11

West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 1: Garwood

Early Bronze Age Funerary Monuments and Burial Traditions in the West Midlands

Paul Garwood

The Institute of Archaeology & Antiquity, University of Birmingham,

Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT

Introduction

This paper is concerned with round barrow monuments and associated funerary traditions in the West Midlands in the Final Neolithic and Early to Middle Bronze Age (c.2500-1000 BC). The evidence from round barrows and ring-ditch sites in the West Midlands is diverse, occasionally richly-detailed, and certainly substantial in comparison with rare, very poorly-preserved settlement evidence: our understanding of these monuments remains central to interpretations of social life in this period (cf. Ashbee 1960; Bradley 1984; Garwood 1991; Barrett 1994, Woodward 2000). More generally, the research significance of the British evidence is also impressive at a European scale: the quantity and quality of the evidence (after three centuries of serious fieldwork), and the presence of several well-preserved segments of monumentalised landscapes, are paralleled in few regions elsewhere. In this context, the West Midlands is not inherently 'impoverished' in comparison with areas such as Wessex, but has a real contribution to make to an understanding of the extinct, unique cultural worlds that existed in north-west Europe in the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC.

The difficulties encountered in arriving at a social understanding of round barrows, in the West Midlands as elsewhere, is often ascribed to a lack of empirical knowledge, but the available evidence, in reality, is considerable and reasonably well-documented. The problem instead lies at the level of interpretation, and in misunderstandings about the nature of the evidence. This paper aims to review current knowledge of the round barrow evidence in the West Midlands, and to evaluate this evidence with reference to current research agendas, especially in relation to new interpretations of the architectural forms, associated funerary practices, spatial organization, landscape settings, chronologies and geographical distributions of Early Bronze Age round barrows (cf. Barrett 1990; Barrett 1994, 70-85; Bradley 1998; Field 1998; Garwood 1991, 1999a, 1999b; 2002, Tilley 1999, 177-238).

Round barrow numbers and overall spatial distribution

There are some 900 recorded round barrows and ring-ditch sites in the West Midlands, roughly half with surviving or recorded mound structures. There has been no previous attempt to review the this evidence in its entirety, and existing county-based summaries are rare and mostly out of date (eg. Smith 1957; Gunstone 1965) or lacking in detail (eg. Hingley 1996), the single exception being Grinsell’s summary of the Herefordshire data (1993). The overall geographical distribution of round barrows and ring-ditches in the West Midlands is shown in Fig.1 [Please note that this illustration is being amended as further data is received from County SMRs). There are notable concentrations of surviving barrows in north-east Staffordshire (Peak District) and south-west Shropshire (Long Mynd, Clun), and further groupings of standing mounds in north Warwickshire, central Worcestershire, and south-west Herefordshire. In most cases these barrows are in upland areas, low-lying meadowlands and sandy heathlands, mostly unsuitable for arable cultivation. The distribution of surviving round barrows thus seems to be largely an outcome of geographically-variable agricultural practices – mounds surviving in areas with historically low incidence of arable farming. It is no coincidence that the visible monuments in these areas often attracted the attention of early fieldworkers, especially in Staffordshire, which further enhanced site recognition and thus exaggerated these barrow concentrations on distribution maps in relative terms.

Ring-ditches too are unevenly distributed across the West Midlands, although as expected they occur most frequently in areas subjected to long-term arable farming, especially in river terrace locations where round barrows rarely survive as standing monuments. There are especially large concentrations of ring-ditches in the Upper Severn, the Upper Teme and tributary valleys in south-west Shropshire, the Warwickshire Avon, and the Trent in Staffordshire. In contrast, very few are known in the Central Severn in Worcestershire and along the Wye in Herefordshire, which may be due to limited air photographic survey. Elsewhere, low incidence of ring-ditches broadly corresponds with upland pastures, heathlands, forested areas, urban areas and deeply-alluviated floodplains.

The most obvious blank area on the distribution map is the old West Midlands County. A scatter of round barrows now destroyed by urban development were recorded in the 19th century on the hills around Birmingham and Wolverhampton, but none in lower-lying arable areas where mounds had probably been levelled by earlier ploughing. The absence of ring-ditches is certainly due to their destruction before air photographic survey was possible. The same pattern is evident in other extensive urban/industrial areas such as the Black Country and Coventry.

Although it is easy to over-emphasise the point, it is apparent that our current distribution map is - at least in part - a modern construct that describes patterns of uneven monument preservation, destruction and recording. These patterns have been created by geographically-variable agricultural practices, urban expansion and industrial activity, and the results of uneven and discontinuous antiquarian investigations, localised air photographic coverage and patchy archaeological survey. There are some clear implications here for potential research-led site identification, mapping and fieldwork initiatives, especially systematic air photographic survey in areas which have hitherto escaped such attention.

More positively, this overview of site numbers and distributions can point to areas of considerable research interest and potential.

1.  The very existence of large numbers of round barrows and ring-ditches in the West Midlands, found across the entire region, is itself significant in research terms. These sites are sufficiently numerous, and in some places sufficiently well-preserved, that detailed local analyses of Early Bronze Age cultural landscapes and funerary practices appear viable. Moreover, given the comments above about known distributions, and the great increase in identifications of ring-ditch sites in the last 30 years (eg. Watson 1991), there is potential for significant new discoveries. This certainly points to a growing appreciation of the sheer density of occupation and intensity of activity in many areas of the West Midlands in the Early Bronze Age. As Buteux and Hughes point out (1995), we should dispense with the idea that the West Midlands was a cultural wilderness in the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC; we have barely started to explore the complexities of the evidence.

2.  The distribution of Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age monument clusters along river valleys is distinctive, with concentrations commonly occurring at intervals of c.12-30 kms: eg. the Avon corridor (Wolvey - King’s Newnham - Barford/Wasperton – possibly the Arrow confluence); and along the Teme (Ludlow – Craven Arms; and Ludlow – Buckton – Clun). This seems to maintain an earlier spatial structuring of ceremonial sites along these rivers in the earlier 3rd millennium BC. This kind of spatial patterning, well-known in other river valleys in southern and eastern England such as the Upper Thames and the Nene and Ouse, invites research into the spatial organisation, territorial ordering and cultural identities of communities living along these river corridors.

3.  Although their survival may be fortuitous, it is evident that there are several major concentrations of standing barrows in upland areas that are especially suitable for studies of monuments in their ancient landscape settings: in the Peak District, south-west Shropshire, south-west Herefordshire, and other more localised groupings elsewhere.

4.  Finally, at a regional scale there is a striking contrast to be seen between the very dense and extensive upland monument concentrations and the ‘beaded’ linear distribution of smaller barrow aggregations along river valleys. This invites large-scale spatial study and the development of interpretative frameworks to account for this pattern, especially in relation to residence and settlement structures and political and religious identities.

Spatial organisation of round barrow groups

The spatial lay-out of round barrow groups in the West Midlands has not been studied in much detail. As far as I am aware there are no large Wessex-style linear barrow groups of more than four mounds in the region, though there are some smaller linear groups with outliers (eg. at King’s Newnham, Warwickshire; see Palmer’s paper, this website). A more common pattern in the region, especially in lowland contexts, is dispersed elongated groupings which may include short linear elements or paired barrows: eg. at Cross Houses, Shropshire (12 ring-ditches along a 1.5 kms stretch of the Severn valley); at Bromfield/Ludlow, Shropshire (20 barrows and ring-ditches in an area some 2.1 kms long between the rivers Teme and Corve); and at Wolvey, Warwickshire (21 barrows and ring-ditches dispersed for c.5 kms along a low east-west ridge to the north of the Anker river).

Our poor understanding of these monument groupings is due largely to the limited character of fieldwork in the region and the lack - until now - of a coherent research agenda to highlight their significance and give direction to future study. In particular, the little dating evidence available prohibits chronological analysis of tempos of monument-building and funerary activities in the period, and changes in monument design and landscape organisation. Although there is now growing recognition of the rapidity of change in monument-building and funerary practices and their shifting social significance during this period (Garwood 1999b; Garwood 2002), there have been few attempts to study these in detail and none so far in the West Midlands. This must be a priority area for future research.

The archaeological investigation of round barrows in the West Midlands

The last point raises questions about the history and character of round barrow studies in the in the West Midlands. It is possible to describe the spatial coverage of fieldwork and methods of investigation and data collection in some detail. This is based on a review of all known round barrow excavations in the region (since the earliest recorded example in 1199), evaluation of research aims and fieldwork methodologies, and mapping of the sites investigated (see Appendix 1; and Figure 2). This allows for an assessment of possible biases in our knowledge of artefact distributions and particular site categories.

There is a general impression that the number of round barrows investigated in the West Midlands is small and that we know little about them. This is misleading: there is information of varying quality for 172 sites. Of these, some 45 have been excavated to a modern standard, of which about 40 were totally or substantially excavated to reveal site plans and/or major structural features (the remainder attracted less than 10% sampling or evaluation, or were only observed after severe truncation). A further six sites have been excavated to 'pre-modern standards' (ie. with some attempt at systematic description, some with plans and/or section drawings, but limited context recording and stratigraphic analysis). The quality of recording of these sites varies from good, such as Green's excavation at Astley, Worcestershire (Green 1962), to poorly-excavated and barely understood examples such as the site excavated by Pape at Wardlow Pasture, Staffordshire (1928). It is difficult to disagree with Pape’s conclusion that “one day was not enough for exploring a barrow properly” (ibid, 155). There are records for a further 121 sites investigated in the 19th century, or before, that can be accurately located to within 100 metres, the majority (85) from the Staffordshire Peak District. Although these sites were usually trenched or simply ransacked, surviving records sometimes provide descriptions of artefact recovery, burial contexts and/or structural details.

This evidence allows for some general statements about the character of the evidence: (i). the full diversity of monument forms and constructional features known in England are represented in the West Midlands (eg. single-phase and complex multi-phased structures, turf stacks, dump mounds and capping layers, round and ring cairns, dome-shaped and flat-topped ‘platform’ barrowd, revettment structures, free-standing timber structures, etc.); (ii). the full range of Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age funerary categories except ‘rich’ Wessex-style burials is also represented, though significantly concentrated in the Peak District and more variably represented elsewhere. It is also apparent, however, that this database also has some serious weaknesses for ambitious interpretative study:

  1. Recent excavations of well-preserved monuments providing detailed evidence of construction, funerary activity, chronology, and environmental context are very rare. This kind of information is essential for establishing a regional framework for the interpretation of early investigations and less well-preserved sites. Most of the 45 sites excavated to a modern standard were severely-truncated ring-ditches, lacking evidence of mound structures, over half having no intact in situ funerary deposits and the majority lacking precise dating evidence. We have, therefore, no basis at present for fine-grained analysis of monumental architecture in the West Midlands in the 3rd - 2nd millennia BC.
  1. Similar comments apply to evidence of graves and funerary assemblages. There is only a small, geographically-uneven assemblage of records of in situ burial deposits available for study. Few of these deposits can be dated precisely, and the majority - deriving from early investigations - lack good contextual information, especially in relation to monument construction sequences and discrete phases of ritual activity. Consequently, in regional terms, the West Midlands presently lacks a detailed chronology and interpretative framework for studying Late Neolithic and Early - Middle Bronze Age funerary traditions, grave types, artefact assemblages and practices.

In this context, there is little impetus to explore and compare local traditions, the tempos of burial and construction events, the changing social and political salience of funerary practices, and to situate these within local cultural landscapes or relate them to wider patterns across neighbouring regions. There is clearly a need for a great deal more research-led excavations of relatively well-preserved standing round barrow sites and groups of these within landscape projects across the whole region.

The West Midlands as a region in the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age

The scale of study implied here does raise a general issue relevant to the whole Research Framework: to what extent did the ‘West Midlands’ have any integrity as a regional cultural entity in the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC, and is it a viable and useful spatial construct for archaeological study of this period today ?

It is apparent, in terms of the geographical patterning of various categories and features of the West Midlands round barrow evidence, that the boundary of the region is an exceptionally arbitrary imposition on the spatial structuring of prehistoric cultural practices. The concentration of sites in north-east Staffordshire is clearly part of the densely clustered and far more extensive Peak District group of monuments. The northern Warwickshire group of large multi-ditched barrows appears most comparable with those to the east in Leicestershire, Northamptonshire, Lincolnshire and Cambridgeshire. The evidence from the Avon valley in Warwickshire is reminiscent of pattern evident the Upper Thames and its tributary valleys just across the Cotswolds to the south. The clusters of sites in the uplands and river valleys of the Welsh Marches appear to be eastern extensions of monument concentrations spanning the modern border. Only the Middle and Upper Severn valley provides any kind of distinctive ‘West Midlands’ geographical and material culture entity, though this is difficult to characterise, if it exists at all, given the limitations of previous research in this area.