Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:19:29.570Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

II.—Romano-Celtic Art in Northumbria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2011

R. G. Collingwood
Get access

Extract

It is a commonplace that before the Romans conquered Britain, its inhabitants had reached a high level of achievement in decorative art, and that one result of the conquest was the destruction of this art and the imposition of an inartistic though materially comfortable culture. With this view I do not propose to quarrel; but in certain ways I think it may with advantage be qualified. My present concern is with one such qualification.

Type
Research Article
Information
Archaeologia , Volume 80 , 1930 , pp. 37 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 1930

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 37 note 1 Archaeologia, lv, 186.

page 37 note 2 Röm. Funde aus Heddernheim, ii, 40.

page 39 note 1 Lindenschmit, Alterthümer unserer heid. Vorzeit, Band III, Heft ix, Taf. 3.

page 41 note 1 In a lesser degree it appears elsewhere, e.g. on a brooch (fig. 3d) of the trumpet type, sub-group R (i), at Traprain Law (P. S. A. Scot., 1915–16, p. 97, fig. 22, no. 1). This brooch might, for all I can see, belong to the late first century.

page 41 note 2 Until 1929, it was usual to date this destruction c. 180 (Dio, lxxi, 7, § 1). Evidence found at Birdoswald in that year seems to demand moving its date to c. 197 (ibid., lxxv, 5, § 4). See Cumb. and West. A. and A. S. Trans., N.S., XXX, p. 200; Arch. Aeliana, ser. 4, vii, 164.

page 43 note 1 In using the letter R for the entire group of trumpet-brooches, I am anticipating the classification of brooches in a work on the Archaeology of Roman Britain, shortly to be published.

page 55 note 1 How debased these imitations are may be seen when examples (e. g. W.A.M. xliii, p. 181, D; ibid., p. 390, B; or the Woodeaton specimen, fig: 12 g, at the Ashmolean) are compared with those figured in e.g. the Newstead, Traprain, and Corbridge reports.

page 56 note 1 Flawed castings of trumpet-brooches are fairly common at Brough-under-Stainmore; but though head-stud brooches were made there, I have never seen a flawed casting of one.