Miscellaneous Notes

( 116 ) Qnfoctffantouo (!l.oteo. FIBULAE AND OTHER STRAY FINDS FROM KENTISH SITES. By E. J. W. Hildyard, F.S.A. IN the course of the last ten years a number of small objects of Roman date found in Kent have come into my possession, and I felt that their number and interest were sufficient to merit publication. Of the brooches, Nos. 19, 20, 21, 22 and 25 were previously in the collection of the late Dr. Arthur Relph, F.S.A. The objects from Canterbury formerly belonged to my friend Lt.-Col. 0. H. North, D.S.O., F.S.A. I must emphasize that I have had no opportunity to examine either published or unpublished material from Kent apart from the Richborough and Swarling Reports, so that I cannot draw corn• parisons with local parallels, but this does not affect the general dating of the objects. The references to Colchester types allude to the forthcoming Camulodunum Report which will contain a new classification of many varieties of early fibulae. I am indebted to Mr. M. R. Hull, F.S.A., for kindly allowing me a preview of his notes. FIBULAE. No. 19 from Springhead, near Gravesend. One-piece brooch with two-coil unilateral spring, elongated catchplate and thickened bow. Both the profile and form of spring make it seem that this must be a descendant of the boat or leech brooches belonging to the Hallstatt period of which there are very few, if any, authenticated specimens from Britain. But without knowing more of the site whence it came it would be unwise to date it with any attempt at precision. Nos. 20 and 21 from Greenhythe and Sarre respectively. Two thistle brooches of Colchester type XB (Collingwood group W) of which the tails, catchplates, and open-work rosettes on the central discs as well as the springs, bolts and pins are missing .. No sign of enamel now remains in the grooves of the bows, but faint traces of engraved ornament can be detected on the spring cover of No. 20. Their present state thus gives little idea of the elaborate and artistic effect they must originally have produced, but No. 21 must once have compared with the finest of the Colchester specimens. None of the few British examples of this Gaulish type need be pre-conquest imports, so that these also may be safely dated to the reign of Claudius. No. 22 from Swanscombe. A complete Aucissa brooch of Colchester type XVIIB (Collingwood group C) in iron, having an unusually !: ,· I I ,_ - 21 44 _, 􀀰 .. ; , lt,•! 1 I •;.•II 􀀂n .·: ,/:1 I •' I " 􀀱 ... -. " " ,, " • .. -----· 20 25 -- 􀀂. 􀀃ll :: 􀀃¥:fi !􀀆􀀇 ', ·􀀂 t.􀀃 19 22 E.J.W.H. del. PLATE T. FIBULAE FROM KENTISH SITES IN THE HILDYARD COLLECTION. 􀀴 size. m 1a 􀀲 8 C1J 21 􀀳 ?1 􀀵 􀀵 .J 2 3 6 􀀂j 􀀁 C -4 5 7 B 9 10 II ! 􀀂 􀀂 (#M3J$5Rtli ,,·,1,•UPili•i!'!"IPi» 13 12 E.J".W.H. de!. Pu.TE II. SMALL OBJ"ECTS FROM CANTERBURY (Nos. 1-11) AND MARGATE (Nos. 12 and 13) ½ size. HILDYARD COLLECTION. ,. ,... 00 I::: .... u, ("} 􀀃t,J 􀀄 t,j g u, 􀀁 􀀂 ?' MISCELLANEOUS NOTES. 119 narrow bow with beaded ornament down the centre. This type, introduced at the Conquest, is common on early sites but does not survive the reign of Nero. No. 25 from Richborough. Brooch of Colchester type XV which may be called the" Early P-shaped "brooch. This is a carefully-made specimen with engraved ornament on the arms, sunken beaded decoration down the bow, two holes in the catch-plate and a fluted foot. Apart from the three rather poor examples at Colchester1 and one at Swarling2 I know of no others from Britain. Mr. Hull has shown that this type is the intermediate forerunner of" the whole P-shaped family of brooches " (Collingwood group T), but its development is mainly Germanic. This must be another Claudian import. No. 44. Brooch from the site of the new Post Office in Canterbury found in 1920. Well-made two-piece brooch with forward-humped bow, decorated arms and triangular opening in the catch plate. This belongs to Colchester type IVB which is distinguished from the " Dolphin " type by the fact that the retaining hook for the chord is cast solid with the bow, as is also the lug through which passes the axial bar of the coiled spring. It might thus be called the " Double Lug" type. Recent stratified examples at ColchesterS a.nd Verulamium 4 have shown these brooches to be rather earlier than was supposed, and this example may be dated A.D. 60-80. No. 96. Brooch from Greenhythe, a perfectly-preserved specimen. This belongs to the British type that appeared in such numbers at Colchester that it has been named after that site, but it is common in, though virtually limited to, the Belgic area of Britain. It is the dominant type at Swarling, after which site it has also been called. This particular specimen may be classed as Colchester type variant Illa, being much smaller and with proportionately longer arms than the normal examples. The eight-coiled spring, corrugated wings and, particularly, the chord hook facing to rear (which distinguishes these brooches from the " Dolphins "} are, however, all characteristic of the type. May be dated A.D. 30-50. OTJIER O:aJEOTS. Nos. 1-11 were found with brooch No. 44. Nos. 12 and 13 are from Margate. 1 and 2. Small pairs of iron shears of normal pattern, chiefly remarkable fo r their perfect condition: 1 Colchester, Nos. 117, 118, 119. 2 Swe.rling Report, page 42, plate XII, 6. 3 Colchester, Nos. 36, 37, 43. • Verulamium, Nos. 22 a.nd 24. 120 MISCELLANEOUS NOTES. 3. Bronze object with hook at one end, and at the other a thin plate doubled over and secured with a copper rivet. Five of these objects, which formed part of sheaths for the protection of the edges of ax:es, were found at Wroxeter and dated before A.D. 120.1 4. Bronze slide key for tumbler lock (of. London in Roman Times, pl. XXX B, 1-8). 5. Heavy bronze finger ring. The very rough finish and irregular shape rather suggest that this may have been part of a shop-keeper's stock which would have required further attention before being offered for sale. This is supported by the absence of any decoration on the bezel on which there are a series of rough scratches. 6. Bronze pin with decorated spherical head. A common type. 7. Headless bronze pin in perfect condition. 8. Bronze needle in unusually fine condition. 9. Bronze pin with decorated head, partly corroded away. 10. Plain bone pin. 11. Part of large bronze needle. 12. Bronze needle of normal type. 13. Part of bronze bracelet with incised decoration. The ends have not been joined. 1 Third_Wroxeter Report (1914) p. 31 and plate XX, 3. 120 MISCELLANEOUS NOTES. HUMAN REMAINS FROM LENHAM. THE burial here reported was an interment lying about a foot deep in the chalk. It was discovered on 3rd March, 1946, while digging a trench for a water main on the south side of the Pilgrims' Way at Lenham (map ref. (War Edition) l" to 1 mile, Sheet No. 116, 343712). The approximate orientation was north-east and south-west. The skeleton as exposed showed considerable displacement. The skull was resting on the left side and very close to it lay a hip bone. The ribs were some distance from the skull and turned round. The teeth were all in good preservation but much worn. The only thing found near the burial was part of an iron buckle of doubtful age. The examination was difficult owing to a snowstorm and could not be left as trenching had to continue. The site was examined later in fine weather bu􀅄 proved fruitless. MISCELLANEOUS NOTES. 121 HENRY STREATFEILD AND HIS FAMILY VAULT. IN the churchyard of Chiddingstone, Kent, is the large family vault of the family of Streatfeild of Chiddingstone. Unlike most family vaults it is situated in the churchyard, not built underneath the church itself. The entrance is through a wooden door in a small square building-not unlike a solid eighteenth century gazebo (for I can think of no better word to describe it}, and from this a long flight of steps leads down to the vault itself ; here, on great slabs raised on brickwork, and each side of a wide passageway, lie in orderly rows between 50 and 60 coffins-all made from trees grown on the estate, and all in an excellent state of preservation, probably owing to the currents of air which enter the vault from the iron gratings in the side of a false altar tomb in the churchyard above. At the top of the flight of steps is a terra-cotta bust of Henry Streatfeild, the builder and designer in 1736 of this resting-place for himself and his descendants. This bust is obviously by a first-class hand but is, unfortunately, unsigned by the sculptor; but it might well be the work of J. M. Rysbrack (1693-1770). Beneath the bust is a bronze plate on which is cut the following inscription : HENRY STREATFEILD A Lover of all lawful Liberty Dependent on no Man True to his Trust Just in his Dealings Often Obliging Never Ungrateful Charm'd with Retirement Delighted in Planting His Passions always followed by Repentance. Nat. 8 Sept. ANNO 1679. OB. 28 Aug. Sepult. 8 Sept. 1747. Henry Streatfeild was a Kentish squire whose ancestors had lived a.t High Street House, in the parish, since the reign of Henry VIII. He was the eldest son of Henry Streatfeild and Sarah,. only daughter and heiress of John Ashdown of Hever. He had married, in 1704, Elizabeth only daughter and heiress of Richard Beard of Rottingdean in Sussex. He was a man of very considerable taste, for he travelled abroad, collected a fine library of books, and employed workmen to decorate with plasterwork the interior of his house. He was, as his epitaph tells us, a keen gardener and laid out to the best possible advantage the gardens and park of his home. A portrait, in the writer's possession and painted in 1710, shows him as a man of middle age, dressed in a brown suit and holding in one hand a bundle of documents, while with the other he points to three large leather-bound folios which stand on a table, covered with a green 122 MISOELLANEOUS NOTES. cloth, by his side. Unfortunately the back of the books are turned away from the spectator and their titles hidden, so we shall never know who were the authors of these volumes on which he set so much store. His love of literature seems to have descended to only one of his children, Sophia, a blue-stocking, a friend of Dr. Johnson and herself the collector of a very fine library of Greek and Roman classics. His eldest son Hem-y married Anne, the illegitimate child of his neighbour the 7th and last Lord Leicester. Lord Leicester had made Henry the child's guardian but, though there was a considerable disparity of ages, he fell in love with his ward and married her. Under her father's will Anne had inherited all the Sidney estates, but the will was contested by Lord Leicester's nieces and after a lengthy lawsuit a settlement was arrived at by which the nieces (Lady Sherrard and Mrs. Perry) received Penshurst and Leicester House in London, while Anne had to be content with the Welsh estate brought into the Sidney family by the marriage of the 1st Earl of Leicester and Barbara Gamage. RUPERT GUNNIS.