were also found at Manching
(Jacobi 1974) and La Tène (Vouga 1923, pl. xxvii). In
Scandinavia cauldrons of similar form are relatively
commonly found in cremation burials (see Moss-Eccardt
1988, 90 for examples).
Maguer et al. (2003) report on the discovery of
an iron rim, ring handles and the upper band of a
cauldron found in a pit at a settlement site at Vivoin,
Pays-de-la-Loire, north-west France. The rim is quite
large, c. 600 mm in diameter. Like the cauldron
remains from Letchworth, the copper alloy bowl was
carefully removed before the iron remains were
334
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
deposited in the pit. The Vivoin cauldron belongs to
the so-called ‘Gallic’ type which is distributed from
north-west and central France to central Belgium
across to south-eastern Germany and Switzerland
(Maguer et al. 2003, fig. 14a). This type of cauldron
dates from the 2nd century BC–1st century AD
(ibid., 230).
In summary, Group II cauldrons date from as early
as the 4th to the 1st century BC. Despite the fact that
similar cauldrons are found in 1st century AD contexts
on the continent, there is currently no evidence that
Group II cauldrons were used this late in Britain or
Ireland but some of the simple globular cauldrons
could conceivably date any time from the latter half of
the 1st millennium BC to the second half of the 1st
millennium AD (Spratling 1972, 235).
Group III: globular cauldrons with narrow
upstanding rims unperforated by rivet holes
The dating of this group has until recently been reliant
solely on the cauldrons from Blackburn Mill (Cat. Nos
11–13; Macdonald 2007, 95). The Blackburn Mill
hoard is dated to the late 1st or 2nd century AD
(Manning 1972, 232–3). The cauldron from the
probable cremation burial at Welshpool (Cat. No. 43)
can also be dated based on associated objects as well as
a recent radiocarbon date (OxA-17440; 1915 ± 30 BP)
taken from a yew stave from the bucket which was also
among the grave goods (Garrow et al. 2009, 119),
which, when calibrated, provided quite a wide date
range (cal AD 1-210) but the dating of this grave group
has also recently been discussed by Adam Gwilt
(forthcoming 2014). Based on the associated objects in
the grave, he concludes that the burial probably took
place around AD 120–150, many of the artefacts in the
grave being heirlooms, manufactured during the later
1st century AD.
In summary, Group III cauldrons probably date
from the late 1st–2nd century AD.
Group IV: globular cauldrons with narrow
upstanding rims perforated by rivet holes
The dating evidence for Group IV cauldrons is
unfortunately non-existent. Past discussions of possible
dating evidence are neatly summarised by Macdonald
(2007, 96): ‘Unfortunately none of the Group IV
cauldrons can be dated by either association or context.
Burns’ overly precise date of the first century AD for the
Elvanfoot cauldron (1969, 34) has rightly been dismissed by Spratling for being based on insufficient
evidence (1971, 111).’
Summary
Group I, III, and possibly Group IV cauldrons
(because they are so similar to Group III), are broadly
contemporaneous, being in use in the 1st and 2nd
centuries AD. The dating of Chiseldon shows that
Group II cauldrons were in use for far longer than
previously thought and were used from the 4th–1st
centuries BC. On current evidence, Group II cauldrons
appear to have gone out of usage at least a century
before the other groups suggesting there may not have
been a considerable overlap of usage with the other
groups, as previously thought. The small concentration of Group I cauldrons in north-west Norfolk
represents a rare example of the usage and visible
deposition of cauldrons in south Britain in the 1st
century AD.
It is difficult to be certain how far these patterns
represent the true distribution and date ranges of the
different cauldron types. The data could be skewed by
broader regional patterns of the deposition of prestige
metal objects, relating to different social trajectories
between southern Britain and northern and western
Britain and Ireland during the 1st and 2nd centuries
AD. Group I cauldrons dating to the 1st century BC are
known on the continent and there seems no reason
why they were not also used this early in Britain.
Similarly, as is demonstrated by the presence of a small
number of Group I cauldrons in north-west Norfolk,
cauldrons were being made and used in southern
England during the 1st century AD. Given that cauldrons similar to Group II cauldrons, such as the
Vivoin cauldron, were made and used on the continent
until the 1st century AD, it is likely that there must have
been some degree of overlap in the usage of Group I
and Group II cauldrons. Nevertheless, as outlined
above, the evidence also hints at strong regional
preferences; with Group II cauldrons preferred in
southern Britain and Group I cauldrons used in the
north and in Ireland.
UNCLASSIFIABLE CAULDRONS
As with all typologies, a number of examples listed do
not easily fit into this classification and it is worth
briefly discussing them here with respect to their
335
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
inclusion or not in the main catalogue (Appendix B).
This is made more complicated as many finds are
poorly recorded or come from watery deposits with no
association, meaning that for dating purposes we are
almost wholly reliant on comparative material and
typologies (see above).
Cauldrons 600–400 BC
As was outlined in the introduction, there is an
apparent hiatus in the deposition of cauldrons
between the Early and later Iron Ages (c. 600–200 BC).
The re-dating of Group II cauldrons back to 400 BC
goes someway to filling this chronological gap. A small
number of other cauldrons defined here for simplicity
as ‘early cauldrons’ can also be shown to date to the
period from 600–400 BC (Hawkes & Smith 1957, 198;
Gerloff 2010). As this period of absence has been of
particular scholarly interest, it was thought worthwhile
to list these early cauldrons as a separate catalogue
(Appendix A).
The cauldron from the River Thames listed as
‘London’ (Cat. no. 5) has been traditionally assigned
typologically to Hallstatt D (Hawkes & Smith 1957,
191–4, fig. 11). Labelled as ‘Type HundersingenNarce’ by Gerloff (2010, 371–2) and interpreted as a
possible import (Hawkes & Smith 1957, fig. 12), it
comprises a large, globular-shaped bowl manufactured from a single piece of copper alloy. The
cauldron has an infolding rim. Three rivet holes are
visible on this rim indicating a point of handle
attachment. Although the handles are now missing, a
similar profile and arrangement of rim and handle
attachment is seen on examples dating to Hallstatt D
from the Continent (Bataille 2008, fig. 18). A sheet
fragment with in-turned rim from Luxulyan, Cornwall
could also be an example of a cauldron of this type
(Gerloff 2010, 371–2, no. 7).
Macdonald (2007, 95) assigns the Kyleakin cauldron (Cat. No. 4) to Group III based on the fact that
the handles were originally attached to the body of
the cauldron. This categorisation is uncertain as the
profile of Kyleakin is very different from the examples
listed in this group, being much flatter. A cautionary
note must be made in terms of the profile because of
the extent of the repairs to the bowl. Nevertheless, it is
not thought that these repairs would have substantially
altered its profile. Gerloff (2010, 378) assigns Kyleakin
to its own group and compares its profile with continental cauldrons dating to Hallstatt D. It is also very
similar in profile to a cauldron from a La Tène A
cremation burial from Wallscheid, Rhineland, Germany
(Verger 1997, 234, fig. 14) and there is another close
parallel from the site of La Tène (Vouga 1923, 81,
p. xxvii (1)). Looking at typologies of continental
cauldrons (eg, Bataille 2008, fig. 18), the profile of
Kyleakin fits most closely with examples dating to La
Tène A or La Tène B. These have distinctive D-shaped
handles. Unfortunately the handles on Kyleakin do not
survive so its early date cannot be proven. The
extensive repairs to the cauldron could also indicate
that it was of some antiquity when it was deposited.
A wooden keg originally containing bog butter from
the same bog, although not necessarily associated,
was radiocarbon dated producing a calibrated date
of AD 246–346 (UB-3186; 3680 ± 35 BP; Earwood
1991, 233).
With no other parallels, the Drumlane cauldron
(Cat. No. 2) is not certain to be of Iron Age date
(Gerloff 2010, 378) but it is included here as it is
generally regarded as so being (Raftery 1980; 1983;
Loughran 1989). It is made entirely of iron, comprising numerous patches constructed in a series of bands
in the same manner as Atlantic cauldrons, and is
regarded as an intermediate piece, bridging Bronze
Age techniques and the adoption of iron (Raftery
1980, 61; Gerloff 2010, 378).
Listed as Late Iron Age by Macgregor (1976) and
Raftery (1980), the cauldrons from Kincardine Moss
(Cat. No. 3) and Ballyedmond (Cat. No. 1) have also
been considered alongside the Late Bronze Age–Early
Iron Age Atlantic category, often being seen as slightly
later, possibly Hallstatt D and broadly contemporary
with the cauldron from ‘London’ (see above) (Briggs
1987, 176; Northover in Cunliffe 1988, 58–60;
Gerloff 2010, 186–9). It is certainly difficult to place
both cauldrons securely into either the Atlantic or
IA/ER sequences (Rynne 1960, 2; Briggs 1987, 176).
Rynne (1960, 2) tentatively suggests a date in the 7th
century BC for Ballyedmond. Briggs (1987, 176) draws
on similarity of decoration with some of the Atlantic
cauldrons described by Leeds (1930) to place them
somewhere between the two main groups. Northover
(in Cunliffe 1988, 58–60) argues for an early date
based on the form of the rims and the layering of
bands, one inside the other. Both, Northover argues,
are more similar to Atlantic cauldrons. He also analysed the metal of both Kincardine and Ballyedmond
and concludes (in Gerloff 2010, 189) that they are
made of metal used during the Hallstatt D and early
336
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
La Tène periods. Gerloff (2010, 188) draws on decoration and cites similarities between the ring-and-dot
motifs on the Kincardine panels with Hallstatt D
decoration. She also sees parallels for both Ballyedmond
and Kincardine with the ‘London’ cauldron (Cat. No. 5)
and a cauldron from a multiple inhumation from the
Dürnberg, near Hallein (Prüssing 1991, 76, no. 271),
both date to Hallstatt D. Assigning the two cauldrons
to their own class (Class B3), she concludes that these
two cauldrons are ‘… contemporary with the latest
phase of the Continental Hallstatt culture. Its beginning
should, therefore, be dated to the earlier part of the
sixth century but probably continuing well into the fifth
century BC…’ (Gerloff 2010, 188).
On the other side of the debate, Piggott (1952–3,
13), for example, states: ‘… it should be pointed out
that the cauldron from Kincardine Moss, Stirling, is a
particularly fine example of Fox’s globular, composite
type, and must surely be of Iron Age date and not, as
sometimes inferred rather than stated, a member of
the Late Bronze Age group of globular cauldrons’.
Macgregor (1976, 150–1) also places the pair in the
later Iron Age because they are made of large pieces
rather than patches. She also cites the decoration
applied to the two cauldrons. She compares the ringand-dot panels of Kincardine with ‘Fox’s casket
ornament’ and the patches on Ballyedmond are seen to
date to the late 1st century AD. The raised bosses on
both cauldrons, which resemble dome-headed rivets,
are also compared with the Northern Boss style.
Raftery (1980, 62–3) is more cautious, particularly as
both cauldrons are single finds from bogs. He draws
on similarities between the crescent-shaped patches on
Ballyedmond and mounts found in the Birdlip mirror
burial to give an early 1st century AD date for the
cauldrons. The validity of this assessment has been
questioned by Macdonald (2007, 95) but he nevertheless includes the two cauldrons in his catalogue of
IA/ER cauldrons.
On the balance of the available evidence, because of
the simple nature of the decoration on both cauldrons, it
is possible to draw on parallels from both the late
Hallstatt and later Iron Age, showing that the decoration is not useful for dating the vessels. The raised bosses
could be also related to domed-rivets from both groups
of cauldron. Like many IA/ER cauldrons, Kincardine
and Ballyedmond are manufactured from three sheets,
but with the exception of some of the projecting-bellied
cauldrons, the pair are much larger than the rest of this
group and their capacities are much more in-line with
the Atlantic group. Unfortunately the exact nature of
handle attachment is uncertain but it seems likely that
the handles were attached at or near the rim. This is also
much more in-line with Atlantic cauldrons. The unusual
rim arrangement of both vessels could also be seen to
echo Atlantic cauldrons. Metal analysis also points to an
earlier rather than a later date. Finally, strong parallels
from elsewhere dating to Hallstatt D can be drawn.
In conclusion, with caution because of the lack of
association, it seems more appropriate on the current
balance of evidence to follow Briggs, Northover, and
Gerloff and place Kincardine and Ballyedmond sometime in Hallstatt D, or very early in the La Tène period.
Cauldrons of probable later date
Appendix C lists cauldrons which are probably later in
date than the Iron Age or early Roman period. The
large copper alloy bowl from Awhirk (Cat. No. 51) is
difficult to categorise because it is unfinished. It has an
unusual profile which is most similar to Kyleakin,
perhaps suggesting an early date. On the other hand,
the small circular hole at the bottom and surface
striations indicate that it was turned on a lathe which
might suggest it is later in date than the IA/ER cauldrons
that form the focus of this paper.
The deposition date of the rest of this group could
be as late as the medieval period. They are discussed
here because parts of these cauldrons have been re-used
and are probably far more ancient (Raftery 1980,
60; Loughran 1989). Raftery (1980, 60) suggests
Sessuegarry (Cat. No. 54) comprises a medieval dish,
which forms a flat bottom, to which an ancient body
has been attached. Kilmilhil (Cat. No. 53) also has a
flat bottom and comprises numerous, roughly cut
sections of copper alloy held together by ‘paper-clip’
rivets. Again the topmost part looks older than the rest
of the vessel, which is possibly medieval (Loughran
1989, 90). Although ‘paper-clip’ rivets are used for
small repairs across the IA/ER cauldron group, they
are not generally used to secure joins between component parts. Loughran (1989, 88–89) views the use of
this technique on the Cloonfinlough (Cat. No. 18),
Dernaveagh Bog (Cat. No. 20), and Kilmilhil cauldrons
as further evidence for the later date of these vessels.
They are included in the main catalogue because
surviving elements are typologically Iron Age with clear
parallels. It is thought likely that the remains that
survive originated in the Iron Age and may have been
subsequently re-worked in a later period.
337
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
Summary
To summarise, a number of cauldrons can speculatively
be dated to the period 600–400 BC, in addition to the
Group II cauldrons from Chiseldon dating from the
mid-4th–early 2nd century BC. Of the others, ‘London’,
Kincardine, and Ballyedmond have very large capacities, in the region of 80 litres. Kincardine and
Ballyedmond also have decorative plates or patches.
Decoration on cauldrons is otherwise rare (although see
below). Even within a conspicuous group of objects,
these cauldrons stand out. Perhaps, during this period,
cauldrons were only rarely in use, with large, elaborate
examples reserved for particularly special occasions,
before becoming more common with the manufacture
of the Group II cauldrons. It is also possible in Ireland
that parts of already ancient vessels were re-used during
the medieval period to construct composite vessels.
Exactly how these ancient vessels were recovered for
re-use is unclear.
TECHNOLOGY
Cauldrons are rarely identical in form and manufacture, giving the impression of different formulations
for the design of each one. Even when numerous
cauldrons are found in the same context, such as
Blackburn Mill and Chiseldon, the cauldrons are all
different and they were often made using different
techniques and technology. Elements of cauldron
design are very sophisticated (Fig. 10). The paper-thin
copper alloy bowl acts as an extremely good conductor
of heat. This is coupled with the use of iron rims and
handles to provide strength and rigidity. Hawkes
(1951, 181) notes that the diminished height to width
ratio achieved by the shoulder carination of projectingbellied cauldrons acted to expose a greater surface area
to the fire, making it quicker to boil its contents.
Copper alloy
Copper alloy bowls must have been made in one of
two ways: ‘sinking’ or ‘raising’ (Maryon 1938; 1949).
Both processes start with a disc of cast copper alloy.
Discs could have been formed by casting direct into
something like sand, or sometimes more formal stone
moulds were made (see Cunnington 1920; Guilbert
1979, 187; Gwilt 2007, 307–8). The time and labour of
making moulds could be offset by the time saved by
starting the thinning processes from a truly circular disc.
Raising involves hammering the copper alloy over a
wooden former with the blows on the outside surface.
The problem with this method is that it is not thought
Fig. 10.
Diagram of cauldron SF7 from Chiseldon, Wiltshire illustrating its complexity (drawn by Stephen Crummy, © Trustees of
the British Museum)
338
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
it would be possible to achieve the thinness of the
copper alloy seen on cauldrons or the depth of the bowls
(Loughran 1989, 23–4). This means that the most likely
process was sinking. This is achieved by hammering the
copper alloy down into a hollow mould. Once the
curvature was set, the bowl could be made deeper by
hammering from the inside against a solid surface in a
spiral pattern from the base upwards. Hammer marks
revealing this process can be seen on a number of the
cauldrons examined here (see Appendix B).
In some instances a small plugged hole is found at
the bottom of cauldron bowls. It is thought that this is
evidence for spinning or final finishing on a lathe.
Although this is generally viewed as an attribute of
cauldrons from later periods (Hawkes 1951, 185,
188–9), the pole lathe was certainly in use by the later
Iron Age and lathes could also have been used in
the final finishing process after the bowl had been
shaped by hammering (Tylecote 1962, 150; Loughran
1989, 25).
Iron
Owing to the poor survivability of iron, most discussions of technology have concentrated on the copper
alloy components (eg, Loughran 1989, 23). Quanyu
Wang (in Joy & Baldwin forthcoming) has analysed
the iron components of the cauldrons from Chiseldon.
Her analysis reveals the sophistication of the techniques used. For example, some of the rims were
attached to the upper band hot. The rim was then
quenched in water causing it to contract and fit firmly
on to the uppermost band. This is the same technique
used to fit iron tyres onto chariot or cart wheels. In the
case of the cauldrons, we are dealing with metalto-metal rather than metal-to-wood as is the case with
cart wheels. Wang also found that iron from different
sources was used to make different components of the
same cauldron. For example, the rim of one cauldron
was found to have a higher phosphorous content than
the upper band. This would have made it more pliable
when hot and harder when it cooled down; both
important properties for attaching the rim when hot
and providing rigidity to the object.
DECORATION
A number of cauldrons have a form of bossed decoration which has been added after final burnishing by
punching from the inner wall to produce a bossed
effect on the outside (Loughran 1989, 26). A more
pronounced form of bossed ornamentation is seen on
the cauldrons from Kincardine Moss (Cat. No. 3) and
Ballyedmond (Cat. No. 1) which have large domedbosses running along the seam between the bowl and
the shoulder. The domed-bosses are not actually
rivets; they are purely ornamental and were raised by
hammering from the inside surface. A series of small
rivets can be seen in between each boss and these are
the actual means of securing the join. The Spetisbury
cauldron (Cat. No. 39) has large domed-rivets in a
similar position creating a very similar decorative
effect.
Two of the early cauldrons, Kincardine Moss and
Ballyedmond, have decorative patches. Covering
the join of the upper band of Kincardine Moss is a
rectangular plate with 53 raised ring-and-dot motifs
arranged in a geometric pattern. On Ballyedmond
there is a crescent-shaped patch decorated with a series
of small raised dots and lines delineating a pattern
arranged around the crescent shape of the patch. The
area around each handle on the Carlingwark cauldron
(Cat. no. 16) is also decorated with a series of lines
comprising small raised rivets. On some cauldrons
particular time and effort has also been invested in
repair patches of novel form such as S-shapes which
can be quite decorative. Interestingly, many of these
are located on the inside and would not have been
visible when the cauldron was full.
Set against this relative paucity of decoration, the
cauldrons from Chiseldon (Cat. No. 11) are exceptional (Joy & Baldwin forthcoming). Bands of at least
two of the cauldrons have scalloped edges and at least
four have decorative patches. Finally, three of the
cauldrons have decorative repoussé mounts located
immediately below the handles. The copper alloy
mounts on cauldron SF11 are decorated with raised
fin and lobe motifs forming a design in the pattern of
an extended lyre-loop (Joy 2008, fig. 5.3). The iron
mounts from cauldron SF7 are in the form of a cow’s
head with elongated ears (Fig. 11). Only one of these
survives but enough remains of the opposing side of
the cauldron to indicate it was similarly decorated.
When it was suspended each half of the ring handle
could have given an impression of the cow’s horns.
The cow’s head decoration from Chiseldon is
exceptional and no other British cauldron is decorated
in this way. This is perhaps surprising given that there
are many well-known examples of Late Iron Age
vessels that are adorned with human or animal heads,
339
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
Fig. 12.
Waldalgesheim or Vegetal style decoration on cauldron
SF10 from Chiseldon, Wiltshire (drawn by Craig Williams,
© Trustees of the British Museum)
Fig. 11.
Decorated cow’s head mount on cauldron SF7 from
Chiseldon, Wiltshire (drawn by Craig Williams, © Trustees
of the British Museum)
decoration. The closest parallels are from the continent,
in particular a series of decorated sword scabbards
from the Paris basin (Ginoux 2009, figs 78–9).
DISCUSSION: USE AND SIGNIFICANCE
especially ox/bull heads, on escutcheons and mounts
on buckets and on the handles of smaller copper alloy
bowls. Most of these objects date to the 1st century BC,
continuing into the Roman period, but as we have
seen, the Chiseldon deposit could be as early as the
4th century BC. Possibly the best-known cauldron from
the continent decorated with animal heads is the 3rd
century BC cauldron from Brå near Horsens in eastern
Jutland, Denmark (Mortensen 1991, 375). The bronze
attachments of each of the three handles are decorated
with owl’s heads. There are also six bulls’ heads which
acted to stop the handles from damaging the bowl.
The Chiseldon example demonstrates that zoomorphic
decoration was in use on vessels in Britain much earlier
than previously realised.
The final decorative patch from Chiseldon is
perhaps the most remarkable (Fig. 12). It comprises an
iron mount with a raised pattern in the so-called
‘Waldalgesheim’ or ‘Vegetal’ style (Jacobsthal 1969)
and previously termed Stage II art by Stead (1996, 22).
The Vegetal Style dates from the later 4th century BC
and the style comprises flowing tendrils. It is widely
distributed from Hungary to England (ibid., 22–5).
The flowing tendril design on this object ends in a
motif more reminiscent of Jacobsthal’s ‘early’ style.
Objects decorated in the Vegetal style are extremely
rare from Britain and there are no more than a handful
of examples, including the shield from Ratcliffeon-Soar, Nottinghamshire (Watkin et al. 1996). There
are no parallels from Britain in iron which use raised
Very little work has been done to examine how
cauldrons were used or what they were used for. Other
than Smith (1906–7; 1914–15), who interprets some
cauldrons as ancient water clocks because of a central
hole in the bowl which we now interpret as evidence for
lathe turning (see above), it is presumed that cauldrons
were used in the preparation and serving of food and
drink. Discussion of their use and significance in the
various catalogues is almost non-existent, perhaps
because it is viewed as self-evident.
There is some discussion of the significance of
cauldrons in the general literature. For example,
Cunliffe (2005, 94, 154, 456–8, 460, 462, 493,
535–6) discusses later Atlantic cauldrons in the context of Early Iron Age exchange networks but, other
than noting the presence of a cauldron in the Baldock
burial, does not mention IA/ER cauldrons. Other
general discussions tend to concentrate on descriptions
of cauldrons in Irish and Welsh early medieval texts,
relating their mythical roles in feasts and as magical
objects associated with resurrection and sacrifice to
their potential social significance during the Iron Age
(eg, Ross 1967; Green 1998).
There has been more discussion of Atlantic cauldrons.
The dominant interpretation of Atlantic cauldrons
is that they were used in the preparation of meat.
Other interpretations include their use in the serving of
alcohol and even drugs (Armada 2008, 152; 2011, 168).
Their large size and associations between cauldrons and
artefacts such as flesh-hooks have also been interpreted
340
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
as evidence for the ceremonial and social importance of
ritual feasting for the elite of the Atlantic later Bronze
Age (Gerloff 1986, 87–8, 96–7; Needham & Bowman
2005, 94; Bowman & Needham 2007, 97–8); for
example Armada (2011, 168) suggests ‘… their use as
symbols of the abundance, wealth and redistributive
power of the chief who owned them.’
Here, an extended discussion is presented to
consider not what IA/ER cauldrons mean, but what
they do; how social practices, specifically feasts and
depositional events, were enacted through their
material properties.
How were cauldrons used?
A number of features of cauldrons can be inferred
from the data collected in this catalogue. These may
seem obvious but when data are limited, observation
of this type can be important. Many of the repairs
observed on the cauldron bowls act to keep them
watertight. We can then infer that the cauldrons held
some form of liquid, or substance including liquid.
Repairs to handles and their attachments to cauldron
bodies imply that suspension via the handles was also
important. Finds of iron chains and frames (Piggott
1952–3; Savory 1966; Manning 1983) provide further
material evidence for suspension of vessels. Suspension
could also have been achieved using perishable materials
which do not survive. Finally, many cauldrons have
black oxidised layers (soot) on the outside surface. This
evidence combined implies that cauldrons were suspended over an open fire to heat or warm the substance
contained within. Depending on the foodstuff or drink
being prepared, and the ratios of solids to liquids,
cauldrons could be used to prepare dishes by stewing,
braising, or boiling (Dan Stansbie, pers. comm 2013).
Their large capacities also mean that they can be used
to serve and/or warm large quantities of drink, possibly
alcoholic (see below).
Continued suspension, once cooking or warming
was completed, would facilitate the serving of food or
drink. Cauldrons are too big and cumbersome to be
easily moved when full. Theoretically this could have
been achieved by inserting a wooden or metal pole
through both handles allowing two individuals, one at
either end, to carry them. It is impractical to consume
food or drink directly from a cauldron. This means
that it would have to be dispensed into vessels or
platters and then distributed. The swivel mechanism
seen on some of the cauldron handles from Chiseldon
allows the vessel to be tipped when suspended, meaning
that large quantities of food could be transferred
relatively easily (Joy in Joy & Baldwin forthcoming).
Wood remains also recovered from Chiseldon could
represent wooden utensils and serving vessels which
were used alongside cauldrons to prepare and serve
food (Cartwright in Joy & Baldwin forthcoming; see
also Earwood 1993).
A very few cauldrons have been found with organic
residues adhering to their surface or trapped in the
overlap between bands. These residues provide clues
as to what was being prepared and served in them.
The most extensive analysis of residues to date has
been conducted on the Chiseldon cauldrons and residue samples taken from most of these contain animal
fats (Steele in Joy & Baldwin forthcoming). This
evidence is interpreted to indicate that the Chiseldon
cauldrons were used to prepare and serve meat stews.
One cauldron has been found to contain the remains
of an alcoholic drink: residues extracted from the
bottom of the cauldron from Eberdingen-Hochdorf,
Kreis Ludwigsberg, Baden-Württemberg, south-west
Germany contained honey, probably the remnants of a
honey-mead (Biel 1987, 126).
Building on this evidence, we can infer more information about the context of the use of cauldrons.
Many have very large capacities. The cauldron from
Hochdorf could hold 500 litres. The cauldrons
examined here had more modest capacities, ranging
from 30–80 litres (see Fig. 8). Even taking into account
the fact that they are unlikely to have been filled to the
brim and probably only ever two-thirds full, even the
smallest cauldrons still probably contained 20 litres.
This is a substantial quantity of food or drink. With
the exception of large ceramic storage jars, vessels of
this size are otherwise rare in Iron Age Britain and
Ireland. So-called pottery cauldrons represent scarce
finds, for example from south Essex. One of the finest
examples came from what is known as the ‘cauldron
pit’ from Ardleigh, Essex (Sealey 1999, 117). Large
wooden cauldrons are also known from Ireland
(eg, Raftery 1983, fig. 168). Although these obviously
could not be heated over a fire, it would have been
possible to cook food or heat liquid by placing hot
stones inside them. Finally, objects such as buckets and
amphorae are present but these were used primarily for
serving and storing drink rather than preparing food.
One final observation is the number of repairs
present on cauldrons. Indeed it is rare to find a cauldron
without at least one repair and many have very
341
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
extensive, overlapping repairs. Although some of these
could have been made at the time of manufacture (Joy
& Baldwin forthcoming), most were added throughout
the life of the object. The fact that so much time was
invested in their repair indicates that they were valued
artefacts and also suggests they led long social lives.
Feasting
Given the relative scarcity of cauldrons (Raftery 1980,
65) and their large capacities, they were probably
not used every day. Rather they were used in the
preparation and serving of food and drink at larger
social gatherings, probably at feasts, but what does
this actually mean in terms of informing us about the
social usage and significance of cauldrons?
Feasting has been a popular recent topic in
archaeology particularly with the publication of three
influential edited volumes on the subject (Wiessner &
Schiefenhövel 1996; Dietler & Hayden 2001; Bray
2003) prompted by major works in social anthropology (eg, Lévi-Strauss 1968; Goody 1982). At their
heart feasts involve the creation and maintenance of
social relationships and can be used to redistribute
wealth, mobilise labour, create alliances between or
exclude different groups, celebrate marriages, commemorate deaths, and compensate for transgressions
(Hayden 2001, 30). As objects used during feasts,
cauldrons help facilitate these activities and that is
where much of their significance and value derives.
The importance of feasting to Iron Age society
is increasingly being recognised (eg, Arnold 1999;
Dietler 1996; 2001). The work of Michael Dietler,
who has examined feasting in the Early Iron Age of
western Europe, has been particularly influential (see
Poux 2004; Ralph 2007; Fitzpatrick 2009). Dietler
(1996; 2001) identifies three different patterns of
feast which he calls Entrepreneurial or Empowering,
Patron-role and Diacritical. Empowering feasts allow
people or groups to acquire prestige without necessarily
requiring the existence of fixed social hierarchies. By
hosting a feast, debts or obligations are passed on to
guests thus making feasts arenas for negotiations of
social influence, but empowering feasts can also be
viewed as celebrations of community identity (Dietler
2001, 76–7). Patron-role feasts occur when there is an
expectation or obligation for the social elite to host feasts
and there is no expectation for equal reciprocation.
Diactritical describes a group of feasts where certain
sectors of society choose to consume different types
of food and drink and/or consume food and drink
in different ways as a means to demonstrate their
difference from others.
Andrew Fitzpatrick (2009) has recently related
Dietler’s categories to archaeological evidence to try
and identify different feasting patterns. Of particular
relevance here is his discussion of the late 2nd century BC
burial from Baldock, Hertfordshire, which contained,
among other things, two wooden buckets, two iron
firedogs, and a cauldron (Fitzpatrick 2009, 395–7). In
this instance, Fitzpatrick argues the cauldron and other
objects in the grave act to demonstrate the grave
occupant’s role as an ‘organiser’ of patron-role feasts.
This is not the only way in which cauldrons could be
represented at feasts. Indeed in the context of the IA/ER
corpus, very few of which are found in graves, it is
unusual, even when the biasing effect of a general lack
of Iron Age graves is taken into account. Much
more likely, cauldrons were used in entrepreneurial or
empowering patterns; at least that is what we can see
from the depositional evidence as is best exemplified by
the remains from Chiseldon, which appear to represent
the symbolic remains of a communal feast. The fact
that many cauldrons were deposited in watery contexts,
presumably as gifts to the gods made by communities
or groups, also adds weight to this interpretation. These
differences also highlight possible changes in the use
and significance of cauldrons through time and
according to region.
Deposition
Fragments or bits of cauldrons are sometimes recovered at settlements but most were deposited complete
or with the rim and handles removed prior to
deposition. The fragile nature of cauldrons could skew
the data in favour of contexts involving single episodes
of deposition, which would minimise potential predepositional damage to artefacts. An alternative view,
and the view subscribed to here, is that the fact that
some objects were deposited intact rather than broken
up should be seen as highly significant. As has been
demonstrated, cauldrons were important objects and
were involved in important social events. A particular
kind of decommissioning may have demanded that
these objects were taken out of society. Some evidence
in support of this is found on sites such as Maiden
Castle, Dorset, where components appear to have
been removed and selected for deposition, particularly
handles and rims, while other cauldron parts, particularly
342
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
copper alloy sheet, may have been recycled or re-used
(Sharples 1991, 160–5). If this is so, then we should ask
why some cauldrons are deposited intact. Perhaps in
these instances the role of cauldrons as containers or as
redistributive receptacles is again drawn upon in
deposition. Their role in redistributive, life-event and/or
religious ceremonies, or the preparation, containment,
and serving of special foodstuffs, could also account for
why cauldrons were seen as appropriate objects to be
deposited in watery contexts and dry land hoards. For
example, in some hoards such as Carlingwark, the
objects are placed inside a cauldron prior to deposition.
It is likely there is more significance to this practice than
simply the use of the cauldron as a convenient container. Rather it is argued that the use of cauldrons as
receptacles for symbolic foodstuffs is drawn upon in
deposition and they are instead used as containers for
another kind of offering, this time to deities or ancestors
rather than attendees at feasts.
Summary
In summary, cauldrons would have taken centre-stage
at feasts suspended above hearths but they were not
always necessarily used in the same way. If some
individuals were served the contents of cauldrons
and others not, social differences could have been
emphasised. Alternatively, if everyone served themselves,
either directly or from large bowls or platters, communal
identity is underlined. A mutually-constitutive relationship between feasting objects and patterns of feasting can
be observed, with the form of feasting objects dictated
by but also influencing feasting patterns.
and Ireland, with a small concentration of objects
in north-west Norfolk. Group II cauldrons are distributed below an imaginary line drawn between the
Bristol Channel and the Wash. Too few examples of
Group III and IV cauldrons are known for too much
significance to be drawn from current distribution
patterns but their ancient distribution may have been
similar to Group I cauldrons though also extending
into western Britain, especially Wales. A perceived
absence of cauldrons between 600 and 200 BC has
been called into question through the redating of
Group II cauldrons to as early as 400 BC and the
identification of a small number of cauldrons dating to
the period 600–400 BC. Detailed examination of the
technology of manufacture and physical evidence of
use and repair indicates that cauldrons are technically
accomplished objects requiring great skill to make.
Many have been extensively repaired, hinting that they
may have been used for some time. It is argued that,
owing to their large capacity, cauldrons were not used
every day but were instead used at large social gatherings, specifically at feasts. The social role of feasting
has been explored and it is argued that cauldrons derive
much of their significance from their use at feasts,
making them socially powerful objects, likely to be
selected for special deposition when their material
properties as containers are transformed, establishing
relationships between people, gods, and ancestors.
Endnote
The author is extremely grateful to Professor Eamonn Kelly
and Eamonn McLoughlin of the National Museum of
Ireland for providing this information and allowing it to be
reproduced here.
1
CONCLUSIONS
Through a re-examination of IA/ER cauldrons, a little
studied but important artefact class, typology and
chronology have been re-addressed and the social
significance of cauldrons for Iron Age society has been
highlighted. IA/ER cauldrons can be divided into two
broad types (projecting-bellied and globular) and four
groups. New data on dating demonstrates that these
four groups are not broadly contemporaneous, as previously thought. Group II cauldrons were made and
circulating in use between the 4th and 1st centuries BC.
The other three groups probably all date to the 1st and
2nd centuries AD although dating evidence, especially
for Group IV cauldrons, is still relatively sparse.
Group I cauldrons are largely confined to north Britain
Acknowledgements: First I would like to thank the Leverhulme Trust for providing funding for much of the
research conducted to write this paper. I would also like to
thank colleagues at the British Museum and Wessex
Archaeology who have worked with me on the publication
of the Leverhulme Trust funded project examining the
cauldrons from Chiseldon, Wiltshire. I have relied heavily
on information derived from Chiseldon to produce this
paper. Alex Baldwin in particular has worked tirelessly
excavating and conserving material from the site. I would
also like to thank Hayley Bullock, Caroline Cartwright,
Andrew Fitzpatrick, Hazel Gardiner, Marilyn Hockey,
Jamie Hood, Philippa Ryan, Val Steele, and Quanyu
Wang. Eamonn Kelly and Eamonn McLoughlin of the
National Museum of Ireland provided the radiocarbon
date of the Balleymoney cauldron and kindly allowed me
to publish this date here.
343
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
I would also like to thank the museum curators and other
staff who assisted me during my research visits. Adam Gwilt,
Evan Chapman, and Mary Davis provided support and
references and Jody Deacon helped me to examine the
cauldrons at the National Museum, Cardiff. Special thanks
must also go to Fraser Hunter, Alice Blackwell, Jim Wilson,
and Ian Leins who helped me to examine and record
cauldrons at the National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh,
when I had a broken elbow. Thank you also to: Mary Cahill,
Eamonn Kelly, Paul Mullarkey, Isabella Mulhall, and
Margaret Lannin from the National Museum of Ireland,
Dublin; Tim Padley of Tullie House Museum, Carlisle;
Andrew Parkin, Great North Museum, Newcastle; Imogen
Gunn, Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology,
Cambridge; Tim Pestell, Norwich Castle Museum, Norwich;
Virginia Smithson and Ben Roberts, British Museum,
London; and Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews, Letchworth Museum.
Thank you also to Julia Farley for locating and providing
information about the Walthamstow cauldrons and to Julia
Farley and Matthew Hobson for investigating the context of
the discovery of the cauldron from Sedgeford. Thanks to
Lois Armada, Andrew Fitzpatrick, Peter Northover, Mansel
Spratling, and Dan Stansbie for providing me with valuable
references and to Stephen Crummy, Saul Peckham, and
Craig Williams for their work on the illustrations and
photography. Adam Gwilt, Fraser Hunter, Mansel Spratling,
and Neil Wilkin kindly read and commented on previous
drafts of this paper. Finally, special thanks to Miriam Joy
and Florence Joy for their help and assistance throughout.
All errors remain my own.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson, J. 1884–5. Notice of a bronze cauldron found
with several small kegs of butter in a moss near Kyleakin
in Skye: with notes of other cauldrons of bronze found in
Scotland. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of
Scotland 19, 309–15
Anderson, R.S.G. 1938. A bronze bowl from the Rhinns of
Galloway. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of
Scotland 72, 137–42
Anon. 1866–8. Donations to the Library and Museum.
Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 7,
7–10
Anon. 1889–90. Purchases for the Museum. Proceedings of
the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 24, 6–17
Anon. 1924. Catalogue of Well-known Collection of
Prehistoric Antiquities, etc. Chiefly from Ireland Formed
by W.J. Knowles. London: Sotheby, Wilkinson & Hodge
Armada, X.-L. 2008. ¿Carne, drogas o alcohol? Calderos y
banquetes en el Bronce Final de la Península Ibérica.
Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arquelogía de la Universidad
de Granada 18, 125–62
Armada, X.-L. 2011. Feasting metals and the ideology of
power in the Late Bronze Age of Atlantic Iberia. In
G.A. Jiménez, S. Montón-Subias, & M.S. Romero, (eds),
Guess who’s Coming to Dinner: feasting rituals in the
prehistoric societies of Europe and the Near East, 158–83.
Oxford: Oxbow Books
Armstrong, E.C.R. 1923. The La Tène period in Ireland.
Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 53,
1–33
Arnold, B. 1999. ‘Drinking the feast’: alcohol and the
legitimation of power in Celtic Europe. Cambridge
Archaeological Journal 9(1), 71–93
Barrett, J.C., Freeman, P.W.M. & Woodward, A. 2000.
Cadbury Castle, Somerset: the later prehistoric and
early historic archaeology. London: English Heritage
Archaeological Report 20
Bataille, G. 2008. Les Celtes: des mobiliers aux cultes. Dijon:
Èditions Univeritaires de Dijon
Biel, J. 1987. Hochdorf. In J.-P. Mohen (ed.), Tresors de
Princes Celtes, 95–188. Paris: Editions de la Réunion des
musées nationaux
Bochnak, T. 2011. Kierunki napływu celtyckich kotłów
z żelaznym brzegiem jako odbicie oddziaływań
latenizacyjnych w kulturze oksywskiej. Między Kulturą
Pomorską a Kulturą Oksywską-Przemiany Kulturowe w
Okresie, Muzeum Archeologiczne w Gdańsku, 57–77
Boon, G.C. 1961. Roman antiquities at Welshpool.
Antiquaries Journal 41, 13–31
Bowman, S. & Needham, S. 2007. The Dunaverney and
Little Thetford flesh-hooks: history, technology and their
position within the later Bronze Age Atlantic zone feasting
complex. Antiquaries Journal 87, 53–108
Bray, T.L. (ed.). 2003. The Archaeology and Politics of Food
and Feasting in Early States and Empires. New York:
Kluwer Academic/Plenum
Briggs, C.S. 1987. Buckets and cauldrons in the late Bronze
Age of northwest Europe: a review. In J.C. Blanchet (ed.),
Les relations entre le Continent et les Iles Britanniques à
l’Âge du Bronze. Actes du colloque de Bronze de Lille
dans le cadre du 22ème Congrés préhistorique de France,
2–7 septembre 1984, 161–87. Amiens: Supplément a la
Revue archéologique de Picardie
Bronk Ramsey, C. & Lee, S. 2013. Recent and planned
developments of the program OxCal. Radiocarbon
55(2–3), 720–30
Bulleid, A. & Gray, H. St George. 1953. Meare Lake Village,
a Full Description of the Excavations and the Relics from
the Eastern Half of the West Village, 1910–1933, Vol. II.
Taunton: Taunton Castle
Burns, J.E. 1969. A bronze cauldron of the Iron Age from
Elvanfoot, Lanarkshire. Glasgow Archaeological Journal
1, 29–34
Clarke, R.R. 1939. The Iron Age in Norfolk and Suffolk.
Archaeology Journal 96, 1–113
Cunliffe, B. 1988. Mount Batten, Plymouth: a prehistoric
and Roman port. Oxford: Oxford Committee for
Archaeology Monograph 26
Cunliffe, B. 2005. Iron Age Communities in Britain: an
account of England, Scotland and Wales from the seventh
century BC until the Roman conquest (4 edn). London:
Routledge
Cunliffe, B. & Poole, C. 1991. Danebury: an Iron Age
hillfort in Hampshire. Volume 5: the excavations
1979–1988, the finds. London: Council for British
Archaeology Report 73
344
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Cunnington, M.E. 1920. Notes on objects from an inhabited
site on the Worm’s Head, Glamorgan. Archaeologia
Cambrensis, 20 (series 6), 251–6
Curle, J. 1931–2. An inventory of objects of Roman and
provincial Roman origin found on sites in Scotland not
definitely associated with Roman constructions. Proceedings
of Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 66, 277–397
Déchelette, J. 1914. Manuel d’archéologie Celtique ou
protohistorique: Troisième partie second age du fer ou
époque de La Tène. Paris: Auguste Picard
DES. 1992. Discovery and Excavation in Scotland.
Edinburgh: Council for Scottish Archaeology
Dietler, M. 1996. Feasts and commensal politics in the
political economy: food, power and status in prehistoric
Europe. In Wiessner & Schiefenhövel (eds), 1996, 87–125
Dietler, M. 2001. Theorizing the feast: rituals of
consumption, commensal politics, and power in African
contexts. In Dietler & Hayden (eds), 2001, 65–114
Dietler, M. & Hayden, B. (eds). 2001. Feasts: archaeological
and ethnographic perspectives on food, politics and
power. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press
Dryden, H. 1845. Roman and Roman British Remains, at
and near Shefford, Co. Beds. Cambridge: Cambridge
Antiquaries Society Publications
Earwood, C. 1991. Two early historic bog butter containers.
Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries Scotland 121,
231–40
Earwood, C. 1993. Domestic Wooden Artefacts in Britain
and Ireland from Neolithic to Viking Times. Exeter:
University of Exeter Press
Eggers, H.J. 1951. Der Römische import im Freien
Germanien. Hamburg: Hamburg Museum Für
Völkerkunde und Vorgeschichte
Evans, A.J. 1890. On a late Celtic urnfield at Aylesford,
Kent. Archaeologia 52, 325–88
Fasham, P.J., Farwell, D.E. & Whinney, R.J.B. 1989.
The Archaeological Site at Easton Lane, Winchester.
Winchester: Hampshire Field Club Monograph 6
Feacham, R.W. 1965. The North Britons: the prehistory of a
border people. London: Hutchinson
Fitzpatrick, A. 2009. The Champion’s Portion: feasting in
the Celtic pre-Roman Iron Age. In G. Cooney, K. Becker,
J. Coles, M. Ryan, & S. Sievers (eds), Relics of Old
Decency: archaeological studies in later prehistory,
389–404. Dublin: Wordwell
Forsyth, J.F. 1964. Some notes on the bronze cauldron
recovered from Loch Gamhna, Inverness-shire. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 97, 249–51
Fox, C. 1923. The Archaeology of the Cambridge Region.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Fox, C. 1946. A Find of the Early Iron Age from Llyn Cerrig
Bach, Anglesey. Cardiff: National Museum of Wales
Garrow, D., Gosden, C., Hill, J.D. & Bronk Ramsey, C.
2009. Dating Celtic art: a major radiocarbon dating
programme of Iron Age and early Roman metalwork in
Britain. Archaeology Journal 166, 79–123
Gerloff, S. 1986. Bronze Age Class A cauldrons: typology,
origins and chronology. Journal of the Royal Society of
Antiquaries Ireland 116, 84–115
Gerloff, S. 2010. Atlantic Cauldrons and Buckets of the Late
Bronze and Early Iron Ages in Western Europe: with a
review of comparable vessels from Central Europe and Italy.
Mainz: Prähistorische Bronzefunde Abteilung II, Band 18
Ginoux, N.-C. 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). Lille: Revue du Nord. Hors
série. Collection Art et Archéologie N° 15, Université
Charles-de-Gaulle – Lille 3
Goody, J. 1982. Cooking, Cuisine and Class: a study in
comparative sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press
Gosden, C. & Garrow, D. 2012. Technologies of
Enchantment? Exploring Celtic Art: 400 BC to AD 100.
Oxford: Oxford University Press
Green, M.J. 1998. Vessels of death: sacred cauldrons in
archaeology and myth. Antiquaries Journal 78, 63–84
Gregory, T. 1978. A bronze bowl from Upwell. Norfolk
Archaeology 37(1), 134
Gregory, T. 1991. Excavations in Thetford 1980–1982,
Fison Way. Volume 1. Dereham: East Anglian
Archaeology 53
Gresham, C.A. 1939. Spetisbury Rings, Dorset.
Archaeological Journal 96, 114–31
Griffiths, W.E. 1948. Topographical list of Roman remains
found in north Wales. Bulletin Board of Celtic Studies 12,
120
Guilbert, G. 1979. Dinorben 1977–8. Current Archaeology
65, 182–8
Gwilt, A. 2007. Silent Silures? Locating people and places
in the Iron Age of South Wales. In C. Haselgrove, &
T. Moore (eds), The Later Iron Age in Britain and
Beyond, 297–328. Oxford: Oxbow Books
Gwilt, A. forthcoming. The dating of the Welshpool grave
assemblage: radiocarbon dating evidence and review.
Montgomeryshire Collections 102
Hatley, A.R. 1933. Early Days in the Walthamstow District.
Walthamstow: Walthamstow Antiquarian Society Official
Publication 28
Hawkes, C.F.C. 1951. Bronze-workers, cauldrons and
bucket-animals in Iron Age and Roman Britain. In W.F.
Grimes (ed.), Aspects of Archaeology in Britain and
Beyond. Essays Presented to O.G.S. Crawford, 172–99.
London: H.W. Edwards
Hawkes, C.F.C. & Smith, M.A. 1957. On some buckets and
cauldrons of the bronze and early Iron Ages. Antiquaries
Journal 37, 131–98
Hayden, B. 2001. Fabulous feasts: a prolegomenon to the
importance of feasting. In Dietler & Hayden (eds), 2001,
23–64
Hunter, F. 1997. Iron Age hoarding in Scotland and
northern England. In A. Gwilt & C. Haselgrove (eds),
Re-constructing Iron Age Societies, 108–34. Oxford:
Oxbow Monograph 71
Jackson, R. 1990. Camerton: the late Iron Age and early
Roman metalwork. London: British Museum Press
Jacobi, J. 1974. Die Ausgrabungen in Manching 5:
Werkzeuge und Gerät aus dem Oppidum von Manching.
Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag
345
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
Jacobsthal, P. 1969. Early Celtic Art (2 edn). Oxford:
Clarendon Press
Joy, J. 2008. Reflections on Celtic art: a re-examination of
mirror decoration. In D. Garrow, C. Gosden, & J.D. Hill
(eds), Rethinking Celtic Art, 78–99. Oxford: Oxbow
Books
Joy, J. 2011. ‘Fancy objects’ in the British Iron Age: why
decorate? Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 77,
205–29
Joy, J. & Baldwin, A. forthcoming. The Bubbling Cauldron:
the Iron Age cauldrons from Chiseldon, Wiltshire.
London: British Museum Press
Klindt-Jensen, O. 1953. Bronzekedelen fra Brå. Aarhus:
Aarhus University Press
Lambrick, G. & Allen, T. 2004. Gravelly Guy, Stanton
Harcourt: the development of a prehistoric and RomanoBritish community. Oxford: Oxford Archaeology Thames
Valley Landscapes Monograph 21
Leeds, E.T. 1930. A bronze cauldron from the River
Cherwell, Oxfordshire, with notes on cauldrons and
other bronze vessels of allied types. Archaeologia 80, 1–36
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1968. L’Origine des Manieres de Table.
Paris: Plon
Loughran, A. 1989. Iron Age Cauldrons in Northwest
Europe. Unpublished MA Thesis, National University of
Ireland, Dublin
Macdonald, P. 2007. Llyn Cerrig Bach: a study of the
copper alloy artefacts from the insular La Tène
assemblage. Cardiff: University of Wales Press
Macgregor, M. 1976. Early Celtic Art in North Britain: a
study of decorative metalwork from the third century B.C.
to the third century A.D. Leicester: Leicester University
Press
Maguer, P., Cherel, A.F. & Auxiette, G. 2003. Nouvelles
données sur les habitats de l’Age du Fer dans le nord
de la Sarthe (commune de Vivoin, autoroute A28). In
B. Mandy & A. de Saulce (eds), Les marges de
l’Armorique à l’âge du Fer: archéologie et histoire:
culture materielle et sources écrites. XXIII colloque de l’,
Nantes, 13–16 mai 1999, 213–34. Rennes: Revue
Archéologique de l’Ouest 10
Manning, W.H. 1972. Ironwork Hoards in Iron Age and
Roman Britain. Britannia 3, 224–50
Manning, W.H. 1983. The cauldron chains of Iron Age and
Roman Britain. In B. Hartley, & J. Wacher (eds), Rome
and her Northern Provinces, 132–54. Gloucester: Alan
Sutton
Maryon, H. 1938. The technical methods of the Irish smiths
in the Bronze and early Iron Ages. Proceedings of the
Royal Irish Academy 44, 181–228
Maryon, H. 1949. Metalworking in the ancient world.
American Journal of Archaeology 53, 93–125
Mattison, W.K. & Palmer, L.S. 1937. Note on a bronze
cauldron from Craven in Yorkshire. Proceedings of the
Prehistoric Society 3, 164–5
McEvoy, E. 1854–5. Urlingford: a magnificent specimen of
the antique bronze cauldrons which seem to be peculiar to
Ireland: and a St. Patrick’s half-penny. Journal of the
Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 3, 131–2
Mortensen, P. 1991. The Brå cauldron. In S. Moscati,
O.H. Frey, B. Raftery, & M. Szabó (eds), The Celts, 375.
New York: Rizzoli
Moss-Eccardt, J. 1965. An iron cauldron-rim from
Letchworth, Herts. Antiquaries Journal 95, 173–7
Moss-Eccardt, J. 1988. Archaeological investigations in
the Letchworth area, 1958–1974: Blackhorse Road,
Letchworth; Norton Road, Baldock; Wilbury Hill,
Letchworth. Proceedings of the Cambridge Antiquaries
Society 77, 35–103
Needham, S. & Bowman, S. 2005. Flesh-hooks, technological complexity and the Atlantic Bronze Age feasting
complex. European Journal of Archaeology 8(2), 93–136
Newton, W.W.H. 1852. Discovery of bronze vessels. &c, at
Cockburnspath, Berwickshire. Proceedings of Society of
Antiquaries of Scotland 1, 43–4
Piggott, S. 1952–3. Three metal-work hoards of the Roman
period from Southern Scotland. Proceedings of Society of
Antiquaries of Scotland 87, 1–50
Piggott, S. 1970. Early Celtic Art. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press
Poux, M. 2004. L’Âge du Vin: Rites de boisson, festins et
libations en Gaule indépendante. Montagnac: Éditions
Monique Mergoil. Protohistoire Européenne 8
Prüssing, G. 1991. Die bronzefäße in Österreich. Stuttgart:
Prähistorische Bronzefunde Abteilung II, Band 5
Raftery, B. 1980. Iron Age cauldrons in Ireland.
Archaeologia Atlantica 3, 57–80
Raftery, B. 1983. A Catalogue of Irish Iron Age Antiquities.
Marburg: Veröffentlinchung Des Vergeschichtlichen
Seminars – Sonderband 1
Raftery, B. 1984. La Tène in Ireland: problems of origin
and chronology. Marburg: Veröffentlinchung Des
Vergeschichtlichen Seminars – Sonderband 2
Raftery, J. 1963. National Museum of Ireland archaeological
acquisitions for the year 1961. Journal of the Royal
Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 93, 115–33
Ralph, S. 2007. Feasting and Social Complexity in Later
Iron Age East Anglia. Oxford: British Archaeological
Report 451
Redknap, M. (ed.). 2011. Discovered in Time: treasures from
early Wales. Cardiff: National Museum of Wales Books
Reimer, P.J., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J.W., Blackwell,
P.G., Bronk Ramsey, C., Grootes, P.M., Guilderson, T.P.,
Haflidason, H., Hajdas, I., Hattž, C., Heaton, T.J.,
Hoffmann, D.L., Hogg, A.G., Hughen, K.A., Kaiser, K.F.,
Kromer, B., Manning, S.W., Niu, M., Reimer, R.W.,
Richards, D.A., Scott, E.M., Southon, J.R., Staff, R.A.,
Turney, C.S.M. & Plicht, J. van der 2013. IntCal13 and
Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0–50,000
years cal. BP. Radiocarbon 55(4), 1869–87
Ross, A. 1967. Pagan Celtic Britain: studies in iconography
and tradition. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
Rynne, E. 1960. A bronze cauldron from Ballyedmond,
Co. Galway. Journal of the Galway Archaeological &
Historical Society 29(1–2), 1–2
Savory, H.N. 1966. A find from early Iron Age metalwork
from the Lesser Garth, Pentyrch (Glam.). Archaeologia
Cambrensis 115, 27–44
346
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Savory, H.N. 1976. Guide Catalogue of the Early Iron Age
Collections. Cardiff: National Museum of Wales
Sealey, P.R. 1999. Finds from the cauldron pit. In
O. Bedwin (ed.), The Archaeology of Ardleigh, Essex.
Excavations 1955–1980, 117–24. Chelmsford: East
Anglian Archaeology Report
Sealey, P.R. 2007. A Late Iron Age Warrior Burial from
Kelvedon, Essex. Colchester: East Anglian Archaeology
118
Sealey, P.R. 2009. New light on the wine trade in JulioClaudian Britain. Britannia 40, 1–40
Sharples, N.M. 1991. Maiden Castle: excavations and field
survey 1985–6. London: English Heritage Archaeological
Report 19
Smith, R.A. 1906–7. The timekeepers of the ancient Britons.
Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, London (2 ser.)
21, 319–33
Smith, R.A. 1909. A hoard of metal found at Santon
Downham, Suffolk. Proceedings of Cambridge Antiquarian
Society 13, 146–63
Smith, R.A. 1914–15. A series of thin bronze vessels
including water-clocks of the Early Iron Age, discovered
at Wotton, Surrey. Proceedings of the Society of
Antiquaries, London (2nd ser.) 27, 76–95
Smith, R.A. 1925. Guide to Early Iron Age Antiquities (2nd
edn). London: British Museum
Spratling, M.G. 1971. Further comments on the Iron Age
cauldron from Elvanfoot, Lanarkshire. Glasgow
Archaeological Journal 2, 111–12
Spratling, M.G. 1972. Southern British Decorated Bronzes
of the Late pre-Roman Iron Age. Unpublished Ph.D.
thesis, University of London
Spratling, M.G. 1975. Fragments of a lorica segmentata in
the hoard from Santon, Norfolk. Britannia 6, 206–7
Spratling, M.G. 2009 [1966]. The Santon Hoard
Reconsidered: a rich burial of the mid-first century AD
from Norfolk. Unpublished B.A. dissertation, University
of Cardiff
Stead, I.M. 1971. The reconstruction of Iron Age buckets
from Aylesford and Baldock. British Museum Quarterly
35, 250–82
Stead, I.M. 1996. Celtic Art in Britain Before the Roman
Conquest (2nd ed.). London: British Museum Press
Stead, I.M. & Rigby, V. 1986. Baldock: the excavation of a
Roman and pre-Roman settlement, 1968–72. London:
Britannia Monograph Series 7
Thomas, N. 2005. Conderton Camp, Worcestershire: A
small middle Iron Age hillfort on Bredon Hill. York:
Council for British Archaeology Research Report 143
Tylecote, R.F. 1962. Metallurgy in Archaeology. A Prehistory
of Metallurgy in the British Isles. London: Edward Arnold
Verger, S. 1997. L’Incinération en urne métallique: un
indicateur des contacts aristocratiques transalpins. In
P. Brun, & B. Chaume (eds), Vix et les éphémères
principautés celtiques. Les VI et V siècles avant J.-C. en
Europe cerre-occidentale, 223–38. Paris: Editions Errance
Vouga, P. 1923. La Tène: monographie de la station publiée
au nom de la commission des fouilles de La Tène. Leipzig:
Karl W. Hiersemann
Watkin, J., Stead, I., Hook, D. & Palmer, S. 1996.
A decorated shield-boss from the River Trent, near
Ratcliffe-on-Soar. Antiquaries Journal 76, 17–30
Wiessner, P. & Schiefenhövel, W. (eds). 1996. Food and the
Status Quest, Interdisciplinary Perspective. Providence:
Berghahn
Wheeler, R.E.M. 1943. Maiden Castle, Dorset. Oxford:
Oxford University Press
APPENDIX A: CAULDRONS PROBABLY DATING TO
c. 600 BC–400 BC
Perhaps because of the size and unwieldiness of cauldrons,
published measurements vary widely. For consistency in the
catalogue which follows (Appendices A–D), where the author
has not measured the object, all measurements are taken from
Loughran (1989). This is because hers is the most extensive
catalogue. Catalogue entries where the object has not been
seen by the author and are reliant on published information
are marked with an *.
Where the author has not seen the cauldron, notes
of repairs are taken from the literature. Where there is
disagreement, Loughran’s numbers are used, again for
consistency.
Abbreviations: diam. = diameter; ext. = external; ht = height;
int. = internal; max. = maximum
1. Ballyedmond, Co. Galway, Ireland
Location: National Museum of Ireland, Dublin (NMI
1961: 180)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 630 mm; rim diam.: 420 mm;
ht: 432 mm
Type: Gerloff Class B3
Description: Globular copper alloy cauldron made from
three sheets. A hemispherical bowl is riveted to an upper
band which comprises 2 rectangular sheets joined by a
single row of rivets. Securing the join between the bowl
and band is a series of equally spaced round-headed
rivets. Between each pair of rivets is a raised small
square boss formed by hammering the metal from the
inside. The upper band curves inwards towards the top.
On top of this band is a flat strip of copper alloy with a
central, rounded groove. According to Raftery (1983,
208), this is probably a later addition to the cauldron
as the rivets securing it are larger and have different
spacing. The handles are missing but 2 concentrations
of rivets defining rectangular areas, diametrically
opposite one another, probably indicate their original
positions. In total there are 30 repairs: 20 patches, and
10 ‘paper-clip’ repairs. The patches vary in form and
there are square, rectangular, oval, leaf, and S-shaped
examples. Most are on the inside surface but 6 are
also attached to the outside. Near the rim are 2 large
crescent-shaped patches 1 on the inside, the other on the
347
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
outside of the cauldron. These have been riveted and are
decorated with raised ornament.
Discovery: Found about 1.2 m below the surface of a bog
References: Rynne 1960, 1–2; Raftery 1963, 126, pl. xiii;
Raftery 1980, 58, no. 2, figs 3–4.1 & 11.2; 1983,
208–9, no. 556, fig. 167; 1984, 231–2.
2. Drumlane, Co. Caven, Ireland
Location: National Museum of Ireland, Dublin
(NMI1887: 3)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 375 mm; diam. at mouth:
337 mm; ht: 193 mm; ext. diam. of handle: 80 mm
Type: Globular
Description: Made entirely of iron, the bowl is formed of a
number of sheets arranged in concentric rings and joined
by large dome-headed rivets. The handles are made of
twisted square-sectioned bar metal. These are secured to
the vessel by 2 rectangular-shaped plates through a loop
situated above the level of the rim.
Discovery: Found at a depth of 75 cm while cutting turf on
the shore of Drumlane Lough.
References: Raftery 1980, 57, 68 f., figs 1.2; 1983, 207,
no. 555, fig. 166; 1984, 9, 228, 231, fig. 4, 3; Loughran
1989, no. I6.
3. Kincardine Moss, Stirlingshire, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (DU1)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 640 mm; ht: 410 mm
Type: Gerloff Class B3
Description: Large copper alloy globular bowl and a wide
upper band comprising 2 copper alloy sheets. The
2 main sections are joined by small rivets. Between each
pair of rivet is a large circular raised boss which has
been formed by hammering from the inside. From a
distance these resemble large dome-headed rivets but
they are purely decorative. The areas of overlap of the
band are concealed by 2 rectangular decorative plates.
These are both decorated with 50+ raised rings-and-dots.
The handles are missing. There are 2 diametrically
opposed areas on the rim where they could have been
attached but neither attachment survives. Hammer
marks can be seen across the surface of the vessel, these
have been hammered from the outside. The upper-part of
the cauldron is an unusual arrangement. Running along
the inside of the mouth is a hollow copper alloy tube.
On the outside of the mouth is another hollow tube
formed by folding over the top-most part of the upper
band. The cauldron is in excellent condition and there is
no evidence of repair.
Discovery: Found at Kincardine moss in 1768
References: Anderson 1884–5, 313, fig. 2; Burns 1969,
32–3; Piggott 1970: 21, no. 106; Raftery 1984, 232,
328; Hunter 1997, 110, 125.
4. Kyleakin, Skye, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (DU5)
Dimensions: diam. at mouth: 450 mm; ht: 236 mm
Type: La Tène A or La Tène B?
Description: Globular copper alloy cauldron with a short
vertical neck at the top where the rim would have been
secured. There are no rivet holes in this area which
implies that if an iron rim originally existed, it was
folded over onto the lip and applied hot or hammered to
make the joins secure. The attachments for the 2 handles
are visible on the upper body of the cauldron. These
comprise three large rivet holes arranged to form the
points of a shallow isosceles triangle. Below this are a
further 4 rivets arranged to form the corners of a small
square. A small square section of metal is secured by
these rivets to the inside of the cauldron. The arrangement
is the same on the opposite side but some of the holes
have been filled. The cauldron has been much repaired.
It is difficult to unpick the stratigraphy of the repairs to
the base as they are so extensive. A small disc may once
have been secured to the main body by rivets but it is
difficult to be certain if it is a repair or was part of the
original manufacture as so many subsequent repairs have
been made. Some of the repairs to the side of the cauldron
have at least 3 layers. Patches of copper alloy of various
shapes and sizes were used. These were secured with
rivets. There are also at least 10 ‘paper-clip’ repairs.
Discovery: Found before 1884, 2.3 m below the surface in peat,
apparently in the vicinity of several kegs of bog butter.
References: Anderson 1884–5, 311, fig. 1; Burns 1969,
32–3; Spratling 1971, 112; Macgregor 1976, 170,
no. 306; Raftery 1984, 232, 328; Loughran 1989 no. S8.
5. London, England
Location: British Museum, London (P&E 1859.0122.13)
Dimensions: diam. at mouth: 510 mm; ht: 360 mm
Type: ‘Hundersingen-Narce’
Description: Large copper alloy cauldron. The substantial
part of 1 side is missing but otherwise the metal is in
good condition. The top has been reinforced by conservators with a flat strip bridging the broken area at the
rim. The hemispherical bowl comprises a single sheet
and has a flattish base. Opposite the missing section is a
triangular arrangement of rivet holes indicating where
the handle was attached.
Discovery: Found in the River Thames before 1859
References: Hawkes & Smith 1957, 191, fig. 11A.
APPENDIX B: IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN
CAULDRONS
6. *Abercairney, Perthshire, Scotland
Location: Perth Museum (IE/1946)
348
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 670–700 mm; rim diam.:
590–640 mm; ht: 375 mm
Type: Globular (Group IV)
Description: Formed from a single sheet of copper alloy. In
good condition except for some dents. The iron rim and
handles have not survived. It has 2 ‘paper-clip’ repairs.
Oval punch marks are visible across the entire surface.
Discovery: From a bog on the Abercairney Estate, discovered
before 1946
References: Burns 1969, 31–2; Spratling 1971, 111; Macgregor
1976, 170, no. 300; Hunter 1997, 125; Loughran 1989,
no. S3.
7. Baldock, Hertfordshire, England
Location: Letchworth Museum
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 680 mm; rim diam.: 660 mm;
ht: 500 mm
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: Fragmentary. Comprising parts of an iron rim,
2 iron ring handles and parts of an upper band of
copper alloy. At the bottom of this band are a number
of dome-headed rivets and the remains of a copper
alloy bowl. The handle attachments both survive and
are comprised of 3 linked, semi-circular iron loops.
4 waisted copper alloy knobs, 2 located at each side of
both handle attachments, acted as ‘stops’ to prevent the
heavy iron handles from damaging the bowl.
Discovery: From a cremation burial with the cauldron at the
centre of the grave.
References: Stead 1971, 251; Stead & Rigby 1986, 55–9,
figs 21, 23; Loughran 1989 no. E6.
8. Ballymoney, Co. Antrim, N. Ireland
Location: National Museum of Ireland, Dublin (NMI
1903: 251)
Dimensions: diam. at rim: 710 mm; ht: 495 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: The hemispherical copper alloy bowl has
pronounced shoulder carination. The upper-band comprises two rectangular sheets which are secured by rivets
to the inside of the bowl. The sheets overlap by 120 mm.
At the very centre of the bottom of the base is a small
disc riveted in place. According to Raftery (1983: 210),
the patination of this disc is different from the rest of the
base indicating that it is an ancient repair. Rectangular
and D-shaped patches are also present, as well as a ‘paperclip’ repair.
Discovery: From a bog, found 6 m below the surface
References: Armstrong 1923, 25 fig. 13.2; Raftery 1980, 59,
no. 4, figs 7 & 12.1; 1983, 210, no. 558; 1984, 234,
316, pl.75; Macgregor 1976, 170; Loughran 1989
no. 1; Gerloff 2010, 379.
Metal Analysis: Sample Area 1 (lower): CU 86.38%;
SN 12.13%; AG 0.4%; ZN 0.13%; AS 0.05%; SB
0.05%; Sample Area 2 (upper): CU 87.82%; SN 11.2%;
AG 0.04%; ZN 0.12%; AS 0.01%; SB 0.05%
Radiocarbon date: From carbonised residues: 1842 ± 25 BP
(UBA-10351); 87–107 cal AD (4.4%), 121–240 cal AD
(91.0%)
References: Unpublished. Information provided by kind
permission of Professor Eamonn Kelly, National
Museum of Ireland, Dublin.
9. Battersea, London, England
Location: British Museum, London (P&E 1861.0304.5)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 375–395 mm; ht: 197 mm
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: Copper alloy globular-shaped bowl. Remaining
rivets and rivet holes indicate that the cauldron originally
had an upper band. According to Smith (1909, 148),
100 years ago there were still traces of iron in this area,
indicating that the band was probably made of iron. The
handles and rim are also missing. Close to the upper edge
on the inside of the bowl are 2 small repair patches.
Discovery: Found in the River Thames at Battersea
References: Smith 1906–7, 328–9, pl. 4 opp. 326; Smith
1909, 148; Spratling 1972, no. 426; Loughran 1989,
no. E7.
10. Bewcastle, Northumberland, England
Location: Tullie House Museum, Carlisle (CALMG:
1947.51)
Dimensions: Int. diam. at mouth: 620–640 mm; ht: 480 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: Projecting-bellied copper alloy cauldron made
from 3 sheets. A hemispherical bowl with pronounced
shoulder carination is riveted inside an upper band
which comprises 2 rectangular sheets joined by 2
inward slanting columns of rivets. The bands overlap by
110 mm. A third vertical column of rivets situated to the
right of the overlap of metal pierces a single sheet of
copper alloy only and is purely decorative. Four rivet
holes forming the corners of a square in both areas of
overlap indicate the position of the iron? handles (now
missing). The rim is missing but was attached by means
of 6 clips of diamond-shaped cross-section secured to
the top of the upper band. Modern conservation makes
it difficult to quantify repairs but the vessel has been
extensively repaired using rectangular and leaf-shaped
patches riveted to the inside of the vessel. Three patches
are located in the centre of the bowl and 5 along its
shoulder. A further 3 repairs are visible on the upper
band. More could be obscured by the conservation
work. In addition there are 2 ‘paper-clip’ repairs.
Overall the vessel is in good condition.
349
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
Discovery: Found in a bog (‘The Black Moss’) at High
Grains, Bewcastle during peat-cutting in 1907
References: Smith 1906–7, 329; Feacham 1965, 229,
pl. 11b; Spratling 1971, 111; Macgregor 1976, 170;
Loughran 1989, no. E14.
11. Blackburn Mill I, Berwickshire, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (DW87)
Dimensions: diam. at mouth: 386 mm; ht: 254 mm
Type: Globular (Group III)
Description: Globular copper alloy bowl. The iron? handles
and rim are missing. Two diametrically opposed groups
of 3 rivet holes near the top of the bowl, forming a
triangle, indicate the position of the handles. No handle
fittings survive. There is extensive evidence of repair.
Three patches are present in the area of the handle
attachment and there are 2 ‘paper-clip’ repairs. The
base has been repaired with 7 patches.
Discovery: Part of a hoard of local and Roman metalwork
found by labourers sometime before 1852. According to
Newton (1852, 43–4), one cauldron was placed upside
down above the other with the other objects contained
inside. The original context of deposition is unclear. The
objects were found while digging a drain for a peat
moss, which was probably once a loch (see Macdonald
1976, no. 301).
References: Newton 1852; Smith 1914–15, 87, 93; Curle
1931–2, 310, 313–14, fig. 21; Hawkes 1951, 183,
fig. 47; Piggott 1952–3, 40 no. B1, fig. 7; Spratling
1971, 112; Macgregor 1976, 151, 170, no. 301;
Loughran 1989 no. S4.
13. Blackburn Mill III, Berwickshire, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh
(DW148a)
Dimensions: Ext. diam. of handle: c. 115 mm
Type: Unknown
Description: Cauldron fragment. Part of the rim and body of
the cauldron survive, as well as the remains of a copper
alloy clamp or clip which is folded over the top of the
rim. The iron rim is square in cross-section.
Discovery: See above
References: Piggott 1952–3, 42, no. B14; Loughran 1989
no. S1.
14. Bog of Allen, Co. Kilkenny, Ireland
Location: National Museum of Ireland, Dublin (NMI
R.S.A.I. 281)
Dimensions: diam. at mouth: 620 mm; ht: 475 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: Projecting-bellied copper alloy cauldron made
from 3 sheets. A hemispherical bowl with shoulder
carination is riveted to an upper band which comprises
2 rectangular sheets joined by 2 vertical columns of
rivets. The overlap of the sheets is not great hence the
2 columns of rivets are quite close to one another. Along
the top of the upper band are 5 rivet holes, perhaps
remnants of the rim attachment. There are 20+ internal
patches, most of which (17) are repairs to the base.
Discovery: Found 2.1 m below the surface of the peat during
turf cutting in 1853
References: McEvoy 1854–5, 131–2; Armstrong 1923, 25,
fig. 13. 1; Macgregor 1976, 17; Raftery 1980, 59, fig. 8;
1983, 210, no. 559, fig. 170; 1984, 234, 316; Loughran
1989 no. I2.
12. Blackburn Mill II, Berwickshire, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (DW88)
Dimensions: diam. at mouth: 315 mm; ht: 216 mm
Type: Globular (Group III)
Description: Globular copper alloy bowl. The iron? handles
and rim are missing. Two diametrically opposed groups
of 3 rivet holes near the top of the bowl, forming a
triangle, indicate the position of the handles. No
obvious fittings survive although staining in this area
indicates they were probably iron. At the centre of the
base is a small perforation which has been plugged
indicating the vessel was spun or turned on a lathe.
There is no evidence of repair and the vessel is in good
overall condition.
Discovery: See above
References: Newton 1852; Smith 1914–15, 87, 93; Curle
1931–2, 310, 313–14, fig. 21; Hawkes 1951, 183;
Piggott 1952–3, 40 no. B2, fig. 7; Spratling 1971, 112;
Macgregor 1976, 151, 170, no. 302; Loughran 1989
no. S5.
15. *Cadbury Castle, Somerset, England
Location: Somerset County Museum, Taunton
Dimensions: Vessel 1: diam. at mouth: c. 360 mm. Vessel 2:
diam. at mouth: c. 500 mm
Type: Globular?
Description: Four iron rim fragments, at least 6 iron band
fragments and 6 iron ring handles with attachments.
Only 2 of the handles look to be a pair, meaning that
the handles come from up to 5 different cauldrons. One
handle is attached by means of a staple and a diamondshaped washer which still survive. The rim fragments
are represented by 2 different sizes allowing the reconstruction of approximate diameters. Some of the band
fragments still have copper alloy rivets attached where
the bowl of the cauldron or a further band was
attached.
Discovery: From the hillfort known as Cadbury Castle
References: Barrett el al. 2000, 227, fig. 134.
350
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
16. Carlingwark Loch, Kirkcudbright, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (DW1)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 680 mm; diam. at mouth: 640 mm;
ht: 458 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: Projecting-bellied copper alloy cauldron made
from 3 sheets. A hemispherical bowl with shoulder
carination is riveted to an upper band which comprises
2 rectangular sheets joined by 3 vertical columns of
rivets. These form a decorative feature. The handles are
missing and there are oblong-shaped gaps in the central
upper portions of the overlaps between the 2 sheets
which is probably where they were affixed. There is an
area of oxidisation in one of the positions where the
handle was affixed implying that the missing parts of
the cauldron – handle and rim – were iron. There is
extensive evidence for repair. Close to 1 handle and the
rim there is a roughly semi-circular patch. There are
4 large and 3 small patches visible on the inside of the
base. Along the sides of the cauldron there are also
numerous repairs, including 20–30 so-called ‘paperclip’ repairs. Two sheet fragments, both with evidence
of repair and patching, represent the remains of 1 or
more cauldrons probably of the same type (Piggott
1952–3, 34, nos C17 & C18).
Discovery: Discovered in the loch by two fishermen in 1866
forming part of a large collection of local and Roman
metalwork. The objects were contained within the
cauldron.
References: Anon. 1866–8, 7–9, pl. I; Smith 1914–15, 87,
93–4; Curle 1931–2, 310–13, fig. 18; Hawkes 1951,
183, fig. 47a; Piggott 1952–3, 28, 31 fig. 7, C1;
Spratling 1971, 111; Macgregor 1976, 170, fig. 309;
Loughran 1989, no. S2.
17. Chiseldon, Wiltshire, England
Location: The British Museum, London (P&E 2007,8034.ff)
Dimensions: Vessel SF5. Max. diam.: 448 mm; Vessel SF7.
Max. diam.: 420 mm; height: >223 mm. Vessel SF8.
Max. diam.: 500 mm; ht: >340 mm. Vessel SF9. Max.
diam.: 450 mm. Vessel SF11. Max. diam.: c. 540 mm.
Vessel SF10. Max. diam.: 480 mm. Vessel SF13. Max.
diam.: 450 mm. Vessel SF82. Unable to determine
dimensions from CT scan. Vessel SF87. Max. diam.:
560 mm; ht: c. 298 mm. Vessel SF105. Max. diam.: 520
mm; ht >298 mm. Vessel SF123. Max. diam. 550 mm;
ht c. 310 mm. Vessel SF149. Max. diam. 450 mm; ht:
290 mm. Vessel SF150. Max. diam.: 500 mm. Vessel
SF153. Max. diam.: 310 mm; ht: 230 mm. Vessel SF154.
Max. diam. 440 mm. Vessel UK1. Max. diam. 340 mm;
ht: 246 mm; Vessel UK2. Unable to determine dimensions
from CT scan.
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: 17 complete cauldrons as well as numerous
fragments. The cauldrons are yet to be published but
all are of Group II form with copper alloy bowls and
bands of copper alloy and/or iron. Rims are of iron
with 3 different types identified. Handles are iron and
ring-shaped. Where handle attachments survive, they
comprise iron staples with 3 bands. Many of the
cauldrons show evidence of repair, some with fancily
shaped patches. At least 3 of the cauldrons are
decorated.
Discovery: Discovered by metal detector user in 2004.
Excavated in 2005. The cauldrons were arranged in a
large pit 2 m in diameter alongside two cow skulls.
Evidence from the immediate vicinity indicates that the
pit was located within a small settlement.
Radiocarbon date: From associated cow bone. Multiple
dates subjected to Bayesian analysis (see Barclay &
Grant in Joy & Baldwin forthcoming) 355–270 cal BC
(50.6%) 265–195 cal. BC (44.4%). See Table 5 above
and Barclay and Grant (in Joy & Baldwin forthcoming)
for full analysis of dates.
References: Joy & Baldwin (forthcoming)
18. Cloonfinlough, Co. Roscommon, Ireland
Location: National Museum of Ireland, Dublin (NMI W22)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 430 mm; surviving ht:
235 mm
Type: Globular (Group II?)
Description: The upper half of a copper alloy globularshaped bowl. Rivet holes indicate the position of the
missing handles. These form a diamond. One patch is
present. This is secured by 6 ‘paper-clip’ repairs.
Loughran (1989, 88) suggests that this method of
attachment for a repair could be an indication that the
cauldron is later in date. More likely, these remains are
Iron Age and have possibly been later reworked. The
top of the bowl ends at the top in a vertical lip
20 mm in height. The bottom section is folded over
making it difficult to tell how the bowl was originally
attached.
Discovery: Unknown
References: Raftery 1980, 60; Loughran 1989 no. I11.
19. Crummackdale, Austwick, Yorkshire, England
Location: British Museum, London (P&E 1954.0701.1)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 450–560 mm; ht: 356 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: Projecting-bellied copper alloy cauldron made
from 2 sheets. A hemispherical bowl with shoulder
carination is riveted to an upper band which comprises
of 1 long strip which overlaps itself diagonally and is
joined by rivets. There is also complex patching around
the upper band. Paired rivet holes on opposite sides of
351
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
the cauldron indicate the position of the now missing
handles. Staining near the top of the upper band indicates
that the missing rim was made of iron. There are
numerous repairs. At the base there are 6 large patches
and 3 small. There are 3 ‘paper-clip’ repairs at the neck.
Discovery: Found before 1937 when cutting drainage
channels in a dried-up tarn 1½ miles (2.2 km) north of
Austwick, at a depth of 40 cm.
References: Mattison & Palmer 1937, 164; Hawkes 1951,
185, 180 with fig. 47 f; Macgregor 1976, 170, fig. 310;
Loughran 1989 no. E2.
10 rivet holes. The iron? rim and handles are now
missing. At the bottom of the bowl, close-set oval
shaped punch marks are visible. These are quite deep
and are roughly 10 × 5 mm in size. They are marked
out in a spiral motif but it is unclear how far up the
bowl they extend as they peter out. Overall the bowl is
in very good condition except for some damage in the
upper part.
Discovery: Circumstances unknown.
References: Spratling 1971, 112; 1972, 238; Macgregor
1976, 170, no. 304; Loughran 1989, no. E8; Hunter
1997, 125.
20. *Dernaveagh Bog, Co. Antrim, Ireland
Location: Ulster Museum, Belfast (279 1925)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 420 mm; ht: 309 mm
Type: Globular (Group III)
Description: Copper alloy globular bowl. It has a vertical
neck with no rivet holes which is c. 20 mm deep. Two
opposing sets of rivet holes below the neck indicate the
position of the missing handles. The vessel is dented and
torn. It is much repaired with patches secured by ‘paperclip’ rivets.
Discovery: Unknown
References: Anon 1924, no. 679; Macgregor 1976, 170,
fig. 300; Loughran 1989, no. S3.
21. *Elvanfoot, Lanarkshire, Scotland
Location: Hunterian Museum, Glasgow (B 1959 3224)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 420 mm; ht: 261 mm
Type: Globular (Group IV)
Description: Globular copper alloy bowl with a short
vertical neck. The neck is perforated by 9 holes punched
from the inside. There is a single ‘paper-clip’ repair just
below the neck. The iron? handles and rim are missing,
otherwise the vessel is in excellent condition. Close-set
punch marks are visible across the surface of the
cauldron. These have been punched out from the inside
and form a spiral pattern, worked up from the base
upwards. Macgregor (1976, no. 303) suggests the vessel
has been sunk using a hollow mould.
Discovery: Found in peat, circumstances unknown
References: Burns 1969, 29 ff, 32 fig. 1; Spratling 1971, 111 f.;
Macgregor 1976, 151, 170, no. 303; Loughran
1989, no. S6
22. Ewartly Shank, Alnhammoor, Northumberland,
England
Location: Great North Museum, Newcastle (1956 227A)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 420 mm; ht: 240 mm
Type: Globular (Group IV)
Description: Globular copper alloy bowl with a short
(14 mm) vertical neck. The neck is perforated by
23. Glenfield, Leicestershire, England
Location: The British Museum, London (P&E
2010.8017.1–2)
Dimensions: Vessel 1: Max. diameter: 480 mm; ht: 180 mm.
Vessel 2: Max. diam.: 620 mm; ht: unknown
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: At least 2 vessels of similar form but different
sizes. Both are hemispherical in shape and comprise a
copper alloy bowl, a thick iron band and an iron rim
with 2 iron ring-shaped handles. Although they vary in
size, both are sufficiently large to be categorised as
cauldrons.
Discovery: Recovered in 2009 during an archaeological
evaluation undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology. The
objects were found side by side and remain in their lifted
state with the highly fragmentary remains supported in
blocks of soil. The cauldrons were donated to the British
Museum by the landowners, Lynwood Farm Estates. The
findspot is probably the site of a settlement.
References: Unpublished Treasure Report (2009 T712).
24. Gullane, East Lothian, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh
(DU14)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 310 mm
Type: Globular (Group IV)
Description: Two large copper alloy bowl fragments.
Although they are not in brilliant condition, the
2 surviving pieces make it possible to reconstruct the full
diameter of the vessel. A narrow vertical neck c. 20 mm
high runs along the top of the bowl. This is perforated
by a number of large, circular rivet holes. The base
section also has a number of rivet holes so the cauldron
originally had a circular base attached to the main body
by rivets. As this no longer survives it is impossible to
establish if this was part of the original manufacture or
if it was a repair. Both handle attachments are visible.
These comprise an internal plate for strengthening,
secured to the main body of the cauldron by four
rivets. The plate sits inside the cauldron with the top
352
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
overhanging the neck on the outside following its
contours. A little to one side of where one handle was
positioned is another hole and a possible repair. It is
possible that this handle was repositioned at some point
in the past. It is impossible to ascertain if this occurred
for both handles as the opposite section no longer
survives.
Discovery: Discovered on the beach by metal detector user
References: DES 1992, 50; Hunter 1997, 125.
25. Inveresk, East Lothian, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Edinburgh, Scotland
(FR 756)
Dimensions: Dimensions of largest fragment: 220 × 360 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: Seven large and 7 smaller sections forming the
substantial remains of a cauldron. Two other fragments
may form the base and part of the body of a further 2
cauldrons. Enough of the first cauldron survives to make
it possible to reconstruct its profile. It is projectingbellied, comprising a hemispherical bowl with shoulder
carination riveted to a cylindrical upper band. The very
bottom of the bowl comprises a small circular disc of
sheet metal, riveted to the main body by 40–50 rivets and
an additional 3 strengthening bars. This central bottom
section is c. 120 mm in diameter. The strengthening bars
indicate that this is probably a repair. Areas of ‘rust-like’
corrosion can be seen on 2 of the sections. These looked
initially to be possible remains of an iron rim but on
closer inspection it is more likely to be some other kind of
corrosion product. There is a further large section which
belongs to a separate cauldron. The metal is thicker and
has a different patina. The fragment that remains is also
constructed in a different way from the other fragments.
It is made up of 2 bands of metal riveted together, one
overlapping the other. A third fragment comprises a
cauldron bowl. Since we already have the bowl of the
cauldron described above it must be from another vessel
but it could not be ascertained whether it belongs to the
second fragment or a separate, third vessel. Although,
like the second cauldron, the metal is thicker than the
first vessel, the patina resembles that of the first vessel.
The most interesting feature of this fragment is the
central rivet hole which has not been plugged. This is
presumably a result of spinning or lathe turning during
manufacture.
Discovery: Unknown
References: Unpublished
26. *Ipswich, Suffolk, England
Location: Ipswich Museum, Ipswich (1920-90-3)
Dimensions: Dimensions of fragment: c. 155 × 100 mm
Type: Globular (Group II?)
Description: Collection of fragments including 3 strips of
copper alloy of double thickness with rivets in situ and
section of a copper alloy bowl.
Discovery: Found in the 1920s during street development
in Berners Street, Ipswich.
References: Clarke 1939, 73; Loughran 1989, no. E9.
27. Letchworth, Hertfordshire, England
Location: Letchworth Museum
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 513 mm; diam. at mouth:
508 mm; ext. diam. of handle: 105 mm
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: Iron rim, upper band and handles of a cauldron.
The rim is rounded in cross-section. The handles are
round in cross-section. Each is secured to the upper band
by 1 large staple, held in place by a single rivet. The
staple has 3 ridges. Two round ‘stoppers’ are located
below each handle.
Discovery: Discovered during excavation of a settlement. The
cauldron fragment was found in a ditch alongside pottery
sherds dating to the 1st and 2nd centuries BC.
References: Moss-Eccardt 1965, 173 ff., pl. 45; 1988,
88–90; Spratling 1971, 112; 1972, 236–7; Macgregor
1976, 170; Loughran 1989, no. E10.
28. Llyn Cerrig Bach I, Anglesey, Wales
Location: National Museum, Cardiff (44.32.76i)
Dimensions: Width: 240 mm; ht: 215 mm; wt: 85.9 g
Type: Globular?
Description: Copper alloy sheet fragment. Some modern
damage caused by folding after discovery. There is
evidence that the fragment was cut during antiquity.
Three copper alloy patches are fixed to the upper section
of the inside surface close to the rim by rivets. Two
remain in situ. One is incomplete attached by a single
rivet. The other is elaborately made. It tapers has a
waisted form and is secured by 3 rivets. It is difficult
to be certain but these patches were probably put in
place at the time of manufacture rather than showing
evidence for ancient repair. The external face is blackened,
probably oxidisation caused by use. Traces of iron
corrosion remain, indicating that the upper band was
probably made of iron. No visible hammer marks.
Discovery: Found during construction work at RAF Valley,
Anglesey in 1942. Part of a total of 170 iron, copper
alloy and wood artefacts and animal bones originally
deposited in a small lake.
References: Fox 1946, 42 f., pl. 38, nos 76 & 77; Savory
1976, fig. 29; Macgregor 1976, 170; Loughran 1989,
no. W1-3; Macdonald 2007, 88–97, 225–6, pl. 1a,
figs 17–19, no. 24.
Metal Analysis: see Macdonald 2007, table 18.
353
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
29. Llyn Cerrig Bach II, Anglesey, Wales
Location: National Museum, Cardiff (44.32.76ii)
Dimensions: Width: 280 mm; ht: 210 mm; wt: 62.6 g
Type: Globular?
Description: Copper alloy sheet fragment. Some modern
damage caused by folding after discovery. Part of the
edge of the fragment was deliberately cut in antiquity. In
one corner is a rivet fixing 2 square washers still in situ.
The external face is blackened, probably oxidisation
caused by use. Traces of iron corrosion remain, indicating the upper band was probably made of iron. Rivet
holes are also visible at this juncture. In poor overall
condition and visibly worse than the other 2 fragments
from this site.
Discovery: See above.
References: Fox 1946, 42 f., pl. 38 nos 76 & 77; Savory
1976, fig. 29; Macgregor 1976, 170; Loughran 1989,
no. W1-3; Macdonald 2007, 88–97, 226, pl. 1a,
figs 17–19, no. 25.
Metal Analysis: see Macdonald 2007, table 18.
30. Llyn Cerrig Bach III, Anglesey, Wales
Location: National Museum, Cardiff (44.32.77)
Dimensions: Width: 145 mm; ht: 275 mm; wt: 67.5 g
Type: Globular?
Description: Copper alloy sheet fragment. The fragment is
creased. It is uncertain whether this is ancient or associated with discovery. There are 4 patches on the internal
surface. Corrosion associated with a fifth patch can also
be seen. The patches are 4-sided and circular in form and
are fixed with rivets. One patch is superimposed on
another. Part of the edge of the fragment was deliberately
cut in antiquity.
Discovery: See above
References: Fox 1946, 42 f., pl. 38 nos 76 & 77; Savory
1976, fig. 29; Macgregor 1976, 170; Loughran 1989,
no. W1-3; Macdonald 2007, 88–97, 226–7, pl. 1a,
figs 17–19, no. 26.
Metal Analysis: see Macdonald 2007, table 18.
31. Loch Gamhna, Inverness, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (DU13)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 470 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: Copper alloy cauldron in very fragmentary
condition. The largest pieces comprise a circular bowl
section and an upper band formed from 1 long sheet of
copper alloy. The surviving bowl is much distorted. The
join between bowl and band is secured by rivets. It is
not possible to discern where the 2 ends of the upper
band join. This was presumably in the area with most
damage where a small section is now missing. It is difficult
to make out where the handles were originally attached.
There are 2 possible locations. In the area where a
large portion of the upper band is now missing, there
is reinforcement of the join. On the opposite side there
is a reinforcement bar. This is rectangular in form
and is secured by rivets. The alternative position of
handle attachment is a large rectangular-shaped gap
but there is no corresponding area on the other side,
except for 2 holes. Present in the fragments is a section
similar to the area where the handles were fixed to the
Carlingwark cauldron (Cat. No. 16), with decorative
rows of rivets. Building on this information, a similar
construction for the Loch Gamhna cauldron can be
suggested. The upper band is 10–20 mm in width and is
riveted to the inside of the bowl. In some places there
are 2 rows of rivets, in others just 1. Not enough of this
band survives to reconstruct the height of the cauldron.
The question of whether the cauldron had an iron rim
or not is now impossible to ascertain, in parts the
copper alloy curves over the interior band, it is possible
if there was an iron rim that it was located inside
this fold. One fragment has a repair where one patch
superimposes another.
Discovery: Discovered 1 May 1964 in about 50 cm of water,
2.5 m from the shore of the loch
References: Forsyth 1964; Hunter 1997, 126.
32. *Loughan Ford, Ireland
Location: Ulster Museum, Belfast
Dimensions: Unknown
Type: Globular?
Description: Four large fragments of copper alloy sheet.
Discovery: Circumstances unknown
References: Gerloff 2010, 377.
33. Lound Run, Suffolk, England
Location: British Museum, London (P&E 1898.0516.1)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 330 mm; ht: 160–165 mm
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: Hemispherical copper alloy bowl fragment.
Iron rivets in situ at the edge of the fragment indicating
that the upper band was probably iron. Three patches
(2 large rectangular patches and 1 additional repair near
the upper edge) are visible in the upper and lower parts
of the bowl and there are 2 ‘paper-clip’ repairs.
Discovery: Found in 1898 while excavating peat from a
silted-up channel called Lound Run, 1.5–1.8 m below
the surface.
References: Clarke 1939, 73, pl. xx.
34. Manorbier, Pembrokeshire, Wales
Location: National Museum, Cardiff (2005.28H)
Type: Globular (Group III?)
354
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Description: Numerous fragments of copper alloy as well as
well-preserved iron rim fragments. The copper alloy is
very thin and in poor condition. There are a number of
pieces with patches secured by rounded and square
rivets indicating the cauldron may have been much
repaired. Similarly much of the iron is highly corroded
and the finds have not been fully cleaned. The single
section of rim that has been cleaned is in very good
condition. It comprises a thin folded-over strip with a flat
top, creating a T-shaped profile. A small section of copper
alloy is still in situ indicating that the rim was fitted onto
the bowl/band by means of a slot in the lower half of the
rim. There is a blackened oxidised layer on the outside
surface of some of the copper alloy. The cauldron is
attributed to Group III based on an absence of rivets
along the surviving section of rim and band but the area
of handle attachment does not survive, meaning that the
attribution cannot be entirely certain.
Discovery: Discovered by a metal detector user in 2005. Part
of a group containing 5 complete and at least 3 other
fragmentary objects. These include a trulleus with
openwork decoration, 2 dippers and 2 strainers. The
cauldron remains comprise 1 of the fragments. In
addition, there are 2 flat-bottomed dishes.
References: Chapman in Redknap 2011, 92.
35. New Mains, Whitekirk, East Lothian
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh
(unregistered)
Dimensions: Fragment 1 (sticky labels read ‘2’ and ‘A’).
Width: 165 mm; ht: 118 m. Fragment 2 (probably joins
fragment 1). Width: 113 mm; ht: 35 mm. Fragment 3.
Width 70 mm; ht: 54 mm. Fragment 4. Width: 116 mm;
ht: 55 m
Type: Globular?
Description: ‘Four fragments of sheet copper alloy, plausibly
from the one vessel. Two of them join (tentatively) to
form the incomplete convex shouldered profile of a
vessel, with rim and base lost. Creases on the larger
fragment suggest it was bent when found but has been
reshaped. The restoration seems plausible, and gives
a maximum diameter estimated at 260 mm at the
shoulder. The form is likely to be globular. Shallow
circumferential grooves on the interior survive from the
hammering process. The upper edge of the larger fragment has traces of a repair patch on the outer surface;
the patch is lost, but the two rolled-sheet rivets which
held it are in place, and retain fragments of the patch.
This may correlate with a surviving patch fragment on
one of the other fragments, and may have been ripped
when the cauldron was damaged; or they may represent
separate patching episodes. It seems unlikely that the
vessel held the hoard, as there is evidence that it was
incomplete when buried, not just damaged. The smaller
joining fragment (No. 2) has a patch of small round
indents (diam. 3.5 mm) in one area, suggesting deliberate
damage. More curious is the straight lower edge, now a
little worn (inhibiting certain identification), but the
straightness suggests it was deliberately cut. It is cut
neatly around the circumference, so must have taken
place when the vessel was whole, not flattened’ (Fraser
Hunter, pers. comm 2013).
Discovery: Found in the late 1960s/early 1970s, in
fieldwalking after the discovery of a Roman Iron Age
hoard (Macgregor 1976, nos 14, 206, 220) comprising
a bridle bit ring, beaded torc, spiral armlet, and fragmentary Roman patera. The vessel is likely to be related
to the hoard.
References: Macgregor 1976
36. Santon, Norfolk, England
Location: Museum of Archaeology & Anthropology,
Cambridge (MAA 1987-06-09)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 420 mm; ht: 300 mm;
ext. diam. of handle: 90 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: Comprising 2 substantial pieces of copper alloy
as well as an iron rim and 2 iron ring handles. It is in
fragmentary condition, particularly at the base, and has
been restored. A hemispherical copper alloy bowl with
shoulder carination is riveted to an upper band which
comprises 1 long strip which overlaps itself by 50 mm
and is joined by 2 near vertical columns of 9 rivets. The
iron rim is diamond-shaped in cross-section and is
attached to the top of the upper band by copper alloy
rectangular shaped clips which are 60 × 25 mm in size
and secured to the upper band by 3 rivets. Three of the
original clips survive. The handles are riveted to the
upper band by T-shaped iron staples (110 × 25 mm).
The very bottom of the bowl has been replaced with a
circular disc 250 mm in diameter fitted to the outside of
the bowl. This is of different thickness from the rest of
the bowl indicating that it is an ancient repair. There are
a number of other repairs on the body but owing to the
condition of the object, it is difficult to quantify them.
A number of the repairs act to reinforce the upper band
at the position of handle attachment. A further repair
located at the point of handle attachment is multi-phase
with 2 patches superimposing a larger primary repair
patch.
Discovery: Found in 1897 by a labourer who initially
reported the findspot as his garden in Santon Downham.
The findspot was later established as being in the parish
of Santon. The findspot is probably on the site of a
settlement. The find comprises over 100 local and
Roman objects deposited within the cauldron.
355
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
References: Smith 1909, 146–8, pl. xv.1; Smith 1914–15,
87–9; Fox 1923, 104; Curle 1931–2, 310–11; Clarke
1939, 71–2; Hawkes 1951, 182; Spratling 1972, 235–6,
no. 429; Macgregor 1976, 170; Loughran 1989 no. E5.
37. Sedgeford, Norfolk, England
Location: Norwich Castle Museum, Norwich (2012.110)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 350 mm; surviving ht: 120 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: Projecting-bellied cauldron in very bad condition.
It comprises the substantial portion of a copper alloy
bowl and parts of a copper alloy band. The join between
the bowl and band are secured by small circular rivets
spaced c. 7 mm apart. Some fragments of iron also
survive. One piece is identifiable as an iron handle
attachment which is secured to the point of overlap of the
upper band by 2 substantial rivets.
Discovery: Discovered in 2006 by Mr Roger Greaves on the
surface of a field next to a hole (NGR TF 7108835727)
while out walking his dog. It was probably uncovered
by nighthawks who were disturbed by the local
gamekeeper.
References: Unpublished
38. *Shepperton, Surrey, England
Location: Chertsey Museum, Chertsey
Dimensions: Width: 320 mm; ht: 150 mm
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: Hemispherical shaped copper alloy bowl.
Rivets remain at the edge as do remains of a copper
alloy upper band. Numerous repairs are present.
Discovery: Discovered in 1987 during gravel extraction in a
now extinct channel of the River Thames
References: Gerloff 2010, 376.
39. Spetisbury Rings, Dorset, England
Location: British Museum, London (P&E 1862.0627.1)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 280 mm; diam. at mouth:
240 mm; ht: 195 mm
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: Copper alloy hemispherical bowl riveted to an
upper band formed of a long single band. The vessel has
an iron rim which is diamond shaped in cross-section.
Originally the 2 sections were joined by 32 rivets, 1 is
now missing. The rivets are relatively large (6 mm in
diameter) and dome-headed. They are spaced c. 15 mm
apart. The upper band overlaps by c. 25 mm and was
the position of 1 of the handle attachments. The handle
attachments themselves are missing, as are the handles
and both were attached to the upper band by 2 vertically
spaced rivets 40 mm apart. The cauldron is heavily
corroded making it difficult to identify ancient repairs.
There is 1 repair patch located on the inside of the vessel
near the seam. It is nicely shaped and could possibly
have been added at the time of manufacture rather than
being a later repair.
Discovery: Found during railway construction in 1857 in a
large pit alongside other artefacts, including weapons,
pottery, currency bars, and buckets, as well as human
remains.
References: Smith 1925, 134 f., fig. 147; Gresham 1939,
120–2, fig. 5; Spratling 1972, 229, 579, no. 404,
fig. 184; Macgregor 1976, 170; Loughran 1989,
no. E13.
40. Urlingford, Co. Kilkenny, Ireland
Location: National Museum of Ireland, Dublin (NMI
R.S.A.I. 281)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 620 mm; ht: 475 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: Projecting-bellied cauldron with copper alloy
bowl and band. The bowl is large with pronounced
shoulder carination. The upper band comprises 2 sheets
held together by 2 rows of evenly spaced, small, circular
rivets. The 2 sheets overlap by 30–35 mm. The upper
band is riveted to the outside of the bowl using small
circular rivets spaced roughly 5 mm apart. Two possible
handle locations are visible. Diametrically opposed to
each other are 2 sets of 2 large circular holes (roughly
10 mm in diameter). These are aligned horizontally and
are spaced 180 mm apart. They are located in the 2
other quadrants from where the bands overlap, 40 mm
below the top of the cauldron. The alternative, and
more likely, location for the handles is at the point
where the upper bands overlap. At both points of
overlap, and diametrically opposed to one another,
are 2 large circular holes aligned vertically and spaced
150 mm apart. Patches are also visible on the inside of
the cauldron at both of these locations of overlap. The
cauldron has been extensively repaired with square, D,
rhomboid, and rectangular shaped patches riveted to
the inside of the vessel. There are 6 patches on the upper
band and up to 17 patches on the bowl, located at the
shoulder. A further paper-clip repair and 1 washer are
also present.
Discovery: Found in the Bog of Allen during turf cutting,
7 ft (2.1 m) below the surface on 23 May 1853 (McEvoy
1854–5, 131).
References: McEvoy 1854–5, 131–2; Armstrong 1923, 25,
fig. 13.2; Raftery 1980, 59; 1983, no. 559, fig. 170;
Loughran 1989, no. I2, 75–77.
41. Walthamstow I, Essex, England
Location: British Museum, London (P&E OA.10953)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 370–400 mm; ht: 195 mm
356
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: Copper alloy hemispherical bowl. A series of
rivets and iron fragments in situ on the outer edge
indicate that the upper band was iron. There are
2 patches on the inside surface, 1 sub-rectangular in
shape. A hole in the centre has been plugged by a rivet.
Discovery: From the river Thames at Walthamstow.
Circumstances unknown.
References: Smith 1906–7, 329–30; Smith 1914–15, 87–8;
Hatley 1933, 19–20, 29, fig. 14; Spratling 1971, 112;
1972, 236, no. 430; Macgregor 1976, 170; Loughran
1989, no. E14.
42. Walthamstow II, Essex, England
Location: British Museum, London (P&E OA.10954)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 510 mm; ht: 270 mm
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: Copper alloy hemispherical bowl. Originally
this vessel would have comprised an upper-band but
this is now missing. The vessel has been heavily
repaired. The base has been replaced with a disc-shaped
patch and there are also a number of other ancient
patches.
Discovery: From the River Thames at Walthamstow.
Circumstances unknown.
References: Smith 1905–7, 329; Macgregor 1976, 170;
Loughran 1989, no. E15.
43. Welshpool, Powys, Wales
Location: National Museum, Cardiff (60.234/5) (on loan
from Powys County Council)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 394 mm*; ht: 250 mm*
Type: Globular (Group III?)
Description: Comprising 3 large pieces and 3 fragments of
copper alloy sheet. Two of the larger pieces have iron
rims attached to the sheet. The rim is c. 20 mm wide and
sits roughly vertically above the copper alloy section
which has a pronounced shoulder. In cross-section the
rim is lipped at the top. The join between rim and bowl is
made by means of a narrow groove in the rim c. 10 mm
wide. The top of the bowl slots inside the groove. The
third large piece is a substantial piece of the bowl and is
hemispherical in shape. The upper section is missing.
Based on surviving sections joining the rim, it is thought
that the overall shape was globular rather than hemispherical. There is a small central hole in the base which
has been plugged with copper alloy. No evidence for
handle attachment or repairs survives. The cauldron is
attributed to Group III based on an absence of rivets
along the surviving section where the rim was originally
attached but the area of handle attachment does not
survive, meaning that the attribution cannot be entirely
certain.
Discovery: Discovered in 1960 by workmen laying a drain.
Thought to be the remains of a cremation burial. The
cauldron contained 3 Roman paterae and a ewer. Also
present were a bucket with an ox-head escutcheon,
2 iron firedogs, a glass jar, the stamped base of a glass
mould-blown bottle, and a pottery vessel. A sample of
wood from the bucket radiocarbon dated giving a result
of 1–140 cal AD (92.9%). Gwilt (forthcoming) dates the
grave goods to AD 65–150.
Radiocarbon date: From a bucket stave of yew: OxA-17440;
1915 ± 30 BP; 1–140 cal AD (92.9%); 150–170 cal AD
(1.3%); 190–210 cal AD (1.2%). Date published in
Garrow et al. (2009, 119), discussed by Gwilt
(forthcoming).
References: Boon 1961, 13 ff.; Eggers 1966, 103, no. 16;
Loughran 1989, no. W 3.
44. Whitemills Moss, Dumfriesshire, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (DU6)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 360 mm; diam. at mouth:
340 mm; ht: 210 mm
Type: Globular (Group IV)
Description: Copper alloy globular-shaped bowl comprising
a single piece hammered into shape. In very good
condition. At the top is a narrow, vertical band c. 15 mm
high. This has 9 equally spaced rivet holes running
around it. The rivet holes are quite large and circular.
There is no evidence for handle attachment so this must
have also occurred on the missing rim. There are very
few imperfections visible. The only visible repair occurs
c. 40 mm from the base where there is a large ‘paper
clip’ repair with 2 bands of metal visible on the outside.
Discovery: Found before 1889. Circumstances unknown.
References: Anon. 1889–90, 16; Macgregor 1976, 151, 170,
no. 307; Loughran 1989, no. S6.
45. Woodburn, Dalkeith, Midlothian, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (DU12)
Dimensions: Width: 140 mm; ht: 120 mm
Type: Unknown
Description: Comprising 4 patches of sheet copper alloy
riveted together in a complex pattern.
Discovery: Circumstances unknown
References: Unpublished
46. Wormegay, Norfolk, England
Location: Norwich Castle Museum, Norwich (1954.67)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 335 mm; ht: 270 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: A hemispherical bowl with distinct shoulder
carination is riveted to an upper band which comprises
1 long strip which overlaps itself and is secured by 2 inward
357
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
slanting columns of rivets. The overlap varies between
70 mm at the top and 90 mm at the bottom. The band is
100 mm wide and is riveted to the outside of the bowl.
The rivets securing this join are small and spaced
5–7 mm apart. The iron rim and handles are missing.
Rivet holes at the top of the band indicate that the rim
was originally attached using clips. The handles were
originally positioned at the overlap of the upper band
and diametrically opposite. The remains of the handle
attachment comprise 3 rivet holes arranged at the points
of an equilateral triangle spaced 50 mm apart. There is no
evidence of repair. The cauldron is now in a fragmentary
state and sits in a specially constructed cradle.
Discovery: Found near Blackburgh Priory during ploughing.
References: Macgregor 1976, 170; Loughran 1989, no. E5.
carination is riveted to an upper band which comprises
2 rectangular sheets which overlap by c. 200 mm. It is at
these overlapping areas that the handles were originally
attached. Torn rivet holes are all that remains of these
attachments. The area of the handle attachments was
reinforced in antiquity by copper alloy patches. Other
repairs include 3 long patches at the shoulder and a large
circular disc which replaces the base which is 350 mm in
diameter. There is a further rectangular patch on the
upper band.
Discovery: Circumstances unknown
References: Raftery 1980, 59–60, no. 6, fig. 9.1; 1983, 211,
no. 560, fig. 171; Loughran 1989, no. I.3.
50. *Unprovenanced III, Ireland
47. Ynys-Gwrtheyrn, Llanenddwyn, Gwynedd,
Wales
Location: National Museum, Cardiff (21.24/36e)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 240 mm
Type: Globular
Description: The hemispherical copper alloy base of a
possible small cauldron. There is no evidence of repair.
Discovery: ‘Five bronze cooking utensils, one containing
a hoard of coins (mostly Republican but including two
of Augustus (27 BC–AD 14) and one of Vespasian
(AD 69–79). Three of the vessels and two Republican
coins (AR) are now in the National Museum of Wales’
(Griffiths 1948, 120).
References: Griffiths 1948, 120.
Location: Ulster Museum, Belfast
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 380 mm; ht: 309 mm
Type: Globular (Group III)
Description: Globular shaped cauldron comprising a single
piece of copper alloy. Two triangular arrangements
of rivet holes diametrically opposed to one another
and located on the shoulder of the vessel indicate the
position of the handles. A series of repairs are visible
close to the rim, a second concentration at the base.
These rectangular patches are secured by ‘paper-clip’
rivets.
Discovery: Circumstances unknown
References: Loughran 1989, no. I.15
APPENDIX C: CAULDRONS PREVIOUSLY LISTED
ELSEWHERE BUT PROBABLY LATER IN DATE
48. Unprovenanced I, Ireland
Location: National Museum of Ireland, Dublin (NMI
1926: 17)
Dimensions: Fragment 1. 340 × 230 mm. Fragment 2.
250 × 260 mm
Type: Globular (Group II)
Description: Two large sheet copper alloy fragments. One
section is broadly rectangular and probably formed part
of an upper band. The second is very crumpled.
A rectangular patch is visible and is attached to the
outside of this second fragment.
Discovery: Circumstances unknown
References: Raftery 1983, 211, no. 561; Loughran 1989
no. I.7
49. Unprovenanced II, Ireland
Location: National Museum of Ireland, Dublin
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: 630 mm; ht: 470 mm
Type: Projecting-bellied (Group I)
Description: Projecting-bellied copper alloy cauldron made
from 3 sheets. A hemispherical bowl with shoulder
51. Awhirk, Dumfries & Galloway, Scotland
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (DU16)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 530–470 mm; ht: 275 mm
Type: Does not fit typology, possibly later in date
Description: Large copper alloy bowl. The profile of the
vessel is unusual. It is not globular and is less rounded
than other examples as it tapers substantially towards
the bowl. The vessel is unfinished. There is no evidence
for rivet holes at the top which could have been used to
secure the missing rim. Neither is there evidence for an
indentation seen on other cauldrons where the rim
has been fitted over the metal. In the centre of the base
there is a small hole. This is unplugged and shows no
evidence of having been sealed. Striations going around
the metal indicate that it was probably spun or finished
on a lathe. The metal is quite thick and is in excellent
condition.
Discovery: Found by a ploughman on the farm of Awhirk,
in the Rhinns of Galloway, on peaty land, probably
formerly a bog/moss.
References: Anderson 1938; Hunter 1997, 124.
358
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
52. Denny, Falkirk, Scotland
55. Upwell, Norfolk, England
Location: National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (DU10)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 460 mm
Type: Globular? Uncertain date
Description: Circular piece of copper alloy. A possible
cauldron base but it is very flat. The edges are very
fragmentary but the metal is bent over in places with
some possible rivet holes. Set c. 40 mm from the edge
are 29 equally spaced holes. One of these is filled with a
‘paper-clip’ like repair. Not certain to be Iron Age/
early Roman.
Discovery: Unknown
References: Unpublished.
Location: Norwich Castle Museum, Norwich
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 250 mm; ht: 110 mm
Type: Does not fit typology. Possibly later in date
Description: Shallow vessel comprising a copper alloy bowl
and a narrow band. The band comprises 1 narrow sheet
of metal. The ends overlap by 10 mm and the join is
secured by 3 rivets. The band fits inside the bowl. The
attachment between the 2 is unusual and is secured by
folding the top of the bowl into the bottom of the band.
The vessel originally had a further band secured above
it. The join was secured by rivets. Sixteen rivet holes are
present, 10 of which have been filled with ‘paper-clip’
repairs indicating re-use after the uppermost band was
removed in antiquity. One repair patch is present on
the band.
Discovery: Discovered in 1976 by mechanical excavator on
the Norfolk bank of the Old Croft River at Upwell
References: Gregory 1978.
53. Kilmihil, Lack East, Co. Clare, Ireland
Location: National Museum of Ireland, Dublin (NMI
1943/236)
Dimensions: Diam. at mouth: c. 500 mm; ht: c. 450 mm
Type: Does not fit the typology. Possibly later in date
Description: Bucket-shaped vessel with a flat bottom. The
bottom part comprises rectangular sheets of copper
alloy riveted to one another using ‘paper-clip’ rivets.
The upper half is globular in form and has a short
(16 mm) vertical neck. Loughran (1989, 90) suggests
that the topmost portion may be of some antiquity but
it was later re-used and added to the bottom portion,
which is later in date, perhaps medieval. The top section
of the cauldron may have originally been globular in
shape with a vertical rim and no rivets.
Discovery: Circumstances unknown
References: Raftery 1980, 60; Loughran 1989, no. I 14.
APPENDIX D: CAULDRON FRAGMENTS
56. Camerton, Somerset, England
Description: Possible iron ring handle of a cauldron or bucket
References: Jackson 1990, 66, no. 289, pl. 30
57. Conderton Camp, Worcestershire, England
Description: Copper alloy sheet fragments with rivets and
washers in situ.
References: Thomas 2005, 149–150, no. CU12.
58. Danebury, Hampshire, England
54. Sessuegarry, Co. Sligo, Ireland
Location: National Museum of Ireland, Dublin (NMI
1942:111)
Dimensions: Max. diam.: 550 mm; diam. at mouth:
455 mm; ht: 390 mm
Type: Does not fit the typology. Possibly later in date
Description: Loughran (1989: 91) describes this as a
composite vessel. The lower half has straight sides and a
flat bottom. The upper half is more globular in form.
The metal of the lower half is thicker than the metal of
the upper half. The joining sections of both halves have
been cut in zigzag fashion and the join is secured by
‘paper-clip’ rivets. A number of patches are attached to
the inside surface of the upper half. There are no repairs
on the lower half. Loughran suggests that the lower half
is not as ancient as the upper portion.
Discovery: Found 60 cm below the surface of a bog.
Circumstances unknown
References: Raftery 1980, 60; 1984, 232; Loughran 1989,
no. I14.
Description: Fifty-one fragments or groups of fragments of
sheet copper alloy, including some large sections which
have been folded up (see Cunliffe & Poole 1991, fig 7.5
(1.113 & 1.114)) and could be from vessels.
Dating: Elsewhere at the site, from a hoard of iron objects, is
a pair of iron cauldron hooks (Cunliffe & Poole 1991,
353, fig. 7.21), probably dating to the 2nd century BC.
References: Cunliffe & Poole 1991.
59. Easton Lane, Hampshire, England
Description: Possible example of the copper alloy ‘paperclip’ part of a ‘paper-clip’ repair
References: Fasham et al. 1989, 81, fig. 85(4).
60. Fison Way, Suffolk, England
Description: Four sheets of copper alloy folded together.
One is decorated with repoussé bosses
References: Gregory 1991, 132, fig. 117(26).
359
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
Description: Folded and riveted copper alloy sheet
References: Lambrick & Allen 2004, fig. 8.5(4).
Discovery: From the well-known cremation cemetery.
Unfortunately they were recovered prior to the excavation of the site so exact details are unclear.
References: Evans 1890, 319–20, fig. 2.
62. Maiden Castle, Dorset, England
65. Lesser Garth, Cardiff, Wales
61. Gravelly Guy, Oxfordshire, England
Description: Seven possible iron ring cauldron handles
c. 100 mm in diameter. Six are listed by Wheeler (1943),
a seventh is illustrated in Sharples (1991) and discussed
by Palk (in Sharples 1991, 165). Previously believed to
be horse harnesses, Northover (in Sharples 1991, 161)
states that they could be cauldron handles. In addition
to the iron handles, a large quantity of sheet copper
alloy with attached rivets was also discovered at the site
(ibid., 160). Some of the rivets and studs attached to
these sheet fragments are identical to those used on
cauldrons like the example from Spetisbury implying
that at least some of these sheet fragments derive from
cauldrons.
Dating: The context of the iron ring published in
Sharples (1991) dates the handle to the early–mid
1st century BC.
References: Wheeler 1943, 275; Sharples 1991, 160–1, 165,
fig. 197(9).
63. Mount Batten, Plymouth, England
Description: A number of copper alloy vessel fragments,
including a substantial piece (no. 13) which has been
folded over. This could be large enough to be from a
cauldron.
Dating: It dates to ‘period 3e’ which probably lies somewhere
between 450/400 and 100 BC but could have been slightly
later (Cunliffe 1988, 24). These finds are distinct from
those examined in the same report by Northover (in
Cunliffe 1988, 58–60) which belong to Atlantic Class B2
cauldrons.
References: Cunliffe 1988, 24–7, fig. 15.
APPENDIX E: RING HANDLES
64. Aylesford, Kent, England
Location: British Museum, London (P&E 1818.1824.26 &
1818.1824.27)
Dimensions: Ext. diam. of handles: 110 mm
Type: Ring handles
Description: Two heavily corroded iron ring handles together
with their iron attachments. Owing to the corrosion, it is
difficult to be certain whether the attachments have 2 or
3 ribs. The handles are round in cross-section.
Location: National Museum, Cardiff (65.82.3)
Dimensions: Ext. diam. of handle: 88 mm
Type: Ring handle
Description: Iron ring handle complete with iron attachment
comprising 3 ribs. The ring handle is circular in crosssection. The 3 ribs are fused together and form a D-shaped
loop in cross-section, the ends of which are not joined.
Unfortunately the handle attachment is broken off at the
point where it affixed to the cauldron so it is now impossible to establish how this join was made. It is clear that the
ring handle was free-moving within the attachment.
Discovery: Discovered in 1965 in the topsoil of a quarry.
It was probably part of a hoard of iron which also
contained a section of cauldron chain, cauldron hanger,
knives, latch-lifter (all iron), and trade-iron billets.
Items of chariot and horse fittings were also present: a
bridle-bit and lynch pin (both iron), and a large, enamel
decorated bronze chariot terret (flat-ringed central terret
with 3 decorative bosses).
References: Savory 1966, 38, fig. 3; 1976, no. 35, fig. 37.
66. Meare Lake Village, Somerset, England
Location: Taunton Archaeological Museum, Somerset
Dimensions: Ext. diam. of handle: 118–121 mm
Type: Ring handle
Description: Iron ring handle with iron attachment
comprising 3 ribs.
Discovery: From the west village at Meare
References: Bulleid & Gray 1953, 243, pl. L.
67. Stanfordbury, Bedfordshire, England
Location: Museum of Archaeology & Anthropology,
Cambridge (MAA 1988 05-23)
Type: Ring handle
Description: Iron ring handle
Discovery: Stead & Rigby state: ‘The only cauldron from a
La Tène III burial in England came from the very centre
of one of the Stanfordbury graves; but like the Baldock
cauldron it disintegrated and only the handle survive.
An iron tripod and a pair of fire-dogs were found in the
same grave’ (Stead & Rigby 1986, 59).
References: Dryden 1845, 15–21; Fox 1923, 100, pl. xvii;
Stead & Rigby 1986, 59.
360
J. Joy.
IRON AGE AND EARLY ROMAN CAULDRONS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND
RÉSUMÉ
‘Feu, brûle; et, chaudron, bouillonne’: Chaudrons de l’âge du fer et du début de la période romaine en GrandeBretagne et Irlande, de Jody Joy
Cet article présente un nouvel examen des chaudrons de l’âge du fer et du début de la période romaine, une
classe d’artefacts peu étudiée mais néanmoins importante qui n’a plus été considérée comme un groupe depuis
l’étude non publiée de Loughran en 1989. Les chaudrons sont classés en deux grands types (avec panse saillante
et globulaire) et quatre groupes. Nous présentons de nouveaux témoignages de datation, repoussant la date de
ces chaudrons au IVe siècle av.J.-C. Nous remettons aussi en question une vieille croyance que les chaudrons
étaient en grande partie absents de la Grande-Bretagne et de l’Irlande entre 600 et 200 av.J.-C.grâce à cette
nouvelle datation et à l’identification de chaudrons datant d’entre 600 et 400 av.J.-C. Un examen détaillé de la
technique de fabrication et des preuves physiques d’usage et de réparations indiquent que les chaudrons étaient
des objets techniquement accomplis dont la fabrication nécessitait une grande habileté. Beaucoup avaient subi de
nombreuses réparations, ce qui montre qu’ils avaient été utilisés pendant un certain temps. Nous argumentons
qu’en raison de leur grande capacité, ces chaudrons ne servaient pas tous les jours mais étaient au contraire
utilisés à l’occasion de grands rassemblements sociaux, spécialement à des banquets. Nous explorons le rôle du
banquet dans la société et nous argumentons qu’une grande partie de l’importance des chaudrons vient de leur
usage à ces banquets, ce qui en fait des objets socialement puissants, susceptibles d’être choisis pour des dépôts
particuliers.
ZUSSAMENFASSUNG
„Kessel brodelt, Feuer zischt”: Eisenzeitliche und frührömische Kessel Großbritanniens und Irlands, von
Jody Joy
Dieser Beitrag stellt eine Neuuntersuchung eisenzeitlicher und frührömischer Kessel vor, die eine selten
untersuchte, aber wichtige Artefaktklasse sind, die seit der unpublizierten Arbeit von Loughran (1989) nicht
wieder besprochen wurde. Kessel können in zwei generelle Typen– mit vorstehendem Bauch und kugelige – und
in vier Gruppen unterschieden werden. Neue Datierungen werden vorgelegt, die diese Kessel bis ins 4. Jh. v. Chr.
zurückdatieren. Auch die langlebige Annahme, dass Kessel zwischen 600 und 200 v. Chr. in Großbritannien und
Irland weitgehend fehlen, wird mithilfe dieser Neudatierungen und der Identifikation von Kesseln in Frage
gestellt, die zwischen 600 und 400 v. Chr. datiert werden. Die detaillierte Untersuchung der Technologie ihrer
Herstellung und der Spuren von Gebrauch und Reparaturen deuten an, dass Kessel technisch ausgefeilte Objekte
sind, deren Herstellung große Fertigkeiten erfordert. Viele sind extensiv repariert worden, was zeigt, dass sie für
einige Zeit in Gebrauch waren. Es wird argumentiert, dass Kessel aufgrund ihres großen Fassungsvermögens
nicht alltäglich benutzt wurden, sondern stattdessen großen sozialen Zusammenkünften vorbehalten waren,
insbesondere Festen. Die soziale Rolle von Feasting wird diskutiert und es wird argumentiert, dass Kessel viel
von ihrer Bedeutung durch ihren Gebrauch bei Festen erlangten, was sie zu sozial einflussreichen Objekten
machte, für die die Wahrscheinlichkeit hoch war für spezielle Deponierungspraktiken ausgewählt zu werden.
RESUMEN
‘Fuego, quemar; caldero, bullir’: calderos de la Edad del Hierro e inicios de época romana en Gran Bretaña e
Irlanda, por Jody Joy
Este artículo presenta un nuevo examen de los calderos de la Edad del Hierro e inicios de época romana, una
clase de artefacto poco estudiado pero importante que no ha sido considerado como grupo desde el estudio
inédito de Loughran in 1989. Los calderos se clasifican en dos tipos generales (de panza prominente y
globulares) y en cuatro grupos. Se presentan nuevas evidencias sobre su datación, retrotrayendo la fecha de estos
calderos al siglo IV BC. También La creencia de que estos calderos generalmente están ausentes en Inglaterra e
Irlanda entre el 600 y el 200 BC es cuestionada por las nuevas dataciones y por la identificación de calderos
datados entre el 600 y el 400 BC. Un examen detallado de la tecnología de manufactura y la evidencia física de su
361
THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY
uso y reparación indica que los calderos eran objetos técnicamente complejos cuya elaboración requería una
gran destreza. Muchos de ellos han sido intensamente reparados, reflejando que fueron usados durante cierto
tiempo. Esto permite sostener que, debido a su gran capacidad, el uso de los calderos no era cotidiano sino
destinado a las reuniones sociales, concretamente a los festines. Se explora el papel social de estos festines y se
plantea que el significado de los calderos deriva de su empleo en ellos, convirtiéndolos en objetos socialmente
poderosos, lo que probablemente les hace seleccionables para depósitos especiales.
362