Power and Religious Acculturation in Romano-Celtic Society: An examination of archaeological sites in Gloucestershire 9781407303871, 9781407321387

Citation preview

BAR 477 2009 ADAMS

Power and Religious Acculturation in Romano-Celtic Society

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

An examination of archaeological sites in Gloucestershire

Geoff W. Adams

BAR British Series 477 2009 B A R

Power and Religious Acculturation in Romano-Celtic Society An examination of archaeological sites in Gloucestershire

Geoff W. Adams

BAR British Series 477 2009

ISBN 9781407303871 paperback ISBN 9781407321387 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407303871 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My greatest debt is to two scholars who have done so much towards the development of this study: Dr Richard Reece and Professor Frank Sear. Whatever is good in this study is due to their example and assistance. Special mention must also be made of my friends and colleagues at the University of Tasmania who have given consistent support and assistance towards the final product. I am grateful not only to all of them for their encouragement, but to all the friends and colleagues who have contributed to the enjoyable and fruitful years at previous universities where I have worked and studied, considering that this work is a culmination of various projects dating back to 1998. Thanks must also go to my family and friends for their help and understanding. However, the main contributor to assisting its development has been my wife, Olivia, who still amazes me with her consistent support. I would also like to dedicate the following pages to both my children (Callan and Charlotte) and to the ‘Williams’ (Adams and Donaldson), for their excellent example over the years.

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER Urban Romanisation and the Native Aristocracy ............................................................................ 13 CHAPTER II Villa Complexes in Gloucestershire .............................................................................................. 28 CHAPTER III The Economic and Social Function of Villas in Gloucestershire and Beyond ................................................................................................................................ 43 CHAPTER IV Temples and Shrines in Gloucestershire .................................................................................... 71 CHAPTER V The Association between Temples and Villas in Gloucestershire ................................................ 89 CHAPTER VI Shrines in Villa Complexes in Gloucestershire ......................................................................... 103 Conclusions for the Romano-Celtic Beliefs of the Local Élites and their Expression of Power ..................................................................................................... 112 APPENDIX I Use of the term 'Celt' .................................................................................................................. 120 APPENDIX II Celtic Coinage and its Evidence for Dobunnic Society ............................................................ 122 APPENDIX III Database of Dobunnic Coinage ............................................................................................... 138 APPENDIX IV Database of Votive Inscriptions from Gloucestershire............................................................. 174 TABLES ............................................................................................................................................................. 177 ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 203 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................. 203 FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................................... 228

ii

LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 11 Table 12 Table 13 Table 14 Table 15 Table 16 Table 17 Table 18 Table 19 Table 20 Table 21 Table 22 Table 23 Table 24 Table 25 Table 26 Table 27 Table 28 Table 29 Table 30 Table 31 Table 32 Table 33 Table 34 Table 35 Table 36 Table 37 Table 38 Table 39 Table 40

Table showing all Structures under Discussion Table showing the Statistics for the Houses in Gloucestershire Table showing the Entertainment Percentage with and without Open Areas for Houses in Gloucestershire Table showing the Statistics for the Villas in Gloucestershire Table showing the Entertainment Percentage with and without Open Areas for Villas in Gloucestershire Table showing the Statistics for the Villas Outside of Gloucestershire Table showing the Entertainment Percentage with and without Open Areas for Villas Outside of Gloucestershire Table showing the Habitation Trends for Villas in Gloucestershire between AD 200-250 Table showing the Habitation Trends for Villas in Gloucestershire between AD 250-300 Table showing the Habitation Trends for Villas in Gloucestershire between AD 300-350 Table showing the Habitation Trends for Villas in Gloucestershire between AD 350-400 Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Barnsley Park Villa (Villa 2) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Frocester Court Villa (Villa 3) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Spoonley Wood Villa (Villa 4) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Wadfield Villa (Villa 5) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Farmington Villa (Villa 6) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Whittington Court Villa (Villa 8) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Withington Wood Villa (Villa 9) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Hucclecote I Villa (Villa 10) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the North Cerney Villa (Villa 12) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Chesters Villa (Villa 14) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Great Witcombe Villa (Villa 15) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Chedworth Villa (Villa 17) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Woodchester Villa (Villa 18) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Fishbourne Villa (Villa 19) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the North Leigh Roman Villa (Villa 20) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Bignor Villa (Villa 21) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Whitebeech Villa (Villa 22) Table showing the Spatial Data Statistics for the Mount Roman Villa, Maidstone (Villa 23) Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa of Diomede (Villa 24) Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa of Asellius (Villa 25) Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa of L. Iucundus at Pisanella (Villa 26) Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa of T. Stephanus (Villa 27) Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Casa dei Miri (Villa 28) Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa of the Mysteries (Villa 33) Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the House of the Vettii Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the San Marco Villa (Villa 34) Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the House of the Bicentenary Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa at Badgeworth (Villa 32) Table showing the Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Lullingstone Villa (Villa 35)

iii

LIST OF GRAPHS Graph 1 Graph 2 Graph 3 Graph 4 Graph 5 Graph 6 Graph 7 Graph 8 Graph 9 Graph 10 Graph 11 Graph 12 Graph 13 Graph 14 Graph 15 Graph A Graph B Graph C Graph D Graph E Graph F Graph G Graph H Graph I Graph J Graph K Graph L Graph M Graph N Graph O Graph P Graph Q Graph R

Graph showing the Comparison of Estimated Surface Areas of Houses in Gloucestershire Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each House in Gloucestershire Graph showing an Adjusted Percentage of Identifiable Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each House in Gloucestreshire Graph showing the Levels of Habitation at the Villas in Roman Gloucestershire Graph showing the Results Produced by Lewit (1991) to Examine the General Levels of Productivity of Sites in Roman Britain Between AD 200-400 Graph showing the Results for the General Levels of Productivity of Sites in Roman Gloucestershire Between AD 200-400 Graph showing the Comparison of Estimated Surface Areas of Villas in Gloucestershire Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa in Gloucestershire Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Internal Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa in Gloucestershire Graph showing the Comparison of Estimated Surface Areas of Villas Outside of Gloucestershire Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa Outside of Gloucestershire Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Internal Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa Outside of Gloucestershire Graph showing the Comparison of Estimated Surface Areas of All Villas Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Internal Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Quarter Staters Graph showing the Corpus of Different Dobunnic Staters Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Staters Graph showing the Average Weights of Dobunnic Stater Issues Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Uninscribed Western Staters Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘ANTED’ Staters Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘EISV’ Staters Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘CATTI’ Staters Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘CORIO’ Staters Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘BODVOC’ Staters Graph showing the Corpus of Different Dobunnic Silver Issues Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Silver Issues Graph showing the Average Weights of Dobunnic Silver Issues Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Uninscribed Western Silver ‘Regular’ Types Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Uninscribed Western Silver ‘Irregular’ Types Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘ANTED’ Silver Issues Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘EISV’ Silver Issues Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘BODVOC’ Silver Issues

LIST OF MAPS Map 1 Map 2 Map 3

Map of Roman Gloucestershire Map of the Associations between Various Romano-Celtic Temples and Villas Map of Dobunnic Coin Finds iv

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 27 Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37 Figure 38 Figure 39 Figure 40 Figure 41 Figure 42 Figure 43 Figure 44 Figure 45 Figure 46 Figure 47 Figure 48 Figure 49 Figure 50 Figure 51 Figure 52 Figure 53 Figure 54 Figure 55 Figure 56 Figure 57 Figure 58

Plan of Gloucester Plan of Building 1.18 from Gloucester Plan of Building 1.5 from Gloucester Plan of House 3S from Caerwent Plan of the House of Aristide from Herculaneum Plan of the House of the Mosaic Atrium from Herculaneum Plan of the House of the Stags from Herculaneum Plan of the Southern Houses at Herculaneum Plan of Cirencester Plan of Building 12.1 from Cirencester Plan of Building 12.2 from Cirencester Plan of Building 12.3 from Cirencester Plan of Kingscote Plan of the Fourth Century House from Kingscote Plan of Dorn Plan of the House from Dorn Plan of Bourton-on-the-Water Plan of the Villa at Barnsley Park (Villa 2) Plan of the House of the Trellis from Herculaneum Plan of the House of the Faun from Pompeii Plan of the House of the Prince of Naples from Pompeii Plan of the Villa at Frocester Court (Villa 3) Plan of the Villa at Spoonley Wood (Villa 4) Plan of the Villa at Wadfield (Villa 5) Plan of the Villa at Farmington (Villa 6) Plan of the Villa at Painswick (Villa 7) Plan of the Villa at Whittington Court (Villa 8) Plan of the Villa at Withington Wood (Villa 9) Plan of the Villa at Hucclecote (I) (Villa 10) Plan of the Villa at Hucclecote (II) (Villa 11) Plan of the Villa at North Cerney (Villa 12) Plan of the Villa at Turkdean (Villa 13) Plan of the Chesters Villa at Woolaston (Villa 14) Plan of the Great Witcombe Villa (Villa 15) Plan of the Early Villa at Chedworth (Villa 17) Plan of the Later Villa at Chedworth (Villa 17) Plan of the Villa at Woodchester (Villa 18) Spatial Plan of the Villa at Barnsley Park Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa at Barnsley Park Plan of the Residence at Frocester Court in Isolation Spatial Plan of the Frocester Court Villa Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Frocester Court Villa Spatial Plan of the Spoonley Wood Villa Public and Private Space in the Spoonley Wood Villa Spatial Plan of the Wadfield Villa Public and Private Space in the Wadfield Villa Spatial Plan of the Farmington Villa Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Farmington Villa Spatial Plan of the Whittington Court Villa Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Whittington Court Villa Spatial Plan of the Withington Wood Villa Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Withington Wood Villa Spatial Plan of the Villa at Hucclecote (I) Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa at Hucclecote (I) Spatial Plan of the Villa at North Cerney Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa at North Cerney Spatial Plan of the Chesters Villa at Woolaston Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Chesters Villa v

Figure 59 Figure 60 Figure 61 Figure 62 Figure 63 Figure 64 Figure 65 Figure 66 Figure 67 Figure 68 Figure 69 Figure 70 Figure 71 Figure 72 Figure 73 Figure 74 Figure 75 Figure 76 Figure 77 Figure 78 Figure 79 Figure 80 Figure 81 Figure 82 Figure 83 Figure 84 Figure 85 Figure 86 Figure 87 Figure 88 Figure 89 Figure 90 Figure 91 Figure 92 Figure 93 Figure 94 Figure 95 Figure 96 Figure 97 Figure 98 Figure 99 Figure 100 Figure 101 Figure 102 Figure 103 Figure 104 Figure 105 Figure 106 Figure 107 Figure 108 Figure 109 Figure 110 Figure 111 Figure 112 Figure 113 Figure 114 Figure 115 Figure 116 Figure 117 Figure 118 Figure 119

Spatial Plan of the Great Witcombe Villa Public and Private Space in the Great Witcombe Villa Spatial Plan of the Villa at Chedworth Public and Private Space in the Villa at Chedworth Spatial Plan of Woodchester Villa Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Woodchester Villa Plan of the Fishbourne Roman Villa (Villa 19) Spatial Plan of the Fishbourne Villa Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Fishbourne Villa Plan of the North Leigh Villa (Villa 20) Spatial Plan of the North Leigh Villa Public and Private Entertainment Space in the North Leigh Villa Plan of the Bignor Villa (Villa 21) Spatial Plan of the Bignor Villa Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Bignor Villa Plan of the Whitebeech Villa at Chiddingfold (Villa 22) Spatial Plan of the Whitebeech Villa Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Whitebeech Villa Plan of the Mount Roman Villa at Maidstone (Villa 23) Spatial Plan of the Mount Roman Villa Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Mount Roman Villa Plan of the Villa Diomede (Villa 24) The Porta Ercolano at Pompeii Spatial Plan of the Villa Diomede Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa Diomede Plan of the Villa of Asellius (Villa 25) Spatial Plan of the Villa of Asellius Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa of Asellius Plan of the Villa of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus at Pisanella (Villa 26) Spatial Plan of the Villa of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus Plan of the Villa of T. Siminius Stephanus (Villa 27) Spatial Plan of the Villa of T. Siminius Stephanus Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa of T. Siminius Stephanus Plan of the Villa at Casa dei Miri (Villa 28) Spatial Plan of the Villa at Casa dei Miri Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa at Casa dei Miri Plan of the Settlement at Lower Slaughter Plan of the Temple at Dean Hall (Temple 6) Plan of the Temple at Upton St. Leonards (Temple 7) Plan of the Temple I at Wycomb (Temple 9) Plan of the Temple at Wycomb and its Surrounding Structures Plan of the Temple II at Wycomb (Temple 9) Plan of the Temple at Chedworth (Temple 10) Plan of the Temple at Uley (Temple 11) Plan of the Temple at Lydney (Temple 12) Plan of the Temple at Lydney with its Associated Structures Plan of the Villa of the Mysteries (Villa 33) Plan of the House of the Vettii Plan of the Villa San Marco (Villa 34) Plan of the House of the Bicentenary Spatial Plan of the Villa of the Mysteries Spatial Plan of the House of the Vettii Spatial Plan of the Villa San Marco Spatial Plan of the House of the Bicentenary Plan of the Villa at Badgeworth (Villa 32) Spatial Plan of the Villa at Badgeworth Public and Private Space in the Villa at Badgeworth Plan of the Villa at Lullingstone (Villa 35) Spatial Plan of the Villa at Lullingstone Public and Private Space in the Villa at Lullingstone vi

Introduction The fascination with the religion of Iron Age and Roman Britain, indeed with the entire culture of the early Britons, has increased markedly in recent years, providing more research and analysis in Romano-Celtic Britain. The numerous ancient monuments and the rites linked to them have influenced many scholars to attempt to identify the nature of the native religion, and the degree of influence that the Romans had upon the local population during the occupation. This debate is exceedingly topical owing to the research that has been undertaken to determine the cultural influences that Rome exerted over its Western provinces. The most effective way to analyse the degree of Roman influence on the native religion is through archaeological evidence, although the ancient literary sources do provide further insights.

Roman period, mainly through the importation of luxury items such as wine and imported pottery, but this process increased and flourished during the Roman occupation (Burnham 1996, 131). Luxury items were, for the native aristocrats, a sign of their station in society and their dominance within such a hierarchical structure (Haselgrove 1982, 82). During the Roman period, the villas of the native élite became further examples of this advertisement of status, thus highlighting their aspirations and acquiescent attitudes toward the Roman administration (Black 1987, 7). The construction of Romano-Celtic temples was also probably an extension of this pro-Roman attitude: structures erected by the aristocracy to emphasise their growing romanitas. Therefore, if a connection between these Romanised buildings can be proven, then it would also illustrate the small percentage of the population that these structures represent (Webster 1997a, 166-7).

There are several aspects to be discussed throughout this investigation, but the central focus has been upon the native aristocracy and their response to Rome. This has revealed that the Romanised buildings erected by the native nobility have created an appearance of Romanisation, with little significance for the nature of society in Britain as a whole. To support this hypothesis, it is also helpful to consider the elements of this apparent Romanisation, namely the archaeological evidence for rural Romano-Celtic temples and Romanised villas in Britain. Some examination of the urban centres has been undertaken, but the reason for this is to gain a clear picture of all the social conditions during the occupation. Temples of the Romano-Celtic style were one of the features of the landscape in Britain during the Roman occupation, but it has been argued in this study that the continuation of these temples has produced a false representation of the religion and the Romanisation of the period (Clarke 1996, 83). They were simply a representation of the Romanised attitude of the native aristocracy. In view of the fact that this group comprised only a very small percentage of the overall population (De la Bédoyère 1999, 77), this ready adoption of Roman architectural methods is a poor representation of the beliefs of the entire rural community. This is an attempt, therefore, to determine the extent of the social and religious impact of Rome on the native population, and on those who accepted Roman beliefs.

All the same, the position of these Romanised residences in the countryside can also provide an additional source of information on their impact within the community. The construction of large villa residences in a classical style made a clear statement of both success and cultural affiliation to viewers both inside and outside its confines. In order to determine the impact of this architectural style within both an internal and external context two methodologies have been adopted in this study. Firstly, the external impact has been analysed by examining the topographical positioning of the villas in order to ascertain their prominence within the local community. Secondly, the internal effect has been assessed through the examination of the potential social role for each residential structure, which through the statistical results should establish whether the statement of romanitas by the owner was intended to be private as well as public. These methodologies are explained further below. It seems probable that the nature of rural Romano-Celtic society did not alter greatly from that of the pre-Roman period. There was probably a clear class structure, where the aristocracy maintained a strong cohesion to assert their position and exploit the lower classes (Claessen 1983, 213). A system of patronage would have existed between these social groups, which would have extended throughout Romano-British society (Salway 1981, 616). This type of ‘client’ system has also been noted in the villa system in Gaul (Wightman 1978, 110), with several other epigraphic examples also being found in the Ravensbosch villa in the Netherlands (Slofstra 1983, 934). It is this dominant relationship that would have allowed the local aristocracy to control the construction of the rural Romano-Celtic temples, which were an extension of the romanitas exhibited in their Romanised villas throughout the countryside.

A second prominent feature of Romanisation in the British countryside during the occupation was the Romanised villas, symbolising the benefits of adopting classical lifestyles. Most of these structures represent the native aristocracy’s desire to exhibit and maintain their status and prestige through the construction of houses with Roman-style architecture and materials (Clarke 1996, 76; Hingley 1996, 44). Adoption of Roman practices had occurred to a lesser degree in the pre-

1

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY In order to ascertain the extent of such undertakings, one might examine the relationship of Romano-British villas to temples in terms of proximity. To deal with every villa and temple in Roman Britain would, however, create a huge corpus of archaeological evidence, the analysis of which would prove to be beyond the scope of this present work. For this reason, it has been decided to restrict the study to one region in Roman Britain. The county of Gloucestershire has been chosen for its wealth of archaeological evidence, providing the possibility of an accurate assessment (Map 1). Some evidence has also been taken from other areas in Britain and from the Continent, to emphasise the findings in Gloucestershire and to also provide this hypothesis with balance. In this analysis, a major factor is location: an association between the rural Romano-Celtic temples and the Romanised villas has been studied because of the similar social motivations behind their construction. It is believed that the close proximity of these two types of sites is not coincidental and has a bearing on their construction. This is an original approach for the study of these archaeological sites that sheds more light upon the nature of society in rural Roman Britain, and the role of the native aristocracy and its apparent Romanisation.

whereas in the rural regions it was purely through the role of wealthy landowners, who sought to enhance their romanitas. In both cases, that being urban and rural, this group saw themselves as the social leaders of the community. But the chief feature in both town and country is the survival of the native beliefs despite the use of Roman materials and construction techniques for the erection of Romano-Celtic temples. An important distinction between the villa-sites has been made based upon their position and wealth. The more affluent villa complexes appear to have been in a closer connection with the Romano-Celtic temples than some of the smaller establishments. This further substantiates a link between these domestic and religious structures. In order to demonstrate this distinction, a comparison between the types and wealth of villas in Gloucestershire is also necessary. The analysis of the proximity of Romano-Celtic temples and the affluent villa complexes has, therefore, aided in the assessment of the influence of Roman practices and styles on traditional native customs. To date, the parallels between rural Romano-Celtic temples and the Romanised villas have only been dealt with to a limited extent (Millett 1990, 195). It is my contention that the two were intrinsically connected, with both religious and residential structures signifying the desire of some members of the British aristocracy to appear Romanised. These tendencies are reflected in the dating, distribution and architecture of many sites in Britain, and become the major focus of this study.

The origins, dating, distribution, position, layout and architecture of the villas and temples in Roman Gloucestershire have been the primary basis for this study. This information provides insight into the style and direction of the native aristocracy and their religion, reflecting the resilience of the native cults despite Roman domination. The analysis depends greatly upon the archaeological evidence available. The literary sources have been utilised to the fullest extent, but, because of their frequently biased nature and the limited range of sources dealing with this area of Romano-Celtic history, most evidence is archaeological. A difficulty emerges if only certain parts of a site have been excavated. The nature of the evidence, of course, varies, depending on the structure and the type of site under consideration.

The evidence of the villas has been examined using several techniques. One principal focus is the relationship between these villas and the local rural Romano-Celtic temples. The purpose of this analysis is to find a correlation between the two, thereby creating a link in regard to their origin. Another technique is to examine the villa and its estate to observe the communal aspects of the villa and its reflection of the cult activity. This mostly entails the consideration of the rooms that may have served a ritual function within the villa complex. From these investigations, the degree of Romanisation of the native religion in Britain can be ascertained. As mentioned previously, the analysis of the romanitas of the villas themselves has used both topographical and statistical methodologies in order that their social significance can be quantified as expressions of a cultural affiliation with the provincial administration.

The variation in types of temple sites has also been analysed. Urban temples have been dealt with separately from the rural shrines, because of the differing degrees of Romanisation. The impact of Roman culture on urban areas was more significant than in rural regions because of greater contact with the Roman conquerors. This approach was utilised by Rivet (1964) and produced a comprehensive and pertinent analysis of Romano-British society and culture. Various élite members of the community for different reasons constructed Temples but the most prevalent motivation was the political or social aspirations of the native nobility. Those who constructed the temples were, in all likelihood, from the same elevated social group. The only difference would have been the circumstances in which the construction was undertaken. The erection of temples in the urban centres would have been the responsibility of the native aristocrats through their positions as local officials,

This study is limited to the period from the late preRoman Iron Age in Britain, from around the early First Century AD, to the end of the Third Century AD. There may be some aspects of the research that look at a later period, but this is to further substantiate the argument presented. This time restriction should enable an accurate analysis of society in Gloucestershire in the decades just after conquest, through Rome’s occupation of Britain, to the rebirth of Romano-Celtic temple-and-villa construction in the rural areas.

2

INTRODUCTION A variety of evidence can be utilised from the Gloucestershire region in order to achieve the most accurate evaluation. Most of the elements examined are the Romano-Celtic temples and villa structures of known plan. Buildings without any known plan are also interpreted, using the available evidence, such as inscriptions, text and associated finds, to attempt to analyse native society and religion. The pre-Roman numismatic evidence has also been included in an appendix because it provides a valuable reflection of the attitudes of the Dobunnic leaders before the conquest in AD 43, of the prosperity of their economy (Van Arsdell 1994, 1) and their adoption of Roman practices. Therefore, the intention of this study is to examine as many varying types of evidence as possible in order to gain the fullest image of Romano-British society. This process of analysis seems to be the most practical to determine the general tendencies of the religion and society in Roman Gloucestershire.

hinterland regions of the countryside. However, both of these elements are also difficult to assess in definitive terms at many of the sites under question. When examining the commercial/economic potential for many extra-urban sites there are numerous factors that often hinder a clearly defined approach towards understanding the whole process (Branigan and Miles 1989, 3). All the same, this is often a matter that is focused upon creating a defined terminology rather than a study of a selection of sites and their intended function. But there is also a difficulty in the extant evidence at many structures in this region as well, which poses a greater limitation on their analysis. All the same, this should not preclude the possibility of considering this element within the Romanised villas located in the Gloucestershire region. This is largely owing to the important symbolism of wealth and success that they represented, and so the commercial viability of these structures must be considered.

Method for Archaeological Analysis The method by which the economic viability of a villa site has been evaluated has used a progression of factors that can evaluate its intended function overall. Firstly, the first consideration is whether evidence of commercial productivity currently exists. If there is no clear evidence of such a function, then there can be little further discussion of this economic role. However, if the extant evidence does indicate a commercially productive function in some regions of a extra-urban complex, then the extent of this is determined by considering both the nature of the evidence and the amount of space dedicated to such a role within each complex, which is evaluated through spatial data analysis. The method used in this regard is similar to that implemented for determining entertainment space (see below), but in this instance it is intended to establish the economic priorities of each respective complex. Naturally, the varied levels of evidence at each site limits the application of this method, but it still provides a useful point of consideration for these Romanised villas and their economic viability.

The analysis and methods used in this study are varied in accordance with the nature of each site. Firstly, the finds and layout of each site are examined where possible, including their distance from the respective urban centres, as well as the levels of wealth displayed in the architecture and decoration of the building. This allows for further insight into the social standing and the activities of the owners of these structures (Allison 1992, 248). The most important aspect is the variation in the percentage of space allocated for potential entertainment within the villa structures. This assists in determining the variation in relation to a villa’s position from the city centre. In turn these results have been compared with structures from other regions to find any further variation. This is significant because it determines whether there was any substantial difference amongst each group of villas and the implications this had for the social function of these complexes. The selection of structures to be analysed throughout this study has been determined by the availability of material and the desire to establish the most comprehensive understanding of each villa structure. The most comprehensive understanding of these villas can be established by determining their differences and similarities to other structures. The use of statistics has been the most beneficial method of accomplishing this.

The topographical position of each villa complex is also of great use when examining how these residences expressed the cultural values and affiliations of their respective owners. The central theme of this analysis is to determine the visibility of each extra-urban structure within the countryside, which in turn should provide a clearer understanding of their expression of status and romanitas within the countryside, but beyond the confines of the structure itself. The expression of status and romanitas within villa complexes in particular are considered in the analysis of potential entertainment space in Chapter III, whereas their broader communication of a Roman cultural affiliation is examined in Chapter II. However, the topographical position of extra-urban structures has not been limited to the villa complexes, but it is an important consideration for the rural Romano-Celtic temples as well.

Economic and Topographical Methodologies When considering the importance of Romanised villas as being symbolic of power and social status there are two key areas of interest that can assist in determining these qualities: their economic productivity and their topographical position. Both of these elements were significant factors that represented the dominating symbolism of these élite residences, which in turn epitomised their status and cultural romanitas within the

3

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Nevertheless, there were additional considerations when it came to the placement of the religious sites, particularly in relation to the continuity of sanctity at many structures. But it cannot be ignored that both types of structure were intended to communicate some kind of cultural affiliation with the provincial administration in a fashion that often extended well beyond the confines of their structural limits. Naturally, one of the most significant features that is also considered in this instance is the proximity of a particular site to a major Roman road, which would have further accentuated the possibility for its visibility throughout the local countryside. This has been considered in association with the Romanised villas and Romano-Celtic temples, but also in relation to the smaller urban settlements in Gloucestershire, such as Dorn, Bourton-on-the-Water and Kingscote.

Peristyla were measured to include the porticoes because of the viewing connection that they had with the interior (Vitr. 3.2.8; 5.1.1-3). Each room was examined individually with the records of its finds and décor in order to determine its function, but its position within the entire structure was also taken into account. The allocation of room function was often problematic (owing to the inaccessibility of several sites), but extreme caution was exercised in order to gain the most accurate identification of function possible. The rooms that have been determined to have a potential entertainment function have been referred to using the traditional terms (the peristyle, tablinum, triclinium, diaeta, oecus, exedra), but aside from possessing an entertainment role, there has been no assumptions made about their functions. For example, if a room has been identified as a triclinium it is not assumed that it was only used for dining, rather that this was likely to have been its most common function. The use of the traditional terminology makes the different aspects of each space more discernable in the discussion (See Allison 1992; 2004, 177), but it is not the intention to make any over-riding assumptions about any singular function.

Both of these methods are intended to further highlight the important social and cultural implications of these Romanised structures: they represent the socio-political views of the local élites who were implicitly connected to them, but not necessarily those held by the wider population of Roman Gloucestershire. Through the economic and topographical methodologies it is possible to view the priorities of the local leaders in relation to their exhibited romanitas, but this in turn exemplifies their dominant role in the construction of such structures. This public and external focus has then been further exemplified in the analysis of potential entertainment space at the villa complexes, which represents the limited intended social function at many of these villas. This examination exhibits how important the external perception was at many Romanised villa establishments, which is entirely different to complexes from other regions. Naturally, this was not always the case, but it is evident that the social expectations were significantly different in Roman Gloucestershire as compared to other regions, such as Latium and Campania for example.

Following this, the surface area of each room potentially used for entertainment was calculated and converted into a percentage of the total surface area of the entire structure. These results have been shown in a series of Tables (Tables 2-7) and the total percentage of potential entertainment space for each structure has been illustrated in a series of graphs. The graphs have provided the most coherent form of comparison of the possible social roles of each structure in a way that takes into consideration the size of each complex, the percentage of potential entertainment space (thus removing the differences in each villa’s total surface area) and the aspect (internal/external) of each structure’s capacity for serving an entertainment function. By presenting the statistical results in this fashion it facilitates the best format for discussion.

Statistical Method for Determining Entertainment Space

Statistical Analysis The process of acquiring the statistical data for measuring potential entertainment space was applied universally to all residential structures that had available floor plans. The process involved measuring the surface areas of entire structures and the spaces within the walls. The overall size of each complex has been determined by its layout. Those structures with a definitive boundary, such as the Villa at North Cerney (Villa 12), provide a clear demarcation of their limits. Other structures plainly include a domestic hortus within a boundary wall, such as the Villa at Spoonley Wood (Villa 4). These have also been included because it is clear that these regions were seen as being in closer association with the domus rather than the estate (Plin. Ep., 5.6.8-20). This variation in the limits of each residence is indicative of the differing elements found at each site.

One of the most important analytical tools for the archaeological material throughout this study is the use of statistics taken from the amount of space designated for various functions. This has been done in a similar fashion to the study of De Kind (1998) on houses at Herculaneum, but with a different focus. The statistics have derived from the potential entertainment space, in order to ascertain the possible social role of each residence around the various urban centres under discussion. The statistical analysis is divided into three sets. The first method used gathers all the surface areas for potential entertainment space including all known open areas, such as peristyla, gardens and courtyards. The second method excludes all open areas from the group of potential entertainment space. The Third incorporates those open areas with an element of decorative pretension. The information collected using

4

INTRODUCTION these methods has then been converted into percentages to determine the emphasis placed upon a social function at residences of vastly differing sizes.

It should be clarified here that the references to open entertainment space include both peristyla and external porticoes. Many peristyla within this corpus of structures had no view towards the exterior, but it was their illumination and ventilation that is being taken into consideration in their inclusion as ‘open space’. Some viewing rooms, such as diaetae and exedrae, have been discussed in reference to such open areas, but they have not been included among the statistics for open entertainment regions. However, many open regions (peristyla and courtyards) had a utilitarian role and have been excluded from some statistical calculations (see below). The term ‘utilitarian’ has been used in general to indicate a clear non-entertainment room, indicating a residential or productive function. Those spaces referred to as utilitarian areas were used for the daily running of the household rather than being potentially used for either public or private entertainment.

There are four reasons why entertainment space has been considered in these different ways. Firstly, owing to the varying and multiple roles that open areas served within many residences, it is hoped that by considering potential entertainment space in all of these ways, the most accurate results should be achieved. Secondly, the exclusion of all open areas should not only avoid false interpretations at some sites with incomplete extant plans, but also indicate whether the focus of the building was upon internal or external entertainment. Thirdly, owing to the varying levels of extant knowledge on many complexes, it should allow for greater flexibility and also for more interpretation of some sites with limited available information. Finally, converting all the results into percentages allows for a comparison not only of how much space could have been used for prospective entertainment, but also of the emphasis placed upon entertainment by each owner. The importance of this can be clearly considered if a small villa has a smaller area for entertainment than a larger residence, but possesses an equivalent percentage of potential entertainment space. This implies that despite the reduced size of the complex, the emphasis upon a potential social function was just as important at the smaller villa as it was at the larger residence.

All of these statistics and percentages have been considered within their archaeological contexts, thus avoiding the possibility of discrepancies. These results are intended to serve as a guide for analysis rather than an illustration of an exact percentage. After all, the designer of each building would not have formally considered the percentage of space that was to be allocated to entertainment areas. But these results are designed to serve two main purposes. Firstly, to determine whether or not the social nature of these structures complemented similar residences on the continent, which provides a more accurate image of life in these Romano-British districts. Secondly, it allows for a clearer understanding of how these villas were designed, thus presenting further insight into the intentions of each owner and their priorities for each structure.

There is one difficulty that can arise when applying this method to each of the sites under question: the designation of potential entertainment space. Owing to the limited amount of detailed information at many sites, often the only aspects of a room that can be examined to assign a potential entertainment function are its position, décor and the comments of its excavators. This problem is unavoidable and must be taken into consideration when assessing the results. But when examining an imperfect source of material/information, such inconsistencies are more typical than unusual, which is the perennial dilemma of archaeological interpretation. In order to reduce the effect of this, the classification of potential entertainment space has sought to determine the minimum number of rooms with such a function by only including the most obvious rooms from the available information.

The main difficulty when using this style of statistical method is the reliance upon a clear definition of entertainment space, as opposed to non-entertainment space. Recent scholarship has questioned the viability of assigning a definite function to particular areas within the domus (Allison 1992, 235-49; 2001a, 181-208; Leach 1997, 50-72), illustrating the flexible nature of these residences (See Moormann 2002, 429-30). Throughout this study, the designation of areas as entertainment space does not preclude the possibility of any other function for these rooms. It is simply indicating that a particular area had a potential entertainment role, indicating that the provision of such space within a residence is indicative of the owners’ intentions and the conception of each structure. Conversely, if there were limited provision for social activity within a villa, it would appear unlikely to have been a priority for the owner. Therefore, it seems that this type of division of use (entertainment/nonentertainment) is conceivable and should provide a clearer understanding of the role that these residences served.

However, one of the most important aspects to note is the interpretation of open space. Frequently open areas are the clearest examples of potential entertainment space, but they are also among the most easily identifiable regions in the archaeological record. In view of the commonly significant dimensions of peristyla and open courtyards, it is possible that this may distort the statistical results to present an unrealistic representation of the site under question. So the frequent dominant role of open areas as potential entertainment space also may be more indicative of how they were used.

5

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY The nature of the social activity (public/private) has also been taken into consideration for these sites, using the Hillier and Hanson method. This method of analysis has shown the different roles that existed at each site, but also that there was a continued emphasis upon entertainment in these structrues. The application of the Hillier and Hanson method to these sites has illustrated the presence of entertainment space in both private and public (inaccessible/accessible) regions within the villa residences using another statistical method. Allison (2004, 123) has argued that a formal public/private division did not exist within her survey of thirty Pompeian townhouses, but the use of the Hillier and Hanson method in this instance is intended to illustrate the variation in accessibility and location within the potential entertainment areas as a group, in order to show their differing uses as entertainment rooms. The results of this analysis have been shown in the coloured images for each structure analysed, as well as the Access Map among the figures. Using both methods together (potential entertainment analysis, Hillier and Hanson spatial analysis) creates a compelling image of the social function that the villas possessed, which often varied between each structure.

The definition of the role of open spaces within these residences can be problematic, owing to the multiple functions that they performed. These areas could have been used for purposes including, but not limited to, entertainment, storage, relaxation or commercial function. Open spaces also provided the benefits of increased ventilation and illumination to the residence. Because peristyla and courtyards were so versatile, one must be careful not to over generalise, as this may distort not only the results of the statistical analysis but also the importance of these areas and the reasons behind their inclusion in many structures. It also seems inaccurate to draw a significant generalisation about the differing roles performed by peristyla and paved courtyards. There are obvious distinctions suggested by the inclusion or exclusion of a colonnaded section around the perimeter of open spaces, but this should not lead to a differentiation in function. There is no doubt that the inclusion of classical architectural elements would have heightened the appearance of such an open space (Zanker 1988, 26), but it would not have restricted their role. In most cases, the well-appointed décor within many peristyla is indicative of a less utilitarian role than most unadorned courtyards, but this was not always the case. Hence there is a dilemma with the allocation of specific functions to these areas. So it is evident that some caution must be used when examining the use of these areas and the different roles they may have performed.

This spatial data analysis makes references to several statistical calculations that have been used to determine the levels of accessibility for each room within the structures under discussion in the region. These values are titled ‘Control Value’, ‘Depth from Exterior’, ‘Mean Depth’, ‘Relative Asymmetry’ and ‘Real Relative Asymmetry’. Control Values determine the level of control exerted by each room upon its accessibility and that of its neighbouring rooms. If a Control Value is over 1 it is a ‘controlling space’, or in other words it controlled access to at least some of its neighbours. If it was below 1 its access was controlled by at least one of its neighbouring rooms. Depth from Exterior measures the number of spaces between a room and the closest entrance into the building, which also clarifies its accessibility.

In order to analyse the levels of social activity at the residential complexes in Roman Gloucestershire, they have not only been examined as a group, but have also been compared to other townhouses and villas on the continent. The continental examples have been taken from Latium and Campania, and are included purely for comparative reasons (for further analysis of these structures, see Adams 2006, 2008). By undertaking this is possible to gain further insight into the social processes that existed in the extra-urban regions of Roman Gloucestershire. A few additional examples have also been taken from elsewhere in Roman Britain, such as House 3S at Caerwent and Fishbourne Roman Palace, but as with the examples from Central Italy, they have only been included on a comparative basis to accentuate the statistical results of the main study.

Mean Depth measures the accessibility of a room in relation to the other rooms in the complex. If a space has a high Mean Depth, it means that access to it was more restricted. Relative Asymmetry is used in relation to determining the potential for social interaction. If a room has a low Relative Asymmetry value, it has a high potential for social interaction. Real Relative Asymmetry values are used in the same way, but are more reliable because they take into consideration the number of rooms within each structure. When all of these methods are used in conjunction with each other it is possible to determine the accessibility of each potential entertainment room and, in turn, its public/private role. Following from these calculations, the role of each potential entertainment space, according to their public or private role, has been illustrated on the floor-plan (grey regions indicating a public role and black showing a private function).

Definitions Before proceeding further, the phrase ‘potential entertainment space’, which has been used consistently throughout this study, should be defined. This term is used broadly to describe regions within the residences that may have been used for entertaining guests or for leisure. The exact nature of what can be deemed ‘entertainment’ is ambiguous and usually impossible to determine absolutely from the archaeological record. However, it emerges from the evidence that most rooms within the residences under examination actually served a

6

INTRODUCTION variety of roles, which not only makes the use of ‘potential’ necessary within this phrase, but also the nature of the entertainment somewhat hypothetical. Rooms determined in this study to have been potentially used for entertainment were likely to have had other uses, but it is their use for otium in particular that is the present focus of this research.

consideration of their architectural type (see below), the secondary spatial data analysis (or the Hillier and Hanson method) and the other available information on each architectural space, such as décor, aspect and the finds from each room. Nevertheless, there must be a note of caution. Owing to the meagre publication of the lists of finds at many sites under discussion in the Gloucestershire region, there are limits to this study. Without a comprehensive source of knowledge on the finds of each room, it is difficult to gain a detailed understanding of the actuality of room function at the time of the eruption (Allison 2004). This limitation, however, does not preclude analysis entirely. By examining the architectural spaces and the intentions behind their inclusion in the structure, it is possible to ascertain a pattern of design and potential function in areas that do not have a high number of recorded artefacts. It is certain that the layout and location of most rooms would have governed their role within each structure and their intended function would depend upon the preferences/priorities of the owner. There was certainly some evolution in room function over time, which has been taken into consideration where possible. But it was the intention behind the construction of villae suburbanae that is the most fundamental inquiry within this study, particularly in relation to their social role (as shown in the potential entertainment rooms).

For the purposes of this study there are several terms that must be defined: ‘entertainment space’ (and therefore the meaning of ‘non-entertainment space’), ‘social’, ‘public’ and ‘private’ and ‘Romanisation’. ‘Entertainment space’ has been used to indicate an area of a residence that could be used for either relaxation or the receipt of visitors by the leading residents of the household. The use of this phrase is intentionally general by reason of allowing a degree of flexibility in regard to the specific activities that occurred in such regions. The ‘entertainment space’ of the structures under question were those areas that could be used for purposes other than the general duties of the household. With this definition in mind, it is logical that the definition of ‘non-entertainment space’ are those areas that functioned as architectural spaces intended to fulfil the utilitarian responsibilities (or daily workings) of the household. The ‘non-entertainment space’ was not intended for communal gatherings or selfindulgence of any kind, but to provide areas for the smooth running of the residence. The term ‘social’, which is often used to clarify the more general phrase of ‘entertainment space,’ is intended to indicate interactions between the leading members of the household with people from outside the household (typically in an amicable context, although this does not preclude commercial or political contexts). The use of this term is intended to highlight the potential for a communal function with non-household members in a particular architectural setting.

Many of these rooms also incorporated a reception function as well as an entertainment role, which indicates more of an official role for these spaces. In the consideration of what was potential entertainment space only the atrium, which was traditionally used for reception, has been excluded. This is owing to the almost universal inclusion of an atrium, which was also frequently used as an entrance vestibule by the First Century AD after the introduction of peristyla. The social intentions of villa owners were not represented by the inclusion of atria within the group of potential entertainment rooms. Tablina have been included for two reasons. Firstly, because of their frequent representation as an important public space for receiving clients in the ancient sources. Secondly, tablina were used to advertise the social status of many élites, making them a pertinent addition to villae suburbanae when examining room function in a social context.

The term ‘public’ has been used in this study to indicate areas within a residence that could be frequented by groups of residents and non-residents whether they had been formally invited into the architectural setting or not. The ‘public’ regions were areas that could be easily accessed from the entrance to the structure and that also had a low level of restriction for people from outside the household. ‘Public’ has frequently been used in this study in conjunction with ‘social’ in order to indicate the potential for communal gatherings in these areas (for a variety of occasions) that were also quite distinct from the ‘private’ regions.

The division between the social roles of rooms with a potential entertainment function and those without has been investigated in order to present a view of the differences between areas intended for large-scale public entertainment and those meant for private/intimate occasions. This has been highlighted by the Hillier and Hanson method (1984, 96-140; 148-75), which clearly illustrates the accessibility of particular rooms and in turn their public or private natures. The implications when applying this method to Pompeian residences has been fully discussed by Grahame (2000, 37-42), but it provides a valuable tool to statistically exhibit the

‘Private’ has been used to indicate areas that were only accessible by members of the household and their invited guests. These rooms were more secluded in their location and their accessibility had a higher degree of control. These ‘private’ areas contrasted the ‘public’/communal (or social) regions because of their reduced accessibility and limited clientele. The division of areas into ‘public’ and ‘private’ spaces has primarily been made through the

7

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY informal social divisions that existed within each residence. Even the criticisms of Clarke (1998, 28-41) and Brown (1990, 100-1), that this method can only be used for determining the relationship between inhabitants and strangers, are correct, this is precisely the intention for its use within this study. The social features of these villas are a central theme of the statistical interpretations of potential entertainment space.

public buildings having been financed by the local aristocracy, which would have been easily recognisable by the rest of the community. Therefore, it would seem that the use of the terms ‘Romanised’ and ‘Romanisation’ can be used with this view of the aspirations of these members of the community. These ambitions were most clearly epitomised in the urbanised regions through the construction of Romanised complexes, which made a clear statement of romanitas and social status within the region.

Another term that needs to be clarified from the outset is ‘Romanisation’. The acculturation process of ‘Romanisation’ has been keenly debated in recent years, which has produced a number of interpretations and methodologies that have been used to interpret Romanised sites throughout the Mediterranean. For example, Jones (1997) has focused upon the question about whether modern conceptions of ethnic identity can be applied to ancient societies, with the argument that the diversity that was present within the material evidence suggested that a generalised ‘Romanisation’ process could not be legitimised. Webster (2001) has instead advocated the view that it is the practice of blending the identifying cultural factors which is significant for our understanding of the overall acculturation process. Mattingly (2004, 9) has continued this view with the argument that the diversity of cultural interpretation within ancient society negates the possibilities for a ‘neat unitary solution’ for the process of Romanisation, but this highlights the importance of maintaining an individualistic case-by-case approach. Hingley (2005, 8990) has noted the significance of regional variation within the process of Romanisation in relation to domestic residences, which emphasises the nature of the acculturation process itself. Despite the regional differences in many residences, it was the intent of each individual owner, through the adoption of such markers of cultural affiliation like Romanised architecture, which is important to consider. These structures were clear symbols of their intended cultural attachment, often regardless of the owners own knowledge of actual ‘Roman’ culture or its implementation.

The Significance of Domestic Architecture as a Cultural Identifier and its Analysis The construction of a Romanised residence within the provinces should be viewed as a representation of cultural symbolism, being a clear icon of status, wealth and power, regardless of the level of facilities that existed within the structure itself. Each complex made an external statement of cultural affiliations with the Imperial administration, purely through their layout and design. It also represented the capacity of its owner to dominate its environment and the surrounding community (Mielsch 1987, 45-9; Wallace-Hadrill 1998, 43). All the same, the type of structure created by each owner was also a representation of their own intentions and preferences, providing a clear indication of not only the intended social statement that the building embodied, but also the type of lifestyle that they sought to attain within each residence. There were numerous forms of domestic and religious architecture throughout the Roman Empire (Smith 1998), with each generally corresponding to the regional traditions, climatic requirements and temporal trends behind their designs, but, nevertheless, they all represented a similar social statement of power and romanitas. Whether such cultural affiliations were indicative of the community in general is a topic of some debate (Hingley 2005), but the collective recognition of this statement within the wider society is undeniable. The Roman domus often represents a microcosm of ancient society, frequently embodying the combination (and the effect of the interaction) of different cultures within one residence, as well as providing evidence of different levels of society because of the recurrent extended nature of their households. The dominant members expressed their influence in its design and their lifestyles, whereas the subordinates were less prominent, but, nonetheless, played a significant part within the running of the household/estate. The design, location, and function of each complex give a clear indication of the historical and cultural circumstances that surrounded both those residing within its walls and also the wider community.

Nevertheless, as Reece has commented (1988, 11), the so-called ‘Romanised’ culture that was adopted in the Roman provinces was a combination of influences from many different regions, such as Gaul, Spain, Italy and Rome itself. Thus, to use a term like Romanisation is in many ways a simplification (Hingley 1997, 85), but it is still indicative of the intent exhibited in the adoption of these cultural identifiers. Roman culture was shown through various types of construction, such as the monumental architecture of public and private buildings (Barrett 1997, 59); the adoption of this material culture does represent the influences, allegiances and aspirations of those who sought to ingratiate themselves with the Roman administration (Hingley 1997, 97). To be ‘Romanised’ was to adopt a lifestyle that was also reflected in the material inclinations of the individual (Barrett 1997, 63). This process was exhibited in relation to both public and private structures, with the majority of

There are several methodologies that have been used within recent scholarship to analyse the lifestyles and social practices that occurred within Romanised residences. These methodologies have focused upon

8

INTRODUCTION various different aspects and archaeological interpretative processes that allow for a greater understanding of their social significance, in both an insular and a wider collective context. For example, the previous studies on archaeological statistical/spatial analysis by Hillier and Hanson (1984), Grahame (2000), Longfellow (2000), Clarke (1998) and Brown (1990) have all been of great assistance in the development of the processes of statistical analysis of Romanised residences. Each scholar has added to the discussion of the use of statistics in the interpretation of ancient residences, contributing to the advancement of current theories upon the development of domestic structures within Roman provincial society. The work of De Kind (1998), has also been useful having employed a similar method (examining surface areas and their implications for interpretation), which has also been further developed by Adams (2006) in the analysis of potential entertainment space. These methodologies for interpreting domestic space will be of great use for the analysis of the residences in Roman Gloucestershire.

and chronology are the essence of this case study and provides the framework for investigation. The county of Gloucestershire provides a well-documented location for the analysis of this association at its height and may be taken to reflect aristocratic influence for the rest of the province.

The research of Allison (1992, 1997, 2001, 2004) has also made a significant contribution through her reassessment of previous archaeological methodologies and their assumptions about room function. Eleanor Winsor Leach (2004) has also undertaken a study of social activity in the Roman house in her latest work, The Social Life of Painting in Ancient Rome and on the Bay of Naples, but has used the evidence of the wall paintings rather than floor plans. These different approaches to study of domestic activities have different merits and intentions, but the possibility to comprehensively include all these methods (focusing upon statistical analysis, loose finds, wall-paintings) provides the most ideal process of interpretation for any domestic residence. The residences in Gloucestershire have produced a widerange of evidence that should allow for the implementation of all of these methodologies in their interpretation, which should then permit the optimal understanding of their social significance and function within such a community.

One author to look at a possible connection between villas and Romano-Celtic temples was Rodwell (1980). At the outset, he felt that there was no parallel between the two types of site; but he did not examine the question in any detail: he offered only an overview. He cited Chedworth as an example for a neighbouring temple and villa not being closely associated (Goodburn 1998, 34), although he does say that this viewpoint was “only for the time being” (Rodwell 1980, 219). However, he notes that a close association has been found between a villa and temple at Newel, near Trier (Wightman 1970, fig. 17). In the light of discoveries since the publication of this study and the Rodwell’s own acknowledgement of the possibility of an association his view can be understood.

Previous Studies There has previously been little suggestion of an association between the Romanised villas and rural Romano-Celtic temples in Roman Britain. This may be due to a limitation in the excavated material or knowledge at the time. Several major works have been published on the villas, for example by Smith (1997), Branigan (1977) and Percival (1976), and several major works on the architecture of Romano-Celtic temples by Lewis (1966) and Wilson (1973b; 1975b), but there have been no major works dealing with an association between the two types of sites.

The possibility of a connection between villas and Romano-Celtic temples received more positive comment from Millett (1990, 195-6). His study is predominantly concerned with the distribution of rural Romano-Celtic temples in the Third Century, as examined by Horne (1981, 21-6). Millett (1990, 195-6) notes a similar distribution pattern for rural temples and Romanised villas across southern Britain. He also suggests that the purpose of erecting such structures would have been for the display of status by the local aristocracy, combining the function of religion and priesthoods with political and social power. This is in keeping with his general opinion that there was a continuation in the social dominance of the local nobility from the early Occupation period (Woolf 1991, 342). Millett does not examine the association between these structures in detail. Nevertheless, his reference to such an association is very relevant to the present study and provides a method by which the affiliation between these Romanised domestic and religious structures might be illustrated.

Another important outcome of this study is a determination of the influence of Roman religion upon the native religion, and the role of the native aristocracy in this apparent Romanisation. Owing to their position prior to and during the occupation, and the possibilities for advancement open to them, their influence would most likely have been considerable (Cunliffe 1997, 259). But the accumulated evidence demonstrates that the Romanisation of the native Celtic religion was of a purely external nature, that it was found mostly among the native élites (Frere 1987, 316), and that these influences did not have any fundamental effect upon the traditional beliefs of the natives. This is best shown through a study of the archaeological remains of the temples discovered in Roman Britain and their contexts within society during the period, namely their association with other aristocratic inspired structures, such as the Romanised villas. This emphasis on dating, distribution, architecture

Potter and Johns (1992, 204) have made a more recent reference to the link between villas and local Romano-

9

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Celtic temples. This work mentioned the possibility, but only during the Third and Fourth centuries AD. The authors also refer to the use of rural Romano-Celtic temples as instruments of display of wealth and status for the native aristocracy, corresponding with the rural revival in the Third Century. This reference to an association between rural temples and villas was also quite brief, avoiding any critical discussion of their connection, but this is in keeping with the general nature of the book and its purpose (Hanson 1994a, 337).

on the urban centres of Roman Britain, but the most comprehensive of these would be that by John Wacher (1995). This book provides a vast quantity of information and analysis concerning the two major centres in Gloucestershire: Gloucester and Cirencester. Here the author gives the known information of each centre and makes his analysis. He does not make sociological interpretations about the material, preferring to concentrate on the facts of each centre (Jones 1996, 4879). One good example of this is shown in his discussion on the possibility of some temple sites in Cirencester (Wacher 1995, 308, 317, 320). This descriptive approach is useful, providing the reader with a clear understanding of what has been found, without unnecessary interpretation.

Through the examination of these comments on the association between rural Romano-Celtic temples and the Romanised villas it appears that there seems to have been some agreement that such an association did exist. But the amount of detailed investigation in these works is quite limited, and this is where this study hopes to add to the scholarship on the topic. Previous research has also mentioned the occurrence of villa/temple association only for the Third or Fourth centuries, whereas this study seeks to look further into the Iron Age origins and the early occupation period.

Wacher is also a co-author of two of the other major works that examine the urban centres. The book by Wacher and Burnham (1990) has proven to be of great value. This study, dealing with the smaller urban centres across southern Britain, was written in a similar way to the previous book. This method was shown, for example, in their approach towards the small town of Wycomb, which included a large religious precinct. The concentration upon the finds of these smaller settlements has provided an invaluable resource of information for these centres that provided a link between the major centres and the countryside: for example in Gloucestershire, Bourton-on-the-Water and Wycomb (Esmonde Cleary 1992, 341-3).

The county of Gloucestershire has also been chosen as the focus of the study to provide a manageable scope for research, which can hopefully be applied to the rest of southern Britain. Naturally, such a study requires an extensive amount of research into the archaeological information from the region, with the site reports making up the majority of works used. These have been mostly taken from Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society (TBGAS). There have also been site reports from Britannia, and articles from journals such as the Antiquaries Journal. These reports are naturally not of an even quality, but if they have listed the artefacts discovered, they are still useful in obtaining a picture of the archaeological site in question. Of particular use for this study were the recently published structural plans and record of finds and datable evidence at the Great Witcombe Villa complex (Leach 1998). This report discusses the context and previously unknown elements of this villa establishment, without excessive interpretation by the author (Black 1999, 408). Some attention was given to the analysis of the development of certain sites where it was pertinent, but the reports were primarily examined for detailing the nature of each site, the facilities at each, when they were constructed and the dates of use, depending on the amount of information obtainable. Site reports such as this are invaluable because of the limited access to archives, or the disappearance of many finds.

Wacher and McWhirr (1982) also published an extensive excavation report on Cirencester. This excavation report details the possible military origins of the later civitascapital in the First Century. Fulford has questioned the evidence for such a fort at the site (Fulford 1983, 376-7), but this present study follows the arguments of the excavators. In all likelihood, the military presence at Cirencester was brief, but the evidence of the ramparts and other military equipment does seem to suggest such a presence. One of the other major works used in the examination of the major urban and smaller civic centres in Gloucestershire was that by McWhirr (1981). This book deals exclusively with the Roman remains in Gloucestershire and was of great use for this study. There were no references included in this work, intended for the ‘interested layman’ (Manning 1983, 368). But owing to the author’s vast experience in the region, the study has been of great use. McWhirr views Gloucestershire as a whole, combining the urban, rural, military, civilian and religious elements to gain a comprehensive view of the region during the Roman Occupation. He has devoted a considerable section of the book to discussing some of the individual villa complexes, such as Frocester Court and Great Witcombe, which provides a useful overview for comparison (McWhirr 1981, 83-97). In view of the intended audience, the amount of detail is limited, but the information provided is still of great use.

The emphasis of this study is upon the rural regions of Gloucestershire but, to gain a full account of the social and political environment during the Occupation, the urban centres have been reviewed briefly. Naturally, despite the fact that most of the population in Gloucestershire lived in the countryside, these towns would have played a major role in the administration and social interaction of the region. There are several works

10

INTRODUCTION Another study of the archaeological remains in Gloucestershire is that undertaken by the Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (RCHM) and published in 1976. This book provides a comprehensive study of all the known finds of Iron Age and Roman material from the county at the time, including a gazetteer of small finds and crop-mark sites (Rodwell 1978a, 500). It outlines all the major sites known at the time of publication, and includes a vast quantity of previously unpublished material. There is little in the way of analysis, the author/s simply stating what had been discovered at each site, and sometimes including the findings of the excavators with little explanation. A good example of this is in the uncomplicated discussion of the villa complex at Rodmarton, which included a few references for further research (RCHM 1976, 98-9). In view of the vast quantity of finds in the region from the Roman period, this book has proven to be of great assistance in this study. Although since its publication there have been many discoveries in Gloucestershire, but the gazetteer of material listed in this volume was invaluable. It provided the greatest amount of information for some of the lesser-known or possible villa establishments, listing the finds and suggested dates for habitation.

papers deal specifically with the theme of architecture, and were of great assistance to this study despite the relatively long period since their publication. Of these papers, one of the most valuable would have been the assessment of the social function and representation of the villas. Despite the title of the volume, this study does attempt to relate the Romano-British sites into the corpus of known villas from the continent, making comparisons that open up the field of material considered (Potter 1980, 450). Another major study of Roman villas is that by Branigan (1977). This book has contributed greatly to the knowledge and theories concerning the development of villas in this region. Branigan compiles a good listing of material and discusses the development of the major complexes in the region, such as the villa sites at Badgeworth, Aylburton, Woolaston and Compton Grove. But, in view of the publication date, there are several views that have since been criticised. One of these is his attributing the growth of villas in the Third Century to an influx of Gallic immigrants or their investment, using the evidence of the villa structures themselves (Branigan 1973, 82-95). Smith has questioned this opinion, purely on architectural grounds (Smith 1978b; 1983, 239-46), and also by Millett, because the erection of luxurious villas represents expenditure on wealth, rather than an investment in production (Millett 1990, 189). But despite this flaw, the evidence discussed by Branigan and his overview of the general development of Romanised villas in the region is of great assistance.

In the examination of the villas of Gloucestershire one of the major authors is Smith. His works, especially that of 1997, concentrate upon the social structure and function of the villas, and the rooms within. The purpose was to determine the social organisation of the residents of these villa complexes (Hingley 1999, 419). Smith (1997, 282) stresses the importance of approaching these structures from a wide perspective, covering the western provinces of the Roman Empire; this strategy has provided the current study with a number of other examples of villas to compare with those in Gloucestershire. Owing to the lack of detailed information about many rooms within the villas examined, many of Smith’s ideas can only be viewed as a hypothesis (Hingley 1999, 419), which the author himself has commented upon (Smith 1997, 275). Moreover, several of these ideas on the social structure of villas in his earlier works have been criticised by others (Clarke 1990, 337-53; Millett 1990, 197-8), but Smith has responded to this criticism (1997, 123). Therefore, the ideas of Smith have in many ways been accepted in this present study, in full knowledge of the limitation of the existing evidence to support his theories. In view of the method of interpretation used, which was used sensibly without straining the evidence for the hypothesis, his attempt at outlining the social environment of villa complexes and the presence of separate households seems plausible, if not completely acceptable to all.

Scott’s list of villas in Gloucestershire is useful for a study of this kind (1993a), providing a compilation of all of the possible villas in Britain, with a detailed selection in Gloucestershire. This book has proven a great resource for finding the available information for many of the villa complexes, but it is also hampered by several discrepancies. One of these is the inaccurate dating of several villas, and also the confusing use of some names of villas that are no longer in use (Bartholomew 1995, 416). Many of the grid references in the book have also proven to be inaccurate, and this further reduces the usefulness of the book. Yet despite these difficulties, it still provided a useful compilation of information for the study, and an overview of possible villas in the region. When studying the development and design of the temples in Roman Gloucestershire, one cannot go past the definitive work on Romano-Celtic temples by Lewis (1966). The author deals with the archaeology of the known religious structures in Britain at the time, preferring this to a discussion of the religion (Wilson 1967b, 239). There have been several discoveries of religious buildings since the publication (1966) of this book, but these have been dealt with through the archaeological reports for individual sites. Lewis defines the difference between the Roman and native style of temple plans, and also uses several examples of RomanoCeltic sanctuaries from the Continent to gain a clearer

One of the articles of Smith is an inclusion in a book specifically devoted to the study of Romano-British villas, edited by Todd (1978). This compilation of articles provides the opinions of several authors on specific areas within the study of Romano-British villas. Four of these

11

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY understanding of British sites. The layout of the study allows for detailed investigation into many of the individual temple complexes. Lewis (1966, 72, 125) has included a vast quantity of material, which provided a great deal of information for some of the lesser-known structures, such as the possible temples in Cirencester and Gloucester. This study has long been one of the most important works on Romano-Celtic temples with the author’s analysis of the plans and finds making it the standard reference.

(1992), which contains a great deal of analysis concerning the complex at Uley, but sets it within a wider framework, detailing many of the recent developments in Romano-Celtic religious studies. When these works are combined, they provide a good framework for the current knowledge of Late Iron Age and Roman religious practices and structures. One further scholar whose research should be commented upon is Horne (1986, 15-24). His papers on the architectural and chronological developments of the Romano-Celtic temples, especially in the Third Century, are of great value. The use of chronological analysis to substantiate a particular trend can be quite dangerous, with the temptation to make the evidence conform to the theory. However, Horne, in both of his studies, has successfully analysed the development of Romano-Celtic temples in the western provinces, with special emphasis on the role of the native religion in the Roman period.

The contributions of Wilson have also added greatly to the understanding of Romano-Celtic temple plans and their development within the Roman Empire. Wilson attempts to produce a clear pattern within the RomanoCeltic temple plans, noting their similarities and differences. The most important aspect of these studies is the wide-ranging number of examples, from different regions of the western provinces that were used to analyse the plan types. In view of such a diverse range of individual sites, Wilson commented on the variations, but shows that there were also similarities; this demonstrates that there was a general plan for Romano-Celtic temples. Through this he also stresses the importance of Iron Age sanctity at many of these sites, despite the construction of later buildings (1973b, 24). Wilson (1975b, 3) is correct in viewing the construction of such temples as an important interaction between native and Roman cultures, symbolising their assimilation in the rural regions. In his survey on the topography of the Romano-British structures (1973b, 25, 29), he also makes a distinction between urban and rural temples, in view of their differing political and social circumstances. Wilson comments on the similar distribution of Romano-Celtic temples and villas in Britain, suggesting a possible connection between them, but he does not emphasise the point.

Summary In view of the relatively unexplored nature of this hypothesis, it has not been the purpose of this review to outline the difficulties presented by many of the authors. The aim is to pay due respect, in many ways, to the significant works which have made this research possible. The vast experience and knowledge of many authors has been taken into full account and this study seeks more to add further to the field of Romano-British archaeology, and less to deconstruct ideas previously presented. The opinions shown in most of the previous research have provided an indication that this hypothesis is a viable concept for a study within the western provinces of the Roman Empire. The overall intention of the present study is to determine two key elements: to ascertain the extent of Romanisation in the region of Gloucestershire, and to examine the dominating profile of the native élites within this acculturation process. Both the villas and the RomanoCeltic temples provide insight into these elements, but in different sociological spheres. However, if a connection between the two types of structures can be drawn then the possibility for understanding the romanitas of such constructions is improved exponentially. In many ways, both the villas and Romano-Celtic temples epitomise the social dominance of the local aristocracy and their social expression of affiliation with the provincial administration.

One of the most significant excavation reports on a rural Romano-Celtic temple, not only in Gloucestershire but also in Romano-British studies as a whole, is the report by Woodward and Leach (1993) on the Uley site. This book is one of the most detailed and informative archaeological reports used in this present study. The authors have plotted and recorded all of the finds discovered at the site, providing a clear interpretation on the development of this religious complex (King 1994, 347). The discoveries are clearly presented with many contributions by individual experts, for example the discussion of the coins by Reece (1993, 80-8). The report is also complemented by another work by Woodward

12

Chapter I Urban Romanisation and the Native Aristocracy The central focus of this study is the Romanisation of Gloucestershire, particularly in relation to status and its expression in both residences and in the local religion, and the role of the native aristocracy in that process. Several key facets have been be examined here, including aspects of the pre-Roman period in Gloucestershire, the Roman urban regions and their origins, the relationship between these centres and the countryside and the Roman influences the region experienced. This analysis has established the development of Roman culture from the pre-Roman into the Roman period, and demonstrate the limited effect of Roman culture upon the native populace overall, except on certain members of the native nobility.

military occupation, and the provincial period that saw the growth of urbanisation. It is to be expected that Romanisation would have been greater in these centres than in the rural regions of Gloucestershire (Potter and Johns 1992, 84-6; Cunliffe 1988, 158), with the proRoman local aristocracy becoming the link between the Roman administration and the common people (Salway 1981, 111). It was in the larger vici, especially in civitascapitals like Cirencester, that the members of the native élite were dominant, leading politics and social development (Wallace-Hadrill 1991, 94). It was in these larger settlements that the control of local administration was delegated to the local nobility once they had gained the trust of the Roman state, thereby strengthening their position of wealth and superiority (Burnham 1996, 131; Hopkins 1980, 121). For an accurate representation of the Romanisation that occurred in Gloucestershire, however, the pre-Roman period must be examined briefly in order to identify the beginnings of this process.

The intention of this chapter is to analyse the progressive Romanisation of Gloucestershire, but with a particular focus being placed upon the urban centres within the region. This has been traced from the pre-Roman period and seeks to examine how the urban centres changed over time during the Roman occupation. It is evident that each of these urban centres responded quite distinctly to the prevailing circumstances at different times, but in general terms it is also clear that their success was largely determined by the levels of support each received from the local population. Backing from the provincial administration was not enough to ensure the continuing development of an urban centre, particularly in relation to its commercial development.

The Pre-Roman Urban Centres In the pre-Roman period there were two different kinds of major settlement in Gloucestershire: the hill-forts and the oppida. Several hill-forts have been discovered in the region, for example at Crickley Hill (SO 927161), North Cerney (SP 996095), and Salmonsbury (SP 173208). The settlement at Salmonsbury is defined as a ‘hill-fort’ because of its layout and nature, even though it is located in a valley bottom with Belgic pre-Roman occupation. There are also other examples found at Ranbury Ring (SP 090009) and Trewsbury (ST 981998). The settlement at Crickley Hill is one of the most notable in Gloucestershire, perhaps originating in the 7th or 6th Centuries BC (Cunliffe 1991, 358). Another hill-fort that was founded around this time was that at Leckhampton Hill, with the pottery of the earliest phase dated to around 500 BC (Champion 1976, 179). The defences consisted of a single rampart and ditch, with possible traces of another ditch (RCHM 33). A large roundhouse, which may have been associated with several less substantial huts, was erected near the front entrance to the settlement (Dixon 1976, 161). Occupation continued into the Roman period, and there is early evidence of metalworking (RCHM 34). A similar example of a hill-fort has been discovered at North Cerney. This settlement appeared in the 1st Century BC and was surrounded by a massive ditched enclosure (Cunliffe 1994, 74-5). The hill-fort was a later development than most similar settlements in the Cotswolds, and has a later villa complex on the site, with the suggestion of continuous habitation (Trow and James 1989, 83-7). The settlement at Salmonsbury also has evidence of continuous use into the Roman period, but

In order to examine these urban centres effectively there have been two primary objectives: to trace the development (or decline) of each settlement over time, and to analyse the nature of the domestic environments at each site where possible. It is hoped that by studying each centre in these fashions it is possible to gain an understanding of these urban settlements and their influence throughout the region. In relation to the domestic environments, the available evidence is very restricted because of the small number of townhouses that have been fully excavated. However, where possible the analysis of their potential social function and spatial organisation has been undertaken in order to try and understand at least a small fraction of the domestic activity in the region. Therefore, through the analysis of both the urban development in Roman Gloucestershire and its impact upon the general region, it is hoped that an overall impression of its Romanisation can also be attained, which can further illustrate the processes of cultural acculturation and its advocates during the Roman occupation. There seems to have been three major phases in the development of the civic centres: the pre-Roman, the 13

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY contrasts with many similar hill-fort sites in Gloucestershire because of its location on almost flat ground in Bourton Vale (Dunning 1976, 75). Occupation at this site began from the 1st Century BC and continued into the Roman period, finishing in the late 4th Century. In view of the later date for the foundation of this hill-fort and its unusual location, the choice of this site may indicate a transition between hill-forts and oppida in the late Iron Age.

3.57061) indicate that eleven tribes formally submitted to Rome; this would have included at least part of the Dobunni (Millett 1990, 46). Cassius Dio also mentions their acceptance of Roman rule with the submission of the ‘Bodunni’ to Aulus Plautius in AD 43 (Dio 60.20.2), which is usually corrected to read Dobunni (Levick 1990, 144). In fact, many of the tribal leaders may have benefited greatly from assimilation, gaining political support from the new regime, even during the military occupation (De la Bédoyère 1993, 29). After AD 69, there appear to have been some British recruits for the Roman military, with at least one unit taken from the Dobunnic tribes (Holder 1980, 129). Bagendon continued to import goods and wares from the continent during the occupation and was involved in high status activities. The reason for the later shift from Bagendon to Cirencester would have been for the greater advantage in trade (Wacher 1995, 29), communication routes and the dominance of the local Roman economy (Millett 1990, 74).

Following on from the hill-fort settlements (Reece 1976, 63), the major centres of the late Iron Age came to be the oppida, or tribal centres (Cunliffe 1994, 76), with the most important in Gloucestershire being the settlement at Bagendon. Oppida appear to have maintained a strong element of kinship, a notable aspect of the native culture, which created a distinctive form of urbanism within the centre. These centres have shown substantial evidence for social and economic communal connections but have not shown other evidence of aspects which one would usually expect from the major Western cities (Woolf 1993, 231-2). The excavations at Bagendon are only two kilometres away from the hill-fort at North Cerney and the two were associated through trade and industrial production (Trow 1990, 109-11). The association between the two sites is also shown through their proximity because the North Cerney hill-fort is located within the later Bagendon dike system (Trow 1982, 26). Bagendon was founded at the beginning of the 1st Century BC, with two areas of settlement, and nine dikes and several ditches surrounding the oppida (RCHM 6). The domestic residences of the occupants were reasonably comfortable, mostly half-timbered huts with masonry footings and stone floors (Clifford 1961a, 151). There were two substantial roundhouses located within the settlement, as well as evidence of grain storage pits. Occupation continued into the Roman period. There have been finds of Arretine pottery at the settlement that indicate this continued occupation (Rodwell 1976, 309). The Dobunnic people were divided into two regions, as shown by their coin distribution, but there was no real separation within the tribe (Cunliffe 1991, 171). Finds of Dobunnic coins on the British southern coast, in Cornwall, Wales, Devon and Essex, indicate that the Dobunni undertook large-scale trade (Clifford 1961a, 154). There did seem to have been a strong connection between them and the Catuvellauni in the early 1st Century, which may have assisted their commercial dealings (Hawkes 1961, 53-5). One of the most interesting aspects of the oppida at Bagendon is that the only coins found there dating to before the 3rd Century AD were British, illustrating the continued use of the local British denominations at the site, at least to a limited extent, into the Roman period (Reece 1979, 211). For further discussion of this, see Appendices II and III.

The Military Occupation With the introduction of the Roman administration, there came to be a large military presence in Gloucestershire, with three major bases at Kingsholm (SO 834319), Gloucester (SO 830186) and Cirencester (SP 030016) (McWhirr 1981, 5). These forts had two purposes: to protect the newly conquered regions from attack and to control the new provincials early in the Occupation (Breeze 1985, 223). The first base to be established was the legionary fortress at Kingsholm in c. AD 49 (Richmond 1960, 185), located on the banks of the old course of the Severn River. A tombstone found in the area (RIB 122) suggests that legio XX Valeria occupied the fortress (McWhirr 1981, 14), but there is still doubt as to when the legion was there. It is possible that the legion may have arrived from Camulodunum in AD 49 (Hurst 1985, 119) to carry out the campaigns against the Silures (Tac. An., 12.32). There is epigraphic evidence (RIB 121), possibly linked with Kingsholm, which may imply that the garrison stationed there was a mixed legionary/auxiliary garrison, but this is still uncertain (Maxfield 1980, 303). There were two phases of timber structures at Kingsholm in the early 1st Century, and the site was abandoned in the mid-sixties (Hurst 1975, 26794). The fortress was probably abandoned when the military presence moved to Gloucester around AD 67 (Wacher 1995, 150). There has been much debate over which legions were stationed at the Gloucester barracks. The fortress may have been erected by legio II Augusta after it moved from Exeter (McWhirr 1981, 19), and before it moved to Caerleon by c. AD 87-8. It is also possible that legio XIV Gemina occupied the fortress in AD 69 before it left Britain in AD 70, but this does seem unlikely. One other possibility, as suggested by Maxfield, is that Gloucester may have been a mixed legionary/auxiliary garrison, similar to that proposed for Kingsholm, with the legio II

The Dobunnic tribes did not resist the Roman occupation; instead they readily accepted the patronage of Rome. Both the Arch of Claudius in Rome (CIL 6.920), which was dedicated in AD 52, and the Arch at Cyzicus (CIL

14

URBAN ROMANISATION AND THE NATIVE ARISTOCRACY Augusta being divided between Gloucester and Exeter until it was later fully intact in Caerleon (Maxfield 1980, 303-4). A certain answer is unobtainable, but Gloucester continued to be used as a fortress until it became Colonia Nervia Glevensium (CIL 6.3346), between AD 96 and 98 (Wacher 1995, 150).

were often adopted before the charter was granted (An example of this has been shown in the regulated seating in the theatre in the Spanish Lex Irnitana (González 1986, 194-5, 218). This initiative on the part of the local aristocracy reflects the Romanisation process of both the provincial administration and the native nobility. Gloucester was the only colonia in Gloucestershire, originally designed for the settlement of legionary veterans. Municipia were similar to the colonia, and were granted a charter, but usually only with Latin rights. There are no recognised municipia in Gloucestershire, and the only known example in Britain is Verulamium (Whittaker 1997, 152). However, for the purposes of the present study it is important to note that by the 2nd Century AD the vast majority of Roman Britain was not under direct military control (Cunliffe 2001, 410), with most of the areas being governed through local administrative centres, such as the colonia at Gloucester.

Cirencester has also produced evidence of possible military occupation during the early Roman period. There seems to have been Iron Age habitation, with a stake circle 2.43 metres in diameter discovered. However, the major developments occurred in the Roman period (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 28). In view of the ready submission to Rome by such Dobunnic leaders such as Boduocus, it is possible that the location of this fort close to Bagendon was to protect the local populace from outside incursions, for example from the Silures (Tac. An., 12.31). Unlike the fortresses at Kingsholm and Gloucester, the fort at Cirencester was for an auxiliary garrison. Other cities that previously had auxiliary forts are found at Littlechester, Dorchester, Water Newton and Great Casterton (Webster 1975a, 37). Two military tombstones were discovered in the Watermoor region (RIB 108, 109): these inscriptions are from different cavalry regiments, with one, RIB 109, dating to before AD 63, confirming an early foundation for the post. The Claudian material discovered suggests a date of around AD 49 (Wacher and McWhirr 1982, 57, 64). Artefacts, especially military and personal equipment (Webster 1960, 49-98), represent further evidence for the presence of an auxiliary garrison at Cirencester (McWhirr 1988, 74). A rampart and other associated ditches of a military nature have also been found, and it appears that the army remained in occupation until the mid seventies. Numismatic evidence is sparse in comparison with other Romano-British forts, with an absence of sesterii and small change, which suggests only a small military presence at Cirencester (Reece 1982, 86). To the north of the fort, a large vicus developed, which grew into a prosperous trading community and became the civitascapital immediately after the withdrawal of the military (Wacher 1995, 304).

Gloucester It was quite common and natural for many urban centres in Roman Britain to develop out of military sites, and the organs of government at the colonia of Gloucester followed the framework of the Roman administration (Fig. 1) (Burnham 1979, 268-9). The name of the town was Colonia Nervia Glevensium, which was shown on a tombstone discovered in Rome of a frumentarius of legio VI (CIL 6,3346). The colony was originally founded as a settlement for veterans, but it is uncertain what part, if any, they played in the daily administration of the colonia. Some of the buildings from the previous fortress were retained for civilian use, but there was a gradual process of demolishing buildings throughout the settlement, without immediate replacement in many areas (Wacher 1995, 151). Of the public buildings, the first forum and basilica complex was erected in Insula III during the Trajanic period (McWhirr 1981, 23), and was constructed in wood. This was later replaced with a masonry structure, using imported and Purbeck marble and also sandstone for the piazza of the forum (Wacher 1995, 152). There was a base of an equestrian monumental statue discovered in the southern corner of this piazza (Hassall and Rhodes 1974, 15).

There are other examples of civitas-capitals having their origins as forts in Roman Britain, such as Verulamium, Exeter, Wroxeter and Leicester (Frere 1984a, 11). The forts at Gloucester and Cirencester thus developed into the two largest civilian centres in Gloucestershire, with Gloucester becoming a colonia and Cirencester one of the largest civitas-capitals in Roman Britain. Similar military origins have also been found at Colchester and Lincoln (Crummy 1982, 125). Before any discussion of the developments of major civilian centres, it would be useful to clarify the terms used. There are three different classifications of settlement: the colonia, municipia, and planned vici or civitas-capitals. A colonia had full rights and self-government, usually receiving a lex coloniae, or civic charter upon its foundation. In order to be granted either municipal or colonial status, the city had to comply with several guidelines concerning its institutions. These

These buildings were erected, as at Lincoln, over the former legionary principia. Unlike at Lincoln, the forum cut across the main street, running from the northeast to southwest gates, which followed the lines of the legionary viae praetoria and decumana. There are also possible remains of baths and a theatre, but owing to the poor standard of remains, no plan can now be constructed. The bathhouse was probably located on Westgate Street, as indicated by the discovery of an apsidal hypocaust, dated to approximately AD 120 (Heighway and Garrod 1980, 83). There is also evidence of aqueducts, with the remains of one found at the East Gate (Heighway 1983, 47). Columns, discovered on Westgate Street, may also indicate the existence of a temple there (Hurst 1988, 66). This is supported by the

15

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY discovery of several pieces of sculpture (McWhirr 1981, 24). In view of the status of Gloucester as a colonia, temples to the main Imperial and Roman cults might be assumed, as one of the most prominent signs of Romanisation (Fishwick 1969, 77).

Aristide from Herculaneum (Fig. 5) have also been included in order to place these structures within a broader historical and cultural context (Table 2). In order to further exemplify the difference in potential social function between the Romano-British examples and those on the continent, the Houses of the Mosaic Atrium (Fig. 6) and Stags (Fig. 7) from Herculaneum have also been included within this study on a purely comparative basis.

The evidence is lacking in Britain for the priesthood of the Imperial cult, but its presence would certainly have been in this and other coloniae, for example, as indicated by the inscription of the sevir Augustalis of York and Lincoln, M. Aurelius Lunaris, at Bordeaux (Courteault 1921, 102). Britain has produced a large quantity of dedications to the Imperial numen, which reflects the popularity of the cult in some regions (Fishwick 1991, 413-5). Membership of the Imperial cult would have been of great benefit to many ambitious leaders seeking the approval of the Roman administration for political, social or financial advancement (Fishwick 1961, 168). The presence of other Roman cults has been shown through the discovery of an altar to Mars in Kingsholm (RIB 120; Garrod 1991, 20), and an altar representing Attis, the consort of Cybele on the Bon Marché site (Wilson 1962, 180). A jet plaque was found on the New Market Hall site inside Gloucester, and may be a dedication to a native deity (Wilson 1967a, 195). All of the Romanised public buildings erected in Gloucester may be seen as representing the aspirations of the inhabitants and their desire to create a colonia worthy of the Roman ideal (Wacher 1995, 158).

Building 1.5 (Fig. 3) was constructed as part of the first military fortress at Gloucester, being located close to Berkeley Street and has been dated to the late 60’s AD (Hurst 1999, 114). At this point the majority of structures in Gloucester were made of timber and clay (Hurst 1999, 114), which highlights the simplistic, unadorned nature of the site at this time. Building 1.5 (Fig. 3) epitomises the character of these early residences, which has also been referred to as one of the ‘Centurion’s Houses’ (Hurst 1999, 116). Judging from the overall design of the structure it was largely utilitarian and also quite small (281.62m2) (Table 2). Only one room could potentially be classified as a dining room (Room A), but this is largely owing to its central position and size (Fig. 3). With this room being the only potential entertainment space for Building 1.5, the statistical results are suitably low (9.45% entertainment space) (Graph 2), which corresponds with the generally utilitarian nature of the structure. Judging from this result, it is evident that early residence design in Gloucester was definitely intended for practical rather than social purposes.

This is also reflected in many of the private houses within Gloucester. For instance, Building I.14 is only a modest house, erected in the early 2nd Century, but it had masonry walls, mortared floors, with a tiled hearth in the south-western corner (McWhirr 1981, 39). A tile used here was inscribed ‘RPG’ (Respublica Glevensium) (Heighway and Parker 1982, 25; Goodburn 1976, 354). In the mid-2nd Century, this house and others were replaced by a sophisticated and sizeable courtyard house (Building, I.18) (McWhirr 1981, 40) (Fig. 2). The later building had a water cistern and fountain, and its largest room (Room 9), in the centre of the eastern range, had a mosaic floor, which contrasted greatly with the mortared rubble used for the rest of the house. The Roman features were evidently intended to impress visitors to the house.

When this is compared to the later Building 1.18 (Fig. 2), which was constructed around the middle of the 2nd Century AD, it is evident that the owner of this house had a different social intention for their residence. As Wacher has commented (1995, 156), it is clear that this structure was owned by a relatively wealthy person, and it is evident that the design was partly inspired by those used in central Italy during the 1st Century AD (Perring 2002, 72). Three areas have been identified as being potential entertainment spaces: Rooms 1, 15 and 16 (Fig. 2). Room 1 was an open courtyard at the centre of this residence, whereas Rooms 15 and 16 have been viewed as potential dining areas because of both their position and their indications of decorative features.

In order to examine the progression of the domestic residences from the 1st to 2nd Centuries AD in Gloucester spatial analysis of two extant structures has been undertaken. The residences in question are Buildings 1.5 (Fig. 3) and 1.18 (Fig. 2), and their examination should give a better idea of the changes that occurred in Gloucester during the transition from its role as a military base to becoming a colonia. While it would be preferable to analyse more structures than this, the number of fully excavated houses in Gloucester is limited, which precludes further examples being included. However, owing to the comparisons of Building 1.18 with other residences by Wacher (1995, 156) and Perring (2002, 72), House 3S at Caerwent (Fig. 4) and the House of

The spatial analysis of potential entertainment space for Building 1.18 at Gloucester has further highlighted the different demeanour of this structure to Building 1.5 (Table 2). Initially it is important to note the difference in size (Graph 1), with Building 1.18 being significantly larger (1,245.48m2) and possessing more living space (Fig. 2) (Table 2). With this in mind it is of little surprise that the amount of potential entertainment space was also significantly higher (20.03%) (Table 2) (Graph 2). All the same, it should also be noted that this result largely comprises Room 1 (167.46m2). When this area is removed from the statistical data (Table 3), it is notable that Building 1.5 actually possessed a higher percentage of internal potential entertainment space (Graph 3).

16

URBAN ROMANISATION AND THE NATIVE ARISTOCRACY space (196.07m2) dedicated for potential entertainment areas. Rooms 9 and 10 exhibit the owners’ focus upon a pleasant lifestyle, especially when the size of the residence is taken into consideration (Table 2). In fact, this house had the smallest surface area of all townhouses on the southern frontage of the Bay of Naples, but had a high percentage of entertainment space (Graph 2). This space was primarily internal in its disposition (Graph 3), unlike most townhouses on the southern frontage of Herculaneum, such as the Houses of the Mosaic Atrium (Fig. 6) and the Stags (Fig. 7) (See Adams 2006, 78-87).

However, this result should only be viewed as indicating a difference in design: Building 1.18 was clearly primarily focused upon the central courtyard as a primary residential space and it is evident that this layout lent itself more to open-aired social activity, which was clearly indicative of house plans from central Italy at the time. Another residence from Roman Britain that has exhibited a similar layout is House 3S at Caerwent (Fig. 4), which provides a useful statistical comparison. The open courtyard (Room 2) included a tessellated colonnade and a central garden area (Wacher 1995, 389), which has been interpreted as the main reception area (Perring 2002, 72). The other main potential entertainment rooms (Rooms 1 and 3) were located to the south of this open space (Fig. 4) (Perring 2002, 72), with Room 3 being provided with a hypocaust heating system (Wacher 1995, 390). Both of these rooms have been viewed as potential dining areas for the purposes of the spatial analysis. The data taken has shown that although this house was smaller than Building 1.18 (842.56 m2) (Table 2) (Graph 1), it possessed a greater amount of potential entertainment space (30.45%) (Graph 2). All the same, this residence appears to have been built during the 4th Century AD, and may have been more indicative of a non-local owner (Wacher 1995, 389). It is evident that the central courtyard was a dominant space within both Building 1.18 at Gloucester and House 3S in Caerwent (Table 3) (Graph 3), which is significant because of their definite ‘Roman’ associations in their layout. This is clearly indicated when they are compared to examples from central Italy, for example the Houses of Aristide, Mosaic Atrium and Stags from Herculaneum (Figs. 6-7).

The House of the Mosaic Atrium (Ins. IV, 1-2) (Fig. 6) was planned to appreciate the panorama beyond (Fig. 8), with two distinct regions: the entrance area and colonnaded courtyard area (Maiuri 1977, 27). These separate areas were constructed on two levels, owing to the natural slope of the ground, further accentuating the differing function of each region. As previously noted, it is quite common for these complexes to be designed with a clear demarcation between different regions within these houses. There were six rooms with potential entertainment roles: the colonnaded courtyard, as well as Rooms 5, 9, 12, 23 and 24. Room 5 seems to have served primarily as an office, whereas the décor and position of Room 12 suggests that it was a dining area. Room 9 has also been classified as a potential entertainment area, but Rooms 23 and 24 have been deemed to be small open viewing areas. The statistical data from this residence illustrates its intended function and the important social role that it possessed. The percentage of space (31.69%) for potential reception/entertainment was comprised ofseveral different areas (Graph 2). The diversity of types of room and their number within this residence highlight that it frequently served a public role. It is also evident that the designer focused the layout towards the landscape, and yet there was also a relatively high percentage of internal reception space (Table 3). This would have provided the owners with a large number of options for choosing areas for social occasions, which would have largely depended upon each particular circumstance.

The House of Aristide (Ins. II, 1) (Fig. 5) was located on the III cardo, with the rear quarters being constructed upon the extreme brow of the hill, overlooking the Bay of Naples (Maiuri 1958, 373). It is interesting to note that the location of the storerooms in the complex was in a place conventionally assigned for entertaining rooms. But these are located on the lower floor, which has only partially survived whereas the upper rooms have not endured. It would have been these upper rooms that would have been used for the entertaining of guests and for a quiet respite place for the leading inhabitants of the building.

Adjacent to the House of the Mosaic Atrium was the House of the Stags (Ins. IV, 21) (Figs. 7-8), which would have been very impressive, stretching roughly 43 metres in length (Maiuri 1977, 61). This building had two distinct regions: the northern entrance quarter and southern terrace area (Tam Tinh 1988, 25). These two parts were connected by a portico that was illuminated by windows. The period of these features has been dated to the Claudian/Neronian period (Maiuri 1977, 61).

The storerooms were hidden beneath the reception rooms towards the rear of the building and there was also a ramp that led directly from the harbour through a door onto cardo III (Budetta 1990, 221). Four potential entertainment areas were included in this house: Rooms B, 9, 10 and 12. These areas were all well-appointed and their positions indicate a definite non-utilitarian aspect to their function.

As with the House of the Mosaic Atrium, the owner of the House of the Stags had a large amount of choice when it came to entertainment space (Table 2) (Graph 2). Room 15 and the open areas are fine examples of the variety that was available for any occasion. The portico allowed for an impressive view of the panorama beyond, while the other entertainment areas could have provided pleasing

It seems quite evident that the House of Aristide would have been a generous and distinguished residence, owing to its size, position and décor. The statistical analysis has illustrated that this residence had a significant amount of

17

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Comparative Size of Houses 2500

Metres Square

2000

1500

1000

Kingscote

12.3 (Ciren.)

12.2 (Ciren.)

12.1 (Ciren.)

Stags (Herc.)

M. Atrium (Herc.)

Aristide (Herc.)

1.18 (Glos.)

1.5 (Glos.)

0

House 3S (Caer.)

500

House

Graph 1 – Graph showing the Comparison of Estimated Surface Areas of Houses in Gloucestershire

Comparative Percentages of Potential Entertainment Space of Each House Including Open Areas 35 30

Percentage

25 20 15 10 5

Kingscote

12.3 (Ciren.)

12.2 (Ciren.)

12.1 (Ciren.)

Stags (Herc.)

M. Atrium (Herc.)

Aristide (Herc.)

House 3S (Caer.)

1.18 (Glos.)

1.5 (Glos.)

0

House

Graph 2 – Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each House in Gloucestershire environments for reception, entertainment and relaxation. The open disposition of this townhouse was similar to the House of the Mosaic Atrium (Graphs 2, 3), being only slightly lower.

The potential entertainment areas comprised of a colonnaded courtyard (Room P), Room 5 (which seems to have been a dining room), Room 15, Room 18 (which was a viewing room) and Rooms 22 and 23. This was over a quarter of the total surface area (28.37% entertainment 18

URBAN ROMANISATION AND THE NATIVE ARISTOCRACY space), which was a consistent result with other houses in the region. The significance of the Houses of the Mosaic Atrium and Stags is that they both represent houses where the layout was specifically adapted to orientate the dining and open regions of each complex towards the coast, thus taking full advantage of the impressive view and beneficial sea breezes. These townhouses could quite rightly be compared to suburban villas in their function and lifestyle, but the one distinguishing feature is the question of privacy. The owners of both houses were evidently of some social (or at least financial) standing, suggesting that there would have been numerous visitors, making the houses quite busy at certain times, especially for the morning salutatio.

several buildings with mosaics (Hurst 1976, 73). During the 3rd Century, the decline of public facilities in Gloucester began; as seems to have been the case throughout Roman Britain (Reece 1980a, 77). This decline can also be seen in some of the residences: for example the courtyard house in Berkeley Street was demolished in the 3rd Century and remained vacant for the rest of the Roman period. One of the most notable aspects of the colonia of Gloucester is that, despite its position of importance and rank, there was limited growth throughout the Roman occupation after the late 2nd Century AD (Richmond 1946, 72-3). This is seen especially when a comparison is made with the civitascapital of Corinium Dubunnorum (Cirencester), which was one of the most successful trading centres in Roman Britain. It appears that Cirencester, as the local civitascapital, with its high proportion of native inhabitants, was the preferred exchange centre for the regional producers rather than the Roman colonia at Gloucester.

Therefore, it is evident that despite the clear intentions of the Romano-British examples to convey an impression of social status, they appear comparatively modest in relation to their continental counterparts. After all, the House of Aristide was by no means the most opulent residence in Herculaneum as can be seen when compared to the Houses of the Mosaic Atrium (Fig. 6) and Stags (Fig. 7), let alone other residences from much larger urban centres (See Adams 2008). All the same, what is important to note is the intentions of the owners: these Romano-British houses were still meant to convey the message of status, wealth and, most importantly, romanitas. It is also significant to note the clear difference between houses of the 1st and 2nd Centuries AD in Gloucester, which suggests an evident shift in social priorities during this transitional period.

Cirencester The planned vici, or civitas-capitals, were initially unfortified, nucleated communities, with certain local administrative duties (Shotter 1998, 43), and were usually organised along standard Roman lines (Reynolds 1975a, 70). The selection and development of these capitals was primarily due to the occupancy of the local aristocracy, who were motivated by trade and by a desire to appear more Romanised (Collingwood 1929, 269). Most of this group had residences in these regional capitals, with pro-Roman attitudes increasing the possibility of economic, administrative and social growth for the town (Rivet 1964, 73). These civitas-capitals continued to be centres for trade and exchange into the 4th Century, which highlights their important function for the local economy (Evans 1990, 92).

Many of the alterations to veterans’ housing in Gloucester occurred around AD 125, but the boundaries of these plots remained despite the changes to the structures. There was probably a change in occupancy, however, because very few veterans would have been left in the colonia by this time (Wacher 1995, 156). Excavations in Southgate Street revealed a row of timber houses dated to the 1st and 2nd Centuries; a courtyard building in the 3rd Century eventually replaced them (Frere 1990, 346). On the New Market Hall site in Insula V, terrace houses dated back to the first period of the vicus. These had changed less than others in Gloucester, and remained much the same until the time of Theodosius, although over time many had mosaics added to them. There was another similar house on the Bon Marché site, near the northern city wall, which had a mosaic dated to c. AD 200 (Wilson 1959, 126).

The information available from the civitas-capital of Cirencester is rather meagre, since only about four percent of the site has been excavated (McWhirr 1993, 47). But it is still possible to get a reasonable idea of the development of the city (Fig. 9). The early fort had little effect on the layout of the later town, and the grid layout, based upon the orientation of Ermin Street, developed in the late 1st Century. The military occupation at Cirencester did not continue for long after AD 70: the town was founded soon after. A civilian vicus had developed in the later military period, which would have assisted in the decision for the choice of the site as civitas-capital. Another factor may have been its close proximity to the oppida at Bagendon (Groenman-van Waateringe 1980, 1037). The basilica was one hundred metres long and twenty-four metres wide, with an exterior veneer of imported marble and Purbeck marble for the mouldings of the interior. The forum was similarly laid out on a very grand scale (Wacher 1964, 11). The grandeur of this complex is shown by the fact that the forum and basilica of Cirencester was larger than any other in Roman Britain except London. Large Corinthian

A thriving community began to develop outside the city walls, with industrial activity such as iron-smithing and pottery and possibly a public market. The built-up areas spread up to twice the size of that inside the walls (Atkin and Garrod 1989, 239). The major part of the settlement was located on the northern side of the city, but there were still 1st-2nd Century structures located to the south (Atkin 1990, 3, 7). This extra-mural area of Gloucester did not consist of just lower grade buildings, as there was a monumental building at 63-71 Northgate Street and 19

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Comparative Percentages of Potential Entertainment Space of Each House Not Including Open Areas 30

Percentage

25 20 15 10 5

Kingscote

12.3 (Ciren.)

12.2 (Ciren.)

12.1 (Ciren.)

Stags (Herc.)

M. Atrium (Herc.)

Aristide (Herc.)

House 3S (Caer.)

1.18 (Glos.)

1.5 (Glos.)

0

House

Graph 3 – Graph showing an Adjusted Percentage of Identifiable Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each House in Gloucestershire capitals were used for the porticoes and there was probably a larger than life-sized bronze statue in the apse. In the Hadrianic period, another substantial wing may have been added to the forum to be used as a cattle and meat market. This type of specialised market was rare in Roman Britain and further emphasises the agricultural wealth of Cirencester and its environs as early as the 1st and 2nd Centuries.

and temples by the wealthy classes; but there have been no certain sites of temples uncovered. There have been several religious depictions of Mercury, the head of a river god and a relief of the Deae Matres discovered in Cirencester (Toynbee 1963, 7, pls. 29, 37, 76). One possibility is in Insula XX near Ashcroft Road, which produced a collection of sculptures and altars associated with the Deae Matres, and the suggestion of an earlier shrine (RIB 105). There is a possible temple site at Price’s Row, with a dedication to Mercury and the Matres discovered (Hassall 1973, 213). Another may have been erected south-west of Tower Street, where statuettes of Minerva, Diana and Cupid and a large Corinthian capital with depictions of native deities have been found (Wacher 1995, 320; Frere 1988, 465). There was also an extensive paved area, dated to the 4th Century, in the western corner of Insula XIII, which could be interpreted as the temenos of a temple. In the 4th Century Cirencester was probably promoted to provincial capital of Britannia Prima (RIB 103; Mann 1961, 319). This period saw additions and alterations made to the forum and basilica (McWhirr 1981, 29) and a vast growth in the wealth of the city (Wacher 1995, 314). The large number of Roman-style public works in the civitascapital of Cirencester reflects the attitudes of many of its leading inhabitants, especially the members of the ordo decurionum, who would have sponsored such buildings as part of their magisterial responsibilities (Burnham 1996, 133; Burton 1987, 434-5; Drury 1980, 55).

Of the other public structures at Cirencester, city defences were erected at the end of the 2nd Century. They consisted of an earth bank that was replaced by a stonewall in the 3rd Century (McWhirr 1993, 47). Another major feature was the amphitheatre that had been built in a disused quarry (Brown and McWhirr 1967, 185-97). It was elliptical in shape and may have held gladiatorial and wrestling performances put on by the local magistrates at election time (McWhirr 1981, 32-3). Amphitheatres in Roman Britain are notable for their scarcity and poverty when compared to the continent (Esmonde Cleary 1987, 177). The structure was altered in the late 2nd Century, when several small flanking chambers were added to the entrance: there is a strong possibility that one of these was a small shrine for the performers, perhaps to a deity like Nemesis (Wacher 1995, 308). A theatre may have been erected in Insula XXX for drama, mime and musical performances (McWhirr 1981, 33; Drinkwater 1987, 346). There are two possible bath sites west of Tower Street and evidence of an aqueduct running beneath the road near the Verulamium Gate (Wacher 1995, 308).

These inhabitants of Cirencester also displayed their proRoman attitudes in their private housing, as shown by the large number of wealthy, Romanised establishments in

Cirencester has produced many pieces of religious sculpture, all representing the adornment of local shrines 20

URBAN ROMANISATION AND THE NATIVE ARISTOCRACY the civitas-capital. Stone buildings began to appear at Cirencester before other towns, for example the masonry house in Insula XXIII that was erected early in the 2nd Century AD (Wacher 1963, 19). Privately owned shops were built in Insula V during the Flavian period (Walthew 1975, 195), still of wattle and daub, but with good quality concrete floors and painted plaster in the domestic quarters (Wacher 1962, 9). These buildings are similar to those in Insula XIV in Verulamium. There has been the discovery of a stone-founded building in Insula XIX dated to the late 1st Century AD (Esmonde Cleary 1997, 443) A large town house (Building 12.2), dated to the middle of the 4th Century, was uncovered at Beeches Road in Insula XII, which contained a fine mosaic of a browsing hare (McWhirr 1986, 45). One of the most unusual aspects of this building is a large room that contained a pillared and channelled hypocaust system beneath a mosaic floor (McWhirr 1981, 57).

the residences already examined from Gloucester, which exhibit a different time period and socio-political environment. Building 12.1 (Fig. 10) was originally constructed during the 4th Century AD and comprised a simple rectangular block at this point (McWhirr 1986, 23), which gradually evolved into the final structure under question. This structure was in all likelihood constructed entirely out of limestone, but the vast majority of the superstructure has since been removed (McWhirr 1986, 44). The design of this residence was centred on two corridors rather than an open courtyard (Fig. 10). Five areas within Building 12.1 have been identified as having served a potential entertainment role: Rooms 5, 6, 10, 12 and 14 (Table 2). Rooms 5 and 12 appear to have served as dining rooms, whereas the others have been classified as exedrae. At first glance the spatial analysis of this residence suggests that it was not intended for a significant social function (Graph 2), but this is largely a product of its lack of a central courtyard (Fig. 10). When the internal potential entertainment space is considered (Table 3), this residence produces the highest percentage of all the Romano-British townhouses examined in this study (Graph 3). This divergence in the results illustrates how this structure was not designed in a fashion similar to the courtyard houses, but that it was still clearly a wellappointed residence that served an important social function for its leading inhabitants.

th

By the end of the 4 Century, this building contained eleven mosaics and many painted plastered walls; evidence of agricultural activity at the site was also found, the likely source of its wealth (McWhirr 1978, 789). A further three major houses were built in Insula IV in the Parsonage Field, Watermoor. The earliest possible date of occupation for these houses was the early 3rd Century (Rennie 1971, 72-3). The obvious wealth and the extent of this building program is quite unusual in Roman Britain during the late 4th Century and seems to indicate the important status of the city during this late period. Another building discovered in Dyer Street had one of the most classical mosaics from Roman Britain. It represented a marine thiasos in a rare free-flowing design (Wacher 1995, 312), dated perhaps to the 2nd Century (Webster 1959, 51). The house also produced evidence of fine painted wall plaster, decorated with garlands of leaves. Two courtyard houses discovered in Insula XIV (Buildings 14.1 and 14.2), which dated from the early 3rd to 4th Century had mosaics, had painted wall plaster in several rooms (Brown and McWhirr 1969, 231-43).

Building 12.2 at Cirencester (Fig. 11) was also constructed around the middle of the 4th Century AD (McWhirr 1986, 45). This residence is the largest example from both Gloucester and Cirencester (Table 2) (Graph 1), but much of this space was probably dedicated to either agricultural or ceramic production. Three areas have been identified within this structure as having a potential entertainment function: Rooms 1, 7 and 14 (Fig. 11). Room 1 has been classified as an oecus, whereas Rooms 7 and 14 have been viewed as likely dining areas. The spatial data analysis of Building 12.2 has exhibited a similar pattern to that of Building 12.1 (Table 2) (Graph 2), which is largely a result of neither possessing a central courtyard.

The analysis of potential entertainment space for residences at Cirencester has been undertaken using three houses: Buildings 12.1, 12.2 and 12.3 (Figs. 10-12). While there are several other notable residences in Cirencester, such as Building 25.1 (Perring 2002, 72), it was thought that by taking three quite different examples from the one insula that the best cross-section of structures from Cirencester could give the most accurate statistical results. However, there is also a possibility of common ownership with these structures (McWhirr 1986, 77-8), but judging from the plans and their variation in facilities this appears unlikely. It seems more probable that each of these residences were constructed independently, but with different priorities during the revival of Cirencester in the 4th Century AD. It is hoped that by analysing these structures and their potential entertainment function that it can provide a good perspective of the circumstances in late-Roman Cirencester, as well as providing a good comparison with

All the same, it should be noted that the greater focus upon a utilitarian role at Building 12.2 is reflected in the results as well (Graph 2). The analysis of internal entertainment areas (Table 3) is of interest because it produces a similar result to that of Building 1.18 at Gloucester (Graph 3). However, this should not be taken as an indication of them being of comparable social significance – Building 1.18 still had a large, wellappointed courtyard to use for social occasions. It is evident that while Building 12.2 at Cirencester was clearly intended for some social activities, it was evidently more utilitarian than its previously mentioned smaller counterparts at Gloucester (Building 1.18) and Cirencester (Building 12.1).

21

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY on the region, it is questionable as to the actual number that may have settled there, with a very low percentage of legionaries surviving that many years of service (Sommer 1984, 30). The opinion of Hopkins (1980, 124-5) is that the number could be as low as 2.93%. The majority of the Dobunni, having a degree of centralisation already, would have regarded their tribal capital, Cirencester, as the major urban centre in the region, thus minimising the role of Gloucester in the area (Millett 1990, 87-8). In Cirencester, the town developed quickly, attracting the pro-Roman members of Dobunnic society, while others continued to live in the traditional centre at Bagendon.

Building 12.3 (Fig. 12) at Cirencester was by far the smallest of this group (Table 2) (Graph 1). This structure produced evidence of mortar floors and wall plaster in the living areas and it appears to have been constructed in the mid-late 4th Century AD (McWhirr 1986, 71). The fourth phase of habitation saw significant additions to the structure, but it is in the final fifth phase that has been analysed in relation to its potential social function. Two regions within this building have been identified as having possessed a potential entertainment role: Rooms 51 and 61 (Fig. 12). It appears that Room 61 was an open courtyard, whereas Room 51 has been classified as a possible dining area.

The analysis of potential entertainment space within the residences at Gloucester and Cirencester has established that the social function of these houses was minimal. It is evident that these Romano-British residences were generally not intended for large-scale social occasions, which is quite different to residences on the continent, such as in Latium (See Adams 2008) and Campania (See Adams 2006). This is particularly noticeable when the results from the courtyard houses are compared to the more common corridor house from Gloucestershire. Therefore, it seems that despite the perceived romanitas of these structures they were intended to function along completely different lines to their continental counterparts. This may indicate several things, such as a difference in climate, different social functions/traditions, a change in architectural form over time, but in view of the results in general it appears likely that this is indicative of a different intended social function. This may be a marker of how Romano-British society functioned in a different way to that in central Italy, which is to be expected in view of the ‘provincial’ nature of Romano-British society – it often reflected a cultural amalgam rather than a clear adoption of ‘Roman’ culture by the élites.

Neither of these regions seems to have been particularly opulent, but this correlates with the largely utilitarian character of Building 12.3 at Cirencester (McWhirr 1986, 76-7). The spatial data analysis has produced a higher percentage of potential entertainment space for this residence (15.75%) than at the previous examples from Cirencester (Table 2) (Graph 2), but this is largely owing to the inclusion of the central courtyard within the statistical results. Room 61 was in all likelihood to have served more of a utilitarian role, and with this space removed from the data (Table 3) the percentage seems more appropriate for the structure in general (2.79% entertainment space) (Graph 3). It is evident that Building 12.3 was not intended for a significant social function, but it still provides a good example of how many houses at Cirencester served as primarily productive centres during the 4th Century AD. One of the most notable aspects of non-public buildings in Cirencester is the presence of several workshops for the production of luxury goods in the city, for example mosaics, sculpture and also possibly metalwork (Toynbee 1963, 130). This shows that the affluent nobility were willing to spend their wealth to display their commitment to a Romanised way of life. There is evidence of at least one sculptor, Sulinus the son of Brucetus, who may have produced sculptures in both Cirencester and Aquae Sulis (Bath) (RIB 105, 151). The Corinian mosaic school was one of the few during the 3rd Century that did not go into decline, except for the period from AD 230-270. This reflects the strength and demand for such high status works (Johnson 1996, 152). To actively encourage the Romanisation of the populace was no major concern for the administration, and was more a response of the local élite to the allure of romanitas (Woolf 1992, 351-2).

Native Responses to the Occupation Following the Roman conquest of Britain and the ensuing military occupation, a number of social and economic changes within the native society may have caused a degree of economic upheaval (Leech 1982, 216-7). Cassius Dio (62.3) sees one of the major provocations for the Boudiccan revolt to be Roman taxation, and Tacitus (Ag., 13.1) refers to the obligations imposed on the native population by the government and to make the necessary financial contributions. Tacitus (An., 14.38) also mentions that Julius Classicianus had quarrelled with Suetonius Paulinus over the punishment that he had inflicted upon those groups who had participated in the Boudiccan revolt. Dio (62.1) also records that Seneca had lent ten million sesterces at interest to the Britons and then recalled this loan, partially causing the Boudiccan revolt. It appears that, in early Roman Britain, the continental provinces and Rome itself sought to exploit the new trading contacts to make the conquest of southern Britain a profitable experience (Fulford 1991, 39). The peripheral location of Britain within the Empire,

Conclusions for Gloucester and Cirencester The inhabitants of Gloucester and Cirencester would have been quite different, and yet both groups would have included pro-Roman members of the community. Many inhabitants of Gloucester would have been the descendants of the legionary veterans settled there by the provincial government, but it is unknown how many of these veterans would have been there by the middle of the 2nd Century. In regard to the influence of the veterans

22

URBAN ROMANISATION AND THE NATIVE ARISTOCRACY combined with the initial post-conquest financial pressure (Hingley 1982, 23), would have certainly placed an added strain upon the wealth of the native population.

These major settlements were not the only towns in Roman Britain and reflect but a small percentage of the ‘urban’ population. Advertising one’s romanitas was not restricted to the major centres, there being several examples in some of the smaller urban settlements. These vici were centres where a combination of trade and agriculture took place (Whittaker 1990, 115), with a sufficient number of buildings and organisation to be differentiated from the regional villages. There was usually some form of deliberate planning in most of these towns (Todd 1970, 115), but often some random elements appear in the layout. Many did have a degree of official or military function imposed upon them (Burnham 1996, 103); especially those located on the Fosse Way. Examples of such small towns in Gloucestershire include Dorn, Bourton-on-the-Water, Lower Slaughter, Dymock, Wycomb and Kingscote (McWhirr 1981, 59).

But the economic strain would have been greater on those members of the native society who sought political advancement. The extent of financial assistance given by the Roman administration to the growing urban centres is unknown, but it is unlikely that it was substantial. Tacitus (Ag., 21.1) mentions that Agricola had provided some public assistance to the local population, but this was not a common practice and the money was more likely to have been a loan (Collingwood 1975, 15). However, this financial assistance may have been part of Vespasian’s campaign to educate and encourage the provincials to become candidates for civil and military service (Woodside 1942, 126). The provincial administration may have provided some subsidy for the erection of the forum and basilica in the major centres (Mackreth 1987, 134), and possibly the urban defences later on, but most of the finances needed would have been the responsibility of the local ordo decurionum (Blagg 1980a, 27). Most major Romano-British vici received their defences in the 2nd Century, for example at Gloucester and Cirencester (Hunter 1967, 89). The summa honoraria were often the most important source of income for the urban centres, and would have affected the town’s ability to construct public buildings (DuncanJones 1985, 29). But the distinction between public and private funding would be minimal since it would have come from the same source: the local aristocracy.

Small Towns in Roman Gloucestershire Several of these settlements had their origins as army settlements, for example at Dymock, Dorn and Kingscote. Kingscote (ST 806960), which is eighteen kilometres south-west of Cirencester, had paved roads and a large area of buildings (Fig. 13). The presence of the Roman army here is indicated by the discovery of two military copies of Claudian asses, a coin of Nero, preFlavian samian ware, twelve Claudian or early-Flavian brooches and several military bronzes (Eagles and Swan 1972, 61-2; Webster 1975b, 59). Despite this early occupation, the settlement was undefended. Occupation at the site continued from the 1st Century, with signs of bronze and iron working, but only limited evidence of agricultural production (Fulford 1982, 407-8), and also quarrying in the mid-2nd Century (McWhirr 1981, 73, 75). The site was analysed through the use of multispectral aerial photography (Hampton 1977, 265), which also added to our understanding of the general layout of this small Roman town. There are several other Romanised structures located in its vicinity, such as the villas at Frocester and Woodchester, and the RomanoCeltic temple at Uley (Fig. 103). Several tombstones (RIB 133, 134, 135 and 136) were also discovered along the Iter XIV, which ran between Gloucester and Aquae Sulis (Bath). However, it is also notable that Kingscote was not located on this major Roman road (Map 1). As a result of this it seems to have only been used as an army settlement in the 1st Century AD, being converted into a civilian centre sometime during either the 2nd or 3rd Centuries AD.

This expenditure may not have always been for the purpose of public benevolence, with the quest for selfadvertisement and popularity creating a substantial incentive (Frere 1985b, 34). When this is combined with the rapid pace at which Romano-British towns grew (Jones 1991a, 53), the financial burden on the local population, especially the aristocracy, becomes clear (Jones 1974, 14). In most of the large Romano-British towns all of the public buildings had been erected by the early 2nd Century. It is likely that the local magistrates would have had to gain the approval of the provincial administration for the erection of such structures (Digest, 50.10.3; Garnsey and Saller 1987, 37), hence there are few superfluous buildings in Romano-British towns (Millett 1995, 62). However, domestic residences continued to be built in wattle and daub until the middle of the 2nd Century (De la Bédoyère 1991, 145), when the stone houses first appear in Cirencester (Perring 1987, 147, 150). These domestic residences were still Romanised in character and utilitarian, but were not inclined towards the display of status. This may have been a continuation of the native traditions in the early Occupation period, with Iron Age houses showing little distinction in status. The change in the 2nd Century throughout Roman Britain reflects a growth in expendable wealth and the expression of Romanisation, and it seems relevant that this corresponds roughly with the end of the period when large amounts were spent on public buildings (Perring 1987, 152).

One of the most conspicuous features of post military settlement is the sumptuous building located in the northwest corner, with a splendid Venus mosaic, hypocausts and wall plaster dated to the late 3rd or early 4th Century AD (Wilson 1980, 117). The quality of the workmanship is remarkable, considering the status of the settlement (Millett 1977, 287, 290). There is evidence of classical religion at the site with the discovery of a relief depicting ars, inscribed ‘IVLIVS L(ibens) S(olvit)’, and also a 23

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Romano-Celtic sculpture of Minerva (Toynbee 1964, 79). The house was much more well-appointed than its 3rd Century predecessor, which was largely designed as a strip house with four or five separate units (Jennings 1979, 296). The 4th Century complex included several outbuildings (Fig. 14) (McWhirr 1981, 77), which may provide further evidence of commercial productivity at Kingscote. There was also a large courtyard (Room 9), but the primary function of this area is questionable. The structure was gradually enlarged, particularly with the inclusion of Rooms 1, 2 and 3 (Fig. 14) (Jennings 1979, 297).

percentage (9.85% entertainment space) (Graph 2) shows that there was some intention to impress potential visitors, but that this was not allowed to surpass its productive capacity, particularly in comparison with Building 1.18 at Gloucester and House 3S at Caerwent. In addition to this, it seems that the courtyard (Room 9) was more likely to have been mostly used for production (Table 3) (Graph 3), which significantly reduces its statistical results even further. Therefore, it would appear that while this residence dominated the small centre at Kingscote and gave a clear image of romanitas, the commercial function of this building was another important factor to its owners.

These three rooms (Rooms 1, 2 and 3) wee probably the central residential/entertaining areas during this phase of habitation. This proposed function has been accentuated by the decorative features uncovered, in addition to their comparative distance from the utilitarian areas on the eastern side of the structure, such as Room 7 (McWhirr 1981, 77) (Fig. 14). Room 1 has produced the mosaic of Venus, but has also exhibited evidence of late 4th Century wall-paintings (Swain and Ling 1981, 167). It has been hypothesised that Room 1 had an image of Achilles on Skyros painted on its walls (McWhirr 1981, 77), but the highly fragmentary nature of the remains makes a definitive interpretation problematic (Swain and Ling 1981, 169-72). Room 2 was a later addition than Room 1 (Jennings 1979, 297), but it was also well-appointed with fine mosaic flooring and wall-paintings (Swain and Ling 1981, 173). Room 3 also included an aquatic mosaic (McWhirr 1981, 77), which further suggests that these rooms were viewed as a distinct group.

A similarly impressive structure in a small town can be seen at Dorn (SP 207339). This town possessed a regular street pattern (Esmonde Cleary 1987, 75; St. Joseph 1961, 132), which reflects its origins as a military fort (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 253) (Fig. 15). It was a walled settlement, located just to the west of the Fosse Way, not on the main road (Taylor 1961, 132) (Fig. 15). The evidence of military occupation during the early Roman period is revealed by finds of 1st Century Gallic samian ware (McWhirr 1981, 62). The military nature of the site has also been shown through its immense bank and ditch system, with ramparts and a clear defensive function (Fig. 15). In addition to the Flavian pottery there have also been numerous finds indicating 2nd Century activity, but these structures appear to have been demolished (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 255). Judging from the location of Dorn, especially in relation to its position near the Fosse Way, a military function appears quite definite during the 1st and 2nd Centuries AD, but its later purpose is less certain.

The analysis of a potential entertainment function has identified four areas as having possibly fulfilled such a role: Rooms 1, 2, 3 and 9 (Fig. 14). Judging from the statistical results (Table 2) it is evident that this residence was not intended to fulfil a significant entertainment function, with only 9.85% of its surface area having the potential to serve such a role (Graph 2). This is particularly important when it is noted that this period of habitation represented the pinnacle of its facilities. All the same, these results clearly epitomise the priorities of the owner: an external façade of romanitas in conjunction with commercial productivity.

The town contained a late Roman courtyard building (Fig. 16) with plastered walls and a tiled roof, and also a shrine, with two sculptured stones from a possible altar to a genius. There was clearly a degree of classical influence upon the region, which is shown through the discovery of an altar to Regina at nearby Lemington (RIB 125). Judging from the levels below this courtyard building, it is evident that the earliest possible date for this structure is around the middle of the 3rd Century AD (Finch Smith 1987, 290). At first glance the coloured wall-paintings and the general structure of this residence indicates the social aspirations of the owner. However, it is evident that the available resources of the owner were comparatively restricted because the extant structure itself was less than forty square metres (39.55m²). All the same, there is little evidence to provide any further insight into the later occupation of this site, which makes its analysis more restricted. Overall, Dorn was one of the smallest known settlements with a grid pattern and city defences, and suggests that the settlement may have had an official, if not military purpose (McWhirr 1981, 62). The decision to construct town defences was usually made at a provincial level, not by local officials, which explains this evaluation as a military site (Wacher 1975b, 51). Owing to the limited finds and progression of the

In view of the limited accessibility of Kingscote to the larger urban centres it is also evident that this residence was not intended for large entertaining occasions beyond the social possibilities of the local community. These social limitations have been further accentuated through the spatial data analysis and its comparison with the residences from Gloucester and Cirencester. Firstly, it is notable that this residence at Kingscote (Fig. 14) was the largest urban structure analysed in this region (Table 2) (Graph 1). All the same, this did not mean that a huge amount of space was dedicated for a potential entertainment role either, with the majority of the structure being used for a utilitarian function. When the courtyard is included within the spatial data, the resulting

24

URBAN ROMANISATION AND THE NATIVE ARISTOCRACY site following the military period, it is evident that it was not developed as an economic centre. This was, in all likelihood, owing to its position just off the Fosse Way, which reduced its commercial potential. Owing to the lack of pre-Roman evidence from this site it would appear that habitation at Dorn was almost purely associated with the provincial administration, which in many ways accounts for its limited expansion, even when the later courtyard residence is taken into consideration.

The resident community and also passing travellers, seeking good fortune from the local spirits, in all likelihood, used this shrine. An even more impressive religious sanctuary in a small town has been discovered at Wycomb, with a Romano-Celtic temple as a central feature in the settlement (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 201). Considering that the finds from this enclosure do not pre-date the 1st Century AD (Finch Smith 1987, 291), it is difficult to ascertain the presence of native sanctity at this site, which is also to be expected in view of its position at the junction of Ryknild Street and the Fosse Way (Map 1). All the same, such a date and location cannot exclude the possibility of its Romano-Celtic focus either. This is particularly important to note with the close connection between this site and the Iron Age settlement at Salmonsbury (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 288). It appears likely that the Bourton-on-the-Water site itself flourished during the Roman occupation between the 1st and 4th Centuries AD, but that this was in conjunction with a continuation of the native traditions as well. The prominence of local romanitas is to be expected at the junction of two major Roman roads, but this should not be seen as the sole cultural element either.

There are several other examples of small towns with a ‘dominant’ building and a possible religious sanctuary in Roman Britain. Another from Gloucestershire was at Bourton-on-the-Water (SP 159208) (Fig. 17). This settlement was similar to Dorn in that it was located near the major communication and trade route in the region, on the Fosse Way, with finds dating from the 1st to 4th Century; these included Claudian coins and Neronian pottery (Finch Smith 1987, 290). There is evidence of previous Iron Age occupation, especially at the nearby ‘hill-fort’ settlement at Salmonsbury, and at The Chessels, which is a probable Iron Age religious site. The Bourton-on-the-Water settlement did not have any defensive walls, but was made up predominantly of roadside buildings (McWhirr 1981, 62-3). One of the most interesting structures in this settlement was a likely posting station and stable of 3rd Century date; a similar building has been discovered outside the Bath Gate at Cirencester. As it is located on the Fosse Way, it may be a mansio, serving as a centre of local government and accommodation for government officials (Black 1995, 2).

The presence of at least one large Romanised structure within these settlements is not truly indicative of the rest of the settlement and actually formed only a small element of the town as a whole (Burnham 1987, 180). In several of the settlements there is evidence of previous Iron Age habitation, for example at Bourton-on-theWater, Wycomb, Lower Slaughter and Lechlade. There are several reasons for the more Romanised residences: they may have been official accommodation, houses of the wealthier members of the community, or possibly a villa in urbibus (Burnham 1988, 47). Apart from instances like the mansio in Bourton-on-the-Water, it appears that most were owned by wealthy members of the local population, or at least those who sought to associate themselves with the provincial administration.

Similar mansio sites in other counties can be found at Godmanchester, Chelmsford, Catterick and Wanborough (Frere 1975, 6; Wacher 1978, 87). The example at Bourton-on-the-Water was planned according to the winged portico design and seems to be the only building of any pretension in the settlement (Todd 1976, 108). On the other side of the Fosse Way was a possible shrine, with two concentric walls, 1.5 metres apart, with welllaid masonry (Wilson 1968, 198). Leading up to this shrine was a well-metalled and cambered street, over seven metres wide, which branched off the Fosse Way (McWhirr 1981, 65). While no associated finds of ‘religious significance’ have been discovered it is difficult to interpret another role for such a structure. But this point highlights the cautious nature of prior interpretations: obvious ‘religious’ finds constitute altars, figurines and other associated objects – this structure has produced none of these. However, the design of the structure indicates a Romano-Celtic religious function. All the same, in view of its location at the junction of two major roads and the continuing prominence of local cultures in the area, a dearth of permanent/monumental offerings within such a small, transient community is to be expected. It also may indicate the continuity of native religious dedications that were not necessarily so uniform with traditional classical religion, particularly in light of the lack of classical dedications discovered in the region.

But another important aspect of these smaller settlements is their close connection to other settlements, especially the wealthy villas in the region (Todd 1978, 207). There are several small settlements in Gloucestershire that have one or more villas nearby. A good example of this is at Wycomb that had a villa only eight hundred metres from the settlement, and the Sudeley-Spoonley Wood complex only six kilometres away (De la Bédoyère 1999, 96). The settlement at Wycomb probably worked as a service centre for at least six villas in the surrounding areas, within a radius of around 8 kilometres (Fulford 1982, 417). At Bourton-on-the-Water, the Leadenwell villa, which is close to the urban centre, occupation has been dated from the 2nd to 4th Centuries (Donovan 1934, 101). Another corridor type villa has been discovered near the outskirts of the Roman settlement at Sapperton, which is eight kilometres west of Cirencester (St. Joseph 1969, 128).

25

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY The connection between villas and other settlements is similar to the principle of coloniae: that the people in the settlements worked land (Rivet 1969, 180). This is also understandable because many of the smaller settlements were intrinsically connected with agriculture and, in many ways, maintained a parasitical relationship with the rural producing sites (Fulford 1982, 417). Since the development of small towns was usually due to economic reasons (Frere 1975, 4), these centres would have provided valuable local trading markets and communication centres for the villa owners (Millett 1982, 424; Miles 1982, 58). They also would have been attractive to the Roman government for minor administrative functions (Burnham 1987, 182). This would explain the origins of many small towns: initially forts or religious sanctuaries, but with strong community ties (Hingley 1989, 114-5).

oppida appears to have happened at a later stage in this area when compared to other British centres, such as at Verulamium, which occurred in the mid-late 1st Century BC (Cunliffe 1991, 81-3). By contrast Bagendon, which was the most significant oppida in the region, was not established until the early 1st Century AD (Clifford 1961a, xix). Despite the later introduction of this urban centre it appears clear that it would have been an important urban centre for trade (Cunliffe 1991, 102). Occupation continued at Bagendon until the 60’s AD, which coincided with the introduction of both Cirencester and the new fort at Gloucester, but as Frere has noted (1962, 273) these oppida were extremely important during the initial stages of the Roman conquest. It seems evident that the fluctuating levels of success of these Roman towns was indicative of the changing nature of the region following the Roman occupation until the 4th Century AD. Soon after the Roman conquest of the county it is evident through the demise of Bagendon and the growth of Cirencester and particularly of Gloucester that the status quo had changed. This would have largely been a product of the new commercial environment that had been created. The introduction of new markets, particularly in the form of soldiers and ultimately colonists at Gloucester, shifted the focus away from the local oppida to the new Roman colony.

However, as Finch Smith has noted (1987, 3) the vast majority of these roadside settlements were not based upon pre-Roman Iron Age sites, with their prime focus being upon their strategic and communicative value. This has been reflected in the sites at Kingsholm, Dorn and Bourton-on-the-Water, which had only limited connections to the pre-Roman period. However, it seems to have been their association with the local native communities that ultimately determined their lasting levels of success. For example, the differences between Dorn and Bourton-on-the-Water during the 3rd and 4th Centuries AD illustrate the varying amounts of habitation and commercial success at sites with and without a strong local connection. All the same, each of these smaller urban centres do exhibit the continued promotion of romanitas within the local environment, despite their varied levels of success in the later stages of the Roman occupation. These settlements were still clear exponents of a Roman cultural affiliation that was communicated beyond the confines of their physical boundaries.

All the same, it was through the creation of major roads throughout the region that accentuated the initial importance of Gloucester and also of Cirencester. Both of these cities were on major communication and trade routes, which provided their inhabitants with increased access to the trade networks of the new Roman province. The importance of having a high degree of accessibility to this network is also exhibited in the development of small towns, with their varying levels of success. Nevertheless, it is also evident that the market potential of Gloucester and Cirencester were quite different (See Hurst 2005), which may explain the divergence in their levels of ultimate success as well.

General Conclusions Through the analysis of the archaeological material from several of the prominent urban settlements in Gloucestershire, it becomes evident that the Romanised members of the local community would have had residences in the larger centres as well as their main bases in the villas. It was in these centres where the public expression of Romanisation was at its greatest that the owners would have received the most benefits from the Roman administration. The small towns appear to have had one or two major structures of classical or Romano-Celtic design, but the majority of the population were still agriculturally based with few Roman pretensions. Romanisation was predominantly the prerogative of the local élite, who resided in Romanised houses from the late 2nd Century, erected in either the urban centres or in the adjacent rural areas. The analysis of the urban centres in Gloucestershire has shown the different stages in the development of urbanism in the region. The introduction of pre-Roman

When considering the progression of development at Gloucester and Cirencester, it is their dissimilarity which is most striking. On one hand, Gloucester clearly enjoyed substantial growth and development during its initial phases of occupation, but it gradually started to decline from the early 3rd Century AD. The reasons given for this deterioration have varied significantly with different interpretations, but it does seem logical to look towards the development of Cirencester. The evolution of this civitas capital significantly contrasts Gloucester, with there being only gradual development in the late 1st and 2nd Centuries AD, until a comparatively dramatic rise in prominence and living conditions around the end of the 2nd Century AD. While the ‘native’ significance of Cirencester as a centre is evident, there may have also been some commercial benefits for its inhabitants. The location of Cirencester was much closer to the important commercial markets to the east of Gloucestershire, which

26

URBAN ROMANISATION AND THE NATIVE ARISTOCRACY would have been of great advantage in comparison to the residents of Gloucester. In relation to military strategy and conquest, Gloucester was by far superior, but the commercial advantage of Cirencester within a broader provincial context cannot be ignored, particularly with its native Iron Age connection as well.

All the same, these well-appointed residences still made a clear statement of social and cultural affinity with the provincial administration. While they may not have been intended for large scale social activity, they were still highly visible structures that declared the romanitas of their owners. This would have been particularly important to the owners of Building 1.18 at Gloucester and the large residence at Kingscote. This statement of romanitas extended not only beyond the confines of the structure, but also throughout the wider community as a sign of social success and political affiliation. Therefore, these residences epitomise the combined influences of the Romano-British aristocracy, where although the social statements were clearly intended to indicate an association with the Roman state, the interpretation of these forms were often affected by a ‘local’ conception of such traditions.

It is in this regard that the dualism of the ‘native capitals’ becomes apparent: they symbolised the ‘home’ of the local communities, and yet they also became important centres of romanitas. In many ways this combined symbolism worked in the favour of the administration by allowing a sense of local tradition and autonomy while encouraging the adoption of Roman mores and social symbols. This combined expression of local and ‘Roman’ traditions has been clearly exhibited in the statistical analysis of potential entertainment space for the townhouses in Gloucestershire. These structures were intended to express the success, status and romanitas of their owners, and yet they served a different social purpose to traditional houses in central Italy (See Adams 2006). The comparison with élite houses on the southern frontage of Herculaneum (Fig. 8) illustrates this well. Herculaneum was by no means a major centre in central Italy, and yet the results taken from these three houses are significantly higher than in the Gloucestershire examples. Therefore, it would seem that the emphasis upon social activity was significantly lower in these Romano-British urban centres, which indicates a difference in intended function. There was evidently some provision of space for a potential entertainment function at these élite residences in Roman Gloucestershire (Table 2) (Graph 2), but not to the same extent as their continental counterparts.

Nevertheless, the native élite were vital for this process. It was this group who possessed both the resources and the socio-political motives to undertake such an acculturation movement. The vast majority of the local population had little to gain from adopting such symbols of romanitas, but the local nobility would have seen it as a means to ensure their social dominance on a regional level. This may provide another reason for the ultimate success of Cirencester: local issues (in addition to its commercial advantages) may have been viewed as being of more importance than those benefits from being associated with a colonia. However, the affairs of the local élites extended far beyond these urban centres and can also be viewed in the countryside, through the construction of Romanised villas.

27

Chapter II Villa Complexes in Gloucestershire One of the most prominent features of Romanisation in the British countryside, particularly Gloucestershire, was the presence of villas, demonstrating the adoption of Roman lifestyles. Most of these Romanised villas represent the willingness of members of the native nobility to exhibit their status through the construction of houses with Roman-style architecture and materials (John 1969, 40). During the occupation, the villas of the native élite became one of the most prominent advertisements of status (Black 1987, 7), highlighting their aspirations and acquiescent attitudes toward the Roman administration. But it is evident that, despite the obvious wealth needed to erect these Romanised structures, the level of luxury varied; this could be indicative of the differing social conditions occurring in many of the villas. Regardless of the evident inequality in wealth between some of these villa complexes, they all represent a Romanising tendency in rural Roman Britain. Such tendencies would have also extended to the style of religious buildings in the region. In this chapter, the villas of Gloucestershire will be studied to determine their differing degrees of wealth and social status; which will then allow an examination of the relationship of villas to the temples and shrines in the region.

traditions influencing habitation patterns in the extraurban areas is an additional consideration as well. A distinction should be made between the social conditions in the rural regions and the urban centres. The erection of villas occurred much earlier than the corresponding luxurious townhouses in most areas (Walthew 1975, 189, 195). The earliest masonry buildings in Cirencester were erected in the latter part of the 2nd Century, which was comparable to the limited scale in domestic architecture in Gloucester. There were certain similarities between the two styles of house, with the plans of villas having a definite influence on the later townhouses. There were some examples in Gloucestershire of villas being constructed as early as the second half of the 1st Century, for example at North Cerney (SO 996095), but the majority were gradually established during the 2nd Century, particularly throughout the Dobunnic territory, as at Chedworth and possibly Whittington Court, and also in the territory of Gloucester at Hucclecote (II), Dryhill, Barnsley Park and Brookthorpe (Branigan 1977, 34-5, 43; Percival 1976, 91, 95; Potter and Johns 1990, 85-6). Many other villas in Gloucestershire were erected in the 3rd Century, for example at Frocester Court, Farmington, Compton Grove and Listercombe Bottom.

It would be useful to begin by defining the term “villa”. Wightman (1970, 139) sees villas as “all farms or country-houses built at least partly in stone”. Smith (1997, 11) further clarifies this statement by adding that the structures must take a distinctly Romanised form of planning which was quite unlike any native farmstead. The true canons of classical architecture, for example axiality and symmetry, were adopted slowly in Britain, but the use of rectangular buildings was a definite break from the native traditions of construction (Percival 1987, 543). This chapter will focus upon the status, wealth and living conditions within the villas, rather than on their actual construction.

It has been suggested by Branigan (1973, 82-95) that the late development of these villas, especially in southern Gloucestershire, was due to the migration of wealthy Gauls at the end of the 3rd Century. After they had escaped from the barbarian incursions in Gaul, these Gallic immigrants caused the growth of large courtyard villas in the Durotrigan and Dobunnic territories (Branigan 1972, 118-19). Some similarities between many British and Gallic villas have been observed by Smith (1978a, 169), but he does not come to the same conclusion about their origins. He also points to serious differences in the symmetry of British and Gallic courtyard villas, especially in Picardy, where the layout of the lower buildings is unlike that of British courtyard villas (Smith 1982, 327). Branigan’s hypothesis has not been proven conclusively and it is even more debatable when the number of 2nd Century villas in the region is taken into account (Todd 1978, 207). Some villas dated to the 2nd Century can be found at Siddington, Rodmarton, Whittington Court, Chedworth, Barnsley Park, Turkdean, Brookthorpe, Dryhill, Hucclecote (I) and Hucclecote (II). There may have been some degree of Gallic immigration, but it is unlikely that it was on such a large scale with the area previously being an Imperial Estate. Smith (1983, pp. 239-46) and Millett (1990, pp. 186, 189) have argued that the construction of these

There are eighteen villas to be discussed in this chapter, comprising those structures from Roman Gloucestershire that have the most amount of available information. As just mentioned, the focus here is largely upon the status and design of these residences, whereas their economic and social function is the primary discussion of the next chapter. All the same, these topics are briefly considered in this chapter as well, but only in general terms. This has been related to the topographical placement of each villa structure, which is intended to consider the local prominence of these residences within a geographical context. This is another consideration that provides some indication of the intentions that lay behind their construction. All the same, the possibility of pre-Roman

28

VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE the 2nd Century (Walthew 1975, 196). It must be noted that, while most of the villas in Britain did not emerge until the 2nd Century, many were not richly endowed until the 3rd or 4th Centuries, during a later rural revival (Jones and Mattingly 1991, 240-1). The development and prospects of villas and urban settlements were intertwined (Wacher 1981, 124). It was only through the combined efforts of the rural population for production and the urban marketplaces that the population was able to create a surplus (Rivet 1964, 126).

villas represents expenditure on status display rather than an investment in production, and it is of interest to note that Varro (RR 1.13.6-7) mentions instances of villa buildings being too expensive for the productive capacity of the estate because of the owners vying for more status. Whether the inhabitants were of Gallic or native origin does not, however, influence the central fact that the housing of the majority of the native population did not reflect a high degree of romanitas. In the urban centres, sophisticated planned townhouses did not appear before the mid-2nd Century (Walthew 1975, 192). For example, at Verulamium only one stone domestic structure is thought to antedate AD 65, but it may even have been later (Todd 1978, 204). Cirencester probably began its major development from the vicus which originated in the middle of the 1st Century AD (RIB 109; De la Bédoyère 1992, 19), since most of the Dobunnic native population had until the Conquest been based at Bagendon, which was almost five kilometres away. They had been enticed, most likely through economic means, to settle at the new civitas-capital (Goodburn 1998, 9). At Cirencester, the domestic structures were built mostly of clay and wood in a Romanised ‘strip-house’ layout during the 1st and 2nd Centuries AD (De la Bédoyère 1992, 62). Gloucester, on the other hand, developed from the legionary fortress that had been established there by AD 67 and was made a colonia between AD 96-8 during the principate of Nerva (Wacher 1995, 150). Houses there were still planned along the ‘strip-house’ format, as at Cirencester, but there were also examples of Mediterranean style houses, which is not surprising in view of the status of the city (De la Bédoyère 1992, 62). These more impressive townhouses developed earlier in Gloucester than at other major cities in Britain, but this would surely be attributable to its classification as a colonia. Both Gloucester and Cirencester had high concentrations of villas in a wide surrounding area (Hodder and Millett 1980, 71, 74). This followed the pattern in Roman Britain of the erection of villas around the centres of the greatest administrative importance (Millett 1991, 172).

The interdependence of rural and urban forms of economic production is also reflected in the inhabitants of both the villas and the elegant townhouses. It is more than likely that the occupants were one in the same; the native élite now had the wealth and political status that they craved and the benefits of participating in the Roman political system (Brunt 1975, 270; Rivet 1969, 204). The Romanised villas were the most conspicuous expressions of status, probably by the wealthy members of the ordo decurionum, with houses in both the town and country (Johnston 1976, 281). The rural residences were probably occupied more than those in the towns, with agricultural production having a traditionally respectable reputation: urban connections, however, were essential for marketing (Potter and Johns 1990, 78). This is emphasised by the extravagant nature of villas in comparison with townhouses, having more use and, therefore, more amenities. The villas in the Gloucestershire region provide a good example of such differentiation. The wealthy region around the towns of Cirencester and Gloucester had many rich and sophisticated villas (Percival, 1976, 100), such as at Woodchester, Chedworth, Spoonley Wood and Barnsley Park. On the other hand, the quality of urban residences in towns was generally fairly poor, despite the amount of capital invested by the élite in public buildings. It is accepted that the earliest known example of a residence built of stone at Cirencester was from the early 2nd Century. Its construction, earlier than examples at other major centres, may be attributable to the easy access of stone as a building material (Wacher 1995, 309). However, despite this early example, the trend towards stone residences was not readily accepted until the late 2nd Century. But the interdependence of the urban centres and the rural villas was paramount: it was the connection between these two types of community that led to economic and social success for both (Goodburn 1998, 35).

A few of the early villas such as those at Chedworth and Great Witcombe were quite luxurious (Branigan 1977, 34). This wealth and sophistication was largely due to their location in more fertile regions, leading to greater profits (Williamson 1989, 76). The capacity for large production was essential, for considerable capital was needed for the construction of these early villas; a factor that further emphasises the agricultural basis for the native aristocrats’ wealth (Wacher 1981, 126; Blagg 1990a, 206). Most operated diversified or mixed economies that aimed for self-sufficiency in most aspects, and a profitable surplus in others (Branigan 1989, 42). The emphasis on lavish rural dwellings, rather than urban, continued even in Chichester in Sussex, which adopted Roman practices virtually immediately after the Claudian conquest: there is little indication of urban development until well into the Flavian period, and the construction of townhouses did not commence until

The connection between Cirencester and some of the villas is shown through an analysis of mosaics. There seems to be a trend towards displaying particular images, usually in classical form. One mosaic that depicts a classical deity was discovered at the Woodchester Roman villa (SP 838032). Found in Room I of this villa, it depicts Orpheus and the Beasts (Clarke 1982, 199). There are further Orpheus mosaics at the villa north of Withington Wood (SP 03121487) and another at the Barton villa (SP 016022) near Cirencester (RCHM 132, 29). There has been another example discovered at the 29

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY The 2nd to 4th Century villa at Barnwood (SO 865190) was around three kilometres east of Gloucester and this would be more typical of a villa site’s position in relation to a major centre (Rawes 1977, 24). The benefits for trade and political advancement would have created a more than sufficient reason for any ambitious aristocrat to stay close to an urban centre. Another house in Cirencester (Building 12.2) (Fig. 11) discovered in Insula XII and dated to the late 4th Century, may have combined urban and rural functions (De la Bédoyère 1992, 77). It was associated with outbuildings and had traces of weaving and metalworking, which suggests that it was connected with agriculture outside the city precinct (Wilson 1973a, 307-8). There are other examples of similar buildings at Silchester and Wroxeter (Wacher 1974, 283). A further example comes from Gloucester, where at 13-17 Berkeley Street, a courtyard house was erected no earlier than the Antonine period and followed a similar plan to many Romano-British courtyard villas. Despite the political, economic and administrative advantages associated with the urban centres, therefore, the land remained the focus of power, security and stability, hence its continuing prominence (Miles 1989, 61).

Winterton Villa in Lincolnshire (Neal 1981, pl. 83). The Barton mosaic is considered to be as high a quality as that at Woodchester, with similarities in style and workmanship (Sewell and Powell 1910, 67; St. C. Baddeley 1926, 78). These mosaics were part of the “Corinian School”, which was the largest group in Britain and may have originated before the end of the 3rd Century AD (Smith 1969, 97-101). The popularity of the Orpheus mosaics suggests workshops based at Cirencester around AD 300-320 (Toynbee 1964, 268-72), especially when, in general, it has been found that eightyfive percent of mosaics are discovered within an eightykilometre radius of the centre where a mosaic school is located (Branigan 1994, 15). While the country villa was the normal place of residence for the native élite, urban dwellings were necessary because of the centralised political, social and cultural system whereby they stood for office, performed public service and increased their personal renown (WallaceHadrill 1991, 242). The control of the region, for local administrative matters, was based in the towns; so it was essential for ambitious native leaders to have a footing there, even though their economic base was on the land (Reynolds 1975, 70). Being close to a major urban centre would also have been advantageous for trade purposes, making the transportation of produce much more reliable and efficient. In Gloucestershire, this can be seen at the Barton villa, discussed briefly above. This was a winged corridor villa and had the distinguishing feature of a supposedly ‘Saxon’ burial being discovered under the Orpheus mosaic (Scott 1993a, 70).

The continuing rural focus is indicative of the status and respectable wealth exhibited by the local leaders, and is reflected in the villas and other associated structures (Black 1994, 110). Such an emphasis had continued from the Iron Age with the economy following past agricultural practices and methods. Continuity of habitation from Iron Age timber roundhouses to Roman styled rectangular masonry structures has been noted in several other areas of Britain: for example, there has been extensive evidence found at Quinton and Piddington in Northamptonshire (Friendship-Taylor 1997, 47-51), at the Lockleys and Park Street villas in Hertfordshire (Rook 1997, 53-7), and in Yorkshire (Wilson 1997, 915), and at Barnsley Park in Gloucestershire. An important aspect of understanding the Romanisation process is determining the smooth and continuous progression from Iron Age to Romanised architecture at many of the villa complexes in Gloucestershire and throughout Roman Britain.

Villa 1 – The Barton Villa This villa was located only three hundred and sixty-five metres northwest of the Roman town wall of Cirencester (RCHM 29). Its position demonstrates the advantages in remaining within easy reach of the local administrative centre. It would not have been necessary to be so close to a trading centre. Unfortunately, little else of The Barton Villa has been recorded aside from the notable mosaic of Orpheus and its conservation (Fox 1951, 51-3; Sewell and Powell 1910, 67-77), which limits the possibility for its analysis. All the same, its close position to Cirencester in many ways necessitates its inclusion, particularly in relation to its period of occupation. While the origins of this villa are unknown, it was certainly occupied and possibly improved around the beginning of the 4th Century AD (Fox 1951, 53). In view of the context in which the numismatic evidence was discovered with this mosaic (Fox 1951, 52), it is clear that it was during the early 4th Century that this fine mosaic was introduced to the villa, which corresponds well with the revival of villa habitation in Gloucestershire at the time. However, when the close proximity of The Barton Villa is taken into consideration, this should come as no great surprise, and this may indicate that this structure could have possibly been viewed as a villa suburbana (See Adams 2006, 915).

Villa 2 – Barnsley Park Villa One of the best examples of a villa that revealed continuous habitation from its Iron Age origins into the Roman period was the complex at Barnsley Park (SP 083067) (Webster and Smith 1982, 66). This establishment began with three adjoining yards, all of which had earlier round buildings from the pre-Roman period (Fig. 18). The discovery of shallow postholes also implies a timber predecessor for the stone house (Wilson 1975a, 271). Finds of pottery, including fragments of samian ware, indicate a degree of Romanisation by the second half of the 2nd Century AD (Webster 1967, 75; Wilson 1968, 198). The erection of a Romanised structure did not actually occur until the third period, during the mid-late 3rd Century (Smith 1997, 238); this is 30

VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE supported by the discovery of 700 Roman coins from the 3rd and 4th Century (Wilson 1964, 171), with the earliest Roman material being fragments of Trajanic samian pottery (De la Bédoyère 1993, 9). It was in the fourth major period of development that a stone rectangular building with a bath suite was erected at one end of the previous structures (Smith 1997, 238). On numismatic evidence, the main building of the villa may have been as late as AD 360 (Webster 1980, 12).

(1985, 341-51) would be the most probable. The gradual evolution of a dominant household among several distinct groups conforms to the overall design of this residence and compliments its topographical placement. The region in which the Barnsley Park villa was built was comparatively flat, providing little opportunity for its owner to express their social dominance to the wider community. This structure was definitely a statement of romanitas and fiscal success, but this was still limited by the practical considerations of the circumstances of its residents.

One of the most important discoveries was that of a tile inscribed ‘ARVERI’: there are many similar tiles found in Gloucestershire, especially at Cirencester, suggesting an association between the two centres. There have been other examples discovered at Listercombe Bottom, King’s Stanley, Frocester, Rodmarton and Brookthorpe (McWhirr and Viner 1980, 359-77; Collingwood and Taylor 1931, 240). The ‘ARVERI’ inscription probably represents the producer Arverus, who was making tile and brick mainly for Cirencester (McWhirr 1981, 111). Tiles were an important building component for Romanised structures and the connection between rural and urban centres was necessary to obtain such materials (Webster 1979, 291). The Barnsley Park structure was of an exceedingly high quality and occupation continued until the end of the 4th Century (De la Bédoyère 1993, 9). Webster and Smith (1982, 67) believes that the Barnsley Park complex was only a part of “a number of establishments in a large estate”, and also that it was not the house of a landowner, but more likely that of a bailiff or a manager. Owing to the large number of coins discovered at the site (Reece 1972a, 202) and the many dry-stone walled structures in the farmyard, Webster (1982, 12-14) viewed the site as being used as cattle saleyards. Smith (1985, 341-51) disagrees with this assessment, preferring to view the villa as a gradually developing estate with several resident households, one of which held a dominant position to the others. Webster and Smith (1987, 87) concede the possibility for multiple occupations and the lack of equality between the dominant and outlying households.

The Number of Households in Roman Houses The existence of villas that probably contained more than one household sheds light on the functional demands of these buildings. Several Roman houses, especially in Ostia, Pompeii and Herculaneum, have been seen to contain more than one resident household (WallaceHadrill 1994, 106-7). One of the best examples of these is the House of the Trellis (Ins. 3, 13-15) (Fig. 19) in Herculaneum, which contained two separate residences with separate hearths and lararia. This townhouse was divided and this has been indicated by the number of entrances, with Entrance 13 leading to a small flat on the upper level of the structure, whereas Entrance 14 led down a passage to an open courtyard. This section of the structure was also elegantly painted in Fourth Style wall paintings (Wallace-Hadrill 1994, 199). Entrance 15 led directly into a small shop, which seems to have been owned (or at least leased) by the residents of the central section of the House of the Trellis. Another is the House of the Faun in Pompeii (Fig. 20), which contained two atria, one of lower status than the other. The House of the Faun (Reg VI, Ins. 12, 2-5) was one of the largest and most elegant residences in Pompeii (Clarke 2003, 247). The date of its original construction was around the late 2nd Century BC, judging from the mortar used in the front halls and colonnaded courtyards (Carrington 1933, 131). The front of the building comprised of two entrances to the residence and five shops, some with upper floors. At least two of these commercial areas seem to have been leased out by the owner, which was not uncommon in Pompeian society (Moormann 2002, 429-36). As mentioned previously, upon entering the building there were two atria that served different social groups within the household (Rooms B, b). Despite the probable differentiation in function between the halls, they were both of equal architectural importance, with the axiality of their placement enhancing the impressive appearance of each other.

It does seem, therefore, that the most compelling impression that this villa complex provides is of the gradual unification of the separate establishments and the ensuing Romanisation (Smith 1997, 239). Similar processes of unification elsewhere in Britain are evident at the Hartfield-Garden Hill villa (TQ 44 31) in Sussex and the Whitton villa (ST 08 71) in Glamorgan. The large number of 3rd and 4th Century coins can be explained by the probable drop in their value, limiting their purchasing power and thereby increasing the numbers used for trade (Davies 1993, 131). This coincided with the economic and administrative reforms of Diocletian that attempted to stabilise the economy of the Roman Empire by standardising the issues (Liebeschuetz 1987, 455-69; Reece 1999, 135).

The most notable feature of the House of the Faun is its fine wall décor and mosaics, which exhibited the highest culture and appreciation for Hellenistic civilisation. At the time of the eruption, the House of the Faun still had rooms decorated with First Style wall decoration. This house is indicative of a stately home that maintained its original design and part of the earliest wall decorations into the

While the villa at Barnsley Park (Fig. 18) was not the most ostentatious structure in Rome Gloucestershire, it would seem that Smith’s assessment of its development 31

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY last phase of architectural development. The mosaics in the dining rooms adjacent to the Tuscan hall reflect the desire to exhibit culture and status with appropriate iconography for the function of these rooms.

1982, 323). Such multiple households can also be deduced in ‘hall-type’ villas, based around a large rectangular room, which becomes the focal point for the structure (Dark and Dark 1997, 45-6). Good examples of hall-type villas with probable multiple households in Gloucestershire are at Rodmarton, Cherington, Farmington and also at Frocester Court (Smith 1978b, 357-8).

Room H depicted Egyptian animals between the entrance columns, with a mosaic of Alexander towards the middle. It has been suggested that the reproduction of Greek art may have served as a moralising message in public contexts (Barringer 1994, 166), but it portrayed culture and education in a private setting. The mosaics reflect the desire of the owners to exhibit their appreciation of Hellenistic art and to accentuate their cultural and intellectual standing (Westgate 2000, 273). When the elegant decoration within the noble district is compared to the basic décor of the servile area, it further exemplifies the clear distinction between each section of the townhouse.

Villa 3 – Frocester Court Villa Like Barnsley Park, the villa at Frocester Court (SO 785029) experienced a long period of occupation, from the mid-late Iron Age into the late Roman period (Fig. 22) (Price 1968, 198). A series of ditches discovered at the site to the south of the villa dates from the preconquest period to the end of the 3rd Century AD (Gracie and Price 1979, 9; Frere 1977, 413; Goodburn 1979, 319). A well with a possible votive use has been dated to the turn of the 1st Century AD (Price 1984, 49-76). This complex is located almost seventeen kilometres from the colonia of Gloucester and is only around six and a half kilometres from the villa at Woodchester (Gracie 1970, 15). Its wealth at the time of the conquest is illustrated by the discovery of a quantity of imported terra nigra pottery, two Dobunnic issues and a coin of Claudius but, despite this, the construction of the Romanised villa did not occur for over two centuries (Price 1983, 141). The plan of this complex was that of a winged-corridor, featuring several mosaics, a bath suite and hypocaust system (Scott 1993a, 72).

This has also been noted at the House of the Prince of Naples (Reg VI, Ins. 15, 8) (Fig. 21) in Pompeii, which contained separate households with different levels of status in the distinct residential units. This residence was approximately two hundred and forty square metres in surface area and included an upper level, which was seemingly rented out by the owners who lived on the ground floor. The distinction in these residential units is accentuated by the stairs to the upper level (Area P) being placed in an external position of the structure (WallaceHadrill 1994, 48). As with the House of the Faun, the social and residential distinction between the various inhabitants of this townhouse over all would have been apparent to all of the visitors to this residence. Having considered these three residences, it is quite clear that the distinction between these households was reflected in the domestic architecture (Wallace-Hadrill 1988, 52). This style and layout was connected to the dominant position of some inhabitants and clearly defined the social environment within the house (Fredrick 1995, 266).

The building was of medium size, but had unusually large foundations (Gracie 1970, 15-6). The foundations have been interpreted by some scholars to be indicative of a second storey for the building (Esmonde Cleary 1994, 285; Price 1994, 40; Hurst 2002, 633), but these deep foundations have also been interpreted by Smith (1978b, 358) to give the hall sufficient height to assist in the removal of smoke from the building. The first stage included a large hall and, in all likelihood, had another additional room attached, which is very similar in format to the Farmington villa (Smith 1997, 261). The Frocester Court villa was erected no earlier than around AD 275, on the evidence of a coin of Postumus (AD 259-268). A front corridor on the southeast side and projecting wings were added shortly after initial construction (Gracie 1970, 16), and the formal gardens at the end of the 3rd Century (Gracie and Price 1979, 20) (Fig. 22). The house was reorganised later around AD 340, with the addition of a hypocaust (Room 12) and mosaics in two rooms (Rooms 6 and 7), and again in AD 360 with the erection of the northeast wing, which included an elaborate bath suite and an adjacent room for the working of wool (Price 1995, 10). Another indication of high status pretensions in this villa is seen in the discovery of an engraved glass vessel imported from the Rhineland (Wilson 1966, 212). All of the evidence indicates a building that was not just used as the living space for its occupants, but rather an establishment used for both living and working, having some similarities to the villa

The layout of the villas in Roman Gloucestershire did not strictly follow such strict Roman social sensibilities (Wallace-Hadrill 1988, 54), for example as outlined by Vitruvius (6.5.2): qui autem fructibus rusticis serviunt, in eorum vestibulis stabula, tabernae, in aedibus cryptae, horrea, apothecae ceteraque, quae ad fructus servandos magis quam ad elegantiae decorem possunt esse, ita sunt facienda (‘But those who rely upon rural produce, they must have stalls for cattle and shops in the forecourt, and, within the building, cellars, barns, storage places and other spaces that are for the storage of produce rather than for an pleasing effect’). This also contained several aspects that were more common in the western provinces. The deviation from the classical cannons of villa structures may represent the continuation of some native practices, such as the tradition of using communal land (Clarke 1980, 338). By the 3rd or 4th Centuries, the lack of classical symmetry cannot be attributed to ignorance and the most obvious interpretation would be that there were some continuing native traditions, such as the residing of multiple households in one building (Smith 32

VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE at Spoonley Wood (Smith 1997, 75, 262; Fitzpatrick 2004, 304).

While the economic considerations were clearly important to the leading inhabitants of the villa at Spoonley Wood, displaying their social status was just as important. As previously noted, the planning of this structure around a courtyard was clearly intended to impress visitors (Fig. 23) and it was seemingly intended to be designed in this fashion from its inception. The structure itself was placed on a slight slope that declined towards the east, which accentuated the prominence of this structure slightly in this direction, and further exhibited the romanitas of this residence.

When considering the communication of status at the Frocester Court villa it is important to note that it was not located on a high promontory, but was placed in a relatively flat position. This should not be taken as being indicative of the owner’s limited social pretensions, but instead it is more suggestive of the pre-Roman heritage of the site. Even though the villa itself was not built until the late 3rd Century AD, habitation appears to have been continuous from the early 1st Century AD at least, which provides a better indication of its selection. However, in view of the possibility of a second storey at the Frocester Court villa, it would have certainly still have been relatively prominent in its own right.

Another feature that would have been quickly noticed by a visitor to the Spoonley Wood complex was the shrine. This was placed in the centre of the complex, at the end of the entrance path and led into the main entertaining room, thus adding to the impressive nature of the villa. Even though the suites in either wing were essentially the same, the southern wing was superior because three of the suites were heated and had baths, which were entered from the western end of the villa via a stone-flagged corridor. The quantity of fuel required to heat these rooms would have certainly been great and were probably not consistently used (Black 1985, 88-9). Smith (1997, 269) points out that the interruption in the porticus between the house and the north wing would also have emphasised the social inequality that existed.

Villa 4 – Spoonley Wood Villa The Spoonley Wood complex was not as impressive or as wealthy as Barnsley Park, but was still reasonably lavish and exhibited a contrast in degrees of affluence. The building was planned in the aisled villa format, being a simple rectangle, with subdivisions (Fig. 23). One of the most noticeable aspects of the villa is that it had specific architectural features that revealed the social and economic differences between its various groups of residents. The main villa building was a unit-system house that comprised three apartments (Price 1983, 269). Of these, the best appointed was the residence in the southern wing, which included a bipartite room for entertaining favoured and less-favoured guests separately (Cosh 2001, 229-30;Perring 2002, 77). This would have had the purpose of creating a social distinction that was designed to impress and, therefore, advance the social and possibly the political aspirations of the owner.

Villa 5 – Wadfield Villa Only two and a half kilometres away from the Spoonley Wood villa complex is another villa site at Wadfield (SP 02312604). The overall plan consisted of three wings around a courtyard, with a bath suite in the southern range (Fig. 24). The walls of the structure were quite immense, but were irregular, and the courtyard was paved in a very rough fashion (Scott 1993a, 76). The imperfect nature of this workmanship suggests that the villa residents were not exceptionally wealthy, but were using whatever means possible to appear Romanised. The accommodation quarters and a possible main reception room (Room 1) were in the western wing and probable service rooms in the northern wing (McWhirr 1981, 97). The difference in decoration between the western and northern wings may also be another demonstration of separate households within the villa. There was a hypocaust system in the western wing, along with tessellated pavements, painted plaster and moulded stonework (Scott 1993a, 76).

The villa had tessellated pavements of red clay, blue lias and brown and white limestone. They have been described as “elaborate and elegant” (O’Neil 1952, 164), and had not been damaged greatly from antiquity. The whole structure was based around a courtyard and there was a bath suite on the southern side of the complex (McWhirr 1981, 96) (Fig. 23). This is one of several courtyard villas in the region, others including Abbotswood (SP 185263) (Darvill, Greatorex and Rey 1989, 205, 207-8), North Leigh in Oxfordshire (SP 39 15), Chedworth (SP 052134) and Wadfield (SP 02312604), forming an unusual cluster of courtyard-style villas (Branigan 1977, 54; Ellis 1999, 199-245). There were also vast amounts of tesserae, fragments from frescoes, coins and animal bones discovered at the villa site (O’Neil 1952, 162), with one of the most interesting finds being a marble statuette of Bacchus (Henig 1984, 170). The complex itself is located extremely close to a stream that would have maintained the villa’s water supply (McWhirr 1981, 96), and there is evidence that the economy of the estate would have been based primarily upon cattle (Percival 1976, 163).

The mosaic here has been dated to the 2nd Century AD, which is very early when compared with the majority of mosaics in Gloucestershire villas (Wilson 1980, 120). Enough of it remains to indicate a reasonable standard of living in the villa, with an attempt at a Romanised appearance. A spring line was located around sixty metres behind the villa, which would have served as the water supply for the complex (Rawes 1971, 124), with a stone building discovered near this spring line (McWhirr 1981, 97). The purpose of this building was probably agricultural. In view of the date of the mosaic, the villa 33

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY may have been erected in the middle of the 2nd Century and the scatter of pottery in the surrounding areas indicates that occupancy continued at least to the middle of the 3rd Century AD (Rawes 1971, 125).

suggests a foundation for the masonry house in the first half of the 4th Century AD, with a peak in the middle of that century (Gascoigne 1969, 62). There may have been some desire for a more sophisticated lifestyle, with the appearance of a channelled hypocaust and bath suite in the 4th Century AD (Fig. 25), but the additions seem to have been limited by the finances of the occupants. The cavity for the hypocaust appears to have been poorly planned and clearly reflects the limited resources of the occupants, who, nevertheless, still aspired to a Romanised façade.

Owing to the large amount of destruction and robbing of the site, the social situation at this villa is not as clear as at Spoonley Wood, but their proximity and similar use of a courtyard plan provides a connection between the villa establishments. As with the previous structure (Villa 4), the design of this villa was intended to be socially impressive upon entering the courtyard, which also conveyed the romanitas of its leading residents. In view of the topographical positioning of the Wadfield villa, which was located in a relatively flat and open region, it was clearly more important to accentuate the social status of the owners within this internal courtyard rather than in an external context. All the same, without a greater amount of information about this structure, the possible conclusions for the villa at Wadfield are understandably restricted.

The comparatively limited nature of the aspirations for the leading residents of the Farmington villa is also illustrated through the topography of the site. This structure was placed within a comparatively open and even countryside, which did not accentuate the sociopolitical dominance of the owners. The romanitas of the leading residents was expressed in a clear fashion, but this was not extended to social authority to the same extent. It is quite evident that the owners of the Farmington villa expressed their romanitas within an external context, and yet social ascendancy was articulated only on an internal level.

Villa 6 – Farmington Villa Another example of a structure that exhibits the social distinction between the inhabitants of a villa complex is shown at the Farmington site (SP 13231585), but the difference in status is not extreme. This was a typically elongated ‘hall-type’ villa that probably housed more than one household (Fig. 25) (Smith 1997, 31). The original hall-type villa later added baths. This is one of several hall-type villas in the region, with other examples at Rodmarton, Barnsley Park and Cherington (Smith 1978b, 357). There are also many examples of this style in Pannonia (Smith 1978a, 170; Scott, 1993a, 72). This building had many similarities to that at Frocester Court and prospered well enough that its simple origins were eventually hidden behind a conventional ‘winged corridor’ façade. There are also many ‘winged corridor’ villas in Raetia, Upper and Lower Germany and northern Gaul (Smith 1978, 117, 137). The ‘winged corridor’ style included internal corridors with rooms on either side with an external veranda (Burke 1978, 33). The walls of the Farmington villa were constructed on a straight-sided foundation of no great depth or width, with the wings and corridors constructed in a similar fashion, except of a lighter build (Gascoigne 1969, 40). Later additions were of a lower quality, sometimes without a pitched foundation course, and using more stone rubble and less mortar in the wall cavity.

As at the Barnsley Park villa there is no spatial differentiation to imply a superior/inferior relationship and the two separate family units were really only identifiable by the distinctive styles of hearth. The contrast of wealth between the households there is shown by the differing quality of surrounds of the hearths. The first and superior hearth is located almost opposite the central entrance and was close to a paved area, suggesting a degree of wealth and a means of impressing visitors as they entered the building. The well-made paved area was large enough to accommodate a family. The wealth of the first hearth may be contrasted with the second. This did not have the same quality of paving as the first, and its position, to the right of the entrance near the southeast corner, suggests a work-area. This clearly suggests a distinction in status between the two family units who resided at this villa complex. The difference was not great, simply enough to indicate a dominant household. Villa 7 – Painswick Villa The Painswick villa establishment (SO 85751020) is located around five hundred and fifty metres north of Painswick. St. Clair Baddeley (1904, 158) dated it to the late 2nd Century, which seems to be very early for this region. The villa was irregular in layout, of courtyard style with tessellated floor, wall plaster and a bathhouse (Fig. 26) (Scott 1993a, 75). Small lumps of opus signinum were discovered, indicating the use of tessellated pavements, but these had been badly robbed and much of the flooring was not found intact. A colonnade on the western side of a corridor was found with a mosaic flooring featuring black tesserae of three different sizes (RCHM 93).

The villa was in many respects similar to that at Barnsley Park, but was not as luxurious (De la Bédoyère 1993, 55). The earliest finds of pottery have been dated to the 2nd Century AD, but its comparatively modest circumstances are possibly confirmed by the fact that only twenty-three Roman coins have been uncovered, which contrast with the seven hundred or more at Barnsley Park. The lack of coin evidence could also point to a late foundation of the villa, as there were no issues discovered at the site dating to before AD 320. This 34

VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE One of the notable finds of this villa was a flue-tile that had a ‘RPG’ (Respublica Glevensium) inscription. There has been debate as to whether the discovery of such an inscribed tile implies that the Painswick villa is within the territorium of Gloucester. But considering the vast array of tiles also discovered at the Hucclecote villa (see below), it seems highly unlikely considering the long distances such materials seem to have travelled (Wacher 1995, 162). There has only been one possible tile kiln discovered in Gloucester itself, at St. Oswald’s Priory, and this tilery may have produced the tile (McWhirr 1979, 109), but they may also have been made at Deerhurst (McWhirr 1981, 111; Butler, Rahtz and Taylor 1975, 351-3). This example is the furthest east such a tile has been found and demonstrates the breadth of the association between Gloucester and the Romanised rural complexes (Branigan 1977, 114). These tiles have been discovered in several areas, with two hundred fragments being found at Commercial Road (SO 829185) in Gloucester (Frere 1985a, 300) and there have also been several discoveries at the Hucclecote (I) establishment (Clifford 1955, 67-72).

Villa 8 – Whittington Court Villa The villa complex at Whittington Court (Fig. 27) (SP 01572051) is an example of a site being chosen because of its proximity to a water supply (RCHM 126). It was located in a sheltered position, and has evidence of occupation through the Iron Age into the Roman period (O’Neil 1952, 16). The earliest Romanised structure was probably the bath building during the 2nd Century. Branigan (1977, 35) dates the main phase of occupation to the late 3rd and 4th Centuries, but, in spite of the discovery of one hundred and fourteen coins, the numismatic and pottery evidence have provided limited insight into the precise dating of this phase (O’Neil 1952, 17, 49-53). Occupation at the complex continued into the early 5th Century (RCHM 126). The walls were well-laid courses of local oolite masonry, and the plan was of a rectangular block containing three rooms, two with hypocausts, and at least one with a mosaic pavement (Fig. 27) (O’Neil 1952, 17, 19). The workmanship seems to indicate the use of local craftsmen for the villa, especially when the shapes of Rooms 1 and 10 are considered. A later phase of construction occurred in the second quarter of the 4th Century, with a small winged corridor house and bath suite (RCHM 127), and the final phase of development saw the destruction of the bath house and the reuse of its site for the villa establishment (O’Neil 1952, 17). In the third phase, the villa another building was added to the complex, which was predominantly a hall with a tessellated pavement, connected by a corridor (Perring 2002, 77). The kitchen at the rear of the building was linked to a large hall, which may have served as a room for banquets (Black 1994, 107). Eight geometric mosaics were laid down during this third phase, with one of the floors covering a coin of Constantine I, which gives a terminus post quem of c. 330-337 (Branigan 1977, 99).

On the northeast side of the villa was a room of considerable size (Room X) with a geometric and scroll type mosaic; the room also contained fragments of wall plaster, with Roman-style painting. An apsidal hypocaust had roughly half a metre high pilae and probably heated Room X (RCHM 93). In view of the size, furnishings and position of this room, it is likely that it was used by the principal inhabitants of the villa as a dining room. The baths at this complex were square in shape and were lined with opus signinum, with a stone platform between the two baths (RCHM 93). The topography of the Painswick villa was not intended to accentuate the social dominance of the leading inhabitants, which may further illustrate the divided nature of this structure in general terms. The social status of some residents was clearly exhibited through the facilities of some regions within this complex, but it seems quite evident that the dominance of the residents was not primarily intended to be expressed to an external audience. The romanitas of the Painswick villa was openly articulated to the wider audience of the surrounding extra-urban community, but there were clear limitations upon the available resources of the owner as well.

When one considers the insertion of so many mosaics and the addition of this large room (Room 10) to the complex, a possible interpretation is that the dominant resident was seeking to add to the grandeur of the establishment to further emphasise his romanitas, and used local craftsmen. There is a strong possibility that a five sided southern pavilion was the most important room in the house, probably the villa owner’s living quarters, with a hypocaust, mosaic floor and pleasant view which sought to be impressive, yet on a smaller scale (Smith 1997, 125). The primary focus of the owners of the Whittington Court villa was clearly upon providing a pleasing living environment rather than establishing their social dominance to a wider audience beyond the confines of its structure. This is illustrated not only through the largely internal focus of its design, but also in its position, which was relatively open and even in its topography. All the same, the romanitas and cultural inclinations of the owners are undeniable – it is just that they were expressed more to guests and visitors rather than the wider community.

Only two coins of Constantius were discovered at the villa, which in itself is remarkable. Other finds include samian ware, pieces of amphorae and mortaria, pewter ware and glass bottles. According to Baddeley (1904, 171), this villa was one of the few in Gloucestershire which had no alterations made to the original structure after construction. In view of the early date that this villa was supposedly constructed, its lavish Romanised furnishings, the apparent link that it held with Gloucester and the focus of luxury on one side of the house, there appears to have been one dominant household within this establishment, but owing to the lack of evidence it is impossible to clearly distinguish the social conditions in the Painswick villa. 35

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY have been a representation of the original villa façade (De la Bédoyère 1993, 56). The villa was located around four kilometres away from the colonia of Gloucester (Hunter 1960, 159). The roof tiles discovered at the site have showed the association between it and the colonia. There were tiles used in this villa that had been made at Gloucester (inscribed ‘RPG’) and clearly illustrate the association between the colonia and the villa, as at the Painswick villa (see above) (Clifford 1961b, 45). The discovery of eight tiles stamped ‘TCM’ also illustrates a connection with Cirencester. These tiles have also been discovered at Ebrigton and the complex at Harnhill Estate, Driffield (Phillips 1985, 31-5). Some of these tiles may have been produced at the tile-kiln at Mintey, which are largely dated to before AD 250 (Darvill 1979, 312-3).

Villa 9 – Withington Wood Villa Almost five and a half kilometres away from Whittington and ten kilometres from Barnsley Park is another villa at Withington Wood (SP 03121487) (O’Neil 1952, 15). The evidence for a possible social distinction between two households is clearer at this complex because the pavements of some rooms were higher than the others. Room A was the highest level, followed by Rooms B and D, Room C having the lowest pavement (RCHM 131) (Fig. 28). The differing levels may imply a difference in status between the inhabitants of the villa. There is a difference of over two hundred and forty millimetres between the western and eastern ends of the main building: the western side appears more prestigious, with painted wall plaster and impressive mosaics (Fig. 28) (Lysons 1917, 121).

Another point of interest concerning the villa at Hucclecote is that the complex may have been constructed early in the 2nd Century, as compared with the majority of the villas in the region (Clifford 1933, 338): pieces of samian ware from the Flavian period and a 2nd Century brooch were supposedly discovered at the site (Clifford 1961b, 44). McWhirr (1981, 99) disputes this interpretation, arguing that this does not agree with the coin evidence for the villa; he suggests a date of around 300. Nevertheless, there was still evidence of previous timber buildings dated to the 2nd Century (Clifford 1961b, 44), indicating probable continual habitation at the site dating back to the 1st or 2nd Centuries, which, along with the pottery and brooches, could provide evidence of early pro-Roman tendencies. The continued habitation at this site does explain its topographical placement, which was not intended to further accentuate the social status of its leading residents – the construction of a Romanised residence did that sufficiently. This also corresponds well with the primarily agricultural focus of this complex at Hucclecote (McWhirr 1981, 99). All the same, the early construction of this stone residence is still quite remarkable and this did continue to convey an impression of romanitas to the wider community.

A similar difference in height can be seen at the Woodchester villa, where the lavish Room I is raised higher than the other rooms, further enhancing its status (St. C. Baddeley 1926, 75). The Withington Wood villa had a tripartite corridor, hypocaust and baths (Scott 1993a, 77) (Fig. 28). One of the most notable features is the mosaic discovered in Room D, which combines both classical and native deities and styles. The northern side depicts Ocean with sea-creatures in a typically Durotrigan style, whereas the southern side portrays Orpheus in classical fashion (RCHM 132). This may indicate that the occupants continued to follow their native traditions and beliefs to a certain extent in association with the classical religions. This mosaic is a rarity because most examples depict classical deities. The portrayal of Orpheus in the Withington villa has been described as being ‘livelier’ than that on the corresponding mosaics on the Woodchester and Barton villas. In view of the size of this room, it was probably used to entertain visitors, an activity which was usually connected with the wealthier residents of a villa complex. But this villa probably illustrates the unequal social standing of the inhabitants of the villa, containing more than one household. All the same, it must be noted that the fiscal pretensions of the leading residents at the Withington Wood villa were by no means as elevated as other villa owners, such as those at Woodchester (Fig. 37) and Great Witcombe (Fig. 34). Nevertheless, it is quite evident that the cultural aspirations of the leading household at the Withington Wood villa influenced the design, décor and location of this structure.

Villa 11 – Hucclecote II Villa Adding further weight to the marked display of romanitas in this region was the discovery of another villa close to Hucclecote (I), as mentioned above. This nearby structure, Hucclecote (II) (SO 869168) (Fig. 30), originally thought to have been associated with the first complex as a ‘bath block’, is located just over a kilometre away from the villa site (Hunter 1960, 159). The structure of the Hucclecote (II) villa had a simple “straight-range” plan, with five cells and may have had two lobbies to serve the separate households (Fig. 30), which is largely the reason why it was interpreted to have been a bathhouse. This villa has produced some evidence of decorative pretension, with opus signinum flooring being uncovered in some sections (Hunter 1960, 163), but it appears to have been largely utilitarian in its overall function. However, the existence of baths still illustrate some degree of aspiring romanitas on the part of the

Villa 10 – Hucclecote I Villa Examples of villa complexes in Gloucestershire with more than one household can also be seen at Hucclecote (SO 876176) and North Cerney (SO 996095) (Smith 1997, 102, 50). The villa at Hucclecote (I) (Fig. 29) had two separate household units and the building was most likely entered from different doorways; this villa also included a scratched drawing on wall-plaster that may 36

VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE the 3rd Century AD. During the Roman period, as with Hucclecote (I) villa, this villa establishment also provided indications of supporting two households (Smith 1997, 50). It is also notable that the Hucclecote (I) villa was also an early construction, which may indicate a similar intended function for these complexes in general terms. The placement of the villa at North Cerney was clearly influenced by the Iron Age habitation at the site, but the marked display of romanitas at such an early stage of the Roman occupation would have made a striking impression upon the local population.

leading residents of this villa, but the results are of course still limited for this structure because of its incomplete investigation (Fig. 30). It is now considered to be a villa in its own right and has been dated to the middle of the 2nd Century AD (Branigan 1977, 34). A tile inscribed ‘TPF’ was discovered at this site, which has parallels at Hucclecote (I), Bisley and many examples at Cirencester. This structure was occupied until the middle of the 4th Century AD, then it appears to have been dismantled and the land turned over to agricultural use. One of the most interesting aspects of this villa is that it was located over six kilometres away from the closest source of Inferior Oolite, the material used for its construction. It would have required an effort to obtain this material, and the occupant would have needed substantial financial resources to do so. All the same, the topographical location of the Hucclecote (II) villa, which was placed in flat, wooded country (Hunter 1960, 159), illustrates the limited expression of social dominance by its owners. This corresponds well with the general impression conveyed by this structure (Fig. 30), which was a small, well-constructed complex that expressed romanitas but without social dominance.

Villa 13 – Turkdean Villa The villa at Turkdean (Fig. 32) was constructed on a promontory overlooking a dry valley (Esmonde Cleary 1998, 418) and was another example of a rural Romanised residence that was intended to exhibit the romanitas of their leading inhabitants. The design of the villa was placed around three separate courtyards (Fig. 32), measuring approximately one hundred and twenty metres by seventy-five metres overall (Holbrook 2004, 53), and seems to have been erected some time in the 2nd Century (De la Bédoyère 1999, 96). It contained a bathhouse, and the northern range featured corridors on both sides of the residential rooms that appear to have been quite large. A building has been uncovered to the east of the main residential structures, with a terminus post quem of around AD 350-60 (Esmonde Cleary 1999, 365). The villa at Turkdean (Fig. 32) also included a sunken feature that produced vast quantities of painted wall-plaster in the cellar, which may indicate a similar kind of shrine to those discovered in the villas at Great Witcombe and Lullingstone, but this is discussed further in Chapter VI.

Villa 12 – North Cerney Villa The villa at North Cerney (SO 996095) is located around eight kilometres from Cirencester and has a history of occupation dating back to the 2nd Century BC (Fig. 31) (Trow 1988, 19, 39). This complex was based within a former late Iron Age hill-fort, which appeared in the 1st Century (Cunliffe 1994, 74-5). The similarity of locations and soil types between the earlier hill-forts and the Romanised villas has been noted in the Silchester region, suggesting the common residency of the local aristocracy (Tully 2000, 115). The site was located close to several spring lines (Torrens 1982, 74-5) that were used both in the Iron Age and Roman periods, and it appears to have had close economic connections to the oppidum of Bagendon. Both settlements were involved in traditionally high-status activities, including the importation of Gallic and Mediterranean fine wares and industrial operations (Trow and James 1989, 85). The hill-fort site yielded evidence of gold-work and minting during the late Iron Age (Frere 1985a, 300).

This sunken feature has also been interpreted as being part of a bath complex for the residents (Holbrook 2004, 45), but the central location for such facilities would make such a function highly unlikely (Fig. 32). This is also shown by the simple fact that no hypocaust systems have been identified at the complex (Holbrook 2004, 64). The villa itself was based around three courtyards, with two of them being within the residence itself. Each of the wings were connected by a series of corridors (Fig. 32), which have been mapped out using a geophysical survey of the site (Holbrook 2004, 53-4).

The villa was erected in the mid/late 1st Century: there was a Hod Hill brooch dated to AD 45-65 (Trow and James 1989, 83), discovered with one of the walls and occupation continued until the late 3rd Century AD (Frere 1986, 412). When the affluence of the site is considered in relation to the early date of the villa establishment, it is likely that there was some continuity of settlement, probably by the native aristocracy. The early demise of this complex, as compared with the growth of other villas in the region at this time, was probably due to the inadequacies of the site itself and the inability of the owners to handle the economic changes of the middle of

The topographical placement of the villa at Turkdean clearly epitomises the social pretensions (or ambitions) of the leading residents. This complex was placed in a high position above a dry valley and would have possessed a fine view of the local panorama (Holbrook 2004, 64). In turn it would have also been quite prominent within the local community, making a clear statement of the owner’s status and romanitas. The significance of this is further accentuated by the comparatively early period of construction during the 2nd Century AD. It is quite evident that the Turkdean villa was a well-appointed and impressive residence in the Gloucestershire region.

37

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY There were several villa complexes in Gloucestershire that expressed exceptional degrees of wealth, notably Great Witcombe (SO 907143), Chedworth, Woodchester and possibly the villa at Bibury. It is also possible to discern that more than one household resided at each of these establishments by examining their long, extended plans, which had no strong emphasis upon centralisation (Smith 1978a, 160-2).

Villa 14 – Chesters Villa The primary structure for the Chesters villa was planned as a winged corridor structure (Fig. 33), which was based on a central courtyard, with evidence of at least two phases of construction (Taylor 1935, 218). There is also some indication for the existence of a northern wing and, owing to its dimensions and associated finds in this region it appears that this would have been the most elaborate part of the villa (Fulford and Allen 1992, 159). There was an additional residential structure on the eastern side and a bathhouse in the southern quarters. Room 1, which was placed within the eastern wing (Fig. 33), had a flagged floor, but there was a missing portion on the lower side beside Room 3 (Scott Garrett 1938, 96). A possible votive pit, which was filled with coarse pottery, pseudo-Samian ware, late coins and wire from a twisted copper bracelet, was discovered close to this room. A hypocaust serviced Room 4 during the first phase of development at the complex (Scott Garrett 1938, 99), which illustrates that the wealth of the structure had been present from the time of its construction. Owing to the numismatic finds from the Chesters villa, the initial phase of habitation has been dated to the middle of the 2nd Century (Branigan 1977, 35). Room 4 also appears to have had a fine tessellated pavement and painted wall plaster during the early period of habitation, whereas Room 15 possessed a hypocaust, but the style of flooring is unknown (Scott Garrett 1938, 99).

Villa 15 – Great Witcombe Villa The villa at Witcombe is another example of the location of a wealthy Romanised structure near some natural springs (Clifford 1954, 5), in this case around eight kilometres from Gloucester (Leach 1998, 1). The springs actually worked against the designers of the villa in this instance, because they made the ground unstable, and this led to a plan with very unusual features (McWhirr 1981, 92). The basic plan is that of a corridor villa connected to a courtyard (Fig. 34) (Scott 1993a, 73). Predating the Romanised villa was some evidence of habitation, with a few discernible buildings dating from the Iron Age period to the mid-2nd Century (Leach 1998, 2, 49). The greatest portion of this complex, which can be dated to roughly AD 250 (McWhirr 1981, 92), is made up of two equal-sized suites of rooms which constituted the east and west wings, linked by a long gallery (Leach 1998, 2). The wings had different functions, the western containing two separate bath suites and living accommodation, the eastern holding the kitchens and more functional rooms. Period III saw the remodelling of one of the baths, the central range façade and dining room, and also the addition of further rooms and baths to the south west range, possibly in the late 3rd Century (Leach 1998, 126). These extensions included an unusual octagonal room (Room 15), which was fronted by a tessellated gallery roughly three and a half metres wide, with a porticus (RCHM 60) and a hypocaust (Leach 1998, 11). According to McWhirr (1981, 92-3), it may have contained a household shrine, but it is more probable that there was an elaborate water shrine on the opposite side of the porticus (Smith 1997, 166).

The Chesters villa also included two distinct bathhouses (Fig. 33), which were serviced by one furnace. However, these baths were introduced during different phases of habitation, which suggests a possible change in social structure at some point. The second group of baths had a few large rooms, but it should be noted that those from the earlier period were smaller, better decorated and had more rooms. In view of the addition of a larger bath suite during the second phase of development and the possible continued use of the first suite, it is likely that, at least during the second period, there was more than one household residing in the Chesters villa complex. The distinction in size and decoration may be another marker of the social differentiation between two households, with the alterations to the structure possibly indicating a change in the social hierarchy of the villa inhabitants (Adams 2001, 25-8). The placement of the Chesters villa would have been quite prominent, it being located slightly to the east of the ‘Via Iulia’, which was an important route between Caerwent and Gloucester (Map 1). It was also placed on a higher position than the road that would have accentuated the prominence of the structure itself, and in turn the social and cultural distinction of its leading residents.

In all likelihood, occupation by the principal residents at the villa ended around AD 380, but it may have been taken over by subordinates until the late 4th or early 5th Century (Leach 1998, 129). There was a large quantity of pottery discovered which had been produced at Gloucester, and this indicates a strong economic connection between the villa and the colonia (Clifford 1954, 36-7). The numismatic evidence suggests that there was trading activity at the site even before the erection of the villa, with the discovery of a denarius of Domitian dated AD 77-8. But there were also a large number of coin issues from the mid-late 3rd Century into the 4th Century AD (Leach 1998, 95), which illustrates the continued prosperity of the villa. This can also be seen at several other villas in the region, such as Frocester Court and Chedworth (Clifford 1954, 52-6; Percival 1976, 48; Reece 1987, 77, 78).

It appears more than likely that many of the villas above had more than one family unit residing in the villa complex. Some examples have portrayed an essentially equal status between these households. Yet it seems that on most occasions there was a dominant group that expressed greater wealth through more lavish facilities. 38

VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE But the addition of luxurious facilities and the majority of improvements to the villa occurred early in the 4th Century AD (Goodburn 1998, 13). The building may have been originally conceived in timber in the form that it later took in stone, representing a gradual process of Romanisation from layout to material adaptation. Later in the century, after a fire, it was replaced in an extended form with baths and more rooms (Fig. 36) (Goodburn 1983, 7). The heating area of this villa has produced three iron beams that were probably used to support the boilers, as suggested by Wacher, who found other examples at Catterick, Jewry Wall (Leicester) and Corbidge (Wacher 1971, 200-2). Features included a wealth of decorated sculptured stone mosaic floors, comfortable heated rooms and bathing facilities (Goodburn 1998, 35; Frere 1991b, 274). The mosaics were constructed out of red clay and various coloured limestone, laid on three distinct levels of concrete (Anon. 1889-90, 215). On the southern side of the building there was a stone cist discovered containing the burial of a child, tesserae, oyster shells and an urn. At first glance it would seem that these changes reflect the high degree of wealth of the dominant resident, as such additions were notably absent from other sections of the villa. However, the first masonry stage had high quality construction, whereas the later periods of rebuilding used poorer quality materials (Perring 2002, 109). So it would seem that with the addition of large-scale facilities for an improved lifestyle were not entirely indicative of the changing circumstances of its owners.

It appears that this villa was originally built to a grand design and, despite several additions it remained essentially true to its original floor plan (Fig. 34) (Leach 1998, 129-30). It was planned carefully to delineate the separate functions of the rooms, with the quarters and entertaining areas of the principal residents clearly detached from the other domestic apartments. The Great Witcombe villa is an example of one of the most extravagant rural complexes in Britain, clearly demonstrating the romanitas of the owner in the most lavish fashion. Of course this was complimented by the prominent position of this structure (Holbrook 2003, 195), which was clearly intended to exhibit the wealth and social prestige of its leading residents as well. Villa 16 – Bibury Villa Another very wealthy villa in Gloucestershire was that at Bibury (SP 122065). This structure had both tessellated pavements and baths, but the plan itself has not survived a variety of disturbances (Scott 1993a, 68), which limits the possibilities for its analysis. The villa is situated within a loop of the River Coln, with shelter provided by ground rising steeply from the river. This location must have been a most suitable one for a villa, since it later became the centre of a Saxon manor that included Barnsley Park. The excavations have uncovered a range of buildings that extend south for roughly ninety metres and for the same distance west (RCHM 14). The roof was of large plain slabs in the southwest of the villa and upside down gutter-slabs in the northeast section. The evidence for mosaic pavements, bath suites, pottery and coinage is of a very scant nature. Large expanses of concrete flooring were found but no evidence of any drainage system (Bishop 1984, 43). There was a possible shrine seventy-five metres southwest of the villa (Frere 1988, 465). In view of the immense size of the villa complex, its position and luxurious fittings, it was in all likelihood an establishment of great wealth. However, the paucity of evidence limits any interpretation of its social climate.

But the social differentiation within the Chedworth villa was shown by the internal layout, with the wealthiest accommodation being in the western wing of the villa (Smith 1997, 136, 214). This wing was entered from the courtyard through a porticus that led into a shrine room with smaller domestic rooms beside it. The northern wing did not have the same level of facilities as the western side, and the southern and eastern wings were still less well served, and not sufficiently important to be entered from the courtyard. No doubt the western wing would have conveyed the impression of a successful villa owner, with amenities that accompanied such success. However, as with the complex at Turkdean (Villa 13), the Chedworth villa was placed in a valley area, which would not have greatly accentuated the social position of its residents. But it seems that the prime focus of the design (and placement) of this complex stemmed largely from the Iron Age traditions that seemingly pre-dated the construction of the Romanised villa structure (See Chapter VI for further discussion).

Villa 17 – Chedworth Villa One of the wealthiest villas in Gloucestershire that exhibits the distinction between different groups of residents can be found at Chedworth. This villa (SP 052134), one of the most famous Roman sites in Britain, clearly reflects the desire of the native aristocracy for status. The reason for the location of the villa was probably the availability of water, as there was a natural spring in the northwest corner of the complex (Goodburn 1983, 6). The original unpretentious villa was established in the early/mid-2nd Century (Fig. 35) (Richmond 1959, 6). It began as three separate buildings on three sides of a courtyard and that were gradually connected over time (Smith 1997, 163). The courtyard included a garden area that had been provided with a drainage system by the 3rd Century AD (Fitzpatrick 2001, 369). However, this was done after all of the separate wings had been constructed and connected (Fitzpatrick 2002, 341).

In one of the rooms (Room 3) in the southern wing, a large number of coins were discovered, suggesting that it was used for the issuing of payments (Richmond 1959, 8). If the positioning and the proximity of this room to the higher status western wing are taken into account, it seems quite appropriate for a function of this kind; there was a similar type of room, for example, in the Frocester Court villa (Room 11) and a similar position in relation to the rest of the building. A total of 360 coins were 39

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Centuries, but the earliest issue is one of Hadrian (Branigan 1977, 42).

discovered at Chedworth. These finds followed the general principle, suggested by Reece (1972b, 274-5; 1987, 77, 78, 129-30), that in the earlier periods there was limited use of higher valued issues with a tendency towards the lower denominations in the 3rd and 4th Centuries. In regard to the coins discovered at Chedworth, one of the most intriguing aspects is the discovery of only one Theodosian aes, which contrasts with the vast number of this issue that reached nearby Cirencester. This may indicate that the villa had ceased to use coins by around AD 386 (Reece 1959, 163).

Within the villa several marble pieces of note were found. The first and most distinguished, from Room 25, is a figure of Diana Luna made of imported Asiatic marble (Clarke 1982, 207). Another is the torso of a Cupid and Psyche group, made of Pentelic marble, which was found near the entrance to Rooms 50-59. These artefacts further demonstrate the standing and wealth of the residents of the Woodchester villa complex, and their desire to make their Romanisation as apparent as possible; the statues probably had a decorative function, rather than being directly religious (Henig 1984, 170).

Villa 18 – Woodchester Villa The villa that exhibited the greatest amount of wealth and status in Gloucestershire was the complex at Woodchester (SO 838032) (Perring 2002, 42). Smith (1997, 182) defines this villa as a palace, believing that the luxury of the architecture and layout of this complex was sufficient to make this term appropriate (Fig. 37) (Rutter 1957, 182). One of the most prominent features of the villa was the mosaic depicting Orpheus (Clarke 1982, 197). The room (Room 1), which housed it was enormous, measuring fifteen metres square, and probably served not only a private but also a public function. The ground level actually rose towards this particular room, emphasising the prominence of this section of the villa (see above for the Painswick villa).

The basis for the Woodchester economy would have been agricultural, as with other British villas, and it is likely, in view of its affluence, that the estate was very large. Its position would provide easy access and considerable advantage for agriculture. This villa complex was certainly the grandest in Gloucestershire, as shown not only by its immense size and its lavish furnishings, but also by the unified architectural scheme of the entire complex (McWhirr 1981, 94). The prominence of the leading residents (and their romanitas) was also further accentuated by the topographical location of this complex, which clearly expressed their social and fiscal dominance over the surrounding community.

There was also a group of remarkably well-appointed rooms opposite this room, which further indicates that the villa owner would have been of a rank above that of the other estate owners in the region. Room 10 had a very well designed mosaic with the figures of two boys holding up a basket of fruit and the inscription ‘BONVM EVENTVM’ below (O’Neil 1955, 174; Witts 2000). The lavishness of the Woodchester mosaics is also repeated in the Room XII mosaic that consisted of part of a Vitruvian scroll similar to that in Room 1, with a geometric pattern that rivalled the quality of the mosaic in Room 1. The wealth of the Woodchester complex has been compared with that of Fishbourne Roman Palace, which is also seen as the residence of a Romanised British owner (Clarke 1982, 197, 221).

General Conclusions It appears that the majority of villas in Gloucestershire did not appear until the middle of the 2nd Century and most of these were not originally as lavish as the later villas at Great Witcombe and Woodchester. A good example of the early/mid-2nd Century can be seen in the development of the Chedworth complex, from its unpretentious origins into the sumptuous courtyard complex of the 3rd Century (Figs. 35-36). When the appearance of these structures is compared with the introduction of masonry townhouses at Cirencester in the middle of the 2nd Century, there is an interesting correlation.

The Woodchester villa contains sixty-four rooms that were arranged around three courts, and covers about a hectare (Branigan 1977, 94). The axial approach through the courtyards and principal room at the villa indicates that the luxury was not purely for its own sake, with Room I being used as an audience hall or for ceremonial use (Smith 1997, 182-3, 193). The villa gives the impression that it was probably a single creation, rather than a collection of structures that were eventually joined together. This makes it indeed a rarity among RomanoBritish villa complexes (McWhirr 1981, 94). Furthermore, 2nd Century samian pottery and earlier walls have been uncovered (Clarke 1982, 205), indicating that there was a previous structure on the site before the end of the 2nd Century (Wilson 1974, 451). Most of the numismatic evidence has been dates to the 3rd and 4th

It seems that the same members of the community did not build both urban and rural masonry buildings until the middle of the 2nd Century. To further emphasise this development, most of the large-scale public building works had been completed by this time, which must have given the native aristocracy more expendable wealth for the expression of status (Millett 1990, 137). Another reason for the lack of cash resources for the erection of high status structures in the 1st and 2nd Centuries could also be the state of the general economy at the time. It is more than likely that there would have been a degree of economic upheaval in the immediate post-conquest period (Fulford 1991, 39; Hingley 1982, 23). The imposition of new taxes and the political and social instability would have adversely affected the Romano40

VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE of Diocletian in AD 294-5, which, for a short period, provided a more secure monetary system that gave the wealthy aristocrats, from villas like Great Witcombe, Chedworth and Woodchester, the stability which they needed for such additions. All the same, the economic focus of these structures is considered on a collective basis in Chapter III. The focus for this section of the study has been focused more upon the social status and romanitas of the leading residents.

British economic environment, limiting the amount of free capital for the native elite (Hopkins 1980, 101). Since one of the predominant reasons for the subjugation of Britain was the promise of financial gain, the Romans would have employed every means at their disposal for profit. A small number of villas did appear soon after AD 43, for example at Fishbourne in Surrey (Cunliffe 1971, 77-80) and North Cerney in Gloucestershire, but Fishbourne is hardly a typical Romano-British villa and North Cerney is unusual both for its location and early demise (Hingley 1991, 78). It appears that most of the villas in Gloucestershire were built a considerable time after the coming of Rome. This was mirrored in several other Roman provinces, such as in Gallia Belgica. In this region, which had been conquered by the middle of the 1st Century BC, at least half of its villas were not established until the second half of the 1st Century AD (Wightman 1985, 105). The villas seem to have dominated Gallia Belgica in the mid/late 1st Century, where the development of the vici slowed dramatically (Walthew 1982, 225-33). There is also evidence of continuity of settlement with many of the villas in Gallia Belgica, especially around Trier, having Iron Age predecessors (Wightman 1970, 139).

In this regard, one important method by which some villa owners exhibited their social position and romanitas was through the topographical placement of their villas. Some residences, such as the Great Witcombe, Turkdean and Chesters villas, took advantage of the local topography in order to further accentuate the social status of their leading residents. However, this was not applied in a uniform fashion, with many of the smaller establishments being located in a relatively open and even location. Another aspect that of course limited the choice of elevated sites as a means of expressing status was the continued habitation of a particular site from the preRoman period, as has been noted at the Frocester Court, North Cerney, Whittington Court, Hucclecote (I) and possibly Chedworth villas. Nevertheless, this is an important point to consider: the continued use of traditional sites illustrates the continuity of native practices (or preferences) despite the adoption of Roman residential traditions. Conversely, this also further highlights the desire for a prominent position (rather than Iron Age traditionalism) at other structures, such as the villas at Great Witcombe, Turkdean and Woodchester.

A similar pattern of villa development occurred in Gaul proper where, while Caesar had achieved the submission of the people by 50 BC (Drinkwater 1983, 16), it appears that the majority of villas were not established until the middle of the 1st Century AD (Blagg 1990a, 195-7). This can be seen in the regions of Picardy (King 1990a, 93), Aquitaine (Percival 1976, 71) and also throughout Gallia Narbonensis (Rivet 1988, 85). As in Britain, there was a growth in Gallic agriculture at the beginning of the 1st Century AD, but the transformation was not instantaneous and the native leaders would have faced some initial difficulties in adjustment (Drinkwater 1990, 211, 213). Financial constraint was the most likely explanation for the low number of villas built during the 1st Century, with new obligations, such as for taxation and the erection of public structures to be met. The late development of villas in this region may also have been partly because such large investments would have needed to be secure, especially in the frontier regions. A stable environment for long periods was necessary in order for the villas to develop (Percival 1976, 84). This pattern of development could explain the emergence of many villas during the 2nd Century in Gloucestershire; with the Silures still a threat during the second half of the 1st Century AD (Tac. Ann., 12.32, 38-40). But this trend has been noted throughout southern Britain and naturally the threat of the Silures certainly would not have applied to southeast Britain.

One of the overwhelming conclusions one draws when examining the development of villas in the Gloucestershire and indeed anywhere throughout the province of Roman Britain is that not all villas are of equal standard. When the splendour of the Woodchester and Chedworth is compared with the simplicity of Hucclecote (I), Hucclecote (II) and North Cerney, the difference in wealth is quite obvious. Despite this, the reason for their construction remains the same: a desire to appear Romanised and ‘civilised’. The only difference is the amount of capital that was available. The differentiation between these structures was primarily based upon wealth (and in turn social status) rather than the intent to exhibit an affiliation with the provincial administration and their cultural/residential traditions. It was the fiscal distinction between sites and their owners that prompted the creation of particularly opulent sites, such as the villas at Great Witcombe, Turkdean and Woodchester. All the same, the intention to display an association with Roman culture was not limited to the largest villas, but their topographical placement further accentuated their social dominance as well. The exhibition of romanitas was uniform for all of these villas in Gloucestershire, but there was a significant difference in the available wealth and their ensuing social dominance.

In view of the introduction of the Roman taxation system and the probable financial outlays in the urban centres on public works, the reason for the later development of villas was mostly financial. The subsequent increase in additions made to many villas towards the end of the 3rd Century may also be explained by the financial reforms 41

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY One should remember that the majority of the population continued to live without such pretensions (Mattingly 2006, 357-8, 375-8). A good example of this is shown at the Brockworth farm that lay between the villas at Great Witcombe and Hucclecote. This settlement continued to use native style housing even when it may have adopted Roman measurement for land allotments (Rawes 1981, 45-77). The contrast between Brockworth and Great Witcombe reflects the realities of the Roman occupation. Not all Britons adopted Romanised housing and lifestyles, only those with aspirations to appear Romanised. The Barnsley Park villa shows how an owner could seek to maintain an impressive Romanised façade, while limiting the costs of such an undertaking by

combining two houses (Smith 1997, 239). Naturally the dominant resident of the establishment would make his own quarters more impressive, thus further highlighting his status and ‘success’ over the other inhabitants. Once this distinction had been made between the different degrees of wealth within a group of villa owners, it would have been only the most prosperous who would have had the capital to spend further on non-domestic structures such as shrines or temples, which are discussed further in Chapter IV. However, it is important to further analyse the economic and social functions of the Romanised villas in Gloucestershire, which is the primary focus of the next chapter.

42

Chapter III The Economic and Social Function of Villas in Gloucestershire and Beyond previously, the analysis of potential entertainment space uses statistics have derived from the potential entertainment space, in order to ascertain the possible social role of each residence around the various urban centres under discussion. The statistical analysis is divided into three sets. The first method used gathers all the surface areas for potential entertainment space including all known open areas, such as peristyla, gardens and courtyards. The second method excludes all open areas from the group of potential entertainment space. The third incorporates those open areas with an element of decorative pretension. The information collected using these methods has then been converted into percentages to determine the emphasis placed upon a social function at residences of vastly differing sizes.

Introduction The principal aim of this portion of the study is to directly address the question of how Romanised villas expressed power and wealth in Gloucestershire. The main focus is upon two aspects: firstly, the economic viability of these extra-urban residences, and secondly, the importance of a social function within these complexes, in order to determine how this socio-political status was expressed within each structure. This is complimented by an analysis of how the division of public and private space occurred in each structure, which can further highlight the social function and intended design of each villa residence in Roman Gloucestershire. The structure of this chapter focuses upon each different form of analysis, which is intended to allow for a distinct and yet integrated approach for the examination of villas in Gloucestershire. The analysis of economic viability for each villa in the region has been based upon the comparison of each site with the general results produced by Lewit (1991). This style of analysis is important because it accentuates the fiscal domination of particular structures over time in Roman Gloucestershire. The analysis of social function has been based upon both the examination of potential entertainment space and the use of the Hillier and Hanson (1984) method of spatial data analysis, which determines the availability of private and public space within each villa structure. Through the use of both methodologies the levels and style of social function within each residence in rural Gloucestershire can be attained, which highlights their intended function even further.

All of these statistics and percentages have been considered within their archaeological contexts, thus avoiding the possibility of discrepancies. These results are intended to serve as a guide for analysis rather than an illustration of an exact percentage. After all, the designer of each building would not have formally considered the percentage of space that was to be allocated to entertainment areas. But these results are designed to serve two main purposes. Firstly, to determine whether or not the social nature of these structures complemented similar residences on the continent, which provides a more accurate image of life in these Romano-British districts. Secondly, it allows for a clearer understanding of how these villas were designed, thus presenting further insight into the intentions of each owner and their priorities for each structure. The nature of the social activity (public/private) has also been taken into consideration for these sites, using the Hillier and Hanson method. This method of analysis has shown the different roles that existed at each site, but also that there was a continued emphasis upon entertainment in these structures. The application of the Hillier and Hanson method to these sites has illustrated the presence of entertainment space in both private and public (inaccessible/accessible) regions within the villa residences using another statistical method. Allison (2004, 123) has argued that a formal public/private division did not exist within her survey of thirty Pompeian townhouses, but the use of the Hillier and Hanson method in this instance is intended to illustrate the variation in accessibility and location within the potential entertainment areas as a group, in order to show their differing uses as entertainment rooms. The results of this analysis have been shown in the relevant tables for each structure analysed, as well as the Access Map

The intention of the economic analysis of villas in Gloucestershire is to further highlight the domination of many sites throughout the region, which epitomises their fiscal success. All the same, it should also be noted that this study is limited to the Romanised sites, which makes a wider comparison somewhat problematic. The economic analysis is only a small section of this overall study, which could be the prime focus of a major economic study of Romano-British society in general, but this is not the primary aim of the present study. For present purposes the main aim is to focus upon how the villas in Roman Gloucestershire presented their status and wealth to determine how this evolved over time, and to examine the fiscal success of these establishments over time in comparison to other Romano-British sites. The importance of the examination of potential entertainment space and spatial data analysis is a fundamental feature of this study. As mentioned 43

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY among the figures. Using both methods together (potential entertainment analysis, Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis) creates a compelling image of the social function that the villas possessed, which often varied between each structure. These methods can provide the best processes by which an interpretation of their intended social function can be achieved when used in conjunction, which can highlight the nature of social activity in villas from Roman Gloucestershire. All the same, prior to this style of analysis, the most important consideration should be the economic viability of these structures over time, which is the subject of the next section.

an ornamental garden, preferring a productive hortus (RR 10.29-34): neu tibi Daedaliae quaerantur munera dextrae / nec Polyclitea nec Phradmonis, aut Ageladae / arte laboretur: sed truncum forte dolatum / arboris antiquae numen venerare Priapi / terribilis membri, medio qui semper in horto / inguinibus puero, praedoni falce minetur (‘Do not seek a statue made by Daedalus or carved by Polyclitus or Phradmon or Ageladas, but the roughly-cut trunk of a certain old tree that you may venerate as the Priapus god in the midst of your garden, who with his terrifying member scares the boys and plunders with his reaping-hook’). The study of Kolendo (1994, 59-71) on the profitability of suburban estates has testified to the clear presence of agricultural production at many properties, often combined with high levels of luxury in the residences. There would have been a clear advantage to owning these suburban villas because of their close connection to the urban markets (Morley 1996, 86-90), but the residential facilities would have been just as important to the owners. Ideally each estate was meant to aim towards self-sufficiency (Erdkamp 2001, 349), but this was not always a priority for the owners (Cicero Leg. Agr. 2.78; D’Arms 1970, 12). From a Roman perspective, having elements of productivity would have made luxurious villas of otium more acceptable (Purcell 1995, 152), hence the dual character of many villa residences.

The Economies of Romano-British Villas The economic factors involved with the ownership and running of a villa complex in Roman Britain are additional features that were intrinsically connected to the perceived status of these structures. While the primary focus of the present study has been upon the social status and romanitas of these rural residences, the economic viability and standing of these estates was another vital aspect that is closely associated to the question of their perceived status. In general terms, Roman agriculture was largely based on a mixed and intensive method of farming that was enabled through the efforts of a slave workforce (White 1970, 51). However, it is also evident that smaller subsistence-based economies continued throughout the entire phase of the Roman Empire as well (White 1970, 419-20). It is this divergence in manpower and in turn profitability that draws a significant distinction between the various villa sites throughout the western Mediterranean.

When considering the economic aspects of RomanoBritish villas in particular it is important to note that the agricultural potential for this region was quite different to the circumstances on the Italian peninsula (White 1970, 48). As Percival has mentioned (1976, 106-7), the farming practices were based upon ‘dry farming’, which was a result of lengthy dry summers with shorter winters that had a high level of rainfall. This required careful management in order to preserve the available water, which in turn affected crop rotations and general productivity (Percival 1976, 107). By comparison Roman Britain possessed a cooler and wetter climate that provided the advantage of almost continuous moisture in the soil (Percival 1976, 111). All the same, this did provide additional disadvantages, such as the haste that was necessary for harvesting and the difficulties with producing a dry storage location (Percival 1976, 111). Therefore, it is quite evident that the agricultural circumstances in Roman Britain would have been quite different to those on the continent.

As mentioned previously, many of these properties were usually either run by the family/slaves (Rawson 1971, 38), or leased to tenants (Finley 1976, 117; Rosafio 1994, 147). The only significant form of indirect taxation applied to these properties was estate duty (vicesima hereditatium), which was a five percent tax upon inheritances (Crook 1967, 256), but this applied to all forms of property. Extra-urban property investment was deemed to have been a stable form of acquiring wealth (Capogrossi Colognesi 1995, 29; Kehoe 1988, 20; 1996, 391; Saller 1994, 125; Syme 1960, 366-7), whereas the exploitation of urban rents allowed for immediate funds (Parkins 1997, 108), as seen in the investments of Cicero for example (Frier 1978, 1-6). He mentions the possible acquisition of a suburban villa in his Epistulae ad Quintum Fratrem (3.1.23): T. Anicius mihi saepe iam dixit, sese tibi, suburbanum si quod invenisset, non dubitaturum esse emere (‘T. Anicius has continually informed me that if he discovered a suburban property that he would not delay in purchasing it for you’).

Once the Roman conquest of Britain had been achieved, it is of no great surprise that their main focus was upon occupying the fertile downs and lowland valleys in the south-eastern regions of the island (Greene 1986, 122). This resulted in a large amount of forest clearance during the initial stages of the occupation, but the overall system of agriculture remained largely unchanged from the preRoman period (De la Bédoyère 2006, 183-4). There were clearly some introductions to the traditional agricultural practices, such as the improved Roman corn-drying oven (Percival 1976, 112), but in general terms it seems that

The Rei Rusticae by Columella, written around AD 6065, begins by commenting upon how agricultural pursuits had been abandoned by many wealthy Romans, in preference for luxuria and otium (RR 1.Praef.15-19; 1.7.3; 10. Praef. 2). He tries to discourage the creation of 44

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND the pre-existing methods largely continued throughout the Roman period.

Unfortunately, owing to the limited publication of loose finds at several of the villas under question, the possibility of determining the exact nature of the individual economies is virtually impossible. Therefore, the analysis has been largely undertaken in a collective fashion, but this has still provided a good insight into the developments in productivity in Roman Gloucestershire. This can also in turn allow for a better understanding of how these structures not only represented social status, but also economic success over a long period of time (See Witschel 2004, 272-3).

All the same, there are indications of the expansion and greater diversification of crop production during this period (Jones 1982, 99), which may have resulted from an increase in demand from the continent. It should also be noted that there were other forms of production associated with Romano-British villa economies as well, such as animal husbandry, which included wool production as an important source of revenue (Wild 1982). Industry in the extra-urban regions would have also included mining, timber, pottery, tiles (Darvill and McWhirr 1982) and stone production (Cleere 1982, 124). These industries would have provided an additional source of revenue for the villa owners, but of course the availability of these industries was determined by the nature of each individual estate. But it is important to note that mining in particular has been noted in Gloucestershire (RIB II.1 2404.13), such as at Lydney Park, and that this resource in general has been cited as a motive for the original invasion of Britain as well (De la Bédoyère 2006, 162), as indicated by Diodorus Siculus (5.22): alla; peri; me;n kat j aujth;n nomivmwn kai; tw`n a[llwn ijdiwmavtwn ta; kata; mevro~ ajnagravyomen o{tan ejpi; t h;n Kaivsaro~ genomevnhn strateivan eij~ Brettanivan pa ragenhqw`men, nu`n de; peri; tou` kat j aujth;n fuomevno u kattutevrou dievximen (‘But we shall provide a detailed description of the traditions of Britain and of yhe other aspects that are unique to the island when we discuss the campaign that was undertaken by Caesar against it, and at this point we shall consider the tin that is produced in the island’). All the same, the major focus for the present study is upon the primary source of production in Romano-British villas: agriculture.

The method used by Lewit (1991) was intended to analyse the subject of the decline of the villa system/economy during the 3rd and 4th Centuries AD (Lewis 1991, 27). While this study focused upon the Roman Empire in general terms, the analysis of Roman Britain and its resulting statistics provide a useful comparison for the examination of villa economies in Gloucestershire. The initial focus is upon habitation trends within the villa structures (Lewit 1991, 27-8), which can determine the periods in which the structures reached their peak of occupation. The ensuing examination has determined the general levels of productivity at each site under question (Lewit 1991, 2830), which has assisted in establishing the progression of productivity at each site. By undertaking this form of analysis it has been possible to examine the economic progression of the villas in Gloucestershire in light of Roman Britain overall. The habitation trends for the villas in Gloucestershire (Graph 4) clearly exhibits the primary phases of rural habitation in Romanised residences from the region. While there are instances of Romanised residences being constructed during the early stages of the Roman period, the majority of structures were constructed from the late 2nd Century AD on. Judging from these results it is evident that the height of the villa system occurred in Roman Gloucestershire between the late 3rd and mid 4th Centuries AD (Graph 4). This result establishes why the main focus of the economic analysis has been upon this period. It was during this period that the majority of villas reached their productive peak, while also representing the main phase of Romanised habitation in rural Roman Gloucestershire.

As far as the developments of Romano-British agriculture are concerned, it appears to have reached its peak around the middle of the 4th Century AD (Percival 1976, 115-16), which was epitomized by the improvements in ploughing systems around this time. It is of no great surprise that this corresponded with the heights of villa expansion in the province and so this period has been the prime focus of the economic assessment of the villas in Roman Gloucestershire. At this time it is evident that there would have been a large number of free tenant farmers inhabiting these villa complexes, as well as large slave-run economies (White 1970, 411). This difference in size corresponds well with the type of villa sites that have been discovered in Gloucestershire.

In her analysis of the levels of productivity during this period, Lewit (1991, 28-30) has shown that there was a high level of expansion and prosperity throughout most regions of the Western Empire. This is important because it further highlights the problems in the arguments of those who try to explain the development of villas in Gloucestershire at the end of the 3rd Century AD as being a result of the barbarian incursions into Gaul (Branigan 1973, 82-95). According to Lewit (1991, 29), ninety-two percent of sites surveyed in Britain exhibited prosperity during the early 3rd Century AD, which was maintained during the second half of that century (eighty percent), the early 4th Century (eighty-four percent). There was a clear decline in the Romano-British villa economy during

The Economy of Villas in Roman Gloucestershire The intention of this portion of the study is to examine the developments in habitation and productivity within the villas located in Roman Gloucestershire. This has been undertaken by comparing the results from all of the structures in this region with the general findings that have been produced by Lewit (1991) (discussed below). 45

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY the late 4th Century AD (Lewit 1991, 29), with only sixty-two percent of sites exhibiting any kind of prosperity. The overall results for Lewit’s analysis have been exhibited in Graph 5. These statistics provide a useful comparison for the villa complexes in Roman Gloucestershire.

these villa complexes in Gloucestershire is also exhibited in the limited evidence for abandonment by the end of the 4th Century AD, which be another indication of their long term productivity. Evidently the 4th Century decline was largely a result of the organisational decline in the province, but the success of villas in Gloucestershire prior to this is undeniable. Generally it is quite evident that the villas in Gloucestershire reflect the economic prosperity of the region during the Roman period. While the facilities of the various establishments were varied, it is clear that the possibilities for fiscal success were present at the majority of sites. In addition to this, it is evident that this may indicate that there was a degree of fiscal stability in the region as well, which is shown once the results of the late 4th Century AD are considered. All of these factors make it quite clear that not only were these complexes largely fiscally successful, but that they also used this success to accentuate their romanitas. All the same, the context in which this was expressed is another significant consideration that must be analysed. potential entertainment space, which has then in turn been used in conjunction with the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis of spatial networks. Through this dual approach it is possible to determine no only the extent of the intended social activity at these complexes, but it is also possible to examine whether each potential entertainment space was used for public or private occasions, which is shown by the comparative levels of accessibility for each space. However, it should be noted that only fourteen of the sites mentioned in Chapter II have been analysed here, which is owing to the incomplete or unpublished state of the floor-plans for Villas 1, 7, 11 and 12. In addition to this, the North Cerney structure (Villa 12) has only been analysed in relation to its spatial analysis because of a dearth of known evidence. The analysis of the Turkdean villa (Villa 13) has also only had is potential entertainment space considered, which is a result of its limited excavation to date, but the present analysis has still exhibited the dominance and the immense proportions of its central courtyard, which remains a vital factor in its analysis.

The general productivity for the villa estates in Gloucestershire (Graph 6) highlights the wealth of these establishments during the 3rd and 4th Centuries AD. As shown in Table 8, seventy-eight percent of the villas in Gloucestershire were either expanding or clearly exhibiting prosperity during the first half of the 3rd Century AD. This was clearly a significant phase of growth in the region and provides an important indication of the economic productivity during this period. During the second half of the 3rd Century there was a similar emphasis upon expansion (thirty-three percent) and prosperity (forty-five percent) (Table 9) (Graph 6), which further exhibits the economic strength of Roman Gloucestershire at this point during the development of the region. While the aggregate results for this period are not as high as those produced for the early 3rd Century, it is important to note that only two structures exhibited any sign of decline at this stage (Villas 5 and 12). During the first half of the 4th Century AD there was a similar emphasis upon expansion (twenty-two percent) and prosperity (sixty-seven percent), but it was evident that the economic development of these Romanised establishments had reached its peak during this period (Table 10) (Graph 6). Only two structures had been abandoned at this point (Villas 5 and 12), but they were clearly early villa complexes with a high degree of preRoman tradition. There was clearly a definite shift in habitation during the second half of the 4th Century AD with half of the sites under question moving into a period of decline (Table 11) (Graph 6). Only seven villa complexes were exhibiting any kind of prosperity during this period, which illustrates the economic decline that was occurring at this stage of the development of Roman Gloucestershire. Therefore, judging from this analysis it is quite evident that the high point of productive occupation in villas from Roman Gloucestershire was between the early 3rd and mid 4th Centuries AD. Clearly the vast majority of the villa complexes were not inhabited until the early 3rd Century, which epitomises the growth in the display of romanitas at this time. All the same, in comparison with the results of Lewit (1991), it is significant to note that the main period of expansion for villas in Gloucestershire (be it in the early 3rd Century AD) was seemingly earlier than in the province overall. This was probably indicative of the wealth/agricultural fertility of the region in general.

The Roman term villa was applied to a diverse group of buildings outside the urban centres (Winsor Leach 1989, 304). The emphasis upon luxury at many villas indicates that this was often an important expression of status. As Buck has illustrated, there were several terms that were commonly used for ‘farm’, including praedium, fundus and villa (Buck 1983, 9-10). He has also shown that the term villa was always used in relation to an extra-urban residence. In a legal sense there was no distinction between the different types of villa (Buck 1983, 9-10); the variance being more concerned with lifestyle, function and position. Wightman sees villas as “all farms or country-houses built at least partly in stone” (Wightman 1970, 139). Smith further clarifies this statement by adding that the structures must take a distinctly Romanized form of planning which was quite unlike any native farmstead (Smith 1997, 11). The true canons of classical architecture, for example axiality and

Evidently there was a greater expectation for fiscal success in Gloucestershire, which may also be indicated by the sustained levels of prosperity in the region by comparison to the province in general. The success of 46

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND symmetry, were adopted slowly in Britain, but the use of rectangular buildings was a definite break from the

native traditions of construction (Percival, 1987: 543).

Levels of Habitation in the Villas from Gloucestershire 18 16

Number of Villas (/18)

14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 mid/late 1st

early 2nd

mid 2nd late 2nd early 3rd

mid 3rd

late 3rd early 4th

mid 4th

late 4th

Century

Graph 4 – Graph showing the Levels of Habitation at the Villas in Roman Gloucestershire Results for the General Productivity of Romano-British Villas (from Lewit 1991) 60

50

Percentage

40 AD AD AD AD

30

200-250 250-300 300-350 350-400

20

10

0 Expansion

Prosperity

Decline

Abandonment

Destruction

Amount of Success

Graph 5 – Graph showing the Results Produced by Lewit (1991) to Examine the General Levels of Productivity of Sites in Roman Britain Between AD 200-400

47

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Results for the General Productivity of Villas in Gloucestershire 80 70

Percentage

60 50 AD AD AD AD

40

200-250 250-300 300-350 350-400

30 20 10 0 Uninhabited

Expansion

Prosperity

Decline

Abandonment

Amount of Success

Graph 6 – Graph showing the Results for the General Levels of Productivity of Sites in Roman Gloucestershire Between AD 200-400 The Social Function Gloucestershire

of

Villas

in

Roman Gloucestershire (Table 4) (Graph 7), covering only 740.13m2 in total. The limited extent this complex embodies its generally modest demeanour, which indicates that it was largely intended for agricultural production rather than large-scale social activity. This is also reflected in there being only two spaces that could be identified as potential entertainment areas: Room 5 and Area C (Fig. 18). Owing to its décor, flooring and endowment with a hypocaust heating system it is likely that Room 5 was used as a dining area, whereas Area C was a large, open courtyard. All the same, it should be recognised that this open area was seemingly used more for agricultural production rather than entertainment. Nevertheless, for the purposes of making a consistent form of analysis of these structures, this area has still been included within the initial statistics.

Roman

The analysis of social activity within the villas from Roman Gloucestershire has used two methods: the examination of However, this does not lead to the assumption that this was solely taken on by either the pre-Roman élite population or emigrating ‘Romans’. Considering that all four of the structures under discussion were constructed in masonry no earlier than the 2nd Century AD, this would have made the adoption of romanitas a social construct, being indicative of the status quo. Sites with evidence of progressive Romanization dating back to the first century, such as at the Chedworth and Barnsley Park villas, seem to be indicative of the Romanization of the traditional local élites, but this cannot be claimed with any certainty for all Romano-British villa complexes. The onset of Roman rule, typified by the introduction of planned cities and masonry villas (Frere 1987, 229; Clarke 1996, 72) must have changed the local society, but it also cannot be assumed that all of the native customs were altered (Adams 2005). The varying degrees of Romanization clearly indicate that this cannot be taken on a general basis, with the willingness of various individuals/households/communities being the determining factor.

The analysis of potential entertainment has shown that with the inclusion of the courtyard within the statistical results (Table 4) that the Barnsley Park villa appears to have served a significant social function (Graph 8). All the same, it is quite evident that Area C was in all likelihood not primarily used for such a function, which significantly impacts upon the overall percentage of potential entertainment space for this establishment (Table 5). Once this region has been removed from the statistical data the ensuing result is reduced by 27.97% (Table 5), which provides a more accurate representation of the potential social activity in this residence (Graph 9). This final result clearly suggests that the Barnsley Park villa (Villa 2) was not intended for large-scale social interaction and that it was primarily meant to serve a productive role for its residents.

Villa 2 – Barnsley Park Villa General Surface Area: 740.13m2 The residence at Barnsley Park (Fig. 18) was one of the smallest structures analysed from the countryside of 48

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis (Fig. 38) (Table 12) has illustrated the largely unrestricted design of this structure, which is exemplified in its comparatively low average Real Relative Asymmetry result (1.03) and this highlights its large amount of spatial accessibility. However, the only potential entertainment space (Room 5) was among the most restricted regions, as shown by its Depth from Exterior (5) and reasonably high Mean Depth (3.23), and Real Relative Asymmetry values (1.393) (Table 12). These results would further the suggestion that this space should be viewed as being largely private (Fig. 39) and that the Barnsley Park villa was not primarily intended for luxuria and otium. This analysis also confirms the general impressions of its topographical placement, which indicate that while its residents sought to convey their romanitas through the creation of this residence, their limited resources seem to have prevented any further developments to its structure. However, while this villa was a small, productive complex, it still made a definite statement of the cultural affiliations of its leading residents, and perhaps their social aspirations.

be more in keeping with the general demeanour of the Frocester Court villa (Villa 3) (Graph 9). This structure was clearly a small residence, but it is also evident that the leading household certainly aspired to exhibit not only their romanitas but also their social dominance over the ‘subordinate’ residents. When the structure itself is considered without the open courtyard, which covered approximately 771.84m2, the dominance of the leading residents becomes even more apparent. Within the enclosed residence, Rooms 7, 12 and 19 comprised approximately 14.55% of the structure’s surface area, which is only reduced to 12.06% potential entertainment space once Room 19 is removed from the statistics. The dominance of the eastern region within the structure is also exhibited by the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis (Table 13) (Fig. 41), with the division between the two households being shown by the average Real Relative Asymmetry results (1.51). This is the second highest result from the Gloucestershire villas in this regard and epitomises the restricted accessibility within the Frocester Court villa.

Villa 3 – Frocester Court Villa General Surface Area: 1,806.08m2

Judging from the Mean Depth and Real Relative Asymmetry results (Table 13) it would appear that Room 12 served a more public function when compared to Room 7 within this region (Fig. 42). This is also in keeping with their comparative size (Table 4). All the same, this result is in stark contrast to the accessibility of Room 19 (Table 13), which was clearly a secondary dining area and epitomises the subordinate role of the western side of this residence. Therefore, in view of both the topographical placement of this structure and the dominance of the eastern household, it is evident that the leading residents not only expressed their social superiority in an external format but also within an internal context as well. While the size of the Frocester Court villa was modest in comparison to Villas 13-18 (Graph 7), it was clearly a prominent example of romanitas and social dominance within the countryside of Roman Gloucestershire.

The Frocester Court villa (Fig. 22) was much larger than the Barnsley Park complex (Table 4), but it was still among the group of smaller structures within the countryside of Roman Gloucestershire (Graph 7). A large amount of its surface area comprised the open courtyard (Area C), which covered approximately 1,034.24m2 (Table 4). All the same, in a similar fashion to the previous establishment (Villa 2), the open courtyard at the Frocester Court villa appears to have primarily served a productive function rather than a social role. Nevertheless, this area must be included within the initial data for potential entertainment space so that the methodological consistency of this approach can be maintained. Three additional rooms have also been identified as potential entertainment areas because of their well-appointed décor and positioning: Rooms 7, 12 and 19 (Fig. 22).

Villa 4 – Spoonley Wood Villa General Surface Area: 3,231m2

The analysis of the social interaction within the Frocester Court villa is made more complicated because of the existence of two households within this residence. Rooms 7 and 12 appear to have served the ‘dominant’ residents, whereas Room 19 seems to have been a secondary triclinium for the other household. Therefore, owing to the clear existence of two familial groups at this residence, the division of space (including an analysis of only the structure itself) has also been considered (Fig. 40).

The villa at Spoonley Wood (Fig. 23) was much larger than the previous two structures (Table 4), but it was by no means the largest complex in Gloucestershire (Graph 7). This residence was well-appointed by comparison to the other smaller villas in the region, but was relatively modest when compared to the larger establishments, such as the establishments at Great Witcombe (Villa 15) and Woodchester (Villa 18). Only three areas have been deemed as having served a potential entertainment role within this building: Rooms A, 13 and 14 (Fig. 23). The small number of areas classified in this regard is indicative of the limited amount of information on this villa structure. All the same, these areas were clearly potential entertainment areas for the leading residents of the Spoonley Wood villa.

When all of these areas are included within the statistical analysis, the overall percentage of potential entertainment space is remarkably high in view of its size (Table 4) (Graph 8). All the same, this percentage appears to be exaggerated in view of the largely productive role for the open courtyard. Once this area has been removed from the statistics (Table 5) the resulting percentage seems to 49

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Unlike the previous two complexes (Villas 2 and 3) it is quite evident that the central courtyard (Area A) could have served a potential entertainment function (Fig. 23). Therefore, with the inclusion of this area within the statistics (Table 4) it is clear that this structure served an important social function (79.04% potential entertainment space) (Graph 8). All the same, while the importance of the courtyard for such a role is undeniable, it is still important to consider the prominence of the internal social spaces (Table 5). This analysis not only exhibits the dominance of the large central courtyard for reception (Graph 9), but it also shows the limitations in our understanding of this complex in general, with only one region of the structure being able to be identified with such a function. Nevertheless, the social role for the open courtyard should still be acknowledged, so it is quite clear that this villa served a social function.

13) and restricted (Room 14) region within the central domain of the villa (Perring 2002, 155). Villa 5 – Wadfield Villa General Surface Area: 1,434.05m2 This complex (Fig. 24) was located close to the Spoonley Wood villa (Map 1), but it was comparatively smaller than its neighbour (Table 4) (Graph 7). As noted in the previous chapter, the Wadfield villa was not located in a prominent topographical position, which is indicative of its largely utilitarian focus. Four regions have been identified as having served a potential entertainment role within this structure: Rooms 1, 2, 3, and Area A (Fig. 24). Owing to their décor, position and flooring it is thought that both Rooms 1 and 3 served as possible dining areas, whereas Room2 functioned as an exedra.

While the Spoonley Wood complex (Fig. 23) was not as well-appointed as some of the largest villas, but was still reasonably furnished and exhibited a contrast in degrees of affluence within its structure (Adams 2005, 39; Percival 1976, 163). Even though the suites in either wing were essentially the same, the southern wing was superior owing to their heating and bathing facilities (Black 1985, 88-9). Smith points out that the interruption in the porticus between the house and the north wing would have further emphasized the social inequality that existed (Smith 1997, 269). The building was an aisled villa (Smith 1963, 1-30), being a simple rectangle, with subdivisions (Fig. 23). The most well-appointed area within the villa was the southern wing, including a bipartite room for entertaining favoured and lessfavoured guests separately (Rooms 13-14)).

The comparatively modest nature of the Wadfiled villa (Villa 5) is made quite clear by the analysis of its potential entertainment function. Even with the inclusion of the central courtyard (Area A) the result is still only 16.92% (Table 4), which is the lowest percentage for these villas in Roman Gloucestershire (Graph 8). Once the courtyard is removed from the statistical data, which seems appropriate in view of its largely productive function, the ensuing percentage is only 4.43% potential entertainment space (Table 5). This result indicates that there was some provision for a possible social role at this residence, but that it was by no means the primary role for its inhabitants when compared to the other structures in the region (Graph 9). This complex was clearly intended to express its romanitas largely within an internal context, but it is evident that this was also limited by the practical considerations of agricultural productivity and the available resources of its owners.

The Spatial Data analysis of the Spoonley Wood Villa (Fig. 43) (Table 14) has produced an average Real Relative Asymmetry of 1.003, which is one of several examples among these case studies placed within the accessible (public) section of its results (Fig. 44). The high degree of accessibility throughout this complex is complemented by there only being three rooms with restricted access (Rooms 1, 31, 32), which had the highest Depth from Exterior and Mean Depth scores, illustrating their internal and external inaccessibility. The open-styled layout of this structure is also shown by the lower average Real Relative Asymmetry (1.003) in comparison to the Great Witcombe (Villa 15) and Chedworth (Villa 17) villas. As with the Great Witcombe Villa, the rooms with the middle and high range of scores were located on the extremities of this complex, particularly on the northern and southern sides. When the results are particularly applied to the bipartite dining room (Rooms 13-14) it provides mathematical evidence that there was a higher degree of privacy in Room 14, suggesting a social differentiation in their functions. Owing to the large doorway, the location and this social distinction, it would further the interpretation that these rooms were used as a bi-partite dining room. This was the only known designated social area, which is significant as it represents a combined accessible (Room

The Spatial Data analysis of the Wadfield Villa (Fig. 45) has produced the second lowest average Real Relative Asymmetry results (0.982), illustrating the close connection that existed within this small complex (Fig. 46). However, for the size of this structure there was a high degree of differentiation in accessibility. This was governed by the connection to the central courtyard (for a comparison see Grahame 2000, 95), with rooms placed onto it serving as controlling rooms, as shown by their Control Values and Depth from Exterior results (Table 15). As with the previous examples, the division of Real Relative Asymmetry results has correlated with the Mean Depth values. The scores from the Wadfield Villa (Fig. 46) have illustrated a similar division in degrees of accessibility, which also would have been expected at other villa sites, but the variation between each complex and their levels of accessibility are clearly evident. There are three internal rooms that have an identified entertainment function within this complex (Rooms 1-3). It is notable that both Room 1 and 3 were clearly more accessible than the private Room 2 (Fig. 46). This indicates a provision for both public and private occasions, which in turn suggests a wider social role for this complex. This is particularly notable owing to the 50

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND limited provision for such varying occasions in the larger complexes at Chedworth (Villa 17) and Spoonley Wood (Villa 4).

Villa 8 – Whittington Court Villa General Surface Area: 468.79m2 The villa at Whittington Court (Fig. 27) was the smallest example of a residence in the countryside of Roman Gloucestershire (Table 4) (Graph 7), covering only 468.79m2 approximately. Nevertheless, in this instance, the size of the complex does not necessarily correspond with a lack of social aspiration on the part of its leading residents. While this complex was smaller than the other structures in this corpus of villas, it was well-appointed with a strong emphasis upon lifestyle and otium. As with the Farmington villa (Villa 6) there is no identifiable open courtyard at this establishment, which means that there are only two areas that have been classified as potential entertainment spaces: Rooms 4 and 10. Both of these spaces possessed hypocaust heating systems and well-appointed décor, but their relative positioning has inclined Room 4 to be viewed as a triclinium, whereas Room 10 was a sizeable hall for larger social occasions (Fig. 27).

Villa 6 – Farmington Villa General Surface Area: 732.33m2 The Farmington villa at Clearcupboard (Fig. 25) was significantly smaller than Villas 3, 4 and 5 (Table 4), but it possessed similar dimensions to the complex at Barnsley Park (Villa 2) (Graph 7). Despite its modest size it still had some decorative pretensions and living facilities, such as the bathhouse that was placed on the northern side of its structure (RCHM 56). All the same, it should also be noted that the main focus of this small establishment was upon agriculture, which is exhibited in the discovery of a corn drier in Room 4 for example (Fig. 25). Only one area within this complex has been classified as having served a potential entertainment function: Room 1. This room is the only example that possessed enough decorative pretension to justify such a classification, having wall plaster and opus signinum flooring.

The statistical analysis of the Whittington Court villa (Table 4) has illustrated the prominent social role that this complex was intended to perform, producing a percentage of 30.3% potential entertainment space. While this result may not appear to have been remarkable initially (Graph 8), it is important to note that this percentage does not include an open courtyard. The significance of this result is made clearer when it is compared to the internal social results at the other complexes (Table 5) (Graph 9). This residence has produced the highest percentage of enclosed social space from the villas in the Gloucestershire region, which epitomises the importance of social activity at this extraurban residence. It is evident that the priorities of its owners was upon internal social activity, which may have provided a more controlled (and heated) environment in which they could express their romanitas to their invited guests. The priority of this internal focus has also been exhibited in its limited topographical prominence in the previous chapter as well.

The analysis of potential entertainment space within the Farmington villa has produced results that are clearly indicative of its modest size and facilities (Table 4). With there being only one identifiable potential entertainment space (Room 1) (Fig. 25), the initial result is the lowest from the villas located in Roman Gloucestershire (8.93% potential entertainment space) (Graph 8). All the same, it is important to note that this comparison has been affected by the absence of an identifiable courtyard at this complex. Therefore, once this result is compared to the percentages of internal social space (Table 5) the data seems more indicative of the structure in general. Nevertheless, it is still quite evident that the Farmington villa was not intended to serve a large-scale social function (Graph 9). The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis (Fig. 47) (Table 16) has supported this conclusion, particularly in relation to the limited amount of restriction in accessibility that existed within this residence, as shown by the comparatively low Mean Depth results. Judging from the Real Relative Asymmetry results for Room 1 (1.281), it seems likely that this dining area would have been used for more private occasions (Fig. 48), particularly when this score is compared to the average result for the complex overall (1.199). Therefore, with all of these results taken into consideration it becomes quite clear that while the Farmington villa expressed a degree of romanitas in its structural design, the communication of social dominance and success was much more limited. This was in all likelihood restricted by the fiscal resources of its owners rather than a lack of willingness on the part of its leading residents to express their cultural affiliation with the provincial administration.

The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis (Fig. 49) (Table 17) has added further insight to the function of both Rooms 4 and 10 as well, indicating that their accessibility was restricted from the other regions of the complex, which is indicated by their Mean Depth, Real Relative Asymmetry and Control Values. All the same, in view of their differing Depth from Exterior results, it seems that Room 4 would have been used for public occasions, whereas Room 10 was more of a private ‘invitation only’ space (Fig. 50). It is also important to note that these spaces were clearly removed from Room 8, which was evidently used for more productive/utilitarian purposes. Therefore, despite the diminutive proportions of the Whittington Court villa, it is evident that this residence was intended to express the romanitas and social importance of its leading residents to its invited guests, providing a useful comparison to the other small establishments in the region. 51

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY continued habitation of this site from the pre-Roman period. This complex appears to have accommodated two separate households, with the northern wing being the more dominant group by having slightly more available space that included the bathhouse (Fig. 29). All the same, there were only two identifiable areas that served as potential entertainment areas within this complex: Rooms 12 and 14. This may indicate that this dominance of one household was not overtly expressed within the residence. Both of these rooms (Rooms 12 and 14) were relatively well-appointed and seem to have primarily been used as dining areas.

Villa 9 – Withington Wood Villa General Surface Area: 583.38m2 The complex at Withington Wood (Fig. 28) has only been partially excavated, which does limit the possibility of its spatial analysis, but it is still possible to draw some conclusions about its design and general demeanour from the extant evidence. The known complex was comparatively small (Table 4) (Graph 7), but judging from the layout of this structure it could have been quite a sizeable complex (Fig. 28). Within this group of areas, two rooms have been identified as having a potential entertainment role on the basis of their mosaic pavements, décor and location within the structure: Rooms A and D. Room A has been classified as a probable dining area, whereas Room D has been viewed as an exedra.

As with the Withington Wood complex (Villa 9), the initial statistical results for the Hucclecote I villa have been affected by its lack of an identifiable courtyard (Table 4). This style of layout has clearly influenced the comparable statistics (Graph 8), which has produced the second lowest result (11.66% potential entertainment space). All the same, when this percentage is compared to the internal results (Table 5) it produces the third highest percentage for the villas from Roman Gloucestershire (Graph 9). Nevertheless, it is important to note that two households resided within this complex, and that the nature of the social space did not extend beyond the provision of single dining areas for each familial group.

The statistical results for the Withington Wood villa have produced percentages which suggest that this may have been quite an opulent extra-urban residence (Table 4). While the initial statistics (Graph 8) do not seemingly indicate a significant social function for this establishment, it is important to note that there is no identifiable courtyard in this data, which makes the internal social analysis more relevant (Table 5). This form of analysis indicates that the Withington Wood complex (Villa 9) had a significant amount of space within the known structure that could have been used for reception purposes, having the second highest percentage from this group of structures (14.06% internal potential entertainment space) (Graph 9).

When the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis is applied to the Hucclecote I villa (Table 19) (Fig. 53) the unrestricted accessibility of Rooms 12 and 14 is clearly indicated. The high level of accessibility of these rooms is shown through their low Mean Depth and Real Relative Asymmetry values (Table 19), which exhibits their largely public usage (Fig. 54). This result is indicative of the dual household style of residency at this complex, with such a habitation format reducing the capacity for purely social spaces in this residence. In view of this, it appears highly unlikely that this villa complex was used for large-scale social activity, with it being more indicative of being used for dining for each separate household. While the Hucclecote I villa did express a degree of romanitas, it did not convey similar levels of social prestige and fiscal dominance that was expressed at other complexes, such as the Great Witcombe (Villa 15) and Woodchester (Villa 18) establishments.

This residence also produced the lowest average Real Relative Asymmetry result (0.919) within the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis (Table 18) (Fig. 51). When Rooms A and D are considered using this form of analysis, it indicates that both of them were quite restricted in their accessibility, particularly in relation to their Mean Depth and Real Relative Asymmetry values (Table 18). This suggests that they were both used as private areas for social interaction (Fig. 52). All the same, it is difficult to draw any further conclusions about this complex without more detailed archaeological investigation of this site. Judging from the prevalence of mosaic pavements and well-appointed décor in this villa it does appear evident that the owners clearly sought to express their status and romanitas through this opulent residence, but the actual role of this villa remains largely uncertain.

Villa 12 – North Cerney Villa The possibility for the analysis of the North Cerney villa (Fig. 31) is significantly reduced because of the limited amounts of available evidence for this structure. This means that the examination of potential entertainment space cannot be undertaken, but it is still possible to use the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis method to try to examine the nature of this residence (Fig. 55). As with the Hucclecote I complex (Villa 10) there were clearly two separate residential households in this residence, which epitomises the modest nature of this structure in general terms.

Villa 10 – Hucclecote I Villa General Surface Area: 509.6m2 This complex (Fig. 29) was the second smallest residence in this corpus of villas from Roman Gloucestershire (Graph 7), covering only about 509.6m2 in its surface area (Table 4). Despite its relatively small dimensions this complex still included bathing facilities, indicating the Romanised lifestyles of its leading residents (Rooms 1, 8 and 9). This is particularly notable in view of the 52

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis (Fig. 55) of the North Cerney villa epitmises the unrestricted accessibility of this complex (Table 20). This is particularly shown through the low Mean Depth values for this structure, which were also very consistent, varying by no more than 1.167 overall. The limited restriction in accessibility is also exhibited in the Relative Asymmetry and Real Relative Asymmetry values (Table 20), which highlights the communal and quite modest nature of the North Cerney villa (Fig. 56). It is quite clear that the two households within this complex were presented on an equal social level and seem to have shared much of the residential space.

While it is impossible to press this analysis any further with the current available information on the Turkdean villa, it is still possible to draw clear comparisons between this complex and the other large courtyard residences in Roman Gloucestershire (Villas 15, 17 and 18). The consistency in design and statistical results for these complexes indicates a degree of uniformity in their social role and intended function overall. Nevertheless, it is still impossible to draw any further conclusions about the Turkdean villa without additional archaeological investigations at the site. All the same, for the purposes of the present study it is most important to note the overt expression of romanitas at this complex through its dimensions and topographical prominence, which was aided by the open layout of the structure, which correlates with the other large villa complexes from Roman Gloucestershire.

All the same, the analysis of this structure highlights the differences that existed between many of the villa complexes in Roman Gloucestershire. The North Cerney structure was a clear expression of romanitas, but this did not necessarily equally represent fiscal or social success/dominance at every structure. This residence seemingly did not express such ‘power’ within either an internal or an external context, but was instead quite practical and functional in its design. This is particularly significant when the pre-Roman habitation of this site is taken into consideration, suggesting that while the impression of romanitas was adopted by its owners, the traditional Celtic familial elements continued to be followed. This complex at North Cerney is quite different to the larger Romanised villas in the region, such as the Turkdean villa.

Villa 14 – Chesters Villa General Surface Area: 4,987.32m2 The Chesters villa at Woolaston (Fig. 33) was another large residence (Table 4) that was constructed in a prominent location in the western regions of Roman Gloucestershire. This complex was one example of a group of large extra-urban residences from this region (Graph 7), covering approximately 4,987.32m2 (Table 4). This structure included two bathing complexes, which indicates the highly Romanised lifestyles of its leading residents. Owing to the limitations in the available information for this sizeable establishment only three areas have been identified as potential entertainment spaces within the Chesters villa: Rooms 4, 7 and Area C (Fig. 33). In view of their position, décor and provision with hypocaust heating systems, Rooms 4 and 7 have been classified as a dining area and a diaeta respectively. Area C was an open courtyard, but it seems to have primarily served a utilitarian function. Nevertheless, it has been included within the initial statistics in order to maintain methodological consistency in the results.

Villa 13 – Turkdean Villa General Surface Area: 5,746.92m2 While the examination of the North Cerney villa (Villa 12) has been limited to the Hillier and Hanson form of Gamma analysis, the Turkdean complex is only able to be considered in relation to its potential entertainment function. This is largely owing to the incomplete excavation of this villa complex, but it is still possible to examine the overall dimensions and layout of this sizeable residence. The main aim of this examination is to examine the dominance of the open regions within its structure and to establish the enormity of its general surface area, which exhibits the well-appointed nature of the Turkdean villa in comparison to the previous extraurban residences from Roman Gloucestershire.

With the inclusion of Area C in the data (Table 4), the ensuing analysis of potential entertainment function produces the highest percentage for the Chesters villa (83.45%) from among this group of villas from Roman Gloucestershire (Graph 8). All the same, it seems highly unlikely that this open area was primarily used for a social function, but when this area is removed from the statistical results (Table 5) it produces the lowest result (1.1% potential entertainment space) within this corpus of villas (Graph 9). The dramatic contrast between these two statistical results exhibits two features: firstly, the spatial dominance of this open area (being 4,107.32m2); and secondly, the limited amount of available information for the residence itself. However, if the internal entertainment space (54.67m2) is considered in relation only to the domus itself in isolation (880m2), it produces a potential entertainment result of 6.21%, which is more in keeping with the general demeanour of the residence.

Despite the clear limitation in this analysis of potential entertainment space for this structure, it is evident that the Turkdean villa was a large courtyard residence (Fig. 32), which included a significant amount of open space (Table 4). When the overall surface is considered in isolation, it is established that this was the third largest villa from Roman Gloucestershire (Graph 7), covering approximately 5,746.92m2 (Table 4). The prominence of the open areas within this villa is exhibited in the initial statistical results, comprising over one third of its total surface area (39.57% potential entertainment space).

53

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY When the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis is applied to this section of the complex (Fig. 57) it produces results that exhibit its relatively high level of restriction in accessibility (Table 21). The average Real Relative Asymmetry result for this complex was 1.157, which establishes that it was a highly controlled complex, and it is important to note that both Rooms 4 and 7 were located in private/restricted regions of the residence (Fig. 58). This would suggest that the Chesters villa was not intended for large-scale social activity within its confines. Nevertheless, it is evident that the expression of social dominance (and romanitas) by its owners was directed more towards an external audience, which is illustrated by its size and topographical prominence near the Via Iulia.

and Depth from Exterior values as well. Only three of these rooms were also controlling rooms (Rooms 6, 8, 28). The high level of inaccessibility in the Black regions is also illustrated in their Depth from Exterior scores (ranging from 12-14) and their highest Mean Depth values, but this should not be surprising for this group of baths (Adams 2005, 48), which were not going to be easily accessible by uninvited visitors. The Great Witcombe Villa (Villa 15) had one of the largest number of rooms within this case study, but by using the Real Relative Asymmetry values this is taken into account. These results illustrate the wide-scaled accessibility throughout the complex, but conversely it also exhibits the complexity of the structure in its final phase of habitation. This is shown by the accessibility of most rooms when compared to each other. But when the average Real Relative Asymmetry (1.806) is compared to the other structures, it is significantly higher, illustrating its greater accessibility. Leach has argued (1998 126, 129) that both Rooms 15 and 28 served as dining rooms, and therefore social roles. This is significant because, judging from the Gamma analysis of this villa, they served quite different roles. Room 15 was clearly used for a public occasions, which is also shown by its central location (Perring 2002, 155). Room 28 is quite different, having a higher Depth from Exterior (8) and Real Relative Asymmetry value (1.864), indicating its more private role. This differentiation in accessibility represents the presence of two possible dining areas that served for different kinds of occasions and possibly a different clientele.

Villa 15 – Great Witcombe Villa General Surface Area: 9,156.65m2 This well-appointed villa was the largest extra-urban residence in Roman Gloucestershire (Fig. 34), covering approximately 9,156.65m2 (Table 4) (Graph 7). This sizeable complex epitomised the fiscal and social dominance of its owners, while being a clear statement of their romanitas as well. There were areas within this villa that were dedicated for both production and otium, with the leading residents clearly being focused upon their intended lifestyles and for the estate to be self-sufficient as well. Despite the opulence of this residence, only four areas have been safely identified as serving a potential entertainment function. Rooms 15, 28, 44 and Area A (Fig. 34). This collection should be viewed as the minimum number of spaces for such a role, with there being other rooms that seem to have possessed more of a dual function (social, productive) within its confines.

Villa 17 – Chedworth Villa General Surface Area: 3,719.52m2

The analysis of potential entertainment space has shown that a large proportion of this structure could have performed such a social role (Table 4), with this percentage comprising 41.33% of the total surface area. This is one of the highest results within this corpus of villas from Roman Gloucestershire (Graph 8) and also epitomises the spatial dominance of Area A (Fig. 34). All the same, once this open region is removed from the statistics (Table 5) there is a stark contrast in the ensuing percentage (5.66% potential entertainment space) (Graph 9). Nevertheless, it is still pertinent to note that the Great Witcombe villa was still provided with approximately 517.92m2 in enclosed identifiable entertainment space, so it was hardly lacking in this regard either.

The residence at Chedworth (Fig. 36) was another large complex in the Gloucestershire countryside by its final phase of habitation (Table 4) (Graph 7). As with several of the other sizeable villa structures in the region, this establishment was focused upon a large central courtyard, but it is also important to note the lengthy extension of the northern wing that progressed significantly to the east of this area as well (Fig. 36). Despite the well-appointed nature of this villa, there are only two clearly identifiable potential entertainment spaces at this residence: Room 5 and Area A (Fig. 36). As with the villa at Great Witcombe (Villa 15) these two areas should be viewed as the minimum provision for potential social space at this complex.

The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis (Fig. 59) has also produced some useful results (Table 22). Firstly, when the coloured spatial diagram is viewed (Fig. 60) it is notable how dominant the accessible regions of the complex are, with the more inaccessible regions being located in the eastern and western wings. The average Real Relative Asymmetry score is 1.806, which is located within the middle sphere of results (White). This is despite most rooms being placed in the lower scale (Grey regions). All of the White rooms had higher Mean Depth

The analysis of potential entertainment space (Table 4) has illustrated the spatial dominance of Area A within this structure, providing a comparatively high percentage (37.59% potential entertainment space) despite the inclusion of only one internal reception area (Graph 8). This prominence is further illustrated once the open courtyard is removed from the statistical data (Table 5) (Graph 9), which is comparable to other large courtyard villas in Gloucestershire, such as the Turkdean (Villa 13), Great Witcombe (Villa 15) and Woodchester (Villa 18) 54

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND complexes. This is also a notable feature of other large residences beyond this region of Roman Britain, but this is discussed further below.

The analysis of the social activity within the Woodchester villa complex (Table 4) has exhibited the large amount of space that could have fulfilled such a role, comprising 42.94% (2,620.13m2) of its general surface area (Graph 8). Naturally a large proportion of this was in the open courtyards (Areas A and B), but this still left around 742.74m2 in internal social space as well (Table 5) (Graph 9). In addition to this it is also important to note not only the number of social/reception rooms (comprising 6 enclosed spaces), but also their varied size and position within the Woodchester complex in general (Fig. 37).

The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis for this complex (Fig. 61) has produced an average Real Relative Asymmetry result of 1.236. This score is placed within the middle section of these results (Table 23). The Chedworth Villa produced fewer extreme scores in comparison with the Great Witcombe Villa, which is shown by the even spread of accessible/inaccessible regions throughout the structure (Fig. 62). There was a higher concentration of rooms in the middle (White) area of results, of which most were controlled, having only Rooms 3 and 24a as controlling rooms that is shown by their Control Values. This has produced a greater variation in the consistency of the Depth from Exterior and Real Relative Asymmetry values for these inaccessible areas, but illustrate a continuing correlation between the Real Relative Asymmetry divisions and the Mean Depth values. The results have also highlighted that the well-appointed western wing of the Chedworth Villa was largely accessible from both the exterior and other regions of this complex.

The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis (Fig. 63) (Table 24) has further illustrated the varied nature of these potential entertainment spaces. Judging from these statistics, it is evident that Rooms 1, 26 and 27 would have been public areas for reception, whereas the other internal areas would have fulfilled more of a private role for the leading inhabitants (Fig. 64). This is largely shown through their lower Real Relative Asymmetry values, which were smaller than the average Real Relative Asymmetry result for the villa in general (1.081). The public areas (Rooms 1, 26 and 27) also have lower Mean Depth values (Table 24), which furthers the suggestion that they were largely accessible. Of course, Areas A and B would have also served a primarily public social role, being ideal for larger social occasions. This greater variation in the type of potential entertainment space also provides a clear indication of the important reception role that was intended for the Woodchester villa. It is evident that this large, well-appointed structure was designed to display the romanitas and social dominance of its leading residents within both an internal and external context.

For an understanding of social activity at the Chedworth villa, the only known entertainment space was Room 5, which has been classified as a dining room (Goodburn 1998, 15). Unlike Room 15 in the Great Witcombe villa, access to this space was relatively restricted to visitors, judging from its relatively high Depth from Exterior (4) and Real Relative Asymmetry result (1.2). It was by no means the most restricted space within the complex, but it was clearly not intended for a highly visible social role, with its access being controlled by Room 5b. This corresponds well with the changing focus of the owner during the fourth century, where the emphasis for luxuria was primarily upon the internal facilities rather than the external, with the creation of the utilitarian courtyard.

General Conclusions for the Social Function of Villas in Gloucestershire The analysis of social function within the villas from the countryside of Roman Gloucestershire has exhibited a wide range of variation in their facilities and intended roles for each complex. While this variation may have frequently been a result of the financial resources of each owner, it is still evident that the intended lifestyles for each structure were another significant factor in their facilities and design. For example, if a particular villa complex was not intended to serve a social role for its leading residents and was instead going to be infrequently occupied and almost purely used for agricultural production, it would have been unnecessary for it to be provided with large potential entertainment spaces, regardless of the owner’s financial capacity to make such provisions. Large potential entertainment areas indicate that this was a priority for an individual owner, which was intrinsically connected to the desire for the expression of romanitas. Therefore, while the availability of expendable capital would have been an important consideration, it was by no means the sole factor in determining the role that each structure was intended to perform.

Villa 18 – Woodchester Villa General Surface Area: 7,831.66m2 The Woodchester complex (Fig. 37) was the second largest villa from Roman Gloucestershire (Table 4) (Graph 7), covering approximately 7,831.66m2. This opulent residence was primarily focused upon two large central courtyards, with a series of adjoining areas that were often well-appointed, which illustrates both the wealth and romanitas of its leading residents. The social success of its owners was not only accentuated by its topographical prominence, but it was also exhibited in the important entertainment function that was intended for this complex. Eight regions have been identified within this villa that could have served a potential social role: Areas A, B, Rooms 1, 10, 22, 25, 26 and 27 (Fig. 37). This is the highest number of identifiable potential entertainment spaces for the villas from Gloucestershire and epitomises the opulent character of this residence and the owner’s desire for luxuria and otium within its confines. 55

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Comparative Size of Villas in Gloucestershire 10000 9000 8000

Metres Square

7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 2

3

4

5

6

8

9

10

13

14

15

17

18

Villa Number

Graph 7 – Graph showing the Comparison of Estimated Surface Areas of Villas in Gloucestershire

Potential Entertainment Space of Villas in Gloucestershire With Open Areas 90 80 70

Percentage

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2

3

4

5

6

8

9

10

13

14

15

17

18

Villa Number

Graph 8 – Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa in Gloucestershire

56

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND

Comparative Percentages of Open and Internal Entertainment Space for Villas in Gloucestershire 90 80 Entertainment % With Open Areas

70

Percentage

60 50 40 30

Entertainment % Without Open Areas

20 10 0 2

3

4

5

6

8

9

10 13 14

15 17 18

Villa Number

Graph 9 – Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Internal Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa in Gloucestershire Judging from the comparative sizes of these structures (Graph 7), there was a clear distinction in the size and demeanour of villas above and below 3,000m2. All the same, the primary reason for this difference in size was because of the design of each structure over 3,000m2 (with the exception of the Chesters villa) was focused upon one or two large central courtyards, whereas the other extra-urban residences were primarily designed as aisled or corridor structures. While is could be argued that this design has affected the overall statistical results, it is still undeniable that these courtyard residences were still larger than the smaller structures, even with the exclusion of the open regions from their surface areas. In addition to this it is also important to note the similarity between these villas and many comparable structures in central Italy (Adams 2006; 2008), which in turn reflects the accentuated acceptance of romanitas in their design.

addition to this it may be possible to differentiate between the extent of Romanisation in the courtyard villas and their aisled/corridor counterparts. The romanitas of both villa forms is self evident in their structure, but it seems possible to suggest that the courtyard villa was a clearer expression of the acceptance of Romanised lifestyles and their social implications. Another good example of such a large structure has also been discovered at Tockington Park Farm as well (Masser and McGill 2004, 98), which further highlights the prevalence of such large extra-urban structures in Roman Gloucestershire. The analysis of potential entertainment space in these structures (Graph 8) has also exhibited a wide degree of variation in the social function for the villas in Roman Gloucestershire. Through this examination the statistics have established that half of these extra-urban complexes were clearly intended for a social role (Villas 4, 8, 13, 15, 17 and 18), whereas Villas 3, 5, 9 and 14 have produced less certain results. Of the villas that clearly had a reception function, it is notable that only the Whittington Court complex (Villa 8) was not focused upon a large central courtyard. This residence was instead provided with a large, private entertaining hall at the rear of its structure (Fig. 27), which is quite an unusual addition.

In addition to this architectural expression of Romanisation (as compared to the straightforward process of romanitas being expressed in the construction of masonry residences alone) there is the further consideration of the intended lifestyle at these complexes. The inclusion of this type of courtyard was frequently used to fulfil a potential entertainment role within Romanised society in central Italy (Adams 2006; 2008), so therefore it is possible that this open design was indicative of the adopted lifestyles of the residents (and their romanitas) rather than a purely architectural phenomena (Graph 9). It is important to note how the layout of these residences was a definitive representation of how they were intended to be used. Therefore, it was the inclusion of these courtyards that provided a further presentation of romanitas and its associated lifestyle. In

The significance of this form of analysis is in the consideration of the contexts in which social status (and romanitas) could be expressed within the countryside of Roman Gloucestershire. The variation in the results for each structure clearly epitomises how the values, priorities and fiscal circumstances of each owner affected the development of these residences. This illustrates how 57

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY it is quite difficult to make sweeping, general statements about these structures overall. All the same, it is certainly evident that there was a definite distinction in focus between the smaller and larger villa complexes in this region. The larger residences clearly possessed the space (and intent) to provide appropriate locations for reception, despite being located beyond the confines of the urban centres in this region.

judgement by using a mathematical formula instead of relying upon varying perceptions. By using this method and the division of Real Relative Asymmetry values, it has been shown that the division is a plausible method of analysis and that it corresponds well with the Mean Depth values of each room, representing a global view of their accessibility in conjunction with the Depth from Exterior and Control Value results. The overall scores have also shown how room number does not necessarily equate with accessibility. The natural conclusion would be to assume that a larger number of rooms would lead to a greater number of rooms in either public or secluded areas, as was shown in the Chedworth villa (Fig. 62). However, the greater variation in the Wadfield villa than the Great Witcombe villa has clearly shown that the two do not necessarily correlate. This would suggest that the public/private division of space was not as straightforward as would be expected, at least on a functional level. The theory of perceived public/private space is certainly applicable, but each structure varied widely when compared to their counterparts in the division of use.

It appears that the majority of villas in Gloucestershire did not appear until the end of the 2nd Century and most of these were not originally as lavish as their later counterparts, such as the Great Witcombe villa. A good example of a villa built in the early/mid-2nd Century can be seen in the development of the Chedworth complex, from its unpretentious origins into the well-appointed complex of the 3rd Century. When the origins of these structures are compared with the introduction of masonry townhouses at Cirencester in the middle of the 2nd Century (Adams 2005, 52), there is an interesting correlation. It seems that both urban and rural masonry buildings were not widespread until the middle of the 2nd Century, probably being built by the same members of the community. To further emphasize this development, most large-scale public building works had been completed by this time, which must have given the local wealthy élites more expendable capital for the expression of their status (Millett 1990, 137).

One of the clearest conclusions one draws when examining the development of villas in Gloucestershire and indeed anywhere throughout the province of Roman Britain is that not all villas are of equal standard. When the splendour of the Great Witcombe and Chedworth villas are compared with the simplicity of Barnsley Park, North Cerney and Wadfield the difference in wealth is quite obvious. Despite this, the reason for their construction remains the same: a desire to appear Romanised and to connect the owner with this social identity. The only difference is the amount of capital that was available. One should remember that the majority of the population continued to live without such pretensions. A good example of this is shown at the Brockworth farm that lay between the villas at Great Witcombe and Hucclecote I. This settlement continued to use native style housing even when it may have adopted Roman measurement for land allotments (Rawes 1981, 45-77). The contrast between Brockworth and Great Witcombe reflects the realities of the Roman occupation. Not all Britons adopted Romanised housing and lifestyles, only those with aspirations to appear Romanised.

This allowed for the social identity of each owner to be expressed through the construction of residences such as well-appointed masonry villas. This expression of romanitas was not only conveyed to visitors, be they invited or uninvited, but also to the local community who also viewed these structures from afar. Villas such as the Woodchester, Turkdean, Great Witcombe and Chedworth complexes were grand statements, illustrating the social identity of their owners, which were gradually expanded over time to further this impression. The construction of large Romanized villas communicated this social identity to both internal and external audiences, but judging from the Gamma analysis results, there was clearly variation between various owners in regard to which audience was a higher priority. When the results of the spatial data analysis are compared it illustrates the great variation in the levels of accessibility at each complex. This is particularly notable when the Great Witcombe and Wadfield villas are compared (Figs. 60, 46), having such a different level of facilities and number of rooms, but also entirely differing formats of accessibility throughout their structures. The Great Witcombe villa seems to be the most analogous with the Spoonley Wood villa (Figs. 60, 44), but this is largely because of the dominance of their large central corridors for distributing accessibility (Rooms 14, B respectively). The results have also shown a distribution of accessible/inaccessible space that is somewhat surprising because it does not follow a consistent pattern. However, this is the major benefit of the Hillier and Hanson method. It removes the need for subjective

Nevertheless, the most significant result that has been exhibited within this study is the varied social priorities of the owners. Judging from the Gamma analysis results it is evident that the owners of both the Chedworth and Spoonley Wood villas placed more emphasis upon communicating their social identity to an external audience, having only limited provisions for internal social activity. This is further emphasized at the Chedworth villa by the dining area being located in a controlled region of the villa. This is in clear contrast to the Wadfield and Woodchester villas, which had not only more rooms that fulfilled a social function, but also a 58

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND greater variation in their accessibility, indicating greater emphasis upon social activity at the complex. This disparity is further accentuated by the differing levels of décor and facilities at either complex, which adds to the suggestion that the design of Romano-British villas was indicative of the owner’s priorities as well as their expendable capital. Nevertheless, this variation should be expected: some owners would have sought privacy rather than social activity, whereas others would have sought the opposite. In general, the desire to communicate a social identity to the community was a central theme behind the construction of these villas and their later additions. Even so, the role that they served, in a social context, was determined by the social inclinations of their owners.

Mediterranean (Cunliffe 1971, 61). The architecture betrays the handiwork of foreign craftsmen, probably from Gaul, demonstrating great architectural advances not only in Roman Britain but also for all the western provinces (Cunliffe 1971, 69). The acquisition of materials for the massive structure would have required a great organisational skills in itself, for example, with one hundred and sixty limestone columns having to be brought in from Gloucestershire and northern France (Cunliffe 1971, 73-4). As mentioned previously, it is likely that the Fishbourne villa (and the Hayling Island temple), were most likely constructed by the same leader, Cogidubnus (King and Soffe 1994, 116). Cogidubnus is the most likely candidate for such extensive undertakings because of the extremely high status and financial resources that would be needed for such endeavours, almost requiring the patronage of a legatus augusti (RIB 91). Both structures reflect the power and influence of a king whose domain was extensive enough to be mentioned by Tacitus (Ag. 14). During the period these buildings were also paralleled by the undertaking of other public works in the region, mainly at Chichester, with all structures reflecting the use of Gallic craftsmen in the architecture. Both the villa and the temple reflect a continuity of occupation/ use from the pre-Roman period (Manley and Rudkin 2005, 55-99), and ownership in the case of Fishbourne, indicating that the progression in both structures was due to a Romanised native leader (Henig 1984, 38). Since it is highly unlikely that the Roman administration would have provided any direct funding for such projects, the emphasis remains on the motives of the Atrebatan leader (Salway 1981, 113). Clearly the motives behind Cogidubnus’ actions were to ensure the support and alliance of the new Roman administration in the hope that his now tenuous grip on power would continue.

The Comparison of the Social Function of Villas in Gloucestershire with Complexes from Other Regions The comparison of villa complexes in Roman Gloucestershire with ten establishments from both the continent (in this case Campania) and other regions of Roman Britain is intended to place the previous structures within a wider social and historical context. This provides the possibility of gaining a better understanding of each individual structure in Roman Gloucestershire and also of the region in general terms during this period. Five of the structures have been analysed from elsewhere in Roman Britain (Villas 1923), whereas another five structures have been examined from Campania. While the vast majority of these additional sites were primarily focused upon otium and luxuria, it is important to note that some smaller villas have also been included to provide the optimal comparison for our understanding of socialisation in villa culture. However, the opulent ‘palace’ at Fishbourne in West Sussex provides another useful comparison at the opposite extreme of the social environment in the Romano-British countryside.

In order to evaluate the impression (and romanitas) of his residence, the Flavian phase of the Fishbourne villa has been analysed (Fig. 65). As would be expected, there are quite a few areas within this residence that have been classified as potential entertainment spaces: Rooms A, B, C, D, E, 8, 16, 24, 25, 33, 36 and 70 (Fig. 65). Areas A, B, C, D and E functioned as open colonnaded peristyla, whereas Room 70 was an ‘Audience Chamber’ (Cunliffe 1999, 54), which means that it has been grouped with the tablina (Table 6). Rooms 24 and 36 were clearly halls intended for a reception function, whereas Rooms 8, 16, 25 and 33 were intended to function primarily as dining areas within a variety of residential contexts (Fig. 65).

Villa 19 – Fishbourne Villa General Surface Area: 19,865.24m2 The most impressive villa constructed in early Roman Britain was the establishment at Fishbourne that appeared between AD 50-70 (Wacher 1981, 124; Jones and Mattingly 1991, 243). It consisted of three main parts, a courtyard with corridors on the northern, eastern and western sides, a bath suite of at least eight rooms and a range of rooms stretching fifty-two metres in length. It was highly decorated and was the most exceptional villa in size and amenities in Britain (Blagg 1990, 198). Cogidubnus, King of the Atrebates, who was a clientking of Rome, most likely erected the villa (Tac. Ag. 14; Percival 1976, 95). Cogidubnus had a very pro-active Romanising policy as a result of which the city of Chichester (Noviomagus Reg(i)norum) and the villa at Fishbourne had begun to progress steadily in the two decades following conquest (Cunliffe 1971, 53, 59). The villa was constructed using grey Purbeck marble, hard white chalk and grey and red silt-stone from the

The analysis of potential entertainment space for the Fishbourne Roman villa has shown the grand proportions and reception facilities of this extra-urban residence. Not only was this villa the largest complex analysed within this study (19,865.24m²) (Table 6) (Graph 10), but it also possessed the greatest number of social spaces (12 areas). This also is reflected in this residence producing the highest percentage of potential entertainment space (53.52%) within this group of structures located beyond 59

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Gloucestershire (Table 6) (Graph 11). The areas included here were also overtly used for entertainment purposes rather than having a possible utilitarian function as a supplementary role, which further highlights the wellappointed demeanour of this residence. It was also largely focused upon open-aired reception, which is emphasised by the amount of internal potential entertainment space at this complex (Table 7) (Graph 12). All the same, internal reception areas still represented over one thousand square metres of the villa’s surface area (Table 7), which illustrates that it was certainly well provided with such social spaces. In view of the grand dimensions and important social function of this structure, it is understandable why it has been described as a ‘palace’ and would have been a fitting residence for King Cogidubnus.

Two there was a greater impression of architectural unity, which gave the sense that it was originally designed in this format (Wilson 2004, 102) and was accentuated by its décor. Phase Three saw another period of rebuilding with the inclusion of a new bath complex in the northern wing for example, but the southern and western wings were also extended around the courtyard (Ellis 1999, 208) (Fig. 68). This phase seems to have been the height of expansion and productivity of this establishment, with Phases Four and Five being comparatively minor in their changes to this villa (Ellis 1999, 215-17). There are six regions within the villa at North Leigh that have been identified as having served a potential entertainment role: Rooms 1, 7, 16, 30, 56 and Area C (Fig. 68). It is evident that by the third phase of habitation that the central courtyard (Area C) was largely used for a residential function rather than a productive role. Owing to their location and décor, Rooms 16 and 30 have both been classified as an exedra and Room 1 has been viewed as a bi-partite triclinium in a similar fashion to the villa at Spoonley Wood (Villa 4) (Fig. 23). This room was actually part of a suite with Rooms 2 and 3 (Wilson 2004, 100), but it is quite evident that this was the primary reception space in this region of the complex. Finally, owing to their external aspect, Room 56 has been classified as an oecus, whereas Room 7 was clearly an open diaeta (Fig. 68).

The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis has also illustrated the wide variation in social contexts that were provided in the Fishbourne villa (Fig. 66) (Table 25). Judging from these results, it is evident that Areas A, B, C, D, E, 8, 16, 36 and 70 were largely public space, whereas Rooms 24, 25 and 33 were used primarily for more private occasions (Fig. 67). This variation in accessibility further establishes the importance of reception and social activity in this palatial residence, it being provided with a variety of spaces that could have been used for a variety of occasions in a similar fashion to the villa at Woodchester (Villa 18), but on a much grander scale. It is important to note that by far the vast majority of areas within this residence were used for living and reception rather than a utilitarian role, and that most areas were closely connected, as shown through the average Real Relative Asymmetry result for this villa (0.775). The Fishbourne villa was clearly a wellappointed residence that was primarily intended for social activity and reception with the strongest sense of palatial romanitas.

The North Leigh Roman villa in Oxfordshire is another example of a well-appointed courtyard residence that provided a clear expression of romanitas (Fig. 68). This complex was originally constructed around the early/mid 2nd Century AD and habitation continued until the late 4th Century (Wilson 2004, 102). This residence was located rather close to the River Evenlade and was also in close proximity to the main connecting Roman road between London and Cirencester (Ellis 1999, 199). This establishment gradually developed over time in a similar fashion to the villa at Chedworth (Villa 17) (Wilson 2004, 102), with approximately five major phases of construction (Ellis 1999, 203-17) (Fig. 68).

The analysis of potential entertainment space for the villa at North Leigh in Oxfordshire (Villa 20) has shown a similar set of results to the Fishbourne villa (Table 6). While the North Leigh villa was over thirteen thousand square metres smaller than the previous residence (Table 6) (Graph 10), it still had a large amount of space within its structure that can be classified as potential entertainment space (3,312.42m²) (Graph 11). This was largely made up of the central courtyard, which was almost three thousand square metres in size (Table 6) (Fig. 68). All the same, it is evident that approximately half of the complex could have been used for social reception (50.19% entertainment space) (Graph 11). This percentage illustrates the grand and well-appointed demeanour of the North Leigh villa. However, once the central courtyard is removed from these statistics, it is possible to see just how dominant this area was within this residence (Table 7) (Graph 12). This highlights the preference for open-aired entertainment space for the owners of this villa. All the same, this villa was still hardly lacking in its provisions for internal entertainment, having over three hundred square metres that could have fulfilled this role (Table 7) (Graph 12). It is evident that the North Leigh villa was a large and impressive residence that would have served an important social function for its leading residents and their guests.

The first phase of construction at North Leigh saw the gradual expansion of this Romanised residence from a simple aisled villa into a winged structure that extended across the northern, southern and western sides (Ellis 1999, 203-7). With the developments introduced in Phase

The application of the Hillier and Hanson method (Fig. 69) to the North Leigh villa has provided another example of a large courtyard residence that has exhibited a wide range of contexts for potential entertainment (Fig. 69) (Table 26). This villa was more controlled in its

Villa 20 – North Leigh Villa General Surface Area: 6,599.34m2

60

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND accessibility than the Fishbourne palace, having an average Real Relative Asymmetry value of 1.028, but it is evident that there were provisions for both public and private reception (Fig. 70). All the same, the majority of areas were quite accessible, which was similar to the Woodchester (Villa 18) and Chedworth (Villa 17) villas in Roman Gloucestershire. Therefore, it is evident that the villa at North Leigh in Oxfordshire, which is only a short distance from Gloucestershire, was comparable to the other large courtyard structures in the region under question (Villas 4, 13, 15, 17 and 18), having a similar emphasis upon Romanised facilities and analogous provisions for social activity within its confines.

Spoonley Wood villa in Gloucestershire (Villa 4) (Fig. 23). Room 8 was the only potential entertainment space that was directed towards an external perspective in this residence, which probably served as a diaeta (Fig. 71). The analysis of potential entertainment space for the Bignor Roman villa (Villa 21) exhibits the heights of residential luxury that was attained by its final phase of occupation. While this complex was dwarfed by its near neighbour at Fishbourne (Villa 19), it was still the second largest residence within this corpus of structures located beyond Gloucestershire (Table 6) (Graph 10). While the percentage of potential entertainment space within this complex was not as high as in the villas at Fishbourne and North Leigh (Table 6) (Graph 11), it was clearly still used for a prominent social function, having 34.53% of its surface area potentially being able to be used for a reception role. The dominance of the open courtyard as a reception space is shown through the comparison exhibited in Table 7 and Graph 12, which was also illustrated at the North Leigh Roman villa (Villa 20). All the same, the fact that the Bignor villa had six additional internal areas that clearly could have potentially served an entertainment role exhibits how it was hardly lacking in this regard either.

Villa 21 – Bignor Villa General Surface Area: 7,722.86m2 The origins of the Bignor Roman villa in West Sussex (Fig. 71) have been dated to the early 2nd Century AD (Aldsworth and Rudling 1995, 181), but it is quite clear that occupation at this site pre-dated the Roman occupation, which may indicate some native traditions in this location. This residence was another opulent courtyard villa by its final phase of habitation (Fig. 71), representing a complex that not only exhibited its romanitas on the grandest scale, but also over a long period of time. Judging from the ceramic evidence in particular, it appears that there were three primary phases of development for the Romanised villa at Bignor, with two subsequent minor stages of alteration as well (Aldsworth and Rudling 1995).

The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis for the Bignor villa (Fig. 72) has exhibited the comparatively high level of accessibility within this structure, having an average Real Relative Asymmetry value of 1.036 (Table 27). It is notable that all of the potential entertainment areas within this well-appointed residence were located in the public sphere (Fig. 73), which is exhibited in both their Mean Depth and Real Relative Asymmetry values (Table 27). All the same, it is also important to note that accessibility into the residence itself was heavily controlled, illustrating the privilege that was implied by simply gaining entry to this opulent residence. Therefore, it is quite clear that the Bignor villa was another example of a prominent and sizeable structure that expressed its romanitas and social dominance at reception occasions within its confines in a similar fashion to the large establishments already discussed from Roman Gloucestershire (Villas 4, 13, 15, 17 and 18).

The original modest stone residence, which was designed in a similar style to that of an aisled villa (Aldsworth and Rudling 1995, 184) was constructed between the middle of the 2nd to 3rd Centuries AD during Phase IIA. The structure gradually developed over time, with the northern and southern wings being introduced in Phase IIIA and the final completion of the enclosed courtyard by Phase IIIB (Aldsworth and Rudling 1995, 184). The agricultural productivity of the site continued at the Bignor Roman villa after this point, but these utilitarian areas were largely removed from the residential precints and placed in four separate structures to the west of the residence (Aldsworth and Rudling 1995, 182). This would indicate that the courtyard (Area C) (Fig. 71) should be viewed as a residential region at this stage of habitation.

Villa 22 – The Whitebeech Villa at Chiddingfold General Surface Area: 2,258.99m2 The Roman villa at Whitebeech (Fig. 74) (SU 9784 3610) was constructed on a gentle slope towards the east in the county of Surrey. The complex was originally discovered in 1888, but the subsequent excavations of the site occurred at a much later date (Cooper 1984, 58-61). This structure provides a good comparison with the smaller villa residences in Roman Gloucestershire. As with the previously discussed villas located beyond Gloucestershire in Roman Britain, this complex was focused upon a large courtyard to the east of the main villa precinct (Fig. 74). The primary residence was designed as an aisled structure along one side of this

In view of this, there have been seven areas within the Bignor Roman villa that have been classified as having served a potential entertainment role: Rooms 7, 8, 12, 13, 55, 56 and Area C (Fig. 71). As just mentioned, the courtyard appears to have been largely residential in function at this stage of habitation and it clearly maintained the dominant focus of the complex. Owing to their décor and position, Rooms 7 and 56 appear to have served as exedrae, being placed on opposite sides of the courtyard. Rooms 12, 13 and 55 were probably dining areas, with Room 55 being a bi-partite triclinium (Fig. 71), in a similar fashion to Rooms 13 and 14 at the 61

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY courtyard, which may suggest that this open area served more of a utilitarian role for the residents.

The Hillier and Hanson form of analysis (Fig. 75) has shown how the villa at Whitebeech was also provided with entertainment areas that were located in both the public and private regions of this residence (Fig. 76) (Table 28). Nevertheless, it is also quite clear that none of these regions were really suitable for large-scale public occasions, and so despite the accessible placement of Room 5 for example, it is more than likely that it would have largely been used for members of the household rather than for frequently entertaining guests. However, this structure provides a good comparison with the smaller villa establishments in Roman Gloucestershire, such as Barnsley Park (Villa 2), Frocester Court (Villa 3), Wadfield (Villa 5) and the Farmington complexes (Villa 6).

Judging from the ceramic evidence the main period of occupation at this complex extended between the middle of the 2nd Century AD and the mid to late 3rd Century AD (Cooper 1984, 81-2). In general terms the evidence of the loose finds suggests that agriculture was not a primary function of this residence at Whitebeech (Cooper 1984, 82), but this is probably a result of the 19th Century excavations and their limited recording of more utilitarian artefacts. There appears to have been more than one phase of development at this residence, particularly with the introduction of the northern block that housed the kitchen facilities and the southern structure that was probably used for agricultural production (Fig. 74) (Cooper 1984, 69-71).

Villa 23 – Mount Roman Villa, Maidstone General Surface Area: 1,536m2

Five areas have been identified as having served a potential entertainment role within the villa at Whitebeech: Rooms 1, 5, 6, 7 and Area C (Fig. 74). Area C was clearly an open courtyard, but it primary function seems to have been more focused upon a utilitarian role. All the same, this area has been included in the initial grouping of statistics in order that the method and results are consistent within the present corpus overall. Room 5 has been identified as having served a dining role for the most part, whereas Room 6 has been classified as an exedra. Room 7 has been referred to as a hall in the excavation reports (Cooper 1984, 67), whereas judging from its position and décor Room 1 may have served as a tablinum (Fig. 74).

The Mount Roman villa at Maidstone (Fig. 77) was located in close proximity to the River Medway, and was largely excavated at two key stages (1843 and 1970). As can be seen in the general plan (Fig. 77) it has not as of yet been fully excavated, but it still provides a good comparison for the main corpus of extra-urban residences in Gloucestershire, particularly with the smaller establishments. This residence gradually developed over three phases, which began in the second half of the 2nd Century and continued into the early 4th Century AD at least (Kelly 1992, 181, 208). The main structure of the complex was focused upon two primary wings that were placed on the northern and southern perimeters, which were connected by long corridors (Fig. 77) (Kelly 1992, 182). It is thought that there was a central courtyard within this residence, but this can only be established conclusively with further excavation. The entrance to the Mount Roman villa was probably located in the centre of the eastern wing (Fig. 77) (Kelly 1992, 182).

The analysis of potential entertainment space for the villa at Whitebeech (Villa 22) illustrates a significant difference between this complex and Villas 19, 20 and 21 (Table 6) (Graph 10). At first glance it is quite clear that this structure was significantly smaller than these other residences (Graph 10), being more comparable with the Frocester Court villa in Gloucestershire (Villa 3) (Table 4) (Graph 7). All the same, the percentage of potential entertainment space taken from the villa at Whitebeech illustrates the dominance of the courtyard within the initial application of this method (50.7% entertainment space) (Table 6) (Graph 11). However, the social function of this large open area is highly questionable, with it being more likely to have been used for a more utilitarian function. Therefore, once this space has been removed from the statistical data (Table 7) (Graph 12) the ensuing results are more indicative of the general demeanour of this residence (6.75 % entertainment space). This analysis has confirmed that the villa at Whitebeech (Villa 22) was not primarily intended to perform a social function, with the overall intention of the structure being directed more towards a productive/utilitarian role. This is further highlighted when the internal structure is considered in isolation, which was approximately 1,266.18m². The internal potential entertainment space (152.53m²) still only comprised roughly 12.05% of its surface area, which illustrates the largely productive role for this residence.

Owing to the discovery of a concentration of opus signinum flooring and hypocaust systems in the northwestern corner of the villa (Rooms 2-4) (Kelly 1992, 184) it is more than likely that these rooms comprised the baths for the leading residents. The well-appointed nature of this complex is indicated by these areas being introduced during the first phase of occupation as well (Kelly 1992, 180). It would appear that the complex was well constructed from the initial stages of habitation, which is shown through the substantial nature of its masonry (Kelly 1992, 190). The ensuing periods of enlargement seem to have simply added to its demeanour of otium and romanitas despite its comparatively small size overall. Three areas within the Mount Roman villa at Maidstone have been identified as having served a potential entertainment function: Rooms A, D and J (Fig. 77). Judging from the original excavation reports (Kelly 1992, 184), all of the rooms in the southern wing have 62

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND 1947, 12). Room 17 originally opened onto a deck, which was supported by columns. This was later altered but the bases of these tufa columns were observed within the walls, forming the original portico (Richardson 1988, 350). This opened towards the garden below, originally surrounded by a simple wall and indicative in character and function of the typical productive garden (Maiuri and Pane 1947, 12). The portico would certainly have been an open and well-ventilated veranda that allowed sweeping views and sea breezes. It was later renovated to become larger and more impressive, taking full advantage of the view. Despite the modest origins of the residence it is clear that its position was chosen for the outlook towards the bay.

produced evidence of well-appointed mosaic flooring in opus signinum and plastered walls. Therefore, the placement of each room would suggest that Rooms A and D primarily functioned as dining areas, whereas Room J was a more secluded and private diaeta. The analysis of potential entertainment space at this residence illustrates the modest nature of the facilities at the Mount Roman villa in comparison to its larger counterparts at Fishbourne (Villa 19), North Leigh (Villa 20) and Bignor (Villa 21) (Table 6). Table 6 exhibits how this was the smallest Romano-British complex from beyond the Gloucestershire region within this corpus (Graph 10) and this is also reflected in the low percentage of potential entertainment space in this complex (4.36%) (Graph 11). All the same, this could be a result of its lack of an identifiable courtyard at this residence (Fig. 77), which is shown in the comparable result for internal potential entertainment space (Table 7) (Graph 12). Nevertheless, judging from the general demeanour and proportions of the structure, it is evident that it was not intended for a prominent social function.

Seven areas have been included among the rooms with potential entertainment space: Rooms A, E, 6, 17, 8, 16 and 20. This included both of the colonnaded courtyards (Rooms A, E), the large hall (Room 16) and Room 17 for reasons of their open and well-appointed appearance. Rooms 6, 8 and 20 were probably dining areas due to their décor and viewing positions. These areas were probably not the only rooms within such an opulent complex to have a possible entertainment function, but these were the only rooms included in order that only those that were clearly used for entertainment purposes were considered. The percentage of space allocated to entertainment covered over forty percent of the plan (Table 6), illustrating the intentions of the owner (Graph 11). This was dramatically larger than the previous two sites and indicates the differing facilities and décor at these residences. The open areas covered the largest area within this space (Graph 12), but there were also larger areas intended for dining and viewing the coastline (Table 7). This large percentage of space is even more compelling when the greater ability to include the lower floor is taken into consideration. These results illustrate that the prime function of this suburban villa was residential entertainment and recreation, rather than agricultural productivity, which provides a useful comparison with Villas 4, 13, 15 and 17 from Roman Gloucestershire. All the same, the Villa of Diomede was seemingly not used for agriculture at all, which was more indicative of the complexes at Fishbourne (Villa 19) and perhaps Woodchester in Gloucestershire (Villa 18).

The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis for the Mount Roman villa (Fig. 78) (Table 29) (Villa 23) has exhibited quite different results to those produced at the Whitebeech complex, illustrating the largely inaccessible nature of the potential entertainment areas when the Mean Depth and Real Relative Asymmetry values are taken into consideration (Fig. 79). In a similar fashion to the Chesters villa (Villa 14), this residence was actually fairly restricted in its accessibility in general terms, having produced an average Real Relative Asymmetry value of 1.272. In addition to this it is evident that this inaccessibility would not have made this structure well suited for large-scale social activity. This rather simple complex therefore provides a useful comparison with the smaller structures in Roman Gloucestershire, such as the Farmington (Villa 6), Hucclecote I (Villa 10) and North Cerney residences (Villa 12). Villa 24 – Villa Diomede General Surface Area: 4,616.09m2 The Villa of Diomede (Fig. 80) was located approximately two hundred metres to the north-west of the Porta Ercolano, along the Via dei Sepolcri (Fig. 81) (Maiuri and Pane 1947, 11). The design of this building was determined by its topography (Carrington 1936, 87). The land slopes down progressively from the east to west and also from the north-east to the south-west along its axis. This setting allowed the creation of impressive views at the rear of the building, presenting the panorama of the Bay of Naples, Sorrentine Peninsula and Island of Capri (Richardson 1988, 348).

In the Villa of Diomede (Fig. 82) this is most notable in Rooms 6 and 8, both of which produced high results for Real Relative Asymmetry (both 2.132) and Mean Depth (both 6.95) (See Table 30), illustrating a low level of social interaction and high restriction from other rooms in the complex. Only the main level of this villa suburbana was taken into consideration in this spatial analysis to serve as a more reliable comparison with the other suburban villas, but even this partial sample illustrates that entertainment space existed in both the public and private domains (Fig. 83). Rooms A and 16 all produced results showing that they controlled access to other areas (5.41, 2.49 respectively) and that their Real Relative Asymmetry results (1.017, 1.548) illustrate the high levels of potential interaction at each room. Room 20, on

There is clear evidence of substantial additions and alterations to the building. The initial structure has been dated to the 2nd Century BC, being originally square in plan and symmetrically designed around a central hall, which is more indicative of townhouses (Maiuri and Pane 63

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY the other hand, had a high Real Relative Asymmetry (2.086) and Mean Depth (6.82), illustrating its residential accessibility. This does not disagree with WallaceHadrill’s interpretation (1994, 38-61) of public/private space, but complements actually it. The entertainment role of villae suburbanae encompassed both public and private occasions and the rooms that could serve an entertainment role were positioned in accordance with their intended purpose – be it public or private.

region. The presence of both public and private entertainment regions (Fig. 86) also highlights that the role this residence performed was similar to other suburban villas in the Pompeian region. Even if the colonnaded courtyard was excluded from the group of entertainment areas, the complex still produced a percentage of 11.46% (Table 7), which is quite a high result (Graph 12). When this is taken into consideration with the level of décor and facilities at this complex, the comparison of this structure with the villa complexes from Gloucestershire becomes quite interesting. The villa of Asellius was clearly intended to fulfil a similarly combines social/productive function as noted at the Spoonley Wood (Villa 4), Chesters (Villa 14) and Chedworth (Villa 17) complexes in Gloucestershire, which can be taken as a further indication of their perceived status and romanitas to the surrounding community in the region.

Villa 25 – Villa of Asellius General Surface Area: 1,094.64m2 This villa was intended for otium and was positioned to provide a spectacular view of the Bay of Naples, with facilities to create a comfortable residence for its owners (Della Corte 1921, 426). The complex was located on the summit of the hill at Pisanella and underwent several periods of reconstruction and renovation (Stefani 1998, 41, 46-7). It was constructed approximately twelve hundred metres from Pompeii (Fig. 84) and the general plan was centred upon an open courtyard with a covered portico and rooms flanking three sides (Fig. 84). The complex had dimensions of approximately 36 by 33 metres, including space for housing between ten to twelve slaves (Day 1932, 200). Despite having a great deal of evidence for agricultural productivity at this site, several areas also exhibit the well-appointed nature of this residence (Stefani 1998, 46-7). These included Room 18 and 19 on the western perimeter, as well as the larger Room 15 on the northern side. The primary function of these areas was determined by position and décor. There were six areas with a clear potential entertainment role: the colonnaded courtyard (P1-P4), Rooms 8, 13, 18, 19 and 20. There were several other rooms that could have served a similar function, but these rooms were the most obvious examples.

Villa 26 – Villa of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus at Pisanella at Boscoreale General Surface Area: 1,113.88m2 This villa (Fig. 87) is located approximately three kilometres to the north of Pompeii and has been previously classified as both a rustic villa (Sogliano 1895, 207-14) and suburban villa (Della Corte 1965, 433), the latter being more appropriate in view of its position, size and level of facilities. The discovery of an inscription at this complex has allocated its ownership to the merchant L. Caecilius Iucundus, who also owned an elegant house inside Pompeii (Della Corte 1965, 436). He was a businessman, involved in trade (Andreau 1974, 303-4), active in Pompeian domestic politics (Andreau 1973, 244), and was duovir (Andreau 1974, 305). Carrington’s appraisal (1931, 119) of this residence being used only occasionally by the owner appears appropriate. The residence was maintained by a libertus, L. Caecilius Aphrodisius (Della Corte 1964, 436).

Owing to the level of décor at this complex and its facilities it seems appropriate to classify it as a suburban villa, and the statistical results further substantiate this assessment. Judging from the character of the colonnaded courtyard within the structure it is appropriate to include it in the entertainment data. This gives a percentage of 35.1% entertainment space (Table 6), which is analogous with the results from most other well-appointed structures in this study (Graph 11) (Tables 6, 7). The Hillier and Hanson method has illustrated the division between accessible and inaccessible regions in this suburban villa (Fig. 85) (See Table 31). Both the colonnaded courtyard (P1-P4) and Room 8 had clear public roles with lower Real Relative Asymmetry (0.435, 0.691, 0.606, 0.881, 0.777 respectively) and Mean Depth values (2.17, 2.86, 2.63, 3.09) than the private potential entertainment rooms.

The main entrance to this moderately sized complex was located to the north-west, being preceded by an open space. This area has produced a large number of tiles and mortar deposits (Sogliano 1896, 232), suggesting that the region was being repaired or renovated at the time of the eruption in AD 62. Room I appears to have been a dining area with brick pavement and white plaster (Sogliano 1899, 15). The remains of three couches have also been found in this space. The northern position of the room produced a pleasant dining environment with a view of the bay and the surrounding countryside, taking advantage of the winter sunshine (Potter 1987, 96). Ownership by Iucundus reflects the diversification of his business interests, being involved in both agriculture and commercial trade (Étienne 1966, 186-9). The position of this estate would have allowed Iucundus to easily commute to Pompeii and it would have also provided for a convenient location to escape from his commercial responsibilities. The combination of both urban and rural sources of revenue was quite common, with prominent

The private rooms (Rooms 13, 18, 19, 20), particularly Rooms 18-20 with their higher Depth from Exterior (4), had higher Real Relative Asymmetry (0.903, 1.052 respectively) and Mean Depths (3.43, 3.83), illustrating the greater inaccessibility (privacy) attainable in this 64

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND Pompeian families maintaining modest townhouses as well as rural and suburban productive properties (Franklin 2001, 200).

finds of ten small anvils, a small amount of fused bronze and two plaster head models. The discovery of this productive area indicates that the owners may have diversified their productive capabilities. But the most notable of these finds was the discovery of an inscription near the cistern (No. c) in the eastern side of the colonnaded courtyard, reading: M. MVNDICIVS MALCHIO M. CLODIVS AGATHO MAG EX.P.C.F.C. M(arcus) Mundicius Malchio, M(arcus) Clodius Agatho, mag(istri), ex p(ecunia) c(onlata) f(aciundum) c(urarunt). (Sogliano 1899, 499)

When the statistical analysis of this establishment was performed in a similar fashion to the previous structures it produced an analogous result (21.83% entertainment space) compared to those complexes in Campania (Graph 11) (Table 6). However, if this is the only method used it creates an inappropriate perception of the role of this complex. When the courtyard is removed from the entertainment space it makes a substantial difference to the results (3.65% entertainment space) (Table 7), which is more in keeping with the general demeanour of this villa. The percentage of entertainment space is quite low in comparison with most of the most well-appointed villa structures (Graph 11), but this seems to be understandable.

This inscription is important because of the reference to magistri, which has also been referred to in connection with the pagus Augustus Felix suburbanus (Sogliano 1899, 499). The importance of this reference to magistri is due to its location outside of the walls, whereas the other reference was discovered within the urban precincts of Pompeii. When the position of this complex is considered it would be appropriate to classify it as a villa suburbana with a predominantly agricultural emphasis. Agriculture was not a purely rural occupation (there being many examples of productive gardens within the city) (See Jashemski 1979). If the impressive mosaic in Room F is considered, there appears to have been some desire for notable décor by the residents.

In view of its ownership by Iucundus, who also owned a large townhouse in Pompeii (V, 1, 26), the entertainment role of this villa would have been reduced. This is particularly evident in the fine décor performed in Third Style that adorned the office of this townhouse (Ruggiu 1995, 390-1). But, in all likelihood, Iucundus would have used the suburban residence for relaxation, as well as production, rather than large-scale entertainment. This would explain the large number of agricultural areas within the residence and the absence of large dining or viewing rooms, apart from Room I. The Hillier and Hanson method has illustrated (Fig. 88) that the accessibility to this room was controlled (Control Value of 0.33) and that its relatively high Mean Depth (3.77) and Real Relative Asymmetry (1.111) indicate that it was restricted (Table 32). It is clear that this room was located in the private domain of this suburban villa (Fig. 89). Large-scale public entertainment was not intended for this residence. It served more of a restricted/intimate entertainment role, perhaps for gatherings of the owners’ household or his close amici. When this structure is compared with those from Roman Gloucestershire it is possible to see similarities with some of the smaller residences, such as the villas at Frocester Court (Villa 3), Whittington Court (Villa 8) and Hucclecote I villas (Villa 10). Each of these structures had some social aspirations, but they were typically restricted by the importance of productivity at these complexes.

The rooms included as having a potential entertainment role were Rooms F, G, H, V and W. Room F is deemed to have been a potential entertainment room due to the Philosophers pavement that would not have been included if it was purely utilitarian. Room G also seems to have served a similar purpose, particularly in view of its size and location within the complex. Room H has been included, as well as two large rooms that looked onto it (Rooms V, W). The statistical analysis of the Villa of T. Siminius Stephanus has also illustrated its similarities to the other Campanian complexes. With the inclusion of the colonnaded courtyard within the entertainment region of the villa, its percentage of entertainment space (28.85%) is consistent with these other structures (Table 6) (Graph 11). The total space for entertainment within this complex is not the highest among those previously discussed from the Pompeii region, but this is to be expected in view of its comparable size and demeanour. It appears that the owner was attempting to provide recreational facilities within this villa, and accentuated them with such decoration as the Philosophers’ mosaic. This suburban villa was also the smallest complex within this group, illustrating the differing circumstances (or priorities) of the owner to those of other larger residences.

Villa 27 – Villa of T. Siminius Stephanus General Surface Area: 1,047.11m2 It has been hypothesised that this complex was not an isolated villa, but could be viewed as a pagus. There are some difficulties with this complex (Fig. 90), such as the unknown placement of the principal entrance, but it is still possible to draw some conclusions about its nature and function. This complex was extremely close to the city, located only one hundred and thirty metres north of the Porta Vesuvius (De Vos 1982, 180). To the south of this villa was a small bronze workshop that produced

The spatial analysis of this villa suburbana has illustrated a clear separation between the public and private entertainment rooms (Fig. 91) (Table 33). Both Rooms F and G have higher Real Relative Asymmetry (0.993, 0.75 65

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY respectively) and Mean Depth results (3.90, 3.19), illustrating their comparatively inaccessible qualities and private roles. The colonnaded courtyard was clearly accessible to non-household members and had a Control Value of 13.03 that makes its high potential for social interaction, as shown by its low Real Relative Asymmetry, understandable (0.342). Both Rooms V and W were controlled by Room H (Control Value 0.06 for both) and were comparatively more accessible from other rooms (Mean Depth 2.98 for both) than Rooms F and G (Fig. 92). As with the Villa of Iucundus at Pisanella (Villa 26), this complex provides clear similarities with the smaller social and productive establishments from Roman Gloucestershire, such as the villas at Frocester Court (Villa 3), Spoonley Wood (Villa 4) and Whittington Court (Villa 8).

oil that occurred at this residence. Finally, owing to its position and judging from the overall layout of the structure, the focus of the building would have been largely towards the internal courtyard (Figs. 94, 95). Therefore, it appears unlikely that this villa would have possessed a significant social function. When these considerations are combined with the statistical data (Tables 6, 7 and 34) (Graphs 11 and 12) it confirms the impression that this establishment was a sizeable complex that was permanently resided in by its owners, but that focused predominantly upon productivity. This was quite different to most villae suburbanae located on the ridge of Varano at Stabiae (See Adams 2006), but it does correlate well with the smallest villa complexes in Roman Gloucestershire, such as the structures at Barnsley Park (Villa 2), Wadfield (Villa 5) and Farmington (Villa 6).

Villa 28 – The Villa at Casa dei Miri General Surface Area: 4,656m2

General Conclusions – the Expression of Social Dominance

This complex outside of Stabiae (Fig. 93) was a large establishment but most of its surface area was made up of open regions including a large central courtyard (Room B) and what was probably a kitchen garden to the southeast (Room D) (Jashemski 1979 330). The layout of this structure exhibits some urban characteristics, with the entrance leading directly into Room A (Carrington 1931, 121). This may be explained by its close connection to Stabiae, being located approximately eight hundred metres from the Villa San Marco. Room B most likely served a residential function, possibly filling a potential reception/entertainment role as well. This is shown by the wall décor that was usually absent in purely utilitarian open areas. These paintings depicted fish in a blue sea, possibly indicating the presence of a pool in this open area.

The key element that has been determined through this analysis is the variation in the social activities within the structures under question. While all of the extra-urban complexes in Roman Gloucestershire exhibited the romanitas of their owners through the construction and embellishment of these residences, this did not necessarily provide a correlation with an expression of their social dominance. Of course this was implied within the Romanisation of their residences, but not all of them went out of their way to further accentuate this aspect. When comparing the circumstances of the villas at Barnsley Park (Villa 2), Frocester Court (Villa 3) and Hucclecote I (Villa 10) with those at Great Witcombe (Villa 15), Chedworth (Villa 17) and Woodchester (Villa 18), the marked contrast in size, facilities, wealth and potential social space clearly exhibits this variation. The larger establishments not only expressed a cultural affiliation with the provincial administration, but they also clearly exhibited their social dominance within both an external and an internal context. These large, wellappointed residences were prominent examples of the social prestige of their owners, which was communicated to the local population on a series of sociological and psychological levels.

A dining room (Room c) has also been identified (Fig. 93) (Carrington 1934, 275), but there has been little comment on this region of the building. However, another important focus of the residence was upon agriculture, with finds of dolia for either wine or oil storage discovered in the utilitarian courtyard (Room C) (Jashemski 1979, 330). The eastern entrance also appears to have been large enough for carts, allowing for the easy transportation of produce. Carrington has mentioned that the large area to the west (Room G) was used as either a wine or oil storeroom (Fig. 93) (Carrington 1934, 275), which seems to confirm the prominence of productivity within the intentions of the owners.

When these structures from Roman Gloucestershire are compared to the other Romano-British villas (Villas 1923) it is quite clear that they were in many ways indicative of the general variation that existed in similar structures throughout the province. While the Fishbourne villa (Villa 19) was an exceptional example from Roman Britain, it is possible to view a similarly contrasted representation from these structures in size (Graph 13), facilities, potential entertainment space (Graph 14), and open design (Graph 15) as has been noted in Roman Gloucestershire. In turn, this suggests that there was a similar variation in the communication of power and social dominance (rather than romanitas) within this group of villas. The overt difference between the design, facilities and social symbolism at the Fishbourne (Villa 19) and Maidstone (Villa 23) complexes clearly exhibits

When examining this structure there are three notable aspects. Firstly, it was a large complex but most of the internal regions were devoted to productivity. However, it was not a purely utilitarian establishment, having features that suggest there was some provision for a social role by the owner. Secondly, this complex epitomises the ideals of Roman self-sufficiency, which is illustrated in the presence of the kitchen garden (Room D). This garden would have been used for the household rather than for commercial advantage, unlike the production of wine or 66

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND

Comparative Size of Villas Outside of Gloucestershire 25,000.00

Metres Square

20,000.00

15,000.00

10,000.00

5,000.00

0.00 19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Villa Number

Graph 10 – Graph showing the Comparison of Estimated Surface Areas of Villas Outside of Gloucestershire

Potential Entertainment Space of Villas Outside of Gloucestershire With Open Areas 60

50

Percentage

40

30

20

10

0 19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Villa Number

Graph 11 – Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa Outside of Gloucestershire

67

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Comparative Percentages of Open and Internal Entertainment Space for Villas Outside of Gloucestershire 60 50

Entertainment % With Open Areas

Percentage

40 30 20

Entertainment % Without Open Areas

10 0 19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Villa Number

Graph 12 – Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Internal Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa Outside of Gloucestershire

Comparative Size of All Villas 25000

Metres Square

20000

15000

10000

5000

0 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Villa Number

Graph 13 – Graph showing the Comparison of Estimated Surface Areas of All Villas

68

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FUNCTION OF VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE AND BEYOND

Potential Entertainment Space for All Villas 90 80 70

Percentage

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Villa Number

Graph 14 – Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa

Comparative Percentages of Open and Internal Entertainment Space for All Villas 90 80 Entertainment % With Open Areas

70

Percentage

60 50 40 30

Entertainment % Without Open Areas

20 10

28

26

24

22

20

18

15

13

9

6

4

2

0

Villa Number

Graph 15 – Graph showing the Percentage of Identifiable Internal Entertainment Areas to the Known Total Area of Building Complex at Each Villa their differing circumstances and the dissimilar priorities of their respective owners.

each group of villas (Graph 13), with the establishments from Roman Gloucestershire being generally larger, particularly in relation to the courtyard residences. This is significant because all of these residences in Campania (except the Villa of Iucundus) were focused upon courtyards at the centre of their design. This is made more important when the amounts of potential

All the same, once these statistical results are compared with the villas from central Italy (Villas 24-28) there are noticeable differences that are able to be recognised. Firstly, it is important to note the comparative sizes of 69

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY entertainment space are compared, which shows how much more consistent the statistical results are from the Italian residences when contrasted to the Gloucestershire villas (Graph 14). This could be indicative of either a difference in social custom, with such provisions being more necessary within an Italian context, or it may be a representation of the British (or non-Italian) interpretation of how these complexes were meant to function. In all likelihood, it would appear that both are plausible explanations for this difference in interpretation and social function. However, it has already been noted that feasting customs were seemingly of some importance during the pre-Roman period (Pitts 2005) and may have continued into the Roman era, which could indicate that social practices still largely followed the native Celtic traditions within many households (See McCarthy 2006, 208-9), which may contradict the prior analysis of some modern scholars (Perring 2002, 202-3).

viewed as an indication of wealth, but also of its intended function. Large villas with sizeable potential entertainment areas made clear statements about the success of their owners, with the villas at Turkdean (Villa 13), Great Witcombe (Villa 15), Chedworth (Villa 17) and Woodchester (Villa 18) being perfect examples of this. This social space was absolutely necessary to convey this social dominance within an internal context – it exhibited not only wealth through the fine décor of such an environment, but it also drew a clear distinction between the residences of these dominant figures and the potentially smaller residences of those whom they entertained (and sought to dominate). In addition to this, the inclusion of large open courtyards added to the overall dimensions of the structure and in turn added to the external prominence of these structures as well. The impression of romanitas and social dominance was clearly conveyed in both spheres and was a fundamental feature of their design. All the same, this influence (and dominance) could also be expressed beyond the confines of these villas establishments, such as in the construction of public buildings with temples being an ideal example.

In general terms, this analysis has established not only the variation that existed within these villas, but also their similarities. One of the most obvious similarities was how the design of each structure should not only be

70

Chapter IV Temples and Shrines in Gloucestershire Having examined the Romanised domestic residences and their socio-political connotations, the focus now turns to the religious buildings of Roman Gloucestershire. The main intention of this chapter is to examine the Romanisation of the native Celtic religion and to consider how this was expressed. Another significant point for deliberation that extends from this is the question of whether this exhibits a dramatic shift in the religious beliefs themselves, or whether it was simply a change in the form of religious representation. The contention of this study is that the continuity of sanctity at many religious sites from the pre-Roman period illustrates how the romanitas of Romano-Celtic temples was more representative of a change in form of religious expression rather than a substantial change in the beliefs of the wider community. The Romanisation of the native religion in the rural regions was also a result of the native élites, rather than the majority of the local population in Roman Gloucestershire as well.

36). Membership within the ordo decuriones had a minimum property qualification (Frere 1991, 236) and an entry fee (Garnsey 1971), which meant that it ideally represented the local aristocracy. Elections were initially held within the popular assembly for this group, but by the 2nd Century AD the new members appear to have been selected by the ordo decuriones itself (Wacher 1995, 36), which would have further established the elitism of these local aristocrats. Decuriones have been attested in Roman Britain at Gloucester (RIB 161), York (RIB 674) and Lincoln (RIB 250), but it is also quite clear that the existence of these administrative bodies extended beyond the coloniae of the province as well (RIB 311, 707, 933, 1700). As Frere has noted (1991, 237) there was a great deal of expense associated with membership of the ordo decuriones, which included the wider pressure placed on the decuriones to pay for the construction of public buildings. Naturally this would have included religious precincts, which would have also been appealing to them because such an undertaking also accentuated the piety of the individual towards a particular deity. Therefore, it is evident that this group of local property owners would have had a significant impact upon the choice and architectural design of temples and shrines throughout the region of Roman Gloucestershire.

In any study of the development of religion in Roman Gloucestershire, the major features for discussion are religious precincts and their archaeological remains, usually in the form of temples and shrines. These religious buildings had several forms and differed in status and wealth, but were linked, for example, by the dedication of votive objects. The material obtained from the archaeological remains provides valuable insight into how the local population approached their deities, what they dedicated to their gods, their relative position and constructional material of the structures and, therefore, the context in which they viewed their deities. It also assists in defining the importance and role of each god, as well as the number and possibly the social standing of the deity’s devotees. In this analysis of the religious sanctuaries in Roman Gloucestershire it is useful to examine the urban and rural sites separately. This division is convenient because of the difference in the degree of Roman influence on the native inhabitants and also the need of the local aristocracy to express their adoption of Roman culture. There will also be a distinction made between the smaller shrines and the larger Romano-Celtic temples, which occurred in small settlements and rural regions.

Within the ordo decuriones there were additional roles that were specifically focused upon temple construction: the Duumviri, but particularly the Duumviri aedi dedicandae and the Duumviri aedi locandae. These officials were specifically focused upon the dedication of land for and the supervision of temple construction. The existence of duoviri at Gloucester has been well established though the discovery of several inscriptions that list their members (RIB II.5 2487.1, 2487.2, 2487.3, 2488.1). The existence of such officials highlights the conscious necessity for the provision of this authoritative responsibility, which epitomises how important the erection of temples was within the wider Romano-British community. Unfortunately there is no direct evidence linking the members of the ordo decuriones with temple construction in Roman Britain, but there is certainly evidence from elsewhere in the Roman Empire and there is no reason to suggest that Britain was an exception from this tradition. Evidence of the importance of such positions and their associated prestige has been shown from inscriptions discovered at Ostia (D’Arms 1976, 393-7; Gordon 1931, 67) and also at Pompeii (Welling 1893, 227), but it is in the explicit mention of temple construction within the

Nevertheless, one of the most important topics to consider first is the question of who actually built these religious buildings, particularly in relation to the Romano-Celtic temples. Within an urban context the most likely candidates were members of the ordo decuriones. This group represented the primary administrative authority within the provincial towns and was comprised of a number of decuriones (Wacher 1995,

71

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Lex Irnitana from Spain (González 1986, 189-90, 195) that makes their importance even more obvious.

Roman rules in regards to the manumission of slaves by the Latins (González 1986, 156-7); and the implementation of the Roman civil law codes on all inhabitants of the municipium (González 1986, 176, 181; Lintott 1993, 141). Such legislation, combined with the veritable use of Roman administrative practices, reveals the desire of the Roman imperial régime to encourage the gradual Romanisation of the provincial population, at least in reference to the provincial aristocracy (Jones and Milns 1984, 46). A few features of the traditional native system was actively allowed for within the municipal legislation. This local autonomy is shown in two clear areas, that being the size of the ordo decuriones (González 1986, 149, 158) and the assignment of seating at games and local spectacles (González 1986, 174).

This charter was principally associated with the conferral of ius Latii on the inhabitants of the cities in question and accordingly provide a great deal of information on the legal status of Latinitas and its dividends. Through research into the lex Irnitana it has been deduced that the effect on the administration institutions of these cities was paramount. The functioning of internal local administration still remained predominantly the responsibility of the local authorities but the gradual adoption of Roman institutions, by those willing provincials, is undeniable. Before the discovery of the Lex Irnitana these limitations were seen as less rigid than they have now proven to be, with the degree of local autonomy being severely limited (Lintott 1993, 141). There are several areas within these charters that are explicit in the imposition of Roman institutions upon the provincial administrative system. Naturally local government would have had the greatest influence of Romanisation on the provincial populace, making the Roman imperial interest in local provincial administration quite logical (Churchin 1991, 66). The remaining chapters of the municipal laws predominantly deal with the status and duties of the local magistrates. The loss of the first eighteen chapters of the lex Irnitana, probably dealing with the grant of the ius Latii itself, the arrangement of the population and the religious duties of the municipium is however unfortunate.

The lex Irnitana has proven to be of the utmost use in determining the perspective of the principles behind Roman provincial administration. The charters reflect Rome’s desire to gradually influence the provincial nobility in their development towards a greater degree of romanitas. These aristocrats were the essential link between Rome and the provincial population, acquiescing in Rome’s desire for greater Romanisation. The adoption of Roman institutions, combined with the elite’s appropriation of Roman names, titles, dress and lifestyle all played a crucial role in the compliance of the majority of the provincials with the imperial authorities (Churchin 1991, 126). The prospect of advancement and the considerable degree of local autonomy that was preserved for the nobility assured their compliance with the Roman provincial administration, seeking the benefits of a Roman lifestyle (Jones and Milns 1984, 46).

The adoption of Roman administration practices meant that the majority of the governing functions remained the responsibility of the local magistrates, but the ordo decuriones, the regional senate, was the unquestionable controlling body in regards to internal affairs (Hardy 1912, 64). These councils became the source for appropriate magistrates to be appointed, rather than the magistrates being suitable candidates for the ordo after their tenure (Braund 1988, 27). The decuriones were chosen by the duovirs making the control of local administration in provincial municipia completely dominated by the pro-Roman upper echelon of society (Last 1970, 452). Despite the control of the local council being foremost in the community, this was only applicable in the sphere of internal affairs, with all decisions being subject to the consideration of the provincial governor (Jones 1970, 212). The provincial governor is only mentioned twice in the lex Irnitana (González 1986, 149, 174, 176), but the limits placed upon the local institutions and magistrates reveal that all criminal cases and lawsuits exceeding a certain amount were referred to him (González 1986, 170, 172, 175-6).

This was only achieved by avoiding any wanton disruption of the provinces systems and stability, with a series of allurements and benefactions proving to be the more effective measure to adopt to gain compliance (Last 1970, 448). This would have directly impacted upon the Romanisation of the native religion throughout the all of the provinces and clearly establishes the dominating influence of the local élites in Roman Gloucestershire. Another notable example from the continent that indicates the prominent role of decuriones in the construction and improvement of local temples is taken from the Temples of Apollo and Isis in Pompeii, where the repairs to their structures by local magistrates are commemorated on several inscriptions near their entrances (CIL 10.787; 10.802; 10.847). Such an action was also commemorated in an inscription discovered at the Temple of Bellona at Ostia (Meiggs 1973, 359) where a duovir and the ordo decuriones are mentioned as being directly responsible for the reconstruction of this urban temple. All the same, it is also important to note that the influence of these leaders would have also extended into the hinterland of the urban centres as well (Wacher 1995, 38).

Contained within the lex Irnitana there was deliberate legislation from the Roman administration to assimilate the Spanish provincials with Roman citizens. Some of the more important aspects of such legislation was the identical regulations for tutoris optio between both parties (González 1986, 157); the implementation of

The role of the native aristocracy in the Romanisation of the native religion in rural areas was important, and one of the most visible manifestations of the Romanisation 72

TEMPLES AND SHRINES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE process was the erection of Romano-Celtic temples. Despite the introduction of these structures, however, continuity of sanctity from Iron Age to Romano-Celtic is a common feature (Webster 1996, 458). Romano-Celtic temples were often erected on the site of previous Iron Age sacred sites, with many continuing to be venerated throughout the Roman occupation (Cunliffe 1997, 204; Potter and Johns 1992, 108). This leads to the belief that there was merely a veneer of Romanisation overlying the persisting native religion.

this was the only ‘local’ epigraphic/Romannised dedication, the limited evidence in this regard still exemplifies the minimal acceptance of Romanised forms of religious dedications throughout the region. It is also important to note the location in which these offerings were dedicated, being discovered predominantly within an urban context. The vast majority have been discovered within major towns (Appendix IV), which may exhibit the greater emphasis upon romanitas within such an urban context. More than half of these dedications have been uncovered in Cirencester, Kingsholm and Kingscote (Appendix IV), illustrating the higher degree of Romanisation in these regions. All the same, this corresponds well with the wider expression of romanitas, which seemed to be more restricted than exhibited in the construction of Romano-Celtic temples. This exemplifies the limitations in the adoption of Roman culture throughout the wider local population, with only certain members of the community adopting such cultural motifs.

The broader limitations of the Romanisation of native religion in Gloucestershire are also exhibited when the epigraphic religious dedications are taken into consideration, despite the romanitas exhibited in many of their associated temple structures. The examination of the votive tablets and altars provide an additional source of information for the discussion of this Romanisation, covering a different sphere of expression. As would be expected, the erection of Romanised temples would have almost exclusively been within the domain of either collective groups (such as the ordo decuriones, the provincial administration and professional/religious guilds) or wealthy individuals, such as the native Romano-British élites. All the same, the erection of altars and other epigraphic dedications would have been available to a wider clientele, which suggests that they provide a better view of the Romanisation of the nonélite community.

The move from the Iron Age sanctuaries to RomanoCeltic temples changed little but external appearance, with many of the buildings placed on previously sacred sites. Some examples of this in Roman Britain have been noted at Hayling Island (Hampshire) (Downey, King and Soffe 1980, 289-304), Gosbecks (Essex) (Wait 1985, 157), Lancing Ring (West Sussex) (Bedwin 1981, 37-56) and Harlow (Essex) (Selkirk 1968, 287-90). It was not the task of the Roman administration to have undertaken such construction, but the responsibility of the tribal élite. It is highly unlikely, however, that most of the native inhabitants adopted Roman ways, or that these customs were forced upon them (Hingley 1989, 11). It is questionable even whether the administration, either Roman or native, was at all concerned with the beliefs of the peasantry.

The first point of consideration in relation to these votive dedications is the low number of extant examples from this region (Appendix IV). This can be taken as an additional indication of the limited acceptance of Roman religion within the wider community in Gloucestershire. This is further accentuated when the deities being addressed are considered. Forty percent of the mentioned deities are simply to the Genius of the place, which, while this has been interpreted by Yeates (2006, 18) as being in reference to a specific local deity (named Cuda), is more likely to indicate that the dedicator may not have been a member of the local community (otherwise the reference to the deity may have been more specific). A good example of the non-local use of dedications to the Genius is provided by Dedication 5 (Appendix IV), which was discovered at the military fort of Kingsholm, and was erected by men called Choguncum and Orivendus.

One of the most obvious signs of religious Romanisation, especially in major cities, was the introduction of the Imperial Cult (Fishwick 1969, 77). The most famous of these religious centres was the temple of Divus Claudius at Colchester (Tac. Ann. 14.31), even though there were probably other temples at various colonia, for example in York and Lincoln (RIB 678; Lewis 1966, 122). The Imperial Cult temple at York was probably erected in the High Ousegate/Spurriergale region, the remnants of a substantial second century stone structure having been found there (Ottaway 1993, 69). A dedication to the Imperial Cult and a possible local deity “Joug” was also discovered in the area, adding to the likelihood of a temple there (RIB 648). The 2nd Century was a prosperous period for York and the erection of such a temple corresponds well to such community success (Ottaway 1989, 3).

In addition to this there is also an example of an official dedication (in the form of a statue base) by the governor of Britannia Prima (Dedication 3), which further illustrates the offering of these votive inscriptions by people who were clearly not from the Gloucestershire region. The general provenance of externally based dedicators is complemented by the limited evidence for local members of the community who erected such epigraphic offerings. From this corpus there is really only one example (Dedication 4) that was clearly presented by a local, Sulinus, who also presented similar dedications at Bath (RIB 150, 151). While it is by no means certain that

There is no certain evidence for a classical temple at Lincoln, but there are quite a few indications leading to that supposition (Green 1976, 168). The evidence from inscriptions attest the existence of seviri augustales, 73

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY members of the imperial priesthood, being based at the city, and this is a strong indication of the presence of the Imperial Cult. An Imperial temple was most likely positioned at Bailgate, in Lincoln (Lewis 1966, 122). Both York and Lincoln also have evidence of popular cults for Mercury and Apollo, with offerings being provided by wealthy residents who had accepted these Roman deities (RIB 270, 271; Norman 1971, 147). This curial order was closely associated with the agriculturally-based native élite, who resided in both the urban and rural areas, and the aristocracy and the curiales often worked together on their religious structures (RIB 91, 92; Todd 1989, 89).

civitas capitals such as Chichester. This too was in one of the most Romanised areas in Britain, even from the reign of Cogidubnus (RIB 91); it boasted a statue to Jupiter Optimus Maximus, possibly from the Claudian period, and also a probable temple to Neptune and Minerva (RIB 89, 92). It is likely that the importance of the Imperial Cult and the divine house justified the erection of a temple to these deities, especially in view of the high degree of continental association and influence in the area (Rivet 1964, 77). In Europe dedications to the Emperor and Roma had been made from the time of Augustus, but such votives would have had little effect upon most of the Britons after the Roman conquest. The cult of Claudius provided something more tangible for them (King 1990b, 234). It is most likely that, even though there were many legionary veterans in the colonies, a number of incolae, or native inhabitants, would have also been included in the community (Wacher 1995, 125). These would have been of the upper echelon with the majority of the population still living in rural districts (Potter and Johns 1990, 68). At this time the urban centres only consisted of a very small percentage of the population, including land-based aristocrats in townhouses, who were seeking Roman favour and advancement.

The Imperial temple at Colchester, which was founded around 50 AD, and mentioned by both Tacitus (Ann. 14.31) and Seneca (Apoc. 8.3), became a symbol of the Roman imperialism which produced both positive and negative responses from the native population (Lewis 1966, 61). The imposition of such a temple so early into the occupation had probably predated the complete pacification of the native population, resulting in a predicament for the provincial administration (Fishwick 1991, 138; Simpson 1993, 2). The confiscation of native land for veterans and the erection of the Divus Claudius Temple would have been seen as an arrogant statement on behalf of Rome, and was bound to cause local dissension (Cunliffe 1988, 161). According to Tacitus (Ann. 14.31), the seizure of the Icenian king’s territories had incited them to rebel, thus revealing Rome’s reliance on the compliance of the native élite. Rebellion was usually led by the nobility, especially in the Icenian incident (Black 1987, 7-8), but the limited number of these occurrences is indicative of the aristocracy’s general cooperation (Millett 1990a, 39). Furthermore, the imposition of the Imperial Cult was designed to encourage loyalty and to serve as a mechanism of social advancement for the willing native population (Fishwick 1987, 273).

There are essentially three types of temple to be dealt with here: Classical temples, native shrines and RomanoCeltic temples. The main difference between the Classical temples and the others is that the former were erected in the urban centres, whereas most of the shrines and Romano-Celtic temples were constructed in the rural regions. But one of the most compelling points when studying the religious sanctuaries of Roman Britain is the comparative scarcity of Classical temples (Lewis 1966, 57). The archetypal characteristics of Classical temples were a cella that was raised on a podium, and a pedimental roof supported by columns (Blagg 1980b, 31). Several of these temples were erected during the 1st Century in Britain (De la Bédoyère 1991, 170), but some notable exceptions to this dating have been found in Gloucestershire: on the limited evidence, the likely Classical temples in Cirencester were erected in the 2nd Century.

Colchester had become a major oppidum in the preconquest period, having been open to external influence from this time (Cunliffe 1976, 151). Local aristocrats would have served as the seviri augustales, the Imperial Cult priests. Unfortunately there is no record of the provincial priesthood at Colchester, but their existence is certain (Fishwick 1997, 31). The architecture of the Divus Claudius temple was on exceedingly grandiose lines with a podium twenty-four by thirty-one and a half metres, with marble flooring, and an octastyle facade and with classical style columns that were approximately three hundred and thirty centimetres apart (Lewis 1966, 61-2). There was also a curia, a theatre, and ample living quarters for the most civilized colonists, but the eyecatching temple was raised above the level of these other public buildings, a monument to the Romanisation of the local élite (Wheeler 1920, 89), who, after all, presumably contributed the funds for its construction (Potter 1997, 75). Other evidence for the Imperial Cult in Britain can be found not only in the coloniae but also in some of the

Urban Temples in Roman Gloucestershire The urban centres of Roman Gloucestershire, that is Gloucester and Cirencester, have provided little evidence of religious structures, but there are some indications. Most of the known temples erected there were dedicated to Classical deities, although no plans are known. In view of the status of Gloucester, it is likely to have had a temple associated with its forum (Wilson 1973b, 26), probably from the late 1st or early 2nd Century AD (Lewis 1966, 140). Gloucester may have also had another located at St. Aldate’s, a short distance north of the city walls, with the discovery of several large columns, possibly from a Classical temple. There have been two discoveries of sculpture that indicate Romano-Celtic craftsmen: a British goddess in bronze (Richardson 1962, 74

TEMPLES AND SHRINES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE between the two was most likely due to the political, economic and social benefits gained by urban dwellers in the first two centuries, and the rejection of city life from the 3rd Century AD (Horne 1981, 25). The contrast between the two is that the urban temples were created to serve a community, whereas the rural shrines were often built on pre-existing Iron Age sites (Lewis 1966, 50, 141). According to Wait (1985, 173, 183), sixty percent of the Celtic shrine sites he surveyed continued into the Roman period, with some other Romano-Celtic structures possibly having Iron Age predecessors. The continuity from Celtic sacred site to Romano-Celtic temples related to both occupation and function. One well-known example is Thetford, but there are many other examples (Gregory 1992). This development was most likely due to the desire of the local villa owners to update the regional sanctuaries to appear more Romanised. Some of these religious complexes also contained markets and theatres as a central feature of the public buildings to provide for the local rural community. Good examples of this are at Woodeaton, Cold Kitchen Hill and Thistleton I (Collingwood and Richmond 1969, 158). So these religious sanctuaries, while based on religion, served also as communal centres for the region, blending religious, social and economic interests (De la Bédoyère 1993, 105). These regional religious centres are commonly found within small rural settlements with the shrine and its associated buildings being the focus and possibly the original purpose for the township, as at Thistleton and Woodeaton (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 176).

176-7), and a Romano-Celtic head that may have been used to decorate a possible temple (Greene 1975, 33845). There was also a possible temple to Mercury, with two reliefs of the god and his native consort, Rosmerta, being discovered at the colonia (Webster 1986a, 59-60). It seems that the pairing of these two deities may be continuing the native beliefs, except in a different medium, which is similar to the continuity in sacred sites from the pre-Roman to Romano-British periods (Webster 1997b, 327). But there is little certain evidence of temples in Gloucester, whereas there have been several discoveries from Cirencester, where there was also a higher percentage of native inhabitants. Cirencester had a Classical temple incorporated in the forum complex. It was a 4th Century addition that faced to the southeast towards the basilica (Wilson 1973b, 26). Five Corinthian capitals were discovered in the town, which suggests the presence of another Classical temple (Blagg 1980b, 35). The evidence for Roman religion is also shown through the discovery of a Jupiter column, dedicated in the 4th Century AD (RIB 103). The late dedication of this column indicates that there was a continuation of pagan beliefs despite the growing popularity of Christianity at the time (Lewis 1966, 144). A probable temple to the Deae Matres is indicated by the discovery of a dedication by Sulinus (RIB 105). This dedication has been dated to the 2nd or 3rd Centuries AD and was found along with two reliefs of the Matres, a statue of one of the mothers, and parts of another column (Lewis 1966, 125). It is unlikely any temple to these deities was classical in style, in view of the deities worshipped there. Such a temple may indicate a persistence of native belief among some of the local inhabitants, but incorporating such architectural features as columns would indicate that the temple was still Romanised to a certain degree. There may have also been a temple to Minerva erected in the civitas-capital, with the discovery of two sculptured heads of the goddess and a torso, none of which match, but suggest the presence of a temple. There could be another temple dedicated to Mercury at Cirencester, dated to the 2nd or 3rd Century. This is proposed in view of the discovery of a stone head of Mercury, and also a relief of the deity with Rosmerta. The presence of Rosmerta illustrates that there still would have been an element of native ritual observance among the Romanised inhabitants of Cirencester. Nearby was a broken statue that may have been holding a rod, which further suggests a temple to Mercury. The amount of architectural material surviving limits the classification of these structures, however, and provides little indication of the plans. But the amount of sculptured masonry suggests that several temples existed in Corinium, as would have befitted a city of its standing.

The persistence of Celtic traditions throughout the Roman period is also apparent at the Henley Wood sanctuary. Like many other temple sites, this precinct had been used from the Iron Age as a marketplace and religious sanctuary (Watts and Leach 1996, 138). Two temples have been recovered from the Roman period, with Temple I probably being built in the 1st Century AD. The second temple was constructed later, but both structures have strong Iron Age affinities (Watts and Leach 1996, 142-3). Among the finds were a pre-Roman brooch and a late Roman bronze figurine. The strong continuities of construction and dedication reflect a religious site with a continuing cult practice with no apparent hiatus or decline (Watts and Leach 1996, 143). A similar example is the Iron Age and Romano-Celtic sacred site at Frilford in Berkshire. During both Iron Age and the Roman period the settlement at Frilford contained a spacious religious complex with at least two temples within a temenos and also an amphitheatre (Hingley 1982a, 305). The continuity from the pre-Roman to Roman periods is shown with both stratigraphical and ceramic evidence (Bradford and Goodchild 1939, 9). The stratigraphical evidence is proven in the perpetuation of ‘henge’ and stone circles as a principal part of the religious cult (Stevens 1940, 167). Beneath the circular temple was a penannular-ditched shrine of Iron Age date, possibly originating from the 1st Century BC. There was another building discovered beneath the square RomanoCeltic temple: a circular ritual enclosure with two child

Rural Temples and Shrines in Roman Britain The rural Romano-Celtic religious sites in Britain developed at a later date than their urban counterparts with the majority developing in the 3rd and 4th Centuries AD (Jones and Mattingly 1991, 290). This difference 75

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY burials (Stevens 1940, 167). The circular shrine also yielded a number of votive artefacts, including a miniature sword and shield, possibly symbolizing the continued reverence for a Celtic military deity in a Celtic or Romano-Celtic form (Wait 1985, 157).

the spring may have extended from the Iron Age until into the 5th Century AD (Hutton 1991, 218). Fifteen altars were dedicated to Coventina and deposited in the well, with some being ceremonially deposited to avoid desecration (Allason-Jones and McKay 1985, 8). This probably occurred in the late 4th Century AD, when the Theodosian edict against paganism threatened the cult and Coventina’s devotees sought to protect her dedications from profane hands. This edict only stopped pagan rituals; members of the local community continued to venerate the site, as evidenced by coin dedications after the dismantling of the shrine (Allason-Jones and McKay 1985, 54, 73). In view of its origins and longevity, the cult would have, during the Roman period, been a “more formalized variant of pre-Roman ritual practice” (Chadwick 1971, 163). A possible indication of pre-Roman veneration is the discovery of an early copy of a Philip II of Macedon stater (Allason-Jones and McKay 1985, 66, 75). These coins were widely circulated during the late Iron Age in Britain, and may signify an example of pre-Roman religious respect for the spring. The popularity of water-deities continued throughout Britain during the Roman occupation, being a major theme of Celtic spirituality (Ross 1967, 19-33; Webster 1996, 449-51).

A ploughshare was also uncovered at the base of a posthole, indicating a connection with fertility (Bradford and Goodchild 1939, 15). This circular temple has been dated to c. AD 90 and the shrines were probably the main focus for the entire native settlement (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 182). The complex is unique because it is the only site to produce two adjacent sacred buildings with continuity from the Iron Age to the Roman period. Despite the endurance of such features the Iron Age shrine itself had little influence on the structure of its successor (Bradford and Goodchild 1939, 9). There were two Romano-Celtic temples built of stone, one circular, and the other a square Romano-Celtic temple with a portico (Harding 1974, 105). The wealth of the settlement reflects the affluence of the local tribal leaders and their desire for Roman culture. Frilford is also noteworthy because of the distinctive method of coin dedication found there. On the path leading to Temple 2, a large numbers of coins had been trampled into the ground (Lewis 1966, 47). This is also found at Woodeaton and Pagan’s Hill, further exemplifying the symbolism of coin offerings (Green 1976, 38). A possible reason for the location of the complex at Frilford is that it was on a tribal boundary of the Atrebates and the Dobunni (Wait 1985, 183). The use of Celtic religious sites as communal gathering places between tribes is a common feature in Britain, with other likely examples at Lancing Ring and Woodeaton. The extensive nature of the Frilford complex may reflect the importance of such communal gatherings persisting throughout the Roman period in accordance with local religious tradition, as well as economic reasons (Hingley 1982a, 309). All the evidence at Frilford indicates a strong sense of traditional sanctity, emphasising the longevity of native beliefs (Bradford and Goodchild 1939, 15).

Another example of a shrine where the major focus was a water-deity was at Buxton, which was similar to the sanctuary at Bath. Both Bath and Buxton had hot medicinal springs, which were revered for their healing qualities (Frere 1975, 5-6). The springs at Buxton were associated with the deity Arnemetia, a word “derived from the Celtic nemeton, a sacred grove” (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 176) and which explains the name of the settlement, Aquae Arnemetiae. There is a possibility that the temple here was classical in design, as it was built in association with a Roman bath (Lewis 1966, 71). There is also a possibility that the temple and the baths were both used by the Roman military in much the same way there as at Bath, but the considerable attraction would have been to civilians (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 176). Owing to the isolated position of the settlement the local élite most likely erected the structures. The region’s elevated positioning was perfect for animal husbandry, being ideal for native aristocrats with large estates. This is evident from the limited degree of urbanization in the region for such a religious complex. The native élite would have still been associated with the temple, but mostly maintained their rural residences because of the agrarian nature of the region’s economy (Frere 1975, 34). The economic benefits from the springs for the local population would have ceased at the end of the Roman occupation, but it is likely that the local inhabitants continued to revere the springs in their ancestral fashion with a continuation of the healing cult (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 178). Unfortunately, owing to limited excavation, much of this site remains unknown.

Similar perseverance is also evidenced at Coventina’s Well, which was probably revered in the Iron Age as well. The shrine at Coventina’s Well was the setting for a water-cult to the goddess Coventina, as shown in the numerous inscriptions (RIB 1522-35). The goddess Coventina was distinctively Celtic in both name and depiction, having a definite role as a healing deity (Green 1989, 401). The Romano-Celtic temple itself was a square, open-air structure built over the sacred well (Allason-Jones and McKay 1985, 3). The site has produced many altars and votive objects, including large numbers of coins and small personal offerings (Collingwood and Richmond 1969, 159). The height of the cult’s popularity was during the Roman period, as evidenced by the dedications by members of the Roman military (RIB 1523-4, 1529, 1534-5), but the sanctity of

A similar site is the complex at Springhead, which has been more extensively excavated. This site reveals the 76

TEMPLES AND SHRINES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE same hard evidence for continuity between the preRoman and Roman periods. There are a number of ditches beneath the remains of a Romano-Celtic shrine, suggesting continuity from the Iron Age (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 192). The substantial masonry buildings of this Romano-Celtic sanctuary reveal the large area that the settlement covered (Harker 1980, 285-6). Such extensive structures naturally reflect the efforts of the native leaders, being the only group sufficiently motivated or wealthy enough to undertake such works. There were at least three Romano-Celtic shrines erected at the sanctuary with the earliest, Temple I, being dated to the late 1st or early 2nd Century AD (Lewis 1966, 20). There is a possibility that this large religious sanctuary was connected to a water deity, and associated with the springs and marshes in the area (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 192-3). This deity probably also had connections with healing, an association with Venus; there was a figurine of the deity discovered on the cella floor of Temple II (Detsicas 1983, 70, 146). The complex prospered throughout the Roman period until the advent of Christianity in the 4th Century AD (Harker 1980, 288). The prosperity of the settlement at Springhead was probably based on the sanctuary, with obvious religious significance to the Cantiaci in both the pre-Roman and Roman periods (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 189).

artefacts deposited by the native population. The complex is likely to have been associated with healing, as suggested by the construction in the late 2nd or early 3rd Century of a covered arcade to take waters from a nearby stream (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 190-1). The whole complex at Nettleton suggests that the majority of the clientele would have been travellers along the Fosse Way (De la Bédoyère 1993, 108), and that the tribal élite from the Dobunni would have benefited greatly from the economic rewards of assimilation. The early transition to Roman architecture and lifestyles is indicative of the tribal leaders’ pro-Roman sentiments. In this instance it reflects cooperation between the local nobility and the Roman military, with both parties seeking stability and security (Wedlake 1982, 143-5). Another example of pro-Roman tendencies is noticeable among Atrebates, especially at one of their major religious centres located at Hayling Island. This RomanoCeltic temple had one of the most distinctive plans in Britain (Drury 1980, 62). This early adoption of GalloRoman building methods reflects the political developments in the region. This strong Roman influence was due to the presence in the district of King Cogidubnus, a client of Rome, who most likely built the temple, as well as the villa at Fishbourne and the foundation of the city of Chichester (Noviomagus Regnensium) (Potter and Johns 1990, 85). Cogidubnus is an excellent example of a tribal leader who benefited from the patronage of the Roman State (Todd 1989, 83). It also indicates the extent of Cogidubnus’s commitment to Rome and Roman ways. The origins of the plan for the Hayling Island temple lie in Gaul, and it was constructed in accordance with Roman practices probably using Gallic craftsmen (Drury 1980, 66). The original late Iron Age temple was completely reconstructed in around AD 60-70 in stone. It became a major cult centre of great wealth, reflecting the king’s status as a client-king of Rome (King and Soffe 1994, 115). The new cult centre was twice as large as its Iron Age predecessor and reflected a completely different architectural style. This is indicative of the native élite’s adopting Roman decoration, fashions and techniques to appear highly cultured in the administration’s eyes, but the similarities between the Iron Age and Roman shrines are still apparent. There remained an open space within the temenos that was used in the Iron Age for the offering of votive artefacts, and remained the main depository (Downey, King and Soffe 1980, 293). The artefacts presented during the Iron Age were mostly of a military nature, but this ceased during the Roman period. This reflected the degeneration of the native warrior culture; moreover, the conquered Britons had been disarmed after AD 43 (Frere 1987, 60).

There may have been a similar emphasis on healing at the shrine to Apollo-Cunomaglos at Nettleton in Wiltshire. The Romano-Celtic shrine could have been constructed as early as AD 69 but it is more likely to have been later (Wedlake 1982, 11). This shrine was built on the site of a pre-Roman religious sanctuary, most likely revering the Celtic deity Cunomaglos (hound-prince) (Wright 1962, 191). The existence of a pre-Roman sanctuary is indicated by the discovery of coins from the Dobunni and Belgic pottery underlying the ditches of a 1st Century enclosure (Wedlake 1982, 99). This shrine may also have been situated on the Dobunni/Belgae border, and used for communal gatherings and settling disputes (Green 1976, 39). The Roman army had constructed a fort to the south in around AD 47 probably at the same time as the construction of the Fosse Way and the frontier. The early modifications would have been due to cooperation between the native aristocrats and the Roman military. Owing to the previous expansion of Catuvellaunian influence, the Dobunni leaders had readily accepted Roman protection, patronage and lifestyles. During the 1st Century the army would have provided a great influx to the shrine, bringing not only more wealth, but also other deities to the region. Apart from the worship of the combined ApolloCunomaglos deity at Nettleton there is also mention of devotion to Silvanus, Diana, Mercury and Rosmerta (Wright 1969, 235; Toynbee 1964, 161-2). The attendance of members of the military at the shrine only lasted for a very limited time, with the shrine continuing to be frequented by the local Dobunni tribes (Wedlake 1982, 6). There was thus an unusual number of bronze brooches discovered at the site, presumably votive

The deity that was worshipped may have been a Romano-Celtic Mars, or possibly Augustus and Mars Mullo (Downey, King and Soffe 1980, 300). It is obvious that the temple at Hayling Island was a religious complex of some standing, possibly being the tribal cult centre for the Atrebates even during the Iron Age. It is exceptional 77

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY within Roman Britain for its early date, its design and its departure from Celtic tradition (King and Soffe 1994, 116). This change was largely due to the leadership of the pro-Roman tribal élite, most likely Cogidubnus, and not a change in the composition of the population. The traditional views of the common people are evidenced in the continual offering of votive artefacts, despite the discontinuation of military votive material.

By an examination of various sacred sites in south-east Britain, the continuity of the Celtic religion from the preRoman period throughout the Roman period is shown quite clearly. The transformation of the Celtic sanctuaries into Romano-Celtic sites changed little but for external appearance, with the majority of these sanctuaries being placed on previously sacred locations. It was not the task of the Roman administration to have undertaken such modifications; they were in the hands of the tribal élite. It is highly unlikely, however, that most of the native inhabitants adopted Roman ways, or that these habits were forced upon them (Hingley 1989, 11). It is questionable even whether the administration, albeit Roman or Celtic, was at all concerned with the beliefs of the peasantry. The main objective of the Roman régime was to influence the native élite to adopt Roman ways to make the province a more stable, profitable environment (Millett 1990, 40). For the native élites, there were benefits for them in the construction of such temples: they would appear more Romanised, and therefore more trustworthy, to the administration. The limited construction of shrines in the Iron Age would have also been performed by the tribal leaders in some areas in south-east Britain, being an obvious and ostentatious expression of gratitude to a local deity. In many cases this continued throughout the Roman period (MacCulloch 1991, 281), as with other traditions, except that the shrine was constructed in a different style, in accordance with the new fashions of the period. The attitude of the native élite to the construction of these temples is paramount in ascertaining their relationship with the Roman administration. It was by creating such Romano-Celtic temples that the aristocracy expressed their privileged positions, in much the same way as did their impressive Romanised villas throughout the countryside. The majority of these villas were erected in the second and third centuries, whereas rural RomanoCeltic temples were predominantly constructed in the 3rd and 4th Centuries AD. This seems to have been an apt progression in the aristocracy’s display of Roman tendencies.

Comparable continuity can also be seen at the RomanoCeltic temple at Harlow which was built relatively early after the Roman conquest, and displayed a strong sense of continuity from the Iron Age. The temple, erected around AD 80, consisted of a square cella, with an ambulatory having a cobbled pavement to the eastern side (France and Gobel 1985, 21-3, 135). The RomanoCeltic temple was erected at a comparable time to those at Frilford II, Springhead I, Verulamium and Woodeaton, with the most similar stylistically being Springhead I. Beneath this structure there were remnants of posthole and bedding trenches and also three votive hoards of coins and brooches, all dating between 50 BC and AD 50; this suggests an Iron Age predecessor (Wait 1985, 157-61). The Romano-Celtic temple was extended around AD 120 with a wooden palisade, but the major additions of rooms and tessellated floors occurred in the early 3rd Century AD (France and Gobel 1985, 21-3). The occupation and function of the site was continuous from the Bronze Age until the 4th Century AD (Wait 1985, 161). This constant veneration makes this site significant in that the traditional sanctity continued for so long despite the Roman domination (France and Gobel 1985, 138). The relatively early construction suggests a number of willing aristocrats who sought Roman patronage and undertook such renovations. One final example of a relatively wealthy group seeking Roman advancement is at the settlement of Wanborough. This temple site has produced evidence of pre-Roman ritual use in the form of charcoal and votive offerings, particularly a large number of coins (Wacher 1975c, 233), beneath the Roman remains. The Romano-Celtic temple follows the typical form with an almost square cella within an ambulatory, a tiled roof and tessellated pavement in the cella (Crocker and McCracken 1994, 164-5). Again, these relatively wealthy structures are further evidence of the aristocracy’s efforts and their desire to appear civilized. The Romano-Celtic stone structure and its associated buildings were erected around the late first century and a foundation deposit of ritual crowns was made (Crocker and McCracken 1994, 165). An association with water is possible, with the presence of a nearby pond, but it is more likely that the deity was a Celtic Jupiter with solar attributes, in view of the wheel symbolism on the ritual crowns. The sanctity of the site continued until the late fourth century; this lays further emphasis on the traditional and conservative nature of most the native population’s beliefs, and the longevity of the Celtic religious cults (Crocker and McCracken 1994, 165).

Rural Temples and Shrines in Roman Gloucestershire Within Roman Gloucestershire, the most common types of temple were rural shrines and Romano-Celtic temples. The major difference between these two types was the amount of planning and capital invested into the structure and usually the types of material, with the Romano-Celtic temples being better appointed and much larger (Wait 1985, 179), such as Wycomb I and II (discussed below). Another difference was in their plan. There was a variety of layouts and styles of Romano-Celtic temples; most were square, but some were circular or polygonal (Wilson 1975b, 4). The plans was usually centred on a cella, which served as the cult room, surrounded by an ambulatory (Blagg 1991, 8). In most reconstructions of Romano-Celtic temples, the cella is usually presented as a central tower rising above the roof of the ambulatory (Wilson 1980, 5). Most temples were constructed using Roman materials, with plastered and painted stonewalls, 78

TEMPLES AND SHRINES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE community, whereas the rural shrines were often built on pre-existing Iron Age sites (Lewis 1966, 50, 141). According to Wait (1985, 173, 183), sixty percent of the Iron Age shrine sites he surveyed continued into the Roman period, with some other Romano-Celtic structures also likely to have had Iron Age predecessors. The development in rural areas was probably due to the desire of the villa owners to update the local sanctuaries to appear more Romanised. Some of these religious complexes also contained markets and theatres that served the local rural community. Good examples of this in Gloucestershire are at Wycomb and Bourton-on-theWater (McWhirr 1981, 130, 62-3). There are other examples of such settlements at Woodeaton, Cold Kitchen Hill and Thistleton I elsewhere in Britain (See Collingwood and Richmond 1969, 158; Lewis 1966, 84, 130). So these religious sanctuaries, while based on religion, served also as communal centres for the region, blending religious, social and economic interests. They would also serve to reinforce the status and perceived Romanisation of the local leaders.

mosaics and tiled roofs (Blagg 1991, 8). But in many ways, the native tradition continued in association with these classical features, such as in the choice of location (King 1990b, 232; Horne 1981, 26). It also appears that, at least in some cases, the form of the previous Iron Age ritual practices continued into the Roman period, which conditioned the Romano-Celtic ceremonial customs (Blagg 1991, 8), for example at Lower Slaughter (discussed below). The role of the native aristocracy in the Romanisation of the native religion in rural areas was of vast importance, and one of the most visible manifestations of this process was the erection of Romanised shrines and temples. The influence of the Roman occupation of Britain had in many ways a substantially different effect on temples in the country from those in towns. Cicero (Leg. 2.8.19) declares that in his ideal State the urban centres religious observances were to focus upon the official cults, whereas the family rituals were to be located in the countryside: in urbibus delubra habento; luco in agris habento et Larum sedes (‘In the cities they shall have shrines; they shall have groves, in the countryside and homes for the Lares’). The attitude of the Roman administration, therefore, seems to have been to tolerate traditional religious observances at the rural shrines (de Sainte Croix 1972, 63).

Temple 1 – Lower Slaughter Several small settlements in the area contained rustic shrines, for example at Custom Scrubs, King’s Stanley, Blaise Castle, Siddington, Daglingworth and Lower Slaughter. The settlement at Lower Slaughter (Fig. 96) is located two kilometres northeast of Bourton-on-theWater, along the Fosse Way. Excavation produced evidence of many pits, ditches, wells, burials and several structures (McWhirr 1981, 66-7). There was Iron Age habitation, but on a fairly modest scale. In the Roman period, two domestic structures were erected, their rectangular layouts and areas of pitched-stone paving suggesting that some members of the local community were Romanised. In a studded chest buried in the courtyard of Building 67 was a hoard of 137 coins, dated between AD 260-75 (RCHM 79). Two more coin hoards were uncovered at Lower Slaughter, one of around 1,500 coins, mostly minimissimi, and another in Building 83, of 1,170 coins, 482 of which were minimissimi. These coins measured a diameter less than 10 mm, but do not seem to have been a part of the currency system (Reece 1970, 36; Melville-Jones 1990, 186). These low value coins have been discovered at many religious sites, and may have been a type of symbolic offering (Webster 1986a, 123). These coins have also been discovered at Brean Down, Pagans Hill, Canterbury and Richborough. Their purely votive nature has been question however (Boon 1988, 141). Despite the apparent wealth of these Romanised structures and their associated finds, the remains of several circular domestic houses were also uncovered (O’Neil and Toynbee 1958, 49); this provides, perhaps, a better indication of the lifestyles of the majority of the inhabitants.

The resolute attitude of the majority of the rural population towards maintaining their own traditional beliefs was a factor throughout the Roman period and is shown in the archaeological record (Henig 1988, 24). The continuity from late Iron Age to Romano-Celtic is clearly demonstrated in the on-going use of native Iron Age religious sites throughout the Roman period. There was a façade of Romanisation but the fundamentals, or spirit, of the native religion undoubtedly continued with little alteration (King 1990b, 237). Woolf (1995, 347) believes that the combination of both cultures created a new hybrid Romano-British style, which was distinct in itself. Since the location was vastly more important than the structure itself (Maculloch 1911, 280), the benefits from any Romanisation was the trust gained by the native aristocracy from the Roman administration: the construction of Romano-Celtic temples was not the responsibility of Rome, especially in rural areas, and was undertaken by the nobility to secure their dominant position. The continuing sanctity at the sites reflects the strong traditionalism that remained in native society despite Romano-Celtic developments (Harding 1974, 112). Many of the rural religious buildings in Roman Britain were constructed at a later date than those in the towns, with most rural temples erected in the 3rd and 4th Centuries (Jones and Mattingly 1991, 290). This was most likely due to the political, economic and social benefits gained by urban dwellers in the first two centuries, and the rejection by them of city life from the 3rd Century onwards (De la Bédoyère 1993, 102; Horne 1981, 25). Urban temples were created to serve a

The temple at Lower Slaughter (Building 47) (Fig. 96) was constructed after AD 350 and was rectangular with six rooms (McWhirr 1981, 67). From the discovery of columns and sculptured architectural fragments nearby 79

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY shrine that served the local community. This building was located roughly twenty-two kilometres away from Cirencester, and is about one hundred and eighty metres away from the River Frome (RCHM 70). The evidence for its classification as a rural shrine includes several altars with reliefs of the Genius loci and Mars in different guises, and it may have been a shrine dedicated to Mars (Lewis 1966, 126). One of the reliefs was badly weathered (Swynnerton 1922, 222), but was similar to another discovered in Gloucester, indicating a common producer of such stone altars (Lindgren 1980, 111). There was also an altar to Fortuna, which may add further weight to the identification as a shrine (Clifford 1938, 300).

(Lewis 1966, 126), it appears that the temple was one of some standing, especially as it was located in a small rural settlement. It was probably dedicated to Mars and Minerva. The religious use of the site has been dated to the 2nd Century, predating the construction of the temple: an altar has been discovered which may have a representation of Mercury (Lindgren 1980, 60), and the weathering of the stone suggests that it originated in the 2nd or 3rd Century, despite being discovered in a 4th Century context. It is likely, however, that native-type deities were worshipped at the temple, despite the Classical representation (Birley 1986, 89). Fragments of a votive tablet were discovered close to the structure of the temple, and a well (Well 5) contained several votive pieces (McWhirr 1981, 67). The finds included two uninscribed portable altars, two votive plaques with figures of headless deities, and also two seated statuettes. The statuettes may have been purposely decapitated, which suggests that their deposition had been the result of the growth of Christianity in the settlement. The votive plaques depict Mars, Minerva and two show the Genii Cucullati. These Genii were depicted as hooded deities and may symbolise healing. A similar altar depicting Mercury and Minerva has also been discovered at Aldsworth in Gloucestershire (Henig, Cleary and Purser 2000)

Fragments of tessellated pavement, as well as a tile stamped ARVERI (RCHM 70), suggest that the structure was Romanised and that the builder was probably associated with Cirencester (McWhirr and Viner 1980, 359-77; Collingwood and Taylor 1931, 240). The ‘ARVERI’ inscription probably represents the producer Arverus, who was making tile and brick mainly for Cirencester (McWhirr, 1981, 111). The site has produced evidence of timber and later masonry stages, with its use extending into the 4th Century AD (Goodburn 1978, 456; Wilson 1974, 449-51). Some continuity of use at the site is apparent, with Iron Age roundhouses and a pit burial of an adult female (Heighway 1989, 37). But on the evidence of dedications to the local Genius loci and Mars, it appears that, during the Roman occupation, this temple was supported by some members of the Romanised aristocracy who were responsible for the erection of such a shrine. Nevertheless, the native sanctity of the King’s Stanley complex is undeniable, which illustrates the importance of the local traditions at this site and in many ways further epitomises the divergent elements within many Romano-Celtic temples and shrines.

The deposition of votive material in wells has been well documented in Roman Britain (Ross 1992, 46-59; Wait 1985, 51-83). Such dedications reflect an emphasis upon fertility and the natural world in the native religion (Woodward 1992, 53). The dedication of votive offerings during the Roman period did not change greatly from the pre-Roman period and reflect the beliefs and desires of the individuals involved. Stone altars also represented the wealth and status of the leaders in the tribes (Webster 1986a, 118). It was probably the concern the native aristocrats held for the preservation of their social standing that saw many adopt the votive practices of Rome to appeal to the Roman administration. Johns (1996, 9) defines votive material as being “simply those which have been dedicated to the use of a god”, taking many different forms. On the whole, these offerings usually can be classified into four groups: coins, symbolic models, personal objects and curse tablets (Webster 1986a, 123). A good example of a ritual well can be found at Coventina’s Well where a vast quantity of votive material was offered to the goddess (AllasonJones and McKay 1985). The depiction of Mars is very similar to another altar discovered at King’s Stanley and probably represents the same native deity, except that at Lower Slaughter the god was depicted as a group of three (O’Neil and Toynbee 1958, 52). The use of triadic imagery was a potent native religious expression, which sought to heighten the ‘power’ of the representation (Cunliffe 1997, 187).

There are other possible small rural shrines in Gloucestershire, but little structural evidence remains. Despite this, they all appear to represent the deliberate Romanisation of local sanctuaries. Such change reflects the assimilation of the Roman and native religions, the cultural emphasis depending upon the preferences of the devotee. One of these may be at Daglingworth (SO 99850443), where two reliefs of the Genii Cucullati were found (Lewis 1966, 126). Another dedication to the Matres and the Genius Loci (RIB 130) was probably erected by a native Briton (Alcock 1986, 118), who was following the Roman tradition of honouring the Genius Loci, and also the Celtic Matres. These tablets were discovered close to a Romanised structure which may have either been a villa (RCHM 41) or a shrine (Lewis 1966, 126). The structure has provided fragments of tessellated pavement (RCHM 41), but little else is known about it. The combination of the Mother Goddess cult and the Genii Cucullati is quite common, with other examples being found on the continent (Green 1995, 111). The discovery of the dedications to these native

Temple 2 – King’s Stanley The remains of the complex at King’s Stanley (SO 81000410) provide another possible example of a rural 80

TEMPLES AND SHRINES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE deities at a Romanised sanctuary assimilation of both religious cultures.

illustrate

the

shrine was expressed in its masonry structure and in its altars, whereas the location and traditions of the Custom Scrubs precinct was more indicative of its Celtic sanctity.

Temple 3 – Kingscote Temple 5 – Blaise Castle Another possible shrine to Minerva may have been located at Kingscote (ST 806960). Seventy-five buildings have been identified at this small Romanised town, with finds of sandstone tiles, mortar, pottery and quern fragments (RCHM 71). The wealth was not substantial, but there were still many Romanised buildings, most of which were agricultural (Reece 1984, 185-6). Almost nothing remains of the shrine itself, but the best indication of a sacred building is a large stone statue (Lewis 1966, 126), the head of a statue of Minerva, and also a relief which depicts the goddess. These may indicate that there was a shrine to the goddess located within this small town.

The site at Blaise Castle has also produced evidence of a possible shrine (Lewis 1966, 125). The site was originally an Iron Age hill-fort, which seems to be quite common, with other similar examples of shrines in hillforts found at Lydney Park and Uley. At Blaise Castle, few structures remain, with only a few fragments of painted plaster and roof tiles. A large number of Roman coins were discovered in the northwest corner of the site, dated from the Republican period. The structure was most likely Romanised to some degree, but it was located within a temenos, as was the temple at Lydney Park (Lewis 1966, 132-3), which may indicate the site had Iron Age origins. Despite the discovery of Romanised dedications at many of these possible shrines, therefore, it cannot be assumed that the deities were strictly classical. The representation of these deities in Roman form may disguise the traditional sanctity at several former Iron Age sites.

Judging from the overall sequence of developments at Kingscote, as mentioned in Chapter I, it would be logical to view this sacred space as being a Roman introduction. There is no indication of native sanctity (or habitation) at this site (Eagles and Swan 1972, 61-3) and it seems that the shrine was probably introduced during the military occupation at Kingscote. This is quite unusual within the general corpus of religious structures in Roman Gloucestershire, but this may also explain the limited remains of its structure as well. The lack of sacred traditions at this site would have provided little incentive for the local community to maintain this area once the town itself had started to decline. Nevertheless, little else can be taken from this site without further archaeological investigation.

In all likelihood, the Romanisation of the site at Blaise Castle was a result of it being used as a military base (Clifford 1878-9, 87), which has affected the nature of the extant evidence. This would suggest that while the romanitas of the complex was clearly expressed within its structure and in its dedications, whereas the site itself represented a longer tradition of native sanctity. There was a clear representation of Celtic religious traditions through the continued inclusion of a temenos, which illustrates the combined foci of this complex. While it seems that the Romans saw this site as an opportune location for military or commercial settlement (Clifford 1878-9) the local traditions of sanctity were clearly upheld during the Roman period as well.

Temple 4 – Custom Scrubs Another possible shrine to Minerva and Mars has been discovered at Custom Scrubs (SO 894081) (Yeates 2006, 400). An altar to Minerva was found with several other altars, four to Mars, and one to Silvanus; a relief of a man and woman was uncovered nearby. There are also two reliefs of armed figures and a possible Genio sacrum, inscribed DEO ROMULO, which may represent Mars in the guise of Romulus (CIL 7.73), and another altar to Mars Olludius (RIB 131). One of the representations of Mars, a votive tablet, has been dated to the 3rd Century, and has the inscription ‘DEO ROM(U)LO GULIOEPIUS DONAVIT IUVENTINUS FECIT’ (RIB 132).

Temple 6 – Dean Hall Another temple that may have had Iron Age origins has been discovered at Dean Hall (SO 682119) (Fig. 97). This temple is situated close to the Severn River, with the peak period of activity in the 2nd or 3rd Centuries (Frere 1985a, 300). Originally there were two structures, one circular and another rectangular, built according to Iron Age methods but during the Roman period (Frere 1986, 410). The circular shrine was set around a small water source that was part of a natural spring (Jones and Mattingly 1991, 292), which was quite similar to the Iron Age shrine at Hayling Island. The use of such techniques may indicate a continuing Iron Age sanctuary. However, it is also important to note that there are many native sanctuaries that have not produced evidence of structures (Hutton 1991, 166-7, 227). The timber structures were later replaced in the late 2nd Century with a temple using stone foundations (Jones and Mattingly 1991, 292). The entrance had an eastern orientation, as with many Romano-Celtic temples, such as Pagans Hill (Rahtz 1951,

Unfortunately, the structure of this shrine is unknown, but it seems that this was another example of a Romanised religious precinct that had native Celtic heritage (Baddeley 1923, 89). With this sacred site being placed on a prominent, picturesque promontory, it would have been an attractive location for such a Romanised religious precinct (Baddeley 1923, 87). All the same, it is evident that this shrine was of modest dimensions (Baddeley 1923, 88), so it seems that the elevated position of this complex added to its prominence rather than its surface area. Nevertheless, the romanitas of this 81

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY 116), Wycomb II, Silchester I, II and III, and Springhead I and II (Lewis 1966, 13).

All three of the shrines are associated with a row of possible buildings, and a courtyard with a path connecting the two (Rawes 1978, 12). However, the continuity of sanctity at this site illustrates how the romanitas of the Upton St. Leonards complex was indicative of only certain members of the local community, being largely representative of only those individuals who sought to exemplify those ideals and manners of Romanised religious expression.

The temple was around eleven metres wide and over thirty metres long at its maximum, with a western apse (Frere 1985a, 300). The springhead was finally developed into a formalised pool with a masonry drain to the northwest (Jones and Mattingly 1991, 292). A wall that contained several small apsed and rectangular niches and an internal north-south wall that defined the cella later replaced the apse. A hoard of one hundred and fifteen coins dated to the 3rd and 4th Century was uncovered in the northwest corner of the temple site (Frere 1988, 467), which suggests a votive offering. In view of the Iron Age tradition at this site, it is evident that there was continuity of sanctity into the Roman period. This site is a good example of a native sanctuary having the addition of a Romanised temple to express the commitment of the local aristocracy to Rome. There is a possible settlement seventy metres southeast of the shrine, with a great amount of Roman evidence (Frere 1985a, 300). However, the combined Roman and Celtic nature of this site is undeniable, with the native traditions of sanctity being a fundamental feature of this site.

Temple 8 – Bourton-on-the-Water The small town at Bourton-on-the-Water (SP 159208) has also produced evidence of a temple, with possible links to the pre-Roman period. The circular building of well-laid masonry had two concentric walls, one and a half metres apart (Wilson 1968, 198), with an internal diameter of seven metres (Grew 1981, 354). It was located outside of the main centre, which suggests that it had Iron Age origins (Yeates 2006, 431-2). The preRoman date for the settlement seem likely when the lack of Roman planning for the layout of the city and the close proximity to the Iron Age settlement at Salmonsbury are considered (O’Neil 1968, 31). Pottery discovered within the shrine has been dated to the 2nd Century, but the structure itself has been dated to the middle of the 1st Century AD (Smith 2001, 214). Leading to the shrine was a well-metalled and cambered street that branched off the Fosse Way (McWhirr 1981, 65). The resident community and also passing travellers seeking good fortune from the local spirits probably used this shrine. Bourton-on-the-Water probably arose as a market town; it was also apparently a religious centre, and this may have been the origin of the settlement, as at Wycomb (see below) (Burnham and Wacher 1990, 201).

Temple 7 – Upton St. Leonards Another Romanised temple has been discovered at the small settlement at Upton St. Leonards (SO 859151). This shrine is in close proximity to the colonia of Gloucester, and is also near the Hucclecote and Great Witcombe villas (Rawes 1984, 23). It seems likely that this was an agricultural settlement, with evidence of small rectangular enclosures dated to the 1st Century (Frere 1989, 310-11). The early date of these features, and the proximity of the site to Glevum, may indicate that this was part of the rural land allocations for the veterans at the colonia; but the majority of the finds are dated from the 2nd to 4th Centuries AD (RCHM 123). The timber shrine was polygonal in shape and there may have been a temenos that defined the sanctuary (Fig. 98) (Rawes 1984, 33). The entrance to the building was to the east. Paving stones used at the northeast of the structure; a cobbled area to the southwest was connected to the shrine by a cobbled track, and may represent a general assembly place.

The placement of this settlement on the Fosse Way had a clear impact upon the Romanisation of the site (Clifford 1939, 129-30), and in turn the romanitas of the religious precinct. While the numismatic evidence from this temple indicates its use between the 2nd and 4th Centuries AD (Donovan 1934, 103-6), it is evident that its pre-Roman Celtic sanctity was a continuing tradition, especially with the placement of a well within its confines during its development (Donovan 1934, 104). Therefore, it seems that the site at Bourton-on-the-Water was another example of a religious precinct where the romanitas of its structure belied the native traditions that continued there.

Finds included a bronze octagonal finger ring, a large number of iron nails and a great quantity of horses’ teeth, as well as finds of samian ware, a 2nd Century mortarium and several pieces of local pottery (Rawes 1973a, 12). A sculptured stone head, found around twenty metres from the shrine in a 4th Century context (Rawes 1984, 31), could provide a further indication of the sacred activities at the complex (Rawes 1978, 12). In view of the shape of the temple, and the fact that most Romano-Celtic polygonal structures indicate pre-Roman sanctity (Drury 1980, 72), there may have been some continuity of belief at the site from the Iron Age period. There are also similarities between the layout of this temple complex and those at Lydney Park and Uley (discussed below).

Temple 9 – Wycomb Wycomb (SP 025197) contained quite a large-scale religious precinct (Smith 2001, 266). The Roman villa at Whittington Court lies only two kilometres to the west of the small town, so there was probably an association between them (Rawes 1976, 2). The vicus had paved streets and several stone buildings, some with hypocausts and pavements (McWhirr 1981, 73). The focus of the settlement was probably the market in this small town (Rawes 1973b, 13), but the shrine would have also played a prominent role. There is evidence of Iron Age 82

TEMPLES AND SHRINES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE occupation that probably continued until the 5th Century, with a peak of activity during the 2nd Century (Rawes 1973b, 13). The first shrine at Wycomb (Wycomb I) was a rectangular building with two rectangular rooms (Fig. 99), measuring nine metres by eleven metres overall. The entrance was located on one of the longer sides, near the southeast corner, in a similar fashion to the shrine of Apollo at Nettleton Shrub (Wedlake 1982, 10). The floor was probably paved and the walls were fairly substantial. There is also a possibility that some of the nearby buildings may have also served a religious purpose (Fig. 100), which would be similar to those found at Colchester, Maiden Castle and Collyweston. The Celtic shrine had been replaced by a large Romano-Celtic temple, exemplifying yet again the continuity of sanctity at the site.

the Coln River (Goodburn 1998, 34). The temple was roughly square in shape, with a portico of fifteen and a half metres by fifteen metres (Lewis 1966, 1, 13). A pit, probably votive in function, was discovered within the ambulatory of the temple (Baddeley 1930, 358), producing human remains and also the bones of a red deer (Goodburn 1998, 34). The use of pits for votive dedications during the Iron Age in Britain is well attested (Cunliffe 1992, 69-83), and such a dedication at this Romano-Celtic temple suggests that the sanctity of the site predates the building. Further evidence for the continuity of sanctity was a stone relief of a hunter with a dog and stag, which was one of the most notable finds from the site (Goodburn 1998, 34). There may well have been a native hunting deity connected with the shrine, for example Silvanus, but the proximity to the Coln River may also indicate a water cult Lewis 1966, 48). The temple itself has been dated to the mid-2nd Century AD, and it probably continued in use until some time during the 4th Century AD (Smith 2001, 222). Massive, wellfinished blocks, some as large as one thousand by six hundred millimetres, were used for the construction of the podium. This was a temple of some pretensions, possibly erected by an aristocrat seeking to impress visitors to the site. In further support of this suggestion, the temple at Chedworth has also produced evidence of masonry capitals, which are exceedingly rare in Roman Britain (Blagg 1980b, 36, 38).

The second temple at Wycomb (Wycomb II) was built on a typical Romano-Celtic plan, about thirteen metres square with an additional portico. It was erected in the late 3rd Century (Fig. 101). The cella, was raised above the level of the ambulatory; this also occurred at Springhead I (Kent) and possibly also at Bourton-on-theWater. There was a theatre associated with the complex (McWhirr 1981, 73), a frequent combination in the Roman world, such as at Verulamium, Champlieu and Gosbecks Farm (Wacher 1985, 42). The religious sanctuary was probably used for public assemblies (Lawrence 1863-4, 422; McWhirr 1981, 73), and there may also have been a ceremonial route leading from the temple out of the settlement to a group of burials outside the town (Rawes 1980, 22). There are other religious precincts in Britain associated with theatres, such as at Woodeaton, Cold Kitchen Hill and Thistleton I (Collingwood and Richmond 1969, 158). The association has also been noted at some continental sanctuaries, for example at Ribemont-sur-Ancre (Cadoux 1978, 325-67). A large assemblage of artefacts with possible religious connotations was discovered at the Wycomb II site, including a number of knives, boar tusks, deer horns, sculptured stones, a broken statue and several iron and bronze rings. The temple seems to have been decorated with stone columns, a pediment and several pieces of ornamental sculpture (Lewis 1966, 41-2). A stone relief, possibly of Mars, bears a striking resemblance to those representations of the god discovered at King’s Stanley and Lypiatt Park (Rawes 1976, 3). It is rare for a Romano-Celtic temple in Britain to have been adorned with decorated stonework, even when the possibility of later theft is taken into account (Blagg 1980b, 36). The discovery of the stone columns at the Wycomb temple complex could be seen as a reflection of the wealth invested in the temple.

Temple 11 – Uley One of the largest and most impressive rural RomanoCeltic shrines was the temple erected at Uley (Fig. 103). This site also provides a good example of the continuation of native beliefs: there may have been a sacred element at the site dating from as early as the Neolithic and continuing into the 5th Century AD (Rahtz and Watts 1979, 195). In the pre-Roman period, there was a large oval sacred enclosure, measuring forty-eight by twenty-five metres, with several associated ritual structures and deposits (Grew 1980, 385). The initial Romano-Celtic structure was erected in the early 1st Century as a stone temple with a probable internal sacred pit for the dedications that had originated in the late Iron Age (Woodward and Leach 1993, 34-5). It was almost square in shape, measuring fourteen by twelve metres externally, with an internal cella. The erection of the stone temple did not change from the previous alignment of the Iron Age structures (Rodwell 1980, 216), with both facing to the east, and this gives weight to the view that there was continuity of ritual at the site (Smith 2001, 183). Ambulatories extended on the western, southern and eastern sides, supported by walls of masonry (Woodward and Leach 1993, 33). Owing to large amounts of goat and sheep remains at the site (King 2005, 332-4), it is believed that the deity revered at the Uley temple could have been a native horned god. This probably then led to the late Roman interpretation of the deity as a native equivalent of Mercury.

Temple 10 – Chedworth Another Romano-Celtic temple that has produced evidence of such masonry was discovered at Chedworth (Fig. 102). This temple is located around eight hundred metres southeast of the villa complex, on a hillside near

83

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY A remarkably large number of coins came to be deposited at the site between AD 350-60, including a large number of irregular copies of Imperial issues (Reece 1980b, 122, 126). A similar type of coinage was discovered at the Lydney temple site (discussed below) and suggests a possible link between the devotees and their dedications at the two large temple complexes, which is appropriate in view of the location of the temple in the territory of the Dobunni and their hasty submission to Rome, even before the Claudian conquest (Dio 60.20.1). The temple was most likely built by a group of wealthy natives seeking to emulate Roman religious traditions. Yet despite their eager desire for Roman culture and protection, their adherence to native beliefs continued.

1988, 60). There have been only four other defixiones discovered in Britain not dealing with theft; one concerned with love and three connected with perjury (Hassall and Tomlin 1986, 428-31; RIB, 6, RIB 7, RIB 221; Adams 2006a). The style of language used on the tablets, both at Bath and Uley, was that of colloquial Latin, suggesting that most dedications were made by members of the population with limited access to formal education, even in the case of practised scribes (Adams 1992, 24; Hassall 1980, 87). Jackson (1953, 108-11) suggests that Latin would have only been spoken by the upper classes, which indicates that the inscribing of the defixiones would have been probably been written by a scribe at the sanctuary, who may have also sold the tablet there (See Stevens 1966, 109). Despite this, the style of Romano-British Latin that would have been written or spoken would have been very different from the style used on the continent (See Mann 1971, 219). The Uley tablets are of much the same nature as the tablets at Bath, except that the stolen articles are of more value, with mention of draught animals, gold rings, cash from a strong box, sheep, and two wheels and a cow being stolen (Woodward and Leach 1993, 116-123). These tablets also include accusations of embezzlement and, when combined with the different array of stolen articles, demonstrate the difference between the requests placed at an urban healing shrine, and a rural temple with a more restricted and wealthier clientele. The devotion to Mercury at Uley is quite understandable, in view of the prosperous, rural nature of the community. As well as being a protector of his patrons from the Otherworld, the god was seen as a protector of herds and flocks, hence the requests for the return of cattle and sheep.

This can be seen in two ways: first, in the enduring use of the internal Iron Age pit throughout the Roman period (Ellison 1980, 308), and the dedication of Iron Age-style military votives, such as small spears (Henig 1994, 15). Similar finds have been uncovered at the Hayling Island temple (King and Soffe 1991, 111). The second way of viewing the continuity of Celtic beliefs is in the confirmation of long-held beliefs shown by the care with which the head of the Mercury statue was buried after the destruction of the Romano-Celtic temple in the 4th Century (Smith 2001, 113). The ritualistic burial of the head in the post-Roman period reflects the traditional respect that was shown for the head in Celtic religion, continuing throughout the Roman period, even with the advent of Christianity (Esmonde Cleary 1989, 184). Both of these persisting traditions, when combined with the continuity of use of the site, demonstrate the adoption by native leaders of a veneer of Roman culture while maintaining their traditions and beliefs over a number of centuries. Some of the most interesting finds at the Uley complex were the defixiones, which provide an insight into the types of requests which many of the supplicants made of the god. The defixiones are related to the negative aspects of religious supplication, being used only when the individual has been hurt in some way and desires retribution or compensation. Defixiones were smallinscribed sheets of lead intended to influence, by supernatural means, the actions or welfare of persons, such as, a deity being requested to assist in the return of a stolen article (See Tomlin 1988).

Versnel has highlighted how the majority of defixiones in the Roman Imperial period were intended to either injure or constrain a person who was disliked by the author of the curse tablet (Versnel 1991, 191-2), which is largely in keeping with the overly negative focus of the continental cursing theme. On the continent the most common theme was to curse an individual in order to prevent them from acting or living in a certain fashion. Those who were cursed were bound to the will of the author in a largely preventative manner. This was not the case in the Romano-British defixiones. The overwhelming majority of curse tablets discovered at Bath and Uley were reactionary: an act or wrong had been done to the author and through the use of defixiones they sought to redress the matter.

As Tomlin comments, it was usually the loser’s last resort, to ensure the bad luck of someone else, or to correct one’s own misfortune. Most Romano-British curse tablets have been discovered at Bath and Uley, two very important religious sites. At Uley, the most common deity that was appealed to was Mercury, with a few tablets to other deities, such as Mars and Silvanus (Woodward and Leach 1993, 115; Hassall and Tomlin 1979, 343). A feature of the curse tablets from Roman Britain is that they generally deal with matters of theft, which is uncommon in the Greco-Roman world: of thirteen hundred defixiones found in the Empire outside of Britain, only twenty relate to this offence (Tomlin

The basic theme of Romano-British curse tablets was revenge, which was quite different in orientation to the continental ‘precursor’ model. Naturally there have been several instances of reactionary curses discovered on the continent, but they comprise a minority, which is in stark contrast to the high percentage of those discovered in Britain. In recent years there have actually been a large number of ‘reactionary’ curses discovered on the continent, which has changed the overall impression of 84

TEMPLES AND SHRINES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE continental curses somewhat. The most notable examples have been uncovered at the Magna Mater sanctuary in Mainz (Blänsdorf 2005, 11-26; Witteyer 2004, 41-50; 2005, 105-24), which have predominantly dealt with theft. Several other curses have been discovered in modern Portugal and Spain that also follow the ‘prayers for justice’ format (Faraone, Garnand, and Lopez-Ruiz 2005, 161-86; Versnel 1994, 145-54; 1998, 217-67; 1999, 125-62; 2002, 37-76), which seems to be more akin with the Romano-British tradition rather than the prevalent continental model. These discoveries highlight the frequent regional basis upon which curse tablets and their use are interpreted and used by the various communities within the Roman Empire. While these discoveries are inherently significant they still seem to be exceptions to the overall tradition for composing curse tablets on the continent. Nevertheless, the almost exclusive model of using curse tablets in Roman Britain as ‘prayers for justice’ cannot be underestimated. The exclusivity of the Romano-British tradition may provide a more extreme example of regional interpretations of how to use curse tablets, which also occurred in other provincial regions of the Roman Empire where the defixione tradition had been a comparatively recent introduction.

than a provocation, and they were typically centred upon ‘correcting’ the status quo rather than delivering an advantage for the author. This attitude was also prevalent in some areas on the continent, but the exclusive use of curse tablets as ‘prayers for justice’ in Roman Britain provides a compelling and unprecedented example of a regional interpretative process. The British employed the practice in their own fashion, in particular in relation to theft. They adopted the custom to suit their own needs, harmonising the Greco-Roman defixio tradition with their own style of worship of local deities. Such traditions were most likely adopted by the native aristocracy more rapidly because of the proRoman tendencies that the majority of this class held in the area from around the time of the Roman conquest. There has a defixio discovered at another major temple site in Gloucestershire, the late Roman temple at Lydney Park (SO 616026). Temple 12 – Lydney This temple has been one of the most discussed temples discovered in Britain (Yeates 2006, 1013-15), and is, in many ways, unique. Wheeler dated the temple complex to the 4th Century, around AD 367 (Fig. 104) (Wilson 1980, 130). However, the foundation has been shown to be earlier, with the late 3rd Century seeming more appropriate (Casey 1981, 149). The site was presumably an Iron Age hill-fort (Saville 1984, 143). In the early Roman period, the most common forms of domestic structure were timber huts. There was limited Roman influence until the 3rd Century, with only small amounts of samian ware and coinage uncovered. It was at this time that iron mining began, and it dramatically changed the fortunes and outlook of the inhabitants (Bledisloe 1929, 60). During the 4th Century there seems to have been a flourishing cult at the sanctuary, as is shown by the wealth of votive and structural remains (Wheeler and Wheeler 1932, 61).

The strong prevalence for the reactive style of defixio in Roman Britain is not only shown through the finds from Bath and Uley, but also from elsewhere throughout the province. There have been other examples of defixiones that resulted from theft discovered elsewhere in Gloucestershire (Frere 1991b, 293-5), Suffolk (Hassall and Tomlin 1994, 293-5), Hertfordshire (Hassall and Tomlin 1997, 455-7), and Norfolk (Hassall and Tomlin 1994, 296-7). The revenge theme within Romano-British curse tablets is also clearly apparent in examples discovered in London (Hassall and Tomlin 1987, 360-3), and also Wanborough in Wiltshire (Hassall, Wilson, Wright and Rea 1972, 363-7). When the broad geographical range of these is considered in association with the thematic consistency it is quite clear that Romano-British defixiones should be viewed in a different fashion to their continental counterparts. The basic premise behind all of these defixiones was the same (to seek the advantage of the author through the disadvantage of another person/group), but it was in their intentions that they were different. In accordance with the majority of magical incantations, according to the Frazerian model, the majority of continental defixiones seem to have been intended to attain individual goals that frequently countered the benefit of others (Versnel 1991, 178-9). The reactionary theme of Romano-British curse tablets was quite different: they sought either ‘justice’ (from the perspective of the author) or revenge for a previous wrong, which suggests a completely different motive. This should not be taken as a suggestion that the Romano-British examples were morally ‘superior’, but more that the social contexts in which they were used (or provoked) was quite different to the examples of other curse tablets on the continent. The Romano-British examples were ‘magical’ reactions to an action rather

Many finds were associated with the temple, one of the most notable being over eight thousand coins, including issues of Arcadius and Honorius (Lewis 1966, 89). The majority of the issues discovered at the site were dated to the late Roman period, with only five dated to before the middle of the 3rd Century (Wheeler and Wheeler 1932, 14), which has become the accepted date for its construction (Yeates 2006, 7). A large number of irregular copies of Imperial issues were also discovered at the site, which were similar to those discovered at Uley (Reece 1980b, 122). Other associated finds at the site included nine representations of dogs in stone or bronze, an oculist’s stamp, around three hundred and twenty pins, almost three hundred bracelets and several lead and bronze plaques (Lewis 1966, 89). One lead plaque depicts a nude male figure in profile, and possibly represents Apollo (Hutchinson 1986a, 222). In view of the presence of a mosaic at the site depicting Bacchus, the attribution of this deity seems appropriate. There have also been other mosaics depicting Bacchus discovered in 85

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Gloucester and Cirencester, and also at the Chedworth and Woodchester villas. The lead plaque was of local manufacture and may have been acquired at the site itself. A defixio found there was inscribed with a request by Silvanus for the return of a lost ring, and his dedication of half its value (Collingwood 1932, 100). This request is very similar to those discovered at Uley. Two large Roman decorative blocks were also discovered which have been dated to the later 2nd or early 3rd Century (Blagg 1983, 255-9). These blocks, probably connected with a large monument, may show that there were wellappointed Romanised structures at an earlier date than previously thought. The many finds of a votive nature at Lydney Park provide a good indication of the sanctuary’s popularity.

Tacitus (Ann. 14.31) also notes that members of the local aristocracy at Camulodunum spent great sums while serving as priests of the colony: ad hoc templum divo Claudio constitutum quasi arx aeternae dominationis aspiciebatur, delectique sacerdotes specie religionis omnis fortunas effundebant (‘More than this, the temple raised to the deified Claudius persistently met the view, like the castle of an eternal dictatorship; while the priests, selected for its service, were obliged under the pretext of religion on to pour out their wealth like water’). Such an inscription is important in view of the limited amounts of epigraphic material relating to the dedication of building restoration in Roman Britain (Wilkes 1996, 2), and symbolises the aspirations of the devotee. If the reading by Wright (1985) of the inscription is correct, it illustrates the renown that a local leader was able to obtain through the benefaction of a temple. On stylistic grounds, the mosaic is dated to AD 340-370 at the earliest (Cookson 1984, 56). The pavement also depicted sea-creatures and fish (Henig 1980, 92), and when this is considered with the finds of bronze reliefs that depict a sea-deity, fishermen and tritons, it appears that Nodens may have been a water god. The deity had several facets: one of the most obvious was that he was a god of healing, as shown by the oculist’s stamp and the many pins and bracelets found. The healing aspect of Nodens is confirmed by numerous representations of dogs, as this animal was often associated with healing (Webster 1986b, 58). Nodens was also commonly represented as a hunting deity, especially through his combination with Mars (Green 1992, 162), and it is important o also note that Mars was also connected with a healing function (Green 1986, 112).

The plan of the temple at Lydney Park cannot be clearly defined as either a Classical or Romano-Celtic temple, having elements of both types (Blagg 1980b, 41). The temple seems to have been planned as a single unit, but was divided into two separate sections (Wheeler and Wheeler 1932, 60). It was closed in style, with three separate chapels, where the residing deity was worshipped (Fig. 104). These chapels were originally divided by piers from side-aisles, which continued as an ambulatory behind these shrines (Collingwood and Richmond 1969, 157). The use of columns to form a rectangle separated from the outer walls by an ambulatory provides aspects of a basilical temple, and would have created an axial symmetry, similar to the winged-corridor villas, with a degree of Classical form (Blagg 1996, 15). Despite this, there were also elements of Romano-Celtic temples, creating a unique combination of both styles. There are examples of similar RomanoCeltic temples in both Britain and on the Continent (Horne 1986, 18-19). The temple seems to have been decorated with wall-plaster on both the inside and outside walls (Lewis 1966, 89), which provides an indication of the site’s status and the wealth invested in it (Bidwell 1996, 27). Several mosaics were discovered within the building and there seem to have three stages of development in the flooring. In time, these side-aisles collapsed because of the insecure foundations of the temple and the spaces between the piers were connected to add further support.

Several masonry structures were associated with the temple (Fig. 105) (Smith 2001, 201). One of the most prominent buildings was a large courtyard house, situated to the northeast (Lewis 1966, 89). It was quadrangular in plan, flanked by verandas or corridors on three sides, with a large fore-hall on the fourth. The structure was essentially classical and urban in its design and may have been used as a guesthouse for devotees visiting the temple. The building had a monumental entrance and was decorated with mosaics and painted wall-plaster. Another structure was a well-equipped bathhouse, which would have served the residents of the courtyard house (Lewis 1966, 89). There was also a long corridor building that contained several smaller cubicles, some with elaborate mosaics (Wheeler and Wheeler 1932, 49-51). The function of this building is unknown, but it seems likely that it may have been used for healing purposes. When such well appointed structures are considered along with the wealth of the finds and the architecture of the temple itself, it appears that the temple at Lydney Park was an important religious complex. The longevity of the cult is also well attested, with structural repairs and patching of mosaics showing that the temple was in use well into the 5th Century AD. The importance and popularity of the cult of Nodens can also be seen when it is compared with the decline of other pagan cults during this period, with

The main deity worshipped at Lydney Park was the native god, Nodens (Yeates 2006, 33), as shown by the large numbers of dedications to him, and an inscription on a mosaic in the cella of the temple. The conjectured reading is: d(eo) n(odenti) T(itus) Flavius Senilis, pr(aepositus) rel(igionis), ex stipibus possuit; o[pitu]lante victorino interp(r)[e]tante: “Mars Nodens Titus Flavius Senilis, superintendent of the cult, from the offerings had this laid; Victorinus, the interpreter (of dreams), gave his assistance” (trans. Wright 1985, 2489). The nature of the inscription and its position made it obvious to visitors that this was a benefaction (Henig and Soffe 1993, 1). From the Digest (50.10.3) we know that only the name of the benefactor could be inscribed on a public building. 86

TEMPLES AND SHRINES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE the onset of Christianity in Britain (De la Bédoyère 1991, 185).

When the use of decorated stonework for Romano-Celtic temples, which did not appear in temple architecture before the 3rd Century AD, is considered, the special munificence of these religious buildings becomes clear (Blagg 1980b, 41). It was exceedingly rare for either temples or villas to be adorned with columns in Roman Britain, but there are several examples in Gloucestershire (Blagg 1996, 11). Columns have been discovered at temple sites such as Wycomb II, Uley, Lydney Park and Chedworth. They have also been uncovered at the villas at Great Witcombe, Woodchester and Chedworth. It has been claimed that the dearth of epigraphic dedications in Britain is a reflection of the limited competition in Romano-British society (Wilkes 1996, 2), and yet it seems that these architectural features in Roman Gloucestershire make a statement of great wealth and romanitas (Blagg 1996, 16). A number of the known Romano-British inscriptions concerning private architectural munificence were erected for the construction and repair of religious structures, with buildings and statues comprising over seventy percent of attested inscriptions for public works (See Blagg 1990b, 15). The building, maintaining and embellishing the rural religious structures by the local nobility has been noted in Gaul (Derks 1998, 243) and Africa (Whittaker 1997, 159-60), probably with similar motivation to those in Britain. The pro-Roman native élite would also have greatly benefited from the patronage of the Imperial administration (Webster 1999, 16), and such Romanised structures would have been useful for making their allegiances known.

General Conclusions One of the most compelling themes that the sacred sites in Gloucestershire illustrate is the prevalence of temples with an Iron Age heritage. That is not to say that all religious sites dated back to the Iron Age, but the continuation of native beliefs and rituals was very common (Wilson 1975b, 3). The blending of native and Classical deities would have been of great importance for the assimilation processes after the conquest of Britain by the Romans (Blagg 1986, 15; Jones 1991b, 119). The deities were enough alike in their roles and attributes, for example health and fertility, to justify the conflation of their names and identities, but the native gods were not changed significantly. Romano-Celtic temples seem to have been an adaptation of Roman building practices to the requirements of native ritual (Wilson 1975b, 3-26), with the emphasis still remaining predominantly upon the native cult practices. Most of the Romano-Celtic temples in Roman Britain and Gaul seem to have developed in the rural areas during the 3rd Century AD (Horne 1981, 215). Gloucestershire appears to follow the general rule, with the major exception of Uley. This may have been because of the early completion of most major public works in the urban centres, making funds more available to certain individuals for expenditure in the rural areas. There is no reason to believe that the reverence towards rural deities would have ceased throughout the 1st and 2nd Centuries AD, as quite a few dedications were still being offered in this period. The development of RomanoCeltic temples and shrines in the 3rd Century may simply be due to the fact that an increased number of the native aristocracy were now able to erect such structures, to amplify any social, religious and official connection that they had to the sanctuary, and to demonstrate their Romanisation.

Nevertheless, for the purposes of the present discussion, the key issue to note is the frequent connection between rural Romano-Celtic temples and pre-Roman sanctity. Of the twelve temple and shrine precincts considered here in detail, only the small shrine at Kingscote has produced no indication of an Iron Age predecessor, and this seems to have been largely owing to the military origins of this settlement. All of the other rural Romano-Celtic temples have exhibited the continuity of sanctity that was so common at these complexes. All the same, the difficulty in identifying this common theme has been mentioned by Millett (1995, 93) who has noted that Romano-Celtic religion cannot be viewed as a united religion, but more as a combination of local cults throughout the province. This divergence in religious expression was also manifested in the architectural diversity within the preRoman Celtic shrines (Smith 2001, 162). Nevertheless, the continued sanctity of these native sanctuaries is undeniable and of great significance for our understanding of these complexes.

The limited adoption of epigraphic forms of Romanised religious dedications (Appendix IV) epitomises the restricted use of such offerings. The difficulty (within the scope of modern analysis) is that the survival of these altars and statue bases makes this form of offering the most understandable and obvious representation of religious dedication. All the same, judging from the number of dedications and their targeted deities, it is evident that the Roman elements (and their associated dedicatory traditions) were not adopted by the wider community. This is also shown through the use of the defixione tradition in Roman Britain, where a ‘classical’ form was used in a particularly Celtic (or native) fashion. All the same, the ‘positive’ religious epigraphic offerings (and their limited acceptance in relation to traditional Celtic offerings) cannot be taken as an accurate representation of the reality of religious beliefs or dedicatory traditions in Roman Gloucestershire. This interpretation is also important in relation to the analysis of Romano-Celtic temples and shrine in Roman Gloucestershire (and their wider significance) as well.

Therefore, the architectural phenomenon that was the Romano-Celtic temple should definitely be viewed as an amalgamation of two cultural traditions. However, it seems that the romanitas of these religious buildings was really only in the structure of the complex itself for the vast number of devotees at these sites. This is supported by the limited number of votive altars being dedicated within these precincts, and the continued use of native87

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY styled offerings, such as miniature weapons, at many sites in the Gloucestershire region. Even when the classical dedicatory traditions were adopted by sections of the local population, such as in the case of the defixiones, the interpretation of how they were to be used was still largely based upon a regional (rather than a ‘purist’) basis. All the same, the romanitas of these structures was still symbolic of the social context of the times, whereby connections were drawn between the Roman and Celtic communities. However, it must also be noted that generalising the Romano-Celtic religious tradition is a perilous activity, with each site accentuating different cultural/religious elements and traditions at varying levels (See Smith 2001, 163). Yet it is still important to consider the trends overall, and it is quite clear that the continuity of native sanctity and many of its associated traditions provides some insight into the nature of religious practices in Roman Gloucestershire.

Romanised models of expressing their power and social status, which has also been noted previously in relation to their urban and rural residences (See Chapters I, II and III). Naturally the motivation for expressing their elevated positions within the community would have been primarily focused within an urban or semi-urban context, which has been shown by the study of Smith (Smith 2001, 163), but it was by no means limited to these centres. The exhibition of status in a Romanised fashion was also quite prevalent among the local élites in a rural setting throughout the Gloucestershire region, and this would have extended to the construction of extraurban temples and shrines. This group of local élites would have been the only members of the community who had both the financial means and the motivation to express their status (and romanitas) through such constructions (it is unlikely that the provincial administration would have seen small, rural shrines as being important enough to build – particularly those of a Romano-Celtic nature). Therefore, in order to try and establish this more conclusively, an examination of the association of the Romanised villas and Romano-Celtic temples has been undertaken in the next chapter.

With this in mind, it is now important to consider the prominent role of the native élites in this perceived acculturation process. As Smith has noted (2001, 162), this group played a key role in the adoption of

88

Chapter V The Association between Temples and Villas in Gloucestershire In Gloucestershire, as elsewhere in Roman Britain, the most prominent features of Romanisation in the countryside were the Romano-Celtic temples and the villas. Both types of structures represented the desire of members of the native nobility to demonstrate their status through the construction of buildings with Roman-style architecture and materials (Hingley 1996, 44). Through the very style of architectural construction, it is quite evident that there was some connection between these two types of building (Dark and Dark 1997, 49). Along with villas, Romano-Celtic temples were a vehicle for displaying wealth and status (Blagg 1990a, 195); they could also indicate the holding of religious positions, and the endowment of temples was an effective method of wielding power (Potter and Johns 1990, 204). The message that the adoption of Roman architecture and planning was meant to send was one of civilisation and culture at the “highest” level (Rivet 1964, 104). These Romanised structures were, in reality, reflections of the builders’ aspirations within a changing social setting. Since the erection of buildings such as temples and villas was in the hands of the native aristocracy, there should be some connection between the structures (Ellis 1995, 164).

process. In turn this accentuates the limited change in religious practices among the vast majority of the native population and this undermines the view of a broad acceptance of Roman cultural traditions within the wider community as well. In that case, it appears that some of the wealthier villas were built with shrines or sanctuaries close by, probably to serve the inhabitants and other nearby neighbours. The relationship between such structures could lead to the hypothesis that both the temples and villas were constructed by the dominus of the villa residents to emphasise his prominence in the surrounding rural community. The building of Romano-Celtic temples in rural areas was not necessarily expected, but there is little doubt that any prosperous villa owner could have erected such a temple if he chose (Rodwell 1980, 219); it is assumed that the erection of the wealthiest villas was undertaken only by those who sought to elevate themselves socially because of their greater resources. To build significant villas and temples was an expression of power, intended to impress not only the local population, but also visitors and others (Renfrew and Bahn 1996, 387), such as the Roman administration. This study will now examine the proximity of various villas to shrines and temples, and look for similarities in their architecture and date of construction. At the outset, some villas and RomanoCeltic temples from other regions in Roman Britain will be briefly mentioned in order to provide a wider range of examples for this study, but the main emphasis will still focus upon Gloucestershire.

Therefore, the intention of this chapter is to establish the connection between these extra-urban structures in order to gain a clearer understanding of the limited expression of romanitas in the countryside of Roman Gloucestershire. This has initially been undertaken through the consideration of religious expression in general terms during the period, but then the focus has shifted directly towards the possibilities of villa-temple associations in Roman Britain overall. Following from this the various villa and Romano-Celtic temple complexes has been considered from Gloucestershire itself. The inclusion of an analysis of sites beyond Gloucestershire has been intended to further establish the possibility of common structural origins for these sites on a provincial level before considering it with a local sphere. This also contextualises the Gloucestershire region within a broader sphere, illustrating the usefulness in its analysis as a representation of the social and cultural environment of southern Roman Britain.

In Roman Britain, there are quite a few examples of temples in close proximity to rural Romano-Celtic temples. In this examination, ten kilometres will be used as the greatest viable distance between villas and temples, limited by points within two hours’ walking time (See Vita-Finzi and Higgs 1970, 1-37). There are a several examples from other regions in Britain. Near the Romano-Celtic temple at Harlow (Essex), there were at least six villa sites, most of which were approximately two kilometres away (Scott 1993a, 63). Other temples with villas nearby have also been noted at Thistleton (Leicestershire), Islip (Oxfordshire), Boxted (Kent) and Foxcote (Buckinghamshire). There also seems to have been connection between the tripartite corridor villa at Titsey (Surrey) and the Romano-Celtic temple less than a kilometre away (Rodwell 1980, 219). The temple at Wanborough was close to three Romanised villas within a ten kilometre radius, but there has been little excavation undertaken at these sites to further connect these

The wider implications of this proposed association between rural Romanised villas and temples are just as important as the religious connotations because it illustrates the acceptance of romanitas in the countryside and also the dominance/prominence of the local Celtic aristocracy in the progression of this Romanisation 89

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY structures (Scott 1993a, 178). The temple sites at Darenth (Kent), Frilford (Oxfordshire), Eccles (Kent) and Nettleton (Wiltshire) were located less than five kilometres from villa complexes, and they all provide a likely link between the temples and their patrons.

villas and temples. It is through a combination of these methods a connection may be established.

It may be possible to demonstrate a connection between Romano-Celtic temples and villas by examining the architectural materials and styles. The ground plans of these two types of structures were obviously quite different, but there were still elements that may provide a link. This analysis is based on the premise that the similar attributes found in two sites may provide an indication of a close connection, in preference to those with more dissimilar characteristics (Gatrell 1983, 35). These common finds suggest a level of interaction that reflects the presence of a transport and material connection between the sites (Haining 1990, 70-1). One example of this could be the common use of columns, which were a rarity in Roman Britain. Another link could be the common use of decorative styles and themes. The wealth invested in these structures may also provide another indication of an association. A good example of this could be Fishbourne Roman Palace and the Hayling Island Romano-Celtic temple in Sussex. These buildings were erected in the same period (King and Soffe 1994, 116), and probably reflected the wealth and status of the Atrebatan leader, Cogidubnus, who is believed to have undertaken their construction (Jones and Mattingly 1990, 292). Cogidubnus seems to be the best candidate for the erection of these buildings, with both structures reflecting the power and influence of a leaders’ domain that was extensive enough to be mentioned by Tacitus (Ag. 14) (Barrett 1982, 45): quaedam civitates Cogidumno regi donatae (is ad nostram usque memoriam fidissimus mansit), vetere ac iam pridem recepta populi Romani consuetudine, ut haberet instrumenta servitutis et reges (‘Certain cities were given to King Cogidumnus, who had remained loyal continuously, down to the present time, according to the ancient and long-received principle of Roman policy, which employs kings as tools of enslavement’).

Most of the early villas were constructed in the counties of Sussex and Kent and were quite luxurious (Percival 1976, 95). This wealth and sophistication was largely due to the location of most sites in more fertile regions, leading to greater profits (Williamson 1989, 76). This capacity for large production was imperative, for considerable capital was needed for the construction of these early villas; this further reflects the agricultural basis for the native aristocrats’ wealth (Wacher 1981, 126; Blagg 1990, 206). Most villas operated diversified or mixed-economies which aimed for self-sufficiency in most aspects, and a profitable surplus in others. The emphasis on lavish rural dwellings, rather than urban, continued even in Chichester, which adopted Roman practices virtually immediately after the Claudian conquest: there is little indication of urban development until well into the Flavian period, and the construction of town houses did not commence significantly until the 2nd Century AD (Walthew 1975, 196). But it still must be noted that the majority of villas did not emerge until the 2nd Century, and that most were not richly endowed until the 3rd or 4th Centuries AD, during a later rural revival (Jones and Mattingly 1990, 240-1). The development and prospects of these villas and the urban settlements were intertwined (Wacher 1981, 124). It was only through the combined efforts of the rural population for production and the urban marketplaces that the population was able to create a surplus (Rivet 1964, 126).

The Association Between Romanised Villas and Romano-Celtic Temples in Roman Britain

This interdependence between both forms of livelihood is also reflected in the inhabitants of both the villas and the elegant town houses. It is more than likely that the occupants were one in the same; the native élite had the wealth and political status that they craved (Walthew 1975, 22). Their rural residences were most likely occupied more than their urban counterparts, with agricultural production having a traditionally respectable reputation: urban connections, however, were essential for marketing (Potter and Johns 1992, 78). This is emphasized by the extravagant nature of villas in comparison with town houses, having more use and, therefore, more amenities. The villas in the Bath region provide a good example of such differentiation. The wealthy, romanised town at Bath had rich and sophisticated villas in the surrounding area, for example at Wellow, Keynsham, Pitney and Atworth, with many of these having mosaics, and some with more than one (Percival 1976, 100).

Another method of defining an association between villa complexes and temples is through dating and chronology. It stands to reason that, in the rural areas, the majority of villa owners would have erected their Romanised residences before any masonry temples and shrines. This was different from the urban centres where many of the stone public buildings were built before the domestic housing because, a result of the native leaders’ seeking an elevation in the status of the town. The simultaneous construction of a temple and villa would have meant a great deal of expense for a villa owner, and would only occur rarely, with the most luxurious structures, such as Fishbourne/Hayling Island and possibly Woodchester/Uley in Gloucestershire. While the dating of the evidence is problematic because it is not usually very precise, the use of chronological evidence may add further weight to a plausible association between some

The continuing rural focus is indicative of the desires of the native élite for status and respectable wealth, with the villas and other associated structures being indicative of this desire (Black 1994, 110). This emphasis was a continuation of Iron Age routine and ideals with the

90

THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN TEMPLES AND VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE economy following past agricultural practices and methods (Miles 1989, 60). The dependence on agricultural production is emphasized at the Bignor villa where the head of a statue of Ceres was uncovered. This Roman deity was responsible for the production of cereals, and was revered to stimulate production (Applebaum 1975, 121). The worship of this Roman deity is indicative of the highly Romanised occupants, which can also be seen in the Classical styled mosaics at the villa (Henig 1995, 90). These include the famous mosaic of a bust of Venus with her hair cascading down her shoulders – obviously the work of a professional artist (Henig 1995, 123). Occupation at this site had occurred from at least the late Iron Age with a steady pattern of growth (Todd 1978, 205). The villa was erected in the late 1st or early 2nd Century AD, reflecting the economic importance of agriculture for the erection of such structures (De la Bédoyère 1993, 31). It also exemplifies the Romanising tendencies of the villa owner in regard to his religious affiliations.

Celtic temples in rural areas would have been solely dependent on the aristocracy, as they were the only group with the capital and the motivation to do so. The agricultural economy was probably already capable of creating a substantial surplus during the Iron Age, and the Roman invasion would not have greatly affected this (Haselgrove 1989, 177). But these symbols of Roman culture, as stated before, were restricted to the tribal leaders, with most rural inhabitants continuing their traditional lifestyle from the pre-conquest period (Miles 1989a, 121). Some of the villas constructed by the native aristocracy were built with shrines or sanctuaries on their premises, probably to serve the inhabitants and other nearby residents. There is also a possible correlation between the location of some villas and neighbouring shrines which were at some time converted to Romano-Celtic shrines. The relationship between such structures could lead to the assumption that both buildings had been constructed by the villa-owner to serve his desire for prominence in the surrounding rural community. The erection of Romano-Celtic temples in rural areas was not necessarily expected, but there is little doubt that the owner of any large complex could have erected such a religious precinct if he so chose (Rodwell 1980, 219). To confirm such a prospect requires an examination of the villas and their proximity to such structures, with the possibility of similarity in architecture and period of construction. A good and prominent example of this is the relationship between the villa at Fishbourne and the Romano-Celtic temple at Hayling Island.

Another possible example is the villa at Rivenhall, Essex. This villa, consisting of two ‘proto-palace’ buildings, originated in the early Flavian period, sixteen kilometres from Colchester (Walthew 1975, 198). Both of these structures had domestic functions and were constructed over Iron Age and earlier Roman structures (Rodwell and Rodwell 1973, 115, 119). The discovery of an ornate Celtic mirror under Building 1 and the elaborate nature of both structures reflect the social and economic prominence of the resident, with continuity of habitation from the Iron Age. Obviously the native residents benefited from the conquest of Britain and maintained to focus on agricultural production to a large degree (De la Bédoyère 1993, 29). The resident was most likely a Trinovantian aristocrat who had ingratiated himself with the Roman administration, thereby ensuring continued prestige and status for himself and his descendants (Percival 1976, 97). His religion may also have begun to reflect the influence of Rome: located within Building 2 of this complex was a ‘Deep Room’ which was situated centrally within the structure (Rodwell 1985, 30). The possibility of this room being used as an underground shrine is an attractive explanation, with there being similar indication at the Lullingstone villa (see below for further discussion).

The most impressive villa constructed in early Roman Britain was the establishment at Fishbourne which appeared between AD 50-70 (Wacher 1981, 124). It consisted of three main parts, a courtyard with corridors on the northern, eastern and western sides, a bath suite of at least eight rooms and a range of rooms stretching fiftytwo metres in length (Blagg 1990, 198). It was highly decorated and was the most exceptional villa in size and amenities in Britain. The villa was most likely erected by Cogidubnus, King of the Atrebates, who was a clientking of Rome (Tac. Ag. 14). Cogidubnus had a very proactive Romanising policy as a result of which the city of Chichester (Noviomagus Reg(i)norum) and the villa at Fishbourne had begun to progress steadily in the two decades following conquest (Cunliffe 1971, 53, 59).

The villas erected at any stage of the Roman occupation always symbolized wealth, and the desire of the occupants to advertise their assets (Potter and Johns 1992, 84). The message that the adoption of Roman architecture and planning were meant to send was one of civilization and culture at the highest level (Rivet 1964, 104). These Romanised structures were, in reality, reflections of their owners’ aspirations within a changing social setting (Ellis 1995, 164). This exhibition is not only seen in the construction of villas, but also corresponds agreeably with the fortune invested in public architecture – fora, basilicas, temples and theatres (Blagg 1990b, 195). The erection of such buildings as Romano-

There are several apparent connections between the Fishbourne villa and the Hayling Island temple (Map 2). Both structures were probably erected at roughly the same time, around AD 50-75, and both were most likely undertaken by the same leader, Cogidubnus (King and Soffe 1994, 116). Cogidubnus is the most likely candidate for such extensive undertakings because of the extremely high status and financial resources that would be needed for such endeavours, almost requiring the patronage of a legatus augusti (RIB 91). Both structures reflect the power and influence of a king whose domain

91

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY was extensive enough to be mentioned by Tacitus (Ag. 14; Barrett 1982, 45). During the period these buildings were also paralleled by the undertaking of other public works in the region, mainly at Chichester, with all structures reflecting the use of Gallic craftsmen in the architecture (King and Soffe 1994, 116). Both the villa and the temple reflect a continuity of occupation, and ownership in the case of Fishbourne, indicating that the progression in both structures was due to a Romanised native leader (Cunliffe 1971, 167). Since it is highly unlikely that the Roman administration would have provided any direct funding for such projects, the emphasis remains on the motives of the Atrebatan leader (Salway 1981, 113). Clearly the motives behind Cogidubnus’ actions were to ensure the support and alliance of the new Roman administration in the hope that his now tenuous grip on power would continue.

structures at the Stanwick, Darenth, Stroud, Fring and Walton-on-the-Hill villas. The Lullingstone villa was constructed in the late 1st Century, most likely within a generation of the Claudian invasion (Percival 1976, 91). The proprietor undertook enterprises in both agriculture and also in the working or trade of copper (Todd 1978, 203). The Deep Room was an original component of the first Romanised house, and may have initially been the entrance to the villa from the garden, then proceeding up a tiled staircase (Meates 1955, 59-61). This room was later converted into a household shrine in the 3rd Century AD, with a number of votive offerings being buried in the floor. These included the only two marble portrait busts discovered at any Roman villa in Britain, which were also in association with pottery vessels, all being carefully placed in position (Meates 1955, 66-77). These busts were made of Pentelic marble and had originated in the 2nd Century AD; the identity of the subjects is unknown (Meates 1987, 53). This room would have probably served the residents of the house, whereas the circular shrine, located just north of the villa (Lewis 1966, 86), was most likely intended for the surrounding tenants or neighbours.

There are quite a few other examples of villas being in close proximity to Romano-Celtic temples. At Harlow, for instance, there have been at least six villa sites discovered in the area of the Romano-Celtic temple, all approximately two kilometres away; unfortunately there has only been a limited amount of excavation, limiting the possibility of establishing a strong correlation between them and the temple (Map 2) (Scott 1993a, 63). At Titsey there may have been a relationship between the tripartite corridor villa, which was just under a kilometre away from a Romano-Celtic temple (Map 2) (Rodwell 1980, 219). The villa contained mosaic floors, but was of fairly modest size, with little trace of plastering discovered (Fox 1905, 214-15). Occupation here continued from the 1st to 4th Centuries AD, its position being influenced by the close proximity to a spring (Black 1987, 99-101). The temple was square and situated in a temenos along the London-Lewes road, and probably had an Iron Age predecessor (Lewis 1966, 3).

The circular shrine at the Lullingstone villa was in close association with the domestic residence, and was probably constructed in the Hadrianic period. There was a stairway leading from the villa up to the shrine, and the building was paved with red and yellow tesserae. The shrine was constructed as a conscious imitation of Romano-Celtic temples, possibly on an Iron Age site, there being definite signs of longevity of custom and tradition from the pre-Roman period at the site (Meates 1955, 69). There were fragments of 1st and 2nd Century AD pottery discovered within the sanctuary, and there is a possibility that it may have possibly contained a cult image (Meates 1987). The villa/Romano-Celtic temple association is also found at Stanwick (Map 2). This was the only villa in this region of the Nene Valley, the availability of fresh water being a contributing factor in the selection of this site (Neal 1989, 149). There was extensive Iron Age occupation with continuation into the Roman period, including a temenos contemporary with the 1st Century AD settlement. The focus of this religious sanctuary was a Bronze Age barrow, possibly for a tribal leader, or symbolizing a death festival (Neal 1989, 157). The boundaries between deities and ancestors were often blurred in Celtic religion, with barrows continuing to be revered by the native population. The continued reverence for such a Bronze Age monument was possibly due to the nobility seeking to stress their elevated lineage (Potter and Johns 1992, 87). There were a vast number of 1st and 2nd Century ritual offerings in the vicinity: five hundred coins and feasting remains were found around the ambulatory. Added to this were a miniature bronze axe and a Venus figurine, symbolizing Iron Age sanctity continuing into the Roman period (Jones and Mattingly 1990, 246). There were a number of wells at the villa that

The Romano-Celtic temple at Wanborough may also have been in close proximity to three Roman villas within a ten kilometre radius, but again there has been little excavation undertaken (Map 2) (Scott 1993a, 178). There are also villas situated near Romano-Celtic temples at Darenth (approximately five kilometres), Frilford (approximately two kilometres) and Thetford (approximately three kilometres), all providing the possibility for a link between the two structures and their patrons (Map 2). The number of examples where Romano-Celtic temples have been erected in the same vicinity as villas increases the possibility that the local nobility instigated such undertakings. Since that it is unlikely that the Roman administration would have built these structures, the local élite would have been the only members of society to have the finances or the motive to do so. This intimate and private connection between villas and Romano-Celtic shrines is also noticeable at many other sites, for example the circular shrine and the ‘Deep Room’ in the Lullingstone villa, and the external

92

THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN TEMPLES AND VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE produced pottery remains and more coins, with the total number of coins discovered at the Stanwick villa being around three thousand (Neal 1989, 166). There were also hundreds of brooches and lead weights deposited in the wells, increasing the possibility of a sacred site, which may have not only been intended for private use, but for the neighbouring residents as well.

of the rituals, and therefore beliefs, into and beyond the Roman period. The villa/temple association is the only explanation for the erection of such religious structures, especially with the indifference of the administration for such public works. A similar distribution of RomanoCeltic temples and villas continued into the later period, and there is little doubt of their connection (Potter and Johns 1992, 204).

Another site with a large number of votive artefacts is at Farley Heath (Map 2). It is in close proximity (approximately one kilometre) with the villa at Waltonon-the-Hill in Surrey (Map 2) (Williams 1971, 193). The temple was square in shape with a polygonal temenos. There were over a thousand coins discovered on the site (Lewis 1966, 47), and also a sceptre, probably for ritual purposes, which was a bronze strip punched with representations of animals and other figures that was wound around a wooden core. The artwork of this sceptre is clearly Celtic in origin, but later finds show the adoption of Roman style. There is also an association with the Imperial Cult, revealing the integration of Roman Imperial worship into a Celtic belief structure. There are other examples of similar sceptres at Wanborough and in the Llyn Cerrig hoard at Anglesey, these all reflect earlier Iron Age traditions continuing into the Roman period. Both the Walton-on-the-Hill villa and the Farley Heath temple originated in the pre-Roman period, but neither structure remained in continual use throughout the Roman occupation (Lewis 1966, 49).

Within the Gloucestershire region, there are several examples where a possible connection between a villa and temple complex is exhibited. At times these associations are not simply a matter of which precinct was closest to another Romanised structure, but instead it is indicated through the sequence of construction and habitation or use of the various establishments. This is most clearly exhibited in relation to the residences at Park Farm (Villa 30), Aylburton (Villa 31) and the Chesters Villa at Woolaston (Villa 14) in relation to the RomanoCeltic temples at Lydney (Temple 12) and Dean Hall (Temple 6). In this case, it is to be expected that if one owner was responsible for the erection of both structures that the villa would be constructed first – it is logical to suppose that the villa would have been a higher priority as an expression of romanitas because it was directly associated with the owner. However, as has been discussed below, the sequences of construction are not always straightforward when considering the association between these complexes.

Two further examples should be considered. The Stroud villa in Hampshire was also associated with a possible Romano-Celtic shrine, which was octagonal in shape (Map 2) (Smith 1978, 125; Lewis 1966, 86). The villa itself was strange because the main section was an aisled farmhouse with wings, but the octagonal outbuilding almost certainly had a ritual use (Scott 1993a, 86). The structure associated with the villa at Fring may also have had a sacred function. This villa was a rectangular structure which probably originated in the late 1st Century and continued into the 3rd Century AD (Scott 1993a, 132). There was a hexagonal building in the central area of the villa complex which may have been a RomanoCeltic shrine (Rodwell 1980, 219). The association that can be drawn through the combination of all these shrines is the need for continuity and intimate worship for the native aristocracy, whether on a public or private basis.

Claydon Pike (Villa 29 and Temple 13) One of the clearest examples of an association between a Romano-Celtic temple and a Romanised villa in Gloucestershire is at the Claydon Pike settlement (SU 190996). This site is located around eighteen kilometres from the civitas capital at Cirencester, probably on a tribal border, which would have been beneficial for intertribal trade (Miles and Palmer 1990, 20). It is also of some interest because of its position at the junction of two river valleys and two settlement systems (Miles and Palmer 1982, 5). This community had been settled in the Iron Age and occupation continued into the Roman period (Miles 1982, 58). The community shifted onto a new gravel platform in the late Iron Age, with new settlements appearing at Roughground Farm and Thornhill Farm (Allen, Darvill, Green and Jones 1993, 186). With the onset of the Roman occupation, the low lying settlements seem to have been replaced by officially fostered centres, including domestic accommodation, large barns and religious structures. The pre-Roman settlement was covered by a field system of at least twenty hectares during the 1st Century AD, illustrating a change in settlement pattern (Rankov 1982, 377-8). Despite the clear separation between the three different settlement areas at Claydon Pike, owing mostly to the watercourses and marshes at the site (Miles 1983, 76), there was a physical connection between them. The settlement was a complex combination of fields, paddocks, drainage-ditches, roads and tracks, two

The Association Between Romanised Villas and Romano-Celtic Temples in Roman Gloucestershire Each religious structure, whether a public Romano-Celtic temple or a private shrine, reflects the desire of the native nobility to maintain their familiar traditions, and the measures they were willing to undertake. The intimate association between many of the Romano-Celtic temples and the neighbouring villas demonstrates their need to continue their old ways beneath a veneer of romanitas. Certainly the continuation of position and planning in many of the temples and shrines indicate the perpetuation

93

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY cemeteries, a small rural shrine and domestic buildings built of either stone or timber (Miles 1984, 195).

quite different, there would have probably been substantial interaction between them (See Miles 1984, 203-5).

The 1st and 2nd Century settlement was designed on a regular and systematic basis, with elements of zoning similar to the layout of the preceding Late Iron Age community (Miles 1984, 199). The focal point of the settlement was an area of open space, around fifty by thirty metres, in the centre of the community, which formed a right angle to the main road (Miles and Palmer 1982, 9). On the eastern side of this were several substantial buildings. Most notably, there was an aisled house, which consisted of two rooms, with timber sleeper-beam construction, and also an aisled barn (Miles 1984, 199). The entrance to these buildings was through an elaborate gateway, which fronted onto the area of central space along a metalled street and through another gateway. Opposite these buildings, on the western side of the central space, there were at least two inferior structures that were surrounded by two circular gullies. The difference in status between these two areas was obvious, though not comparable to the social differentiation at the later villa complex.

The villa complex at Claydon Pike (Villa 29) was a later development from the earlier Romano-British settlement at the site, with the size of the settlement contracting and continuing to have an eastern focus for occupation (Miles 1984, 202). The villa was fairly modest, a comfortable domestic farmstead with only one room containing a hypocaust (Building 9). This building was L-shaped and contained three rooms (Miles 1984, 202). A gatehouse attached to this building controlled access to the yard. There was another larger building (Building 8) as well, containing eight rooms and two sunken chambers, which was probably the main house. These rooms are of uncertain function, but they may be household shrines similar to the sunken cellars at Great Witcombe, Turkdean and Lullingstone, but this is purely conjecture (Miles 1984, 202). This building was situated within a Dshaped yard and was linked to this enclosure by a curtain wall, which separated the western and eastern sides (miles and Palmer 1983, 92). The division may suggest that there was more than one household living within the villa, or simply that each yard had a different use. The economy of the villa was based on pastures, but flax and corn were also grown (Miles and Palmer 1990, 23).

Within the settlement, south of the central area of open space, a small shrine had been erected (Temple 13) (Miles and Palmer 1990, 23). It was twenty-five by fifteen metres and was surrounded on three sides by a double ditch and a single ditch on the northern side (Frere 1984b, 312). Inside the building was a large pit, probably for the deposition of votives (Miles and Palmer 1983, 91). Here large amounts of burnt material were uncovered (Frere 1984b, 312), which further indicates the votive nature of both the building and the internal pit. Large quantities of pottery and glass were found, and also four rolled strips of lead, which may have been defixiones (Miles and Palmer 1983, 91). A number of pits were located outside the structure, some of which contained fragments of limestone pillars, charcoal, capitals and a finely wrought block of ashlar masonry (Miles 1984, 199). One pit contained animal skeletons and above them was a limestone pillar and its base (Miles and Palmer 1983, 91). The area to the southeast of the structure, within the ditches, had been cobbled near the external pits (Miles 1984, 199).

In this period, the previous rectangular shrine was demolished and another shrine erected 60 metres to the east of the villa buildings (Miles 1984, 202). This building was circular in design, roughly seven metres in diameter, with broad limestone foundations and a flagged floor (Frere 1984b, 312). The Romanised shrine was erected after the villa, in the 4th Century AD, and was set up in a marsh within a circular stonewall (Miles and Palmer 1990, 23). There may have been one entrance with a cobbled path leading to the northeast and another entrance to the southeast (Keevil and Booth 1997, 35). The shrine had similarities to others found in Roman Britain, for example in Oxfordshire at Brigstock, Collyweston and Frilford. Over three hundred coins, mostly 3rd and 4th Century issues were discovered within the shrine (Miles 1984, 202), and also a complete beaker, a bronze votive leaf and a miniature bronze votive axe (Frere 1984b, 312). There is evidence that this shrine may have had a predecessor (Keevil and Booth 1997, 35). In view of the large number of 3rd Century coins deposited at the site, it would seem quite likely that sanctity of this place extended further back than the date of the shrine.

There seems to have been a military presence at Claydon Pike at this time, with the discovery of several pieces of military metalwork. These include a gilded vine leaf, a symbolic bronze mount in the shape of a shield and vulva, and several bronze studs (Miles 1984, 199-202). After the decline of this settlement, around the end of the 2nd Century, a small villa was erected on the site (Miles and Palmer 1990, 23). The change at the Claydon Pike settlement also coincides with other changes in the region, such as the construction of the villa at Roughground Farm (Allen, Darvill, Green and Jones 1993, 186). The villa at Roughground Farm is only two and a half kilometres to the northwest of Claydon Pike, and even though the history of the two settlements is

There seems to have been a clear connection between the shrine and the villa at Claydon Pike (Smith 2001, 224). The first is that the relationship between the two buildings can be seen purely on a spatial basis, with only sixty metres between them. Another is the Romanised road which directly connects them (Dark and Dark 1997, 50); it was quite common for villa owners to construct stretches of road, especially to connect their property to

94

THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN TEMPLES AND VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE Romano-Celtic temple is compared with the relatively modest villa of the 2nd and early 3rd Century. The basis for this apparent dilemma is the discovery at the temple of sculptured masonry, such as Tuscan capitals (Lewis 1966, 41), which indicate the lengths to which the builder went to decorate the temple. These architectural pieces seem to reflect the later wealth of the Chedworth villa, corresponding well with its luxurious development during the early 4th Century AD (Goodburn 1998, 13). The remaining evidence for the temple is quite limited, mostly owing to modern disturbance, so it is impossible to ascertain a reliable sequence of development at the site. But it appears that, in all likelihood, there was more than one phase of development for the temple, and these pieces of ornate masonry may well reflect a later addition to it.

the main road network. The date of construction of the shrine and villa can also provide an indication of the association between them. After the size of the Claydon Pike settlement contracted and the villa complex was built, it appears that any military or administrative influence ceased and the villa inhabitants probably became the leading residents of the community. The construction of the stone shrine coincided with the withdrawal of this outside or “official” influence. It therefore seems most likely that the local leaders would have been the only group able, or willing, to build such a masonry structure. Other members of the local community may have used the shrine, but it seems that the villa owner would have been responsible for the erection of this shrine. The relatively small size of the temple seems to have been a reflection of the modest means of the villa dominus, but the wealth of the dedications represents the high respect paid to the resident deity.

To further this suggestion, there seems to have been some architectural similarities between the two sites, which provide some additional evidence for an association. During the later phase of the villa, small columns were used in the western and southern wings to add support for the roof (Anon. 1889-90, 215). These “dwarf” columns were positioned on the veranda of these two wings and reflect the wealth of the villa dominus. A large column was also discovered thrown into the octagonal basin. It may have been part of a pair, supporting the front of the nymphaeum (Goodburn 1998, 13; Farrer 1870, 251; Richmond 1959, 22). In view of the relative rarity of columns as an architectural feature in Roman Britain (Blagg 1980b, 36, 38) their discovery at both of these complexes may be significant in further showing an association between them.

In this region there were very few particularly large, luxurious villas. The villa at Claydon Pike is rather small and obviously was not the residence of extremely wealthy aristocrats. The reason for this may be found in the continuity of the site from the Iron Age period (Miles 1984, 207). It has been suggested that there was only a limited amount of hierarchical development at the settlement, with the community following traditional forms of landholding, and this prevented the accumulation of great wealth by individuals. Chedworth (Villa 17 and Temple 10) Another site which has produced evidence of an association between a Romano-Celtic temple and a Romanised villa is the Chedworth complex (Adams 2003). The connection between the two buildings has long been made and this is one of the most likely pairing of associated structures in Roman Britain. As mentioned previously, the Romano-Celtic temple at Chedworth was located only around eight hundred metres to the southeast of the villa (Goodburn 1998, 34). The proximity of the two buildings suggests an association between them. There is evidence of Iron Age sanctity at the temple complex and the continued use of the site suggests some persistence of native beliefs. This is shown through the use of a votive pit for depositing dedications within the structure (Goodburn 1998, 34); during the Iron Age the use of such pits for ritual purposes was quite common (Cunliffe 1992, 69-83).

It seems very probable that there was an association between the Chedworth Roman villa and the RomanoCeltic temple, not only because of the relative proximity of the complexes and the close date of foundation for both sites, but also the architectural similarities. The temple would probably have been used by the native population and not only, in this case, by the villa owner himself, in view of the household shrines located at the villa site for private religious observances. The erection of this temple structure was probably meant to allow the villa owner to appear more Romanised and to advertise his social, financial and possibly political status and success. Owing to the continuity of sanctity at the site, it is unlikely that the rituals and beliefs centred there would have changed, with the majority of the population continuing to revere the local deities.

The masonry temple building was probably built during the middle of the 2nd Century AD (Lewis 1966, 53). The date corresponds well with the time of construction of the first masonry phase of the southern wing of the villa complex (Fig. 35) (Goodburn 1998, 13). The early phase of habitation at the villa had already occurred by the middle of the 2nd Century, and it is probable that the Romano-Celtic temple had been constructed shortly this. A difficulty arises, however, when the well-appointed

There may have also been other villa inhabitants who patronised the Romano-Celtic temple at Chedworth (Baddeley 1930, 264). The Listercombe Bottom villa was, in all likelihood, also associated. This villa was situated less than three kilometres from both Chedworth buildings (Scott 1993a, 70). There is evidence of some wealth: the site has produced evidence of tessellated pavements, water conduits, a pillared hypocaust and a flagged corridor (Collingwood and Taylor 1931, 240). In

95

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY view of the proximity of these sites, there would have certainly been a connection, but the erection of the Romano-Celtic temple is more likely to have been attributable to the residents at Chedworth. There were two other villas, Withington Wood and Compton Grove, which may have been connected to the Chedworth sanctuary. The Withington Wood villa (Villa 9) was located only three kilometres from the temple site. It is unlikely that this villa was responsible for the erection of the temple, but in view of its proximity, the villa owner’s patronage of the temple seems likely. The villa at Compton Grove was also probably connected with Chedworth. The distance separating these sites was only four and a half kilometres, which would be close enough for an association. Compton Grove has produced evidence of 3rd and 4th Century pottery and coinage, with its foundation probably dating to the 3rd Century (Branigan 1977, 35). The building itself was made of oolite masonry, being about three and a half metres wide and at least twenty-two metres long (RCHM 38). There were five or six rooms and at least two of these were heated by hypocausts, and also evidence of wall painting (McWhirr 1981, 125). The villa was located close to an important Roman road that branched out, with one side connecting with the Fosse Way and the other leading directly to Chedworth (Margary 1955, 133-4). Therefore, the presence of this road and the general proximity of the sites would indicate that there was an association between these structures. As with the Withington Wood villa, it is unlikely that the Compton Grove inhabitants had been responsible for the erection of the Chedworth temple, but they would probably have frequented the sanctuary.

bath block in the southern wing. In the eastern wing, Room 1 had a flagged floor, but there was a missing portion on the lower side beside Room 3 (Scott Garrett 1938, 96). A hole, filled with coarse pottery, pseudoSamian ware, late coins and wire from a twisted copper bracelet was discovered here. This may have been a votive pit, possibly to the lares familiares, but this is purely conjecture. A gutter or channel was found leading from the middle of the room on its eastern side (Scott Garrett 1938, 96), which may have had some connected with the performance of ritual in this room. It is possible that this may be similar to the water feature, possibly a household nymphaeum, discovered at the Great Witcombe villa. The walls of an adjoining corridor had also been plastered (Scott Garrett 1938, 96). A hypocaust serviced Room 4 during the first phase of development at the complex, showing that the wealth of the complex had existed from the time of the villa’s construction. This initial phase has been dated by coin finds to the middle of the 2nd Century (Branigan 1977, 35). Room 4 also seems to have had a fine tessellated pavement and painted wall plaster during the early period. Room 15 also had a hypocaust, but the style of flooring is unknown (Scott Garrett 1938, 99). The villa possessed two separate bathhouses with one furnace servicing both systems. These baths had different phases, which may suggest a change in social structure. The second stage of the baths consisted of a few large rooms, however, those from Period I were smaller and finer and contained more rooms. In view of the addition of a second larger bath suite during the second phase of development and the continued use of the first suite, it is likely that, at least during the second period, there was more than one household residing in the Chesters villa complex. The distinction in size and decoration may be another indicator of social differentiation between two households, with the changes to the building representing a change in the social hierarchy of the villa inhabitants (Adams 2001, 25-28).

Lydney Park (Temple 12) and the Chesters Villa (Villa 14) Another association between a Romanised temple and villa complex is suggested between the Lydney Park temple and the Chesters villa at Woolaston (ST 59709870) (Adams 2004, 59-61). Here, the villa is located roughly four and a half kilometres to the south of the temple (Fulford and Allen 1992, 204). It was one of three located close to the western bank of the Severn Estuary, the other two villas being the Boughspring, Tidenham complex (Walker 1986, 37-40; Pullinger 1990, 12-25), four kilometres to the south, and Park Farm villa, four and a half kilometres to the north (Fulford and Allen 1992, 159). For further discussion of the Park Farm villa, see below.

The Chesters villa has also produced a large quantity of evidence for iron-working at the site. A timber building, roughly sixty-five metres south of the residential structures, was discovered and seems to have been used for iron-working (Frere 1989, 312). Within this building were the remains of several furnaces for the smelting of iron (Frere 1991b, 278), with finds of clay, tap slag and lumps of Forest of Dean iron ore (Frere 1989, 312). A terminus post quem for the building is the middle of the 3rd Century (Frere 1991b, 278). It was at this point that the production of iron became more organised and corresponds well with the construction of the second phase of the villa (Fulford and Allen 1992, 198-9).

As mentioned previously, the main Chesters building was planned along the lines of a winged corridor villa centred on a central courtyard, with evidence of at least two phases of construction (Taylor 1935, 218). There also appears to be some evidence for a northern wing and, because of its size and the finds associated with this wing, it appears that this would have been the most elaborate part of the villa (Fulford and Allen 1992, 159). Another residential block was on the eastern side, and a

Iron was an important product for the Romano-British economy, as mentioned by Strabo who comments on its export to the continent (Strabo 4.5.2): fevrei de; si`ton kai; Boskhvmata kai; cruso;n kai; a[rg uron kai; sivdhron. tau`ta o`h komivzetai ejx aujth`~ kai; devrmata kai; ajndravpoda kai; kuvne~ eujfuei`~ pro;~ ta;~ k 96

THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN TEMPLES AND VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE unhgesiva~ (‘It [Britain] produces wheat, cattle, gold, silver and iron. These accordingly are exported from the island, as are skins, slaves and dogs that are naturally suited for hunting’). The production of iron in the Forest of Dean region is well known with the discovery of several iron mines in the region (Collingwood 1975, 401). In view of the proximity of the Chesters site at the mouth of the Ley Pill and the discovery of the iron debris at this site, the villa complex would have been in a good position for the working and then the transportation of the iron (Fulford and Allen 1992, 201-3). Columella (1.2.3) stressed the importance of being close to a stream or river for the import and export of supplies to a villa estate: quod si voto fortuna subscribit, agrum habebimus salubri caelo, uberi glaeba, parte campestri, parte alia collibus vel ad orientem vel ad meridiem molliter devexis; terrenisque aliis atque aliis silvestribus et asperis, nec procul a mari vel navigabili flumine, quo deportari fructus et per quod merces invehi possint (‘But if fortune attends our request, we shall have a property in a healthy environment, with fertile earth, partly flat, partly hilly with a gradual eastern or southern slope; with some parts of the land cultivated, and other parts forested and rough; not far from the sea or a navigable river, by which its products may be taken away and supplies imported’).

for the needs of the producers. There seems to have been an intensification of demand for iron during the later Roman period (Fulford and Allen 1992, 205). It is possible, therefore, that the ore extracted at the Lydney Park temple site may have been the ore that was transported to the Chesters villa complex, where it was smelted and later fed directly into the wider trading circle of the Roman Empire. The connection between the Lydney Park temple and the Chesters Roman villa can also be illustrated by the Roman road between the two sites. The major road connecting Caerwent and Lydney is located roughly one and a half kilometres inland of the Chesters villa (Margary 1957, 56). An ancient track, which is now called Packhorse Way, runs directly from the main Roman road to the Chesters villa (Scott Garrett 1938, 112). It has been suggested that this track followed an older Roman road, connecting the Chesters villa with both Caerwent and the Lydney Park temple. Numismatic evidence may further substantiate the connection. The Lydney temple has produced large numbers of irregular copies of Imperial issues, including many minimi, both individually and in hoards (Wheeler and Wheeler 1932, 104-29). Hoards of entirely, or nearly entirely minimi issues have been discovered at Colchester (40 issues), Richborough (861 issues) and Verulamium (422 issues) (See Sutherland 1937, 116-7). Similar types of coinage were also discovered at the Chesters villa, with several barbarous copies of imperial issues and two probably locally produced minimi as well (Scott Garrett 1938, 114). In view of the frequent discovery of minimi at temple sites, such as at the Lydney and Uley temple sites, and their relatively low value within the Roman economy, a ritual purpose for these issues is likely. The discovery of this type of coinage at both of these sites suggests another connection between the complexes. The proximity of the Lydney temple site to the Chesters villa must also be taken into consideration: they were only four and a half kilometres apart (Fulford and Allen 1992, 204). In view of this, their connection by the main road between Caerwent and Lydney, and the similar date of construction of the buildings, the relationship between the sites appears fairly certain. A possible association in the production of iron and also the number of common coin issues found further indicates a connection between the Chesters villa and the Lydney Park temple complex (Adams 2004).

Iron-smelting at the site appears to have only constituted part of the villa’s economy, with a large emphasis remaining upon the production of cereals. A watermill has been postulated, which indicates a level of cereal production which was in excess of the subsistence needs for the villa (Fulford and Allen 1992, 201). Despite the discovery of iron-smelting at the site, there is no evidence of ore extraction. It may have been mined elsewhere and transported to the Chesters villa for smelting. Nevertheless, it is clear that the wealth of the villa was due to the careful exploitation of its resources, and its owners would have been in a position to build an elaborate temple as part of their desire for status. The association between the Lydney Park temple and the villa at Chesters can be shown through several types of archaeological evidence (Adams 2004). The first of these is the discovery of iron-mining at the Lydney site prior to the erection of the temple (Smith 1994, 31). The mine was similar to other known Roman mines in Spain, consisting of small sharp incisions roughly fifty to three hundred millimetres in length (Wheeler and Wheeler 1932, 21). It was probably cut during the middle of the 3rd Century and was disused and blocked by the end of the 3rd Century AD (Wheeler and Wheeler 1932, 18-19). The dating for the use of this mine corresponds with the beginning of the increased and more organised smelting of iron at the Chesters villa, with the construction of the temple following.

The main deity worshipped at Lydney Park (Fig. 3) was the native god, Nodens, as shown by the large numbers of dedications to him, and an inscription on a mosaic in the cella of the temple (Wheeler and Wheeler 1932, 28). The conjectured reading is: d(eo) n(odenti) T(itus) Flavius Senilis, pr(aepositus) rel(igionis), ex stipibus possuit; o[pitu]lante victorino interp(r)[e]tante: ‘Mars Nodens Titus Flavius Senilis, superintendent of the cult, from the offerings had this laid; Victorinus, the interpreter (of dreams), gave his assistance’ (Wright

The reason for the cessation of iron production at the Lydney temple site is unknown, but it may have been because the resources there were not sufficient enough

97

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY The Aylburton villa has also been dated to the 2nd and 3rd Century, with a mid-2nd Century foundation (Branigan 1977, 35). Finds of late 3rd Century cooking ware and Samian pottery were discovered to the north of the building (Taylor 1956, 141). There were also four tiles inscribed ‘TPLF’ (Wright 1956, 150); similar tiles were found in Cirencester (Clifford 1955, 71). This suggests that there was a connection between the villa complex and the civitas-capital. The structure itself was roughly fifty metres by thirteen and a half metres, with a two and a half metre wide corridor on the long side of the building (Taylor 1956, 141). The villa was located around four hundred and fifty metres from the main road between Lydney and Caerwent, and would probably have been joined to this major connecting route.

1985, 248-9). The prominence of the associated officials, Titus Flavius Senilis and Victorinus, reflect the possibilities for self advertisement and advancement by being involved in the maintenance of a local temple. This is especially important to remember because and its position made it obvious to visitors that this was a benefaction by Senilis, regardless of the nature of the offerings (Henig and Soffe 1993, 1). From the Digest (50.10.3) we know that only the name of the benefactor could be inscribed on a public building: Opus novum privato etiam sine principis auctoritate facere licet, praeterquam si ad aemulationem alterius civitatis pertineat vel materiam seditionis praebeat vel circum theatrum vel amphitheatrum sit. Publico vero sumptu opus novum sine principis auctoritate fieri non licere constitutionibus declaratur. Inscribi autem nomen operi publico alterius quam principis aut eius, cuius pecunia id opus factum sit, non licet. (‘A private person may commence a new development even without the authorisation of the emperor, except if it is to surpass another citizen or cause agitation or is a circus, theatre or amphitheatre. But it is declared in the constitutions that a new venture at public expense cannot be commenced without the authorisation of the emperor. And it is not lawful for any other name to be inscribed on a public building than that of the emperor or of the man whose funds built it’).

The association between both the Park Farm and Aylburton villas and Lydney Park seems fairly clear because of their close proximity. The villa at Park Farm also seems to have been connected with the Lydney site because, as with the Chesters villa, there has been evidence of iron-smelting discovered at the site (Fulford and Allen 1992, 159, 202), which may indicate an association even before the erection of the temple. The small distance of both villa sites from the major Roman road may also be another link. However, one of the difficulties that occur for any proposed association between the temple and these villas is the dating of the structures. The temple has been dated to the end of the 3rd Century, by which time both of the villas at Park Farm and Aylburton had been founded for at least a century. Owing to the limited amount of chronological information for the villas, it is impossible to obtain a terminus post quem. There is a problem in that the known Romanised facilities at these villa complexes do not seem to reflect the affluence of the Lydney temple. In view of the short distance between both of these villa it would seem that neither of the villa owners would have had large estates, thus limiting their expendable capital. Therefore, while the residents of these villas may have been in some way connected to the Lydney Park temple, the origins of the structure were more likely to have been the responsibility of the dominus of the Chesters villa.

Whether this temple would have been viewed as a public in the terms of this act is unknown, but it still should be a point of consideration. Tacitus (Ann. 14.31) also notes that members of the local aristocracy at Camulodunum spent great sums while serving as priests of the colony: ad hoc templum divo Claudio constitutum quasi arx aeternae dominationis aspiciebatur, delectique sacerdotes specie religionis omnis fortunas effundebant (‘More than this, the temple raised to the deified Claudius persistently met the view, like the castle of an eternal dictatorship; while the priests, selected for its service, were obliged under the pretext of religion on to pour out their wealth like water’). The inscription at Lydney is important in view of the limited amounts of epigraphic material relating to the dedication of building restoration in Roman Britain (Wilkes 1996, 2), and symbolises the aspirations of the devotee.

Park Farm Villa (Villa 30), the Aylburton Villa (Villa 31) and the Dean Hall Temple (Temple 6)

Another villa located close to the Lydney Park temple, the Park Farm Roman villa (SO 625018), may have also been associated with temple complex. Little has been published about this villa, however, so the conclusions that can be drawn are limited. It was located only about a kilometre to the east of the temple site (Scott 1993a, 74), which provides a strong indication of the connection between them. The villa plan was based along the lines of a small tripartite house with three outbuildings (Frere 1988, 469). The house contained tessellated pavement and flagged floors (Scott 1993a, 74), indicating that the status of the inhabitants was reasonably high. Finds of 2nd and 3rd Century pottery provide dates for the period of occupation (Frere 1988, 469).

On the other hand, the dating of the Park Farm and Aylburton villas may correspond better with the Romano-Celtic temple complex at Dean Hall. The villas and the Dean Hall temple were eight kilometres apart, which is still within the parameters defined above. This religious complex has revealed evidence of Iron Age sanctity, especially with the continued use of a natural spring within the temple complex (Frere 1985a, 300). The half-timbered rectangular Romano-Celtic temple was probably erected during the late 2nd Century (Frere 1986, 410). This building was later modified with the addition of a red sandstone tessellated floor within the cella. The dating of the temple corresponds well with that of the

98

THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN TEMPLES AND VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE attitudes of the local population and the wealth of the region, but also the continuation of Iron Age sanctity in their religion. Occupation evidence has also been dated from the later 1st or early 2nd Century at Woodchester, and includes a Hod Hill brooch and a cremation near Southfield Road, which may be the site of an early 2nd Century villa/cemetery (Clarke 1982, 217). Most importantly, the marble decorative fragments found at the villa complex have been stylistically dated to the Flavian or Trajanic periods. The wealth of the early structures is unknown, but it would seem that, in view of the status of the finds, there was another structure of some pretension erected before the 3rd Century “palace”.

Park Farm and Aylburton villas, that is, during the middle of the 2nd Century. These villas are the closest known Romanised centres in the vicinity, and may well be associated with the religious complex. A sequence of the construction of the villas followed by the conversion of an Iron Age religious sanctuary into a Romano-Celtic temple would appear to be quite probable. The Lydney temple complex, despite being closer to the Park Farm and Aylburton villas, was not erected for some time after, and its origins were unlikely to have been associated with these villas. In view of the Iron Age sanctity of the Dean Hall site, the distance between the villas and the temple would probably not have been a great issue because of the continuity of native belief at the site.

The later developments of both sites may add weight to their probable association. In the first half of the 4th Century, the final construction work was probably made to the Woodchester complex, with the construction of the inner courtyard and its adjacent rooms. This was paralleled by the alterations to the temple at Uley during the first half of the 4th Century, with major reconstruction during the fifth phase of development (Woodward and Leach 1993, 11).

Few finds were noted at the Dean Hall site, with a lack of evidence of wealth, and no mention of coins or pottery. When the limited number of finds is considered with the fact that the original structure was a half-timbered structure, it seems that the temple had been fairly modest during the early Roman occupation. If, therefore, the level of luxury and decoration at the Park Farm and Aylburton villas is compared with the Dean Hall temple, it appears feasible that one or both of the villa owners had been responsible for the construction of the structure.

Another indicator is their affluence and facilities at the same time. As noted above, it appears that there had been Romanised residents at the Woodchester from as early as the 1st Century and habitation continued until at least the end of the 4th Century AD (Clarke 1982, 222). The demise of the villa at this time correlates with the demolition of the temple complex at Uley and the clearing of the site (Woodward and Leach 1993, 11). It would appear, therefore, that the residents of the Woodchester villa would have been suitable candidates for the erection and maintenance of such an impressive religious site.

Another connection between the temple and villa complexes was the proximity of a major road that ran from Caerleon and Newnham (Margary 1957, 55-6). This Roman road was constructed during the 1st Century as a connection between the major military bases at Caerleon and Gloucester, and was probably completed around AD 81 under the supervision of Agricola. There was thus a ready-made connection between these sites before the building of either temple or villas. The paucity of finds limits the prospect of confirming an association, but the connection is a strong possibility.

There are other common features between the Uley and Woodchester sites. One of these is the numismatic evidence, with both producing large quantities of small bronze coinage, mostly dated from the reigns of Tetricus to Valens (Reece 1980b, 122). As observed earlier, the use of small issues as votive offerings was commonplace, and their presence in large quantities at Woodchester may be symbolic. The architectural evidence may also provide another indication of a connection. Both structures were highly Romanised, utilising such classical architectural features as ornamental sculptures and columns (Woodward and Leach 1993, 207-10). The earliest pieces of decorative masonry, it was noted, were from the Flavian/Trajanic period at Woodchester, and other pieces were dated to the early 3rd Century (Clarke 1982, 20910). The dating of these later pieces corresponds with that of the statue of Mercury at the Uley temple, which has been attributed to the mid-Antonine period (Woodward and Leach 1993, 92). When all of this evidence is taken into consideration, it seems that there was a connection between the Woodchester and Uley, and that the owners of the villa had been responsible for the erection and subsequent refurbishing of the temple.

Woodchester Villa (Villa 18) and the Uley Temple (Temple 11) A connection may also have existed between the Romano-Celtic temple complex at Uley and the villa at Woodchester. These complexes were two of the most well-appointed Romanised buildings, not only in Gloucestershire, but also in all of Britain during the Occupation. One of the clearest features that points to a connection is the relatively small distance separating them. There is only about six kilometres between the villa and temple, close enough to be seen as significant connection. To date no Roman road has been discovered, but the existence of such a road is a strong possibility. The dating of the structures provides another connection. The first Romano-Celtic temple at Uley has been dated to the beginning of the 2nd Century (Woodward and Leach 1993, 33). This early date is quite unusual for RomanoCeltic temples and illustrates not only the pro-Roman

99

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY appropriate for a wealthy local resident to renovate. This would have been of great social advantage for any native aristocrat, in view of the regular patronage which such a temple like Bourton-on-the-Water would have had, positioned as it was on the Fosse Way. The temple was constructed and decorated along fairly modest lines, which would also correspond well with the apparently limited resources available at the Farmington villa (Gascoigne 1969, 34).

Frocester Court Villa (Villa 3) and the Uley Temple (Temple 11) The villa at Frocester Court may also have had a connection with the Uley sanctuary, as it was even closer to the temple than the Woodchester villa: only two and a half kilometres apart. It has been noted that there are certain structural similarities between some of the associated buildings at the Uley complex and the villa at Frocester Court (Woodward 1992, 49). The correlation between the multi-phased rectangular buildings at Uley and the domestic houses at Frocester Court may indicate a common designer or builder, and would confirm an association. All types of jewellery and personal items discovered at Uley have also been found at this villa complex (Woodward and Leach 1993, 332), further pointing to an association. Another connection is their pre-Roman heritage, with initial occupation at Frocester Court being dated to the mid/late Iron Age (Price 1983, 139). Both sites had wells with votive material, suggesting a connection in ritual (Woodward and Leach 1993, 308).

Whittington Court Villa (Villa 8) and the Wycomb Temple (Temple 9) A similar association may be seen between the sites at Wycomb and Whittington Court. The relationship of this villa complex to the small town has previously been noted with the villa being located only two kilometres to the west of the small town (Rawes 1976, 2). The dating of these two structures may provide a further indication. Branigan (1977, 35) has dated the main phase of occupation at the Whittington Court villa to the late 3rd and 4th Centuries AD. The period may be connected with the development of the religious site at Wycomb: it was roughly at this time that the first shrine in this small settlement was replaced by a larger Romano-Celtic temple (Lewis 1966, 77). This structure was well appointed and would have probably needed the input of a wealth local resident to pay for the lavish decorations added to the structure. Therefore, in view of their close proximity and the similar dating in their development, there may well have been an association between the temple and villa.

The Frocester Court had a well close to the villa building that may have served a ritual function. It was built of stone and was dug during the late 1st Century AD. It was deliberately blocked off in the early 4th Century. The shaft was circular, about two and a half metres in diameter, and among other finds it contained a quantity of bovine leg bones that were deposited in a relatively fresh state. Three bronze brooches and a finger ring were also found, their position suggesting a votive purpose rather than accidental loss. The well was of a similar nature to one discovered at the Uley temple, which, in view of their proximity, suggests a connection between the two sites (Price 1984, 49-59). The inhabitants were probably quite wealthy at the time of the Conquest, but the erection of the villa did not occur until the late 3rd Century (Price 1983, 141; Gracie and Price 1979, 20). It is for this reason that the Woodchester residents are the preferred candidates for the erection of the RomanoCeltic temple at Uley; but the occupants of the Frocester Court site most probably also had a connection with the sanctuary, dating back to the pre-Roman period.

There are several other villa complexes that may have had an association with the temple at Wycomb. One is the villa at Colesbourne (SO 98461108). This complex was located only roughly three kilometres from Wycomb (Collingwood and Taylor 1932, 215), and comprised five separate buildings, with evidence of sandstone tiles, tegulae, 4th Century pottery and large blocks of Oolite masonry (RCHM 35). In one of these buildings (Building A) was a patterned mosaic about seventeen metres long in the corridor. The largest building (Building B) consisted of a row of six rooms with corridors and a hypocaust at one end. It contained at least three geometric mosaic pavements as well as evidence of painted wall plaster, including an elaborate fresco on the southeast wall of Room 5. Two column bases, three rectangular terminals and an unusual stone column shaft were also uncovered. These impressive architectural pieces could possibly indicate a connection between the villa and the temple at Wycomb, with both sites producing evidence of similar types of decorative masonry, such as columns (Lewis 1966, 41-2). At the villa, there was also a relief of a soldier, possibly Mars (RCHM 36), which would provide an indication of the religious affiliations of the villa inhabitants. The relief may also draw a connection between the villa and the Wycomb temple, where a relief of Mars was also discovered (Rawes 1976, 3).

While there are several villa and religious sites in Gloucestershire that may have been associated; it is also quite common to find a connection between villa complexes and small settlements with temples, especially those small towns that were located on major roads (Todd 1978, 198). One of the best examples of this can be seen between the Farmington villa and the Bourtonon-the-Water settlement. These two sites were less than five kilometres apart. They were also connected by the Fosse Way, which was one of the most important roads in Roman Britain. Both of these sites have produced evidence of 2nd Century pottery (De la Bédoyère 1993, 55, 9; O’Neil 1968, 35), which may also point to an association between them. In view of the probable Iron Age sanctity at the Bourton temple site, it would seem

100

THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN TEMPLES AND VILLAS IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE thoroughfare. This Roman road passed directly through the settlement at Upton St. Leonards, which makes it likely that the residents at Harescombe had an association with the shrine in this small town.

General Conclusions From these examples, it is clear that there was an association between many of the Romanised villas and rural Romano-Celtic temples in Gloucestershire. This would make sense since there was little organisation in the Romano-Celtic religions (Dark 1993b, 144), and the erection of the temples was almost certainly totally reliant upon private benefaction, at least in rural areas. Nevertheless, this does not necessarily mean that all villas would have been directly connected with a local rural temple. Both Columella (1.3.3-4) and Cato (1.3) stress the importance of being close to a major road for efficient transportation at the closest city centre: multum conferre agris iter commodum (‘A nearby road adds much to the value of land’); si poteris, sub radice montis siet, in meridiem spectet, loco salubri, operariorum copia siet, bonumque aquarium, oppidum, validum prope siet aut mare aut amnis, qua naves ambulant, aut via bona celebrisque (‘If possible, it should be placed at the base of a mountain and face south; the location should be healthy, there should be a good reserve of labourers, it should be well watered, and near it there should be a thriving city, or the sea, or a navigable river, or a good and well travelled road’). The Great Witcombe villa was, in the light of its position close to Ermin Street, probably associated with the religious observances that occurred in Gloucester. The complex was only about five kilometres from the colonia and, in view of their wealth and status, some of the occupants may have played an important political and social role within the urban community, while maintaining a rural residence. The same could be said for the residents of the Hucclecote villa, located only two and a half kilometres from Gloucester. It is quite common to find villas being intimately connected to the most administratively important towns, such as Cirencester (Millett 1991, 172).

As previously mentioned in Chapter III, the prominence of these structures within the wider community was clearly an important factor in the construction of these Romanised complexes. This was of course more noticeable in the placement and design of the Romanised rural residences, but it may have also been a factor for the Romano-Celtic temples. It is significant that many of the temples and shrines were built within small settlements, such as at Kingscote (Temple 3), Upton St. Leonards (Temple 7) and Bourton-on-the-Water (Temple 8). These settlements were obvious locations for a Romanised temple structure, having a higher proportion of travelling visitors, and in turn a greater level of prominence within the wider community. All the same, this cannot be applied to the more remote complexes, such as the Romano-Celtic temple at Chedworth (Temple 10). It is in this regard that the connection between Romano-Celtic temples and Romanised villas is essential in order to determine the development of these complexes and to understand their romanitas. This is also the case in relation to the Uley (Temple 11) and Lydney sites (Temple 12), where it seems that a rural settlement has developed from the introduction of a prominent RomanoCeltic temple structure, which simply added to the standing of these precincts. As seen with the Lydney temple in particular, the connection between these complexes and the leading members of the community simply extended their scope for exhibiting their influence beyond the confines of their villas estates. The discovery of this mosaic inscription naming Titus Flavius Senilis illustrates how local élites sought to promote themselves in such a religious context that became permanent displays of their piety, but also their social prestige as well. All the same, it is also important to note that the deity addressed in this instance was Nodens, without any reference to a syncretised Romano-Celtic god. This illustrates the continuity of Celtic sanctity at this site during the 3rd and 4th Centuries AD, despite the highly Romanised nature of both the temple itself and the medium in which this declaration was expressed (being in a central mosaic).

There were also other villa owners who may have primarily associated themselves with temples in Cirencester. Barton Farm is a prime example, with only some three hundred and sixty-five metres between it and the walls of the civitas capital. Barnsley Park was also just over six kilometres from Cirencester, connected by Akeman Street (margary 1955, 136), and the Rodmarton villa (ST 9443 9843) less than three and a half kilometres from Cirencester, near the Fosse Way. This would explain the limited number of rural temples in the vicinity of the major centres. One exception to this is the shrine located at Upton St. Leonards, which is only three kilometres from the outskirts of Gloucester. But this religious complex was itself part of a small settlement, and may have been connected to a villa site at Harescombe (SO 84000914). Little is known of this villa except that there have been discoveries of roof and flue tiles, two columns, tesserae, coloured plaster, pottery and a silver issue of Theodosius (RCHM 62). The villa was located roughly a kilometre to the east of the road between Sea Mills and Gloucester (Margary 1955, 128), and was probably connected to this important

Nevertheless, the romanitas of Romano-Celtic temples was a significant feature that would have clearly provided motivation for the local élites to construct these religious precincts. While the continuity of sanctity at these complexes illustrates the Celtic aspects of their significance (See Fulford 2001), the romanitas exhibited in their construction also exemplifies the socio-political circumstances of this period. The adoption of Romanised building materials made a clear statement of the social affiliations of these local leaders with the provincial administration, while continuing to maintain the native religious traditions of the general (non-élite) community.

101

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY The decline of the shrine at Kingscote (Temple 3) illustrates the importance of local traditions in the perceived sanctity of these complexes. Therefore, it would seem that these Romano-Celtic temples represent a fine balancing act between the socio-political needs of the Romanised, aristocratic benefactors and the local religious traditions of the wider rural population.

It appears, therefore, that the role the wealthy native aristocracy played in the erection of rural Romano-Celtic temples was quite substantial. It was the nobility who were the only members of the Romano-British society with the resources and the social and political motivation to undertake such construction. This trend was by no means limited to Gloucestershire or Britain as a whole. The role of the native aristocracy in the erection of rural Romanised shrines has also been noted in Gaul (Drinkwater 1989, 191). These cultural changes during the Roman period have been shown to be mostly on the part of the native nobility and the Roman State (Derks 1998, 241). The financing, building and maintaining of monumental religious structures became a new form of highly visible aristocratic votive dedication. The new Romano-Gallic temples seemed to hold a native significance (Hatt 1970, 245), while emphasising commitment to Rome (Derks 1998, 242). This has been shown, for example, on the funeral relief from Reims, depicting Cernunnos with Mercury and Apollo (Mackendrick 1972, 162-4). Several inscriptions discovered at Romano-Gallic sites have confirmed the involvement of the native Gallic nobility in local religion (Drinkwater 1983, 179-81). These inscriptions do not necessarily represent the traditional beliefs of the aristocracy, but more the desire for status and political allegiances (Derks 1998, 242). They have also proven conclusively the influence that the wealthy members of society could wield in the rural regions. Despite the lack of epigraphic evidence in Roman Britain, there would certainly have been a similar social climate. This reflects the attitude of the Roman administration to ignore the rural poor and to leave their assimilation under the control of the local nobility (Whittaker 1997, 155). Thus, the developments at many religious sites provide a good illustration of the native aristocracy’s cultural position, although the temples do not necessarily represent the majority of the population. The nature of the beliefs of many local aristocrats is best ascertained by examining the domestic rituals at their rural estates.

In addition to this, the general acculturation process needs to be considered. The process of Romanisation has recently been a topic of much debate among modern scholars (Woolf 1991; 1992; Mattingly 2002; 2004; Hingley 2005). The main source of contention has been concerned with the question of whether the provincial administration took an active role in the acculturation of the local population. In this regard it is the contention of this study that the local élites took on the primary role in this process, as indicated by Tacitus (Ag. 21): iam vero principum filios liberalibus artibus erudire, et ingenia Britannorum studiis Gallorum anteferre, ut qui modo linguam Romanam abnuebant, eloquentiam concupiscerent. inde etiam habitus nostri honor et frequens toga. paulatimque discessum ad delenimenta vitiorum, porticus et balineas et conviviorum elegantiam (‘As a result, the country that previously declined the Latin language started to aim for rhetoric: further, the wearing of our dress became an honour, and the toga came into fashion, and gradually the Britons went off course into tempting vices: for the ambulatory, the bath, and the luxurious dinner table’). It would seem that the Roman provincial administration may have encouraged this process, but that it was more a result of the willingness of the local nobility to adopt an appearance of romanitas in order to further their social ambitions and their dominant status within the local region. Of course Tacitus’ representation was primarily intended to accentuate Agricola’s active role in this regard, but he also clearly alludes to the excesses that frequently came with such humanitas. All the same, the use of this account must be made with some caution (see Black 2001).

102

Chapter VI Shrines in Villa Complexes in Gloucestershire As stated before, one of the most intriguing features of the Romano-British villa were the private shrines within the complexes. It is more than likely that many villas throughout Roman Britain contained within their walls a shrine for the observance of rituals for the domestic deities (Smith 1997, 291), but much of the detectable archaeological material has been lost (Renfrew and Bahn 1996, 388) and, therefore, many of these household shrines are missed. Free standing and detached shrines are, in many ways, easier to interpret. It is important to also note that beyond those discussed below, there may have been other examples at the Abbotswood and Bibury villas (Darvill, Greatorex and Rey 1989, 205-10; Frere 1988, 465).

these villa structures. All the same, this does not necessarily preclude the possibility of a continuation of native sanctity at these shrines – but it simply affected the monumental form in which this cultural affiliation was expressed. This prominent placement of domestic ritual was not only intended to exhibit personal piety, but also represented the Romanised cultural affiliations of its leading inhabitants as well. These household shrines need to be examined on several thematic levels of communication in order to understand their overall significance. Of course, the most significant problem in this regard is the identification of household shrines within this corpus of villas from Roman Gloucestershire. Owing to the limitations in the extant evidence, the most prominent shrines have been able to be identified whereas the more personal (or ‘private’) shrines are not as easily identifiable. Nevertheless, it is only possible to discuss the extant evidence, but it is still important to note this limitation within the available evidence. At this point it is also important to note the restrictions in the archaeological expression of Celtic domestic cults (Smith 2001, 162), which further complicates this form of analysis. All the same, in view of their design and location within each structure it is still possible to consider the cultural traditions of domestic cults within villas from Roman Gloucestershire. However, it is important to initially consider the forms in which the native and Roman forms of religious dedication were expressed.

The household shrines of within Roman villas provide a valuable insight not only into the religious focus of the inhabitants, but also into the social climate and structures within the villa community itself (Smith 1997, 291). Such shrines were commonly erected in a position where they connected buildings or farmyards and must have had a unifying function for the households in the extended villa group. This function can be illustrated by their common central positioning within the main residential building, near the entrance, or between the individual households. The location of the shrine might also indicate the differing social positions of the inhabitants of the villa complex itself. The intention of this chapter is to examine not only the variable nature of domestic rituals within the villas from Roman Gloucestershire, but to also discuss the differing traditions that they epitomised. Initially the prime focus has been upon both the Celtic and Roman traditions of domestic ritual in order to contextualise these traditions, but there is particular emphasis upon the placement of these ritual activities and the forms in which they were physically expressed. The comparison of these traditions is intended to allow for the contextualisation of the various household shrines from these extra-urban complexes in order to determine the traditions that they sought to primarily follow. There appears to have been some differentiation in form and placement within these residences that corresponded with either the native or introduced traditions.

Nonetheless, if the Romanised domestic shrines are to be viewed as being more prominent then the question of public and private shrines needs to be addressed. Therefore, the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis of these structures has been applied in order to statistically examine this differentiation between various areas. This is intended to illustrate how Celtic and Romanised religious traditions were often expressed within different domestic contexts. This should not be taken as a clear cut differentiation of religious activity, but rather as a variation in the expression of romanitas: if an overt connection with Roman religion was desired, then the relevant shrine would be placed within a more public region of the domus. If this religious association was not a priority of the owner then ritual activity could occur within a less prominent location in the residence. Nevertheless, it is initially important to discuss some of the difficulties in determining the nature of Celtic ritual activity, particularly in relation to domestic environments.

Therefore, in order to distinguish these ‘types’ of domestic shrines (and their cultural affiliations/ connotations) both the architectural form and placement of such activities has been considered within these structures. It seems evident that the exhibition of romanitas (and its associated ritual activity) has led to the construction of more prominent household shrines within 103

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY (Fitzpatrick 1984). All the same, the continuation of native domestic cult traditions has been clearly identified by Fulford (2001) in relation to six separate sites within Roman Britain (Silchester, London, Neatham Baldock, Verulamium and Portchester). These sites have produced a series of pits and wells within various domestic environments that clearly exhibit the continuation of Celtic domestic cults within Romanised urban residences. It is also important to note that they were largely within ‘private’ contexts as well (Fulford 2001, 201), but this has been discussed further below. For the purposes of the present discussion it is important to now consider the nature of Roman domestic religious traditions and their social connotations.

Celtic Traditions for Domestic Religion In general terms it is evident that there was a relatively consistent form of religious dedicatory process within Celtic society. As Cunliffe has noted (1991, 295) the religious activity within Celtic society was typically focused upon either shrines or natural locations, such as streams, pools or groves. During this period, religious dedications were also deposited in pits and shafts as well (Ross 1968), which has led to some distinction between land-based and watery religious contexts (Merrifield 1987, 22-57). All the same, it is important to note that these two styles of religious dedication were still intrinsically linked (Fulford 2001, 199) and that they had links to cult activity that extended back into the Bronze Age (Laing 1979, 85).

Roman Traditions for Domestic Religion

The religious temples and temenoi within Celtic religion were frequently imbued with natural elements that accentuated their significance to the local community (Ross 1992, 19). However, it should also be noted that many of the pre-Roman shrines from Britain were also relatively unremarkable, being quite simple wooden structures (Ross 1992, 19), such as at Heathrow (Cunliffe 1991, 295). All the same, it must also be remembered that there was a wide variation between many of these structures, which illustrates that often the local focus of many individual cults was centred in their immediate regions rather than within the island overall. Nevertheless, most of these structures included a central cella, which was clearly the most sacred section within these structures (Cunliffe 1991, 295). The persistence of this style of temple into the Roman period illustrates how the sanctity of local beliefs often continued, despite the construction of larger masonry temples (Cunliffe 1991, 295). The continuation of these designs (and in turn their religious function) is more suggestive of this rather than a significant change in the structure itself.

Internal shrines are often identified through architectural and structural features that are common to many houses in the Roman Empire, for example at Pompeii and Herculaneum (Clarke 1991, 8). Roman architecture was, in many ways, centrally connected with ritual (Brown 1961, 9), playing a pivotal role in both public and private life (Clarke 1991, 1). The worship of the Penates and the Lares took place in daily rituals, often at permanent shrines within the house. The household Penates were associated with protecting the food supply of the family (Mart. Ep. 8.75.1), embodying the means of subsistence for the household (Orr 1978, 1563). The household Lares seem to have been connected with both the safety of the household and also respect for the ancestors of its inhabitants (Orr 1978, 1564). The lares familiares protected the entire household and were often intimately connected with the genius of the paterfamilas, as seen at the Villa of the Mysteries in Pompeii (Villa 33) (Fig. 106) (Clarke 1991, 8-9). At Pompeii there are several types of lararia, ranging from the simplest rectangular recess in a masonry wall to miniature temples and wallpaintings that were provided with altars.

In relation to Celtic domestic religion, it seems that the main difficulty is its inherently ambiguous nature (Hutton 1991, 165). As Cunliffe has noted (1991, 297) the possible number of unidentifiable Celtic religious sites is almost limitless, owing to the lack of an intended structure being built for this purpose. All the same, the limitation in the identifiable archaeological evidence does not mean that Celtic domestic religion did not exist either. It is simply more likely that the household cults were able to often function within a less structured (or formalised) setting that did not require a monumental architectural setting for it to be viewed as being ‘special’. Of course this is illustrated not only within a private domestic sphere, but also in the public domain as well. However, it is possible to view some indications of domestic cults within Celtic society as well.

One of the best examples was found in the House of the Vettii (Fig. 107); it was highly decorated, standing around three and a half metres high and was probably one of the most expensive of its type (Beard, North and Price 1998, 102-3). The Villa of the Mysteries (Villa 33) may have also had a lararium (Richardson 1988, 358), but this room may have been part of a bath suite. Another example was discovered at the Villa San Marco (Villa 34) (Fig. 108), where a richly painted lararium with marble wall panels and a mosaic floor was an important feature (McKay 1975, 118-20). In Herculaneum, in the House of the Bicentenary (Fig. 109), one of the most debated household shrines found was a small stuccoed panel with the representation of a cross and a small cupboard, possibly for sacred objects (Orr 1978, 1585-6). Household shrines have been discovered elsewhere in the Roman Empire, for example in Spain and Germany. In Britain, a household lararium was identified in Silchester in the northern end of the enclosed courtyard in House II (Boon 1957, 124).

As Smith has shown (2001, 162), the changeable (or flexible) nature of Celtic religious practice meant that it was fully integrated with the functioning of individual households, which has been illustrated at Danebury

104

SHRINES IN VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis can provide some useful insight at this point into the public/private nature of the household shrines from Campania. Four residences have been examined here, comprising two villas (Villas 33 and 34) and two townhouses (the Houses of the Vettii (Pompeii) and Bicentenary (Herculaneum)). It is hoped that through this form of analysis it may be possible to establish some of the domestic ritual traditions within a ‘Roman’ context. Of course, this will not be a far reaching analysis of Campanian material, which is beyond the scope of the present study, but instead this has been undertaken for purely comparative purposes. This can then in turn allow for further discussion of the native and Roman traditions for household shrines within the Gloucestershire region.

the purposes of the present study it is important to note that prominent and public household shrines were often located within large élite residences, which was quite different to the Celtic traditions of domestic ritual. This is further illustrated by the ancient literary traditions, which is the next topic of discussion. Ancient Documentary Evidence for Domestic Religion The literary sources provide numerous accounts of the importance of household shrines in Roman daily life. In his De Legibus (2.8.19), Cicero refers to their importance and the necessity to observe the correct rituals: Ad divos adeunto caste, pietatem adhibento, opes amouento. qui secus faxit, deus ipse uindex erit......In urbibus delubra habento; lucos in agris habento et Larum sedes (‘They will draw near the gods in purity, bringing piety, and leaving treasures behind. Whoever will do otherwise, God Himself will deliver punishment to him....In cities they will have shrines; they will have groves in the countryside and quarters for the Lares’). Cicero also refers to the Lares in the De Re Publica (5.5.7), as an integral part of Roman life: Ad vitam autem usumque vivendi ea discripta ratio est iustis nuptiis, legitimis liberis, sanctis penatium deorum Larumque familiarium sedibus, ut omnes et communibus commodis et suis uterentur. nec bene vivi sine bona re publica posset nec esse quicquam civitate bene constituta beatius (‘But, in relation to the practical conduct of life, this system offers for legal marriage, legitimate children, and the consecration of homes to the Lares and Penates of families, so that everyone may make use of the public property and of their own personal belongings. It is impossible to live acceptably except in a good State, and nothing can create greater happiness than a wellconstituted State’).

The spatial analysis of these residences from Roman Italy (Tables 35-38) (Figs. 110-13) have produced some interesting results. The domestic shrine from the Villa of the Mysteries (Fig. 106) (Villa 33) has produced a Real Relative Asymmetry result (1.283) that shows its comparable accessibility (Fig. 110), particularly in relation to the average for the structure overall (1.586) (Table 35). The House of the Vettii (Fig. 107) (Table 36) was a generally accessible residence (Fig. 111), having an average Real Relative Asymmetry result of 0.815, and this has been reflected in the accessibility for the large, public household shrine within its confines. The Villa San Marco (Villa 34) (Fig. 108) also possessed a large domestic shrine that was located close to the entrance of its structure (Table 37) (Fig. 112). While accessibility within this enormous residence was more restricted, having an average Real Relative Asymmetry result of 1.236, the household shrine was located close to the entrance (as shown by the Depth from Exterior value of 3) and was evidently meant to be viewed publically, judging from its proportions. The domestic shrine within the House of the Bicentenary (Fig. 109) (Table 38) was also placed within the public domain (Fig. 113), having a lower Real Relative Asymmetry value (0.766) when compared to the residence’s average (1.044), but it should be pointed out that it was by no means as elaborate as the previous two structures (the House of the Vettii and the Villa San Marco).

Plautus, in the Aulularia (pro. 18-20), emphasises that the Lares were to be respected by the members of the household, especially by the paterfamilias: atque ille vero minus minusque impendio curare minusque me impertire honoribus. item a me contra factum est, nam item obiit diem (‘As a matter of fact, his neglect grew and grew quickly, and he showed me less honour. I did the same to him, so he also died’). Plautus portrays the intimate connection between the home, the ancestors and the household deities in the Mercator (5.1.834-7): di penates meum parentum, familiari Lar pater, vobis mando, meum parentum rem bene ut tutemini. Ego mihi alios deos penatis persequar, alium Larem, aliam urbem, aliam civitatem (‘You Penates of my parents, father Lar of this house, to you I commit the well-being of my parents that you guard them well. For myself other Penates, another Lar, another city, another country, I shall seek’). Horace refers to the dedication of sacrifices to the Lares in his Satires (2.3.164-5), with the ambitious but penitent man paying great respect to these deities: immolet aequis hic porcam Laribus: verum ambitiosus et audax (‘Let him kill a pig to the kind Lares. But he is ambitious and stubborn’). This sentiment is also shown

This analysis has not only illustrated the often prominent nature of these household shrines, but also their differentiation in function. It is quite evident that the shrines in the Villa San Marco and the House of the Vettii were intended to be viewed by a wide audience, judging from both their dimensions, but also their spatial accessibility. This has been cast into a clearer perspective in comparison to the household shrines from the Villa of the Mysteries and the House of the Bicentenary, which were also public inclusions, but not as overt in their dimensions or their wider prominence. In addition to this, it must also be noted that there are many known household shrines that were largely unadorned and positioned within the utilitarian regions of various residences in Roman Italy (Orr 1978). All the same, for

105

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY by Horace in his Odes: te multa prece, te prosequitur mero defuso pateris, et Laribus tuum miscet numen, uti Graecia Castoris et magni memor Herculis (‘You with many a prayer, you with unmixed wine poured from bowls, he worships; and blends the majesty with his household gods, like Greece heedful of Castor and great Hercules’).

domestic deities, and would have performed a similar social function to the internal household shrines. Villa 17 – Chedworth Villa At the Chedworth villa, the private shrine consisted of an apsidal building that was erected to the northwest over the spring that gathers near the villa (Fox 1887, 323; Richmond 1959, 21) (Fig. 36). A large stone column was discovered in the octagonal basin and was probably one of a pair that stood at either side of the entrance to the sanctuary (Goodburn 1998, 24). The building was square in shape but with an apse at the back (Richmond 1959, 22), and was obviously architecturally impressive. Reconstruction has shown that it would have stood roughly two metres high (Esmonde Cleary 1994, 285). The shrine would have existed, in one form or another, from the initial phase of the villa’s development (Smith 1978a, 162). The residential buildings in the courtyard were skewed in the direction of the shrine (Smith 1997, 291), which may indicate that the sanctity of the spring predated the erection of the villa, and even the shrine itself. In the northeast corner of the shrine was an uninscribed altar, which was most likely dedicated to a water-goddess (Goodburn 1983, 24). The discovery of this altar and its association with water has generally led to the identification of this shrine as a nymphaeum. Other similar examples of small water-shrines can be found at the Downton villa, Wiltshire and the Beddingham Roman villa (Smith 1978a, 157; Rudling 1997, 5).

In the Satyricon (29), Petronius mentions the shrine to the household deities, located in the main dining room: praeterea grande armarium in angulo vidi, in cuius aedicula erant Lares argentei positi Venerisque signum marmoreum et pyxis aurea non pusilla, in quo barbam ipsius conditam esse dicebant (‘And in a corner I saw a large cupboard that held a small shrine, in which were the silver house-gods, and a marble statue of Venus, a large gold box, where they told me Trimalchio’s beard was arranged’). Not all household shrines would have been so luxurious but, in all likelihood, a large number of Romanised villas would have had certain rooms in which such shrines were located, for example in the atrium, kitchen area or dining room (Clarke 1991, 9). The rituals for the Penates and Lares were often associated with the family meal, with a portion of the meal being placed on the hearth for the household spirits (Howatson 1997, 419). It is for this reason that the most common area that had a ritual function in RomanoBritish villas was the large dining/reception room, a room usually located in the centre of the dominant residential building (Smith 1997, 48). This central area was used for communal and domestic functions, in addition to its ritual purpose. It may have been used for the feasting that accompanied religious rites. These central rooms were characterised by wide openings, which is noticeable at several villas, for example at Chedworth and Spoonley Wood. During the 1st Century AD, it does appear that it was also becoming a Roman practice to have more than one family unit residing within the household, such as at Ostia (Sear 1983, 35). But despite the similarity in this residential practice, the social relationship between the inhabitants was probably not equal, with one dominant group within the villa community. In Roman Britain, a number of classical reception rooms appeared in villas during the early Occupation period (Ellis 1995, 169), but even more were built in the 3rd and 4th Centuries, for example the polygonal room at the Great Witcombe villa (Fig. 34). These rooms reflect the typical dining practice of the upper classes of this period, and their desire to adopt Romanised lifestyles (Ellis 1995, 178).

Several other small altars with pagan figures were found in association with the shrine. One of these was a representation of Lenus Mars (RIB 126). The stone bears a crudely carved figure with a spear and an axe, the eyes, nipples, navel and genitalia indicated by sunken points that may have been coloured (Goodburn 1998, 27). There was an inscription [L]en(o) M[arti] beneath the figure. Lenus was a Treveran deity that was associated with certain aspects of healing, but he was often artistically portrayed as a warrior (Green 1992, 142). Another altar was discovered with a similar figure, but highly-stylised, and this may have been to the same deity (Goodburn 1998, 27). The lines on the side of this particular altar are taken to represent circular shields and spears and reinforce the interpretation of the figure as a depiction of Mars. A small figurine of bronze has also been discovered in connection with the villa complex. It may represent a priest or the household’s paterfamilias (Green 1976, 174), adding further evidence for the classical emphasis of the religion of the inhabitants. It has been argued that the entire Chedworth villa complex was a religious centre (Webster 1986a, 114), but this appears to be unlikely, since there is no dominant central temple within the site (De la Bédoyère 1993, 115).

Freestanding and detached shrines are easier to recognise than those incorporated within buildings because they are distinct from the main domestic structures. Quite often these shrines had classical features, including sculpture and inscriptions (Dark and Dark 1997, 48). Several of these contained water-cults, for example at Chedworth (Fig. 36), with similar cults have been noted at Darenth (Kent) and Famechon (Somme) (Smith 1997, 291). These structures would have also housed images of the

This is reflected by the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis of this structure (Table 23) (Fig. 62), which illustrates how removed this shrine was from the entrance to the complex, having a Depth from Exterior value of 5.

106

SHRINES IN VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE All the same, it is also important to note the prominence of this detached structure within the confines of the complex overall, with the entrance to the shrine having a lower Real Relative Asymmetry value (1.187) than the average result for the residence in general (1.236). The inner sanctum of the shrine itself was of course more restricted, having a Real Relative Asymmetry result of 1.505 (Table 23), but it is evident that this religious structure was intended to be quite prominent within the villa itself (Fig. 62). Therefore, it seems appropriate to view this shrine as an overt representation of the owner’s romanitas, while maintaining elements of domestic Celtic sanctity as well, which may be more indicative of their personal religious traditionalism.

Roman entertaining: for example, Horace demonstrates the importance of correct seating at Roman dinner parties in his Satires (2.8.18-41); Vitruvius, in the De Architectura (6.5), outlines how the dining room was specifically intended for invited guests; and in the Satyricon (31), Petronius also refers to everyone taking their places, with there probably being a certain hierarchy (Sullivan 1965, 187, n. 9). At the Spoonley Wood villa, the room was closely linked to the possible shrine at the villa, with the rituals performed close to the entrance of this room in the porticus (Smith 1997, 269). The shrine was probably centred on a large masonry foundation just to the north of the central entrance to the villa, which would be used for the performance of domestic rituals.

There were several other dedications from the later Roman period at the villa, including three inscribed slabs (RIB 128). These stones reveal that Christianity probably became the dominant belief. The slabs all bear the Christian chi-rho symbol and further demonstrate the continuing traditions of sanctity not only into the Roman period, even into the Christian era (Grover 1867, 222-3). It may be that this represents the deliberate Christianising of the stones around a former pagan shrine. Toynbee (1953, 15) has argued that this does not prove that the owners of the Chedworth complex were Christian.

The position of this religious focus suggests that the rituals performed were public as well as private. In view of the presence of different households at the villa (McWhirr 1981, 96), the communal use of the shrine would appear quite appropriate. The Spoonley Wood shrine may have been of quite considerable size (Smith 1997, 269), and when its location is taken into account, its importance would have been obvious. The public nature of this ritual building is also emphasised by the paved path that led directly to the shrine and the central bipartite room from the villa’s western entrance (Fig. 23) (Smith 1997, 266). The prominence of this shrine is also accentuated in the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis (Table 14) (Fig. 44), having produced a Real Relative Asymmetry value (0.576) that was significantly lower than the average result for this complex (1.002). This examination further illustrates how the prominent location of this shrine was intended to exhibit not only the piety of the owner, but also their romanitas.

The villa at Chedworth may have had another shrine, a household-sanctuary, located within the main domestic building. The evidence for this shrine is mostly through the characteristic wide opening of the entrance and its central position between the separate household residences in the main wing (Smith 1997, 214). Small domestic rooms were located on either side of the room, serving the individual households within the building. This possible shrine-room was larger in size and would have provided a distinction between the different residential groups (Smith 1997, 289). It was obviously a central feature of the structure, being open to all visitors to the villa and also to the domestic quarters. The shrine was obviously of a later date than the nymphaeum, in use only after the main focus of the building was moved towards the centre of the structure.

Another likely shrine has been discovered close to this villa. The building, possibly a small shrine to Jupiter, is roughly eight hundred metres to the south (Wilson 1959, 127). The site produced a sculpture in local stone of an eagle with folded wings (Wilson 1959, 127). There was also a small, uninscribed altar, which adds weight to the evidence for a religious function. Many potsherds and coins were recovered. The eagle sculpture could suggest that some inhabitants of the villa observed rituals of the Imperial Cult. The presence of a classical cult at the Spoonley Wood complex would provide a clear indication of the pro-Roman tendencies of at least some members of the villa community. Such loyalty was also probably a display of the cultural and social aspirations of its dominus.

Villa 4 – Spoonley Wood Villa The villa at Spoonley Wood is another example of a Romanised rural complex which may have had a domestic shrine (Fig. 23). The villa structure was of masonry, fashioned in an elegant style, with elaborate workmanship (O’Neil 1952, 164). It had a courtyard, with the northern side laid out as if it were a winged corridor villa, similar to Frocester and Farmington, with a central reception and dining room (McWhirr 1981, 96). This room was designed on a bipartite plan, and was located in the centre of the eastern wing; in all likelihood, it was used for entertaining visitors to the establishment. The nature of the room may have been intended to separate the favoured guests from those with less prestige (Smith 1997, 268). This was an important aspect of

Further evidence of some of the residents’ leanings towards classical religion has been shown in a burial discovered near the villa. This burial is in many ways unique for Roman Britain because the person was interred with a large statuette of Bacchus. This statue has been dated to the 3rd or 4th Century and was discovered inside the coffin (Hutchinson 1986a, 157-8). It was roughly three hundred and eighty millimetres in length and depicts the figure of a naked Bacchus leaning against

107

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY a tree stump and pouring wine from a cantharus. It was made of an Italian marble, which may indicate a foreign workshop. The subject matter of the piece seems to be appropriate for a guardian and guide for the deceased in the after-life (Hutchinson 1986b, 137). The discovery is important because it demonstrate the veneration of Bacchus in connection with the Otherworld in Roman Britain (Toynbee 1964, 69). Bacchus seems to have been a popular deity in the Gloucestershire region. For example, he was regularly depicted on mosaics, as at Gloucester, Cirencester, Chedworth, Woodchester, and the Lydney Park temple (Hutchinson 1986a, 157-8). The burial is also interesting because of the two swords that accompanied the male body (Green 1976, 174). In view of the date of this burial, it may represent a veteran of the Roman military. Therefore, this may have been a local aristocrat who joined the Roman army for the benefits of citizenship. This is plausible because Britons had been recruited for local service from as early as the 1st Century AD, as mentioned by Tacitus (Ag. 29) (Dobson and Mann 1973, 194, 196). It may provide some insight into a continued native tradition, through the use of grave goods, and yet there was a strong classical element. In view of all of the religious artefacts discovered at the Spoonley Wood villa, and the possible shrine to Jupiter, there seems to have been some adoption of classical beliefs by some members of the household.

When the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis is applied to this residence (Fig. 115, 116) (Table 39), it is evident that this was a domestic shrine that was intended to serve a different role to those from Chedworth (Villa 17) and Spoonley Wood complexes (Villa 4). Judging from the Real Relative Asymmetry result for Room 12 (1.400) it is clear that this shrine was intended more for private use rather than as a public (or highly Romanised) area for domestic rituals. Of course, this is also indicated in the pit-style of deposition that was undertaken in this area, which is more representative of native traditions than of classical rituals. Therefore, the domestic shrine at the Badgeworth villa (Villa 32) provides a useful comparison with the larger, more Romanised household shrines, which further exemplifies the prominence and romanitas of the previous shrines within a more public sphere of these extra-urban residences. Villa 15 – Great Witcombe Villa There were also several other villas in Gloucestershire that seem to have contained rooms for the observance of domestic rituals, a good example being the villa at Great Witcombe (Fig. 34). It is quite unusual in its design and had features which suggest a couple of rooms in the main residence were domestic shrine-rooms. One was the octagonal room (Room 11b), an extension on the northern side of the main corridor. It was originally the porticus during the first and second periods of construction at the villa, but was later rebuilt as an octagonal extension during the third phase (Smith 1997, 166). The room has been identified as a domestic shrineroom by some scholars (McWhirr 1981, 92-3), but this interpretation has also been questioned by others (Leach 1998, 126; Smith 1997, 166): while there may be some connection between the octagonal shape and native beliefs (Drury 1980, 72). Leach (1998, 126) believes that this room was probably used as a reception or dining room. Even so, as has been observed above, it appears quite common for reception rooms to be used for religious purposes, and the observance of domestic cults.

Villa 32 – Badgeworth Villa The villa at Badgeworth (Fig. 114) (SO 93171689) is another example of a Romanised structure which has produced evidence of possible ritual activity in a central room. The building follows a corridor-type plan and is constructed in local oolite masonry (RCHM 5). It contains a bath block with stuccoed walls and a flaggedstone floor, and there are traces of painted wall-plaster on the internal walls. It seems to have had a 3rd or 4th Century AD foundation, as large amounts of British imitation samian ware were found (Branigan 1977, 34). The villa must have been reasonably well appointed because there was a column base discovered in the corridor and these were usually only found in more luxurious houses (RCHM 6). Within this building was an oblong room that was parallel to the main domestic rooms (Room 12) (Fig. 114). It may have been used for some religious function (Smith 1997, 123). Part of the flooring was raised to a higher level than the rest and was covered, like the surrounding floor, with opus signinum (RCHM 6). Near the raised section was a hole filled with bones and charcoal, and also a coin of Valentinian. There was a similar pit at the Chesters villa, containing pottery, late coinage and bracelet wire, which may also indicate a place for ritual dedications (Scott Garrett 1938, 96). It appears, therefore, quite likely that the hole at the Badgeworth villa contained religious dedications. In view of these discoveries and also the features of the room itself, it appears that at least part of Room 12 would have served a religious function for the inhabitants of the villa at Badgeworth.

Another shrine in the Great Witcombe villa may have been located directly opposite the octagonal room, within the main corridor. According to Smith (1997, 166), there was a quite elaborate shrine in this position, probably a water feature. It appears to have been another porticus, with three drains running from the building (Neal 1977, 36). They were designed to remove water from it, and extended down beyond the boundary wall (Leach 1998, 44). The presence of these drains indicates that a water feature was located here which, in all likelihood, was a nymphaeum (Neal 1977, 36). The possibility of such a room in the villa is further supported by the discovery of narrow retaining walls, which served to further waterproof the main walls of the structure. The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis for this area (Table 22) has clearly exhibited the largely public role for this shrine (Fig. 60). Its central placement was evidently intended for it to be viewed by a wide audience, which also

108

SHRINES IN VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE 1997, 64). Late 4th Century coins were uncovered from the fill of the feature (Esmonde Cleary 1999, 365), and may have been dedications.

exhibited the romanitas of the domestic rituals of the leading inhabitants. All the same, this was quite different to the religious practices that were undertaken elsewhere in the Great Witcombe villa, such as in Room 1 (Fig. 34).

All the same, the incomplete excavation of the Turkdean villa complex provides some limitations on the interpretations of this site. However, in order to consider the social and religious contexts of these ‘Deep Rooms’ at the Great Witcombe and Turkdean establishments, a further comparison with the Lullingstone villa (Villa 35) has also been undertaken. While it would be preferable to examine the example of such a space from the Turkdean residence in greater detail, the wider consideration of the traditionalism of these semi-subterranean religious areas is still of some use for our understanding of the Turkdean complex as well. This has been undertaken in order to establish the Celtic religious traditionalism that they represented, which was seemingly connected to the landbased/pit-styled deposition of votive dedications.

There is another room (Room 1), which may have served a ritual function in the Great Witcombe villa, located in the western wing of the complex. It was isolated from the lower baths and the floor level was over a metre and a half below that of Room 49 (Clifford 1954, 16). The difference in height here has led to the supposition that the room was a cellar (Neal 1982, 154, 156). There were several niches in the northern wall of the room, and this may indicate that the use for this cellar was religious (RCHM 61). They were an original element of the plan (Clifford 1954, 16), which suggests that if the function of the cellar was religious, it was intended for that purpose from the outset (niches have also been discovered at the Dean Hall temple for example). The importance of this room is also indicated by the stuccoed walls, with each painted with different coloured panels (Neal 1977, 33). It may have had a ritual use (Lysons 1819, 178-84), similar to the ‘Deep Rooms’ at Lullingstone (see below) and Rivenhall villas (Meates 1955, 61-4; Rodwell and Rodwell 1985, 30). In view of the existence of other possible household shrines at the Great Witcombe villa, its position within the house, and its similarity to other sacred cellars, it would seem likely that it was used as a private shrine by the wealthier residents of the villa complex (Table 22). The design of this space also appears to have represented the continuation of Celtic religious traditions, despite the overt expression of romanitas in the rest of this palatial extra-urban residence (discussed below).

As mentioned previously, the Lullingstone villa (Fig. 117) was constructed in the late 1st Century AD, most likely within a generation of the Claudian invasion (Percival 1976, 91). The proprietor undertook enterprises in both agriculture and also in the working or trade of copper (Todd 1978, 203). The “Deep Room” was an original component of the first Romanised house, and may have initially been the entrance to the villa from the garden, then proceeding up a tiled staircase (Meates 1955, 59-61). This room was later converted into a household shrine in the 3rd Century AD, with a number of votive offerings being buried in the floor. These included the only two marble portrait busts discovered at any Roman villa in Britain, which were also in association with pottery vessels, all being carefully placed in position (Meates 1955, 66-77). These busts were made of Pentelic marble and had originated in the 2nd Century AD; the identity of the subjects is unknown (Meates 1987, 53). This room would have probably served the residents of the house, whereas the circular shrine, located just north of the villa (Lewis 1966, 86), was most likely intended for the surrounding tenants or neighbours.

Villa 13 – Turkdean Villa As mentioned previously, the villa at Turkdean (Fig. 32) is situated on a promontory overlooking a dry valley (Esmonde Cleary 1998, 418) and may be another example of a rural Romanised residence that had a cellar with a possible religious purpose. The structure is planned on a triple-courtyard, measuring roughly one hundred and twenty metres by seventy-five metres overall, and seems to have been erected some time in the 2nd Century (De la Bédoyère 1999, 96). It contained a bathhouse, and the northern range featured corridors on both sides of the residential rooms that appear to have been quite large. A building has been uncovered to the east of the main residential structures, with a terminus post quem of around AD 350-60 (Esmonde Cleary 1999, 365). It included a sunken feature that yielded a large amount of painted wall-plaster in the cellar, and may indicate a similar type of cellar/shrine (or ‘Deep Room’) to those found at Great Witcombe and Lullingstone. A ritual function for part of this building seems to be quite appropriate, since it was erected in a detached position from the main residential buildings, and provided a sense of separation that is common to several Romano-Celtic sacred sites, such as at Claydon Pike (Dark and Dark

The Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis of the 4th Century Lullingstone villa complex (Villa 35) (Figs. 118, 119) has illustrated some useful spatial correlations with the Great Witcombe and Turkdean villas. Initially it is important to note that this ‘Deep Room’ (Room 11) (Fig. 117) was very much a private shrine, being quite restricted in its accessibility (Table 40). This is exhibited in its Depth from Exterior (5) and Real Relative Asymmetry values (1.605), with the latter being significantly higher than the average Real Relative Asymmetry result (1.245). A similar emphasis upon privacy has been noted at the Great Witcombe villa (Table 22) and this also correlates well with the general impressions of spatial isolation given by the ‘Deep Room’ in the Turkdean villa complex (Fig. 32). The common placement of these ‘Deep Rooms’ in private regions indicates that they were not included as

109

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY monumental expressions of romanitas, but were instead representations of the continuing pursuit of Celtic religious traditions, even despite the overtly Roman nature of these residences in general terms.

General Conclusions As stated above, the evidence for shrines within most Roman villas in Britain is sparse, but this is partly due to the multiple functions which most of the rooms would have performed. The inhabitants of the villas in Gloucestershire would have carried out their domestic rituals to the household deities in rooms, which were also used as reception and dining rooms. Through the examination of the villas above, it is clear that most of the villas that have likely evidence for domestic shrines were the more prosperous ones, the owners of which could afford to dedicate an area within the building for religious purposes. The Lares, in association with the Penates, were all pervasive in their influence on daily life (Alcock 1986, 115). It would be unlikely that these spirits would have been unattended in a Romanised household, especially in view of the seriousness with which these cults were viewed (North 1976, 1).

Villa 18 – Woodchester Villa The Roman villa at Woodchester (Fig. 37) may have also contained a domestic shrine. The complex is one of the largest and most luxurious in Roman Britain, with some of the residents probably wielding substantial influence within the community (Smith 1997, 182). It seems more than likely, therefore, that there would have been some form of domestic ritual activity within the complex. A shrine could have probably been located in the large entertaining room (Room 1), which was around fifteen metres square and contained the great pavement (Clarke 1982, 198-9). In view of the magnitude and luxury of this room, it may have performed a public function (Smith 1997, 182). In all likelihood, this public role would almost certainly have also included a religious aspect for the residents of the villa. Unfortunately little of the internal fittings have survived in this room (Clarke 1982, 199), so this is difficult to substantiate. However, the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis for this structure (Table 24) has illustrated that this was a highly accessible space (Fig. 64), which would indicate a public role for any shrine placed within its confines.

In the villas that have produced some evidence of domestic shrines, there seems to have been a strong degree of classical influence on the shrine rooms and the deities worshipped there. Since the villas were among the wealthiest in Roman Gloucestershire (such as at Chedworth and Woodchester, with Spoonley Wood being the only exception within this group), and even in Britain, the degree of Romanisation shown by their inhabitants would be correspondingly high. It should not, therefore, come as a surprise at all that many of the deities honoured in these household shrines were classical in origin. After all, the architecture and structure of the villa itself was not the only means by which members of the local élite could express their Romanisation (Percival 1987, 544). This expression was a response of the native aristocracy to the onset of Roman rule (Woolf 1992, 351-2), but it did not always symbolise the complete abandonment of the inhabitants’ native heritage. Despite the fact that many of the religious representations at these villas were in classical guise, it did not necessarily clearly indicate any radical change in religious belief, only the portrayal of the deity. The religious beliefs of the inhabitants were one of the areas in which many of the native traditions continued behind a veneer of conformity (Percival 1982, 312). This can be seen at the Chedworth villa with the continued veneration of the local water deity into the Roman period and the spring’s retained sanctity despite the arrival of Christianity. But there were also clearly classically inspired religious observances occurring at the Woodchester villa, which bore little similarity to any native belief.

But there is other religious evidence that may shed light upon the views of the Woodchester inhabitants. The great pavement, with its depictions of nymphs and Orpheus charming the beasts, may give further indications of some ritual function for the room. It has been suggested that the depiction of Orpheus with the animal procession in this mosaic could be identified with Christianity, but this is still debated (Black 1986, 157). A religious connection is a possibility when the popularity of water-deities at other villas in Gloucestershire is taken into consideration, such as at Chedworth and Great Witcombe. Another indication of the religious nature of life at Woodchester can also be seen in the BONUM EVENTUM inscription in the mosaic of Room 10 (Clarke 1982, 201). These mosaics suggest that at least some inhabitants had a knowledge of Classical mythology. Several pieces of religious sculpture have also been discovered of both local and imported marble (Clarke 1982, 207). They include portrayals of Diana Luna, Cupid and Psyche. Even if these mosaics and sculpture do not represent the adoption of classical beliefs by the inhabitants, it still does provide clear evidence of their desire to exhibit their wealth, power, education, culture and Romanisation (Fredrick 1995, 226-7). In view of the prevalence of representations of classical deities and the luxurious facilities of the Woodchester villa itself, it appears that the wealthy inhabitants of this complex had accepted a high degree of Romanisation and possibly classical religious beliefs.

It appears, therefore, that while there is very little consistency in ritual activity at the villas in Gloucestershire, one common feature is the constant veneer of romanitas that all of the shrines possess: even when a shrine has Iron Age origins, it is always represented in classical style, in accordance with the rest of the villa complex. This seems to have been the

110

SHRINES IN VILLA COMPLEXES IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE ultimate goal for the native élite: to demonstrate the extent of their Romanisation and their aspirations for advancement within the Roman Empire. Cato and Varro tell us that the household gods were of great importance to the villa owner for the good fortunes of the estate; a wealthy Romano-Briton would be wise to carry out the correct religious rituals, even to the extent of making provision for them in their own home - Cato (2.1): paterfamilias ubi ad villam, venit, ubi larem familiarem salutavit, fundum eodem die, si potest, circumeat; si non eodem die, at postridie (‘When the owner arrives at the farm, after paying respect to the household god, let him go over the entire property, if possible, on the same day; if not, at least the next day’); Varro 1.1.4: quocirea scribam tibi tres libros indices, ad quos revertare, siqua in re quaeres, quem ad modum quidque te in colendo oporteat facere (‘Therefore I shall write for you in three handbooks [the gods] to which you may turn whenever you wish to know, in a given case, how you ought to proceed in agriculture’).

example of the different interpretations of domestic cults within Roman Gloucestershire, exhibiting a closer affiliation with the continuation of the local Celtic religious traditions. Other examples of this have also been identified in Room 1 of the Great Witcombe villa (Villa 15) and at the Turkdean residence (Villa 13), which were designed as ‘Deep Rooms’ that were quite similar to the example from the Lullingstone complex (Villa 35). These household shrines were seemingly associated with pit-focused native cults and represented a continuation of Celtic religious traditions, which was quite different to the more classical religious depository traditions within residences. All the same, it should also be noted that the prominence of Romanised religious expressions was also a common feature. The romanitas exhibited in the household shrines from the Spoonley Wood villa (Villa 4), Woodchester villa (Villa 18) and in Room 32 at the Great Witcombe villa (Villa 15) was clearly important for these domestic cult locations. It is also significant to note that these household shrines were highly visible aspects within these extra-urban residences, but this was also indicative of the desire to exhibit the romanitas of the leading residents. However, as previously discussed, this type of household shrine was not the only style of domestic shrine constructed in Roman Gloucestershire, and at this point it is important to discuss their similarities and differences.

The analysis of domestic ritual within the rural Romanised villas from Gloucestershire has highlighted the importance of recognising both the Roman and Celtic religious traditions in the various household shrines. These shrines seem to have often exhibited the dualistic traditions of cult activity within their confines, with the household shrine at the Chedworth villa (Villa 17) being a perfect example. This shrine was a clear representation of romanitas, particularly in relation to its spatial and architectural prominence, and yet it also maintained a direct association with the Celtic traditions of waterbased cults. In this instance it is impossible to accentuate one tradition over the other – instead this household shrine was simply a ‘true’ representation of the RomanoCeltic tradition and its syncretised characteristics. This is also illustrated in the Great Witcombe villa (Villa 15) (Fig. 34), which possessed two household shrines that individually fulfilled both the public display of romanitas (Room 32) and also the continuation of Celtic religious traditions (Room 1). These Romano-Celtic shrines were evidently intended to exhibit both romanitas and native sanctity, which would have been easily recognised by their respective audiences.

In general terms, it is initially important to note that that ‘Romano-British’ interpretation of domestic cult activity within these residences. There was little consistency in the form or associated cultural traditions within this corpus of household shrines, but this exhibits the personal interpretation for the construction of such shrines. It is evident that these household shrines from Roman Gloucestershire are easier to differentiate when compared to the public Romano-Celtic temples and shrines that were discussed in Chapter IV. In all likelihood, this was largely owing to the more personal connection between the owners and their domestic shrines, whereas the wider acceptance of Romano-Celtic temples by the wider community may have been more of a consideration (even slightly) for public religious structures. The patrons for the construction of RomanoCeltic temples clearly had a significant impact on their design (and their perceived romanitas), but the household shrines allowed a more personal expression of religious affiliations. Therefore, the analysis of these domestic cults within the Romanised villa establishments from Gloucestershire exhibits both the public acceptance and also the private continuity of the Roman and Celtic religious traditions.

This examination has also displayed the differentiation has also displayed the differentiation in the ‘types’ or styles of domestic cults within Roman Gloucestershire. The more Romanised shrines were more prominent and public examples that were largely intended to display the cultural (or religious) affiliations of their leading residents, but of course these examples were not the only examples from these villa complexes. The pit-focused shrine from the Badgeworth villa (Villa 32) is a good

111

Conclusions for the Romano-Celtic Beliefs of the Local Élites and their Expression of Power The evidence that has been dealt with in this study has shown that the native aristocracy wielded a great amount of influence on the Romanisation of rural Gloucestershire. This was the group within the British population that adopted Roman customs in order to secure the patronage and support of the provincial administration. Most of the populace, especially in the rural areas, had little reason to follow the religious observances of Rome and, therefore, continued their native traditions by assimilating them with Classical deities, if they acknowledged them at all.

early time. It appears, however, that the residents of the civitas capital may have been reluctant to construct their homes in stone before this time, the local aristocracy preferring to use their resources for the erection of public buildings. All the same, it is also important to note the differing series of developments at Gloucester and Cirencester. While the comparison of these two centres has received some criticism (Hurst 2005) their variation in habitation patterns must have been largely due to their dissimilar origins and perceived social traditions. Gloucester did not consist of just lower grade buildings, as there was a monumental building at 63-71 Northgate Street and several buildings with mosaics (Hurst 1976, 73). During the 3rd Century, the decline of public facilities in Gloucester began; as seems to have been the case throughout Roman Britain (Reece 1980a, 77). This decline can also be seen in some of the residences: for example the courtyard house in Berkeley Street was demolished in the 3rd Century and remained vacant for the rest of the Roman period. Cirencester clearly benefitted from its local associations during the 3rd and 4th Centuries Ad, which would have resulted in an increase in the commercial activity within its confines. This city also enjoyed a closer connection with the potential (and larger) markets in the south-eastern regions of the province, which may have added to this development during the later stages of the Roman occupation.

After the initial conquest of Britain by Rome, the Dobunni were one of the first tribes to accept the Roman occupation and attempted to ingratiate themselves with the provincial administration. The ready submission of the local aristocracy to Aulus Plautius in AD 43 reflects the attitudes held by those leaders who sought to maintain their position within the new Roman regime: Dio (60.20.2): fugovntwn de; ejkeivnwn rposepoihvsato oJmologiva/ mevro~ ti tw`n Bodouvnnwn, w|n ejph`rcon Katouellanoi; o[nte~, kajntau`qa froura;n katalipw;n provsw h[/ei (‘After the fleeing of these kings he acquired through submission a section of the Bodunni, who were governed by a tribe of the Catuvellauni, and leaving a garrison there, he pushed further and came upon a river’). The first changes took place in the urban centres, with the foundation of both Gloucester and Cirencester at the end of the 1st Century AD. The native oppidum at Bagendon continued to be inhabited after the conquest but, from the numismatic evidence (Reece 1979, 211), it seems the residents of this settlement were not so eager to join forces with the new administration. Those who sought to do so would have built residences at the civitas-capital, Cirencester, founded originally as an auxiliary garrison (Webster 1975a, 37).

Another point that is important to note is the expression of romanitas within these cities, but particularly in relation to the domestic residences from these towns. The traditions of continued native habitation were clearly an important factor in the development of these urban centres, but this was also combined with an ever increasing expression of romanitas in the élite residences as well. The dualistic nature of Romanised social expression and native functionalism clearly epitomises the Romano-Celtic form in which these houses were constructed. The façade of Romanised residences was taken on by the local aristocracy and yet the social function and layout of these townhouses clearly followed local traditions more closely. Of course, this is to be expected – despite the introduction of Romanised architectural traditions the vast majority of the social occasions would have followed a local format. This has been exhibited not only in the general design of these complexes, but also through their spatial analysis, which has illustrated the different social traditions in which they were used in Roman Britain when compared to those townhouses from Roman Italy.

The first necessary buildings to be erected at Cirencester were the monumental public buildings, which were highly desirable in a Romanised civitas capital. In view of the considerable gains which members of the local aristocracy could obtain, for example by becoming members of the local ordo decurionum (Whittaker 1997, 154-5), there was definitely an incentive to build such structures in the major urban centres. In most of the major centres in Roman Britain, these public buildings were completed by the early the 2nd Century AD (Jones 1974, 55). In Cirencester, it was around the middle of the 2nd Century AD that the building of masonry domestic structures began, the town being one of the earliest to do so in the province. Romanised domestic structures had been built before this time using timber, but even this reflects the level of urbanisation of the inhabitants at this 112

CONCLUSIONS FOR THE ROMANO-CELTIC BELIEFS OF THE LOCAL ÉLITES AND THEIR EXPRESSION OF POWER All the same, it is still important to note the social messages that these Romanised urban townhouses were intended to convey. These masonry residences were entirely different to the traditional round-houses, even though they maintained a functional similarity – they looked completely different. They were a highly visible statement of the romanitas of their leading residents and made a clear statement about their social, political and cultural affiliations to a wide audience. This final aspect is particularly important to note – this romanitas was conveyed to anyone who saw the house, it was not just for invited (or uninvited) guests to the residence. All the same, as noted previously, these urban townhouses did not exactly function along strict classical lines, which is the main issue that has been raised in their interpretation. These masonry townhouses were truly Romano-British – representing a combination of native and introduced social and architectural elements, which was intrinsically linked to their presentation of social success and power.

17) and Woodchester (Villa 18), although this seems to have been common to both native and Roman traditions (Smith 1982, 323; Wallace Hadrill 1994, 103, 106-7). But one important factor that must be remembered is that these Romanised villas do not truly represent the people in rural Gloucestershire, the majority of whom continued to live in native-style housing during the Roman occupation, with an example of this being found at Brockworth (Rawes 1981, 45-77). The architecture and materials used by the villa complexes was a clear expression of romanitas, which was also a notable aspect of the Romano-Celtic temples in the region. All the same, it is also important to note that the vast majority of these Romanised villas were not built until the middle of the 2nd Century AD, with villas like that at North Cerney (Villa 12) clearly being the exception to the rule (Hingley 1991, 78). As Fulford has suggested (1991, 39), this may have been a result of an initial downturn in the newly formed Romano-British economy, or it may have perhaps been owing to the usury of less than scrupulous Romans, such as Seneca (Tac. Ann. 13.42; Motto 1966; Davis 2003, 12) as mentioned by Cassius Dio (62.2): diav te ou\n tou`to, kai; o{ti oJ Senevka~ ciliva~ sfivsi mu riavda~ a[kousin ejpi; crhstai`~ ejlpivsi tovkwn daneivsa~ e[ peitj ajqrova~ te a{ma aujta;~ kai; biaivw~ ejsevprassen, ejp anevsthsan (‘This was one cause for the rebellion; another lay in that Seneca, in the hope of receiving a good interest rate, ahd lent the islanders 40,000,000 sesterces that they did not require, and had then called in this loan all at once and had resorted to extreme methods in demanding it’). Nevertheless, the delay in the construction of such Romanised residences was to be expected, and this has also been noted elsewhere in the western provinces, such as in Gallia Belgica (Wightman 1985, 105).

There seems to have been a similar pattern with the construction of villas in the Gloucestershire region. Most of the villas were erected in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries AD, but there were others built in the 4th Century. Many of these villas were, therefore, built a considerable time after the conquest. This delay in villa construction has also been noted in the other regions of Roman Britain, as well as Gallia Belgica (Drinkwater 1983, 16) and Gallia Narbonensis (Rivet 1988, 85). Several of the villas in Gloucestershire reveal continued habitation from the Iron Age into the Roman period, for example Barnsley Park (Villa 2), North Cerney (Villa 12) and Frocester Court (Villa 3). North Cerney is of special interest in view of its position within the boundary ditches of an Iron Age hillfort and also for the early date of its construction. This villa complex represents a member of the local aristocracy who erected a Romanised villa in the 1st Century AD, but probably owing to the changing social and economic conditions of the time, the complex was abandoned around the end of the 3rd Century AD (Trow and James 1989, 87).

Nonetheless, once the local aristocracy were able to construct rural Romanised residences, it is quite clear that they were used as a medium to not only express their romanitas, but also their socio-political dominance. As noted with the urban townhouses previously, these large masonry residences made clear statements about the cultural (and political) affiliations of their owners to the wider community in an unmistakable format. In some instances, such as at Great Witcombe (Villa 15), Turkdean (Villa 13) and at the Chesters villa (Villa 14), the prominence of these structures was also accentuated by their elevated topographical location. This not only made the structure more visible, but it also reaffirmed the suggestion of social dominance as well by being placed psychologically higher than the local audience. However, it is also important to note that some examples, such as the complexes at Frocester Court (Villa 3), Whittington Court (Villa 8) and Hucclecote (I) (Villa 10), had habitation traditions that extended back to the pre-Roman period, which would have been a different factor in the selection of their locations. This simply highlights the wide variation in villa structures from Roman

Many of the villas in the region showed differing levels of wealth, indicating a distinction in status even among the native aristocracy. Yet it must be noted that all of these complexes still represent a pro-Roman attitude among the inhabitants, and usually a higher level of wealth than in surrounding settlements. At some villas there may have been more than one household residing in the complexes, as in the hall-type villas such as Rodmarton, Cherington, Farmington (Villa 6) and Frocester Court (Villa 3) (Smith 1978b, 357-8). But Gloucestershire also had several of the most lavish villa complexes in Roman Britain, for example Chedworth (Villa 17), Great Witcombe (Villa 15) and Woodchester (Villa 18). These complexes represented the highest social grouping within the community, those aristocrats who had sufficient funds to erect the most palatial residences. Within this group there may also have been more than one resident household, as at Chedworth (Villa 113

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Gloucestershire and the priorities of their respective owners.

18), the marked contrast in size, facilities, wealth and potential social space clearly exhibits this variation. The larger establishments not only expressed a cultural affiliation with the provincial administration, but they also clearly exhibited their social dominance within both an external and an internal context. These large, wellappointed residences were prominent examples of the social prestige of their owners, which was communicated to the local population on a series of sociological and psychological levels.

This leads to another important point for consideration: these villa complexes were clearly not of an equal ‘standard’ and varied greatly in relation to their social circumstances, functional intent, and also in the fiscal standings of their owners. This is made quite clear when comparing small residences, like the Barnsley Park (Villa 2) and Hucclecote (II) (Villa 11) complexes, with their larger, more opulent counterparts at Great Witcombe (Villa 15) and Woodchester (Villa 18). All the same, the most important ‘unifying’ feature of these villa complexes was the intent to clearly exhibit the romanitas of their respective owners. This is clearly evident at all of these establishments, regardless of their social or economic circumstances. All of them sought to identify themselves with the provincial administration through the erection of such residences. However, as has been noted with their urban counterparts, this did not necessarily correspond with the adoption of strictly ‘Roman’ lifestyles, particularly in relation to their extra-urban social activities and this is also related to their levels of productivity as well.

Once these statistical results are compared with the villas from central Italy (Villas 24-28) there are noticeable differences that are able to be recognised. Firstly, it is important to note the comparative sizes of each group of villas (Graph 13), with the establishments from Roman Gloucestershire being generally larger, particularly in relation to the courtyard residences. This is significant because all of these residences in Campania (except the Villa of Iucundus) were focused upon courtyards at the centre of their design. This is made more important when the amounts of potential entertainment space are compared, which shows how much more consistent the statistical results are from the Italian residences when contrasted to the Gloucestershire villas (Graph 14). This could be indicative of either a difference in social custom, with such provisions being more necessary within an Italian context, or it may be a representation of the British (or non-Italian) interpretation of how these complexes were meant to function. In all likelihood, it would appear that both are plausible explanations for this difference in interpretation and social function. However, it has already been noted that feasting customs were seemingly of some importance during the pre-Roman period (Pitts 2005) and may have continued into the Roman era, which could indicate that social practices still largely followed the native Celtic traditions within many households (See McCarthy 2006, 208-9), which may contradict the prior analysis of some modern scholars (Perring 2002, 202-3).

The general productivity for the villa estates in Gloucestershire (Graph 6) highlights the wealth of these establishments during the 3rd and 4th Centuries AD. As shown in Table 8, seventy-eight percent of the villas in Gloucestershire were either expanding or clearly exhibiting prosperity during the first half of the 3rd Century AD. This was clearly a significant phase of growth in the region and provides an important indication of the economic productivity during this period. During the second half of the 3rd Century there was a similar emphasis upon expansion (thirty-three percent) and prosperity (forty-five percent) (Table 9) (Graph 6), which further exhibits the economic strength of Roman Gloucestershire at this point during the development of the region. While the aggregate results for this period are not as high as those produced for the early 3rd Century, it is important to note that only two structures exhibited any sign of decline at this stage (Villas 5 and 12).

In general terms, the analysis of potential entertainment space within these structures has established not only the variation that existed within these villas, but also their similarities. One of the most obvious similarities was how the design of each structure should not only be viewed as an indication of wealth, but also of its intended function. Large villas with sizeable potential entertainment areas made clear statements about the success of their owners, with the villas at Turkdean (Villa 13), Great Witcombe (Villa 15), Chedworth (Villa 17) and Woodchester (Villa 18) being perfect examples of this. This social space was absolutely necessary to convey this social dominance within an internal context – it exhibited not only wealth through the fine décor of such an environment, but it also drew a clear distinction between the residences of these dominant figures and the potentially smaller residences of those whom they entertained (and sought to dominate). In addition to this, the inclusion of large open courtyards added to the

The key element that has been determined through the analysis of these villas is the variation in the social activities within the structures under question, which has been undertaken through the discussion of their potential entertainment areas. While all of the extra-urban complexes in Roman Gloucestershire exhibited the romanitas of their owners through the construction and embellishment of these residences, this did not necessarily provide a correlation with an expression of their social dominance. Of course this was implied within the Romanisation of their residences, but not all of them went out of their way to further accentuate this aspect. When comparing the circumstances of the villas at Barnsley Park (Villa 2), Frocester Court (Villa 3) and Hucclecote I (Villa 10) with those at Great Witcombe (Villa 15), Chedworth (Villa 17) and Woodchester (Villa 114

CONCLUSIONS FOR THE ROMANO-CELTIC BELIEFS OF THE LOCAL ÉLITES AND THEIR EXPRESSION OF POWER overall dimensions of the structure and in turn added to the external prominence of these structures as well. The impression of romanitas and social dominance was clearly conveyed in both spheres and was a fundamental feature of their design. All the same, this influence (and dominance) could also be expressed beyond the confines of these villas establishments, such as in the construction of public buildings with temples being an ideal example.

customs, and this is seen in the close association between many of the villas and the Romano-Celtic temples. The limited adoption of epigraphic forms of Romanised religious dedications (Appendix IV) has also epitomised the restricted use of such offerings. The difficulty (within the scope of modern analysis) is that the survival of these altars and statue bases makes this form of offering the most understandable and obvious representation of religious dedication. All the same, judging from the number of dedications and their targeted deities, it is evident that the Roman elements (and their associated dedicatory traditions) were not adopted by the wider community. This is also shown through the use of the defixione tradition in Roman Britain, where a ‘classical’ form was used in a particularly Celtic (or native) fashion. All the same, the ‘positive’ religious epigraphic offerings (and their limited acceptance in relation to traditional Celtic offerings) cannot be taken as an accurate representation of the reality of religious beliefs or dedicatory traditions in Roman Gloucestershire. This interpretation is also important in relation to the analysis of Romano-Celtic temples and shrine in Roman Gloucestershire (and their wider significance) as well.

The religious sanctuaries in Roman Gloucestershire were varied, but also had many common features. One of the major differences was the result of their location that is whether they were urban or rural temples. The urban temples often focused directly upon the religions of Rome, with possible temples to Minerva and Mercury in Cirencester (Lewis 1966, 125). The rural temples usually revered the traditional native cults but were assimilated with the Roman pantheon, such as at Uley (Temple 11) and Chedworth (Temple 10). This distinction follows the Roman attitude whereby the urban temples housed the State cults and the rural sanctuaries paid respect to the ancestral and family cults, as mentioned by Cicero (De Leg. 2.17-22). Rural temples and shrines were quite often constructed on different levels of wealth and size, and this was probably due to the amount of wealth available. This can be seen when comparing the levels of expenditure at the Uley (Temple 11) and Lydney Park (Temple 12) religious complexes with the comparatively modest structures at King’s Stanley (Temple 2) and Dean Hall (Temple 6). There was also a considerable difference in the dates of construction of the rural temples. The Romano-Celtic temple at Uley (Temple 11), erected in the early 1st Century AD, predated the stone temple at King’s Stanley (Temple 2) by at least two centuries, and the Lydney Park (Temple 12) temple has been dated to the end of the 3rd Century AD at the earliest. This does not necessarily mean that these sites were not regarded as sacred prior to this, but it does show that the construction date of many of these religious sites and their apparent Romanisation was more varied than that of the villas.

Nevertheless, for the purposes of the present discussion, the key issue to note is the frequent connection between rural Romano-Celtic temples and pre-Roman sanctity. Of the twelve temple and shrine precincts considered here in detail, only the small shrine at Kingscote has produced no indication of an Iron Age predecessor, and this seems to have been largely owing to the military origins of this settlement. All of the other rural Romano-Celtic temples have exhibited the continuity of sanctity that was so common at these complexes. All the same, the difficulty in identifying this common theme has been mentioned by Millett (1995, 93) who has noted that Romano-Celtic religion cannot be viewed as a united religion, but more as a combination of local cults throughout the province. This divergence in religious expression was also manifested in the architectural diversity within the preRoman Celtic shrines (Smith 2001, 162). Nevertheless, the continued sanctity of these native sanctuaries is undeniable and of great significance for our understanding of these complexes.

There seems to have been continuity of sanctity at many of the religious sites, which usually occurred in the form of the erection of Romano-Celtic temples over Iron Age sacred places or shrines. Another continuation of belief can be seen in the offering of Roman style altars and inscriptions in watery contexts, for example at Lower Slaughter (Temple 1). This is indicative of the cultural assimilation that occurred in Roman Britain where native beliefs and rituals continued within a Roman context. Despite the new building materials and appearance of the Romano-Celtic temples and the new forms of votive dedication, the local beliefs remained an integral part of the Romano-Celtic religion and should not viewed as secondary to the Roman pantheon. This is especially important when the influential role of the native aristocracy is taken into consideration. It was this group that actively sought to assimilate the two religious

Therefore, the architectural phenomenon that was the Romano-Celtic temple should definitely be viewed as an amalgamation of two cultural traditions. However, it seems that the romanitas of these religious buildings was really only in the structure of the complex itself for the vast number of devotees at these sites. This is supported by the limited number of votive altars being dedicated within these precincts, and the continued use of nativestyled offerings, such as miniature weapons, at many sites in the Gloucestershire region. Even when the classical dedicatory traditions were adopted by sections of the local population, such as in the case of the defixiones, the interpretation of how they were to be used was still largely based upon a regional (rather than a 115

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY ‘purist’) basis. All the same, the romanitas of these structures was still symbolic of the social context of the times, whereby connections were drawn between the Roman and Celtic communities. However, it must also be noted that generalising the Romano-Celtic religious tradition is a perilous activity, with each site accentuating different cultural/religious elements and traditions at varying levels (See Smith 2001, 163). Yet it is still important to consider the trends overall, and it is quite clear that the continuity of native sanctity and many of its associated traditions provides some insight into the nature of religious practices in Roman Gloucestershire.

association. Architectural similarities of structures were also used in order to suggest a connection between some villas and temples. This follows the basic premise that if the temple was to have been constructed by a villa owner, similar architectural techniques and styles may have been used at both sites. This has been shown at the temple and villa structures at Chedworth (Temple 10, Villa 17), through their use of decorative sculptural ornamentation. The numismatic evidence from some sites has also been used to add weight to the argument. The prominence of these structures within the wider community was clearly an important factor in the construction of these Romanised complexes. This was of course more noticeable in the placement and design of the Romanised rural residences, but it may have also been a factor for the Romano-Celtic temples. It is significant that many of the temples and shrines were built within small settlements, such as at Kingscote (Temple 3), Upton St. Leonards (Temple 7) and Bourtonon-the-Water (Temple 8). These settlements were obvious locations for a Romanised temple structure, having a higher proportion of travelling visitors, and in turn a greater level of prominence within the wider community. All the same, this cannot be applied to the more remote complexes, such as the Romano-Celtic temple at Chedworth (Temple 10). It is in this regard that the connection between Romano-Celtic temples and Romanised villas is essential in order to determine the development of these complexes and to understand their romanitas. This is also the case in relation to the Uley (Temple 11) and Lydney sites (Temple 12), where it seems that a rural settlement has developed from the introduction of a prominent Romano-Celtic temple structure, which simply added to the standing of these precincts.

With this in mind, it is now important to consider the prominent role of the native élites in this perceived acculturation process. As Smith has noted (2001, 162), this group played a key role in the adoption of Romanised models of expressing their power and social status, which has also been noted previously in relation to their urban and rural residences. Naturally the motivation for expressing their elevated positions within the community would have been primarily focused within an urban or semi-urban context, which has been shown by the study of Smith (Smith 2001, 163), but it was by no means limited to these centres. The exhibition of status in a Romanised fashion was also quite prevalent among the local élites in a rural setting throughout the Gloucestershire region, and this would have extended to the construction of extra-urban temples and shrines. This group of local élites would have been the only members of the community who had both the financial means and the motivation to express their status (and romanitas) through such constructions (it is unlikely that the provincial administration would have seen small, rural shrines as being important enough to build – particularly those of a Romano-Celtic nature). Therefore, in order to try and establish this more conclusively, an examination of the association of the Romanised villas and RomanoCeltic temples was also undertaken.

Nevertheless, the romanitas of Romano-Celtic temples was a significant feature that would have clearly provided motivation for the local élites to construct these religious precincts. While the continuity of sanctity at these complexes illustrates the Celtic aspects of their significance (Fulford 2001), the romanitas exhibited in their construction also exemplifies the socio-political circumstances of this period. The adoption of Romanised building materials made a clear statement of the social affiliations of these local leaders with the provincial administration, while continuing to maintain the native religious traditions of the general (non-élite) community. The decline of the shrine at Kingscote (Temple 3) illustrates the importance of local traditions in the perceived sanctity of these complexes. Therefore, it would seem that these Romano-Celtic temples represent a fine balancing act between the socio-political needs of the Romanised, aristocratic benefactors and the local religious traditions of the wider rural population.

The connection been these villa and religious structures has been shown using several types of archaeological evidence. The most important and obvious of these is the existence of a road linking the two sites. There are a couple of examples of this, such as the domestic and religious structures at Claydon Pike (Villa 29, Temple 13), and also at the Lydney Park temple (Temple 12) and Chesters villa (Villa 14). The existence of a road would seem to show the most logical association between two sites because of the practicalities of travelling from one to the other. Another method that was utilised to show a connection was to take into consideration the relative proximity of two sites, with distances of less than ten kilometres allowing a possible connection. Naturally, this distance alone cannot prove an association, but no sites have been taken into consideration over this limit as a general guideline. A good example of this is the Uley temple site (Temple 11) and the Woodchester villa complex (Villa 18), the close proximity and similar wealth and attributes of which indicate a possible

It appears, therefore, that the role the wealthy native aristocracy played in the erection of rural Romano-Celtic temples was quite substantial. It was the nobility who 116

CONCLUSIONS FOR THE ROMANO-CELTIC BELIEFS OF THE LOCAL ÉLITES AND THEIR EXPRESSION OF POWER were the only members of the Romano-British society with the resources and the social and political motivation to undertake such construction. This trend was by no means limited to Gloucestershire or Britain as a whole. The role of the native aristocracy in the erection of rural Romanised shrines has also been noted in Gaul (Drinkwater 1989, 191). Several inscriptions discovered at Romano-Gallic sites have confirmed the involvement of the native Gallic nobility in local religion (Drinkwater 1983, 179-81). These inscriptions do not necessarily represent the traditional beliefs of the aristocracy, but more the desire for status and political allegiances (Derks 1998, 242). They have also proven conclusively the influence that the wealthy members of society could wield in the rural regions. Despite the lack of epigraphic evidence in Roman Britain, there would certainly have been a similar social climate. This reflects the attitude of the Roman administration to ignore the rural poor and to leave their assimilation under the control of the local nobility (Whittaker 1997, 155). Thus, the developments at many religious sites provide a good illustration of the native aristocracy’s cultural position, although the temples do not necessarily represent the majority of the population. The nature of the beliefs of many local aristocrats is best ascertained through the examination of the domestic rituals.

mentioned frequently, and was a significant factor in Roman religion. Those members of the Romano-Celtic society who had adopted Roman lifestyles and customs would, therefore, have seen these domestic rituals and the household shrines as an essential feature of both their public and private romanitas. These religious foci were varied in regard to their position within the settlement. There were essentially two types of household shrine: the internal shrine-room and the freestanding shrine. The villa at Spoonley Wood (Villa 4) may have contained both types, each serving a different purpose. The most common were the internal shrines, some of which would have served as Roman-styled lararia. These have been discovered at several villas, such as Great Witcombe (Villa 15), Spoonley Wood (Villa 4) and probably Woodchester (Villa 18). The villa at Woodchester contained several pieces of sculpture that portrayed Roman deities, which indicates that, at the very least, the villa inhabitants were attempting to present their household deities in Classical guise. There are a couple of examples of freestanding standing shrines in Gloucestershire, such as at Chedworth (Villa 17) and Spoonley Wood (Villa 4). The shrine at Spoonley wood seems to have been dedicated to Jupiter (Wilson 1959, 127). The detached shrine at Chedworth is quite different, probably having Iron Age origins (Goodburn 1983, 24). This shrine was a nyphaeum, housing a spring near the villa. There were quite a few water shrines associated with villas, such as at Great Witcombe (Villa 15) and Frocester Court (Villa 3). Both Chedworth and Frocester Court seem also to have represented a continuation of Iron Age belief, with the residents beginning to deposit altars and inscriptions in the Roman custom after the erection of the villa. It appears, therefore, that in a few instances the native aristocrats who resided at these complexes assimilated their household rituals within a Roman framework, as they had done with the construction of the RomanoCeltic temples.

In view of the close association between many of the villas and the Romano-Celtic temple complexes in Gloucestershire, there are some conclusions that can be drawn concerning the nature of Romano-British society in the region and the important role that the native nobility undertook in the assimilation of the two religions. Despite the prominent part played by the British aristocracy it would seem that the Romanisation of the native religion was not as far reaching as it might appear. Most of the rural population seem to have persevered with their native religious traditions without any serious change. The continued use of Iron Age sanctuaries may indicate that there was little alteration to their beliefs. The limited nature of this religious assimilation seems to have also been the case in Gaul, where continuity of sanctity at many pre-Roman sacred sites has also been noted into the Roman period, under the guise of Romano-Gallic religion. Derks (1998, 177, 245) has argued that, in Gaul, the local communities maintained the essence of their own traditions, despite the introduction of elements of Roman culture. This is not to say that, in either Britain or Gaul, there were members of the Romano-Celtic society who did adopt Classical deities, but, again, this would have been predominantly from the local nobility. Indeed, the adoption of Classical religion by some of the native aristocracy in Roman Gloucestershire has been evidenced in the some of the household shrines in the villa complexes.

The public nature (in association with the use of more monumental architectural forms) of the classically-styled household shrines has been clearly illustrated by the Hillier and Hanson Gamma analysis of the villas at Spoonley Wood (Villa 4), Chedworth (Villa 17), Woodchester (Villa 18) and Room 32 at the Great Witcombe villa (Villa 15). This accessibility and physical prominence was clearly correlated with the desire to exhibit the romanitas of the leading residents. This is contrasted by the private/inaccessible location of those shrines that were more symbolic of the continuing pursuit of Celtic religious traditions. This has been made evident in the examples taken from the villas at Badgeworth (Villa 32), Turkdean (Villa 13) and Room 1 at the Great Witcombe complex (Villa 15).

Several of the villas in Gloucestershire contained household shrines. In the literary sources, the existence and importance of these domestic shrines has been

Judging from the variation in the placement and design of these household shrines, it is important to recognise and interpret the significance of this differentiation. While 117

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY this dissimilarity in location and its intended audience exhibits the different religious traditions of the household members, it is still essential to note that this was an important feature of Romano-Celtic religion. Each individual shrine may have accentuated some elements of either the native or classical religious traditions to a greater (or lesser) extent, but the combined use of Romanised architecture with native sacred sites can still not be overlooked. Even the most native orientated household shrines, such as at the Badgeworth villa (Villa 32) was still placed within a highly Romanised domestic context. The Chedworth villa’s household shrine is another perfect example of this cultural dualism. These shrines clearly represent the implications of RomanoCeltic syncretism and expression.

structure built by the leaders was of less importance than its location, and the genii loci had no real need for it. However, it is important to note how all of these Romanised structures were clear examples of both romanitas and also of the social influence (or power) of the local élites. These buildings frequently symbolised the standing social prestige of their constructors, and in many ways they epitomised the desire to maintain the hierarchical status quo. This interpretation indicates how despite the introduction of a new governing power within the British sphere, the local élites still sought to maintain their dominance over the wider ‘subordinate’ community. All the same, it should also be noted that this primary focus upon Romanised structures could also be a result of the extant archaeological evidence, with these structures being more prominent within the extant archaeological record. However, this archaeological prominence seems to be indicative of the social success that their constructors sought to exemplify. The local élites attempted to display their socio-political status, and this has resulted in a longer standing source of evidence for modern archaeologists when compared to the more traditional structures.

In many ways this makes the household shrines from villas in Roman Gloucestershire an entirely different form of religious expression to the public Romano-Celtic temples. The household shrines have exhibited a greater variation in their cultural foci, but this dissimilarity has also shown a consistency in theme and location, which makes an invaluable source of information. However, the domestic context for this religious expression was the catalyst for this – the dominus had a greater degree of control and this allowed them to express either their traditional beliefs or their romanitas freely. There were additional constraints, however minor, with the sponsoring of local Romano-Celtic temples, which produced a different corpus of archaeological evidence. There was also a greater degree of importance placed on the accentuation of their romanitas within this public forum, whereas greater religious liberty was possible within the secluded confines of their domus. All the same, the influence that the native aristocracy had upon the Romanisation process in Britain cannot be underestimated. It was through this group that the provincial administration was able to maintain the pax romana, because of the dependence of the poorer classes upon the local nobility (Whittaker 1997, 155). Rome maintained this aristocratic social order by offering incentives to the native leaders through the taxation system and also by the offer of citizenship for holding administrative and political offices.

Nevertheless, this ties in with the analysis of the Romanisation process and its modern perception. The emphasis upon Romanisation illustrates a cultural predilection towards the accentuation of the effect of this introduced tradition. All the same, as has been noted frequently throughout this study, this process was not simply an introduction of cultural affectation, but more of an assimilation process. However, the same comment can be made about the persistence of Celtic traditions. The rejection of Roman culture has been previously accentuated in order to exemplify the strength of native cultural and religious customs, but this is also giving an unnecessary primacy of one cultural tradition over another when considering the local aristocracy. The evidence really seems to suggest the creation of a Romano-Celtic tradition that took on both cultural elements on a largely equal basis. One element cannot be viewed without the other – but it must be noted that the local élites were a pivotal group within the overall acculturation/assimilation process.

It would have been largely to retain their status that the nobility sought to construct Romanised villas, to build new temples on the site of their traditional sanctuaries and to adopt Roman lifestyles (Hanson 1994b, 155). The Romanisation process can thus be clearly seen to benefit both the Roman administration and the local élites. But the majority of the population, being the rural lower classes, do not appear to have been a part of this assimilation process. Their daily lives would have probably changed very little, with most continuing to follow their traditional methods and customs. Their religious practices would not have altered drastically either, despite the introduction of a new architectural form for the shrine at the sacred places. The Romanised

It is evident that the local aristocracy were pivotal figures within the acculturation process within Roman Gloucestershire. It seems clear that this group played a significant role in the creation of the Romano-British province, which in turn affected both their domestic and religious forms of expression. While this does not provide a complete representation of Romano-British society in Gloucestershire, it certainly exhibits the cultural influences of this leading group of local aristocrats. All the same, romanitas was not the only impression that these structures were intended to convey – power and social domination were frequently exhibited within both domestic and religious contexts as well. This was as much about allying themselves with the provincial 118

CONCLUSIONS FOR THE ROMANO-CELTIC BELIEFS OF THE LOCAL ÉLITES AND THEIR EXPRESSION OF POWER administration as it was concerned with maintaining the existing social hierarchy within the region. Therefore, it is evident that these structures were symbolic on several levels, but were largely intended to express romanitas,

social success and traditional associations in a variety of contexts that were determined by the particular tastes of each local member of the élites in Roman Gloucestershire.

119

Appendix I The Use of the Term ‘Celt’ Over recent years there has been much debate over the definition of the term ‘Celts’, in regard to the inhabitants of Britain. Scholars are divided: the first group, led by Collis, feel that it is impossible to assume that material and linguistic similarities prove the existence of a common culture in Britain and on the Continent (Collis 1997, 10). The other group, which includes Ruth and Vincent Megaw, justify the usage of the term ‘Celt’ for the British inhabitants (Megaw and Megaw 1998, 432-5), and rely in the main on archaeological and documentary evidence to demonstrate the existence of a common culture (Green 1996, 3). The argument is also based on the linguistic evidence of Celtic ‘P’ (Welsh) and ‘Q’ (Gaelic), suggesting the possibility of at least two separate migrations of Celts from the continent (Megaw and Megaw 1989, 189).

traditions, but the similar ethnic and cultural backgrounds would have still been evident within both tribal groups. Of course the origins of the term ‘Celt’ are also problematic. The first known examples are recorded in the Greek writings of the 5th Century BC, in the form Keltoi, which was used in relation to the tribal groups in southern Gaul and in the Danube region (Rankin 1987), such as by Herodotus (2.33): [Istro~ te ga;r potamo;~ ajrxavmeno~ ejk Keltw`n kai; Pur hvnh~ povlio~ rJevei mevshn scivzwn th;n Eujrwvphn: oiJ de; Keltoi; eijsi; e[xw Jhraklevwn sthlevwn, oJmourevousi de; Kunhsivoisi, oi] e[scatoi pro;~ dusmevwn oijkevousi tw`n ejn th`/ Eujrwvph/ katoikhmevnwn (‘The Ister flows from the lands of the Celts and the town of Pyrene through the middle of Europe; now the Celts live beyond the pillars of Hercules, being neighbours of the Cynesii, who are the most western country in Europe’). But as Woolf has observed (1989, 237), the use of this term is uncertain because of their classical origins rather than a ‘Celt’ actually using the term in relation to himself. However, this term would not have been used by any member of an Iron Age community, instead the name of their tribal group would have been applied because of the strength of their tribal identities rather than ethnic identities. This is a large part of the ambiguity that surrounds the term (Wells 1998, 814-15), but does not necessarily establish that the ethnic and cultural links between these groups can be entirely disregarded or denied.

Clearly the word ‘Celtic’ means different things to different people, but this investigation has followed the view of Megaw/Green, whereby the term ‘Celtic’ has been used for the native people who inhabited the areas under investigation in the late pre-Roman Iron Age and during the Roman occupation. The discussion has been based on the cultural, archaeological, documentary and literary evidence that has been discovered, identifying a common heritage and social system that can been deemed ‘Celtic’. This particular context for the use of this term was meant to delineate the cultural connections of many tribal groups throughout Britain and Europe. It was not meant to imply a vast ‘Celtic commonwealth’ (James 1999, 28), but a modern term for tribal groups, which express a common cultural and linguistic heritage.

All the same, in some regards the proponents of the term ‘Celtic’ (Rankin 1987) have also done their arguments some disservice through the continued emphasis upon the heroism of the ancient Celts (Woolf 1989, 236), which simply continues the idealistic and classical representation of them as being ‘noble savages’. This idea of a grand Celtic nation resisting the ‘evil’ tyranny of Roman rule (Drinkwater 1989a, 101; Rankin 1987, 298) highlights the popular idealism of these communities, which seemingly had little in common with the actual circumstances overall. This is unfortunately often tied to modern ethnic identities and the idealistic/romantic investment that some members of the community place in the glories of the past, which have added fuel to the fire of academic debates in relation to the term over time. As mentioned previously, the idea of a united ‘Celtic nation’ is entirely untenable, with this ethnic group being a diverse range of tribal collections, which largely viewed themselves on a tribal level rather than as a wider group. Each of these groups responded to the Roman Empire in a different fashion, with some being more accepting of Roman domination than others. However, the disparate fashion in which these tribes

The arguments posed against the use of the term ‘Celt’ are varied in their emphasis, but it would appear that the major issue is placed on the question of unity within the Celtic tribal groups. As James (1998, 203) has previously noted, the nature of Iron Age society in the western Mediterranean was based upon a series of local or regional tribal groups that appear to have been quite distinct in their collective consciousness. For example, the Dobunni would have certainly seen themselves as being from the Dobunni rather than part of a wider ‘Celtic’ nation. This is quite correct, but it appears unlikely that political disunity cannot be the sole reason for abandoning the clear cultural similarities that these groups would have possessed. For example, it seems quite safe to assume that members of the Dobunni would have seen more things in common with their Atrebatic or Catuvellaunian contemporaries than with the invading Roman forces and their cultural traditions. The Dobunni were clearly different to the Catuvellauni in some of their

120

THE USE OF THE TERM ‘CELT’ responded to Rome was a large reason for the ultimate success of Roman expansionism in the region – but the collective disunity between these groups cannot be taken as a sign of ethnic or cultural disunity either.

between them, they do not entirely remove the similarities between these groups. The difference in artistic expression, such as on the Celtic coinage, were perfect examples of this: the Dobunnic issues were slightly different to those of the Atrebates, Durotriges and Iceni, but the similar stylistic tendencies among them are still apparent. The differences reflect the tribalism of their culture, indicating their socio-political identities, whereas the similarities represent the general Celtic nature of these groups overall.

The difficulties that are inherently tied up with this topic are undeniable. However, for the purposes of this study the term ‘Celtic’ has been used sparingly, but it has still been accepted in general. While the tribal basis of the native communities reflects the disunity and differences

121

Appendix II Celtic Coinage and its Evidence for Dobunnic Society Previous to this issue the coinage of Philip had been designed to associate with the major coinages of the area of the time, being the Chalcidian issues and the coinage of Amphipolis. This association with such issues from other states was in accordance with his domination of these states at the time. These issues were predominantly in silver and the use of this precious metal preceded the use of gold by many years, and continued after gold coinage was introduced (Price 1974, 21). The date of 357 BC was highly significant in the development of Philip’s power and his coinage after the capture of Amphipolis greatly increased the dominance that he held in the region (Cawkwell 1978, 36). This allowed Philip access to the rich mining area of Mount Pangaion, after which he crushed all Chalcidian opposition in 348 BC, with a major factor being the fall of Olynthos (Ellis 1976, 16). It was by this that Philip was able to secure his position and also a vast amount of wealth, which is estimated at being around a thousand talents annually (Price 1974, 22). Diodorus Siculus (16.8.7) mentions this wealth and its effect on the strength of Macedon, by stating: ejk de; touvtwn tacu; swreuvsa~ plou`ton, aijei; ma`llon dia; th;n eujporivan tw`n crhmavtwn eij~ uJperoch;n megav khn h[gage th;n Makedonikh;n basileivan (‘From these mines he soon collected a fortune, with the profusion of money he lifted the Macedonian kingdom higher and higher to a much more dominant position’).

Introduction The intention of this appendix is to examine some of the issues presented by the numismatic evidence from preRoman Britain. Many of the issues involved with the Celtic coinage requires a focus beyond the Dobunni in order that this source of information can be used effectively, but the Dobunni and their role in Gloucestershire are still considered as a unique group where possible. One of the key concerns within this part of the study is the imagery of the issues and their symbolism for the local community. All the same, the production of the Dobunnic coinage and its circulation patterns also comprise important aspects of their analysis. For the purposes of the statistical analysis, the main texts that have been consulted are Hobbs (1996) and Allen (1961). However, the initial focus has been upon how the style of imagery for many Celtic coins developed over time. The Origins of the Imagery Used on Celtic Coinage in Britain The study of Iron Age coinage in Britain has had a great deal of attention over the years, complementing a resurgence of interest in the period as a whole (Mack 1975; Allen 1980; Hobbs 1996; Fitzpatrick 1992, 1-32). This section has discussed the different forms of imagery on the separate denominations of Iron Age coinage, the major influences on the first Celtic coins in Britain and the meaning behind the depiction of any symbols on the issues. It is evident that, although different iconographic forms, there was a definite trend in the images on the different forms of coinage, be they gold, silver or bronze. The adoption of Roman imagery can be seen as an attempt by the native rulers to make an impression upon their people, portraying the leader as sophisticated and ‘fashionable’.

This stater of Philip II was issued for many years by the Macedonian, probably being first issued in 345 BC and continued until c. 336 BC (Howgego 1995, 48). This stater of Philip became a symbol of the success of the Macedonian leader, both politically and financially. This issue became “one of the staple currencies of the Hellenistic world” and drew special attention to the growth of Macedonian power and influence (Price 1974, 22). These coins attained very much an international role, which became even more pronounced under the leadership of Alexander (Howgego 1995, 8). But it was through this coinage that Philip was able to advertise his political strength and successes that had led to such an impressive expansion of the Macedonian state.

The iconography on most gold coins issued by British tribes was derived from the Apollo-and-Horse imagery from the Philip II of Macedon ‘Biga’ stater (Nash 1987, 132). It is the purpose of this section to firstly examine the original issue itself, within its historical context, and then to view the consequences that this issue had for the development of coinage across Western Europe. These consequences will focus upon the development of coinage in Celtic tribes in this region and the long lasting effects this coin had on the motifs of these tribal people.

On the obverse of the stater Philip depicted an image of the bust of Apollo. This depiction was made in reference to the sanctuary of Apollo at Delphi at whose games Philip presided in 346 BC (Price 1974, 22). This implies a political message because it was through this council that Philip was able to wield a considerable amount of influence on the affairs of Greece. The reverse image was just as significant in the portrayal of Philip’s growing influence. This image was of a racing chariot (biga) which referred to the victory of Philip at the games at Olympia (Plut. Alex., 4.5):

One of the most significant points that can be raised concerning this numismatic issue is that this was the first gold coinage of the Macedonian kings (Price 1974, 23). 122

CELTIC COINAGE AND ITS EVIDENCE FOR DOBUNNIC SOCIETY ou[te ga;r ajpo; panto;~ ou[te pa`san hjgavpa dovxan, wJ~ Fivlippo~ lovgou te deinovthti sofistikw`~ kallwpizovme no~ kai; ta;~ ejn jOlumpiva/ nivka~ tw`n aJrmavtwn ejgcaravt twn toi`~ nomivsmasin (‘For it was neither every type of fame nor every avenue that he desired, as Philip had, who showed himself as a sophist through the weight of his oratory, and took care to have his cariot victories at Olympia shown on his coinage’). This style of depiction was indicative of the Greek aristocratic motifs, with little deviation from the standard type of political iconography (Howgego 1995, 66). This approach implies that Philip was making a statement about his connections with the Panhellenic cause, envisaging himself as the most natural leader for Greece, who could consolidate their differences and move forward towards greatness (Howgego 1995, 65).

services. But even if this is not the case, owing to the widespread circulation of this coinage the Celtic tribes would certainly have had a degree of contact with the gold staters of Philip. There were many tribes throughout Europe that adopted the iconography of this particular stater and imitated them, for example the Pictones, the Parisi and the Iceni in Britain. There were many examples of imitations minted in Britain for an example. These coins were introduced by Gallo-Belgic tribes in the late 2nd Century BC who had also begun copying the imagery of this Philipic stater (Rodwell 1976, 182). The continuation of the Apolloand-horse design reflects the consistency and conservatism of Celtic iconography on gold coinage (Green 1992, 151). The development of the motif to a more geometric native style, yet maintaining the essence of the image, may be symbolic. The significance of the Apollo design is strengthened by the popularity of horse depictions, which had possible solar connotations, thus representing wealth, economic viability and status; and Apollo, too, was associated with the sun, for example at the sacred spring sanctuary at Sainte Sabine in Gaul (Green 1977, 306). The deity of this temple in Burgundy was referred to as Apollo Belenus (‘brilliant Apollo’) and illustrates the religious significance of horse and solar imagery (Thevenot 1951, 129-41). The solar imagery can also be seen as part of the Celtic tradition on a silver coin found at Petersfield in Hampshire. It depicts, on the obverse, an antlered head (possibly Cernunnos) with a wheel symbol between its antlers. All this combines to strengthen the possibility for such religious undertones on British coinage used by the native aristocracy. It is also this interpretation of the numismatic symbolism that may provide a reason for the popularity of horses on British coinage.

The gold staters of Philip II became internationally recognisable by following the Chalcidian numismatic methods of being a different weight standard to the silver coinage that was issued (Price 1974, 23). It was through this method that the value of the different currencies could be easily designated and was able to be used more freely. In this case, one gold stater had the equivalent value of eight silver tetradrachms and the weights of the gold staters were fixed at 8.6g (Price 1974, 23). This weight was also the equivalent to the Attic standard didrachm that had also been in widespread useage throughout the region. The one dilemma that resulted from such an extensive dispersal and production from around Mount Pangaion was the drop in value in comparison to silver in the later years which made the gold and silver equation of value more difficult (Price 1974, 23). But despite this difficulty, the effect that the dispersal of this numismatic issue was impressive and far reaching, stretching all the way across Western Europe. The imitation of this stater of Philip II of Macedon can be seen throughout Western Europe, with the iconography of the Apollo head and the equine motif on the reverse continuing for centuries (Mack 1953, 2). The most prevalent number of copies developed from many of the Celtic tribes across Europe, for example in Gaul and Britain.

Dobunnic Coinage The study of Dobunnic numismatics in particular has produced further insights into the nature of pre-conquest society in the region. The coins illustrate the progression of trade and political associations in the Dobunnic people, and also provide a rough view of the tribal boundaries and of the political and social imagery that they wanted to portray. The Dobunni issued coinage in gold, silver and base metals, with the first gold stater attributable to them dated to around 50-30 BC (Bean 1994, 126). Prior to the minting of their own coinage, they had used Atrebatic coinage (Allen 1961, 76), which is reflected in the style of imagery in many of the early Dobunnic issues (Cunliffe 1991, 170). Judging from a general overview of the Dobunnic issues it is evident that there was a degree of homogeneity in their imagery. This could suggest that the Dobunnic community had a clear impression of their own collective identity, despite the external influences upon the original imagery. The Dobunnic style of numismatic representation also maintained a definite Celtic form for many of the coins, but it must also be noted that the use of the Latinised

The methods by which the Celtic tribes attained these coins has been under discussion for many years, with some scholars deeming the eastern Celts to have been employed by Philip II as mercenaries (Nash 1987, 17, 58). Unfortunately there is no direct evidence that shows Philip employing Celts as mercenaries. Athenaeus (532e), Diodorus Siculus (16.8.7) and Demosthenes (Olynthiac II, 17.1) all refer to Philip using mercenaries, and there is mention of a Celtic presence in the region in the fourth century (Justin, 24.4.3; Pseudo-Scylax, Periplus, 18-19). When this is combined to the many references on the ferocity and intimidating force that the Celtic tribes provided (Polybius, 2.26-30; Diodorus Siculus, 5.29.4-5; Justin, 24.4.7; Livy, 5.36; Strabo, 4.4.1-4), it seem quite plausible that this stater of Philip II was introduced to the Celts by the payment for mercenary 123

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY inscriptions by some issuers still indicate the influence of Roman coins.

and the horse symbol was an apt advertisement for many native leaders. The depiction of horses symbolised the animal’s great ritual and social significance to the Britons (Ross 1992, 405), stressing a link between the value of the coin, the economic importance of horses to the community, the exalted position of the issuer and the reverence for the depicted deity. This, in turn, may reflect a desire of the native nobility to justify and strengthen their position by using such symbols on their coins.

Of the gold coinage, most were inscribed, usually with the ruler’s name, and all depicted a triple-tailed horse on the reverse (Van Arsdell 1989, 266). The most common names inscribed on these coins are ‘CORIO’ and ‘BODVOC’ (Hobbs 1996, nos. 3064-3102, 3135-42; Mays 1992, 73), presumably abbreviations of Celtic names, with ‘CORIO’ issuing the first inscribed coinage in around 30 BC (Cunliffe 1991, 170). Each of these rulers had different distribution patterns within the Dobunnic territory (Haselgrove 1993, 57), which implies that there were different areas of influence and interaction within the tribe itself (Cunliffe 1991, 171). Of the nine known types of gold issues, seven of them had the ‘Dobunnic Branched Emblem’ on the obverse (Sellwood 1984, 201), which may have been a derivative of the cruciform wreath on the earliest staters of Tasciovanus (Sellwood 1975, nos. 149, 150). These issues can be compared with the silver coinage, most of which were uninscribed (Van Arsdell 1989, 266). Only ‘BODVOC’ inscribed his silver coinage (Hobbs 3143-5) and displayed locally inspired images (Allen 1961, 79). The base issues were mostly debased successors of the silver coins, but would have played a very minor role within the trading circles of the late Iron Age to early Roman periods (Hodder 1979, 194). The use of horse imagery on the coinage had strong social and religious connotations (Creighton 1995, 290), symbolising sovereignty (See Oaks 1990, 82) and was used almost universally on coinage in Iron Age Britain (Megaw and Megaw 1989, 160, 224).

But the one notable aspect of the iconography on Celtic coinage is the trend to use different types of imagery on different types of issues. For example, one finds that British gold staters and quarter-staters usually depict the native derivatives of the Apollo-and-Horse design or, in the case of Tincomarius (Hobbs, 766-74), Verica (Hobbs, 1143-53, 1177-1236), Cunobelinus (Hobbs, 1769-1855) and Eppillus (Hobbs, 986-1005, 1125-6), include the ruler’s name or capital. The use of these inscriptions by the tribal leader was originally incorporated into the Apollo-and-Horse design, but eventually became the dominant aspect on many issues. Owing to this development, the progression of the motif is apparent and represents a continuation of design on the gold coinage, not a complete change. The common style of depictions on the coins of lesser value is markedly different, with a greater degree of variation. Such a difference may imply a separate attitude towards and use for the silver and bronze denominations. For example, in Britain, Cunobelinus maintains the use of the ear of wheat and his name on the gold coinage but then figures such as Victory, Hercules, the Sphinx, Pegasus and Jupiter Ammon appear on his other coinage (Mack, 201-13, 215, 222, 231-2, 235). Epaticcus likewise uses the ear of wheat on his gold staters and Romanised imagery on his silver and bronze issues (Mack, 262-3a). Commius (Hobbs, 724-30), Tasciovanus, Andocommius, Addedomaros, Dubnovellaunos and Verica all generally continued this pattern (Mack, 149-57, 184-7, 197-8, 275-6, 106-14, 121-2, 124-7; Hobbs, 2416-21). Addedomaros uses an image of a flower on the obverse of his quarter staters, but continues the use of the horse on the reverse, possibly continuing the solar/agricultural theme in a more personalised and native format. Verica’s coinage was previously thought to have depicted the vine-leaf on the obverse, but these were contemporary forgeries with Verica continuing the predominant tradition (Hobbs, 1159-76).

Religious Iconography on Celtic Coinage in Britain To the Britons, the horse was a symbol of power, be it political or religious, and was a very important aspect of their religion and society (Creighton 1995, 286). Such importance is expressly shown in the account of Giraldus Cambrensis concerning a ceremony performed in Tir Conaill: ‘When the whole people of that land has been gathered together in one place, a white mare is brought forward into the middle of the assembly. He who is to be inaugurated, not as a chief, but as a beast, not as a king, but as an outlaw, embraces the animal before all, professing himself to be a beast also. The mare is then killed immediately, cut up in pieces and boiled in water. A bath is prepared for the man afterwards in the same water. He sits in the bath surrounded by all his people, and all, he and they, eat of the meat of the mare that is brought to them. He quaffs and drinks of the broth in which he is bathed, not in any cup, or using his hand, but just dipping his mouth into it round about him. When this unrighteous rite has been carried out, his kingship and dominion have been conferred.’ Giraldus Cambrensis, Topographia Hibernie 3.25, (trans. O’Meara). This tale is indicative of the connection of the ruling class with horses and the social dominance they symbolised. Sovereignty implies protection and control of the state,

The continuation of the Apollo-and-Horse depictions on gold coins shows the value that was placed in the coins and the motifs on them. The prevalence of this imagery, when combined with the distribution patterns of these coins, may relate to their religious beliefs. The constant use of such motifs on gold issues may symbolise the power and status of the issuing leaders, intended to impress the native aristocracy. There was obvious symbolism in the images on gold coins and the message

124

CELTIC COINAGE AND ITS EVIDENCE FOR DOBUNNIC SOCIETY was self-promotion and power for those who issued them.

not a great deviation from that of the Apollo-and-Horse motif, but reveals the different attitude that was prevalent towards this lower denomination of coinage. It was this type of issue that held the greatest possibilities for propaganda and portrayal of the issuing leader on the later coins. For example, a common feature on the obverse of the bronze coins of Tasciovanus was a head, possibly a portrait of the leader himself, with inscriptions that read either ‘TASCIO’ or ‘VERU’ (Hobbs, 1711-35). This portrait was presented in a native style that may have been an attempt on Tasciovanus’ behalf to appear one of the people. Yet this can be distinguished from some of his other issues that have classical motifs, for example the winged horse (Hobbs, 1685-9), sphinx, a lion or a classical eagle with its wings spread (Hobbs, 1690-2, 1693-7). It is possible that this divergence in style on separate issues indicates the ruler trying to appeal to particular sections of the community at different periods during his reign.

The imagery on silver and bronze denominations is much more varied and often Romanised. The earliest uninscribed silver denominations continued to use the derivative symbols from the Philip of Macedon ‘Biga’ Stater (Hobbs, 376-400). The ‘Danebury Type’ of uninscribed silver issues continued to use mainly this type of imagery as well (Hobbs, 577-92, 595-601), but also featured the wheel symbol, indicating a continuation in a solar meaning for the iconography (Hobbs, 631-3). It is noticeable, however, that in these early issues the imagery did not change when a different type of metal was used for minting. This was most likely because the concept of coinage had not yet become a native tradition, so the leaders continued to repeat the images. The silver Iron Age issues of Britain have their own distinctive features. One of the most common is the use of Roman images or styles. It is probable that many of the leaders who were minting coins used Roman engravers for the moulds for their issues. Tincomarius is a good example, using classical bull and eagle imagery on the reverse on a large number of his coins (Hobbs, 880-926). Verica, too, adopted many Roman icons, for example the winged horse (Hobbs, 1507-12), a thyrsus with a cornucopia and a vase (Hobbs, 1543-58), or even an urn with the inscription of ‘REX’ (Hobbs, 1572-8). Cunobelinus also adopted Roman imagery, possibly for the same purpose. Cunobelinus had a very wide range of motifs on his silver issues, including many Roman ones. Such issues included intertwined snakes in classical style (Hobbs, 1856), Victory was a common theme (Hobbs, 1863-5, 1883) and of considerable interest was the representation of an ear of wheat in a classical style (Hobbs, 1867A), which can be contrasted to the wheat/solar imagery on his gold staters.

This is especially noteworthy when the imagery of Cunobelinus’ bronze issues is examined. On different issues of his bronze coinage the depiction of the head on the obverse, possibly a representation of the leader himself, is portrayed in several different styles. These include native representations of Cunobelinus (Hobbs, 1902-5) (Fig. 6), Roman-style portraits of the leader (Hobbs, 1944-51, 1956-9, 1968-79) and also Hellenised depictions, which may have even been influenced by the coinage of Alexander the Great (Hobbs, 1984-6, 1991-5). Each of these portraits would have been designed to appeal to certain groups within Catuvellaunian society, with the classical imagery designed to give an impression of culture, position and standing. The reason for the continuation of native-style depiction may have been the leader ingratiating himself with the lower classes, who did not approve of classical representations. It may also be indicative of the anti-Roman attitudes of some leaders, who preferred traditional artistic methods.

Such imagery on the silver issues is understandable. The nobility would have found the use of such imagery appropriate for the leader of their tribe, being a representation of sophistication, economic success and aristocratic fashion. The leader would have benefited from this by using this to promote his position and status in the eyes of the native nobility, from both inside and outside his own tribe. This coinage would not have been used by the common population, who would have infrequently come into contact with such currency. The denominations that were mostly used by the lower classes would have been the base metal issues, and their imagery was different again.

This iconography on bronze issues is different from that on the gold and silver coinage, possibly indicating a different intended purpose and use for each denomination, depending for which social sector the issues was intended. Each different issue would have been embellished with certain designs that were intended to appeal to the user. Since each of the separate denominations served a different purpose, and was used by distinct groups, it makes sense for the independent denominations to portray their own social and political messages. The bronze coinage was used by the lower classes and was probably used at a higher rate of circulation. This meant that the use of either native or classical imagery on the coins would have been beneficial for the leader, depending on the political climate at the time. The higher circulation rate would have also meant there was a greater chance for propaganda, and hence more variation in the motifs, because of the broader scope for promotion.

The base metal coinage, chiefly of bronze, had a different iconographic trend from those of the gold and silver. It is the bronze coinage which displays the greatest variation in subject, message and style of all British Iron Age coinage. The early uninscribed bronze coinage commonly depicted a head on the obverse and a charging bull on the reverse (Hobbs, 660-713). This imagery was

125

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY The distinct trend in iconography was also reflected in the different distribution patterns of the gold, silver and bronze coinage. The gold coinage has a markedly different distribution pattern from that of silver and bronze, being in isolated finds on higher ground, while the others tend to be discovered around river valleys and settlements (Curteis 1996, 19). These patterns have been observed in Wessex, Northamptonshire, Norfolk and also in the Aisine Valley in France (Curteis 1996, 22). This strongly suggests that each type of coinage had a different use. Gold issues were chiefly used by the aristocracy and are largely discovered in isolated hoards (Haselgrove 1993, 48). The silver coinage, on the other hand, was probably used more as a means of trade and exchange, possibly with the continent (Milne 1948, 12). Bronze coinage was more restricted and was clustered around nucleated settlements like Braughing and Colchester, probably with a higher circulation rate (Haselgrove 1987, 216). It is most unlikely that this indicates a fully developed market economy, but rather that the base metal coinage was only used in certain centres for small scale trading (Cunliffe 1978, 32-3). In view of this difference, it is possible that the prevalence of more varied iconography on silver and bronze was because these coins were used and traded more, especially the silver. The higher degree of usage by the population would have inspired the issuing ruler to take advantage of this increased opportunity for propaganda, hence the larger number of messages on these coins. Roman imagery could have illustrated the cultivation of the leader and any possible trading links they had with Rome.

comparison, the silver issues were used more frequently, mainly for trade by the aristocracy and quite often with Rome; their wider distribution necessitated more varied and Romanised imagery. The base metal coins would have been used on a day-to-day basis, for the purchase of basic goods or small-scale trade. It was this coinage that showed the greatest degree of iconographic variation in subject, message and style. But it was this denomination that gave the widest scope for public propaganda and advantage. It is probable that the selection of image depended upon what the issuer wanted to communicate to the local people and those in surrounding areas. It is this coinage that lacked any distinct trend, but reflects the desired imagery of the Celtic political leaders. But it is the constant themes and styles of the imagery on the coinage that does add further weight to the belief that each of the different types of coin served a different and often designated purpose. It is because of this that they are discovered in different locations, and have different messages for the distinct social groups throughout Iron Age British society. The Dobunnic issues clearly followed this pattern, possessing a unique style and tradition that clearly represented both their collective identity and also the ambitions of their various leaders. While the Dobunni started minting their own coinage at a comparatively later stage than other tribal groups in southern Britain, this should not be taken as an indication of them being a disorganised or disjointed community until this stage. The consistency in the imagery indicates the strength of their own traditions within an introduced stylistic medium. All the same, it is also possible to view the consistency in the Dobunnic organisational structures by examining the metrology of their gold and silver issues throughout the period between the middle of the 1st Century BC and the middle of the 1st Century AD.

The silver and bronze coinage held a different opportunity for the leaders who minted coinage. The local flavour of these coins and the new elements that they depicted would certainly have attracted a great deal of attention (Rodwell 1976, 283), thus providing a new medium for the native élites to impress the common people and the neighbouring tribes. This would demonstrate that the differentiation between coin types was important, deliberate and self-conscious (Allen 1980, 19). The decision of the tribal leaders to use specific designs is shown in the variety that was used just for the depiction of horses, which illustrates the real choice they had concerning imagery and political message (Rodwell 1976, 289). The rationale for Roman depictions may have been the British chieftains’ desire for peaceful and profitable relations with Rome. The development of such relations would be beneficial for both parties in that the Britons would maintain their independence and the Romans would not feel threatened from across the Channel.

The Statistical Analysis of Dobunnic Coinage The aim of this particular form of analysis is to determine the continuity in the production of gold and silver issues by the Dobunni. This is important because it can provide a good understanding of the financial management of the various leaders and can give an impression of their fiscal stability as well. These issues have been chosen because of their inherent value and the data has been taken from the collection in the British Museum, as published by Hobbs (1996). It is thought that by comparing the various weights it is possible to establish the continuity (or discontinuity) of the inherent quality (i.e. the content of precious metals) of the Dobunnic currency. The weights under discussion are measured in grams, which has been applied to all the coins under discussion (Appendix III). The results have been exhibited in a series of graphs (Graphs A-R) that clearly exhibit the trends shown by each denomination or issuer.

The difference between the iconographic trends for the separate types of coinage is quite apparent, in accordance with the distinct uses that each denomination had. The gold coinage was used to store wealth, as collateral, to make large payments and also for religious dedications, which reflected the wealth and status of the devotee. In

When the gold issues are examined there were two different denominations: the staters and quarter staters

126

CELTIC COINAGE AND ITS EVIDENCE FOR DOBUNNIC SOCIETY (Appendix III). Unfortunately, the corpus of quarter staters is restricted to nine different issues (Graph A), which limits the number of conclusions that can be taken from them. The average weight of this group is 1.02 grams, with only two of the Uninscribed Western Gold issues being significantly lower in weight than the other coins (Coins 11 and 13) (Graph A). Despite the restricted nature of this corpus, these results do illustrate the consistency in their production. All the same, considering that there was only one inscribed quarter stater (by ‘CORIO’), it suggests that this type of gold denomination was not in high circulation and was probably less popular than the silver issues as a means of exchange within Dobunnic society.

When considering the silver issues of the Dobunni (Appendix III), it is also important to note the prevalence of particular types within the corpus (Graph K), which is dominated by the Uninscribed Western Silver ‘Regular’ issues. At first glance, when examining the weights of the silver Dobunnic coins in general terms it appears quite clear that there was a greater amount of variation in these issues than was shown in the gold staters (Graph L). The average weight of all these issues was 1.0007 grams, which further accentuates the marked variation between the various issues (Graph M). All the same, with the silver issues being divided into their various types, it appears that in general terms the silver coinage was relatively consistent in weight as well, with the exception of the forgeries and the ‘Irregular’ type. It is also notable that ‘CORIO’, who issued so many gold staters, did not produce inscribed silver issues. This could suggest that he did not produce silver coinage, but it would seem more likely that this leader did make such issues, but saw it as being more important to directly link himself with the gold staters.

As far as the Dobunnic gold stater issues are concerned, the corpus is dominated by the ‘CORIO’ issues and forgeries of these coins (Appendix III) (Graph B). The prevalence of the ‘CORIO’ staters illustrates not only the strength of the Dobunnic economy at this stage, but also the active approach of ‘CORIO’ in relation to gold coin production. The large number of forgeries further accentuates this as well. When considering the various weights of the Dobunnic staters (Graph C), it is initially evident that in general terms these coins were produced in a consistent fashion. The vast majority of them were minted with weights between five to six grams with the lightest issues being forgeries (Graph D). When this comparison is broken down into the various types of issues, this consistency is further highlighted, with the ‘ANTED Forgeries’ clearly having the lowest intrinsic value in their metrology. It is also notable to view the similar average weights between the ‘CORIO’ issues and the ‘CORIO Forgeries’ (Graph D). Therefore, these results also provide an initial impression of the consistency in the weights of these gold staters, which could suggest that the Dobunnic economy was comparatively stable.

When each of these silver types are examined in isolation it produces a similar impression as noted with the gold staters, but with a more marked amount of variation in weights, particularly in relation to the Uninscribed Western Silver ‘Regular’ issues (Graph N). Even though the average for this group is 1.03 grams, the variation around this is a notable aspect of this type. However, it should still be noted that these coins were still largely heavier than the average weight of the entire corpus. This is made even clearer once the Uninscribed Western Silver ‘Irregular’ types are considered in isolation (Graph O) illustrating how only two of these coins (Coins 76 and 84) were above the average weight over all. The silver issues of ‘ANTED’ (Graph P), ‘EISV’ (Graph Q) and ‘BODVOC’ (Graph R) were slightly more consistent in their weights, but there was still more variation in the silver than the gold coinage.

All the same, once each of these types are examined in isolation, the variation in these issues becomes more noticeable. For example, the weights of the Uninscribed Western Gold issues (Graph E) ranged from 5.41 to 5.64 grams. Nevertheless, despite this variation in metrology, it is still evident that the quality of these coins was still quite high, which indicates the inherent value of these issues. The same impression is given by the results taken from the gold staters of ‘ANTED’ (Graph F), ‘EISV’ (Graph G), ‘CATTI’ (Graph H), ‘CORIO’ (Graph I) and ‘BODVOC’ (Graph J). So despite a degree of variation in the weights of these coins, there was generally a consistent emphasis upon maintaining the quality of the staters over time, which further illustrates not only the strength of the Dobunnic economy but also the benefits that these coins would have provided as a means of exchange.

Therefore, when considering the implications of this analysis, it seems quite apparent that there was a fair degree of consistency in the production of Dobunnic gold and silver coinage over time. There was certainly a degree of variation in weight between individual issues, but this is also evident in larger, more centralised economies at the time, such as during the reigns of Tiberius, Caligula and Claudius in Rome (See Adams 2007, 167-72). When the consistent production of the issues is taken into consideration with the continuity of the imagery it provides a clear impression of the homogeneity in this group of Celtic coinage, which in turn suggests that the Dobunni were a highly centralised and well-organised tribal group. It would also indicate a degree of success in their trading networks, but this requires an examination of the circulation patterns of Dobunnic coinage.

127

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Dobunnic Quarter Stater Weights 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

198

Coin Number

Graph A – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Quarter Staters

Corpus of Different Gold Stater Issues

Uninscribed Uninscribed Forgery ANTED ANTED Forgeries EISV INAM or INAHA CATTI COMUX CORIO CORIO Forgeries BODVOC

Graph B – Graph showing the Corpus of Different Dobunnic Staters

128

CELTIC COINAGE AND ITS EVIDENCE FOR DOBUNNIC SOCIETY

Dobunnic Gold Stater Weights 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

202 205

195 199

189 192

183 186

177 180

171 174

165 168

159 162

153 156

147 150

141 144

135 138

129 132

123 126

104 120

91

94

4

88

1

0

Coin Number

Graph C – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Staters

Weights of Different Gold Issues 6 5 4 3 2 1

Category

Graph D – Graph showing the Average Weights of Dobunnic Stater Issues

129

BODVOC

CORIO Forgeries

CORIO

COMUX

CATTI

EISV

ANTED Forgeries

ANTED

Uninscribed

Average

0

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Weights of Uninscribed Western Gold Issues 5.7 5.65 5.6 5.55 5.5 5.45 5.4 5.35 5.3 5.25 1

2

3

4

Coin Number

Graph E – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Uninscribed Western Staters

Weights of Western Gold Issues of 'ANTED' 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 87

88

89

90

Coin Number

Graph F – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘ANTED’ Staters

130

91

CELTIC COINAGE AND ITS EVIDENCE FOR DOBUNNIC SOCIETY

Weights of Western Gold Issues of 'EISV' 5.5 5.4 5.3 5.2 5.1 5 4.9 4.8 103

104

105

106

Coin Number

Graph G – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘EISV’ Staters

Weights of Western Gold Issues of 'CATTI' 5.38 5.36 5.34 5.32 5.3 5.28 5.26 5.24 5.22 121

122

123 Coin Number

Graph H – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘CATTI’ Staters

131

124

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Weights of Western Gold Issues of 'CORIO' 5.7

5.6

5.5

5.4

5.3

5.2

5.1

Coin Number

Graph I – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘CORIO’ Staters

Weights of Western Gold Issues of 'BODVOC' 5.7 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.3 5.2 5.1 5 199

200

201

202

203

204

205

Coin Number

Graph J – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘BODVOC’ Staters

132

206

166

164

162

160

158

156

154

152

150

148

146

144

142

140

138

136

134

132

130

128

5

CELTIC COINAGE AND ITS EVIDENCE FOR DOBUNNIC SOCIETY

Corpus of Different Silver Issues

Regular Type Sub-Type: E or F Uncertain Forgeries Irregular Type ANTED EISV BODVOC

Graph K – Graph showing the Corpus of Different Dobunnic Silver Issues

Dobunnic Silver Issue Weights 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2

Coin Number

Graph L – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Silver Issues

133

1 11 5 11 9

11

99 10 7

86

82

78

74

70

66

62

58

54

50

46

42

38

34

30

26

22

18

14

0

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Weights of Different Silver Issues 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Average

Regular Type

Forgeries

Irregular Type

ANTED

EISV

BODVOC

Category

Graph M – Graph showing the Average Weights of Dobunnic Silver Issues

Weights of Uninscribed Western Silver 'Regular' Types 1.4

1.2

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

Coin Number

Graph N – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Uninscribed Western Silver ‘Regular’ Types

134

64

62

60

58

56

54

52

50

48

46

44

42

40

38

36

34

32

30

28

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

0

CELTIC COINAGE AND ITS EVIDENCE FOR DOBUNNIC SOCIETY

Weights of Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Types 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

Coin Number

Graph O – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic Uninscribed Western Silver ‘Irregular’ Types

Weights of Western Silver Issues of 'ANTED' 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 96

97

98

99

100

101

Coin Number

Graph P – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘ANTED’ Silver Issues

135

102

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Weights of Western Silver Issues of 'EISV' 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 107

108

109

110

111

112 113 114 Coin Number

115

116

117

118

119

Graph Q – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘EISV’ Silver Issues Weights of Western Silver Issues of 'BODVOC' 1.045 1.04 1.035 1.03 1.025 1.02 1.015 1.01 207

208 Coin Number

209

Graph R – Graph showing the Weights of Dobunnic ‘BODVOC’ Silver Issues result of the consistent nature of their numismatic production, as discussed in the previous section, which could have made the Dobunnic currency an attractive means of exchange. However, it should still be noted that the Dobunnic coinage was still a comparatively minor currency in the greater scheme of pre-Roman Britain, especially when contrasted with the Catuvellaunian issues for example.

The Circulation Patterns of Dobunnic Coinage One of the most compelling features of the Dobunnic coinage is the distances it travelled, especially in the first century AD (Allen 1976, 202), having been discovered in Essex and Lincolnshire (Van Arsdell 1994, 21). There is evidence of strong trading links with the Catuvellauni, especially during the reign of Cunobelin. Many Catuvellaunian silver and bronze issues have also been discovered in Dobunnic territory (Sellwood 1984, 195). Of course it is quite clear that the Catuvellauni had become one of the dominant tribal groups by the middle of the 1st Century AD, so the wide distribution of their issues is to be expected. All the same, this is a good indication of the Dobunni’s commercial standing throughout the region as well. This may have been a

As Allen (1961, 87-91) has discussed, the vast majority of Dobunnic coins have been discovered in the Gloucestershire region (Map 3), which was clearly the heartland of Dobunnic territory during the pre-Roman period. However, as shown in Map 3, the trading networks for the Dobunnic extended well beyond this area. All the same, the distribution of Dobunnic coinage 136

CELTIC COINAGE AND ITS EVIDENCE FOR DOBUNNIC SOCIETY beyond this region was more sporadic, with different issues having different concentrations of circulation. Notably it is important to observe that the most influential gold coinage (being the staters of ‘CORIO’) have been discovered in the southern and northern regions beyond Gloucestershire rather than towards the east. However, the later trading connection with this eastern region, particularly during the dominant phase of Catuvellaunian expansion, should not be disregarded. Nevertheless, as Allen (1961, 91) has mentioned, it is significant that Dobunnic issues are more prevalent beyond Gloucestershire than non-Dobunnic issues being discovered within this county from this period.

with the continent (Clifford 1961, 154). It is more than likely that the native aristocracy would have been well accustomed to commercial and diplomatic dealings with Rome before the conquest of AD 43 (Haselgrove 1984, 30). It has been claimed that one recognisable result of the Dobunnic aristocracy becoming involved in foreign trade in the late Iron Age was that it would have made society more hierarchical and, if trade was controlled, their position within the community would be enhanced (Fitzpatrick 1989, 43). The use of native coinage continued well into the Roman period at oppida like Bagendon, but when this is compared with settlements, especially military sites, such as early Cirencester, which has one known British issue from 3,715 coins, the predominance of the Roman military administration is quite clear (Reece 1979, 211, 214-5).

The majority of Dobunnic issues discovered have been along track-ways or rivers, which further suggests their usage in large-scale trade (Van Arsdell 1994, 27), even

137

138

2940

2941

2942

4

5

6

2938

2

2939

2937

1

3

Hobbs No.

Coin Number

Appendix III

AV

AV

AV

AV

Uninscribed Western Gold

Uninscribed Western Gold - Forgery

Uninscribed Western Gold

AV

Uninscribed Western Gold

Uninscribed Western Gold

AV

Uninscribed Western Gold

Type

Fabric

1/4 Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Denomination

plain (obliterated die) or traces of wreath pattern

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Obv Design Horse (right) above misc. i, below head 2 pellets, below pellet & wheel e, below tail wheel a, above tail pellet-triangle, pellet border Horse (right) above misc. i, below head 2 pellets, below pellet & wheel e, below tail wheel a, above tail pellet-triangle, pellet border Horse (right) above misc. i, below head 2 pellets, below pellet & wheel e, below tail wheel a, above tail pellet-triangle, pellet border Horse (right) above misc. i, below head 2 pellets, below pellet & wheel e, below tail wheel a, above tail pellet-triangle, pellet border Horse (right) above misc. i, below head 2 pellets, below pellet & wheel e, below tail wheel a, above tail pellet-triangle, pellet border horse r., above pellet-in-ring & pellet-ring n, above & below head pelletin-ring, before

Rev Design

1.15

1.14

5.41

5.47

5.64

5.57

Weight

139

2944

2945

2946

9

10

2943

8

7

AV

AV

AV

Uninscribed Western Gold

Uninscribed Western Gold

AV

Uninscribed Western Gold

Uninscribed Western Gold

1/4 Stater

1/4 Stater

1/4 Stater

1/4 Stater

plain (obliterated die) or traces of wreath pattern

plain (obliterated die) or traces of wreath pattern

plain (obliterated die) or traces of wreath pattern

plain (obliterated die) or traces of wreath pattern

crescent a & pellet, below animal I, below tail crescent a & pellet, above tail ring? horse r., above pellet-in-ring & pellet-ring n, above & below head pelletin-ring, before crescent a & pellet, below animal I, below tail crescent a & pellet, above tail ring? horse r., above pellet-in-ring & pellet-ring n, above & below head pelletin-ring, before crescent a & pellet, below animal I, below tail crescent a & pellet, above tail ring? horse r., above pellet-in-ring & pellet-ring n, above & below head pelletin-ring, before crescent a & pellet, below animal I, below tail crescent a & pellet, above tail ring? horse r., above pellet-in-ring & pellet-ring n, above & below head pelletin-ring, before crescent a & pellet, below animal I, below tail crescent a & pellet, above tail ring? 1.13

0.98

1.18

1.18

APPENDIX III

140

2949

2950

2951

14

15

2948

12

13

2947

11

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

AR

AR

AV

AV

Uninscribed Western Gold

Uninscribed Western Gold Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

AV

Uninscribed Western Gold

Unit

Unit

1/4 Stater

1/4 Stater

1/4 Stater

head r. (profile 2), before 2 pellet-inrings & 2 animals m, below animal m

head r. (profile 2), before c.3 pellet-inrings & animal m, behind 2 crescents c & pellet-inring

cross of 3 pellet-lines & single pellet-inring line, in each corner triplet g & pellet-in-ring?

plain (obliterated die) or traces of wreath pattern

plain (obliterated die) or traces of wreath pattern

horse r., above pellet-in-ring & pellet-ring n, above & below head pelletin-ring, before crescent a & pellet, below animal I, below tail crescent a & pellet, above tail ring? horse r., above pellet-in-ring & pellet-ring n, above & below head pelletin-ring, before crescent a & pellet, below animal I, below tail crescent a & pellet, above tail ring? horse I., ring on shoulder & rump, above pellet-in-ring & ?, below tail ?, below pellet-in-ring & ?, below head pellet-in-ring? horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, below tail pellet, below animal u, pellet-in-ring, pellet & crescent c, below head pellet-in-ring, before 'S' & pellets horse l., pellet.in-ring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, below tail pellet, below 3 pellet-inrings & animal 0, below head pellet-inring, before wheel i? 0.88

1.21

0.78

0.98

0.69

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

2956

2957

2958

2959

20

21

22

23

2954

18

2955

2953

17

19

2952

16

141 Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

2 horses facing each other, above pelletin-ring, between double-ring & animal? head r. (profile 2), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m, below ring & animal m, behind cA crescents c & c.2 rings head r. (profile 2), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m, below ring & animal m, behind cA crescents c & c.2 rings head r. (profile 2), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m, below ring & animal m, behind cA crescents c & c.2 rings head r. (profile 2), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m, below ring & animal m, behind cA crescents c & c.2 rings head r. (profile 2), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m, below ring & animal m, behind cA crescents c & c.2 rings head r. (profile 2), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m, below ring & animal m, behind cA crescents c & c.2 rings head r. (profile 2), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m, below ring & animal m,

horse l., pellet.in-ring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, below animal 0, 3 pellet-inrings & crescent a, before ? horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, above tail 2 rings, below misc. u, before ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, above tail 2 rings, below misc. u, before ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, above tail 2 rings, below misc. u, before ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, above tail 2 rings, below misc. u, before ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, above tail 2 rings, below misc. u, before ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, above tail 2 rings, below misc. u, before ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, above tail 2 rings, 0.81

0.91

0.82

0.7

1.19

0.87

1

0.81

APPENDIX III

142

2964

2965

2966

28

29

30

2962

26

2963

2961

25

27

2960

24

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile 2), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, below pellet

head r. (profile 2), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, below pellet

head r. (profile 2), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, below pellet

head r. (profile 2), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, below pellet

behind cA crescents c & c.2 rings head r. (profile 2), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m, below ring & animal m, behind cA crescents c & c.2 rings head r. (profile 2), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m, below ring & animal m, behind cA crescents c & c.2 rings head r. (profile 2), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m, below ring & animal m, behind cA crescents c & c.2 rings

below misc. u, before ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, above tail 2 rings, below misc. u, before ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, above tail 2 rings, below misc. u, before ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal n, above tail 2 rings, below misc. u, before ring horse 1., pelletin.ring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, below tail pelletin-ring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pellet-in-ring horse 1., pelletin.ring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, below tail pelletin-ring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pellet-in-ring horse 1., pelletin.ring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, below tail pelletin-ring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pellet-in-ring horse 1., pelletin.ring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, below tail pelletin-ring, below misc. 1.22

0.99

1.05

0.96

0.57

0.43

1.05

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

143

2969

2970

2971

2972

34

35

36

2968

32

33

2967

31

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile 3), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, behind pellet-in-ring

head r. (profile 3), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, behind pellet-in-ring

head r. (profile 3), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, behind pellet-in-ring

head r. (profile 3), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, behind pellet-in-ring

head r. (profile 3), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, behind pellet-in-ring

head r. (profile 2), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, below pellet

v, below head pellet, before pellet-in-ring horse 1., pelletin.ring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, below tail pelletin-ring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pellet-in-ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above & below tail pellet-inring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above & below tail pellet-inring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above & below tail pellet-inring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above & below tail pellet-inring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above & below tail pellet-inring, below 0.81

1.08

0.8

1.25

1.05

0.95

APPENDIX III

144

2975

2976

2977

40

41

2974

38

39

2973

37

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 3), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, behind pellet-in-ring

head r. (profile 3), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, behind pellet-in-ring

head r. (profile 3), before cA pellets & c.2 animals m, behind pellet-in-ring

misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above & below tail pellet-inring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above & below tail pellet-inring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse 1., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above & below tail pellet-inring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above tail 2 pellets, below tail pellet-in-ring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above tail 2 pellets, below tail pellet-in-ring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring 1.29

1.18

0.82

1.24

0.78

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

145

2980

2981

2982

45

46

2979

43

44

2978

42

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets & c.2 animals m

horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above tail 2 pellets, below tail pellet-in-ring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above tail 2 pellets, below tail pellet-in-ring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above animal q, above tail 2 pellets, below tail pellet-in-ring, below misc. v, below head pellet, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, 1.26

1.15

1.24

1.22

1.2

APPENDIX III

146

2985

2986

2987

50

51

2984

48

49

2983

47

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets 1.07

1.01

1.18

1.16

1.21

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

147

2990

2991

2992

55

56

2989

53

54

2988

52

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets 1.3

1.28

1.13

1.13

1.27

APPENDIX III

148

2995

2996

2997

60

61

2994

58

59

2993

57

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, 0.87

1.14

0.9

1.17

1.11

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

149

3000

3001

3002

3003

3004

65

66

67

68

2999

63

64

2998

62

AR

AR

AR

Uncertain Contemporary Forgery Uncertain Contemporary Forgery

AR

AR

AR

AR

Uncertain Sub-Type: E or F Uncertain Contemporary Forgery

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver. 'Regular' Type

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile 5), before 2 pellet-rings f., c.6 crescents c & spiral k

head r. (profile 5), before 2 pellet-rings f., c.6 crescents c & spiral k

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

head r. (profile 4), before c.4 pellets, c.2 pellet-in-rings & c.2 animals m

horse r., above flower d, before 2 pellets, below forelegs cross & ring, below flower i, cross & crescent c, below tail quad. b, above tail pellet horse r., above flower d, before 2 pellets, below forelegs cross & ring, below flower i,

above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder'& rump, above cross & animal q, above tail pellet-inring, below pellet-in-ring & misc. v, below head & before pellet-in-ring, above head 2 pellets

1.06

0.82

0.71

0.75

1.04

0.93

1.01

APPENDIX III

150

3009

3010

3011

73

74

75

3007

71

3008

3006

70

72

3005

69

AR

AR

AR

Uncertain Contemporary Forgery

Uncertain Contemporary Forgery

Uncertain Contemporary Forgery

AR

Uncertain Contemporary Forgery

AR

AR

Uncertain Contemporary Forgery

Uncertain Contemporary Forgery

AR

Uncertain Contemporary Forgery

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile 5), before 2 pellet-rings f. & c.6 crescents c

head r. (profile 5), before 2 pellet-rings f. & c.6 crescents c

head r. (profile 5), before 2 pellet-rings f. & c.6 crescents c

head r. (profile 5), before 2 pellet-rings f. & c.6 crescents c

head r. (profile 5), before 2 pellet-rings f. & c.6 crescents c

head r. (profile 5), before 2 pellet-rings f. & c.6 crescents c

head r. (profile 5), before 2 pellet-rings f. & c.6 crescents c

cross & crescent c, below tail quad. b, above tail pellet horse r., above flower d, before multiple pellets, below 'X' & flower e, below tail 'V', above tail pellet horse r., above flower d, before multiple pellets, below 'X' & flower e, below tail 'V', above tail pellet horse r., above flower d, before multiple pellets, below 'X' & flower e, below tail 'V', above tail pellet horse r., above flower d, before multiple pellets, below 'X' & flower e, below tail 'V', above tail pellet horse r., above flower d, before multiple pellets, below 'X' & flower e, below tail 'V', above tail pellet horse r., above flower d, before multiple pellets, below 'X' & flower e, below tail 'V', above tail pellet horse r., above flower d, before multiple pellets, below 'X' & flower e, below tail 'V', above tail pellet 0.76

0.82

0.91

0.85

0.75

0.75

0.87

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

151

3016

3017

3018

80

81

82

3014

78

3015

3013

77

79

3012

76

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

AR

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile p), before c.4 pellets & wheel u head r. (profile p), before c.4 pellets & wheel u

head r. (profile p), before c.4 pellets & wheel u

head r. (profile p), before c.4 pellets & wheel u

head r. (profile p), before c.4 pellets & wheel u

head r. (profile p), before c.4 pellets & wheel u

head r. (profile 6), before animal r, pellet-ring var. x & wheel e?

horse l., ring on shoulder & rump, above wheel o, below tail 3 pellet-inrings, below pelletinring, below head? horse l., above ring, double-ring & c.2 pellets, above tail star r. below tail ring & doublering, below ring & wheel c, below head ring horse l., above ring, double-ring & c.2 pellets, above tail star r. below tail ring & doublering, below ring & wheel c, below head ring horse l., above ring, double-ring & c.2 pellets, above tail star r. below tail ring & doublering, below ring & wheel c, below head ring horse l., above ring, double-ring & c.2 pellets, above tail star r. below tail ring & doublering, below ring & wheel c, below head ring horse l., above ring, double-ring & c.2 pellets, above tail star r. below tail ring & doublering, below ring & wheel c, below head ring horse l., above ring, double-ring & c.2 pellets, above tail 0.98

0.75

0.95

0.84

0.88

0.89

1.09

APPENDIX III

152

3021

3022

3023

3024

86

87

88

3020

84

85

3019

83

Western Gold of 'ANTED' & Variants

Western Gold of 'ANTED' & Variants

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

Uninscribed Western Silver 'Irregular' Type

AV

AV

AR

AR

AR

AR

Stater

Stater

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Leaf c

Leaf c

head r. (profile 7), before c.3 crescents c? animal l. looking back, spear? protruding from mouth, above uncertain objects, behind misc. 32?, below 2 joined rings, before c.3 joined crescents c animal l. looking back, spear? protruding from mouth, above uncertain objects, behind misc. 32?, below 2 joined rings, before c.3 joined crescents c

head r. (profile 7), before c.3 crescents c?

horse l., above pelletring f, above tail crescent a, below tail ring?, below?, below head ring & crescent a, before 2 rings horse r., above cross, crescent c, 2 pellets, & 'ANTED' below head cross & 'R', between forelegs T, below cross, wheel e & 'C', below tail 'V' & ring, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c, 2 pellets, & 'ANTED' below head cross & 'R',

horse l., above pelletring f, above tail crescent a, below tail ring?, below?, below head ring & crescent a, before 2 rings

star r. below tail ring & doublering, below ring & wheel c, below head ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above wheel j, below tail, below & below head pellet-inring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above wheel j, below tail, below & below head pellet-inring

5.28

4.49

0.37

0.6

1.07

0.94

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

153

3027

3028

3029

92

93

3026

90

91

3025

89

Western Gold of 'ANTED' - Forgeries

Western Gold of 'ANTED' - Forgeries

Western Gold of 'ANTED' & Variants

Western Gold of 'ANTED' & Variants

Western Gold of 'ANTED' & Variants

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

between forelegs T, below cross, wheel e & 'C', below tail 'V' & ring, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c, 2 pellets, & 'ANTED' below head cross & 'R', between forelegs T, below cross, wheel e & 'C', below tail 'V' & ring, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c, 2 pellets, & 'ANTED' below head cross & 'R', between forelegs T, below cross, wheel e & 'C', below tail 'V' & ring, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c, 2 pellets, & 'ANTED' below head cross & 'R', between forelegs T, below cross, wheel e & 'C', below tail 'V' & ring, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c, 2 pellets, & 'ANTED' below head cross & 'R', between forelegs T, below cross, wheel e & 'C', below tail 'V' & ring, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c, 2 pellets, & 'ANTED' below head cross & 'R', between forelegs T, below cross, wheel e & 'C', below tail 'V' & ring, pellet border 1.14

4.73

5.11

5.42

5.18

APPENDIX III

3032

3033

3034

3035

97

98

99

3031

95

96

3030

94

AR

AR

AR

AR

Western Silver of 'ANTED'

Western Silver of 'ANTED' Western Silver of 'ANTED'

AV

AV

Western Silver of 'ANTED'

Western Gold of 'ANTED' - Forgeries

Western Gold of 'ANTED' - Forgeries

154 Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Stater

Stater

head r. (profile 4), before 3 'S"s, c.3 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings head r. (profile 4), before 3 'S"s, c.3 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 4), before 3 'S"s, c.3 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 4), before 3 'S"s, c.3 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

Leaf c

Leaf c

horse r., above cross, crescent c, 2 pellets, & ' ΛNEO " below head cross & 'R', between forelegs 'I', below cross, wheel e & 'C', below tail 'V' & ring, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c, 2 pellets, & 'ANE[O]' below head cross & pelletin-ring, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-ring e horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet, 'TED' & 3 pellets, below tail pellet-inring, below pellet-inring & 'AN', below head c.2 pellets, before pellet-in-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet, 'TED' & 3 pellets, below tail pellet-inring, below pellet-inring & 'AN', below head c.2 pellets, before pellet-in-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet, 'TED' & 3 pellets, below tail pellet-inring, below pellet-inring & 'AN', below head c.2 pellets, before pellet-in-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet, 'TED' & 3 pellets, 1.05

1.2

1.35

0.9

5.37

5.27

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

3036

3037

3038

3039

3040

100

101

102

155

103

104

Western 'EISV'

Gold

of

AV

AV

AR

AR

Western Silver of 'ANTED'

Western Silver of 'ANTED' Western Gold of 'EISV'

AR

Western Silver of 'ANTED'

Stater

Stater

Unit

Unit

Unit

Leaf c

Leaf c

head r. (profile 4), before 3 'S"s, c.3 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 4), before 3 'S"s, c.3 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 4), before 3 'S"s, c.3 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

below tail pellet-inring, below pellet-inring & 'AN', below head c.2 pellets, before pellet-in-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet, 'TED' & 3 pellets, below tail pellet-inring, below pellet-inring & 'AN', below head c.2 pellets, before pellet-in-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet, 'TED' & 3 pellets, below tail pellet-inring, below pellet-inring & 'AN', below head c.2 pellets, before pellet-in-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet, 'TED' & 3 pellets, below tail pellet-inring, below pellet-inring & 'AN', below head c.2 pellets, before pellet-in-ring horse r., above cross, 2 pellets & ' EISY " below head cross & crescent c, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellettriangle, pellet border horse r., above cross, 2 pellets & ' EISY " below head cross & crescent c, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet5.32

5.38

1.27

1.24

0.96

APPENDIX III

156

3043

3044

3045

3046

108

109

110

3042

106

107

3041

105

AR

AR

AR

Western Silver of 'EISV'

Western Silver of 'EISV'

AV

AV

Western Silver of 'EISV'

of

of

AR

Gold

Gold

Western Silver of 'EISV'

Western 'EISV'

Western 'EISV'

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Stater

Stater

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

Leaf c

Leaf c

triangle, pellet border horse r., above cross, 2 pellets & ' EISY " below head cross & crescent c, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellettriangle, pellet border horse r., above pellet-triangle & ' EISY " below head pellet, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle, pellet border horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet 1.15

1.19

1.11

1.22

5.39

5.03

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

157

3049

3050

3051

114

115

3048

112

113

3047

111

AR

AR

AR

Western Silver of 'EISV'

Western Silver of 'EISV'

AR

Western Silver of 'EISV'

Western Silver of 'EISV'

AR

Western Silver of 'EISV'

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

& 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring 1.18

0.68

1.25

0.92

1.07

APPENDIX III

3054

3055

3056

3057

119

120

121

3053

117

118

3052

116

AR

AR

AV

AV

Western Silver of 'EISV'

Western Gold Inscribed 'INAM' or 'INAHA' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CATTI'

AR

Western Silver of 'EISV'

Western Silver of 'EISV'

AR

Western Silver of 'EISV'

158 Stater

Stater

Unit

Unit

Unit

Unit

Leaf c

Leaf c

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

head r. (profile 8), before 3 'S"s, c.2 pellets & c.2 pelletin-rings

horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse l., pellet-inring on shoulder & rump, above pellet & 'El', below tail pellettriangle, below pellet & 'SV', below head 2 pellets, before pelletin-ring horse r., above cross, crescent c & ' INI\M " below head cross, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellettriangle horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & 'CATTI' below head cross, before 3 pellets, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle 5.36

3.86

0.79

1.18

1.07

1.09

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

3058

3059

3060

3061

3062

3063

122

123

124

125

159

126

127

Western Gold of 'COMUX'

Western Gold of 'COMUX'

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

Western Gold of 'CATTI'

Western Gold of 'CATTI' Western Gold of 'COMUX'

AV

Western Gold of 'CATTI'

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & 'CATTI' below head cross, before 3 pellets, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & 'CATTI' below head cross, before 3 pellets, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & 'CATTI' below head cross, before 3 pellets, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' COMVX 'I, below head cross, before 3 pellets, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellettriangle horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' COMVX 'I, below head cross, before 3 pellets, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellettriangle horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' COMVX 'I, below head cross, before 3 pellets, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet5.3

5.37

5.44

5.28

5.37

5.34

APPENDIX III

160

3068

3069

132

133

3066

130

3067

3065

129

131

3064

128

AV

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

triangle horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' 5.51

5.22

5.52

5.31

5.53

5.42

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

161

3074

3075

3076

138

139

140

3072

136

3073

3071

135

137

3070

134

AV

AV

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO' Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 5.55

5.54

5.46

5.53

5.59

5.52

5.51

APPENDIX III

3079

3080

3081

3082

144

145

146

3078

142

143

3077

141

AV

AV

AV

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

162 Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' 5.52

5.56

5.65

5.54

5.49

5.52

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

3083

3084

3085

3086

3087

3088

147

148

149

150

151

152

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

163 Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' 5.49

5.56

5.49

5.59

5.5

5.49

APPENDIX III

164

3093

3094

3095

157

158

159

3091

155

3092

3090

154

156

3089

153

AV

AV

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO' Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 5.54

5.5

5.56

5.44

5.48

5.5

5.52

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

3098

3099

3100

3101

163

164

165

3097

161

162

3096

160

AV

AV

AV

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

AV

Western Gold of 'CORIO'

165 Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' 5.62

5.48

5.47

5.46

5.65

5.56

APPENDIX III

3104

3105

3106

3107

169

170

171

3103

167

168

3102

166

166 Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellets, crescent c & ' CORIO " below head cross, before 3 'V's?, below wheel e, behind pellet, pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, 5.51

5.55

5.48

5.46

3.72

5.56

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

167

3110

3111

3112

3113

175

176

177

3109

173

174

3108

172

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head 5.54

5.54

5.49

5.57

5.47

5.59

APPENDIX III

168

3116

3117

3118

181

182

3115

179

180

3114

178

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' 5.49

5.54

5.59

5.55

5.51

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

3121

3122

3123

3124

186

187

188

3120

184

185

3119

183

169 Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, 5.56

5.54

5.61

5.49

5.91

5.55

APPENDIX III

170

3127

3128

3129

3130

192

193

194

3126

190

191

3125

189

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head 5.57

5.5

5.55

5.44

5.49

5.42

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

171

3133

3134

3135

198

199

3132

196

197

3131

195

AV

AV

Westem Gold of 'BODVOC'

AV

AV

AV

Westem Gold Attributed to 'CORIO'

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Western Gold of 'CORIO' - Forgery

Stater

1/4 Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

BODVOC'

'COR'

Leaf c

Leaf c

Leaf c

cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above cross, 2 pellet-in-rings, crescent c & 'CORIO' below head cross, before 3 'V's? below wheel e, behind pellettriangle, 'V' & 'S' horse r., above pellet-in-ring & pellet-ring n, above & below head pelletin-ring, before crescent a & pellet, below animal I, below tail crescent a & pellet, above tail ring? horse r., above cross, crescent c & 2 pelletin-rings, below head cross, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle, pellet border 5.4

1.14

5.5

5.55

5.58

APPENDIX III

3136

3137

3138

3139

3140

3141

200

201

202

203

204

205

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

AV

Westem Gold of 'BODVOC'

Westem Gold of 'BODVOC'

Westem Gold of 'BODVOC'

Westem Gold of 'BODVOC'

172 Westem Gold of 'BODVOC'

Westem Gold of 'BODVOC'

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

Stater

BODVOC'

BODVOC'

BODVOC'

BODVOC'

BODVOC'

BODVOC'

horse r., above cross, crescent c & 2 pelletin-rings, below head cross, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c & 2 pelletin-rings, below head cross, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c & 2 pelletin-rings, below head cross, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c & 2 pelletin-rings, below head cross, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c & 2 pelletin-rings, below head cross, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle, pellet border horse r., above cross, crescent c & 2 pelletin-rings, below head cross, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle, pellet border 5.27

5.35

5.3

5.59

5.46

5.52

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

173

3144

3145

209

3143

207

208

3142

206

AR

AR

Westem Silver 'BODVOC'

AR

Westem Silver of 'BODVOC'

Westem Silver of 'BODVOC'

AV

Westem Gold of 'BODVOC'

Unit

Unit

Unit

Stater

head l. (profile q), before pellet & 'BODVOC', pellet border

head l. (profile q), before pellet & 'BODVOC', pellet border

head l. (profile q), before pellet & 'BODVOC', pellet border

BODVOC'

horse r., above cross, crescent c & 2 pelletin-rings, below head cross, below cross & wheel e, below tail pellet-triangle, pellet border horse r., above pellet, pellet-in-ring & cross, above head crescent c & pellet, before head cross, below pellet-ring i & pellet, below tail pellet, above tail crescent c horse r., above pellet, pellet-in-ring & cross, above head crescent c & pellet, before head cross, below pellet-ring i & pellet, below tail pellet, above tail crescent c horse r., above pellet, pellet-in-ring & cross, above head crescent c & pellet, before head cross, below pellet-ring i & pellet, below tail pellet, above tail crescent c 1.03

1.02

1.04

5.25

APPENDIX III

174

Base

3

Cirencester (Corinium) (Garden of the Firs, Victoria (New) Road, in the south part), Glos.

After A.D. 296

Altar

Cirencester (Sheep St.), Glos.

2

Type

Base

Place

1

Date

Cirencester (Siddington, 1 ½ miles southeast)

No.

Appendix IV

19 x 38 x 15 in.

16 x 17 x 17 ½ in.

Rectangular base, with the right side and part of the face broken away.

33 x 27 in.

Dimensions

Altar, broken into several pieces and lacking a part of the base.

Description Base broken vertically into two parts. Across the gap of 9 inches in the centre the stone exhibits a sharp edge, as if it formed a tenon to secure a statue.

To the holy Genius of this place.

To Jupiter, the best and greatest, His perfection Lucius Septimus …, governor of Britannia Prima, restored (this monument), being a citizen of Reims. This statue and column erected under the ancient religion Septimus restores, ruler of Britannia Prima.

Face: I(oui) O(ptimo) [M(aximo)] | L(uciuc) Sept(imius) [… | u(ir) p(erfectissimus) pr(aeses) B[r(itanniae) pr(imae)] | resti[tuit] | ciuis R[emus] Back: [Si]gnum et | [e]rectam | [p]risca re|[li]gione co|[l]umnam Left: Septimus | renouat | primae | provinciae | rector It is unknown

Sacred to the Genius ….Attius …. Willingly and deservedly fulfilled his vow.

Genio | sa[cru]m] | MIO[.]EDI | Attius CH[..]VVS | [u(otum)] s(oluit) l(ibens) [m(erito)]

G(enio) S(ancto) huius loc[i]

Translation

Inscription

Male

?

?

Sex

N/A

N/A

N/A

Age

Male

?

Male

Interred By

The top of the figure appears to consist of two cylinders and a triange.

In a niche a Genius stands facing the front; he is draped from the waist and wears a turreted crown. In his right hand he holds a patera over a small alter, and on his left arm he carries a cornucopia.

The top is flat and has a dowel-hole.

On the face the text in enclosed in an ansate panel.

The capital has a projecting moulding and carries a focus on its right-hand and lefthand portions. Across the gap of 9 inches in the centre the stone exhibits a sharp edge, as if it formed a tenon to secure a statue.

Two columns (romanesque) appear to divide the texts.

Decoration

Relief

RIB v. 1, no. 103, pp. 3031

RIB v. 1. no. 102, p. 30

RIB v. 1, no. 101, p. 30

Bibliography

175

Altar

Dedication

Relief

Relief

Daglingworth, Glos.

Custom Scrubs (The Scrubs), Bisley, Glos.

Watercombe House, Bisley, Glos.

8

9

10

Relief

Dedicationslab of oolite recut to form a double windowframe Gabled relief in finegrained oolite; the inscription, once below the left-hand part of the gable, is now weathered away. Gabled relief in finegrained

Oolite altar

Oolite relief

Altar

15 x 18 x 5 in.

15 x 20 x 5 in.

24 x 21 in.

4 ½ x 7 in.

7 ½ x 10 ½ x 3 ½ in.

9 x 12 in.

Altar, the lower part of the die and the base are broken off.

Altar

Chedworth, Glos.

Lemington, near Moretonin-Marsh, Glos.

12 x 23 in.

Altar, the face of the capital is borken away

7

6

5

4

Cirencester Town railway station (Ashcroft, in the north-west part of the town, and south-east) Kingsholm, the site of the legionary fortress northeast of Gloucester

Male

Male

To the god Romulus Gulioepius presented this, Juventinus Deo Rom[u]lo | Gulioepius | donauit |

Female

Male

Female

Male

?

To Mars Olludius

To the Mother Goddesses and to the Genius of this place …..(set this up).

To Lenus Mars

The queen goddess.

To the god, the Genius of Choguncum, Orivendus…

To the Suleviae, Sulinus, son of Brucetus, willingly and deservedly fulfilled his vow.

MARTI OLLVDIO

[Ma]trib[us at | Ge]nio l[oci | …]ilia[…|..

[L]en(o) M[arti]

Dea Regina

Deo | Genio Chogunci | Oriuendus | …

Sule(u)is | Sulinus | Bruceti (filius) | u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito)

whether the right side was inscribed.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Male

?

?

?

?

?

Male

The god, with a tunic reaching below the knees and inhigh boots, faces front. In his right hand he holds a cornucopia full of fruit; over his left shoulder he wears a cloak which, folded in herring-bone pattern, reaches down to the edge of his tunic. The god stands facing front wearing the panolpy of Mars.

None

There is a panel containing a goddess with elaborate halo coiffure and a robe reaching to her knees. In her left hand she holds a pointed staff resting on a stand, in her right a short staff resembling a cordoned column. In the panel a crudely carved god faces the front with spear in right hand and axe in left hand.

None

plain sides

RIB v. 1, no. 131, pp. 3940

RIB v. 1, no. 132, p. 40

The figure is surrounded by a structure

RIB v. 1, no. 130, p. 39

RIB v. 1, no. 126, p. 38

RIB v. 1, no. 125 p. 37

RIB v. 1, no. 119, p. 36

RIB v. 1, no. 105, p. 32

The figure is surrounded by a structure resembling a shrine (a gabled roof held up by two pillars).

None

Plain sides and a focus on the flat top.

The border below the panel is inscribed

Three small lumps on the top of the stone.

None

APPENDIX IV

11

Kingscote Parish, Glos.

Relief

Semicircular relief of oolite, now broken into four pieces

oolite, inscribed below the gable.

15 x 10 x 2 ½ in.

Iul[i]us l(ibens) s(oluit)

Iuuentinus | fecit

Julius Willingly fulfilled (his vow)

made it.

?

N/A

Male

Notable are the crested helmet, with sideplums and cheekpieces, and the large protective apron. On the left is an altar carrying offerings. The centre of the relief is occupied by an enthroned deity, apparently female, holding with her right hand an object now indistinguishable in her lap. Her left arm is raised, as if it once held a sceptre or the like. Over her left shoulder are seen the head and left shoulder of a draped attendant. To the right a helmeted horseman rides to the right. his right hand held reins now seen crossing the horse’s neck. at knee-level is shown a round shield, apparently held by his left hand. The mane and tail of the horse are prominent, even exaggerated. to the left of the deity is seen the standing figure of the dedicator in tunic and cloak. what is left of the hair suggests that he may have been wraethed in order to sacrifice. his right arm is extended to pour libation on to a small altar. Further to the left the space for a second feature is defined by two vertical cuts, weathering having obliterated whatever was contained therein. None

resembling a shrine (a gabled roof held up by two pillars).

RIB v. 1, no. 135, p. 41

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

176

TABLES Table 1

All Villas Villa Number

Name

Location

Chapters

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

The Barton Villa Barnsley Park Villa Frocester Court Villa Spoonley Wood Villa Wadfield Villa Farmington Villa Painswick Villa Whittington Court Villa Withington Wood Villa Hucclecote I Villa Hucclecote II Villa North Cerney Villa Turkdean Villa Chesters Villa Great Witcombe Villa Bibury Villa Chedworth Villa Woodchester Villa Fishbourne Villa North Leigh Villa Bignor Villa Whitebeech Villa Mount Roman Villa Diomede Asellius Lucius Caecilius Iucundus T. Siminius Stephanus Casa dei Miri Claydon Pike Park Farm Aylburton Badgeworth Villa of the Mysteries Villa San Marco Lullingstone Villa

Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire West Sussex, UK Oxfordshire, UK West Sussex, UK Chiddingfold, UK Maidstone, UK Pompeii, Italy Pompeii, Italy Boscoreale, Italy Pompeii, Italy Stabiae, Italy Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Pompeii, Italy Stabiae, Italy Darent Valley, UK

2 2 and 3 2, 3 and 5 2, 3 and 6 2 and 3 2 and 3 2 2, 3 and 5 2, 3 and 5 2 and 3 2 2 and 3 2, 3 and 6 2 and 3 2, 3 and 6 2 2, 3, 5 and 6 2, 3, 5 and 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 6 6 6 6

Gloucester Gloucester Caerwent, UK Herculaneum, Italy Herculaneum, Italy Herculaneum, Italy Cirencester Cirencester Cirencester Kingscote Herculaneum, Italy Pompeii, Italy Pompeii, Italy Pompeii, Italy Herculaneum, Italy

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 6 6

Townhouses Building 1.5 Building 1.18 Caerwent 3S Aristide Mosaic Atrium Stags Building 12.1 Building 12.2 Building 12.3 Kingscote House of the Trellis House of the Faun House of the Prince of Naples House of the Vettii House of the Bicentenary

177

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Temples 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Lower Slaughter King’s Stanley Kingscote Custom Scrubs Blaise Castle Dean Hall Upton St. Leonards Bourton-on-the-Water Wycomb Chedworth Uley Lydney Claydon Pike

Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire Gloucestershire

4 4 4 4 4 4 and 5 4 4 4 and 5 4 and 5 4 and 5 4 and 5 5

Table 2 Building

Area m2

Triclinia

1.5 (Glos.)

281.62

26.63

1.18 (Glos.)

1,245.48

81.98

Caerwent 3S

842.56

Aristide (Herc.)

Exedrae- Halls

Open Areas

Tablina

Total

Ent. %

26.63

9.45

167.46

249.44

20.03

34.25

222.27

256.52

30.45

647.18

37.65

32.57

196.07

30.3

Mosaic Atrium

1,178.98

68.98

56.63

198.34

23.11

26.44

373.62

31.69

Stags

1,205.9

31.7

73.13

199.25

19.97

18.04

342.09

28.37

12.1 (Ciren.)

707.02

25.97

43.74

69.71

9.86

12.2 (Ciren.)

1,282.79

61.39

85.92

6.7

12.3 (Ciren.)

337.87

9.43

43.77

53.2

15.75

Kingscote

2,202.49

35.33

135

217

9.85

77.11

Diaetae

Oecii

48.74

24.53

46.67

Table 3 Building

Entertainment Size with Open Areas

Size of Open Area(s)

Entertainment % with Open Areas

Entertainment % without Open Areas

1.5 (Glos.)

26.63

NA

9.45

9.45

1.18 (Glos.)

249.44

167.46

20.03

6.58

Caerwent 3S

256.52

222.27

30.45

4.06

Aristide

196.07

32.57

30.3

25.26

373.62

198.34

31.69

14.80

Stags

342.09

199.25

28.37

11.85

12.1 (Ciren.)

69.71

NA

9.86

9.86

12.2 (Ciren.)

85.92

NA

6.7

6.7

12.3 (Ciren.)

53.2

43.77

15.75

2.79

Kingscote

217

135

9.85

3.72

(Herc.) Mosaic Atrium

178

TABLES

Table 4 Open Areas

ExedraeHalls

Villa

Area m2

Triclinia

2

740.13

11.75

206.9

3

1,806.08

85.44

1,034.24

4

3,231

53.9

5

1,434.05

43.33

6

732.33

65.42

8

468.79

39.45

9

583.38

16

10

509.6

59.4

13

5,746.92

14

4,987.32

36

4,107.32

15

9,156.65

454.76

3,266.67

17

3,719.52

48.53

1,349.63

18

7,831.66

39.06

Total

Ent. %

218.65

29.54

1,146.56

63.48

2,500

2,553.9

79.04

179.08

242.65

16.92

65.42

8.93

102.6

142.05

30.3

66

82

14.06

59.4

11.66

2,273.8

39.57

18.67

4,161.99

83.45

63.16

3,784.59

41.33

1,398.16

37.59

3,362.86

42.94

20.24

Tablina

Diaetae

Oecii

26.88

2,273.8

502.27

2,620.12

39.06

162.35

Table 5 Villa

Entertainment Size with Open Areas

Size of Open Area(s)

Entertainment % with Open Areas

Entertainment % without Open Areas

2

218.65

206.9

29.54

1.59

3

1,146.56

1,034.24

63.48

6.22

4

2,553.9

2,500

79.04

1.67

5

242.65

179.08

16.92

4.43

6

65.42

NA

8.93

8.93

8

142.05

NA

30.3

30.3

9

82

NA

14.06

14.06

10

59.5

NA

11.66

11.66

13

2,273.8

2,273.8

39.57

NA

14

4,161.99

4,107.32

83.45

1.1

15

3,784.59

3,266.67

41.33

5.66

17

1,398.16

1,349.63

37.59

1.3

18

3,362.86

2,620.12

42.94

9.48

179

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Table 6 Villa

Area m2

Triclinia

ExedraeHalls

Open Areas

Tablina

19

19,865.24

199.19

951.08

9,336.08

144.95

20

6,599.34

60.21

132.17

2,992.52

63.76

21

7,722.86

133.76

148.71

2,363.6

20.61

22

2,258.99

19.66

125.32

992.81

23

1,536

48.29

24

4,616.09

25

1,094.64

26

24

Diaetae

Oecii

Total

Ent. %

10,631.3

53.52

3,312.42

50.19

2,666.68

34.53

1,145.34

50.7

18.68

66.97

4.36

63.76

7.55

1,592

171

104.5

1,891.5

40.98

14.98

258.48

43.83

66.61

383.9

35.1

1,113.88

40.69

202.5

243.19

21.83

27

1,047.11

40.44

232.87

302.11

28.85

28

4,656

66.56

816.64

883.2

18.97

28.8

Table 7 Villa

Entertainment Size with Open Areas

Size of Open Area(s)

Entertainment % with Open Areas

19

10,631.3

9,336.08

53.52

6.52

20

3,312.42

2,992.52

50.19

4.85

21

2,666.68

2,363.6

34.53

3.92

22

1,145.34

992.81

50.7

6.75

23

66.97

NA

4.36

4.36

24

1891.5

1592

40.98

6.49

25

383.9

258.48

35.1

11.46

26

243.19

202.5

21.83

3.65

27

302.11 883.2

232.87 816.64

28.85 18.97

6.61 1.43

28

180

Entertainment % without Open Areas

TABLES

Villa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Villa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Table 8 Habitation Trend in AD 200-250 Uninhabited Expansion Prosperity Decline

Abandonment

√ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Uninhabited √

Table 9 Habitation Trend in AD 250-300 Expansion Prosperity Decline √ √ √ √

√ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

181

Abandonment

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Villa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Villa

Table 10 Habitation Trend in AD 300-350 Uninhabited Expansion Prosperity Decline

Abandonment

√ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Table 11 Habitation Trend in AD 350-400 Uninhabited Expansion Prosperity Decline

Abandonment

√

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

√ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

182

TABLES

Table 12 Spatial Data Statistics for the Barnsley Park Villa (Villa 2) Room

Mean Depth

External C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 29

3.62 2.69 1.92 2.62 1.69 2.31 3.23 3.08 2.46 2.62 2.31 2.69 3.38 2.46

Relative Asymmetry 0.437 0.282 0.153 0.27 0.115 0.218 0.372 0.347 0.243 0.27 0.218 0.282 0.397 0.243

Control Value 0.5 1.333 1.167 0.167 3.666 1.667 0.333 0.833 0.667 0.167 0.667 1 0.5 1.833

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.637 1.06 0.573 1.011 0.431 0.816 1.393 1.3 0.91 1.011 0.816 1.06 1.487 0.91

Depth from Exterior 0 1 2 4 3 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 3

Table 13 Spatial Data Statistics for the Frocester Court Villa (Villa 3) Room

Mean Depth

External C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

5.2 4.25 3.8 2.85 2.8 2.95 4.35 3.4 4.35 3.7 3.8 3.75 3.9 3.3 3.95 4.15 4.75 5.55 5.1 6.5 4.75

Relative Asymmetry 0.442 0.342 0.295 0.195 0.189 0.205 0.353 0.253 0.353 0.284 0.295 0.289 0.305 0.252 0.311 0.332 0.395 0.479 0.432 0.579 0.395

Control Value 0.5 1.25 0.2 3.083 1.533 1.666 0.25 2.7 0.25 1.2 0.2 0.333 0.333 1.333 0.833 1.333 1 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

183

Real Relative Asymmetry 2.009 1.555 1.341 0.886 0.859 0.932 1.605 1.15 1.605 1.291 1.341 1.314 1.386 1.145 1.414 1.509 1.795 2.177 1.964 2.632 1.795

Depth from Exterior 0 1 4 3 4 5 3 2 3 4 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 8 10 5

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Table 14 Spatial Data Statistics for the Spoonley Wood Villa (Villa 4) Room

Mean Depth

External A B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

3.53 2.56 2.53 5.71 4.71 4.09 3.82 3.12 3.79 2.82 3.53 2.97 3.88 3.09 3.18 3.15 3.97 3.15 3.21 3.06 4.94 3.97 3.79 3 2.44 3.18 3.09 3.79 3.06 3.74 3.74 4.59 3.06 5.5 6.47

Relative Asymmetry 0.158 0.097 0.095 0.294 0.231 0.193 0.176 0.132 0.174 0.113 0.158 0.123 0.18 0.130 0.136 0.134 0.185 0.134 0.138 0.128 0.246 0.185 0.174 0.125 0.09 0.136 0.130 0.174 0.128 0.171 0.171 0.224 0.128 0.281 0.341

Control Value 0.25 1.517 3.32 0.5 1.33 0.25 1.08 1.833 0.91 0.93 0.83 1.18 0.5 1.35 0.35 1.43 0.33 0.93 0.43 1.1 0.5 1.33 0.66 0.85 1.6 1.047 0.997 0.83 0.997 0.83 1.58 0.75 0.417 1.5 0.5

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.952 0.587 0.576 1.773 1.396 1.163 1.062 0.798 1.050 0.685 0.952 0.741 1.084 0.786 0.821 0.809 1.118 0.809 0.831 0.775 1.483 1.118 1.050 0.753 0.542 0.821 0.786 1.050 0.775 1.031 1.031 1.351 0.775 1.694 2.059

Depth from Exterior 0 1 2 5 4 3 3 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 5 4 4 3 2 3 3 4 3 4 4 5 3 6 7

Table 15 Spatial Data Statistics for the Wadfield Villa (Villa 5) Room

Mean Depth

External A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

3.39 2.42 2.68 3.61 2.97 2.84 3.77 3.06 4.42 3.71 3.65 3.84 2.26 2.87 3.48 2.68 3.48 2.90 2.68 3.58

Relative Asymmetry 0.164 0.097 0.115 0.18 0.135 0.126 0.191 0.142 0.235 0.186 0.182 0.195 0.086 0.129 0.171 0.115 0.171 0.131 0.115 0.177

Control Value 0.25 1.518 0.71 0.75 0.893 1.303 0.83 0.473 0.83 1.5 0.58 0.25 2.16 2.143 0.58 1.393 0.58 0.785 5.08 0.625

184

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.947 0.562 0.666 1.034 0.781 0.729 1.097 0.816 1.355 1.074 1.050 1.125 0.499 0.741 0.982 0.666 0.982 0.752 0.666 1.022

Depth from Exterior 0 1 3 4 3 3 4 3 5 4 4 4 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3

TABLES 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Room External P 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Room External 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

4.48 3.58 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.42 3.65 4.13 4.35 4.39 4.42 3.65

0.24 0.177 0.182 0.182 0.182 0.166 0.182 0.215 0.231 0.233 0.235 0.182

1 0.625 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.455 1.33 1 0.83 0.83 1.5 0.75

1.379 1.022 1.050 1.050 1.050 0.959 1.050 1.240 1.327 1.343 1.355 1.050

4 3 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 4 4

Table 16 Spatial Data Statistics for the Farmington Villa (Villa 6) Mean Depth Relative Control Value Real Relative Asymmetry Asymmetry 2.6 0.356 0.25 1.207 2.7 0.378 0.2 1.281 2.7 0.378 0.2 1.281 1.8 0.178 4.25 0.603 2.7 0.378 0.2 1.281 3.8 0.622 0.5 2.108 2.9 0.422 1.5 1.431 2.3 0.289 0.75 0.979 1.7 0.156 2.7 0.529 2.6 0.356 0.25 1.207 2.7 0.378 0.2 1.281

Depth from Exterior 0 3 3 2 3 4 3 2 1 2 3

Table 17 Spatial Data Statistics for the Whittington Court Villa (Villa 8) Mean Depth Relative Control Value Real Relative Asymmetry Asymmetry 3.667 0.485 0.333 1.757 2.167 0.212 1.133 0.768 2.917 0.349 1.25 1.264 2.167 0.212 1.833 0.768 3.667 0.485 0.333 1.757 2.333 0.242 0.583 0.877 2.417 0.258 2.166 0.935 2.25 0.227 0.833 0.822 3.333 0.424 0.25 1.536 2.667 0.303 0.5 1.098 3.833 0.515 0.5 1.866 2.75 0.318 2.333 1.152 2.167 0.212 1.166 0.768

Depth from Exterior 0 2 5 4 2 3 4 4 5 5 6 1 3

Table 18 Spatial Data Statistics for the Withington Wood Villa (Villa 9) Room

Mean Depth

External A B C D E F G H I J K L M

2.846 3.154 3.154 3 2.231 1.462 2.231 1.923 2.846 2.231 2.231 2.231 2.692 2.385

Relative Asymmetry 0.308 0.359 0.359 0.333 0.205 0.077 0.205 0.154 0.308 0.205 0.205 0.205 0.282 0.231

Control Value 0.25 0.5 0.5 1 1.143 3.75 0.643 2.643 0.25 0.643 1.143 0.75 0.143 0.143

185

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.154 1.345 1.345 1.247 0.767 0.288 0.768 0.577 1.154 0.768 0.768 0.768 1.056 0.865

Depth from Exterior 0 4 4 4 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 3 2 3

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Table 19 Spatial Data Statistics for the Hucclecote I Villa (Villa 10) Room

Mean Depth

External 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

3.571 5.571 4.619 3.762 3.762 4.714 4.714 2.714 4.429 3.476 3.571 2.619 2.619 3.571 2.905 4.333 5.286 3.476 4.429 4.429 3.857 3.857

Relative Asymmetry 0.257 0.257 0.362 0.276 0.276 0.371 0.371 0.171 0.343 0.248 0.257 0.162 0.162 0.257 0.191 0.333 0.429 0.248 0.343 0.343 0.286 0.286

Control Value 0.25 0.5 1.5 0.833 2.333 0.333 0.333 1.083 0.5 1.25 0.25 2.5 2.083 0.25 2.5 1.25 0.5 2.75 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.201 1.201 1.692 1.289 1.289 1.734 1.734 0.799 1.603 1.159 1.201 0.757 0.757 1.201 0.893 1.556 2.005 1.159 1.603 1.603 1.336 1.336

Depth from Exterior 0 6 5 4 4 5 5 3 4 3 3 1 2 2 2 4 5 3 4 4 3 3

Table 20 Spatial Data Statistics for the North Cerney Villa (Villa 12) Room

Mean Depth

External 1 2 3 4 5 6

1.833 2.167 2 1.667 1.833 1.667 2.5

Relative Asymmetry 0.333 0.467 0.4 0.267 0.333 0.267 0.6

Control Value 0.666 0.833 0.833 1.333 1.166 1.833 0.333

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.979 1.374 1.176 0.785 0.979 0.785 1.765

Depth from Exterior 0 2 3 1 2 1 2

Table 21 Spatial Data Statistics for the Chesters Villa (Villa 14) Room

Mean Depth

External 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

3.143 3.762 4.619 3.667 3.571 2.905 2.571 3.619 2.286 2.857 3.476 2.571 3.19 2.952 3.476 4.429 2.857 3.524 5.238 4.095 3.81 3.81

Relative Asymmetry 0.214 0.276 0.362 0.267 0.257 0.191 0.157 0.262 0.129 0.186 0.248 0.157 0.219 0.195 0.248 0.343 0.186 0.252 0.424 0.31 0.281 0.281

Control Value 1.2 0.75 0.333 0.833 1.75 1.416 0.95 0.583 2.166 1.833 0.583 0.783 1.166 0.533 1.833 0.333 0.533 1.5 2 0.5 0.833 0.833

186

Real Relative Asymmetry 1 1.289 1.692 1.248 1.201 0.893 0.734 1.224 0.603 0.869 1.159 0.734 1.023 0.911 1.159 1.603 0.869 1.178 1.981 1.449 1.313 1.313

Depth from Exterior 0 4 5 3 4 3 2 4 1 3 4 2 3 2 3 4 2 3 5 1 4 4

TABLES

Table 22 Spatial Data Statistics for the Great Witcombe Villa (Villa 15) Room

Mean Depth

External A 1 1a 2 3 4 5 6 7 7a 8 8a 9 10 11 11a 11b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 24 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 34 34a 35 41 42 43 44 45 46 46a 48 49 50 51 51a 52 53

7.35 6.37 5.12 5.65 4.67 5.60 6.12 7.10 6.71 7.69 7.69 7.42 8.40 8.25 9.12 10.25 11.04 10.10 8.40 4.58 4.52 5.5 4.69 5.88 4.98 5.79 5.79 5.79 6.48 6.52 7.21 6.92 8.13 8.15 8.21 5.42 6.54 5.5 7.52 5.48 6.21 6.42 8.19 6.48 6.48 6.48 6.48 5.65 5.65 5.79 7.52 5.5 7.52

Relative Asymmetry 0.254 0.214 0.164 0.186 0.146 0.184 0.204 0.244 0.228 0.267 0.267 0.256 0.296 0.29 0.324 0.37 0.401 0.364 0.296 0.143 0.140 0.18 0.147 0.195 0.159 0.191 0.191 0.191 0.219 0.220 0.248 0.236 0.285 0.286 0.288 0.176 0.221 0.18 0.260 0.179 0.208 0.216 0.287 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.186 0.186 0.191 0.260 0.18 0.260

Control Value 0.5 1.5 0.667 0.167 4.2 0.83 1.75 0.33 2.58 0.25 0.25 2.75 0.25 0.58 2 1.33 0.5 0.33 0.25 0.367 3.33 0.2 0.697 0.497 2.66 0.497 0.497 0.667 1.25 0.75 1.91 2.08 0.58 0.58 0.25 0.7 3.83 4.167 0.2 1.83 0.53 0.33 0.25 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.167 0.167 0.867 0.2 0.2 0.2

187

Real Relative Asymmetry 2 1.691 1.297 1.464 1.155 1.448 1.612 1.921 1.798 2.107 2.107 2.022 2.330 2.283 2.557 2.913 3.162 2.866 2.330 1.127 1.108 1.417 1.162 1.537 1.253 1.508 1.508 1.508 1.725 1.738 1.955 1.864 2.245 2.251 2.270 1.392 1.744 1.417 2.053 1.411 1.640 1.707 2.264 1.725 1.725 1.725 1.725 1.464 1.464 1.508 2.053 1.417 2.053

Depth from Exterior 0 1 6 6 5 7 8 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 12 13 14 13 11 4 3 4 4 6 4 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 9 2 7 6 8 5 6 6 9 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 8 4 8

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Table 23 Spatial Data Statistics for the Chedworth Villa (Villa 17) Room

Mean Depth

External A M N P Q 1 1a 1b 2 3 4 5 5a 5b 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 21a 22 23 24 24a 25 25a 26 26a 27 28 29 29a 30 31 32 33 34

3.85 2.87 3.72 2.91 3.72 3.64 5.34 6.45 4.53 3.60 6.94 5.53 4.70 5.26 3.94 4.70 3.85 3.89 4.64 4.51 4.47 5.43 3.66 4.64 4.51 5.64 4.66 6.19 3.60 4.28 5.13 5.21 5.26 6.09 6.06 7.04 3.43 4.91 4.91 4.91 4.91 4.91 4.91 4.91 5.77 5.47 6.70 4.79

Relative Asymmetry 0.126 0.083 0.120 0.084 0.120 0.117 0.192 0.242 0.156 0.115 0.264 0.201 0.164 0.189 0.130 0.164 0.126 0.128 0.161 0.156 0.154 0.196 0.118 0.161 0.156 0.206 0.162 0.230 0.115 0.145 0.183 0.187 0.189 0.226 0.224 0.268 0.108 0.173 0.173 0.173 0.173 0.173 0.173 0.173 0.212 0.198 0.253 0.168

Control Value 0.2 2.643 7.83 3.61 1.143 1.643 1.5 0.5 0.75 0.45 1.25 0.5 1.33 0.5 1.143 0.83 0.643 0.143 0.2 0.95 1.53 0.58 2.723 0.2 0.58 0.5 1.33 0.5 0.45 2.33 1.75 1.25 0.25 0.33 1.33 0.5 0.311 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.33 1.33 0.5 1.611

188

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.924 0.606 0.882 0.619 0.882 0.856 1.408 1.767 1.145 0.843 1.927 1.469 1.2 1.381 0.954 1.2 0.924 0.937 1.181 1.138 1.125 1.437 0.862 1.181 1.138 1.505 1.187 1.683 0.843 1.064 1.340 1.365 1.381 1.651 1.641 1.959 0.788 1.268 1.268 1.268 1.268 1.268 1.268 1.268 1.547 1.450 1.848 1.229

Depth from Exterior 0 1 3 2 3 3 5 6 4 2 4 5 4 5 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 5 4 4 2 3 4 4 4 5 5 6 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 6 4

TABLES Table 24 Spatial Data Statistics for the Woodchester Villa (Villa 18) Room

Mean Depth

External A B 1 2a 2b 2c 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56

5.507 3.12 3.293 4.467 3.587 3.653 4.36 4.8 4.547 5.4 4.48 4.427 5.147 4.853 6.227 4.427 6.293 5.613 4.613 5.613 4.613 4.613 5.613 5.613 4.413 6.347 5.36 6.347 6.347 6.347 4.2 4.107 5.093 5.093 5.093 4.2 5.013 5.76 4.96 4.96 4.52 3.253 5.253 5.253 4.267 5.147 6.053 4.16 5.067 6.053 6.053 5.147 4.56 4.56 4.56 4.56 4.56 4.067 4.053 5.013 4.907

Relative Asymmetry 0.122 0.057 0.062 0.094 0.07 0.072 0.091 0.103 0.096 0.119 0.094 0.093 0.112 0.104 0.141 0.093 0.143 0.125 0.098 0.125 0.098 0.098 0.125 0.125 0.092 0.145 0.118 0.145 0.145 0.145 0.086 0.084 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.086 0.108 0.129 0.107 0.107 0.095 0.061 0.115 0.115 0.088 0.112 0.137 0.085 0.11 0.137 0.137 0.112 0.096 0.096 0.096 0.096 0.096 0.083 0.083 0.108 0.106

Control Value 0.25 3.217 6.833 1.683 3.593 2.076 1.243 0.433 0.433 1.25 0.35 0.6 1.583 2.333 0.5 0.35 0.25 0.5 1.167 0.5 1.167 1.167 0.5 0.5 1.367 0.2 4.333 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.143 3.143 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.143 0.866 1 0.866 1.033 0.433 0.243 0.333 0.333 2.1 0.25 0.25 2.35 3.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.243 1.076 0.583 1.75

189

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.196 0.558 0.607 0.921 0.686 0.705 0.892 1.009 0.941 1.166 0.921 0.911 1.098 1.019 1.382 0.911 1.401 1.225 0.960 1.225 0.960 0.960 1.225 1.225 0.901 1.421 1.156 1.421 1.421 1.421 0.843 0.823 1.088 1.088 1.088 0.843 1.058 1.264 1.049 1.049 0.931 0.598 1.127 1.127 0.862 1.098 1.343 0.833 1.078 1.343 1.343 1.098 0.941 0.941 0.941 0.941 0.941 0.813 0.813 1.058 1.039

Depth from Exterior 0 3 5 1 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 4 3 3 5 5 4 5 4 4 5 5 4 6 5 6 6 6 4 4 5 5 5 4 4 5 4 4 3 4 7 7 6 7 8 6 7 8 8 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71

5.893 4.88 5.867 5.867 5.867 5.867 5.867 5.867 5.947 5.947 5.947 5.947 5.947 5.947 4.96

0.132 0.105 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.107

0.333 6.25 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 6.5

1.294 1.029 1.294 1.294 1.294 1.294 1.294 1.294 1.294 1.294 1.294 1.294 1.294 1.294 1.049

8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7

Table 25 Spatial Data Statistics for the Fishbourne Villa (Villa 19) Room

Mean Depth

External A B C D E 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

4.911 2.233 2.933 2.978 3.022 3.033 4.822 4.822 3.833 4.822 4.822 3.2 3.2 3.922 3.922 4.667 4.667 4.667 3.678 4.667 4.667 3.967 3.967 3.967 3.967 3.967 4.144 4.144 3.156 4.144 3.967 4.956 4.956 4.956 4.956 3.967 3.189 3.189 3.978 4.967 4.967 2.956 3.944 3.944 3.944

Relative Asymmetry 0.088 0.028 0.028 0.044 0.045 0.046 0.086 0.086 0.064 0.086 0.086 0.049 0.049 0.066 0.066 0.082 0.082 0.082 0.06 0.082 0.082 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.071 0.071 0.048 0.071 0.067 0.089 0.089 0.089 0.089 0.067 0.049 0.049 0.067 0.089 0.089 0.044 0.066 0.066 0.066

Control Value 0.5 11.542 2.386 5.186 0.909 2.626 0.2 0.2 4.2 0.2 0.2 0.376 0.376 0.2 0.2 0.143 0.143 0.143 5.343 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.25 0.25 3.043 0.25 2.25 0.333 0.333 0.333 0.333 2.25 0.2 0.2 0.866 0.333 0.333 10.543 0.083 0.083 0.083

190

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.977 0.311 0.311 0.488 0.5 0.511 0.955 0.955 0.711 0.955 0.955 0.544 0.544 0.733 0.733 0.911 0.911 0.911 0.666 0.911 0.911 0.744 0.744 0.744 0.744 0.744 0.788 0.788 0.533 0.788 0.744 0.988 0.988 0.988 0.988 0.744 0.544 0.544 0.744 0.988 0.988 0.488 0.733 0.733 0.733

Depth from Exterior 0 3 4 4 4 4 6 6 5 6 6 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 5 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 6 6 2 3 3 3

TABLES 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85

3.944 3.944 3.922 3.944 3.944 3.944 3.944 3.944 3.156 4.156 4.156 4.156 3.022 3.022 3.811 4.8 4.689 5.544 6.422 7.411 8.378 6.422 7.411 3.122 3.2 3.078 3.078 3.2 3.2 4.144 3.122 3.178 3.244 3.122 4.167 4.433 3.156 5.067 4.1 3.122 5.078 3.156 4.089 3.122 5.078 4.222

0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.048 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.045 0.045 0.063 0.085 0.083 0.102 0.122 0.144 0.166 0.122 0.144 0.048 0.049 0.047 0.047 0.049 0.049 0.071 0.048 0.049 0.05 0.048 0.071 0.077 0.048 0.091 0.07 0.048 0.092 0.048 0.069 0.048 0.092 0.072

0.083 0.083 0.5 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 3.043 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.293 0.293 2.5 0.25 0.583 1.5 0.666 1.333 0.666 0.666 1.333 0.043 1.043 0.5 0.5 1.043 0.543 0.833 0.043 0.876 1.376 0.043 0.333 0.5 0.543 1.5 1 0.043 0.043 0.376 0.376 2.5 0.043 1.333

0.733 0.733 0.733 0.733 0.733 0.733 0.733 0.733 0.533 0.788 0.788 0.788 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.944 0.922 1.133 1.355 1.6 1.844 1.355 1.6 0.533 0.544 0.522 0.522 0.544 0.544 0.788 0.533 0.544 0.555 0.533 0.788 0.855 0.533 1.011 0.777 0.533 1.022 0.533 0.766 0.533 1.022 0.8

3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 4 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 4 4 5 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 8 4 6 5 4 6 4 5 4 6 5

Table 26 Spatial Data Statistics for the North Leigh Roman Villa (Villa 20) Room

Mean Depth

External C 1 2 3 4 4A 4B 5 6 6A 7 8 9

3.657 2.644 5.315 4.315 5.315 5.945 6.932 5.973 4.986 4.137 5.123 6.932 5.123 5.123

Relative Asymmetry 0.074 0.046 0.12 0.092 0.12 0.137 0.165 0.138 0.111 0.087 0.115 0.165 0.115 0.115

Control Value 0.09 3.869 0.333 2.2 0.333 1.25 0.5 0.25 2.2 3.75 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.2

191

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.711 0.442 1.153 0.884 1.153 1.317 1.586 1.326 1.067 0.836 1.105 1.586 1.105 1.105

Depth from Exterior 0 1 4 3 4 5 6 5 4 3 4 6 4 4

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY 10 11 12 14 15 15A 16 17A 17B 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 26 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 44A 45 45A 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60A 60B 60C 61 62 63 64 65 66

2.562 3.438 5.945 4.425 4.397 5.384 4.425 4.397 5.384 4.425 3.945 4.849 5.877 6.685 7.808 5.959 8.822 4 3.753 4.11 4.137 5.041 5.014 5.959 4.068 5.959 5.014 5.055 5.397 4.411 5.397 4.411 4.616 5.068 6.055 3.178 3.219 3.452 3.63 5.247 6.233 4.315 5.247 4.315 5.37 4.384 5.37 4.397 5.384 5.384 5.384 3.384 3.452 3.493 5.438 4.452 4.562 4.562 3.411 4.562

0.043 0.068 0.137 0.095 0.094 0.122 0.095 0.094 0.122 0.095 0.082 0.107 0.135 0.158 0.189 0.138 0.217 0.083 0.076 0.086 0.087 0.112 0.112 0.138 0.085 0.138 0.112 0.113 0.122 0.095 0.122 0.095 0.1 0.113 0.14 0.061 0.062 0.068 0.073 0.118 0.145 0.092 0.118 0.092 0.121 0.094 0.121 0.094 0.122 0.122 0.122 0.066 0.068 0.069 0.123 0.096 0.096 0.096 0.067 0.096

0.29 4.59 1.25 0.143 1.143 0.5 0.143 1.143 0.5 0.143 0.286 2 0.833 1 1.5 0.333 0.5 2 0.143 0.643 1.143 0.5 0.75 1 2.25 1 0.75 0.25 0.5 1.25 0.5 1.25 0.5 1.5 0.5 3.34 0.733 1.34 1.09 1 1 0.7 1 0.7 0.333 2.333 0.333 3.333 0.25 0.25 0.25 1.756 0.623 0.84 0.5 1.333 0.25 0.25 3.09 0.25

192

0.413 0.653 1.317 0.913 0.903 1.173 0.913 0.903 1.173 0.913 0.788 1.028 1.298 1.519 1.817 1.326 2.086 0.798 0.730 0.826 0.836 1.076 1.076 1.326 0.817 1.326 1.076 1.086 1.173 0.913 1.173 0.913 0.961 1.086 1.346 0.586 0.596 0.653 0.701 1.134 1.394 0.884 1.134 0.884 1.163 0.903 1.163 0.903 1.173 1.173 1.173 0.634 0.653 0.663 1.182 0.923 0.923 0.923 0.644 0.923

2 2 5 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 5 6 7 5 8 3 3 3 3 4 4 5 3 5 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 5 2 2 2 2 4 5 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 2 2 2 4 3 3 3 2 3

TABLES Table 27 Spatial Data Statistics for the Bignor Villa (Villa 21) Room

Mean Depth

External C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9A 9B 9C 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 23 24 25 26A 26B 27 28A 28B 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

5.279 2.75 7.794 6.794 6.926 5.897 5.926 5.147 4.191 4.162 4.779 4.162 3.912 3.206 3.353 4.162 4.162 4.191 4.191 4.338 4.309 5.294 7.118 6 5.176 4.25 5.823 4.882 4.191 4.235 4.235 4.265 4.176 4.235 5.221 5.162 3.162 3.279 4.265 4.809 3.941 5.221 5.794 4.809 3.853 4.662 6.5 5.529 3.029 3.912 4.044 4.044 4.044 3.985 4.941 5.926 4.015 5 4.044 3.985 4.941

Relative Asymmetry 0.127 0.052 0.202 0.172 0.176 0.146 0.147 0.123 0.095 0.094 0.112 0.094 0.086 0.065 0.070 0.094 0.094 0.095 0.095 0.099 0.098 0.128 0.182 0.149 0.124 0.097 0.143 0.115 0.095 0.096 0.096 0.097 0.094 0.096 0.126 0.124 0.064 0.068 0.097 0.113 0.087 0.126 0.143 0.113 0.085 0.109 0.164 0.135 0.060 0.086 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.089 0.117 0.147 0.09 0.119 0.090 0.089 0.117

Control Value 0.5 1.291 0.5 1.5 0.333 0.583 2 0.5 0.1 1 0.583 1.1 1.75 6.036 3.576 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.143 1.143 0.5 0.5 1.5 1 0.643 1 0.75 0.1 0.625 0.625 0.125 1.625 1.125 1 0.333 0.618 4.226 0.125 0.5 1.333 0.5 0.5 1.333 0.923 1.083 0.25 2.833 6.726 0.342 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.59 1.5 0.5 1.09 0.5 0.09 0.59 1.5

193

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.182 0.483 1.877 1.601 1.637 1.353 1.361 1.146 0.881 0.873 1.044 0.873 0.804 0.609 0.650 0.873 0.873 0.881 0.881 0.922 0.914 1.186 1.690 1.381 1.154 0.898 1.333 1.072 0.881 0.894 0.894 0.902 0.877 0.894 1.166 1.150 0.597 0.629 0.902 1.052 0.812 1.166 1.325 1.052 0.788 1.012 1.520 1.251 0.560 0.804 0.841 0.841 0.841 0.825 1.089 1.361 0.833 1.105 0.841 0.825 1.089

Depth from Exterior 0 3 9 8 8 6 7 6 5 6 6 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 8 7 6 5 7 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 4 4 5 7 6 6 7 6 5 6 8 7 3 5 5 5 5 5 6 7 5 6 5 5 6

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY 58 60 61 62 63 78 79 80

5.926 3.338 3.574 4.324 4.338 6.485 7.471 6.5

0.147 0.069 0.076 0.099 0.099 0.163 0.193 0.164

0.5 0.816 0.536 1.25 0.143 1.25 0.5 0.25

1.361 0.646 0.711 0.918 0.922 1.516 1.788 1.520

7 2 3 1 55 8 9 8

Table 28 Spatial Data Statistics for the Whitebeech Villa (Villa 22) Room

Mean Depth

External A B C D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 48 49

4.333 4.412 6.51 3.333 3.373 5.451 4.392 4.392 5.451 4.157 4.98 5.922 4.941 5.137 3.255 3.333 3.49 4.412 4.412 4.412 5.314 5.314 4.432 6.51 4.569 6.078 5.078 6.078 5.157 5.373 6.078 5.176 3.529 4.902 4.314 4.647 5.353 5.137 4.157 3.471 5.373 5.118 5.373 4.431 4.569 4.118 5.098 5.922 5.804 6.706 8.627 7.647

Relative Asymmetry 0.133 0.136 0.22 0.093 0.095 0.178 0.1357 0.1357 0.178 0.126 0.159 0.197 0.158 0.165 0.09 0.093 0.1 0.136 0.136 0.136 0.173 0.173 0.137 0.22 0.143 0.203 0.163 0.203 0.166 0.175 0.203 0.167 0.101 0.156 0.173 0.146 0.174 0.165 0.126 0.1 0.175 0.165 0.175 0.137 0.143 0.125 0.164 0.197 0.192 0.228 0.305 0.266

Control Value 0.2 1.143 0.5 1.183 2.116 0.5 1.2 1.2 0.5 0.866 1.833 0.333 1.833 0.833 0.85 0.926 1.348 0.533 0.7 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.476 0.5 0.143 0.25 2.75 0.75 0.75 1.893 0.25 0.25 3.166 0.333 1.476 1.666 0.333 0.333 1.583 1.85 0.5 0.333 0.833 1.7 0.833 1.7 0.333 0.333 0.833 1 0.5 1.5

194

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.023 1.046 1.692 0.715 0.730 1.369 1.043 1.043 1.369 0.969 1.223 1.515 1.215 1.269 0.692 0.715 0.769 1.046 1.046 1.046 1.330 1.330 1.053 1.692 1.1 1.561 1.253 1.561 1.276 1.346 1.561 1.284 0.776 1.2 1.330 1.123 1.338 1.269 0.969 0.769 1.346 1.269 1.346 1.053 1.1 0.961 1.261 1.515 1.476 1.753 2.346 2.046

Depth from Exterior 0 5 7 3 1 4 4 4 4 2 3 4 3 4 2 3 4 5 5 5 6 6 5 7 5 7 6 7 6 6 7 6 4 6 5 5 6 5 4 2 4 3 3 0 5 4 5 4 4 5 7 6

TABLES Table 29 Spatial Data Statistics for the Mount Roman Villa, Maidstone (Villa 23) Room

Mean Depth

External A B C D E F G H I J K L M N 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

3.24 4.44 5 5.16 4.36 4.04 4.36 3.56 3.4 3.56 3.4 3.56 2.76 2.92 2.52 3.64 4.44 5.32 6.28 4 3.92 3.92 4.88 4.88 3.24 3.04

Relative Asymmetry 0.187 0.287 0.333 0.347 0.28 0.253 0.28 0.213 0.2 0.213 0.2 0.213 0.147 0.16 0.127 0.22 0.287 0.36 0.44 0.25 0.243 0.243 0.323 0.323 0.187 0.17

Control Value 0.2 0.833 0.333 1 1 2 1 0.75 0.583 0.75 1 0.833 1.7 1.2 2.283 0.833 1 1.5 0.5 0.2 1.2 1.2 0.5 0.5 0.4 2.7

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.954 1.464 1.698 1.770 1.428 1.290 1.428 1.086 1.020 1.086 1.020 1.086 0.75 0.816 0.647 1.122 1.464 1.836 2.244 1.275 1.239 1.239 1.647 1.647 0.954 0.867

Depth from Exterior 0 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 2 2 1 3 4 5 6 3 3 3 4 4 2 2

Table 30 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa of Diomede (Villa 24) Room

Mean Depth

External A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

4.82 3.84 6.92 6.03 6.13 5.11 6.08 6.95 3.34 6.95 4.76 4.47 4.39 4.05 3.92 4.61 5.45 5.32 4.61 5.45 6.24 6.82 5.89 6.82 6.82 5.92 5.39 4.68 4.76 5.74

Relative Asymmetry 0.212 0.157 0.328 0.279 0.285 0.228 0.282 0.330 0.13 0.330 0.208 0.192 0.188 0.169 0.162 0.200 0.247 0.24 0.200 0.247 0.291 0.323 0.271 0.323 0.323 0.273 0.243 0.204 0.208 0.263

Control Value 0.1 5.41 0.83 0.97 0.64 3.19 0.14 0.33 2.14 0.33 0.64 1 1 1 0.6 0.76 0.49 2.49 0.86 0.49 0.49 0.2 3.47 0.2 0.2 0.67 1.16 0.58 1.2 0.5

195

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.369 1.017 2.121 1.802 1.838 1.473 1.820 2.132 0.838 2.132 1.347 1.243 1.215 1.093 1.046 1.293 1.594 1.548 1.293 1.594 1.878 2.086 1.752 2.086 2.086 1.763 1.573 1.318 1.347 1.698

Depth from Exterior 0 1 9 8 8 7 8 9 8 9 6 5 4 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 4 9 8 9 9 8 3 2 2 3

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

4.82 4.76 5.74 4.68 5.45 6.37 7.39 5.55 4.58

0.212 0.208 0.263 0.204 0.247 0.298 0.355 0.252 0.198

0.2 1.2 0.5 0.45 0.75 1.5 0.5 0.25 1.2

1.369 1.347 1.698 1.318 1.594 1.924 2.290 1.630 1.283

2 2 3 2 3 4 5 3 2

Table 31 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa of Asellius (Villa 25) Room

Mean Depth

External A A’ B C P1 P2 P3 P4 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

3.2 2.63 2.69 3.31 3.49 2.17 2.86 2.63 3.37 4.29 4.29 4.29 3.09 4.29 4.29 3.09 2.86 4.74 3.77 3.83 3.43 4.46 4.46 4.46 3.6 3.83 3.83 3.83 3.6 3.6 4.46 3.49 3.6 4.46 3.6 3.6

Relative Asymmetry 0.133 0.098 0.102 0.14 0.150 0.070 0.112 0.098 0.143 0.199 0.199 0.199 0.126 0.199 0.199 0.126 0.112 0.226 0.167 0.171 0.147 0.209 0.209 0.209 0.157 0.171 0.171 0.171 0.157 0.157 0.209 0.150 0.157 0.209 0.157 0.157

Control Value 0.7 1.81 2.39 5.25 3.2 3.04 3.64 4.97 0.34 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.17 0.17 0.14 2.14 0.5 1.25 0.25 0.45 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.14 0.33 2.14 0.14 0.33 0.14 0.14

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.817 0.606 0.628 0.858 0.925 0.435 0.691 0.606 0.881 1.223 1.223 1.223 0.777 1.223 1.223 0.777 0.691 1.390 1.029 1.052 0.903 1.286 1.286 1.286 0.966 1.052 1.052 1.052 0.966 0.966 1.286 0.925 0.966 1.286 0.966 0.966

Depth from Exterior 0 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 4 4 2 3 3 3 2 4 4 4 2 4 5 4 4 5 4 4

Table 32 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus at Pisanella (Villa 26) Room

Mean Depth

External A B C D E F G H I

3.1 3.07 2.9 2.97 2.97 2.8 2 2.97 3.6 3.77

Relative Asymmetry 0.15 0.147 0.135 0.140 0.140 0.128 0.071 0.140 0.185 0.197

Control Value 0.58 1.11 1.11 0.11 0.11 1.36 5.52 0.11 0.33 0.33

196

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.842 0.830 0.762 0.790 0.790 0.722 0.401 0.790 1.043 1.111

Depth from Exterior 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 4 3

TABLES J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 2 3 4

3.47 3.6 2.87 4.37 3.47 2.93 2.67 2.8 3.03 3.87 4.67 2.93 3.87 3.93 2.9 3.7 3.87 2.13 3.03 3.03

0.176 0.185 0.133 0.240 0.176 0.137 0.119 0.128 0.145 0.205 0.262 0.137 0.205 0.209 0.135 0.192 0.205 0.080 0.145 0.145

2.5 0.33 0.11 0.5 1.33 0.36 1.05 1.11 0.11 0.33 0.5 0.11 0.33 0.5 2.11 0.33 0.5 6.44 0.11 0.11

0.991 1.043 0.750 1.352 0.991 0.774 0.670 0.722 0.814 1.151 1.472 0.774 1.151 1.175 0.762 1.083 1.151 0.453 0.814 0.814

3 4 3 5 4 2 1 1 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 2 4 2 3 3

Table 33 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa of T. Siminius Stephanus (Villa 27) Room

Mean Depth

External A B C D E F G H J N O P Q R S V W Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

3.98 2.93 3.76 2.93 2.76 3.76 3.90 3.19 2 3.52 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.98 2.90 2.98 2.98 3.52 3.76 3.76 3.76 3.76 2.79 2.98 5.10 5.10 4.12 5.10 3.29 2.60 4.26 4.26 3.98 3.57 2.79 3.90 3.90 2.62 2.48

Relative Asymmetry 0.149 0.096 0.138 0.096 0.088 0.138 0.145 0.109 0.05 0.126 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.095 0.099 0.099 0.126 0.138 0.138 0.138 0.138 0.089 0.099 0.205 0.205 0.156 0.205 0.114 0.08 0.163 0.163 0.149 0.128 0.089 0.145 0.145 0.081 0.074

Control Value 0.17 3.36 0.28 5.17 2.23 0.28 0.11 0.44 13.03 0.25 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.39 0.06 0.06 0.25 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 4.06 0.06 0.25 0.25 3.25 0.25 2.5 1.81 0.25 0.25 0.17 0.25 0.31 0.11 0.11 1.06 0.17

197

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.020 0.660 0.945 0.660 0.602 0.945 0.993 0.75 0.342 0.863 0.678 0.678 0.678 0.678 0.678 0.650 0.678 0.678 0.863 0.945 0.945 0.945 0.945 0.613 0.678 1.404 1.404 1.068 1.404 0.784 0.547 1.116 1.116 1.020 0.880 0.613 0.993 0.993 0.554 0.506

Depth from Exterior 0 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 3 5 5 5 5 4 4 7 7 6 7 5 4 6 6 2 4 4 3 3 4 3

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY 22 23 24

2.98 2.98 3.90

0.099 0.099 0.145

0.06 0.06 0.11

0.678 0.678 0.993

4 4 3

Table 34 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Casa dei Miri (Villa 28) Room

Mean Depth

External A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

3.16 2.24 3.32 2.68 3.08 3.12 4.08 3.2 3.2 4 1.88 2.84 3.32 2.84 2.84 4.2 3.24 2.52 3.8 3.4 3.4 4.04 2.44 3.08 2.72 3.12

Relative Asymmetry 0.187 0.107 0.201 0.146 0.180 0.184 0.267 0.191 0.191 0.260 0.076 0.16 0.201 0.16 0.16 0.278 0.194 0.132 0.243 0.208 0.208 0.264 0.125 0.180 0.149 0.184

Control Value 1.16 3.46 0.66 0.46 0.67 1.17 0.5 0.17 0.17 0.33 4.25 0.13 1 0.13 1.13 0.33 1.66 0.79 0.5 0.25 0.25 0.33 2.46 1.75 0.63 1.67

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.958 0.550 1.029 0.745 0.922 0.940 1.366 0.976 0.976 1.330 0.390 0.816 1.029 0.816 0.816 1.419 0.993 0.674 1.242 1.064 1.064 1.348 0.638 0.922 0.763 0.940

Depth from Exterior 0 3 1 3 4 4 5 4 4 5 2 3 4 3 3 2 1 1 4 4 4 3 3 2 3 4

Table 35 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa of the Mysteries (Villa 33) Room External A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Mean Depth 4.82 3.84 6.92 6.03 6.13 5.11 6.08 6.95 3.34 6.95 4.76 4.47 4.39 4.05 3.92 4.61 5.45 5.32 4.61 5.45 6.24 6.82 5.89 6.82 6.82 5.92

Relative Asymmetry 0.212 0.157 0.328 0.279 0.285 0.228 0.282 0.330 0.13 0.330 0.208 0.192 0.188 0.169 0.162 0.200 0.247 0.24 0.200 0.247 0.291 0.323 0.271 0.323 0.323 0.273

Control Value 0.1 5.41 0.83 0.97 0.64 3.19 0.14 0.33 2.14 0.33 0.64 1 1 1 0.6 0.76 0.49 2.49 0.86 0.49 0.49 0.2 3.47 0.2 0.2 0.67

198

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.369 1.017 2.121 1.802 1.838 1.473 1.820 2.132 0.838 2.132 1.347 1.243 1.215 1.093 1.046 1.293 1.594 1.548 1.293 1.594 1.878 2.086 1.752 2.086 2.086 1.763

Depth from Exterior 0 1 9 8 8 7 8 9 8 9 6 5 4 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 4 9 8 9 9 8

TABLES 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

5.39 4.68 4.76 5.74 4.82 4.76 5.74 4.68 5.45 6.37 7.39 5.55 4.58

0.243 0.204 0.208 0.263 0.212 0.208 0.263 0.204 0.247 0.298 0.355 0.252 0.198

1.16 0.58 1.2 0.5 0.2 1.2 0.5 0.45 0.75 1.5 0.5 0.25 1.2

1.573 1.318 1.347 1.698 1.369 1.347 1.698 1.318 1.594 1.924 2.290 1.630 1.283

3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 4 5 3 2

Table 36 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the House of the Vettii Room

Mean Depth

External A B C D E 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

2.923 3.115 2.154 3.115 2.692 2.692 2.923 3.231 3.154 4.115 3.885 3.885 2.962 3.115 2.5 2.692 2.269 1.731 2.692 2.5 2.5 3.154 4.115 3.231 3.115 2.692 2.692

Relative Asymmetry 0.153 0.169 0.092 0.169 0.135 0.135 0.153 0.178 0.172 0.249 0.230 0.230 0.156 0.169 0.12 0.135 0.101 0.058 0.135 0.12 0.12 0.172 0.249 0.178 0.169 0.135 0.135

Control Value 1.833 0.167 4.424 0.167 0.091 0.091 0.45 0.2 1.2 0.5 0.833 0.833 1.167 0.167 0.291 0.091 3.091 7.867 0.091 0.291 0.424 1.75 0.333 0.2 0.167 0.091 0.091

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.801 0.881 0.480 0.881 0.705 0.705 0.801 0.929 0.897 1.297 1.202 1.202 0.817 0.881 0.625 0.705 0.528 0.304 0.705 0.625 0.625 0.897 1.297 0.929 0.881 0.705 0.705

Depth from Exterior 0 4 3 4 3 3 1 3 3 4 5 5 4 4 1 3 2 2 3 1 2 1 2 3 4 3 3

Table 37 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the San Marco Villa (Villa 34) Room External A B C E F G H J N 1 2 3 4 5

Mean Depth 6.35 6.63 5.75 4.86 4.47 4.54 4.78 7.01 8.13 7.11 7.29 5.89 6.48 5.41 6.48

Relative Asymmetry 0.120 0.126 0.106 0.086 0.077 0.079 0.084 0.135 0.160 0.137 0.141 0.109 0.123 0.099 0.123

Control Value 0.64 1 0.83 3.8 0.53 1.2 9.7 5.66 0.33 0.61 2.5 0.47 0.14 0.09 0.14

199

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.350 1.421 1.199 0.974 0.876 0.893 0.954 1.517 1.800 1.542 1.588 1.234 1.383 1.113 1.383

Depth from Exterior 0 10 9 7 6 5 3 2 4 1 3 2 2 4 2

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59a 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70

6.48 5.49 6.23 7.98 7.98 8.96 7.98 7.97 7.97 8.96 7.98 8.13 5.41 5.41 5.40 5.41 5.41 5.41 5.41 5.41 5.41 5.10 4.11 4.90 3.90 4.89 4.89 4.89 4.89 4.89 3.95 4.16 5.37 5.37 5.37 5.37 5.04 4.22 4.30 5.14 7.22 6.24 5.34 6.19 5.25 6.09 6.96 7.98 7.68 7.42 5.40 5.09 5.84 4.95 4.63 4.85 5.81 5.81 6.80 6.80 5.81 6.80 4.23 5.40 4.93

0.123 0.100 0.117 0.156 0.156 0.178 0.156 0.156 0.156 0.178 0.156 0.160 0.099 0.099 0.098 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.092 0.069 0.087 0.065 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.066 0.071 0.098 0.098 0.098 0.098 0.090 0.072 0.074 0.093 0.139 0.117 0.097 0.116 0.095 0.114 0.133 0.156 0.150 0.144 0.098 0.091 0.108 0.088 0.081 0.086 0.108 0.108 0.130 0.130 0.108 0.130 0.072 0.098 0.088

0.14 5.5 0.25 0.11 0.11 0.33 0.11 2.11 2.11 0.33 0.11 0.33 0.09 0.09 0.14 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.2 2.05 0.53 5.73 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 1.24 0.47 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.28 1.45 5.95 0.11 0.33 2 0.47 0.66 1.14 0.66 2 0.11 0.33 0.83 0.14 1.67 0.33 0.23 2.81 2.14 1.17 1.17 0.5 0.5 1.17 0.5 0.17 0.14 11.1

200

1.383 1.133 1.320 1.762 1.762 2.009 1.762 1.759 1.759 2.009 1.762 1.800 1.113 1.113 1.110 1.113 1.113 1.113 1.113 1.113 1.113 1.035 0.785 0.984 0.732 0.982 0.982 0.982 0.982 0.982 0.744 0.797 1.103 1.103 1.103 1.103 1.020 0.813 0.833 1.045 1.570 1.323 1.095 1.310 1.073 1.285 1.504 1.762 1.686 1.621 1.110 1.032 1.222 0.997 0.916 0.972 1.214 1.214 1.464 1.464 1.214 1.464 0.815 1.110 0.992

2 1 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 10 9 8 9 8 9 10 3 11 11 8 8 9 2 8 8 9 9 10 10 9 10 8 8 8

TABLES 71 72 73 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82

5.97 5.97 5.97 5.97 5.65 5.97 5.97 5.97 5.97 5.49 5.34

0.111 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.104 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.100 0.097

0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.58 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.64 0.22

1.254 1.254 1.254 1.254 1.174 1.254 1.254 1.254 1.254 1.133 1.095

9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

Table 38 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the House of the Bicentenary Room

Mean Depth

External 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

3 2.091 2.727 3.045 3.045 3.045 3.045 2.455 2.682 3.045 3.773 3.045 2.818 3.909 3.909 3.182 2.545 3.864 4.818 3.636 3.682 3.773 4.591

Relative Asymmetry 0.190 0.103 0.164 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.138 0.160 0.194 0.264 0.194 0.173 0.277 0.277 0.207 0.147 0.272 0.363 0.251 0.255 0.264 0.342

Control Value 2.5 7 0.611 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.278 0.611 0.111 0.167 0.667 4.333 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.311 1.2 0.5 1.667 0.5 0.167 0.333

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.911 0.497 0.786 0.931 0.931 0.931 0.931 0.663 0.766 0.931 1.263 0.931 0.828 1.325 1.325 0.994 0.704 1.305 1.739 1.201 1.222 1.263 1.636

Depth from Exterior 0 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 5 5 6

Table 39 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Villa at Badgeworth (Villa 32) Room

Mean Depth

External 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

2.571 1.643 3.071 4 2 2.929 2.286 2.429 2.429 3.357 2.571 2.292 3.357 2.292 2.292

Relative Asymmetry 0.241 0.098 0.318 0.461 0.153 0.296 0.197 0.219 0.219 0.362 0.241 0.198 0.362 0.198 0.198

Control Value 0.167 3.7 1.5 0.5 4.167 0.2 0.667 1.167 1.167 0.5 0.167 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.2

201

Real Relative Asymmetry 0.933 0.381 1.230 1.782 0.594 1.145 0.763 0.848 0.848 1.400 0.933 0.767 1.400 0.767 0.767

Depth from Exterior 0 1 3 4 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Table 40 Spatial Data Analysis Statistics for the Lullingstone Villa (Villa 35) Room

Mean Depth

External 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

3.875 2.938 2.125 3.063 2.313 3.25 3.25 3.375 2.438 3.938 3 3.938 3.938 3.813 2.875 3.813 3.813

Relative Asymmetry 0.383 0.258 0.15 0.275 0.175 0.3 0.3 0.316 0.191 0.391 0.266 0.391 0.391 0.375 0.25 0.375 0.375

Control Value 0.5 1.25 2.083 0.25 2.5 0.25 0.25 0.333 1.5 0.25 3.333 0.25 0.25 0.25 3.25 0.25 0.25

202

Real Relative Asymmetry 1.571 1.059 0.614 1.127 0.717 1.229 1.229 1.297 0.785 1.605 1.092 1.605 1.605 1.537 1.024 1.537 1.537

Depth from Exterior 0 1 2 3 3 4 4 4 3 5 4 5 5 5 4 5 5

Abbreviations AJA American Journal of Archaeology BAR British Archaeological Reports CA Current Archaeology CBA Council for British Archaeology CJ Classical Journal JRA Journal of Roman Archaeology JRS Journal of Roman Studies NSc Notizie degli Scavi OJA Oxford Journal of Archaeology RCHM Royal Commission on Historical Monuments RIB Roman Inscriptions of Britain, Vol. 1 RSP Rivista di Studi Pompeiana TBGAS Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society

Bibliography Adams, G.W., 1999, “Messages on Iron Age Coinage in Britain”, Scriptorium 3, pp. 72-9.

Adams, G.W., 2007, The Roman Emperor Gaius ‘Caligula’ and his Hellenistic Aspirations, Brown Walker, Boca Raton.

Adams, G.W., 2001, “British Iron Age Numismatic Iconography - a Social and Religious Interpretation”, Transactions of the Third ASCS Postgraduate Conference, pp. 31-43.

Adams, G.W., 2008, Rome and the Social Role of Élite Villas in its Suburbs, BAR Publishing, Oxford. Adams, J.N., 1992, “British Latin: the Text Interpretation and Language of the Bath Curse Tablets”, Britannia 23, pp. 1-27.

Adams, G.W., 2001, “Who Built the rural Romano-Celtic temples? Lydney and the Chesters Villa: a case study”, Proceedings of the Mass Historia Conference, Melbourne Historical Journal, pp. 25-28.

Alcock, J.P., 1986, “The Concept of Genius in Roman Britain”, in Henig, M. and King, A. (ed.), Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire, BAR, Oxford, pp. 113-33.

Adams, G.W., 2003, “The Role of Villa Owners in the Romanisation of the Native Religion in Britain: Chedworth Roman Villa”, Anistoriton 7.

Aldsworth, F. and Rudling. D., 1995, “Excavations at Bignor Roman villa, West Sussex 1985-90”, Sussex Archaeological Collections 133, pp. 103-88.

Adams, G.W., 2003, “The Connection between RomanoCeltic Temples and Rural Romanised Villas in Britain: an Examination of Some Possible Sites in Gloucestershire”, Journal of Ancient Civilisations 18, pp. 113-122.

Allason-Jones, L. and McKay, B., 1985, Coventina’s Well: a Shrine on Hadrian’s Wall, Trustees of the Clayton Collection, Oxford.

Adams, G.W., 2004, “Was there a connection between rural Romano-Celtic temples and Romanised villas? Lydney Temple and the Chesters Villa”, The New Regard of the Forest of Dean 19, pp. 59-61.

Allen, D.F., 1961, “A study of the Dobunnic Coinage”, in Clifford, E.M., Bagendon: a Belgic Oppidum, Heffer, Cambridge, pp. 75-149. Allen, D.F., 1976, “Wealth, Money and Coinage in a Celtic Society”, in Megaw, J.V.S., To Illustrate the Monuments - essays on archaeology presented to Stuart Piggott, Thames and Hudson, London, pp. 200-8.

Adams, G.W., 2006, The Suburban Villas of Campania and their Social Function, BAR Publishing, Oxford Adams,

G.W., 2006a, “The social and cultural implications of curse tablets [defixiones] in Britain and on the Continent”, Studia Humaniora Tartuensia 7.A.5.

Allen, D.F., 1980, The Coins of the Ancient Britons, London. Allen, T., Darvill, T., Green, S. and Jones, M., 1993, Excavations at Roughground Farm, Lechlade, Gloucestershire: a prehistoric and Roman 203

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY landscape, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Oxford.

Barrett, J.C., Fitzpatrick, A.P. and Macinnes, L. (eds.), 1989, Barbarians and Romans in North-West Europe: from the later Republic to late Antiquity, BAR, Oxford.

Allison, P.M., 1992, “The relationship between walldecoration and room-type in Pompeian houses: a case study of the Casa della Caccia Antica”, JRA 5, pp. 235-49.

Barrett, J.C., 1997, “Romanization: a critical comment”, in Mattingly, D. (ed.), Dialogues in Roman Imperialism: Power, discourse, and discrepant experience in the Roman Empire, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series, Portsmouth, pp. 51-64.

Allison, P.M., 1997, “Artifact Distribution and Spatial Function in Pompeian Houses”, in Rawson, B. and Weaver, P. (eds.), The Roman Family in Italy: status, sentiment and space, Humanities Research Centre, Canberra, pp. 321-54

Barringer, J.M., 1994, “The Mythological Paintings in the Macellum at Pompeii,” Classical Antiquity 13.2, pp. 149-171.

Allison, P.M., 2001, “Using the Material and Written Sources: turn of the Millennium Approaches to Roman domestic space”, AJA 105.2, pp. 181208.

Bartholomew, P., 1995, “Review of a Gazetteer of Roman Villas in Britain”, Britannia 26, pp. 415-17.

Allison, P.M., 2004, Pompeian Households: an analysis of the material culture, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Monograph 42, Los Angeles.

Bean, S.C., 1994, “The earliest staters from the area of the Dobunni?”, British Numismatic Journal 64, pp. 126-8.

Andreau, J., 1973, “Remarques sur la pompéienne”, Dialoghi di Archeologia 7, p. 244.

Beard, M., North, J. and Price, S., 1998, Religions of Rome, Vol. 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Andreau, J., 1974, Les Affaires de Monsieur Jucundus, École Francaise de Rome, Rome.

Bedwin, O., 1981, “Excavations at Lancing Down, West Sussex 1980”, Sussex Archaeological Collections 119, pp. 37-56.

Anon., 1877-8, “Temporary Museum”, TBGAS 2, pp. 246.

Bidwell, P., 1996, “The Exterior Decoration of Roman Buildings in Britain, in Johnson, P. (ed.), Architecture in Roman Britain, CBA Research Report, York, pp. 19-29.

Anon., 1889-90, “Roman Villa at Spoonley”, TBGAS 14, pp. 208-10. Anon., 1889-90, “Chedworth Roman Villa”, TBGAS 14, pp. 214-15.

Birley, E., 1986, “The Deities of Roman Britain”, in Hasse, W. (ed.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der Roemischen Welt, II.18.1,Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 3-112.

Anon., 1957, “Roman Britain in 1956: Sites Explored”, JRS 47, pp. 198-226. Applebaum, S., 1975, “Some observations on the Economies of the Roman Villa at Bignor, Sussex”, Britannia 6, pp. 118-32.

Bishop, E.A., 1984, “A Culvert at Bibury Roman Villa site”, Glevensis 18, pp. 43-4. Black, E.W., 1985, “Hypocaust Heating in Domestic Rooms in Roman Britain”, OJA 4, pp. 77-92.

Apted, M.R., Gilyarrd-Beer, R. and Saunders, A.D. (eds.), 1977, Ancient Monuments and their Interpretation, Phillimore, London.

Black, E.W., 1986, “Christian and Pagan hopes of salvation in Romano-British mosaics”, in Henig, M. and King, A. (eds.), Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Oxford, pp. 147-58.

Atkin, M., 1990, “Excavations in Gloucester 1989 - an interim report”, Glevensis 24, pp. 2-13. Atkin, M. and Garrod, A.P., 1989, “Archaeology in Gloucester 1988”, TBGAS 107, pp. 233-42.

Black, E.W., 1987, The Roman Villas of South-East England, BAR, Oxford.

Barrett, A.A., 1982, “The civitates of Tiberius Claudius Cogidubnus”, Echos de Monde Classique 26, pp. 45-55.

204

BIBLIOGRAPHY Black, E.W., 1994, “Villa-Owners: Romano-British Gentlemen and Officers”, Britannia 25, pp. 99-110.

Investigación sobre Magia Antiguas 5, pp. 11-26.

y

Astrología

Bledisloe, 1929, “Lydney, Gloucestershire”, TBGAS 51, pp. 55-78.

Black, E.W., 1995, Cursus Publicus: the infrastructure of government in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford.

Boon, G.C., 1957, Roman Silchester, Parrish, London. Black, E.W., 2001, “The First Century Historians of Roman Britain”, OJA 20.4, pp. 415-28.

Boon, G.C., 1988, “Counterfeit coins in Roman Britain”, in Casey, J. and Reece, R. (eds.), Coins and the Archaeologist, 2nd ed., Seaby, London, pp. 102-88.

Black, E.W., 1999, “Review of the Great Witcombe Roman Villa, Gloucestershire”, Britannia 30, pp. 407-8.

Bradford, Blagg, T.F.C., 1980a, “Roman civil and military architecture in the province of Britain: aspects of patronage, influence and craft organization”, World Archaeology 12, pp. 2742.

J.S.P. and Goodchild, R.G., 1939, “Excavations at Frilford, Berkshire, 1937-8”, Oxoniensia 4, pp. 1-70.

Brandt, R. and Slofstra, J. (eds.), 1983, Roman and Native in the Low Countries: Spheres of Interaction, BAR, Oxford.

Blagg, T.F.C., 1980b, “The Decorated Stonework of Roman Temples in Britain”, in Rodwell, W. (ed.), Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 31-44.

Branigan, K., 1972, “The End of Roman West”, TBGAS 91, pp. 117-28. Branigan, K., 1973, “Gauls in Gloucestershire?”, TBGAS 92, pp. 82-95.

Blagg, T.F.C., 1983, “Two Decorative Relief Carvings at Lydney Park, Gloucestershire”, Antiquaries Journal 63, pp. 355-9.

Branigan, K., 1977, The Roman Villa in South-West England, Moonraker Press, Bradford-onAvon.

Blagg, T.F.C., 1986, “Roman religious sites in the British landscape”, Landscape History 8, pp. 15-25.

Branigan, K., 1989, “Specialization in Villa Economies”, in Branigan, K. and Miles, D. (eds.), The Economies of Romano-British Villas, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 42-50.

Blagg, T.F.C., 1990a, “First Century Roman Houses in Gaul and Britain”, in Blagg, T.F.C. and Millett, M. (eds.), The Early Roman Empire in the West, Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 194-209.

Branigan, K., 1994, “The New Roman Britain - a view from the west country”. TBGAS 112, pp. 9-16.

Blagg, T.F.C., 1990b, “Architectural Munificence in Britain: the Evidence of Inscriptions”, Britannia 21, pp. 13-31.

Branigan, K. and Fowler, P.J. (eds.), 1976, The Roman West Country, David and Charles, Newton Abbot.

Blagg, T.F.C., 1991, “Buildings”, in Jones, R.F.J. (ed.), Britain in the Roman Period: Recent Trends, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 3-14.

Branigan, K. and Miles, D. (eds.), 1989, The Economies of Romano-British Villas, J.R. Collis, Sheffield.

Blagg, T.F.C., 1996, “The External Decoration of Romano-British Buildings”, in Johnson, P. (ed.), Architecture in Roman Britain, CBA Research Report, York, pp. 9-18.

Braund, D. (ed.), The Administration of the Roman Empire, 241 BC-AD 193, Exeter Studies in History 18, Exeter, 1988. Breeze,

Blagg, T.F.C. and King, A.C. (eds.), 1984, Military and Civilian in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford. Blagg, T.F.C. and Millett, M.(eds.), 1990, The Early Roman Empire in the West, Oxbow, Oxford.

D.J., 1985, “Roman forces and native populations”, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 115, pp. 223-8.

Brown, F.E., 1961, Roman Architecture, Braziller, New York.

Blänsdorf, J., 2005, “The Curse Tablets from the Sanctuary of Isis and Magna Mater in Mainz” MHNH: Revista Internacional de

Brown, F.E., 1990, “Comment on Chapman: some cautionary notes on the application of spatial

205

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY measures to prehistoric settlements”, in Samson, R. (ed.), The Social Archaeology of Houses, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 93-109.

Burton, G., 1987, “Government and the Provinces”, in Wacher, J. (ed.), The Roman World, Vol. I, Routledge, London, pp. 423-39. Butler, A.S., Rahtz, P.A. and Taylor, H.M., 1975, “Deerhurst 1971-74: the Society’s Research Project on the Archaeology of the English Church”, Antiquaries Journal 55, pp. 346-65.

Brown, P.D.C. and McWhirr, A., 1967, “Cirencester, 1966”, Antiquaries Journal 47, pp. 185-97. Brown, P.D.C. and McWhirr, A., 1969, “Cirencester, 1967-8: Eighth Interim Report”, Antiquaries Journal 49, pp. 222-43.

Cadoux, J.-L., 1978, “Un sanctuaire gallo-romain isolé: Ribemont-sur-Ancre (Somme)”, Latomus 37, pp. 325-67.

Brunaux, J.L., 1988, The Celtic Gauls: gods, rites and sanctuaries, tr. Nash, D., Seaby, London.

Capogrossi Colognesi, L., “The limits of the ancient city and the evolution of the medieval city in the thought of Max Webber”, in Cornell, T.J. and Lomas, K. (eds.), Urban Society in Roman Italy, University College London Press, London, pp. 27-37.

Brunt, P.A. (ed.), 1974, The Roman Economy, Blackwell, Oxford. Brunt, P.A., 1975, “Did Imperial Rome Disarm her Subjects?”, Phoenix 29, pp. 260-70.

Carrington, R.C., 1931, “Studies in the Campanian ‘Villae Rusticae’”, JRS 21, pp. 110-30.

Budetta, T., 1990, “Ercolano: Attività dell’Ufficio Scavi: 1990”, RSP 4, pp. 218-221.

Carrington, R.C., 1933, “Notes on the Building Materials of Pompeii”, JRS 23, pp. 125-138.

Burke, J., 1978, Life in the Villa in Roman Britain, B.T. Batsford, London.

Carrington, R.C., 1934, “Some Ancient Italian CountryHouses”, Antiquity 8, pp. 261-80.

Burnham, B.C., 1979, “Pre-Roman and Romano-British Urbanism? Problems and Possibilities”, in Burnham, B.C. and Johnson, H.B. (eds.), Invasion and Response: the Case of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 255-72.

Carrington, R.C., 1936, Pompeii, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Casey, J. and Reece, R. (eds.), 1988, Coins and the Archaeologist, 2nd ed., Seaby, London.

Burnham, B.C., 1987, “The Morphology of RomanoBritish ‘Small Towns’”, Archaeological Journal 144, pp. 156-90.

Casey, P.J. (ed.), 1979, The End of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford.

Burnham, B.C., 1988, “A Survey of Building Types in Romano-British ‘Small Towns’”, Journal of the British Archaeological Association 141, pp. 35-59.

Casey, P.J., 1981, “Lydney Park”, CA 76, p. 149. Cawkwell, G., 1978, Philip of Macedon, London. Chadwick, N., 1971, The Celts, Penguin, London.

Burnham, B.C., 1993, “The Small Towns of Roman Britain - the last fifty years”, in Greep, S. (ed.), Roman Towns: the Wheeler inheritance, CBA Research Report, York, pp. 99-110.

Champion, S., 1976, “Leckhampton Hill, Gloucestershire, 1925 and 1970”, in Harding, D.W. (ed.), Hillforts - Later Prehistoric Earthworks in Britain and Ireland, Academic Press, London, pp. 177-90.

Burnham, B.C., 1996, “Celts and Romans: Towards a Romano-Celtic Society”, in Green, M.J. (ed.), The Celtic World, Routledge, London, p. 12141.

Churchin, L.A., 1991, Roman Spain: Conquest and Assimilation, Routledge, London.

Burnham, B.C. and Johnson, H.B. (eds.), 1979, Invasion and Response: the Case of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford.

Clarke, G., 1982, “The Roman Villa at Woodchester”, Britannia 13, pp. 197-228. Clarke, J.R., 1991, The Houses of Roman Italy, 100 BCAD 250: Ritual, Space and Decoration, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Burnham, B.C. and Wacher, J., 1990, The Small Towns of Roman Britain, B.T. Batsford, London.

206

BIBLIOGRAPHY Clarke, J.R., 2003, Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans: visual representation and non-elite viewers in Italy, 100BC – AD 315, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Collingwood, R.G., 1929, “Town and Country in Roman Britain”, Antiquity 3, pp. 261-76. Collingwood, R.G., 1930, The Archaeology of Roman Britain, Methuen, London.

Clarke, S., 1990, “The Social Significance of Villa Architecture in Celtic North West Europe”, OJA 9, pp. 337-53.

Collingwood, R.G., 1932, “Inscriptions”, in Wheeler, R.E.M. and Wheeler, T.V., Report on the Excavation of the Prehistoric, Roman, and Post-Roman Site in Lydney Park, Gloucestershire, Society of Antiquaries, Oxford, pp. 100-4.

Clarke, S., 1996, “Acculturation and continuity: reassessing the significance of Romanization in the hinterlands of Gloucester and Cirencester”, in Webster, J. and Cooper, N.J. (eds.), Roman Imperialism: Post-Colonial Perspectives, Leicester Archaeology Monographs, Leicester, pp. 71-84.

Collingwood, R.G., 1975, “Roman Britain”, in Frank, T., An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome, Vol. 3, Octagon, New York, pp. 14-118.

Clarke, S., 1998, “Social Change and architectural diversity in Roman Period Britain”, in Forcey, C., Hawthorne, J., Lembke, C. and Witcher, R. (eds.), TRAC 97, Proceedings of the Seventh Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Nottingham 1997, Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 28-41.

Collingwood, R.G. and Richmond, I.A., 1965, Roman Inscriptions of Britain, Methuen, London. Collingwood, R.G. and Taylor, M.V., 1931, “Roman Britain in 1930”, JRS 21, pp. 215-50. Collingwood, R.G. and Taylor, M.V., 1932, “Roman Britain in 1931”, JRS 22, pp. 198-229.

Claessen, H.J.M., 1983, “Kinship, Chiefdom, and Reciprocity - on the use of Anthropological Concepts in Archaeology”, in Brandt, R. and Slofstra, J. (eds.), Roman and Native in the Low Countries: Spheres of Interaction, BAR, Oxford, pp. 211-22.

Collis, J., 1997, The European Iron Age, Routledge, London. Cookson, N.A., 1984, Romano-British Mosaics, BAR, Oxford.

Cleere, H., 1982, “Industry in the Romano-British Countryside”, in Miles, D. (ed.), The RomanoBritish Countryside, Pt 2, BAR, Oxford, pp. 123-36.

Cooper, T.S., 1984, “The Roman Villa at Whitebeech, Chiddingfold: excavations in 1888 and subsequently”, Surrey Archaeological Collections 75, pp. 57-83.

Clifford, B., 1878-9, “Some Remarks on the Ancient Passage across the Severn”, TBGAS 3, pp. 839.

Cosh, S.R., 2001, “Seasonal Dining-Rooms in RomanoBritish Houses”, Britannia 32, pp. 219-42. Courteault, P., 1921, “An Inscription recently found at Bordeaux”, JRS 11, pp. 101-7.

Clifford, E.M., 1933, “The Roman Villa, Hucclecote near Gloucester”, TBGAS 55, pp. 323-46.

Creighton, J., 1995, “Visions of Power: Imagery and Symbols in Late Iron Age Britain”, Britannia 26, pp. 285-301.

Clifford, E.M., 1938, “Roman Altars in Gloucestershire”, TBGAS 60, pp. 297-307.

Crocker, G. and McCracken, J.S. (eds.), 1994, “The Roman Temple at Wanborough”, Surrey Archaeological Collections 82.

Clifford, E.M., 1954, “The Roman Villa, Witcombe, Gloucestershire”, TBGAS 73, pp. 5-65. Clifford,

E.M., 1955, “Stamped Tiles found Gloucestershire”, JRS 45, pp. 67-72.

in Crook, J.A., 1967, Law and Life of Rome, Thames and Hudson, London.

Clifford, E.M., 1961a, Bagendon: a Belgic Oppidum, W. Heffer and Sons, Cambridge.

Crummy, P., 1982, “The Origin of Some Major Roman Towns”, Britannia 13, pp. 125-34.

Clifford, E.M., 1961b, “The Hucclecote Roman Villa”, TBGAS 80, pp. 42-9.

Cunliffe, B., 1971, Excavations at Fishbourne, 19611969, Vol. 1, Society of Antiquaries, London.

207

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Cunliffe, B., 1976, “The Origins of Urbanization in Britain”, in Cunliffe, B. and Rowley, T. (eds.), Oppida: the beginnings of urbanization in Barbarian Europe, BAR, Oxford, pp. 135-61.

Darvill, T., 1979, “A Petrological Study of LHS and TPF Stamped Tiles from the Cotswold Region”, in McWhirr, A. (ed.), Roman Brick and Tile, BAR, Oxford, pp. 309-50.

Cunliffe, B., 1978, “Money and Society in Pre-Roman Britain”, in B. Cunliffe (ed.), Coinage and Society in Britain and Gaul: some current problems, CBA 38, London.

Darvill,

Cunliffe, B., 1988, Greeks, Romans and Barbarians: Spheres of Interaction, B.T. Batsford, London.

Darvill, T. and McWhirr, A., 1982, “Roman Brick Production and the Environment”, in Miles, D. (ed.), The Romano-British Countryside, Pt 2, BAR, Oxford, pp. 137-50.

Cunliffe, B., 1991, Iron Age Communities in Britain, 3rd ed., Routledge, London.

T., Greatorex, P. and Rey, D., 1989, “Abbotswood Roman Villa, Swell, Gloucestershire, 1985”, TBGAS 107, pp. 20510.

Davies, J.A., 1993, “The Study of Coin Finds from Romano-British Towns”, in Greep, S. (ed.), Roman Towns: the Wheeler inheritance, CBA Research Report, York, pp. 123-33.

Cunliffe, B., 1992, “Pits, Preconceptions and Propitiation in the British Iron Age”, OJA 11, pp. 69-83. Cunliffe, B., 1994, “After Hillforts”, OJA 13, pp. 71-84.

Davis, P.J., 2003, Seneca: Thyestes, Duckworth, London. Cunliffe, B., 1997, The Ancient Celts, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Day, J., 1932, “Agriculture in the life of Pompeii”, Yale Classical Studies 4, pp. 165-208.

Cunliffe, B., 1999, Fishbourne Roman Palace, Tempus, Stroud.

De Kind, R.E.L.B., 1998, Houses in Herculaneum: a new view on the town planning and the building of Insulae III and IV, J.C. Gieben, Amsterdam.

Cunliffe, B., 2001, Facing the Ocean: the Atlantic and its peoples, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

De la Bédoyère, G., 1991, The Buildings of Roman Britain, B.T. Batsford, London.

Cunliffe, B. and Miles, D. (eds.), 1984, Aspects of the Iron Age in Central Southern Britain, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Oxford.

De la Bédoyère, G., 1992, Roman Towns in Britain, B.T. Batsford, London.

Cunliffe, B. and Rowley, T. (eds.), 1976, Oppida: the Beginnings of Urbanisation in Barbarian Europe, BAR, Oxford.

De la Bédoyère, G., 1993, Roman Villas and the Countryside, B.T. Batsford, London. De la Bédoyère, G., 1999, The Golden Age of Roman Britain, Tempus, Stroud.

Curteis, M., 1996, “An Analysis of the Circulation Pattern of Iron Age Coins from Northamptonshire”, Britannia 27.

De la Bédoyère, G., 2006, Roman Britain: a new history, Thames and Hudson, London.

Dark, K., 1993, “Roman-Period Activity at Prehistoric Ritual Monuments in Britain and in the Amorican Peninsula”, in Scott, E. (ed.), Theoretical Roman Archaeology: First Conference Proceedings, Ashgate Publishing, Avebury, pp. 133-46.

Della Corte, M., 1921, “Pompei – Scavi eseguiti da privati nel territorio Pompeiano”, NSc Series 5, Vol. 18, pp. 415-67. Della Corte, M., 1965, Case ed Abitianti di Pompei, Fausto fiorentino, Naples.

Dark, K. and Dark, P., 1997, The Landscape of Roman Britain, Sutton, Stroud.

Derks, T., 1998, Gods, Temples and Ritual Practices, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam.

D’Arms, J.H., 1970, Romans on the Bay of Naples, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Detsicas, A., 1983, The Cantiaci, Allan Sutton, Gloucester.

D’Arms, J.H., 1976, “Notes on Municipal Notables of Imperial Ostia”, AJPh 97.4, pp. 387-411.

De Vos, A. and M., 1982, Pompei, Ercolano, Stabia, G. Laterza, Rome.

208

BIBLIOGRAPHY Dixon, P., 1976, “Crickley Hill, 1969-1972”, in Harding, D.W. (ed.), Hillforts - Later Prehistoric Earthworks in Britain and Ireland, Academic Press, London, pp. 162-75.

Hobley, B. (eds.), Roman urban topography in Britain and the western Empire, CBA Research Report, London, pp. 28-33. Dunning, G.C., 1976, “Salmonsbury, Bourton-on-theWater, Gloucestershire”, in Harding, D.W. (ed.), Hillforts - Later Prehistoric Earthworks in Britain and Ireland, Academic Press, London, pp. 76-118.

Dobson, B. and Mann, J.C., 1973, “The Roman Army in Britain and Britons in the Roman Army”, Britannia 4, pp. 191-205. Donovan, H.E., 1934, “Excavation of a Romano-British Building at Bourton on the Water, Gloucestershire, 1934”, TBGAS 56, pp. 99128.

Eagles, B.N. and Swan, V.G., 1972, “The Chessalls, a Romano-British Settlement at Kingscote”, TBGAS 91, pp. 60-73.

Donovan, H.E., 1939, “Reports on Roman Remains, Gloucestershire”, TBGAS 61, pp. 107-31.

Ellis, J.R., 1976, Philip II and Macedonian Imperialism, London.

Downey, R., King, A. and Soffe, G., 1980, “The Hayling Island Temple and Religious Connections across the Channel”, in Rodwell, W. (ed.), Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 289-304.

Ellis, J.R. and Milns, R.D., 1970, The Spectre of Philip, Sydney University Press, Sydney.

Drinkwater, J.F., 1983, Roman Gaul: the three provinces, 58 BC-AD 260, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.

Ellis, S.P., 1995, “Classical Reception Rooms in Romano-British Houses”, Britannia 26, pp. 163-78.

Drinkwater, J.F., 1987, “Urbanisation in Italy and the Western Empire”, in Wacher, J. (ed.), The Roman World, Vol. I, Routledge, London, pp. 345-79.

Ellison, A., 1980, “Natives, Romans and Christians on West Hill, Uley: an interim report on the excavation of a ritual complex of the first millenium AD”, in Rodwell, W. (ed.), Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, Part I, BAR, Oxford, pp. 305-28.

Ellis, P., 1999, “North Leigh Roman Villa, Oxfordshire: a report on excavation and recording in the 1970’s”, Britannia 30, pp. 199-245.

Drinkwater, J.F., 1989, “Patronage in Roman Gaul and the problem of the Bagaudae”, in WallaceHadrill, A. (ed.), Patronage in Ancient Society, Routledge, London, pp. 189-201.

Erdkamp, P.P.M., 2001, “Beyond the limits of the ‘Consumer City’”, Historia 50, pp. 332-56.

Drinkwater, J.F., 1989a, “The Celts through Greek and Roman Eyes”, CR 39.1, pp. 100-101.

Esmonde Cleary, A.S., 1987, Extra-Mural Areas of Romano-British Towns, BAR, Oxford.

Drinkwater, J.F., 1990, “For Better or Worse? Towards an Assessment of the Economic and Social Consequences of the Roman Conquest of Gaul”, in Blagg, T.F.C. and Millett, M.(eds.), The Early Roman Empire in the West, Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 210-19.

Esmonde Cleary, A.S., 1989, The Ending of Roman Britain, B.T. Batsford, London. Esmonde Cleary, A.S., 1992, “Small Towns Past and Future”, Britannia 23, pp. 341-4.

Drury, P.J., 1980, “Non-Classical Religious Buildings in Iron Age and Roman Britain: a Review”, in Rodwell, W. (ed.), Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 45-78.

Esmonde Cleary, A.S., 1994, “Roman Britain in 1993: Sites Explored”, Britannia 25, pp. 261-91.

Drury, P.J. (ed.), 1982, Structural Reconstruction: approaches to the interpretation of the excavated remains of buildings, BAR, Oxford.

Esmonde Cleary, A.S., 1998, “Roman Britain in 1997: Sites Explored”, Britannia 29, pp. 365-432.

Esmonde Cleary, A.S., 1997, “Roman Britain in 1996: Sites Explored”, Britannia 28, pp. 395-453.

Esmonde Cleary, A.S., 1999, “Roman Britain in 1998: Sites Explored”, Britannia 30, pp. 319-74.

Duncan-Jones, R.P., 1985, “Who paid for public buildings in Roman cities?”, in Grew, F.O. and

209

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Étienne, R., 1966, La Vie Quotidienne a Pompéi, Hachette, Paris.

Fitzpatrick, A.P., 2001, “Roman Britain in 1997: Sites Explored”, Britannia 32, pp. 311-400.

Evans, J., 1990, “From the End of Roman Britain to the ‘Celtic West’”, OJA 9, pp. 91-103.

Fitzpatrick, A.P., 2002, “Roman Britain in 1997: Sites Explored”, Britannia 33, pp. 275-372.

Faraone, C.A., Garnand, B. and Lopez-Ruiz, C., 2005, “Micah's Mother (Judges 17:1-4) and a Curse from Carthage (KAI 89): Evidence for the Semitic Origin of Greek and Latin Curses against Thieves?” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 64, pp. 161-86.

Fitzpatrick, A.P., 2004, “Roman Britain in 1997: Sites Explored”, Britannia 35, pp. 225-350.

Farrer, J., 1870, “Chedworth Roman Villa”, Journal of the British Archaeological Association 26, pp. 251-2.

Fox, A., 1951, “The Date of the Orpheus Mosaic from The Barton”, TBGAS 70, pp. 51-3.

Fitzpatrick, A.P. and Morris, E.L. (eds.), 1994, The Iron Age in Wessex: Recent Work, Trust for Wessex Archaeology, Dorchester.

Fox, G.E., 1887, “The Roman Villa at Chedworth, Gloucestershire”, Archaeological Journal 44, pp. 322-36.

Fincham, G., Harrison, G., Rodgers Holland, R. and Revell, L. (eds.), 2000, Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Oxbow, Oxford.

Fox, G.E., 1905, “Notes on some probable traces of Roman Fulling in Britain”, Archaeologia 59, pp. 207-32.

Finch Smith, R., 1987, Roadside Settlements in Lowland Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford. Finley, M.I., 1976 (ed.), Studies in Roman Property, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

France, N.E. and Gobel, B.M., 1985, The Romano-British Temple at Harlow, Gloucester, West Essex Archaeological Group, Gloucester.

Fishwick, D., 1961, “The Imperial Cult in Roman Britain”, Phoenix 15, pp. 159-73.

Frank, T., 1975, An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome, Vol. 3, Octagon, New York.

Fishwick, D., 1969, “The Imperial numen in Roman Britain”, JRS 59, pp. 76-91.

Franklin jnr., J.L., 2001, Pompeis Difficile Est: studies in the political life of Imperial Pompeii, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

Fishwick, D., 1991, The Imperial Cult in the Latin West, Vol. 2.2, Brill, Leiden. Fishwick,

Fredrick, D., 1995, “Beyond the Atrium to Ariadne: Erotic Painting and Visual Pleasure in the Roman House”, Classical Antiquity 14, pp. 266-87.

D., 1997, “The Provincial Centre at Camulodunum: Towards and Historical Context”, Britannia 28, pp. 31-9.

Frere, S.S., 1962, “Bagendon, a Belgic Oppidum (Review)”, JRS 52, pp. 272-3.

Fitzpatrick, A.P., 1984, “The deposition of La Tène Iron Age metalwork in watery contexts in southern England”, in Cunliffe, B. and Miles, D., Aspects of the Iron Age in Central Southern Britain, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Oxford, pp. 178-88.

Frere, S.S., 1975, “The Origin of Small Towns”, in Rodwell, W. and Rowley, T. (eds.), Small Towns of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 47.

Fitzpatrick, A.P., 1989, “The Uses of Roman Imperialism by the Celtic Barbarians in the later Republic”, in Barrett, J.C., Fitzpatrick, A.P. and Macinnes, L. (eds.), Barbarians and Romans in North-West Europe: from the later Republic to late Antiquity, BAR, Oxford, pp. 27-54.

Frere, S.S., 1977, “Roman Britain in 1976: Sites Explored”, Britannia 8, pp. 355-425.

Fitzpatrick, A.P., 1992, “The roles of Celtic Coinage in south east England”, in M. Mays (ed.), Celtic Coinage: Britain and Beyond, BAR, Oxford, pp. 1-32.

Frere, S.S., 1984b, “Roman Britain in 1983: Sites Explored”, Britannia 15, pp. 266-332.

Frere, S.S., 1984a, “The Early Development of the Cities of Roman Britain”, Revue Archeologique de Picardie 34, pp. 11-17.

Frere, S.S., 1985a, “Roman Britain in 1984: Sites Explored”, Britannia 16, pp. 251-316.

210

BIBLIOGRAPHY Survey and Excavation 1987-91”, Britannia 23, pp. 159-215.

Frere, S.S., 1985b, “Civic Pride: a factor in Roman town planning”, in Grew, F.O. and Hobley, B. (eds.), Roman urban topography in Britain and the western Empire, CBA Research Report, London, pp. 34-6.

Garnsey, P., 1971, “Honorarium Decurionatus”, Historia 20, pp. 309-25.

Frere, S.S., 1986, “Roman Britain in 1985: Sites Explored”, Britannia 17, pp. 363-427.

Garnsey, P. and Saller, R., 1987, The Roman Empire: Economy, Society and Culture, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Frere, S.S., 1988, “Roman Britain in 1987: Sites Explored”, Britannia 19, pp. 415-84.

Garrod, A.P., 1991, “Minor Development Sites, 1990”, Glevensis 25, pp. 20-2.

Frere, S.S., 1989, “Roman Britain in 1988: Sites Explored”, Britannia 20, pp. 258-326.

Gascoigne, P.E., 1969, “Clear Cupboard Villa, Farmington, Gloucestershire”, TBGAS 88, pp. 34-63.

Frere, S.S., 1990, “Roman Britain in 1989: Sites Explored”, Britannia 21, pp. 303-64.

Gatrell, A., 1983, Distance and Space: a geographical perspective, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Frere, S.S., 1991a, Britannia, Pimlico, London. Gilley, S. and Sheils, W.J. (eds.), 1994, A History of Religion in Britain, Blackwell, Oxford.

Frere, S.S., 1991b, “Roman Britain in 1990: Sites Explored”, Britannia 22, pp. 221-95.

González, J., 1986, “The Lex Irnitana: a new copy of the Flavian Municipal law”, JRS 76, pp. 147-243.

Friendship-Taylor, R.M., 1997, “Settlement and Continuity? Two Late Iron Age Settlements and Roman Sites in Northamptonshire”, in Friendship-Taylor, R.M. and D.E. (eds.), From Round House to Villa, Upper Nene Archaeological Society, Northampton, pp. 4751.

Goodburn, R., 1976, “Roman Britain in 1975: Sites Explored”, Britannia 7, pp. 290-377. Goodburn, R., 1978, “Roman Britain in 1977: Sites Explored”, Britannia 9, pp. 403-72.

Friendship-Taylor, R.M. and D.E. (eds.), 1997, From Round House to Villa, Upper Nene Archaeological Society, Northampton.

Goodburn, R., 1979, “Roman Britain in 1978: Sites Explored”, Britannia 10, pp. 267-338. Goodburn, R., 1983, The Roman Villa - Chedworth, National Trust, London.

Frier, B.W., 1978, “Cicero’s Management of his Urban Properties”, CJ 74, pp. 1-6.

Goodburn, R., 1998, Chedworth Roman Villa, National Trust, London.

Fulford, M., 1982, “Town and Country in Roman Britain - a parasitical relationship?” in Miles, D. (ed.), The Romano-British Countryside, Pt 2, BAR, Oxford, pp. 403-19.

Gordon, M.L., 1931, “The Freedman’s Son in Municipal Life”, JRS 21, pp. 65-77.

Fulford, M., 1983, “Review of Early Roman Occupation at Cirencester”, Britannia 14, pp. 376-7.

Gracie, H.S., 1970, “Frocester Court Roman Villa, Gloucestershire, First Report, 1961-67”, TBGAS 89, pp. 15-86.

Fulford, M., 1991, “Britain and the Roman Empire: the Evidence for Regional and Long Distance Trade”, in Jones, R.F.J., Britain in the Roman Period: Recent Trends, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 35-47.

Gracie, H.S. and Price, E.G., 1979, “Frocester Court Roman Villa, Second Report 1968-77: the Courtyard”, TBGAS 97, pp. 9-64.

Fulford, M., 2001, “Links with the Past: Pervasive ‘Ritual’ Behaviour in Roman Britain”, Britannia 32, pp. 199-218.

Grahame, M., 2000, Reading space: social interaction and identity in the houses of Roman Pompeii: a syntactical approach to the analysis and interpretation of built space, BAR Publishing, Oxford.

Fulford, M. and Allen, J.R.L., 1992, “Iron-Making at the Chesters Villa, Woolaston, Gloucestershire:

211

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Green, M.J., 1976, A Corpus of Religious Material from the Civilian Areas of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford.

Groenman-van Waateringe, W., 1980, in “Urbanisation and the North-West Frontier of the Roman Empire”, in Hanson, W.S. and Keppie, L.J.F. (eds.), Roman Frontier Studies 1979: Papers presented to the Twelfth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, Part III, BAR, Oxford, pp. 1037-44.

Green, M.J., 1977, “Theomorphism, and the Role of Divine Animals in Romano-British Art”, in J. Munby and M. Henig (eds.), Roman Life and Art in Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 297-326.

Grover, J.W., 1867, “Pre-Augustine Christianity in Britain”, Journal of the British Archaeological Association 23, pp. 221-30.

Green, M.J., 1986, The Gods of the Celts, Allan Sutton, Gloucester. Green, M.J., 1988, “ Review of Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire”, Britannia 19, p. 520.

Hadman, J., 1978, “Aisled Buildings in Roman Britain”, in Todd, M. (ed.), Studies in the RomanoBritish Villa, Leicester University Press, Leicester, pp. 187-96.

Green, M.J., 1989, Symbol and Image in Celtic Religious Art, Routledge, London.

Haining, R., 1990, Spatial data analysis in the social and environmental sciences, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Green, M.J., 1992, Dictionary of Celtic Myth and Legend, Thames and Hudson, London.

Hampton, J.N., 1977, “Aerial Reconnaissance for Archaeology: uses of the photographic evidence”, Photogrammetric Record 9, pp. 265-72.

Green, M.J., 1992, “The Iconography of Celtic Coins, in M. Mays (ed.), Celtic Coinage: Britain and Beyond. Green, M.J., 1995, Celtic Goddesses - Warroirs, Virgins and Mothers, British Museum Press, London.

Hanson, W.S., 1994a, “Review of Roman Britain”, Britannia 25, p. 337.

Green, M.J., 1996, “Who were the Celts?”, in Green, M.J. (ed.), The Celtic World, Routledge, London, pp. 3-7.

Hanson, W.S., 1994b, “Dealing with Barbarians: the Romanization of Britain”, in Vyner, B. (ed.), Building on the Past: Papers celebrating 150 years of the Royal Archaeological Institute, Royal Archaeological Institute, London, pp. 149-63.

Green, M.J. (ed.), 1996, The Celtic World, Routledge, London. Greene, K.T., 1975, “The Romano-Celtic Head from the Bon Marché Site, Gloucester: a reappraisal”, Antiquaries Journal 55, pp. 338-45.

Hanson, W.S. and Keppie, L.J.F. (eds.), 1980, Roman Frontier Studies 1979: Papers presented to the Twelfth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, Part I and III, BAR, Oxford.

Greene, K.T., 1986, The Archaeology of the Roman Economy, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Harding, D.W., 1974, The Iron Age in Lowland Britain, Routledge, London.

Greep, S. (ed.), 1993, Roman Towns: the Wheeler inheritance, CBA Research Report, York.

Harding, D.W. (ed.), 1976, Hillforts - Later Prehistoric Earthworks in Britain and Ireland, Academic Press, London.

Gregory, T., 1992, Excavations in Thetford, 1980-82, Fison Way, Vol. I, East Anglian Archaeology, Dereham.

Hardy, E.G., 1912, Roman Laws and Charters, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Grew, F.O., 1980, “Roman Britain in 1978: Sites Explored”, Britannia 11, pp. 345-402.

Harker, S., 1980, “Springhead - a brief re-appraisal”, from Rodwell, W. (ed.), Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 285-8.

Grew, F.O., 1981, “Roman Britain in 1980: Sites Explored”, Britannia 12, pp. 313-68.

Haselgrove, C., 1982, “Wealth, prestige and power: the dynamics of late Iron Age political centralization in south-east England”, in Renfrew, C. and Shennan S. (eds.), Ranking,

Grew, F.O. and Hobley, B. (eds.), 1985, Roman urban topography in Britain and the western Empire, CBA Research Report, London.

212

BIBLIOGRAPHY Resource and Exchange: Apects of the archaeology of Early European Society, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 79-85.

Hasse, W. (ed.), 1986, Aufstieg und Niedergang der Roemischen Welt, II.18.1,Walter de Gruyter, Berlin. Hatt, J.J., 1970, Celts and Gallo-Romans, tr. Hogarth, J., Nagel, Geneva.

Haselgrove, C., 1984, “Romanisation before the Conquest: Gaulish Precedents and British Consequences”, in Blagg, T.F.C. and King, A.C. (eds.), Military and Civilian in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 5-63.

Hawkes, C.F.C., 1961, “The Western Third C Culture and the Belgic Dobunni” in Clifford, E.M., Bagendon: a Belgic Oppidum, W. Heffer and Sons, Cambridge, pp. 43-74.

Haselgrove, C., 1987, Iron Age Coinage in South-East England, BAR, Oxford.

Heighway, C., 1983, The East and North Gates of Gloucester, Western Historical Trust, Bristol.

Haselgrove, C., 1989, “The Later Iron Age in Southern Britain and Beyond”, in Todd, M. (ed.), Research on Roman Britain, 1960-89, Britannia Monograph Series, Gloucester, pp. 1-18.

Heighway, C. and Garrod, P., 1980, “Excavations at Nos. 1 and 30 Westgate Street, Gloucester: The Roman Levels”, Britannia 11, pp. 73-114. Heighway, C. and Parker, A.J., 1982, “The Roman tilery at St Oswald’s Priory, Gloucester”, Britannia 13, pp. 25-77.

Haselgrove, C., 1993, “The Development of British IronAge Coinage”, Numismatic Chronicle 153, pp. 31-63.

Henig, M., 1980, “Art and Cult in the Temples of Roman Britain”, in Rodwell, W. (ed.), Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 91-113.

Hassall, M., 1973, “Inscriptions 1969-73”, in McWhirr, A., “Cirencester, 1969-1972: Ninth Interim Report”, Antiquaries Journal 53, pp. 211-14.

Henig, M., 1984, Religion in Roman Britain, B.T. Batsford, London.

Hassall, M., 1980, “Altars, Curses and other Epigraphic Evidence”, in Rodwell, W. (ed.), Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 79-98.

Henig, M., 1994, “Religion in Roman Britain”, in Gilley, S. and Sheils, W.J. (eds.), A History of Religion in Britain, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 1323.

Hassall, M. and Rhodes, J., 1974, “Excavations at the New Market Hall, Gloucester”, TBGAS 93, pp. 15-100.

Henig, M., 1995, The Art of Roman Britain, Batsford, London.

Hassall, M. and Tomlin, R.S.O., 1979, “Roman Britain in 1978: Inscriptions”, Britannia 10, pp. 267-357.

Henig, M. and King, A. (eds.), 1986, Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire, BAR, Oxford.

Hassall, M. and Tomlin, R.S.O., 1987, “Roman Britain in 1992: Inscriptions”, Britannia 18, pp. 360-3.

Henig, M., Cleary, R. and Purser, P., 2000, “A Roman Relief of Mercury and Minerva from Aldsworth, Gloucestershire”, Britannia 31, pp. 362-3.

Hassall, M. and Tomlin, R.S.O., 1993, “Roman Britain in 1992: Inscriptions”, Britannia 24, pp. 310-22. Hassall, M. and Tomlin, R.S.O., 1994, “Roman Britain in 1993: Inscriptions”, Britannia 25, pp. 293-5. Hassall, M. and Tomlin, R.S.O., 1997, “Roman Britain in 1996: Inscriptions”, Britannia 28, pp. 455-7.

Henig, M. and Soffe, G., 1993, “The Thruxton Roman Villa and its Mosaic Pavement”, Journal of the British Archaeological Association 146, pp. 128.

Hassall, M., Wilson, D.R., Wright, R.P. and Rea, J., 1972, “Roman Britain in 1971: Inscriptions”, Britannia 3, pp. 363-7.

Hillier, B. and Hanson, J., 1984, The Social Logic of Space, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Hasse, W. (ed.), 1978, Aufstieg und Niedergang der Roemischen Welt, II.16.1,Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.

Hingley, R., 1982, “Roman Britain: the structure of Roman Imperialism and the consequences of Imperialism on the development of a peripheral province”, in Miles, D. (ed.), The

213

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Romano-British Countryside, Pt 1, BAR, Oxford, pp. 17-53.

Hopkins, K., 1980, “Taxes and Trade in the Roman Empire”, JRS 70, pp. 101-25.

Hingley, R., 1982a, “Recent Discoveries of the Roman Period at the Noah’s Ark Inn, Frilford, South Oxfordshire”, Britannia 13, pp. 305-9.

Horne, P., 1981, “Romano-Celtic Temples in the Third Century”, in King, A. and Henig, M. (eds.), The Roman West in the Third Century, BAR, Oxford, pp. 21-6.

Hingley, R., 1989, Rural Settlement in Roman Britain, Seaby, London.

Horne, P., 1986, “Roman or Celtic Temples? A case study”, in Henig, M. and King, A. (ed.), Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire, BAR, Oxford, pp. 15-24.

Hingley, R., 1991, “The Romano-British Countryside: the significance of Rural Settlement forms”, in Jones, R.F.J., Britain in the Roman Period: Recent Trends, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 75-9.

Howatson, M.C., 1997, The Oxford Companion to Classical Literature, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Hingley, R., 1996, “The ‘legacy’ of Rome: the rise, decline, and fall of the theory of Romanization”, in Webster, J. and Cooper, N.J. (eds.), Roman Imperialism: Post-Colonial Perspectives, Leicester Archaeology Monographs, Leicester, pp. 35-48.

Howgego, C., 1995, Ancient History from Coins, Routledge, London. Hunter, A.G., 1960, “A Romano-British Bath Block”, TBGAS 79, pp. 159-73.

Hingley, R., 1997, “Resistance and domination: social change in Roman Britain”, in Mattingly, D. (ed.), Dialogues in Roman Imperialism: Power, discourse, and discrepant experience in the Roman Empire, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series, Portsmouth, pp. 81-100.

Hunter, A.G., 1967, “1-5 King’s Square, Gloucester, 1960”, TBGAS 86, pp. 88-94. Hurst, H.R., 1975, “Excavations at Gloucester - Third Interim Report: Kingsholm 1966-75”, Antiquaries Journal 55, pp. 267-94.

Hingley, R., 1999, “Review of Roman Villas: a Study in Social Structure”, Britannia 30, pp. 419-20.

Hurst, H.R., 1976, “Gloucester: a Colonia in the West Country”, in Branigan, K. and Fowler, P.J. (eds.), The Roman West Country, David and Charles, Newton Abbot, pp. 63-80.

Hingley, R., 2005, Globalizing Roman Culture: unity, diversity and empire, Routledge, London.

Hurst, H.R., 1985, Kingsholm: Excavations at Kingsholm Close and other sites with a discussion of the archaeology of the area, Gloucester Archaeological Reports, Cambridge.

Hobbs, R., 1996, Iron Age Coins in the Britisah Museum, British Museum Press, London. Hodder, I., 1979, “Pre-Roman and Romano-British Tribal Economies”, in Burnham, B.C. and Johnson, H.B. (eds.), Invasion and Response: the Case of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 187-96.

Hurst, H.R., 1988, “Gloucester”, in G. Webster (ed.), Fortress into City: the consolidation of Roman Britain, first century AD, B.T. Batsford, London, pp. 48-73.

Hodder, I. and Millett, M., 1980, “Romano-British villas and towns: a systematic analysis”, World Archaeology 12, pp. 69-76.

Hurst, H.R. 1999, “Topography and Identity in Glevum Colonia”, in H.R. Hurst (ed.), 1999, The Coloniae of Roman Britain, JRA Supp. 36, Portsmouth, pp. 113-35.

Holbrook, N., 2003, “Great Witcombe Roman Villa, Gloucestershire: field surveys of its fabric and environs, 1999-2000”, TBGAS 121, pp. 179200. Holbrook,

Hurst, H.R. (ed.), 1999, The Coloniae of Roman Britain, JRA Supp. 36, Portsmouth.

N., 2004, “Turkdean Roman Villa, Gloucestershire: archaeological investigations 1997-1998”, Britannia 35, pp. 39-76.

Hurst, H.R., 2002, “The ‘villa’ near Frocester Court in its context”, JRA 15.2, pp. 630-8. Hurst, H.R., 2005, “Roman Cirencester and Gloucester Compared”, OJA 24.3, pp. 293-305.

Holder, P.A., 1980, Studies in the Auxilia of the Roman Army from Augustus to Trajan, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

214

BIBLIOGRAPHY Hutchinson, V., 1986a, Bacchus in Roman Britain: the evidence for his Cult, BAR, Oxford.

Jones, M., 1982, “Crop Production in Roman Britain”, in Miles, D. (ed.), The Romano-British Countryside, Pt 2, BAR, Oxford, pp. 97-108.

Hutchinson, V.J., 1986b, “The Cult of Bacchus in Roman Britain”, in M. Henig and A. King (eds.), Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Oxford, pp. 135-45.

Jones, M.J., 1996, “Review of the Towns of Roman Britain”, Britannia 27, pp. 487-9. Jones, R.F.J., 1991, Britain in the Roman Period: Recent Trends, J.R. Collis, Sheffield.

Hutton, R., 1991, The Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles, Blackwell, Oxford.

Jones, R.F.J., 1991a, “The Urbanisation of Roman Britain”, in Jones, R.F.J., Britain in the Roman Period: Recent Trends, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 53-65.

Jackson, K., 1953, Language and History in Early Britain, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. James, S., 1998, “Celts, politics and motivation in archaeology”, Antiquity 72, pp. 200-9.

Jones, R.F.J., 1991b, “Cultural Change in Roman Britain: Recent Trends”, in Jones, R.F.J., Britain in the Roman Period: Recent Trends, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 115-20.

James, S., 1999, The Atlantic Celts: Ancient People or Modern Invention, British Museum Press, London.

Jones,

Jashemski, W.F., 1979, The Gardens of Pompeii, Herculaneum and the Villas destroyed by Vesuvius, Vol. 1 and 2, Aristide D. Caratzas, New Rochelle.

S., 1997, The archaeology of ethnicity: constructing identities in the past and present, London.

Jones, B.W. and Milns, R.D., 1984, The Use of Documentary Evidence in the Study of Roman Imperial History, Sydney University Press, Sydney.

Jennings, V., 1979, “Kingscote”, CA 69, pp. 294-9. Keevill, G.D. and Booth, P., 1997, “Settlement, Sequence and Structure: Romano-British Stone built Roundhouses at Redlands Farm, Stanwick (Northants) and Alchester (Oxon)”, in Friendship-Taylor, R.M. and D.E. (eds.), From Round House to Villa, Upper Nene Archaeological Society, Northampton, pp. 1945.

John, D.A.S., 1969, 55 and 54 BC - Caesar’s Expeditions to Britain, Bristol Classical Press, Bristol. Johns, C., 1996, “The Classification and Interpretation of Romano-British Treasures”, Britannia 27, pp. 1-16. Johnson, P., 1993, “Town Mosaics and Urban Officinae”, in Greep, S. (ed.), Roman Towns: the Wheeler Inheritance, CBA Research Report, York, pp. 47-65.

Kehoe, D.P., 1988, “Allocation of Risk and Investment on the Estates of Pliny the Younger”, Chiron 18, pp. 15-42. Kehoe,

Johnson, P. (ed.), 1996, Architecture in Roman Britain, CBA Research Report, York. Johnston, D., 1976, “Villas and other substantial buildings”, CA 21, pp. 280-6.

D.P., 1994, “Approaches to profit and Management in Roman Agriculture: the evidence of the Digest”, in Carlsen, J. (ed.), Landuse in the Roman Empire, L’Erma di Bretschneider: Rome, pp. 46-58.

Kehoe, D.P., 1996, “The sources for Roman farm tenancy”, JRA 9, pp. 389-94.

Jones, A.H.M., 1970, A History of Rome Through the Fifth Century, Vol. II: The Empire, Macmillan, London.

Kelly, Jones, A.H.M., 1974, “The Cities of the Roman Empire”, in Brunt, P.A. (ed.), The Roman Economy, Blackwell, Oxford.

D.B., 1992, “The Mount Roman Villa, Maidstone”, Archaeologia Cantiana 110, pp. 177-235.

King, A., 1990a, Roman Gaul and Germany, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Jones, B. and Mattingly, D., 1991, An Atlas of Roman Britain, Blackwell, Oxford.

King, A., 1990b, “The Emergence of Romano-Celtic Religion”, in Blagg, T.F.C. and Millett,

215

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY M.(eds.), The Early Roman Empire in the West, Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 220-41.

Wacher, J. (ed.), The Roman World, Vol. I, Routledge, London, pp. 455-69.

King, A., 1994, “Review of the Uley Shrines: Excavation of a Ritual Complex on West Hill, Uley: Gloucestershire, 1977-9”, Britannia 25, pp. 347-9.

Lindgren, C., 1980, Classical Art Forms and Celtic Mutations: Figural Art in Roman Britain, Noyes Press, New Jersey. Lintott, A., 1993, Imperium Romanum: Politics and Administration, Routledge, London.

King, A., 2005, “Animal Remains from Temples in Roman Britain”, Britannia 36, pp. 329-69.

Longfellow, B., 2000, “A Gendered Space? Location and Function of Rooms in the Villa of the Mysteries”, in Gazda, E.K. (ed.), The Villa of the Mysteries in Pompeii – ancient ritual, modern muse, Kelsey Museum of Archaeology, Ann Arbor, pp. 25-37.

King, A. and Henig, M. (eds.), 1981, The Roman West in the Third Century, BAR, Oxford. King, A., and Soffe, G., 1991, “Hayling Island”, in Jones, R.F.J., Britain in the Roman Period: Recent Trends, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 111-113.

Lysons, S., 1917, “An Account of the Remains of several Roman Buildings and other Roman Antiquities discovered in the County of Gloucester: Discoveries at Withington”, Archaeologia 18, pp. 118-21.

King, A. and Soffe, G., 1994, “The Iron Age and Roman Temple on Hayling Island, Hampshire”, in Fitzpatrick, A.P. and Morris, E.L. (eds.), The Iron Age in Wessex: Recent Work, Trust for Wessex Archaeology, Dorchester, pp. 114-16. Kolendo, J., 1994, “Praedia suburbana e loro redditività”, in Carlsen, J. (ed.), Landuse in the Roman Empire, L’Erma di Bretschneider: Rome, pp. 60-71.

Lysons, S., 1918, “Account of the Remains of a Roman Villa discovered in the Parish of Great Witcombe in the County of Gloucester: Discoveries at Withington”, Archaeologia 19, pp. 178-84.

Laing, L., 1979, Celtic Britain, Book Club Associates, London.

MacCulloch, 1991, The Religion of the Ancient Celts, Constable, London.

Last, H., 1970, “Local Government”, CAH XI, pp. 44756.

Mack, R.P., 1975, The Coinage of Ancient Britain, Spink, London.

Lawrence, W.L., 1963-4, “Wycomb”, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries 2, pp. 422-6.

MacKendrick, P., 1972, Roman France, St. Martin’s Press, New York.

Leach, P., 1998, Great Witcombe Roman Villa, Gloucestershire, BAR, Oxford.

Mackreth, D.F., 1987, “Roman public buildings”, in Schofield, J. and Leech, R. (eds.), Urban Archaeology in Britain, CBA Research Report, London, pp. 133-46.

Leech, R., 1982, “The Roman interlude in the SouthWest: the dynamics of economic and social change in Romano-British South Somerset and North Dorset”, in Miles, D. (ed.), The Romano-British Countryside, Pt 1, BAR, Oxford, pp. 209-67.

Maiuri, A., 1958, Ercolano, i nuovi scavi (1927-1958), Vol. 1, Istituto Poligrafico dello Stato, Rome Maiuri, A., 1977, Herculaneum, 7th ed., Istituto Poligrafico dello Stato, Roma.

Levick, B., 1990, Claudius, Yale University Press, New Haven.

Maiuri, A. and Pane, R., 1947, La Casa di Loreio Tiburtino e la Villa di Diomede in Pompei, I Monumenti Italiani Series 2, Fasc. I, La Libreria dello Stato, Rome.

Lewis, M.J.T., 1966, Temples in Roman Britain, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Manley, J. and Rudkin, D., 2005, “A Pre-A.D. 43 Ditch at Fishbourne Roman Palace, Chichester”, Britannia 36, pp. 55-99.

Lewit, T., 1991, Agricultural Production in the Roman Economy A.D. 200-400, BAR, Oxford. Liebeschuetz, J.H.W.G. 1987, “Government and Administration in the Late Empire”, in

Mann, J.C., 1961, “The Administration of Roman Britain”, Antiquity 35, pp. 316-20.

216

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Mann, J.C., 1971, “Spoken Latin in Britain as Evidenced in the Inscriptions”, Britannia 2, pp. 218-24.

McWhirr, A., 1974, “Cirencester”, CA 42, pp. 216-9. McWhirr, A. (ed.), 1976, Studies in the Archaeology and History of Cirencester, BAR, Oxford.

Mann, J.C., 1985, “Epigraphic Consciousness”, JRS 75, pp. 204-6. W.H., 1983, “ Review of Roman Gloucestershire”, Britannia 14, pp. 368-9.

McWhirr,

A., 1978, “Cirencester, 1973-6: Tenth Excavation report”, Antiquaries Journal 58, pp. 61-80.

Margary, I.D., 1955-7, Roman Roads in Britain, Vol. 1 and 2, Phoenix House, London.

McWhirr, A. (ed.), 1979, Roman Brick and Tile, BAR, Oxford.

Masser, P. and McGill, B., 2004, “Excavations of Romano-British Sites at Tockington Park and Westerleigh, South Gloucestershire, in 1997”, TBGAS 122, pp. 95-116.

McWhirr, A., 1979, “Tile-Kilns in Roman Britain”, in McWhirr, A. (ed.), Roman Brick and Tile, BAR, Oxford, pp. 97-190.

Manning,

McWhirr, A., 1981, Roman Gloucestershire, Alan Sutton, London.

Mattingly, D. (ed.), 1997, Dialogues in Roman Imperialism: Power, discourse, and discrepant experience in the Roman Empire, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series, Portsmouth.

McWhirr, A., 1986, Houses in Roman Cirencester, Cirencester Excavation Committee, Cirencester. McWhirr, A., 1988, “Cirencester”, in Webster, G. (ed.), Fortress into City: the Consolidation of Roman Britain, First Century AD, B.T. Batsford, London, pp. 74-90.

Mattingly, D., 2002, “Vulgar and weak Romanization or time for a paradigm shift?”, JRA 15.2, pp. 53640. Mattingly, D., 2004, “Being Roman: expressing identity in a provincial setting”, JRA 17, pp. 5-25.

McWhirr, A. and Viner, D., 1980, “The Production and Distribution of Tiles in Roman Britain with particular reference to the Cirencester region”, Britannia 9, pp. 359-77.

Mattingly, D., 2006, An Imperial Possession – Britain in the Roman Empire, 54 BC-AD 409, Allen Lane, London.

Meates, G.W., 1955, The Lullingstone Roman Villa, Heinemann, London.

Maxfield, V.A., 1980, “The Roman Military Occupation of south-west England: further light and fresh problems”, in Hanson, W.S. and Keppie, L.J.F. (eds.), Roman Frontier Studies 1979: Papers presented to the Twelfth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, Part I, BAR, Oxford, pp. 297-310.

Meates, G.W., 1987, The Roman Villa at Lullingstone, Kent, Vol. II, Kent Archaeological Society, Maidstone. Megaw, J.V.S., 1976, To Illustrate the Monuments essays on archaeology presented to Stuart Piggott, Thames and Hudson, London.

Maxwell, G.S. (ed.), 1983, The Impact of Aerial Reconnaissance on Archaeology, CBA Research Report, London.

Megaw, R. and Megaw, V., 1989, Celtic Art: from its beginnings to the Book of Kells, Thames and Hudson, London.

Mays, M., 1992, “Inscriptions on British Celtic Coins”, Numismatic Chronicle 152, pp. 57-82.

Megaw, V. and Megaw, R., 1998, “The mechanism of (Celtic) dreams?: a partial response to our critics”, Antiquity 72, pp. 432-5.

McCarthy, M., 2006, “Romano-British People and the Language of Sociology”, OJA 25.2, pp. 20112.

Meiggs, R., 1973, Roman Ostia, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

McKay, A.G., 1975, Houses, Villas and Palaces in the Roman World, Thames and Hudson, London.

Melville-Jones, J., 1990, A Dictionary of Ancient Roman Coins, Seaby, London.

McWhirr, A., 1973, “Cirencester, 1969-1972: Ninth Interim Report”, Antiquaries Journal 53, pp. 191-218.

217

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Merrifield, R., 1986, “The London Hunter-God”, in Henig, M. and King, A. (ed.), Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire, BAR, Oxford, pp. 85-92.

Millett, M., 1982, “Town and Country: a review of some material evidence”, in Miles, D. (ed.), The Romano-British Countryside, Pt 2, BAR, Oxford, pp. 421-31.

Merrifield, R., 1987, The Archaeology of Ritual and Magic, London.

Millett, M., 1990, The Romanization of Britain: an Essay in Archaeological Interpretation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Mielsch, H., 1987, Die Römische Villa: architektur und lebensform, Verlag C.H. Beck, Munich.

Millett, M. 1990a, “Historical Issues and archaeological interpretations”, in Blagg, T.F.C. and Millett, M. (eds.), The Early Roman Empire in the West, Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 35-41.

Miles, D. (ed.), 1982, The Romano-British Countryside, Pt 1 and 2, BAR, Oxford. Miles, D., 1982, “Confusion in the Countryside: some comments from the Upper Thames region”, in Miles, D. (ed.), The Romano-British Countryside, Pt 1, BAR, Oxford, pp. 53-79.

Millett, M., 1991, “Roman towns and their territories: an archaeological perspective”, in Rich, J. and Wallace-Hadrill, A. (eds.), City and Country in the Ancient World, Routledge, London, pp. 169-89.

Miles, D., 1983, “An integrated approach to the study of ancient landscapes: the Claydon Pike project”, in Maxwell, G.S. (ed.), The Impact of Aerial Reconnaissance on Archaeology, CBA Research Report, London, pp. 74-84.

Millett, M., 1995, Roman Britain, B.T. Batsford, London. Milne, J.G., 1948, Finds of Greek Coins in the British Isles, Oxford University Press, London.

Miles, D., 1984, “Romano-British Settlement in the Gloucestershire Thames Valley”, in Saville, A. (ed.), Archaeology in Gloucestershire, Cheltenham Museums, Cheltenham, pp. 191211.

Moormann, E.M., 2002, “Pompeii’s proprietors and tenants under one roof”, JRA 15, pp. 429-36. Morley, N., 1996, Metrolpolis and hinterland: the city of Rome and the Italian economy, 200 BC – AD 200, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Miles, D., 1989, “Villas and Variety: Aspects of Economy and Society in the Upper Thames Landscape”, in Branigan, K. and Miles, D. (eds.), The Economies of Romano-British Villas, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 60-72.

Motto, A.L., 1966, “Seneca on Trial: the case of the Opulent Stoic”, CJ 61.6, pp. 254-8. Munby, J. and Henig, M. (eds.), 1977, Roman Life and Art in Britain, Part II, BAR, Oxford.

Miles, D., 1989a, “The Romano-British Countryside”, in Todd, M. (ed.), Research on Roman Britain, 1960-89, Britannia Monograph Series, Gloucester, pp. 115-26.

Nash, D., 1987, Coinage in the Celtic World, Seaby, London. Neal,

Miles, D. and Palmer, S., 1982, Figures in a Landscape: Archaeological Investigations at Claydon Pike, Fariford/Lechlade, An Interim Report, 1979-82, Oxford Committee for Archaeology, Oxford.

D.S., 1977, “Witcombe Roman Villa: a reconstruction”, in Apted, M.R., GilyarrdBeer, R. and Saunders, A.D. (eds.), Ancient Monuments and their Interpretation, Phillimore, London, pp. 27-40.

Neal, D.S., 1982, “Romano-British Villas - one or two storied?”, in Drury, P.J. (ed.), Structural Reconstruction: approaches to the interpretation of the excavated remains of buildings, BAR, Oxford, pp. 153-71.

Miles, D. and Palmer, S., 1983, “Claydon Pike”, CA 86, pp. 88-92. Miles, D. and Palmer, S., 1990, “Claydon Pike and Thornhill Farm”, CA 121, pp. 19-23.

Neal, D.S., 1989, “The Stanwick Villa, Northants: an interim report of the Excavations of 1984-88”, Britannia 20, pp. 149-68.

Millett, M., 1977, “Art in Small Towns: ‘Celtic’ or ‘Classical’”, in Munby, J. and Henig, M. (eds.), Roman Life and Art in Britain, Part ii, BAR, Oxford, pp. 283-96.

Norman, A.F., 1971, “Religion in Roman York”, from Butler, R.M. (ed.), Soldier and Civilian in

218

BIBLIOGRAPHY Roman Yorkshire, Leicester University Press, Leicester, pp. 143-54.

Percival, J., 1987, “The Villa in Italy and the Provinces”, in Wacher, J. (ed.), The Roman World, Vol. II, Routledge, London, pp. 527-47.

North, J.A., 1976, “Conservatism and Change in Roman Religion”, Papers of the British School at Rome 44, pp. 1-12.

Perring,

O’Neil, H.E., 1939, “Reports on Roman Remains, Gloucestershire”, TBGAS 61, pp. 107-31.

D., 1987, “Domestic buildings in Romano_british towns”, in Schofield, J. and Leech, R. (eds.), Urban Archaeology in Britain, CBA Research Report, London, pp. 147-55.

O’Neil, H.E., 1952, “Spoonley Wood Roman Villa, Gloucestershire, TBGAS 71, pp. 162-7.

Perring, D., 2002, The Roman House in Britain, Routledge, London.

O’Neil, H.E., 1952, “Whittington Court Roman Villa, Whittington, Gloucestershire”, TBGAS 71, pp. 13-87.

Phillips, R., 1985, “Harnhill Estate Romano-British Villa, Driffield 1982”, Glevensis 19, pp. 31-5. Pitts, M., 2005, “Pots and Pits: Drinking and Deposition in Late Iron Age South-East Britain”, OJA 24.2, pp. 143-61.

O’Neil, H.E., 1955, “Woodchester Roman Villa”, TBGAS 74, pp. 172-5. O’Neil, H.E., 1968, “The Roman Settlement on the Fosse Way at Bourton Bridge, Bourton-on-theWater, Gloucestershire”, TBGAS 87, pp. 2955.

Potter, T., 1980, “Studies in the Romano-British Villa”, Britannia 11, pp. 449-50. Potter, T., 1987, Roman Italy, University of California Press, Berkeley.

O’Neil, H.E. and Toynbee, J.M.C., 1958, “Sculptures from a Romano-British Well in Gloucestershire”, JRS 48, pp. 49-55.

Potter, T., 1997, Roman Britain, British Museum, London. Potter, T. and Johns, C., 1990, Roman Britain, British Museum Press, London.

Oaks, L.S., 1986, “The Goddess Epona: concepts of sovereignty in a changing landscape”, in Henig, M. and King, A. (ed.), Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire, BAR, Oxford, pp. 77-83.

Price, E.G., 1983, “Frocester”, CA 8, pp. 139-45. Price, E.G., 1984, “Frocester Court Roman Villa: Third Report 1980: the well”, TBGAS 101, pp. 4976.

Orr, D.G., 1978, “Roman Domestic Religion: the Evidence of the Household Shrines”, in Hasse, W. (ed.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der Roemischen Welt, II.16.1,Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 1557-91.

Price, E.G., 1994, “Frocester Court Excavations 1993”, Glevensis 27, pp. 40-1. Price, E.G., 1995, “Frocester Court Excavations 1994”, Glevensis 28, p. 10.

Ottaway, P., 1989, “The Empire Strikes Back – new discoveries in the Roman town at York”, Rescue News 49, p. 3.

Price, M., 1974, Coins of the Macedonians, British Museum, London.

Ottaway, P., 1993, Roman York, Batsford, London.

Pullinger, J., 1990, “Excavation Report - The Roman villa at Boughspring with a new assessment”, Dean Archaeology 3, pp. 12-25.

Parkins, H.M., 1997, “The ‘consumer city’ domesticated? The Roman city in élite economic strategies”, in Parkins, H.M. (ed.), Roman Urbanism: beyond the consumer city, Routledge, London, pp. 83-111.

Purcell, N., 1995, “The Roman villa and the landscape of production”, in Cornell, T.J. and Lomas, K. (eds.), Urban Society in Roman Italy, University College London Press, London, pp. 151-79.

Percival, J., 1976, The Roman Villa, Book Club Associates, London. Percival, J., 1982, “Recent Work on Roman Villas in Britain”, Caesarodunum 17, pp. 305-20.

Rahtz, P., 1951, “The Roman Temple at Pagans Hill, Chew Stoke, N. Somerset”, Proceedings of the

219

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Somerset Archaeological and Natural History Society 96, pp. 112-42.

Studies in the Archaeology and History of Cirencester, BAR, Oxford, pp. 61-79.

Rahtz, P. and Watts, L., 1979, “The End of Temples in the West of Britain”, in Casey, P.J. (ed.), The End of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 183201.

Reece, R., 1977, “Mosaics and Carpets”, in Munby, J. and Henig, M. (eds.), Roman Life and Art in Britain, Part ii, BAR, Oxford, pp. 407-13. Reece, R., 1979, “Roman Monetary Impact”, in Burnham, B.C. and Johnson, H.B. (eds.), Invasion and Response: the Case of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 211-17.

Rankin, H.D., 1987, Celts and the Classical World, Croom Helm, London. Rankov, N.B., 1982, “Roman Britain in 1981: Sites Explored”, Britannia 13, pp. 328-95.

Reece, R., 1980a, “Town and Country: the end of Roman Britain”, World Archaeology 12, pp. 77-92.

Rawes, B., 1971, “An Outbuilding at Wadfield Roman Villa”, TBGAS 90, pp. 124-8.

Reece, R., 1980b, “Religion, Coins and Temples”, in Rodwell, W. (ed.), Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 115-28.

Rawes, B., 1973a, “Upton St. Leonards”, Glevensis 7, p. 12.

Reece, R., 1982, “The Roman Coins”, in Wacher, A. and McWhirr, A. (eds.), Early Roman Occupation at Cirencester, Cirencester Excavation Committee, Cirencester, pp. 86-7.

Rawes, B., 1973b, “Wycomb, Andoversford”, Glevensis 7, p. 12-13. Rawes, B., 1976, “The Wycomb, Andoversford”, Glevensis 10, pp. 1-7.

Reece, R., 1984, “The Cotswolds: an essay on some aspects and problems of Roman Rural Settlement”, in Saville, A. (ed.), Archaeology in Gloucestershire, Cheltenham Museums, Cheltenham, pp. 181-9.

Rawes, B., 1977, “A Roman Site at Well’s Bridge, Barnwood”, TBGAS 95, pp. 24-39. Rawes, B., 1978, “The Portway Roman Site at Upton St Leonards”, Glevensis 12, pp. 11-13.

Reece, R., 1985, “Roman towns and their plans”, in Grew, F.O. and Hobley, B. (eds.), Roman urban topography in Britain and the western Empire, CBA Research Report, London, pp. 37-40.

Rawes, B., 1980, “The Romano-British Site at Wycomb, Andoversford”, TBGAS 98, pp. 11-55. Rawes,

B., 1981, “The Romano-British Site at Brockworth, Glos.”, Britannia 12, pp. 45-77.

Reece, R., 1987, Coinage in Roman Britain, Seaby, London.

Rawes, B., 1984, “The Romano-British Site on the Portway, near Gloucester”, TBGAS 102, pp. 23-72.

Reece, R., 1988, My Roman Britain, Cotswold Studies, Cirencester.

Rawson, B., 1971, “The Family in Roman Society”, Teaching History 5.2, pp. 34-47.

Reece, R., 1989, “Coins and Villas”, in Branigan, K. and Miles., D. (eds.), The Economies of RomanoBritish Villas, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 34-41.

Reece, R., 1959, “Coins from the Roman Villa at Chedworth”, TBGAS 78, pp. 162-5.

Reece, R., 1999, The Later Roman Empire, Tempus, Stroud.

Reece, R., 1970, Roman Coins, Ernest Benn, London.

Renfrew, C. and Shennan S. (eds.), 1982, Ranking, Resource and Exchange: Aspects of the archaeology of Early European Society, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Reece, R., 1972a, “The Use of Roman Coinage”, OJA 3, pp. 197-210. Reece, R., 1972b, “A short survey of the Roman Coins found on fourteen sites in Britain”, Britannia 3, pp. 269-76.

Renfrew, C. and Bahn, P., 1996, Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice, 2nd ed., Thames and Hudson, London.

Reece, R., 1976, “From Corinion to Cirencester - Models and Misconceptions” in McWhirr, A. (ed.),

220

BIBLIOGRAPHY Rennie, D.M., 1971, “Excavations in the Parsonage Field, Cirencester, 1959”, TBGAS 90, pp. 6473.

Rodwell, W. (ed.), 1980, Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford.

Reynolds,

Rodwell, W. and K., 1973, “The Roman Villa at Rivenhall, Essex: an Interim report”, Britannia 4, pp. 115-27.

J.M., 1975, “Legal and Constitutional Problems”, in Wacher, J. (ed.), The Civitas Capitals of Roman Britain, Leicester University Press, Leicester, pp. 70-5.

Rodwell, W. and Rodwell, K., 1985, Rivenhall: investigations of a villa, church and village, 1950-1977, Council for British Archaeology, Dorchester.

Rich, J. and Wallace-Hadrill, A. (eds.), 1991, City and Country in the Ancient World, Routledge, London. Richardson, K.M., 1962, “Excavations in Parsonage Field, Watermoor Road, Cirencester, 1959”, Antiquaries Journal 42, pp. 160-82.

Rodwell, W. and Rowley, T. (eds.), 1975, Small Towns of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford. Rook, T., 1997, “The View from Hertfordshire”, in Friendship-Taylor, R.M. and D.E. (eds.), From Round House to Villa, Upper Nene Archaeological Society, Northampton, pp. 537.

Richardson, L., 1988, Pompeii: an Architectural History, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Richmond, I.A., 1946, “The Four Coloniae of Roman Britain”, Archaeological Journal 103, pp. 5784.

Rosafio, P., 1994, “Slaves and Coloni in the Villa System”, in Carlsen, J. (ed.), Landuse in the Roman Empire, L’erma di Bretschneider, Rome, pp. 145-58.

Richmond, I.A., 1959, “The Roman Villa at Chedworth, 1958-59”, TBGAS 78, pp. 5-23.

Rivet, A.L.F., 1964, Town and Country in Roman Britain, Hutchinson, London.

Ross, A., 1968, “Shafts, pits, wells – sanctuaries of the Belgic Britons”, Coles, J.M. and Simpson, D.D.A (eds.), Studies in Ancient Europe: essays presented to Stuart Piggott, Leicester University Press, Leicester, pp. 255-85.

Rivet, A.L.F. (ed.), 1969, The Roman Villa in Britain, Routledge, London.

Ross, A., 1992, Pagan Celtic Britain, 3rd ed., Routledge, London.

Rivet, A.L.F., 1969, “Social and Economic Aspects”, in Rivet, A.L.F. (ed.), The Roman Villa in Britain, Routledge, London, pp. 173-216.

Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, 1976, Ancient and Historical Monuments in the County of Gloucester, Vol. 1, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London.

Richmond, I.A., 1960, “Roman Britain, 1910-1960”, JRS 50, pp. 173-91.

Rivet, A.L.F., 1988, Gallia Narbonensis, B.T. Batsford, London.

Rudling, D., 1997, “Round ‘house’ to Villa: the Beddingham and Watergate Villas”, in Friendship-Taylor, R.M. and D.E. (eds.), From Round House to Villa, Upper Nene Archaeological Society, Northampton, pp. 1-8.

Rodwell, W., 1976, “Coinage, Oppida and the Rise of Belgic Power in South-Eastern Britain”, in Cunliffe, B. and Rowley, T. (eds.), Oppida: the Beginnings of Urbanisation in Barbarian Europe, BAR, Oxford, pp. 181-366.

Ruggiu, A.Z., 1995, Spazio Privato e Spazio Publicco nella Città Romana, École Française de Rome Palais Farnèse, Rome.

Rodwell, W., 1978, “Review of Iron Age and RomanoBritish Monuments in the Gloucestershire Cotswolds”, Britannia 9, pp. 500-1.

Rutter, E., 1957, “Chedworth Roman Villa: An Exploratory Trench”, TBGAS 76, pp. 160-4.

Rodwell, W., 1980, “Temple Archaeology: Problems of the Present and Portents for the Future”, in Rodwell, W. (ed.), Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 211-41.

St. Clair Baddeley, W., 1904, “The Painswick or Ifold Villa”, TBGAS 27, pp. 156-71. St. Clair Baddeley, W., 1923, “A Romano-British Altar at Siddington”, TBGAS 45, pp. 291-2.

221

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY St. Clair Baddeley, W., 1923, “Custom-Scrubs or Roman Tump”, TBGAS 45, pp. 87-90.

Cunliffe, B. and Miles, D. (eds.), Aspects of the Iron Age in Central Southern Britain, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Oxford, pp. 191-204.

St. Clair Baddeley, W., 1926, “The Roman Pavement at Woodchester”, TBGAS 48, pp. 74-97.

Sewell, E.C. and Powell, A.H., 1910, “The Roman Pavement at the Barton, Cirencester”, TBGAS 33, pp. 67-77.

St. Clair Baddeley, W., 1930, “The Romano-British temple, Chedworth”, TBGAS 52, pp. 255-64. St. Joseph, J.K., 1961, “Air Reconnaissance in Britain, 1958-1960”, JRS 51, pp. 119-35.

Shotter, D., 1998, Roman Britain, Routlegde, London. Simpson, C.J., 1993, “Once Again Claudius and the Temple at Colchester”, Britannia 24, pp. 1-6.

St. Joseph, J.K., 1969, “Air Reconnaissance in Britain, 1965-1968”, JRS 59, pp. 104-43

Slofstra, J., 1983, “An Anthropological approach to the study of Romanization Processes”, in Brandt, R. and Slofstra, J. (eds.), Roman and Native in the Low Countries: Spheres of Interaction, BAR, Oxford, pp. 71-104.

Sainte Croix, G.E.M., 1972, “The religion of the Roman world”, Didaskalos 4, pp. 61-74. Saller, R.P., 1994, Patriarchy, property and death in the Roman Family, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Smith, A., 2001, The Differential Use of Constructed Sacred Space in Southern Britain, from the Late Iron Age to the 4th Century AD, BAR, Oxford.

Salway, P., 1981, Roman Britain, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Smith, D.J., 1969, “The Mosaic Pavements”, in A.L.F. Rivet (ed.), The Roman Villa in Britain, Routledge, London, pp. 71-125.

Saville, A., 1984, “The Iron Age in Gloucestershire: a Review of the Evidence”, in Saville, A. (ed.), Archaeology in Gloucestershire, Cheltenham Museums, Cheltenham, pp. 140-78.

Smith, D.J., 1978, “Regional Aspects of the Winged Corridor Villa in Britain”, in Todd, M. (ed.), Studies in the Romano-British Villa, Leicester University Press, Leicester, pp. 117-48.

Saville, A. (ed.), 1984, Archaeology in Gloucestershire, Cheltenham Museums, Cheltenham. Schofield, J. and Leech, R. (eds.), 1987, Urban Archaeology in Britain, CBA Research Report, London.

Smith, J.T., 1963, “Romano-British Aisled Houses”, Archaeological Journal 120, pp. 1-30. Smith, J.T., 1978a, “Villas as a key to Social Structure”, in Todd, M. (ed.), Studies in the RomanoBritish Villa, Leicester University Press, Leicester, pp. 149-86.

Scott, E., 1993a, A Gazetteer of Roman Villas in Britain, Leicester Archaeology Monographs, Leicester. Scott, E. (ed.), 1993b, Theoretical Roman Archaeology: First Conference Proceedings, Ashgate Publishing, Avebury.

Smith, J.T., 1978b, “Halls or yards? A problem of villa interpretation”, Britannia 9, pp. 351-8.

Scott Garrett, C., 1938, “Chesters Roman Villa, Woolaston, Gloucestershire”, Archaeologia Cambrensis 93, pp. 93-125.

Smith, J.T., 1982, “Villa Plans and Social Structure in Britain and Gaul”, Caesarodunum 17, pp. 32136.

Sear, F., 1983, Roman Architecture, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.

Smith, J.T., 1983, “Flight of Capital or Flight of Fancy?”, OJA 2, pp. 239-46.

Selkirk, A., 1968, “Harlow Roman temple”, CA 11, pp. 287-90.

Smith, J.T., 1985, “Barnsley Park Villa; its Interpretation and Implications”, OJA 4, pp. 341-51.

Sellwood, L., 1983, “A Numismatic Note on the Dobunnic Branched Emblem”, OJA 2, pp. 113-14.

Smith, J.T., 1997, Roman Villas: a Study in Social Structure, Routledge, London.

Sellwood, L., 1984, “Tribal Boundaries Viewed from the Perspective of Numismatic Evidence”, in

222

BIBLIOGRAPHY Smith, S., 1994, “A Reassessment of the Dating Evidence for the Lydney Temple Site”, Dean Archaeology 7, pp. 28-33.

Taylor, M., 1961, “Roman Britain in 1960: Sites Explored”, JRS 51, pp. 157-91.

Sogliano, A., 1895, “Boscoreale – Scoperta di una villa rustica”, NSc Series 5, Vol. 3, pp. 207-214.

Thevenot, E., 1951, “Le Cheval sacré dans la Gaule de l’Est”, Revue archéologique de l’est et du centre-est, vol. 2.

Sogliano, A., 1896, “Boscoreale – Nuove ricerche nell’area della villa rustica in contrada Pisanella. Giornale redatto dalle Guardie degli scavi”, NSc Series 5, Vol. 4, pp. 204-36.

Thomas, C. (ed.), 1966, Rural Settlement in Roman Britain, CBA Research Report, London. Todd, M., 1970, “The Small Towns of Roman Britain”, Britannia 1, pp. 114-30.

Sogliano, A., 1899, “Boscoreale – Nuove esplorazioni nella villa romana della Pisanella”, NSc Series 5, Vol. 7, pp. 14-16. Sommer, C.S., 1984, The Military Vici in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford.

Todd, M., 1976, “The Vici of Western England”, in Branigan, K. and Fowler, P.J. (eds.), The Roman West Country, David and Charles, Newton Abbot, pp. 99-119.

Stefani, G., 1998, “Boscoreale: la Villa di Asellius le sue pitture”, RSP 9, pp. 41-62.

Todd, M. (ed.), 1978, Studies in the Romano-British Villa, Leicester University Press, Leicester.

Stevens, C.E., 1940, “The Frilford Site - a postscript”, Oxoniensia 5, pp. 166-7.

Todd, M., 1978, “Villas and Romano-British Society”, in Todd, M. (ed.), Studies in the Romano-British Villa, Leicester University Press, Leicester, pp. 197-208.

Stevens, C.E., 1966, “The Social and Economic Aspects of Rural Settlement”, in Thomas, C. (ed.), Rural Settlement in Roman Britain, CBA Research Report, London, pp. 108-28.

Todd, M., 1989, “The Early Cities”, in Todd, M. (ed.), Research on Roman Britain: 1960-89, Britannia Monograph Series, London, pp. 7590.

Sullivan, J.P., 1965, Petronius: The Satyricon, Penguin Books, London.

Tomlin, R.S.O., 1988, Tabelae Sulis, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Oxford.

Sutherland, C.H.V., 1937, Coinage and Currency in Roman Britain, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Torrens, H.S., 1982, “The geology of Cirencester and district”, in J.S. Wacher and McWhirr, A.D. (eds.), Early Roman Occupation at Cirencester, Cirencester Excavations 1, Cirencester, pp. 72-8.

Swain, E.J. and Ling, R.J., 1981, “The Kingscote WallPaintings”, Britannia 12, pp. 167-75. Swynnerton, C., 1922, “Stanley St. Leonards”, TBGAS 44, pp. 221-69.

Toynbee, J.M.C., 1953, “Christianity in Roman Britain”, Journal of the British Archaeological Association 16, pp. 1-24.

Syme, R., 1960, “Pliny’s Less Successful Friends”, Historia 9, pp. 362-79.

Toynbee, J.M.C., 1963, Art in Roman Britain, Phaidon Press, London.

Tam Tinh, T., 1988, La Casa dei Cervi a Herculaneum, Giorgio Bretschneider, Rome.

Toynbee, J.M.C., 1964, Art in Britain under the Romans, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Taylor, M., 1935, “Roman Britain in 1934”, JRS 25, pp. 201-77.

Trow, S.D., 1982, “The Bagendon Project 1981-1982: a brief interim report”, Glevensis 16, pp. 26-9.

Taylor, M., 1951, “Roman Britain in 1950”, JRS 41, pp. 120-45. Taylor, M., 1956, “Roman Britain in 1955”, JRS 46, pp. 119-46.

Trow, S.D., 1988, “Excavations at Ditches hillfort, North Cerney, Gloucestershire, 1982-3”, TBGAS 106, pp. 19-85.

Taylor, M., 1960, “Roman Britain in 1959: Sites Explored”, JRS 50, pp. 210-42.

Trow, S., 1990, “By the northern shores of Ocean: some observations on acculturation process at the

223

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY edge of the Roman World”, in Blagg, T.F.C. and Millett, M. (eds.), The Early Roman Empire in the West, Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 103118.

Vitz-Finzi, C. and Higgs, E.S., 1970, “Prehistoric Economy in the Mount Carmel Area of Palestine: Site Catchment Analysis”, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 36, pp. 1-37.

Trow, S. and James, S., 1989, “Ditches Villa, North Cerney: An example of locational conservatism in the early Roman Cotswolds”, in Branigan, K. and Miles, D. (eds.), The Economies of Romano-British Villas, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 83-87.

Vyner, B. (ed.), 1994, Building on the Past: Papers celebrating 150 years of the Royal Archaeological Institute, Royal Archaeological Institute, London. Wacher,

Tully, D., 2000, “The application of GIS to the study of settlement patterns: Silchester, a case study”, in Fincham, G., Harrison, G., Rodgers Holland, R. and Revell, L. (eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 104-17.

J., 1962, “Excavations at Cirencester”, Antiquaries Journal 42, pp. 1-14.

Wacher, J., 1963, “Excavations at Cirencester, 1962”, Antiquaries Journal 43, pp. 15-26. Wacher, J., 1964, “Cirencester 1963: Fourth Interim Report”, Antiquaries Journal 44, 9-18.

Van Arsdell, R.D., 1989, Celtic Coinage in Britain, Spink, London.

Wacher, J., 1971, “Roman Iron Beams”, Britannia 2, pp. 200-2.

Van Arsdell, R.D., 1994, The Coinage of the Dobunni, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Oxford.

Wacher, J., 1974, “Villae in Urbibus?”, Britannia 5, pp. 282-4.

Versnel,

Wacher, J. (ed.), 1975a, The Civitas Capitals of Roman Britain, Leicester University Press, Leicester.

H.S., 1991, “Some Reflections on the Relationship Magic-Religion”, Numen 38.2, pp. 191-2.

Wacher, J., 1975b, “Village Fortifications” in Rodwell, W. and Rowley, T. (eds.), Small Towns of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 51-2.

Versnel, H.S., 1994, “Peprêmenos: The Cnidian Curse Tablets and Ordeals of Fire”, in R. Hägg (ed.), Ancient Greek Cult Practices from the Epigraphic Evidence: Proceedings of the Second International Seminar on Ancient Greek Cult, Stockholm, Astroms, pp. 145-54.

Wacher, J., 1975c, “Wanborough”, in Rodwell, W. and Rowley, T. (eds.), Small Towns of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 233-4. Wacher, J., 1978, Roman Britain, J.M. Dent and Sons, London.

Versnel, H.S., 1998, “And any other part of the entire body there may be... : An Essay on Anatomical Curses,” in F. Graf (ed.), Ansichten griechischer Rituale: Geburtstags-Symposium für Walter Burkert, Stuttgart, B. G. Teubner, pp. 217-67.

Wacher, J., 1981, The Coming of Rome, Granada, London. Wacher, J., 1985, “The functions of urban buildings: some problems”, in Grew, F.O. and Hobley, B. (eds.), Roman urban topography in Britain and the western Empire, CBA Research Report, London, pp. 41-2.

Versnel, H.S., 1999, “Punish those who rejoice in our misery: On Curse Tablets and Schadenfreude,” in D.R. Jordan et al. (eds.), The World of Ancient Magic, Papers from the First International Samson Eitrem Seminar at the Norwegian Institute at Athens, 4-8 May, 1997, Bergen, Norwegian Institute at Athens, pp. 125-62.

Wacher, J. (ed.), 1987, The Roman World, Vol. I and II, Routledge, London. Wacher, J., 1995, The Towns of Roman Britain, Routledge, London.

Versnel, H.S., 2002, “Writing Mortals and Reading Gods: Appeal to the Gods as a Duel Strategy for Social Control,” in D. Cohen (ed.), Demokratie, Recht und soziale Kontrolle in klassischen Athen, Munich, pp. 37-76

Wacher, A. and McWhirr, A. (eds.), 1982, Early Roman Occupation at Cirencester, Cirencester Excavation Committee, Cirencester.

224

BIBLIOGRAPHY Wait, G.A., 1985, Ritual and Religion in Iron Age Britain, Vols. I and II, BAR, Oxford.

Webster, G., 1980, “Barnsley Park”, CA 72, pp. 11-14.

Walker, B.F., 1986, “Boughspring: a Moderately Sophistocated Romanised Farmhouse”, Glevensis 20, pp. 37-40.

Webster, G., 1984, “The Function of the Chedworth Roman Villa”, TBGAS 101, pp. 5-20. Webster, G., 1986a, The British Celts and their Gods under Rome, B.T. Batsford, London.

Wallace-Hadrill, A., 1988, “The Social Structure of the Roman House”, Papers of the British School at Rome 56, pp. 43-97.

Webster, G., 1986b, “What the Britons required from their gods as seen through the pairing of Roman and Celtic deities and the character of votive offerings”, in Henig, M. and King, A. (ed.), Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire, BAR, Oxford, pp. 57-64.

Wallace-Hadrill, A. (ed.), 1989, Patronage in Ancient Society, Routledge, London. Wallace-Hadrill, A., 1991, “Elite and Trade in the Roman Town”, in Rich, J. and Wallace-Hadrill, A. (eds.), City and Country in the Ancient World, Routledge, London, pp. 241-72.

Webster, G., 1988, Fortress into City: the Consolidation of Roman Britain, First Century AD, B.T. Batsford, London.

Wallace-Hadrill, A., 1994, Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Webster, G. and Smith, L., 1982, “The Excavation of a Romano-British Rural Establishment at Barnsley Park, Gloucestershire, 1961-1979, Part II 360-400+”, TBGAS 99, pp. 66-105.

Wallace-Hadrill, A., 1998, “The Villa as Cultural Symbol”, in Frazer, A. (ed.), The Roman Villa: villa urbana, University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Webster, G. and Smith, L., 1987, “Reply to J.T. Smith’s Suggested Re-Interpretation of Barnsley Park Villa”, OJA 6, pp. 69-89.

Walthew, C.V., 1975, “The Town House and the Villa House in Roman Britain”, Britannia 6, pp. 189-205.

Webster, J., 1996, “Sanctuaries and Sacred Places”, in Green, M.J. (ed.), The Celtic World, Routledge, London, pp. 445-64.

Walthew, C.V., 1982, “Early Roman Town Development in Gallia Belgica: a review of some problems”, OJA 1, pp. 225-36.

Webster, J., 1997a, “A negotiated syncretism: readings on the development of Romano-Celtic religion”, in Mattingly, D. (ed.), Dialogues in Roman Imperialism: Power, discourse, and discrepant experience in the Roman Empire, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series, Portsmouth, pp. 165-84.

Watts, L. and Leach, P., 1996, Henley Wood, Temples and Cemetery Excavations, 1962-69, Council for British Archaeology, York. Webster, G., 1959, “Cirencester: Dyer Court Excavation, 1957”, TBGAS 78, pp. 44-85.

Webster, J., 1997b, “Necessary comparisons: a postcolonial approach to religious syncretism in the Roman provinces”, World Archaeology 28, pp. 324-38.

Webster, G., 1967, “Excavations at the Romano-British Villa in Barnsley Park, Cirencester, 1961-66”, TBGAS 86, pp. 74-83.

Webster, J., 1999, “At the End of the World: Druidic and other Revitalisation Movements in PostConquest Gaul and Britain”, Britannia 30, pp. 1-20.

Webster, G., 1975a, “Fort and Town in Early Roman Britain”, in Wacher, J. (ed.), The Civitas Capitals of Roman Britain, Leicester University Press, Leicester, pp. 31-45.

Webster, J., 2001, “Creolising Roman Britain”, AJA 105, pp. 209-25.

Webster, G., 1975b, “Small Towns without Defences”, in Rodwell, W. and Rowley, T. (eds.), Small Towns of Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 53-66.

Webster, J. and Cooper, N.J. (eds.), 1996, Roman Imperialism: Post-Colonial Perspectives, Leicester Archaeology Monographs, Leicester.

Webster, G., 1979, “Tiles as a Structural Component in Buildings”, in McWhirr, A (ed.), Roman Brick and Tile, BAR, Oxford, pp. 285-294.

225

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Wedlake, W.J., 1982, The Excavation of the Shrine of Apollo at Nettleton, Wiltshire, 1956-1971, Society of Antiquaries of London, London.

Williams, J.H., 1971, “Roman Building Materials in South-East England”, Britannia 2, pp. 166-95. Williamson, T., 1989, “Settlement, Hierarchy and Economy in Northwest Essex”, in Branigan, K. and Miles, D. (eds.), The Economies of Romano-British Villas, J.R. Collis, Sheffield, pp. 73-82.

Welling, J.C., 1893, “The Last Town Election in Pompeii: an archaeological study of Roman Municipal Politics based on Pompeian Wall Inscriptions”, American Anthropologist 6.3, pp. 225-40.

Wilson, D.R., 1959, “Roman Britain in 1958: Sites Explored”, JRS 49, pp. 102-35.

Wells, P.S., 1998, “Who, Where, and What Were the Celts?”, AJA 102.4, pp. 814-16.

Wilson, D.R., 1962, “Roman Britain in 1961: Sites Explored”, JRS 52, pp. 160-90.

Westgate, R., 2000, “Pavimenta atque emblemata vermiculata: Regional Styles in Hellenistic Mosaic and the First Mosaics at Pompeii”, AJA 104, 255-275.

Wilson, D.R., 1964, “Roman Britain in 1963: Sites Explored”, JRS 54, pp. 152-77.

Wheeler, R.E.M., 1920, “The Vaults under Colchester Castle: a further note”, JRS 10, pp. 87-9.

Wilson, D.R., 1966, “Roman Britain in 1965: Sites Explored”, JRS 56, pp. 196-217.

Wheeler, R.E.M. and Wheeler, T.V., 1932, Report on the Excavation of the Prehistoric, Roman, and Post-Roman Site in Lydney Park, Gloucestershire, Society of Antiquaries, Oxford.

Wilson, D.R., 1967a, “Roman Britain in 1966: Sites Explored”, JRS 57, p. 174-202.

White, K.D., 1970, Roman Farming, Thames and Hudson, London.

Wilson, D.R., 1968, “Roman Britain in 1967: Sites Explored”, JRS 58, pp. 176-205.

Whittaker, C.R., 1990, “The consumer city revisited: the vicus and the city”, Journal of Roman Archaeology 3, pp. 110-18.

Wilson, D.R., 1973a, “Roman Britain in 1972: Sites Explored”, Britannia 4, pp. 271-323.

Wilson, D.R., 1967b, “Review of Temples in Roman Britain”, JRS 57, pp. 238-42.

Wilson, Whittaker, C.R., 1997, “Imperialism and culture: the Roman initiative”, in Mattingly, D. (ed.), Dialogues in Roman Imperialism: Power, discourse, and discrepant experience in the Roman Empire, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series, Portsmouth, pp. 143-63.

D.R., 1973b, “Temples in Britain: a topographical survey”, Caesarodunum 8, pp. 24-44.

Wilson, D.R., 1974, “Roman Britain in 1973: Sites Explored”, Britannia 5, pp. 396-460. Wilson, D.R., 1975a, “Roman Britain in 1974: Sites Explored”, Britannia 6, pp. 221-83.

Wightman, E.M., 1970, Roman Trier and the Treveri, Rupert Hart-Davies, London.

Wilson,

D.R., 1975b, “Romano-Celtic Temple Architecture”, Journal of the British Archaeological Association 38, pp. 3-27.

Wilson,

D.R., 1980, “Romano-Celtic Temple Architecture: How much do we actually know?”, in Rodwell, W. (ed.), Temples, Churches and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, BAR, Oxford, pp. 5-30.

Wightman, E.M., 1985, Gallia Belgica, B.T. Batsford, London. Wild, J.P., 1982, “Wool Production in Roman Britain”, in Miles, D. (ed.), The Romano-British Countryside, Pt 2, BAR, Oxford, pp. 109-22. Wilkes, J.J., 1996, “Introduction”, in Johnson, P. (ed.), Architecture in Roman Britain, CBA Research Report, York, pp. 1-5.

Wilson, D.R., 2004, “The North Leigh Roman Villa: its Plan Reviewed”, Britannia 35, pp. 77-107.

Williams, A.M., 1908, “The Stroud Roman Villa, Petersfield, Hants.”, Archaeological Journal 65, pp. 56-60.

Wilson, P.R., 1997, “Tradition and Change: Rural Buildings in Roman Yorkshire”, in FriendshipTaylor, R.M. and D.E. (eds.), From Round

226

BIBLIOGRAPHY House to Villa, Upper Nene Archaeological Society, Northampton, pp. 9-15.

Wright,

R.P., 1962, “Roman Britain Inscriptions”, JRS 52, pp. 190-9.

in

1961:

Wilson, R.J.A., 1980, Roman Remains in Britain, Constable, London.

Wright,

R.P., 1969, “Roman Britain Inscriptions”, JRS 59, pp. 235-46.

in

1968:

Winsor Leach, E., 2004, The Social Life of Painting in Ancient Rome and on the Bay of Naples, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Wright, R.P., 1985, “A Revised Restoration of the Inscription on the Mosaic Pavement found in the Temple at Lydney Park, Gloucestershire”, Britannia 16, pp. 248-9.

Witchel, C., 2004, “Re-evaluating the Roman West in the 3rd c. A.D.”, JRA 17, pp. 251-81.

Yeates, S.J., 2006, Religion, Community and Territory: Defining Religion in the Severn Valley and Adjacent Hills from the Iron Age to the Early Medieval Period, Vols. 1-3, BAR Publishing, Oxford.

Witteyer, M., 2004, “Verborgene Wünsche: Befunde antiken Schadenzaubers aus MogontiacumMainz”, in K. Brodersen and A. Kropp (eds.), Fluchtafeln. Neue Funde und Deutungen zum antiken Schadenzauber, Frankfurt, pp. 41-50. Witteyer, M., 2005, “Curse Tablets and Voodo Dolls from Mainz. The Archaeological Evidence for Magical Practices in the Sanctuary of Isis and Magna Mater” MHNH 5, pp. 105-124. Witts, P., 2000, “Mosaics and Room Function: the evidence from some Fourth-Century RomanoBritish Villas”, Britannia 31, pp. 291-324. Woodside, M. St. A., 1942, “Vespasian’s Patronage of Education and the Arts”, American Philological Association 73, pp. 123-9. Woodward, A., 1992, Shrines and Sacrifice, B.T. Batsford/English Heritage, London. Woodward, A. and Leach, P., 1993, The Uley Shrines: Excavation of a Ritual Complex on West Hill, Uley, Gloucestershire, English Heritage, London. Woolf, G., 1991, “Review of the Romanization of Britain: an Essay on Archaeological Interpretation”, Britannia 22, pp. 341-2. Woolf,

G., 1992, “The unity and diversity of Romanisation”, Journal of Roman Archaeology 5, pp. 349-52.

Woolf, G., 1993, “Rethinking the Oppida”, OJA 12, pp. 223-34. Woolf, G., 1995, “Beyond Romans and natives”, World Archaeology 28, pp. 339-50. Woolf, G., 1989, “Review”, JRS 79, pp. 236-9. Wright,

R.P., 1956, “Roman Britain Inscriptions”, JRS 46, pp. 146-52.

in

1955:

227

MAPS Map 1 Map of Roman Gloucestershire

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Aylburton/Park Farm Badgeworth Barnsley Park Bibury Bourton-on-the-Water Boughspring Brookethorpe Chedworth Cirencester/Barton Farm Colesbourne Compton Abdale Dean Hall Dorn Farmington Frocester Gloucester Great Witcombe

Site Numbers 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

Harescombe Hucclecote Kingscote King’s Stanley Lechlade Lydney Painswick Rodmarton Sapperton Spoonley Wood Uley Upton St. Leonards Whittington Court Withington Wood Woodchester Woolaston/Chesters Wycomb

Map 2 Map of the Associations between Various Romano-Celtic Temples and Villas

228

FIGURES

Map 3 Map of Dobunnic Coin Finds

229

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

FIGURES Figure 1 Plan of Gloucester

Figure 2 Plan of Building 1.18 from Gloucester

Figure 3 Plan of Building 1.5 from Gloucester

230

FIGURES

Figure 4 Plan of House 3S from Caerwent

231

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 5 Plan of the House of Aristide from Herculaneum

Figure 6 Plan of the House of the Mosaic Atrium from Herculaneum

232

FIGURES Figure 7 Plan of the House of the Stags from Herculaneum

Figure 8 Plan of the Southern Houses at Herculaneum

Figure 9 Plan of Cirencester

233

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Figure 10 Plan of Building 12.1 from Cirencester

Figure 11 Plan of Building 12.2 from Cirencester

234

FIGURES

Figure 12 Plan of Building 12.3 from Cirencester

Figure 13 Plan of Kingscote

235

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Figure 14 Plan of the Fourth Century House from Kingscote

236

FIGURES Figure 15 Plan of Dorn

Figure 16 Plan of the House from Dorn

237

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 17 Plan of Bourton-on-the-Water

Figure 18 Plan of the Villa at Barnsley Park (Villa 2)

238

FIGURES Figure 19 Plan of the House of the Trellis from Herculaneum

Figure 20 Plan of the House of the Faun from Pompeii

239

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 21 Plan of the House of the Prince of Naples from Pompeii

Figure 22 Plan of the Villa at Frocester Court (Villa 3)

Figure 23 Plan of the Villa at Spoonley Wood (Villa 4)

240

FIGURES

Figure 24 Plan of the Villa at Wadfield (Villa 5)

Figure 25 Plan of the Villa at Farmington (Villa 6)

241

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Figure 26 Plan of the Villa at Painswick (Villa 7)

242

FIGURES Figure 27 Plan of the Villa at Whittington Court (Villa 8)

Figure 28 Plan of the Villa at Withington Wood (Villa 9)

243

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 29 Plan of the Villa at Hucclecote (I) (Villa 10)

Figure 30 Plan of the Villa at Hucclecote (II) (Villa 11)

Figure 31 Plan of the Villa at North Cerney (Villa 12)

244

FIGURES

Figure 32 Plan of the Villa at Turkdean (Villa 13)

Figure 33 Plan of the Chesters Villa at Woolaston (Villa 14)

245

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

246

FIGURES Figure 34 Plan of the Great Witcombe Villa (Villa 15)

247

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 35 Plan of the Early Villa at Chedworth (Villa 17)

Figure 36 Plan of the Later Villa at Chedworth (Villa 17)

248

FIGURES Figure 37 Plan of the Villa at Woodchester (Villa 18)

249

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 38 Spatial Plan of the Villa at Barnsley Park

Figure 39 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa at Barnsley Park

250

FIGURES Figure 40 Plan of the Residence at Frocester Court in Isolation

Figure 41 Spatial Plan of the Frocester Court Villa

Figure 42 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Frocester Court Villa

251

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Figure 43 Spatial Plan of the Spoonley Wood Villa

252

FIGURES Figure 44 Public and Private Space in the Spoonley Wood Villa

Figure 45 Spatial Plan of the Wadfield Villa

Figure 46 Public and Private Space in the Wadfield Villa

253

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Figure 47 Spatial Plan of the Farmington Villa

254

FIGURES Figure 48 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Farmington Villa

Figure 49 Spatial Plan of the Whittington Court Villa

255

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 50 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Whittington Court Villa

Figure 51 Spatial Plan of the Withington Wood Villa

256

FIGURES Figure 52 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Withington Wood Villa

Figure 53 Spatial Plan of the Villa at Hucclecote (I)

257

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 54 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa at Hucclecote (I)

Figure 55 Spatial Plan of the Villa at North Cerney

258

FIGURES Figure 56 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa at North Cerney

Figure 57 Spatial Plan of the Chesters Villa at Woolaston

259

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 58 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Chesters Villa

Figure 59 Spatial Plan of the Great Witcombe Villa

260

FIGURES Figure 60 Public and Private Space in the Great Witcombe Villa

Figure 61 Spatial Plan of the Villa at Chedworth

Figure 62 Public and Private Space in the Villa at Chedworth

261

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY

Figure 63 Spatial Plan of Woodchester Villa

262

FIGURES Figure 64 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Woodchester Villa

Figure 65 Plan of the Fishbourne Roman Villa (Villa 19)

263

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 66 Spatial Plan of the Fishbourne Villa

Figure 67 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Fishbourne Villa

264

FIGURES Figure 68 Plan of the North Leigh Villa (Villa 20)

Figure 69 Spatial Plan of the North Leigh Villa

265

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 70 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the North Leigh Villa

Figure 71 Plan of the Bignor Villa (Villa 21)

266

FIGURES Figure 72 Spatial Plan of the Bignor Villa

Figure 73 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Bignor Villa

267

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 74 Plan of the Whitebeech Villa at Chiddingfold (Villa 22)

Figure 75 Spatial Plan of the Whitebeech Villa

268

FIGURES Figure 76 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Whitebeech Villa

Figure 77 Plan of the Mount Roman Villa at Maidstone (Villa 23)

269

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 78 Spatial Plan of the Mount Roman Villa

Figure 79 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Mount Roman Villa

270

FIGURES Figure 80 Plan of the Villa Diomede (Villa 24)

Figure 81 The Porta Ercolano at Pompeii

271

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 82 Spatial Plan of the Villa Diomede

Figure 83 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa Diomede

272

FIGURES Figure 84 Plan of the Villa of Asellius (Villa 25)

Figure 85 Spatial Plan of the Villa of Asellius

273

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 86 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa of Asellius

Figure 87 Plan of the Villa of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus at Pisanella (Villa 26)

274

FIGURES Figure 88 Spatial Plan of the Villa of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus

Figure 89 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus

275

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 90 Plan of the Villa of T. Siminius Stephanus (Villa 27)

Figure 91 Spatial Plan of the Villa of T. Siminius Stephanus

276

FIGURES Figure 92 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa of T. Siminius Stephanus

Figure 93 Plan of the Villa at Casa dei Miri (Villa 28)

277

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 94 Spatial Plan of the Villa at Casa dei Miri

Figure 95 Public and Private Entertainment Space in the Villa at Casa dei Miri

278

FIGURES Figure 96 Plan of the Settlement at Lower Slaughter

Figure 97 Plan of the Temple at Dean Hall (Temple 6)

279

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 98 Plan of the Temple at Upton St. Leonards (Temple 7)

Figure 99 Plan of the Temple I at Wycomb (Temple 9)

280

FIGURES Figure 100 Plan of the Temple at Wycomb and its Surrounding Structures

Figure 101 Plan of the Temple II at Wycomb (Temple 9)

281

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 102 Plan of the Temple at Chedworth (Temple 10)

Figure 103 Plan of the Temple at Uley (Temple 11)

282

FIGURES Figure 104 Plan of the Temple at Lydney (Temple 12)

Figure 105 Plan of the Temple at Lydney with its Associated Structures

283

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 106 Plan of the Villa of the Mysteries (Villa 33)

Figure 107 Plan of the House of the Vettii

284

FIGURES Figure 108 Plan of the Villa San Marco (Villa 34)

Figure 109 Plan of the House of the Bicentenary

285

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 110 Spatial Plan of the Villa of the Mysteries

Figure 111 Spatial Plan of the House of the Vettii

286

FIGURES Figure 112 Spatial Plan of the Villa San Marco

Figure 113 Spatial Plan of the House of the Bicentenary

287

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 114 Plan of the Villa at Badgeworth (Villa 32)

Figure 115 Spatial Plan of the Villa at Badgeworth

288

FIGURES Figure 116 Public and Private Space in the Villa at Badgeworth

Figure 117 Plan of the Villa at Lullingstone (Villa 35)

289

POWER AND RELIGIOUS ACCULTURATION IN ROMANO-CELTIC SOCIETY Figure 118 Spatial Plan of the Villa at Lullingstone

Figure 119 Public and Private Space in the Villa at Lullingstone

290