Walking along any British high street, you’re likely to spot individuals donning earrings that draw inspiration from Bronze Age designs, often oblivious to their historical roots. These originals, crafted during the late Bronze Age (1000-600 BC), have been identified by various names such as hair rings, penannular rings, and ring money. With exquisite workmanship involving casting, forging, and twisting, these artifacts were primarily made from gold, occasionally incorporating white and yellow gold. The perennial debate among archaeologists revolves around whether they served as a form of currency, commonly referred to as “ring money.” In this article, Chris Rudd explores intriguing perspectives and draws parallels from Africa.
The ambiguity surrounding the purpose of gold ring money from the Late Bronze Age (c.1100-600 BC) persists. Was it primarily intended as jewelry, or did it function as a form of currency? Scholars remain divided, and the 1996 Treasure Act has added complexity to the issue. Gillian Varndell of the British Museum highlighted the challenges in defining these artifacts under the new act, emphasizing the need for clarity on the term “coin.”
The debate hinges on the definition of “money.” If confined to “coins,” ring money doesn’t fit the bill. However, if considering money as a “means of exchange” or a “method of payment,” the case for Bronze Age penannular rings as prehistoric money gains traction. Esteemed numismatists from the British Museum advocate for this broader interpretation of money.
In “Money, from Cowrie Shells to Credit Cards,” Joe Cribb suggests that money encompasses anything facilitating transactions. Ancient Egyptian depictions of gold rings being weighed hint at the possibility of these items serving as money during the British Bronze Age. Similarly, Nubians offering gold rings as tribute in another Egyptian tomb painting further supports the idea of gold rings as a form of payment.
Contrary views among archaeologists persist, with some viewing Bronze Age gold rings as prestige ornaments rather than primitive currency. Dr. Stuart Needham disputes the label “ring money,” while others, like Dr. Paul Robinson, argue that the consistent size, shape, and design of these rings suggest their potential use as a primitive currency.
Seeking analogies from Africa, where ring money was used for over 700 years, sheds light on the debate. Illustrations of African ring money bear striking resemblance to Bronze Age rings from Western Europe. The similarities, coupled with the monetary usage of these artifacts in Africa until 1948, provide a compelling parallel.
In conclusion, the role of Bronze Age penannular rings is likely multifaceted, serving as personal adornments, symbols, and possibly as a form of prehistoric money. The extensive historical usage of ring money in Africa offers a compelling argument in favor of their monetary function in Bronze Age Britain. The ongoing debate reflects the complex nature of understanding ancient artifacts and their varied purposes.