Study Group for Roman Pottery

National Research Framework: East Midlands & East Anglia

Regional Research Priorities

search tips   advanced search 
site search by freefind


Edited by T.S. Martin & C.R. Wallace on behalf of The Study Group for Roman Pottery, East Midlands & Anglia Regional Group October 1997; selectively revised 2002


3.1 Ensuring that the Highest Quality of Pottery Analysis is Achieved.

3.1.1 Aims for the future. It is recognized that pottery research should be closely tied to larger themes in the examination of the Roman period (cf. Section 2.1).

3.1.2 The basis of Research. The basis of research in the field of pottery studies must remain:/p>

(i) the (preferably swift) production of accurate published pottery reports written or closely supervised by competent and experienced persons employing up to date methodologies and reference material.

(ii) the production of regional monographs or articles, of the type that all pot workers use (eg. Young's (1977) volume on Oxfordshire wares). The bases for these are often the above reports and the publication of kiln sites (cf. Section 3.4).

3.2 The Potential of Museum and other Existing Collections

3.2.1 A National Catalogue of Roman Pottery Collections. A project to identify collections of Roman pottery in museums, units, private collections, etc. is considered highly desirable. This would be a big task; bigger, for instance, than with later Prehistoric collections. However, its creation is a logical, efficient, step, for at present there is no existing catalogue of the incidence of collections in England.

Many research projects depend in the first place on the assessment of the potential, availability and quantities of ceramics, and very little information is currently available regarding what is in museums or other collections. Much information on the incidence of assemblages could be brought together using existing catalogues: The National Monuments Record's Excavation Index gives the location of the finds from many sites and county-by-county catalogues can be accessed; similarly the annotated Bibliography to the Study Group for Roman Pottery's own Journal contains a wealth of useful data of this sort - from publications. (A similar project has already taken place in the East Midlands relating to Anglo-Saxon pottery and a national survey for collections of prehistoric pottery sponsored by English Heritage has recently been undertaken).

An assessment of collections would effectively highlight unstudied and unpublished sites, and provide data regarding their potential. This might result in a 'target list' of significant unstudied collections worthy of publication. Assessment of the collections could beneficially include recording basic information upon them for computerization (as with the current Later Prehistoric Pottery Survey). This would constitute valuable qualitative information and would be suitable for graphical plotting using GIS; plots of the incidence of material by date, approximate size, condition, etc. would be possible.

3.2.2 The Potential of Existing Collections - The Catuvellauni. Recent work on the Baldock sites has highlighted the need to re-assess and publish fully the pre-war material excavated by Westell in Letchworth Museum. Important sites like Godmanchester, Odell and Cambridge are all in museum, unit or HBMCE stores.

3.2.3 The Potential of Existing Collections - The Corieltauvi. Important collections include: antiquarian material in Peterborough Museum; Fenland Survey archives, including recorded fabric and form data; extensive pottery archives in The Jewry Wall Museum, Leicester, from both city sites (unlikely to be published in the near future) and large collections of field-walked material from Leicestershire; Lincoln; and Rutland County Museum's collection of Great Casterton material (this site is represented in several East Midlands museums and a single catalogue is highly desirable).

3.2.4 The Potential of Existing Collections - The Iceni. Notes on collections in Norwich Castle, Kings Lynn and the Fitzwilliam Museum (Cambridge) made by M. Darling and T. Gregory in the late 1970s/early 1980’s exist but need updating; J. Plouviez has made extensive notes on kiln groups in Ipswich Borough.

3.2.5 The Potential of Existing Collections - The Trinovantes. There is high potential in Essex for ceramic syntheses (cf. Fulford and Huddleston 1991, 34). While rescue-funded work has resulted in sufficient information upon which to base such work in central Essex, there are several less well known areas where current threats are low or where useful material languishes in museum stores (eg. south Essex).

The Great Chesterford and modern Harlow areas have seen much excavation of stratified Roman sequences but little publication. Material in Harlow and Saffron Walden Museums could provide, as Chelmsford (cf. Going 1987) has done, an opportunity to develop a synthesising approach to the pottery of the surrounding region. Saffron Walden Museum holds many valuable records of excavations undertaken in the 19th century.

Turning to cemeteries, the potential of the collections in Colchester & Essex Museum of early-mid Roman burial groups from the town should not be ignored. The nature of the surviving finds and documentation for Great Chesterford requires assessment. A synthesis of Chelmsford's cemeteries has been undertaken by Wickenden, but this work remains to be published. Publication of the burials from Mucking is anticipated.

3.3 Specialist Wares

As is widely recognized it is essential that reports on specialist wares (eg. Samian, amphorae, mortaria, other fines) are well integrated with pottery reports and that this includes quantification. Persons co-ordinating pottery reports share responsibility with specialists to achieve these ends. Presentation of data in tabular form may assist and should be encouraged. Viewing existing reports it may be that much valuable site information was overlooked because specialist wares were treated differently to other pottery. There is a pressing need for common standards in reporting (cf. 1.2, above; see now Willis 1997b).

3.4 Kiln Groups and Production Sites: Research & Publication Priorities

3.4.1 General Comments. The basis for understanding production sites per se is Swan (1984). As elsewhere in Roman Britain there were, within this region, a range of such industries, from those of national importance to very minor ones. A number of these can be highlighted as requiring work at several different levels.

Generally within the East Midlands and East Anglia the lack of good excavated and published kiln groups is considered a major problem. The often large collections from kilns need special allocation of time and resources to process the material and will normally require extensive illustration. The value of using kiln wasters for extrapolating the true range of products from kilns and matching them with the material found on consumer sites has long been appreciated. Several kiln groups within the region urgently require funding.

As in the past, kilns are often explored by local amateur groups and individuals (eg. the Nar Valley industry, 3.4.4 below). These projects clearly need special support to see them through to publication. The potential importance of pottery collections from the northern frontier, for enhancing understanding of the chronology and distribution of the wares of the various East Anglian and East Midlands industries, needs to be borne in mind (as indeed does the contribution of the latter towards understanding the former). A full account of the Mancetter-Hartshill industry (a publication priority for the West Midlands (see Booth & Willis 1997)), is signalled here as important for the East Midlands too.3.4.2 The Catuvellauni.

(i) The Nene Valley: There are many known kiln sites in the Upper Nene region, the bulk of which seem to date from the mid first century and to last at least into the second; regional exports include mortaria. Although sites like Biddlesden, Ecton, Hardingstone and Weston Favell have been published detailed knowledge of their form types and fabrics is lacking. Extensive kiln fields are known to exist in other areas of the Upper Nene such as Cogenhoe, Brafield, Denton and Great Houghton. Kiln bars are often found on first and second century sites during fieldwalking in other nearby parishes, none of which have been excavated. Concerted research, evaluation and publication is warranted.

Potentially the most important kiln site in the Upper Nene, especially for the late Iron Age-early Roman transition, is Rushden which has only been selectively published to date. It may be a key site for the study of the Iron Age-Roman transition and a modern illustrated corpus is required. Any future development around the area of the excavated kilns should be closely monitored.

The following excavated Lower Nene Valley kiln groups warrant publication: Water Newton, Stibbington (cf. 2.3.1, above), Chesterton and Sibson.

(ii) Cambridgeshire: While the pottery from the major kiln sites at Horningsea and Cherry Hinton, excavated earlier in the century, has recently been republished (Evans 1990; 1991), this kiln material is unlikely to reflect the full range of ceramics from those sources. Certainly, Horningsea/Horningsea-type fabrics occur in a much wider range of forms in excavated assemblages and more recent excavations at the site itself are still unpublished. Recent excavations at Foxden produced huge quantities of fine local 'Gallo-Belgic' wares which resemble Cherry Hinton fabrics and so whether Cherry Hinton could have been a major producer of Gallo-Belgic-influenced wares akin to Rushden needs to examined. Wasters from Jesus Lane, Cambridge have suggested a kiln site just outside the Roman small town; the pottery assemblages from sites excavated in Cambridge since the 1950s, if published (see 3.6.1, below) will probably shed light on this.

(iii) Buckinghamshire: The Fulmer/Hedgerley kilns are partly published but would repay fuller assessment.

(iv) Other kiln groups: It would be useful, subsequent to the recent publication of the Harrold kilns (Bedfordshire), to complement this by the publishing of the Bozeat kilns (material from which is housed in Northampton Museum), which also produced shelly ware. There is much useful material in R. Friendship-Taylor's thesis (see 3.9 below), regarding production sites and distribution in the Northamptonshire region and it is important that this evidence this supported to publication.

3.4.3 The Corieltauvi. The priority kiln groups requiring attention are as follows:

(i) Swanpool (including St Helen's cemetery).

(ii) Lea.

(iii) the Knaith and Bourne kilns (cf. 3.7.2, below).

(iv) Derbyshire. None of the Derbyshire Ware industry’s kilns have been excavated under modern conditions and while most of the kilns have been published the reports vary in quality. These kilns are of a type that is unique in Britain and a programme of fieldwork will almost certainly provide valuable new information (cf. 3.7.2, below).

(v) Rossington Bridge. Publication of the kiln group at Rossington Bridge (South Yorkshire) and the fabric characterisation and quantification of the stratified pottery from Doncaster is fundamental to our understanding of the chronology and inter-relation of sites in the north Nottinghamshire/South Yorkshire area.

(vi) Water Newton Area 5.

(vii) Northamptonshire: Bozeat (mid 1st C.); Ecton (2nd-early 3rd C.); Grendon (mid 1st C.); Quinton Great Holt Field (mid late 1st C.); Rushden/Irchester phase Cii (pre-Conquest); Stibbington, B. Hartley's 1957 excavation; Wellingborough Hardwich Park (late 1st-early 2nd C.); Wellingborough Queensway (mid-late 1st C.); Weekley Quarry Kilns 5 & 6 (AD 45-80).

(viii) Leicester and Leicestershire sites: Publication of Great Holme St (Leicester) and Ravenstone (Leicestershire) kilns may be carried out by Leicestershire Museums (the archives of products are accessible and both come from controlled excavations). Study of the Leicester Forest rural nucleated industry is required, this being mostly known from fieldwalking and old excavations. A project could take on the study and re-publication of east Leicestershire/Rutland and south-west Lincolnshire sites, which may represent another rural nucleation (eg. Market Overton, Greetham, Bourne, Colsterworth) as a sub-regional study. (ix) North Lincolnshire. The material from the Caistor/Walesby/Claxby/Market Rasen kiln concentration (including the production of Parisian Ware) could be usefully employed in combined study of pottery production and distribution in northern Lincolnshire.

3.4.4 The Iceni. Suffolk and Norfolk have conspicuously few published kiln groups. At a national level the publication of the products of the Waveney Valley industry (including the production sites along its tributaries) is a priority. These products occur in a distinctive fabric and are known to reach Northern Britain from the Flavian period onwards. Study and publication should include Wattisfield, Rickingham, Pakenham (grey wares), Icklingham, Market Weston, Hinderclay and Botesdale. The Pakenham site is important both for fine ware kilns and good stratified domestic groups.

Brampton is particularly important as it is a major industry, with its products of regional significance, and probably supplied to the northern frontier. In addition its output included specialist forms, eg. mortaria and flagons.Other kiln publication priorities comprise the following: the Nar Valley kilns (especially Pentney and Shouldham); Morley St Peter (Norfolk); Lakenheath (the fabric from which, when compared with that of Harrold, could contribute to the suggested programme of work on shell-gritted pottery, 3.7.3 below); the Hevingham industry (which produced stamped mortaria and is of regional significance); and Nayland with Wissington (Suffolk).

3.4.5 The Trinovantes. Publication for the Much Hadham industry is a first order priority. The long awaited corpus is much needed as this major late regional tradition lacks any significant publication, with no form series and no study of its distribution beyond Pomel's unpublished M.Phil. thesis (1984; cf. 3.9, below). Publication awaits funding for the completion of writing-up the kiln excavations.

Essex kilns include centres producing BB2/BB2 allied products, and these are of national significance with their distribution including the northern frontier. At present the sources of many of the BB2 allied wares found in the North are unknown and so more work (aimed at publication) on the many known but inadequately published kilns of southern Essex is highly desirable (cf. 2.5.3 above). The northern material has of course potential for assisting in the dating of these industries (cf. Evans and Willis 1997). Relevant sites include Billericay Buckenham's Field and the Mucking kilns, of early and late Roman date, which have only ever received preliminary publication. At present Orsett is on course of publication. In the north-east London region, A. Thompson is working on the Elm Park 'kiln', which made grey-wares similar to those from Mucking kilns. It would be worth carrying out new fieldwork in the area of this chance find.

Other sites include: the early kilns 34 and 35 at Colchester Sheepen by-pass, 1960); the late Roman kilns at Halstead in north-east Essex, known only through an unpublished dissertation of 1980, and Coddenham (Suffolk), the output of which included mortaria and hence as a specialist site it is of particular importance.

Patterns of local wares, discerned after the sort of work discussed in sections 3.6 and 3.8 (below), might indicate possible kiln sources worth following up.

3.5 Early Military Sites: Research and Publication Priorities

Many conquest period military sites lie within the East Midlands / East Anglia region.

With one or two exceptions (eg. Dannell & Wild 1987), however, the amount of published material from the region's early military installations (and especially forts) is surprisingly limited and constitutes a striking gap in our knowledge; in particular quantitative information is lacking. Part of the problem has been the limited number and scale of excavations.

New samples recovered using modern techniques are desirable, though in the circumstances publication of available collections is warranted even where the Museum material represents largely unstratified finds, as in the case of the fort site at Broxtowe (Nottingham) and Fingringhoe Wick (Essex), a Claudian fort and possible supply base. Pottery associated with the early military phases at Ancaster (Lincolnshire) and Thorpe (Notts) should also be supported to publication. There is excellent potential here for a discrete 12-18 month regional project reviewing the extant collections and bringing unpublished material into print. This may also usefully include a fresh analysis of the modest sized groups from sites such as High Cross and Great Casterton. Darling's seminal study of equivalent material from the west of Britain (Darling 1977) would form a good model for such an undertaking.

Publication of the pottery from the Claudian fortress at Colchester (Symonds & Wade forthcoming) is anticipated. This volume will be a major contribution of national and international significance, especially as virtually no specifically military groups are published for Colchester, with the exception of the contemporary horizons from the Sheepen complex to the west of the fortress (Niblett 1985). More information is available for the military pottery from Lincoln (eg. Webster 1949; Darling 1981; 1984) although there has been much less area excavation here. The planned publication of further material, such as that from East Bight 1980-1, should be supported.

3.6 Consumer Sites

3.6.1 The Catuvellauni. Major unpublished sites, or ones where re-assessment is desirable:

(i) Towcester: It would be useful to extend the forms chronology published in the Towcester suburbs report, to cover the first and second century ceramics within the town, thus completing an overall survey for at least one Roman town in Northamptonshire. Late Iron Age pottery from Towcester should also be published.

Material currently held at a number of locations needs to be brought together in order to achieve this.

(ii) Wood Burcote, near Towcester: this important group of pottery should be considered when studying pottery from south-west Northamptonshire.

(iii) Ashton, Northamptonshire: this site could proceed to publication

(iv) Irchester: it is felt that we need to know more about the ceramic material from this site.

(v) Rainsborough hillfort, Northamptonshire: Examination of material in The Ashmolean by C. Woodfield suggests the hillfort may have been re-occupied at the time of the Roman invasion, with further evidence of activity in the Roman era.

(vi) Borough Hill, Northamptonshire.

(vii) Cambridge: The vast quantity of pottery from sites excavated in Cambridge between the 1950s and early 1980s (especially the Shire Hall excavations) is moving towards publication; this will surely provide an invaluable collection for the region.

(viii) Sandy: A MAP2 assessment report has been submitted.

(ix) Godmanchester, Rectory Farm: work in progress should be supported to publication.

(x) Chells Manor, Hertfordshire: A report is in final draft.

3.6.2 The Corieltauvi. Suggested research projects and priorities:

(i) The study of Rutland and adjacent production sites could be related to a study of consumer sites in the vicinity, taking advantage of recent English Heritage projects on Empingham and Thistleton, the Whitwell archive, and Leicestershire Museums’ archives (and others) on sites on the Anglian Water and Petrofina pipelines. This would tie in with the study of Lower Nene Valley patterns of supply.

(ii) An inter-regional study of the ceramics from the 'small towns' and roadside settlements along Watling Street (and other roads) could result in valuable insights into assemblages from Wall, Rocester to Bannaventa and beyond. Such a project could involve regression study with regard to Upper Nene Valley, 'Pink Grogged', Mancetter-Hartshill and other wares produced outside the region.

(iii) In Derbyshire so few groups are published to modern standards that assemblages from all types of non-military sites excavated under modern conditions should provide significant new information, as would the publication of museum collections from old fieldwalking and stratified sites rich in material remains such as Brough-on-Noe fort. Very few sites are adequately published and little is known of the distribution of Derby Racecourse products or Derbyshire Ware and associated coarse wares (cf. 2.3.2, above).

3.6.3 The Trinovantes. Suggested research projects and priorities:

(i) East Coast Trade. The finds from sites such as that at Leigh Beck on Canvey Island, might be best studied as part of a wider look at aspects of east coast connections. It appears that many coastal sites, of widely differing appearance/status, have similar pottery supply patterns and produce examples of wares not commonly found on inland sites. This area would appear to hold interesting research potential.

(ii) The Trinovantian area, and its pottery assemblages, has good potential for investigating some major themes in Romano-British studies such as Romanization, and the investigation of whether tribal/civitas identity can be discerned in pottery groups (eg. by comparison with material from the Icenian civitas).

(iii) The 1973 Coddenham (Suffolk) excavations. This site includes late Iron Age and early Roman evidence, a military presence and develops as a 'small town'. This site is potentially comparable to Elms Farm (Essex) and Kelvedon (Essex).

(iv) On the apparent western edge of the Trinovantian civitas sampled rural sites (some single-period or with distinct areas for different phases) should be supported to publication. These sites have often been extensively excavated over a large area, presenting opportunities to study the pottery in spatial terms.

(v) Publication of the following sites is considered highly desirable: Moor Hall, Rainham; Great Sunnings Farm; Manor Farm; Hunts Hill Farm; Uphall Camp; and Havering Park.

The finds from these sites seem to relate better to Mucking and to both sides of the lower Thames rather than to west of the river Lea. From analysis and publication we would gain a better idea of the pottery assemblages found in north-east London/Thameside Essex and would have a good basic corpus to aid future work. Some earlier material, if reassessed (eg. Corbets Tey & South Ockendon) would be helpful, as would the West Essex Archaeological Group sites in the Chigwell-Abridge area.

3.7 Regional Ceramic Traditions: Wares

3.7.1 The Catuvellauni. Potential research projects and priorities:

(i) Practitioners and Units working in this area generally require access to better regional form and fabric series.

(ii) Comments below on the need for a study of shell-gritted wares(3.7.2) can be echoed here, as they are a strong regional tradition in Catuvellaunian territory.

(iii) No single overall treatment of the major early Roman regional tradition, Verulamium Region Ware, exists. Although the recent corpus for early London (Davies et al. 1994) is extremely useful vis-à-vis VRW a monograph on the industry is desirable especially as very similar gritty wares from Northamptonshire can be difficult to separate. (Research on the end of the VRW industry needs publication).

(iv) Godmanchester is a key site for understanding these similar Northamptonshire products and R. Perrin is working on this tradition.

3.7.2 The Corieltauvi. Potential research projects and priorities:

(i) A primary need for the East Midlands is the study of shell- and calcite-tempered wares, both those made in the region (eg. at Greetham, Rutland, and Bourne, in Lincolnshire) and those traded in from outside. This would have to be multi-period in order to comprehend continuity of production from the pre-Roman to the Roman period. There is a need to establish whether there are single or multiple sources for these wares. Several sites in south Lincolnshire (of Iron Age and Roman date), including the Bourne Grammar School kiln material, have already had some thin-section analysis, thus forming a basis for this project. Work has also been undertaken on post-Roman wares as a British Academy project with visual separation of fabrics supplemented by thin-section work and chemical analysis, producing significant results.

Products from other known kiln sites require similar and/or chemical analysis. A specific project on Dales Ware is also desirable.

(ii) The characterisation of "Trent Valley" ware and related fabrics following Iron Age tradition and the revision of their dating is basic to our understanding of first century settlement patterns in south Nottinghamshire. Such work should elucidate the nature of ceramic production and distribution.

(iii) The Nene Valley: Dissemination of information on fabrics, particularly variant fabrics, for the main industries at Mancetter/Hartshill and the Lower Nene Valley is needed to ensure that they are clearly differentiated as well as establishing any relationship between the two.

The origins of the Lower Nene Valley grey ware tradition needs to be established primarily through a survey and publication of kiln material from Lincolnshire and Northamptonshire. There should be a proper survey of patterns of supply of Lower Nene Valley products looking at the evidently differing distributions for the grey wares, colour coated wares and themortaria. Although there have been recent publications of some of the kilns operating in the Lower Nene Valley there is no standard typology for the production centre as a whole though this is imperative if such a survey is to be carried out.

A comprehensive analytical study of D.N. Hall’s field-walked assemblages from Northamptonshire by J. Taylor (1996) has revealed marked patterns in the distribution of Nene Valley (as well as other) products throughout the county. This evidence should be supported to publication (pointing the way for the study of the rich sample of site groups from both the county and region). Analysis of the field-walked material from the Fenland project forms a obvious group for similar syntheses.

N. Cooper's detailed study of the Lower Nene Valley industry (Ph.D. thesis in prep., University of Leicester) should form a highly useful contribution when available.

(iv) Rough-cast wares: Analysis of the South Carlton kiln rough-cast wares is in progress at Bradford University, however, other production sites require characterisation; these include Brough-on-Humber, Great Casterton, Stanwick (Northamptonshire), and Oxfordshire products.

(v) Rusticated Wares: The concentration of vessels of this type in the East Midlands would benefit from characterisation studies, and a better definition of its relationship with such wares in the West Midlands.

(vi) Mortaria: South Carlton and Lincoln Technical College kiln mortaria are already the subject of a British Academy-funded project of fabric analysis with Bradford University. Work by P. Rush on Castleford has resulted in the collection of data on mortaria from the area, and a research archive at Bradford which should be integrated into any future work. Work on the mortaria would also provide useful information relating to the generalised 'cream-ware' vessels, such as flagons etc., often made in association with mortaria.(vii) Derbyshire Ware: This ware was produced alongside a range of other fabrics (cf. Brassington & Webster 1988). Although most of the excavated kilns of this industry are published, none of the pottery recovered has been scrutinised using quantitative methods and there seems little prospect of this happening as very little of the excavated material appears to have found its way into museum collections. This lacuna needs to be redressed by further fieldwork when possible and a new study of distribution (cf. 2.3.2 & 3.6.2, above).

(viii) Derby Racecourse Ware: This was the main supplier of coarse wares to Little Chester from the late Flavian period to c.120/140 A.D. There is a need to know how widely these wares were distributed and to compare the Strutt’s Park and Derby Racecourse sites to clarify the date of the kilns and the origins of pottery production at Derby. Moreover, we need to take a fresh look at the relationship between this and the Derbyshire ware industry.

(ix) Fabric characterization of Derbyshire Ware and Derby Racecourse products. Although preliminary characterisation of these wares was conducted by D.F. Williams as part of the Derby Little Chester publication, further work could usefully be done on new related fabrics used to make Derbyshire Ware forms (eg. M. Brassington’s so-called "Pre- Derbyshire" Ware and a new Derbyshire ware fabric present at Royston Grange). Related wares made at Rossington Bridge and Mancetter-Hartshill, could be included in such a project.

3.7.3 The Iceni. Potential research projects and priorities:

(i) Analysis and publication of three key industries is required: Brampton (Norfolk), the Nar Valley (Norfolk) and the Wattisfield area (Suffolk). Good kiln groups exist for these industries (Brampton and Nar Valley in private collections and the Wattisfield area in Ipswich Museum). Preliminary work has been carried out on them. Fabric reference collections are needed at each working unit within the region. The Nar Valley has potential for an integrated project in that it was part of a substantial rural industrial complex which included iron-working and salt extraction.

(ii) Grey ware mortaria. Sufficient material exists to examine how these East Anglian products relate to white mortaria and other local industries.

(iii) A Lower Nene Valley industry corpus is required (cf. 3.7.2, above).

(iv) Late shell-gritted wares. Can we identify sources (cf. 3.7.2, above)? What are the inter-relationships with tile production and distribution and iron-working, as suggested by Charge (1995) at West Wickham, Cambridgeshire.

3.7.4 The Trinovantes. Potential research projects and priorities:

(i) Hadham Ware. Sites along the course of the A120 in north-west Essex represent an opportunity for using the linear pattern of sites on major road projects to study the distribution of particular wares. In this case products of the Hadham kilns can be expected to comprise much of the pottery.

Coupled with evidence from other recent work in the region, including sites (like Chelmsford) away from the line of the A120/Stane Street, we may be able to use pottery data from this project to study the distribution-pattern of Hadham products in relation to the different models of production and distribution outlined by Hodder in the 1970s.

Another topic could be the testing of Pomel’s definition (1984; 3.9, below) of a Hadham 'zone', that is a core territory for its products with boundaries beyond which there is a definite fall-off in amounts of the ware found.

(ii) Sudy of the shell-gritted fabrics, especially early wares, on both sides of the lower Thames should be conducted and will be facilitated by the publication of early Roman corpus for London (Davies et al. 1994).

3.8 Regional Ceramic Traditions: Vessel Styles

3.8.1 The Catuvellauni. Potential research projects and priorities:

(i) R. Friendship-Taylor's research (cf. 3.9 below) has identified strong patterning in the distribution of channel-rimmed jars centred on the Nene Valley and the north Bedfordshire/north Buckinghamshire region. Their presence in outlying districts (eg. at Leicester and Verulamium) may be explained by trade in their contents. This work should be written up for publication.

(ii) Can pottery distributions be used to identify civitas and other boundaries in this area as Evans has shown for East Yorkshire in the Roman period (1988)? The pottery from Towcester, for example, differs from that to the west, so might this relate to cultural/political boundaries?

3.8.2 The Corieltauvi. Potential research projects and priorities:

(i) There is a notable second century Lincolnshire style zone which may be broadly defined by reference to the products of the Roxby kilns. Similar vessels occur at widely separated kilns and north of the Humber. Definition of their distribution must depend on evidence from kiln and occupation sites, but a project cannot be clearly defined until the question of museum collections has been resolved (cf. 3.2).

(ii) The Swanpool industry produces a later style zone, many of the vessel types being copied elsewhere. Definition of the distribution should be part of work on the publication of the kiln material.

(iii) South of Lincoln the pottery is less well known, but appears to tie in more closely with material from the Nene Valley, and definition of localised styles and their distribution is needed. This work would need to be integrated into work on the Fenland. Stylistic zones within the Fenland extending into Norfolk also need definition.

(iv) Several 'style' and 'trade' zones are discernible in Leicestershire and Rutland; key wares include Derbyshire Ware, Greetham-Bourne shelly wares, Northamptonshire hard grogged ware, as well as form/decoration styles of grey wares.

(v) Examination of these 'style zones' might be linked to a test of Millett’s hypothesis regarding the placing/growth of 'small towns' and temples close to tribal boundaries (Millett 1990).

(vi) Comparison of dies, vessel types, decorative 'fingerprints' or fashions may reflect movement of potters or ideas and where appropriate material should be considered from this angle. An obvious example is the evidence for G. Attius Marinus at Mancetter-Hartshill and Little Chester and Sarrius at Mancetter-Hartshill and Rossington Bridge.

3.8.3 The Iceni. Style zones have been suggested but need definition. Concordance between typologies in use may help.

3.8.4 The Trinovantes. See points raised under Section 3.7.4

3.9 Unpublished Work

An amount of currently unpublished work needs to be made available and supported to publication. Obvious examples include:

(i) The report on the pottery from the 1971-85 excavations in Colchester.v

(ii) R. Friendship-Taylor's recently completed M.Phil. thesis examining late Iron Age and early Roman pottery in the Nene and Welland Valleys.

(iii) J. Taylor's thesis (1996) which included study of D.N. Hall's extensive surface-survey collections from Northamptonshire.

(iv) Further publication of the Mucking assemblage.

(v) There are several useful unpublished dissertations in the Institute of Archaeology, London, that warrant wider availability. These include Geddes' (1977) study of the pottery from the Verulamium theatre; Pomel's (1984) thesis on late Roman pottery; and Charlton's (1993) examination of the distribution of Nene Valley wares.

(vi) J. Samuels’ (1983) survey of Roman pottery production in the East Midlands.

To Section 2 Return to Eastern Britain Contents Page Return to Framework Menu To Section 4