
| ISSN 1357-4442 | Editor: Simon Denison |
|---|
| FEATURES |
A 10,000-year-old campsite in southern Britain provides remarkable new evidence for hunter-gatherer
life after the Ice Age. John Lewis reports.
They are a small group, just four or five people,
bent to their tasks as they sit shoulder-to-shoulder by the campfire. No one speaks much.
Their attention is fixed on survival.
Smoke from the fire drifts away across the
cold, tundra landscape of southern Britain.
Reindeer graze in the distance.
Some of the group work on flints - making
new tools, repairing old ones. Flint chippings
lie scattered around their feet. Eventually the
knappers decide the flint they're working on
can produce no further tools, and they toss the
knapped-out flint core over their shoulder onto
a rubbish pile behind them.
Others work away at bone and antler. They
make harpoons for hunting fish, pins for sewing
up leather shoes, toggles for their fur-lined
leather `parka' coats. Fine bone chippings rain
down around their feet while larger pieces of
waste are thrown back onto the rubbish pile.
All around lie the bones and body-parts of
last week's kill. Two reindeer had been shot
with arrows, roughly butchered at the kill-site
and hauled back to camp. Charred bones from
recent meals lie nearby.
There is no uncontrolled feasting with this
group. They eat three-quarters of the meat
now, during the short period they are at camp
working on their equipment. The remaining
quarter they pack up in skin bags to take away.
For before long the group is once again on the
move, following the slowly-migrating herds of
reindeer until they make another kill some
miles further on.
All this takes place about 10,300 years ago,
in the part of southern England that would
later become Uxbridge, west of London. Just
over a thousand years later, about 9,100 years
ago, another group of hunters makes camp in
exactly the same spot.
It is a larger group of about a dozen people.
They sit in two arcs, facing each other across
the fire. They talk, they tell stories as they
work. It is winter, and the main task at hand
is extracting marrow from a cache of red deer
bones saved up over several months' hunting.
The landscape has changed. Gone are the
scrubby open tundra and the migrating herds
of reindeer found a thousand years earlier.
Woodland now covers much of the
ground. It is a mixed blessing for the
hunters, impeding movement but
providing a valuable new material -
timber.
Here at camp, alongside the flints,
bones and antlers, members of the
group now work away at wood, perhaps
building a canoe or shaping stretcherpoles for carrying luggage or young
children. As happened a thousand years
before, fine shavings and stone chips land
at their feet while larger lumps of material
are thrown away to the back.
Eventually this hunting group also
moves on.
It may seem miraculous that after
so many thousands of years we can
tell so much about the Uxbridge
camp-site, which was excavated
a few years ago and is now
approaching publication.
Part of our ability to interpret the
scatters of flint and bone stems, of
course, from our knowledge of
modern hunter-gatherer behaviour.
Anthropologists have detected
certain `normal' patterns of action
which are likely to have remained fairly
unchanged since hunting began.
A large animal is generally too heavy
to transport back to camp whole, so
initial butchery takes place at the kill-site. First
you remove the skin if you need it unbroken for
tents or clothing. Next you quarter the animal,
cutting off its four legs which are the main
meat-bearing parts. The skull and backbone
you leave behind.
Hunters may slit open the animal's belly to
reach its intestines. The stomach can become a
useful bag, the guts make serviceable twine or
rope, while the liver and kidneys provide food.
Antlers and horns can be cut off for tools.
Archaeologists see these patterns
reflected in sites such as Uxbridge,
allowing us to recognise kill-sites and
camp-sites simply from the types of
bones that are found.
One of the reasons we believe that hides
were being prepared for leather during the
early (late Glacial) occupation at Uxbridge is
that we found reindeer toe-bones, which
typically remain attached to skin that has been
flayed. If the skin is not taken, the animal's feet
are usually left behind with the carcass.
Also helping us understand Uxbridge was
research done by the great American
archaeologist Lewis Binford among the Inuit
of northern Canada in the 1970s. In order to
understand the patterns found around
campfires on archaeological sites, he followed a
group of rifle-bearing Inuits in their motorised
skidoos, and painstakingly recorded how they
handled their game, how they sat around the
fire, and the patterns of waste they left behind.
One pattern he found was the distinction
between the `drop zone' and the `toss zone' for
different types of waste. Small bits just drop to
the floor, while larger pieces are thrown away,
or tossed backwards. This is exactly the pattern
we found at Uxbridge during both periods of
occupation. With flints, for example, the
densest scatters were around the fire, but the
heaviest waste pieces - the used-up cores, the
unworkable nodules - were found always at a
distance.
Another pattern was that of the `wind
corridor'. Hunters around a fire, Binford found,
often sit side-on to the wind. If they sit upwind
they block the wind to the fire, and if
downwind they get a faceful of smoke. This
side-on seating plan produces two distinct fans
of debris with gaps at either end - which is
exactly what we found in the later (Mesolithic)
occupation of the Uxbridge camp.
Uxbridge (the site is formally known as
Three Ways Wharf) is one of the most
important hunter-gatherer sites in Britain
because it is one of the very few where we have
tools and animal bones together, allowing us to
construct a fuller story. Another similar site has
been found a few miles away at Church
Lammas in Staines but the analysis of the finds
there is still underway.
It may even be that the two camp-sites
represent successive stops made by the same
group of late Glacial hunters. The only way to
prove it would be to find a flint flake from one
site that exactly matched a tool at the other
site, suggesting that a tool repaired at one camp
had been carried to the other and discarded.
They say that, in one instance, a pair of late
Glacial flints found on opposite sides of the
English Channel - in England and Belgium -
have been refitted together (at this period the
North Sea was dry land), so such long-distance
matching should in theory be possible. I can't
prove the story but I'd like it to be true.
Certainly, refitting knapped flakes found
within the Uxbridge site has allowed us to tell
some fascinating stories. In one case, we found
a flint burin, or chisel, which had been carried
around the site during the late Glacial
occupation, as its owner whittled away at a
piece of antler or bone.
Every so often, he (or she) stopped,
resharpened the chisel by striking a small piece
off its end which fell to the ground. This person
then moved on, still chiselling away, until they
stopped again and resharpened the tool - and
so on several times as they paced around the
fire. Eventually, with the task complete, the
blunt chisel was thrown away.
This kind of refitting is relatively easy.
You simply collect all your chisels and chisel
pieces (so-called burin spalls) and see if any
match. Sometimes individual flints have a
distinct colour or pattern and you can quickly
see which pieces go together.
Afar harder task is refitting dozens of small
flake tools and waste pieces back together to
form the original flint nodule, like a three-dimensional jigsaw puzzle often up to a foot
long. However, we did manage to do this at
Uxbridge with one very distinctive flint which
had a beautiful vein of translucent quartz
running right through it.
The original knapping of the flint probably
took no more than ten minutes of someone's
time. Piecing it together took far longer, but by
doing so we forged an uncanny link with the
mind of the man or woman who first handled
the flint more than 10,000 years ago.
I strongly suspect that it was the vein of
quartz that attracted our knapper to this flint,
because what we found was that the nodule had
been worked in such as way as to ensure the
maximum amount of quartz in every finished
blade. You can imagine the knapper's
determination and delight watching the
translucent blades falling off the core.
One huge blade knocked off this core was
used for heavy-duty chopping of antler. Its
heavily damaged or `bruised' blade edge is very
characteristic of a tool that has been put to this
kind of work. Another quartz-rich blade was
modified and turned into a microlith used as
an awl. Several pieces of flint were missing from
the reassembled nodule, representing the
blades and other tools that were carried away
when the hunters left their camp.
Another illuminating type of close analysis
is that of `microwear'. This is the study, under a
microscope, of the detailed pattern of wear on
a flint or bone tool which is said to indicate the
type of work that the tool has been used for.
Thus, the working of bone, wood, flint and
leather all leave distinctive traces on the blade.
Microwear analysis on the quartz microlith
indicated it had been used for boring leather.
The later, Mesolithic hunter group who
set up camp at Uxbridge had with
them a very unusual collection of
animal bones - the leg bones of at
least 15 red deer, and very little else. The
assemblage as a whole does not seem to
represent the butchered remains of animals
that had been recently killed. So what was
going on?
According to James Rackham, the
environmental archaeologist who worked on
the site, the leg bones probably represent a
cache of supplies held over from one or two
months of hunting. Stripped of meat, the bones
had been stored, perhaps in snowdrifts or in
bags up trees, until they were needed in the
depths of winter.
In the cold season and early spring, supplies
of fat and carbohydrate - energy-giving
nutrients - tend to run low in the landscape.
Grazing animals are themselves using up their
fat reserves and represent a protein-rich but
nutritionally poor source of food. The autumn's
supplies of hazelnuts will perhaps by now have
been consumed.
It is a time of crisis for humans who live by
hunting and gathering. Anthropological
research has shown hunter-gatherers in some
parts of the world rapidly losing weight at this
time of year. The stored leg-bones at Uxbridge,
however, contained a supply of marrow and fat
which could be released by boiling. This
appears to demonstrate that our Mesolithic
group had evolved a strategy for getting
through the most dangerous time of year.
As they sat in two arcs on either side of their
campfire, some members of the group smashed
the bones and tossed the joint ends onto a heap
behind them. Others worked bone, or wood, or
leather, or flint. The areas used for different
types of work seem distinct, and it looks as
though each group member had his or her own
allotted task to perform.
Perhaps someone in the group was good at,
say, making boots - at cutting the leather to fit
the foot, at sewing the boot up with a bone
needle, at lining it with fur. It is a skilled job and
ethnographic research shows that, for whatever
reason, it is often carried out by an elderly
woman. That, then, would be her regular work. I like to imagine children running around
the outside of the circle, picking up odd
bits of flint or bone and practising their
craftworking skills. Evidence of
apprenticeship has been claimed at other sites,
but sadly there is nothing to prove it occurred
at Uxbridge.
It is likely that, sitting face-to-face with one
another across the fire, these people talked.
At a time before monuments were built, and
when the dead were seldom buried, they
probably expressed their religious beliefs and
maintained a cultural identity by oral history -
by telling stories of the past.
At the head of each arc sat the flint knappers.
I regard these as senior members of the group,
the story-tellers who also took responsibility
for producing the knives and axes - the most
symbolically potent of the group's possessions.
In the Neolithic period which followed, it is
commonplace for archaeologists to assign
symbolic or ritual significance to axes and other
tools, especially when found in `ritual deposits'.
I suspect this symbolic potency had deep roots
in the Mesolithic era.
A wedding ring today has intense significance
for its owner, but remains - in material
reality - nothing but a gold ring. In the same
way, I believe axes were imbued with now unreachable meanings as tales of group history
were told around the fire. One axe, for
example, was broken on the site and reused to
make blades and a microlith point. Is this
merely an economical reuse of raw material?
Or could the axe have been used in some `great
event' that merited such honourable recycling?
From our distance of nine millennia, we can
see these people as they sit, and work, and talk.
But we cannot yet quite see into their minds.
John Lewis directed the Uxbridge excavation for the
Museum of London Archaeology Service. He now
works at Wessex Archaeology
Europe's best preserved Neolithic village was dug in the 1920s and the 1970s, but it continues
to give up new secrets, writes Alexandra Shepherd
It has been called the `best-preserved
prehistoric village in northern Europe',
but no archaeologist can claim credit for
its discovery. Rather it was a great storm
that blasted away the covering layers of
sand and first revealed the 5,000-yearold stone walls, furnishings and other
remarkable remains of Skara Brae.
That was in 1850, and in the following
70 years or so an assortment of
antiquaries and local enthusiasts -
including members of a 1913 house party
from the nearby big house - carried on
what the elements had begun. By 1924,
when the site on mainland Orkney was
taken into state guardianship, five
Neolithic houses had been cleared out
and many artefacts carried away.
Then the elements struck again.
A further great storm washed away part
of one house, and a protective sea wall
was then built which cut into midden
deposits surrounding the village. It was
clearly time for more consolidation, and
to oversee it the authorities called in
Gordon Childe, then Professor of
Archaeology at Edinburgh and one of
the most influential archaeologists of
the 20th century. His work at Skara
Brae between 1928-30 proved to be his
most famous dig and produced the site
that visitors see today.
The site consists of nine houses
linked by passageways, with a main
thoroughfare that opens onto a paved
area dubbed the Market Place, and a
possible workshop beyond. The
structures stand in some places more
than two metres high, their walls usually
double, packed with midden and
plastered thickly with blue-grey clay.
Floors were also made of this clay. The
settlement had a stone-built drainage
system, possible indoor sanitation and
efficient security, with doors wedged
against jambs by bars slotted into the
walls behind.
A wealth of finds from the site
included three of the major indications
of a Neolithic lifestyle - the bones of
domesticated animals (principally cattle
and sheep, but also pigs and dogs),
polished stone axes and numerous
sherds of flat-based pottery decorated
with grooves and cordons.
Alongside these was a considerable
array of tools, including numerous
`Skaill knives' (Childe's name for the
ubiquitous disc-shaped segments of
beach pebbles used for butchery);
scrapers, awls and smoothers for
leather-working; and bone mattocks
and shovels made from cattle shoulder
blades for digging and earthmoving.
Childe also found bone and ivory pins,
thousands of tubular and disc-shaped
beads and, intriguingly, finely sculpted
stone balls and more enigmatic forms,
some carved with designs also found
incised on the stonework within the
village.
To have walls standing almost to their
original height and a myriad of finds
would be enough to set the site apart.
But what makes Skara Brae so
exceptional is the preservation of the
layout of individual houses, resulting
from the use of sandstone for the chief
items of furniture.
Today, visitors can still see complete
rooms with bed-places facing each other
across a central hearth, cupboards,
storage places, alcoves and little cells
set into the walls. Most evocative of all,
opposite the doorway of one house
stands a two-tier dresser, reminiscent
of so many farmhouses across the
centuries.
Yet this astonishingly preserved
embodiment of an early farming
community took some time to assume
a key place in the Neolithic of Britain.
Although Childe described it as
`essentially a Neolithic culture', he saw
the site - very much in the spirit of his
times - as a survival in the north of a
primitive Neolithic lifestyle that had
long been overtaken further south.
Indeed, he published the site under the
subtitle `a Pictish village', arguing that
it dated from the late Bronze Age.
Early dates
Others placed Skara Brae even later, on
the basis of the similarity of many of its
artefacts and architectural features to
those found at Iron Age brochs. It was
not until publication of Stuart Piggott's
Neolithic Cultures of the British Isles in
1954 that the site was positioned firmly
back in the Neolithic - on the evidence
of pottery - albeit, in those pre-radiocarbon days, a very short Neolithic
squeezed into the 500 years from 2000-1500 BC.
Even then Skara Brae had not fully
arrived. Although its pottery
assemblage played a major role in
identifying the striking similarities
between the type of Grooved ware of
Orkney and that produced far to the
south in Essex, its name was not used
to label the northern end of this
phenomenon. Instead Piggott turned to
the settlement of Rinyo on Rousay, first
excavated in 1937, a site without Skara
Brae's miraculous preservation but with
more rigorous stratigraphy - and so
`Rinyo-Clactonian' entered the
literature.
That lack of solid stratigraphy for
Skara Brae was finally rectified by the
first modern excavations of the site,
which took place in 1972-3 under the
direction of David Clarke of the
National Museums of Scotland. These
gave the village a firm chronology,
defining the picture of a long-lived,
settled community, existing from 3100-2500 BC with only minor alterations in
lifestyle over that period.
The excavations also confirmed the
early presence of cereals at Skara Brae -
alongside pastoral farming - and
produced an array of organic finds such
as a rope of twisted crowberry stems
and part of a finely-shaped handle of
willow. Clarke's dig also added a further
three early structures to expand the
plan of the earliest village and
incidentally produced the finest
decorated stone from the site.
Normal village
The final publication of Clarke's work is
still in train and its completion should
allow Skara Brae to make its full
contribution to all aspects of the
Neolithic - the period, the pottery
style, and the history of settled
agricultural communities. For,
paradoxically, although one of the most
famous sites in Britain, until now Skara
Brae's contribution to the creation of
serious models for the Neolithic has
been severely limited.
Archaeologists have taken too much
to heart Piggott's warning against using
its unparalleled preservation to make
generalisations about the rest of Britain
or Scotland. Steering clear of making it
the prime domestic type-site, some
have gone so far as to claim it was always
unique, suggesting it was perhaps a
settlement for magician priests.
Yet the 1937 excavation of Rinyo,
revealing a very similar settlement, had
demonstrated clearly that Skara Brae
was not alone. Work over the last two
decades (particularly by Colin Richards
of Glasgow University) has added
further sites to these two - Barnhouse
and other possible sites on mainland
Orkney, Links of Noltland on Westray
and Pool on Sanday. A picture has begun
to emerge of not one Skara Brae but
many, suggesting an Orkney landscape
studded then, as now, with flourishing
farming communities.
Archaeologists are now becoming
increasingly confident that the close
similarities in the Grooved ware pottery
across Britain from southern England to
Orkney - Piggott's Rinyo-Clactonian
culture - stand for a real link not just an
archaeologist's theory. What that means
in human terms is still hard to say, but in
an ironic reversal of the old views of
fossilised survival in the north,
increasingly the origins for this style are
seen as lying at the northern end of the
connection.
Orkney first
Recently I have myself drawn attention
to evidence that supports this view.
The decorated stones in Skara Brae bear
criss-cross and diamond motifs that
I believe are formal expressions of the
patterns which appear naturally as
fissures in Orkney bedrock. With these
same geometric designs forming the
basis of much of the Grooved ware
design, the case for placing the origins
of at least parts of the tradition in
Orkney begins to look increasingly
secure.
The abandonment of Skara Brae, like
its discovery, has been attributed to a
great storm, overwhelming the
inhabitants with sand so rapidly that
one fleeing woman was said to have left
the beads of her necklace scattered in
her wake.
I think this particular scenario is
unlikely. Evidence shows the
inhabitants lived with almost
continuous sand-blow, and would not
have given up in the face of a single
storm. The encroaching sea and
increased salt spray may have gradually
put an end to cereal production, making
life less supportable. Then disease - or
even conflict - may have brought about
the finish of the settlement.
Perhaps it is significant that, as Skara
Brae was deserted, the upper levels at
Rinyo and at a number of Orkney's
chambered tombs were marked with
traces of a new cultural package -
Beakers. This hints at a time of very
significant change on the islands which
seems to have spelt the end of a settled
Neolithic life on Orkney.
Whatever the reasons for its demise,
Skara Brae remains an icon for the
Neolithic. Its houses still seem to
radiate an air of gentle domesticity,
bearing the memory of a sheltered
farming life sustained by its people over
many generations.
Alexandra Shepherd took part in the
1972-3 excavations at Skara Brae and is
coordinating their publication for the
National Museums of Scotland and
Historic Scotland
Roman culture was fading in Britain from the early 200s. It had all but gone a century later.
Neil Faulkner looks at the evidence.
It used to be thought, years ago, that
Roman Britain `ended' in AD 410.
The impression was that, one day,
the Roman army marched out in
orderly fashion under their standards,
and on the next, the barbarian Saxons
sailed in and consigned everywhere to
the Dark Ages.
More recently, archaeologists have
taken a different line, arguing that
Roman Britain hardly ended at all.
Using evidence mainly from single sites
like Wroxeter, they claim that some
aspects of Roman culture - such as
town life, bureaucracy and the use of
Latin - continued, at least in the west,
as late as the 7th century. Although
some scholars have pointed to signs of
early decline, the dominant view has
been that of survival.
New research, however, throws that
consensus into doubt. Taking the
excavated evidence as a whole, it now
seems that Roman culture was
disintegrating in Britain from the early
200s and had almost completely gone
by the end of the 4th century.
This gradual but inexorable collapse
affected towns, villas and villages.
Nothing was exempt. The imperial
project, the bringing of civilised life to
barbarian lands, started with
enthusiasm but ended - and ended
early - amid piles of refuse and squalor,
with abandoned farms and villages,
country houses turned into barns and
workshops, and towns heavily fortified
by an embattled class of state officials
desperate to cling on to power.
Part of the new research work was a
large-scale survey of Roman buildings
I conducted during the 1990s with Jack
Newman, a retired quantity-surveyor
and amateur archaeologist based in Essex. We looked at published
excavation reports to catalogue and
analyse large samples of excavated
Romano-British buildings from town
and country, first recording the
approximate date of construction, then
the likely length of occupation. Some
of the results were published this year.
The towns survey included about
1,500 buildings from 300 excavations at
17 urban sites across England (civitas
capitals, coloniae and possible municipia),
ranging from Wroxeter to Canterbury
and from Exeter to Lincoln. A clear
pattern emerged. Most civic buildings
were erected in about AD 75-150, most
private town-houses in about AD150-225, and urban occupation (measured by
rooms in use) reached peak levels in the
early 3rd century.
Civic construction work then
collapsed as resources were diverted
into building town walls in the mid to
late 3rd century. There was a partial
recovery in the early 4th - the so-called
`Constantian renaissance' - but it was a
temporary blip, and, from around AD
325, Romano-British towns faced
terminal decline. Few new buildings
were erected, many old ones were
abandoned, and by about AD400 there
was little left in most places but a
wasteland of ruins and rubbish.
Colchester is a prime example.
My survey counted 115 private buildings,
most of them excavated by Philip
Crummy's Colchester Archaeological
Trust in the 1970s and 80s. Especially
important were two massive rescue sites
up against the south wall of the town -
Lion Walk and Culver Street - which
between them represented about half
the total area so far excavated in the
town. We now know of 20 grand houses
in Colchester at its peak in about AD
250, but a hundred years later only three
of these were left, and by AD 400 there
were none at all.
Archaeologists have sometimes
made too much of a few
exceptional sequences.
When Shepherd Frere
uncovered Building XXVII.2 at
Verulamium (St Albans) in 1955-61, most
scholars agreed with him that Romano-British town life must have flourished
well into the 5th century - and a new
consensus was quickly established.
It seemed confirmed when Philip
Barker's excavations on the Baths
Basilica site at Wroxeter in 1966-91
revealed a long post-Roman sequence
culminating in a grand residence of 6th
century date which many felt was highly
Romanised. Ken Dark has argued
recently that, in the early Dark Ages,
supposedly `Celtic' western Britain was
in fact `Roman' - with Latin literacy,
classical tastes, trade links with the
Mediterranean, and a whole political
framework inherited from the Romans
of the 4th century (BA March 1998).
These conclusions seem much less
compelling in the light of my survey
results. Early Dark Age elites used the
forms and symbols of Romanitas to
legitimise their claims to wealth and
power. It is no surprise that much of
their material culture looks `Roman'.
The same process can be witnessed in
other periods. The Sutton Hoo Saxons
imported Byzantine luxuries,
Renaissance scholars wrote in Latin,
and the Georgians built in a neoclassical style - in each case we are
dealing with the reuse of ancient
cultural symbols in a new situation.
The 5th and 6th centuries in Britain
were probably no different - some elite
culture was retained, but it was a thin
veneer behind which one of the most
complete transformations in British
history had taken place. What the
archaeology as a whole shows is near-total collapse of the Roman settlement
pattern - not just the disappearance
of towns, but of villas too, and indeed
many native villages and farmsteads.
Two further recent surveys add
weight to this view - one by Jack
Newman of 78 villas randomly selected
from published reports, another by
Katie Meheux from the Institute of
Archaeology (UCL) of 162 possible
villa sites in the Severn Valley/Welsh
Marches region. Neither survey has
yet been published.
One favoured explanation for urban
decline is that the Romano-British
gentry `retreated to the countryside'
to escape the burdens of public service
in towns, and there, from the late 3rd
century onwards, invested heavily in the
embellishment of their country seats.
Because of this, Guy de la Bédoyère has
described the 4th century as Roman
Britain's `golden age' (BA July 1999).
In fact, the boom in the villa
economy seems to have ended early in
that century. Newman's survey showed
that between AD 300 (the peak) and AD
350 the amount of new building-work
undertaken on villas fell by almost two thirds. Both his survey and that of
Meheux revealed that a majority of villas
had been abandoned by about AD375
and virtually all by about AD 400.
The odd exception - like Whitley
Grange in Shropshire - cannot alter the
general picture. Much more typical
were sites like Gorhambury in
Hertfordshire, where the grand house
was a ruin and had been incorporated
into the farmyard by the mid-4th
century, and Thurnham in Kent, where
one of the central rooms was being used
as an iron smithy at an even earlier date.
Native villages and farmsteads fared
somewhat better, but many were still
deserted or contracted sharply in the
4th century. Katie Meheux surveyed 317
native rural sites in the Severn
Valley/Welsh Marches region and
discovered a fall of 27 per cent in the
number occupied between AD 100-150
and AD 350-400. My own more modest
survey of 177 rural sites excavated in
1969-96 (as listed in the Roman
archaeology journal Britannia) showed
a fall of 35 per cent for the same period.
When careful modern excavation
reveals evidence of early decline at sites
like the Romano-British village of
Heybridge in Essex (BA September
1999), excavators often conclude that
here is the exception, and they seek
special-case explanations. Certainly,
it was the more marginal sites that
succumbed - economic crisis strikes
down the weakest - but it was part of
a general pattern. At Heybridge, some
peripheral areas had been abandoned by
about AD200, few new buildings were
erected in the central zone in the 3rd
and 4th centuries, and rubbish pits were
encroaching on the sacred precinct
around the temple.
Taken as a whole, the evidence
implies not a 4th century `golden age',
but after about AD325 at any rate, an
agricultural slump, a decaying class of
gentry and an increasingly hard-pressed
peasantry. There was, it seems, decline
in both town and country - Roman
Britain was in crisis long before AD 410.
What had gone wrong?
The crisis must have had deep
roots. In the centuries before
the Claudian invasion of
Britain, Rome had been a fast-growing empire - a dynamic system of
robbery with violence in which wars of
plunder were waged to fill the treasury,
support the army, and subsidise the
policy of `bread and circuses' which
ensured domestic peace.
But the conquest of Britain had
been one of the last great military
adventures, almost an afterthought.
Rome had already reached the limits of
her empire. Civilisation - forts, towns,
villas and `the world of taste' - was
expensive. In the absence of a
continuing stream of plunder, it could
only be paid for out of the surpluses
generated by extensive arable
agriculture, which enabled the Roman
authorities to raise labour corvées and
taxes from rural areas to devote to
building a Roman way of life.
By the 1st century AD, the Roman
frontiers ran roughly along the limits
of ploughed land - beyond lay a true
barbaria of upland crofters and
pastoralists whose impoverished
economies could not support
`Romanisation'. The Roman army
repeatedly failed to conquer the
wilderness of northern Britain. This was
not a localised failure. Central Europe
was also beyond its reach. An ancient
system of military imperialism such as
Rome was tied to the ploughed.
For some time the empire's
dependency on internal resources did
not matter much. Landowners, rich
peasant farmers and numerous petty
traders found ready markets for their
surpluses in an economy pump-primed
by state arms expenditure. But there
was a fine balance. Without the subsidy
of conquest, documentary sources tell
us, taxes slowly crept up, labour corvées
became longer, and arbitrary
requisitions were more frequent.
By analogy with other, better documented historical
periods, it is likely that rising
demands provoked resistance.
Peasants no doubt secreted their grain,
hid their cattle in the woods, and their
sturdy sons on cousins' farms.
Sometimes perhaps they banded
together to ambush tax collectors and
press-gangs. We know that some
abandoned marginal plots and took to
the hills and forests to live as bandits
beyond the law.
Caught in the middle were the
municipal gentry who ran the towns.
Faced with trying to hold together a
disintegrating infrastructure, many lost
their taste for public service and town
life. Ancient historians have long
acknowledged a `decline of the
decurionate' from the later 2nd century
onwards, but Romano-British
archaeologists have often assumed that
Britain was different.
A parallel development was the rising
wealth and power of a small class of
imperial grandees - holders of high
office, owners of multiple estates, men
networked into the late Roman
bureaucracy and protected by their
contacts within it. The evidence was
meticulously collated by the great
ancient historian AHM Jones in his
1960s book The Later Roman Empire, but
again Romano-British archaeologists
have been reluctant to use these insights
in interpreting their own data.
The awkward relationship between
archaeology and history is an old
problem. Archaeologists are often
fearful of drifting too far from the
`scientific' rigour of postholes and
potsherds into a reliance on what some
see as `biased' documents. But if our task
is to explain what happened in the past,
historical and archaeological evidence
need to be integrated so that a proper
story can be told.
Nor can archaeologists restrict
themselves to looking only at their own
patch - a single site, region or province.
New thinking about interpreting the
past urges us to see Roman Britain as
part of a `world system'. We should be
able to fit together the evidence
collected by historians of the empire
with what we find on our excavations.
I think this can be done.
Let us take the example of late
Romano-British towns. We have known
for a long time that town walls were
strengthened in the 4th century -
principally with the addition of
projecting bastions - but recent
excavation evidence has given a much
fuller picture of what things were like
inside late Roman towns.
It is not just that grand old
townhouses fell into ruin and were not
replaced. Civic buildings also decayed -
like the public baths at Canterbury,
which, after refurbishment at the
beginning of the 4th century, soon fell
into disuse and were taken over by
`squatters'. On the other hand, town life
of a sort certainly continued. Amid
abandoned houses, plebeian hovels and
piles of refuse and sewage, there were
government offices, arms factories,
official warehouses, and active markets.
Canterbury's municipal baths were in
ruins, but a street-front portico with
shops and stalls was completely rebuilt
around AD 400.
After the grand houses had been
pulled down in Colchester's Culver
Street suburb, a huge aisled warehouse
was constructed, perhaps for storing
taxes-in-kind and military supplies.
At Caerwent, though much of the old
town hall was demolished, one part was
retained and given a central-heating
system, perhaps for government offices,
while another was used for
metalworkers' hearths and furnaces,
possibly for making armaments.
These sites were still towns, but
very different from those of
the 2nd century - no longer
the local centres and garden-cities of a Romanising gentry, but
heavily defended outposts of an
embattled empire. Imperial defence was
the priority and local infrastructures
were kept up because the war effort
needed them. The imperial grandees
in control - courtiers, officers, civil
servants and bishops - enriched
themselves; but gentry, peasantry,
towns, villas and villages were left
impoverished.
When the last Roman soldiers left
the island or melted back into the
countryside in the early 5th century,
Britain's fragile Romanitas had already
rotted away to almost nothing.
The succeeding Dark Ages are `dark'
for archaeologists precisely because
virtually none of the rich material
culture of Roman Britain survived.
Almost the whole edifice of
Romanisation vanished in a generation
or two - the forts, towns and villas, the
mosaics, frescoes and hypocausts, the
stone-quarries, potteries and markets.
Late Roman Britain had been part of a
world system in crisis, and because it
was a distant, under-developed region,
it was one of the first to fall.
Neil Faulkner's book `The Decline and Fall
of Roman Britain' was published by Tempus
last month
Return to the British Archaeology homepage
© Council for British Archaeology and individual authors, 2000
Hunters in the cold
Great sites: Skara Brae
Decline and fall