Geophysical prospection and archaeological excavation are helping to contextualise a group of Middle Bronze Age metalwork hoards in Brittany. At Kerouarn, three hoards with a total of 89 bracelets were found buried in a semi-circular enclosure with a monumental entrance, bounded by two deep ditches and their associated embankments. No domestic or funerary remains were discovered.

A variable proportion of finds from the Neolithic and Chalcolithic of ‘Old Europe’ has come from places outside settlements, cemeteries, production sites, ritual sites, or caves. Such finds tend to be described as ‘chance/isolated/single/stray’ finds or, when in groups, as ‘hoards’. The frequent, modernist cause invoked for these finds is that they were either ‘hidden’ in times of mortal danger, represented a ‘gift to the gods’, or simply ‘lost’. One reason for these explanatory shortcomings is the over-attention to the types of objects deposited in the landscape and the frequent lack of attention to the often-distinctive place of deposition. We believe that we have misnamed, overlooked, or not accurately characterised an entire class of sites, which we term ‘landscape deposition sites’, whose defining feature was the transformation of a place by the deposition of a significant object or group of objects to create a qualitatively different place. The creation of such landscape deposit sites varied in time and space throughout Old Europe, but all sites were affected by this new dimension of the extended cultural domain.

In this article, we consider the interpretations of metal deposition in North-west Europe and the light they shed on an earlier and geographically different region. The primary aim of this paper is an exploration of the variable relationships between landscape deposit sites and the coeval finds made in special deposits in settlements and cemeteries in the 5th and 4th millennia bc, which will lead to proposed new interpretations of landscape deposition sites.

In late summer, sometime between cal a.d. 340–405, a hoard of tightly packed, stacked copper-alloy vessels was deposited in the Vale of Pewsey, Wiltshire. The corrosion of the vessels allowed for the preservation of delicate plant macrofossils and pollen. Analysis of this material has provided insights into the date, season and context of this act of structured deposition. A second hoard of similar vessels was deposited in the fourth or fifth century only a few miles away at Wilcot. The hoards and their deposition relate to Romano-British lifeways, at a time when the region was on the cusp of a dramatic period of change. The distribution of late Roman coins and belt fittings offers further insights into the social and economic character of Wiltshire at their times of deposition.

The Early Bronze Age Únětice Culture in central Germany was a highly stratified society with a ruling class of ‘princes’, as evidenced by the famous burials at Leubingen and Helmsdorf, and the newly excavated burial mound Bornhöck near Dieskau. To investigate the notion of Únětice military organisation, this article presents a new interpretation of the numerous weapons hoards recovered from the region. Hoard deposition and composition from central Germany strongly suggests a shift from a Late Neolithic culture of ‘warrior heroes’ to the creation of organised standing armies of professional soldiers under the control of ruling elites.

Bivalve bronze moulds were used for casting bronze and lead objects – mainly axes – during the Middle and Late Bronze Age. These remarkable artefacts, which were sometimes beautifully decorated, have been surprisingly little studied. This paper discusses the bronze moulds from Britain, outlining the range of possibilities that existed for the life courses of these objects during the three broad stages of manufacture, use, and deposition. Two points will be emphasised. First, it will be shown that the biographical pathways available to bronze moulds differed significantly from those of moulds made from stone or clay, which may relate to the differing properties and conceptual associations of these three materials. Secondly, the relationships between the life courses of bronze moulds and the artefacts cast in them will be explored, focusing particularly on cases in which moulds and their castings were deposited together in the same hoard. It will be suggested that the ‘genealogical’ link between a mould and its ‘offspring’ could have formed a significant element of the biography of both objects.

Iron Age tankards are stave-built wooden vessels completely covered or bound in copper-alloy sheet. The distinctive copper-alloy handles of these vessels frequently display intricate ‘Celtic’ or La Tène art styles. They are characterised by their often highly original designs, complex manufacturing processes, and variety of find contexts. No systematic analysis of this artefact class has been undertaken since Corcoran’s (1952a) original study was published in Volume 18 of these Proceedings. New evidence from the Portable Antiquities Scheme for England and Wales and recent excavations have more than quadrupled the number of known examples (139 currently). It is therefore necessary and timely to re-examine tankards, and to reintegrate them into current debates surrounding material culture in later prehistory. Tankards originate in the later Iron Age and their use continued throughout much of the Roman period. As such, their design was subject to varying influences over time, both social and aesthetic. Their often highly individual form and decoration is testament to this fact and has created challenges in developing a workable typology (Corcoran 1952a; 1952b; 1957; Spratling 1972; Jackson 1990). A full examination of the decoration, construction, wear and repair, dating, and deposition contexts will allow for a reassessment of the role of tankards within the social and cultural milieu of later prehistoric and early Roman Britain.

Hoard finds appear throughout the European Bronze Age with distinct chronological and chorological peaks. While there is some consensus on seeing hoards as an expression of cultic behaviour, the large ‘scrap metal' hoards in particular still provoke interpretations as raw material collected for recycling. With socketed axes whose sockets were intentionally filled with deliberately fragmented metalwork, Hansen (1996–1998) has pointed out a group of finds that could be crucial to a better understanding of ‘scrap’ hoards. Using the finds from the Carpathian Basin as a case study, a dual biographical approach is applied to this group. A close look at the complex use-life of the objects themselves, as well as an attempt at re-integrating them into the local history of hoarding, leads to the conclusion that they constitute single acts of dedication in larger contexts. “Scrap hoards’” can thus be understood as long-term accumulations of votive objects and can be integrated into the social practice of Bronze Age hoarding.

This paper explores the interpretation of the deposition of artefacts in Ireland from c. 2500 to c. 800 bc, combining a contextual analysis with post-processual ideas about materiality, artefacts, and their biographies. Hoards, single and burial finds are shown to be complementary strands of the depositional record and the result of deliberate deposition. It is argued that both the symbolic value of these items as well as economic and practical rationales determine the depositional mode. The paper attempts to infer social practices and rules that determined the differential treatment of materials and object types. The main structuring factor in the depositional record is the type-specific meanings of individual artefacts, which embody social identities beyond the utilitarian function of the object. The act of deposition facilitates and legitimates the literal and symbolic transformation of artefacts and the concepts they embody. The need for a separation between ritual and profane interpretation is removed, as deposition is understood as the reflection of prehistoric concepts rather than labelled according to modern notions of functionality. It is also argued that both dry and wet places are meaningful contexts and that different forms of wet landscapes were conceptualised differently