Number of Groups forming the Sample:

• Military sites - 8 samples
• Extra-mural occupation at military sites - 4 samples
• Major civil sites - 35 samples
• Smaller centres - 22 samples
• Religious / ritual sites - 3 samples
• Rural sites - 22 samples
• Other sites - 3 samples

Total 97

Key to Context Type abbreviations:
C, constructional contexts; D, ditch fill contexts; DG, mainly ditches and gullies; E, enclosure ditch fill contexts; FD, debris from major fire; G, gully/ies; L, layer; LD, levelling and/or demolition; LSC, layer, probably cultivated soil; MM, midden or midden like deposit; MU, make-up layers; P, pit/s fill; PG, penannular gully fills; PH, post holes, including post holes relating to buildings/structures; Q, fill of quarry pit; S, slot/s; SD, fill of shallow depression; V, various; VS, various settlement deposits; W, well/wells.

For references see Table 29

Notes:
DNA (under Sample Size) denotes that Data was Not Available.

i. Quantification by EVE in these cases is evidently by rim only (RE). Identifiably residual rim sherds (that is items belonging to a vessel first represented in an earlier period) were excluded from the calculations relating to these groups by the reporter (Taylor 1991, 369).

ii. Quantification by EVE in these cases is evidently by rim only (RE); procedural details are not stated in this report, though it seems likely given the quantities of pottery documented by count and weight, that only rims have been measured; moreover measurement of rims only was the method followed by the same author in the contemporary companion report (Taylor 1991, 336).

iii. Deposits comprising fire debris from major fire dating to the early Hadrianic period; calculations may include amphorae.

iv. Late group with apparently very high residual content of samian, included here for comparative purposes.

v. May include a re-deposited element.

vi. In this case the data relate to EVE measurements evidently including both rims and bases.

Information upon some of the Groups appearing in this Table:

With these EVE data, note that in the case of some of the smaller groups, the samian percentage may be the product of the presence of just 1 or 2 rim sherds.

• Canterbury, Well 101. This feature did not appear to the excavators as containing an unusual/structured fill, and from some level of close attention to the report it does not appear to have been or included structured deposits. A wide range of samian occurs. Data: Pollard 1988, P. 236. The site is located at the southern edge of the Roman town; the well appears to be associated with a timber building with clay floors, and lies more or less immediately adjacent to a metalled road. There are a number of indicators of agricultural activity in this vicinity, though the function of the timber building is not certain.
  
  
• Chells, Boxfield Farm, Well CAB, fills 6-13. This pottery Group is thought to be a structured deposit (c. 26 complete, almost complete or semi complete samian and non-samian vessels were excavated or reconstructable).
  
  
• Cirencester. Note that there are slight differences in the 'percentage of Group formed by Samian by EVE' data as presented here with that appearing in an earlier publication (Willis 1998a, Table 2). The latter article was prepared before the full publication data for these Cirencester samples (Cooper 1998) was available.
  

  Insula VI lies at the hub of the Roman town, being adjacent to the Forum and with Ermin Street on its south-western side.
  It is not immediately apparent why the percentage of samian from Cirencester, Ceramic Phase 4 (Insula VI, Period 2.3) is comparatively so low; it may relate to the status of the area of the town from where the material deposited in this ditch derived, if indeed it came from another area as ground 'make-up'; the percentage of coarse wares (such as BB1) is much stronger than in the earlier groups.

• Great Witcombe villa. This Period group comes from an amalgam of deposits from the villa and its immediate vicinity; the samian from the site is mid/late Antonine to third century; the overall quantities of Lezoux samian and East Gaulish samian from the site are closely similar, supporting the interpretation that the villa was not established before the late second century. One might have expected a higher proportion of this Period 2 group to have been formed by samian given the status of the site, but the date of the group extending through the third century is probably a telling factor as at this time imports and consumption of samian were declining markedly, especially after c. AD 250.
  
  
• Hassocks, Stonepound Pit, Building. This group is from an apparently unrecorded excavation, but is believed by Dr Malcolm Lyne to be a coherent group. The building was apparently of some pretension as the collected material includes mortared bricks of opus specatum type (cf. Lyne 1994).
  
  
• Heybridge, Elms Farm. The Ceramic Phase 4 Key Groups sample here excludes data from Feature 20008, which appears to include a structured element. Well 6280, fill 16083: the pottery is thought to include a structured deposit, and this Group is included in the Table as a separate entry.
  

  CP 4 Key Groups: 9213, 9218, 24013
  CP 5 Key Groups: 5147, 6201, 15773
  CP 6 Key Groups: 7118, 9029, 10159
  CP 8 Key Groups: 6182, 10062, 16088

• Littlehampton, Belloc Rd, Ditch G. The Group comprises sherds from a minimum of 28 vessels. All the samian is Central Gaulish. Lyne states: "The fine and specialized wares ... make up an unusually high 54.8% of all the pottery ..." (Lyne 1993, 17).
  
  
• Salford Priors, Area D Phase 1. Features comprised c. 3 circular structures defined by post-holes and a number of pits and gullies/ditches; several activity zones were discernible. At this stage the site was probably an open farmstead type settlement, situated on the river Arrow terrace (Palmer 1999). The pottery assemblage from this phase comprised 495 sherds dominated by Class E (Grog tempered) fabrics, which are thought to be pre-Flavian, with some early Severn Valley wares (Evans 1999). There was only a single samian sherd, being a rim sherd from a Drag. 24/25.
  
  
• Shepton Mallet, Fosse Lane 1990. Period 2, Building X: A stone founded building, possibly an aisled hall with an apsidal southern end; function not certain; may have been 'ancillary'. This building produced a high proportion of tablewares generally (eg. tankards, etc.) rather than kitchen wares.
  Period 2, Building VII: The sample relates to deposits from in and around a well preserved stone founded building, probably destroyed by fire, possibly including a kitchen, store and 'living' room.
  Period 3, Building IX: There is a high 'residual' component to this Group including the samian ware; all the samian is SG or CG. The Group is included here for comparative purposes. The deposits forming this sample are associated with a composite stone-founded building, possibly multi-functional. This was the only building from which painted wall-plaster came; 'household items' recovered; seen as successor to Building X.
  
  
• Silchester. The Group from the Rampart Section, E. of the S. Gate 1974, Group 2.7, contains much later first century AD samian. The Group from the 'South West Angle' 1978, Group 2.3 is the final pre-Rampart deposit at this point.
  

  % of Fine wares overall from Group 1.1 is c. 25%
  % of Fine wares overall from Group 1.2 is c. 28%
  % of Fine wares overall from Group 2.1 is c. 10%
  % of Fine wares overall from Group 2.2 is c. 10%
  % of Fine wares overall from Group 2.3 is c. 14%
  % of Fine wares overall from Group 2.7 is c. 25%

• Tort Hill East, Period 2A. This Group includes a small South Gaulish rim sherd that may be residual.
  
  
• Wantage, Mill St, 1993-4, Phase 1. Features represented are ditches interpreted as functioning as land divisions associated with agricultural production. Occupation is presumed to occur nearby, but was not directly identified within the trench.