PREVIOUS   NEXT   CONTENTS   HOME 

3.4. Period 4, c. AD 55 - 80

Assemblage composition (see Tables 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 15 & 16)

Continuity in the morphology of the early post-conquest settlement was also matched by very little change in the proportions of general functional classes of pottery. Most of the stratified groups came from pit deposits, with a smaller proportion coming from ditch fills. Jar forms comprised the highest proportion by general functional class in all features. However, underlying this continuity were a number of significant changes in the individual form types. One of the most striking changes was a decline in vessels associated with the style of consumption noted in the previous two phases, based around Gallic-style butt-beakers and platters. Gallo-Belgic imports were virtually non-existent, whereas locally made versions of butt-beakers and platters had both reduced by approximately 50%. Such decreases were compensated for by increases in other locally produced beaker and bowl forms, and small increases in the proportion of samian vessels (especially cups and platters). The decline in imported wares from Gaul was also matched by a significant reduction in the importation of wine amphorae (accounting for less than 1% of the wine amphorae from all seven phases considered here).

Correspondence analysis: excavated area (see Figures 5a and 5b)

In CA by excavated area, there was much greater homogeneity in the spatial distribution of consumption technology in this period. The cluster of areas from the southern zone (K, L, M and P) corresponded to several forms with more 'Roman' cultural connotations - flagons, mortaria, and samian vessels (cups, platters, dishes and bowls). In contrast, the previously favoured Gallo-Belgic imports corresponded with the temple area J, which also had the highest proportions of other diagnostic components of the Gallo-Roman consumption style (butt-beakers and platters), quantities that were not paralleled anywhere else within the site in this period. This kind of potential curatorial activity in a highly ritualised context could highlight the former significance of this style of consumption. Although on further inspection the quantity of imported Gallic pottery in the temple area is small (just over half an EVE), the locally produced Gallo-Belgic forms occurred in area J in much higher quantities, and accounted for over 25% (1.45 EVEs) of the butt-beakers and nearly 80% (2.3 EVEs) of the platters at the site in this period.

Correspondence analysis: assemblage/feature (Figures 12a and 12b)

After the removal of initial outliers, the patterning observed in the area CA was reinforced in CA of assemblage content. On the left-hand side of the plot, three pits from area J (18019, 18018 and 13219) corresponded to a series of Gallo-Belgic imports (jars, butt-beakers and platters), and locally made platters, which suggests that the trends identified above for area J were consistent and not just the product of a single unusual deposit. Of perhaps greater significance, the lower quadrants of the CA plot featured a cluster of vessels in samian ware (cups, bowls and platters) and mortaria, corresponding to a number of features from the southern and peripheral zones. The sheer number and variation in assemblage size of these deposits suggests a similar pattern of use/deposition as witnessed with the Gallo-Belgic forms in the previous phase. However, the changing cultural significance (from Gallo-Belgic to samian) and functional contents of such a suite of vessels (from emphasis on drinking vessels to dining ware and mortaria) suggest major changes in consumption practices during this period (especially at the apparently high-status southern zone of the site), which would have occurred within a generation of the Roman conquest of the area in AD 43.

 PREVIOUS   NEXT   CONTENTS   HOME 

© Internet Archaeology URL: http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue21/2/3_4.html
Last updated: Tue May 08 2007