Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T01:26:06.397Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Dual Character of the Beaker Invasion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

J. G. D. Clark
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his classic work on the Bronze Age pottery of Britain the late Lord Abercromby adopted the old division of the class of beaker pottery into three types originally proposed by Dr Thurnam as far back as 1871. In order that Abercromby may not be misrepresented I propose to quote the essential portions of his definitions. In type A, the ‘ high-brimmed globose beaker ’, ‘ the body is more or less globular ; the upper part, separated from the body by a constriction, frequently very defined, spreads out like the calyx of a flower and forms a brim or neck that almost equals the body in height. The sides of the neck or rim . . . are straight and not recurved at the lip ’. In type B, the ‘ ovoid beaker with recurved rim ’, ‘ there is no distinct demarca- tion between the body and the rim, but the one glides into the other by a gradual curve ’. Finally type C, the ‘ low-brimmed beaker ’, ‘ may be regarded ’, in Abercromby's own words, ‘ as a debased variety of our first type ’.

It should be clear already I think that in labelling his types A, B, and C Abercromby has given the false impression that we have three types of beákers, whereas what we really have are two types, of which one has a ‘debased variety’. We therefore suggest that a less misleading classification would be, for instance, A(x), A(Y), and B. This may seem a trifling point but we believe it has helped to obscure the proper recognition of the true dual character of the Beaker invasion of this country. We propose to substantiate the validity of our suggestion in the course of this short paper.

Type
Research Article
Information
Antiquity , Volume 5 , Issue 20 , December 1931 , pp. 415 - 426
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 1931

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

* The type ‘B’ embraces a multitude of variations in form of which only one is shown in the diagram. All however partake of certain fundamental characteristics which lend some sort of unity to the group.

1 Ipswich Museum, no. 1920.

2 A flint dagger was found at Lockeridge, near West Overton, Wilts, with a beaker of the B group. Wilts. Arch. Mag. XLIII, 395–6Google Scholar. This area is one in which both complexes are found richly, and cases of intermixture might be expected.

3 The following A+C beakers come from the area : Green Low, Alsop Moor ; Smerrill Moor ; Grind Low ; Haddon Field ; Bee Low ; Sliper Lowe, Brassington Moor ; Monsel Dale ; Rusden Low ; Stakor Hill, Buxton ; Dowel, Sterndale ; Minning Low ; Blake Low ; Castern, Wetton; Stanshope; Top Low; Mouse Low, Deepdale.

In addition two ‘mongrel’ beakers have been recorded, belonging to Abercromby’s ‘hybrid variant AB’ : Stanshope ; Gospel Hillock, Cowdale.

4 The following B beakers come from the area : Cissbury (2) ; Downs northeast of Shoreham ; Kingston by sea ; Burpham ; Wolstonbury ; Devil’s Dyke ; Falmer ; Belletout, near Eastbourne ; Heathery Brow between Telscombe and Southease.

The solitary A beaker was found at Telscombe.

5 DrFox, Cyril and Grimes, W.F., Arch. Cumbr. 1928, pp.137–74.Google Scholar

6 Compare figs. 90 and 96 of the British Museum Guide to the Bronze Age.

7 Net Low ; Castern ; Buxton ; Gospel Hillock, Cowdale ; Dowel Sterndale.

8 DrFox, Cyril, Arch. Cambr. 1925, pp. 11–24 Google Scholar

9 Reproduced by permission of the British Museum.

10 van Giffen, Dr A.E., The Hunebeds in the Netherlands, pl. 154, fig. 81Google Scholar. Unknown to the author Dr Rudolf Stampfuss, remarked on the great similarity of the two pots on page 93 of his book ‘Die Jungneolithischen Kulturen in Westdeutchland ’, 1929.