A database containing information on over 35,000 coins from sites in southern Britain was established. This was used to investigate chronological and geographical distributions of fourth century Roman coinage in Britain, and the role of coins in archaeological dating. The regularity of finds supports a view of official supply policy as the principal determinant of the coins used, deposited and subsequently recovered. Throughout the fourth century, Britain received supplies of bronze from up to three mints of which one was always the primary source. One or two secondary sources supplemented this, particularly at times of major new issues. The few finds from other mints represent material that arrived through circulation and exchange. The only clear geographical variation Was after 388AD when new issues failed to circulate extensively beyond the towns. Variations between sites are related to differences in coin using and depositing practices. Three groups of sites were recognised: towns and larger settlements, villas and rural buildings, and temples. Differences between these are most apparent after 350AD when circulation and use underwent significant changes in the rural areas. Typical excavations of rural buildings produce few coins, probably representing accidental losses. On some sites casual loss accounts for only a small proportion of the recovered material. Here, votive deposition, rubbish disposal and non-recovery of hoards are the major sources of finds. A study of the stratified material reinforces the need for caution in using coins for dating, and has important implications for the use of coins in archaeological dating. Residuality and lengthy circulation severely limit inferences about the dates of deposition of the contexts in which coins are found. Throughout the fourth century, and probably also earlier, most coins were deposited within a few decades of their issue. Unfortunately for the archaeologist in search of a date for a deposit, examples of primary deposition are greatly outnumbered by residual and re-deposited material.

No description available.

Please note: creative writing works are permanently embargoed in OpenBU. No public access is forecasted for these. To request private access, please click on the lock icon and fill out the appropriate web form. / A collection of poems / 2999-01-01T00:00:00Z

Romano-British towns are conventionally divided into those that possessed administrative powers (the major or ‘public’ towns) and those that did not (the minor or ‘small towns’). Public towns and small towns differed in terms of size and socioeconomic status, with the latter sometimes characterised as semi-rural rather than truly urban. Hitherto, research into the differing nature of the communities at public and small towns has focused primarily on variations in settlement morphology, architecture and material culture. This study provides a new perspective on the issue by examining osteological indicators of lifestyle and health in skeletal samples from these two categories of site. Roman populations from the small town of Ancaster, Lincs (N=271) and the public town of Winchester, Hants (N=330) dating to c. AD 200-410 were analysed using standard osteological methods. Data on age-at-death, growth and stature, and skeletal and dental pathology were recorded and compared using a range of statistical tests to identify potential differences. Additionally, published data for contemporaneous populations were collated for comparison. A biocultural approach was used to contextualise the data with reference to archaeological and historical evidence. Some differences in demography were observed, but were probably the result of sample biases. No marked differences in growth or stature were observed. Pathology prevalence rates were comparable for many conditions. However, higher rates of joint disease at Ancaster, and differences in the pattern of long bone trauma may point to the Ancaster population having experienced a more agrarian lifestyle, engaging in more frequent and/or extended periods of heavy labour. In contrast, there was more evidence for violent trauma at Winchester, and the frequencies of three non-specific indicators of ill health (cribra orbitalia, porotic hyperostosis and dental enamel hypoplasia) and scurvy were higher. This suggests that people at Winchester experienced greater levels of social, dietary and environmental stress, perhaps reflecting a larger, more heterogeneous population. Dental health status was generally poorer at Ancaster, which may be due to differences in diet, oral hygiene and/or other non-dietary factors. Published data for other populations broadly support the study conclusions, although comparisons were limited by incompatibilities in methodology and data presentation. Overall, the findings corroborate existing perspectives on the socio-economic characters of public and small towns, but differences were not pronounced. The significance of the findings is discussed in relation to the nature of settlement and society in Roman Britain.

Yes / Despite much work on the frontier of Roman Britain, major questions concerned with society and settlement archaeology remain underinvestigated. Salient details of two major urban sites, Carlisle and Corbridge, both of which may shed further light on processes of settlement growth and decline, and which may ultimately contribute to a greater understanding of how the frontier worked, are summarized. At Carlisle, and probably also at Corbridge, settlement growth associated with forts was rapid and multi-tracked, but from the later 2nd century AD changes took place associated, perhaps, with enhanced status and a growing sense of community.

Inequalities in society, past and present, are influenced by a number of aspects of identity. The purpose of this study is to investigate dental health differences at a Romano- British site as they relate to (1) sex, (2) social status, and the (3) confluence of sex and social status, using the theoretical frameworks of Embodiment and Intersectionality. Dental health data for 342 adults from Roman Winchester (4-5th century CE) were compared between sex and social status groups. Statistical analyses showed that males exhibited higher rates of anterior antemortem tooth loss (AMTL) and higher rates of dental wear than females; additionally, the Lower Social Status group had higher rates of posterior and total AMTL than the Higher Social Status group. When analyzing sex and social status, the Higher Social Status group exhibited no statistically significant differences. Within the Lower Social Status group, however, males and females exhibited differences in anterior AMTL, anterior dental wear, and posterior dental wear. No differences in dental caries rates were found for any subgroups. Results show that in this skeletal sample, dental health between the sexes was not drastically different, suggesting, at least with respect to diet, that women were not fundamentally inferior to men, contrary to surviving literary evidence. By analyzing the confluence of sex and social status, analysis shows that the Higher Social Status group was defined by more equality between sexes, while minor differences were found in the Lower Social Status group. This may suggest that in families where resources were strained, men and women consumed slightly different diets, while in families where resources were plentiful, women and men consumed similar foods. The results of this thesis provide new insights into the lives of women and lower social status groups, and contributes to a greater understanding of inequalities and dietary variation in Roman Britain. / Thesis / Master of Arts (MA)

The aim of this thesis is to test the theory that literacy in Roman Britain was largely an achievement of a wealthy, educated social elite. Inscribed material from Roman Britain has been examined in connection with four areas of human activity: religion, working life, funerary practice and personal, social and domestic life. In each of these areas there has been an attempt to identify the writers or instigators of the inscriptions, the reasons for their literate output, and the practical and literate skills involved in producing the written record. There is also an appreciation of the style of production and the quality of the written Latin. Spelling tables are provided, at the end of each chapter, listing words in which the spelling deviates from normal Classical Latin forms and some other irregularities. It is clear that inscribed material which survives from Roman Britain can only be a tiny fraction of what was produced there. Furthermore, factors affecting survival mean that the archaeological record cannot be expected to be a representative sample of what was originally written. There are additional problems when examining literacy in a past society. Each written record is only evidence of the skill required to produce that piece of writing. It cannot reveal the full capabilities of the writer. The archaeological record can suggest literacy of a basic, moderate or high level, but it is important to bear in mind the limitations of the evidence: a simple, crudely carved inscription should not be regarded as indicative of poor literacy skills if no other evidence is available to confirm this.

Yes / Despite the vast amount of work and the huge database for Roman Britain, the people of the province remain very difficult to discern. There are many reasons for this, but one is that we have not yet learned to look behind the disjecta membra of archaeology in order to understand the structure and nature of society, and how the Roman Conquest may have impacted upon it. The language of sociology offers scope for thought, especially when combined with examples drawn from historically documented societies in later periods. Whilst models drawn from the classical world are important, attention also needs to be focused on the local, and on the factors that determined the shape of people¿s lives and influenced their daily activities. Not all these are archaeologically detectable, nevertheless an appreciation of their existence is an important pre-requisite in attempting explanations of patterns in the data. `The self image of some historians makes it appear as if they are concerned in their work exclusively with individuals without figurations, with people wholly independent of others. The self image of many sociologists makes it appear as if they are concerned exclusively with figurations without individuals, societies or `systems¿ wholly independent of individual people. ¿ both approaches, and the self images underlying them, lead their practitioners astray. On closer examination we find that both disciplines are merely directing their attention to different strata or levels of one and the same historical process¿. (Elias, The Court Society, Oxford 1983)

Yes / Bioarchaeological and clinical data show that diet influences health, and this relationship is crucial to how we understand past health with respect to sex and age. We propose a new method that coinvestigates the relationship between mortality risk and diet in the past. Our method integrates dietary stable isotope data (δ13 Carbon and δ 15 Nitrogen) from Roman Britain (N=659) with hazards analysis. The results show that these data can be informatively used in this type of analysis in general, and that in the context of Roman Britain, higher δ 13C is associated with lower risks of mortality while higher δ 15N is associated with elevated risks of mortality. Importantly, the results emphasize that a bioarchaeological approach to interpretation must be taken in order to more fully understand the results obtained by the method

The effects of Romanization were believed to be devastating to the cultures conquered by Rome, but Britain was an exception. The Romanization of Britain began through trade with the continent long before the invasion by Claudius. But the natives of Britain did not accept the Roman culture as completely as other conquests by Rome. R. G. Collingwood did not believe that the Romans dominated the Celtic culture. What he observed in the inscriptions and archaeology of Britain was a conflation of both cultures. Roman Britain was a unique combination of Celtic and Roman culture that was achieved through mutual acceptance and practice of both cultures’ values. The examination of two of those values, religious and mortuary practices, can help reveal the extent of Romanization in Britain and finally confirm Collingwood’s theory of Romanization.