The Coins.
If we turn now to the coins, we shall find the date to lie within narrower limits than those fixed by the animals. They consist of:—
Two silver of Trajan, d. 117.
Four bronze of Tetricus I., 267–274.
One bronze of Tetricus II., 267–274.
One bronze of Gallienus, d. 268.
One bronze of Constantine II., d. 343.
One bronze of Constans, d. 353.
Three barbarous imitations in bronze of coins of Tetricus, circa 400–500 A.D.
In a group of coins such as this the latest only give a clue to the date, since the earlier may have remained in circulation long after they were struck. In India, for example, those of Alexander the Great have not yet disappeared from the country, and in Spain, in the shops of Malaga, Moorish, Roman, and even Phœnician coins were current in 1863, as well as all those which have been struck since.[51] We may therefore disregard the earliest coins, and fix our attention more particularly on those of the Constantine family, and the bronze minimi mentioned last in the list. The presence of the coin of Constans implies that the cave was occupied either during or after 337 A.D., when he ascended the throne; while the date of the minimi has not been ascertained with accuracy. “They abound upon all Roman sites, such as Verulam and Richborough. In size they come nearest to those struck under Arcadius and his successors, and I think that you will not be far wrong in assigning them to the first half of the fifth century. The latest of the genuine Roman coins found in this country are those of Arcadius and Honorius; at least, the finding of any of later date is quite exceptional. What the currency was between that time and the commencement of the Saxon coinage it is hard to say. It seems probable, however, that gold and silver had nearly disappeared, and that the needs of a small local commerce were supplied by the Roman copper coins of which abundance remained in the country, and by small pieces struck after their model, not improbably by private speculators.” This opinion, which Mr. John Evans, F.R.S., has been kind enough to write me, coincides with that of Mr. Newton, as well as that of Mr. Roach Smith; and we may therefore assume, with tolerable certainty, that the cave was inhabited during the first half of the fifth century or afterwards, at a time when the withdrawal of the Roman Legions had left the colony of Britain, whose youth and vigour had been consumed in the fierce struggle of the rivals for the throne of the West, a prey to the barbarian invaders.
It is of course conceivable that some of these coins may have been dropped at one time, and some at another, but nevertheless it seems very probable that the whole accumulation belongs to the same relative age. But whether this be accepted or not, it is certain the cave was inhabited during the time that the minimi were in circulation,—that is to say, during the first half of the fifth century, or from that time forwards.
The Jewellery, and its Relation to Irish Art.
This conclusion as to the date, derived from the coins, is confirmed in a remarkable degree by the examination of the articles of luxury. Besides two bronze brooches of the Roman pattern, known by archæologists as harp-shaped ([Coloured Plate], fig. 5), was one of the split-ring type, with a moveable pin, which is generally assigned to the later period of the Roman occupation of this country. One type of brooch was composed of two circular plates of bronze, soldered together, the front being very thin and bearing flamboyant and spiral patterns in relief ([Fig. 25]), of admirable design and execution. The original of the figure was discovered by Mr. Jackson, and is more perfect than any of those which we obtained in our excavations. It is altogether unlike any Roman brooch properly so called, both in its composite make and style of ornament. A similar brooch has been discovered at Brough Castle, in Westmoreland, and was figured in the Proceedings of the Antiquarian Society (vol. iv. 129), by Sir James Musgrave, and a second is preserved in the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy (492). The style corresponds with that of a medallion on a Runic casket of silver-bronze, figured by Prof. Stevens, and stated to have been obtained from Northumbrian Britain, as well as that of a brooch in the Museum at Mainz, assigned by the same authority to the third or fourth century. It is also to be met with in the illuminations of one of the Anglo-Saxon Gospels at Stockholm, as well as in those of the Gospels of S. Columban, preserved in the library of Trinity College, Dublin, and in the “Book of Kells” (8–900).[52] In all these cases it cannot be affirmed to be Roman, and it is not presented by ornaments of either purely English or Teutonic origin. It is most closely allied to that work which is termed by Mr. Franks “late Celtic.” From its localization in Britain and Ireland, it seems to be probable that it is of Celtic derivation; and if this view be accepted, there is nothing at all extraordinary in its being recognized in the illuminated Irish Gospels. Ireland, in the sixth and seventh centuries, was the great centre of art, civilization, and literature; and it is only reasonable to suppose that there would be intercourse between the Irish Christians and those of the west of Britain during the time that the Romano-Celts, or Brit-Welsh, were being slowly pushed to the westward by the heathen English invader. Proof of such an intercourse we find in the brief notice in the “Annales Cambriæ,” in which Gildas, the Brit-Welsh historian, is stated to have sailed over to Ireland in the year A.D. 565. It is by no means improbable that about this time there was a Brit-Welsh migration into Ireland, as well as into Brittany.
Fig. 25.—Bronze Brooch (natural size).
Nor is it at all strange that the same style of ornament should occur in some few cases in North Germany.