The Archaeology of Britain: An introduction from ... - waughfamily.ca
The Archaeology of Britain: An introduction from ... - waughfamily.ca
The Archaeology of Britain: An introduction from ... - waughfamily.ca
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Roman <strong>Britain</strong>: civil and rural society<br />
• 159 •<br />
and Mattingly 1990). This stemmed <strong>from</strong> two largely unstated preoccupations. <strong>The</strong> first was that<br />
it was in the south and east that the Britons were visibly Romanized. Thus in the south and east<br />
it was possible to study the assimilation <strong>of</strong> the native population to a ‘higher’, Mediterraneanderived<br />
civilization. <strong>The</strong> second was that in the north and west, the same focus on the study <strong>of</strong><br />
Roman-style monuments and material meant an almost exclusive concentration on military<br />
archaeology (Chapter 8), which also fitted into the separate sub-discipline <strong>of</strong> the study <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Roman army on an Empire-wide basis (Figure 9.1). This led to a neglect <strong>of</strong> the archaeology <strong>of</strong><br />
the civil population, which exhibited little or no sign <strong>of</strong> Romanization, and whose <strong>of</strong>ten<br />
insubstantial remains made for difficult, sometimes dull, digging.<br />
APPROACHES TO THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD<br />
Overview<br />
As a result <strong>of</strong> those factors outlined above, the study <strong>of</strong> the civil population long concentrated<br />
on those site-, monument- and artefact-types that were archaeologi<strong>ca</strong>lly highly visible and attested<br />
to the influence <strong>of</strong> Rome on her most north-westerly province. Foremost amongst these were<br />
the towns, acknowledged hallmark <strong>of</strong> Graeco-Roman civilization. <strong>The</strong> effect <strong>of</strong> Rome on the<br />
countryside was seen in the spread <strong>of</strong> villas, the quasi-Roman residences <strong>of</strong> those with the means<br />
and the wish to define themselves as part <strong>of</strong> the new imperial order. Whereas town-dwellers and<br />
villa-owners <strong>ca</strong>n have formed only a tiny, if influential, fraction <strong>of</strong> the total population, the<br />
evidence <strong>of</strong> temples and shrines might stand for the more intangible but hugely important sphere<br />
<strong>of</strong> the impact <strong>of</strong> Rome on the realms <strong>of</strong> thought and belief <strong>of</strong> a wider spectrum <strong>of</strong> the populace.<br />
So also might the sculpture, mosaics and wall-paintings found in towns, villas and temples, where<br />
‘Roman’ and ‘native’ elements might be disentangled, incidentally throwing light back onto the<br />
intractable problems <strong>of</strong> Iron Age religion (Henig 1984; 1995). Burial, though, so vital a source <strong>of</strong><br />
information on demography, social structure and religious practice in so many periods <strong>of</strong> British<br />
archaeology, has until very recently been almost totally neglected by students <strong>of</strong> Roman <strong>Britain</strong>,<br />
though thousands <strong>of</strong> burials are known (almost all <strong>from</strong> the south and east) (Philpott 1991).<br />
<strong>The</strong> Roman period in <strong>Britain</strong> is also (in) famous for the huge numbers <strong>of</strong> artefacts that entered<br />
the archaeologi<strong>ca</strong>l record; their technologi<strong>ca</strong>l competence means that the inorganic ones persist<br />
in quantity (de la Bédoyère 1988). By far the commonest is pottery, traditionally much used as<br />
evidence for dating, but also available for analysis <strong>of</strong>, for instance, trade or exchange, site function,<br />
and the changing consumption <strong>of</strong> food and drink. Coins have also obviously been much exploited<br />
for their dating potential, but more recent studies have shown their usefulness for inter-site<br />
comparisons (Reece 1987). Other classes <strong>of</strong> artefact such as glass, metalwork and organic materials<br />
all have their own protocols <strong>of</strong> study.<br />
Developments since 1945<br />
<strong>The</strong> study <strong>of</strong> Roman <strong>Britain</strong> since the Second World War has been affected by many <strong>of</strong> the wider<br />
developments in archaeologi<strong>ca</strong>l method and thought, though <strong>of</strong>ten less radi<strong>ca</strong>lly than for other<br />
periods. <strong>The</strong> appli<strong>ca</strong>tion <strong>of</strong> techniques derived <strong>from</strong> the physi<strong>ca</strong>l and chemi<strong>ca</strong>l sciences has<br />
contributed relatively little to our understanding <strong>of</strong> the period. For instance, radio<strong>ca</strong>rbon dating<br />
has been little used, since on the whole the dating derived <strong>from</strong> histori<strong>ca</strong>lly datable artefacts<br />
provides a cheaper and more secure framework. As has also been noted in regard to military<br />
installations (Chapter 8), dendrochronology <strong>ca</strong>n be even more precise and certain than artefacts,<br />
and is beginning to have an appreciable impact on the dating <strong>of</strong> sites with suitable conditions <strong>of</strong><br />
preservation, such as within London. <strong>An</strong>other technique that has proved valuable is ceramic