Welsh Journals

THE EXCAVATION OF A BARROW IN CARDIGANSHIRE PART II Part I of this report± was a factual account of the results of excavations in a Bronze Age barrow on Banc Troed-rhiw-seiri, in Tir-y-mynach parish, Car- diganshire. The evidence was there interpreted first of all with a view to re- constructing the history of the monument and the sequence of events connected with it. The present article is an assessment of the structure and grave goods in relation to similar monuments and relics elsewhere in Britain, and more par- ticularly in Wales. It will be remembered that the primary burial was probably an inhumation accompanied by a beaker, two barbed-and-tanged arrowheads, and a flint flake. The grave was encircled by a line of stakes, later obscured by a bank of which the material was obtained from a ditch outside. A secondary burial took place later in the Bronze Age, being this time a cremation accompanied by a pigmy cup. The barrow was also refashioned, stone being added to the bank and to the central area to form a low mound. F. DISCUSSION (i) The Beaker Burial and the Original Structure. It is convenient that since the publication of Part I of this report there have appeared two papers devoted to Welsh beakers. The first, by Dr. Savory2, represents part of a project of research on Welsh bronze age pottery in general, and concentrates particularly on form and decoration. The second, by Mr. Griffiths,3 is similarly the out- come of a period of research, and is phrased as a critique of Savory's paper, expressing independent and at times divergent views (which coincide broadly with those recently given by Professor Piggott4), while treating the accompanying grave goods and circumstances of burial more fully. Constant reference will be made to these two papers here by their authors' names, as also to Lord Abercromby's pioneer work. It is not the purpose of this report to review either paper, though the theories expressed in each may be tested by appli- cation to our own material, as will undoubtedly happen on future occasions also. The reader is recommended to refer to them more fully in order to appreciate the complexity of the general problem of beaker origins and typology, which is a matter of some controversy at the time of writing. The fragments of the beaker and its apparent form are shown in Part I, Fig. 3, and described in §D i. Before discussing its typology and origins it should be emphasised that its suggested original form and decoration were drawn as objectively as possible. (The drawing in Savory, Fig. 4, No. 3, must be disregarded as being from hearsay