Cursus Publicus: The Infrastructure of government in Roman Britain 9780860547815, 9781407318684

Citation preview

BAR 241 1995  BLACK  CURSUS PUBLICUS

Cursus Publicus The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

E. W. Black

BAR British Series 241 B A R

1995

Cursus Publicus The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

E.W. Black

BAR British Series 241 1995

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR British Series 241 Cursus Publicus © E W Black and the Publisher 1995

The author's moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9780860547815 paperback ISBN 9781407318684 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9780860547815 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Tempvs Reparatvm in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 1995. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from: BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK E MAIL [email protected] P HONE +44 (0)1865 310431 F AX +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

To Beatrice, Hilary and Sylvia

CONTENTS

Acknowledgments

iii

CHAPTER ONE:

Introduction

1

CHAPTER TWO:

Development

4

CHAPTER THREE:

Mansiones in the first century

17

CHAPTER FOUR:

Hadrianic mansiones

32

CHAPTER FIVE :

Other second century mansiones

48

CHAPTER SIX:

The Third century

65

CHAPTER SEVEN:

The Fourth century

76

CHAPTER EIGHT :

Conclusion

89

APPENDIX ONE:

The Pizos Inscription

97

APPENDIX TWO:

The Antonine Itinerary

98

APPENDIX THREE:

The mansio baths at Wall

108

Abbreviations and Bibliography

110

Figures

117

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express my thanks to Dr. Barbara Levick for reading through and commenting on early drafts of Chapter Two and for allowing me to use her translation of the inscription from Burdur in Turkey in the same chapter. Garry Fagan drew my attention to the inscription from Volubilis and suggested that it referred to a mansio. I am also grateful to Patrick Allen and Raph Isserlin of the Archaeology Section of Essex County Council Planning Department for reading and commenting on Chapter Three, and for giving me access to information in advance of their own publications of excavations on the mansio and roadside settlement at Chelmsford. Richard Brewer kindly supplied details of the new system of insula numbers at Caerwent, and Frank and Nancy Ball provided information about excavations at Wall ahead of publication. My colleagues Mrs. Christine Treacher and Mrs. Felicity Benson provided translations of passages from a number of German publications. Additional items of information have been supplied by Ian Betts, Chris Going, Pete Liddle, Judith Plouviez and Charmian Woodfield. To all of these I am grateful for the assistance they have given me. Finally, Steve Robey was characteristically generous in helping out a computer illiterate when I was in trouble. Finally Dr. Rajka Makjanic took immense trouble in preparing the text for publication.

iii

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION The perspective of this book is both narrower and broader than the traditional approach to classes of sites such as Villas , Forts , Towns and 'Small Towns'. The installations studied here had a very specific and limited set of functions and their study is perhaps more akin to a subject such as Defences. However , the latter is usually dealt with in a fragmented way, with sites being classified as military or civilian and treated separately. Such separation certainly makes no sense in the present work and information drawn from all types of sites is examined and considered together. The advantages of this will hopefully become apparent in the course of the book. The title I have chosen is not The Mansiones of Roman Britain. The description and discussion of these archaeologically recognisable complexes do indeed comprise the major part of the book, but I have allowed myself considerable latitude in pursuing topics that arise from this. I hope that the reference to the Infrastructure of Government in my title conveys a fuller idea of what I think the book is about. The road system of Roman Britain , developed in the first century A.D., was a military road system. It was based on London which was a new, strategically-sited, foundation fulfilling a similar role to Lyon in Gaul. The roads linked London both to native centres in the south-east where romanised cities were constructed and to legionary bases further west and north which were eventually also succeeded by cities. Until the massive re-deployment of troops in the 70's and 80's these roads linked fort-sites established in the initial conquest phase or subsequently. Even if Roman government for some provincial s at first meant military government by the local commanders of these forts, the administration of the Roman army units themselves required that officials and soldiers should travel along the roads on government business . The government authorised the construction of praetoria to accommodate such travellers . In these they could stay overnight, be fed, and, if of high enough rank, obtain vehicles and / or animals to convey them on the next stage of their journey. The system that provided these requirements ultimately came to be known as the cursus publicus. Normally in first century Britain its staging-posts were to be found attached to forts and fortresses . As more and more civitates were set up in the southern part of the province from the Flavian period onwards, vici or roadside villages were established along the roads between the new cities where officials and soldiers could be lodged in the homes of the vicani. This arrangement often preceded the construction of new purpose-built accommodation, and no doubt in many vici it remained in operation throughout the Roman period. However, in other roadside settlements special accommodation , with bath-buildings and other facilities, began to be provided in the Hadrianic and Antonine periods. Considerable archaeological excavation has been carried out

in roadside settlements in Britain in the last three decades and within the last few years two major studies of such sites have been published (Smith 1987; Burnham and Wacher 1990). In both there is a recognition that the posts of the cursus publicus were probably important in the development of some of these settlements. Smith (1987, 8) states the current, rather uncertain, view: ' ... there is in lowland Britain little positive evidence for the development of civilian settlements outside forts, during the period of military occupation. While this does not of course disprove the hypothesis that where forts were located, civilian settlements developed, it does suggest that the influence of forts upon settlement growth has perhaps been overstated . The postingstations that replaced them, being permanent installations, may have had a more lasting effect, though this too is difficult to assess. ' Both these modem studies contain a fairly short list of sites where a praetorium has been excavated and recognised for what it was, in most cases taking the form of an elaborate courtyard building. The difficulty in identifying these installations has arisen largely because they are nowhere adequately defined in the literary and epigraphic sources. In addition , the most archaeologically visible element, the accommodation, was only one part of a posting-station. Fortunately the complete plan of such an establishment has been excavated outside the legionary fortress at Inchtuthil and there it can be seen that the accommodation, baths, stabling and quarters for the staff were laid out around two large open yards . Moreover two distinct categories of accommodation can be recognised and these can be referred to conveniently as 'standard class' and 'first class ' accommodation , reflecting as they do the stratified nature of Roman society . It is therefore possible to treat Inchtuthil as a 'type site' and to identify other postingstations by reference to the elements found there. The examples selected for description in this book are identified by analogy with the distinctive elements seen at Inchtuthil such as the barrack-like standard class accommodation, other accommodation often in definite suites of rooms and sometimes provided with hypocaust heating at a period when this was very rare. a prominently placed entrance hall, the presence of a detached bath-building, one or more yards or enclosures with which the buildings are associated, and the relationship between the buildings and the main road . The application of these criteria is more or less difficult , and the identification of posting-stations more or less secure, depending on the amount of excavation that has been carried out. Because both first class and standard class accommodation were sometimes united in a courtyard building it has been much more convenient to discard the word praetorium - with its overtone of a building for high-ranking officers - in most contexts in this book, and to substitute the more flexible mansio. This word originally referred to shelter or accommodation and later to any building offering this. Here

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain mansio will be used to refer either to the whole complex of facilities used by government travellers, or to all , or part of, the accommodation of such establishments.

maintained by its continuing attention as the necessary infrastructure for governing the province. The creation of roadside settlements to service mansiones is attested in inscriptions from Thrace dating to the Neronian and Severan periods and there are some indications that the same motive lay behind the foundation of roadside settlements in Britain, and that mansiones here served as centres for local government as well as providing accommodation for the government's officials. The description of the working and the installations of the cursus publicus in this book is intended in part as a contribution towards understanding the origins and functioning of 'small towns' in the province.

It is possible that in some roadside settlements and cities the elements of the mansio were not all to be found together. Where the accommodation was in a different location from the stables and waggon-park, and where the two grades of accommodation were not combined in the same building, a particular problem may sometimes arise in distinguishing between an official mansio and a commercial inn. Here the frequent location of mansiones well behind the road frontage seems to be a useful criterion. It seems unlikely that any inn would be so sited. In most roadside settlements the mansio was also by far and away the largest and most impressive building, and often the only residential building which had walls with masonry footings. In cities it must be admitted that the task is more difficult. What seems to have been a commercially-run inn has been recognised at the eastern angle of insula 38 at Xanten in Germania Inferior (Bridger 1989). Here the accommodation and an added bath-building took up nearly 80 metres on the north-east side and 60 metres on the adjoining south-east side of the insula. At Wroxeter the building constructed after the second century fire on Site VI occupied only about 23 metres of the street frontage (Bushe-Fox 1916, Plate XXXI). Behind this most of the rooms opened off a corridor at right angles to the line of the street and the western end of the building, furthest from the street, comprised a large bath-suite (rooms 13-17). The full depth of the property was c.54 metres. In both cases it can be argued that the size of the establishment seems too small by comparison with mansiones in cities elsewhere. Obviously this cannot be regarded as decisive , and the inclusion or rejection of such cases seems to be at present a matter of personal choice.

Chapter Two deals with the development of the cursus publicus throughout the empire to the end of the third century A.D.. It is hoped that this will be of value since the considerable literary and epigraphic material is rarely referred to in excavation reports or general discussions dealing with the plans of British mansiones. Nevertheless, it forms an essential background to interpreting the archaeological sites considered in this volume. It will be seen that it is sometimes possible to interpret otherwise puzzling aspects of the archaeological remains by reference to it. Sometimes there is an apparent lack of correspondence which itself raises questions and stimulates examination of the reasons why this should be so. In large measure, however, the literary and epigraphic material is included to illustrate aspects of the cursus publicus about which archaeology can offer only ambiguous indications, or none at all. The use of such material from other provinces is a common practice in Romano-British studies and is always attended by the caveat, usually implicit, that it is an analogy that is being offered and not a demonstrable proof of how things were in Britain. It seems to me that this is justified in the context of the present volume where the subject comprises government installations, built in the first century largely by the Roman army and in the second century under the direction of senatorial governors of proconsular rank. The former is not likely to have created a peculiarly British building-style nor the latter to have introduced administrative arrangements unique to Roman Britain.

At the end of the Roman Republic Cicero sums up what we should expect to find in the buildings offering accommodation at mansiones when he refers to facilities for dining and sleeping. I have attempted to identify the uses of c~rtain rooms at many of the sites discussed. This seems to me to follow automatically from the identification of a site as a mansio. The reader should be aware, however, that these are possible, sometimes even probable, but never certain identifications. They serve the purpose of recalling that what appears in the ground as foundations or robber trenches, and in the excavation report as a two-dimensional plan, was once a functional building.

Britain is rich in the plans of mansiones and a detailed discussion of particular examples through the first to fourth century forms the core of Chapters Three to Seven. The arrangement is broadly chronological, depending on the earliest date for which good evidence for a particular mansio exists. However, I have not been over-rigid in following this, both because it would result in an imbalance in the size of the chapters and because it has sometimes been convenient to treat particular mansiones together, for example those at Silchester and St Albans which are both dealt with in Chapter Six. The location of the sites discussed, and of some others where there seems to me to be good evidence for the former existence of some building of the cursus publicus, is shown on Fig. I. In Appendix Two there is a detailed re-assessment of the Antonine Itinerary , a prime source for the names and locations of roadside settlements which is often cited without a full appreciation of its complexity . The sites listed in the Itinerary have been designated as fort, city, mansio or vicus, and each one will have contained facilities that were part of

In those areas which were already urbanised before they were incorporated into the Roman empire - chiefly in the eastern provinces - the role of the central government tended to be supervisory and emperors and provincial governors reacted to requests and proposals from local communities rather than initiating them. It often seems to be assumed that, after some timely encouragement by governors like Agricola, the same ideals of urban patriotism quickly prevailed in Britain. But the evidence that this was the case is very slight. An equally good case can be made that civitas-capitals and many roadside settlements were both deliberate creations of the Roman government and were

2

Introduction

the cursus publicus. However , there has been no attempt to present all the structural evidence for possible components of these. There will be many instances where a fragment of a building could have belonged to a mansio. If the detailed treatment of the best examples in this book establishes what might be expected this will aid local researchers in

interpreting the elements of a mansio in their own particular roadside settlement or military vicus. Note: Latin terms and quotations have been given in Italic script. Greek words have been transliterated into English and are also given in Italics.

3

CHAPTER

TWO

DEVELOPMENT Those who used the cursus publicus fell into two distinct categories: couriers travelling as quickly as possible between the emperor and his governors, and the officials and soldiers travelling on routine business within and between provinces. The services that were supplied to them were not created by a single act. Their development and administration at the end of the Republic and through the first three centuries A.D. form the subject of this chapter .

contracted to be a parochus. Elsewhere on the journey Horace and his fellow-travellers put up in the villas of friends or even in inns, creditably following Cicero's example of avoiding imposing financial burdens on cities or individuals who would otherwise have had to supply their needs. It is uncertain when this system began but it seems likely that it was initiated as part of Rome's road-building and consolidation of her control in Italy, and was transferred later to the provinces as these were taken over and required to be administered. An inscription of 132 B.C. from near Polla (ILLRP no.454), relating to the Via Popilia / Via Annia between Capua and Rhegium, makes the claim: 'I was also the first to replace shepherds by ploughmen on the public land. I set up here a market and public accommodation' (forum aedisque poplicas heic fecei). The linkage of a mansio, if this is what the aedes publicae of the inscription represents, with a market settlement is significant and we will find it recurring in the imperial period (see below). A lex agraria of 111 B.C. includes references to what seem to have been the equivalent of Horace's parochi. The purpose of the law seems to have been to guarantee the status of the remaining public land and of recently privatised land following the legislation in the tribunates of Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus (133 and 123/22 B.C.). Among its provisions it is stated that any land, place or building (ager, locus, aedificium) assigned to a man who was or would be required to be one of the roadside villagers (in viasieis vicaneis) was not to count as private property or be disposable by sale. In his commentary Lintott considers that these viasii vicani were responsible for the repair of roads and for providing subsistence for official travellers, probably in exchange for rent-free holdings of public land (Lintott 1992, 213-15). Unfortunately, since the law always refers to vicani and not to a category of viasiei vici, it is not certain whether the status was assigned to a complete community or simply to particular individuals within vici.

The Late Republic.

In the period of the late Republic Roman officials on journeys could requisition various commodities for their use. A letter of Cicero (Att. V.16.3) describes his own arrival as governor in the province of Cilicia in 51 B.C. and how he and his staff abstained from such requisitioning: Be sure that not only did we not take fodder or anything normally provided under the Lex lulia but did not even demand fuel: apart from four couches and a roof (tectum) no-one took anything, and in many places we did without the roof, generally staying under canvas. The Lex lulia de rebus repetundis was a law passed by Caesar in his consulship in 59 B.C. and evidently restricted the items that Roman officials could demand. It was not the first legislation to cover such matters and had been preceded, probably in 101-100 B.C., by a Lex Porcia (Lintott 1993, 93). Despite its existence Cicero implies in his letter that the usual demands amounted to sumptus (extravagance). He informs us that among what could be demanded legitimately was fodder for animals , fuel for heating, and a meal and a bed under cover. (The four couches are interpreted by Shackleton-Bailey (1968, 204) as the three couches arranged in a dining-room (triclinium) and one for sleeping.) It seems likely that the provincial communities were enabled to designate or contract individuals to provide the various items required and these were known as parochi (a transliteration of the Greek word meaning 'providers') . Cicero (Att. Xlll.2a.2) jokingly asserted that Sestius who entertained Ariarathes, later to be king in Cappadocia, in Rome in 45 B.C. was acting as aparochus publi cus.

There is no indication in the passages of Cicero and Horace cited here that the provision of the transport used by official travellers was part of the obligations laid down by the Lex lulia. Since Cicero mentions fodder among the things he refused but says nothing about the animals that had to be fed, it seems likely that transport and draught animals could not simply be requisitioned. L. Piso's extravagant grants of diplomata as governor of Macedonia are not defined by Cicero (In Pisonem 90) and the word does not necessarily have the same specific meaning it later acquired. Here it must be translated by the general 'letters of recommendation' rather than by 'warrants to requisition transport'. Other passages (Caesar Bel/um Civile 1.30 and 111.42)refer to the requisitioning of transport in a wartime situation.

Horace's account of his journey along the via Appia probably in 38 or 37 B.C. in the company of Maecenas and other friends who were on an official mission for Octavian tells us that at the pons Campanus, three Roman miles from Sinuessa, they stayed at a villula and the parochi provided fuel and salt as they were required to do. The villula 'provided a roof (tectum praebuit) and may have been a specific instance of Cicero's tectum, presumably not a purpose-built mansio but accommodation whose owner had

For delivery of his private letters from his province Cicero had to rely on the services of friends and freedmen travelling

4

Development back to Italy. Although he certainly wrote official dispatches to the magistrates and senate (Fam. XV.1 and XV.2), the impression is that these were few and that it was up to Cicero himself to take the initiative in sending them. As a mark of respect he sent orderlies and lictors (statores meos et lictores) with a letter to Coelius Caldus who had newly arrived as his quaestor in the province (Fam. 11.19.2), but there is no indication of a regular establishment of tabellarii on a governor's staff to carry official letters and dispatches. It is true that it may be wrong to infer from this silence that they did not exist. We do know that Cicero's friend, the businessman Atticus, could make use of a frequent service of tabellarii set up by the tax-collecting companies (Att. V.15.3). For these to operate efficiently adequate transport and frequent changes of animals, whether horses for riding or mules for drawing light carriages, had to be available along the routes that were followed. The companies presumably maintained and paid for the necessary personnel, animals and equipment from their profits. It seems unlikely to the present writer that the government of the Republic was prepared to shoulder the same expenditure but it is still possible that it imposed it on others and that the communities along the routes that its couriers followed were compelled to contract out the provision of animals and other services to local stables and inns. In the civil war Caesar sent news of his victory at Pharsalus by mounted couriers (per dispositos equites) (Caesar Bel/um Civile 111.101),but this may again have been a wartime measure . Moreover, even if the provision of transport for official couriers was a service imposed on local communities it would still have required a degree of co-ordination and supervision, and there is no reference to this during the Republic. On balance, therefore, a regulated system for supplying transport to the messengers dispatched by provincial governors to the senate seems unlikely.

limit of the territory of Pompeii. Miss B. Levick (pers . comm.) suggests 'taxi' as an appropriate translation of cisium which was a fast two-wheeled vehicle. The location of the drivers at the limit of the city territory sounds like something determined by administrative convenience, perhaps reflecting the city's responsibility for providing transport to official travellers. It is possible that these had to change from one cisium to another whenever they passed into the territory of a new city. At Cales another inscription (CIL X.i.4660) refers to the cisium-drivers at one of the city gates . However, the cisiarii were independent operators, not directly controlled by the city authorities or by the emperor, at least in the early imperial period. CIL I.ii.1446 attests a guild of cisiariei Praenestinei at Praeneste, and the Baths of the Cisiarii near the Porta Romana at Ostia are just the sort of facility that a collegium provided for its members. The mosaic in the frigidarium, dating to the early decades of the second century A.D. and contemporary with the conversion of an earlier building to form the baths. is a revealing item of evidence (S. Menchelli in Pasquinucci 1987, 79-80 Fig.61). On two sides of the floor cisiarii are shown driving -in this case- four-wheeled carriages drawn by one or two mules, and on the other two sides attending to a team of mules or to harness while mules graze in the background. The animals in the last two scenes are named on the mosaic. Framing the centre of the floor, where the drain for the cold-douche was placed, was a representation of a city-wall with a central gate in three sides and a tower in the centre of the fourth side. The four angles of the city-wall, each with its own tower, were supported by figures of Telamones. The walled city may well be meant to represent Ostia itself, and the cisiarii plainly regarded themselves as vital to the communications of the city. It is probable that this confidence was based on the contracts for providing transport for couriers and other official travellers which individual members of the guild negotiated. The cisiarii can be regarded as the suppliers and drivers of the vehicula which were necessary in the second version of Augustus' postal system. The inscription on a late first or early second century funerary altar (CIL XIV 409) tells us that among many honours Cn. Sentius Felix was the patron of the iuvenes cisiani at Ostia. Cisiani is presumably a variant of cisiarii. Whether the iuvenes cisiani were the whole body of Ostian cisiarii or a section of them is unclear, but the use of iuvenes is reminiscent of Suetonius' use of the term to describe the couriers of Augustus along the military roads .

Provision of Transport from Augustus to Trajan.

It is Suetonius (Div. Aug. 49,3) who tells us that the emperor Augustus first introduced a system of young men (iuvenes) stationed at intervals along the military roads to relay news from the provinces to the government in Rome, and later replaced these with a system of carriages (vehicula) to carry the original messenger, with his message, from starting-point to the capital. Additional information could then be obtained from a reliable source. There were certainly precedents for this in the Hellenistic kingdoms or in the messengers of the Persian kings (Pflaum 1940, 205-8) . It is just possible that by iuvenes Suetonius meant the quasimilitary organisations (collegia iuventutis) attested in communities in Italy and some of the provinces (Pflaum 1940, 216). If this technical sense of the term is correct Augustus' employment of the members of the most prominent local families as his couriers was a finely judged compliment. The reason offered by Suetonius for its discontinuation may be taken at face value.

An inscription from Pisidia dating from Tiberius' reign deals largely with the supply of transport to officials and soldiers. The bilingual text, Latin with a Greek translation, has been published by Mitchell whose commentary forms the basis of the observations made here and should be consulted for fuller information (Mitchell 1976, 106-31) . In it there is no specific mention of imperial couriers; those using the transport are the personnel of the provincial government (including soldiers), and other officials and soldiers passing through the province. The translation given here is taken from Levick 1985, 100-101.

An inscription (CIL X.i.1064) found at the Stabian gate at Pompeii records that the duumvirs L. Avianius Flaccus and Q. Spedius Firmus paved the road from the milestone (perhaps close to the gate) as far as the cisium-drivers at the

Edict of Sextus Sotidius Strabo Libuscidianus , praetorian legate of Tiberius Caesar Augustus: It

5

Curs us Public us : the infrastructure of govermnent in Roman Britain is in the highest degree unjustifiable for me in my edict to tighten up regulations drawn up with the utmost care by the Augusti, one of them supreme among divinities, the other among Emperors, to prevent the use of transport facilities without payment. But since there are persons whose lack of discipline calls for punishment here and now, I have put up in individual cities and villages a list of the services that I judge ought to be provided, with the object of seeing it observed, or, if it is disregarded, of backing it up not only with my own power but with the majesty of the best of Emperors from whom I received instructions on this very point.

The governor Strabo Libuscidianus states that he had set up lists of the facilities that should be provided in individual cities and villages. The inscription refers to the obligations of the people of Sagalassus, but it was found at Burdur about 28 kilometres west-north-west of the city, presumably at the site of a vicus in its territory which may have lain on a road linking Cormasa and Conana. Nucleated settlements which could provide the stipulated services were essential to the system. It seems to be stated that altogether ten carra and ten mules had to be provided, but it later appears that this was to be the maximum provision for an individual. This was the entitlement of the provincial procurator and a Roman senator. According to the text it was also the entitlement of the procurator's son. Miss Levick has suggested thatfilioque eius was the error of a scribe in taking down the dictation of the edict and that what was intended may have been vilicoque eius (B. Levick pers. comm.). Diplomum for diploma in the inscription, here used in the specific sense of a 'transport warrant', is such a mistake. Vilicoque eius would mean 'and the procurator's agent' and would make excellent sense in the context. Nevertheless, the text may have meant what it said. The Gracchan lex repetundarum of 123 or 122 B.C. lists various senatorial magistrates and officials who could be prosecuted under its terms and it includes their sons (queive filius eorum quoius erit, quoius pater senator siet). It was evidently felt that the sons of senatorial miscreants were likely to be as deeply involved in any corruption as their fathers (Lintott 1992, 18). It is conceivable that the senatorial tradition of sons accompanying and assisting their fathers in administrative posts was also practised by early imperial procurators, or at least that this was considered possible by those responsible for drafting the Burdur decree. At any rate, the procurator and his son/agent were evidently likely to be the most frequent users of the service since they head the list and precede the general definition of entitlement which encompassed senators.

The people of Sagalassus must provide a service of ten carts and the same number of mules for the legitimate purposes of persons passing through, and receive from the users ten asses per schoenus for each cart and four asses per schoenus for each mule: if they prefer to provide donkeys they are to give two in place of each mule at the same rate. Alternatively, if they prefer to give for each mule and each cart what they were going to receive if they were providing them themselves, they are to pay it to members of another town or village who will actually perform the service , so that they may take it on. They shall be obliged to provide transport as far as Cormasa and Conana. However, the right to use these facilities shall not belong to everybody, but to the procurator of the best of Emperors and to his son, a right to use them which extends to ten carts, or three mules in place of each cart or two donkeys in place of each mule, used on the same occasion, for which they are to pay the fee established by me. Besides them, it shall belong to men on military service , and those who have a warrant (diplomum), and those who travel from other provinces on military service, on the following terms: to a senator of the Roman people are to be supplied not more than ten carts , or three mules in place of each cart or two donkeys in place of each mule, for which they are to pay what I have laid down; to a Roman knight in the service of the best of Emperors must be given three carts or three mules in place of each or in place of each mule two donkeys, on the same terms; if he requires more he shall hire them at the rate decided by the person who is hiring them out; to a centurion a cart or three mules or six donkeys on the same terms. To those who are carrying grain or anything else of the kind for their own profit or use I wish nothing to be supplied, nor anything for a man's baggage animals or those of his freedmen or slaves. Board and lodging ought to be provided without charge to all who are members of my own staff and to persons on military service from all provinces and to freedmen and slaves of the best of Emperors and their baggage animals, on condition that they do not demand other services free from those unwilling to provide them.

The word translated by 'cart' in the edict is carrum. Although Diocletian's Edict on Maximum Prices (XV.42-44) shows that carrum was used to refer to both a two-wheeled and a four-wheeled vehicle the conversion rate of three mules for one carrum in the Burdur inscription implies a definite relationship between the two. White (1984, 129) estimates a maximum load of about 300 lb. (136 kg.) for a pack-mule, and this is the equivalent of 416.7 Roman librae. Among the vehicles with a prescribed load-limit mentioned in the Theodosian Code the carrum figures only once and has a limit of 600 librae assigned to it (T.C. 8.5.47). If the weight of the driver (c.200-250 librae) is added, the total load (800-850 librae) is only the equivalent of what could be carried by two mules. However, the weight of the carriage itself has then to be added to this. It looks therefore as if some sort of rough calculation like this, rather than the size of the load the animals could carry, determined the rate of three pack-mules in place of each carrum laid down in the governor's edict. White (1984, 208) draws attention to a relief-sculpture from Neumagen and another on the Igel monument where two yoked mules are accompanied by another used as a trace-animal. The vehicle is missing on the Neumagen sculpture but on the Igel monument it is a high four-wheeler carrying a driver and a large bale of cloth

6

Development

(Dragendorff and Kruger 1924, 54-55 Abb.32). In this scene the mules are shown straining to pull the load which is portrayed as enormous, and it seems likely that what is represented here is a raeda , a vehicle frequently mentioned in Section 8.5 of the Theodosian Code where its weight limit is given as 1,000 librae. A similar vehicle drawn by three stocky ponies can be seen on a relief honouring Epona from Beihingen (Bender 1978, 59 Abb.27). A lighter fourwheeler is seen drawn by three mules on the tombstone of a speculator of Legio VII Claudia from Viminacium and carries two passengers and their luggage (Bender 1978, 37 Abb.2), a load that must have fallen just within the 600 librae permitted on a carrum. The vehicles of the cisiarii in the mosaic from Ostia are similar. One is shown drawn by a single mule but is empty while the other is drawn by two mules and carries two passengers. A vehicle on a soldier's tombstone from Strasbourg is carrying a load which must have been considerably lighter than that shown on the Igel Column, judging by the apparent speed of the two mules drawing it (Esperandieu 1918, 148-9, No.5499) . It is suggested here that this lighter four-wheeled vehicle, or at least something very similar to it, is the carrum of the Burdur edict. A pre-Hadrianic writing-tablet from the fort at Chesterholm (Inv. No. 85/51) lists 48 axses carrarios (carrum-axles) in an inventory of vehicle-parts and other items, confirming that the carrum was used by the army (Bowman and Thomas 1987, 140-42) . The use of a fourwheeler rather than the two-wheeled cisium at Ostia presumably arose from the needs of customers who wanted to travel with rather more baggage than the couriers dispatched by the emperor or a provincial governor.

travellers, particularly soldiers , to transport or to shelter and hospitality within the limits set out by the governor, by the reign of Claudius the prefect of Egypt is found insisting that there was no such entitlement without possession of a diploma issued by him (Mitchell 1976, 126 with references). But the government servants entitled to the use of transport were all of high social status (centurion and above), and this made them all the more difficult to deal with. In the early second century the scrupulous Pliny as legatus Augusti of Bithynia wrote to Trajan to excuse himself for issuing a permit to his own wife for her to use the transport service on a sudden journey back to Italy (Pliny Epistulae X.120). Pliny had received a carefully-calculated number of transport permits (diplomata) to issue from the emperor himself. Trajan was continuing the practice of Domitian attested in his letter to the procurator Claudius Athenodorus (McCrum and Woodhead 1961, no.466). The practice must have been prompted by the excesses of governors less scrupulous than Pliny. Administration of the System in the First and Second Centuries.

In Italy equestrian officials with the title praefectus vehiculorum are well represented in inscriptions of the second century (Pflaum 1960-61 , nos. 94,141,144,163,193, and 238). Under them they had a staff of freedman administrators (e.g. CIL Vl.2.8542 : M. Ulpius Aug . lib. __ a commentaris vehiculorum). It has been recognised that equestrian praefecti vehiculorum also existed in the first century and may be attested in the pre-Claudian period (Eck 1975). The clearest example is L. Baebius Iuncinus (CIL X.6976) who held his praefectura sometime after A.D.63. A freedman T. Flavius Aug . lib. Saturninus (CIL VI.2.8543) was a tabularius a vehiculis initially presumably under Vespasian or Titus . In A.D.97 Nerva issued a commemorative sestertius (Mattingly and Sydenham 1926, 229 No.93) which shows two mules grazing with shafts and harness in the background and proclaims that Italy was freed from the obligation to provide transport: vehiculatione ltaliae remissa . Plutarch Galba 8.4 shows that in A.D.69 it was the local magistrates who had the duty of procuring transport for messengers dispatched by the senate. The praefectus vehiculorum and his staff before Nerva's reform were presumably only responsible for carrying out a general supervision of the services in Italy to see that the local provisions functioned together as a system. To what extent this involved on the spot inspection is unknown and there is no evidence that the praefectus had any responsibility beyond Italy. Practice in the provinces may have varied. Domitian's letter to Claudius Athenodorus implies that in Syria at least the procurator had some degree of responsibility for overseeing the system. In Italy Nerva's remission of the vehiculatio may have entailed relieving the local magistrates of their managerial role which could have involved disputes with a praefectus or his officials. After A.D.97 the praefectus may have been responsible for making the contracts with suitable parochi or mancipes in each location. Payment for the transport services they provided may have continued to come from taxes levied on the communities along the routes. Alternatively, and allowing more

The users of the transport, unlike those entitled to board and lodging (mansio), had to pay for it. It was therefore in a different category from the items available to Cicero and Horace under the Lex lulia which effectively correspond to the board and lodging of the edict. This may also have been the situation in the late Republican period but there is nothing in the meagre evidence to suggest it. Rather the entitlement of travelling soldiers and officials to transport supplied at a cheap rate by the local communities can be seen as an additional burden on them, an extension of Augustus' demands for transport for his couriers. It is unknown how frequently couriers were sent to and from the emperor, but the Younger Pliny's correspondence with Trajan (Epistulae X) gives the impression that it was still up to the governor to take the initiative, as in the time of Cicero. Many governors were probably infrequent correspondents. By contrast soldiers and officials travelling within a province or passing between provinces must have been all too frequent. Implicit in the terms of the edict from Burdur, and in other documents of later date (e.g. CIL III.9251, a decree of Claudius) are the twin abuses of travellers' failure to pay for the transport they used, and the exaction of services on top of those that were legally allowed , sometimes by people who had no legal entitlement. The government sought to control such requisitioning in its own interests, so that it could rely on the availability of transport for those engaged on business that it deemed important. Although in the Burdur edict there seems to be an automatic entitlement of various classes of

7

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain credibility to Nerva's claim, the government drew on its general provincial revenue to relieve the burden on the Italian cities. Tiris measure would then be in the same spirit as the alimenta which were devised by Nerva (Aurelius Victor Epitome Xll.4) and implemented under Trajan.

fairer distribution of the expenses of the cursus publicus among the population of the territories of provincial cities. The available evidence from the first century A.D. and the early second century shows emperors and their subordinates involved in trying to check the abuses perpetrated by official travellers or those claiming to have this status. Tiris continued throughout the period when the cursus publicus operated as a system. However, from the middle of the second century a new sort of case was being brought to the notice of provincial governors. Mitchell (1976, 120) notes that under Antoninus Pius the villagers of Dagis in the territory of Histria in Lower Moesia appealed directly to the provincial governor against their assessment to provide transport and other unspecified liturgies along a public road. Tiris appeal, and its reference to an earlier appeal by another village, show decisions about the level of contributions no longer in the hands of the city authorities. The village had to make transport available to official travellers, but resources were known to be available from elsewhere to replace the contribution of Dagis if its inhabitants won their appeal. An exemption from providing transport was granted to Pizos and other Thracian emporia in the early third century (see below and Appendix One), and this again carries the implication that this could be supplied using other than local resources. In Phrygia in the third century the supply of transport by two villages was calculated on the basis of their apophora or tax-assessment (Frend 1956, 51). Tiris would seem to be more appropriate for calculating a money-tax , and it can be suggested that other communities were paying such a levy.

Another measure attributed to Trajan is likely to have been part of the same package as Nerva's reform of the vehicu/atio since this can hardly have been fully implemented before the latter's death in January A.D. 98. A short note in Aurelius Victor (de Caesaribus 13.5), probably applying to Italy, seems to indicate that the stages between stopping-places for imperial couriers were shortened. The purpose was to speed up the transmission of dispatches by having more frequent changes of animals. Cicero (ProRoscio Amerino 7.19) records that a messenger travelled 56 Roman miles by night in ten hours cisiis - by taxis. The plural is significant since changes of vehicle and team were essential for keeping up this speed. Pflaum (1940, 385-86) calculates the speed of imperial couriers at about 50 Roman miles a day. It seems very probable that it was not simply philanthropy that lay behind vehiculatione Italiae remissa. Closer direction and increased expenditure were facilitated by Nerva's reform. The number of staging-posts and of animals could be increased and the protests from magistrates and their communities, if they were no longer being called on to run the system and to meet its cost, were avoided. Nerva's reform affected Italy. In those provinces which had a developed pattern of cities and villages the local magistrates at first remained responsible for administering the system. Where no such developed settlement pattern existed provincial governors saw to the establishment of adequate facilities. From the time of Hadrian the responsibility of administration no longer rested with any of the provincial communities. The emperor's action is recorded by the Scriptores Historiae Augustae (Vita Hadriani 7.5): he introduced a regular cursus under the control of the treasury (statum cursum fisca/em) so that magistrates should be relieved of this burden. The measure comes in a list taken at the start of the reign. Its beneficiaries were not the provincial communities in general but their magistrates, and the substance must be that they were no longer responsible for the local financing of the system. In effect Hadrian extended to the provinces one element of the changes introduced by Nerva in Italy. The main purpose, from Hadrian's point of view, was undoubtedly to introduce a more efficient supervision of what was spent and of the use of the services. Tiris must be the sense of the term fiscalem which probably indicates the involvement of the provincial fiscus to whose representatives, rather than to those of the city treasuries, taxes for maintaining the system henceforth had to be paid. In the Burdur inscription the governor stated that transport had to be made available and fixed charges had to be paid for its use. How the obligation to supply carra and animals was met was a matter for the city authorities. In the allocation of duties villages along the roads used by soldiers and officials might be burdened more heavily than those elsewhere in a city's territory and they were in any case clearly likely to suffer directly from the indiscipline of travellers. It is possible that Hadrian's reform did create a

We learn that one of the Phrygian villages, Anosos, was responsible for providing teams of oxen for short distances (4 or 5 Roman miles) along three roads leading from it. On the road to Synnada the villagers of Antimacheia took over with their animals. Where the transfer took place both villages had to maintain a stock of fodder (Zawadzki 1960, 89-91 ). Since both villages lay within imperial estates the supply of fodder was probably a direct levy on them, but they do not seem to have been required to supply the waggons that were pulled by their animals. It is possible that the vehicles employed were now requisitioned or purchased by the state for its permanent use. In the fourth century it was whole districts (pagi) rather than the roadside communities which had to provide waggons in Sardinia (T.C. 8.5.16). At the same time the regulations in the Theodosian Code (T.C. 8.5.60 and 11.1.9) show that the supply of fodder to mansiones and mutationes within their territory was controlled by the officials of the cities. Where this was purchased, and not supplied in kind as a tax-obligation, the funds seem to have been drawn from the fiscus. Another tax, or the same one, was levied on all the provincials for maintaining a set number of animals at each staging-post. There is no surviving indication in the sources apart from the Historia Augusta, but it seems a strong possibility that the beginnings of arrangements along these lines go back to the period of Hadrian's reform. If so, a tax was levied on all provincials but in roadside settlements like Dagis there was still some sort of obligation to provide transport. It is not clear exactly what form these angareia took. A direct levy of animals and in some places vehicles in place of the tax seems most likely, but it is possible that different

8

Development arrangements were made in different provinces .

provinces . In the Digest (50.4.18. 29-30) Hadrian is himself stated to have reiterated the rulings of earlier emperors about who was exempt from providing lodging for official 'guests' and this implies the general absence of purpose-built accommodation during his reign. A similar ruling is attributed to the jurist Paul in the early third century (Digest 50.5.10). This causes problems in identifying the elements of mansioneswhen they might be scattered in various locations in a city or roadside settlement, rather than being a purposedesigned complex as was sometimes the case in provinces where urbanisation was a Roman introduction . It is rare to be able to recognise particular buildings where accommodation must have been provided, such as the inns at the Little Saint Bernard Pass in the Alpes Graiae or at Immurium in Noricum (Grenier 1934, 208-10; Pauli 1984, 218-19 Figs.133-4). The only excavated building that can be identified as a mansio with the help of an inscription is in the north-east quarter of the city of Volubilis in Mauretania Tingitana . The wording of the inscription is itself ambiguous (AE 1922, No.57) . It tells us that in the reign of Gordian III the procuratorial governor M. Ulpius Victor totally rebuilt domum cum balineo (a residence with its baths) which had become a ruin. The mid third century building is usually referred to as 'Gordian's palace' or 'the governor's palace' in the modem literature. The domestic quarters to the west could easily belong to a wealthy private mansion or indeed a palace for a top official. However, that the domus was in this case a mansio seems clear from the scale of the bathing facilities to the east and the provision of access to them. The baths could be entered both from the domestic block and directly from the street to the north (Thouvenot 1958, 31 and plan Fig.8). It seems clear that they were used both by highranking officials temporarily resident in the domus, and by their subordinates who were presumably quartered in the homes of various citizens elsewhere in the town. As the original dwelling that Ulpius Victor rebuilt seems to have been a private residence owned in the second century by the family of a prominent citizen L. Pompeius Senior, it is possible that all officials, of whatever rank, had previously lodged in private homes.

Accommodation and Settlements to Service it.

It was not necessary, from the point of view of those providing services, that these should be centralised, however convenient that might be for those wishing to use them. Even accommodation might have been assigned in a number of different places in a city rather than in one building. Furthermore, those differences in rank and status, so clearly reflected in the number of carriages assigned to senator, knight, and centurion in the Burdur inscription, were surely also reflected in the quarters available to officials. At Pompeii there is a small number of graffiti which attest the presence of soldiers of the Praetorian Guard in the city. It cannot be proved that all these soldiers were present on government business and therefore occupying accommodation provided by or on behalf of the city, but if this supposition is made the resulting picture corresponds to what we should expect to find on general considerations (Mau 1899, 379,393 and 482). One centurion is attested in an atrium-house, a comfortable private dwelling, in l.iii.5 close to the Stabian gate. A private soldier is housed in VIII.iii.21, a much smaller property, apparently lacking an atrium. Three other soldiers are found close together in VIl.i and VIII.xii. C. Valerius Venustus, a private soldier, left his name on the wall of a bedroom in the inn in VIIl.xii.34-36. Many other guests also left records of themselves and it is clear that the premises were not a purpose-built mansio. Presumably the inn-keeper supplied accommodation as a parochus and later claimed the cost back from the city. M. Nonius Campanus of Caesius' century visited a shoemaker's shop in VIl.i.41 and the name of the centurion M. Caesius Blandus himself is twice scratched on columns of the peristyle in the adjoining atrium-house (VII.i.40). The presence of both a private soldier and his centurion makes it virtually certain that they were in Pompeii on official business of some kind. The different quarters occupied by the private soldier Venustus and the centurion Caesius Blandus reflect the strongly stratified nature of the Roman army and society. In Apuleius' fictitious account (MetamorphosesX.1) it is a centurion who chooses his quarters in a decurion's house rather than in an inn (stabulum).

In theory the existence of a particular building serving as a

mansio exempted the inhabitants of a settlement from having soldiers or officials requisitioning accommodation in their homes. In practice it did not always work. An inscription from Missema in Syria records the reply of the governor Julius Satuminus to the people of Phaenae, a head-village (metrokomia),in Commodus' reign (IGRRom III. 1119):

No doubt there were cities where a publicly-owned building was used as a mansio, or even where a building was specially built for this purpose. An inscription from Ameae in Lycia (IGR Rom III.639), dating to A.D.112/117 in the latter part of Trajan's reign, records the expenditure of 3,000 denarii by Diotimus and his wife Lalia on restoring the parochion (the equivalent of mansio) which had earlier been made into a school. Under Hadrian there was an extensive building-programme to provide mansiones in Britain, financed by the fiscus (see Chapter Four). Purpose-built mansiones were also constructed in other frontier provinces, and we saw that this was probably the case in Italy itself in the Republican period, but there is no reason to think that the construction of purpose-built accommodation by the government was undertaken throughout the empire. No doubt Diotimus' parochioncontinued in use at Ameae as did earlier facilities which were already adequate in most

If anyone, a soldier or even a civilian, makes his residence with you by force, write to me and you will have justice. For you owe no service to visitors and since you have a visitors' lodge (xenon, the equivalent of mansio) you cannot be forced to take them into your houses . Display this letter of mine in a conspicuous place in your headvillage, so that no-one can plead a lack of knowledge in defending himself . In the pre-Hadrianic period the provision, or not, of a mansio was generally a matter for the city authorities to determine.

9

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

However, in some parts of the Roman empire city authorities, and cities, and roadside settlements containing any sort of suitable accommodation, were lacking. Where this was the case the imperial government took steps to create facilities for the use of its personnel. An inscription (CIL lll.2.6123) that was found 36 kilometres from Philippopolis in Thrace, and dated to A.D. 61/62 in Nero's reign, records how the emperor ordered the procuratorial governor Ti. Julius Iustus to build tabernas et praetoria along the military roads. A praetorium was originally the general's tent, and later came to be used for a commanding officer's residence. In the inscription it means something like 'official residence', referring to the building(s) offering accommodation and other facilities to soldiers and government officials (in effect a mansio). Tabernae should mean 'shops' and/or 'inns'. It is unnecessary to regard these as an alternative to the praetoria as if sites along the roads were provided with one or the other. Rather they were complementary and were created alongside a mansio in the same location. Tabernae catered for those travellers' demands that were not supplied officially at the mansio. In the Burdur edict it is specified that nothing was to be supplied to those carrying grain or other similar goods for their own profit, or to a traveller's personal baggage animals or those of his freedmen or slaves. More importantly, the mansio itself required a pool of craftsmen and local suppliers for its efficient running. The majority of the mansio staff were probably slaves. A pre-Trajanic inscription (CIL 11.2011) indicates that a statio (probably a mansio) at Nescania in Baetica was staffed by slaves owned by the city (Mackie 1983, 199 note 37). Fourth century texts in the Theodosian Code (8.5.31; 5.37; 5.50) list mule-driver (mulio), waggon-driver (carpentarius), veterinary (mulomedicus), and groom (hippocomus) as personnel assigned to the cursus publicus . Another text (T.C. 8.5.34) specifies that there should be one mule-driver to every three post-horses (veredi) at the stages for changing animals (mutationes). These all required the services of a small community, and no doubt there were additional personnel required to run the accommodation and feeding of travellers at mansiones and these might be recruited locally. Thus the decision to build a mansio was usually accompanied by the creation of a village or market settlement to service it. The Polla inscription of 132 B.C. has exactly the same twin provision, in this case described as forum aedisque poplicas. Originally constructed by the governor, such establishments in the provinces must have remained under his supervision, at least until the creation of local political entities which were able to assume the responsibility. Different arrangements could arise from the needs of particular circumstances. In Egypt in the reign of Domitian toll-charges were levied on ordinary travellers using the route between Coptus and the Red Sea ports (IGRRom 1.1,183). Here the facilities, on a road passing through a barren countryside, were maintained by the government but were necessarily also used by civilian traffic. The tolls were varied for different categories of travellers . Soldiers were of course exempt, but women who accompanied them paid 20 drachmai. Prostitutes paid the highest toll, 108 drachmai.

Later official foundations in Thrace are dealt with in an inscription (IGRRom I. 766) from Pizos dating to A.D. 202, the year in which Severus and Caracalla passed through the province on their return to Rome from the east. This reveals an approach that echoes the procuratorial governor's provision of tabernas et praetoria 140 years earlier and is in the same tradition as the foundation recorded in the Polla inscription nearly 200 years before that. The very conservatism of administration and administrators in the period of the High Empire means that it can be used to illustrate the policies and actions likely to have been followed in the first and second centuries. It is also worthy of special consideration because conditions in Thrace, a settlement pattern with large city territories and the comparatively late date of its annexation under Claudius, make this province a particularly suitable analogy for Roman Britain. (A translation, omitting the list of settlers' names, is given in Appendix One.) The text of the inscription opens with the imperial titles of Severus and Caracalla and states that Pizos was founded as an emporion by the bounty of the rulers. A list of 164 settlers from nine different villages and of nine 'chief settlers' (hypatoi oiketores) follows. Next comes an edict of the governor C. Sicinius Claros which refers not to Pizos specifically but to a number of emporia that the emperors wished to be newly founded or, in the case of those already existing, to be made 'more splendid'. Behind the rhetoric about the emperors' desire to maintain the excellent state of affairs they found in Thrace and their satisfaction with the provision of mansiones (stathmoi) there is a distinct feeling that things had not quite measured up to the standard of imperial inspection. The governor deals first with the men who were to be in charge of the emporia: they were not to be 'commoners engaged in business/trade' (enporikoi demotai), but prominent men who belonged to a senate (bouleutai, presumably in the case of Pizos members of the boule of Beroe/Augusta Traiana). They are given judicial and other powers. The governor next goes on to tell how he persuaded people to move to the emporia from the surrounding villages by offering them freedom from contributing corn to the city (in the case of Pizos to Beroe) and from the provision of men for military duties and from the angareia. (The last term here refers to the provision of transport animals; the other obligations may correspond to the liturgies from which the villagers of Dagis wished to be relieved.) Finally the men in charge (toparchoi) together with the para-military police (epistathmoi stratiotai , the equivalent of stationarii) must check that they take over the buildings (specified as praitoria and balaneia: the mansiones and their baths) and the fittings in proper order, and hand them on to their successors in proper order with a written inventory. Their property and that of the magistrates who nominated them is made liable to confiscation if they fail to do this, and is paid into the treasury of their city. The emporion where any loss or damage has occurred is also made liable to a fine of fourfold the amount. The Greek term praitoria is the same as praetoria used in the Neronian inscription discussed above. In the latter it was

Development coupled with 'shops' (tabernae) and it was suggested that these provided the necessary back-up and support for a mansio. The Pizos inscription shows the same link, between mansiones and market-settlements which were created together with them. The term emporion is an excellent translation of forum used in the Polla inscription. It is clear that the Roman authorities were prepared to create such settlements to service their installations , and this will be important when we come to consider the mansiones of the first century and the Hadrianic period in Britain. Among other concessions the settlers were attracted to the emporia by the removal of the obligation to supply angareia. Here this must refer to supplying animals for transport, rather than to the whole of their obligation towards the cursus publicus. This is evident from the fine to be imposed on the emporion when there was neglect or dishonesty in the provision of facilities. The implication may be that the inhabitants of the emporion were responsible for the upkeep of the mansio buildings and their fittings . They may have paid a levy for this directly to the toparchos to be spent at his discretion in accordance with some general guidelines, rather than to the provincial fiscus to which toparchoi then had to apply for funds. The remission of the duty to supply transport was worth having for this was probably the heaviest and most inconvenient demand of the cursus publicus. The settlers no doubt hoped to benefit from providing services to travellers that were not part of their entitlement at the mansio itself. In addition , the exemption from supplying corn to the cities in whose territories the emporia lay implies that the settlers were given land which they were expected to farm.

In arranging the appointment of local senators as the men in charge of the emporia and responsible for the mansiones it seems that the governor was making an innovation , for he stated that he preferred such men to 'commoners engaged in business'. This phrase cannot refer to the ordinary inhabitants of the emporia themselves since he says that he did not order such men to be sent out to the emporia.It seems possible that in this context it means something like 'contractors'. With Hadrian's award of overall supervision of provincial mansiones to his provincial governors or procurators it is probable that in some cases the mansio was run by a manceps,a contractor who would be looking to make a profit on his undertaking. The necessary funds and contributions came from taxes levied on the city and its territory as a whole, while in the local communities where mansioneswere situated the provision of transport existed as a liturgy in place of the tax. In the case of the Thracian emporia the transport-liturgy was remitted to attract enough settlers to maintain the accommodation and other facilities. Sicinius Clams' aversion to placing private contractors in charge of these public assets and the taxes for their maintenance was probably well-founded.

The Road-Police, Militias and BeneficiariiConsulares. Along with the managers of the emporia there are the paramilitary police, the stationarii. It seems that they were envisaged as a regular feature of the Thracian emporia. Guard-posts (stationes) for soldiers policing the roads (milites stationarii) were first instituted in Italy by Augustus

11

(Suetonius Div. Aug. 32.1), and then extended to other provinces. From an inscription from Antinoupolis in Egypt dated to A.D.136/37 (IGRRom 1.1142) we learn that the new road constructed from Antinoupolis to Berenice on the Red Sea was provided with watering-places (hydeumata),poststations (stathmoi), and guard-posts (phrouria), and although these were clearly distinct categories it would be surprising if they did not occupy the same locations on the road. A stationarius was posted to Anosos in Phrygia in the third century to enforce the procurator's distribution of the duties to provide transport that was under dispute between two villages (Frend 1956, 52-53) , and in this case was very much concerned with the running of the cursus publicus. Although the occurrence of stationarii may have varied from province to province , and none is yet attested epigraphically in Britain, it is certainly highly likely that they were to be found here and that they were closely linked to the mansiones. In the military districts where forts rather than civilian settlements were placed along the roads the army probably undertook the task of patrolling and policing. At least some of the fortlets and towers built along the roads in northern England and southern Scotland can be regarded as posts used in work of this sort. On the other hand when the Younger Pliny (EpistulaeX. 77) requested Trajan to station a centurion at Juliopolis in Bithynia to supervise travellers passing through the city who caused it unspecified loss or damage the emperor refused, although he had earlier stationed a centurion at Byzantium. This, he explained, was an exceptional case (Pliny Epistulae X. 78). It seems unlikely that Hadrian and his successors were any more willing than Trajan to detach regular soldiers for police duty of this sort in the cities and civilian roadside settlements of southern Britain. There most of the guard-duty may have been carried out by the inhabitants themselves . This is suggested by the exemption from guard-duty which is recorded in the Pizos inscription. The stationarii at Pizos may have been the alternative to guards supplied from among the settlers. In Britain items of military equipment from roadside settlements are often interpreted as indicating the presence of the Roman army , usually a temporary presence. The alternative interpretation , that the equipment is evidence for armed guard-duty carried out by the inhabitants of the settlements, is rarely considered. However, this needs to be examined seriously. At Baldock spearheads came from contexts of first to fourth century date so that several 'military presences' would have to be postulated. A group of thirty-three spearheads and projectile points, either arrowheads or artillery-bolts , came from a third century well (Manning and Scott 1986, 145-49). Their deposition may have been connected with a cult of Mars as is suggested in the report (Stead and Rigby 1986, 86), but this was secondary and their primary use was to function as weapons. They constitute good supporting evidence for the existence of a militia which performed guard-duty in roadside settlements. Whether this was organised on a local basis at each vicus, or the men involved belonged to a larger militia organised at civitas level , is uncertain. Literary references are indirect and not usually very informative (Brunt 1975). Tacitus (Historiae 1.67-68) tells us of a force maintained by the Helvetii in A.D.69 which was probably a militia. In the l 70's Didius Julianus met an invasion of Chauci into Gallia

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain Belgica with auxilia raised from his province (SHA Didius Julianus 1.7-8). These are unlikely to have had no military training and were probably militias organised by the

civitates. Beneficiariiconsularesare attested epigraphically at several places where mansiones existed or may have existed in Britain (RIB 88,235,602, 725, 726, 745, 1030, 1031, 1085, 1225, 1599, 1696). These were legionary soldiers attached to the staff of the provincial governor, and their suggested functions include overseeing the cursus publicus and the security of the roads (Pflaum 1940, 335). In so far as these functions fell within the competence of the provincial governor there can be no objection to seeing beneficiarii assigned to special tasks in connection with them from time to time. An inscription from Mainz, set up by a beneficiarius in A.D.208, honours the Imperial Family, Jupiter Optimus Maximus, Silvanus, Diana, the genius of the catabulum of the governor, and the other gods (AE 1976, No.502; Herz 1976). The catabulum(a Latinised version of a Greek word) seems to have been a sort of depot, probably where stores moved by the heavy transport branch of the cursus publicus were received. Two other altars from the same place (AE 1976, Nos. 501 and 503) were also set up by beneficiarii. Both also honoured the Imperial Family, Silvanus and the genius loci, and No.503 also honoured Diana. It seems likely that here the genius catabuli and the genius loci can be equated. The recurrence of Silvanus and Diana is clearly significant and prompts the question why they should be associated with the genius catabuli. Were these seen as the particular deities which had to be propitiated in connection with the transport of goods and supplies along roads passing through thinly-settled or uncultivated terrain, where the risk of theft or brigandage might be greatest? Or was it thought that the very construction and use of the roads might be regarded as an offence or intrusion by the gods of the wild countryside? At any rate there are two dedications to Silvanus by beneficiarii consulares in Britain (RIB 1085 from Lanchester and RIB 1696 of third century date from Chesterholm) which may have been set up by men concerned with overseeing the movement of supplies. A more direct reference comes in RIB 725, from Catterick. There Titus Irdas, a singularis consularis,set up an altar to 'the god who measured out roads and paths' (deo qui vias et semitas commentus est). This was restored in A.D.191 by a beneficiariusconsularis,Q. Varius Vitalis. The majority of inscriptions referring to beneficiarii consularesin Britain come from forts and settlements on the military roads leading north from York and from the area of Hadrian's Wall. It is not clear that in this case the distribution merely reflects the overall density of inscriptions in Britain. The duties carried out by beneficiarii consulareson behalf of the governor in the north may usually have been performed by civilian aediles or other officials in the southern roadside settlements. In support of this two inscriptions (RIB 745 from Greta Bridge and RIB 1696 from Chesterholm, both in Britannia Inferior) were set up by beneficiarii consulares provinciae superioris, suggesting that the requirement for beneficiarii was indeed greater in the more militarised of the two provinces.

To see how the cursuspub/icus worked as a system we must tum now to the Roman road-books which contain lists of routes and places situated on them together with the distances between them. We will begin by looking at what additional information they can provide on the frequency of purpose-built accommodation, and then we will see whether the pattern of mansiones they reveal is matched in routes leading from the provincial capital at London to the nearest cities.

Mansiones in the Roman Road-books. A variety of glosses appears in Roman road-books, including mansio and mutatio, and this might seem to offer an easy way of reconstructing the system of installations belonging to the cursus publicus. The two road-books most relevant here are the Antonine Itinerary and the Bordeaux Itinerary (Cuntz 1929). The latter is fourth century in date and it describes a route, in several sections, from Bordeaux to Jerusalem for the use of pilgrims to the biblical holy places. There is a single instance of vicus and one castellum in the section from Toulouse to Aries, but apart from this each name in the lists is glossed by civitas, mansio or mutatio. This is the terminology of the compiler, providing a guide to how the private traveller should divide up his journey. In the summaries at the end of each section the places listed as civitates appear in the grand total of mansiones which can be translated in a non-technical sense as 'places to stop the night'. Similarly a mutatio is simply a 'place for changing transport'. The Bordeaux Itinerary is not an authoritative guide to what official facilities were provided or to the official status of each place. Most importantly, the private traveller would hire new transport at each substantial settlement he came to, hence the use of mutatio to describe these settlements. We have seen that this was not the case with official travellers. The third century inscription from Sulmenli made it clear that a diadoche (the equivalent of mutatio), where the responsibility of Anosos to provide animals was taken over by the next village, was located a prescribed distance along the road between them. Nevertheless, the frequency of the two basic categories in the Bordeaux Itinerary, mansio I civitas and mutatio, presumably does give some indication of the spacing of the settlements which serviced the official facilities. In the section between Aries and Milan, for example, there were 22 civitates and mansiones and 23 mutationes (Cuntz 1929, 553.3 - 558.2). On some parts of the route they alternate; elsewhere a civitas and mansio, or two mansiones, or two mutationes follow each other. The distance is given in the Itinerary as 475 Roman miles and the intervals between a civitas and mansio or between two mansiones vary between 12 and 35 Roman miles. The majority (fourteen out of twenty-one) fall between 20 and 35 Roman miles. The Bordeaux Itinerary was designed for a traveller going on horseback or by carriage . A priori it is reasonable to suggest that accommodation should have been regularly available at intervals of a single day's journey for travellers on foot or for those accompanying the slow-moving convoys of heavy transport waggons, and the longer intervals between civitates and mansionesclearly do not provide for this. This need must

12

Development have been met by the places listed as mutationes and the distinction between these and mansionesin the Itinerary was clearly only a real one for a particular type of traveller . Anderson (1992, 12) calculates that the minimum distance that could be covered by ox-waggons in a day in north-east England was about 25 kilometres (c.17 Roman miles). The intervals between roadside settlements on the roads leading from London are rather less than this. The six settlements closest to London were all between 10 and 14.5 Roman miles from the provincial capital, and the longest interval between settlements further along the roads was 18 Roman miles. However, he has not allowed for the change-over of animals taking place on the roads between the settlements and this presumably explains why most of the actual figures fall below his minimum.

did exist. There is presumably a similar significance in 266.8-13 which lists two castra and two mansionesbetween Aquincum and Crumerum, and in 98.6 - 102.5 where civitas and vicus occur in the first part of the route between Mediolanum and Traiectus Siciliae. In 58.1 - 63.2, between Carthage and Leptis Magna, civitas, colonia,municipium, vicus and villa all appear as glosses. The term mansio does not appear though all but three of the

24 mileages are in excess of 20 miles and the places named were all probably overnight stopping-places . It is probable that there were purpose-built mansionesin some of the cities but it seems that there were none on the roads between them. The vici and villae must have supplied the accommodation here and it is clear that the six villae were functioning as mansiones. Two of them, both called villa Aniciorum, had become state property following the condemnation of C. Anicius Cerealis for treason in Nero's reign (Tacitus Anna/es XVI.17). Three of the others were presumably also stateowned for the Villa Magna is alone distinguished as villa privata. Five of the six are preceded by place-names which suggests that, like mansiones, they were located at or in the vicinity of roadside settlements. The Villa Faustini which is found in Route 5 of the British section of the Itinerary and lies at or near Scole should be regarded as an analogous case.

In the Antonine Itinerary only a tiny minority of the places named are glossed in any way. This reflects the official character of the document, for each place along its routes must have been able to offer both lodging and transport to soldiers and officials . There are long intervals between the places in some routes and these seem to list overnight stops only. In some cases the same stretch of road appears in another route with places added and the intervals shortened. These routes were designed for travellers on foot or for those accompanying convoys of waggons. The Antonine Itinerary is a much more complex document than the Bordeaux Itinerary, with a varied collection of routes which are clearly not all of the same date. Van Berchem (1937) showed that the longest of them, from Rome to Egypt (Cuntz 1929, 123.8 - 163.5), was the route designed for Caracalla's planned journey in A.D.214-15. (Pizos , founded in 202, duly appears in 136.6.) The others are also likely to represent official journeys of some kind, but spread over a considerable period of time. The occurrence of later nameforms (e.g. Diocletianopolis for Pella in Macedonia and Herculia for Gorsium in Pannonia), or of later army formations such as Leg. I Jovia and Leg. II Hercu/ea, shows that some routes were not compiled, or at least did not reach their final form, before the very end of the third century. The use of Byzantium rather than Constantinopolis suggests a date for this before A.D.326. The dating of the routes in the British section of the Antonine Itinerary is re-examined in Appendix Two where it is suggested that they also belong to the end of the third or early in the fourth century.

In Gaul the places on the route between Reims and Trier (365.7 - 366.4) are all listed as vicus and Trier is described as a civitas, and in 372.3 - 373.5, between Trier and Cologne, Trier is again a civitas and the intermediate stops are glossed as vicus. As we have seen the use of vicus probably means that there was no purpose-built mansio, and it seems that in some provinces at least these were comparatively rare. A statement attached to a route from Catana to Agrigentum in Sicily - mansionibusnunc institutis (94.2-3) - indicates that official accommodation had been constructed in some at least of the four places named. If so, there had previously been none. This is just what we should expect from the ruling of the jurist Paul on who was exempt from providing transport and lodging for officials and soldiers. Their demands were clearly a common occurrence.

A few additional instances of purpose-built accommodation can be identified at those places in the Itinerary where Praetorium appears as a place-name or as part of a placename (177.3, 212.2, 259.13, 272.5, 398.1 and 418.8). Presumably these places had their origin in the foundation of a praetorium like those established in the Neronian period and early third century in Thrace. They are found in Asia Minor, the Iberian Peninsula, Pannonia and Dalmatia. The sole instance in Britain (464.1 and 466.4) is probably a corruption of Petuaria. The official buildings may or may not have been maintained in such places at the period when the Antonine routes were compiled. One case of particular interest comes at 260.5- 7, the entry for Inicerum in Pannonia Superior. Inicerum itself is listed as 28 miles from Manneiana . It is then noted: sed mansio Augusti in praetorio est Picentino,only 25 miles from Manneiana. Here mansio seems to be used to mean 'stopping-place' in a non-technical sense while praetoriumis used technically to refer to 'official

The vast majority of the names throughout the Antonine Itinerary have no gloss at all. However, in the first part of Caracalla's Route many of the names, especially within Italy, are provided with glosses. Civitas, vicus, mansio, villa and castra all occur. Thirty-seven of the mileages between these places are in excess of 20 miles, 13 fall between 20 and 15, and only six fall below 15 miles. Most of these places are therefore likely to have been mansiones in the sense used in the Bordeaux Itinerary, i.e. places where the emperor made an overnight stop. If this is so then the distinctions made in the list between the various types of site must be significant in some other way. It can be suggested that vicus indicates a roadside settlement where no purposebuilt accommodation was available, while mansio was used in a technical sense to indicate where such accommodation

13

Curs us Public us: the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

accommodation': 'But the Emperor's stopping-place is at the Residence at Picentinum'. Inicerum had clearly grown to be the more important place and it seems likely that official travellers often chose to stay there rather than at the mansio three miles closer to Manneiana.

seems similar to the decision to make Lyon the chief city of the Three Gauls. By c.100 there was even a garrison, as there was at the capital of Gallia Comata (Drinkwater 1983, 96; Merrifield 1983, 77-83). As the provincial capital and the hub of the developed roadsystem London will have been the centre from which and to which most official journeys were made. The spacing of the roadside settlements between London and the nearest cities will be considered in relation to the places in the Antonine Itinerary which are listed on the same roads (Fig.2). A full discussion of the British routes of the Itinerary and of the identification of the places listed in them will be found in Appendix Two.

The absence of glosses from most of the place-names in the Antonine Itinerary means that it does not provide much useful information about the location of purpose-built mansiones. They may or they may not have existed in such places. The routes in Gaul, Africa and peninsular Italy where glosses do occur suggest that they were generally absent from there, and that, as the legal texts imply, soldiers and officials lodged in the homes of the inhabitants of the vici through which they passed. These are analogous to the viasii vicani in the lex agraria of 111 B.C .. It is significant that no places at all are glossed with mutatio for, as we have seen, the change-overs were situated at some point between each pair of roadside settlements. However, the official character of the routes implies that all the places named in them were under an obligation to supply services to the cursus publicus. With this in mind we will tum to particular roads and roadside settlements in Britain to see how the system might have worked in more detail.

In Routes 3 and 4 of the Itinerary there is only one stoppingplace between London and Canterbury, at Rochester, which lies 30.5 Roman miles from the former and 28 miles from the latter city. What was probably part of a bath-building has been recorded below the Medieval cathedral (Hope 1898, 214-15). It lay c.75 metres behind the frontage of Watling Street and was apparently on the same alignment as the cathedral and therefore lay at an angle to the road. We shall come across many instances where the position and orientation of a mansio and its baths match those of the remains at Rochester, and it seems most likely that this is what these represent. The settlement was provided with defences at some time after c.A.D.150/75 (Harrison and Flight 1969, 75) and this indicates concern that some installation and/or function located there should be protected (see Chapter Five). At Canterbury itself it has been suggested that a building partly excavated at The Tannery may have been a mansio (Blockley et al. 1988, 314-15 Fig.14), but this cannot be properly assessed until more information is available.

Manswnes and Vici around London. Purcell (1990, 12-14) has stressed the importance of roads in the Roman concept of dividing up and controlling conquered territory and subsequently in administering it. A prime example is the evident importance of Agrippa's strategic road-system in Gaul, probably initiated in the early 30's B.C. and based on the recently-founded colony of Lyon (Drinkwater 1983, 124-26). In south-east Britain a number of pre-ex1stmg centres Canterbury, Chichester, Colchester, Silchester and Verulamium - were developed as cities in the early Roman period and were no doubt already linked by roads before A.D.43. Other roads reflect the lines of early military advance or consolidation. However, it is clear that by the time the routes acquired their definitive line it was London that had become the hub of the strategic roadsystem.

The users of Routes 3 and 4 would clearly have travelled by horse or by carriage, staying overnight at Rochester. However, Route 2, following the same road, has stoppingplaces at Welling (11.5 Roman miles from London); at Springhead (21.5 miles); Rochester (30.5 miles); and at Durolevum before Canterbury is reached. The identity of Durolevum is uncertain. It was probably the roadside settlement between Stone by Faversham church and Ospringe (Philp 1976), c.17 .5 Roman miles from Rochester and c.10.5 miles from Canterbury. The intervals in Route 2 would allow a journey on foot to be completed in either direction between London and Canterbury in about two and a half days, with overnight stops at Springhead and Durolevum or at Rochester and Welling. Travellers on foot must have lodged with parochi or in requisitioned accommodation at Welling, Springhead and Durolevum, and in the terminology of the Antonine Itinerary these places will have counted as vici. At Springhead a detached bath-house which lay 35 metres behind the line of Watling Street (Penn 1969, 171-76; Burnham and Wacher 1990, 194-95 Fig.59: marked as 'hypocaust') seems too small to have catered for the lowranking soldiers and officials lodging in the strip-houses along the main road. It may have been privately owned and perhaps available to travellers at a charge. However , there was also a buttressed granary with a raised timber floor,

Roads from London were laid out to Colchester with its colony of veterans, and to the legionary fortresses at Exeter, Kingsholm, Lincoln and Wroxeter. These were garrisoned contemporaneously within the period c.60- 70 (Maxfield 1989, 20-23) and it seems most likely that it was then that the developed road-system based on London was established. Despite Tacitus' remarks about the traders attracted there before A.D. 60 (Anna/es XIV.33) the first clear evidence of government involvement is the tombstone of the immediately post-Boudican procurator Julius Classicianus {RIB 12). Considerable investment is apparent in the development of the waterfront from c. 70 onwards (Brigham 1990, 134-35), and this is crowned by some sort of suitable civic status, perhaps that of a municipium, c.75. It was then that the first forum was built and a planned expansion of the town began (Milne and Wootton 1990, 18184). In some respects the development of London to become the provincial capital in the latter part of the first century

14

Development certainly a mansio at Alfoldean. There are relief-patterned flue tile fragments dating to c.100 and to the Hadrianic period, and poorly-recorded excavations found traces of buildings of a substantial character probably belonging to it (Black 1987, 120-23). Fragments of flue tiles dating to the Hadrianic period are also known from Ewell and one piece comes from an excavation at 15/16 Church Street in Dorking town centre which located a Roman ditch on or close to the line of Stane Street (Bird et al. 1984, 265). These may well indicate the provision of baths for soldiers and officials, but it is unlikely that they were accompanied by purpose-built accommodation. The settlement at Hardham will also have been a vicus.

constructed in the first half of the second century (Penn 1958; Detsicas 1983, 75-6). This is an extremely unusual type of building to find in a roadside settlement and it may have been constructed to store fodder for the cursus publicus. Its internal area was c.126 square metres and this is close to the area of the granary or fodder-store in the fortlet at Castleshaw which functioned as a mansio (see Chapter Three). It can be assumed that the same roadside settlements provided changes of animals and transport for those entitled to them at a set number of miles to east and west along Watling Street. The change-over for transport between Canterbury and Durolevum may have been located at Brenley Comer. Here there were roadside buildings, including what may have been a shrine (Wilson 1973, 322). At Dartford, 5 Roman miles beyond Welling and about the same distance from Springhead, there was probably some sort of roadside settlement. In origin this may have been the change-over point for transport provided by these two vici.

On Ermine Street between London and Braughing, a settlement which possessed a mansio but was not a city, there were intermediate settlements at Enfield, Cheshunt and Ware. At Enfield, nearly 10 Roman miles from London, excavations at Lincoln Road showed that a sequence of ditches, probably delimiting an enclosure, had spanned the period from c.85 to the late third - fourth century. Stratified building-materials showed that at least one late first century building had been 'roofed with tegulae and constructed from sandstone blocks or, more probably, half timbered upon a sandstone sill', while flue tiles indicate the existence of a bath-building (Gentry et al. 1977, 121 and 124-26). Nearly 6 Roman miles beyond Enfield there are indications of some kind of roadside buildings, possibly an extensive settlement, at Cheshunt (Smith 1987, 177). Ware lay c.6.5 miles beyond Cheshunt and almost the same distance from Braughing. Excavations have concentrated on features of the third fourth century settlement, but 'a first-century military-type ditch and traces of a few light timber buildings' have been located (Goodbum 1978, 445). Whether Ware was founded in the first century as a vicus or began as a stopping-place for changing transport between Cheshunt and Braughing is not clear. Braughing itself will be considered in detail in the next chapter.

Routes 5 and 9 both cover the road from London to Colchester and, once again, the differences between them reveal different modes of travel. In Route 5 Chelmsford, with its known mansio, is the only intermediate stop, 31 Roman miles from London and 23.5 from Colchester, two days' leisurely travel on horseback or by carriage. In Route 9 there is a stopping-place at Durolitum, probably Romford, 13 Roman miles from London and 18 from Chelmsford. Thirteen miles beyond Chelmsford Kelvedon is listed with a further 10 miles to Colchester. Some travellers on foot will probably have done the journey in two and a half days with overnight stops at Chelmsford and Durolitum; others may have taken an extra day, stopping also at Kelvedon. Vici at Durolitum and Kelvedon will have supplied changes of transport to those entitled to it and lodging to those who were not. A third case is Routes 2, 6 and 8 between London and St Albans. The first route has an intermediate stopping-place at Brockley Hill, another vicus, while in the last two this is omitted. By analogy, although Staines is the only place listed between London and Silchester in Route 7, it can be assumed that there were vici which provided lodging for those on foot and new transport for high-ranking travellers. The settlement at Brentford, about 10 Roman miles from London, will have been one of these. A second may be the site at Rapley Lake, Bracknell c.10.5 miles beyond Staines and nearly 17.5 miles from Silchester (Frere 1983b, 331). There may have been a third vicus at Finchampstead where aerial photographs show buildings beside the Roman road (Hampton and Palmer 1977, 161-62 Fig.20). Alternatively, since a milestone has been found here and it is possible that the obligation to provide transport was measured to and from particular milestones, it may have been the change-over point ten miles before Silchester. The mansionesat St Albans and Silchester will be considered in Chapter Six.

The link between roadside settlements and the administrative requirements of the Roman government was stated very clearly by Rivet (1975). Despite this the desire to see 'economic forces', or even local landowners, as the major factor in the creation of markets along the roads of the Roman province keeps recurring (compare Hingley 1989, 111-20 and Millett 1990, 143-56). There is certainly no reason to deny that roadside settlements embodied a market function. This was clearly the case with the fora, tabernae and emporia that are linked with mansiones in inscriptions, and it is implicit in the suffix -magus found in the names of particular roadside settlements in Britain. But a plethora of local economic factors could never have created the system of settlements along the major roads that we see existed already by the early second century. This was the result of government action.

Another route from London, the Stane Street leading to Chichester, is not among the routes of the Antonine Itinerary but the settlements along it conform to the pattern of those that are. From London to Ewell is 14 Roman miles, from Ewell to Dorking just under 10 miles , and from Dorking to Alfoldean 11.5 miles; Alfoldean to Hardham is 12 Roman miles and Hardham to Chichester nearly 15 miles. There was

Study of the sites on the roads around London shows that they would have provided an adequate system of mansiones and of villages to supply animals for those travelling on horseback or by carriage . The routes in the Antonine Itinerary where there are long intervals between the places

15

Cursus Pub/icus: the infrastructureof governmentin Roman Britain listed were compiled for such men. Other routes, or the same routes with more frequent stopping-places, were for slowermoving pedestrians or those accompanying ox-waggons. The archaeological evidence for official installations at the roadside settlements considered above is quite substantial, with parts of purpose-built mansiones excavated at Braughing and Chelmsford, and what was probably an

official fodder-store at Springhead. Relief-patterned flue tile fragments from many of them attest the constructionprogramme carried out in Hadrian's reign. The following chapters will examine the archaeological evidence from some of these sites, and from others in other parts of Britain, in much greater detail.

16

CHAPTER THREE MANSIONES IN THE FIRST CENTURY We saw in Chapter Two that a governor of Thrace in the Neronian period constructed tabernas et praetoria to provide acceptable accommodation and services for government officials and soldiers in a province that lacked a network of cities and roadside villages. A similar deficiency existed in Britain, yet after the invasion of A.D.43 soldiers and civilian officials had to travel and had to find nightly accommodation. Here, after the initial campaigning, each newly-overrun part of the province had a network of roads and forts imposed on it. The Roman army constructed mansiones alongside at least some of these forts. These will now be described individually.

within the fortress, exhibit features that would justify a description as temporary rather than pennanent. The provision of hypocaust heating in one of them is decisively against this. It has been suggested to the writer that even a 'temporary bath-building' had to be constructed in stone but this does not apply to domestic rooms where warmth could be provided in other ways and did not require hypocausts. That these were provided indicates that the buildings were intended to be pennanent. The whole complex makes excellent sense interpreted as a mansio, and a parallel is available in the buildings interpreted in this way in the area of the Friedhof outside the legionary fortress at Vindonissa (Ludin 1967; 1970a and b: Fig.3b in this volume).

The earliest mansio was at Richborough in Kent where it fonned part of the Claudian supply-base. However, it is better to begin with that outside the legionary fortress at Inchtuthil, of Flavian date, since the layout is known in its entirety and the component parts of mansiones can be best understood by considering this example. Because of the lack of an adequate description of a mansio and its elements in the literary and epigraphic sources Inchtuthil must serve as a 'type site' and the identification of other mansiones must be based on a comparison with it.

The more easterly of the two courtyards at Inchtuthil is flanked on one side by the barrack-like buildings. These contained fifteen contubernia each, but no centurion's quarters. On the opposite side of the courtyard was the building containing two rooms with hypocausts. This was certainly a residential building, and certainly for persons of high rank. We are dealing here with buildings offering two grades of accommodation - what can be conveniently tenned 'first class' and 'standard class' accommodation - and the more easterly courtyard can be called the 'residential courtyard'. At Vindonissa there were again buildings offering two types of accommodation, here separated by a narrow yard and linked at one end by further rooms (Fig.5). In the more westerly range there seem to have been ten contubernia and this was therefore presumably the standard class accommodation. In the second range there were at least two suites of first class accommodation, each of two rooms linked by a central passage or lobby. The mansio baths lay to the north-west. We have seen in Chapter Two that a distinction between the accommodation provided for ordinary soldiers and officials and for those holding the rank of centurion and above is likely, just as it was the latter who were entitled to the use of transport while the fonner were not.

Inchtuthil (Pitts and St.Joseph 1985, 207-222) (Fig.1:19).

Approximately 40 metres from the south-east comer of the legionary fortress lay a defended enclosure. This initially contained a long barrack-like building positioned close to one entrance through the defences and separated by a wide open area from another timber building with two rooms with masonry walls which were equipped with hypocausts. Behind the latter was a group of buildings laid out around a second courtyard and in relation to the second entrance into the enclosure (Fig.3a). Work on the enclosure and the buildings within it must have begun at the same time as work on the adjoining legionary fortress, that is following Agricola's victory over the Caledonian coalition in A.D.84, and the buildings must have been given up along with the fortress in A.D.88 at latest (Hobley A.S. 1989, 73). Within this short period modifications occurred. The defensive rampart was backfilled into the ditch and the barrack-like building was replaced by a pair of such buildings (Fig.4).

The more westerly courtyard at Inchtuthil can be referred to as the 'service courtyard'. Appropriately backing onto the first class accommodation on one side of this was a stable, a building 4 metres wide internally and 44 metres long. On the opposite side of the yard was the bath-building. Flanking the entrance into the yard were two blocks which were compared to centurions' quarters in the excavation report (Pitts and St.Joseph 1985, 213). It is possible that these were extra units of accommodation for official travellers, but far more likely that in one of these (Building I) we have the quarters for the mansio staff. We have seen that residential buildings for travellers flanked the more easterly courtyard. Building II, with its regular sub-divisions to the north-west and single large, barn-like, room to the south-east and another to the north-east, may have been a fodder-store. The first class accommodation at Inchtuthil merits closer examination to attempt to detennine the uses to which its rooms were put and, if possible. the number of residents it could

The whole complex is referred to in the excavation report as 'The Temporary Compound for Officers', and the discussion (Pitts and St.Joseph 1985. 220-222) concludes that 'the compound can best be interpreted as the residence first of the praefectus castrorum and then of the legatus /egionis. It would have continued in use until the praetorium [inside the fortress] was completed.' The whole discussion and its conclusion are based on the premise that the buildings within the compound were intended as temporary structures. However, Pitts and St.Joseph (1985, 216 and 220) conceded that this was not the case with the bath-house, and as this was an integral part of the complex their premise is therefore untenable. Nor do the other buildings, any more than those

17

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain accommodate. The rooms in Fig.6 have been assigned numbers to facilitate the discussion .

incorporating the entrance hall and the two suites of superior accommodation, plus the dining-room, were physically separated from the rooms to the south-east and north-west by the passages 5 and 22.

It is evident that modifications were made to the building in the course of construction. The curved wall-trench between rooms 7 and 8 replaced a straight trench that had been started but not completed. At the north-west end of the building the position of the west comer of room 28 was clearly primary, and the irregular shape of rooms 27 and 28 resulted from the separation of rooms 27-30 from the rest of the range and the extension of corridor 26 around the south-east and southwest sides of this block of rooms. The wall-trench of the north-east wall of room 23 extended c.0.3 metres beyond the line of its south-east wall and the original intention was probably to join this to the west comer of room 28. This plan would have given four suites of two-room units (23 and 24; 27 and 29; 28 and 30; and another lying between the first two), fronted on the north-east by a corridor (Fig.6a). In the plan that was adopted one of the two-room suites was retained (rooms 23-24) and four single-room units (rooms 27, 28, 29, and 30) were created, each entered independently from corridor 26 (Fig.6b).

The reconstruction offered here proposes an initial plan to provide accommodation for five centurions and higherranking officials in two-room suites, and accommodation in fifteen contuberniafor lower ranks. Two three-room suites of superior accommodation with hypocausta were also provided, presumably for very high-ranking individuals. This was modified to provide four single-room units for individuals in the first class accommodation (possibly eight if the suites formed by rooms 3 and 4 and by rooms 23 and 24 were split up) and twice as many contubernia.The heated accommodation for superior officers was unchanged. A close parallel for the first class accommodation at Inchtuthil has been excavated outside the legionary fortress at Nijmegen (Haalebos 1991). This comprised an aisled entrance hall (J on Fig. 7) flanked by ranges of accommodation. There were no hypocausts, but the suites of rooms in the eastern range (rooms L, M, N and rooms 0, P, Q) can be regarded as superior accommodation as they were larger than those in the western range. In the latter rooms B, C and D probably formed one suite while rooms E, F, H and I were either two suites or else single-room units of accommodation like rooms 27-30 at Inchtuthil. Rooms A and K may have been segregated dining-rooms. The Nijmegen building is also dated to the late Flavian period.

Room 14 was centrally placed in the facade looking onto the residential courtyard. It was an aisled hall and can be termed the 'entrance hall'. This was a feature of many mansiones,as we shall see, and its function will be discussed later. On each side of the hall were matching sets of three rooms ( 11-13 and 15-17). Beyond these in each case was a masonry room with a hypocaust (rooms 10 and 18). A further group of three rooms (7-9 and 19-21) adjoined each of the heated rooms. Rooms 11 and 15 were corridors linking rooms 8 and 19 to the entrance hall. It seems likely that 8 and 19 were the praefurnia serving the heated rooms . The two heated rooms (10 and 18) were hypocausta: they were designed to heat adjoining rooms indirectly (Black 1985, 77-80). The only building within the fortress equipped in this way was the house built for the primus pi/us (Pitts and St.Joseph 1985, 150). At his Laurentine villa the Younger Pliny describes a passage fitted out with a hypocaust which lay between a bedroom and library and served to heat up both of these rooms (Epistulae 11.17,9). A similar role may be assigned to the hypocausta in rooms 10 and 18. Associated with each of these was a suite of superior domestic accommodation. These probably comprised rooms 9, 12 and 13 in one case and rooms 16,17 and 21 in the other, although it is possible that 9 and 21 formed additional separate units of accommodation. During construction the size of room 7 was increased by the insertion of the curved partition between it and room 8. It seems probable that there was an effective continuation of the passage 11 across rooms 8 and 7 to link with passage 5 which flanked room 6 on two sides. The identification of room 6 as a dining-room (Pitts and St. Joseph 1985, 210) is probably correct and it seems likely that room 7 served as the kitchen. Rooms 3 and 4 may have been additional accommodation. At the south-east end of the building rooms 1 and 2 are regarded as an open loggia for relaxation (Pitts and St. Joseph 1985, 210). It may be significant that there were two rooms reflecting the two grades of accommodation in the building, with and without hypocaust heating respectively. The central block of rooms

Various elements at lnchtuthil are distinctive and can be sought at other sites in an attempt to identify mansiones:the barrack-like standard class accommodation; the presence of an entrance hall and of hypocausta heating some of the rooms in the first class accommodation; a detached bathbuilding; stabling and large yards around which the buildings are grouped. In addition the position of the complex is also significant. It is not placed adjacent to the main road leading to the fortress gate, but about fifty metres back from it. The space reserved along the road frontage would presumably have been occupied by tabernae in the canabae legionis had Inchtuthil not been evacuated before building was completed.

Richborough(Bushe-Fox 1928, 13-15; Cunliffe 1968, 1119) (Fig. I :63). Richborough is listed in Route 2 of the Antonine Itinerary. Whether or not it was the main beach-head for the Roman invasion, soon after A.D. 43 a military supply-base was established there. In Area XXI the earliest traces of building (Building B) are too fragmentary to reconstruct. Its successor, Building C, is also incomplete (Cunliffe 1968, 15 Fig.7) . It comprised a range of at least four rooms with a corridor on the east side. Two adjacent rooms measured 10 ft. 6 ins by 22 ft. (3.2 x 6.7 m) internally and the other complete room was 15 ft. by 22 ft. (4.6 x 6.7 m). The floor areas (21.5 and 30.7 square metres) compare quite well to those of contuberniain the standard class accommodation at Inchtuthil (24.5 and 26.8 square metres) and Vindonissa (26.3 square metres). but it is only the presence of certain mansio buildings later in the first century that suggests this

18

Mansionesin thefirst century identification. Building D was erected to the east of Building C (in Area XVIII) but seems to have been of later date as two postholes associated with it cut through wall-trenches of the latter . Although incomplete considerable elements of the layout of Building D were recorded (Fig.8) . Parts of the west and south sides of a yard were delimited by what in the report is described as a 'corridor' 12 ft. (3.7 m) wide (Cunliffe 1968, 15). A range of four rooms of approximately equal size (c. 11 ft. 6 ins x 13 ft. 6 ins. : 3.5 x 4.1 m) lay outside this yard attached at right angles to the western arm of the 'corridor'. Their floor area (14.6 square metres) actually exceeds that of the larger part of each contubernium in Building F (12.3 square metres) which was the latest mansio on the site, and they may have formed part of first class accommodation. The small number of rooms suggests that they did not comprise the whole of it. The western end of the building was continued to the south by a wall which must have enclosed a yard with perhaps further rooms on its south side, and to the west of these there seems to have been a line of posts representing a portico. The relationship of the fourroomed building to the 'corridor' to the east shows that this is not an accurate description for the latter. At most it can have given direct access to only one room along its entire surviving length, and its width is also excessive . It seems possible that the two arms of the 'corridor' were in fact cartsheds and/ or stables approached from the eastern yard, just as the stable and accommodation buildings at lnchtuthil were attached to different courtyards. At Richborough the southern stable / shed was separated from another block of rooms by a gap or corridor 7 ft. (2.1 m) wide, recalling the way that the first class accommodation backed onto the stable at Inchtuthil. The buildings considered so far did not stand in isolation, but formed part of a supply-base. To the north of an east-west road (Watling Street) was the mansio itself and what may have been workshops, and to the south there were at least ten granaries (counting four in insula I, the most northerly of which must have been destroyed by the Flavian quadrifrons arch). North-south streets joining the main east-west road divided the base up into blocks and the frontages were lined with porticoes. On the west side of insula IV containing the mansio there was a granary flanked by a portico (Building A in Area XIX). A continuous wall-trench on the west side of the granary may represent a fence surrounding the mansio buildings, and may have linked up with the south wall of a room on the south side of the insula. All the other granaries had six parallel trenches for the supports which raised them above the ground and this would also be the case with Building A if the most westerly trench did not form part of the building. The room to the south lay at an angle to the street grid, like the adjoining buildings, but its south wall was parallel to the street. There is some uncertainty whether this and the adjoining room were part of Building D or its successor Building E (Cunliffe 1968, Figs.9 and 27), but whichever was the case it can be inferred that they were built up to a pre-existing boundary that conformed to the street grid.

19

The granary associated with the mansio can be identified as a fodder-store. This was apparently absent at Inchtuthil unless Building II , flanking the entrance to the service-courtyard, served this purpose , and it is only rarely that it can be recognised elsewhere. However, oats or barley, as well as hay , were fed to horses and it has been suggested that in Britain beans were also used (Hyland 1990, 87-94). Hyland calculates a minimum of 1.5 kg of barley and 4.5 kg of hay per horse per day and the cereals at least will have required careful storage. It need not cause surprise therefore to find a distinctive military-style granary at some mansiones constructed by the army . The street grid is thought to be early in date, probably Claudian (Cunliffe 1968, 234), and the divergent alignment of the main mansio buildings indicates that the construction of Building D or one of the earlier buildings preceded the street grid. This divergent alignment is followed by all the buildings from B (the fragmentary predecessor of C) to the latest mansio building on the site , Building F, which was demolished for the construction of the quadrifrons arch in c.85-90. These buildings were of timber and there seems no reason why their alignment should not have been altered to that of the street grid at one or other of the reconstructions. That it was not altered must mean that there was another permanent feature governing each successive rebuilding. It is possible that this was the bath-building of the mansio, and its position , if not its exact alignment , can be fixed . When the quadrifrons arch was built the main mansio building was re-sited to the north where it was reconstructed with masonry foundations (the First House on Site III). When this was excavated Bushe-Fox (1928 , 14) thought that room 11 with its hypocaust had contained a hot-bath because he found traces of a lead pipe at the south-west angle of 11 passing through the west wall of room 12 (its furnace-room). However , he noted that the inlet for the pipe was at the same level as the bottom tile in a wall-flue in room 11. Since the tile must have drawn in heated air from the hypocaust below the floor level of room 11 it must itself have been set below the floor , and the same must therefore apply to the lead pipe. It is therefore doubtful whether the pipe had in fact anything to do with the drainage of room 11, and indeed the existence of an isolated hot-bath without ca/dariumand other bathingrooms makes no sense. Room 11 is actually one of the class of early domestic hypocausta, designed to heat adjacent rooms indirectly, that were noted earlier in the first class accommodation at Inchtuthil. However, in room 12 BusheFox described a 'curved step' at the west end of the room and two 'brick piers' projecting from the north and south walls. These also make no sense, as part of a stoke-hole, but taken together the curved foundation, the two tile pilae, and the lead pipe do make sense as part of an apsidal hot-bath that had been demolished and partly re-used in the west walls of rooms 11 and 12 of the First House . This will have been part of a bath-building which was associated with the timber mansionesBuildings C - F. At Richborough, as at lnchtuthil , the baths were associated with the service court of the mansio. It can be suggested that it was the bath-house , built in masonry and remaining in use throughout the period c.44-

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin Roman Britain 85, which governed the alignment of the successive timber buildings.

least 13.1 metres) is matched by room vi in the west range of Buiding F and by the central aisled hall (14) in the first class accommodation block at Inchtuthil. It can be suggested that room 19 served as the entrance hall for the First House at Richborough. If it was centrally-placed in the south side of the building then three more contuberniapresumably lay to the east matching those on the west.

Although in fragmentary condition the elements of Building D, together with Building A and the bath-building on Site III, comprise a fairly complete complement of buildings: cartsheds and stables and bath-building around a yard to the rear; domestic accommodation with access from a separate courtyard; a fodder-store on the west side of the compound adjacent to two roads for easy delivery of barley and other feed. In Building E which succeeded D at least two ranges of accommodation seem to have been laid out around a courtyard, the south-west comer of which was excavated (Fig.9a). Near the north end of the recorded part of the west range there seems to have been an entrance just under three metres wide and traces of an exterior colonnade were found. The southern part of this range was divided by a corridor running north-south and the two rooms on the west side of this were virtually the same size as the rooms in Building D. On the other side of the corridor there seems to have been a longer room, or more probably a portico, facing into the courtyard. The south range was more fragmentary with the corridor turning along beside it and adjoining the courtyard.

The original plan of the mansio was later altered to create additional accommodation. Room 11, as already noted, was a hypocaustonand must have been intended to heat room 10 which will have served as a bedroom for a soldier or official of high rank. South of rooms 8-10 was a new corridor (13) which occupied the spaces originally forming the rear rooms of the contubernia14-16, the south wall of the corridor being built on the northern side of the original dividing walls. The corridor may have given access to rooms 9 and 10, though not apparently to room 8 (Bushe-Fox 1928, 13) which must have been entered from an ante-room to the north (room 7). This was reached by a wide verandah along the west side of the building. On the north side of the courtyard ( 17) room 3 was constucted as an extension to room 2 in the original west range and gave access to rooms 5 and 6. The presence of room 18 behind the entrance hall may indicate that a similar infilling took place on the eastern side of the courtyard . It can be concluded from these alterations that rooms 9-11, and with them rooms 3 and 5-6, were all additions to the original plan. Two suites of first class accommodation can be recognised in the final plan (the original suite 4, 7 and 8, and rooms 5-6). Rooms 9 and 10 formed a suite of superior accommodation heated by the hypocaustonin room 11. The three contubernia were reduced in size at the time of the alterations. At least as much accommodation again was probably present in the missing eastern half of the building.

Building F, the final rebuilding on this site, is more easily comprehensible but is essentially the same plan as Building E. There are parts of three ranges round a courtyard and presumably a fourth once existed (Fig.9b). The barrack-like layout of the south range is immediately apparent and recalls the standard accommodation at Inchtuthil, though the internal floor area of each contubernium(17.6 square metres) is less. It is possible that these rooms were usually entered from an external path along the southern side of the range, leaving the courtyard as the preserve of the occupants of the first class accommodation. Room vi (c.5.95 by 7.47 metres) probably served as an entrance-hall and occupied the centre of the west range in the same position as the entrance into Building E. The corridor (vii) leading from the entrance hall recalls the similar provision of corridors in the first class accommodation at Inchtuthil. At Richborough, however, the doorway across the corridor shows that room viii was not part of a suite along with the rooms to the south. These two rooms were an additional contubernium- they are identical to those in the south range - and room viii therefore probably functioned along with the entrance hall. It may have been an office, and was perhaps matched by another in a similar position to the north.

The pottery associated with the First House was stated to be no later than the early part of the second century (Bushe-Fox 1928, 15), and if this is reliable its successor, the Second House, can reasonably be associated with the Hadrianic reorganisation of the system of mansiones and is treated in Chapter Four.

Caerleon(Wheeler and Wheeler 1928, 144-46) (Fig.1:6). Caerleon is listed in Routes 12 and 14 of the Antonine Itinerary. When the amphitheatre outside the legionary fortress was excavated a small part of a bath-building was found close to one of its entrances (Fig. I la). The baths had been demolished and rebuilt, removing the obstruction to the amphitheatre gate caused by the furnace of the original structure. This was therefore earlier than the amphitheatre and the latter's construction is now put c.90 (Zienkiewicz 1986, 21). It is therefore possible that these external baths were constructed at the same time as the legionary fortress, c.75. The furnace of the altered baths was filled in in the Hadrianic period , and a new bath-building near Gate A of the amphitheatre to the south-east was presumably constructed at this time. Only a fragment of its cold bath is known, and it is said in the report to be contemporary with the amphitheatre because it discharged used water into a drain that ran past it from the west and which was found to

When the great quadrifrons arch was constructed c.85-90 Building F was demolished, and a new mansio built to the north on the site of the earlier mansio baths. This is known as the 'First House' on Site III. The construction of the arch seems to mark the end of the military presence at Richborough until the later third century, and it seems probable that the new mansio was built by the magistrates of the civitas Cantiacorum. In the south-west comer was a row of three suites consisting of pairs of rooms, entered on the south from a narrow corridor leading from room 19 (Fig.IO). These should presumably be regarded as suites of standard class accommodation similar to the two-room suites in the south range of Building F. The size of room 19 (5.6 by at

20

Mansionesin thefirst century join and be of one build with the culvert that was laid through Gate B of the amphitheatre. However , this does not mean that the bath-building at Gate A need have been constructed as early as A.D.90. The discharge from the cold bath could have been connected with the drain at any time after this date and before the bath was itself filled in during the second half of the second century or later. The drain served some building further to the west which was contemporary with the amphitheatre and with the rebuilt bath-building close to Gate H. Excavation in this area was carried out in 1955 (Anon. 1956, 122). A quadrangular area said to measure about 91.4 by 68.5 metres was found surrounded by ranges of rooms, some of which contained heating and drainage systems, and was entered through a colonnaded porch. Roof-tiles stamped LEG. II. AV. ANTO . showed that re-roofing had been carried out early in the third century using tiles supplied by the military.

were contemporary. The original plan and the final plan of the complex, so far as these can be reconstructed, are shown in Fig.12a-b . The original mansio comprised four ranges of rooms (1-4) around a courtyard measuring 16.8 by 13.1 metres. Towards the courtyard the ranges were fronted by galleries or porticoes (5-8). The northern portico was extended as a corridor (9) to the east to give access to areas 10, 13, and 14. Area IO was situated on the west side of a yard and was about 22 by 3 metres internally. Its proportions and position recall the stable on one side of the service courtyard at Inchtuthil, and the same use, as a stable and vehicle-shed, can be suggested for it. Area 13 may have been another stable adjoining a more secure inner yard (12) which was cut off from the yard to the south by a wall. Area 14 could have been accommodation for drivers and others concerned with looking after the transport of the mansio.

No further details are available but a small-scale plan is included in the overall plan of the fortress and its environs (Boon 1972, folding plan at end). This shows parts of the north and west ranges of a courtyard building. The colonnaded entrance is at the west end of the north range. The west range comprises at least five small rooms each about half the floor area of a legionary contuberniumand clearly analogous to the standard accommodation already noted at mansiones. This, together with the military involvement in the early third century re-roofing, suggests that the buildings south of the amphitheatre at Caerleon formed the fortress mansio. The very early date of the original baths at Gate H of the amphitheatre is wholly in agreement with this since we have seen that at Inchtuthil the mansio was under construction along with the fortress. Presumably the original residential accommodation was in timber. The fragmentary evidence we have suggests rebuilding or alteration to part or the whole of the complex c.90, in the Hadrianic period, and in the early third century. It seems unlikely that the third century courtyard-house c.270 metres to the west-northwest was part of the mansio accommodation at Caerleon (contraBoon 1972, 60).

Room 11 which probably originally measured 6.1 by 8.2 metres projected to the west of the west range of the courtyard building. Apart from area 14, this was the only room where the side walls were given substantial foundations so that it can be assumed to have had a special function. Its central position in the western range suggests that it functioned as an entrance-hall, like the aisled hall in the first class accommodation at Inchtuthil. Within the ranges of the courtyard building there were no doubt contuberniafor low-ranking soldiers and officials and individual bedrooms for their superiors, as well as a communal dining-room and accommodation for the domestic staff of the mansio. As at Richborough and Inchtuthil the baths were situated to one side of the service yard. At Newstead they occupied a separate walled enclosure. Very little remained of the original bath-building. Below room L which belonged to the later baths were fragments of substantial walling. To west and south of this was an enclosure wall, and a drain headed from the more westerly fragment of walling towards the enclosure wall and then turned and ran parallel to it. A possible interpretation is that the walling below the west wall of L represents a cold bath situated in the south-west angle of a frigidarium or projecting beyond it to the west. The walling below the east wall of L will then represent the south-east angle of the cold room . If this was the case the baths presumably extended to the north and had been wholly removed by later building-work.

Newstead (Curle 1911, 92-103; Black 1992a) (Fig.1:22). The mansio at Newstead lay in an annexe to the west of the second auxiliary fort of the Flavian period which was probably constructed immediately after the evacuation of lnchtuthil and other forts to the north. It was thus the near contemporary of the legionary mansio at Inchtuthil and probably the exact contemporary of the First House at Richborough. The second Flavian fort was held until c.105 (Hartley 1972, 14-15) and the mansio must have been given up at the same time. The walls of the mansio were cut through by a ditch and a new bath-building was constructed on the site of the mansio baths when the fort-site was reoccupied c.140.

The early bath-building was superseded by a new building of which rooms K,L,M and N were identified. The walls of rooms M and N are described as resting on river-cobbles like the mansiowalls, and unlike those of the Antonine bathhouse (Curle 1911, 98-99). The relationship of rooms K-N suggests a reihentypbath-house with room L functioning as a cold plunge-bath. Tile debris from Pit L VII which contained material from the Flavian and early Trajanic occupation and which had been dug through the north-east corner of yard 12 included 'one or two fragments of tegulae mammatae- tiles with points projecting so as to leave an open space for hot air between them and the wall' (Curle 1911, 103). Such tiles were not used to form wall-jacketings

The main accommodation building was of courtyard plan but only the cobble foundations of the main load-bearing walls , and probably not all of these, were traced. This building underwent substantial alterations and the baths seem to have been completely rebuilt. Here it is assumed that these events

21

Cursus Publicus : the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain in hypocausts later than the first century A.O. by the end of which they had been superseded by flat tiles and ceramic spacers, or by tubuli (box flue-tiles). They will have been used in the tepidarium or caldarium of the mansio baths .

that it did on the other side also, especially as the flooring of the porticoes themselves , a pebbled surface, was quite different. One analogy for the Timber Phase I building at Chester may be the enclosure bounded by a portico on at least one side at Richborough (Building D: see Fig.8). Another is a possible compound c.40 by at least 45 metres at Cardiff (Webster P.V. 1990, 35-37 Fig.4). This feature and fragmentary buildings assigned to Cardiff I (c. A.O. 55/60 75) may have been outside the defences of a contemporary fort, as was the case with the area they occupied in the two succeeding periods. It is suggested here that Chester's Timber Phase I was a similar enclosure, either the residential or the service courtyard of the mansio, and that a second, complementary, courtyard lay to the south. Timber Phase I was tentatively dated c.75-80.

The second bath-building was also in a walled compound. Its east wall was found running north-south close to the line of the later Antonine rampart on the east. If the more southerly of its returns to the west is projected it meets the south-west comer of the earlier enclosure. It seems therefore that the western side of the earlier enclosure remained standing while its southern side was demolished and replaced. The northern wall of the new enclosure was on a parallel alignment to the north and south walls of the yard 12 and the other east-west walls of the mansio. In the second period of the courtyard building (Fig . l 2b) a wall was built across the portico (5) and this was rebuilt to the east as a narrower corridor (15). The wall continued across and divided the courtyard. The eastern part of the courtyard (16) was probably now roofed and sub-divided into rooms to create extra accommodation, as we saw happened in the First House at Richborough. Room 11 was enlarged to virtually the full width of the internal courtyard. A further alteration was the addition of 17 on the eastern side of 10. Area 17 also incorporated the southern end of 13 so that this was now reduced in size or else simply demolished. If 17 was a replacement for 13, and 10 continued to have the same function as before, there was an increase in the space for vehicles and animals to match the increased accommodation provided in 16.

Timber Phase II which sealed the demolished earlier building was represented only by an east-west portico . Although it was assumed that this was also part of a courtyard-building this is unproven. Again no trace was located of the range of rooms presumed to lie to the north. There were resurfacings of the floor of the portico and of the area to the south which was similar in character. Demolition took place c.100. In Timber Phase III there was an east-west range of rooms with a drainage gulley to the south (Fig. 13a). At least three rooms could be inferred. Although very little of the plan could be recovered two important aspects call for comment. The first is the lack of any portico, which suggests a difference in function from that of the two preceeding phases of building. The second is the change in the width of the range in the western part of the excavated area where it is narrower than to the east. At some point the southern wall was set in by 0. 7 metres. This feature recurred in the plan of the Stone Phase 11/111building (Fig.13b ), which in other respects also shows a close similarity to the plan of Timber Phase III, although the former did not succeed the latter immediately. This led the excavator to comment that the architects of Stone Phase II may have had plans of the earlier building available to them (Mason 1980, 15). In the plan of Stone Phase 11/111 a small room (room 2) linked the narrower western and wider eastern parts of the range and probably also gave access between the external areas to north and south. This recalls the arrangement at the north-west end of the range of first class accommodation at Inchtuthil (Fig.6). There the original plan seems to have envisaged that this end of the building should have been c.0.3 metres wider than the rest (see above). As finally built a gap or cross-passage separated a block of four rooms with corridors on three sides from the rest of the range which was 1.45 metres narrower. The rest of the range also lacked a portico or veranda like the Timber Phase III building at Chester. While it cannot be claimed that there is a precise match the details are sufficiently similar to raise the question whether the design of the Timber Phase III building was based on that of the range of first class accommodation at Inchtuthil. The Timber Phase III building was constructed after c.A.D.100 and was demolished sometime before c.120 . It has been suggested that Legio XX returned to the fortress at Gloucester after the abandonment of Inchtuthil, and only later moved to Chester (Hurst 1988, 51-56 and 70-71). The beginning of Timber

Chester (Mason 1980) (Fig.1 :13). Chester is listed in Routes 2 and 11 of the Antonine Itinerary. At Chester, as at Inchtuthil and Caerleon, there is evidence for a mansio dating as early as the foundation of the legionary fortress . The building proposed as a mansio was situated to the west of the road that led south from the porta praetoria of the fortress to the Dee crossing (Fig.llb). A second road may have approached it directly from the gate. Only a very small area was examined but the excavator has argued convincingly in favour of the identification (Mason 1980, 80-84). He points to the scale of the building and its similarity of plan through successive phases from c. A.D.100 (Timber Phase III) to the fourth century (Stone Phase IV). In addition, many of the phases can be correlated with significant periods of alteration to the internal buildings of the legionary fortress. Timber Phase I comprised two 'verandas', 2.17 metres wide, meeting to form what was probably the south-east angle of a rectangular courtyard-building or enclosed area. The former interpretation is preferred by the excavator. This would mean that the verandas or porticoes fronted the building externally. Although no trace of them was found ranges of rooms could have existed behind, since the conditions of the excavation could have prevented their recognition. However, similar layers of sand were recorded both within the angle formed by the porticoes as well as outside it, and if the sand represented an open surface on one side it seems reasonable to accept

22

Mansionesin thefirst century Phase III could mark the arrival of the legion at Chester. The later phases of the Chester mansio will be dealt with in later chapters.

patterned tiles from the site (see Appendix Three). The Phase II additions to the baths shared the orientation of the walls on the south-west side of the residential courtyard, again suggesting that both buildings existed together. Part of a circular hut was located between the baths and accommodation and later on its site was crossed by a ditch, presumably marking out two separate compounds.

Wall (Round 1992) (Fig.1:69). Wall appears in Route 2 of the Antonine Itinerary. Excavations in the 1970's found that the courtyard-building and bath-house first explored in 1912-14 which formed the later mansio had succeeded two timber phases. These lay to the south-west of a sequence of forts which began in the Neronian period. The latest fort ditches were finally filled in early in the second century (Wilson D.R. 1971, 260).

During Phase 2 rooms a, b and c were combined and the new room was given a concrete floor. A wide robber-trench along the south-west side of the enlarged room removed a masonry wall that was thought by the excavator to be contemporary with the concrete floor (Round 1992, 4-5 and 75-6). This seems doubtful. The robber-trench continues the line of a feature which Round (1992, 8-9) conceded may itself have been the foundation trench for a wall although he preferred to interpret it as a shallow drainage ditch. Here it is taken to represent a wall and to be a continuation of the wall removed by the robber-trench. It will be shown in Chapter Five that it functioned as part of the Phase 3 mansio, along with rooms 9 and 16 which were assigned in the report to Phase 2A. The robbing of the wall will be related to alterations to the Phase 3 mansio. Before it was robbed it must have passed alongside the line of the timber wall on the south-west side of rooms a-c. This was also removed by the robber-trench but there is no reason for thinking that it was replaced at the time the concrete floor was laid .

The earliest Roman activity on the site of the mansio is evidenced by plough-furrows. Probably in the Flavian period rather than earlier a complex of timber structures with thatched roofs was erected on narrow sleeper-beams (Fig.14). The remains were fragmentary. A row of rooms, probably fronted by a gallery or portico, existed on the south-east side of a possible courtyard. At the north comer of the site was a series of divisions placed just over one metre apart. Although these were regarded by the excavator as floor-joists and this seems the most likely interpretation, it is possible that they represent divisions between rooms that provided standard class accommodation. Such diminutive units are matched in the Hadrianic mansio at Melandra Castle (Fig.26). Further traces of timber buildings were noted up to nearly 20 metres away to the north-east and over 30 metres to the south-west another building with sleeper-beams was probably demolished to make way for the Phase I baths.

The re-assignment of the robbed wall to Phase 3 means that the carved stones found re-used in the courtyard building must have been taken from some other Phase 2 structure. These carried carvings, primitive in style, of ritual and religious subjects, British rather than Roman in character (Frere 1977, 392-94).

The remains are not in themselves distinctive (unless the diminutive contuberniaare accepted), and their identification as the first mansio on the site depends on the succession of later buildings which can be assigned this role. The most important link between the three phases of residential buildings is the associated bath-house. The first phase of this seems to overlap the first two phases of the residential buildings. It is dated towards the end of the first century (see Appendix Three), but since its alignment is close to that of the south-eastern range of the Phase 1 timber buildings it is likely that both structures were in existence contemporaneously, even if only for a short time. If this was the case the destruction by fire of the Phase 1 accommodation must be put at c. A.D.100 rather than earlier (contraRound 1992, 74).

The fill of the ditch between the baths and the accommodation contained a quantity of painted wall plaster which was thought to come from the demolition of the Phase 2 building. This was dated by the excavator to c.140-50 (Round 1992, 74), but a later date is possible and perhaps preferable. Both the primary and the main ditch fills contained, along with earlier material, pottery dated to the mid-late second century (Round 1992, 4-5). This will be considered further in Chapter Five.

Carlisle (No final report available) (Fig.1:10). Carlisle appears in Routes 2 and 5 of the Antonine Itinerary. Parts of two timber buildings excavated in The Lanes area of the city are considered here. The larger of them (Building A) lay within a ditched compound, but this may not have been contemporary with it. The ditch on the south side of the compound was parallel to the southern ditch of the late first century fort and the compound was possibly an appendage of the fort (Fig .16a). The Period IV. l waggon-park at Chelmsford may provide a parallel (see below). The date of Building A is pre -A.D.150 (Caruana 1983, 78). Outside the compound, and about 40 metres to the east of Building A, was Building B which is thought to have been approximately contemporary (Fig. l 6b).

Phase 2 of the mansio accommodation is again represented by timber buildings, now with post-holes set in trenches. There was clearly a courtyard in this phase with a well in the centre (Fig.15). Along the north-east side was a range of at least ten rooms of which five (rooms e-j) were approximately equal in size. One larger room (room c) was flanked by narrower passages. This is a characteristic of dining-rooms and the building can be interpreted as a range of accommodation units and a dining-room for the residents. The Phase I baths must have continued in use for some time after the new accommodation was built if it is correct to associate Phase II of the baths with the Hadrianic relief-

23

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain Building A extended for 55 metres, but neither end was located. It is thought likely that a large, undivided hall, c. 9 by 26 metres, occupied a substantial part of it. There were at least three rooms to the north of this and at least two to the south, though it is uncertain whether the complete building was a single row of rooms or whether this was just one range of a courtyard-building. In discussing the purpose of the building Caruana (1983, 78) rejected the possibility that it was a mansio, it seems because the building was thought to be too large. He concluded: 'Without being too specific it is suggested that this is a large house for an important field commander or a leading official. Praetorium in this sense might, therefore, be an appropriate label. It should be remembered that this building is just behind an important military frontier and several other such buildings are offered as possible comparisons - the residency at Inchtuthil, and the palace of the Dux Ripae at Dura-Europos.' We have seen above that the 'residency' at Inchtuthil was a mansio and, as far as we know, there was never a Commander of the Stanegate Frontier or Commander of the Valiumanalogous to the Dux Ripae. The large hall in Building A at Carlisle is paralleled by the entrance-halls of mansioneselsewhere and the position of the buildings 50 metres back from a major east-west road recalls the similar position of the mansio buildings at Inchtuthil. It is a preferred location which we will come across repeatedly. The building should be accepted as a mansio. Building B comprised two ranges of rooms c.3 metres deep fronted by colonnades. Between the two ranges was a courtyard and the west end of this was filled by a hall measuring c.7 by 8 metres internally. There was a colonnade to the west of this facing towards Building A, and the westermost rooms of the two ranges projected beyond the colonnade to form 'wing rooms'. The north and south walls of the hall lay on the line of the colonnades fronting the ranges of rooms, and this must mean that enclosed corridors replaced the colonnades at these points. Centrally-placed doorways were located in the west and east walls of the hall. In the interim report (Caruana 1983, 80-81) the building has been tentatively identified as a temple with the hall as its cella approached from the west through a columned pronaos, and it is suggested that both stood on a raised clay podium. However, there was no structural trace of a podium and the constant feature of cellae is that opposite the entrance the worshipper was confronted by a cult-statue of the deity placed in front of a solid wall, not by another doorway. The opposed doorways identify the room as an entrance-hall through which one passed into the courtyard beyond. It is not known what room(s) lay at the eastern end of the courtyard, but the ranges of small rooms to north and south can be readily identified as part of the accommodation of a mansio. The monumentalisation of the approach is matched at Caerleon where a columned porch marked the entrance to the courtyard of the mansio. It is possible that the entrance-hall in Building B was a secondary feature as one might expect a more satisfactory integration with the adjoining rooms in the north and south ranges had all been part of the same design. On the other hand projecting wings occur in the mansio at Kempten and perhaps at Silchester (see Chapter Six).

24

Chelmsford (Drury 1988) (Fig.1:41). Chelmsford appears in Routes 5 and 9 of the Antonine Itinerary. Excavations on the masonry mansio and at scattered sites surrounding it have revealed a complex sequence of periods. Periods IV (c. A.D. 60/65-90) and V (c. A.O. 90-120/125) and VI.I (c. A .O. 120/125-130) all precede the erection of the Hadrianic masonry building in Period VI.2. The short-lived timber buildings of Period VI. I are recognised in the report as belonging to an early Hadrianic mansio. The layout of the site in Periods IV and V will be examined in this chapter and it will be argued that a mansio can be recognised in these periods also. Since the excavator has offered a different interpretation it is necessary to discuss the rather fragmentary evidence from a number of separate sites in detail. Some of these sites have individually-dated sub-periods within the date-range for each major period, and readers are referred to the excavation report for full details of these. At Site S in Period IV an important sequence of features lay on the south-east side of the Roman road from London to Colchester (Fig.17). The earliest (IV.1) was a ditch with one terminal, presumably marking an entrance from the road, within the excavated area. It ran parallel to the line of the road for about 10 metres to the north-east of the terminal, then turned eastwards at an angle of 120 degrees. To the south of this arm there were traces of a bank about 2 metres wide formed from the upcast from the ditch. The IV .1 ditch was back-filled and replaced by a simple road-side ditch (IV.2). This in tum was filled and over it was laid out a portico or corridor c. 1.3 metres wide defined by slots for timber posts (IV .3). It had gravel flooring and a similar surface was found extending about 1 metre, and at one point 4-5 metres, behind it. Towards the road there was a gap c.7 metres wide between two slots marking the front of the structure and to the rear of it a drain terminated roughly in line with the more north-easterly of these slots. Although the rear slot and the flooring continued across the gap it seems possible that there was a wide entrance at this point giving access to an enclosure behind the timber structure. NeronianFlavian pottery preceded and was associated with this, while Flavian pottery came from the fill of one of the slots. After the demolition of the timber structure a new ditch and rampart with an entrance were laid out on the same line parallel to the road (IV.4). The rampart was a substantial feature about 6 metres wide and revetted with turf at the front. In Period V the original entrance was closed by extending the rampart across it and a new entrance was provided further to the north-east. However, the ditch of Period IV.4 was allowed to silt up. The rampart and ditch of Period IV .4 were considered 'unequivocally military' by the excavator and part of the defences of a fort lying immediately south-east of the road, and this led him to regard the roadside ditch (Period IV .2) and the timber structure (Period IV.3) as internal features of earlier and larger forts that had straddled the main London-Colchester road. It was thought that the ditch and bank of Period IV . 1 could have been the defences of a camp or defined an annexe to a fort (Drury 1988, 128). Later, however, it is stated that

Mansionesin thefirst century the Period IV.4 enclosure 'must surely represent a road station, developing directly from the post-Boudican military base, and maintaining approximately the form, during Period IV.4 at any rate, of a small fort' (Drury 1988, 130).

wall and an associated stoke-hole (AK75 and AK76) are the only features known of the earliest baths (Drury 1988, 23). Even their alignment is uncertain. However, they lay close to Features AR67 and Z43, the ditch that was proposed as the north boundary of the Period IV.4N compound, and may have also lain near to the eastern boundary of this. If the stoke-hole was filled in at the end of Period V, as the limited dating evidence suggests, the baths must have been built earlier in Period V or in Period IV. Although not provable the track on Site AR, delimited on the south by AR87 and heading in the direction of the bath-house, may have been intended to give access to it. If AR87 has been correctly interpreted as part of the Period IV .3 enclosure the original baths may also belong to this late Neronian - early Flavian period , but it is unnecessary to attribute them to an earlier fort.

More recent excavations adjacent to Site S (at the Godfrey's Mews site) have defined the Period IV .1 enclosure as a quadrilateral with maximum dimensions of c.98 x 61 metres within its ditches (Allen, in prep.). Unfortunately at the points examined the bank did not survive, nor was any further evidence found for the later boundaries recorded by Drury on the road frontage. However, about 90 metres north-east of Site S the line of a palisade trench (Feature AR87) crossed Site AR in Period IV, and the same line was followed by a ditch (Feature AR67) in Period V. The alignment of these features is not exactly the same as that of the north and south sides of the Period IV .1 enclosure, but it is only about ten degrees out. Drury himself (1988, 128) noted this and compared the sequence of development in Periods IV and V on Sites AR and S without, however, suggesting that the boundaries may have belonged to the same enclosures. It is proposed here that Features AR87 and AR67 do in fact represent the north sides of the enclosures defined by the Period IV.3 timber boundary and its Period IV.4N successor on Site S. These relationships are shown in Fig.18a-c. The well (S394) within the Period IV .I enclosure was not filled in until Period V (Drury 1988, 53), suggesting that despite the apparent break in Period IV.2 there was some degree of continuity in the use of the area throughout Periods IV and V. In addition the entrance of Period IV.I is matched by the possible entrance through the timber structure in IV.3, and by those of IV.4 and V (with very slight changes of position).

In Period V what was probably a new northern boundary to the whole complex was laid out across Site T. A metalled track now passed the baths in the direction of a gateway through this. The boundary lay about 50 metres behind the frontage of a road which left the London-Colchester road and probably headed for the port at Heybridge. On Sites AG, R, and V fragmentary timber buildings were excavated to the north of the predecessor of this road, a metalled alley about two metres wide (Isserlin and Wickenden, in prep.). The alignment of the alley and the later road determined that of the buildings to the north in the earlier part of Period IV and that of the northern boundaries of the various enclosures to the south which have been discussed above. One of the Period IV buildings (on Site AG) had at least two ranges of rooms meeting at right angles and would be acceptable as accommodation in a mansio. However, it is over 200 metres from the north boundary of the Period IV .1 enclosure on Site S with which it is probably contemporary, and it and the other buildings in the same area have been tentatively attributed to a fort, thought to belong immediately after rather than before A.D. 60/61 (Wickenden 1990, 58 and pers. comm. R. Isserlin). The full case for the existence of a fort in this position will be developed in the final report (Isserlin and Wickenden, in prep.). Here it should be noted that its buildings were superseded by civilian occupation in the late Neronian / early Flavian period.

The timber boundary of IV .3 and the modified rampart of V when the ditch of IV.4 was no longer maintained cannot have been the defences of forts so that it seems very unlikely that the 'unequivocally military' rampart and ditch of Period IV.4 represent a fort. Rather the whole sequence represents a compound, first attested in Period IV .1, then, following suppression in IV.2, re-instated and extended to the north in Period IV.3. The timber structure of IV.3 is reminiscent of those suggested above for the Chester mansio in Timber Phases I and II and seen delimiting the compounds of Building D at Richborough and the possible compound at Cardiff. The military-style rampart and ditch of Period IV.4 at Chelmsford is matched by the defences put round the mansio at Inchtuthil in its first phase. Perhaps it was constructed by the army, but it was to define an installation used by the military rather than run by them or garrisoned by them. The excavations of 1987 behind Drury's Site S failed to reveal traces of contemporary buildings, either military or official or civilian. The only features that were recorded were remains of hearths or ovens, all within 30 metres of the road-edge. This absence, and the comparisons cited above, combine to suggest that the sequence of enclosures served as a secure waggon-park belonging to a mansio.

If the boundaries on Sites S and AR did enclose the waggonparks/service-yards of a mansio, and if the earliest baths on Site AK also belonged to it, there should have been accommodation to go with these. On Site AA, about 70 metres to the north of Site S and on the opposite side of the London-Colchester road, two slots representing part of the north-east wall of a major timber building were located. The slot closer to the line of the road was off-set 0.75 metres beyond the other which had a drainage-gulley along its north-east side. It was suggested (Drury 1988, 71) that the part of the building closer to the road was roofed with its ridge parallel to the road while the other had its ridge at 90 degrees to the road. It may be no more than an interesting coincidence that the dog-leg in the line of the wall is matched in the Timber Phase III building at Chester. The building on Site AA could have been in use throughout Period IV (c. A.D.60/65 - 90), and it may be that it was here

On Site AR in Period IV a track seems to have led eastwards from the London-Colchester road. On Site AK in this direction were traces of a bath-building. A fragment of a

25

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain that the mansio accommodation was located. remained here in Period V is not known.

Whether it

Building 3 was identified as a workshop because of traces of furnaces and pits with quantities of iron fragments and charcoal from smithing activities in its south-eastern room.

There is nothing whatever in the archaeology of Roman Chelmsford to support the idea that it was intended to be the chief town of the Trinovantes (contra Wacher 1974, 196-98). This suggestion rests entirely on the imperial prefix in the name Caesaromagus which, it has been observed, was usually assigned to civitas-capitals. What has been overlooked is that Caesaromagus is not so grandiloquent when considered as the neighbour of Colonia Claudia Victrix Camulodunum. The naming of Chelmsford was perhaps contemporary with, or a little later than, the naming of Colchester, and no doubt the officials who administered the vicus were appointed by the authorities in the colony. What is of greater interest is the implication in the name that Chelmsford was a deliberate Roman foundation, designed to provide a roadside market, like the tabernae which accompanied praetoria in Neronian Thrace.

In the western part of the fortlet were a granary (Building 6), a latrine or stable (Building 7), and a 'courtyard building' (Building 5). In the excavation report it was suggested that Building 5 may have been the accommodation of a mansio, but since both the standard class and first class accommodation can be identified in the eastern part of the fortlet it is more likely that this building housed the permanent staff of the mansio. Building I at Inchtuthil was a similar building. The distinctive granary is not matched at lnchtuthil though such a building did exist in the mansio at Richborough. Whether Building 7 was a stable or not (and its internal depth of c.3.5 metres is compatible with this suggestion), the granary will have acted as a fodder-store. Its capacity was within the range for a full-sized auxiliary fort, quite out of proportion for the fortlet, and this may help to identify other mansiones.

Castleshaw (Redhead et al. 1989) (Fig.1:11).

All the buildings within the fortlet fit with its identification as a mansio. The defences are not surprising: we have seen them provided, at least initially, at Inchtuthil and at Chesterholm in the second century the mansio complex outside the fort was defended by a rampart (see Chapter Five). What seems to be missing at Castleshaw is a waggonpark, but its absence may tell us what sort of traffic was using this road in the early second century: not supply convoys or civilian officials in carriages but mounted couriers and high-ranking officers with cavalry escorts. It is significant that Castleshaw is about 53 Roman miles from Chester and about 55 from York and, as we saw in Chapter Two, that the estimated speed of couriers was about 50 Roman miles a day.

The fortlet at Castleshaw was occupied from c. A.D.105 into the 120's and was built on the site of an earlier fort on the military road between Chester and York. Although it belongs to the early years of the second century it is most convenient to include it here since its closest analogy is with the first century mansio at Inchtuthil already dealt with in this chapter. The fortlet was originally excavated in 1907 and 1908 and re-examined in 1984. The recent excavation report is exemplary in discussing its function, considering its possible role as a 'base fortlet', housing administrative buildings for a garrison partly outposted, and as a 'commissary fortlet', possibly housing a mansio, or receiving taxes, or engaged in production for military use. A firm conclusion was not reached. However, comparison of the excavated buildings with those of the mansio at Inchtuthil demonstrates that the fortlet at Castleshaw was in fact a mansio and falls within the class of 'commissary fortlets'.

Brandon Camp and Leintwardine (Frere 1987a; Stanford 1968) (Fig.1:2 and 59).

Excavations in the interior of an Iron Age hillfort at Brandon Hill in Herefordshire revealed the traces of Roman militarystyle timber buildings dating to the Neronian period. A roadway from the east gate of the hillfort linked it to the line of the Roman road between the legionary bases at Wroxeter and Usk. The roadway continued across the interior of the hillfort, its line marked by a drain, past a group of buildings which included a large granary, to a second, more compact, group in the western half of the interior (Fig.20b). Professor Frere had considerable difficulty in defining the nature of the military occupation. The large granary was not matched by the accommodation required by a large garrison. Many of the buildings seemed more like the tabernae of traders than quarters for regular army units. He finally concluded that Brandon Hill had been a campaign-base (Frere 1987a, 62-3 and 69-71). Here it is suggested that Brandon Hill became the site of a mansio in the Neronian period, that it is in fact an example of the installations that the Neronian governor of Thrace described as tabernas et praetoria. Its location within the ramparts of a deserted hillfort rather than on the line of the military road was presumably dictated by considerations of security.

Building 2 in the eastern half of the fortlet was identified as a barrack block (Fig.19). It had six contubernia. However, it was the only building identified as a barrack block and we have seen that at Inchtuthil such buildings formed the standard class accommodation of a mansio. Facing Building 2 across a narrow roadway was Building 4. This, a timber building like the others in the fortlet, contained a masonry hypocauston which was once re-designed with a new stokehole during its period of use. The excavators themselves were wary of assigning this to the quarters of a mere centurion (Redhead et al. 1989, 49-50), rightly, for at Inchtuthil only the quarters of the primus pi/us within the fortress had this amenity. However, in the first class accommodation of the mansio outside there were two hypocausta. It is the presence of the hypocauston in Building 4 which is decisive in confirming that the fortlet at Castleshaw was in fact a mansio. The hypocauston was provided to warm accommodation that might be used by a very senior officer on his way between the legionary bases at Chester and York.

26

Mansionesin thefirst century This identification rests on analogy with the other mansiones already discussed in this chapter. All the buildings, except for the granary, in the eastern part of the site (Buildings AO) can indeed be interpreted as tabernae. The unexpectedly large granary is matched, as we have seen, by that in the fortlet at Castleshaw and, like it, should probably be regarded as a fodder-store. It occupied a location close to the entrance so that carts making deliveries did not have to be driven further into the complex. There seems to be no particular reason for this if the fodder was coming from military stores, and it may indicate that it was being supplied by local native farmers. In the western part of the site Building II contained six contubernia, with areas between 8.9 and 10.6 square metres, but lacking armamentaria.The six contubernia in the standard class accommodation at Castleshaw had papiliones of similar size, but also contained armamentaria.Building II at Brandon Hill can be identified as standard class accommodation, and next to it Building I presumably comprised the first class accommodation. A wide entrance led into room 1 (11.3 by 10.7 metres) in Building IV, and vehicles may have been brought inside it. There was a possible cooking-oven in room 2. Room 3 was only three metres across. High-quality pottery and glass came from the vicinity of Building IV and prompted the suggestion that it had been the residence of the officer commanding the presumed campaign-base. In the context of a mansio Building IV may have served in part as a store for the dining-utensils used by travellers. Building III was thought to be a barracks but may have been domestic accommodation for mansio staff, or for a manceps. The separate grouping of the buildings for travellers and for permanent staff was a feature of the mansiones at Castleshaw and Inchtuthil.

If this interpretation of the Neronian occupation of Brandon Camp is accepted it has considerable importance for our understanding of the genesis and development of roadside settlements in Roman Britain (Fig.20a). The mansio was succeeded in the late Neronian-early Flavian period by a fort at Jay Lane and a vicus c. 500 metres away at the crossing of the River Teme where the Roman road follows the line of the High Street in Leintwardine village (Stanford 1968, 314-17). The vicus seems to have continued through a possible gap in the military presence and throughout the life of the next fort (c.90-130) established at Buckton c.1.5 kilometres away to the south-west (Fig.1:3) . It seems clear that the siting of the vicus was determined by the road and river-crossing and the presence of a Roman garrison to guarantee security. Stanford (1968, 271) believed that he had found successive mansio buildings, at first of timber followed by stone, at Roman Rise (Site B) in Leintwardine, but the plans recovered are too fragmentary to be interpreted convincingly in this way. There were two later timber periods on Site B and the second of these (Period III) was a structure with at least six division walls at intervals of about 4 to 4.5 metres (Stanford 1968, 273-74 Fig. 26). This could have been a range of standard class accommodation in a mansio. None of the periods on Site B could be given an absolute date and this is unfortunate since aerial photography has revealed a courtyard building which was probably a mansio outside the fort at Buckton (St. Joseph 1977, 145).

This must have belonged to the same period as the fort (c. 90-130). The bath-house which Stanford excavated close to the River Teme at Leintwardine contained in its foundations pieces of worked stone which almost certainly came from robbing the wall of the Buckton fort at the time of its evacuation, and the pottery associated with it also suggested a date in the period 130-50 for its construction (Stanford 1968, 283 and 294). Throughout these developments the civil settlement on the main road was the permanent element. When the new fort was built 1.5 kilometres away at Buckton a new mansio was built to accommodate officials whose business took them there, but the civil settlement , which had existed for at least twenty years, remained at Leintwardine. It was situated on the main road and most of the official traffic , which was merely passing through to some further destination, will have lodged here. Its obligations remained the same throughout: the provision of accommodation and transport to official travellers. A timber-laced rampart and ditches were provided at Leintwardine sometime after c.160-90. Stanford's belief that the roadside settlement was destroyed to make way for a military supply-base at this time is not supported by any evidence from the excavations and Sommer (1984, 28) is no doubt correct in regarding these as defences around the civil settlement. The vicus at Leintwardine, like its predecessor at Brandon Camp, can be regarded as a deliberate foundation designed to provide services to official travellers. This was probably the case with other roadside settlements elsewhere. Braughing (Holmes 1955; Partridge 1977) (Fig. l:37).

Braughing-Puckeridge was a pre-Roman centre of considerable importance, with evidence for the minting of coins and possibly the presence of traders literate in Latin (Partridge 1981, 323; 1982, 325-26). No first century Roman fort has yet been located but an early Flavian bathhouse has been excavated c.550 metres from Ermine Street and c.850 metres from Stane Street, beside the present course of the River Rib (Fig.2la). It comprised a hot room with a hot bath adjacent to the furnace and an apsidal extension towards the west, a warm room, and a combined undressingroom and cold room (Fig. 21b). Room 4 was a small room two metres square which opened from the east side of the cold room but its floor level was 10 centimetres above the floor of the latter. Even so it is likely that room 4 held a cold bath. The junction between the two rooms was totally destroyed by a fourth century ditch. The same feature may have destroyed a drain taking waste water from the southeast comer of room 4 to join the drain from the cold-douche in room 1. The dating of the building to c.70-90 was largely based on the use of a form of tegulae mammataeinstead of box-flue tiles. These combined solid mammaewith notches serving as nail-settings in the sides of the tiles (A. G. Rook in Partridge 1977, 58). The baths went out of use in the period c.120-40. The discovery of relief-patterned flue tiles (dies 16 and 64) in a fourth century dump of material beside a courtyard building partly excavated c.200 metres to the south-west close to Braughing railway station (Holmes

27

CursusPublicus:the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain 1955, 106 and 126) shows that another bath-building was constructed in the same period. This can hardly be coincidence. Die 16 was certainly associated with mansio baths at Chelmsford, Godmanchester, and Wall, and may have been so at other sites (see Chapter Four). It is likely to have been so at Braughing as well. If its Hadrianic replacement belonged to a mansio, this must also have been the context of the Flavian bath-building. The courtyard building at Braughing Station measured approximately 35.4 by 21 metres. The width was reduced to c.18 metres by an in-turn half-way along the east side of the building (Partridge 1977, 67 Fig.24). Holmes dated its construction to A.D. 75-85 on the basis of pottery and a coin of Vespasian (A.D. 71- 73) associated with an earlier clay floor. He believed that this floor represented occupation by workmen erecting the courtyard building (Holmes 1955, 104). However, from the published sections G-H and J-K (Holmes 1955, Fig.4 facing page 100) it seems that the clay floor and some later layers andfeatures were truncated prior to the digging of the foundation trench for the wall of the building and the laying of an associated mortar floor. Holmes' date A.D. 75-85 can therefore only be taken as a terminuspost quern.The courtyard building might indeed be as late as the Hadrianic period and be part of a new mansio complex which included the baths attested by the reliefpatterned tile fragments. It is at any rate most likely that the mansio buildings which accompanied the Flavian bath-house were of timber. The Link between Mansiones and the Army in the First Century.

The mansiones considered in this chapter reveal how much movement of soldiers and officials was taking place in Roman Britain in the late first century A.D .. It is probable that similar provision was made in the Claudian and Neronian periods, and there can be little doubt that other mansionesof these periods existed along with Richborough, Chelmsford, and Brandon Hill. The installations at Cardiff have been referred to above. There is a possibility of a mansio bath-house east of the legionary fortress at Colchester (Black 1992b). Bidwell (1979, 9-11 Fig.3) has drawn attention to fragmentary timber buildings within a fenced compound south of the later fortress at Exeter and argued for their military character. The earliest structures may have been enclosed by a ditch lying c.80 metres back from the road approaching the south-east gate of the fortress, and this is reminiscent of the situation of the mansio at lnchtuthil. The Fetter Lane baths in York, constructed with tiles stamped by the Ninth Legion and perhaps of early second century date, may have been part of a mansio in a similar location (RCHM 1962, 52 No.19). The building lay over 150 metres back from the main road which approached the river-crossing and the legionary fortress beyond on the north-east bank of the River Ouse.

fort it can be assumed that the mansio and the granaries of the Claudian supply-base at Richborough lay within a defensive circuit. The presence of legionaries in garrison at Hod Hill in addition to auxiliary cavalry now seems unlikely (Maxfield 1986, 65), and this means that one of the two courtyard houses thought to have been used by the unit commanders requires to be re-interpreted. Praetorium 1 in the north-east quadrant of the fort (Richmond 1968, Fig.43) could be re-interpreted as a mansio. Similarly, a large and complex building in the eastern part of the praetenturaof the Period 2 fort at The Lunt (Robley B. 1975, 13-14 Fig.4) also seems to be superfluous to the accommodation requirements of the garrison, and prompts the same suggestion. We will see in Chapter Seven that there are occasional instances where a mansio seems to have lain within the defences of a fort in later periods. We saw in Chapter Two that by the date of the Burdur inscription in Tiberius' reign soldiers and officials on journeys were entitled to accommodation and, if of high enough rank, to transport. The construction of purpose-built mansionesin provinces which lacked a developed pattern of roadside cities and villages should certainly have been carried out by the Roman army at least as early as this. Logically it should have begun as soon as forts were constructed which were occupied for a period of years in the process of garrisoning and policing newly-conquered territory. Such circumstances obtained, beyond or on the Rhine, before Augustus' death. The Claudian mansio at Richborough was clearly not a new development along with the invasion of Britain. Similar complexes should be identifiable in other frontier areas where the army was present. The examples at Nijmegen and Vindonissa have been cited above as parallels for the mansio at Inchtuthil, but these are dated to late in the first century A.D .. A failure to realise the size and complexity of mansiones, and the distinctive components that might be expected in their plans, has probably inhibited their recognition at continental military sites, just as it has in Britain. One promising candidate is a complex building excavated at Neuss (Novaesium) in Germania Inferior (Muller 1984, 80). The plan shows a rectangular courtyard with double ranges of rooms to the north-east and north-west (Fig.22). The outer range on the north-west consists of small rooms (c. 3 by 5.5 metres), some at least subdivided like military contubernia,terminating in a larger room. This arrangement is repeated in part of the range to south-west of the courtyard. The inner ranges on the north-east and north-west are much wider and are mostly subdivided. Around the inside of the courtyard is a colonnade nearly four metres across with two wide entrances from the exterior on the south-east side. Within the courtyard and on its longitudinal axis is a structure represented by rows of posts set 1.3 to 1.5 metres apart. Like such remains elsewhere this must represent a granary, here with an area of c.85 square metres. The whole complex is interpreted as either a fabrica or Magazinbau. The second suggestion was no doubt influenced by the presence of the granary, but the variation in the size of rooms seems too great, and some of the passages or corridors uncomfortably narrow, for this to carry conviction. Nor do

It may sometimes be necessary to look inside the defences of Claudian and Neronian forts to locate mansio buildings. Although the mansiones at Inchtuthil and most of the other sites considered in this chapter have lain outside a fortress or

28

Mansionesin thefirst century there seem to have been traces of metal-working or other activities to support the idea that it was a workshopcomplex. Instead it is proposed that the building was a mansio, with standard class accommodation in the outer ranges and first class in the inner ranges. The south-west side of the colonnade, where additional corridors front the rooms, could have served as a stable with the granary as a fodder-store. If the building has been correctly assigned to Camp E or Camp F it must be Tiberian in date. However, this seems to be based on its alignment with a Tiberian roadside ditch, and since this strictly provides only a terminus post quern it is just possible that it is later and belongs to the period of the Claudian legionary fortress further to the east. If the former is the case it lay within the fortress; if the latter it lay outside.

between the fortress at Wroxeter and those at Usk and later Caerleon. The same close link with the army applies in the case of Castleshaw on the road between Chester and York. To all appearances this was a fortlet, one of a large but poorly understood class of military installations. We have seen that its internal buildings identify it as a mansio but its permanent staff may not have been soldiers. The valuable discussion and gazetteer of fortlets in the Castleshaw excavation report (Redhead et al. 1989, 80-128) has identified a class of small fortlets with barrack-blocks as well as 'commissary fortlets', many of which, like Castleshaw itself, may prove to have been mansiones.These may correspond to the guard-posts and mansioneswhich we saw in Chapter Two were provided along the road from Antinoupolis to the Red Sea in the Hadrianic period. The only first century mansio known at present that might have been an adjunct of civilian government is that at Chelmsford, and even here it is likely that the army was involved in the re-foundation of the colony at Colchester which had been destroyed in the Boudican rebellion, and possibly also in the re-establishment of London, and needed this for the use of its own personnel.

Another example, dating within the period c.40- 70, was sited to the south of the fort at Valkenburg. The building was partly excavated in the 1980's on the north side of the Marktveld gully and had at least five suites of rooms separated by passages, similar to rooms E-1 at Nijmegen (Van Dierendonck et al. 1993, 25 Fig.IO). Described as a 'semi-military building', it was probably the first class accommodation of a mansio.

The construction of mansionesby the Roman army in Britain in the first century resulted in complexes that were systematically laid out and incorporated building-types and other elements that were to some extent standardised. There is perhaps a danger of inferring a fort or other military installation from evidence that would be better interpreted as a mansio. Since soldiers are likely to have been the most frequent users of mansiones a small number of items of military equipment cannot be taken as evidence for one rather than the other. Some building-types are also ambiguous for we have seen that rooms in the standard class accommodation of mansiones can be identical to military contubernia.We have also seen that large military-style 'granaries' are a feature of some mansiones. Nor is the presence of a rampart and ditch of defensive proportions necessarily decisive. Much greater caution is therefore required in the identification of first century forts in particular.

The analysis of mansionesbuilt in the 80's A.D. at Inchtuthil, Richborough, and Newstead shows that in each case additional accommodation had to be provided, at Inchtuthil possibly even before the building became operational. This suggests that when they were first planned not even their builders envisaged accurately the scale of use to which they would have to be put. They were not designed for complete units of troops moving to or from their forts: these would presumably camp under canvas. But the number of civilian officials and of individual soldiers on special commissions likely to be moving around the province was clearly underestimated. The increase in traffic seems to have begun in the period immediately following Agricola's governorship. The army of Britain was re-deployed, garrisoning new forts in the newly-conquered territory in the north and evacuating many forts in the southern part of the province. It can be argued that the increased accommodation in mansioneswas for government personnel who were largely concerned with matters relating to the army, rather than to civilian government. A strength-list among the wooden writingtablets from Chesterholm reveals that almost two-thirds of the garrison was absent from the fort when it was compiled. Most of them were out-posted at Corbridge but the total includes a centurion who was in London and small groups of men at four unknown locations (Bowman and Thomas 1991). These small parties will presumably have been accommodated at mansiones on their journeys to and from their destinations.

The Role of Mansionesin the Genesisof Small Towns. Although Brandon Camp-Leintwardine and Braughing were situated on military roads, and the mansio buildings in them were probably constructed by the army, they are both examples of the civilian 'small towns' which are found along the road network of the province. At Braughing where there was intensive pre-Roman occupation the mansio was in a sense grafted onto the earlier settlement. At Brandon Camp and Leintwardine it has been shown that there are strong grounds for thinking that settlements were deliberately established to service successive mansiones on a road between two legionary fortresses. This corresponds to the settlements of viasii vicani on public land along roads in Italy in the second century B.C .. The roadside settlement at Leintwardine seems to have survived the evacuation of the local garrison from the Jay Lane fort, presumably because it was still necessary to provide services for official travellers using the road. This is why in the last decade of the first

Apart from the mansiones associated with forts and fortresses, that at Richborough was at a major point of entry to the province that was also a military base while Wall was on a via militaris linking London to the legionary fortress at Chester and Braughing was beside Ermine Street on the way from London to the successive northern fortresses at Lincoln and York. Brandon Camp, succeeded by Leintwardine, lay

29

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain century when a new fort and mansio were built at Buckton 1.5 kilometres to the south-west the vicus remained in the same location. The new mansio no doubt catered for officials and soldiers whose destination was the fort at Buckton, but others will have lodged at Leintwardine which lay on the main road. The mansio at Buckton presumably became redundant in the 130's or 140's when the fort was evacuated, but the roadside settlement continued to exist. Similarly at Chelmsford where a fort and mansio lay together on the road between London and Colchester, the establishment of the roadside settlement came only when the fort was evacuated. Here the name Caesaromagus presumably records the deliberate foundation of an emporion with a role which included servicing the mansio. A similar case is Packenham / Ixworth in Suffolk where civilian occupation of buildings in regular plots succeeded a post-Boudican fort (Frere 1986, 404). Castleshaw, in what continued to be the military zone of the province, provides a functional parallel. Here the fort was succeeded by a fortlet which was in fact a mansio. This suggests that the importance of forts in the genesis of many 'small towns' should be re-assessed.

foundation to supply services for official travellers. Forts could be supplied from distant sources (compare Tacitus De Vita Agricolae 19.4), and the large fodder-stores at Richborough and Castleshaw show that this could also apply to mansiones. However, it was ultimately more convenient for the latter to rely on local market-settlements for their requirements. The new settlements were probably based partly on agriculture and partly on servicing traffic along the roads. In time additional important functions as local market-centres or religious foci might be expected to develop. There was therefore a functional continuity between a fort and a vicus that succeeded it, but this was determined by the road. It is not true to say that the fort was in any real sense the origin of the vicus. There can be little doubt that the populations of these settlements were drawn from the native Britons living in the locality. This brings us to the second commonly perceived origin for Romano-British small towns. The proximity of a pre-Roman settlement and a vicus on a Roman road does not by itself offer an explanation for the development of the latter. Roman forts may have been sited near native centres to control them, or for logistical reasons, but it is difficult to see what incentive there can have been for native people to continue to live beside or to move spontaneously to settle beside a Roman road. The economic attraction of such a location only existed if the settlement had a legal status and a recognised administration. Without these it presented too easy a target for exploitation and pillage by any undisciplined troops passing through it. The emergence of vici therefore carries with it the implication that they possessed an administration and legal status from the outset and were not spontaneous growths. Their foundation was in the interest of the Roman government which needed them to provide facilities for official travellers: it seems logical to look to the Roman government as the body responsible for establishing them. In some instances the governor may have acted directly. In most parts of the province the task will have been made the responsibility of the civitas authorities. As a result of this, and of the different dates when they were established, we can expect there to have been some variety among the vici. However, if there was no mechanism or incentive to establish a civilian vicus before the setting up of civitas government, it follows that none should precede this and that the roadside settlements in a particular civitas should only start to develop when the first signs of selfgovernment appear in the civitas-capital. It should not be surprising therefore that the start of continuous occupation in many roadside settlements does not come until the very end of the first century A.D., shortly after many of the civitates had been set up. An earlier stage detectable at some sites may prove to have been a praetorium et tabernaefounded by the governor. We have seen how this was the case at Brandon Hill and Leintwardine, and some other possible examples will be considered here.

When a fort is said to be the origin of a 'small town' it is usually assumed that there is a causal connection between the two. This is probably unprovable, and in its simplest form the hypothesis is unlikely. Traders who settled alongside a fort to trade with the garrison, still less women unofficially married to the soldiers, will not have remained behind when that garrison was moved elsewhere. The roads that linked fort-sites were a much more significant factor. The role of the forts located along military roads was to make them secure. While these forts were still garrisoned they were both destinations themselves and staging-posts on longer journeys for officials, civil or military, using the road. When the forts were evacuated such officials still required stopping-places on their journeys to more distant destinations, but the population of wives and traders from any military vicus had departed with the garrison. There might already be a mansio, constructed by the military beside a fort, but once the garrison had gone the business of repopulating the settlement had to begin. In other cases the sites of the evacuated forts were ideal for the location of a new mansio and supporting settlement or of a vicus offering accommodation in the houses of its inhabitants. The regular spacing of the forts had to be duplicated in the spacing of the new roadside settlements since both were intended to provide secure stopping-places along the roads; the fort-sites had been in military control and were already 'public land' and new land-confiscations were not required. An inscription found close to Ermine Street at Sawtry in Huntingdonshire (RIB 230) reads public(..) and probably marked the boundary between land assigned to such a roadside settlement and private land. It was found during roadworks in 1939 and north of its findspot traces were noted of probable timber buildings and rubbish-pits. Pottery indicated occupation from at least the early second century into the fourth century and pieces of flue-tiles show the presence of a bath-building (Garrood 1943). The settlement at Sawtry lay c.11 Roman miles from Godmanchester and c.9.5 from Chesterton/Water Newton. No fort is yet known there but there can be little doubt that this was a deliberate

At Nettleton on the Fosse Way there was a first century polygonal enclosure reminiscent of that at Inchtuthil but defended or defined by three ditches. It contained traces of timber buildings (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 190). Its

30

Mansionesin thefirst century interpretation was left uncertain in the excavation report after it had initially been seen as a camp or military installation (Wedlake 1982, 6-7); a mansio is one alternative and perhaps the most likely interpretation. It is even possible that a polygonal enclosure was a distinctive feature of such sites. In Wharf Close at Thorpe in Nottinghamshire a sequence of development has been traced beginning with pre-Roman structures, followed by a fortlet, then a vicus beside the Fosse Way. The vicus was first given defences in the second century and a new circuit was provided in the fourth century, extending the defended area (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 272). To the north in Oddhouse Close aerial photographs show two ditches defining a polygonal enclosure (Frere and St. Joseph 1983, 178-79 Fig.109). Unfortunately the intersection of the ditches of the fortlet and vicus and those of the polygonal enclosure have not been excavated and do not show up on aerial photographs. However, it can be suggested that the latter represents an enclosed praetorium et tabernae like Brandon Hill, and that this rather than the fortlet was the true predecessor of the roadside vicus. Other polygonal enclosures occur adjacent to the fort at Llanfor and at

31

Llansantffraid-ym-Mechain c.1. 75 kilometres south-west of the fort at Abertanat (Frere and St. Joseph 1983, 105-6 Fig.13; Frere 1992, 256-57 Fig.2). Both contained granaries or fodder-stores like Brandon Hill. Rather than being 'stores-compounds' or 'campaign-bases' it can be suggested that these were also defended praetoria, founded by the governor. The regular network of roadside settlements is not confined to the major roads leading from London, and this presumably means that they were designed to aid administration of the civitas by the civitas authorities, as well as to serve the personnel of the governor and provincial procurator. It seems that incentives must have been offered to get local people to move to them, land to farm and perhaps exemptions from various obligations to their civitas or to the provincial government itself. All this means that the Roman authorities must be assigned a much more positive role, direct or indirect, in the establishment of roadside settlements or 'small towns' than has usually been the case hitherto.

CHAPTER FOUR HADRIANIC MANSIONES The Hadrianic reform of the cursus publicus was discussed in Chapter Two and there it was suggested that its financial management, previously the responsibility of city authorities in the provinces, was taken over by the governor or other representative of the emperor. Roadside settlements continued to supply transport, but their assessment was now determined by the governor and they could be granted an exemption. Other funds must have been available to cover such cases for the services of the cursuspublicus still had to be provided along the roads. It seems most probable that an additional tax was now levied on those provincials who were not liable for the transport liturgy, and that its proceeds were used to purchase animaliapublica and fodder as they were in the fourth century. It is at any rate clear that the main effect of Hadrian's reform related to the cost of transport. In the Digest (50.4.18. 29-30) both Vespasian and Hadrian are said to have re-iterated earlier rulings on who was exempted from supplying lodging to official travellers in their homes, implying that the reform introduced by the latter had no effect on this obligation for the majority of his subjects. However, it is Hadrian's reign which sees the beginning of a concerted and extensive programme of construction in civilian roadside settlements in Roman Britain, apparently financed by the provincial fiscus. This will be examined in the second part of this chapter. The first task must be to examine a selection of contemporary mansionesbuilt by the military. These serve to put their civilian counterparts into a wider context, and also raise a number of specific and general problems about what determined the provision of purpose-built accommodation. As in Chapter Three the discussion is based on a detailed analysis of specific sites, beginning with the legionary fortress at Chester.

Construction of Stone Phase II was begun c.120 coinciding with the widespread Hadrianic programme of building-work at mansiones. However, it was left unfinished and deposits of refuse covered the floors and urinal pits were dug in room 1 and through its walls. Work was not recommenced until c.180 when new floors were laid and the building was completed as originally planned (Stone Phase III). This presumably reflects the absence of a large part of the legion on the northern frontier through much of the second century (Mason 1980, 82-3) . In the Stone Phase III building there was a gap of at least 3 metres at the east end of the north wall of room 1 and Mason (1980, 16) suggested that the northern limit of the room might have been formed by arcading. If this was so a comparison can be made with the two rooms (1 and 2) at the south-east end of the range of first class accommodation at Inchtuthil (Fig.6). To the north a new surface of pebbles and tile chips was laid down, while to the south a second well (Well I) was provided in the colonnade. It is possible that the colonnade was not so much a formal architectural feature as a covered area for functions connected with the animals at the mansio. Its depth (3.6-4.4 metres) would have been adequate for stalling animals, and is similar to the depth (c.4 metres) of the stable alongside the first class accommodation at lnchtuthil. Two probable mansionescontemporary with the Stone Phase II mansio at Chester have been excavated further west along the route to Caernarvon. One lies at Caernarvon itself and the other is at Pentre Farm, Flint.

Pentre Farm, Flint (O'Leary et al. 1989) (Fig.1:62). Chester (Mason 1980) (Fig.1:13). Excavations at Pentre Farm uncovered what is described as 'an official building in the Roman lead mining district '. The authors of the excavation report preferred to interpret the complex as the residence of a procurator in charge of an imperial estate concerned with the working of local lead deposits. They claimed that the internal evidence for the function of the site was 'not, in itself, sufficient to generate a thorough discussion of the complex and attempts at further explanation must draw on external evidence and general argument, a process which necessarily remains open-ended' (O'Leary et al. 1989, 47) . First it is necessary to attempt to identify the elements of the site that were excavated in terms of function, and to draw on parallels for these elements elsewhere. It will be seen that this 'internal evidence' is much more helpful than the authors of the report were prepared to allow.

Stone Phase I on the site of the mansio differs both from the preceding timber plan (Timber Phase III) and the succeeding stone plan (Stone Phase 11/111) although these two themselves match closely (Fig.13). The excavator concluded that a record of the Timber Phase III plan was available to the builders of Stone Phase 11/111 (Mason 1980, 15), but what the unfinished Stone Phase I building represents is unclear. In Stone Phase II the site was first levelled down and a well (Well II) was constructed. An east-west range of rooms was built just north of this with a colonnade on its south side, extending over the well. The wider room to the east (room 1) had a coarse white mortar floor; the passage (room 2) one of light brown mortar; and the western room (3) an opus signinum floor. If this was part of the first class accommodation the presence of the well suggests that the stables and service courtyard, and probably the baths , lay to the south, while the residential courtyard lay to the north. It seems likely that a piped water supply would have been laid on here.

The complex went through eight major phases (termed Stages in the report), beginning c. A.D.120 and ending c. 240. Only the first of these will be discussed in detail. It is of

32

Hadrianic Mansiones

prime importance to remember that only part of the establishment was actually excavated. Comparisons must be made with this in mind. To facilitate the discussion buildings have been assigned individual numbers.

interpretation. Building 1 is easily compared to standard class accommodation in mansiones at lnchtuthil and elsewhere. Room 21 in Building 3, if indeed it had no north wall, has a close match in rooms 1 and 2 in the first class accommodation at Inchtuthil and rooms 18-20 are matched three times in the same building (rooms 11-13, 15-17, and 23-25).

In Stage I three separate buildings were identified (Fig. 23a). Building 1 probably comprised four contubernia, the two more westerly of which were excavated. The divisions measured c. 1 by 4 metres and c. 4.2 by 4 metres, though later in Stage I they were united to form single rooms. To south and west of Building 1 were foundation trenches which were interpreted as the outer walls of a verandah and corridor respectively, attached to the building. These are better interpreted as the walls of a yard defined on the north by a further trench c. 5.2 metres from Building 1. A separate area (8) was closed off on the north side of Building 1 within which was a semi-circular feature (F27), perhaps the setting for a basin or trough.

Individual elements of Stage I at Pentre Farm can therefore be matched in the mansio at Inchtuthil. The involvement of Legio XX Valeria Victrix is attested at Pentre Farm by stamped tiles found in contexts of Stage VI (O'Leary et al. 1989, 48 and 92), and the Twentieth is the legion which is thought to have built Inchtuthil and ultimately to have moved to Chester. The starting-date for Pentre Farm, c. A.D.120, ties in very well with the Hadrianic building programme to construct mansiones including those at Chester and Caernarvon, and a milestone (RIB 2265) demonstrates attention being given to the route between Chester and Caernarvon in Hadrian's fifth year of tribunician power , between 10 December 120 and 9 December 121. The chief objection made to the mansio interpretation in the excavation report concerns Route 11 of the Antonine Itinerary. This lists two stopping-places between Caernarvon and Chester: Conovio (Caerhun) 23.5 Roman miles from Caernarvon, and Varis (? St. Asaph) 20.5 miles further on, leaving a stage of about 30.5 miles from St. Asaph to Chester. The Pentre Farm complex is only about 13 Roman miles from Chester and it was argued that: 'Its identification as the site of a mansio, and home of Varae, would leave unequal distances for the three stages known to have existed between Chester and Caernarvon' (O'Leary et al. 1989, 49). There is no question of identifying Varae with the settlement at Pentre Farm, but even so the mileage figures in the Itinerary are far from being equal as they stand. What has not been considered is that oxwaggons cannot have been expected to travel 30.5 Roman miles in one day, so that an additional mansio between St. Asaph and Chester was essential for their drivers' needs. Another may have been required between Caernarvon and Caerhun. The Antonine Itinerary was based on a list of journeys planned for individuals on particular occasions but it incorporates considerable editing, probably carried out in the later third or fourth century (see Appendix Two). As we saw in Chapter Two it sometimes gives a complete or nearcomplete list of stopping-places in one route and a shorter list for mounted travellers in another which covers the same stretch of road . Route 11 is one of the second type and lists only three stages because it was intended for soldiers or officials on horseback or in carriages travelling relatively quickly. Even they will have needed to change animals at Pentre Farm and on other occasions they might have required lodging alongside travellers on foot. As we have seen, there is quite good evidence that Building 2 was a stable and/or vehicle shed, contrary to the claim in the excavation report that no stabling was found (O'Leary et al. 1989, 49).

Immediately east of 8 a doorway led through the north wall of the yard from area 5. It was in line with a second doorway into Building 2 which was separated from the yard wall by a gap (4) c. 1.2 metres wide. This was probably unroofed like the similar gap (7) separating the yard wall from Building 3. Building 2 was originally c. 26 metres long by c. 3.5 metres wide internally, with a single room (room 1) divided off at its west end. At the east end the building was probably open towards the north. During Stage I a partition was put in blocking the original doorway from the south and creating a new room (room 2). The north wall of the new room was demolished and a large water tank or trough (F4) was set on its line. The central placing of F4 in relation to the north side of room 2 implies that it was inserted when or after this room was created. To the north of rooms 1 and 2 an area was enclosed by a ditch (F300) which probably defined a paddock or corral. Later still the trough went out of use and a new boundary ditch was cut across it. Beyond the west wall of the yard was Building 3. The southern limit of this was not excavated and no evidence was found to show that it terminated in line with the south wall of the yard as assumed in the excavation report. Room 21, the northernmost room, may have been open to the north where no trace of a foundation trench for a wall was found. Parts of five more rooms (17, 17a, 18-20) were excavated. Room 17a was probably a passage across the building with 19 and 20 forming a suite to the north and 17 and another room a second suite to the south. Room 18 seems to have been a narrow corridor linking 21 to 17a. It is not known whether or not buildings existed to the south of the yard or what lay to the east of the excavated site. To the west of Building 3 a ditch (F500) and trackway (4/14) may have marked a boundary in Stages I-III, and c.35 metres to the north of the buildings ditches F2,12 and F4 seem to have defined a metalled area of broadly the same period (O'Leary et al. 1989, 41 and 44-46).

Using the analogy of lnchtuthil, a bath-building must have been provided and may have been located to one side of the service areas to the north of Building 2. If Building 3 has been correctly identified as first class and Building 1 as standard class accommodation the residential areas

The width and the open side of part of Building 2 are compatible with its use as a stable and/or vehicle-shed, and the creation of room 2 with its watering-point reinforces this

33

Cursus Publicus:the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain evidently lay to the south. Building 3 may have extended a considerable distance south of the excavated area. Building 1 has the appearance of being crammed into the walled yard. Although it belongs to the original stage of the complex the building gives the impression that it is an afterthought as far as any overall design is concerned. Additional standard class accommodation may have existed, possibly south of the walled yard or east of Building 1, and lying parallel to the first class accommodation as at lnchtuthil. Fig.23b shows the Pentre Farm complex in Stage V which is dated to the second half of the second or the early third century. Building 1 had been rebuilt previously. One comer of Building S was located, with a hypocaust in the northernmost room (O'Leary et al. 1989, 26). Pits in two of the rooms of Building 4 perhaps indicate that it was used as workshops, although it seems more likely that it was designed as accommodation. In Building 6 a drain leading from a cold douche in the centre of room 39 means that this was the frigidarium in a bath-suite. Presumably F303, described as a 'stone-lined pit', was actually a cold bath. Although a formal layout is lacking the elements seen here are also present at mansiones elsewhere and this reinforces the suggestion that Pentre Farm had the same role.

47-49). In each case it is possible to distinguish two suites of rooms with hypocaust heating and the same applies to the small courtyard building recognised as a mansio beside the military baths at the Saalburg (Jacobi 1897, Tafel XIV Fig.I). At Caernarvon it can be suggested that rooms B and C and rooms D and E formed two similar suites. Room F may have been a triclinium and rooms A and I service rooms. This interpretation must obviously be treated with caution, but it takes into account both the German parallels and provides a rational succession from the accommodation of the three centurions' quarters of Period SA to Building SSl in Period 6. Periods 6-6A are dated Hadrianic to early Antonine. In Period 7 the baths B 1 were retained but SS 1 was replaced by SS2, a new and larger masonry building with a courtyard (Fig.24c). The subdivision of room II and the insertion of a hypocaustonin Ilb and the construction of a wall to enclose the baths were later changes. At some time in the Antonine period a stone wall was added to the fort rampart, even though the excavators concluded from the comparative lack of material belonging to this period that the fort can only have held a very reduced garrison (Casey et al. 1993, 13).

TSll was probably retained in Period 6 when the centurions' quarters were replaced by Building SSl (Fig.24b). This had seven principal rooms and two small latrines (G and H), although room F may have been an addition. A short length of wall (231) may indicate a second masonry building. In Period 6A a bath-house (B 1) was built to the south of SS 1.

Building SS2 was seen as the functional successor to SSL A colonnaded courtyard containing a well was flanked on three sides by ranges of rooms, and a fourth range presumably existed where the building adjoined the via principalis. Two units of accommodation can be distinguished in the east and south ranges. Rooms III-V and VI-VIII both consisted of a passage or lobby linking two larger rooms. The more important of these suites was evidently rooms III-V since when room II was subdivided the hypocauston in Ilb was designed to heat the adjoining part of room III. Room Ile formed the furnace room and Ila then formed a passage isolating this suite from room I to the north. Room X was a through-passage leading to the baths so that rooms IX and XI which flanked it must be regarded as separate units. Rooms XII-XIV may have been additional single-room units and these five rooms together can be regarded as contubernia forming standard class accommodation. The hypothesis that the building was two-storeyed is unlikely for it mistakenly identifies as stair-wells rooms IV and X, the former a lobby which linked rooms belonging together in a suite and which is a recurrent feature of the plans of mansiones(contraK. Wilson in Casey et al. 1993, 317-18). Although B 1 may have gone out of use earlier part of SS2 was eventually demolished in the late third century. The succeeding fourth century period of the site will be discussed in Chapter Seven.

The closest analogies for SS I and BI in a military context are the small buildings which functioned as mansiones offering first class accommodation outside certain German forts. These are later than SS I and have rooms with hypocaust heating, but they provide essentially similar facilities. At Rainau-Buch a range of accommodation and a detached bath-building lay close to the military bath-house north-east of the fort (Fig.2Sa: Planck 1983, 10-17) and at Eining a building very similar in size to SS 1 had a bath suite attached to its east end (Fig.2Sc: Fischer and Spindler 1984,

As with the site at Pentre Farm the excavators failed to recognise the structures in Periods 5B- 7 at Caernarvon as a mansio. Their hypothesis that the excavated buildings represent the residence of a procurator in charge of mining is too specific. Such an official may have existed and such an official may have been in residence periodically at Caernarvon, but the key fact given by the accommodation of all periods is that it was for more than one resident of the same or similar status, and in Period 7 we can distinguish two different grades of residents. In the course of this and the

Caernarvon(Casey et al. 1993: Fig.1:7). Three periods of timber barracks belonging to a fort of the Flavian-Trajanic period have been excavated. In Period SA the contuberniaof the three latest barracks were demolished and the debris burnt. However, the centurions' quarters were retained (Period 5B) and a further timber building (TSll) may have been erected (Fig.24a). In the small portion of TS 11 that was excavated there were three closely-spaced east-west trenches. A row of post-holes occurred to the west of the single north-south trench. The excavators observed that the post-holes lay too close for a verandah (Casey et al. 1993, 45). This limited evidence suggests to the present writer that TS 11 may have been a timber granary with raised floor, with the line of post-holes representing an extension of the building. Its maximum dimensions, if it extended to the via principalis, would have been c.17.S by 4.7 metres (an area of c.82 square metres).

34

HadrianicMansiones following chapter we shall come across many parallels for the courtyard building at Caernarvon among the mansiones in roadside settlements in the civilian areas of the province. The group of three mansiones considered above were all constructed or reconstructed at the same time, c.A.D.120. However, there are significant differences which raise questions about their purpose and use. We saw that in the first century mansiones were probably used mainly by the military or by officials whose main business was with the affairs of the army. A corollary of this in some cases was that when the fort was evacuated the mansio in the same location was no longer needed. The withdrawal of much of legio XX from Chester early in Hadrian's reign fits very neatly with the failure to complete the Stone Phase II building at the mansio there. Dover and Melandra Castle are analogous cases (see below). The mansio at Caernarvon was built inside a fort, on top of demolished barrack-buildings, and this presumably signifies that the garrison had been withdrawn or at least reduced. At Pentre Farm there is no indication of a garrison either before or after the construction of the mansio. While at least part of the mansio at Chester was effectively derelict, the installations at these two places were being maintained, and presumably were in use. Clearly this use cannot have related to the needs of military garrisons. We saw in Chapter Three that a centurio regionarius may have used the monumental entrance hall of the mansio at Carlisle as the setting for his district administration. It can be suggested that the mansiones at Caernarvon and Pentre Farm were built to provide facilities for the journeys of administrators who took over after a phase of direct military rule by fort commanders in North Wales. Like that at Chester, the mansiones at Caernarvon and Pentre Farm were presumably constructed by the Roman army. In their Hadrianic phases at least they show a range of building-forms and a planning which do not seem to be standardised in the way that might have been predicted from the type-site at Inchtuthil. This is certainly the case also at Melandra Castle which was occupied in the Hadrianic period while the fort it lay beside was still garrisoned. This will be examined next. The military mansiones at Dover and Lancaster will then be considered and their development will be traced through the second century in order to provide a background against which the civilian developments in the same period can be viewed.

The mansio was a large timber building with a complicated plan that is difficult to parallel elsewhere. In addition it is certain that some of the room divisions, particularly in the south-west part, were not located because of the difficult circumstances of the excavation. It effectively comprised two parts, to the south-west and to the north-east, separated across most of their width by an unroofed space (11), and linked on the north-west side by what was probably an entrance hall (12). Room 12 probably originally matched the size of the adjoining room 7 and room 14 was partitioned off at its north-east end at a later stage. If so, it is tempting to see rooms 7 and 12 as a pair of entrance halls, each serving its own half of the building. On the north-west side of 12 room 13 was not well defined. If it was an addition to 12 it would also seem to have been demolished before the rest of the building as a pit lay on the line of its north-west wall. In the north-eastern area rooms 28-32 are immediately recognisable as the contubernia of standard class accommodation, albeit of an unusually small size (cf. Webster P.V. 1971, 68). A possible parallel was noted in Chapter Three in the Phase 1 accommodation at Wall. Room 27 at the end of the block is slightly larger but probably served the same purpose, while 15-17 were three more such rooms fronted by a narrow corridor (21-22) which led via room 18 to 38. The extension of the corridor (20) was probably an addition along with room 14. Corridor 22 may also have extended to the north-east to give access to further contubernia(33-34 and perhaps 19). It is suggested that the whole area of 23-26 was originally a courtyard which was later in-filled to create additional rooms (24-26, with perhaps one more room in the east angle). The curious L shape of 25 and 26 resulted from the wish to create a lightwell (23) in the centre of the former courtyard area. The suggestion that room 18 was a stairwell to an upper storey (Webster P.V. 1971, 68) is unlikely. Its purpose was more probably to give access to room 38, a large room with evidence for a wooden floor. This can be identified as a communal dining-room in view of the hearth in the adjoining room 37 which will have served as the kitchen. Room 35 will also have been a service room for the use of the mansio staff, reached from the north-west side of the building by corridor 36. The original courtyard (23-26) was entered from 12 and from it access could be gained to all the rooms grouped around it. When rooms 24-26 were built into the courtyard access to rooms 27-32 was blocked and these must then have been entered from the exterior of the building on their south-east side.

Melandra Castle (P.V.Webster 1971) (Fig. I :21).

Excavations in 1966-69 demonstrated that a civil settlement existed beside the fort at Melandra Castle probably from c.80 until its abandonment c.140. A ditch and rampart that had once enclosed the settlement had been levelled by the time the mansio was built c.120-30. However, in the vicinity of the mansio a new rampart without an accompanying ditch was constructed on the same line. When the fort was evacuated c.140 the civil settlement was also deserted and the mansio was systematically demolished. The mansio is shown in Fig.26 where the rooms have been assigned numbers to facilitate the discussion.

The south-western part of the building is much more difficult to interpret. It was suggested that room 7 served as an independent entrance hall to it, and since the standard class accommodation clearly occupied the north-eastern half of the building it presumably contained the first class accommodation. In view of the drain running south-east from it and its apparent Jack of sub-divisions it is tempting to identify room 1 as stabling. This is reinforced by the difficulty otherwise of seeing how room 3 could have been

35

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain lit. A stable roofed at a low level on its north-west side would have allowed the provision of celestory lighting. On the other hand room 1 forms the obvious line of access from 7 to rooms 2 and 3. Rooms 4-6 were reached from the entrance hall by corridors 9 and 10 and it seems unlikely that 2 and 3 were not also reached under cover. On the whole room 1 is best interpreted as a portico or gallery. Patches of opus signinum flooring survived in room 3 both in the eastern comer and adjacent to the division-wall with room 4, but an unrecorded partition-wall may nevertheless have existed, giving two rooms of approximately the same size as rooms 2 and 8. This would have formed a range of four large rooms to be the first class accommodation, while rooms 4-6 housed

amanceps. Although the accommodation of the mansio has been recovered the service courtyard with its stable, staff accommodation and bath-building remains virtually unknown. Slight traces of a further building or buildings lay to the south-east reached by a cobbled pathway across the line of the early ditch that had surrounded the civil settlement. During the life of the mansio a new rampart divided these buildings from the residential building. It is tentatively suggested that this enclosed the service courtyard of the mansio, providing additional security for the transport and animals kept there. We will see that there were analogous enclosures at the mansio at Dover.

constructed over the southern part of the original walled enclosure. A new enclosure with flint walls was therefore built further to the north (Period III). It is estimated to have measured c. 45 by 40 metres, similar in size to the earlier enclosure and presumably with a similar function, though none of the other necessary elements of the mansio of this period has been definitely located. However, it is possible that the bath-building, traces of which were found below the west end of St. Mary's church in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, was in fact the mansio baths. At least two periods seem to be represented in the recorded walls and at least two heated rooms were noted. A variety of tile types is illustrated including an 'arm-chair voussoir' used in a vault and a voussoir-shaped brick with a classis Britannica stamp (Lyon 1779, facing page 325). If this was the bath-building belonging to the mansio, then the analogy of lnchtuthil and Newstead would suggest that the residential accommodation of this period lay to the west of the flint-walled enclosure. In Period IV (c. 160-80) a building (C6) was constructed over the west wall of the flint-walled enclosure, following its line. Only the southernmost room of this was excavated and it contained a hypocaust, indicating that this was a domestic range and probably that it formed the first class accommodation. Its position on the west side of the former enclosure is a further indication that the residential accommodation lay in this direction. The walled enclosure seems to have been replaced by an open yard, and on the south side of this building C7 was constructed. It recalls the blocks of rooms that flanked the entrance to the service yard at lnchtuthil and which were probably accommodation for the mansio staff. A matching building would have lain to the east with an entrance passing between them. An entrance in this position certainly existed in Period VI.

Dover (Philp 1989) (Fig.1:16).

Dover appears in Route 3 of the Antonine Itinerary. The excavator, Brian Philp, has given a lucid and convincing account of a sequence of buildings to the north of the classis Britannica fort and has proposed that in the latest periods (VI and VII), before they were destroyed by the construction of the Saxon Shore fort c. 250- 70, they formed elements of a mansio. In fact elements of a mansio can be recognised in all the periods from Period II which was contemporary with the first, unfinished, classis Britannica fort dated to a few years before c. 120. The sequence of periods is shown in Fig.27.

Building C7 is on the same alignment as the fort wall to the south. even though the military bath-building. on a different alignment, lay between the two. Probably this implies that other mansio buildings, perhaps further west, were also on an alignment following that of the fort wall. If C6 was first class accommodation these may have been buildings which provided standard class accommodation.

As at Inchtuthil the construction of the mansio was begun as early as the fort itself. Both were left unfinished, presumably, as at Chester, because the presence of the unit was required in the north. The elements of the Period II mansio that have been recognised comprise a large enclosure (41.7 by 38.5 metres) surrounded by a wall with chalk foundations. Between the enclosure and the north wall of the fort was a range of rooms (A8). This probably comprised a series of at least seven rooms internally c. 4.9 by 4.0-4.2 metres (Philp 1981, 17), and can be recognised as the standard class accommodation of the mansio. It was probably intended that this should be on one side of a residential courtyard with the first class accommodation on the other, adjacent to the walled enclosure. The enclosure was probably a secure waggon-park similar to area 12 at Newstead.

It seems probable that it was only in Period V (c. 180-200) that the residential buildings were united in a courtyard plan. The service yard was taken over for this purpose. Building C6 was retained and along the south side of the courtyard a new range (C8) was built. This had a gallery or portico on its south side fronting a long hall which served as a monumental entrance hall to the residential courtyard. C8 presumably extended all the way between the west range (the first class accommodation) and a corresponding new range (perhaps standard class accommodation) on the east. In front of the entrance hall, and presumably flanking a central approach, building C7 was retained.

Although nothing survived. the fittings of C8 must have been impressive. The so-called internal buttresses of the entrance hall were probably low piers or bases supporting engaged columns or pilasters with an entablature and possibly pediments. much as shown in the main zones of the painted

A new classis Britannica fort was built c. 140-60, with a road approaching its north gate across the site of the unfinished mansio building A8. A military bath-house was

36

HadrianicMansiones walls of rooms 2 and 3 of the 'Painted House' which succeeded C8 (Philp 1989, plates XXXV and XXXVI). The Painted House itself will be dealt with in Chapter Six. At Dover the arrangement of the buildings in a courtyard plan came only towards the end of the second century, a little later than the Antonine courtyard building at Caernarvon. The direct heating of a room in the first class accommodation at Dover by a hypocaust was dated to c.160-80. We saw that the northernmost room of the building which replaced Building 3 at Pentre Farm was provided with hypocaust heating in Stage 5 (second half of the second or early third century). The same provision is found in the mansio at Lancaster at about the same time. Here there was a complex sequence of buildings. Some of these were contemporary with the occupation of a fort, but the later phases seem to postdate the known military presence.

postulated bath-building. The plan of A3 may have been similar. Building B was destroyed by fire and it is tempting to explain this as deliberate demolition carried out when the auxiliary fort was evacuated c.140, as happened at Melandra Castle. A new timber building (Cl) is dated to the middle years of the second century (P.Webster in Jones and Shotter 1988, 126-27). Its alignment differed from that of its immediate predecessor and reverted to that of A3 (Fig.28c). A range of rooms c.5.2 metres wide and c.41.3 metres long lay northsouth. At its south end room A with stone walls was heated by a hypocaust, indicating that this was a range of first class accommodation. The rest of the building was constructed of timber and part of one division wall was found 5.2 metres from the north end. A second heated room (B) was added to the south at a later stage and projected c.1.6 metres to the east. A stub of walling on the western side of room A near its south-west comer may indicate that the courtyard to the west was closed by a wall on its south side.

Lancaster(Jones and Shotter 1988) (Fig.1:20). Excavations at Lancaster in the 1970's located parts of successive mansio complexes close to the north-east side of an early second century auxiliary fort. Further traces of mansio buildings were found by Richmond. These were not fully published and the two plans that are available (Richmond 1954, Fig.I; Anon. 1959, 107 Fig.7) display contradictions. The composite plan in Jones and Shotter (1988, 64 Fig.23) is largely followed here (Fig.28), but my phasing differs to some extent. This should be regarded as very tentative where it deals with structures excavated by Richmond.

Rooms A and B were regarded by the excavators (Jones and Shotter 1988, 61) as additions to the final, masonry, courtyard building to occupy the site (their Building C: Building C2 on Fig.28) . However, the walls of room A are exactly aligned with those of the mid-second century timber building on the composite plan and they were regarded as contemporary by whoever was responsible for the figure showing the development sequence of the buildings in the report (Jones and Shotter 1988, 62 Fig.22 and 64 Fig.23). This is adopted here, and the interpretation of rooms A and B as the caldariumand tepidariumrespectively of a bath-suite is rejected. The conjoined pilae close to the furnace arch of room B on which the bath-suite interpretation rests may simply reflect an awareness that the pilae in this position were likely to suffer greater damage from the heat and the raking out of burnt material. Externally the stoke-holes have no supports for hot-water tanks to feed baths, either in room A or room B, and in any case a bath in a tepidarium is a rarity. Finally, the doorway which was in the north-west comer of room A (Jones and Shotter 1968, 63) makes no sense if A was a caldarium,since in the Roman sequence of bathing the caldarium came last and was usually only entered from the tepidarium. Rooms A and B should be regarded as domestic rooms. The occurrence of one such room in the first class accommodation at Caernarvon, Dover and Pentre Farm was noted above, and other examples will be found in the next chapter.

The earliest mansio is represented by parts of two timber buildings (Al and A2) with what is termed an 'aquifer' perhaps a drain - running between them from the north-west (Fig.28a). Two rooms in Al and one in A2 were c.1.5-2 metres wide, similar to the ranges of narrow contuberniain the standard class accommodation at Melandra Castle (Fig.26: rooms 28-34). Al and A2 were assigned to period lb or le (or both) of the military occupation, roughly within the reign of Hadrian. Within this period A 1 seems to have been replaced by a slightly wider building which had stone foundations probably carrying a timber superstructure and a verandah on its north-west side, and which, like Al, respected the line of the drain or aquifer. A large timber building (A3), traces of which were found by Richmond to the north, shared the alignment of A2 and is conjecturally part of the earliest mansio. This was replaced by another timber building on a different alignment shared by A 1 and the north-west wall of its successor . It is possible that this alignment conformed to that of a building to the south-west, conceivably a bath-house which was served by the aquifer.

The timber building which incorporated rooms A and B was burnt down, probably once again a deliberate act of clearance as room A was incorporated in the new masonry courtyard building (C2). This will be dealt with in Chapter Seven.

The successsors of A 1 and A3 were two distinct buildings but they are combined together as Building B in the report . The plan is very fragmentary (Fig.28b). Perhaps a gallery or portico formed the west side of a building fronting onto a courtyard to the west. At its north end the gallery returned towards the west, while the successor of A 1 with its own verandah closed off the south side of the yard. An additional gallery ran across the courtyard , perhaps towards the

To the north and west of Building C2 Richmond found traces of three buildings with stone footings, possibly strip buildings contemporary with it. One of these was constructed over the fill of a military-style ditch which had probably defined the area of the early mansio. The ditch was filled in the second half of the second century, probably after c.160 (P. Webster in Jones and Shotter 1988, 126).

37

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain There is some evidence that when Building C2 was constructed at Lancaster in the later third century the first class accommodation incorporating rooms A and B had been disused for some time (see Chapter Seven). If the mansio was the administrative successor of the fort this seems to imply a change in the established routine of government. We saw that at Caernarvon the mansio accommodation was at least partly disused by the end of the third century and that occupation at Pentre Farm had ceased by c.240. Another instance seems to be the mansio at Catterick (Fig.l:12). The establishment here has been extensively excavated (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 111-17). Although the final report has not yet appeared and only a brief summary can be given here, when it is published it will undoubtedly contribute to solving some of the problems raised in this chapter concerning the role of mansiones as the successors of forts in the government of some areas of the province. A postulated Agricolan fort at Catterick is thought to have been evacuated c.120. A courtyard building which seems to have provided the first class accommodation of the mansiois dated to c.160, but this was preceded by another stone-built structure (information from P.R. Wilson). This may have been part of an earlier mansio and if so the sequence matches that at Caernarvon very closely. The Antonine building seems to have incorporated the military bath-house, which was extensively re-built, and may be contemporary with the re-establishment of the fort in the Antonine period (Frere 1991, 238-40). If the bath-building continued to function between the military withdrawal and the construction of the courtyard building this would support the suggestion that there was a Hadrianic mansio.

York to the garrisons further north. A more likely possibility is that the demolition of the mansio is to be connected with an administrative change, the promotion of the civitas Brigantum,so evident under the Severi. The maintenance of the purpose-built accommodation would presumably have been charged to the inhabitants of Cataractonium and ultimately to the authorities of the civitas, as was the case with Pizos and Beroe. The alternative was for them to provide lodging for officials in their homes. It seems possible that in this case the civitas authorities opted not to take on the responsibility, and the cost, of the mansio. It was presumably at their request that the change was brought about, and presumably it expressed their own preference, if not that of the people living in Catterick. A lessening in the demand for accommodation may not have been a foreseeable result of the removal of the garrison, but this may have occurred as the third century progressed, with the stability of the northern frontier and the reduction in the size of the army. It would be very helpful to have more information about the bath-building close to the west gate of Aldborough, the capital of the Brigantes, and any buildings that were associated with it since Wacher (1974, 401) has suggested that this may have belonged to a mansio there. The demise of the mansio at Lancaster may have resulted from the reduction in military traffic in the third century, while developments at Caernarvon and Pentre Farm could be linked to the status of Chester where there is the possibility of a civilian city and administrative centre from perhaps as early as the second century (Strickland 1981). The variation in practice among the mansionesin the military areas of Britain that have been considered in the first part of this chapter allows us to see that the provision or maintenance of a mansio after the evacuation of a fort was not automatic. An assessment seems to have been made in each case to see whether one was needed. It is possible to postulate a link with direct rule by imperial officials who succeeded military commanders as the effective government in some districts. As yet the hypothesis can only be regarded as tentative. More carefully-dated mansiones must be excavated in the so-called Military Zone of Britain, and more information is required about the civilian settlements like Chester which may have taken on a wider administrative role.

A building-stone attests a cohors Vllll engaged on the construction of the courtyard building. The entrance was at first through a small columned portico but later a rectangular hall-like structure with a flagged floor, c.9.5 by 22 metres, replaced this. When the rest of the building was demolished at the end of the second or early in the third century this hall remained in use, and it is likely that it continued to serve the administrative functions associated with the mansio. Even without its purpose-built accommodation Catterick will still have provided transport for those travelling by the cursus publicus. It is in line with this that the baths seem to have remained in use after the demolition of the accommodation since at Inchtuthil the bath-building was one of the facilities of the service-courtyard. The entrance hall at Catterick may also have been used for functions connected with local government.

A final military site to be considered is Benwell on Hadrian's Wall. The Hadrianic mansio has not been excavated, but it can be argued that it occupied the same site as the excavated building and the reason for this location is relevant to the larger question of why Hadrian's governors initiated the construction of so many mansionesin the civilian part of the province.

Confirmation must await the final publication of the excavations but it seems possible to suggest that the demolition of the mansio accommodation was contemporary with the final evacuation of the fort. If so, the prime purpose of the mansio would appear to have been to cater for officers and civilian officials whose business was concerned with the military establishment at Catterick itself rather than for those passing through it to other destinations. We saw above that this seemed to be the case at some other military mansiones but it hardly seems likely at what must have been a frequent overnight stopping-place for travellers on their way from

Benwell (Petch 1928) (Fig.1:1).

Building E at Benwell, partially excavated in 1926-27, is shown in Fig.29a. It has been previously interpreted as a mansio (Salway 1965, 73- 75), but Salway's proposal that it was an aisled building should be rejected. The proposed aisles are not of equal width (3.1 and 4.6 metres), nor does room 6 match what is found in aisled buildings. The west

38

HadrianicMansiones end of Building E adjoins the road leading towards the south gate of the fort, and access to the building would most naturally be through room 6. Such large rooms in aisled buildings are placed at the opposite end of the building from the entrance, or the entrance is in a side wall, not directly into such rooms from the exterior. In aisled buildings partition walls are built in line with the sub-divisions created by the posts dividing aisles and nave, but in Building E no consistent spacing of posts can be inferred from the position of the surviving partition walls. Petch's view (1928, 53) that ranges of rooms were built round an unroofed yard (7) is far preferable. It also gives a plan which is found elsewhere at mansiones,e.g. in Building B at Carlisle and in the northeastern part of the residence at Melandra Castle, where two ranges of rooms face each other across a narrow yard. Only the internal divisions that were found are shown on the plan, but since the western part of the north range and the south range were either inadequately explored or poorly preserved it is probable that areas 8 and 9 were also subdivided. In the north range there is space for another three rooms as large as room 5, so that five rooms in all probably occupied this range. If so, this will have been standard class accommodation. It is possible, in view of the greater depth of the rooms in the south range, that it contained first class accommodation, an arrangement similar to that at Vindonissa. Room 6 was the entrance hall.

provided with a whole list of the measures the emperor took to re-establish it on his tour of the army in the German provinces immediately prior to his visit to Britain (SHA Vita Hadriani IO). Although the passage may include stock elements belonging to the typical 'good commander' they are not necessarily on that account to be disbelieved . Among these was a clamp-down on soldiers who were absent from their units without proper authorisation. More generally it is clear that soldiers, and in particular tribunes and centurions, were to be subject to a strict regime in which the military life-style was distinguished from , and as much as possible separated from, that of civilians . The exclusion of the mansio at Benwell from the military zone marked by the val/um represents one aspect of this. It seems possible that purposebuilt mansio accommodation was provided for soldiers and officials travelling in the civilian parts of Roman Britain precisely to segregate them from the civilians in the roadside settlements in whose homes they would otherwise be obliged to lodge. This will be discussed further below. First the civilian mansionesof the Hadrianic period must be described and their characteristics established. The best site with which to begin is Chelmsford because it illustrates aspects of second century development which will be found to recur elsewhere, and the significance of these can best be brought out by reference to this well-excavated and well-published example.

Chelmsford(Drury 1988) (Fig.1:41).

Rooms 1- 3 at the east end of the building seem to form a suite of first class accommodation. It is uncertain whether they were later additions or part of a larger, earlier, building which was rebuilt and shortened (Petch 1928, 54 and plate XVl.2). The small group of pottery from the foundation trench of the north wall (Petch 1928, 64 no.8 and 69 nos. 1719, Fig.IO), which Salway and Gillam used to date the building to the Severan period (Salway 1965, 75), might instead only provide a date for the latest period of construction. At any rate a group of earlier second century pottery came from what Petch tentatively interpreted as a drain sealed by the fragmentary structure on the east of room 3 (Petch 1928, 55 and 68-69 (Fig.9)). An alternative possibility is that the drain was a beam-slot belonging to a timber predecessor of Building E. A break in the foundation of the north wall at the junction of rooms 3 and 4 (Petch 1928, 54) may mark the position of another sleeper-beam that was left in situ. Certainly Building E is situated as if it respected the val/um, and it occupied the first available space to the east of the road south of the val/um crossing (Fig.29b ). Since the val/um no longer functioned in the Severan period (Breeze and Dobson 1987, 141) this is best explained if the site for the mansio had been determined when the val/umwas an effective demarcation line. This was probably when the val/umwas constructed in the Hadrianic period.

The development of the mansio in the second century is shown in Fig.30. In Period VI.I on Site S (A.D. 120/25 160/75) the long sequence of boundaries delimiting the compound (the possible waggon-park) was ended by the creation of building-plots fronting onto the LondonColchester road. In the more recent excavations at the adjoining Godfrey's Mews site it was found that the eastwest ditches bounding these plots extended as far as a boundary ditch on the west side of the mansio complex (Allen, in prep.). It seems reasonably certain that these boundaries belonged to a single scheme of re-organisation in the Hadrianic period , and that new property-units in the settlement were created at the same time as the mansioaccommodation was rebuilt (see below). This development may reflect the sort of provisions indicated in the Pizos inscription in the Severan period in Thrace. The buildings which were excavated on Site S were occupied continuously over some 40-50 years . At the end of this period they were demolished and Period VI.2 saw the digging of defensive ditches and the construction of a rampart along the line and to either side of the boundary on the south side of the more southerly of the excavated properties. A timber gateway was provided where the road from London entered the now defended mansio and settlement. The layout of the defences reveals the essential morphology of the settlement very clearly. The two major roads, the London-Colchester road and the branch to the port at Heybridge, were no doubt lined by plots similar to those on Site S. These will have extended back 40-50 metres from the road frontages. and this is precisely where the defences on the north-east and north-west sides of the settlement

It is probable that other mansio buildings, those associated with the service courtyard and perhaps first class accommodation, remain to be examined.

If it is correct that the mansio at Benwell was deliberately sited outside the val/um this must be seen as a matter of military discipline. According to the Scriptores Historiae Augustae this was very dear to Hadrian's heart. We are

39

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructure of governmentin Roman Britain were located. In the angle between the two roads the defences were extended to take in the mansio and its compound.

at the end of the west range have suggested that there may have been a tower here (Milton 1987, 62-63). This may have functioned as a fodder-store for barley or oats .

On Site AR and Sites Z and AK Period VI. I was much

The internal depth of the rooms in the north range is 6 metres. N2 and N6 were clearly passages linking the inner porticoes to west and east of the courtyard with the external gallery/portico N7. In view of this N3-5 should be taken as a unit. The centrally-placed room N4 (c.6 by 6.6 m) may have been an entrance-hall and N3 and NS offices on either side. This 'tripartite' arrangement in the entrance range will be found to occur at a number of mansiones.

shorter than on Site S (A.D. 120/25 - 130). On Site AR a timber building and wooden water-pipe line were constructed on the north-east side of a new metalled road. The southern corner of the building was located, and if it extended as far as the London-Colchester road it would have been c. 50 metres in length. On the south-west side beside the side-road it was fronted by a gallery or portico c.2 .35 metres wide, and a similar gallery (c.2.5 metres wide) may have occupied the south-east side. Alternatively the latter may have been a narrow room. This suggestion is supported by the form of the building in Period VII. I (c.200/210 - mid third century) when, after it had been rebuilt in stone in Period VI.2, a room c.3 metres wide was created in the gallery on the south-east side and another room the same width seems to have been planned in line with this beyond the south-east wall of the building (Drury 1988, 21 Fig.15). These were presumably intended as additions to a range of similar rooms extending to the north-west. It can tentatively be suggested that this building was a block of standard class accommodation.

Room E2 (8.8 metres square) spanned the whole width of the east range and is best considered along with the circular /aconicum (room B3). New baths had been provided at the start of Period VI. I. These are attested by the two drains on Site AK that may have served a cold bath and a cold douche to the south and by a fragment of relief-patterned box-tile keyed with die 16 from the filling of one of the slots on Site Z (Drury 1988, 23; 27 and 84: Table 2). The /aconicum (B3) is too far distant (at least 18 metres away) to have functioned with this cold room, and its stoke-hole would have opened towards it. The Period VI. 1 baths were cleared away at the start of Period VI.2 and it was probably then that B3 was constructed. It was probably intended that a corridor (B 1) continuing from N7 should lead past B3 to a changing-room, cold room, and all the other standard bathing facilities, and that B3 would have been entered directly from the cold room as was usually the case. AKS l, a vertical-sided trench on the eastern side of B3 , may have been a marking-out trench for one wall of this cold room (Drury 1988, 29 Fig.23). However , it was not until the start of the next period (VI.3) , in the later second or early third century, that these other rooms were actually constructed. In the meantime E2 in the east range of the courtyard building was probably used as a cold room serving the isolated /aconicum. E3 served as an ante-room to the two rooms to the south (E4 and ES) about which little can be said.

Traces of a new timber building were also found further to the east. Part of only one wall-slot was found on Site AK. It lay only one metre to the west of one of the stoke-holes of the later circular laconicum (B3) and marks the east wall of the building. It had been partly cut away by the east wall of the courtyard building of Period VI.2 . On Site Z there were three slots, two apparently forming the building's south-west angle. Only the west end of the third slot was located, c.2.5 metres from the south wall and c.4.4 metres from the west wall of the building . It may have turned to the north at this point. The total length of the building can be given as c.45 metres. There is no evidence that it extended to the south or that it was a courtyard building like its successor. Although not enough of its internal arrangements are known to determine its function, it may have provided the first class accommodation of the mansio like the courtyard building which replaced it. The new metalled road which passed the building on Site AR also served the building on Site Z/AK.

In the west range were two more ante-rooms (W2 and WS) extending the full width of the range, each giving access to two rooms (W3 and W4, 4.2 by 5.2 m each, and W6 and W7, 4.2 by 4.5 m each). Presumably each pair of rooms and its ante-room went together to form a single suite. The width of the external portico N7 (2.5 m wide) increased to 3 metres on the west front (W9), and it was presumably from this that W2 and WS were entered. The treatment of this corner is similar to that of the fragmentary timber building and its masonry successor on Site AR. In Period VI.3 the external portico W9 was demolished , with the implication that the ante-room W2 was now entered from N2, and WS from the internal portico W 1.

The timber building on Site AR was quickly rebuilt in stone and the masonry courtyard building was constructed at the same time (Period VI.2, c.A .D.130). On Sites Z and AK the foundations for this cut the slots for the walls of the Period VI. I timber building and the drains from the cold room and cold plunge of the baths. A portico bounded at least three sides of the courtyard and there were additional porticoes fronting the north and west ranges externally (Fig.31). The layout of the southern end of the building is not so well known as that of the north end and it is even possible that there was no south range . At the south end of the east range corridors seem to have surrounded a block of three rooms on at least two sides. Conceivably this formed the accommodation of a contractor (manceps) or of a decurion appointed by the magistrates of Colchester to administer the vicus and its mansio. The depth and width of the foundations

In the same period on Site AR a branch of the water pipeline was laid to supply a fountain or cistern set on a clay platform on the south side of the approach road. A well on this side of the road which had presumably met the water requirements here from Period V onwards was now transformed into a shaft which was filled and re-cut a total of five times before it received its final filling at the end of

40

HadrianicMansiones Period VI.3, c. 190/200 or slightly later. The succession of shafts was ritual in character with a horse skull or skulls occurring in four out of the six fillings. Two further horse skulls were deposited in the roadside ditch to the north (Drury 1988, 14 (Fig.11) and 19-20).

marked about 0.6 to I metre from the central section of the north-east wall of room 3, and a single post-hole lies about 0.6 m from the opposite wall. There seems little to encourage acceptance of the interpretation proposed for room 3, and it is suggested here that it was a roofed entrance-hall.

Godmanchester(Green 1975) (Fig.1:51). The entrance into 3 is marked by two piers which project towards the exterior. There is another projecting pier to the north-east and this must mean that the intention was to have two entrances side by side, one into 3 and the other into the area occupied by rooms 5, 6, and 7. The robbing of the walls after the building fell out of use makes it difficult to confirm this but it must be significant that room 5 does not extend to the north-east wall of 3 but has its own south-west wall with a gap of only half a metre or less between the two. The implication is that rooms 5 and 6 were not part of the original plan. In this the area occupied by these two rooms, and by 7, seems to have formed a second large room or hall, alongside the entrance-hall (room 3).

Although no final report has appeared fairly full interim reports have been published on the bath-building (Green 1959; 1960a; 1960b) and on the development of the town as a whole, including the mansio (Green 1975). The most recent summary has been published by Burnham and Wacher (1990, 122-29). It is possible that some of the dating and the interpretations put forward in the interim reports and discussed here will be revised in the final publication. After the evacuation of a Claudian fort, and the destruction of what is claimed to be an early civil settlement in the Boudican revolt, planned land-division took place in the early Flavian period forming an agricultural village laid out on both sides of Ermine Street. The construction of a second fort laid out across the line of Ermine Street is not closely dated. The site to be occupied by the mansio complex overlying the south comer of this second fort was cleared c. A.D.120, but building was interrupted and rubbish-pits were dug among the foundation trenches before it was resumed. This recalls the failure at Chelmsford to provide a full range of bathing facilities for the mansio constructed in the late Hadrianic period.

When the south-west and south-east ranges of the building are considered it is clear that the original plan was to have two suites of rooms, one in each range (rooms 14-16 and 20-22), presumably for higher-ranking travellers. Rooms 15 and 21 were not stair-wells but lobbies or ante-rooms giving access to and uniting the rooms on either side. We have seen the same arrangement in the first class accommodation at Vindonissa and in the First House at Richborough. A series of single rooms (17-19, 31, and 23-25) was provided for other guests. It is possible that each was first class accommodation designed for a single occupant, but perhaps more likely that some at least of the rooms were standard class contubernia.

The work was finally completed and the main residential building, of courtyard plan, lay about 65 metres back from Ermine Street and was entered at the north-west end via a side-road (Fig.32a). The bath-building lay behind to the south-east on a slightly different alignment and seems to have had its main entrance from Brown Street, the road from Sandy which joined Ermine Street at Godmanchester. In line with the north-west range of the courtyard building was a masonry building with a single aisle, in use in the second and third centuries (Goodbum 1976, 334). It seems likely that the stabling and other facilities connected with the transport services of the mansio lay between these buildings and Ermine Street. On the south-west the complex was bounded by a ditch which is thought to have served as an aqueduct and was perhaps incorporated into a boundary ditch enclosing the centre of the settlement. The aqueduct at least is said to be of early second century date.

At the south-east end of the building room 26 was identified as a kitchen because of the numerous rubbish-pits to the north-east of it. Green therefore identified 28 as a diningroom. However, room 29 is larger (c.8 by 5 metres) and is perhaps more likely to have had this role. Rooms 26 and 28 can be regarded as a pair of service-rooms, including the kitchen area. This has the advantage of allowing an indirect approach from the kitchen to the dining-room via the portico (12), in place of the direct entry from the kitchen which Green envisaged. The latter was not an arrangement which found favour in the Roman period. Rooms 27 and 32 are both identified as tower-granaries, although 32 was a later addition.

Green has proposed functional identifications for the rooms of the courtyard building which must be considered here (Fig.32b). In the north-west range room 3 is identified as a 'stable-yard', with rooms 6 and 9 as stables 'each holding six or more horses', and rooms 5 and 8 as tack-rooms. One piece of evidence offered in support of this is that 'wooden bollards lined the sides of the buildings to protect the walls' from damage by carts parked in 3 overnight. It will not be possible to check the stratigraphical relationship of the 'bollards' to the walls and floor-levels of the room until the final report is published. On the interim plan (Green 1975, 199 Fig.11) a rather ragged row of five or six post-holes is

Rooms 8-10 in the north-west range were part of the original plan of the mansio and may have housed a manceps or a magistrate in charge of the vicus. The suite of rooms at the south end of the east range of the courtyard building at Chelmsford may provide an analogy. The staff of the mansio at Godmanchester were perhaps housed in the single-aisled building with concrete floors that lay in line with the northwest range. It has been suggested by Green (1959, 223; 1960a, 254) that the plan of the bath-building was altered before completion by the sub-division of the planned praefurnium (H), so that

41

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain rooms 1-5 fonned one suite and rooms A-D and Jl-J2 a second suite. The facilities in the two alleged suites are so improbable, especially in the comparative sizes of their rooms, that the idea is rejected here. It is assumed instead that the baths functioned as originally planned: H praefurnium;4 hot bath; G (5) caldarium;F tepidarium; E passage; D laconicum; C cold bath; B cold room; A apodyterium;J1 lobby; J2 latrine. Room 6, an apsidal hot bath, was added at some time on the west side of G, and room A was subdivided. The cold bath had a tessellated floor and some of its limestone tesserae were identified as coming from the Purbeck area of Dorset. The presence of box flue-tiles keyed with die 16 provides a clear chronological link with the mansio at Chelmsford (Green 1960b, 277). The adaptation of the north end of the baths to fonn a much smaller bath-house will be dealt with in Chapter Seven.

partitions may have been removed by stone-robbing (Phillips and Walters 1977, 225), or may not have been constructed in stone, could have been occupied by the standard class accommodation. A single room (6), probably added at the northern comer of the building, measured c.2.4 by 4 metres. If this was the size of contubernia in the north-east range then there may have been ten or eleven of them, with perhaps a dining-room at the south-east end matching room 19. If this reconstruction is correct this would be significantly different from Chelmsford, where it was suggested that the standard class accommodation occupied a separate building . Unfortunately, until the north-east range is excavated this cannot be proved and it is possible that it was occupied by single-room units of first class accommodation, or by a mixture of such units and standard class contubernia. A gallery (33) led from the south-west side of the building to what seem to have been the mansio baths (Phillips and Walters 1977, 227 and Frere 1985, 310). Fieldwork has produced a concentration of relief-patterned tile fragments in the area of the mansio and these presumably derived from its baths (inf. M. Stone). Among the dies represented is die 12 which is contemporary with the Hadrianic die 16 found at Chelmsford and Godmanchester. However, a fragment of flat tile with a nail-setting (keyed with die 54), may have been used in a wall-jacketing with ceramic spacers and may indicate a pre-Hadrianic phase in the baths. The lack of alignment between the baths (and some other buildings revealed by aerial photography) and the street grid also suggests that they are earlier than the masonry courtyard building. This may have been preceded by an earlier timber mansio. The construction of the masonry building could have been carried out when the baths were refitted with new boxtiles in the Hadrianic period or later still.

Immediately west of the mansio and the aqueduct was a small rectangular temple dating to the second century. This was rebuilt during the same century as a rectangular eel/a with a surrounding verandah. One of a later group of bronze votive feathers found nearby was inscribed with a dedication to the god Abandinus (Green 1975, 200-201) . Early in the third century a fence which then enclosed the mansio buildings seems to have taken in the temple as well. It may be that the temple had always been closely associated with the mansio. Lower Wanborough (Phillips and Walters 1977) (Fig. I :60).

Lower W anborough appears in Route 13 of the Antonine Itinerary. A courtyard building lay within a regular street grid c. 140 metres north-east of Ennin Street (Fig .33a). Phillips and Walters (1977, 227) have correctly identified this as a mansio. Although the plan (Fig.33b) is known only from aerial photography, the elements that comprise it are closely matched in the masonry courtyard building at Chelmsford. To facilitate the description numbers have been assigned to the rooms.

The regular grid of streets on the north-east side of Ennin Street is of particular interest and, on the analogy of Chelmsford and Godmanchester, may indicate that the construction of the masonry mansio was accompanied by the organisation or re-organisation of a settlement to provide facilities and support for it. A rampart and ditch have been located at one point lying at 90 degrees to Ermin Street, but they did not continue on the opposite side of the road and this has given rise to the suggestion that they were not completed (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 163).

The entrance hall (3), placed centrally in the north-west side, was flanked on each side by a slightly smaller room (2 and 4) and by a passage (1 and 5) communicating between the external and internal porticoes (29 and 30). The external portico was extended around the south-west side where the first class accommodation was situated. This was two suites, each comprising a pair of rooms with a lobby between them (rooms 20-22 and 23-25). Room 26 was a passage linking the external and internal porticoes on this side. On the southeast side there were two projecting wings, one perhaps containing a suite of rooms (8-11) for a manceps or a magistrate , and the other a large room ( 17) which may have been a tower-granary, again matched in the plan of the building at Chelmsford. The recessed courtyard here was bounded by a portico (32). Among the rooms in the main south-east range may have been a kitchen (15) and diningroom (19) with a further passage between them, while rooms 12-14 may have fonned an additional larger unit of first class accommodation . The north-east range, where internal

Richborough (Bushe-Fox 1928, 15-18) (Fig .1:63).

The construction of the 'Second House' on Site III was thought to have followed immediately on the demolition of its predecessor which was associated with pottery said to be no later than the early part of the second century (Bushe-Fox 1928, 15). Although its bath-house was not excavated a fragment of relief-patterned tile keyed with die 9 should be associated with this. Dies 9 and 16 were found in the same deposit at Rayne in Essex and a Hadrianic date is virtually certain (E.W.Black in Smoothy 1989, 20-21). It therefore seems that the baths at Richborough were altered, or new baths were constructed, as part of the Hadrianic building programme. Although it is tempting to extend this dating to the Second House as well, in view of the sequence at

42

HadrianicMansiones Chelmsford it would be wiser to assign it a date in the Hadrianic period or later. It was still standing when the quadrifrons arch was converted to a look-out and signaltower and surrounded by a rampart, since the ditches that went with the latter respected it. However, when the Saxon Shore fort was constructed c.277-285 the north wall of the fort cut through it (Johnson 1970). The Second House (Fig.34) was constructed on a larger scale than its predecessor where we have seen that the need for additional accommodation led to the in-filling of its courtyard (Chapter Three). Only the south-west comer and parts of the south and west ranges survived. Nothing was recovered of the north and east ranges needed to complete the Second House as a courtyard building, though almost certainly this is what it was. The walls were of flint with tile courses, and the floors seem to have been of wood. In the south range are three large rooms (12-14) with porticoes to north and south of 13 and 14. Room 14 is larger and measured at least 6.6 by 8.8 metres. It was probably the entrance hall flanked on each side by a slightly smaller room (room 13 and another on its east side), forming a unit similar to rooms N3-5 at Chelmsford and rooms 2-4 at Lower Wanborough. The entrance hall (room 19) of the First House also occupied its south range. In the west range Bushe-Fox (1928, 16) recognised two suites of three rooms (2, 4-5; 6, 8-9) entered via lobbies (3 and 7) from the portico (1) to the west. This was obviously part of the first class accommodation but, unlike at Chelmsford and Lower Wanborough, there was no internal portico facing into the courtyard. Instead a rather contorted route had to be followed from 14 via 11 and then 10 to reach the western portico. Room 10 must have functioned in this way as a corridor rather than a stairwell as Bushe-Fox (1928, 16) conjectured, otherwise there would have been no connection between the west and south ranges.

used to key the tiles) represented at each site are given in brackets: Alchester (14, ?38); Alfoldean (4, 5, 16, 66; dies 22 and 23 may indicate a pre-Hadrianic mansio baths); Bradwell on Sea (5A); Braughing (16, 64); Brockley Hill (three different dies are reported but the identifications are uncertain; one may have been die 43); Cave's Inn (67, 114); Charterhouse on Mendip (25); Chelmsford (4, 6, 8, 16, 16A, 44, 46); Coddenham (9); Dorchester on Thames (35); Dorking (69); Dover (27); Castle Hill, East Bridgford ( 17); Ewell (1, 4, 5, 14, 66); Godmanchester (16); Great Casterton (72); Great Chesterford (32); Heybridge (16); Kenchester (8); Kettering (9); Lower Wanborough (3, 12, 25, 39, 54, 68, 92); Richborough (9, 85; also an uncertain die of Lowther's Group 9 (plain chevron type)); Sandy (32, 120); Staines (25); Towcester (probably die 16); Wall (16, 17, 45; also an uncertain die of Lowther's Group 5 (diamond and lattice type)); Welwyn (die 58).

Many of these finds have been noted in Lowther 1948 and will be republished together with the more recent finds in a new corpus of relief-patterned tile (Betts et al. forthcoming). The majority of the dies can be dated fairly securely to the Hadrianic period though the dating of some is uncertain. The list of sites does not include civitas-capitals or cities of higher status where such tiles could have been used in public baths as well as, or rather than, in baths belonging to a mansio. The information the tiles can provide on the organisation of the Hadrianic building-programme will be considered below. Here four of the sites in the list will receive limited discussion. Alchester (Fig.1:31). Alchester lay on the road between Towcester and Dorchester-on-Thames , about 24 Roman miles from the former and nearly 18 from the latter. Such a situation makes the presence of a mansio very likely. There was a rudimentary street grid, laid out in relation to the main road which passed through the site from north to south. A fragment of tile stamped with die 14 is in the Ashmolean Museum and came from excavations in 1925 or 1926 carried out in the centre of the walled area on the east side of the north-south road. A second piece of tile, keyed with die 38, was an old donation, re-accessioned in 1967, and has no precise provenance. Foster (1989, 147) has suggested that a building revealed in aerial photographs lying two insulae to the west of the main road (c. 100-160 metres away) was a mansio. A structure with nine small compartments showing on one of the photos may well have been standard class accommodation. The substantial building with a tessellated floor and a hypocaust partly explored west of the walled town in 1766 (the 'Castle Hill') may have been a developed aisled building. This at least is suggested by the 8 feet (2.44m) wide entrance (Dunkin 1816, 195-6). It is likely to have been part of a villa. The defences comprised an earth rampart and a contemporary stone wall fronted by a ditch (Young 1975, 139-40). They were dated to the late second century and enclosed about 26 acres (c.10.5 hectares).

Hadrianic MansionesIndicated by Relief-Patterned Flue Tiles.

In addition to the mansiones discussed in detail in this chapter others at Castle Hill, East Bridgford and at Cave's Inn were probably established in the Hadrianic period but are dealt with in Chapter Five because the main excavated structures are dated later in the second century. The reason for suspecting a Hadrianic mansio at these two sites is because they have produced fragments of relief-patterned box tiles which can certainly (Castle Hill) or probably (Cave's Inn) be dated to this period. Where such tiles occur in a roadside settlement and can be associated with an excavated building (as at Chelmsford, Godmanchester and Wall), they have always been associated with the bath-house of a mansio. At Lower Wanborough relief-patterned tile fragments found in field-walking were again concentrated in the area of the mansio (pers. comm. M. Stone). It is therefore highly probable, if not absolutely certain, that the occurrence of relief-patterned tile from a roadside settlement indicates the existence of a Hadrianic mansio somewhere within it. All the sites where this is the case are listed here and are also shown on Fig. I. The particular die numbers (the patterns

Great Casterton (Fig. I :52). A bath-house, thought to be of late first century date, lay only 10 metres west of Ermine

43

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain Street and at an angle to the road (Corder 1961, 49-50). This situation is unusually close to the road but it is reported that substantial walls were observed in watching briefs on the east side of the road (information P. Liddle). If this was the mansio accommodation the baths may have been sited on the opposite side of Ermine Street to facilitate the disposal of waste water into the River Gwash. It would be helpful to know the date of the mansio and whether it was established when the nearby fort was evacuated in the late 70's A.D .. The single piece of relief-patterned tile is marked with the year 1958, the same year that the bath-house was trialtrenched, but it was not published and small-scale excavation also took place in the same year on the eastern side of Ermine Street about 100 metres from the line of the road. The excavator commented on the poor preservation of structures in this area where the natural limestone was less than two feet (0.6m) below the modem surface (Corder 1961, 47-8). A certain degree of caution is perhaps required in identifying the known baths as the bath-house of a mansio. The defensive rampart at Great Casterton was originally assigned to the period A.D. 170-180 (Corder 1954, 3). Hartley (1983, 89) has more recently suggested a terminus post quernof 150-160.

Kenchester(Fig.1:57). Magnis occurs in Route 12 of the Antonine Itinerary. Here the cold plunge bath and a drain belonging to a bath-building were excavated c.65 metres behind the line of the main road through the settlement. Fragments of tile keyed with die 8 (also represented at Chelmsford) were found near the drain (Jack 1916, 27). To the west were further structures (site 7) which may have belonged to the mansio, set at an angle to the main road differing from that of the bath-building (Jack and Hayter 1926, 25 and Pl. I facing page 6). One of these incorporated a courtyard 8.2 metres square with what seems to have been a portico round it and rooms with concrete floors on at least two sides. The situation of these buildings is typical of mansiones, seen at Chelmsford, Lower Wanborough, Wall and elsewhere, set well back from the road frontage which was occupied by strip-buildings many of which would have been shops offering goods and services. The latest material from the bank of the earthwork defences is dated c.140-180 (WebsterG. 1957, 141-42).

Towcester(Fig.1:68). Lactodorooccurs in Routes 2 and 6 of the Antonine Itinerary. One fragment of relief-patterned tile, probably of die 16, came from a small excavation on the site of St. Lawrence Church which produced other hypocaust debris and revealed a herringbone brick floor above an earlier floor of opus signinum (Frere 1984a, 300). A bathbuilding is probably indicated and its position, c.60 metres back from the line of Watling Street, matches the preferred position for mansiones elsewhere. The suggestion that a small part of a building excavated close to the junction of Watling Street and the road to Alchester belonged to a mansio(Lambrick 1980, 44-5 and 114) is less likely.

refined since a pit with rich contents dated c.175 was cut into the tail of the rampart and this provides a terminusante quern (Woodfield 1993, 20-21 and 25). When they were constructed this brought an end to occupation both immediately inside and outside the line of the defences. However, in the 170's lines of ditched plots were laid out along the Alchester road some of which were occupied by buildings, presumably dwellings. This formed a 'suburb' south of the Silverstone Brook and the excavators suggested that this may have been intended to accommodate those who were displaced by the construction of the defences which was happening at about the same time (Brown et al. 1983, 131133). The long list of mansiones discussed in this chapter has provided a much more varied corpus of plans than the examples treated in Chapter Three. Several of the civilian mansiones discussed above had courtyard plans, and this development was foreshadowed at Newstead and Richborough. However, it is notable that the military mansionesof the Hadrianic period did not have such a plan. It was not until the Antonine period that this was adopted at Caernarvon, probably at Catterick, and at Dover. Chelmsford, Godmanchester, Lower Wanborough and Richborough are all linked by the occurrence of reliefpatterned tile of Hadrianic date, but the only one of these for which other reliable dating evidence is at present available is Chelmsford. There the Period VI.1 timber buildings are assigned to c.120/25 and the masonry courtyard building of Period VI.2 to c.A.D. 130 (Drury 1988, 25-31). The dating of Period VI.2 seems rather too precise and should perhaps be expressed as a range, c.130-40. It is clear that the reliefpatterned tiles were first fitted in the baths in Period VI. I and there is no reason to think that the accommodation of this period was intended to be any less permanent than such timber buildings elsewhere. At Wall, where relief-patterned tiles were also fitted in the baths, the timber accommodation of Phase 2 lasted from c.100 to c.160-70 or later. While there is therefore good evidence for a Hadrianic buildingprogramme to provide or re-fit mansio baths, the provision of accommodation in masonry courtyard buildings cannot be linked with this. It has been convenient to discuss some of these in the present chapter but they may all eventually turn out to be Antonine in date like those considered in Chapter Five below. It seems likely that purpose-built accommodation was provided along with the Hadrianic mansiobaths but that it was usually of timber and simpler in plan. As was stated at the start of the chapter Hadrian's reign saw the beginning of a building-programme at mansiones at civilian roadside settlements, but this was continued and was elaborated through the second century A.D. The provision of a 'tripartite entrance hall' is a development of the entrance halls seen in first century mansiones, while recognisable suites of rooms for high-class travellers link the first class accommodation with its military prototypes. The barrack-like standard class accommodation of these military models seems to have been adopted in some civilian buildings and was presumably intended to house soldiers below the rank of centurion and the equivalent grades of civilian officials. It may also have housed stationarii who

The defences at Towcester were dated c.160/180 by the material from a bank behind what was regarded as a contemporary wall (Brown and Alexander 1982, 56). This contemporaneity has since been confirmed and the dating

44

HadrianicMansiones were probably permanently stationed at some mansiones. Bath-buildings are still essentially detached structures, but are now much more conveniently situated for the occupants of the accommodation. Perhaps most striking is the repeated siting of mansiones well behind the main-road frontage in roadside settlements. This was also the situation of the mansio at lnchtuthil and, as was the case at the legionary fortress , the roadside locations must have been reserved for tabernaebelonging to or rented by the ordinary inhabitants of the settlements. This was certainly so at Chelmsford where the roadside site of the earlier waggon-park was given up at just the time when the Hadrianic mansio was constructed. The preferred location well behind the main road disposes of the suggestion that is sometimes made that some of the mansionestreated here were privately-run inns. In Chapter Three we saw that in Britain in the first century the mansioneswere almost all built by the Roman army and must have been either under the supervision of fort commanders or of the provincial governor. There is little evidence for the involvement of local magistrates in providing and running mansiones until c. 85-90 at Richborough where the First House may have been built by them. Of course, it was only in the 80's and 90's of the first century that civitas government was effectively established over a large part of the south of the province with the creation of new cities as chefs-lieux for the tribes and the appointment of officers ([egati iuridici) to assist the governor in his judicial functions, of whom the earliest probably took office in A.D .79 (Frere 1987b, 183-84 and 190-93). We saw in Chapter Three that to begin with the inhabitants of roadside settlements probably had to provide accommodation in their own homes. This would have meant that they were far more open to exploitation and robbery by their official guests than where a purpose-built mansio was provided . The existence of such a building made it easier to supervise travellers and diminished the risk of disaffection among the provincials. We have also seen that Hadrian reiterated the rules laid down by earlier emperors about the lodging of officials and soldiers with the civilian population, and that his reform of the cursus publicus was concerned not with this but largely with the financing of the provision of transport. Nevertheless it can be demonstrated that the mansio baths built in roadside settlements in Hadrian's reign in the civilian areas of Roman Britain were constructed under the direction of the provincial governor or procurator and not by beneficent private individuals or the officials of the different civitates where they were situated.

they had been stock-piled for a period of time, possibly by a builder or a builders' merchant, before being finally put to use. The occurrence of one particular pattern (die 16) at Braughing, Chelmsford, East Bridgford, Godmanchester and Wall, and of die 8 at sites as far apart as Chelmsford and Kenchester, suggests that many of the builders who constructed the Hadrianic mansio baths were based in or close to London. These dies have an overall distribution which suggests they were made close to the provincial capital (die 16 perhaps in Essex or west Kent; die 8 in Essex) , and the occurrences at distant mansionesare difficult to account for unless the building-contracts were being offered in London. Builders based there who had successfully bid for contracts presumably continued to draw on their existing suppliers. If it is correct that the contracts were put out in London, it almost certainly means that they were put out by the provincial procurator and that the building-programme they represent was initiated and financed by the government. It is worth noting that the first known milestone survey of roads in Britain was also initiated early in Hadrian's reign (Sedgley 1975, 2). The vast majority of dated milestones from Britain belong to the period from Gordian III to Constantine. This reflects the political uncertainties of a time when the erection and display of inscriptions to the successive emperors was a prudent expression of loyalty. Of the Hadrianic milestones (RIB 2244, 2265, 2272) two at least date to 119-121, that is to immediately before Hadrian's visit to the province, and these can also be seen as expressions of loyalty to him. However, this initial series of milestones may also reflect a real programme of work on the roads. In addition both the planning of itineraries to be followed by the emperor in A.D.122 and the decision where to improve the facilities of mansiones in the early Hadrianic period will certainly have been aided by it.

Why should this new attention have been lavished on mansiones?It was pointed out earlier in this chapter that Hadrian was deeply committed to the restoration of high standards of military discipline. It seems possible that the emperor wished to curb the abuses that soldiers and officials were always liable to practise when they were in unrestricted contact with the civilian community. We saw in Chapter Two that this problem had been brought to the notice of Trajan in connection with Juliopolis and that the emperor had declined to station a legionary centurion in the city to police travellers . He had done this for Byzantium , but explained to Pliny that this was a special case because of the multitude of travellers passing through it (Pliny Epistulae X.77-78). Hadrian was probably as much concerned with the moral integrity of his officers as with the protection of civilians for although the provision of purpose-built mansiones gave lodging to those whose rank entitled them to transport, many vici had no purpose-built accommodation and here soldiers below the rank of centurion lodged in the homes of the inhabitants. It may be that the emphasis placed by the Augustan History on the strict vetting of officers by Hadrian, and such apparently picturesque details as the demolition of dining-rooms and porticoes in the forts , is a fair reflection of the truth. At any rate, it is an interesting observation that

The Hadrianic building-programme was extensive and is well-attested by the occurrence of relief-patterned flue tiles from many sites (see above and Fig.I). These tiles were produced in civilian tileries, for the same dies that are found at mansionesare represented in cities and at villas. Of course the tile-makers and the builders who used the tiles were not the same men. The fabrics of the relief-patterned tiles used at Chelmsford indicate that they were made from clays taken from at least four different sources (Drury 1988, 83), and one of the dies (die 44) may be represented in two different fabrics (inf. Dr. I. Betts). Whether or not this means that the tiles were obtained from different tileries , it does show that

45

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain although hypocausta are known in Flavian and Trajanic mansiones, at lnchtuthil, Castleshaw and Richborough, no certain example is found in any mansio built under Hadrian.

building at Rottweil belongs to the first half of the second century (Klee 1986, 59).

Rooms with hypocaust heating are found again later in the second century, but the Second House at Richborough, perhaps a Hadrianic mansio, had floors of wood.

Elsewhere the mansio buildings occupied the road frontage. At Kempten (Cambodunum) the mansio complex stretched along 110 metres of the main street, adjoining the forum and basilica (Schleiermacher 1972, Pl.2), and at Frankfurt am Main / Heddernheim (Nida) the mansio occupied a frontage of just over 90 metres along one of the main streets of the city (Woelcke 1938, Beilage 1 facing pg.162). At Heddernheim a large entrance hall gave access to a courtyard which was narrow in relation to its length like that at Chelmsford and some other British mansiones(Fig.36a). The accommodation lay along the east and west sides of this courtyard and beyond the eastern range was a large bathbuilding. At Kempten the baths, the wall surrounding the baths pa/aestra, and a formally-designed tripartite entrance hall between two blocks of accommodation lay adjacent to the street (Fig.36b). First class and standard class accommodation can perhaps be distinguished in the more northerly block, the former comprising suites of two rooms separated by corridors as at Chelmsford. The same arrangement existed at Valkenburg and Nijmegen in the preFlavian and Flavian periods respectively. In addition two complexes of rooms adjoining a large courtyard to the rear may have provided superior accommodation for very senior officers or officials. At both mansionesthere were yards that could have served as waggon-parks. A final example is found at the municipiumof Camuntum (Swoboda-Milenovic 1960). Here the elements of the mansio were crowded together into a small insula and there has been considerable alteration, including the re-location of the baths (Fig.37). Fifteen contubernia, provided in their latest period with tessellated floors and each c.4 by 3.5 metres, were laid out in two ranges with a narrow yard between them. They lay next to the large bath-building that formed the western part of the complex. The excavator did not know what to make of these rooms. He suggested they were perhaps shops and rejected the idea that they formed accommodation, while having to admit that one of them (room 35) which was fitted with a hypocaustonmust have done so (Swoboda-Milenovic 1960, 40-41). To the east other rooms, less regularly planned and many heated by hypocausts, may have been the first class accommodation. In the unexcavated south-east part of the insula there may have been a yard and stabling. These cases show that in such purpose-built mansiones the same elements are indeed present as in the British examples.

The result of having purpose-built mansio accommodation in roadside settlements in civilian Roman Britain, and of its peripheral position in these settlements, is that it stands out. This prominence probably means that mansiones are easier to recognise in Britain than elsewhere. The architecture of the Hadrianic mansionesclearly owed much to earlier buildings seen at military sites. We saw in Chapter Three that such buildings are found associated with the fortresses at Novaesium and Vindonissa, and that the Roman army in the first century did not evolve a building-type that was unique to Britain. Hadrian's military reforms, with which the construction-programme of British mansiones has been linked here, are described in the context of the emperor's visit to the German armies. It can be expected therefore that evidence for a similar programme of construction will be found in the civilian settlements near to which these and other continental garrisons were stationed. No systematic search has been carried out in the archaeological literature, in the same way as has been done for Britain, to identify continental mansiones.However, it is possible to offer a few examples which reproduce in striking fashion the elements found in British mansiones.The first of these is at Rottweil (Arae Flaviae) in Germania Superior (Klee 1986). Here an auxiliary fort (Kasten III) was evacuated in the mid 80's of the first century A.D .. In the area of the former retentura, about 60- 75 metres behind the main road frontage, lay a bath-house and a courtyard building forming the first class accommodation of the mansio (Fig.35). The peripheral situation of these buildings is the same as that of so many British examples. To the south-west Building J, which lay beside and end-on to the road, contained sixteen rooms (rooms 3-18) each about four metres square in two ranges separated by a yard 5.5 metres wide. At the west end was an entrance hall flanked by further small rooms (1 and 2). At the east end was a small bathsuite. Although it is argued in the excavation report that Building J was a market-hall with flanking rows of storerooms this is difficult to accept. Building B at Carlisle and the building south of the val/um at Benwell are analogous structures and, like them, Building J at Rottweil should be interpreted as the standard class accommodation of a mansio. At Inchtuthil the standard class accommodation was also separated from the other elements of the mansio and was closer to the road leading to the fortress gate, though it was not actually on the road frontage. The small bath-suite in Building J is also easier to accept in a residential context than as part of a market-hall. To the north-east of Building J and separated from it by an enclosed yard was Building K, called a strip-house in the report. Its presence demonstrates what made the road frontages so valuable at Rottweil and at the settlements where mansiones are found in Britain. The construction of Building J is undated, but the courtyard

The continental examples cited above which were built in civilian contexts are found in precisely those areas where the army's influence was permanent, as it was in Britain, and where the army was directly or indirectly responsible for the earliest phases of romanisation and urbanisation. The new towns of the German and Danube frontiers arose in much the same circumstances as the civitates of first and second century Britain, in close proximity to large concentrations of Roman troops. There is, by contrast, an apparent lack of parallels for such mansionesaway from the frontiers, in the interior of Gaul for instance. Here Grenier ( 1934, 205- 7) was only able to propose a single plausible example, at

46

HadrianicMansiones Thezee on the road between Tours and Bourges. Since he wrote new excavation has brought a substantial revision of the site plan and new uncertainty over the purpose of the buildings (Picard 1968, 338-39 and Fig.21). More significantly, in discussing the establishment of roadside settlements in Gallia Belgica, Wightman (1985, 92-3) could only refer to a single complex identified as an inn, at Charneleux. There is nothing distinctive in the plan of the buildings (Mertens 1968, 18-19 Fig.12) which were late Roman in date, while the roads and their roadside settlements were in existence by the mid first century A.D .. It is not possible to demonstrate that the continental mansiones in frontier provinces were constructed by the

47

imperial government in the way that it is for Britain. However, there is surely the same rationale behind them. It was through the towns in these provinces that the traffic of soldiers and officials would be heaviest. Trajan recognised that travellers passing through Byzantium required the special supervision of a legionary centurion, but it seems that Hadrian attempted to devise a more fundamental solution to ensure the discipline of his officers and subordinates. The Hadrianic building-programme which first set out to provide a network of mansiones in the frontier provinces is a remarkable instance of the systematic approach to a problem and a clear strategy to solve it which are typical of this emperor.

CHAPTER FIVE OTIIER SECOND CENTURY MANSIONES We have seen how, in the demilitarised parts of the province, Hadrian's reign saw widespread construction and reconstruction of mansiones.The work begun under Hadrian clearly continued through the second century and the present chapter deals with some of these later mansiones. Four of these are at military sites and, although one of them, Corbridge, is most unlikely to have lacked a mansio until the Antonine period, it is possible that those at Brecon Gaer and Chesterholm were new foundations. In his catalogue of military vici Sommer (1984, 62-101) lists some twenty sites, in addition to those discussed in this volume, where the identification of a mansio has been suggested. The evidence is in some cases very good (elaborate courtyard buildings at such sites as Glenlochar or Old Carlisle , revealed by aerial photography; a partial plan recovered in old excavations at Bryn-y-Gefeiliau), but in others it is poor and sometimes no more than guesswork. None of these sites merits detailed description here, but it should be noted that the authentic mansionesamong them are likely to have been constructed in or before the second century.

Period 1 of Building B comprised 'room I', a rectangular space internally c.10 by 8.5 metres enclosed by walls and with a contemporary wall extending to the south. The west and south walls of corridor 9 were both butted onto room l and so the latter was taken to be earlier than the rest of the building. This must be regarded as very doubtful , for room 1 is an integral part of the plan of the building which will be treated here as an architectural and functional unit (Fig.38b). The focus of the building was room 2 (9 by 7 .5 metres) which presumably formed an entrance hall approached by a sideroad from the main road about 90 metres to the west. From room 2 access could be had through 8 and 9 to the servicearea (rooms 10-15). Here room 11 was a latrine, and from the animal bones and oyster shells in an ash layer above the drain west of 15 Wheeler (1926,64) inferred that the kitchen had been in this area. There was a foundation between 8 and 9 and presumably there was a door here which separated the service-rooms from the remainder of the building.

Of the five civilian sites dealt with in this chapter the mansio at Caerwent might be Hadrianic while that at Castle Hill, East Bridgford was certainly in existence by the Hadrianic period, although the major excavated elements are later. The mansio at Whitchurch, with a terminus post quern of c. A.D.170, and that at Cave's Inn are of particular interest for their location on Watling Street, the via militaris leading to the legionary fortress at Chester. Relief-patterned tiles from Cave's Inn suggest that baths existed there in the Hadrianic period, though the excavated accommodation is Antonine. There was a mansio at Wall from at least as early as the Flavian period, and Phase 3 (the courtyard building) was broadly contemporary with the accommodation at Cave's Inn and Whitchurch. The apparent coincidence in dating at these three sites should possibly be linked to the construction of the Stone Phase III mansio at Chester itself, dated c.180. There may have been a co-ordinated programme of building along this part of Watling Street, prompted by the return of the twentieth legion to Chester following the Roman withdrawal from the Antonine Wall and southern Scotland.

BreconGaer(Wheeler 1926, 60-68) (Fig.1:4). The excavation of Building B, at the top of a steep slope down to the River Y scir and west of the road leading to the porta principalis dextra of the fort, took place in the campaign of 1924-25 (Fig.38a). Wheeler (1926, 67) proposed that it formed part of a mansio and this identification is very likely to be correct. Hypocaust heating is a rare feature in buildings of the first and second centuries but was present in the first class accommodation of several of the mansionesdiscussed in Chapter Three and in the postHadrianic phases of buildings discussed in Chapter Four. Its presence in Building B at Brecon Gaer is a valid criterion in interpreting this building as part of a mansio.

Room 7 had a 'cement' floor and measured c.6 by 6.5 metres. The room was situated as if to give a view across 8 to room 1. This relationship is taken here to indicate that room 7 was the dining-room of the mansio with a view across the porticus (8) into 1, which was not a room or even roofed, but a garden courtyard. Seen like this Building B is a clever adaptation of the building-type with four ranges of rooms around a courtyard which is commonly found at mansiones. The view across the garden from room 7 to the opposite valley slope is a sophisticated feature of the design, perhaps not surprising in luxury villas in Italy but unexpected in a British mansio. Room 3, opening off the entrance hall, was a lobby giving access to rooms 4 and 6 which must together have formed a suite of rooms of superior accommodation. Room 4 was provided with a hypocaust which was fed from another in room 5. The latter was in fact a hypocauston,designed to heat adjacent rooms indirectly, and its position between rooms 4 and 7 is matched by hypocaustain villas at Ashtead (Surrey) and Darenth (Kent) (Black 1985, 80 and Figs . lb and 2d). However, there is no evidence in Wheeler's report to indicate that the hypocaust in room 4 was a secondary feature. The main purpose of the hypocaustonin room 5 must therefore have been to heat room 7. The east wall of room 6 was continued beyond the south-east comer of the room and a further room or rooms, cut away by a later road, may once have existed to the south, so balancing the western block of rooms (16-23) and framing the approach to room 2. It is possible that the western block of rooms (16-23) was an addition to that part of the building already described since its west end had to be built on an artificial stone platform above the slope down to the river. However , it has already been noted that the entrance hall (room 2) may have been recessed between the western block of rooms and others

48

Other secondcenturymansiones south of rooms 4 and 6, and rooms 16-23 are here regarded as part of the original building .

It is likely that there was a second storey above these rooms since it is otherwise difficult to see the need for corridor 18 as well as corridor 20. The thickening of the south wall of room 19 may indicate that there was a stair-well at the west end of 20. Room 19 would then have been entered from corridor 18. Rooms 22 and 23 may have formed a two-room suite of accommodation on the ground floor and two more such suites could have existed, above these rooms and over rooms 17-19. Like room 7, room 19 had a 'cement' floor and it also looked westward across the valley. It may have functioned as an independent dining-room for the residents in the western block. In line with the west wall of room 17 there seems to have been a door across corridor 20, dividing rooms 16 and 17 from the rest of the block. Room 17 originally had an entrance over two metres wide which was later reduced to just under one metre. Room 16 had a floor of 'coarse white cement' , corresponding to room 15 in the northern servicearea, and the walls of both 16 and 17 were rendered with white plaster. Tentatively rooms 16 and 17 can be identified as service-rooms for the western block. In conclusion, the western block may mirror the provision made in rooms 3-15, with a dining-room (19) , service-rooms ( 16 and 17), and living-quarters (rooms 22-23 and two additional suites at first-floor level). If rooms 4 and 6 was the accommodation for a person of the highest status, rooms 22-23 and the other two suites postulated above. which lacked hypocaust heating, represent a lower grade of first class accommodation. The standard class accommodation, probably a range of rooms similar to those known elsewhere, must remain to be found in the vicinity of Building B or else was provided in the homes of the vicani. Wheeler showed that the drain which flushed the latrine in room 11 was contemporary with the construction of Building B, and he argued plausibly that its origin was Building C which lay near the north-west comer of the fort. He suggested this was an external bath-house serving the garrison (Wheeler 1926, 62-63). Perhaps this also served the mansio. The addition of the stone wall to the fort, the reconstruction of the central range of buildings in stone, and the construction of Building B are all now dated to c. A.D.140 or later (Simpson 1963, 20; 27; 30 and 35). The hypocausts in Building B utilised tiles with ansate stamps of Legio // Augusta showing that construction had been carried out by military personnel (Boon 1984, 54: Types A.ii.I, 2, 3 and 6). Two late third century coins were associated with Building B, one of which had been flushed into the drain passing below the building, so that occupation presumably did not end before the later third century (Simpson 1963, 34).

fifteen rooms in three ranges round a narrow courtyard. The earliest part of this building was rooms I-III and room I is said to have had Antonine pottery sealed in its floor makeup (Birley R.E. 1970. 116-17). Though this has not yet been published it will be accepted here as indicating that the mansio was built in its original form at some time in the middle or second half of the second century. The two recesses, one rectangular and one apsidal, of room III make it clear that this building was designed as a bathhouse (Fig.40). However, the intention was evidently not carried through. Although room III had a hypocaust neither recess contained a hot-bath; room II, which should have functioned as the tepidarium, was not provided with a hypocaust; room I, where the cold room and cold bath should have been, showed no trace of any such facilities. Instead room IV was built against the north side of III and heated by a hypocaust, and both rooms were served by a stoke-hole in the north wall of IV. Room V was built on the north side of room I. It seems likely that the rooms that lay to the west of the later courtyard house and were demolished when this was built, and the building on Site XXX, were contemporary with this period of the mansio (Birley R.E. 1977, 44). Two building stones of Legio // Augusta were associated with the building on Site XXX (Hassan and Tomlin 1977, 432 Nos.23 and 24) and testify to the official character of the complex. The buildings on Sites XXXII-XXXIII might also date to this period (Birley R.E. 1977, 47-48). Fig.39 shows the postulated layout of the original mansio.

If rooms I-III (on Site IX) were designed as a free-standing bath-building analogy with other military mansiones suggests that this would have lain on one side of a service courtyard, with a stable and perhaps accommodation for staff on other sides. Plainly such a provision, if this had been the intention, was not what was produced. The two rooms heated by hypocausts (III and IV) were not bath-rooms. They must have been a unit of first class accommodation. entered from the courtyard through room II. Room I was entered from II and also had a doorway from the exterior. It perhaps formed a second suite with room V. With its two suites of rooms the building is thus similar to SS 1 at Caernarvon and to those providing superior accommodation at Rainau-Buch and Eining. Perhaps the long range of Site XXX was originally designed as the stabling (and its depth, c.4 metres, is comparable to that of the stable at lnchtuthil), but if so it was converted into rooms which could have served as additional accommodation. When this might have happened is not yet clear. However. the location of the standard class accommodation was obviously in the buildings on Sites XXXII-XXXIII. These two ranges of rooms were separated by a narrow gap, probably to catch the eaves-drips. Site XXXII was poorly preserved, but Site XXXIII had eight rooms and, except for those adjacent to and conforming to the lines of the streets at either end, these were of a standard size. approximately 3.5 by 5.5 metres. Their similarity to the ranges of standard class accommodation already discussed in this book makes their function certain. The suggestion that they formed 'married quarters' for soldiers living out of the

Chesterholm (Birley R.E. 1970; no final report) (Fig. I: 14).

The military occupation at Chesterholm comprised five successive periods between c.A.D.85 and 140 (R. Birley in Daniels 1989, 46). In the Antonine period a fort with a stone defensive wall was built. Outside this Site IX comprised a building which has been identified as a mansio (Birley R.E. 1970, 114; 1977, 42-43). In its final form it consisted of

49

Curs us Public us: the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain fort with their families after Severus had permitted serving soldiers to contract legal marriages was already undermined, as Birley ( 1977, 46-48) recognised, by the dating evidence. The absence of a bath-building in the mansio as finally built is explicable if the residents were able to use the military bath-building provided for the garrison of the fort. This was evidently the case at the Saalburg where the courtyard building with first class accommodation adjoined the regimental bath-house (Jacobi 1897, Tafel XIII and XIV Fig.I).

The via principalis of the fort remained in use to the south of these buildings. It continued the line of the Stanegate (Road 1), the east-west road known at present between Corbridge and Carlisle. South of Road 1 were two walled military compounds, one on either side of the via praetoria of the fort (Road 3), containing accommodation and workshops for two detachments of legionary craftsmen from Legio II Augusta and Legio VI Victrix, while to the north of the central Sites 78 and 10-11 lay at least two more large granaries and other official buildings. The dating of this series of structures is uncertain although it has received considerable discussion (Simpson 1974 and Brassington 1975, with references; Bishop and Dore 1989, 139-41). Probably all of them belong within the half-century following the evacuation of the fort. Alongside these official buildings were numerous civilian strip-houses, lining the Stanegate and the 'eastern branch' of Dere Street (Road 4). At some point the whole town was enclosed by a clay rampart on a cobble base, probably fronted by a stone wall (Salway 1965, 56-59).

The demolition of the westernmost rooms on Site IX may have been occasioned by the construction of a rampart across their line. This enclosed the mansio and other buildings across the street to the north. Presumably the construction of new east and west ranges, extending from rooms IV and V to form the completed courtyard building, was contemporary with this.

In the completed building (Fig.40) rooms VI and VII were both heated by hypocausts and probably formed another suite of superior first class accommodation, like III and IV. It is possible that room I now functioned as a dining-room for the occupants of these two suites. Of the other rooms XIV was a latrine and XV enclosed the stoking-area for the hypocausts in rooms III and IV. Rooms VIII-XIII are left as additional service rooms and quarters for permanent staff and/or for the slaves of the occupants of the larger suites. A building-stone of Legio VI Victrix was re-used in the northern wall of the courtyard building (Birley R.E. 1970, 127-28 No. 4) and had presumably come from the demolished west range of rooms.

The mansio complex lay on the southern edge of the Roman town above the River Tyne. The two military compounds, the granaries and the other official buildings occupied very much the same area as the earlier fort, while the civilian buildings were confined to the road frontages beyond this. It therefore seems likely that the mansio comprised all the buildings south of the compounds. The predominant alignment of the excavated buildings is east-south-east to west-north-west but to simplify the description this is regarded as an eastwest alignment, and the walls lying at right angles to this are regarded as aligned north-south. To the west of the mansio was the 'western branch' of Dere Street (Road 2) which entered the town after crossing the river and the Cor Bum. The western part of the mansio was excavated in 1906-1907, and to the east aerial photography has revealed that the northern range of rooms (Site 3) may have extended as far as Road 3 (Bishop and Dore 1989, 10), the continuation of the via praetoria of the fort. Although the southern defences of the fort have not yet been located by excavation the south-west comer of the ditch system may show up on aerial photographs (Bishop and Dore 1989, 9 and 131). If projected the lines of the three possible ditches would pass under the mansio buildings on Site 3 and meet Road 3 approximately where this makes a slight change in alignment. It seems likely that fragmentary buildings between Site 2 and Site 3 (Blocks A and B), which differ in alignment from the succeeding mansio buildings, were laid out in relation to Road 3 like those revealed in aerial photographs immediately west of the road. Their location immediately outside the defences of the fort and their alignment on the continuation of the via praetoria suggest that they were part of a mansio contemporary with the occupation of the fort, when it, rather than Dere Street, was the most significant feature of the site. Blocks A and B are assigned here to Phase 1 and Fig.42 shows their relationship to the later mansio buildings.

Alterations were carried out to the courtyard building, apparently following a fire which destroyed the west range. The hypocausts in rooms VI and VII went out of use and an oven was inserted in room VI. In the east range the latrine in room XIV was filled in. The partition between rooms XII and XIII was removed and a wide entrance opened to the courtyard (Birley R.E. 1970, 114). At some time the roof of room III collapsed and the room was walled off, and room II was similarly treated at a later date (Birley R.E. 1977, 45). The dating of these alterations and of the destruction of the building must await the publication of the final excavation report. Corbridge (Forster 1908) (Fig. I :45).

Corbridge figures in Route 1 of the Antonine Itinerary. The central part of the Roman town occupied the site of successive forts dating from c. A.D. 86-163 (Bishop and Dore 1989, 140). After the evacuation of the latest fort the site was re-used as a military depot (Fig.41). The central range of the fort and part of the retentura were taken over for the construction of a large store-building of courtyard plan (Site 11) which was begun but never completed. Work on an adjacent granary (Site 10) may have been suspended but this was eventually finished and together with a second granary (Site 7) it stood within a walled compound. A fountain and water distribution-point (Site 8) fed by an aqueduct lay between the granaries and the unfinished courtyard-building.

South of the south wall of Block B the excavators found traces of a concrete floor and they state that this had also been 'carried over the top of the existing foundations'

50

Othersecondcenturymansiones (Forster 1908, 241). Below the area labelled U on Site 2 there was an opus signinum floor bounded by walls on three sides. The east wall extended to the north and this must indicate that at least one further room lay in this direction. The lower of two concrete floors found near the north-east corner of area U perhaps belonged to the same structure since a drain which started here first ran above this floor and then cut through it and also through the east wall bounding the opus signinumfloor (Forster 1908, 229). The north-south masonry wall noted below the eastern edge of the lower floor in room B on Site 2 by Forster (1908, 218) might have been part of the same building, but this is very uncertain. What makes the suggestion worth considering is that the concrete floor in the area of Block B is in the correct position to have belonged to a range of rooms running north-south and incorporating the rooms in area U. The outer wall of a corridor on the east side of such a range might have lain on the line of the wall below the floor in room B. Although the links between these fragmentary remains are rather tenuous they are treated together here and assigned to Phase 2 (Fig.43).

In the area between Dere Street (Road 2) and Sites 2 and 3 there were various fragmentary structures that were not fully explored. The most complete of these was a long building (c.3.5 by at least 15 metres) aligned north-south and with a drain immediately to the east of it. This drain was cut by the north walls of the successive buildings on Site 2 (at 'x' on Fig.43), and the north end of the long building was destroyed by the construction of the range of rooms on Site 3 and the street which fronted them. The long building itself overlay a length of wall that seems to have belonged to a Phase 1 structure ('z' on Fig.43). From its south-west corner a wall was traced for c.9.1 metres to the west and parallel to this and cut by the west wall of the long building another short length of wall lay just under 2 metres to the north. These two walls probably belonged to a covered walkway or portico which had originally extended further to the east , and which was shortened when the long building was constructed. Traces of other porticoes were found next to Road 2 on the west, and c.27 metres to the north where the slope must have been cut back for the construction. Here the portico extended nearly 7 metres beyond the line of the west wall of the long building. About 2.5 metres further east a fragment of wall was found below the later road ('y' on Fig.43). This may represent the fourth side of a porticoed enclosure. Such porticoes, apparently enclosing an open area, are matched in timber at Chelmsford and Richborough, and perhaps at Chester. It can be suggested that the stone version at Corbridge represents the same thing, a secure enclosure, probably for parking waggons. The long building, with its accompanying drain, was clearly inserted and involved the demolition of the east side of the enclosure. The latter is assigned to Phase 2A and the former to Phase 2B. It is the correct depth for a stable .

giving a distorted shape to the easternmost room. The eastern end of the building, excavated in 1906, lay to the east of a hedge-line that crossed Site 2, while most of the building lay to the west and was excavated in the following year. There are difficulties in combining the published plans of the two parts of Site 2, and this introduces an element of uncertainty into the discussion of the building-sequence set out here. The key to understanding the building are the three slightly different lines adopted in successive rebuildings for two of the main east-west walls. The sequence was appreciated in the case of the more southerly wall by the original excavators who recognised that the divergent alignment of the southern wall of rooms D, E, and F, and a parallel wall to the south, and the relationship of these to the other walls, indicated an earlier date, and that rooms P, Q, and R overlay an earlier east-west wall and had at some time been extended slightly to the south (Forster I 908, 220 and 22627). The north wall of the building was poorly preserved but a careful reading of the description and examination of the two plans (for 1906 and 1907) make it clear that the lines of three walls of different periods were found (Woolley 1907, plate III facing page 174; Forster 1908, 227-28 and plan facing page 240). Fig.44 shows walling that is suspected of belonging to Phase 3. Despite the problem of the incompatability of the two plans made at the time of the excavations, this can be rationalised as a range c.44 metres long with an elongated room added to the south at the west end. Where the southern wall of this room passed through room I it was interrupted by a flue which contained soot. In the excavation report it is stated that the concrete floor of room I 'rested on a heavy bed of clay through which the flue passed' and that it was impossible to trace any connection between the flue and the hypocausts in the adjacent rooms G and J. The relationship between the floor and its clay bed and the flue shows that the latter pre-dated the creation of room I and had ceased to function when or before the floor was laid. The flue perhaps served a hypocauston in the earliest building on Site 2, warming an adjacent room or rooms in the main range. If this is correct, the Phase 3 building, like its successor, can be identified as a range of first class accommodation. The alignment of the east wall of the building is shared by the large 'concrete mass' to the south ('y' on Fig.44) which was probably a water-tower as Salway (1965, 53) suggested, presumably constructed to maintain the pressure in a nearby fountain. This was probably the fountain excavated immediately to the north of the first class accommodation, to which the vigorous 'lion and stag' sculpture group belonged (Forster 1908, 234-40). Surrounding the fountain was an opus signinum floor with a gutter around it ('z' on Fig.44). This presumably represents a roofed area, and since no trace of walls was found inside the gutter the roof was perhaps supported by timber columns set on individual bases that were subsequently robbed. The construction of the fountain implies that the aqueduct and water-distribution point (Site 8) in the northern part of the town had now been constructed by Legio XX Valeria Victrix

The earliest structure on Site 2 that can be clearly defined was on a new alignment, almost at right angles to Road 2, though the eastern end wall of the building was parallel to the line of Road 3 and the buildings aligned on it further east,

51

Curs us Public us : the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

(RIB 1164).

necessarily on the same lines they occupied later.

At the southernmost point of Site 2 the excavators found a drystone structure ('x' on Fig.44) with thick walls rising externally in stepped courses (Forster 1908, 232-33). It was set against the steep slope which fell away to the south of the roadway and there was no trace of a north wall. It was filled with earth containing burnt rubbish and fragments of opus signinum. Although the purpose of this feature is unclear it is assigned to Phase 3 because the alignment of its south wall seems to match that of the water-tower and the east-west walls of the hypocauston in the first class accommodation.

It was probably in Phase 4 that the system of drains found in areas T and U was constructed. The two more easterly drains in area U look as though they began from the same point so that one was probably a replacement for the other. The most easterly one, which was traced most completely and which was therefore probably the earliest, was cut by the Phase 6 wall of room Q. If the lines of the two eastern drains are projected to the north they both meet the Phase 4 building where its southern wall is inset at the junction of rooms A and B. This seems unlikely to be a coincidence, and they are therefore assigned to this phase. Together with a third drain coming from further west they seem to have emptied into a larger drain which re-used the opus signinum floor of a demolished Phase 2 room as its bottom and the wallfoundation on the north of it as one side. The southern side of this drain is possibly indicated by a stub of wall projecting from the east wall of area T. Within T the drain turned south alongside the wall , then again turned to the west. This arrangement of drains almost certainly indicates that part of T contained a free-standing structure serving as a latrine. The drains to the east in area U must have collected water from the roofs of the building to the north.

The drain of the Phase 2B stable was cut by the construction of the accommodation building on Site 2 and the stable was presumably demolished at the start of Phase 3. However , the west wall of the new accommodation was aligned on the west wall of the stable and it seems likely that this was retained to form the new eastern boundary of the waggonpark. It may have been at this stage that a blocking-wall was built across the portico on the north side of this. The blocking-wall lay c.3 metres further west than the new east wall of the waggon-park and the gap may have been occupied by a new stable, perhaps constructed in timber. In Phase 4 the main building on Site 2 was rebuilt slightly to the south (Fig.45). Its north wall was located immediately south of the north wall of the Phase 3 building. The southern wall was traced below the floors of rooms L and R. It seems to be represented in room Q by the stone 'bench' beside the north wall of the room so that there was a dog-leg in its line at the point where the division-wall between Q and R was later constructed. This is a feature in the design of mansio buildings that we have come across at Inchtuthil and Chester , where it can be attributed to legio XX , and at Chelmsford. On the northern side of room P traces of this wall were removed by the construction of the hypocauston in Phase 5. South of rooms D, E, and F it seems that the wall of the earlier building was retained to be the new south wall, even though it was on a slightly different alignment. It was probably at this time rather than earlier that room F was provided with a channelled hypocaust. The arrangement of the flues within this makes it possible to say that two chimneys existed in the south wall and that this was therefore now an exterior wall. The hypocauston that lay immediately to the south in Phase 3 must have been demolished. The southern wall of the hypocauston west of the stoke-hole was totally removed. This was probably the result of the creation of a yard on the west and south sides of room F . A short length of wall near the north-west comer of F and another fragment below two of the hypocaust pilae of the later room G were the only traces of the wall that once enclosed this. It seems logical to connect the yard with the provision of the hypocaust in F, and this was probably fired from the west at the position later occupied by a Phase 7 wall .

Two pilae in room F close to its north wall were re-used bases with sockets to take timber uprights . If these were original elements of the hypocaust, and there is no reason for thinking that they were not, this provides a correlation with Site 3 since a row of four similar stones was placed in front of the range of rooms there to carry the posts of a verandah. It is even possible that both sets of bases were originally used for the roof-supports around the Phase 3 fountain immediately north of the first class accommodation . Four rooms and a passage were excavated in the range of rooms on Site 3 and aerial photographs indicate that it probably extended to the east as far as Road 3. The excavated rooms all had concrete floors but there is nothing distinctive about their plan which might indicate their function. Room 'a' had a drain in it and a large quantity of bones and also produced considerable signs of burning. In room 'b' there were fragments of two Andernach quernstones (Forster 1908, 242). It would seem reasonable to take these finds as indicating the use of rooms 'a' and 'b' for preparing food. In view of its proximity the large room 'e' may therefore have functioned as a dining-room , and bedrooms comprising standard class accommodation may have lain further to the east. The double thickness of the north wall of rooms 'a' and 'b' on the excavators' plan (Forster 1908, plan between pages 260 and 261) is because the range to which they belonged was built in front of the ea st end of the portico of the Phase 2 waggon-park. The range of rooms may have extended to the west as far as Road 2. To the south a new road was constructed. The waggon-park between the buildings on Site 2 and Site 3 must now have been moved elsewhere or , if it remained , it was no longer enclosed as it had been before.

A northern gallery existed in Phase 4, if not earlier, since it fronted room F. The remainder of the range may have comprised rooms A-E and room N. Room M may have formed a return of the gallery on the east side of the building. However, the sub-divisions of this phase were not

Phase 5 on Site 2 saw the final rebuilding of the north wall

52

Other second centurymansiones slightly to the north (Fig.46). To the south a series of new rooms (P, Q, R and L) was constructed behind the eastern part of the main range, and the south wall of this was rebuilt slightly to the north, like the north wall. Although the excavators conjectured that this new wall was continued south of rooms D, E and F they admitted that no trace of it was found (Forster 1908, 220). It seems to the present writer more likely that a desire to retain the hypocaust in room F meant that the western part of the range was left unaltered . A new hypocauston was provided in room P, with a stokehole to the west reached from the north gallery by steps in room D (Salway 1965, 53). Two suites of superior accommodation with hypocaust heating were thus provided: rooms C and B, and rooms E and F. To the east was room A which may or may not have been sub-divided (Forster 1908, 218). This room , or part of it, may have been a dining-room for the high-ranking guests occupying the two suites.

use at the start of Phase 3 contained deposits of burnt earth and charcoal, while burnt material also came from the fill of the enigmatic stepped foundation on the southern slope which was also assigned to Phase 3. Although there is a lack of recorded datable finds associated with the destruction in room D the broad chronology set out in the preceding paragraph would allow it to be associated with the Severan destruction attested on Site 11 (Forster and Knowles 1911, 165). The destruction that preceded Phase 3 might then be associated with the disaster attested c.180 (Breeze and Dobson 1987, 130).

Camelon(Christison et al.1901) (Fig.1:8) . Excavations in the 'South Camp' at Camelon in the l970's revealed at least three main systems of defensive ditches (Maxfield 1979). The earliest was Flavian in date, and the latest, together with an accompanying rampart, formed an annexe to the adjacent fort in the Antonine period. The undated ditches intermediate between these two periods follow the same line as the Antonine defences and it is possible that the former belonged to the Antonine I and the latter to the Antonine II period. Some features belonging to an earlier Antonine occupation were sealed by the annexe rampart . Within this were four stone buildings , partly excavated in 1899-1900 (Fig.47a). RIB 2210, a buildinginscription, came from the bath-building (Building 17) naming Legio XX. Little can be said of Building 15, of which five walls were located but no complete room plan, or of Building 16.

No very clear account was given of room M, excavated in 1906, which occupied the east end of the building. Salway (1965, 52) suggested that the southern sub-division of the room may have contained a latrine but this may not be correct since the latrine in T certainly continued in use. Although the construction of rooms Q and R cut the drain which had supplied water to flush it in Phase 4, a new drain was constructed bringing water from gutters which converged at the angle between T and room Q. Room M may have functioned as a kitchen or other service-room. Next to it N was a through-passage designed to separate room M from the domestic quarters.

Building 17 evidently had two periods, possibly corresponding to Antonine I and II (Fig.47b). The heated rooms of the earlier baths (l-5) were incorporated into the later building. Room l was the furnace; 2 was the hot-bath ; 3 was the caldarium (hot room); 4 an apsidal alcove for a labrum (cold-water basin); 5 was the tepidarium (warm room). They were built on a concrete platform which continued south-eastwards from room 5 towards where the original frigidarium (cold room) and cold bath must have lain. In the later period these two rooms must have been removed and to replace them rooms 6-10 were built onto the existing heated rooms. One of the external buttresses on the north-west wall of the earlier block was now enclosed within the new room 6. Room 7 had a drain starting near the centre of the room where there must have been a cold douche, and 7 was therefore the new cold room . The excavators' section drawing (Christison et al.1901, plate VI) seems to show that the floor level of room 6 was almost two feet (0.61 m) lower than that of room 7. This suggests that room 6 was the new cold bath. On the opposite side of 7 were rooms 8 and 9. Room 9 had a hypocaust with its stoke-hole on the southeast side and was probably a laconicum entered from room 7. Room 8 was probably the undressing-room. Room 10 had a tiled floor distinct from the flagstone paving of the cold room (7) and a drain that probably served to empty the cold bath in room 6 followed the line of its walls on the north-east and south-east sides, an arrangement characteristic of a latrine.

The southern wall of the building, which was traced below the later floors of rooms P, Q, and R, was not traced in the area of room L. It seems likely that here the southern limit of the building was already on the line of the later south wall of these rooms, and that a slightly deeper room existed south of M and N. This may have been another service-room like roomM. The next period in the development of the building (Phase 6) saw extensive additions, as well as modifications to the existing rooms. So far as dating is concerned, it is only possible to argue in broad terms from the nature of the heated rooms in Phases 3-6. In Phase 3 a hypocauston was provided. These are known at various sites and can be dated in general to before c.A.D.200 (Black 1985, 77-80). Phase 4 saw room F directly heated by its own hypocaust. In Phase 5 a new hypocaustonwas constructed to heat room C, but this was dis-used in Phase 6 when two new hypocausts provided direct heating to rooms G and J. It is therefore proposed that Phases 3-5 all belong within the second half of the second century. Phase 6 could date to the later second century or later and is dealt with in Chapter Six. Since Phase 2 began after the evacuation of the fort in c.163 a minimum of four building-periods must be accommodated within about forty years. Evidence for destruction by fire was found in room D relating to the end of Phase 5 (Forster I 908, 219; Salway 1965, 53). The filling of the stable drain which went out of

The notable staggering of the rooms added to the west of the original block must have been caused by the proximity of

53

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain Building 18, and the need to have a gap for access between the two buildings. Since rooms 6-10 belong to a later period of the baths and the corresponding earlier rooms must have abutted or overlapped the north corner of Building 18, the latter should also be assigned to a period later than the original baths.

possible inn by its excavators (Martin and Ashby 1901, 307) was House xvi.3s. Opposite this in the next insula to the east there was a detached bath-building (House xvii.5s). It is proposed that these buildings should be considered together as elements of a mansio (Fig.48a). House xvi.3s was a courtyard house and was almost square, measuring c. 27.4 by 29.3 metres (Fig.48b). It was entered through a large room (15) in the east range. All the rooms were floored originally with gravel concrete or rammed gravel, perhaps a base for the joists of wooden floors. A secondary floor in room 15 was of opus signinum, and various other substantial alterations indicate that the building was of at least two periods. The excavators noted that at first there seems to have been a large basin in the courtyard, probably fed by a fountain since a pipe-line was found below the lower floor of room 15 (Martin and Ashby 1901, 305 and 309). At a later date this was dismantled and a gutter to collect the water from the roof of a peristyle surrounding the courtyard was laid across it. It was probably at this period that a latrine was added to the south range since a drain carried water from the gutter to flush it. A statue base faced the doorway into the peristyle from room 15 and the peristyle had a tessellated floor. The hypocaust in room 10 in the south range may also be secondary. It was observed by Martin and Ashby (1901, 307):

Although Plate V in the excavation report seems to show that Building 18 terminated at Room A the general site plan (Plate II) shows other walls indicating a further room beyond Room A and rooms that may have belonged to a range lying at right angles to these. If this is accurate a courtyard building is indicated, with a north-east range c.35 metres in length. Room A measured c. 12.2 by 5.2 metres internally. On its north-west side was Room B, a hypocauston,designed to heat Room A indirectly. Although the excavators stated that the floor of Room C was at a higher level than the sub-floor of the hypocaust in B, they also stated that it was very disturbed and it is most likely that the hypocaust was stoked from here. Steps down into Room C were found outside its south corner. Externally A and B were flanked by buttresses, suggesting that they stood higher than the other rooms. The size of Room A suggests that it may have functioned as a diningroom. Room C, where the stoke-hole for B may have been situated, could also have functioned as a kitchen. The excavated part of Room D had no trace of sub-division. An entrance hall and offices were presumably situated in the north-west range. If the identifications of Rooms A-C have been correct only the south-west and south-east ranges can have been available for providing accommodation. This makes it virtually certain that the courtyard building contained first class accommodation only. Presumably standard class accommodation was provided elsewhere within the fort annexe. From its size the bath-building is unlikely to have served the garrison of the fort as well as persons staying at the mansio.

'It is curious to notice that in some pieces we get all three coats [of the painted wall plaster in room 10] superposed the one on the other, while in others we only get two or one in the same thickness of plaster. It is clear that when the new coat was applied, the old had to some extent been broken away.'

One explanation of this may be that the earliest coat of wall plaster decorated the room before the hypocaust was installed and in some places had to be totally removed rather than plastered over when this was done. If this was the case the original building had identical suites of rooms ( 1- 3 and 10-12) in the north and south ranges respectively, and these can be identified as two suites of first class accommodation. The lobby, room 8, together with rooms 7 and 9 clearly formed another suite which may have served as accommodation for a manceps. From its size room 6 must have been the dining-room and room 4, separated from it by a passage (5), was probably the kitchen. It was noted that the lower of two coats of plaster in room 4 did not have painted decoration (Martin and Ashby 1901, 308).

Caerwent(Martin and Ashby 1901; Ashby et al. 1903) (Fig. I :26). Venta Silurum figures in Route 14 of the Antonine Itinerary. Although it ultimately became the civitas-capital of the Silures it is uncertain how early this development occurred and the street-grid may not have been completed before the early third century (Brewer 1990, 80-83). In this case the terminuspost quernof c. A.D.130 or 140 for the earthwork phase of the defences is likely to be much earlier than the bUe date. The town wall may belong to the second quarter of the fourth century (Casey 1984, 70-71 and 74-76).

After room 10 was provided with its hypocaust it seems to have continued in use as accommodation but it may have also functioned as a hypocaustonto heat the adjacent room 9. This is indicated by the absence on the west side of room 10 (where it adjoins room 9) of the projecting ledge which supported the upper floor of the room on the north and east sides, and perhaps on the south where the wall was poorly preserved (Martin and Ashby 1901, 308). On the west there must have been a continuous jacketing of box flue tiles, and this is one place where the original coat of painted wall

Wacher (1974, 379-81) has pointed out that the large house (House xviii.12s) near the south gate, which is sometimes called a mansio, shows none of the elements that would justify this identification. In particular it lacks a detached bath-building which is the invariable accompaniment of mansiones. Another house which was considered as a

54

Othersecondcenturymansiones exterior of the rear wall of a strip-building (the central building in the complex xii.16s: Ashby et al.1911, 431). It is possible that the optio was staying in accommodation provided by its owner in accordance with the requirement on communities to house soldiers travelling on official business. At Caerwent lower-ranking soldiers and officials may have been lodged in various buildings throughout the town since House xvi.3s clearly provided only first class accommodation.

plaster will have been completely removed. There is no direct dating evidence for House xvi.3s but if it lacked any form of hypocaust heating when first constructed this suggests a relatively early, perhaps a Hadrianic, date. The provision of the hypocaust in room 10 can be assigned to some time later in the second century, and this date would also suit the Tuscan capitals from the peristyle which belong to a type current in the later second and third century (pers. comm. T.F. C. Blagg; Martin and Ashby 1901. 302-4 Figs.4 and 5).

Whitchurch (Jones and Webster 1968) (Fig.1:72).

Mediolanum, modem Whitchurch, appears in Routes 2 and 10 of the Antonine Itinerary . A suitable candidate for a mansio was partly excavated in 1965-66 lying c.60 metres to the west of the main route between Wroxeter and Chester within what had been the area of an auxiliary fort evacuated in the Trajanic period (Fig.49a). However, it was not until after c.170 that Building 1, a courtyard building facing east which presumably formed the first class accommodation of the mansio, was built. Early second century timber buildings with minor industrial activity had preceded it. Also sometime after c.170 the settlement was defended by a clay rampart (Goodbum 1978, 436-37).

Despite the suggestion of a late date for parts of the street grid the north-south street between House xvi.3s and the baths had presumably always existed in some form to link them to the main east-west road running through the settlement. The house is not quite aligned on the north-south street and in fact lies partly across its line. This relationship does not show that the house is later than the street, but more likely that its eastern gallery ( 17) is a later addition. The return of 17 on the north side of room 16 seems to support this since it must have interfered with the integration of the roof lines of the north and east ranges. Nor is room 15 centrally-placed on the axis of the courtyard and the earlier basin, and this again suggests a substantial redesigning of the east range. Part of an ansate inscription (RIB 312) which may mention Legio fl Augusta came from the packing of the pipe-line below room 15 and could have been re-used from an earlier mansio building. The bath-building diverges more drastically from the line of the streets and is therefore more certainly earlier in date. Early in the third century Caerwent may have presented an appearance similar to that of Lower Wanborough where a street-grid was superimposed onto a roadside settlement and where a mansio and baths, the latter again on a divergent alignment, lay c.140 metres back from the main road (Fig.33a).

Less than half of Building l was excavated (Fig.49b) . The location of cobbling apparently forming the approach to an entrance into a large room in the east range allows this to be identified as the entrance hall and suggests that the facade of the building on this side was about 22 metres long. In the south range rooms 3-5 measured approximately 3 by 4 metres internally; room 2 must have been larger, while room 6 was only c.2 by 4 metres. It is possible that there was an upper storey but no positive evidence for one was found. No floor levels survived and the walls had been almost totally robbed.

In the bath-building, despite the poor condition of the remains, the succession of rooms is clear: room 1, praefurnium; 2 and 5, hot baths; 3, caldarium; 4 and 7, tepidaria; 8, frigidarium; 10, laconicum with its own praefurnium in 11. A cold bath presumably once lay to the west of room 8, but this and most of room 8 itself were removed when the baths were remodelled. The alignment of the baths was followed approximately by that of xvii.6s to the north and by a long building containing a drain to the south. Originally House 6.s seems to have comprised the area occupied by rooms 1-9 but, except for the wall dividing rooms 1-4 from 5-9, all the internal divisions were probably later additions. Because of its alignment it is tentatively proposed that the earliest version of House 6.s formed part of the mansio. Its precise function is uncertain, but the gallery along its west side suggests that it was some sort of accommodation.

A second building (Building 3) lay c.13 metres east of Building l on a slightly different alignment, and a wall, once rebuilt, lay between them. Again robbing of the walls of Building 3 had been complete, but two successive mortar floors, the earlier on substantial stone foundations, were found in both the rooms that were partially excavated. In the more westerly room the second floor was associated with a masonry 'bench' or support along at least the north and west walls, and the junction between this and the floor was sealed by a quarter-round moulding. The position of Building 3 would be compatible with a function as the bath-house serving the mansio, and the two rooms could have been the changing-room and cold room in such a building. However, too little is known about the building to make any positive identification. Room 6 along with room 7 in the east range formed an Lshaped corridor leading from the peristyle of the mansio to a comer of the front facade, and therefore avoiding a passage through the main entrance hall. This was also a feature found at Caerwent, at the north-east comer of the facade (Fig.48b). Why this arrangement was required is uncertain. It may have had something to do with access to and from the baths. assuming that Building 3 at Whitchurch was the bath-suite.

At an unknown date, but after the street-grid had been laid out, House xvii.6s was converted to a private dwelling . the middle one of three properties (xvii.4s, 6s, and 9s) on the north side of the insula. It was perhaps after this conversion that an altar to Mars Ocellus (RIB 310) was dedicated by an optio Aelius A(u)gustinus. It was found in situ against the

55

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain Cave's Inn (Lucas 1984) (Fig.1:39).

on most of the walls.

The site appears as Tripontium in Route 6 of the Antonine Itinerary and much of the accommodation of a mansio was excavated between 1969 and 1982, lying c.90 metres back from the line of Watling Street (Fig.50a). The interim report which has appeared is used as the basis of the entry here. Building 1 measured c.23.5 by 5.75 metres externally. Its outer walls were of stone and internal divisions were of timber. There were six rooms with a corridor along the north-east side. The rooms measured c.3 by 3.5 metres though room 4 was slightly wider, c.4 metres. They had been decorated with painted wall plaster and had mortar floors. A coin of Domitian and Antonine samian came from the foundation levels of the building. It is clear from the plan (Fig.50b) that it represents a block of standard class accommodation. However, it is possible that earlier mansio buildings preceded it. At the south-eastern end of the excavations a large deposit of tiles was sampled in what it was suggested might have been the stoking-pit of a tile-kiln. Among the tiles was one fragment of relief-patterned boxtile (Lucas 1984, 27 and 37). Such tiles are unlikely to have been made much later than c.150 and the majority of patterns are Hadrianic or earlier. A Hadrianic bath-house and other buildings may have existed, and the line of post-holes c.3.5 metres from the north-east side of Building 1 should be assessed with this in mind. Certainly the explanation that they formed a verandah on this side of the building (Lucas 1984, 27) is unsatisfactory because of the presence of the internal corridor giving access to all the rooms. The supposed tile kiln itself might turn out to have been a bathbuilding since the absence of surviving mortar on the tiles from the stoke-hole area is not a safe indication of whether they had been used or not, and no definite wasters are mentioned.

Although the rooms in Building 2 were slightly larger than those in Building 1 the difference was not great and there were no clear two-room suites and no hypocausts that would be expected in a block of first class accommodation. Nevertheless this is what it must have been. We shall see that other late second century mansiones along Watling Street exhibit a similar economy. Coins of Nerva and Antoninus Pius from the construction levels make it possible that Buildings 1 and 2 were contemporary. As yet no late second century defences have been recognised at Cave's Inn. Building 2 was extended at an unknown date. Since the form of hypocaust then provided in room 9 makes it very unlikely that this was before c.A.D.200 this development is dealt with in Chapter Six. Lying 100 metres north of the mansio accommodation and bisected by Watling Street was an early fourth century defended enclosure (Cameron and Lucas 1973, 95-6 and Figs. 2-5). Excavations on the west side of this, both inside the line of the ditch and outside it to the west and north, revealed numerous features, mostly earlier in date. Many of these were linear features - ditches, slots, burials - and despite many divergencies two major alignments can be recognised. One is at an oblique angle to Watling Street and seems to have been set out using the course of the stream to the south-west as a base-line. The mansio buildings on the opposite (south-west) side of the stream share this alignment, and elements conforming to it are found both east and west of Watling Street (unnumbered features north of Area 1 on the east side of the road and to the west features 202,210-210A,222,235,244,267,293, 704, 712-14, 729, 756, 758-59). These seem to represent a series of small plots with sub-divisions. Several inhumation burials were aligned on these boundaries (features 237-40, 268, 705-6, 742, 747, 753), and traces of contemporary buildings were located (114, 202/11, 260B, 282, 708, 725, 734). Some of the features conforming to the oblique alignment (210-210A, 235 and 756) contained late first and early second century pottery in their fills and may have been open at this time, while 244 is said to have contained no pottery later than Antonine.

Between Building 1 and Building 2, and earlier than the latter, was a two room structure with drystone walls, perhaps merely foundations. It is said to have had a stoke-hole, presumably in the smaller room. The larger room measured c.4.8 by 2 metres. There can be little doubt that this was a hypocauston, similar to those in the timber first class accommodation at Inchtuthil. It indicates that an earlier range of first class accommodation, probably a wooden building, had lain approximately between and probably at right angles to Buildings I and 2. Associated pottery belonged to the early second century.

Co-existing with, sometimes superseding and sometimes superseded by, features on the oblique alignment were others set parallel to or at right angles to Watling Street (231-32 , 246-47, 257, 286, 296-97, 298/2, 715, 733). These were again associated with traces of buildings (features 250, 260A, 292 and 294, 751-52) and with burials (213,262, 707, 731, 735, 746). One of these buildings (751-52) at right angles to the road seems to have been contemporary with an adjacent boundary (756) at the oblique angle to the road. East of Watling Street the adaptation of the oblique alignment in the close vicinity of the road is particularly clear. This will be discussed further below.

Building 2 lay at a slight angle to Building 1 and a little to the north-east. Externally it measured c.30.5 by 7.75 metres, and had seven rooms with stone partition-walls. Room 6 filled the whole depth of the building but an internal corridor ran on the north-east side of rooms 7-12. Rooms 8-12 were all c.3.5 metres wide, i.e. the same width as the rooms in Building 1, but they were slightly deeper, c.4 metres. Room 6 (c. 5.5 by 6 metres) at the north-west end of the range may have been a communal room, perhaps a dining-room, separated from the accommodation in the range by room 7 which may have served as an ante-room. All the rooms had floors of opus signinum and painted wall plaster was in situ

Wall (Round 1992) (Fig.1:69). A large part of a masonry courtyard building was first

56

Other second cellturymansiones excavated in 1912-14 (Lynam 1913) and re-excavated in the 1970's (Fig.51). It was found to be Phase 3 in a sequence of mansio buildings the first two of which have already been considered in Chapter Three. Its south-western wall was built against a terrace and the floor-level of the mansio lay some 2.5 metres above the entrance to the bath-building to the south-west. After the main excavations of the 1970's the complete plan of rooms 9 and 16 was recovered by F. and N. Ball to whom I am grateful for supplying details.

On the south-east side of the courtyard building was an external portico (21) from the centre of which opened room 4 which must have been the entrance hall. Beside this room 2 may have been an office. From room 4 you reached an internal colonnade surrounding a small courtyard or garden area (18) where facing you was an apsidal fountain basin (19). On the south-west side of the courtyard rooms 5-7 are of similar size and they probably served as single-room units of accommodation . Their area (8-10 square metres) is less than that of most standard class contubernia found elsewhere and they are therefore tentatively identified as accommodation for individual first class travellers. Room 8, adjoining them in the north-west range, was probably another such unit, made rather larger to allow access from the colonnade. Rooms 10-11 may have been two more separate units or have formed a suite of superior accommodation. Rooms 13-14 may have formed another suite along with room 1, perhaps for a manceps or civitas official in charge of the mansio.

aperture in the north-west wall opened above a soakaway in the internal colonnade (Round 1992, 16). A staircase in room 4 may have led down from room 3 to the exterior on the south-west side.

It was noted in the discussion of Phase 2 of the mansio in Chapter Three that the ditch where much Phase 2 wallplaster was dumped contained pottery assigned to the midlate second century in both its primary and main fill. A further terminus post quern of c.135- 70 is provided by samian from a hearth assigned to the construction of the Phase 3 mansio, while the latest samian from the foundation trenches was early-mid Antonine and the latest coarse ware c.125-70 (Round 1992, 11 and 13). A pit at the north-east end of 21 cut a mortar level associated with the construction of the building but cannot be related to floor levels since none survived in this area . It contained pottery datable to the second half of the second century, some perhaps to the early third century, and this gives a terminus ante quern for the building. Pottery from the lowest layer of the robber-trench was mid second century and this may again provide a terminus post quernfor the construction of the building. The main fill of the trench contained pottery and food debris that presumably relates to the first period of use. The pottery included items with a date of 150-250 (Round 1992, 14). A relieving-arch inserted above the Phase 2 well below the north-we st wall of room 2 has a similar late-second to early-third century terminuspost quern(Round 1992, 11). The excavator's date of c.140-50 for the courtyard building seems too precise and probably too early on the evidence that is presented. It is suggested that a date in the range c.150-80 would be more appropriate ; that the Phase 3A alterations occurred in the late second to early third century; and that occupation continued for an unknown period into the third century, probably ending before the widespread circulation of radiate coinage. It is possible that the preponderance of second century pottery and the absence of much recognisably later material should be explained by the incorporation of broken sherds into daub walling.

The largest room was room 12, originally 7.8 by 6.6 metres. On its south-east side corridor 17 separated it from the rest of the north-east range. On the opposite (north-west) side a wall-trench delimited another corridor (15) leading from room 16. The wall-trench was continued on the north-east side of 12 by the robber-trench that was assigned in the report to Phase 2 (Round 1992, 13-14). The robber-trench rather represents an extension of corridor 15 leading from room 16 all the way to corridor 17. The corridors were clearly designed to function together and linked room 16 and room 12. This indirect approach and the size of room 12 suggest that it was the dining-room and room 16 was the kitchen of the establishment. This link between the rooms is confirmed by the alterations of Phase 3A. When a hypocaust was inserted into room 12 it was stoked from the north-west , an activity which prevented access along corridor 15. It must have been at this time that the outer wall of the corridor on the north-east side of 12 was robbed since it no longer served any function. The outer wall of the north-west branch continued in use because it now sheltered the stoking-area of the hypocaust. In order to provide new access to 12 from the kitchen in 16 a passage was created through room 10. When the hypocaust was inserted room 12 itself was reduced to approximately the same depth as rooms 10 and 11. This allowed easy access from the new passage past the north comer of the colonnade to corridor 17. Room 9 was probably a service room along with 16.

The settlement at Wall may have extended to 20-30 acres (8-12 hectares) in size, but there is little information available about it. There is as yet no evidence that it and the mansio were enclosed / defended in the second century (Webster G. 1958b, 4-6) . Although the mansio accommodation may have been destroyed in the third century, it is possible that Phase V of the baths was later in date , and its rooms continued in use when it no longer functioned as a bath-building (see Appendix Three). Occupation on a site south of Watling Street extended beyond A.D. 400 (Ball and Ball 1985, 5). Castle Hill, East Bridgford (Oswald 1941) (Fig. I :49).

This is the site of Margidunum on the Fosse Way mentioned in Routes 6 and 8 of the Antonine Itinerary. Excavations in the 1960's established that in the first century, from c. A.D. 50-60, the frontage of the Fosse Way was developed for a considerable distance and that iron-working was a significant activity. It was suggested that the site may have

The most problematical room is room 3 in the south-east range . It contained two areas of discolour ed sand, the larger of which incorporated a plethora of small post-holes. An

57

Curs us Public us: the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain been a military works depot and a first century fort was postulated, though no certain traces of it were found (Todd 1970, 17-19; 21-22; 40). The transition to a civilian settlement is not well documented. Two early, probably second century, ditches were found in a section across the line of the defences on the south side of the town (Todd 1970, 42-48). The inner ditch at least was accompanied by a rampart with a terminus post quern of c. A.D.140 and may be regarded as defensive. It was deliberately filled before the erection of a masonry wall in front of the rampart. The outer ditch was regarded as later by the excavator although its intersection with the inner ditch was not examined. The two ditches were on different alignments and the outer ditch was less obviously defensive in character. It had silted up by the early third century and it is possible that it simply formed a boundary rather than a defence, and that its digging preceded the inner ditch and rampart.

containing such material which Oswald states lay above them. A schematic section (Oswald 1941, 34 Fig.5) shows two layers with daub and charcoal separated by the remains of charred beams and the upper one sealed by a layer of fragments of painted wall plaster which formed the foundation of the earlier gravel floor in Building L. If the charred beams were in situ then two periods of timber buildings may have existed on the site. Perhaps it is more likely that the separate layers of debris represent clearance deposits following a single fire. The erection of Building L probably followed rapidly after the demolition and burning of the timber building if this provided the wall-plaster fragments used in the foundation of its floor. The burials may have been made between these two events. Part of a penannular brooch adapted as a ring and found on the finger of one of the skeletons provides only a broad first - third century date (Oswald 1941, 35 and 53 Fig.12B no.IO; Fowler 1960, 176: Type D6).

Todd (1970, 55-58) also reviewed the evidence for buildings within the defended area of the town which had been examined earlier in this century by Oswald. He pointed out that Oswald's chronology and his interpretation of some of the features he excavated are not reliable, and that other features are likely to have been overlooked. Nevertheless the scale of Oswald's work to the north of the Fosse Way within the walled area means that any discussion must be based on what he recorded. There seem to have been at least three ditched plots, probably all containing buildings, representing properties along the road frontage. Two lanes led between these to the area behind, the more southerly to a group of three substantial masonry buildings (Fig.52a). The ditches delimiting the rear of the plots clearly formed a significant boundary, presumably the boundary of the mansio compound. The buildings and the ditches demarcating the roadside properties shared the same, slightly oblique, alignment to the Fosse Way.

A second published section (Oswald 1941, 35 Fig.6) shows a pit dug through the earlier and sealed by the later gravel floor of Building L. A brown earth with builder's debris and wall plaster lay between the two floors and this suggests that in its first phase the building contained at least some domestic accommodation. Parallel to L and about 4.6 metres to the north-east lay Building M, described by Oswald as a 'Bath-Building' and by Todd (1970, 58) as 'a small bath-house, of the well known Reihentyp'. Externally the building measured c.7 by 39 metres. Two large rooms (4 and 5) occupied the middle portion and the north-west end, while the supposed bathsuite was at the south-eastern end where an apse projected to the south-east from room l. Beside this room 2 had a channelled hypocaust heated from a stoke-hole on the northeast side, and beyond 2 room 3 (c. 3.1 by 5.5 metres internally) was provided with a pillared hypocaust. Heated air reached the hypocaust in 3 from below room 2.

Building L, which Todd (1970, 57) suggested was second century in date, was c.25 by 11.5 metres externally (Fig.52b). No internal partitions were noted though a gully leading to a soakaway, apparently contemporary with the second of two gravel floors, may indicate the stalling of animals. A concrete surface c. l.6 metres wide lay along the north-east side of L and a lean-to or even a verandah may have existed here. The north-western end of the building overlay features labelled 'Pre-Flavian Pits with Skeletons' on Oswald's plan. Three bodies were found, two in what may have been intersecting graves aligned north-east to southwest and the third in a feature aligned north-west to southeast. Despite the stress put by Oswald on the disturbed condition of two of the skeletons, which he attributed to decay being advanced before burial, it seems possible that the remains represent regular burials. It is notable that the graves, if this is what they were, share the alignment of the roadside properties and of Building L. The northern and north-western sections of the defensive rampart may have been preceded by earlier boundaries following similar lines and defining the mansio enclosure.

If the apse is interpreted as a cold bath its position in relation to the supposed cold room (room 1) is certainly not typical of a Reihentyp bath-suite. More significantly room 3 which should have been the caldarium in such a building is only half the size of the tepidarium (room 2), and it is beside the latter, not beside the caldarium, where the stoke-hole is situated. These were not the heated rooms of a bath-suite. Rather room 3 was a hypocauston designed to heat the adjacent rooms indirectly. It probably originally had its own stokehole beyond the north-east wall, or the flue from room 2 may have begun as the stoke-hole for the hypocauston. In any case it seems probable that the channelled hypocaust in room 2 was later in date. The latter is again better seen as heating a domestic room. At some stage a mortar floor was laid down above a layer of charcoal in the stoke-hole of room 2. Comparisons can easily be made with ranges of rooms with hypocausta, where channelled hypocausts were subsequently added, at mansiones and, like such buildings, Building M at Castle Hill can be interpreted as a range of first class accommodation. The presence of a hypocauston should indicate a second century date. Presumably rooms 4 and 5

The fill of the graves contained burnt daub and charcoal and this may indicate that they were dug through a layer

58

Othersecondcenturymansiones which were not fully excavated by Oswald were subdivided into a number of smaller rooms. Below the opus signinum floor of room 1 Oswald found an earlier mortar floor and sealed between them were two sherds, one samian and one coarse ware, datable to the late first - early second century (Oswald 1941, 55 Fig.13, 7-8). It is likely that the mortar floor belonged to a predecessor of Building M, and it in tum sealed a post-hole of an earlier building. Oswald's published plan shows the wall at the south-east end of Building M extending both to the north-east and to the south-west beyond the comers. The extension to the southwest seems to be broken away and there is a straight joint marked on the plan at its junction with the comer. It is possible that there was an enclosed yard attached to the south-east end of Building M and that the semi-circular apse was a feature within this. But this seems unlikely since it would have projected across the roadway to the west. Fragments of relief-patterned flue tile from Castle Hill are recorded by Lowther (1948, 14) and these are keyed with die 17, a pattern which also occurs at the mansio baths at Wall. A Hadrianic bath-building must therefore have existed and is virtually certain to have been part of a mansio. It is possible that the apse and the early mortar floor in room 1 belonged to this. The separate elements in the area of Buildings L and M can be tentatively described as follows: (i) occupation, possibly on a nearby site, included a building with daub walls and wall plaster which was burnt down; (ii) three individuals, perhaps victims of the fire, were buried before the erection of Building L; (iii) there was a bath-building, probably belonging to a Hadrianic mansio; (iv) a mortar floor below Building M indicates an earlier building which may have been the postulated Hadrianic baths. Buildings L and M presumably functioned contemporaneously but it is not possible to form a clear picture of the earlier structures or their relationship. The abandonment and demolition of Building L at an uncertain date was followed by the accumulation of silt and peat layers above its remains and then by the dumping of large stones, followed by layers of earth with builder's debris, presumably in an attempt to consolidate the ground in the fourth century. Building N, the third of the masonry buildings located by Oswald, seems to have dated to the fourth century and will be considered in Chapter Seven.

It has been necessary to consider some of the sites described in this chapter in considerable detail both because they had a complicated sequence of rebuilding, and because this was not always fully appreciated by their excavators . Barrack-like standard class accommodation is found in both civilian and military contexts at Cave's Inn and Chesterholm, and may have been present at other sites. The first class accommodation is clearly the most variable of the elements belonging to mansiones, but the sites examined here show that the use of hypocaust heating in some of the rooms was becoming normal in the second half of the second century.

59

There are exceptions to this at Cave's Inn, initially at Wall, and possibly Whitchurch. and this group will be considered along with the mansio at St Albans in Chapter Six. It is worth repeating that the provision of hypocausts was by no means frequent either in villas or town houses at this time, nor indeed in the houses assigned to the commanding officers in auxiliary forts. This emphasises the exceptional character of such buildings occurring in humble roadside settlements or fort vici. The preference for a location well behind the mainroad frontage, noted in the last chapter, is found again in the examples treated here. In addition, at Cave's Inn and East Bridgford it seems that the same oblique alignment to the road was shared by the mansio and roadside properties, suggesting that the planning of both was determined by a single authority. This aspect of mansiones, and the related problem of defences around roadside settlements, must now be considered more fully. Settlements Built to Service Mansiones. It was suggested in Chapter Three that roadside settlements could have been deliberately created in Britain to service mansiones,as inscriptions attest they were in Thrace in both the Neronian and the Severan periods. The military-style establishment dated c.55-60/65 in the hillfort at Brandon Hill was identified as a mansio (praetorium)and tabernaeto service it, deliberately founded by the Roman authorities, and the vicus at Leintwardine which succeeded it was also seen as a deliberate foundation. Polygonal enclosures at Nettleton and Thorpe may have contained similar establishments. At Godmanchester and East Bridgford mansionesseem to have been added to settlements that were already in existence. Nevertheless, the position of these on major roads means that they must have supplied transport and lodging for official travellers and does not rule out an official foundation, even if initially no purpose-built accommodation was provided. These can be seen as similar to the settlements where viasii vicani were established in Italy in the second century B.C.. Green (1975, 186-90) claims that the Flavian settlement at Godmanchester displays evidence of regular planning. If he is right in recognising divisions based on a multiple of a Celtic rather than the Roman foot in this, it seems more likely that the planning was carried out by personnel employed by the civitas Catuvellaunorumthan by soldiers or others acting on the orders of the governor. In the Flavian period it was the cities and other political units which were as a rule responsible for providing the facilities for the cursus publicus. We saw in Chapter Three how the First House at Richborough should have been built by the civitas of the Cantiaci, and it seems a reasonable assumption that the evacuated fort site at Godmanchester. if it was not retained in military ownership, passed under the control of the civitas. The tribal authorities set about establishing a roadside settlement with a regular division of land units. If no specific buildings for lodging official travellers were constructed these must have spent the night in the homes of the settlers. There is no evidence for what arrangements were made but an obvious possibility is that the settlers acted as parochi in exchange for allotments of land. Clearly such a planned layout, rather than a piecemeal and 'spontaneous'

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain development, provides a good indication of a deliberate foundation. This may be relatively easy to recognise in some cases by the use of aerial photographs. Normally, largescale excavation will be required to establish that it existed. On the outskirts of Magiovinium, also in Catuvellaunian territory, David Neal has suggested that a series of plots and enclosures was laid out with widths of 19 and 38 metres and 56 metres in depth (giving areas which he has equated with the Roman dextans and quincunx). In the Antonine period large-scale smithing was taking place but this ended and the whole area was covered by a deposit of coarse, sandy soil sometime after c.180. He suggested that this was deliberate tidying-up of the area by a local authority (Neal 1987, 18 and 30). If the provision of services for the cursus publicus was decisive in the establishment of many 'small towns', as suggested in Chapter Three, such planning and management can be expected to have been the norm, though no doubt at many roadside settlements the initial layout has been obscured by secondary developments . The quantity of subfloor, pita and flue-tile fragments from Magiovinium indicates the existence of a bath-building, presumably mansiobaths (pers. comm. C. Woodfield). Further support from excavation for the closeness of the link between mansiones and their roadside settlements comes from Chelmsford. There the area of the evacuated fort on Sites AG and V was occupied by civilian buildings in the late Neronian / early Flavian period (lsserlin and Wickenden, in prep.). It is clear that it was not the fort but the mansio which generated the civilian settlement. In the Hadrianic period when new mansio accommodation was provided new civilian plots were also laid out on Site S. These were destroyed by the construction of defences c.160/75 but were re-instated when the defences were levelled in the early third century (Drury 1988, 57-69). At Towcester the second century defences also involved the destruction of some properties and it seemed possible to the excavators that the plots laid out in a new suburb may have been contemporary and occasioned by just this event (Brown et al. 1983, 131-33). It was pointed out earlier in this chapter how an alignment that was oblique to Watling Street was shared by the buildings of the mansio and the properties alongside the road at Cave's Inn. In some cases this was altered in the course of time to a more convenient alignment at right angles to the road. It is tempting to see the oblique alignment as an official's layout of property boundaries, perhaps contemporary with and determined by the original establishment of the mansio, either in the Hadrianic period, to which the relief-patterned tile probably belongs, or even earlier.

This provides another indication of the interdependence of

mansio and vicus, and shows the authorities' recognition of the prior claim of the vicani to the roadside locations. The same rule seems to have applied even in the civitas-capitals at Caerwent and Silchester (see Chapter Six).

It is to be expected that additional evidence will eventually be found for the combined administration, if not always for the simultaneous establishment, of mansionesand their vici. One very obvious manifestation of this is the construction of earthwork defences around roadside settlements in the later second century. Defences around Roadside Settlements.

The provision of earthwork defences around Romano-British cities and roadside settlements involves a very complex series of issues and was discussed in some detail in a number of publications in the early 1980's (Hartley 1983; Crickmore 1984; Frere 1984b). However, no consensus of opinion seems to have emerged to explain what seems to be a Romano-British phenomenon. The discussion here will concentrate on the smaller defended sites, some of which contained mansiones. This is preceded by a brief statement on the role of defences around cities. By c. A.D.60 the ditches of pre-Roman defences at Silchester and pre- or early Roman defences at Chichester had been filled in (Boon 1969, 6; Down 1989, 66). The context is the immediately post-Boudican period when the Roman army had suspended its offensive into Wales and returned to be on the spot in areas of potential trouble in the south and east of the province. By the early - mid Flavian period cities were again being provided with defences. A town wall at the refounded colony of Colchester, probably dating between c. A.D.65 and 80 (Crummy 1992, 14-18), is matched by earthwork defences at Silchester (the 'Manor Farm Ditch'), Winchester, Exeter, and St Albans. Recent excavations in Leicester at Causeway Lane within the northeast quadrant of the later walled town have revealed a substantial ditch back-filled during the early second century (Connor 1992, 175) which may represent early town defences. The provision of these defences had nothing to do with the status of the cities involved. It was rather the accompaniment of the renewed advances of the Roman army in the years A.D. 70-86. The lessons of the Boudican rebellion were being implemented: when the army moved forward the cities were no longer left defenceless as most had been in the Neronian period. By c. 100 or slightly later the defensive ditches at Silchester and St Albans were no longer being maintained and this indicates a changed perception. By then it was clear that there would be no repeat of the Boudican rebellion. The rapid withdrawal of the troops from Inchtuthil and the auxiliary forts in Scotland, and the re-imposition of garrisons on those tribes within the province from which such rebellion might have erupted, ensured that the southern tribal leaders could feel secure.

The usual location of Hadrianic mansiones in roadside settlements well behind the main road-frontage was noted in Chapter Four, where it was suggested that this was quite deliberate and that the frontage was reserved for the buildings of the ordinary inhabitants. The present chapter has provided further examples, at Cave's Inn and East Bridgford. At Whitchurch timber buildings and industrial installations had earlier occupied the site of the mansio but these were again on the periphery of the settlement (Jones and Webster 1968, 203-5). The choice of the peripheral location avoided substantial interference with properties in the settlements.

The first century defences round cities were to provide security rather than to advertise status. By the early second century the colonies at Gloucester and Lincoln were both

60

Other second century mansiones

surrounded by stone walls like Colchester. This was an indication of their special status. The Fosse earthwork at St Albans, unfinished when work was halted c. 155 by the Antonine Fire, followed this model to the extent of incorporating masonry gates. A similar combination occurs at Cirencester, though its precise dating within the second century is uncertain. At Exeter and Winchester it is thought that parts at least of the walls were contemporary with earth banks dated to the late second or early third century (Henderson 1988, 118; Frere 1989, 316-18). In these cases it seems to have been the ultimate intention to supplement or replace the earthwork defences throughout by a stone wall. A commitment was being made, but the expense of the construction was evidently to be spread over many years. St Albans was not threatened by any enemy in the mid second century and the new defensive circuit was most probably planned as a project contributing to the prestige of the city. After the Antonine Fire work was not resumed on the defences until some time after c. 210/30 when a wall and accompanying earth bank were constructed on a new line (Frere 1983a, 36- 7). The more widespread provision of earthwork defences has usually been dated to late in the second century and has been seen to reflect conditions or a situation where it was judged that defences were genuinely required. The two known military emergencies of the late second century, in A.D. 180-84 when there was a serious reverse in the north and a governor was killed and in A.D.197-200 when the Maeatae threatened the province. may have provided the stimulus in some cases, but they are unlikely to have been the sole, or even the initial, reason for others. Here it is necessary to tum to the defended roadside settlements some of which have provided more precise dating evidence. Both Professor Frere and the present writer previously drew attention to the roadside settlements at Chelmsford and Kelvedon where civic pride or competition for status seemed unlikely to have been factors in the provision of defences and where these were no longer properly maintained by the early or mid third century (Frere 1984b, 68-69; Black 1984, 11516). The short life of these defences was seen as good evidence that they had been erected in response to some real or perceived emergency and, when it was past, were no longer thought worth retaining . In the case of Kelvedon the final report is still not available and in the interim report the defensive ditch is dated on pottery evidence to the last decade of the second century A.D. (Eddy and Turner I 982, 11). Although the context of the pottery is not given this dating would allow the defences to be seen as a response to one of the known northern emergencies . The final report on the Chelmsford excavations has appeared and there it is argued that the defences were constructed c. 160/75. This involved the demolition of buildings on Site S associated with pottery given this dating (Drury 1988, 62). Thus, while the defences at Kelvedon and Chelmsford were certainly no longer fully maintained after a short period, at Chelmsford at least their construction is dated before the earlier of the two emergencies advanced as possible reasons for their erection. The same can now be said of Towcester where a contemporary bank and wall have been given a te,minus ante quern of c. 175 (Woodfield 1993, 20-21 , 36-37 and 43-45).

It has been suggested that the initial construction of earthwork banks rather than masonry walls may presuppose a careful approach to the financing of the projects, and a long-term strategy for their completion. There is some evidence from Cirencester for the piecemeal construction of the wall that was inserted in front of the earth bank (Crickmore 1984, 146- 7). but at other cities it is possible that the circuit was built at one go, after sufficient funds had been accumulated or in response to some new threat. If the time-scale, a hundred years or more, seems rather long, it does at least offer an explanation of the very conservative architectural style of the city walls eventually constructed in the late third century in Britain. These ignore the style of fortification adopted in Gaul at the same time, and in contemporary forts (the 'Saxon Shore forts') in Britain , where bastions were provided. It is indeed as if the cities were implementing plans that had been approved in the late second century. The dating of the defences at Chelmsford and Towcester to the late 160's or early 170's, and the possibility that at many cities the earthwork defences were regarded as a first stage in the provision of a walled circuit, requires an earlier and rather different context from the events of 180-84 and 197200. Perhaps the most likely that can be suggested is following the ending of the second occupation of the Antonine Wall and the withdrawal of Roman troops from southern Scotland. Daniels (1991) has suggested that this withdrawal was a consequence of the need to transfer troops from Britain to the Danube frontier at just this time. The year 170 saw a disastrous barbarian invasion of Italy where Aquileia was besieged and another of Macedonia and Greece where the unwalled cities were easily plundered (Birley A. 1966, 223-28) . It may have been in the same year that Didius Julianus, commanding Legio XXll Primigenia at Mainz, defeated an invasion by the Chatti. Perhaps in 172, as governor of Gallia Belgica, he levied troops in his province to meet what was perhaps a seaborne attack by the Chauci (SHA Didius Julianus l.7-8) . The Romano-British defences, constructed c. I 70 onwards in what may sudden! y have seemed a vulnerable frontier province, seem to fit here. What was enclosed within the defensive circuits of civitas capitals and roadside settlements clearly differed. At the former most of the inhabited area, but at the latter only a fraction of the settlement, was usually protected (Esmonde Cleary 1987. 167-68). There was already a tradition of enclosing mansiones that had behind it motives rather different from those lying behind the fortification of cities. It is worth considering how these motives might still have been relevant in the decisions taken to defend so many roadside settlements in the later second century. At Inchtuthil the mansio was at first surrounded by a rampart and ditch. These defences protected the accommodation and stables, and the buildings were ranged around two large yards, at least one of which was probably used as a waggon-park. It seems unlikely that the rampart was intended to be manned against a determined attack. If the compound was threatened the staff and the residents in the mansio would surely have taken refuge in the legionary fortress. However, the rampart and ditch around the mansio would have provided effective

61

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain security for waggons and their loads against theft or pilfering. The mansiones at Camelon, Newstead, Melandra Castle and Chesterholm all seem to have lain within earthwork annexes attached to forts. Here again the annexes will not have been defended: rather they were enclosed to provide some protection for animals and movable goods within them. However, mansiones at other military sites were not defended or enclosed, and at Inchtuthil the defences were quickly demolished . Clearly there was no general rule. Sometimes the security of an earthwork 'defence' was deemed necessary by the Roman army, at other times it was not.

of the settlement. Again at Neatham only part of the settlement (6 acres: c.2.5 hectares) was enclosed by two ditches and presumably by a rampart (Millett and Graham 1986, 43). Some mansiones, such as Wall and Cave 's Inn, seem never to have been defended. This variation is difficult to explain unless there was considerable freedom of decision left to those with local responsibility for each roadside settlement. Clearly the minimal line of the defences at East Bridgford and Neatham demonstrates a concern to define and protect an official establishment , but it is equally clear that there was no concerted, or at least no centrally-directed, programme of fortification of minor sites containing mansiones,just as there was none to protect cities in the later second century. The variation in the concept of what was being defended, whether mansio alone or mansio and settlement, and the total lack of defences in some cases , suggest rather that the second century earthwork defences represent a series of individual initiatives, presumably involving approval by the governor at least.

At Brandon Hill the security provided by the defences of a disused hillfort was considered desirable and at Nettleton and Thorpe, which we saw in Chapter Three may have been praetoria founded by the governor, the establishments were enclosed by ditches and presumably a rampart. What was at least an effective barrier to unauthorised movement, if not a defence, is also found at other roadside settlements with mansiones in the civil zone of the province. Godmanchester in the early second century was provided with a boundary ditch and it was suggested above that the outer ditch excavated by Todd at East Bridgford may have been another. In her gazetteer of smaller defended sites Crickmore (1984, 103-38) notes ditches or palisades of first or early second century date at Bitterne, Caistor-By-Y armouth, Dorchesteron-Thames and Worcester. The anomalous early defences at Brough-on-Humber are another instance. They have a terminuspost quernof c. A.D.125 and pre-date later second century defences (Wacher 1969, 27-29). Mansiones may have existed in some of these settlements. An inclination to demarcate official installations was thus a factor which was continually present but unpredictable in its occurrence. It represents an extension of the idea of the enclosed waggonpark seen at Chelmsford in the first century which was defined in one phase by a timber fence and later by a 'military' rampart and ditch, and is comparable to the provision of 'defences' around the mansio at Inchtuthil. The defences provided at roadside settlements in the later second century represent a further development of this. That they did not simply enclose the waggon-park or the mansio installations but almost invariably a stretch of the main road passing through the settlement as well suggests that one of their purposes was to confine all movement into and out of the settlement to the line of the road where regular surveillance could take place at the gateways. This would probably have been carried out by some of the inhabitants of the settlement. One of the exemptions granted to the Pizos settlers was that they did not have to serve as guards (phrouroi). The implication is that this was normally expected.

The construction of earthwork defences or walls by the larger towns must have influenced the choice of a similar form of enclosure at the smaller roadside settlements . For example, the defences at Chelmsford may have been contemporary with, or slightly later than, an earth bank added behind the town wall of Colchester (Crummy 1984, 14-15). Towcester and Alchester even seem to have been provided with walls as their initial defences in the late second century (Brown and Alexander 1982, 56; Young 1975, 139-40). Some of the reasons for enclosing cities may also have applied to smaller settlements. Obviously defence against a real or imagined danger remains the likely initial motive, but it is even possible that 'civic pride' was a factor in some cases . The glorification of the city that was such a part of educated Roman ideology (Matthews 1989, 388-92) could be, and was, extended to minor nucleations (although not necessarily by their permanent inhabitants). The preamble to the Pizos inscription, referring to the existing emporia being made 'more splendid' by the care of the emperors , is an excellent example. Such settlements are directly comparable to a place like Chelmsford with its mansio, and this may explain the way that some of those in Britain were defended in imitation of the cities. It is important to ask who took the initiative, in the case of roadside settlements, to approach the governor for approval for a scheme of defence. This in effect becomes a question of who was in a position to do so. It is hard to imagine the ordinary inhabitants of so many settlements conceiving the idea, drafting petitions and setting out the arguments in favour of their case. But the idea will have been familiar to men of the decurial class who were putting it into practice in the same period at many civiras-capitals. The defences provided at roadside settlements in the second century are themselves excellent evidence that there were people in authority, drawn from this class, responsible for these settlements and very probably resident in them. It will be remembered that it was such men, drawn from the city councils on the recommendation of their magistrates, that Sicinius Claros, the Severan governor of Thrace, drafted in to be in charge of Pizos and the other Thracian emporia. These

At Kenchester the earthwork defences enclosed a large area (c. 22 acres: 9 hectares). Eventually there were houses with mosaics and hypocausts and the settlement approximated to the image of a small civitas capital (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 75). At East Bridgford by contrast the wall, and probably the earlier earthwork defences though their line is not certain (Todd 1970. 48), enclosed a small area (c.5.5 acres : c.2.2 hectares) including the mansio buildings but little

62

Other second century mansiones toparchoi were certainly obliged to take their responsibilities seriously: they paid for any damage or Joss to the installations of the mansio by the confiscation of their property. However, extensive new construction of villas was taking place in the countryside in the later second and early third century, and many of the owners of these will have been of decurial rank. This suggests that security-consciousness was combined with an optimism and confidence in the status quo.

The security of convoys with army supplies and other items being moved by the government will have been the practical argument likely to convince a provincial governor of the need for defences at a roadside settlement. This must be the common link in the variety of defences around roadside settlements in the later second century as well as in the various boundaries and barriers provided at earlier mansiones in the civil and military zones. The character of the ramparts and ditches at Leintwardine and Chelmsford has suggested that the Roman army was involved in constructing them (Stanford 1968, 314-15; Wickenden 1990, 61). It is often forgotten that civitates disposed of militias which were presumably equipped like regular soldiers and would have been capable of constructing ramparts and ditches in military style (compare Tacitus Historiae 1.67-68). It was presumably with a force made up of such troops that Didius Julianus foiled the Chauci early in the l 70's. These civitasmilitias would seem more likely to have been the builders of the late second century earthwork defences than the regular army. That many of the primary earthwork defences were never provided with walls, while others were, is in accord with an essentially para-military view of their purpose and reflects the continuing importance of individual initiative from those in charge of a mansio or a vicus. Defences may be taken as an indication of functions connected with the cursus publicus, but their absence certainly does not mean that these did not exist. Local Government from Mansiones.

Not every vicus had a purpose-built mansio, but where this existed it was usually the most substantial building. Since it provided accommodation for travelling soldiers and officials it was the obvious base for directing the affairs of the settlement where it was situated. The use of mansiones as centres of government only becomes clear in legal texts in the late fourth century. Rescripts in the Theodosian Code (12.6.19 and 12.6.21) show how some mansiones served as local centres for the collection of taxes. The second of these documents, issued in the joint reign of Valentinian, Theodosius and Arcadius, states:

administrative centres from a much earlier period. It was suggested in Chapter Three that Building A at Carlisle was the base for the centurio regionarius known to have been at Luguvalium from the Vindolanda writing tablets (McCarthy et al. 1989. 300). The monumental entrance hall in this building would have provided a setting where the centurion could have appeared with dignity to impose the government's decisions and issue its commands. By the second century, in lowland Britain at any rate, such direct rule will have been rare. Literary and epigraphic evidence from Gaul and elsewhere shows that vici were usually administered by magistrates (magistri vici, aediles, curatores and a quaestor are attested), appointed by the authorities of the civitas to which they belonged (Johnson 1975). This was also the case in Thrace where the governor required the toparchos who was to be in charge of the mansio at Pizos and its emporion to be a town-councillor nominated by the magistrates of Beroe. He had judicial powers and clearly ran both the mansio and its settlement as a single entity. The only instance of an aedilis vici attested epigraphically in Britain is M. Ulpius Januarius who paid for a theatre-stage at Petuaria early in the reign of Antoninus Pius (RIB 707). It seems preferable to take this at face value and to classify Petuaria as a roadside settlement rather than as the civitas capital of the Parisi. The latter was perhaps the civil settlement across the River Ouse from the legionary fortress at York, a relationship paralleled at Cologne much earlier where the capital of the Ubii lay beside a double legionary fortress. Considerable development was taking place in York in the mid-second century (Ottaway 1993, 72), and it is possible that the creation of a new city for the Parisi was a direct consequence of the advance of the Roman army into southern Scotland at the start of Pius' reign. Ptolemy's attribution of York to the Brigantes need be no more accurate than his assignment of London to the Cantiaci. In the preceding section of this chapter we saw that the provision of earthwork defences in the second century was only comprehensible if men of the same status as Januarius had been appointed to run mansiones and roadside settlements in Britain. There is accommodation in the mansio at some sites, such as Chelmsford and Godmanchester, where an appointee from the local curia could have been housed. The entrance hall of a mansio would have been an obvious setting for conducting the administration of such a settlement. It must certainly have served as a reception area where the warrants (diplomata) of new arrivals could be presented and scrutinised. Section 8.5 of the Theodosian Code is particularly concerned with the illegal use of the cursus publicus by unauthorised persons and with demands for animals in excess of the legal entitlement, and the careful checking of warrants was the duty of provincial governors as well as the local supervisors of mansiones (T.C. 8.5.8; 22; 23; 49). This was not a fourth century fixation for we saw in Chapter Two that concern for such abuses can be traced back at least as early as the Burdur Edict in Tiberius' reign. The retention of the entrance hall at Catterick after the demolition of the mansio accommodation shows that it had a specific function that was still required and it is likely that this was the authentication of diplomata. Although it is impossible to prove from archaeological evidence the administration of the

We have ordered full measures (modii) made of bronze or stone along with sixteenths (sextarii) and pound weights (pondera) to be placed in mansiones and in each city so that every tax-payer may know what he ought to give to the collectors since the measures of all the commodities will be set out under his own gaze. It is likely that mansiones were being used as local

63

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin Roman Britain directly connected with the mansio, and that the second hall was used for the administration of the vicus. We will see in Chapter Six that the blocking of the approach to room 3 in the early third century and the sub-division of the second hall can be linked to the provision of a new, detached, administrative building adjacent to Ermine Street.

settlement itself could have been carried on from the same room. However, at Godmanchester there was the anomalous situation of two large halls (room 3 and the space later divided between rooms 5- 7). Room 3 was centrally placed and was evidently the entrance hall as such. It can be suggested that this was reserved for conducting business

64

CHAPTER SIX THE THIRD CENTURY. The Institution of the Praefecti Vehiculorum.

Throughout the second century it was the task of provincial governors or procurators to administer the cursus publicus in their provinces. Part of the transport was provided by the communities of the cities and vici along the roads, apparently in lieu of a tax which was levied on other provincials. The proceeds from this could be used for the purchase of fodder, of animals, and sometimes for the provision of buildings. In Italy, at the centre of the empire where the traffic of highranking officials and couriers was heaviest, an equestrian praefectus vehiculorum administered the services. From the reign of Marcus Aurelius a separate official was appointed to administer the transport of the emperor's supply-route , the Via Flaminia, that led to the north (CIL X.6662). Marcus' Danubian wars must have caused heavy use of this road and led to the creation of this post. Later testimony (Dio Cassius 78,11; CIL X.7585) shows that the praefectura vehiculorum per viam Flaminiam continued beyond the period of Marcus' wars and early in the third century an inscription from Rome (CIL VI.36899) attests contractors (mancipes) and the hamessers of draught cattle (iunctores iumentarii) who were under the direction of the praefecti of the roads leading from southern Italy, the Appia, Traiana and Annia. Various inscriptions, the earliest of which (CIL III.6075: Pflaum 1960, 647-49 no.241) can be dated to A.D. 202/205 and the others within the third century, show that the system of praefecturae vehiculorumwas extended to certain groups of provinces: Lugdunensis, Aquitania and Narbonensis in Gaul (IGRRom 111.181; CIL XIV.170); the two Pannonian provinces, Moesia Superior and Noricum (CIL IIl.6075); Gallia Belgica and the two German provinces (CIL VIII.12020). This administrative change was originally linked by Pflaum (1940, 297-98) to a passage in the Scriptores Historiae Augustae (Vita Severi 14) in which Septimius Severus is said to have transferred the cost (or more literally 'the burden') of the transport service from private citizens to the imperial treasury in order to win popularity. However, he later retracted his argument (Pflaum 1960, 937-38), admitting that CIL VIII.26582, giving the career of A. Vitellius Felix Honoratus who was advocatusfisci (legal officer of the treasury) in connection with the vehiculatio along the via Flaminia and later in the region north of the Po and in part of Noricum, showed that taxes must have been paid for the running of the transport services in these areas. The regions where the praefecturae were set up therefore fall into line with provinces like Thrace (the Pizos inscription: IGRRom I. 766) or Phrygia (the Sulmenli inscription: Frend 1956) where these obligations on local communities normally remained in force in the third century. The opinion of the early third century jurist Paul (Digest 50,5,10) that soldiers and practitioners of artes liberates (including teaching and medicine) were exempt from providing transport and lodging to official travellers, with the implication that others were not, can therefore be taken at face value as applying to the empire as a whole. The

passage in the Vita Severi must therefore be fictitious, or else it refers not to financing but to some change in the personnel required to be managers at mansiones. We saw in Chapter Two that this was probably what was behind Nerva's reform and the re-organisation under Hadrian. The Pizos inscription, dated to A.D. 202, is certainly concerned with the selection of the best candidates to run the emporia and in it the governor Sicinius Clams declared his decision to appoint senators from the local city council rather than businessmen. The same problem, of finding the most reliable managers, is still prominent in the fourth century in the Theodosian Code (see Chapter Seven). Pflaum's observation (1940, 280-83) that the provincial

praefecturae vehiculorumwere set up in those areas where troops were concentrated, or from which, as in the case of the Gallic provinces, the army drew heavily for supplies is valid, though any link with the annona militaris cannot now be maintained. The annona was a levy of goods and materials for military requirements which operated as a tax. When Pflaum was writing van Berchem had recently argued that it was Severus who had instituted the annonamilitaris and that mansiones were used as collecting-points for the new tax (van Berchem 1937, 168-69 and 187). The systematisation of the annona is now regarded as the work of Diocletian at the end of the third century, a development from irregular levies made with increasing frequency as the century progressed (Rickman 1971, 278-83). Previously supplies had been purchased for the army or, when requisitioned, payment had been made (Breeze 1984). Those responsible for conveying these, usually soldiers or subordinates of the procurator (Strabo 3.4.20), had presumably always made use of the cursus publicus. This is evident from as early as the reign of Tiberius when the decree from Burdur allowed the procurator the maximum allocation of ten carriages, or thirty mules, or sixty donkeys. The same document stressed that no transport or other facilities were to be provided to those moving com or other goods for private use or profit, implying that the movement of such goods on behalf of the government was a normal event.

It is unlikely that granaries or special storage facilities were provided at mansiones for goods on their way to the military as these would have been quickly transported on to their destination. This would have been a depot like the third century supply-base at South Shields with its 23 granaries (Daniels 1989, 85-86 Fig.44) or Corbridge where the unfinished second century courtyard building on Site 11 was intended to be a store-building (Rickman 1971, 257-63). The most that might be expected at an ordinary mansio would perhaps be a secure compound to serve as a waggonpark. The best examples of this are the chalk-walled and flint-walled enclosures at Dover, an appropriate reminder that transport by sea was a cheaper and more effective way of supplying the northern garrisons than land -transport and that this was a primary role of the classis Britannica.

65

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain The praefecti vehiculorumin charge of groups of provinces may have been appointed to improve the co-ordination of the transport of military supplies and represent an attempt to supervise this more efficiently, rather than any more fundamental re-organisation. This was only one of the services which used the mansiones although by the fourth century its importance had gained it a separate title, the cursus clabularius (heavy transport service). Although not attested epigraphically it is possible that a praefectus vehiculorumalso operated in the British provinces from the early third century.

ImperialJourneysand the AntonineItinerary. In the course of his work on the annona militaris van Berchem (1937, 172-78) recognised that the Antonine Itinerary listed routes and stopping-places used by emperors on journeys or by military expeditions. The longest route was that planned for Caracalla's journey to Egypt in A.D.214-15. Imperial journeys did indeed require careful planning in advance and the routes were published to enable adequate preparations to be made. Suetonius (Tiberius 38) records how the emperor Tiberius used to make such preparations almost every year as if he intended to tour the provinces and the armies, although he never actually set out. Transport was requisitioned for him and provisions laid up in the municipia and coloniae. Later in the first century when the emperor Titus contracted the fever from which he died he was at a mansio on his way from Rome to the Sabine country (Suetonius Titus 10). A certain Plotius Grypus, commemorated by Statius (Silvae 4.9.16-19), may have been responsible for the organisation of an imperial journey for Titus' brother and successor Domitian (Coleman 1988, 221-24). The most detailed information is provided by the Scriptores Historiae Augustae (Vita Severi Alexandri 45): the emperor Severus Alexander published an edict two months in advance of his journey in which he stated on what day and at what hour he would leave Rome and reach the first mansio. Then came a list of mansionesand stoppingplaces, and where stocks of food were to be available, all the way to the frontiers. Van Berchem's explanation of the Antonine Itinerary remains plausible, and on this basis the writer previously attempted to relate the British routes to the presence of Severus and his two sons in Britain in 208-211 (Black 1984). A detailed reexamination of this is presented in Appendix Two and there the Severan date is rejected and a date in the reign of Diocletian or the early years of Constantine is preferred. It is clear that there has been very extensive revision of the official route-plans by an editor and that some of them may even have been compiled by him. Nevertheless, the Scriptores Historiae Augustae (Vita Severi 22,4) show that Severus stayed in at least one mansio during his British expedition, and the evidence reviewed above shows that mansiones would be the usual accommodation for an emperor on the move. From the Pizos inscription it is clear that the passage of Severus and Caracalla through a province could lead to the establishment of new mansiones. It is therefore reasonable to look for such cases in Britain, or for mansioneswhere considerable new building took place in the

early third century. The construction work at so many

mansiones in the 120's and 130's must surely have been connected with Hadrian's visit in 122 and, although the system was therefore well-established by 208, some Severan contribution might be expected. Mansiones which may show this are considered first, followed by others with significant third century development which has not been dealt with already in previous chapters.

Dover (Philp 1989) (Fig.1:16). The second century development of the mansio has already been considered in Chapter Four. In Period VI (c.200) Buildings C7 and C8 (probable staff accommodation and a monumental entrance hall respectively) were demolished and replaced by Building C9 (the luxurious accommodation known as The Painted House) and Cl 1 which together effectively formed the new south range of the courtyard. Building Cl 1 has not yet been published, but it is said to be similar in character to C9. C6, the first class accommodation first constructed in Period IV (c.160-80), continued to function on the west side of the courtyard (Fig.53). Building C9 comprised two suites of extremely luxuriously decorated rooms. One of these (rooms 5 and 6) was added to the south of Building C6 and the suite may have included rooms within this west range. If so it had at least two living-rooms heated by hypocausts and a bedroom (the projecting room 6). The better preserved suite had three hypocaust-heated livingrooms (rooms 1-3) and a bedroom (room 4). The floors were of opus signinum and the walls were painted with high quality paintings showing Bacchic subjects. Some of the tiles employed in C9 carried stamps of the classis Britannica, indicating government involvement in their construction. If Building Cll formed a third suite of the same standard such a provision is quite exceptional. The mansio was not given up when the fort was evacuated, perhaps during the northern campaigns of Severus, and indeed it seems to have catered for additional traffic. Sometime in the period c.210-230 (Period VII) a clay walled building was constructed in the south-west angle of the residential courtyard of the mansio. This represents an infilling of the courtyard to provide additional accommodation such as was done, for example, at Richborough (the First House) and at Newstead. In the period c.250-270 the mansio was finally destroyed by the construction of the Saxon Shore fort (Period VIII).

Silchester(Price 1887; Fox and Hope 1894) (Fig.1:28). The mansio at Silchester (Calleva Atrebatum) occupied a large part of insula VIII close to the south gate of the city (Fig.55a). It is one of the most frequently cited examples of such buildings and it is somewhat surprising to discover how little is actually known of its development and dating. F.G. Hilton Price (1887, 263) records how excavation commenced under the Rev. Joyce in 1876-77 and continued thereafter under the Rev. Monro. It was Price himself who had plans and drawings made of the mansio baths in 1881 and who later published an account of them, assigning numbers to the rooms (Price 1887, 272-80). On his small-scale site plan

66

The Third century

Price (1887, Pl.XV facing pg.260) showed the eastern part of the south range of the courtyard building and individual rooms are designated by letters, but the description in the text is no more than a list of their dimensions. Joyce's excavations of the remaining rooms of this building were back-filled c.1880 and the only plan made of them was drawn at a small scale by the Ordnance Survey. In 1893 Fox and Hope re-excavated the baths and traced the edges of the courtyard building. None of the rooms belonging to the three main ranges was fully excavated, though the apsidal room (9) built onto the west range was defined as well as the courtyard (C) and outbuilding (63-67) to the west. The remainder of the plan (Fox and Hope 1894, Pl.XVII facing pg.210) was based on the recording carried out by the Ordnance Survey. Re-excavation was evidently felt to be desirable but was never carried out. Nevertheless the function of the building was discussed and it was concluded (Fox and Hope 1894, 226) that it was 'a large hospitium intended for the use of those who came to the city either for public or private affairs'. That this identification is essentially correct and that the building was in fact a mansio is evident from the presence of a tripartite entrance hall inserted into the north range and from the detached bathbuilding on one side of the walled yard to the east. The association of baths with the service yard has already been noted at several mansiones. Boon's account provides the most up-to-date plan with details added from aerial photography and information from Joyce's unpublished Journal (Boon 1974, 138-44). This appears here as Fig.54 where for ease of reference the rooms have been assigned numbers. His analysis of the plan was taken as the starting-point for what follows here, but a different view has been adopted of the early development of the building based in part on the larger number of mansiones now available for comparison. The building comprised three ranges of rooms on the north, west, and south sides of courtyard A. At the west end of the north range rooms 54-60 probably represent the latest layout, obscuring earlier arrangements. It is possible that room 54 and a single room to the south (later subdivided to form 55 and 56) were part of the original building, matching rooms 38 and 39 at the eastern end of the north range. A wall continuing the west wall of the west range is probably concealed under room 1 and rooms 59 and 60, and is shown by broken lines on Fig.54. It was found crossing 61 and it was continued across the west end of the external portico of the north range (52) between rooms 57 and 58. Although the south wall of 60 is slightly out of line with the south wall of the inner portico (53) it may nevertheless be original. It extends to the west into the space marked 62 and there may have been a pair of rooms here forming a projecting wing as in the southern range (rooms 14 and 16). If so they were presumably originally enclosed by a portico as in the south range. This reconstruction is shown in Fig.55b. If it is accepted then the suite of entrance rooms (47-50) in the north range must belong to a remodelling of the building, since the entrance must originally have been in the west range, framed between the projecting ends of the north and south ranges. This is supported by the fact that room 49 has

clearly been built across what was part of the portico 53. The original arrangement replaced by rooms 47-50 is not known, but this probably survives in the plan of the eastern half of the range. Here there seem to have been two suites of first class accommodation (rooms 38 and 40-42, and rooms 4346). Rooms 38 and 40-41 may have been suppressed when room 37 was added to the south. This was apparently similar to room 49 which opened from the entrance hall (48) and also extended into courtyard A, and to 33 in a matching position in the south range and again connected to a large room (32) in the range behind. Alternatively the fact that room divisions were planned at the east end of the north range but not of the south range may indicate that the rooms in the north range survived behind what was merely a facade balancing 33. Boon (1974, 140) suggests that a second storey existed above room 32 since the quantity of collapsed clay from the walls was here more than twice the usual depth. It is possible that this also extended above 33 and was matched by another two-storeyed structure on the opposite side of the courtyard (above rooms 37-38 and 40-41). In the west range the central room 5 perhaps functioned as the original entrance hall with a porch or steps in line with it leading into courtyard A. What rooms lay to north and south of this is uncertain. Room 1 was certainly a later creation extending across part of the portico 11. It may originally have extended as far as the south wall of 60, or two rooms may have occupied this end of the range. Rooms 3-4 and 67 are probably not part of the original plan since such pairs of small rooms (one of which served as a lobby) are characteristic of the suites of accommodation in the north and south ranges. This means that they have either been created by reducing the size of an originally larger room 5 or, perhaps more likely, they were inserted into room 2 and room 8. Very tentatively the original west range comprised five rooms between the projecting wings. In the south range the original arrangement of rooms from rooms 28 and 29 westwards probably survived, though room 22 was originally smaller. It was later enlarged at the expense of room 23, and a single large room heated by a hypocaust was created out of rooms 18 and 19. The east end of the south range has been fairly extensively remodelled, presumably when 33 was built across the portico and into the courtyard. Rooms 30 and 31 probably originally formed a single room. Four suites of first class accommodation can be distinguished ( rooms 16-18; rooms 19-22; rooms 23-26; and rooms 27-30 / 31). The last three at least consisted of a lobby with a bedroom behind it and a living room to each side. There is no trace in the plan of the building of the small single rooms typical of standard class accommodation and it seems that it comprised first class accommodation only. A large bath-building was constructed on the east side of courtyard B. The main furnace-room was 77, possibly entered by steps on the north side where two short lengths of walling may have served as supports. The area 76, where eventually a boiler was situated over the main flue, may at first have been a hot bath. Price's plan shows that there had been some alteration or robbing at the inner end of the main flue and the flue walls

67

CursusPublicus:the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain seem to make straight joints with the east wall of room 75. Price's room 11 was in fact two rooms (74 and 75 on Fig.54) each with a rectangular recess on the south side . Room 75, closest to the furnace, was the caldarium,probably with a hot bath to the south. Room 74 was a tepidarium.Room 73 was a second tepidariumand rooms 71 and 72 beside it were two laconica.Room 69 with a drain for a cold douche starting below the centre of its floor was the cold room with the cold bath in room 70 to the south. To the north of 69 room 68 must have been the original apodyterium,and rooms 79-87 are all later additions. It is significant that room 68 is in line with the end of portico 34, the inner portico in the south range of the courtyard building to the west. The apodyterium was evidently sited to be approached from this portico.

35.48 metres) to be a coincidence. The north wall of Courtyard B of the mansio lies at an angle to this but its alignment is similar to that of some of the earlier properties in the west of the insu/a and at right angles to the line of the Late Iron Age defences of Calleva which passed below the mansio baths. This suggests that it was respecting the boundary of an earlier property incorporated into the northeast comer of the insula. The line of the original northern boundary of the mansio can therefore be tentatively plotted (Fig.55b). On the west the depth of the properties along the street may have been the same as on the north since House 4 extends back for c.33 metres. This matches the layout we have noted at Chelmsford and East Bridgford where the mansio boundary occurred at the rear of properties fronting onto the road but the mansio buildings were set further back within it. At Silchester insula VIII was designed to accommodate the mansio and properties fronting the streets to the north and west. At Chelmsford and East Bridgford the boundary was accompanied or marked by a ditch. If it existed, it is uncertain what form the boundary took at Silchester. A ditch is not impossible since although the excavators found no trace of such a feature they noted that the summer of 1893 was particularly dry and 'hardened the soil to a degree that much interfered with the detection of foundations and rubbish pits' (Fox and Hope 1894, 199).

The reconstruction offered here of the earliest period of the building that can be recognised in the plan is of course conjectural. It can be tested by excavation and may prove useful in focusing attention on where this might be most profitably carried out. It has the merit of conforming to some degree to the building plans of Hadrianic mansiones,or to features of these, elsewhere which are known now in much greater detail than when Boon was writing. Projecting wings are a feature of the courtyard buildings at Chelmsford and Lower Wanborough, though admittedly at both these sites they seem to occur on the rear facades . A more apt comparison for the suggested form of the mansio at Silchester would be the building at Frankfurt am Main (Heddernheim) or that at Kempten (Fig.36), both civitascapitals like Silchester. Both buildings had two parallel ranges of accommodation linked at one end by a range at right angles, comprising a single large room at Frankfurt am Main and a suite of three rooms at Kempten . In both cases this was where the entrance lay.

Some of the alterations to the original form of the Silchester

mansio have been referred to above. The hall (59) with the

The relationship of the mansio and the other buildings of insu/a VIII also merits some consideration. The original mansio faced west and lay nearly 100 metres behind the street frontage on that side (Fig.55b). It was aligned on the street grid but there were traces of four or five other buildings in the western part of the insula which were not aligned on the grid. This was also true of the first phase of the public baths and in many cases it indicates that the buildings concerned belong to a relatively early date (Boon 1974, 47). A road directly approaching room 5 of the mansio from the west would have passed across the site of one of these buildings and may have interfered with a second. It therefore seems likely that the unaligned buildings predate the mansio and that some or all of them were demolished when it was built. The earliest elements of the street grid may be Neronian but its completion may not have been achieved until the Hadrianic period (Boon 1974, 53; Fulford 1985, 9). The latter date should provide a terminusad quern for the mansio, either the excavated building or a predecessor occupying the same position, since it can be seen that the insula was designed to accommodate it.

series of small rooms on two sides (54-58) and a gallery (60) to the south was perhaps an area for the work and accommodation of servants or staff. This set of rooms resembles the separate structure (63-67) on the west side of a new courtyard (C) which blocked access to the west range from the exterior of the building, and these together recall the buildings flanking the entrance to the service courtyard at Inchtuthil. It seems likely that the narrow space (61) to the south of 60 represents a continuous passage, or even an unroofed gap walled up at both ends, separating the block of rooms to the north from the main part of the west range to the south.

In the west range room 1 was a large room heated by a hypocaust of composite type (with a small central area where the floor was supported by pilae from which channels extended to the outer walls of the room). Room 5 also had hypocaust heating. The furnace for 1 was perhaps near its north-west comer; that for 5 was in room 3. Room 4 was probably a bedroom, opening off room 2 and heated indirectly from room 5. The same arrangement can be seen to the south of room 5 where room 7, presumably opening from room 8, will also have been a bedroom. Room 6 was a passage linking rooms 5 and 8. The entrance range of the mansio has clearly been replaced by two suites of superior first class accommodation, one comprising rooms 1, 2 and 4 and the other rooms 5-8 and perhaps also room 10. Room 9 is of particular importance and Boon (1974, 140) refers to it as 'perhaps an audience-chamber or at very least a grand dining-room'. It had clearly been added to the more southerly of the two suites of superior accommodation in the west range and it projected across and interrupted the

The north wall of the mansio and the southern limits of two houses (1 and 2) along the north side of the insula both seem to respect a boundary running c.36 metres behind the street frontage. This is too close to one actus (120 Roman feet:

68

The Third century external portico (11). A large block of masonry attached to its south-west comer can be interpreted as the stoke-hole and flue of a hypocaust. It is possible that the division between rooms 8 and 10 was removed, so creating a large rectangular reception room in front of room 9 (Boon 1974, 140-41), but this is not necessary unless room 9 was an audience-chamber for official functions. Room 8 and room 9 together form a room-set that is found at a number of urban mansiones and in deciding which of Boon's suggestions is more probable this comparative material should be taken into account (Fig .68). The only other British example is at St Albans where room 33, probably heated by a hypocaust , may have been entered from a rectangular reception room (34). They belong to a mansio that was built in the third quarter of the second century (see below in this chapter). At Augst a similar pair of rooms (54 and 55), both equipped with hypocausts, was constructed in the second quarter of the third century (Bender 1975, 91-95 and Beilage 14). The stoke-hole of room 55 at Augst is a good pointer to the real nature of the projecting mass of masonry beside room 9 at Silchester (Fig.56). At Kempten two blocks of rooms opened off a portico lying behind the main accommodation and the baths (Fig.36b), and each included an apsidal room (47 and 61). At Camuntum the apsidal room 71 was approached through a smaller reception room (70). A hypocaustonwas inserted into room 83 to the east of 70, presumably intended to heat both 70 and the remainder of 83 which contained a bed-alcove (Fig.37).

Whether these alterations in the south range were contemporary with those in the west range is unknown, but the provision of hypocaust heating in some suites of rooms, marking them out as superior suites of first class accommodation , is a development that can be assigned a broad date from its occurrence at other mansiones.In Britain, after an apparent ban on rooms heated by hypocausts in the Hadrianic period, these are found again in the later second century at mansiones at Dover, Lancaster and St Albans. However, in each case it is only a single suite that is provided with hypocaust heating. The earliest case where more than one suite of rooms is heated in this way is the mansio at Dover. The suites of heated rooms there are a more striking parallel since they, like the suites in the west range at Silchester , occupied the position of the entrance range of the preceding building. They are dated c. A.D.200. Confirmation of a late second - early third century date comes from the mansio at Augst (Bender 1975, Beilagen 912). Here the earliest elements that can be attributed to the mansio belong to Period VI (early second century) when blocks of rooms were constructed on two sides of a yard or hall about 15.5 metres apart. In the Hadrianic period a large number of additional rooms was added to the southern block (Period VII). In Periods VIII-IX in the second half of the second century some of the southern rooms were equipped with hypocausts and new heated rooms were added, producing two recognisable suites of superior first class accommodation (rooms 9-11 and rooms 15-16). We saw above that apsidal dining-rooms were constructed in mansionesat St Albans, Camuntum and Augst in the period between c.150 and c.250. The provision of hypocausts in more than one suite of accommodation falls within the same broad range, and it seems likely that the major phase of alterations at Silchester can be assigned to this period .

The apsidal rooms at these mansionesare all very similar in size (with the exception of room 61 at Kempten which is larger) . The example at Camuntum is associated with accommodation that includes a recognisable bedroom, like room 9 at Silchester. At Augst there is no clear association with the superior first class accommodation. However, at Kempten the two blocks of rooms along the portico can easily be interpreted in this way. In no instance does an apsidal room occupy the sort of focal position that might be expected of an audience-chamber, and some of them are not easily accessible from the entrance hall of the mansio. Boon's second suggestion, that room 9 at Silchester was a dining-room, therefore seems more attractive both in view of its location beside domestic accommodation and because of the fairly close parallels at other urban mansiones which support this interpretation. The significance of these rooms will be discussed at the end of the present chapter.

In the baths a new changing-room (80) was built onto the original building to the west of the cold room and linked to the external portico (35) of the south range by a gallery (78). In its final period at least room 80 had a wooden floor supported on joists laid on sills of rammed tile. The provision of yet another changing-room (81) to the north came later as the difference in the walling in the south walls of the two rooms is evident in the artist's view published by Price (1887, Pl.XVIII). It therefore seems that room 80 was an additional changing-room and that room 68 continued to function. The blocking of portico 34, from where room 68 was earlier approached, by the construction of 33 across it is probably to be connected with this. The subdivision of room 30 / 31 provided a passage (room 31) from the inner to the outer portico and so, via 78, to the new changing-room . It was presumably now that the walls enclosing Courtyard B were constructed , since this supplies a reason for the duplication of the changing-room. Room 80 lay within the courtyard and must have been used by the residents in the first class accommodation of the mansio; room 68 lay outside and was presumably available to lower-ranking soldiers and officials accommodated in houses in the town. We saw in Chapter Two that a similar arrangement was adopted at the mansiobuilt at Volubilis in the third century.

A further suite of superior rooms lay at the west end of the south range. Rooms 18 and 19 were combined and heated by a hypocaust. Flues connected this new room with both room 15 and room 21. It may be that both rooms were used as furnace rooms, presumably successively. Rooms 16 and 17 presumably also belonged to the suite, and room 20 led from 18/19 into the enlarged room 22. The suite formed by 16-22 combined two earlier first class suites and again contained a room with hypocaust heating. Boon (1974 , 140) notes that a quantity of food refuse was found adjacent to rooms 32 and 33 and it seems possible that one of them served as a diningroom and the other as a kitchen, probably for the occupants of the remaining suites of rooms (rooms 23-26 and 27-30).

69

Cursus Publicus:the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain The only addition that seems to be later than the main phase of alterations described above is a new bath-suite. Room 81 was a new changing-room built onto the northern end of room 80. From there bathers progressed to rooms 82-85, a smaller but complete set of wet-heat baths. This duplication must mean that either two categories of bathers were being segregated completely or that the earlier baths were now disused. The construction of a corridor (86) with a latrine (87) off it, giving access to room 82, the cold room of the new bath-suite, shows that this was also used by people resident elsewhere in the city. These need not have been the ordinary citizens of Silchester as is sometimes suggested, but are more likely to have been officials and soldiers distributed in various lodgings. The new bath-suite was built at a slight angle to the older baths and the length of wall on the west side of the space (62) at the north-west comer of the courtyard building shares this alignment, suggesting that the two may have been contemporary.

the second century town ran past it on the south-west side (Fig.57a). The building partially excavated on Extramural Site S and tentatively proposed as a praetorium (mansio) or guild-headquarters by Frere (1983a, 282-87) offers no distinctive features in support of the former identification. A privately-run inn seems just as unlikely: although second century traffic on the road from Braughing and Colchester was evidently heavy enough to prompt the construction of a bath-building on this approach to the town (the Branch Road baths), this was disused early in the third century (Wilson 1975, 258-60) when the building on Site S was being constructed. Third are elements in the planning of Building III.2 which can be matched in mansiones elsewhere and suggest that it had this official character. These are considered in detail below. Fourth is the proximity, in the northern comer of the same insula, of a substantial bathbuilding (Frere 1989, 300). This was apparently constructed before the Antonine Fire and may not at first have been specifically intended as mansio baths. However, its refitting after the fire may help to explain the choice of location for Building III.2. The latter has a rather economical provision of accommodation and the siting of the mansio to take advantage of baths which could quickly be made serviceable again might have seemed another attractive economy measure.

We have seen that the location of the mansio at Silchester conforms to that of mansiones in roadside settlements. The mansio at Caerwent was arguably in a similar position in relation to the second century street grid there, and the first class accommodation at Rottweil (Arae Flaviae) was similarly sited. However, St Albans and some continental mansioneswere located along street frontages. It is possible that the choice of a location well behind the main street was prevalent in a particular period. If so, this may be another peculiarity of Hadrian's reign, like the scarcity or absence of rooms heated by hypocausts. This suggestion is in itself insufficient for dating the original Silchester mansio to the Hadrianic period, but it is plausible enough to rank as another hypothesis and to provide another reason, along with the many problems raised above, for re-excavating this complex.

The Wheelers regarded room 31, on the south-east side of the earlier version of Building III.2, as a 'porch' and presumably the main entrance to the building (Fig.57b). This was certainly mistaken for the only external portico (2) lay on the south-west side fronting the street that led from the London gate. This must have formed the approach to the building. There was a right-angled tum at each end of 2, forming two passages (4 and 22) that led through to the internal colonnade (2A, 2B, 2C and 14). Between these passages lay a block of five rooms (1, 3, 6A, 6B and 21). None of these was particularly large but together they must be regarded as the equivalent of the entrance hall and flanking rooms which we have met at so many mansiones. The closest parallel is in the north range of the first class accommodation at Chelmsford where rooms N3-N5 are flanked by the passages N2 and N6 (Fig.31).

St Albans/ Verulamium (Wheeler and Wheeler 1936, 9396). (Fig. I :29). Building III.2 at St Albans was a courtyard house occupying the west comer of insula III. It replaced buildings destroyed in the Antonine Fire c. A.D.155, and was probably constructed in the third quarter of the second century (Niblett 1987, 37-39). In the very late third century or early fourth century it was rebuilt, possibly following a period of dilapidation. The first period of the building is most conveniently dealt with in the present chapter to facilitate comparison with the mansio at Silchester. The reconstructed building of c.A.D.300 will be considered in Chapter Seven. The reasons for identifying building III.2 as a mansio are not perhaps compelling considered singly, but taken together they amount to a strong enough case to support its inclusion here.

In the north-east range rooms 24 and 25 were heated by cruciform channelled hypocausts. The creation of the passage 25A was presumably contemporary with the construction of room 31. Rooms 24, 25 and 31 together formed a single suite of superior first class accommodation, with 25A a lobby within the suite entered from room 26. Another suite may have been formed by rooms 29 and 32, entered from room 28. Room 27, between the two passages 26 and 28 and right on the central axis of the courtyard, is likely to have been a dining-room. In the opposite north-west range were seven rooms all with tessellated flooring. Room 10 was a central passage that may have given access to and from the neighbouring street. Rooms 8-9 and 11-13 were all more or less equal in size and can be regarded either as five units of accommodation of a more basic kind or as two suites of rooms. Presumably in either case this was also first class accommodation and, if so, comparison with the first phase of the Silchester mansio (Fig. 55b) is striking. Either only half

First is the courtyard plan, so far unmatched in other masonry houses constructed after the Antonine Fire at St Albans but found commonly among mansioneselsewhere in this period. Second is the position of the building in the city, conveniently placed above all for those arriving in Verulamium from London. A street from the London Gate of

70

The Third century as many residents were catered for at Verulamium, or the accommodation for all but one of them was markedly less generous than at Silchester. The larger room 7 may have been a dining-room serving the guests in the north-west range. Rooms 5 and 23 could have functioned as kitchens: it is difficult to see what other rooms could have done so and a kitchen containing a hypocaust stoke-hole is known elsewhere , e.g. in the villa at Folkestone (Winbolt 1925, 5859).

Danube in 167/68. Corbridge (Forster 1908) (Fig. I :45).

Phase 6 of the mansio at Corbridge saw rooms P, Q, and R extended to the south to the same line as the southern wall of L (Fig.58). Although the Phase 4 drains which had flushed the latrine in Thad apparently been put out of action by the construction of rooms P, Q, and R in Phase 5, at least one new drain was constructed then bringing water from gutters which converged at the angle between T and room Q. When the south wall of Q and R was extended south in Phase 6 this drain could have continued in use.

In the north-east range there may have been two suites. Rooms 16-17, and 20 seem to belong together, and room 14A may have been an internal porch or lobby giving access to these from the street. This suite may have accommodated the supervisor of the mansio, whether he was a local decurion or a contractor (manceps) who had undertaken to run the establishment. Alternatively, they may have been servicerooms and / or accommodation for staff. Rooms 34 and 36 form a second suite linked by the passage 35, along with the apsidal room 33 which was presumably a dining-room similar to those we have encountered at Augst, Carnuntum and Silchester. According to the Wheelers (1936, 95) room 33 probably contained a hypocaust in this period. If this is the correct interpretation for rooms 33-36 it clearly formed a special suite of accommodation and its function will be discussed further at the end of this chapter.

At both the west and east ends the building was extended southwards to create two new wings. The west range of the new building contained hypocausts in rooms G and J. These evidently formed a suite of superior accommodation entered via the ante-room I and fronted by a passage (0). Room J was warmed by heated air passing along a flue from room G, and the logical position for the stoke-hole which fed G would have been in room H. It is likely that the furnace outside the west wall of F continued to function in this period . It was put out of action eventually and the stokehole blocked by the construction of a new latrine (W), but this did not happen before Phase 7. Rooms E and F, then, continued as a second suite of superior accommodation. Rooms C and P (now with its hypocaust disused), and rooms B and Q, may have formed another two suites of first class accommodation .

We saw in Chapter Five that new accommodation was constructed at mansiones at Cave's Inn, Whitchurch, and probably at Wall , in the period after c. 160/70. There it was suggested that this may have been connected with the full reoccupation of Chester as a legionary base from c. 180. St Albans was also situated on Watling Street and a date as late as 180 would be possible for the first phase of the courtyard house III.2. However, it is thought more likely that this was constructed not very long after the Antonine Fire c. 155 (Niblett 1987, 39). It has been pointed out above that if the accommodation in the north-west range of Building III.2 was in single-room units, this compares very unfavourably with the accommodation at Silchester. However, it is very similar to the first class accommodation at Cave's Inn where Building 2 contained five single-room units, each c. 4 by 3.5 metres and so slightly smaller than rooms 7-8 and 11-13 at St Albans, separated by a passage from a larger room (6) which probably served as a dining-room (Fig.50b). The south-west range and part of the north-west range of the courtyard building at Wall may have comprised even smaller rooms serving as first class accommodation (Fig.51). Since the rather economical provision of first class accommodation at St Albans can be matched at Cave's Inn and Wall it is not possible to invoke lack of resources following the Antonine Fire to explain this. In any case, if from the Hadrianic period mansiones could be built using funds raised as a tax to maintain the cursus publicus by the provincial fiscus as was argued in Chapter Four, the provision of facilities at St Albans should not have depended solely on local resources. It seems more likely that in the reigns of Marcus Aurelius and Commodus a greater restraint was being imposed on the expenditure of the fiscus in the construction of new mansiones. This may be connected with the financial difficulties that followed the start of the hostilities on the

The area of the eastern part of room R lay on the hedgeline dividing the eastern and western areas excavated in 1906 and 1907, and comparison of the plans made in these years shows discrepancies here which make it difficult to be sure to what phase rooms S and K belong. The later plan (of 1907) indicates that S (and therefore K) pre-dated the Phase 5 south wall of R. The two rooms should therefore have existed as part of the Phase 4 building. The 1906 plan does not show this relationship to the Phase 5 wall but suggests instead that S and K were additions in Phase 6. This, at any rate, is the interpretation preferred here. Although the 1906 plan must incorporate inaccurate measurements of the width of rooms L and R, the 1907 plan appears to have been a 'rationalization' of the earlier plan, and this may have introduced new inaccuracies. Room K was heated by a jacketing of flue tiles along its north wall ('z' on Fig.58). This was supplied with heated air by a long flue from a hypocaust to the east of room M . It seems that the south wall of this followed the same line as a Phase 3 wall, but the eastern end-wall of the Phase 3 building was overlain by pilae. A fragment of wall further east (at 'y' on Fig.58) may represent the eastern wall of the hypocaust. The stoke-hole ('x' on Fig.58) seems to have been in the southern half of room M which was partitioned off. The south side of this was formed by what was probably a support for a cistern, and if this is correct it suggests that a small bath-suite was attached to the east end of the building . Presumably this was for the exclusive use of the residents in the first class accommodation. There is a parallel for such an

71

Cursus Publicus : the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

arrangement at Eining in Raetia where a block of first class accommodation also had a bath-suite added onto its east end (Fischer and Spindler 1984, 48 Abb.19).

Godmanchester(Green 1975) (Fig. I :51). By the early third century a series of fences enclosed the mansio buildings and included a small temple dedicated to the god Abandinus sited beyond the south-west wing of the residential building. By this time the dyke which received the discharge from the cold bath of the mansio bath-suite had silted up. This may carry the implication that the baths no longer functioned as before and give a context for the remodelling of the stoke-hole area (Green 1959, 223 and 225 Figs. 1-3). The creation of a new entrance lobby, cold room and cold bath (rooms 1-3) in the area of the original furnace-room (H) must mean - if these identifications are correct - that a new praefurnium was created to heat the hypocaust(s) which functioned with these, either in rooms G/5 and 4 or in 4 alone. This existed in the latest (fourth century) phases of the baths when room 4 was heated by a furnace on its south side within the earlier room G/5. It is tempting to see the earliest sub-division of H as contemporary with this, although the excavator regarded it as a change of plan during the construction of the building. It is to be hoped that the phasing and its chronology will be clarified in the final report.

The size of K, and its relatively elaborate painted wall plaster (Forster 1908, 223), as well as the relatively economical and quickly-functioning heating, suggest that this was the dining-room of the establishment in Phase 6. It must have been approached from the north gallery through N and L and this means that both the previous service-rooms (L and M) had changed their function. Room S probably replaced them and served as the new kitchen. The removal of all the floors and other features within room A, which it was suggested was the earlier dining-room, makes it impossible to assign a function to it in this period.

Cave's Inn (Lucas 1984) (Fig.1:39). Building 2 of the mansio accommodation was modified at an uncertain date to become what is referred to in the interim report as Building 3 (Fig.59). Rooms 7-9 were extended to the north-east to incorporate the area of the former corridor. Room 9 was also extended to the south-east and the remaining portion of 10 (about half the original area of the room) became the stoke-hole for the channelled hypocaust that was provided in the enlarged room 9. This form of hypocaust is unlikely to date before the third century A.D .. In addition tile platforms, identified as stands for braziers, were provided in rooms 6 and 8. A new range was added at right angles to the north-west end of the original building and comprised five rooms (1-5), of which room 5 was heated by a pillared hypocaust. A new corridor fronted and linked both ranges and turned to the north-east opposite room 12 to form the third side of a courtyard. It disappeared under a modern barn and yard in this direction.

In the early third century the approach to the entrance hall (room 3) of the mansio was blocked by a fence which crossed the roadway immediately in front of it (Fig.32b). It may be that the construction of rooms 5 and 6 within the northern part of the second large hall belongs to the same period. The independent south-west wall of room 5 shows that it and room 6 were independently roofed and 7 presumably became an open area. A new corridor (11) was built to link 5 and 6 via room 21 to the portico (12) around the courtyard. Presumably the suite formed by rooms 20-22 was now broken up into two separate units (room 20 and room 22). At about the same period in the early third century a masonry building was constructed beside Ermine Street on the edge of the mansio complex. Christened 'The Basilica' by its excavator it had a small enclosed courtyard adjoining the road and an elaborate architectural facade with three entrances, the central one flanked by recesses formed by projecting bases which presumably carried columns (Green 1975, 202-3 Fig.13). Within was a single aisle backed by a hall. This structure can be regarded as a detached monumental entrance hall to the mansio complex, replacing the original hall (room 3) incorporated in the residential courtyard building. Its monumental features have a partial parallel in room 3. However, its location shows that it was intended to fulfill other purposes as well and it can be compared to the entrance hall added to the mansio at Catterick which continued in use after the rest of the building had been demolished. These other purposes had perhaps earlier been fulfilled by the second large hall (room 5/6/7) in the courtyard building. It was suggested in Chapter Five that this had been used for the administration of the vicus by a supervisor, perhaps a decurion appointed by the magistrates of the civitas Catuvellaunorum.

Withinthe rooms that were formerly part of Building 2 new opus signinum floors were laid. In the new north-west range a section drawing (B-B: Lucas 1984, 29) shows that rooms 2-4 at least had floors of the same material, and that the floor of room 3 was renewed . Building 3 with its hypocausts was evidently intended as first class accommodation . The layout of rooms is at first difficult to comprehend in detail but it seems to be focused on room 4. This room gave access to room 7 which separated two suites of living-accommodation (rooms 5 and 6, and rooms 8 and 9), in each of which one of the rooms had a hypocaust and the other a brazier stand. On the north-east side of room 4 was the largest room (3), separated from 5 by a narrow passage-like space and from rooms 1 and 2 on the opposite side by a similar narrow corridor. Room 3 was most probably the dining-room, both because of its size and because the flanking, isolating, passages are a feature found with what seem to be dining-rooms at villas (Black 1987, 50). We have come across another case in rooms 26-28 in Building III.2 at St Albans. The rooms at the ends of the building (1 and 2, and 10-12) were probably service-rooms and/or accommodation for staff. Room 4 can be recognised as the equivalent of the entrance hall, sited at the angle of the two ranges of rooms.

Although the mansio complex and perhaps much of the settlement were enclosed by a ditch in the early second century there were no certain defences until the construction

72

The Third century of a town wall, backed by a clay rampart, was begun after A.D. 270- 73 (the date of a coin in the rampart material) . It seems that the wall was left unfinished but work was later restarted. In the meantime the courtyard building, the baths and the single-aisled building belonging to the mansio had all been burned at about the close of the third century. A scatter of human bones was associated with this event and the excavator concluded that there may have been a massacre. The later walling, built in the early fourth century, was at a narrower gauge and lacked a rampart. It re-used materials from the destroyed mansio buildings and was demolished in the second quarter of the fourth century soon after its construction (Rankov 1982, 363).

the northern part of the building from suites of first class accommodation in the southern part. Here rooms N , 0 , P , and U can be regarded as one suite, and presumably C, D, S, and T formed a second. Room R was presumably the diningroom serving the occupants of these two suites. Q, as noted earlier, may have given access to the terrace to the south, and also served to isolate the eastern suite of rooms. Among the tiles from the site was a quantity of fragments of box tiles and 'half-box tiles' . The excavators argued that it was not the builders' intention to install a hypocaust in any of the rooms of the courtyard building and they suggested that these tiles had been brought there to be broken and re-used as building-material. It was also suggested that a detached bath-building may have lain to the east and that the tiles may have derived from this (Evans et al. 1985, 79-80 and 9394). The half-box tiles are a first century type so that their origin is a matter of some interest. However, it would be very surprising, in the light of the other mansiones of second and third century date examined so far, if a mansio with first class accommodation was being constructed in the mid/late third century without any provision of hypocausts . In fact it is possible that it was intended to have a hypocaust in room 0 . Here the builders' levels were covered by a layer of clay on top of which were cobbles set in mortary clay. This may have been the foundation for a floor level. A single course formed of four tiles in two adjoining pairs, each spanning the width of the east wall , is described as the south jamb of a doorway. Room O was situated at the lowest point of a sloping site and the excavators suggested that it had been a cellar and there had been a room above it entered at the level of the courtyard . The tile jamb was seen as part of the doorway into the cellar. A similar interpretation was proposed for the detached room V. Although it was suggested that tiles had been robbed from other door-jambs none was found in situ except in the east wall of 0, and there were jambs formed of stones elsewhere in the building. It is possible that the tiles in the east wall of O were not a door-jamb at all but the stokehole of a hypocaust and that the conjectural cellar was where pilae would have been placed to support the floor of the room above. Firing could have been carried out from the space between O and V to the east.

Cold Knap, Barry (Evans et al. 1985) (Fig.1:44). A courtyard building was excavated at Cold Knap on the coast of South Glamorgan in Wales in 1980-81 and has been identified as a mansio (Fig.60). It was dated to the mid/late third century and it was suggested that it was sited to receive traffic crossing the Bristol Channel from the estuary of the River Parrett on the English side which was connected to Ilchester by road. The identification as a mansio is provisionally accepted here. Although it has to be admitted that there is nothing in the plan of the building to compel this, the only alternative would seem to be that it was being constructed as a private estate-residence, a villa. This itself would cause problems for the plan is distinctly unusual for a villa. The excavation revealed that the building had not been completed or occupied and that it had finally been robbed in the mid/late fourth century. The four ranges of rooms were set round a courtyard with an internal portico or colonnade. The southern range (rooms OT) was constructed first and room O projected slightly beyond the east side of the adjoining east range. A further structure, apparently a single room (V), lay to the east of room O separated from it by a gap of c. 3.3 metres closed by a wall on the south. In the course of construction the east wall of room P had been moved c. 1.2 metres to the east, and the east wall of room N was also moved to the east. The excavators' argument that the latter alteration shows that room O was to be entered from N seems valid. To south of the southern range, towards the sea, was a terrace.

The chronological spread of the pottery from the site suggested occupation from the mid second to the late fourth century so that a mansio may have existed here and functioned throughout or within this period even though the excavated building was never put to use.

The excavators noted that room G in the north range and room Q in the south range had probably been used to give access to the building during the construction phase, and that they may have been intended as entrances in the finished building. The central position of G in the north range, both in relation to the exterior facade and the internal courtyard, makes this an attractive suggestion. If this was the case the resemblance of rooms E-G and I-J in the north range to a range of standard class accommodation must be dismissed. Indeed there was a door between room E and room A showing that E was not a separate unit. A more apt comparison would be the groups of five rooms which formed the front ranges of the earlier mansiones at St Albans and Silchester (Figs. 54b and 57b). It is possible that the corridors in the east and west ranges (rooms H and M) served to separate service rooms and staff accommodation in

Chelmsford (Drury 1988) (Fig.1:41) . On Site S the defences that had been constructed around the mansiocomplex and much of the accompanying settlement c. 160/75 ceased to be maintained, probably c. 200-210/20. The property boundary that had existed before their construction was re-instated. To the south of it a striphouse, Building E, was eventually destroyed by fire, perhaps at the very end of the third or at the beginning of the fourth century. Burnt daub from the top of the final filling of the ritual shaft

73

Curs us Publicus: the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

on Site AR indicated that a building nearby was destroyed by fire c. 200/10 at the start of Period VII. I. The line of the water-pipe feeding the cistern here was re-routed and the cistern itself seems to have been retained. The alterations to what may have been the standard class accommodation of the mansio have been described in Chapter Four. It seems to have been the intention to create extra rooms at the southeast end of the building, but although the foundation trench of the south-west wall of the final room was dug there was no return to the north-east and it must be assumed that the work was never finished.

a range of single room units (implied by the blocking of the doorway between rooms 39 and 40). Building 4 was retained and a new room (room 41) may have been added on the north side of room 32 at this time. Part at least of Building I was also retained. At the start of Stage VII Building I was demolished and rooms 42 and 45 were built onto Building 4, replacing room 34, with a timber structure (43) to the east (Fig.6lb). This may have been a shed, but it is close in size to rooms 42 and 45 and it is possible that it was an additional room. Rooms 42 and 45 were again single room units, each with its own doorway, and can be seen as supplementing the accommodation in Building 6. New flooring in rooms 39 and 40 was similar to that in rooms 42 and 45. A wattle partition may now have existed in room 39. In Building 4 room 28 may have been sub-divided like room 39. Fl64 in room 31a may also mark the line of a wall and the creation of a passage separating room 30 from a new room of equal size to the east. Floors were generally of clay/loam with a surface of pebbles and tile fragments. In Building 7 new piers were constructed to support the hot bath in room 4 7. Eventually the flue was blocked and the use of the building for bathing must have ceased.

On Sites AK/Z at the northern end of the courtyard building post-Roman activity generally removed deposits later than Period Vl.3. There was some evidence for a fire, now dated to the later third century, in room E2 in the east range. Subsequently a shallow foundation trench was dug on the same line as the two post-holes defining the south side of the passage at the north end of E2. It is assumed in the report that a new wall was built and new floors laid and that the building continued in occupation. Evidence for a re-roofing following the fire was recovered in the more recent excavations (Allen, in prep.). Excavations at the southern end of the east range in 1985 established that the digging of robber trenches was the latest Roman activity here (Milton 1987, 64). The robber trenches of the walls on Sites AK/Z are said to have 'contained only Roman pottery' (Drury 1988, 34), but this is not assigned a more exact date.

Stages VI and VII both have a terminus post quernin the late second/ early third century. Despite the reduction in the size of the baths that took place in Stage VI and the poor quality floors in Stages VI-VII, the provision of single rooms as units seems compatible with the continued functioning of the complex as a mansio offering standard class accommodation. Building 4 and Building 7 together resemble the twin suites of accommodation with associated baths that were noted at Eining, Rainau-Buch and Caernarvon (Fig.25). Unlike the two examples in Germany there were no domestic hypocausts in Building 4, although there had been at least one in the earlier Building 5. The simple explanation may be the true one: that fewer soldiers and officials were travelling through Pentre Farm and that the passage of senior personnel was particularly infrequent.

The baths certainly continued in use throughout the fourth century, and fence-lines and other features on Site Zand the replacement of pipes in the water pipe-line on Site AR attest activity during this century, but it is uncertain how long the occupation of the residential buildings of the mansio carried on.

Pentre Farm, Flint (O'Leary et al. 1989) (Fig.1:62). The single known room of the Stage V Building 5 which probably formed part of the first class accommodation of the mansio in that phase was demolished at the start of Stage VI. In the absence of excavation further south it is not known whether the rest of the range to which it belonged was also demolished. Above it a new bath-building (Building 7) was constructed (Fig. 61a). Room 51 was the praefurnium, though this was not recognised in the report. The tile flooring of the flue survived though the walls on each side had been robbed. The opening between 47 and 51 which the excavators regarded as a threshold, 'heavily scored by repeated opening of the door that once stood in this position' (O'Leary et al. 1989, 30), was the inner end of the flue and the scoring was the result of raking out burnt material. The drain which led from 51 into the main drain (F95) taking waste water from the cold bath (Fl30) is a feature commonly found in baths. It served to collect condensation from the sub-floors of the hypocausts. Room 47 will have held a hot bath; 48 was the caldarium; 50 was the cold room.

In Stage VIII Building 7 was no longer used as a bath-house. A new room (52) replaced earlier verandahs on its east side and extended along the west side of room 42, utilising its west wall. Post-pits cut through surfaces inside rooms 42 and 45 similar to a new yard laid outside to the south (46). However, one post-pit (Fl97) cut Stage VII surfaces only so that the two rooms must have been demolished at the end of Stage VII before the Stage VIII surfaces were laid. The former cold room (50) and furnace room (51) may have been combined in a single large room when the flue into room 4 7 was blocked. Room 52 was later sub-divided. The rest of Building 4 and Building 6 are assumed to have continued in use until the final abandonment and demolition of the complex in the mid third century. It is not possible to be certain whether it was still functioning as a mansio in Stage VIII.

Box tiles used in the drain from room 51 and tiles stamped by the Twentieth legion may have been re-used from the Stage V baths (Building 6). The latter was now converted to

Some of the third century developments considered in this chapter are in line with what might be expected from developments in earlier periods. After the appearance of

74

The Third century hypocaustain the first class accommodation of mansiones in the late first and early second century, and their apparent absence from Hadrianic mansiones, we saw in Chapter Five that rooms heated by hypocausts are found again in later second century buildings. There we saw that the mansiones at Chesterholm and Corbridge both eventually had two suites of accommodation with a pair of hypocausts in each. We have seen earlier in this chapter that at St Albans two rooms with hypocausts are found in a single suite probably in the third quarter of the second century. The third century saw the provision of hypocausts in two suites of first class accommodation at Cave's Inn, but the most spectacular multiplication of hypocausts to heat domestic accommodation is found at Dover. There in Period VI we know of three suites of superior first class accommodation, all with rooms heated by hypocausts. The most completely recorded suite in Building C9 (rooms 1-4) comprised three living rooms, all three with underfloor heating, and a bedroom. This provision is extraordinary and requires a special explanation. The excavator remarked that Building C9 must have been 'provided for some very special domestic, or social, purpose. On its own merits it seems likely that it was built either for a leading official attached to the major naval base, or more likely, as a transit residence for important officials passing to and from the Continent' (Philp 1989, 281). In view of the archaeological dating of Period VI to c.A.D.200 it seems reasonable to connect the 'Painted House' at Dover with the expeditio Britannica of Septimius Severus and his sons in A.D.208-11, and to suggest that the special accommodation was built initially for the imperial family. The dedication by a strator consularis to the Matres ltalicae found re-used near the Painted House may even belong to the same context (Hassall and Tomlin 1977, 42627 No.4). In 208 Dover was still the main British base of the classis Britannica and was only evacuated in a redeployment during the Severan campaigns (Philp 1981, 94 and 99). At Silchester there were ultimately three suites containing rooms with hypocausts. As at Dover what had been the entrance range of the mansio was taken over to provide the space for the bulk of the new superior accommodation. However, since there was only one heated room in each suite and it is not certain that they all belong to the same period of construction, it is safer to regard them as part of the trend towards increasing the number of hypocausts rather than

75

connected to the special circumstances of an imperial visit. A room which seems to be confined to urban mansiones is the apsidal room found at St Albans and Silchester and at a number of continental sites. This seems to have been associated with domestic accommodation and it was suggested above that it was in fact a grand dining-room. Such a dining-room in the upper-class Roman world was one of the settings where status was publicly displayed to a selected audience (compare Wallace-Hadrill 1988, 84-94). The appearance of apsidal dining-rooms in mansiones signals the need of some superior officials for an additional setting to display their importance, a setting more intimate than the communal entrance hall of a mansio. Moreover, the nature of such display suggests that it would more naturally have been repeated, during a prolonged residence, rather than have occurred once as an official made a fleeting visit or passed through a city. It has been suggested to the writer that the provision of these dining-rooms fits with indications of increasing control in the government of cities by representatives of the emperor. Such curatores - financial managers - are found as early as the Flavian period and increase in numbers through the second century (Levick 1985, 149-50 and 197-99). The known dating of apsidal dining-rooms is therefore contemporary with the widespread employment of these officials. It may be relevant that the earliest example, at St Albans, was built soon after the Antonine Fire had destroyed much of the city, evidently a period when careful financial control was requisite. Another structure of Severan date, the Basilica at Godmanchester, may have been associated with the running of the mansio and with aspects of local government. Through the third century most existing mansiones seem to have continued to function as before. Exceptions are at Cave's Inn where two suites of superior first class accommodation replaced the five single-room units available in the second century, and at Pentre Farm where the whole establishment seems to have gone out of use by the mid third century. These are possible signs of a decrease in official traffic. From the later part of the century there are a number of cases of failure to finish building that had been begun, and even of destruction and abandonment. Wall, Godmanchester, Cold Knap (if it was a mansio), Chelmsford and St Albans all fall within this category. The reasons for this will be discussed more fully in Chapter Seven.

CHAPTER SEVEN THE FOURTH CENTURY. In the fourth century there is a tremendous increase in information about the cursus publicus. This is largely contained in a section of the Theodosian Code headed 'The Public Post, Transport Provision, and Supplementary Transport Provision' (De Cursu Publico, Angariis, et Parangariis: T.C. 8.5). This is a collection of rescripts and instructions, mostly sent by emperors in the second half of the fourth century, to their praetorian prefects and to the governors of various provinces and other high officials. None is concerned specifically with Britain but most are set out in such a way that it is clear that they had a general application beyond the jurisdiction of the particular recipient. Most are concerned with abuses of the system and they do not provide a co-ordinated account of how it was run day by day . Nevertheless, there are innumerable valuable details which will be examined at the start of this chapter. We will then go on to look at the archaeological evidence from various sites in Britain.

number of those enabled to travel in this way was clearly to be severely limited. Maximum Loads. We saw in Chapter Two that a carrum in the first century was assigned three mules and that its load was probably the same as the 600 librae permitted in the fourth century (T.C. 8.5.47). There are repeated injunctions in the Theodosian Code (8.5.8; 17; 18; 28; 30; 47 and 48) against the overloading of vehicles and animals , and from these it is possible to gain a good idea of the range of vehicles and their permitted loads. The raeda is cited most frequently and is assigned a maximum load of 1,000 librae. T.C. 8.5.8 lays down that it should be drawn by eight mules in summer and by ten in winter. The same regulation assigns three mules and a load of 200 librae to a birotum (twowheeler). Although we saw in Chapter Two that the carrum of the Burdur inscription had three mules and in Diocletian 's Prices Edict the carrum could have either two or four wheels, the differences in the permitted loads for birotum and carrum show that these were two different vehicles. T.C. 6.29.2 treats raeda and birotum together with horses as alternative ways of carrying personnel rather than goods. A maximum of two raedae per unit could be employed to transport sick soldiers (T.C. 8.5.11), and in this rescript two yoke of oxen (i.e. four animals) are the maximum permitted for each vehicle. Presumably these were the equivalent of the eight mules allowed by Julian and their use explains the term quadriga customarily applied to the raeda in 359 (T.C. 6.29.5). (Another name for it, flagella ('whip'), recorded in the same document presumably refers to standard practice in the treatment of the animals.) One user of raedae was the Office of the Sacred Largesses which was responsible for the collection and movement of money taxes and levies in gold and silver, the mints and the payments of donatives to troops, and additionally for the collection of clothing and its distribution to soldiers and other government employees (Jones A.H.M. 1964, 427-37; T.C. 8.5.13; 16; 18; 33; 48). The Praetorian Prefects were responsible for the rations of various kinds which for most of the fourth century formed the largest part of the payments made to soldiers and officials, and the transport of these must certainly have been both larger in bulk and more frequent. Transport of such goods between provinces utilised the cursus clabularius. In writing to his Praetorian Prefect Mamertinus about the cursus publicus in Sardinia (T.C. 8.5.16) the emperor Julian stressed the importance of the waggons which the provincials supplied for the angariarum cursus to transport public supplies to the coast, presumably for shipment out of the province. However, it seems that the transport of commodities to consumers in the same province, or at least to the closest conveniently-situated distribution point, was usually the task of the tax-payers themselves or of the city authorities (Jones A.H.M. 1964, 448-59; see also below). In addition to its heavier load a raeda might also carry two or three guards as well as the driver (T.C. 8.5.18).

The Regulations of the Theodosian Code. The Two Divisions of the Transport Service. In the discussion of the Burdur inscription in Chapter Two it was noted that the procurator and his son were permitted ten carra, an allocation equal to that of a senator. While a senator no doubt required these to transport the paraphernalia that defined him and his status for those he met, the procurator is more likely to have needed ten carra for the transport of supplies on behalf of the government. In the fourth century the two branches of the transport service were clearly distinguished. T.C. 8.5.62 refers to them as the velox et clavularius cursus. Ammianus (20.4.11) uses clabularis cursus for the heavy-transport service and vehicula or res vehicularia in contexts where faster movement of persons was involved (14.11.5 and 16; 21.16.18). The status of travellers continued to be important. A vicarius and his staff were allowed thirty asses and ten post-horses, while the limit for a comes was four post-horses and one supplementary post-horse, for tribunes it was three, and for others (domestici, protectores and agentes in rebus) it was two (T.C. 8.5.38 and 49). Warrants. The nomenclature for warrants entitling travellers to use official facilities had also changed. In place of the earlier diploma in T.C. 8.5.9 the warrant for a raeda is called a tractoria and this seems to be contrasted with the evectio which secured the use of a birotum (a two-wheeler) . A rescript of Julian (T.C. 8.5.12) gives very specific instructions concerning the number of warrants that could be issued to make use of facilities of the cursus publicus. He declares that he himself will supply ten or twelve evectiones to each vicar and he instructs his praetorian prefect Mamertinus to issue two each year to each governor (praeses) so that they can send their subordinates 'to separate and remote parts of the provinces' . The emperor will also send one warrant to governors which they can use to communicate directly with him. Presumably each warrant could be used repeatedly for the term of its duration but the

In a regulation of A.D. 364 (T.C. 8.5.17) Valentinian and Valens applied an upper limit of 1,000 librae to the loads of

76

The Fourth century vehicu/a, and went on to ban the use and even the construction of larger waggons. This was presumably prompted by fear that heavier loads would cause damage to the road surfaces (compare T.C. 15.3). In two laws given four years later (T.C. 8.5.28 and 30), while the emperors maintain the 1,000 librae limit for raedae, angariae are allowed a limit of 1,500 /ibrae. T.C. 8.5.48 specifies that linen and cloaks should no longer be dispatched on raedae but on angariae or by boat, although the delicate garments and linen for cloaks required by the imperial household were still to be sent by raedae with a weight limit of 1,000 librae. In A.D.374 the proconsul of Africa was instructed to ensure that clothing for military use was transported directly to the posts where the troops were stationed (T.C. 8.5.33).

replacements which had to be paid for by taxes. Remota provin cia/ibus cura in this case may be a claim with some foundation. Other worries remained, as various rescripts in the Theodosian Code show. According to T.C. 8.5.21 the supervisors of the fami/ia, the staff of the cursus publicus, were demanding money from those who supplied the waggons, for wear on wheels and for other ministeria. What this amounted to was an attempt to get the provincials to pay for repairs to the waggons they had contributed to the cursus publicus. In A.D.365 Valentinian and Valens ordered the adoption throughout Italy of a reform by the governor of the Suburbicarian Districts (T.C. 11.1.9). The governor had ordered the tabularii of the various towns to supply fodder to their mansiones and mutationes at a regular and predictable rate. This was to remove the previous uncertainty about the supply and also to prevent the trickery (fraudes) of the tabularii . It seems that these municipal bureaucrats must have been profiting in some way by holding up or limiting the supply of fodder. It is clear from this and other texts in the Theodosian Code that mansiones and mutationes at this period were grouped under the control of such officials in the city in the territory of which they were situated. In T.C. 8.5.60 the complaint is that the mancipes and apparitores have not been supplying fodder adequately to the animals. It is alleged that they have costed this at an unfair price that is being passed on to the provincials. The system seems to have been that the supervisors of the staging-posts and the city officials produced an estimate of how much it was going to cost to purchase fodder locally and submitted it to the officials of the Jiscus . They then set the taxes at a level to cover the cost. The money raised for this must have come into the hands of the mancipes and apparitores to be spent and, since they had employed a ridiculously high price in their calculations, they were able to pocket the extra money. Any shortfall in the money raised to meet the inflated price only meant that less fodder was actually purchased. An abuse of the same kind occurs in T.C. 8.5.64 where the emperors complain that the provincials are providing both fodder and money for the account of the post-horses, and are also burdened by having to provide supplementary posthorses. Here the fault seems to lie with imperial officials rather than those in the cities. In A.D. 412 the supervisors of mansiones were permitted to purchase animals for the use of the cursus publicus (T.C. 6.29.9). It is not stated who had done this previously , but it implies that money raised in taxes was now at the disposal of the supervisors for this purpose.

All this is indicative of persistent, if not necessarily effective, concern with rules and regulations governing the transport of goods by the heavy-transport service. Riders using horses (veredi) belonging to the cursus publicus were repeatedly limited to a load of 30 librae. An exception was made in the case of palatini acting as escorts in the movement of gold and silver who were allowed a limit of 50 librae (T.C. 8.5.48). In a nearly contemporary ruling (T.C. 8.5.47) the weight of the saddle and bridle was laid down as 60 librae, and the saddle-bag was allowed to weigh 35 librae. Animals and Familia. The animals of the cursus publicus were of prime importance and continued to constitute a major expense. In the context of the journey of Constantius' remains to be interred at Constantinople Ammianus (21.16.21) describes how the animalia publica were shown to the dead man 'as they usually are to the [living] emperors'. A special tax operated to maintain the number of animals (T.C. 8.5.42) and an annual replacement rate for veredi of 25% was considered the maximum figure by the emperors in 377 when they forbad the practice of making this into an automatic demand whatever the real need actually was (T.C. 8.5.34). They went on to prescribe that there should be one mule-driver for every three post-horses. It is clear, therefore, that there was a set number of animals permanently available at posting-stations, specially purchased for the cursus pub/icus. It is not so clear what this number actually was. In T.C. 8.5.40 in an attempt to impose 'moderation' in travel it was ordered that only six posthorses and a single carriage should be dispatched on any one day. The inhabitants of the roadside settlements where posting-stations were situated were no doubt often obliged to provide additional animals. In T.C. 8.5.34 the emperor Gratian rejected a proposal to pay for stables in Africa at state expense: the provincials had to meet the bill. This presumably means that each city was expected to pay for the buildings of the cursus publicus in its own territory. Clearly, if this was the case, the central funding of buildings, as was argued applied to Britain in the Hadrianic period, was not operating in proconsular Africa. Yet CIL V.2.8987 from Concordia commemorates Julian for shortening the stages between mutationes through the agency of his praetorian prefect Mamertinus and the corrector of Venetia and Histria. In doing this the emperor was presumably reducing the wear on animals and, in theory at least, the demand for

The staff of the cursus pub/icus is described in T.C. 8.5.21 as a familia, a word which denotes a closely-knit group, probably servile. This included mule-drivers, waggondrivers, and veterinaries who are all listed as being in receipt of subsistence allowances and clothing with which they should be content (T.C. 8.5.31). Mule-drivers are referred to as public slaves in T.C. 8.5.58, and had evidently been in the custom of hiring out animals of the public post for the journeys of private individuals until Constantius II and Julian ordered it to stop (T.C. 8.5.10).

77

Curs us Public us : the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain Supervision. Throughout section 8.5 of the Theodosian Code two inter-related themes recur. One is the difficulty of finding suitable administrators to be in charge of mansiones and mutationes. It was laid down that the supervisors must actually be present and resident on the spot to exercise their authority (T.C. 8.5.23 and 36). They did not have to serve beyond five years (a tustrum, the traditional duration for public contracts) and were only allowed a prescribed number of days (exact number uncertain) away from their post each month. There were penalties for slackness (T.C. 8.5.23), and unauthorised absence was a capital offence (T.C. 8.5.36). In A.D. 365 it was determined that they should be those with the rank of count, or governor, or accountant, 'who thus remove themselves from the performance of service in all municipal and state offices' (T.C. 8.5.23). However, if these were not available decurions were to be chosen instead (T.C. 8.5.26). By A.D. 377 in Africa supervisors drawn from the municipal senates and municipal magistrates were excluded and ex-members of the proconsular or other equivalent office-staffs were preferred (T.C. 8.5.34). The next year it was recognised that supervisors might be men in imperial service, or decurions, or hired managers (aut militans ... aut decurio vet manceps) (T.C. 8.5.35). In 385 ex-members of the various office-staffs who sought to escape service by obtaining further honorary rank were to be made to serve (T.C. 8.5.46); those who had escaped into the church were to retain their exemption but were to lose their property. In 404 suitable supervisors to check abuses were still lacking (T.C. 8.5.65). It seems that the opportunities for lining one's pocket as a supervisor of the cursus publicus just did not compensate for the service of five years that was required. The trouble was that there were far too many people trying to pass off illegal warrants, appropriating animals in excess of their entitlement, overloading vehicles and using them for transporting private goods, and many of the offenders were of high rank. A rescript sent by Constantine in 315 illustrates the difficulty of dealing with highly-placed delinquents (T.C. 8.5.1):

against misappropriating animals (T.C. 8.5.3). Exptoratores had been sent out to investigate. What prompted the emperors' concern was the inadequate transport available for their own journeys because of the demands made by these other prominent officials. By 357 Constantius and Julian had found that officials of the praetorian prefect and vicarii were competing with the agentes in rebus for the role of overseeing the regulations of the cursus pubticu s (T.C. 6.29.2). It had become a licence to carry out extortion and they ordered it to stop. Only two agentes in rebus were to supervise the public post in each province. The abuses they were supposed to check were familiar : the attitude of the perpetrators was neatly summed up as contumacia vet dignitas (a disrespect for authority and a sense of being above the law). The agentes in rebus quickly made the most of their position to exact a charge from travellers before releasing a carriage for their use. Constantius complained of their avarice and limited what they could exact to one gold solidus per carriage (T.C. 6.29.5). In 368 Valentinian and his colleagues instructed that

'watchful and diligent' members of the imperial bodyguard should be sent to enforce regulations on the maximum loads for waggons (T.C. 8.5.30). No doubt their predecessors had expressed the same aspiration in dispatching their chosen supervisors. In charge of moving the supplies to the troops in the fourth century were the primipitares who were the retired chiefs of each provincial governor's officium (Jones A.H.M. 1964, 459). Their job must have resembled that of the praefecti vehicutorum attested in the third century. An edict of 358 in Constantius' reign (T.C. 8.4.6) reveals how the duces receiving these supplies expected ever larger rake-offs (munera vet sportulam) for themselves. Either an increasing proportion of the supplies had to be turned into cash to meet their demands or the primipilares had to dig into their own pockets. The imperial rescript did not seek to abolish the practice but merely to peg the level of the rake-offs at what had been current in the previous reign.

Mansioneswithin Forts. The later third century saw drastic changes at many British mansiones. At both Dover and Richborough this was because the building of new forts required the clearance of sites occupied by mansiones. It is not known whether new, purpose-built, premises were provided to replace these. If this was done they have not been located, or have not been recognised. It is worth comparing the fort at Piercebridge in Durham which was constructed a few years earlier (c. A.D.270). The south-east quadrant of this was occupied by a bath-house forming the south range of a large courtyard building at least 46 by 72 metres. The eastern range of this has been almost completely excavated and contained pairs of rooms originally interpreted as the contubernia of a barrackblock. A channelled hypocaust heated the more easterly rooms in two adjacent pairs in this range (Goodburn 1979, 285-86 Fig. 6). While the position of the courtyard building does not automatically rule out its interpretation as the commanding officer's residence, it must give rise to some doubt. The planning of the rooms is also highly unusual for a C.O.'s house and they can be interpreted as a series of two-

If any person while making a journey should consider that he may abstract an ox that is not assigned to the public post but dedicated to the plough, he shall be arrested with due force by the rural police (stationarii) and the supervisors of the public post, and he shall be haled before the judge (iudex meaning the governor), if the judge is present, or else he shall be delivered to the municipal magistrates , with an adequate indictment, and by their service he shall be transmitted to the judge; or if he should be of such high rank that it is not proper to rise up against him with such severity, his name shall be referred to Our Clemency.

The dispatch of investigators or soldiers who could effectively check the abuses perpetrated by such highranking people was a rare occurrence. In 326 Constantine and Constantius wrote to give warning to the praetorian prefect, Acindynus, and through him to governors and other officials,

78

The Fourthcentury room suites rem1mscent of those in the first class accommodation at Chelmsford. The whole complex could be interpreted as a mansio, built within the fort rather than outside its defences. If it is correct that the baths in this complex pre-date the fort they must then be seen in relation to the roadside settlement and Dere Street which runs c.220 metres to the east. Such a location on the periphery of a roadside settlement is very common for mansiones, and it can be suggested that here the fort was deliberately sited to enclose an earlier mansio. This suggestion must be viewed with due caution since the final excavation report on the site has not yet been published. However, it focuses attention on the possibility that mansiones might have been found within military fortifications in this late period, just as it was suggested they were in some locations in the ClaudioNeronian period.

beginning of work to enclose the settlement with a wall. The wall is dated later than c. 270 but it was not finished. Later it was completed, enclosing a reduced area, but was demolished in the second quarter of the fourth century (Rankov 1982, 363; Burnham and Wacher 1990, 128-29 and Fig.34). It will be necessary to wait for the publication of the final excavation report to understand what connections might exist between these events, and indeed to learn how closely or otherwise they are related chronologically. The mansio site was re-occupied c. 360/70 when further robbing of the buildings took place. However, one of the tower granaries (32) was retained, though its use was not necessarily the same. The north-west end of the bath-house was recommissioned and a small bath-suite was created, or reconstructed. The shrine of Abandinus was rebuilt in a new form. The single-aisled building was also rebuilt (Goodbum 1976, 334). Only the residential accommodation of the mansiodoes not seem to have been reconstructed.

At Richborough and Dover, in contrast to Piercebridge, the fortifications were provided with bastions and were in accordance with contemporary continental practice. In these forts it has proved very difficult to identify internal buildings. Mansio accommodation may have existed and be indistinguishable among the ephemeral traces that have been recorded. In the north-east comer of the fort at Richborough a small late-Roman bath-building was found on the same site as the mansio that preceded the fort. This may represent some continuity of use in this part of the fort interior.

Castle Hill, East Bridgford (Oswald 1941) (Fig. I :49).

At East Bridgford the wall enclosed a comparatively small area, probably following the line of an earlier earthwork defence. The second century mansio buildings seem to have been demolished. Only one fourth century structure (Building N) is known. It lay nearly three metres south-east of Building L and shared its alignment. The plan recorded by Oswald has two walls with notable dog-legs in their courses (Fig.62). This may indicate that the building was altered during its life, but further speculation would be unprofitable. Six of the seven rooms recognised by Oswald had opus signinum floors containing much broken wall plaster. These lay on the two sides of a gravel-floored corridor or alleyway. Evidently the building was domestic and its location suggests that it was connected with the reestablishment of the mansio in some form in the fourth century. It is possible that it represents first class accommodation and/or the quarters of a supervisor. The consolidation of the area to the north-west was probably contemporary with the use of Building N, but as no other buildings were found, or at least recognised, it is possible that the site lacked the purpose-built accommodation found in the earlier mansio. The latest coin from Building N was one of Valens, c.370, in mint condition.

At Caernarvon we saw in Chapter Four that mansio accommodation and baths occupied the south-east comer of the fort through most of the second and third centuries. Towards the end of the third or early in the fourth century the south and east ranges of the residential courtyard building were disused or demolished. The west range remained in use and at least one domestic hypocaust was installed in it in Period 7B (Fig.24d). Although a new bath-building, begun in Period 8, was not completed, the domestic rooms continued in use perhaps until the mid fourth century or later (Casey et al. 1993, 60). During this time various minor buildings, ovens and furnaces were built and demolished, but the most significant event was the re-furbishment of the fort defences in Period 9. The fort had seen a drastic decrease in the number of troops present in the second century but was again occupied by a military garrison in the Severan period and through most of the fourth century. Virtually throughout this period the mansio accommodation, even after its substantial reduction, retained the same location within the defences until, in the late fourth century, a large timber-lined drain cut across it. At Lancaster new first class accommodation was constructed in the later third century, and although the fort of this period has not been located it is virtually certain that here the mansio lay outside it (see below). Uniformity is not a feature of late Roman military installations. However, there is considerable evidence for the destruction of the mansio accommodation at other, mostly non-military, sites in the later third century. This will first be reviewed and then its possible significance will be discussed.

Caerwent (Ashby et al. 1903) (Fig.1:26).

At Caerwent it is thought that the final development of the street grid and the expansion of the settlement beyond the main east-west road frontage did not take place much before the beginning of the third century (Brewer 1990, 80). The street linking the courtyard building (House 3s) in insula xvi to the main road was presumably established earlier if it is correct that the building was the first class accommodation of a mansio. The northern road frontage of insula xvi must have been built up while House 3s was still in use since a boundary-wall which joined its north-west comer served to separate it from House 2s which fronted the road to the north (Fig.63). The mansio baths (House 5s) in insula xvii lie at at oblique angle to the courtyard house and to the street grid, a peculiarity also found at Lower Wanborough (Fig.32a). We

Godmanchester (Green 1975) (Fig.1:51).

Here the mansio was burnt down, but apparently after the

79

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain saw in Chapter Five that, together with part of House 6s, they were the earliest elements in insula xvii. Further east, in insula xviii, the construction of the masonry houses planned by the early excavators seems to have post-dated the use of a drainage ditch which, from its alignment, probably served the public baths in insula xiii (Fig.63: drain 2). Its southern course was redug a few metres to the west but when this new alignment was built over it must reflect a major change in the functioning of the public baths. A coin of Valens from the ditch between Houses xviii.I ls and 12s suggests that this may have been fairly late in the fourth century (Ashby 1905, 296).

As was noted above, House xvi.3s was still in use when the property to the north (House 2s) was laid out, but at some stage it seems to have been demolished. The boundary wall that divided it from House xvi.2s is overlain at its southwest comer by House ls, a building containing a T-shaped com-drier and another furnace or oven, and at the same time House 2s was extended to the west. It is significant that the alignment of House 1s is quite different from that of the other buildings in insula xvi, and that it approximates to that of the baths and outbuilding (treated as part of the baths in the report: House xvii.5s, rooms 12-13) in the neighbouring insula. The coincidence of alignment can be most easily explained if House 3s, lying directly between these buildings, had been removed. This similarity of alignment should also mean that Houses xvi.ls and xvii.5s belonged to the same establishment.

The original sequence of rooms in the mansio baths was at some time reversed (Fig.48b). Room 1 became a cold room, and traces of red painted wall plaster were apparently found on its south wall (Ashby et al. 1903, 393-94). A tiny cold bath (room lA) was built onto its north-east side. A drain ran from this to the south-west below room 1 and then turned sharply to the south-east to avoid the massive foundations of the furnace and the supports for the hot-water tank which had not been removed. The excavators state that the ends of the drain had been cut off by the walls of room 1, but the relationships seen in the plan suggest that the drain postdated rather than pre-dated the use of the room as a praefurnium. If a passage for the drain was not made in the south-east wall a different arrangement to drain the cold bath must have been adopted. The plan shows a break in the north-east wall of room lA which might mark a drain outlet.

Rooms 12-13 in House 5s must have been built after the demolition of the original cold bath and cold room (8) in the baths as it would have blocked access to the latter. It contained a drain which may indicate the stabling of animals (Fig.48b). After the transfer of the standard class accommodation, if that is what it was, to private ownership and the demolition of the first class accommodation, the facilities comprised the remodelled baths, the possible stable adjacent to them, House xvi. ls and a considerable area of apparently open land next to the defences in the south-west comer of the city. On the north they were bounded by the properties along the east-west street and on the east perhaps by ground attached to House xviii. lOs/lls and House xviii.12s after the suppression of the north-south street between insulae xvii and xviii. If it is correct that the bath-building continued in use this suggests continuity with the earlier mansio, and that the area was not simply turned over to cultivation inside the city defences. Again it seems that the changes specifically affected the accommodation of the mansio.

In room 4 the excavators found that the central section of the wall between rooms 3 and 4 had been removed. This must mark the location of a new furnace-flue and hot-water tank, making room 4 the new praefurnium. No sign of these structures was found, however. Presumably they were built in brick and this was totally robbed like the pilae from the eastern two-thirds of the heated rooms, or it is possible that the intended re-organisation of the baths was never completed. The latter seems less likely in view of the decoration seen in room I. A boundary wall, its course followed by a drainage ditch to the south, crossed the open area eastwards from room 4 of the baths (Fig.63: drain 1). Another wall, starting from room 9 in House xvii.6s, served to separate this house from the area to the south which may have formed an extension of the land attached to House lOs/1ls in insula xviii. House xvii.6s is on the same oblique alignment to the street grid as the bath-building and so presumably pre-dates the laying out of the streets, at least in its original form. It was suggested in Chapter Five that it may have comprised a block of standard class accommodation. If so, it was later turned into a private house. This presumably happened at the same time as the properties on either side (Houses xvii.4s and 9s) were laid out. The south wall of House 4s respects the praefurnium (room 1) of the original bath-building, and the size of the added cold bath (room lA) was restricted by the presence of the house-wall. If the construction of Houses xvii.4s, 6s, and 9s was contemporary with or later than the laying out of the street grid, perhaps in the early third century, this gives a terminuspost quernfor the alterations to the mansio baths.

This sequence of development can be suggested for the buildings in the south-western angle of Caerwent using alignments and boundaries as a guide, but it is at present only hypothetical and requires to be tested by excavation. Should this take place the true picture will inevitably prove more complex. If, as suggested, accommodation was no longer provided in a building set aside for the purpose this presupposes that adequate lodging was available in private households in the city. However, in our present state of knowledge it is not possible to suggest an absolute date for this change.

Whitchurch(Jones and Webster 1968) (Fig.1:72). The excavators proposed that by the late third century Building I, which was probably the first class accommodation of the mansio, had been demolished and replaced by Building 2. The east wall of this lay c. 2.75 metres east of that of its predecessor. As the gutter which had run along the south side of Building 1 was recut, it was assumed that Building 2 covered the whole area occupied by

80

The Fourth century Building 1 (Jones and Webster 1968, 207-8). Unfortunately the wall of Building 2 could not be related stratigraphically to other features or layers and it has been suggested that it was actually the outer wall of an external corridor or portico added to Building 1 (Webster G. 1975, 75). If this was so the material dated to the fourth century and associated by the excavators with Building 2 (Jones and Webster 1968, 208) probably belongs instead to later occupation of the site. Building 1 at least had been demolished by the first quarter of the fourth century, the date of a burial cut into the robbertrench of the wall between rooms 5 and 6. Building 3 may have outlasted Building 1, surviving into the fourth century.

Constantine I, both of the years 306-08. Coins from the destruction levels of Building 3 were mostly Constantinian, and the latest coins from the filling of robber-trenches were two of Constantius II (Fe! Temp . Rep. (falling horseman) copies). However, a coin of Valentinian came from a black layer on the floor of room 11, and two slots were later cut into the floors of rooms 11 and 12 and were associated with small pits or post-holes containing late fourth century material, including two coins of Arcadius. It is not clear whether the disuse of Building 1 preceded that of Building 3, nor whether the meagre traces of later fourth century activity represent some continuity with the earlier mansio or some totally new use of the site . This may become clearer when the mansiobaths are published since these can be expected to have been retained in use , even if the accommodation was given up, for as long as the mansiocontinued to function .

There are many uncertainties involved with the buildings at Whitchurch . Whether the sequence resembled that at Godmanchester it is not possible to say on the limited evidence that is available. A wall fronting the second century rampart which defended the settlement was probably a later addition but its date is not established (Goodbum 1978, 437).

About the beginning of the fourth century a rectangular area of about three acres (1.2 hectares) about 100 metres north of the mansio accommodation and bisected by the course of Watling Street was defended by a clay rampart and a single ditch, c. 4.3 metres wide and 2.5 metres deep. The ditch is thought to have been open for a relatively short time before being deliberately filled (Cameron and Lucas 1973, 95-96). The two major alignments of the property boundaries and other features preceding this enclosure have been described in Chapter Five. A third alignment, represented by features 206, 295 , 711, 727-28, and 739-40 is probably later than these two. One of the features (711) cuts the earlier obliquely aligned ditch 713 containing mid-late third century pottery, and may be contemporary with the enclosure. Feature 711 was itself superseded by 709 which seems to revert to the earlier alignment (Cameron and Lucas 1973, 104 and Fig. 3). Two wells (701 and 726) also demonstrate fourth century occupation in this area, and a circular timber building (288) was of fourth century date.

Chelmsford (Drury 1988) (Fig.1:41). At Chelmsford no fortification was constructed to replace the earthwork defences that were no longer being maintained in the early/mid third century. Here there is no doubt that the mansio baths continued to function until late in the fourth century (Allen 1988, 32). The latest dated phase in the courtyard building was a reconstruction and re-roofing following a fire, tentatively dated to the later third century (Phase VII.2). Buttresses were added along part of the east range (Milton 1987), but how long an interval elapsed between the fire and these repairs is not known. Fourth century fence-lines and post-holes occurred on Site Z to the west. Because of later disturbance no unambiguous evidence has been found for the use of the building itself in the fourth century (Drury 1988, 33-34), although this seems highly likely since coins of the late fourth century came from 'destruction levels' on Sites AK and Z (Drury 1988, 34). Clearly there is uncertainty about when occupation was resumed in the courtyard building and how long this continued, and the same is the case with the standard class accommodation on Site AR (Drury 1988, 22). At Site Sand in the more recent excavations at Godfrey's Mews it was found that the properties along the street frontage were maintained until the mid-fourth century (Period VIl.3). At that time the area they had once occupied was taken over for a stockaded enclosure, probably for livestock, and, further back was an area of smithing. The boundary between the mansio and the former roadside properties seems to have disappeared at this time and this indicates a major reorganisation of the site (Allen, in prep.). It is possible that Chelmsford is another site where accommodation was no longer available in a purpose-built mansio throughout the fourth century.

Although the early fourth century enclosure impinged on the settlement, occupation clearly continued outside it. It did not interfere in any way with the site of the mansio buildings, although the accommodation there may have become disused at about the time that it was constructed. Webster (1971) included Cave's Inn in a group of sites along the course of Watling Street and the road to Wroxeter, all of which contained small defended enclosures to which he applied the term burgi. This will be considered at greater length below.

St Albans (Wheeler and Wheeler 1936, 95-6) (Fig . 1:29). The earlier version of the courtyard building III.2 was in 'an advanced state of decay ... .indeed a well-marked layer of debris had accumulated in many of the rooms' when it was rebuilt c.A.D.300. When this occurred the main approach was still from the south-west (Fig.64). The rooms on this side were extended across the earlier portico to the edge of the street. Room 6 is now clearly recognisable as the entrance hall, and in line with it room 15 spans the colonnade of the inner courtyard and extends into this. Room 6 is flanked by rooms 3 and 21, all three forming a 'tripartite entrance hall'. This complex of rooms is very similar to rooms 64 and 69- 71 which formed the later entrance to the

Cave's Inn (Lucas 1984) (Fig.1:39). In Building 1 the beams which supported the internal partition walls were removed in the Roman period and in the ashes of a fire lit on one of the mortar floors and sealed by a 'black packed layer' were coins of Maximianus and

81

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain mansio at Silchester (Fig.54). The hypocausts in rooms 24 and 25 (the superior first class accommodation) were filled in and the building now seems to have lacked any room with hypocaust heating. Nevertheless mosaic floors were laid in rooms 24 and 25 and these rooms clearly remained superior domestic rooms. Room 31 was demolished and an external portico was built across it. This may mean that the southeast range was re-orientated to face away from the inner courtyard. Despite this the provision of rooms in the northwest and south-east ranges was essentially the same as in the earlier building, and it seems likely that their function was also unchanged. In the north-east range room 33 was given a mosaic, but the reception room in front of it was subdivided into rooms 34A and 34B, and two further rooms (38 and 39) were added on the north-east side. It seems probable that these were entered via room 33. Rooms 18 and 19 were added in a similar position at the opposite end of the range, and room 14A was enlarged. The meaning of these alterations is difficult to establish. A possible interpretation is that rooms 33 and 38-39 now formed an extra suite of accommodation, entered from the lobby 34B; rooms 34A and 36 formed yet another suite entered from 35; and 14A and 16-20 were left as the supervisor's quarters or as staff accommodation. There is no stratified material later than the end of the third century. This gave a terminus post quern for the later phase of the building. Its occupation cannot be dated satisfactorily. Only four unstratified fourth century coins were recovered and from this the Wheelers ( 1936, 96) concluded that there had been no significant occupation in the latter half of the fourth century . Four post-holes defining a structure c. 3.75 by 4.5 metres lay over the southern comer of the internal colonnade but it could not be dated.

Corbridge (Forster 1908) (Fig. I :45).

Phase 7 saw the final period of alterations to the mansio at Corbridge (Fig.65). This can be dated to the end of the third century or later by the discovery of a coin of Carausius in good condition below the final floor in room B. It seems that the wall between B and C was removed to form a room of similar size to room A (Forster 1908, 218). In the courtyard south of rooms P, Q and R two large new rooms (U and V) were created, again of uncertain function. In U the drain which flushed the latrine in T was now put out of action and the latrine itself must have been disused. There may have been a wall or fence to close off the southern side of T since the east wall of O extends southwards toward s the projected line of the south wall of U. A new latrine (W) must belong to this period. It was flushed by a conduit bringing water from the east and crossing the site of the Phase 2 fountain north of the building. Probably contemporary with this was room X with a concrete floor on which an altar base was found, apparently in situ (Forster 1908, 235). It lay c. 0.31 metres above the opus signinum floor associated with the Phase 2 fountain and projected more or less centrally from the northern gallery of the building. To the south of the new latrine (W) was a small rectangular courtyard and within this, attached to the west wall of G, was a foundation in the form of a quarter-circle with a flagged floor. Salway (1965 , 52) interpreted this as part of the stoking-area for the hypocausts in F, G, and J, but there seems to be no real supporting evidence . An alternative is to see the feature as originally a semi-circle which formed the basin for a fountain, though once again there is no record of pipes or drains that might support this interpretation.

If the hypocaust in room F continued to operate it must now have been fed by flues from the hypocaust in room G . Five different layers of painted plaster are recorded from room K and this suggests a long life for the room. However, the wall-jacketing along its north wall presumably ceased to function when the stoke-hole in the southern part of room M was blocked ('z' on Fig.65). Presumably the baths to the east also ceased operation. The latest coins from the building on Site 2 are issues of Valentinian and Valens from Room F, while the street fronting Site 3 produced issues of Valentinian and Gratian (H.H.E. Craster in Forster 1908, 293-94).

Chester (Mason 1980) (Fig . 1:13). On the evidence of deposits (layers 4- 7) in Well II the Stone

Phase III building was burned down towards the end of the third century. The excavator argued that the fire was accidental rather than deliberately started as part of a demolition and clearance of the building, but the evidence he offered is not conclusive (Mason 1980, 20-21). It was followed in the late third or early fourth century by the construction of two detached blocks separated by an open passage (Stone Phase IV). This was simply once more a rebuilding of the earlier plan with the open passage corresponding to the earlier room 2, and in Stone Phase IVa the passage was again roofed. Many of the sandstone blocks from the Stone Phase III building were re-used in the flooring of the courtyard surface to north of the later building. Well I continued in use, suggesting that the functional areas as well as the planning of the earlier establishment were retained.

Lancaster (Jones and Shotter 1988) (Fig. I :20).

The timber range of first class accommodation at Lancaster , erected in the mid second century , seems to have remained standing through most of the third century and was finally burnt down. The larger heated room , room A, was retained for incorporation into a new , masonry , courtyard building (Building C), but room B was demolished and overlain by a wall belonging to the new building. The demolition of room B is dated no earlier than the late third century and no later than the mid fourth century (P. Webster in Jones and Shotter 1988, 115). There was some evidence that it 'was in a collapsed condition for some time before it was demolished' (Jones and Sholler 1988, 67). It is possible that when it was

Apart from the roofing of the passage the courtyard surfaces and floor surf aces were twice renewed in Phase IVa. In the mid fourth century Well I was filled in and the filling of Well II was completed, marking the end of activity in the excavated part of the mansio.

82

The Fourth century

burnt the timber building of which room B formed a part had also been derelict for some time. In support of this is RIB 605, probably to be dated to the reign of Postumus in the 260's, which records the reconstruction of a bath-building and a basilica that had collapsed through age by the ala Sebosiana. If this refers, as it most probably does, to the bath-building of the garrison it suggests that the fort may have been unoccupied for a period before the 260's, and, if so, the mansio may also have been abandoned. This would explain why a timber building of second century date was not replaced until the late third century.

constructed in timber, as was that of a near contemporary bath-building at Bearsden on the Antonine Wall (Breeze 1979, 25), while room 6 may be the remains of a cold bath of this period (contra Stanford 1968, 290). It is, at any rate, unlikely to belong to the same period as the cold bath (room 5a) of Period II which would have blocked access between it and the rest of the building. In Period II the west end of the baths was remodelled with a new cold bath (5a) and a greatly reduced cold room (5). This period was dated later than c.160 and may have continued, with fairly minor alterations (Period III), into the late third century. Period 11/111ended with evidence for the disuse of the hypocausts in rooms 1 and 2, but it is not clear how long this lasted. The hypocausts were dismantled and new floors laid so that the rooms were no longer heated (Period IV). Probably as part of the same rebuilding the cold bath (5a) was filled in and a new floor laid above it to create a larger cold room. A cold douche was installed in room 5 at the same time, presumably as a replacement for the bath. Its drain (Fl2) joined a second major drain (F4/Fl0) which cut across room 6. A new hot bath (room 7) was added to room 4, and it can be assumed that the latter and room 3 continued to function as heated rooms. Period IV was dated to the fourth century.

The new Building C had a portico (G) along its west front with an entrance at P (Fig.28d). In the west range there may have been a latrine at the southern end of H. There is no room obviously reminiscent of the entrance hall(s) found in the courtyard buildings of second century mansiones. In the south range room F formed an entrance lobby to rooms A and E, both heated by hypocausts, and perhaps to room D. In the north range an unnumbered room immediately to the south of T was heated by a hypocaust, and the three rooms here probably formed a second suite of accommodation. Little of the east range was recorded. Although there was no internal portico the two suites of accommodation in the north and south ranges were on a more generous scale than those in most second century mansiones, comprising three rather than two rooms, and hypocaust heating was provided in both suites.

The period of disuse of the baths recorded by Stanford may be another instance of the interruptions and possible interruptions in the occupation of mansiones noted already in this chapter.

To the south of the south range was a small yard, from which the hypocaust in A was stoked, and south of this again was a building at least 15.6 metres long and c.4 metres wide. This had a flagged floor like the surface of the courtyard (J) in Building C. It may have been a vehicle-shed or stable.

Changes in the Provision of Accommodation.

Although the evidence is far from being as clear as could be wished it seems that from the end of the third century special buildings set aside as mansio accommodation were destroyed or demolished at several sites where they had once existed. This is most clearly the case at Godmanchester . Another case seems to be Wall where the accommodation was given up but the baths probably continued to function (Chapter Five and Appendix Three). The same may have happened at Caerwent, Cave's Inn, Chelmsford, East Bridgford, Leintwardine and Whitchurch, but the evidence from these sites is either not sufficiently clear or not sufficiently plentiful to be certain. At St Albans there were signs of severe dilapidation before the mansio was rebuilt c.A.D.300, and a period of decay or abandonment seems to have preceded the rebuilding at Lancaster. Other sites, such as Corbridge and Chester, seem to show no significant break in the provision of accommodation. However, at St Albans, Corbridge and Lancaster we are certainly dealing with first class accommodation, while at Chester the identification of the excavated building is uncertain.

To the west of Building C there are slight traces of what was probably a substantial building, once interpreted by Richmond as a granary (Jones and Shotter 1988, 71). A substantial drain (feature 9) led southwards from the direction of this building (Jones and Shotter 1988, 66 Fig. 24) and there is a possibility that it was a bath-building contemporary with Building C, or perhaps with one of its second century predecessors.

In the second quarter of the fourth century Building C was destroyed by the construction of the Wery Wall, part of a late fort, recalling similar sequences at Dover and Richborough. Leintwardine (Stanford 1968) (Fig.1:59).

The bath-house at Leintwardine (Fig.66) was referred to in Chapter Three where it was suggested that it belonged to a successor of the mansio at the fort at Buckton which was evacuated in the Hadrianic period. Stanford identified room 1 of the earliest (Period IB) baths as the caldarium, but its position on one side of the building and 'overlapping' a smaller heated room (room 2) in the main range suggests rather that it was a laconicum. Room 2 will have been a tepidarium, and rooms 3 and 4 to the east will have been a second tepidarium and the ca/darium. The unheated rooms will have lain to the west. The cold room (5) may have been

We saw in Chapter Six that the final phase of the mansio at Pentre Farm had come to an end by the mid third century, and in Chapter Four that the mansio accommodation at Catterick had been demolished around the end of the second century. Changes were therefore made in the provision of accommodation from time to time. In some cases, perhaps in the case of Pentre Farm, this may have been because the

83

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain level of traffic no longer justified the provision of a mansio. At Catterick it was suggested that the demolition of the mansio was not the inevitable result of the evacuation of the fort, as perhaps it had been at Melandra Castle c.A.D.140, but was rather an option chosen by the authorities of the civitas Brigantum. By their decision the inhabitants of Cataractonium were obliged to accommodate official travellers in their homes. By contrast in the early third century at Dover the mansio was retained after the evacuation of the classis Britannica fort. However, if the loss of mansio accommodation really did occur at a number of sites at the end of the third and early in the fourth century it is necessary to enquire whether this had a wider significance and what might have lain behind it.

worn out by the effects of a long stage (ILS 5906). AE 1922.57 from Volubilis in Mauretania records that Gordian III had rebuilt domumcum balineo,a residence with its baths, through his procurator M. Ulpius Victor . It was suggested in Chapter Two that this domus was the first class accommodation of a mansio. The inscription may show that central funding of such construction in the provinces was still going on in the mid third century, and it certainly shows that imperial officials had responsibility for any that was undertaken. A fairly close terminusante quernfor the change to local responsibility by the cities in the provinces can be inferred from a rescript written in 328-30 by Constantine to his praetorian prefect Ablabius (text in Chastagnol 1981, 384-88). This concerned the restoration of city statu s to Orcistus in Phrygia and was inscribed and set up there along with subsequent items , probably in the second half of 331. At some time between 237 and 324 when Constantine had eliminated Licinius Orcistus had lost its status as a civitas and become a vicus placed under the control of Nacolia. If it is correct that Constantine was reversing a change imposed by Licinius himself (Chastagnol 1981, 401-2) , this fits well with the reference to a mansio in the inscription. The rescript lists the points put forward by the people of Orcistus in favour of their claim to urban status. These included the natural advantages of the place and the civic embellishments and economic activities that supported the claim. An important point was that four roads met there and there was a mansio. The existence of a mansio would not have been worthy of comment in this context unless it had been provided by the Orcistani themselves and not by the provincial governor or by the magistrates of Nacolia. Chastagnol himself suggested that Orcistus' importance for the cursus publicus was a recent development and that the mansio had been built not long before the date of the inscription, perhaps early in the fourth century (Chastagnol 1981, 403). This ties in well with the archaeological evidence from Britain where we have seen that the dilapidation and demolition of mansio accommodation built by the imperial authorities seems to have begun towards the end of the third century.

We know from the Theodosian Code that the need of the government for particular facilities of the cursus publicus could be reviewed and changes in the provision throughout a whole province could be instigated. In A.D.363 the emperor Julian wrote to his praetorian prefect Mamertinus that he had discovered that the use of post-horses (veredi) was UMecessary in Sardinia and he ordered that this branch of the service should be discontinued (T.C. 8.5.16). He made the point that the cost had fallen on the people of the country districts (pagi) in particular. However, he was careful to stress that the waggon-service (angariarumcursus) for the transport of public supplies to the coast must continue. Mamertinus was instructed to take into account the local conditions and to prescribe the number of waggons he thought it necessary for each district to provide . It had been decided in the Hadrianic period that purpose-built mansiones were required in many roadside settlements in Britain , at least for higher-ranking travellers. It is possible to envisage a similar decision to dispense with purpose-built mansio accommodation at some, though evidently not all, the mansiones in the British provinces in the later third century. The question is then whether this was a conscious decision by the government, perhaps involving assessment of the houses in each roadside settlement and checking that among them there were some suitable for the accommodation of its senior personnel, and balancing this against the need to protect the inhabitants from exploitation by their guests . Such a process could have been spread over many years but it seems improbable. A better case can be made that it was the indirect result of a government decision and it seems likely that it is a sign of the ineffectiveness of government in this period rather than of any informed assessment of what was required.

Assuming that the cities in Britain had become directly responsible for providing the accommodation for official travellers not very long before this, what could have produced such a sorry result? Various factors were probably at work. One may have been the cost of maintaining a mansio. It may have seemed to the city authorities that it was a cheaper alternative to let soldiers and officials lodge in private houses. There may have been a decrease in the frequency of soldiers and officials travelling through civilian areas because of reductions in the size of the army in Britain in the third century. Perhaps the temporary inconvenience and expense of such lodgers was better than shouldering the task of building or repairing a mansio as a munus personale (Compare the Digest 50.4.18,10). Constantine (T.C. 11.16.4) had laid it down that it was provincial governors rather than the leading decurions (principales)who had to determine the allocation of extraordinary public services , including the provision of angariae, but his stipulations and later documents (T.C. 11.16.10, 15 and 18) make it clear that men with money and influence were frequently exempted from

We saw earlier in this chapter that Gratian rejected the idea that the state should pay for stables for the cursuspublicus in Africa (T.C. 8.5.34). He ruled that the provincials, by whom he must have meant the city governments, should bear the cost. The earlier existence of central funding by the state seems to be implied by the fact that this proposal was made and in Italy it seems that the government was still undertaking the construction of facilities for the cursus publicus a few years after Gratian's ruling. Between 379 and 383 Valerius Anthidius, agens vices praefectorumpraetorio, saw to the construction of a stable just over ten miles from Rome to save the animals of the cursus publicus from being

84

The Fourth century menial public responsibilities.

At St Albans when the

lodging and winter billeting for officials, their parents, children and wives were granted the same rights as the veterans themselves (Ehrenberg and Jones 1975, 135-36 No.302). By the late third century many of the population of places like Corbridge or Lancaster may have been related by marriage to serving soldiers. The continued provision of special mansio accommodation at these military stations may represent the working of the exemption recorded by Paul, and its de facto extension to others closely tied to the troops in such garrisons.

mansio was rebuilt no hypocaust heating was provided, a clear sign of economy, and the same was the case with Building N at East Bridgford. The mansio at St Albans seems to have had a relatively short life and although this might be explained by the wish of local principales to escape a financial burden, there must also have been a reason why the governors and the vicar of the diocese took no steps to ensure that a high standard of purpose-built accommodation remained available. Here the attitude of the official guests themselves may be more relevant.

Later Defences and Burgi. Despite the fulminations of the emperors against them, recorded in the Theodosian Code and elsewhere, it is clear that venality and private profit were the watch-words of administrators and soldiers at all levels of fourth century government. We have come across notable instances of it earlier in this chapter. The triumph of this attitude has been described as the 'privatization' of the emperor's power, and of the authority of government (MacMullen 1988). Specific examples can be cited to show that it applied in Britain as elsewhere. In 367, leading an expedition to deal with a concerted barbarian attack on Britain, Count Theodosius found it necessary to offer immunity to deserters and to soldiers who had been absent from their units on indefinite leave, presumably bought from their officers. He eventually found that the barbarian invaders had successfully bribed the arcani (or areani) who were responsible for giving warning of any impending attack (Ammianus 27.8.10; 28.3.8).

Another aspect of the roadside settlements which must be examined here is the provision of defences in the later third and fourth centuries. We saw in Chapter Five that in the second century some earthwork defences enclosed a substantial part of the settlement and could be regarded as imitating the circuits surrounding tribal capitals and other cities, while others enclosed a much smaller area around the mansio and were primarily designed to define and secure its installations. Many mansiones were sited well back from the main road frontage but the defences usually enclosed a length of this so that it seems to have been part of their purpose whatever the size of the area enclosed - to supervise traffic using the road and to restrict access between the areas within and without the defences to the line of the road. People, animals and vehicles could be checked at a limited number of easily controlled points where the road(s) passed through gates in the defences. It is this aspect which seems to be of prime importance in the later third and fourth centuries. This can be demonstrated most easily by looking at the group of fortified enclosures termed burgi by Webster.

The fourth century saw a retreat from effective control over individual bureaucrats and soldiers who were supposed to be the executives of the government. This had its origin in the political and military upheavals in the third century and is a picture which fits very well with the archaeological evidence reviewed above for the disappearance of official accommodation in mansiones. The segregation of officials and soldiers within a separate enclave where supervision might be attempted was no longer found in many places. Presumably accommodation in the homes of the populations resident in the roadside settlements gave the opportunity for more convenient extortion. The complaints of the villagers of Phaenae in Syria in the late second century were noted in Chapter Two: despite the existence of an official mansio, those who were entitled to use it preferred to impose themselves on private householders. Commodus' governor answered the villagers' complaints, but it seems that in Britain in the late third century the soldiers' preference had received official sanction. Provision of accommodation in the British provinces seems to have become again similar to the situation as it was before the Hadrianic period.

One of these, at Cave's Inn, has been described earlier in this chapter. The others, also lying along Watling Street and the road to Wroxeter, are at Whitton Lodge, Mancetter, Wall, Water Eaton, and Red Hill (Webster G. 1971; 1975, 46). A similar enclosure has recently been located at High Cross between Whilton Lodge and Mancetter and is thought to enclose the major crossroads there (inf. P. Liddle). They vary in size from 0.75 to 12 acres (0.3 to 4.9 hectares), and in the form of the defences they were given. At Cave's Inn, as we saw above, no trace of a stone wall has yet been found, while at Wall one certainly existed (Gould 1964, 2-7). At Whilton Lodge a wall was inserted in the late third or early fourth century on the line of earlier earthwork defences (Dix and Taylor 1988, 302-305). Webster interpreted the enclosures as strong-points built by Constantius Chlorus for the recovery of the British provinces in A.D.296, while conceding that they continued in use thereafter. At Cave's Inn, Mancetter and Red Hill the ditches may have been filled in fairly rapidly and occupation continued in close proximity outside the enclosures. As Crickmore (1984, 83-86) has pointed out, the rampart or wall alone may have been a sufficient barrier, and the enclosures may have functioned as originally intended through the fourth century.

It may be significant that the sites where purpose-built accommodation certainly continued to be provided Chester, Corbridge and Lancaster - were military establishments. It will be recalled that the early third century jurist Paul stated that soldiers and the practitioners of artes liberales were exempt from providing lodging to official travellers (Digest 50.5. 10). In an edict of the triumviral period where Octavian had laid down a range of privileges for veteran soldiers, including exemption from providing

Burgus is not a technical term and its use does not in itself 85

Cursus Publicus : the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

help us to understand what the function of the enclosures was. It is necessary to examine what other purpose they could have had besides serving as military strong-points, and the most secure starting-point is Whilton Lodge where an earlier line of earthwork defences was supplemented by a stone wall. The earlier defences had presumably enclosed a mansio or vicus, along with a stretch of Watling Street for the easy surveillance of travellers and goods. Wall and Cave's Inn and Webster's other sites seem to have lacked earlier earthwork defences, and at the first two at least the mansiones were excluded from the area of the burgi. It seems possible that these had the simple purpose of enclosing a length of the main road. They may have been concerned, like their second century predecessors, with the regulation and protection of legitimate traffic using the road rather than with the defence of the settlement or its population against hostile forces. By far and away the most important users of the road will have been the heavy-transport waggons of the cursus publicus. Webster's burgi can be explained as secure waggon-parks for these vehicles. Their position, on the road itself, was convenient for such convoys, for making an overnight stop or for changing draught-animals or waggons. The defensive nature of the enclosures should not be overstressed: the provision of masonry walls must have been as natural in the early fourth century as that of earth ramparts had been in the second century. The mansio or vicus did not have to be included within the enclosures since it was the supplies in the waggons which would be the target of any pilfering or banditry. The military escort of such convoys might have been sufficient to mount a guard on the gateways of a burgus and patrol the perimeter since we know that two or three guards could be assigned to a raeda (T.C. 8.5. 18). Alternatively the guard-duty may have been performed by some of the inhabitants of the roadside settlements. This is likely to have been the case in some places in the second and third centuries. One of the exemptions granted to the Pizos settlers was that they were not required to act as guards (phrouroi) and this implies that elsewhere this was required. (Burgarioi which the settlers were also exempted from supplying will have manned a fort or watch-tower somewhere in the vicinity of the settlement.) This solution overcomes the problem of just who 'defended' the burgi on Watling Street and other walled roadside settlements in Britain. If they were not, or if most of them were not, permanent military strong-points they did not require a permanent military garrison. Items of military insignia, like the buckle from Cave's Inn, are no proof of a permanent garrison (contra Hawkes 1973, 151), rather than of soldiers passing through on the sort of escort-duty described here.

(1984, 74-82) was able to show that there are too many uncertainties in our knowledge to allow us to attach this to a particular occasion or personality in the fourth century. For a long time they were taken to be the manifestation of the reconstruction of civitates et castra carried out in A.D.368 by Count Theodosius (Ammianus 28.3.2), but it now seems quite likely that some at least of the towers precede his activity. It may be that it is mistaken to look for a single event to explain them; they might rather represent attention over a long period to the fortifications of places which had a continuous significance for the vicarius in Britain and for his superior, the Praetorian Prefect of the Gauls. In 359, before launching a projected attack on the Alamanni, Julian made it his priority to enter cities that had been destroyed and left empty and to fortify them and to build granaries in place of those that had been burned where he could store the grain regularly brought over from Britain (Ammianus 18.2.3). For Julian the purpose of fortifying these civitates was clearly to protect the granaries holding the food-supply for his army. The annona that came from Britain also had to be stored securely in Britain at collecting-points and on its way to the ports from which it was shipped to Gaul. The civilian settlements with towers are concentrated along two routes (Crickmore 1984, 75 Fig.3), an eastern one from York to London and through to Canterbury, and a western, perhaps starting at Wroxeter with another fork from South Wales, uniting at Gloucester and continuing across to Bitteme on the south coast. These must be seen in relation to the forts (the Saxon Shore Forts) already existing at or close to where they terminate: Dover, Lympne, Richborough and Portchester. Both routes, marked by cities and castra fortified with towers, lead from the interior of the Diocese to the ports which must have handled Britain's exports of com for the army in Gaul. Other significant collecting-points may be indicated at Towcester and other sites where towers were also provided. It is tentatively suggested that the defence of such supplies and their escorts, rather than the defence of cities and their populations, was the rationale behind the provision of towers at some fortified sites in Britain, a matter of military logistics spanning both sides of the English Channel. Taxation.

It was Diocletian towards the end of the third century who systematised the requisitioning of commodities which had virtually replaced money taxes and who established taxation in kind as the principal means of meeting the commitments of the government. In some provinces there must have been a considerable increase in the demand for waggons and animals to transport the goods levied as taxes on to those who needed them, largely the army. In the British Diocese it is possible that this increase was not very great. At least in the first and second centuries the large number of soldiers in Britain must have meant that requisitioning was a frequent, and probably a regulated, occurrence. It is more difficult to conjecture what might have happened in the third century after the Severan expedition when, overall, the size of the garrison was reduced. A reduction in the demands is possible. It is also possible that commodities continued to be

If the role of the burgi and other roadside settlements with restricted defended areas has been correctly interpreted this reflects the concern shown by emperors for the heavytransport service responsible for conveying taxes and other items of value for the government and supplies for the army. The provision of projecting towers, often termed bastions in the modern literature, at a number of cities and other walled settlements (castra) certainly seems to indicate the perception of a serious military threat. However, Crickmore

86

The Fourthcentury requisitioned at the same level as before, but were in part dispatched to troops outside Britain. This may have been the origin of the export of com from Britain on which Julian relied and which was noted as a regular occurrence in A.D.359. In the first century the raising of taxes and of requisitiondemands, and their transport to the soldiers, was organised through the civitates and their officials (Tacitus Agricola 19.4). This remained the case through the fourth century. In A.D.313 (T.C. 11.7.1) Constantine wrote to the proconsul of Africa clarifying the roles of the officials concerned: the taxcollectors were forbidden to take legal proceedings against defaulting tax-payers until they had received the lists of names from the city's registrar (a tabulariocivitatis). There was to be no extortion: tax-payers who had a complaint should produce proof in court and the tax-collectors would be severely punished. T.C. 11.1.2, sent to the same proconsul on the same day, warned the lowest grade of tax-collectors (sexagenarii)and the tabularii against allowing tax-payers to present only the paper-work and not the actual commodities that were their payments. These were to be delivered each month to the cities from the tax-payers' own horrea. (T.C. 11.1.15 and 11.7.11 in the joint reign of Valentinian and Valens indicate that payments were to be made every four months.) At the start of the fifth century the cities were still largely responsible for the collection (T.C. 11.7.16). Arcadius and Honorius informed the praetorian prefect Hadrianus that the governor (iudex) had to find out the tax-payers whose payments were due, the tabularii had to provide him with the names of the masters (nomina dominorum:presumably the large landowners whose tenants were in arrears with their taxes), and the curia/es and their officials (apparitores)had to chase the tax-payers for the arrears.

In 385 it was laid down (T.C. 11.1.21) that except for what was due to the frontier troops no tax-payers were to be required to deliver items for the maintenance of mansionesor transport their taxes in kind an wrreasonable distance (nemo possessorum ad instruendas mansiones vel conferendas species excepta /imitaneorumannona longius delegetur,sed omnis itineris ac necessitatis habita ratione). The same sort of grievance had afflicted the provincials in Flavian Britain over the transport of supplies to remote forts (Tacitus Agricola 19.4). Then the greed of military bureaucrats, who exacted payments to change the destination of a delivery, lay at the root of the problem. The same corrupt practice probably lay behind the need for this reform in the fourth century. It should have meant that the items required for the running of mansionescould be delivered straight to them by tax-payers living in the locality. If this was the case it must imply that receipts for such items were issued by officials who received them there. The Latin might also mean that other taxes in kind were not always paid to the tax-payer's civitas, if this was too remote. Where else they might be paid is not stated but the assumption that it was at mansiones seems a reasonable one since these are mentioned in the same context. We saw in Chapter Five that standard sets of weights and measures had to be provided at mansiones as well as at civitates so that tax-payers could see that their

87

payments were accurately registered (T.C. 12.6.21). Twenty-three years later Honorius and Theodosius were outraged that landowners were being defrauded by the use of false measures and weights. This offence was being committed velut licito, as if it didn't break the law (T.C. 11.8.3). The emperors instructed the defensores of cities to take steps to stop it. However, they felt that those in charge of the cities (whether defensor,ordo, curator or magistratus) were only too likely to ignore the complaints of tax-payers. They instructed the latter to post their complaints in public: the scribae and tabularii would then have the duty of bringing them to the notice of the magistrates and they would have to take action. While they served their purpose in displaying the emperors' concern for justice and the welfare of their subjects, the solutions offered in such documents can hardly have been effective. In addition, the substantial burden of transporting military supplies to the coast for transshipment to Gaul under the direction of the primipilares remained in place. In the cities there were public horrea in which taxes in kind were stored (T.C. 11.1.15). The best known examples in the western empire are the two massive store-buildings at Trier (Wightman 1970, 117-19) . In Britain there is a possible example within a large porticoed enclosure at Wroxeter (Wilson 1984, 119-20 Fig.I). Such buildings need not always have had so distinctive a form and so may not be easily recognised. Buildings may have been adapted to become store-buildings or may have incorporated this function along with others. In some continental fora there are cryptoporticoes which could have provided storage-space for commodities paid as taxes, and it is possible that some of the ranges of rooms in the fora of Romano-British cities had the same purpose. They are usually described as 'shops' or 'offices', but some at least may have served as stores . If mansioneswere also sometimes used as delivery-points for taxes in kind the same problems exist in identifying space where these might have been stored. As we have seen the ramparts or walls provided around many mansionesand vici, and in the fourth century the burgi identified by Webster, probably indicate a concern with the passage through them of convoys of waggons. It is possible that taxes in kind paid at a mansio would require no more than temporary storage so that a purpose-built store-building would not be needed. One possible horreum has been tentatively identified at Alcester in Warwickshire where a building at least 40 metres long was divided internally by walls into at least ten spaces, each 9.6 by 3 metres. The excavator argued that the spaces between the internal walls were wider than was usual for a granary with sleeper-walls supporting a raised timber floor and that the walls did form room-divisions. Nevertheless, he interpreted the structure as a store-building (Booth 1989, 98-101 ). Unfortunately the interpretation is questionable, particularly because of uncertainty about the flooring in the proposed rooms, and it is unsafe to accept it as a certain example of a horreum. The use of some mansiones for collecting taxes in kind is a reasonable assumption, but as yet it cannot be supported by structural evidence in the form of horrea. Clearly the documentary and archaeological evidence are

Cursus Publicus: the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

complementary. The existence of the former allows the rather sparse and puzzling evidence for the buildings of fourth century mansiones and mutationes in Roman Britain to be interpreted in the context of the real concerns that exercised the minds of emperors. These concerns were prompted by abuses and deficiencies. Although they carry the assumption that there was, or could or should be, a provision of facilities that functioned as a system , the emperors are shown fighting a losing battle against the allpervading greed of their own sub-ordinates. The biggest apparent change from the provision of the second century was undoubtedly the stress on the heavy-transport service.

As this must always have existed to serve the needs of army supply, the notice it is given in later sources probably only reflects the growing difficulty of administering it efficiently . The disappearance of purpose-built mansio accommodation at a number of sites in Britain deserves equal attention. Its implications are that the government had given up the attempt to supervise the accommodation and other entitlements of its soldiers and officials . The civilian populations of cities and roadside settlements were consigned to the mercy of their transient guests, as they had been in most other provinces throughout the Roman period.

88

CHAPTER EIGHT CONCLUSION The evidence presented in Chapters Three to Seven has been largely concerned with mansiones, where official accommodation was available. In these chapters, except for Chapter Seven, there were very few references to any site that could be described as a mutatio, although this term is often coupled with mansio and applied to roadside settlements in the modem literature. This modem usage follows that found in the Theodosian Code and the Bordeaux Itinerary. However, except perhaps for Springhead with its granary / fodder-store no mutatio can be recognised archaeologically in Britain that dates before the fourth century, and such fourth century examples that are suspected are mansio sites that seem to have lost their function of providing special accommodation yet continued to operate in some form (see Chapter Seven). We saw that in the first to third centuries at least animals were changed over at intermediate points along the road, probably at a particular milestone, between two vici. Such places need not have had extensive facilities, and even fodder might have been taken out to them at frequent intervals. A stable may have been built but perhaps nothing more substantial than this. In the roadside settlements themselves there is, in my view, a considerable likelihood that detached bath-buildings were provided specifically for the use of official travellers. At a number of sites the location of these is peripheral, the same as that of many mansiones,and may indicate that they served the same clientele (see below). However, this interpretation can be contested and so the occurrence of baths cannot be used without other evidence to identify an installation of the cursus publicus. At present the presence or absence of purpose-built accommodation is the major distinction that we can hope to make between roadside settlements from archaeological evidence . In all such places, or on the roads between them, a change of transport had to be available for higher-ranking travellers and the use of the term mutatio simply reflects their view of the amenities. In the same way, although purpose-built standard class accommodation was sometimes provided for those soldiers and officials who were not entitled to transport, the word mansio above all refers to accommodation for their superiors. This is implicit in the alternative term praetorium. At most roadside vici common soldiers and low-grade officials could expect to lodge in the dwellings of the vicani.

and officials below the grades entitled to transport and for those accompanying convoys of waggons. Like the board and lodging, transport (angareia) was usually provided by the inhabitants of the settlement (unless they had an exemption like the Pizos settlers). This was sometimes in place of, perhaps sometimes in addition to, a permanent establishment of animals, owned by the state and paid for out of the taxes raised by the provincial fiscus. Although these were undoubtedly significant impositions upon the vicani they will have left no trace in the archaeological record. Defences were provided around vici as well as mansionesin the later second century, attesting the importance of security in these roadside settlements both to the provincial government and to the aediles or other officials placed in charge of them. These men were probably in many cases decurions of the civitates in which the roadside settlements were situated and they may have been personally liable to financial penalties for any losses or damage to installations under their charge or to convoys of supplies which passed through. The defences can be regarded as controls on theft and brigandage and no doubt this was how they functioned in practice. However, the fortification of so many cities and roadside settlements in the second half of the second century is certainly eloquent testimony to a particular anxiety about security at that time and may have been stimulated initially by the shock engendered by news of the barbarian invasions of Italy and Greece in A.D.170, following hard on the withdrawal from southern Scotland and a possible transfer of troops from Britain. The danger would have seemed suddenly closer and more real with the raids into Belgica by the Chauci in the early l 70's (SHA Didius Julianus 1.7-8; Wightman 1985, 159-60). The defences seem to show that, where a mansioexisted, both it and the settlement attached to it came under the control of the same authority. Another pointer to this is the siting of the mansio within a settlement. There are numerous cases where the mansio was constructed in a peripheral position, leaving the road frontage either already occupied or soon to be occupied by the houses of the inhabitants. The mansio at Wall lay about 70 metres back from the line of the main road. The same situation was adopted for the courtyard buildings and baths at Chelmsford (c. 100 metres back), Lower Wanborough (c. 120 metres back), Godmanchester (c. 65 metres back from Ermine Street), and East Bridgford (c. 90 metres back). At Whitchurch the courtyard building lay c. 65 metres back from Watling Street and at Cave's Inn the mansio buildings lay c. 90 metres back and a stream lay between them and the road. It is clear from these cases that what might have been regarded as a situation inherited from the military period at Wall was in fact deliberately chosen. At Chelmsford what seems to have been the waggon park of the first century mansio, situated beside the road, was given up in the Hadrianic period and tenement plots were laid out over it. The same seems to have been the case even in the civitascapitals. At Silchester the mansio lay about 36 metres back

Vicus is in fact a better term than mutatio for the roadside settlements where there was no purpose-built accommodation. Roadside vici may be attested as a special category in an agrarian law of 111 B.C. where land and buildings assigned to viasii vicani were retained in public ownership. This is still the usage of the Antonine Itinerary where mansio and vicus but not mutatio are found, and this is to be preferred to the Bordeaux Itinerary since it seems to record official route-plans. It also reflects our current limitations in classifying sites from archaeological evidence. A vicus was a settlement from which new animals were available for continuing a journey, and it also had to be a large enough place to provide accommodation for soldiers

89

Cursus Publicus:The infrastructureof governmentin RomanBritain from the east-west street from which it was approached in the later period of its use, but as originally planned it was c. 90 metres behind a north-south street frontage . Despite its status as a tribal capital Caerwent in the first and second centuries may not have amounted to much more than a roadside settlement lining the main road from Caerleon, and the position of the building identified as a mansio in Chapter Five, c. 125 metres behind this road, is in line with the pattern elsewhere. The government did not choose these locations out of uninterested goodwill to its subjects; it was done because the smooth running of the mansio and its services depended on the co-operation of the ordinary vicani. Even if these relied primarily on farming land held from their civitas or from the provincial government a small income could no doubt be made from a commercially advantageous roadside location by providing additional services to travellers and their retinues . At Wall the alignment of the mansio was established in the military phase and corresponded more or less to that of the fort. It was therefore at an oblique angle to Watling Street. At Water Newton/ Chesterton a courtyard building revealed by aerial photography lay to the south-west of Ermine Street and at an angle to the road and c.26 metres back from it (Mackreth 1979, 20 Fig. 11). Mackreth was correct to identify this rather than a second courtyard building aligned on and fronting the road further to the north as the mansio,for it is on the same alignment as the auxiliary fort about 400 metres away. This is rather often the case with mansiones and might be a clue to a military phase existing in certain roadside settlements. It does not follow, however, that the mansio was necessarily the immediate successor of a fort in such cases. At Chelmsford the alignment of a long sequence of mansio boundaries and that of the Hadrianic courtyard building seem to have been based on the line of the early road traced on Sites AF, AJ, and V rather than on the main London - Colchester road. This early road is thought to have had its origin as one of the internal roads of a fort (Isserlin and Wickenden, in prep.). By contrast, at Godmanchester, the southern comer of the later fort was overlain by the cow-tyard building of the second century mansio the planning of which had clearly not been influenced by the military layout (Fig.32a). There was a range of activities that were carried on by the inhabitants of roadside settlements. These included agricultural production and processing, various industries and crafts, the provision of religious foci, as well as the servicing of military and official traffic and of civilian travellers. It is very difficult in most cases to decide how important each of these was to a particular vicus. Indeed , their relative importance is likely to have varied from place to place and over time at a particular location. Various 'origins' for roadside settlements are commonly considered in the modem literature. Just what is meant by this is usually left rather vague, and has often taken the form of endowing an earlier use of the site with the status of an explanation for its later development. The most frequently cited 'origins' are those where a Roman fort or a native nucleated settlement is seen as explaining the existence of a later 'small town'. This is unsatisfactory since it is a description of a sequence of

settlement or use rather than an explanation of why the sequence happened. In seeking for this consideration of the roads themselves and of the role that they were intended to play is crucial. The roads were initially built to link together the forts and native centres, and subsequently the cities, which formed the basis of the government's administration of the province . The creation of smaller settlements along the roads to cater for the needs of soldiers and officials engaged in this administration was a necessary accompaniment of this. Whatever other functions were attached to or attracted to roadside settlements, from the beginning or later, this was the function which determined and explains their original foundation . In many cases this will have been carried out by the civitas authorities on behalf of the government at the end of the first century, and Hadrian's officials later grafted mansiones onto sites which were part of an already functioning system. Ironically enough the clearest example of a planned vicus is the Hadrianic settlement at Stonea which was not on a main road. This is thought to have been a market- and administrative-centre for imperially-owned estates in the Fens , and its most impressive feature was a large stone building lying within its own precinct and nearly forty metres behind a street (Potter 1989, 160-69) . This seems analogous to what was taking place at the same time in roadside vici like Chelmsford and W anborough. For the late first century phases of vici excavation on a large scale is still needed at many more sites to recover the original layout of property boundaries and to demonstrate that the settlements were deliberately planned rather than developed piecemeal. The review of mansiones in Chapters Three to Seven has shown that there are certain elements that recur at such sites : first class accommodation, with recognisable suites of rooms some of which may have hypocaust heating, and an entrance hall; standard class accommodation, usually imitating the contubernia of military barrack blocks; a detached bathbuilding; yards and sometimes , but not always, recognisable stables , fodder-stores and quarters for the mansio staff and the supervisor in charge. The only complete mansio, in the sense that it displays all these elements, is that outside the legionary fortress at Inchtuthil. In other cases excavation has been partial and some elements are missing. The component parts of mansiones and their layout seem to have been determined early on. Building D at Richborough and the mansio at Inchtuthil are recognisably the same kind of establishment. We have seen that at Inchtuthil and Rottweil the standard class and first class accommodation were provided in separate buildings, and that the latter lay well back from the main road frontage while the former lay either on it or at least closer to it. In Chapter Four it was argued that this was also the case at Chelmsford where the courtyard building (first class accommodation) lay c. 100 metres back from the road and the building on Site AR, the end of which was located c. 50 metres from the road, may have been the standard accommodation. A different arrangement is seen at Carnuntum (Fig .37). Here the elements of the mansio were crowded together into a small insula. The linking of separate ranges of mansio accommodation and other facilities to form a courtyard building came before

90

Conclusion the end of the first century, with Buildings E and F at Richborough and the mansio at Newstead. The Tiberian building at Neuss had a courtyard plan but here the ranges of accommodation were laid out round a yard that served as the waggon-park. The tradition of separate ranges disappeared relatively slowly. It is still found in the first Hadrianic mansio at Chelmsford and in the same period at Caernarvon and Pentre Farm. The courtyard building at Chelmsford was constructed in the late Hadrianic or perhaps in the early Antonine period, while that at Caernarvon was Antonine . At Dover a courtyard plan was not adopted until Period V (c.180-200). Two separate ranges of accommodation were newly constructed at Cave's Inn in the Antonine period. The courtyard building at Whitchurch and probably that at Wall were not built before c.170. The adoption of such a plan was therefore not commonplace before the second half of the second century.

Mansiones at

Godmanchester certainly, and Lower Wanborough probably, combined the first class and standard class accommodation in the same courtyard building. At Wall the courtyard building seems to have contained first class accommodation only. This was also the case at Caerwent, St Albans and Silchester and the same was probably true at Heddernheim and Augst. At the Saalburg the mansio beside the garrison's bath-building outside the porta praetoria of the fort contained only first class accommodation, and because excavation here has been so extensive it is very unlikely that a building with standard class accommodation ever existed. Rainau-Buch is similar , with a range of rooms including two suites with hypocaust heating to the north-east of the auxiliary fort (Planck D. 1983, 94 and 110 Figs. 59 and 70). Although the garrison's bath-house was adjacent, as at the Saalburg, there was another detached bath-house for the use of the high-ranking occupants of the mansio. At Eining, unusually, a small bathsuite was attached to a range of first class accommodation with rooms heated by hypocausts, again not far from the garrison's bath-house (Fischer and Spindler 1984, 36 and 48 Figs. 12 and 19). At Caerwent we saw that there was some evidence for the residence of an optio in a privately-owned house in the city, and it seems very likely that lower-ranking soldiers and officials were often expected to lodge with private householders while their superiors went to the mansio. We have seen that this was the rule at roadside settlements which lacked mansiones,and in Chapter Two we saw how this worked at Pompeii.

have suites of two rooms, presumably for individuals, but this seems to have been modified to give single rooms. Units with two major rooms were common, however , and can be recognised in the first class accommodation of many mansiones.Often the major rooms of a suite flanked a lobby or passage opening off a gallery or portico and extending across the full width of the range of rooms. A variation of this is where the lobby occupies only half of the width and a small additional room takes up the rest. These two 'room sets ' (S3 and S4) were defined by Drury in an important paper (Drury 1982, 295). His Set S6, present at Chelmsford, comprised a pair of rooms set back to back with a lobby to one side (Fig.31 ). Suites of rooms similar to Set S6 can be seen in the plans of mansionesat Heddernheim and Nijmegen (Figs.7 and 36a), while the earliest example seems to be the pre-Flavian building at Valkenburg (Van Dierendonck et al. 1993, 25 Fig.10). Three of the ranges of the guest-house known as the Leonideum at Olympia, built by Leonidas of Naxos in the fourth century B.C., have an arrangement of rooms two deep reached through halls entered from the internal portico (Tomlinson 1976, Fig . 9 facing page 48). Such 'hotels' for officials or eminent guests are a well-known feature of Greek sanctuaries, and are of course familiar from sanctuaries of Roman date in the western provinces (for example Sanxay and Lydney: Grenier 1960, 555 Fig.170; Wheeler and Wheeler 1932, Pl.LI). It is possible that this type of building influenced the adoption and design of the courtyard buildings which usually formed the first class accommodation of mansionesfrom the later second century onwards. The influence may not have been all one way for in addition to the courtyard building at Lydney there was a long range of rooms that is reminiscent of a range of standard class contubernia. The architecture of the mansionesclearly owed most to earlier buildings seen at military sites. This is obvious in the case of the barrack-like standard class accommodation. Courtyard buildings also, like those at Chelmsford, Lower Wanborough, and Silchester in its original design , had relatively narrow courtyards and resemble two ranges of rooms linked at one or both ends. The size and elaboration of mansiones in cities vary considerably (Fig.68). That at Caerwent stands out as being much nearer to those found in vici than to other urban examples. St Albans is larger but is still comparatively economical in the scale of its accommodation, with a range of single room units. Only Silchester approaches the complexity of Kempten and Heddernheim, and it is notable that the baths at these two sites were on a much larger scale. The same was the case at Carnuntum but it is possible that earlier baths there were closer in size to those at Silchester and Caerwent, and that some of the differences in the plans can be accounted for by differences in dating. Certainly in the original plan of the Silchester mansio there was no large apsidal dining-room and the entrance range probably resembled that at St Albans. At both there is a contrast with the larger scale of the entrance halls in the three mansionesin Germany (Fig.68a, b and e). This probably had its origin in the military buildings used as models for the same contrast can be seen in the size of the entrance halls at Inchtuthil and Nijmegen in the Flavian period (Figs.6 and 7).

The accommodation buildings of the mansiones have been looked at in detail in the preceding chapters. The standard class accommodation at Inchtuthil was without a doubt modelled on the quarters of the milites gregarii in standard barrack blocks and this ancestry is apparent in all such accommodation (Fig.67). It is not known how many men might have been expected to share each room, but presumably, as in military contubernia,the rooms did not provide privacy for individuals. However, they vary in size and practice may also have varied. Of greater interest is the first class accommodation. At Inchtuthil there seems to have been a change of plan before the construction of the building housing this was completed. The original intention was to

91

Curs us Public us: The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain The provision of hypocausta at Inchtuthil to heat some of the bedrooms in the first class accommodation, but not all, implies a distinction between the residents. TI1is is to be expected as we have seen the evidence of the Burdur inscription that men of different rank had a different entitlement to transport. The quarters with hypocaust heating have sometimes been referred to as 'superior accommodation' in earlier chapters, and this can be a useful tenn in discussing the accommodation at particular mansiones. It is important to re-emphasise the significance of the provision of hypocaust heating in the first and second centuries. It was a rarity in both town houses and villas at this time and is a good indicator that a building in a military vicus or roadside settlement had an official function. In addition to Inchtuthil hypocausta, small rooms with hypocausts heating adjacent rooms indirectly, have been noted in the First House at Richborough in the first century and at Castleshaw in the early second century. An example at Cave's Inn may also belong with this group, but its dating will not be clear until the site receives full publication. There then seems to be an hiatus in the Hadrianic period and I have suggested that this was perhaps a reality reflecting the emperor's concern that his officers should adhere to a rigorous military lifestyle. However, hypocausta are again found at Camelon, Corbridge and East Bridgford later in the second century. At Corbridge the provision of heated rooms started with a hypocauston in Phase 3, followed by a room heated directly by a channelled hypocaust (room F at the north-west end of the range) in Phase 4, and then a hypocauston again (room P) in Phase 5. Ranges of accommodation with a room with direct hypocaust heating at one end are found in the Antonine period at Dover and Lancaster and at Pentre Farm a room with a pillared hypocaust is dated to the second half of the second century or early in the third century (O'Leary et al. 1989, 26). The hypocaust below room IO at Caerwent served both to heat this room directly and as a hypocauston for room 9, and at Brecon Gaer the hypocauston in room 5 warmed room 7 indirectly and fed warm air into a hypocaust below room 4 which heated this room directly. The provision of hypocaust heating reaches its full development only in the later second century when two rooms in each of two suites were given direct heating at Chesterholm (rooms III and IV and rooms VI and VII). At Corbridge it was in Phase 6 (possibly third century in date) that a suite of superior accommodation incorporated two rooms (G and J) with direct hypocaust heating. Again probably in the third century the first class accommodation at Cave's Inn (Building 3) was constructed with two suites each with a single room heated directly by a hypocaust, and at Lancaster towards the end of the century one suite was provided with a single hypocaust and a second with two. We have seen how the more extravagant provision of hypocaust heating at Dover has suggested the presence of members of the imperial family at this mansio during the British expedition of Septimius Severus in 208-211.

century hypocausts are much more commonly fitted in a wider range of buildings. The identification of a building as the first class accommodation of a mansio is therefore less easy in such circumstances and depends on other criteria. A courtyard plan alone is not enough. At Wall the detached bath-house and the position well back from the road frontage confinn the identification. At Whitchurch only the second of these criteria is available. In the case of the courtyard building at Cold Knap. Barry the identification as a mansio must be regarded as very provisional, but this may change if further information becomes available about its context. Another distinctive feature of superior accommodation in some urban mansiones in the period c.150-250 is a large apsidal room. In Chapter Six it was suggested that this was possibly attached to a suite used by a curator or logistes, an official appointed by the emperor to overhaul the finances of particular cities, and that it functioned as a dining-room. As such it would have served to display the status of a resident curator civitatis to a selected group of guests. One of the two examples at Kempten is considerably larger than others known elsewhere, and perhaps looks forward to late Roman urban palaces for officials such as that of Herculia in the new province of Valeria (fonnerly part of Pannonia Inferior). The focal room in this building was a large apsidal hall with hypocaust heating (Fitz 1980, 7 Fig.II; 20-21; plates 3132). So far the only British mansiones with apsidal diningrooms are those at St Albans and Silchester. The bath-buildings at mansiones were almost invariably detached structures, and were originally associated with the stable-yards and waggon-parks rather than with the accommodation provided for travellers. At some vici, such as Brampton and Cowbridge, baths are found occupying a peripheral location like that of mansiones. Either purposebuilt accommodation may have existed but has not yet been found, or baths may have been provided without such accommodation for users of the cursus publicus. It is suggested that this is in fact the usual explanation for the occurrence of bath-buildings in roadside vici and that most such buildings, at least in the first and second centuries, were official in character. The case for this is strengthened where relief-patterned flue tiles of Hadrianic date have been found since these are known to have been associated with the bathhouses of mansiones at several sites. Although this argument will not prove acceptable to everyone, an attempt has been made in the caption to Fig.I to indicate both structural evidence for bath-buildings in roadside settlements and where relief-patterned tiles have been found. A more detailed search of excavation reports and other sources would probably add to the number of the fonner, and the study of these bath-buildings in their contexts merits further work. Fig.69a shows the bath-house of the Antonine fort at Bothwellhaugh where the garrison was most probably an auxiliary cohort of about 480 men (Keppie 1981, 46). This provides a standard by which to assess the baths found at mansiones and the scale of the traffic using their facilities. At Inchtuthil the baths (Fig.69c) were intended to cater for the occupants of two blocks of standard class

Some second century mansiones, such as Wall and Whitchurch, were apparently not initially provided with hypocaust heating, and conversely in the third and fourth

92

Conclusion accommodation (a total of thirty contubernia)and perhaps six or eight units of first class accommodation. This must represent at least half the strength of an auxiliary cohort. Bearing in mind that a regular rota for bathing could not be imposed on all the temporary residents in a mansio in the same way as on a garrison, the slightly larger size of the baths at Inchtuthil can be reconciled with the accommodation of the mansio there. The fort at Camelon was about forty per cent larger than Bothwellhaugh and may have held a milliary cohort. This makes it likely that the baths there (Fig.69b) were separate mansio baths rather than the baths used by the garrison which remain unlocated. At Chesterholm it seems to have been the original intention to provide a bath-house exclusively for the use of the occupants of the mansio, or of some of them, but this was not carried through and there they must have shared the baths used by the garrison, as at the Saalburg. Most of the other baths shown in Fig.69 are similar in size and comparable to the cohort baths at Bothwellhaugh. This includes those in cities like Caerwent and Silchester and those in vici at Braughing, Chelmsford, Godmanchester and Leintwardine (Fig.69e-j). Although other baths at Cowbridge and Wall both seem rather large (Fig.69d and k), the difference in scale is not perhaps great enough to be significant. There is no doubt that the baths at Wall belonged to a mansio. Tiles stamped by Legio II Augusta were employed in the bath-building at Cowbridge which lay c.80 metres behind the line of the Roman road between Cardiff and Neath (Rankov 1982, 333). This must mean that the baths were originally constructed for the use of military or official personnel. The peripheral location is that favoured for mansio facilities, although it remains possible that this was a military bath-house attached to a fort.

chosen for the facilities of mansiones(Fig. 70i). It is probable that the cold room and cold bath remain to be found. If this was an official building at all its size suggests that it was provided for very restricted use, perhaps like the earlier baths at Caernarvon for travellers of high rank. The same may have been the case with an even smaller set of baths at Bitterne (Fig. 70g). Here the later second century bath-house (only c.5.3 metres square) lay adjacent to a building at least 30.5 metres long (Cotton and Gathercole 1958, 16-21 Fig.2). Only the west wall of the latter was located. This is very little to go on but since the buildings lay on the periphery of the Roman settlement there is a possibility that they belonged to a mansio. The scale of the baths attached to mansionesin the first and second centuries reveals an expectancy that they would be used by large numbers of officials and soldiers moving around the province. It seems unlikely that baths on such a scale were provided simply for prestige and show for the maintenance of bathing facilities and the supply of fuel were expensive items. There is no evidence that mansio baths were available for the use of the ordinary inhabitants of a vicus. On the contrary, the general uniformity in the size of the baths shown in Fig.69, whether in cities or vici or at military sites, suggests that no provision was made for the populations at these places to make use of them. At military sites and in cities other bathing facilities were available. In vici it seems that this was one aspect of romanisation that the majority of vicani simply had to do without. The few much smaller bath-suites that can be associated with superior accommodation at some mansiones in Germany and Britain reflect a segregation in bathing that was sometimes practised, and is most obviously represented by the bathsuite attached to the praetoriumof the commanding officer in some forts. The scale of provision may ultimately have become less generous for lower-ranking personnel, as at Pentre Farm, but this may also reflect a decrease in traffic, at least in some districts, in the third and fourth centuries.

The additional small bath-suite in the standard class accommodation at Rottweil is only matched in Britain by the extra suite of bathing-rooms added to the baths at the Silchester mansio (Fig.70a). It was suggested in Chapter Six that these were intended for the segregated use of milites gregarii and the lower grades of government officials who were resident in lodgings in the city rather than staying in the mansio itself. In Chapter Four it was suggested that the earlier baths at Caernarvon (Fig. 70h) were intended for the use of higher-ranking officials and officers, as were bathsuites at the German sites of Rainau-Buch and Eining. An apt comparison can be made with the bath-suite of the second century villa at Lullingstone in Kent (Fig.70b). The bath-building at Brampton (Fig. 70d) where the cold room and cold bath were not found in the excavations can be compared to the later baths at Silchester (Knowles 1977). It lay about 120 metres west of the road to Caistor St. Edmund (Venta Icenorum), and two burials found close by may have preceded it and related to properties fronting the main road. Comparable again is the later bath-building at Caernarvon (Fig.70e), and perhaps that at Richborough (Fig.70f). There is unfortunately no certainty that these three bath-buildings should be linked with the cursus publicus. Those at Caernarvon and Richborough may have been built for the use of garrison troops in these forts, but their small size compared to second century military baths is striking. At Springhead a small bath-building lying c.35 metres behind Watling Street again has the peripheral location commonly

Securely identified stables and waggon-sheds are few in number, though the service-yards of mansiones were sometimes flanked by structures resembling corridors or porticoes or verandahs. Examples have been noted at Chelmsford (Period IV.3 on Site S), Chester, Corbridge and Richborough. It seems probable that these fulfilled the functions of stables and waggon-sheds. At Dover the two successive walled enclosures probably functioned as secure waggon-parks. The granaries, or more probably, fodderstores which are found at Richborough, Brandon Camp and Castleshaw, in mansionesconstructed by the military, are not a regular feature in civilian contexts in a later period. Only Springhead had a similar building, and this went out of use in the late second or early third century (Detsicas 1983, 76). However, it is only granaries which had raised wooden floors that form a distinctive and easily recognised buildingtype. Tower granaries may have existed at Chelmsford and Godmanchester, and rooms or structures of some kind must have been used to store fodder at all mansiones and mutationes. Quarters for the staff of the mansio can be recognised at Inchtuthil in one of the two buildings flanking the entrance to the service courtyard, at Castleshaw and

93

Cursus Publicus: The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain perhaps at Dover and Silchester. An aisled building at Godmanchester may have served the same purpose.

In the Hadrianic period it seems to have been decided that a concerted programme of construction was needed to provide facilities of an adequate standard in civilian contexts . This is most clearly seen in the occurrence of relief-patterned flue tiles which indicate a considerable provision and / or refitting of bath-buildings. It is not clear that new accommodation was constructed on the same scale, but there are a few sites, most notably Chelmsford, where this was the case. It seems probable that for the disciplinarian Hadrian it was of importance to separate soldiers and travelling officials from civilians , for the good of both. The most striking thing about this is the way that so many mansiones were sited well behind the road frontage, interfering as little as possible with roadside properties. It is found earlier at Inchtuthil and Wall and in the early Hadrianic period at Chelmsford. Thereafter it is such a recurring feature of mansiones in Britain that it can be used to support or even to suggest the identification of a building as part of a mansio.

One further component of mansiones requires special notice. This is the entrance hall which may have regularly served as the setting for some of the transactions of local government. A 'tripartite entrance hall' occurs in 'Villa C' (the first class accommodation) at Rottweil where rooms 4-6 formed such a set, and at Kempten in rooms 2, 4 and 5. In Britain rooms 47, 48 and 50 formed a tripartite entrance hall in the later plan of the mansio at Silchester, and rooms 3, 6 and 21 a similar set in the later version of Building 111.2at St Albans. Others are found at Chelmsford (rooms N3-N5); Lower Wanborough (rooms 9, 10 and 36); and possibly in the Second House at Richborough (rooms 13 and 14, and an additional destroyed room). This may have been anticipated in its predecessor Building F where room vi formed the entrance hall proper with room viii to the south and perhaps a matching room to the north (Fig.9b). However, most British mansiones seem to have had a single entrance hall , as was the case at Heddernheim. In some cases, Building A at Carlisle and the Period V Building C8 at Dover, the entrance hall was on a monumental scale. Entrance halls perhaps acted as reception areas where the warrants (diplomata) of new arrivals could be examined. One or both of the flanking rooms in tripartite entrance halls could have functioned as a repository for the records of a mansio . The main hall was perhaps usually reserved for more formal functions, and this interpretation accords well with the large size of some of them. In the cities there were certainly other buildings where the business of local government was carried on, but this was not so in the average roadside vicus. In these settlements the entrance halls of mansiones provided the obvious setting for conducting local government. The most convincing case, and perhaps the only case that can be argued with the support of archaeological evidence, is Godmanchester where there were two halls in the mansio and these were superseded in the early third century by the detached 'basilica' fronting on Ermine Street.

We do not know the legal clauses covering completion of work and payments Hadrian's officials included in the contracts they awarded for the construction of mansiones, but there were evidently difficulties. At Godmanchester foundation-trenches for the south range of the courtyard building and the baths were dug and then work stopped and rubbish-pits had been dug through the trenches before it was resumed. At Chelmsford we have seen that a timber building, probably first class accommodation, was constructed along with a bath-suite. Within a few years the builders were back to demolish the timber building and baths (though most of the flue tiles seem to have been kept for re-use), and to construct a new masonry courtyard building and new baths . However, although construction-trenches were laid out the baths were not completed until c.160-200 or even later (inf. P. Allen). Since these were buildings constructed for the government it is legitimate to wonder whether the interruptions reflect the wider concerns of the government at the time, and / or perhaps an inability to finance the schemes it had undertaken. If the cessation of building came in the later years of Hadrian after c.130 the only apparent cause that could have occasioned it would be the Jewish War which ended in 135. This seems rather a remote event to have affected the construction of mansiones in Britain. However, the archaeological dating evidence would not rule out a rather later date for the masonry courtyard building at Chelmsford and if this was the case the interruption of the work might have coincided with the Antonine advance into Scotland in A.D.140. This is a more attractive context since it is now known that work on the baths was suspended throughout the reign of Antoninus Pius. With the advance into Scotland the southern part of the province was further removed from the regular comings and goings of military personnel and the completion of the facilities at southern mansiones may have seemed unnecessary. This interpretation is at present dependent on the evidence from Chelmsford. The full publication of the mansio at Godmanchester, where there was also a delay in completing the building , will allow its validity to be examined, and other cases may come to light.

The earliest British mansiones were designed and built by the military. The most striking discovery at these is the occurrence of two classes of accommodation, here termed standard class and first class accommodation. It has been generally assumed that mansiones were for higher-ranking travellers and that those of lower status lodged in whatever civilian accommodation was available . In many places this was certainly the case. However, the assumption that it was always so has led to some clear misinterpretations of excavated buildings . At Rottweil the excavator did not recognise the standard class accommodation for what it was, prefening to interpret the contubernia as storage rooms flanking a market hall, while at Carnuntum a residential function for similar contubernia was dismissed. This can be paralleled in Britain where the standard class accommodation at Carlisle has been identified as a temple and at Chesterholm where it was at first interpreted as 'married quarters' for soldiers serving in the garrison. It is hoped that the complexity and size of some of these establishments will now be better appreciated .

In Chapter Five it was suggested that the mansiones at

94

Conclusion Cave's Inn, Wall and Whitchurch formed a group where the construction of new accommodation took place in the second half of the reign of Marcus Aurelius (Fig.71) . This was linked to the renewed importance of Chester following the return of detachments of the Twentieth Legion from the northern frontier. In Chapter Six the construction of a new mansio at St Albans was also associated with this programme and it was pointed out that the accommodation in this did not seem to be so generous as in earlier mansiones. The first class accommodation at Wall and Cave's Inn, though not at Whitchurch, has been fully excavated and is also less generous than might have been expected. Neither of these mansioneshad hypocaust heating to begin with, though there had been a hypocaustonin an earlier building at Cave's Inn and another is found at Camelon in the reign of Pius. Both the building programme itself and its economical execution can be linked to the suggestion by Daniels ( 1991) that the Antonine Wall and southern Scotland were given up by Marcus after the crisis on the Danube frontier had developed in 167-68. There was a shortage of soldiers because of the plague brought back from the east by the men of Lucius Verus and the emperor's lack of financial resources is symbolised by the auction of imperial property in the Forum of Trajan in 169. This may be reflected in the character of the later second century mansiones along Watling Street. The new construction of mansiones was presumably considered necessary because the military zone of the province had been relocated further south and more soldiers and officials were expected to be travelling between London and Chester. This is a reversal of the pause in mansio building that seems to have occurred here in the reign of Pius, just as Pius' policy of occupying southern Scotland was reversed. The stabilisation of the northern frontier on the line of Hadrian's Wall introduced a corresponding period of stability in the provision and maintenance of mansionesdown to the latter years of the third century. It is likely that the need for accommodation declined in the course of the third century since the size of the army in Britain is thought to have been reduced (Breeze and Dobson 1985, 13-15; Davies 1991, 52-54). This is perhaps reflected in the difference between the Antonine first class accommodation at Cave's Inn (Building 2) with its five single-room units and its successor Building 3 which had two suites of accommodation both with hypocaust heating. At any rate it is from the end of the third century that the provision and use of purpose-built accommodation comes to an end at many sites. At some the bath-buildings continued in use but were often rebuilt on a reduced scale. In Chapter Seven this was interpreted as the shedding of an aspect of the cursus publicus which was no longer regarded as relevant or important by the imperial authorities. The upright moral character of their officers and their segregation from civilians did not concern late third century emperors. Much more pressing were the logistics of supplying the army and officials. This is evident in the new phase of fortification at cities and roadside settlements, with the construction of masonry walls along the line of earlier ramparts and the later provision of towers. Entirely new defences were erected, not only the so-called burgi on Watling Street, but fortified posts elsewhere, for example in Sussex at Hardham and Alfoldean and at Packenham /

Ixworth in Suffolk where the first century fort ditches were redug in the fourth century (inf. J. Plouviez) . At London it now seems probable that the whole city wall should be assigned to a single programme dating to the third quarter of the third century rather than earlier (Sankey and Stephenson 1991, 120-22) while Canterbury and probably Chichester were provided with defences for the first time c.270-90 (Frere et al. 1982, 17 and 84; Down and Magilton 1993, 108-9). As in the later second century the particular situation which acted as a stimulus prompting this renewed fortification of cities and roadside settlements was probably the Germanic invasions into Gaul from the reign of Gallienus onwards. However, once the defences were constructed there can be little doubt that the prime role of these places was to provide security for government supplies. This function, however, came to an end with the expulsion of Constantine Ill's officials in the first decade of the fifth century. A recent assessment sees the curtailment of the administrative and tax-collecting role of the cities leading to their desertion in the next twenty years (Esmonde-Cleary 1989, 144-54). Despite Simon Esmonde-Cleary's belief that roadside settlements, in contrast to cities, acted largely as local centres providing services to the surrounding agricultural populations he has to admit that they too shared in the early fifth century collapse. It has been argued in the present volume that the roadside vici were deliberately established with the primary task of servicing official traffic and that this remained their chief role through the fourth century. It also seems that they could have functioned as centres where taxes had to be paid. In addition, on analogy with Roman practice elsewhere, their inhabitants were themselves probably usually engaged in working agricultural holdings classed as public land. Certainly other functions, including that of a local market, are not excluded, but the desertion of such settlements together with that of the cities is a further argument that the existence of both was closely linked to the survival of Roman government. When this came to an end such additional economic functions as they had acquired were not in themselves enough to maintain them as viable local centres. Much of the research carried out in writing this book has involved the use of interim reports. A lot of excavation has been carried out on mansiones,but a great deal of this has not received definitive publication. The suggestions put forward here will be validated, or not, when this eventually happens. It would be fair to say, however, that excavations have been opportunistic rather than problem-orientated. In particular the importance of government and the deliberate foundation of cities and roadside settlements, like earlier forts, for the purposes of administration and control is often minimised or tacitly ignored. I have attempted to address them in this book. Further progress in interpretation can only come by putting forward hypotheses using all the evidence, including the literary and epigraphic evidence about the workings of the empire available in greater abundance from other provinces. It is no matter if these are eventually proved wrong: their value lies in stimulating thought and debate . With this in mind it seems appropriate to conclude by proposing some future lines of research, both in the hope that

95

Cursus Publicus: The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

such work will produce some supporting evidence for ideas put forward in this book and with the expectation that new and better ideas will be generated. There is probably little to be gained from exammmg additional mansiones at military sites, but it was noted in Chapter Four that more needs to be done to set some of them within the context of the transition from military control by fort commanders to civilian control. Caernarvon and Pentre Farm in Wales and Catterick in Brigantia should be viewed in relation to the superior administrative centres at Chester and Aldborough. Similar interesting possibilities are present with cities and roadside settlements. Perhaps the most important caveat to be applied to any research excavation designed to examine a mansio is that it should examine the official installations in the context of the settlement where they occur. This needs to be geared to establishing not only the original character of a settlement but also its development and any changes in its economic basis over time. As far as cities are concerned re-excavation of the mansio at Silchester can be recommended. As Fox remarked a hW1dredyears ago: 'a re-examination of the site ....ought to be Wldertaken if our task of exploration is to be made thorough and complete' (Fox and Hope 1894, 222). To achieve this not only the mansio but insula VIII in its entirety should be examined since it includes buildings on the same alignment as the public baths, sometimes thought to represent an early phase in the development of the city, as well as a mixture of official and private buildings. Knowledge of the developm~nt and interaction of these over time, and the complete examination of a considerable stretch of the defences and their effect on the use of space within the insula, would repay the necessary expenditure of resources. A number of roadside settlements are tempting candidates for further excavation. At one end of the scale is Lower Wanborough where part of the settlement adjoining the main road has already been excavated (Burnham and W acher 1990, 158-64). Here the laying out of an orthogonal street grid and the nature of the defences, as well as the history of the mansio, require investigation in an integrated programme of research. At the other end of the scale there are many settlements where no purpose-built accommodation was provided. In some a bath-building may have been present for the use of official travellers and there may be evidence for a less ambitious but still a planned layout. Others lack any obvious sign of even such minimal planning. Representatives of these, investigated on a sufficient scale, would increase our sum of knowledge. This can be termed the 'single site approach'. However, a coherent research design for roadside settlements should

96

logically take as its starting-point a particular road, and aim to examine and compare the settlements along it. We have seen how praefecti were in charge of transport along particular roads and groups of roads in Italy and in Britain how a building-programme may have been carried out by the authorities at mansiones along Watling Street in the later second century. A promising choice for such research might be the route from London to Caistor St. Edmund via Colchester. Routes 5 and 9 of the Antonine Itinerary give us the names of three roadside settlements between London and Colchester and of another four between Colchester and Caistor (see Appendix 2). The Roman site at Romford has not yet been located and the chances of major excavations here are presumably slight. At Chelmsford a substantial amoWlt of work has already been carried out over the last twenty years by the Chelmsford Archaeological Committee succeeded by the Archaeology Section of Essex CoW1ty Council. It is probably the case that more is known of the inter-relationship of the mansio and settlement here than anywhere else. Kelvedon has also received attention, from Warwick and Kirsty Rodwell and again from archaeologists employed by Essex CoW1tyCouncil. Nothing is known of the settlement Ad Ansam (Stratford St Mary) but some excavation has been carried out at Coddenham. Stoke Ash is again virtually Wlknown. Scole, on both the Suffolk and Norfolk sides of the River Waveney, was sampled by excavation in 1973 (Rogerson 1977) and a considerable programme of work has been carried out in 1993. If its identification with Villa Faustini is correct this is the sole case in Britain in the vicinity of which we may find what was originally a privately-owned villa later functioning as a mansio. A programme of research-excavation along the London - Caistor road would have the added benefit of dealing with sites belonging to two different civitates, the Trinovantes and Iceni. The involvement of both in the Boudican rebellion means that the same factors may have affected the early development of roadside settlements in their territories, and perhaps distinguish these from similar sites in other civitates. Differences in the organisation of the settlements originating from the different administration of the tribes, from a Roman colony and a civitas-capital respectively, in the later first and early second centuries might also be discernible. The ideal would be to sample all these sites by excavation at least to the extent of the work already achieved at Chelmsford. The number of sites is the minimum that could be expected to produce useful results. Overall, if the importance of the cursus publicus in the fW1ctioningof these sites has been correctly assessed, it might be expected that there will be a similar development in all of them since the same road passed through them all.

APPENDIX ONE. THE PIZOS INSCRIPTION. The translation given here is based on the text published in IGRRom 1.766: To Good Fortune, the greatest and most godlike emperors L. Septimius Severus Pertinax and M. Aurelius Antoninus, the Augusti, and P. Septimius Geta, Caesar, and Julia Domna, Mother of the Camp, and of their whole House, and of the sacred senate and people of the Romans and of the sacred armies, the market (emporion) of Pizos was founded by the bounty of the rulers when L. Septimius Severus Pertinax and M. Aurelius Antoninus, the Augusti, our all-powerful rulers, held the consulship, and those listed below came to live in it: On behalf of the victory and the continuance for all time of

The names of settlers are given in four columns. The first column has 52 names from three villages and the words 'with his brother' occur alongside four names. The second column has 54 names from four villages, of which one is erased and another is accompanied by the words 'with his brother'. The list for the last village in the second column is continued onto the third column with a further 45 names, of which one is erased and another three are accompanied by 'with his brother'. A further 7 names from two other villages complete this column. The fourth column has the names of 9 chief settlers. After this comes the decree of the governor. C. Sicinius Clarus propraetorian governor of the Augusti decrees: Our greatest and most godlike all-powerful rulers took satisfaction in the provision of the staging-posts (stathmoi) and because they wished that their province should remain in the same good state for the whole of their age, they provided for the existing markets (enporia) to be made more splendid and for new ones to come into being. And these have been created. Since it must be the case that things arising from a divine gift are also made more fortunate by the status of those placed in authority over them, I ordered city councillors to be sent out to these markets to be local leaders (toparchoi) rather than common people engaged in commerce, giving to them through the authority of a letter both the administration of justice and full rights to rule those living there, not with haughtiness and violence but with justice and reasonableness, and not only to behave in this way themselves but also to protect them from others who have chosen to [commit] some injustice, producing conditions of abundance and plenty. So that these markets might be more fortunate I persuaded the most respectable men from the surounding villages to reside there and others also to make their homes in these markets, and I myself offered those who willingly wanted to do this that they would have great gifts from the emperors' godlike fortune, that is freedom from the tax of corn for the city, and freedom from the provision of garrisons (bourgarioi) and guards (phrouroi) and official transport (angareia). So much for the rank of the local leader and the freedom from taxes of the inhabitants, present and future. Concerning the buildings, so that they may be cared for and always remain, I order the local leaders and the policemen (epistathmoi stratiotai) to take over the accommodation (praitoria) and the baths (balaneia) in altogether perfect condition from those in charge of them, that is in the fabric and the fittings and services, handing them on to those who succeed them properly inventoried just as they take them over. So that I may render them more careful with regard to taking over and passing on their charge, I order that from the time they take over until they pass it on the property of the local leaders and of the magistrates whom I ordered to make the nominations at their private risk should be liable to the treasury of the cities, and in addition to this that the markets should be liable fourfold for anything that is lacking.

97

APPENDIX TWO. TIIE ANTONINE ITINERARY. In an earlier paper (Black 1984) the writer argued that the British section of the Antonine Itinerary comprises journeys made by the emperors Septimius Severus and Caracalla (Antoninus) and the Caesar Geta during the expeditio Britannica in 208-211. One of the purposes of this appendix is to re-examine this hypothesis. The routes appearing in the Itinerary comprise lists of places and the mileages between them and it is obviously important to establish as closely as possible at what date they were compiled. The British section of the Itinerary has been thoroughly studied by Professor Rivet (1970; Rivet and Smith 1979) and his identifications of the places named on the routes will normally be given in the lists below without comment. There are a few names where it has been found necessary to revise Rivet's identifications and these are discussed under the routes where they occur. Rivet's attempts to correct 'wrong' mileages in the Itinerary were based on the belief that the distances were derived from accurate lists based on milestone surveys of the routes, and not from a visual presentation on a map. The proposal that distances that fall short of the real figures were measured from the edges of 'town zones' around the major towns (Rodwell 1975) was followed by Rivet in the later of his two publications. However, it has been pointed out that there is no independent evidence for the existence of such zones (Mann 1987). Instead Mann has drawn attention to the diversity of practice in the measurements used in different areas of the Roman Empire, even when the same name was employed. He has proposed that a 'Celtic mile' existed for measuring distances on roads: this would have been approximately one eighth longer than the Roman mile, just as the pes Drusianus, known to have been used in northern Gaul. was said by Hyginus to be one eighth longer than the Roman foot. Mann considered that the use of this Celtic mile rather than the Roman mile would account for most of the figures in the Antonine Itinerary which seemed to understate the real distances . Although he offered no specific illustrations in support of this it seems to be the solution that works best for many of the inaccurate mileages in the Itinerary (see below). In addition, it can now be seen that the Thurmaston milestone (RIB 2244) which was set up in A.D.119-20 was probably measured in Celtic miles. It was found 410 yards (375 metres) beyond the position it should have occupied if it had been set up two Roman miles from the east gate of Leicester. If the eastern boundary of the city is taken to have been the same in the Hadrianic period its position is only 5 metres out for a milestone measuring the distance in Celtic miles. An attempt has been made to classify the various stoppingplaces as mansio or vicus, following the model provided by a few routes in the Antonine Itinerary where such glosses do occur. By mansio is meant purpose-built accommodation; vicus signifies a settlement from which animals and vehicles were available for official travellers, but where accommodation was provided in the homes of the inhabitants. There was probably a mansio at every fort and in every city (coloniaor civitas-capital), but these will be

described as 'fort(ress)' or 'city' in the lists . The Itinerary mileages are given in Roman numerals and the real distances (in Roman miles) in Arabic numerals, to the nearest halfmile. The distances were measured using the 1:50,000 Landranger series of Ordnance Survey maps. Mileages are calculated to and from the centre of cities and other types of site, as far as these can be determined. This is primarily a matter of convenience, and in most cases will make no significant difference to the mileage figure. A milestone from the centre of Lincoln (RIB 2241) and another measured (in Celtic miles) from the eastern side of Leicester (RIB 2244) seem to indicate that practice varied in the Roman period. Even the Digest entry (50.16.154) stating that miles should not be measured from the miliarium Urbis (the golden milestone set up by Augustus in the Forum in Rome) but from the built-up area of the city shows how confusion existed in measuring distances from Rome. Where the numerals in the Itinerary appear in heavy type these are figures that seem to be calculated in Celtic miles. The text is that edited by Cuntz (1929). Route 1 464.1-2 A limite id est a vallo Praetoriom.p. clvi. High Rochester fort 464.3 a Bremenio Corbridge mansio xx 25 Corstopitum viiii 10.5 Ebchester fort 4 Vindomora Binchester fort xviiii20 465.1 Vinovia vicus xxii 22 Catterick 2 Cataractoni xxiiii 24.5 Aldborough city lsurium 3 466.1 Eburacum fortress XVll 17.5 York leug. VI Victrix Kexby ?vicus Derventione vii 7 2 11.5 Shiptonthorpe vicus Delgovicia xiii 3 Brough mansio XXV 12 4 Praetorio The heading states that the journey is from the frontier, that is from Hadrian s Wall, to a place called Praetorium. Such place-names occur in other provinces and presumably indicate where a previously uninhabited and unnamed site was selected for a purpose-built mansio. However, it has been proposed that the destination was in fact Petuaria (Brough-on-Humber), and that Praetorio is either a corruption or a rationalisation of this name. The startingplace is High Rochester. From there the stops are at intervals mostly in excess of 20 Roman miles as far as York. Seven Roman miles from York the more direct road to Brough crossed the River Derwent in the vicinity of Kexby and this, rather than the place Derventio (Malton, also on the Derwent). should be what is referred to in the Itinerary. Half way between the Derwent and Brough a settlement extended for a considerable distance along the road between Hayton and Shiptonthorpe. This settlement has been identified with Delgovicia (Frere 1985, 281). The distance from the Derwent to the excavated area within this settlement is c.11.5 miles and from here to Brough is a further 12 miles. An alternative and less direct route from York reaches a second crossing of the Derwent at Stamford Bridge after

98

The Antonine Itinerary c.8.5 miles. From there to Shiptonthorpe is 13 miles, with the same distance of 12 miles on to Brough. 466.1 2

Eburacum leug. VI Victrix Derventione

3 4

Delgovicia Praetorio

both before and after York, is the same. It is therefore unnecessary to postulate the conflation of separate routes, and Praetorio in the heading must be a rationalisation just like Praetorio in the text.

xvii 17.5 York fortress vii 8.5 Stamford Bridge ?vicus xiii 13 Shiptonthorpe vicus XXV 12 Brough mansio

The insertion of an extra stage. as well as the rationalisation of the name Petuaria, indicates that the route has been revised. Numerous indications of revision will be pointed out in the remaining routes of the Itinerary and for convenience these will be referred to as the work of 'the editor'. Most , though not necessarily all, were probably the work of a single individual.

Rivet (1970, 41) thought that Route l may have been a conflation of two routes , the first ending at York, which could be referred to as a praetorium in the sense of a military headquarters, and the second from York to Brough. This is a possible solution and the destination given in the heading will then have prompted the change in the conflated text from Petuaria to Praetorio. Seeming to support this is the difference in the frequency of places named in the two parts of the route, before and after York. In the first part two of the stages are 25 miles, but the 30.5 miles between Corbridge and Binchester is split into two stages of I0.5 and 20 miles. Potential additional stopping-places at Risingham, Lanchester, and Piercebridge are omitted. It seems that the users of this part of the route were able to travel at a rate of 25 miles a day but that 30 miles was too far. All the places named must have been overnight-stops rather than simply mutationes where fresh animals were obtained; nor are there any other superfluous names. Between York and Brough the intervals are 7, 11.5 and 12 (or 8.5, 13 and 12) miles. Here it seems there is a stop that should not have been needed if this was part of the same plan as the first part of the route. However, there is an intruder in the text. The final figure of xxv miles between Delgovicia and Brough must in fact represent the correct distance between the River Derwent and Brough, and must have remained unaltered when the stage to Shiptonthorpe was inserted into the route. If this is correct the route that was followed must have crossed the Derwent at Stamford Bridge. However , the mileage from York to the Derwent seems to point to the crossing at Kexby rather than at Stamford Bridge. A possible solution is that this mileage is given in Celtic rather than in Roman miles. In the first part of the route (464.3-465.1) the total of mileages is xlviii, just one mile short of the measured total of 49 Celtic miles. Despite the inaccurate individual mileages to Corbridge and to Binchester, which should be 22 and 18 Celtic miles respectively, it seems that here too the distances were based on a calculation in Celtic miles.

Route 2 466 .5-6 Item a vallo ad portum Ritupis m.p . cccclxxxi sic Birrens ? 467.1 a Blatobulgio Castra fort Exploratorum xii 17 Netherby city or xii IO Carlisle 2 Luguvallo fort Old Penrith fort xi iii 13 3 Voreda Kirkby Thore fort xiii 14 4 Brovonacis 12.5 Brough fort Xlll Verteris 5 fort Xllll 13.5 Bowes 468 . 1 Lavatris vicus Catterick xvi 21 2 Cataractone xxiiii 24.5 Aldborough city lsuriam 3 fortress xvii 17.5 York 4 Ebura cum ?vicus viiii 9.5 Tadcaster Ca/caria 5 ?fort ?Leeds ? Camboduno 6 Slack fort ?xx Camuloduno Manchester fort xviii 23 7 Mamucio xviii 20.5 Northwich ?vicus 469.l Condate fortress Chester 2 Deva leg. XX Vici xx 17 vicus Tilston X 11 Bovio 3 xx 8.5 Whitchurch mansio 4 Medialano XU 11.5 ?Harcourt Rutunio 5 ?vicus Mill city xi I0.5 Wroxeter 6 Urioconio vicus 11 Red Hill XI Uxacona 7 Water Eaton vicus xii 11.5 470.1 Pennocrucio mansio Wall xii 13.5 2 Etoceto xvi 16.5 Mancetter vicus Manduesedo 3 4 Venonis xii 11 High Cross vicus xvii 18.5 Whilton Bannaventa 5 vicus Lodge Towcester mansio xii 11 6 Lactodoro Dropshort vicus xvii 17 471.1 Magiovinto Dunstable vicus xii 11 2 Durocobrivis xii 12.5 St. Albans city Verolamio 3 Brockley Hill vicus vii ii 9 4 Sul/oniacis city xii 14.5 London Londinio 5 vicus 11.5 Welling X 472.1 Noviomago xviiii IO Springhead vicus 2 Vagniacis ?mansio Vllll Rochester Durobrivis 9 3 vicus xiii 17.5 Ospringe 4 Durolevo Duroverno xii 10.5 Canterbury city 5 adportum 6 XII 11.5 Richborough mansio Ritupis

If Shiptonthorpe was not originally present in the section from York to Brough, the only anomaly in the second part of the route is the short stage from York to the River Derwent. It is likely that a vicus was situated there and that the journey was broken at it for an overnight stop, since other rivers in the Itinerary seem to be included as stopping-places rather than simply as geographical features (e.g. at 103. l, 104.3, 105.5 and 106.1 on the route from Milan to Traiectus Siciliae). We have already seen that the maximum distance covered in a day in the first part of the route did not exceed 25 miles. The short stage from York to the Derwent is thus explained, since the distance from York to Brough is 33.5 Roman miles, and it is clear that the character of Route I,

Like Route l this starts from an outpost fort beyond Hadrian's Wall. This particular fort, at Birrens, is thought to

99

Curs us Public us: The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

have been abandoned by the Roman army by A.D.184 (Breeze and Dobson 1987, 144), but this does not rule out the survival of the name in later use. There is a stage missing between Tadcaster and Manchester and Rivet has proposed that the name of the fort at Slack should be supplied. Because of its similarity to Camboduno this could easily have been omitted in copying the Route. The figure of xx miles could then have appeared next to Camuloduno in the original text and Camboduno could have been located in the area of Leeds, as a reference in Bede (HE Il,14) suggests it was. The stage to Catterick can be amended to xxi, and that to Manchester to xxiii. The figure for the stage to Northwich is correct if it is given in Celtic miles. This then seems to have been subtracted from a total of xxxviii Roman miles from Manchester to Chester, to produce the inaccurate xx miles from Northwich to Chester. Bovio has now been identified with a settlement at Tilston on the direct route between Chester and Whitchurch (Waddelove and Waddelove 1984, 255-57), and this lies nearly 11 Roman miles from the former and c.9.5 miles from the latter. The distance of xx miles from Tilston to Whitchurch was in fact the distance from Chester to Whitchurch and it seems that, like the stage to Shiptonthorpe in Route 1, the stage to Tilston was an insertion into an earlier list. The mileage is probably a guess. The first and final parts of the route are the most instructive for understanding how the text of the original route has been altered. The mileages from Birrens to Netherby and from Netherby to Carlisle are both wrong. The exact line of the main road from Birrens east of the River Esk to its junction with the branch road to Netherby is not known, but the distance between the two forts must have been close to 17 Roman miles. From Netherby to Carlisle was c.10.25 Roman miles. The detour to and from Netherby adds about 7 miles to the direct route between Birrens and Carlisle, but even if this is subtracted the result still does not agree with the Itinerary's total of xxiiii miles. The equal distances assigned to the two unequal stages in the Itinerary are obviously suspect and suggest the arbitrary subdivision of a larger total. The only solution that makes sense of the figures is that this total was calculated as 24 Celtic miles (:;;:27 Roman miles), and this was then equally divided between the two stages. The text gives the distances between Rochester and Ospringe and between Ospringe and Canterbury as xiii and xii miles. As the real distances are c.17 .5 and 10.5 Roman miles, these figures are obviously grossly inaccurate. However, the combined distance of 28 Roman miles is nearly 25 Celtic miles, and the two mileages in the text add up to this figure. Durolevo must have been inserted into the route and the distances to and from it are guesses based on the distance between Rochester and Canterbury expressed in Celtic miles. The first stop after London, Noviomagus, was identified by Rivet with Crayford where considerable but ill-recorded Roman finds have been made. A definite roadside settlement has recently been located at Welling (Garrod and Philp 1992) and this is the identification adopted here. The stage from Welling to Springhead is given as xviiii miles and this again is clearly wrong. But the distance from London to

Springhead is c.21.5 Roman miles, the equivalent of 19 Celtic miles. Noviomago is therefore another insertion, and the distance of x miles from London presumably another guess. The actual distance is about 11.5 Roman miles which is just over 10 Celtic miles, so that in this case the guess was fortuitously accurate. However, the figure of 19 Celtic miles to Springhead has not been amended to allow for the new stage. From Springhead to Rochester is 9 Roman miles, which is the figure that appears in the Itinerary. What seems to have happened is that the editor took the additional names Noviomago and Durolevo from another source, perhaps a map, which lacked distances to these minor places. Since he was forced to guess the distances to Welling, and to and from Ospringe, he got them wrong. It seems likely that distances appeared in both Roman and Celtic miles in the original form of the route he was editing. Distances in Roman miles and leagues appear side by side in some routes in Gaul, including one beginning from Milan and ending at Boulogne (356.1 363.2). The editor is also presumably responsible for selecting one or other of the distances, in Celtic or Roman miles, from those he found for each stage and suppressing the other. The final stage in the route, from Canterbury to Richborough, is correctly given as xii Roman miles, like the viiii miles from Springhead to Rochester. North of London the text gives the stage from St Albans to Brackley Hill as viiii miles which is the correct figure in Roman miles, but the correct figure from Brackley Hill to London is 14.5 Roman miles rather than xii . It seems that the editor has used a total of 21 Celtic miles rather than 23.5 Roman miles as the distance between the two cities. The distance from St Albans to Brackley Hill (in Roman miles) has been subtracted from this total to give a false mileage between Brackley Hill and London. Elsewhere there are distances which are inaccurate by only one mile and it is clearly unsafe to assume that those which are understated represent the correct distance in Celtic miles and to ignore those which are overstated. Such stages are regarded simply as inaccurate distances in Roman miles. It seems possible that many of them betray where additional stopping-places have been inserted, or at least where the mileage to them was not given in the original Itinerary and has had to be estimated. Examples are the stages between Carlisle and Brough. those between Wroxeter and Wall, and between High Cross and Towcester. It seems clear that the selection of figures from the original alternatives in the Itinerary has been anything but systematic. It occurred as part of a process of inserting additional stopping-places, or mileages to them. but this was also carried out by simply subdividing the original longer stage totals. Distances expressed in Celtic miles in Route 2 are concentrated in the stages between London and the nearest cities in the final part of the route. From the analysis given here it is possible that in its original form Route 2 contained fewer stopping-places, and may have been similar to Route 1. The list may have been: Birrens - Carlisle - Brough - Catterick - Aldborough York - Slack - Manchester - Chester, and from there on the

100

The AntonineItinerary various places designated as city or mansio. However, it seems that Northwich, Brockley Hill and Springhead were included in the original Itinerary with the distances to them, and this may have been so with other forts and vici.

35). This is c. 10.5 Roman miles to the west of Ix worth along a known Roman road. There is no known direct link between Ixworth and Caistor but the distance as the crow flies is c.30 Roman miles . Again no road is known from Icklingham to Cambridge but the distance is c.25 Roman miles. The sum of these distances is c.65.5 Roman miles. The total distance in the Itinerary is Ix miles, but it is c.61.5 Roman miles straight from Caistor to Cambridge so that this must be Ix Celtic miles. The equivalent is 67.5 Roman miles , and this is just compatible with the postulated route via Icklingham. The sum of the stages between Water Newton and Lincoln is lvi miles and this best suits the route by Great Casterton . Causennis should be on the road rather than off its line like the site at Saltersford suggested by Rivet and Smith (1979, 164). Ancaster is the obvious choice. Perhaps here what were written as xxx and xxvi were intended to be xxxvi and xx. The three stage distances from Littleborough to York seem to be given in Celtic miles and represent 65.25 Roman miles which is very close to the measured total (64.5 miles). The distance from Catterick to Bowes is also in Celtic miles .

Route 3 473.1-2 Item a londinio ad portum Dubris m.p. !xvi sic 3 Dubobrius xxvii 30 Rochester ?mansio 4 Durarverno xxv 28 Canterbury city 5 ad portum Dubris xiiii 16 Dover mansio Route 4 473.6- 7 Item a londinio ad portum lemanis m.p. lxviii 8 Durobrivis xxvii 30 Rochester ?mansio 9 Durarvenno xxv 28 Canterbury city 10 Ad portum Lemanisxvi 16 Lympne ?mansio These two routes follow part of Route 2 and it is clear that the distances between London and Canterbury are again given in Celtic miles, or approximately so. The only exception is the stage to Lympne in Route 4 which, like that to Richborough in Route 2, is expressed in Roman miles. Routes 3 and 4 were clearly designed for travellers on horseback or in carriages.

Route 5 does not show evidence for the insertion of additional stopping-places, but there is an extensive and almost whimsical selection of Celtic rather than Roman miles. The use of Colonia for Camulodunoand of lcinos for Venta lcinorum was probably not a change from the original text, for there are similar 'late' forms of place-names in the route from Milan to Boulogne (e.g. Ambianis in 362.4) . Route 5 seems designed for a rapidly executed journey to the northern military area. Concern for imperial estates in East Anglia, and with army supplies, might have caused the detour to Caistor and Cambridge to meet with procurators and other responsible officials. However , comparison with Route 9, which also covers the road from London to Caistor, suggests that considerable caution is required in accepting this (see below).

Route 5 474.1-2 Item a londinio luguvalio ad Valiumm.p. ccccxlii 3 Caesaromago xxviii31 Chelmsford mansio 4 Colonia xxiiii 23.5 Colchester city 5 Villa Faustini XXXV 40 Scole vicus 6 lcinos xviii 17.5 Caistor St. Edmund city 7 Camborico XXXV ?Icklingham vicus Duroliponte 8 XXV Cambridge vicus 475.l Durobrivas XXXV 34.5 Water Newton mansio 2 Causennis XXX 36 ?Ancaster vicus 3 Lindo XXVl 19 Lincoln city 4 Segeloci xiiii 14 Littleborough

Route 6 476.7 Item a Londinio Lindo m.p. clvi sic xxi 23.5 St. Albans Verolami 8 xii 12.5 Dunstable Durocobrius 9 XU 11 Dropshort 10 Magiovinio 11 Lactodoro xvi 17 Towcester XU 11 Whilton 477.1 lsannavantia Lodge Tripontio xii 11 Cave's Inn 2 viii 7.5 High Cross Venonis 3 XU 4 Ratas 13 Leicester xiii 14 Willoughby Verometo 5 Margiduno xii 11.5 East 6 Bridgford vii 6.5 Thorpe AdPontem 7 vii 7.5 Brough Crococalana 8 xii 13 Lincoln 9 Lindo

?vicus 5 6 7 476.l 2 3 4 5 6

Dano Legeolio Eburaco lsubrigantum Cataractoni Levatris Verteris Brocavo Luguvalio

xxi 23 xvi 18.5 xxi 23 xvu 17.5

Doncaster Castleford York Aldborough xxiiii24 .5 Catterick xviii 21 Bowes xiiii 13.5 Brough xx 19.5 Brougham XXI 20 Carlisle

fort fort fortress city

vicus fort fort fort city or fort

There are many problems associated with Route 5. Between London and Caistor the stage distances alternate between Celtic and Roman miles, and the editor was clearly selecting these from the original route-plan tum and tum about. The accuracy of both sets of mileages shows that both were taken directly from this source, without the intervention of the editor's own faulty calculations. The route between Caistor and Cambridge, and the identification of the intermediate Camborico, are uncertain. The best solution is probably to identify Camboritum with Icklingham (Moore et al. 1988,

city

vicus vicus mansio vicus mansio vicus city

vicus mansio vicus vicus city

Route 8 478.6 Item ab Eburaco londinio m.p. ccxxvii xxi 23 Castleford fort la gecio 7 Dano xvi 18.5 Doncaster fort 8 xxi 23 Li ttleborough 9 Ageloco

101

Cursus Publicus: The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain

10 11 479.1

Lindo Crococalano Margiduno

14 xii ii 13 Xllll 14

2 3 4 5

Vernemeto Ratis Vennonis Bannavanto

11.5 14 XU 13 xviiii 18.5

6 7 8 9

Magiovinio Durocobrivis Verolamo Londinio

xxviii 28 11 xii 12.5 xxi 23.5

Xllll

XU XU

XU

itself was fixed after the distance in Celtic miles had been selected for the stage between St. Albans and London. It seems possible that Route 8 was an artificial creation because the first part of it was taken from Route 5 and because of the omission of mansiones between Lincoln and London where they would be expected to appear. It may have been the work of the editor whom we have seen to be responsible for so many alterations and interpolations. Route 6, on the other hand, may preserve a record of a genuine journey between London and Lincoln.

?vicus Lincoln city Brough vicus East Bridgford mansio Willoughby vicus city Leicester High Cross vicus Whilton Lodge vicus Dropshort VlCUS Dunstable vicus St Albans city London city

Route 7 477.10 Item a Regno Lundinio m.p. xcvi sic 478.1 Clausentum xx 19.5 ?Wickham 2 Venta Belgarum X 13.5 Winchester Galleva 3 24.5 Silchester Atrebatum xxii 27.5 Staines xxii 4 Pontibus London xxii 21 Londinio 5

Both Route 6 and Route 8 cover the same ground, though in reverse order , between London and Lincoln. This is the full extent of Route 6 but Route 8 begins at York and the first part , as far as Lincoln, matches 475.3- 7 in Route 5. The stopping-places are given in reverse order, but Celtic and Roman miles are used for exactly the same stages in the two routes. This is suspicious. It will be convenient to set out the corresponding parts of Routes 6 and 8, together with part of Route 2 which covers the same ground from High Cross to London, before proceeding further with the discussion. Route Lincoln Brough Thorpe East Bridgford Willoughby Leicester High Cross Cave's Inn Whilton Lodge Towcester Dropshort Dunstable St Albans Brockley Hill London Total Mileage From High Cross From Lincoln

2

XVU

XU

xvii

xii xii Vllll

xii

xci

8

xciii xcii 93.5 clvi clvi 159

The only significant discrepancy between Route 2 and Route 6 is the two mile shortfall in the former between High Cross and Whilton Lodge. There are important differences between Route 6 and Route 8. The latter omits one vicus and two mansiones . The omission of Towcester created an anomalously long stage between Whilton Lodge and Dropshort. Discrepancies in the mileages occur in the first stage to Brough, in that from Willoughby to Leicester, and between High Cross and Whilton Lodge. The remarkable thing is that, despite these differences , the total mileage from Lincoln to London is the same in both routes. Clearly individual mileages must have been altered in both to make them conform to this total of 156 miles. However, the total

city city mansio city

The Regno of the heading is Chichester, properly Noviomagus Reg(i)norum. The mileages of the two stages between Chichester and Winchester, by the most direct route via Wickham and Shedfield, add up to about 33 Roman miles but the Itinerary gives xxx miles. It seems most likely that this total is expressed in Celtic miles. It has been suggested that Clausentum was at Wickham on the River Meon (Rivet and Smith 1979, 166), and if so this seems to be another case where one stage length, accurately given in Roman miles, has been subtracted from a larger total in Celtic miles to produce an inaccurate distance for the second stage. The distance between Winchester and Silchester is given in Celtic miles. The total mileage between Silchester and London is actually about 43 Celtic miles, one mile short of the total in the Itinerary , but the agreement is close enough. This figure has either been arbitrarily divided into two equal stages of xxii miles or, since the xxii miles from Staines to London is close to the real figure of xxi Roman miles, the same sort of calculation has been employed here as we saw in the first part of the route between Chichester and Winchester. The total mileage given in the heading of Route 7, like that for Route 6, agrees with the sum of the individual stages and this shows that the total mileages in the Itinerary were calculated or re-calculated when the editor introduced his amendments into the text.

True Mileage and Status city xii xi iii 13 vicus vii 7.5 vicus vii xiiii 6.5 mansio xii XU 11.5 vicus xiii xii 14 city xii XU 13 vicus viii 7.5 mansio XU xviiii 11 vicus xii 11 mansio XVI xxviii 17 vicus xii xii 11 vicus xii xii 12.5 city 9 VIGUS xxi xxi 14.5 city 6

vicus

Route 9 479.10-11 Item a Venta lcinorum Lundinio m.p. cxxviii sic xxxii 23.5 Stoke Ash vicus 480.1 Sitomago Coddenham mansio xxii 12 2 Conbretovio vicus xv 15 Stratford AdAnsam 3 St. Mary 4 vi 6.5 Colchester city Camuloduno Kelvedon vicus viiii 10 Canonio 5 Xll 13 Chelmsford mansio Cesaromago 6 XVI 18 ?Romford vicus 7 Durolito city Lundinio xv 13 London 8 The mileage in the heading is one more than the sum of the individual stages and this may simply be due to careless

102

The Antonine Itinerary

addition. It will be assumed here that any inaccuracies must be mistakes by the editor rather than wrong figures introduced during the subsequent transmission of the text. The route starts at Caistor St. Edmund and ends at London and so matches, or largely matches, part of Route 5 in the reverse direction. The sum of the two stages from Chelmsford to London is correct measured along the most direct route. A site at or near the crossing of the River Rom at Romford is suggested by the name Durolito (Rivet and Smith 1979, 170) and the inaccuracy of the stage distances to and from it is not significant. It is clear that the editor had to guess the new stage distances that he created when he interpolated a new stopping-place in other routes, and it is very likely that this was the case with the stages before and after Durolito in Route 9. From Colchester to Chelmsford is c.23.5 Roman miles and it is clear that the stages to Kelvedon and to Chelmsford are expressed in Celtic miles. The distances between Coddenham, Stratford St. Mary and Colchester are accurately expressed in Roman miles. It is the first two stages of the route which have caused serious problems. The most direct route between Caistor and Coddenham is c.35.5 Roman miles . Since this is c.31.5 Celtic miles it seems possible to take the xxxii miles of the first stage as the complete distance between Caistor and Coddenham, given in Celtic miles and left uncorrected after the interpolation of Sitomago. The xxii miles from Sinomagus to Coddenham can be seen to have been misplaced since the same figure in the Peutinger Table refers to the stage between Caistor and Sinomagus (Rivet and Smith 1979, 169). Stoke Ash is perhaps the site of Sinomagus, c.12 Roman miles from Coddenham and c.23.5 from Caistor, and the figure of xxxii Celtic miles has been divided only approximately between the two stages . This solution has the advantage of making it unnecessary to look for a diversion from the direct route between two cities to take in the place Sinomagus. It is instructive to compare the first part of Route 5 with Route 9, after the correction of the mistakes made by the editor. Route

5

London Romford Chelmsford Kelvedon Colchester Stratford St. Mary Coddenham Stoke Ash Scole Caistor

13 xxviii xvi 18 xii 13 xxiiii viiii 10.5 VI 6.5 xv 15 X 12 XXXV 6 XVlll xxii 17.5

Total Mileage

CV

9

True Mileage

xv

CV

Status city vicus mansio vicus city vicus mansio vicus ?vicus city

curious alternation of Roman and Celtic miles that was noted in Route 5 is also present in Route 9. It seems clear that both routes in their present form were compiled by the same individual, presumably the person referred to here as the editor. Route 10 481.1 Item a Clanoventa Mediolano m.p. cl sic Ambleside fort 2 xviii 21 Galava Alone xii ?13 ?W atercrook fort 3 xviiii ?13 ?Burrow-in4 Galacum Lonsdale fort Bremetonnaci xxvii 32.5 Ribchester fort 5 ? ?fort 482.1 Coccio xx Manchester fort 2 Mamcunio xvii 29 xviii 20.5 Northwich ?vicus 3 Condate 4 xviiii 28.5 Whitchurch mansio Mediolano Route 10 starts from the fort at Ravenglass and ends at the mansio at Whitchurch. Rivet has already drawn attention to the difficult problems of identification and wrong mileages associated with this route (Rivet and Smith 1979, 171- 72) , but it is important to be aware that the latter must be mistakes by the editor since the individual stage mileages add up to the total given in the heading. In view of the instances of guesswork and miscalculation we have seen in other routes it seems legitimate to suspect the same here. The first two stage mileages are accurately expressed in Celtic miles. The sum of the next two, to Burrow-inLonsdale and to Ribchester, is xlvi miles and this must be very close indeed to the true mileage. It seems that this total has simply been inaccurately divided between the two stages. In the second half of the route the mileage between Manchester and Northwich could be the true figure expressed in Celtic miles. The same figure was given for this stage in Route 2. The remaining three stage mileages seem totally arbitrary but when they are added together the result (lvi miles) is once again close to the true mileage (about 58 Roman miles). The best solution may be to subtract x miles from the stage to the unknown Coccium and add it to the final stage. There is no obvious logic in a journey ending at the obscure roadside settlement of Whitchurch. However, this may be the doing of the editor, for we have already seen that he is capable of combining parts of routes to create a new route that is entirely fictitious. He might be equally capable of shortening a route . Whitchurch shared the name Mediolanum with the city of Milan. wealthy and important in the period of the Tetrarchy and in the fourth century, and this may be enough to explain how it came to figure as the destination of Route 10. If the entire route is not fictitious the original destination may have been Wroxete, and, if so, the journey can be explained as an inspection of forts and facilities on a military supply-route, starting perhaps with a voyage by sea from Chester to Ravenglass. We will see that the next route provides a parallel.

111.5

It will hardly be fortuitous that both routes have the same total mileage, despite the different totals of Celtic and Roman miles in each. The routes are also complementary in that Route 9 includes the places omitted from Route 5. The

103

Cursus Publicus: The infrastructure of governmentin RomanBritain Route 11 482.5 Item a SegontioDevam m.p. lxxiiii sic 6 Conovio xxm1 23.5 Caerhun 7 Varis xviii 20.5 St. Asaph 8 Deva xxxii 30.5 Chester

c.186 miles, in this case it looks as though the editor has not corrected the heading to take account of his adjustments to the text.

fort ?fort fortress

Route 12 can be taken together with Routes IO and 1 I. All three are tied to the Chester-Wroxeter area and each of them could have begun with a sea-voyage from Chester.

This route begins at the fort at Caernarvon and ends at the fortress at Chester. The 'true mileages' are only approximate because the course of the roads is uncertain in many places, but the sum is very close to the total mileage of the route. It seems likely that all the distances are given in Roman miles, but the total mileage between Caerhun and Chester seems to have been inaccurately apportioned between the stages before and after Varis, suggesting that this place may be an insertion by the editor or that it simply appeared as an intermediate stopping-place between fort and fortress without a separate mileage figure. There is nothing to preclude the idea that the route represents a tour of inspection of forts which began with a voyage from Chester to Caernarvon.

Route 13 484.10 Item ab /sea Callevam.p. cviiii 485.1 Burrio viiii 10.5 2 Blestio xi 15.5 3 Ariconio xi 12.5

4 5 6 7

Route 12 482.9-10 Item a Muridono Viroconiorumm.p. clxxxvi 484.1 Leucaro xv 20.5 Loughor fort 2 Nido 14 Neath xv fort Bomia 3 xv 25 Cowbridge ?mansio 4 Iscae leg. /I Augusta xxvii 29.5 Caerleon fortress Burrio 5 viiii 10.5 Usk vicus 6 Gobannio xii 12 Abergavenny fort 7 Magnis XXll 24.5 Kenchester mansio Bravonio XXllll 8 22.5 Leintwardine

mansio 9

Viriconio

xxvii

26.5 Wroxeter

city

Section 483.1-8, which appears in the text, is an intrusion repeating Route 15 and has been omitted here. Route 12 begins at the city of Carmarthen, the tribal capital of the Demetae. As with the two preceding routes, the course of the roads in Route 12 is not always certain and some of the 'true mileages' are therefore estimated. In the first three stages the repeated distance of xv miles is wrong in every case. What seems to have happened is that the stage distance to Neath, probably xiiii miles, dropped out of the text. The distances before and after add up to c.45 Roman miles and this is the same as the three xv's in the text. It seems likely that these were obtained by dividing the sum of these two stage distances equally between the three stages.

Clevo [Carinio Durocornovio Spinis Calleva

sic

Usk vicus Monmouth ?vicus Weston under ?vicus Penyard xv 16.5 Gloucester city xvi 18.5 Cirencester city ] xiiii 16 Wanborough mansio xv 20 Woodspeen vicus city 14.5 Silchester xv

Route 13 begins at the legionary fortress of Caerleon. The stage mileages in the text add up to 90 miles, but a further stage from Gloucester to Cirencester, which has been lost at some period, must be added. The distance from Cirencester to Silchester is about 45 Celtic miles, very close to the xliv miles in the text. The final stage, from Woodspeen to Silchester, is correct in Roman miles so that this information was available to the editor. However, it looks as though he obtained the two preceding mileages by subtracting the figure for this final stage from his total distance in Celtic miles between the two cities. He then split the resulting xxviiii miles arbitrarily between the remaining two stages. If the editor was using mileages expressed in Celtic miles between the cities in this route the distance to Cirencester may have been given as xvi Celtic miles. In the first section, from Caerleon to Gloucester, the individual stage mileages could all be given in Celtic miles except for that to Monmouth where xi may be a scribal error duplicating the following mileage to Weston under Penyard. If xiii (in Celtic miles) was the original entry here the sum of the mileages would agree with that of the heading. Route 14 485.8 Item alio itinere ab /sea Callevam.p. ciii sic 9 VentaSilurum v11119 Caerwent city 486 .1 Abone xiiii Sea Mills ?mansio

The distance between Cowbridge and Caerleon is underestimated in the text by at least two miles and that between Caerleon and U sk by about one and a half miles (using the route via Bulmore). The stage figures of xxvii and viiii miles are probably expressed in Celtic miles. However, it is possible that there was a shorter route available to bypass Roman Cardiff, and that a shorter alternative route was also used between Caerleon and Usk. and that the figures in the text are accurate. The mileages in the stages to Kenchester and Leintwardine seem to have been transposed. The total mileage given in the text is 166 miles and in the heading it is 186 miles. As the true mileage should also be

2

Traiectus

viiii

3

Aquae Su/is Verlucione Cunetione Spinis Calleva

vi xv xx xv xv

4 5 6 7

ferryport 16 15.5 17.5 15.5 14.5

Bath Sandy Lane Mildenhall Woodspeen Silchester

mansio vicus ?mansio vicus city

Roman miles are used in 485.9, 486.4 and 6-7. Elsewhere the individual mileages are, or may be. inaccurate and need not be expressed in Celtic miles. However, since the sum of the mileages agrees with the total stated in the heading the inaccuracies must be due to a re-arrangement of digits rather

104

The Antonine Itinerary

than to more drastic changes or to losses in transmission. If this is so the section between Caerwent and Bath may originally have read as follows: Venta Silurum Traiectus Abone Aquae Sulis

viiii 9 vi iii

Caerwent

iiii xvi

Sea Mills Bath

16

If Moridunum is to be identified with Woodbury, it is necessary to suppose that the total mileage between Dorchester and Exeter is given in Celtic miles and that it has been inaccurately divided between the two stages. The equivalent in Roman miles, about 57.5 miles, is close to the measured distance. However , yet another candidate is available . Following his excavations of mid first century Roman military buildings inside the Hembury hillfort which seems not to have been occupied in the final Iron Age period Todd (1984, 266) proposed that it was Moridunum. He suggested that the name included the Latin root mora (blackberry) and meant something like 'fort overgrown with brambles'. The name might then have been transferred to a site about four kilometres further south at Fenny Bridges on the Roman road. As far as the mileages go this works fairly well. It is about 42 Roman miles (37 Celtic miles) to the crossing of the River Otter at Fenny Bridges and 14.5 Roman miles (12.5 Celtic miles) from there to Exeter. The figure from Dorchester must have been given in Celtic miles and it appears that the roadside settlement should lie a little to the east of the crossing.

city ferryport ?mansio mansio

This would involve a crossing from the port of Sudbrook on the Welsh side of the River Severn to a landing-point at or near the mouth of the Avon, the Traiectus of the text. The distances in the re-arranged text, if given in Roman miles , fit this comfortably. The remaining problem involves the overstatement of the distance between Sandy Lane and Mildenhall. Since the preceding and following mileage figures appear accurate there seems to be no obvious way to reconcile the xx miles of the text with the true mileage. However, it is possible that a figure of 65 miles between Bath and Silchester has been divided in approximate round figures between the intermediate stages. The fact that the larger figure of xx miles is assigned to what was the longest stage lends support to this. If this was the procedure followed by the editor he was presumably using a map which lacked mileages between minor places but gave a fairly accurate representation of the intervals between them.

486.16 Moriduno

17 / sea Dumnoniorum xv

486.16 Moriduno xxxvi 17 /sea Dumnoniorum xv

30 Woodbury vicus 26.5 Exeter city

42 14.5

Fenny Bridges vicus Exeter city

It is not clear at present which, if either, of these solutions is to be preferred. However, the remaining figures in 486.1015 seem to have been re-arranged, presumably after the text had become damaged or worn. In the process IO miles were lost since if the last two stage distances are subtracted from the total mileage in the heading lxxxv miles are left against a total of lxxv for the stages in 486.10-15. However, the total in the heading is itself an understatement of the true distance for these stages of about 8 Roman miles . This might be accounted for if some of the stage distances were expressed in Celtic rather than in Roman miles. A possible reconstruction of 486.10-15 is offered as follows:

Route 15 486.8-9 ltem a Calleva /sea Dumnoniorum m.p. cxxxvi sic 10 Vindomi xv 12.5 Wheatsheaf Inn vicus 11 Venta Velgarum xxi 12.5 Winchester city 12 Brige XI vicus 13 Sorbiodoni vm 24 Old Sarum vicus 14 Vindocladia xii 25 Shapwick vicus 15 Durnonovaria vm 19 Dorchester city 16 Moriduno xxxvi41 Sidford vicus 17 /sea Dumnoniorum xv 15 Exeter city Route 15 begins at Silchester and ends at Exeter. Rivet noted that the mileage figures in it had suffered more severe corruption than in other routes , but he thought that the final stage to Exeter was given accurately since the distance between Moridunum and Exeter is also xv miles in the Peutinger Table (Rivet and Smith 1979, 178-80). He proposed that Moridunum should be located at Sidford because this, rather than a site further inland, seemed to fit better with the meaning of the name ('Sea-fort'). This would work if the mileage from Dorchester to Sidford was expressed as 36 Celtic miles. More recently the discovery of a fort and later roadside settlement at Woodbury near Axminster has led to the suggestion that this was the site of Moridunum (Frere 1991, 281-82 Fig.26) . This would give the following:

xxxvi

486.10 Vindomi 11 12 13 14 15

Venta Velgarum Brige Sorbiodoni Vindocladia Durnovaria

12.5 Wheatsheaf Inn xxi 12.5 Winchester Ashley vi 6 Old Sarum xvm 18 xxii 25 Shapwick xviii 19 Dorchester xv

vicus city vicus vicus vicus city

In this, if the site at the Wheatsheaf Inn really does represent Vindomi, the stage distances to it and to Winchester are wildly wrong. It is possible that Vindorni is an insertion and that the mileage to it is a guess . The xxi miles of 486 .11 may represent an inaccurate or corrupt figure for the total mileage between Silchester and Winchester. The true figure in Celtic miles would be xxii miles. Rivet has proposed that Brige was located near Ashley on the Roman road north of Farley Mount and Beacon Hill (Rivet and Smith 1979, 179 and 278). and that the figures in 486.12 and 486.13 should be amended to vi and xviii miles respectively to give an accurate mileage between Winchester and Old Sarum . Vindocladia is a name derived from the hill-fort at Badbury Rings but must refer to a settlement on the Roman road on

105

Cursus Publicus : The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain the site of an early fort at Shapwick (Field 1976 and inf. B. Putnam). It is suggested that an initial x has dropped out of the figures in both 486.14 and 486.15. The mileage between Old Sarum and Dorchester is then xi miles, one mile in excess of the measured distance in Celtic miles. These suggestions give a total xv miles in excess of the cxxxvi miles of the heading and this can be accounted for if the xv miles of 486.10 was an addition by the editor rather than a later corruption .

If the mileages to and from Dorchester are given in Celtic miles, and if Vindomi is an insertion, the route exhibits the same sort of phenomena we have seen in other routes where distances in Roman miles and in Celtic miles have been combined at random. In the light of this re-examination of the evidence it must be concluded that it is extremely difficult to maintain the claim that the routes in the British section of the Antonine Itinerary represent journeys undertaken by Septimius Severus and his sons. When I made this proposal (Black 1984) it seemed to be the best context for the routes. Some of these could be related to the northern campaigns while others seemed to start or finish at three centres further south (London, Silchester and Wroxeter / Chester) and it seemed possible to relate these to the Caesar Geta's governorship of Britain. The late name-forms in some of the routes caused a difficulty for an early third century date, but this was dismissed as later alteration to the text. Mann's perceptive observation that two different standards of miles could have been used in the stage distances and the demonstration above that there were originally two distances, in Roman and Celtic miles, for each stage may create an additional difficulty for such an early date. Admittedly the Hadrianic milestone from Thurmaston seems to give the distance from Leicester in Celtic rather than Roman miles but it is a different matter when local variants are included in official route-plans. An editor has clearly carried out extensive revision on the British section of the Itinerary and has interpolated many minor places. At the same time he has introduced inaccurate mileages, and has carried out a 'rationalisation' by rejecting one or other of the alternative mileages he found in the text. His selection was quite arbitrary for he combined Roman and Celtic miles together in the same routes. However, the editor was not simply revising official routes, but, if the analysis given above is correct, he was altering and supplementing them. and, in at least one case (Route 8), he created a new route. The later, fictitious, Lives of the Scriptores Historiae Augustae provide a parallel for this sort of activity.

sections of the Itinerary which suggests that it reached its final form no earlier than the reign of Diocletian (Rivet and Smith 1979, 152-53). The majority of the Gallic routes in the Itinerary (363.4 387.3) are concentrated in the north-east comer of Gaul. This is not perhaps surprising as it was in this area that the traffic of troops and officials must always have been the heaviest. However, it is notable that all five of the routes which cross from Italy into Gaul (339.7 - 363.2) start from Milan. This city served as Maximian's capital during the Tetrarchic period, but was of no particular importance at an earlier date (Krautheimer 1983, 69-70). It was here in A.D.293 that Constantius Chlorus was elevated to the position of Caesar. His first task was to regain control of north-east Gaul from the forces of Carausius which was achieved by the siege and surrender of Boulogne. This was followed by campaigns in the area of the Rhine mouth against the Franks . Three years later came the successful attack on Allectus' forces with Asclepiodotus sailing from the mouth of the Seine and Constantius' troops from Boulogne. At the same time their superior, the Augustus Maximian, was present on the Rhine (Barnes 1976, 179). The route from Milan to Boulogne (356.1 - 363.2) may even represent Constantius' own first successful move in this series of campaigns . However, it is divided into three sections: from Milan to Vienne; from Vienne to Reims; from Reims to Boulogne. This division suggests a date after the establishment of the Diocletianic provinces and dioceses, since it was only then that Reims became the capital of Belgica Secunda and Vienne the capital of Viennensis. No fewer than nine of the twenty-one routes in north-east Gaul start or finish in the capitals of Diocletianic provines, five of them in Reims, and it seems likely that the majority of them belong to this period. The same is probably the case with the British routes. In these there is the same mixture of nameforms, some in which the place-name is retained and others where the place-name has been superseded entirely by the tribal name . It was also in this period, and in the early years of Constantine, that emperors were most frequently seen in Britain. The recovery of the island in 296 was a military campaign fought in the south, but Constantius, accompanied by his son, came in 305-06 to campaign north of Hadrian's Wall. Routes 1 and 2 which record journeys back from beyond the Wall could easily belong to these campaigns. Route 5 could also do so. Routes 3 - 9 begin or end at London. the capital of Maxima Caesariensis in the Diocletianic re-organisation. Route 6 ends at Lincoln which was the capital of Flavia Caesariensis. Route 8 ends at York, the capital of Britannia Secunda , but we have seen that there is some doubt concerning the authenticity of this route . It may have been invented to fill a gap that was obvious after the creation of the British Diocese. If these routes belong to A.D.296 or later. it is notable that Routes 10 - 15, which are like them in their name-forms and in having alternative mileages in Roman and Celtic miles, bear no relation to the Diocletianic provincial capitals. (The fourth capital, that of Britannia Prima, is thought to have been at Cirencester.) However, there may have been considerable changes in these provinces in the early years of their existence (compare Frere

The date of the editor's activity was probably the late third or the fourth century, as the use of the forms Regno, lcinos and Colonia suggests. It has already been pointed out that such late name-forms, as well as the appearance of alternative distances (in Gallic leugae and Roman miles), occurs in the part of the route from Milan to Boulogne which lies beyond Lyon (359.2 - 363.2). The use of leugae as a measurement of distance on Gallic milestones occurs in the third century (Buckley 198 I, 305), but it is possible to argue that this particular route must be dated to the very end of the century. This is in accordance with the internal evidence from other

106

The Antonine Itinerary

1987b, 198-99). Routes 10 - 15 fall into two groups, based on Silchester and Chester / Wroxeter. It is likely that these centres therefore had some administrative significance. Is it possible that they, along with London and York, were the earliest Diocletianic provincial capitals? The routes in the Antonine Itinerary do not present a check-

107

list of mansiones and vici in early fourth century Britain , for they do not cover every major road in the Diocese, but they do provide a nearly complete list for those roads that are included. By virtue of their position on the roads all the settlements that are named will have made some contribution to the cursus publicus.

APPENDIX THREE THE MANSIO BATHS AT WALL. In 1956 Webster carried out small-scale excavations to elucidate the history of the baths at Wall (Webster G. 1958a). He revealed a building 7 metres wide and at least 16.2 metres long, aligned north-east to south-west , and predating the visible remains. That this early building was also a bath-building was indicated by the opposed apses. Webster considered that the absence of flooring at the inner southwest comer [of room V] and the very clean building debris covering the remains indicated that this building had never been used or completed. This will be discussed more fully below. The phasing suggested here differs in several respects from that tentatively proposed by Webster (1958a, 19 Fig.3), and is shown in Fig .72. Rooms and areas where rooms can be supposed to have existed in Phase I have been assigned Roman numerals to distinguish them from the later rooms which are given Arabic numbers in the published reports. Excavations carried out in 1971 have now established that the 'courtyard' symmetrically placed on the north-east side of the Phase I baths was probably contemporary with them and that it was roofed. Fragments of wall plaster and tile from rubble forming part of its floor make-up suggest that it may have been built originally in timber (Round 1974, 20). The plan (Fig. 72.i) represents a Reihentyp bath-house. Room I must have been a combined changing-room and cold room. A drain through the north-west wall presumably indicates the position of a cold bath rather than a latrine (contra Webster G. 1958a, 17). This may have had mosaic decoration since fragments of samian thought to be waste from the manufacture of tesserae were found in the trench dug across room I in 1971 (Round 1974, 15).

a single room, the caldarium, with a hot bath next to the furnace and a second, smaller, bath, or more likely a recess for a labrum, opening off the south-west wall. In line with the new caldarium and above the earlier rooms IV and V was a tepidarium, heated from a stoke-hole to the south-east. This was stoked from the area which was proposed as the praefurnium to room VIII in Phase I and it is likely that the laconicumand its stoke-hole continued to function in Phase II. Rooms I-III also seem to have been retained. The south-east wall of the new range of rooms was constructed on top of a demolished Phase I wall , but the division between the new caldarium and tepidarium lay alongside an earlier wall . It is possible that the buttress shown at the north-east end of this division , which is not matched by a corresponding buttress at the south-west end, may represent a wall that was later truncated. In Phase II it may have extended to meet the south-west wall of room I, slightly increasing the size of room III. A chimney flue in the north-east wall of the caldariumwould have emptied beyond the room delimited by this. Possibly also to be assigned to Phase II is the colonnade wall found on the north-west side of room I which also turned to run parallel to the north-east side. The incorporation of about half of the Phase I building into that built in Phase II suggests that Webster (1958a, 15) was wrong in thinking that it had not been completed or put to use. However, his observation was based on the excavations he carried out in the area of room V, and this was one of the rooms that was replaced in the new Phase II construction. It is therefore possible that Phase II was actually a change of plan which took place during the initial building of the baths. The construction work of Phase III is Antonine in date (see below), but the presence of relief-patterned flue tiles keyed with die 16 (found also at Chelmsford, East Bridgford and Godmanchester) shows that hypocausts were being fitted with tiles in the Hadrianic period. This must have been either in Phase I or Phase II. A worn coin of Vespasian came from a Phase I construction trench and the samian possibly used to make tesserae for a cold bath in room I is dated c. 75-90 (Round 1974, 15). Both indicate a date around the end of the first century for the construction of the Phase I building. It seems therefore that the relief-patterned tiles must be assigned to Phase II, and that this was some twenty to thirty years later than the construction of Phase I. The Phase I baths must have been in use throughout this period.

In the part of the building excavated by Webster the opposed apses should have opened off the caldarium(room V). To the north-east of this there is space for two tepidaria (rooms III and IV), and the wall between the later rooms 4/6 and 10/11 may be on the line of the division between them. To the south-west of room V a division-wall was located with a rebate for an opening. Presumably this marked the entrance to a hot bath (room VI), and beyond this will have been the main furnace-room (room VII). A doorway close to the southern comer of room I, if present in this position in Phase I, will have given access to a room alongside room III. This (room VIII) will have been a laconicum. A short length of wall butting against the apse on the south-east side of room V may have belonged to its praefurnium (room IX). The alterations to the Phase I building in Phase II were essentially very simple. Rooms IV-VII at the south-west end of the earlier building were replaced by a new set of heated rooms. These crossed the line of IV and V and joined the remaining rooms of the Phase I building at approximately 90 degrees (Fig.72.ii). The new heated rooms were larger than their predecessors and it was presumably the need for more space which prompted their construction. Room 1 was the praefurnium; the later rooms 2 and 3 originally formed

In Phase III a separate cold room and cold bath (rooms 8 and 9) were constructed overlying the Phase I-II /aconicum (room VIII). A new laconicum (room 11) and a heated transitus or lobby (room 10) were built to the north-west of room 8, replacing room III of the Phase I-II baths , and necessitating the rebuilding of the south-west wall of room I (Fig. 72.iii). The siting of room 11 and its stoking-area implies that the drain of the original cold bath (room II) was

108

The mansio baths at Wall

now no longer in use. At first room I seems to have been retained, now used solely as an apodyterium . It was later enlarged and provided with a new colonnade. A new entrance was made into room 8 in line with the entrances into these. No doubt the new hall continued to function as the apodyterium, but there must also have been room for other social activities. There may have been a central row of roof supports (Round 1974, 15; Webster G. 1958a, 21). The construction of the enlarged apodyterium has a terminus post quernin the early Antonine period given by pottery found in make-up layers associated with its walls (Round 1974, 19 and section G - H). One of these layers contained much burnt material including roof tiles and window-glass and it was suggested that they derived from the clearance of a destroyed building. This was probably the Phase 2 mansio. The dating of pottery from the construction trench of room 9 which Webster ( 1958a, 17) assigned to the second half of the second century is in agreement with this. Room 7 was added in Phase IV (Fig.72.iv). The plan of the 1912-14 excavations (Lynam 1913, Plate VII facing page 139) shows three pilae surviving in position by the southeast wall. The construction of this room blocked access to the stoke-hole of the tepidarium and it must have been at this time that flues were cut through the wall between the latter and the caldarium (Webster G. 1958a, 16). The former tepidarium stoke-hole may now have been utilised as a flue, drawing heat into room 7 from the rooms to the north-west. If so, it seems that the new room was an additional tepidarium. Phase IV is dated to the third century by a coin of Julia Dornna found in the core of one of the walls of room

109

7 (Webster G. 1958a, 17 note 3). In Phase V the establishment contracted (Fig.72.v). The praefurnium (room 1) was abandoned and room 12 from which 10 and 11 were heated now also served as the praefurnium for the caldarium . A new hot bath may have been created adjoining it in room 2 and the labrum recess was walled up and the caldarium was sub-divided to create a new tepidarium (room 3). The cold room and cold bath of Phase III-IV (rooms 8 and 9) were no longer used and the Phase II-IV tepidarium was sub-divided to form a new cold room with shower emplacement (room 6) and cold bath (room 5). The remainder of the room served as a passage (room 4). The flues between 10 and 11 were blocked and room 10 now became the apodyterium. There is no dating evidence for Phase V and it is unclear how late the baths were in use. The blocking of various doorways indicates a further contraction of facilities. Room 10 may have been disused first and the doors between it and rooms 6 and 11 were blocked. If so, a new entrance must have been made into room 6. Subsequently room 11 was disused and the way into it from room 4 was blocked. At some stage the hypocausts no longer functioned as the flue from 12 into room 2 was blocked, but this in itself implies that the building continued to be used for some purpose. Webster (1958a, 22) noted a surface associated with fourth century pottery to the north-west of room 12. The mansio accommodation seems to have become disused by the later third century, but the baths may have continued in operation in the fourth century.

ABBREVIATIONS AE Bede HE CBA Cicero Au. Cicero Fam. CIL IGRRom ILLRP ILS JRS OJA

SHA Suet. Div . Aug. T.C.

l'Annee Epigraphique Bede Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum Council for British Archaeology Cicero Epistulae ad Atticum Cicero Epistulae ad Familiares Corpus lnscriptionum Latinarum ed. F. Ritschel et al. Berlin. 1862 -. lnscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinellles eds. R. Cagnat, J. Toutain and P. Jouguet. Paris . 1901 - 1927. lnscriptiones Latinae Liberae Rei Publicae Volume l. ed. A. Degrassi. Florence. 1957. lnscriptiones Latinae Selectae ed. H. Dessau. Berlin. 1892 - 1916. Journal of Roman Studies Oxford Journal of Archaeology Scriptores Historiae Augustae Suetonius Vita Divi Augusti Codex Theodosianus

BIBLIOGRAPHY Allen P.T. 1988 'Excavations of the Mansio Bath House, Chelmsford, 1987-1988.' Essex Journal Vol. 23 No. 2 (Summer 1988), 27-33 . Allen P.T., (in preparation) Caesaromagus: excavations of Roman Chelmsford 1980-88. East Anglian Archaeology. Anderson J.D. 1992 Roman Military Supply in North-East England. BAR British Series 224. Tempus Reparatum. Oxford. Anon. 1956 'Roman Britain in 1955. l. Sites Explored.' JRS 46, 119-146. Anon. 1959 'Roman Britain in 1958. l. Sites Explored.' JRS 49 , 102-35. Ashby T. 1905 'Excavations at Caerwent, Monmouthshire, on the Site of the Romano-British City of Venta Silurum, in the year 1904.' Archaeologia 59 Part 2, 289-310. Ashby T., Hudd A.E. and Martin A.T. 1903 'Excavations at Caerwent, Monmouthshire, on the Site of the Romano-British City of Venta Silurum, in 1902.' Archaeologia 58 Part 2, 391-406. Ashby T., Hudd A.E. and King F. 1911 'Excavations at Caerwent, Monmouthshire, on the Site of the Romano-British City of Venta Silurum, in the years 1909 and 1910.' Archaeologia 62 Part 2, 405-48. Ball F. and Ball N. 1985 'Rescue Excavation at Wall (Staffordshire), 1980/81 (Wall Excavation Report No. 13).' Transactions of the South Staffordshire Archaeological and Historical Society 25 (19831984), 1-30 Barnes T.D. 1976 'Imperial Campaigns, A.D. 285-311.' Phoenix 30, 174-93. Bender H. 1975 Archiiologische Untersuchungen zur Ausgrabung Augst-Kurzenbettli . Antiqua 4. Basel. Bender H. 1978 Romischer Reiseverkehr. Limesmuseum Aalen . Betts 1.M., Black E.W. and Gower J.L. forthcoming A Corpus of Roman Relief-Patterned Tile in Britain. Bidwell P.T. 1979 The Legionary Bath-House and Basilica and Forum at Exeter. Exeter Archaeological

Reports Volume One. Exeter City Council. D.G., Crocker G. and McCracken J.S. 1984 'Archaeology in Surrey 1982.' Surrey Archaeological Collections 75, 263- 72. Birley A. 1966 Marcus Aurelius. Eyre and Spottiswoode. London. Birley R.E. 1970 'Excavations at Chesterholm-Vindolanda 1967-69.' Archaeologia Aeliana (fourth series) XLVIII, 97-155. Birley R.E.1977 Vindolanda. A Roman frontier post on Hadrian's Wall. Thames and Hudson. London. Bishop M.C. and Dore J.N. 1989 Corbridge. Excavations of the Roman fort and town, 1947-80 . Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England. Archaeological Report No. 8. Black E.W. 1984 'The Antonine Itinerary: aspects of government in Roman Britain.' OJA Vol.3 No.3 (November 1984), 109-21. Black E.W. 1985 'Hypocaust Heating in Domestic Rooms in Roman Britain.' OJA Vol.4 No.I (March 1985), 7792. Black E.W. 1987 The Roman Villas of South-East England. BAR British Series 171. Black E.W. 1992a 'Newstead: the Buildings in the Western Annexe.' Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 121. 215-22. Black E.W. 1992b 'A Pre-Boudican Bath-Building at Colchester.' Essex Archaeology and History 23, 120-23. Blockley P. et al. 1988 'Interim Report on Work carried out in 1987 by the Canterbury Archaeological Trust.' Archaeologia Cantiana104 (1987), 291-332. Boon G.C. 1969 'Belgic and Roman Silchester: the Excavations of 1954-58 with an Excursus on the Early History ofCalleva.' Archaeologia 102, 1-81. Boon G.C. 1972 !sea: the Roman Legionary Fortress at Caerleon, Monmouthshire. National Museum of Wales. Cardiff. Boon G.C. 1974 Si/chester : The Roman Town of Calleva. David and Charles . Newton Abbot. Bird

110

Bibliography Boon G.C. 1984 Laterarium lscanum: The Antefixes, Brick and Tile Stamps of the Second Augustan Legion. National Museum of Wales. Cardiff. Booth P.M. 1989 'Roman store buildings at Alcester.' Transactions of the Birmingham and Warwickshire Archaeological Society 94 (1985-6), 63-106. Bowman A.K. and Thomas J.D. 1987 'New Texts from Vindolanda.' Britannia 18, 125-42. Bowman A.K. and Thomas J.D . 1991 'A Military StrengthReport from Vindolanda.' JRS 81, 62-73. Brassington M. 1975 'A Re-appraisal of the Western Enclave and Environs, Corstopitum.' Britannia 6, 62-75. Breeze D.J. 1979 'The Roman Fort on the Antonine Wall at Bearsden' in D.J. Breeze (ed.) Roman Scotland. Some Recent Excavations, 21-25. Edinburgh. Breeze D.J. 1984 'Demand and Supply on the Northern Frontier' in R. Micket and C. Burgess (eds.) Between and Beyond the Walls. Essays on the Prehistory and History of North Britain in Honour of George Jobey, 264-86. JohnDonald. Edinburgh. Breeze D.J. and Dobson B. 1985 'Roman Military Deployment in North England.' Britannia 16, 1-19. Breeze D.J. and Dobson B. 1987 Hadrian's Wall (3rd edn.). Penguin Books. Harrnondsworth. Brewer R.J. 1990 'Caerwent - Venta Silurum: A Civitas Capital' in B.C. Burnham and J.L. Davies (eds.) Conquest, Co-existence and Change. Recent Work in Roman Wales, 75-85. St. David's University College, Lampeter . Bridger C. 1989 Colonia Ulpia Traiana lnsula 38: die Befunde der Grabung 1979 bis 1983. Reinische Ausgrabungen Band 31. Cologne. Brigham T. 1990 'The Late Roman Waterfront in London.' Britannia 21, 99-183. Brown A.E. and Alexander J.A. 1982 'Excavations at Towcester 1954: The Grammar School Site.' Northamptonshire Archaeology 17, 24-59. Brown A.E., Woodfield C. and Mynard D.C. 1983 'Excavations at Towcester, Northamptonshire: the Alchester Road Suburb.' Northamptonshire Archaeology 18, 43-140 Brunt P.A. 1975 'Did Imperial Rome Disarm Her Subjects?' Phoenix 29, 260- 70. Buckley B. 1981 'The Aeduan Area in the Third Century' in A. King and M. Henig (eds.) The Roman West in the Third Century, 287-315. BAR International Series 109(ii). Burnham B.C. and Wacher J. 1990 The 'Small Towns' of Roman Britain. Batsford. London. Bushe-Fox J.P. 1916 Third Report on the Excavations on the Site of the Roman Town at Wroxeter Shropshire 1914. Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London No. IV. Oxford. Bushe-Fox J.P. 1928 Second Report on the Excavation of the Roman Fort at Richborough, Kent. Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London No. 7. Oxford. Cameron H. and Lucas J. 1973 'Tripontium. Second Interim Report .. .' Birmingham and Warwickshire Archaeological Society Transactions 85 ( 1971-

111

1973), 93-144. Caruana J. 1983 'Carlisle.' Current Archaeology 86 (March 1983) (Vol. VIII No. 3), 77-81. Casey P.J. 1984 'Caerwent (Venta Silurum):the excavation of the north-west comer tower and an analysis of the structural sequence of the defences.' Archaeologia Cambrensis 132 (1983), 49- 77. Casey P.J., Davies J.L. and Evans J. 1993 Excavations at Segontium (Caernmfon) Roman Fort, 1975-1979. CBA Research Report 90. Chastagnol A. 1981 'L'Inscription Constantinienne d'Orcistus.' Melanges de /'Ecole Fran~aise de Rome Antiquite 93 (1) 381-416. Christison D., Buchanan M. and Anderson J. 1901 'Account of the Excavation of the Roman Station at Camelon, near Falkirk, Stirlingshire .. .' Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland (3rd series) XI (1900-1901),329-417. Coleman K.M. 1988 Statius Silvae Book IV. Clarendon Press Oxford . Connor A. 1992 'Excavations on Causeway Lane, Leicester (SK 584048).' Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological and Historical Society LXVI, 17378. Corder P. (ed.) 1954 The Roman Town and Villa at Great Casterton Rutland. Second Interim Report for the Years 1951-1953. University of Nottingham. Corder P. (ed.) 1961 The Roman Town and Villa at Great Casterton Rutland. Third Report for the Years 1954-1958. University of Nottingham. Cotton M.A. and Gathercole P.W. 1958 Excavations at Clausentum, Southampton 1951-1954. Ministry of Works Archaeological Reports No.2. Her Majesty's Stationery Office. London. Crickmore J. 1984 Romano-British Urban Defences. BAR British Series 126. Crummy P. 1984 Colchester Archaeological Report 3: Excavations at Lion Walk, Balkerne Lane and Middleborough, Colchester, Essex. Colchester Archaeological Trust. Crummy P. 1992 Colchester Archaeological Report 6: Excavations at Culver Street, the Gilberd School, and other sites in Colchester 1971-85 . Colchester Archaeological Trust. Cunliffe B.W. (ed.) 1968 Fifth Report on the Excavations of the Roman Fort at Richborough, Kent. Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London No.23. Oxford. Cuntz 0. 1929 ltineraria Romana 1. ltineraria Antonini Augusti et Burdigalense.Teubner. Leipzig. Curle J. 1911 A Roman Frontier Post and its People: the Fort of Newstead in the Parish of Melrose. Maclehose. Glasgow. Daniels C. 1989 Handbook of the Eleventh Pilgrimage of Hadrian's Wall. The Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle upon Tyne and the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society. Newcastle upon Tyne. Daniels C. 1991 'The Antonine abandonment of Scotland ' in V.A. Maxfield and M.J. Dobson (eds.) Roman Frontier Studies 1989: Proceedings of the XVth

Cursus Publicus: The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies. 48-51. University of Exeter Press. Exeter. Davies J.L. 1991 'Roman Military Deployment in Wales and the Marches from Pius to Theodosiusl' in V .A. Maxfield and M.J . Dobson (eds.) Roman Frontier Studies 1989 : Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, 52-57. University of Exeter Press . Exeter. Detsicas A. 1983 The Cantiaci. Alan Sutton. Gloucester. Dix B. and Taylor S. 1988 'Excavations at Bannaventa (Whilton Lodge, Northants.), 1970-71.' Britannia 19, 299-339. Down A.1989 Chichester Excavations 6. Phillimore. Chichester . Down A. and Magilton J. 1993 Chichester Excavations 8. Chichester District Council. Dragendorff H. and Kruger E. 1924 Das Grabmal von Igel. Jacob Lintz. Trier. Drinkwater J.F. 1983 Roman Gaul.The Three Provinces, 58 BC-AD 260. Croom Helm. London. Drury P.J. 1982 'Form, Function, and the Interpretation of the Excavated Plans of some Large Secular RomanoBritish Buildings' in P.J. Drury (ed.) Structural Reconstruction : Approaches to the interpretation of the excavated remains of buildings, 289-308. BAR British Series 110. Drury P.J. 1988 The Mansio and other sites in the southeastern sector of Caesaromagus. CBA Research Report 66. Chelmsford Archaeological Trust Report 3.1. Dunkin J. 1816 The History and Antiquities of Bicester London. Eck W. 1975 'Die Laufbahn eines Ritters aus Apri in Thrakien.' Chiron V, 365-92. Eddy M.R. and Turner C. 1982 Kelvedon. Essex County Council Occasional Paper No.3. Ehrenberg V. and Jones A.H.M . 1975 Documents illustrating the Reigns of Augustus and Tiberius. second edition. Oxford. Esmonde Cleary A.S. 1987 Extra-Mural Areas of RomanoBritish Towns. BAR British Series 169. Esmonde Cleary A.S. 1989 The Ending of Roman Britain. Batsford. London. Esperandieu E. 1918 Recueil General des Bas-Reliefs, Statues et Bustes de la Gaule Romaine Vol. VII. Paris . Evans E., Dowdell G. and Thomas H.J. 1985 'A Third Century Maritime Establishment at Cold Knap, Barry , South Glamorgan.' Britannia 16, 57-125. Field N. 1976 'The discovery of a Roman fort at Shapwick near Badbury Rings , Dorset.' Britannia 7, 280-83. Fischer T. and Spindler K. 1984 Das rdmische Grenzkastell Abusina-Eining. Fiihrer zu archaologischen Denkmalem in Bayem Niederbayem I. Konrad Theiss. Stuttgart. Fitz J. 1980 Gorsium - Herculia - Tac. (Revised edition.) Corvina Kiado. Budapest. Forster R.H. 1908 'Corstopitum. Report of the Excavations in 1907.' Archaeologia Aeliana (third series) IV, 205-303. Forster R.H. and Knowles W.H. 1911 'Corstopitum: Report

112

on the Excavations in 1910.' Archaeologia Aeliana (third series) VII , 143-267. Foster A.M. 1989 'Alchester , Oxon .: A Brief Review and New Aerial Evidence.' Britannia 20, 141-47. Fowler E. 1960 'The Origins and Development of the Penannular Brooch in Europe.' Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 26, 149- 77 . Fox G.E. and Hope W.H. St.John 1894 'Excavations on the site of the Roman city at Silchester, Hants., in 1893.' Archaeologia 54 Part 1, 199-238 . Frend W.H.C. 1956 'A Third Century Inscription Relating to Angareia in Phrygia.' JRS 46, 46-56. Frere S.S. 1977 'Roman Britain in 1976. 1. Sites Explored.' Britannia 8, 356-425. Frere S.S . 1983a Verulamium Excavations Volume fl. Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London No. XLI. London . Frere S.S. 1983b 'Roman Britain in 1982. I. Sites Explored.' Britannia 14, 280-335. Frere S.S. 1984a 'Roman Britain in 1983. I. Sites Explored.' Britannia 15, 266- 332. Frere S.S . 1984b 'British Urban Defences in Earthwork.' Britannia 15, 63- 74. Frere S.S. 1985 'Roman Britain in 1984. 1. Sites Explored.' Britannia 16, 252-316. Frere S.S. 1986 'Roman Britain in 1985. I. Sites Explored.' Britannia 17, 364-427. Frere S.S. 1987a 'Brandon Camp, Herefordshire.' Britannia 18, 49-92. Frere S.S. 1987b Britannia . A History of Roman Britain (third edition). Routledge and Kegan Paul. London. Frere S.S. 1989 'Roman Britain in 1988. I. Sites Explored.' Britannia 20, 258-326. Frere S.S. 1991 'Roman Britain in 1990. I. Sites Explored.' Britannia 22, 222-92. Frere S.S. 1992 'Roman Britain in 1991. I. Sites Explored.' Britannia 23, 256-308. Frere S.S. and St. Joseph J.K . 1983 Roman Britain from the Air . Cambridge University Press. Frere S.S., Stow S.and Bennett P. 1982 Excavations on the Roman and Medieval Defences of Canterbury. The Archaeology of Canterbury Volumell. Kent Archaeological Society. Maidstone. Fulford M. 1985 Guide to the Si/chester Excavations. The Forum Basilica 1982-84. Department of Archaeology, University of Reading . Garrod D. and Philp B. 1992 The Roman Settlement at Welling. Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit. Garrood J. R. 1943 'Romano-British Site at Sawtry, Huntingdonshire.' Transactions of the Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire Archaeological Society VI part vi, 178-86. Gentry A., Ivens J. and McClean H. 1977 'Excavations at Lincoln Road, London Borough of Enfield , November 1974 - March 1976.' Transactions of the London and Middlesex Archaeological Society 28, 101-189 . Goodbum R. 1976 'Roman Britain in 1975. 1. Sites Explored.' Britannia 7, 291-377. Goodbum R. 1978 'Roman Britain in 1977. l. Sites Explored.' Britannia 9, 404- 72.

Bibliography Goodbum R. 1979 'Roman Britain in 1978. 1. Sites Explored.' Britannia IO. 268-338. Gould J. 1964 'Excavations at Wall (Staffordshire), 1961-3 on the site of the early Roman forts and of the late Roman defences.' Transactions of the Lichfield and South Staffordshire Archaeological and Historical Society V (1963-64), 1-50. Green H.J.M. 1959 'An Architectural Survey of the Roman Baths at Godmanchester Part One.' The Archaeological Newsletter Vol. 6 No. IO, 223-29. Green H.J.M. 1960a 'An Archaeological Survey of the Roman Baths at Godmanchester Part Two.' The Archaeological Newsletter Vol.6 No.11, 252-58. Green H.J.M. 1960b 'An Archaeological Survey of the Roman Baths at Godmanchester Part Three. 'The Archaeological Newsletter Vol.6 No.12, 276-81. Green H.J.M. 1975 'Roman Godmanchester' in W. Rodwell and T. Rowley (eds.) Small Towns of Roman Britain, 183-210. BAR British Series 15 Grenier A. 1934 Manuel d'Archeologie Gallo-Romaine Volume 2. A. and J. Picard. Paris. Grenier A. 1960 Manuel d'Archeologie Gallo-Romaine Volume 4. A. and J. Picard. Paris. Haalebos J.K. 1991 'Die Legionscanabae in Nijmegen' in V.A. Maxfield and M.J. Dobson (eds.) Roman Frontier Studies 1989, 184-87. University of Exeter Press. Hampton J.N. and Palmer R. 1977 Implications of Aerial Photography for Archaeology.' Archaeological Journal 134, 157-93 . Harrison A.C. and Flight C. 1969 'The Roman and Medieval Defences of Rochester in the Light of Recent Excavations.' Archaeologia Cantiana 83 (1968), 55-104 . Hartley B.R. 1972 'The Roman Occupation of Scotland: the evidence of Samian ware.' Britannia 3, 1-55. Hartley B.R. 1983 'The Enclosure of Romano-British Towns in the Second Century A.D.' in B.R. Hartley and J. Wacher (eds.) Rome and her Northern Frontiers, 84-95. Alan Sutton. Gloucester. Hassan M.W.C . and Tomlin R.S.O. 1977 'Roman Britain in 1976. 2. Inscriptions' Britannia 8, 426-49. Hawkes S.C. 1973 'A Late Roman Buckle from Tripontium.' Transactions of the Birmingham and Warwickshire Archaeological Society 85 (1972), 145-59. Henderson C. 1988 'Exeter (lsca Dumnoniorum)' in G. Webster (ed.) Fortress into City, 91-119. Batsford. London. Herz P. 1976 'Neue Benefiziarier-Altare aus Mainz.' Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphik 22, 191-99. Ringley R. 1989 Rural Settlement in Roman Britain. Seaby. London. Robley A.S. 1989 'The Numismatic Evidence for the PostAgricolan Abandonment of the Roman Frontier in Northern Scotland.' Britannia 20, 69- 74. Hobley B. 1975 'The Lunt Roman Fort and Training School for Roman Cavalry, Baginton, Warwickshire. Final Report: Excavations (1972-73) with conclusions.' Transactions of the Birmingham and Warwickshire Archaeological Society 87, 1-56 .

Holmes J. 1955 'Excavations and Fieldwork at Roman Braughing.' Transactions of the East Herts. Archaeological Society 13 (1950-54), 93-127. Hope W. St J. 1898 'The Architectural History of the Cathedral Church and Monastery of St.Andrew at Rochester .' Archaeologia Cantiana 23, 194-328. Hurst H. 1988 'Gloucester (Glevum)' in G. Webster (ed.) Fortress into City, 48-73. Batsford. London. Hyland A. 1990 Equus . The Horse in the Roman World. Batsford. London. Isserlin R.M.J. and Wickenden N.P. Frontage Sites in Caesaromagus. CBA Research Report, in preparation. Jack G.H. 1916 The Romano-British Town of Magna (Kenchester) Herefordshire . The Research Committee of the Woolhope Club. Hereford. Jack G.H. and Hayter A.G.K. 1926 The Romano-British Town of Magna (Kenchester) Herefordshire: Excavations carried out during the years 19241925 . The Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club. Jacobi L. 1897 Das Romerkastell Saa/burg bei Homburg vor der Hohe. Bad Homburg. Johnson J.S. 1970 'The Date of the Construction of the Saxon Shore Fort at Richborough.' Britannia I, 240-48. Johnson J.S . 1975 'Vici in Lowland Britain' in W. Rodwell and T. Rowley (eds.) Small Towns of Roman Britain , 75-83. BAR British Series 15. Jones A.H .M. 1964 The Later Roman Empire 284-602 . Volume One. Basil Blackwell. Oxford. Jones G.D.B. and Webster P.V . 1968 'Mediolanum: Excavations at Whitchurch 1965-6.' Archaeological Journal 125, 193-254. Jones G.D.B. and Shotter D.C.A. 1988 Roman Lancaster . Brigantia Monograph Series No. I. Department of Archaeology University of Lancaster. Keppie L. 1981 'Excavation of a Roman Bathhouse at Bothwellhaugh, 1975- 76.' Glasgow Archaeological Journal 8. 46-94 . Klee M. 1986 Arae Flaviae Ill. Der Nordvicus von Arae Flaviae. Konrad Theiss. Stuttgart. Knowles A .K. 1977 'The Roman Settlement at Brampton. Norfolk: Interim Report.' Britannia 7, 209-21. Krautheimer R. 1983 Three Christian Capitals : topography and politics. University of California Press. Lambrick G. 1980 'Excavations in Park Street. Towcester.'Northamptonshire Archaeology 15, 35118. Levick B. 1985 The Government of the Roman Empire. A Sourcebook. Croom Helm. London. Lintott A. 1992 Judicial Reform and Land Reform in the Roman Republic. Cambridge University Press. Lintott A. 1993 lmperium Romanum. Routledge. London. Lowther A.W.G. 1948 A Study of the Patterns on Roman Flue-Tiles and their Distribution. Research Paper of the Surrey Archaeological Society No . I. Lucas J. 1984 'Tripontium. third interim report.' Transactions of the Birmingham and Warwickshire Archaeological Society 91 (1981), 25-54. Ludin 0. 1967 'Die Untersuchungen in Gebiet der Friedhoferweiterung von 1967.' Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa Jahresbericht 1967, 44-50.

113

Curs us Publicus: The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain Ludin 0. 1970a 'Friedhof Windisch. Grabung 1969.' Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa Jahresbericht 1969/70, 56-72. Ludin 0. 1970b 'Friedhof Windisch, Grabung 1970.' Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa Jahresbericht 1969/70, 73-76. Lynam C. 1913 'Archaeology.' Transactions of the North Staffordshire Field Club XLVII (1912-13), 13942. Lyon J. 1779 'Description of a Roman Bath discovered at Dover.' Archaeologia V, 325-34. Mackie N. 1983 Local Administration in Roman Spain AD . 14-212 . BAR International Series 172. Mackreth D. 1979 'Durobrivae.' Durobrivae 7. 19-21. MacMullen R. 1988 Corruption and the Decline of Rome. Yale University Press. New Haven. Mann J.C. 1987 'A Note on the so-called Town-zone.' Britannia 18, 285-86. Manning W.H. and Scott I.R. 1986 'Iron Objects' in I.M. Stead and V. Rigby Baldock. The Excavation of a Roman and Pre-Roman Settlement, 1968-72, 14562. Britannia Monograph Series No. 7. London. Martin A.T. and Ashby T. 1901 'Excavations at Caerwent, Monmouthshire, on the Site of the Roman City of Venta Silurum in 1899 and 1900.' Archaeologia 57 Part 2, 295-316. Mason D.J.P. 1980 Excavations at Chester, 11-15 Castle Street and Neighbouring Sites, 1974-8. A Possible Roman Posting House (Mansio). Grosvenor Museum Archaeological Ecavations and Survey Reports No. 2. Chester City Council. Matthews J. 1989 The Roman Empire of Ammianus. Duckworth. London. Mattingly H. and Sydenham E.A. 1926 Roman Imperial Coinage. Volume 2. Vespasian to Hadrian. Spink and son. London. Mau A. 1899 Pompeii : its Life and Art. Translated by F.W. Kelsey. MacMillan. New York. Maxfield V.A. 1979 'Camelon 'South Camp': Excavations 1975-79' in D.J. Breeze (ed.) Roman Scotland Some Recent Excavations, 28-32. Maxfield V.A. 1986 'Pre-Flavian Forts and their Garrisons .' Britannia 17, 59- 72. Maxfield V.A. 1989 'Conquest and Aftermath' in M. Todd (ed.) Research on Roman Britain 1960-89, 19-29. Britannia Monograph Series No. l 1. McCarthy M., Caruana I. and Keevill G. 1989 'Carlisle.' Current Archaeology 116 (Vol.X No.9) (August 1989), 298-302. Mccrum M. and Woodhead A.G. 1961 Select Documents of the Principates of the Flavian Emperors ..A.D. 6896. Cambridge University Press. Merrifield R. 1983 London City of the Romans. Batsford. London. Mertens J. 1968 Le Relais Romain de Chameleux. Archaeologicum Belgii Speculum l. Brussels . Millett M. 1990 The Romanization of Britain. Cambridge University Press. Millett M. and Graham D. 1986 Excavations on the Romano-British Small Town at Neatham, Hampshire 1969-1975. Hampshire Field Club

Monograph No 3. Milne G. and Wootton P. 1990 'Urban Development in Londinium, AD 50 to 120: Leadenhall Court excavations 1984-86.' London Archaeologist 6.7, 179-87. Milton B. 1987 'The Chelmsford Mansio - Excavations at 23 Grove Road, Chelmsford, 1985. 'Essex Journal Vol.22 No.3 (Winter 1987), 62-64. Mitchell S. 1976 'Requisitioned Transport in the Roman Empire: A New Inscription from Pisidia' JRS 66, 106-31. Moore I.E., Plouviez J.and West S. 1988 The Archaeology of Roman Suffolk. Suffolk County Council. Mtiller G. 1984 'Die militarischen Anlagen und die Siedlungen von Novaesium' in H. Chantraine et al., Das Romische Neuss, 53-94. Konrad Theiss. Stuttgart. Neal D.S. 1987 'Excavations at Magiovinium, Buckinghamshire, 1978-80.' Records of Buckinghamshire 29, 1-124. Niblett R. 1987 'Evidence for the Antonine Fire at Verulamium from the Wheelers' Excavations.' Hertfordshire Archaeology 9 (1983-86), 29-78. O'Leary T.J., Blockley K. and Musson C. 1989 Pentre Farm, Flint 1976-81. BAR British Series 207. Oswald F. 1941 'Margidunum.' J RS 31, 32-62. Ottaway P. 1993 Roman York. Batsford. London. Partridge C. 1977 'Excavations and Fieldwork at Braughing, 1968-73.' Hertfordshire Archaeology 5, 22-108 . Partridge C. 1981 Skeleton Green. Britannia Monograph Series No.2. Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies. London. Partridge C. 1982 'Graffiti from Skeleton Green.' Britannia 13, 325-26. Pasquinucci M. (ed.) 1987 Terme Romane et vita quotidiana. Edizioni Panini. Modena. Pauli L. 1984 The Alps : Archaeology and Early History. Thames and Hudson. London. Penn W.S. 1958 'The Romano-British Settlement at Springhead. Excavation of the Bakery, Site A.' Archaeologia Cantiana LXXI (1957) . 53-105. Penn W.S. 1969 'Springhead: Miscellaneous Excavations.' Archaeologia Cantiana 83 (1968), 163-92 Petch J.A. 1928 'Excavations at Benwell (Condercum). Second Interim Report (1927 and 1928).' Archaeologia Aeliana (fourth series) V ,46- 74. Pflaum H-G. 1940 'Essai sur Le Cursus Publicus sous Le Haut-Empire Romain.' Memoires presentes ... a l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres Tome XIV. 189-390. Pflaum H-G. 1960-61 Les Carrieres Procuratoriennes Equestres sous le haut-empire romain. Paris . Phillips B. and Walters B. 1977 'A Mansio at Lower Wanborough. Wiltsire.' Britannia 8. 223-27. Philp B.J. 1976 'The Probable Site of Durolevum.' Kent Archaeological Review 43, 62-4. Philp B.J. 1981 The Excavation of the Roman Forts of the Classis Britannica at Dover 1970-1977. Third Research Report in the Kent Monograph Series . Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit. Philp B.J. 1989 The Roman House with Bacchic Murals at

114

Bibliography Dover. Fifth Research Report in the Kent Monograph Series. Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit. Picard G. Ch. 1968 'Informations Archeologiques. Circonscription du Centre.' Gallia 26, 321-45. Pitts L.F. and St. Joseph J.K. 1985 lnchtuthil. The Roman Legionary Fortress. Britannia Monograph Series No.6. Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies. London. Planck D. 1983 Das Freilichtmuseum am riitischen Limes im Ostalbkreis. Fiihrer zu archaologischen Denkmalern in Baden-Wilrttemberg 9. Konrad Theiss. Stuttgart Potter T.W. 1989 'The Roman Fenland: A Review of Recent Work' in M. Todd Research on Roman Britain 1960-89, 147- 73. Britannia Monograph Series No.11. London. Price F.G.H. 1887 'Further Notes upon Excavations at Silchester.' Archaeologia 50 Part 2, 263-80. Purcell N. 1990 'The Creation of Provincial Landscape: the Roman Impact on Cisalpine Gaul' in T. Blagg and M. Millett (eds.) The Early Roman Empire in the West, 6-29. Oxbow Books. Rankov N.B. 1982 'Roman Britain in 1981. 1. Sites Explored.' Britannia 13, 328-95. RCHM 1962 Eboracum: Roman York. An Inventory of the Historical Monuments in the City of York Volume 1. The Royal Commission on Historical Monuments England. Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Redhead N., Roberts J., Start D., Walker J., and McNeil R. 1989 Castleshaw: The Archaeology of a Roman Fort/et. The Archaeology of Greater Manchester Volume 4. Greater Manchester Archaeological Unit. Richmond I.A. 1954 'Excavations on the Site of the Roman Fort at Lancaster, 1950.' Transactions of the Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire 105 (1953), 1-23. Richmond I.A. 1968 Hod Hill. Volume Two: Excavations Carried out between 1951 and 1958. The British Museum. London. Rickman G. 1971 Roman Granaries and Store Buildings. Cambridge University Press. Rivet A.L.F. 1970 'The British Section of the Antonine Itinerary.' Britannia 1, 34-82. Rivet A.L.F. 1975 'Summing Up: the Classification of Minor Towns and Related Settlements' in W. Rodwell and T. Rowley (eds.) Small Towns of Roman Britain, 111-14. BAR British Series 15. Rivet A.L.F. and Smith C. 1979 The Place-Names of Roman Britain. Batsford. London. Rodwell W. 1975 'Milestones, Civic Territories and the Antonine Itinerary.' Britannia 6, 76-101. Rogerson A. 1977 'Excavations at Scole, 1973.' East Anglian Archaeology No.5, 97-224. Round A.A. 1974 'The Bath-House at Wall, Staffs. Excavations in 1971 (Wall Excavation Report No. IO).' Transactions of the South Staffordshire Archaeological and Historical Society 15 (197374), 13-28. Round A.A. 1992 'Excavations on the Mansio Site at Wall (Letocetum), Staffordshire, 1972- 78 (Wall

115

Excavation Report No.14).' Transactions of the South Staffordshire Archaeological and Historical Society 32 (1990-1991), 1-78. Salway P. 1965 The Frontier People of Roman Britain. Cambridge University Press. Sankey D. and Stephenson A. 1991 'Recent Work on London's Defences' in V.A. Maxfield and D.J. Dobson (eds.) Roman Frontier Studies 1989: Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, 117-24. University of Exeter Press. Exeter. Schleiermacher W. 1972 Cambodunum - Kempten: eine Romerstadt im Allgau. Rudolf Habelt. Bonn. Sedgley J.P. 1975 The Roman Milestones of Britain. BAR British Series 18. Shackleton-Bailey D.R. 1968 Cicero's Letters to Atticus Volume lll. Cambridge University Press. Simpson G. 1963 'Caerleon and the Roman Forts in Wales in the Second Century A.D. Part 2: Southern Wales.' Archaeologia Cambrensis CXII, 13- 76. Simpson G. 1974 'Haltwhistle Bum, Corstopitum and the Antonine Wall: a Reconsideration.' Britannia 5, 317-39. Smith R.F. 1987 Roadside Settlements in Roman Britain: A Gazetteer and Study of their Origins, Growth and Decline, Property Boundaries and Cemeteries. BAR British Series 157. Smoothy M.D. 1989 'A Roman rural site at Rayne, Essex; excavations 1987.' Essex Archaeology and History 20, 1-29. Sommer C.S. 1984 The Military Vici in Roman Britain. BAR British Series 129. Stanford S.C. 1968 'The Roman Forts at Leintwardine and Buckton.' Transactions of the Woo/hope Naturalists' Field Club 39 (Part 2), 222-326. Stead I.M. and Rigby V. 1986 Baldock. The Excavation of a Roman and Pre-Roman Settlement, 1968-72. Britannia Monograph Series No.7. London. St. Joseph J.K. 1977 'Air Reconnaissance in Roman Britain, 1973-76.'JRS67, 125-61. Strickland T.J. 1981 'Third Century Chester' in A. King and M. Henig (eds.) The Roman West in the Third Century Part ii, 415-44. BAR International Series No.109(ii). Swoboda-Milenovic R.M. 1960 'Ausgrabungen in der Zivilstadt 1953/54 und 1958.' Carnuntum Jahrbuch 1958, 30-58. Thouvenot R. 1958 Maisons de Volubilis : Le Palais dit de Gordien et La Maison a la Mosaique de Venus. Publications du Service des Antiquites du Maroc Fascicule 12. Todd M. 1970 'The Roman Settlement at Margidunum: The Excavations of 1966-8.' Transactions of the Thoroton Society of Nottinghamshire 73 (1969), 7104. Todd M. 1984 'Excavations at Hembury (Devon), 1980-83: A Summary Report.' Antiquaries Journal LXIV Part 2, 251-68 . Tomlinson R.A. 1976 Greek Sanctuaries. Paul Elek. London. Van Berchem D. 1937 'L'Annone Militaire dans !'Empire Romain au Ille Siecle.' Memoires de la Societe

Cursus Publicus : The infrastructure of government in Roman Britain Nationale des Antiquaires de France for 1936, 117202. Van Dierendonck R.M., Hallewas D.P. and Waugh K.E. (eds.) 1993 The Valkenburg Excavations 19851988 . Introduction and Detail Studies. Nederlandse Oudheden 15. Wacher J.S. 1969 Excavations at Brough-on-Humber 1958-1961. Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London No. XXV. Leeds. Wacher J.S. 1974 The Towns of Roman Britain. Batsford. London. Wallace-Hadrill A. 1988 'The Social Structure of the Roman House.' Papers of the British School at Rome L VI, 43-97. Waddelove A.C. and Waddelove E. 1984 'The Location of Bovium.' Britannia 15, 255-57. Webster G. 1957 'Excavations on the Defences of the Romano-British Town at Kenchester , 1956. Interim Report.' Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club XXXV Part 2 (1956), 138-45. Webster G. 1958a 'The Bath-House at Wall, Staffordshire; Excavations in 1956.' Transactions of the Birmingham Archaeological Society 74 (1956), 1225. Webster G. 1958b The Roman Site at Wall. Her Majesty's Stationery Office. London. Webster G. 1971 'A Roman System of Fortified Posts Along the Watling Street, Britain' in S. Applebaum (ed.) Roman Frontier Studies 1967. (Proceedings of the 7th International Congress), 38-45. The Students' Organisation of Tel Aviv University. Webster G. 1975 The Cornovii. Duckworth. London. Webster P.V. 1971 'Melandra Castle Roman Fort: Excavations in the Civil Settlement 1966-1969 .' Derbyshire Archaeological Journal XCI, 58-118. Webster P.V. 1990 'The First Roman Fort at Cardiff in B.C. Burnham and J.L. Davies (eds.) Conquest, Coexistence and Change. Recent Work in Roman Wales, 35-39. St. David's University College, Lampeter. Wedlake W.J. 1982 The Excavation of the Shrine of Apollo at Nettleton, Wiltshire, 1956-71. Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London No.40. The Society of Antiquaries and Thames and Hudson. London.

116

Wheeler R.E.M . 1926 The Roman Fort near Brecon. London. Wheeler R.E.M. and Wheeler T.V. 1928 'The Roman Amphitheatre at Caerleon , Monmouthshire.' Archaeologia 78, 111-218 . Wheeler R.E.M. and Wheeler T.V. 1932 Report on the Excavation of the Prehistoric, Roman, and PostRoman Site at Lydney Park, Lecestershire. Research Report of the Society of Antiquaries of London No. IX. Wheeler R.E.M. and Wheeler T.V. 1936 Verulamium . A Belgic and Two Roman Cities. Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London No.XI. Oxford. White K.D. 1984 Greek and Roman Technology. Thames and Hudson. London. Wickenden N.P. 1990 'Caesaromagus.' Essex Journal Vol.25 No.3 (Winter 1990), 58-63. Wightman E.M. 1970 Roman Trier and the Treveri. Rupert Hart-Davis. London. Wightman E.M. 1985 Gallia Belgica. Batsford. London. Wilson D.R. 1971 'Roman Britain in 1970. 1. Sites Explored.' Britannia 3, 299-351. Wilson D.R. 1973 'Roman Britain in 1972. 1. Sites Explored.' Britannia 4, 271-323. Wilson D.R. 1975 'Roman Britain in 1974. 1. Sites Explored.' Britannia 6, 221-83. Wilson D.R. 1984 'The plan of Viroconiurn Cornoviorum.' Antiquity VIII, 117-20. Winbolt S.E. 1925 Roman Folkestone. London. Woelcke K. 1938 'Der neue Stadtplan von NidaHeddernheim.' Germania 22, 161-66 . Woodfield C.C.S. 1993 'The Defences of Towcester, Northamptonshire.' Northamptonshire Archaeology 24 (1992), 13-66. Wooley C.L. 1907 'Corstopitum : Provisional Report of the Excavations in 1906.' Archaeologia Aeliana (third sries) III, 161-86. Young C.J. 1975 'The Defences of Roman Alchester.' Oxoniensia XL, 136- 70. Zawadzki T. 1960 'Sur une Inscription de Phrygie Relative au Cursus Publicus.' Revue des Etudes Anciennes LXII, 80-94. Zienkiewicz D.J. 1986 The Legionary Fortress Baths at Caerleon. 1. The Buildings . National Museum of Wales and Cadw. Cardiff .

FIGURES

KEY TO PLACES IN FIG. I.

MILITARY SITES: only those sites with evidence for mansiones. 1 BENWELL 2 BRANDON CAMP 3 BUCKTON 4 BRECON GAER 5 BRYN-Y-GEFEILIAU 6 CAERLEON 7 CAERNARVON 8 CAMELON 9 CARDIFF 10 CARLISLE 11 CASTLESHA W 12 CATTERICK

13 CHESTER 14 CHESTERHOLM 15 COLCHESTER 16 DOVER 17 EXETER 18 GLENLOCHAR 19 INCHTUTHIL 20 LANCASTER 21 MELANDRA CASTLE 22 NEWSTEAD 23 OLD CARLISLE 24 PIERCEBRIDGE

CITIES: all cities are shown; only those with evidence for mansionesare numbered. 25 ALDBOROUGH 26 CAERWENT

27 CANTERBURY 28 SILCHESTER 29 ST ALBANS

VICI: only those with evidence for mansionesor bath-buildings are numbered. (M = structural evidence for a mansio B = structural evidence for a bath-building RP= relief-patterned flue tile present. Sites with combed flue tile are not included). 30 31 32 33 ~4 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

ALCESTER B ALCHESTER ?M RP ALFOLDEAN ?M RP BATHRP BITTERNE B BRADWELL ON SEA RP BRAMPTON B BRAUGHING ?MB RP BROCKLEY HILL RP CAVE'S INN M B RP CHARTERHOUSE RP CHELMSFORD MB RP CHIGWELL B CODDENHAM RP COLD KNAP, BARRY M CORBRIDGE M ?B COWBRIDGE B DORCHESTER-ON-THAMES OORKING RP EAST BRIDGFORD M RP EWELL RP GODMANCHESTER M B RP

RP

52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73

GREAT CASTERTON B RP GREAT CHESTERFORD RP HEYBRIDGE RPP ICKLINGHAM B IXWORTH B KENCHESTER ?M B RP KETTERING RP LEINTW ARDINE B LOWER WANBOROUGH M B RP NEATHAM B PENTRE FARM, FLINT M B RICHBOROUGH M RP ROCHESTER B SANDY RP SPRINGHEAD B STAINES RP TOWCESTER ?B RP WALL MBRP WATER NEWTON ?M WELWYN RP ?M WHITCHURCH M WYCOMB B

118

200KM 120ML ■ MILITARY SITES .CITIES O e VICI

Q

[)

119

KEY TO PLACES IN FIG.2

CITIES 1 2 3 4 5 6

LONDON CANTERBURY CHICHESTER COLCHESTER ST ALBANS WINCHESTER

VICI and OTHER ROADSIDE SETTLEMENTS

~

7 ALCHESTER 8 ALFOLDEAN 9 BALDOCK 10 BISHOPS STORTFORD 11 BRAINTREE 12 BRAUGHING 13 BRENLEY CORNER 14 BRENTFORD 15 BROCKLEY HILL 16 CHELMSFORD 17 CHESHUNT 18 CHIGWELL 19 COGGESHALL 20DARTFORD 21 DORCHESTER-ON-THAMES 22 DORKING 23 DOVER ?d DROPSHORT 25 DUNSTABLE 26 ENFIELD : 7 EWELL 28 FINCHAMPSTEAD

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

FLEET MARSTON GREAT DUNMOW HARDHAM HARLOW HEYBRIDGE !PING KELVEDON LYMPNE NEATHAM OSPRINGE RAPLEY LAKE RECULVER RICHBOROUGH ROCHESTER ROMFORD SPRINGHEAD STAINES STRATFORD ST MARY WARE WELLING WELWYN

■

e ■

•

Provincial City Fort Vicus/

Capital

b

Mansi

o baths

found

f

FI u e ti I es present

Mansio

...... N

-

80KM 50ML

B

A

"

./

i

---

-✓

r

""\1

~

I

I

''

N N

',

~

t~~· '-~b

A L_~~ ~/1

~

~~

_/

-

-

-

I

b

--===i--===---=:::::::11--===--c:::::5~00M

-

-

-

-

Fig. 3a The relationship of the fortress and mansio at Inchtuthil b at Vindonissa.

-

baths

-

-

!2_00FT

LEVELLED

DEFENCES

-_-_-_-_- --~,, ~---=--=-~ , _ __ ___ ,:, \

-, ,_ '

- - '\ ✓ ✓,,, ✓

✓

✓

/

/ /

I

I N

w

I I I I

I

I

I

/

/

/

/

/

/

✓

/

✓

I

\

\ \ \

\ \ \ \ \ \

-

~~

I \

I

I

\

I

\

f i rs I

\

\

\

\

\

I \

accommodation

\ \ \

\

/

I

I

I

I I

I

contubernia

c=:=---===---====--====--===-•lOOM MMM

Fi ~. 4 Overall plan of the mansio at lnchtuthil.

I I I I I I

300 FT I

--

~

L.

C

-

first class ace om mod at ion

N

~

I

contubernia

L 5

F~g.5 Plan of the mansio at Vindonissa.

50 M

•

A 25 17 30

29

18

24

h

21 16 27

28

23

22 20

19

• •

■

•

JO h ■

•

14

15

I 13

12

11

h

8

~

4

9

2

I I

6

7

I

5

3

1

I

hypocaust

"'

N

Vl

B 25

17

30

29

18

24

h 16

27

23

22 20

19

■

•

I

13 10

21 28

•

15

•

■

14

•

12

11

8

h

'~

4

g

2

6 7

5

3

1

I I I I

26

5

80 M

Fig. 6 The first class accommodation at Inchtuthil: a as planned b as built.

• A

• C

B

■

\

-

•

•

-

...... N

°'

D

•

F

G

■

I ■

•

K

I L

M

N

J

E

H

•

• "

- -

--

I 0 p

Q

40 m

■■□■u•-====-------======•----•

Fig. 7 Plan of the first class accommodation at Nijmegen .

baths

......

-U

ij VI

.. :::>: .- . .

.

'

.. . ... . . . .... :. .. . .... . . . -

.

·

·

Fl

IA

. . . ;. ~

Flavian

V

. • . • .· • , • .

.-,_-· ;::'::.·.:.:·.·.·. --~'_:._' ·. --./{:~\:::::·-·-· :.-_:_: :/ /,// ½/

COD

/

drain

V

- - - - - ••• - - E-? . ..

.. •••

slots

,.;,.,..J :';l

-- - -

/

U///~

=----~___) IV 3

0

E

~

~

- -

Fig. 17 Chelmsford Site S: periods IV.1-V.

,(~

/

~ -____L_/_/_

0

0

IV 3

IV 1 I

I I

I

V

To Colchester

AG

I

::_

AG

~

-::0V

FORT?

- : -;,..

,., - ,,_,.,::-V

4-- .:-- -

·'·":o---AJ

AF

AF

I

I

I

I

- -~

"S) V

T

I

/

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

~

I

I

I

-

I

'

I

I

I

I

AA --r

~-

AA I

I

I

I

I

I

I

,"-"~ -::::, ', AR

- AR

To London

-==--===--= == --===- -== =-~2~00M ------

Fig. 18 Chelmsford: overall plans in periods IV.I. IV.3 and V.

AK Q),

'

.&-:-' ,',-_

~

--r I

'' ''

AK

t.,J

I

' ' ,' ' '

baths

-._J

'

z

.

baths

, '._•,·····

,•

..