|
made apparently of ivory or bone; a bronze pin,1
of which the head is lost; a fossil echinus, the Spatangus cor-anguinim,
polished, and evidently, deposited in the grave as a relic, ornament,
or charm, and two Roman coins. The larger of these coins (as Mr. Faussett,
the Honorary Secretary of our Society, to whom I have been indebted for
many valuable suggestions, has informed me,) is a large brass of Aurelius;
the smaller is too much obliterated to be easily deciphered.2
I will now give a detailed description of the principal
relics of this grave :—The Gold Pendants (Plate I., figs. 1—6).—These
are thin circular plates of gold, stamped in patterns, and supplied with
loops, also of gold, for suspension. They are of three sizes. The diameter
of the largest is about 1 1/4 inch, and its weight 3 dwts. 3 grs.; of the
smallest 1 1/8 inch, and 1 dwt. 21 grs.; the remaining four are alike in
size, intermediate between these two, and weigh 2 dwts. 17 grs. They are
of pure gold, and stamped on
one side only, the central |
|
ornament in them all being curious patterns
of scrolled and interlaced figures,3 some of which are like
attempts at emblematical designs,— rude hints, perhaps, afterwards
improved by other northern and German nations, and ingrafted into those
architectural designs which gave a new style to Europe.
1. [ This appears to be a large needle, broken at
the eye.]
2. [ Conjectured by Mr. Vaux, of the British Museum, to be one
of
Tetricus.]
3. [ It will be observed in the very accurate illustrations which
accompany this description, that three of these pendants are exactly
alike, and evidently stamped by the same mould. It is curious to see
that the loops of these three, though clearly attached after the
stamping, are very nearly, though not quite, in the same position in
each; near enough however, to shew that the figures are intended to be
regarded with that point uppermost ( to shew it indeed more plainly for
the slight difference as proving the loop to have been fixed be the eye
and not be any merely mechanical arrangement). This gives us plainly a
designed bottom and top to the group of figures, and, given a bottom and
top, must we not suppose there to have been a meaning also? |