LATE ROMAN BRITAIN IN TRANSITION, AD 300 - 500 A Ceramic Perspective from East Yorkshire

453 Pages·2008·29.38 MB·English

3.6 Villas, estates and money: Roman Britain in the fourth century...........................128
3.6.1 Fourth century archaeological developments...................................................129
3.6.2 Social change in late Roman Britain................................................................134
3.6.3 Explaining the archaeology of fourth century Roman Britain.........................141
Chapter 4: Late Romano-British ceramic production in context
4.1 Romano-British ceramics: approaches, interpretation and chronology................147
4.1.1 Introduction................................................................................147
4.1.2 The history of Romano-British pottery studies; some legacies.....................147
4.2 Production, use and typology: the classification of Romano-British
ceramics........................................................................................153
4.3 Ceramic production and market economics................................................ 156
4.3.1 Modelling mechanisms: explaining Romano-British ceramic
distributions..................................................................................158
4.3.2 Romano-British ceramic production in the fourth century:
thereceived view..........................................................................170
4.4 Ceramic production and the Romano-British agricultural economy.....................174
4.4.1 Grey-wares and fine-wares: ceramics and estate production.......................175
4.4.2 Coarse-wares: ceramics and tributary social relations...............................181
Chapter 5 : The archaeology of eastern Yorkshire from the first to the fifth centuries
AD
5.1 Introduction....................................................................................191
5.2 Iron Age elites and the Roman impact.....................................................192
5.2.1 Social hierarchy in the later pre-Roman Iron Age....................................192
5.2.2 York, Brough and Malton in the first and second centuries AD....................194
5.2.3 The east Yorkshire countryside in the first and second centuries AD.............197
5.3 Third century developments................................................................199
5
5.3.1 Colonia Eboracensis .199
5.3.2 Brough and Malton from the third century............................................204
5.4 The later third and fourth centuries........................................................205
5.4.1 The east Yorkshire landscape from the later third century...............................205
5.4.2 Malton in the fourth century.............................................................................. 215
5.4.3 York in the fourth century.................................................................................216
5.5 Interpreting the fifth century................................................................218
Chapter 6: Romano-British ceramic production in east Yorkshire
6.1 Pottery production in later pre-Roman Iron Age east Yorkshire.......................225
6.2 Grey- and coarse-ware manufacture: Norton, Holme-on-Spalding-Moor
andLockington; Knapton....................................................................226
6.3 Estate production in the Howardian Hills.................................................234
6.4 Fourth century calcite-gritted ware production and the 'Huntcliff-type' jar..........243
6.4.1 Forms, fabrics and techniques of manufacture.......................................243
6.4.2 Function, organisation and location of production...................................247
6.4.3 Existing schemes of classification..................................................... 257
6.4.3. 1 M.R.Hull's classification.............................................................................257
6.4.3.2 Developments of Hull's classification: form..............................................272
6.4.3.3 Developments of Hull's classification: fabrics..........................................273
6.4.4 A revised classification..................................................................278
Chapter 7: Calcite-gritted ware assemblages in York and east Yorkshire
7.1 Introduction...................................................................................283
7.2 Wellington Row, York.......................................................................285
7.2.1 The site and excavations................................................................285
7.2.2 Structural phases 0 - 8...................................................................287
6
7.3 York Minster .302
7.4 Crossgates, Seamer...........................................................................305
7.5 Elmswell.......................................................................................306
7.6 Ceramic analyses and results................................................................306
7.7 Conclusions...................................................................................340
Chapter 8: The fifth century AD in York and east Yorkshire
8.1 Introduction...............................................................................343
8.2 Ceramic production into the fifth century............................................343
8.3 The social context of fifth century ceramic production in east Yorkshire.......359
8.3.1 Late Roman trajectories........................................................359
8.3.2 Roman into Ang1ian' ...........................................................381
8.4 Britannia and the continental provinces in the fifth century.......................384
Appendices
Appendix1: The walls of Colonia Eboracensis...............................................391
Appendix 2: Calcite-gritted ware classification; procedures and fabric
groups...............................................................................394
Appendix 3: Wellington Row, York, Area 7: descriptions of structural
phases...............................................................................409
Bibliography...........................................................................................................436
7
List of Figures
Fig. 1.1 Late fourth century ceramic supply in southern Britain: sites
(after M.G.Pomel, 1984)................................................................161
Fig. 1.2 Late fourth century ceramic supply in southern Britain:
Oxfordshirered-wares....................................................................................162
Fig. 1.3 Late fourth century ceramic supply in southern Britain:
NeneValley colour-coated wares...................................................................163
Fig. 1.4 Late fourth century ceramic supply in southern Britain:
NewForest colour-coated wares....................................................................164
Fig. 1.5 Late fourth century ceramic supply in southern Britain:
MuchHadham wares......................................................................................165
Fig. 1.6 Late fourth century ceramic supply in southern Britain:
Tilfordwares..................................................................................................166
Fig. 1.7 Late fourth century ceramic supply in southern Britain:
LateRoman shelly ware.................................................................................167
Fig. 1.8 Late fourth century ceramic supply in southern Britain:
LateRoman grog-tempered wares..................................................................168
Fig. 2 Archaeological sites in eastern Yorkshire referred to in the text..................200
Fig. 3.1 Calcite-gritted and related wares : M.R.Hull's form series, Type 24...........259
Fig. 3.2 Calcite-gritted and related wares : M.R.Hull's form series, Type 24,
(cont.)............................................................................................................ 260
Fig. 3.3 Calcite-gritted and related wares: M.R.Hull's form series, Type 26...........261
Fig. 3.4 Calcite-gritted and related wares : M.R.Hull's form series, Type 26,
(cont.)............................................................................................................ 262
Fig. 3.5 Calcite-gritted and related wares : M.R.Hull's form series, Type 27 ..........263
Fig. 3.6 Calcite-gritted and related wares: J. Monaghan's form series, Type JH ....264
Fig. 3.7 Calcite-gritted and related wares : J. Monaghan's form series, Type JH,
(cont.)............................................................................................................ 265
Fig. 3.8 Calcite-gritted and related wares : J. Monaghan's form series, Type JH,
(cont.)............................................................................................................266
Fig. 3.9 Calcite-gritted and related wares : J. Monaghan's form series, Type JH,
(corn'.)............................................................................................................ 267
Fig. 3.10 Calcite-gritted and related wares : J. Monaghan's form series, Type JH,
(corn'.)............................................................................................................ 268
8
Fig. 3.11 Calcite-gritted and related wares : J. Monaghan's form series, Type JH
andJL..........................................................................................................269
Fig. 3.12 Calcite-gritted and related wares : J. Monaghan's form series, Type JS .....270
Fig. 3.13 Calcite-gritted and related wares : 3. Monaghan's form series, Type BK . . .271
Fig. 4 Re-classification of calcite-gritted jar rim-forms......................................282
Fig. 5 Wellington Row, York, Area 7: structural phase 0....................................289
Fig. 6 Wellington Row, York, Area 7: structural phase 00...................................290
Fig. 7 Wellington Row, York, Area 7: structural phases 1 & 2..........................291
Fig. 8 Wellington Row, York, Area 7: structural phase 3..................................292
Fig. 9 Wellington Row, York, Area 7: structural phase 4...................................294
Fig. 10 Wellington Row, York, Area 7: structural phase 5...................................296
Fig. 11 Wellington Row, York, Area 7: structural phase 6...................................297
Fig. 12 Wellington Row, York, Area 7: structural phase 7/8.................................298
Fig. 13 Wellington Row, York, Area 7: structural phases, ceramic
assemblagesand coins..................................................................300
Fig. 14. 1 Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Periods 1 - 3 : percentages of calcite-
gritted, Crambeck, east Yorkshire grey- and Nene Valley colour-
coatedwares (weight).....................................................................................308
Fig.14.2 Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Periods 1 -3 : percentages of calcite-
grittedand all non-calcite-gritted wares (weight)..........................................308
Fig. 15.1 Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Periods 1 - 3 : percentages of calcite-
gritted, Crambeck, east Yorkshire grey- and Nene Valley colour-
coatedwares (EVEs)......................................................................................309
Fig. 15.2 Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Periods 1 - 3 : percentages of calcite-
grittedand all non-calcite-gritted wares (EVEs)............................................309
Fig. 16.1 York Minster, Periods 5 - 6A: percentages of calcite- gritted,
Crambeck, east Yorkshire grey- and Nene Valley colour-coated wares
(weight)...........................................................................................................311
Fig. 16.2 York Minster, Periods 5 - 6A: percentages of calcite- gritted and
allnon-calcite-gritted wares (weight)...........................................................311
Fig. 17.1 York Minster, Periods 5 - 6A: percentages of calcite- gritted,
Crambeck, east Yorkshire grey- and Nene Valley colour-coated wares
(EVEs)............................................................................................................312
9
Fig. 17.2 York Minster, Periods 5 - 6A: percentages of calcite- gritted and
allnon-calcite-gritted wares (EVEs).............................................................312
Fig. 18 Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Periods 1 - 3 : CG Fabric Groups by
inclusions(weight)...........................................................................................314
Fig.19 Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Periods 1 - 3 : CG Fabric Groups by
inclusions (weight), 'weighted' for residuality of INCL 01 / 02 in CP 3.........316
Fig.20 Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Periods 1 - 3 : CG Fabric Groups by
inclusions(EVEs).............................................................................................317
Fig.21 York Minster, Periods 5 - 6A: CG Fabric Groups by inclusions (weight).....319
Fig.22 York Minster, Periods 5 - 6A: CG Fabric Groups by inclusions (EVEs).......320
Fig.23 Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Periods 1 - 3 : CG Fabric Groups by
firingconditions (weight).................................................................................322
Fig.24 Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Periods 1 - 3 : CG Fabric Groups by
firingconditions (EVEs)...................................................................................323
Fig.25 York Minster, Periods 5 - 6A: CG Fabric Groups by firing conditions
(weight).............................................................................................................324
Fig.26 York Minster, Periods 5 - 6A: CG Fabric Groups by firing conditions
(EVEs)..............................................................................................................325
Fig.27 Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Periods 1 - 3 : percentages of jar
rim-forms He3, He4 and He5...........................................................................329
Fig.28 York Minster, Periods 5 - 6A: percentages of jar rim-forms He3, He4
andHe5.............................................................................................................330
Fig.29 Wellington Row and York Minster: rim-forms He3, He4 and He5,
representationin INCL fabric groups...............................................................331
Fig.30 Wellington Row and York Minster: rim-forms He3, He4 and He5,
representationin FC fabric groups...................................................................332
Fig.31 (a-d) Elmswell and Crossgates, Seamer: INCL fabric groups, weight (g) /
EVEs..................................................................................................................334
Fig.32 (a-d) Crossgates, Seamer and Wellington Row Ceramic Period 1: INCL
fabricgroups, weight (g) / EVEs.......................................................................336
Fig.33 (a-d) Wellington Row, York, Ceramic Period 3 : INCL fabric groups by
weight(g) /EVEs..............................................................................................337
10
Fig.34 (a-d) Elmswell and Crossgates, Seamer : FC fabric groups, weight (g) /
EVEs..................................................................................................................338
Fig.35 (a-d) Wellington Row, Ceramic Periods 1 and 3 : FC fabric groups,
weight(g) /EVEs..............................................................................................339
Fig.36 West Heslerton, North Yorkshire: late Romano-British and 'Anglian'
settlement.................................................................................374
List of Tables
Table 1 Comparison of 'early' and 'late' fabrics, by inclusions, as % of calcite-
gritted assemblages from Wellington Row and York Minster....................... 352
Table 2 Comparison of 'early' and 'late' fabrics, by firing conditions, as % of
calcite-gritted assemblages from Wellington Row and York Minster...........353
Table 3 Fabric FC 04 :breakdown of Fabric Group by inclusion................................. 356
Table 4 Fabric weight per 0.01 EVE and per sherd for calcite-gritted ware,
Crambeck grey-ware, east Yorkshire grey-ware and Nene Valley
colour-coated ware, 'normalised' around values for Crambeck grey-ware... .406
11
Preface
This thesis was conceived as a response to a straightforward conviction; that the
fifth century in southern Britain - the part of the island which had previously comprised
the Roman province of Britannia - remains all but impenetrable to archaeological
research. Direct, material evidence for settlement is scarce. Compared to the wealth of
archaeological data deriving from the preceding three-and-a-half centuries, it is
negligible. Consequently, of necessity, interpretations of early post-Roman Britain have
been short on evidence and long on speculation. Whilst attempting to elevate study of
the period from sketchy final chapters of books on 'Roman Britain', recent overviews
have in effect resorted to one of two positions. Either everything stopped in the fifth
century (cf. Esmonde-Cleary 1989) or, in essence, nothing really changed (cf. Dark
1994).
The fundamental problem is one of recognition. Notoriously, distinctive and
chronologically diagnostic artefacts of the period AD 400 - 500 are few and far between
in Britain. Classes of material fundamental to the construction of Romano-British
artefact chronologies, notably coinage and distinctive metalwork, appear absent or, at
best, scarce. Few late Roman ceramic types are acknowledged as having continued in
production from the fourth even into the early fifth century, and still fewer are accepted
as being uniquely diagnostic of the period AD 400 - 500. The systems of classification
which have proved effective in ordering and understanding the substantial, and often
highly standardised material culture of the imperial province cease to be operable in the
ensuing century. Little if any progress has been made, or even systematically attempted,
in adapting or refining them in an attempt to bring it into sharper focus. The absence of
widely applicable artefact chronologies is compounded by the difficulties of radiometric
dating in this period; complications in the C14 calibration curve, the seeming lack of
late Roman timber suitable for dendrochronological determination. In consequence,
assemblages of the materials which furnish so much of archaeology's potential to
explore the past, notably animal bones and palaeoenvironmental evidence, can rarely be
attributed to the period with any confidence. Most of the 'generic' research questions
typically pursued through archaeology are compromised in this period by a simple lack
of data.
12
This absence of evidence has come to be accepted as the leitmotif of the fifth
century - its defining characteristic. Most recent commentaries, including at least one
major work of synthesis, have seen fit to accept the paucity of material at face value,
treating it as a representative picture of life as it was lived in the fifth century
(Esmonde-Cleary 1989, 143). But the argument is not persuasive. The explanations
offered for the apparent disappearance of the artefact types which are the stock-in-trade
of Romano-British archaeology lack coherence and conviction. Furthermore, it should
be noted that the fifth century seems to be materially impoverished not merely when
compared with the prodigious material output (by insular standards, at least) of the first
to fourth centuries AD. It compares unfavourably in this respect with the pre-Roman
Iron Age, the Bronze Age, the Neolithic, and even the dispersed hunter-gatherer
communities of the Mesolithic. The very completeness and synchroneity of such an
apparent collapse in production ought to arouse suspicion. Its acceptance as a genuine
historical phenomenon, and the explanations offered to account for it, are in fact
predicated on a particular characterisation of the nature of Roman society and culture,
and of why and how their material expression had been adopted and perpetuated in
Britain over the preceding three-and-a-half centuries.
This thesis examines a specific body of material - assemblages of coarse, hand-
made pottery - from sites in what is now eastern Yorkshire. The calcite-gritted and
related wares which comprise these assemblages are known to have been in production
in the second half of the fourth century, and it is currently accepted as possible that this
may have continued into the first or second decade of the fifth (one researcher going so
far as to extend their possible date range until "AD ?450"; Monaghan 1997). The
research detailed here attempts to identify and quantify variability in form, fabric and
characteristics of manufacture and decoration, and to investigate the possibility that
aspects of this variability may be time-dependent. Chronological control is provided by
the well-stratified, coin-bearing deposits from the site at Wellington Row, York, and the
composition of coarse ceramic assemblages from such sites compared with other
settlements in eastern Yorkshire. The intention is to demonstrate that sub-sets of the late
Roman coarse-ware corpus in this region may be attributable to the middle and possibly
later decades of the fifth century, thus providing the means for the identification of
contemporary settlement.
13
The research was undertaken in the belief that the apparent lack of fifth century
material culture reflects twentieth century archaeology, and the assumptions of its
practitioners, more than it does fifth century reality. Some of these assumptions -
amongst them those which have long provided the basic framework for the
interpretation of Roman Britain - can be traced back to the intellectual and political
conditions of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. A lack of sustained,
critical historiographic study has allowed them to take firm root and determine the
essential elements of an orthodoxy drawn directly from liberal political economy. This
is not to say that nothing has changed. The seventy years separating Francis
Haverfield's The Romanisation of Roman Britain from Martin Milletts The
Romanization of Britain have witnessed not only an exponential increase in the data
available to those researching the province, and of the resources devoted to retrieving it,
but the gradual development of a more rigorous, systematic and critical approach to
interpretative constructs and their application. Millett's Romanization specifically aimed
to ground the archaeological study of the province in such 'new' thinking, and in the ten
years since its publication a range of post-processualist critiques have called the
traditional verités of the subject still further into question. Nevertheless, at two crucial
levels - the 'meta-narrative' of Romano-British archaeology (typically rejected by post-
processualist studies as a valid interpretative construct, and consequently remaining
intact by default), and the 'grassroots' classification and interpretation of material
culture (often dismissed as 'order-for-the-sake-of-it' but invariably, inevitably,
continuing to be deployed), the assumptions of the social and intellectual context in
which Romano-British archaeology was nurtured endure in contemporary
interpretations. This is at least in part responsib]e for the shortcomings and
inconsistencies of our current understanding.
The fifth century picture is further complicated, and interpretation has been
profoundly influenced, by the purported ethnicity of material culture in immediately
post-Roman Britain. 'Roman' and 'Anglo-Saxon' material cultures are held to be
distinct, immutable entities, created and employed in direct and deliberate opposition to
one another. Although this study takes as its starting point a class of object which
unarguably originates in fourth century - 'late Roman' - Britain, and attempts the
14