Iron Age Coinage in South-East England, Parts i and ii: The Archaeological Context 9781407388496, 9781407388502, 9780860544616, 9781407317908

Citation preview

Iron Age Coinage in South-East England The Archaeological Context

Colin Haselgrove

Part i

BAR British Series 174(i) 1987

B.A.R.

5, Centremead, Osney Mead, Oxford OX2 ODQ, England.

GENERAL EDITORS A.R. Hands, B.Sc., M.A., D.Phil. D.R. Walker, M.A.

BAR 174 (I), 1987: 'Iron Age Coinage in South-East England' Part I

© Colin Haselgrove, 1987 The author’s moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher. ISBN 9781407388496 (Volume I) paperback ISBN 9781407388502 (Volume II) paperback ISBN 9780860544616 (Volume set) paperback ISBN 9781407317908 (Volume set) e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9780860544616 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Table

o f C ontents

P art

L ist

o f

L ist

o f Tables

i P age

I llustrations

v iii

P reface and Acknowledgements

ix

Chapters

I ntroduction:

the

s tudy o f

The beginning

2 .

3 .

I ron A ge c oinage i n B ritain:

o f I ron A ge c oin s tudies

I I

" A f irm a nd s ecure f oundation": J ohn E vans, 1 860-1910

I II

Further s ystematisation a nd the e laboration historical paradigm, c 1 910-1960

I V

D evelopments r eaction

V

The p resent

s ince

1 960:

1

the w ork o f S ir

c onsolidation

2

o f

5

and

7

s tudy

8

An a rchaeological a pproach t o

I ron A ge c oinage:

The i nterpretation o f c oin f inds

1 3

I I

A s ubstantivist p erspective o n I ron A ge c oinage

1 7

I II

C oin u se i n t he M editerranean w orld a nd b eyond

2 3

I V

The a rchaeology o f c oin p roduction a nd types

2 8

Analytical p rocedure a nd p roblems: I ron A ge c oin s amples: I I

The dynamics

I II

Quantification c oin f inds

I V

Analytical p rocedure

theoretical c onsiderations

o f c oin c irculation a nd d eposition a nd s tatistical manipulation

o f

3 3 3 6 3 9

4 2

4 .

5 .

6 .

7 .

The

s tructure

o f the evidence:

I

I ntroduction

I I

An a pproach t o the s patial o f I ron Age c oinage

I II

Regional c oinage t raditions

I V

Delineation o f the

✓

The a rchaeology o f the S tudy A rea ( i) s outh-east England ( ii) c entral s outhern England

5 8

V I

Coin ( a) ( b) ( c) ( d)

6 3

The

47 and t emporal

o rdering

i n I ron Age Britain

S tudy Area

f ramework:

I

I ntroduction

I I

The

I II

P eriod I c oinage a nd i ts

I V

P eriod I I c oinage and i ts ( a) B elgic Gaul ( b) B ritain ( c) absolute dating

✓

P eriod I II c oinage a nd i ts

V I

The a rchaeological evidence a nd t he dating o f s ubsidiary s eries ( a) the potin s eries ( b) s ubsidiary s ilver s eries

o rigins

5 2 5 4

f inds in the S tudy A rea g eneral c onsiderations a nalysis o f f ind l ocations a nalysis o f s ite f inds a nalysis o f s tratified f inds

chronological

48

7 5 o f the

P hilippus

g old c oinage

i n Gaul

s ubdivisions

7 8

s ubdivisions

s ubdivisions

Depositional patterning i n n on-settlement

7 6

8 0

9 2 9 4

c ontexts:

I

Depositional t rends in the l ocation data

I I

Hoards a nd multiple f inds

1 17

I II

Non-settlement c oin d eposition ( a) burials ( b) t emples ( c) o ther c ontexts

1 22

✓

Discussion

1 34

S ettlement I

f inds

r ecorded f ind

1 03

s outh o f the Thames:

I ntroduction

1 39 1 1

8 .

I I

The Key S ites

I II

C oin r epresentation o n o ther

I V

Discussion

S ettlement

( a) ( b) ( c)

Canterbury S ilchester and Chichester o ther Key S ites s ettlement

1 39

s ites

1 51 1 57

f inds n orth o f the Thames:

I ntroduction

9 .

I I

The Key S ites

I II

Coin r epresentation o n o ther

I V

Discussion

( a) ( b) ( c)

Colchester Braughing and S t A lbans o ther Key S ites s ettlement

1 63

s ites

1 80 1 86

I ntegration and s ynthesis: The

1 0.

1 63

the a rchaeological c ontext:

adoption o f c oinage

i n B ritain

1 89

I I

P ost-Caesarian developments

1 95

I II

C oinage

2 04

I V

C oin c irculation a nd use: a rchaeology

i n the R oman S outh-East the

c ontribution o f

Conclusions a nd s ummary

2 08

2 15

P art

i i

Appendices

Gazetteer o f f indspots r ecorded 1 960-1982.

B ritain

2 21

2 .

Concordance o f the chronological and g eographical a rrangement o f I ron Age c oinages in Britain used in this s tudy with their c lassifications a ccording to Allen, Mack a nd S cheers.

2 31

3 .

Catalogue c oins.

Age

2 67

4 .

B rief l isting o f known a rchaeological s ites i n s outheast England where I ron Age c oins have c ertainly o r p robably b een f ound.

3 31

o f hoards a nd

o f

I ron A ge coins in

1 .

' multiple

f inds'

o f

I ron

5 .

Catalogue o f a rchaeological

s tratified c ontext.

6 .

Metrology o f the p rincipal in Britain.

I ron Age

c oins

I ron Age

c oin g roups

B ibliography

a nd

their

3 59

f ound

479

4 87

i v

L ist

o f

I llustrations

Part

i

P late I Evolution o f g old c oinage i n B elgic Gaul during the s econd quarter o f the f irst c entury B C. ( After S cheers, 1 977, with modifications).

F igures 1 :1

I ron A ge

c oin hoards discovered i n B ritain by decade.

2 :1

S urface c oin f inds f rom Woodcock Hall, ( a) I ron A ge a nd early Roman ( b) F lavian - Hadrianic.

3 :1

L ife cycle

3 :2

Models

4 :1

C ircumstances o f discovery o f n ew c oin t ypes belonging t o the p rincipal s eries f ound i n the S tudy A rea, 1 700-1985, by decade.

4 :2

Number o f n ew c oin types belonging t o the s eries f ound in the S tudy A rea, 1 700-1985, year p eriod.

4 :3

L ocation o f the

4 :4

The

4 :5

D ie l inking

4 :6

Type, s tatus and s tratified c oin f inds.

5 :1

Distribution o f early B ritish derivative c oinages s outhern England ( a) E 41, S 41 ( b) S W41-51.

5 :2

Chart o f Gallo-Belgic derivatives.

5 :3

P roportions o f Gallo-Belgic c oin f indspots i n Gaul and B ritain ( a) By s eries ( b) As p ercentage o f t otal f or each c ountry.

5 :4

Distribution o f

5 :5

Date r anges o f p otential R oman c oin British P eriod I II c oins.

5 :6

P eriodization and p hasing

o f the

S aham T oney

i ndividual c oin.

o f c oin l oss

( a)

s tatic

( b)

dynamic.

p rincipal by twenty

S tudy A rea.

S tudy Area and l ocation o f Key S ites. o f g old coins

S E41

o f Cunobelinus

dating

o f

c oinages

( E81-82).

c ontexts

a nd

their

y ielding

in

B ritish

and i ts I nsular imitations.

V

p rototypes

o f B ritish I ron A ge

f or

c oinage.

5 :7

Quantities

5 :8

Associations o f a rtefact types.

6 :1

Gold c oin f ind l ocation density

6 :2

( a) and

6 :3

B ronze

6 :4

Gold c oin f ind l ocation density: I -III c oins.

6 :5

Distance o f g old coin r ivers and c oasts.

6 :6

Hoards

and multiple

f inds by p eriod o f deposition.

6 :7

Hoards

a nd multiple

f inds by s ize range

6 :8

Map s howing l ocation o f Chapter 6 .

6 :9

C oin f inds f rom Harlow a nd Hayling p eriod o f d eposit.

S ilver F 2).

o f

I ron Age

( b)

c oins in dated c ontexts.

B ritish

I ron A ge

c oins

( a)

F l

w ith

( b)

o ther

F 2.

potin c oin f ind l ocation density

c oin f ind l ocation density

( a)

F l

p roportions

f ind l ocations

f inds

( b)

f rom

( F1

F 2. o f P eriod

navigable

o f deposits.

a nd s ites d iscussed

I sland t emples

i n

by

6 :10 H istogram o f c oin f inds f rom t emple and multiple deposit s ites by p ercentage o f m etal a nd phase. 7 :1

Map o f s ites s outh o f the T hames a nd K ennett I ron A ge c oins.

7 :2

S tratification o f c oins f rom Key S ites ( a) Canterbury ( b) S ilchester ( c) C hichester.

7 :3

B reakdown o f excavation and F l s tray f inds s outh o f the Thames and Kennett.

7 :4

Mean r epresentation o f c oins o n major a nd s ettlement s ites i n d ifferent c irculation a reas o f the Thames a nd K ennett.

7 :5

Representation o f c oins s truck i n d ifferent metals different categories o f s ite.

8 :1

Map o f s ites n orth o f the Thames I ron A ge c oins.

8 :2

C oin f inds ( b) R oman.

8 :3

S tratification o f

8 :4

S tratification o f c oins f rom o ther K ey S ites ( a) B raughing ( b) Baldock ( c) S t.Albans.

8 :5

Breakdown o f excavation a nd F l s tray f inds north o f the T hames a nd Kennett.

c oins

f rom s ites

a nd K ennett

f rom S heepen by Region:

( a)

y ielding

m inor s outh

o n

yielding

I ron A ge

f rom S heepen .

v i

f rom

s ites

8 :6

Mean r epresentation o f c oins o n major and minor s ettlement s ites i n different c irculation a reas n orth o f the Thames and Kennett.

8 :7

Representation o f c oins different categories o f

9 :1

F indspots

9 :2

Coin c irculation:

the hoard evidence.

9 :3

Coin c irculation:

the evidence

s truck in different s ite.

o f B ritish c oins

P art

metals

o n the Continent.

o f

s ite

a ssociations.

i i

A3:1

Map o f hoards

A3:2

Map o f g old multiple f inds in the

A3:3

Map o f multiple ( b) p otin .

A3:4

Map o f h oards c ontaining o utside t he S tudy Area .

A4:1

Map

A5:1

Colchester: l ocation o f f inds ( Inset: S heepen).

s ites with I ron Age c oin

A 5:2

Distribution o f

Harlow T emple.

A5:3

S ilchester: f inds.

A 5:4

B raughing: f inds.

l ocation o f

s ites with I ron Age

A 5:5

S t. Albans: f inds.

l ocation o f

s ites w ith I ron A ge c oin

A 5:6

Canterbury: f inds.

A 5:7

Caburn:

A6:1

Metrology o f

A6:2

Metrology o f ( a) c oinage ( SW51-91) ( P1-P2).

A6:3

Metrology o f

s ilver c oinage,

P eriods

A6:4

Metrology o f b ronze c oinage,

P eriods

o f

f ound in the

f inds

s ites where

on

S tudy Area.

in the

S tudy Area.

S tudy Area

( a)

s ilver

S tudy Area c oin types

I ron A ge

f inds a t

l ocation o f

f ound

c oins have been f ound.

s ites w ith I ron Age c oin

l ocation o f

c oin

s ites w ith I ron Age c oin

p its with p otin f inds. g old c oinage

i n B ritain,

P eriods I -III.

S outh-Western s ilver a nd bronze ( b) S outh-Eastern potin c oinage

v ii

1 1-111.

L ist

o f Tables

P art

i

3 :1

S urvival rates o f f ound in B ritain .

s ome

I ron Age g old and s ilver types

4 :1

The S tudy Area: chronology.

c eramic a ssemblages and approximate

4 :2

P re-1960 I ron A ge n orth o f the Thames

4 :3

B reakdown o f c oin f inds i n the S tudy Area t o their r eliability category ( Fl-F3).

4 :4

Number o f l ocations Age c oins.

6 :1

Recorded c ircumstances f inds in the S tudy A rea.

9 :1

S ome p otential explanations f or the bulk t ransfer Gallo-Belgic c oinage a cross the Channel.

c oin f inds

f rom

s elected

s ites

a ccording

o f different kinds y ielding

P art

o f discovery f or

F l

I ron

s tray

i i

A 1:1

B reakdown o f I ron A ge c oin p rovenances published the author, 1 978-84.

A 1:2

B reakdown o f I ron A ge coin provenances in s eries o f published gazetteers.

A 1:3

Additions t o the published l ists f ound in the S tudy A rea t o 1 982.

A2:1 -A2:7

o f

o f

the

I ron A ge

by

f ull

c oins

C oncordance o f the a rrangement o f I ron A ge c oinage u sed in the s tudy w ith Allen, Mack and S cheers r eferences. A 2:1 Western c oinage A 2:2 S outh-Western c oinage A 2:3 S outhern c oinage A 2:4 S outh-Eastern c oinage A 2:5 Eastern c oinage A2:6 East Anglian c oinage A 2:7 North-Eastern c oinage

v iii

P reface

and Acknowledgements

This publication i s a r evised version o f my doctoral thesis, submitted in March 1 986 t o the University o f Cambridge. This was c ompleted under the supervision o f Dr. J. A. Alexander, P rofessor B . W. Cunliffe and the l ate Dr. D. L . Clarke, whose advice and encouragement I g ratefully a cknowledge. Valuable c omments w ere made by my examiners Dr. J.R.Collis and P rofessor F . R. Hodson, though a ll r esponsibility f or the o pinions expressed and any e rrors r emains my own. F inancial a ssistance was provided by the Department o f Education a nd S cience, Trinity C ollege, Cambridge and the University o f Durham, t o whom g ratitude i s a lso due f or g ranting m e s abbatical l eave t o c omplete the w ork . F or unrestricted access t o his I ndex o f Celtic Coins, I s hould particularly l ike t o thank P rofessor S .S.Frere. Without h is f oresight in e stablishing the Index w ith the late D .F. Allen this s tudy would have been much m ore difficult. Many o ther i ndividuals have a llowed me t o c onsult material i n their care o r have p rovided information about unpublished f inds and o ffered much g enerous a ssistance, including: D r. J. A . Alexander, D . Allen, T . Ambrose, Dr. M. Bell, P . Bennett, P rofessor M . Biddle, G . C. Boon, L . Brown, R . A. Brown, P .J.Casey, P rofessor J . M.Coles, M .Corbishley , P rofessor R . J. Cramp, J . Debord, B . Dix, A . Down, A .Fitzpatrick, Dr. J.Foster, Dr. M.Fulford, T . Gregory, F . Grew, K . Gruel, R . Goodburn, P rofessor C .F.C. Hawkes, Dr. C. Hills, Dr.I. Hodder, Dr. B. K. Hope-Taylor, Dr. J . P.C. Kent, Dr. A. King, T . Merson, Dr. M. J. Millett, the l ate K . W. Muckelroy, D r. D. Nash, C .Partridge, L . Pitts, Dr.T. P. P otter, A . Proctor, J .Pullinger, Dr. R.Reece, V . Rigby, Dr. P.Robinson, K .Rodwell, D r.W . Rodwell, R . T.Schadla-Hall, Dr.S.Scheers, D r. P.Sealey, L . S ellwood, Dr. M . G.Spratling, Dr.I. M .Stead, S . S tow, T . Tatton Brown, Dr. R. Thomas, F . H. Thompson, S . Trow and T . Volk . T o a ll o f them, my s incerest thanks a re due. I have b enefitted g reatly f rom many s timulating c onversations about I ron Age c oinage with J ohn Kent a nd Daphne Nash. Thanks a re a lso due t o the f ollowing f or their much n eeded a ssistance in the p reparation o f this work f or publication: S . Brown, Y . Beadnell, T . Middlemas a nd T . Woods f or their work with the i llustrations and tables; P . C. Lowther f or wordprocessing this text a nd, t ogether w ith D .Stanness and A .Snell, the dissertation on which i t i s based; M . J. Millett and P .J.Casey f or r eading the t ext. F inally, I s hould l ike t o t hank S usanne Haselgrove, my parents, and my l ong-suffering c olleagues and s tudents in the D epartment o f Archaeology, Durham, e specially P amela Lowther, f or their help and encouragement o ver many years.

Department o f A rchaeology, 46, S addler S treet, Durham City, DH1 3 NU.

June

i x

1 987

Chapter

I ntroduction:

the s tudy o f

1

I ron A ge coinage in Britain

Approximately 1 5, 000 p rovenanced I ron A ge c oins, c omprising n early 7 00 d ifferent types, r ecorded i n B ritain p rovide o ne o f t he p rincipal s ources o f evidence f or the c ommunities who u sed them. Their s tudy c an be d ivided into f our main s tages: the p eriod up t o 1 860 when the s ubject's f oundations were laid; f rom 1 860-1910, the p rincipal f ormative p eriod; a p eriod o f f urther s ystematisation f rom 1 910-1960; and t he last twenty f ive y ears which have s een d ramatic c hanges.

I

The b eginnings

o f

I ron A ge c oin s tudies

Recognition that c oins w ere s truck i n p re-Roman B ritain g oes back t o the l ate s ixteenth c entury. Camden's B ritannia ( 1586) i ncludes w oodcuts o f c oins o f Cunobelinus, and i llustrations o f f ourteen B ritish a nd f our Gaulish c oins w ere i nserted into the s econd edition ( Camden, 1 600). Camden's i dentification o f Cunobelinus, Camulodunum and V erulamium, a nd h is i nterpretation o f COM a s C ommius have a ll s tood the t est o f t ime. A s Evans ( 1864, 2 ) o bserved, this " ought a lone t o have s ufficed t o p lace the s tudy o f B ritish c oins o n a s ecure f oundation". However, d espite numerous i ntervening works r anging f rom eccentric s peculation - W ise's ( 1750) a ttribution o f c oins r eading TASC t o Gaul and CVNO t o S pain, o r P ettingal's ( 1763) equation o f TASCIA with t ribute paid t o R ome - t o s ound observations - that uninscribed c oins p redated inscribed i ssues and t hus the Roman i nvasion ( Borlase, 1 754) - o r P egge's ( 1766) c lassification o f Cunobelinus' c oinage, i t was n ot until Evans' o wn w ork that t his f oundation was f inally laid. The c ontribution o f these early a ntiquaries s hould n ot, however, b e o verlooked. F oremost i s their r ecord o f discoveries which w ould o therwise be l ost: B orlase's r ecord o f the Cam nB rea hoard, Battely's o f t he Reculver c oins ( 1745) o r the many f inds n oted by S tukeley ( 1720; 1 762). Often i ndeed, t heir r ecording has i ntroduced a s ubstantial bias i nto o ur knowledge o f d ifferent a reas, which r equires careful c onsideration i n u sing this evidence t oday ( Chapters 2 , 4 ). A p rominent example i s the C olchester a rea where a s uccession o f a ntiquaries f rom Morant ( 1748) onwards - P ollexfen, W ire, e tc. - were a ll a ctive c ollectors. A lso e stablished, a lthough the i mplications were f ully g rasped, was the a ssociation b etween t he c oins

1

n ot and

c ontemporary a rchaeological s ites - f rom P lot's ( 1677) g old quarter s tater " found a mongst o ld f oundations" a t Woodeaton, Oxfordshire, the earliest r ecorded s ite f ind, to the c oins f rom Neville's excavations a t s everal R oman s ites in the 1 840s a nd 1 850s in north-west E ssex. Neville's r ecording was f ar ahead o f h is t ime ( Fox, 1 923), and not o nly a llows r econstruction o f the c ontext o f these c oins a s c ertainly Roman ( Appendix 5 ), but w ould have permitted early r ecognition, to paraphrase Reece ( 1984a , 1 97), that I ron Age c oins o ccur a s l osses o n Roman s ites because they were in u se on them. I n f act the s ignificance o f I ron Age c oins a s s ite f inds was n ot a ppreciated before Hawkes and Hull's excavation a t Sheepen Farm, C olchester, in the 1 930s - and has s till t o be f ully g rasped . The analysis o f c oin distributions t o establish their a reas o f c irculation was another early a chievement. F irst, De Lagoy ( 1826) s uccessfully proved the existence o f B ritish c oinage by s howing that Cunobelinus' c oins w ere o nly f ound i n England a nd thus unlikely to be Gaulish! Then, in 1 849, Akerman published t he f irst a rchaeological d istribution map ( 1849, P l. I X), o n which he p lotted f ind s pots t o s how where different types had c irculated. N o c oins i nscribed T INC o r V IRI, f or i nstance, had been f ound o utside Hampshire and S ussex . Drawing o n this, Akerman r efuted the o mission ( on the g rounds that t hey w ere p robably not B ritish) f rom the M onumenta H istorica B ritannica ( Petrie and S harp, 1 848) o f a ll but Tasciovanus' and Cunobelinus' c oins.

I I " A f irm a nd s ecure Evans. 1 860 - e .1910

f oundation":

t he work o f

S ir

J ohn

What was s till l acking was a r easoned chronological f ramework and a detailed a rrangement o f i ndividual types in s pace and t ime. I t was Evan's enduring c ontribution t o s upply this i n The Coins o f the Ancient B ritons ( 1864), a meticulous s tudy o f the different types, their p robable inter-relationship, a nd a ll the p reviously c ollected information i ncluding p rovenances. The a ccurate e ngravings o f the s ignificant types w ere a factor in the r apidly increased r eporting o f f inds, s uch that by 1 890, Evans c ould publish a ßupplement i ncluding many more unrecorded types, and many n ew f inds ( from 2 40 n ew p rovenances, c ompared t o 2 52 before 1 864). Evans p ersonified the values o f the V ictorian e ra, a polymath and an F .R.S., h is i nterest extended beyond c oins t o many o ther a spects o f a rchaeology, f rom B ronze Age a rtefacts t o Roman villas. Much o f h is work was based o n his o wn c oin c ollection, which passed o n h is death e ither t o the British Museum a s the nucleus o f the national c ollection o r t o the A shmolean Museum in 1 941 i n the bequest o f h is s on, S ir Arthur Evans. Evans had t he means and c ontacts, p ractical a s w ell a s s ocial, to obtain " first r efusal" o n many f inds and i nformation about o thers f rom f ellow c ollectors s uch a s Latchmore o r Kennard. Recognising the i nformation which Evans a massed through these c ontacts

2

i s a c rucial f actor in a ssessing o ur knowledge o f I ron Age c oin deposition e .g. o ur r ecord o f the n ineteenth c entury c oin f inds a t B raughing i s largely the p roduct o f Evans' direct i ntervention. Evans' interest a nd approach must be s een i n the perspective o f n ineteenth c entury developments. Numismatics i tself came o f a ge in 1 836 with the publication o f Numismatic Chronicle and Taylor Combe's B ritish Museum catalogue. More i mportant s till was the gathering pace o f the Industrial R evolution, s een c learly in the hoards discovered i n the m iddle decades o f the c entury ( Fig. 1 :1). Of particular i mportance were railway c onstruction and i ronstone quarrying, p roducing the i mportant g roups f rom B raughing a nd Duston r espectively; o ccasionally i solated f inds were d isturbed the same way ( e.g. Evans, 1 864, 1 69; 1 90). T he n ew types discovered a t t his t ime ( 140 b etween 1 864 and 1 890) enabled r elationships t o be e stablished i n a way not p ossible w ith the previous l imited s ample. Evans' m ethods o f s patial a nd t emporal o rdering a re described i n his book and i n a l esser known a ddress to the Royal S ociety ( Evans, 1 875). W ith his palaeontological a nd s cientific i nterests, Evans r eadily a ssimilated the r evolution b rought about by Darwin's Origin o f S pecies ( 1859) a nd r ecognised i n natural s election, ' the theory o f descent w ith variation', a theoretical a nalogy f or p rinciples which were a lso discernible i n the evolution o f human material c ulture and o f c oinage in particular. I n this, h e was s ignificantly i nfluenced by the v iews o f P ittRivers, a major a rchaeological c ontemporary ( Thompson, 1 977). E vans' s uccess in marrying t ypological degradation and the g enesis o f n ew varieties t o Darwinian ideas i s s hown i n t he choice o f I ron A ge c oin typology t o i llustrate the distortion o f i mages during c opying ( Blakemore, 1 977). Evans a lso s uggested another major p rinciple f or the chronological a rrangement o f c oinage:" Besides the s uccession o f types, there i s a nother ... law t hat a ppears to be natural t o a ll absolute g overnments which s trike c oins, i f n ot i ndeed to o ther ruling p owers. This i s the g reat l aw o f e ffecting economy a t the expense o f o thers.... by s triking c oins o f the s ame denomination a s those a lready i n c irculation, but e ither o f l ess weight, o r o f baser a lloy, o r o f both" ( Evans, 1 875, 485). A llied t o this i s Gresham's L aw, the p rinciple that bad money d rives g ood money o ut o f c irculation. How appropriate s uch propositions a re t o c oinage i n I ron Age s ociety w ill b e c onsidered in Chapters 2 -3. Evans' c hronology f or uninscribed c oin types s till provides t he e ssentials o f the m odern f ramework. Evans r ecognised the ultimate dependence o f the earliest B ritish s eries o n t he g old o f P hillip I I o f Macedon ( died 3 36 B C). This, he a rgued, was imitated i n Gaul in the early third century B C, e laborating his a bsolute chronology w ith r eference t o s uch historical events a s the Celtic invasion o f Greece i n 2 79 BC a s a f actor i n the type's s pread. The

3

0 003 0 86 1 0 96 1

f

O te t 0 36 1 . 0 06 1 . 0 89 l 0 98 l 0 1 78 1 _ 0 38 1 0 08 1 0 8L 1 0 9/1

O ZL I _ O OL l 0 89 1 0 99 1 O V9 1 C \ J

F ig . 1 :1 decade.

I ron A ge c oin hoards discovered i n B ritain by

4

Gaulish c oinage p rovided the n ecessary intermediary f or c oinage i n B ritain. By a ssuming that the diminution in the g old s tater's weight f rom the P hilippus s tandard o f 8 .6 gm to the i nscribed s tater weight o f 5 .4 gm ( reached in the f irst c entury BC) was l ess rapid in i ts earlier s tages, he f ixed o n 1 50 BC a s the a pproximate date f or the f irst B ritish c oinage, n ot r ecognising that i t was i n f act Gaulish. The i nscribed c oinage he dated t hrough the c lassical texts, his o nly e rror not r ecognising V ERICA COMMI F . R EX ( 1864,178) a s the B epikos expelled j ust before AD 43 ( Dio Cassius H istories LX, 1 9, 1 ). Archaeology was i tself a dvancing s wiftly, o f particular s ignificance P itt-Rivers' p ioneering use o f a ' relic-table' i n the excavation r eport f or the Caburn ( Pitt-Rivers, 1 881). I n this, the f inds i ncluding f ive potin c oins, were s ystematically s et o ut by c ontext, enabling a ssociations and s tratification t o be r ecovered a t a g lance.

I II Further s ystematisation and the ' historical paradigm' c . 1 910-60

e laboration

o f

the

Evans' mistake i n a ttributing many uninscribed Gaulish types t o B ritain was n ever accepted o n the C ontinent where I ron A ge c oin s tudies had developed in parallel with Britain. The A tlas des monnaies gauloises ( de l a T our, 1 892) c orrectly a scribed the majority o f these types t o B elgic Gaul (although the British section s till included a f ew C ontinental types) and the matter was put beyond doubt by B lanchet's ( 1905) T raitA, a s ynthesis which s urpasses even Evans' with i ts detailed l isting o f hoards a nd s ite f inds. I n a diffusionist f ramework rapidly i ncreasing in popularity, B ritain a cquired the idea o f c oinage f rom Gaul, with c oin types f ound o n both s ides o f t he Channel the means o f i ts i ntroduction . Despite the larger proportion o f B ritish f indspots f or most o f these ( Chapter 5 ), this p remise has b een a t the c ore o f I ron A ge s tudies ever s ince. I t was l eft t o a rchaeologists t o provide a c ontext f or this. S ince S ir Arthur Evans ( 1890) published t he c emetery a t Aylesford, Kent, i t had been accepted that the l ater I ron A ge in south-east England shared many characteristics with the a djoining a rea o f the C ontinent. Caesar had n oted that the maritime part o f B ritain was inhabited by c ommunities with o rigins in B elgic Gaul ( DBG V , 1 2-14), a nd there were s everal o ther l inks. In 1 925, these e lements were f ormalised i nto a s ingle model by Bushe-Fox ( 1925) in his r eport o n the r elated c emetery o f S warling, Kent. He equated the material culture a t both these s ites w ith Caesar's i mmigrants, maintaining that two distinct a reas o f B elgic s ettlement c ould be r ecognised: the S outh-East, and c entral s outhern England. Noting Continental o pinion, he pointed o ut that the i mported c oinage c oincided c losely in date with this material. The c oins therefore b elonged t o these B elgic immigrants, who were responsible f or their introduction into B ritain. I n both a reas o f s ettlement

5

this c oinage developments

lay a t the head o f t he post-Caesarian dynastic i mplied by the i nscribed c oinages.

The o ther e lements o f this a rchaeological c omplex o n both s ides o f the Channel - f ine wheelmade pottery, a f latg rave c remation r ite and the a ppearance o f Roman m etalwork and p ottery types - were s et o ut s ystematically by Hawkes and Dunning ( 1930). I t was l eft to B rooke t o do the s ame f or the c oinage in two major papers ( 1933a; 1 933b). His s cheme had f ive key e lements: 1 . A later date f or the g old c oinage deriving f rom the ' Philippus' in Gaul ( and thus i n B ritain). T his was acquired not f rom the Greek world direct, but rather through t rade with Rome, whose g old currency i t b ecame in the s econd c entury BC a fter the defeat o f Macedon. 2 . The f irst c oin types f ound i n B ritain a lso a rrived through t rade, s ince they had n o o bvious p rogeny ( directly c ontradicting the f irst a rgument) and w ere t oo early t o be l inked t o B elgic migration. 3 . Their s uccessors, which d id have an e xtensive p rogeny, c ould b e equated d irectly w ith the a rchaeologists' f irst and s econd B elgic i nvasions o f 7 5 BC a nd c . 5 0 B C i nto the S outh-East and c entral s outhern England r espectively. 4 . C ommunities p eripheral t o t he r egion o f B elgic s ettlement c opied their types. These f ormed the p rototypes f or extensive t ribal c oinages in a reas l ike East A nglia, the W est and the S outh-West which emerged a s d istinct entities a t the Roman Conquest. 5 . F inally, Brooke a ttempted t o c orrelate the dynastic s equence implied by the i nscribed c oinages and the p olitical c ontrol o f important c entres s uch a s C olchester. B rooke's papers, o f course, a ppeared a s excavations a t C olchester and S t. Albans w ere g iving a rchaeological s ubstance to their pre-Roman p hases. B rooke's ideas were d eveloped by Derek Allen i n two major c ontributions ( 1944; 1 960). The earlier paper c ompleted the i ntegration o f t he i nscribed c oinage w ith the c lassical t exts s tarted by Evans, f or the f irst t ime u sing the f ormer t o f ill gaps i n t he w ritten s ources t o r ec onstruct a narrative p olitical history o f the f inal c entury o f B ritain's independence. Among Evans' hypotheses n ow modified was t he dating o f V erica t o the f irst c entury AD and i ndividuals s uch a s E ppillus a nd E paticcus t o the p eriod o f Cunobelinus. A llen's n ew a rrangement f ormed the unacknowledged basis f or Mack's ( 1953) type s eries, which made the f ield accessible t o a w ider public, with important r epercussions s ince metal-detectors were i ntroduced. The f ormative p eriod o f B ritish I ron A ge c oin s tudies culminated w ith Allen's magisterial ' Origins' paper ( 1960). S eizing o n an apparently s ecure t erminus a nte quer n p rovided by the L e Catillon hoard, A llen advanced a n ew a bsolute chronology f or the earliest c oinages in B ritain. A ssuming that c oins normally n ever t ravelled f ar f rom t heir

6

t erritories o f o rigin, and i n keeping with the ' Invasion hypothesis' then dominating B ritish prehistory ( Clark, 1 966), Allen s aw t ribal movements a A the o nly satisfactory explanation o f the introduction o f c oinage to Britain, i n a s equence o f s ix s eparate waves which began before 1 00 BC and ended w ith the Roman c onquest o f Gaul ( Allen, 1 960, F ig. 2 8, A -F). Evans' c lassification by numbered P lates and B rooke's r eliance on doubtful tribal a ttributions were superseded by a n ew, n eutral t erminology. The a rticle was accompanied by a s ystematic g azetteer o f p rovenanced c oins, 1 0,067 in a ll, and a discussion o f the p rincipal hoards.

I V

Developments

s ince

1 960:

c onsolidation and r eaction

With Evans' s ecure f oundation' f inally a chieved by B rooke and A llen, the p eriod s ince 1 960 has s een c onsolidation in o ur knowledge o f the p rincipal s eries. A llen himself l ed the way w ith s everal detailed r egional s tudies, b eginning with the c oinages a scribed t o the Dobunni ( Allen, 1 961), a nd t he Coritani ( Allen, 1 963; n ow r endered Corieltauvi; Tomlin, 1 983). The latter s tudy u sed the f indspot evidence t o r eject Evans' a ttribution t o the B rigantes in f avour o f the C orieltauvi. O ther important s tudies examined the c oinage a scribed to the Durotriges ( Allen, 1 968b) and the B ritish potin s eries ( Allen , 1 971). The upsurge i n a rchaeological a ctivity in the 1 960s a lso r esulted in a marked increase i n f inds, those f rom Harlow a llowing Allen ( 1967a) t o p ropose a more d etailed a rrangement o f Cunobelinus' bronzes. More s ystematic excavation p rocedures enhanced the r ecovery o f s mall c oin types: 5 0% o f the Owslebury excavation f inds were s ilver m inims, 42% a t Chichester ( Appendix 5 ). With the advent o f m etal detecting a s a p opular hobby in the 1 970s, the r ate o f discovery o f a ll categories has increased yet m ore dramatically. S aha r a T oney, Norfolk ( Brown, 1 986), may be used a s an example: s ystematic f ieldwalking o ver s everal years up to 1 976 had yielded a mong o ther f inds a mere 7 I ron Age c oins. With the use o f a metal d etector, 5 1 were f ound in the n ext year a lone ( R. A.Brown, P ers. Comm.). Unfortunately, f ew such f inds a re r ecorded w ith c omparable p recision ( Haselgrove, 1 984a). Most probably e scape notice a ltogether; o thers acquire s purious p rovenances t o enhance their s ale value. I n a ll, 4 ,632 provenanced c oins f ound s ince 1 960 have b een r ecorded ( Haselgrove, 1 978; 1 984a; Appendix 1 ), i ncluding 1 20 h itherto unrecorded types, many f rom large deposits s uch a s Waltham f ound by m etaldetectors a nd n ot r ecorded a t their place o f discovery. These matters a re dealt w ith b elow ( Chapter 4 ). Using the c omprehensive photographic r ecord o f I ron Age c oins built up by F rere a t Oxford, Allen embarked o n detailed die s tudies o f individual s eries: the c oinage a ttributed t o the I ceni ( Allen , 1 970a); the gold i ssues o f Cunobelinus and Verica ( Allen , 1 975; Allen and Haselgrove, 1 979). A t the s ame t ime S cheers began her r eappraisal o f c oinage in B elgic Gaul ( 1972; 1 977). As a r esult, r easoned

7

estimates o f s uch variables a s the volume o f a c oinage, the f ine metal r equired and the number o f d ies u sed, ( e.g. Allen, 1 975; Haselgrove, 1 984b) a re now possible. S ince Allen's death i n 1 975, r esearch has i f anything intensified. S everal major s tudies a re n earing c ompletion o r publication ( Appendix 2 ). Useful r eappraisals o f particular s eries i nclude Mackensen ( 1974) and Robinson ( 1977). Kent ( 1978a; 1 978 1 3; 1 981) has a pplied S cheer's r esults in a r eappraisal o f the earliest c oinages in Britain. I n our broader understanding o f I ron Age s ocieties, Allen's ' Origins' marks t he c lose o f an era rather than the dawn o f the n ext. F irst, the monolithic ' invasion hypothesis' underpinning Allen's s cheme was f inally c onfronted ( Birchall, 1 965; Cunliffe, 1 966; Hodson, 1 964; Mulvaney, 1 962). P aradoxically, in s eparating t he imported Gallo-Belgic c oinages a nd the ' Aylesford-Swarling' material culture ( cf. B irchall, 1 965), A llen's paper was i tself instrumental in this development. While s ome a rchaeologists c lung t o c oinage a s the o nly r emaining material underpinning the invasion s cheme ( Hawkes, 1 968; Harding, 1 974), o thers, t aking advantage o f the quantities o f n ew data g enerated i n t he 1 960s a nd 1 970s, e stablished an a lternative s ynthesis which s tressed i ndigenous p rocesses o f development a nd the c omplexity o f I ron Age c ommunities ( Cunliffe, 1 978a; c f. Champion, 1 979). This paradigm r eflected b roader c hanges in the discipline ( e.g. B inford, 1 972; C larke, 1 968; 1 973; Renfrew, 1 973) i n which i ts methodological f oundations were r efashioned and f resh a ttitudes t o i nterpretation emerged. Among the n ew a rchaeological c oncerns which may be s ingled o ut a s e specially r elevant i s the emphasis o n exact description a nd meaningful c omparison, p lacing more r eliance o n quantitative analysis and p resentation ( e.g. C larke, 1 968; Doran and Hodson, 1 975; Hodder and O rton, 1 976). The f ormation p rocesses o f the a rchaeological r ecord have c ome under c ritical s crutiny ( e.g. S chiffer, 1 976), t ogether w ith the s ampling p rocedures u sed in data c ollection ( e.g. Cherry e t a l. 1 978). I nterpretative a ssumptions s hould be e xplicit a nd appropriate t o the c ontext, a s f ar a s this c an be j udged ( cf. Hodder, 1 982a). A c ritical awareness o f the c omplexity o f p re-industrial s ocieties and o f the p otential differences between them and our o wn i s c rucial.

V

The p resent

s tudy

This r eorientiation has i mportant c onsequences f or I ron Age c oin s tudies. Until r ecently, c oinage has b een cast in a passive r ole, r eflecting historical events such a s invasions and dynastic s truggles, and r epresenting the same money uses a s i n the h istorical s ocieties which provide the analogies o n which s uch i deas r est. Much r ecent work has c ontinued i n this v ein. Haselgrove ( 1982) has used c oin distributions a s indicators o f the

8

t erritories o ver which named i ndividuals exercised p olitical c ontrol, o r S ellwood ( 1984b) t o map t ribal boundaries. S imilarly, i n f reeing the earliest c oinage f rom the a gency o f i nvasion, Kent ( e.g. 1 978a) has s ubstituted a lternative h istorical events. Caesar c omplains, t ruthfully o r o therwise, that the B ritons w ere helping the Gauls ( DBG I V, 2 0) and K ent s uggests that Gallo-Belgic c oinage entered B ritain t o purchase this s upport. Yet the basis o f the i dea i s s imply a nalogy w ith t he M editerranean world ( cf. K raay, 1 964; Nash, 1 975a; 1 981) a nd where Caesar a ppears t o describe the p ractice exactly ( for the T reveri) t rans Rhenum l egatos m itterent, c ivitates s ollicitarent, p ecunias p ollicerentur .." ( DBG, V , 5 5), this ' money', i f s ent, does n ot f igure i n t he c oin r ecord. S cheers' n ew dating i s s imilarly d ependent o n her a ssumption that a f amily o f c losely r elated c oin types a nd the hoard horizon i n which they o ccur r eflect a nother r ecorded event - Caesar's i nvasion o f B elgic Gaul i n 5 7 BC ( Scheers, 1 977). R odwell's ( 1976) r eassessment o f the c oin evidence i s r ooted i n s imilar c oncerns. Among the a rchaeologists who have embraced a c oncern f or more g eneral p rocesses, a variety o f a ttitudes t o I ron A ge c oinage o btain. S ome have a dopted a " wait a nd s ee" s tance e .g. Cunliffe ( 1978a, 69). S uch a p osition, h owever, i s p otentially harmful, s erving o nly t o maintain a s eparation o f c oinage f rom the c ultural a ssemblage t o which i t b elonged. Another g roup p erceived i n c oin data a p erfect t esting g round f or t echniques o f s patial a nalysis designed t o b ring o ut s tructure i n d istributional data e .g. f all-off patterns w ith d istance f rom a known mint ( Hogg, 1 971) o r a t boundaries ( Hodder, 1 977a; 1 977b; Hodder and O rton, 1 976, F ig. 5 .82). T rend s urface a nalysis has b een used t o examine t he a ssociation b etween z ones o f d ense c oin deposition a nd o ther d istributions, e .g. major burials o r major s ettlements, o r t o i nvestigate the r elationship o f the c oins to t he R oman r oad n etwork ( Hodder and Orton, 1 976, F ig. 5 .46; F ig. 7 .1, e tc.). A lthough t hese applications can b e c riticised o n various g rounds, n otably their a ssumptions a bout c oin u se, they a mply d emonstrate the p otential o f q uantitative m ethods t o s upplement v isual i nspection o f d istribution maps. A t hird p osition, a dhered t o h ere, i s that I ron A ge c oinage must b e c ast in a m ore a ctive r ole, b oth i nteractively a s part o f the e vidence i ntegrated t o p roduce a b etter understanding o f particular l ate I ron A ge cultures and processually a s e vidence, by i ts v ery a doption and u se, o f s ignificant c hanges in late I ron A ge c ommunities. A s yet, the o nly B ritish a rchaeologist a ctively pursuing s uch a ims has b een C ollis, a lthough o n the C ontinent a s imilar a pproach has b een f ostered by Nash ( 1975a; 1 976b; 1 978a; 1 978b) a nd R oymans ( 1983; R oymans a nd Van der S anden, 1 980). I n a s eries o f i mportant a rticles ( 1971a ; 1 971b; 1 974a; 1 981a), C ollis s uggested that ' low value' c oinage i ndicated the r ise o f a market exchange s ystem. This a ssumption was c riticised ( e.g. Haselgrove, 1 979) and he has n ow modified his v iews ( Collis, 1 981a), w ith even t he early Roman

9

economy n ow v iewed a s ' embedded' w ithin s ocial r elations rather t han market-based ( Crawford, 1 970; Hodder, 1 979; Reece, 1 979; Chapter 2 ). C ollis' major c ontribution, however, was m ethodological. A rguing that p recious m etal c oin u se c ould b e s et a part, C ollis c alled f or a lternative theoretical f rameworks. I f, f or instance, the earliest inscribed c oinages were n ot i ssued by r ulers w ith a territorial basis, t heir d istributions would n ot be susceptible t o the p olitical interpretations u sually proffered. A r ange o f p ossible c onditions o f c oin p roduction a nd u se s hould b e c onsidered i n a g iven c ontext ( Collis, 1 971a). I n a l ater paper, C ollis ( 1981a) examined how t hese a lternatives w ould g enerate d ifferent t ypes o f distribution pattern a nd c ould t hus p erhaps b e r ecognised in the a rchaeological r ecord. And o f particular r elevance here was his c onsideration o f the c oin a ssemblages o n l ate I ron A ge s ites o f d ifferent c haracter - major administrative c entres, m inor markets, f armsteads, e tc., in the kind o f quantitative i nvestigation c ommonplace i n o ther r ealms o f n umismatics ( cf. Grierson, 1 975; R eece, 1 972, e tc.). I f A llen ( 1976a) was q uick t o c oncede C ollis' p rincipal a rgument that I ron A ge c oinage s hould b e c onsidered a part f rom c oin u se i n o ther s ocieties - C ollis' v iews m et w ith s evere c riticism i n o ther quarters, n otably f rom R odwell ( 1976). Apart f rom s everal s pecific d isagreements e .g. o ver why p lated c oins a re f ound o n c ertain k inds o f s ite, Rodwell's main a rgument was t hat the patterns which C ollis discerned did n ot s tand up t o h is o wn s crutiny o f t he data, which h e then developed t o t he c onclusion that s o s evere were the biases i n the a vailable evidence that t esting a ny p roposition c oncerning c oin c irculation was exceedingly difficult, i f n ot i mpossible ( Rodwell, 1 981). S imilar c riticisms have a lso b een o ffered o f t he quantitative a nalyses c ited earlier ( Sellwood, 1 984b). T he p oint, h owever, i s r ather how the data can be u sed t o examine p ropositions about the f unctions o f I ron A ge c oinage and m ore g enerally a bout l ater I ron A ge s ocieties. I n his r eplies t o Rodwell, C ollis ( 1981a, 1 981b), s tresses that because t he data a re i nadequate f or h is questions t o be answered n ow, i t does n ot mean that they w ill a lways b e s o. T esting i s m erely p ostponed until better c ontrolled data a re a vailable; m oreover by p osing f undamental questions n ow - who p roduced I ron A ge c oins a nd f or what purposes, e tc. ( cf. Collis, 1 981b) - we may h ope t o influence data c ollection t o f acilitate their b eing answered i n the f uture. C ollis' ( 1981a) o ther p oint i s equally valid: t he more g eneralised the m odel a lternatives we f ormalise i nto expectations o f a rchaeological patterning, the b etter t heir c hances o f b eing p reserved i n the partial s amples t hat f orm the a rchaeological r ecord ( cf. C larke, 1 973). We may t hus determine which models a re appropriate t o a g iven c ontext, which r equire modification and which must b e a bandoned. C onversely, the m ore particular a p roposition, t he more t otal the i nformation r equired, a nd the l ess l ikely that the a rchaeological r ecord c an p rovide i t ( Pitt-Rivers, 1 892).

1 0

The p resent s tudy has two p rincipal a ims. The f irst i s t o p rovide f or s outh-east England the c ontrols o n I ron A ge c oin data that C ollis has c alled f or a nd Rodwell i s c orrect t o i nsist a re l acking. W ith this i nformation, we may determine which p ropositions may be examined using existing data, and which q uestions r equire n ew a pproaches. The capacity o f modern c omputers ( Doran a nd Hodson, 1 975) o ffers a means f or i mplementation; a p ossible f orm f or a n i ntegrative r ecord i s s et o ut e lsewhere ( Haselgrove and C ollis, 1 981). There i s an o ld adage that the quality o f what we g et o ut i s o nly a s g ood a s what g oes i n; a f irst p riority i s thus t o ensure the quality o f the data. A s econd a spect o f the p resent s ituation i s l ess s atisfactory. A s C ollis puts i t ( 1974a), c oin c lassification i s a ' specialist' matter - though n o more s o than w ith a ny o ther c ategory e .g. c eramics. H owever, i n t he a rchaeological r ecord a ll t hese c ome t ogether, both i n the c ontext o f t he past s ocieties whose material culture they w ere, a nd p hysically i n the s ense o f habitual a ssociation i n s tratified a rchaeological d eposits. W ith a ny a rtefact o r a ssemblage, t he i nterpretation o f i ndividual f inds d epends n ot o nly o n their c ircumstances o f discovery, but a lso o n t heir c ontext o f deposition and any p ostdepositional t ransformation t o which they have b een s ubjected ( cf. S chiffer, 1 976). The latter a re a rchaeological questions. I n this, c oin f inds a re n o d ifferent f rom a ny o ther ( Grierson, 1 975; Chapter 2 ). This i s e specially t rue o f the l ater I ron A ge where n either t he r ole o f c oinage, n or the way i n which s ocial and e conomic patterns o f b ehaviour varied f rom o ne r egion t o another, i s f ully understood. Even p oints that may r easonably b e a ssumed f or b etter documented s ocieties i .e. that c oin f inds o n o ccupation s ites p rimarily r eflect their l oss f rom u se ( e.g. R eece, 1 984a) - c an o nly b e accepted w ith qualification f or I ron A ge c oins and must o ften be a matter o f i nvestigation. F requently, the c ontext o f deposition i s a major question: any a nswer r equires an integrative a pproach c alling i nto p lay a ll facets o f the a vailable evidence. The s ystematic i ntegration o f c oins a nd the r emainder o f the material r ecord i s l ong o verdue. On this a t l east, Collis a nd R odwell a gree; b oth have s ought t o use c oinage i n a b roader a pproach t o l ater I ron A ge s ociety, but f ew o thers have done l ikewise ( e.g. Cunliffe, 1 981b; Harding, 1 974). I t i s a s obering thought that the r elative o rdering o f I ron A ge c oinage has n ever r eceived s tratigraphic c onfirmation. W orsaae's d emonstration o f the empirical validity o f Thomsen's ' Three A ge s ystem' i s, a fter a ll, p erceived a s a c rucial advance f or the d iscipline ( Daniel, 1 967). A s a n i mportant deduction f rom a s tratified c oin g roup, F rere's ( 1960) ' recalibration' o f the D orset I ron Age s equence f rom the Maiden Castle f inds s tands c onspicuously a lone. D etailed analysis o f a ssociations, s tratigraphy a nd s ite c ontext a re f undamental i f c oinage i s t o be s ystematically r elated t o o ther c omponents o f material c ulture a nd s ociety. Moreover, both a rchaeological c ontext

1 1

and c ultural c ontext a re f undamental t o the interpretation o f every c oin f ind ( Chapter 2 ). Until r ecently, hoards have been r elied o n a s the p rimary evidence f or both chronology a nd c irculation patterns, y et many types n ever o ccur i n s uch deposits. F or a balanced p erspective, the evidence o f excavated c oins i s e ssential. Many i deas c ould well b e t ested by excavations o n s elected s ites. A c orollary i s that the i nformation may a lready b e there a nd we a re s imply f ailing t o extract i t. R odwell ( 1981) o ffers workers' f ailure t o hand in g old c oins t o their s upervisors t o explain t heir absence a t S heepen, when h is m odel predicted them. C ertainly, we s hould n ot take honesty f or g ranted ( any more t han we s hould a ssume t hat a n excavator has made a ll t he r elevant o bservations). Yet p lated c oins ( admittedly s lightly l ighter a nd s ometimes easily r ecognisable a s s uch) a re handed i n , n or were there g old c oins i n the m odern S heepen excavations. The s econd a im o f the p resent s tudy i s t o p repare a c orpus' of a rchaeological evidence s o t hat c oin f inds can b e used t o t est p ropositions about l ater I ron A ge s ocieties through the a rchaeological r ecord, r ather than independently o f i t. O rganised a ccording t o their a rchaeological c ontext a nd r eliability, c oin f inds o ften l ead t o d ifferent c onclusions ( Chapter 4 ). I t i s n ot f easible i n a s ingle a nalysis t o i nvestigate every p ossibility, n or a ll the patterns o f variation i n t he a ssociated a rchaeological material - s uch categories p ose major p roblems o f their o wn. S elected c ase-studies c oncerned w ith g eographical, c hronological a nd c ontextual patterning have therefore been c hosen h ere t o s tand p roxy f or t he m ore i ntegrative a pproach w hich w e m ight f ollow i n the f uture. The p otential o f s uch a pproaches i s amply demonstrated by Hodges and Cherry's ( 1983) s tudy o f the c oinage c hanges a ccompanying i ncreased s ocial a nd p olitical c omplexity i n Anglo-Saxon England, i n which t heir basic propositions a re t ested a gainst b oth a rchaeological a nd numismatic evidence. The f ollowing c hapters a re i nitially c oncerned with interpretative p erspectives ( Chapter 2 ), methodology, and the s tructure o f the data ( Chapters 3 -4, Appendix 1 ). To ensure a n a dequate s ample s ize, a f lexible a rrangement r elating the different s eries i n s pace a nd t ime i s developed i n Chapters 4 -5 ( Appendix 2 ). U sing the p rimary material a ssembled i n Appendices 3 -6, s ome basic t rends a re then examined i n the f ollowing Chapters ( 6-8). I n Chapter 9 , these p reliminary r esults a re p laced i n t he b roader c ontext o f c hanges i n I ron A ge s ociety i n s outh-east England i n t he f irst c enturies B C a nd AD. Chapter 1 0 summarises t he p rincipal c onclusions a nd o ffers s ome s uggestions f or the f uture c ourse o f I ron A ge c oin s tudies.

1 2

Chapter 2

An a rchaeological

" The past t here"

I

i s

a pproach t o

a f oreign c ountry: ( L.P. Hartley,

The i nterpretation o f

I ron A ge c oinage

they do things d ifferently The Go-Between,

1 .

L ondon.)

c oin f inds

Numismatic t echniques a re n ormally d eveloped i n i ndividual s tudies ( Grierson, 1 975), and c ompared t o a rchaeology, a ttempts a kin t o Childe's ( 1956) o r C larke's ( 1968) t o develop a n explicit b ody o f theory g overning t heir a pplication have s o f ar b een lacking. There i s, h owever, a m easure o f a greement o ver which p rinciples have s ome c ross-cultural validity ( e.g. O 'Neill, 1 935; G rierson, 1 965; 1 966; 1 975; C rawford, 1 983; Casey, 1 986), which must b e o ur s tarting p oint h ere. One o f the p rincipal variables d ictating the evidential value o f c oins i s t heir c ircumstance o f d iscovery. O 'Neill ( 1935) d istinguishes b etween c hance f inds a nd e xcavation f inds a nd exemplifies t he u se o f each . The f ormer, h owever, i s a misnomer ( e.g. R odwell, 1 981), a s many o ther f actors a re g enerally i nvolved: which a reas a re under c ultivation o r have b een a f ocus o f disturbance; the a ctivity o f particular i ndividuals o r museums; g old c oins a re p erceived a s valuable, whereas c orroded b ronzes may n ot b e r ecognised. Only i n a r estricted s ense i s ' chance' a t erm a ppropriate t o even the m ost casual f ind a nd a g roup o f f inds can n ever b e c onsidered a random s ample i n the s tatistical s ense ( cf. D oran and H odson, 1 975). C onsequently, the t erm ' stray' i s p referred h ere ( cf. G rierson, 1 965). S uch f inds a re a n i mportant c ategory, the basis o f many distribution maps, but their r elationship t o past b ehaviour i s a matter f or i nvestigation r ather t han a ssumption. Excavation c oins a re d ifferentiated b ecause t heir d iscovery i s g enerally the s ource o f b oth m ore a nd d ifferent k inds o f i nformation. W ith the a dvent o f m etal d etectors, however, s uch a d istinction r equires s ome m odification. A t p resent, S aham T oney, N orfolk, i s a s olitary example o f the p otential o f s ystematic s urface c ollection ( Fig. 2 :1). This s ite i s d iscussed e lsewhere ( Brown, 1 986; Haselgrove, 1 985b), but p articularly i rteresting a re t he c hronological differences and the s omewhat r ectilinear c luster o f C laudio-Neronian i ssues o n r ising g round o verlooking a p robable I ron A ge s ettlement a rea. An early Roman f ort ( B) s eems p robable a s there i s

1 3

/

0 3 0

0

0 •

./ , 7 / /

0

/ 7 / 7

7

0 0

/

o • 0

o • s •o• •• 0D i oP c • •

B

•

I RON AGE

•

C LAUD IO -NERON IAN OR E ARL IER

/ /

0 0 E

o c•

NOT SURVEYED

oo

inee l

2 00 i Me t res

7

/ / / /

•

F LAV IAN

+

TRAJAN-HADR IAN

,

a

0

/ NOT SURVEYED

F ig .

Toney

+

2 :1 ( a)

2 00

Me tres

/

S urface c oin f inds f rom W oodcock Hall, S aham I ron A ge and early R oman ( b) F lavian - Hadrianic.

14

m ilitary m etalwork f rom t he s ame a rea ( Brown, 1 986). S urface f inds r ecorded l ike this a re evidently o f g reater a nalytical value t han many unstratified excavation c oins. A m ore w orkable d istinction i s thus between d iscoveries made under c ontrolled c onditions a nd those which were n ot. The s econd s et o f variables d etermining the value o f c oin f inds r elates t o the nature a nd quality o f a ssociated i nformation, i .e. their c ontexual a ttributes. I n e ffect, s tray f inds a re the l owest i n a h ierarchy o f categories a ccording t o the i nformation which may b e extracted f rom them. Even f or a w ell p rovenanced f ind, this w ill n ormally b e l imited t o data d erived f rom i ts physical l ocation, f or example, p roximity t o known s ites o r r outes ( cf. Hodder a nd O rton, 1 976), a nd s ometimes f rom t he i mmediate c ontext e .g. c oins f rom watery p laces. I n a ddition t o l ocational a ttributes, s ite f inds a fford c ontextual i nformation through t heir a ssociation w ith o ther a rchaeological material. H ow u seful the i nformation i s w ill vary w ith c ircumstance: the r elevance o f t he c ontext ( Medieval r obber t renches o r V ictorian excavators' backfill a re l ess u seful!); whether the c ontext i s i solated ( a p ipeline f ind) o r r elated t o o thers, e ither physically o r a s part o f an a rchaeological pattern. The m ost i nformative s ituations a re g enerally those w ith s everal f inds f rom different c ontexts w ithin the f ramework o f a w ellunderstood s ite, i deally i n p rimary c ontexts r eflecting direct d eposition, f or example, f loor s urfaces o r o ther c ontexts f or which t he f ormation p rocesses ( Schiffer, 1 976) can b e r econstructed, a lthough inevitably, this i s c onstrained by the c omprehensiveness o f r ecording ( as well a s the a ccuracy o f o bservation). Notwithstanding Neville and P itt-Rivers' early excellence, n ot until Camulodunum ( Hawkes a nd Hull, 1 947) d id a major excavation r eport i ntegrate t he c oins a nd t heir a rchaeological c ontext, a nd f ew have d one s o thereafter. P rovided that l ike i s c ompared with l ike, s ite f inds can b e a nalysed i n a variety o f ways ( cf. O 'Neill, 1 935; Grierson, 1 965; 1 966; Casey, 1 986). Grierson d istinguishes between l ocation f inds, where a r estricted a rea o r s mall s ite i s i nvolved a nd a rea f inds, where a s ubstantial s ite has been i nvestigated. W ith t he f ormer, the l evel o f c omparison i s n ormally b etween s ites, whereas w ith the l atter, variation b etween c ontexts and a reas c an a lso b e a ssessed. Unfortunately, s ite f inds have o ften b een c ompared w ithout due r egard f or e ither the c ircumstances o f discovery o r their c ontext. G iven the manner i n which many c ollections o f I ron A ge c oins have b een f ormed, they a re unlikely t o b e i n the l east r epresentative o f the s ites f rom which they d erive. The t hird s et o f variables a re those r elating t o the nature o f the c oin f ind. A basic distinction i s b etween s ingle a nd multiple f inds ( Grierson, 1 965; 1 975). The latter a re g enerally f urther d ivided i nto hoards - g roups a lready f ormed a t the t ime o f l oss, and cumulative f inds c oins brought t ogether by c ircumstance, f or instance

1 5

o fferings a t a r eligious s ite o r individual l osses accumulating i n a particular catchment. Determining which i s the case r equires c areful c onsideration o f s everal factors: the c oins; their patination and wear patterns; the depositional c ontext; any a ssociated f inds and s o o n. F or example, hoards a re f requently d isturbed a fter deposition and only r ecovered a s a s cattered f ind; conversely, a g roup f rom a s ingle r efuse p it may c onsist entirely o f s eparately l ost c oins. Thus, a s mall g roup o f C ontinental c oins f ound together a t the Hayling I sland t emple ( types o therwise unrepresented there) were p robably deposited t ogether ( Appendix 3 , H 18). The nature o f a ' find' a lso d efines i ts r elevance f or particular q uestions. Many o ther Hayling coins were a lso probably deposited i n g roups which cannot now be r econstructed, s o t here i s n o r eason t o exclude the one r ecognised ' hoard' f rom that s ite's c oin l ist, a s o ne would the hoard f rom a burial a t K ing Harry Lane ( H21) f rom the s tudy o f i ndividual c oin l osses t here. Hengistbury Head ( Cunliffe, 1 978b), w ith i ts c oin yield far i n excess o f any o ther I ron A ge s ite i s a g ood example o f these difficulties ( 162). B ushe-Fox's excavations unearthed a t l east 3 ,034 c oins - exact t otals were impossible o wing t o their c ondition ( Bushe-Fox, 1 915). However, these were n early a ll f rom a s ingle l ocation - the enigmatic S ite 3 3 - a nd deposited i n the c ontext o f metallurgical o perations which c ontinued i nto t he later s econd c entury AD, and may date exclusively t o that p eriod. This g roup i ncludes a ll the excavated g old c oins except o ne, f ound beneath a hearth on the a djacent S ite 3 2. By c ontrast, s ubsequent excavations in o ther parts o f t his 8 0 ha s ite yielded o nly 3 0 c oins between them. Of these, 1 9 came f rom a z one f urther east, where a ctivity dates t o the latest I ron A ge and early Roman p eriods ( Cunliffe, 1 978b). S even potin c oins, a type o therwise unrepresented o n the s ite, were f ound t ogether i n a f irst c entury BC c ontext i n 1 970-1 and p resumably r epresent one d eposit, while modern excavation o f o ver 2 500 s q i n o f extensive deposits r elating t o t he f loruit o f the s ite a s a n international port-of-trade ( Cunliffe, 1 978b) y ielded o nly f our c ertain c oins. With 9 9% o f the e xcavated c oins evidently f rom a s ingle, Roman, c ontext, w hatever the nature o f the deposit, the o verall c oin l ist c annot be u sed indiscriminately i n c omparing Hengistbury w ith o ther s ites. S imilarly, a s a potentially Roman deposit, the n on-local i ssues i n the S ite 3 3 f ind s hould only be u sed w ith c aution a s an i ndex o f Hengistbury's p re-Roman c ontacts. C ertainly, i ts p reeminence a s a Channel p ort i mplies t hat m ost f oreign c oins e .g. f rom A rmorican Gaul, r eached t he s ite during i ts f loruit, but w ithout s tratigraphic e vidence this r emains a matter o f i nference rather than c ertainty. S ensu s trict°, c oin l oss a t H engistbury i s r elatively modest, a nd n ot dissimilar f rom o ther major Dorset s ites s uch a s Hod Hill o r Maiden Castle. As a s ample o f c oin deposition, the r elationship o f the o verall s ite a ssemblage to the o riginal p opulation can thus be anything but s traightforward.

1 6

The t erm ' hoard' a lso has major c onceptual o vertones. A s a phenomenon, h oarding has b een extensively d iscussed ( e.g. O 'Neill, 1 935; K ent, 1 974; Grierson, 1 975) and f our main types d istinguished: a ccidental l osses; emergency h oards; s avings h oards; a nd ' abandonment' h oards, where there was n o i ntention o f r ecovery, a s in a burial. These c ategories can b e s ubdivided, e .g. emergency hoards i nto o fficial, i ndividual, r efugee a nd r obber h oards. Each p rovides different evidence, while c onversely, i nterpretation o f a particular h oard w ill depend o n i ts c omposition and c ontext, a s i n R odwell's ( 1976) l inking o f many f irst c entury B C hoards o f s imilar c omposition t o the e mergency s upposedly g enerated by Caesar's i nvasions i n 5 55 4 BC. A key question i s the validity o f the a nalogy employed. Whether a s pecific hypothesis, l ike Rodwell's, o r more g eneral, the o verall c lassification o f hoards i nto d ifferent c ategories r ests u ltimately on a nalogies w ith s ocieties where c oin use a nd hoarding a re h istorically d ocumented. F or the analogies u sed in interpreting I ron A ge c oinage t o b e r elational r ather than f ormal ( Hodder, 1 982a), h owever, w e must a ssume that i t was b eing u sed a nd was entering the a rchaeological r ecord in b roadly t he s ame way and under t he s ame c onditions a s in the s ocieties f rom which t hese a nalogies a re d rawn. This p roposition i s f undamental a nd must b e examined f urther.

I I

A s ubstantivist

p erspective

o n I ron Age c oinage

I n the s o-called ' formalist' approach, m oney i ncluding c oins - i s r egarded a s having the s ame d ominant f unction i n a ll s ocieties, i .e. f or c ommercial e xchange. I n turn , t his a ssumes the a vailability o f a n unrestricted r ange o f g oods a nd s ervices t o b e b ought a nd s old i n s uch t ransactions, a nd i mplies the a bility o f i ndividuals to o btain t heir s ubsistence a nd i ncrease their w ealth through m onetary exchanges f or p rofit. According t o t his a nalysis, a boriginal e conomies s imply p ossess s uch characteristics in a m ore w eakly developed f orm t han do m odern market e conomies ( Dalton, 1 981). A t the heart o f this f ormalist paradigm i s the a ssumption that a ll individuals, whatever the s ocial c ontext, cannot but c ompete with o ne a nother, exchanging their l abour a nd p roducts t o maximise their s atisfaction ( Godelier, 1 972). European I ron A ge c oin s tudies have l ong b een d ominated by this v iew o f m oney-use, f or example C olbert de B eaulieu's ( 1973a) a ssertion that g old c oin r epresents the natural f irst s tage in the d evelopment o f a f ully c ommercial e conomy. And while e conomic h istorians have p ropounded a n umber o f theories o f the o rigins o f money ( cf. E inzig, 1 949; C odere, 1 968; S ervet, 1 984), f ew question t he a ssumption that t he i nitial r ole o f c oinage p roper was a s a medium o f exchange and that o nce i t was i ntroduced t o a g iven s ociety, m onetary exchange r apidly r eplaced p re-existing m odes o wing t o i ts g reater c onvenience ( e.g. Galbraith, 1 975), d espite the

1 7

i ntroduction o f European m oney i n e thno-historical c ontexts, s uch a s C olonial A frica, y ielding s cant s upport f or s uch a v iew ( e.g. B ohannon, 1 959; N eale, 1 976). This e thnocentric v iew o f s mall-scale economies d iffering o nly in degree f rom t hose o f the modern W estern w orld has b een c hallenged by two major s chools o f t hought. The s tructural-Marxist paradigm i nsists o n the h istorical s pecificity o f d ifferent m odes o f p roduction ( e.g. G odelier, 1 972; 1 977; M eillassoux, 1 981), a lthough i ts a dherents s till s eek t o explain material p rocesses w ith c oncepts l argely e laborated i n r elation t o Capitalism a nd r elatively w eakly developed f or o ther economic f orms ( e.g. Marx, 1 973). The s chool c laims a s ignificant c ontinuity b etween the work o f Marx a nd that o f L evi-Strauss ( Harris, 1 980) i n their c ommon i nterest i n e lucidating h idden determining s tructures. S econdly, there i s t he s ubstantivist p aradigm a ssociated with P olanyi ( 1957) a nd Dalton ( 1969) who a rgue t hat t he c oncept o f a r ationalist H omo Economicus i s i nappropriate t o most material t ransactions o utside c apitalist market economies. The ' formalist' definition o f t he economy i s t hus a mended t o a ' substantivist' o ne - the p rocesses by which s ocieties a re materially p rovisioned ( e.g. P olanyi, 1 957) - which a cknowledges s tructural d ifferences between n on-market a nd market s ocieties, a nd t he i nseparability o f economic a ctivity f rom s ocial o rganisation a mong the f ormer, where different t ransactional p rinciples g overn t he d istribution o f material g oods a nd s ervices. T o a nalyse them, a n ew c onceptual v ocabulary has b een d eveloped: r eciprocity a nd r edistibution a s a lternative modes o f i ntegration; p orts o f t rade; g eneral a nd s pecial-purpose m onies; administered t rade e tc. ( e.g. Dalton, 1 975). I n t hese s ocieties, c ompetitive, p rice-fixing markets - i n the s ense o f b oth p lace a nd p rinciple - a re e ither c ompletely a bsent ( Sahlins, 1 974), o r may be p resent p eripherally ( Bohannon and Dalton , 1 962). Exchange r elationships a re f requently multicentric, s o that different g oods f all into mutually exclusive t ransactional s pheres o ften d istinguished by d ifferent p rinciples o f exchange and m oral values. W ith i ts n eutral t erminology drawn f rom a w ide-ranging s tudy o f s ocio-economic s ystems a nd a pparent avoidance o f an e thnoc entric v iewpoint, the s ubstantivist paradigm has r apidly g ained g round i n B ritain, particularly through Renfrew's work ( e.g. 1 973). I ts t erminology i s n ow c ommonplace ( e.g. Cunliffe, 1 978a ; 1 978b) a nd t he p erspective a f eature o f major a nalyses o f both p re- a nd p ost-Roman s ocieties in Europe ( e.g. C ollis, 1 984; Grierson, 1 959; H odges, 1 982). F or i deological and o ther r easons, t he p rotagonists o f these g roupings e mphasise their d ifferences, rather t han any c ommon g round ( cf. Harris, 1 980). T he s tructuralMarxists c riticise t he s ubstantivists f or t heir empiricist approach i n t reating o nly the v isible a spects o f different s ocial s tructures, a nd advocate r ather t he r ationalist pursuit o f an underlying l ogic i n the r ealm o f i deas. Both, however, a ccept the c entral dogma o f f unctionalism, " that cultural details must a lways b e v iewed i n c ontext,

1 8

t hat everything i s m eshed i n w ith everything e lse" ( Leach, 1 976, 5 ). I n t his t hey a re c omplementary, n ot c ontradictory. B oth a ccept t he economic s ystem a s ' embedded' i n a s ocial f abric - where Capitalism i s different f rom n on-market e conomies i s that the l atter a re embedded i n wholly d ifferent s ets o f s ocial r elations. B oth a gree, therefore, t hat o ur c oncept o f money i s a f unction o f i ts r ole i n o ur o wn s ociety. Outside this m odern c ontext, w e must b e p repared t o l ook a t what c onstitutes money, a nd the s ocial a nd economic r elations i t enshrines, in very d ifferent t erms. A s Karl P olanyi p ut i t: " Because o f t he exchange-use o f money under o ur market o rganisation o f e conomic l ife we .. t hink o f m oney i n t oo narrow t erms. N o o bject i s money per s e a nd a ny o bject i n a n a ppropriate f ield can f unction a s m oney ... money i s a s ystem o f s ymbols, s imilar t o l anguage, w riting o r w eights a nd m easures .. a s earch f or i ts s ingle purpose i s a b lind a lley ... W e must b e c ontent w ith l isting the purposes t o which o bjects c alled m oney a re a ctually p ut ... by p ointing t o t he s ituation i n which w e o perate these o bjects a nd w ith what e ffect" ( 1968, 1 75) The m ost

i mportant

o f t hese u ses a re:

1 . M eans o f p ayment: the u se o f q uantifiable o bjects i n the d ischarge o f p olitical, r eligious o r s ocial o bligations, e .g. r eciprocal g ift exchange, compensations, f ines, t ribute, b ride w ealth o r f or s ervices; a bility t o make s uch payments may c onfer p restige a nd t he s ocial i mportance o f w ealth l ies i n a p erson's c apacity t o do s o. 2 . S torage o f w ealth: a ccumulation o f quantifiable o bjects f or f uture d isposal o r t o h old a s valuables. P ossession a nd d isplay c onfer s tatus o n t he o wner a nd t here i s a c lear l ink t o the n eed t o make payments. 3 . S tandard o f value: a dministrative and exchange t ransactions, e ven a t a f ixed rate, o ften r equire a unit o f a ccount t o equate different c ommodities. S tandards i mpart g reater f lexibility t o t ransactions a nd g reater c onvertibility between c ommodities. M oney o bjects a lso f unction i n a ccounting a s a s tandard o f d eferred payments. 4 . M edium o f exchange: the u se o f quantifiable o bjects f or i ndirect exchange, i .e. a cquiring m oney o bjects through direct exchange t o o btain o ther objects t hrough f urther exchange - a s a c onvenient s tepping s tone i n o btaining o ne type o f g oods f or a nother. The dominant u sage o f m odern, o r general p urpose, m oney in c ommercial t ransactions s ubsumes a ll t he o ther f unctions. I n o ther c ontexts, this i s o ften n ot s o a nd s eparate o bjects a re f ound p erforming s ome o r o nly o ne o f these f unctions. S uch currencies P olanyi ( 1968) christened s pecial purpose money.

1 9

Under the s ubstantivist d efinition, therefore, a ny quantifiable o bjects u sed f or payment o r s torage o r s tandard o r i ndirect exchange, a re m oney. A s ymbolic s ystem, m oney a cquires i ts meaning f rom the d efinite s ocial s ituation in which i t o perates. I t can b e i ntegrated w ith o ther s ymbolic s ystems - numbers, weights, m easures a nd u ltimately r ecording a nd w riting - an a spect t o which C odere ( 1968) a ssigns particular importance i n t he development o f m oney s ystems. Where objects can b e c ounted o r m easured, exact c omparison i s p ossible. W ith s mall numbers, c ounting i s s imple; where they a re l arge, m easurement o f volume o r w eight p rovides a n i mportant s hort o ut ( cf. Ridgeway, 1 892). Only w ith t hese a dditional e lements can money s ystems r each t heir f ull s ymbolic p ower. A c rucial f urther s tep i s where the units a re made t o a uniform quality a nd r endered p recisely p roportional t o o ne a nother i n different a mounts ( Grierson, 1 978). W ith t he f abrication o f metallic p ieces o f uniform w eight, s tamped w ith a n o fficial mark, t he W estern t radition o f t he particular f orm o f m oney w e c all c oinage was b orn i n w estern A sia M inor i n t he s eventh c entury BC ( Grierson, 1 975; K raay , 1 976; S ervet, 1 984). F rom t here i t s pread r apidly throughout the G reek w orld a nd t he M editerranean, a nd t hence to the C eltic s ocieties i n a b elt s tretching f rom t he Danube t o S outhern B ritain ( cf. A llen a nd Nash, 1 980). C oinage, particular, by G rierson:

then, i s c oncrete f orm

c onventionally d efined a s o f money, e ither explicitly,

a a s

" pieces o f m etal s tamped, u sually o n b oth s ides, w ith d evices which r elate t hem t o t he m onetary units named i n v erbal o r w ritten t ransactions, s o that t hey r epresent these f or a ll l egal purposes" ( Grierson, 1 978, 2 ) o r i mplicitly,

a s by C rawford:

" a p iece o f metal o f a d etermined s tandard i ssued by a c ompetent a uthority .. a particular i ssue must have a pproximately t he s ame w eight a nd f ineness i n o rder t o b e u sable a nd .. b ear t he mark o f a s pecific a uthority" ( Crawford, 1 983, 1 85). L eft undefined, h owever, i s what f orm m oney u se a ssociated w ith c oinage takes. I n f ormalist t hought, i ts p rimary u se i s a s a g uaranteed m eans o f e xchange ( e.g. Casey, 1 986), but f rom a s ubstantivist p erspective i t c ould a s easily b e a ny o f the o ther money u ses l isted a bove - a nd exclusively s o. A p riori, the s ubstantivist a rgument t hat a ll the a rtifacts morphologically c lassifiable a s c oins n eed n ot have had the s ame f unctions e verywhere they a re f ound ( cf. P olanyi, 1 968), a ppears m ore s atisfactory, e specially i n a p rehistoric c ontext. W e, t herefore, have r ecourse t o two a pproaches t o g enerating hypotheses about t he f unction o f I ron A ge c oinage: through t he particular c ontext o f i ts a doption, a nd by m eans o f g eneralisations d educed f rom

2 0

c omparative s tudies. S ince C eltic c oinages b egan a s i mitations o f G reek c oins, the f unction o f their M editerranean p rototypes i s the o bvious s tarting p oint and w ill b e examined f urther i n S ection I II b elow. The p roblem, h owever, i s that c oin i s a symbol a nd a s w ith any s ymbolic s ystem, may have c hanged i ts m eaning i ndependently o f the t ransmission o f t he physical f orm f rom o ne cultural c ontext t o a nother ( cf. H odder, 1 982b). Whether t ransmission o f a n ew and unfamiliar device was e verywhere a ccompanied by the s ame i deas would depend o n t he p rocesses a t work, but s eems i mprobable. Moreover, many I ron A ge c oinages w ere a cquired n ot d irectly f rom their u ltimate G reek p rototypes, but v ia their d erivatives i n i ntermediate r egions. I n s uch c ircumstances, I ron A ge c oinage c learly has the p otential t o have b een u sed rather differently f rom the G reek o riginals. The a lternative a pproach i s to draw o n c omparative s tudies o f m oney o bjects u sed o ver the whole s pectrum o f ' pre-colonial' a nd n on-industrial s ocieties f or which data e xist ( e.g. Dalton, 1 965; 1 977; 1 981) t o g enerate hypotheses a bout m oney u se which might b e r elevant i n I ron A ge c ontexts. A gain, there a re p roblems, n otably t hat m ost o f the data o n p rimitive m oney w ere g athered by f ieldworkers l ate i n t he c olonial p eriod, when these s ocieties had a lready b een s eriously a ffected by the p resence o f modern European m oney ( cf. B ohannon, 1 959). I nvestigation has g enerally b een empirical ( cf. L each, 1 976) a nd f ounded i n a narrow t heoretical f ramework, c entred o n o bjects p erceived a s media o f exchange, r ather t han a ddressing the f ull range o f s ocio-economic t ransactions i n a g iven c ultural c ontext, j ust a s a rchaeologists s ingle o ut i ron " currency bars" ( Allen, 1 967b). Much o f r elevance i s p robably m issing f rom the earlier s urveys ( e.g. E inzig, 1 949; Quiggin, 1 949). N evertheless, the mass o f o bjects c lassified p rimitive c urrencies, Dalton ( 1977) p roposes, c an r educed t o three main categories o f m oney-stuff:-

a s be

1 . P rimitive valuables: the means o f a cquiring s uperior p olitical, s ocial a nd r eligious r oles, i .e. l eading s tatus, p rerogatives, p ower, entourage in s tateless s ocieties. P olanyi ( 1968) s eparates t hese f rom what he c alls t reasure i n s tate s ocieties, where h igh s tatuses a re f ormally o rganised, a nd s ocial o rganisation s harply s tratified and valuables p erform a d ifferent f unction i n t heir pattern o f e lite c irculation. Nevertheless, a s m oney-like t hings, they a re a nalogous i n being a ccumulated a nd t ransacted in n on-commercial ways. A s F inley ( 1956, 6 5) puts i t: " The t win u ses o f t reasure w ere i n p ossessing i t and i n g iving i t a way, paradoxical a s t hat may a ppear". 2 . P rimitive m oney i s d efined a s the medium o f market p lace t ransactions i n a boriginal economies w ith o nly s mall market s ectors. Dalton i ncludes uniform objects s uch a s bars o f s alt a nd a lso i tems which might easily b e i mitated a nd thus c annot b e c ontrolled by a c entral authority. The t erm ' money' i s a ppropriate, p recisely because o f the c ommercial u sage.

2 1

3 . Early cash ( or early c oinage) p roduction i s r estricted to early s tate s ocieties where i t i s used t o meet p olitical obligations, such a s f ines and t axes, o r f or s ervices, a s well a s f or o rdinary market t ransactions. I t i s a r igorously c ontrolled medium: early cash bears devices imposed by i ts i ssuer, thus r endering i t more difficult t o imitate a s well a s a ssuring the u ser o f i ts s tandard. Dalton's model i s o f g reat a ssistance in g enerating c ertain expectations o f each category. P rimitive valuables, a lthough r esticted t o the p restige s phere, should s how extensive distributions through their use i n exchanges and a lliance f ormation b oth w ithin a nd between s ocial g roups. P rimitive money i s l ikely t o have a l imited s patial distribution, c onfined t o those particular g roups and p laces which r equire this m edium ( cf. Hodges, 1 982). Early cash, particularly a s i t b ecomes more multi-purpose, should f low more f reely between g roups and c entres, but overall w ill be c onfined t o the t erritory o f i ts i ssuing authority, moving b eyond this o nly on a ccount o f i ts intrinsic value. However, the s ample on which Dalton bases h is model has no direct a nalogy t o I ron Age s ocieties. F or example, he a sserts that c oinage i s not f ound i n s tateless s ocieties. While s ocio-political c omplexity c omparable to early s tates i s evident i n c ertain a reas s uch a s C entral Gaul ( Nash, 1 976b) many c oin-using s ocieties w ere evidently n ot s tates. In e ffect, the s ocieties o f l ater prehistoric and e arly historic Europe were m embers o f a s pecies w ith i nstitutions that do n ot c onform entirely to t he c ore a ttributes o f a ny o f the g enus-sets o utlined by Dalton ( 1981). Despite h is substantivist a pproach Dalton f alls i nto the t rap o f o verr eadily equating c oinage w ith h is category o f early c ash rather than c onsidering a lternatives. A f urther p roblem t hus a rises i n many I ron Age c ontexts with definitions o f c oinage, s uch a s those quoted earlier, a s the existence o f the s tate i s y et a gain a ssumed. On this model, a ll derivatives o f t he P hillip I I s tater a re either d ismissed a s a ncient f orgeries, t rue a s r egards their o riginal c ontext, but absurd a s r egards their massive imitation in o ther c ontexts. A ttempting t o i dentify the particular mark o f a ' competent a uthority' ( Crawford, 1 983) c reates n ew p roblems w ith uninscribed c oins, g iven the a rray o f motifs and c omplex s ymbolism employed, a lthough late l egends f requently a ppear t o p ersonify this authority in an i ndividual(s). But in many o ther cases, a ' competent authority' c ould b e any individual w ith the n ecessary r esources and t echnical s kills. Even in a decentralised s ociety, these may, o f c ourse, b e c ontrolled, but we have no way o f knowing, and the degree o f p olitical c entralisation a nd l egal a spects implicit in t he definitions quoted above i s anyway a bsent. The r elationship o f I ron A ge coinage to i ts i ssuers, a s much a s t o i ts users, i s thus a n i mportant question and c ertainly cannot be a ssumed. Many Celtic c oin types w ere probably p roduced a nd u sed i n ways c losely akin t o p rimitive valuables o r p rimitive m oney in t he s tratified,

2 2

but r elatively d ecentralised s ocieties o f M iddle I ron A ge E urope. Later o n, s ome c oinages w ere p erhaps u sed m ore l ike early c ash, but many o f these w ere o nly s truck a fter the R oman c onquest o f Gaul and thus under the increasingly d irect i nfluence o f the Roman monetary economy.

I II C oin u se i n t he M editerranean World a nd beyond F rom i ts f irst a ppearance i n A sia M inor i n the s eventh c entury B C, the p rincipal uses o f Greek g old a nd s ilver c oinages w ere a s a m eans o f payment f or s ervices a nd t o m eet o bligations, particularly those o f the s tate - n ot t o f acilite t rade ( Kraay, 1 964; 1 976; Rutter, 1 981; S ervet, 1 984). This pattern p ersisted e ven when s tates b egan t o p roduce s maller d enominations a nd b ronze i ssues i n the f ifth a nd f ourth c enturies B C a nd these a cquired a n a dditional u sage i n t ransactions b etween p rivate i ndividuals ( Collis, 1 984; Grierson, 1 978). I n Dalton's ( 1977) t erms, G reek c oinage i s early c ash, but u sed o nly i n a s econdary r ole a s a m edium o f exchange. A s imilar v iew may b e taken o f R oman c oinage ( Crawford, 1 974; 1 985). T he v olume o f c oins m inted was p rimarily d etermined by t he l evel o f m ilitary expenditure - t he n umber o f a ctive l egions a t a ny t ime - a nd r epresents the c onversion o f bullion, b ooty a nd t ribute i nto a medium o f payment, a lthough o ther f actors must a lso b e c onsidered ( Hopkins, 1 980). Under the Empire, t his c ontinued ( Reece, 1 984b), g old a nd s ilver being m inted t o m eet the s tate's o bligations t o p ay i ts s ervants a nd s oldiers, whereas the p rimary purpose o f s triking b ronze was t o r egain bullion f or the s tate. The main s ources m entioning the physical u se o f m oney have b een s ummarised by R eece ( e.g. 1 979, 1 981). B oth h e a nd C rawford a gree t hat R oman c oinage was n ot s truck t o p rovide a m edium o f exchange, while C rawford ( 1970) a rgues that t he extent t o which i t was s o used has b een g reatly o verestimated, a t l east until t he early Empire. I n t he M editerranean w orld t he p rimary purpose o f s triking c oinage was thus t o make payments, whatever s econdary f unctions i t s ubsequently a cquired. One c ontext i n which C eltic-speaking g roups e ncountered Mediterranean c oin u se d irectly was during the H ellenistic p eriod, t o pay mercenaries, i ncluding C elts ( e.g. P olybius, H istories, I , 6 6, 6 ). S uch payments a re w idely a ccepted a s a s ignificant f actor i n the w idespread a doption o f c oinage in T emperate E urope ( e.g. Nash, 1 981). P olybius s tresses the mobility o f the p rimitive valuables - g old a nd c attle o f the C eltic-speaking immigrants o f N orthern I taly ( II, 2 6, 5 ). R eadily p ortable valuables w ill have been a ttractive t o r eturning m ercenaries. S uch a hypothesis i s s upported b y the early C eltic c oins b eing based o n Greek rather than R oman models, f or the l atter made v ery l ittle use o f m ercenaries. I t i s i mportant, however, that " mercenary p ayments", a s the explanation c urrently i n vogue f or the d iffusion o f c oinage, d oes n ot g ain uncritical a cceptance a s the o nly

2 3

mechanism f or i ts w idespread adoption, i n the s ame way a s the " invasion hypothesis" in B ritish p rehistory ( cf. C lark, 1 966). O ther mechanisms involved, f or example, c ould include coins used in extra-territorial payments, j ust a s the acquisition o f s laves has been suggested to explain the Roman Republican c oin hoards i n Romania ( Crawford, 1 977) o r a s Rome later disbursed d iplomatic s ubsidies t o her " friendly kings" ( Braund, 1 984). S imilarly Allen ( 1976a) r elates the proliferation during the Gallic war o f Gaulish s ilver c oinages based in character, s tandard and weight o n the Roman quinarius t o the payment o f a llied a uxiliary troops s erving with the Roman a rmies, a lthough an a lternative i s that the c oinage was s truck f or the pay o f Roman l egionaries i n Gaul during the war ( Allen, 1 976a). I f s o, i t i s to a ll intents a nd purposes an extension o f the Mediterranean currency s ystem. There a re s everal r ecent s urveys o f the r elevant Classical t extual evidence f or a ctivities in Gaul a nd Britain that can be s ubstantively defined a s money-use. These a re largely o f Dalton's ( 1977) category o f primitive valuables ( e .g. A llen, 1 976a; C ollis, 1 985; Nash, 1 975a; 1 981). Only the main points n eed b e s ummarised h ere. S ources mentioning the physical use o f money s tuffs a re f ew. The b est known i s when L ouernios, K ing o f the Arverni, distributed g old and silver to his followers in a lavish display l asting days a nd r ewarded a eulogistic p oet with a bag o f g old ( Athenaeus I V, 3 ; paraphrasing P oseidonios). But during the s econd c entury BC there i s n o c oinage a ttributable to this t erritory, a nd L ouernios may have been distributing o ther valuables ( Nash, 1 981). The same i s t rue o f the o ther r eferences which mostly r elate t o warfare and r eligion. Caesar m entions the payment o f inducements on s everal o ccasions ( e.g. DBG I , 9 ; V . 5 5; V II, 3 7; 63; 64), g enerally a s pecunia g ; o ther c ontexts include t ribute ( vectigalia; DBG I , 1 8; V , 2 2) t olls ( portoria ; LaG I , 1 8), the dedication o f s poil ( DBG V I, 1 7) and valuables a t s acred p laces ( cf. S trabo, Geography I V , 1 , 1 3) much o f which Caesar s tripped f rom s uch s ites ( Haselgrove, 1 984b). Another use was the a ttempt t o r ansom a chieftain's head f or i ts w eight i n g old ( Strabo I V, 4 , 5 ; Diodorus S iculus, H istories V , 29, 4 ). References t o c oins, a dmittedly f rom C entral Europe, a ppear i n L ivy's a ccounts o f booty carried i n various t riumphs during the s econd c entury BC ( Brooke, 1 933a; Haselgrove, 1 984b) s uch a s S cipio's o ver t he B oii i n 1 67 BC ( Livy, H istoriae, XXXVI, 40). Caesar's t estimony, i f a ccepted a t f ace value, implies the deliberate a ccumulation a nd r eckoning o f valuables among a t l east s ome Gaulish c ommunities ( DBG V I, 1 9). The o ne c ontemporary passage which r efers t o c oinage in pre-Roman B ritain, i s Caesar's well known c omment: " Utuntur aut a ere, aut nummo aureo, aut taleis f erreis ad c ertum p ondus examinatis p ro nummo..." ( DBG V , 1 2). This a pparently a ttests the use o f g old coins, of bronze in unspecified f orm and o f i ron bars ' pro nummo' and the

2 4

s ignificance o f t he weight o f a ll three ( cf. S pratling, 1 976). I t a lso, h owever, i ntroduces s everal uncertainties. I n terms o f what f unction would Caesar r egard an i tem a s nummus? Was h e c orrect? W ere t here i tems which we would r egard a s money , but Caesar w ould n ot have? T o what part(s) o f B ritain d oes the passage r efer? Caesar i s d escribing the P ars maritim a but may have c onflated i nformation r elating t o o ther a reas o btained f rom t raders o r native i nformants. The d ifficulties o f the t exts have b een r eviewed extensively ( e.g. C ollis, 1 985; Nash, 1 976a): the a ccounts l ack g eographical a nd t emporal s pecificity; their e thnoc entricity; t he p ropagandist purpose o f s ome c ompilations ( Stevens, 1 951); g eneral s hortcomings ranging f rom b ias, m isrepresentation and s electivity t o e rrors, o missions, m istakes o f t ransliteration a nd i ncomplete s urvival ( cf. T ierney, 1 960); t ranslation a ccording t o o ur o wn, e thnoc entric, f rame o f r eference. P articularly unsatisfactory has b een u se o f t exts a s though they r elate t o a s ocio-political o rganisation, r eligious b eliefs, c ustoms, a nd c ulture c ommon t o a ll C eltic-speaking c ommunities, unchanging i n s pace o r t ime. The a rchaeological r ecord o f l ater I ron A ge Europe ( Collis, 1 984; C hampion e t a l., 1 985) s hows c onsiderable variation, even a cross r elatively s mall r egions, s uch a s B elgic Gaul ( Haselgrove, 1 987) which i n t urn must i ndicate d ifferences b etween g roups in their s cale a nd s ocio-cultural c omplexity. T he t exts themselves s upport this ( Nash, 1 976a). T here i s a c lear d istinction between t he p olitically d ecentralised a nd d ispersed c ommunities described by P olybius a nd the c entralised a nd s ocioeconomically d ifferentiated p olities o f Caesar's a ccount ( Nash, 1 976a). And t hroughout much o f T emperate Europe, the l ater I ron A ge s aw r apid c ultural c hange a nd development ( Collis, 1 985). The i mplications a re twofold. S o f ar, this d iscussion has emphasised the c ontextual interpretation o f c oin f inds in a s tatic f ramework. U ltimately, however, a n a rchaeological a pproach must encompass the dynamic nature o f phenomena ; the c hanging c haracter o f the c oinage a nd that o f i ts s ocio-cultural c ontexts. The task i s made m ore difficult b y the r ecursive r elationship b etween t he t wo. The p resence o f i mported c oins n eed have l ittle p rocessual s ignificance. A s w ith a ny e xotica , mere p ossession c ould have c onferred p restige b ut d oes n ot, i n i tself, b estow o n c oinage a f ormal r ole even f or w ealth s torage. D eliberate p roduction o f c oinage, e ven i f w holly i mitative, i mplies s omething v ery different - t hat c oins were b eing made f or a purpose. The v ery a doption o f c oinage i s thus o ne o f t he m ost s ignificant c hanges undergone by I ron A ge c ultures i n Gaul and B ritain, y et i t i s r are t o f ind the p oint a ddressed directly. B oth p otin a nd b ronze c oinage have b een l inked t o the d evelopment o f r etail marketing ( e.g. A llen, 1 971; Collis, 1 971b ; R odwell, 1 976). Y et o nly Collis evinces a c oncern f or t he f undamental a nd p otentially d isruptive

2 5

nature o f s uch a d evelopment. F or t he r est, i t a ppears t oo o bvious a n i mprovement f or f urther c omment. Y et many European c ommunities well p laced t o have a dopted c oinage, n evertheless did n ot ( Haselgrove, 1 979). A lso, the f unction o f c oinage may have changed o ver t he p eriod that i t was i n u se ( Collis, 1 974a). Thus, while t he dynamism o f s ocial f ormations r equires analysis o f a spects o f I ron A ge s ocieties beyond t he c oinage, the dynamism o f the c oinage i tself a lso d emands f ormal m ethodological r ecognition ( Chapter 3 ). The question o f why c oin u se o nly d eveloped i n s ome c ontexts, a nd o f w hat f actors g overned i ts a cceptance ( cf. Renfrew, 1 978) i s a c omplex o ne. R elevant f actors i nclude the s ophistication o f currencies a lready u sed by a g iven p eople a nd their l evel o f s ymbolic d evelopment. The f ormer r aises particular difficulties: even when d irectly o bservable, a ny u se o f q uantifiable o bjects a s m oney s ymbols i s o pen t o m isinterpretation a nd may b e v irtually i mpossible t o r ecover a rchaeologically. S ophisticated u sage o f a m oney s tuff i n a particular a rchaeological c ontext c ould t hus entirely e lude u s; i t c ould b e f abricated f rom a p erishable material o r may s imply d efy r ecognition. Our a ppreciation o f t he p robable nature o f ' money-use' i n g roups adopting c oinage w ill depend v ery l argely o n how o verall, we v iew t hat s ociety through i ts material r emains, a nd i s t hus e ffectively c ircular. S ome r elevant i nferences about s ymbolic development can, n evertheless, b e made d irectly f rom material r emains ( Renfrew, 1 982): t he u se o f units o f m easure; o f u nits p ermitting quantification; o f p lanning t o a p reconceived d esign. C oinage i tself i s e vidence f or s ome o f t hese c oncepts a nd they a re c entral t o why s ome s ocieties a dopted c oinage r eadily a nd o thers f ailed t o do s o. There i s o verwhelming evidence o f the c omplementary c apabilities o f the c ommunities w hich a dopted c oinage. Whatever t he p roblems p osed by c oin l egends ( Allen a nd Nash , 1 980) t here was a pparently w idespread " conditional l iteracy" ( Goody, 1 977) by the end o f the f irst m illennium BC, a s s een i n t he w ritten r ecords o f t he Helvetii ( Champion, 1 980a) and o ther evidence ( Jacobi, 1 974; o f. Caesar, D BG, V . 4 8). C omplex mathematical f eats can b e p erformed a nd n atural c ycles c omprehended even i n t he absence o f s ymbolic n otations s uch a s we o urselves employ ( Piggott, 1 968): the C oligny Calendar s tands a s evidence t hat t hey w ere. There i s w idespread evidence o f s tandardised units in S outhern England, i ncluding i ron bars ( Allen, 1 967b), volumes o f s alt, p erhaps even o f s torage p its ( cf. Cunliffe, 1 984), a nd s tone w eights ( Champion a nd C hampion, 1 981). S pratling ( 1973; 1 976; 1 979) has a rgued that b oth h oard g roups a nd i ndividual a rtefacts i mply the existence o f p recise w eight s tandards. S miths w ere c learly able t o exert t he c ontrol o ver quality a nd q uantity n ecessary f or p roducing c oinage. A c ommon f actor i n the h istorical s ources t o the a reas o f C eltic Europe where c oinage adopted i s the w idespread evidence f or t he use p rimitive valuables i n the d ischarge o f s ocial i n s ocial c ompetition, a nd f or w ealth s torage

2 6

r elating t o was r eadily o f existing o bligations, a nd d isplay.

The i mportance o f w ealth l ay i n a p erson's capacity t o make s uch payments without undermining their s tatus. Whatever the i tems i nvolved - t orcs, r ings o r weaponry, cattle o r s laves - the use o f s uch valuables w ithin widespread networks o f patron-client r elations was evidently a well e stablished a spect o f the r eproduction o f the s ocial o rder in many r egions. A llen ( 1976a), C ollis ( 1971a), Nash ( 1981) and Haselgrove ( 1979; 1 984b) have a ll a rgued that the i ntroduction o f p recious m etal c oinage i s r eadily understandable a gainst t his background. C oinage s imply b ecame another s pecialised f orm o f valuable, s ubject t o the s ame g eneral r ules o f u se a s o thers. I t was a rguably f reely c onvertible with t hem by w eight o f p recious metal. There a re p ossible m etrological r elationships b etween i ndividual a rtefacts and r ound numbers o f c oins: t he t orc in the Tayac, G ironde, h oard w eighs 0 .762 kg., 1 00 t imes the m ean w eight o f the l ocal g old s tater ( Kellner, 1 970). But i n t ime, i t i s easy t o s ee c oinage, w ith i ts g reater v ersatility, a ll but r eplacing these t raditional valuables. I n c onditions o f i ncreasing p olitical c entralisation, an i mportant p roperty o f c oinage must have been i ts s ymbolic ability t o c onvey i nformation b etween the i ssuing a uthority a nd the r ecipient r egarding obligations o r s tatus; g radually therefore i t g ained a cceptance - a nd a cquired n ew r oles - a s a t oken. A s a w orking model the hypothesis i s a ttractive; i t w ill be f urther examined b elow. C ertain r egularities i n the c oin evidence s hould a lso be mentioned. A c ommon a ssumption i s t hat g old c oins were the i tems o f m ost value. The e thnocentricity o f this i s b rought o ut by Tacitus' c omments o n the a ttitude o f G erman p eoples t o g old a nd s ilver a t a later date ( Germania, 5 ). H owever, the p ractice o f making g old and s ilver-plated r eplicas o f p recious m etal c oins does s upport the e xistence o f a m etallic h ierarchy . M ore c aution i s n ecessary, however, w ith t he f urther a ssumption t hat multi-metallic c oinage ' sets' n ecessarily r epresent unified s ystems with f ixed r elationships a nd c onvertibilities between d ifferent ' denominations' a ccording t o their w eight a nd value ( e.g. A llen, 1 970a). Rome's c oinage was s uch a currency s ystem and was g radually i mposed o n most o f W estern Europe, including Gaul f rom 5 0 B C ( although there were i mportant c hanges during the r eign o f Augustus, n ot l east h is r eorganisation o f the mainstream b ronze c oinage, e .g. S utherland, 1 951; Grant, 1 954; C rawford, 1 985). B ut direct r elationships b etween i t a nd the c oinages o f the Celtics peaking a reas a re o ften t oo r eadily a ssumed f rom the c oincidences which do exist e .g. A llen ( 1976a). A lthough " bimetallic c oinages" a re r elatively c ommon, s outh-east England i s e xceptional i n having a s ustained " trimetallic c oinage" ( although this may b riefly have b een the c ase in B elgic Gaul i n the m id f irst c entury BC; Haselgrove, 1 984b).

2 7

I V

The

a rchaeology o f

c oin p roduction and types

The emphasis o f this s tudy i s upon c oins a s f inds. F or i ts r esults to be integrated w ith o ther a rchaeological material, however, equally f undamental i s the c omplementary perspective a fforded by the s tudy o f c oins a s a rtefacts i n their own r ight. Much o f the work r eviewed in Chapter 1 i s c oncerned with s uch matters. I p ropose t o c omment briefly on three r elevant questions: the p roduction o f c oinage, the s cale o f output and what information may be extracted f rom c oin types. The t echnology o f s triking o r casting I ron Age c oinage has been discussed extensively. R ecent s urveys i nclude those o f Allen ( 1971; 1 976a), A llen a nd Nash ( 1980), C ollis ( 1985), Kellner ( 1984), Roymans a nd Van d er S anden ( 1980), and T ournaire e t a l. ( 1982). A particularly i mportant f ield i s the c omparative analysis o f c oin dies, i nvolving detailed s tudies o f die-combinations a nd o f the s uccessive s tages o f wear, t ouching up a nd a lteration experienced by the d ies ( e.g. C olbert de B eaulieu, 1 973a; Göbl, 1 972; Gruel, 1 981). A llied to a nalytical m ethods capable o f determining metallic c omposition t o a h igh l evel o f accuracy and p recision ( e.g. Hall a nd M etcalf, 1 972), s uch s tudies enable a more detailed a ppraisal o f the p roduction p rocess and o f the r elative o rdering o f i ndividual s eries than f or a ny o ther f orm o f a rtefact. Also unusual t o c oinage i s the p ractice o f o verstriking n ew types o nto a c oin, which ( if the o riginal types can be i dentified) p rovides valuable insights i nto their r elative c hronology ( cf. D ebord, 1 982; S cheers, 1 982). The survival rate o f d ies, o r o f o ther equipment o r facilities a ssociated with m inting, i s very l ow. None have been f ound in B ritain, a lthough a f ew a re known f rom the Continent, f or example, dies f rom C orent, Bar-sur-Aube a nd Avenches and a hoard o f anvils and s tocks f rom S zalaska , Hungary ( Allen, 1 976a; Collis, 1 985). I n s eeking t o e stablish where c oinage was p roduced, much has been made o f the f requent o ccurrence o f baked-clay s lab-moulds o n later I ron A ge s ites i n the c oin-using parts o f Europe. S uch f inds a re s ummarised by T ournaire e t a l. ( 1982); f or Britain, new f inds a t B oxgrove, S ussex ( Bedwin, 1 983), and B raughing ( Partridge, 1 982) may be a dded t o their l isting. S uch evidence poses two p articular questions: whether these m oulds were, in f act, c onnected w ith the manufacture o f c oins, and i f s o, what i mplications this has f or the o rganisation o f p roduction? The c onventional interpreta tion o f these moulds, with t heir varying number, s hape a nd s ize o f depressions f or t he p roduction o f c oin b lanks, upheld experimentally by Tylecote ( 1962), has r ecently been challenged ( Sellwood, 1 980) o n metallurgical g rounds that the f orm o f the p ellet these w ould g enerate - however this was done - i s i ncompatible w ith the edge characteristics o f the c oins, a p oint n oted by Allen ( 1961a) and Castelin ( 1960). S ellwood s uggests t he b lanks w ere p oured i nstead. While c ertain t ypes, e .g. the-bronzes i nscribed MOTVIDIACA, probably were, this i s unlikely f or the majority. Alternatively, t he pellets may have passed through a s econd

2 8

s tage o f manufacture. S ome Gaulish c oins were s truck o n cast blanks ( Allen, 1 961a).

c ertainly

The matter r emains unresolved. These s lab-moulds were c ertainly in s ome way a ssociated w ith metalworking. Analysis has shown g old, s ilver and c opper r esidues ( Tournaire e t al., 1 982) and b ronze a nd s ilver p ellets were f ound in s itu in m oulds f rom S t. Albans ( Frere, 1 983a) and O ld S leaford ( Jones e t a l., 1 976). Their p resence o n s ites c orrelates r emarkably c losely i n s pace a nd t ime with I ron A ge c oinage. I f n othing e lse, they a re f urther evidence f or the s ame degree o f t echnical c ompetence and c ontrol in m etalworking implied by the c oinage i tself. A c onnection w ith i ncreased a lloying a t this period i s a lso p ossible, a lthough the s pecific f unction s uggested by S ellwood ( 1980), c ounting p ellets t o p roduce a lloys o f s pecific c omposition, s eems o ver-contrived. The o nly t rue c oin m oulds known a re f or casting potins, f rom B oviolles ( Blanchet, 1 905) and S enlis ( Massy, 1 983). Whether o r n ot s lab-moulds were d irectly c onnected with c oin p roduction, their o ccurrence cannot i n any case be taken a s s ynonymous w ith m inting a t that exact physical l ocation. B lanks p roduced i n o ne p lace may have b een taken e lsewhere f or s triking; the A frican a nalogy p resented by Rowlands ( 1971) demonstrates j ust how s ocially and s patially c omplex p rocesses o f metalworking can be. As evidence o f minting, f inds o f b lanks o n s ites a re o pen t o a s imilar o bjection. Ultimately, m inting c an o nly b e s tudied i n the b roader c ontext o f the o rganisation o f m etalworking g enerally, a lthough a s the Gussage A ll S aints f inds s how, even where the p rimary evidence i s p reserved, there a re s till f ormidable p roblems o f i nterpretation ( cf. S pratling, 1 979). Even where i nscriptions r elating t o i dentifiable p laces s uch a s Camulodunum appear on particular c oin types, i t i s s till an a ssumption that they w ere m inted there. No B ritish s ite has y ielded the multiple i ndications o f c oin manufacture evident a t F rench s ites s uch a s V illeneuve S t. Germain ( Debord e t a l., 1 985). C onversely, s ince w e know n othing o f the p rocesses by which c oin was disbursed by i ts i ssuers, even w here s eries were s truck f or c irculation i n a particular a rea ( for example, the TASCIOVANVS F IL types o f Cunobelinus ( Allen, 1 967a)) i t d oes not f ollow that t hey were m inted within the s ame t erritory. C ontrary t o the g eneral a ssumption ( Hogg, 1 971; Collis, 1 985), b oth his major s eries c ould have been minted a t a s ingle l ocation. Distributional evidence cannot yield a c onclusive answer, even when a llied t o t he s tudy o f c ompositional and typological variation. This i s equally t rue where s everal p laces o f p roduction a re s uggested f or a s ingle c oinage, e .g. t hat inscribed TOGIRIX i n Gaul ( Dayet and C olbert de Beaulieu, 1 962), a lthough d ies a re evidently more easily t ransported f rom o ne workshop t o a nother than i s the f inished product. A s trict distinction must thus b e drawn between manufacture ( making the dies and blanks and s triking the c oins - o r the s trip moulds f or casting p otin c oins; Allen 1 971) and i ssue ( who a uthorised o r c ommissioned c oinages

2 9

and why, and how the f inished product was distributed). I t i s anachronistic t o a ssume that e ither manufacture o r i ssue were c ontinuous processes. I f anything, c oin production was p robably largely episodic a nd r elated to particular needs o r events, a s well a s being g overned by f actors s uch a s the availability o f the raw materials. I t would be m istaken to a ssume that the latter were in equally p lentiful s upply in a ll a reas a t a ll t imes. According t o the model f ollowed here, a major f actor in m inting must have been the n eed to make s pecific payments, whether p olitical, r eligious o r s ocial. An o bvious c ontext i s the emergency c onditions g enerated by war. However, the t emptation under the h istorical paradigm to r elate c oinages s olely t o events r ecorded i n the t exts ( e.g. S cheers, 1 972) must be a voided unless there i s a s trong s upporting evidence. Detailed die s tudies may be informative - d ies u sed to exhaustion o r d espite disfigurement; d iscontinuities i n die c ombinations - but in g eneral, c ontextual p rinciples must be a pplied. Rules f ormulated f or o ne s ituation a re n ot n ecessarily r elevant t o a nother. B oth dies and c oins may s ometimes have been s tockpiled - Allen ( 1972) s uggests the f ormer f or the i ssues inscribed C RICIRV . Thus, a s ignificant lapse i n t ime i s p ossible b etween the f irst a nd last c oins o f a particular s eries, w ithout any p erceptible d ifferences between them. Equally, c oins may have e ntered ' circulation' l ong a fter they were s truck. C onversely, c omplex type-development n eed n ot imply a l ong duration f or a s eries, but c ould i nstead r elate t o s hort p eriods o f i ntense a ctivity. I nevitably, t here a re cases where typological development i s the r everse o f the a nticipated c hronological development ( e.g. C olbert de B eaulieu, 1 973a). And a lthough in g eneral, both weight a nd metallic c omposition decline with t ime in I ron A ge c oinage ( e.g. Allen a nd Nash, 1 980), these a ttributes must n ot be a pplied i nflexibly f or determining the inter-relationships b etween s eries, e specially i f the s amples a re s mall. Various s tatistical t echniques have been developed t o e stimate the number o f d ies used in particular s eries f rom the s urviving s ample within known c onfidence l imits. By using experimental data o n the possible number o f c oins s truck f rom each d ie ( e.g. S ellwood, 1 963) and c omposition, the t otal number o f c oins s truck o r t he w eight o f p recious metal employed ( e.g. Allen, 1 975) can a lso be e stimated. A s imple c omputer p rogram o bviates the n eed f or p rotracted calculations ( Sellwood, 1 984b). Caution i s, h owever, necessary, a s the method a ssumes a r andom sample o f the o riginal p opulation, a c ondition which cannot be m et i n p ractice ( Chapter 3 ). Nevertheless the l ikelihood o f o btaining s ignificantly m isleading r esults s hould d iminish where the n umber o f individual f inds i s r easonably large ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 984b). As additional variables a re i ntroduced, s o the c onfidence l imits decrease. The episodic nature o f p roduction, f or i nstance, may have precluded d ies being used t o f ull capacity; how many coins were a ctually p roduced w ill have b een d ependent o n the c ircumstances ( e.g. i n a m int working under emergency pressure, more breakages a re l ikely) a nd w ill o nly rarely have r eached the theoretical maxima ( cf. Haselgrove,

3 0

1 984b). Nor n eed a ll the c oins have entered c irculation. N evertheless, s uch o rder o f magnitude e stimates o f the r elative importance o f d ifferent s eries and, through t his, a g auge o f their r elative s urvival rate, a re o f g reat value. The f inal s et o f a rchaeological questions c oncern the meaning o f the a ctual c oin types - a s o pposed t o the s eparate p roblem o f type definition ( Chapter 4 ). A gain, the historical paradigm has dominated the f ield, many discussions f ocusing o n the l ink between c oin l egends and individuals in the h istorical s ources, e .g. C olbert de B eaulieu's ( 1962) l isting o f p rominent l eaders i n Gaul mentioned by Caesar whose names o ccur o n c oins, o r Rodwell's ( 1976) a ppraisal o f whether the Dubnovellaunus o f c oin s eries f ound i n E ssex and K ent r espectively, was o ne individual o r two. S ometimes g roup names o ccur: i n Gaul, Caesar's Remi ( REMO), the Aulerci Eburovices ( AVILIRCO I IBVROVIC) o r the V eliocasses ( SVTICOS/VELIOCAGI) ( Roymans and Van der Sanden , 1 980) o r i n B ritain, the I ceni ( ECEN) ( Allen, 1 970a). O therwise, a ttention has l argely c oncentrated on what c an be l earnt o f I ron A ge customs and material c ulture f rom t heir depiction o n c oins ( e.g. A llen, 1 958), a s with the s hip r epresentation o n a c oin o f Cunobelinus ( Muckelroy e t a l., 1 979). S uch s tudies a re, however, l imited b y t he g eneralised dependence o f many I ron A ge coin types on Classical models, given the difficulty in e stablishing whether a particular type has b een a ffected by s uch borrowing. By c ontrast, l ittle a ttention has been paid t o what m ight be l egitimately i nferred f rom the c oin t ypes c oncerning p olitical c onditions and s ocial o rganisation. Apart f rom o ccasional r eferences t o what may b e t itles and p laces, t he majority o f inscriptions have g enerally b een a ssumed t o b e the p ersonal names o f the i ssuing authorities, variously described a s kings, c hieftains o r magistrates w ithout f urther qualification. N ot o nly i s s uch an approach devoid o f a nthropological i nsight a s t o the political s tatus o f the i ndividuals s o named, but o ther i nterpretations a re c learly p ossible. Far g reater s ensitivity t o the c omplexity o f the i ssues i nvolved i s n eeded. Already, d ie s tudies have demonstrated h ow much can be l earnt f rom the variation e ither a llowable o r d eliberately i ntroduced w ithin an i ndividual c oin type. I n many cases, " control marks" ( cf. Grierson, 1 975) evidently d ifferentiate i ndividual d ies i n a s eries, a s w ith Cunobelinus' g old c oinage - an i ndication o f t he c ontrol exercised o ver m ints o perating under c onditions o f r elative p olitical c entralisation ( Allen, 1 975) - o r s ub-groups within the i nscribed c oinage a scribed t o t he Dobunni ( Sellwood, 1 984a). I n the l atter case, S ellwood t ested the p roposition that the die-marks d istinguished t he p roducts o f individual c raftsmen o r s eparate mints, o r w ere marks o f value, and c oncluded that either o f the f ormer were possible. A lternatives t o b e c onsidered i nclude a c orrelation between particular markings a nd individual e ngraving s tyles o r t he pattern o f die l inking.

3 1

O ther p ossibilities a re t hat t o f ill up the s ubsidiary a reas o f the f ield, i ndividual d ie-sinkers c ould s elect their o wn motifs a nd devices, whether o r n ot f rom a r ecognised r epertoire, a nd d id s o f or r easons which w ere s ometimes d eliberate, s ometimes d ecorative, a nd s ometimes r andom . I n o ther cases, t he t ype a s a whole i s c learly a carefully c ontrived c omposition. M uch c ould be l earnt f rom variant s pellings a nd l ettering s tyles o f i nscriptions ( Allen a nd Nash, 1 980) a nd where i ndividual m otif-punches w ere u sed i n die manufacture ( cf. Duval, 1 977). But p rogress i n e lucidating the m eanings a ttaching t o t he s ymbolism a nd choice o f particular c oin types w ill o nly c ome t hrough d eveloping b etter c riteria f or g rouping t ypes t ogether a s r elated i ssues ( e .g . Cunobelinus' d eveloped t ypes, A llen, 1 967a) a nd s tudying their variability. S uch a n a pproach has a n o bvious b earing o n the r elationship b etween the degree o f p olitical c entralisation a nd t he c ontrol exerted o ver m inting i n d ifferent c ontexts ( cf. C ollis, 1 971a).

3 2

Chapter

3

Analytical p rocedure

I

I ron A ge c oin samples:

The p roblems p osed s ummarised by Grierson:-

and p roblems

theoretical c onsiderations by c oin evidence

a re

succinctly

' The f undamental p roblem i s .. r eliability. The validity o f any i nterpretation .. must largely depend upon how exactly ( coin f inds) r epresent .. random s amples ... Not merely a re the s amples extremely s mall they a re s everal t imes r emoved f rom the c oin p opulations which i nterest us. The c oins available f or s tudy a re o nly a s ample o f those .. l ost. These in turn a re o nly a s ample o f those .. in c irculation. Those .. would b e o nly a sample o f the .. c oins i ssued. Anywhere i n this r epeated p rocess o f s ampling, d istortions o f the e vidence a re o nly t oo l ikely t o have o ccurred. F inally .. o ur information r egarding the c oins f ound may be i ncorrect." ( 1965, v) S uch a model can be a lternatively expressed ( e.g. Collis, 1 974b), and extended t o any a ssociated a rchaeolo gical material ( Clarke, 1 973). Unless p ossible biases a re c onsidered, unjustified i nferences w ill c ertainly b e made. Regarding Grierson's f inal p oint, c oins may be m isidentified when worn o r c orroded, o r by f ollowing an inadequate description. F indspots a re o ften e rroneously r ecorded and c oins m isattributed. A r ecent problem i s deliberate f alsification . There a re a lso modern f orgeries s uch a s the s o-called Guildford-Haslemere hoard o r the British B 2 s eries ( Mackensen, 1 973). Excavation c oins have possibly n ot a lways b een handed i n, o r s tolen f rom an unguarded s ite ( cf. Rodwell, 1 981). O ther p roblems i nclude modern l osses and even p lanting o f c oins. Exceptional s ingle f inds must therefore a lways be carefully s crutinised, and even w ith s everal f inds the i ssue can be f inely balanced, a s w ith the P tolemaic b ronzes f rom Winchester ( Collis, 1 975; B iddle, 1 975) and can o ften o nly be r esolved when the f inds can be r elated t o a wellestablished pattern, e .g. Roman c oins f ound i n S cotland ( Casey, 1 985). S uch a f rame o f r eference i s, however, lacking f or I ron Age c oins. I n discussing sample bias, a c onvenient distinction i s between t ransformational factors ( e.g. S chiffer, 1 976) which a ffect the f ormation o f the a rchaeological r ecord, and r etrieval factors r elating t o how data a re c ollected and r ecorded ( e.g. Cherry e t a l., 1 978). The rarity o f Roman g old c oins on s ites exemplifies the f ormer. Owing

3 3

t o their value, t he f inds a re a p oor r eflection o f t he numbers s truck ( cf. Reece, 1 984a). T he l atter a re discussed by Rodwell ( 1981): a ctive c ollectors o r r ecord keeping i n c ertain a reas; l and u se; known s ites. E ven under ' controlled' c onditions, b iases i ntervene: t he a rea o r s ite s ampled, o r the m ethod o f excavation. M ore ,r igorous p rocedures i n r ecent y ears have r esulted i n a s ignificant i ncrease i n s mall s ilver types r ecovered, e .g. a t S ilchester. W ith f resh data c ollection , the r emedy i s o ften in a rchaeologists' hands. F or material a lready c ollected, o ne must d etermine where i nformation i s u sable, a nd s eek to c ontrol o r c ompensate f or b iases. An a dvantage o f c oin evidence i s t hat partially i ndependent e stimates f or ' coins m inted' a nd t hus o f t heir s urvival rate c an b e o btained, while w orking w ith t he numbers f ound a s evidence f or ' coins d eposited'. The n umber o f ' coins c irculating', c an thus b e a pproached f rom two d irections. The a rchaeological p roblems have r eceived e xtensive d iscussion ( e.g. C larke, 1 973). I s hall, t herefore, c oncentrate o n h ow c oin f inds d iffer f rom o ther c ategories. This may b e expressed w ith a d iagram i llustrating t he l ife cycle o f c oinage ( Fig. 3 :1). C oins a re " attracted" t o t he a rchaeological r ecord ( cf. S chiffer, 1 976) much l ess t han, f or example, f ired c lay a rtefacts, a lthough i nevitably t he a ctual t rajectory o f i ndividual c oins i s dependent o n various f actors: i ntrinsic, c ontextual a nd c hance. T he k ey a rea i s t he c irculation p ool: n ot a ll c oins m inted e nter i t, a nd those that d o may b e r ecalled a nd r ecoined o r m elted d own. R emoval o f c oin f rom i ts r egion o f c irculation ( e.g. by m igration) i s a s pecial c ase o f t his p rocess. The r elatively f inite nature o f the m etal r eservoir s hould a lso b e s tressed: a part f rom c oins t hemselves, the o nly s ources o f s upply a vailable w ithin t he r egional s ystem a re o ther a rtefacts ( including bullion), o r metal e ither i mported f rom e lsewhere o r extracted l ocally . Their c omposition s hows t hat s ome Gaulish s ilver a nd b ronze types were evidently s truck f rom m elted-down R oman c oins ( Allen and Nash, 1 980). Apart f rom c oins w ithdrawn i n t his manner, the main p rocesses whereby c oins l eave t he c irculation p ool a re deliberate d iscard, a ccidental l oss, a nd h oarding. B ut deposition i s o ften o nly t emporary: e fforts may b e made t o r ecover a ccidental l osses o r d eliberate d eposits, e .g. c oins l ooted f rom s acred s ites a nd r epossessed h oards. C oin f inds, e specially o f p recious m etal, a re l ikely t o b e c laimed by t heir f inder. S ome o f t he I ron A ge c oins p laced in l ater g raves i n B elgic Gaul ( cf. S cheers, 1 977) w ere p resumably f inds i n t his manner. Many h oards f ound b efore the twentieth c entury a re known t o have b een m elted d own with l ittle o r n o r ecording; many may have s uffered s uch a f ate a s early a s t he R oman p eriod. I t i s c onvenient, therefore, t o r egard a s potential data , o nly I ron A ge c oinage s urviving i n ' archaeological c ontext' ( Schiffer, 1 976) a t l east until t he e ighteenth c entury, w hen discoveries began t o b e f requently r ecorded, a nd a s r ecorded a rchaeological data f inds a bout which w e have s ome information. The d istinction i s inevitably s omewhat a rbitrary. C onceptually, what i s i mportant i s t he

3 4

r I 0 U . 4 0 0 . 4 0 . 4 4 4

§ 4 0 0 . 1 0 0 0

0

1

0 P i 0 C l . m c A

Converted t o r aw material

o o ther a rtefacts

A

-0 4 .t o O 0 O 0

• 0 c d 1 4 4 . ) P . 0 4 0

o

1 4 4 1

a

. c i + 3 . 1 O O l i c

p l

0

>

.0

0 0 0 1 4 • 0 c ) 4 . ) 4 . ) C a 0

1 4

" 0 . 0 r l A

0

.l . a

1 4

0 .

1 4

0 o 0

• C I 1

0

0 2 t )

1 4

0 0

g P 4 4 ) 1 r e i d 0 V . 0

0

• r i X

i 0 0 4. 4

1 1 0 1 4 V

0 0

M ETAL O RES

0

> +3

Recovered

Extraction

0

F ig.

3 :1

L ife cycle o f the i ndividual c oin.

35

1 34

M:

00«

0 1 4 o f X i d C I

r elationship b etween ' coins r ecovered' a nd ' coins d eposited a nd n ot r ecovered' a nd t hat between the l atter a nd ' coins c irculating', a nd h ow much t hese have b een d istorted. A lthough o n R oman s ites, most c oin f inds may r easonably b e r egarded a s l osses f rom u se ( Reece, 1 984a), this cannot b e a ssumed f or I ron A ge c oins. The t erm d eposition, c overing b oth a ccidental l oss a nd d eliberate d iscard, i s therefore t o be p referred.

I I

The dynamics

o f c oin c irculation a nd d eposition

I t i s i mportant t o e stablish s ome g eneralised hypotheses a bout c oin c irculation a nd d eposition t hrough t ime. These f actors a re r elevant b oth t o t he c hronological i nterpretation o f c oin-bearing deposits a nd t o t he g eog raphical a rea o ver which t ypes c irculated. H oards c ontain c oins p roduced a t d ifferent t imes, a llowing s eriation t o b e u sed i n t he r elative o rdering o f d ifferent t ypes ( cf. A llen, 1 960; C rawford, 1 969). I n b oth s pace a nd t ime, c oin d eposition w ill b ear a r elationship t o the c hanging c omposition o f the c oin p opulation t hat c onstitutes t he ' circulation s phere', but n ot n ecessarily a s imple o r d irect o ne. Any g eographical c hanges i n the e xtent o f a particular c oin p ool i n e ffect a lters t he c irculation a rea o f i ts c onstituent types. The C laudian c onquest i ntroduced many much earlier R epublican i ssues i nto c irculation i n B ritain ( e.g. S utherland, 1 937), but this e xtension o f t heir d istribution has n o r elevance t o the extent o f t he a rea under t he p olitical c ontrol o f R epublican R ome. Yet t ime a fter t ime, this p rocedure i s a pplied t o I ron A ge c oin f inds. Most s tudies take a n i ndividual type, o r c ontemporary g roup, a nd a nalyse them a ccording t o a s tatic f ramework ( Fig. 3 :2a), a s though t he c oins w ere deposited b efore they w ere s uperseded by a nother t ype o r g roup, a nd t heir distribution p atterns a re g enerally a ssumed t o r eflect the extent o f t heir t erritory o f o rigin a t the t ime o f i ssue ( e.g. A llen, 1 944). W henever the d istribution i s t oo w idespread f or t his t o b e l ikely, the p ractice i s t o i nvoke s uch m echanisms a s i nvasion, o r wholesale d isplacement ( e.g. A llen, 1 960; K ent, 1 978a; 1 981). S uch explanations, h owever, c an o nly b e upheld i f they a re c onsistent w ith o ther k inds o f e vidence. A s w ith t he C laudian i ntroduction o f R epublican s ilver t o B ritain, many s uch s econdary distributions may b e m erely a f unction o f the diffusion o f a l ong-lived type w ell a fter i ts p eriod o f i ssue. The c oins o f Addedomaros i n t he U pper Thames Valley have l ong b een i nterpreted a s i ndicating his c ontrol o f a s econd t erritory there ( e.g. A llen, 1 944). Yet t here i s n o r eason why these c oins s hould n ot have a rrived a t a l ater date with t he c oins o f C unobelinus a lso f ound t here. T heir g old c oins o ccur t ogether i n h oards ( Appendix 3 ) a nd a re o n a s imilar s tandard. Only by demonstrating that the two a re n ot a ssociated i n the U pper Thames r egion can t he latter

3 6

D YNAM IC MODEL

t 3

A

j t

« ; ' t

i , ; t

3

3

]

A

A

A

.

>

/ 6

>I .

› .

i l

>

i .

N

O r-

g

F ig .

3 :2

Models o f c oin l oss

3 7

( a)

s tatic

( b)

dynamic.

hypothesis be discounted. This simple 'static' model of successive circulation pools each comprised of different types must be replaced by a more dynamic model (cf. Collis, 1974b), which views their composition as gradually changing as older older types become rarer through deposition or withdrawal and new ones are introduced. Plotting how many coins of a particular type were in circulation at successive points in time produces a frequency distribution mirroring its life cycle, numbers rising as coins enter circulation, reaching a maximum, and then declining. The exact curve will vary, but in general the pattern is familiar as the process of birth, maturity and death through which many archaeological entities pass (Clarke, 1968) and the basis for seriation exercises. The assemblage composition at any time is a cross-section of the frequency distribution of the constituent types (Fig. 3:2b). By studying the composition of individual coin groups, it should be possible to establish their relative order. Coin hoards, as we have seen, are particularly amenable to such analysis (of. Crawford, 1983), often contributing supporting intrinsic for example, the wear patterns of the different evidence, types - although such evidence is not without difficulties (Walker, 1976) - but similar arguments can be applied in comparing site finds and those from stratified sequences of deposits. This model has several implications. The rate of deposition of individual types obviously reflects the quantity in circulation, giving through time a matching frequency distribution of coins deposited, although lagging By constructing such a curve behind it chronologically. for coins in dated contexts, the probability of an individual coin having been deposited during a particular time period may be assessed, although there are complicating factors. Alternatively, a cumulative frequency curve (Collis, 1974b), may be used to estimate the probability of a coin having been deposited by a particular date, although this does not in itself date the deposit in which such a coin was found. The overall pattern of coin deposition through time is obviously also a function of the circulation pool, i.e. the relative proportion of similar types being deposited at any time should bear a definite relationship to the proportions in circulation (of. Fig. 3:2b), although the absolute numbers deposited will be dependent on the type and its use. Unless there are differences in the context of coin use, similar patterns of synchronous coin deposition on sites or areas with the same circulation pool are therefore to be expected. Hoards, with the varied selection factors involved, are less predictable (of. Grierson, 1975 etc.). The pattern of coin deposition may also be considered cumulatively. Assuming external factors, such as re­ deposition of coins lost elsewhere and subsequent disturbances, do not intervene, coins stratified in contexts up to a given terminus ante quem should be 38

r epresentative o f the h istory o f c oin deposition a t t hat l ocation. Conversely, variation between the c oins i n c ontemporary deposits a t different l ocations s hould r eflect different patterns o f deposition, p roviding r esiduality i s n ot a p roblem. These expectations may be used t o c onstruct g eneralised chronological models a gainst which i ndividual l ocation and a rea f inds may be a ssessed f or g oodness o f f it. The s patial implications o f m ixed c irculation dynamics have a lready been m entioned. The l osses in a n a rea t o which a c oin population was n ewly i ntroduced s hould r eflect i ts changing c omposition f rom t hat t ime, o lder types b eing deposited a longside c ontemporary i ssues in p roportion t o the numbers i n c irculation. T o i dentify this phenomenon, dated c ontexts a re r equired. Types b elonging t o t he i ntrusive c irculation p ool s hould n ot o ccur i n horizons p redating their i ntroduction, while, c onversely, t he f requency d istribution f or dated c oin-yielding deposits ( and f or the o verall r egional a ssemblage) s hould b e a ttenuated c ompared t o t he a rea where the c oins had o riginally c irculated, e specially f or the o lder types. Reconstruction o f the l ife c ycle o f different c oinages f rom dated c ontexts i s thus a n i mportant c heck o n o ur c hronologies; r elating their depositional patterning through a ssociation i n c losed c ontexts i s f undamental t o r econstructing c irculation p rocesses in I ron A ge B ritain . Neither task i s eased by t he c onstant post-depositional r ecycling o f a rchaeolgical material ( cf. F oley, 1 981), w ith r esiduality f requently i nvoked t o explain aberrant o bservations ( e.g. R odwell, 1 976). Residuality i s undeniably a p roblem, but i t i s a lso o ne amenable t o i nvestigation - i nternally t hrough the s tudy o f the variability o f g roup c omposition a nd externally through s tratigraphic r elationships. By e stablishing t he s tructure o f the majority o f the data, i t s hould be p ossible t o i dentify aberrant i ndividual o bservations a nd t o o ffer a n explanation.

I II Quantification f inds

and

s tatistical manipulation o f

c oin

I mplicit in the p revious d iscussion i s the p roposition that c oin f inds a re amenable t o quantitative t reatment. Archaeology i s dependent o n the a ssumption o f r egularities i n past human b ehaviour and i ts i nterpretative p rocedures a re f ounded o n the r ecognition o f s ignificant patterning. Numerous a rchaeologists have d iscussed why a quantitative a pproach i s p referable t o qualitative a ssessment o f t he evidence ( e .g . Clarke, 1968; Doran and Hodson, 1 975; Hodder and Orton, 1 976; O rton, 1 980). Their a rguments have e special f orce f or c oins, a s mass-produced and nearly identical o bjects ( Grierson, 1 966; 1 975). The question i s thus the t echniques to be u sed, a nd where quantitative methods can a ssist u s in o vercoming the imperfections o f o ur s amples.

3 9

S ince the a pplication o f s tatistics t o anything that can b e counted has f lourished f or a t l east a c entury ( Grierson, 1 966), i t i s s urprising t o f ind Rodwell ( 1976, 2 78) a rguing t hat " ... t o the s tatistician, there a re i nsufficient numbers o f p re-Roman c oins o f any i ndividual type f or s tatistical c alculations t o b e made" when 1 4,699 p rovenanced c oins a re r ecorded ( Appendix 1 ) and e xtant s pecimens, with o r w ithout a f indspot, r un into thousands. Rodwell's a rgument i s f ounded o n a m isconception o f both s tatistics a nd the p otential o f the evidence f or quantificatiion. Two main a reas o f s tatistics a re distinguishable: s imple d escriptive s tatistics, and and hypothesis t esting ( e.g. i nferential s tatistics 1 951). The f ormer i s c oncerned B lalock, 1 972; Moroney, manageable p roportions u sing w ith r educing data t o i ncluding t he calculation o f s tandardised p rocedures, p ercentages o r more f ormal m easures o f c entral t endency ( e.g. m ean, mode) o r d ispersion ( e.g. s tandard deviation). S uch measures f acilitate t he exploration a nd c omparison o f data. Although I ron Age c oin s tudies have l agged b ehind o ther branches o f numismatics, their a pplication i s well e stablished and R odwell ( 1976; 1 981) has h imself c arried o ut s uch calculations o n the B ritish evidence i n p resenting s ite f inds by the p ercentages o f types i n each m etal! D escriptive s tatistics a re c ertainly n ot w ithout p roblems. Relevant i nformation can be l ost a nd s ample s tatistics can b e m isleading i f a pplied uncritically t o the p arent p opulation ( Blalock, 1 972). With this r eservation, descriptive s tatistics w ill b e u sed h ere a s a matter o f c ourse. Rodwell's ( 1976) o bjections carry g reater f orce when a pplied t o the u se o f s amples f or e stimating p opulation parameters within known c onfidence l imits o r f or s ignificance t esting ( e.g. o f the g oodness o f f it o f a n o bserved s ample w ith a p redicted theoretical d istribution o r f or a ssociation between two variables). U sing s uch procedures o n a rchaeological s amples raises b oth theoretical and p ractical p roblems, m ost obviously the mathematical r equirement o f a random sample. I f this a ssumption cannot be met - a nd i t does n ot s eem e specially appropriate t o s amples exposed t o s o many p otential distorting f actors - what validity will a s ignificance t est have? Nor i s i t easy t o g ive the p recise s pecification o f the a rchaeological p opulation sampled that any f ormal p rocess o f s tatistical i nference demands. Rejection o f null hypotheses i s d ependent i nter a lia o n the s ample s ize, s o we o ften f ace the danger o f holding o n t o f alse hypotheses f or s heer l ack o f evidence ( cf. Orton, 1 980). These difficulties have b een d iscussed a t l ength elsewhere ( e.g. Cherry e t a l. 1 978; Doran and H odson, 1 975). S ometimes they may p lausibly b e c ircumvented, most obviously by the a ssumption that the a rchaeologial s ample approximates t o a r andom s ample, a s i n using die s urvival f requency f or e stimating the o riginal p opulation. There has, h owever, been l ittle a rchaeological work c oncerned with the inaccuracies i nduced by r elaxing the mathematical r equirements, a nd the a pproach i s c learly o pen t o abuse.

4 0

O ften the answer depends heavily o n the f orm i n which a t est i s a pplied, a s w ith the i nfluence o f quadrat s ize o n t echniques used t o examine the s tructure o f a rtefact d istributions ( Hodder and Orton, 1 976). I n any case, even i f the p ractical a nd s tatistical o bjections can be o verc ome, inference f rom s amples o f c oin f inds will a lways r equire a s eries o f a ssumptions, i nterpretative a rguments a nd g eneralisations that a re exclusively a rchaeological. Most quantitative analyses o f c oin f inds will therefore i n p ractice be case-studies ( cf. Doran and Hodson, 1 975), i .e. s ituations where, a lthough a meaningful hypothetical p opulation may be delimited, a s tatistical sampling s trategy f or i t cannot be devised. The target population ( cf. Krumbein and Graybill, 1 965) i s inaccessible and mathematical l inks b etween i t a nd the s ample c annot r easonably b e a pproximated. I nstead, the s ample i s s een a s a meaningful p opulation in i ts o wn r ight, a nd analysed a nd i nterpreted a s s uch, r ather than a s a p roxy f or a nother o ne. S tatistics may therefore be calculated t o explore and s ummarise the data, and t o s uggest hypotheses, but n ot to e stimate p opulation parameters. A lthough s ignificance t ests a re thus o f l imited r elevance, there a re, however, various s tatistical t ables w hich can g ive a u seful, a lbeit i nformal, indication o f the c onfidence which may be p laced i n descriptive s tatistics c alculated f or a g iven s ample s ize ( e.g. Doran a nd H odson, 1 975, Table 3 .1). A lso, a s Orton ( 1980) has s hown, a rchaeological p robabilities can s ometimes be expressed in ways which a llow p roblems t o b e examined in a s tatistical manner ( Orton, 1 980). Descriptive s tatistics a lso s erve a s a n o bvious basis o f c omparison b etween d ifferent s ets o f data o r variables. B lalock ( 1972) upholds p ercentages, in particular, a s capable o f g iving a very g ood i ndication o f t he r elationship b etween pairs o f dichotomised variables a nd more s ophisticated m ethods can be used in c ertain s ituations ( e.g. D oran a nd H odson, 1 975; Hodder and O rton, 1 976). Evaluating the s imilarity o r d ifference between r esults i s, however, a matter o f a rchaeological i nterpretation a s i s explaining them. Nevertheless, in d ismissing s tatistical calculations entirely, Rodwell i s b eing unduly p essimistic. C omparative exercises hinge o n s ample s tatistics b eing s ufficiently r epresentative o f their phenomenon . I f they a re n ot, this can o nly l ead t o ' true' hypotheses b eing i ncorrectly r ejected o r ' false' hypotheses b eing w rongly r etained. I deally, a c ase-study i s a r epresentative, a lthough non-random, s ample o f a delimited, but ina ccessible, target p opulation; inference depends o n the validity o f this a ssumption . S ince c oin data a re s ubject t o s o many distorting f actors in the r ecording p rocess ( cf. Rodwell, 1 981), this i n turn i mplies a n eed f or s ubs ampling among the material t o i solate s uitable c ases tudies and t o e liminate m isleading data. P urposive s election, however, i s i tself o pen t o s everal c riticisms ( e.g. Binford, 1 972; Cherry e t a l., 1 978); f or a case-study a pproach, an analytical p rocedure which minimises these must therefore b e devised.

4 1

I V

Analytical

procedure

I n practice, n o s ample - however s elected - can b e guaranteed to be r epresentative, s hort o f incorporating the whole p opulation. The s trength o f p robabilistic p rocedure l ies i n i ts insistence o n a c ontrolled s ituation a nd i n helping us t o know where we s tand in r elation to various inferences ( e.g. Moroney, 1 951). Rather than the c oncept o f r epresentativity per s e, these a re the key a spects o f c lassical s tatistical theory that we s hould b e bringing t o the f ore. I n effect, o ur c oncern must be w ith c ases where the r ecorded data o n c oin l oss a re r eliable. What inferences we p lace o n s uch f inds w ill d epend o n the context and o ur i nterpretative f ramework . Good c ases tudies will therefore b e those where the r ecorded data r epresent a s traightforward t ransformation o f the p otential data o n c oin f inds ( cf. F ig . 3 :1). A p riori, t he most promising material w ill be that c ollected under c ontrolled c onditions, p redominantly excavated f inds. These p rovide the s ubstance o f much o f the discussion below. There c annot, however, be a ny question o f excluding s tray f inds a ltogether; these p rovide most o f the data o n g old circulation a nd o n the earlier s tages o f c oin u se. What i s c rucial i s that the t wo c ategories a re n ot c onfused. R odwell's ( 1976, 3 13) a rgument - that b ecause excavation f inds a nd s tray f inds each have d ifferent characteristics ( gold coins a re r are in excavations; r eporting o f s tray f inds f avours g old coins), they may b e amalgamated to g ive a s ample ' more r epresentative o f the s ite' - must be r ejected o utright. I n the c ase o f Wickford, the s ite he d iscusses, t he b ias i nherent t o o ne g roup i s thus mapped o n t o the o ther, distorting t he o ne valid p erspective ( the c oins i n t he e xcavated a rea). The g old coins, i n fact, w ere p robably f ound b eyond the l imits o f the s ite ( Appendix 5 ). Together, these d ifferent s ets have m ore t o t ell us a bout c oinage i n c irculation than e ither o n i ts o wn, but the distinction between them must b e maintained. Rodwell's admission o f numerous i nstances where the c oin l ist f or a ' site' has b een a ltered by l argescale excavation underlines this. F rom h is o wn c areful s tudy o f the biases i n s tray f ind evidence i t would b e s urprising i f t his were n ot s o ( cf. R odwell, 1 981). L ike must b e c ompared with l ike.

the

T o differentiate the evidence a ccording t o i ts quality, f ollowing categories w ill therefore be employed:

F irst

o rder

( F1)

= P ositive; s pecific f ind l ocation r ecorded ( e.g. e xcavation c oins, known f indspots e tc.)

S econd o rder

( F2)

= P robable; r ecorded r eliable)

Third o rder

( F3)

= P ossible; b road f ind l ocation r ecorded ( e .g . " in the n eighbourhood o f", p otentially unreliable a ttributions e tc.)

g eneral f ind ( e.g. parish a nd

4 2

l ocation s eemingly

F ourth o rder

( F4)

= Rejected; i nferred f inds unreliable a ttributions

and apparently

These categories c onflate two d ifferent s trands o f information - the p recision o f the s patial r ecord and i ts a ccuracy; i t i s unfortunately the l atter which i s o ften o pen t o question. S uch a d ivision i s the obvious o ne with which t o work, i .e. in e stablishing a database that i s s ubstantially r eliable, though not n ecessarily r epresentative. Most o f the case-studies here w ill b e c onfined t o F l data, but t o the extent that they c onform t o the s ame t rends, F 2 data may be used t o sharpen o ur i mages. Where t here a re deviations, the causes can b e i nvestigated. F 3 data cause the g reatest p roblems, a s they i nevitably include s everal s ignificant f inds which have b een accurately, but i mprecisely, r ecorded; their value f or analytical purposes i s s trictly l imited. W ithin these categories, e specially F l, the value o f f inds varies w ith c ircumstance ( cf. Chapter 2 ). C losed g roups a nd a rea f inds have the g reatest analytical p otential, c onstrained by the quality o f r ecording and a ssociated information. Hoards, in particular, divide into those which a re c ompletely r ecorded, those o nly partially r ecorded a nd t hose f or which the r ecord i s inadequate. F or excavation f inds, the danger o f m issing data has a lready b een s tressed. B eyond categories o f r eliability, we evidently n eed p rinciples t o g uide the u se o f c oin f inds n ot r ecorded under c ontrolled c onditions. The most o bvious test o f a cceptability - that f inds s hould exhibit c hronological o r s patial s tructure that can be unambiguously r elated t o past patterns o f behaviour - i s m ore u sually o pen t o f alsification than c onfirmation. S ometimes we can hope t o f ilter o ut the biases i mparted by s urvival and r ecovery, but much o f the t ime this w ill p rove i mpossible. The best approach i s therefore t o c ircumvent the p roblem a ltogether wherever p ossible. S uch a way f orward has two e lements. The f irst i s t o evolve mechanisms whereby f inds can be s een a gainst the background f ormed by a ll s imilar f inds, i .e. t o e stablish t rends - c ontextual, s patial, t emporal - t hat a re ' normal' to the data a s a whole, e .g. f or d ifferent types o f s ite, f or different a reas o r p eriods, a nd f or c oins o f different metals. In this way, whether v ersed i n quantitative o r merely qualitative a rguments, i nterpretation will b e f ocused o n g enuine cases o f marked deviation f rom the normal patterns, rather than t rying to a rgue a particular case f rom patterning g eneral t o the data a s a whole. T he p rincipal c ondition this i mposes on the data i s r eliability. W ith a database c omprising o nly o bservations verified a s a ccurate, we may s till be misled by i ts incompleteness, o r by o ur models, but both we may eventually hope to i mprove. We s hould n ot, however, b e misled by i ts b eing ' wrong'. Whether the normal s tructure o f the data can be d irectly r elated to past behaviour patterns, and what a rchaeological meaning a ttaches t o deviations f rom the r ule, will depend on the individual

4 3

case

and c ontext.

As an o bvious c orollary, analysis s hould p rimarily address those p roperties o f c oin f inds most r esistant t o distortion through the p rocess o f discovery and r ecording. The s econd e lement o f the approach i s thus t o work a s f ar a s possible with r elative quantities o f f inds rather than with absolute numbers. Roman numismatists have l ong been aware that absolute numbers y ield r elatively l ittle d irect information ( e.g. Casey, 1 974; 1 986; R eece, 1 972; 1 974; 1 985). B oth the volume and duration o f c irculation o f individual c oin types a re variable, a s a re the g roups into which they a re a ggregated, e .g. the c oins i ssued by a particular Emperor. Much work has therefore been d irected to ensuring uniform p resentation o f c oin t otals - by expressing c oin deposition in t erms o f c oins p er y ear o f r eign p er s ite o n a base o f 1 000 per s ite ( Casey, 1 974), o r p er equivalent p eriod o n the s ame base ( Reece, 1 972; 1 985) - thus p ermitting valid c omparison between s ites o r a gainst the B ritish mean ( Reece, 1 974). The main d ifficulty i n extending this a pproach t o I ron A ge c oins i s the c omparatively s mall numbers. However, the range o f c oin types i s a lso much more l imited, and t hus a priori a s maller sample may b e a s r epresentative a s a much larger a ssemblage o f Roman c oins. There a re t wo s eparate i ssues i nvolved: the s urvival r ate o f t he c oinage, a nd the absolute s ample s ize n eeded f or r easonably undistorted r elative i nformation ( e.g. the p roportions o f c oins o f different p eriods). I n o ver half the c ases f or which i nformation i s available the s urvival r ate i s above two c oins p er die ( Table 3 :1). Where the o riginal die population has b een e stimated, over 7 0% o f the dies a re r epresented in 7 o f the 1 1 cases. This c ompares w ith the s urvival o f a t l east o ne c oin f rom a bout 9 0% o f the numbered Republican dies ( Crawford, 1 974). I t would be dangerous, however, t o extend the I ron A ge f igures, calculated f or f requently hoarded precious m etal types, to bronze and p otin c oins. The s urvival p er d ie i s appreciably higher f or extensively hoarded types ( e.g. Verica; " Iceni") than f or the r est ( Cunobelinus; " Dobunnic A "). The latter, i n particular, i s p robably a better g uide f or types o cccurring p rimarily a s s ite f inds. W ithout p rior knowledge, i t i s usually i mpossible to s pecify the s ize o f s ample n eeded t o c haracterise adequately a particular c oin p opulation ( cf. B lalock, 1 972). On this p oint. Rodwells's view ( 1976), that f or m ost types o f I ron A ge c oins t he number o f known examples i s t oo small f or s tatistical a nalysis, has s ome validity. He overlooks, however, the p ossibility o f s uppressing s ome o f the variation by g rouping these basic u nits i nto l arger s ets - chronological, g eographical, t ypological, e tc. - on which numerical a nalysis may b e p erformed. A t this m ore g eneralised l evel, a r elatively s mall s ample i s o ften sufficient t o characterise the parent c oin p opulation, a s the c onsistency o f the f requency distributions o btained by Roman numismatists i llustrates ( e.g. Casey, 1 986, 9 1-94). A f urther advantage i s that by increasing the e ffective sample s ize in t his manner, t he c ontribution o f individual

4 4

Type

C oin s urvival per known o bverse die

% d ie s urvival e stimated; ( No. o f known d ies)

S cheers No.8

2 .5

8 5

+ 1 3%

( 85)

S cheers No.9

2 .0

9 1

+ 1 0%

( 65)

S cheers No.10 AV 1 /4

2 .7

7 3 + 1 6%

( 32)

S cheers No.13

2 .2

5 6 + 9 %

( 64)

S cheers No.24

1 .2

2 5

+ 1 %

( 368)

S cheers No.26

1 .1

2 1

+ 9 %

( 70)

B ritish A l

2 .7

B ritish A2

1 .8

B ritish B

2 .8

B ritish C -D

Cunobelinus AV

AV

1 /4

V erica AV

AV

1 /4

" Dobunnic A "

" Iceni"

AR

AR

( Rev. d ie)

( Rev. d ie)

-

( 18)

-

( 12)

-

( 8)

1 .0

-

( 12)

2 .4

79 + 6%

( 64)

1 .7

7 3 + 1 5%

( 21)

4 .4

9 3 + 5%

( 21)

3 .4

9 0 + 8%

( 17)

1 .3

46 + ?%

( 70)

3 .3

-

( Rev. d ie)

( 350)

S ource

S cheers Haselgrove

1 977; 1 984b

Mackensen

1 974

Allen

1 975

A llen and Haselgrove 1 979

S ellwood

A llen 1 970a

NB: the mean s urvival rate f or a ll B elgic g old coins is c oins p er die ( ie. 2 168 c oins f rom 1 544 d ies).

Table 3 :1 S urvival rates o f s ome types f ound i n B ritain.

4 5

I ron A ge

1 984b

g old and

1 .4

s ilver

deviations important.

and

e rroneous

o bservations becomes

much

l ess

Chapters 4-5 therefore s ubdivide the B ritish c oin data i nto equivalent r egional and c hronological units s o that their d epositional patterning c an b e c ompared. I n g rouping c oin types l ike this, various uncertainties a re i ntroduced, particularly chronological o nes, but these can be accommodated by a ssociating r anges o f years w ith each chronological phase r ather than an absolutely f ixed p eriod. I n e ffect, by making o ur uncertainties explicit, the r igour o f mathematical analysis can be j ustified d espite the imprecision o f many o f o ur a ttributions ( cf. Orton, 1 980).

4 6

Chapter 4

The

I

s tructure

o f

the evidence

I ntroduction

The p rincipal g azetteer o f B ritish f inds was published o ver 2 5 y ears a go ( Allen, 1 960). Given t he number o f s ubsequent discoveries ( Chapter 1 ), a f irst s tep in this s tudy was t hus a c omprehensive r evision o f t hat l isting. This has a lready been published. Haselgrove ( 1978) summarises f inds made before t his r esearch c ommenced; Haselgrove ( 1984a) d iscoveries r ecorded during i ts c ourse. A b reakdown o f t he n ew i nformation i s g iven i n Appendix 1 . Overall, 4 ,632 n ew c oins a re l isted: 1 2% s tray f inds, 3 6% s ite f inds a nd 5 2% hoard c oins. While t he p roportion o f s tray f inds has r emained r elatively c onstant, s ite f inds have i ncreased dramatically. I n 1 960, these f ormed a mere 9 % o f the t otal ( Appendix 1 ); t oday the f igure i s n early double. I n t otal, s ome 1 4,699 c oins w ith r ecorded f ind s pots have been published ( 12% s tray f inds, 1 8% f rom known s ites, 7 0% hoard c oins), a f igure well b eyond the c ompass o f a s ingle s tudy. I n s electing a manageable p roportion f or a nalysis, the f ollowing c riteria w ere d eemed r elevant. F irstly, s ince t he d istribution a ssociated w ith d ifferent c oin f amilies varies markedly w ith t ime, t he S tudy A rea s hould u ltimately b e g eographically based, r ather than a ddressed t o particular c oinages. S econdly, t he a nalysis s hould encompass the depositional patterning a ssociated w ith analogous t ypes i n d ifferent r egions a nd s ocioeconomic c ontexts. This, i n turn, p resumes a well e stablished a rchaeological f ramework, particularly in the s phere o f s ettlement pattern. Thirdly, t he S tudy Area s hould maximise the number o f s ite f inds to p ermit c omparative s tudy o f c oin a ssociations a nd c ontexts. The r egion which best m eets these c riteria i s undeniably s outh-east England. The earliest c oinage o ccurs there a nd i t i s t he only a rea where b ronze a nd p otin were used. There a re c lear c ontrasts between t he c oinage t raditions o f t he Home C ounties a nd c entral s outhern England, but a lso an o verall homogeneity, f or example, i n the early adoption o f l egends a nd p rojection o f p olitical a uthority, c ompared to the c oinages which e volved i n the p eripheral a reas t o west and n orth ( Allen, 1 962). The exact b oundaries a dopted f or the S tudy Area a re discussed b elow. B ut before patterns o f c oin deposition a t different s ites and in different a reas can b e m eaningfully c ompared, there must f irst b e a f ramework f or r elating the different s eries, r equiring the existing s ystem o f c lassification t o b e r ecast.

4 7

I I An a pproach t o the s patial &Wi ta n _QT _Ba I ron Age c oin types f ound in B ritain

QIUe 'ring

Qf

The basic p rinciples applied by Evans ( 1864) a nd Allen ( 1960) f or o rdering British I ron A ge c oinage were s et o ut in Chapter 1 . I n p ractice, however, these a rrangements a s translated i nto a type s eries ( Mack, 1 975) raise a number o f difficulties: ( 1) The a ppropriateness o f the p rinciples i nvoked i s o ften an o pen question ( cf. Chapter 2 ). A priori, the conditions under which I ron A ge coinages w ere p roduced may be different f rom those c ontexts with which implicit a nalogies a re drawn, c omplicating the t ranslation o f type ' development', weight l oss a nd ' debasement' i nto a chronological s equence. ( 2) The definition o f " types", a lthough f undamental t o a rchaeological c lassification, ( cf. C larke, 1 968) has been t reated a s s elf-evident. While t his may b e t rue f or the l ater i nscribed i ssues, i t i s a major p roblem f or the earlier uninscribed s eries. ( 3) C lassificatory p ractice i s o ften variable f or the d ifferent s eries. L ike Evans' p lates, Mack's type numbers s ometimes d istinguish between m ere d ie variations, while e lsewhere c ombining q uite different d esigns. Allen ( 1960) a ttempted t o o vercome this by i ntroducing higher o rder g roupings, but, i n p ractice, these o perate a t d ifferent l evels f or d ifferent c oinages. While what c onstitutes a meaningful c oinage " set" w ill o bviously d iffer, the intuitive manner i n which these g rouping were d erived r enders t hem e ssentially a rbitrary a nd palpably uneven, a nd makes e ffective c omparison impossible. S cheers' ( 1977) treatment o f B elgic Gaul, a lthough m ore c omprehensive, i s o pen to the s ame basic c riticism . To t hese p roblems may be a dded the e ffect o f the gathering pace o f a rchaeology and m etal detecting s ince 1 960 i n a dding o ver 1 20 previously unrecorded varieties ( Fig. 4 :1). The c onsequences a re twofold. F irstly, t hese new types have been a ssimilated p iecemeal into the existing c lassification ( e.g. Mack, 1 975). S econdly, the s heer number o f n ew types underlines the l imited amount o f information about type variation o n which this was c onstructed . Evans ( 1864) c ould d raw o n o nly 3 8% o f the ' types' n ow a vailable and Allen had o nly 8 0% , and t his makes n o a llowances f or r eadings and d escriptions c larified by better p reserved discoveries. A s a r esult, s everal inconsistencies in the existing s chemes a re n ow a pparent. Thirdly, this r aises the question o f h ow c omprehensive o ur knowledge o f the r ange o f type variation i s yet, even today. Only f or the g old types, largely derived f rom h oard evidence, have r ecent f inds had r elatively l ittle impact o n the o verall p icture. For the bronze and e specially the s ilver types, however, the o pposite s ituation o btains, 44% o f the latter being n ew discoveries s ince 1 960 ( Fig. 4 :2). In they

p ractice, t he implications a re l ess s evere t han appear, s ince o ur understanding o f the f ramework o f

4 8

E xcava t ion f i nds

NN

0

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

M 1 1 1 1 1• 1• 11

H oa rd f i nds

1 7 .

c i

F ig . 4 :1 C ircumstances o f d iscovery o f new c oin belonging t o t he p rincipal s eries f ound i n the A rea, 1 700-1985, by decade.

4 9

types S tudy

•

•

•

• •

•

=

= •

e.••• • •

•

•

1 1 1. 1. . 1 • 1 1

•

•

•

• •

1 1 . •

=

•

•

•

• •

aM M I « N M I

• •

0000000000 1 1

• •

•

, 1

•

c i ) a )

0 1 1

•

•

I

• • • •

• 0 0 )

r •

0 0 7 )

0 C O

c o

0 L C )

c o

F ig . 4 :2

• • • 0 C O

• •

0 0 ) O D

=7 -

•

0

0 C O

0

0

C r )

C O

•

0

c 7 ) 0 )

Number o f n ew c oin types belonging t o p rincipal s eries f ound i n t he S tudy A rea, 1 700-1985, twenty year p eriod .

5 0

the by

c ommoner i ssues t o which most n ew f inds c an be r elated i s p robably r easonably c omplete. Obvious exceptions a re the s maller s ilver a nd b ronze f ractions, which were m ostly m issed i n earlier e xcavations i f m odern f inds e .g. a t S ilchester ( Appendix 5 ) a re typical. H owever, there a re a lso s everal uninscribed types, m ostly s ilver, but a lso s ome b ronzes a nd g old f ractions, which c annot r eadily be r elated t o the m ore c om mon t ypes. Most o f t hese a pparently b elong t o the c losing s tages o f uninscribed c oinage when s triking p roliferated ( e.g. A llen, 1 960; Haselgrove, 1 979). Owing t o the s mall numbers o f s pecimens, t heir g eographical o rigin i s o ften d ifficult t o e stablish. T he t raditional c oin c lassification i s thus wanting in c rucial a reas. R esting o n untested a ssumptions a rrived a t l argely by i ntuitive p rinciples, l acking f irm theoretical j ustification a nd taking l ittle a ccount o f much i nformation n ow a vailable, i ts f orm i s unsatisfactory w ith r espect t o the a ims o f much m odern a nalysis ( Haselgrove a nd C ollis, 1 981). I n s hort, a n ew c lassification i s r equired, s tarting f rom f irst p rinciples a nd based o n the b roader c orpus n ow a vailable. Any s ingle a pproach t o t he p roblem, however, w ill u sually o nly have partial validity , e ffectively the l imited a rea o f ' truth' which each s eparate m ethodology a llows ( Clarke, 1 966). D esign variation i s o ne s tarting p oint, but a number o f a lternative p erspectives w ill a lso have t o b e employed. These i nclude: ( 1) the work o n t he i dentification o f dies, t he punches u sed i n t heir manufacture a nd o n ' control marks' begun by Allen ( cf. 1 970; 1 975); ( 2) m easurement o f m etrology a nd o f d ie a xes t o m odern s tandards o f p recision; and ( 3) the major a nalytical p rogramme which K ent has i nitiated a t t he B ritish Museum. I n this way, t he c ontradictions o f each a pproach may b e i dentified a nd, i n the c oincidence o f t heir s eparate a reas o f ' truth', a m ore r esilient c lassification may b e s ought. This, however, l ies i n the f uture. H ere we a re f aced w ith s urmounting t he o bstacle the c urrent c lassification p resents t o t he p arallel a im o f s earching f or a rchaeological s tructure i n t he c oin data. What i s r equired i s a c omprehensive s ystematisation o f t he e xisting c lassification t o p roduce b roadly c omparable g roupings l arge e nough f or basic c ontextual, s patial a nd t emporal t rends t o b e identified. To a chieve this, w e n eed c onsider o nly t hose a ttributes w hich enable a c oin type t o b e p laced a t t he a ppropriate c hronological s tage o f whatever b roader r egional g rouping t o which i t b elonged. O ther c haracteristics o f the i ndividual types a re s econdary t o this p urpose a nd r elevant o nly a t a more detailed l evel. I n e ffect, by s implifying t he c urrent c lassification, w e may h ope t o g enerate s ufficiently large s amples t o be u sable. T his i nvolves the f ollowing s teps: f irst, division o f the p rincipal c oin types f ound i n B ritain into major r egional f amilies a ccording t o t heir typological a ffinities a nd i nscriptions, a nd s econd, a c omprehensive r eview o f t he

5 1

absolute chronology and s ubdivision o f t his t imescale i nto phases o f equal duration, t o p rovide c omparable a nalytical units. A thirty year p eriod p roved the s ubdivision which most c losely m irrors c hanges during the c entury a nd a half when coinage was in c irculation i n B ritain, with a dditional o verlapping phases c reated t o a ccommodate particular f eatures o f the data. This chronological f ramework i s discussed s eparately below ( Chapter 5 ). Thirdly, the c oins in each r egional phase have b een s ubdivided a s f ar a s p ossible into their c onstituent s eries and c lasses u sing any additional c ommon c haracteristics they p ossess, with types f alling o utside the mainstream being a ssigned t o whichever r egional phase and g roup o ffers the b est f it. The r esultant a rrangement i s g iven i n Appendix 2 , w ith a f urther c ommentary o n the p rocedure a nd Concordance Tables ( Figs. A2:1-7) r elating the g roupings p roposed h ere t o the e stablished c lassifications ( Allen, 1 960; Mack, 1 975; S cheers, 1 977). S ubsequent r eference t o c oin types i n the t ext will g enerally be a ccording t o this a rrangement, i .e. Regional Family/ P hase/Series/Class ( e.g. E 82.2). By being d esigned t o a llow questions t o be a nswered o r f ormulated f rom the e vidence o f t he c ommonest types, this a rrangement c onforms t o t he methodology a dvocated above ( Chapter 3 ). A lthough i ndividual types, particularly the rarer o nes, may e ventually p rove m isplaced, i ncreased s ample s izes s hould o veride these i ndividal e rrors a nd a llow n ormal t rends a nd s ignficant d eviations t o be extrapolated w ith s ome c onfidence, s ince q uantified a nalysis w ill r est o n a p roportionately g reater c ontribution f rom the c ommoner types which a re more l ikely t o have b een c orrectly o rdered. A s w e have s een, a s econd advantage o f this a pproach i s that i t a llows g enuine uncertainties a ttaching t o t he data t o b e a ccommodated ( cf. Orton, 1 980), e .g. the f requent l ack o f a ny i ndependent evidence f or c hronological o r g eographical a ttribution.

I II Regional c oinage t raditions

i n I ron A ge B ritain

Coinage s truck i n B ritain i s c onveniently d ivided i nto s even major g eographical a nd typological g roupings. T hese largely c orrespond t o A llen's ( 1944) ' dynastic' and ' tribal' g roupings, but o wing to o ur i gnorance o f t he exact r elationship b etwen the R oman administrative d ivisions a nd the preexisting s ocio-political g roupings ( Haselgrove, 1 984c) - which must a nyway have f luctuated while c oinage was in u se - I have r everted t o a r egional n omenclature, s imilar t o E vans' ( 1864) s cheme. S ix o f the r egional f amilies c orrespond quite c losely t o h is g roupings, but they have a ll but o ne - t he W estern c oinage - b een r enamed according t o their d istributional f ocus a s we p erceive i t today. The s eventh c onsists entirely o f uninscribed types. Each t radition has a t i ts h ead o ne o f the s even main s eries into which t he uninscribed types c an be d ivided ( Allen, 1 960) and each s hows s ome d egree o f c ontinuity f rom t hese p rototypes i nto the l ater s tages o f t he c oinages, a lthough c omplicated by i nter-regional borrowing.

5 2

The r egional c oinage t raditions a re d iscussed i n detail in Appendix 2 ; their main c haracteristics may b e s ummarised here a s: ( 1) Western ( W) A g roup o f g old and s ilver units usually a ttributed to the p redecessor o f the Roman c ivitas o f the ' Dobunni'. F ractions a re r are. ( 2) ßouth-Western ( SW) A c omplex s eries o f s taters ( with rare quarters) s truck f irst in g old, then i n g ood s ilver, later i n very debased metal, and f inally d egenerating to cast bronze c oins b earing t races o f a p recious metal wash. They cannot therefore be c onsidered a bi- o r t rimetallic s et ( Haselgrove, 1 979), a nd a more s atisfactory analogy i s with the b illon c oinages o f north-west Gaul. This c oinage i s n ormally i dentified w ith the ' Durotriges'. ( 3) S outhern ( S) I n i ts later s tages, an i nscribed and heavily Romanised b imetallic g old - s ilver s ystem o f units and f ractions. S ome o f the latest i ssues have epigraphic l inks w ith the Eastern r egion ( S91). The earlier s tages o f c oin p roduction w ere l ess homogeneous, with r elated g old f ractions being s truck o n two different modules and s tandards ( cf. A llen a nd Haselgrove, 1 979), a nd a d iversity o f uninscribed s ilver types, s ome o f which may, however, o verlap w ith the i nscribed i ssues. T raditionally, this c oinage i s a ttributed t o the ' Atrebates'. ( 4) S outh-Eastern ( SE) This c omplex g rouping i ncludes c oinages s truck o n both banks o f the Thames e stuary, a s well a s s eries which the epigraphic evidence l inks with the M iddle Thames Valley a nd the R omanised typology to the S outhern t radition ( SE81-2). The S outh-Eastern c oinage had c lose l inks with the C ontinent, a nd s ome o f t he earliest bronzes may y et t urn o ut t o be i mports ( cf. D eleströe, 1 977). Many i nscribed i ssues a re t rimetallic s ets. This c oinage i s anomalous i n i ts r elatively early d emise i n the f irst quarter o f t he f irst c entury AD when i t was absorbed into the Eastern t radition through the c oinage o f Cunobelinus. T raditionally, the K entish t ypes have been a ttributed to t he ' Cantii' a nd those f rom E ssex and S uffolk to the ' Trinovantes'. ( 5) Eastern ( E) L ike the two p receding c oinages, the Eastern f amily has a c omplex early development, but was subsequently d ominated by two major trimetallic i nscribed c oinages. I n p lacing Cunobelinus' c oinage ( E81-5) with the Eastern s eries, i ts t ypological a ffinity t o S outh-Eastern i ssues s hould n ot b e o verlooked. In t his s ense, his coinage i s a lso the culmination o f the S outh-Eastern tradition and by the C onquest had a chieved a c irculation which encompassed b oth r egions. T raditionally , this c oinage has been l inked t o the ' Catuvellauni'. ( 6) East Anglian ( EA) A s eries o f g old ( and o ccasional quarters) a nd s ilver units a nd f ractions. This c oinage i s dominated by l arge h oards, s everal o f them a lso c ontaining Roman i ssues, and universally a ssociated w ith the r evolts o f AD 47 and AD 6 0/61 ( Allen, 1 970a). I t i s therefore a ttributed t o t he ' Iceni'. Typologically t here i s a b reak

5 3

b etween the earliest g old dependent o n n eighbouring r elatively late.

and s ubsequent t raditions;

d evelopments l egends a re

( 7) North-Eastern ( NE) A s eries o f g old s taters, s ilver units and f ractions, f ormerly a ttributed t o the ' Brigantes' ( Evans, 1 864), but now t o the ' Corieltauvi' ( cf. A llen, 1 963). Outside this mainstream development and difficult t o r elate to i t chronologically, a re three i mportant s ubsidiary g roups. Two have o bvious Continental antecedents: the cast bronze o r p otin t radition ( P1-P2), i ts home undoubtedly in the S outh-East ( Allen, 1 971) a nd a distinctive s eries o f s ilver i ssues s truck o n a thin, b road f lan ( ST) c oncentrated i n c entral s outhern England a nd c losely paralleled in northern France ( Allen, 1 965b). The third g roup, a s ilver s eries r elated to the W estern t radition, but g eographically and typologically d istinct ( Robinson, 1 977), has a s poradic d istribution f ocused o n W iltshire. H ere, i t has b een a ssociated w ith the W estern g roup ( WS), but i ts a ffinities w ith t he S outhern f amily s hould n ot be o verlooked. The o ther main g rouping o f c oins f ound i n B ritain c onsists o f g old s eries imported f rom B elgic Gaul, s everal o f them c losely r elated ( Scheers, 1 972). T hese ' GalloB elgic' types s tand typologically a t t he h ead o f s ubsequent B ritish developments, a lthough the r ange o f p rototypes i s more extensive t han Allen ( 1960) a llowed, and were u sed there o ver a l ong period. I n this way , t hey ( and a s eries o f c lose i mitations which w ere p robably I nsular in o rigin) belong t o the mainstream o f B ritish c oin use i n a manner quite distinct f rom the o ther Continental i mports which o ccur s poradically throughout s outhern B ritain. These Gallo-Belgic s eries a re thus integrated here w ith t heir I nsular p rogeny ( SE1-5, S 5 e tc.).

I V

Delineation o f the

S tudy A rea ,

T o e stablish satisfactory boundaries f or the S tudy Area, use has b een made o f a n earlier a nalysis ( Kimes e t a l., 1 982), which mapped the boundaries o f the f our outlying c oinages, a long w ith those o f t he g old c oinages o f eastern England, by f itting a theoretical d istance-decay f unction t o the density o f f indspots a long t ransects running o utwards f rom t he v isual c entre o f each distribution. W hile s uch a nalyses have their p roblems ( cf. Hodder and O rton, 1 976; S ellwood, 1 984b), this o ne appears s uccessful in delimiting the c ore a reas o f each distribution, a s well a s d rawing a ttention t o f eatures which c ould r epay c loser s tudy: a c lose r elationship between the boundaries mapped and major r ivers and t he existence o f p otential b oundary z ones between d iscrete c irculation s pheres. The l atter a re well known among o ther Celtic-speaking g roups ( Nash, 1 978a; O 'Corrain, 1 974) a nd had a n important r ole in between-group r elations.

5 4

The boundaries which this analysis s uggested f or the S tudy A rea a re s hown i n F ig. 4 :3. On the o ne hand, they a re largely mutually exclusive w ith the p eripheral c oinage distributions, o nly the Upper Thames Valley, and the margins o f the Cambridgeshire F enlands p roving exceptions. On the o ther hand, they c omfortably encompass the w elldefined l imits o f the Eastern a nd S outh-Eastern g old families, c losely f ollowing, a s these do, major r ivers s uch a s the S tour, Ouse a nd Thames. I n the extreme n orth-west, the boundary has been f ixed a s the r iver N ene, which bisects the z one b etween the Eastern a nd North-Eastern s eries. Only i n the west i s the b oundary a p roblem, a s there a re i nsufficient f ind l ocations f or a mathematical analysis o f the S outhern c oinage distribution. V isual inspection, however, s uggests t he r iver Test a s their western b oundary a nd the Avon a s the eastern l imit o f the adjacent S outh-Western s eries, a lthough there i s undeniably s ome o verlap ( cf. Cunliffe, 1 981a). The boundary o f the S tudy Area has t herefore been d rawn a long the 3 00 km Easting through this p otential " boundary z one", a lthough a t an early p eriod, t his a rea p ossibly had a s eparate existence w ith i ts o wn r egional c oinage ( cf. S ellwood, 1 984b). T o f acilitate density-dependent a nalysis, the north-eastern a nd n orth-western b oundaries a re f ormed by a lternately i ncluding a nd excluding 1 0 km quadrats a long these l ines. The S tudy A rea thus defined ( Fig. 4 :4) encompasses 3 0,600 s quare km . I t i s p enetrated by o ver 1 000 km o f major waterways, defined here a s r ivers navigable before the major i mprovements o f the e ighteenth c entury ( Dyos and A ldcroft, 1 969) a s f ar upstream a s they have b een d rawn. Obviously, the c omplex f actors i nvolved ( e.g. E vans, 1 975) p reclude a d irect a ssessment o f their navigability i n the late I ron A ge, a lthough with the s lower currents which then prevailed, a ll r ivers o nce past their t orrent s tage were p resumably navigable t o l oad-carrying c raft o f s ome type ( information f rom the late K . W.Muckelroy). Given the quantity o f i mported c oinage and bulky i mports, e .g. a mphorae ( Haselgrove, 1 982; P eacock, 1 971) f ound in l ater I ron Age B ritain, i t i s worth s tressing h ow l ittle o f the S tudy Area i s m ore than 1 5 km f rom major waterways p robably navigable t o the s ea-going vessels o f the b eamy hulled type o f the Canterbury c oin ( Muckelroy e t a l., 1 978) a nd Caesar's d escription ( DBG, I II, 1 3). Geographically, the S tudy A rea i s virtually t he c ore o f F ox's L owland Z one ( 1932), encompassed b y the C retaceous s ediments o f t he C hiltern escarpment and the S outh Downs, a nd r eaching the Jurassic s pine. M odern o pinion d iffers f rom F ox's o ver the degree t o which the natural environment c onstrained a rable f arming in p rehistory ( e.g. Evans, 1 975; L imbrey and Evans, 1 978). Although the s ettlement r ecord s till has s ubstantial gaps ( cf. Cunliffe, 1 978a), most o f the r egion was p resumably i ntensively cultivated by t he l ater I ron A ge, t he s trong c lay b ar ns t o the north o f the Thames ( Woolridge and L inton, 1 933) a ssuming a particular i mportance with the advent o f s uitable c rop s pecies and o f i ron c ultivation t echnology ( Bradley, 1 978; J ones, 1 981). While p opulation e stimates

5 5

• If

/ NORTH E ASTERN

1

E AST ANGL IAN

1

I

EASTERN WESTERN

SOUTH > _,EASTERN

SOUTH WESTERN

SOUTHERN

L and > 15km f r om ma jo r wa te rways -

F ig . 4 :3

B c o iu n n a d ga e ri e s e sr o i e fs p r inc ipa l r eg iona l

L ocation o f the S tudy A rea.

5 6

B a ldoek 1 C o lches te r

9 1 1 B raugh ing

K e lvedon • _

1JHa r low

= -• S t .A lbans W ick fo rd , B eauchamps

F a r ley -H ea th I

• Qws lebu ri

-

= _

_ = m i C h iches te r • H ay ing I s land

F ig . 4 :4

r i

L and o ve r 1 37m

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

The S tudy A rea a nd l ocation o f Key S ites.

5 7

5 0 Km

a re e ssentially s peculative, many n ow a ccept a p opulation d ensity c omparable t o the D omesday f igures ( Fowler, 1 983) a nd Caesar's c omment t hat the pars maritim& was thickly s tudded w ith farmsteads ( DBG, V , 1 2) does n ot c ontradict t his. I f t his i s the c ase, t he d ensity o f I ron A ge s ettlement i s per s e unlikely t o be a major variable i n the pattern o f c oin f inds, w ith t he e xception o f c ertain o bvious z ones s uch a s the F ens, c oastal a nd e stuarine f lats a nd t he W eald. The b oundary a nalysis a lready c ited s ustains t he v iew, a lthough extensive i ron-working i n the W eald ( Manning, 1 979) i ndicates t hat e ven i n t hese a reas t he p opulation density was p robably n ot a s l ow a s i s g enerally a ssumed. Where d ifferential d iscovery a nd r ecording a re n ot a p roblem, variations i n f ind d ensity c ould w ell r elate t o g enuine differences i n a ccess t o c oinage a mong t he c onstituent c ommunities.

V

The a rchaeology o f the S tudy A rea

The c eramic-based f ramework p ut f orward by Cunliffe ( 1978a), d rawing o n earlier w ork by B irchall ( 1965) a nd H odson ( 1964), has n ow b een s upplemented by Thompson ( 1982) a nd Rodwell ( 1976), a nd f or c entral s outhern E ngland, by t he Danebury s equence ( Cunliffe, 1 984). Apart f rom t he l atter, which i s c alibrated by a large number o f r adiocarbon dates, t he c hronology o f this material i s f ixed l argely through the r elationship, r eal o r a ssumed, b etween i ts a ssociated metalwork a nd t he C ontinental La T Ane f ramework ( e.g. C ollis, 1 985), s upplemented i n the c losing s tages o f the I ron A ge by m ore c losely datable R oman i mports, n otably a mphorae ( Peacock, 1 971; 1 984), p restige s ilver a nd b ronze m etalwork ( Birchall, 1 965; S tead, 1 967) and f ine wares, n otably S amian and Gallo-Belgic w ares ( Hawkes a nd Hull, 1 947). ( i)

S outh-East E ngland

By AD 43, the material c ulture o f most o f the S outhEast extending to the East M idlands ( Knight, 1 984) a nd t he Upper Thames Valley ( Harding, 1 972) may be c haracterised a s facets o f a s ingle c omplex, n amed a fter the Aylesford t ype c emetery excavated by Evans ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 984c). I ts k ey a ttributes ( Hawkes a nd Dunning, 1 930) a re f ine wheelmade p ottery types paralleled a cross t he Channel, e specially t he pedestal u rn, a nd f lat-grave c remation f or the d isposal o f the d ead , a r ite w ith which t he p ottery i s i ntimately a ssociated. These c emeteries a re g enerally s mall ( Whimster, 1 981), a lthough o ccasionally l arger o nes o ccur, a s a t S t. A lbans ( Stead , 1 967). Within the r ite's broader distribution, t here a re r esticted a reas o f marked burial differentiation a ccording t o the g rave g oods ( Haselgrove, 1 982; 1 984c). T his t ier o f burials u sually includes R oman i mports. The r elatively s mall number o f c remations o verall i mplies t hat a ccompanied burial was i tself a m inority r ite ( Haselgrove, 1 982).

5 8

P ace H odson ( 1964) a nd S tead ( 1976), the a pplication o f the t erm ' culture' i n the s ense p ropounded by Childe ( e.g. 1 956) t o t his material i s a s p remature a s the e thnic l abel ' Belgic' o f earlier s cholars ( Bushe-Fox, 1 925; Hawkes a nd Dunning, 1 930) n ow s eems i nappropriate. I f anything the ensemble d iscussed s o f ar i s a f unerary s ub-culture ( cf. C larke, 1 968) a nd n eed n ot therefore r elate t o o ther f acets o f the s ame s ociety in a ny r eadily p redictable manner. I n f act, many i tems used a s g rave g oods do a lso o ccur i n habitation c ontexts, e .g. f ibulae, p ottery, a mphorae, e tc., p roviding the e ssential l ink w ith s ettlements ( and thus w ith c oinage), but s ystematic i nvestigation o f the r elationship b etween these s pheres has s o f ar been l imited ( Haselgrove, 1 984c). A s w ith t he c oinage, w ork has t ended t o emphasise a s ingle c ategory a nd i ts t ypology, e .g. the f ibulae, a nd most n otably the g rog-tempered p ottery t radition ( Thompson, 1 982). The t erm ' Aylesford c omplex' w ill t herefore b e p referred h ere. Another a spect o f t he c hanging nature o f s outh-eastern s ociety during the f irst c enturies B C a nd AD was t he d evelopment o f a n ew c lass o f extended s ettlement nucleations s uch a s S ilchester o r S t.Albans a longside t he s maller s ettlements a nd m ixed f arming units f ound t hroughout the S tudy A rea ( e.g. C ollis, 1 985; C unliffe, 1 978a; R odwell, 1 976). Quite a part f rom the c oin e vidence, t he i mportance o f t hese s ettlements i s p lain f rom the m ention o f C olchester i n the c lassical s ources ( Haselgrove, 1 982), f rom e arly R oman m ilitary d ispositions ( Frere, 1 978) a nd f rom t heir n odal p ositions i n the a dministration o f the s ubsequent p rovince. Even s o, a lthough a s ettlement h ierarchy i s r easonably a ssumed f or l ate I ron A ge B ritain, i t has y et t o be empirically v erified a nd r esearch o n t he s ervices a nd f unctions a ssociated w ith the d ifferent types o f s ite, a long the l ines i ndicated by C ollis ( 1985), a nd o n the r esidence p atterns o f t he s ocial e lite, i s badly n eeded ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 986). Cultural c hange i s i nvariably c omplex a nd o nly r arely o ccurs i n n eat packages embracing d ifferent categories i n a s ynchronous horizon ( e.g. B inford, 1 972). The Aylesford c omplex i s n ot e qually well r epresented e verywhere i t i s f ound ( Haselgrove, 1 984c), while o ur understanding o f i ts s pread i s handicapped by o ur i gnorance o f the p rexisting middle p re-Roman I ron A ge ( MPRIA) material culture a nd s ettlement pattern o ver much o f the S outh-East. F ew s ites o f this earlier p eriod have b een extensively excavated e .g . L ittle Waltham ( Drury, 1 978) a nd Abingdon A shville ( Parrington, 1 978), but i t i s c lear that i n s ome a reas e .g . the Upper T hames Valley, t he existing MPRIA t raditions l asted l onger t han i n o thers w ith d irect C ontinental c ontact ( cf. C unliffe, 1 978a). Their e ventual absorption within the A ylesford c omplex cannot b e a ccurately dated, but b elongs t o i ts l ater s tages, w hen i mports, and e specially f orms which c opied them, had b ecome a c ommon f eature o f the c ore a ssemblage ( Thompson , 1 982). T he l ack o f a ny d iscernible earlier i nfluence n eed n ot, h owever, imply that t here was p reviously n o i nteraction b etween these a reas and the S outh-East. The c oinage i mplies o therwise a nd, i n a ny case, discontinuities a t b oundaries

5 9

o ften c onceal 1 982b).

intensive

interaction across them

( Hodder,

The absolute c hronology o f different r egional developments i s thus difficult t o establish. I n i ts earlier phases, the ' Aylesford' chronology depends o n a f ew I talian metalwork and a mphora imports. Hawkes a nd Dunning ( 1930) o riginally s uggested a s tarting date o f c 7 5 B C, but the burials c ontaining these imports are p robably postCaesarian ( Birchall, 1 965), despite the earlier c hronology n ow being advanced f or s imilar f inds a t O rnavasso ( Graue, 1 974). B irchall's c onclusions a re r einforced by the brooch types a ssociated with the c remations ( Stead, 1 976), while Thompson ( 1982) a rgues a s imilar date f or the g rog-tempered pottery ( although s ettlement a ssemblages s uggest that the c eramic tradition c ould well b egin earlier than o ther f acets o f t he c omplex). R elatively f ew burials can be a ssigned t o t his s o-called W elwyn P hase ( Stead, 1 976); the majority b elong t o h is L exden P hase, defined by the i mport o f North F rench Gallo-Belgic wares, a nd t hus n ot earlier t han the c lose o f t he f irst c entury BC. Even o n the Continent, the f loruit o f t he equivalent c omplex i s partially p ost-Caesarian, a lthough c remation a nd f ine wheel-thrown p ottery both a ppear t here well before the C onquest ( Haselgrove, 1 984c). The c hronological s cheme a dopted h ere i s g iven i n Table 4 :1. P eriod i i s c haracterised throughout the S outh-East by the o pen b owl and j ar-dominated a ssemblages o f the MPRIA ( Cunliffe, 1 978a) and lasted well i nto the f irst c entury B C. P eriod i i i s defined a s the Welwyn P hase o f the Aylesford c omplex a nd dated p rimarily t o the s econd half o f the f irst c entury BC by the a ssociated R oman Dressel 1 B a mphorae and metalwork . However, a t this p eriod Aylesford t raits a re largely r estricted t o East Kent, E ssex a nd the H ertfordshire C hilterns. E lsewhere, P eriod i a ssemblages c ontinued t o be deposited throughout the later f irst c entury BC and i n s ome a reas, e .g. Northamptonshire, even into the f irst c entury AD . The f inal phase o f the later p re-Roman I ron Age ( LPRIA), P eriod i ii i s defined by the i mport o f A rretine and North F rench Gallo-Belgic wares a nd extensive c opying o f Romanised p ottery f orms, f rom a round the beginning o f the f irst c entury AD . Related a ssemblages developed t hroughout the r egion, a lthough actual i mports a nd e ven c opies may b e r are o r non-existent a s in W est Kent. S uch a ssemblages c ontinue a fter the C onquest, t he i mpact o f which i s o ften v irtually imperceptible o n rural s ites f or decades. On urban and military s ites, p re-Flavian ( Period iv) a ssemblages a re more distinctive, a s r ecognisably C laudian f orms o f S amian and Gallo-Belgic ware o ccur f requently . The c hronology o f the c eramic imports i s l argely derived f rom their p resence/absence i n h istorically dated c ontexts o n t he Continent, f or example, the Augustan f orts i n Germany ( Hawkes and Hull, 1 947; C ollis, 1 985). As a r esult, t he chronological f ramework applied to B ritish s ites i s p otentially s ystematically t oo late ( M . J. Millett, P ers. Comm.). Each s herd in e ffect c ontributes a t erminus post_quem based o n i ts date o f d iscard elsewhere, r ather

60

ASSEMBLAGES

U ) 0 CI M . i . 1 : 1 E ( 1 ) C O r n
. < -

r -I 0 1

o c n

M U U 0

i

o h l ) . 4

0 4 ) W

W A 1

r n a )

4 d i M

r i l e d i

4 4

0

Z

. 1

E t

) . 4

r e , 1 d

M 5 g l

1

r 4

e

a l

o

c . )

c : 3

0

4

e o , I $ . 4

r i d w

— c n g i W 4 -1 4 J c i r 1 0 4

e ) . 4

e

1 4 r d

Ii i

4 I d i

3 4

" 4

" 4 4

e o . i

e o • i 3 4 W ( 1 4

W CL 4 I

r ' .

I C O 4 I , . .4

IMPORTS

. 1

1

H

a ) w

I g ,

C : 1

I

0 U )

W

0 4 0 -

4

. .

P 4 -

w C I M

. n E W m 0
1

< 4 , 4 C 4

c r ) E t

4 H C 4

4" )

— X 0 d i U I

CONQUEST

r d 0 4 ) M

( 1 ) i d i c n , i A 5 0 U l

r d e -D

c

r t i . 1

r e c i E e

U

x

g i

4

4

. I S Z

0 3 e

4 )

a ) z

< H

A 4 4 I I

I I I

I

m

r ,. 0 M ) I

e

o . c

c f )

E e

0 4

W

r d M

E . i 0 a ) 4

0 4

0 E g i

0 t 4 ' C S 0 1 4

U I 4 d ) Ii I W m m

m W 1 4

e

, i

Ie I i

M

I 0

c N i , I

a ) r n c n 0 g 4

u

4 )

it

E i

U

4

m E $ 4

o

r 4

l

I

I I

I I

I

e W

I

4 ) g i

o

E

W X

+ 0

C A

0

C4

H

I

4 4

1

I

.

m

0

g i

4 1 : 1

I

.

m

I

I

I

C U

u )

u i

I

0 . 0

3 . 4 0

0

0

I \ I \

I

E ,i

t g i

I

0 4

I

I

. 0

4

I

I

e

I

I

I

0

a )

r d . , 1

I

I

I

h l

I

t n

< -

I

E. ,, 0

, i >

W

e

. A

I

M

I

w

I

3 4

4 . 3 4 ) r d r i 0 4

I I

I I

\

I

0

Table 4 :1 The S tudy A rea: approximate chronology. 61

c eramic a ssemblages and

than o ne based o n i ts date o f manufacture, a s f or a Roman c oin; t he r esult i s a cumulative t endency t o a later dating than s trictly r equired by the p roduction s pan o f i ndividual types. I f s o, the dates g iven here may eventually have t o be adjusted t o g ive earlier s tarting dates t o P eriod i i and

( ii)

Central

S outhern England

In c ontrast t o the S outh-East, t he MPRIA a rchaeology o f the W essex c halklands, characterised by the ubiquitous ' saucepan p ot c ontinuum' ( Cunliffe, 1 978a), i s r easonably w ell d ocumented . I n the LPRIA, however, s ettlement l ocation was l ess obviously dominated by the c halk, a nd o nly r ecently has a more c oherent p icture emerged, while the c hronology s till p resents d ifficulties ( e.g. B edwin a nd H olgate, 1 985). A f urther c ontrast i s t hat the L PRIA c eramic a ssemblages o f Cunliffe's ' Atrebatic' s tyle-zone ( 1978a), a re more o bviously r ooted i n earlier t raditions. T he key e lements o f t he ' Aylesford' c omplex , s uch a s c remation, o ccur o nly s poradically, a nd c opying o f Roman i mports i s a l ate p henomenon. L inks w ith the c omplex a re s trongest i n t he n orth a nd east, the Weald e xerting a n egative i nfluence. There i s, h owever, a s ignificant C ontinental c ontribution t o developments i n c entral s outhern E ngland, m ost o bviously i n the earliest w heelmade f orms. Roman i mports a lso r eached s everal s ites, e .g. Danebury and Owslebury ( Cunliffe, 1 984; C ollis, 1 968). D ressel l A a mphorae a re f ar c ommoner t han in eastern England; t he lack o f burials may have r esulted in partial underr epresentation o f the later 1 B f orms o nly n ow being r emedied by s ettlement excavations. The s equence o f s tratified d eposits a t S ilchester, f or example, i s c omparable t o B raughing ( Fulford, 1 986; P ers. C omm.). I t a lso c onfirms t he e vidence o f s ites n orth o f the T hames, s uch a s W elwyn Garden C ity, that i mport o f C entral Gaulish m icaceous f ine wares c ommenced before their North F rench Gallo-Belgic c ounterparts when w ine a mphorae a re the only o ther r eadily i dentifiable c eramic i mports. Cunliffe ( 1984) p roposes the early f irst c entury B C f or the i nception o f wheelmade p ottery , l argely o n the a ssumption that this was c ontemporary w ith the i mported D ressel l A a mphorae a t Danebury a nd Hengistbury Head . However, a t Owslebury a nd Winchester, these amphorae a re a ssociated w ith s aucepan p ottery ( Biddle, 1 975; S elkirk, 1 971, 3 6), a nd the early dating can, in f act, be questioned. A t Hengistbury, these a mphorae a lso o ccur s tratified w ith l ocally made s aucepan p ots a nd G lastonbury wares in c ontexts p redating the i ntroduction o f the n orthwest F rench wheelmade wares w ith w hich the s tart o f the wheelmade p ottery t radition i s a ssociated ( Cunliffe, 1 9810). This a ccords w ith Danebury, where the end o f P hase 7 , characterised by s aucepan p ottery, has a c alibrated C 14 t erminus p ost que r n o f 1 00-50 BC ( Cunliffe, 1 984). T hese s ites c ould t hus s upport a l ater dating f or the introduction o f wheelmade p ottery, a nd by extension, f or

6 2

the c ontinued u se o f " MPRIA" p ottery a ssemblages i nto t he l ater f irst c entury BC i n Hampshire ( i.e. i nto P eriod i i) a nd t hus p robably i n o ther a reas, e .g. S urrey, a s well ( cf. Table 4 :1). The o ne a rea unaffected by wheelmade p otting t echniques was East S ussex which instead i n the L PRIA s aw t he d evelopment o f a d istinctive handmade pottery t radition. N ow t ermed East S ussex Ware ( Green, 1 980), this p ersisted f or most o f the R oman p eriod. As R oman i mports a re a lso a bsent, an a ccurate s tarting date i s d ifficult to f ix, but o ne w ithin the f irst c entury BC i s l ikely f rom s outhe astern e lements i n the d ecorative t echniques and f orms, a nd o ccasional Aylesford i mports a t s ites l ike the Caburn.

V I

C oin f inds i n t he S tudy A rea ( a)

g eneral c onsiderations

4 2% o f p ublished B ritish c oin f inds a re f rom w ithin t he S tudy A rea ( i.e. 6 ,113 c oins, 1 9% s tray f inds, 2 9% f rom known s ites a nd 5 2% h oard c oins: Appendix 1 ). S ince 1 960, t he number o f e xcavation c oins has v ery n early t rebled. Until t hen, o nly C olchester, R ichborough a nd S ilchester had y ielded o ver 1 0 c oins in ' controlled' excavations, whereas n ow there a re 1 6 s ites, f ive w ith o ver 5 0 c oins. C olchester a nd Harlow t emple l ead the way w ith o ver 2 00 a nd B raughing, Canterbury, a nd Hayling I sland t emple a ll have i n excess o f 1 00. C oins have b een e xcavated o n o ver 1 00 s eparate s ites. A lthough by R oman s tandards the s ample r emains s mall, t he s ituation i s c learly much improved o n that o f 1 960. The f irst s tep has b een t o e xamine the p edigree o f a ll 6 ,113 p rovenanced c oins. A ll the o bvious published material has b een c hecked, but the n umbers evidently made i t i mpracticable t o s earch through a ll t he r ecords i n museums a nd p rivate hands. C entral t o t he a nalysis has therefore b een the I ndex o f C eltic c oins a t the I nstitute o f A rchaeology, Oxford ( Haselgrove, 1 978). This r ecords the known p edigree o f i ndividual c oins, i ncluding s upplementary i nformation c ollected by Allen i n c ompiling h is 1 960 gazetteer, o r s upplied by museums and o wners. Anomalies have b een r esolved by p ersonal v isits t o t he major museums o r by c orrespondence w ith o wners. I n a f ew c ases, " unprovenanced" c oins i n c ollections have b een i dentified w ith particular d iscoveries ( e.g. Haselgrove, 1 981), but u sually t his i nvolves unacceptable i nferences. A p rimary a im h ere was t o e stablish which f inds had their p lace a nd c ircumstances o f d iscovery r ecorded i n a n ear c ontemporary d ocument. T he p edigree i s particularly i mportant, a s i t o ften s hows whether a p rovenance i s a later a ttribution, a lthough f or the o ldest f inds this i s g enerally m ore d ifficult t o detect. Much thus depends o n Evan's ( 1864; 1 890) j udgement a nd a nnotations. On t he whole, f alsification s eems l argely a modern phenomenon, a lthough many m ore c oins must have b een d eliberately s old

6 3

w ithout o r with only a vague p rovenance by f arm l abourers who f ound them, the o nly way they c ould do s o w ithout a ttracting the landowner's notice ( cf. Rodwell, 1 981). S pace p recludes detailed t reatment o f individual cases here, but two examples will s uffice. Table 4 :2 s hows p re-1960 f inds f rom f ive major s ites ( omitting the 1 930-9 C olchester excavation c oins). T he r eliability categories a re those explained i n C hapter 3 . A ll the expected f actors may be d iscerned: a s ignificant distortion t owards p recious metals among l ess w ellr ecorded f inds, especially a t the two s ites m ost c elebrated amongst the early antiquaries ( Colchester and S andy); higher quantities o f bronze c oins where s ustained p ublic interest in a prolific l ocation was a roused ( e.g. t he S heepen excavations, o r the r ailway discoveries a t B raughing); a nd the g eneral e ffect o f s trong l ocal i nterest ( Colchester). Not a s ingle F l g old c oin c omes f rom a demonstrable I ron Age s ettlement a rea; e .g. a t D orchester, a ll three c oins c ome f rom Overy F ield o n the o pposite bank o f the R iver T hames. Most s triking o f a ll, however, i s h ow f ew c oins can b e r eliably p rovenanced to the s ites, making i t d ifficult t o s ee any j ustification f or i ncluding t he r emainder i n s ite l ists, l et a lone u sing them t o i nfer t he h istory o f d eposition a nd o ccupation o n these s ites ( e.g. Rodwell, 1 976, F igs. 40-41). The s ame t rends a re a pparent f or the S tudy A rea a s a whole ( Table 4 :3). P recious metal c oins dominate t he h oard and ' non-site' categories, their dominance i ncreasing a s the s pecificity o f the p rovenance declines. C onversely, o n s ites, the baser metals a re p reponderant, even a mong t he l ess r eliably r ecorded c ategories. This c ontradicts t he c onventional w isdom that p recious metal f inds a re a lways p referentially r eported, a lthough they do ( often a s p lated c opies) s how t he expected i ncrease i n the r eliably r ecorded category, e specially o n t he major s ites. I n a ll, o nly 5 5 f inds have been r ejected o utright, a nd the f igures s how a n o verall i ncrease o f 3 27 o ver the published t otal o f 6 ,113 o wing to the i nclusion o f n ew f inds ( Appendix 1 ). But a s expected, the r eliability l evels o f the s tray a nd n onexcavation s ite f ind categories, where F l c oins a ccount f or o nly 3 3% and 2 9% o f the r espective t otals, a re r elatively l ow. Excluding hoard e vidence, o nly f or g old a re the majority f rom c ontexts n ot d emonstrably a ssociated w ith a known s ite, i tself an a rgument f or directing analysis o f d eposition p rimarily t owards s ite f inds. Overall, t he t otal o f 1 ,834 non-hoard c oins with r eliable p rovenances c ompares f avourably with the 1 06 a vailable t o a parallel a nalysis f or the Netherlands ( Roymans and van der S anden, 1 980), a lthough that a rea had o nly l imited i ndigenous c oin p roduction. ( b)

The a nalysis

o f

f ind l ocations

A s econd example c oncerns the p roliferation o f f inds pots that c an o ccur w ith unsatisfactorily r ecorded f inds. Here, two o pposing t endencies a re g enerally a t w ork . One i s the c entripetal e ffect c reated by t owns and known s ites. While the latter i s o bvious, the f ormer echoes Rodwell's

6 4

S ites

S pecific P rovenance ( F1)

Colchester ( 1)

B raughing

AV ( 2) AR AE P otin

AV AR A E P otin

General Vague/Attributed P rovenance P rovenance ( F2) ( F3)

5 4 5 0

1 8 1 0 40

1 5 4 6

5 9

6 8

2 5

2 1 4 2 5

3 1 1

5 0

1 4

1 7

8

Dorchestero n-Thames ( 3)

AV AR AE P otin

3 3 6 1 2

Great Chesterford ( 4)

S andy

Notes ( 2) ( 3) ( 4)

AV AR AE P otin

AV AR AE .P otin

7 1

6 1 7 1 +

2 -

1 5+

2

1 3 7 2

-

o

8

1 3

1

4 1 1 6

1

6 3 1 4+ 2 +

2

2 5+

2 1+

( 1) Colchester t otals exclude 1 930-9 S heepen f inds AV, AR i nclude p lated c oins f rom a ll s ites I ncludes 1 AR a nd 4 AE f rom excavations s ince 1 960 All s pecifically provenanced c oins f rom excavations

Table 4 :2 P re-1960 I ron A ge s ites n orth o f t he Thames.

c oin f inds

6 5

f rom s elected major

First Order

( F1) S tray

Coinage

Hoards

' Non-site'

AV

1 155(42%)

1 87(69%)

AR

2 62(10%)

AE P otin

3 0(

1 %)

1 275(47%) 2 722

S econd Order

S ite

Excavation

Major O ther S ites

Major O ther S ites

8%)

4 1(35%)

2 7(10%)

9 (10%)

1 7(14%)

1 27(12%)

69(22%)

3 5(13%)

7 2(82%)

49(41%)

7 51(72%)

1 40(45%)

2 3( 2 72

7 (

8%)

0

-

8 8

1 2(10%) 1 19

7 8(

8 4(

8%)

1 7(

8%)

5%)

89(28%)

1 040

3 15

( F2) Hoards

' Non-site'

Major

S ites

O ther

S ites AV

2 26

( 32%)

3 05

( 77%)

2 2

( 18%)

2 5

( 25%)

AR

3 79

( 55%)

3 7

( 9 %)

1 0

( 8%)

3 0

( 30%)

AE

5 4

( 8%)

4 5

( 11%)

8 6

( 72%)

4 1

( 41%)

P otin

3 6

( 5%)

1 1

( 3 %)

695

Third Order

2 ( 2%) 1 20

3 98

5 ( 5 %) 1 01

( F3) Hoards

' Non-site'

Major

S ites

O ther S ites

AV

2 1

( 18%)

1 08

( 65%)

2 6

( 10%)

6 ( 18%)

AR

2 8

( 25%)

3 9

( 24%)

1 7

( 7%)

3 ( 9%)

1 ( 1 %)

1 5

( 9 %)

2 12

( 83%)

AE P otin

6 4 1 14

( 56%)

4 ( 2%)

1 2 56

1 66

-

2 4

( 70%)

1 ( 3%) 3 4

NB: F or the purpose o f this table, major s ites were taken a s those w ith a y ield o f o ver 40 F l c oins, i .e. C olchester, Harlow, Hayling I sland, S ilchester, B raughing, Baldock S t. Albans and Canterbury.

Table 4 :3 B reakdown o f c oin f inds i n the S tudy according t o their r eliability category ( Fl-F3).

6 6

Area

( 1981) p oint that until t he p resent c entury i t was n ot easy f or r ural farm workers t o s ell c oins f ound o n land they w orked f or s omeone e lse, unless they l ived s ufficiently c lose t o s izeable t owns t o d ispose o f f inds without a rousing s uspicion. T his must be o ne f actor behind many F 3 p rovenances o f the f orm ' found n ear' o r ' bought a t', f or e xample, Cambridge a nd Colchester. Many hoards were d isposed o f in L ondon ( Appendix 3 ). The o pposite, o r c entrifugal, t endency o ccurs when c oins f rom a s ingle l ocation o r f ind were d ispersed through d ifferent channels, a cquiring s eparate p rovenances, c reating a spurious c luster o f f indspots when t here was o riginally o nly o ne. F or example, a t l east f our hoards f ound w ithin a 1 0km r adius o f Colchester i n the n ineteenth c entury w ere dispersed w ithout a n a dequate r ecord a nd a re p robably the s ource o f s everal g old c oins among t he l ess w ell p rovenanced f inds f rom there. A more s pecific example i s f urnished by p lotting a ll C unobelinus' g old c oins s truck f rom known d ies ( Allen, 1 975) t o examine whether c oins s truck a t a s ingle m int m ight have been d isbursed in batches t o s econdary c entres ( or i ndividuals) f rom which they were s ubsequently d istributed ( Author, unpublished). A ssuming t hat these b atches c ontained d ie-linked c oins, a s do h oards ( e.g. Haselgrove, 1 981), c lustering o f particular d ies m ight b e p redicted a round e ach s econdary c entre. In the e vent, the s ample p roved t oo s mall ( Fig. 4 :5), but did r eveal a t l east o ne p robable hoard d ispersed w ithout adequate r ecording, i n d ie-linked c oins r ecorded f rom Lawshall ( L), n ear C olchester ( C), a nd n ear I pswich ( I) r espectively. Further i nvestigation s howed t hat t hese w ere a ll f irst r ecorded i n t he decade 1 860-70, and a re the o nly ' Classic' s eries f inds known f rom the a rea. While c oincidence cannot b e r uled o ut, the date s uggests c oins f rom t he s ame f ind s old s eparately a t C olchester a nd I pswich. Lawshall was p resumably e ither the p lace o f d iscovery o r much c loser t o i t. Comparison o f the p edigree o f o ther die-linked c oins w ould c ertainly bring f urther examples t o l ight. Overall, c onventional distribution maps ( e.g. Cunliffe, 1 981a) p robably s ignificantly o ver-represent the true d ensity o f g old c oin f indspots. Until s uch analyses a re undertaken, p recautions a gainst s uch d istorting f actors a re n eeded. I n a ddition t o r ecognised hoards ( H1-H56A), Appendix 3 therefore l ists a ll known multiple d iscoveries o f g old, s ilver o r p otin ( the m etals m ost f requently hoarded) f rom the s ame g eneral l ocations ( together w ith s uspicious c oincidences) a s a s pecial c ategory o f multiple f ind ( Ml-M143), 1 14 o f them g old. S ome g roupings a re doubtless g enuine c oncentrations o r the p roduct o f a ssiduous r ecording, but many more p robably r epresent n ow s cattered hoards ( e.g. a t C olchester), s ite f inds ( near Godalming, a nd n ear Guildford) o r a rtificial g roupings c reated by i nexact r ecording ( near Cambridge, Oxford). In the a nalysis o f f ind density a t a ny l evel o ther than F l, each multiple f ind i s therefore t reated a s a s ingle l ocation.

6 7

F ig .

4 :5

Die l inking o f g old c oins

6 8

o f Cunobelinus

( 381-82).

The g rouping has, h owever, a s econd i mportant purpose. Over 40% o f the multiple f inds r ecord two o r m ore o f c oins a ctually f ound t ogether o r a t the s ame p lace. Whilst c ertainty i s o ften i mpossible, a nd their c hronological value l imited, many s uch d iscoveries were p resumably small hoards, o f a nything f rom 2 -5 c oins, a lthough o thers were p robably parts o f larger f inds, o f which they n eed not be r epresentative. E ither way, these " small hoards" a re a m ore s ignificant c omponent o f p recious m etal c oin deposition than has hitherto b een a llowed ( cf. Chapter 6 ). Counting each multiple f ind o nly o nce i n a category, the s eparate l ocations ( excluding hoards) y ielding c oins i n each metal a re a s f ollows:

F 2 l ocations M etal

F l

l ocations

1 _0ns ite'

S ite

Excavation

1 14

3 1

1 6

AV types

2 31

AR types

3 8

2 0

1 8

2 9

A E types

4 6

2 6

3 1

5 6

P otin types

1 9

1 6

Table 4 :4 Number I ron A ge c oins.

o f l ocations

6

46

o f d ifferent k inds y ielding

These f igures s upport t he hypothesis a lready advanced, that even w ith p referential r ecording, a lone o f t he metals, g old o ccurs m ore f requently i n o ff-site c ontexts. I n c ontrast t o the i mpression many d istribution maps g ive, the a ctual number o f f ind l ocations i s r elatively s mall. ( c)

The a nalysis o f s ite

f inds

The d iscussion s o f ar has a ssumed that what c onstitutes a s ite, a nd by extension which c oins a re s ite f inds, i s s elf-evident. I n f act, this raises b oth t heoretical a nd p ractical p roblems. The character o f s ites varies widely, f rom p ermanently o ccupied s ettlements, t o c oncentrations o f material r esulting f rom a n a ctivity p erhaps p erformed o nly o nce a t a g iven l ocation . Human b ehaviour u tilises the l andscape a s a whole, a griculture b eing o nly o ne o f many a ctivities n ormally c arried o ut b eyond the c onfines o f the d omestic s ettlement unit, p roducing a n ear-continuous s catter o f material b etween s ettlements ( as well a s c oncentrations a t f oci f or particular a ctivities, f or e xample, manufacture o r p rocessing. F oley ( 1981) has t ermed t his material ' off-site' a rchaeology; various f orms o f c oin d eposition evidently f all w ithin i ts s cope: c asual

6 9

l oss, u sing s ettlement r efuse f or manuring c oncealing a h oard o r making o fferings a t a natural

f ields, s hrine.

With many ' stray f inds', however, i t i s uncertain whether there was a ssociated a rchaeological material. Here, a s ite w ill therefore b e defined a s any l ocation which ( in a ddition t o c oins) has yielded a rtefacts a nd/or f eatures indicative o f p otentially a ssociated human a ctivity, unless the o nly o ther r ecorded r emains a re r easonably c ertainly t hose o f c ontainers f or the c oins ( hoards), and excluding cases where t he a ssociation i s s imply t oo n ebulous ( beach a nd r iver f inds). Chronologically, a part f rom o ccasional l ater p rimary deposits, e .g. Anglo-Saxon burials, t he s cope o f the a ssociated material has been deemed t o b e t hat o f I ron Age o r Roman date. The s ites s o defined a re l isted i n Appendix 4 . I n character, they r ange f rom known s ettlements and l ocations where particular a ctivities w ere f ocused ( production s ites, t emples) t o p otential s ettlements, f eatures i ndicative o f non-settlement a ctivity ( e.g. l ynchets), a nd m iscellaneous s catters a lmost c ertainly f rom manuring f ields w ith s ettlement r efuse. The entries a re t herefore divided i nto two g roups: t he f irst ( 182 s ites) i s r estricted t o s ites with w ell-provenanced c oin f inds ( whether t hrough excavation o r a s s urface f inds ( F1)). T he s econd g roup ( 56 s ites) i ncludes s ites y ielding untraced c oins, a nd t hose cases where the a ssociation w ith c oin f inds i s not d efinite ( i.e. F 2 c oins). F requently, t he available evidence o ffers l ittle g uide to the nature o f the s ites; e ven where i t d oes, characterisation i s o ften f ar f rom s traightforward. These difficulties a re d iscussed i n Appendix 4 . M oreover, the character o f many s ites changed c onsiderably while I ron A ge c oinage was i n u se. A ll major c hanges i n s ite s tatus f rom the MPRIA t o the late Roman p eriod ( including a ny R oman military a ctivity) have therefore been l isted. Ultimately, however, the a im i s t o uncover depositional patterning a ssociated w ith d ifferent types o f s ites a nd, where the o ccupation varies in s pace o r t ime, t he pattering in different a reas. Regularities e stablished f or the better documented s ites s hould p rovide a p ointer t o the character o f o thers lacking s uch i nformation. Two k inds o f e rror may be expected: ( 1) where inadequate i nformation has e xcluded f ind l ocations which a re, i n f act, s ites a s defined, and ( 2) c oins incorrectly t reated a s s ite f inds ( i.e. where t heir a ssociation w ith o ther material i s c oincidental). E ither p roposition may, o f c ourse, b e t ested in the f ield. T he t erm ' non-site' has therefore b een p referred t o ' off-site' f or l ocations with n o evidence f or a ' site'. Analysis o f ' non-site' f inds must a lso a im t o uncover any r egularities i n the character o f d eposition, a nd i f s o, whether t hese amount t o s pecific patterns o f depositional behaviour. However, the distinction b etween ' site' a nd ' off-site' f inds i s an a rtificial o ne ( cf. Foley , 1 981) a nd a f ar more i mportant o ne i s that b etween different depositional patterns, i .e.

7 0

b etween deliberate d eposition, f or whatever r eason, a nd a ccidental l oss, a b ehavioural d ichotomy which i s unlikely t o be c onveniently c ontained by the ' site'-'non-site' f ramework. A m ore a ppropriate d ivision i s thus t o examine n on-site f inds a longside those f rom s ites where deliberate d eposition can b e i nferred a s a s ignificant factor, e .g. c oins f rom t emples, burials, e tc. ( Chapter 6 ). I n Chapters 7 -8 the emphasis w ill b e o n s ettlement f inds, where ß p riori a h igher p roportion w ere p resumably a ccidentally p arted f rom their o wners o r u sers. ( d)

Analysis o f s tratified f inds

Central t o a ny a rchaeological a nalysis a re t he a ssociations a nd s tratification o f s ite f inds. A gain, data c ollection has n ecessarily b een r estricted t o p ublished s ources, s upplemented by unpublished n otes o n s ome o lder excavations ( e.g. R ochester), a nd by unpublished i nformation o n i mportant r ecent e xcavations. I n a ll, 5 20 c ontexts w ith s tratified c oins f rom 9 1 s ites a re l isted i n Appendix 5 . The f ollowing d etails a re i ncluded: the n ature a nd date o f t he c ontext; whether i t i s a p rimary a ccumulation ( i.e. where the c oins may b e i n s itu l osses o r d iscards) o r a s econdary deposit ( i.e. l ikely t o c ontain material i ntroduced o r disturbed f rom o ther deposits); a nd d etails o f any a ssociations. Often, o nly g eneral d etails a re a s y et a vailable ( e.g. f or Harlow t emple) a nd many o lder r ecords a re unfortunately o f l imited value. O f the 3 03 c ontexts w ith r ecorded a ssociations, 7 9% a re published, but o nly 3 2% o f them c omprehensively by m odern s tandards. F or the o thers, published detail varies f rom the i ndifferent ( details o f s tratification, but o nly partial d etails o f a ssociations) t o the i nadequate. The m ost c omprehensively p ublished major s ites r emain t he Caburn ( Pitt-Rivers, 1 881; Curwen a nd Curwen, 1 927), a nd S heepen ( Hawkes a nd Hull, 1 947; N iblett, 1 985).

F ig. 4 :6 s hows t he b reakdown o f c ontexts b y type, c ategory a nd date f or the t hree main c oinages o f t he S tudy A rea, t ogether w ith t he p otin s eries ( excluding the f inds f rom Harlow T emple; s ee Appendix 5 ). The vast majority a re p ost-Conquest c ontexts, p re-Flavian d eposits a ccounting f or easily t he l argest p roportion. The o nly s ignificant g roup o f c oins t o c ome f rom p re-first c entury AD c ontexts a re t hose c ontaining p otins. A t l east f our f actors have c ontributed t o t his pattern ( 1) M ost o ther s ite f inds a re b ronzes a nd t hus r elatively l ate i n the s equence; ( 2) d eposition o f a particular type i s l ikely t o p eak a fter t he date a t which manufacture b egan ( cf. Chapter 3 ); ( 3) many f inds a re f rom R oman s ites, o f which many m ore have b een excavated than L PRIA s ites a nd ( 4) m ost c oins a re f rom s econdary c ontexts, s uch a s p it a nd d itch f ills a nd makeup. This must p roduce a l ater dating than i f the c oins w ere a t their o riginal p oint o f deposition, a lthough a s l ater c ontexts d emonstrate, the a ctual degree o f r esiduality varies w ith c ircumstance. The value o f c oin f inds i s c learly g reatest where there

7 1

T YPE OF CONTEXT 1 1

• 000 000

1

Make -up/ l e ve l l ing L aye r S u r face

0• 1 1 1

••••••••••••

Qua r ry/ p i t G u l ly/ d i tch

SOUTH E ASTERN

EASTERN

SOUTHERN

POT IN

1 1

••• 1 1 00 1 1 1 1

I i

• •I

i

• 1 1

0 1 1

•0 0000 1 1

i l i

000 1

I i

I i

1 1

We l l

i

B u r ia l

I I l

P os th o le O the r

1

CATEGORY OF CONTEXT P r ima ry ? P r ima ry ? Seconda ry S econda ry

•

1

00 0 1

I

00 1 1 1

0 1 1 1

•1 1

000000 1 1 1 1 00000 1 1 1

000 1 1 1 1

1

II I 1 1

000 000 000 000000 1

00

0000 1 0 1 1 1 1

1

• I I I I •

00000 000 0000004 -5 2 00 0 1 1

000 1 1 1 1 • I

I l

P ER IOD OF CONTEXT MR _ I

A

i

l i t

P re -F lav ian F l av ian

000 1 1

• 1 1

C 2nd AD

00 0 1 1

1

L a te R oman

00 1 1 1 1

1 1 1

1

• 1 1 1 1

P os t R oman

• 1 1

1 1

I l

1

U PPER

F ig . 4 :6

RO W = K ey s i tes

Type, s tatus s tratified c oin f inds.

i l

I l 1

L O WER RO W = O the r s i tes

and dating o f c ontexts yielding

7 2

a re s tratified g roups o f s ufficient s ize f or depositional a nd c ontextual t rends t o be inferred with s ome c ertainty. I n c onsequence, analysis f ocuses o n s ites m eeting this r equirement, a lthough i nevitably the exact threshold i s r elatively a rbitrary, a s the absolute number o f c oins varies with the s ite. The c riterion adopted here has b een t o define Key S ites a s those with a t l east t en r ecorded c oin-yielding c ontexts. Ranked in o rder, these a re:Canterbury ( abbreviation CA, 9 1 c ontexts); C olchester ( CO, 8 5); Harlow T emple ( HA, 8 0); B raughing ( BR, 47); Baldock ( BA, 2 6); S t. Albans ( SA, 2 2); Chichester ( CH) and S ilchester ( SI, both 1 4); Odell ( OD, 1 2); K elvedon ( KE) and W ickford ( WI, both 1 1) a nd the Caburn, G lynde ( GC, 1 0). A lso included i s the Hayling I sland ( HI) t emple, where the c oins a s yet c an o nly b e l isted by s tratigraphic phase. T o t hese thirteen s ites, Farley Heath ( FH) a nd Owslebury ( OW) have been added, t he f ormer o wing t o i ts h igh yield o f excavated g old coins ( 29%), the l atter a s o ne o f the f ew m inor rural s ites where the c oin evidence c an be r elated to t he changing c haracter o f the f armstead, i ts economy, and i ts c ontacts ( cf. C ollis, 1 971b). These s ites ( Fig. 4 :4 above) f orm the c ore o f the d iscussion i n l ater c hapters. A t a ll the larger s ites, s everal discrete l ocations and excavations have yielded c oins ( Appendix 5 ), p artly because o f developments a fter AD 4 3; partly because o f the extended nature o f many LPRIA nucleated s ettlements; a nd s ometimes s imply b ecause o f uncertainty whether o utlying o ccupation s ites were within the territorial l imits o f a particular c omplex e .g. P ark S treet villa n ear S t.Albans. The latter a re therefore i ncluded both i n the K ey S ites s ection o f Appendix 5 , a nd, where appropriate, i n a nalysis o f the r elevant c ategories o f minor s ite. The Key S ites a ccount f or 429 ( 83%) o f the c ontexts y ielding I ron Age c oins. Thirteen o thers, mostly s ubstantial Romano-British s ettlements, i ncluding Baylham, Cambridge, Dorchester-on-Thames, Northchurch ( Cow Roast), R ochester and Winchester, s hare a f urther 4 2. The r emaining 49 s ites have o nly o ne c ontext a piece. I n c onsequence, their value f or the a nalysis o f depositional patterning i s e ffectively l imited t o the a dditional i nformation o n c oin s tratigraphy which they g ive a s a g roup. This i n f act m irrors the pattern o f the K ey S ites a lmost exactly ( Fig. 4 :6 a bove). D iscussion i n C hapters 7 8 o f these a nd o ther s ites with excavated and F l c oins w ill therefore be directed p rimarily to their c oin l ists, a nd using them t o c onstruct a p reliminary m odel o f the c oin f inds ' expected' o n d ifferent k inds o f s ite and in d ifferent r egions.

7 3

Chapter 5 The chronological framework "Celtic gold coins found in Britain display the principles of Gresham's Law in two respects; a decline by stages in the weight ... and ... in their (Allen, 1960, 302) gold content." I

Introduction

The chronological development of coinage in Britain can be divided into three principal periods. As their basis is the production span reconstructed for individual coin types, they will be designated Periods I-III to distinguish them from the archaeological Periods i-iii discussed above. These latter reflect rather the timespan of deposition of particular assemblages, including the coins, an important distinction which is often overlooked. In Period I, Continental coinage was imported in some quantity, but indigenous production is not immediately discernible. The principal concentration is on both sides of the Thames estuary. In Period II, the importation of coins greatly increased, and widespread production commenced within an arc from Dorset to Lincolnshire. Most surviving Period II coins are gold (and probably potin) types, but by its close, silver and bronze were both also being struck. Another feature of the Period is the heterogeneity of the types. Period III, effectively ended by the Roman conquest, is defined by an almost universal practice of inscribing coins, although this evidently started earlier in the South-East than elsewhere. Other major features of Period III coinage are frequent use of Roman prototypes (confined to the Study Area), and the Romanisation of die engraving. Absolute dates for Iron Age coins are calculated from three principal sources (1) imitation of a dateable prototype (2) occurrence in an independently or historically dated context and (3) information linking the type to a known personality. The difficulties involved are The first gives a terminus post quem thus considerable. for the beginning of production, but no indication of its duration, and the second a terminus ante quem for the same event; both may be far removed, however, from the actual date when production began, while the source date is often questionable. Only rarely are both kinds of information available and precise enough to date the start of production with any accuracy. The best dated Iron Age coin is the Gaulish bronze inscribed GERMANVS INDVTILLI.L., 75

i ts p robable p rototype the q uadrans R IC 5 64 m inted a t Lyons c 1 0 B C, a nd f ound a t the R oman f ort o f Oberaden a bandoned in 8 B C ( Scheers, 1 977, N o.216). T he p ossible l oopholes a re o bvious, however, n ot l east a n a lternative p rototype s truck in 4 0 B C. Often d ependence i s t oo g eneralised f or the a ctual p rototype t o b e c ertain ( e.g. Henig, 1 972), while dating by h istorical e vents i s f ull o f p itfalls. Relating c oinage t o known p ersonalities i s o pen t o s imilar d ifficulties. Apart f rom t he validity o f the c orrelation, f ew i ndividuals' y ears a s p otential c oin i ssuers a re dated c losely enough t o o ffer more than a pproximate t ermini post a nd ante quos f or the s eries bearing their name. Nor c an we a lways be c ertain that s triking n ecessarily c oincided w ith t heir p eriod o f authority, f or example, t he b ronzes naming AVLVS H IRTIVS, Governor o f Gaul i n 4 5-44 B C ( Scheers, 1 977, N o. 1 53). A t erminus a nte quem c an, h owever, b e o ffered f or c ertain British i ssuers o f c oinage a pparently r ecorded a s s upplicants t o R ome ( cf. A llen, 1 944), but a gain, even accepting the c orrelation a nd the s ources a s valid, the dating i s a t b est a pproximate. N ot until P eriod I II w ere t ypes embodying e lements derived d irectly f rom dateable p rototypes s truck i n B ritain o r can u se b e made o f the h istorical f ramework. P rior t o this, uninscribed c oins i n B ritain w ere m ostly d istant imitations o f t he s tater o f P hillip I I o f Macedon , o ften imports. The s ource o f their absolute dating i s t hus the chronological f ramework f or Gaulish c oinage in g eneral and f or B elgic Gaul i n particular, n ow t o b e c onsidered.

I I

The o rigins o f t he

P hilippus g old c oinage i n Gaul

A lthough there i s a f airly r efined r elative c hronology f or Gaulish c oinage ( e.g. A llen a nd Nash, 1 980), i ts absolute dating a lso s uffers f rom t he p roblem that o nly in the l ater s tages was c opying o f c losely dateable p rototypes f requent ( Scheers, 1 969) o r c an the horizon p rovided by the Roman C onquest b e u tilised. Thus, t he o nly f ixed p oint f or the a doption o f the P hilippus c oinage i n Gaul, i s the l ate f ourth c entury B C date o f the p rototype. As a r esult, chronologies vary f rom l ong ( e.g. Nash, 1 975b, 1 978b) t o r elatively s hort ( e.g. C olbert d e B eaulieu, 1 973a; Castelin, 1 978), d epending o n h ow c lose a date t o the p rototype i s a llowed f or t he earliest i mitations. I n their d ifferent ways, t hese s cholars a re united i n their s earch f or a s uitable h istorical c ontext f or the f irst Gaulish c opies - a cquisition t hrough m ercenary s ervice i n the M editerranean ( Nash), t he a ppearance o f the P hilippus i n R ome i n t he earlier s econd c entury BC ( Castelin, f ollowing B rooke, 1 933a) o r i ts a ssociation w ith an A rvernian economic ' hegemony', which c ollapsed f ollowing Rome's i ntervention i n the 1 20s B C a nd a llowed the s pread o f m inting r ights throughout the r est o f Gaul ( Colbert de B eaulieu). S uch a n a pproach c an o nly depress the chronology t owards the p eriod when t extual evidence b ecomes

7 6

c ommoner. Nash ( 1975b) has dealt c onvincingly w ith the anachronistic basis o f C olbert d e B eaulieu's model. Castelin's f ramework s uffers f rom i ts a dherence t o a r igid pattern o f w eight l oss in twenty y ear p eriods. Nor n eed Rome have b een the s ole s ource o f the P hilippus i n Gaul. I f anything, t he earliest i mitations p oint to i ts p enetration b oth by way o f t he Danube ( Allen, 1 974) a nd by c oastal r outes ( Scheers, 1 981). Castelin's v iew t hat g old c oinage i n B elgic Gaul b egan o nly a fter t he i nvasions o f the C imbri a nd T eutones i n the l ate s econd c entury BC i gnores the earliest g roup o f g old c oins i n the a rea ( Scheers, 1 977, N os.1-4). These a re n ot o nly highly unusual i n t heir r epeated i mitation o f T arentine s taters o f the l ater f ourth a nd third c enturies B C, but a lso derive f eatures, n otably t he p seudo-legend, f rom t he P hilippus ( or more p robably , f rom i mitations o f i t) which i mply i ts p resence i n Northern Gaul a t a r elatively early date. They p robably date t o t he l ater third c entury B C. The f our examples f ound i n B ritain may b e c ontemporary i mports and a re a lmost c ertainly the earliest C eltic g old c oins t o have r eached this i sland ( e.g. A llen, 1 960). They had n o o bvious p rogeny a nd whether they ever c irculated h ere in any meaningful s ense i s d oubtful. I n r ecent y ears, the c ase f or a l ong chronology has gained c onsiderable g round. F irstly, where Gaulish g old c oins i mitate G reek o riginals, these a ll b elong t o the s ame late f ourth-third c entury B C p eriod ( Scheers, 1 981). This s uggests t heir p enetration a s a ' group' a nd c opying a t a date f airly c lose the p rototypes - o therwise w hy were n o later c oins i mitated? S econdly, t he d erivative c oinages themselves p assed t hrough three d istinct p hases: ( 1) c lose imitation o f t he p rototypes w eighing o ver 8 .0 g m, t ogether with halves a nd q uarter-staters, a l ocal i nnovation ( 2) the f irst l ocal d evelopment o f Gaulish t ypes, n ormally above c 7 .60 g m a nd i n g ood a lloy, a nd ( 3) a f inal phase o f local development, c haracterised by n ew types o f l ow weight and l ow p recious m etal c ontent s truck o n a large scale ( Nash, 1 975b). Yet a ll t hese d evelopments a re a llowed o nly s eventy y ears by C olbert d e B eaulieu ( 1973a). The third a rgument i s i ndirect. T he s o-called ' silver belt' i n t he s outh o f Gaul ( Allen a nd Nash, 1 980) d isplays three distinct p hases e ssentially parallel t o t he g old ( Nash, 1 975b), o nly a third c entury B C date f or t he f irst phase i s s upported by i ndependently dated h oards ( cf. Crawford, 1 968; Nash, 1 978b). F ourthly, a nd d ecisively, the a rchaeological evidence a lso s uggests t hat the chronology i s t oo l ow ( e.g. Furger-Gunti, 1 982; Kruta, 1 982). P olenz ( 1982) l ists 1 4 p robable M iddle La T Ane g rave f inds o f g old a nd s ilver c oins p redating the end o f the s econd c entury B C, s ome o f which a re a lmost c ertainly third c entury B C, e .g. G iengen a .d. B renz a nd V evey ( both with g old). A r elatively early date f or the subsidiary s ilver s eries f ound i n the ' gold b elt' a lso, a ccords w ith the l ong development displayed by types l ike those inscribed KALETEDOU, o ne o f which, t ogether w ith two ' monnaies-ä-la c roix' a nd two s ilver Late La T Ane b rooches ( Collis, 1 985), o ccurs i n the Lauterach h oard o f Roman denarii - i n which t he latest c oin i s a n i ssue o f 1 17/116

7 7

BC ( Crawford, 1 969) - which later d evelopments i mply was exported f rom the Roman w orld before t he f irst c entury BC ( Crawford, 1 974).

I II

P eriod I c oinage and i ts

s ubdivisions

Apart f rom t he early g roup o f half a nd quarter s taters based o n T arentine p rototypes, the f irst major Gallo-Belgic g old s eries a re g enerally dated w ithin the s econd c entury BC ( Allen, 1 960; S cheers, 1 977). T hey a re in g ood metal and i nitially o n a s tater s tandard o ver 7 .6 gm. The ' crossed l ines' c oins ( S11-12) a re p resumed the earlier ( Kent, 1 978b) a s the c ommoner ' broad-flan g roup' s hows a complex t ypological development a nd i ts l ater types ( SE212 ; S E31) a re o n a l ower w eight s tandard ( 7.3-7.2 g m). Thus, while t he f ormer b elong t o t he s econd o f the Gaulish g old phases, the latter w ere a pparently s till being s truck when g old w eights b egan t o decline s harply throughout Gaul ( cf. C olbert de B eaulieu, 1 973a). B oth have r elated quarter s tater s eries. The Tayac, G ironde, h oard, i n which b road-flan c oins were a ssociated w ith l ocal types a nd East Gaulish i ssues ( Nash, 1 978b; h er Tayac a nd B eaune types) i s a k ey o ccurrence f or t he s eries ( although n ot a historically f ixed date a s t here a re n o g rounds t o l ink the hoard w ith the C imbric i nvasion i n the late s econd c entury BC; o f. Kellner, 1 970). I t does, h owever, i mply the c ontemporaneity o f the b road-flan c oins, ( all earlier variants i n S cheers' ( 1977) typological s equence) w ith t he Tayac and B eaune types. The f ormer b elongs t o the s econd Gaulish g old phase while the l atter i s t he f orerunner o f a s eries i tself s upplanted by a s ilver c oinage by the early f irst c entury BC ( Nash, 1 978b). On t his basis, a date f or the h oard i n, o r s oon a fter, the m id s econd c entury BC would s eem r easonable. However, a n a pparent c hronological p roblem i s p osed by a s ingle A rmorican g old c oin in the h oard, which C olbert de Beaulieu ( 1973a) dates a t earliest b efore 8 0 BC. This, however, r eflects h is c ompression o f d evelopments i nto the period a fter 1 21 BC; s ince t he c oin w eighs 7 .55 g m i t c ould be earlier. I n a ny case, g old c oinage p robably s pent much o f i ts l ife i mmobile i n h oards ( Nash, 1 978b) and a s ingle c oin c ould e asily have been added l ater t o a g roup o therwise put t ogether well b efore the end o f the s econd c entury BC. Tayac thus g ives u s a broad t erminus ante q uem f or the earlier s tages o f the b road-flan s eries, and thus f or the s tart o f g old p roduction r elevant t o B ritain. P recise dating o f the duration o f t his B ritish P hase 1 ( as i t w ill be t ermed h ere) a nd the t ransition t o the ' post-Tayac' broad-flan s tater s eries ( Phase 2 ) i s i mpossible, but b oth a re p resumably c omfortably w ithin t he s econd c entury BC. Typologically a f inal p hase o f P eriod I Gallo-Belgic c oin p roduction c an b e d istinguished . This s et the pattern o f insular g old c oinages, but p receded the much l ower weight s tandards and d ebasements c haracteristic o f P eriod

7 8

I I. I t e ncompasses a c hangeover t o thicker f lans o n a r educed m odule, a nd the s tart o f the d isintegration o f the basic P hilippus types t o a s tage where the d esigns a re n o l onger c omprehensible. A t imescale f or this P hase 3 c oinage ( which i s i n a ny case uncommon in B elgic Gaul a nd e ven rarer i n B ritain) i s i mpossible, however, i t may have b een very s hort, o r a l onger p eriod during which l ittle c oinage was s truck. The o nly quarter-stater model f or B ritish i ssues ( SE32) p robably a lso began t o b e s truck during this s hadowy P hase 3 . Most b road-flan c oins f ound i n B ritain a re worn, l eading K ent ( 1978a; 1 981) t o s uggest that they were only i mported a t t he end o f their c urrency o n the C ontinent, where that w ear had b een a cquired. This would have t o be a t a l ate date, p ossibly even c ontemporary w ith the s ucceeding P eriod I I c oinages ( Kent, 1 978b), an a lternative t o the c onventional v iew that t he P eriod I s eries were s ignificantly earlier i mports, a cquiring their wear through c ontinued c irculation i n B ritain ( Allen, 1 960). D iscriminating b etween these hypotheses i s t hus c rucial f or e stablishing whether a P eriod I c oinage ever c irculated i n B ritain i n i ts o wn r ight, r ather t han merely a s a n adjunct t o later i ssues. I n f act, e xamination o f the g roups o f c oins w ith B ritish a nd C ontinental p rovenances r espectively l eaves l ittle d oubt t hat t he broad-flan g roup c ontinued t o c irculate i n B ritain a fter t hey had b een c omprehensively r ecalled o n the C ontinent. P eriod I c oins w ith C ontinental p rovenances s how l ess wear a nd n ever o ccur i n hoards w ith P eriod I I t ypes, whereas i n B ritain they a re c omparatively c ommon i n m id-first c entury B C hoards, a nd o ccasionally f ound i n l ater hoards e .g. A lfriston, H 50). S ince the c oins in t hese B ritish hoards a re a lready t hroroughly worn, t his horizon e ffectively p rovides a t erminus a nte quer n f or t he wearing p rocess. By this date, therefore, the hoard c oins, a t l east, had a cquired g reater w ear than their c ounterparts a broad, which o ught t o i mply t hat they were i mported s ignificantly earlier. As a g roup, t he broad-flan c oins w ith B ritish p rovenances a re l ater in emphasis than t hose o n the C ontinent, w ith a h igher p roportion o f p ost-Tayac types ( 60% a gainst 5 2%). The l ower weight o f B ritish s pecimens ( cf. F ig. A 6:1) i s a lso s ignificant, the p roduct o ften n ot o f wear ( which t ends t o r edistribute m etal o ver the s urface), but o f c lipping ( Allen, 1 960); p resumably t o l ower the w eight o f t he heavier, earlier s pecimens i n l ine w ith the l ower p ost-Tayac s tandards. The bulk o f the b road-flan s taters w ere p resumably therefore i mported i n P hase 2 ( otherwise t here s hould b e m ore f ull w eight p reTayac types) i n t he l ater s tages o f their C ontinental c urrency, t hough q uite p ossibly s till w ithin the s econd c entury B C, a cquiring their a dditional wear by c ontinued u se in B ritain where they w ere beyond the r ecall which r emoved t heir c ounterparts f rom c irculation i n B elgic Gaul. Die-linked c oins o f a ll t he c ommoner b road-flan ' crossed l ines' varieties o ccur o n both s ides o f

7 9

and the

Channel a nd a re thus p resumably C ontinental s trikings. However, there a re n o s ecurely p rovenanced ' crossed l ines' s taters ( 811) abroad ( they a re n ot, however, c ommon i n B ritain) and i t i s c onceivable that t ogether w ith s ome o f the r arer p ost-Tayac s ub-classes o f the broad-flan s tater ( e.g. S E22.1-2) they w ere a ctually s truck in B ritain .

I V

P eriod I I c oinage and i ts s ubdivisions ( a)

Ealglc Gaul

By c ontrast to P eriod I , P eriod I I c hronology b enefits f rom the Caesarian c onquest o f Gaul, which p rovides t wo i mportant p oints o f r eference: c oin types naming i ndividuals o f whom Caesar knew ( cf. Dayet a nd C olbert d e B eaulieu, 1 962) a nd the 4 73 Gaulish i ssues ( 11 g old, 2 44 s ilver, 1 63 b ronze a nd 5 5 p otin o f 7 6 types) a nd 1 34 R oman down t o 5 4 BC f ound i n the A lesia battlefield d eposit o f 5 2 BC ( Colbert d e Beaulieu, 1 955a). This g ives a t erminus a nte que r n f or many s ignificant s eries o ver a large part o f Gaul, while s everal c ommon types a bsent f rom t hese d eposits can r easonably be a scribed a p ost-Conquest date. T he deposit i s l ess useful f or B elgic Gaul, but t he two t ypes p resent ( Scheers, 1 977, N os. 1 46, 1 63) a re evidence f or the a ppearance o f b oth s truck b ronze a nd i nscriptions t here by this p eriod ( although n ot n ecessarily much earlier, a s t he war undoubtedly t ransformed Gaulish c oinages; A llen a nd Nash, 1 980; Haselgrove, 1 984b). The d etailed c hronology w orked o ut f or P eriod I I c oinages in B elgic Gaul by S cheers ( 1977) has t herefore t o make two important a ssumptions: f irstly, that the pattern i n B elgic Gaul c onforms t o o ther a reas, a nd s econdly t hat s pecific types a nd hoards a re l inked t o Caesar's c onquest o f the a rea f rom 5 7 BC. F or t he s ubsidiary c oinages, S cheers' p icture i s undoubtedly c orrect: most i nscribed bronze c oinage in the r egion i s e vidently p ost-Conquest, while the Gallic War i s the m ost l ikely c ontext f or t he f irst, l imited s eries o f ' regular' s ilver t ypes, o ften o verstruck o n earlier C entral a nd Eastern types. F or t he g old i ssues t here a re, however, p roblems. S cheers' dating employs f our p ropositions ( 1972; 1 977): ( 1) a g roup o f r elated types w ith a c ommon p rototype ( her No. 9 ; Gallo-Belgic C i n A llen's t erminology) w ere s truck by the B elgic c onfederacy t o f inance the war a gainst Caesar; ( 2) c ertain c ivitates o nly gained the r ight t o s trike c oinage through the p olitical upheaval e ngendered by the war ( cf. C olbert d e B eaulieu, 1 973a); ( 3) g old c oinage c eased t o be s truck i n Gaul a fter 5 0 BC ( e.g. C olbert d e B eaulieu, 1 955b); a nd ( 4) s ince C lasses 3 -4 o f t he p rototype a re d ie-linked t o C lass 1 o f t he uniface s eries ( her No.24) o f t he s upposed c onfederate i ssue, the p rototype i tself dates t o j ust before the war. Many s cholars a ccept h er a rguments, and, by extension , t hat the Gallic war was the main p eriod f or t he i mport o f P eriod I I g old t o B ritain ( e.g. Kent, 1 978a; 1 981).

8 0

A ssociation w ith the war i s i mplied by the dramatic weight l oss ( from o ver 6 .0 g m t o 5 .5 g m o r l ess) and debasement o f t hese s eries, by the f requency o f hoarding and by the massive o utput, p erhaps 1 0-15 t imes h igher than before ( Haselgrove, 1 984b). But S cheers' s econd proposition has n o evident historical basis ( cf. Nash, 1 975b), while t he third cannot b e r egarded a s absolute ( Haselgrove, 1 984b). The latest types o ften d iffer f rom their p redecessors in b earing incriptions, in their l ow weight a nd f ineness ( some o f them ( e.g. S cheers, 1 977, No.29) s howing a s hift f rom s ilver t o c opper a s the dominant a lloying m etal); i n u sing f ewer o bverse dies; and in being c losely l inked t o s ilver and b ronze i ssues, s ome imitating Roman d enarii a nd c ertainly p ost 5 0 BC ( Haselgrove, 1 984b). Gold c oins a lso o ccur i n a l imited number o f late h oards. S ome g old c oinage, therefore, i s quite p ossibly p ost-Conquest and the v iew that i t was i mmediately s uppressed i s n ot s upported. A lthough t he hypothesis that the war e mergency b rought uniform c urrency m easures, o n which S cheers' f irst p roposition r ests, i s i tself untestable, t here a re g rounds f or p referring a h igher c hronology. T here a re a ctually two s eparate typological g roupings, o ne i n the w est which ultimately derives f rom the b road-flan P eriod I s taters v ia Gallo-Belgic C , t he o ther in the eastern part o f B elgic Gaul with the ' oval eye' s tater type ( Scheers, 1 977, N o.30) a t i ts h ead ( Plate I ). This, S cheers d erives f rom the f irst g eneration o f the w estern g roup ( ibid. N o.26) but the typological d ependence c an b e r eversed - the c oins a re o n the s ame w eight s tandard - i n which c ase, h er unitary g rouping b reaks d own . S econdly, n ew d iscoveries s uch a s the Thuin hoard ( Huysecom, 1 981) which c ontained h itherto unknown early variants o f o ne o f the w estern types ( cf. S cheers 1 977, N o.29), a nd a c areful examination o f the d ies u sed i n s triking d ifferent c lasses ( e.g. i bid. N os. 2 4, 2 6, 3 0) s uggest a m ore c omplex development t han S cheers a llows. Thirdly, the t hree earliest c lasses o f t hese l atter t ypes a ccount f or o nly 9 % ( No.24), 1 2% ( No.26) a nd 1 4% ( No.30) r espectively o f t he t otal d ies i n each s eries, s uggesting that the massive i ncrease i n o utput d emanded by the war came o nly a fter a ll three s eries were a lready being s truck. The f inal a rgument f or a l onger chronology i s p rovided by the B ritish evidence. ( b)

B ritain

The a rgument underpinning A llen's c hronology f irst B ritish g old c oinage i s a s f ollows:

o f

the

" The w orn c oin o f B ritish B i n the L e Catillon hoard i s o f s ingular i mportance f or c hronology . F rom a nalogy w ith many h oards c ontaining s imilar p roportions o f A rmorican c oins .. t his o ne was buried b etween 5 6 a nd 5 1 BC ... B ritish B g oes back a g ood deal l onger than t hat: o ne m ight s uggest i n r ound f igures t o 7 0 o r 8 0 B C ... L et u s n ow r eturn t o Gallo-Belgic C , the date o f which w e l eft ... Gallo-Belgic C i s two r emoves f rom B ritish B , .. n ow p laced s omewhere i n the o rder o f 7 0 o r 8 0 B C .. a date i n the o rder o f 1 00 BC w ould

8 1

2 8

Mack 5 8

P l 9 / 4 2 7

2 5

- a > 3 0

3 1

3 0/6

P late I Evolution o f g old c oinage i n B elgic Gaul during the s econd quarter o f the f irst c entury BC ( After S cheers, 1 977, w ith m odifications). S cale 1 :1.

8 2

n ot b e o ut

o f t he question"

( Allen,

1 960,

1 06-7)

L e Catillon a lso c ontained a well-worn Gallo-Belgic D q uarter-stater ( Scheers, 1 977, No.13) a nd f resh s ilver s taters ( derived f rom another early B ritish g old type, S 41.1) a nd quarter-staters ( themselves s econd g eneration d erivatives o f Gallo-Belgic D ), in e ffect, a f urther d evolutionary s tage i n the B ritish s eries, a nd i mplicit c onfirmation o f the date f or B ritish B ( SW 4 1). S ince Gallo-Belgic C ( SE 4 1.1-3) p rovided the p rototype f or s everal o ther B ritish g old s eries, the c hronology c ould be extended t o the B ritish uninscribed s eries a s a whole ( Allen, 1 960). Under the h istorical m odels then dominating B ritish a rchaeology, L e Catillon a ppeared a s ecure f ixed p oint. M odern s cholarship, h owever, i s more c autious. The p rincipal doubts r evolve a round three p roblems: ( 1) the dating o f L e Catillon ( 2) the t imescale o f the d evolutionary p rocess a nd ( 3) c ertain B ritish g old types, which A llen d erived d irectly f rom S E41.1-3, b orrow t raits f rom l ater types, which must therefore d epress their c hronology. L e Catillon i s d iscussed i n Appendix 3 ( H64). Recent c riticisms s tress t hree p roblems. F irst, the p recise Gallic War dating i s unwarranted, a s o ther Channel I sland h oards w ith A rmorican c oins a lso c ontain Roman i ssues which p lace them f irmly i n the later f irst c entury BC. S econdly, the h oard c ontains f ive p otentially p ostCaesarian f ibulae, s uggesting that L e Catillon i s i tself o ne o f t hese l ater d eposits ( e.g. C ollis, 1 985; K rämer, 1 971). Thirdly, s ome o f the Northern Gaulish c oin types i n the hoard a re l ikely t o date n o earlier than the m id f irst c entury B C ( e.g. S cheers, 1 977). N one o f t hese a rguments, h owever, i s i ndividually decisive ( Appendix 3 ) a nd L e Catillon a lso has f eatures which d istance i t f rom the l ater, m ixed hoards s uch a s Rozel ( H65) L ot 1 , w ith i ts t erminus p ost que r n o f 3 9 BC. An earlier dating, therefore, c annot b e discounted a nd deposition a ny t ime w ithin the m iddle third o f t he f irst c entury BC i s p erfectly p ossible. Theoretically, a t l east, the h oard c ould s till s upport A llen's h igh c hronology, and, in s o d oing, undermine S cheers' c onservative o ne. But the dating o f L e Catillon has in a ny case b een o veremphasised. A s econd p roblem i nherent i n A llen's c hronology i s the a ssumption t hat two r emoves ( 1960, 1 07), i .e. two s uccessive f alls i n weight a nd f ineness, i mply two c hronological s tages o f a ppreciable duration b etween GalloB elgic C a nd B ritish B , and o f a f urther ' remove' b etween the l atter a nd t he s ilver ( based o n A llen's belief t hat t hese B ritish d erivatives were the p roduct o f a g radual w esterly movement o f B elgic immigrants, a s the s outhw estern c ommunities would o therwise have borrowed A rmorican types). A llen's model i s a c lassic example o f the p referred explanation being made t o yield the c hronology a s w ell ( cf.

6 3

Renfrew, 1 973). Assuming the typological o rdering i s valid, a diffusion p rocess f rom east t o west i s c ertainly n ot improbable ( Fig. 5 :1). But a s Collis ( 1971a) o bserves, an ' overlapping s ystem' model, w ith multiple borrowing by c ommunities s uccessively adopting c oinage, provides an equally g ood f it to the evidence. Despite Allen, the rapid adoption o f a s ilver-rich a lloy ( and u ltimately o f i ssuing i t very debased) c ould well be ' Armorican' t raits. But this explanation no more easily y ields a r elative chronology than does the m igration hypothesis. There i s no r eason why the s triking o f the derivative s eries on different s tandards s hould r eflect a s ignificant l apse in t ime between t hem, rather than, f or i nstance, c onditions internal t o the s ocial g roups adoptng c oinage. We do n ot know i f I ron A ge c oins were s truck a s identical o bjects o f p recise weight ( i.e. a l marco) o r a s a s pecific number f rom a f ixed weight ( i.e. a l p ezzo). But i f S pratling ( 1976) i s c orrect that two d ifferent s tandards o f 3 09 gm a nd 6 34 gm were i n use in l ate I ron Age B ritain, different c hoices c ould well have been made i n the a reas where c oinage was adopted. A t 6 . 4 gm, S 41 s taters c ould r epresent an i ntended s triking r atio o f 1 00 t o the h igher s tandard, while a t 6 .1 gm , S W41 f its a r atio o f 5 0 t o the o ther. S uch r ound f igures, o f c ourse, w ere n ot n ecessarily s ignificant t o I ron Age c ommunities. I f anything, the s ubdivisions f ound o n Romano-British weights, but potentially indigenous s tandards in o rigin ( cf. A llen , 1 960), s uggest 3 and 4 a s c ommon denominators - but the example i llustrates the p roblem n eatly. Even i f L e Catillon was d eposited before 5 0 B C, the t imescale o f the B ritish developments i t encapsulates c ould s till b e o ne o f years rather than g enerations. A third p roblem with A llen's s cheme i s that c ertain o f the r egional g old types which he derived directly f rom S E41 take o ther t raits and their metrology f rom types l ater in the C ontinental s equence ( cf. S cheers, 1 977). P aradoxically this n ow p rovides the most s atisfactory basis upon which to s ubdivide P eriod I I c oinage i n B ritain. The r elationships between the different s eries a re shown in F ig. 5 :2; their metrology i s s et out in A ppendix 6 . T o avoid c onfusion, the three phases into which the various s eries a re broken down ( assuming a t imescale f or B ritish developments a t l east partially analogous t o the Continent) a re numbered c onsecutively t o those o f P eriod I : Phase 4 : B ritish derivatives o f S E4 w ithout f eatures derived f rom c oinages o f the Gallic War p eriod, e .g. E4, S 4 e tc., t ogether w ith their p rototypes. P hase 5 : C oinages u ltimately derived f rom S E4, incorporating f eatures f rom c oinage o f the war p eriod, S 5, E 5, together with their p rototypes.

but

e .g.

P hase 6 : C oinages with f eatures b elonging t o t he f inal s tages o f C ontinental c oin p roduction, n otably a c opperr ich a lloy; their weight i s g enerally i n the range 5 .6 5 .4 gm.

8 4

F ig .

5 :1 Distribution o f early British derivative c oinages i n s outhern England ( a) E41, S 41 ( b) SW41-51.

8 5

t . 0 r s 2

-C 0

-C • r-

• r 5• 1 •

•

7 1 0 .-

(1)

> 11

A

• r • r ▪-

S4 ( Br it ish A 2)

C C 1

▪ 4, S -

( 'Durotr ig ian '

( Le C at illon I R )

C f )

L r )

F ig. 5 :2 Chart derivatives.

E 0 U

o f Gallo-Belgic c oinages

8 6

and their B ritish

These g roupings a re d iscussed i n Appendix 2 . The f irst i ncludes t he L e Catillon ( S41, S W41, S W51) d evelopment f rom S cheers ( 1977) N o.9, a lready d iscussed, c opying i ts l atest c lasses ( SE41.2-3) a nd s truck a t the s ame weight - a nd a parallel s eries o f quarter-stater i mitations ( SE42-3). There a re a lso two c lasses o f more f aithful c opies o f the o riginal s tater type ( 1) S E41.4, c losely c omparable t o S E41.1 and c onceivably i mports; o ne c oin in t he s eries has an o bverse d ie l ink w ith i ts p rotot ype. However, the r everse d ies a re distinctive a nd c onfined t o B ritain; p ossibly d ies were i mported a s well a s c oins. ( 2) S E41.5, which has two varieties ( cf. Allen, 1 960, G , HA), b oth p robably Kentish in o rigin, the latter parent t o the r ight-facing North-Eastern c oinages ( NE51). B oth c opy the f inal c lasses o f the p rototype, but a re l ighter. Also p ossibly K entish i s the p rototype f or the mirror i mage l eft-facing North-Eastern c oinage ( NE52). This, ( Evans, 1 864, A ll), h owever, derives i ts exergual design a nd weight f rom S cheers' uniface s tater s eries ( SE51.2),as d oes the c oinage t o which i t gave b irth. These c oins may t herefore b e p laced w ith the Gallic War g roup o n the s trength o f their m ore immediate p rototype ( the f irst o f t he c lasses w ith which Continental uniface s tater p roduction p eaked). The s ame a rguments a pply t o the s oc alled ' wolf' s eries o f s taters f ound i n East Anglia ( EA51). The two o ther major P hase 5 g roups a re A llen's ( 1960) B ritish Q ( S5) and B ritish L ( E5) r espectively. They a re f requently a ssociated i n hoards and w ith the uniface s tater ( SE51; Haselgrove, 1 984b) a nd have o ther f eatures i n c ommon: the r elated quarter-staters and a uniface s tater s tream, l inking them w ith the l ater C ontinental types ( SE51.4-5) which a re o f equivalent weight. B oth had a c onsiderable p rogeny i ncluding t he earliest i nscribed i ssues i n t heir r espective r egions. Where t hey differ, h owever, i s t hat the basic S 51 s tater i n a s ilver-rich a lloy o n a 5 .9 g m s tandard ( cf. F ig. A6:1) - a s o pposed t o i ts l ighter s uccessor S 63 ( 5.4 gm) i n a c opper-rich a lloy ( cf. A llen, 1 961a) - i s s o c lose t o i ts p rototype ( S50; S cheers, 1 977, No.26 C lass 3 ) that i t c ould i tself b e C ontinental, a nd a s many a s f ive examples have, i n f act n ow b een f ound i n F rance. E 51-52, by c ontrast, has a more h eterogenous p arentage. A llen ( 1960) d erived i t f rom the N orth-Eastern t radition, but i t i s c loser t o S 51, which Evans ( 1849) l ong a go s uggested a s i ts p rototype. Various f eatures, s uch a s t he e lliptical ear o f the horse ( Van Arsdell, 1 984a), a re a dopted e ither f rom S 51, o r directly f rom t hat type's p rototype ( S50) - g iven the c loseness o f the r elationship b etween them, which i s o f n o g reat s ignificance - o r l ess c ertainly, having the w reath pattern o n e ither s ide o f the head in o pposing d irections. But the Eastern s eries f airly c ertainly b orrows f rom o ther types, B ritish and C ontinental, a s w ell ( Haselgrove, 1 984b), and breaks a ltogether n ew g round i n the heavily Romanised horse o n

8 7

the r everse. The s ource i s p resumably o ne o f the s tater types ( Scheers, 1 977, Nos.27, 3 0, C lasses 5 -6, and especially 2 8) with which the Gallic War s eries ends, unless these f eatures derive directly f rom Roman denarii. Phase 4 c oins a re f requently a ssociated with P eriod I coins in hoards, whereas P hase 5 types rarely a re ( Haselgrove, 1 984b). P hase 4 c oins a re o nly marginally more c ommon in the many hoards c losing with P hase 5 i ssues in both B elgic Gaul ( 20) and B ritain ( 15), i ndicating that the wartime t ransformation o f Continental c oinage extended to Britain. Moreover, a s Allen's ( 1960) dating o f E 5 and S 5 t o the later f irst c entury B C was t o a llow t ime f or their devolution, their minting c ould therefore belong t o the s ame mid-first c entury c ontext. C rucial, i f contentious, evidence f or the earlier date c omes f rom an S 51 s tater s tratified in a ditch a t V illeneuve S t. Germain, Aisne, with 1 35 o ther c oins, m ostly p otins a nd very f ew bronze. D ebord ( 1981), f ollowing the F rench numismatists, g ives the s ite a p ost-war date, u sing A llen's dating o f the s tater t o 40/20 B C a s his c linching evidence. However, over 7 0% o f the f ibulae f rom the s ite a re pure La T Ane I II types, most o f t hem i ron ( Debord, 1 982), the dominant Dressel 1 B a mphora f orm i s not definitively p ost-Caesarian ( cf. P eacock, 1 971) and there a re earlier D ressel l A sherds. None o f the a ssociated c oins i n the ditch a re demonstrably p ost-Conquest ( although o ne p otin type ( 3 c oins), c ould be derived f rom d enarii o f 49 a nd 49-45 BC r espectively; S cheers, 1 977, No.195), while the o verstruck s ilver types l ook l ike an emergency i ssue. The s tater s eems unlikely t o b e the o nly markedly later c oin i n s uch a large c ollection. British P hase 5 types a re thus broadly c ontemporary with their Continental p rototypes, and p resumably l inked to the influx o f g old i nto B ritain a t this p eriod ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 984b). Moreover, i f the s ubsequent s witch t o a c opper-rich a lloy and even l ighter weights in P hase 6 f ollows c losely o n Continental d evelopments ( cf. K ent, 1 978a), c ontinued P hase 5 production l ong a fter 5 0 B C i s r elatively unlikely. Typologically, a lmost a ll P hase 6 c oins a re derivatives o f B ritish P hase 5 types, a nd d irect l inks w ith the Continental g old a re l imited t o two c ases: ( 1) the V motif adopted f rom t he o bverse o f the l ate uniface s tater S E51.6, o n a quarter-stater ( S65.3), which i s f airly c ertainly B ritish ( cf. K ent, 1 981); a nd ( 2) the double S motif a pparently taken f rom the p receding c lass o f the same s eries ( SE51.5) o n the o bverse o f a uniface s tater ( E62.2), which a lso has S outhern l inks including an o bverse die-link and a t riple-tailed horse o n the r everse. Continental influence i s, h owever, a pparent in P hase 6 in the uninscribed s ilver types ( e.g. S 66-68; S E61-2; E 63) and more l imited number o f bronzes ( SE63) s truck f or t he f irst t ime in B ritain. This d evelopment belongs t o the later f irst c entury BC ( cf. Allen 1 960), and n ot o nly mirrors B elgic Gaul, but potentially occurred f or s imilar r easons, i .e. a s hortage o f g old a fter the P hase 5 influx . The s carcity o f s urviving c oins s uggests that P hase 6 g old production was c omparatively l imited, i ts s tater o utput

8 8

A P hase 1

CONT INENT

E

BR ITA IN

SE 1 / 12

2 7

S

3 8

1 / 12

P hase 2 SE 2 1/22

3 7

SE 3 1

1 3

SE 3 2

3

SE

4 1 . 1

1 3

S E

4 1 .2-3

SE

4 21

P hase 3

P hase 4 a

P hase 4 b i m i lm o

szm u mm i

2 3 2 7

P hase 5 a SE 5 1

9 3

SE 5 2

1 9

S

5 0

1 5

S

5 1

1

P hase 5 b

1 00

1 0 0

0

4 0

%

2 0

[ 1 E 1

0

2

4

F RANCE

n

F a n

3 PHASE

4 E

1 3 1

I B M

h 4 L

BR ITA IN

5 SE

=1 86

F ig . 5 :3 P roportions o f Gallo-Belgic c oin f indspots Gaul a nd B ritain ( a) by s eries ( b) a s p ercentage t otal f or each c ountry.

8 9

i n o f

divided between s eries r epresenting the tail end o f P hase 5 developments and those which anticipate P eriod I II ( e.g. S 63.1-2). B etween these, there was e ither a gap, o r ( in c entral s outhern England o nly), a t emporary s witch in emphasis to f ractional types. The o ccasional s triking o f quarter-stater types in s ilver ( e.g. E63) a lso s uggests l imited g old availabilty, but d ie s tudies a re n eeded a s c onfirmation.

( c)

A bsolute d ating

The absolute dating o f P hases 5 and 6 i s r elatively s traightforward. The f ormer c entres o n 5 7-50 BC, t o which a decade must be a dded o n e ither s ide t o encompass c oinages, n otably S E51, a lready in p roduction b efore Caesar's intervention and B ritish types p ossibly m inted a fter the war ended. I t thus o verlaps both P hase 6 - w ith i ts e ffective t erminus p ost que r n o f 5 0 BC s et by the s ame event, and t erminus ante que r n s et by P eriod I II ( below) and P hase 4 , c onsisting o f types unlikely t o have b een s truck l ater than the war. The o nly major difficulty i s therefore the s tarting date f or P hase 4 , ushered i n by the p rototype s tater s eries ( SE41.1). A date in the r ange 8 0+10 BC i s the most p robable. The dating s uggested above f or P eriod I makes a s tart b efore the f irst c entury BC unlikely. A t the l ower l imit, B ritish developments, the degree o f wear a nd a s ignificant d rop in weight before the uniface type e volved a ll s uggest a date f or S E41.1 well before the war, notwithstanding i ts die l ink with i ts s uccessor. The r euse o f this d ie i s i n a c lass ( SE51.1) which c ould p redate the war, and c ontra S cheers ( 1977), i s n ot therefore an i ndissoluble l ink between S E41.1 and the war p roduction. I f p roduction was indeed episodic, ' reuse' o f ' old' a nd even worn o ut d ies was p robably anyway the rule rather than the exception. Further evidence f or a l ong chronology c omes f rom the pattern o f importation t o B ritain ( Fig . 5 :3). The proportion o f S E41.1 imported i s particularly h igh , but unlike o ther types, i ts distribution i s largely c oastal ( Fig . 5 :4) and s uggests different circumstances. The Higham hoard ( H29) l ooks l ike a c ollection buried w ithout ' circulation'. But these c oins were c losely i mitated in Britain, o r even - g iven a n o bverse die l ink b etween an Insular c oin f rom n ear Gravesend and the Continental s eries - c ontinued to be s truck there. The s ubequent c lasses S E41.2-3 ( and the c ontemporary S E42.1) were n ot, h owever, imported in the s ame p roportions. By c omparison t o o ther Gallo-Belgic s eries they a re, i f a nything, s ignificantly over-represented o n t he C ontinent, which implies they w ere deposited there o ver l onger and/or a chieved w ider c irculation than the o ther types. They a re n ot s truck f rom an unusually large number o f dies, n or were they h oarded ( Haselgrove, 1 984b), but they had e ffectively disappeared f rom c irculation by the Gallic War ( cf. S cheers, 1 972).

more

The c oins o f these later types r eaching B ritain s how a inland distribution, a nd m ore important, were w idely

9 0

A P e te rbo roug

S ne t t isham

B rums tead e z e

•

A 2 ,3

L and o ve r 1 37m

o

e

2 0

3 0

a o

5 0 Km

• 1

I I 4

n 0

Hoa rd

D 5

F ig .

5 :4

D istribution o f

S E41

91

and i ts

I nsular i mitations.

i mitated, c losely i n the Thames e stuary, m ore c rudely i n a n a rc s tretching f rom there t o the S ussex c oast. These B ritish d erivatives, a re thus, i n e ffect, the c ounterparts o f the c lasses t hen c irculating o n t he Continent. They bear v ery s imilar types, a nd w eigh t he s ame, a nd i t i s d ifficult therefore n ot t o c onclude that they have a s imilar t imescale, with the p roviso t hat the l ightest o f them ( and the c losely r elated types a t the h ead o f N orthEastern developments) w ere p robably s truck a fter t he g old influx o ccasioned by the Gallic War ( cf. K ent, 1 981).

V

P eriod I II c oinage a nd i ts

s ubdivisions

The c hronology o f P eriod I II c oinage in B ritain p resents f ewer p roblems. Allen's ( 1944) s cheme s till holds g ood, s ubject o nly t o m inor a djustments. The keys t o this s ituation r eside i n m ost P eriod I II c oinages b eing i nscribed by their i ssuing a uthority, s ome o f whom a re named i n C lassical s ources ( cf. Mann a nd P enman, 1 977), a nd i n the w idespread c opying o f R oman m odels. A s i n Gaul, the Roman C onquest p rovides a useful f ixed p oint, while i n i ts a ftermath, h oards c ontaining dateable Roman c oins o ccur i n c ertain a reas ( Allen, 1 970a; K ent, 1 973). A lso f or the f irst t ime, c oins ( mainly b ronze types), b ecome c ommon i n i ndependently dateable s ite d eposits. Fairly c ertainly identifiable c oining a uthorities early i n P eriod I II i n the S outh-Eastern and S outhern a reas r espectively a re Dubnovellaunus a nd T in ( commios) r ecorded a s r efugees t o Augustus i n h is R es Gestae ( 32). S ome w riters o ffer a s pecific date ( e.g. S tevens, 1 951), but o nly a g eneral t erminus ante quem o f c AD 1 4 c an b e g iven a s the basic t ext was updated o n o ccasions ( Brunt a nd Moore, 1 967). The p light o f t hese r ulers was n ot n ecessarily r elated, while i ndividuals who had m erely s ubmitted t o Augustus a nd b ecome c lients ( cf. S trabo I V, 5 .3) c ould c onceivably a lso have b een i ncluded i n this passage. M ore c losely dated a re Amminus, who f led t o Caius ( Suetonius, C aligula 4 4.2), a nd s truck t ypes r elated t o those o f Cunobelinus who exiled h im ( E85); and V erica who p rovided C laudius w ith h is i nvasion p retext ( Dio, LX, 1 9, 1 ). Cunobelinus was dead by AD 4 3 ( Ibid 2 0, 1 ). The CARA o f the l ate S outhern s eries, S 93 i s p resumably h is s on Caratacus. Outside t he S outhern a rea, t he earliest P eriod I II c oinages a re o ften uninscribed a nd f ollow o n f rom their i mmediate p redecessors ( e.g. S 71, S E71-3, E 71), but the main f eature o f P eriod I II i s t he r apid R omanisation o f a ll the main s eries, p roviding a b road t erminus post q ue r n f or subsequent d evelopments. A variety o f p rototypes were employed, o ften m ore t han half a c entury o ld ( Fig . 5 :5). The b orrowing i s f requently t oo g eneral f or a s pecific model t o b e i dentified ( cf. S cheers, 1 982), o r was f rom a g emstone o r a n i ntaglio ( Henig, 1 972). Even s o, t he p rincipal h orizon i mitated evidently belongs t o t he late f irst c entury B C, i ts c ontext a lmost c ertainly i n t reaties

9 2

9 0-

I Z I

8 0

I B

7 0

6 0

5 0 .

•

In

•

4 0«

I I

3 0-

2 0

II

1 0

BC AD 1 0 .

2 0.

3 0 •

4 0

5 0

6 0 S72 1

S72 2 S8 1

S82

S9

SE82

E7 11

E72 2E7 13 E75 -E7 3

E8 1

E82/ 31

E82/

E84 -5 E A73 E A94

32

D AT ING OF POTENT IAL ROMAN CO IN P ROTOTYPES OF P ER IOD I CO INS

F ig.

5 :5 Date ranges f or B ritish P eriod I II

o f p otential Roman coin c oins.

9 3

prototypes

e stablished b etween Augustus and i ndividual B ritish r ulers f ollowing his r eorganisation o f the Gaulish p rovinces i n 2 7 BC; S trabo's narrative ( IV 5 .3) s uggests a t erminus a nte ( D iem f or these developments o f 7 BC ( Haselgrove, 1 9840). The i nception o f P eriod I II must then be p laced e arly i n the last quarter o f the c entury; the c oin t erminus p ost que r n o f 1 0-9BC i s n oticeably r estricted t o the l ate i ssues o f T incommius ( S72) a nd Tasciovanus ( E71.3). Following A llen ( 1944), P eriod I II may b e d ivided i nto two P hases ( 7-8) o f b roadly thirty years duration . The metrological evidence, h owever, s uggests Addedomaros ( SE73) and Dubnovellaunus ( SE71-2) both s truck c oinage earlier r elative t o T asciovanus t han A llen a llowed ( Fig. A 6:1) and thus early i n P hase 7 , while in P hase 8 , t he c oin e vidence c onfirms that V erica's m inting a nd, l ess c ertainly, Cunobelinus' c ontinued v irtually t o the C onquest. The f ormer uses T iberian models, a s w ell a s t he A s o f A grippa/ Neptune s truck under Gaius ( AD 3 7-41) ( S82.2), a s d oes the unusual s ilver c oin E 84, i nscribed CVNO/SOLIDV. T he F . o r F IL, o n s everal s eries, n eed n ot n ecessarily d enote a f ather-son r elationship b etween t he i ndividuals s o l inked ( Haselgrove, 1 9840). G reater chronological o verlap b etween various s eries c an therefore be a llowed, particularly between the l ater t ypes b earing Tasciovanus a nd a ssociated l egends ( E71.3, E 73-74) and the earliest i ssues o f Cunobelinus ( E81). T he s tratified s equence a t C olchester and o ther s ites ( Chapter 8 ) c onfirms A llen's ( 1967a) d ivision o f Cunobelinus' c oins i nto early ( E81, E 82.1, E 83.1) and d eveloped types ( E82.2, E 83.2). I t r emains a n o pen question whether a ny c oinage was s truck a fter AD 4 3. T he Neronian h ead o n t he l ate East Anglian inscribed s ilver type EA94, n ow r ead a s S UB R I P RASTO ( Mossop, 1 979), i mplies that, i n s ome a reas a t l east, • was. T o a ccommodate the p ossibilty, a number o f types, including t he s ilver i ssues i nscribed E PATICCV and CARA ( S91-3) - which t he h oards p lace a t the v ery end o f the S outhern s equence - a nd the equivalent s eries which c lose the p eripheral c oinages, a re a ssigned h ere t o an a rbitrary P hase 9 , dated c AD 3 0-60. M ost o f them i t must b e a ssumed, w ere p robably s truck b efore AD 4 3, r ather than a fter.

V I The a rchaeological s ubsidiary s eries

e vidence and the

dating

o f

the

The a pproximate dates o f the p eriods a nd phases d iscussed a bove a re g iven in F ig. 5 :6. I n i ts l ater s tages, the a bsolute c hronology i s r easonably s ecure p roviding that t he o pening a nd c losing dates o f phases a re a ccepted a s ranges r ather than a s p recise and their i nter-regional equivalence a s g eneral r ather t han exact. I n the earlier s tages, t he r elative o rdering i s r easonably s ecure, but t he absolute c hronology i s necessarily a b est f it between t he l onger a nd s horter extremes p ropounded by A llen ( 1960) a nd K ent ( 1981).

9 4

, : E > I —r n

=Z . ,a

a= Z

c

. 4 =

Z

' 2

=

=

0 .

N o r th e as te rn

a

)

I

=

=

E as t A ng l ian

« M .

• •

E as te rn

)

I

S ou th e as te rn

a

I

S ou th wes te rn S ou the rn

I

I

——

r

X 1N .X .1

ll l lX 1‘ .1

=

::

Wes te rn

MIM I

M IOM MO O M::

2

eN , L0 N

. c

C °

=M IM MO M MM I MM= Z:

f,

O D N C »

0

0

a )

O.

C D

F ig. 5 :6 c oinage.

P eriodization

and phasing o f B ritish

9 5

,z t

0

I ron

Age

S ite evidence a ssists l ittle i n dating the earlier s tages. The o nly g old c oins f rom early c ontexts a re a p lated S E31.2 f ound a t Danebury ( Appendix 5 , No.27) i n ditch s ediments, which cannot b e c losely dated ( cf. Cunliffe, 1 984) - and have t oo early a terminus p ost quem ( Chapter 4 ) - and an S 41.1 f rom a s torage p it a t Hurstbourne P riors ( Appendix 5 , No. 2 6). However, i t i s uncertain whether the latters' associations were c onfined to P eriod i /ii s aucepan pottery o r i ncluded later w heelmade wares. Nor a re s tratified c oins helpful in p roviding t ermini ante quos f or t he intermediate phases. The S E63 b ronze f rom the T itelberg, Luxembourg, w ith i ts well dated s equence, was unstratified ( Reding, 1 972) - the b ronze inscribed DVBNO ( Mack, 1 975, 291A), a lso unstratified, i s unlikely t o be B ritish ( Delesträe, 1 977). An example o f the p robable B elgic prototype ( Scheers, 1 977, No.80e) o f the inscribed b ronze o f Dubnovellaunus ( SE71.1; Mack, 1 975, 291) i s, h owever, s tratified in C ouche I , which has a terminus a nte quem o f 3 0 BC ( Weiller, 1 977). In B ritain, n o c oins b elonging to the main r egional s eries o ccur i n c ontexts p re-dating P eriod i ii ( Fig. 5 :7). One o f the earliest, a n E 73 bronze a ssociated w ith MPRIA pottery in a house g ully a t Radley ( Appendix 5 , N o.4) i s, i f a nything, more s uggestive o f a late date f or t he a rrival o f w heelmade pottery types i n the Upper Thames Basin ( Chapter 4 a bove), a lthough the gully had been r ecut t oo o ften f or certainty. More g enerally , however, the pattern o f s tratification o f the later c oins and their a ssociations with dateable a rtefacts b ears o ut their r elative o rdering. Only P hase 6 c oins a re better r epresented in p re-Conquest d eposits. S imilar t rends a re evident with t he a ssociations ( Fig. 5 :8); P hase 7 a ssociations w ith f ibulae a re mostly w ith Nauheim derivative and C olchester types ( the dominant LPRIA f orms in B ritain) and their f ineware a ssociations a re most o ften w ith Augusto-Tiberian f orms. T he majority o f P hase 8 a ssociations a re w ith Romanised f ibulae, s ome o f t hem p reConquest i mports, and T iberio-Claudio-Neronian wares. Allowing f or the c ircularity o f this material having been used t o date many o f the c ontexts, t he c hanging c omposition o f the a ssemblages with which each phase o f c oinage a re a ssociated - extending even t o c ontexts where the bulk o f the material was r esidual ( e.g. a t S heepen) p rovides impressive c onfirmation o f their r elative o rdering and a r easonable indication o f the validity o f the absolute chronology. ( a)

The p otin s eries

( P1-2)

Despite the 5 3 potins r epresenting 5 main c lasses a t Alesia ( Colbert de B eaulieu, 1 955a), the French numismatists, l ed by C olbert de B eaulieu ( e.g. 1 970), maintain that C ontinental p otin p roduction commenced c lose to the Gallic War and that the British s eries derived f rom them must be c orresponding later ( Colbert de B eaulieu, 1 973b). This v iewpoint, however, i gnores considerable a rchaeological evidence that by then potin c oinages had

9 6

P hase 8 ( l a te )

•

S

P hase 8 (ea r ly )

z :

• •

N c i ) c o c o _ c ( 1 . _

• • • •

2 : • • • •

•

-

e : -

•

S

•

•

•

•

w

c o i C 7 4 = 0 C l _

F ig.

5 :7

i •

•

•

•

•

i =

=

=

= ,

L n L i

-

0

=

a < T Z I C C \ J 0

L a te R oman

L n 4 C ö a _ . . _

P re -F l av ian

w c o c u . c C I .

Quantities o f I ron Age c oins i n dated c ontexts.

9 7

A

BROOCH TYPE

P o t in

P hase 7

L a te L a T ene

1

I

N auhe im d e r iva t ive ( i ron )

I

1 1

C o lches te r

I

N auhe im d e r iva t ive ( Cu a loy )

P hase 8 ( ea r ly )

P hase 8 ( la te )

1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 I

1 1 1

1 1 1 1 I

1 1

1 1 1 1

I

L ang ton D own

I

1 1

I

T h is t le

1

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 I

I l

I

H od H i l l

1

I

I

P enannu la r

I

A uc issa

I

I

1 1

P la te

I

I

I

I

I

I

R ose t te O the r

B

1 1

C o lches te r d e r iva t ive

I

H I

I

I MPORTED POTTERY

TS/GB Wa re : A ugus to -T ibe r ian C laud io -N e ron ian F lav ian

C

I

1 1 1 1 1 1

M

1 1 1 1 1 M I

1 11 1 1 1 1

I l

MH 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U M

1

I MPORTED AMPHORAE

1

D resse l 1 B S ou th S pan ish D resse l 2 -4

D

D resse l 2 0

I

R hod ian

I

ROMAN CO INS R epub l ican

M

A ugus tus -Ca ius

I

C laud ius- N e ro F l av ian

MH O H I M M

I

1

F ig. 5 :8 A ssociations o f B ritish I ron A ge c oins w ith o ther a rtefact t ypes.

9 8

a lready undergone s ubstantial typological modification, and had a chieved w idespread c irculation in Gaul a nd s outh-east England. The p recise date a t which s o-called p otin c oins, i mitating the butting bull bronzes o f Massalia, b egan t o be c ast i s hard t o e stablish, but was c ertainly w ithin the s econd c entury B C ( Allen and Nash, 1 980). S upporting this date i s a s ingle T Ate d iabolique p otin i n the Lattes, Gard, hoard ( Allen, 1 971) - t his s eries p ostdates the f irst s tage o f p otin c opying - a lthough C olbert de B eaulieu ( 1973b) b oth r ejects the dating o f t he hoard and a rgues t hat the p otin was intrusive. By the late s econd c entury o r early f irst c entury B C, p otin was undoubtedly being p roduced in quantity i n Eastern a nd C entral Gaul, s ignificant o ccurrences i ncluding ( 1) the Houssen hoard, where the ' horned horse' variety o f Eastern Gaul was a ssociated w ith s ilver c oins b elonging t o the early part o f the KALETEDOV s eries, which s hould date the hoard w ell b efore t he m id f irst c entury B C ( Allen, 1 976d); ( 2) a t the s ites o f La T Ane a nd Basel Gasfabrik: the f ormer s hould g ive a t erminus a nte quer n f or the p otins p resent ( including those w ith Q DOCI a nd TOG ( IRIX) l egends r elated t o the p re-Conquest s ilver s eries o f the s ame l egends) before the m iddle o f the f irst c entury B C ( Allen, 1 973b; de Navarro, 1 972). A t the Gasfabrik, mutually e xclusive with the Münsterhügel s ite ( cf. C ollis, 1 985; S torck , 1 984), various p otins ( including t he butting bull type), a re c onsistently a ssociated w ith early l ate La T äne material i ncluding Nauheim a nd Lauterach f ibulae and D ressel 1 A a mphorae ( Furger-Gunti a nd B erger, 1 980); the s ite has p roduced nothing l ater t han this horizon and Furger-Gunti ( 1982) dates the a ppearance o f p otins there t o the e arly f irst c entury BC. ( 3) A t S an B ernardo, Ornavasso, g rave 49 belonging t o Graue's P hase I I, which h e dates . Q 9 0-50 B C, but c ould c ommence s omewhat earlier, c ontained 2 p otin c oins ( Graue, 1 974). C loser t o B ritain, p otin c oins were a lso b eing c ast in B elgic Gaul by the early f irst c entury B C, a lthough p ossibly a l ater development h ere than f urther t o t he s outh a nd east. A t Variscourt, A isne, a n extensive nucleated s ettlement which began i n the s ame early phase o f L a T Ane I II a s the Gasfabrik ( Colin, 1 984; Haselgrove, 1 985a) p otins o f S cheers ( 1977) No.191 - the o nly type p resent a re a gain a ssociated p redominantly with D ressel 1 A a mphorae ( e.g. C onstantin a nd F leury-Ilett, 1 982). A t Marienborn, n ear Mainz, t he s ame t ype o ccurs i n a c remation b elonging t o La T Ane C 2 a nd p robably o f s econd c entury B C date ( Polenz, 1 982). However, a lthough their g lossy t in-rich f abric i s r eminiscent o f B elgic examples, the B ritish p otin s eries i s m ost c losely r elated t o the butting b ull o r " deformed quadruped" s eries o f C entral Gaul ( Allen, 1 971). These early C ontinental d erivatives, i ncluding c oins which i mitate the Massaliote o riginals very c losely ( e.g. A llen a nd Nash, 1 980, F ig. 4 06), a re themselves f ound i n the S outh-East i n large e nough numbers ( Haselgrove, 1 978; 1 984a) t o s uggest that their i mport may have t riggered the development o f the B ritish s eries directly, without B elgic Gaul a s an i ntermediary - o n the Continental evidence a t

9 9

a ny t ime

f rom the

l ater

s econd c entury BC o nwards.

The B ritish p otin c hronology has been c omplicated by A llen's ( 1971) p remise that the latest B ritish p otins w ere p roduced i mmediately p rior t o the C laudian i nvasion, based o n their f requent o ccurrence i n l ater f irst c entury AD c ontexts and o n p urely R oman s ites e .g. Lullingstone. Their s tarting date, Allen a rgued a s p re-Caesarian o n the a ssumptions that t he hoard o f p otin c oins f ound a t S nettisham ( H70) was c ontemporary w ith the g old h oards ( H69, H 71) and that t he p otin hoards in W est L ondon e nding w ith the same dominant c lass ( P1.3) were c oncealed by r efugees f leeing Caesar's i nvasion. This l ed h im t o p ropose a chronology s tretching the s eries o ut o ver a c entury, but c oncentrating p roduction i n the f irst f ew d ecades, a p roposition which r equires a n unusual d egree o f i mmobilisation o f t he basic type. A llen's early date f or the s tart o f t he B ritish p otin s eries a ppears c orrect, but h is e xtending i ts p roduction s pan s o l ate i s l ikely t o b e w rong ( Figs. 5 :7-8). A lone o f a ll the B ritish s eries, p otins c onsistently o ccur i n P eriod i i c ontexts, and a re a ssociated w ith D ressel 1 B a mphorae i n them, a s well a s w ith the earliest f ibula types o f any B ritish c oinage. A t Chilly, S omme, a P 1.3 c oin was i ncluded i n a hoard o f uninscribed B elgic bronzes ( Scheers, 1 982b); l acking i nscribed c oins, t he hoard i s unlikely t o have b een deposited s ignificantly a fter t he C onquest, y ielding a f urther t erminus a nte que r n. On s everal s ites ( e.g. Hascombe, A shstead, a nd t he Caburn) p otins a re a ssociated with p ure MPRIA a ssemblages, i n c ontexts p robably dating t o P eriod i ( Appendix 5 ). A ll t hese c oins b elong t o the earlier s tages o f the c oinage. I n c ontrast, the l ater types a re o nly j ust r epresented i n P eriod i i c ontexts a nd do n ot become dominant until P eriod i ii; their p roduction, t hus, p robably c ommenced i n the l ater f irst c entury BC. B ut Canterbury a part, their f requency o f o ccurrence i s a lso g reatest i n P eriod i ii i n m arked c ontrast t o P hase 7 -8 b ronze c oins - s uggesting t hat p roduction c eased s ignificantly b efore the C onquest and that they a re s ubstantially a r esidual p henomenon a t the ' Roman' s ites c ited by A llen ( 1971). The n umber o f e arlier types i n s tratified c ontexts, a lso s upports this: a fter s howing a s ignificant decline i n P eriod i ii c ontexts, i t holds c onstant f or t he p re-Flavian p eriod ( cf. F ig. 5 :7). B ritish p otins, t herefore, w ere p robably p roduced f rom the l ate s econd c entury BC ( certainly f rom w ell before the Caesarian i nvasion) until a t l east t he l ate f irst c entury B C; and they evidently c ontinued i n c irculation f or s ome t ime a fter this ( cf. R odwell, 1 976). There may t herefore b e a c onnection b etween their g radual " obsolescence" and the i ncreasing volume o f b ronze c oinage s truck i n K ent f rom this p eriod o r a lternatively w ith t hat a rea's i ncorporation i nto the Eastern c oinage s phere. ( b)

the

S ubsidiary s ilver s eries

( ST)

The W estern s ubsidiary s eries ( Robinson, S tudy Area, n eed n ot b e c onsidered

1 00

1 977), h ere.

r are i n I t i s

p robably r elatively e arly, however, a s i s the o ther p rincipal s eries o utside mainstream developments: t he thin s ilver c oinage o f c entral s outhern England ( ST) a nd i ts p resumed n orthern F rench p rototypes ( Allen, 1 965a). S cheers' ( 1977) p ost-Caesarian dating f or these t ypes i s based s olely o n their l ightness, a nd misses the i ndividuality o f the t radition. The o nly f irm dating f or the a ssumed p rototype ( but s ee Appendix 2 ) i s the Rozel Hoard, L ot 1 , w ith i ts 3 9 BC t erminus p ost quer n, but the p resence o f B ritish t ypes a t L e Catillon ( Appendix 3 ), and i n a P eriod i i c ontext a t Owslebury ( Owl), c onfirms their r elative antiquity. Their s triking i n B ritain s hould thus b elong t o Phases 5 -6 a t l atest, a nd c ould c onceivably, l ike the potin c oinage , have begun earlier s till.

1 01

Chapter 6

Depositional patterning

I Depositional

t rends

i n the

i n n on-settlement

r ecorded

contexts

f ind l ocation data

This c hapter examines depositional patterning o f c oins f rom non-occupation c ontexts a nd the behaviour these may i ndicate. The problem o f equifinality ( Leach, 1 977) n ecessitates directing analysis t o the best-documented deposits; hoards, f or example, a re o ften s imilar i n f orm, but may r esult f rom v ery d ifferent c ircumstances ( Chapter 2 ). Only with d etailed evidence can we decide b etween the a lternatives. Before examining s pecific depositional t rends, the data n eed c onsideration a t a m ore g eneral l evel. F irst, i nterpretation o f i ndividual deposits depends o n background knowledge o f c omparable f inds. We n eed t o know which a ttribute values a re s pecific and which mirror more g eneral t rends ( e.g. where there i s s patial o r t emporal autocorrelation). S econdly, even unaccompanied f inds can p rovide valuable information about depositional patterning. Multiple f inds a re an o bvious case. For c ertain questions, e .g. r egional d ensities, t he s ample o f f inds w ith g ood c ontextual data i s o ften t oo s mall, o r unnecessarily r estrictive. F inally, a t every l evel, r ecovery b iases a re p otential factors in the s tructure o f the evidence, a nd must be c ircumvented o r made explicit. We may begin by p osing three questions o f the f ind l ocation densities f or each c oin metal: ( 1) whether there i s a greement b etween F l a nd F 2 f ind l ocations; ( 2) what type o f d istribution i s a ssociated with each metal; and ( 3) whether there i s c onclusive evidence o f n on-settlement deposition. The s ubsequent s earch f or more d etailed s tructure must, o f n ecessity, f ocus on r elative t rends which a re r esistant t o d istortion by d ifferential r ecording, e tc. Excavated c oin l ocations a re omitted, a s s ite numbers vary s ignificantly between r egions a nd would introduce an unwarranted b ias. S imilar d iscrimination i s n ot p ossible f or s tray f inds, a s there i s g enerally i nsufficient i nformation a bout the mode o f d iscovery. However, i f w ell r ecorded F l d iscoveries a re a ny guide, n o o ne category dominates t o the exclusion o f a ll o thers ( Table 6 :1). 5 3% a re f inds by the individual " disturbing" them a nd 3 3% d iscoveries dislodged by s ome o ther p rocess. " Systematic" s earching a ccounts f or o nly 1 0% , but, o f c ourse, metal detector f inds a re amongst the worst r ecorded. Large-scale earthmoving c ontributes r elatively f ew discoveries, and p loughed-out f inds have declined with m echanised

1 03

M ode

o f d iscovery

Large-scale extractive cuttings.

T otal

earthmoving e g. industries, r ailway

P ercentage

1 1

4%

Building and c onstruction works

3 9

1 4%

Cultivation and p loughing

4 6

1 6%

3 8

1 3%

3 0

1 0%

o r

5 6

2 0%

F inds dislodged through e rosion o r o ther d isturbances t o the g round s urface

3 6

1 3%

Archaeological m etal detecting

3 0

1 0%

D igging eg. t renches,

a llotments, p its.

Gardening

in g rounds

drainage

o f house

F inds d islodged through c oastal r iverine e rosion

p rospection

and

T otal:

Table 6 :1 Recorded c ircumstances f inds i n the S tudy A rea.

a griculture: i n n either c ontact with the s oil. t opsoil, a worrying a spect

2 86

o f discovery f or F l

s tray

c ase a re i ndividuals i n d irect G iven w idespread i mporting o f i s the number o f g arden f inds.

The a nalysis o f f ind l ocation density employs a quadrat-based approach . S uch methods have many disadvantages ( Hodder a nd Orton, 1 976; Orton, 1 980). Here, the difficulties o f variation w ith the s ize and s hape o f the quadrants a re o utweighed by t he advantages o f the National Grid. A lso, s ince r egional t rends a nd r elativities a re the o bjective, t hese effects s hould be l ess s evere. T o ensure a m ean density o f a t l east one p er c ell, a twenty kilometre s quare has b een a dopted ( excluding a ten kilometre s trip a long t he w est edge o f the S tudy Area). V isual p resentation, e mploying c ircles t o s ymbolise c ells exceeding the m ean density by a s pecific f actor ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 985b), has been u sed; the thresholds f or each metal depend o n the t otal density. Apart f rom the obvious p roblems o f visual a ssessment ( cf. Hodder and Orton, 1 976), the major d isadvantage i s t hat f ind density i s under-represented f or c ells encompassing expanses o f s ea o r e stuary ( 7 c ells o ut o f 8 1 ( 9%) c ontain l ess than 5 0% dry land). F or most o f the S tudy Area the main c oncern i s rather the unquantifiable p roblem o f a rchaeological " visibility". C ells w ith l arge expanses o f p ermanent

1 04

pasture, woodland, o r heavily built o ver before m ost w ere r egistered, a re p robably a ll under-represented.

f inds

For both F l a nd F 2 g old f inds the s pread o f l ocations i s r emarkably uniform, with half the c ells above the mean density but o nly 3 0% more t han twice this ( Fig 6 :1). Overall, they a re c learly s imilar. I f they w ere random s amples, a chi-square t est o f s patial a ssociation ( Hodder and Orton, 1 976, 2 02) would g ive a value o f 7 .1, r ejecting a null hypothesis o f no a ssociation b etween the a reas above average density a t the 0 .01 l evel. The F 2 l ocations thus r einforce the F l p icture. The a reas o f above average r ecorded g old deposition include the c oast; a long the Thames and i ts t ributaries, the Lea, the Medway a nd the Wey; and an a rc f rom E ssex t o the Upper Thames Valley. A reas below the mean i nclude the Weald and t he n orth Hampshire and B erkshire downs; the r egion n orth-west o f the Chilterns, and s outh-west E ssex ( cf. Rodwell, 1 981). Differential r eporting has more marked e ffects w ith particular c oncentrations ( the c hi-square value o f 3 .0 f or c ells above twice the mean density would n ot r eject the null hypothesis o f n o a ssociation a t the s ame l evel a s b efore). S everal c oncentrations r eflect a n i ndividual's catchment, f or example, the F l c luster a round Maidstone ( D.F. Kennard) a nd F 2 f inds n ear Wallingford ( W.R. Davies). F inds f rom Chequers, the P rime M inister's r esidence, c ontribute t o the marked F l c oncentration i n the Chilterns n ear Aylesbury ( Fig. 6 :1a). Compared t o g old ( 468 f inds), the s amples f or s ilver ( 81) and p otin ( 54) a re s mall. F ig. 6 :2 therefore c ombines the F l and F2 f inds but s ince f or each F l p redominates, the p icture s hould n ot be s eriously a ffected. F or s ilver ( Fig. 6 :2a), the r elative c oncentrations a round the n orthern and western boundaries a re a f unction o f the adjacent p eripheral c oinages. Only i n the M iddle Thames Valley and S ussex a re there extended a reas w ith a density above the mean. Hampshire s urprisingly fails t o r egister. Most o ther c ells above average density c oincide w ith w ell known s ettlements e .g. B raughing, Rochester and S andy. The p otins ( Fig. 6 :2h) s how the a nticipated b ias t owards Kent a nd West L ondon, the maximum densities c oinciding w ith the well known hoard c oncentration ( Allen, 1 971). Two r egions with s everal excavations f inds - East S ussex and Essex - do n ot f igure a t a ll. The dominance o f the p rimary a rea g ives a dded s ignificance t o the o nly " outside" c ell t o r egister, a round Baldock and B raughing. The Western L ondon g roup l ooks discrete f rom the Kentish; hoards apart, m ost S urrey p otins a re o f the s eries without an eye ( P2), s uggesting a s eparate development there. As with g old, the a reas w ith above the mean d ensity o f F l and F2 bronze f inds c oincide ( chi-square = 7 .6), but n ot a ll o f those o f h igher density ( chi-square = 1 .9). L ike the potin, the lack o f bronze in much o f the S tudy Area raises the mean values where i t was i n c irculation. Over 6 5% o f the F l and F 2 c ells above the mean d ensity have more than twice the a verage. The maximum F l densities a re

1 05

F ig.

6 :1

( a)

F l

g old c oin f ind l ocation density.

1 06

F ig . 6 :1 ( b)

F 2 g old c oin f ind l ocation density.

1 07

F ig.

6 :2

( a)

S ilver c oin f ind l ocation density.

1 08

L and o ve r 1 37m 0 mx 5

•

a

n

F 1

2 =5 4

F 2

m = 066

1 0

2 0

3 0

mx4 > m x1 0

F ig .

6 :2

( b)

P otin c oin f ind l ocation density.

1 09

4 0

5 0 Km

in c oastal Kent, a round Colchester, the Chilterns, a nd the r iver basins to their north and west ( Fig. 6 :3a). The lack o f f inds between B raughing and C olchester ( cf. C ollis, 1 985), underlines the s eparateness o f the Eastern and S outh-Eastern c oinages n otwithstanding their eventual unification. Although there a re b iases e .g. the F 2 B edfordshire Hertfordshire f inds r ecorded by Evans and Latchmore ( Fig. 6 :3b), the bronze distribution i s undoubtedly more c lustered than the g old . A mere f our c ells c ontribute 3 9% o f F l f ind l ocations; f or F 2, 3 7%. Adding c ells above three t imes the mean, the p roportions r ise to 5 1% a nd 63% r espectively. F or g old, t he c orresponding f igures a re 1 3% and 1 5%. Two o f the l eading F l bronze c ells c oincide w ith Colchester and B raughing. The o thers a re in n orth Kent and the s outh-west Chilterns, the l atter o f particular interest g iven the i ndependent c oncentrations o f g old and s ilver. The c lose r elationship b etween Aylesbury Museum and the Ashmolean i s n ot the o bvious explanation a s intensive metal detector a ctivity e lsewhere i n their catchment has n ot g enerated s imilar c oncentrations. The F l bronze c oncentration a round W inchester i s a f unction o f the S outh-Western c oinage distribution. The d ifferent l ocational patterning o f g old and bronze s hould i ndicate dissimilar p atterns o f use. The extensive, uniform distribution o f g old compares to that expected o f primitive valuables ( Dalton, 1 977), whereas the r estricted, c lustered bronze patterning i s c loser t o p rimitive money and early cash. S ilver has t raits i n c ommon w ith both g old and b ronze: a r elatively uniform d istribution i n the S outhern c oinage a rea, but beyond this, a t endency t o c luster a round the major s ettlements, p erhaps p ointing t o a different f unction. With p otin, the s mall s ample g ives an inadequate p icture, but i ts emphasis o n S urrey and K ent i s probably r eliable. I t was undoubtedly u sed l ongest in Kent, and there i s a c hronological pattern t o i ts deposition elsewhere. The East S ussex g roup i s e arly and has l inks w ith both S urrey and Kent, whereas most p otin f inds in c oastal E ssex, Hertfordshire and the Upper Thames Valley belong to the l ater P 1 s eries. They a re thus broadly c ontemporary w ith S E6-7 i ssues, a nd have a s imilar distribution, i n e ffect, belonging t o the s ame c irculation pool. A t this l evel, d ifferential r ecovery a nd r ecording have apparently distorted the s tructure o f the evidence l ess than Rodwell ( 1981) f ears, a lthough l ocal variation i s o ften explained i n this way. There a re c lear t rends i n the type o f distribution a ssociated w ith each m etal, i mplying differences in u se. The n ext question, therefore, i s how much non-settlement deposition has c ontributed t o this patterning, a nd what i nformation a bout this t he s tray f inds p rovide. I n p ractice, the f igures in Tables 4 :2-4:3 s uggest r elatively f ew s tray f inds apart f rom g old a re n on-site deposits. Excluding hoards, 8 5% o f F l s ilver, 8 9% o f the

1 10

= = F-

L and o ve r 1 37m

• • •

m x2

mx 3

m x 4

F ig .

6 :3

• •

e

m

3o

4o

2 =7 2

m x5 m =0 .89

>m x 10

( a)

F l bronze c oin f ind l ocation density.

1 11

5o Km

F ig . 6 :3 ( b)

F 2 b ronze c oin f ind l ocation density.

1 12

p otins and 9 7% o f the bronze a re s ite f inds, while 7 0%, 7 7% and 7 7% o f t heir f ind l ocations r espectively a re known s ites. Most o ther s tray f inds in these metals thus p resumably derive f rom unrecognised s ites. With g old, a different p icture emerges. Only 43% o f a ll n on-hoard F l g old c oins a re f rom known s ites ( many o f them p lated); o nly 2 9% o f g old f ind l ocations a re demonstrably s ites. The unusually high number o f g old c oins r ecorded a s s tray f inds, and t he k inds o f s ite excavated, have p ossibly depressed the p roportion o f g old f rom s ites. I dentical numbers o f s ites w ith s tray g old and b ronze f inds a re known ( 31), higher than f or e ither s ilver ( 18) o r p otin ( 6). Different kinds o f s ites may thus be i nvolved, a s Collis ( 1971a) has s uggested. This i s s upported by the h igher p roportion o f s tray g old f inds f rom m inor ( 35%) r ather than f rom major s ites ( 8%) ( cf. Table 4 :3). However, t he a rgument can be f urthered by f ocusing o n the r egions where both g old a nd b ronze were used, i .e. Kent and n orth o f t he T hames. There the ratio o f c ells with an above-average density o f f ind l ocations f or the two m etals i s a lmost exactly 1 :1 ( for F l, a ctually 2 7 g old t o 2 6 bronze). Their s patial c onfiguration i s a lso s imilar. I t f ollows that w ithin the s ame c ells, bronzes a re c onsistently r eported f rom s ites a nd g old a re n ot. S ince w e know f rom the b ronzes that the s ites a re there, i t i s i nconceivable that i f l arge numbers o f g old were a lso f rom s ites, this w ould n ot have r egistered, even a llowing f or i ts rarity i n t he excavated s amples. We may c onclude, therefore, that while g old s ite f inds a re p robably s omewhat under-represented , most g old f inds merit c onsideration a s non-settlement d eposits. An o bvious s tarting p oint i s how r egional F l g old f ind p roportions vary f or the three main p eriods ( Fig. 6 :4). Where c oins o f d ifferent periods were a ssociated, t he later date has been taken. P eriod I deposition i s c oncentrated in Kent, c oastal E ssex, and inland a long the Thames t o the Chilterns. The o nly s ignificant o utside d istribution i s i n S ussex. The main f eature o f P eriod I I i s the s pread o f c oinage to the a rc a round this p rimary a rea; there i s, however, a v oid i n the n orth L ondon a rea. The P eriod I II d istribution g enerally mirrors P eriod I I, but s everal a reas with n o p revious history o f c oin deposition n ow a ppear ( e.g. the L ower L ea, c entral E ssex a nd the Oxford a rea). C onversely i n two o f the three a reas o f highest d ensity, the Upper M edway and Middle Thames, there i s a marked f all-off i n P eriod I II c oin l ocations; in the Chilterns, p roportions a re i dentical f or a ll three p eriods. A more g eneral P eriod I I-III t rend i s that i n c entral s outhern England earlier c oin types a ccount f or m ore f ind l ocations, whereas i n n orth Kent and n orth o f the Thames, the p osition i s r eversed. F or a ll p eriods, a reas o f above a verage g old d eposition a re mutually exclusive o f three o f the l eading s ettlements: B raughing, Canterbury and S t. Albans. Taking

P eriods

I and

I I

together,

1 13

the

d ominance

o f

-------

-

- - -- ----

--=== --= � =. ==== =-

----====-

-�-���. -- 7--��-

•-

- - -

-- - - - ----- ------- - -

� Land over 137m - Period I

Ill)

m x3

D

Period II

� = 233 m

= 2·87

0

10

20

30

40

50

��--��--��Km

Period Ill

Fig. 6:4 Gold coin find location density: Period I-III coins. 114

proportions

of

Continental issues is apparent. Only in the Solent basin, and an arc from the Upper Medway to the Goring Gap and up the Chilterns do early Insular types appear. The two main streams of Continental types are mutually exclusive (of. Allen, 1960), and overlap only in East Sussex and the Upper Thames basin. In the South-East, imports comprised the majority of coins in circulation until the late first century BC, whereas in southern England far more later Period II find locations are for Insular types (S5-6, etc.). Their distribution is complementary to the earlier Insular products (S4, E4, etc.). In Period III, the Thames and the Wey form the northern boundary of the Southern coinage distribution, although its core is further south. South-Eastern types are significant in Essex, up to the River Blackwater, and Kent, and along the north bank of the Thames as far as Oxford. North of this, Eastern issues dominate. Overall, the divisions established in Period II are maintained in Period III. This patterning implies a network of relationships whereby gold moved over long distances in relatively large If gold coins were primitive valuables (of. quantities. Allen, 1976a; Collis, 1971a), their circulation would presumably be restricted to the higher echelons of society. This may be examined further by looking at Fl gold find locations in relation to classes of sites which could be associated with the elites: (1) hillforts, as possible focal sites for larger territories (e.g. Cunliffe, 1984) (2) Roman villas, from which LPRIA elite residence patterns may perhaps be partially postdicted (of. Millett, 1980) and (3) LPRIA cremation cemeteries, given the restricted rite For each, the find locations within a these represent. two kilometre catchment of all known sites - 16% for hillforts, 15% for villas and 13% for cemeteries - is higher than expected from a uniform distribution. Since villas are very nearly twice as common as the others, the result is particularly interesting (the null hypothesis would be rejected at the 0.01 level for all three classes). These results are not conclusive (the method makes no allowance for chronology, or for enhanced reporting around prominent monuments) but they indicate lines for further analysis. The density analysis probably under-represents the proportion of gold find locations near the coast and major An alternative, therefore, is to calculate the rivers. frequency of Fl and F2 finds within bands of 1 km (R/C2) and 2-5 km (R/C3) of these, together with finds from water, beach and mud contexts (R/Cl) (Fig. 6:5). The proportion within 5 km (46%) is no greater than expected from nearly half the Study Area, although many of the remaining finds are within 5 km of other sizeable rivers. But the larger deposits (hoards and multiple finds) are concentrated within 5 km of water. By total weight of precious metal, there is thus an emphasis on this restricted area, although this could simply reflect the Continental origin of much of it. Secondly, if only this area is considered, more finds than expected cluster within the 1 km strip closest to the water (a chi-squared test would reject the null 115

AS INGLE F INDS

+ 1 13

5 0-

4 0-

3 0 -

2 0-

1 0 -

B MULT IPLE F INDS 5 0-

4 0 -

3 0 -

2 0 -

1 0 -

C HOARDS 2 0 -

1 0 I R 1

I I R 2

I R 3

I C l

F ig .

I I C 2

I l C3

I OTHER

6 :5 D istance o f g old c oin f ind l ocations navigable r ivers a nd c oasts.

1 16

f rom

hypothesis except f or hoards). Thirdly, many f inds a re actually f rom w et p laces: 3% o f s ingle f inds, 8% o f multiple f inds, a nd 2 1% o f hoards. While modern developments may have enhanced c oin r ecovery in these z ones, these f igures c onfirm t he importance o f t he c oast and r ivers i n the g old f ind distribution, p resumably a f unction o f their r ole i n c ommunication, o r a s a f ocus f or s ettlement, o r both. Moreover, while s ome ' wet f inds' have undoubtedly b een e roded f rom c liffs and r iver banks, the total numbers s uggest that o thers were directly p laced i n the water.

I I

Hoards and multiple

f inds

F ifty nine deposits, c onventionally c lassified a s hoards, a re r ecorded f rom the S tudy Area ( Appendix 3 ), excluding the l ate Roman f ind f rom P itstone C ommon ( H22). By dominant metal ( 56% g old, 1 4% s ilver, 8% bronze a nd 2 2% p otin) they c ompare c losely t o the s ixty e ight B ritish hoards e xamined by C ollis ( 1974a), c onfirming his p oint that s truck bronzes were r arely hoarded. A ll f ive b ronze f inds a re exceptional, i ncluding a burial a t K ing Harry Lane, ( H21); t en E 82.1 c oins f rom S heepen, apparently a hoard l ost accidentally ( H10); while g roups f rom Hayling I sland ( H18) a nd Farley H eath ( H43) both f orm part o f m ore extensive c oin deposits a t these t emples. The Romsey hoard ( H19A), l ike Farley H eath, c onsisted o f S W81 b ronzes ( probably better r egarded a s very debased s ilver) a nd c ontained Roman c oins up t o Domitian. The S tudy A rea differs markedly f rom the o verall British p icture i n having f ewer s ilver-dominated hoards. Only two a re known, both mainly o f S outhern i ssues, a nd each p roblematical. Maresfield ( H55) was only partially r ecorded and g old c oins may actually have dominated the f ind ( Evans, 1 864), while the s tatus o f the r iver bank f ind a t Kew ( H45) i s uncertain. I t a lso had a t l east o ne g old c oin. Lancing D own, Waltham S t. Lawrence and Wanborough ( H2, H47, H54) a re r eligious s ites. All three f inds c ontained Roman i ssues, a nd were a lso p ossibly partially cumulative deposits, while E riswell and the poorly r ecorded Battle and P ortsmouth hoards ( H19, H40a, H 51) a re o f t ypes f oreign t o the S tudy Area. The mixed Roman s ilver and g old hoard f rom Chippenham ( H5) had no definite I ron A ge s ilver and i s p robably p ost-Conquest. S ilver hoard deposition i s e ffectively r estricted t o t he S outhern r egion, a nd then in a r itual c ontext. The two m etals p rimarily hoarded i n the S tudy Area a re g old and p otin . Apart f rom poorly r ecorded f inds a t Colchester ( H8) a nd Bardwell, ( H40), 2 8% o f the 43 h oards a re p otin and t he o ther 7 2% g old, s ilver being p resent o nly in two beach f inds, n either o f them c losed deposits ( H54, H56). B irling ( H52) i s a nomalous, c onsisting entirely o f p lated g old c opies, which o therwise o ccur o nly i n s ilverdominated and t emple hoards. Gold and p otin, then, w ere hoarded a lone i n a way the o ther metals w ere not.

1 17

The p otin hoards have been discussed f requently. A llen ( 1971) a rgues that their d eposition r eflects Caesar's invasions o f 5 5-54 BC. Collis ( 1974a) i s more c oncerned with p otin's f unction and c ontends that the c oins must have been o f r elatively h igh value to have been hoarded. Four n ew hoards have been r ecorded. K ingston and Wandsworth ( H46, H48) a re in the W est L ondon c oncentration o f hoards a ttributed t o r efugees by A llen ( 1971); a s n either a re c losed f inds, they c ould c onceivably be s ite c oins e roded f rom r iverside s ettlements, a s may a n earlier f ind f rom Hammersmith ( H33). I f their p rovenances a re r eliable the number o f P 1. 3 types r ecorded f avours their interpretation a s s cattered hoards. A r ecent d iscovery n ear F olkestone ( H28) d emonstrates that the p rototypes were a lso o ccasionally hoarded. The f ourth f ind was a t B oxley , Kent ( H26). Folkestone a part, t he homogeneity o f the h oards has, i f anything, been exaggerated. Exact f requencies a re doubtful, a s o nly a s ample o f each hoard has g enerally been r ecorded. Although P 1.3 c oins a re invariably p resent, their r elative proportion d ivides the hoards i nto three g roups: ( 1) with P 1.3 i n a m inority ( Birchington, B oxley , S t. James' P ark); ( 2) where P 1.3 i s the most c ommon type ( Brentford, Gunnersbury, S unbury); a nd ( 3) where o ver 5 0% were P 1.3 types ( Hammersmith, S nettisham ( H70) a nd p robably Wandsworth). Moreover, the r elative f requencies o f types in the larger hoards ( Nos. 2 4, 2 6, 3 5, 3 7, 7 0) s uggest a c hronological s equence, but a part f rom the earliest h oards being Kentish, there i s n o s patial t rend. The hoards may n evertheless s till b e b roadly c ontemporary. W ith c oins k ept t ogether i n l arge numbers, f or whatever r eason, d ifferential i mmobilization o f types and s ome variation b etween deposits i s t o b e e xpected . S everal w ere buried i n c ontainers - three p ots a t S unbury; wooden boxes o r o rganic wrappings a t B irchington and S nettisham. This n eed indicate n either i ntention o f r ecovery, nor the r eason f or deposition. Collis ( 1974a) c orrectly s tresses f unctional changes a s a p otential k ey t o why s o many hoards c lose w ith the s ame type a nd none except p ossibly Bardwell ( H40) - w ith a l ater type. But the potin evidence a lone cannot answer the question, e specially without p recise chronology. The n on-recovered hoards i n o ther metals a nd s ite f inds i n the p rimary a reas o f p otin c irculation ( Chapter 7 ) a lso n eed examination . Apart f rom Chute a nd F reckenham ( H40B, H 56A) which c ontained c oins belonging t o a djacent g eographical s eries, 7 3% o f the twenty n ine authenticated g old hoards a re dominated by types s truck in the S tudy Area, t he o ther 2 7% by Continental imports. Over a third w ere p robably buried in a c ontainer, u sually a hollow f lint ( Nos. 3 , 2 9, 3 2, 5 6A and p robably 3 8, 49) o r a p ot ( Nos. 1 2, 40b and p ossibly 4 , 1 4). P resumably o thers w ere i n o rganic c ontainers o r wrappings, which did n ot s urvive o r went unrecorded ( e.g. S nettisham). Exceptionally, a c lay " tray" was used a t Haverhill ( H41), p ossibly a baked-clay s lab-mould , and two s mall " lead" boxes a t Union House ( H8), but both a re p oorly r ecorded. The total n umber o f c oins in the c losed f inds

1 18

has n o o bvious pattern, a lthough Whaddon Chase ( H4) was exceptional in r unning into 1 000's. Only three t otal weights a re r ecorded: Chute ( H56A) 3 96.34 gm; Higham ( H29) 7 1. 92 gm; and W esterham ( H32) 8 8. 97 gm. None o f these correlate with the weight s tandards c laimed by S pratling ( 1976). While hoards f rom Gaul ( e.g. Dühren, Frasnes-LesBuissenal and Tayac) a nd B ritain ( e.g. Netherud a nd S nettisham) demonstrate that C ontinental g old c oins were s ometimes i nterred i n hoards w ith o ther p recious metal a rtefacts, g enerally torcs o r i ngots ( Furger-Gunti, 1 982; Haselgrove, 1 984b), there a re n o definite examples i n the S tudy Area. P recious metal a rtefacts do o ccur in s ome beach f inds ( H27, H 53, H 56), but o nly a t F olkestone was the physical a ssociation - a s mall g old ingot and a c oin direct. A t S elsey, a ssociation i s unlikely a s most a rtefacts a re Roman o r S axon ( Brown, 1 979). The t endency t o r iverine a nd c oastal l ocations i s particularly marked a mong hoards o f C ontinental o rigin, i n the Thames estuary a nd Medway basin. S ome, l ike the diel inked g roup f rom H igham, were p robably i nterred without " circulation" i n B ritain but n ot a ll need be, g iven the number o f later h oards in s imilar c ontexts. Apart f rom this, g old hoard l ocations a re noteable in ( 1) their a voidance o f known s ites; both exceptions, Ambresbury Banks hillfort ( H11) a nd t he Union House, Colchester ( H8) may b e s purious; and ( 2) their i ndication o f multiple, c umulative deposition in r estricted a reas. Were this l atter phenomenon r estricted t o b each deposits, e .g. B ognor o r S elsey, i t would p robably be put down t o wave a ction. But s everal t errestial deposits a lso s how s igns o f t his ( Appendix 3 ), e .g. H igh Wycombe ( H3); Mark's T ey ( H12, H 13): and Haverhill ( H41), a nd o utside the S tudy Area: Cam nB rea, I pswich, S nettisham, ( H57, 6 97 1, 7 5; c f. a lso Rozel a nd the B irchington p otin hoards). Multiple f inds a dd f urther examples, e .g. Addington and Ryarsh ( M43, H31); and Oldbury ( M56, 5 7). There a re h istorical parallels f or h oards buried in more than one l ot ( cf. Kent, 1 974), the probable explanation a t Cam nB rea, Haverhill, H igh Wycombe a nd a rguably Snettisham . I n o ther cases, t he chronological disparity between deposits s uggests n ot, e .g. between Mark's Tey-1 and 2, C lacton B each-1 and 2, o r the f inds f rom Oldbury. An i nteresting c ase i s S elsey ( H56). As f ar a s the g roups f rom s even s eparate beach l ocations o n the western and eastern s hores o f the B ill can be r econstructed ( Appendix 3 ), two end w ith P hase 5 c oins, f our w ith P hase 8 , and o ne with P hase 9 . The o verall t otals a re dominated by Phase 6 ( 20%) a nd e specially P hase 7 ( 32%) types, a nd a lmost a ll V erica's c oins ( 12%) a re his earlier i ssue ( s81) s uggesting deposition mostly w ithin P hase 8 . Despite their c ommonness, t he p roportion o f Phase 4-5 c oins ( 29%) appears too h igh , c ompared t o c ontemporary c losed f inds, f or them to be r esidual, a nd r ather s upports the evidence o f Cakeham and M edmenny beaches that deposition began in P eriod I I, with f urther discrete deposits a t a l ater date. The Bognor f inds can be s imilarly s eparated, a lthough t heir o verall emphasis i s earlier ( H53). B ut a pattern o f

1 19

cumulative g old deposition a t s pecific l ocations d oes n ot n ecessarily m ean that s imilar f actors were r esponsible; f urther evidence i s n eeded. F ig. 6 :6a s hows the f requencies o f g old a nd s ilver f inds ending with c oins o f each phase. P hase 5 c oins, mostly s truck before 5 0 BC, a re a ssigned t o P eriod I Ia a nd P hase 9 c oins t o P eriod I IIb . Roman ( R) indicates hoards w ith c oins o f Claudius o r l ater a nd the s ilver t otals i nclude the debased f inds f rom Farley Heath and Romsey. Only c oherent multiple f inds ( Appendix 3 ) a re i ncluded. The proportion o f late deposits in the S tudy A rea has been c onsistently under-emphasised o wing to poor r ecording a nd their g enerally s mall s ize. I n f act, 3 6% o f the g old a nd 8 0% o f the s ilver f inds end w ith P eriod I IIb types. And while hoards terminating w ith P eriod I Ia c oins a re p redictably more c ommon ( 38%), t he intervening p eriod i s n ot unrepresented, e specially P eriod I IIa ( 18%). Outside t he S tudy Area, the p roportion o f d eposits c ontaining l ate g old i s even h igher ( 47%) ( Fig. 6 :6b). The majority o f the " Study Area" c oins in these r egions a re Gallo-Belgic types, C ontinental c oins dominating 6 3% o f a ll P eriod I Ia h oards. Most P eriod I Ia deposits ( 70%) t erminate with P hase 5 r ather than P hase 4 c oins. Many v iew this a s a p eak in h oarding due t o the emergencies o f t he mid f irst c entury B C ( e.g. Rodwell, 1 976). I f the a uthentic s mall h oards a mong t he multiple f inds ( Fig. 6 :6; n umbers beside bars) a re a dded t o the o ther hoards, P eriod I Ia i s s lightly a ccentuated r elative t o P eriod I IIb but the o verall f requency ( 38%) i s unchanged. G iven the l imited c oin p roduction i n P hase 6 , this f igure i s a rguably n o h igher t han expected i f P hase 5 g old f ormed the p rincipal P eriod I Ib c oinage o f many a reas ( Appendix 2 ). I f s o,some hoards ending with P hase 5 c oins a re p robably later d eposits; their larger numbers cannot be t aken a p riori a s a h oarding p eak. This i s n ot t o deny t hat the Gallic War a nd the Roman i nvasion were f actors i n the non-recovery o f i ndividual P eriod I Ia a nd I IIb hoards; undoubtedly they w ere ( e.g. A llen, 1 970a), but t hey do n ot e specially i ntrude into the hoarding r ecord. The mean number o f g old h oards per thirty year p eriod i s r emarkably uniform f rom b efore 5 0 BC, when I nsular s triking c ommenced, t o the m id f irst c entury AD, a marked c ontrast t o both the s ilver and p otin. Chronologically , t he g old a nd s ilver h oard and multiple-find patterns mirror o ne a nother c losely. This p oses two questions: ( 1) t o what extent a re multiple-finds unrecognised s cattered hoards, o r analogous c umulative deposits; a nd ( 2) s ince the multiple f ind f requencies a re those o f the l atest c oins a t d ifferent l ocations, h ow much i s the hoarding pattern a f unction o f p recious metal deposition i n I ron A ge B ritain in g eneral? The r ecord l eaves l ittle doubt t hat many g old finds a nd s ome s ilver were e ither s mall h oards o r part o f larger o nes, ( cf. Table A3:1). I f these a re t ransferred t o the hoards category, the s ilver p roportions a re unaffected. W ith the g old , however, the emphasis shifts t o t he later

1 20

A . I NS IDE S TUDY AREA A V H oa rds

AR H oa rds

2 0

u b

m a

n i b

R

n a

I n a

I l b

R

AR Mu l t ip le f i nds

A V Mu l t ip le f i nds 3 0

2 0

1 0

2

1 0

n a

9

3

u b

I n a

1

•3

t u b

R

n a

u b

1

m a

2

n i b

R

B . OUTS IDE S TUDY AREA

A V H oa rds w i th c o ins f r om s t udy a rea

A V H oa rds w i thou t c o ins f r om s tudy a rea

2 0

1 0

n a F ig .

6 :6

l i b

mm

m a

n i b

R

H oards a nd multiple

i m a

l i b

m a

l o b

f inds by p eriod o f deposition.

1 21

p eriod. This i s exactly the pattern p redicted i f s everal o f the r emaining multiple f inds were cumulative deposits. The obvious deduction i s that s ome multiple f inds c ould b e independently deposited c oins f rom p rolific s ites. For s ilver f inds, this i s p robable ( Appendix 3 ). Over 7 0% a re f rom parishes with major s ettlements ( e.g. Colchester, S andy), o r w ithin the distribution o f the peripheral s ilver c oinages ( e.g. Alchester, Duston, I cklingham, Towcester). As a lready o bserved, s ilver hoarding i s r are in the S tudy Area, with three-quarters o f the bona f ide deposits made up o f p eripheral types a nd two-thirds o f the S outhern s ilver f inds o fferings o n r eligious s ites. S ilver ( and a lso p otin, M 134-143) multiple f inds thus c onform t o the g eneral pattern o f r egional deposition. W ith g old, h owever, s ites a re known i n o nly 3 6% o f parishes w ith multiple f inds. F or many o f them, a r ecording b ias may be s uspected ( only 1 3% a re definite a ssociations). Most g old multiple f inds, l ike the s ingle c oins, a re f rom n on-site l ocations, a nd c onsequently a re a s difficult t o explain. A p ossible a pproach i s t he s ize r ange o f deposits ( Fig. 6 :7). Most a re unaccompanied s ingle f inds. The multiple f ind evidence p laces this i n p erspective; most h oards a re small ( 2-10 c oins) a nd o nly the f ew which a ttract n otice ( cf. A llen, 1 960) c ontain m ore c oins. This s upports the earlier c onclusion that g old c oinage was w ell distributed through the s ector o f the p opulation with a ccess t o i t. More important a re the broader i mplications. I f g roups o f 2 -3 c oins w ere o ften deliberately deposited t ogether, whatever the r easons, then this may a lso b e t rue o f many s ingle f inds. Even s ingle c oins were p resumably o f c onsiderable value and carefully c urated a nd the majority a re much more l ikely t o have been d eliberate deposits than accidental l osses. I f, a s f or h oards, there were " preferred" z ones o f deposition, the later dating o f the multiple f inds, may r esult f rom many o f them being cumulative deposits o f s ingle c oins o r s mall hoards. The s ite evidence s upports this. S ingle s ite f inds a re a s maller o verall p roportion o f l ocations ( 63% c ompared t o 7 0%), a nd many a re p lated f orgeries, p resumably r ecognised a s s uch. Multiple g old deposits a re g enerally discrete h oards ( 39% o f s ites), o r f rom o ther n ons ettlement ( often r eligous), c ontexts ( 35%) which must now be examined. Many c oins i n s ettlement g roups a re a lso p lated ( 13%).

I II Non-settlement ( a)

c oin deposition:

burials

A n oteable f eature o f LPRIA m ortuary r ites i s the g eneral absence o f c oins and indeed p recious metals ( apart f rom a f ew s ilver cups) f rom g raves, even f rom the o therwise wealth-consuming Welwyn burials ( Stead, 1 967). Whatever s ocial r elationships and ends directed the u se o f

1 22

NON-S ITE N F INDS ( F l)

1 00

5 0

2 -5

6 -10

1 -25

2 6 -50

5 1 100

> 100

11 R ecogn ised h oa rd 5 0

S ITE N F INDS ( F l+EXCAVAT ION )

17 7,1 1

2 -5

F ig. 6 :7 d eposits.

H oards

6 10

a nd

1 -25

multiple

1 23

2 6 -50

5 1 100

f inds by

> 100

s ize

range

o f

c oins and o ther valuables s uch a s t orcs i n l ife, they a re not directly r eflected in burial; B elgic Gaul i s s imilar ( Haselgrove, 1 984c). Only three L PRIA c remations w ith a ssociated c oin f inds ( all Eastern b ronzes) a re known in the S tudy Area, a t Baldock and S t.Albans, a nd in t wo o f them ( BA4; S A14) there i s no c lear evidence o f the c oins having been deliberately deposited w ith the burial. A LPRIA c ontext and deliberate inclusion a s g rave g oods i s, however, a ssumed f or the third ( Allen, 1 968a) - t en A E E73 in a well f urnished burial a t King Harry L ane ( SA2; s ee a lso H21) - a lthough the f ind i s n ot yet f ully published. Allen's s uggestion that these ten c oins w ere i ntended t o r epresent the t raditional Roman denarius, ( even though the a s had l ong been r eckoned a t 1 6 t o t he denarius) i s o verc ontrived. But the w ider p ossibility, that their p resence i s a f acet o f the Roman c ontribution t o the L PRIA c remation r ite ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 984c), s hould n ot b e o verlooked. Equally, even i f p ost-Conquest, the two burials w ith s ingle c oins c ould ( if the a ssociations a re upheld) r epresent very early adoption o f the Roman c ustom o f p roviding c oinage f or the dead, s ubstituting l ocal c urrency. Most R omano-British burials w ith documented c oin f inds in t he a shes a re, admittedly, n o earlier than t he l ater s econd c entury AD ( Alcock, 1 980), but there a re i solated i nstances o f c remations w ith earlier c oins, s uch a s Caistor-by-Norwich, and the c ustom was c ertainly p ractised in B elgic Gaul by an early date e .g. a t the Titelberg ( Metzler, 1 977). Despite the f ew i ncontestable cases o f c oins being used a s g rave g oods, the p ossibility o f I ron A ge c oin deposition having p layed a r ole in the b roader p rocess o f disposal o f the dead cannot be r uled out. Archaeologically r ecoverable burial was, a fter a ll, a m inority r ite, e ven i n t he L PRIA in s outh east England ( Haselgrove, 1 982). L eaving a side the p ossiblility that c oins i n watery p laces w ere o fferings a ccompanying the d ead ( cf. F itzpatrick, 1 984), there a re s everal f inds f rom c emeteries, a s o pposed t o the a ctual g raves. These o ccur in the s ame a reas a s the c remation r ite ( Fig . 6 :8; Whimster, 1 981), and a re absent f rom c entral s outhern England, i ncluding the c remations b elonging t o the r ecently-identified early Roman e lite burial t radition ( Millett, 1 987). The o nly definite LPRIA c emetery f ind i s Aylesford. Evans' n otes r ecord the two P hase 5 c oins ( M44) f rom o utside the main burial c oncentration, adjacent t o a z one o f I ron A ge p its ( Thompson, 1 982, 5 89). A rguably, t hese c ould b elong t o a s ettlement. Another p robable f ind i s S turry ( 8135), but there burials c ontinue i nto the R oman p eriod. A t Witham, and Folkestone ( S67, S 114-5), the c oins were d iscrete f rom the burials, a lthough a t East W ear Bay there i s a c oncentration in the n eighbourhood ( H27; M 53). The o ther c emeteries with f inds a re R oman, e .g. Bapchild and Deal, Kent ( S96, S 107) a nd the extra-mural c emetery a reas a t Abbey F ield, and the Union, Colchester ( Appendix 5 ). A t Duston, N orthamptonshire ( S143), the i ronstone quarry f inds n eed n ot be f rom the a rea o f p re-Roman burial. O ther f inds f rom K ing Harry Lane, V erulam Hill F ields ( SA3), L exden, and l ess c ertainly S outh Malling ( S181), a re

1 24

N

.L and o ve r 1 37m

0

• B u r ia l

0 Cemetery

X R ive r s ou rce

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0 Km

A U nspec i f ied r i tua l s i te

I I s o la ted t emp le

p Religious complex

F ig. 6 :8 Map s howing l ocation o f f inds a nd s ites d iscussed i n Chapter 6 .

125

p robably a ssociated with early Roman r ibbon development t raversing the earlier c emeteries. However, w ith parallel f inds f rom c emeteries with I ron Age beginnings i n B elgic Gaul ( e.g. Arcy-Sainte-Restitue; S cheers, 1 977), o ccasionally f rom definite La T äne I II c remations ( Armentiäres-sur-Ourcq, Wederath) a nd s poradically f urther a field ( Polenz, 1 982), the p ossibility o f a m ore definite a ssociation with the c ontinentally-inspired c remation r ite c annot b e ruled o ut. A lternatively, c oins f rom c emeteries m ostly r epresent " reuse" i n much later mortuary c ontexts. I ron A ge c oins i n a ll m etals were o ften included i n Roman and Merovingian g raves i n Belgic Gaul ( cf. S cheers, 1 977). The o nly c ertain c ases i n B ritain o f r euse o f I ron A ge c oins a re a s w eights f or balance s ets i n Anglo-Saxon g raves a t G ilton T own ( Appendix 5 , N o.41) a nd Watchfield ( Scull, 1 986). The B irchington f ind c ould b e a t hird example ( Appendix 5 , No.42), but the inclusion o f the s ilver c oins a s bullion i s m ore l ikely. E ight, p ossibly n ine, R oman burials c ontain c oins; C077-8; KE5-8, Lancing Down ( Ibid., N os.845 ) a nd p erhaps Meldreth ( S200), m ost o f t hem l ater Roman i nhumations. The c oins a t S heepen a nd K elvedon a re t hought r esidual l osses f rom an earlier p eriod, a ccidentally i ncluded i n the g rave f ills; a ll but K E8 a re c ertainly f rom a reas that w ere p reviously i ntensively o ccupied. However, w ithout d etailed information o n t he p ositioning o f the c oins, j udgement must be r eserved . Of 8 6 R oman c oins r ecorded f rom R omano-British i nhumations ( Alcock, 1 980), 1 5% a re, a fter a ll, o f f irst c entury AD date a nd apparently a ntique t ypes, and a s many a s 3 1% o f them a re c learly a ttested a s p laced i n the mouth o f t he deceased ( as a f ee t o Charon). The Lancing c oins have p erhaps the best c laim t o b e r eused a s g rave g oods, s ince b oth Roman burials w ere mutually exclusive o f the c ella where the o ther c oins w ere f ound. The r ecord , however, i s c onfused ( H54). I n passing, o ne may question the p revailing i nterpretation o f a ll s uch double s quare Romano-British s tructures a s t emples ( Lewis, 1 966). Lancing Down c ould be a mausoleum, i ts t imber phases ( Bedwin , 1 981), a nd mound earlier s tages i n the f ormalisation o f whatever f ocus LPRIA r ites d emanded f or the d isposal o f the dead. O ther potential i solated mausolea a nd mounds w ith I ron A ge c oin f inds a re M eldreth; the Mutlow Hills; Kit's C oty; S t. Leonard's H ill; Thornborough ( S15, S 34, S 124, S 197, S 200) a nd l ess c ertainly the C op, B ledlow, a nd S ugar L oaf H ill, F olkestone ( S117, S 192). There i s thus i nsufficient evidence t o c orrelate I ron A ge c oin d eposition w ith burial a part f rom i solated c ases, l argely r estricted t o the Aylesford c omplex . I t i s o ften n ot c lear i f the a ssociation i s w ith mortuary r itual o r r eligous p ractice a t l arge. ( b)

t emples

A lthough

W oodeaton i s the earliest

1 26

r ecorded s ite

f ind ,

and o ther t emples quickly s howed themselves r elatively prolific in I ron A ge c oins, these were o ften interpreted a s casual l osses a t f airs held a t r eligous s ites ( e.g. C ollis, 1 971b; Rodwell, 1 976), until the excavations a t Harlow and Hayling I sland s howed that they were, beyond doubt, deliberate deposits. Another p robable t emple was r ecently excavated a t Wanborough ( H47). The two p rincipal t emples, a t Harlow and Hayling I sland ( and earlier discoveries f rom Farley Heath) a re described in Appendix 5 . The most interesting questions c oncern the patterning and r elationships o f the different k inds o f p reRoman o ffering, but o nly interim r eports o n Hayling I sland and the n ew ( 1985-6) excavations a t Harlow have a ppeared s o f ar ( Downey e I a l, 1 980; Bartlett, 1 987) and the way the f inds f rom the p revious Harlow excavations a re r ecorded does not f acilitate the r econstruction o f g roups o f o fferings; the r eport ( France and Gobel, 1 985) c ontains o nly l imited s patial data. The p resent discussion will therefore f ocus o n the o verall c oin l ists and the depositional s equence ( Fig. 6 :9), the f irst question being the extent o f p re-Conquest o fferings, s ince in each case the construction o f a F lavian-period s tone t emple p rovides the only e ffective t erminus a nte quer n f or earlier a ctivity. A t Harlow, t he c luster o f early g old beneath t he c ella ( cf. Fig. A 5:2), s tands o ut f rom the main f inds a nd must be p re-Conquest, but t o a rgue f rom this t o a r itual s ite p rior to the c onstruction o f the t emple ( France and Gobel, 1 985) may be c ircular. A lthough c omplicated by the p roportion o f c oins f rom the later parts o f t he s tratigraphic s equence, the r elatively unchanging s pectrum o f i ssues by phase f rom different parts o f the t emple ( Fig. 6 :9) i mplies that the majority o f c oins i n F lavian a nd later c ontexts a re r esidual a nd w ere deposited before the f irst s tone buildings. The n ext earliest g roups a re f rom b eneath the S outh and West r anges, the l atter c oncentrated n ear an earlier g ully ( cf. F ig. A 5:2), which the n ew excavations show to be c ircular and p robably the r emains o f a building ( Bartlett, 1 987). Largely on the s trength o f this c oncentration o f c oins and o ther o fferings, i t i s s uggested that this was a n I ron Age shrine, but i t i s not c lear that the two a re c ontemporary ( Appendix 5 ). P reviously, F itzpatrick ( 1985) had suggested that these c oins were deposited a round a c entral o bject o r f igurine, a s a rgued f or Continental s ites ( e.g. Furger-Gunti, 1 982; P lanck, 1 982). In fact, the intensity o f c oin deposition o n the s ite during the late I ron Age p roper has p erhaps been s eriously o verestimated ( Haselgrove, f orthcoming c ). The p roportion o f developed i ssues o f Cunobelinus ( later E 8) in the East range s uggests that deposition there was a lmost entirely post -Conquest. Even i n the W est and S outh ranges, i t was probably n ot s ignificantly p re-Conquest, o therwise more c oins o f Tasciovanus ( E7) would o ccur. A lthough s urprising, this c onclusion a ccords with the brooches and the p ottery. However, the r egional data ( Fig 8 :6) a gainst which Harlow can be c ompared c ome a lmost exclusively f rom s ettlements and thus very l argely r eflect c oin l osses f rom c irculation,

1 27

* 0 _ _ I

1

.<
, CD

d C O

w

1"

_ c o

O D

: L i ' l* 7

c i s 'W r i 2

u 0 V

P la ted c o ins

+( e l

CD =

J C O

o

o c n

C O L I )

o

n

W

C o ins b y me ta l

0 .

C o ins b yp hase

a .

L r ,

0 \ °

c \ °

0\3

F ig. 6 :10 Histogram o f c oin f inds f rom t emple a nd multiple deposit s ites b y p ercentage o f m etal a nd phase.

1 31

Waltham and Wanborough i t main c losing s eries a t each part o f the S outhern a rea: and Lancing Down, S 81-2; a t

i s c orrespondingly l ate. The s ite i s the last m inted i n that a t Farley H eath, Hayling I sland Waltham a nd Wanborough, S 91-2.

A t Woodeaton a nd Overy F ield ( a p ossible t emple) i n the Upper Thames Valley ( S152, 8 156) g old types ( often p lated) dominate, but this c ould b e a r eporting bias. The AV S W41 f ound w ith a m iniature a xe i mmediately o utside t he East gate a t S ilchester ( SI] .) i s p resumably a temple f ind . The s ame may be true o f c oin f inds o utside the Balkerne Gate, Colchester. E lsewhere the dominant metal i s b ronze. Artefacts f rom Harlow H olbrooks imply a s econd r eligous f ocus, where b ronze deposition c ommenced earlier t han a t the temple ( cf. F ig. 6 :10). But there a re n o o ther p roven t emple f inds a lthough K it's C oty ( 8124), w ith a c oin l ist c overing the R oman p eriod a nd a range o f s mall f inds, was e ither a t emple o r a mounded mausoleum a nalogous t o L ancing a nd Mutlow Hills. A r eligious c ontext i s n ot definite f or the quadrangular enclosure p receding the G osbeck's t emple ( C085), the r oadway f ind a t S pringhead ( S134; Appendix 5 , No.66), o r the f inds f rom the l arge t emple and n ortheastern p recincts a t S heepen ( C01-2, C062). T he c oins f rom t he I nsula n orth o f the Roman theatre a t Canterbury ( CA4-17) a re n ot o bviously a ssociated w ith the major t emple s ubsequently e rected there. A ston Upthorpe ( S7) i s n ot c ertainly a t emple. Only Harlow i s p rolific o n the s cale o f the S outhern s ites; Woodeaton, w ith i ts brooches a nd s word-chape ( Harding, 1 972) c ould b e an o utlier o f the l atter t radition. No I ron A ge c oins w ere f ound a t two o ther t emples where m inature a rtefacts a re held t o r epresent p reRoman r itual a ctivity - F rilford ( Harding, 1 972) a nd Worth ( Klein, 1 928) - a lthough f inds i n g old and o ther m etals a re known i n their v icinities. C oins d o, however, f requently o ccur where a c omplex o f R oman r eligious buildings was s ubsequently c onstructed ( in a n urban c ontext, a t Canterbury, S heepen a nd S t. Albans; i n a r ural s etting a t Gosbecks and S pringhead, S outhfleet), a lthough a t n one o f them can a direct a ssociation a s yet b e demonstrated . Frilford has r ecently b een r ecognised a s another s uch rural c omplex. On analogy w ith Gaul, these a re a ssumed t o b e r eligious c entres p erforming a range o f s ubordinate s ocial and economic f unctions ( Hingley, 1 982). A f ind f rom the " villa" a t Garford ( S9) a cross the r iver and p resumably part o f the c omplex c ould well add F rilford t o the l ist o f rural r eligious c entres w ith I ron Age c oins; Thornborough ( S197) and G estingthorpe ( S52) a re o ther p ossible examples, a s i s Harlow. T here c ould be c onnections b etween the a ctivities which b rought I ron A ge c oins t o these p laces, a nd whatever p romoted their development a s r eligious c entres a fter the C onquest. I f s o, the c ontrast w ith the more p rolific i solated t emples o f c entral s outhern E ngland may imply r egional differences i n e . g.: ( 1) patterns o f deposition a lthough t he caveat raised f or Harlow deserves r eiteration ( 2) where o fferings were displayed above g round, and t hus p otentially r ecoverable a t

1 32

abandonment; ( 3) the kind o f r itual s ites f ormalised in the Roman p eriod; a nd ( 4) the p ost-Conquest t reatment meted o ut to existing d eposits. ( c)

o ther

c ontexts

Outside this f ramework o f burial and o rganised r eligion - g enerally o f a later date - the s earch f or r egularities i n non-settlement deposition i s handicapped by a l ack o f s ystematic investigation o f f ind l ocations. Where excavation has f ollowed the discovery o f h oards, i t has g enerally been c oncerned with i ncreasing the numbers, rather than e stablishing their c ontext. Even f or the B ronze A ge, with i ts multiplicity o f a rtefact deposits ( cf. B radley, 1 984), such s tudies have o nly r ecently been i nstituted. Various c ontextual themes w ould c ertainly r epay a ttention when o pportunities f or f ield investigation a rise. One i s r epeated p recious m etal c oin deposition a t a particular l ocation. A s econd i s the l ocation i tself. Dail Na Caraidh, the f irst B ronze A ge hoard s ite excavated w ith s uch questions in m ind, p roduced c lear evidence o f multiple d eposits, and Gourlay a nd Barrett c onclude: ... r epeated a ctivity, the u se o f a d ramatic lands cape s etting and the employment o f o ther markers and natural s ymbols a re exactly what an anthropologist would t ell us we s hould expect f rom a r itual s ite." ( 1984, 3 49) This must n ot b e s een a s unthinking advocacy o f r itual explanation wherever u tilitarian m odels f ail; a nything, a fter a ll, can f unction a s a s ymbol ( cf. H odder, 1 982b; L each, 1 976). B ut the best explanation o f a g iven d eposit may r eside in t he r itual b ehaviour o f the g roup r esponsible a nd can b e t ested by s eeking f urther evidence o f a ssociated r itual a ctivity . Conversely, particular k inds o f c ultural a nd landscape s ettings a re f requently used i n the r itual d iscourse o f human g roups, f or example, b oundaries ( Leach, 1 977), a p oint a menable to investigation . Repeated use o f c omparable l ocations may i tself e stablish a s trong p robability o f a r itual dimension, e specially i f, a s with g old c oins, the deposits a re l ikely t o b e deliberate. Accepting that e ither individually o r c ollectively, better explanations may be f ound, i t i s worth r eviewing r ecurrent c ontexts which m ight f all into s uch a category. The h igh i ncidence o f c oast a nd r iver f inds has a lready been s tressed. S ource s ites a ppear e specially i mportant a s w ith Farley Heath, Wanborough, and e .g. the s ource o f the S eine ( Piggott, 1 968). P otentially a nalogous f inds c ome f rom the s ource o f the L ea a t L eagrave ( M2) and f rom the I tchen a t Cheriton ( H17, e tc.). The f ormer, t ogether with the n earby s ite a t L imbury, c ould easily b e yet a nother r ural r eligious c omplex ( S186-7). A number o f multiple d eposit l ocations have poorly understood I ron Age a ctivity , e .g. S elsey, a nd Mark's Tey, where there may have been a Welwyn type burial ( S205; Rodwell, 1 976).

1 33

There i s a c oncentration o f early g old f ind l ocations i n the Medway basin ( cf. F ig . 6 :4), e specially a round the two major defended s ites a t Loose ( M58) and Oldbury ( M567 ). Notwithstanding the number o f excavations o n hillforts, they account f or a higher proportion o f l ater I ron Age metalwork d eposits, e . g. currency bar hoards ( cf. A llen, 1 967b) a nd bronze horse bits ( cf. S pratling, 1 972) than expected ( Bradley, 1 984). Emergencies a re o ne explanation f or increased deposition a t and a round these s ites. But an a lternative c ould be their r ole a s r eligious f oci, e .g. the late g roup o f buildings a t t he c entre o f Danebury , ( Cunliffe, 1 984) - even a fter their abandonment. A r ecent, mixed f ind o f mainly s outhern c oins j ust outside the h illfort a t Danebury may indicate a nother t emple there, but there a re o ther p ossibilities. Cam nB rea, Castle P iece, Rozel ( H57, 6 1, 6 5; a ll o utside the S tudy Area) and Ambresbury Banks ( H11) have a ll y ielded hoards n ot o bviously r elated t o o ccupation o n t he s ite. The p recious metal c oin f inds f rom the defences a t Danebury ( Appendix 5 , Nos. 2 7-29; t wo p lated) and O ldbury ( M56), a re paralleled a t o ther h illforts, e .g. Cholesbury ( 521; AV), U ffington ( S12; AR) a nd the Caburn ( potin). There a re a lso s everal g old coins f ound a t o r j ust b eyond the l imits o f undefended s ettlements, e .g. Nazeingbury ( S62), W ickford . The explanation may b e s traightforward: ( 1) r efuse disposal on the margins o f s ites, there b eing many c oin f inds in ditches backfilled w ith o ccupation material; ( 2) t he l imits o f a s ettlement p erceived by the a rchaeologist may n ot c oincide c onceptually o r f unctionally w ith those r ecognised by i ts inhabitants, o r; ( 3) o utside the s ettlement was a safer p lace t o c onceal a s mall h oard. But g iven the emphasis which Leach ( 1977) lays o n a ll boundaries a s s acred, and o n defences a s b oundaries b etween culture a nd nature, a f urther possibility , that s ome c oins were o fferings, s hould be c onsidered.

I V Discussion The l ater I ron Age i n s outh-east England i s characterised by a marked i ncrease i n material c ulture r ecovered f rom the a rchaeological r ecord ( Haselgrove, 1 982). This i s t rue o f mortuary e vidence, o f hoards, e .g. o f bronze ( Spratling, 1 972), i ronwork ( Manning, 1 972) a nd currency bars ( Allen, 1 967b), and o f a rtefacts d eposited s ingly, o n t emple s ites, and in r ivers - a s quantitative a nalysis o f the latter c onfirms ( Fitzpatrick, 1 984). C ertain f eatures a re explicable in h istorical t erms, e .g. a m id-first c entury AD horizon o f m etalwork hoards. An a pparent i ncrease i n s ettlement material p robably r eflects the amount o f excavation on Roman s ites. But o verall the t rend i s t oo emphatic t o disregard. The two key a spects a re: ( 1) the i ncrease in f ormal d eposition, and ( 2) the categories i nvolved, o ften those w e envisage a s o bjects o f e lite d isplay, e .g. weaponry, c hariot f ittings and h orse harness, t omes.

1 34

A major question i s how c oin d eposition ( itself a n i nnovation o f the p eriod) r elates t o this broader pattern The c onventional v iew ( Chapter 2 ) interprets m ost nons ettlement c oin d eposits a s i ntended f or r ecovery, but f or s ome r eason abandoned. S ince c oinage, burial and a rtefact hoarding a re a ll a lmost mutually exclusive, the o nly a pproach i s through the l ocations i n which c oins and o ther c ontemporary a rtefacts c o-occur: watery p laces a nd t emples. S ome question the i ntegrity o f ' wet f inds' a s a c lass, p referring to s ee them a s e roded f rom s ettlements, a nd o thers s eek p rosaic explanations, e .g. accidental l osses a t f ords, b oats s inking, battle s ites ( cf. B radley , 1 984). But many now a ccept them a s f ormal o fferings, p art o f a w estern European t radition o f deposition in watery p laces, i ncluding p eat b ogs, in c ontrast t o c entral Europe where g rave f inds a nd hoards p redominate ( Torbrugge, 1 970-1). W eapons a ppear the category most f requently deposited ( cf. F itzpatrick, 1 984), a lthough dredging o bviously f avours l arger a rtefacts, a nd most s maller a rtefacts e .g. c oins a nd f ibulae a re s eparate water-edge d iscoveries. A martial e mphasis i s a lso evident in cumulative deposits, s uch a s L lyn C errig Bach ( cf. F ox, 1 958) a nd La T Ane i tself ( de Navarro, 1 972), a lthough S chwab ( 1974) a rgues t hat the l atter was a s ettlement o verwhelmed by the s ame f lood which d estroyed Cornaux n earby. The c oins f rom La T ne ( Allen , 1 973b) l ead to t he q uestion o f whether those f rom B ritish r ivers a nd beaches f orm part o f the s ame w ider European t radition. The main p roblem i s that ' wet f ind' a ssociations a re n ot direct. D iscoveries a t the s ame l ocation p rovide o nly c ircumstantial e vidence, whether a g eneral pattern, e .g. t he c oncentration o f p otin f inds f rom the Thames in West L ondon, o r more s pecific, e .g. c oin and metalwork f inds f rom watercress beds a t B ourne End ( S212) o r the Hayling I sland tankard handle paralleled a t Kew ( H.45). S trabo's a ccount ( based o n P oseidonios) o f the 1 5,000 talents o f unworked g old and s ilver r emoved f rom the t emple e nclosures a nd s acred lakes a t Toulouse in 1 06 BC ( Geography I V , 1 .13) i s a p ossible a nalogy f or the practice, a s i s h is c omment that f or the i nhabitants o f many parts o f ' Celtica' " the l akes i n particular p rovided i nviolability f or their t reasures, i nto which they l et down heavy masses o f s ilver a nd g old" ( ibid., a scribed t o o thers besides P oseidonios). There i s, h owever, c omplementary evidence f rom t errestrial s ituations. A t Harlow, f ibulae a nd animal r emains - p redominantly o f sheep in the a ge r ange 6 -9 m onths, p robably killed i n the a utumn - were d eposited a longside the c oins ( France and Gobel, 1 985). T he major c omponents o f t he LPRIA a ssemblage a t Hayling I sland ( weaponry, h orse harness and vehicle equipment), a re exactly the c ategories which dominate the ' wet f inds'. The a bsence o f weaponry i n the later deposits there i s p resumably due t o the _ Lex Julia de vi publica f orbidding c ivilians to c arry a rms ( Downey e t a l., 1 980). The lack o f weapons a t Harlow c ould be explained by the p ost-Conquest d eposition o f much o f the material. More nebulous a ssociations i nclude the Woodeaton s cabbard and a h orn c ap

1 35

and H ill

o ther bronzes ( one ( Spratling, 1 972).

a Roman l amp)

f rom

S t.Leonard's

The deposition o f l ocal c oins a s t emple o fferings i s paralleled in B elgic Gaul, e .g. a t B ois L 'Abbe, E u, S eineMaritime ( Delestree, 1 984) and C hilly, S omme ( Scheers, 1 982), and further a field, e .g. a t V illeneuve au C hätelot, Aube ( Piette, 1 981). The s heer quantity o f c oinage i n ditches a t V illeneuve S t. Germain, where an earlier enclosure i s interpreted a s r itual ( Debord, 1 982), and P ommiers ( Haselgrove, 1 985), i s difficult to explain a s s ettlement r efuse. O f the 2 11 C ontinental Romano-Celtic t emples ( Horne and King, 1 980) with r ecorded o fferings ( a m inimum f igure o wing t o p oor r ecords), 2 6% have b oth I ron A ge c oins and o ther a rtefacts o r a nimal bones, a nd a nother 5 % c oins o nly. C onversely, Continental c oin f inds a re a lso f requent i n c oastal and r iverine c ontexts, e .g. C ondä-surA isne ( Scheers, 1 977). The s econd l argest c oncentration o f I ron Age coin f inds i n the N etherlands i s f rom t he r iver c onfluence a t Rossum/Lith, mainly o f s ilver c oins. A lthough Roymans and van der S anden ( 1980) c onnect t hese w ith s ettlement, the l ate La T ene s words, bronze bracelets and f ibulae a lso dredged up s uggest o therwise. Two major objections must be f aced: ( 1) t he a ssociation b etween g old c oin f inds ( the m etal most o ften d eposited deliberately) a nd t emples i s w eak. Most d ry l and f inds a re mutually exclusive o f temples; ( 2) most o f t he t emple evidence i s Roman. H owever, p ost-Conquest deposition i s a lso apparently o ften i n n ew f orms, i .e. b ronze a nd s ilver c oin, whereas where there i s earlier deposition a t t he s ame s ite, i t i s in g old and thus a l ink to o ther c ontexts, a lthough much s till depends o n how s ites s uch a s Mark's T ey and S nettisham a re i nterpreted. However, t errestrial a rtefact deposition c omplementary t o c oinage i s a lso p erhaps underestimated, w ith even dry land d isoveries s uch a s the I sleham a nd Thrapston s words a nd s cabbards n ow b eing i nterpreted a s o riginally deposited i n wet c onditions ( cf. F itzpatrick, 1 984). While this c ould a lso b e t rue o f s ome c oin f inds, the i mportant p oint i s that, unlike them, l arge a rtefacts p laced o n o r c lose t o the s urface w ill o nly s urvive i n exceptional c ontexts e .g. the B ois d e W erimont c ave f inds ( Marien, 1 970). Although the numerous weapon f inds - u sually deliberately damaged - and animal b one f rom t he La T Ane 1 1I II sanctuary a t Gournay-sur-Aronde, Oise ( Bruneau, e t a l., 1 980; 1 985) and i n s maller quantities a t Ribemont-surAncre, S omme, and S t.Maur, O ise ( Brunaux, 1 986) a ttest an early s tart t o s uch d epositional p ractices, m ost d ated t emple d eposits i n Gaul o nly b egin i n the early Gallo-Roman p eriod. R ecently, Gruel and C lement ( forthcoming) have s uggested that, while a nimal b one, brooches, p ottery and e specially weaponry were a lready e mployed a s o fferings i n the later I ron A ge, m onetary o fferings may b e an i nnovation o f the early Roman period, a n expression o f the c hanging values o f p ost-Conquest Gaulish s ociety. The custom, they h int, may even have i ts o rigins i n the Roman world , w here i t i s c ertainly a ttested a t a n early date ( Babelon, 1 897). L ong a go, Blanchet ( 1905) came t o the s imilar c onclusion

1 36

that making c oin o fferings a t r iver s ources and f ords was unlikely to b e a p re-Roman custom, s ince the majority o f c oins w ere Roman a nd the Gaulish types f ound with them w ere g enerally late i ssues. Whether i ndigenous o r Roman in inspiration, these n ew developments w ere directly c ontemporary with the main p eriod o f B ritish c oinage, s uggesting that the whole movement towards making o fferings a t f ormal t emples in c entral s outhern England, and the o ther a reas i n c lose c ontact with the Continent, o wes much t o c ross-Channel c onnections s uch a s a re evident a t Hayling I sland ( Downey e t a l., 1 980). Bois L ' Abbe, f or i nstance, o ffers a particularly c lose parallel t o Hayling I sland. I t, too, i s s ited n ear the s ea and has yielded a f ew B ritish c oins ( cf. Chapter 9 ), a s w ell a s c learer evidence o f how the c oins had o riginally been deposited: in heaps a nd p iles wedged between the f lints, s ome o f them p robably i n w oven c ontainers ( Mangard, 1 978). A f eature c ommon to B ritain and Gaul i s the l ocation o f temples c lose t o t ribal boundaries ( Stevens, 1 940; B runaux, 1 986) o r n ear r ivers and the c oast ( Bradley, 1 984). C oin distributions i ndicate that r ivers p robably f ormed the a ctual c ultural bondaries ( Kimes e t a l., 1 982). B oth they and the c oast p robably had a s pecial s ignificance a s natural boundaries ( Leach, 1 977). There i s thus a p otential c orrelation b etween Romano-British t emple building and the a reas w ith the h ighest density o f p recious metal d eposition in the Later I ron A ge. B oth may s imply be a f unction o f the o verall s ettlement pattern, but an a lternative i s t hat whole c oastal o r r iver a reas had r itual s ignificance a s l iminal z ones. This might a lso explain why there i s no s pecific c orrelation between the f ormal deposition o f c oinage, metalwork, and t emples. T emples f ormalising a r itual landscape w ould n ot a lways c oincide with t he natural f oci, o r with where o fferings had p reviously b een made. S ome do ( e.g. Farley Heath and Hayling I sland?, and in B elgic Gaul, a t Gournay-sur-Aronde; c f. Bruneau e t a l.. 1 985); o thers a pparently do n ot ( e.g. Gosbecks, S nettisham?); a t s ome, s mall hoards o f earlier g old c oins i mply that they may ( e.g. Harlow and B ois L ' Abbö; Mangard, 1 976, 3 34). I n Gaul, the p lundering o f p recious metal c oin o fferings f rom sacred s ites during the Gallic War ( Haselgrove, 1 984b), their s ubsequent r emoval t o defray the c ost o f n ew buildings, and c hanges o f l ocation a ll p rovide p lausible explanations f or why there i s l ittle s ign o f the custom until t he p ost-Conquest e ra, by when c oin o fferings a t t emples were p redominantly o f base m etal. I f i t i s a ccepted that c oins and o ther material w ere deliberately d eposited f or n on-utilitarian r easons, s ome r eason must b e o ffered. S o f ar, the s etting has b een s tressed, o n the a ssumption that watery p laces had a particular r itual s ignificance, implicit i n the w idespread veneration o f s prings, pools, r ivers, e tc., among C eltics peaking peoples ( cf. P iggott, 1 968; T orbrugge, 1 970-1). Such f inds a re g enerally i nterpreted a s o fferings to water deities, o r, on dry l and, to their t errestrial c ounterparts.

1 37

This f ails to explain the marked increase i n t hese depositional processes during the L PRIA. Accepting t he r itual c ontext, an a lternative i s t o s tress the p revailing c onditions, e specially the new f orms o f wealth a ccumulation a t this t ime ( e.g. Nash, 1 975a), and the r ole o f p rimitive valuables in s ocial c ompetition. Two basic i nterpretations can be o ffered. One s ees the s pecial character o f prestige i tems safeguarded by r egular destruction ( cf. Meillassoux, 1 981), t he o ther, a cts o f deposition a s s tatus-building activities ( cf. Bradley, 1 984). Regular public s acrifices a nd the p ractice in many a reas o f Gaul o f p iling the s poils o f warfare o n c onsecrated g round, p rotected by r eligious p enalties ( DEG V I, 1 6-17) c ould conform to the f irst idea . S uch s anctions possibly extended t o ' wet f inds', a lthough c onversely t he breaking o f i tems a t t emples may i ndicate that they were n ot a lways r eliable. As f or s tatus-building a ctivities, burial p rovides an o bvious c ontext a nd Caesar a lso mentions c ostly Gallic f unerals ( Ibid. 1 9). A gainst this, the main ' wet f ind' categories a re largely mutually exclusive o f " visible" LPRIA burials and a lthough g ender c ould b e b ehind this dichotomy, the Welwyn Garden C ity c remated bone ( Stead, 1 967) i mplies n ot. Ritual deposition can be a c ontext f or individual s tatus c ompetition, a nd Gregory's ( 1980) analysis o f g ift g iving, c ombining both the above i deas, may be r elevant t o the I ron Age s ituation. Most f orms o f c ompetitive c onsumption c oncern g ifts between r ivals, the r ules o f r eciprocity a llowing i mbalances c reated o n o ne o ccasion t o be r edressed o n another. " Gifts t o g od" ( Gregory, 1 980, 644), h owever, a llow c ontinuous a ccumulation o f prestige s ince a p erson makes them without t he r isk o f an equivalent g ift being r eturned. B ecause s acrifices c annot be r ecovered, s uch o fferings deplete the o verall s upply, making i t more difficult f or o ther c ontenders t o s urpass the o riginal effort ( Bradley, 1 984). I n a p eriod o f p olitical c entralisation and rapid e conomic change l ike the LPRIA, s uch an emphasis i s not u nlikely. The p lated f orgeries a t s ome t emples c ould a lso make s ense ( e.g. Hayling I sland), l eading individuals f inding i t easier t o " cheat" o n g ifts to deities ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 979), i n whose t emples their o fferings were inviolate a nd c onspicuously displayed, than in g ifts o r payments t o o thers.

1 38

Chapter 7

S ettlement

I

f inds

s outh o f the Thames

I ntroduction

M ost s ettlement f inds a re p resumably c oins a ccidentally parted f rom t heir o wners i n the p laces where they were habitually u sed ( cf. Reece, 1 984a). I nitially, t he p atterning o f c oin f inds a t t he Key S ites ( Chapter 4 ) w ill b e r eviewed. A gainst this background, o ther s ettlement c oin l ists, a nd the d ifferent t ypes o f s ite yielding f inds, w ill t hen b e examined f or information a bout c oin c irculation. The Thames a nd i ts t ributary, the K ennett, p rovide a c onvenient basis f or s ubdividing the s ettlement e vidence. S ites s outh o f t hese r ivers ( Table A4:1) a re p lotted o n F ig. 7 :1, a ccording t o t he d ominant c oin metal ( excavation/ F l f inds o nly). S ites w ith t wo m etals i n equal p roportions a re s hown a s a djacent s ymbols. S uperficially, the o bvious d ivision i s b etween c entral s outhern England, where s ilver p redominates, a nd t he r est o f the r egion, but d etailed i nspection i ndicates t hat the l atter c omprises t wo d istinct t erritories: E ast K ent a nd t he M edway a rea, w here b oth b ronze a nd p otin o ccur; a nd W est K ent, East S ussex a nd S urrey up t o the r iver Wey . I n t his " Wealden" r egion, p otin p redominates, i ncluding t he n oteable f ieldwork c luster i n the Darenth valley, w ith o ccasional g old f inds. There a re a lso h ints o f g old dominated " peripheries" n orth o f the r iver T est a nd i n the Upper M edway basin. The K ey S ite f or East Kent i s Canterbury. I n c entral s outhern England, there a re three: S ilchester, Chichester a nd Owslebury. F or the z one b etween, t here i s o nly t he Caburn, a nd, a s y et, n o s ettlements w ith extensive c oin l osses.

I I

The K ey S ites ( a)

Canterbury

C oins have b een f ound r egularly a t Canterbury s ince t he p ost-war excavations b egan, and C anterbury n ow has m ore c oin-yielding c ontexts ( 91) than even Colchester, a lthough f ew a re yet p ublished. M ost f inds a re evidently f rom t he nucleated s ettlement b eside the r iver S tour; i ts f ull extent i s n ot yet c ertain, but t here i s p re-Conquest o ccupation o utside t he l ater walls b oth n orth o f the r iver ( S105) and t o the s outh-east a long Watling S treet ( S103). The c oncentration o f c oins w ithin t he walls ( Area I ), where most major excavations have been ( cf. F ig. A 5:6), w ill therefore dominate d iscussion. However, the p roportion o f c oins in p re-Conquest c ontexts o utside this a rea i s n ot

1 39

-E x tens ive ly e xcava ted PR IA s i tes w i thou t c o ins 4

I l l !

l i

l i

F ig . 7 :1 Map o f s ites s outh o f t he y ielding I ron A ge c oins. 1 40

T hames

a nd

K ennett

o nly h igher, but c omprises a h igher f requency o f e arlier t ypes, a nd c omparable d ensities may eventually be e xpected e lsewhere ( cf. F ig. 7 :2). The overall extra-mural c oin a ssemblage s hows t he s ame t rend, except that the earlier p otin types a re a bsent. While potin s urvival i s poor c ompared w ith o ther metals, c oin deposition i n these a reas i s thus unlikely t o b egin s ignificantly earlier. A rea 1 i tself i s b est d ivided into the t hree i nsulae n orth, s outh-east, a nd n orth-east o f the theatre ( which i tself has p roduced o nly t wo c oins). The s tratification o f t hese three g roups ( Fig. 7 :2) excludes 1 2% ( N, S E i nsulae) a nd 2 4% ( NE i nsula) o f t he f inds f rom c ontexts n ot yet p hased. A s o n a ny urban s ite, many s tratified c oins a re r esidual; 1 5% a re f rom s econd c entury c ontexts a nd 2 3% f rom s till l ater d eposits. C onversely, t he h ighest p roportion f rom p re-Roman l ayers i s 2 7% ( N i nsula). Two t rends m erit c omment. F irst, p otins dominate the p re-Conquest c ontexts e verywhere a nd o nly a s ingle c oin ( E81) i s l ater. S econdly, t he numbers i n p re-Flavian d eposits i ncrease, w ith a h igher p roportion o f later t ypes, a nd then decline s harply i n t he F lavian p eriod, except i n t he NE I nsula. S uperficially, this s uggests that: ( 1) p otin d ominated c oin d eposition a t C anterbury until the C onquest, a nd ( 2) I ron A ge c oinage c ontinued i n u se f or up t o a g eneration a fter AD 4 3. While t he s econd p oint i s s upported by o ther s ites, the f irst i s m isleading. The k ey t o t his i s t he d iffering o ccupation h istories o f the a reas. C ontrary t o a ppearances, c oin d eposition t erminated earlier i n t he N E I nsula t han e lsewhere. The c oins f rom R oman d eposits a re n early a ll p otins a nd m irror the p re-Conquest l evels. D efinitively l ate c oins ( i.e. P hase 7 -8 b ronze) a re a bsent f rom a large p re-Flavian s ample, where t hey w ould b e expected, a nd the ' Flavian' g roup i s m ostly f rom t he c onstruction deposits o f the R oman baths a nd p alaestra ( CA59-68). S ince the o nly early s ign o f the C onquest was a p it c ontaining m ilitary horse b ronzes ( Appendix 5 ), s everal " pre-Flavian" c ontexts ( CA475 3) a nd three o thers which have a F lavian t erminus a nte quem o nly ( CA62-64) quite p ossibly a ntedate the C onquest. Most o f t he c oins, t hen, w ere p robably d eposited b efore the C onquest. There was t hen a h iatus i n s ettlement until the s ite was l evelled f or a t imber building phase which i mmediately p redated t he F lavian l aying o ut o f t he R oman t own . The o ther excavated s ites a re e ither o n Watling S treet a nd the early r oad which intersected i t ( areas where p re-Flavian l osses a re t o b e expected), o r s ufficiently c lose by f or t hem t o b e a s ource o f material i ntroduced i n the later l evelling o perations ( Marlowe I V). P hase 7 -8 i ssues a re c ommon in b oth t he o ther I nsulae in t he p reF lavian horizon, whereas p otin f inds decline, implying that i t was by then e ither r esidual o r a m inor e lement o f the c irculation p ool. S ince o ccupation o utside t he L PRIA defensive ditches c ommenced i n the early f irst c entury AD, i t i s p ossible that by the C onquest the f ocus o f s ettlement had s hifted t o t he r iver-crossing a nd a pproach s ubsequently

1 41

1 00

CANTERBURY

8 0

N o r th I n su la

6 0 0 4 )

P re -Conques t

P re -F lav ian

C 2nd AD

F l av ian

4 0 2 0

1 00

C ANTERBURY

g o

S ou theas t I n su la

g o

%

4 0 2 0

1 00

CANTERBURY

8 0

N o r theas t I n su la

6 0

70

2 0

CANTERBURY

1 00 8 0

O the r

6 0 %

4 0 2 0

1 00

S ILCHESTER

g o

6 0 %

4 0 2 0

1 00

CH ICHESTER

g o

6 0 %

4 0 2 0

. 55 6 C

P P 78 E8 0 1 34 -5

. 55 6 C P P 7 8 E8 149 1 34 .5

F ig . 7 :2

‘5 6 C

P P 78 E8 149 1 34 -5

$ 56 C PP 1 34 -5

S tratification o f c oins f rom K ey S ites ( a) Canterbury ( b) S ilchester ( c) C hichester

1 42

78 E8L 9

employed by Watling

S treet.

The c oin l ists s upport this a nalysis. M ore N E I nsula c oins a re p otins ( 69%) than i n the o ther two ( 35%, 3 6%), and a lthough t he r atio o f earlier t o l ater c lasses i s the s ame f or a ll t hree ( 1:2), i t has a lso y ielded the o nly two i ndubitably early s pecimens ( P1.2). I t a lso has the l argest number o f C ontinental c oins ( 6), a ll p re-Augustan types, f ewest I nsular s truck i ssues ( 17%, a gainst 5 2% ( SE) a nd 5 9% ( N)), a nd the c oin l ist ends w ith earlier Phase 8 types. The t otal number o f c oins f rom w ithin the ditched a rea ( 47 c oins) i s higher than the o ther two I nsulae c ombined ( 37) a s expected o f t he i nital f ocus o f t he LPRIA s ettlement, a nd the c oins f rom s ecurely p re-Conquest deposits a t Marlowe I V - which s traddles an e ntrance through the m iddle ditch, t he i nner d itch, and part o f the i nterior - a re e arly. C onversely, the P hase 7 a nd 8 c oins ( 10 o f each) p ut a f irm early f irst c entury AD emphasis o n the two o ther I nsulae. F inally, a ll the l atest c oins f rom Canterbury, ( 6 E 81-E82.1; 2 E 82.2; 1 E 85), a re f rom s ites beside Watling S treet, o r t he e arly N E-SW r oad w ith which i t i ntersects, c onfirming t his chronological s hift in the f ocus o f c oin l oss. The i dentified Canterbury a ssemblage ( 109 c oins) i s dominated by l ocal c oinage, p otins ( 50%) a nd o ther S outhEastern types ( 25%), but there a re three o utside g roups: Continental ( 13%) S outhern ( 3%) and Eastern ( 9%), which a pparently r elate t o the c hanging external r elations o f the LPRIA s ettlement f rom i ts f oundation t o the C onquest. I nitially, there w ere c lose t ies w ith the C ontinent, a s expected g iven Canterbury's p roximity t o t he s hortest a nd most r eliable C hannel c rossing o f the p eriod ( cf. McGrail, 1 983). The s truck b ronze c oinage o f B elgic Gaul, t he s ource o f a ll but t hree o f the imports, p rovided the r epertoire f rom w hich t he S outhern-Eastern s eries was drawn ( Appendix 2 ). The two S outhern c oins, o ne o f which i s c ontemporary ( S81), may b e a f acet o f the l ink i mplicit i n Eppillus' i ssues ( SE82). T he Eastern e lement p resumably r eflects the ' unification' o f the two r egional c oinages during P hase 8 , a nd g eographically, l ooks t o E ssex rather than H ertfordshire. C ompared t o C olchester, however, E 82.2 c oins a re s carce, s uggesting e ither a d iminution i n c oin s upply t o the r egion o r t hat the C onquest p revented their export i n numbers c omparable t o the earlier E 8 types. However, while the E 82.2 t ypes a re p robably Cunobelinus' f inal i ssues ( Appendix 2 ), t he s econd hypothesis may b e r ejected. The r elative f requency o f early a nd developed types e lsewhere in K ent mirrors Canterbury, but i mmediately n orth o f the Thames, e .g. a t W ickford ( and a lso a t Harlow), the r atio i s r eversed and c omparable t o C olchester; a d ecline i n c oinage exported t o K ent during P hase 8 i s thus the m ore l ikely explanation. I f s o, there may be a l ink w ith the s eries i nscribed AMMINVS ( E85), which the s tyle r elates d irectly t o Cunobelinus' o wn . Amminus, Cunobelinus' s on, was p ossibly, his a ppointed s ubordinate in K ent ( Nash , 1 982), and the inscription DVNO o n t wo Kentish f inds ( e.g. CA13)

1 43

i mplies a s eparate m int t here, p ossibly Canterbury i tself. By volume the E 85 s eries i s hardly a s ubstitute f or E 82.2, but the d isturbances i mplicit i n Amminus' expulsion ( Suetonius, Caligula, 44.2) c ould w ell explain the decline i n the i mport o f the l atter. The a ssociation o f f lint-gritted wares a nd Dressel 1 a mphorae in c ontexts l acking Gallo-Belgic wares, e .g. a t Rose Lane ( Frere, 1 954) and t he q uantity o f D ressel 1 B i n the modern excavations ( cf. A rthur, 1 986), i ndicate that o ccupation a t Canterbury c ommenced during P eriod i i, i .e. w ithin the later f irst c entury BC. The s eries o ccurring r epeatedly in p re-Conquest c ontexts a re p otins, S E6 types, a nd C ontinental i ssues. Their evident p riority o ver t he more p rolific P hase 7 -8 i ssues s upports t wo i mportant s uggestions i n Chapter 5 : ( 1) the later p otin c lasses ( P1.4-5) must b e e ssentially a c oinage o f t he l ater f irst c entury B C; their d iscovery i n s ecure P eriod i i c ontexts a t Canterbury s hould o nly b e a matter o f t ime; ( 2) the s eries o f uninscribed s ilver a nd b ronze i ssues w ith C ontinental a ffinities ( SE63) a re e arlier t han t hose w ith i nscriptions; even i f t he f inal q uarter o f the f irst c entury B C ( i.e. early P hase 7 ) d oes p rove a p referable absolute dating, t he r elative o rdering i s s urely c orrect. The c oin l ist i mplies t hat o ccupation was i ntensive f rom the s tart. S etting the p otins a side, 4 2% o f the o ther c oins a re f irst c entury BC i ssues. E ven i f s ome C ontinental c oins a re much l ater i mports, t his s hould i ndicate a f lourishing s ettlement b efore t he e nd o f the c entury. Relative t o t he i nscribed i ssues, t he p roportion o f S E63 t ypes i s a lso much h igher t han i n K ent a s a whole. A f urther gauge o f Canterbury's early i mportance i s t he r atio o f I ron A ge t o R oman c oins u p t o C laudius i n t he excavations up t o 1 955, a t 2 :1, h igher than f or a ny o ther major s ite ( Reece, 1 972, e tc.) except B raughing f or which a s imilar s equence i s a rgued ( Chapter 8 ). A f urther, i f r elative, f ixed p oint f or t he s tart o f o ccupation i s g iven by t he p otins. Overall, o nly 2 7% o f the p otins f rom Canterbury a re earlier types, but i n the a rea o f earliest L PRIA s ettlement, t he proportion i s h igher ( 33%), while c onversely o n s ites where occupation c ommences i n the f irst c entury AD , i t i s markedly d iminished ( 14%). A r easonable d eduction i s t hat p otin was s till b eing cast when Canterbury was f ounded, a s o therwise t he r atio s hould h old c onstant ( as o pposed t o the a bsolute number d eposited which s hould, a nd d oes, d ecline). But a ll e xcept two o f the earlier t ypes ( both f rom the e arly s ettlement nucleus) b elong t o the C lass ( P1.3) c urrent when massive hoarding o ccurred, a nd where i dentified i n d etail ( 3 c oins) t o t he l atest s ub-classes ( Allen, 1 971, L 5-7). T hus, when Canterbury was f ounded, the earliest t ypes ( up t o 4 0-50% i n the hoards) had a ll but d isappeared . H ere, h owever, t he l ack o f a n absolute t imescale i s f elt. A llen's Caesarean dating o f the h oards i s o nly h ypothesis ( 1971). A t S nettisham ( H70), which has a s late a c omposition a s a ny p otin hoard, the g old f rom the o ther d eposits ( Nos. 69, 7 1) would n ot p revent t he whole c ollection having b een exported f rom the S outh-East b efore the mid f irst c entury BC; indeed

1 44

this i s i mplied b y the l ack o f P hase 5 types. Canterbury, t herefore, was f ounded during t he l ater s tages o f p otin p roduction, but s ufficiently b efore i t c eased f or the p roportion o f earlier i ssues t o have f allen s till f urther by t he early f irst c entury AD. A date b efore the f inal quarter o f the f irst c entury B C i s p robable, and p ossibly c onservative. Whether p otin a nd b ronze p roduction o verlapped s ignificantly, p otins w ere a pparently the c ommonest t ypes c irculating a t Canterbury until P hase 8 . This a ssumes a n equivalent l oss r ate, p erhaps unjustified i f b ronze a nd p otin had s eparate f uctions ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 979). I f s o, p otin c asting c eased e ither b ecause t here was n o n eed t o c ontinue i t o r b ecause i ts u ses were taken o ver by s truck b ronze a nd s ilver. S everal Canterbury p otins a re d eliberately halved ( 5) o r quartered ( 3), s uggesting t hat their u se was n ot r estricted t o whole unit t ransactions. Any o ver-representation t his p ractice has b rought a bout r elative t o b ronze i s c ancelled o ut by p otin's p oorer r ecord o f s urvival. I n s ummary, t he c oinage i mplies a major s ettlement a t Canterbury i n, o r s oon a fter, the third quarter o f t he f irst c entury B C. O ther s ettlements w ith P eriod i i material ( including D ressel 1 a mphorae) o n the s urrounding h igher g round w ere a pparently a bandoned a t t his p eriod. A t B ridge ( S99) C ontinental p otins o utnumber B ritish a nd the c oin l ist ends w ith P 1.3. The l ack o f p otins f rom B igberry, despite the Late La T ene m etalwork d eposits, c ould s upport i ts i nterpretation a s a r efuge a nd n ot i ntensively o ccupied ( cf. DBG, V , 9 ), but l ittle o f the h illfort's i nterior has b een s ampled ( cf. Thompson, 1 983). Valleyward movement a nd l ocal a ggregation a re thus b oth p otential f actors i n the g rowth o f the nucleated s ettlement a t Canterbury. I n P hase 8 , Canterbury's i mportance p robably d eclined, r eflected by t he i mported c oin s upply a nd v irtual c essation o f r egional m inting. ( b)

S ilchester a nd C hichester

A lthough many S ilchester excavation c oins a re n ot w ell p rovenanced ( Appendix 5 ), t wo c oncentrations a re a pparent f rom t he m odern e xcavations a t t he Basilica ( Fulford, 1 986) a nd a round the S outh Gate - c oinciding w ith the two nuclei o f L PRIA o ccupation ( Period i i i) s o f ar r ecognised . M ost o f the r emaining f inds a re a lso f rom w ithin t he I nner Earthwork ( Boon, 1 969; c f. F ig. A 5:3). C onversely, t here a re n o s urface c oins f inds f rom the P eriod iii s ettlement a rea o ver the S alient Dyke, a lthough s lab-moulds w ere r ecovered ( Fulford a nd C orney, 1 984). T he identifiable c oins f rom the S outh Gate a rea ( SI5-7) a re a lmost a ll unstratified; t heir emphasis ( 75% P hase 7 -8) i s c onsistent w ith the T iberio-Claudian i mports f ound t here. On the Basilica s ite, where the s tratified s equence b egins i n P eriod i i ( SI8-14) t here is a lso a c lose f it w ith the date o f o ccupation, but t he m odern excavation differs f rom t he earlier S ilchester c oin l ist i n i ncluding a s ignificant p roportion o f S outhern i ssues ( 37%) - a nother

1 45

S outhern c oin was f ound i n 1 985 ( M .Fulford, P ers. C omm.). These small c oins a re l ikely t o have b een m issed i n earlier excavations - o ne c oin was i n V ictorian backfill ( SI14) a nd a re p robably under-represented i n the o verall s ample. An i ndication i s g iven by the r atio o f s ilver t o b ronze i n the modern excavations ( 1:2) a s o pposed t o 1 :10 before, which c ompares t o r atios o n major s ites o f 1 :5 i n the S outh-Eastern a rea a nd 1 :25 n orth o f t he Thames. I n f act, S ilchester has twice t he m ean number o f excavated s ilver c oins f or S outhern s ites. A ssessment o f the S ilchester c oin l ist must r ecognise that t he absolute numbers o f S outhern s ilver c oins a re r elatively m eaningless, c ompared t o the more c ommon b ronzes f rom t he Eastern a nd S outhEastern c oinage r egions i n which S ilchester participated a t different t imes ( below). Applied t o t he s mall number o f c oins f rom p re-Conquest c ontexts ( cf. F ig. 7 :2), this a rgument has i mmediate f orce. The p roportion o f the t otal s tratified up t o t he F lavian p eriod ( 42%) i s h igher t han Canterbury ( 37%) a nd exceeded o nly by B raughing ( 50%) a mong the major LPRIA s ettlements. As the chances o f having a P hase 7 c oin a s a s ite f ind a re a bout a quarter s outh o f the Thames o f what they a re ( even o n a m inor s ite) n orth o f i t, t he a ctual i ntensity o f d eposition r epresented by the S ilchester c oins i s s imilar t o S keleton G reen ( 13 c oins i n p re-Conquest c ontexts). A s a g auge o f S ilchester's i mportance, t he c oin evidence thus exactly a ccords w ith t he l ater Augustan - T iberian i mported I talian s amian a nd Gallo-Belgic f ineware a ssemblage which has i ts c losest parallels a t S keleton G reen ( M . Fulford, P ers. C omm.; c f. P artridge, 1 981) s ubstantiating, a t l ast, the epigraphy o f E ppillus' c oinage a nd the i ndications o f a major s ettlement a fforded by t he dykes ( cf. B oon, 1 969). Two questions r emain: the r egional c oinage t raditions t o which S ilchester was a ffiliated, a nd the s tanding o f the later f irst c entury B C s ettlement. The f our main traditions r epresented a re: Eastern ( 34%), C ontinental ( 29%), S outhern ( 20%) a nd S outh-Western ( 10%). O f t hese, the latter may b e d iscounted. S W81-91 b ronzes o ccur a t both the o ther c ivitas c apitals bordering the S outh-Western r egion and a t o ther major s ites beyond ( e.g. C olchester a nd R ichborough) a nd a re b est explained b y early R oman m ilitary a ctivity. B ut a h igher f requency o f S outh-Eastern i ssues ( 5%), m ight have b een e xpected g iven t he S E81 s eries. I n f act, t he a ssemblage c omposition i s m isleading, w ith the r elative s carcity o f the S outhern s ilver a gain t o b lame. S ilchester i s l ocated w ithin the o nly c oherent z one o f S outhern s ilver d eposition ( Chapter 6 ). S imilarly, a ll the P eriod I II F l g old f inds f rom the c ell i n which S ilchester l ies a re S outhern types, a s a re 5 0% o f the P eriod I I g old . The o ther 5 0% a re Gallo-Belgic i mports, and thus f ully i n k eeping w ith the C ontinental b ronze a nd p otin issues f rom the s ite. I n t he m odern excavations, S outhern and C ontinental types ( 31% each) p redominate, f ollowed by Eastern c oins ( 23%), w ith S outh-Eastern i ssues ( 15%) n ow a m ore r espectable p roportion.

1 46

Two-thirds o f the S outhern c oins b elong t o P hase 7 o r earlier, i ndicating a f loruit under T incommios; the o ne c oin o f V erica i s o f his earlier s eries ( S81). B oth S outh-Eastern c oins a lso b elong t o P hase 7 , which i s a ppropriate f or the episode i mplied by E ppillus' s eries ( not i tself r epresented), f urther emphasising that period o f S ilchester's h istory. C onversely, t he emphasis o f the Eastern c oins i s l ate, w ith 5 0% l ater E 8 t ypes; a s ingle c oin o f E paticcus ( S92) i s b roadly c ontemporary. Where s tratified, these l ate c oins a re f rom postConquest c ontexts ( S12-13), r aising the p ossibility that l ike the S outh-Western b ronzes they d id n ot a ctually r each S ilchester until a fter the i nvasion. Moreover, s ystematic pre-Conquest i mportation o f E astern c oinage m ight have b een expected t o g enerate a higher p roportion o f early E 8 types than o bserved ( 12%). I n f act, t hese types a re g enerally r are where t he Tasciovanus l egend ( E7) i s f ound, a nd r elative t o l ater E 8 i ssues, t heir r epresentation a t S ilchester i s above normal, c omparable t o B raughing a nd a head o f S t.Albans. T he c orollary o f this i s t hat E 7 c oins d ominated t he c irculation p ool f or r ather l onger i n the w est o f the S tudy Area a nd a re thus e ffectively o ver-represented c ompared t o the l ater types. S everal s ites o utside E ssex ( e.g. B raughing) thus s how a characteristic " longevity" o f P hase 7 types ( Chapter 8 ), but S ilchester a t 2 5% , l ike S t.Albans, does n ot. U sing these yardsticks, S ilchester i s o ne o f the l ater Eastern a ssemblages, but the c oins a re p robably p re-Conquest a rrivals. These c oins, a nd Epaticcus' i ssues ( S91-2), a re g enerally i nterpreted a s e vidence o f S ilchester's partial incorporation i n the c irculation s phere under Eastern p olitical c ontrol ( cf. A llen, 1 944, B oon, 1 969). T he r elative s tage when this o ccurred i s e stablished by t he lack o f S outhern a nd S outh-Eastern c oins b elonging t o P hase 8 , a nd by the p roportion o f Tasciovanus' c oinage ( E717 3). When this i s s ubdivided i nto ' early', ' main' a nd ' late' i ssues ( Appendix 2 ), t he n ormal p roportions o n s ites o ccupied i n P eriod i ii a re 1 :3:1. A t S ilchester the ratio i s 0 :1:1, a lbeit i n a v ery s mall s ample ( 4 c oins), which i mplies that S ilchester d id n ot participate in t he Eastern c irculation s ystem until a late s tage, p robably well i nto P hase 8 . The a bsence o f a l ocal b ronze c oinage c ould b e a f actor in why Eastern c oins were e xported i n s ome quantity t o S ilchester a t a t ime when the s upply t o K ent was in decline. A t Canterbury, t here was a lready much l ocal bronze i n c irculation, but d espite t he S outh-Eastern episode, this was n ot s o a t S ilchester. C ollis' s uggestion that r ecognised p lated f orgeries w ere u sed a s bronzes ( 1971a , 7 9) f its particularly w ell i n t he c ontext, a s nearly 2 5% o f the Eastern c oins a t S ilchester a re p lated. A gainst these i deas, n one o f the l ater a uthorities m inting in the M iddle Thames a rea u sed b ronze, d espite their l inks to a reas w ith b ronze c oinages and i n o ne c ase t heir extensive s triking o f i t e lsewhere ( SE82). I nstead, t heir

1 47

c oinages ( SE81, S 91-3) employ o nly the p recious m etal units a nd f ractions t raditional t o the S outhern c oinage. Whatever o ccasioned these s eries, i t evidently i ncluded n o r equirement f or b ronze; i t may r easonably be i nferred that Eastern bronze was p resent in the a rea o nly in a s econdary r ole. The s ame must a pply t o the C ontinental c oins, a lthough the a rgument they p resent f or the i mportance o f Canterbury i n the later f irst c entury BC, a pplies w ith equal f orce t o S ilchester, where there i s n ow a mple evidence ( including D ressel 1 amphorae and Central Gaulish m icaceous ware i mports) f or a major s ettlement f rom P eriod i i. Three qualifications must, h owever, be made. F irst, a lthough the p roportion o f base metal C ontinental c oins a t S ilchester ( 29%), i s h igher than a t any o ther major B ritish s ite, even Hayling I sland ( 23%), and well a head o f Canterbury ( 13%) a nd B raughing ( 8%), this dominance i s a f urther c onsequence o f the r elative r arity o f S outhern c oins. The absolute f igures, p utting Canterbury ( 14 c oins) i n the l ead, S ilchester ( 12) n ext a nd B raughing ( 11) i mmediately behind w ith 1 1, a re a b etter g uide. A s econd p oint i s whether the C ontinental c oins a re i ndependent early i mports o r s econdary t o S ilchester's l ater c onnection w ith the S outh-East. The r atios o f S E7 t o C ontinental c oins, 1 :1 a t Canterbury, 1 :2 ( in r ecent excavations) a t S ilchester, i mplies o nly l imited d ependence o n the Kentish l ink. A f ew c oins may , h owever, be much later i mports, e .g. the late b ronze, S cheers ( 1977) No. 2 16, o r a n anciently p ierced potin ( SI14). The third p oint i s whether these C ontinental c oins w ere i mported v ia the Thames, o r the S outh c oast. The p roportion o f B elgic i ssues ( 92%) i s h igher than e ither B raughing ( 82%) o r Canterbury ( 79%); a llied t o the Gallo-Belgic g old in the a rea, this s trongly s uggests the f ormer a s the main r oute. A t Hayling I sland, B elgic i ssues f orm o nly 2 8% o f the c omparable C ontinental c oins, and the r elative f requency o f Gallo-Belgic g old f inds i s a lso l ower, even w ith the S eineS pithead c rossing. W ith a S outh c oast r oute, A rmorican and N orthern Gaulish c oin types, between t hem 5 2% o f the C ontinental c oins a t Hayling I sland a nd f ound throughout the S outhern c oastal a rea, m ight a lso b e expected a t S ilchester. S ince P eriod I II S outh-Eastern d eposition i s r easonably c ontinuous up t he Thames Valley, a lbeit p rimarily t o the n orth o f t he r iver ( Chapter 6 ), S ilchester's l ink w ith Kent expressed i n the S E81-82 s eries i s n ot unexpected . The " Aylesford" e lement i n the S ilchester c eramic a ssemblage, g enerally l inked with t he s ubsequent Eastern a ffiliations ( cf. B oon, 1 969), c ould a rguably be a c onsequence o f earlier, direct c onnections w ith East Kent. A r elated p oint i s whether the a bsence o f S outh-Eastern p otins a t S ilchester i s a f unction o f t he earlier excavation m ethods. The C ontinental p otin f inds i mply that cultural r ejection i s n ot the answer. I f g enuine, the explanation o f their a bsence i s p robably both g eographical and chronological, g iven the p otin f inds a t major s ettlements n orth o f the Thames ( Chapter 8 ); i .e.

1 48

S ilchester was o utside the n etworks by which p otins w ere exported f rom K ent during t he l ater f irst c entury B C. This a ccords w ith t he P eriod i ii dating o f the Aylesford e lements a t the s ettlement. I f s o, S ilchester's c ontact w ith the C ontinent was p robably i nitially direct. The c oin s ample f rom the n orth-west quadrant o f R oman Chichester, where modern e xcavation has been c oncentrated ( Appendix 5 ), s upports D own's a ssessment that the f irst s ignificant a ctivity i s a m ilitary s ite o f the m id f irst c entury AD ( 1981). N o c oins a re f rom demonstrably p reC onquest c ontexts, while t he p re-Flavian horizon i s d ominated by late P hase 8 a nd P hase 9 i ssues ( cf. F ig. 7 :2 a bove) a s would b e p redicted o f a n ew o ccupation a t t his p eriod. Military a ctivity a lso s eems a l ikely c ontext f or the f our n on-local b ronzes a t Chichester. A p riori, the f inds s upport t he a rgument t hat indigenous c oinages f rom the l ocal c irculation p ool c ontinued t o be u sed a fter t he C onquest, despite b eing s ilver. There a re, h owever, two p eculiarities i n the Chichester pattern. F irstly, the ratio o f S 7 t o early S 8 c oins, 2 :1, i s h igher than f or most s ites, i ncluding most o f t he l ate t emple f inds, a lthough c omparable t o Hayling I sland a nd l ower than S ilchester. S econdly, the r atio o f I ron A ge t o early Roman c oins, ( 3:4), a lmost matching S heepen ( 1:1), i s s urprisingly h igh g iven the r elative s carcity o f S outhern s ilver. Residual g roups o f l ate Augustan - early T iberian f inewares i mply an i mportant L PRIA c entre i n t he n eighbourhood ( Appendix 5 ) - o r l ess p robably o ne w ithout r ecognisable earthbound f eatures i n t he excavated a reas. This would a ccord with the e mphasis o n P hase 7 c oinage. One S 71 c oin f rom an early c ontext was a ccompanied by a c onsiderable quantity o f r esidual f ineware ( CH2). The s econd o bservation c ould b e e xplained i n o ther ways, e .g. ( 1) the m ilitary phase b ringing Roman c oin t o C hichester was s hort-lived , o r ( 2) that s ilver was u sed d ifferently a fter the C onquest. M ore evidence will therefore b e n eeded t o p rove a LPRIA c entre b eneath Chichester. ( c)

o ther K ey S ites

The two r emaining K ey S ites, Owslebury a nd t he Caburn, a re discussed i n Appendix 5 . Owslebury's i mportance l ies i n t he n umber o f c oins f rom a s ingle f arm, p ointing t o t he r esidents' s tatus rather than the s ize o f the s ettlement unit a s the c rucial variable i n their p resence o r a bsence o n s ites i n c entral s outhern England. However, the c omparative e xtent o f the excavations s hould n ot b e o verlooked. Throughout the M /LPRIA Owslebury a lso exhibits i mportant external c ontacts l argely r eflected by the c oin t ypes. I nitially , l inks w ere with t he a rea west o f t he S olent, a nd u ltimately ( in c ommon w ith this r egion) w ith the Normandy a rea. The S eine-Spithead axis i s e specially s triking in the a ffinities o f the warrior burial ( Collis, 1 973). One o f the earliest c oins i s a thin s ilver t ype ( ST1), a t radition with o bvious Norman a ffinities ( Allen, 1 965b; C ollis, 1 971b). The o ther i s a Gallo-Belgic s tater ( SE51). Later, a s with o ther S outh D owns and c oastal p lain s ettlements, the main i ndices o f e xternal c ontact a re

1 49

Gallo-Belgic f ineware i mports, but t he a rgument t hat this was mediated through eastern England ( Collis, 1 971b) i s n ot c ompelling. An a lternative, h inted a t i n S elkirk ( 1971), o f intervening c ontacts with the Aylesford c omplex , marked by p edestal j ars and tazzae ( Collis, 1 971b), w ould a ccord w ith the P 1.5 c oin a nd i s an a lternative s ource o f the S E51 s tater. The Caburn p rovides a marked c ontrast. There a re f ew c eramic imports and ( ignoring the Carthaginian b ronze c oin f ound j ust o utside; S pokes, 1 927) the Caburn i tself i s unique among the B ritish s ites w ith m ore t han f ive c oins i n the homogeneity o f i ts f inds, which a re a ll e arlier p otin types ( P1.2-3, P 2.1-3). Their d istribution r ules o ut a s cattered h oard ( Fig. A 5:7). Rather t oo much i s made o f the t otal n umber o f c oins ( e.g. C ollis, 1 974a); v ery f ew s ites can b oast a volume o f excavated s ubsoil f eatures c omparable t o the 1 27 large s torage p its emptied a t the Caburn. One c oin p er 1 2.7 p its i s n ot excessive c ompared t o the o ther W ealden s ites w ith p otin f inds. I t i s h igh c ompared w ith o ther extensively excavated s ites i n c entral s outhern England, a p oint d iscussed b elow . The Caburn's most s triking f eature i s the l ack o f l ater c oins. A fter the i nitial p otin i nflux ( apparently a t a n early date, a lthough the Caburn's c hronological f ramework i s t oo p oor t o b e d ecisive; Appendix 5 ), t he c oin s upply e ither c eased, d espite c ontinuing o ccupation, o r t ook a f orm unconducive t o a ccidental l oss ( assuming t he n egative evidence i s r eliable). A change i n t he i nhabitants' s tatus i s improbable, a s they c ontinued t o c ommand the r esources t o embellish the defences. A c hange i n f unction i s p ossible, e .g. a rresting o f the Caburn's r ole a s a r edistributive c entre, o r o f t he incipient m arket development s uggested by C ollis ( 1974a) o n a nalogy w ith p re-Caesarian f ortified s ites i n Gaul ( e.g. F ort Harrouard, N ormandy). But a ny r ole a s a c ollection c entre implied by the s torage p its ( assuming their u se c ontinued throughout t he LPRIA) a ppears unimpaired. I n f act, the o nly c oinage l ater t han the Caburn p otins f ound i n East S ussex i s S outhern g old, e .g. a t Bullock D own ( S173) a nd S tanmer ( S182) o r i n the A lfriston a nd B irling hoards ( H50, H 52). Apart f rom a p ossible b each f ind a t P evensey ( 1 4133) and a dubious " near A lfriston" p rovenance ( Haselgrove, 1 984a), even s tray f inds o f S outhern s ilver a re unknown, and the m ost w esterly s ite f ind i s f rom the Dyke, above B righton ( S180). T hus a lthough g old was r eaching t he a rea, East S ussex was a pparently o utside the t erritory i n which S outhern s ilver was habitually u sed. The absence o f these, o r o ther l ater s ite f inds, a t the Caburn i s t hus n o m ore than a n e xpression o f a w ider, r egional t rend . Even w ithin the main c oinage a rea, i t i s p ossible t hat g old and s ilver w ere primarily u sed i n different t ransactions a nd thus had largely mutually exclusive patterns o f c irculation . S ix o f t he 1 3 major d eposits a re in o ne metal o nly, a f urther f our h ave between 9 3% a nd 9 7% o f e ither g old o r s ilver, a nd even where p roportions a re

1 50

m ore even, a t Farley H eath, Hayling I sland and Waltham, o ver 7 0% o f the S 7-S9 c oins a re s ilver. Whatever c oin u se the Caburn p otins r epresent, i ts f ailure t o d evelop l ocally i s n ot o bviously explained by t he s ubsequent partial r eorientation o f East S ussex t o the S outhern c oinage a rea. I t i s rather - l ike the d istinctive handmade p ottery t radition - a f acet o f the whole r egion's e ssential i solation f rom d evelopments e lsewhere f rom t he LPRIA o nwards ( Green, 1 980).

I II

C oin r epresentation o n o ther

s ettlement

s ites

B esides the K ey S ites, f ew s ettlements i n t he r egion have y ields i n excess o f f ive c oins, t aken here a s t he m inimum a ssemblage f or c omparative purposes ( Fig. 7 :3). Only W inchester has s een extensive m odern e xcavations. T he c haracter o f the o thers ( e.g. B oughton Monchelsea) i s o ften a nything but c lear. S ix a re i n East Kent, two i n c entral s outhern England. The " Wealden" z one i n b etween i s unrepresented, unless O ldbury ( S121) i s c ounted o n t he s trength o f i ts two s mall g old hoards ( M56). One, unusually, c onsists o f P eriod I c oins, a dmittedly c lipped a nd worn, the o ther o f P eriod I I t ypes, but b oth c onsonant w ith the MPRIA a ssemblage a ssociated w ith t he c onstruction o f the rampart ( in which the e arlier hoard was p robably buried). Many o f the s herds a re wheel-turned, i n l ocal s andy f abrics, a nd derived f rom S -curved f oot-ring b owls ( Ward-Perkins, 1 944) s uggesting a date n o earlier than t he f irst c entury BC. There i s l ittle t o s uggest l ater o ccupation ( which i s c onsistent w ith the a bsence o f P eriod I II c oins), a lthough a s a t B igberry the i nterior has hardly b een s ampled. The r ecent t rial excavatons did, however, f ind t races o f s ettlement ( Thompson, 1 984) and f inds o f p otin a re eventually t o be expected i f this o ccupation was extensive and i s c orrectly dated . Ward-Perkins' ( 1944) s uggestion that t he s ite was r edefended i n the m id f irst c entury AD n ow s eems untenable ( Thompson, 1 984). I n East Kent, B oughton M onohelsea ( S98) a nd S pringhead, ( S134) a re l ate i n emphasis even i f p otins were m issed, while Radfield ( S132) which e nds w ith P hase 6 b ronze a nd late p otins a ppears early. T he o ther three Kentish s ites a re l ess c lear c ut. Rochester, a bout which l ittle i s published , has a c oin l ist d own t o early P hase 8 , and w as evidently a major LPRIA s ettlement ( S130). The p roportion o f C ontinental types i s s imilar t o Canterbury, but there i s more emphasis o n t he earlier p otin c lasses s uggesting t hat o ccupation there both c ommenced a nd d eclined s omewhat earlier. A t East Wear Bay ( S115), the excavated c oins s uggest a n early s ettlement d istinct f rom the l ater v illa, an i mpression r einforced by s ome o f the s tray f inds. O thers, however, a re early P hase 8 c oins. Although t hey c ould i ndicate c ontinuity, the l ack o f P hase 7 c oins, which a re a lmost equally c ommon o n s ites, i mplies a h iatus between the two o ccupations, p ossibly while the c remation c emetery was i n u se.

1 51

0

. ci n

4 7 -

1 2 ( „ 1 0

c tW C

0

i l

EI

c o

0

E xcava t ion c o ins

3

S t ray f i nds ( H )

c . )

E= N umbe r o fc o ins

4 5 r n a )

0

t o

0

i c )

F ig . 7 :3

B reakdown o f excavation and F l s ites s outh o f the Thames and Kennett.

152

s tray f inds

f rom

Rochester a nd S pringhead, w ith i ts t emple c omplex ( Harker, 1 980), w ere both i mportant R oman s ettlements. A t R ochester, this p resumably f ollows o n f rom the p re-Conquest s ituation. The p ossible a mphora burial ( Rodwell, 1 976) a t B oughton M onchelsea, c lose t o t he i mportant L PRIA d efended s ite a t L oose, s uggest h igh s tatus i nhabitants a s may the F olkestone villa. A t Radfield, the c oins s upport t he i dea that the L PRIA material a ssociated w ith the R oman enclosure was r esidual f rom a n i mportant s ite n earby. This l eaves R ichborough ( S129), w ith t he s econd l ongest Kentish c oin l ist, but the l east s ubstance o therwise. D espite s uggestions t o the c ontrary ( e.g. R odwell, 1 976), i ts s uperficially i mpressive a ssemblage l ooks s purious. The P hase 8 c oins ( including S W8 b ronzes) have a r atio o f 1 : 2 8 t o early R oman c oins, and there i s a much h igher r atio o f l ate t o early Eastern types t han a t Canterbury. B oth these c haracteristics c ould b e a by-product o f the e normous R oman c oin l osses ( cf. R eece, 1 972) a t this i mportant early m ilitary s ite a nd p ort. The p ercentage o f C ontinental i ssues f rom B elgic Gaul ( 50%) i s v ery l ow f or the l ocation, a nd their heterogeneity parallels t he Rhineland f orts ( Furger-Gunti, 1 981). The A TECTORI c oin i s l ate. H ow l ate the MPRIA enclosures b eneath t he f ort w ere u sed i s uncertain ( Cunliffe, 1 968); a f ew earlier types ( e.g. P 1.3) c ould b e a ssociated w ith t hese, but the R oman s ite i s undoubtedly the main f actor. I n c entral s outhern England, t he W inchester ( S76) f inds d ivide b etween the e arlier c oin types, mainly l ocal s ilver i ssues ( ST1, S 6-7) f rom the O ram's A rbour a rea, a nd the l ater S outh-Western c oins ( SW71-81) a lmost a ll f rom the valley b elow. These l atter, which i nclude t hree excavation f inds, c ould b elong e ither w ith p urely Roman developments, o r w ith a n earlier i ndigenous o ccupation i n the v icinity ( indicated by r esidual early f irst c entury AD material, i ncluding s lab-moulds; B iddle, 1 968). O f the earlier g roup, t he a ssociation o f t he S T1 c oin with O ram's A rbour l ooks g enuine, d espite i ts c oming f rom a l ater d eposit j ust o utside the s outhern d efences ( Appendix 5 , N o.31). Further s tray f inds o f S 6-7 types w ithin the e nceinte i mply that o ccupation t here c ontinued a t l east t o t he end o f the f irst c entury B C ( despite t he MPRIA c haracter o f the c eramic a ssemblage). Even i f t he P tolemaic b ronzes a re s et a side ( cf. C ollis, 1 975), the undoubted i mportance o f Oram's A rbour, which has D ressel 1 f inds, may be a f actor in o ther e arly n on-local i ssues f rom the n eighbourhood e .g. P 2.2 a t O liver's Battery. East Harting ( S175) i s p oorly r ecorded, a nd may encompass m ore t han o ne l ocation. The f inds s uggest a f irst c entury AD date, but unusually i nclude E 72 a nd E 75.1 c oins a nd A rmorican s ilver, t he l atter p aralleled a t a nother l ate downland s ite a t t he Dyke ( S180), part o f a thin S outh c oast s catter. T he o ther c oin-yielding s ites i n the a rea display a s lightly earlier emphasis ( Fig. 7 :4). Many a re s ingle f inds, which may therefore i mply e ither d iminishing a ccess t o c oinage f rom t he t he late f irst c entury B C, o r c hanges in the s ettlement pattern. Apart f rom Danebury a nd O ram's A rbour ( both abandoned a s major

1 53

n ucleated s ettlements) multiple c oin f inds a re i nvariably f rom s ites o ccupied i n the f irst c entury AD. A s c oin p roduction i ncreased i n P eriod I II, this s uggests u se was c oncentrated o n f ewer s ites than b efore, o f which o nly Owslebury s hows c ontinuity with the MPRIA o ccupation and o therwise changes markedly i n c haracter. I n East Kent, the m inor s ites s how t he expected i ncrease i n l ater s truck c oinage o ver early types, m irroring the l arger s ites ( Fig. 7 :4). S truck c oins a re f ound on markedly m ore s ites, twice a s many a s the e arlier p otins a nd f ive t imes the l ater. The larger s ites s uggest a definite break, p otin a nd b ronze c o-occuring o n o nly a third o f them ( excluding Canterbury and R ochester) o f which, Radfield, a nd p erhaps F olkestone a nd R ichborough, p robably belong w ith t he earlier g roup. This pattern does n ot extend west o f the M edway r egion, s truck b ronzes o ccurring o nly a t Lullingstone ( S125) a nd O tford ( 5127), b oth Roman s ites. I n o ne s ense, these t rends m erely r eflect the r estructuring o f t he L PRIA s ettlement pattern t hroughout t he s outh ( e.g. Cunliffe, 1 978a). This i s i mplicit i n the c lose a ssociation b etween P eriod I II c oinage i n c entral s outhern England a nd the R oman r oad n etwork ( Hodder and O rton, 1 976). While o ther f actors n eed exploring, e .g. r oads may f ollow p rehistoric r outes o r natural f eatures, 5 6% o f the c oin-yielding s ettlements i n t he r egion have o ccupation b efore a nd a fter the C onquest, a nd another 3 3% R oman o nly. I n East K ent, the f igures a re 4 5% a nd 4 1% dropping t o 3 0% each i n t he " Wealden" z one. The R oman s ettlement pattern i s t hus r ooted i n L PRIA d evelopments, a nd r estructuring must a lready have b een well a dvanced when the P eriod I II c oins, which f orm m ost the s ite f inds, w ere s truck, but w e s hould n ot o verlook t he p ossible c onsequences o f r eadier r ecognition o f R oman a rtefacts: ( 1) under-representation o f s ites w ith M /LPRIA a ctivity; and ( 2) exaggeration o f the degree o f c ontinuity o n i ndividual s ettlements. Another a pproach i s t he nature o f the s ites, a nd the c oinage each c ategory has y ielded. Due t o the d ifficulties o f f unctional c lassification ( Appendix 4 ), o nly qualitative t rends w ill be p ursued h ere. F ig. 7 :5 t otals t he I ron Age a nd Roman m ilitary a nd c ivilian s ites yielding c oins o f each metal, both e xcavated a nd s tray f inds. M ortuary and r eligous f inds excluded, m ost o f t he P RIA s ites w ith p recious m etal c oins a re n ucleated s ettlements o r f arms teads, whereas a h igher p roportion o f the s ites w ith base m etal f inds a re o f m ore n ebulous c haracter, e .g. e nclosure c omplexes. One s urprising r esult i s that m ore n ucleated s ettlements ( to which many h illforts can p robably be added) have y ielded g old o r s ilver than have m inor s ettlements, a f urther i ndication o f t hese m etals' a ssociation w ith the l eading s ites, a lthough this m ust be qualified by recognising that; ( 1) c oins f rom nucleated s ettlements are u sually p lated, but not f rom the m inor s ites; and ( 2) w ith a n o verall r atio o f e .g. 1 :2 t o s ilver and 1 ;10 w ith b ronze i n East K ent, g old types have a b etter chance o f o ccurring i n the larger a ssemblages r ecovered

1 54

( b ) THE WEALD

I N

( a ) EAST KENT

o e

o e

o e

2= 6 1

I I — D 0 C o

a ) _ i c o w o r -

Ma jo r s i tes

w I 1 u _ 0

( c ) CENTRAL SOUTHERN ENGLAND

M ino r s i tes

C l ) w 2 < I H

M ino r s i tes

o e

t r ) a 4 ) a C 0 ( . 0 1 . 0 V /

o e

7 :4 Mean r epresentation o f c oins o n major and m inor s ettlement s ites i n different c irculation a reas s outh o f the Thames and K ennett

Fig.

1 55

ROMAN M IL ITARY S ITES

P R IA S ITES A V ,A E/ AV

5

7

I n

A V , AE/ AV 5

n i t

F A R

AR AE/AR 5

AR , A E /AR

7

5 .

7 I m

n

a wn

A E

A E 5 1

5

m an

m n

a wn m n mn

POT IN

5I I- m in

m ar l

N uc lea ted M ino r Mo r tua ry R i tua l

,m in i f i Ma jo r

.I -

H i l l fo r t E nc losu reEnc losu re S i te '

s e t t lemen t f a rm/ s e t t lemen t

n P roduc t ion

5

POT IN F o r t ress

F o r t

S tee ly h i l f o r t s i t e base

c omp lex

E a r ly m i l i ta ry n uc lea t ion

ROMAN S ITES A V , E hm , 5

7 1 1

H. n

AR , A E/AR

5

7

n

I n S ITES SOUTH O F T HE T HAMES

na nI

E xcava ted s i tes o n ly

POT IN 5

- - E RI 3 1 I " d iE n

P ub l ic N uc lea ted V i l la t aw ) s e t t lemen t

v

,

4

P la ted c o ins A l l s i tes

mn

M ino r Ceme te ry I s o la tedRe l ig iousP roduc t ionEnc lo su reEncte rse 'S i te . s e t t lemen t t emp le c omp lex s i te c omp lex

A m

F ig. 7 :5 R epresentation o f c oins s truck i n different m etals o n d ifferent categories o f s ite.

1 56

f rom nucleated s ettlements. Among the P RIA s ites, b ronze ( as p erhaps expected) s hows a s light bias t owards nucleated s ettlements, a lthough many o f the enclosures p resumably b elong t o f urther m inor s ettlements and f armsteads. But p otin, d espite b eing l inked t o i ncipient market d evelopments ( e.g. Allen, 1 971; K ent, 1 978b), i s m ore c ommon o n the r ural s ites. This l ead i s maintained o n the Roman s ites, but i t i s those f arms c lassified a s v illas, i .e. those o f h igher s tatus, r ather t han the minor o nes, which have the m ost f inds. W ith the b ronze, h owever, what was a s light t endency f or t he P RIA s ites i s n ow a marked t rend. The majority o f the R oman s ites w ith c oins w ere nucleated s ettlements ( including the p ublic t owns) while the r ural s ettlements o n which b ronzes a re f ound a re m ostly v illas. Another R oman d evelopment i s t he a ppearance o f b ronzes o n p roduction s ites, mainly s alting a nd k iln s ites a long the n orth Kent c oast. C oins a re r are o n their c ounterparts w ith d efinite P RIA a ctivity; t hose that have b een f ound a re g old o r p otin.

I V

Discussion

C oin d eposition o n o ccupation s ites d isplays s everal r egional a nd t emporal t rends n ot r eadily a pparent i n the g ross distributions: ( 1) the p rincipal c oin t ypes f ound o n s ites in c ertain a reas, e .g. w est o f t he T est, a re g old; ( 2) early p otins, a re t he main s ite f inds i n the W ealden z one; ( 3) b ronze s ite f inds a re r estricted t o East Kent, where the l ater p otin types a re a lso c oncentrated a nd; ( 4) i n P eriod I II, t his b ronze-using ' core' a nd a s imilar s ilver-using ' core' i n c entral s outhern England were s urrounded by g old-using p eripheries w ithout l ocal c oin p roduction. The g enerally early date o f the g old f inds f rom s ites where i t p redominates, m irrors the c oin s upply t o those a reas. The Upper M edway basin has o ne o f t he main c oncentrations o f P eriod I /II f inds i n t he S tudy A rea ( cf. F ig. 6 :4). W est o f the T est, the a bsence o f l ater g old i s even more marked. T he l atter a rea, i n c ommon with v irtually the whole o f W iltshire, l acks a r ecognisable LPRIA c oinage t radition, a part f rom t he Western s ubsidiary s eries ( WS), which i s l ocalised f urther n orth b etween the K ennett and the Thames ( cf. S ellwood, 1 984b). A s i n the S outhern r egion, a f ew S W61-81 c oins a re f ound ( e.g. Danebury), but i n numbers which s uggest i solated i mports t o what l ooks l ike a " buffer z one" b etween the major s outh c oast c oinage t raditions. A s a lready p ointed o ut, l arge-scale excavations a t O ldbury c ould b e expected t o yield p otin f inds, a nd the absence o f c oins i n o ther m etals i n t he Upper Medway basin i s p ossibly more a pparent t han r eal. Apart f rom t he t otal absence o f c oin-yielding s ites i n t he Weald p roper, the main i nterest o f this a rea i s thus t he difference b etween developments i n East Kent and the a reas t o the s outh and

1 57

w est. A long w ith g old - l argely i mported - the e arlier p otins w ere evidently i n c irculation o n s ites throughout t he a rea, many o f which have y ielded MPRIA a ssemblages, s ometimes exclusively s o. The s ites vary f rom m inor hillforts, e .g. Hascombe ( S168), t o s ingle f armsteads, e .g. S utton-at-Hone ( S136). P otins were cast f rom i ndividually made m oulds ( Allen, 1 971) and c ould have been p roduced a t a purely l ocal l evel. The P 1 s eries s hows a t endency t o eastern l ocations a nd the P 2 t o the west, but their distributions a re n ot mutually exclusive ( Chapter 6 ). W ith the later p otin c lasses, the pattern c hanges. These o ccur o n o nly o ne o f 1 0 Wealden s ites a nd o n b oth s ignificantly f ewer ( 10 a s a gainst 1 6) a nd largely different s ites i n East K ent ( only 4 s ites o ut o f 2 2 have both early a nd l ate c oins). Conversely, s truck b ronze c oinage, c ommon i n East Kent f rom the l ater f irst c entury B C, a chieved o nly l imited p enetration o f the Darenth valley a nd i s o therwise absent f rom the W ealden s ites, a s i s S outhern s ilver i n East S ussex. The c hronological pattern o f r egional c ontacts i mplicit i n the p otin distributions a pplies equally t o the M /LPRIA c eramic a ssemblages. The d istribution o f the e arly p otin i s i dentical t o the ' foot-ring b owl' t ype ( Ward-Perkins, 1 944), extending t o s outh-east E ssex ( cf. D rury, 1 978), and c ompares v ery c losely t o the a rea where t raditions o f curvilinear decoration o n large everted r immed j ars w ith o mphalos o r f oot-ring bases, Cunliffe's ( 1978a) ' MuckingC rayford' and ' Late Caburn-Saltdean' s tyles, d eveloped in parallel, p robably i n the f irst c entury B C. Conversely, the LPRIA " isolation" o f East S ussex i s matched in c ontemporary c eramic distributions n orth o f t he Weald, e .g. the ' Charlton' type o f b ead-rimmed bowls a nd the f irst c entury AD ' Patch G rove' p ottery i ndustry ( Ward-Perkins, 1 944). The g rog-tempered Aylesford c omplex c eramic a ssemblage has l ittle i mpact o n W est Kent a nd i mport c opies a re virtually n on-existent ( Thompson, 1 982). The initial w idespread o ccurrence o f potin s outh o f the Thames and v irtual c onfinement o f later types t o East K ent, a re paralleled in the r eorientation o f the } f /LPRIA c eramic a ssemblages. S uch c hanges s uggest i ncreased emphasis o n the s eparate i dentities o f t he L PRIA c ommunities i nhabiting t hese d ifferent a reas. This c ould i ndicate a l essening o f i nteraction between them, but i t n eed n ot do s o ( cf. Hodder, 1 982b). I n any case, the P eriod I II g old types demonstrate that s ome external c ontacts w ere maintained. F or the W ealden s ites, h owever, these n o l onger i nvolved East Kentish p otin types, n or was their l ack a s timulus to r eplacement by l ocal casting. M oreover, t he pattern o f s tratification o f early p otins ( Fig. 5 :7) s hows a marked f all in P eriod i ii d eposits, s uggesting that t heir u se had e ffectively c eased by the early f irst c entury AD. Even i f there was i nitially l ocal p roduction i n the n orthern Weald, p otin g ives the i mpression o f an e ssentially a lien m edium, r ejected, a long w ith i mports, by the cultural milieu which evolved there a nd i n East S ussex

1 58

during the f irst c entury B C. A l ink w ith the widespread hoarding o f the earlier t ypes may b e implied. This was evidently more disruptive t han A llen ( 1971) s upposed, w ith major c onsequences f or p otin c irculation. P otin c ontinued t o b e exported f rom East K ent in the later f irst c entury BC, but now l argely t o a reas where i t was p reviously r are o r unknown: Essex, Hertfordshire and the Upper Thames Valley, exactly those a reas w ith which t he S E6-8 c oinages, t ogether with the adoption o f c remation a nd the g rogt empered p ottery t radition, i mply that Kent was c losely l inked ( cf. Chapter 8 ). I n e ssence, the later h istory o f p otin i s that o f the e laboration o f the Aylesford c omplex i tself. S outh-Eastern b ronze i s e ffectively a lso an Aylesford t rait, but - unlike the l ater p otin s eries - r elatively l ocalised, r arely t ravelling o utside i ts t erritory o f o rigin. I nitially, their f unction i s unlikely t o be c omparable, s o C ollis' ( 1974a) s uggestion, that the c hangeover t o p roducing the later p otin types c oincided w ith a f unctional c hange i n p otin's s tatus f rom a h igh t o l ow value medium, a ppears i mprobable. On the o ther hand, the o ccurrence o f p otins i n the s ame l ater s ettlement d eposits a s bronze, e .g. a t Canterbury, i mplies t hat l atterly, both w ere being u sed i n the s ame p laces. I n this s ubsequent c ontext, C ollis' m odel has g reater m erit, p otin having by then b ecome r edundant i n i ts p rimary f unction ( implied by the c essation o f p roduction), but c ontinuing t o b e u sed i n a n ew, s econdary r ole, a longside b ronze. P ossible r easons why p otin l ingered i n c irculation i nclude: ( 1) i ts t raditional types were immune t o p olitical c onditions, unlike the s truck c oin types which s ymbolised the i ssuing authority, a nd p ossibly had high p ropaganda c ontent ( e.g. A llen, 1 958; Rodwell, 1 976); a nd ( 2) much l ess c ertainly, i ts c omparatively l ow c opper c ontent r endered i t l ess worth r ecalling. G iven the i ncreasing a ssociation o f b ronze w ith the nucleated s ettlements ( for which a l eading r ole i n r edistributive o r exchange t ransactions can r easonably be i nferred) the deliberate halving and quartering o f p otins a t Canterbury s hould a lso be n oted, a lthough f ractions a lso o ccur o n s ome r elatively m inor s ites e .g. F arningham ( S110), Radfield. I n b eing r estricted t o the c ore t erritories o f ( by then) c omparatively c entralised p olities ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 984c), the S outh-Eastern s ilver and b ronze and S outhern s ilver have very much the c haracter o f Dalton's ( 1977) early c ash, c ontrasting w ith the c ontinued export o f g old t o o utlying a reas throughout P eriod I II. Cunobelinus' g old, f or example, i s more c ommon in K ent than a re his b ronzes. I t may t herefore b e s ignificant t hat the c essation o f the p otin s upply c oincides w ith both East S ussex and West K ent developing n ew a ffiliations w ith the S outhern and Eastern c oinages r espectively. The c oncentration o f g old bearing Tasciovanus l egends ( E71-5) i n W est Kent i s especially s triking. I f these g old d istributions a re indicative o f political d ependence ( Haselgrove, 1 982), i t may well be that the s ame i s t rue o f t he earlier p otin distributions, i .e. that p otin was i nitially a f orm o f p rimitive valuable ( cf. C ollis, 1 974a), a nd was accumulated

1 59

a nd t ransacted i n n on-commercial ways, s uch a s a lliance f ormation o r t ribute payments b etween d ifferent a reas l inked in s ome f orm o f w ider g rouping, and the d ischarge o f s ocial o bligations within them, ( although p robably n ever moving o utside i ts primary r egion o f c irculation o n the s ame s cale a s t he g old). I n this c ontext, Dolley's ( 1954) c omment o n the s ilvery a ppearance o f p otin - making i t p robable that i t c irculated a longside a g old r ather than a s ilver c oinage - may well b e r elevant. C essation o f the import o f p otin i nto the W ealden a rea c ould thus be a c onsequence o f the r estructuring o f interr egional r elationships in the m iddle o f the f irst c entury BC. The earlier potin has a n i dentical d istribution t o P eriod I g old ( cf. Chapter 8 ), a nd i ts a rea o f c irculation changes a long s imilar l ines in P eriods I I/III ( Chapter 6 ). The eventual r edundancy o f p otin m ay thus be c onnected t o the i nflux o f p recious metal i n t he m id f irst c entury BC. The o bvious o bjection, that p otin i s t oo c ommon o n s ites t o be a h igh value coinage, i s c ountered i f t he r ole o f p otin had s ubsequently changed, a nd t he s ite l osses mainly o ccurred thereafter, a hypothesis which t he s tratified evidence s upports ( cf. F ig. 5 :7). There a re two i mportant d ifferences b etween t he S outhEastern and S outhern a reas, o ne c hronological, the o ther depositional. I n East K ent, c hanges i n the LPRIA s ettlement pattern w ere c learly w ell advanced by t he t ime s truck s ilver a nd bronze c oinage was i ntroduced . But i n the S outhern a rea, a g reater d isparity between P hase 6 and l ater types, s uggests t hat t here, t hey were l argely d elayed until the end o f t he f irst c entury B C, with the deposition o f MPRIA a ssemblages c ontinuing l ater than many a llow ( e.g . Cunliffe, 1 978a), and o nly c easing with t his eventual r estructuring o f the s ettlement pattern. On t he s outhern edge o f t he S ussex Downs and o n t he c oastal p lain, there a re o ther i ndications o f a c hange i n s ettlement pattern a round this t ime ( Bedwin a nd Holgate, 1 985). S econdly, there a re many more extensively e xcavated s ites w ith n o c oin f inds i n c entral s outhern England, e .g. C owdery's D own ( Millett, 1 983), than anywhere e lse i n the S tudy A rea ( cf. F igs. 7 :1 a nd 8 :1). S ince c oins o ccur in s ome quaptity a t c ertain r ural s ites, e .g. Owslebury a nd East Harting, their absence o n t hese o thers i s p robably g enuine a nd i mplies that, c ompared f or example t o bronze i n East K ent, t heir c irculation was r estricted t o f ewer s ettlements, which, f rom the i mports, were t hose o f h igher s tatus. This s uggests that the S outhern s ilver, even i n f ractions, i s n ot equivalent t o b ronze i n the S outh-East ( Collis, 1 971a), and was employed i n different k inds o f t ransactions, p ossibly e lite-orientated. Even s o, s ilver o ccurs o n twice a s many s ites i n c entral s outhern England a s in East Kent and o n a lmost a s many a s i n the much l arger Eastern r egion, both a reas where i t i s particularly a ssociated w ith the nucleated s ettlements. The a pparent differences c ould c onceivably b e l argely a function o f s imilar r oles having b een p erformed by nucleated s ettlements i n the o ne case a nd b y much s maller s ites i n the o ther ( cf. C ollis, 1 971a), a s in c entral s outhern

1 60

England. With the a bandonment o f h illforts there i n the f irst c entury BC, we a re p erhaps w itnessing the t ransfer o f ' central-person' f unctions f rom the nucleated s ites where the e lite had p reviously r esided ( e.g. Cunliffe, 1 984) to their n ew, p rivate dwellings i n the c ountryside, s ettlements which - a part f rom a f ew i ndications o f h igher s tatus - a re indistinguishable f rom o ther r ural f armsteads. Even in the early Roman p eriod, the e lite a pparently r emained p rimarily r urally-based ( Millett, 1 987), a nd the e ssentially decentralised economy p robably r emained embedded i n the e xisting s ocial s tructure l onger a nd t o a g reater extent than i n Kent o r n orth o f t he Thames. I f s o, the ' new p lace' a nd ' market' e lements i n t he Romanised p lacenames Noviomagus Reginorum and y enta B elgarum ( Rivet a nd S mith, 1 979) m ay w ell r ecall how, when f ounded, the two public t owns o f t he r egion p erformed a r ole l argely o utside the existing economic and s ocial s ystem. One, a t l east, o f these ' peoples' a ppears t o b e a n a rtificial c reation, f urther s ustaining the impression g iven by their f ailure to adopt b ronze c oinage a nd t he more d ispersed s ettlement pattern, that the c ommunities o f c entral s outhern England d iffered markedly f rom those o f the S outh East.

1 61

F ig. 8 :1 Map o f s ites n orth o f the T hames a nd K ennett y ielding I ron A ge c oins.

1 62

Chapter 8

S ettlement

I

f inds n orth o f the Thames

I ntroduction

Apart f rom the s ites i n the n orth and w est ( Fig. 8 :1) which b elong w ith the s ilver p eripheral c oinages, the bronze-dominated s ettlements i n the t erritory b ounded by the Kennett, Nene a nd S tour p resent a m ore unified p icture than those s outh o f the Thames, b ronze f orming 9 0% o f the f inds f rom major s ites a nd 6 2% f rom m inor s ites. The p rincipal d ivision i s r ather b etween the r estricted a rea where C unobelinus' Camulodunum c oinage ( E82) i s c oncentrated ( Essex, a nd s outhern S uffolk) a nd the l arger, western r egion where Tasciovanus l egends p redominate ( E83). There was a lso a n extensive P hase 7 c oinage i n the l atter a rea ( 48% o f P eriod I II c oinage, a s o pposed t o 8% i n t he east). These t rends . n evertheless mask s ignificant r egional variations. I n t he east exclusive b ronze-domination i s r estricted t o a c luster o f s ites a round C olchester, b eyond which p otin i s a lso c ommon; t here a re a lso " coin-less" s ites. I n the w est, the c ore o f b ronze-dominated s ettlements i s the n orth-eastern Chilterns a nd the U pper Ouse a nd N ene basins t o the n orth-east. T here a re a lso a reas i n which s everal s ites have y ielded g old: Cambridgeshire, a nd the Upper Thames Valley, where m ore bronze-dominated a nd a lso " coin-less" s ites a re known. F inally, b lank a reas may be n oted ( cf. Chapter 6 ); L ondon; n orthern B uckinghamshire; and t he M iddle Ouse basin, a lthough N orth-West L ondon has g old f inds a nd may b e a c ontinuation o f t he g old-using " periphery" s outh o f the r iver. T he k ey s ites in the east a re C olchester, K elvedon and W ickford; i n t he w est, Baldock, B raughing, Odell a nd S t . Albans.

I I

The K ey S ites ( a)

C olchester

Excluding the m ilitary s upply base a t F ingringhoe, Gosbecks a nd L exden, the C olchester s ites c an b e d ivided into three z ones ( Fig. A 5:1): ( 1) S heepen; ( 2) t he l egionary f ortress a nd s ubsequent c olonia; a nd ( 3) t he extra-mural s ettlement a nd c emetery a reas. Neither ( 2) n or ( 3) s how d irect evidence o f p re-Roman a ctivity. Sheepen, by c ontrast, has the l ongest I ron A ge c oin l ist f rom any B ritish s ite, 2 89 c oins, 1 44 o f them s tratified . I t was c omprehensively i nvestigated i n the 1 930s, by l inear

1 63

t renching a nd s ome a rea excavation. Further l arge-scale excavations t ook p lace i n 1 970, a nd there have b een various m inor excavations. A ll these s ites a re described i n Appendix 5 . A ccording t o Hawkes and Hull ( 1947), i ntensive o ccupation s tarted a t S heepen i n the early f irst c entury AD, o n the h istorical p remise that d evelopments a t Camulodunum b egan w ith the i nception o f Cunobelinus' r eign, f or which they f ollowed A llen's ( 1944) c oin c hronology. After the C onquest, there was i ntensive i ndustrial a ctivity, e .g. p ottery f iring, a nd m etalworking ( quite p ossibly f or m ilitary equipment), until t his was a rrested by the B oudiccan r evolt. Thereafter, o ccupation r apidly diminished a nd f rom t he F lavian p eriod, the dominant f eature was the t emple c omplex a t i ts n orthern l imits ( Hull, 1 958). Extensive o ccupation deposits f rom a variety o f f eatures, m ostly a s backfill o r make-up, f urnished a massive quantity o f f inds, e .g. I talian a nd S outh Gaulish s amian, Gallo-Belgic wares, a mphorae, b rooches. F rom their d istribution, t he e xcavators c oncluded t hat early o ccupation was l argely c onfined t o t he n orthern z one o f t he s ite ( their R egions 1 , 2 , a nd 4 , A rea D ; c f. F ig . A5:1) c losest t o the r iver, while p re-Flavian a ctivity was e specially p rominent i n t he s outhern a rea ( Regions 3 , 4L a nd 5 ) t raversed by a w inding Roman r oad. When t he c oins a re s et o ut by R egion, s everal d ifferences a re a pparent ( Fig. 8 :2a). C oins a re v irtually absent f rom R egions 2 ( which i s l argely o utside the S heepen Dyke) and 6 . I n R egions 1 a nd 4 , t he s tratified c oins a re mainly earlier E 8 types, whereas i n 3 a nd 5 ( and i n t he 1 970 excavation) l ater i ssues p redominate. The earlier dating o f a ctivity in R egions 1 a nd 4 i s t hus a pparently r eflected by the c oins d eposited. But o nly i n R egion 3 does the chronological e mphasis o f the unstratified s ample m irror the s tratified c oins, and i n R egions 1 a nd 4 , i t i s a lmost the exact i nverse. Occupation i n b oth c ontinued a fter the C onquest. The o bvious i nference i s that deposits which f ormed a t t his p eriod were m ore badly a ffected by s ubsequent d isturbances t han those which underlay t hem, f or example, t hose a ssociated w ith the building o f the t emple c omplex in R egion 1 ( which has t he l argest n umber o f unstratified f inds), a lthough s ome c oins c ould b e i ntrusive with make-up i ntroduced f rom e lsewhere. There i s n o evidence that a ny o f t he c oins f ound i n t he t emple a rea were o fferings; m ost o f t hose s tratified a re f rom make-up. ( CO2). F or c omparison, Roman c oin l osses a re s et o ut i n 8 :2b. Occasional p re-Conquest p enetration o f R oman c oins into E astern England i s i mplicit i n their i mitation ( cf. S cheers, 1 982), but m ost c annot have r eached S heepen before AD 4 3. T hey s hould therefore b e a r easonable i ndex o f the r elative i ntensity o f post-Conquest deposition i n the d ifferent r egions. The f it w ith t he I ron A ge pattern i s e ncouraging. I n Region 3 , with m ost l ater E 8 c oins, t he s tratified t otals a re dominated by the R oman i ssues current a t t he t ime o f t he C onquest and a mong t he unstratified c oins, the p roportion o f l ater i ssues r ises s ignificantly.

F ig .

1 64

(0 CD:

m a.

�

0

7'" :::J

en-

0

.,

�

CD

:::r

�

Q)

'
=226

0

OF THE

M ino r s i tes 2= 66

5 0

( b ) EAST HERTS/M IDDLE OUSE BAS IN Ma jo r s i tes 2 =142

M ino r s i tes

( C ) CAMBS /N W E SSEX

2= 4 2

0/ 50 '0

( d) CH ILTERNS/UPPER THAMES V ALLEY Ma jo r s i tes

0 4 )

4 3

M ino r s i tes

= 46

( e )

NENE V ALLEY 2= 2 7

5 0

5 6 C

P P 7 8E8L 1 -34 -5

5 _5

6 C

P P 7 8E8L 1 -34 -5

F ig .

5 _5

6 C

P P 7 8E8L 1 -34-5

8 :6 Mean r epresentation o f c oins o n major a nd minor s ettlement s ites in different c irculation a reas n orth o f the Thames and K ennett.

1 83

7 b ronze

( SE74,

E 71.1,

e tc.)

in the c entral a rea.

The lack o f late c oinage a t Braughing, Great Chesterford and Cambridge thus extends t o o ther l ocal s ites, c onfirming the decline in the s upply o f c oinage t o the r egion a s a whole, a gainst which background the p roportions a t Baldock and Sandy ( and a lso Harlow), a re even more anomalous. Further west, S t. Albans and N orthchurch a re both in l ine with neighbouring m inor s ites, but Duston ( and p robably Dorchester) a re both chronologically ahead o f their a reas, s uggesting that t hey may have had a r ole in the s ubsequent diffusion o f b ronzes t o n eighbouring rural s ettlements. 40% o f the P hase 7 c oins a t Duston a re the r elatively rare i ssues with ANDOCO l egends ( E75.1), which in g old have a diffuse distribution f rom the Upper Thames Valley to the F en margin; his c oins i n o ther metals a re c oncentrated in the B raughing a rea. Among the a ttested P RIA o ccupation s ites with g old f inds, the n umbers o f h illforts, m inor r ural s ites a nd nucleated s ettlements a re approximately even, a lthough c oins f rom the latter category a re u sually p lated ( Fig. 8 :7). But b ronze, a lthough f ound o n many r ural s ettlements, i s o verwhelmingly c oncentrated a t the major s ites, where i ts ratio t o g old i s 6 5:1, a s a gainst 1 0:1 f or the m inor s ites ( the o verall ratio o n b oth c lasses o f s ites i n East Kent, i ndicating the r elatively s maller quantity o f bronze l osses o n the major s ites there). The r ural s ettlements w ith b ronze a re a gain p resumably mostly the more i mportant s ites s uch a s Odell; a majority o f the R oman rural s ites o n which b ronze o ccurs had v illa s tatus. B oth s ilver, a s p redicted f rom the density a nalysis, a nd p otin ( in marked c ontrast t o the s outh) a re f ound o n more nucleated P RIA s ettlements t han rural s ites. I n a Roman military c ontext, c oins a re r elatively c ommon in the extra-mural s ettlements o utside f orts a nd a lso o ccur a t industrial s ites p robably p roducing f or t he a rmy. The most dramatic f eature o f the R oman p eriod i s the apparent a ssociation o f s ilver- a nd b ronze-use w ith the rapid f urther nucleation o f s ettlement t hen taking p lace. A lthough r ooted i n the LPRIA s ettlement pattern, this was more immediately a c onsequence o f m ilitary d ispositions, the n ew r oad n etwork, a nd a marked i ncrease i n l ocal p roduction ( e.g. o f i ron a nd p ottery i n Northamptonshire). S everal p ossible f actors s uggest t hemselves: ( 1) the movement o f p eople a cquiring o r p ossessing c oinage i nto these c entres; ( 2) the t ransfer o f t ransactions i nvolving c oinage f rom a p reviously m ore rural s etting; a nd ( 3) changes i n c oin-use r esulting f rom t he Conquest. I t i s impossible to choose b etween these a lternatives o n the evidence available, except that the s cale o f LPRIA l oss on many nucleated s ettlements implies t hat ( 3) n eed n ot b e a f actor, except that n ew i ndividuals a nd g roups may have been involved . The question n eeds careful examination with r eference t o early R oman c oin l osses. I t i s, however, a t imely r eminder o f how r egularities we p erceive t oday may have b een modified by the C onquest,

1 84

P R IA S ITES A V ,

ROMAN M IL ITARY S ITES

E /AV

A V ,A E /AV

5

H

5 1 7,

P A M

P APA AR , AE/AR

AR , AE/AR

i n

n

I n

5 ,

1 , 2 1F

m in

I n n

A E AE

1 0

5

5

1

. n

I n . n

POT IN

5

N uc lea ted M ino r 'Mo r tua ry ' s e t t lemen ts e t t lemen t s i te

POT IN

5

I n

n R i tua l s i te

' Ma jo r h i l l to r t

.H i l l fo r t E nc losu re E nc losu re c omp lex

' S i te

F o r tress

F o r t

S upp ly b ase

E ar ly P roduc t ion m i l i ta ry s i te n uc lea t ion

ROMAN S ITES A V .AE/AV

7 5

7

I [ 1 . 9

9I

n

AR . AE/AR

1 0

5

i n

1 7 A

z

i

A E 2 5

2 0

1 5

1 0

S ITES NORTH O F T HE T HAMES

5

i n 1

mn

POT IN

I I

1 0

E xcava ted s i tes o n ly

P la ted c o ins

5

P u b l i c N u c l e a t e d t own

S e t t lemen t

V i l la

i H

M ino r ' Ceme te ry ' s i te/ f a rm

A l l s i tes

mn I so la ted T emp le ' P roduc t ionEnc losu riEnc losu r4 t emp le c omp lex s i te c omp lex

' S i te '

F ig. 8 :7 Representation o f c oins s truck i n d ifferent m etals on different categories o f s ite.

1 85

whether c oinage moved s hort d istances with i ts users t o n ew ( or n ewly important) l ocal s ites - a s s eems g enerally t o b e the case, - o r the disruption went deeper g eographically, and a ffecting the s ectors o f the p opulation using c oinage. I n turn, this r eaffirms the n eed f or careful s tratigraphic analysis o f changing patterns o f c oin l oss o n the d ifferent k inds o f s ites where i t o ccurs.

I V

nia _ c olaai =

The s ettlement evidence a ccords with that s outh o f t he Thames i n s uggesting large a reas where g old r emained t he o nly ( North-West L ondon) o r p rincipal coin m etal ( Cambridgeshire and n orthern E ssex) i n c irculation . I n most o ther a reas ( the s outh-west Chilterns and the Upper Thames basin; N orthamptonshire) the i ntroduction o f b ronze i n any quantity i s s econdary t o developments in the c ore t erritories o f the Eastern ( Hertfordshire/Bedfordshire) a nd S outh-Eastern ( Essex) traditions, despite a r elative abundance o f earlier g old types o riginating f rom t he s ame c ore t erritories. The export o f g old l argely, o r entirely, o n i ts o wn i s paralleled i n W est Kent ( E7-8). I n two cases out o f the three ( the exception i s t he B raughing a rea), the c ells w ith maximum F l bronze f ind densities c oincide with the g old - a round Colchester a nd in the s outh-west Chilterns. This latter i s o f particular i nterest, a long with North-West London, the only putative g old-using periphery with a s ignificant proportion o f P eriod I f inds; in most, P eriod I II f inds predominate i n c ontrast t o s outh o f the Thames. S econdly, i t i s t he o nly r egion with a s ignificant c oncentration o f I nsular P eriod I I f inds, including S 5 types, and i s a l ikely t erritory o f o rigin f or the E 5 g old s eries h eading s ubsequent Eastern developments ( cf. A llen, 1 960). The o rigin o f the Eastern c oinage and i ts r elationship t o the S outh-Eastern i s p otentially m ore c omplex than has b een a llowed. I f the typological a ffinities a re taken a t f ace value, these observations s uggest that the earlier, western s tream o f the i nscribed c oinage ( E7) evolved o ut o f two distinct s eries with discrete t erritorial o rigins: t he g old-using s outh-west Chilterns a nd a s eparate bronze-using c ore t o the north-east which had S outh-Eastern a ffiliations. The exact process cannot be s pecified , but i ts c omplexity i s implicit i n the p lethora o f P hase 7 l egends ( cf. Allen , 1 967a). These developments t ook p lace while Tasciovanus was a l eading minting authority i n the a rea, a nd may a mount to h is obtaining a position o f paramountcy over the o thers. This model o f two i nitially d istinct t erritorial domains i n the Chilterns makes s ense o f s everal o bservations o therwise difficult to explain, e . g. the l ater emphasis o f the bronze c oinage c irculating o n the w estern s ites, a nd the late s tart o f S t. Albans i tself. C lose t o the boundary between these domains ( a p ossible f actor i n

1 86

the c onstruction o f the l inear earthworks), S t. Albans may well o we i ts s ubsequent p rominence t o being c entrally p laced f or the unified t erritory that emerged. The c oncentration o f f inds c lose t o Aylesbury ( if n ot s purious) i mplies a nother major LPRIA s ettlement there, a s yet unlocated , which m ight, in turn, explain the anomalous Roman c oin l ist f rom Northchurch, p lacing i t n earer the l arge t owns than the c ountry s ites ( Reece, 1 982). The o riginal t erritorial division ( perhaps even t emporarily r estored a t the end o f P hase 7 ), a nd a lapse in t ime b etween the two c omponent domains c oming under Cunobelinus' c ontrol, c ould a lso explain why r elatively more E 83.1 types a re f ound i n the B raughing r egion and E 83.2 c oins f urther w est. Developments in E ssex a re l ess c omplex. The i nference f rom the g old distribution that Colchester l ies o utside the p rimary c irculation a rea o f S outh-Eastern c oinage a ccords with t he r elatively late date o f major developments a t S heepen. The dominance o f b ronze o n E ssex s ettlements i s e ffectively r estricted t o C olchester and i ts s atellites ( cf. Collis, 1 985), a s i f a n earlier boundary b etween i t a nd the a rea where S outh-Eastern c oinage had c irculated c ontinued t o f orm the l imit o f the main bronze-using c ore, w ith Eastern b ronzes o nly p enetrating S outh-East E ssex through the l eading s ettlements ( e.g. Wickford, B raintree). This r ecalls the western margins, but c ontrasts w ith the more c ontinuous s ite d istribution i n the Chilterns a nd Upper Ouse basin. This d istinction i s r einforced by the pattern o f extensively excavated " coinless" s ites, most o f which a re i n S outh-East E ssex a nd the Upper Thames Valley ( cf. F ig. 8 :1). Little n eeds a dding about f irst c entury BC d evelopments. Most s ites with p otins n orth o f the Thames ( 63%) have excusively P 1.4-5 p otins, o r in a ssociation w ith P 1.3 types ( 13%). Their export there thus belongs t o the l ate s tages o f the s eries. But there i s a thin s catter o f the earlier c oins ( as m ost a re excavation f inds, their distribution may well f ill o ut with f urther work) in t he a reas where the P eriod I g old i s a lso c oncentrated: i n t he s outh-west Chilterns ( e.g. Wendover P 2.3) and o n the E ssex c oast ( Gestingthorpe P 2.1; C laydon; Witham). G iven t he l atter a rea's MPRIA c eramic c ontacts w ith Kent ( cf. Drury, 1 978), these p otins a re p otentially earlier exports f rom s outh o f the Thames s imilar t o those f ound in East S ussex. But the main p eriod o f e xport c learly f ollows o n the p otin hoard horizon, a f acet o f the emergence o f t he b roader S outh-Eastern c oinage a rea s panning the Thames e stuary. This c ontrasts w ith the w estern a rea, where p otin i s l argely c onfined t o the major s ites. This i nter-regional m ovement o f p otins r eflects the extensive c ontacts the major s ettlements n orth o f the Thames maintained with K ent a nd the C ontinent during the earlier phase o f the LPRIA. This n etwork o f s ites i ncluded B raughing, Baldock, Great Chesterford, Kelvedon, S andy a nd W ickford, but s ignificantly a pparently n either C olchester n or S t. Albans. This axis l inking Hertfordshire/North-West E ssex, the E ssex c oastal a rea and East Kent, i s expressed

1 87

in o ther a spects o f S outh-Eastern c oin c irculation, a nd in the material culture a nd mortuary r ituals o f the Aylesford c omplex, with their s trong Continental a ffinities. Whatever f actors l ie behind this pattern o f interaction, i t was in existence by the mid f irst c entury BC, and thereafter n ot o nly g reatly intensified, but was a lso g radually Romanised. The B elgic Gaulish bronzes a nd p otins c oncentrated a t these major s ettlements ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 984c, F ig . 2 ) a re p otentially the p roduct o f direct c ontact with the Continent. The p roportion o f n on-local i ssues ( 26.5%) a t the T itelberg, a nd the c ontacts these r epresent ( Reding, 1 972), s how that there t oo a t this p eriod bronzes w ere moving l ong distances between i mportant s ettlements ( unless their presence can be a scribed purely t o the Roman a rmy). This w idespread usage, i n turn, may be a f actor in why the n orth-east Chilterns f ollowed Kent i n a dopting b ronze c oinage. I n their a ssociation with the c ore t erritories o f the most c entralised p olities, s ilver a nd bronze a gain d isplay the c haracter o f " early c ash". Gold had a m ore w idespread r ole, being both u sed i n these a reas and exported t o the p eripheries. The P eriod I II f ind densities i mply that the most g old deposition f ell o utside the earliest bronze-using c ore i n the Chilterns. Eventually, however, b ronze c oinage p enetrated most o f the ' peripheries', a lthough the date, and l ikely volumes exported, varies. The s implest model f or this p rocess i s a n analogy w ith the l ong-distance i nteraction which b rought bronze c oinage into the c ore t erritories and made i t a cceptable there in the f irst p lace. On the w estern extremes, Roman m ilitary dispositions and the p roductive enterprises these s timulated, ( e.g. i n Northamptonshire) i s a p ossible a lternative, g iven t he l ate date o f the b ronzes a nd the m ixed c haracter o f the A lchester and Duston f inds. But the most p robable c ontext f or the a dvent o f b ronze i n these p eripheral a reas i s a s part o f the b roader p rocesses o f cultural change they experienced i n the early f irst c entury AD , r esulting i n the a doption o f c remation ( Whimster, 1 981) and a material culture w ith ' Aylesford' t raits ( Cunliffe, 1 978a; Thompson, 1 982) among o ther developments. The c ommon background implies a l ink, j ust a s earlier, the c lose a ssociation in s pace a nd t ime between the i nitial e laboration o f the Aylesford c omplex and the f ormation o f the S outh-Eastern a nd Eastern c oinage a reas s uggests underlying p rocesses in c ommon.

1 88

Chapter

9

I ntegration and s ynthesis:

I

The adoption o f

the a rchaeological c ontext

c oinage i n B ritain

S ystematic importation o f P eriod I gold i nto s outheastern England c ommenced i n the MPRIA, probably peaking i n the later s econd c entury BC. Caesar's text a lone s uggests s ix p ossible mechanisms, a ll except the p lundering o f B elgic Gaul with the s upport o f modern i nterpreters ( Table 9 .1). Archaeology, however, d oes not g ive decisive s upport t o any o ne hypothesis, nor i ndeed s hould i t b e expected t o do s o. The c omplementary d istributions o f the p rincipal types ( S12, S E11-21, e tc.) do not r equire d ifferent m echanisms - i ndeed a s ingle distribution may b e the p roduct o f s everal - a lthough they do imply different patterns o f c ontacts. S till f urther explanations may b e p roffered, f or example, g ifts o r payments, t o n ew a llies o r c lients. Although this question w ill c ontinue to be debated, i t i s p referable t o accept a r ange o f p ossibilities, a nd t o c oncentrate o n developing n ew l ines o f enquiry in a reas o f g reater c ertainty. F irst, a lthough the earliest B elgic g old t ypes based on Tarentine p rototypes ( Scheers, 1 977, Nos.2-3) o ccur o ccasionally i n Britain, import i n any quantity d id n ot s tart before the S E11-21 s eries w ere w ell e stablished i n B elgic Gaul, a lthough the S 12 types may b e earlier a rrivals. S econdly, t hese imports did n ot g enerate I nsular g old p roduction, a t l east on any s cale ( unless, o f c ourse, d ies w ere imported. This c ould b e t ested by examining whether dies used o n B ritish c oins die l inked t o C ontinental examples a re c onsistently m ore worn). A lso the eventual withdrawal o f S E11-22 types f rom c irculation o n the C ontinent ( presumably f or r ecoining) did n ot extend t o B ritain, c onfirming that t he S outh-East was n ot h ome t erritory f or i ts authors i n t he same way. Thirdly, the influx o f g old had a lready declined before P eriod I p roduction t erminates in Gaul. I ts c ontext i n B ritain i s thus d iscrete f rom s ubsequent d evelopments, a s A llen ( 1960) maintained. The nature o f g old f inds usually precludes d irect a rchaeological a ssociations. The distribution o f P eriod I c oinage i n B ritain, i s, h owever, very s imilar t o t hat o f the s ites with earlier p otins, especially s outh o f the Thames, which i tself d isplays an even more marked discontinuity w ith later developments, a parallelism which s trengthens the hypothesis o f c oassociation. Futher s upport f or this derives f rom the existence o f d istinct western ( S12, P 2) and eastern ( SE11, e tc., P l) s treams o f g old a nd p otin a lthough these a re not entirely mutually

1 89

1 976

c o • •

a )

H • • • H

W

1 . 4 14

A a ) 4 : 1 Stray prestige

o f warfare.

0

D ata

orting Archaeolo

Rodwell,

s o •

g l

4 -2 ‚ C I

; 1 O t o

w

4 -)

O C A 9 1 0 c d 0

c d H

c d

f a i` 0 . 0

Mc d C D

Authority

H c d

• 4 1 ( 1 ) ` 0 0 P O ( 1 ) P 4P I

C r )

H C V

.

• > H

> H

. 0 . 0 • ( r j

1 0

P O

4 ) r . n

e v

. > H •

C D1 0 : 1

0

, — t

. H H •

• H

( t )

5

C D 0 eH 0 H

( 1 )

Q ) 4 -) ( i

r i ) c d C . D

( . 7 1g t r e l 4 )

c H o • • C D F 1

c l ( f )

C H r n

( N )

1 90

Obtained by

units

Carried by

0 0 g 4

E I

Cross-Channel

• . I

s ocio-political

0

I nstitutionalised

c ir-

A c d 4 -2

exclusive. The s ame patterns o f r egional c ontact, p etrologically s upported, a re manifest in the late MPRIA c eramic a ssemblages o f E ssex, Kent and East S ussex. A c ommunity o f interest embracing the Thames a nd r epresenting the cultural c ontext f or the earliest c oinage in B ritain may therefore be p osited. S ite f inds ( e.g. a t the Caburn, O ldbury, e tc.) b ear o ut the b roader r egional a ssociation. These early p otins were c learly the f irst indigenous c oinage p roduced o n any s cale. Why they w ere introduced, i s obscure. There i s, a t f irst s ight, n o c onnection with the import o f Gallo-Belgic g old, the p otins being derived i nstead f rom c entral Gaul; t echnically they c ould even p redate the g old. I n p ractice, a functional and c onceptual l ink s eems a ssured. L ike g old, the p otins were evidently u sed in l ong-distance t ransactions, a nd thus p otentially i n d ealings between e lites. They were largely p roduced i n K ent, where early C ontinental p otins a re c oncentrated, a nd thus c losest t o t heir s ource a nd that o f the g old a s well. Early g old a nd potin i n B elgic Gaul a re l argely mutually exclusive ( cf. A llen and Nash, 1 980), whereas the s ource a reas o f the B ritish p rototypes were a lready l argely b imetallic ( in t he s ense that c oins i n both metals were p roduced), a p oint which may b e r elevant t o the B ritish p otins. Apart f rom the P 1.1 s eries ( 3.6 - 3 .4 gm), r estricted t o East Kent, these a re l ighter than their C ontinental c ounterparts. But the t op weights o f the P 2.1 ( 2.0 gm) and P 1.2 c oins ( 1.7 g m) l ook a s i f they c ould b e r elated t o the quarter-staters c irculating i n their a reas ( S12, S E12-22), a lthough their i ndividuality a nd c ondition p reclude c ertainty. S imilarly, the s teps through which their weights s ubsequently d eclined ( P1.3, 1 .7-1.4 g m; P 1. 4-5, 1 .2-1.0 gm) a re very c lose t o s uccessive later quarter-stater s eries ( SE42-62). S ome C ontinental p otins may a lso have a n i ntended r elationship t o g old, but their weights a re g enerally c loser t o half-staters o r l ater, p erhaps t o the whole unit ( cf. S cheers, 1 977). An a rgument can thus be made o ut f or I nsular p otin p roduction being a c onsequence o f the i ntroduction o f g old, cast f irst a s a n a lternative to the g old, a lthough s ubsequently p erhaps because o f o ther uses i t a cquired. These n eed n ot have differed g reatly, a s the g reater f requency o f p otin s ite f inds p robably r elates largely t o the latter s tages o f i ts use a nd obsolescence ( Chapter 7 ). By v irtue o f f orm a nd manufacture, p otin may s tand a part f rom s truck c oinage, but f unctionally i ts o rigins i n B ritain a re thus p otentially r elated t o the g old . F inally, the s ilvery a ppearance o f the early p otins implies that they c irculated a longside g old rather than s ilver c oins a nd a rgues f or a p restige r ole. There i s a p ossible a nalogy w ith s ilver u se i n c entral s outhern England a t a l ater date. The main p eak o f c oin i mport during P eriod I I was undoubtedly a c onsequence o f the Gallic War, with s everal m echanisms p robably i nvolved ( Haselgrove, 1 984b). I t was a pparently quite d istinct f rom the s maller g old influx

1 91

which initiated this p eriod ( Chapter 5 ) and ruptured the pre-existing pattern o f g old a nd p otin c irculation . A s i n P eriod I , the imported types a pparently had s eparate territories o f o rigin, in the S omme basin ( SE41.1) a nd i n the Pas-de-Calais ( SE42.1). Their B ritish distributions a re markedly c oastal, f rom West S ussex to the Thames estuary. The o nly c oncentration i s in the Medway basin, which anyway has the h ighest density o f P eriod I -II f inds. A t this p oint, p robably in the s econd quarter o f the f irst c entury BC, I nsular p roduction o f g old began both where P eriod I c oinage had p reviously c irculated, a nd i n c entral s outhern England, a lthough i n outlying a reas ( e.g. East Anglia a nd L incolnshire) m inting o nly began w ith the major g old i nflux during the Gallic War. There i s, h owever, a conspicuous division between t he East Kentish home t erritory o f a s eries o f I nsular c opies, mainly s taters ( e.g. S E41.4), a lmost i ndistinguishable f rom imports - and elsewhere, where the I nsular c opies a re c ruder ( e.g. E 41, S 41). I n Kent, p roduction i s virtually an extension o f Continental m inting. Coins c ontinued to b e imported and o ne die l ink i mplies that dies were t oo ( e.g. S E42.2-3). E lsewhere, a lthough the basic S E41.2 type i s c opied, the I nsular i ssues a re g enerally distinguished by n ew motifs beneath the horse ( e.g. SW41, E41.3). This dichotomy i s largely r espected by P hase 5 developments. The basic i mported t ypes ( SE51-2) o ccur everywhere. However, in the west o f the S tudy A rea ( from the s outh c oast t o the Chilterns) n ovel I nsular i ssues ( S5 with s trong but s eparate C ontinental a ntecedents, a nd E 5) o ccur a longside them. I n c ontrast, in the r est o f the S outh-East, these I nsular i ssues had n o major c ounterparts, and i mports o r c losely r elated Kentish c opies ( SE52. 4, S E61-2) r emained the p rincipal types in c irculation until the end o f P eriod I I. This distribution presages the c ontacts i mplicit in t he S outh-Eastern c oinage a nd the bronze-using c ore o f the Eastern r egion with which i t had s uch s trong l inks. The pattern o f P hase 5 import may thus be r egarded e ither a s a f actor in t he f ormation o f this network, o r a s evidence that i t a lready existed. T he s ame r elationships a re mirrored i n the L PRIA Aylesford c omplex , which breaks w ith MPRIA c eramic patterns in a manner a lmost exactly analogous t o the P eriod I -II c oin distributions. In P eriods I -II, t he u ltimate c ontext o f c oinage in s outh-east England i s i ndisputably C ontinental. E arly o n, the degree o f i ntegration n eed n ot b e g reat. I n P eriod I I, these c onnections intensify, with I nsular g old p roduction both an extension o f the C ontinental s ystem and a pparently a r eaction t o i t, developments culminating with massive import o f g old, and C ontinentally-based c oinages i n a reas p reviously l argely unaffected by these processes. These changes may n ow be s et i n a b roader p erspective. Whatever the mechanisms, c oinage i s material e vidence o f c ross-Channel c ontacts during both the B ritish equivalent o f the later C ontinental La T Ane I I p eriod, g enerally r egarded a s o ne o f I nsular i solation ( e .g. Bradley, 1 984; Cunliffe, 1 978a), and the earlier s tages o f

1 92

La T ene I II, which i s only s lightly better r epresented. F or the l atter p eriod, the c oin evidence has s upport f rom the c lassical t exts, which imply extensive c ross-Channel c ontacts. We know o f c ross-Channel exchange ( e.g. S trabo I V, 1 .14; 4 .1), a lbeit primarily w ith Armorica, a n etwork with material expression west o f the I sle o f W ight ( cf. Cunliffe, 1 978b; Haselgrove, 1 9840). One o f Caesar's j ustifications, h owever s purious, ( DBG I V, 2 0) f or invading B ritain was that in t he Gallic campaigns, the Gauls had r eceived r einforcements f rom the B ritons. s ome point, immigration had a pparently taken p lace 1 2), p ossibly much e arlier; what a reas w ere a ffected, i s unclear. I t o ught t o have been o n s ome s cale, a s s everal g roups w ere involved ( Hawkes, 1 968). Individuals with B ritish t ies included D iviciacus, who had w ithin l iving memory c ontrolled land o n both s ides o f the Channel ( DEG I I, 4 ), and C ommios ( DBG I V, 2 1). Caesar's a ssertion that the Gauls knew next t o n othing o f B ritain and that g enerally o nly t raders visited B ritain and they knew o nly the c oast facing Gaul ( DBG I V, 2 0) thus l ooks l ike an excuse f or the p oor r esults o f h is invasion in 5 5 BC ( Haselgrove, 1 984 0. Even s o, Caesar's i nformation was c ertainly n either a lways r eliable o r c omplete, a nd i s p robably c onfused o ver s everal p oints.

( L IEG

A t

V ,

Allowing f or d istortion and a n o bscure t imescale, the texts thus s uggest kinship t ies a nd s ocio-political l inks between B elgic Gaul and the parts o f B ritain o pposite. I f Caesar's a ccount has s ubstance, t his may well b e where the immigrants ( DBG V , 1 2) have r elevance. Common e thnicity, e specially among the e lites, would p rovide a n o bvious basis f or p olitical and s ocial t ies, w ith a lliances a nd marriages being p romoted between individuals a nd c ommunities o n both s ides o f the Channel. Existing r elations o f dependence between patrons a nd their m igrating c lients may well have been maintained, a nd n ew o nes f ormulated. S uch r elations would i nvolve exchanges o f various kinds, g ifts b etween elites, p ayment o f t ribute a nd i nducements. Moreover, their i ntensity s hould be g reatest between the a reas where the best s ea-passages a re f ound ( cf. S trabo I V, 6 , 1 1; McGrail, 1 983). This i s exactly the pattern we f ind with the s uccessive c oinages imported f rom the S omme basin and the P as-de-Calais, a nd o ne which takes o n more s ubstance in the largely post-Caesarian Aylesford c omplex. The c oinage, too, implies a s econd n etwork b etween the S eine r egion and c entral s outhern England, a nother c rossing a ttested i n antiquity ( cf. S trabo I V, 1 , 1 4), i .e. the thin s ilver s eries ( ST1-4), the c ontinuity b etween S 51 a nd the c oinage o f the n orthern P aris basin ( S50) and p erhaps t he different weight s tandards employed i n t he c omplex S outhern quarters tater t radition ( S51-65). Two r ecent f inds o f S E32 s taters in the a rea , the o nly examples f rom B ritain, a t Hurstbourne Tarrant ( Kent, 1 985) and a t Danebury ( a plated c opy), h int that there were a lso l inks with the S omme basin a t the end o f P eriod I . The picture Absence

c oinage, thus, does n ot c ontradict the t extual o f well-established c ross-Channel r elations. o f further material e vidence i s o nly a p roblem

1 93

f or those who w ill n ot admit possible disjunction between material and written evidence. We a re s till p oorly informed about the l ater MPRIA material c ulture o f the S outh-East and f urther evidence o f C ontinental a ffinities in the later s econd a nd earlier f irst c enturies B C may yet be adduced. But even i f n ot, this i s no r eason t o discount the t exts, s ince marked cultural discontinuities a t boundaries can c onceal intensive i nteraction a cross them ( Hodder, 1 982b). A s i t i s, w e have p erhaps over-readily discounted what material there i s, f or example, the dependence o f B ritish MPRIA s words a nd their s cabbards o n C ontinental La T Ane I I f orms ( cf. P iggott, 1 950; S tead, 1 984). Hawkes ( 1984) s uggests that the f inewares decorated with a rc designs a nd s tamped impressions f ound in eastern England, e .g. Cunliffe's Mucking-Crayford s tyle ( 1978a), c ould have their immediate inspiration i n the Middle I ron A ge p ottery o f the Hunsrück-Eifel. N ot o nly does this a rea o f C ontinental i nfluence c oincide w ith the c ommunity o f i nterest expressed by the P eriod I g old imports and p otin p roduction, but there a re a lso i tems which may be a ctual i mports: the s ix La T Ane I I s words w ith i ron s cabbards f ound in the Thames a nd t he L ea ( Hawkes, 1 984), the bronze s poons f rom Deal, o r the L etchworth cauldron ( Hawkes, 1 968). And a lthough w eaponry is the o nly category with a l arge m easure o f d irect C ontinental La T ène I I influence, i t may b e r elevant that the f ormation o f the whole l ater I ron A ge S outhern B ritish decorated b ronze m etalworking c omplex belongs t o this p eriod ( Spratling, 1 972). O ther changes i n the s ame g eneral p eriod t hat g old c oinage was f irst i mported c ould thus a lso r elate t o a n etwork o f r elations a nd international t ransactions b etween warrior elites s imilar t o those the t exts s uggest a t a s lightly later p eriod. The same c ould b e t rue o f o ther p restige metalwork. The t ubular g old t orc f rom S nettisham ( Clarke, 1 954) i s c losely paralleled i n B elgic Gaul, a nd c ould a s easily b e a n earlier p restige i mport, a s a byp roduct o f the Gallic war ( cf. Haselgrove. 1 984b). S imilarly, the La T ne I II tripod bucket f orm i n burials l ike Aylesford a nd Baldock, i f not the a ctual v essels, i s C ontinental a nd t he Aylesford example was p robably o ld when p laced in the g rave ( Stead, 1 984). Just a s P eriod I I w itnessed a rupture w ith p re-existing c oinage, earlier La T ne I II developments have a n impact o n n ew a spects o f t he a rtefact a ssemblage. Occasional t rue Nauheim f ibulae, their northern F rench w ire b ow c ounterparts, a nd the earlier b ossed-bow ( La TAne I I derivative) types ( both the l atter o ccurring i n ' Aylesford' c ontexts) c ould b e p re-Caesarian i mports, a lthough this i s c ontentious ( cf. S tead, 1 976; 1 984). On the evidence o f s ites s uch a s B igberry, O ldbury a nd Wheathampstead, a p reCaesarian date f or the introduction o f wheel-thrown p otting t echniques and g rog-tempering ( as o pposed t o the w idespread p ractice o f c remation burial) i s more p robable t han many discussions a llow ( e.g. B irchall, 1 965; S tead, 1 976). Grogt empering, e specially, extends a long broadly the s ame a xes a s the emergent S outh-Eastern and Eastern c oinage a reas.

1 94

I n c oinage a nd o ther s pheres a like, the Continental basis o f P eriod I I developments a ppears both more extensive, a nd l ess r estrictive, than f or P eriod I . Equally, a lthough the Gallic war was a major f actor i n their i ntensification, the f oundation o f these developments was p robably a r estructuring o f r elations which had a lready taken p lace, a s ocio-political p rocess t o which the i nception o f P eriod I I c oinage, the building o f late Wealden h illforts ( e.g. O ldbury) and r efugee hoards ( e.g. a t Cam nB rea, S nettisham) may a ll r elate. Gold and p otin, then, because they s urvive through deliberate deposition o r a ccidental l oss, a re j ust the most c onspicuous manifestations o f the g radual r eintegration o f I nsular a nd C ontinental material culture. That this, in turn, entailed c ontacts which w ere u ltimately s till f urther f lung has been a rgued e lsewhere ( Haselgrove, 1 984c; 1 987). The earliest i mportation o f wine t o the S outhEast c ould a lso date t o this p eriod; Dressel 1 A a mphorae r eached the s outhern f ringes o f B elgic Gaul w ell before the m id-first c entury BC ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 985). Earlier c ontacts between B elgic Gaul a nd f urther s outh a re evident i n the V ictory o n the S E11 s eries, derived f rom s ilver Emporion imitations o f the late third c entury BC, a nd in t he earlier Tarentine p rototypes ( cf. S cheers, 1 977). The g old and p otin c oinages i n the Thames e stuary a rea f it well with Caesar's c omment about nummo i n the maritime r egion ( DBG V , 1 2), a lthough he p erhaps uses a ere ( rather than nummo a ere) advisedly o f the potins, w hich were c rude i n c omparison even t o c ontemporary C ontinental p otins. But i n r eferring t o taleis f ereis, Caesar p robably c onflates i nformation f rom e lsewhere, e .g. c entral s outhern England where s word-shaped i ron bars, p roduced t o p re-determined w eight s tandards ( cf. Cunliffe, 1 984), were o ften h oarded ( cf. Allen, 1 967b). C onversely, Caesar's t estimony does n ot p rove the a bsence o f s ilver c oinage until a fter this date, s ince developments e lsewhere ( such a s the thins ilver s eries) may have passed unnoticed. The o nly c oncentration o f " currency bar" deposits in the S tudy Area i s f ocused, interestingly, o n the part o f Hampshire that r emained o utside the s ilver-using c ore o f the S outhern c oinage a rea. A lthough p resumed t o p redate g old c oinage there, t his n eed n ot f ollow f rom their MPRIA a ssociations and there a re distributional l inks w ith S W41 and i ts l ater derivatives ( SW51-71).

I I

P ost-Caesarian Developments

The a rchaeological c ontext o f post-Caesarian c oinage i s much b etter understood t han earlier developments ( Haselgrove, 1 984 0. The l eading theme i s the g radual Romanisation o f the indigenous c ommunities, f irstly through indirect ( non-intensive) c ontact o nly, and l atterly through direct r elations w ith the Roman world. During P eriod i i, a rchaeological d evelopments i n the S outh-East were e ssentially an extension o f the c losely r elated l ate La T ne I II c omplex o f B elgic Gaul ( already s ubject t o R oman

1 95

domination), w ith o nly s mall quantities o f R oman i mports r eaching B ritain ( mostly Dressel 1 B a mphorae). I n P eriod however, the quantity o f R omanised c ommodities increased markedly and their penetration was a lso much g reater, both g eographically and down the s ocial hierarchy. By the C onquest, s outhern England was materially a lready highly Romanised ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 984c). Following their s urrender ( deditio) in 5 4 BC, Caesar i mposed a n a nnual t ribute o n the p eoples o f s outh-east England ( DBG V , 2 2) and concluded a lliances w ith l eading individuals. Whether c ontemporaries r ecognised Caesar's s ettlement a s the de facto c onquest o f B ritain ( cf. S tevens, 1 951), a s f or instance with Gaul, i s debatable ( Todd, 1 981). D iodorus S iculus ( III, 3 8.2; V ,21.4) apparently d id. But the C ivil War, i n any c ase, p revented de i ure i ncorporation o f the s urrendered a reas i nto t he Empire. Apart f rom the s upression o f m inor r evolts b etween 46-29 BC, B elgic Gaul was a lso l eft l argely a lone until t he Augustan r eorganisation o f the Gallic p rovinces in 2 7 BC ( Dio L III, 2 2, 5 ). By then, probably much earlier, t he tribute i mposed o n B ritain by Caesar had l apsed ( cf. S trabo, I V, 5 .3), but c ircumstances f orced Augustus t o abandon h is p lans t o campaign there f irst i n 3 4 B C ( Dio, XLIX, 3 8, 2 ), a nd then when, c ontrary t o expectations ( Dio, L III, 2 2, 5 ), i ts p eoples r efused t o make t erms i n 2 7 BC ( ibid., 2 5, 2 ). However, w ith c hanging c ircumstances in B ritain a nd t he g rowing s tability o f the p rincipate, o btaining R oman support b ecame a n ew f actor i n i ndigenous p ower s truggles, and Augustus was s ubsequently a ble t o e stablished t reaties with s everal r ulers ( Strabo, IV , 5 .3; c f. I I, 5 .8). The u se o f REX o n P eriod I II c oins implies that s ome r ulers w ere r ecognised a s r eges s ocii ( cf. S tevens, 1 951). S trabo furnishes a p robable t erminus a nte que r n o f 7 B C f or t hese developments ( Haselgrove, 1 984c), a lthough a date up t o Augustus' d eath i s possible. But b y then, two a llied rulers had f led t o s eek Augustus' p rotection ( Res Gestae, 3 2), and m ore f ollowed b efore AD 43 ( e.g. D io, LX, 1 9, 1 ). Fresh treaties must have been c oncluded s ince what mattered t o Roman p olicy was the c ontinuity o f f riendly r elations with the l eading p eoples s uch a s enabled the r eturn o f Germanicus' s hips i n AD 1 6 ( Tacitus, A nn . 2 , 2 4). These c hanges a re particularly c lear i n the wealthc onsuming burial r ite o f the Welwyn g raves ( cf. S tead, 1 967). These have their c losest parallels in t he territories o f the p ro-Roman R emi a nd t he T reveri o n t he s outhern f ringes o f B elgic Gaul ( Haselgrove, 1 987). I t i s f requently s uggested t hat Caesar's t reaties w ith various British c ommunities were i nstrumental i n the i mport o f t he I talian wine a mphorae and p restigious g ifts, ( e.g. s ilver cups, bronze and g lass vessels, and the f irst C entral Gaulish f inewares) f ound in the Welwyn burials ( Stead, 1 967). A f urther p ossibility i s that Caesar made t he c ommunities who had submitted t o him i nto c lients o f p roRoman g roups in B elgic Gaul, s uch a s the Remi. T his c ertainly happened in Gaul ( e.g. D EG VI, 4 ; V III, 6 ). Patron-client r elations between w idely s epargted g roups a re

1 96

a ttested b oth there ( DBG I I, 1 4) a nd quite possibly i n earlier c ross-Channel r elations ( DBG I I, 4 ). They would help explain the c lose C ontinental a ffinities o f the Aylesford c omplex during P eriod i i. Later, however, in keeping w ith the c hanging p olitical s ituation , the Welwyn burials became i ncreasingly Romanised ( cf. S tead, 1 967). A t L exden, which s hould date t o the p enultimate decade BC, the s ymbolism employed i s s ufficiently Roman i n emphasis, e specially t he Augustus medallion, t o s uggest a lliance with the Emperor himself. The possible f olding s tool i s p lausibly i nterpreted a s a l ink w ith the s ella curulis, the c eremonial s eat o f R omans in a uthority ( Foster, 1 986), a f urther i ndication o f the exceptional s tatus a nd a ffinities o f the o ccupant(s) o f the tumulus w ith t he R oman world. The t ransition i nterpreted a rchaeologically a s o ne f rom indirect t o d irect c ontact with R ome thus c orresponds historically w ith i mperial r ecognition o f various I nsular c ommunities during P eriod i i. Until then, the S outh-East c ontinued t o depend o n the o ld-established l inks with B elgic Gaul, o bviously modified by the war and r efugee movements a cross t he Channel ( cf. DBG I I, 1 4). Thereafter, c ontacts w ere dominated by R ome's o wn external r elations, diplomatic a nd economic. T reaties w ere e stablished a nd r enewed, a nd Roman c ommercial exploitation i ntensified g reatly, a s s hown by the i nflux o f i mports - Arretine, I talian a nd S panish a mphora-born c ommodities, a nd especially N orth F rench Gallo-Belgic tablewares - a nd by the Romanising t endencies in i ndigenous p roduction ( e.g. Thompson, 1 982). A rguably, S trabo's a ccount o f c rossChannel exchange ( IV, 5 , 2 -3) i s a nachronistic, r ecalling a p eriod when t he exports f rom Gaul w ere o nly ( to h im) " petty t rifles". T he i mports a nd C olchester's advantageous l ocation w ere i mportant f actors i n Cunobelinus' a ttainment o f a paramountcy s urpassing a ll p revious developments ( Haselgrove, 1 982); Cunobelinus h imself a lmost c ertainly had a t reaty w ith R ome ( Haselgrove, 1 984c). The p roliferation o f P hase 5 c oinage in B ritain undeniably r eflects the massive i nflux o f g old during the Gallic war, e .g. a s m ercenary payments ( Kent, 1 978a) and with r efugees. Caesar's i nvasions s hould a lso be a f actor. The weight s tandards a nd f ineness b rought about by the war p ersisted v irtually unaltered up t o AD 43. I n Belgic Gaul, the d rain o f p recious m etal a way f rom the r egions f rom where g old had p reviously t ravelled t o B ritain p recipitated extensive b ronze c oinages o n a M editerranean model ( Haselgrove, 1 984b). These d evelopments i n B elgic Gaul w ere o f both s ymbolic and p ractical importance: i n p rojecting the c ontinuing authority ( and n otional a utonomy) o f the i ssuers a nd p roviding a c ontinuing m eans t o make payments within the c ivitas ( Haselgrove, 1 987). Most i mportant, the p rincipal o f t oken c oinage - increasingly R oman in character, and o ften a t p eak weights which s uggest a f ull ( e.g. S cheers, 1 977, Nos.30a , 1 64) o r v ery s lightly r educed quadrans s tandard ( ibid ., Nos.80, 1 46) - was e stablished, when there was s till n o o fficial Roman b ronze c oinage. The earliest Insular s truck b ronzes ( SE63, S E71-74) derived their

19 7

g eneral t ypology and weight s tandards f rom this r educed s eries and an even l ighter unit ( e.g. S cheers, 1 977, N os. 3 0a/5, 1 51). These s tandards were r etained even when the types became f ully R oman ( e.g. E 71.3; S E82; E 82-3). As with the ' Aylesford c omplex', the a doption o f s truck b ronze and, to a l esser extent, s ilver i n B ritain i s ' Romanisation' a t a r emove - by virtue o f B elgic Gaul having moved i nto the o rbit o f the Empire - but n ot, a s yet, face t o f ace. The r ange o f types s truck i n the a ftermath o f the Gallic war was r elatively heterogeneous, c oin deposition was l imited, a nd l arge a reas p roduced l ittle c oinage. Despite the i nflux i n P hase 5 , the g old s upply was p ossibly a l imiting f actor i n P hase 6 , a s s hown by the c opper-rich a lloys and the s triking o f g old types i n s ilver ( e.g. E61.3, E 63). A s i n Gaul, this may have been an impetus t o s triking i n o ther m etals. One f actor may be the t ribute ( vectigalia) which Caesar l evied o n c ommunities which had s urrendered t o h im ( DBG V , 2 2; C icero Ad A tticum 4 . This must have b een paid f or a f ew years a t l east ( Hawkes, 1 977), a nd may have b een a r apid d rain o n the c oinage in c irculation. The

basic d ichotomy b etween the b imetallic S outhern a nd the eventually t rimetallic c oinages o f the S outh-East was a lready a f eature o f the p eriod. T his echoes the n ew pattern o f c ross-Channel c ontact e stablished in P hase 4 , p robably r einforced by Caesar's i ntervention, through which s truck bronze a nd various R omanised t raits were t ransmitted during P hase 6 . I n the S outhern r egion, these same i nnovations were, i n the main, e ither r ejected o r t ook much l onger t o p enetrate. F rom the p otential c onnections i n t he COMMIOS o f t he f irst i nscribed c oins ( S63.2), t he double l ink w ith t he A trebates, and the f light o f Caesar's C ommios t o Britain ( Frontinus, S trategemata I I, 1 3, 1 1), the r egion i s o ne w e might expect t o r emain initially hostile t o R oman i nfluence, a lthough quite possibly maintaining i ts r elations w ith k indred c ommunities in Northern F rance.

c oinage

The pattern o f l ater f irst c entury BC c oin and a mphora imports has b een e xamined e lsewhere ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 984c, F igs. 2 -3). C ontinental c oins g enerally f ollow the c ontacts expressed by the l ater potin types ( P1.3-5; Chapters 7 -8), and r ecent f inds have not s ignificantly a ltered the distribution o f D ressel 1 B amphorae ( Peacock, 1 971), o ther than g iving K ent m ore s ubstance ( Haselgrove, 1 982). An exception i s S ilchester, where B ritish p otin i s a bsent, which suggests that i t was a l ate participant i n the Romanising S outh-Eastern n etwork. C ontact with the Continent, a s i ndicated by the a rrival o f c oins, Dressel 1 amphorae a nd C entral Gaulish m icaceous wares a ll before the c lose o f P eriod i i ( Fulford, 1 986), was p robably d irect ( Chapter . 7 ) S ilchngter i tself i s the o nly s ite i n the Middle Thames a rea w ith Dressel 1 B amphorae. D espite the b ias i mparted by the absence o f a S outhern bronze c oinage causing that r egion t o be under-represented, the s ame c ontacts a re evident in the d istribution o f

1 98

B ritish c oins in n orthern Gaul ( Fig. 9 :1). These f all i nto three g roups. F irstly, there i s the S outhern a nd W estern g old, mostly S 51, which may in any case b e C ontinental. Later f inds include a c oin o f C ommios ( S63.2) f rom C oulommiers. These a nd the g roup of ST, S W5-7 a nd W6 s ilver types i n the Channel I slands and Normandy a ccord with c ontacts between n orthern France and the s outh c oast during the f irst c entury BC using the more westerly c rossings ( cf. Cunliffe, 1 978b). A lthough l ittle r eliance c an be p laced o n an o lder discovery a t P ernois ( Bertrand, 1 912), r ecent f inds o f W estern c oins a t both Hayling I sland a nd Bois L ' AbbA c ould r eflect the l inks which earlier l ed t o the adoption o f the t riple-tailed horse type ( S50-51) a s the prototype f or the Western g old s eries. The third g roup, v irtually a ll S outh-Eastern and Easter types, i s c oncentrated in the S omme basin and o n the s outhern f ringes o f Belgic Gaul, exactly the a reas f rom which m ost o f the l ate Continental c oins f ound in Britain derive. S everal f inds a re f rom r eligious s ites ( e.g. Bois L ' Abbe, Chilly), p resumably non-local i ssues o ffered f or s imilar r easons to those a t Hayling I sland . British c oins w ere e vidently exported i n s maller quantities than C ontinental i ssues were i mported, s ometimes p erhaps a lso a t a l ater date ( e.g. an EA72 f rom Ludwigshaven). But their date and derivation s uggest the s ame network o f c ontacts. 7 7% o f the third g roup p redate P hase 8 . Of the earlier c oins f ive, ( 83%) a re o f S outhEastern extraction ( P1.3-5, S E6) and one a n E 6 type; a ll c ould date to the phase o f " indirect contact". With the P hase 7 -8 c oins, emphasis s witches t o the Eastern s eries, w ith e ight E 7-8 types ( 73%) a nd only two S E7. B ronze c oinage i n the S outh-East commenced a t a t ime when the r egion was e ffectively an extension o f B elgic Gaul, o wing t o a c ombination o f existing r elations, n ew t reaties o r patron-client r elations imposed by Caesar, and the p ro-Roman a ttitudes o f s ome c ommunities ( DBG V , 2 0-22). The c onditions p revailing i n B elgic Gaul a nd the r easons f or s triking bronze c oinage there and ( less c ertainly) the uses i t a cquired i n c irculation, s hould t hus b e f actors in the parallel developments i n the r estricted a reas o f the S outh-East which had the c losest Continental c ontacts. The basic pattern o f P eriod I II c oinage e stablished, s ubsequent developments r eflect the f riendly r elations c oncluded by Augustus. This t ransformation i s a pparent in the Romanising t endencies o f P eriod I II types. P articularly s triking i s the abandonment o f their p resumed anti-Roman s tance by the i ssuers o f the S outhern c oinage, i nferred f rom the Roman models u sed f or S 7-8 types ( Allen, 1 944). The t echnical s kill a nd c lassical s tyle o f s ome i ssues e .g. S 72.1, S 82.1, E 82.2 ( Allen, 1 975; Allen a nd Haselgrove, 1 979) a re the w ork o f an engraver who was, a t l east, Roman t rained. Augustus and h is s uccessors may even have presented Roman-engraved dies to various B ritish r ulers ( Nash, 1 982). They a lso probably r eceived s ubsidies i n various f orms ( cf. B raund, 1 984) and i mperial g ifts, whether p restige g oods, bullion o r c oinage, may have b een a f actor in the r esurgence o f p recious metal m inting during

1 99

F ig .

9 :1

F indspots o f B ritish c oins o n t he C ontinent.

2 00

P eriod I II. These i nferred r eges s ocii a lso b egan t o emulate the c oinage o f t heir Roman p atron - the emperor in the s ymbolic use o f i nscriptions l egitimating their r ule ( e.g. F IL a nd REX l egends) a nd o f types a s p ropaganda r einforcing i t. P ossible examples o f the l atter a re the V ictory types employed by E ppillus i n Kent ( SE82), the o pposition i nherent i n t he v ine l eaf ( S82.1) and ear o f barley ( E82) s tater s eries ( cf. A llen, 1 944), a nd R oman models g enerally. A llen ( e.g. 1 970a; 1 975) s uggests that the later g old s tater weight ( 5.4 g m; two-thirds o f the aureus) was f ixed by c onvention a t a ratio o f 1 :60 t o the Roman p ound ( 324 gm). T his, h owever, s eems unlikely. The degree o f variation i s g reater t han A llen a llows ( cf. F ig . A6:1). More p robably, this s tandard ( and that o f the b ronze) derives f rom B elgic Gaul, a rguably i mposed there i n c onnection w ith t ribute payments ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 984b). S imilarly, the u sual P eriod I II s ilver s tandard ( 1.2-1.3 gm; a bout o ne-third o f t he d enarius a nd two-thirds o f the Gaulsh ' quinarius') c ould r elate t o the Roman, b ut t his s eems even l ess l ikely. There i s much r egional variation and I nsular s ilver c oinage s hows l ess c ontinuity w ith C ontinental i ssues i n i ts t ypology a nd f ractions; the s tandard i s more p robably I nsular. I f i t was o riginally intended a s half the n otional b ronze unit ( c 2 .7 gm) a nd o ne-quarter o f t he g old - a s s eems p ossible - this s trongly s uggests the r elationship b etween a ll t hree m etals was the important f actor a nd n ot the Roman c urrency s ystem a t a ll. The s tater s tandards t o which the Gallic war g ave b irth a re n ot c onfined t o t he g old, a s t he weight p eak ( 5.4-5.9 g m) o f t he b ronze i nscribed ATISIOS R EMOS ( Scheers, 1 977, No.148) s hows. A m ore p recise date than 2 7-7 B C ( see a bove) f or t he B ritish r ulers' a lliances w ith Augustus may b e s uggested f rom the w idespread use o f the extensive c oinage s truck a t Lugudunum c 1 5-10 B C ( cf. Mattingly, 1 923, e .g. the butting bull type) a s p rototypes ( cf. F ig . 5 :5). R elatively f ew dateable c oins w ere employed s ubsequent t o this ( ibid). Augustus, h imself, was i n Gaul f rom 1 6-13 BC, a fter the German d isaster o f 1 6 B C, s upervising the m ilitary p reparations f or the i nvasion o f Germany, a l ikely c ontext f or n egotiations w ith the B ritish c ommunities. I n 1 2 B C, Drusus i naugurated the a ltar o f Rome a nd Augustus a t Lugudunum, which he d edicated i n p erson i n 1 0 B C ( e.g. Grant, 1 954). S ome B ritish rulers p ossibly even s ent r epresentatives t o these e vents, f or Augustus t reated h is c lients a s m embers o f the empire ( e.g. W ells, 1 984; o f. S uetonius, Augustus, 4 8). This date f its w ell w ith the a bsence o f S ervice l a Arretine f rom B ritain. This has a r elatively w idespread distribution a nd o ccurs i n B elgic Gaul, e .g . a t Amiens ( Massy, 1 980). The a pparent rarity o f a ll the earlier f inewares o n n on-military s ites there may well be a p roduct o f uneven r esearch ( Haselgrove, 1 985a). The earliest Arretine i mports i n B ritain b elong t o the Oberaden horizon, e .g. a t Gatesbury ( Partridge, 1 981), a nd the parallels a re

2 01

s trongest w ith Haltern a nd a fter ( Hawkes and Hull, 1 947). The n orth F rench Gallo-Belgic wares c onform t o t he s ame pattern. This p laces the upsurge in t rade t o B ritain l ate in the f irst c entury BC, exactly a s the h istorical a nd c oin evidence s uggest. The o ther key f actor in t hese developments was undoubtedly the c ommercialisation, a round the same t ime, o f B elgic Gaul i n the wake o f the a rmy. F rom later Augustan t imes until a fter the C onquest, the n orth F rench k ilns, i n particular, s upplied the bulk o f the imported tablewares o n B ritish s ites ( e.g. S tead a nd R igby, 1 986). A lthough unlikely t o p redate the f inal quarter o f the c entury, w e s hould n ot o verlook the a rrival o f the C entral Gaulish m icaceous wares, a t a t ime when w ine a mphorae a re s till the o nly r ecognisable i mports i n s ettlement deposits, an indication that c hanges were a lready underway before the p eriod o f m ost i ntense d iplomatic a ctivity. S trabo's a ccount ( Geography I V , 5 .3) i mplies that the " normalisation" o f r elations l eading t o f ormal t reaties was o f s ome duration. S ome r egions w ill have b een a ffected earlier a nd m ore deeply t han o thers - T incommios' a ccession may be a f actor i n the a ltered o utlook o f t he S outhern a rea - while s ome d irect r elations c ould p redate t he i ntensive d iplomatic a ctivity a ssociated w ith Augustus' o wn s tay i n Gaul. But w ithout the t reaties which r esulted f rom the latter, i t i s d ifficult t o envisage R omanisation o n the s cale which u ltimately o ccurred. The c hronology a nd i ntensity o f R omanising t endencies in P eriod I II c oinages undoubtedly c orrelates w ith the o ther material b enefits o f c lient-relationships r eflected in the pattern a nd v olume o f Roman i mports. S ilchester and B raughing, w ith the l argest c ollections o f early i mports, a re c entral t o the d omains where t he two earliest Romanised c oinages ( i.e. S 71.2; E 71.2-E72) o ccur, a lthough the Romanisation o f the l atter s eries i s a ltogether more r estrained . The two l ater s ites, S t.Albans a nd Colchester, a re f ocal t o the m ore h eavily R omanised E 71.3 a nd E73 s eries, a nd the twin s treams o f C unobelinus' c oinage. The Roman w orkmanship o f t he l atter's l atest g old ( E82.2), and late u se o f R EX ( E83.2), p erhaps i mplies that h e c oncluded a n ew t reaty w ith R ome r elatively l ate i n h is r eign, p resumably w ith T iberius o r e ven Caius. C oinciding w ith the e clipse o f S ilchester, there a re s igns o f a n ew c entre in the Chichester a rea. The Roman w orkmanship a nd c opying o f Caius' c oinage i n V erica's S 82 s eries c ould s uggest a f resh t reaty w ith the n ew e mperor, a s was n ecessary under Roman p ractice. An i mportant L PRIA d evelopment was t he s hift i n the c entre o f g ravity o f C ontinental c ontact a way f rom the Thames e stuary, f irst t o H ertfordshire a nd u ltimately t o the C olchester a rea, a s demonstrated by the n umber o f s ites w ith P eriod i i i i mports i n t he different d omains ( Haselgrove, 1 982, F igs. 1 0.4-5; the r elative f requencies a re n ot s ignificantly a ffected by r ecent f inds). The cultural a nd g eographical i solation o f East K ent ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 984c), the g reater e conomic p otential o f the r egion n orth o f the T hames ( not l east i ts f ertile l oams;

2 02

W oolridge a nd Linton, 1 933), and a ccess t o r esources f rom e lsewhere i n B ritain a re a ll p robably factors. The c oinage i mplies that s ocio-political p rocesses a re a lso r elevant. D espite Dubnovellaunus being a n eventual s upplicant t o Augustus and the t echnical s kill o f his coins ( SE71.1), Roman influence i s n egligible ( Allen, 1 944). The s ame i s t rue o f Addedomaros' c oinage ( SE73) l ocalised a t the n orthern f ringes o f the S outh-Eastern r egion. Only l ate i n t he s equence, with E ppillus' i ssues ( SE82.1), do S outhEastern types become p redominantly Roman, and this may be s olely o n a ccount o f h is S outhern l inks; the l egend R EX i s r estricted to his Calleva c oins ( SE81). The l evel o f Romanisation i n the Eastern a nd S outhern c oinages thus a ccords w ell w ith the s ite evidence, c oinciding with the f loruit o f B raughing and S ilchester r espectively. But i n E ssex there i s n o s uch c oinage o r s ite until Cunobelinus a nd Camulodunum. The L exden tumulus i s o f interest here. Whether o r n ot he was Addedomaros ( Peacock, 1 971), i ts o ccupant ( if a ruler) died l ate enough to b e probably i n t reaty w ith Augustus ( and the g rave c ontained an i mpressive a rray o f i mports) but t oo early - i f an a uthority f or c oinage - t o have i ssued an extensive Romanised c oinage, i f t he S 7 and E 7 s eries a re a ny g uide. Between Addedomaros a nd Cunobelinus, the o nly extensive E ssex c oinage was t hat o f Dubnovellaunus ( SE72.1), which epigraphy makes s econdary t o h is K entish i ssues ( SE71.1; c f. A llen, 1 944). A ssuming o ne i ndividual, n ot two ( Rodwell, 1 976), this s hould make East Kent h is base. H is i ssues there c oincide with the f loruit o f Canterbury, but i ts p ublished i mports ( apart f rom amphorae) s tart r elatively late ( only p rovincial Arretine, l ate Augustan a t b est, i s r ecorded), p otentially c oinciding w ith the Romanisation o f the K entish c oinage under Eppillus ( SE82.1). This p icture may, h owever be modified by the c onsiderable quantity o f p re-Claudian Gallo-Belgic and o ther imported wares f rom the r ecent excavations ( see A rthur, 1 986). The g ap in the s equence o f i mports in E ssex between L exden and S heepen and the eclipse o f Kent by H ertfordshire t hus a pparently both c orrelate w ith the c irculation o f the n on-Romanising c oinage o f Dubnovellaunus in the r egion. Later, however, Hertfordshire was in turn e clipsed by C olchester and the r elative obscurity o f B raughing l ater i n Cunobelinus' r eign may b e a f unction o f i ts r educed p olitical s tatus, r endering i t l argely i rrelevant t o Cunobelinus' c ontrol o f the r egion i n a way that S t. Albans, a nd the l eading s ites o f o ther p reviously independent domains ( i.e. Canterbury a nd S ilchester) were n ot. But the i mportant f eature o f P eriod I II c oinages i s t he i mplicit l ink between their R omanisation a nd the s trength o f R oman i nterest i n their i ssuing a uthorities. I f S trabo's a ccount ( Geography I V, 5 .3) i s a ny guide, this was v ested i n the s tronger p olities a nd was a c ontributory factor i n their f urther expansion, l eading eventually t o Eastern paramountcy , the eclipse o f the o ther r egions, and the p retext f or C laudius' i nvasion.

2 03

I II

Coinage

in the R oman

S outh-East

Roman monetary i mpact o n p ost-Conquest B ritain ( Kent, 1 973; Reece, 1 979; 1 981) and, earlier, o n Gaul ( Nash, 1 978c; C rawford, 1 985) has b een extensively discussed. Nash concurs that the i ndigenous Gaulish bronzes, whether o r n ot r educed i n s tandard, p layed the r ole o f the i mperial quadrans ( or s ometimes, the s emis e .g. de la T our, 1 892, 7 156 e tc., S IMISSOS P VBLICOS L EXOVIO). Although s tressing the political and s ocial o bsolescence o f indigenous p recious metal c oinages more than Haselgrove ( 1984b), s he l ikewise v iews the exactions o f the Caesarian c onquest a s a major factor in the c essation o f g old and ( more g radually) s ilver p roduction in B elgic Gaul. Base metal c oinages, however, were r equired f or l ocal a dminstrative purposes, whether c ivilian payments within the community o r payment o f auxiliary troops s erving with the Roman a rmy. The a rmy was p resumably the p rincipal a gency by which R oman c oinage was g radually f ed into i ndigenous c irculation i n Gaul. I n Gaul, the C onquest, i f a nything, s timulated i ndigenous m inting, whereas with the i nvasion o f s outh-east England i t r apidly t erminated ( Reece, 1 981). A s i n Gaul, h owever, s ite f inds i mply c ontinuing use o f indigenous c oinage i n most a reas, p ossibly f or l onger a nd in l arger q uantities than s ometimes a llowed ( e.g. Reece, 1 979). B ut b efore this i s discussed, the r eason why, unlike Gaul, n o s ignificant i ndigenous minting c ontinued, m erits c onsideration. The c ontrast i s l ess r eal t han a pparent. Outside K ent a nd the Eastern r egion , P eriod I II B ritish c oinages w ere o f p recious metal o nly, however d ebased, and mainly s truck f or military , p olitical a nd s ocial purposes. The s ame f actors a s in Gaul p resumably r endered t heir m inting largely i rrelevant o r i mpracticable i n a p ost-Conquest c ontext ( Haselgrove, 1 984c) and p roduction rapidly c eased. C ontinued c irculation i s a nother matter. A t l east t wenty hoards and t emple deposits c ontain both I ron A ge and Roman c oins. These m ixed f inds c luster i n the known c lient k ingdoms i n c entral s outhern England a nd East Anglia a nd have a c omplementary d istribution t o the hoards with o nly Roman c oins ( up t o Nero), which a re c oncentrated in s outheast England ( Kent, 1 973). I n Cunobelinus' f ormer domains, E 8 g old o ccurs i n o nly two early Roman hoards, h inting a t the more r apid d isappearance o f B ritish p recious m etal i ssues i n c onquered t erritory. Apart f rom e xtortion a nd p lunder, t he n ecessity o f a cquiring Roman c oin to pay tax may have been a n i mportant f actor, a lthough this w ill have been l ess o f a drain on the indigenous bronze. Even in the n otionally a utonomous a reas, however, w e s hould not o verlook t he p ossibility that t he Roman m onetary s ystem a nd denominational s tructure t ook hold s oon a fter t he C onquest, despite the c ontinued u se o f l ocal s ilver. C rawford ( 1985) makes a s imilar p oint a bout t he a reas o f Gaul w ith c ontinued c irculation o f native l ow value currency and f ew s igns o f the early p enetration o f Roman c oinage. I n t he c ircumstances in which they were deposited, the m ixed

2 04

hoards a nd temple f inds in B ritain c ould r epresent the a mount o f R oman c oinage c irculation in the c lient kingdoms.

easily underby then in

The absence o f post-Conquest b ronze c oinages i n the s ilver-using a reas i s to be v iewed a gainst their p revious f ailure t o a dopt b ronze and c ompares t o Gaul. There, the polities s triking extensive b ronze c oinages a fter the Conquest a re a pparently mainly those a lready p roducing base-metal i ssues before 5 0 BC - a lthough difficulties o f a ttribution and c hronology p reclude c ertainty. I n s ome a reas o f B elgic Gaul which p reviously had p recious metal c oinages o nly, there i s l ittle p ost-Conquest p roduction in any metal ( cf. S cheers, 1 977). I f the differences i n Gaul before and a fter t he Conquest a re e ssentially quantitative rather than qualitative ( i.e. a n i ntensification o f b ronze production where t here were a lready e stablished s ocial and political needs f or i t, a ugmented by c hanged c ircumstances), t he same a rgument can p erhaps, be extrapolated to n on bronze-using a reas o f B ritain. The m id f irst c entury AD - l ike the l ater f irst c entury BC - was a period o f marked s hortage o f o fficial Roman bronze c oinage ( e.g. Reece, 1 979), exacerbated by s uppression o f Caligula's a ez ( Boon, 1 974). A massive quantity o f imitation a es was, t herefore, p roduced in Claudius' r eign a nd beyond ( e.g. S utherland, 1 937), s o the same a rguments cannot be applied t o the Eastern r egion and to Roman n eeds which c ould have been m et by p ost-Conquest minting o f Insular bronze there. D ie l inks imply that large numbers o f C laudian c opies f ound i n B ritain w ere imported f rom n orthern Gaul ( Boon, 1 974). M oreover, a lthough imitations were c ertainly a lso p roduced in Britain, the l ack o f die l inks a t C olchester i mplies that this d id n ot happen in the early p eriod there ( ibid.). Thus, when a n eed f or bronze i s documented, f aced w ith the a lternatives o f i ndigenous p roduction and c opying Roman i ssues, the latter happened ( Reece, 1 979). Two l ines o f a rgument may b e p ursued. One i s t hat indigenous p roduction o f existing b ronze types ( e.g. E 82.2) continued a fter AD 43. The d epositional patterning would a llow this. A gainst this, i t s eems unlikely that the requisite d ies s urvived the C onquest, while their u se ( or the i ssue o f existing s tocks) i s, i n a ny c ase, a different matter f rom s triking entirely new types. Why, then, despite c ontinuing u se o f e xisting c oinage was there n o further i ndigenous p roduction? First, eastern England was t ransformed into a p rovince much faster than B elgic Gaul. The i ndigenous c oinage a lready i n c irculation c ould have b een s ufficient t o m eet existing B ritish n eeds, while m inting more would not satisfy R oman u sage, e . g. c ommerce w ith the a rmy, paid in Roman c oin, and payment o f s tate dues and taxes, a ccepted only i n i mperial c oin ( Reece, 1 979). Secondl y, with _f our l egions, auxiliaries, and s tate s ervants to pay ( Reece, 1 984b), Roman c oinage must have entered c irculation in Britain r elatively more intensively than i n Gaul. Thirdly, Eastern s ilver a nd bronze was derived f rom the Romanising

2 05

c oinages o f Belgic Gaul, ( although this derivation does not make their use the same, l et a lone their c onvertability into o ther c ommodities a t a s imilar r ate; Reece, 1 979). While the Roman m onetary s ystem had i tself evolved f urther in the intervening c entury with the r eforms o f Augustus ( Grant, 1 954), Roman c oin u se was a s a r esult p ossibly m ore r eadily a ssimilated than i t had been i n Gaul. There i s n o r eason t o s uppose that Rome a ctively s uppressed indigenous p roduction, even i n c onquered territory. I n the cases we know o f ( e.g. Dio L II, 3 0, 9 ), Roman i ntervention was s olely t o ensure the c ompatibility o f l ocal s ystems o f r eckoning a nd c urrency w ith her o wn . There i s no evidence that Rome had earlier s ought to control the i nternal f iscal a rrangements o f individual Gaulish o r any o ther peoples - b eing p rimarily c oncerned to pay the a rmy ( cf. Nash, 1 9780) - o r a ctually prohibited l ocal m inting. Opinion why this ended in Gaul thus varies. Reece ( 1979) s uggests that the g reat v olume o f b ronze c oinage s truck under Augustus r emoved the n eed. F or Crawford ( 1985), i t i s m ore a matter o f the R oman monetary s ystem by then having p revailed. The s ustained m ilitary activity i n the later part o f Augustus' r eign must have g reatly i ncreased the p enetration o f Roman c oinage. The disbandment o f the auxiliary c ivitas r egiments, a long w ith the withdrawal o f taxation p rivileges under T iberius, f ollowing the r evolts o f AD 2 1 ( Haselgrove, 1 987) may h ave r emoved the r emaining raison d 'Atre o f indigenous production. The imposition o f taxes i n R oman m oney, whenever this f irst a ffected the different c ivitates, i s a lso a r elevant f actor i n the o bsolescence o f l ocal c oinages. Boon ( 1974), however, would s ee the Roman authorities a t pains t o s uppress the l ast r emaining indigenous c oinages o f Gaul and S pain b efore C laudius' r eign and thus r egards Claudian c opies a s c ounterfeit. But Nash ( 1978c) r ejects any c oncerted a ct o f s uppression, a nd s ees Gaulish imitations o f Roman c oins a s c ontinuing existing traditions, currency o penly s truck f or l ocal n eeds, o nly now f ully Roman a nd c learly distinguished f rom o fficial coinage ( which a lone c ould be used i n o fficial t ransactions) by c ountermarking. As i n B ritain later, t his hypothesis can o nly be examined by a careful s tudy o f the c ontext, d ie-linking a nd d istribution o f these imitations, a lthough a p riori, the c omparable w eights o f many imitations o f Augustan Lugudunum i ssues and c ontemporary Gaulish bronzes, s upports Nash's c ase ( 1978c). In c onsidering the c ontinued c irculation o f l ocal coinages i n B ritain, i ndigenous a nd Roman n eeds and u sage a re best kept s eparate. F rom a R oman p erspective, i t i s possible that there was i nitially no s hortage because o f the volume o f i ndigenous bronze a vailable a nd that l ater, when o ne a rose, Roman c opies w ere p roduced. By weight, Eastern bronzes were r eadily a ssimilable a s quadrantes. A t Sheepen, p resumably heavily i nvolved i n a rmy c ommerce, the ratio o f early post-Conquest B ritish t o R oman c oin l osses cannot be f ar s hort o f 1 :1, a lthough by ( presumptive) value, the proportion i s w ell below o ne-quarter. Hawkes

2 06

a nd Hull's ( 1947) c laim o f o nly l imited s patial a ssociation between these l osses ( i.e. B ritish c oins were p redominantly a ssociated with i ndigenous s tructures, Roman c oins with Roman s tructures, a lthough both a re f requent i n s ome a reas e .g. a long the r oad) may be noted, but i s, in f act, mainly a ttributable t o chronological f actors ( Chapter 8 ). On the Continent, there i s, however, s ome suggestion o f s eparate ' civilian' and military s pheres o f Roman c oin use. I n the f ormer, the rarity o f quadrantes a s s ite f inds s uggests their value was t oo s mall f or g eneral use ( Reece, 1 981; 1 984a). Most C laudian imitations a re o f higher w eight than the quadrans, usually a round o r above the weight o f the s emis ( Sutherland, 1 947). But the l ow proportion o f whole Roman bronze c oins a t Haltern c ompared with cut c oins, s maller Roman demominations a nd Gaulish bronzes ( Nash, 1 978c) a pattern extending to o ther military s ites ( but uncommon away f rom them) implies d ifferent c oin n eeds in t he m ilitary s phere. S pecifically, Nash ( 1978c) s uggests a sses ( the d enomination p rimarily s upplied t o the a rmy) were inappropriate t o i ts d ealings in these r egions. The s ame, then, c ould be postulated l ater, f or B ritain. A t S heepen there a re f ew cut c oins, whereas a t C laudian Hofheim, halved p ieces, hybrids a nd earlier c opies abound ( Sutherland, 1 947). By implication then, a t C olchester the r ole o f t he l atter was largely f illed by Eastern b ronzes, and Roman m ilitary n eeds can be s een a s one f actor k eeping indigenous l ow-value c oinage i n c irculation where i t was l ocally a vailable. The o ther w ould b e B ritish usage a s l ong a s t his c ontinued discrete, o r - where this overlapped in f unction with R oman c ivilian u sage - until the l atter ( and i ts e quivalences) p revailed ( cf. Reece, 1 979). This p icture a ppears c onsonant with the p re-Flavian s ite f inds in different parts o f the S tudy A rea, a nd the rapid f all-off i n F lavian c ontexts ( Chapter 7 -8). A military c onnection i s born o ut by the m ilitary s ites with I ron Age c oins i n the S tudy A rea ( e.g. Alchester; Chichester, F ingringhoe, Richborough) a nd especially outside i t ( e.g. A shill, Hod H ill, L ongthorpe, Mancetter, S aham Toney, Waddon H ill, Wroxeter; c f. Haselgrove, 1 978; 1 984a). But a part f rom S heepen, the numbers a re s mall. Only Roman currency was t ransported to n ewly-occupied r egions i n any volume ( and n ormally o nly a t the delivery s tage), whereas the i ndigenous c oinage s tayed l argely where i t was. I n this s ense, p re-existing patterns o f c irculation were hardly a ffected by a rmy use, a part p erhaps f rom the interface a reas o n t he northern a nd western f ringes o f the S tudy Area ( which p robably had a substantial early m ilitary p resence; o f. F rere, 1 978), t o which the c oin s upply i s late. C onceivably, early f orts ( e.g. Alchester) had a r ole in diffusing i mported P hase 8 c oinage i nto their territories i n the immediate a ftermath o f the C onquest ( cf. Chapter 8 ). I n a ny case, we s hould n ot n ecessarily expect indigenous c oin l osses in the f orts, but rather wherever coins were used in t ransactions, f or instance, a t the rapidly developing p ost-Conquest s ettlement nucleations and

2 07

p roduction s ites ( Chapter 8 ). This s eparation i s c learest a t Colchester, between the f ortress a rea a nd S heepen. S t. Albans, Sandy, and s outh o f the Thames, W inchester and Hod Hill a re o ther p ossible examples. On many s ites, however, military " usage" may be expected t o m erge i nto B ritish u sage ( providing this c ontinued) a nd i s thus n ot easily s eparable. The most s triking a spect o f p ost-Conquest deposition i s, however, the s eparation between Roman c ivilian and B ritish u sage, a nd between the c onquered t erritory and the c lient k ingdom e stablished in c entral s outhern England ( e.g. Frere, 1 978). Thus, we may point t o the c ontrast between the c olonia , and the extra-mural s uburbs a t C olchester, o r b etween I nsula X IV and the r ibbon developments a t S t. Albans. L ondon had n o l ocal bronze c oinage, but the number o f p robable post-Conquest l osses w ithin the o ther two public towns n orth o f t he Thames i s s ignificantly s maller t han a t those within t he c lient k ingdom, Chichester, S ilchester, a nd possibly W inchester. Canterbury's a dvancement t o public s tatus ( and p ossibly W inchester's) dates t o a later p eriod a ltogether ( cf. Appendix 5 ). But i nterestingly, despite B ritish usage c ontinuing in the c lient kingdom , i t n ever a pparently p enetrated the c lass o f n ewly-emergent s maller n ucleated s ettlements, e .g. Neatham o r Wickham Bushes. C oin use was Roman f rom t he s tart - i n marked c ontrast t o s imilar s ites n orth o f the Thames. By i nference then , B ritish c oin usage i n the c lient kingdom c ontinued l argely a s p reviously until R omanisation r endered i t i rrelevant. E lsewhere m ilitary u sage p resumably declined r apidly w ith the s hift in a rmy o perations t o n orth a nd west ( cf. F rere, 1 978) - a lthough t his t rend was t emporarily a rrested by the events o f AD 6 0-1 - t o be f inally k illed o ff ( along w ith most C laudian c opies; B oon, 1 974) by the massive i nflux o f n ew o fficial bronze ( including f ractions o f a sses) i n t he late Neronian-Flavian p eriod. P resumably the same was t rue o f a ny i ndigenous bronze i n R oman c ivilian c irculation n orth o f the Thames. Where Britain d iffers m ost f rom Gaul i s the r ate a t which the b ronze-using t erritories were made directly s ubject t o Roman law, w ith their c hartered c entres o f " Romanisation by example" ( Haselgrove, 1 984c), and a lso thus o f Roman c oin use, r esulting i n a m ore rapid demise o f i ndigenous usage than might have o therwise b een the case.

I V Coin c irculation a rchaeology

a nd

use:

t he

c ontribution

o f

W ith t he a rchaeological c ontext o f I ron A ge c oinage e stablished i n s ome detail, a f ramework exists f or t esting models p redicting the c onsequences o f differing c oinage functions ( e.g. derived by analogy f rom s tructurally s imilar s ocieties) a s a rchaeologically r ecoverable patterning, e .g. c ontextual o r distributional ( cf. C ollis, 1 981a). Moreover, expectations can n ow o ften b e expressed quantitatively, r ather than purely qualitatively, p roviding

2 08

i L u F —

3

0

00

I

L U 2

P os t -Conques t

C I ) C 2nd AD

I C C L I

0

c i )

e l

ee l

• 1 1 1

• 1 1 1

1

I

I

•

H I

• I

• 1

•I

P os t -Conques t

I i

1

I P os t -Conques t

1

•l

C 2nd AD

c L u ( I )

L U

C 2nd AD 1

2

3

4 5 C o in P hase

6

7

8

• =5

F ig .

9 :2

C oin c irculation:

2 09

the hoard evidence.

9

r elative m easures a re employed. Where s uitable data a re a s yet unavailable, n ew s ocio-economic m odels can s till a fford useful i ndications o f l ines a long which data c ollection m ight p roceed. The three main p recepts a dvanced i n Chapter 3 have b een s ubstantiated: ( 1) the dynamism o f t he c irculation p rocess; ( 2) the expectation ( other variables b eing h eld c onstant) o f i nter- o r i ntra-site uniformity ( expressed a s r egional means), a gainst which individual c oin g roups c an b e a ssessed f or g oodness o f f it; a nd ( 3) the t ime l apse between p roduction a nd deposition. The c irculation dynamics o f I ron A ge c oin a re expressed in the a ssociations o f types i n h oards a nd o f c oins deposited i ndividually, but s tratified t ogether ( or w ith o ther dateable a rtefacts). F ig. 9 :2 s hows the f requency o f hoards c ontaining c oins o f each phase o f the three main r egional c oinages. The h ighest f requencies o ccur i n t he depositional p eriod c losest i n date t o the c oins, t he number o f l ater o ccurrences f alling o ff m ore o r l ess s harply a ccording t o the v olume a nd c ompatibility o f different t ypes. A lthough hoards a re d ifficult t o date exactly, t hey d o s en ate, a nd the f requency o f h oards w ith c oins o f a p articular phase c hanges t hrough t ime b roadly a s expected. T he p atterning o f the S outhern types b ears o ut the p robability o f a break b etween P hase 5 a nd P hase 6 p roduction. The p attern o f c oin t ypes a ssociated i n c ontemporary s ettlement d eposits ( Fig. 9 :3) y ields s imilar c onclusions. Coins o f each p hase a re m ost o ften a ssociated w ith e ach o ther ( 3 g roups) o r with c oins o f the p revious o r s ucceeding p hase ( the o ther 3 ). L ike the h oards, t he a ssociation p attern i ndicates a r apid turnover o f c oin types dominating the c irculation p ool. D espite b eing c omparatively s carce early P hase 8 types a re, f or example, more o ften f ound t ogether than w ith P hase 7 c oins, but l ess o ften w ith the c ommoner later P hase 8 c oins t han t he l atter o ccur t ogether, even a llowing f or r egional variation. P hase 7 c oins o ccur o ver t wice a s f requently with early a s t hey d o w ith l ate P hase 8 c oins. The mutually exclusive g roupings o f P eriod I I a nd P eriod I II types, r esiduality a nd r egional f actors n otwithstanding, r eflect the marked c hanges a ssociated w ith t he i nception o f I nsular bronze p roduction i n P hases 6 -7. A ssuming t hat f rom P eriod I I o nwards n either r ecoining n or the p olitical s uppression o f p revious c oinages w ere major f actors i n t he w ithdrawal o f I ron A ge c oinage f rom c irculation, t his h igh t urnover r ate must i ndicate r elatively h igh f requencies o f t ransactions u sing basemetal c oinage, whether a s s tandard, p ayment, o r m eans o f exchange. T he s ealed g roup f rom S keleton Green c onfirms how h igh l oss rates can be at a major s ettlement a nd c ould s upport the v iew t hat bronze c oinage o ccurs i n the L PRIA S outh-East p rimarily a s a s tandard , n ecessitated by t he much higher r ate and v olume o f i nter-conversion o f different c ommodities a t this p eriod ( Hodder, 1 979).

2 10

.

P hase 8 E P hase 7

x x

XX

X

' xx x

x x

XX

' xx

XXXX 3 CX

J c x

X

XX

XX

X

P hase 6 C on t inen ta l

P o t in

FX

XX

P hase 8 L

XXX X

P o t in

e x . =

x

x

XX x

XX 1 8 8 i x xx xx •

M X XXX 3 1 • 1 › CXXX XX X

C dn t in- P hase P hase e n ta l 6 7 T IME

F ig .

9 :3 C oin c irculation : a ssociations.

2 11

P hase 8 E

XX

P hase 8 L

t he e vidence o f s ite

I nteraction between c entres had p reviously c oncerned e lite exchanges o f valuables, whereas l ong-distance movement o f much larger quantities o f s taples, raw materials, and c ommodities s uch a s s laves i s implicit in S trabo's exportable s urplus ( IV, 5 .2; c f. Haselgrove, 1 982). S uch networks must l ie behind the movement o f potins and Continental bronzes between major c entres and a re a lso probably a factor underlying bronze p roduction: the n ew needs t o which s triking b ronze was the administrative r esponse ( Haselgrove, 1 979) having a c ommon s ource. A s econd f actor in i ts p roliferation may have b een n eed o f a means o f payment o f f ull-time c raftsmen and o ther s pecialists p roviding e lite s ervices i n s uch c entres, the numbers o f whom a re l ikely t o have r isen s harply a t this period ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 979; Nash, 1 975a; 1 976b). Activities i nvolving s ilver and b ronze l osses i n the S outh-East most o f a ll i nvolved the nucleated s ettlements. However, the p roportions o f c oins o f d ifferent phases o n the major s ites a re paralleled o n t he r ural s ites ( e.g. Odell) s howing that there was a r elatively unimpeded f low o f c oinage between these different types o f s ites, whatever the r easons. This a lso happened a t a n i nter-regional l evel w ith bronze c oinage being imported in bulk a nd apparently subsequently diffused f rom s econdary c entres there, whether the primary f actor was t he expansion o f the Eastern p olity o r the R oman a rmy ( the t imesoale s uggests the f ormer). Despite the l ack o f b ronze and s mall quantity o f s ite f inds, a c irculation r hythm emerges even in the S outhern r egion, i ndicating that i t d iffers l ess in the s ociopolitical t ransactions u sing c oinage, t han i n the c ultural f orms a nd s ettlement pattern through which these w ere mediated. S ilver was p robably a more i mportant c omponent o f the Eastern and S outh-Eastern c oinages than n ow a ppears, owing t o the absence ( in c ontrast to t he o ther r egions) o f post-Conquest s ilver hoarding, a pattern extending even to Roman hoards ( cf. S utherland, 1 937). The number o f different types i s p robably the b est i ndex o f t heir o riginal f requency in c irculation. Overall, the volume o f c oinage n orth o f t he Thames was c ertainly g reater t han in the S outhern r egion, w ith Cunobelinus' g old o utput a lone p robably well o ver three t imes that o f V erica ( Allen a nd Haselgrove, 1 979). Throughout the S tudy A rea, the p rimary r ole o f c oinage was p robably in the vertical r elationships between i ssuers and their s ubordinates i n i ts t erritory o f o rigin, i ts use in horizontal r elationships between i ndividuals and g roups essentially a characteristic a cquired t hrough c irculation, rather than the r eason f or i ts i ssue. Gold , which was exported in quantity b eyond t hese c ore t erritories t o distinct p eripheral a reas ( leading in s ome cases t o t heir eventual absorption) may be a partial exception. The increased s ize o f LPRIA p olities must have r endered t heir effective c ontrol more d ifficult. W e s hould p ossibly therefore view these g old-using p eripheries i n the l ight o f the Roman p ractice, i tself applied t o s outh-eastern

2 12

E ngland, o f buttressing e ssentially a utonomous c lients o n t he f rontiers t o maintain the s tability o f the c ore. Even i f n ot, their existence i s a r eminder o f h ow t he a doption o f c oinage must b e s een a s a c ontrolled a nd s ocially e mbedded p rocess, a nd a nything but the unfettered s pread o f a n economically u seful d evice t hat the f ormalist viewpoint w ould l ead u s t o e xpect. P eaks i n c oin d eposition g enerally c oincide with the p eriod o f maximum c irculation o f a type, a n unspecified p eriod a fter i ts manufacture c ommenced ( cf. Chapter 3 ). B ut despite a r elatively r apid t urnover o f c oinage, the g ap b etween manufacture a nd c ontext date i s s ystematically w idened by most c oins b eing s tratified i n s econdary c ontexts ( through which they have b een r ecycled t o a g reater o r l esser e xtent). A g ood example o f this e ffect i s p rovided by R egion 1 a t S heepen. N evertheless, i f the s ample i s l arge enough, t he o verall c oin a ssemblage a nd i ts c omposition i n s tratified d eposits i s g enerally a r easonably a ccurate g uide t o the l ikely p eriod o f c oin l oss. S ingle f inds, however, a re p rimarily o f value i n building up a p icture o f the d epositional patterning f or the c oin type a s a whole ( or o f a rtefacts s uch a s f ibulae), which w ill eventually p rovide a f ramework enabling more p recise date r anges t o b e o ffered f or i ndividual deposits.

2 13

C hapter

1 0

C onclusions and s ummary

The p rincipal o bjective o f this s tudy i s a n a rchaeological r eappraisal o f r ecorded I ron A ge coin f inds i n s outh-east England a s a basis f or m ore i ntegrated s tudies o f I ron A ge s ocieties ( Chapter 1 ). Obvious l imitations o f the i nformation we a lready p ossess i nclude: ( 1) the b iases a rising f rom uneven r ecording o r f rom the s ites excavated; ( 2) a l ack o f detail a bout a ssociations a nd s tratification; a nd ( 3) o ur i gnorance o f c irculation p rocesses a nd their c hronology. More r igorous methods a re n eeded t o c ircumvent o r e liminate b ias a s f ar a s p ossible, e .g. through quantification and the use o f r atio data, a nd by basing a nalyses p rimarily o n w ell-documented cases tudies. But i mprovement o f the database cannot b e s eparated f rom the u ses t o which i t i s t o b e put. S ince w e l ack c lear evidence f or the f unction o f I ron A ge c oinage, a f lexible a pproach must b e adopted, n ot o ne a ttempting a lways t o r elate c oin f inds t o the f ew h istorical events w e know about, and c ontextual patterning a nd m eaning s ought through i ntegrated a rchaeological s tudy. Chapter 2 deals w ith t he a rchaeological i nterpretation o f c oin f inds a nd t he i nadequacy o f f ormalist inference f aced with a s ymbolic medium in a d istant c ultural c ontext. The s ubstantivist a pproach o f P olanyi ( 1968), a lthough n ot w ithout s hortcomings ( most o bviously t he l imitations i nherent in any c ross-cultural f ormulation) i s therefore p referred. The t extual evidence f or c oinage i n f irst m illennium B C Europe i s b riefly r eviewed, t ogether w ith t he a rchaeological evidence f or c oin p roduction . Chapter 3 i s c oncerned w ith t he f ormation o f c oin s amples a nd m ethodology. An a bstract model o f c oin c irculation a nd d eposition a llows c ertain expectations t o b e derived. By d irecting a nalysis t o the p roperties o f c oin s amples most r esistant t o d istortion a nd quantifying r eliably r ecorded material, the t rends n ormal to this data may be e stablished a nd i nterpretation f ocused o n t hese patterns and g enuine c ases o f d eviation. While o ur i nterpretation o f p erceived patterning must a lways a llow f or t he i ncompleteness o f the data, this p roblem c an be r educed by a ggregating c oin f inds ( Appendix 1 ) i nto c omparable h igher-order c hronological and r egional g roupings, r ather t han f ocusing o n i ndividual types. Again, this entails a ccepting g eneralisation a s a n a im and i ts ' truth' a s p robabilistic, rather than absolute. S uch a n a rrangement i s p resented i n Chapters 4 -5 ( cf . Appendix 2 ), w ith an o verall a ppraisal o f t he database f or the S tudy A rea, i ncluding the c hronologies o f I ron A ge coinage a nd the M /LPRIA material c ulture s equence. Although most

2 15

s tratified c oins a re f rom s econdary deposits, the a rchaeological s equence n ot o nly g ives independent c onfirmation o f particular a spects o f t he chronological f ramework e .g. the r elative o rdering o f Cunobelinus' b ronzes, but a llows s eries s uch a s t he Kentish p otins t o b e r elated t o mainstream d evelopments. Using the p rimary material i n Appendices 3 -6, the d epositional patterning o f c oin f inds i s then e xamined: ( 1) i n n on-settlement c ontexts ( both the l ocations, e .g. t emples, r ivers, e tc., and t he deposits, e .g. h oards, multiple f inds; Chapter 6 ); ( 2) i n s ettlement c ontexts s outh and n orth o f the Thames ( Chapters 7 -8) and; ( 3) i n a w ider a rchaeological c ontext ( Chapter 9 ), a nd explanations o ffered f or c ertain g eneral t rends. The d ensity o f f ind l ocations varies s ignificantly b etween b oth m etals a nd r egions. Gold i s c onsistently d ifferent f rom t he o thers a nd i t i s inferred that m ost n on-site f inds, n ot j ust the o bvious h oards, r esult f rom d eliberate a cts o f deposition, f requently, i t i s s uggested, o f a s ocial o r r itual n ature. During t he LPRIA, there was, however, a s hift t o m ore f ormalised r itual f oci ( e.g. t he Harlow a nd Hayling I sland t emples), e specially in the S outhern r egion. Major s ettlement s ites a nalysed i n detail i nclude Canterbury, S ilchester, Chichester a nd i n eastern E ngland, C olchester, B raughing a nd S t.Albans. Their c oin a ssemblages, t ogether w ith o ther s ettlements, a nd the d ifferent t ypes o f s ites y ielding c oins, p rovide a basis f or various i nferences a bout the r egional a nd chronological patterning o f c oin c irculation a nd the t ransactions i n which c oinage was used, a lthough f ull a nalysis o f the i nformation c ollated h ere must b e r eserved t o a p lace a nd t ime appropriate t o i ts c omplexity. P reliminary r esults a re a s f ollows. F irstly, w ithins ite analysis o f the c oins d eposited a nd their c ontexts a nd a ssociations has enabled t he patterning o n s pecific s ites t o be l inked t o changes i n t he i ntensity o f a ctivity and t he s tatus a nd c ontacts o f the s ite e .g. a t C olchester, B raughing, Canterbury a nd S ilchester. S ite f inds, l ike h oards, i ndicate a ,r apid " turnover" o f c oin t ypes i n c irculation a nd t hus imply a h igh f requency o f t ransactions f rom which c oin l osses o ccurred. But d espite c ontinuing u se o f c oinage there was n o major d islocation o f p reexisting patterns o f c irculation i n the early Roman p eriod, o ther than l ocally a s a f unction o f c hanges i n s ettlement pattern s et i n m otion by t he C onquest. S econdly, b etween-site c omparison o f excavated c oin a ssemblages ( augmented by r eliably p rovenanced s tray f inds) a nd the a ggregation o f f inds f rom major a nd m inor s ites d emonstrate c onsistent d epositional r egularities, a llowing underlying s patial a nd t emporal t rends t o b e extrapolated f or g roups o f s ites. The e xistence o f d istinct r egional c irculation p ools can r easonably b e i nferred, while s imilar p atterning o f c oin l osses o n d ifferent s ites s uggests a r elatively h igh c irculation v elocity, a t l east f or b ronze c oinage. A llowing f or the s mall s amples, there i s a g ood f it b etween t he o bserved patterning a nd the g eneral

2 16

expectations derived f rom the abstract model o f c oin c irculation ( Chapter 3 ), s ufficient t o justify a nalysing I ron A ge s ite f inds in a c omparable manner t o e .g. Roman c oin l osses. Here, a ssessment o f whether individual s ite a ssemblages deviate s ignificantly f rom r egional and t emporal t rends has b een qualitative, but eventually s uitable quantitative m easures ( e.g. s tandard deviation) must be devised a nd a pplied. Thirdly, analysis o f the dominant c oin metals on s ettlements has e stablished d ifferent kinds o f c oin-using a reas, most obviously a number o f g old-using " peripheries" which o ften persisted up t o the C onquest. By c ontrast, s ilver i n c entral s outhern England a nd bronze throughout the r emainder o f the S tudy A rea a re g enerally r estricted to a more l imited t erritory o f o rigin. Within these l atter z ones, the pattern o f deposition differs: the S outhern s ilver shows a r elatively uniform distribution, whereas the S outh-Eastern and e specially the Eastern s ilver and bronze d isplay m ore c lustered patterns, with l osses c oncentrated o n the major nucleated s ettlements and their s atellites. A priori, these variable patterns o f use a re l ikely to r elate t o differences i n s ocio-political o rganisation; g old-only u sage i s a ssociated w ith the more decentralised c ommunities, e .g. i n East S ussex, b ronze and s ilver w ith the more o bviously c entralised p olities. But the d ifferent types o f r egional distribution that s ilver and b ronze display may be l ess a f unction o f their use i n d ifferent kinds o f t ransactions than a r eflection o f the different cultural f orms and s ettlement patterns through which these t ransactions were m ediated. There i s a definite a ssociation o f c oin deposition w ith the l eading s ettlements and p robable r esidences o f the e lite throughout the S tudy Area. I n c rossing i nto the p eripheries, g old s hows the c haracteristics o f a " primitive valuable", whereas b ronze, a nd even s ilver, l ook m ore l ike f orms o f " early cash" ( cf. Dalton, 1 977). Analysis s upports Collis' ( 1974a) s uggestion o f a c hange in the f unction o f p otin, i nitially a pparently distributed through the s ame n etwork a s g old, but s ubsequently displaying a more r estricted pattern, a lthough s till i nvolving l ong-distance c ontacts b etween major s ettlements. Using the evidence o f s ite a ssociations and a ssemblages, i t i s a lso p ossible t o document c hanges in the c irculation a reas a ssociated w ith particular c oinages, e .g. between the e arlier and l ater p otins, o r the expansion o f bronze-using i n the Eastern a rea, a nd to e stablish c orrelations between these a nd b roader patterns o f LPRIA material culture c hange. All three p rincipal p eriods o f c oin p roduction have a n underlying dependence o n C ontinental developments, t he a rchaeological c ontext o f each c orresponding to a d istinct s tage in the e laboration o f c ross-Channel r elations and their impact on I nsular c ommunities ( Chapter 9 ). P eriod I g old i s largely c onfined t o a c eramically-defined MPRIA " community o f interest" f ocused o n both s ides o f the Thames e stuary. C ontinental La ' Mi le I I developments had m inimal impact, r elating largely t o the s phere o f e lite a lliances and exchange. T he I nsular p otin t radition i s a f urther

2 17

indication o f B ritain's the influx o f g old.

i solation f rom Belgic Gaul,

d espite

By c ontrast, P eriod I I s aw the r upture o f this pattern and a division e stablished between the S outh-East and c entral s outhern England which p ersisted t o the C onquest. I ts l eading f eature i s t he a rchaeological expression o f direct c ontact between the f ormer r egion and B elgic Gaul, and indirect c ontact with the Roman world. While c oinage was then a dopted throughout the S tudy Area, the s ubsequent innovations and c ontacts which i t expresses c oincide c losely w ith the e laboration o f the " Aylesford c omplex", i tself e ssentially an extension o f Continental La T Ane I II developments. The main f eature o f P eriod I II i s direct c ontact w ith the Roman world, largely a s a r esult o f t reaties e stablished b etween Augustus and individual B ritish rulers. There i s a marked c orrelation between the Romanisation o f the c oinage a nd the volume o f o ther Romanised i mports i n particular a reas. These r elations were instrumental in the expansion o f Cunobelinus' domain and in B ritain's eventual a nnexation a s a p rovince ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 982; 1 9840). For understanding o f I ron A ge c oinage t o advance n ew, a rchaeologically i ntegrated models a re o bviously n eeded ( e.g. C ollis, 1 981a; Haselgrove a nd C ollis, 1 981). Equally, there i s much information s till t o b e extracted f rom the c oins themselves ( e.g. K ent, 1 985; S ellwood, 1 984a). This s tudy has s ought t o demonstrate the p otential o f quantification f or e stablishing " normal" t rends a gainst which i ndividual s ite a ssemblages may be a ssessed, a nd o f s tratifed g roups f or p roviding d etailed i nsights i nto depositional patterning o n s pecific s ites. U ltimately, however, what i s r equired i s a n ew a ttitude t o the data c ollection p rocess. A t p resent, t his i s passive; c oinage i s s een a s a valuable by-product o f casual discovery a nd excavation a like. I nstead o f waiting f or c oins t o be f ound, we s hould n ow b e c ontemplating how f uture data c ollection, i ncluding c oin data, may be s tructured t o answer the questions w e w ish t o p ose. I t i s admittedly d ifficult t o envisage s trategies f or improving r egional d istributional evidence and in t his s phere, p rogress i s r ather a matter f or improved public r elations a nd information gathering, with the l evels o f data r eliability r igorously maintained. But c oin r ecovery f rom excavations c ould c ertainly be i mproved, e .g. by the use o f s ieving p rocedures. I f the unstratified c oins f rom B raughing a nd S aham T oney a re a ny g uide, systematic s urface c ollection ( using metal detectors, though these have o perational d ifficulties) f rom p loughsoil ( which larges cale excavations o ften d iscard unscreened) would a llow the c oin a ssemblages o f i ndividual s ites t o be characterised, thus p roviding a basis f or more extensive i nter-site c omparisons ( cf. Haselgrove, 1 985b). S imilarly, s ites ( or parts o f s ites) c ould b e excavated s pecifically with the a im o f s olving problems c onnected w ith c oin-use ( e.g. the nature o f c oin deposition a t the earliest LPRIA s ettlement f oci a t B raughing, o r t he c ontext o f the f inds a t a hoard s ite, a s a t Dail na Caraidh), a nd f ind l ocations, n ew and

2 18

o ld, c ould b e examined i n the f ield f or r elevant information. But u ltimately, evaluating the f unctions o f c oinage and i ts s tructural c onsequences f or LPRIA communities r equires s till more: implementation o f r egionally-based r esearch designs, s ampling and posing integrated questions o f the f ull range o f s ite types and their environmental s etting, s o that depositional patterning o f c oinage can b e r elated t o o ther a spects o f cultural variability in the broader c ontext o f s ocioeconomic change during the LPRIA in s outhern B ritain.

R evised

2 19

June

1 987

Iron Age Coinage in South-East England· The Archaeological Context

Colin Haselgrove

Part ii

BAR British Series 17 4(ii) 1987

B.A.R. 5, Centremead, Osney Mead, Oxford OX2 ODQ, England.

GENERAL EDITORS A.R. Hands, B.Sc., M.A., D.Phil. D.R. Walker, M.A.

BAR 174 (II), 1987: 'Iron Age Coinage in South-East England' Part II

© Colin Haselgrove, 1987

The author’s moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher. ISBN 9781407388496 (Volume I) paperback ISBN 9781407388502 (Volume II) paperback ISBN 9780860544616 (Volume set) paperback ISBN 9781407317908 (Volume set) e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9780860544616 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Table of contents Part 11 Appendices 1.

Gazetteer of findspots of Iron Age coins in recorded 1960-1982.

Britain

221

2.

Concordance of the chronological and geographical arrangement of Iron Age coinages in Britain used in this study with their classifications according to Allen, Mack and Scheers.

231

3.

Catalogue of hoards and 'multiple finds' of Iron coins.

Age

267

4.

Brief listing of known archaeological sites in southeast England where Iron Age coins have certainly or probably been found.

331

5.

Catalogue of stratified archaeological context.

their

359

6.

Metrology of the principal Iron Age coin groups found in Britain.

479

Bibliography

487

Iron Age coins

and

Appendix

1

Gazetteer o f f indspots o f I ron Age c oins i n B ritain r ecorded 1 960 - 1 982

The majority o f f indspots n oted during the c ourse o f the r esearch o n which this s tudy i s based have n ow been published ( Haselgrove, 1 978; 1 984a), and n eed o nly be s ummarised h ere. Most a re a lso incorporated i n a r ecently published s eries o f distribution maps ( Cunliffe, 1 981a). The published l ists i nclude the material known t o the author up until the end o f 1 982, t ogether with a f ew f inds that i t was p ossible t o i ntroduce while the last manuscript was i n p reparation. F or r easons which n eed n ot be r epeated h ere, these l ists i nclude o nly a p roportion o f the f inds which have a ctually b een made i n r ecent years and a re r estricted t o p rovenances that can be verified o r a t l east believed. Table A 1:1 s ummarises t he numbers o f c oins i nvolved i n t erms o f three g eneral categories o f S tray, Hoard, a nd S ite f inds, t he numbers i n parentheses b eing those c oins f ound w ithin the S tudy A rea. F or ease o f c ross-reference, the c oins a re t otalled according t o the c lassification e stablished by A llen ( 1960). Table A 1:2 a ggregates t his i nformation w ith A llen's earlier c ompilation to g ive a n o verall b reakdown o f B ritish p rovenances, with f igures f or t he S tudy Area a gain in parentheses. C omparison b etween the t wo t ables indicates how much l arge-scale excavation and ' systematic s urface c ollection' has s hifted the balance t owards s ite f inds, a lthough t he distortions a rising f rom the i nclusion o f a f ew l arge s ites o r f inds n eeds t o b e s tressed ( Chapter 4 ). Many m ore e xtant c oins have had t o b e o mitted a s t hey lack any i ndication o f their p rovenance. R ough calculations using the Oxford I ndex s uggest that, f or the more extensive g old coinages, t he ratio o f p rovenanced t o known s pecimens varies f rom 0 .3 t o 0 .65. S uch a s tatistic, however, i s r elatively a rtificial, s ince many c oins w ith r ecorded f inds pots cannot n ow b e t raced a nd may thus f igure in t he unprovenanced c ategory a s w ell. Occasionally ( e.g. Haselgrove, 1 981) i t i s p ossible t o s how that t his has happened, but f or t he majority, the uncertainty r emains. I nevitably, a s r esearch has c ontinued, i t has p roved n ecessary t o make a f ew additional c orrections. These a re detailed i n Table A 1:3. S ystematic a dditions have n ot, h owever, b een made s ince t he " 1984" l ist w ent t o p ress, w ith the exception o f the f ollowing i mportant new g roups o f excavated c oins: B raughing 1 972 ( T.Potter); Canterbury, Marlowe V 1 982 ( D .Nash); Hayling I sland 1 981-2 ( A.King); S ilchester Basilica 1 979-84 ( M .Fulford); I am indebted t o t he individuals i ndicated f or p roviding i nformation i n

2 21

a dvance o f publication. These a re l isted i n full i n Appendix 5 . Important n ew hoard f inds ( J. P. C. Kent, P ers. C omm.) c ome f rom S outhend-on-Sea ( H14) and Wanborough ( H47). These f inds add 3 82 c oins to the published totals i n Table A 1:2. A f ew f inds o f B ritish c oins o n the Continent a re a lso noted, a lthough the two S 51 g old s taters merely r einforce the a rgument that this was in fact a Gaulish i ssue.

2 22

A .

Coinages

o f

the

S tray

Southern Coinage

S tudy Area

Hoard

S ite

Total

Uninscribed

3 3

( 27)

8 7

( 87)

1 5

( 14)

1 35

( 128)

I nscribed

28

( 27)

1 75

( 172)

4 2

( 37)

2 45

( 236)

Thin

1

S ilver

( 1)

2

62

( 55)

2 64

Uninscribed

3 4

( 25)

I nscribed

1 6

( 13)

2 5

Potin

26

( 26)

7 6

( 64)

3 0

( 19)

2 1

( 17)

( 2)

2 2

( 19)

25

( 22)

( 261)

7 9

( 70)

4 05

( 386)

South-Eastern Coinage 3

( 3)

4 9

( 42)

8 6

( 70)

( 25)

3 0

( 24)

7 1

( 62)

1 00

( 95)

1 20

( 110)

2 46

( 231)

1 28

( 123)

1 99

( 176)

4 03

( 363)

1 5

( 13)

1 5

( 12)

6 0

( 44)

( 4)

180

( 173)

2 07

( 194)

Eastern Coinage Uninscribed Tasciovanus

e tc.

Cunobelinus

e tc.

B . Western

6

7 2

( 64)

2 5

( 24)

5 28

( 517)

6 25

( 605)

1 23

( 100)

4 6

( 41)

7 23

( 702)

8 92

( 843)

( 13)

Coinages

o f

t he periphery

Coinage

' Dobunnic'

U ninscribed

1 8

( 2)

' Dobunnic'

I nscribed

2 4

( 2)

' Dobunnic'

I rregular

5 4 7

2 64

3

( 1)

( 0)

5 9

( 11)

7 9

( 0)

2 7

( 1)

1 15

( 3)

( 0)

1 1

( 7)

1 9

( 8)

9 7

( 19)

2 13

( 24)

( 1)

1 25

( 4)

( 21)

2 92

( 24)

( 5)

6 9

( 0)

( 3)

1 19

( 0)

( 3)

1 39

( 0)

South-Western Coinage Early

5

Gold

' Durotriges'

S truck

' Durotriges'

Cast

4 2 2 49

East

1 1 11

( 1)

3 9

( 0)

( 5)

2 97

( 0)

1 17

( 3)

2 98

( 103)

8 2

( 1)

1 150

( 158)

4 3

( 2)

1 199

( 161)

( 4)

1448

( 261)

1 27

( 4)

1 598

( 269)

( 0)

1 4

( 1)

( 2)

1 17

( 3)

5

( 0)

46

( 1)

( 22)

4 63

( 29)

Anglian Coinage

Early Gold ' Iceni'

U ninscribed

' Iceni'

I nscribed

5 1 2 6 2 3

2

( 0)

( 0) ( 2)

7 ( 0) 3 92 ( 108)

North-Eastern Coinage Early Gold

9

( 1)

5

' Corieltauvi'Uninscribed

2 0

9 7

( 1)

' Corieltauvi'I nscribed

1 2

( 1)

1 9

( 0)

3 9

( 1)

7 0

( 2)

4 1

( 3)

1 9

( o)

1 41

( 3)

2 01

( 6)

Table A 1:1 B reakdown o f published by the author,

I ron A ge coin p rovenances 1 978-84.

2 23

C .

Continental C oinage

S tray

H oard

S ite

Total

6 2

( 40)

8 8

( 24)

1 4

( 12)

1 64

( 76)

O ther B elgic Gaul

1 2

( 8)

1 0

( 2)

2 9

( 29)

5 1

( 39)

A rmorican Gaul

1 3

( 1)

4 3

( 0)

1 1

( 6)

6 7

( 7)

O ther Gaulish

1 7

( 6)

1 4

( 60)

1 8

( 16)

4 9

( 32)

1 04

( 55)

1 55

( 36)

7 2

( 63)

3 31

( 154)

( 0)

1 15

( 106)

1 26

( 111)

' Gallo-Belgic'

Gold

D . I llegible,

U ncertain

u nclassed, 1 0

( 5)

TOTALS:

5 35

( 298)

2 427(722)

P ERCENTAGES:

1 2%

( 14%)

5 2%(33%)

e tc.

Table A 1:1

1

Continued

2 24

1 670(1165) 3 6%(53%)

4 632(2185)

A . S outhern U ninscribed

C oinages o f t he S tudy A rea S tray 1 21 ( 103)

I nscribed

8 9 3

T hin s ilver

2 13 S outh-Eastern U ninscribed

e tc.

C unobelinvs,

e tc.

( 182)

1 14

( 97)

9 7

( 94)

I nscribed P otin

E astern U ninscribed Tasciovanus,

( 76) ( 3)

4 9

( 48)

2 60

( 239)

7 2 9 1 2 37

( 54) ( 83) ( 202)

4 00

( 339)

B .

H oard

S ite 3 2

( 28)

T otal 4 35 ( 406)

( 3) ( 681)

5 7 2 3 1 12

( 50) ( 20) ( 98)

5 57 4 0 1 032

( 529) ( 26) ( 961)

( 90) ( 33)

7 5 4 7

( 67) ( 40)

2 82 1 17

( 254) ( 167)

1 520(1370) 1 646(1493)

1 54 2 76

( 140) ( 247)

1 8 2 79 8 67

( 24) ( 269) ( 843)

2 82 4 11

( 275) ( 403)

1 4 7 07

9 3 3 3

3 10

( 299)

1 7 3 0 3 57

( 15) ( 25) ( 339)

1 164(1136)

1 723(1558) 2 182(1979)

4 00

( 377)

3 87 ( 367) 1 134(1070) 1 921(1814)

C oinages o f t he P eriphery

W estern C oinage ' Dobunnic' u ninscribed ' Dobunnic' i nscribed ' Dobunnic' i rregular

4 5

( 6)

2 11

( 0)

1 47

( 17)

4 03

( 23)

8 8

( 13)

1 29

( 8)

5 1

( 3)

2 68

( 24)

3 3 43

( 0) ( 8)

1 8 2 16

( 8) ( 28)

2 6

( 9)

6 97

( 56)

2 12 2 332 2 014

( 11) ( 86) ( 1)

4 558

( 98)

( 1)

5 1 38

( 1) ( 20)

S outh-Western C oinage Early Gold ' Durotriges'-Struck ' Durotriges'-Cast

2 5

( 9)

1 04

( 14)

1 86 1 983

( 1) ( 39)

2 45

1

( 33)

( 1)

2 1 31

( 1) ( 24)

2 006 4 175

( 0) ( 40)

6 2 52

( 0) ( 34)

2

E ast A nglian C oinage Early Gold ' Icenii-Uninscribed ' Iceni'-Inscribed

1 1

( 1)

( 0)

1 3

4 1 2 3

( 17) ( 16)

7 19

( 198)

8 8

( 6)

8 48(221)

1 742

( 160)

7 5

( 34)

2 461

( 358)

4 8 1 38

( 5) ( 11)

1 813(181) 2 674(403)

2 5

( 2)

2 7

( 4)

6 6

( 0)

1 21

2 7

( 1)

( 0) ( 3)

( 4)

1 59

( 5)

( 7)

8 5 1 54

4 7

7 9

1 73

( 6)

4 06

( 16)

N orth-Eastern C oinage Early G old

3

( 3)

5

( o)

3 3

( 5)

( 2)

2 14

( 6)

' Corieltauvi'Uninscribed ' Corieltauvi'I nscribed

T able A 1:2 B reakdown o f I ron A ge c oin p rovenances i n f ull s eries o f published g azetteers.

2 25

the

C .

C ontinental C oinage

S tray ' Gallo-Belgic' Gold O ther B elgic Gaul A rmorican G aul O ther Gaulish

H oard

e tc.

T OTALS: P ERCENTAGES: 1 960 T OTAL: P ERCENTAGES:

T otal

( 263)

2 72

( 177)

2 4

( 19)

6 01(459)

3 2 3 2 3 9 4 08

( 14) ( 8) ( 16) ( 301)

5 3 6 8 6 6 4 59

( 3) ( 5) ( 10) ( 195)

5 5 4 0 3 2 1 51

( 54) ( 9) ( 27) ( 109)

1 40 ( 71) 1 40 ( 22) 1 37 ( 53) 1 018(605)

1 28

( 111)

2 11(181)

D . I llegible,

S ite

3 05

U ncertain

u nclassed 3 7

( 25)

1 741(1171) 1 2%

( 19%)

1 206

( 873)

1 2%

( 22%)

4 6

( 45)

1 0348(3162)

T able A 1:2

7 0%

2 610(1780)

( 52%)

1 8%

( 29%)

7 921(2440)

9 40

( 615)

9 %

( 16%)

7 9%

( 62%)

C ontinued

2 26

1 4699(6113)

1 0067(3928)

F ind location

Type

Gallo-Belgic A ( 1984a, TV613980 bef.

Eastbourne,

1 984,

R eference

1 11-2)

Sx.,

1 AV

1 /4 S E12.2

Gallo-Belgic C ( 1984a,

3 AV

Hants.,

1 985.

( Scheers

C 1.2)

1 AV

S E32.1

Gallo-Belgic D ( 1984a, Eastbourne,

1 984,

1 977,

TL88.40

The

S y.,

P ulborough,

coin

-

R udling

an

1 AV S E51

S f., b ef.

-

SCMB

1 970. 1 859.

actually o ther

1 859).

The

1 AV SE51

-

Owles

1 AV SE51

0

Whitbourn

1 AV SE51

-

S x.A.C.

1 17,

( 1979),

2 51

S y.,

l isted

contained 1 AV E41

l isted a s K .,

a s above.

( J.P.C.Kent,

B ritish

LX - B ronze and S ilver Holywell,

B eds.,

1890.

1 981-3,

Lower

Mailing,

T he

Table c oins

1 720)

Castle K .,

t ype and H oard

( 1978,

and may be

1 8)

8 9 was

l inked w ith

Pers.

( 1984a,

B raintree,

Baldock,

Park S treet.

h oard f rom Corfe Common,

- U ninscribed

( 1984,

D orset

1 36)

also

Comm.).

1 18-9)

1 AE SE74

Ex.,

1 AR S E73.2

0

Latchmore

E

F rere

1 AE S E74.1 ( M272A;

1 981,

i s a lso this

Farnham

( 1859)

( 1890)

( LX21-22)

Fountain H otel,

TL244337

S y.,

t he

( Stukeley,

u nder Durotriges

TL16.33

TL755229

f rom

( 1970)

1 15)

Farnham, 98)

f rom Farnham, f ind

4 25

f rom t here.

B ritish A ( 1984a, ( Hoard

coin

f ound a t Addington,

f inds

D elete:

s tray

7 12

( 1977),

Sx.,

early

( 1984),

1 14-5)

l isted a s B ritish A l

( Whitbourn,

bef.

1/4

1 976.

p robably

( 1985)

2 17

Ex.,

C ornard,

TQ31.78 Lambeth,

n ear,

Kent

Eastwoodbury Lane.

G reat

TQ074200

-

1 13)

Sx.,

Gallo-Belgic E ( 1984a, bef.

SE31.2

o n t he beach.

TQ85.85 Eastwood,

( 1984),

1 12-3)

Hurstbourne Tarrant,

bef.

Rudling 2 17

SU38.53

TV617987

-

o n t he b each.

H erts.,

LX22)

1 AE S E74.1

-

S tead and R igby

( LX22)

A 1:3 Additions to the published l ists f ound i n the S tudy Area t o 1 982.

2 27

( 1984),

3 07

( 1986)

o f

I ron

A ge

Potin

( 1984a,

1 22-4)

TL755229 B raintree, 1 981-3,

E x.,

TR193369 Folkestone, 1 948,

E .

( Class

( Class S f.,

( 1984),

S I I)

I o r

T ester & B ing ( 1949)

0 ,S G reenfield I I)

e t al.(1948)

1 Potin P 1.5

B alkwill

( 1979)

( Type 0 2)

1 979. TM128492,

C laydon,

S f.,

Paper M ill Lane. T V590963 Eastbourne, 1 979,

I o r

1 Potin P 1/2

K .,

O liver C rescent.

F rere 3 07

1 Potin P 1/2

K .,

T L85.64 Bury-St.-Edmunds,

E

( Type 0 2)

o f c emetery.

TQ54.67 Farningham, 1 947,

1 Potin P 1.5

F ountain H otel.

S x.,

( Type P ),

K .,

2 13-4

I ) S

( 1975),

D rewett

( 1982)

( Type J )

1 Potin P 1/2

N orthview,

Owles

( Class

1 Potin P 1.2

B ullock Down.

D elete:

1 Potin P 1/2.1-3 S

S utton-at-Hone,

( Ibid.).

B raughing,

W ickham K ennels,

1 982,

K .

( 1984a,

H erts.,

1 23),

p otin

which r epeats

( 1984a,

1 23)

f ound i n a p it n ot a d itch

i s P 1.5

( Partridge,

1 982).

T incommius

( 1984a,

1 24-5)

S U862051 C hichester, 1 966,

S t.Mary's

V erica

( 1984a,

S x.,

1 AR S 72.1

H ospital.

E

D own & R ule ( 1971)

( M - )

1 26-7)

D elete 1 AR1/4 S 82.2 P rinces R isborough,

which r epeats 1 978 r eference t o

B ledlow coin.

Tasciovanus

( 1984a,

1 29-30)

TL577187 G reat Canfield,

Ex.,

1 980. TL251340 Baldock, 1 979 o r b ef.,

H erts.,

Walls F ield.

1 AE E 75.2

Eddy & Davies

( m - )

( 1982),

1 AE E 71.3 ( M176;

TL39.24 B raughing, 1 982,

TL125065 S t.Albans, 1 938,

H erts.,

W ickham Kennels.

S

1 AE E 73

3 5-6

S tead and R igby ( 1986)

M 189)

1 AE E 71.2

E

Partridge

( 1982)

( M174)

H erts.,

I nsula X VII.

1 AE E 71.2

0 ,E R ichardson

( 1944)

( M174)

S U57.94 D orchester-on-Thames,

1 AE E 71.2

0

Evans

( 1890),

Oxon.,

1 AE E 73

E

F rere

( 1984b)

b ef.

1 890.

( M171; D elete: 6 3)

coins

f rom n ear M ilton K eynes

M 190)

( 1978,

which r epeat o thers.

Table A 1:3

C ontinued

2 28

5 45

5 7) and V erulamium

( 1978,

Cunobelinus

( 1984a,

TL16.38 Clifton, bef.

1 AE E 83.2

1 890. B eds.,

1 AE E 83.2

1 890.

TL40.52

Haslingfield,

Cambs.,

1 AE E83.2 ( M246;

TL44.58 Cambridge,

1816,

M eldreth,

M ettle

( Many

o f

TL62.21

1 854,

or bef.

Cambs.,

Ex.,

Ex.,

-

B raybrooke

( 1854)

( 1860)

coins

o f

0

N eville

( 1854)

0

N eville

( 1854)

F rere

1 AE E 83.2

( 1984),

3 07

H uggins

( 1978)

( M244) Baldock, bef.;

H erts,

1 942,

Walls

K .,

F ield.

1 966.

B rafield-on-the G reen,

2 AE E 83.2

S tead and R igby

( 1249)

( 1986)

1 AE E 81 3

Ward

1 AV E 82.2

B rown

( 1983)

B rown

( 1982)

1 AE E82.2

Owles

( 1973),

( M260A)

1 01

( 1246)

1 982,

C oneygree.

Long M elford,

S f.,

Chapel F ield. Castle S treet,

coins

Canterbury

f rom V erulamium

w hich repeat coins

f rom t he

A lter:

Braughing

K ennels

1 982 excavations

A lter:

Alcester,

A lchester,

( 1968)

( 1208) 1 AE E 83.2

f our

N eville

( 1 1225)

SP811598 L ittle Houghton,

D elete:

O

1 AE E82.2

Ex.,

Fountain H otel.

Northants.,

1 973,

without type)

H erts.)

Northants.

TL863452

( 1890)

2 87,

1 /4

1 AV E 81-2

S tanstead Abbots,

TQ516594 O tford, SP819581

Latchmore

1 854.

1 974-5.

or

-

by B raybrooke are i n f act

o r AV

TL387066 Nazeingbury,

1 980

( 1890)

1/4

1 AV E81-2

E x.,

TL755229 B raintree,

TL251340

Latchmore

( 1960),

1 AE E81-3?

1 854.

( Conceivably

1 981-3,

O

H e owned an E83.2 which could be this.)

Dunmow,

or bef.

Allen

1 AV E81-2 o r AV

the AE called Cunobelinus

TL52.24 S tanstead, i n

( 1890)

H ill.

Tasciovanus.

i n

b ef.

College walks".

TL365457,

Latchmore

( M242)

1889.

" near

O

( M244)

TL18.48 Langford, bef.

1 30-4)

B eds.,

Oxon.,

( 1984a,

( 1984a,

( 1 4244, s ame

1 32)

2 48)

s ites

Warwicks.

( 1978,

to 2 AE E82.1,

( Partridge,

1 32)

Gate

1 978,

7 7)

( 1248,

and 2 49)

7 5-6). E83.2

( 1 4230,

2 42),

W ickham

1 982).

( 1978,

7 9;

1 984a,

S P56.20.

T able A 1:3

( repeats

1 959 and SE

C ontinued

2 29

1 33;

1 984,

1 40,

1 42)

to

Epaticcus TQ075203 1 983,

( 1984a, Gay

1 34)

S treet,

Uncertain B ritish o r TM128492 Paper

1 AR S 91

Sx.,

S E o f Beedings.

C laydon,

S ?

A ldsworth

S

Owles

Gaulish

S f.,

1 974,

1 AE SE75.1

M ill Lane.

( Coin

( 1984)

( M263A)

( 1975)

2 13-4

s ame type a s

Evans

f ind f rom Hacheston,

( 1864,

S f.,

1 20)

which s eems

f rom B rettenham, to p lace

N f.,

i t with the

and a n ew

South-Eastern

s eries.)

Durotriqes

- Uninscribed

D elete:

A shtead

o thers.

T here

the

( 1960, i s

2 44)

and Chichester

only o ne AR M 317

( 1978,

( 1984a,

8 5)

1 38)

which

f rom Waddon Hill

r epeat ( outside

S tudy A rea).

Continental P rovenances Eu,

S eine-Maritime,

Bois

1 974-8,

2 AV S 51 1 AV

L 'Abbe.

1 /4

E

D elestree

( 1984)

S E72.2

1 AR W61 ( M34A/58 P ernois,

S omme,

bef.

1 912.

= B r

1 AV W92

QA;

1 4 298; S

Class

B ertrand

A ) ( 1912)

1 AV W91 ( M395; The

AE C unobelinus

E82.1 i s

( M231);

t he

f rom V ertault,

coin f rom

also an AE Cunobelinus

Abbreviations:

S aintes,

( Bertrand,

E = Excavation;

M 391)

Cote d 'Or Charente

( Allen,

2 35)

( Blanchet,

i s

an

1 905)

1 912).

0 = Omitted by Allen

s ite

Table A 1:3

1 960,

I nferieur

C ontinued

2 30

( 1960);

S = known

Appendix 2

Concordance o f the c hronological and g eographical arrangement o f I ron A ge c oinages i n _ Britain used in this s tudy w ith their c lassificationß a ccording t o Allen , Mack and S cheers

The g eneral procedures used i n c onstructing an arrangement t o f acilitate the a ims o f this s tudy a re s et out i n the t ext. S even main r egional c oinage t raditions can b e r ecognised ( together with three i mportant s ubsidiary s eries). F rom i ts adoption to the Roman c onquest, the coinage went t hrough three main periods, each o f them with up t o three s eparate phases. A s far a s p ossible, the c oins belonging t o each phase have been r esolved i nto their constituent s ets. The r esultant a rrangement i s s et o ut in full a s Tables A2:1-7. Each c oncordance table i s accompanied by a c ommentary on the o verall development o f the c oinage t radition, although lack o f s pace p recludes detailed j ustification. The a rrangements r eflect the most up-to-date published discussion, m odified wherever n ecessary ( e.g. f or unrecorded examples) by the author's o wn a ssessment, based on examination o f the a ctual c oins o r a t l east photographs, a lthough i nevitably there have been cases where i t has been necessary t o r ely o n drawings o r o n a d escription. S imilarly, c alculation o f a g roup's m etrology i s based on a ll the available s pecimens. I n the s ubsidiary a rrangement u se has been made o f two main c oncepts: ( 1) the types. ( 2)

s eries;

the C lass;

Such s ubdivisions s ignificance.

the basic g rouping o f

r elated

c oin

a ny useful distinction within a s eries. n eed

not

be

o f

c hronological

For the u ninscribed c oinages, the basis o f g rouping individual c oin types i nto a s eries i s n ormally t heir overall d esign, o r a dominant theme expressed by o ne o r more types e .g. P attern/Horse e tc. B y c ontrast, f or the inscribed c oinages, the inscription i s n ormally the key a ttribute, enabling o therwise disparate types t o be united as a s ingle i ssue. With a ll I ron A ge c oinages, however, such g roupings - even where they a ppear i rrefutable - must be considered a matter f or investigation rather than assumption, and s hould n ot be taken t o i mply their s triking a t a s ingle time and p lace even in the more c entralised polities o f s outh-east England.

2 31

I n the Concordance Tables, the c oin ' types' c omprising s eries and c lasses a re g iven a ccording to A llen ( 1960), Mack ( 1975), i ndicated by the p refix 1 4 , and Scheers ( 1977). As these works c ontain detailed descriptions o f the types, the data g iven here a re r estricted t o the modal weight calculated f or each s eries; the f ull f requency range i s g iven i n the h istograms c ontained i n Appendix 6 . All r eferences to this a rrangement abbreviated f orm a ccording t o the f ormat: Region ( alphabetic)

Phase ( numeric)

S eries ( numeric)

a re

g iven

i n

Class ( numeric)

E 83.2 thus i ndicates a c oin o f the E astern r egion belonging to P hase 8 , S eries 3 ( coins b earing the names o f Cunobelinus and Tasciovanus), C lass 2 ( the developed types i n this s eries, M242-4 e tc). Both S eries and C lass a re o ptional and may be o mitted. The a rrangement i ncorporates p rovenanced c oins known t o the author by January 1 984, f rom w ithin the S tudy Area . I n the case o f o therwise unpublished t ypes, the page number o f their entry in the r ecent g azetteers ( where an abbreviated description w ill g enerally b e f ound) i s included in Tables A2:1-A2:7; pp. 2 6-108 a re i n Haselgrove ( 1978), pp. 1 15-50 in Haselgrove ( 1984a). F ull descriptions a nd i llustrations o f these types s hould be available s hortly w ith publication o f the s uccessor t o Mack ( 1975) which was announced r ecently ( Van Arsdell and S ellwood, f orthcoming).

2 32

W estern Coinage

( Table A 2:1)

The major s tudy o f this c oinage, g enerally a ttributed t o the D obunni, i s Allen ( 1961a). A detailed r eappraisal i s, however, c urrently being undertaken by Lyn S ellwood ( forthcoming). T he a rrangement g iven here, based o n the author's o wn r eappraisal o f the c onstituent c oinage types and their metrology, and o n s horter s tudies in the i nterim, n otably Robinson ( 1977), must therefore be r egarded as p rovisional. S ellwood's published a rticles ( 1983; 1 984a; 1 984b) s uggest t hat the s cheme put f orward here does n ot differ i n e ssentials f rom hers. For the m ost part, A llen's g eneral s cheme can be r etained virtually a s i t s tands. F rom i ts metrology and c omposition, the uninscribed g old s eries ought t o b e a p ost-Caesarian d evelopment and i s a ssigned to P hase 6 . A t the o ther extreme, the latest inscribed c oin types e specially those i nscribed BODVOC, which b reak with their p redecessors i n various ways, e specially in their employment o f a b old Roman f ount ( Allen, 1 961a) - c ould c onceivably be p ost-Conquest i ssues ( cf. S ellwood, 1 984b). No Dobunnic c oin c an be d emonstrated t o c ome f rom a c ontext which i s c ertainly p re-Conquest, n ot even a t Bagendon ( Clifford, 1 961). The t wo main questions a re: ( 1) A llen c lassified the r elatively rare q uarter-stater M68 ( his B ritish RB) a s the c ounterpart o f t he earliest s taters, W61. While i t i s c onceivable that s ome o f these s truck i n r ed g old s hould be s o c lassed, t his i s n ot born out by p rovenanced s pecimens. The majority a re s truck a t a r elatively h igh s tandard and i n yellow gold a nd a re much more l ikely t o belong t o the main S outhern s eries ( see Table A2:3). The matter i s d iscussed a t g reater l ength by Robinson ( 1977). Two quarter-staters ( possibly m odern f orgeries) with the l egend E ISV ( W82) were r ecently f ound near Cheltenham ( Haselgrove, 1 984a), but t here a re s till no c ounterparts o f the ANTED s tater. ( 2) The c hronology and o rdering o f t he earlier s ilver types. A s S ellwood ( 1983) has p ointed o ut, i f the a ssociation o f a s ilver c oin o f Allen 's C lass F w ith the 1 830 hoard - o therwise o f A rmorican i ssues - f rom Mount Batten ( H80) i s a ccepted a s valid, their manufacture c ould have c ommenced b efore the c lose o f the f irst c entury BC. A s these types a nd Allen's C lass F ( W71.2) a re heavier than A llen's B -D ( W71.1), the t wo c lasses may well be b roadly c ontemporary; o r c ould even have a c hronological o rder the r everse o f the o bvious t ypological o rder ( cf. Allen, 1 961a), which, h owever, o pens up a v oid i n the m iddle o f the Western c oinage. As y et there a re n o g rounds to c ompensate f or t his by advancing the dating o f the ANTED s eries. I n the degree o f c ontrol exercised o ver their p roduction ( Sellwood, 1 984a), ANTED's types a re i n every way the counterpart o f V erica's and Cunobelinus'. I t l ooks a s though there w as a l engthy break in c oin p roduction in t he Western a rea.

2 33

Ee t _ern S ubsidiary S eries A number o f s ilver types f all o utside the main Western c oinage t radition; A llen c lassed t hese a s ' Dobunnic I rregular'. This distinction has n ow been f ormalised by Robinson ( 1977); their o verall d istribution, a lbeit t hin, favours the W iltshire f ringes o f t he S outhern c oinage r egion, a n a rea o therwise w ithout a s ignificant I ron A ge c oinage. This division i s f ollowed here with the differentiation o f a W estern s ubsidiary c oinage, including Allen's I rregular c lasses L -N, those n oted by Robinson a nd a number o f r ecent f inds ( Haselgrove, 1 984a). They have not been phased but, l ike the W61 s ilver types, a ppear typologically and metrologically early ( and a re even potentially their s ource); the majority probably belong to P hase 6 and they a re unlikely t o p ostdate P hase 7 . Robinson a lso s uggested the t ypologically devolved base g old s taters o f A llen's MB s eries a s a m ember o f t his s ubsidiary c oinage. Allen r egarded these a s very p oor c opies o f E 61.2, but the horse o n t he r everse undoubtedly a lso r esembles those o n the s ubsidiary s ilver, and a number o f f inds s ince 1 977 l end g eographical s upport t o t his a ttribution. While the p robable p rototype belongs typologically t o the Eastern c oinage f amily, i ts known f indspots a re a lso mainly i n c entral s outhern England. W ith a lmost a ll the known s pecimens w eighing below 5 .0 g m, these devolved s taters cannot therefore be easily r elated t o mainstream developments a nd may ( like s ome o f the East Anglian s taters) in f act belong t o t he f inal phase o f c oinage in Britain rather than earlier, a s A llen a ssumed. They were a pparently a ssociated w ith the very l atest S outhern s ilver i n the S avernake f ind ( H75) and the s uggestion w ould gather f urther f orce i f the Mark's T ey c oin was i ndeed f rom the 1 843 hoard ( H13). Their l ow weight f inds a n echo in the s tandard o f 4 .4 gm adduced by Kent ( Pers. C omm.) f or the l ater S outh-Western i ssues in the Donhead S t.Mary f ind ( see Table A 2:2 below). However, until b etter evidence i s a vailable, we s hould not c ompletely discount the p ossibility o f a date f or the type not f ar r emoved f rom i ts p rototype ( je. within P hase 6 ) - a t l east o ne s pecimen weighing a s much a s 5 .6 g m i s known - o r i t c ould be that the s eries was s truck on c ompletely d ifferent s tandards o n s everal s eparate o ccasions.

2 34

W ESTERN P HASE

C OINAGES

( W6-W9)

6

S er ies 1 ( Br it ish R A) A VR

( M374)

A R ( M376 = C lass A , E aston G rey N o 2=p 140)

5 .6 g m

P HASE

1 .2 g m

7

S er ies 1 ( uninscr ibed) C lass 1

C lass 2

A R ( M378, 3 88A , 3 79 = C lasses B -D)

A R ( M380, 3 82 = C lasses E -F)

1 .0 g m

1 .2 g m

P HASE

8

S er ies 1 - A NTED l egends A VR

( M385-6)

A R ( M387 = C lass G )

5 .4 g m

1 .0 g m

S er ies 2 - E ISV l egends A VR

( M388)

5 .4 g m

P HASE

A VU ( "Che ltenham" = p 141)

A R ( M389 = C lass H )

. .

0 .9 g m

9

S er ies 1 - M ixed A V l egends A VR

( M390-3)

5 .5 g m

A VU ( M394)

A R ( M384B , 3 83-4 = C lasses M X, I , J )

-

0 .9 g m

S er ies 2 - B ODVOC l egends A VR

( M395)

A R ( M396 = C lass K )

5 .4 g m

1 .0 g m

Table A 2:1

P hasing

o f Western c oinages . .

2 35

W ESTERN

S UBSIDIARY

C OINAGE

( WS1-WS3)

T wo-tailed H orse g roup

U ninscr ibed g o ld

S er ies 1 - H orse r ight

S er ies 3 - B r it ish M B

A R ( M375)

A V ( M62)

1 .1 g m

4 .8-4 .6 g m N B

A pparent ly a p oor c opy o f E 61.2

N B

W anborough c o in h as p seudo-legend a nd

S er ies 2 - H orse l eft C lass 1 A R ( M374A-B;

U pavon, W anborough = p 98; A llen, 1 960 P 1 X IV, 3 5)

c ou ld b e p rototype f or D obunnic M X

1 .2 g m C lass 2 A R ( M377, 3 84A, 3 84C;

K intbury ,

A% ( Hod H ill N o 1=A llen, 1 960, 2 47)

W eir F arm = p 141) 1 .1 g m

0 .7 g m

C lass 3 ( leaf b etween t ails) A R ( Patching N o 1= p 120) 1 .3 g m

Table A2:1

Continued

2 36

S outh-Western Coinage

( Table A2:2)

Although A llen ( 1968b) c onsidered them when writing his r eport o n the H od H ill c oins, a nd the earliest i ssues have b een s tudied b y Mackensen ( 1974), this uniformly dull c oinage had n ever been analysed i n depth p rior t o the i nvestigation r ecently c ompleted by M elinda Mays ( 1986), which i s t o be p ublished s hortly. The a rrangement p roposed h ere must therefore a gain be r egarded a s p rovisional. Mackensen's ( 1974) die s tudy o f the earliest g old c oins i n the a rea a lso extends to the f irst " silver" i ssues ( SW51), which d erive their o bverse f rom the g old, a nd in f act c ontain a s ignificant p roportion o f the m etal ( Kent, 1 985), a lthough the r everse c omes f rom S outhern o r Eastern i ssues ( S41 - E 41). B ritish B 2 c oins ( Mackensen, 1 983), h owever, a re m odern f akes. Not o nly i s this evident f rom their p edigree, but analysis ( J.P.C.Kent, P ers. Comm.) has n ow r evealed t hat they c ontain s ignificant q uantities o f z inc. The L e Catillon hoard ( H64), which p rovides the f ixed p oint f or the s eries, i s discussed f urther i n Appendix 3 ; here i t n eed o nly b e n oted that a p ost-Caesarian dating f or this deposit does n ot a ffect the l ikelihood that the early " silver" i ssues w ith their 5 .9 g m s tandard belong t o P hase 5 . F rom their type, m etrology a nd g eneral a ppearance, a t wofold d ivision may b e s uggested f or the r emaining s truck s ilver c oins, the f irst ( encompassing A llen's A var.b - C ) l imited i n i ts d istribution; the s econd i n i nferior metal ( Allen's c lasses D-F) much c loser t o the s o-called s truck " bronze". I ndeed, the latter's a ssignment t o a s eparate phase i s m ore f or c onvenience than o f chronological n ecessity ( SW71-81), f or a s H ill ( 1911) s uggested o f the c ast s eries which e nds this c oinage, they c ould b e the p roduct o f a r elatively s hort p eriod o f t ime. Recent work l eaves l ittle doubt that the p resent-day appearance o f t he S outh-Western s eries b elies their c omposition a nd i ntended appearance, and thus t heir f unction. Chemical analysis o f the c oins f rom S outh Cadbury has s hown that the apparent b ronze c oins were in f act s ilver o f varying degrees o f p urity, while many o f the Hengistbury c oins have t races o f a g old o r s ilver wash ( Haselgrove, 1 979). Now s ome o f t he s ilver c oins have b een s hown t o c ontain a s ignificant p ercentage o f g old, l eading Kent ( 1985) t o s uggest that the whole s eries may in f act be bad g old. F inally, the d iscovery o f a hoard o f 8 6 s taters ( and 2 q uarter s taters) in g ood c ondition a t D onhead S t. Mary, W iltshire ( Frere, 1 986) has a llowed Kent ( Pers. Comm.) t o adduce a w eight s tandard o f 4 .4 gm f or a l ater s tage o f t he c oinage; the metrology s hows a number o f o ther possible p eaks ( Fig A6:2). Initially s truck a t o ver 6 .0 g m ( SW41), a nd then e mploying the 5 .9 - 5 .4 gm g old s tandards e stablished i n the Gallic War p eriod ( SW51-61), the c oinage eventually declined t o l ess than half i ts o riginal weight ( SW71-91).

2 37

The S outh-Western c oinage then was evidently n ot a b imetallic c oinage i n the a ccepted s ense, but rather a " precious metal c oinage" based o n t he s tater and quarter, which experienced a d rastic debasement and l owering o f the weight s tandard o ver the p eriod o f i ts minting. The r eason i s obscure; i t i s a lso a f eature o f n earby Armorican Gaul ( cf. C olbert d e B eaulieu, 1 973a; G ruel, 1 981, e tc.) a nd o f the Northern Gaulish types o f the E llingham hoard ( H61); a s hortage o f p recious metal i s the s traightforward explanation. This pattern underlines the e ssentially n orth-western F rench a ffiliation o f this c oinage t radition a nd d istinguishes i t f rom the thin s ilver i ssues w ith their c onnections p rimarily w ith n orth-eastern F rance which Allen ( 1968b) i ncluded a s Durotrigian. They a re p laced h ere w ith the main S outhern c oinage ( Table A2:3).

2 38

S OUTH-WESTERN P HASE

C OINAGES

( SW5-SW9)

4( Uninscr ibed G o ld)

S er ies 1 - B r it ish B 1 A V ( M32) 6 .1 g m

P HASE

N B

S ee a lso S E43 .3?

N B

O bv . d esign d er ives f rom S W41.

5

S er ies 1 - L e C at illon S ilver A R ( M317)

A RU ( M319a = A llen, 1 60,

5 .9 g m

( 1 .3 g m)

F ig 2 7, 4 )

P HASE

R ev , d es ign f rom S 41.

6

S er ies 1 - E ar ly H od H ill T ypes ( A-C) A R ( M317)

A R4 ( M319 = A llen, 1 960,

5 .0 g m

( 1 .0 g m)

F ig 2 7, 5 -6)

P HASE

7

S er ies 1 - L ater H od H ill T ypes ( D-F) A R ( M317)

A RU ( M319 = A llen, 1 960, F ig 2 7, 7 -9)

4 .1 g m

P HASE

8

S er ies 1 - L atest S truck C o ins / E /R, iE

( M318)

3 .1 g m

P HASE

9

S er ies 1 - C ast C o ins P E ?

N B

( M322-370)

L ack o f ' wear ' o n t hese c o ins - s ome o f t he p ellets s tand u p t o 1 .3 m m f rom t he

2 .2 g m

s urface - i mp lies t hat t hey a re t he p roduct o f as hort s pace o f t ime ( H ill, 1 911)?

Table A 2:2

P hasing

o f

S outh-Western c oinages.

2 39

S outhern Coinage

( Table A2:3)

Although s ome o f their c onstituent e lements a re the s ubject o f c omprehensive modern s tudies, n one o f t he three p rincipal c oinage t raditions o f the S tudy A rea have ever b een l ooked a t i n a nything l ike the depth w ith which most o f the p eripheral c oinages have been t reated. The basic s urvey o f a ll three i s Allen's ( 1944), s upplemented f or the earlier uninscribed c oinage by A llen ( 1960), and, f or the Gallo-Belgic s eries, by S cheers ( 1977). The evolution o f these t raditions i s more f ully d iscussed in the text ( Chapters 4 -5). P hases

1 .4

A t the h ead o f the t radition but typologically d istinct f rom later developments a re two g roups, A llen's GalloB elgic B ( S11-S12) a nd his B ritish A 2 a nd i ts derivatives ( S41). The f ormer o ccur throughout t he Thames r egion, w ith a c oncentration i n the a rea west o f L ondon ( Kent, 1 978b) a nd a re c lassed a s S outhern t o emphasise their s eparateness f rom S outh-Eastern d evelopments. K ent s ees them a s the earliest c oins t o c irculate i n B ritain and they a re c ertainly early i n the B elgic Gaulish s equence ( Scheers, 1 977). E xcept f or the n ew type f rom Cheriton ( Haselgrove, 1 984a), t he latter g roup were i ncluded i n Mackensen's ( 1974) d ie a nalysis. This demonstrates that the distinction between A llen's B ritish A l and A 2 has g eographical a s w ell a s typological validity enabling the latter t o b e a ssigned t o the S outhern c oinage ( S41.1). The type derives f rom S E41.2-3 a nd s hould b e p re-Caesarian. There w ere a number o f r egional variants w ith a l imited distribution ( S41.2-4). P hases

5 -6

A lthough the p rincipal Gallo-Belgic s eries a re not uncommon i n the r egion, their impact was m inimal. I nstead, the f irst major r egional g old s eries S 51-S52 ( albeit w ith a varied parentage i ncluding S E51 a nd p ossibly S E41) has i ts inspiration in a Gallo-Belgic s eries, which i s rarely f ound in B ritain ( Allen's F ; S cheers, 1 977, N o.26; S 50.3). However, t his i gnores the f act t hat i ts main B ritish derivative, Allen's QA, experienced a s harp f all i n i ts weight s tandard a ssociated with a n e qually abrupt c hange f rom a s ilver-rich t o a c opper-rich a lloy ( Allen, 1 961a; Kent, 1 978a), the l atter usual f or p ost-Caesarian g old c oinage i n B ritain. O f these two g roups, the p resumptively later, l ighter and more debased s eries ( S63) i s r estricted to B ritain, whereas the f ormer i s f ound in F rance a s w ell, where i t i s easily c onfused with i ts parent. The difference in modal w eight i s o nly 0 .1 gm and a n a ltogether too s harp distinction has e vidently been drawn between what a re e ssentially two variants in a c ontinuous s eries ( S50.3-551) o ccurring o n both s ides o f the C hannel. The s ignificant break i n s triking came o nly a fter the type was established in B ritain ( S51-S63; Haselgrove, 1 984b).

2 40

An a lready c omplex p ost-Caesarian s ituation ( Allen, 1 960, L Z e tc.) has b een further c omplicated by the n ew varieties o f g old a nd e specially s ilver types which have b een f ound i n r ecent years ( 16), e specially a t Hayling I sland. I n the g old, a s ignificant development i s the s triking o f n arrow a s w ell a s broad-flan f ractions, a dichotomy which p ersists t o the c losing s tages o f the c oinage ( Allen a nd Haselgrove, 1 979). The s ilver i s n otable f or the g eneral p roliferation o f types and a ppearance o f f ractions, C ontinental developments c learly being a f actor i n the f ormer. A detailed a ppraisal awaits Nash's publication o f t he Hayling I sland c oins. I n the m eantime, the approach f ollowed here i s that o f g rouping types i nto s eries a ccording t o the basic themes which they express ( cf. Allen, 1 960, Appendix 1 B): Head/Horse; Opposed B easts/ Horse, e tc. ( S66-S68). P hases

7- t 3

The basis f or the a rrangement o f the s eries i nscribed T INCOMMIVS and V ERICA r emains A llen ( 1944), s upplemented by a die s tudy o f t he l atter's g old ( Allen a nd Haselgrove, 1 979) a nd s hort n otes o n the Owslebury excavation f inds ( Allen, 1 965b; 1 967c; 1 968d). F or both rulers, earlier a nd l ater g roups o f i ssues a re discernible, a nd f urther r efinement w ill c learly b e p racticable when the n ew c oin types - 1 5 in a ll - have b een a ssimilated. Unsurprisingly, w ith modern e xcavation m ethods and MD use the i mpact has b een greatest f or t he s ilver f ractions, with a t otal o f 1 3 m inim types, e ither n ew discoveries o r r eattributed t o T incommius and V erica, s ince 1 960. P hase

9

A lthough t hese c oin types have evident a ffinity w ith the Eastern r egion, m ost o bviously 5 91 w ith i ts T ASCI F l egend, the existence o f f ractions f or the s ilver units and a pparent absence o f b ronze p laces them f irmly i n the S outhern t radition, a c onclusion born o ut by their distribution. W hile the late date o f t hese s eries i s evident f rom the S avernake and Wanborough f inds ( H47, H75), there a re no o bvious g rounds f or a p ost-Conquest date. The c oins inscribed CRAB ( S94) a re included o n typological g rounds, but a n earlier date c annot be r uled o ut. Thin S ilver types I n r ecent y ears, excavations have added t en n ew thin s ilver types, a lthough o nly Mack 3 21-321a ( 1975) i s a t a ll c ommon. The B ritish home o f these latter i s evidently Hampshire, but t he o thers have a b roader S outh C oast d istribution a s f ar a s K ent a nd there a re a lso f inds i n the Upper Thames Valley. While distinct f rom t he main S outhern s eries, their a ffinity i s c learly with that t radition m ore than i t i s with t he S outh-Western s eries. Allen ( 1965a) p ointed t o the ultimate a ncestry o f the main Hampshire s eries ( ST1), c ombining the e ffigy o f P allas A thene f rom t he s tater o f Alexander I II and the d egraded c harioteer/horse o f the B ridiers type o f s ilver d rachm, a s

2 41

t ransmitted through the c oinage which developed between the L oire and Caen in the earlier f irst century BC. Allen i nitially derived the s eries f rom the s o-called Type P icard ( Scheers, 1 977, No.52), but this i s questioned by Delestree ( 1984), who o bserves that the analogies are thematic rather than s pecific, e .g. the o ne i s f lat, the o ther s cyphate. There c ertainly a re o ther l inks with B elgic Gaul ( e.g. Scheers No.53) and a lso w ith A rmorica ( e.g. Type de B rech) and D elesträe s uggests the latter as the p rototype o f the B ritish types. A more l ikely s ource, h owever, i s the L ower S eine/Upper Normandy r egion, and o ne o f the s econd g eneration o f P allas-head derivatives f ound t here, the s o-called R ouen type ( Scheers N o.51/2; o f. A llen and Nash, 1 980). Owing t o these uncertainties, t he B ritish c oins have n ot therefore been f ormally phased, a lthough their p resence i n the L e Catillon hoard ( H64) c onfirms their r elatively early s tart, p robably i n P hase 5 , p ossibly c ontinuing into P hase 6 . However, a n e ven earlier date cannot b e r uled out a nd S cheers' ( 1977) p ost-Caesarian dating o n the basis o f their l ightness m isses the i ndividuality o f the t radition.

2 42

S OUTHERN P HASE

C OINAGES

( 51, S 4-S9)

1( Be lgic G au l o nly )

' C rossed L ines" T ypes - S cheers n o 1 0 S er ies 1 - R ight-fac ing

S er ies 2 - L eft-fac ing

A V ( Gallo-Be lgic B A1)

A V ( Gallo-Be lg ic B B1)

A VU ( Ga llo-Be lg ic B B2)

7 .8 g m

7 .8 g m

1 .9 g m

N B

A n A V1 2 a / lso e x ists, b ut h as n ot b een f ound i n B r itain.

S cheers ( 1977, 2 82-3)

d ist ingu ishes f our v ar iet ies o f A VU o f w hich v ar iet ies a -c a re f ound i n B r itain

P HASE

4

S er ies 1 - U ninscr ibed

G o ld

C lass 1 - B r it ish A 2

C lass 2 - B r it ish C

C lass 3 - C lass 4

C lass

-B r it ish D

" prototype" A V ( M29)

A V ( M31)

6 .4 g m

6 .1 g m

N B

A V ( Cher iton = p 115)

A V ( M33) 5 .1 g m

C lasses 1 -2 b oth e xhib it c onsiderab le v ar iation i n f lan m odu le

P HASE

5

S er ies 0 - C lasses 1 -2

C lass 3 ( Ga llo-Be lg ic F )

A V ( Scheers C lasses 1 -2)

A V ( Scheers C lass 3 )

A E

6 .2 g m

6 .0 g m

( >6 .0 g m)

N B

B r itish Q A t akes i ts r everse t ype d irect ly f rom C lass 3 , b ut t he o bverse i s c loser t o C lasses 1 -2 o r e ven S E41 .

S cheers N o 2 6 C lasses 4 -5 f orm

as eparate s er ies w ith t he

h orse l eft, t he p rototype o f t he g o ld c o inage i nscr ibed C RICIRV ( Scheers, 1 977, N o 2 7). T he m ean w e ight o f t he C lass 4 c o ins, a nd a lso o f C lass 1 o f t he C R ICIRV A V, i s 5 .9 g m . C lass 5 i s o nly k now f rom a s ing le c o in f ound a t A mb leny , A isne. S er ies 1 - B r it ish Q A, b road f lan q uarters

S er ies 2 - U niface

A V ( M58)

A V4 ( Var a . M 64, 6 5, 6 5/70, 7 0)

A V ( M59)

A V4 ( M68)

5 .9 g m

1 .3 g m

5 .8 g m

1 .2 g m

A V4 ( var b . M 63 , 6 3/71, 7 1)

N B

1 .3 g m

P HASE

Af ew e xamp les o f t he A VU s truck i n c opper-r ich a lloy m ay b e long w ith W 61

6

S er ies 3 - B r it ish Q A i n c opper-r ich a lloy; e ar liest i nscr ibed c o ins C lass 1 A V

C lass 2 ( COMM IOS?)

( M58, 6 0, 6 1)

5 .4 g m

A R

( M66-67, 6 9)

A V

1 .1. g m

Table A2:3

( M92)

5 .4 g m

Phasing

o f

2 43

S outhern c oinages.

P HASE

6( Continued)

S er ies 4 - N arrow f lan q uarters, h orse r ight

S er ies 5 - N arrow f lan q uarters, h orse l eft

C lass 1

C lass 1

C lass 3

A V 4 ( M75)

A V 4 ( M74)

A V 4 ( M80 = L Z5; M 83 = G allo-

0 .9 g m

0 .8 g m

1 .0-1.1 g m

C lass 2

C lass 2

A V 4 ( M77, 8 1 =L Z4, 6 )

A V R% ( M72-73; 3 7; H ay ling I s land N os 1 -2 =

1 .0 g m

1 .1 g m

B e lg ic X C2)

p 120)

S er ies 6 - H ead/Horse S ilver t ypes C lass 1 - H ead/Horse r ight, L Z7

C lass 3 - H orse r ight

A R ( M89 = L Z7)

A R% ( M90-91)

A R ( Hay ling I s land N os 3 -5, 1 5-16 = p p120,

1 .2 g m

0 .3 g m

1 .0 g m

1 41, c f P ortsmouth, 1 830)

C lass 2 - H ead/Horse l eft, L Z8

C lass 4 - H orse l eft

A R ( M446b; P etersf ie ld N o 2- p 120)

A R ( M88; H ay ling I s land N os 2 1-22 - p 141)

1 .1 g m

1 .3 g m

S er ies 7 - O pposed B easts/Horse t ypes

S er ies 8 - H ead-Pattern/Horse t ypes

C lass 1 ( Boars b ack t o b ack)

C lass 1 ( Head-Pattern r ight)

A R ( M373; H ay ling I s land N o 6.p 120)

A R ( M86; P etersf ie ld N o 1= p 118)

1 .1 g m

1 .2 g m

C lass 2 ( Anima ls F acing)

C lass 2 ( Head-Pattern l eft)

A R ( Ip ing, H ay ling I s land N o 2 5 -p 120)

A E /AR ( Hay ling I s land N os 1 7-18 = p 120) ( 0 .7-0.8 g m)

( 1 .1-1.5 g m)

N B

P HASE

7

C lass 1 h as s ome a ff inities w ith W S3 A V

( TINCOMM IOS)

S er ies 1 - E ar lier i ssues A V ( M93-94)

A V% ( M95)

A R ( M106A)

A R% ( M119, 1 20; L itt le

5 .3 g m

1 .0 g m

1 .1 g m

( 0 .3 g m)

H art ing = p 125)

S er ies 2 - L ater I ssues C lass 1 A V ( M96, 9 8)

A R ( M106; 1 06 r eversed,

A V% ( M97, 9 9)

A R% ( M118, 3 16)

1 31B W a ltham N os 1 , l a =p 124) 5 .3-5 .4 g m N B

( 1 .1 g m)

1 .0 g m

M 96 p oss ib ly t he w ork o f aR oman ( trained) e ngraver

C lass 2 A V ( M100)

A V% ( M101-104)

A R ( M105)

5 .1-5 .2 g m

1 .0 g m

1 .0 g m

Table A 2:3

Continued

2 44

0 .3 g m

P HASE

8 ( VERICA)

S er ies 1 - E ar lier I ssues, C OM .F l egends C lass 1 A V ( M109-110)

A V% ( M111-113)

A R ( M115, W altham N o 2 =p 126)

A R% ( M117,

1 20b,

W a ltham N o 3 =p 126)

( 5 .2 g m)

1 .2 g m

1 .3 g m

( 0 .3-0 .4 g m)

A R ( M123, W a ltham N o 4

A R% ( M120A, C -D,

C lass 2 ( REX t ypes) A V ( M121)

A V% ( M114 , 1 22 - B road F lan)

H ay ling I s land N o 8 , K ew = p p52, 1 27) 5 .3 g m

1 .3 g m

1 .2 g m

( 0 .3-0 .4 g m)

S er ies 2 - L ater I ssues, C OMM I.F l egends C lass 1 ( V ine L eaf) A V ( M125)

A V% ( M124)

A R% ( Waltham N o 5= p 126)

5 .3 g m C lass 2 A V% ( M126-7)

A R ( M128-131, A , B ; W a ltham N o 6= p 125)

A R% ( M116, 1 20E,

1 32;

W a ltham N os 7 -8, H ay ling I s land N o 1 9 -p p126-7)

1 .2 g m

( 0 .2-0 .3 g m)

A V ( M262)

A R ( M263A)

A R% ( M264)

5 .3 g m

1 .1 g m

( 0 .3 g m)

S er ies 2 - E PATI

S er ies 3 - C ARA

P HASE

9

( _ Late I nscr ibed I ssues)

S er ies 1 - T ASCI F /EPAT ICCV l egends

A R ( M263)

A R% ( Wa ltham N o 1 2 =p 134)

A R ( M265)

A R% ( Waltham N o 1 3 = p 134)

1 .2 g m

( 1.2-1.4 g m)

S er ies 4 - C RAB A R ( M371)

A R% ( M372)

Table A 2:3

C ontinued

245

S OUTHERN

C OINAGES

- T HIN

S ILVER

G ROUP

( ST1-ST4)

S er ies 1 - H ampsh ire t ypes C lass 1

C lass 2

C lass 3

A R ( M321)

A R ( M321A)

A R ( A llen, 1 965 T ype K )

0 .4-0 .7 g m

( 0 .6 g m)

( 0 .4 g m)

S er ies 2 - O ther B r it ish v ar ieties ( Unc lassed) A R ( Hay ling I s land N os 9 -12, 2 3; H eng istbury = p 135; M 384D = D obunnic 0 ; B ushe-Fox , 1 915 P 1 X XXII, 2 7 =H ay ling N o 9 ) ( 0 .1-0 .6 g m) S er ies 3 - B e lg ic G au l T ypes C lass 1

C lass 2

C lass 3

C lass 4

A R ( Var a . M 87)

A R ( M87A = S cheers N o 5 3;

A R ( Canterbury N o 1

A R ( Easton G rey N o 1

1 .2 g m

( 0 .5 g m)

B ox ley = p 135)

=p 135) ( 0 .7 g m)

A R ( Var b . A llen, 1 960, P 1 X III, 2 0 H ay ling I s land N o 2 4 =p 135) N B

B oth C lass 1 a nd C lass 4 h ave a b oar u nder t he h orse o n t he r everse .

S er ies 4

A rmor ican G au l T ypes

C lass 1

C lass 3

C lass 2

A R ( Hay ling

A R ( M320)

A R ( A llen, 1 960, 2 74 )

I s land N o 1 3 =p 135) ( 0 .6 g m)

1 .2 g m

( 0 .6 g m)

Table A2:3

C ontinued

2 46

=p 135)

S outh-Eastern Coinage

( Table A 2:4)

The Gallo-Belgic s eries a re more c oncentrated in the S outh-East t han in any o ther r egion. An important development i s the i solation o f a g roup o f I nsular derivatives ( Allen's Gallo-Belgic C ) which a re c loser c opies than a ny o f the o thers and the p rototypes o f the North-Eastern r ight-facing g old s eries ( SE41.4-5). The obverse die l ink between a C ontinental S E41.1 s tater and an Insular S E41.4 c oin s hould a lso be n oted. B ritish G evidently belongs t o the s ame s eries o f c lose imitations a s do the B ritish 0 ( SE42.2-4) quarter-staters, a c ontinuity o f development r eminiscent o f the S outhern c oinage ( S505 1). I n this c ase s ome o f the I nsular c oins a re earlier in date than t he l atest C ontinental s trikings ( 8E52.1-3). Allen's B ritish P ( SE52.4) derives f rom the s econd o f these latter c lasses. The kindred quarter-staters ( SE43) have a lso been included a s a S outh-Eastern s eries. The parent s eries a re discussed f urther i n Haselgrove ( 1984b). GalloB elgic c oins f airly c ertainly r emained i n c irculation in parts o f the S outh-East, n otably Kent, l ater than i n m ost o ther r egions. P hases 6-7 The basic a rrangement i s a gain A llen's ( 1944; 1 960), modified on t he basis ( Chapter 4 ) o f a ccording f amilial r elationships p recedence o ver l imited distributional evidence, a nd, ( as w ith the earlier, o ften p oorly preserved, s ilver and bronze) o f g rouping types i nto s eries and c lasses a ccording t o their basic c ommon theme. Thus, s ome o f Allen's B ritish L Z types a re r eclassified h ere a s S outh-Eastern ( 5E62), f orming a l ink a s they c learly do between the C ontinental uniface c oins which p rovided their p rototype, a nd the types i nscribed DUBNOVELLAVNVS ( SE72). The r elationships p roposed h ere b etween s ome o f the earliest inscribed c oins a nd o thers o f the uninscribed i ssues ( Allen's LX g old, s ilver and bronze e tc.) a re broadly i n a ccord with Rodwell ( 1976) ( SE61-62; S E71-75). The S outh-Eastern c oinages a re f ound i n Kent, E ssex, w ith smaller numbers in Hertfordshire, S uffolk a nd the M iddle/ Upper Thames basin. The most d ifficult types t o p lace a re the b ronzes, r ecent excavations having yielded s everal n ew varieties, both uninscribed and inscribed ( 15). I n g eneral t erms, their i nitial i nspiration a nd typological a ffinity i s c ertainly Continental, particularly f or the Kentish types ( SE63, e tc.), but a lso n orth o f the Thames ( e.g. S E75). S ome have obvious c ounterparts among t he l ater i nscribed types a nd e vidently f orm part o f the s ame s eries ( e.g. S E71). The f irst inscribed types o f Dubnovellaunus ( SE71.1; Mack, 1 975, 2 91 e tc.) a re a particularly p recise m irrorimage o f a post-Conquest B elgic bronze type ( Scheers, 1 977, No.80e; D . Nash, P ers. Comm.). Mack ( 1975) 2 91A, h owever, p robably i s Gaulish ( Delesträe, 1 977). The c ontinental parallels a nd number o f imports r eaching s ites l ike

2 47

B raughing and Canterbury i mply that s triking in b ronze began i n P hase 6 , but the s ituation i s c omplicated by the uncertainty a ttaching t o the potin s eries and a later date i s n ot t o b e ruled o ut. P hase 8 Despite a f ew n ew types, the p icture g iven by Allen ( 1944) i s e ssentially unchanged. The c o-occurrence a t Waltham a nd Wanborough ( H2, H47) o f both o f the s eries inscribed E PPILLVS s trengthens t he a rgument f or this being the s ame i ndividual. There a re o bvious a ffinities b etween c oins i n his Kentish s eries ( SE82.1) and the S outhern s eries i nscribed VERICA ( S81.1), while his Romanised types a re a p ossible s ource f or the t ypes o f the f inal s eries o f the S outhern c oinage ( S91 - 9 4). P atin t ypes The p otin c oinage o f the S outh-East was the s ubject o f a n ew s tudy by A llen ( 1971), n ow c omplemented by a r eappraisal o f the t echnology ( Van A rsdell, 1 986). P roperly s peaking, a c ast bronze c oinage, the term p otin i s r etained h ere a s a c onvenient s horthand. The later p otins w ere the p roduct o f a l ong p eriod o f experimentation t o develop m ore e fficient manufacturing methods a nd Van A rsdell d educes f ive d ifferent s tages o f mould-formation f rom the markings o n t he c oins: p rototype ( Allen's t ype A ), experimental ( B-D), i nnovative ( E-G), o ptimisation ( H-L) and adjustment ( M-0). Van A rsdell's a nalysis o f the s triations o n the i nnovative p eriod c oins c onvincingly r efutes A llen's s uggestion that papyrus ( with i ts intimations o f early M editerranean c ontacts) was u sed t o p ress o ut the moulds; rather s craping, wire, wood ( cf. Evans, 1 864) a nd t extile were a ll u sed, g enerating a t l east f our d ifferent k inds o f s triations. The h ome o f B ritish p otin c oinage was c learly s outh o f the Thames, p rincipally i n Kent, a lthough a s ignificant number o f these c oins a re f ound n orth o f the r iver, e specially the latest c lasses ( Allen M -P). They have o ne o f the m ost extensive distributions o f any British type, a ppearing a t a number o f s ites i n the W estern r egion ( Beckford, Glastonbury a nd Meare). T he Continental o rigins o f the s eries a re n ot i n doubt a nd t he a ssumed prototypes, both c ast and s truck Gaulish c opies o f the s econd c entury BC b ronze c oinage o f Massalia, e specially the C entral Gaulish butting bull o r " deformed q uadruped" s eries ( e.g. BN 5 311, BN 7 388), a re turning u p in increasing n umbers throughout the S outh-East and even i n Norfolk ( cf. G regory , 1 980; Haselgrove 1 978; 1 984a). T hese p rototypes date t o the l ater s econd c entury BC o r p ossibly the early f irst c entury; their distribution i n B ritain a ppears w ider than that o f the earliest B ritish p otin d erived f rom them. I t i s doubtful whether A llen's type s eries o r Van Arsdell's t echnological varieties have a unilinear chronological validity and the a rrangement p referred here has b een t o d ivide the types into t wo principal s eries ( P1, P 2), r etaining o nly t he more o bvious subdivisions. There

2 48

a re h ints o f a g eographical basis t o this d ifferentiation, w ith P 2 c oins m ore c ommon i n the W eald a nd the western part o f the core distribution. S trictly s peaking, the " protot ypes" ( P1.1) s hould perhaps be c lassed a s a s eparate s eries s ince many o r a ll o f them c ould yet turn o ut t o be C ontinental i mports. They r etain the r elief and s tylisation o f t he o riginals in c ontrast t o the f lat l inear s tyle characteristic o f the o ther B ritish types, and weigh t wice a s much a s t heir s uccessors. These ( P2.1 e tc.), in t urn, have f eatures that c ould i mply m ore t han o ne p rotot ype such a s a n a pparent vestigial l egend i n the exergue o f o ne o f the S nettisham c oins, while the s ilvery a ppearance i nduced by t he h igh tin content i s a lso f ound in B elgic Gaul types ( e.g. S cheers, 1 977, No.191). As Dolley ( 1954) o bserved, this l atter f eature s uggests that the B ritish p otins c irculated a longside a g old r ather t han a s ilver c oinage a nd o ffers f urther s upport f or the i dea t hat p otin i nitially f unctioned a s a h igh value c oinage ( Collis, 1 974a). The a rchaeological evidence ( Chapter 5 ) l eaves l ittle d oubt that both s eries have p re-Caesarian o rigins. O ther f actors h inting a t a l ater s econd c entury, o r early f irst c entury B C, date a re the p ossibility t hat t he weight o f p otins f ell i n s tep w ith that o f P eriod I -II g old quarter s taters, a nd t he existence o f a t l east o ne a nciently g oldp lated p otin ( P1.2). Whether o r n ot Van A rsdell ( 1984b) i s c orrect t o s uggest that this was intended t o pass a s a Gallo-Belgic B q uarter s tater ( S12), he i s s urely r ight t hat the f orgery ( if I ron Age) i s more r eadily c omprehended i n the period b efore quarter s taters o n a b road, thin f lan w ere displaced by later s maller and thicker c oins. I f the hoard evidence i s a ccepted a t f ace value, P 1.45 a re later than a ny o f the P 2 s eries, P 1.2 may be b roadly e quivalent t o P 2.1, and P 1.3 o verlaps P 2.2-3. The P 1.3 s eries may have c ontinued t o be cast a fter the hoard h orizon t erminated and there may have b een a g ap in p roduction between them and the latest types. On balance, p otin production p robably c eased during the later f irst c entury BC, and c ertainly by early in the f irst c entury AD, a lthough they c ontinued to c irculate f or s ome t ime a fterwards.

2 49

S OUTH-EASTERN P HASE

C OINAGES

( SE1-SE8)

1 ( Be lg ic G au l o nly)

" Broad F lan" T ypes ( Scheers N o 8 ) P re-Tayac S er ies 1 - r ight-fac ing

S er ies 2 - l eft-facing a nd e xergua l

C lass 1

t ypes

C lass 1

A V ( Scheers C lass 1 )

A V% ( C lass 1 )

A V ( Scheers C lass 2 )

A V% ( C lass 2 )

7 .6 g m

2 .0 g m

7 .8 g m

1 .7 g m

A V ( C lasses 4 -5)

A V% ( C lasses 3 -5)

A V ( C lass 6 )

A V% ( C lass 6 )

7 .7 g m

1 .9 g m

7 .5 g m

1 .8 g m

C lass 2

P HASE

C lass 2

2 ( Be lgic G au l o nly)

" Broad F lan" T ypes ( Scheers N o 8 )P ost-Tayac S er ies 1 - r ight-fac ing

S er ies 2 - l eft-fac ing C lass 1

A V ( C lass 3 )

( AV 1 4? / )

7 .3 g m N B

A V ( C lass 7 )

A V% ( C lasses 7 -8)

7 .5 g m

1 .8 g m

S ome o f t he A V% S E11.2 a bove p robab ly

C lass 2

b e long w ith t h is s tater t ype w hich i s

A V ( C lass 8 )

c op ied f rom S E21.2, a nd s ome o f t he A V%

7 .2 g m

( A n?)

S E22 .1 p robab ly b e long w ith t he e ar liest s taters o f 5 E22 .2 .

P HASE

3 ( Be lg ic G au l o n ly )

S er ies 1

S er ies 2

C lass 1

C lass 2

A V ( Scheers N o 8 ,

A V ( Scheers N o 9 ,

C lass 4 b;

C lass 2 )

A V% ( Scheers N o 1 3, C lasses 1 -2 )

S cheers N o 9 , C lass 1 ) 7 .0 g m

7 .2 g m

P HASE

1 .7 g m

4

S er ies 1 - S cheers N o 9 , G a llo-Be lg ic C ;

S er ies 2

S cheers N o 1 3, G allo-Be lgic D C;

B r it ish G , H A

B r itish 0

C lass 1

C lass 4

C lass 1

C lass 3

A V ( C lass 3 )

A V ( Insu lar C )

A V% ( C lass 3 ; D C)

A V% ( M43)

6 .6 g m

6 .5 g m

1 .5 g m

1 .5 g m

C lass 2

C lass 5

C lass 2

C lass 4

A V ( C lass 5 )

A V ( Var a . M 46, 4 6A

A V% ( M40)

A V% ( M44)

1 .4 g m

1 .4 g m

6. 4 g m

= G V ar b . M 50A - H A)

C lass 3

6 .2 g m

A V ( C lass 4 ) 6 .3 g m

Table A 2:4

P hasing o f

S outh —Eastern c oinages.

2 50

P HASE

4 ( Cont inued)

S er ies 3 - kgrouped C lass 1

C lass 3

A VU ( M35)

A E/AVU ( Hay ling I s land N o 2 0 =p 121)

1 .5 g m

( 0 .8 g m)

C lass 2 A V% ( M45) 1 .4 g m

P HASE

5

cheers N o 2 4 , G alloS er ies 1 - " Uniface"; S

S er ies 2 - S cheers N o 1 3; G allo-Be lq ic D ;

B e lg ic, E

B r itish P

C lass 1

C lass 4

A V

A V

6 .3 g m

5 .9 g m

C lass 6 A V

C lass 1

W

C lass 3

A V4 ( C lass 4 ; M 41A

A V4 ( C lass 6 ; M 39,

=D B) 5 .5 g m

1 .4 g m

4 2 =D A) 1 .3 g m

C lass 2

C lass 5

C lass 7

C lass 2

C lass 4

A V

A V

A E

A V4 ( C lass 5 ; M 41A

A VU ( M36, 3 8 =P )

6 .2 g m

5 .8 g m

4 .6-4 .7 g m

1 .3 g m

=D B)

C lass 3

N B

1 .2 g m

S E52 .4 d er ives f rom S E52 .2

A V 6 .2 g m

P HASE

6

S er ies 1 - H orse r ight A V ( M294 = L Y2)

A V4 ( M78 = L Y3)

A R ( M272 - L X15; H ay ling I s land N o 1 4b =

( 5 .6-5 .9 g m)

1 .4 g m

( 1.0 g m)

A V ( M84, 2 92 = L Z1)

A VU ( M85 = L Z2)

A R ( M442-443 = L X14; W a ltham N o 9 ; H ay ling

( 5 .4-5 .6 g m)

1 .3 g m

( 0 .9 g m)

p 118)

S er ies 2 - H orse l eft

I s land N o 1 4a = p p34, 18)

S er ies 3 - T wo B east t ypes A R ( M445 = L X16; 4 46 - A E ( M295-296, 3 16A-B L Z9)

N B

=L V 6 -9; 4 46

l arge a nd s ma ll m odu les

L X26; 2 99)

1 .2 g m

1 .9 g m

T able A 2:4

T he A E a re s truck o n

C ontinued

2 51

P HASE

7

( DUBNOVELLAVNVS,

A DDEDOMAROS)

S er ies 1 - H orse r ight C lass 1 ( Dubnove llavnvs, K ent) A V ( M282-283)

A V4 ( M284-5 = L Y4-5)

A R ( M286-288;

A E ( M289-291; M 316C -

C anterbury

L Y10 C anterbury

N o 2=p 128) 5 .3-5 .6 g m

1 .3 g m

0 .9 g m

N os 3 -5; B orstal = p p119, 1 28) ( 1 .7, 2 .4 g m) N B

T he w eight f requency d istr ibut ion i s b imodal.

C lass 2 ( Uncertain o r p seudo-legend)

C lass 3 ( Pattern/Horse)

A V ( M279)

A E ( M316D; C anterbury

5 .4 g m

1 .3 g m

N o 1 0 =p 119)

S er ies 2 - H orse l eft C lass 1 ( Dubnove llavnvs, E ssex) A V ( M275)

A V4 ( M276)

A E ( M277, 2 81 =

N B

L X23-24; 2 78 ;280A

f requency d is-

=L X25, C anterbury

t r ibut ion i s

N o 6 ; T hetford =

e ffect ive ly

p p128-9) 5 .5 g m

1 .3 g m

T he w e ight

b imoda l c f S E71.1

( 1 .6-2 .5 g m)

C lass 2 ( Uncertain o r p seudo-legends)

C lass 3 ( Pattern/Horse)

A V ( M293 - L Y1; 2 97)

A V4 ( M298)

A R ( M446D = L Z10)

5 .3 g m

1 .3 g m

S er ies 3 - P attern/Horse t ypes ( Addedomaros) C lass 1 A R ( Canterbury N o 9-p 119)

A V ( M266)

A V4 ( M271 = L X3;

5 .6 g m

1 .4 g m

( 0 .6 g m )

A V ( M267)

A V1 4 ( / M270 = L X2)

A R ( M272A = L X17; R omsey

5 .5 g m

1 .4 g m

S andy = p 32)

C lass 2 =p 56)

C lass 3 A V ( M268)

A V4 ( M269)

5 .5 g m

( 1 .2 g m)

S er ies 4 - H ead/Horse t ypes ( w ith f eather o n s i lver) C lass 2

C lass 1 A R ( M274A )

A E ( M274 = L X22)

A R ( M441 = L X11;

A E ( M273 = L X21)

H ar low N o 1 =p 34) ( 1 .1 g m)

1 .7 g m

Table A2:4

( 1 .4 g m)

C ontinued

2 52

1 .4 g m

P HASE

7( Cont inued)

S er ies 5 - P ronounced C ont inenta l A ff init ies C lass 1

C lass 2

A E ( Brettenham, C laydon, H acheston -

A E1 2 ( / M280C c f S cheers,

A ppendix 1 c f S cheers 1 977,

1 977, N o 1 03)

N o 8 7 e tc)

P HASE

8

( EPPILLVS)

S er ies 1 - C ALLE l egends A V1 4 ( / M107, 3 02;

A R ( M108)

W altham N o 1 0 =p 128) ( 1 .1 g m)

( 1 .2 g m)

S er ies 2 C lass 1 ( COM .F l egends) A V ( M300-301)

A V4 ( M303-304)

A R ( M305-308)

A E ( M309-312; C anterbury N o 7 ; W altham N o 1 = p p127-8)

5 .4 g m

1 .3 g m

1 .2 g m

C lass 2 ( Uncertain l egends e tc) A R ( M299A)

A RU ( M316E)

Table A2:4

A E1 2 ( / M316F)

Continued

2 53

2 .2 g m

S OUTH-EASTERN

P OTIN

C O INAGE

I- E arlier G roup S eries 1 - T ypes w ith C entral

P oint

S eries 2 - T ypes w ithout C entral

C lass 1 P otin ( C lass A = ' Prototype') 3 .4-3.7 g m C lass 1 P ot in ( C lasses B -D) 2 .0 g m C lass 2 P ot in ( C lasses E -G) 1 .8 g m C lass 2

C lass 3

C lass 3

P otin

P ot in

P ot in

( C lasses J -K)

( C lass L )

( C lass H )

1 .4 g m

1 .6 g m

1 .5 g m

I - L ater G roup C lass 4

C lass 5

P otin

P otin

1 .2 g m

( C lass M )

( C lasses N -P)

1 .2 g m

Table A 2:4

Continued

2 54

P oint

Zastern C oinage

( Table A2:5)

P re-Caesarian g old c oin p roduction in the Eastern r egion ( initially the Home Counties north o f L ondon, but broadening to i nclude much o f the S tudy Area by the t ime o f the Conquest) i s l imited to Allen's B ritsh A l s eries ( E41.1). A d ie analysis o f these and the c losely r elated types o f the C lacton h oard ( E41.2-3) has been undertaken by Mackensen ( 1974). As w ith their S outhern c ounterparts ( S41) these early I nsular d erivatives c opy S cheers ( 1977) No.9 ( SE41.2-3), but had n o discernible direct influence on s ubsequent developments. P hases

5 -7

S ince Roberts' detailed analysis a nd d ie s tudy o f the g old s eries ( E51-62) a t the head o f the main c oinage developments i n Eastern England and i ts derivatives i nscribed with T ASCIOVANVS a nd a ssociated l egends ( E71-75) i s not c omplete, the basic a rrangement a gain r emains Allen's ( 1944; 1 960). The earliest g old s eries ( E51-52), which have a w idespread, i f thin, d istribution throughout the S tudy A rea, a re the e xact c ounterparts by design a nd m etrology o f the gold s eries heading S outhern developments ( S51-52) w ith which they a re f requently a ssociated. I ndeed, that the Eastern s eries w ere derived f rom the S outhern was o riginally s uggested by Evans ( 1849; Van A rsdell, 1 984a). B eyond this, h owever, their dating and derivation i s c ontentious ( Harding, 1 974; Rodwell, 1 976). The o nly points that n eed be n oted here c oncern their r elationship t o the Gallo-Belgic t ypes. I n i ts uniface design, the E 52 s eries i s c losely l inked t o the main Continental s eries ( SE51), while there i s an o bvious debt t o the l atest s tages o f c oinage in B elgic Gaul in the a doption o f a more naturalistic h orse a t the s ame s tage o f metrological development ( Haselgrove, 1 984b). I n a ll p robability, o ther e lements o f t he design derive f rom c lose B ritish c opies o f Continental o riginals ( e.g. S E41.4, NE51). The use o f s ilver i n the Eastern c oinage c ommences with c lose c opies o f g old o riginals ( LX18-19 = E61.3; LX10 = E 63.1 - a lthough a f lurry o f r ecent f inds f rom Norfolk s uggests that L X10, while belonging typologically t o the E 63 s eries, f orms part o f the earliest s tratum o f the East Anglian s ilver c oinage. A gain the C ontinental debt i s c lear. This i s a lso the case with s ome Phase 7 types ( although this i s e ssentially a c ommon debt t o Roman c oinage e .g. E 71.2-3) when bronze c oinage a lso began t o be s truck a s part o f t rimetallic s ets which bear n ot o nly the name o f TASCIOVANVS, but a variety o f a ssociated l egends RVIIS, D IAS, ANDO, S EGO. As a r esult o f the f inds f rom Baldock, Braughing a nd Harlow these can n ow be r elated to o ne another r ather better than before. The a rrangement adopted here f or the l egend c ombinations i s s imilar to A llen's ( 1967a). With the bronze c oin f ound a t Great

2 55

Canfield, the a ssociation o f CAMVL a nd TASCIOVANVS l egends n ow s eems e stablished ( E75.1). P hase 8 A lthough there has been no o verview s ince 1 944, the s eries i nscribed with CVNOBELINVS l egends have r eceived c onsiderable a ttention. A die a nalysis o f the g old was published t en years a go ( Allen, 1 975), while the H arlow f inds ( Allen, 1 967a) p rovided t he basis f or a new a rrangement o f the b ronze, d ifferentiating between e arly and late types and d istributionally between those w ith CAMVLODUNVM l egends a nd those with T ASCIOVANVS F , which he s uggested were i ssued by a s eparate W estern mint. A s imilar c lassification i s p ossible f or the s ilver ( cf. E 81-3). I f the Jupiter Ammon p ortrait o n t wo o f the developed C olchester types ( Mack, 1 975, Nos. 2 51, 2 53) i s intended to r epresent Cunobelinus, they c ould w ell be l ater than the developed types w ith Tasciovanus l egends, which employ m ore youthful, beardless p ortraits ( Ibid ., Nos. 2 42-3, 2 46, 2 48) and thus the f inal i ssues o f h is l ong r eign. The t ypes w ith Cunobelinus' n ame a lone ( E81) a re undoubtedly his earliest c oins a nd may o verlap w ith the l atest P hase 7 i ssues i n the West. A number o f u nusual n ew s ilver and b ronze t ypes have r ecently c ome t o l ight including the " ship c oin" f rom Canterbury ( E81), a pparently a double unit ( Muckelroy, Haselgrove and Nash, 1 978), but do n ot a ffect the g eneral p icture. There a re p oints o f s imilarity b etween the c oinage o f Cunobelinus a nd those i n t he name o f DVBNOVELLAUNVS ( SE717 2), f or i nstance i n the d esign o f t he g old types. A c ase can c ertainly b e made f or i ncluding C unobelinus' c oinage a s the c ulmination o f the S outh-Eastern c oinage, rather t han o f the Eastern t radition. On balance, h owever, the l inks with the latter a ppear t he s tronger, typologically, distributionally a nd i n the pairing o f the l egends. The c onventional a scription, that o f E vans ( 1864), has b een r etained. Assigned t o the c losing p hase o f the Eastern c oinage o n typological g rounds a re a n umber o f rare types, i ncluding the s ilver c oins b earing the l egend SOLIDV w ith a r everse type a pparently derived f rom an A s o f Agrippa ( AD 3 7-41) ( cf. S cheers, 1 978) a nd evidently l ate, p ossibly even p ostConquest ( E84). The g eneral manner o f engraving and p resentation o f the c oins i nscribed AMMINVS ( Allen , 1 976b) and a ttributed t o Adminius ( Nash, 1 982) i s very c lose t o Cunobelinus' c oins a nd they have therefore b een i ncluded a s part o f the Eastern c oinage s eries ( E85), a lthough t he f ew known f indspots have a ll b een s outh o f the Thames a nd his home i s l ikely t o b e K ent. I f t he individual whose name a ppears o n the c oins i s the Adminius, s on o f Cunobelinus, who was driven o ut o f B ritain and made a deditio t o C aius e AD 3 9-40 ( Suetonius, C aligula 44, 2 ), a s s eems l ikely , this p rovides a u seful t erminus a nte quem f or h is c oinage.

2 56

E ASTERN P HASE

C OINAGES

( E4-E8)

4

S er ies 1 - U ninscr ibed G o ld C lass 1 ( Br it ish A )

C lass 2 ( Br it ish E )

C lass 3 ( Br it ish F )

A V ( M28)

A V ( M47)

A V ( M48)

6 .4 g m

6 .2 g m

6 .4 g m

P HASE

5

S er ies 1 - P attern/Horse T ypes, B r it ish L A

S er ies 2 - U niface T ypes, B r it ish L B

A V ( M133-135, 1 38A)

A V ( M140)

A V% ( M134A, B ; S aham N o 8= p 118)

5 .8 g m N B

1 .2 g m

5 .8 g m

D ie l inks s how t hat M 133 i s e ar lier t han M 135

P HASE

6

S er ies 1 - P attern/Horse T ypes

S er ies 2 - U niface T ypes, B r itish L B C lass 1

C lass 1 ( LB) A V ( M136, 1 37, 1 38)

A V% ( M73a, M 76 = L X4)

A V ( M141-143)

5 .6 g m

1 .2 g m

5 .6 g m

A V% ( Braughing N o 4=

A V ( M144-6; M 59A)

A V% ( "Dunstab le" = p 32)

C lass 2 ( LB, M A) A V ( M147-8, 1 39A)

C lass 2 ( LZ3, L X5) p 117)

5 .4 g m

N B

D oub le S o n M 146 o bv . d er ived f rom S cheers

5 .4 g m

N o .24 C lass 5 ; R ev f rom S 51.

M 59A

c ou ld e qua lly b e c lassified a s S 51 a nd h as a n o bv . d ie l ink w ith M 141. C lass 3 ( LX18-19) A R ( M439-440; M 76A)

A E/AR1 2 ( / Braugh ing N o 2=p 118)

1 .0 g m S er ies 3 - H ead/Horse T ypes C lass 1 ( XD, L X10, L X10 V ar)

C lass 2 ( LX6-8)

C lass 3 ( LX9)

A /1 4 ( / M79)

A R ( M435-437;

A R ( M280)

A R ( M438; B ishop 's S tortford,

B raugh ing

C ambr idge

N o 1= p 118)

N o 1= p 118) 1 .3 g m

1 .5 g m

Table A2:5

1 .0 g m

P hasing

( 0 .5 g m)

o f Eastern c oinages.

2 57

P HASE

7

( TASCIOVANVS a nd A ssociated L egends)

S er ies 1 - U ninscr ibed/TASCIOVANVS/VERLAM IO l egends C lass 1 A V ( M149-150, W est

A VU ( M151 = L X1; M 153)

W ickham = p 57)

A R ( Cambr idge N o 2 ,

A E ( M167, B a ldock

B edford D orchester

N o 1= p 61)

=p p34, 1 29) 5 .5 g m

1 .3 g m

1 .3 g m

2 .0 g m A E1 2 ( / M182) 0 .9 g m

C lass 2 ( Inf luence f rom c o inage o f MA ntonius o n A E p ortraits) A V ( M154-157)

A V4 ( M152)

A R ( M158, 1 61-162,

A E ( M169-172,

1 74-175,

1 79-180, A shton =

1 64-166)

p 64) 1 .3 g m

5 .4 g m

1 .3 g m

2 .0 g m A E1 2 ( / M173, 1 83, A -6 ; B a ldock N o 2 , B raugh ing N o 3 , P ucker idge N os 2 3=p p61-2, 18) ( 0 .9-1.2 g m)

C lass 3 ( Pronounced R oman i nf luence o n A R, A E t ypes) A V ( M184)

A IN ( M185)

A R ( M159-160, 1 63)

A E2 ( M178)

5 .4 g m

1 .3 g m

1 .2-1.3 g m

5 .1 g m

N B

A V i nscr ibed R ICON

A E ( M176-177,

1 81)

1 .3 g m S er ies 2 - T ASCIOVANVS D IAS/VER L egends A R ( M188, T r ing

A E ( M168, 1 77, 1 92)

A E1 2 ( / Pucker idge

p 62) ( 1 .2 g m)

N B

2 .0 g m

A pparent ly c ont emporary w ith

N o 4=p 61) ( 0 .3 g m)

E 71.2-3

S er ies 3 - V IR/RVIIS L egends A E ( M189-191)

A E1 2 ( / M193)

2 .2 g m

0 .7 g m

N B

A pparent ly c ont emporary w ith E 71 .3

S er ies 4 - T ASCIO/SEGO L egends A V ( M194)

A V4 ( M195)

A R ( M196)

5 .5 g m

1 .3 g m

( 1 .2 g m )

N B

A pparent ly c ont emporary w ith E 71.2, p robab ly l ate i n s equence

Table A2:5

Continued

2 58

P HASE

7( Continued)

S er ies 5 - O ther T ASCIOVANVS L egends C lass 1 ( ANDOCO) A V ( M197)

A V4 ( M198)

A R ( M199)

A E ( M170A, 2 00)

5 .4 g m

1 .3 g m

1 .1 g m

( 1 .4-1 .6 g m)

A V4 M 187)

A E ( Great C anf ie ld =

C lass 2 ( CAMVL) A V ( M186)

N B

A ppendix 1 ) 5 .5 g m

S er ies 5 i s a pparent ly b road ly c ontem-

1 .3 g m

p orary w ith E 71 .1- 2

P HASE

8

( CVNOBELINVS)

S er ies 1 - C VNO L egends A V ( B iga = M 201)

A V¼ ( B iga = M 202)

A R ( M214, 2 16-217,

A E ( M222A-223, 2 27-

2 54-255; O xford

2 28, 2 32 , 2 57A,

=p 78) 5 .4 g m

1 .3 g m

1 .1 g m

2 61) ( 1 .7-2 .2 g m) A E2 ( Canterbury N o 8 =p 77) ( 4 .14 g m)

S er ies 2 - C AM/CVN L egends C lass 1 ( Ear ly t ypes) A V ( L inear = M 210,A;

A VU ( L inear = M 209;

W ild A , B=M 211-212,

A R ( M215, 2 56;

W ild; P last ic -

P last ic A , B-

A E ( M222, 2 24, 2 26 .

C o lchester

M 204-205)

2 29, 2 30-231, 2 33)

N o 2=p 132)

M 203, 2 13) 5 .4 g m

1 .3 g m

1 .2 g m

2 .1 g m A E1 2 ( / M233A)

C lass 2 ( Deve loped t ypes) A V ( C lassic A , B=

A V ( C lassic; M 234A)

A R ( M218-219, 2 34,

M 206-208)

A E ( M225, 2 50-253,

2 41A, 2 58;

2 60; S tandon -

C o lchester

p 75)

N o 1= p 132) 5 .4 g m N B

1 .3 g m

1 .2 g m

2 .0 g m

O bv . d ie l ink b etween P last ic a nd C lassic

S er ies 3 - C VN/TASC F L egends C lass 1 ( Ear ly t ypes)

C lass 2 ( Deve loped t ypes)

A E ( M220-221, 2 45, 2 47)

A R M 235-240)

A E ( M242-244, 2 46,

2 .5 g m

1 .2 g m

2 .4 g m

S er ies 4 - S OLIDV L egend

S er ies 5 - A MM INVS L egends

A R ( M259)

A R ( M313,314)

A E ( M315; C anterbury

( 1 .1 g m)

0 .9-1.0 g m

( 1 .5 g m)

2 48-249)

N o 1 =p 135)

Table A2:5

C ontinued

2 59

East

Anglian C oinage

( Table A 2:6)

The basis o f o ur knowledge o f t he East Anglian c oinage i s Allen ( 1970a), a n i n-depth a rrangement made possible by the h igh incidence o f hoarding o f these c oins - a phenomenon g enerally a ssumed t o r elate directly t o the t roubles o f AD 4 7 and e specially AD 6 0-1. The difficulties o f type d efinition ( Chapter 4 ) a re s uch, h owever, t hat what was then c onsidered a n e specially d etailed s tudy must n ow b e r egarded a s s tandard p ractice ( e.g. S ellwood, 1 984a, b ). Although s everal n ew variants have been d iscovered s ince 1 970 - s ix f rom the s ite a t Woodcock Hall, Saham T oney, N orfolk ( Brown, 1 986) - t hey a ll c onform t o the three c oncurrent s eries: P attern/Horse; B oar/Horse; Face/Horse ( Series 1 -3) d ifferentiated by Allen ( 1970a). These n ew f inds do, however, underline the chronological a nd r epresentational b ias which c an ensue f rom a heavy p reponderance o f hoard f inds a mong t he s urviving c oins ( cf. A llen and Haselgrove, 1 979). I n s uch c ircumstances, the u se o f s tatistical e stimation p rocedures t o calculate the number o f dies employed i n s triking a particular s eries r equires caution, while i t may b e a sked whether the h istorical interpretation l ed A llen t o p ropose a n a bsolute c hronology which i s a ltogether t oo l ate i n emphasis. Allen's ( 1970a) r elative o rdering, h owever, w ith the s upport o f h is d ie s tudy and a nalysis o f the wear p atterns exhibited by t he different types c ontained in the h oards, can be a ccepted w ith o nly m inor m odification. The early uninscribed g old coins in the region ( Allen's B ritish J ) c an now b e s een a s partially dependent o n the Gallo-Belgic unit 'a ce s taters ( SE51). B oth the exergual design a nd the m etrology f ollow C lasses 2 -3 and the East Anglian c oins have therefore b een a ssigned t o P hase 5 . But, a s Kent ( 1978a) has n oted, the devolved t ypology o f the r emaining uninscribed g old c ompared w ith the earliest s ilver types c ould i mply that they were s truck r ather later t han the c hronological p lacement r etained h ere a llows. This later g old and indeed the whole P attern/Horse s eries ( EA61-91) i s c losely l inked t o the earlier s tages o f t he Eastern c oinage t radition ( E61.2; E 71; E 75; c f. A llen, 1 970a). S imilarly, the Boar/Horse s eries ( EA62-72) d erives f rom the e arliest N orth-Eastern s ilver i ssues ( NE61), while r ecent f inds s uggest that the M O s eries, a ssigned typologically to the Eastern c oinage ( E63.1), c onstituted an equivalent early s tratum o f the F ace/Horse s eries ( EA73-83). Allen's r elative o rdering i s s upported by the s urvival r ates o f 1 .4, 1 .5 and 1 .7 c oins/obverse die f or t he uni nscribed c oins o f the B oar, Face a nd P attern/Horse s eries r espectively, c ompared t o 3 .4 f or ANTED , r ising t o 8 .8, 1 0.6 and 1 1.8 f or the ECEN, E CE A a nd E CE B s eries. These l atter, a t 4 7% easily the dominant c onstituent o f the h oards, a nd a t 1 6% the l east w ell r epresented in s ettlement g roups, evidently a chieved o nly l imited c irculation and w ere p lausibly dated t o the p ost-Conquest p eriod by Allen;

2 60

they have therefore b een a ssigned t o Phase 9 ( EA91.1-3). The s ame c ould b e t rue o f the latest types o f Face/Horse c oins ( EA83.2), a lthough their f loruit lay earlier. The f inal s tage o f East Anglian c oinage, probably employing an early Neronian p rototype, and carrying the r everse l egend E SICO FECIT, was the i rregular s eries EA94 ( Allen, 1 976c). The o bverse l egend, a lthough l ess c lear, i s p robably SUB RI P RASTO ( Mossop, 1 979), i f s o, a pparently a lluding to the c lient ruler, P rasutagus. The type, however, i s known o nly f rom a s ingle, unsealed f ind.

2 61

E AST P HASE

A NGL IAN

C O INAGES

( EA5-EA9)

5

S eries 1 - B ritish J A A V ( M49) 6 .1

N B E xergual

g m

P HASE

d esign t aken f rom S E5 1.2-3

6

S eries 1 - P attern/Horse C lass 1

C lass 2

A V ( M49A = J B )

A V ( la = M 397-399;

A R ( IVa, b = M 4 14

4 036 )

= L X20)

( 5.7-5.8 g m)

5 .4 g m

1 .0 g m

S eries 2 - B oar/Horse A R ( h a =M 407)

A R I > ( 1Ib = M 4 11;

1 .1

0 .5 g m

S aham N o 4= p 147) g m

P HASE

7

S eries 1 - P attern/Horse C lass 1 A V ( lb = M 400, A ; 4 0 1)

A V1 4 ( / Id = M 404)

A R ( IVc = M 415;

A IV e ( IVd = M 4 17A)

S aham N o 3= p 147) 5 .6 g m

( 0.9-1.0 g m)

( 0.8-1.2 g m)

( 0.5 g m)

C lass 2 A V ( lc = M 402, 4 03A, C ) 5 .6 g m S eries 2 - B oar/Horse

S eries 3 - F ace/Horse

C lass 1

C lass 2

C lass 1

A R ( hic d = M 408;

A R ( Ile = M 409)

A R ( lila = M 413 A , B , C = L X 13;

1 .2 g m

1 .2 g m

S aham N o 1= p 147) 1 .2 g m

M 412 = L X12; S aham N o 2= p 147)

C lass 3 ( CANS D VRO)

C lass 2

A R ( Ilf = M 434)

A R ( Illb = M 413)

1 .2 g m

1 .2 g m

C lass 4 ( ALE S CA) A R ( 11g = M 469)

N B V ery m uch o utside t he m ain s eries

Table A2:6

P hasing o f East Anglian c oinages.

262

P HASE

8

S eries 1 - A NTED L egends A V ( Va = M 418)

A R ( Vb = M 419-421,

A R1 2 ( / Vc = M 422)

S aham N os 5 , 6= p 148) 5 .4 g m

1 .2 g m

0 .5 g m

S eries 3 - F ace/Horse C lass 1

C lass 2

A R (Hic = M 4 13D)

A R ( 111d)

1 .2 g m

1 .2 g m

P HASE

9

S eries 1 - E CEN, E D, E CE L egends C lass 1

C lass 2

A R ( V ia-c = M 423-424;

A R1 2 ( / V Id = M 4 17A, 4 31)

A R ( V II = M 425)

0 .6 g m

1 .2 g m

4 25, 4 29-430) 1 .2 g m C lass 3 A R ( V III = M 426-428;

I X =

M 432-433) 1 .2 g m N B I n t he l arge E ast A nglian c o in h oards, t he c oins i n t his s eries a ppear t o b e f resh ly s truck ( A llen, 1 970). S eries 4 - S UB R I

P RASTO/ESICO F EC IT

A R ( X =M 434A; M ossop, 1 979) 0 .7 g m

Table A2:6

C ontinued

2 63

N orth-Eastern C oinage

( Table A2:7)

A llen's ( 1963) s tudy o f this c oinage was the p rototype f or h is l ater t reatment o f the East Anglian c oinage, i ts basis a p hotographic l isting o f the c 430 s pecimens t hen t raceable. I t i s a lso a c lassic i n i ts u se o f t he distributional evidence t o c orrect the error i nherent i n the t raditional a ttribution o f the c oinage to the B rigantes ( Evans, 1 864; o f. Grierson, 1 975, e tc.). A c omprehensive r e-evaluation based o n the l arge number o f coins which have c ome t o l ight s ince 1 960-3 ( many m ore than the 2 01 in t he later gazetteers, o f which a s ubstantial proportion ( 70%) a re s ite f inds) has been p romised by May and Mossop, but a t t he t ime o f w riting published i nformation i s l imited ( May, 1 984). A lthough the n ew discoveries a re unlikely t o a ffect t he o verall f ramework, their i mpact c an be g auged f rom the 1 3 n ew varieties a lready i ncluded i n Table A2:7. T o take a s ingle s eries, NE83 w ith V EP l egends, May ( 1976) a lludes t o three s eparate i ssues o f the m ost c ommon l egend c ombination ( VEP CORF) a s w ell a s a n ew r eading V EP OC(I?)ES, a ll g rouped here a s a s ingle c lass N E83.1. North-Eastern c oins, however, a re r are i n t he S tudy Area and i n a ny case, their r elative c hronology i s unaffected. As in t he W estern a rea, the u se o f i nscriptions i s a late f eature, but t he possibility o f this c ommencing i n P hase 7 ( rather t han i n P hase 8 a s p roposed h ere) must b e a llowed. The r elationship between m etrology a nd typology s eems more c omplex t han i n s ome o f the o ther r egional t raditions, but may r eflect t he s mall s ample a s y et a vailable. P ost-Conquest m inting i s a p ossibility, r ather than a p robability, o n the p resent evidence. Two important p oints c oncerning the North-Eastern c oinage a re the c onsistent p roduction o f s ilver f ractions g oing back t o i ts early s tages ( NE61-2) and the l ikelihood that there w ere S outh-Eastern i ntermediaries i n the derivation n ot o nly o f the early h orse-right g old ( NE52) ( see Table A2:4), but a lso o f the h orse-left s eries ( NE51). This t ies i n w ith the g eneral s catter o f these c oins ( Allen's B ritish I ) in s outh-east England and s uch p eculiarities a s the r elated b ronze c oin f ound a t Mildenhall, W iltshire ( Haselgrove, 1 978). A k ey c oin i s Evans ( 1864) A ll, which takes i ts exergual design f rom S cheers ( 1977) No.24 C lass 3 a nd i s a t the s ame w eight s tandard. I n a ddition t o this s pecimen f rom L oughborough , another was f ound a t L inton, Kent i n the l ate nineteenth c entury ( Payne, 1 895), but o mitted by A llen ( 1960). Eventually, s ome c oins p resently i ncluded a s NE51.1 may therefore have t o b e r eclassified a s S outh-Eastern.

2 64

N ORTH-EASTERN P HASE

C OINAGES

5

S er ies 1 - P attern/Horse l eft C lass 1 A V ( IC

M 52-53)

6 .2 g m N B

( NE5-NE9)

S er ies 2 - P attern/Horse r ight

C lass 2

C lass 1

C lass 2

A V ( ID = M 54)

A V ( HA - M 50)

A V ( HB = M 51,A)

5 .9 g m

( 6 .2 g m)

5 .9 g m

A n A E c o in f ound a t M ildenhall, W ilts, w eighing 3 .2 g m a ppears t o b e long t o C lass 1 ( Hase lgrove, 1 978a, 2 6)

P HASE

6

S er ies 1 - P attern/Horse l eft C lass 1 ( "Prototypes") A V ( ID, E = M 55-57)

A R ( F =M 405A, B )

A R1 2 ( / I .M 451, 4 45C)

( 5 .8-6 .0 g m)

( 1 .1-1.4 g m)

( 0 .8 g m)

A V ( KL, M = M 447-448)

A R ( G =M 405)

A R1 4 ( / M451A)

5 .4 g m

1 .3 g m

( 0 .3 g m)

C lass 2

S er ies 2 - P attern/Horse r ight A R ( H

M 406; U = M 410) A% ( J =M 406A)

1 .3 g m

P HASE

( 0 .6 g m)

7

S er ies 1 C lass 1 A V ( N, R , S=M 449A-C)

A R ( V, W = M 452-3)

A R1 2 ( / ZA - M 455, A )

A RU ( ZC

5 .6 g m

1 .2 g m

0 .5 g m

( 0.2 g m) N B

M 455B)

T h is c o in w as f irst p ub lished a s M 456A .

C lass 2 A V ( 0, Q = M 449)

A R ( X =M 454)

5 .6 g m

1 .3 g m

( M454A) 0 .4 g m

S er ies 2 - U niface a nd r e lated t ypes A V ( P, T )

A R ( Y

5 .4 g m

1 .0 g m

Table A 2:7

M 453A)

P hasing

A R1 2 ( / ZB, D = M 456, A ) 0 .5 g m

o f North -Eastern c oinages.

2 65

P HASE

8

S er ies 1 - A VN C OST L egends A V ( M457)

A R ( M458)

A R1 2 ( / M458A; A llen, N o

5 .5 g m

1 963, 9 5)

1 .0 g m

S er ies 2 - E SVP A SV L egends A V ( M456B)

A R ( M456C)

5 .4 g m

1 .1 g m

S er ies 3 - V EP L egends C lass 1 ( VEP C ORE) A V ( M459-460)

A R ( M464)

A R1 2 ( / M464A)

5 .3 g m

( 1.0-1.3 g m)

( 0 .5 g m)

A R ( M460B)

A R1 2 ( / M464B)

1 .1 g m

0 .5 g m

C lass 2 ( VEP o nly ) A E/AV ( M460A)

P HASE

9

S er ies 1 - D UMN/T IGIR S ENO L egends A V ( M461)

A R ( M462)

5 .4 g m

( 1.2 g m)

S er ies 2 - V OLISIOS L egends C lass 1 ( DUMNOCOVEROS) A V ( M463)

A R ( M463A)

A R1 2 ( / M465)

5 .4 g m

1 .3 g m

( 0 .5 g m )

C lass 2

C lass 3 ( CARTIVEL)

( DUMNOVELLAVNVS)

A V ( M466)

A% ( M467)

A% ( M468)

( 4 .9 g m)

0 .5 g m

0 .5 g m

S er ies 3 - U ncertain l egends C lass 1 ( DAT I SO)

C lass 2 ( ES)

A R ( M416)

A R ( Owmby

( Th ist leton N o 3 , K irm ington N o 2= p 145)

N o 4

=p 108) ( 0 .8 g m)

0 .5 g m

Table A2:7

C ontinued

2 66

Appendix 3

Catalogue

o f hoards and ' multiple o f I ron Age c oins

f inds'

This a ppendix i s divided i nto three s ections. The f irst ( I) l ists the c ontents o f a ll the known f inds f rom t he S tudy Area which have p reviously been c lassified a s hoards ( Fig. A3:1), a nd i s f ollowed by ( II) a l isting a nd maps ( Figs. A 3:2-3) o f o ther multiple f inds o f g old, s ilver a nd p otin c oins. The f inal s ection ( III) l ists hoards f rom o utside the S tudy Area which c ontained Eastern, S outhEastern o r S outhern types ( Fig. A 3:4) including unp rovenanced h oards ( Nos. 7 6-78), and o ther B ritish hoards c ontaining Continental c oins ( Nos. 7 9-85). I n v iew o f their o verall s ignificance, there i s extended t reatment o f the f ollowing major f inds: Farley Heath; Hengistbury H ead; Lancing Down; L e Catillon; R ozel; S nettisham; Wanborough. Entries f ollow a s tandard f ormat: the r ecorded c ircumstances o f the f ind; the c oin types a nd numbers p resent; any a ssociated a rtefacts; and a c ommentary where r equired. Reference i s g enerally made to the s tandard g azetteers ( Appendix 1 ), unless there a re f urther s ources which add materially t o these. The

f ollowing

s tandard abbreviations a re employed:

CR = C omplete r ecord P R - P artial r ecord I R = I nadequate r ecord MD = Metal d etector NFD = No

f urther d etails a vailable

BM = B ritish Museum TT = T reasure t rove

2 67

• 1 08

0 40

•m e -

=

•5

-

=

•4 1 7 .

d i 0 1 2 , 13 .

8"

6 ,7

•1 ( 39 ) = 1 4

=

3 6 u 3 5 ß43 ,

le

38

20

e

3 7

•4 2

—

0 4 4 1 5

2 9 0

4 6

=

= -

• 3

-3 2

—30•

4 9°04 =

p e =

27.

55

5 40 1 9

Z 5 .

5 0

5 3

5 6

F ig .

• 25

-

-

4 7 e _

•26

A3:1

n

L and o ve r 1 37m

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

Map o f hoards f ound i n the S tudy Area.

2 68

4 0

5 0 Km

I .

H oards

o f

I ron A ge c oins the S tudy Area

f ound w ithin

BERKSHIRE 1

Maidenhead, bef. 1 845. I R. A llen ( 1960). The t icket a ccompanying an AV S 51 in the BM implies that 5 w ere f ound. Pace Allen, Evans ( 1864, 6 5) n eed not c ontradict this, and a s mall hoard can be inferred. On the s trength o f a s econd c oin, n ow untraceable, which was then in the BM ( Evans, 1 864, 6 7) a s econd type may be a dded ( AV S 52). I t i s not c lear whether this s hould be r egarded a s a s ixth c oin o r one o f the o riginal f ive. Contents: British 5 + AV S 51-52

2 .

Weycock H ill, Waltham S t. Lawrence? 1 977 o r before. P R. Haselgrove, ( 1984a); J . P. C. Kent ( Pers. C omm.). MD f ind. This h oard was purportedly f ound in a f ield adjacent to the Roman t emple s ite. A t l east o ne Gallo-Belgic AV has p reviously b een f ound in the parish a nd Neville ( 1849a) a lso mentions g old c oin f inds. S ubsequent i nvestigations, however, failed t o verify the exact f indspot, which may have b een e lsewhere in the Middle Thames basin. The g eneral c ondition o f the I ron Age c oins s upports t heir derivation f rom a s ingle f ind, but there a re hints that the Roman c oins and a ssociated a rtefacts may b e the r emnants o f a much larger and d istinct R oman f ind which had largely b een d ispersed by the t ime the Waltham f ind r eached the BM. The R epublican denarii ( all worn) and 2 o f AD 69 ( both in f resh c ondition) could c onceivably belong with the B ritish c oins; denarii o f Sabina and Faustina ( both w orn) a re, s imilarly , a lmost c ertainly intrusive. The condition o f the Waltham c oins a lso s uggests that they a re d istinct f rom the 1 976 f ind a t Kew B ridge, but this cannot be r egarded a s c onclusive s ince the latter a ll came f rom a r iver bank c ontext into which they c ould have been e roded f rom their o riginal p lace o f d eposition away f rom the edge o f the Thames. A proportion o f the Waltham f ind was probably dispersed before the h oard was s eized a s TT and i t i s virtually c ertain that c oins c oming o nto the market f rom both s ources have subsequently been c onfused. The h oard must therefore b e taken in three l ots:1 )

Coins c ertainly in the hoard

Total:

B elgic Gaul 1 AV 1 /2 S cheers Nos 1 AV 1 /4 1 AV S E51.2 3

: .1 -4

2 69

( BM) B ritish 4 AV, 1 AE/AV 4 AV 1 /4 1 AV 1 /4 1 AV 1 /4 2 AR 3 AR 1 AR 3 AR

S 51.1 e l

I .

S 64.1 S 65.3 S T3.1a,2 S 66.4 W S1 WS2. 2

Total: 2 ) Coins probably B irmingham Mus.):

B ritish 1 AV1/4 4 AR 2 AR1/4 3 AV1/4 2 AR 1 AE 1 AR 1 4

Total: 3 )

I tems p ossibly

f rom

the

1 2 2 2 1 5 2 2 3 5 5 4 3 2 1 70

hoard

AR S E62 AV, 1 AE/AV S 71-72 AV 1 /4 S 71-72 AR 8 72.1 AV, 1 AR S E81 AV 1 /4 S 81.1-2 AR, 6 AR 1 /4 S 81-82 AR, 2 AR 1 /4 S 91-92 AR, 2 AR 1 /4 S 93 AR E 83.2

( Nat.

Mus.

Wales;

S 81.1 S 81-82 S 81-82 S E81 S E81 S E82. 1 S 91

f rom the hoard:

Total:

Roman 1 9 AR 1 AR 1 AR 2 1

c oins Republican d own t o Marcus Antonius Civil war i ssue AD 69 V itellius

The f ind a lso i ncluded a s trip and p ossible coin b lank in g old a lloy a nd part o f a possible f ibula in s ilver. A g lobule o f s ilver and two blobs o f a s ubstance r esembling s older adhering t o a v ery worn Belgic Gaul AV i mplies that s ome o f the o lder c omponents o f t he hoard came f rom a metalworking c ontext ( cf. S nettisham, e tc.). I f t hese W ere deposits f rom a sacred p lace or t emple, c ontamination by later, Roman material i s not improbable.

BUCKINGHAMSHIRE

3 .

High Wycombe, K eep Hill, 1 827. CR? A llen ( 1960, No.26). 1 1 AV were f ound i n a n oblong hollow f lint, about the s ize o f a s wan's e gg ( Evans, 1 864) by a boy who was t rying to dig out a mole. A f urther f ind o f 2 AV i n 1 860 s uggests multiple deposits. The earthworks o n the h ill a re undated, and there i s no r eason t o a ssociate them with the c oin f inds. The c ontents w ere: 1 )

Total:

1 827 F ind British 7 AV E 71.1 3 AV E 71.2 1 AV E 75.2 1 1

2 )

Total:

2 70

1 860 F ind B ritish 2 AV E 71. 3

2

The s ite o verlooks a Roman V illa. o f more g old f inds f rom the a rea, i dea o f multiple d eposits.

1 .

There a re r ecent r eports further s upporting the

Whaddon Chase, 1 849. P R. Allen ( 1960, No.16). This hoard, until r ecently the largest excepting the Hengistbury Head deposit ever f ound in B ritain, i s n ot well r ecorded. The t otal number o f AV may have been n early 2 000 a s a large quantity f ound their way to L ondon bullion dealers a s well a s the 420 t raced a t the t ime. A number o f p robable hoard c oins f ound their way i nto the BM a nd BN c ollections. Two o f these ( AV E 52, AV S E51) a re n ot in the c ontemporary r ecord and may therefore be intrusive. O ther hoard c oins undoubtedly a cquired a lternative p rovenances ( cf. Evans 1 890, 434). A c ontemporary n otebook b elonging t o S ophia B ockett has drawings o f 5 AV ( 2 S 51, 3 E 51). The

identifiable c oins were: B elgic Gaul 1 AV S 50 ? 1 AV S E51

T otal:

2

Total

B ritish 1 AV S W41 2 -3 AV N E51 2 26+ AV E 51 ? 1 AV E 52 7 2+ AV S 51-52 3 03+

Whether o r n ot t he two types unrecorded a t the t ime a re a ccepted a s a c omponent, the hoard appears homogeneous. I t was f ound in Narbury F ield, L ittle Horwood. P otsherds f ound w ith the hoard i mply that i t was o riginally c oncealed in a c ontainer.

CAMBRIDGESHIRE

Chippenham, Manor Farm, 1 981 o r bef. P R. Haselgrove ( 1984a). P robable hoard o f 46+ AV, AR B ritish a nd Roman f ound by MD o n a s ite with evidence o f I ron Age-Roman o ccupation, a s well a s later material ( pottery, brooches, a nimal bone, e tc.). O ther c oins f rom the s ite i nclude 1 AR EA73.2, 1 AE E 82.2, a nd Roman AE Hadrian and AR base C 3rd-4th AD . C ontents:-

Total:

B ritish 5 AV E 82.1 P lastic A ( all 5 s truck f rom o ne Obv. die, 4 f rom the s ame Rev.) 5 T otal:

Roman 2 5 AR Republican 2 AV, 9 AR Augustus 1 AV, 3 AR T iberius 1 AV C laudius AD 4 1-2 4 1

The f ind has c ertainly been c ontaminated e .g. by a modern(?) f orgery o f a nother E 82.1 s tater. H owever, the patination and wear pattern o f the Roman c oins a nd d iel inking o f the B ritish c oins s upport the i dea o f a hoard deposited within P hase 9 , while the rarity and quality o f

2 71

the Roman i ssues may indicate a c ore o f pre-conquest imports. The AR EA73.2 c ould a lso b e a hoard f ind.

E SSEX

6 .

C lacton Beach, 1 898 ( Clacton-1). P R. Allen ( 1960, N o.13). Laver r ecords a hoard o f 1 23 coins f ound on the b each in 1 898, the bulk o f which passed t o E vans, whose c ollection c ontained 1 11 o f them a t the t ime o f his death. S everal o ther hoard c oins were a cquired by C olchester Museum. A t s ome s tage these must have b een c ontaminated by o ther coins f ound o n C lacton beach, a s the r ecorded total now o utnumbers the o riginal 1 23. S ome i ntermixing w ith the 1 905 f ind cannot be ruled o ut. The r ecorded coins a re: B elgic 4 + AV 3 AV 3 3 AV

T otal:

Gaul S E22 S E41 S E51

( 1 Class 3 ) ( 8 Class 1 6 Class 2 )

4 0+

B ritish 1 AV S E41. 4 5 AV E 41.1 1 5 AV E41. 3 6 3 AV S E41.5 5 AV 1 /4 SE43.3 Q 8 9

BM c oins p rovenanced a s Chipping S odbury and ( less c ertainly) I xworth a re p robably m islabelled hoard coins ( SE41.5). A ll the S E51 c oins belong t o the earliest s tages o f that c oinage, but there i s n o d ie-linking. Two o f the 5 AV E 41.1 have the s ame dies ( Mackensen, 1 974).

7 .

Clacton B each, 1 905 ( Clacton-2). P R. Allen ( 1960, N o. 41). In F ebruary 1 905, a t l east f our c oins were f ound o n the beach, o ne p ossibly a s tray f rom the p revious f ind ( AV S E22). The o ther 3 p lus t wo s tray f inds in 1 924 a nd 1 930, and another c oin in Colchester Museum imply a s econd deposit a lthough, a s a t S elsey, this cannot be e stablished f or c ertain. The c oins a re:

T otal: The

8 .

1 930 c oin was

B ritish 2 AV E 51.1 1 AV 1 /4 S 51.1 2 AV E 61-62 1 AV S E73 6

f ound o pposite the third Martello T ower.

Colchester, Union House, 1 835 ( Colchester-1). I R. Allen ( 1960, No.28). A n ewspaper cutting i n W illiam W ire's c opy o f M orant ( 1748) r ecords the discovery o f a hoard a t Union House ( St. Mary's) o f which 5 0 c öins went t o a Mr. Till o f Great Russell S treet, Covent Garden . There i s a f uther note about ( presumptively) the s ame f ind i n Wire's own d iary f or 3 rd April 1 845: " A lad inmate o f Union House said that not l ong s ince t wo l ead boxes c ontaining g old and silver coins

2 72

were f ound there. He l ikewise informed m e that there i s ( sic) two l ead c offins under the back entrance o f the h ouse", the latter presumably deriving f rom a late Roman c emetery o n this s ite immediately o utside the west wall o f the Colonia. A s r ecorded the c ontents were:

T otal:

" Uncertain Chieftains" 2 2 AV 1 5 AR 8 AE 45 Total:

B ritis4 2 AV E 81-82 1 AV 1 /4 E 81-82 2 AE E 83.1-2 5

The s ite has y ielded s everal o ther AE E 81-83. W ire ( Diary, 1 S eptember 1 856) r ecorded this a s o ne o f the two s ites " both within a nd without the walls" o f Colchester where the g reatest number o f c oins o f Cunobelinus had been f ound ( the o ther was West L odge, L ondon Road). I n the same entry, he r efutes Dr. Duncan's contention that c oins o f Cunobelinus were " from b elow the r emains o f the Roman o ccupation" observing that a t both Union House and West Lodge they were f ound " either o n the l evel o f Roman r emains o r a ssociated w ith them." W ire did n ot s ee the hoard and the p ossibility o f s ome c oins b eing Roman cannot b e discounted. As a rare instance where p recious metal a nd b ronze c oins a re r ecorded a ssociated in s ignificant numbers, a c onnection with the t emples o n the a djacent Balkerne Lane s ite i s not impossible. The r eference t o the boxes ( if not c onfusion with the c offins) i mplies a deliberate deposit, but i ntermixing with s ite f inds c ould have o ccurred.

9 .

1 0.

Colchester, " within 5 m iles", 1 807 ( Colchester-2). I R. Allen ( 1960, No.42). Ruding r ecords a large parcel o f c oins f ound within 5 m iles o f Colchester i n 1 807, the metal o f which was s o p oor that intrinsically the c oins were o nly worth 5 s hillings and s ixpence each. The o nly c oin i llustrated was o ne o f • Addedomaros -: British 1 AV S E 7 3.3 Evans a ssociates the hoard w ith the Mark's Tey f inds ( below). While this i s a p lausible f indspot, the 1 807 discovery i s c ertainly d istinct.

Colchester, S heepen, 1 930-9 ( Colchester-3). CR. A llen ( 1960); Hawkes and Hull ( 1947). Excavations. Appendix 5 , C037. Group o f 1 0 c oins f ound , s ealed below puddled c lay, s cattered o ver t he bottom o f a r ectangular p it, D9 ( Region 4 ). Composition: B ritish 1 0 AE E 82.1 The clay c ontained imported GB wares and a considerable quantity o f indigenous f abrics, a s well a s 3 s herds o f Claudian T S c onsidered intrusive f rom an upper f ill not later than P eriod I II, engulfed by a later f eature ( Pit DIa). I n the undisturbed p ortion o f the p it a t a depth o f 5 '6" ( i.e. presumably within o r below the c lay) was a f lat-

2 73

bow p enannular b ronze brooch. The pit i s a ssigned t o P eriod 1 , but with the T S s herds i n the c lay, this may be questioned.

1 1.

Epping Forest, Ambresbury Banks, 1 974. CR? Allen ( 1975); Haselgrove ( 1978). MD f inds. A s cattered hoard. The f irst c oin was a llegedly f ound a t Ambresbury Banks hillfort, the o thers f rom the same g eneral a rea over a f urther p eriod. Two c oins p robably f rom the same s ource a ppeared o n the market i n 1 974. Composition:-

Total: Two

1 2.

o f the

B ritish 4 AV E 71.1,2,3 1 0 AV E 82.1 1 4

E 82 AV have a c ommon obv .

die.

Marks Tey-1, 1 803. P R. A llen ( 1960, No.14). A l etter o f 1 848 i n the B odleian L ibrary r ecords the discovery. The hoard was p loughed up i n a f ield b etween the Turnpike R oad a nd Mark's T ey Church and had been contained in a p ot s mashed by the p lough. 3 8 c oins were uncovered; o ne was d escribed a s " made o f g old and s ilver and was worth s ix o r s even s hillings". This description p resumably extended t o the f ind a s a whole a s the Rector then r estored 3 o f the c oins t o the f inder f rom whom he had p reviously purchased them f or " a t rifle", keeping o nly 7 o f which 5 s ubsequently w ent t o Oxford. These a re: B elgic Gaul 3 AV S E51 ( 1 Total:

3

C lass 2 ) Total:

B ritish 1 AV E 41.1 1 AV S 51 2

The g oldsmith's description a ccords well with the g old a lloy c omposition o f t he s urviving c oins. I n the c ircumstances, the Rector c ould hardly have kept t he c oins o f highest intrinsic value, which i mplies a f ineness f or the f ind o verall which c ontrasts markedly with the baser coins f ound " within 5 m iles o f C olchester" in 1 807. The whole hoard i s t hus l ikely t o have b een early. I t c ompares to C lacton-1 a nd i s die l inked t o b oth i t and Westerham. Furthermore, t he 1 803 f ind i s therefore a n unlikely s ource f or various o ther base g old coins f ound a t Mark's T ey in the n ineteenth c entury which must e ither be f rom the 1 843 hoard ( or the 1 807 h oard i f i t was was Mark's Tey) o r were o ther deposits i n whatever c ontext a ttracted the hoards ( below).

1 3.

Mark's Tey-2, 1 843. I R. Allen ( 1960, No.27). The r ecord o f this find i s c onfused w ith that o f 1 807. I t was discovered n ear the f ifth m ilestone f rom C olchester ( but see below) and o ne AV Addedomaros exhibited t o the Numismatic S ociety in April 1 844 i s presumed to be a hoard coin f rom the c oincidence o f dates. There i s n o p roof. This c oin i s in Colchester Museum w ith 5 o thers f rom Mark's

2 74

Tey, which by a ssociation a re a ssumed t o be f rom the s ame f ind; they c ould, however, be 1 807 c oins. The s ame hoard is n oted by Wire ( Diary 2 0 January 1 844) a s " some g old coins .. f ound about s ix months s ince in a f ield o pposite the s ixth ( sic) milestone Mark's T ey. The o ne s hown me was a Cunobelin". Wire knew his c oins o f Cunobelinus, s o that ruler's c oinage can be f airly s afely added t o the known contents o f t he hoard. I n a ddition, s ix months earlier ( 13 June 1 843) h e r ecords another AV Cunobelinus f ound e ither a t S tanway ( the adjacent parish) o r Mark's Tey in 1 843; i t i s difficult t o a void the c onclusion that this was a lso a hoard c oin, p erhaps discovered a head o f the r est. I f Wire is c orrect about the m ilestone, this would p lace the 1 843 f ind i n the v icinity o f the 1 803 hoard, about 5 miles f rom the edge o f Colchester, possibly the s ource o f the confusion. On a nalogy w ith o ther f inds, 3 s eparate deposits f rom the s ame s ite i s p erfectly p lausible. The c ontents o f the 1 843 f ind therefore included:

T otal:

B ritish 5 + AV S E73 ( 1 C 1.1, 3 C 1.2, 1 + AV S E72.1 2 AV E 81-82 ( 1 E 82.1). 8 +

1 C 1.3)

This a grees w ith the n ineteenth c entury r ecord o f s everal AV Addedomaros ( again c onfusion w ith the 1 807 f ind cannot be ruled o ut), a s the d ominant c onstituent o f the hoard. O ther c oins f ound a t Mark's T ey : A number o f t hese p resumably derive These a re : 1 1 1 1 1

AV AE/AV AV AV AV

f rom the above

f inds.

S W41 ( Not c ertainly f ound there) EA61.1 E 61.1 ( Probably f rom the 1 843 hoard) WS3 S E72.1

Many o f the o ther g old c oins f rom t he Colchester d istrict now in C olchester Museum a re a lso quite p robably hoard c oins, but v iew o f the c onfused r ecords, they a re a ssembled s eparately i n S ection I I ( multiple f inds).

1 4.

S outhend-on-Sea, 1 985. CR. J .P.C. Kent ( 1985). MD F ind. NFD. The c oins were f ound i n a ssociation with s herds o f black g ritted handmade p ottery, p resumably the c ontainer in which they were deposited.

T otal:

B elgic Gaul 3 3 AV S E 5 1 3 3

Found by MD user o n a c onstruction s ite.

2 75

HAMPSHIRE

Andover, n ear, F inkley Down, ( 1984a). MD Find. Apparently a s mall hoard . NFD .

1 980-1982.

P R.

Haselgrove

C ontents:-

British 2 AV S 63.1 6 AV S 72.1 - 2 1 AV S 81.1 Total: 9 The Down i s c lose to an i ntersection o f Roman Roads. S 52.1 f ound o n o pposite s ide o f i t.

1 6.

Bentworth ( Alresford), c 1 880. P R. Haselgrove ( 1981). This hoard has a lready been r eassessed e lsewhere b y the author; a r ecently r ediscovered l etter o f 1 880 c onfirms the true f indspot a s B entworth, n ear A lton. There were probably m ore c oins than can n ow b e l isted :

T otal:

1 7.

1 AV

Cheriton, 1 983. P R. Apparently an i ntact

T otal:

B ritish 8 2 AV S 81.2 a nd S 82.1 5 AV S 91 8 7+

Haselgrove ( 1984a). MD g roup. N FD . C omposition:

f ind.

B ritish 2 7 AV S 41.3 3 AV 1 /4 S E42 3 0

The s taters a re the p robable p rototype f or Allen's B ritish D s eries ( S41.4); the s o-called C heriton s tater. I n view o f this, i t may be a sked whether the f indspot o f the new hoard i s a f abrication. The type s hows c onsiderable variation.

1 8.

Hayling I sland, Temple, 1 976. C R. Haselgrove ( 1978). Excavation f ind. A s mall hoard f ound s tratified i n a P hase I I ( pre-stone temple) c ontext. Northern Gaul 4 AE ' Carnutes' B N 6 088 2 AE ' Aulerci Eburovices'

DLT XXVIII,

7 034

The c oins a re a ll f rom different d ies. F rom their rarity in the o verall s ite a ssemblage, however, i t i s c lear that they were d eposited a s a g roup.

1 9.

P ortsmouth, n ear?, 1 830. I R. A llen ( 1960, No. 38); 1 980. This p roblematical f ind has b een r eassessed by

2 76

Robinson, Robinson,

who r ejects s everal c oin types p reviously a ssigned to i t ( AR EA91, AR ' Baiocasses' BN 6 979, AR S 94). There i s no c ontemporary l ocal r ecord o f the f ind. The hoard i s described a s " a parcel amounting to n early 1 00 c oins in s ilver and mixed metal .. f ound n ear P ortsmouth" ( Robinson, 1 980), in which the f ollowing types a ppear: Continental S everal AR Armorican Gaul ( Coriosolites C l. VI, I II, I I) 1 + AR 1 /4 A rmorican Gaul ( Coriosolites?) Total:

4 ++

T otal:

British 6 + AR S W61-71 2 + AR S W61-71 1 AR S T1.1 1 AR Uncertain Head r ./ horse 1 AR o f. S 66.3 1 1+

As Robinson o bserves, a Channel I sland p rovenance i s not impossible. I n view o f the c oincidence i n date, the f our c ollectors w ith c oins f rom the f ind a ll l iving in the West Country, and the existence o f a nother l arge naval base a t P lymouth, i t i s c onceivable that the t rue f indspot was actually Mount Batten. However, the c oins a re paralleled a t Hayling I sland, and would c ertainly n ot be o ut o f p lace o n the s outh c oast, while Hayling I sland i s a p lausible p rovenance f or the c oins Robertson r ejects f rom the hoard, i f not f or the hoard i tself.

1 9A.Romsey, Timsbury, 1 907. CR. A llen, ( 1960). 1 8 AE S W81 f ound i n hoard w ith 43 R oman AE down to Domitian. The f indspot i s 5 km w ithin the boundary o f the S tudy Area.

2 0.

Yarmouth, I sle o f W ight, 1 867. P R. A llen ( 1960, No.11). This hoard was f ound n ear Yarmouth, a pparently o n the c oast. A ll o f i t passed t o Evans. B ritish 8 AV S 41.2 The dies

s ix BM c oins were s truck ( Mackensen, 1 974).

f rom o ne Obv.

a nd

two

Rev.

HERTFORDSHIRE

2 1

S t. Albans, K ing Harry Lane, 1 967. CR. Haselgrove ( 1978). S tead ( 1969). E xcavation f ind. 1 0 coins a ccompanying a c remation burial in the large late I ron Age c emetery i n u se c 1 5/10 BC - c AD 4 0/45. S ee Appendix 5 , S A2. British 1 0 AE E73 There

i s

o ne p ossible Rev,

d ie l ink

2 77

( Allen,

1 968).

2 2.

P itstone C ommon, M oneysbury Hill, 1 870. P R. Allen ( 1960). 1 AE E 83.2 f ound i n hoard o f Roman AE down t o Tetricus I I, AD 2 70-3. The p lacename i s s uggestive o f earlier coin f inds.

KENT

2 3.

Birchington-1, Quex P ark, I sle o f T hanet, 1 853. I R. Allen ( 1960, No.52). The total numbers were n ot r ecorded. The hoard i s g enerally r egarded a s part o f the s ame g eneral deposit a s Birchington-2 below, but d iffers in c omposition . The identifiable types were: S eries 1 P 1.2 4 P 1.3 Total:

P 1 ( 6%) ( 23%)

5

T otal:

S eries P 2 2 P 2.1 ( 12%) 7 P 2.2 ( 41%) 3 P 2.3 ( 18%) 1 2

Evans ( 1864) omits P 1.3. The f ind was a l arge o ne a nd this i s n ot c ertainly a r epresentative s ample. There was a lso a n odd, double s ized p otin, with o bscure designs, which bears no r esemblance to the s tandard type.

2 4.

Birchington-2, Quex P ark, I sle o f T hanet, 1 853. P R. A llen ( 1960, No.53). A hoard o f over 6 00 p otin f ound t renching f or gardening purposes s ome months a fter the f irst f ind. The c oins were packed in two t iers i n a s mall box about 9 " by 4 " b y 3 ", presumably o f wood, which lay 1 8" below t he surface. The hoard was s till i ntact in 1 930, but s ubsequently dispersed . A s ample o f 4 1 i n B irchington Museum i s a gain not necessarily r epresentative. S eries P 1 1 3 P 1.2 ( 32%) 1 P 1.3 ( 2%)

2 5.

T otal:

S eries P 2 1 1 P 2.1 ( 27%) 1 4 P 2.2 ( 34%) 2 P 2.3 ( 5%) 2 7

Total:

1 4

Evans runner cast.

( 1864) observed that many o f the c oins had only o ne p rojecting, p resumably the last o f a s tring when

Borden ( Tunstall), Heart's D elight, 1 873 onwards. P R. Allen ( 1960, No.29). The f irst 3 AV ( 2 Cunobelinus, 1 R oman) w ere f ound a t the same s pot i n 1 873. The authority f or the a ureus being o f Claudius i s Evans ( 1890, 5 58), but Worsfold ( 1948) i n h is report on the adjacent Iron Age s ettlement t hought the c oin more p robably Augustus, 1 8 B C. I n 1 943 a f ourth AV was f ound nearby a t College Road, S ittingbourne, and a f ifth AV in 1 968. Evidently a s omewhat s cattered hoard. Contents:

2 78

Total:

B ritish 4 + AV E 82.1 4+

Another AV E 82

2 6.

The not

S eries P 1 6 P 1.2 ( 30%) 6 P 1.3 ( 30%) 1 2

Haselgrove

?

f our

( 1984a).

f ound a t the s ame The types were : -

Total:

identification o f c ertain.

ßeries 1 P 2.1 7 P 2.2 8

o f the c oins

( 2

MD

s pot

a s

2 P 2. 2)

i s

( 5%) ( 35%)

P 1.2,

F olkestone-1, S eashore, 1 877. P R. A llen ( 1960, No. 6). 6 AV f ound t ogether o n the beach. Two f urther c oins o f the same type f ound o n the beach, 1 AV i n 1 838 ( 8E51.4) and 1 AV in 1 865 in East Wear Bay, a re p robably h oard s trays, a s a re an AV 1 /4 S E32-42 and s mall g old ingot f ound t ogether in 1 870. Composition:

T otal:

B elgic Gaul 8 AV S E51 ( 1 Class 4 ) 1 AV 1 /4 S E42 ( or 3 2?) 9

Associated w ith a small g old i ngot. Norfolk, hoard .

2 8.

C laudius

f rom S ittingbourne c ould be a h oard s tray.

Boxley, The Warren, 1 983. CR? Find? 1 9 potins, s everal f ragmentary, s ingle potin three years before.

Total:

2 7.

Total:

Roman 1 AV 1

C ompare t he Weybourne,

Folkestone-2, n ear, 1 980. CR? Haselgrove ( 1984a). MD f ind? A hoard r ecorded in the t rade, there a re unfortunately NFD:

T otal:

S eries P 1 64 P 1.1 64

These c oins, w ith the l egend MA above a l eft-butting bull, may be a ctual C ontinental imports o f C entral Gaulish o rigin ( cf. Allen and Nash, 1 980 No 406).

2 9.

Higham, 1 911. C R. Allen ( 1960, No.1). 1 1 AV f ound i n a hollow f lint. The c oins were s truck f rom 7 obverse and 8 r everse d ies. Composition:

Total:

B elgic Gaul 1 1 AV 8 E41.1 1 1

2 79

3 0.

L enham H eath, 1 781. I R. A llen ( 1960). A large h oard o f which o nly 4 c oins n ow S eries P 1 1 P 1.2 1 P 1.3 This

3 1.

f ind conforms

s urvive

S eries 1 P 2.1 1 P 2.2 to the main s eries

o f

in the BM:

P 2

P otin hoards.

Ryarsh ( Offham), e 1 860 o nwards. P R. Allen ( 1960, No.4). A hoard o f s eries o f hoards s cattered over a c onsiderable a rea. 8 AV c oins came t o l ight e 1 860, 1 f rom an unspecified l ocation, 2 f rom Chequers Field, Offham, 2 f rom Chequers Lane Hop Garden, Offham, a nd 4 f rom the ' Golden P iece F ield' Ryarsh, a name which i tself suggests o ther earlier f inds. At l east 2 o ther c oins have been r ecorded s ubsequently ( 1 AV S 51; 1 AV S E 5 1 f rom ' Chequers'):

T otal:

B elgic Gaul 1 AV S E41 8 AV S E51 9

B ritish 1 AV S 51 Total:

1 '

An AV S E51 f rom Trottiscliffe and 2 AV ( SE41.1, f rom Addington ( M43) c ould a lso b e hoard s trays.

3 2.

Westerham, Kent, 1 927. CR. Allen ( 1960, No. 9). H oard o f 1 4 AV in a s pherical h ollow f lint, natural holes. Contents: B elgic Gaul B ritish 1 AV S E22.2 1 AV S E41. 4 1 2 AV E41.1 T otal: 1 Total: 1 3

S E51. 3)

w ith

two

The E 41 AV w ere a ll s truck f rom o ne Obv. die, which d isplays g radual wear through the s equence. 7 Rev, dies w ere u sed. The s ame Obv. die appears a t Cam nBrea, C lacton and Mark's T ey .

LONDON

3 3.

Hammersmith, i n the Thames, 1 916 a nd bef. P R A llen ( 1960). 4 p otin were f ound here i n 1 916 where three o thers had been d escovered s eparately o n p revious o ccasions. This s uggests yet a nother s mall, s cattered Thames-side hoard. 6 c oins s urvive: S eries P 1 s eries P 2 4 P 1.3 2 P 2.1 The missing

3 4.

c oin belonged t o the earlier part

S t. James' Park, 1 827. P R. Allen ( 1960). A s izeable hoard f ound i n excavations " to

2 80

o f the r ange.

f orm a s ewer

f or

the n ew palace in S t James' P ark, small number o f c oins s urvive:

Total:

1 5

S eptember

1 827".

A

S eries P 2 2 P 2.1 5 P 2.2

S eries P 1 1 P 1.2 3 P 1.3 2 P 2.3 4

Total:

9

M IDDLESEX

3 5.

Brentford, E el P ie I sland, 1 860. P R. Allen ( 1960). There may have been more than o ne deposit, n ot n ecessarily f ound a t the s ame t ime. Nine potins a re r ecorded with the Eel P ie I sland p rovenance, two years a fter the Sale ( Sotheby's, 1 915) o f the c oins f rom a f ind o f a t l east 2 66 coins a t Brentford i n 1 860. Only a f ew c oins can now be traced -

S eries P 1

Total:

3 6.

1 P 1.1 2 P 1.2 1 3 P 1.3 1 6

( 4%) ( 8%) ( 50%) T otal:

S eries P 2 1 P 2.1 ( 4%) 5 P 2.2 ( 19%) 4 P 2.3 ( 15%) 1 0

Gunnersbury, Acton H ill, c 1 950. P R. Allen ( 1960). 1 2 coins, a ll s ubsequently s tolen, f ound wrapped i n sacking ( which was not p reserved) in Gunnersbury Lane, Acton Hill, near Millwall R oad. I t was s aid that ' bronze a ge urns' had been f ound n earby ( Allen 1 971). The c oins w ere:

Total:

S eries 6 P 1.3 5 P 2.3 6

P 1

S eries

T otal:

P 2 1 P 2.2 6

I t i s n ot c ertain that this was an ancient f ind. have been a parcel f rom the B rentford f ind.

3 7.

I t

could

Sunbury-on-Thames, S hepperton, 1 949. CR? A llen ( 1960). The f ind c omprised e 3 59 ( c 3 0 f ragmentary, r endering the exact number uncertain). I n three pots: S eries P 1 44 P 1.2 1 25 P 1.3 Total:

1 69

( 14%) ( 40%) Total:

S eries P 2 8 P 2.1 ( 3%) 7 4 P 2.2 ( 23%) 6 6 P 2.3 ( 21%) 1 48

Little more c an be s aid about the p ottery, which was examined by Grimes, than that i t was o f I ron A ge character. A number o f f lints s howing marks o f burning were a lso recovered.

2 81

OXFORDSHIRE

3 8.

Harpsden Wood, n ear Henley-on-Thames, 1 982 o r before. CR? Haselgrove ( 1984a). MD Find? Adjacent to the wood there i s a known Roman villa s ite. 1 7 AV were f ound with a f ew p ieces o f f lint, possibly the r emains o f a hollow f lint in which they had been o riginally deposited of. Westerham, e tc. NFD. C ontents :

T otal:

3 9.

B elgic Gaul 1 AV S E 2 2 1 6 AV S E 5 1.2-3 1 7

Watlington ( Wallingford), b ef. 1 893. Allen ( 1960). W . R. Davies ( Letter, 5 S ept. 1 891) m entions " over 3 0 ancient B ritish g old c oins f ound in the same radius ( 2 miles f rom Wallingford) besides s ilver and b ronze o f E ppillus, C ommios, Ven ous ( sic), Cunobeline, e tc.". The only d irect r eference i s a l etter f rom T . H. Powell in 1 909 t o P . Manning in the Ashomolean mentioning a hoard passed into the hands o f Davies ( who l ived a t Wallingford), a nd was s old w ith h is o ther c oins a t S otheby's in 1 893. P owell b elieved that these were l ots 2 6,29,32,33 and 3 4, the only l ots i n fact with n o r ecorded p rovenance. Two o f these, h owever, do have s eparate r ecords o f their f indspot: 1 AV S E82.1, f ound a t Wallingford in 1 885 ( Evans, 1 890, 5 21) and 1 AV 1 /4 E 82, f ound " in the same n eighbourhood" a s another AV 1 /4 E 82 f ound n earby a t B rightwell, in 1 873 ( where 1 AE/AV 1 /4 a lso E 82 was discovered i n 1 892). The h oard had p resumably n ot been discovered when Evans' S upplement went t o p ress, a lthough i t must be i ncluded in the t otal i n Davies l etter o f 1 891. I n a ll, 2 7 AV were included in his sale, v ery c lose t o the l etter's f igure o f over 3 0). A s l ikely a s n ot, Davies himself was unaware o f the c oins' exact p rovenance o r o f their having been f ound t ogether, s imply assuming a l ocal o rigin o n the basis o f their s ource. I f s o, the details ( if a ccurate) were not r evealed until later ( to P owell?), o r were s imply inferred. An a lready c onfused s ituation i s f urther c omplicated by there being n o l ess than t hree B rightwells ( a p ossible s ource o f the AV 1 /4 E 82 P owell thought to be f rom the hoard) n ear Wallingford: o ne 2 miles west in Berkshire, the o thers l ess then 4 m iles east in Oxfordshire, immediately adjacent to Watlington. E vans t ook B rightwell to be the B erkshire village, but might be wrong. A dispersed f ind f rom s omewhere between B rightwell ( Oxon.) and Watlington c ould w ell be behind the subsequent c onfusion. The matter cannot be r esolved. With the adjustments noted above, the f ind c ontained: B ritish 1 AV 1 /4 2 AV 1 /4 1 AV 1 /4 1 AV 1 /4 1 AV 1 /4

S E52.2 S 51.1 S 64.2 S 65.1 S 71

2 82

Total:

3 AV 1 AV 1 AV 1 1

1 /4 1 /4

S 72.1-2 S 81.2 S 82.1

Chronologically the types f orm a c oherent s eries; n or a s a group a re they g eographically out o f place o n the f ringes o f the Upper Thames basin ( race A llen, nor would an AV 1 /4 E82). However, Davies a lso had odd c oins f rom e lsewhere ( e. g. a n AV 1 /4 S E42 f rom Bognor, a p lausible o rigin f or a ll 1 1 c oins) and a r eputation f or purchasing w ithout c ritical enquiry o f the s ource ( VCH Berks 1 , 2 22-227). Worse s till, t he h igh p roportion o f the total local f inds o f particular types ( e.g. S E72-73) which can be t raced t o Davies' c ollection imply that s ome a t l east o f his coins came f rom s omeone who deliberately f alsified p rovenances t o s ell t o him ( cf. S tead, 1 984). The " Watlington" f ind, although probably hoard c oins, thus has n o value f or chronological o r distributional s tudies. O ther Wallingford coins a re discussed a s multiple f inds ( M11).

SUFFOLK

4 0.

Bardwell, Bury S t.Edmonds, bef. 1 890. I R. A llen ( 1960). S everal potin were f ound, a pparently a hoard but conceivably a s ite f ind. Only 3 can n ow be t raced: S eries P 1 3 + P 1.5 The r emaining c oins a ppear to have been o f the same type. There i s a Roman f ort and s ettlement here, l ocated just outside the boundary o f the S tudy Area.

40A.Eriswell, 1 971. CR. Haselgrove ( 1978). Hoard o f 2 55 AR EA62-91 f ound with 7 1 Roman AR down t o Nero ( RIC 1 0). The f indspot i s 2 km w ithin the b oundary o f the S tudy A rea.

40B.Freckenham , Mildenhall, 1 885. CR. A llen ( 1960, No.31). Hoard AV buried i n a s mall poorly-fired p ot, f ound by labourer working i n his own garden:

T otal:

British 2 EA61 9 0+ EA71 9 2+

( incl.

5 7 C lass

1 ,

20 C lass

a

2 )

Despite t he a bsence o f an i nscription, Evans ( 1890) believed that t hese c oins belonged t o the c losing phase o f the East Anglian c oinage; the weight a nd poor a lloy c ould support this v iew ( cf. Appendix 2 ). The f indspot i s located 8 km within the boundary o f the S tudy Area.

2 83

4 1.

Haverhill, P lace Farm, 1 788. I R. A llen ( 1960, No.2). Labourers digging land drains in M ill F ield f ound 3 o r 4 g old c oins s cattered in the ploughsoil a nd not far f rom them, " a p iece o f b lue c lay about n ine i nches l ong, in s hape an oblong square, c ontaining b etween f orty and f ifty g old c oins, w ith a partition between each coin". The labourers were g iven 43 guineas f or the c oins by a l ocal t radesman a fter they had been valued in London. The two c oins i llustrated f rom the f ind a re both o f the same type, the example in the Gentlemans Magazine f or 1 793 ( Pl.III, F ig. 2, p .29) weighing 6 .54 gm, a pparently a s pecimen o f AV S E41.1 ( Scheers No. 9 C lass 3 ). However, Walford's ( 1803, 7 2-73) description, a lthough ambiguous, i mplies more than one variety: " the s mallest p ieces w eighed 1 01 grains" ( the weight o f the i llustrated c oins) whereas " the large o nes were c oncave o n one s ide and c onvex o n the o ther" a ccording to the labourers' account, the die was the same o n b oth. The obverse a nd r everse o f these c oins w ere s imilar to those a ttributed to B oadicea in Camden's B ritannia". The p rice the labourers r eceived bears Walford out, a s the s mallest c oins were only worth " rather more than s ixteen s hillings". M ost l ikely the heavier c oins b elonged t o an earlier s tage o f the same s eries, S E31.2, which w ould a ccount f or the die b eing called the s ame o n both; o r, l ess l ikely, to the earlier s eries S E11/31.1. I nferred c omposition:

B elgic G aul 5 0 AV S E31.2-SE41.1 As a t S nettisham, the c ircumstances a rgue f or more than one deposit; i t i s d ifficult t o s ee h ow the c lay c ontainer ( which Allen believed t o have been a baked-clay s lab-mould) c ould have been disturbed in such a way a s t o s catter 3 -4 c oins while l eaving the r emainder s itting in t heir c ompartments.

S URREY

42.

Camberley, bef. 1 939. I R. Allen ( 1960, N o.48). A small hoard n oted by G . C.Brooke; t he c asts were destroyed during the war. C omposition: B ritish 4 + AV 1 /4

43.

S 51-63

Farley Heath T emple, Albury, 1 852(?). I R. Allen ( 1960, No.67). Following Evans ( 1864, 1 17), 1 1 A E S W81 f rom the D rummond c ollection f ound o n Farley Heath a re g enerally taken a s a hoard distinct f rom the s eries o f o fferings a ssociated with the temple. In fact, Evans' a ccount i s ambiguous ( "these here engraved ( 2 AE S W81) w ere f ound : w ith s everal o thers o f the s ame type a s well a s w ith o ther British c oins a t Farley Heath") and c ould be discounted , but f or a note o f Martin Tupper's p reserved in the Haverfield L ibrary.

2 84

According t o t his, s everal c rude B ritish " tin" c oins w ere f ound there i n December 1 852 by L ovell ( the A lbury s choolmaster) i n the c ourse o f a s mall amount o f " grubbing" o n the s ite o f the T emple where Tupper h imself had excavated extensively i n 1 848 ( Appendix 5 ). B oth G oodchild ( 1938) a nd A .G.W. Lowther, who was A llen's i nformant, t ook this t o r efer t o British p otin c oins, Allen h imself c oncurring ( 1971, 1 47). While p otins w ould n ot be a t a ll o ut o f p lace a t Farley Heath, i t i s m ore p robable that Tupper's n ote r elates t o t he same f ind a s Evans, the c oins p assing f irst f rom L ovell to the the T emple's o wner, H enry D rummond , and then i n h is bequest a long w ith the r est o f h is Farley Heath c ollection t o the BM ( 1853). S outh W estern b ronzes a re, i n f act, f requently c onfused w ith p otins. L owther was i nvolved i n j ust s uch a c ase, a f ind f rom Ashtead, S urrey, passing i nto A llen's gazetteer a s a Durotrigian s truck b ronze i ssue ( AE S W81) o n t he s trength o f L owther's r eference ( 1946, 1 89) - " a B ritish t in c oin r eported t o b e E vans' type G 5, 6 " - when the c oin had been s een and i dentified by G .C. Dunning a s a p otin c oin! The Farley H eath " hoard" i s p robably b est r egarded a s a g roup o f s imilar c oins deposited a s a n o ffering a t the T emple s ite ( cf. Hayling I sland), a lthough a typical in t hat t he majority o f c oins w ere f ound s ingly ( Tupper, 1 850; Appendix 5 ). A horse's b it was a lso f ound by L ovell in 1 852 ( Goodchild , 1 938) n ot n ecessarily a ssociated w ith the c oins, n or o f I ron Age date.

4 4.

Farnham , Farnham Castle P ark, 1 980. P R. Haselgrove ( 1984a). MD f ind e tc. Whitbourn ( 1859) r ecords t he d iscovery o f a uniface AV a t Farnham Castle. In 1 980, a m etal detector u ser f ound two AV in the Castle g rounds a nd s ubsequent excavations by the l ocal s ociety r ecovered 7 f urther s pecimens o ver a n a rea o f c 5 0 i n s q. A s cattered h oard o f which t he n ineteenth c entury c oin s hould be a s tray a nd another f ound in Farnham i n 1 966, c ould b e. Composition:

T otal:

B elgic G aul 6 AV S E51 ( 3 C lass 2 , 3 C lass 4 ) 6

B ritish 4 + AV 5 51 T otal:

4 +

The a rea i s s loping a nd t he c oins w ere p ossibly e roded d ownhill f rom t heir o riginal p lace o f deposition a t t he edge o f t he p lateau above, n ow c overed by a h ousing e state a nd a n i deal l ocation f or a s ettlement ( M.Millett, P ers. C omm.).

4 5.

K ew B ridge, o n bank o f Thames b etween Kew a nd Brentford? 1 976 o nwards. I R. Haselgrove ( 1978; 1 984a); G .C.Boon ( Pers. C omm.). M D f inds. These c oins w ere f ound by three MD u sers over about a y ear a s a s catter i n a layer o f c ompact g ravel exposed by t he

2 85

s couring action o f the Thames. The c oins a ll o ccurred a t about the same l evel o ver an a rea about 7 5 by 2 5 i n and had p resumably been dislodged f rom the r iver bank, a lthough they c ould equally have been deposited directly i n the water. The f ind was i nadequately r ecorded; only m inimum numbers can be g iven h ere:

T otal:

B ritish 1 0+ AR 2 AR 1 /4 1 + AV 1 /4 3 + AR 3 + AR 2 AR 1 AR 1 AR 1 /4 2 3+

S 81-82 S 81-82 S E81 S E81 S 91 S 92 S 93 S 93 ‘

There i s an o bvious c oincidence in d ate o f d iscovery and c ontent with the Waltham hoard and t he p ossibility that they were the same f ind cannot be r uled o ut entirely. However, a number o f f actors f avour t he view that they w ere i n f act, d istinct: s everal Kew c oins a re i n p oor c ondition c ompatible with the s aline c ontent o f t he water, while the s ingle AV 1 /4 E ppillus i s s ignificantly more worn than any i n the Waltham f ind. The detail o f t heir d iscovery i n the Thames g ravel s eems s ubstantially a ccurate ( although n ot n ecessarily t he p recise l ocation). M ore c oins f rom b oth s ources were c ertainly d ispersed w ithout r ecording and s urfaced in t he late 1 970s, with a range o f s purious p rovenances ( Brighton, North F erriby?). An AE E 83.2 was f ound in the Thames a t Kew B ridge s ometime before 1 937, s uggesting o ther deposits h ere.

46.

Kingston-upon-Thames, f oreshore, 1 974. P R. Haselgrove ( 1978). MD f ind . A number o f p otin c oins f ound by MD o n the f oreshore during the summer, o nly three o f which were r ecorded. There i s nothing t o s uggest a large f ind, n or i s i t known o ver how large an a rea the c oins were s cattered. N ot certainly a hoard. P otin P 1/2 3 + P 1/2.1-3 T otal: 3 +

47.

Wanborough, G reen Lane, 1 983 o nwards. Unpublished. J . P. C. Kent ( Pers. C omm.). MD f inds, e tc. E xcavations 1 985. F rere ( 1986). Initially r egarded a s a s traightforward hoard discovery . A g roup o f c 1 0 AR was f ound f irst, by a MD user o n a f ootpath j ust below the c rest o f t he H ogs B ack, a nd this was f ollowed by the r ecovery o f t wo l arger parcels a lso f ound by MD u sers and p resumptively part o f the s ame g eneral deposit. A ll these c oins w ere l isted by K ent. Later Roman material, including a b uilding with l ate C 2ndC3rd AD o ccupation a nd many Roman A E c oins, mostly C 3rdC4th AD, was a lready known, but i ts d istribution was apparently quite d iscrete and unrelated t o the I ron Age coin deposit. Many c oins w ere virtually i llegible; t hose

2 86

initially r ecorded were:

Total:

B ritish R oman 1 AV 1 1 1 AR Republican /4 S 64.2 /4, 8 AR S 72 4 AR Augustus 1 AV 1 1 AE/AR C laudius AD 4 AV 1 /4, 1 4 AR S E81 S E82 5 0-1, evidently 6 AR /4 S 81-82 not f resh. 2 AV, 4 AV 1 Total: 1 6 S 81-82 60 AR 4 AR S 91 8 5 AR S 92 3 AR S 93 3 AR S 92 o r 9 3 f p lating) 3 AE/AV E 82.1 ( cores devoid o 8 AE S W81 1 AR S 66.2 E A81 1 AR N ew type P attern/Horse o f. S E73, e tc. 1 AR S tar/Dolphin, p robably S 7 T incommios 1 0 AR 1 AR S altire/Lion, p robably S 7 T incommios Head o f. M305 but laureate/horse, 7 AR S E82 Eppillus /4 U rn/Eagle, 8 81/2 V erica 1 AR 1 /4 H ead/Panel, S 81-2 V erica 1 AR 1 Uncertain types 1 4 AR 1 1 AE 2 54

The s orry tale o f what happened s ubsequently a t Wanborough i s already well known ( e.g. CBA Annual R eport, 1 985). Following the i nitial discoveries, s omething a pproaching a g old rush took p lace, w ith c oins b eing g rubbed up by MD users, l iterally i n their hundreds, a nd e ffectively destroying the s tratigraphy. Most o f them came f rom a r elatively r estricted a rea o f . c 3 00 s q . metres adjacent to the f ootpath where the f irst discoverey was made. F ollowing this looting, a n excavation was mounted in t he disturbed t errain, uncovering the r emains o f a Romano-Celtic t emple ( Frere, 1 986). T he c oins a re now interpreted a s having lain on the weathered s urface o f the L ondon c lay, a lthough s ome o f them came f rom w ell within c lean c lay, which a t the t ime was thought o f a s p ossibly infilling a l arge basin o r p ond ( P. Turnbull, P ers. C omm.). Above the c lay was a black layer dated c AD 5 0-150 c ontaining p ottery, burnt b one and what a re interpreted a s e lements o f " priestly r egalia" in c opper a lloy: 1 7 " sceptre-handles" ( 2 o f t hem c onnected by a wooden s haft) a nd a t l east 4 " head-dresses" o f the type with central b ronze disc and dependent c hains. 3 had s tanding wheels o n the disc, p ossibly indicative o f the cult o f Taranis ( Frere, 1 986). The t emple o verlay this deposit, with f lint rubble walls o ver g reensand f oundations, the c elle , measuring c 8 x 7 m f loored w ith i ronstone tesserae and the surrounding p ortico was c 1 5 m square. Some 400 coins w ere fo l ind in the e±cavationß t o add to those a lready r ecovered ( mainly by the p olice) b ringing the total to o ver 1 000. The o riginal t otal was p robably in excess o f 2 000, a ccording to s ome a ccounts, w ell in excess o f that, making Wanborough potentially the biggest deposit

2 87

o f I ron A ge c oins ever f ound i n B ritain. Chronologically, the i nitial " sample" i s a pparently r epresentative o f the larger g roup n ow r ecovered, but the o riginal proportion o f g old i s l ikely t o have been h igher; AV S 91, f or instance, a re unrepresented in the above l ist. The excavation c oins o ffer s ome c ontrol o n what has been disposed o f w ithout r ecord. The excavations l eave l ittle doubt o f Wanborough's s tatus a s an important Roman r eligious s ite, but the nature o f the c oin deposit i s l ess s ure. While a s eries o f o fferings a t an existing L PRIA r itual f ocus a ssociated w ith the s ource o f the s tream which r ises h ere, o r even multiple h oards s imilar t o Marks T ey o r S nettisham, c annot be ruled o ut, a s ingle massive s cattered hoard l aid d own a s s ome k ind o f f oundation o ffering o r dedication d eposit a t present s eems the m ost p robable explanation o f the c oins. E ither way , the c omposition o f the g roup l eaves l ittle d oubt that the o fferings involved w ere both late a nd o f a n unusual nature. Furthermore, a s t here was evidently post-Conquest depositon, t he c oins were s ubsequently e ither p rotected f rom r ecovery by the f orce o f c ivil o r r eligious s anction, o r w ere o therwise c oncealed f rom v iew. There i s a s triking a nalogy w ith F arley Heath w ith i ts " hoard" a nd black l ayer, a nd more distantly w ith Harlow; Waltham S t.Lawrence c ould well b e c omparable. The p resence o f s o many unusual c oins ( many o f which w ere evidently i n a m int s tate when d eposited), o ften h itherto unrecorded types o f varying c ompetence and s tyle but n evertheless a ttributable t o well known S outhern r ulers: T incommus, E ppillus, V erica, E paticcus, raises s ome i nteresting p ossibilities c oncerning their p roduction and c irculation. The two most o bvious ( cf. C ollis, 1 971a) a re ( 1) t hat s triking was s ometimes decentralised w ith c oins being s truck by p owerful i ndividual m embers o f the e lite in the name o f the n ominal c entral a uthority o r ( 2) t hat particular types were s ometimes s truck by t he ruler t o make a s pecific payment t o o ne o f their s ubordinates. E ither way i t i s c lear t hat many o f t hese c oins must have s pent t heir l ives i mmobilised i n t reasuries o r w ere o therwise h oarded, and n ever e ntered g eneral c irculation i n the s ense we understand the t erm .

4 8.

Wandsworth, Thames Foreshore, 1 976-7. P R. Haselgrove ( 1978). MD f ind . Over t wo years, a n umber o f p otins f ound by MD u sers o n a r estricted a rea o f t he f oreshore, c lose t o P utney B ridge, came o n the market. I t i s n ot c lear how many c oins w ere f ound. A s cattered hoard i s p robable. The c oins b elong t o two c lasses: S eries P 1 8 P 1.2-3 T otal: 8 +

49.

Wonersh, Albury, 1 848. P R. A llen ( 1960, No.17). The e xact f indspot i s in d oubt, but was c lose t o A lbury S tation ( Tupper, 1 859) o n a n ewly m ended r oad. The h oard

2 88

was probably i n a hollow f lint, a lthough Evans' s urmise t hat this had b een broken by the t raffic ( 1864) i s n ot n ecessarily justified, a s the extent o f the a rea o ver which the coins were s cattered i s unknown. Nor i s i t c lear how many were f ound a s only the AV E 6I a re s pecified. Tupper e stimated c . 40; only 29 can now be t raced:

Total:

B ritish 1 AV S 63 1 9 AV E61.2 6 AV 1 /4 S E52.4 3 AV 1 /4 S E61 2 9

I t i s p robable that s ome o ther c oins have been ' reattributed' t o Farley Heath by m istake; the balance o f p robability i s a gainst two s eparate f inds c ontaining the r arer AV and AV 1 /4 types within a s hort s pace o f o ne a nother. I t i s c onceivable that the t emple was i tself the s ource o f t he r oad mending material. N ote: The hoard o f 8 6+ AV S E51, E 51 e tc., a llegedly f ound i n o r before 1 944 o n a farm about halfway between Guildford a nd Haslemere, which was a ccepted by Allen, Rodwell a nd o thers a s g enuine, despite obvious p roblems ( Haselgrove, 1 978, 3 , note 1 0) can s urely b e d ismissed a s a r ecent ' plant'. Analysis o f the c oins has s hown that they p ossess unacceptably h igh z inc l evels f or p robable I ron A ge p roducts ( J. P.C.Kent, P ers. Comm.) a nd a re ( very s kilful) m odern fakes.

S USSEX

5 0.

A lfriston, a t o r n ear the Burnt House, 1 824. P R. Allen ( 1960, No.22). Early casts i n the BM c onfirm t hat a g roup o f c oins w ere f ound a t o r near the Burnt House, e 1 824. These were s old by the executor o f a Mr C . Brooker o f A lfriston t o Charles Ade f or Lord Holmesdale f or 2 0 p ounds and delivered to h im i n 1 844, which l ed t o a date o f c 1 840, being g iven t o this f ind. The hoard c onsisted o f a t l east 6 AV; a f urther AV T incommius ( found i n 1 846) may b e a s tray f rom the s ame h oard. The c oins a re: Belgic Gaul 1 AV 1 /4 S E11-12 1 AV 8 E51 T otal:

5 1.

2

Total:

B ritish 1 AV 1 /4 S E62 4 AV S 71 ( 1 C 1.1) S 72 ( 2 C 1.2) 5

-

Battle, bef. 1 839. I R. Allen ( 1960). According t o Evans ( 1864), a hoard o f AR EA uninscribed a nd inscribed i n equal proportions was f ound a t Battle, a pparently i n a p ot. The types i ncluded EA73.2 and EA91.1. Their fate i s unrecorded. The f indspot, f ar o utside the n ormal c irculation a rea, i s not c onfirmed o ther than in t he

2 89

initial n otice ( N.C. ( 1839), 89), and must be suspect. AR EA a re, however, o ccasionally f ound i n S outhern locations, while in the g eneral c ontext o f the East Anglian h oards, outliers a re n ot unlikely. I ndication o f a s outhern h oard f ound a t this p eriod may well be a fforded by a number o f AR EA i ncorrectly a ssociated with the f ind n ear P ortsmouth in 1 830 ( Robinson, 1 980). These include 2 AR EA91.1 ( BM) and 3 AR EA72.2, EA73.2 and EA91.3 a ll o riginally owned by William Buie ( Robinson, 1 980). F rom the o riginal comparison o f the Battle hoard with t he March f ind i t i s c lear that o ther types were p resent. None o f these w ould be o ut o f p lace. A f ind o f AR EA in the S outh s ometime in the s econd quarter o f the n ineteenth c entury, including s ome o r a ll o f the f ollowing types, can therefore be tentatively accepted: B ritish AR EA72.2 AR EA73.2 AR EA91.1 AR EA91. 3 The hoard,

5 2.

however,

( Definite) ( Definite)

i s worthless

f or c omparative

B irling, East D ean, Eastbourne, 1 932. CR? Allen ( 1960, No.21). A g roup o f c oins f ound t ogether by a l abourer d igging f or f lints n ear B irling Farm in 1 932. The d eposit i s the o nly known ' hoard' i n B ritain c omposed exclusively o f p lated c oins, a lthough o n these g rounds i t c ould be argued that i t derived f rom a s ite deposit analogous t o Hayling I sland. The c oins w ere: B ritish 1 A E/AV S E51. 4 ( presumably made in B ritain) 1 A E/AV E 61.2 1 AE/AV 1 /4 S E62 1 A E/AV 1 /4 S 64.2 1 AE/AV 6 E72.1 T otal: 5 Birling Gap i s o verlooked by the p romontary a t B elle T out.

5 3.

s tudies.

f ortification

Bognor R egis, A ldwick B each, 1 842 o nwards. P R. A llen ( 1960, No.19). A large number o f AV were f ound o n the s eashore in 1 841-2. O thers have b een r ecovered s ubsequently, i ncluding s everal f rom A ldwick B each, which may therefore be the location o f the initial f ind , a lthough m ore than o ne deposit cannot be ruled o ut. The r ecords a re s ketchy a nd a s w ith S elsey, the c oins a re b est d ivided between c oins in the initial f ind and the o ther d iscoveries. 1 .

C oins in the

1 841-2

f ind

B elgic Gaul/British 4 AV 3 AV

1/ 4

S E32-42 ( Class 1 ) 1 /4 S E52 ( 1 C lass 2 )

2 90

B ritish 1 AV 1 /4 S E42-43 1 AV 1 /4 S 65. 3

T otal: 2 .

7

Total:

Subsequent

discoveries

( a)

T otal:

2

5 64.2 S 72.1 S 81.1

( ?)

B ritish 2 AV S 72 ( found t ogether 1 864)

Unspecified beach l ocation

Continental 1 AR S outhern Gaul ( Rhone Valley Type)

( c)

1 /4 1 /4 1 /4

Aldwicl B each

B elgic Gaul/British 1 AV 1 /4 5 E32-42 ( Class 1 ) ( This c oin was in g ood c ondition, an unlikely beach f ind). ( b)

1 AV 1 AV 2 + AV 6 +

4 AV 1 /4 S 51-65(Class 1 AV 1 /4 S 63.1 2 AV 1 /4 S 64.2 1 AR S T3.1b 1 AV E61.2 3 AV 1 /4 S 72.1(3),.2 1 AV E 81

1 )

l Ietween M iddleton and E lmer beach 1 AV 1 /4 S 63-65 Total:

1 6

I n a ll, therefore, 3 1 c oins can be p rovenanced t o B ognor B each, a lmost a ll f rom the beach W o f the r esort. I n a ddition, a g old a lloy ingot weighing 425 g m, was f ound o n t he beach a t F elpham, but in v iew o f R obert's ( 1979) a scription o f t he S elsey g old f inds to a p ost-Roman c ontext, there i s no r eason t o a ssociate this discovery w ith the I ron Age c oins.

54.

Lancing Down, R oman T emple, North Lancing, 1 828. I R. A llen ( 1960, No.25). S ee a lso Roach S mith ( 1848); F rere ( 1940); B edwin ( 1981). An account o f t his f ind i s carried by the Gentleman's Magazine ( Part I I, 1 828, 6 31), a lthough i ts a ccuracy i s n ot b eyond question:" During l ast s pring a Roman pavement was discovered o n L ancing D own, buried beneath what a ppears t o b e a l arge tumulus. On r emoving the earth, a g allery 4 0 f t s quare was laid o pen. I n the m idst o f i t i s a r oom 1 6 f t s quare, the f loor o f which i s a tesselated pavement i n excellent p reservation, but without painting o r pattern. I n the c entre o f t he r oom was f ound a quantity o f a shes; a nd among them 2 5 p ieces o f Roman, Ancient B ritish a nd Saxon c oins; o n one s ide o f the edifice 1 2 p ieces o f s ilver c oins, no t wo p ieces o f which were a like." Two years l ater this was qualified by o mission o f the S axon c oins; three s ceatt& were f ound a t the same s ite, but n ot a mong the 2 5 c oins o f the f irst n otice ( Gentleman's Magazine, P art i i, 1 830, 1 7). Only s ix o f the I ron A ge c oins have survived , but the majority were s een by R oach S mith, who s ent impressions t o Evans, f rom whose

2 91

description ( 1864, 1 83-5), o thers c an be i dentified. I n his account ( 1848), c learly before h e had s een them , Roach S mith l isted the c oins a s 2 5 Roman a nd one believed t o be B ritish o r Gaulish ( a total o f 2 6); the f ormer being o f C laudius, Nero ( "a large brass o f this emperor, R ev, a t riumphal a rch, i s in a f ine s tate o f p reservation", I bid., 9 3), Vespasian, Hadrian, P ius, Faustina, M . Aurelius, Commodus and Gallienus. As the I ron Age c oins t otal 1 7, these were presumably a ll the Roman c oins in the f ind. Around the t emple there was a s eries o f burials o f v arying date and c ontent, ranging f rom a B ronze A ge Urn i nverted o ver c remated bones, ( though according to the description, a ccompanied by a Roman brooch; Frere, 1 940), to R omanoB ritish c remations with pottery, f ibulae, c oins, c ombs and r ings. Unstratified f inds included s ome early a nd late I ron A ge and much Roman pottery. T his B ronze Age burial raises the question o f whether t he c onspicious mound marking the s ite o f the temple was i n fact a combination o f the c ollapse o f the temple and an earlier tumulus o n which i t had s tood. The excavators c ertainly c laimed a fter t aking up the pavement o f the t emple o n t he s outh s ide o f the building t o have excavated the g round b eneath t o a d epth o f 6 f t. " It c onsisted o f s ix a lternate layers o f burnt bones and f lints laid in mortar, which appeared t o be c omposed o f chalk, l ime and s ea s and " ( Roach S mith, 1 848, 9 2). Although c onventionally r egarded a s a hoard, these c oins a re perhaps b est r egarded a s o fferings a t a r eligious f ocus, r emnants o f the c oins o riginally d eposited i n the t emple a ell „ a , the remainder having been retrieved o r s tolen a t a later date. 1 2 o f the I ron A ge c oins a re s ilver minims l ikely to be m issed i n s uch c ircumstances. The a shes i n the c entre o f the r oom a re unlikely to r epresent a r itual hearth; a s the f loor here was in g ood c ondition ( although f rom Roach Smith's woodcut, i t was badly w orn o r disturbed on the east and west s ides) any s tructural f eatures should have been r eadily a pparent. An a lternative i s that the r oof had burnt down, in t he same way that the mound implies that the building may have c ollapsed in s itu; in later p eriods, c oncealment o f h oards in rafters was a c ommon p ractice. I f the a ccount i s r eliable, the c oins were s tratified above the t esselated pavement and must have been deposited not only a fter the Conquest, but s ignificantly s o, f urther evidence f or the very late " circulation" o f s outhern AR c oinage. This interpretation i s c omplicated, however, by:( 1) the initial description, which has the 2 5 c oins f ound in the c entre o f the f loor ( where i t was i ntact) a nd 1 2 o f the s ilver c oins ( none o f them a like) f ound on o ne s ide o f the edifice ( where i t was n ot n ecessarily intact); this raises the possibility that s ome c oins in f act derived f rom a stratum underlying the s tone s tructure, of. e .g. Harlow. ( 2) a t l east three s eemingly I ron A ge c oins are d escribed a s c oming f rom g raves, " a Gaulish o r B ritish c oin" f rom c remation 0 , " and two c oins, one s ilver the o ther p lated, both c oncave and c onvex, f rom Grave R . The f ormer i s

2 92

i nscribed V IRI a round a head " ( Roach Smith, 1 848, o nly coins, i n f act, f rom the s chedule o f g raves.

9 3);

the

These s hould b e 1 AR 5 82.2, 1 AE/AR S 82.2 and 1 AE Belgic Gaul, uncertain ( or possibly the AE S cheers No.216). I t n eed not f ollow that the c oins w ere g rave g oods; the i nhumation burial i s p resumably late Roman f rom the a ccompanying i nlaid gold brooch ( cf. F rere, 1 940) and the c oins c ould b e residual in the f ills. Against this, h owever, the l ack o f coins f rom the r ecent excavations ( Bedwin, 1 981), suggests that unlike Hayling and Harlow, the coins were not s cattered over an extensive a rea ( although with m achine s tripping the c hances o f s uch c oin t ypes being r ecovered was s ignificantly r educed). I n a ny case, I ron A ge c oins a re c ommon enough a s g oods i n later g raves, e specially in B elgic Gaul) and the s ilver c oins c ould be f ruits of r obbing a t that t ime. A lternatively t hese burials w ere even later and t he c oins f ound in them w ere the 3 s ceattas s omehow c onfused w ith three g enuine I ron Age c oins f rom the Quaß . I n 1 833, the t emple was g rubbed up by the f armer. The 1 980 e xcavations c onfirmed that this was thorough, but d id r eveal a s mall w ooden s tructure beside the s tone t emple, which the excavator c onsiders a p ossible l ate I ron A ge s hrine, a nd a s tretch o f T emenos gully p receded by a t l east t wo phases o f p ost-holes. Another c oin o f Gallienus was r ecovered, but o verall the p ottery a ssemblage c onfirmed F rere's ( 1940) c onclusion that the main activity a t the s ite was during t he late I ron Age a nd early Roman p eriod; t he fabrics r epresented i ncluded hand-made g rog-tempered wares ( most c ommon), TR, TN, butt-beaker, e tc., amphora ( possibly Dr.1), but only a s mall quantity o f T S h inting a t a decline during t he later C 2nd AD, w ith l ittle a ctivity in t he later Roman period, a part f rom the burials. The p ossibility o f t he s ite r epresenting a mausoleum r ather t han a t emple s hould perhaps be c onsidered. A s f ar a s they c an be t heir c ontexts w ere a s

r econstructed, f ollows:

the c oin

f inds

a nd

1 . " Amongst t he a shes o n the ( or s ome below?) the z ella f loor". Dating F lavian, o r l ater, f or c oins o ver the f loor s urface. P rimary?? B ritish 1 AR 1 /4 5 AR 1 /4 2 1 2 2 T otal: 1 3

A R 1 /4 A E/AV AR 1 /4 AR 1 /4

S 66.1 ( LZ7) S 71.1 ( 1 , 1119, M 120 ( 4)) S 72.1 ( M118) S 81.2 ( M121?) S 81.1 ( 1 4117) S 82.2 ( 1 4116) T otal:

a nd p ossibly up t o three s ceatta, l ater deposits ( total - 2 6).

2 93

B elgic Gaul 1 A E S cheers No.216 ( or c oin l isted below i n Context 2 ?) Roman 9 + A E C laudius-Commodus ( 8), Gallienus ( 1), the latter i ntrusive t o the g roup? 1 0+ these latter

c ertainly

2 . " Cremation burial, Grave P ." 1 AE B elgic Gaul Uncertain, R ev.

Earlier Roman? P rimary? horse. Association: c omb.

3 . " Inhumation burial, Grave R ." L ater Roman? P rimary? 1 AR, 1 AE/AR S 82.2 ( M130, M 128). A ssociations: s keleton. " Under the head in a cavity were t he bones o f a c ock; in the middle o f the g rave a f ibula in t he f orm o f a c ock, but without l egs, the wings inlaid with blue and red s tones ( gold; C ollingwood and Richmond, 1 969, No.109; C 2nd AD o r later); a c loak buckle." ( Roach Smith, 1 848-93). Both g raves w ere s ituated w ithin 5 -6 m o f the s outh-east c orner o f the t emple, both a pparently j ust beyond the l imits o f the mound.

5 5.

Maresfield, Duddleswell, A shdown F orest, 1 825. P R. Allen ( 1960, No.20). According t o Evans ( 1864-92) this f ind consisted o f c 20 AV 1 /4 AR, but o nly the 1 0 i llustrated i n the i nitial n otice (NQ 2 ( 1839), 2 31) can be r eadily identified. Evan's account i mplies more AV1/4 t han he s pecified .

T otal:

B ritish 1 AV 1 /4 S E62 1 + AV 1 /4 S 64.2 1 A E/AV 1 /4 S 64.2 5 AR, 2 AR 1 /4 S 66.1 1 0+

1 AR S 66, d escribed a s dug up w ith s everal o thers near Lewes, S ussex, i s i llustrated in Harriet S ophia B ockett's Notebook, p resumably a r eference t o t he same f ind, a lthough Lewes i s s ome d istance.

5 6.

S elsey B ill, n ear Medmenny Farm, e tc., 1 873 onwards. PR. Allen ( 1960, N o.18); Haselgrove ( 1978; 1 984a); B edwin, 1 983; B rown, 1 979; Willett, 1 879. S elsey B ill has suffered more s erious erosion than a lmost any s tretch o f the s outhern c oastline over the past two hundred years a nd this, c oupled to t he s pectacular q uantity o f c oinage r ecovered a fter 1 873, a nd the l ocal i nterest this g enerated, has p ossibly exaggerated the material there r elative t o o ther beach s ites. These coins s tand a lone a s the o nly definite late I ron A ge o bjects f rom the beach; Roberts ( 1979) has r ecently examined o ther p recious metal a rtifacts g enerally a ssumed t o have been a ssociated with the c oins and c oncluded that a part f rom undiagnostic s craps, the material i s t o b e c lassified e ither a s f ragments o f Roman j ewellery ( late I ron Age t o Roman , some o f i t thus p otentially a ssociated w ith the c oins) o r ( the bulk o f i t), p ost-Roman j ewellery c entering o n the C 7th AD . The best r ecord o f the earlier f inds i s Willett ( 1879) whose f ather o btained n early a ll o f them. Additional material has been c ollected by many p eople, i ncluding E . Heron A llen ( 1911). Many later d iscoveries were o f ' hut f loors' e roding f rom the l ow b rickearth c liffs - c learly s ettlement deposits, dark horizontal bands c ontaining burnt f lint, c harcoal, domestic debris - a nd pottery described a s

2 94

' Iron Age',

but

whether this

The key questions

i s

c orrect

s urrounding the

i s not

known.

S elsey f ind a re:

1 ) Do the c oins belong to the g eneral category o f beach f inds well a ttested f or S outh-East England; were they e roded o ut o f the brickearth o r a c ombination o f both? 2 )

How many discrete deposits

a re i nvolved?

The same c onundrum o f beach vs c liff deposit extends to the o ther c omparable f inds, while I ron Age AV c oins a re c ommon a s d iscrete f inds e lsewhere o n the brickearth o f the p eninsula. B eyond that, however, I can s ee no c ompelling r eason t o exclude S elsey f rom the c ontext o f deliberate c oastal deposition when the pattern i s s o c learly e stablished f or the period. A s f or the s econd question, there a re hints o f c ertain types having been f ound in packets ( e.g. t he 6 AV1/4 E 63.1) i n the same year, which would obviously f avour d iscrete d eposits. S imilarly, the number o f d iscrete f ind l ocations i s unlikely t o be a p roduct o f the wave action and s orting-patterns i nferred by W illett ( ibid. 8 2). V ery f ew c oins, h owever, can be t raced t o their s pecific p oint o f o rigin p articularly the more r ecent f inds), a lthough the bulk o f t he f ind came f rom the b each c lose t o M edmenny f arm. The c oins l isted by W illett a nd Evans a re t herefore g iven f irst, f ollowed by later f inds and c oins f or which a n a lternative p rovenance i s p ossible. ( 1) Coins i n the " 1873 and a fter" b each c lose t o M edmenny Farm) Belgic Gaul/Britain 1 AV 1 /4 S 12 1 AV S E41.1 1 5 AV 1 /4 S E42 2 AV S E51.1,4 1 AV 1 /4 S E52.3

f ind

( mostly f rom

the

B ritish 1 AV S 41.1 2 AV 1 /4 S E43.2 5 AV S 51/63 3 AV S 52 2 5 AV 1 /4 S 51 2 AV 1 /4 S 52 1 AV 1 /4 S 63 3 AV 1 /4 S 65.1-2 4 5 AV 1 /4 S 65.3 ( 3 w ith l egend E ) 1 2 AV 1 /4 S 64.2 1 AV 1 /4 S E61 1 AV E61.2 /4 E 63.1 6 AV 1 1 AR SW61 1 AV S 63.2 2 AV S 71 1 4 AV 1 /4 S 71 /4 S 72 7 8 AV 1 2 AR S 72 1 AV S 81 2 3 AV 1 /4 S 81 4 AV 1 /4 S 82 1 AR S 82 1 AR S 92 2 35

Total:20

2 95

( 2)

Other

c oins

f ound o n Selsey B ill

Belgic Gaul/Britain 1 AV 1 /4 5 E11.2 7 AV 1 /4 S E42 3 AV S E51 ( 1 C lass 6 ) 5 AV 1 /4 S E52 ( 2 C lass

1 )

Total: 1 6

Armorican Gaul 1 AR C oriosolites ( Class V I)

Total: ( 3)

Bracklesham Bay f oreshore

Total:

B ritish 1 AV S 52.1 1 AV 1 /4 S 65.2 1 AV 1 /4 S E81 3

Total:

B ritish 1 AV S 51 1 AV S E51 2

Belgic Gaul/Britain 1 AV 1 /4 S E52.1 ( bef. 1 850)

( 4)

Cakeham B elgic Gaul 1 AV S E41.1

( 5)

East Wittering B elgic Gaul/Britain 1 AV S E51.3 1 AV 1 /4 S E42

Total: ( 6)

B ritish 3 AV S 51 2 AV S 52 8 AV 1 /4 S 51 ( One a t Point, 1 921) 2 AV 1 /4 S 52 1 AV E 51 1 AV 1 /4 S 64.1 1 AV S 63.2 1 AR S 68.1 2 AV S 71 1 1 AV 1 /4 S 71.1 4 AV 1 /4 S 72.1(2),.2(2) 1 AR S 72.1 1 AV S 81.2 ( SE B each) 2 + AV 1 /4 S 81.1 1 AR S 81.1 1 AR S 81.2 1 AV E 82.2 ( East s ide o f p oint) 3 3+

2

Medmenny

Total:

Total:

B ritish 1 AV 1 /4 S 64.2 3 AV 1 /4 S 65 ( 2 C lass 3 ) 1 AV 1 /4 S E43. 2 1 AV S 71.1 1 AV S 72.1 ( before 1 864) 1 AV 1 /4 S 72.1 1 AV 1 /4 S 81. 2 1 AV 1 /4 S E81 1 0

1 875 (effectively the s ame

f indspot

B ritain 1 AV S 52.1

ßelgic Gaul/Britain 1 AV 1 /4 S E42 1 AV 1 /4 S E52 2

2 96

a s N ol?)

( 7)

Pagham

Total: ( 8)

( all

o lder

f inde)

Belgic Gaul/Britain 1 AV S E51.4 ( 1854) 1 AV 1 /4 S E52 ( bef. 2

Britain 1 AV S 82.1

( 1851)

1 850)

West Wittering a ) b )

1 2 1 1 1

f rom ' tumulus', Cakeham Farm ( 1840) o ther f inds

Total:

AV S 63.2 AV 1 /4 S 65. 3 AV S 41.1 AV 1 /4 5 64.2 AV S 81.2 ( 1872, o n beach)

6

The ' tumulus' was p robably a sand dune o r c learance. S ome 3 36 coins can b e i dentified f rom 8 - 9 s eparate l ocations ( at minimum) f rom the western t ip o f S elsey Bay a s far a s Pagham harbour, the adjacent village t o Aldwick where more I ron Age c oins have b een f ound ( cf. B ognor above). S o consistent i s t he pattern r ight a long the c oast that i t i s difficult t o r esist the c onclusion that these f inds r epresent a s eries o f deposits in c oastal l ocations, whether this o riginally m eant the s ea, the b each, o r the c liff. These w ill be v ery much m inimum f igures.

W ILTSHIRE

5 6A. Chute, 1 927. CR. A llen ( 1960, No.16). 65 s taters, s truck f rom 7 Obv. and 2 8 Rev, dies, hollow, s pherical f lint, with o ne natural hole.

Total: The f indspot Area.

i s

f ound i n a

B ritish 6 5 AV S W41 6 5 1 .8 km within the boundary o f

2 97

the

S tudy

1 17 . 0 18

( 10 ) ( 1 09 ) •4 _

•

-

•8 1 •8 2

=

, .=

•

'-

a

1 3 1 4

•2 9

•5

-=, (/ 2-. 7-_ : ' = ' : = =. _ . '.

=

•8 3 •8 8

•4 1 . -

•2 0

-40f i l • 39 -

•8 5

•1 6

3 01

2 51

\ ( 12 ) •2 4

-

3 1

•

1 5 e __

_

-

2 1

•4 2

.77

2 2 •3 2 •2 7

•1 9

•73

L and o ve r 1 37m 0

F ig.

A 3:2

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0 Km

Map o f g old multiple f inds in the S tudy A rea.

2 98

I I.

Multiple F inds

f rom within the

1 :

S tudy Area '

Gold

M l. Bedford, Cut T hroat Allotments, 1 AV E51.1, 1 AV 1 /4 E 82.1

e tc. Total:

2

M2. Luton, Leagrave, S ource o f River Lea. 2 f ound together. 1 AV S E51, 1 AV 5 E73.3, 1 AV E71.3, 1 AV 1 /4 E 82.1 Total: 4 1 AR E83.2 Total: 1 ridge, e tc. M3. Sandy, Girtford B 1 AV S E51, 2 AV 1 /4 5 E73.1,2, AE/AV E82.1 2 AR E 83.2 1 AR S E 62,

1 AV E62.2,

1 AV E 71.1, Total: Total:

2 7 3

M4. S hefford. F ound t ogether. 2 + AV S E41. 4

Total:

2 +

M 5. S ilsoe. 1 AV S E51, 1 AV E 82.1

Total:

2

M 6. B rightwell, n ear Wittenham C lumps, S lade End. 1 AV S 52.1, 1 A E/AV 1 /4, 2 AV 1 /4 E 82.1

Total:

4

M 7. Marcham, near Frilford T emple. 1 AV E 71.3, 1 AV 5 E73.2 1 AR E 83.2

Total: Total:

2 1

M 8. Reading, 2 AV S 63.2

Total:

2

B ERKSHIRE

Market

M9. Ruscombe, n ear t ogether. 1 AV S 51.1, 1 AV S 52

P lace,

M illman Road.

Waltham

S t. Lawrence

Temple.

Total:

M 10. S teventon, B urridges Farm, Canal/GWR. c hronological disparity? 1 AV B elgic Gaul S cheers No.16, 1 AV E 82.1 M 11. e tc. 1 AV 1 AV 1 AR

F ound 2

S ignificant Total:

2

Wallingford, S nows Gravel P it, Wallingford B ridge, 2 f ound together? S 12, 1 AV S E51, 1 AV NE51-61, 1 AV S 81.2, 1 AV S E82.1, W92 Total: 6 S E81 Total: 1

M 12. Winkfield, 2 AV S 52.1

P oplar View.

F ound together. Total:

2 99

2

BUCKINGHAMSHIRE

M 13. Drayton Beauchamp, t ogether. 1 AV E61.1, I AV S E73.3

S tockwell

P iece

Field.

F ound

Total:

2

M I4. E llesborough, Chequers; High S crubbs; Dunsmore Farm . f ound together. I AV S E51, 1 AV S 52.1, 1 AV E 71.2, 1 AV E75.1, 1 AV E 82.1 Total: M 15. Wendover. Chronological disparity. I AV 1 /4 S E22.1, 1 AV E71.2 Total:

2

5 2

CAMBRIDGESHIRE

M 16. Barrington. F ound with various unlocated s ite. 1 AV S E51, I AV 1 /4 S 51.1 ? , 1 AV S E73.1

LPRIA

M I7. Burwell. Meadow beside the Reach r oad, I AV E 51.1, I AV E71.1 M I8. walks 1 AV

f inds

on

Total:

3

T otal:

2

e tc.

Cambridge, Barnwell, F inches walk, n ear the C ollege Chronological disparity? 1 /4 S 51-52?, I AV 1 /4 Armorican Gaul, 1 AV E 82? T otal: 3

ESSEX

M 19. Billericay. 1 AV S E22, I AV 1 /4 Uncertain

T otal:

M20. Castle Hedingham . P robably S ignificant c hronological disparity. I AV 1 /4 S E 1 1-12, 1 AV E71.3 M21. 1 AV

n ot

f ound

2

t ogether. Total:

2

Chelmsford. Two f rom the r iver f ound t ogether. 1 /4 S 51.1, 2 AV E 71.1, 1 AV E 71 2 T otal:

4

M22. Chingford . S ignificant 1 AV S E22, 1 AV 1 /4 E 82.1

chronological d isparity. Total:

2

M23. Colchester. S ee a lso Appendix 5 . ( "Near Colchester" c oins omitted). 1 AV S E22.1, 2 AV S E51, 1 AV EA61.2, 1 AV 1 /4 E71.1, 3 AV, 1 AE/AV S E72.1, 1 AV, I AE/AV, 1 AV 1 /4 E 82.1, I AV E 82. 2, 2 AE/AV NE83, 1 AV B elgic Gaul S cheers No.30? T otal: 1 6 1 AR E 73, I AR W71, 3 AR E 82. 2, 1 A R W91, 1 AR A rmorican Gaul Total: 8 M24. Colne. 2 AV E 81

F ound s eparately. Total:

3 00

2

M24A. Eastwood, S outhend, 1 AV 1 /4 S E22, 1 AV S E51

Eastwoodbury Lane,

e tc. T otal:

2

1 425. Halstead 1 AV E 71.3, 1 AV S E73.2

T otal:

2

1 426. 1 AV

T otal:

2

T otal:

5

Lawford. P ossibly f ound together. 3 E73.2, 1 AV 1 /4 S E72.1

1 427. L eyton. 2 f ound together a t 1 AV E71.2, 1 AV E 75.2, 3 AV E 82.1

I ve Farm C lose.

1 428. Maldon, Maldon Hall; Garden o pposite V ictoria I nn. One much later. 1 AV S E21, 1 AV,1 AV 1 /4 S E22, 1 AV E 71.1 T otal: 4 M29. 2 AV

S affron Walden. S E51.1, 4, 1 AV E 71.3

T otal:

3

1 430. 1 AV

S halford S E31.2, 1 AV

T otal:

2

S E51

M31. Walton-on-the- Naze. 2 f ound earlier. 1 AV S E11-31, 1 AV E 61.1, l AV S E72.1, 1 4 32. 1 AV

together. 1 AV

1 /4

One

c oin

S E73.2 T otal:

4

T otal:

2

Walthamstow. S E73.2, 1 AV E 82.2

HAMPSHIRE

1 4 33. Andover, c lose t o intersection Finkley Down. 1 AV S 52.1, 1 AV 1 /4 S 51.1 1 AR C . Gaul DLT XV, 4 858-9

o f R oman r oads

1 4 34. Basingstoke. 1 AV S 63.2, 1 AV E 71.2 M35. Mortimer West End, Appendix 5 . 1 AV S E51.3, 1 AV S 63.1

B enyon's Wood,

c f.

T otal: T otal:

2 1

T otal:

2

P ond Farm.

S ee

T otal:

M35a. Hurstbourne Tarrant. 3 f ound t ogether. 3 AV S E31.2. Not i ncluded in a nalysis o f f inds 1 4 36. P ortchester, Carnaway Lane; apart. 2 AV S 41.4, 1 AV 1 /4 S 51.1

Hillway.

o r

3 01

f igures.

2 f ound 2 00 yds

M37. Romsey. Chronological disparity. 1 AV SW41, 1 AV S 82.1 1 AR S E73.2 1 4 38. Sandown, I . O.W., t owards White Cliff; 1 AV SW 4 1, 1 AV S E 5 1

2

T otal:

3

T otal: T otal:

2 1

T otal:

2

s hore.

HERTFORDSHIRE

M39. Hitchin, Duckland Common Field. 1 AV 1 /4 S E32.1-42.1, 1 AV S E51, 1 AV S 52.1, P hilippus Copy.

1 AV Early Total: 4

1 440. L illey, L illey Hoo. Chronological disparity? 1 AE/AV E 41.1, 1 AV 1 /4 E 82.1 T otal:

2

1 4 41. Royston. Chronological disparity? 1 AV E41, 1 AV E 82.1

2

Total:

1 4 42. S t. Albans, " Verulamium". 2 f ound t ogether, but Whaddon Chase? 2 AV E 51.1, 1 AV E 71.1, 1 AV 1 /4 B elgic Gaul S cheers N o.23 T otal: 4

KENT

1 443. Addington. One in f oundations c f. Ryarsh? 1 AV S E41.2, 1 AV S E51 1 4 44. Aylesford, 1 AV S E51, 1 AV 1 AR Uncertain

" West o f U rnfield". 1 /4 S 51.1

o f

s tone wall,

1 720,

T otal:

2

F ound t ogether. T otal: T otal:

2 1

1 4 45. B irchington, Thanet, Gore End, e tc. 2 AV S E22. 2, 1 AV S E51, 1 AV 1 /4 S E71.1, 1 4 46. B roadstairs, 2 AV S E51. 4

2 f ound t ogether? 1 AV 1 /4 E 82.1 T otal: 5 Found t ogether. T otal: 2

S tonehouse.

1 4 47. Canterbury, C ollege R oad, 2 AV S E51, 1 AV S E72.1

e tc. T otal:

1 4 48. Chelsfield, S pring Gardens Hill. F ound s eparately. 1 AV 1 /4 8 12, 1 AV S E31-41 o n the heath. 1 AV E 82.1

a nd C rown F ield,

2

Chronological disparity? T otal:

2

C oxheath, 1 /4 S 51.1,

1 4 50. 1 AV

E lham, 3 AV f ound t ogether e 1 840. 1 /4 S E12.2, 1 AV S E41.4, 2 AV S E51.2,3

T otal:

4

T otal:

2

T otal:

2

S E72.2, T otal:

1 5

1 4 51. Farnborough ( Orpington). 1 AV S E51, 1 AV E61.1 Faversham, 1 /4 S E11.1,

S keet

T otal:

1 449. 1 AV

1 4 52. 1 AV

3

Mount Ephraim, 1 AV S E51.3

S taple S treet,

1 4 53. F olkstone, Cheriton, The Warren., e tc. 1 AV S 11, 1 AV 1 /4 S 12, 1 AV 1 /4 S E52.2, 1 AV AV 1 /4 E 82.1

3 02

e tc.

1 /4

M 54. 1 AV

Gravesend, in Thames mud, S E11.2, 2 AV S E51

M55. 1 AV

Herne Bay, 1 /4 S E42.1,

e tc.

Bishopstone Glen. 1 AV S E51

o f.

Northfleet? T otal:

1 AV in s tream. T otal:

M56. 2 AV

I ghtham, O ldbury H ill ( i) within the hillfort. SE51, 1 AV 5 E62 T otal: ( ii) on the h ill, outside? Found t ogether. 1 AV SE22, 1 AV 1 /4 S E22 T otal: There i s a s pring s ource within the hillfort. M 57. 1 AV

3

I ghtham, I ves F ield, Main F ield e tc. SE22, 1 AV S E51, 1 AV E 71.2

2

3 2

T otal:

3

M 58. Linton, Wester H ill, C ourt L odge, Eagles f arm e tc. 1 AV 1 /4 S E11-12, 1 AV 1 /4 S E32.1-42.1, 1 AV 1 /4 5 51.1, AV NE51.1 T otal:

1 4

M 59. Mailing, L ower Malling/West Mailing o f. Ryarsh? 1 AV SE51, 1 AV E 71.1, 1 AV 1 /4 E 71.1

T otal:

3

T otal:

2

M60, 1 AV

Milton Regis 1 /4 S 12, 1 AV

( Sittingbourne). 1 /2 B elgic Gaul S cheers No.2

M61. M inster, S heppey, c liff chronological disparity? 1 AV 1 /4 S 12, 2 AV1/4 S E71.1 M62. 1 AV

Murston ( Sittingbourne). S E61, 1 AV S E71.1

M63. 1 AV

Northfleet, Tollgate, SE22, 1 AV S E41.1

e tc.

f ace,

o f.

e tc.

Addington,

S ignificant T otal:

3

T otal:

2

T otal:

2

Gravesend?

M64. Reculver, c oast/cliffs b elow the f ort. A ll but last f ound a t s ame p eriod. 1 AV 1 /4 S E52.4, 1 AV 1 /4 S E71.1, 1 AV S E73.2, 1 AV 1 /4 E 7 1.1, 1 AV 1 /4 E 82.1, 1 AV Northern Gaul. T otal: 6 M65. 1 AV

Rochester. SE51, 1 AV S E62,

M66. 1 AV

Sandwich. S ignificant SE22, 1 AV S E82.1

M67. 1 AV

S evenoaks. C oins p robably f ound together. 1 /4 S 12, 1 AV S E51

M68. 1 + AV

Shorne, S E71.1,

1 AV E 82.1

Gravesend. 1 AV E 71.1.

T otal:

3

chronological disparity. Total:

2

T otal:

5

T otal:

2

T otal:

2

Chronological diparity? T otal:

2

F ound t ogether.

M69. 1 AV

Sutton Valence, N orth S E22, 1 AV 1 /4 S E22

M 70. 1 AV

Tonbridge, Barden e tc. S E22, 1 AV E 71.2

S treet e tc.

3 03

M 71. 1 AV

Westgate, 1 /4 S E52,

Bay, S tation. 1 AE/AV 1 /4 S E61

T otal:

2

Thames b etween L ondon a nd Tower Bridge. 1 AV S 52.1 Total:

2

LONDON

M 72. 1 AV

London, 1 /4 S 12,

M IDDLESEX

M73. 1 AV

S unbury, 1 /4 S 12,

S unbury Common. 1 AV S 52.1

T otal:

2

T otal:

2

T otal:

2

T otal:

2

2 AV E 71.1,2, T otal: T otal:

2 7 2

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

M 74. Ecton. 1 AV E 75.1, M 75. 1 AV

1 AV E 82.1

Northampton, 1 /4 S E 42.1,

M76. Thrapston. 2 AV 1 /4 E71.3

Dolphin Hotel, 1 AV S E51.

Not

Gold S treet.

f ound t ogether.

OXFORDSHIRE

M77. Dorchester-on-Thames, Overy, e tc. 1 AV S E51, 1 AV S E72.1, 1 AV 1 /4 S E73.2, AV, 1 + AE/AV E 82.1-2 1 AR E 71.2, 1 AR E 83.2

M 78. Goring, C leeve. S ignificant chronological disparity? 1 AV Early P hilippus c opy, 1 AV E71.1 T otal: 2 1 AR S 91 T otal: 1 M 79. I psden, B erinshill e tc. 1 AV E 51.1, 2 AV S E73.2

2 AV f ound t ogether.

M79A L ittle Milton. 1 AV E /S41, 1 AV S 63.1 1 4 80. North S toke, disparity? 1 AV E 41, 1 AV E 51.1, 1 4 81. Tackley, 1 AE/AV S 41.1,

Grims

Dyke,

1 AV E 82.1

e tc.

T otal:

3

T otal:

2

Chronological T otal:

3

" Thackway", e tc. 2 AV f ound t ogether? 1 AV S E72.1, 1 AV 5 E73.3 T otal:

3

3 04

M 82. Woodeaton, a t same p eriod. 1 AV 1 /4 S E52.1.2, 1 AR W91

" amongst

o ld f oundations",

2 AE/AV S E73.2,

2 c oins

1 AV E 82.1

f ound

T otal: T otal:

4 1

T otal:

2

S UFFOLK

M 83. 1 AV

Glemsford. Chronological d isparity . S E51, 1 AV E 82.1

M 84. I cklingham . hoard c oins? 2 AV EA71.1

Found

together:

c ould be Freckenham T otal:

2

M 85. Lawshall, s ource o f R iver Lark? 3 AV E 82.2 T otal: 2 C oins reported f rom s eparate l ocations ( near I pswich, n ear C olchester) a t s ame period; a s they a re a ll f rom the s ame d ies and i n s imilar c ondition, this s uggests the d ispersal o f a large f ind. M 86. Long Melford. 2 C oins f ound together. 1 AV 1 /4 S E42.1, 1 AV51.1/63.1, 1 AV 1 /4 S 51.1, S E73. 2

1 AV 1 /4 T otal: 4

S URREY

M 87. Croydon, o n the Downs e tc. 1 AV S E22, 1 AV S E51

T otal:

2

T otal:

2

T otal:

3

M90. Farnham, c f. Hoards? 1 AV S 51.1, 1 AV S 72.1

T otal:

2

M91. 1 AV

T otal:

2

M 88. 1 AV

Dorking, B ox Hill 1 /4 S 12, 1 AV S E51

M 89. Epsom, 1 AV S E22.2,

a nd Chalkpit

Lane.

NE o f Christchurch, e tc. 1 AV S 41.1, 1 AV S 51.1/63.1

Guildford. 1 /4 S 51.1, 1 AV S 81.2

M92. Kingston, in the chronological d isparity. 1 AV 1 /4 S 12, 1 AV 1 /4 S 72.2 M93. Leatherhead . 1 AV S E22, 1 AV 1 /4

S 52.1

M94. Mitcham. 1 AV S 12, 1 AV S E22

3 05

Thames,

e tc.

S ignificant T otal:

2

T otal:

2

T otal:

2

S USSEX

1 495. Apuldram, Apuldram Farm. 1 AV S 63.1, 2 AV S 71.1

Found t ogether. T otal:

3

1 496. B righton, beach east o f, Roedean e tc. 1 AV S 63.2, 1 AV 1 /4 S 65.2, 1 AV 1 /4 Belgic Gaul S cheers No. 2 3 T otal: 3 1 AR Armorican Gaul T otal: 1 1 497. B righton, Downs above, Hollingdean allotments e tc. Not f ound t ogether. 2 AV S E51.1-4, 1 AV E 51.1, 1 AE/AV E 71.2 T otal: 4 1 498. Chichester. I AV S E32.1-42.1,

S ee a lso Appendix 5 . I AV E 71.2

1 499. Eastbourne. Two f rom beach. I AV 1 /4 S E12.2, 1 AV 1 /4 S E42.1, S E52.1-2, 1 AV 1 /4 E 82.1

T otal:

I AV S E51,

1 4 100. Fairlight, ( Hastings), Cliff End b each. together. 1 AV 1 /4 S 51.1, 2 AV 1 /4 S E52. 4, 2 AV S E62 1 4 101. Funtington, l awn o f Funtington House, garden, e tc. 2 f ound t ogether a t s ame s pot. 1 AV S 41.1, I AV S 63.1, I AV S 63.2 M 102. Hastings, The B ourne, e tc. 1 AV 1 /4 5 E22, I AV 1 /4 S E32.1-42.1, 1 4 103. P oling, Church Farm, 1 AV 5 E51. 2, I AV S 52.1

2

I AV 1 /4 T otal: 5 4

f ound

T otal:

5

C ouncil house

I AV S 63.2

T otal:

3

T otal:

3

T otal:

2

e tc.

1 4 104. S eaford. S econd c oin c ould be a r epeat I AV 1 /4 8 E11-12, I AV 1 /4 S E22

o f the f irst? Total: 2

1 4 105. S horeham. Chronological disparity? 1 AV 1 /4 S E42.2-4, I AV S 82.1

T otal:

2

1 4 106. S teyning, n ear. F ound together. 1 AV S 71.1, 1 AV S 81.2

T otal:

2

1 4 107. Tarring ( Worthing). 1 AV S 41.1, 1 AV S 62.1

T otal:

2

S ee a lso 1 4 108.

1 4 108. Worthing, B each , Heene, Orpington Lane, e tc. 1 AV S E41.1, 1 AV S W41, 2 AV S E51, 1 AV 1 /4 S E52.1-2, I AV S 51.1 T otal: 6

3 06

P otential ' multiple f inds' lacking a n e stablished provenance.

B EDFORDSHIRE

M 109. Biggleswade, " in the neighbourhood o f". 1 AV 1 /4 E 71.1, 1 AV E71.3, I AV E75.1, 1 AV E 82.1 Total: 4 I AE/AR E 71. 2 Total: 1 The provenance i s possibly the s ame a s the " Sandy" ( 1 43) c oins. M 110. P otton, " near". F ound s eparately. 1 AV S E51, 2 AV E 82.1 1 AR E 83.2 P otentially " Biggleswade" o r " Sandy"?

T otal: T otal:

3 1

KENT

" in the vicinity o f". M 111. Maidstone, t ogether. 1 AV S E41.1, 1 AV 1 /4 S E52.1 O ther f inds f rom Maidstone i tself and L inton, Mailing a nd S utton Valence.

Apparently f ound

a rea ,

T otal: 2 i ncluding

S UFFOLK

1 4 112. Bures district. F ound in waste a t 1 AV 5 E73.2, 1 AV 1 /4 E 81

s ugar b eet

f actory. T otal: 2

S USSEX

1 4 113. Chichester, " in the n eighbourhood o f". 3 AV 1 /4 S 51.1 o f. 1 498. C ould b e S elsey?

F ound t ogether. T otal: 3

N ote: The above have n ot b een included i n analysis o f multiple f inds.

3 07

the

t

• S i lve r X P o ti n

E l

L and o ve r 1 37m

0

V

2 0

w

F ig. A3:3 Map o f multiple f inds i n the S tudy Area ( a) s ilver ( b) p otin.

3 08

e

5 0 Km

M ultiple F inds

- 2 :

S ilver

B ERKSHIRE 1 4 114. Windsor, 1 AR 1 /4 S 66.1,

S t. Leonard's Hill. 1 AR S E81

F ound together. Total:

2

Total:

2

Total:

3

E SSEX 1 4 115. Great Bardfield. F ound t ogether. 2 AR Armorican Gaul Coriosolites C1.2 1 4 116. Great Chesterford. 1 AR E63.2, 1 AR S E62, 1 AR

S . Gaul DLT V III,

2 986

HAMPSHIRE

1 4 117. Winchester, S taple S treet, e tc. I AR S 66.2, 1 AR W71.1, 1 AR S 81.1, XXXVIII, 9 340

1 AR

1 4 118. Yafford, I .O . W. F ound t ogether. S everal AR. Taken by D .F. A. a s AR evidence.

S W51-71,

E . Gaul DLT Total: 4

but no Total: ?

KENT

1 4 119. B roadstairs, S even S tones, e tc. 2 AR S E71.1, 1 A R N orthern Gaul DLT X IX, 1 4 120. Greenwich, Improbable? 2 AR EA81

B lackheath.

1 4 121. Richborough. 1 AR S 66.2, 1 AR S T3.1,

Found

6 342-57 t ogether.

I AR S 82.2

1 4 122. S andgate. 2 AR Armorican Gaul Coriosolitae Uncertain

T otal:

C 1.2,

DLT

3

S omewhat T otal:

2

Total:

3

J 29, I AR Total: 3

M IDDLESEX

1 4 123. B rentford, Thames f oreshore, S ion Brentford, o f. P otin. 1 AR E71.3, 1 AR E astern Gaul DLT V II, 2 895 o f. Kew hoard e tc.

3 09

Reach,

Old

T otal:

2

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

1 4 124. Duston, Weedon r oad, I ronstone Mines e tc. 1 AR E 75.1, 1 AR W 81, 1 AR W 82, 2 AR W 91

Total:

5

1 4 125. Towcester. 2 AR NE62.2

Total:

2

Total:

2

Total:

4

F cund s eparately.

OXFORDSHIRE

1 4 126. Northleigh, 2 AR W71.2

S hakenoak,

e tc.

1 4 127. Wendlebury, Alchester. 1 AR E 83.2, 1 AE/AR W71.1, 1 AR W71.2,

1 AR W 81

S UFFOLK

1 4 128. I cklingham. 1 AR E63.1, 1 AR EA73.2, 2 AR EA81,

S E74.2, 1 AR, 1 AR EA91.2

1 4 129. I xworth. 1 AR E 82.2, 1 AR EA62,

1 AR EA73.2

1 4 130. M ildenhall. 1 AR E 63.1, 1 AR EA73,

2 AR,

1 AR

1 A E/AR EA72.1,

1 /2 EA91.1

1 4 131. P akenham. 1 AR EA73.2, 1 AR EA81

1 A E/AR Total: 8

Total:

3

T otal:

5

Total:

2

T otal:

2

S USSEX

M 132, East Harting, B ramshott 1 AR 1 /4 S 72.1, 1 AR S 81.2

B ottom .

1 4 133. P evensey, o n the beach, e tc. 2 -3 f ound together. 2 -3 AR S 66.1, 1 AR S 71.1 T otal: 3 -4 There must b e a s uspicion o f the earlier types being s trays f rom the Maresfield h oard ; they a re only a ttributed to P evensey and o ne, a t l east, was c orroded in a s imilar manner t o the A shdown F orest c oins ( Evans, 1 864).

3 10

Multiple

f inds

- 3 :

P otin

BEDFORDSHIRE

M I34. Sandy, Girtford Bridge, 2 + P otin P 1.4-5

e tc. Total:

2 +

T otal:

2

M I36. B ridge, M iddle P ett Farm. F ound together. 1 P otin B elgic Gaul S cheers No.186, 3 P otin Central Gaul Total: M I37. Deal, s eashore e tc. S everal P otin P I/2? Total:

4

HAMPSHIRE

M I35. Winchester, Olivers Battery. 1 P otin P 1/P2, I P otin P 2.2

Found together.

KENT

?

M IDDLESEX

M 138. Acton. 2 P otin P 2.2

P ossibly s trays

M 139. B rentford, I + P 1.2, I P 1.4-5

Thames

f rom Gunnersbury hoard? T otal:

f oreshore,

S ion Reach.

o f. AR T otal:

2

2 +

OXFORDSHIRE

M I40. D orchester on Thames. S everal P otin P 1.4, e tc. M I41. I slip, I P otin P 1/2,

Apparently f ound t ogether. T otal:

Woodeaton, Middle H ill. 1 P otin P I.5

?

T otal:

2

3 f ound t ogether. T otal:

4

T otal:

2

S URREY

M I42. Addington, P alace E states. 4 P otin P 1.3, P 1. 4, P 1.5 ( 2) 1 4 143. Barnes, Thames f oreshore 1 P otin P 2.2, 1 P otin P I/2

3 11

CHATTER 'S OA

S TO W • C D

S AVERNAKE

)6„ ) E LL INGHAM

H ENG ISI URY • ORFE C ASTLE • \f )

CARN B REA g P ENZANCE

0

E nd s i nP e r iod I

E l

E nd s i nP e r iod I I

p C ) J ERSEY ( LE CAT . )A t y

2 0

0

2 0

4 0

a o

ROZEL

F ig.

a o

R oman

1 0 0 K m

A 3:4 Map o f h oards c ontaining S tudy A rea c oin t ypes f ound o utside t he S tudy A rea .

3 12

the

I II. Hoards f rom parts o f B ritain outside S tudy Area c ontaining c oins belonging t o the Eastern, S outh-Eastern and S outhern Coinages ( by c ounty)

CORNWALL

5 7.

Cam nBrea, I llogan, 1 749. I R. A llen ( 1960, No.16); Haselgrove ( 1978); Mercer ( 1981). This hoard o f about 1 000 AV was f ound in two parts in June 1 749. The f irst g roup was " valued a t about 1 6 p ounds" and an a pproximately s imilar weight was r etrieved a f ew days later n ear the s ame s pot o n the r idge o f Cam nB rea. Apparently a ll t he c oins were worn and s moothed. B orlase ( 1754) i llustrated 1 7 c oins a s a typical s election f rom the hoard, w hich was s ubsequently dispersed ( 5 o f the i llustrated c oins went to the A shmolean Museum). Definitely p resent, therefore, were ( cf. B orlase, 1 754, P late XXIII):

T otal:

B elgic Gaul 1 AV S E22 2 AV 1 /4 S E22 6 AV S 12 1 AV 1 /4 Uncertain ? SE22 1 0 Total:

B elgic Gaul o r B ritain 3 AV 1 /4 S E42 ( all p robably BG) 2 C 1.1 4 AV E 4 1.1 7

B eyond this, t he r ecords a re throughly c onfused. S tukeley ( 1720) a dds t wo types ( AV S E51 and AV1/4 Northern Gaul), but Borlase i s e xplicit that they were n ot Cam nB rea - the latter was i n the Rev. Giffard's p ossession before 1 749 ( although this d oes not rule o ut a hoard s tray). Nor were 4 o ther AV i llustrated i n the s ame p late ( Nos. XXI, XXIII, XXIV-V r espectively): an AV 1 /4 S E71; a c oin c laimed by Allen a s S E41, b ut with a t riple-tailed horse a nd what may be a badly drawn wheel o n the r everse and more l ikely S 51; and two derivatives o f S E41.1 AV S E22 a nd 1 AV 1 /4 S 12 ( Nos. XIX, XX) a re, however, p robably h oard c oins. S tukeley ( 1720, 3 6-7) a lso mentions an AV E 82.1 f rom Cam nB rea , f ound with a c oin o f T etricus. The hoard i s o f l ittle chronological value a s there i s n o way o f b eing s ure o f the r epresentativity o f Borlase's s election, n or can the t wo d istinct l ots n ow be s eparated . F our o f the S tukeley c oins a re p erfectly c onsonant w ith a nother C ornish h oard o f the s ame g eneral p eriod. The c oins a ttributed t o Cam nB rea a re o f interest f or t he amount o f S outh-Eastern g old c learly r eaching an a rea a s f ar away a s C ornwall w ell into the f irst c entury A D . Nor does the Cam nB rea s ite p rovide a n i lluminating c ontext f or the deposition o f these two o r more hoards ( although their c oastal l ocation i s w idely paralleled). Recent excavations demonstrated the f ortifications r ound the s ite t o be p rimarily o f Neolithic date ( Mercer, 1 981). F irst m illennium BC a ctivity i s r estricted to a hut

3 13

c ircle s ettlement, which had a l imited quantity o f I ron A ge s herds. There i s n othing t o preclude the o f the earlier defences a t this p eriod.

5 8.

P enzance? bef. 1 925. 5 AV understood t o B rooke; a s ixth w ith Reported a re: 6

later r euse

I R. A llen ( 1960). have been f ound t here w ere s een by the s ame provenance was s old in 1 925. AV S 51

Allen expressed r eservations o ver the p rovenance s ince the owner l ived in Wallingford, a more l ikely a rea f or the type. A t l east two c oins o f the type have a s ecure C ornish p rovenance and I s ee n o r eason discount the t estimony o f their o wner, while the s ale c oin i mplies a p otential f ind a t this t ime.

DORSET

5 9.

C orfe Castle, C orfe C ommon, T own's E nd. 1 980. ( 1985); Haselgrove ( 1984a) a s " near D orchester, f ind. N FD . C ontents:

Total:

P R? Kent 1 982". MD

B ritish 1 AV E 41 3 0 AR S W51-71 4 AR1/4 S W51-71 3 5

Apparently a s cattered hoard f ound o ver a period t ime. The s pecific p rovenance i s n ot n ecessarily s ound.

o f

GLOUCE TERSHIRE

60.

S tow-in-the-Wold,

1 920.

P R.

A llen

( 1960,

1 63).

NFD.

1 AV S E51.1-4 Apparently f ound w ith what i s described a s This may be c ompared t o f inds f rom B ognor, S elsey a nd Weybourne.

' ring-money'. F olkestone,

HAMPSHIRE

6 1.

Ellingham, Castle P iece, 1 980. P R. Haselgrove ( 1984a). Also known a s Ringwood-2. 4 5 AV, AV 1 /4 f ound by MD , s upposedly s cattered a cross a w ide a rea within this earthwork. C omposition:

3 14

Total:

Gaulish 43 AV Northern Gaul 1 AV 1 /4 S E32-42 44

B ritish 1 AV E 41.1 Total:

1

Systematic excavation f ailed t o add t o these t otals o r to c larify the nature o f the deposit f rom which the c oins had come. 2 0 holes excavated by the MD users, the deepest o f them 0 . 35 i n , were i dentified, c onfirming the provenance and s cattered nature o f the hoard ( PPS 40, 1 980, 3 50).

62.

Hengistbury Head ( now Dorset), 1 911-12. P R. A llen ( 1960); Bushe-Fox ( 1915); Cunliffe ( 1978b ; 1 983). f I ron Age > 3 000 AV, AV1/4, AR, AE f ound in excavati on o Antoninus and Roman S ite, w ith 9 1 Roman AR, A E down to P ius. Composition: Gaulish 1 AV 1 /4 S E 3 2/42 1 AV 1 /4 N ew Variety c f. S E51 1 1 AR, 1 AR 1 /4 A rmorican Gaul

Total:

1 4

T otal:

B ritish 2 AV 3 AV 1 0 AR 1 7 AR 9 AR 1 0 AR 1 308 A E 1 660 AE 3 019

S W41,E61 1 /4 S E42/43 ) S W51-71 1 /4 ) S T1,4 e tc. W71-82 S W81 S W91

While a ll these c oins - the l argest I ron Age c ollection f rom Britain - w ere f ound on, o r in the immediate vicinity o f Bushe-Fox's S ite 3 3 ( most i n the s outhern part) their c ircumstances varied. Two large bundles w ere f ound ( 733 AE, 2 81 A E both a lmost entirely S W91) t he f ormer a ?deliberate deposit lying o n a s tone b etween two o thers, the latter a s a cylindrical mass) a nd s everal s maller " lumps" ( mixed I ron A ge and Roman). Many more, however, were f ound s cattered o ver a wider a rea , a c onsequence o f rabbit burrowing a nd p loughing ( Bushe-Fox 1 915). Material in l oose a ssociation i ncluded a s mall g old bracelet, part o f a torc and a nother f ragment a ll twisted t ogether, a g ilt tore terminal; evidence o f bronze-casting i ncluding an " ingate" a nd s lag: 2 bun-shaped ingots ( one 2 .55kg 9 8% Cu; one 8 .85kg 46% A g 5 1% Cu) and much burnt material. Many cast AE ( SW91) were in f resh c ondition ( Bushe-Fox, 1 915, 2 6), which a longside the evidence f or intensive metalworking l ed Gowland t o p ropose that they had been minted there ( ibid., 7 4). A gainst this hypothesis, many o f them which bore t races o f a g old o r s ilver wash had b een chisel-tested f or their purity ( as had m ost o f t he p recious metal c oins), i ndicating an interest i n their c omposition, which s eems o ut o f p lace i f they had been manufactured there. Beyond the deduction that metalworking o n s ome s cale t ook p lace, the a rchaeological evidence a llows f ew c onclusions about the character o f the f ind. Chronologically, a ctivity f rom the LBA/EIA ( a s ocketed axe, haematite-coated f inewares, f lints) t o late Roman ( pottery) i s r epresented,

3 15

w ith a l ater C 2nd AD TAQ f or the metalworking implied by the a bsence o f Roman c oinage later t han Antoninus P ius. A p robable h earth o n the adjacent S ite 3 2 has a mid - f irst c entury B C TPQ g iven by an Armorican AV ( DLT XXI, 6 723) s tratified b eneath i t. Many o f t he c oins were c learly w rapped and by i mplication deposited s eparately over a n unknown p eriod. This exceptional c oin f ind was a ssociated w ith s ome f orm o f metallurgical o peration, which p robably involved bronze casting. Outside t his c ontext, the f ind has no bearing o n the c haracter o f the p re-Roman o r Roman s ite a t Hengistbury Head, o ther than a s evidence f or t he a rrival o f s everal n on-local a nd C ontinental i ssues i n t he a rea , presumably during t he P RIA, a s this e lement o f t he a ssemblage i s v ery s imilar t o that f rom a nother s uspected p ort-of-trade a t Mount B atten ( Sellwood, 1 983). A lthough well o ver 1 00 o ther I ron A ge coins have been f ound, a lmost a ll w ere made i n t he v icinity o f S ite 3 3 immediately a fter the excavations o r were b each f inds o f uncertain d erivation. By c ontrast, excavations b etween 1 979-1983 o f o ver 2 500 m .sq . o f i ntensive l ater I ron Age o ccupation a long t he s hore o f Christchurch harbour t o the n orth o f S ite 3 3 p roduced o nly 4 c ertain c oins. They were o nly s lightly m ore numerous ( 19, i ncluding 2 AR A rmorican, 1 2 A R, AE S W61-91) i n t he a rea o f the Nursery Gardens t o t he E ast, excavated by S t.George G ray f rom 1 918 o nwards ( cf. Cunliffe, 1 978b), where i n a ny c ase early R oman a ctivity i s m ore p rominent. Of the i dentified R oman c oins u p t o A ntoninus P ius ( 40), 9 5% c ame f rom the S ite 3 3 deposits. The S ite 3 3 c oins c annot be t reated, t herefore, a s s ome have ( e.g. C ollis, 1 971a) a s i ndividual s ite f inds: s ensu s tricto, they c onstitute a s eries o f h oards which w ere s ubsequently s omewhat s cattered a nd must b e c onsidered a s an entity, whatever t he p rocesses which b rought about t heir c oncentration i n this particular c ontext. I n the r escue excavations o f 1 970-1 a long Christchurch Harbour j ust t o the n orth o f the a rea e xcavation o f 1 979 o nwards, 7 p otins w ere f ound, a ll o f t hem early types, including 2 P 1.3. A s they a re t he o nly c oins o f this type f rom H engistbury, t hey a re p resumably a s cattered h oard . According t o t he excavator ( Peacock, P ers. C omm.), t he c oins w ere s tratified a t the base o f t he s equence i n a ssociation w ith D r.lA amphorae i n d eposits which s hould date t o t he f irst half o f C lst B C.

I SLE OF ELY

63.

Chatteris, Langwood H ill, Cambridgeshire, 1 981. I R. Haselgrove ( 1984a). P ossible hoard o f I ron Age coins f ound by MD o n different s ector o f s ame R oman s ite a s p robable R oman hoard, t ogether with 2 24 AE f rom 1 A E E 82.2 t o C 4th AD . C ontents:

3 16

Total:

B ritish 1 AV 1 /4 E 71.3 1 AR E 71.2 7 AR EA73-91 9

Total:

Roman 4 AR Republican 2 AR Augustus 5 AR Tiberius 1 1

The s eparation o f these i nto two discrete g roups was based o n the f inder's t estimony. A llowing f or p loughing, the Roman g roup i s c onsistent with a s cattered hoard. No i nformation i s available f or the I ron Age coins; with the p ossible exception o f the AV 1 /4, they a re p lausible a s o rdinary s ite f inds i n the c ontext o f the f irst c entury AD ( Roman military) o ccupation i mplied by the R oman AE i ssues ( c 1 5% o f the whole), i ncluding a number o f C laudian i mitations. The B ritish g roup was, however, made TT.

I SLE OF J ERSEY

64.

L e Catillon, G rouville ( Jersey-11) Hoard, 1 957. P R. A llen ( 1960, Appendix I V); Colbert de B eaulieu ( 1957; 1 959); Kramer ( 1971); S tead ( 1984); F itzpatrick a nd Megaw ( forthcoming). The hoard known a s J ersey-11 o r L e Catillon was r eputedly d iscovered in three s eparate l ots b etween January 1 957 and 1 959, the f irst two under the s ame s tone, t he third n earby, a gain under a s tone. The hoard was i nitially c onfidently dated t o the Gallic War p eriod ( Colbert de B eaulieu, 1 957; A llen, 1 960) and i mmediately i nvested w ith a crucial r ole a s TAQ f or B ritish c oinage developments. A number o f a ssociated a rtefacts r eceived o nly summary treatment until much later. Neither Allen nor C olbert de Beaulieu s aw a ll the f inds and a number went t o Australia when the f inder's f amily emigrated there and were o nly examined ( by J . V.S.Megaw) r elatively r ecently. According t o the published v ersion, t he c ircumstances o f t he discovery and contents o f each l ot w ere a s f ollows: Lot

1 ( found under a large

Total:

Gaulish 1 3 AV A rmorican 6 04 A R, AR 1 /4, AR A rmorican 6 27

s tone)

1 /2 T otal:

B ritish 3 AR, A R 1 /4 S W51 2 AR S T1.1-2 2 AR S T3.1a, 2 7

The a ssociated a rtefacts w ere a s f ollows: 2 s ilver f ibulae, A lmgren Type 6 5 ( a pair, o ne w ith part o f the s ilver c hain c onnecting them s till a ttached) w ith e laborately b ridged f ootplate; a l ength o f s ilver chain ( presumably a nother p ortion o f the s ame); 2 b ronze f ibulae, Almgren Type 6 5 ( a pair) w ith s imple f ootplate; a b ronze f ibula p in a nd s pring ( apparently detached f rom o ne o f these); a f ifth bronze f ibula, Almgren Type 6 5, w ith bridged f ootplate; 1 s ilver r ing; 2 bronze r ings; 1 i ron disc; 1 i ron handle; s herds f rom a t l east 4 p ottery vessels ( form, f abric unspecified). A f ragment o f a t ore o f g old l eaf c onstruction o n a n i ron c ore; a l ength o f a s econd

3 17

s ilver c hain, 8 5 mm l ong; 1 b ronze r ing was a lso p robably part o f t he f ind ( Fitzpatrick a nd Megaw, f orthcoming). P otsherds o f unspecified type p reviously collected f rom this part o f the f ield l ed C olbert de Beaulieu to s uggest a s ettlement there, and t hat this and Lot 2 had been c ontained in s eparate p ottery vessels. Neither need f ollow. Lot 2 The parcel was s upposededly f ound s hortly a fter the f irst, c oncealed under the s ame s tone - in which case they must have been physically discrete f or L ot 2 t o have initially e scaped d etection. The a rgument i s unsatisfactory ( below). The c ontents were:

Total:

Gaulish 2 7 AV, AV 1 /4 A rmorican 2 20+ AR, AR 1 /4, AR 1 /12 Armorican 5 AR C entral Gaul e tc. 2 52+ T otal:

B ritish 1 AV 1 /4 S E42.2 1 AV, 1 AR S W41 5 AR, 3 AR 1 /4 S W51 1 1

The additional 5 AR S W51 l isted by Mackensen ( 1974) a re r epeats. There a re two d ie l inks a mong the B ritish c oins. No a ssociated a rtefacts a re r ecorded. Lot 3 This parcel was s upposedly f ound two years later u nder another l arge s tone n ear t o the f irst. The c ontents w ere: Gaulish 1 618 AR,

Total:

AR 1 /4, AR 1 /12 A rmorican 3 Uncertain, s tater s ize 1 621 T otal:

B ritish 1 AR 1 /4

2 AR S T1.1-2 3

The uncertain " coins" may be b lanks. a ssociated a rtefacts were r ecorded. New l ight

S W51

O therwise

n o

o n the d iscovery

While L ots 1 a nd 2 w ere a lways taken t o b elong t o the s ame deposit ( e.g. A llen, 1 960, 2 97), whatever the d ifficulties, Lot 3 was g enerally t reated a s a s eparate hoard. Recently, however, the f inder has g iven a n ew a ccount o f t he discovery ( M.Finlaison, l etter t o J .V.S. Megaw; I a m indebted t o Andrew F itzpatrick f or this n ew i nformation). According t o h im, t he c oins w ere a ll f ound f used t ogether in a s ingle mass, which had a dark s tain r ound i t, a nd p laced directly under a s tone. They were r ecovered in a s ingle a fternoon, but s ubsequently s ubdivided and disclosed s eparately. The t otal number o f c oins was p robably n earer 3 000, which w ere p robably o riginally buried t ogether in a n o rganic c ontainer. The s herds were c ollected f rom the field during the n ext f ew days, but n ot f rom c lose t o the hoard, and were not d irectly a ssociated with i t, a lthough they may be contemporary.

3 18

This new a ccount w ould explain the anomalous c omposition o f Lot 2 , which has the l ook o f a s election o f t he rarer c oin types, t ogether w ith a s ample o f the c ommoner C oriosolites issues. I nter a lia these differences i nclude: ( 1) Lots

A s ignificantly higher p roportion o f 1 ( 1%) o r 3 (0%)

( 2) A h igher p roportion o f in Lots 1 ( 1%) o r 3 ( 0.2%).

g old

( 11%)

n on-Armorican c oins

than

( 6%)

than

( 3) Lot 2 , by f ar the s mallest, c ontains the w idest o f types ( 27) a s a gainst L ot 1 ( 20) a nd L ot 3 ( 11)

range

I f the n ew a ccount i s accepted, f ormed a s ingle d eposit made up a s

hoard

Total:

Catillon

Gaulish British 2 268+ AR, AR 1 /4 Coriosolites 1 AV 1 /4 S E42. 2 40 AV , AV 1 /4 O ther Armorican 1 AV, 1 AR S W41 1 74 AR, AR 1 /4, AR 1 /12 " 6 AR, 6 AR 1 /4 S W51 5 AR C entral Gaul, e tc. 4 AR S T1.1-2 3 Uncertain 2 AR S T3 l a.2 2 490 T otal: 2 1

P lus the a ssociated a rtefacts the pottery. The

the L e f ollows.

dating

l isted above under L ot

1 l ess

o f t he hoard

Recent y ears have s een much debate o ver the c ontext o f Le Catillon ( e.g. C ollis, 1 985; E ttlinger, 1 973; Kent, 1 981; Krämer, 1 971; S cheers, 1 977). There i s n ow a c onsensus f or a post-Caesarian date a longside h oards s uch a s Rozel ( Jersey-6, L ot 1 b elow) and J ersey-7 w ith a T PQ f rom Roman coins o f 3 9 B C and 3 2 BC r espectively ( cf. C olbert de Beaulieu, 1 958), but a number o f p roblems r emain. With t he exception o f S cheers whose a rgument f ollows f rom the later C lst dating s he p roposes f or the B elgic Gaul prototype o f S T1.1-2 and f or S T3.1a,2 o n t he basis o f their l ightness, d iscussion has c entred o n t he a ssociated brooches. The a rguments can be s ummarised a s f ollows: Krämer's a ssertion that the f ibulae a re Augustan can be discounted. T he f orm with a s imple f ootplate i s p resent a t Ornavasso ( San B ernardo) i n G raue's ( 1974) S tufe 2 and the c omplex p ierced f oot appears there ( at P ersona) in S tufe 3 . G raue's dating ( c 9 0-50 B C a nd 5 0-25/15 BC) f ollows the l atest R oman c oin TPQ f or each P hase ( 78 BC and 3 8 BC) - a nd may b e o ver cautious g iven the s olid block o f later C 2nd B C R epublican s ilver i n P hase I I g raves ( Crawford, 1 985) - but his basic c onclusion t hat the type is p re-Augustan i s unarguable. The p oint i s r einforced by the a bsence o f A lmgren 6 5s f rom early Augustan m ilitary s ites n orth o f the A lps, and i ts r ole a s the p rototype f or many early I mperial brooch types ( Ettlinger, 1 973), and conversely , b y their p resence a t V illeneuve S t. Germain ( Debord, 1 984) i n what - despite the published dating - i s clearly a mid-Clst B C s ite ( Haselgrove, 1 985a).

3 19

The s ituation i s c omplicated by whether - a s s eems probable - the L e Catillon s ilver brooches a re imports f rom N orth I taly ( cf. S tead, 1 984), o r, g iven t heir c lose parallels in s outh-east England ( at Faversham, F olkestone and G reat Chesterford) and n orth-east F rance ( unprovenanced, Amiens Museum), were manufactured within t he g eneral r egion. I n s hort, the s tarting date which can b e g iven t o the pierced f oot brooch type, s ometime in the m id f irst c entury BC, i s t oo i mprecise f or i t to be applied a s a post-Caesarian TPQ f or the hoard. A n ew l ine o f enquiry i s o pened by Gruel's ( 1986) s tudy o f the s eries o f hoards dominated by C oriosolites coinage. These divide i nto two g roups: a s eries o f c losely r elated hoards i n which the latest s tater, Class I I, i s the c ommonest type p resent, c omprising a ll the J ersey f inds, and a more d iverse g rouping o f mainland hoards which n evertheless c ontain C lass I I c oins a nd must therefore a ll have been buried a fter the s tart o f the i ssue. A t L e Catillon, the p roportions ( in c hronological o rder), a re:C lass V I V I V

o f t he different

c lasses

1 2 3 1 2 2 0 6 2

I II I I

These f igures a nd Gruel's ( 1986) c orrespondence analysis p lace L e Catillon , t ogether with the L e P etit C elland f ind ( Wheeler and R ichardson, 1 957), a t t he very end o f the Coriosolites hoard s equence. However, a s Gruel points o ut, the c ircumstances i n the m iddle o f t he f irst c entury B C when the Jersey hoards were f ormed, p recludes a m ore p recise e stimate o f their s ubsequent burial date. I n this, there i s a t elling analogy with the l ater E ast Anglian hoards ( Allen, 1 970a). In these, the native i ssues a re a lways p resent i n b roadly s imilar proportions, a lthough their R oman TPQ's range f rom 3 0 BC t o Nero, and the hoards p robably r elate to a t l east three s eparate historical c ontexts ( AD 43, 4 7, 60/61) ( Allen, 1 970a). This c ompositional s imilarity i s a f unction o f a s ingle f actor, the r elative p roportions o f d ifferent c lasses i n the c irculation " pool" a t the t ime o f t he effective c essation o f i ndigenous p roduction . For this r eason, i t i s equally unrealistic t o r egard a ll the J ersey hoards ( or r elated deposits i n B ritain e .g. a t Mount Batten) a s the p roduct o f a s ingle r efugee movement s et i n motion by the Caesarian c onquest o f Armorica: their import t o J ersey c ould have s panned a p eriod o f s ome t ime a fter p roduction c eased, but i s unlikely to have s tarted before the f inal i ssue was underway. B y c ontrast, the sample o f 4 8 C oriosolites c oins f ound i n Britain ( identifiable t o c lass) g ives a rather d ifferent picture:-

3 20

Class V I V I V

1 0 8 1 3 6 2 7 3 5

I II I I

A lthough the bulk o f these c oins evidently r eached B ritain, a s they did J ersey, a t a late date, the higher p roportions o f C lasses V I-IV t han in a ny o f the J ersey hoards implies t hat there were a lso earlier imports ( assuming a r easonably unbiased s ample), a f unction, p resumably, o f the c lose c ontacts b etween N . W. F rance and the S outh Coast in the early/mid f irst c entury BC ( e.g. Cunliffe, 1 978b). The Le Catillon h oard has a number o f f eatures which s eem to p lace i t i n between the main J ersey s eries o f h omogenous A rmorican c oin hoards a nd the later h eterogenous h oards f rom Rozel ( Hoard 6 5 below) w ith their TPQ i n the 3 0s BC a nd another m ixed Gaulish and R oman hoard f rom La Vauroque, S ark ( McCammon, 1 984): ( 1) i ts p osition a t the v ery end o f the C oriosolites s eries ( Gruel, 1 986); ( 2) the s light a dmixture ( 1%) o f n on-Armorican types; ( 3) the a ssociated metalwork; ( 4) n o l ess than 2 8% o f the Coriosolites s taters had been t ested in s ome way t o a scertain the quality o f the metal a lloy, c ompared t o l ess than a handfull a t La Marquanderie ( Jersey - 9 ) ( McCammon, 1 984); and ( 5) t he i nclusion o f a f ew ( 1%) Armorican ' petit billon' c oins ( BN 1 0402, e tc.). These tiny, r elatively c rude coins o f p oor a lloy have s ome c laim to b e r egarded a s the latest in t he f ind. Related s eries w ere f airly c ertainly s truck in the p ost-Conquest p eriod, a s a t Troquouzel ( Clement and Gruel, f orthcoming). On the o ther hand, i nscribed Gaulish s ilver i ssues, many o f which a re p robably p ost-Conquest, which dominated the R ozel 1 875 f ind ( Lot 1 ), a re c onspicuous by their a bsence. One can o nly c onclude that w hile i n many r espects i ntermediate b etween the main Jersey s eries a nd the later h eterogenous h oards, L e Catillon c ontains n othing t o demand a date c loser t o ( or within) t he Augustan horizon o f the l atter. I n sum, while a date s oon a fter i s p erhaps more l ikely than the Gallic war c ontext p roposed i nitially, there i s nothing i nternal o r external t o the L e Catillon deposit that demands a date more p recise than the m id/later f irst c entury B C.

6 5.

Rozel, S t. Martin, L ittle Caesarea, 1 875 ( Jersey-6). P R. Colbert de B eaulieu ( 1958); S cheers ( 1977); McCammon ( 1984). This d iscovery came t o l ight through erosion brought on by heavy rainfall, much a s happened i n 1 820 with a nother hoard f ound e lsewhere in the same p romontary f ort ( Le Catel, J ersey-5). Over 7 00 c oins f rom the 1 875 f ind w ere s tudied by Barthelemy, and in 1 953, a f urther parcel o f 3 9 coins was i dentified a s c oming f rom t he s ame s ource. The o riginal t otal was probably a ppreciably higher. Although a British o rigin c an o nly be c laimed f or o ne c oin, J ersey-6

3 21

i s u sefully s ummarized here f or i ts a ssociations denarii with a range o f B elgic s ilver i ssues.

o f

Roman

Unlike L e Catillon, the o riginal a ccount makes i t p erfectly clear that, there were actually two hoards discovered close together in 1 875 ( Colbert de B eaulieu, 1 958), and that they were f ound s eparately. L ot 1 c onsisted o f " the g reater number o f c oins o f s mall s ize and t he s ilver coins a s well a s f ragments o f the p ottery". These were f ound in a small s pace in an earthfall f rom where the p romontary f ortification meets the c liff; p resumably the c oins had been c ontained in o ne o r more p ottery vessels. A short distance " further o n", L ot 2 was f ound " in a hole o n the o riginal surface, f rom which the f all had occured" - i t c onsisted o f c oins o f a larger s ize, o f Armorican type and a f ragment o f a c opper a lloy dagger. Lot

1

Total:

Gaulish 7 9+ AR 2 5 AR 4 80+ AR 2 A E + + AR 5 89+

B elgic Gaul Marseilles C entral Gaul N orthern Gaul 1 /12 A rmorican

B ritish? 1 AR S T4. 3

Roman 1 3 AR d own t o Crawford 5 29/ 2a, c,3, 3 9 BC

1

1 3

The c ommonest t ypes w ere S cheers No.41 ( 62), Q . DOCI ( 40), S OLIMA ( 42), TOGIRIX ( 150), V IIPOTAL ( 50).

S AM F

Lot 2 This c onsisted o f s everal hundred AR, AR 1 /4 Armorican and Northern Gaulish types. The homogeneity o f the proportions o f Coriosolites AR ( of which 1 33 s urvive) with J ersey-5 make an interesting c omparison w ith Le Catillon. In chronological o rder these were:

C l. VI C l. V C l.IV C l.I C l.II

J ersey-6 ( 1 1 0 8 1 5 1 4 5 3

( %)

J ersey-5 < 1 9 6 1 5 1 5 5

( 9 6)

The r ecent Lot 3 i s n ot p roperly p rovenanced and s eems to include c oins f rom both g roups: 3 0 A r, AR 1 /4 Armorican Gaul, 4 AR B elgic Gaul and 1 AV base, 4 AR Northern Gaul, e tc. I n s um, the Rozel 1 875 hoard L ot 1 , w ith 1 AR ? British a nd f our B elgic Gaul AR types ( Scheers N os.41-4) has a TPQ o f 3 9 BC, which d oes n ot apply t o L ots 2 -3. I n 1 807, a f urther hoard o f Coriosolites s taters and quarters ( including C lasses I I, I II, I V) was s upposedly f ound i n a pot ' near the h arbour o f Rozel' ( Jersey - 3 ); there i s, however, a possibility o f t his f ind having b een c onfused with the 1 795 Great Harbour hoard ( Jersey - 2 ). Finally, i n 1 883, a s mall earthenware p ot was f ound a t Rozel, c lose t o the s ite o f the 1 875-80 discoveries. T his " contained both Gaulish a nd Roman c oins, the f ormer b oth o f billon a nd

3 22

s ilver, being mainly o f the smaller o r more rare s ort, and each weighing o nly f rom 1 .2 to 1 .8gm" ( McCammon, 1 984, 3 1). Apart f rom a denarius o f Marcus Antonius m inted c 3 2BC, the number and nature o f the c oins in this hoard ( Jersey 7) a re unknown ( the c oins currently in the p ot in Jersey Museum a re apparently f rom the La Marquanderie h oard). I t i s thus pure p resumption t o apply this TPQ o f c 3 2BC to the main s eries o f hoards dominated by the C oriosolites coinage. I f a nything, Jersey- 7 a long w ith Rozel Lot 1 ( above) and the 1 718 hoard f rom Sark c onstitute a s eparate later horizon o f mixed Roman and Gaulish s ilver h oards. This apparent c oncentration o f discrete h oards a t Rozel i s difficult to explain, unless i t i s s omehow c onnected with the p romontary f ort. One possibilty which deserves c onsideration i s a r itual f ocus. This would explain a s eries o f deposits o ver t ime. There a re c omparable s ites in Britain ( e.g. Marks T ey, S nettisham) and p erhaps Gaul ( e.g. Toulouse). More s pecific evidence i s n eeded.

L INCOLNSHIRE

6 3.

Grimsby, Bargate, 1 954. P R. Allen ( 1960, No.7); H . R. Mossop ( Pers. Comm. t o Allen). S everal c oins were s old t o l ocal dealers a s buttons and disappeared, but were probably o f the s ame type. Identified c oins: B ritish None

B elgic Gaul 5 + AV S E51 ( 4 C lass 2 )

6 7.

Scartho, 1 851. CR. Allen ( 1960, No.15). A small g old h oard f ound while digging the a mill. Contents: B elgic Gaul 2 -3 AV S E5 Total:

2 +

T otal:

f oundations

f or

B ritish 3 AV E 51 1 AV S 51 4

The hoard f ound a t Ulceby-on-Humber, L incolnshire, bef. 1 855, s hould p robably be c onsidered i n the s ame g eneral context a s these and the Norfolk hoards ( cf. C larke, 1 954). I t contained ( in g old a lloy) 3 torcs with l oop t erminals, a bracelet, and ( in c opper a lloy o r b ronze-sheathed i ron) 3 horse b its. A s ingle AV S E51 f ound a t U lceby, A lford, i s part o f the s ame f ind pattern.

NORFOLK

6 8.

Haddiscoe, i n the 1 930s. I R. Haselgrove ( 1984a). Handfuls o f c oins, a pparently p otins, f ound n ear the village were s ubsequently l ost, without having been

3 23

examined. But f or S nettisham-2, this a ttribution might s eem unlikely, and potins a re b eing f ound elsewhere i n N orfolk i n i ncreasing numbers. Not c ertainly a hoard.

69.

S nettisham-1, Ken Hill F ield, 1 948. CR. Allen ( 1960, No.3a); C larke ( 1954, Hoard B ); S ealey ( 1979). This hoard was brough to the s urface during the f irst ever deep p louging o f Ken Hill F ield. A ll the archaeological material discovered was therefore lying b etween 7 " ( the l imit o f p revious p loughing) and 1 2" o f the p resent s urface. The f ollowing day, Hoard C ( below) was uncovered ; the c ontents o f the two were mixed, but i t i s known which c oins belong with each f ind. The 1 2 AV, AV 1 /4 a signed t o Hoard B were f ound during s ubsequent excavations and c annot b e r egarded a s a c losed f ind. The types p resent were:

T otal:

B elgic Gaul 2 AV S E22 1 AV Design hammered o ut, but s imilar f lan a nd weight t o S E 2 2 2 AV 1 /4 S E22 1 AV 1 /4 S Ell 1 AV 1 /4 Design hammered o ut, but s imilar f lan and weight t o S Ell 4 AV S E41.1 ( 2 f rom s ame d ie) 1 AV 1 /4 S E42 P robably B ritish 1 2

The unidentifiable c oins were s andwiched between the pair o f s taters and the pair o f quarters r espectively. The c oins a re die-linked to s pecimens a t Cam nB rea, H igham and W esterham. 1 AV 1 /4 S E42 was p icked up on t he surface 3 0 i n S W o f t he hoard, 1 5 i n f rom the f indspot o f h oard C .

7 0.

S nettisham-2, Ken H ill F ield 1 948. CR. Allen ( 1960, No.3b); C larke ( 1954, Hoard C ); D olley ( 1954); S ealey ( 1979). The c ircumstances o f discovery have a lready been r elated. There w ere a t l east 1 45 p otin c oins, 1 16 o f which were i dentified, a ll o f A llen's C lass 1 . Of t hese, 9 7 c an be c lassed: S eries P 1 S eries 1 2 2 - P 1.1 ( 0%) 4 P 2.1 ( 4%) 7 P 1.2 ( 7%) 1 1 P 2.2 ( 11%) 5 4 P 1.3 ( 56%) 2 1 P 2.3 ( 22%) T otal: 6 1 T otal: 3 6 D olley, ( 1954, 7 4) c ommented l egend in the r everse f ield o f l ink w ith i ts Massaliote bronze f acie p robability that potins rather than a s ilver c oinage, s ilvery a ppearance".

o n t he apparent vestigial No. 46 ( P2.1) a s an o bvious p rototype, a nd on the 2 1 .1m _a " circulated a longside a g old i f o nly because o f t heir

A f ull i nventory o f the a ssociated material is g iven by C larke ( 1954, 46-58). The p rincipal c omponents were: ( 1) l oop terminal torcs i n g old a lloy, t in and c opper a lloy, ( 2) c opper a lloy buffer t erminal torcs ( 3) " ingot-

3 24

b racelets" in c opper a lloy and t in, ( 4) r ings in g old a lloy, c opper a lloy and t in, ( 5) o bjects i n s heet-bronze, i ncluding a U-shaped b inding, s heathing p robably f rom a b ridle-bit, 2 dome-shaped r ivet heads and a f olded bronze d isc, probably a balance pan, ( 6) metal-cake, g old a lloy a nd tin, including one lump o f t in w ith t races o f c harcoal a nd bronze embedded in i t, and a t in drip with t races o f g old a lloy, ( 7) i ron nails, ( 8) c opper a lloy c lamp and ( 9) what may be part o f s cabbard c hape. M ost o f the objects w ere f ragmentary, a pparently broken up f or scrap . C larke's o riginal c onclusion, r eiterated by S ealey ( 1979) that the deposits derive f rom a metalworking c ontext, r ather t han directly f rom use, has t o be qualified b y our l ack o f evidence about the t rue nature o f the s ite ( below). The nails, C larke s uggests, may i ndicate both h oards were p laced i n large wooden boxes, while the s tructure o f the d eposits i mplies careful packing by c ategory a nd s ize, w ith i tems l ike t he c oins in their o wn bags o r c ontainers.

7 1.

S nettisham-3 , K en Hill F ield, 1 950. CR. A llen ( 1960); C larke ( 1954, Hoard E ); S ealey ( 1979). B rought t o the s urface by p loughing, 1 5 i n s outh o f Hoard B t wo years l ater, this hoard c omprised a c omplete decorated r ing-terminal torc a nd bracelet, with a n i ncomplete buffert erminal t orc thrust through them, a ll g old a lloy. An AV 1 /4 S E42 was s ubsequently extracted f rom the t erminal o f the complete t orc. S pratling ( 1976) s uggests this was i nserted t o adjust the t orc's weight t o an exact multiple o f one o f the w eight s tandards in u se then, and a lso that t he hoard's t otal weight was s ignificant, but the mathematics i s i nconclusive. Two further hoards w ere f ound a t S nettisham . H oard A c onsisted o f three tubular t ares, w ith p ortions o f a f ourth, a c lass w ell a ttested in B elgic Gaul ( Furger-Gunti, 1 982) e .g. a t F rasnes-les-Buissenal ( in a ssociation w ith AV S cheers N os.24, 2 9). Hoard A i s i solated f rom the o thers, n ot only b y i ts t ypology but a lso by i ts l ocation, nearly 1 00 i n s outh-east o f H oard E . Hoard D was 1 0 i n NE o f B and c onsisted o f a f urther tubular t orc a nd r ing. There have b een further i solated f inds s ince ( Burns, 1 971); i n 1 964, a n unfinished l oop-terminal t ore; i n 1 968, a nother c omplete l oop terminal t ore, a nd in 1 973, yet a nother o ne, this t ime i n s ilver a lloy ( Sealey, 1 979). Recently a hoard o f C 2nd AD g old a nd s ilver was r eported f rom a S nettisham building s ite ( Frere, 1 986). The

s ignificance o f the S nettisham f inds

Although e xtended d iscussion i s inappropriate here, three p roblems d o n eed t o b e addressed b riefly: the date o f deposition; the s ource(s) o f the metalwork; and the nature o f the s ite and i ts deposits. The Snettisham d eposits were p robably made during the C lst BC. Any g reater p recision, however, i s impossible a nd S ealey's ( 1979) exact date o f 5 4 B C, employing the s ame

3 25

h istorical a rgument a s R odwell ( 1976) must c ertainly be r ejected. E ven i f the f light f rom K ent c ontext were t rue, s ynchronous deposition n eed n ot f ollow. A s a g roup the c oins a re undoubtedly early: o ver 5 0% o f t he Hoard B g old i s o f P eriod I , the p otin p roportions m irror those o f S unbury a nd o ther hoards i n which l ater types a re l acking, a nd pace S ealey, even the quarter-stater i n the H oard E t ore i s p robably p re-Caesarian. Where t he c oins s how g enuine w ear they a re the earliest types. B oth o f t he two later s taters ( SE41) which a ppear worn were a ctually s truck f rom worn d ies. E ven s o, the g roup was a lmost c ertainly put t ogether w ell before t he m id C 1st BC, a nd quite p ossibly deposited b efore t hen, but i n an a rea which was n ever in the mainstream o f c oin c irculation, the date in the s econd half o f t he c entury, o riginally p roposed by C larke ( 1954), cannot be r uled o ut. The c onventional v iew o f the hoards i s t hat they w ere buried a t the s ame t ime, t heir s eparation i nto l ots to m inimise t he r isk o f d iscovery, a nd that t he torcs and o ther i tems f orm a c ontemporaneous a ssemblage, but this may p erhaps b e q uestioned o n b oth c ounts. Unlike the H oard B c oins, the quarter s tater i n the Hoard E t ore t erminal was worn, a llowing b oth the d eposit a nd t he t ore ( if C larke was c orrect t hat the c oin c ould n ot have b een i ntroduced a fter i ts manufacture) t o be o f later date. The h oard l ots vary i n c ertain r espects which c ould b e o f chronological s ignificance: the q uantity o f g old a lloy, t he tubular t orcs i n A , the p otin i n C . The c oins c over a l engthy p eriod, why n ot the t orcs a s w ell? Their g old a lloy c omposition ( 58%-96%) m irrors the c oins, i n c ontrast e .g. t o the I pswich f ind ( all but o ne c 8 0%). The p resence o f s ilvera lloy torcs c ould b e a l ater f eature; unfortunately, c omparative data i s n ot a vailable. Where we d o know t he o rigin o f i tems, i t i s external, a s w ith the c oins, p robably t he tubular t orcs and, i f i ts s imilarities w ith the Netherud t ore a re accepted a s evidence o f their c oming f rom the s ame c entre o f p roduction ( Brailsford, 1 971), p ossibly the H oard E r ing t erminal t orc, a lthough S pratling's ( 1973) c ondemnation o f v isual c omparisons s hould b e n oted. T he h ome o f t he p otins, K ent, may w ell b e the i mmediate s ource f or t he r est o f t his material ( cf. Rodwell, 1 976), but i ts u ltimate o rigin i s c ertainly B elgic G aul. F or n one o f t he r emaining material, however, i s i ts r egional a ffinity a t a ll c lear. I tems s haring t he s tylistic-technical f eatures o f the ' UlcebyS nettisham' s tyle have a l argely c oastal distribution throughout S pratling's ( 1972) ' Eastern' s tyle z one f rom the Vale o f Y ork t o H engistbury, much t he s ame, in f act, a s that o f c oinage o riginating i n B elgic Gaul; pace S pratling, a nd the c luster o f N orfolk t ore f inds n otwithstanding ( Bawsey, N orth C reake, S edgeford, Weybourne, e tc.), o ne can n o m ore l ocate their p roduction c entre i n that r egion t han o ne w ould s eek t o d o f or the c oins. M ost l ikely, a s w ith Ounliffe's ( 1978a) decorated b owl t radition, a number o f variant r egional t raditions a re i nvolved, but the differences b etween them have yet t o b e made explicit. F light d eposits a side, the m ost s traightforward interpretation o f the S nettisham h oards, buttressed by

3 26

S ealey's ( 1979) o bservation that the g ritstone i mplement i mplies m etalworking, i s t hat they b elong t o a w orkshop a ttached t o a n earby e lite s ettlement, a lthough i f t here was one, w e cannot b e c ertain that any o f i ts p roducts a re a mong those r epresented i n the h oards. The e xcavations p rovided n o o ther e vidence f or the character o f t he s ite, n or was a ny o f the c onsiderable a ssemblage o f I ron A ge p ottery o bviously l ate, a lthough s ome f eatures o f the c oarse ware, s uch a s i rregular s coring, c ould b e. I n a ny c ase, in the c eramic vacuum that i s the Norfolk l ater I ron A ge, absence o f e vidence i s n ot n ecessarily e vidence o f a bsence. C ertainly, by t he C 2nd AD , t here was a s ite o f s ome importance in t he v icinity, r epresented by painted wall p laster, r ed-brick t esserae and evidence o f i ron w orking a mongst o ther f inds, a p otential c ontext f or the r ecently discovered l ater C 2nd AD hoard c ontaining R oman s ilver j ewellery, bars a nd c oinage a nd unmounted c ornelian g ems ( Frere, 1 986). T his hoard has a lso b een i nterpreted a s a j ewellers' s tock-in-trade, a lthough g iven t he p eriod o f two c enturies i n b etween, this can hardly b e u sed t o s trengthen t he a rgument t hat the I ron A ge f inds w ere a ssociated w ith a m etalworking c oncern . A gainst t his i nterpretation i s the extent o f t he a rea o ver which I ron A ge t orcs have b een r ecovered, a nd t he t ime-span o f deposition ( although s uch a ctivities bringing t ogether material o f w idely d iffering date s hould n ot be o verlooked). H owever, t he o bvious a lternative - t hat the hoards w ere o fferings a t a s acred s ite - p oses p roblems o f i ts o wn, n ot l east t he manner i n which the d eposits w ere a pparently made c ompared t o s ome o f those a t known r eligious f oci s uch a s Harlow o r Hayling I sland. B ut a " non-functionalist" e xplanation f or the c oncentration cannot b e t otally d iscounted i n t he f ace o f i ncreasing evidence f or multiple d eposits ( e.g. Marks T ey , R ozel). The c losest p arallel o f a ll t o S nettisham i s t he f ind f rom I pswich, where there w ere a t l east three s eparate L PRIA t ore deposits ( Owles, 1 969; 1 971) o n a r elatively exposed h illside. A s a t Tayac a nd S nettisham, S pratling ( 1976) s uggests that t he t otal w eight o f t he main g roup o f 5 r ing t erminal t orcs was s ignificant, but e ven i f t rue, t his a dds n othing t o o ur understanding o f why t he deposit was made. There w ere a lso d ifferences, m ost o bviously t hat the I pswich t orcs, n ot n ecessarily unfinished ( Spratling, 1 973), were o therwise i n p rime c ondition when t hey w ere buried, i n c ontrast t o many S nettisham f inds. F or the t ime being, the n ature o f t he s ite must r emain o pen.

7 2.

W eybourne ( Sheringham), 1 847 o nwards. P R. A llen ( 1960, No.5; 1 971); H aselgrove ( 1970). A t l east s ince 1 914, g old c oins have t urned up o n t he b each a t the borders o f W eybourne a nd S heringham, e roding o ut i n d riblets f rom a h oard buried s omewhere i n t he c liffs above. A l ot o f a t l east 1 2 c oins, a ll f rom d ifferent d ies, b egan t o a ppear i n 1 966. The r ecords a re c onfused, but t he f ollowing c oins w ere p resent:

3 27

Total:

B elgic Gaul 5 9+ AV S E51 ( > 3 C lass 2 , 1 C lass 4 AV 1 /4 S E42 ( all C lass 1 ) 63+

3 )

A p ossible f ragment o f a g old a lloy tubular tore was a lso f ound. I f there were two s eparate d eposits, the f irst to be washed out consisted entirely o f s taters, whereas the 1 966 l ot c ontained both types a s well a s the torc. There a re n o details o f the a rea o ver which the f ind was dispersed. A s mall g old r ing ( 4.1 gm) with s piral decoration r eported f rom Weybourne b each need not b e I ron Age. S herds o f pottery f ound in the same vicinity c ould indicate that the hoard was o riginally in a container.

7 3.

Near Thetford, before 1 890. I R. A llen ( 1960). Evans ( 1864) r ecorded 1 AV E 51 said t o have been f ound, t ogether with f our o ther B ritish c oins near Thetford, Norfolk. NFD . I am inclined t o r eject Allen's s uggestion that these c oins may derive f rom o ne o f the East A nglian hoards f ound a round this t ime; F reckenham, the b est c ontender, was thoroughly r ecorded, while the type i s a t variance with the c omposition o f o ther l ocal hoards. The f ind c ould well be a bona f ide s mall hoard, o f w hich s everal a re o n r ecord, a lthough w ith this type o ne can n ever exclude the p ossibility o f p ackets f rom Whaddon Chase.

S UFFOLK

74.

Lakenheath, R oman F ield, 1 959. CR. Allen ( 1960); Haselgrove ( 1978). Hoard o f 460 AV, AR B ritish and R oman f ound t ogether. S everal later f inds a re p robably hoard s trays. C ontents:

Total:

B ritish 401 AR EA71-91 1 AV EA81 2 AV E 82.2 C lassic B 1 AV E 82.1 P lastic A 405 T otal:

R oman 6 7 AR down t o Caligula AD 3 7

6 7

The broad p roportions o f E A c oins a re t he same a s in o ther hoards f rom t he a rea. T he hoard i s unusual in the 4 g old s taters, and u seful evidence f or their c ontinued ' circulation' t o the t ime o f the C onquest. The p lace n ame suggests earlier f ind(s).

W ILTSHIRE

7 5.

Savernake F orest, Salisbury H ill, n ear Marlborough, I R. A llen ( 1960, No.23); Haselgrove ( 1978). A p oor r ecord s uggests a t l east 1 00 c oins and a

3 28

1 856-7. further

f ind in 1 875. T hree c oins p robably f rom the hoard s old in 1 971, g iving the f ollowing types p resent:

w ere

Uninscribed B ritish 4 + AV WS3

I nscribed B ritish Roman 6 + AR S 92 1 AR T iberius 1 AR S 93 T otal: 4 + 7 + 1 I n addition, 1 2 AV W S3 which came o n t o the market in the 1 950s with a questionable Westerham, Kent, p rovenance, were thought by Allen t o be a possible parcel f rom this f ind. I f there were two d eposits, the obvious division i s b etween the base AV a nd the late AR, were i t n ot f or Evans' t estimony ( 1864) t hat a t l east o ne o f these was with the AR Epaticcus a nd T iberius. A p ossible s olution i s that the AV was the p redominant o r o nly c omponent o f the prospective l ater f ind, which would account f or extra s pecimens m entioned i n 1 890 ( Evans, 1 890: 488). Recently f urther AV W S3 have been f ound i n the a rea a nd c ould be h oard s trays.

UNPROVENANCED HOARDS

76.

N orthern England?, b ef. 1 924. A llen ( 1960; 1 963). The f ollowing multiple examples o f the s ame uninscribed g old types in t he G . W.Shaw c ollection, s old i n 1 924, f orm a c oherent g roup:

T otal:

B elgic Gaul 1 AV 1 /4 S 12 3 AV S E12/22 1 AV 1 /4 S E32/42 1 7 AV S E51 2 2

T otal:

B ritish 1 0 AV S 51/52 2 AV 1 /4 S 51 1 7 AV E 51 T otal:

2 9

O ther Gaulish 2 AV Northern Gaul 1 AV 1 /4 Uncertain 3

( DLT XXVIII,

7 018)

S haw l ived a t B otham Hall, Huddersfield. On analogy w ith S cartho a p rovenance in the Calder o r one o f the r iver valleys draining i nto the Humber basin i s p erfectly f easible. However, t here were c oins f rom o ther s ources in t he collection, s o c ontamination i s a p ossibility a nd there i s a lso doubt o ver s ome o f t he i dentifications.

77.

S outhern England?, b ef. 1 909. A llen ( 1960, 2 29). The f ollowing c oins i n the P . J. Prankerd c ollection, 1 909, f orm a c oherent g roup:

Total:

B elgic Gaul 1 5 AV S E51 1 AV S 50 1 6

T otal:

s old in

B ritish 1 0 AV S 51 1 0 AV S 52 2 0

P rankerd l ived a t the Knoll, S neyd P ark, B ristol. This i s a plausible c omposition f or a hoard deposited s omewhere in

3 29

S outhern England in the m id C lst B C. S ome unidentified uninscribed AV 1 /4 in the c ollection could also have been hoard c oins.

7 8.

Midlands?, bef. 1 961. ( D .F. Allen, n ote). A hoard may be r epresented by 6 uninscribed gold c oins c ollection purchased by S eaby's in 1 961. These were: Belgic Gaul 5 AV S E51 ( 1

in a

B ritish 1 AV S 52

C lass 6 )

The o wner l ived in Northampton, l ight i n 1 889 a nd 1 966.

where AV S E51

have c ome t o

I n a ddition t o the hoards a lready l isted, b rief note may b e made o f a f ew o thers which c ontain C ontinental c oins:

79.

Dewsbury, Yorkshire? c 1 950. P R. A llen ( 1960). 3 0+ AV 1 /2 Northern Gaul ( cf. A E DLT XXVIII, 7021). A llen d iscounted this a s a h oard b rought back f rom F rance by s oldiers, o f. L ens, P as d e Calais, 1 918 hoard. H owever, types o riginating in Normandy do s ometimes o ccur in B ritish hoards e .g. H oards 6 1, 7 6, while t he L ens hoard i s i tself evidence f or their having l eft their a rea o f o rigin.

80.

Mount 7 AR,

8 1.

Netherud, Kirkud, P eebleshire, 1 806. P R. C larke ( 1954). 40+ AV B elgic Gaul ( Scheers No.15) a ssociated with f our g old t orcs ( 2 i dentical, 2 s trand with l oop t erminal, f ragments o f a t orc? o f buffer t erminal type and t he ring terminal f rom a multi-strand t orc).

8 2.

Paul, T resvennack, Cornwall, 43 AR Marseilles i mitations.

8 3.

P enzance, n ear, C ornwall? 1 888. P R. A llen ( 1960). 1 AE B elgic Gaul ( Scheers No.190), 3 P otin Eastern G aul.

84.

P ortland, Dorset, bef. 1 762. I R. A llen ( 19680). 1 AV Eastern Gaul, 4 + AR T ransylvanian types. Records very c onfused. Annotations i n S tukeley ( 1762) s uggest these c oins a re the r emnants o f a predominantly s ilver hoard f ound " in hatfulls" i n the P ortland q uarry. O ther B elgic and B ritish AV, i ncluding AV S E11, S 50, and S 51, f ound here a t different t imes a nd a pparently unrelated to Hoard 69, c ould indicate a nother s cattered hoard.

8 5.

- L incolnshire, bef. 1 970. I R. Haselgrove ( 1978). 2 AV Uncertain Gaulish, 1 AR C entral Gaul, 7 AE Belgic Gaul ( Scheers Nos.46, 69, 1 09, 1 10, 1 13, 1 30), 1 P otin B elgic Gaul ( Scheers N o.186) f ound i n a dyke? More probably a c ollection brought back f rom F rance.

Batten, P lymouth, Devon, 1 AR 1 /4 A rmorican Gaul,

1 830. I R. 1 AR W 71.2.

c 1 907.

3 30

CR?

S ellwood ( 1983).

A llen

( 1961b).

Appendix 4

Brief 1 1 ,ating o f known a rchaeological s ites in S outh-East England where I ron A ge c oins have c ertainly vr p robably b een f ound

This Appendix i s divided i nto two s ections. Entries in the f irst ( I) a re r estricted t o s ites with w ell-provenanced c oin f inds ( F1). The s econd ( II) i ncludes cases where the a ssociation between a known s ite a nd c oin f ind i s p robable ( F2) but not p roven, and a lso f inds where the evidence s eems to p oint t o a s ite but o ffers no indication o f i ts character. National G rid References a re n ot g iven; these w ill be f ound in the published Gazetteers. The l ocation o f both c lasses o f s ite i s g iven i n F ig. A4:1. Only s ummary details have b een i ncluded here, t o the f ollowing f ormat: 1 .

S ite Name

2 .

3 .

Nature

4 .

E stimated date r ange

5 .

Nature

7 .

C omment

o f s ite:

Reference

P RIA/Roman military/Roman c ivilian

o f c oin f inds i f

a ccording

6 .

C oinage metals

any

Normally, only a s ingle r elevant s ource i s quoted. For 3 . and 4 ., the p eriod o f interest i s taken t o be the p eriod C4th/C3rd BC - C 4th AD . Reference to later a ctivity i s o nly made where r elevant t o the c ontext o f c oins o r understanding o f a s ite. For

5 .

the

f ollowing abbreviations will be employed:

-

excavated f inds ( numbers in parentheses a re c ontexts l isted i n Appendix 5 , U /S = unstratified c oins only ; N /A = c oins i n s tratified c ontexts f or which n o information i s available).

-

' Systematic' f ind e .g. f ieldwalking.

-

S tray f ind.

-

Hoard .

M =

Multiple

To l ist f undamental

m etal detector,

quarrying,

f ind.

s ites yielding I ron Age c oins raises a range o f p roblems o f categorisation. These a re

3 31

discussed a t l ength e lsewhere ( e.g. Alexander, 1 972; 1 975; Burnham and J ohnson, 1 979; Rodwell, 1 976). A s pecific p itfall t o be n oted i s the danger o f using coin f inds a s an indicator o f " site s tatus" in the absence o f direct c onfirmatory evidence ( e.g. Collis 1 971a, Rodwell, 1 976). Examples a re " Biggleswade" and Dorchester-on-Thames. None o f the c oins a ttributed t o the s upposed I ron Age c entral place can a ctually be demonstrated to have been f ound there, l et a lone in a p re-Conquest c ontext. Overall the LPRIA s ettlement pattern i s one o f r egional variation; a t one extreme, the c lassic d ispersed p attern implicit in Caesar's c omment ( DBG V , 1 2) that the pars maritima had c reberrimaque a edificia, a t the o ther, the nucleations north o f the Thames. B ut apart f rom a f ew a reas where visionary r esearch p rogrammes have b een pursued, e .g. the Upper Thames Valley, the quality o f t he evidence i s too poor t o discuss the s pecifics o f the I ron Age s ettlement pattern. Only f or a handful o f the s ites l isted i n this Appendix have we a n a ccurate p icture o f the o ccupation s mall s ites l ike Farningham Hill ( Philp, 1 984) which have been c omprehensively excavated, a nd the o ccasional l arger s ite which has s een a massive i nvestment o f r esearch r esources e .g. Danebury ( Cunliffe, 1 984). F or the r emainder, s amples a re g enerally t oo s mall f or r eliable inference a s t o the c haracter and extent o f o ccupation, a nd p recise c lassification i n t erms o f p opulation s ize, p olitical a nd economic f unctions, e tc. Those a ttempts there have b een ( e.g. R odwell, 1 976) r est m ore o n s upposition than evidence. For the R oman p eriod, the f ramework i s better a nd a degree o f useful s ubdivision p ossible ( e.g. Rivet, 1 975). Even s o, g rave l acunae i n o ur knowledge o f both nucleated and rural s ettlement types p ersist, more o ften than n ot c ompounded by inherent s hortcomings in the t erminology, e .g. s mall t own, v illa, e tc., a s i t i s applied t o d ifferent s ites. The p icture i s f urther c omplicated by the p eriod when I ron A ge c oins c irculated i n Britain being o ne o f rapid c hange i n the c haracter o f i ndividual s ites, a s f orts were e stablished and abandoned, n ew w ealth and labour invested a nd s o o n. The a pproach a dopted here has been t o c lassify the character o f s ites during each o f the three main ' states' through which they may have passed: p re-Conquest, Roman ' military' a ctivity and Roman ' civilian' u se. Within each ' state', the a pproach to categorisation o f s ites i s a s f ollows:1 . Functional t erminology ( 'settlement', ' fort', ' temple', e tc.) i s r estricted t o s ites which ( in addition t o e vidence s uch a s c ropmarks, earthworks, e tc.) have yielded material culture and/or physical f eatures i ndicative o f particular a ctivities o n a s cale s ufficient t o warrant application o f s uch a c lassification. 2 . Generic/Morphological t erminology a lready in c ommon usage, where a ppropriate and c ompatible w ith the evidence, has been r etained f or the description o f c ertain c lasses o f

3 32

s ites known only t hrough above-ground f eatures o r c ropmarks e .g. ' hillforts', ' enclosure', o r excavated examples where excavation has b een insufficiently large-scale t o invoke f unctional t erminology. 3 . Listed s imply a s s ites a re any o ther l ocations which in addition t o I ron Age c oin f inds have yielded material culture and/or f eatures i ndicative o f human a ctivity o f the same g eneral p eriod. S ites thus include p otential s ettlements a nd a lso f eatures i ndicative o f extras ettlement a ctivity e .g. lynchets ( described a s appropriate), m iscellaneous s catters, e tc.; hoards, r iver f inds, e tc. a re e xcluded . For each phase, the categories most under 1 . a nd 2 . a re:Mid/Late 1 .1.1 2 3 1 .2 1 2 1 .3.1 1 . 4.1 2 1 .5.1 2

o ften

encountered

P re-Roman I ron A ge

Dyke/extended s ettlement c omplex Nucleated s ettlement Minor/single-unit s ettlement/farmstead Mortuary/ritual s ite Cemetery Ritual s ite P roduction s ite ( e .g . redhills) Large hillfort/defended enclosure > 1 0 ha Hillfort/defended enclosure > 3 ha Enclosure/field/trackway c omplex Enclosure

Roman Military 2 .1.1 2 3 2 .2.1 2 .3.1

Fortress ( legionary, vexillation) Fort S upply base/depot Extra-mural nucleation P roduction s ite ( kilns, e tc.)

Roman Civilian 3 .1.1 P ublic t own ( Colonia , C ivitas capital) 2 Nucleated s ettlement ( small t own, r oadside d evelopment, r oad s tation, extractive s ettlement) 3 Minor/single-unit s ettlement/villa/farmstead/ s ubstantial building 3 .2 Mortuary/ritual s ite 1 Cemetery 2 I solated t emple/mausoleum 3 Religious c omplex 3 .3.1 P roduction s ite ( kilns, r edhills, e tc.) 3 . 4.1 Enclosure/field/trackway c omplex 2 Enclosure

3 33

-

=

-

2= -

7 9 ,8 1

8 3

8 0

_ I F9 2-8 7 -88

F ig .

A4:1

Map o f

s ites where

f ound.

334

I ron A ge coins have been

I . Known S ites with certain I ron Age

c oin f inds

B EDFORDSHIRE 1 . Houghton Regis, P uddiehill S ite LPRIA/ER f armstead; C lst-C2nd AD. E (1): AE. 2 . Houghton R egis, Puddlehill LPRIA enclosure - Roman S ite. E (2): AE.

1 .

Matthews

( 1976)

S ite 2 . Matthews C lst AD o nward.

( 1976)

3 . Odell, Harrold P it S ite 2 . LPRIA - Roman f armstead; Early C lst E (OD1-12): AE/AV, AR, AE

Appendix 5 AD - m id C4th AD.

B ERKSHIRE 4 . Abingdon, East S t. Helens S treet. Thomas ( 1979) Roman s ite underlying Medieval deposits ( ? nucleated s ettlement), ( Iron Age s ite adjacent). M id C lst - C 2nd AD, adjacent o ccupation earlier and later. E (3): AE. F 2 ( 'Abingdon') AV, A E. 5 . Abingdon, Barton Court Farm LPRIA/RB f armstead - LR s mall v illa; E (3A): AE. 6 .

Abingdon,

M iles - C4th AD

( 1984)

Thrupp House Farm, C lst

7 .

L owbury Hill.

Aston Upthorpe,

BC

Radley. Oxford Archaeological Unit ( 1979) - C lst AD .

M /LPRIA f armstead ; E (4): AE.

Roman temple?; S ?: AE.

0 1st

C 3rd - C4th AD ,

V CH Oxon I ( 1939); Davies ( 1985) p ossibly earlier activity .

8 . Easthampstead, Caesar's Camp. VCH Berks I ( 1906) PRIA Hillfort ( Undated) - ? Roman s ite. N FD . C AR. S tukeley mentions both B ritish and Roman c oins f rom h ere, but there may be c onfusion the R oman nucleated s ettlement a t Wickham Bushes ( Frere, 1 984) 1 .5 km S E. 9 . Garford Grew ( 1980) LPRIA/ER s ite - R oman villa. C lst BC/AD - C 4th AD. F l: AE. Part o f L PRIA/Roman r eligious c omplex a t F rilford ( Harding, 1 972; Hingley, 1 982) j ust a cross the r iver? 1 0. Kintbury, P ark Farm. Substantial Roman building. earlier a ctivity. S : AR.

0 3rd

3 35

- C 4th

0 .S. ( 1978) AD , p robably

1 1. Longworth, Cherbury Camp. B radford ( 1940) MPRIA hillfort ( ?LPRIA nucleated s ettlement adjacent). C 3rd - C 1st BC. C : AV. S ic Allen ( 1960), but museum t icket i s not s pecific. 1 2. Uffington, P RIA hillfort: C : AR.

Uffington Castle. not c losely dated.

Cotton

1 3. Waltham S t. Lawrence, Weycock Hill. Neville Roman temple. C4th AD; p robably C lst - C4th AD. E (5): p otin. ( F2. H2?). 1 4. West Hagbourne, Hagbourne Hill. King P RIA farmstead? Undated, but E /MPRIA occupation? E (6): AV.

( 1962)

( 1849a)

( 1803)

1 5. Windsor, S t. Leonard's H ill V CH Berks, I ( 1906) ?LPRIA/Roman s ite ( ?isolated t emple/mausoleum) later C lst C4th AD. F l: AR. M 114.

BUCKINGHAMSHIRE 1 6. Aylesbury, Walton C ourt. Roman s ettlement/villa? C lst S : AR.

( Index) - C4th AD.

1 7. B ierton, V icarage Gardens. LPRIA/ER f armstead, part o f villa BC/early C lst AD - C4th AD . E (7): potin. 1 8. B letchley, S affron Gardens. LPRIA/ER f armstead, part o f villa BC/early C lst AD - C 4th AD . E (8): AE.

complex?

A llen ( 1979) Late C lst

complex?

Knight ( 1984) Late C lst

1 9. B letchley, S herwood Drive ( MK 1 00). LPRIA s ettlement - Roman v illa. E arly C lst; C4th AD. E (U/S): AE. 20. B radwell, Roman villa . E (9): AE.

Bancroft ( MK 1 05). Late C lst - l ate C4th AD,

2 1. Cholesbury, Cholesbury Camp. M /LPRIA hillfort: C3rd/C2nd BC - C lst C : AV. 2 2.

F enny S tratford,

B ow B rickhill.

LPRIA s ettlement/farmstead s ettlement. C : AE.

3 36

Mynard ( 1987) later C 2nd -

Mynard ( 1987) mainly C 4th AD .

Kimball

( 1933)

BC/AD

Knight ( 1984); F rere ( 1975) - NägiDvinium nucleated

2 3. Hambledon, Y esden. Roman villa. N FD. E (?): AE.

Archaeologia LXXI,

24. Haversham, H ill Farm. LPRIA/Roman s ettlement/farmstead. AE

C lst

Waugh e t a l. AD o nward.

1 89

( 1974)

2 5. Haversham, S tanton Low. Knight ( 1984); 0 .S. ( 1978) Substantial R oman building; E /MPRIA s ettlement adjacent. C5th/4th - later C 1st BC; C lst - C4th AD. S : AE 2 6. Haversham, W ood Farm. LPRIA s ettlement/farmstead. S : AE. 2 7.

Little

K imble,

C lst

Waugh e t a l. BC/AD and earlier.

( 1974)

f oot

o f Cymbeline's Castle. OS ( 1978); Waugh e t a l. ( 1974) Substantial Roman building; ? E /MPRIA f armstead adjacent. NFD. C : AE. 2 8. Olney, A shfurlong. Knight LPRIA f armstead - Roman minor n ucleated s ettlement. BC/AD - C4th AD. S : AE. 29.

S aunderton,

( EPRIA f armstead) adjacent. S : AE.

f oot

o f

( 1984) C lst

L odge H ill.

LPRIA/ER

Dyer ( 1973); Waugh e t a l. ( 1974) farmstead/settlement; LR villa

3 0. Wendover, f oot o f Boddington h illfort. LPRIA/Roman s ite(s). C lst - C4th AD? S : AE, p otin. ( F2 ( Wendover) AV). M 15.

( Index)

CAMBRIDGESHIRE 3 1. Abington P iggotts, Bellows H ill. EPRIA/LPRIA/Roman f armstead/settlement. C : AV.

C 4th BC

Fox ( 1924) - C4th AD .

3 2. Cambridge, Castle Hill. A lexander ( 1975) LPRIA nucleated s ettlement - ER f ort - Duroliponte nucleated s ettlement. C 1st BC - C 4th AD . E (10-14): AR, A E. ( F1 Uncertain). 3 3. Chippenham , Manor Farm. LPRIA/Roman s ettlement/farmstead? S : AR, AE. H 5.

C lst

T . V olk ( Pers. Comm.) - C 4th AD.

34. Gt. Wilbraham, Mutlow Hill, F leam Dyke. N eville ( 1852) Roman? mausoleum , disturbing BA tumulus; C 1st C4th AD. E (15): AE.

3 37

Fox

3 5. Histon, A rbury Camp. P RIA r ingfort; n ot c losely dated. C : AV. 3 6. Histon, Arbury Road. ( EPRIA enclosure) LPRIA/ER enclosure s ettlement e tc. C lst BC/AD - C4th AD . E (?): AR. 3 7. Horningsea, k iln s ite. Roman kiln s ite; earlier possibly earlier. E (16): AR. S : AE/AR.

enclosures?

3 8. S oham, B y-pass s ite. LPRIA/ER s ite; C lst BC - C lst S : AV. ( F2: A E).

AD,

( 1923)

- LR

DOE ( 1969) extra-mural

C 2nd

Walker ( 1912) C3rd AD,

Grew p ossibly l ater.

( 1981)

3 9. S tapleford, Wandlebury. Hartley ( 1957) ( EPRIA)-MPRIA n ucleated s ettlement ( hi nfort) - LPRIA/Roman s ite. C4th - C 2nd/Clst BC; C lst - C 2nd AD, l ater? C : " a c oin o f Cunobelinus" ( Babbington, 1 883). 40. West Wickham, S treatly Hall Farm . V CH Cambs. I II ( 1978) Roman r oadside s ite ( ? nucleated s ettlement). C3rd - C4th AD, p resumably earlier. S : AV

ESSEX 4 1.

Ardleigh,

Abbots Hundred Acre F ield.

LPRIA/Roman enclosure/complex C4th AD. C : AE. ( F2:AV). 42.

( ?

s ettlement).

Couchman and Avory ( 1983) C lst B C/AD -

B illericay,

S chool Road E /Buckenham Field. W ilson ( 1972); F rere ( 1977) LPRIA/ER nucleated s ettlement. C lst - C2nd AD, p robably later. E (18-19, N /A): A E, p otin. ( F2: AV). M 19. 43. Braintree, F ountain Hotel s ite, e tc. Eddy ( 1983) LPRIA/Roman nucleated s ettlement. C lst - C 4th AD, p ossibly earlier. E (19A-D): AR, A E, p otin. ( F2: AV). 44. Chelmsford, M oulsham S treet, e tc. Drury ( 1975) ? ER f ort/settlement - Roman nucleated s ettlement ( ?public town). Mid C lst C4th AD . E (N/A): AE. ( Fl-F2: AV). M21. 45-51. Colchester: Various l ocations LPRIA Dyke/extended s ettlement c omplex f ortress, e tc. - Colonia. ( Fl:AV. F2: AV, AE/AV, AR, AE). M23.

3 38

Appendix 5 - Legionary

4 5. Sheepen s ite. Ibid. LPRIA s ite ( ? n ucleated s ettlement/landing p lace) - Roman extra-mural production s ite/settlement - r eligious c omplex. Late C lst BC? / Early C lst - C2nd AD. E (C01-80): AE/AV , AR, A E. 46. Walled a rea. ER f ortress - Roman public town. E (C081-83): AE.

Ibid. Mid C lst

- C4th AD.

47. Cheshunt F ield, Gosbeck's Farm. MPRIA s ettlement - ? LPRIA enclosure complex - ER ER/Roman r elgious c omplex. E (C085): AE. 48. Lexden, S t.Clare Drive, e tc. LPRIA c emetery - ER r oad/roadside BC - C4th AD. C : AE. ( F2: AR, AE).

s ettlement.

Ibid. f ort -

Ibid. Later C lst

49. Union ( St.Mary's H ospital); Balkerne Lane. Ibid. ER extra-mural s ettlement; Roman nucleated s ettlement, c emetery, r eligious c omplex. M id C lst - C4th AD . E (C084): AR, AE. ( Fl: AV, AR, AE). 5 0.

West

L odge

( St. Mary's T errace),

ER extra-mural s ettlement; Roman c emeteries. M id C lst - C4th AD. C : AV, AE/AV, A E. 5 1. Fingringhoe Wick ER Supply base/post; R oman villas. C : AR, AE. ( F2 AV). 5 2. Gestingthorpe, Hill Farm. Roman s ettlement ( ?religious adjacent?). Late C lst-C4th AD. E (19E): p otin. S : AE. 5 3. Great Canfield, F itzjohns. Roman s ettlement/farmstead. C 1st AE 5 4. Great Chesterford . LPRIA nucleated s ettlement? s ettlement, c emetery. C lst E (20): AE, p otin. ( F2 AV?,

Abbey F ield, nucleated

Mid C lst

L ords Land. I bid. s ettlement,

Ibid - C4th AD.

Draper LPRIA/ER

( 1985) s ite

VCH E ssex I II - C4th AD .

( 1963)

c omplex;

VCH E ssex I II ( 1963) - ER f ortress - Roman nucleated BC - C 4th AD. AR, AE, potin). M 116.

5 5. Great Dunmow, New S treet, Chequers Lane. W ilson ( 1972) MPRIA f armstead - L PRIA/ER enclosure - Roman nucleated s ettlement ( cemetery). C lst BC - C 4th AD. E (N/A): AE. ( F2 AV). 5 6. Hadstook, Red F ield. Roman villa. C lst AD - C4th AD. E (N/A): AE, AV .

3 39

VCH E ssex I II

( 1963)

5 7. Harlow Temple LPRIA/ER r itual s ite - Roman t emple. E ( HA A -E): AV, AE/AV, AR, AE/AR, A E. 5 8. Harlow Holbrooks. ? LPRIA s ettlement - Roman r eligious AD. E (N/A): AR, AE. 5 9. Heybridge, Crescent Road. LPRIA/ER nucleated s ettlement/ p robably later. E (21): potin. ( M28).

Appendix 5 Early C lst - C 4th AD . ( F2 AV, AE).

p ort.

60. K elvedon. LPRIA nucleated s ettlement - ER F ort s ettlement. Early C lst - C4th AD . E (KE1-11): AR, AE, p otin. ( C:AV).

Appendix 5 C lst - C4th

c omplex.

C lst

D . O.E. ( 1972) - C 2nd AD ,

- Canovium

Appendix 5 nucleated

6 1. Langha r n, B lackbrook Hill. ( EPRIA)-LPRIA s ite. C lst BC/AD? C : AV.

Rodwell

( 1976)

6 2. L ower Nazeing, Nazeingbury. LPRIA/ER f armstead. C lst BC - late C 2nd AD. E (22): AE. ( C: AV).

Huggins

( 1978)

6 3. Mucking. J ones ( 1974), Rankov ( 1982) MPRIA s ettlement - LPRIA/ER enclosure c omplex, c emetery Roman villa f ield s ystem, c emetery C 2nd BC - C4th AD . E (23-24): p otin, AE, AR. 64. R idgewell, Great Ashley F ield . Roman villa; later C lst - C 4th Ad . E (N/A): AV. 6 5.

W endens Ambo,

Chinnels F ield.

( EPRIA s ite) - LPRIA/ER BC/AD - C 4th AD. E (N/A): AE.

f armstead

VCH E ssex I II

( 1963)

Wilson ( 1975); VCH E ssex I II ( 1963) - Roman villa . C lst

66. W ickford, Beauchamps Farm. ( EPRIA s ite) - LPRIA/ER f armstead - R oman s ettlement. Early C lst - C 4th AD . E (1-4): AE/AV, AE, p otin. ( F2 AV, p otin).

Appendix 5 n ucleated

67. W itham, Chipping Hill. R odwell ( 1976); Thompson ( 1982) M /LPRIA s ettlement ( hillfort), burials - ( LR s ite). C lst BC? E (25): potin.

HAMPSHIRE 6 8. Andover, Finkley Down, Knight's Enham . D . O.E. ( 1972) Roman nucleated s ettlement ( M/LPRIA s ettlement; L PRIA/ER enclosure c omplex both adjacent). C : AV. AV H 15. ( F2: AV, AR). M 33.

3 40

6 9. Hayling I sland Temple. L PRIA/ER r itual s ite ? temple - Roman t emple. C 4th AD. E (HI1-10): AV, A E/AV, AR, AE/AR, AE, p otin.

Appendix 5 ?Mid C lst BC -

7 0. Hurstbourne P rior, Railway s iding. YCH Hants I ( 1900) M /LPRIA s ettlement/farmstead - E R s ite ( major Roman building n earby). C2nd/Clst BC - C lst AD? E (26): AV. 7 1. Nether Wallop, Danebury. Cunliffe ( 1984) ( EPRIA) - M /LPRIA nucleated s ettlement ( hillfort) - LPRIA s ettlement/farmstead. C4th - C lst B C/AD. E (27-29): AE/AV, AR. A r ecent f ind o f c oins ( Boon, 1 985) i ncluding S outhern AR a nd S outh-Western types, o utside the ramparts o n the east c ould perhaps indicate a t emple there, o r may s imply derive f rom a s cattered h oard o f C lst AD date. 7 2. Owslebury, B ottom P ond Farm. Appendix 5 M PRIA/LPRIA/Roman f armstead ( LPRIA/ER c emeteries). C3rd B C - 4 th AD . E (OW1-5): AV, AR, p otin. 7 3. Rowland's Castle, Huckswood Lane. M /LPRIA/Roman s ite/enclosure. ? C2nd/Clst E (30): AR.

BC

Collins ( 1955) - C4th AD.

7 4. S ilchester, R oman City. Appendix 5 L PRIA Dyke c omplex/extended s ite - R oman public t own. Later C lst BC - C4th AD . E (SI1-14): AV, A E/AV, AR, A E/AR, p otin, AE. ( M35). 7 5. S tockbridge, A shely Camp. ? PRIA hillfort - Roman enclosure/site. e arlier p ottery. C : AR.

Palmer ( 1984) Roman a ctivity,

7 6. Winchester, S t. G eorge's S treet, Assize C ourt, C athedral Green. Biddle ( 1968) O ram's A rbour M /LPRIA l arge defended enclosure - Roman p ublic town. C 3rd - C lst BC, C lst - C 4th AD. E (31-2): AR, AE. ( C: AE/AV , AR, AE. F 2 AR). 1 4 117. 4 IA coins were w ithin Oram's Arbour enceinte, a ll U /S; a f ifth ( Context 3 1) was f ound just o utside the S defences.

HERTFORDSHIRE 7 7. Ashwell, R oman villa. S : AE.

Ashwell End. C 3rd C4th AD,

Wilson p robably earlier.

7 8. Baldock, Walls F ield a nd F ield 0S3. L PRIA/Roman nucleated s ettlement ( LPRIA B C/AD - C4th . E (BA1-26): A E/AV, AR, AE, p otin. ( C: AE.

3 41

( 1970)

Appendix 5 burials). C lst F2:

AE,

p otin).

79-83. B raughing/Puckeridge: various l ocations LPRIA extended s ettlement c ontext - R oman s ettlement. C lst B C - C4th AD. S : AV, AR, AE, p otin. 79. Skeleton Green LPRIA/ER nucleated s ettlement - ER c emetery. early C lst AD. M id C lst AD - C2nd. E (BR1-26): AE/AV, A E, p otin. 8 0. Gatesbury Track ( 80a)/Field ( 80b) LPRIA nucleated s ettlement. Late C lst E (BR31-2): AE, p otin.

Ibid. BC -

C lst

I bid. BC - mid C lst AD .

8 1. Ermine S treet/Ermine S treet j unction. LPRIA s ettlement - ER r oadside s ettlement. BC/early C lst AD - l ate C4th. E (BR37-47): AE/AR, AE, p otin. 8 2. S tation Road, S tandon. LPRIA/ER s ettlement. Late C lst C lst AD. E (BR27-30): potin, A E. ( F2: AV).

Appendix 5 nucleated

I bid. C lst

Late

B C/early C 1st AD

I bid. - late

8 3. Wickham Hill/Wickham K ennels/Griggs B ridge. I bid. LPRIA/ER s ettlement - Roman nucleated s ettlement. Late C lst BC - C4th AD. E (BR33-36): AR, AE/AR, AE, p otin. ( F2: AV, AE, p otin). 84. Northchurch, C ow Roast. Orna ( 1975) ER s ite ( ?military) - Roman nucleated s ettlement. ( LPRIA c emetery adjacent). M id C lst C4th AD. E (33-38): AR, AE. 8 5-90. S t. Albans: various l ocations LPRIA Dyke/extended s ettlement c omplex - Roman public t own. ( F2: AV, A E). M42.

Appendix 5 E R f ort-settlement

8 5. P rae Wood. LPRIA enclosure c omplex/settlement c omplex. C lst AD a nd later? E (SA1): AE. 8 6. King Harry Lane. LPRIA c emetery - Roman r oadside - C4th AD . E (SA2): A E. 8 7. Verulam Hills F ield. LPRIA c emetery - E R r oadside E (SA3): A E.

? Roman

s ettlement.

s ettlement

8 8. Verulamium Roman C ity . LPRIA enclosure - E R f ort/settlement ? early C lst AD - C4th AD . E (SA4-18): AE/AR, A E. S : AR, AE.

3 42

I bid. enclosure

I bid. Early C lst AD

- L R c emetery .

- Roman public

I bid.

Ibid. town.

8 9. Gorhambury. L PRIA/ER s ettlement/farmstead C 4th AD. E (SA19): A E? 9 0. Park S treet. ? LPRIA/ER s ettlement/farmstead AD . E (SA20-22): AE.

Roman villa.

C lst

- Roman villa.

C lst

9 1. Ware, Allen a nd Hanbury S ite. L PRIA enclosure c omplex? - m ilitary road r oadside s ettlement. C lst - C4th AD. E (N/A): AE. 9 2. Welwyn, Lockleys Park. ? LPRIA/ER s ettlement/farmstead E (39): AE.

Ibid. BC -

Ibid. - C4th

F rere ( 1977) - Roman nucleated/

Ward-Perkins Roman villa.

( 1938)

HUNTINGDONSHIRE 9 3. Sawtry, L PRIA/Roman l ater. E (40): AR.

S tocking C lose. s ettlement/farmstead.

C lst

Garrood ( 1937) AD - p robably

KENT 9 4. Ash, G ilton T own. VCH Kent A nglo-Saxon c emetery ( Post-Roman context). E (41): p otin. 9 5. Aylesford, S and p it. L PRIA c emetery. Late C lst S : AV. M44.

B C

Evans, - early C lst AD.

9 6. Bapchild, Batfield. E R c emetery - ( LR s ite a djacent). E (N/A): A E.

C lst

I ( 1908)

A .

( 1890)

VCH Kent I II ( 1932) AD , C 2nd - C 4th AD?

9 7. B irchington, M innis Bay ( Gore End). Thompson ( 1982) emetery. C lst L PRIA/Roman s ite ( shafts/wells) - Roman c C 2nd AD. C (Gore End): AV. ( F2: AV). M45. 9 8. Boughton Monchelsea, The S lade. R oach S mith ( 1842) L PRIA/ER s ite - substantial Roman building ( bath-house). C lst - C4th AD. E (N/A): AR, AE. C : AV. 9 9. B ridge, Bridge Hill. M /LPRIA s ettlement. C lst E (43): potin. ( M136).

Watson

( 1963)

BC.

1 00. Broadstairs, Dumpton Gap. Hurd ( 1913); Thompson ( 1982) ( EPRIA enclosure c omplex) - LPRIA/?ER s ite ( settlement?), c emetery. C5th - C4th B C, C lst BC/AD. C : AR, p otin ( foreshore), AV ( 250 i n N ). ( F2: AR). M46,

3 43

M 119.

P otin p otentially e roded

f rom c liff d eposit.

1 01. Burntwick I sland , marshes. LPRIA salt p roduction s ite. C lst C (44): AV.

Williams

( 1973)

B C/AD.

1 02-105 Canterbury. various l ocations. Appendix 5 LPRIA nucleated s ettlement ( ? extended c omplex) - Roman public t own. Later C lst B C/early C lst AD - C4th AD . C : AV, AR. ( F2: AV, AR, AE, potin). M47.

I bid .

1 02. Walled c ity. LPRIA n ucleated s ettlement - Roman public t own baths, defences). Early C lst - C4th AD. E (CA1-81): AE/AV, AR, AE/AR, AE, potin. 1 03. 44-5 Watling ? LPRIA nucleated C lst - C 4th AD . E (CA82): p otin .

S treet. s ettlement

1 04. By-pass s ite. E R P roduction s ite E (CA83): A E.

- R oman

M id/later C lst

- Roman

AD.

N FD. F 2: AV).

1 08.

S nargate

S t.,

VCH Kent

S t.,

( 1932)

e tc. S elkirk ( 1973, 8 1-8) s ettlement ( CB f ort BC/AD; early C 2nd -

1 09. Eccles, Rowe Farm P lace. LPRIA/ER enclosure c omplex/settlement Roman villa . Early C lst - C 4th AD . E (46): A E. 1 10. Farningham, Farningham H ill. M /LPRIA f armstead. C lst B C - early C lst E (47-48): potin. F ranks V illa

I II

( 1972)

M 137.

P RIA s ite - extra-mural/nucleated a djacent) - S axon S hore f ort? C lst C4th AD . E (N/A): p otin. C : AR.

Farningham,

I bid. s ettlement

r oadside

Davies

1 07. Deal, Ripple. R oman s ite ( cemetery). C : p otin. ( Fl: potin .

1 11.

I bid . s ettlement.

r oadside

1 06. Darenth, S ewer L ine. P RIA S ite. NFD. E (45): p otin.

Market

t emple,

I bid. ( kiln).

1 05. Whitehall Road. L PRIA nucleated s ettlement ( NE). C lst-C4th AD. E (CA84-87): AE.

Dover,

( ?

Detsicas ( 1965) ( kiln a djacent) -

P hilp

( 1984)

AD.

( Farningham-1).

ER s ettlement/farmstead - Roman v illa. AD. E (49): p otin.

3 44

P roctor ( 1983) Late C lst AD - C4th

1 12. Farningham, O liver C rescent. Greenfield e t a l. ( 1948) M /LR enclosure c omplex ( fields) ( Bath building, Farningham2 villa adjacent). Mid C 2nd - C4th AD. E (N/A): p otin. 1 13. Faversham, S chool P laying F ields. LPRIA/ER enclosure c omplex - Roman villa. AD - C3rd/C4th AD. E (50): potin. ( F2: AV, AR, AE). M52.

P hilp ( 1968) Late C lst BC/Clst

1 14. Folkestone, Cheriton S ite C . Tester and B ing ( 1949) LPRIA/ER s ite ( ? p roduction s ite). Cemetery adjacent. C lst - early C2nd AD. E (51): potin. ( Fl: AV). 1 4 53. 1 15. Folkestone, East Wear Bay. Winbolt ( 1925) LPRIA cemetery/site - Roman v illa. C lst AD, late C lst mid C4th AD . E (52-54): AE, potin. C : AV, A E. ( F2: AV, AR, AE). 1 4 53. 1 16. Folkestone, Castle H ill Camp. VCH Kent I II ( 1932) Roman s ite a t f oot, medieval earthworks o n s ummit. ? C1st C2nd AD. S : AR ( near summit). 1 4 53. 1 17. Folkestone, S ugar L oaf H ill. Roman s ite ( cemetery?). C lst-C2nd, S : AE. 1 4 53. 1 18. F rindsbury, Quarry House. Roman s ettlement/farmstead. C lst S : AE.

Wilson

( 1974)

C4th AD .

Arnold

( 1889)

- C4th AD .

1 19. Greenhithe, S tone Castle Quarry. M /LPRIA s ettlement/enclosures - ER s ettlement. C 2nd - C lst BC, Later C lst E (N/A): p otin.

Detsicas ( 1966) enclosure - R oman - C 3rd AD .

1 20. I ckham, Button Farm, C ourt Hall. D .O .E. ( 1974) P robable Roman r oadside s ettlement ( Production s ite, s ubstantial building). C 2nd-C4th, possibly earlier. E (U/S): AE. Could conceivably b e a s tray f rom C4th Roman bronze hoard. 1 21.

I ghtham,

Oldbury Hill.

Ward-Perkins ( 1939); Thompson ( 1984) - LPRIA/ER s ite ( cremations).

( E) MPRIA large h illfort C2nd/Clst BC; C lst AD. C : AV ( interior); AV ( hillside). 1 22. I ghtham, Mainfield. Roman s ite. Late C lst/C2nd AD, C : AV. ( F1, F 2: AV). 1 4 57. 1 23.

Keston,

1 4 56. V CH Kent p ossible l ater.

Lower Warbank.

LPRIA/Roman enclosures - Roman villa, C4th AD. E (55): potin. S : p otin.

3 45

I II

( 1932)

VCH K ent I II ( 1932); Wilson ( 1975) mausoleum. C lst AD -

1 24. Kits Coty, B lue B ell H ill. Roman t emple. C lst - C4th AD. S : AE. 1 25. Lullingstone. ER enclosures - Roman villa. E (56): potin, AE.

Mid C lst

1 26. New Chetney I sland. Roman s ite ( probably p ottery o r NFD. S : AV. 1 27. O tford, W ickham F ield. Roman s ite ( ? r oadside s ettlement) - C4th AD. S : AE, p otin.

Charles

( 1844)

Meates AD - C4th AD .

( 1979)

s alt

p roduction

( Index) s ite).

Ward ( 1968) ( cemetery nearby). C lst

1 28. Reculver. Thompson ( 1982); VCH Kent I II ( 1932) M /LPRIA enclosures - ER f ortlet - S axon S hore f ort. ? C3rd - C lst BC, m id C lst AD, C 3rd - C4th AD. E (U/S): AE. S /C potin. ( F2: AV - b each f inds?). M64. A t t ime o f discovery o f AV c oins, s ea beginning t o devastate north f ace o f f ort. 1 29. Richborough. Cunliffe ( 1968) MPRIA enclosures - ER beach head/supply depot - Roman nucleated s ettlement/post a djacent - LR f ort/Saxon S hore f ort. Mid C lst - C4th AD . E ( effectively U /S, N /A): AE/AV, A E, p otin. S : AR, AE. M 121. Hanson and F light ( 1968); VCH Kent I II ( 1932) LPRIA s ettlement/enclosures ( ? nucleated s ettlement) - ? ER f ort - Durobrivae nucleated s ettlement. C lst - C4th AD . E (57-60): AE, p otin. ( F2: AV). M65. 1 30.

Rochester.

1 31. S andwich, By-pass. Grew ( 1980) PRIA/Roman s ite ( ? midden) MR p roduction s ite ( ovens). C lst AD, C2nd-C3rd AD. E (N/A): potin. ( F2: AV). M 66. 1 32. S ittingbourne, Roman enclosure ( ? C3rd AD. E (61-4) AE, p otin.

Radfield. Baxter and Mills ( 1978) LPRIA s ettlement a djacent). Late C lst( F2:

AV,

AE).

1 33. S nodland, S andpit, Church F ield. Rankov ( 1982) M /LR V illa ( ? earlier enclosure). M id C 2nd - Mid C 4th AD. E (65): potin . C ( adjacent): AE. 1 34. S outhfleet, S pringhead. Harker ( 1980) LPRIA enclosure c omplex ( ? r eligious s ite) - Vagniacis nucleated s ettlement ( temple c omplex). C lst - 04th AD. E (66): AE. S /C: AE/AV, AE. 1 35. S turry, Ashendens P it LPRIA/ER c emetery. Later C lst E (N/A): Uncertain B ritish.

3 46

I nce BC - C lst

AD .

( 1928)

1 36. S utton-at-Hone, N orthview. L PRIA farmstead. C 1st BC. E (N/A): p otin, ? AE.

P hilp and P hilp

( 1974)

P hilp - C 2nd AD.

( 1973)

VCH Kent I II s altings). Mid C lst

( 1932) - C3rd

1 37. Sutton-at-Hone, S hip Lane. ? LPRIA/ER s ite - R oman enclosure. E (67): potin. 1 38. Upchurch, B irdcage Marsh. E /MR p roduction s ite ( pottery, AD. C /S: AE.

C lst

1 39. Upchurch, S layhills Marsh. E /MR production s ite ( mainly s alting). C : p otin. 1 40. Wilmington, P RIA s ettlement. E (U/S): p otin.

Gravel NFD .

VCH Kent I II ( 1932) Mid C lst-C3rd AD.

P it.

D . O.E.

( 1976)

LONDON 1 41.

City o f London,

L eadenhall

S treet.

Merrifield ( 1983); S heldon ( 1978) f orum/basilica t o NE). Mid

Roman public t own ( adjacent t o C lst - C4th AD . C : AR. AV, AE/AV, AE, p otin f rom bed o f Thames/foreshore b etween L ondon and Tower B ridges ( M72).

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 1 42. Brafield-on-the-Green. ? LPRIA/Roman s ettlement/farmstead. S : AV. 1 43.

RCHM Northants I I C lst - C4th AD .

( 1979)

Duston,

Weedon R oad I ronstone quarries. D .O.E. ( 1975); VCH Northants I ( 1902) LPRIA/ER c emetery - E R enclosure c omplex - Roman nucleated s ettlement. M id C lst - C 4th AD . S : AE/AV, AR, A E. ( 1 475). 1 4 124. On boundary o f S tudy A rea . A lthough a LPRIA s ettlement i s g enerally a ssumed ( e.g. Knight, 1 984), there i s n o direct evidence. 1 44. Gayton, The Warren. S ubstantial Roman building. earlier. C : AE. ( F2: AR). 1 45. Hardingstone. LPRIA enclosure c omplex ( military?). C lst AD . E (68): p otin.

VCH Northants I ( 1902) L ater C2nd - C 4th, p ossibly

- E R

3 47

p roduction

Woods ( 1969) s ite ( kilns)

1 46. I rchester, Chester Camp. RCHM Northants I I ( 1979) R oman nucleated s ettlement ( LPRIA s ettlement, c emetery Roman extra-mural s ettlement adjacent to S ). Late C lst BC - C4th AD. C : AE. 1 47. L ittle Houghton, C oneygree. RCHM Northants I I Roman nucleated(?) s ettlement/production s ite. C lst AD. C /S: AE.

( 1979) - C4th

1 48. Weekley, Castle H edges. RCHM Northants I I ( 1979) M /LPRIA/ER s ettlement/enclosure c omplex - ER p roduction s ite ( military?) - s ubstantial Roman building. C3rd/C2nd BC - C 3rd/C4th AD. S : AE ( found 1 00 i n f rom c entre o f s ite). On boundary o f S tudy A rea. 1 49. Wellingborough, Hardwick Park. RCHM Northants I I ( 1979) LPRIA/ER s ettlement/enclosure c omplex - E /MR p roduction s ite/settlement. C lst BC/AD - C3rd AD . C : AE. ( F2: AV).

OXFORDSHIRE 1 50.

Hampsden M ill Lane. Parrington and De Roche LPRIA/ER/LR s ettlement. C lst AD, C3rd-C4th AD. C : AE. 1 51.

B enson,

Dorchester-on-Thames,

( 1977)

H emp C roft,

Beech House, e tc. Rowley ( 1975) nucleated s ettlement.

LPRIA/ER s ite ( Hemp C roft) - Roman C lst - C4th AD . E (69-72): AR, AE. C ( 'The Demesne'): AR. ( F2: AV, A E/AV, AR, AE, p otin). ( 1 477). S ee a lso Overy F ield ( Site 1 52) and Dyke Hills ( Site 2 27). 1 4 140. 1 52. Dorchester-on-Thames, Overy F ield. Rowley ( 1975) Roman r oad/site ( religious s ite and/or r oadside extra-mural s ettlement). Undated. S : AV, AE/AV . 1 4 77. On the o pposite bank o f the r iver Thame. 1 53. Ducklington. ER/LR enclosure c omplex C4th AD. E (N/A): AR.

( Villa adjacent).

D .O .E. ( 1975) Late C lst/C2nd -

1 54. Henley-on-Thames, Harpsden Wood . VCH Oxon I ( 1939) Enclosure ( Mausoleum?) ( Villa adjacent, C3rd C 4th p ossibly earlier). Undated ( Roman?). S : AV. H38. F indspot in r elation t o enclosure not known. 1 55. Northleigh, S hakenoak. ER farmstead - Roman v illa . E (73): AR. S :AR. 1 4 126.

B rodribb e t a l. ( 1975) Mid/later C lst - C4th AD .

3 48

1 56. Woodeaton, M iddle Hill. Harding ( 1972) P RIA r eligious s ite? - Roman t emple. ? C4th/C3rd BC - C4th AD. E (74): AV. S /C: AE/AV, AR, potin . M82, M 141.

S UFFOLK 1 57. Barham, beside the Church. R oman s ite. C lst - C 4th AD. S : AV. On boundary o f S tudy Area .

Balkwill

( 1978)

1 58. Coddenham, Baylham House. D . O.E. ( 1973) L PRIA/ER s ettlement/enclosures - Combretovium nucleated s ettlement ( ER f orts adjacent). C lst - C3rd AD. E (75-76): AE/AV, AR. C : AE. On boundary o f S tudy A rea. 1 59. Claydon, P aper M ill Lane. Owles LPRIA/ER s ettlement. C lst AD, p ossibly earlier. S : AE, potin. C lose t o boundary o f S tudy A rea.

( 1974)

1 60. Icklingham - Lackford. O .S. ( 1978) Camboretum? ( Lackford) nucleated s ettlement? C3rd - C4th AD, presumably earlier. S : AR. ( F2 I cklingham: AV, AR, AE/AR, AE). M 84, M 128. Nucleated s ettlement a t Lackford inadequately d ifferentiated f rom the s ubstantial Roman building ( villa/ r eligious c omplex?) a t I cklingham; the o nly s ecurely p rovenanced c oin i s f rom the f ormer, a s a re l ikely t o be the majority o f the n ineteenth c entury f inds p rovenanced a s the latter? 1 61. Ixworth. F rere and S t.Joseph ( 1983) R oman nucleated s ettlement ( Roman f ort adjacent t o SW). M id C lst - C4th AD. S : AR. ( F2: AR). M 129. On b oundary o f S tudy Area . 1 62. Long Melford, Chapel F ield. Avent and H owlett ( 1978) E R roadside s ettlement ( LPRIA s ite? - Roman nucleated s ettlement adjacent). Mid 0 1st - end C2nd AD ( town C lst C4th AD). S : AE. ( F2: AV, AE). 1 4 86. 1 63. Mildenhall, Kingsway, e tc. Clarke M /LPRIA s ite ( exact l ocation uncertain) - Roman ( nucleated s ettlement?). C lst AD , presumably later. S : AR. ( F2: AR, potin). M I30.

( 1939) s ite

S URREY 1 64. Albury, Farley H eath. ( LPRIA r eligious s ite) - Roman t emple. C4th AD . E (FH1): AR. E /S: AV, AR, AE. 1 65. Ashtead, I ward S haw, P ark Lane. MPRIA s ettlement/farmstead. E (77): p otin.

349

Appendix 5 Early/mid 0 1st -

L owther

( 1946)

1 66.

Ashtead,

A shtead P ark,

Medieval holloway.

M /LPRIA s ite - s ubstantial Roman building. C : AV ( 100 m f rom c entre o f s ite). 1 67.

Croydon,

C rowhamhurst

P lace,

Copley NFD.

( 1958)

S elsden Road. S y. A.C. 5 0 ( 1946-7),

XXIII

ER farmstead/settlement. E (78): p otin. ( M87). 1 68. Hascombe, Hascombe ' Hillfort'. M /LPRIA defended s ite ( settlement ? ) possibly earlier. E (79): p otin.

Thompson ( 1979) c 2 .5 ha. C lst BC,

1 69. Walton-on-the-Hill, Downs V iew. P RIA/Roman s ite. Undated. S : p otin.

Berry

( 1942-3)

1 69A. Wanborough, Green Lane. G rew ( 1980); F rere ( 1986) ( LPRIA r eligious s ite?) - Roman t emple ( LR building adjacent). C lst-C4th AD . E /F1: AV, AE/AV, AR, AR/AE, AE. ( H47).

S USSEX 1 70. B ishopstone, Rookery Hill. ( E)/M/LPRIA/Roman f armstead. C 5th - C 3rd BC, AD. E (80): p otin. 1 71. Chichester, Walled C ity. ER f ortress - R oman public t own. E (CH1-14): AR, A E. C : AV. ( F2: S ee a lso F ishbourne ( Site 2 36). 1 72.

C lapham,

B lackpatch.

MBA enclosure/farmstead c learly dated. E (81): p otin. 1 73.

Eastbourne,

Roman s ite S : AV. 1 74.

B ell ( 1977) C lst B C - C4th

Appendix 5 M id C lst - C4th AD . AV, AR, AE, potin). M98.

Ratcliffe-Densham & Ratcliffe-Densham ( 1953) - P RIA/Roman s ite ( pond?). Not

B eachy H ead BD16. Drewett ( 1982) ( ?farmstead/settlement). M id C lst - C4th AD.

Eastbourne,

Bullock Down,

Bullock Down,

P RIA l ynchet ( field s ystem). E (82): p otin. 1 75. East Harting, B ramshott Roman enclosure. NFD. C lst E (U/S): AR, A E. 1 4 132. 1 76. Gay S treet, P RIA/Roman s ite. S : AR.

B eachy H ead,

Heathy B row SW. Drewett ( 1982) C4th B C - C lst AD.

B ottom . - C4th AD.

Allen

( 1968d)

B eedings S .E. A ldsworth ( 1984) NFD, but c learly a ctivity C lst BC/AD .

3 50

1 77. Glynde, The Caburn. ( EPRIA)/MPRIA s ettlement ha. C4th BC - C lst AD. E (GC1-10): p otin.

LPRIA defended

Appendix 5 s ettlement Q 1 .5

1 78. Lancing, L ancing Down. Appendix 3 LPRIA/ER r eligious s ite ( temples) - ER/LR c emeteries. C 1st - mid C2nd AD, C 4th AD? E (83-85): AE/AV, AR, AE/AR, AE. H54. 1 79. Patching, P ark B ottom. Roman enclosures ( field s ystem). earlier a nd l ater. C : AR. 1 80.

P oynings,

D evil's Dyke,

VCH Sussex I II ( 1935) C lst - C2nd AD , p robably

Ladies Golf Club.

LPRIA/ER s ettlement/farmstead. E (86): AR. 1 81. S outh Nailing, The Martlets. Roman c emetery/road . C lst - C 2nd c ontinues later. E (N/A): p otin. 1 82. S tanmer, Nansen R oad, Roman s ite. N FD. C : AV.

C oldean.

3 51

AD,

Burstow a nd W ilson ( 1936)

N orris ( 1956) r oad p ossibly

Allen

( 1960)

I I.Sites with probable

I ron Age c oin f inds

B EDFORDSHIRE 1 83. Arlesey, n ear the s tation. L PRIA and ER Cemetery - Roman s ite. ( F2: AE).

C lst

VCH Beds I I - C 2nd AD .

( 1908)

1 84. Bedford, Newnham Marina. D . O.E. ( 1975) ( EPRIA enclosure c omplex) - LPRIA/ER s ettlement/enclosure R oman villa. C lst AD; C 2nd - C4th AD. S : AE. ( F2: AV). M l. C oin f rom " Roman s ite a t B edford", p robably this. 1 85. Eastcotts, Cotton End. LPRIA s ite. C lst BC/AD? Roman o ccupation? C : AR. 1 86.

L imbury,

1 87.

Luton,

K night ( 1984)

Muswell H ill, Rosslyn C rescent e tc. Thompson ( 1982); VCH B eds I I ( 1908) L PRIA c emetery - Roman nucleated s ettlement. ( F2: AV). M2. According to the VCH, the s ource o f most c oins a ttributed t o L eagrave. None a re s ecurely p rovenanced, however, and this belief may b e c oloured by the discovery o f o ther r emains here. L eagrave, the s ource o f the R iver Lea , s eems a more l ikely a lternative, and r ecent f inds o f AR, A E have b een f rom there. L eagrave. S elkirk ( 1972, 1 73-6); L PRIA s ettlement adjacent - Roman s ite. AD. ( F2: AV, AR, AE). M 2.

VCH Beds I I ( 1908) C lst/BC AD ; C2nd

1 88. S andy, Chesterfield, e tc. Johnson ( 1974) ? LPRIA a nd Roman nucleated s ettlement - ER f ort? C lst C4th AD . ( Girtford B ridge): AV, p otin . ( F2: AV, AE/AV, A R, AE, p otin). M3, M 109, M 134. The worst r ecorded o f the important s ites f or I ron A ge c oinage. Not a s ingle c oin has a s ecure s ite p rovenance, a lthough the AE i n S tukeley's p ossession and t he AR i llustrated by Akerman ( 1848) a re l ikely to b e f rom Chesterfield where the early f inds w ere made. Wyatt ( 1866) had B ritish c oins f rom d igging the G . N. R. t hrough t here in 1 850. The 1 856 date o f Evans' " near B iggleswade" coins s uggests their p rovenance was the d igging o f the L .M. S.R. P otton b ranch l ine a gain through Chesterfield a nd then a cross B iggleswade C ommon. S everal s pectacular f inds were made then ( VCH Beds I I, 1 908). There i s n o evidence f or a p rolific " near B iggleswade" s ite d istinct f rom the Sandy c omplex. Latchmore purchased quantities o f C laudian c opies a t Sandy which imply a f ort; a n unlocated r eligious c omplex a lso s eems a p robability f rom the exceptional f inds s uch a s a s ilver c overed s word and the Mercury r elief. The I ron

3 52

A ge c oins a re t he main evidence f or the s tatus o f S andy, which has hints o f nucleated s ettlement a t more than one l ocation ( as well a s the inadequately dated Caesar's Camp h illfort and Gallery Hill enclosure) and p robably b elongs t o the s ame c lass o f LPRIA extended s ettlement c omplex a s e .g. Braughing. 1 89. Shefford. VCH Beds I I Roman c emetery - s ubstantial Roman building. C lst AD. ( F2: AV, AE). M 4.

( 1908) - C4th

BERKSHIRE 1 90. West Challow, C ornhill Farm. VCH Berks I ( 1906) Roman Villa. C 2nd - C4th AD. ( F2 ( East Challow): AR). A possible s ource o f " near L etcombe Regis" AR a nd " near Wantage" AV, AE/AV, AE a s well.

BUCKINGHAMSHIRE 1 91. Aylesbury P RIA hillfort - E R enclosures C2nd AD, a nd earlier. ( F2: AV, AR).

G rew ( 1980) S treet. C lst -

o n Akeman

1 92. Bledlow, The Cop. H ead and P iggott Neolithic - B ronze Age barrow, adjacent t o ( EPRIA)? s ettlement. ? Clst BC o r earlier. S : AR. Roman s ite 7 00 m f rom f indspot a t f oot o f the Cop. 1 93.

Chalfont

S t.Peter.

Chalfont

( 1944) MPRIA

Park Cricket Ground. Evans ( 1890)

Roman s ite? NFD . S : AE/AV. " Many Roman c oins o f various date". Most but c ould have b een a s cattered hoard.

probably a s ite,

1 94. Ellesborough , Chequers P ark. C ocks ( 1909) 1 00 m f rom MPRIA s ettlement ( also unlocated s ubstantial Roman building). C3rd - C lst BC. C : AV. ( F2: AV). M 14. 1 95. Fleet Marston Roman roadside/nucleated s ettlement. ( F2: AE).

0 .S.

( 1978)

NFD.

1 96. High Wycombe, P enn Mead. Roman villa. N FD . ( F2: AR) ( also F l AV and AV H3 n earby).

VCH Bucks

I I

( 1908)

1 97. Thornborough , Z i ourton Grounds Wilson ( 1973) ER enclosure c omplex, c emetery-LR mortuary c omplex/temple. Mid C lst - C4th AD. ( F2: AE).

3 53

CAMBRIDGESHIRE 1 98. Barrington. A ll unlocated: ( EPRIA c emetery). C lst BC/AD? ( F2: AV, AE). M 16.

s ite)

- L PRIA/?ER

1 99. Cambridge, Barnwell. LPRIA/ER c emetery. C lst BC/AD, ( F2: AV/AR). M 18.

s ite

Fox ( 1923) ( possible

Fox

( 1923)

p ossibly l ater.

2 00. Meldreth, Mettle Hill. B raybrooke ( 1860) Roman burial? Undated. C : AE. F ind not discussed in more r ecent a uthorities. No m ention o f human r emains: c ould c onceivably be a h oard. 2 01.

Over,

Cold Harbour Farm,

LPRIA/Roman enclosure c omplex ( F2: AV, AE).

and Further Way. VCH Cambs I II ( 1978) ( kilns). C lst - C4th AD.

E SSEX 2 02. Chignall, S t. James. M /LPRIA s ettlement/enclosure c omplex - Roman BC - C4th AD, p ossibly earlier. ( F2: AE). 2 03. Chigwell, Woolston Hall. Roman nucleated s ettlement. Late C lst ( F2: AR). 2 04.

Epping F orest,

Rankov v illa .

( 1982) C lst

VCH E ssex I II - C 4th AD.

( 1963)

Ambresbury Banks. A lexander e t a l. ( 1978) LPRIA/ER s ite. C lst - C 2nd AD, p ossibly

( EPRIA hillfort) earlier. ( F2: AV. H 11). Not c lear whether hoard f ound within earthworks. 2 05.

Mark's Tey,

n ear the Church e tc.

?LPRIA burial - ER s ite. ( F2: AV. H 12,13). 2 06.

S affron Walden,

M /LPRIA/ER enclosure C 3rd AD. ( F2: AV, AE). M29 .

C lst

Rodwell ( 1976); VCH E ssex I II ( 1963)

AD .

Waterworks,

E lm Grove, Grims D itch Wood. VCH E ssex I II ( 1963) c omplex - R oman s ite. C lst B C/AD -

2 07. Shalford . ( EPRIA s ite). NFD ( pottery). C : AV. ( F2: AV). M30. Not clear that c oin and pottery a ctually p lace.

3 54

Rodwell

f ound

a t

( 1976)

same

2 08. T ilbury, East T ilbury f oreshore. Thompson ? LPRIA/ER s ettlement. ( Later) C lst AD - C 2nd. ( F2: AV, p otin). 2 09. Wakering, L ittle Wakering Hall, e tc. 2 00 i n f rom LPRIA c emetery - P RIA s ite ( probable LPRIA/ER R edhill). C lst BC/AD. C : AE, potin. ( F2: AV).

( 1982)

Thompson ( 1982) o ver wide a rea

HAMPSHIRE 2 10. B itterne L R f ort. Late C 3rd - C4th AD . ( F2: AE).

0 .S.

( 1978)

HERTFORDSHIRE 2 11.

Ashwell.

A rbury Banks and C laybush H ill. F rere and S t.Joseph ( 1983) M PRIA nucleated s ettlement ( hi nfort) - R oman enclosure c omplex. C 3rd - C lst BC; C lst - C4th AD. ( F2: AE). O ld r ecord o f c oins and Roman material f rom here ( Fox, 1 923), but s ource o f B ritish c oins c ould a lso be A shwell E nd ( Site 7 7 above). 2 12. B ourne End, W atercress B eds. L PRIA r itual s ite? S : AV. 2 13. H itchin, Walsworth. L PRIA c emetery. C lst BC/AD . C : AE. ( F2: AV, A E). N ot f rom the burials: s ettlement 2 14. Royston. E R s ite ( ? f ort, r oad s tation). ( F2: AV, AE). M 41. 2 15.

W igginton,

( 1972)

T hompson

( 1982)

s ite n earby? F ox ( 1923) C lst AD.

T he Common.

L PRIA/Roman s ite. C : A E.

S pratling

S pratling ( 1972), V CH H erts I ( 1914)

NFD.

HUNTINGDONSHIRE 2 16. S t.Neots, E ynesbury. S ubstantial Roman building/settlement. AD. ( F2: p otin).

V CH Hunts I ( 1926) Late C lst - C4th

KENT

2 17. Addington, C oldrum Farm. S tukeley S ubstantial Roman building. N FD. C : AV. ( F2: AV). M43.

3 55

( 1720);

Allen ( 1960)

2 18. Barham, Barham D owns. DOE ( 1972; 1 973) ( EPRIA)/MPRIA enclosure c omplex - LPRIA/ER enclosure Roman r oad/site. C 5th - C3rd BC; C lst BC/AD and later. ( F2 AE) 2 19.

Birchington,

Minnis Bay?

Anglo-Saxon c emetery? C (42): AR. S ee Appendix 5 .

Thanet. R igold & Metcalf ( Post-Roman c ontext).

( 1977)

2 20. Borstal, Wouldham Marshes. Haselgrove ( 1984a) P RIA/Roman p roduction s ite? NFD. C : AE, potin. Apparently f rom o ne o f the s altings o r kiln s ites h ere. 2 21.

Greenwich,

Roman villa. C : AR. M I20. 2 22.

B lackheath.

C 1st

Maidstone,

Goodburn

- C4th AD.

( 1979) VCH Kent

The M ount.

LPRIA s ite ( ? nucleated s ettlement) s ettlement. C Ist - C 4th AD. ( F2: AV, p otin).

I II

( 1932)

Webster ( 1975); VCH Kent I II ( 1932) - R oman n ucleated

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 2 23. Thenford, F laxlands. Wilson ( 1974) LPRIA enclosures - ER s ettlement/farmstead - LR villa . ( F2: AE). Reported a s " near B rackley" with Roman c oins f rom the s ite. On the boundary o f the S tudy Area. 2 24. Towcester. Lactodorum nucleated Late C lst - C4th AD. ( F2: AR, AE). M I25.

R CHM Northants I V ( 1982) s ettlement/extra-mural development.

2 25. Wood Burcote. R CHM Northants I V ( 1982) ER enclosure c omplex, kilns - Roman v illa ( ? mausoleum/temple a djacent). Mid C lst - C3rd AD. ( F2: AE). With Roman c oin f rom s ite: a lmost c ertainly this.

OXFORDSHIRE 2 26. Alchester, Wendlebury. Rowley ( 1975) Roman n ucleated s ettlement ( LPRIA enclosure c omplex adjacent). Mid C lst - C4th AD . ( F2: AE, AE/AR, AE). M 127. With Roman c oins f rom s ite: c ertainly this, but s pecific p rovenances lacking. 2 27. Dorchester-on-Thames, Dyke Hills. Rowley ( 1975) P RIA. Large d efended enclosure ( ? nucleated s ettlement). Roman s ite? Undated.

3 56

H ills, but the OS r ecord B ritish, a s well a s Roman a nd S axon c oins having b een f ound there during a gricultural o perations on the banks ( VCH Oxon I I, 1 907). Confusion w ith Roman s ettlement defences? 2 28.

North S toke,

Grim's Dyke.

B radley ( 1969); D . O. E. ( 1974)

P RIA earthwork. Not c losely dated. C : AV. ( F2: AV). 1 80. C oin supposedly f ound i n o r a t Dyke, r eliable and use o f name Grim's Dyke

but s ource may be uno ften indiscriminate.

S UFFOLK 2 29. Pakenham. R oman s ite. ? Clst ( F2: AR). M 131.

AD ;

Goodburn

( 1979)

Hope-Taylor

( 1947)

Grew

( 1981)

C 3rd - C4th AD.

S URREY 2 30. Coulsdon, E R farmstead. ( F2: potin).

S tow Lane, Hooley. M id C lst - C 2nd AD.

2 31. Dorking, Chalkpit Lane. R oadside s ettlement adjacent. S : AV. ( F2: AV). M 88.

C2nd AD onwards.

2 32. Frensham, The Manor. M . Millett ( Pers. C omm.) L PRIA/ER enclosure - R oman building? adjacent. C lst AD , p robably later. F l: AR. S USSEX 2 33. Bramber, B ramber Castle. R oman s ite beneath Medieval castle. C : AV.

VCH Sussex I II C4th AD.

( 1935)

2 34. Eastbourne, P ier, New Hall, e tc. VCH _ Sussex I II ( 1935) P robable Roman n ucleated s ettlement/substantial buildings ( Cemetery). C lst C4th AD. S , C: AV. ( F2: AV, A E, p otin). 1 499. 2 35. Fairlight, Hastings, C liff End . S pratling ( 1972) LPRIA/ER s ite. N FD . C : AV ( Beach). M 100. P otentially e roded f rom o verhanging c liffs where s ite i s l ocated. 2 36. Fishbourne, Chichester. Roman m ilitary s upply depot Mid C lst - late C 3rd AD . C : AV ( Barker C lose).

Cunliffe ( 1971) - Roman palace/villa adjacent.

3 57

2 37. S torrington, Kithurst Down. VCH S ussex I II ( 1935) LPRIA/Roman s ites. C lst - C4th AD. ( F2: AV). Most p robably manuring s catters, material dumped in p onds.

3 58

Appendix 5

Catalogue o f s tratified I ron A ge c oins and t heir a rchaeological c ontext

This a ppendix i s subdivided into two parts. S ection I c atalogues the s tratified c oins f rom the 1 5 s ites o r g roups o f s ites designated Key S ites ( Chapter 4 ), t ogether with o ther s ecurely p rovenanced f inds and a brief discussion o f t he nature o f the s ite a nd a rchaeological phasing o f a reas where c oins have b een f ound. For each s ite ( or part), the c ontexts y ielding c oins a re l isted i n b road c hronological s equence, a part f rom Harlow, Hayling I sland and Farley H eath f or which o nly broad details o f the phasing a re a vailable. I n S ection I I the r emaining s tratified c oins a re l isted a lphabetically by c ounty a nd s ite i n a s ingle n umerical s equence. Each c atalogue entry f or the s tandard f ormat:

s tratified c oins

1 .

C ontext

2 .

Nature,

3 .

I ron A ge c oin t ype(s),

4 .

A ssociated material.

5 .

D iscussion o r qualification where r equired.

f ollows a

number. dating a nd s tatus o f c ontext. i ncluding A llen t ype

o r Mack No.

F or t he K ey S ites, r eference t o publication o r the s ource o f information i s g iven a t t he head o f each subs ection. T he

f ollowing D r.

C a

NFD N /S P RIA

a bbreviations a re employed: D ressel Gallo-Belgic No f urther details N ot s pecified P re-Roman I ron A ge S amian P ublished

3 59

I .

Key

S ites

B EDFORDSHIRE

Odell.

Harrold P it

S ite Two

( OD).

Excavations 1 974-78. P ublication f orthcoming. C omm. S ee a lso Dix ( 1979; 1 980).

B . Dix,

P ers

An enclosed LPRIA s ettlement w ith c ircular s tructures was r e-established in a more o pen s ituation in the later C lst AD; a s uccession o f t imber-framed buildings f ollowed, ending w ith a large r ectangular f armhouse, probably not abandoned until the mid C4th AD. Two s mall c remation c emeteries a re datable t o the earlier C lst AD, o ne o f unurned c remations ( originally in s ome f orm o f perishable c ontainer) in p its w ith unburnt g oods i ncluding c opper a lloy brooches, p ig bones and p ottery. The o ther c emetery ( of urned c remations) was earlier: the p ottery i ncludes b oth usual and uncommon LPRIA types ( Thompson 1 982). Only partial

i nformation i s

available.

1 .

F 543. Layers 1 and 3 i n large p it. Early t o mid C lst AD. S econdary. 1 AE E 71.2 ( 1 4170) ( 3), 1 AE E 83.1 ( 1 4221) ( 1). Associations: 6 b rooches ( types N /S). An AE/AR T iberius was f ound c lose t o the mouth o f the p it in a later p lough-furrow .

2 .

F 328. B ottom o f p it. P robably mid C lst 1 AR E 83.2 ( M236). A ssociations: N /S.

3 .

F 468. Top l ayer ( 1) o f s mall p it. M id C 1st AD. 1 AE E 71.1 ( 1 4182). A ssociations: N /S.

4 .

F 20. F rom r ecutting o f enclosure d itch in west, Late C lst AD. S econdary. 1 AE E 71.2 ( 1 4179). A ssociations: a s V espasian.

5 .

F 765. Top layer ( 1) o f enclosure e ntrance half o f C lst AD. S econdary. 1 A E E 83.2 ( 1 4244). Associations: N /S.

6 .

F 129. Layer ( 2) o f deliberate infill o f l arge quarry p it. Late C lst - early C 2nd AD. S econdary. 1 A E E 71.2 ( 1 4174); 1 A E i llegible. A ssociations: N /S. A l arge quarry p it o riginally dug f or g ravel, u sed f or two inhumation burials; l ayer ( 2) was part o f the deliberate i nfill which c overed these.

7 .

F 400. I n r e-cut o f enclosure ditch, C 2nd AD. S econdary. 1 A E E 71.2 ( 1 4170). A ssociations: N /S. The enclosure ditch was many t imes r e-cut f rom the early C lst AD o nward.

3 60

AD .

S econdary?

S econdary.

layer

f eature.

( 2).

S econd

8 .

F 400. Cut a layer ( 1). I n l atest r e-cut d itch. C 2nd AD. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4249). Associations: N /S.

9 .

F 290. Upper f ill o f pit ( 1). Residual. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( 1 4230). Associations: N /S.

1 0.

A rea A . L evelling deposit C 3rd AD. S econdary. 1 AE/AV 1 /4 S E52.3 ( GB DA). I I, o therwise N /S.

( 1)

o f

enclosure

C2nd AD o r later.

on later

Associations:

farmstead 1 AE

s ite.

T etricus

1 1.

F 542. W ell, cutting C lst AD ditches, infilled in C4th AD . S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4248). Associations: 1 AE Barbarous Radiate ( e AD 2 70-290), o therwise N /S.

1 2.

F 868. Layer ( 1) f inal infilling o f S axon Well. S econdary. 1 AE E71.2 ( 1 4172). Associations: N /S. Unstrgtified c oin 1 AE E 83.2

3 61

P ost-Roman.

E SSEX

COLCHESTER COMPLEX

A .

( CO)

( Fig. A5:1)

S heepen. Excavations 1 930-9. P ublication: Hawkes a nd Hull Hull ( 1958). S ee a lso Haselgrove ( forthcoming a ).

( 1947);

A lthough the excavators' i nterpretation o f the s tratigraphy a nd their absolute chronology, based on the underlying a ssumption that the r ecorded s tratigraphy o f the S heepen Dyke r eflected s pecific h istorical events, can n ow be questioned, the s ystematic nature o f the published r eport p ermits much o f the detail about the c ontexts o f the Iron A ge coins t o be r econstructed. This does not, h owever, a lways extend to o ther i mportant c ategories o f a rtefacts ( e.g. D r.1B wine a mphorae), and i t i s a lmost impossible to r econstruct whole g roups. The coins o f Regions R egion

f ound i n 1 930-9 a re s et o ut using the f ramework a nd P eriods a dopted by Hawkes and Hull.

I

This a rea, encompassing the main S heepen ditch and entrance, a lso c ontained s everal f eatures interpreted a s ' occupation s ites', both l arge depressions a nd s maller ' hut s ites', t ogether w ith r ubbish p its and t wo w ells. The r egion was s ubdivided i nto t he extensively excavated S ite F , and S ite H , i nvestigated by l inear t renching. A fter a b reak in a ctivity, the large Roman T emple building w ith i ts p olygonal enclosure wall was e rected a t the end o f the C lst AD s ealing s ome earlier S ite H deposits. The excavators' o bservation that early activity was g reatest in Region I which yielded the main c oncentration o f imported A rretine a nd D r.1B amphorae a t S heepen, is s upported by the a nalysis o f the coins. ( a)

Area o f L arge Temple

1

S ealed layer under z ellu , make up. P eriod 4 . P rimary? 1 AE E 71.2 ( M173). Assocations: P eriod 4 p ottery, 1 a s C laudius I . P eriod 6 o ccupation i n the S W c orner o f the Temple t emenos y ielded AE c oins o f C laudius ( 2) and Caligula, a f urther a s was s tratified under the T emenos wall.

2

C ella Make-up. Late F lavian deposit. S econdary. 1 AE E 81 ( M257A), 3 AE E 82.1 ( M229, 2 31, 2 33), 1 A E E 83.1 ( M247; f ound w ith an az C laudius I , c opy g rade 1 ) a nd 1 AE E 82.2 ( M251). Associations: C laudian pottery, i ncluding TS f orms 2 7, 2 9, R 1 2, a f ragment o f yellow-green g lass, e tc. The record i s c onfused: in the o riginal r eport, o nly the as o f Claudius mentioned, but Hull ( 1958,227) c ontradicts this c iting the c oins f rom t his make-up d eposit a s " 4 B ritish,

3 62

COLCHESTER

S heepen 4 5

4 9

. . . .. . . . . . 4 8

.••

L exden I

• . . . %

. . •"

. ..

. • . . 50... .. *

. •

. • • • • . * •. *

1

1

2

Km

G osbecks 4 7

Q

9

. •

. . . . .• . •

•

• •

Roman

R ive,

6 5 SHEEPEN R EG IONS

C eme te ry

5 0

0

5 0

1 00

F ig. A 5:1 C olchester: l ocation o f s ites w ith I ron A ge c oin f inds ( Inset: S heepen).

3 63

two

a sses

o f Domitian a nd a third i llegible".

Unstratified c oins

f rom the l arge t emple B ritish 1 AE E 81 5 AE E 82.1 1 AE E 83.1 8 AE E 82.2 Total: 1 5 A lthough P eriod 4 and later deposits were disturbed by the Temple's f oundation trenches and s ecuring make-up f or i t, the possibility that c oins were s till being deposited after i ts c onstruction cannot be r uled o ut. ( b)

3 .

Area t o

s outh o f large T emple

S ealed o ccupation deposit o utside S outh Wall o f T emple. NFD . P eriod 1 . P rimary? 1 AE i llegible. P resumably o ne o f t he indeterminate patches with P eriod 1 p ottery o nly. ( c)

Coins

f ound e lsewhere i n R egion

1

4 .

S ealed o ccupation layer o ver f loor s urface and c lay hearth interpreted a s a dwelling a rea ( F11). P eriod 1 . S econdary. 1 A E/AV NE71.2 ( KBQ). A ssocations: indigenous f abrics p redominate. S ome T S, mainly Arretine; much GB ware.

5 .

Ditch I , g ravel l oam t ip a ssociated with i ts i nfilling. P eriod 2 . S econdary. ( 1 AE E 82.2, M 251). Associations: i ndigenous fabrics; s ome TS, mainly Arretine; much GB ware. The excavators a ssumed this deposit derived f rom the a companying rampart ( see CO22). The c oin i tself s urvived o nly a s an impression i n the c lay f ill.

6 .

Occupation over Ditch 1 . A lmost c ertainly r edeposited f rom elsewhere? P eriod 3 . S econdary? 1 AE i llegible. Associations: S outh Gaulish TS, A rretine, GB s eries i ncludes C laudian f orms. B eakers e specially plentiful ( Forms 1 12-3). I ndigenous f abrics s till a bundant.

7 .

Bottom o f P it H 20. P eriod 3 . S econdary. 1 AE E 83.1 ( M221). A ssociations: mainly i ndigenous fabrics, but a lso T E Form 29. P it 6 ft deep, cut by two P eriod 4 p its ( H21, 2 2), which disturbed the upper f ill o nly . S ealed o ccupation l ayer o ver f loor s urface o f large ' oval dwelling' ( F 1 5). P eriod ( 1-)4. S econdary . 1 A E E 81 ( M232); 1 A E E 82.1 ( M230). Associations: indigenous f abrics, Arretine s tamps LEPIDI and M PS a nd g raphitic wares. The excavators interpreted this d eposit as accumulating c ontinuously f rom P eriod 1 , based o n increasing p roportion o f l ater material. The p osition o f the coins i s n ot r ecorded. The f eature i s s ealed by a P eriod 6 deposit.

3 64

9 .

Upper f illing o f Well H2. P eriod ( 3-)4. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M250). Associations: N /S. An untimbered w ell which p roduced " a g reat preponderance o f material o f P eriod 4 ", pottery, t ile.

1 0.

G ravel f loor/ make-up over Ditch 1 . P eriod 4 . P rimary? 1 AE I llegible. Associations: S outh Gaulish TS, s ome GB wares; a lso i ndigenous fabrics. The position o f the c oin i s not s pecified, but the g ravel i s described a s c lean, rather l oose, make-up with o ccupation c onfined t o two ' hut s ites' s uggesting that the c oin was p robably in s itu o n the s urface.

1 1.

S ealed make-up layer over ' floor s urface' o f large ' occupation s ite' ( F9). P eriod 4 . S econdary? 1 AR E 81 ( M255). Associations: P eriod 4 p ottery. The c oin came f rom the upper l evel with the P eriod 4 material in what was o therwise c onsidered to be a P eriod 3 f eature. The f loor s urface had Arretine and S outh Gaulish T S trodden i n, while l ower in the o ccupation layer was a m ould-pressed marbled dish and a bronze c rest-holder f rom a Roman helmet.

1 2.

S ealed make-up layer o ver f loor s urface o f large ' occupation' s ite ( F9). P eriod 4 . S econdary. 2 AE I llegible. Associations: P eriod 4 pottery. C lay introduced to l evel the ' floor surface' where i t had s ubsided i nto an underlying p it ( F4). The f loor yielded many indigenous and Roman fabrics including Koan a nd S outh S panish a mphora sherds.

1 3.

S ealed ' occupation' o ver s econd f loor s urface in ' occupation s ite' ( F13). P eriod 4 . S econdary? 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230). Associations: P eriod 4 pottery. This f eature was c onsidered to have been r efloored with l oam o ver the P eriod 1 -3 o ccupation deposit which had a ccumulated i n t he hollow.

1 4.

T op f ill o f a large, n early c ircular p it ( F1). Only partially excavated. P eriod 4 . S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230). Associations: P eriod 4 p ottery. L ower l ayers c ontained much o ccupation r efuse including bone, o yster, w ood c harcoal ( oak, hazel), daub , c lay l oomw eights, t ile; c opper a lloy Colchester brooch ( Var.IIIa).

1 5.

Mouth o f P it F l. P eriod 4 . S econdary? ( See C014) 2 AE B elgic Gaul Scheers No.216. P resumably l ost A ssociations: a s above. T op f ill o f p it s pread beyond i ts edges.

1 6.

t ogether?

F ill o f p it F 10. P eriod 4 . ( Period 1 in c oin l ist). S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4251). Associations: P eriod 4 pottery, s tamp C S E T o n A rretine L oeschke 2 ( considered r esidual), c lay l oom-weights, daub, Roman t ile a nd ' native brick f ragments', wood a nd charcoal; animal bone; i ron nails and latch-lifters; furnace c lay and s lag; briquetage; and c opper a lloy T histle brooch ( Class A ) in f ragments.

3 65

1 7.

S ealed deposit i n c entre o f Area H . P eriod ( 4-)6. P rimary? ( See C018). 1 A E E 82.1 ( M231), 1 AE E 82.2 ( M251), 1 AE I llegible. Associations: N /S. An o ccupation deposit o ver probable P eriod 4 metalling, s ealed in P eriod 6 . Coins p otentially in s itu, but c ould be r edeposited.

1 8.

Gravelly l oam s pread in Area H . P eriod ( 4-)6. P rimary? ( See C017) 1 AE E 82.2 ( M251), 2 AE I llegible. A ssociations* N /S. P atch o f p robable P eriod 4 metalling s ealed by P eriod 6 r emetalling. L oam p ossibly r edeposited f rom a rea o f e arlier o ccupation .

1 9.

No details 1 AE E 82.1 S ee

o f c ontext. ( M230).

P eriod 6 .

a lso C080.

Unstratified T emple

c oins

f rom Region

1 o utside

C ontinental 1 A E B elgic Gaul ( Scheers No.216) 1 AR Eastern Gaul ( DLT 8 178)

Total:

2

Total:

Area

o f

large

B ritish 1 AR S W61/71 1 AE S E71.1 3 AE E 82.1 6 AE E 82.2 2 AE E 83.2 ( 1 n ot i n Camulodunum) 1 2 AE I lleg ble 2 5

C onvincing s tructural evidence r elating t o a ctivity i n the S E o f R egion 1 before the erection o f the T emple i s lacking. Many f eatures r egarded a s dwelling a reas by the excavators a re p robably b etter interpreted a s quarry s coops w ithin which o ccupation r efuse was l ater dumped, s ometimes o ver a c onsiderable p eriod o f t ime, but m uch o f i t i n the c ourse l evelling the s ite in the Roman period.

R egion This a rea outside the main S heepen d itch a nd entrance was investigated a long the l ine o f the b y-pass. A s ingle long t rench east o f this, s howed o nly evidence o f extensive c lay d igging o f F lavian o r later date. A l imited number o f d itches, ' occupation s ites', hollows and a futher s ection o f t he S heepen d itch were excavated i n the main a rea ( E). I n the Roman p eriod, the a rea was t raversed by a m eandering f eature i nterpreted a s an a queduct b ringing water t o the main s ite, a lthough N iblett ( 1985) has n ow challenged this interpretation a nd s uggested that i t may i nstead be a nother palisade s lot. The 1 970 excavations c onfirmed that i t does indeed out through the S heepen dyke. T o a c ertain extent, the Region 2 deposits r eflect the early material o f the adjacent Region 1 , but must have been well r emoved f rom the s ource o f this material. There was l ittle Roman a ctivity a fter P eriod 4 .

3 66

2 0.

S ealed o ccupation layer o ver f loor surface in c ircular hollow ( E2). P eriod 3 . S econdary. 1 AE I llegible. A ssociations: ' typical' P eriod 3 p ottery.

2 1.

F ill o f D itch E 3 ( ' Aqueduct'), o riginally t imber-lined and deliberately i nfilled with g ravel, with pockets o f o ccupation material. P eriod 3 . S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4250). Associations: N /S. The o ccupation dumps c ontained P eriod 3 pottery and an Arretine bowl. Unstratified c oins f rom Region 2 1 A E E 82.2 1 A E I llegible T otal: 2 Region 3 This a rea s outh o f Region 2 , r ises s teadily f rom North to S outh. I t i s t raversed by the S heepen ditch and the P eriod 5 ditch r unning parallel to i t. The f ormer was r eused by Roman r oad surfaces a longside which were gullies and p ostholes i nterpreted a s the r emains o f t imber buildings. This a rea, A , o ne o f three s ubdivisions o f the r egion, c onsisted o f a rea excavations A l, A2, A4, c omplemented by extensive t renching. The o thers were the north parts o f B ( an a rea e xcavation j ust inside a nd o ver the S heepen ditch t o the s outh) and C ( a t rench which, l ike B c ontinued s outh i nto Region 5 ). Apart f rom D itch 1 , i s lacking. The equipment in t he n oteworthy.

c lear evidence o f p re-conquest a ctivity c oncentration o f Neronian m ilitary P eriod 6 ( destruction) deposits i s

2 2.

Ditch 1 f ill s ealed by the f irst Roman r oadway. P eriod 2 . S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4246), 1 AE E 81/2?, 1 AE I llegible. General a ssociations: a s C laudius I . Two c oins were f ound a t a depth o f e 5 ft, the o ther a t 3 ft. I f t he s ource o f the i nfilling material, i ncluding the I ron A ge coins, was s olely a n a ccompanying bank ( its existence i s n ot p roven) this s uggests a TPQ f or i ts c onstruction much c loser t o the Roman c onquest than the excavators a llowed. S ee a lso C05.

2 3.

S ealed o ccupation deposit o ver D itch 1 by the entrance. P eriod ( 3-)4. S econdary . 1 AE E 81 ( 1 4223), 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4260). A ssociations: " appropriate" p ottery. The P eriod 4 layers y ielded an a s C laudius I and 6 s ix-coil s piral f inger r ings.

2 4.

S ealed o ccupation deposit o ver D itch 1 s outh o f the entrance. P eriod ( 3-)4. S econdary. 8 AE i llegible, 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4246). Associations: S outh Gaulish T S, early C laudian p ottery; a s Caligula. A deposit o f black matter, c learly o riginating e lsewhere. An a s Augustus was a lso f ound i n this g eneral deposit.

3 67

2 5.

I nfilling o f Ditch 1 , S W o f entrance ( Section 3 1). P eriod 4 . S econdary. 1 AR E 82.1 ( M215), 1 A E E 81 ( M222). Associations: P eriod 4 pottery, Arretine s tamp CR.... a nd copper a lloy T histle brooch. B oth c oins came f rom a ' laid' deposit o f l oamy s and, 1 8" thick.

2 6.

I nfilling o f Ditch 1 ( Section 3 1). P eriod 4 . S econdary. 1 AR E 83. 2 ( M238). A ssociations: P eriod 4 p ottery, c opper a lloy Colchester B rooch. One o f the a lternating l oamy s and and o ccupation deposits in the ditch f ill, o verlying N o 2 5.

27.

S ealed dump o f o ccupation material up t o 2 ft thick o ver c lay f loor s urface, i n turn overlying Ditch 1 ( Section 3 2). P eriod ( 3-)4. S econdary? 1 AE i llegible. Associations: " Typical" P eriod 3 p ottery. The f loor c ontained a dupondius Claudius I . There w ere no s tructural r emains.

2 8.

Qn upper c lay hut f loor s urface established over D itch 1 ( Section 3 2). P eriod 4 . P rimary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M231), 2 AE E 82.2 ( M225, 2 50), 1 A E E 83.2 ( M246), 1 AE i llegible. A ssociations: Copper a lloy T histle B rooch ( Claudian), Langton Down brooch, Aucissa b rooch; unstruck AE f lan; P eriod 4 p ottery. An o val hut f loor w ith p ost hole 2 f t d eep, p ossibly a working a rea, s ealed by a ccumulated o ccupation d eposit.

29.

S urface a ssociated w ith p ost h ole r evetment running a long edge o f Road 2 . P eriod 4 . P rimary? ( Site A l). 1 AE S E72.1 ( M278). A ssociations: P eriod 4 pottery ; 1 AE Julio - Claudian. One r evetment p ost hole yielded a C olchester b rooch, another a moulded d isc b rooch. The s tructure i s i nterpreted a s destroyed in P eriod 5 .

3 0.

S urface o f Road 2 , S ite A l. P eriod 4 . P rimary? 3 AE E 83.2 ( M244, 2 46(2)). Lost t ogether? The read s urface c ontained an a s Caligula, the a ccompanying d itch a s estertius and a s Caligula a nd a n a s C laudius, w ith a denarius P .Fonteius Capito over the ditch . The I ron Age c oins were s ealed b eneath a P eriod 5 destruction l ayer, but c ould have worked their way down through i t t o t he hard metalling below.

3 1.

B ottom o f p it AS. P eriod 4 . S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230). Associations: sherds f rom a m osaic g lass bowl and a pale b lue f lask. The p it was 6 ft d eep and was backfilled w ith o ccupation and destruction material into which later o ccupation material had s ubsided o r been i ntroduced a s make-up ( Period 6 ). A c omplete bronze p atera, s tamped P . CIPI P OLYBI o f m id C lst AD date, was r ecovered f rom the pit edge.

3 2.

Fill o f pit A l2. P eriod 4 . S econdary. 2 AE E 82.1 ( M230), 1 AE E 83.2 ( M248) Associations: P eriod 4 p ottery; a s Caligula, az Claudius I o rthodox; a c onvex black g lass gaming c ounter; s even c opper a lloy b rooches ( 2 Colchester, Nauheim d erivative, Hod Hill c lass D ,

3 68

P enannular C lass A , enamelled p late b rooch and p late brooch w ith f an tail). P it presumably f illed with o ccupation r efuse; n o earlier c ontexts disturbed. 3 3.

T imber s tructure?, S ite A l, o r destruction deposit o ver i t ( more l ikely). P eriod ( 4-)5. S econdary. 1 AR E 83.2 ( M-), 1 AE E 82.1 ( 1 4230), 4 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4225, 2 50, ( 2), 2 51), 1 AE E 83.1 ( M221), 2 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4242), 1 AE E 81/3, 4 AE I llegible. S pecific c ontexts and a ssociations: N /S. M ost o f the c oins p resumably came f rom the thick destruction deposit c overing the a rea. The post holes and gullies w ere i nterpreted a s a t imber s tructure built o n an a rtificially l evelled natural s and s urface which c ontained 2 a sses Claudius I , and Claudian brooches. S outh Gaulish T S w ith a l ittle GB pottery, o ther indigenous and Roman f abrics, g lass, brooches, s lag, t iles, i ron nails, daub, l inch-pins, t errets, and a tankard handle were a ll r ecovered f rom the o verlying d estruction deposit.

3 4.

D itch o f Road 2 , o ver Ditch 1 n ear S ection 43. P eriod ( 4-) 6 . S econdary. 1 AE I llegible. Associations: N /S. D rainage ditch i n c entre o f r oadway, backfilled w ith o ccupation material.

3 5.

Large o val p it ( Site A3) over D itch 2 . P eriod 6 . S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M250). Associations: 3 brooches ( Thistle C lass B , S pade brooch, enamelled p late brooch), t ile, daub, i ron l atch-lifter, nails, GB and Romanised c oarse ware, Arretine s tamped XANTI and a l ist o f T S p latter f orms c omparable t o the B oudiccan s hop i n the Colonia, a s well a s early S outh Gaulish, including a c omplete T iberian bowl mended w ith l ead r ivets. C learly o ccupation r efuse with a n extensive catchment.

3 6.

F ill o f S ite A 4. P eriod 6 . S econdary. 1 AE E 71.2 ( 1 4179), 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4253). Associations: s ix b rooches ( Colchester, Nauheim derivative, Thistle C lass B , H od H ill, Hod H ill C lass B , P late); Roman military e quipment ( mountings, helmet f ittings, a rmour); s lag ( iron a nd bronze), nails, s tuds; AR denarius C laudius; range o f g lass f orms; p ottery mainly P eriod 4 , but s ome P eriod 6 ; S outh Gaulish T S pre-Claudian - Claudian. P ear-shaped h ollow f illed w ith debris f rom metal-working s ite e tc. Unstratified C oins

T otal:

f rom Region 3 . 1 AR S E61 1 AR EA73.2 1 AE E 71.2 7 AE E 82.1 1 1 AE E 82.2 9 AE I llegible 3 0

R egion 4 This r egion c onsisted o f two a reas: L , immediately a djoining Region 3 o n the East, investigated by extensive t renching, and D , t o the east a gain, investigated by two

3 69

l inear t renches, and a small a rea excavation, D l. The Region s lopes downhill t o the North and the East, but most o f i t i s l ow-lying. L i s traversed by the same Roman r oad a s Region 3 ; o ther excavated f eatures c onsisted o f s everal pits; Roman pottery kilns and 2 wells. Immediately S E o f Region 1 , Region 4 yielded the next largest c ollection o f early material. A further a rea excavation took place in a rea L i n 1 970 ( below). 3 7.

P it D9, bottom. P eriod 1 . S econdary? 1 0 AE E 82.1 ( M230 ( 9), 2 31). S ee Hoard

1 0.

3 8.

P it D 14. P eriod 1 ? S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230). A ssociations: N /S. I f the c oin t icket i s c orrect, this c oin was omitted f rom Camulodunum. I t was accessioned in 1 931 and s o o ught to b e a f ind f rom the 1 930 s eason when Area D was excavated. The timber-lined p it c ontained a r ich P eriod 1 r efuse d eposit, including 4 b rooches ( Colchester, Thistles C lass A and C , Langton Down); A rretine s tamps FONT and XANTI; Arretine, GB and much i ndigenous p ottery; a f ragment f rom a p ale b lue monochrome g lass bowl.

3 9.

Lip o f P it L 39. S econdary? 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230). 3 material.

Not No

c ertainly

s tratified.

a ssociations.

P it

P eriod

c ontained

3 ?

P eriod

40.

P it D l B ottom. P eriod 4 . S econdary? 1 AE i llegible. A r ectangular c lay-lined p it which c ontained P eriod 4 material in the p rimary f ill, P eriod 6 material i n the s econdary f ill. J oining P eriod 4 s herds f rom P its D 1, D2, ( and s ite D 1), c onfirm that t his f ill r epresents r edeposited s econdary r efuse.

4 1.

P it D l. P eriod ( 4-)6? S econdary? 1 AE E 82.1 ( M224). Associations: N /S. I f the c oin t icket i s c orrect, another c oin omitted f rom Camulodunum. S ee C040 f or l ower f ill o f P it. U pper f ill contained P eriod 6 p ottery, a l arge c rucible and b riquetage f ragments, a lso 2 b rooches ( Colchester, C ruciform p late brooch).

42.

Occupation r efuse in P it L 17 o ver c lay s urface. P eriod 4 . S econdary. 1 AE i llegible. Associations: P eriod 4 p ottery. P it w ith c lay f loor interpreted a s a ' hut o f native type' in which o ccupation r efuse a ccumulated . Likely to be s econdary use?

43.

Roadway in T rench L 8, 2 0'-40' a t 2 '8". P eriod 4 ? P rimary? 1 AE E 82.2 ( M253). A ssociations: N /S. Roadway i s s ealed by P eriod 6 g ravel. Yet another c oin omitted f rom Camulodunum. T he c oin, a lthough n ot a ccessioned until 1 947, was f ound i n 1 938, s o the label i s c onsistent.

44.

P it L 7. Late P eriod 4 ? 3 AE i llegible.

S econdary.

3 70

Main f illing o f p it c ontained 2 c oins o f T iberius ( one dupondius, o ne a s), much burnt debris, o yster s hells and typical l ist o f Neronian pottery; a lso a deep bowl with i ncised l ines. The p it, dug a s a quarry f or sand, i s cut i nto the r oadway, and would have r estricted c ontinuing t raffic t o under 4 ft w idth. 4 5.

F ill o f P it D4. P eriod 6 . S econdary. 1 AR E83.2 ( M ). Associated with Romanised a ssemblage. Only partially excavated by s lit trench; the pit was a pparently s ealed by a g ravel layer, o ver which was F lavian material, including metalworking debris.

4 6.

F ill o f dish-shaped hollow f eature, S ite D l. F lavian. S econdary. 2 AE E82.1 ( M230, 2 31), 1 AE i llegible. Associations: mid t o late F lavian p ottery with r esidual material; TS " Claudian a t earliest"; late GB f orms; Romanised g rey and buff wares. O ther f inds: 5 g lass gaming c ounters, a blue g lass r ing-bezel; brooches including C olchesters, a " spill o f hard m ortar"; a n a s C laudius. The f eature cut P its D ia, D 1, D2 ( See C040), the i llegible AE c oming f rom the l ip o f D ia which c ontained a Langton Down brooch. There i s l ittle s upport f or t he excavators' a ssertion that there was a P eriod 1 s ite o f i mportance here. Unstratified c oins f rom Region 4 . 1 AE/AV N E61.2 1 AR E 61.3 1 AR EA72.2 1 AE S E72.1 1 AR E 81 4 A E E 82.1 ( 1 1 958 in p its 3 A E E 82.2 ( 1 AE E 83.2 5 AE I llegible T otal: 1 8 The number R egion

o f

s tratified AE E 82.1

o n N ew T ech.

c oins

C oll.

i s unusually

s ite)

h igh .

5

This r egion c overed the top o f S heepen H ill and i ts s outhern s lope. W ithin i t, the S heepen Ditch ( 1), makes i ts j unction w ith D itch 1 B ( to f orm an o riginal S W entrance to the s ite) a nd w ith D itch 1 A, a l ater addition. The a rea i s t raversed a lso by Ditch 2 , which cuts D itch 1 j ust n orth o f the entrance, a nd i ts a ccompanying palisade t rench with i ts o wn entrance, r elated t o which i s a Roman r oadway running n orth t owards R egions 3 and 1 . A number o f o ther gullies were a lso excavated, t ogether w ith p its, l ater f eatures including k ilns a nd i nhumation burials, a w ell, and three p robable c lay q uarry p its. The r egion was excavated f rom 1 932-34 a nd a gain i n 1 939; i t takes in t he s outhern p ortions o f B a nd C , which f inished i n an a rea excavation over Ditches 1B a nd 2 . The central part o f the region was discontinuously c overed by Areas G , Y and Z a nd a ssociated t renching. Early material i s r elatively rare.

3 71

47.

Occupation r efuse " just above" f loor s urface apparently a ssociated with r ectilinear s tructure o f l arge parallel beam gullies ( Site Y 1) P eriod 1 . S econdary? 1 AE E 82.1 ( 1 . 1233). Associated with t he s urface were TN a nd TR, and o ther Roman/indigenous f abrics, t ogether with 2 c opper a lloy Langton Down brooches. The g ullies yielded c omparable material. I f this was a building, i t was p resumably a ssociated with the N-S R oman r oadway to w hich the gullies r un parallel; i .e. later than P eriod 1 .

48.

F ill o f Ditch 1 a t and o pposite S .W . entrance, c 6 ' P eriod ( 2-)3 S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M260). Associations: N /S. The c oin came f rom dump o f dark s and o verlying the basal deposits. Could b e earlier.

49.

F ill o f D itch 1 ( south o f S ection 69 , c 6 '). P eriod S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M253). S imilar c ircumstances t o C048.

5 0.

F ill o f D itch 1 A ( Section 7 2, c 5 '). P eriod ( 2-)3? S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 . 1246). A ssociations: N /S. The d itch was d ated t o the end o f P eriod I o n the absence o f p rimary s ilt. Bulk o f f ill sandy o r earth u p to a high l evel, i nterleaving w ith dumps o f P eriod 4 o ccupation debris. " At a l ow l evel j ust S outh-West o f S ection 7 3 a c oin o f C laudius was r ecovered f rom the d itch t erminal". I t i s c lear that the ditch f ill c ould w ell be l ater than t he excavators' b racket, a lthough i t i s c ut by s everal P eriod 4 p its.

5 1.

T ile-clamp l evel i n Ditch 1 B ( Section 8 1). P eriod 4 . S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M243). Associated w ith dense s tratum o f woodash and mass o f Roman t iles a nd wasters. Burning s uggests that they w ere made in s itu, therefore in a c lamp. Whole a ssociated with typically P eriod 4 p ottery. E lsewhere p rimary s ilt o f Ditch I B yielded Colchester brooch; in S ection 7 5, a denarius was f ound i n the f ill a nd in S ection 7 6, t en f ragments o f baked c lay s lab moulds.

5 2.

F ill o f C lay P it 1 . P eriod 6 o r l ater? S econdary . 1 AE E 82.1 ( M224), 1 AE i llegible. A ssociations: a s Caligula, dupondius C laudius ( Antonia) o rthodox ( prob . AD 4 1); three c opper a lloy brooches ( Nauheim derivative, Thistle, H od H ill C lass B ); mainly P eriod 4 pottery, s ome P eriod 6 . P its dug a s c lay quarries, backfilled w ith o ccupation r efuse?

5 3.

F ill o f C lay P it 2 . P eriod 6 o r l ater ? S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 . 1242). Associations: a s C laudius o rthodox ( prob. AD 4 1); c opper a lloy brooch Colchester derivative late C lst AD; p ottery a s C052.

5 4.

Fill o f C lay P it 3 . P eriod 6 o r l ater? S econdary. 2 AE E 83.2 ( M242). Associations: s ix c opper a lloy brooches ( 2 Nauheim derivative, 1 Thistle Class A , 2 Thistle ( Claudian), 1 Langton Down). P ottery a s C052. This f eature

3 72

( 2-)

3 .

cuts through D itches 1 , 2 a nd the palisade, making interpretation a s a c lay p it s omewhat p roblematic.

i ts

5 5.

Fill o f P it G3/Z4. P eriod 6 . S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M226), 1 AE E 82.2 ( M253). A ssociations: 2 c opper a lloy b rooches ( Colchester, Aucissa); c opper a lloy horse f itting; Roman c ooking p ot, abraded s herds o f i ndigenous fabric. The f eature, an e longated rubbish p it, cuts Ditch 1 B a nd was dated by i ts r esemblance to Z l.

5 6.

F ill o f P it G4. P eriod 6 o r earlier? S econdary . 1 AE E82.2 ( M250). Associations: a t bottom o f pit were 4 c rumpled a nd battered Roman i ron s words. O therwise o ccupation r efuse including i ndigenous/Roman f abrics, eg. a Neronian bowl. P it cuts Ditch 1 A, s ealed by t opsoil.

5 7.

F ill o f P it G7. P eriod 6 o r later. S econdary. 1 AE E82.2 ( M253). Associations: decorated S outh Gaulish TS, painted g lass bowl f ragment, 2 c opper a lloy brooches ( 1 C olchester derivative, later C lst AD, 1 P enannular Class B ), a pair o f p lain wire ear-rings, o ne w ith s ilver braid; high f requency o f p ottery f orms which o nly become f requent i n the Roman p eriod. P it cuts Ditch 2 and palisade, f illed w ith o ccupation debris.

5 8.

F ill o f D itch/Pit Z l. P eriod 6 . S econdary. 2 A E E 82.2 ( M250, 2 53). A ssociations: denarius Marcus Antonius, 4 a sses Caligula, 1 AE Roman i llegible, f ragment o f plain blue-green g lass f lask; s crappy p ottery. E longated t rench back-filled with s and a nd much burnt material. Unstratified 1 AE 1 A E 1 A E 3 A E 1 AE ( 5 AE T otal: 1 2

C oins f rom Region 5 . S E72.1 E 71.2 E 82.1 E 82.2 E 83.2 i llegible)

Region 6 This r egion c overs the r emainder o f the east s lope o f S heepen H ill, D itch 2 and i ts palisade s ystem c rosses the s ite f rom S W t o N E. The r egion was excavated 1 938-9 , by s lit trenches, o ccasionally w idened f or s pecific f eatures. The s ubdivisions u sed were K r epresenting the s outhern twothirds, w ith L c ontinuing f rom the North . Among the f eatures was the c orner o f a p ossible palisade enclosure, p its. A c oncentration o f metal-working debris, i ncluding baked c lay s lab moulds i n P it K3 gave r ise t o the s uggestion that t his a rea had b een the s ite o f a mint. A s in Region 5 t he g eneral lack o f early imported p ottery, e tc., i s n oteworthy and has implications f or the dating o f the metalworking o peration, the debris o f which i s a ny way f rom a P eriod 3 p it.

3 73

5 9.

Occupation layer o r dump, S ite L 2. P eriod 1 ? Secondary. 1 AE 5E72.1 (LX25). A ssociations: c opper a lloy brooch ( La TAne I I/Colchester hybrid); i ron latch l ifter o f indigenous type; abundant p ottery o f indigenous f orm/fabric. One o f a c omplex o f s coops and p its in the NW o f the Region; cut by palisade enclosure, but dating based on absence o f imports. S ee C060.

60.

Fill o f P it L42. P eriod 1 ? S econdary . 1 AE i llegible. Associations: P eriod 1 pottery. P it had a homogenous sandy f illing, with no s ign o ccupation r efuse. Dating inferential and based a ssociation in c omplex, o f. C059.

6 1.

Context g iven a s P eriod ? 1?, 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230).

but

o f on

no details

Unstratified c oins f rom Region 6 1 AE 5 E72.1 3 AE i llegible Total: 4 Apart f rom the s lab-mould f ragments, P it K3 c ontained c rucible f ragments, f urnace c lay, f ragments o f bronze and s lag. P ottery c onsisted o f indigenous a nd Roman f orms/ fabrics a nd GB wares which date the deposit to P eriod 3 ". P it K2 o f s imilar f orm, had a c omparable f ill. F our pits further east had n othing s uggestive of " mint remains". Temple p recinct Excavations

t o the North-east

1 959-61.

o f Region

1 .

Unpublished.

This p recinct c ontained a pair o f T emples w ithin i ts walled enclosure, o n the n orth s ide o f the By-pass. The l arger Temple 4 had three phases; the f irst destroyed by f ire and interpreted a s Boudiccan ( Crummy, 1 980) n ot n ecessarily correctly. 6 2.

P it 8 in west c orner o f Cella o f T emple 4 . No date g iven. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M252). Associations: N /S. Context not c omprehensible. " Pit 8 .. cut through 3 3 bottom o f 3 2 o n c obbles J /8/9 c ellar D4'W8"N12/3" ( sic). I t does n ot a ppear o n p lan ( Crummy, 1 980) and s hould thus be s ealed beneath the c lay f loor o f the f irst phase o f the Temple, i .e. P eriod I -1V . Sheepen.

S outh-east

Excavations

1 970 and

o f

S heepen Farm.

1 971.

N iblett

( 1985).

In 1 970, a n extensive a rea excavation was carried out largely within Region 4 , a rea L . Apparently a n i ndustrial a rea f or the l egionary f ortress and s ubsequent c ivilian s ettlement. Erosion a llowed preservation o f o nly a f ew s tructures; l ines o f r ectangular timber s tructures with c lay and g ravel f loors ( cf. 1 930-9) behind which was a z one o f p its y ielding i tems o f military equipment, p ottery largely o f native character, large quantities o f

3 74

metalworking d ebris ( slag, f urnace material, c rucibles, s crap m etal) a s well a s a bronze i ngot and a bronze die, f or s tamping phalerae. The date range was p re-conquest t o Neronian ( Boudiccan destruction) when the s ite was destroyed ( cf. Hawkes and Hull 1 947). Occupation c ontinued on a l imited s cale until the f inal quarter o f the C lst AD . Only 4 s mall p its were a ssigned to the pre-Conquest period. S herds f rom a t l east 5 Dressel 1 amphorae ( 4%) were a lmost c ertainly r esidual; the Dressel 2 -4 f orm dominates ( 33%) f ollowed by Dressel 2 0, Rhodian and S outh S panish types ( each 1 6%) ( Sealey, 1 985). The p re-Roman c oarse pottery a ssemblage i s c losely c omparable with the latest preConquest o ccupation phase a t S keleton Green ( Period I iv, c AD 3 0-40). This a ccords with the suggestion in the text, based o n the I ron A ge c oin f inds ( cf. Haselgrove, f orthcoming a ) that o ccupation in Regions 3 and 4L c ommenced o nly i n the late T iberian period, r epresenting a s ignificant s hift i n the f ocus o f o ccupation a t S heepen. Apart f rom the r ecognition o f s pecifically Neronian deposits ( Period I Vb), the 1 970 phasing f ollows that o f Hawkes a nd Hull. On s ite i ii was one o f 3 r ectilinear v erandah buildings f ronting the r oad t raversing the a rea, e vidently c onstructed early in the p ost-Conquest p eriod, i n R oman s tyle. On s ite i , a t imber-lined c ellar belonging t o a building o therwise c ompletely weathered away, emphasises h ow much e vidence has p robably been l ost to e rosion even o n t he f lat a reas o f the s ite. Two shallow, t imber-framed f eatures, s imilar t o Hawkes and Hull's Well 1 , were p robably R oman l atrines; they too were p robably o riginally s urrounded by t imber s tructures. F ourteen burials belonging t o a p reviously unsuspected i nhumation c emetery dating to the later C3rd-C4th AD were a lso f ound, two o f them with c oins r esidual i n the g rave f ills. S ixteen c ontexts y ielded I ron A ge c oins:1 970

S ite i

63.

F 149/284 ( 2). F ill o f p it. P eriod I V S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M251). A ssociations: c oarse pottery f orms Cam 1 13, 246, 2 58. C olchester ware mortarium, C 2nd AD ( ?intrusive); minute s craps o f c opper a lloy.

64.

F 136 ( 2). F ill o f ? latrine. P eriod I V. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M260). A ssociations: T S Claudian ( 7 vessels) C laudian/Neronian ( 9 v essels); 1 vessel ? pre-Claudian; S tamp T ... ( pre-Flavian). G E wares Claudian. S tamp RELSAN. m ortarium c AD 2 0-55. Lyon Ware c up. Amphora f orms Dr.2/4, Cam 1 84, Haltern 7 0, D r.20 ( pre-Claudian). C oarse pottery f orms Cam 1 13 ( s), 1 36, 2 18, 2 31, 2 41, 2 42, 2 46, 2 58, 2 59 , 2 66(s), l ids. 2 c opper a lloy f ragments; Fe nail. Roman tile waster.

65.

F 132 ( 2) F ill o f s mall rubbish p it. P eriod IV B . S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4260). A ssociations: TS Claudian, C laudian/ N eronian; decorated r im sherd c AD 2 5/40. Lyon ware beaker;

3 75

l ower Rhineland f ineware ( 2 vessels). Amphorae: D r.2/4, D r.20. C oarse pottery f orms Cam 1 13, 1 40. Copper a lloy decorated s topper f rom s mall f lask. C opper a lloy military equipment: helmet f lange, pendant. C rucible. Fragments o f i ron and c opper a lloy. S mall f ragment? o f lamp. 66.

F 146 ( 2). F ill o f latrine. P eriod I VB. S econdary. 1 AE E72 ( M192). Associations: TS C laudian ( 2), C laudian/ Neronian ( 2), Neronian ( 8), s tamps: CELER i i c AD 3 0-60, L ICINIUS c AD 4 5-60; decorated r im s herd c AD 5 0-65. G B wares pre/post Conquest ( 8); TN radial s tamp ADIICAS. Lyon ware cup and beaker. Mortaria c AD 2 0-55 ( 1), c AD 3 0/40-65 ( 1) c AD 5 0-85 ( 2). Amphorae Dr.2/4, Dr.20 ( 1), Dr.20 late C lst/C2nd AD , B eltran I . Coarse pottery f orms Cam 1 04, 1 08 ( 2), 1 15/6, 1 40 ( 2), 1 41, 1 54 ( 35+), 1 55, 1 57, 1 61, 1 63, 1 71, 2 18, 2 21, 2 29, 2 31, 2 42, 2 44, 2 45, 2 46 ( 5), 2 64 ( 2), 2 66 ( 5), 2 68, 2 70 ( 2), 2 71, 2 72 ( 4). c opper a lloy H od Hill B b rooch. F ragments o f c opper a lloy , including m ilitary equipment. Roman r oofing t ile. S mall p iece o f s eptaria. A P eriod I II latrine f illed i n during P eriod IVB o r a t the t ime o f the B oudiccan r evolt; o ne o f the l atest s tratified g roups a t S heepen. The f inds c ome f rom the f inal f illing. 1 970.

S ite

i i

6 7.

F 213. F ill o f g ravel p it. P eriod I VB. S econdary . 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230). A ssociations: IS T iberian-Claudian ( 1), C laudian ( 2), C laudian-Neronian ( 5), Neronian ( 2); decorated c AD 5 0-65(2), c AD 3 0-45(1). G wares C laudianNeronian. Mortarium c AD 3 0/40-65 ( 1). Amphorae: C am 1 84 ( 3), Cam 1 89 ( 1). C oarse p ottery f orms Cam 1 12, 1 13, 1 15/116, 2 18(3), 2 32, 2 59, 2 66 ( 3), 2 72 ( 5). F ragment o f marvered g lass. 1 A E ( Claudian I ) Antonia RIC 8 2. 1 c opper a lloy Thistle ( Rosette) brooch; f ragments o f c opper a lloy, i ron. Gravel p it, f illed w ith rubbish, c ut into F 2/4.

6 8.

F 252. F ill o f large r ubbish p it. P eriod I VB S econdary . 1 AE i llegible . Associations: T S A rretine ( 1), C laudianNeronian GB wares C laudian-Neronian . Lyon ware b eaker. Mortarium ( 2). Amphorae: Dr.2/4, Cam 1 84, B eltran I , Beltran I /II, Cam 1 89, Richborough 5 27, D ressel 2 8. Coarse p ottery f orms. F ragment o f marvered g lass. 1 d enarius Marcus Antonius ( Syd. 1 221) halved C lst AD s esterius. Copper a lloy Colchester brooch, Bagendon brooch , mount, s trap hinge, f ragment o f l orica s egmentata; s lag, e tc. ( See Niblett, 1 985, 3 7 f or f ull i nventory). Large rubbish p it which cut through earlier p its F236, F 246-7, F 251, three o f which c ontained T S Neronian .

69.

F 209 ( 2). F ill o f g ravel p it. P eriod I II-Iv. S econdary . 1 A E E 82.1 ( M230). Associations: I S Claudian ( 1), C laudian-Neronian ( 2), S outh Gaulish ( 1). G 3 wares C laudian-Neronian. C oarse p ottery f orms Cam 1 13, 1 15/6. S lag. Burnt daub. P it cuts F 207.

7 0.

F 271.

F ill o f s teep-sided r ecut o f P it c omplex D . P eriod S econdary. 1 AE E 81 ( M223). A ssociations: I S Claudian ( 5), C laudian-

3 76

Neronian ( 1), S tamp S COTTIVS c AD 2 0-55. TN s tamp Mortaria c AD 2 0-55 ( 2). Amphorae: Haltern 7 0, Dr.20. Recut o f i rregular s haped rubbish p it w ith s helving F217-267. 1 970, _

S ite

ATTA . s ides

i ii

7 1.

F307 F ill o f s teep-sided pit. P eriod I II. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M260). Associations; Ca wares p re/post Conquest Radial T N s tamp BOVTI. Mortarium c AD 2 0-55. Amphorae: D r.2/4 Coarse p ottery f orms Cam 1 13(S), 1 15/6, 2 18(2), 2 41, 2 56, 2 64, 2 66, l id, s torage jar with r osette s tamps. P illar-moulded g lass bowl f ragment. Copper a lloy decorative mount.

7 2.

F314(2) F ill o f s lot. P eriod I II S econdary. 1 AE I llegible Associations: TS C laudian. Cam 2 66.

Coarse pottery

7 3.

F323. F ill o f s mall p it. P eriod I Vb. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M252). Associations: TS T iberian-Claudian ( 1) Claudian ( 1). Amphorae: Dr.2/4, B eltran I . Coarse p ottery f orms Cam 1 13, 2 18, 2 66, 2 70. B ody s herds o f f lagon. F e object; s lag; f ragments o f c opper a lloy.

7 4.

F340. F ill o f s mall p it. P eriod I Vb S econdary. 1 AE B elgic Gaul S cheers No.89. A ssociations: T S P rotoS outhern Gaulish ( 1), ? Ateius B f abric ( 1), T iberianClaudian ( 1). GE wares p re-Conquest. Amphorae: Haltern 7 0. Coarse p ottery f orms Cam 1 13(S), 2 30, 2 32, 2 66, 2 70. P iece o f copper a lloy w ith t inning. The pottery f rom this f eature was extremely w eathered.

7 5.

Layer 4 . F ine c obbled surface. P eriod I V B . P rimary? 1 AE E 82.2 ( M250) 1 AE i llegible. A ssociation: T S P reClaudian ( 1), C laudian ( 2), C laudian-Neronian ( 3), Neronian ( 1). Ca s tamps: TN CCIVCIS; TR cup CANICO; TN TORN ( os)/ VOCA(RI). Amphorae: Haltern 7 0, Cam 1 84, B eltran 1 . C oarse pottery f orms Cam 1 13 ( 5), 1 15 ( 4), 1 61, 2 04 ( 3), 2 16, 2 18 ( 2), 2 55, 2 59 ( 3), 2 66 ( 5), 2 71 ( 2) 2 72 ( 2). S herds o f f lagons, c ooking p ots, and s torage j ars. C opper a lloy s tud, needle, h inge. T inned S -shaped mount i n l eaded bronze. I ron bar. S mithing s lag and hearth l ining. Roman t ile. A ll the pottery f rom t his l ayer was v ery f ragmentary and weathered.

7 6.

Layer 2 . Burnt daub f rom burnt building B . P eriod V . S econdary . 2 AE E82.2, ( M252, 2 53), 2 AE i llegible. A ssociations: T S Tiberian/Claudian ( 1), C laudian ( 15), C laudian-Neronian ( 9), Neronian ( 8); decorated c AD 5 0-65 ( 3), c AD 5 5-70 ( 1), c AD 4 5-60(1), s tamp MARSVS c AD 40-60. TN p latter s tamped TORNOS V OCARIF(ECIT). Mortaria c AD 2 0-55 ( 2), AD 30/4-60(3), c AD 5 0-86(1), p re-Flavian ( 2). Lyon ware and imitation . Amphorae: Dr. 2/4 ( 2). Cam 1 84, Haltern 7 0, D r.20 ( 7), Dr.20 late C lst/C2nd AD, B eltran I ( 8), Cam 1 89, D r.28 ( 2); Iberian amphora bung. Coarse p ottery f orms Cam 1 08(2), 1 46, 1 54, 1 63, 2 18(5), 2 21, 2 29, 2 31, 2 41, 242(2), 2 45, 246(4), 2 52, 2 54 , 2 55, 2 59, 2 60a, 2 64(2), 2 65, 2 66(12), 268, 270(2), 2 71, 2 72(4). S herds o f f lagon , cooking p ot, s torage j ars, G lass: tubular r im f ragment, bowl, indented

3 77

beaker, b eaker r im, square b ottle i n natural g reen g lass ( fragment). Denarius Marcus Antonius ( Syd. 1 216), 1 A E T iberius ( gic 6 6), 3 AE Claudius ( R U 6 6 c opy ( 2), RIC 6 7 c opy). C opper a lloy Colchester and Langton Down brooches. 2 g old p lated r ings. Numerous f ragments o f domestic and military equipment including 2 dice and s haker ( copper a lloy), F e a rrow head, latch l ifter, s hears, bucket handle. Cameo. P ellets o f Egyptian blue and Haematite. S mithing s lag, hearth l ining, tuyere, f uel a sh s lag. Numerous r oofing t iles. Weathered layer o f burnt daub c overing burnt Neronian building. Finds f rom l ayer 1 A and 2 n ot differentiated i n N iblett ( 1985). 7 7.

F208. F ill 4 inhumation g rave. Later R oman. S econdary. 1 AE i llegible ( E82.2?; M252). Associations: n ot r elevant. Coffined i nhumation cut into F 214, P eriod I V large rubbish/ g ravel p it f rom which coin may derive.

7 8.

F 261. F ill o f i nhumation g rave. Later R oman. S econdary . 1 AE i llegible. A ssociations: n ot r elevant. I nhumation f urnished with g oods i ncluding m inature f lask, 3 c opper a lloy b racelets, p in, i n s hallow g rave badly disturbed by r oots and cut i nto F 263, P eriod I II/IV s hallow, s teep-sided pit, f rom which c oin may derive. 1 971

79.

Excavati _on

Context F 7. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M231A). A small-scale excavation which a lso p roduced s lab moulds. Unstratified c oins

f rom 1 970 Excavations 1 AE E 81 ( Site v - Region 1 S ) 3 AE E 82.2 ( one S ite v ii - Region 3 ) 2 AE E 83.2 2 AE I llegible T otal: 8

The f ollowing c oins were casual f inds a t t he t ime disturbance o n the s outh s ide o f Sheepen Hill Fields) which o ccasioned the 1 971 e xcavation: 1 AE E 81 1 AE E 82.1 2 AE E 82.2 1 AE E 83.2 Total: 5

o f t he ( Hilly

1 AE E 71.3 a nd 1 AE E 82.2 f rom S heepen i n 1 970, noted by Allen, which cannot now be t raced , were p resumably f urther casual f inds. Other c oins r eliably provenanced f rom Sheepen ( a) Water Lane, 1 928) This

a rea i s

n ear

S heepen B ridge

( One i n

2 AE E 83.2 immediately N o f Region 2 .

3 78

" excavations",

( b)

Allotments

( c)

Lacking

( not

s pecified which). 1 AE E 81 2 AE E 82.2

s pecific l ocation: 1 AE E 71.3 4 AE E 82.1 1 3 AE E 82.2 1 AE E 83.1 T otal: 1 9

There a re s everal more g eneral r eferences to f inds a t S heepen a t earlier dates e .g. in W ire's D iary e .g. " ... a b ronze b rooch a nd a c oin o f Cunobelin, I think in Fort F ield" ( 4th March, 1 843); about " half a p int" o f coins f ound when a bank was dug n ear the f arm house ( 5th January 1 844). " At t he S heppen f arm two o r three c oins o f Cunobeline were l ikewise f ound a ssociated with Roman r emains c onsisting o f Urns, f ibula, bronze chains, f ragments o f e mbossed s amian ware, e tc" ( 1st S eptember, 1 856) ( possibly r epeats the earlier entries). 1 976 8 0.

B .

Excavations S t Helena's

S chool

S ite

H EC 7 6 C ontext 4 7 S . NFD . 1 AE Belgic Gaul S cheers No. 93. This excavation w ithin R egion 1 o utside the a rea o f t he large T emple.

L egionary

F ortress and

falls

Col _n kia .

E xcavations 1 931; 1965; 1 971. Dunnett ( 1966); C rummy ( 1984).

P ublication:

Hull

( 1958),

A f ew I ron Age c oins have b een r ecovered f rom within the t he later C olonia; in n o c ase i s p re-Conquest a ctivity a ttested. 8 1.

XXXIX. P riory S treet. S ection V II. Bank o f g rey c lay f orming l owest p art o f r ampart. Early C 2nd AD. S econdary. 1 AE E83.2 ( 1 4248). Associations: abraded Romanised s herds, f ragments o f T S F orms 1 8/31, 8 1, 3 7, t ile, i mbrex; f ine b lack micaceous p latter, mortarium. The c lay l ies d irectly o n the yellow s and natural.

8 2.

XXXVI/XXXVII. L ion Walk. C ontext n ot g iven in C rummy 1 984. P ost C onquest. 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4253). Associations: N /S. T he s ite had b een l evelled p rior t o a c omplex s equence o f o ccupation, b eginning w ith the defences and buildings o f t he l egionary f ortress, s ome s tructures s urviving the t ransition f rom f ortress t o c olony ( when the defences were f illed in) t o b e d estroyed in AD 6 0/1.

8 3.

X . North H ill. S ite C . Burnt l evels a ssociated with building d estroyed in intense f ire. P ost AD 60/1. S econdary. 1 AE E83.2 ( 1 4248). P hase 2 destruction l evel c ontained AR T iberius, 2 A E C laudius I R IC 6 6, 6 7; Claudio-Neronian S outh Gaulish T _ E f orms 1 5, 1 8, 1 8R, 2 4, 2 5, 2 7, 2 9, 3 0, 3 3;

3 79

two c opper a lloy b rooches derivative Nero-Flavian).

( 1

Aucissa,

1

Colchester

O ther c oins f ound within the QQ1onia: 1 AE E 82. 2 T own Hall S ite, 1 AE E 82.2 Culver S treet. T his c onfirms W ire's observations ( Diary i st S eptember, 1 856) that c oins o f Cunobelinus a re rare within the C olo _ni _a .

C .

Colchester LBalkerne Lane. Excavations

1 973-6.

( Fig.

P ublication:

A 5:1, C rummy

No.49) ( 1984).

On the main o ccupation s ite o pposite t he Balkerne Gate, the earliest activity i s r epresented by f limsy buildings s et c lose a gainst the L ondon t o C olchester r oad west o f the ditch o f the l egionary f ortress. T he s econd period b egan with f illing in o f the ditch, a nd the c onstruction o f buildings o f better quality t han b efore, t ightly packed and extending well back f rom the s treet f rontage. After the Boudiccan r evolt, the c olonia was p rovided w ith i ts f irst defences, s ubsequently backfilled, w ith the erection o f a monumental g ateway f lanked by two t emples ( only o ne o f which was o f n ormal R omano-Celtic p lan). 8 4.

BK C 7 6 V 4 8 F 8? Road Ditch. P ost C onquest. 1 AR EA73.2 ( Type I IIb). Associations: N /S.

S econdary.

Unstratified c oins f rom the e xcavations: 1 A E E 82.2 1 AE S E72.1 i n s oil r edeposited f rom Balkerne Lane. Also r ecorded f rom the s ite i s 1 A E uncertain ( Tasciovanus o r Cunobelinus) f rom 1 271.45, a nd three earlier c hance f inds: 2 A E E 82.2, E 83.1 and unusually 1 AV 1 /4 E71.2.

D .

S tanway.

Cheshunt

Excavation 1 936. ( 1977; 1 980).

F ield. Hull

Gosbeck's Farm. ( 1958);

Dunnett

( 1971);

C rummy

The unusual c oncentration o f Roman s ites a t Gosbeck's i n the t emple p recinct a nd theatre, t ogether w ith the r ecently discovered f ort a gainst the H eath F arm Dyke - and i ts f ocal p osition in the whole C olchester Dyke c omplex ( e .g . Rodwell, 1 976) imply an i mportant p re-Conquest n ucleus there. There i s, h owever, v irtually n o d irect evidence. Dunnett ( 1971) r ecovered MPRIA p ottery i n p its s ealed beneath a thick turf l ine which underlay the f irst Roman buildings o n the theatre s ite, a nd lying o n the t urf were f urther s herds o f handmade p ottery . The best e vidence, that o f the c ropmarks, which s uggest a large s ubr ectangular homestead a t the c entre o f an e xtensive s ystem o f f ields, t racks, a nd enclosures, i s n ot c losely dated . Another p ossible LPRIA f eature i s the quadrangular enclosure underlying the s tone t emple, f irst excavated by Jenkins i n 1 842 and f urther explored in 1 936 by a t rench cut d iagonally a cross the T emple e nclosure f rom NW t o S E.

3 80

8 5.

S ilt in base o f d itch o f quadrangular enclosure underlying t emple. P ost-Conquest? S econdary? 1 AE E82.2 ( M253). Associations: much o f o ne native vessel o f f orm Cam 2 31 ( a large narrow-mouthed c ordoned f lask with h igh f lattened s houlder). On the evidence o f S heepen, n either o f these a fford a c ertain p re-Conquest t erminus a nte quem f or the ditch. The s ilt o ccupied the bottom 0 .75m o f the 3 .35m deep ditch; i ts upper f ill c ontained s eptaria, t iles and below 1 .5m t here was a g reat deal o f p ottery i ncluding T S f orm 79 s tamped M ...; a heavy bronze p in with a massive g lobular h ead; many tiles a nd t esserae; much mortar lay o n the s ilt. T he f ields a ll a round a re c overed w ith I ron Age a nd Roman p ottery, but o nly o ne o ther I ron Age c oin i s r eported f rom h ere: another 1 A E E 82.2 f ound in 1 931.

E .

C olchester,

o utside the C olonia.

N on-excavation c oin f inds

( Hull,

( Fig. 1 958,

A 5:1,

Nos.48-50)

e tc.).

M ost o ther I ron A ge c oins f rom the C olchester a rea a re i nadequately p rovenanced ( many o f them a ttributed), o r too p oorly described t o be o f use here. A f ew, however, can be a scribed t o s pecific l ocations: ( a) L exden: A well-known c omplex o f mortuary monuments, which i ncludes t he s o-called L exden Tumulus ( Laver, 1 926) i n the a rea o f L exden Grange, S t. Clare D rive, L exden Rectory and L exden P ark ( Hawkes and Hull, 1 947; Hull, 1 958; Whimster, 1 981). Two c oins have a s pecific p rovenance: Lexden D rive 1 A E E 82.2 S t. C lare's D rive 1 A E E 82.2 f rom Laver c ollection. The Lavers carried o ut various excavations i n the latter a rea e . g. o f t he R oman R oad a nd ditches e 1 932, but i t i s n ot c lear whether o r n ot the s econd c oin was f ound i n the c ourse o f these i nvestigations. Three coins f rom L exden c ited by S tukeley ( 1762) lack s pecific p rovenance: 1 AR E 71.3 1 AR E 83.2 1 A E E 82.1 The c oins a re i n t he B . M., but a s S tukeley b elieved L exden t o include Cunobelinus' amphitheatre, burial p lace and c ircus, their p rovenance i s q uite possibly a ttributed. ( b) Fingringhoe W ick ( Hull, 1 958, 1 ; C rummy, 1 977) Extensive g ravel w orking i n t his a rea 8 km t o the S E o n the e stuary o f the R iver C olne, r emoved i n excess o f 2 a cres, which was b ounded by a ditch, and a t l east two Roman s tone buildings, and y ielded a g reat quantity o f f inds o f C laudian date o f a m ilitary -nature including a bronze camp k ettle . The a rea was a pparently f ull o f small rubbishp its, in which m ost o f the p ottery, b rooches, c oins, animal bone and o yster s hells were f ound. The p its a ppeared to be i n r egular r ows. Hull ( 1958) believed the s ite t o be a

3 81

military s upply-base. F our I ron A ge c oins were f oot o f the c liff 1 932-34 ( TM 0 52193): 1 AE E 83.2 2 AE E 82.2 1 AR W71.1 ( A s ingle g old c oin i s known a s F ingringhoe a rea: 1 AV E 82.1)

a c hance

f ound a t

f ind

f rom

the

the

( c) The Union. n ow S t. Mary's Hospital: Wire ( Diary, i st S eptember, 1 856) r ecords c oins o f Cunobelinus f ound here ( and a t West L odge) in a ssociation with Roman r emains in g reater quantities than anywhere e lse in Colchester. I t was a lso the s ource o f the enigmatic Hoard 8 , which included AV a nd AE c oins o f Cunobelinus; s ome o f the f inds f rom h ere c ould, t herefore, c onceivably be hoard s trays ( but s ee Appendix 3 ). The s ite i s adjacent t o Balkerne L ane a nd may partly c onform t o the s ame s equence. Various d iscoveries i ndicate s tone buildings a nd c remation burials ( as w ell a s i nhumations), a pparently a c ontinuation o f t he e arly Western C emetery. The a rea was u sed f or r efuse disposal. 2 AR S E73.2 1 AE E 71/5 1 AE E 82.1 1 AE E 82.2 2 AE E 83.2 1 AR EA81 A late R oman hoard o f c 8 00 A E was f ound i n 1 849 ( Wire, D iary 1 9th March). ( d) West L odge a nd S t. Mary's T errace: A lso s upposedly r elatively p rolific in c oins o f Cunobelinus, o nly two a re s pecifically r ecorded. T his a rea encompasses the c ore o f the early Western c remation c emetery, including the tombstones o f Favonius a nd L onginus, t hrough which r uns the L ondon r oad. 2 A E E 82.2 ( e) The f ormer L ord's Land: This a rea o n the L ondon r oad b etweeen the Union a nd W est L odge has y ielded evidence o f b oth f oundations a nd t esselated pavements b elonging t o t he r ibbon development, a s well a s l arge numbers o f burials: 1 A E/AV NE83 ( f) Abbey F ield L ike the Union, Abbey F ield t o the s outh o f the C olonia has evidence o f many hundreds o f c remations ( many o f them w ith T S, and w ith very f ew obvious p re-Flavian v essels), building f oundations a nd a s econd r efuse t ip. The c oins f ound a re: 1 AV 8 E51 1 A E E 71.3 1 AE E 82.2

( g ) Other findspots: Gold c oins have been f ound o n P arson's Heath ( 1 AV a nd Clarke's Meadow ( 1 AV 1 /4 E 82.2) ( as w ell a s a t 3 82

E 82.1) Layer

de la Haye, c 2 km s outh o f Gosbecks, 1 AV S E22). B ronze c oins a re known f rom the r iver C olne ( 1 AE E 71. 3), a drain in S tanwell S treet ( 1 AE E 82.1), f rom under the C . W.S. S laughterhouse ( 1 AE S W81) and f ound " in a f ield n ear the o ld waterworks b efore 1 796" ( 1 AE E 82.1); there i s a known building a t t his latter p lace and early TS was f ound s inking the " new well" a t the waterworks a t the f oot o f Balkerne Hill in 1 891. The c oin f indspot c ould easily, however, be the Union which i s adjacent, o r even S heepen, which i s c lose a t hand.

HARLOW COMPLEX

( HA)

( Fig.

A5:2)

Harlow R oman T emple E xcavations 1 927; 1 935-6; 1 962-71. Wheeler ( 1928); F rance a nd Gobel ( 1985); Haselgrove ( forthcoming 0 ). Coin r eports: Allen ( 1964; 1 967a; 1 968a); F itzpatrick ( 1985). The very s ize o f the s tratified c oin a ssemblage ( 211 o ut o f 2 36) discovered o n the s ite makes the Harlow Temple a key s ite f or British I ron Age c oinage. Chronologically, the c ontexts f rom which t hey derive can be a ssigned t o three main p eriods o f a ctivity o n the hilltop: 1 .

P re-Temple

C ontexts

( Periods

0 -1)

64 ( 29%) o f t he excavated c oins were f rom c ontexts p redating the f irst s tone building, many o f them interspersed with b rooches a nd animal r emains in a brown " loam" layer thought to r epresent the late I ron Age g round s urface. This layer was a pparently f ormed f rom o rganic materials, the excavators s uggesting l eaf mould, but there a re o ther possibilities. O ther f eatures i ncluded a c urvilinear g ully beneath the western range o f s tone buildings, a large p it under the eastern range, and a number o f p ost-holes which made n o obvious pattern. S ome o f these f eatures were a pparently s ealed by the l oam and should therefore be o f M /LPRIA date. I n the a rea o f the later z elau a t l east, c oin deposition had c ertainly s tarted before the C onquest. The very quantity o f c oins and o ther a rtefacts, i ncluding 1 00 b ronze a nd i ron b rooches, bronze and s hale bracelets, f inger r ings, p ins e tc.- the majority in m int c ondition s uggests deliberate deposition o n a s acred s ite. Most o f the animal b one was o f s easonally s laughtered young s heep, which w ould b e i n keeping w ith this interpretation. In c ontrast to the p ottery f rom the 1 927 excavations ( which i s post-Conquest) the range o f f ine wares, with many c opies o f GB f orms, i s a ppropriate to a late p re-Conquest g roup; o nly a very small quantity o f earlier I ron Age material was f ound ( Thompson, 1 982). The r emains o f a t l east two B ronze Age c remation u rns i mply the f unerary use o f the s ite a t an earlier date; many i nstances o f natural knolls o r mounds being used a s ' barrows' a re known ( e.g. Young, 1 980), the burials s imply being inserted into the mound s urface.

3 83

N T ypes A r i T ypes ( Tasc iovanus ) E 7 ( Cunobe l inus ) E 8 O the r L a te C ts t AD L a te C2nd -E a r ly C3rd AD Ma in a reas o f e xcava t ion

F ig.

A 5:2

Distribution o f

3 84

f inds a t Harlow T emple.

M ost o f the I ron Age coins a re l ikely to have been d eposited a fter the Conquest ( Haselgrove, f orthcoming c ), r ather than in the LPRIA as the excavators believed. Apart f rom the coins in the e ellä area, their chronological e mphasis i s late c ompared to o ther large s ite g roups in t he r egion, 6 1% o f the c oins s tratified in P eriod 0 -1 c ontexts being developed types o f Cunobelinus. The c onstruction o f the s tone temple g ives o nly a terminus ante q uem o f the late f irst c entury AD . The brooches a lso s how a n emphasis o n the s econd half o f the c entury. The C olchester derivatives ( 27%), f ollowed by Hod Hills ( 20%), a re the c ommonest types - the f ormer o utnumbering the o rdinary Colchesters ( 10%) by nearly 3 :1 and the c opper a lloy Nauheim derivatives ( 13%) by 2 :1. Only one Roman c oin i s earlier than AD37, a gainst 4 o f Caius, 2 2 o f Claudius ( 19 o f them B ritish c opies and thus p otentially s truck u nder Nero), a nd 8 o f Nero. As e .g. a t Champlieu, Oise ( Huysecom and Woimant, 1 983) the decline in intensive d eposition o f I ron Age c oinage may c oincide with the i ncreasing availability o f Roman c oin s ome decades a fter t he Conquest. H owever, many o f the I ron A ge coins, even the bronzes, were i n magnificent c ondition and were probably deposited u ncirculated. This, and their p rimary c ontext, would a llow t he Harlow coins an appreciably earlier depositional date t han a s imilar g roup o f s ettlement f inds ( mainly l osses f rom c irculation a nd i n s econdary c ontexts; the same a rgument a pplies t o the brooches) would merit. I f they were o fferings f resh f rom the mint, pre-Conquest deposition, t herefore, cannot be r uled o ut, even f or the developed t ypes o f Cunobelinus. This, however, begs the question o f w hether bronze c oinage was a lways put s traight into c irculation o r whether i t c ould have been kept, immobilised i n s omeone's treasury, until i t was eventually o ffered a t t he t emple. Either way, the dominance o f late types ( E83.2, E 82.2) m eans that i ntensive deposition s tarted a t earliest i n the late pre-Conquest p eriod. The excavators' p icture o f a s ignificant l evel o f c oin deposition s tretching back t owards t he mid f irst c entury BC i s not born o ut by the s urviving earlier c oins, many o f them presumably s urvivals i n c irculation, the r est ( the g old in the e ellä area a part) not out o f keeping with a n ormal s ettlement c ontext. 2 .

T he

f lint

and mortar t emple,

Phases

I -II

( Periods

I I-VI)

T he f oundations o f t his building were r ecorded in 1 764 and 1 819 ( when a number o f I ron A ge coins were found). A t the t op o f a s light hillock, this was a t emple o f c onventional R omano-Celtic type ( Wheeler, 1 928), i ts f oundations c utting the earlier deposits, i ts f loor make-up a thick l ayer o f g ravel. A late Flavian c onstruction date i s p robable f or the e ellä and ambulatory. An a s o f T itus s tratified in the P eriod I l oam g ives a terminus _ post quer n o f AD 79-81, while an a s o f V espasian was embedded i n a c ontemporary c obbled s urface t o the east o f the t emple ( Phase IA). T he

main c oncentration o f

I ron A ge coins

3 85

f rom the

eastern

part o f the s ite c oincides with a b reak i n this s urface, most o f them f rom later c ontexts. This a rea was p ossibly n ever c obbled f or the s ame r easons that the c oins were deposited here; a lternatively the excavators failed to r ecognise a disturbance, into which the c oins were introduced f rom elsewhere, when, early in the s econd c entury, a large f lat s urface was c reated in f ront o f the t emple ( Phase 1 B). This a rea was bounded on i ts l ong s ides by l ines o f postholes and, f acing the T emple, by a gully broken f or an entrance; the enclosure s o f ormed measured c 48.75 m x 3 6.5 i n . In the late s econd o r early third c entury AD, t his was e laborately r econstructed, w ith ranges o f s tone-built r ooms with tesselated f loors and buttresses being e rected a gainst the temple and a long the l ong s ides o f the courtyard, a s well a s a massive gate. This w ork entailed f urther l evelling, the f oundations a gain c utting t hrough e arlier deposits ( Phase I I). 5 4 ( 24%) o f the I ron Age c oins were s tratified in c ontexts r elating t o the two phases o f the s tone-built temple. By and large, the p roportions m irror t hose f or the P eriod 0 -1 deposits, s uggesting a high degree o f r esiduality. A mere 1 9 o f the s tratified c oins ( 9%) w ere f rom o utside the t imber " enclosure", o nly 1 0 o f them a lso beyond i ts s uccessor's walls. 3 .

P ost-temple

c ontexts

( Periods V II-VIII)

1 06 ( 47%) o f the p recisely p rovenanced I ron Age c oins were e ither unstratified o r a ssociated w ith t he rubble l ayers f rom the c ollapse o r demolition o f t he Temple. The l atest c oins o f the latest to be f ound s tratified b eneath c ollapsed walling were c oins o f C onstantine ( 306-337). I n this f inal p eriod, deliberate c oin d eposition s eems t o have r ecommenced ( many c oins a re i n f resh c ondition), the l atest c oin, one o f Valentinian I I ( 389-92). One AE E83.2 i s known f rom a late C 3rd hoard in the a rea ( Pitstone Common), s o the possibility t hat I ron A ge c oins were a gain employed a s o fferings cannot be r uled o ut, but the majority m ust b e r esidual a s their p roportion a gain m irror those i n s tratified c ontexts i n the s ame a reas. The

s tratification a nd a ssociations

o f the

I ron Age c oins

The ubiquity o f the brown " loam" d eposit, the method o f excavation and the f orm o f the published r eport m ake i t extremely difficult t o r econstruct a rtefact a ssociations and thus g roups o f o fferings. I n t he f ollowing l ists a ll the a rtefacts r ecovered f rom the s ame g eneral d eposit within a particular t rench a re g iven, a nd should n ot b e c onsidered t o b e i n s pecific a ssociation. I n a minority o f cases, however, t he c oherence o f the g roup, e .g. HA26 which includes a c opper a lloy ear s coop, tweezers a nd nail c leaner, makes i t p robable that the i tems were d eposited together. The whole question o f depositional patterning a nd the s tructuring o f the o fferings w ould r epay s ystematic s tudy.

3 86

Overall, the s imilarity o f the o fferings ( other than the c oins) t o those c ontained i n LPRIA g raves a t King Harry Lane ( Stead, 1 969) and the p resence o f c remated human bone ( though possibly o f B ronze A ge date) raises the question o f whether the p re-Temple u sage o f the hilltop was in s ome way c onnected with the disposal o f the dead. S everal s o-called Romano-Celtic t emples have a c laim to r egarded a s mausolea ( cf. Black, 1 986), s ome o f them with p re-Temple s tructures e .g. Lancing D own ( Appendix 3 ). In this r ole, they c ould p lausibly encapsulate a l ink with p re-Roman p ractices, the Roman buildings r epresenting a f ormalisation o f an existing mortuary f ocus, rather than a purely r eligious o ne. The r euse o f B ronze A ge tumuli may be another c ommon l ink, a s a t Lancing Down and and o ther temple s ites with I ron Age c oins e .g. Kits' Coty, Mutlow H ills. Given o f the exceptional nature o f the Harlow s ite and the a mbiguities i n the published information, the s tratification and a ssociations o f the Harlow t emple c oins have been excluded f rom the t ext f igures. Their s tratification i n the d ifferent parts o f the s ite was a s f ollows: A .

C ella/Portico A rea P re-Temple Contexta

1 .

E 2.6g. P rimary i nfill o f P it K . P eriod 0 S econdary ? 1 AV 1 /4 S 51.1 ( Br QC). A ssociations: I ron b lade, 2 0.5 cm l ong. The r eport a lso m entions a p lain bronze r ing ( 5.5 cm d iameter) lying a t the base o f the p it, t ogether with a nimal r ibs and a c omplete human parietal bone, but this r ing i s not included i n the f inds inventory. P it K m easured c 1 .2 x 1 .1 m a t t he t op a nd was 0 .76 m deep. B oth i t and a s imilar p it L w ere s ealed by the b rown l oam l ayer which d ipped s teeply i nto t hem, and they were c ut by the f oundation trenches o f the l ater a mbulatory wall. P it L c ontained a g ood d eal o f burnt s oil, daub and a ccording t o the text ( p.23) a n LPRIA f ootring base. This, however, a ppears t o be the same s herd described in t he p ottery c atalogue a s a r im in g rey s andy micaceous f abric and dark g rey s lip, dating to the earlier s econd c entury AD . E ither the sherd was therefore i ntrusive i n the f oundation t rench, o r the s tratification here was not understood c orrectly .

2 .

E 2.6 Brown l oam . P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AV S E51 ( GB E ). A ssociations: Necked j ar i n g rey m icaceous f abric AD 3 0-40. P latter in r omanised g rey m icaceous f abric ( Cam 2 4) c AD 43-65. Handmade j ar i n dark g rey micaceous f abric c AD 1 5-25. Handmade bowl i n dark g rey fabric MPRIA. C opper a lloy Colchester derivative b rooch. F lint blade. Copper a lloy s trap f astener ( ? Roman military h orse equipment). Part o f c opper a lloy brooch ( probably Type 7 1A).

3 .

A2. 4 Brown l oam. Period I P rimar y ( 2 AV 1 /4 S 51.1 ( QC). Associations:

4 .

None.

E 2/E3.6 B rown l oam. P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AV 1 /4 S 51.1 ( Br QC), 1 AE E 83.2 ( M246).

3 87

A ssociations:

c opper s itu. 5 .

a lloy

s mall

s teelyard with s uspension r ing

s till

E 3/F4.6 B rown l oam P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AE/AV 1 /4 S 51.1 ( Br QC), 2 AV 1 /4 E 61.1 ( Br Associations: c opper a lloy bangle, r ound s ection incised g roove.

i n

LB). with

6 .

G4/F3. 5 . Brown l oam o verlying natural? P eriod I P rimary? 1 AV 1 /4 E 51.1 ( Br LA). Associations: none; c ontext o mitted f rom s ite matrix.

7

E 1/E2. 6 . B rown l oam. P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AV 1 /4 E 61.1 ( Br LB). Associations: Wide m outhed j ar w ith f lat-grooved r im i n c oarse b lack m icaceous f abric w ith g rog-temper, perhaps c f. Thompson ( 1982) G 5-3. Copper a lloy C olchester derivative brooch.

8 .

D 2.5. B rown l oam. P eriod I P rimary? 1 AE E 73 ( M189). Associations: vessel i n buff m icaceous f abric w ith abraded mica-dusted f abric c AD 60-75. I ron s taple o r j oiner's dog. T S F orm 1 8 S outh Gaulish. P reF lavian.

9 .

B 3.5. B rown l oam. P eriod I . P rimary? 1 A E E 73 ( M190). A ssociations: l arge jars in f abric Cam 2 70a, 2 70b C laudian-Neronian; j ar f abric p re- and early F lavian; s hallow j ar Thompson C 1-2. Copper a lloy p enannular brooch. o r j oiner's dog. T S F orm 1 5/17 S outh Gaulish, F orm 2 9 S G Neronian.

c oarse b rown in r ed b rown ? related t o I ron s taple p re-Flavian;

1 0.

B 1/B2.5 B rown l oam P eriod I P rimary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4244). A ssociations: c opper a lloy Aucissa B and C olchester derivative brooches. C ircular b lue g lass bead. TS F orm 1 5/17 S outh Gaulish, p re-Flavian.

1 1.

D 5.6 B rown l oam. P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4248). A ssociations: ( ?Nauheim derivative). T emple

P hases

c opper

a lloy

b rooch

1 -2 C ontexts

1 2.

Gravel s ubstructure o f c ella. P eriod I I. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M260A). A ssociations: N /S. C oin f ound i n the 1 927 excavations.

1 3.

B 2.4. Gravel s ubstructure o f ambulatory. P eriod I I. S econdary. 1 AE/AV 1 /4 E 51 ( Br LA). A ssociations: platter in p ale g rey m icaceous f abric C lst AD. Jug r im i n s oft o range f abric c f. Cam 1 65. P re-Conquest t o c AD 6 0. Lid i n dark g rey , g rogt empered, micaceous f abric Thompson ( 1982) L 8.

1 4.

DS. 4 L oamy c lay make-up o f ambulatory. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4253). Associations: N one

3 88

S econdary.

P eriod

1 1

1 5.

B 3. 4. G ravel s ubstructure o f ambulatory. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M249). Associations: None

P eriod

I I.

P ost-Temple C ontexts 1 6.

P laster and S econdary.

r ubble

destruction

deposit.

P eriod

V II.

1 AV S E51 1 AE E 82.1 3 AE E 83.2 1 7.

Disturbed Upper l evels. P eriod V III. 1 AE/AV 1 /4 E 51 1 AE E 83.2

S econdary.

Unstratified c oins 1 AR 5 E74.2 1 AE E 83.1 The c oncentration o f AV in the . Q ella a rea i s r eadily a pparent ( Fig. A 5:2); the deposits w ere evidently the earliest on t he s ite. This s cattered hoard may well r epresent the r emnants o f a larger deposit r etrieved before the c onstruction o f the s tone temple.

B .

' Altar-base'

i n f ront

o f t emple

a nd c ourtyard

P re-Temple Contexts 1 8.

J 1.4. B rown l oam . P eriod I . P rimary? 4 AE E 83.2 ( M242, 2 43, 2 48, 249). a lloy s heath o r f lattened s ocket.

A ssociations:

c opper

P ost-Temple C ontexts 1 9 .

C .

D isturbed upper l ayers. P eriod V III. S econdary 1 AE E 71.2 1 AE E 82.2 2 AE E 83.2 The a ltar belongs with the P hase 2 t emple and r emoved a ll t races o f an earlier f eature.

East

possibly

Range

P re-Temple Contexts 2 0.

2 1.

2 2.

H 5.8. B rown l oam . 2 AE E 83.2 ( M244,

P eriod I . P rimary? 248). A ssociations:

None.

H 11.11. B rown l oam. P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AE E 71.3 ( M176), 1 AE E 82.2 ( M253), 6 AE E 83.2 2 44(2), 2 48(2), 2 49). Associations: None. H 12.11. S urface o f natural. P eriod I . P rimary? 1 A E E 82.2 ( 1 4250). Associations: None.

3 89

( M243,

2 3.

H 14.5. B rown l oam. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M244).

P eriod I . P rimary? A ssociations: None

24.

H26.7. B rown l oam. P eriod I P rimary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( M249). Associations: Handmade j ar in dark g rey calcite-gritted fabric Thompson ( 1982) C 1-2, C lst AD . Copper a lloy p in with r ound head.

2 5.

H28.14. B rown l oam. P eriod I . P rimary 1 AE E 71.2 ( M172), 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230). Associations: a lloy r ing; c opper a lloy pin with c onical h ead.

c opper

2 6.

H29.10. B rown l oam. P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AE E 83.1 ( M221), 1 AE E 83.2 ( M248). Associations: 1 A z T itus i llegible. Copper a lloy r ing; c opper a lloy s tud w ith f lat, r ound head; c opper a lloy e ar scoop, tweezers, and nail c leaner; c opper alloy Colchester derivative b rooch c f. H29.15, HA27 below. The brown l oam in H 29 a lso p roduced an i ron h inge p in.

27.

H29.15. B rown l oam. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M248). above. Temple

P hase

P eriod I . P rimary? A ssociations: N one,

1 and P hase

but

c f.

H29.10 CO26

2 Contexts

2 8.

H27.7. L oamy c lay make up f or c obbled surface. P eriod I I. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M243). A ssociations: c opper a lloy brooch - New type ( Hod H ill variant). I ron Ring.

29.

H8.8. Gravel and c obbled s urface on l oam. P eriod I I. S econdary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4249). A ssociations: J ar in H ertfordshire t ype c ream f abric, with barbotine decoration c AD 60-75. P latter in g rey m icaceous f abric Cam 2 4Cb c AD 4 3-65 ( Report a s H8. 3).

7 0.

H9.13. Gravel and c obbled surface on l oam. S econdary? 1 AE/AV 1 /4 E 82.1 ( M204). Associations: None

3 1.

H 11.8. Gravel and c obbled s urface on l oam. P eriod I I. S econdary? 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4260), 3 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4244). Associations: S emis Nero ( RIC 3 88) AD 6 4-66.

3 2.

H 12.10. G ravel and c obbled surface on l oam. P eriod I I S econdary? 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4250), 3 AE E 83.2 ( M244, 249(2)). Associations: None.

3 3.

1 16.7. Gravel and c obbled surface on S econdary? 1 AE E 83.1 ( 1 4245). A ssociations: N one

3 4.

H29.13. G ravel and c obbled surface S econdary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4249). A ssociations: N one

3 90

P eriod

I I

l oam.

P eriod

I I.

on l oam.

P eriod

I I.

3 5.

H 11.7. S ilt and o ccupation deposits. P eriod I II. S econdary. 2 AE E 82.2 ( M225, 2 53), 2 AE E 83.2 ( M243, 2 44). A ssociations: u Form 30 South Gaulish c AD 60-70. Copper a lloy Colchester b rooch. C opper a lloy s tud with oval h ead. A z Agrippa/Neptune ( RIC 3 2(7b)) Q AD 40. I ron r ing.

3 6.

H 12.6. S ilt a nd o ccupation d eposits. S econdary. 1 AE E72 ( M192). A ssociations: None

3 7.

H 14. 3. S ilt and o ccupation deposits. P eriod I II. S econdary. 1 AE/AR E 83.2 ( 1 4237). Associations: Dark g rey s lipped d ish in pale g rey m icaceous f abric Cam 3 7, AD 7 0-170. Large j ar in g rog-tempered pale g rey f abric Thompson ( 1982) B 1-2, m id C lst AD. Jug r im in p ink/brown f abric var. Cam 1 65? Q AD 1 0-60. Black-colour c oated j ar i n pale g rey f abric c AD 6 0-70. L ower half o f a s mall c opper a lloy brooch with r ound b ow and t riangular catch p late which had been t ightly r olled up ( Type 9 2).

3 8.

H 28.10. S ilt a nd o ccupation deposits. S econdary. 1 AE E71.3 ( M181). A ssociations: N one

3 9.

H 5.17. L oose g ravel l evelling f or p ost S econdary. 1 AE E83.2 ( M246). A ssociations: N one

40.

H 12/H13.7. L oose I V. S econdary. 1 AE E82.2 ( 1 4253).

g ravel

l evelling

A ssociations:

P eriod

I II.

P eriod

holes.

I II.

P eriod

f or p ost holes.

I V.

P eriod

N one

4 1.

H 11. 9. Occupation d eposit and p ost hole f illings. P eriod I V. S econdary. 1 AE E 71.2 ( 1 4174). A ssociations: c opper a lloy s tud w ith c entral p in ( part o f p late brooch?). I ron r ing.

42.

H 11.5. Latest g ravel l evelling. P eriod V I. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M244). A ssociations: c opper Lamberton Moor f ixed l oop brooch.

4 3.

H28. 3. Latest g ravel l evelling. P eriod V I. S econdary . 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4244). A ssociations: None, but c f. H 28.5, below.

S econdary. a lloy Headstud

HA44

44.

H28.5. Latest g ravel l evelling. P eriod V I. S econdary . 1 AE E 83.2 ( M249). A ssociations: F ine sandy g rey micaceous beaker c AD 8 5-105. C opper a lloy r ing with 3 g rooves r ound edge: f urniture handle o r s uspension r ing f or s word s cabbard. A z Marcus Aurelius ( RIC 1 322) c AD 1 54-155. I ron Hook. Cf. a lso H28.3, HA43 above.

4 5.

H 11. 3. Cobbled surface o f c ourtyard. P eriod V I. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4248). A ssociations: N one

4 6.

H 15. 4. Deposition o n c obbled s urface o f Courtyard. V I. S econdary? 1 AE E 83.1 ( 1 4221), 1 A E E 83.2 ( 1 4249). Associations:

3 91

S econdary.

P eriod None

47.

4 8.

H27.3. L evelling V I. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4248).

s ands

a nd g ravels

Associations:

f or

l ong

room .

P eriod

N one

H9.8. F loor make up f or l ong r ooms. P eriod V I. S econdary. 4 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4242, 2 44, 2 46, 2 48). A ssociations: copper a lloy p late ( undecorated). P ost-temple C ontexts

49.

P laster and S econdary.

Rubble

Total: 5 0.

destruction

layers P eriod V III. 1 AE E 71.2 1 AE E 73 1 AE E 82.2 2 AE E 83.2 Total: 5

Total:

P eriod

V II.

1 AE E 73 1 AE E 83.2 2

D isturbed upper

Unstratified c oins:

d eposits.

S econdary.

1 A E E 71.3 1 AE E 83.2 2

The East range yielded the s econd h ighest density o f c oins p er m etre excavated, which c luster i n an a rc round a large p re-Temple p it n ot backfilled until a fter the Conquest and i tself c ontaining f ew I ron A ge c oins.

D .

S outh Range P re-Temple C ontexts

5 1.

K 5.17. L oam and g ravel. P eriod 0 . P rimary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4249). Associations: None

5 2.

K 5.14. B rown l oam. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M250).

5 3.

K6.16. B rown l oam. P eriod 1 . P rimary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4243). Associations: c opper a lloy plate b rooch; h ead o f c opper a lloy b rooch w ith r ound hole in catchplate ( Type 9 2) T emple

P hase

P eriod 1 . P rimary? Associations: None

1 and P hase

2 Contexts

5 4.

K 5.10 Gravel and c obbled s urface o n l oam. P eriod I I. S econdary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4242). A ssociations: P robably part o f c opper a lloy c ladding f or s mall knife handle, decorated with t hree g rooves.

5 5.

F 21.7. Compact g ravel a ssociated w ith p ost I V. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( 1 4231). Associations: None

3 92

holes.

P eriod

5 6.

F 21.11. Occupation d eposit and p ost hole S econdary. 1 A E E 83.2 ( M242). A ssociations: N one

5 7.

K 3.8. Occupation S econdary. 1 AE E71.2 ( M175).

deposit

and p ost

Associations:

f illing.

hole

f illing

P eriod V .

P eriod

V

None

P ost-Temple Contexts 5 8.

P laster a nd S econdary.

r ubble

Total: 59.

destruction

1 2 1 1 5 1 0

AE A E AE A E A E

c ontexts.

S econdary.

oins

T otal:

1 A E E 71.2 1 A E E 83.1 2

The S outh Range m irrors the East Range in i ts o f c oins i n p ost-construction c ontexts.

H .

W est

V II.

E 71.2 1 /2 E 71.2 E 82.1 E 82.2 E 83.2

D isturbed upper l ayers. P eriod V III. 1 A E E71. 3 3 AE E 83.2 T otal: 4 Unstratified

P eriod

predominance

Range

E re l iTa ule _Ze dntexta 6 0.

F 17. Fill o f P it B . P eriod I . S econdary. 1 AE E83.2 ( M248). Associations: None. S tratigraphic r elationship t o brown l oam n ot g iven. This c ould c onceivably b e the p osthole, a ssociated w ith a curvilinear g ully, which c ontained a c oin o f Cunobelinus ( Report, p .23) a lthough the p lan s hows this in trench F7.

6 1.

F 17.8 Brown l oam . P eriod I . ? Primary. 1 AE E83.1 ( M221), 1 A E E 83.2 ( M249). Associations: a lloy Aucissa A b rooch; o f. F 17.10 ( HA62) and ( HA63).

6 2.

6 3.

6 4.

F 17.10. B rown l oam. 1 AE E71.3 ( M176), None, but o f. F 17.8

P eriod I . ? Primary. 2 A E E 83.2 ( M244, 2 48). ( HA61) a nd F 17.12 ( HA63).

F 17.12. B rown l oam. P eriod I . ? Primary. 3 AE E 83.2 ( M243(2), 2 44). A ssociations: F17 8 ( HA62) and F 17.10 ( HA62)

c opper F 17.12

Associations:

None,

but

o f.

F 17.11. Gravel i nsert i n B rown l oam. P eriod I . S econdary. 1 AE E 83.1 ( M245), 2 A E E 82.2 ( M252, 2 53), 3 AE E 83.2 ( M243 ( 2), 2 46). A ssociations: 1 A z Claudius I ( RI 69).

3 93

6 5.

F4.6. B rown l oam. P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AR S E74.1 ( LX22). A ssociations: N one

6 6.

F7.12. B rown l oam. 1 AE E 83.1 ( M221),

6 7.

6 8.

69.

7 0.

P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AE E 82.2 ( M250).

A ssociations:

F 8.5. B rown l oam. P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AE E 71.3 ( M176), 1 AE E 82.2 ( M252), Associations: c opper a lloy f inger r ing, yellow enamel. F 13.6. B rown l oam. 1 AE E 71.2 ( M175).

P eriod I . P rimary? Associations: c opper

N one

1 AE E 83.2 ( M249). w ith r ound bezel,

a lloy nail

F 19.12. B rown l oam. P eriod I . P rimary? 1 AE S E 7 2.1 ( LX23). A ssociations: c opper variant brooch.

c leaner.

a lloy Colchester

F 24.11. B rown l oam. P eriod I . S econdary? 1 AE S E74 ( LX21-22). Associations: C rude handmade j ar i n dark g rey f abric w ith f ine q uartz g rit, buff a nd r ed s urface, MPRIA. P ossibly material d isturbed f rom an e arlier deposit? Temple

1 a nd T emple 2 C ontexts

7 1.

F 20.14. Gravel and c obbled s urface S econdary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 , 1242). A ssociations: None

o n l oam.

P eriod

I I.

72.

F 7.7. S ilt and o ccupation deposits. P eriod I II. 1 AE E 71.3 ( M178). A ssociations: I ron r ing

7 3.

F 17. 7. S ilt and o ccupation deposits. P eriod I II. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M244). A ssociations: None

7 4.

F 18.7. S ilt and o ccupation d eposits. P eriod I II. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M242). A ssociations: c opper a lloy Colchester derivative brooch.

S econdary.

S econdary.

F 25. 9. S ilt a nd o ccupation deposits. P eriod I II. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M248). A ssociations: c opper a lloy Colchester derivative brooch; c opper a lloy c oil o f wire. 7 6.

F 19.6. L oose g ravel make up f or p alisade. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M248). A ssociations: None

7 7.

F 7. 4. Occupation deposit and p ost-hole f illing. P eriod V . S econdary. 1 AE/AR E 75.1 ( M199), 1 A E E 83.1 ( M221), 2 A E E 83.2 ( M244, 249). A ssociations: 1 s emis N ero ( RIC 3 98) . Q AD 6 4-66. Copper a lloy C olchester derivative b rooch. C ircular g reen g lass bead

7 8.

F 18.5. Occupation deposits and p ost-hole f illing. P eriod V . S econdary. 2 AE E 83.2 ( M249). A ssociations: 1 AE/AR Denarius V espasian ( RIC 3 5) Q AD 7 1-2. C opper a lloy s imple Hod Hill b rooch.

3 94

P eriod

IV.

C opper b lade. 79.

a lloy

f inger

r ing.

Copper

a lloy knife hilt

w ith i ron

F 20.3. Latest g ravel l evelling. P eriod V I. S econdary. 1 AE 1 /2 E 71.1 ( M182), 1 AE E 82.2 ( M252). Associations: 1 As Vespasian ( BMC 8 20) c AD 7 2-3. Copper a lloy p late brooch with g lass c entre. Copper a lloy p in. S mall i ron adze h ead. I ron hinge p in. I ron s pade s heath. P ost-Temple Contexts

80.

D isturbed upper

l evels. P eriod V III. 1 AE S E 7 2 2 AE S E 74 4 AE E71.2 2 AE E71.3 3 AE E 72 1 AE 1 /2 E 73 1 AR NE71 2 AE E 82.1 7 AE E 82.2 7 AE E 83.1 3 0 AE E 83.2 1 AE W81. Total: 6 1

S econdary.

Unstratified c oins

T otal:

2 1 1 1 1 1 7

AE AE AE AE AE AE

E 71.2 E 71.3 E 73 E 82.1 E 83.1 E 83.2

The West Range y ielded easily the h ighest d ensity o f I ron Age c oins p er m etre excavated ( Fig A 5:2), a c oncentration which i s p robably l inked t o the a rc o f gully o bserved between t renches F 16-18 a nd s ealed by the brown l oam. Fitzpatrick ( 1985) s uggests that d eposition a round a wooden ' totem p ole' o r f igurine, s uch a s may b e inferred f rom c ontinental evidence ( e.g. Furger-Gunti, 1 982b; P lanck, 1 982), o r even their s uspension f rom o ne in p erishable containers, c ould explain this s ort o f c lustering. I t may a lso b e a sked whether deposition o f i tems in p erishable wrappings c ontributed t o the o rganic c omponent o f t he brown l oam. The excavators' s uggestion that P hase 7 i ssues c luster here, must b e t reated cautiously ; their f requency c ould merely b e a f unction o f the o verall c oncentration. A f ew o f the c oin l osses ( e.g. HA65, 6 8-70) c ould, however, be earlier than anywhere e lse o n t he s ite a part f rom t he cella. Other c oins

s ecurely p rovenanced f rom the T emple

1 819 excavations

( Evans, 1 864) 2 AE E 71.2 2 + AE E 83.2

3 95

These 1 45.

excavations

a re described i n VCH E ssex

1 962-1971 1 AV 1 /4 E 51.1 ( Found i n n eighbourhood 1 965) 1 AE E 81 ( Unstratified, f rom s poil h eap) 2 AE E 82.2 ( Found while landscaping)

o f

I II

( 1963),

excavations,

Casual

The 2 36

f inds during p eriod o f excavations 1 AE E 71.2 1 AV 1 /4 E 82.1 1 AE E 83.1 1 AE E 83.2 t otal o f s ecurely p rovenanced c oins f rom the T emple i s ( 12 g old , 3 s ilver, 6 p lated a nd the r emainder b ronze).

Addendum:

the

1 985-6 Excavations

( Bartlett,

1 987)

S ince t he a bove i nformation was c ollated, investigations have r esumed a t Harlow T emple, w ith an a rea 9 x 2 2 m being excavated i n the c ourtyard c lose t o the W est Range. The r esults c onfirm the exceptional density o f I ron A ge c oins in this a rea a nd d emonstrate that t he a rc o f g ully b eneath the West Range b elongs t o a c ircular f eature, s ome 1 3 i n in diameter. This was s ealed by the brown l oam and i ts p rimary s ilts c ontained MPRIA p ottery. Most o f the i nterior had b een r emoved by a l ate Roman p it, b ut a number o f p its and p ostholes c ontaining LPRIA metalwork were a lso r ecorded beneath the l oam, b oth i nside and o utside the c ircular g ully ( including a p ossible 4 p ost s tructure). I n a ll, 2 74 I ron Age c oins w ere f ound, b ringing the t otal f or the s ite t o 5 10, many o f them in the upper f ill o f the gully and inside i t, a long w ith o ther o fferings o f L PRIA-early Roman date ( including b rooches, p ins, s tyli, t oilet implements, i ron knives, t ools, p loughshares, a s ocketed s pearhead and i ron bar f ragments). A gain, many c oins w ere in a mint s tate a nd their o verall emphasis i s l ate, 6 9% o f them b eing developed i ssues o f Cunobelinus ( E82.2, E 83.2). Only a f ew c oins a re f rom o utside the r egion ( I am i ndebted t o A ndrew F itzpatrick f or d etails). A r itual c ontext has b een c laimed f or a number o f c ircular buildings, e .g . Frilford ( Harding, 1 972) a nd Hayling I sland ( Downey e t a l., 1 980), but s imilar s tructures a re a lso the n orm i n a domestic c ontext and the Harlow example has parallels a t m id-late I ron A ge s ettlements, e .g. L ittle Waltham ( Drury, 1 978) a nd I vy Chimneys, Witham ( Grew, 1 980), b oth i n E ssex . Despite the a pparent a ssociation o f the c oins a nd o ther o fferings w ith t his s tructure, i t may therefore b e p remature t o c laim i t a s a s hrine ( or a t l east that i t began l ife a s s uch) g iven the a pparent discrepancy i n date between t he material a ssociated with i ts c onstruction a nd the p rincipal o fferings. There was no c lear evidence o f the g ully having b een r ecut and, f rom Bartlett's ( 1987) a ccount, i t had l argely s ilted up b efore intensive d eposition s tarted. I t may, therefore, be p referable t o v iew these o fferings a s a s econdary, o r even p ost-abandonment, use o f an earlier c ircular building on

3 96

the hilltop, although the recovery of 6 uninscribed gold coins (plus 1 core) - the highest total recorded outside the cella (but see Rodwell, 1981) - could point to a comparably early phase of offerings here. The LPRIA metalwork sealed in pits and postholes here will be particularly important in understanding the earliest stages of this process, and, indeed, in furnishing a terminus post quem for the deposition of the ubiquitous loam layer, the origins of which must also be in question. As in 1962-71, the quantity of wheelmade LPRIA grog­ tempered pottery recovered was limited. Holbrooks 'Settlement', Excavations 1970-1. Conlon (1973); Fitzpatrick (1985); Coin report: Allen (1973).

of.

Mackreth

(1981).

Beside the Temple, over 100 other Iron Age coins have been recorded from Harlow. The largest number of site finds are the 35 coins from the 1970/1 rescue excavations at Holbrooks, over an area of Q 5.5 ha, 0.5 km NE of the Temple. The majority of these coins came from a small area where quantitites of brooches, bone and bronze pins, bracelets, rings, intaglios, lead weights and a group of indubitably 'votive' items - gilt-bronze 'letters', minature axes, bronze leaves, etc. - were also found. Conlon (1973) interprets the area as a manufacturing centre producing votive items for use at the Temple, but a better suggestion (Fitzpatrick 1985) may be that this area was another ritual locus. Many of the votive items were apparently in primary contexts, and types effectively absent from the Temple. While Britain has yet to produce conclusive evidence of the extensive rural ritual complexes so common in Gaul, there are strong hints at a number of sites e.g. Frilford (Ringley, 1982); Harlow could easily be added to the list. Chronologically, the Holbrooks assemblage runs from the late Clst BC to the C4th AD, much of the material dating from the mid-second century onwards. Only two definite Iron Age features were found, both pits which produced sherds from large storage vessels and other early Clst wares (Thompson, 1982). However, many of the artefacts likely to have been deliberately deposited show the same Clst AD emphasis as at the Temple, most obviously (apart from the Iron Age coins themselves) the brooches, 136 (out of a total of 146) being first century types, including Nauheim derivatives (of. Mackreth, 1981) and a high incidence of Colchester derivatives (30%) with the post-Conquest emphasis this gives. Also Clst AD are the two intaglios. It is possible then that Holbrooks represents a pattern of Clst AD deposition complementary to the Temple. A comparable terminus ante quem is also afforded by the construction of the first flint and mortar buildings on the site, which could themselves have a religious context. Unfortunately the substantial structure found to the west of the main area was undated, but there was evidence for 397

the demolition o f p lastered buildings and t essellated f loors by the late C 2nd AD, which c ould imply that t hese w ere s omewhat earlier. A s eries o f rubbish pits c ontaining C lst AD material a long the eastern boundary o f the s ite w ould r elate well to a c omplete r e-organisation o f the s ite a t that p eriod. Apart f rom three c oins f ound a fter the c onclusion o f the r escue excavation, the c oins were published by A llen ( 1973). Belgic Gaul B ritish 1 A E S cheers No.80f-j 1 AR S E62 ( Found in 1 973) ( identified a fter 6 AE S E72.1 ( 1 in 1 973) 1 973) 1 AE S E74.1 T otal: 1 1 AE E 71.1 2 AE 1 /2 E71.1 5 AE E 71.2 2 AE E 72 1 AE E 73 3 A E E 82.2 2 AE E 83.1 1 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 in 1 973) T otal: 3 5 The a ssemblage has two points o f i nterest; the presence o f a C ontinental bronze i ssue when these w ere absent f rom the T emple, a nd the p reponderance ( 55%) o f p re-Cunobelinus i ssues, which i s much h igher than f or the T emple. Deposition a t Holbrooks was therefore e ither earlier o r, t o a ccommodate the evidence o f the b rooches, a t l east s tarted earlier. Unknown S ite.

Harlow a rea.

A llen

Haselgrove

( 1973);

Q

1 968.

( 1978);

F itzpatrick

( 1985).

5 5 I ron A ge c oins s upposedly f rom the Harlow a rea came o n t o the market in 1 969. They w ere described a s having b een f ound w ith a f ew Roman c oins i n the c onstruction o f a car park a t O ld Harlow, 2 km f rom the H olbrooks and T emple s ites. H owever, F itzpatrick has been unable to verify the f indspot. A s i t i s well o utside the a rea o f the known I ron A ge a nd Roman c omplex and t he date o f the discovery c oincides w ith the landscaping o f the T emple and the early s tages o f the Holbrooks s ite, i t i s much more l ikely that the c oins a re a c ollection f rom o ne o r o ther o f these s ites ( their r esemblance t o the unstratified g roup f rom the West Range o f the T emple i s particularly s triking). Roman 5 Unspecified?

Total:

5

B ritish 7 A E E 71.2 1 A E E 71.3 2 A E E 72 1 A E E 82.1 8 A E E 82.2 3 A E E 83.1 3 1 A E E 83.2 1 A E S E82.1 P ossibly 1 AR EA72.1 T otal: 5 5

3 98

Kelvedon.

A rea o f R oman Small Town

( KE).

Excavations 1 970-3. P ublication f orthcoming. W . a nd K . Rodwell, P ers. Comm. S ee a lso Rodwell, W . ( 1975) Rodwell, K . ( 1979); Rodwell and Rodwell ( 1975); Eddy ( 1982). I ron Age s ettlement on the River B lackwater was s ucceeded by a s mall t own in the Roman period . There i s evidence o f an early f ort. Only the peripheries o f the LPRIA s ettlement have been excavated, a lthough r ectilinear building p lans are r ecorded ( Rodwell, K ., 1 979), the range o f material indicates a s ettlement o f s ome wealth e .g. Dr.1B and D r. 2-4 amphorae, S outhern S panish and Dr.20 amphorae, GB f ine wares ( Ti o utnumbering TR), butt and g irth beakers a nd a s ingle s herd o f Arretine ( late Augustan-Tiberian). Briquetage was a lso f ound in s ome quantity. I ndigenous grog-tempered f abrics include typologically early f orms ( Thompson, 1 982). Glass beads, b rooches a nd an unusual s tamp-decorated v essel w ith later I ron Age parallels i n Gaul were a lso f ound.

A .

Swanmead.

NE end o f V illage

( 1970)

Unstratified 1 AE I llegible f rom base o f t opsoil c lose t o a rea o f LPRIA occupation ( Coin No.7) 1 AE E82.1 f rom base o f t opsoil i n a rea o f m id C lst AD and later o ccupation ( Coin No. 9) 1 A E E82.2 f rom p loughsoil in a rea o f LPRIA activity o n middle b eanfield ( Coin No.8)

B .

S outh s ide

o f early F ort

a nd Small T own

1 .

K 1 042 Ditch. M id . C lst AD. S econdary . 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 1). A ssociations: N /S. F ound a t a point where t he ditch cut through the f loor l evels associated w ith an LPRIA r ectangular building o f late C 1st BC/Clst AD date. The f loor l evels c learly s till s urvived when Roman f eatures cut through them ( see below KE4, 6 , 7 ) but had s ubsequently been r emoved by p loughing. They contained large q uantities o f LPRIA p ottery, charcoal, briquetage, La ' Ml le I II brooches, e tc.

2 .

S ection o f LPRIA d itch. Early/Mid C lst AD . S econdary . 1 A E E 82.2 ( M252). Associations: LPRIA p ottery, early C 1st AD

3 .

K864 Ditch a t a l ittle distance f rom any earlier Late C lst AD. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 1). Associations: N /S.

4 .

K1050 Feature c ut through s ame c ontexts a s KE S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 ). Associations: N /S.

5 .

K 1011 Later g rave i n LPRIA enclosure. 1 A E E 82.1 ( M222). Associations: N /S.

3 99

( 1972)

C 4th AD .

1 .

f eatures.

C 3rd AD.

S econdary.

6 .

K982 Later g rave cut through s ame c ontexts a s KE 1 . C4th AD. S econdary. 1 P otin Belgic Gaul S cheers No.190 Associations: N /S.

7 .

K 1048 Later g rave cut through same c ontexts AD. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P 1). Associations: N /S.

8 .

K 1047 Later g rave C4th AD. P rimary? 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type

a t

a distance

P 1).

a s KE

1 .

C4th

f rom any earlier deposits.

Associations:

N /S.

K . Rodwell observes that a ll the Roman f eatures c ontained a g reater p ercentage o f LPRIA material ( generally p ottery) than Roman. W ithout p ositional i nformation, the g rave f inds, e specially No.8, have to be a ssumed r esidual f rom disturbed c ontexts. W . Rodwell ( 1976) has a lso a rgued that s ince late I ron A ge o ccupation o f this a rea was largely i f n ot wholly a ttributable t o the C lst BC, a nd shifted a way f rom there until a Roman f ort was e stablished s oon a fter the C onquest, the p otin c oins s hould r elate to the earlier a ctivity rather than later. I f s o, t his i s a f urther a rgument f or a n early dating f or p otin manufacture, but d ifficult t o s ustain i n the a bsence o f s tratigraphic proof.

C .

1 971 Excavations by Chelmsford Archaeological Dunnett) a t TL 8 64167

9 .

G 1 ( 3) Context: N /S. P ost-Conquest. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P ). A ssociations:

NFD . mid C lst

T rust

( R.

AD p ottery.

1 0.

B 2 ( 39). I n a p ost-hole. Date unspecified. 1 A E/AR E 82.1 ( M215). Associations: N /S.

D .

H igh S treet

1 1.

F ill o f ditch, S o f H igh S treet. LPRIA/ER? S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( 1 4224), 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4251). Associations: ' Belgic' p ottery . P art o f a largely unstratified c ollection o f material dug up in Kelvedon 1 956-1963 f rom p its and ditches, i ncluding b rooches and p ottery; much o f the latter i s i llustrated by T hompson ( 1982).

( 1956 excavations.

e tc.)

Unstratified f ind 1 AE/AV.1/4 S E52.3. F rom garden o f Lawn S treet, f rom within a rea o f Roman S ettlement.

W ickford,

B eauchamps Farm

S econdary.

House,

H igh

( WB).

Excavations 1 966-1970. F inal Report i n p reparation. W . and K .Rodwell. ( Pers. Comm.). S ee a lso Rodwell ( 1975); Rodwell, K . ( 1979). I nitially identified a s

a f armstead o ccupied f rom the early

4 00

C lst AD to the late C 4th AD, the r ectangular building and the enclosure i n w hich i t s tood a re now interpreted a s the eastern edge o f an extensive s ettlement a rea which became a small town i n the R oman p eriod. The building was s tratified beneath Roman l evels and part o f a g ravel f loor r ecovered; o utside was a g roup o f p its. C lst AD c remations, not part o f a r egular c emetery, have a lso been excavated. The f inds included S outh S panish Dr.20 amphorae, TS and GB wares; s ome o f the j ars c arried graffiti. No Dr.1, 2 -4 o r S outh S panish amphorae w ere f ound. 1 -8. Part o f a s tratified s equence o f LPRIA deposits, i ncluding s tructures, that has yet t o be f ully synthesised s o p recise c ontext details a re n ot y et available. Estimated date: mid C lst BC - m id C lst AD: 1 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L ) 1 A E E72? ( M192?) 1 AE/AV 1 /4 E 82.1 ( 1 . 1209 - identification f airly c ertain) 3 A E E 82.2 ( 1 . 1225, 2 50, 2 53) 1 A E B elgic Gaul S cheers No.89 1 A E I llegible ( poss. a c orner o f an AE/AV Cunobelinus) 9 .

" Residual i n R oman o ccupation deposits". AD . S econdary . 1 A E E 81 ( M223). A ssociations: N /S.

C 2nd AD

1 0.

" Residual i n Roman p it". C 2nd - C4th AD . 1 A E E 82.2 ( M225). A ssociations: N /S.

S econdary .

1 1.

Top o f Roman Well. C4th AD 1 AE/AV E 61.1 ( LB var.) C oins ( a)

( The

lacking a rchaeological

( or later?).

- C4th

S econdary.

c ontext:

F rom builders'

s poil heap:1 P otin P 1.5 1 AV S E72.1 s ite was b eing developed a s

a housing e state.)

( b)

Excavation c oins: 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P ) This c oin was s ent t o Oxford f or r ecording photography w ith d etails o f i ts c ontext. ( c) 1 AV E 82 A g old r ecorded a s f ound here i n

" horse" 1 938.

4 01

c oin

o f

a nd l ost b efore

Cunobelinus

i s

HAMPSHIRE

Hayling

I sland Roman T emple.

( HI).

Excavations 1 976-80. Downey, K ing and S offe ( 1977; 1 978; 1 979; 1 980; f ull publication f orthcoming and P ers. Comm .). 1 50 I ron Age c oins w ere f ound in t he excavations o f t his unusual Romano-Celtic t emple. T hey had evidently b een deliberately deposited t ogether w ith many o ther types o f a rtefacts - p ersonal i tems ( fibulae, f inger r ings, b racelets, b eads, e tc.); f our s peculum m irrors; horse a nd v ehicle t rappings ( including a t hree-link bridle bit, a t erret and s everal l inch p ins; warrior equipment ( socketed s pearheads, s cabbard f ittings, b elt-hooks a nd ? chain mail); s everal broken s word-shaped i ron ' currency' bars'; a nd m iscellaneous i tems i ncluding bronze tankard handles. T he p ottery belongs late in the S aucepan pot c ontinuum ( Cunliffe, 1 978a); wheel-turned c ordoned wares in the N orth F rench t radition and D r.1 s herds w ere a lso f ound. T he f aunal a ssemblage i s dominated by s heep/goat ( 61%) and p ig ( 39%). Many o f the m etal o bjects s how deliberate b reaks o r b ending. When the s tratigraphy i s published in f ull, i t s hould be p ossible t o r econstruct s ome o f the o riginal g roups o f o fferings ( cf. Hoard 1 8); until t hen, analysis i s r estricted t o the o verall patterning o f the c oins i n d ifferent phases. The bulk o f the I ron A ge material c omes f rom the l oam l ayer s urrounding and particularly i n f ront o f the f irst c ircular t imber building, a nd f rom a ssociated p its, g ullies and t he r oughly s quare enclosure d itch which s urrounded i t. T his s tructure p robably s tood f rom t he s econd half o f t he C lst B C t o the s econd half o f the C lst AD when i t was l evelled t o make way f or a massive s tone-built r eplacement which embodied the main e lements o f i ts p redecessor o n a f ar l arger s cale. A s a t Harlow, t his f irst s tone building w ith material o f the 6 0s a nd 7 0s AD i n i ts c onstruction l evels, g ives a t erminus a nte quem f or t he m ain p eriod o f I ron A ge c oin deposition ( Phase I I). H owever, the i ncreased p roportion o f l ate types i mplies that I ron Age c oins c ontinued to b e u sed a s o fferings a fter this p eriod , i f o n a s maller s cale. I n P hase I I c ontexts, c oins o f P hases 7 -9 a ccount f or o nly 2 2% o f the t otal ( 7 c oins o ut o f 3 2) whereas i n P hase I II-IV c ontexts, t hey r epresent 5 9% ( 19 c oins o ut o f 3 2). C ertainly o ther o bjects c ontinued t o b e p laced i n the t emenos ( brooches, b one, p ottery, but n ot martial equipment) i ncluding numbers o f Roman c oins f ound a longside I ron A ge i ssues ( Phase I V). S ome o f the latter, however, a re bound t o be r esidual f rom the building o perations ( Phases I II, I V). Activity continued a t l east until t he end o f the C 2nd AD ( Phase I V, V I), w ith abandonment taking p lace in C 3rd-C4th AD ( Phase V II). There was f urther a ctivity in the Saxon p eriod ( Phase V III), but the I ron A ge coins f rom this a nd the p receding phase a re p resumably r esidual, a s were a number r ecovered f rom s uperficial c ontexts j ust below t he base o f the p loughsoil.

4 02

The coins a re l isted b elow by P hase; detailed information i s n ot yet available. Roman c oins up t o P hase I V o nly.

A .

Phase

I I

Contexts

( Pre-Roman:

Belgic Gaul/British 4 AV 1 /4 S E42.2 1 AE/AV 1 /4 S E42.2 1 AE/AV S E51 1 AE/AV S 50.3 1 AE/AR S cheers No. 41 2 AE B elgic Gaul? 2 P otin 1 S cheers No.206) 1 2 O ther Gaulish 3 AR A rmorican Gaul ( 1 C oriosolites, 2 J29) 1 P otin Central Gaul 4 Roman 3 AE/AR Republican 1 AE/AR Julius Caesar 1 AE/AR Mark Anthony 1 AE/AR Augustus 1 AE/AR T iberius 1 As C laudius I 8 T otal:

Total:

Total:

Total:

This t otal e xcludes l isted a s Hoard 1 8.

B .

Flavian terminus

B ritish 1 AR S W51 1 AE/AV S 63.1 1 AE/AV 1 /4 S 66.3 3 AE/AR S 66.3-4 2 AR S 66. 4 1 AE/AR S 67.1 1 AR S E61 1 AE/AV S E62 5 AR S T1.1 2 AR S T3.1a-2 1 AE/AR W61-71 1 AE/AR W71.1 1 AE/AV NE71.1 1 AE/AR S E72.1 1 AR 1 /4 S 72.1 1 AE/AR S 81-82 1 AE/AV W92 1 AE/AV 1 /4 I llegible 1 AE/AR I llegible 2 7

6 A E Northern

Gaul

Phase I II Contexts ( Construction l evels late 6 0s - early 7 0s AD) 1 AE/AR Phase

ante que r n?)

f ound

o f S tone

t ogether

T emple,

S 92

I I/III

C ontexts

1 A s Titus pre AD 79.

C .

Phase

Total:

I V C ontexts ( Roman S tone T emple t o end C 2nd AD) Continental 1 AV 1 /4 S E42 ( or B ritish) 1 AE/AV S E51 1 AR Eastern Gaul - T ogirix 1 AE Belgic Gaul S cheers No.83 4 R oman 1 8 up t o Faustina I . Coins o f T etricus and C onstantine b elieved i ntrusive T otal:

4 03

B ritish 1 A E/AV S 41 2 AR S T2 1 AR 1 /4 S T3.1b 1 AR S W61 2 AE/AR S W67-71 1 AE/AV 1 /4 S 72.1 1 A E/AR S 72.1 1 A E E 73 1 AE/AR S 81.2 1 AE/AV NE83.1 1 AE/AR I llegible 1 3

D .

Phase I II/IV Contexts during Roman p eriod)

s preads that

( gravel

Continental 2 AE/AR B elgic Gaul S cheers No.41 Roman 1 1 up t o Antonius

P ius

T otal:

E .

P hase

I I/IV C ontexts

( either

F .

P hase V C ontexts No

G .

( alterations

to

,

o r Roman)

B ritish 1 AR 1 AR 2 AE/AR 1 AR 1 /4 1 A E/AR 6

S 66. 3 S T2 S W61-71 S 72.1 S 72.1

i n early C 2nd AD)

I ron A ge c oins.

P hase early

V I C ontexts ( Post-alteration - late C 2nd AD) 1 A E/AV

H .

a dded

British 1 AR S T2 1 AR S T4 1 AE/AR W61 1 AE/AR SW71 81.1.2 2 AR S 1 AE/AR S 82 1 AR 1 /4 S 81-82 1 AE S W81 1 AE S W81 1 AE/AR S 94 llegible 1 AE/AV I 1 1

I ron A ge

C ontinental 1 AV 1 /4 S E42.2 ( or B ritish) 2 P otin C entral Gaul ( 1 Touraine) Roman 5 c oins t o Nero AD 64-8 T otal:

were

Phase

T otal:

V II C ontexts

1 /4

( Abandonment

C ontinental 1 A E/AV S E51 ( II/VII) 1 A E/AV B elgic Gaul, S cheers N o.27 elgic Gaul 1 P otin B Armorican Gaul 2 A R ( one I I/VII) Eastern Gaul, 1 A R S olima 6

4 04

activity/Occupation;

S 65.2.

C 3rd-C4th AD) B ritish 1 AR 1 A E/AR 1 A E/AR 1 AR 1 AR 1 AR 1 AR/AV 1 AR 1 AE/AV 2 AE/AR 1 AE/AV 1 AE/AV 1 AR 2 AE/AR 2 AE/AR 1 AE 1 AE/AV

S 67.2(IV/VII) S 68.2 1 /4 S 68. 2 S T1.1 S T2(II/VII) S T4. 3 E 61 E /63(II/VII) W 61 W61 S 72.2 1 /4 S 72.2 W 71.1(II/VII) S W71 S 82.2(IV/VII) S W81 I llegible

1 AE/AV T otal:

I .

J .

P hase V III

C ontexts

( Saxon)

T otal:

B ritish 1 AR 1 AE/AV 1 AE/AR 1 AE/AR 1 AE/AV 5

Unstratified o r

T otal

s urface

1 /4

I llegible ( II/VII)

2 1

S 66.4 ( VII-VIII) S 72.2 ( VII-VIII) 1 /4 S 82.2 ( VII-VIII) S 92 Uncertain

f inds

Continental 1 AV 1 /4 S E42.2 ( or B ritish?) 1 A E/AV 1 /4 S E42.2 ( " 2 AR Armorican Gaul, Coriosolites 1 P otin B elgic Gaul S cheers No. 1 94 1 P otin Gaulish 1 AR C entral Gaul Q Doci S am F 1 AE Northern Gaul Tasgetios 8

T otal:

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 0

B ritish AV S W41 ( 1/4 s urvives) AE/AR 1 /4 S E43.3 AR S WS1 A E/AV 1 /4 8 65.2 AE/AV 1 /4 S 66.3 A E/AR S 66.3 AR S 66.3-4 AE/AR S E62 AR S T1-2 AE/AR S E62 AE/AV E61 AR S 72.1 AE/AR S 71-72 AR S W71 AE/AV $ 81.2 AR 1 /4 S 82.1 A E/AV S 82.1 AR $ 82.2 AE S W81 AE/AR EA61-93

A s ilver i ngot marked with the graffito X was a lso f ound. 1 AE/AR uncertain was r ecorded in E ly's excavation a t the turn o f the c entury. The m ost s triking characteristic o f the c oin a ssemblage i s the p roportion o f p lated i ssues ( 19% o f the g old; 4 7% o f a ll s ilver i ssues), easily t he highest o f any large s ite c ollection i n B ritain. Nash ( in Downey e t a l., 1 980, 3 01) s uggests that this r eflects r etrieval o f many o f the precious metal o fferings when " early t emple" was dismantled, p ossibly t o d efray the expense o f the r econstruction. I t s hould, however, be p ossible t o t est this by examining the p roportion o f p lated t o unplated c oins i n c ontexts a lready s ecurely s ealed before the dismantling c ommenced. I t must be added that these s uggestions make c ertain a ssumptions - about the nature o f temple o fferings, about the means whereby labour a nd materials c ould b e mobilized - which n eed n ot be appropriate t o the period.

4 05

The p resence o f a b ronze tankard handle c losely r esembling o ne f rom the R iver Thames a t Kew i s o f i nterest g iven the number o f s outhern c oin types r ecovered there ( Hoard 4 5).

Owslebury,

B ottom P ond Farm

( OW).

Excavations 1 961-72. P ublication f orthcoming. ( 1968; 1 970; 1 971b; 1 973; 1 976); S elkirk ( 1971,

S ee C ollis 3 2-37).

Although w ith l ess than 1 0 I ron A ge c oins in s tratified c ontexts, Owslebury i s i ncluded a mongst the key s ites a s o ne o f t he very f ew LPRIA rural s ettlements where c oin evidence c an be r elated t o broader i ndicators o f e conomic a ctivity a nd l ong-distance t rade. The s ite i s a lso i mportant f or i ts LPRIA/early R oman c emetery, w hich i ncludes a warrior burial ( Collis, 1 973). The r emaining burials a re c remations. Overall t he c omplex c overs 4 -5 ha, but despite t his. t he s ettlement a ppears t o have b een a s ingle f arm. About half the main s ettlement a rea was excavated. Occupation, which p robably b egan i n C 3rd B C a nd c ontinues unbroken t o C 4th AD ( Collis, 1 976). P re-Roman i mports i nclude D r.1 ( A?), Dr.20 a nd P ascual 1 a mphorae, H engistbury C lass 5 ware ( cf. Cunliffe, 1 978b) a nd GB f abrics. The p rovisional p eriodisation i s:P eriod

1 Banjo enclosure

( C4th/3rd

C lst

B C)

Owslebury b egan a s a ' banjo' enclosure, c haracterised by c oarse s cratched handmade p ottery f abrics. A d ecorated c hariot l inch p in i mplies a n o ccupation o f r elatively h igh s tatus f rom the o utset. A s eries o f b ell-shaped s torage p its were c oncentrated a long t he w estern edge o f t he enclosure. By t he t ime decorated s aucepan p ottery a ppeared, m uch o f t he e nclosure d itch had a lready b een l evelled. P eriod 2 C 2nd AD)

M ultiple-ditched t rackway c omplex

( Clst B C-early

W ithin the c urrency o f the d ecorated s aucepan p ot t radition, the s ettlement was c ompletely r emodelled w ith s everal d itched t rackways r unning i nto a c omplex o f enclosures. B ell-shaped p its o f i ncreasing c apacity c ontinued until the s aucepan p ottery g ave way t o f ine s andy wheel-made f abrics, a development w hich C ollis l inks w ith those f ocussed o n Hengistbury Head. T he l atest and l argest o f the bell-shaped p its, b elonging t o t he handmade/ wheelmade p ottery t ransition a lso c ontained a D r.1 a mphora handle. ( Period 2a). The s ame l ayout c ontinued in the L PRIA, when the f ormal c emetery was e stablished. The p its w ere n ow s maller c ircular a nd o val f orms. A h iatus i s p ostulated i n t he l ater C lst B C ( Period 2 b). However, i n the early C lst AD, a n ew c eramic a ssemblage s uggests a change i n t he s ettlement's external l inks. This i ncludes l ocal c oarse a nd

4 06

f ine wares, but the major f eature i s the imported f orms/ fabrics; TN, TR, butt-beakers, f ine white f lagons, a s well a s more l ocal imitations o f GB p latters ( Period 2c). The Conquest b rought l ittle n oticeable change; o nly the appearance o f T Z distinguishing post-Conquest d eposits ( Period 2 d). The t rackways and enclosure d itch f ell i nto disuse t owards t he end o f the C lst AD and there was extensive quarrying i nto them. The c emetery was abandoned in the early C2nd AD . P eriod

3

Multiple-undefined-entrance phase

( C2nd-C4th AD)

Although o ccupation c ontinued, the " expected" v illa d id n ot materialise. New r ectangular ditched a rrangements were dug, but o verall the s ettlement l acked defined boundaries and the a ccess r outes t o the s ite w ere ditched. Only partial S . S TI

information i s

available.

1 .

S ite 1 AR

Unspecified c ontext. P eriod 2b/c. ( M321). A ssociations: N /S.

2 .

S ite P . L ower f ill o f quarry p it complex 2 6. P eriod 2 c. c Mid C lst AD? S econdary. 1 AR 1 /4 S 81.1 ( M120A). Associations: butt-beaker, TN, amphora, f ine white ware f lagon, one La T ene I I a nd three La Tene I II f ibulae. This c omplex cuts through the entrance ditch o f t he banjo enclosure a nd the ditched t rackway which f ollowed i t.

3 .

S ite Q . L owest f ill o f V -profiled ditch. P eriod 2 c. Q Mid C lst AD? S econdary. 1 AR 1 /4 S 81. 2 ( M120B). Associations: imported wares a s OW 2 , including TN, a nd o ther LPRIA p ottery, but n o T E " until a higher l evel o f the ditch".

4 .

S ite L . Unspecified c ontext. P eriod 2d . Early R oman. NFD . 1 ARI/4 S 72.1 ( M118). A ssociations: TS and r ather l ater pottery than OW2.

5 .

S ite L . F ill o f p it. P eriod 2d. Early Roman. S econdary. 1 AV S E51 ( GB E ). A ssociations: early Roman p ottery.

6 .

S ite P . Top f ill o f g ully. E ffectively unstratified. S econdary . 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P ). A ssociations: N /S. The gully i s o f L PRIA date, but the p otin was in t he t op f ill, m ixed w ith later material. A c oin o f Hadrian was f ound a f ew inches f rom i t.

4 07

LPRIA.

N FD.

S ilchester,

Calleva A trebatum R oman City

( SI).

( Fig.

A 5:3)

Excavations 1 821; 1 864-78; 1 890-1909; 1 938-9; 1 958-8; 1 9798 6. P ublication: excavations before 1 909 summarised in Boon ( 1969). S ee e specially J oyce ( 1873-4), S t. John Hope ( 1902); Cotton ( 1947); B oon ( 1969); Fulford and C orney ( 1984). S ee a lso Fulford ( 1981; 1 983; 1 984; 1 985; 1 986 and P ers. Comm.). Boon ( 1985) g ives an up t o date l isting o f the c oins. Large s cale exploration o f S ilchester began in 1 866 under Rev. James Joyce and c ontinues today with Fulford's excavation, the third o n the F orum/Basilica ( Fulford, 1 981). I t has long been a ccepted that this public t own had a p re-Roman p redecessor, f rom t he appearance o f CALLEV o r CALLE o n c oinage o f Eppillus, earthworks f ocussed o n the Roman c ity and f rom the development o f a major R oman s ettlement in an a rea dominated by heathland and p oorly drained c lay s oils. The p robable date f or the s o-called I nner Earthwork i s between 1 0 BC + and AD 5 0 + . A LPRIA date i s a lso p robable f or the Rampier Copse and S andy Lane earthworks. T ogether these r epresent t he earliest phase i n the defensive s equence and ( although discontinuous w ith o ne a nother) p rotected the western a pproaches t o t he the s ite. I nsufficient evidence exists f or dating the Outer Earthwork and Dyke S ystems. Two main nuclei o f late p re-Conquest o ccupation ( characterised by D r.1B and 2 -4 a mphorae, I talian and e arly S outh Gaulish TS, C entral Gaulish micaceous wares a nd GB i mports) can now b e r ecognised: the a rea a round the S outh Gate a nd immediately to the east o f i t, a nd beneath the s ite o f the Basilica. The bulk o f this material c omes f rom w ithin the l ine o f the I nner Earthwork, c ontrasting w ith the largest s catter f rom the p receding p eriod ( early/ mid C lst BC) which came f rom o utside i t, o ver B oon's S alient Dyke, a lthough f rom w ithin the Rampier C opse earthwork. I ncluded in the l argest s catter were two f ragments o f baked c lay s lab-mould o f d ifferent m odules ( Group 7 ). There w ere no GB wares o r o ther imports i n the c ollection. The earliest development s ummarised a s f ollows Fulford, 1 986): Late

I ron Age

o f the s ite o f the Basilica may be ( cf. Fulford and Corney, 1 984;

P eriod I ( early/mid-later C lst

BC)

There w ere two principal phases o f p re-Roman s ettlement, to the f irst o f which c an be a ttributed a s eries o f c ircular buildings defined by drip g ullies, a box-lined well and s ome s hallow pits. Grog-tempered handmade pottery i s the most i mportant c oarse ware a t this p eriod a nd imports a re l imited t o a f ew s craps o f f ine wares and D r.1 amphorae. Late

I ron Age

A major change

P eriod 2 ( later C lst in the layout

o f the

4 08

B C - Mid C lst AD) s ettlement

a rea beneath

S ILCHESTER

P ond F a rm

-

s i c h e s te.

E a r thwo rks L i ne o f l a te r c i ty w a l l

F ig .

A

B as i l ica

B

S ou th g a te

A5:3 f inds.

S ilchester:

l ocation o f

4 09

s ites with I ron Age

c oin

the basilica came w ith the e stablishment o f two r oads a t r ight a ngles t o o ne another and o f a n umber o f p lots p erpendicular t o the l ine o f t he s treets; these c ontained p its, w ells and a t l east two r ectilinear buildings. The p resence o f C entral Gaulish m icaceous wares and amphorae in the s lots a nd ditches which d efine t hese p lots, but not Gallo-Belgic wares o f North French o rigin, may w ell i ndicate a date before the latter b egan t o c irculate ( c 2 01 0 B C) f or these d evelopments, p ossibly a round the beginning o f the l ast quarter o f t he f irst c entury BC. F lint-gritted S ilchester wares f irst a ppear a t this t ime. The l atest phase o f t he s outhern r oad i s r epresented b y a well-metalled s urface which s ealed a ll the underlying ditches, a nd the p lots were n ow d efined by a palisade. A ssociated w ith t his w ere a s eries o f p its o r s coops which c ontained C laudio-Neronian p ottery, p ointing to c ontinuing o ccupation down t o t he third quarter o f t he f irst c entury AD. The upper f illing o f the P eriod 1 w ell c ontained a r ich a ssemblage i ncluding amphorae, I talian Arretine, TN a nd TR. P edestal u rns w ere a lso p resent a t this p eriod . Early R oman P eriod 3 ( c AD 5 5/65

- c AD 8 0/90)

The earliest R oman s tructures a re t wo r anges o f t imber buildings, the w estern o ne c 5 5 b y 1 0 i n , w ith 1 0 r ooms, p robably o f two p hases, p erhaps part o f a c ourtyard a rrangement. This c omplex a ligns w ith t he Roman s treet g rid which i tself a pparently p ost-dates t he amphitheatre a nd t own baths ( Fulford, 1 984). I t s eems l ikely t hat t he " courtyard" c omplex r epresents a p re-Flavian f orum. F rom the p ottery s catters, t he extent o f t he P eriod 3 o ccupation s eems s imilar t o P eriod 2 , a lthough t he quantity o f material i s g reater. P eriod 4 ( Flavian-Hadrianic) The " courtyard" building was s ucceeded by a l arge t imberbuilding w ith a n a isled hall a nd s eparate entrance hall. This t imber basilica has a t erminus p ost quem o f AD 7 8, a nd was r eplaced w ithin t he s ame p eriod by o ne in masonry, c onstructed o n a made-up p latform up t o a m etre h igh , which g reatly enhanced t he p reservation o f t he earlier c ontexts. The s ubsequent d evelopment o f the a rea ( Fulford, 1 981) n eed n ot be r epeated h ere. L imited i nformation i s a vailable about the c ontexts o f t he c oins f rom the Basilica excavations u p t o 1 984. F inds i n 1 985-6 have i ncluded a f urther A R S outhern and a n A E S outhern Gaul DLT 2 657/2677 ( ascribed t o the V olcae A recomici), the l atter f rom o ne o f t he s lots which define the p eriod 2 r ectangular p lots ( Fulford, 1 986).

A .

Outside the I nner Earthwork

1 .

" At the Eastern Gate". 1 821 excavations. No s pecific c ontext ( Archaeol. J . 1 1, 1 854, 5 7) 1 AV S W41 ( Br B ) dug up w ith a s econd A E o f Maximian and a

4 10

m iniature bronze axe among a shes and bones ( deers' h orns, e tc.) i n a s pace about three f eet s quare and within the d epth o f three f eet. ( Or AR S W51?)

2 .

B eneath the North Rampart ( near the Amphitheatre g ate). P it A l f ill. P eriod 2 , mid C lst AD. S econdary. 1 AE E83.2 ( M243). Associations: Butt-beaker in p ipe-clay ( Tiberian); buff f abric r immed b eaker ( Tiberian-Claudian); r ouletted butt-beaker o f yellow f abric; c ordoned g lobular urns; r ed-slipped ware; various c oarse wares including imitations o f Haltern 72-72b and s torage vessels. T S was absent a nd the excavator c omments on the absence o f p edestalled f orms. The o ccupation l evel s ealing the p it c ontained inter a lia an a s C laudius I ( Copy); a Hod Hill b rooch; a nd unidentifiable TS f ragments. From the published s ection ( Cotton, 1 947 Fig. 1 ), the c oin was f ound i n the uppermost f ill o f the p it.

B .

C lose t o the

3 .

I nsula XXIIb o r XXVII. 1 901 e xcavations. C ontext N /S. 1 AE/AV S 52.1 ( Br QB). Associations: N /S. I t i s n ot c lear f rom which I nsula this c oin came; XXVII i s o ver the p resumed l ine o f the I nner Earthwork, XXIIb i s o utside.

C .

Within t he

4 .

I nsula XXXIV a longside a wall excavations. C ontext: N /S. 1 P otin B elgic Gaul, S cheers No.195. Area o f

I nner Earthwork.

North-east

s ection

I nner Earthwork o f

House

1 .

Associations:

1 874 N /S.

S outh Gate

5 .

" South Gate o r d itch o utside". 1 873 excavations. N FD. 1 AE/AV N E71.2 ( Br KB), 1 AE S W81 ( 1 4318), 1 A E B elgic Gaul S cheers N o.80e.

6 .

Sandy u pper f ill o f I nner Earthwork d itch, S ite JB. P eriod 2 , post-Conquest. S econdary. 1 A E I llegible ( disintegrated a fter d iscovery). Associations: two GB p latter c opies ( one Cam 2 4, C laudian) and a f ragment o f Ti; c oarse wares. Earthy s and o n t op o f this f ill p roduced two TN p latters ( Cam 5 A,8).

7 .

1 974 Rampart S ection P it 1 f ill. P eriod 2 , m id C lst AD . S econdary. 1 AE 8 E71.1 ( LY10). Associations: T iberio-Claudian I talic? and early Gaulish T S ; T iberio-Claudian/Claudian G E wares ( Ti, T R); b eakers o f B ritish o rigin; D r.2-4 amphora; briquetage; l ocal hand-made c oarse wares. I mports f orm 2 9% o f the a ssemblage, g rog-tempered p ottery 40% a nd f linttempered p ottery 3 1% . The p it was probably n ot f ully f illed until a fter AD 43.

8 .

Are

o f the F orum/Basilica

F423

8 37.

I nfilling

( Fulford,

o f well.

4 11

P ers.

C omm.)

Augustan-Tiberian C ontext.

NFD. P eriod 2 . 1 AR New type o f. S 66. 4 ( Boon, N o. 9), 1 AE Belgic S cheers No.80c? Associations: Augustan-Tiberian T S.

Gaul

9 .

5 56. Augustan-Tiberian Context. Dating p rovisional. NFD . P eriod 2 . 1 AR S 72.1 ( cf. M 118), 1 AE E 73 ( M190). Associations: Augustan-Tiberian T.

1 0.

F 625 1 119. P eriod 2 . 1 AE S E72.1

P re-AD 6 0 ( LX23).

c ontext.

Dating p rovisional.

A ssociations:

NFD .

p re-AD 6 0 TS.

1 1.

1 241. P re-AD 60 Context. Dating p rovisional. NFD. P eriod 2 . 1 AE B elgic Gaul S cheers No.83 Var. Associations: p re-AD 60 T Z

1 2.

F 246 4 17, 4 18. Lowest infill o f " unfinished" ditch b eneath Basilica . C laudio-Neronian ( Period 3 ). S econdary. 1 AR1/4 S 72.1 ( cf. M 118), 1 AR1/4 New type o f. S 81.2 ( Boon, No.13). Associations: C laudian/Claudio-Neronian p ottery including T Z and a green-glazed Central Gaulish terra cotta l ion j ug, c rucible f ragments, cuprous s lag and s lab m ould f ragments. This i s a defensive f eature o f s hort d uration ( c AD 4 5-55/60)

1 3.

F401 7 02 Flavian c ontext. NFD. P eriod 4 . 1 AE E 82.2 ( M250), 1 A E B elgic Gaul S cheers N o.80a. Associations: N /S. The latter c oin i s a nciently p ierced.

1 4.

F 333 5 75. Backfill 1 P otin B elgic Gaul

o f a rchaeological t rench. S cheers No.195.

Victorian.

Unstratified Two c oins were 1 908-9:

f ound i n the

s poil

o f t he F orum excavations,

B ritish 1 AE E 83.2 ( M244) 1 AE? I llegible C oins

f rom the

1 890-1909 R esearch excavation

Apart f rom S I3 a bove, i t i s impossible to determine w here within the walled a rea the I ron Age c oins f rom the S ociety o f Antiquaries r esearch excavation a t S ilchester w ere f ound. They w ere n ever p ublished a nd s everal w ere o nly r ecognised a s s uch l ater ( Boon, 1 954). The f ollowing a ppear t o be f rom these excavations but c ontamination is n ot impossible: ( a)

On Mill

S tephenson's

l ist

in Reading Museum

Continental 1 AE Belgic Gaul S cheers No.64 1 AE Belgic Gaul S cheers No.216* 1 AE Uncertain Gaulish? 1 P otin Eastern Gaul o f. DLT XVI, 5 393, e tc.

4 12

B ritish 1 AE/AV 2 AE/AV 1 AE/AR 2 AE

E 82.1 E 82.2 S 92 S W81

* The c oin i s unnumbered on S tephenson's l ist. A s o ther unnumbered c oins a re f rom J oyce's excavations, may have b een a s well. ( b)

Coins

r ecognised a s

I ron Age

1 A E/AV B elgic Gaul 1 AE B elgic Gaul

a t

T otal:

Surface

f inds

o n o ther

Total: f rom P ond Farm.

2 1 1 3 1 1 1 5

AE A E A E AE AR AE

E 71.2 E 71.3 E 83.1 E 83.2 Unstruck f lan Uncertain

o ccasions

C ontinental 1 AE B elgic Gaul S cheers No.87 1 974)

Coins

a l ater date

S cheers No. 2 9 S cheers No.110

Total:

the this

Mortimer West

B ritish 1 AV S 41.1 ( 1882, n ot n ecessarily inside walled a rea) 1 AR S 72.1 ( e 1 982, j ust east o f walled a rea) 2 End

Two AV c oins a re r ecorded f rom the v icinity o f a s mall earthwork known a s the F rith in the w oods 1 km NW o f the Inner Earthwork. B oon ( 1969) s uggests this may b e a LPRIA enclosure belonging to the earliest p hase o f a ctivity on the plateau. An analogy with e .g. Gatesbury/Braughing, e tc. i s plausible. The f eature i s, however, undated a nd no f inds were r ecorded during the extra-mural s urvey. The c oins were: C ontinental 1 AV S E51.3

Other baked c le,, 3 7 s lab-moulds

B ritish 1 AV S 63.1

f rom within the Walled a re

A number o f o ther baked-clay s lab-moulds have b een excavated on various o ccasions, e ight o f them b etween 1 8901 909 ( Boon, 1 954). One came f rom I nsula I I i mmediately NW o f the Basilica , and another f rom a r ubbish p it o utside the West Gate ( but i nside the inner earthwork). Two f urther f ragments were d iscovered i n the extra-mural s urvey o utside the I nner Earthwork. All these f inds a re p lotted in Fulford and C orney ( 1984, F ig. 8 5). While Rodwell's ( 1976) s uggestion that unstruck f lans may indicate a mint o n the s ame s ite cannot be p ressed, i t i s not c ontradicted by the p ossible S ilchester example i n base s ilver, which i s o n the normal module ( 12 mm) f or late S outhern and S outh-Eastern s ilver. M ost o ther f inds in the S tudy Area a re a lso f rom s ites where m inting i s p robable: Braughing ( 1 A E), Camulodunum ( 6 AE), Canterbury ( 1 AE) and Rochester ( 1 A E?).

4 13

HERTFORDSHIRE

Baldock.

a rea o f Roman small town.

( BA).

Excavations 1 928-9; 1 968-72; 1 980-1. P ublication: S tead a nd Rigby ( 1986); Westell ( 1931); I . M.Stead and V . Rigby ( Pers. C omm.). S ee a lso S tead ( 1975); S elkirk ( 1983a, 70-4); Burleigh ( 1982). The important LPRIA complex a t Baldock on the North Hertfordshire chalk beside the I cknield Way is o ne o f o nly two s ites n orth o f the Thames where Dr.lA amphora h as been f ound ( Peacock, 1 984). A major s ettlement was in e xistence f rom the l ate C lst BC o nwards, d eveloping into a small Roman t own. The 3 ha hillfort o n W ilbury Hill o verlooking the s ite has a lso produced LPRIA material and may well s tand i n the s ame r elationship t o B aldock a s does e .g. Gatesbury to B raughing. Major excavations c ommenced i n 1 968 f ollowing the d iscovery o f the f irst o f two LPRIA bucket burials: this c ontained two b ronze-bound buckets, a l arge b ronze cauldron, t wo iron f ire dogs, two bronze dishes and a D r.lA amphora ( Stead, 1 971). The s econd burial, i n a large r ectilinear enclosure, was f ound i n 1 980-1; f inds i ncluded melted o rnaments and f ragments o f i ron chain mail in o ne p it, a nd the bucket i n another. This burial was 4 50 i n away f rom the f irst, i n the NE quadrant o f the Roman t own which i s where the m odern excavations have been concentrated. The main a rea excavations were in Upper Walls Common ( 19701 ) a nd in Walls F ield ( 1972). The earliest f eatures, belonging t o the mid f irst c entury B C, were a n etwork o f ditches i n Walls F ield, but by the e nd o f the c entury, a n ew s ystem o f p lots was i n being, e xtending NE into U pper Walls C ommon. A gap between the two main p lots i n Walls F ield i mplies that the r oad which o ccupied this p osition throughout the Roman period was e stablished a t this t ime. O ther c ontemporary f eatures include o ne o r more s quare f unerary enclosures outside the enclosure p lots. H owever, p its a nd gullies, a nd the a mount o f p ottery, indicate that by the C onquest, the s ettlement had extended past t hem to c over the whole excavated a rea. The C laudio-Neronian period i s marked by a s harp c hange in the c eramic t radition and by ditches a nd p its throughout both a reas w ith the r oad t hrough Walls F ield now c rossing Upper Walls C ommon, carefully defined by ditches and i ntroducing a s lightly different a lignment there. T he r oad c ontinued i n use throughout the F lavian p eriod, but the ditches were a llowed to s ilt and buildings encloached on the r oad-line. Also in use by the early F lavian p eriod was the extensive c remation c emetery i n the s outhern part of Walls F ield f irst investigated by W estell in 1 928-9 and a gain i n 1 986 ( Site D ), a s econd c emetery t o the n orth o fthe s ettlement ( Site E ) c oming into use in the earlier C 2nd AD. A number o f f irst c entury wells and c ess p its w ere a lso excavated.

4 14

The most intensive a ctivity lasted o nly until the C 2nd AD, a fter which the s ite was o ccupied by f ields and was marginal t o the main s ettlement, a lthough the earlier r oadl ine c ontinued t o be used throughout the later Roman period. The pre-Roman f inds included handmade and wheelmade p ottery f orms i n g rog-tempered fabrics 1 and 2 , and a brooch s equence s tarting with a g roup o f s imple La Töne I II f orms in copper a lloy; the o ther main pre-Conquest types a re C olchester, Langton Down and especially Nauheim derivatives. Three unfinished Colchester brooches indicate that these were manufactured o n the s ite; o ther evidence o f metalworking i ncluded bronze s lag and c rucible f ragments. The main imports f ound a t Baldock were North F rench GB wares, w ith s ome Central Gaulish f lagons and p latters ( which p resumably p receded them). L ittle p re-Claudian T S was f ound a nd o nly o ne s herd o f Arretine. S urprisingly, o nly 1 0 s herds o f I talian amphora were r ecovered apart f rom the vessel in the burial, a lthough S panish D r. 20 a mphora was reasonably abundant. Apart f rom uncovering the s econd bucket burial ( in the NW part o f the f ield) the 1 980-1 excavations s ampled the S W part o f Upper Walls Common ( the whole o f which i s c overed by cropmarks i ndicative o f s ettlement a ctivity, i ncluding r oads, f ields, p its and enclosure boundaries). A s eries o f L PRIA d itched enclosures, s everal t imes r ecut and virtually undisturbed by Roman activity, were r evealed, t ogether with two circular buildings ( Burleigh, 1 982). The enclosure d itches y ielded a number o f I ron Age c oins i ncluding a n AR E 72 inscribed D IAS o f h itherto unrecorded t ype, a nd an AE1/2 E 71.2; no f urther details a re a vailable a t present. T he s tratification o f the f ollows:-

c oins

f ound

b efore

1 980-1

was

a s

A

Upper Wall's Common 1 970-1 a rea excavation a djacent N E s ide o f Walls F ield ( Site A )

1 .

A96. 5 cm down i n f ill o f deep p it. F irst quarter C lst AD . S econdary. 1 AE E71.2 ( M172). Associations: LPRIA pottery.

2 .

A 156. 1 0 c m down i n f ill o f r oad gully s ealed by s urfacing o f Roman r oad A 181. S econd quarter C lst AD. S econdary. 1 AR E 61.3 ( LX19). A ssociations: None s pecified. S ee BA 1 2 b elow .

3 .

A 331. Fill ( 2) o f ditch, p robably c ontinuation o f enclosure d itch A 106. S econd quarter C lst AD, p robably p ost-Conquest. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4246). Associations: LPRIA pottery including c omplete handmade j ar with i ncised decoration o n r im, c ordoned j ar ( F2) and p edestalled jar and two c ordoned j ars, one w ith everted r im ( all in F 8). A t s ome time during t he mid C lst AD , u tilitarian v essel types in F 2 were

4 15

t o the

r eplaced by more g rained but s till g rog-tempered F 8 in a marked break in typological development, traditional f orms being r eplaced by new. F ill ( 3) c ontained a s crap f rom a S outh Gaulish TS p latter and a base f rom a TN p latter, both pre-Flavian. 4

A461 Fill o f Burial 3 . Early/Mid C lst AD. S econdary? 1 AE E 82.2 ( M252). Associations: Base and l ower body o f pot. This was s et in a p it 2 8 c m d iameter, c 1 2 cm deep, s ituated 9 i n S E o f Burial 2 . The base o f the pot c ontained c remated bone. According to the R eport, the c oin and a piece o f burnt c lay daub were f ound in the t op o f the surviving f illing - whether o f t he pit o r the p ot i s n ot c lear - and need not n ecessarily b e c onnected w ith t he burial.

5

A63 F ill ( 1) o f s hallow p it. P re-Flavian? S econdary 1 AE E 71.2 ( M183A), 1 AE E 83.2 ( M246). A ssociations: large GB p latter with unidentifiable r adial s tamp p laced o ver double-bordered hearth ( pre-Claudian), two imported, hard white f lagons ( F2, p re-Flavian/Flavian), c ombed, b urnished bowl ( F8). The Report g ives the p it a date o f f irst quarter C lst AD, but o ne c oin i s evidently l ater a nd both c ame f rom the f irst s crapings a fter the r emoval o f the t opsoil a nd a re not usefully s tratified. The whole g ateway a rea was a nasty muddy melange ( V. Rigby, P ers. C omm.).

6

A 159 Upper f ill o f s hallow p it a t a depth o f 3 0 c m. AD507 0. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4242). Associations: burnished f lask o r f lagon ( F2 p re-Flavian/early F lavian); everted r im o f c olourless g lass bowl. P it i s s ealed by Roman r oad dated t o l ate f irst century AD o nwards ( see BA17).

7

A 119 1 8 cm deep in f ill o f deep probably c AD 5 0-80. S econdary. 1 AE S E 7 4.2 ( LX22). Associations: Flavian p ottery.

p it.

Later

C lst

pre-Flavian t o

AD , early

8

A334. F ill o f quarry s coop. AD 7 0-90. S econdary . 1 AR E 71.2 ( 1 4161). A ssociations: c opper alloy " Nauheim derivative" and Colchester brooches, the l atter unfinished, possibly discarded during manufacture; c opper alloy tweezers; i ron l eaf-shaped b lade w ith c losed s ocket, spiral f errule. P ottery: S outh Gaulish s tamp P RIMUS i ii die 1 8b Form 2 7 ( pre-Flavian), TN p latter Cam 2 1 5 BC-AD 5 5), Central Gaulish micaceous TN p latter, Cam 4 1 0BC-AD 2 5), c oarse ware bowl with i ncised decoration ( F2). P erforated pottery disc f rom c ombed s torage v essel F 2; sub-rectangular c lay s lab w ith r ounded edge o f. W heeler's Belgic bricks; f ragment o f c ircumference o f mouth o f hollow c ircular c lay container i n oven-fired c lay ( ?briquetage).

9

A 160. F ill ( b) o f r oad gully s ealed by s urfacing o f Roman road A 181. AD 7 0-90 S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4248). Associations: f ragment o f wheelmade beaker- s haped c rucible ( Roman t ype) and f ragments of 2 c lay s labs with r ounded edges. S ee BA2 above.

4 16

1 0.

A 121. 2 5cm deep i n f ill o f i nter-cutting quarry hollow c omplex. AD 9 0-120. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4248). A ssociations: Butt-beaker with i ncised decoration ( F5, pre-Flavian/Flavian), minature s traights ided j ar ( F10 l ate C lst/early C 2nd AD), s ome p re-Claudian and o ther Flavian-Trajanic p ottery. Copper a lloy ear-scoop, r ounded a t perforated end, and f ragment o f b lade and f ang o f i ron knife.

1 1.

A321. ? bottom o f s quare s haft-like pit. AD 1 80-220. S econdary. 1 AE E73 ( 1 4189). Associations: Central Gaulish ( ?Vichy) decorated bowl, Form 3 7, s tyle o f Aucanissa ( c AD 1 25-40), r im o f c ream ware f lagon ( F24, late C2nd AD/C3rd AD). C opper a lloy brooch o f. Hawkes and Hull ( 1947) No.113 Type X III r elative o f Langton Down type, head and f oot w ith s oldered panels o f decoration; l ength o f broad, f lat c opper a lloy b racelet with g rooved, r ibbed body and s tamped decoration on the t erminal; c opper a lloy s plit p in w ith o pen c ircular h ead; f lint f lake with i rregular r etouch. P its o f this type c ontained l ayers o f cess. The c oin may be a ssociated with a g roup o f p re-Flavian pottery which i s c learly r esidual in t he pit.

1 2.

A317. F ill o f s quare s haft-like p it, a s BA9. AD 1 80-220 S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4246). A ssociations: c opper a lloy needle, and pair o f c opper a lloy tweezers a nd p ottery, mostly a fter AD 1 80, w ith s ome earlier material.

1 3.

A69. Top o f quarry-hollow. S econdary. 1 AE 1 /2 E 71.1 ( M ). Associations: the s equence o f f inds in this quarry hollow runs f rom the p rehistoric p eriod ( e.g. s herd o f Ebbsfleet ware) t o the C3rd AD , including p ottery, half o f the upper s tone o f a millstone g rit quern and a s herd o f m ould-blown natural g reen g lass f rom s ame Roman f ace-flask a s i n A237 a nd possibly B 104. Another extensive, intercutting c omplex in the entry to a p robable f arm area .

1 4.

A 58 Layer 1 o f r ecut ditch. C 3rd AD. S econdary. 1 AE E 83. 2 ( 1 4249) Associations: Dupondius Vespasian, Antonia ,nus Gallienus AD 2 59-268. Copper a lloy l arge Colchester and H od H ill brooches, c opper a lloy s tud and nail with bulbous head; d iamond-shaped i ron blade ( ?Roman s pearhead); i ron p rojectile p oint and narrow blade, b oth with f langed s ocket; i ron nail a nd f ragment o f ? heavy knife ( both C3rd AD); y ellow g lass i ntaglio, v ery thin and o val, s howing l ion walking r ight, cast f rom worn mould in c lassicising s tyle o f early C lst AD; o paque g reen cylinder bead with two s egments, c ommon f rom Roman s ites; p ottery C lst-C3rd AD. I t i s n ot s tated w hether these a rtefacts w ere f rom the undisturbed C laudio-Neronian l evels 3 -4 below, o r l ike the c oin were r esidual i n l ayer 1 , possibly disturbed by the r ecuttitg of the ditch which surrounds a farmyard a rea. An AE Magnentius ( AD 3 51-3) was f ound on top o f the ditch f ill.

1 5.

A418. Upper f illing C4th AD. S econdary.

( b)

o f i nter-cutting

4 17

quarry

hollow.

1 AE E71.2 ( M175). A ssociations: S estertius Crispina AD 1 80-3, 2 AE Constantine I ( AD 3 19-20; AD 3 30-5). C opper a lloy Nauheim derivative brooch with c opper a lloy r od through 2 c oils o f the s pring; c opper a lloy ear-scoops, nail cleaner; c opper a lloy s lide key , possibly f or casket ( C4th AD); base o f small unguent g lass f lask; 5 perforated, 2 unperforated discs f rom c ombed s torage j ar ( F2-F3) a nd c ooking p ot ( F2). L ower f illing ( a) o f quarry hollow c ontained p re-Flavian material. 1 6.

A 521 Surface o f r oad m etalling. Late C2nd - C4th AD . S econdary. 1 AE E71.2 ( M171). A ssociations: N ot s pecified, but s ee below. The r oad c ontained pottery dating f rom the mid C lst t o the late C2nd AD . A t t he NE s ide o f Upper Walls C ommon ( A188) t he r oad was d efined by g ullies a t l east 6m a part, but a t the S W end ( A521), where i t s loped down into Walls F ield, i t had weathered i nto a hollow way 3 -4m wide which p roduced f inds extending to t he C4th AD, i ncluding a n Antonianus Carausius AD 2 87-293, AE H ouse o f Theodosius ( AD 3 88-402), AE C4th AD; LS S outh Gaulish Montans Drag.37 ( AD 1 15-45) C entral Gaulish L ezoux Drag.37, D rag. 64 ( AD 1 401 60, AD 1 25-140) CG D rag.30, D rag.37 ( AD 1 50-90); c opper a lloy l igula. S ee a lso BA17.

1 7.

A 186 Above r oad s urface. E ffectively unstratified. S econdary. 1 AE E 71. 3, 1 AE E 82.1 ( M177, 2 30) Associations: N ot r elevant. The o riginal f lint m etalling o f the r oad s urvived o nly where there had b een s light s ubsidence into s oft patches i n the s ubsoil. Coins were f ound n ext t o o ne a nother, possibly l ost t ogether. R oadway s eals p it A 159 ( BA6). S ee a lso BA16. Unstratified C oins f rom Upper Walls C ommon 1 AE E71.2 ( 1 4179) 1 A E E 75.2 ( Tasciovanus, ( M ). Same type a s G reat Canfield, Appendix 1 . Obv. B earded h ead l eft, CAMLV , R ev . TASCI, g oat s tanding l eft with 3 r ing o rnaments.)

B

Walls Field 1 972 a rea excavation o n N E s ide a djacent t o Upper Walls C ommon ( Site 8 ).

1 8.

B 72 S ealed layer beneath r oad B 72. F irst quarter o f C lst AD, conceivably earlier. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P 1). Associations: P erforated p ottery disc f rom c ombed s torage j ar ( F2); B urnished tazze w ith evenly s paced c ordons ( F2, p re-Claudian) handmade s traights ided j ar with deeply i ncised d ecoration ( F2, C lst B C), handmade everted-rim j ar w ith h igh r elief c ombing ( F2, C lst BC); Mica-coated everted r im v essel, type c f. S keleton Green e tc. ( pre-Claudian). T he latter i s a n import f rom s ame Central Gaulish s ource a s m icaceous TR p latter Cam 1 and c ream/white s lipped f lagons Cam 1 69 . The TAQ f urnished by the Welwyn Garden C ity burial ( Stead, 1 967) implies t hat the import o f these m icaceous C entral Gaulish fabrics a nd p latters p redated that o f Arretine a nd GB f inewares a t t he end o f the C lst BC. The S ilchester s equence b ears this o ut ( Fulford, 1 986) and there a re a lso f lagons in burials a t

4 18

o f Walls

F ield

King Harry latest.

Lane which date t o the very early C lst

AD

a t

This context i s i mportant ( along with BR31) a s o ne o f the earliest datable o ccurrences o f the last p otin c oin type. Only the earliest a ssociated pottery i s i ncluded in the r eport ( V. Rigby, P ers. Comm.), but even s o, the a ssemblage i s not dissimilar t o g roups in c ontexts g iven a later C lst BC date elsewhere ( e.g. BR30). The c ontext thus p robably belongs very early i n P eriod i ii, but a late P eriod i i date i s not impossible. 1 9.

B 162. Top layer o f ditch. E ffectively unstratified ( early C lst AD?). S econdary . 1 AE/AV 1 /4 S E42.1 ( GB DC). A ssociations: ditch c ontained p re-Claudian p ottery o nly and i s dated AD 1 -25 in the r eport, but c oin came f rom t op layer and c ould be intrusive.

2 0.

B 34. Fill o f quarry s coop. F irst quarter C lst AD . S econdary . 1 AE S E 74.1 ( LX21). A ssociations: I ron knife w ith upward curving back and s trongly curved edge o f P RIA f orm; LPRIA p ottery.

2 1.

B 73. Top f ill o f r oad g ully. S econd quarter p robably p ost-Conquest. S econdary. 1 AE E83.2 ( M242). A ssociation: n one s pecified .

2 2.

B 26 Middle f ill o f c ircular p it with vertical walls. 9 0. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M242). A ssociations: undecorated bone f ragment, possibly a ntler. LPRIA - Roman p ottery.

C lst

AD,

AD70handle

2 3.

B 13. Fill ( 2) o f quarry p it, which cuts earlier well. AD 1 20-150. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5. ( Type 0 ). A ssociations: A a Vespasian AD 697 9; copper a lloy tweezers w ith bordering g rooves ( 2 pairs), s plit-nib pen ( Roman), s traight b inding; I ron o x-goad, bar s played, and f lattened a t o ne end; p erforated p ottery d isc f rom combed s torage j ar ( F2); f ragment o f bone and c reamed m ortar with wattle i mpressions o n the back. T S s tamp D IICV [ MINVS] o n L es Martres de Veyre Form 1 8/31 ( AD 1 20-50) decorated T Z S outh Gaulish p re-Flavian t o F lavian F orms 29, 3 0, 3 7. Central Gaulish Form 3 7 ( AD 1 00-120). B owl F6 decorated with 2 r ows o f c ircular s tamps; m ica-coated c ups ( or pedestal b owls) F 27-F28 ( early-mid C 2nd AD). Upper f ill o f quarry hollow c ontained c opper a lloy Langton Down and Colchester derivative brooches w ith material running through t o the C 4th AD .

2 4.

B 128. F ill(2-3) o f ditch . C 3rd AD . S econdary. 1 AE S E72.1 ( LX24). A ssociations: Denarius S everus Alexander AD 2 22-235; amber c oloured, r ibbed g lass s herd; s traight s ided pewter dish; p ottery p ost-a AD 2 40 . Disturbed by r ecutting o f ditch°

2 5.

B 120. F ill o f q uarry s coop. Late C3rd AD. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M243). Associations: Copper a lloy o bjects include brooch with f lat decorated bow, 4 c oil s pring,

4 19

internal chord, s olid catchplate ( cf. s hort Nauheim , m id C lst AD type), Nauheim derivative brooches ( 2), R osette brooch decorated with r epoussA p laque, Aucissa b rooch; parts o f two bracelets with incised decoration; f our s tuds, imported emerald g reen g lass sherd; bone s pindle whorl. T S s tamps REGVLIM on L ezoux Form 3 1 ( AD 1 45-175) and 0 [011 0 o n La Graufesenque Form 1 5/17 o r 1 8. 2 6.

1 .

B238 B elow r oad c obbles within quarry hollow. C4th AD. S econdary. 1 AE E75.1 ( M200). Associations: mixed f inds in very disturbed c ontext, i ncluding two g lass r im f ragments, o ne blue g reen, o ne g reen. Unstratified c oins f rom Walls F ield From 1 972 excavations 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 2).

2 .

From 1 968 t rial excavations a long beside C lothall Road ( Site D ). 1 AE E 82.2 ( M249)

3 .

1 970 f inds 4 AE E 83.2

4 .

F rom W . Westell excavations o f R oman c emetery and o ther a reas i n Walls F ield 1 925-30. 1 AE E 83. 2 ( M242). This c oin, L etchworth M . No.3817 i s provenanced by S tead and R igby, 1 986, 9 4. a s f rom a n early i nterment in t he Walls F ield Roman c emetery excavated by W estell. However, the c oin i s not s o mentioned i n the excavator's o wn detailed published i nventory ( Westell, 1 931) - two R oman c oins a re - and i s instead l isted w ith a g roup o f miscellaneous Roman c oin f inds, m ostly discovered during the excavations, but including s ome s tray f inds. T his s uggests that the I ron Age c oin was, in f act, unstratified.

5 .

O ther Twentieth C entury f inds 1 P otin P 1.4-5 ( Class I I). Given a s N ewbury's Meadows. 1 AE E 71. 3 ( M176). Walls F ield A llotments 1 AE E 73 ( M189) 1 AE E 83.1 ( M221). G iven a s Newbury's Meadows. 2 AE E 83.2 ( M242, M 249)

6 .

Nineteenth C entury f inds 5 + A E E 83.2 ( M242 ( 4), M 249)

C .

The T ene e A .joining 1 AE E 83.2

D .

SW

s ide

o f

the

F ield

f rom C lothall Road s ite. ( M248 ( 2), M 249(2)).

1 970 T rial Excavation i n housing development f indspot o f 1 968 bucket burial ( Site K ) ( M243).

Park S treet,

Unstratified.

1 981

1 AE S E74.1 ( LX22). S tray f ind beside i n west o f Walls F ield s ettlement.

4 20

s chool g rounds,

6 00

7 4 W ickham 83

M

F ig .

1 00

E xcava t ions

A5:4 f inds.

B raughing:

J 1 _ HM „ T -

0

1 00

2 00

3 00 Me t res

l ocation o f s ites w ith I ron Age c oin

4 21

A s far a s can be j udged, the c oins accord well with the excavated f eatures, with the excavated g roup f rom Walls F ield the earlier in emphasis. However, a s V . Rigby ( Pers. Comm.) warns, an interpretation o f this a s r eflecting an uphill expansion o f the LPRIA s ettlement must be subject to r eservation, g iven that most c oins were recovered e ither f rom the t opmost deposits underlying the p loughsoil o r f rom the top f ills o f f eatures, which were g enerally subsequent i nfilling f ollowing c ompaction. I n addition, s evere p loughing on Upper Walls Common has r esulted in a g reat depth o f material being eroded away and r edeposited in Walls F ield, which may explain the later emphasis o f the s urface f inds f rom there c ompared t o the excavated c oins. A s Rigby p ants out, the apparent a ttraction o f the coin l osses t o muddy p laces s uch a s r oadways and entrances i s o f i nterest.

B RAUGHING-PUCKERIDGE COMPLEX

A .

( BR)

( Fig .

A5:4)

S keleton G reen. Excavations 1 971-2. ( forthcoming b ).

P artridge

( 1981).

S ee

a lso Haselgrove

The g reat i mportance o f the late I ron Age c omplex a t P uckeridge a nd B raughing, hinted a t by the discovery in the n ineteenth c entury o f large quantities o f I ron Age c oins i n unexpected variety, a s well a s by the r ecovery o f early s ettlement material in the 1 930s has r ecently b ecome c lear through extensive excavations. The history o f w ork in the neighbourhood i s s ummarised by P artridge ( 1975). A rea excavations were undertaken a t S keleton G reen in 1 9712 in a dvance o f c onstruction o f a by-pass. The s ite l ies beside E rmine S treet, c 400 i n f rom the Roman s ettlement nucleus o n Wickham Hill, and 7 50 i n f rom the 3 ha enclosure a t Gatesbury Wood, which i s g enerally a ssumed t o b e the earliest f ocus o f p re-Roman s ettlement in the a rea. This has s till t o be d emonstrated c onclusively, a lthough c ropmark photographs s how the enclosure i s i ntegrated into a w ider s ystem o f landscape division. A t S keleton Green, t hree major p eriods o f a ctivity w ere r ecognised: P eriod 1 p re Conquest; P eriod 2 r oad s ystem and a ssociated s ill-beam s tructures o f the p eriod c AD 436 5; P eriod 3 , late C lst AD, c AD 9 0 a s mall c remation c emetery was l aid out o ver the abandoned s ettlement a rea ( Partridge, 1 981, 3 2-5). The p re-Conquest activity was s ubdivided into f our phases, beginning in the last quarter o f the C lst BC. Phase 1 i s r epresented s olely by a ditch a nd palisade t rench. Occupation , i ncluding building and r ebuilding s eems t o have been a t i ts most intense 1 0 BC-AD 2 5 ( Phases 2 -3). The

4 22

s ite was partially abandoned in P hase 4 ( c AD 3 0-40), a lthough t here was a t l east o ne new building a t this s tage, a nd s ome p its were n ot backfilled until then. Most o f the P eriod 1 f eatures were s ealed by a layer o f s terile ( ?flood) s ilt, but a f ew in the western and northern s ectors c ould e qually belong to P hase 4 o r to the postC onquest p eriod. A s izeable collection o f

P eriod

I ron Age

c oins was recovered:

1

1 .

G 5F9(2). Large o val s haped p it. P eriod I ii. S econdary. 1 P otin/AV? c f. N E71.2 ( KBO). Associations: p latters in T i a nd TR; TR girth, butt beakers; two i ron Nauheim derivative b rooches. Other f inds f rom the p it include an Arretine c up, platters ( Augustan-Tiberian) and s tamp RASN; two c opper a lloy Nauheim derivatives ( one early) and o ne Langton Down brooch.

2 .

G 5(3). Occupation l ayer o ver Building 1 . P eriod l ii. P rimary. 1 AE I llegible ( M177?). A ssociations: i ron blade; p reC laudian TN and butt-beaker ( Neronian a t l atest). Not a s ealed deposit?

3 .

G22 F39(2). D itch with curving butt end. S econdary? 1 P otin P 1/P2 ( Class I o r I I, o r Gaulish?). TR ( pre-Claudian) TN ( Tiberio-Claudian).

P eriod

I ii.

Associations:

4 .

G 22 F50. Large o val-shaped p it. P eriod I ii. S econdary. Dug through D itch 1 . 1 AE E 83.1 ( M221). Associations: TN ( late AugustanT iberian). TR B utt-beaker. Amphora: Dr.20.

5 .

G40 F 12(3). Large o val-shaped p it. P eriod I ii. S econdary . 1 AE S E74. 2 ( LX22). A ssociations: TR p latter ( AugustanT iberian), TN p latter, butt-beaker.

6 .

G40 F 12. Large o val-shaped p it. P eriod I ii. S econdary . 1 AE E72 ( M192). A ssociations: Amphorae: D r.2-4, S .Spanish. S ame p it as B R5. S tratigraphically one o f the earliest f eatures on the s ite.

7 .

G22(7). S ealed layer o f destruction debris. P eriod I ii/iii. S econdary? 1 AE E71.2 ( M172). Associations: 6 c opper a lloy b rooches ( same l ayer 6 /7) ( 2 Colchester, 2 Nauheim derivative, 1 Langton Down, 1 P enannular F owler Type C ) and o ne i ron C olchester brooch; i ron knife b lade a nd L -shaped c orner p late; c oarse p ottery including p latter, beaker, pedestal base a nd s torage v essel, T N ( pre-Claudian), TR ( later Augustan-Tiberian). Amphorae: Dr.2-4, D r. 20.

8 .

G23(5). Occupation layer n orth o f Building I I. P eriod I ii/ i ii. P rimary? 1 AE 1 /2 E71.2 ( cf. M 183), 1 AE I llegible. Associations: TN ( later Augustan-Claudian), TR ( Augustan - early

4 23

T iberian), g irth Amphorae: Dr. 2 -4,

beakers; Dr.20.

o ther p re-Claudian

f ine wares.

9 .

G 5(4). S ealed late p re-Roman g round l evel. P eriod I iii+. P rimary? 1 AE E71.2 ( 1 , 1179), 2 AE I llegible ( One M260?). A ssociations: TR p latter ( late Augustan); thin purple glass beaker; bronze s poon; T-shaped l ift key with hooped head; T i Tiberio-Claudian.

1 0.

G22(6). Latest o ccupation layer s ealed by s ilt. P eriod I iii. P rimary? 1 AE E71.2 ( 1 . 1172). Associations: bronze nail-cleaner; p latters, cups, beakers in TN, TR ( late Augustan-Claudian); a lso c oarse fabrics. Amphorae: Dr.2-4, S .Spanish.

1 1.

G23(4). Base o f f lood s ilt. P eriod I iii. S econdary? 1 AE E71.3 ( M177). Associations: b ronze decorative p late; s andstone hone; heavy p late f ragment, c opper alloy H od Hill and Nauheim d erivative brooches; s craps o f T N , TR. Amphora: S . Spanish.

1 2.

G41 F23(9). Large r oughly c ircular p it. P eriod I iii. S econdary. 1 AE S E74.2 ( LX22). Associations: Augustan-Tiberian Arretine ( Loeschke l b, 2a); c opper a lloy brooches ( 1 Aucissa, 1 P late brooch); T R ( Augustan-early T iberian) TN ( Augustan-Claudian). Amphorae ( lower l ayers): D r.2-4, S .Spanish, Dr.20, Dr.6.

1 3.

G44 F l. Large o val-shaped p it. P eriod I iii. S econdary. 1 AE i llegible, p ossibly n ot B ritish. Associations: p latters, beakers in TR, TN and c ream fabrics ( TN T iberioC laudian), f lagon. Amphorae: Dr. 2-4, S . Spanish.

1 4.

G40(6). Layer o f o ccupation material lying on s urface o f c obbled path t o Building V II. P eriod I iii/iv. P rimary? 1 AE 1 /2 E 71.2 ( M183B), 1 AE E 83.1 ( M245). Associations: amber bead; s iltstone r ubber; copper a lloy b rooch ( Nauheim derivative); p latters, cups, beakers i n TN ( late AugustanT iberian), TR ( pre-Claudian).

1 5.

G42 F ll. Large, r oughly c ircular p ost p it. P eriod I iv. S econdary. 1 AE E72? ( M192?). Associations: h eavy f errule/terminal with thin b ronze c ollar; l arge p latter ( TR). P eriod

I I

1 6.

G25 c F 8. Adjacent t o/on s urface o f P eriod I i d itch. P eriod ( I)-II+. S econdary? 1 AE E 83. 2 ( M246). Although r ecorded a s p ossibly f rom the ditch, the lateness o f the c oin t ype c onfirms i t as p robably intrusive. Ditch n ot s ealed by f lood s ilt i n t his a rea.

1 7.

G6(4). Latest p re-Roman o r early R oman land s urface. P eriod ( I)-II. S econdary? 1 P otin P l/P2.1-3 ( Class I ). Associations: p ottery c ounter o f white ware beaker; w eathered, p robably r edeposited TN,

4 24

T R,

beaker

s herds.

1 8.

G 24(4). Latest p re-Roman o r early Roman o ccupation d eposit. P eriod ( I)-II. S econdary. 1 AE E71.2 ( M172). Associations: c opper a lloy twisted wire b racelet; i ron bar o r poker; i ron Nauheim derivative b rooch; TN, TR p re-Claudian t o late T iberio-Neronian; C laudian s andy wares; butt-beaker.

1 9.

G41(5). Layer o f burnt debris north o f Building V II. P eriod ( I-)II. S econdary. 1 AE E71.2 ( M172). Associations: 2 c opper a lloy C olchester b rooches; i ron r ivet; s andstone rubber; D-shaped buckle ( from a L orica S egmentata?); TN, TR and o ther f ine wares ( some r esidual).

20.

G 23(3). S urface o f c obbles. P eriod I I. P rimary? 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 1). Associations: b ronze p in; butt-beaker.

TN,

TR,

2 1.

G 40(4). S urface o f f lood s ilt. 1 AE E71.2 ( M175). Associations: h inge p late.

22.

G 41(4). S urface o f f lood s ilt. o f. BR19. P eriod I I. P rimary? 1 AE E71.2 ( M172), 1 A E/AV halved ( probably a North Gaulish t ype). A ssociations: heavy, s lightly m is-shapen, r ing; s piral i ron washer; p in f rom a h inged b rooch. Amphora: D r. 2 0. D eposits dating ( Period I II).

P eriod I I. P rimary? C olchester brooch; cuirass

f rom later C lst AD/early C 2nd

23.

G 40 F 19. 1 AE E73

24.

G 25 F 11. Context: 1 AE E82.2 ( M260).

2 5.

F 2. Robber trench. 1 AE E83.2 ( M249).

26.

G 22 F24. C ontext N /S. P eriod I II. S econdary. 1 AE Unidentified. A ssociations: N /S. G eneral

27.

C ontext: N /S. P eriod I II. ( M189). A ssociations: N /S.

S ite Layer

AD

o nward

S econdary.

N /S. P eriod I II. S econdary. Associations: N /S. P eriod I II. Associations:

S econdary. N /S.

3

A dark, r elatively thin layer w ith s ome r esidual p re-Roman material a nd r ather more Roman, which p robably r epresents t he later/post-Roman l and-surface/turf l ine. 1 AE/AV S E51 ( GB E ) 2 A E S E72.1 ( LX24) 1 A E E 71.1 ( 1 4167) 1 A E 1 /2 E 71.1? ( 1 4182) 2 A E E 72 ( 1 4168) 1 A E 1 /2 E 72 ( M-) 2 A E 1 /2 E 71.2 ( M183?, o f. M 183A) 1 A E E 82.2 ( 1 4251) 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4246)

4 25

1 AE1/2 5 AE General 2 8.

Uncertain B ritish I llegible

S ite Layer 2

Fine o range c lay hillwash. Coins:

s ilt

which

1 AE 1 AE 2 AE

B .

o r Gaulish

( Fig .

L ink-road S ite

Trial excavation.

A5:4,

a ccumulated

as

post-Roman

E 83.2 ( M249) E 83.2? ( M246?) I llegible

No.83a).

Publication.

S tead

( 1970).

5 7 t renches were excavated a long a p roposed l ink road running c 3 00 i n due E f rom S keleton Green across W ickham Hill. A ll but two yielded evidence o f intensive o ccupation ranging f rom LPRIA t o Late Roman, the l atter a pparently r estricted t o the eastern h illslope, the f ormer ubiquitous. Very f ew f eatures were e xcavated: t he coins were unstratified: British 1 AE/AR E 63.2 ( LX8) 1 AR S E71.1 ( 1 4286) 2 AE E 82.1 ( 1 4229, 2 30) 1 AE S truck w ith b lank dies 1 AE/AR I llegible These a ll came f rom the western two-thirds o f the s ite. An a s C laudius ( Grade 1 c opy) was a lso f ound. The o nly o ther early f inds r ecorded a re a Langton D own b rooch and a onepiece c opper a lloy brooch w ith f our-coiled s pring, i nternal chord and r esidual moulding o n the b ow. Part o f t he s ite was r e-excavated in the Skeleton G reen investigation.

C .

P ump's Mead Excavation

1 970,

unpublished .

Wilson

( 1970).

A Roman r oad, p robably Ermine S treet, part o f the s uburban r ibbon d evelopment s outh o f W ickham H ill, was examined i n Pump's M ead, P uckeridge. F loors, p its a nd postholes dated to the m id o r late C lst AD were f ound. The excavation produced two c oins, but t here a re n o d etails o f their s tratification: 1 AE E 71.2 ( 1 4175) 1 AE E 83.2 ( M246)

D .

S tation R oad. Excavations

S tandon

1 975.

( Fig .

A 5:4,

Publication:

N o.82).

P artridge,

1 980,

2 8-97.

An excavation a head o f a housing d evelopment, 2 50 m S o f the 1 973 excavation o n the Ralph S addlier S chool s ite ( a one-period o ccupation characterised by l ocal wheel-made

4 26

fabrics a nd t he absence o f GB i mports a lthough Dr.1B amphora was f ound).

o r

I ron A ge

c oins,

The main f eature excavated a t S tation Road was a s ubstantial l ate I ron A ge ditch parallel t o the s outhern end o f Wickham H ill. Occupation l asted f rom the early C lst AD to the Neronian p eriod. The excavator divided the s ite i nto three s tratigraphic horizons based o n the d itch s equence and the c oarse pottery g roups: Group 3 ( pre-AD 2 5); Group 2 ( Q AD 2 5-45); and Group 1 AD 4 5-70). I n the absence o f imports ( other than amphora), P artridge s uggests a t erminus ante quer n in the later C lst BC f or G roup 3 , but Thompson ( 1982) would n ot date the p ottery a s early. A ll 5 c oins came f rom the ditch: 2 7.

Ditch 1 , Layer 6 . Group 2 , early C lst AD. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1. 4-5 ( Class I I). Associations: white-ware beaker and pedestal b owl i n o range-red m icaceous s andy ware, imitating TR1(A) and P ompeian Red f abrics ( not n ecessarily p re-Claudian); o ne s herd Dr. 6?; end o f a b ronze p in. ( Among the material incorporated i n Layers 4 -5 a re two i ron brooches ( both Nauheim derivatives) and a c opper a lloy Hod H ill brooch; a n i ron c hisel; a p ottery s pindle whorl; TN, TR and white ware platters, cups a nd beakers. Amphora: 1 D r.1B handle a nd 9 Dr.1/2-4 body s herds.

2 8.

D itch 1 , Layer 3 . Group 2 , p ossibly p re-Conquest. S econdary. 1 AE E83.2 ( M244). A ssociations: 1 i ron and two c opper a lloy Nauheim d erivative brooches, o ne C olchester; the t ongue o f a buckle o r p enannular b rooch; i ron r ing-headed p in; s ocketed o bject; V -shaped b inding; p re-Claudian TN, TR and white ware p latters, cups, beakers. Amphora: D r.1B r im s herd, 1 1 D r.1/2-4 body s herds; 2 S outhern S panish.

29.

D itch 1 , Layer 2 . Group 1 . P ost-Conquest. S econdary. 1 AE E83.2 ( M248). A ssociations: o ne a s C laudius I ( Grade I c opy); b ronze nail c leaner; r im f ragment o f t inned bronze v essel; t wo s herds S outh Gaulish T S ( Tiberio-Claudian), TN, TR and white ware f abrics. Amphora: 3 s herds D r.1; Dr.2-4 r im; 6 Dr.1/2-4 b ody s herds.

3 0.

D itch 1 , L ayer 1 . Group 1 . P ost-Conquest. S econdary. 2 AE E 82.2 ( M225 var., 2 53). A ssociations: c opper a lloy Nauheim d erivative a nd i ron s trip b rooch; ( among the earliest types a t S keleton Green); l amp in buff-white f abric ( Italian?); Ti , TR, i ncluding C laudio-Neronian f orms. Amphora: 1 Dr.1, 3 Dr.1/2-4 b ody s herds. Over 80% o f the identifiable I talian amphora s herds a re D r.1 in c omplete c ontrast to S keleton G reen. The ditch material p resumably mainly derives f rom n earby o ccupation; s ome o ther s mall ditches a nd a p it were a lso excavated.

4 27

E .

Gatesbury T rack 1 979 Excavation.

( Fig.

A 5:4,

No.80a)

P ublication:

P artridge

( 1980,

9 7-132).

A s mall s cale excavation 4 00 i n due E o f Skeleton Green. The Roman l evels had been bulldozed. The s ite i s beside the River Rib, and overlooked o n the east by Gatesbury Wood. Late I ron Age f eatures included p its, ditches and p ostholes. 3 -4 phases a re r epresented, a ll apparently p reConquest; imported material o ther than Dr.1 amphora was absent f rom Phase 1 . 3 1.

F ill o f U -shaped D itch. F41. P hase 1 . S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P 1). Associations: large i ron blade/chopper; s herds o f D r.1B a mphora; sandy a nd g ritty handmade p ottery f abrics and s andy, g rog-tempered wheelmade vessels ( often c ordoned bowls) in r oughly even proportions. This c oin came f rom ditch f ill d isturbed by a l ater p it ( Phase 2 ) a nd a Roman posthole. G iven a v ery late dating f or the c oin ( Goodburn, in P artridge, 1 980: 1 01), the excavator ( ibid., 1 02) expressed c oncern l est t he c oin derive f rom the cutting f eatures r ather than a s r ecorded f rom t he d itch. I can s ee n o r eason t o discount the o riginal p rovenance.

3 2.

F ill o f l arge r ectangular p it ( F46 ( layer 3 )) c ut into D itch F 41. P hase 2 ? ( no s tratigraphic r elationship with later d eposit). S econdary. 1 P otin P 1. 4 ( Type M2). A ssociations: c opper alloy C olchester brooch; p latters, c ups and p edestal b eaker i n TN, F R ; white c ream-ware b eaker, f lagon sherds. F46(2) p roduced s herds o f Dr.1B. Wheelmade g rog-tempered f orms, f abrics. C learly s ome o f the material i n this p it may derive f rom Ditch F 41. O ther f inds here i ncluded g raffito r eading C IINATIN ( on a c ombed s torage v essel) and a Dr.lA r im, the only s ite North o f the T hames a part f rom Baldock where the s ubtype i s a ttested. Dr.1 accounts f or 6 3. 4% o f the a mphora a ssemblage by w eight ( 40.6% by s herd number) and Dr.2-4 only 0 .7% ( 1.0%); Dr.6 and S outh S panish f orms a re a lso present i n s mall quantities, the o ther main component being Dr.20. A s mall p it ( F44, P hase 3 ) cut into t he ditch produced f ragments o f c lay s lab-mould. XRF analysis s howed s ilver a lone was p resent. There i s n o doubting the early date o f Gatesbury T rack; apart f rom the a mphorae, the GB wares a re a ll f orms belonging t o the l ast decade o f C lst BC ; f orms post-dating the f irst quarter o f C 1st AD a re a bsent.

F .

Gatesbury F ield

( Fig.

A 5:4,

No.80b)

1 936 " excavation". Publication o f material ( 1981). S ee a lso Hawkes and Hull ( 1947).

P artridge

Material f rom an excavation c arried o ut by Henderson o n his poultry f arm, 1 00 i n below Gatesbury Wood suggests dense later I ron A ge o ccupation i n the a rea. Unfortunately a

4 28

f ull record was n ot k ept and the material deposited i n Hertford Museum includes o ther f inds f rom Gatesbury; even a llowing f or c ontamination, the bulk o f the f inds belong t o a horizon p receding S keleton Green. S ervice 1 f orms account f or 43% o f the Arretine and the radial s tamp should be early; TR and TN f orms f ound a t Gatesbury not c ommon t o Skeleton Green a re earlier, ( e.g. Oberaden 9 1 p robably o ut o f production before the end o f C lst BC; Dr.1 a ccounts f or 60% o f the amphora s herds ( by weight). F our early brooches were f ound ( 2 C olchesters, 1 Aucissa, 1 Hod Hill. There were many f ragments o f baked c lay s lab-moulds; emission spectroscopy s howed ( as a t Gatesbury T rack a nd S t. Albans) that s ilver was the dominant m ineral. Four coins f rom Gatesbury F ield s hown a t the BM in 1 936 appear t o c ome f rom the excavation, a lthough n ot amongst the material i n Hertford Museum published by P artridge ( 1981). They w ere: 1 AE S E72.1 ( 1 123) 1 AE E 71.1 ( M167) 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230) 1 AE S E82.1 ( M309) T otal: 4 Two c ome

G .

o ther c oins s hown t o the BM in f rom this a rea.

Griggs

1 937

( below)

may

a lso

Bridge Bath house

Excavations

1 969-73.

P ublication:

P artridge

( 1978).

A Roman bath house beside River Rib, 3 50 i n upstream f rom Gatesbury T rack; i t was a pparently built i n the l ate C 1st o r early C 2nd AD, and abandoned and partially d ismantled by the end o f the C 2nd o r s oon a fter. There was p re-Roman o ccupation o n the s ite, dated t o the f irst half o f C lst AD, including large p its d isturbed by the bath building and a possible burnt wattle s tructure with a rammed c halk/clay f loor. The s ingle p re-Roman c oin was p resumably r esidual f rom this horizon . No d etails o f i ts p rovenance a re g iven, but the r ecorded f ind number ( 3) s uggests that i t was unstratified. 1 AE E 71.2 ( M172)

H .

Wickham Kennels Excavation

1 982.

( Fig.

A 5:4,

No.83b)

P ublication:

P artridge

( 1982).

A salvage excavation s ome 1 00 i n NE o f the f ormer B raughing railway s tation. A p ipe t rench r evealed a c omplex s equence o f late I ron A ge ditches and pits and Roman p its, the c loseness o f the d itches t o the o riginal r iver meander suggesting that their p rimary purpose was d rainage, a lthough they had s ubsequently been used f or r efuse disposal. A t the Eastern end o f the t rench, o n the l ine o f a Roman r oad, there were s igns o f late I ron Age ( pits) a nd Roman ( pits, o ven, d itch) o ccupation a s well a s later disturbance.

4 29

The s ite i s important i n c onfirming the apparent continuity o f o ccupation through the p eriod c AD 3 0-45 which i s p oorly r epresented on a ll o ther published s ites, apart f rom S tation Road, S tandon ( above). I t i s c lear that there was a s ignificant s hift i n the f ocus o f s ettlement, and p robably, a s P artridge s uggests, a n overall diminution in i ts intensity. There was c onsiderable evidence f or metalworking f rom the excavations, including i ndustrial waste and f ragments o f three baked-clay s lab moulds o f d ifferent s izes f rom the last o f the s equence o f drainage d itches, a nalysis s howing they were p robably i nvolved with w orking g old a lloys. 3 3.

F ill o f s mall p it, F 4. Late I ron A ge - early Roman c AD 2 5-70. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P ). Associations: " Very l ittle o f importance". F4 i s t he earliest i n a s equence o f p its which had partially been cut away by each s ucceeding p it. The latest ( F2) had p ottery mainly o f late I ron Age type w ith s ome Roman influence, a f ew s herds i n TR, TN ( all p reF lavian) a nd a f ew LS f ragments.

3 4.

F ill o f s mall drainage d itch, F l. Late I ron Age - early Roman c AD 2 5-70. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230). A ssociations: f ragments o f t hree d ifferent s lab moulds ( above); m uch waste f rom bronze and o ther m etal w orking. L ower f ill: c opper a lloy f ibula o f Nauheim c onstruction; b racelet; p ottery s pindle w horl; amphora handle ( sawn o ff); s mall i ron t riangular k nife. Upper f ill: c opper a lloy nail-cleaner; c lipped b ronze waste; p edestal base w ith s quared pattern; i ron box s trapping. P ottery f rom the d itch f ills includes an Augustan A rrezzo Loeschke 7 (b) cup, S outh Gaulish T S f orms 1 5/17, 2 7 a nd 42, ( the l atter F lavian); p latters, f lagon i n TR, TN ( 50% p re-Claudian, r emainder p re-Flavian). The r emaining p ottery i s o f typical l ate I ron Age f orms and f abrics A , B , C ; t he hard s andy R omanising Fabric D was absent. F l i s the l atest o f s everal ditches on the same a lignment, the f irst o f which was p robably the earliest f eature o n the s ite.

3 5.

F ill o f large s hallow p it F 10. Late I ron A ge - Early R oman c AD 2 5-70. S econdary . 1 AE E 83.2 ( M242). A ssociations: bone object; c halk c ounter; p otter's s tamp o n c oarseware platter; c oarseware s pindle w horl; pottery o f Late I ron Age type with more Romanised versions o f butt-beakers and cups ( including p edestal, l id, i n Fabric D ). I mports: TS A rretine L oeschke 2 ( Aug-Tib), TS S outh Gaulish, F orms Ritt. 5 , Drag. 1 5/17 ( Claudian, o ne Tib-Claud) and butt-beaker, f lagon, e tc. i n TN, TR, whiteware ( 20% p re-Claudian, 60% p re-Flavian). F 10 was only partially e xcavated, b ut a ppeared to have two phases; but the p ottery f rom each was a lmost identical. I t i s n ot s pecified which f ill p roduced the c oin.

3 6.

F ill o f large Medieval p it. F 15. Mid-late C l2th AD . S econdary. 1 A E E 71.2 ( M174). A ssociations: n ot relevant, but i nclude three S . Gaulish T ß ( pre-Flavian - F lavian). This p it cut

4 30

through a R oman p it turn cut F 10 above; the c oin.

( F16) o f C lst-C2nd AD date, either c ould have b een the

which s ource

in o f

Goodburn ( in P artridge, 1 982) c ommented on the unworn condition o f the A E E 82.1, in c ontrast to the rather worn AE E 71.2 a nd the s lightly worn appearance o f the potin.

1

Ermine

S treet

Excavations 1 972, 2 99);

( Fig.

A5. 4 No.81).

1 971-2. Unpublished. S . Trow ( Pers. Comm.).

S ee Wilson

( 1971,

3 29;

As a c onsequence o f r erouting the l ink r oad f ollowing the 1 969 t rial excavation ( above), a f urther large-scale a rea excavation was undertaken where the n ew r oute intersected with E rmine S treet, e 2 00 m S SE o f S keleton Green. The excavation i s n ow being made r eady f or publication, a s a part o f which, t his author i s r eporting on the I ron Age c oins ( Haselgrove, f orthcoming b ). The earliest o ccupation t o the West o f E rmine S treet ( examined i n 1 971) was o f t he Conquest p eriod, the main s tructural evidence, a ll o f i t f or t imber buildings, belonging t o the p eriod up t o the early C3rd AD . I n the larger a rea t o t he east o f E rmine S treet examined in 1 972, the earliest s ettlement nucleus, which i ncluded a g roup o f large p its, lay e 60 m t o the n orth-east o f E rmine S treet, the f inds s uggesting occupation f rom before the Conquest until the t hird q uarter o f the C lst AD. F rom the Conquest, the main f ocus o f o ccupation was, however, E rmine S treet, t imber s tructures quickly being s et up a long the f rontage; by the early C 2nd AD , they w ere beginning t o encroach on the r oad i tself. S mall s ide ditches a sssociated with the earliest r oad s urface y ielded Claudian material; presumably this was the o riginal military r oad. S hortly a fterwards the r oad was f irst widened a nd then built-up by 3 0-40 c m o n a s lightly different a lignment, the east s ide ditch b eing r ecut. Initially, the e xcavation i nterupted this a s being the r esult o f f looding in the m id C lst AD. I f the f lood s ilts a t the S keleton G reen s ite a re t o be l inked t o the s ame event, this s equence would imply an early Claudian t erminus p ost quem f or the s ealing o f the P eriod 1 deposits a t the latter s ite and thus o f a p ost C onquest date f or the latest P eriod 1 d eposits c ontra P artridge ( 1981). However, Trow ( Pers. Comm.) i s inclined t o discount the p reliminary interpretation o f t he deposits a ssociated with the r oad and r esolution o f t he problem will have t o await the f inal r eport. Occupation c ontinued i nto the later C4th AD.

3 7.

The

s tratification o f the

( a)

A rea West

o f E rmine

c oins was

S treet

a s

f ollows:

( BR71)

F ill o f P it D 110. P robably p re-Conquest. 1 AE S E74 ( LX21-22). Associations: N /S. dating evidence.

4 31

S econdary. No independent

3 8.

S ealed o ccupation deposit layer D 101. C laudio-Neronian. S econdary? 1 AE S E72.1 ( LX23), 1 AE B elgic Gaul cf. S cheers Nos.867 /89. Associations: 2 Roman military f ittings?, o therwise N /S.

39.

F ill 1 AE N /S.

40.

F loor s urface D93 o f S tructure S 10. AD 1 00-150. P rimary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M248). Associations: N /S, but late C lst T B g iven a s i ndependent dating evidence, presumably i n make up o f surface. No earlier deposits d isturbed by context.

o f boundary ditch. D23. Flavian. S econdary . E 75.1 ( M200). Associations: T B ( Flavian), o therwise

U T Jatz _atified i n s urface/superficial c ontexts D 11, D 74: 2 P otin P 1/2.3 ( Type H /L) D40: 1 AE E 71.1 ( M182) D41: 1 AE E 83.2 ( M242) Unstratified 1 1 1 1

( b)

Area East

AE P otin AE AE

o f E rmine

Belgic Gaul P 1. 3 E 71.2 E 83.2

S treet

S cheers No.80d

( BR72)

4 1.

F ill o f P it C 5. Augusto-Tiberian c AD 1 -40. S econdary. 1 AE S E72.1 ( LX23). Associations: G I 5 ware ( AugustaT iberian) and c oarse wares. A f ew s herds o f post-Conquest T S i ntrusive i n " slump" i nto f eature, but f ill i s p reConquest. Cut by C27.

42.

F ill o f P it C 27. Late Augustan-Tiberian. S econdary. 1 AE 1 /2 E 71.1 ( M182). Associations: S everal s herds I talian T B . ( Augustan-Tiberian). N one o ther s pecified. P it cuts p re-Conquest P it C 5.

43.

Road S urface A 100. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M230).

T B .

AD 40-50. P rimary? Associations: f ragment

o f C laudian

( ?)

44.

F ill o f Road d itch A2. AD40-75. S econdary. 1 AE E 71. 3 ( cf. M 177). A ssociations: none s pecified, but I talianate T B dish and Claudio-Neronian T B in layer above. Road d itch dug AD 40-50, n o earlier c ontexts disturbed.

45.

F ill o f D itch B 39. Late C 2nd AD. S econdary. 1 AE/AR E 75.1 ( 1 4199). A ssociations: Antonine T B , o ther s pecified. Does n ot disturb e arlier c ontexts.

46.

n one

Hearth C26. C 2nd/C3rd AD . S econdary. 1 AE E 71.3 ( cf. 1 4 177), 1 AE E83.2 ( 1 4242). Associations: Antonine mortarium, none o ther s pecified . Not o bserved to disturb earlier c ontexts, but C 26 i s in the a rea o f most intensive P RIA o ccupation.

4 32

47.

S lump into Road ditch A 2. Context p robably R oman. S econdary. 1 A E E 83.1 ( M221). A ssociations: N /S.

unstratified,

but

Unstratified c oins 1 1 1 1 3

P otin AE AE AE AE

P 1.5 E71.1 E71.2 E 83.1 E 83.2

The c oin l ist f rom E rmine S treet ( East) c onforms to the excavator's preliminary interpretation o f c ontinuous o ccupation there f rom before the C onquest. Coins f rom E rmine S treet ( West) a gree with the model o f o ccupation f rom the Conquest p eriod o nwards, but o therwise a re d istinctly earlier in emphasis, and s uggest o ne o f two p ossibilities: ( a) o ccupation a t an earlier period ( late C lst BC/AD) e ither in t he excavated a rea ( and n ot o bservable) o r c lose t o i t, f ollowed b y a break in a ctivity until the Conquest p eriod. This would be directly c omparable t o the s equence a t S keleton Green. ( b) r edeposition o f material f rom an earlier s ettlement nucleus i nto the E rmine S treet ( West) a rea a fter o f o ccupation b egan t here, e .g. material used in make-up o r h illwash e roded f rom the a djacent s lope. This

J .

i s discussed f urther

in Haselgrove

( forthcoming b ).

B raughing-Puckeridge Non-excavation Coins. Evans

( 1890);

VCH H eTts

I V

( 1914,

1 50-2)

Many o ther I ron A ge c oins have been f ound w ithin the g eneral B raughing P uckeridge a rea . Most o f the n ineteenth c entury f inds, w ere a direct r esult o f the c onstruction o f t he railway through the eastern edge o f W ickham F ield, i n 1 861 and i ts widening a t B raughing S tation i n 1 892, a nd the i nterest these discoveries a roused. According t o the V CH, many o yster s hells and a l ittle pottery t urned u p i n the c entre o f the B raughing P uckeridge r oad where i t was c rossed by the railway l ine, and in making the r ailway c utting, extending o ne hundred yards north o f t he r oad, thousands o f c oins were f ound ranging f rom Augustus t o C onstantine " including o ne g old Cunobelin, 3 2 o f Cunobelin and Tasciovanus, 2 0 s ilver Augustus t o P ostumus, t ogether w ith burial urns, many s mall objects and much p ottery including T S" ( Op. C it, 1 51). I n 1 892, during the w idening o f the s tation, " a s mall uninscribed British c oin" was f ound , t ogether with Roman coins o f Augustus t o the f ourth c entury AD, a bronze f ibula and a bracelet, T S, e tc. ( Ibid). Many o ther c oins, e tc., were c learly ploughed up in W ickham F ield, the whole o f which i s r ich in c oins, p ottery and b one.

4 33

Only a minority o f c oins f ound a t B raughing have their exact c ircumstances o f d iscovery r ecorded, while many e scaped r ecording a ltogether. T he AV Cunobelin , not mentioned i n a ny o ther s ource, i s p ossibly an error o n the part o f the VCH f or the AV 1 /4 S 12 f ound in 1 869. Only the more r eliably p rovenanced c oins a re r eported here. 1 .

Coins

f ound in the n ineteenth c entury

( a)

Larkshill F ield

( or Larksfield) B raughing 1 AV 1 /4 S E73.2 a ccording t o Evans ( 1890, 439 information f rom W illiam Allen) " a s pot where numerous British c oins have been discovered. This, however, i s the o nly c oin s o p rovenanced. As P artridge ( 1975) p oints o ut, Larkshill, a p romontary 7 00 i n n orth o f Wickham F ield, was l ong t aken by antiquarians a s the s ite o f a Roman f ort - and f inds a scribed t o i t, n one o f which have any a ssociation with B raughing, l et a lone w ith Larkshill. I t i s not c lear how well i nformed Evans' s ource was; A llen r eported coins f rom o ver a w ide a rea o f E ssex a nd Bedfordshire a s w ell a s Hertfordshire. On t he p resent e vidence o f f ieldwork ( Partridge, 1 975) Larkshill l ies o utside the a reas o f I ron Age a nd Roman s ettlement, but a f ind o f c oins there, which o therwise e scaped the r ecord, c annot be e ntirely d iscounted. ( b)

S tandon

( c)

" At

Total:

1 AV E 61

( ref.

B raughing" ( Sic Evans, 1 890, Q =tinental 1 AV 1 /4 S 12 6 AE B elgic Gaul ( Scheers Nos.59 ( 2), o f. 63, 6 4 8 0, 1 03) 1 P otin B elgic Gaul ( Scheers No.198, f d. 1 868) 1 AE N . Gaul DLT 7 081 AE S . Gaul DLT 2 677 1 0

T otal:

1 864)

e tc.) B ritish 3 AE S E71.1 ( 2 1 893-4) 2 AE S E74 ( one C 1.1, o ne C 1.2) 1 AE E 71.1 4 AE E 71.2 ( one 1 869) 4 AE E 71.3 ( one 1 864) 1 AE E 72 2 AE E 82.1 3 AE E 82.2 ( one 1 869) 1 AE E 83.1 1 2+ AE E 83.2 ( one 1 861, o ne 1 894) 1 AR W91 ( 1864) 4 P otin P 1.5 ( 1865-9) 3 8+

A lthough o nly three c oins have a m ore s pecific provenance ( one AE E 71.2 " out o f the back o f t he Railway S tation", one AE E 82.2 " near B raughing S tation" a nd one AE E 83.2 " at B raughing, during the c onstruction o f the r ailway"), the vast majority, i f n ot a ll, o f these c oins were c learly f ound o n the eastern s ide o f W ickham Hill i n and f ollowing 1 861; the t otal o f 2 8 c oins o f Cunobelinus and Tasciovanus i s r easonably c lose t o the VCH f igure. Most a re l abelled a s " found w ith o thers" o r " among the c oins f ound" a t B raughing.

4 34

( d)

" Near"

B raughing

Total:

( sic 2 AR 1 AR 3 AE 3 AE 3 AE 1 AE 1 AE 1 4

Evans 1 890, e tc.) E 63.3 ( one 1 865) S E63 ( 1867) S E74.1 ( one 1 867) E 71.2 ( two 1 864) E 72 ( 1864, 1 869, E 81 E 83.1 ( 1864)

1 871)

S everal o f these c oins a re labelled o r described a s being f rom " near Braughing a t a s pot where numerous o ther c oins have been f ound". Were i t not f or the o bvious c hronological difference between this and the p revious g roup ( and the p roportion o f AR i ssues?), the c hoice o f w ording would b e d ismissed a s a purely random matter, and the c oins a lso a ssumed t o came f rom the S tation a rea . As i t i s, i t may b e that there i s s ome basis t o the d istinction and t hat these c oins were f rom a n ( earlier) s ettlement nucleus s uch a s S keleton Green o r E rmine S treet W est, o r even Larkshill ( above). ( e)

Between B raughing a nd S tandon 2 AE E 83.2

T hese c oins a re l ikely t o be f rom o ne o f the known s ettlement n uclei, f rom the description, Gatesbury F ield o r S tation Road, S tandon. 2 . ( a)

Coins

f ound i n the twentieth c entury

B raughing

The date

f inds r eported t o the BM i n 1 A E E 71.2 1 AE E 83.1

1 937

s uggests Gatesbury F ield.

( b) Unknown s ite " near Ware", 1 972-3 MD F inds. Haselgrove, 1 978 There is s ome e vidence that this g roup o f MD f inds came f rom B raughing-Puckeridge. C ontamination f rom s ites i n the Harlow-Ware r egion i s, however, more than l ikely ( cf. Harlow 1 968-9), a nd the g roup o f l ittle value f or c omparative purposes: B ritish 1 AV S 52.1 2 AV 1 /4 S 51.1 1 AR S E 62 7 A E S E 7 4 ( 5 C lass 1 , 2 C lass 2 ) 1 AE S E71.1 1 AE 1 /2 E 71.1 2 AR E 71.2 1 0 AE E 71.2 4 AE 1 /2 E 71.2 8 A E E 71.3 5 A E E 72 3 AE E 73 1 AE 1 /2 E 73 2 AE E 75.1 4 AE E 82.1

4 35

Total:

1 9 6 5 6 1 24

AE AE AE AE

1 /2

E 82.1 E 82.2 E 83.1 E 83.2

The dominance o f later i ssues distinguishes this c ollection f rom S keleton Green ( 61% o f the t otal belong to P hase 8 ). I t i s not dissimilar t o the n ineteenth century c ollection f rom the S tation a rea, apart f rom t he lack o f c ontinental i ssues.

S T.

A .

P rae W ood

( Fig.

Excavations ( 1936). S ee

ALBANS COMPLEX

A 5:5,

1 930-4. a lso Hunn

( SA)

( Fig.

A 5:5)

No.85) P ublication. Wheeler ( 1980); Thompson ( 1982).

and

Wheeler

A key s ite f or the L PRIA i n the S outh-East, both i ts enclosure s equence ( Hunn, 1 980) a nd indigenous p ottery f abrics ( Thompson, 1 982) r ecently t he subject o f c areful r e-evaluation, i t i s n ot s o f or i ts I ron A ge c oins. Only o ne was f ound. 1 .

Road s urface o ver Hunn P hase I Ia and I Ib earthwork j unction. P ost-Conquest. P rimary? 1 A E E 83.2 ( M244). A ssociations: N /S. The c oin was f ound o n t he s urface o f g ravel used t o r epair a r oad c onstructed a cross the i nner enclosure earthwork a t i ts j unction w ith the o uter earthwork and palisade trench A . The c onstruction o f these f eatures c annot be dated ( Thompson, 1 982). The f ill o f the ditch p roduced Roman p ottery i ncluding T S ( Form 1 8), a mphora a nd Roman brick . S imilar s herds were i ncorporated i n the r oad metalling ( Wheeler and Wheeler, 1 936: 49). The Wheelers' c ontention that the c oin " lost when i n f airly g ood c ondition" " consistent w ith a mid C lst date f or the w ork" ( ibid), i s a c ircular a rgument based o n their b elief that the r oad was the m eans o f c ommunication between a major p re-Roman c entre a t P rae Wood and i ts Roman s uccessor ( Verulamium). P rae W ood was n ot s uch a s ettlement; t his i s e vident f rom t he l ack o f I ron Age c oins and o f a n extensive s eries o f i mports c ompared t o e .g. B raughing ( cf. T hompson, 1 982); s ettlement i s n ot the o bvious f unction f or the earthworks, a lthough there was a dwelling a rea c 5 00 m NW o f where t he c oin was f ound. The n otion o f P rae Wood a s the immediate p redecessor o f V erulamium r emoved, the r oad n eed n ot b e particularly early; i ndeed the R oman material f rom the i nfill beneath s uggests i t was n ot. In any case, the c oin i s f rom the r epair o f the r oad . I t may be an in s itu loss, but i f s o, well within the Roman p eriod.

4 36

F ig. A5:5 f inds.

S t. Albans:

l ocation o f s ites w ith I ron A ge c oin

4 37

B .

King Harry Lane

( Fig.

Excavations 1 966-8. S tead ( 1969); Rigby,

A 5:5,

i n

N o.86)

P ublication f orthcoming. P artridge ( 1981).

S ee

a lso

A large LPRIA c remation c emetery in u se in the f irst half o f C lst AD, i ts w estern boundary f ormed by the P rae Wood " enclosure", a lthough the a lignment o f the burial enclosure, i s different and s eems t o predate the ditch. Earthworks s haring t his a lignment a re a pparent 5 00 i n NW o f the c emetery within the main P rae Wood c omplex ( Hunn, 1 980, Phase I II, undated); i f s o, Hunn's s equence r equires amendment. The c emetery has i mportant a ssociations o f brooches, metalwork a nd i ndigenous p ottery f abrics w ith imports including a Dr.1 a mphora, 5 T S vessels and a GB a ssemblage later than S keleton Green though earlier than S heepen 1 970 ( Rigby, 1 981). The c remation burials o ften c luster r ound ' richer' p rimary burials a t the c entre o f enclosures. The c emetery was t raversed by the early S ilchester r oad, a nd s ealed by the r ibbon development a long this, o ccupation beginning i n the F lavian p eriod earlier. Apart f rom S A2, details o f the excavation c oins a re n ot a vailable; the r emainder w ere p resumably a ssociated w ith the early R oman o ccupation r ather t han with o ther burials. 2 .

C remation burial. L PRIA. P rimary. S ee Hoard 2 1. 1 0 AE E73 ( 1 4190). A ssociations: 3 c opper a lloy brooches ( 2 Colchester, 1 C olchester-derivative) ( Walton, 1 985). Burial l ocated E o f E nclosure H . O ther c oins f rom excavations: -

S tray f ind while

t he

C emetery

a rea

f ound

during

the

3 AE E 83.2

laying drains: 1 AE E 83.2

Occupation debris i s known f rom a d itch c 5 00 i n S W o f the c emetery a nd an enclosure and 5 hearths f rom neighbouring gardens; the p ottery dates this s ettlement a ctivity f rom the l ast quarter o f C lst BC-C AD 7 0 ( Thompson, 1 982).

C .

V erulam H ills F ield/Stadium S ite Excavations

1 963-4.

P ublication:

( Fig.

A 5:5,

Anthony

No.87)

( 1969).

A s maller c remation c emetery dating t o the f irst half o f the C lst AD f ollowed by later s ettlement and e ight inhumation burials i n two ditches which bounded the burial a rea. The c remation p ottery i s very s imilar t o King Harry Lane; a ssociated g oods i ncluded three c opper a lloy-brooches ( two Nauheim derivative; o ne Colchester). N one o f the I ron Age c oins a ppears t o be f rom a burial; they a re described a s " found i n l ower l evels o f ditches a nd in t opsoil above B elgic c remations". Only two c an be s pecifically p rovenanced:

4 38

3 .

Early ditch o utside the S E Gate. P re-Conquest? S econdary. 2 AE E 83.2 ( M248, 2 49). A ssociations: N /S. I t i s n ot c lear which ditch this was. The burials cut through the a ccumulation a t t he bottom o f the ditches. The layers above c ontained l ate C 1st AD pottery, o n the s trength o f which, t he burials were dated t o the mid-century. The c oins presumably c ame f rom the basal deposits. The

r emaining

c oins

Total:

D .

f ound o n the 2 AE E 71.2 2 AE E 82.2 9 AE E 83.2 1 3

V erulamium R oman C ity

( Fig.

s ite were: -

A 5:5,

No.88)

Excavations 1 930-4; 1 938; 1 955-61. P ublication: Wheeler a nd Wheeler ( 1936); Richardson ( 1944); F rere ( 1972; 1 983; 1 985); Kenyon ( 1934). ( See a lso Haselgrove, f orthcoming a ). The l imited evidence f or LPRIA a ctivity w ithin the 1 0% s ample o f the R oman c ity which has s een s ystematic excavation has b een s ummarised by F rere ( 1982, 3 -4); a s ubstantial p re-Roman ditch, r econstructed a s a quadrangular enclosure c 1 40 x 2 00 i n underlying the F orum a nd Basilica ( Insula X II); a mass o f baked c lay s lab m oulds, b elow the later defences i n I nsula XVII and e lsewhere ( below) a nd s ome o ther p ossible i ndications o f s ettlement, including a r ectilinear t rench-built s tructure ( also I nsula XVII). F rere p osits a n early f ort, but the o nly evidence i s m ilitary equipment, in l ater c ontexts. The s carcity o f C laudian c oins ( Reece, 1 985) s uggests a t m ost a b rief o ccupation. The s treet g rid i s c learly early, and was f ronted by t imber-framed buildings ( Insula X IV), p redating the the B oudiccan r evolt. A lso early i s the d efensive c ircuit i nferred f rom the " 1955" d itch. No D r.1 a mphora w ere r ecovered i n F rere's excavations 1 955-61, o nly D r.2-4 f orms, a nd S outh S panish f abrics, D r.20, e tc. I n a ssessing the earliest f inds f rom V erulamium, i t s hould b e s tressed t hat t otal excavation t o the s ubsoil has b een undertaken o nly exceptionally. T emple/Theatre

a rea

4 .

X IV. No d etails o f c ontext 1 A E E 83.2 ( 1 4248).

5 .

XV . " Earliest o ccupation deposit" N o f the theatre. Mid C lst AD. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M249). A ssociations: early p ost-Conquest p ottery.

6 .

XV . " Earliest o ccupation deposit" underneath the Theatre. M id C lst AD o r later. S econdary? 1 A E E 83.2 ( M248). P ottery " was p redominantly native , but i ncluded a n early T S f orm 1 8 a nd f ragments o f amphora". The theatre had Hadrianic c oins i n i ts c onstruction l evels.

7 .

XVI:

" Earliest

i n F rere

o ccupation deposit"

4 39

( 1972).

beneath t he

c alla o f the

Temple. M id C lst AD. S econdary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( M244). " Level c ontained a n a s C laudius I and a moderate quantity o f Claudian p ottery". 8 .

XVI: " Earliest o ccupation deposit" b elow the c orridor o f the Temple. Mid C lst AD. S econdary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( M249). Associations: early post-Conquest pottery. Area not c ompletely explored. The p ottery s ealed by the temple and enclosure ranged in date f rom C laudius to Vespasian; there was a s econd c oin o f C laudius.

9 .

XVII: " Earliest o ccupation deposit below burnt t imberf ramed building. M id C lst AD". S econdary. 1 AE E 71.2 ( M174). Associations: mainly i ndigenous f orms, fabrics, s ome R omanised; " TS i ndicates a C laudio-early Neronian dating"; 2 c opper a lloy C olchester brooches. This deposit, a layer o f g reen g ravel, r epresents the f illing o f two gullies which ran EW a cross t he s ite a s well a s the deposit o verlying natural; the exact p rovenance o f t he c oin i s unstated, but o ne o f the C olchesters was f ound i n the l owest f illing o f Gully I I a ssociated w ith C laudian TS. Associated w ith the g ullies was a thin, unworn m etalled s urface, but i ts r elationship t o the g reen g ravel i s unspecified. These deposits a re c learly m ore c omplex than a llowed by the Report; most l ikely t hey r epresent a c ombination o f l evelling a nd p loughsoil.

1 0.

XXVII 5 9 X XXI 4 0. Occupation layer o n f loor o f p ost-built Building XXVII 2 E. P eriod 1 , C laudian-early N eronian. P rimary? 1 A E E 83.2 ( M244). Associations: S outh Gaulish T S f orms 67 ( Clst), 1 8 ( pre-Flavian). The o ccupation layer i s s ealed by a t hick burnt deposit equated with the B oudiccan destruction. The dating evidence f or the burning i s not extensive, but the T S sealed is consistently p re-Flavian and AE Nero f irst a ppears above i t ( Frere, 1 982; 1 985).

1 1.

XXVII 5 6 H V III 2 5. " Old p loughsoil" b elow Rooms 4 -5, t imber-framed building XXVII 2 C . P eriod 2 , F lavian? S econdary. 1 AE E 71.2 ( M169-170). A ssociations: S outh Gaulish f orms 2 9, 2 7, 1 8, 1 5/17, 3 6, Curie 1 1 ( Neronian - F lavian). More l ikely l evelling material? The building dates t o the early C 2nd.

1 2.

XXVIII 5 9D XXII 2 9. C ontext below Building 3 , P re-mid C 2nd AD . S econdary? 1 AE/AR E 83.2 ( M237). No i nformation. This c ontext was s ealed by a m id C 2nd AD mosaic.

1 3.

XXVIII 6 0 G X IV 6 2. " Old p loughsoil" b elow Building XXVIII 4 . P eriod 1 , P re-Flavian. S econdary? 1 AE E 71.3 ( M177). Associations: S outh Gaulish T S , forms 2 9, 3 0, 1 8, 2 7 including s tamp O F MACCA. The g round surface was a pparently o pen until t he early Flavian p eriod.

1 4.

XXVIII 6 0 G X IV 7 0. B eside unurned c remation burial upper f ill o f V -shaped ditch underlying Building XXVII P robably P eriod 1 , j ust p ost-Conquest. P rimary.

4 40

R oom

9 .

in 4 .

1 AE E71.3 ( 1 , 1177). Associations: c remated bone; a s herd o f c ordoned jar. The underlying ditch deposit y ielded a g roup o f late I ron Age p ottery t ogether with a baked c lay s lab-mould f ragment, and an unusual bowl-sherd ( probably C laudian). An a sh and c harcoal layer s ealing the c remations, c ontained s herds o f A rretine? 54A ( Gaulish) and S outh Gaulish T S Form 1 8R, p ossibly post-Conquest; the c remations, o ne described a s o verlapping the edge o f the ditch, a re thus p resumably mid C lst AD . There i s no evidence o f the c oin having b een directly a ssociated with the burial a s g rave g oods. Note: i t i s p ossible that this coin r epeats S A13 ( cf. F rere, 1 982, 2 73-4); however, A llen n oted two c oins o f this type and R eece ( 1985) l ists 3 f rom the excavations. N orth 1 5.

o f

t he F orum/Basilica

X IX. S t. Michael's Bakery. F rom l owest l evel, black-silt o f pre-Roman date. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( M244). Associations: 3 f ragments o f baked-clay s lab mould and l ate I ron A ge p ottery. This layer was c 3 .3 m f rom the s urface ( Frere 1 982, 3 1, Note 3 )., S outh o f

F orum/Basilica ,

1 6.

XXII 5 5-6 A XXI 1 0. " Occupation deposit" o n yard f loor a ssociated w ith H ouse XXII, 1 A. P eriod 2 . P rimary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4243). Associations: Central Gaulish T S Form 1 8/31 Trajanic/Hadrianic(?), c oarse p ottery, Type 694. This t imber-framed building i s dated t o the later C 2nd AD. S outh-west a rea o f 0 1st c ity

1 7.

I V. " Earliest o ccupation" i n the I nsula. P re-Flavian? S econdary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4248). A ssociations: N /S. The c oin was p resumably a ssociated w ith t he very l imited pre-Flavian deposits known i n the a rea ( cf. F rere, 1 983a, F ig. 4 ); the deposit was c ertainly s ealed by C 2nd AD a ctivity.

1 8.

V . " Earliest o ccupation" under the eastern end o f Building V , to the west o f Watling S treet. P re-Flavian. S econdary? 1 AE E 83.1 ( 1 4221). Associations: 3 a sses C laudius I ; the bulk o f the pottery was native i n character, but i ncluded C laudian S outh Gaulish IS , f orms 1 5/17, 1 8, 2 4/5. S tructural evidence p redating Building V i s s canty ; the s ealing building i s dated l ate C 3rd AD. The c lustering o f c oins NW o f the Forum/Basilica i s not a pparently entirely a f unction o f the density o f excavation there.

Unstratified Coins

f rom w ithin the Roman c ity

( a)

1 930-4 Excavations 1 AE

E 71.2

( b)

Gorhambury E state 2 AE 2 AE

E 82.2 E 83.2

4 41

( from northern half o f t own)

( c)

" Within/on the

a nd probably

E .

Gorhambury

s ite 1 A R 1 A E

( d)

" At 1 1 1 1

( Fig .

A5:5,

Excavations ( 1983, 3 07),

o f

a ncient V erulam" E 71.2 E 71.2

V erulam" A E 8 E74.1 AR E 71.2 A E E 71.3 A E E 83.1

No.89)

( 1956-61) 1 972-82. Unpublished. S elkirk ( 1983b, 1 15-21)

S ee

Frere

L PRIA s ettlement enclosures underlying Roman villa c omplex s et a gainst the Devil's Dyke, c 1 km north o f V erulamium, w ith i ts own entrance through the Dyke. The p re-Roman o ccupation can be d ivided i nto three phases, the e arliest a n " antenna" enclosure, t o which a s econd larger e nclosure was added l inking i t t o the Dyke. S tructures belonging t o the two later phases have been r ecognised, i ncluding c ircular a nd r ectilinear buildings. 1 9.

F rere ( 1983, 3 07) r ecords a " Belgic" c oin ( no i dentification) f rom a s mall o val building in the outer enclosure; t his p redates a nother c ircular s tructure o f the C lst-C2nd AD. The c oin was a ssociated with native p ottery . N FD.

F .

P ark S treet Excavations 1 943-5; S aunders ( 1961).

1 954-7.

P ublication:

O 'Neill

( 1945);

L PRIA s ettlement underlying Roman v illa c omplex, n ear the R iver V er 3 .5 km s outh o f the c ity . O ' Neill i dentified three phases o f o ccupation p receding the f irst s tone s tructure, a ll f alling w ithin the C lst AD. The earliest s tructures were r ectangular o r s ub-rectangular ( similar t o p ost-conquest developments a t G orhambury) and p robably belong t o the s ame p eriod. The s ite i s known f or t he preConquest " slave chain" f rom a p it which c ontained C laudian TS. 2 0.

" General Belgic L evel", c lose t o s econd hearth ( Belgic P hase 2 ). P ost-Conquest. S econdary . 1 AE E 82.2 ( M251). A ssociations: c opper a lloy Nauheim derivative brooch; white ware s herd; " furrowed" ware o f. P rae Wood; s pindle-whorl. Rather than being o ccupation debris a ccumulating i n s itu, this deposit p robably r eflects the l evelling o f the s ite f or the later b uilding. I t i s c ertainly post-Conquest, c ontaining S outh Gaulish T S F orm 1 8 and various Romanised wares.

2 1.

Embedded i n m ortar o r early C 2nd AD . 1 AE E 71.2 ( 1 4175).

f loor, Building A . S econdary. Associations: N /S;

4 42

Room 1 .

L ate

C lst

C2nd AD material i n

layer 2 2.

l ying

on t his

s urface.

F illing o f P it N o utside North s ide o f Bath Building Room Ma . P ost-Conquest, before late C3rd/C4th AD. S econdary. 1 AE E 83. 2 ( M243). Associations: " practically no pot sherds". From the n ear s terile f ill o f the p it ( which was s ealed by s oot and burnt c lay f rom the s toke-hole f or the furnace in Roman M a), S aunders i nferred that the p it was o pen in the C lst AD.

4 43

KENT

Canterbury. A 5:6)

Durovernum

Cantiacorum Roman C ity

( CA)

( Fig.

Excavations 1 945-61; 1 968; 1 976-82. P ublications f or the earlier excavations ( Frere 1 948; 1 954; 1 970); J enkins ( 1952); F rere, S tow and Bennett ( 1982). Many, including a ll the modern excavations, a re s till f orthcoming. S ee a lso Frere ( 1977, 423-4); Goodburn ( 1979, 3 34-6); Grew ( 1980, 400-1; 1 981, 3 66); B lockley a nd Day ( 1981); S elkirk ( 1981, 2 69-275); B ennett e t a l. ( 1980); Arthur ( 1986). Much o f Canterbury was d evastated by a ir raids in 1 942. In the c ourse o f a rchaeological i nvestigations before r ebuilding, i t b ecame c lear that a major LPRIA s ettlement existed p rior t o the f oundation o f t he Roman public t own ( e.g. Frere, 1 954). However, o wing t o the p iecemeal nature o f the o pportunities, i t has o nly b een in r ecent years, with r eappraisal o f earlier excavated material, e .g. Dr.1 wine amphorae ( cf. Rodwell, 1 976), and extensive a rea excavations by the Canterbury Archaeological Trust, that the f ull i mportance o f the s ite has b ecome a pparent. The most important s ites were Cakebread R obey, N o f the Roman theatre and the Marlowe s ites t o i ts N E and S E. P otential evidence o f o ccupation f rom the later C lst B C i s n ow far more extensive. A t Marlowe I I, a c ircular s tructure w ith a p orched entrance was excavated, w hile a t riple-ditched enclosure, a d efensive a rrangement implicit in i ts s taggered e ntrance, extended through Marlowe I and IV. F inds in t he LPRIA o ccupation l evels included imported wheel-made p ottery and baked-clay s lab moulds; they were s ealed by t wo l arge t imber buildings, themselves overlain by a s treet o n the s ame a lignment. T hese buildings date to c AD 7 0, t he o nly p rior s ign o f the R oman C onquest a p it which produced a g roup o f c 40 t inned b ronze military horse f ittings ( Marlowe I II). North o f the theatre, the Cakebread R obey excavations c overed three s ides o f an I nsula and i n each a major portico was f ound; the r ichness o f the a rchitectural f ragments f rom the s ite s uggests a major temple ( cf. F rere, 1 986, F ig .30). Only p reliminary information i s a vailable on most o f the f inds, and the dating o f s ome contexts i s provisional. Arthur ( 1986) has l isted the r ecent amphora f inds: they include Dr.1B, Rhodian, S . Spanish a nd Dr.20, but I talian Dr.2-4 i s n otably uncommon.

Area I .

S outh-Central

S ector

This a rea i ncludes the theatre, a nd the i nsula te to the N ( Cakebread R obey s ite), S E, and N E ( Marlowe and S t. Margaret's S treet Baths). ( a) 1 .

Theatre

( 1950-6)

D II l ayer 2 3. P re-theatre, c AD 8 0-100. S econdary . 1 AE E 81 ( M227). Associations: 2 s herds S outh Gaulish TS

444

L ATER WALLED C ITY

•1 03

1 02

CANTERBURY

•

Co in f i ndspo ts Ma jo r e xcava t ions

F ig .

A5:6 f inds.

Canterbury:

1 04 •

3 00

0

3 00

6 00

Me t res

l ocation o f s ites with I ron A ge c oin

4 45

Form 2 7; 2 .

6 1-82 Castle

S treet

( 1966)

S urface o f Natural. LPRIA c ontext? 1 P otin P 1.5, quartered ( Type P 1). Associations: N /S. A s econd quartered potin P 1.4-5 ( Class I I) was a lso f ound ( NFD). ( a)

4 .

p ottery.

D III layer 3 8, o verlying a house c AD 260-75. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 ). A ssociations: c oarse g rey-ware jars, dish; o ne s herd p lain r ed c olour coat. ( b)

3 .

C laudio-Neronian c oarse

I nsula n orth o f theatre

( Cakebread Robey

CB/RI 293. L owest l evel o f s mall p it s urface. P eriod I . LPRIA. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L 1). A ssociations: CAS.

I -III

cutting

1 976-9)

o ld

g round

LPRIA pottery.

S ee

5 .

CB/RI 293. Upper f ill o f s mall p it cutting o ld g round s urface. LPRIA. S econdary. 1 AE E 81 ( M-), 2 P otin P 1.3,5 ( Types L , 0). Associations: LPRIA pottery. S ee CA4.

6 .

CB/RI 3 55. Old g round s urface. P eriod I . P re-AD 5 0? P rimary? 1 P otin P 1. 4-5, quartered ( Type P ?). A ssociations: N /S. LPRIA f eatures cutting the o ld g round s urface included a s mall s lot a nd g ully. The c oin was f ound under t he verge o f the p rimary, i .e. broad NE-SW Roman r oad. S ee a lso CA8, CA10.

7 .

CB/R2 3 25. Early Roman s treet metalling. P eriod 1 . P reF lavian. S econdary? 1 A E S E72.1 ( cf. LX22). A ssociations: N /S. A s econdary r oad, parallel t o the f irst. S ee a lso CA9.

8 .

CB/RI 2 49. Dumped deposits over p ossible f loor s urface. P eriod I . P re-Flavian. S econdary? 1 P otin P 1. 4-5 ( Class I I), 1 P otin B elgic Gaul S cheers No.206 ( found t ogether), 1 A E S E71? ( LY ). Associations: bronze f ragments; ? coin blank . P ottery: a f ew early Roman sherds, mostly LPRIA. Detritus a ssociated with this surface s pread b eyond the a rea o f t his hut and s ealed part o f the p rimary R oman r oad s urface.

9 .

CB/R2 2 90. Occupation l oam s ealing metalling o f Roman s econdary r oad. P eriod I , . Q AD 7 0. S econdary . 1 AE/AV E 82.1 ( M210). A ssociations: N /S.

1 0.

CB/R1 2 64. S econdary r epairing o f p rimary NE-SW P eriod I , last third o f C lst AD . P rimary? 1 AE S E71.1 ( M291). A ssociations: N /S. Coin disturbed f rom earlier o ccupation c ontext?.

1 1.

CB/R2 3 11. S poradic c ourtyard metalling. 2 20-350. P rimary? 1 AE S E63 ( LY7). A ssociations: N /S.

4 46

early

s treet.

P eriod I V,

e AD

1 2.

CB/R2 1 60. F inal rubble c ourtyard metalling. AD 3 50-360. S econdary? 1 AE E 82.2 ( M260A). Associations: N /S.

1 3.

CB/R2 1 23. F ill o f ditch t erminal. 6 50. S econdary. 1 AE E 85 ( M313 var.). A ssociations:

P eriod V i,

P eriod V I,

AD 400-

N /S.

1 4.

CB/R1 1 0 under 9 6. Loam o ver f inal Roman s treet. P eriod V Iiii-VIII. S econdary. 1 P otin? I llegible. Associations: N /S. A deposit beside a late C l3th AD t rench f or r obbing the S W c orner o f the Theatre, which had probably disturbed f rom a n earlier c ontext ( cf. CA15 below). The date f or this deposit falls i n the range e AD 8 50-1325.

1 5.

CB/R1 1 06. P eriod V III, 1 P otin P 1.5

1 6.

CB/R3 3 86. F ired c lay pad, i ndustrial horizon. V III, AD 1 200-1325. 1 AE S E71.1 ( M , o f. 291). Associations: N /S.

1 7.

CB/R3 3 18. Dumped deposit s ealing industrial P eriod IX, Q AD 1 300-1450. 1 AE S E71.1 ( M , o f. 291). Associations: N /S.

horizon.

( d) I nsula S outh-east 1 980, e tc.)

I V

Robber trench f or c orner o f late C l3th AD . S econdary . ( Type P 1). A ssociations: N /S.

o f Theatre

R oman

( Site Marlowe

I ,

theatre.

P eriod

1 978,

1 8.

5 Watling S treet. Gravel below p rimary f illing o f P it R l. Early Roman. S econdary . 1 AE E 82.1 ( M222). A ssociations: C laudian Iß F orms 2 9, 3 0, c oarse p ottery, a mphora i n p rimary f ill. Upper f ill: F lavian It a , g lass.

1 9.

CXVI B II1. N S ide o f Watling S treet/W s ide o f R ose F . Jenkins e xcavation 1 950. N FD. ( Adjacent t o M IV). 1 AE E 82.2 ( M225). A ssociations: N /S.

2 0.

M I 3 7. C ontext unspecified, but Modern. S econdary . 1 AE S E71.1 ( M291). A ssociations n ot

p resumably

Medieval/

r elevant.

2 1.

M IV 7 30. D itch s ubsidence. LPRIA. S econdary. 1 P otin B elgic Gaul? o f. S cheers ( 1978) No.301. Associations: N /S.

2 2.

M IV 7 36. " Belgic" C ontext. NFD. LPRIA. 2 P otin P 1.4,5 ( Types M3, P 1). Associations:

N /S.

23.

M IV 9 40. E arly Roman c ontext. N FD . Early Roman . 1 AE S E82.1 ( 1 4312 var.). A ssociations: N /S.

24.

M IV 7 31. F ill o f ? clay p it. Early Roman. 1 AR S E73.1 ( cf. M 270-2), 1 P otin P 1.2-3?, A ssociations: N /S.

4 47

Lane.

S econdary. half ( Type J -L).

2 5.

M IV 7 34. Early Roman c ontext. NFD . Early R oman. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 1). Associations: N /S.

2 6.

M IV 7 13. F ill o f R oman p it. c AD 1 75-300/320. S econdary. 1 AE S E71.1 ( cf. M 291). Associations i nclude Dr.1B a mphora handle e tc.

2 7.

M IV 5 94. Roman c ontext. NFD. F lavian o nward. 1 AE S E71.1 ( M289). Associations: N /S.

2 8.

M IV 6 25. Late Roman c ontext. NFD. 1 P otin P 1. 4-5, f ragment ( Class I I).

2 9.

M IV 4 50. 1 AR 1 /4

3 0.

M IV 3 81B. F ill o f 1 AR B elgic Gaul? Associations: N /S.

S axon c ontext. NFD. S 81.2? ( cf. M 120A, C ).

Late Roman. S econdary? A ssociations: N /S.

P ost-Roman. S econdary. Associations: N /S.

S axon p it. P ost-Roman. S econdary . c f. S cheers No.94 o r B ritish o f.

3 1.

M IV 3 57. F ill o f M edieval p it. Medieval. S econdary . 2 AE 8 E63 ( LY6, LY7). Associations n ot r elevant.

3 2.

M IV 8 0. C ontext: S econdary. 1 AE S E82.1 ( M ).

N /S.

NFD,

p resumably

A ssociations n ot

Unstratified. M IV 1 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L ), Gaulish). ( Both M IV).

1 AE

o f.

S E71?

S67?

Medieval-modern.

r elevant.

( Uncertain B ritish

o r

Marlowe V . I n 1 982, a f ifth s ite was excavated o n t he s ite o f the demolished theatre, N o f the ditches in M I and I V. Finds i ncluded another c ircular s tructure, r eplaced twice and o ther s ettlement f eatures. A ssociated were a s mall h earth, bronze s lag a nd l arge quantities o f L PRIA p ottery including f lint-gritted f orms. This o ccupation was s ealed by grey c layey l oam, c AD 7 0, and a t imber building c onstructed over i t. The f ollowing c oins were f ound:3 2A. MV 1 221. " Belgic" c ontext. NFD. L PRIA. 1 P otin P 1.4 ( Type M 3). Associations: N /S. 3 2B. MV 3 94. " Belgic" t opsoil, phase 1 . NFD. 1 P otin Uncertain Gaulish o f. DLT XXXIII, Associations: N /S.

L PRIA. 8 329?

3 2C. MV 1 035. " Early R oman" layer. NFD . Early Roman. 1 P otin P 1.2-3? ( Class I ?). A ssociations: N /S. 3 2D . MV 1 205. " Roman l ayer". NFD . Roman. 1 AE/AR S E82.1 ( M306). Associations: N /S. Unstratified 1 P otin P 1.4-5

( Class

I I).

4 48

( e) Insula n orth-east o f Theatre ( Marlowe 1 979-80; S t. Margaret's S treet 1 950; 1 948 ( Fountains Hotel S ite), 1 955 ( Baths); R ose Lane/Yard 1 946; 1 951; 1 956-7; Butchery Lane, 1 946). 3 3.

3 4.

R ose Lane H I. F ill o f P it R3. C 2nd AD deposit. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1. 4-5 ( Class I I). A ssociations: N /S.

Roman,

s ealed by m id/later

Dissolved

E V III Extension I I. Lower S econdary? 1 AE S E 6 3 ( LY8). Associations: d eposit a s CA35 b elow.

" Belgic" N /S.

in

c leaning.

Level.

LPRIA.

Apparently the

same

3 5.

E XXI D29. L owest " Belgic" L evel. L PRIA. S econdary? 2 P otin P 1.5 ( Type N , 0 ; o nly o ne s urvives). Associations: N /S. Deposit a pparently c ontinuous w ith CA34. The upper B elgic l evel c ontained Arretine T S and o ther i mported p ottery; above t his a re a s eries o f c lay f loors b elonging t o Roman t imber buildings s ucceeded i n C 2nd AD by a masonry s tructure. L owest l evel o ld g round s urface?

3 6.

B utchery Lane. W est Wing Cellars F , G. ( Sections L -M). S ealed l ayer ( a) o f d irty l oam o n natural. L PRIA. S econdary? 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 ). A ssociations: c opper a lloy b rooch ( probable Nauheim derivative); f inger-ring; LPRIA b ead-rim b owl and o ther LPRIA s herds. P ossibly the o ld g round s urface ( a) i s s ealed by ( b), a p ebbly l oam; both a re prebuilding d eposits.

3 7.

F ountains Hotel. R I 1 AE S E82.1 ( 1 4312).

3 8.

R III 2 . C ontext: N /S. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P ).

39.

2d. Context: Associations:

N /S. N /S.

N FD . A ssociations:

Q 1 3a. C ontext: N /S. NFD . 1 A E S E82.1 ( 1 4310). Associations:

NFD.

N /S.

N /S.

40.

S t. Margaret's S treet 1 950 E V 2 0. On s ite R oman, C 2nd AD o r later. S econdary . 1 AR S E82.2 ( M299A). Associations: N /S.

4 1.

B aths Building. 1 A E I llegible.

42.

RVII 1 9. C ontext: N /S. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 ); A ssociations: N /S.

o f R oman house.

RVI ( VII) C 19. C ontext: N /S. N FD . B elgic Gaul? A ssociations: N /S. N FD. 1 AE B elgic Gaul

43.

R V II Robber T rench. Medieval - Modern. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type N ). A ssociations n ot

44.

R V III 2 2. C ontext: N /S. NFD. 1 A E Belgic Gaul S cheers N o.59.

449

S cheers

S econdary. r elevant.

Association:

N /S.

No. 93.

45.

R V III 2 6. Context: N /S. NFD . 1 A E S E71.1 ( M289), 1 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L ). N /S. F ormer c oin came f rom the base o f 2 6.

46.

R I X. F ill o f P it 1 A E E 71.2 ( M173).

47.

S TMS/79 = M II B695. Context : N /S. N FD. 3 P otin P 1.2,2-3,5 ( first halved; Types J , Associations: N /S.

48.

M II 1 275. Context: N /S. NFD . 1 P otin P 1.2, halved ( Type J ?).

49.

9 . O therwise c ontext: Associations: N /S.

Associations:

N /S.

NFD.

P re-Flavian. J -L, 01).

P re-Flavian. A ssociations:

N /S.

M IIB 6 36B. Context: N /S. NFD . P re-Flavian. 1 P otin P 1.4-5, third ( Class I I). A ssociations:

N /S.

5 0.

M IIB 7 67B. Context: N /S. NFD . P re-Flavian . 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 1). Associations: N /S.

5 1.

M IIB 694. Context: N /S. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 1). a mphora.

NFD . P re-Flavian. A ssociations include

5 2.

M IIB 7 98. C ontext: N /S. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type O -P).

NFD . P re-Flavian. A ssociations: N /S.

5 3.

M IIB 7 17. Context: N /S. NFD . P re-Flavian. 1 P otin P 1.4-5 ( Class I I). A ssociations: N /S.

5 4.

M II 7 59. S ilt i n C ellar. Late Roman. S econdary. 1 P otin C entral Gaul. Early T ete D iabolique. A ssociations: N /S.

5 5.

M IIB 8A. F ill o f p it. Medieval. 1 A E B elgic Gaul. S cheers No.119?

S econdary . A ssociations:

5 6.

M II 7 53A. Unspecified Context. 1 AR S T3.3 ( M ). A ssociations:

5 7.

M II 7 53B. Unspecified C ontext. N FD 1 P otin B elgic Gaul, S cheers No.198. Unstratified 1 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L 2/3) Marlowe I I s ite.

was

S .Spanish

N /S.

N FD. N /S.

a lso

Associations:

r ecovered

N /S.

f rom

the

5 8.

M III 1 262. P ost-hole s ealed by earliest R oman c onstruction l evels. C laudian? S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.4 ( Type M 3). Associations: N /S.

59.

M ITI 1 044. P ost-hole a ssociated w ith c onstruction o f Baths portico. Late F lavian. S econdary . 1 P otin P 1.4, halved ( Type M ?). Associations: N /S.

60.

M III 1 108. C onstruction F lavian. S econdary 1 P otin P 1/2.1-3 ( Class I ).

l evel o f Baths Associations:

4 50

portico. N /S.

Late

6 1.

M III 1 103. Under Op. Sig. f loor, c onstruction l evel portico. Late F lavian . S econdary. 1 P otin P 1/2.1-3 ( Class I ). Associations: N /S.

62.

M III 1 144. F ill o f p it i n c lay layer under P alaestra? AD 20-70/80. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5? ( Type 02?). Associations: include amphora s tub in hard pale o range f abric with c ream s lip.

63.

M III 1 125. C lay layer under P alaestr . S econdary. 1 AE S E71. 3 ( M ). A ssociations: N /S.

64.

M III 1 151. C lay layer under P alaestra. F lavian o r earlier. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 1). Associations: N /S. c f. CA67.

65.

M III 1 124. C obbled a rea o nwards. S econdary? 2 P otin P 1. 3,4 ( Types L , M ).

o f

o f

F lavian o r earlier.

P alaestra .

Associations:

L ate

F lavian

N /S.

66.

M III 1 105. F ill o f P it i n Op. S ig . f loor o f Baths. F lavian. S econdary. 2 P otin P 1. 3 ( Type L 6/7). A ssociations: N /S.

67.

M III 1 151. Undated R oman c ontext. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1. 4-5, f ragment ( Class I I). c f. CA64.

68.

Late

Late F lavian o nwards. A ssociations:

N /S.

M III 1 186. Undated Roman c ontext. Late F lavian o nwards. S econdary. 1 P otin B elgic Gaul S cheers No.199 o r 2 05? A ssociations: N /S. ( f)

69.

Baths

City Wall

S outh o f Burgate

B urgate Lane 1 954 CW22. C ity Rampart. Late C 3rd AD. S econdary. 1 AE S outhern Gaul, DLT I V 1 476 ( cut down). A ssociations: 1 AE Tetricus I ( 270-3), s herds f rom 2 f langed b owls ( 1 r ed c olour-coat, 1 c oarse g rey), p robably late C 3rd AD ; amphora s tamp ( URSI) a nd r esidual s herds. A thick t ip o f dark earth and charcoal with mussels and o ysters, c onceivably an a ddition t o the r ampart, m ore l ikely primary a s s ealed by layers which a re c learly part o f i t.

Area

I I

S outh-eastern

( Cathedral)

S ector

70.

P alace S treet 1 952 J 1 . F ill o f P it 1 . 1 AE S E82.1 ( M309). A ssociations: N /S.

7 1.

5 0 Burgate S treet, J enkins excavations 1 949-1950. s urface o f g ravel f loor. N FD . P rimary? 1 AE S E63 ( LY7). Associations: N /S.

7 2.

Occupation layer b elow burnt l ayer E X 4 , o ver s econd c lay f loor. L PRIA. S econdary? 1 AR S E63 ( LZ9). Association: N /S ( Belgic p ottery?).

4 51

NFD.

X 5 in

7 3.

X 8 , L 21.2.11. 1 P otin P 1.4-5

C ontext: N /S. N FD . ( Class I I). Associations:

N /S.

74.

Intermediate Romano-British l ayers ( bottom) s ide Flavian o r later. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1. 4-5 ( Class I I). A ssociations: N /S.

o f X

7 5.

Grey s and in pit a t s ide o f but f loor 4 ' NFD. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.4-5 ( Class I I). A ssociations:

h earth).

( under N /S.

Two o ther P otin ( 1 P 1.4-5?, 1 p robably P 1/2) f rom Burgate S treet disintegrated during c leaning. No detail their c ontext r ecorded.

A reas S ectors

North-eastern,

North C entral

S outh-western

( Castle)

5 0 o f

and North-western

No I ron A ge c oins were f ound i n the l imited which have taken p lace w ithin these a reas.

A rea V I

5 .

excavations

S ector

7 6.

Dane J ohn 1 981 2 2. Context: 1 AE Northern Gaul? c f. Associations: N /S.

7 7.

1 Watling S treet, 1 948. R oman C ity Bank. Late C 3rd AD . S econdary. 1 AE S E71.1 ( LY10), 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 ). Associations: s emis Trajan, a s C 1st AD i llegible; a c opper a lloy b rooch, C lst-C2nd AD pottery ( residual). The bank was not dated i n this excavation, o ther t han by C4th AD d eposits a ccumulating behind i t, but excavations e lsewhere o n the defensive c ircuit imply a date n o e arlier than the late C3rd AD ( cf. CA69 a bove). Underlying the bank were undisturbed p re-Roman deposits, s ealed by d eposits c ontaining c oins o f V espasian a nd T itus. T hese included a gully w ith LPRIA c ombed wares and a mid C lst AD b rooch; o ther f inds f rom the L PRIA deposits i ncluded imported T i p latters, and butt-beakers o f. Cam . 1 3. The material used f or the bank was p resumably d erived f rom s imilar deposits.

7 8.

" Not s tratified i n the p re-Roman d eposits" Roman o r l ater. S econdary. 1 AE S E63 ( LYS). A ssociations: N /S.

7 9.

1 0-11 Castle S treet. J enkins excavations 1 950. F ill o f rubbish p it. LPRIA? S econdary. 1 AE Belgic Gaul S cheers No.216. A ssociations: a b ronze o bject i n the f orm o f a b ird, a b rooch? ( Jenkins, 1 962); p ottery o f the " late B elgic p eriod".

8 0.

" Belgic deposit". LPRIA. S econdary? NFD . 1 P otin P 1. 4-5 ( Class I I). A ssociations: N /S.

8 1.

1 0 Castle 1 AE S E71

S treet. ( M291).

N /S. N FD. ( Defences). Carnutes DLT XVIII e t

C ontext: N /S. Associations:

4 52

N FD . N /S.

( Jenkins,

s eq .?

1 962).

Areas o utside A5:6, N o.103) 8 2.

( a)

t o the

S outh-east

( Fig.

44-45 Watling S treet, 1 953 L I II, 1 5. Occupation d eposit. Mid C lst AD. S econdary. 1 AE Belgic Gaul S cheers No.143. Associations: t races o f bronze w orking h earths. The deposit was s ealed beneath the metalling o f the f irst Roman r oad. ( b)

8 3.

the C ity-Walls

t o the

S outh-west

Canterbury By-Pass, 1 979 ( Hollow Lane/Stuppington Lane). Fill o f P it 2 9. c AD 5 0-70. S econdary. 1 AE N ew Type o f. S E71 ( Dubnovellaunus) o r B elgic Gaul S cheers N o.164. Associations: LPRIA g rog-tempered beaker, jar, p latter; Romano-British j ars apparently wasters f rom an a ssociated kiln used during the third quarter o f the C lst AD , probably o nly f or two f irings ( Bennett e t a l., 1 980). A chance f ind in 1 979 o f 1 AR S E71.1 i s r ecorded a t I ngoldsby Road, 1 km NW o f the H ollow Lane/Stuppington Lane s ite. ( c)

to t he North-east

A chance garden o f

f ind i n 1 967 o f 1 AV S E51 i s r ecorded 2 C ollege R oad, c 400 i n f rom the walls.

( d) t o the N orth-west on the o pposite bank o f Great ßtour ( Fig. A 5:6, No.105) 84.

Whitehall Road 1 954-5. W V 3 5 2 . presumably Medieval-Modern. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M222). A ssociations: N /S.

8 5.

W V 3 9. P it 2 0 f illing. NFD. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M222). Associations: N /S.

8 6.

W V 3 8. F ill o f P it 1 AE 8 E71.1 ( M290).

f rom

the

C ontext: NFD.

the

R iver

N /S,

but

3 6. NFD. S econdary. Associations: N /S.

The s ite was p rolific in b rooches. I t i s immediately to the s outh o f Watling S treet. The main f eature was a " Belgic hut", o ccupied c AD 2 5-70, i ts p ost-holes r eplaced s everal times, and eventually burnt down. I nside w ere s uccessive f loors a nd hearths, " each a ssociated w ith much pottery, s ome b rooches and a f ew c oins i ncluding o ne o f Dubnovellaunus". 8 7.

Watling S treet exposed i n Whitehall Road, excavation. C ontext: N /S. N FD . 1 AE 1 /4 S E82.2 ( M316F). A ssociations: N /S.

1 958.

J enkins

The r ecord o f the earliest f inds o f potin coins in the walled a rea i s c onfused, and i t i s p ossible that o ne o r two may have inadvertently been o mitted.

4 53

S URREY

Farley Heath,

Albury_ Roman Temple

( FH)

" Excavations" 1 848, 1 852, 1 926, 1 939. Publication: Tupper ( 1850); Wimbolt ( 1927); Lowther a nd G oodchild ( 1943). S ee a lso Goodchild ( 1938) and Appendix 3 , Hoard 43. Although p oorly r ecorded, the nature o f t he Farley Heath f inds i s s ufficiently well established by t he r ecent f inds a t Hayling I sland e tc., to a llow t he temple's inclusion among the Key S ites i n the S tudy Area . In Ashmole's t ime, the walls o f the t emple, a double square s tructure o f Romano-Celtic type, and i ts o ctagonal p recinct, e 75 m across, were s till s tanding to about a f oot ( Goodchild, 1 938), but i t was r obbed o ut in 1 670 a nd not r elocated until Tupper's r esearches b egan in 1 839, culminating i n a c ontinuous 6 month e xcavation in 1 848 when a g reat d eal was f ound. Apart f rom " grubbing" by L ovell i n December 1 852 which p roduced a horse bit a nd s ome British c oins ( Goodchild, 1 938; c f. Hoard 4 3), there was no further excavation until s mall-scale work i n 1 926 uncovered a p it in the t emea utz ( with pottery a nd B ritish c oins), a nd outside i t t o the S W l ater Roman p ottery a nd c oins. The precinct c losely r esembles that a t C oblenz ( Lowther, 1 942-3). I t l ies w ithin a r ectilinear earthwork s ystem o f o 4 ha, double a long the western s ide. I t was s ectioned i n 1 939 but i s undated. I t i s possibly part o f a pre-existing f ield/ enclosure s ystem ( although rather large) a nd t rackway; the latter c ontinued t o be used in the Roman period. Two pottery k ilns and a n o ven were f ound outside this " earthwork" o n the West. There i s a lso a pond which acts a s the s ource o f a s tream a t the end o f the s outh bank, which Tupper ( 1850) s tates w as paved w ith Roman t ile and may have been an important f eature o f t he s acred s ite. Exactly where Tupper excavated i s unclear, but further excavations i n 1 939 s howed that most o f the temenos enclosure had been t renched down t o t he s ubsoil throughout and s lightly beyond i ts a rea, and i t was p resumably h ere that the vast majority o f the f inds w ere made. The bulk o f them came f rom a deposit Tupper describes a s " black mould", e specially a round the t emenos wall f oundations: large numbers o f brooches, o ther o bjects s uch a s r ings a nd ex-votos and o ver a thousand c oins, the R oman o nes ranging f rom Republican t o the C4th AD ( Goodchild , 1 938). Apart f rom one o bvious c oncentration, the c oins w ere s cattered i n the " black mould" o ver a wide a rea . This pattern puzzled Tupper ( 1850), but i s evidently a nalogous to the deposits underlying o ther s tone t emples ( eg . Harlow), a s eries o f o fferings a t an important r eligious f ocus. ( From the abundance o f F lavian pottery and c oins, the s tone temple probably b elongs to the same late C lst AD horizon a s t he o thers, but the nature o f the e arlier a ctivity i s l ess c ertain. P re-Roman s tructures a re unlikely to have b een r ecognised, and I ron A ge pottery is not an obvious

4 54

c onstituent o f the large c eramic a ssemblage. c oins r epresent l ess than 3 % o f the t otal, a ctivity here was e ssentially p ost-Conquest t his i t must be r emembered: ( 1) o ur p erfect,

S ince I ron Age i t may b e that - but a gainst

knowledge o f the Roman activity i s and the s tatistics may be misleading.

f ar

f rom

( 2) many p lated ( cf. Hayling I sland) and/or bronze I ron A ge c oins may not have been r ecognised a s s uch in the 1 840's a nd instead dismissed a s i llegible Roman i ssues. The t otal n umber o f g old and silver issues is s till g reater t han f or a lmost any o ther s ite. ( 3) there a re s triking analogies between Farley Heath and W anborough in t he nature o f the c oin f inds, the " black m ould" layer, and t he o verall s equence. ( 4) I ron A ge w ider a rea o r

c oin deposition may have b een diffuse c oncentrated e laewhere o n the s ite.

o ver

a

I t i s n ot i mpossible that the W onersh h oard s hould be c onsidered in this c ontext. A lternatively, i t c ould have r eached i ts f indspot through r obbing o f material f or r oad r epairs f rom the v icinity o f the t emple ( Appendix 3 ). The t wo f inds have b een hopelessly c onfused i n the past ( Sy. A. C. I , 69-70; c f. A llen, 1 960), and a lthough the f ollowing l ist i s r estricted t o c oins a pparently r eliably p rovenanced t o the t emple, i t i s s till p ossible that o ne o r t wo o f the g old coins are actually hoard coins. T he A

c oins a ttributed t o Farley Heath a re

C oins

f ound a t

a s

f ollows:-

Farley Heath i n the n ineteenth c entury

( Coins r ecorded by Evans ( 1864) o r in the BM ex Tupper and D rummond. B ritish 1 AV1/4 S 51.1 1 AV 8 51-S63.1 ( Conceivably a Wonersh c oin?) 1 AV S 63.2 1 AV1/4 S 64.1 7 AR S 66.1-2 1 AV1/4 E 75.2 1 AV1/4 S 81.2 3 AR S 82.2 1 A E E 82.2 1 1+AE S W81 ( but s ee Appendix 3 , H oard 4 3) 1 AR S 92 T otal: 29+ T upper l ists o ne u ninscribed c oin a s AE/AV, but there i s n o t race o f i t. I n E vans' a ccount ( 1864, 1 76; 2 82) the AV 1 /4 o f Verica and AR E paticcus were " found t ogether a t the same s pot where many o ther B ritish c oins have been f ound, e specially those o f V erica", while the 2 AE S W81 engraved ( 1864, 1 17) were f ound " with s everal o thers o f the s ame t ype a s well a s w ith o ther B ritish c oins a t Farley H eath". Many Farley Heath c oins went unrecorded into p rivate hands, s uch a s Whitbourn's; these included a t l east 9 C lst AD

4 55

Roman i ssues, n otably one o f Augustus who does not o therwise f igure o n the c oin l ist. C onversely, s ome o f the c oins r ecorded with vague " near Guildford" o r " in the neighbourhood o f Godalming" p rovenances a re p robably F arley Heath c oins, among the p ossibilities, 2 AV1/4 S 12, 1 A V S91 ( Epaticcus) f ound in 1 857 ( all in W hitbourn's c ollection) and 1 AR S 93. However, o ther l ocal f indspots a re b y no means improbable, and the t endency t o a ttribute c oins to a well-known s ite must a lso be weighed.

B .

Coins ( a)

f rom the twentieth century excavations

W inbolt's excavation in

1 926

B ritish 2 AR S 66.1,2

( LZ7,

L ZB)

Winbolt ( 1927) was f ortunate enough t o f ind what he t hought to be a l arge p it i n the S W part o f the t emenos, w hich Tupper had m issed. " When i t came t o c learing the s ite o f the debris o f the f inal f ire and d estruction a p it was dug about 5 1 /2 f eet i n the middle down t o the s olid i ronstone r ock. The s ides s loped up g radually, l ike t hose o f a b asin, t o a t op r oughly c ircular, the d iameter o f which was about 8 yards. I nto this a ll k inds o f s urface r ubbish w ere thrown, p ottery, i ron, b ronze and c oins, r epresenting the p re-Roman a nd the whole duration ( with o ne marked gap) o f the R oman o ccupation. From t his w ere extracted, by careful s ifting, many interesting s mall f inds, including 5 1 c oins, beginning with two s ilver B ritish uninscribed c oins a nd ending with o ne o f H onorius" ( 1927, 1 88). F rom this description, this was i ndeed quite possibly a basin o r p ond, f illed w ith o fferings, and subsequently backfilled with o ccupation d ebris; e qually, i t may b e a late sand p it! ( b)

Goodchild a nd L owther's excavation. B ritish 1 A R S 92

1 939

( 1 4263)

This excavation r ecovered t he p lan o f the temple and temenos. The I ron A ge c oin i s n ot m entioned i n the r eport ( prepared in WW I I) a nd i s known o nly through A llen r ecording i t a s f ound a t Farley Heath i n 1 939 . There a re no details o f i ts c ontext. The t otal number o f c oins r easonably a ttributed to F arley Heath i s 6 AV, 1 4 AR a nd 1 2 A E ( see H oard 43). to which may be a dded 1 AR S 81.1 f ound " at A lbury, n ear Farley H eath" ( Evans, 1 864) and p erhaps the Wonersh hoard a nd Lovell's f ind i f the c oins r eally were p otins. A t f ace value, the chronological emphasis o f the Farley Heath coins is s ignificantly earlier than a t Wanborough o r Waltham S t. Lawrence, with a f requency distribution much c loser to

4 56

Hayling I sland. A s a t the latter s ite, deposition i s l ikely t o have c ommenced during the f irst c entury BC, but need not have b een c ontinuous into the Roman p eriod, Winbolt's ( 1927) o bservations above n otwithstanding.

4 57

SUSSEX

Chichester,

Noviomagus Roman C ity

Excavations 1 960, 1 966; 1 968-78. ( 1971); Down ( 1974; 1 978; 1 981).

( CH). P ublication Down and Rule S ee a lso B edwin ( 1983).

An important LPRIA f ocus o n the West S ussex c oastal p lain has l ong been inferred f rom a c ombination o f c ircumstances: the s o-called Chichester Dykes, the d evelopment o f a public t own here and the late I ron Age c oin f inds f rom S elsey ( Hoard 5 6). I f such a s ite existed, i t has yet t o be p recisely l ocated. There i s undeniably a very h igh r elative density o f Middle and Late I ron A ge s ettlement ( Bedwin, 1 983) a nd o f g old c oin f inds o n the Coastal P lain i n this a rea a nd i t may be that this c entre existed in purely r elative terms c ompared to the s urrounding a rea . A number o f f actors direct a ttention t o the Chichester a rea i tself: THe f ocus o f the a rea a round t he head o f Chichester harbour ( Bradley, 1 971), the palatial villa c omplex a t F ishbourne ( Cunliffe, 1 971) and the early d evelopment o f t he c ity i tself, which may b e s ummarised a s f ollows: P eriod 0 : possible p re-Roman o ccupation, i nferred f rom r esidual g roups o f late Augustan - e arly T iberian imported f ine wares here and a t F ishbourne. No major f eatures a re a ssigned t o this phase, but the material m ight derive f rom o ccupation n earby. The earliest p hase ( 1) o f the Dyke s ystem i s p ossibly a lso o f this p eriod ( Bradley, 1 971), a lthough a n early Roman date cannot b e ruled out f rom the r ecently excavated s ection a t B oxgrove ( Bedwin, 1 983), where s lab-moulds in two module s izes were a lso r ecovered. P eriod 1 : earliest t imber buildings: C laudian. These must r eflect an early Roman military g arrison, which c onnects w ith the m ilitary s upply base a t F ishbourne. On analogy w ith Colchester, the r ectilinear s econd phase in the Dyke s equence, p resumably a lso r elates, a t l east in part, to these m ilitary dispositions. P eriod 2 : i ndustrial a ctivity: Claudian-Neronian . P eriod 1 a ppears to have been s hort l ived ; the a ctivity which f ollowed i s a ssociated e ither with a c ontinuing military p resence e lsewhere i n the c ity o r w ith the f irst c ivilian phase. P eriod 3 : t imber buildings o n s tone s ills a nd an early bath building: early F lavian. This r ebuilding was a new departure i n this part o f the c ity a nd c oincides c losely in date w ith s imilar developments a t F ishbourne and Hayling I sland; three s uch e laborate building projects within a f ew miles o f one another a re l ikely t o b e r elated, whether or n ot they a re c onnected w ith a c lient kingship f ocussed o n Chichester. P eriod 4 : the r ebuilding o f the baths and the laying-out o f the s treet g rid: late F lavian to T rajanic. The subsequent development o f the c ity n eed not b e r epeated here.

4 58

A .

The I ron Age 1 968-78 Area 0 ( Tower

1

c oins

f rom the N orth-west

S treet

Quadrant

excavations

1 970-1)

A . 3.2. Occupation layer above t op f ill o f Ditch 2 . C l3thC 14th AD. S econdary. 1 AR1/4 S 72.1 ( M316). Associations not r elevant. D itch 2 was dug and back-filled between c . mid C 2nd and m id C 3rd AD. I t included s ome r esidual material ( e.g. o ne s herd C lst AD T S), but the bulk o f i t was Antonine. Evidence f or p re-Flavian a ctivity here were mainly T S and GB s urvivals. The a rea i s o n the p eriphery o f early military a rea t o the east, the earliest r ecognisable s tructural ensemble, a C2nd AD building. Area 2 ( Central G irls'

S chool)

2

G 190 " Occupation s pread" above turf-line G 200. P eriod 1 . P rimary? 1 AR S 71.1 ( M106A). Associations: P rovincial T S A rretine, T iberio-Claudian T S a nd GB f ine wares, t ogether w ith early C lst AD c oarse ware types i ncluding b ead-rimmed jars.

3

G 153 occupation l ayer below k iln 1 AR1/4 S 72.1 ( M316). NFD.

4

G 134 1 AR

5

E 115 layer o f c lay s ealing t he latest o f the P eriod 2 c ontexts. P eriod 3 . S econdary . 1 AR 1 /4 S 81.2 ( M120D). A ssociations: c ast c opper a lloy object, p ossibly decorated i nlay f or a box ( Roman military?), f lat belt p late p aralleled a t Hofheim ( Roman military).

1 .

Lump o f p otter's c lay i n k iln 1 /4 S 82.2 ( M120E). NFD .

Area 3 ( Wool

S tore

P eriod 2 .

1 .

P eriod

S econdary.

1 .

S econdary?

S ite)

6

W27 S lot W4 drainage g ully. P eriod 1 . S econdary. 1 AR S 91 ( M263A). A ssociations: o ne s herd o f p re-Flavian TS f rom the gully ; the c oin was f ound in the primary s ilt. The gully o ut a n e arlier deposit o f b rown c lay with a s mall f ragment o f Roman g lass.

7

W3 top g ravel m etalling o f t he F orum a rea. C4th AD . S econdary. 1 AR 1 /4 S 81. 2 ( M120A). Associations: N ew Forest s lipped ware. Area 4 ( Clemens Yard)

8

M71 o ccupation l ayer. P eriod 1 . P rimary? 1 AR S92 ( M263). A ssociations: N /S. M 71 i s a ssociated w ith two buildings a nd a p it; the f ormer yielded one s herd o f p re-Flavian 12 . , the latter a f ragment o f T Z dated AD 30-45.

9

M 83 large d epression f illed w ith s ilty c lay. P rimary?

4 59

P eriod

1 -2.

1 AR 1 /4 S 91 ( M264). The f eature i s interpreted a s dug f or c lay but f unctioning a s a p ond f or s ome t ime a fterwards. The c oin came f rom the b ottom o f the f irst s ilt w ith part o f a s mall c rucible; there was n othing later than Neronian T S below the upper most f ill which c ontained F lavian material. A rea 1 0.

5 ( Gospel Hall

S ite)

P 89 S ealed deposit o f brown c lay. P eriod 0 -1. S econdary? 1 AE E 82.2 ( M253). A ssociations: three s mall f ragments of undatable g rey ware. An equivalent deposit i s cut by a P eriod 2 building - i ts s lots c ontained pre-Flavian T S and butt-beaker s herds. A rea 7 ( Tower

S treet)

1 1.

P it A l9 ( B) F ill o f p it. P ost-Roman. 1 AE E 82.2 ( M260). A ssociations: N /S.

S econdary.

1 2.

P it D4 f ill o f p it. C l8th-C19th AD . S econdary. 1 A E S W91 ( M331). A ssociations n ot r elevant. S herds o f Arretine a nd p rovincial A rretine T S were the P eriod 1 and 2 deposits o n t his s ite, 4 3 North S treet

f ound in

( 1950)

1 3.

Occupation deposit b eneath phases o f Roman cobbling laid d own in m id-C2nd AD . P eriod 5 . S econdary? 1 AE E 83.2 ( M248). A ssociations: s herd o f S outh Gaulish TS c AD 1 20+. Earlier a ctivity h ere was c onfined to g ravel quarrying.

B .

N orth-East Quadrant

1 4.

M 6 Occupation deposit. P ost-Medieval. S econdary. 1 AR S 72.1 ( M ). A ssociations n ot relevant, but i ncluded TS Antonine and a R oman bone p in. P eriods 1 and 2 were b oth r epresented here, f inds i ncluding Roman m ilitary equipment, early brooches ( 2 C olchester) and pre-Flavian TS a nd GB wares a ssociated w ith the early t imber s tructures a nd ditch.

( St. Mary's Hospital,

1 966)

The I ron Age c oin which was n ot f ully i dentified a t the t ime o f d iscovery i s t he s ame type a s that f rom Waltham S t. Lawrence No. 1 ( see A ppendix 2 ).

C .

O ther

c oins

f rom Chichester

The o nly o ther I ron A ge c oin p rovenanced f rom within the Roman t own i s 1 AV S 71.1 f ound in The Pallant ( SE quadrant). O thers a re known f rom the immediate v icinity including 1 AV E 61.2 f rom P ortway. There w ere no I ron Age c oins f ound in the main F ishbourne excavations ( Cunliffe, 1 971), a lthough 1 AV1/4 S 51.1 was f ound a t Barker C lose i n 1 976. C oins a ttributed t o Chichester i nclude two f rom B elgic Gaul ( 1 AV1/4 S E 3 2.1-42.1; 1 AR S cheers No.55). A

4 60

f urther s ilver c oin o f V erica was f ound s tratified in early military l evels o n the Greyfriars s ite excavated during the later part o f 1 984 ( Sussex A rchaeol. S oc. N ewsletter No.45, April 1 985)

G lynde.

The Caburn.

P RIA h illfort

( GC)

( Fig.

A 5:7)

E xcavations 1 877-8; 1 925-6 ( also 1 937-8). P ublication: P itt-Rivers ( Lane-Fox, 1 881); Curwen and Curwen ( 1927); f or t he later excavations, s ee Wilson ( 1938, 1 939). S ee a lso B ell ( 1977), Champion ( 1980b), Cunliffe ( 1978a) and Curwen ( 1931). A more c omplex s ite than g enerally a llowed, the C l9th excavations a t t he Caburn were distinguished by P ittR ivers' use o f a " Relic table" which s ystematically s ets o ut the f inds f rom each c ontext with a quantified s ummary o f the pottery f abric types. The Curwens' r ecording was to the same h igh s tandard ( no c oins were f ound i n W ilson's i nvestigation); a nd more c an be s aid about t he a ssociations o f the excavated c oins than w ith many later excavations, a lthough the r ecord i s tantalisingly s hort o f the detail n eeded to e stablish an early c hronology f or P otin c oinage b eyond any doubt. The earliest s ettlement o n the Caburn s eems t o have been a palisaded enclosure; the a ssociated p ottery belongs t o Cunliffe's ' Kimmeridge-Caburn' s tyle a nd c ould be a s early a s C 8th o r C7th B C. Later, the s ite became a ditched enclosure, c 1 .4 ha being f ortified by a s ingle dump r ampart. How much l ater i s uncertain, but a ll the s herds w ithin o r under this bank lack the decoration c haracteristic o f t he M /LPRIA p ottery a ssemblages. Later s till, the s ite was r efortified by a s econd o uter rampart a nd broad-bottomed d itch, p rotecting the n orthern a pproach t o the s ite. D ecorated s herds do o ccur with this defence, a nd the p resence o f C laudian f lagon s herds i n the p rimary s ilt o f the ditch has g enerally been taken t o i mply a date c lose to the m iddle o f t he C lst AD f or t his o peration, p erhaps erroneously . A lthough the name s ite f or three o f the decorative s tyles o f I ron A ge p ottery adduced by Cunliffe ( 1978a) f or the r egion, the chronological parameters o f o ccupation a t the s ettlement i s v irtually impossible to e stablish. The w idely held view t hat their s uccessive p resence implies c ontinuous o ccupation o f t he Caburn up t o the c onquest i s based o n an e ssentially c ircular a rgument. Apart f rom the r amparts, evidence i s l imited t o the 1 40 o r s o excavated s torage pits, the majority identified a s depressions in the s urface o f the interior, p osing two basic d ifficulties: the l ack o f s tratigraphic c ontrol and the l ikelihood that many p its c ontain material which s lumped i n f rom later deposits - the " surface mould", a pparent i n the excavation r eports but not n ecessarily detectable in individual cases. I llustrative o f the p roblem a re a f ew l ate Roman c oins and

4 61

T HE C ABURN

% \\2

111 11 1111 1 11 1 i1 I 1i i ii t

. . ,_ I .

I I -, -. . . . , -- _ , „ , , ,r.

.. ,

_ __. . — . . . .

•

•• • -.. 1 1. 11

Z: . . . • — .

." : ; . . , . . . ." . ., . .: . . . : : ." . . , .T . :1 7 . . ,1 . _ . _ . . ._ . 2 . .. t . - • ..

•

=

— _ _ — —

=

• •

.. ...

9 .

• z .. 0 › ,e .

F ig . A5:7

4 0

6 0

Caburn:

8 0

Me t res

« ''.

. ..

'

1 .. . . .. .. .. . . .

. .. .4

.

. . , . :. . . , ' . b . „ . . . . . . . . . • . . .„ . / Z ." • • . . ., . .4 ;/ . : 21 . , . . . . . . . , , r . • — .

, . • Y ' / . .

2 0

=

3 — _ .. -_ . . . . . . —. _ . . . b .— :. : . . . , . . . . . .. _ _ _ _ . _ , .

0

2 0

1...' ..

-. . .. -• - .. .

z r .

. " , :

,

•

" ' ' — '' ' . . : .

. : 4 , . . • , . . " s ' .:

• C o in f i nds

p its with potin f inds.

4 62

Castor a nd Upchurch ware s herds which a re c learly i ntrusive in pits f reshly disturbed a t that p eriod, o r s till partially o pen. M ore problematic a re the s craps o f T S ( Pit 3 5), Roman t ile ( Pit 3 9) and a c opper a lloy Colchester derivative f ibula ( Pit 1 07). Apart f rom clearly early pottery, three main a ssemblages a re discernable i n the p its ( cf. Champion, 1 980b, e tc.): 1 . small f ine ware bowls with S -shaped p rofile r ings, p otentially o f the p eriod C 6th-C4th BC.

and

f oot-

2 . distinctive s aucepan p ottery a nd a ssociated MPRIA f orms. A larger p roportion o f the a ssemblage was d ecorated than before; o ther c haracteristics i nclude burnishing and l inear tooled decoration . This t radition c ould g o back as early a s the C4th BC a nd gave way t o 3 . the hard s oapy g rog-tempered f abrics and f orms including l arge g lobular n ecked bowls and j ars which became the " East S ussex Ware" ( Green, 1 980) o f the R oman period. Decoration i ncludes i ncised s tanding a rc d esigns, " eyebrow o rnament", a nd applied c ordons. The p ottery i s handmade. This the

latter ' industry' i s a ssumed t o have developed during later C lst B C i n parallel w ith K ent a nd e lsewhere, ( e.g. f rom the u se o f c ordons) a nd s ome e lements c ould be earlier ( e .g. the u se o f s tamping and r ouletting), but the earliest s ecure a ssociations ( at B ishopstone) a re more p robably earlier C lst AD. There i s a t present n o evidence t o s upport the C 2nd BC s tarting date p roposed by Cunliffe ( 1978a). Offering m ore than a r elative dating f or the Caburn p its i s thus extremely d ifficult. Curwen's ( 1931) " dating" o f his p its following H awkes ( 1930) o nly r eally t ells us that s ome 8 5% o f the p its belong t o t he p eriod a fter the C4th B C. They do, h owever, o ffer s omething o f a c ontrast w ith P itt-Rivers' p its, a s these l atter may be v ery c rudely d ivided u sing f irst the s herds i llustrated i n t he Report, a nd s econd the p roportions o f " fabric types" i n the p its; p ottery f rom " surface mould" c ontexts was d iscounted.

Basis

1 931 1 881-2

Early

M iddle

Late

S ample S ize

D ecoration

1 5%

49%

3 6%

7 8

p its

( Decoration ( 'Fabrics'

1 7% 1 1%

6 6% 8 4%

1 7% 5 %

1 2 p its 3 7 p its

The s implistic basis o f these f igures n eed not b e laboured. I n r eality , the c omplexity o f the s ituation c an o nly b e a pproached a long l ines s uch a s those adopted f or the I ron A ge pottery a ssemblages f rom B ishopstone ( Hamilton, i n

4 63

Bell, 1 977). While the d ivergence o f the f igures c ould s imply r eflect a different h istory f or the quadrant investigated by P itt-Rivers, they d o s uggest a difficulty with Curwen's divisions based o n d istinctive f orms and decoration. I nter a lia , a r econsideration o f the r elationship between the Caburn and Ranscombe, immediately to the west, with i ts indications o f C lst-C2nd AD a ctivity, i s called f or; equally, the s equence a t Owslebury where the deep s torage p its g ive an inadequate r epresentation o f the overall s ettlement h istory, c easing w ith the currency o f saucepan p ottery i tself, may be a p ossible analogy f or the Caburn. For the p resent, therefore, the s tratification o f the Caburn c oins may be p resented o nly a ccording to r elative chronological divisions. 1 .

Fill o f r ectangular P it 2 3, 1 .04 i n d eep. MPRIA. S econdary. 1 P otin P 2.1 ( Type D ). A ssociations: d ecorated s aucepan pot, 3 o ther decorated s herds, 2 0 s mooth, 1 medium, 1 c oarse undecorated s herds; b one a rtefact. NB. c oin f ound during back-filling, " must have b een l ow down a s i t was f ound i n b lack earth mixed w ith c halk" ( Pitt-Rivers, 1 881, 483).

2

Fill o f s ub-circular P it 4 8, 1 .14 i n d eep. MPRIA. S econdary. 1 P otin P 2.3 ( Type H ) a t 0 . 91 i n . Associations: i ron f ragment, 3 i ron nails; v ery f ew s herds ( 3 with s tabbed decoration ( LBA/EIA) and o ne MPRIA d ecorated sherd).

3

F ill o f r ectangular P it 1 06, 1 .12 i n d eep. M PRIA? S econdary. 1 P otin P 2.2 ( Type F ) a t 0 .69m. A ssociations: c halk l oom weight; ( ? saddle) quern; s herds i ncluding decorated LBA/EIA haematite-coated carinated b owl; 2 decorated MPRIA sherds; s trainer base with i ncised h erringbone decoration, considered i ntrusive and p robably R omano-British by C urwen, but c ould be p re-Conquest East S ussex ware.

4 .

Fill o f r ectangular P it 3 7, 0 .79 i n d eep. MPRIA? S econdary. 1 P otin P 2.2 ( Type GB), 1 P otin P 1/2 ( Class I ) a t b ottom. Associations: i ron knife; a ntler handle; s mall i ron s ickle; 40 s herds in s mooth ware, n one d ecorated.

5 .

Fill o f r ectangular P it 29, 0 .71 i n d eep. MPRIA? S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L ) a t bottom o f " surface mould", 0 .38 m deep. A ssociations: worked bone-antler; 8 s herds " smooth", 1 sherd " medium", n one decorated.

6 .

Fill o f t rapezoidal P it 1 33, 1 .22 i n d eep. MPRIA? S econdary . 1 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L ) a t 0 .61 i n . Associations: s herds including LBA/EIA r im with s lashed d ecoration, M PRIA? sherd decorated w ith l ines o f dots, s herd o f Upchurch ware, considered i ntrusive by Curwen .

7 .

Fill o f s quare P it 5 8, 1 .12 i n deep . MPRIA? S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.2 ( Type K ) a t 0 .25 i n . A ssociations: i ron billhook a nd p oint; s tone rubber; z one o f p ottery a t 0 .3-0.45 I n ; s mall bowl with S -shaped p rofile and f ootring. Curwen's LIA Roman dating p resumably r ests on the latter, which could well b e earlier but the p ossibility that p it had two

4 64

d istinct

f ills

r emains.

8 .

F ill o f r ectangular P it 2 2, 0 .91 i n deep. LPRIA/early R oman? S econdary. 1 P otin P 1/2 ( Class I ) o n b ottom. Associations: iron o bjects i ncluding ? belt l oop handle; blue g lass b ead; 4 d ecorated s herds i ncluding r im w ith applied f inger-tip d ecoration; s herds o rnamented w ith l ines o f dots; 5 4 undecorated s herds i ncluding 3 " medium", 5 1"smooth" and 1 " finest quality". I ntrusive?

9 .

F ill o f r ectangular P it 43, 1 .27 i n deep. LPRIA/early R oman? S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.2 ( Type ( T ) a t 0 .46 m . Associations: sawn a ntler; z one o f p ottery a t s ame d epth a s c oin; undecorated r im sherd, ? E. S ussex Ware. ( Curwen's dating: l ater C lst AD).

1 0.

T op o f north o uter r ampart. Unstratified. S econdary? 1 P otin P 2.2 ( Type GB). P icked up i n a f resh mole cast. P otentially f rom LPRIA bank material, but c ould b e f rom i ntrusive f eature. A lthough 5 c oins c ome f rom p its c lose t o the c entre o f the s ite, the r emainder a re distributed o ver the enclosed a rea ( apart f rom GC10), and a re thus unlikely t o derive f rom a s cattered hoard. I f they d id, s uch a deposit would have t o a ntedate the f illing o f t he p its ( Fig . A5:7). Overall, the c ontext o f the Caburn p ottery s eems t o s upport a n early date f or the s eries, w ithin the currency o f the S ussex MPRIA c eramic t radition, but a s has a lready been p ointed o ut, this c ould have c ontinued until late i n the C lst BC. A Carthaginian AE c oin o f 2 00 BC was a lso f ound i n 1 926 i n a mole h ill 7 0 i n north o f the Caburn ( Spokes, 1 927). T his c ould have r eached the s ite i n t he p re-Roman p eriod, but the discovery o f a c oin o f E lagabalus AD 2 18-222 s truck i n Asia Minor a lso j ust o utside the Caburn t o the n orth ( ibid.), warrants c aution a gainst i ts uncritical a cceptance a s a c ontemporary import. This p roblem i s d iscussed e lsewhere in r elation t o the P tolemaic b ronzes f ound a t W inchester ( Biddle, 1 975; Collis, 1 975).

4 65

I I.

O ther C oins with excavation c ontexts

B EDFORDSHIRE

1 .

Houghton Regis. P uddlehill S ite 1 ( P) ( Matthews, 1 976) L ower f ill o f Ditch 2 . Early post-Conquest. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.2 ( 1 4242). A ssociations: much pottery including Thompson ( 1982) c ordoned bowls f li; butt-beaker G5-6; c opy o f 0 carinated cup G3-2; o ut-turned c onical l id L9 ( postC onquest); l idded bowl D3-4; w ide-mouthed everted r im j ar B3-1; tall c ordoned j ar B 3-6 ( Roman).

2 .

Houghton Regis, P uddlehill S ite 2 ( P) ( Matthews, 1 976) Adjacent t o LPRIA Drainage Gulleys A -G. E ffectively uns tratified. 1 A E E 82.2 ( 1 4242). A ssociations: n ot r elevant. On P lan F ig . 1 17, the c oin i s marked c 2 5 m f rom the g ullies, i n an a rea o f Roman f eatures. I t i s unclear whether the c oin was excavated f rom an o ccupation deposit o r an unstratified f ind.

B ERKSHIRE

3 .

Abingdon, East S t. Helens S treet. ( R.Thomas, P ers. F ill o f Medieval ditch. Medieval. S econdary. 1 A E E 83.2 ( 1 4249). A ssociations: n ot r elevant. D itch disturbed c ontexts o f m id C lst-C2nd AD date.

C omm .)

3A.

Abingdon, Barton C ourt Farm. ( Miles, 1 984) T op f ill o f c ess p it 3 66. P robably earlier C2nd AD. S econdary. 1 A E E 83.1 ( 1 4221). A ssociations: s mall i ron r od; TS S outh Gaulish D rag.18, D rag.33, Drag.36 ( all F lavian); l arge m ortarium o f late C lst/earlier C 2nd AD type. P ost hole 3 84 w ithin the p it c ontained an i ron b rooch o f m id C lst AD type. P it 3 66 was " constructed w ithin a nd c ontemporary with" t he enclosure d itch 3 47, w ithin which p ottery a ccumulated in the l ater C lst-early C 2nd AD . The f ill o f p it 3 6 c onsisted mainly o f layers o f yellow and g reenish c lay, the p ost i ndicating s ome f orm o f t imber c onstruction.

4 .

Abingdon,

Thrupp House Farm, Radley, S ite C . ( Oxford A rchaeological Unit, 1 979) F ill o f p enannular d itch o f c ircular s tructure. Late C lst BC/early C lst AD? S econdary . 1 A E E 73 ( 1 4189). A ssociations: handle o f i ron knife; i llf ired s and t empered b ead-rim bowls, o ne s herd w ith s lashed r im, described a s MPRIA and unlikely t o post-date the C lst BC; thus a p otentially early a ssociation f or the c oin type. However, the ditch had been r ecut a t l east three times and i t i s n ot c lear with which phase the c oin i s a ssociated ; t he r emaining material may be s ignificantly earlier.

4 66

5 .

Waltham

S t. Lawrence,

Weycock Hill T emple

" Lying amongst the unstratified. 1 P otin P 2.2 ( Type F ?). 6 .

f oundations" Associations:

( P) ( Neville, 1 849a) NFD. E ffectively

N /S.

West Hagbourne, Hagbourne Hill ( P) ( King, 1 803) F ill o f p it. C lst BC? S econdary. 1 AV NE 6 1.1 ( Br KE). According t o K ing, the c oin was f ound with a s ilver c oin and perhaps o thers and the c elebrated metal-work hoard, i ncluding 2 bronze 3 -link bridle bits, 3 t errets ( all LPRIA), a r ing-headed pin , a disc-headed p in, and much earlier a rtefacts ( an LBA s ocketed axe and o ne o r more MBA s ocketed s pearheads). A ll o f these had s upposedly been deposited i n a s ingle hole c 0 .5 m i n diameter a t the bottom o f o ne o f s everal p its ( presumably the s torage p its o f a s ettlement). The p ossibilities a re numerous: that two hoards w ere amalgamated, t hat the objects w ere f ound s eparately o n a multi-period s ite, that o ne hoard had d isturbed the o ther; i f the a ccount i s s ubstantially a ccurate, the B ronze A ge material p resumably derived f rom a h oard d isturbed w ithin the I ron A ge.

BUCKINGHAMSHIRE

7 .

B ierton, V icarage Gardens ( D.Allen, P ers. C omm .) F ill o f s outhern b oundary ditch, about halfway down. c AD 5 0 ( or earlier?). S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P ). Associations: wheelmade p ottery. The ditch, r ecut o nce, c oincided w ith t he l ine o f a Roman wall. R elationship with N-S boundary ditch n ot e stablished: that ditch p roduced a c opper a lloy C olchester brooch and carinated cup o f E 1-1 f orm ( cf. Thompson, 1 982). Excavator may have u sed s upposed l ate dating o f c oin ( Allen, 1 971) t o date ditch, but there i s c ontinuity i nto the post-Conquest p eriod.

8 .

B letchley, S affron Gardens F ill o f ditch. L PRIA/ER. S econdary. 1 AE E 71.2 ( M172). A ssociations: " Belgic"

9 .

( Gowing,

1 964)

p ottery.

B radwell, Bancroft Roman V illa ( P) ( Green, 1 975) MK105. Building I destruction, Room 9 . " Rubble c ollapse" o n C4th AD mosaic f loor. Late/Post-Roman. S econdary. 1 AE E71.2 ( M174). A ssociations: N /S. T he rubble c ollapse yielded 8 0 c oins AD 2 60-390, n early a ll AD 3 30-348; p ottery late C3rd-C4th AD , l ess than 2 0 s craps o f T ß ; late R oman blown g lass. P ossible hoard f rom r afters? The o nly c ontemporary i tem f rom the destruction d eposit catalogued in the r eport ( Mynard, 1 987) i s a c opper a lloy Nauheim derivative brooch .

4 67

CAMBRIDGESHIRE

1 0.

Cambridge,

Castle H ill.

( J.Alexander,

RGS1b, Belgic? gateway f ootings. 1 AR S E62 ( LX ). Associations: 1 1.

L PRIA. " Belgic"

I bid. RGSIb, 2 55. P rimary s ilt end. LPRIA. S econdary? 1 AR E 71.1 ( M ). A ssociations: f ragment.

J . Pullinger, P ers. C omm.) P rimary? s herds.

i n B elgic ditch by butt" Belgic s herds",

bronze

1 2.

I bid. RGSIb . L ower f ill o f well, s ealed and f illed by C 2nd AD g rave. C lst AD. S econdary? 1 A E E 71.3 ( M178). A ssociations: C lst AD s herds.

1 3.

I bid. RGSIb, 2 50. Layer cut i nto n atural; s hallow pit? Early C 2nd AD . S econdary. 1 AE E 71.1 ( M167). A ssociations: s herds up to c AD 1 00. AE Uncertain f ound n ear t he p revious c oin.

1 4.

I bid . RGSIIa, 1 4. B rown c rumbly l oam . NFD. 1 AR E 63.1 ( LX10 var.). A ssociations: N /S.

1 5.

G reat

W ilbraham.

Mutlow H ill,

F leam D yke

Among Roman building f oundations. unstratified. 1 A E E 73 ( M191). Associations: N /S.

partially

( P). ( Neville, 1 852) NFD . E ffectively

1 6.

Horningsea, R oman k iln s ite ( P). ( Walker, 1 912) T rench c lose t o k iln 5 . E ffectively unstratified, p robably Roman c ontext. S econdary? 1 AR E63.2 ( LX8). A ssociations: " surrounded by f ragments o f p ottery", including p edestal urns and T S; " within a f ew inches were 5 bone p ins, part o f i ron s tylus. None more than 0 .4 m b elow the s urface". F rom the description, a s hallow d itch?

1 7.

Meldreth, M ettle H ill. ( Braybrooke, 1 860) I n s quare l eaden ' coffin' f ound l evelling mound. Roman. P rimary. 1 AE ' Cunobelin', p ossibly E 83.2? A ssociations: 5 glass vessels; b ronze a rmlet; bone p in . P ossibly a burial, but no mention o f human r emains.

ESSEX

1 8.

1 9.

B illericay, S chool Road S ite. Rubbish p it. NFD. S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M229). Associations: B illericay, 2 50 i n East F ill o f p it. C 2nd AD. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P ).

( Index) N /S.

LPRIA - Roman s ite.

o f S chool R oad S ite. S econdary., A ssociations: T S Hadrianic.

4 68

( Index)

1 9A. Braintree, F 366 7 55. S econdary? 1 AE E82.2

Fountain I nn S ite. F loor l evel o f building ( M ,

o f.

2 25).

s ealing

A ssociations:

a C lst

( Index) AD ditch.

N /S.

1 9B.Ibid. A rea 3 l ayer 7 13. F ill o f large unidentified late Roman f eature. C 4th AD ( "coin r esidual"). S econdary . 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P 2 var.). A ssociations: N /S. 1 9C.Ibid. F 337 449. Lowest excavated layer " Coin r esidual'. S econdary. 1 AR SE73.2 ( LX17). Associationd: N /S. o f. 1 9D .Ibid. F 337 S econdary. 1 AE S E74.1 Contexts

3 43.

T op layer

( LX221).

1 9A-D a re n ot

o f well

Associations:

f ill. N /S.

included in the

o f well

f ill.

1 9D .

" Coin r esidual". o f.

f igures

1 9C. o r analyses.

1 9E. Gestingthorpe, H ill Farm. ( Draper, 1 985) Building 1 yard o r g ully a ssociated with s econd phase o f building. Effectively unstratified, p robably ; late Roman c ontext. S econdary. 1 P otin P 2.1 ( Type C ). Associations: not c ertain, but possibly 7 AE Roman c AD 2 70-335. Coins f ound in s traight l ine parallel t o external NE wall o f Building 1 , but 0 .5 i n away, s uggesting a possible gully n ot n oticed during excavation. Context omitted f rom analysis. 2 0.

Great

Chesterford ,

n orthern a rea o f Roman t own. ( Neville, 1 849b) B uilding I I? Late C3rd-early C4th AD?

Foundations o f S epondary. 1 , AE 1 /2 E 71.1 ( M182). A ssociations: N /S. C oin f ound breaking up and r emoving the f oundation walls o f S tukeley's " Templi Umbra"; c ontext n ot n ecessarily r eliable. 2 1.

Heybridge, Crescent Road. ( Index; Thompson 1 982) F ill o f t imber-lined p it 1 95. N FD: but c ontext s hould date t o later C lst AD. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P ). A ssociations: N /S, but c oin described a s r esidual. Area l evelled by C2nd AD .

2 2.

L ower Nazeing, Nazeingbury. ( P). ( Huggins, 1 978) Gravel l ens in i nsubstantial d itch 4 . F irst half o f C 2nd AD. TAQ AD 1 60. S econdary. 1 AE E83.2 ( M244). Associations: a lmost exclusively R oman p ottery ( first half o f C2nd AD), 7 0% " greyware" f abric, but p re-Flavian F orm 2 9; mortarium; i ron nail; melon b ead; c olour coated pottery " mouthpiece"?

23.

Mucking excavations. ( DFA n otes) 6 c oins s ent t o D FA f rom 3 p its c ontaining " Early I ron A ge" pottery r elated t o L PRIA-early Roman ditched enclosure. 2 i dentified a s P otin P 1.5, which came f rom different p its, 1 a s AE 5 E74.1? ( LX21), 3 AE uncertain ( not n ecessarily I ron A ge). F ill o f P it. NFD . LPRIA-early Roman? S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P ). Associations: I ron Age p ottery, much charcoal. B ronze c oin(s).

4 69

24.

Ibid. F ill o f P it. NFD. LPRIA-early Roman? S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type P ). A ssociations: I ron A ge pottery, much charcoal. B ronze c oin(s)?

2 5.

Witham, Chipping Hill earthworks. ( Thompson, 1 982) From s ealed d eposit inside the earthwork. M /LPRIA? N FD. S everal P otin P 1/2.1-3 ( Class I ). A ssociations: hand-made I ron Age pottery.

HAMPSHIRE

2 6.

Hurstbourne

P riors,

yard

adjacent t o Railway S iding. ( VCH Hants I , 2 62) F ill o f s torage p it. M /LPRIA-Roman? S econdary. 1 AV S 41.1 ( Br A ). A ssociations: " pottery turned i n the lathe"? S aucepan pottery i n the S t.Catherine's H ill-Worthy Down t radition has been identified f rom the s ite, but there was a lso Roman material in the p its.

2 7.

Nether Wallop, Danebury Hillfort ( P). ( Cunliffe, 1 984) T rench 6 . Layer 2 1. Upper s ilting o f the S outh h ornwork ditch. P eriod 7 . ( Clst BC?-Clst AD); n o r eason why c ontext s hould n ot be C lst BC. P rimary? 1 A E/AV 5 E31.2 ( GB C ). A ssociations: 6 s herds a re described f rom l ayer 2 ( a haematite-coated bowl ( cp.3-?4); two burnished j ars i n f ine g rit-tempered a nd s andy f abrics r espectively ( cp.7); 2 s herds i n a s andy f abric a nd o ne in Fabric F ( fine s mooth)). The underlying layer p roduced another cp.7 j ar s herd and the o verlying s ilt a f ine white ware s herd ( Roman) and 2 s andy s herds ( probably R oman). C .14 dates g ive a s tart f or P eriod 7 c 1 00/50 BC; i ts TAQ i s g iven by t he r ecutting o f the d itch which post-dates the L IA early Roman s herds in t he s ilts.

2 8.

Ibid. T rench 1 4. Layer 2 0. T opsoil in the e ntrance f orecourt within the hornwork. Unstratified. S econdary. 1 A E/AV S 81.2 ( M121). Associations: mixed material, basically I A, but i ncluding Roman, S axon e tc.

29.

Ibid. " From t he f osses" i .e. p resumably f rom the r ampart ditches. NFD . ( British Museum; Cunliffe, 1 984) 1 AR S W61 ( M317). Associations: N /S. A note o f A llen's that the c oin was f ound " in a r ubbish p it", g iving n o s ource, a ppears t o be a misunderstanding o f the above.

3 0.

Rowlands Castle, Huckswood Lane, ( P). ( Collins, 1 955) " Black p it s oil" a t t op o f S E s ection o f ditch . Later Roman. S econdary. 1 AR S E72.3 ( LZ10). Associations: f ound " very c lose" t o well worn A s T rajan. A s Domitian and i mitation r adiate ( C3rd AD) f ound in s poil h eap f rom the trench. Apparently o ccupation material dumped t o infill top o f ditch.

3 1.

Winchester, A ssize Court S . ( Just outside S defences o f Oram's Arbour) ( Biddle, 1 965) Roman s treet l evels a t E end o f T rench V I/VIII ( Section C D ). M id C 2nd AD ( or later?). S econdary.

4 70

1 AR S T1.1 ( 1 4321). Associations: w inged b ow brooch t inned bronze ( Claudian); T S early C2nd AD - Antonine. 3 2.

in

W inchester, Cathedral Green . ( Biddle, 1 965) F ill o f medieval p it. S econdary. 1 AE SW81 ( 1 4318). A ssociations: not r elevant. Baked c lay s lab-moulds a lso f ound in s tratified c ontext o n this s ite beneath Roman t imber building, i tself o verlain by the Forum . S axon layers c ontain r esidual Ti , TR, buttb eaker.

HERTFORDSHIRE

3 3.

Northchurch,

Cow R oast,

Orchard

s ite. ( Index; Wilson, 1 975, 438) observed during the 1 972-4

No pre-Roman c ontexts were excavations. ( 4) 2 2F l ayer 3 . N FD . Roman ( Clst-C4th AD) 1 AR E72 ( cf. M 188). Associations: N /S. 3 4.

I bid. ( 30) 2 1K l ayer 5 8. Roman ( Clst-C4th) 1 AE E73 ( 1 4190). A ssociations: N /S.

3 5.

I bid. ( 30) 2 1K l ayer 64. NFD. l ater? 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4242). A ssociations:

R oman

o r later?

o r l ater?

( Clst-C4th

AD)

or

N /S.

3 6.

I bid. 2 2J l ayer 6 . 1 AE E 82.1 ( 1 4221).

NFD. Roman ( Clst-C4th AD) Associations: N /S.

o r later?

3 7.

I bid. 2 3G l ayer 3 . 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4242).

NFD. Roman ( Clst-C4th AD) A ssociations: N /S.

o r

3 8.

Northchurch. Cow R oast, E sso S ite F ill o f P it. NFD. Roman ( Clst-C4th AD) 2 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4246, 2 48). A ssociations: Az C laudius I .

3 9.

W elwyn, L ockley's P ark, Roman V illa ( P)(Ward-Perkins, 1 938) F rom the S econd B elgic L evel, P ost-Conquest, P re AD 6 0/65. S econdary. 1 AE E 83.2 ( 1 4249). A ssociations: " Pottery o verwhelmingly B elgic in c haracter". 3 l ocal TN imitations; white ware butt-beaker, o ther butt a nd g irth beakers; 4 s herds T S S outh Gaulish Claudian F orms 1 8 o r 1 5/17 p latter r im, l arge 1 8 ( described a s f rom o ccupation material a ssociated w ith s econd Belgic house. This c ontext?). B rooches: C oppera lloy Dolphin type, Aucissa type; o penwork disc b rooch w ith n iello. On analogy with e .g. P ark S treet, t his l evel was p robably a make-up deposit. The B elgic wares a re catalogued i n Thompson ( 1982): most b eakers a re p ostC onquest.

4 71

later?

( Index) o r later? c lose t o I rregular

HUNTINGDONSHIRE

40.

S awtry, S tocking Close ( P). ( Garrood, 1 937) S C3 1 00, j unction o f Ditch 3 with two o ther ditches, in the upper part o f the deep f ill a t the confluence. LPRIA? S econdary? 1 AE E 71.2 ( M ) a t 1 .0 i n . Associations: hard g rey wheelmade pottery " with a rather s oapy surface" f ound c lose t o the c oin, c learly g rog-tempered ' Belgic' pottery ( cf. Thompson, 1 982) including c ordoned ? pedestal urn, b ead-rim j ar and everted r im bowl. A s ocketed i ron t ool came f rom the s uperficial f illing o f S C3.

K ENT

4 1.

A sh,

G ilton T own Anglo-Saxon C emetery

( P). ( 7CH Kent I , 1 908) Grave 6 6. P ost-Roman. P rimary, i n s econdary function. 1 P otin B elgic Gaul S cheers N o.200. A ssociations: i ncluded C onstantinian c oin. P otin r eused a s c oin weight w ith a balance. Recently a s econd B elgic Gaul P otin ( Scheers No.186) has b een r ecorded r eused a s a weight i n a balance-set c ontained i n a C6th AD i nhumation g rave a t Watchfield, Oxfordshire ( Scull, 1 986), 2 7 km w est o f Oxford a nd j ust o utside the S tudy Area. The balance-set, with two c opper pans, was c ontained in a l eather c ase b earing a r unic inscription, a long with the P otin a nd o ther c oins r eused a s w eights, including a dupondius o f Hadrian and C 4th A E o f Constantine the Great and C onstans. The c ondition o f the p otin s uggests i t was l ost s oon a fter i ssue and s ubsequently r ecovered a t a much l ater date.

42.

B irchington, M innis Bay?, T hanet. ( Roach S mith, 1 848) F ill o f g rave? Late C7th/C8th AD . P rimary? 1 AR S E82.1 ( 1 4307). Associations: 4 s ceattas, nothing e lse s pecified. This i s thought t o b e a g rave ( Rigold and Metcalf, 1 978). A small hoard i s t he obvious a lternative.

43.

B ridge. B ridge H ill, edge o f Barham Downs. ( Watson, 1 963) F rom " occupation a rea", ? fill o f s hallow p it/quarry s coop. LPRIA . S econdary? 1 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L ). A ssociations: c opper a lloy b rooch ( internal c hord type with s quare p ierced f oot); c opper a lloy p in; quernstone; LPRIA p ottery ( forms Thompson's A l, C6-1 a nd C 3). There were a lso a pparently s herds o f D r.1 amphora in the deposit.

44.

Burntwick I sland, Marshes. ( Williams, 1 973) Red H ills deposit. Effectively unstratified. NFD . 1 AV S E41.2 ( GB C ). A ssociations: LPRIA p ottery, briquet a ge.

4 5.

Darenth, Gravel P it excavations S P72 DG10. Fill o f P it D . " Iron Age", S econdary. 1 P otin P 1/2.1-3 ( Class I ). Associations:

4 72

( Index) IA pottery.

46.

E ccles, R owe Farm P lace, Roman V illa. ( Detsicas, 1 965) F ill o f V -shaped d itch. P eriod I ( up to c AD 5 5). S econdary. 1 AE E 82.1 ( M233), 1 AE E 82.2 ( M250). Associations: embossed bronze f ittings f or w ood casket; C laudian pottery .

47.

Farningham, Farningham Hill KMW-12. ( Philp, 1 984) 1 48 Upper f illing o f s outh-east enclosure d itch. P hase 2b, p robably late C lst BC. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.3? ( Type L ?). Associations: C opper a lloy brooch p in ( sprung i n 4 turns); chalk s pindle whorl; sandstone l oom weight; c halk p laque. P ottery: maximum 1 06 v essels in various f abrics, c 6 6% g rog; g lobular j ars; f oot-rings, p edestal base, e tc.

4 8.

I bid. 6 2 F ill o f large oval p it 1 0. P hase 2a, mid C lst BC, p ossibly earlier. S econdary . 1 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L ). Associations: Maximum c 1 3 vessels i n various f abrics, c 7 5% s hell-tempered; o ne g lobular jar w ith lattice d ecoration. Fire-cracked f lints.

49.

F arningham, F ranks Roman V illa. ( Proctor, 1 983) P rimary s ilting o f P hase 1 g ullies. P hase 1 , late C lst AD . S econdary. 3 P atin P 1.5 ( Types 0 , P ). Associations: pottery f rom g ullies mainly s hell- and g rog-tempered wares; a f ew n onl ocal s herds, i ncluding o ne imitation TN c up ( pre-Flavian) a nd GB i mitations o f ? local manufacture; o ne l ead-glazed s herd o f S taines ware late C lst AD . The gullies a re i nterpreted a s a p re-villa r ectilinear building.

5 0.

Faversham,

S chool

P laying F ields,

Roman V illa S ite ( P). ( Philp, 1 968) enclosure d itch 2 . AD ( 10-)50.

Upper f ill o f large S econdary. 1 P otin P 1/2.1-3 ( Class I ). A ssociations: " Patch Grove" ware s herd. R omanised s andy ware s herd. Thompson ( 1982) B 1-1 and g rog-tempered and f lint g ritted wares including a c opies, f orms A 8, 9 ; B i, 2 , 3 ; C4; E 2; G5; S i. 5 1.

F olkestone,

Cheriton S ite C ,

E o f c emetery ( P). ( Tester and B ing, 1 949) 1 P otin P 1/2 ( Class I o r I I). A ssociations: ' combed' wares; 2 c olanders; s plinter o f TS ( ? i ntrusive). Burnt c lay mentioned i n r eport c ould be b riquetage?

5 2.

F olkestone, East W ear Bay, Roman V illa ( P). ( Winbolt, 1 925) F loor o f hypocaust i n B lock B , r ooms 2 , 3 , 4 . P ost c AD 1 00. S econdary? 2 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L ), 1 A E B elgic Gaul S cheers No.87. A ssociations: TS ( Pre-Flavian a nd Hadrianic).

5 3.

I bid. " Corridor 1 4 n ear large hypocaust 1 2, B lock B , " at a l ow l evel". P re Q AD 1 00, p robably late F lavian. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L ). Associations: N /S. P robably makeup. I t a ppears t o s eal c remation burials belonging to the LPRIA/early R oman c emetery, were cut into the underlying natural c lay ( Winbolt, 1 925, 3 0-1).

4 73

5 4.

Ibid. f rom Room 47, B lock A , " at a l ow l evel". P re-early C2nd AD, p robably p ost-Flavian? S econdary. 1 AE Uncertain. A ssociations: N /S. A gain p resumably makeup. Although the f irst building o f B lock A i s Flavian, a s far a s can be judged f rom the evidence o f the r eport, Room 47 belonged to the r ebuilding in the early C 2nd AD. There is no evidence o f an earlier s tructure here, a lthough timber-framing i s unlikely to have been detected.

5 5.

Keston, Lower Warbank. WB C25-3. Upper f ill o f enclosure S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 ). Associations: N /S.

5 6.

Lullingstone,

Roman V illa

( Index) LPRIA?

d itch.

( P part 1 ). ( Meates 1 984; P roctor, 1 983) Wall o f earliest h ouse. c AD 80-

Foundation trench f or E . 90. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Tyoe 0 ). A ssociations: late ' Belgic' pottery, i ncluding bead r im j ars; a s herd o f l ead-glazed S taines Ware. 5 7.

Rochester, 5 0-54 H igh S treet. ( D. Nash, P ers.Comm.) E25 2 3 Reg 3 . I n g ravel t rackway make-up. C lst AD, preClaudian. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1/2.1-3? ( Class I ?). Associations: N /S.

5 8.

Ibid. R 13 5 2 B2. B eneath hearth. 1 P otin P 2.2 ( probably Type F -G).

NFD . Associations:

N /S.

5 9.

Ibid. R6 E 2-W g rid ( centre part) o range 1 3 GKH. T op o f bank make-up, 1 i nch below surface. C lst AD? p re-Claudian. S econdary. 1 P otin P 2.2 ( probably Type F ?). Associations: N /S.

6 0.

Ibid. R5 E 2 c entral g rid brown 6 , 6 '6" N 3 '6" E . 1 /4" above o range c lay bank, GKH. C 1st AD? S econdary. 1 P otin B elgic Gaul S cheers No.188? A ssociations: N /S.

6 1.

S ittingbourne, Radfield ( P). ( Baxter a nd Mills, 1 978) In s ealing layer 4 c lose t o r im o f ditch c ontaining C lst/C2nd AD Roman material. Late C 2nd-C3rd. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 ). Associations: 4 s herds TS ( mid-late C2nd AD), c oarse ware ( mainly C 2nd AD , s ome C lst AD); t ile; copper a lloy p in; buckle and La T Ane I II brooch with perforated catchplate ( La T Ane I I derivative with nonfunctional c ollar, c f. Bushe-Fox, 1 925, P late XV , 1 6). Both amphora and a q uernstone a re mentioned f rom the layers s ealing the ditch but i t i s n ot c lear whether they were f rom this c ontext, o r the n ext.

62.

Ibid. I n S ealing layer 5 above C lst-C2nd S econdary. Late C 2nd-C3rd AD . S econdary . 1 AE 5 E63 ( LY6). A ssociations: Roman pottery, also above.

63.

Ibid.

RAD 2 29.

1 P otin P 1.5

F ill

( Type P ).

AD

ditch.

t ile.

o f C lst AD ditch. Associations:

4 74

S econdary. ( Allen, N /S.

S ee

1 970-1)

64.

I bid. RAD 1 0. F ill o f C 1st AD d itch. 1 P atin P 1.4 ( Type M ). Associations:

S econdary. N /S.

6 5.

S nodland S andpit, Church F ield V illa. 5 0 S P 8 6 2 3. F ill o f D itch. N FD. 1 P otin P 1.4 ( Type M ). Associations: N /S.

66.

S outhfleet, S pringhead T emple V I/Gateway. ( P). ( Penn, 1 968) Make-up deposit underlying R oad 1 . C laudian. S econdary. 1 AE S E63 ( LY6). A ssociations: C laudian s herds.

6 7.

S utton-at-Hone, Ship Lane. ( P). ( Philp, 1 973) F ill o f s teep-sided p it 2 . C 1st AD? S econdary. 1 P otin P 1/2.1-3 ( Class I ) a t 0 .95 i n . A ssociations: n one i n s itu; three L IA/Early Roman s herds came f rom the c orresponding s poil ( this was a n emergency excavation o n a gas p ipeline).

( Index)

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

6 8.

Hardingstone. ( P). ( Woods, 1 969) Upper f ill o f l arge enclosure d itch 3 . M id-late C lst AD. S econdary. 1 P otin P 1.5 ( Type 0 ). A ssociations: v essels w ith curvilinear d ecoration; p lain, handmade f orms; l ocal s helly j ars, R omanised ' Belgic' f orms; s ome Roman. D eliberate i nfill o f s econd r ecut o f d itch, p eriod o f early R oman k ilns.

OXFORDSHIRE

6 9.

Dorchester-on-Thames. W est rampart. ( Frere, 1 962) C I I 4 0. P re-rampart l ayer o ver and s ubsiding i nto ' Belgic' g ully. L ate C lst AD - early C 2nd AD?. S econdary. 1 AR E 71.1 ( M445A). A ssociations: l ' a S outh Gaulish Loeschke 5 . ( Tiberio-Claudian) a nd F orm 1 8 ( probably F lavian): s herd o f LPRIA/ER g ranulated buff a nd g rey ware.

7 0.

Ibid. C II 8 . M ake-up o f f irst r ampart. Late C 2nd AD . S econdary. 1 A E E83.1 ( 1 4221). A ssociations: T S Central Gaulish Form 3 3 ( 2) ( Trajanic-Hadrianic, Hadrianic-Antonine) T R 3 g irthb eaker, c ream-ware G E beaker, white ware j ug Cam. 1 63 ( Tiberio-Claudian), TN p latter.

7 1.

I bid. S outh rampart A V 3 9. Make-up o f f irst r ampart. C 2nd AD. S econdary . 2 AE E 82.1 ( 1 4222), E 83.2 ( M246?). A ssociations: T Z ( Clst AD-Trajanic); c oarse wares, burnished and c olour c oated f abrics.

4 75

7 1A. Dorchester-on-Thames,

S W c orner,

Allotments

s ite. ( Frere, 1 984b) s hallow hollow .

G I I 1 8. S ilty l oam layer in large F lavian . S econdary. 1 AE E73 ( 1 4190). Associations: sherds o f the period c AD 60-90 w ere r ecovered f rom the l oam and brickearth deposits f illing the hollow, which was s ealed by a l oam s pread c ontaining s ome C 1st AD pottery. ( Context o mitted f rom analysis). 7 2.

Dorchester-on-Thames,

B eech House Hotel ( P). ( Rowley and Brown, 1 981) Make-up deposit. M id/later C2nd AD .

BH 1 4 03 1 3/14. S econdary . 1 AE E 83.2 ( M248). A ssociations: IS S outh Gaulish F orms 1 5/17, 1 8/31, 29, 3 5; overall date _ c AD 1 25. Coarse p ottery up to c AD 1 50, including c ream ware b eaker. 73.

Northleigh,

S hakenoak Roman V illa

( P). ( Brodribb e t a l., 1 971) P eriod 3 a f loor above P eriod 2 P eriod B 3a, l ater C 2nd AD .

I n g ravel deposit 5 below Room BX, ( Section K -K). S econdary . 1 AR W71.1 ( Type B ). Associations: N /S. A deposit used t o l evel a rea f or f loor s urface, a s i nfill o ver rubble which in turn o verlies r efuse dump with high p roportion o f Antonine s herds, brooch. 7 4.

Woodeaton, Middle H ill. " Among o ld f oundations". NFD. 1 AV 1 /4 S E 5 2.1-2 ( Br 0 ). A ssociations:

( Stukeley,

1 720)

N /S.

ßUFFOLK

7 5.

Coddenham , Baylham H ouse, S ite 3 . ( Wilson , 1 974) Upper f ill o f t imber-lined well. M id C lst AD. S econdary. 1 AR 1 /2 EA62 ( Type I Ib). A ssociations: copper a lloy Colchester brooch; ' Belgic' p ottery. Well infilled a fter timber l ining decayed and packing s lumped.

7 6.

Ibid. Upper f ill o f boundary d itch. C lst AD ( late?). S econdary . 1 AE/AV1/4 S E72.1 ( 1 4276). A ssociations: Roman and B elgic brooches were f ound i n this d itch .

SURREY

7 7.

Ashtead ,

P ark Lane,

Garden o f

I ward Shaw

( P). ( Lowther, 1 946) Fill o f rubbish o r s torage p it dug in the chalk. M /LPRIA . S econdary . 1 -2 P otin P 1.3 ( Type L ). ( Probably). Associations: triangular l oom w eight; sherds f rom 7 vessels ( 2 l ightly burnished, 2 burnished with t ooled decoration , 2 s herds i n

4 76

a g ritted f abric). P ottery described a s having S outheastern B c haracteristics and r elated t o that f ound a t Wisley i . e. Cunliffe's ( 1978a) Hawk's Hill-West C landon S aucepan pottery t radition. I llustrations c onfirm the latter. The c oins' identification r ests o n information f rom G .C. Dunning to D .F. A.; they were n ot s een by L owther, who understood t hem t o be Evans G 5,6 ( i.e. AE SW81), but this i s highly i mprobable. 7 8.

C roydon, S elsdon Road, C rohamhurst P lace. ( Sy. A. C.. 1 946-7) C learly s tratified in a late C lst AD Layer. NFD. 1 P otin P 1/2.1-3 ( Class I ) " in m int condition". Associations: N /S.

7 9.

Hascombe, I ron A ge Hillfort. ( P). ( Thompson, 1 979) L owest f illing ( 5) o f r ock cut o val p it 7 7/6 P it 2 , p ressed into s urface. M /LPRIA, p robably C lst BC. S econdary? 2 -3 P otin P 2.2 ( probably Type F o r G ). Associations: pressed i nto s urface were a f ew s herds ( some decorated u. c it., F ig. 2 5, 9 -11) b elonging t o Cunliffe's ( 1978) Hawk's Hill-West Clandon s aucepan p ot t radition). Alternative interpretation o f f eature a s hearth. Two C .14 dates: Charcoal i n l ayer 5 1 00 bc + 5 0 ( BM-1485) Charcoal i n upper f ill 3 1 30 a d + 5 0 ( BM-1489)

S USSEX

8 0.

B ishopstone, Rookery H ill. ( P). ( Bell, 1 977) Middle f ill ( burnt c lay/ash) o f r ectangular p it 7 16 cut into f inal f ill o f enclosure d itch. M /LPRIA. S econdary . 2 P otin P 1/2 ( probably C lass I o r I I). A ssociations: 2 s herds o f f abric 3 a , unburnished s andy ware. There i s no c lose date f or the p it: the enclosure d itch had virtually s ilted up by the t ime that s aucepan p ottery was in vogue ( a characteristic f orm in B ishopstone Fabric 5 ); only a f ew s herds were deposited i n the t op c entimetres o f f ill. The absence o f Fabrics 2b a nd 5 c haracteristic o f the later I ron A ge unenclosed s ettlement may a rgue a date f or the p it early in this period ( Clst BC - C lst AD).

8 1.

C lapham,

B lackpatch Hill ( P). ( Ratcliffe-Densham a nd Ratcliffe-Densham, 1 953) F ill o f large bowl s haped depression A , p robably a p ond in u se a fter a bandonment o f B ronze A ge s ettlement enclosure. No dating p ossible. 1 P otin Belgic Gaul S cheers No.206. Associations: objects s cattered a mong the f lints ( at base o f depression) down to the chalk w ithout any p recise s tratification i ncluded p ottery f rom MBA t o much worn Roman g rey ware, including a f ew L IA burnished ( 1 wheelmade); 1 TS s herd. O ther f inds: 3 tabular f lint discs; Roman nail; f ragment o f s heet bronze; 1 0 f lint knives; hundreds o f " pot boilers"; P otin c oins in " mint c ondition".

82.

E astbourne, Bullock D own, B eachy Head. ( P). ( Drewett, S tratified Q 60 c m below s urface in lynchet Q 1 i n C 1st AD o r earlier? S econdary.

4 77

1 982) d eep.

1 P otin P 1.2 ( Type J ). Associations: o nly 2 Romano-British s herds were r ecovered f rom this lynchet s ection, both f rom the t op, s uggesting that p loughing s topped a t this p eriod . P ottery f rom E /LIA s uggests cultivation throughout t he p eriods. Fabrics include c oarse-gritted Fabric 1 ( 37%), sandy i ron o xide Fabric 3 ( 29%) and East S ussex Ware ( 30%); f orms i nclude s aucepan p ottery and s houldered j ars. 8 38 5.

Lancing Down, Roman T emple. F or details o f f rom p robable cella and two p ossible g rave Appendix 3 , Hoard 5 4.

8 6.

P oynings,

The Dyke,

I ron Age c oins c ontexts, s ee

Ladies Golf Club ( P). ( Burstow and Wilson, 1 936) F ill o f s hallow p it 7 . M id/later C 1st AD? S econdary. 1 AR S 92 ( M263). A ssociations: 1 A E C laudius I . None o f the " considerable a mount" o f pottery in this p it i s identified. Hawkes c onsidered the p ottery f rom the s ite typical La T Ane I II, l argely wheel-made, but r elatively c lumsy types, i ts a ffinities c learly w ith W est S ussex a nd Hampshire ( i.e. S outhern A trebatic; C unliffe, 1 978a). T he i mported ware c onsisted o f a TR c up, white ware a nd r ouletted b eakers, C laudian f lagon; t here a re a lso a f ew s herds o f imitation GB wares a nd Romanised g rey wares, b ut these came f rom P its 2 , 6 a nd 9 .

4 78

Appendix 6

Metrology o f

the principal I ron _ Age c oin g roups found in B ritain

The f ollowing f igures display the f requency o f the weights r ecorded f or the p rincipal g roups o f c oins f ound in B ritain a s r ecorded in the I ndex o f C eltic C oins, Oxford, s upplemented by the data g iven f or the main Gallo-Belgic s eries by S cheers ( 1977) a nd by i nformation c ollected by the author. Obviously damaged o r f ragmentary c oins a re excluded, a s a re p lated c opies and a ny c oins o f doubtful a uthenticity. The f igures a re n ot exhaustive a nd, in particular, o mit s everal r ecently d iscovered hoards f or which n o metrological information i s a vailable. They n evertheless g ive a r easonable indication o f the metrology a nd dispersion f or most s eries and enable the s ignificance o f c oin w eights in the different metals employed a t d ifferent t imes a nd p laces to be explored f urther, and were t herefore f elt w orthwhile i ncluding here. The weight f requencies a re uniformly p resented o n an i nterval o f 0 .10 g m ( measured o n the range 0 .05-0.014 gm, e tc.), in f our f igures a s f ollows: A6:1 A6:2

A ll ( a) ( b)

g old types

( Periods

I -

S outh-Western s ilver and bronze S outh-Eastern potin c oins

A6:3

O ther

s ilver types

( Phases 6 -9)

A6:4

O ther b ronze types

( Phases 6 -8)

i ssues

A f illed c ircle r epresents 5 s pecimens. The m odal w eights f or i ndividual s eries g iven in Appendix 2 w ere c alculated f rom the same m etrological data.

4 79

PER I OD I AV 8 .0

S 1 1-12

7 . 8

I • I

7 . 6

I

C l . 2

1 0 1 00 1

000

7 . 4 gm

SE 3 1 C l . 1

SE1 1-2 1

00 OM H D •

7 . 2

7 . 0 6 .8 6 .6 6 . 4 6 .2

AV 2 .0 1 . 8 gm 1 . 6

U nc lassed I 00 000 00 1 1 1 1 0 0 000 1 1 1 00 I

1 . 4 1 . 2 SE4 1 C I .1

AV

C 1 .4 C I .2

C I .3

PER IOD I t E4 1 C I .5 C I . 1

I 00 1 1 000 I 1

0 1 1 00 1 1 1 1 000 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1

S41 C I . 2

SW4 1

7 . 0 6 .8 I I I

6 .6 6 .4

I

gm 6 .2

1

6 .0

I I 000 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 I

O i l 000 0 1 1 00 0 1 1

0 00 1 0 00 000 0000 1 1 000 1 1 1

5 .8 5 .6 5 .4 AV 1 / 4

S E42

SE42 C I .2 -4

SE43 C l .2

SE52 C I . 1

•

00 0 1 1 1

•

C I . 2

I

• I I I 00 00 I

C I .3

I

0 1 1

C I . 4

I I 00 1 1 1 1 I I

0 .8 0 .6

F ig.

A 6:1

M etrology o f g old c oinage i n B ritain,

480

P eriods

AV

P ER IOD 1 -1 1 1

SE 5 1

C 1 . 1

a .2

C l .3

111 1 1 1 00 0 00 00 01 1 1 1 •1 1 •I

00 00 01 00 1

C l . 5

C l .4

C l . 6

6 .6 6 . 4 •I •• •••• •• •• • 6 .2 00 I 6 .0

1 I I 000 1 1 1 1 •• •• • 1 1 00 1

5 .8 gm 5 .6

1 1

5 . 4 5 .2 5 . 0 4 .8 4 .6 AV% S5 1 1 . 4

S52

S63

S64 -65

00•00 1 1 1 1 00 00000 0 0 0 01

I 1

1 . 2 •1 1 i gm 1 . 0

1 1 •1 1 1 0 0 0 00 0 I 1 101 1 • I I

0 .8 0 .6

A V

S5 1 , S63 C I .1

S50

SE6 1- 6 2

S52

N E5 1-62

E5 1- 5 2

EA5 1-6 1

1 S E6 1-62 W6

6 .4 6 .2 1 1 1 1 00 0 I 0 000 1 0000 I l 000 000 0 0 0 I •I I l l i i

6 .0 g m

5 .8 56 5 .4

I I

• 1

I I

•

I I 1

5 .2 5 .0 AV 6 .0

E 6 1-62 C I .1

C l .2

S63 C l .2

S 7 1-72

S8 1

S82

S9 1

5 .8 5 .6 g m 5 .4 5 .2 5 .0

00 I • 00 00 1 •0 00 0 1 1 I I •I I I

I l 1

4 .8

Fig.

A 6:1

C ontinued

481

1 1

PER I OD AV

EA 7 1 0 1 .1

C I . 2

NE 7 2

NE 7 1

M

SE 7 1 -72

1 E7 1 ,C I . 2 E7 E7 4 ,E 75 C I . 3 C I . 2

SE 7 3

E7 1 0 1 .1

00 0 1 1 00 000 0 1 • I I I I

1 00 1 1 1 00 1 1

E7 5

6 .0 5 .8 gm

5 .6 5 . 4

I I I I

1 • 1 1

5 . 2

1

00

5 .0

AV 1 / 4

S8 1 CH

S7 1-72

C I . 2

SE 7 1 -73

E 7 1 E7 5 C I .1 C I . 2

E82

SE 8 1-82

1 . 6 1 . 4 1 . 2 gm1 .0

•I 000 1 1 1 • • • • • • •• I ••

1 1 • •• • • •

•1 •• I l

•

•

I

0 .8 0 .6 0 .4

AV

E 8 1

E9 1-92 NE8 1 -83 N

SE 8 2

E 82

W8 1-82

W9 1

W92

WS 3

6 .0 5 .8 5 .6 5 .4 5 .2 gm

1 00 0 •• • • • • • •• •• • •• I 00 0 0 001 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 •

•1 1

S

1 I

5 .0 I

4 .8 4 .6 4 .4 4 .2 4 .0 3 .8

F ig . A6:1

C ontinued

482

0 4

i 0

= eo_ o pe_e

6 -

N=e i m m e m iet ,_—

i = e i iü i=_ _ 1 m i m me g b_=

m N

5 : d

_ _ _m ä ta i hig i ,_

e = e •

=

=

-= 0E 01 1 11 1 E1 E0 -- -E i

-- = 1,—

=_

=

= i re _ == = ääoo mmme-eC D • g i

e x i

C M

. 4 :

0

C O

C O

c e

e t

N

0 r i

C O

C O N

e

c \J N

0

N

M

co .

e

N

c e

0 3 C O e t 00 0

e f b= = e= lies=_ E e

4 ! 1 )

* C l ) _ g= =_••E.••==.ää.=..•=•••=•=_• e _ e _

a _

e ee_ w < 1 X