Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T10:07:01.160Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The excavation of an enclosed hut-group at Cae'r-mynydd in Caernarvonshire*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2011

W. E. Griffiths
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The ‘enclosed hut-groups’, or native homesteads consisting of round or rectangular buildings within an enclosure, of N.W. Wales are well known and have been discussed by Ralegh Radford as well as by Hemp and myself. Caernarvonshire contains many examples of these farmsteads, but few have been excavated and the problems of their origin, date, and development are still numerous and perplexing. Howel Williams excavated two sites of this type near Rhostryfan in 1921–2, and these yielded Romano-British pottery and other objects datable to the second to fourth centuries A.D. Two hut-groups at Caerau, near Pant-glas, excavated by O'Neil in 1933–4, proved to have been occupied during the second and third centuries. This dating is in accord with what is known of similar sites in Anglesey, the best known of these being at Din Lligwy. On the other hand, a more recently excavated homestead in the island, at Pant-y-saer, has produced evidence of occupation during the earlier part of the dark ages.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Antiquaries Journal , Volume 39 , Issue 1-2 , April 1959 , pp. 33 - 60
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 1959

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 33 note 1 RCAM, Anglesey Inventory (1937), pp. lxxiii–lxxxiii.Google Scholar

page 33 note 2 Antiquity (1944), pp. 188–94.

page 33 note 3 Ibid. (1951), pp. 179 ff.

page 33 note 4 See vol. i of the Caernarvonshire Inventory of the RCAM (1956), and the forthcoming vols. ii and iii.

page 33 note 5 Arch. Camb. (1923), pp. 87–113, 293–7.

page 33 note 6 Ant. Journ. (1936), pp. 295–320.

page 33 note 7 Arch. Camb. (1908), pp. 183–210; (1930), pp. 375–93.

page 33 note 8 Ibid. (1934), pp. 1–36.

page 33 note 9 Ibid. (1954), pp. 111–13.

page 33 note 10 RCAM, Caerns. Inv. ii, no. 1173.Google Scholar

page 35 note 1 See p. 38 below for a discussion of the possibility that some at least of the fields may pre-date the Cae'r-mynydd hut-group.

page 37 note 1 RCAM, Caerns. Inv. II, nos. 1190–2.Google Scholar

page 37 note 2 Arch. Camb. (1866), opp. p. 216; see also p. 226.

page 42 note 1 The employment of orthostatic and coursed walling in the same hut should dispel the belief that the two types of construction are chronologically distinct. The same mingling of techniques was observed in an Iron Age hut in the Conway Mountain hillfort (Arch. Camb. (1956), p. 52Google Scholar, Hut 1; RCAM, Caerns. Inv. I, pl. 2).Google Scholar

page 44 note 1 The hearth-platform recalls the ‘smithy-forge’ in the hut-group at Coed-y-brain, near Rhostryfan, excavated by Williams, Howel (Arch. Camb. (1923), pp. 295–7).Google Scholar

page 50 note 1 The objects described in this section have been presented to the Department of Archaeology, National Museum of Wales, Cardiff.

page 52 note 1 Since the above was printed, portions of the upper stones of two other rotary querns have been brought to my notice which there is reason to believe are from the Cae'r-mynydd homestead: (i) of coarse grit, 21/2 in. thick, parallel upper and lower surfaces sloping up at a fairly steep angle; about 14 in. diam. with central hole 2 in. diam.; (ii) of a fine-grained rock, similar in shape to (i) but dimensions uncertain since the edge is missing. These examples reinforce the belief that the rotary quern is a standard type in the enclosed hut-groups.

page 53 note 1 For useful comments on the pottery I am indebted to Mr. L. Alcock, M.A., F.S.A., Dr. H. N. Savory, M.A., F.S.A., and Mr. A. C. Thomas, M.A.

page 59 note 1 Arch. Camb. (1956), p. 77, fig. 13.

page 59 note 2 Ibid. (1934), pp. 22–27.

page 59 note 3 The date of the Pant-y-saer silver brooch cannot be much earlier than 600; ibid., pp. 19–20, fig. 7.

page 60 note 1 As a matter of fact, I began a trench across the hut in 1949, but was forced to abandon it when our labour supply failed. In 1955 we always seemed to have too many other things to do, and were never able to return to it.

page 60 note 2 Arch. lxxxiii, 279; Arch. of Cornwall and Scilly, pp. 151–2.

page 60 note 3 P.P.S. (1947), pp. 24 ff.