415

Insular MIlItary-style sIlver pIns In late Iron age Ireland

Introduction

Imperial rome has left a comparatively faint footprint on the Irish archaeological landscape.1 notwithstanding that the romans never conquered Ireland, the paucity of romano-British and gallo-roman material in Ireland is curious, particularly when contrasted with the evidence for interaction with powerbrokers elsewhere along the frontiers, where dealing with local elites involved inter alia feeding their appetite for fine pottery, glassware, silver tableware and prestige jewellery.2 However, in common with other frontier areas, hoards of roman Hacksilber, coinage and ingots are known,3 and these may have originally served as diplomatic gifts and/or official donatives and payments. there is also an important corpus of fine metalwork from Ireland which is often omitted from discussions of north-western provincial roman material culture. silver dress-pins of indigenous type that were current in late roman Britain also occur in Ireland, and represent the most tangible record of how Irish elites used silver, in imitation perhaps of high-status late antique metalwork. In this paper the existence of an Insular Military style is explored with particular reference to six silver dress-pins from Ireland. It is argued that the form and technique of the decoration of this early assemblage of Irish silver is derived from provincial late roman art.

Insular silver pin types

throughout the provincial roman west, the fourth and fifth centuries ad witnessed a growing demand amongst elites for small, expensive objects intricately wrought in de luxe materials such as gold, ivory and silver.4 this high aristocratic culture found an audience in Ireland and was expressed in an assemblage of exceptionally accomplished dress-pins such as proto-handpins,

handpins and disc-headed pins (hereafter referred to collectively as projecting-headed pins).5 these are native rather than roman pin-types, with an Insular Iron age pedigree, all sharing the same basic morphology of a pinhead offset at a right angle from the shank.

the developmental origins of the handpin are uncertain and have seen extensive debate. stevenson has suggested that so-called ‘proto-handpins’ played a leading role in their genesis – proposing, for example, that the arcades of beads of proto-handpins evolved into the ‘fingers’ of handpins.6 He suggests that in their turn proto-handpins had evolved from rosette- and half-rosette-headed pins. even so, proto-handpins do not comprise a particularly uniform group; there is considerable variation, for instance, among the pins from Castletown Kilpatrick (Co Meath), newtownbond (Co longford), Welton-le-Wold (lincolnshire), tripontium (Warwickshire), and an unprovenanced specimen that have all been classified as proto-handpins (illus 27.1).7 However ill-defined the wider corpus, all three proto-handpins from Ireland are linked by their use of silver.8 one of them has a plain lower plate; the other two have reserved fine-line ornamentation, the original inlay now missing.9 all feature the characteristic arched arcade of between three and five ‘beads’. like the rest of the corpus of silver dress-pins from Ireland, they show signs of heavy wear and repair, suggesting that they were in circulation for a considerable period of time – unlike their counterparts in Britain, none of which have been repaired.1

there is just one silver handpin known from Ireland (illus 27.8). It has a horizontal arcade of elongated ‘fingers’.11 the fillets that separate the ‘fingers’ from each other and from the lower plate are plain, in contrast to the handpins from norrie’s law (Fife), gaulcross (Banffshire), denton (northumberland) and long sutton (somerset).12

CHapter 27

Insular Military-style silver pins in late Iron age Ireland

FIONA GAVIN

416

late roMan sIlver

Illustration 27.1Heads of silver proto-handpins. Left, Castletown Kilpatrick, Co Meath (head diameter 11mm; NMI 7.w.24; © National Museum of Ireland). Centre, unprovenanced (head diameter 12.2mm; NMI 2009:10; © Rupert Wace Ancient Art). Right, Newtownbond, Co Longford (head diameter

19.3mm; NMI 1944:95; © National Museum of Ireland)

In contrast to the other types, disc-headed pins seem to be a predominantly Irish phenomenon (illus 27.2).13 only two silver examples are known, both provenanced to Ireland.14 they are the largest and heaviest of the Irish silver dress-pins and represent,

classical form and ancestry of the pelta motif on the oldcroft proto-handpin open up the possibility that ornamentation of this type is universally earlier than assumed. this possibility was suggested by newman, who first posited the existence of this ornament

horizon in Irish metalwork and drew comparisons between it and late provincial types; it was later developed by laing in his exploration of the roman ancestry of early medieval ‘Celtic’ art.18

this paper explores this hypothesis further, recommending, inter alia, a less seriated typology of decorated silver projecting-headed pins (proto-handpins, handpins and disc-headed pins) in favour of a more cladogenic one that espouses contemporaneity of different types. Focusing on these six decorated silver dress-pins found in Ireland,19 it will be argued here that they

represent an Insular rendition of late antique provincial roman art of the fourth and early fifth centuries ad.2

The military style

the term ‘Military style’, first coined by Böhme,21 describes an oeuvre with a highly distinctive palette of geometric patterns, rows of running spirals, vine scrolls, rosettes, peltas, palmettes, six-pointed interlaced stars, stepped patterns, swastikas, marigolds,and profiled animals. In marked contrast to earlier, more restrained ornament, the most striking aspect of this style is brilliant, faceted Kerbschnitt surfaces, which are often off-set against niello inlay, giving the ornamental frieze colour, contrast, texture and life. the decorative fields are framed within chased and beaded borders, resulting in grids of ornamentation that cover virtually the entire surface.22 Commonly found on provincial roman buckles, belt-sets, and brooches worn by both the military and the privileged, Military-style art appears to have been transmitted by the movement of troops along the borders of the provincial roman north-west and its neighbouring territories during the mid-fourth century ad.23 the chip-carved silver-gilt and niello-inlaid belt-slide, sword-sheath mount and buckle-plate from Ballinrees, Coleraine, Co derry, northern Ireland, recognised as being among the most accomplished examples of this style, are matched

at least in an Irish context, a considerable investment in the ostentatious display of silver.15 they are also the most visually striking and accomplished examples of this corpus, and may be viewed almost as pattern books of the Insular Military style. the palette is dominated by geometric and stylized plant motifs arranged in four distinct zones: (i) in the central roundel of the disc; (ii) around the circumference of the disc head; (iii) following the angle of the shank; and (iv) on the recto of the shank. Here the ornamentation extends in a series of rectangular panels almost halfway along the length of the shank, terminating in a nib-shaped panel (illus 27.3).

While there is consensus that the decorated silver proto-handpins are datable to the later fourth century, the suggestion of a similar date for the silver disc-headed pins and handpins challenges traditional typo-chronologies, which have tended towards sixth- and seventh-century horizons on the basis of general similarity with the ornament of later decorative metalwork such as hanging-bowl mounts, zoomorphic penannular brooches, latchets and so on.16 this interpretation has also included the assumption that they are of Irish or pictish origin. More than thirty years ago, however, Catherine Johns suggested that they were late roman.17 against a backdrop of technical and stylistic ubiquity across this corpus, Johns’s observations concerning the

417

Insular MIlItary-style sIlver pIns In late Iron age Ireland

Illustration 27.2Silver disc-headed pin. L 328mm; head diameter 20.2mm. British Museum 1888,0719.100. © Trustees of the British Museum

Illustration 27.3The decoration along the shank and on the disc face of the Londesborough disc-headed pin (BM 1888,0719.100) suggests that only this decorated

portion of the pin was visible when in use. L of decorative frieze 88.9mm; head diameter 20.2mm. © Trustees of the British Museum

only by three spear-shaft fittings and a buckle in the vermand treasure, from north-west France.24 Military style, as described by Böhme, has many features familiar from roman art, and many of its essential stylistic elements, such as geometric patterns executed in Kerbschnitt and the stamped borders and panels, emulate designs in gallo-roman sculpture in gaul.25 the principles of design and style that define Military-style art are by no means restricted to items of official military garniture, but occur across a variety of media, from wall-hangings and carpets to mosaic pavements, carved stone furnishings, prestige silver plate, and accessories such as brooches, hairpins and so on. this suggests that by drawing on a common repertoire of motifs, artisans practising in different media across a wide geographical area contributed to an oeuvre whose aesthetique was defined by colour, light, abstraction and the desire to create richly textured relief surfaces.26

Cognate expressions of high aristocratic culture can be seen in Ireland in this group of pins, whose shared attributes of exquisite workmanship and the use of precious metal sets them apart from contemporary and later indigenous ornamental metalwork.27 Characterised by a combination of crisp fine lines and faceted angular and curvilinear ornament, the tiny panelled friezes are made up of evolved classical, vegetal, and geometric motifs, framed by beaded borders. perhaps significantly, these are the earliest known instances of panelled composition and formal framing of motifs in metalwork occurring in Ireland.

these are hand-crafted, possibly commissioned pieces, each unique. Microscopic examination of the worked surfaces has revealed the pins were initially cast in one piece with the decoration applied afterwards; in all instances the background was cut away, leaving the crisp, fine-line design in low relief. the recesses were then inlaid with red enamel or, more rarely, niello, providing a colourful contrast to the main relief design. although they share a decorative vocabulary, and have certain stylistic affinities with contemporary and later personal ornaments in bronze, including developed handpins, zoomorphic penannular brooches, latchets and a group of enamelled armlet terminals, these latter are markedly less accomplished.28 Indeed, the precise and exact use of gravers, scorpers, hollow punches and blunted chisels employed on all of these silver pins derives from late antique silverwork of the highest calibre, and is a hallmark of the Insular Military style.

The significance of silver

In contrast with much of north-western europe, silver does not occur in any appreciable quantity in the Irish artefact record until at least the eighth century ad.29 In a society where gold and bronze were the prestige metals during the Iron age, the appearance of Insular types in silver, ornamented in provincial roman style, must have been of considerable moment, making, without a doubt, a significant social statement. the quantity of metal used in the manufacture of the

418

late roMan sIlver

larger disc-headed pins reinforces the sense that these were costly items and that they were likely to have been the preserve of the elite. although argentiferous galena occurs in relative abundance in Ireland, there is no evidence for its exploitation during the first half

Illustration 27.4Distribution of Insular Military-Style silver pins

of the first millennium ad.30 this suggests that this early corpus of Irish silver is a product of interaction with roman Britain and the wider provincial roman West.

recent analyses conducted on the Irish silver corpus have revealed a relatively consistent, though unusual, alloy composition (table 1). the tin levels observed are consistent with the use of scrap bronze rather than pure copper when alloying the silver.

likewise, the presence of metallic zinc suggests that scrap brass or gunmetals may also have been deliberately added to the melt.31 significantly, the ratio of copper: tin: lead is notably high in lead. leaded bronze is usually in the range 5–15% , but the copper: lead ratio observed in these silver alloys (which is often at a ratio of 1:1 and higher) represents an unfeasible level for use in a casting alloy, as lead is insoluble in the alloy at such levels. a possible interpretation is that lead was deliberately added along with bronze/brass to the silver in separate proportions. this may have been for operational reasons as the addition of lead to the crucible mix allows the metal to be engraved more efficiently, resulting in the removal of ‘chips’ of metal rather than long ‘shavings’.32 Indeed, microscopic examination of the worked surfaces by the writer has revealed that the background has indeed been removed in a series of sharp, angular chips suggesting that this particular alloy facilitated the crisp, hand-wrought, fine-line relief ornament that is a hallmark of the Insular Military style. the use of such alloys may also relate to functionality: dress fasteners and hair-pins might have been subject to significant stresses in the course of day-to-day use, and these alloys would be more resilient than higher-purity silver.33

excavation of second-century ad layers at Xanten (nordrhein-Westfalen, germany) revealed the existence of a simple yet sophisticated chemical method for refining debased

silver to a very high degree of purity.34 evidence for the re-use of the by-products of this cupellation technique by Insular silversmiths is provided indirectly in the marked compositional similarity

Castletown Kilpatrick

Newtonbond

Welton-le-Wold○

South Denton

Norrie’s Law

Gaulcross○

Freswick Links

Leicester ○

Oldcroft

Chilton TrinityLong Sutton

○

1 Specimen2 Specimens3 Specimens(plus 3 additional unlocalised)

200km

➣

Tripontium

419

Insular MIlItary-style sIlver pIns In late Iron age Ireland

Table 1Recent analyses on Irish ‘Military-Style’ pins in the National Museum of Ireland

NMI % % % % % %Reg No Artefact Find spot Component Copper Tin Zinc Lead Gold Silver

6.W.36 Disc-headed pin Unlocalised Pinhead 4.6 2.2 0.1 4.5 1.6 86.0

Shank 5.6 2.2 0.1 5.8 1.4 84.0

2009:10 Proto-handpin Unlocalised Pinhead face 3.7 <0.1 0.2 4.3 0.9 90.0

Outer bead (right) 4.0 <0.1 0.2 3.5 0.9 89.1

Shank 2.8 <0.1 0.2 3.4 1.0 90.4

P634 Hand-pin* Castletown Kilpatrick, Pinhead face 3.2 4.7 0.2 6.4 0.8 83.1

Co Meath Pinhead edge 3.1 4.1 0.2 7.0 0.7 83.3

Outer ‘finger’ (left) 3.2 4.7 0.2 8,5 1.0 80.8

1944:45 Proto-handpin Newtownbond, Pinhead edge 3.2 <0.1 0.0 3.0 2.1 90.6

Co Longford Central finger 3.4 <0.1 0.0 3. 1.8 90.7

Shank 2.8 <0.1 0.0 2.8 2.0 91.4

7.W.24 Proto-handpin Castletown Kilpatrick, Pinhead recto 3.2 0.9 0.6 6.2 0.8 87.3

Co Meath Outer finger (right) 3.9 0.9 0.7 6.7 0.8 86.1

Upper shank** 4.0 1.0 0.7 6.3 0.6 86.3

1920:53 Proto-handpin Unlocalised Pinhead verso 4.1 0.1 0.1 2.6 1.7 89.1

Shank (upper) 4.2 0.2 0.1 2.9 1.8 89.2

* Shank is later replacement – no measurements taken** Upper shank only – lower section is replacement

See also Marzinzik, this volume, note 84. Analysis by Dr Paul Mullarkey, National Museum of Ireland. The artefacts were analysed by X-ray fluorescence using a Spectro Midex EDXRF spectrometer with a molybdenum anode. The diameter of the tube collimator and the measurement spot size is 0.7 mm, and the distance from the sample surface varies from 2–5mm. The operating conditions for the X-ray tube were 45kV and 0.6mA at normal air pressure. Sample counting time was 180 seconds live time. The principal elements analysed were silver, copper, tin, zinc, lead, gold, iron, arsenic and antimony. The artefacts were analysed intact within the sample chamber and the measurement spot, which is highlighted by a laser, was viewed on an adjacent computer screen, thus allowing for accurate positioning of the sample site. Two to three sites were selected for analysis on each artefact, each of which was originally cast in one piece. There was no sample preparation, such as polishing or abrasion of the surface, as it would have resulted in unacceptable damage. Results are affected by the surface conditions of the object, such as curvature, indentations, pitting and the presence of contaminants, surface dirt and corrosion products. Another factor affecting the results is the surface depletion and enrichment of copper, tin and lead, due to corrosion mechanisms during burial; therefore the results must be viewed as semi-quantitative.

between the colourful, glassy crucible slags produced as a by-product of this metallurgical process and the red ‘enamel’ inlays on some Celtic and anglo-saxon metalwork.35 While the earliest evidence of its re-use as an inlay occurs on a set of bronze enamelled pins found in a roman villa of second/third century date in Wange (vlaams-Brabant, Belgium),36 the

earliest dated occurrence on Insular metalwork is on the silver pin from oldcroft, gloucestershire,37 for which associated coins suggest a date around ad 359. a similar glassy matrix has also been identified on the londesborough pin, suggesting that knowledge and use of this inlay spread relatively quickly across the provincial roman West.38 the necessity to refine

420

late roMan sIlver

debased roman silver prior to its re-use fortuitously provided an excellent inlay material for silver. Being extremely rich in lead oxide (c 70%) and low in silica (c 20%), this particular inlay compound had a low melting temperature and was quite free-flowing and fluid in a molten state. these characteristics would have rendered the ‘enamel’ particularly suitable for inlaying on silver and would also have minimised the risks to the delicate ornament during the enamelling process. X-ray fluorescence (XrF) analysis of silver and bronze objects from the nMI has tentatively identified the use of a similarly high-lead compound, indicating that it too is most probably a by-product of the same silver-refining process.39 this demonstrates the wide-scale dissemination of the products of late roman technologies within and beyond the limes and, specifically, their adoption and use by late Iron age Irish metalworking industries.4

Distribution

thus far, a total of eighteen silver pins in this style have been identified (illus 27.4). they are distributed across Ireland and Britain, with examples occurring in the Bristol Channel area, the english east Midlands, around Hadrian’s Wall, north-east scotland and the Irish east Midlands. the social, political and cultural context in which these objects circulated is, in effect, terra incognita. very few were found during excavation or in closely dated contexts. the majority, including some of the most significant pieces, come from antiquarian collections or are metal-detected finds, and therefore lack secure provenance. others, such as those from oldcroft, Castletown Kilpatrick, norrie’s law and gaulcross, are from hoards, and fewer again are from settlements, such as Tripontium and south denton. none are from sepulchral contexts. the pin from oldcroft provides the only fixed date for the series.41 a specimen from the destruction levels of a well-appointed mansio at Tripontium that was occupied into the early fifth century ad42 is the only evidence of the type of socio-cultural context of such objects: the fine, colourful wall paintings and hypocausted dining room here attest to the wealth and status of the occupants.43

In Ireland the distribution of silver in the Insular Military style is thus far confined to the east Midlands,44 a particularly internationalised region that appears to have enjoyed sustained and intimate contact with the roman world.45 While the pin provenanced to newtownbond, Co longford,

is not associated with any known contemporary monuments, the two specimens from the townland of Castletown provide a potentially intriguing glimpse into the Irish socio-cultural context in which these objects may have occurred. Castletown village is overlooked from a distance of approximately 800m by what appears to be a minor assembly site known as raffin Fort.46 the penultimate phase at raffin dates from the early fourth and fifth centuries ad, making it contemporary with the Castletown Kilpatrick pins.47 the occurrence of the silver pins here may support newman’s contention that raffin represents a new and internationally orientated political order, which arose out of a period of upheaval that favoured those who established new relations and/or group affiliations with roman Britain via trade or military service.48 this area boasts a concentration of ogham stones, including one at raffin itself, which is perhaps further testimony to the internationalisation of this region during these centuries.49 against such a backdrop, declarations of connectivity with rome may have been calibrated against a desire to maintain indigenous cultural identity and tribal affiliations through continuity of traditional dress accessories.50 though clearly not of Imperial issue per se, these objects nevertheless operated mimetically within an aristocracy for whom status was measured by military prowess and ostentation.51 throughout the wider provincial roman west, similar militaristic pretensions have been noted among civilian elites. Whereas the crossbow brooch originally served to denote authoritative military and administrative rank, by the fifth century ad it had also, as it were, devolved into a fashionable dress accessory of wealthy elites.52 Bronze chip-carved belt fittings, which have a wide distribution across lowland Britain, may also be a manifestation of the use of militaria as status symbols at this time.53 a corresponding mimetic may apply to the silver pins and also to the wider assemblage of Irish bronzework that is decorated in this style (see below).

Origin and influence

all of these silver pins were clearly produced by artisans with similar skills and a mutual late antique orientation; the precision, delicacy, minutia and complexity of their hand-wrought ornamentation suggest limited production in a number of small specialist workshops. the work is individualistic in style and execution; by their very nature, objects of

421

Insular MIlItary-style sIlver pIns In late Iron age Ireland

this type would have been impossibly time-consuming and wholly unsuited to large-scale manufacture for general markets. Moreover, microscopic study of the worked surfaces by the writer has revealed nuanced differentiation and variation in technique and ability which suggests that these objects are unlikely to represent the output of one workshop or region. ornate precious metal artefacts such as these are highly portable, and could with ease have been transported over great distances and imitated locally in small workshops far from where the prototype originated. In southern england their distribution appears to correlate with roman roads, as does the distribution of many artefact types in roman Britain.

there is as yet no proof that the silver pins found in Ireland were actually fabricated there; in fact the evidence seems to suggest otherwise. the two-dimensional punching, engraving and shallow chip-carving of the Insular Military style has its closest technical parallels in romano-British prestige metalwork. Furthermore, though niello was extensively employed from the first century ad in roman Britain as an inlay material, like silver its occurrence in Ireland during the early centuries ad is exceptionally rare.54 thus, the occurrence of niello inlay on the silver disc-headed pin in the national Museum of Ireland is particularly noteworthy, and introduces the prospect that it may be an import from roman Britain.55 similarly, the tiny notches visible around the panels of this pin (illus 27.5) – chiselled

out to retain the inlay ‒ are a characteristic feature of late roman silverwork: the same technique is evident, for example, on a fourth-century niello-inlaid silver crossbow brooch in the British Museum.56 Further evidence is provided by the fine punched ornament employed along the outside edges of the main ornamental zones to encase, and thus enhance, the relief of the main design (illus 27.6). typically, the decorative borders were created by a row of punched annulets or half-annulets set between a pair of framing lines. late roman silver also employs arc, dot and annular punching to create decorative bands and textured surfaces. Following their analysis of punch-marks on items from the thetford treasure, Johns and potter observed that the creation of beaded ornament and/or textured surfaces using this technique is ‘stylistically in the spirit of the fourth century’ and demonstrative of a late roman date.57

In fact, the cumulative evidence suggests that the entire manufacturing process, from sourcing the raw materials to the fabrication and decoration of each

Illustration 27.5Tiny notches on pin-head NMI 6.w.36, used to retain the

original niello inlay. © National Museum of Ireland

Illustration 27.6Angle of shank decorated with running S-scrolls, framed within

a beaded border. Dimensions 6.9 × 15.8mm. British Museum 1888,0719.100. © Trustees of the British Museum

422

late roMan sIlver

artefact, was carried out in a skilled and rigorously controlled fashion by an accomplished and well-equipped artisan, trained in late roman silversmithing techniques and fabrication methods. It is doubtful whether, at such a remove from the workshop traditions of late roman Britain, Irish artisans could have made these objects. However, perhaps working in a more familiar medium, Military style was translated into bronze in Ireland; and not just the ornamental style but also to a standard of excellence equivalent to those in silver. there exists a select assemblage of Irish bronze objects, including disc-headed pins, zoomorphic penannular brooches of Kilbride-Jones’s type B1, and various mounts and fittings (many associated with horse furniture) that achieves remarkable finesse in reproducing the same repertoire of motifs and designs as occurs on the silver pins.

engraving and chasing bronze, a harder and less yielding metal, presented its own difficulties, and some of the techniques employed on silver did not translate across to this baser medium. the engraved lines and punched annulars on the versos of some B1 penannular brooches,58 for instance, are shallower and less bead-like than those of the silver pins, suggesting that bronze was less amenable to punched ornament. elsewhere, the bronzesmith used scribed lines in an attempt to mimic a beaded border, as for example on the shank of the treanmanagh pin (illus 27.7).59 the Bann disc, petrie Crown and Cork Horns, however, testify to the virtuosity of Irish craftsmen working in bronze.60 In the case of the five ornamented disc-headed pins from Ireland,61 the decoration was executed by hand, post-casting, using the same combination of engraved and chased ornament noted on the silver specimens. Furthermore, tiny toothed projections are also observable around the inner circumference of an unprovenanced disc-headed pin in the national Museum of Ireland, where their function was to retain the enamel inlay in the same way as on silver examples inlaid with niello.62 this is the only instance known to the writer of the use of this technique on Irish bronzework. the indebtedness of this corpus of bronze objects to the silver ones may be illustrated by the fact that many of them show distinct signs of tinning, perhaps reflecting a desire to mimic the colour of the more exotic silver.

Concluding remarks

the uniformity of the style of ornament and iconography of these silver projecting-headed pins

Illustration 27.7Imitation of beaded border on a copper-alloy pin, Treanmanagh

(photo author). © National Museum of Ireland

constitute a special and quite distinct group within the wider Insular corpus of pins. It is argued here that they are in fact culturally and chronologically coeval, dating from the mid-fourth and early fifth centuries ad. though micro-sequencing may be evidenced by differential levels of wear, the association of two different pin types (a proto-handpin and a handpin) at Castletown Kilpatrick, Co Meath, should, as Ó Floinn suggests, be accepted as evidence of contemporeanity (illus 27.8).63 dating the corpus thus reinforces its stylistic relationship with contemporary elite personalia from the wider provincial roman West.

these Insular pins testify to a mastery of the skills of the silversmith’s craft. they bear witness to the acquisition of new, specialised and innovative metalworking and decorative techniques, as well as the dissemination of a new art style and a corresponding demand for sophisticated, opulent, classically ornamented products in Ireland during late antiquity. the use of a locally exotic precious metal bearing intricate, exquisite and profuse decoration and locally exotic inlay materials such as niello, suggests that this metalwork is part of the school of highly accomplished late roman provincial art, and serves to underscore the important role this assemblage played in Irish society. Its dissemination in Ireland and Britain may reflect the movement of people, goods and ideas during this formative period of Insular history. that the trappings of late roman aristocratic culture were transferred to indigenous types suggests that they were considered regalia of note. this testifies to the willingness of Irish society to embrace what the outside world had to offer. Moreover, its strong association with roman

423

Insular MIlItary-style sIlver pIns In late Iron age Ireland

precious metal, classically derived motifs and late antique fashions and design principles suggests that these traits played a role in the constitution of the Irish aristocratic elite, particularly in tribal areas of the Irish east Midlands. the recognition of this Irish art horizon as part of the Military-style oeuvre allows it to be viewed in its correct socio-cultural and chronological setting, as part of a diverse range of exquisitely crafted, high-status ornamental metalwork whose distinctive style physically embodied the Zeitgeist of late antiquity.

Acknowledgements

First and foremost I would like to thank Conor newman and professor John Waddell who read drafts of the text at various stages and I am, as always, grateful for their comments and advice. I would also like to express my gratitude to dr paul Mullarkey of the national Museum of Ireland for his analysis of and discussions on the technical aspects of the assemblage. sincere thanks are also due to dr andy Halpin and Finbarr Connolly (national Museum of Ireland), dr sonja Marzinzik and virginia smithson (British Museum), angie Irvine (rugby art gallery and Museum), and sue youngs for their kind assistance. I also owe thanks to noel McCarthy, liam Hickey and angela gallagher for their help with the map for this paper, and last but not least to dr Fraser Hunter and dr Kenneth painter for their invitation to contribute to this monograph. the mistakes and opinions ventured in this remain entirely my own.

Illustration 27.8Two silver pins from Castletown Kilpatrick, Co Meath. Above, proto-handpin (L 84mm; NMI 7.w.24). Below, handpin (L 141mm; NMI P634).

© National Museum of Ireland

Notes 1 see Ó ríordáin 1947; Bateson 1973; 1976. 2 Wells 1992, 178–9. 3 Mattingly & pearce 1937; Bateson 1971; 1973. 4 elsner 2004, 287. 5 this paper draws on current phd research on Insular

Ornamental Metalwork ad 300–500 generously funded by a government of Ireland research Fellowship.

6 stevenson 1955. 7 national Museum of Ireland (nMI) p634; British Museum

(BM) M&Me 452; rugby art gallery & Museum; nMI 1945:44 & 2009:10. see youngs 2005, 249–51.

8 only five specimens in bronze are known. all are undecorated and from northern Britain. two are from traprain law, east lothian (Burley 1956, 170; fig 3, nos 118–19), one from Covesea, Moray (Benton 1931, 194–6, fig 16,5), one from Bernary, Hebrides (Fowler 1963, 152; national Museums of scotland gt 237) and one from Corbridge, northumberland (Forster et al 1911, 147, fig 34). decorated silver proto-handpins are more numerous; examples are thus far only known from Ireland and southern england.

9 plain unprovenanced specimen, nMI 1920:52; decorated examples from Castletown Kilpatrick, Co Meath (nMI p.634) and newtownbond, Co longford (nMI 1944:45).

10 In relation to the Castletown Kilpatrick pins, the shank of nMI p634 is a later copper-alloy replacement while the other (nMI 7.w.24) has evidence that the lower third of its shank was remade and then soldered back into position. the use of rivets to repair an ancient break on the londesborough pin so as to preserve the ornament suggests that these pins were valued for their aesthetic and symbolic qualities.

11 From Castletown Kilpatrick, Co Meath; nMI 7.w.24.

424

late roMan sIlver

12 national Museums scotland (nMs) FC 31 & l.1962.128; great north Museum WdW F87; taunton Museum 52.a.135.

13 there are nine bronze disc-headed pins known from Ireland, five decorated (discussed below; see note 61) and four plain (nMI p.739; W200; W1972.336; 1916:58). two specimens are known from southern england, an unpublished example from Broxbourne, Hertfordshire (letchworth Museum 181:1976) and another from attworth villa, Wiltshire (Wiltshire Heritage Museum dZsWs:1971.7.22). see youngs 2008, 78–9.

14 the londesborough pin (BM Mla1888.7–19,100; see note 19 for discussion of its provenance) and an unlocalised specimen (nMI 6.w.36). samuel lewis (1837) also describes an intriguing pin from pallaskenry, Co limerick: ‘In a quarry near the town was found an ancient silver bodkin, weighing 5oz. 2dr., now in the possession of sir aubrey de vere, Bart.’. Its weight suggests it may be another of these substantial disc-headed pins; unfortunately its present whereabouts are unknown.

15 the londesborough pin is the more substantial, now measuring 328mm and weighing 116.9g; the unprovenanced nMI example measures 269.8mm and weighs 74.72g.

16 see youngs 1989, nos 10 and 11: Harding 2007, 242; Henderson & Henderson 2004, 92–4; youngs 2008, 78; Bruce-Mitford & raven 2005, 3; gavin & newman 2007.

17 Johns 1974, 295–7.18 newman 1995, 23–5; laing 2005.19 though it has been suggested that the londesborough

pin may be of scottish origin (youngs 1989, no 10), the pin was first recorded as part of the collection of Major sirr, dublin, a collector of Irish antiquities, suggesting that it has an Irish provenance. It was later acquired by Mr C Kirkpatrick sharpe of scotland who submitted it to the society of antiquaries of scotland on 24 January 1848 (see Way 1859, 57). the pin then passed to albert denison, 1st Baron londesborough, and was later purchased through rollin & Feuardent in 1888 by the British Museum.

20 see also gavin & newman 2007.21 Böhme 2000, 78.22 Forsyth 1951, 238; schorsch 1986, 20–3.23 Behrens 1930, 285; Bullinger 1969, 78; Hawkes & dunning

1961, 11–12.24 Mattingly & pearce 1937; Forsyth 1951; Kent & painter 1977,

125–6; Böhme 1986, 2000; schorsch 1986. see Marzinzik, this volume.

25 see ager 1985, 13, fn 45.26 Forsyth 1951, 237–8; Henig 1995, 139, 170; elsner 2004,

287; Manley 2007, 429.27 newman 1995, 23–5.28 Kilbride-Jones 1980, 7, fig 2–4; youngs 1989, nos 21, 25, 26.29 ryan 2002, 8.30 see Kinahan (1889, 6, 56), Jackson (1971, 1–4) and ryan

(2002, 1–15) for discussion on the circumstantial evidence for the early exploitation of Irish argentiferous lead.

31 Metcalf & northover 1988, 104.

32 Bayley & Butcher 2004, 15, 30. 33 solid silver pins of these dimensions could most probably

not have been put to practical use. By alloying the silver with copper or, in this instance, various alloys of copper, the mechanical properties of the silver were altered; this possibly made it harder and able to withstand the stresses associated with everyday use without deforming, and also more elastic and able to reconfigure after stress.

34 see rehren & Kraus 1999, 265–71.35 see stapleton et al 1999, 919.36 rehren & Kraus 1999, 272; Wouters 1996, 289–93.37 BM 1973.8–1.1. unpublished analysis by Ian Freestone

2000. (see also rehren & Kraus 1999.)38 stapleton et al 1999; Freestone 2000.39 analysis by dr paul Mullarkey, national Museum of

Ireland, who suggests that comparison of the analysis of the metal substrate with the analysis of the inlay material allows reasonable deductions to be made, particularly in relation to lead, which occurs in significantly lower quantities in the metal substrate (pers comm).

40 stapleton et al 1999, 916.41 BM p1973.8–1,1; Johns 1974, 295; rhodes 1974, 65–74.42 see lucas 1981 and 2005.43 lucas 2005, plates 46–7.44 of the six silver projecting-headed pins provenanced to

Ireland, three are unlocalised.45 see newman 1998; 2005, 378–82.46 ngr: n8202 8278.47 For summary see newman et al 2007, 349–51.48 newman 1998, 133.49 see Charles-edwards 2000, 172–6 and newman 2005,

381–2, who offer commentary on the extension to Ireland of the wider roman practice of inscribing stones to commemorate individuals.

50 garbsch 1965, 85. see smith 1913 for variants of projecting ring-headed pin in Ireland.

51 Fitzpatrick 1989, 28.52 Heurgon 1958, 23; swift 2000, 43–4, 108.53 see Wild 2004, 303; swift 2000, 202, 219.54 oddy et al 1983, 29. see also youngs 1989, no 13 for the

possible use of niello on a bronze anthropomorphic mount, decorated in the Military style.

55 nMI.6.w.36.56 BM prB 1881–1–25, 1. see la niece 1998, fig 8.57 Johns & potter 1983, 66–7, 72.58 see, for example, Kilbride-Jones 1980, cat no 55; also

newman 1995, 23–5 for discussion.59 treanmanagh pin: nMI Ia/l/1963:4 (unpublished).60 o’Kelly 1961; raftery 1984, 269–73.61 (i) unlocalised, nMI W201; (ii) treanmanagh, Co

limerick, nMI Ia/l/1963:4; (iii) unlocalised, BM oa. 313; (iv) unlocalised (purchased from rev earl of Mulgrave, new ross, Wexford), BM 1883,0218.39; (v) yelltown (telltown), Co Meath, Museum of archaeology and anthropology, Cambridge, MC1899.198.

62 unprovenanced disc-headed pin (youngs 1989, no 12).63 Ó Floinn 2001, 2.

425

Insular MIlItary-style sIlver pIns In late Iron age Ireland

References

ager, B 1985 ‘the smaller variants of the anglo-saxon Quoit brooch’, Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 4, 1–58.

Bateson, J d 1971 ‘the finding of roman silver coins in the vicinity of the giant’s Causeway’, Ulster Journal of Archaeology 34, 50–7.

Bateson, J d 1973 ‘roman material from Ireland: a reconsideration’, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 73(C), 21–97.

Bateson, J d 1976 ‘Further finds of roman material from Ireland’, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 76(C), 171–80.

Bayley, J & Butcher, s 2004 Roman brooches in Britain: a technological and typological study based on the Richborough Collection. london: society of antiquaries of london.

Behrens, g 1930 ‘spätrömische Kerbschnittschnallen’, Sonderabdruck aus Schumacher-Festschrift Zum 70. Geburtstag Karl Schumachers – 14. Oktober 1930, 285–94. Mainz: e schneider.

Benton, s 1931 ‘the excavation of the sculptor’s Cave, Covesea, Morayshire’, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 65 (1930–1), 177–216.

Böhme, H W 1986 ‘das ende der römerherrschaft in Britannien und die angelsächsische Besiedlung englands im 5 Jahrhundert’, Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 33, 469–574.

Böhme, H W 2000 ‘the vermand treasure’, in reynolds Brown, K, Kidd, d & little, C t (eds), The Metropolitan Museum of Art Symposia. From Attila to Charlemagne: Arts of the early Medieval Period in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 78–90. new york: yale university press.

Bruce-Mitford, r l s & raven, s 2005 A corpus of late Celtic hanging-bowls with an account of the bowls found in Scandinavia. oxford: oxford university press.

Bullinger, H 1969 Spätantike Gürtelbeschläge. Brugge: de tempel.

Burley, e 1956 ‘a catalogue and survey of the metal-work from traprain law’, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 89 (1955–6), 118–226.

Charles-edwards, t M 2000 Early Christian Ireland. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.

elsner, J 2004 ‘late antique art: the problem of the concept and the cumulative aesthetic’, in swain, s & edwards, M (eds), Approaching Late Antiquity – The Transformation from Early to Late Empire, 271–309. oxford: oxford university press.

Fitzpatrick, a 1989 ‘the uses of roman imperialism by the Celtic barbarians in the later republic’, in Barrett, J, Fitzpatrick, a & Hutton, p (eds), Barbarians and Romans in Northwest Europe, 27–54. oxford: archaeopress (Bar International series 471).

Forster, r H, Knowles, W H, Haverfield, F, Craster, H H e & Meek, a 1911 ‘Corstopitum: report on the excavations in 1910’, Archaeologia Aeliana 7, 143–267.

Forsyth, W H 1951 ‘the vermand treasure’, The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 9(9), 236–40.

Fowler, e 1963 ‘Celtic metalwork of the fifth and sixth centuries ad: a re-appraisal’, Archaeological Journal 120, 98 –159.

Freestone, I 2000 Unpublished analysis of the Oldcroft pin. london: British Museum.

garbsch, J 1965 Die norische-pannonische Frauentracht im 1. und 2. Jahrhundert. Munich: Beck (= Münchner Beiträge zur vor- und Frühgeschichte 11).

gavin, F & newman, C 2007 ‘notes on Insular silver in the “Military style”’, Journal of Irish Archaeology 16, 1–10.

Harding, d W 2007 The Archaeology of Celtic Art. london: routledge.

Hawkes, s C & dunning, g C 1961 ‘soldiers and settlers in Britain, fourth to fifth century’, Medieval Archaeology 5, 1–70.

Henderson, g & Henderson, I 2004 Art of the Picts: sculpture and metalwork in early Medieval Scotland. london: thames & Hudson.

Henig, M 1995 The Art of Roman Britain. london: Batsford.Heurgon, J 1958 Le trésor de Ténès. paris: Ivanov.Jackson, J 1971 ‘Mining in Ireland: some guidelines from the

past’, Technology Ireland, october 1971, 1–4.Johns, C M 1974 ‘a roman silver pin from oldcroft,

gloucestershire’, Antiquaries Journal 54, 295–7.Johns, C & potter t W 1983 The Thetford Treasure: Roman

jewellery and silver. london: British Museum publications.Kent, J p C & painter K s (eds) 1977 Wealth of the Roman World,

ad 300–700. london: British Museum publications. Kilbride-Jones, H e 1980 Zoomorphic penannular brooches.

london: society of antiquaries of london (reports of the research Committee of the society of antiquaries of london 29).

Kinahan, g H 1889 Economic Geology of Ireland. dublin: royal geological society.

laing, l r 2005 ‘the roman origins of Celtic Christian art’, Archaeological Journal 162, 146–76.

la niece, s 1998 ‘niello before the romans’, Jewellery Studies 8, 49–56.

lewis, s 1837 A topographical dictionary of Ireland: comprising the several counties, cities, boroughs, corporate, market, and post towns, parishes, and villages, with historical and statistical descriptions. republished 1984, Baltimore: genealogical pub Co.

lucas, J 1981 Tripontium. Third Interim Report on the excavation of a Romano-British settlement at Cave’s Inn near Rugby. leicester: glendinning (= transactions of the Birmingham & Warwickshire archaeological society 91).

lucas, J 2005 Tripontium: The Fourth and Final Report. leicester: glendinning.

Manley, J 2007 ‘decoration and demon traps: the meaning of geometric borders in roman mosaics’, in gosden, C, Hamerow, H, de Jersey, p & lock, g (eds), Communities and Connections: Essays in Honour of Barry Cunliffe, 426–48. oxford: oxford university press.

Mattingly, H & pearce, J 1937 ‘the Coleraine hoard’, Antiquity 2, 39–45.

426

late roMan sIlver

Metcalf, d M & northover, J p 1988 ‘Carolingian and viking coins from the Cuerdale hoard: an interpretation and comparison of their metal contents’, Numismatic Chronicle 148, 97–116.

newman, C 1995 ‘the Iron age to early Christian transition: the evidence from dress fasteners’, in Bourke, C (ed), From the Isles of the North: Early Medieval Art in Ireland and Britain, 17–25. Belfast: HMso.

newman, C 1998 ‘reflections on the making of a “royal site” in early Ireland’, World Archaeology 30(1), 127–41.

newman, C 2005 ‘re-composing the archaeological landscape of tara’, in Breathnach, e (ed), The kingship and landscape of Tara, 361–409. dublin: Four Courts press.

newman, C, o’Connell, M, dillon, M & Molloy, K 2007 ‘Interpretation of charcoal and pollen data relating to a late Iron age ritual site in eastern Ireland: a holistic approach’, Vegetation, History and Archaeobotany 16, 349–65.

oddy, W a, Bimson, M & la niece, s 1983 ‘the composition of niello decoration on gold, silver and bronze in the antique and Mediaeval periods’, Studies in Conservation 28, 29–35.

Ó Floinn, r 2001 ‘patrons and politics: art, artefact and methodology’, in redknap, M, edwards, n, youngs, s, lane, s & Knight, J (eds), Pattern and purpose in insular art. Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Insular art held at the National Museum & Gallery, Cardiff, 3–6 September 1998, 1–14. oxford: oxbow.

o’Kelly, M 1961 ‘the Cork horns, the petrie crown and the Bann disc: the technique of their ornamentation’, Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society, 66(203), 1–12.

Ó ríordáin, s p 1947 ‘roman material in Ireland’, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 51, 35–82.

raftery, B 1984 La Tène in Ireland: problems of origin and chronology. Marlburg: veröffentlichungen des vorgeschichtlichen seminars Marlburg 2.

rhodes, J F 1974 ‘the oldcroft (1971–2) hoard of bronze coins and silver objects’, Numismatic Chronicle (seventh series) 14, 65–74.

rehren, t & Kraus, K 1999 ‘Cupel and crucible: the refining of debased silver in the Colonia ulpia traiana, Xanten’, Journal of Roman Archaeology, 12, 263–72.

ryan, M 2002 ‘some archaeological comments on the occurrence and use of silver in pre-viking Ireland’, in

ryan, M (ed) Studies in Medieval Irish metalwork, 1–15. london: pindar press.

schorsch, d 1986 ‘the vermand treasure: a testimony to the presence of the sarmatians in the western roman empire’, Metropolitan Museum Journal 21, 17–40.

smith, r a 1913 ‘the evolution of the hand-pin in great Britain and Ireland’, Oposala Mantelio, 280–91.

stapleton, C p, Freestone, I C & Bowman, s g e 1999 ‘Composition and origin of early Mediaeval opaque red enamel from Britain and Ireland’, Journal of Archaeological Science 26, 913–21.

stevenson, r B K 1955 ‘pins and the chronology of brochs’, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 21, 282–94.

swift, e 2000 Regionality in Dress Accessories in the late-Roman West. Montagnac: Monique Mergoil (= Monographies Instrumentum 11).

Way, a 1859 Catalogue of Antiquities, Works of Art and Historical Scottish Relics, exhibited in the Museum of the Archaeological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland during their annual meeting, held in Edinburgh, July 1856. edinburgh: thomas Constable.

Wells, p 1992 ‘tradition, identity and change beyond the roman frontier’, in schortman, e M & urban, p a (eds), Resources, Power and Interregional Interaction, 175–86. new york: plenum press.

Wild, J p 2004 ‘textiles and dress’, in todd, M (ed), A Companion to Roman Britain, 299–308. oxford: Blackwell.

Wouters, l 1996 ‘email auf römischen, bronzenen Zierscheiben’, Arbeitsblätter für Restauratoren, Gruppe 2 Bronze, 289–93.

youngs, s 1989 ‘The Work of Angels’: masterpieces of Celtic metalwork 6th–9th centuries ad. london: British Museum publications.

youngs, s 2005 ‘after oldcroft: a British silver pin from Welton le Wold, lincolnshire’, in Crummy, n (ed), Image, Craft and the Classical World: essays in honour of Donald Bailey and Catherine Johns, 249–54. Montagnac: editions Monique Mergoil.

youngs, s 2008 ‘the metalwork’, in erskine, g p & ellis, p, Excavations at Atworth Roman Villa, Wiltshire 1970–1975, 78–9. devizes: the Wiltshire archaeological and natural History society.