What do we know about Bryn y Ffynon and Brymbo Man?
In Part 1 of this four-part series, two Late Neolithic – Early Bronze Age burial sites were introduced: Bryn y Ffynon (the grave of the so-called Brymbo Man), and Bryn yr Ellyllon (the grave in which the Mold gold cape was found). A map of their locations was shown, the circumstances of their discovery was described, and the two graves were set in the context of similar sites in northeast Wales.
This post looks more closely at the Bryn y Ffynon, best known as the grave of Brymbo Man, one of the star exhibits in the Wrexham County Borough Museum. Part 3 looks at Bryn yr Ellyllon, the grave that produced the Mold Cape. I the fourth and final part, the various strands will be brought together in a conclusion, together with visiting notes. The bibliography for all four parts can be found at present at the end of part .
Contents of Part 2:
- The grave
- The grave goods
- The skeleton
- Funerary rituals
- Dating
- What did Brymbo Man look like?
- Who was Brymbo Man? Was he important?
- How did he make a living?
- Final comments on Part 2
- (Sources are listed at the end of Part 1)
The grave
Brymbo Man was buried in a stone-built grave called Bryn y Ffynon (Well on the Hill) on the north side of Ruabon Mountain, now the site of a housing estate in Brymbo to the northwest of Wrexham. No burial mound, either of earth or stone, has survived, and it is not known if there ever was one. In the northeast of England there were cemeteries of flat graves, so a burial mound might not have been essential everywhere, but in northeast Wales mounds of earth (barrows) or stone (cairns) were usual, even though not all of them remain. Some mounds were built in complex layers using different materials, and importantly could contain secondary burials, usually cremation burials, that were added to the mound, sometimes involving the extension of the mound. The loss of a burial mound often equates to the loss of valuable data. Stone cairns in particular were often robbed for their stone for much later building material, sometimes leaving a hidden cist unsuspected beneath the surface. Given the upland location of the site, if the grave was covered, it probably lay under a cairn.
The cist (burial chamber) itself was made of roughly hewn slabs of local stone lining the walls and floor of the grave, and measured 96 x 79cm (38 x 31 inches). The cist was aligned north-south. A very large and uneven slab of stone, called a capstone, was placed over the top of the cist, sealing the burial before any burial mound was built over the top, itself measuring 5ft 6ins (167cm) long, 3ft 3ins wide (c.1m) and 9ins (23cm) thick.
The Grave Goods
There were only two items found in the grave with Brymbo Man, which are on display with the skeleton. One is a ceramic vessel known as a Beaker and the other is a flint tool. This is fairly typical of Early Bronze Age graves. Without access to the excavation report (unpublished) one assumes that the relationship between the objects and the skeleton in the cist was recorded, and that this is what has been reproduced by the museum, with a flint knife placed not far behind the skull and the Beaker placed towards at the base of what remains of the skeleton.
The Beaker
Brymbo Man was accompanied in his grave by a very distinctive ceramic form known as a “Beaker,” more precisely a short-necked Beaker. The Beaker tradition was an import from Europe, marking one of the changes in the centuries at the end of the Neolithic and beginning of the Early Bronze Age. Where a Beaker is buried with the individual, it may be accompanied by a variety of other goods, but is often the only object found. This suggests that the beaker itself was pivotal in establishing the identity and purpose of the grave and its owner. Skeletons in Beaker graves were flexed / crouched, (with their knees bent and their legs pulled up to their chests).
The process by which Beaker burial traditions arrived in Britain is still poorly understood. Options are that the tradition was imported by visitors or immigrants; or that it was brought back from the continent by British (using the term loosely) travellers who found certain affinities with the funerary practises that they observed. The idea of foreign people being buried with the new Beaker style burial is given some credence by beaker burials from the Stonehenge region, and in particular the Amesbury Archer, who was buried with a range of goods traditionally associated with beakers, and was subjected to isotope analysis that indicated his origins were probably in the Alps. In addition, a multi-disciplinary DNA analysis research project in 2017 proposed that a significant percentage of the indigenous population of Britain was, by the Middle Bronze Age, replaced by those who brought the Beaker tradition with them at the end of the Neolithic: “the genetic evidence points to a substantial amount of migration into Britain from the European mainland beginning around 2400 BCE.” (Olalde et al). As is so often the case with this sort of DNA research, as highlighted in the study itself, there are questions remaining about the extent to which it is possible to extrapolate from the data used, including sampling issues (statistical, geographical and relating to the quality of the material).
The new burial tradition found favour, whatever it represented. The new funerary regime could not have spread so far and and wide throughout Britain and Ireland without people in all those regions being complicit. Whatever the mechanism of transmission, by the end of the Neolithic the continental Beaker and associated objects had become desirable, and were found extensively under round barrows, as well as occasionally in other contexts, in many parts of Britain.
Beakers were hand-made (i.e. not wheel-thrown), built up from a single ball of clay that was hollowed out and shaped before being fired. There is a video at the end that demonstrates how Beakers may have been assembled and decorated. A certain amount of skill went into the construction, which is a very specific shape, and the decoration must have taken considerable patience, but what is most remarkable about it is its faithful reproduction of an idea that had spread through Europe and was now perfectly at home in burials of northeast Wales. The Beaker may have had slightly different ideas associated with it different areas, but it clearly imparted a message either about the deceased, the role or status enacted by the deceased in life, the status conferred upon the deceased after death, the place where the burial was made, as well as ideas and ideologies inherited with the Beaker tradition.
The flint knife
A flint tool was found in the grave. It is plano-convex (flat on one side and curved on the other). Flint was the preferred stone for tool manufacture in Britain. In Cheshire, and less frequently in northeast Wales, it could be found locally in river beds and on beaches as pebbles, which are useful for making small tools, but for more ambitious pieces it would be imported from areas where flint was part of the geological fabric. The reason for its popularity is the way in which it responds when it is struck in order to shape it into a tool. The term for it is conchoidal fracturing, which means that the shock-wave of its fracture creates a slightly concave “bulb of percussion” from which concentric lines that ripple out from the point of impact. The waste products left over from tool manufactured, undifferentiated flakes, are usually referred to as “debitage.” Some of these could be further worked into other smaller tools, but others might be abandoned and are useful datasets about tool manufacture in their own right. Some tools are very distinctively shaped, like barbed and tanged arrowheads, but others are far more generic, like the one accompanying Brymbo Man. Stone tools were often hafted in wood to make, for example, arrows, spears and axes.
Small plano-convex tools were common in the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, particularly from the northeast, and often towards the end of the period. When the edges are worked to form a sharp edge, they are usually termed knives, but many, including this one, were probably multi-purpose tools. A particular industry referred to as “plano-convex” tools, formerly “slug knives,” is characterized by tools made with specialized pressure-flaking over one face of the tool, which have a very distinctive appearance and are particularly associated with the northeast and food vessels. Nothing special went into the manufacture of this item, which is a very everyday piece, and although it is technically plano-convex, it is not characteristic of the more elaborate objects that are usually associated with the term. I cannot find an image of the reverse side of the flint, but it looks more like a flake (a piece struck from a core piece of flint without much additional work) than a properly manufactured and shaped tool.
The Skeleton
The skeleton as it survives today is incomplete, as shown in the photograph on the left. Even with only a partial skeleton to study it could be determined that the deceased was a male who, at the time of his death, was 5ft 8ins/173cm tall, and was strong and powerful, indicated both by the shape of his skull and by the muscle attachments to both his skull and his leg bones.
Brymbo Man is thought to have been 35 years of age at the time of his death. There are different estimates of life expectancy for this period, but it is probable that 35-40 was a good age. His age was determined both by the degree to which the bones in his skull had fused and by the wear of his teeth. He had once suffered a wound above hairline on his forehead, thought to have been caused by an arrowhead, but this had healed and was not the cause of his death. No cause of death was identified. He could, for example, have died from an injury that left no traces on what remains of his skeleton, or from illness or disease.
Isotope analysis has not been carried out on the Brymbo skeleton. Isotopic ratio analysis has become very popular for an increasingly popular for the study of past human and livestock migrations. The technique was used, for example, on the tooth enamel of a skeleton found near Stonehenge, known as the Amesbury Archer, and indicates that this person spent his childhood in the Alps. It has also been used by the Beaker People Project, which has concluded that dsfsadfsd. It also be used on livestock remains, helping to show patterns of mobility such as transhumance. Like radiocarbon dating, isotopic analysis requires a sample of human material, which is destroyed in the process, and so far Wrexham County Borough Museum has decided not to subject the Brymbo remains to avoid harming the remaining bones. The choice between preservation and knowledge is a difficult one to make.
Funerary Rituals
Rituals for the dead can be important for ensuring that the living transition successfully into an afterlife, but they may also be important for the living, allowing communities to come to terms with the loss of a community member, to create ancestral links with a particular landscape, and to formalize any exchange of role from the dead person to a living replacement. These ideas are familiar from the rituals that we engage in today when we attend a funeral. In prehistory, it is likely that there were other reasons and meanings embedded into the ritual activities accompanying the deposition of the dead. There was certainly an internal logic to the burials contained within the stone chambers during this period, and the Brymbo burial shares many of these features.
The presence of the Beaker puts it within a burial tradition that is quite distinctive. The dead were buried by themselves, usually under a barrow or cairn, in a small chamber (cist) with a Beaker vessel and sometimes other objects. This European tradition was adopted slowly throughout Britain, and Beakers were adapted by local people to conform to their own traditions. There are numerous variants. Quite what this tradition meant to living communities is unknown. It may have indicated some sort of specific role in society for the deceased, and it may even indicate, in this case, that the the deceased was either involved in networks of communication and exchange with other areas, or was not native to the northeast Wales or border area.
The skull was laid on its side, with the head to the north, facing east and, if the museum display reflects how the skeleton was found, the rest of the bones were apparently laid to give the impression of a crouched burial. Although there are exceptions, males were usually laid with their heads facing east, females with their heads facing west.
Only 13% of the Bryn y Ffynnon skeleton was interred in the grave. This is not an accident of survival of decay, but a deliberate decision by those who buried the remains. This is not unusual. Analysis of the skeletal remains by osteology specialist Corinne Duhig found that some of the bones bore cut marks that had been made by a sharp tool, which may indicate de-fleshing the bones. The disarticulation of the skeleton, the missing bones, and and the signs of defleshing imply that between death and interment multiple activities took place. None of this was by any means unusual in the period, or indeed from the preceding Early Neolithic. One explanation for this type of activity is that the person died some distance from home and that the body was prepared somewhere else for travel prior to burial; another is that the practices were part of a set of rituals that marked the transition from life to death, possibly including a transition to an afterlife. It is also entirely possible that the body may have been laid to rest elsewhere and moved here at a later date.
Splitting of bodies between multiple places is not as strange as it sounds and has parallels, for example, in Medieval Britain. For example, when Earl Ranulf III of Chester (1170-1232) died away from home, his body was eviscerated (internal organs removed) so that it could buried in three locations. His entrails were buried where he died in Wallingford, his heart was buried at Dieulacrès Abbey in the Midlands and his embalmed body was then returned to Chester for burial in St Werburgh’s Abbey. This was completely consistent with the traditions of the period.
The pre-interment activity at Brymbo does beg the question of how close the association between the dead person and the objects in the grave actually was. If there was a considerable period between death and interment, it may be that the objects had more to do with the living than the dead, and that they were simply conventional contributions in which ideas were embodied in the artefacts about the site itself, rather than statements about the deceased.
Dating
The skeleton has not been subjected to radiocarbon dating, but is thought to date to around 1900BC on the basis of artefacts that accompany the burial. Relative dating of this sort is achieved by comparing the objects in graves with similar graves that have been subjected to radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon dating is a scientific method, known as absolute dating, that measures the amount of atmospheric carbon-14 remaining within organic materials such as bone or wood to obtain a date. A brief but useful explanation can be found Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit website. A sample of organic matter (such as skeletal or plant material) is required for the dating procedure, and this sample is destroyed in the process of obtaining a date. Recent improvements in the technique need much smaller samples, but some curators are reluctant for even small samples to be destroyed. Signage at the Wrexham County Borough Museum explains that the museum has decided, at the time of writing, not to have the Brymbo Man scientifically dated. Instead, the relative (inferred) date given above has been based mainly on the Beaker. Beakers have been studied extensively. They appear from 2500BC, and there are multiple different styles, some of which can be charted over time. The Brymbo Beaker, placed at around the 1900BC mark, is well into the Early Bronze Age and on the edge of the period when this style of pottery was going out of fashion.
What did Brymbo Man look like?
The Brymbo skull was used by facial reconstruction expert Dr Caroline Wilkinson at the Unit of Art in Medicine at Manchester University, to create an estimate of Brymbo Man’s appearance. Although the skull is incomplete, what remained was enough for Dr Wilkinson to use. The skull itself was fragile, but robust enough for a cast to be made. The position and size of the muscle attachments helped to build a sense of the musculature in the face which, along with bone structure and overall body weight, help to determine the shape of the face. The shape and size of all apertures in the face, such as eyes, mouth and nose, and the spatial relationship between them, also contribute to how a face would have looked. Once the underlying structure of the face had been determined, the skin, represented by clay, was added. There are some things that are not determined by the underlying structure, like lips and ears. Once the model head was completed, a make-up artist was responsible for hair and the colour of eyes, complexion and hair. This is not a definitive representation, but it is based on the available data, and it gives an excellent sense that the skeleton was once a living man.
Who was Brymbo Man? Was he important?
Given that 1000s of people during the Bronze Age were not buried (the landscape would have been stuffed full of mounds if they had), we know that a selection process had been implemented, and this selection process put Brymbo Man in this grave. Unfortunately we do not know the selection criteria for those who were deposited in graves.
One might wonder if he was the leader of his community, but he might equally be an elder respected for his experience and knowledge, a ritual specialist responsible for the religious well-being of the community, or a wealthy trader who conferred status on the group without necessarily having a position of hierarchical power. Perhaps it was not his place in society that marked him out, but an action or event in which he took part. Or was his death itself significant in some way? Perhaps he was the first person to die after the establishment of a claim over a new territory. Equally he might be a person or an idea regarded by the community for reasons that we might never imagine, because we can never know how people were categorized or how they related to the ideas of the community and the broader social conventions to which they were connected.
Whatever he represented, whether as a valued family member, an important representative of the community, or a symbol of something rather less conceivable, the burial itself was clearly important. Assembling the grave was no light-hearted exercise. Even without a barrow, cutting the stone for the the stone-lined cist, which would then have to be assembled, would have been a significant activity. Even more impressive, the quarrying of the stone for the capstone and moving the capstone into position would have required many hands, probably some lifting technology, and a great deal of incentive and determination.
We know that Brymbo Man had sustained an injury to his skull, which he survived. The nature of the injury suggests that it might have been made by an arrow, which could have been received in a hunting accident, or in conflict. There are numerous reasons why people might resort to violence, including livestock raiding, disputes over territory as well as personal grievances, but there is no matching data from other burials in the area, such as evidence of similar injuries, to indicate wider scale disputes. Although his injuries could have been connected to his role or status, and might have been a criterion by which he was selected for a round barrow burial, we simply have no way of knowing whether or not this was the case.
Beyond speculation there is little information that the presence of a burial with a single Beaker and a single stone tool can divulge about who the deceased may have been in life. It is not even clear whether he was important in his own right or whether his burial represented a set of ideas and traditions, quite unlike our own, that led to his burial in this location. As things stand, we cannot form an opinion about whether he was any more important to his contemporaries than the event that placed him in the grave. What can be stated with some confidence is that the grave itself, and the dome of earth or stone that probably encased it, were significant to the people who built it, standing proud on a landscape that was inhabited by people, and to whom it would have communicated messages that we can no longer read.
What do we know about how Brymbo Man made a living?
We know something about Brymbo man’s vital statistics, and how he was treated after death, but so far we have not had the opportunity to look at how he may have lived his life. In Britain, Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age resources potentially included cereal (wheat and barley) and legume crops, as well as livestock, primarily cattle and sheep. In the earlier Neolithic period, after an initial burst of agrarian activity, livestock herding became dominant over cereal cultivation, possibly because of teething problems with the establishment of cereal farming in new territories by inexperienced farmers. Cattle herding increased, and soon sheep also contributed to the subsistence mix, with dairy products rising in importance. Before the end of the Early Bronze Age, cereal farming resumed on floodplains and other suitable land. Although different areas had access to different types of land and both wild and domesticated resources, there is no reason to doubt that the inhabitants of northeast Wales could obtain access to subsistence assets when they required them, choosing the best combination of crops and livestock for the conditions in which they lived. Hunting wild game probably supplemented the diet.
How much of this applies to the Brymbo area? We know that the grave was on a hillside above the River Alyn. The hillside is used used for sheep farming. Given that Brymbo Man was buried in this location, it can be assumed that he lived and worked here for at least a portion of the year, but whether this was a settled or mobile life is unknown.
The point was made above that Brymbo Man was a sturdy individual with no obvious health defects, that 35 was a respectable age for the period, and that these observations suggest that he was healthy and probably had a nutritious diet. We can state with some confidence is that Brymbo Man was once part of a family, and a larger community, made up of farmers and/or herders, as well as stone and pottery workers who exploited the fertile lowlands and highland pastures of northeast Wales, possibly on a transhumant or otherwise seasonal basis. These were the people who buried him. There would have been many other men, women and children in the area when he was alive and making a living, each with a specific role within the community.
It is possible that some members of the community split away from the rest on a seasonal basis, following a pattern of taking up livestock onto the hills to take advantage of summer pasture, before returning in the autumn to help with the harvest. If the burial on the edge of Ruabon Mountain is an indication of an affiliation with this particular part of the landscape, Brymbo Man was probably involved in sheep or cattle herding, and was in easy reach of the Alyn valley for other agrarian activities. Climatic indicators suggest that the weather was warm and relatively dry, and although lowland areas could be freed up for agriculture by the clearance of often dense woodland before they could be cultivated, upland areas were often used for both cultivation and herding.
Coming back once again to the Beaker, it is as far as one can tell from other excavated sites in the region, something of an unusual object in northeast Wales and the borders. This one in particular seems to have affinities with other areas and it seems unlikely that it was made locally. The presence of the copper mine on the Great Orme indicates that there was significant trading activity from there to other parts of Britain, and that the development of complex overland and seagoing trade routes were established had been established by the Early Bronze Age. It is in not, therefore, far-fetched to suggest that this grave, overlooking the Alyn valley and only a few kilometres from the Dee valley, might have had connections further afield, and that the Beaker may not have been made by native potters, but was an import, either in trade, or in company with Brymbo Man. This is highly speculative and more data is required. Perhaps the beaker itself, and analysis of the clay from which it was made, could add additional data. Isotopic analysis of the skeleton might also well help to clarify some of these distance-related questions. As noted above, however, this would involve inflicting damage on the Brymbo remains.
Final Comments on Part 2
Brymbo Man remains elusive. One grave on its own, even containing a skeleton and grave goods, provides insufficient data for judging what the grave meant to the people that buried a man there, and covered his burial chamber with a giant capstone and, probably, a barrow or cairn. Isotope data could probably get us a little further, but only as far as assessing whether this man was likely to have travelled. All we can say for sure is that he had no obvious signs of ill health, that his physique, height and age suggest that he was well nourished, that he had received an injury apparently inflicted by another human, and that the hilly surroundings of his burial place might imply that he was involved in livestock herding or that this was a route he travelled in the course of another economic activity.
The real value of Brymbo Man, the objects in his grave and his burial mound is as a data source in comparative research to enable the development of a greater understanding of all these burials, the features they shared, and how they were differentiated from one another. Once sufficient data has been accumulated, probably not until decades from now, it may be possible to return to Brymbo Man, better informed, with more knowledge to hand, to ask some of the above questions again.
Next
Bryn yr Ellyllon, the Early Bronze Age burial cairn that produced the Mold Cape, are discussed in a similar vein in Part 3.