When Expediency Broaches Ritual Intention: The Flow of Metal Between Systemic and Buried Domains

Abstract

The current interpretation of Bronze Age metalwork deposits relies on an opposition between deposits made ritually and those made with the utilitarian objective of temporary safe keeping. Tied to this distinction were the intentions, respectively, to leave buried in perpetuity, or to retrieve. Contrasts in the character and burial location of hoard deposits are used to support the dichotomous interpretation. The article challenges this bipolar model by showing that hoard characterization often reflects a more complex spectrum and by disputing that the recovery of valuables by depositors would invalidate ritual objectives. Furthermore, in considering the flow of metal through the exchange systems of Bronze Age Europe, it is argued that flexibility of intention at and after deposition would have been an invaluable strategic device, enabling greater control over the local metal stock. To extract the full meaning locked up in these crucial archaeological deposits for the period, their interpretation is better centred on new questions relating to expression, occasion, enactment, and the social conditions triggering recovery.