AD 450: Cultural Identity in Sub-Roman Britain

AD 450: Cultural Identity in Sub-Roman Britain A Midlands Discussion by Benjamin Sorrill School of Archaeology and Ancient History University of Leicester Dissertation submitted for BA (EU) degree in Archaeology March 2012 Abstract The work looks at the question of cultural identity in the transition between Roman and Anglo-Saxon culture in 5th Century East Midlands. Such a study is important because this period and geographical location form a key point in the development towards the modern culture of the United Kingdom. The research approach adopted in this dissertation includes an assessment of historical sources relating to this period and an examination of the arguments of modern scholars. It also explores the archaeology of urban and rural settlement of the people living in the East Midlands in the 5 th Century and their material culture to determine if the evidence excavated provides correlation to those arguments. The main conclusions drawn from this study are that the transition between Romano-British and AngloSaxon culture was less turbulent than historical sources suggested being more of a fusion than conquest. Word Count: 10,153 i TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................................... i LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ................................................................................................. ii AKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................................... iii CHAPTER ONE: Introduction ............................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER TWO: Historical Sources ................................................................................... 3 Gildas’ De Excidio Britanniae, Zosimus’ Historia Nova, the Chronica Gallia, Constantius’ Vita Sancti Germani and the Vergilius Romanus. ............................................ 3 Bede’s Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum, Nennius’ Historia Brittonum and The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles. ....................................................................................................... 7 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 9 CHAPTER THREE: Modern Interpretations ................................................................... 10 CHAPTER FOUR: Rural Living ........................................................................................ 14 Cossington, Leicestershire (Thomas 2008) ......................................................................... 14 Empingham, Rutland (Cooper 2000) .................................................................................. 15 Empingham II, Rutland (Timby 1996) ................................................................................ 19 Great Easton, Leicestershire (Priest & Cooper 2004) ......................................................... 19 Medbourne, Leicestershire (Score 2007)............................................................................. 20 South Cliff Farm, Lincolnshire. (Wessex Archaeology 2004) ............................................ 21 Discussion............................................................................................................................ 22 CHAPTER FIVE: Urban Living ......................................................................................... 24 Ratae Corieltauvorum (Leicester) ....................................................................................... 24 Lindum Colonia (Lincoln) ................................................................................................... 26 Discussion............................................................................................................................ 28 CHAPTER SIX: Material Culture ...................................................................................... 30 CHAPTER SEVEN: Conclusion ......................................................................................... 34 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................. 37 Ancient Sources ................................................................................................................... 37 Modern Sources ................................................................................................................... 38 ii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS CHAPTER TWO: Historical Sources 2.1: Vergilius Romanus http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Roman_Vergil (17 March 2012) 3 2.2: Vergilius Romanus ibid. (17 March 2012) ..................................................................................... 5 2.3: Vergilius Romanus ibid. (17 March 2012) ..................................................................................... 5 2.4: Vergilius Romanus ibid. (17 March 2012) ..................................................................................... 7 2.5: Vergilius Romanus ibid. (17 March 2012) ..................................................................................... 8 2.6: Vergilius Romanus ibid. (17 March 2012) ..................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER FOUR: Rural Living 4.1: Barrow Three, Cossington. Anglo-Saxon phase. (Thomas 2008, 58) ............................................ 14 4.2: Anglo-Saxon SFB and Iron-Age features, Cossington (ibid, 72).................................................... 14 4.3: Empingham site complex (Cooper 2000, 2) .................................................................................. 15 4.4: Empingham Roman (EPR) plan (ibid, 10) .................................................................................... 16 4.5: Empingham I Anglo-Saxon Cemetery (EPS) plan (ibid, 23).......................................................... 17 4.6: Empingham North (EPN) plan (ibid, 17) ...................................................................................... 18 4.7: Empingham West (EPW) plan (ibid, 46)....................................................................................... 18 4.8: Great Easton Roman phase ceramic finds during 2004 excavations, adapted from (Priest & Cooper 2004, 50) ............................................................................................................................................ 19 4.9: Great Easton Saxon phase ceramic finds during 2004 excavations, adapted from (ibid, 51) ........... 20 4.10: Great Eston ceramic finds, all phases, prior to 2004 excavations adapted from (ibid, 52) ............. 20 4.11: Excavation of east-west oriented, supine burials at proposed Christian cemetery in Medbourne. (Score 2007, 8) ................................................................................................................................... 20 4.12: ‘High status’ female burial South Cliffe Farm, Lincs (Wessex Archaeology 2004, 39) ................ 21 CHAPTER FIVE: Urban Living 5.1: Roman Leicester - Virtual Romans Project http://jerryscd.blogspot.co.uk/ (17 March 2012) .......... 24 5.2: SFB post holes from Bonners Lane, Leics. (Finn 2004, 18) ........................................................... 25 5.3: Newarke Street Roman cemetery (Cooper 1996, 28) ..................................................................... 25 5.4: Roman Lincoln (http://www.heritageconnectlincoln.com/imgGallery/big_Colonia.jpg) (17 March 2012).................................................................................................................................................. 26 5.5: St Paul-in-the-Bail, Site of Roman Forum and the two early Christian churches. (Jones 2003, 128) 27 CHAPTER SIX: Material Culture 6.1: Hanging bowl, late-4thC, Finningley. (Kendrick 1932, 163) ........................................................ 31 6.2: Hanging Bowl early 7thC, St Paul-in-the-Bail, Lincoln. (Vince 2003, 149) ................................... 31 6.3: 5thC hanging-bowl found in Sleaford, Lincs. (Kendrick 1932, Plate I) ......................................... 32 6.4: Dolphin Buckle late-4thC, Leic. http://finds.org.uk/images/wscott/medium/dscn6515.jpg ............ 32 6.5: Horsehead buckle 5thC, Lincs. Redrawn after Michael J. Cuddeford. (Laycock & Marshall 2005) http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/ceejays_site/images/hhb08.jpg (17 March 2012) ............................................ 33 iii Acknowledgements Dr. Neil Christie For his keen incisiveness and motivational skills in the supervision of this dissertation. Diana & David Sorrill For suggestions and support. Dr. Terry Hopkinson For being everything you would want in a personal tutor during this entire process. 1 Chapter One Introduction The departure of the Roman Empire from Britain was the start of, arguably, the most critical period of history for this island; yet it also one of the most mysterious and neglected. The importance of this transition period cannot be under-rated because the foundations of British democracy and, by extension, much of the rest of the world lie in this century. What attention this period does receive often leaves the limited historical and archaeological evidence rubbing shoulders uncomfortably with the nationalistic and cultural baggage of the best known of British legends, King Arthur. Traditionally the starting point for the narrative for this period has been based upon the Honorian Rescript of AD 410: “Honorius, having sent letters to the cities of Britain, counselling them to be watchful of their own security.” (Zosimus VI: 10) Britain could no longer depend on Rome for their protection from external threats (Faulkner 2000, 172). Then followed by the settlement of the Saxon and other Germanic groups in the east and south of what would become ‘England’. This narrative, however, has become increasingly unconvincing due to doubt cast upon it by recent archaeological work. Not only has no evidence yet been found in the archaeological record of any significant conflicts but also the increasing estimates of the population size of late-Roman Britain (Heather 2009, 268) make any invasion hypothesis increasingly untenable (Pryor 2004, 144). While evidence of settlement decline and population movement in North-Western Europe in the 5th century cannot be denied (Basalmans 2009, 324: Weale et al 2002, 1018) it must be questioned whether this movement was a settlement of Germanic interlopers into areas of sub-Roman Britain partially abandoned by the Romano-British population or an integration into existing settlements (Meier 2003, 49) In order to explain the durability of the ‘Invasion Hypothesis’, championed by writers like Härke over other explanations it is necessary to examine the contemporary and near 2 contemporary Christian sources from this period and assess their influence on later historical, archaeological and political thinking in regard to their impact on questions like ‘Celt versus Saxon’ (Härke 2003, 14: 2011, 10) and ‘Christian versus Pagan’ that form such an integral part of the history and legend of that period. This dissertation will look at the evidence for Germanic influences occurring in southeast Britain during the 5th century as a result of the settlement in Roman Britain of Germanic foederati recruited into the Roman army during the 4th century (Pattison 2008, 245) at the end of their enlistment period together with the possibility that, following the collapse of the Imperial apparatus, this Romano-Germanic population emerged to fill the resulting power vacuum at a local level in the more ‘Romanised’ populations of south and east of Britain acting as seed population centres attracting the mid-5th century Adventus Saxonum emigrating from the western European mainland to Britain. This dissertation will focus on the 5th century AD, targeting AD 450 as representing the pivotal transitional period in the area from which the case studies are drawn; the East Midlands region between Leicester and Lincoln. The reasons for choosing this region is that it is a key area within the ‘Romanised’ province of Britannia and the formation of the earlyAnglo-Saxon kingdoms in the 6th century containing both the provincial capital and Colonia of Lincoln and the Civitas of Leicester. It will also examine the evidence to assess what, if any, impact Saxon acculturation had on the rural landscape looking at a variety of sites across the region. In chapter two I will examine the historical sources before going on to look at modern arguments in chapter three. Chapters four and five will examine the rural and urban archaeology in the East Midland and then look at the material culture in chapter six before summing up the arguments in chapter seven. 3 Chapter Two Historical Sources This section will look at the representation of the 5 th Century in the historical texts. The chapter will be divided into two sections, the first dealing with the contemporary or nearcontemporary sources and the second examining the later chronicles and histories of the first millennium AD. Of the many 5th Century hagiographies I have only chosen that of Saint Germanus because there are so many that it would be impossible to cover them all with any reasonable depth. The following is by no means a complete list of the sources available but a selection of those most relevant to the topic at hand. Gildas’ De Excidio Britanniae, Zosimus’ Historia Nova, the Chronica Gallia, Constantius’ Vita Sancti Germani and the Vergilius Romanus “Unluckily, our chief witness to this process, and almost our only native one, is an irritating monk named Gildas” (Ashe 1971, 30) Probably the most important of the ancient sources for this period is the De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae attributed to Gildas Sapiens a Deacon of the Church who later seems to have joined a monastic community and risen to the rank of abbot. Estimates of when it was written vary between AD 486 and AD 546 although it is most likely to have been authored in the early-6th Century. While De Exidio Britanniae cannot be regarded as a historically reliable text (Esmonde-Cleary 1989, 167), being more an extended diatribe, a liber querelus, aimed at his contemporaries in both the temporal and spiritual landscape of early-6th Century Britain (Ashe 1971, 30); an extended parable paralleling the trials and tribulations of Old Testament Israel with the Britons of the 5th Century AD (Higham 1994, 26-29). So while it unwise to take Gildas’ writing at face value there is however a wealth of information beneath 2.1: Vergilius Romanus 4 the surface of his text which gives an insight into the interactions of the rulers of sub-Roman Britain and the ‘Saxon interlopers’. This subtext implies the survival of a Romano-British culture long after the withdrawal of the Imperial bureaucracy at the beginning of the 5 th Century and only being ‘forgotten’ at the time of Gildas writing De Excidio Britanniae. “For as well as the remembrance of the of such terrible desolation of the island, and also of the unexpected recovery of the same, remained in the minds of those who were eyewitnesses of the wonderful events of both, and in regard thereof, kings, public magistrates, and private persons, with priests and clergymen, did every one of them live orderly according to their several vocations. But when these had departed out of this world, and a new race succeeded, who were ignorant of this troublesome time, that not so much as a vestige or remembrance of these virtues remained among the above named orders of men.” (Gildas, 26) While the issue of dating does give a slight problem with assessing the cultural impact for the target year of AD 450 when looked at in relationship to the Chronica Gallia of AD 452 which states that in AD441: “Britanniae usque ad hoc tempus variis cladibus eventibusque latae in dicionem Saxonum rediguntur.” “The Britons, which to this time had suffered from various disasters and misfortunes, are reduced to the power of the Saxons.” (Chronica Gallia a CCCCLII, (AD 441)) But in the Chronica Gallia of AD511 the entry for this year is limited to: “Britanniae a Romanis amissae in dicionem Saxonum cedunt” “The Britons, lost to the Romans, yield to the power of the Saxons” (Chronica Gallia a DXI, (AD 440)) 5 There are still some issues over the accuracy of the dating in both the Chronica Gallia (Muhlberger 1983, 23-33: Jones & Casey 1988: 367-398: Burgess 1990, 185-195) the entries from both chronicles are generally accepted as being fairly accurate despite the only surviving copy being a Carolingian reproduction. This in turn would indicate that by the mid-5th Century there was a significant ‘Saxon’ 2.2: Vergilius Romanus cultural and political presence operating in sub-Roman Britain. Dating aside however the key question lies in the words used in the chronicle ‘rediguntur’ and ‘cedunt’, ‘reduced to’ and ‘yielded to’, which have the possibility of entirely different interpretations of either coming under the rule of the ‘invading’ Saxon or, lacking the Imperial resources, being reduced to a parity with the Saxons and it is this second interpretation that would seem to fit Gildas’ narrative more closely especially when documents attributed to British authorship such as the Vergilius Romanus (Dark 2000, 36) show pictorial representations [Figures 2.1 – 2.6] dating from the 5th or early-6th Century of a ‘Romanesque’ nature (including an apparent awareness of the larger Roman world) although it must be noted that there is a question of whether Gildas’ view of what is Roman in the early-6th Century is distorted by the appropriation of Imperial styles and legacy by the continental Christian Church, in much the same way as early Imperial Rome co-opted religion into the Imperial power structures to give additional legitimacy to the regime The Vita Sancti Germani of Constantius of Lyon, written in the late-5th Century, seems to support the view of a continuing ‘Romanism’ in sub-Roman Britain. Written very much in the hagiographical tradition of the Catholic Church it never the less contains some intriguing clues as to the structure of Britain in the early-5th Century. 2.3: Vergilius Romanus 6 Concerned more with the suppression of Pelagianism the Vita describes a society that was still, heresy aside, essentially Christian in structure and while independent from the secular rule of Rome but still apparently accepting spiritual leadership. “Thus this most wealthy island, with the defeat of both its spiritual and its human foes, was rendered secure in every sense. And now, to the great grief of the whole country, those who had won the victories over both Pelagians and Saxons made preparations for their return.” (Constantius, 18) This submission is underlined in a brief entry in Prosper of Aquitaine’s Contra Collatorum describing the exile from Britain of Pelagian heretics by Pope Celestine: “Since he shut out from that remote place in the Ocean some enemies of grace who had seized upon the soil of their birth-place” (Prosper, 21) The Historia Nova written by Zosimos another source which, like Gildas, it a composite work drawing from different sources but with a more anti-Christian bias to it. Mainly concentrated on the troubles of the continental provinces the Historia Nova references the upheavals in early-5th Century Britain painting a different picture of the Romano-British than that presented by Gildas The Britons therefore took up arms and, braving the danger on their own behalf, freed their cities from the barbarian threat… the barbarians from beyond the Rhine overran everything at will and reduced the inhabitants of the British Island and some of the peoples in Gaul to the necessity of rebelling from the Roman empire… Now the defection of Britain and the Celtic peoples took place during Constantine’s tyranny, the barbarians having mounted their attacks owing to the carelessness in administration. (Zosimus, VI 5.2 – 5.6) From Zosimus we also find the clearest reference to the Honorian Rescript believed to be the instrument by which Roman rule ended in Britain. Zosimus’ writing has also been linked to the idea of a common uprising, the Bacaudae, occurring in Gaul and Britain against the Roman administrative elite (Thompson 1956: 163-167) as a direct result of misadministration as a result of the conflict between Constantine III and Honorius. The evidence for this is, however, not overwhelming and while there is a measurable decline in the elite infrastructures of Roman Britain (Heather 2009: 294) the reference in the later chronicles to the British elites appealing to Aetius for aid has been thought mitigate against any kind of 7 ‘class war’ at this time. Even taking that into account the writing of both Gildas and Zosimus suggest the view of a mixed political and cultural landscape that by AD 450 had changed from a Romano-British mainly Christianised urbano-centric late-Imperial province into a Germano-British patchwork outside the contracting boundaries of the Roman Empire and its state mandated religion. 2.4: Vergilius Romanus Bede’s ‘Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum’, Nennius’ ‘Historia Brittonum’ and ‘The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles’. "The influence of the clergy, in an age of superstition, might be usefully employed to assert the rights of mankind; but so intimate is the connection between the throne and the altar, that the banner of the church has very seldom been seen on the side of the people" (Gibbon 1998: 53) The ‘Venerable Bede’ is often credited with being the first English historian. His Historia Ecclesiatica Gentis Anglorum (History of the English Church and People) is regarded as being a much more reliable work of scholarship than Gildas’ De Excidio despite drawing large sections from that work when covering 5 th Century Britain. The difference between the two authors is that while Gildas is writing a political and ecclesiastical polemic to his contemporaries Bede’s writing pares away much of the hyperbole to present a much more neutral historical framework; this ‘toning down’ is especially noticeable in the rehabilitation of the Saxons by Bede from the strong intemperate language of De Excidio (Gildas, 23) (Bede, 15). Of course Historia Eccesiatica is not free of its own biases; Bede is writing for educated Anglo-Saxon elites of whom many claimed descent from the Saxon chiefs that Gildas excoriates, so there an element in his writing which is taking care not to upset the royal and noble patronage of the monastic establishment he was a part of. It is this balance 8 between the Church, the Anglo-Saxon hegemony and monastic scholasticism that differentiates Bede from the collection of writings composed by ‘Nennius’ in his Historia Brittonum. Historia Brittonum is believed to have been constructed from various textual sources by Nennius (although this name is a matter of dispute (Pryor 2004, 24)) in the early-9th Century at the court of King Merfyn of Gwynedd. While it draws on many of the same sources used by Bede, along with Welsh 2.5: Vergilius Romanus poetic and story cycles (Ashe 1968 p45), it is a much more ‘politicised’ document underlining a dominant British claim to the island over the Saxons as the author makes clear: “But I bore about with me an inward wound, and I was indignant, that the name of my own people, formerly famous and distinguished, should sink into oblivion, and like smoke be dissipated. But since, however, I had rather myself be the historian of the Britons than nobody… But I have got together all that I could find as well from the annals of the Romans as from the chronicles of the sacred fathers, Hieronymus, Eusebius, Isidorus, Prosper, and from the annals of the Scots and Saxons, and from our ancient traditions.” (Nennius, prologue) Historia Brittonum suffers many of the same flaws of De Exicidio with the history secondary to the ‘proto-nationalist’ propaganda message just as it is in the latter with regard to ‘Christianist’ propaganda exaggerating the Christo-centricity of many of the surviving records against the ‘Saxon’ incomers (Gibbon 1998: 53). The style of the text is heavily influenced by the hagiographical traditions of the 7th/8th Century but also has an element of myth building about it drawing upon Welsh oral traditions from such epics as the Gododdin (James 2010, 30) to build the picture of ‘King Arthur’. The result of this is that Historica Brittonum must be considered as much a story as history (Brynjulfson 1996, 3). 9 Finally we shall look at The AngloSaxon Chronicle. Of the seven source documents for this text the earliest, the Parker Chronicle can be tentatively dated to the late9th/early-10th Century (Savage 1982, 11). The manuscripts appear to be an attempt to unify regional chronicles into one document with the genealogies of various Saxon kingdoms included within it, such as the Mercian Chronicle material placed within the Abingdon and Worcester versions of The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. 2.6: Vergilius Romanus Of note is the Northern Rescension in the latter which includes elements from Bede’s Historia Eccesiatica (Higham 1992, 156). The lack of reference to any source chronicles and the inclusion of the Bede mean that the reliability of The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles is, at best, debatable and with the earlier more concise Bede to draw from it is best not to use them when considering the 5 th Century. Conclusion While historical sources may provide useful clues to the state of post-Roman Britain they do have to be used carefully. Unlike modern scholarship there is no system of referencing of sources except in a very ad hoc manner. In this case the first set of sources whose writers were either alive at the time or writing within living memory can provide valuable data of a first-hand nature while the second set writing a long time after the events may be prone to ‘fantastical’ addition. Equally though they may also have been able to access other sources of material not available to the earlier writers and provide a synthesis of the texts that offers insight into the movements making history. 10 Chapter Three Modern Interpretations The interpretations of the ancient sources coloured much of the debates of the 19th and 20th Century onwards but with the developments of new methods in archaeology it soon became clear that the historical evidence was not giving a clear picture of the 5 th Century. The argument of a province ‘submerged by an Anglo-Saxon current which swept away the Romano-British’ (James 2001, 30) was disputed with theories of the acculturation of the native Britons to a ‘Germanic’ lifestyle (Reece 1980, 90). This has led to the development of studies relating to the period taking on a distinctly bi-polar nature with the theories of archaeologists and historians set on a sliding scale between migrationist and acculturationist arguments. The problem lies in the conflicting evidence. Why does the Romano-British way of life appear to collapse? If it does then how come it does so quickly especially when the durability of many aspects of pre-Roman Iron Age Briton is considered? The barbarian raids of the first decades of the 5th Century have been held up as ‘the beginning of the end’ of Roman Britain: “The Roman Army in Britain had, though, one last act to perform. However degraded, it remained all that stood between the Romano-British ruling class and the deluge … across the ice there poured a vast horde of Alans, Suebi and Vandals. The Frankish federate forces opposing them were swept away, and the horde passed into and through Roman Gaul… Britain was cut off.” (Faulkener 2000: 172) This view is challenged by other historians such as Kulikowski (2000, 325) who see a more complicated situation of the initial barbarian raids being blunted by Constantine III’s intervention but then being used as part of the internecine squabbles between the Imperial factions. The raising in Britain of three ‘emperors’ culminating in the ‘usurpation’ of Constantine III is suggested by Matthews (1975, 308) as an attempt to stabilise the situation in Gaul and maintain the important imperial connection to Rome instigated by the RomanoBritish elite in order to preserve the economy of late-Roman Britain (Heather 2009, 294). With the elevation and deposition of Marcus and Gratian prior to Constantine III taking 11 action it could be suggested that rather than being yet another ‘power grab’ for the Western Empire (contra: Faulkner 2000, 173) it was a spur to action so, effectively, Constantine III wasn’t drawing troops away from Britain but defending its vital interests at the instigation of its elites (Kulikowski 2000, 333). The success of Constantine III, followed by the usual pattern of ‘imperial ambition’ beyond the remit of his elevation can be used to explain the risings, in Gaul and Britain, and the expulsion of the Roman administrative elite (Thompson 1956, 166). This is one of the paradoxes of sub-Roman Britain though because while the administration might have been expelled there is still evidence of organisation along Roman lines (Mummy 2002, 8) albeit not using Roman nomenclature (Constantius, 15) which survives up to the ‘gemitus Britannorum’ (Gildas 20) with its implication that Britons still considered themselves partially under the care of Rome particularly in relation to Christianity (Contra: Painter 1971, 162). This picture is complicated by the apparent dominance in the Roman villas of pagan over Christian symbologies (Dark 2004, 286) which seem at odds with the contemporary records discussed above. What do these arguments mean for Britain in AD 450? Early-5th Century Gaul is a melting pot of different ‘cultural’ identities interacting in a confused political framework. There are no clear groupings with ‘native’ and ‘barbarian’ forces being hired by all factions in the on-going turmoil and yet Roman Gaul survives (Ward-Perkins 2000, 518) amid the well documented large scale incursions and civil strife while, according to the traditional view, a more culturally homogenous Britain collapses within a few years as a result of the landing of a few boatloads of Saxons (Reece 1980, 84). There is little argument that migration is a factor in the demographics of sub-Roman Britain it is the level and timing of the migration that is the issue. Some believe that the process was gradual stretching back into the Iron Age as part of wider trade and cultural interactions within north-west Europe (Pattison 2008, 2424-5) especially with regard to the late-Roman Empire and the recruitment of Germanic peoples into the military and their ‘settlement’ into Romano-British communities (Dark 2000, 58-9). This interpretation is disputed however by other writers who have returned to the model of 5 th Century migration and racial/cultural ‘apartheid’ in post Roman Britain (Thomas et al 2006, 2653-6) basing 12 their theories on archaeo-genetic research on the Y-chromosome of the modern British (Weale et al 2002, 1012) which shows a sharp geographical difference between populations of ‘British’ and ‘Saxon’ ancestry and an interpretation on the 7 th Century ‘Laws of Ine’ that relies on a significant immigrant population of ‘late-coming’ Saxons (Härke 2011, 5) estimating the potential figures at: “According to his [Gebuhr] figures, the migration of 250,000 people from Denmark to East Anglia would require no more than 38 years, using 20 boats in a continuous transport operation during a sailing season from May to August. These calculations show that a large scale Anglo-Saxon migration would have been feasible, particularly if the time-scale is taken into consideration.” (Ibid, 9) As feasible as these figures may be on paper the argument against them lies in the lack of evidence in south-east Britain of such an influx of Saxons happening (Higham 1992, 225) with an apparently undisturbed continuity of settlement (Pryor 2005, 82) as well as the survival of Christian centres like St Albans (Dark 2000, 82). As for the Y-chromosomal evidence it has to be noted that the similarities between North-Western European haplogroups make these figures difficult to differentiate at best (especially when Medieval Nordic and Norman factors are added) and that other studies (Capelli 2003, 983) show a less sharp divide in genetic markers across the Britain indicating a more heterogeneous community. This situation is complicated by the suggestion by some researchers that the genetic divide was a product of colonisation in the Mesolithic of the east/west littoral zones of Britain, the west from the Iberian Peninsula and east from Central Europe and the suggestion that Iron Age Britons owed as much of their genetic heritage to ‘Germanic’ stock as they did to ‘Celtic’ stock (Oppenheimer 2007, 312, 232). There have been attempts to define a set of criteria for burial differentiating between Saxon and British (O’Brian 1999, 60) by either orientation or grave goods or suggested that ‘Saxon’ immigrants could be identified by weapons in burials (Härke 1997, 3) but even then problems of acculturation and identification cloud the issue (Härke 2007, 5); the presence of items in a grave identified as ‘Anglo-Saxon’ cannot necessarily be taken as having belonged to a ‘Saxon’ (Esmonde- 13 Cleary 1989, 203) but may be part of acculturation processes with ‘new’ material culture replacing the ‘old’(Higham 1992, 12). The re-use of Bronze and Iron-Age burial sites like Cossington can be interpreted either as a way of securing land right or as a continuity of settlement despite changing styles and patterns. The evidence would suggest a middle path between the polarities of Pryor and Härke with smaller 5th Century Saxon migration interacting with a culture familiar with Germanic mercenaries and filling the power vacuum left in the south-east of Britain as the re-emergence of the British kingdoms in the north and west was doing the same; Gildas’ ‘Tyrants’(Higham 1994, 180), created by the absence of Roman administration (Johnson 1980, 175) which also offers an explanation to the diverging pathways of Britain and Gaul in the 5 th Century. 14 Chapter Four Rural Living We shall now turn our attention to rural settlements in the East Midlands and the transitional patterns shown with a brief summary of the sites then a discussion of what the settlement placement indicates. Cossington, Leicestershire Eleven kilometres north of Leicester is Cossington. The area around Cossington shows evidence of prehistoric, Roman and Anglo-Saxon settlement with a complex of three Bronze Age round barrows, two constructed in close proximity with the third set half a kilometre to the North West. For the purposes of this dissertation I will only be considering that third barrow and the closely associated archaeological features [figure 4.1: Barrow Three, Cossington. Anglo-Saxon phase. 4.1]. Barrow Three is significant because of the continuance of use throughout its history. The deposition of Iron Age and Roman ceramics into the fabric of the mound and the re-use in the Anglo-Saxon period with up to eight inhumations with grave goods dated to the 6th – 7th Century shows a continued veneration of the barrow [figure 4.1]. This is supported by the nearby presence of an Iron Age roundhouse and an Anglo-Saxon ‘Sunken Featured Building’ (SFB) [figure 4.2]. The poor bone preservation conditions make it difficult to assess 4.2: Anglo-Saxon SFB and Iron-Age features, Cossington the population living, and being 15 buried there, but the remnants of the grave goods show strong cultural patterns underlining the importance of the barrow itself as the focus of activity. The Anglo-Saxon burials are furnished weapon burials indicative of pagan practices which are mirrored in other local rural sites such as Wanlip (Thomas 2008, 124). Empingham, Rutland Situated in the Gwash Valley next to Rutland Water is the Empingham complex of sites. Of the five sites this dissertation will look at Empingham Roman (EPR), Empingham North (EPN), Empingham I Anglo-Saxon Cemetery (EPS) and Empingham West (EPW) [figure 4.3]. 4.3: Empingham site complex 16 EPR (Cooper 2000, 4-16) is believed to be a Roman farmstead with occupation stretching back into the Neolithic [figure 4.4]. Roman activity appears to be limited in the 1st and 2nd Centuries AD and it is in the mid-3rd Century an ‘aisled barn’ is constructed on the site with developments continuing to the late-4th Century. Associated with the site to the north was an iron working complex which seems to have gone out of use sometime in the 4th Century. Some Anglo-Saxon pottery was found on the site which was stratographically insecure. Also found on the site were a cluster of five burials, of which four are difficult to date due to the rescue conditions under which the excavation was taking place, the fifth was a 4.4: Empingham Roman (EPR) plan 17 north-south orientated female and child interred in a limestone coffin with two ‘Lower Nene Valley’ ceramic vessels (ibid, 14). Near to EPR and connected by a trackway is EPS (Liddle et al 2000 23-45), an earlyAnglo-Saxon settlement with associated cemetery. The Anglo-Saxon settlement is constructed within an existing Roman enclosure (ibid, 24) and contains at least three SFB’s believed to be eastern limit of a larger settlement extending along the trackway to EPR. The excavation of an area of intense burning together with evidence of hammer scale would indicate that metal working activity was being undertaken. Three early-Anglo-Saxon burials are located within building one, an adult female, an adolescent male and a prepubescent child. The child is the only burial with goods: a knife of a type commonly associated with the early-6th Century (Riddler et al 2006, 14) and some iron objects, possibly including keys. In total there are 14 graves associated with EPS mainly from the early-6th Century eleven graves with goods and three without. 4.5: Empingham I Anglo-Saxon Cemetery (EPS) plan EPN (Cooper 2000, 17-22) is the site of an aisled house dating from the mid-4th Century. While some of the finds indicate there may have been an earlier settlement this was not confirmed by excavation at the time. Two burial areas to the south-west (five burials) and east (seven burials) appear to be of 4th Century in origin with the intercutting occurring in the south-western group indicative of multi-generational burial (ibid, 19-20) One of the 18 burials (male 45+) shared both the alignment and the style of burial, sarcophagus and grave goods, with that of the female and child at EPR. The last of the Empingham sites we shall look at is EPW (ibid, 4649). About 500m north-west of EPR it was occupied in two phases, an Iron Age phase and an early-Anglo-Saxon phase. this 4.6: Empingham North (EPN) plan There is some evidence that site remained in occupation through the Roman period as the evidence from nearby sites does indicate that continuous habitation was likely (ibid p48). The early-Anglo-Saxon phase contains two potential SFB’s containing ceramics dating from the late-5th/early-6th Century and was possibly part of a larger Anglo-Saxon settlement linked to the cemetery at Empingham II making EPW the earliest example of ‘Anglo-Saxon’ settlement in the Empingham complex 4.7: Empingham West (EPW) plan 19 Empingham II – Anglo-Saxon Cemetery The excavation of the cemetery at Empingham II found 153 individuals in 135 inhumation burials with one cremation burial. The orientation of the burials would indicate that the population was pagan with a dating sequence running from the mid-5th Century into the 6th and 7th. The grave goods found with the burials appear to be of local manufacture (Timby 1996, 97) although the group of late-5th to early-6th Century spearheads are rare for this area of a form usually found in the Wessex area (Harke 1996, 67). The ceramic assemblage indicates local fabrication with the exception of one fabric type that appears to be sourced from the Montsorrel area (Williams 1996, 69) possibly as part of the early-AngloSaxon ‘Charnwood Ware’ industry (Henderson 2000, 158) Great Easton, Leicestershire The area of Great Easton has traces of occupation running from the Neolithic to the present day. There is evidence of a villa located to the south of the village and to the north discoveries have been made of iron slag and ceramics suggesting some kind of industrial metal production. The discovery of early-Anglo-Saxon ceramics indicate a continuity of settlement during through the 5th Century AD especially given secure context and condition in which the early-Anglo-Saxon sherds were found along with Roman ceramics (Priest & Cooper 2004, 37) [figures 4.8 – 4.10]. 4.8: Great Easton Roman phase ceramic finds during 2004 excavations 20 4.9: Great Easton Saxon phase ceramic finds during 2004 excavations 4.10: Great Eston ceramic finds, all phases, prior to 2004 excavations Medbourne, Leicestershire Situated just under one kilometre to the north-west of Medbourne are the remains of a Roman ‘Small Town’ with three associated villas and a farmstead. On a junction with the ‘Gartree Road’, Corieltauvorum linking Ratae with Camulodunum, and another highway to the north of Britain it is a larger example of a rural town from the Roman period. Reaching its height during the 2nd Century AD and declining into the 4th Century it still shows activity into the Anglo-Saxon period. The town layout during the Roman period is mainly north of the 4.11: Excavation of east-west oriented, supine burials at proposed Christian cemetery in Medbourne. 21 road with a façade of buildings along the southern side. The presence of a late-4th Century cemetery on the eastern limit of the town suggests a significant Christian presence in the town. The ceramic evidence indicates Anglo-Saxon occupancy in the 5th Century in the three villa sites and to the south of the ‘Romano-British’ cemetery and the main settlement at (Liddle 2000, 1-2) with possible use of rubble from the demolition of Roman buildings used in Anglo-Saxon features such as the ‘droveway’. There is believed to be an ‘Anglo-Saxon’ cemetery to the East of the Anglo-Saxon settlement. The orientation of the Anglo-Saxon features are at a 45o's to the Roman features suggesting a change in the emphasis of town life away from the Gartree Road. South Cliff Farm, Lincolnshire. Located four kilometres to the north of Lincoln, South Cliff Farm sits on the Lincoln Edge. The archaeological evidence shows occupation from the Neolithic to modern times with strong Roman activity shown by local villas and due to proximity to Lindum Colonia. The site consists of a number of features, a Bronze Age round barrow, a Roman enclosure and an early-Anglo-Saxon cemetery. The placement of the cemetery is believed to have conformed to a Roman field boundary as part of the settlement based on a former Romano-British estate. It is the closest Anglo-Saxon inhumation cemetery to Lincoln from that period (Wessex Archaeology 2004, 25). The cremation and cemetery inhumation includes burials dating from the 5th Century and extending into the 6th. It is believed that settlement of foederati was occurring in this area from the 4th Century (ibid, 24). The grave goods found with the inhumations vary in quantity from one ceramic vessel to a richer female burial with copper clasps from her garments believed to be a fashion imported from Scandinavian regions in the late-5th Century (ibid, 20, 4.12: ‘High status’ female burial South Cliffe Farm, Lincs. 22 25). Discussion Any discussion of rural settlement in the 5th Century runs into the problem of identifying the people living on the land especially as much of the information is based on cemetery excavation (Christie 2004, 4). Throughout history the gap between ‘rich’ and ‘poor’ has been widest in rural settings (Faulkener 2000, 137). The rural elites in villas, with access to wider markets whose existence was facilitated by connections to the urban centres theses elites had largely withdrawn from in the 4th Century (Esmonde-Cleary 1989, 110), still utilised the pool of skills and goods the late-Imperial structures allowed. The decline in the villa estates and the ‘squatter’ phenomenon (Dark 2004, 289) indicates the presence of a ‘non-elite’ element working these estates which did not ‘disappear’ in the 5th Century so what happened to cause such a change in rural living? While much of late-Roman archaeology has focused on the excavation of villas at the expense of ‘farmstead’ sites it is on those non-elite sites that the transition was happening. Romanisation had always lain lightly on the non-elite rural population and while they adapted to the various technological improvements in agriculture and material culture introduced during the Empire that opened up marginal land to farming it is questionable how ‘Roman’ they became. The development of the Empingham complex shows a progression through the Iron Age roundhouses at EPW to a semi-high status villa with associated out buildings and settlement involved in industrial activity into the 6 th Century, all within the space of just over one kilometre square. There is no cataclysmic invasion event apparent in the archaeological record, just a steady evolution of a country estate. In his report on Empingham Cooper underlines (2000, 26) the phenomenon of ‘settlement shift’ (Wandersiedlung) as being relevant to the evolution of this complex settlement. This same pattern of evolution is apparent in Medbourne where the Anglo-Saxon settlement appears on the southern edge of the existing town but still adjacent to the road that is the focus of the settlement. The evidence of Christianity at Medbourne is a key factor in assessing the site because traditional narratives from the historical sources indicate Christians at odds with Pagans yet this settlement seems to show that cohabitation was possible between the two groups. The problems lies in the terminology of ‘Romano-British’ and ‘Anglo-Saxon’ when describing the cemeteries because if there was a continuous occupation at the sites described then the question that must be asked is: where are the ‘Romano-British’ population being interred? 23 The evidence of mixed cremations and inhumations at South Cliff would indicate that, at least in rural settings, the cohabitation and fusion in life there also applied to the treatment of death (O’Brien 1999, 94). The two ‘high status’ burials at EPN and EPR which, by the evidence of the ‘Lower Nene Valley’ ceramics (Tyers 1996, 173), date from either the late-4th or early-5th Century share an orientation commonly associated with Southern Germanic rites (Timby 1996, 16). The example of Cossington would indicate that this pattern occurred in either one of two possible interpretations; either the Romano-British inhabitants adopted the SFB’s associated with the Anglo-Saxon occupation while continuing to use the barrow as a focus for ritual activities or the newly incoming Anglo-Saxons were adopting the ritual areas used by their Romano-British predecessors. The Sunken Feature Building is considered a key piece of diagnostic evidence for Anglo-Saxon settlement and has been found on both sides of the North Sea (Meier 2003, 42, 44) with continental examples dating from AD 300. Examples excavated at West Heslerton (Powlesland 2012) and Mucking (Pryor 2004, 151) dated to the mid/late-4th Century. While Mucking may be due to the stationing of Germanic foederati that reasoning cannot be applied to West Heslerton. There is also the factor of the ‘aisled halls’ that appear on Anglo-Saxon sites in the West Midlands bear a striking similarity to the footprint of the structures at EPR and EPN having no real parallel in terms of continental construction (Arnold 1988, 34) suggesting that innovation in rural settlements flowed both ways. On the archaeological evidence it is hard to support any large-scale population replacement theory, especially in rural areas as there are just too many overlaps in the archaeological record. This is re-enforced by the lack of substantial evidence for the destruction of these settlements so while there is evidence for decline from the late-4th century onwards it seems largely confined to the elites of Romano-British life with the rural pagani carrying on everyday life and adapting to new circumstances, technologies, culture and neighbours. 24 Chapter Five Urban Living In this chapter we shall look at the two urban settlements of Ratae Corieltauvorum and Lindum Colonia first giving a description of the towns and the relevant archaeology of the 4th and 5th centuries and then discussing the implications of the Late to sub-Roman transition. Ratae Corieltauvorum (Leicester) Ratae Corieltauvorum was the Civitas capitol of the Corieltauvi, an Iron Age federation of tribes occupying parts of Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire and Rutland areas. Believed to be one of the two main administrative centres of the Corieltauvi there was an initial Roman military settlement alongside the civilian moving to civilian administration in the late-1st Century AD with significant civic works in the 2nd Century AD [figure 5.1]. The archaeology shows a prosperous town to the late-4th Century AD (Kenyon 1948, 36) when a fire destroyed the forum, basilica and market (Kipling 2006, 1). Reconstruction during the final years of Roman occupation and the sub-Roman period appears to be 5.1: Roman Leicester limited (Hebditch et al 1973, 42) indicating a period of severe decline although the archaeology does show evidence of occupation into the 5th Century (Wacher 1974, 362) and the development of ‘black earth’ 25 suggesting some intramural agricultural undertaken. evidence activity being There is also of metalworking waste and a furnace being found in the macellum (market place) and the lateRoman building in Vine Street (with hammerscale and other indications of crafting 5.2: SFB post holes from Bonners Lane, Leics. such as glass-working (Rodgers 2011, 138). Excavations within the town show late-4th Century activity in Causeway Lane (Connor & Buckley 1999, 59-60) and Bonners Lane (Finn 2004, 14-15). The evidence is sparse but indicates the inhabitation and renovation of earlier buildings with levels of commercial activity being undertaken as shown by the presence of a possible shop veranda from the Bonners Lane excavation (ibid, 15) indicating market activity outside the walls of the Civitas. On the same plot as the shop veranda was a ‘Sunken Feature Buildings’ (SFB) [figure 5.2] of atypically large size in which was found a mixture of both late-Roman and early-Saxon pottery sherds. Another SFB was discovered 30m from this feature in 1997 (Gossip 1998, 159-160) with another at the Richmond Road excavations (Morris 2010) which, when taken together, could indicate an extra-mural Anglo-Saxon settlement. SFB’s have also been located within the civitas itself with two examples found over the remains of the Roman macellum at Highcross Street (ULAS 2006) along with features and artefacts found at the Causeway Lane (Connor & Buckley 1999, 61) and Freeschool Lane excavations (Speed 2005, 19, 32) indicative of late-5th and 6th occupation. Century Anglo-Saxon Near the Bonners Lane 5.3: Newarke Street Roman cemetery 26 site on Newarke Street [figure 5.3] are the remains of a late-4th Century cemetery (Cooper 1996). The early/mid-Roman suburb that occupied the area seems to have been abandoned when the town defences were being upgraded during the 4th Century (Wacher 1974, 362). Thirty-nine graves were excavated; orientated west- east with a mixture of ages and sexes and buried in a supine position having minimal grave-goods with evidence of coffins and stone lined graves in many cases (ibid 1996, 12-19). When assessed using the relative weighting designed by Watts (1991, 38-98: Cooper 1996, 26-27) the results indicated the cemetery was Christian. The presence of Christianity within the civitas would be consistent with urban life in late-Roman Britain and attempts have been made to locate a suitable candidate for a church (Courtney 1998, 116). The most likely location being the site currently occupied by the late-Saxon church of St Nicholas in the area between the Roman baths and the forum on the site of the palaestra where there could be an early church incorporating the Jewry Wall. According to Kenyon (1948, 37) this may be the reason the wall survived quarrying activity that occurred across many civic structures in later periods. At another civitas, Wroxeter, elements of the palaestra have been included in a proposed 5th century church (Ottaway 1992, 112). Lindum Colonia (Lincoln) Lindum Colonia was established initially as a Roman legionary fortress around AD 65. It was transformed into a Colonia during Domitian’s Principate around AD 80 and became the provincial capital of Flavia Caesariensis in the early-3rd Century (Wacher 1975, 132). During the early-4th Century the town prospered but rapidly declined during the later 4th Century with signs of reduced occupation into the 5th Century and beyond. two The city is divided into sections, the Upper City containing the Forum and Basilica and the Lower City which abuts 5.4: Roman Lincoln onto the Witham and seems to be 27 the focus for the economic activity in the settlement [figure 5.4]. Lindum presents a challenge to the archaeologist; for all its importance as a Colonia and provincial capital there is a relative lack of systematic archaeological excavation in comparison to other Roman centres. This is unfortunate due to the unique circumstances of late and sub-Roman Lindum and the subsequent foundation of the ‘early-Anglo-Saxon’ kingdom of Lindsey (Green 2008, 1-43). One of the features of the archaeology of Lindum is the paucity of early-Anglo-Saxon finds within the city. The results from one possible site of an early-Anglo-Saxon presence, St Peter’s, (Heritage Connect Lincoln 2010: Vince 2003, 154-5) in the Lower City are unfortunately ambiguous as it is not clear whether the burials are pagan or Christian and the dating is uncertain possibly relating to the late-7th Century Christian ‘revival’ in Lincoln. Accordingly the area has been targeted for as important for further work (Vince 2006, 172). Traces of early-Anglo-Saxon pottery in the Lower City are mainly found in the Flaxengate and waterfront areas (Jones 2003, 129) while other zones such as Hungate show little trace of these ceramics despite abundant evidence of late-4th Century Romano-British remains (Vince 2003, 152). The retrenchment of the city is also shown in the decline in market activity in the suburbs and the development of industrial processes like metalworking within the walls at Hungate, West parade and Flaxengate (Jones 2003, 134-5) with areas of ‘black earth’ indicating intramural agricultural activity. The Upper City, or Principia, contains even less evidence of earlyAnglo-Saxon with just a handful of sherds of early-Anglo-Saxon ceramics discovered. The main area of interest in the Upper City, when considering the subRoman development of the settlement, is in the forum and in the conflicting interpretations of the church of St Paul-inthe-Bail [figure 5.5]. The presence of intramural burials, probably Christian, and the of attendance of the Bishop of Lindum, Adelphius, at the Council of Arles in AD 314 attests to the presence of 5.5: St Paul-in-the-Bail, Site of Roman Forum and the two early Christian churches. 28 Christianity and Christian authority in the city which could be a factor in the developments in Lindum during the sub-Roman period. The first interpretation was that the remains of the structure represent a church built as part of the 7 th Century ‘conversion period’ church (Sawyer 1998, 226-8), the second interpretation is of a 4 th and 5th Century church surviving the end of Roman Britain (Jones 2003, 137). As a second building ‘cuts’ into the first church (Steane 2006, 192) which bears a stratigraphical relationship to the ‘Bailgate Wall’ (Jones & Gilmour 1980, 71) along with the inhumations giving a range of C14 dates that would place the earliest burials towards the 5th Century (possibly as early as the 4th Century) (ibid, 16061) and subsequent burials into the middle Anglo-Saxon period (Steane 2006, 286) the archaeological evidence suggests that Jones’ interpretation is more likely. The decline of Lindum in the late-4th Century is possibly due to being a victim of its own success. The elevation to provincial capital leaving it vulnerable to the internal conflicts of the late Empire he revolts of the ‘British Emperors’ drawing military and elite administrative personnel from the town which seems to be reflected in the rise and fall of ‘high status’ townhouses within Lindum during the 4th Century (Wacher 1975, 142, 149 Discussion Ratae Corieltauvorum and Lindum Colonia, while having different roles in Roman Britain, show similarities in their declines. Both have a last prosperous period at the beginning of the 4th Century with improved defences and signs of construction within those defences. This urban decline in late-4th Roman Britain has been attributed to a number of factors; the ‘barbarica conspiratio’ of AD 367, the late-4th/early-5th Century civil strife within the Roman Empire, the permanent settlement in the early-5th Century of Vandals, Burgundians, Huns and Goths and the secession, or cutting loose, of Britain in AD 410. What we see in the archaeological record is not the destruction of the two towns more a withering and contraction following the withdrawal of the Roman administration. With the loss of wider Imperial connections the cities seem to have lost a major part of their raison d’etre as part of the Imperial distribution network for goods, money and manpower. The evidence from Ratae and Lindum shows the cities were turning over areas inside their defences for agricultural and industrial purposes, like the small scale industrial processes in the east range of the forum at Lindum (Steane 2006, 56-7), which indicates an attempt to realign themselves within the changed trade networks of sub-Roman Britain after the collapse 29 of the Roman system. It may be that these industries were engaged in the cannibalisation of the towns themselves by stripping valuable iron, lead and glass to be recast for trading purposes. The Anglo-Saxon input into the sub-Roman cityscape appears to be limited with settlement restricted to the peripheral regions at Ratae with not even that at Lindum. There seems to be a rump population clinging to a sense of Romanitas concentrated within the two cities distinct from the rural hinterlands where the populations show more evidence of integration. The critical thing about cities is that they consume not only resources but also people and for people to be drawn to the city there has to be some attracting feature outweighing the risks. The end of Roman rule seems to have upset this equilibrium which would explain why, when rural populations seem much more stable, the urban centres suffered such dramatic population loss during the 5th Century. A factor in this equation could be Christianity, with a more traditional Imperial form of Christianity (Thomas 1981, 137) being city-based and more doctrinaire with regard to paganism than the rural church. This urban church, comprising the high ecclesiasts, is still connected to the international Christian scene, attending councils on the continent and adopting Roman Imperial styles and duties (Jones 2003, 137) (along the same lines as Saint Ambrose of Milan). These are possibly the “The teachers of perverse doctrine…” (Constantius, 14) of the Vita Sancta Germani and it is this urban Christianity that disappears as the city economies collapse rather than the more elusive rural Christianity. 30 Chapter Six Material Culture The problem with assessing the material culture of the 5 th Century is that it is not uniform and there is not much to find. This is exacerbated by the volume of material culture from the Roman period; for instance the ceramic finds from a mid/late-Roman site will often be measured in kilograms while the sub-Roman will be measured in individual sherds. In the Bonners Lane excavation 32.593kgs of ceramic finds was taken from phases 2 – 6 while just 436gr of early-Saxon ceramic was taken from phase 7 (Finn 2004, 67, 84). This overload of evidence of evidence can ‘mask’ the smaller scale ‘petty’ craft activities making it easy to overlook anomalous fabrics and styles amid the ‘noise’ of the mass market assemblages. There are two ways this can be looked at: firstly it can be seen as indicating the material poverty of the sub-Roman population following the collapse of Roman industrial infrastructure (Faulkener 2004, 10) or it could be seen as a potential survival of ‘Roman’ material culture into the sub-Roman period (Dark 2000, 227). There are problems with both these models. In the first case the ‘fast collapse’ model leaves the question of what did the sub-Roman British population use to ‘fill the gap’ between the Roman and Anglo-Saxon cultural packages given the increasing estimates of population and the paucity of evidence for an alternative package. In the second case there is not enough evidence of the survival of large scale manufacturing processes, on the contrary the evidence from the urban centres indicates the development of ‘local’ industry within the walls of an almost parasitical nature feeding off the Roman infrastructure. The ‘Nene Valley Ware’ ceramic industry is a case in point because despite a thriving industry stretching up the end of the end of the 4th Century there is an assumption made as to its rapid decline in sub-Roman Britain (Todd 1973, 129) but while the scale of the industrial activity may have diminished is it realistic to assume that all activity has ceased by AD 450 (Henderson 2000, 158)? With the lack of numismatistic or other firm dating evidence to secure the chronology of late-4th/early-5th Century deposits (Lane 2009, 20) the ceramic evidence can only be assumed to date from AD 410 or even later which, given the very tight 31 time period for change in the 5th century East Midlands, makes a large impact on the assessment of the material culture of subRoman Britain. In any artefact assemblage you are always going to get a bias towards the 6.1: Hanging bowl, late-4thC, Finningley. elite elements, the ‘haves’ rather than the ‘have nots’. This means that, particularly in Roman contexts, you are more likely to find the master than the slave despite the opposite being true in terms of numbers inhumed. This is particularly relevant when it comes to the transformation of value if the assumption is made that the ‘elite’ were attempting to maintain a ‘Roman’ cultural lifestyle as the diminishing availability of Roman material culture would lead to artefacts gaining value by scarcity, in effect goods considered commonplace in the 4 th Century would have increased prestige value in the 5th Century which must be taken into account when considering possible interpretations of the archaeology (Williams 1996, 69). The lack of ‘5th Century forms’ could also be explained by the isolation of the subRoman ceramic industry from Imperial influences rendering the industry moribund producing the same 4th Century styles of ceramics for the dwindling RomanoBritish market (Dark 1996, 58). There is also the issue of craft bias to consider; in the Empingham example the presence of types of knives (Cooper 2000, 43) or spears (Harke 1996, 67) could be considered diagnostic either of an Anglo-Saxon population or an Anglo-Saxon metalworker living with, or trading to, 6.2: Hanging Bowl early 7 thC, St Paul-in-the-Bail, Lincoln a population of uncertain ‘ethnicity’. Identifying the 32 crafter is a key issues involved with the assessment of the crossover between the two different ‘culture’ paradigms of the urban/rural and industrial/small scale craft and 6.3: 5thC hanging-bowl, Sleaford, Lincs. although it is tempting to label the evidence of material culture as ‘Roman’ and ‘Anglo-Saxon’ how accurate would that be as it suggests a distinct lack of innovation in the Romano-British population. There are some examples of artefact groups which indicate the survival of RomanoBritish crafts into the sub-Roman period in the East Midlands; for example the occurrence of hanging-bowls (Kendrick 1932, 163). The earliest of these, from Finningley near Lincoln [figure 6.1], has a probable 4th Century date (Todd 1973, 130) while the hanging-bowl found in St. Paul-in-the-Bail, Lincoln, is thought to date from to 7th Century (Steane 2006, 157) [figure 6.2] with other examples of this type of artefact found throughout the East Midlands dating to the 5th and 6th Century [figure 6.3]. One of the most studied elements of material culture from this period are the ‘quoit style buckles’ categorised in 1961 (Hawkes & Dunning 1961, 1-70). The first occurrences of this artefact are found in Britain no later than the mid-4th Century and are originally part of lateRoman military equipment (Hills 2007, 299) be issued to foederati (Suzuki 2000, 6). As the 4th and 5th Century developed so did the patterns of the buckles (Laycock and Marshall 2005) passing out of purely military use and becoming part of a post-Roman dress code with many of these buckles being restricted to certain general 6.4: Dolphin Buckle late-4thC Leic geographic locations in Britain. While there is not 33 the space in this dissertation to fully examine the distribution of these brooches it is worth looking at a couple of the styles that have particular relevance to the East Midlands area (ibid 2005). The first of these is the ‘Dolphin Buckle’; thought to the earliest form of quoit brooch it has a wide presence across the Roman Empire with examples being found in Leicestershire and Lincolnshire and would indicate the presence of foederati in the East Midlands in the 4th Century. The second style is the ‘Horsehead Buckle’, a style that appears to be fairly unique to Britain with few examples being found elsewhere. In Britain though it is found in both Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon grave contexts with a variant of the design appearing in Anglo-Saxon female graves but not the grave of Romano-British women. It has been suggested by Laycock (2006) that stylistic variations may indicate territorial differences although it may just be a particular craft evolution (Inker 2000, 48). Importantly these artefacts that they show a two way material culture crossover between the Romano-British and Anglo-Saxons (ibid, 50-51) In conclusion identifying the material culture of sub-Roman Britons is problematic. Many factors hide the 6.5: Horsehead buckle 5thC, Lincs. th pattern of the 5 Century from the eyes of the archaeologist that attempting a definitive statement about the nature of material culture is nearly impossible. We know that elements of Romano-British culture survives elsewhere on this island and the indications from the examples of the hanging-bowls and quoit brooches can be interpreted as showing clear stylistic pathways, particularly in the representation of zoomorphic forms of decoration, between the Romano-British and their Anglo-Saxon ‘successors’ in the East Midland in AD 450. 34 Chapter Seven Conclusion The Ethnicity of the East Midlands in AD 450 What does the information tell us about the ethnic composition of in the East Midlands in the 5th Century? The historical sources paint a picture of a country, or perhaps more accurately a religion, in crisis bedevilled by pagan hordes, heretics and recusants. What it also shows us is that, contrary to traditional interpretations, there is still a strong survival of Romanitas surviving to the 6th Century. The modern arguments are based around the polarities of acculturation and mass migration with many different interpretations drawing on both historical and archaeological evidence looking at contrasts between urban versus rural, Romano-British versus AngloSaxon and Christian versus pagan. The archaeological evidence is ambiguous but as more sites are being excavated and published the picture becomes more detailed, especially with regard to rural sites as previous excavations have tended to concentrate on villas at the expense of the small settlements and farmsteads important to understanding the rural transition. In urban contexts the protections offered under PPG: 16 and its successor PPS: 5 has led to a much broader coverage of urban archaeology but at the expense of strategic site choice making systematic programs of excavation difficult. In some cases, the commercial element has worked to the detriment of post-excavation analysis and publication (fortunately Leicester is particularly well served in that regard). In terms of material culture, the survival, or lack thereof, of late Roman industry is the issue with regard to the 5th Century. This is closely followed by the need to recognise the individual crafters involved in the small scale manufacture of goods. Is the transition in the material culture from 4th to 6th Century a change in style or a change in personnel? The answer to the question of the 5th Century transition lies in the cultural flexibility of sub-Roman Britons in the East Midlands following the disconnection from the Roman administrative superstructure? The evidence would point away from the idea of an 35 aggressive racial apartheid between Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon and more a tentative acculturation. The settlement patterns don’t indicate a violent take-over but more of a ‘pitching up’ on the edge of many settlements. Vital to this matter is the nature of late Roman Christianity. We know from the contemporary texts there was an active Christian network and there is, I believe, evidence for a ‘two stream’ Christian establishment differentiating between urban and rural Christianity with urban Christianity being more doctrinaire and militant with the church leaders being important in the metropolitan elite and still in contact with continental networks. We know the late Roman church was effective in eliminating the ‘competition’ from the large metropolitan centres so it can be suggested that the maintenance of this monopoly continued into the sub Roman period keeping the incoming Anglo-Saxons at bay, as evidenced by the mainly suburban presence of early Anglo-Saxons in Ratae. This monopoly might explain why islands of Romano-Britishness survive into the 6th Century, like Lindsey but eventually these islands are eroded away as the cultural paradigm of 5 th Century Britain changed but, in the case of both Lincoln and Leicester, leaving just enough folk memory for them to regain their Bishops as part of the episcopal restoration following the Augustine mission of AD 597. For the rural population there seems to be a much more ‘laissez-faire’ attitude with evidence suggesting pagan and Christian living together in small settlements such as Medbourne. Is this flexibility is key to the survival of Christianity as a non-episcopal entity in the South and East of Britain despite the paucity of ‘Christianised’ 5th Century artefacts? The Vita Sancti Germani attests to rural Christians being drawn in numbers to Germanus’ preaching. Romanisation was a more metropolitan phenomenon than a rural one in Britain and that much of what could be considered Iron Age culture survived throughout the period of empire as the Cossington evidence suggests. When taken with the evidence of settlement of Germanic soldiers during the late Roman Empire it would suggest the rural landscape of the East Midlands in sub Roman Britain was one familiar with their culture and, given the similarities in settlement patterns, of a much more close relationship than between rural and metropolitan. With the collapse of the Roman administrative and mercantile systems the towns lose much of their role within the local economic networks, which would also apply to the larger villa estates as they are part of the elite and aligned in their fortunes to the urban centres. What was the ethnicity of the East Midlands in AD 450? The larger urban centres remain ‘Christo-Roman’ but clinging to that imperial identity probably led to their decline. The population of the rural areas, always more British than Romano-British, seem to 36 integrate with the initial Germanic colonisers throughout the 5 th Century adopting the material culture of their neighbours as the supply of Roman material culture declined. 37 Bibliography Historical Sources Bede. A History of the English Church and People. Translated by L. Sherley-Price (Penguin Classics). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. 1955. Chronica Gallica a CCCCLII et DXI (452 and 511). Translated by T. Mommsen. Chronica Minora Saec. IV, V, VI, VII vol. 1, pp. 629-666, 1892. http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artsou/chron452.htm (17 March 2012) Constantius of Lyon. The Life of St. Germanus of Auxerre. Translated by T. Noble and T. Head. Soldiers of Christ: Saints' Lives from Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, 75-106. Philidelphia: Pennsylvania State University Press. 1994. http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artsou/constex.htm (17 March 2012) Gildas. On the Ruin of Britain. Translated by J. Giles. Gloucester: Dodo Press. 2007 Nennius. History Of The Britons (Historia Brittonum). Translated by J. Giles. Project Gutenburg. 2006. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1972/1972-h/1972-h.htm (17 March 2012) Prosper. Epitoma chronicon ed. primum a. CCCCXXXIII (433), continuata ad a. CCCCLV (455). Translated by T. Mommsen. Chronica Minora Saec. IV, V, VI, VII vol. 1, pp. 341-501. 1892. http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artsou/prosp.htm (17 March 2012) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles. Translated by A. Savage. London: Guild Publishing. 1982. Zosimus, New History. Translated by G. J. Vossius. London: Green and Chaplin 1814. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/files/zosimus00_preface.htm (17 March 2012) 38 Modern Sources Arnold, C. J. 1988. An Archaeology of the Early Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms. London: Routledge. Ashe, G. 1971. The Quest for Arthur’s Britain. London: Paladin. Basalmans, J. 2009. The early-medieval use of ethnic names from classical antiquity: The case of the Frisians. In T. Derks & N. Roymans (eds), Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity: The Role of Power and Tradition, 321-339. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Brynjulfson, S. 1996. Dark Rooms and Dry Straw. http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artgue/guestsheila.htm (17 March 2012) Burgess, R.W. 1990. The Dark Ages Return to Fifth-Century Britain: The 'Restored' Gallic Chronicle Exploded. Britannia 21: 185-195 Capelli, C., Redhead, N., Abernethy, J. K., Gratrix, F., Wilson, J. F., Moen, T., Richards, M., Stumpf, M. P., Underhill, P. A., Bradshaw, P., Shaha, A., Thomas, M. G., Bradman, N. and Goldstein, D. B. 2003. A Y Chromosome Census of the British Isles. Current Biology, 13: 979–984. Christie, N. 2004. Landscapes of Change in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages: Themes, Directions and Themes. In N. Christie (ed) Landscapes of change: rural evolutions in late antiquity and the early Middle Ages, 1-38. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Connor, A & Buckley, R. 1999. Roman and Medieval Occupation in Causeway Lane, Leicester (Leicester Archaeology Monographs No. 5). Leicester: University of Leicester. Cooper, L. 1996. A Roman Cemetery in Newarke Street, Leicester. Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological & Historical Society, 70: 1-90. Cooper, N.J. 2000. The Archaeology of Rutland Water: Excavations at Empingham in the Gwash Valley, Rutland, 1967-73 and 1990 (Leicester Archaeology Monographs No. 6). Leicester: University of Leicester. Courtney, P. 1998. ‘Saxon and Medieval Leicester: the making of an Urban Landscape’ Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological and Historical Society, 73: 110-45 Dark, K. 1994. Civitas to Kingdom: British Political Continuity300 – 800. Leicester: Leicester University Press. 39 Dark, K. 1996. Pottery and Local Production at the End of Roman Britain. In K. Dark (ed) External Contacts and the Economy of Late Roman and Post-Roman Britain, 53-66 Woodbridge: The Boydell Press. Dark, K. 2000. Britain and the End of the Roman Empire. Stroud: Tempus. Dark, K. 2004. The Late Antique Landscape of Britain, AD 300-700. In N Christie (ed) Landscapes of change: rural evolutions in late antiquity and the early Middle Ages, 279300. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Esmonde-Cleary, A.S. 1989. The Ending of Roman Britain. London: Batsford. Faulkner, N. 2000. The Decline of Fall of Roman Britain. Stroud: Tempus. Finn, N. 2004. The Origins of a Leicester Suburb: Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Medieval and postMedieval occupation on Bonners Lanes. Oxford: Archeopress. Gibbon, E. 1998. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Abridged). Ware: Wordsworth Editions Gossip, J. 1998. York Road/Oxford Street (SK 585 039). Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological & Historical Society, 72: 159-60. Green, T. 2008. The British Kingdom of Lindsey. Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies, 56: 1–43. Härke, H. 1996. Comments on the Weaponry. In J. Timby (ed), The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Empingham II, Rutland, 67-68.Oxford: Oxbow. Härke, H. 1997. Early Anglo-Saxon military organisation: an archaeological perspective. In A.N. Jørgensen and B.L. Clausen (eds.), Military aspects of Scandinavian society in a European perspective, AD 1-1300. (Publications from the National Museum, Studies in Archaeology and History, vol. 2), 93-101. Copenhagen: National Museum. Härke, H. 2007. Ethnicity, ‘Race’ and Migration in Mortuary Archaeology: an attempt at a short answer. In S. Semple and H. Williams (eds). Early Medieval Mortuary Practices ((Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 14), 12-18. Oxford: Oxbow. Härke, H. 2011. Anglo-Saxon Immigration and Ethnogenesis. Medieval Archaeology, 55: 1-28. 40 Hawkes, S. C. and Dunning, G. C. 1961. Soldiers and Settlers in Britain, fourth to fifth century: with a catalogue of animal-ornamented buckles and related belt-fittings. Medieval Archaeology, 5: 1-70. Heather, P. 2009. Empires and Barbarians: Migration, Development and the Birth of Europe. London: Pan Macmillan. Hebditch, M., Mellor, J., Boon, G. C., Butcher, S., Cotteril, A. B., Dannell, G., Hartley, K., Mattingly, H. B., Todd, M., Charlesworth, D. and Hartley, K. F. 1973. The Forum and Basilica of Roman Leicester. Britannia, 4: 1-83. Henderson, J. 2000. The Science and Archaeology of Materials: An investigation of inorganic materials. London: Routledge. Heritage Connect Lincoln. 2010. The churches of St Peter and the Silver Street burial. http://www.heritageconnectlincoln.com/lara-raz/the-churches-of-st-peter-and-the-silverstreet-burial/921 (17 March 2012) Higham, N.J. 1992. Rome, Britain and the Anglo-Saxons. London: Seaby. Higham, N. J. 1994. The English Conquest: Gildas and Britain in the fifth century. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Hills, C. 2007. The Archaeology of Anglo Saxon England in the Pagan Period. In: M. Biddle, J. Brown, P. Clemoes (eds), Anglo-Saxon England, 8: 297-330. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Inker, P. 2000. Technology as active material culture: the Quoit Brooch Style. Medieval Archaeology, 44: 25-52. James, L. 2001. Warrior Race: A History of Britain at War. London: Hachette Digital. Johnson, S. 1980. Later Roman Britain. London: Granada. Jones, M. E. and Casey, J. 1988. The Gallic Chronicle Restored: A Chronology for the AngloSaxon Invasions and the End of Roman Britain. Britannia, 19: 367-398. Jones, M. J. and Gilmour, B. J. 1980. Lincoln, Principia and Forum: A Prelimary Report. Britannia, 11: 61-72. 41 Jones, M. J. 2003. The Colonia Era. In M. Jones, D. Stocker, & A. Vince (eds), The City by the Pool: Assessing the Archaeology of the City of Lincoln. Lincoln Archaeological Studies 10, 56-137. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Kendrick, T. K. 1932. British Hanging-Bowls. Antiquity, 6:22 161–184. Kenyon, K. 1948. Excavations at the Jewry Wall Site, Leicester. London: The Society of Antiquaries. Kipling, R. 2006. Windows on the Past: Excavations at 9 St. Nicholas Place, Leicester. http://www.le.ac.uk/ulas/downloads/StNicolasPlace.pdf (17 March 2012) Kulikowski, M. 2000. Barbarians in Gaul, Usurpers in Britain. Britannia, 31: 325-345 Lane, A. 2009. The End of Roman Britain and the Coming of the Saxons: An Archaeological Context for Arthur? In H. Fulton (ed), A Companion to Arthurian Literature, 15-29. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. . Laycock, S. 2006. Britannia: the threat within. British Archaeology, 87. http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba87/feat1.shtml (17 March 2012) Laycock, S and Marshall, C. 2005. Late Roman Buckles in Britain. http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/ceejays_site/pages/lrb_titlepage.htm (17 March 2012) Liddle, P. 2000. An Archaeological Resource Assessment of Anglo-Saxon Leicestershire and Rutland. http://www.le.ac.uk/ulas/publications/documents/27leicas_000.pdf (17 March 2012) Liddle, P, Glaswell, S. J. and Cooper, N. J. 2000. Site 3: ‘Empingham I’ Early Anglo-Saxon Settlement and Cemetery. In N. Cooper (ed) The Archaeology of Rutland Water: Excavations at Empingham in the Gwash Valley, Rutland, 1967-73 and 1990 (Leicester Archaeology Monographs No. 6), 23-45. Leicester: University of Leicester. Lawrence, S. 1983. The Gallic Chronicle of 452 and its authority for British events. Britannia, 14: 23-33. Matthews, J. 1975. Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court A.D. 364-425. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Meier, D. 2003. The North Sea Coastal Area: Settlement History from Roman to Early Medieval Times. In D. Green & F. Siegmund (eds), The Continental Saxons from the Migration 42 Period to the Tenth Century: An Ethnographic Perspective, 37-66. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press. Morris, M. 2010. Excavations beneath De Montfort University’s PACE and Hugh Aston Buildings (2006-2008). http://www.le.ac.uk/ulas/projects/DMUbusinessandlaw.html. (17 March 2012) Mummy, K. 2002. The Groans of the Britons: Toward the British Civitates Period ca. 406-455 C.E. Ex Post Facto: Journal of the History Students at San Francisco State University, 11: 1-15 O’Brien, E. 1999. Post-Roman Britain to Anglo-Saxon England: Burial Practices Reviewed. Oxford: B.A.R. Oppenheimer, S. 2006. The Origins of the British: A Genetic Detective Story. London: Constable. Ottaway, P. 1992. Archaeology in British towns: from the Emperor Claudius to the Black Death. London: Routledge. Painter, K. S. 1971. Villas and Christianity in Roman Britain. In G. Sieveking (ed) Prehistoric and Roman Studies: Commemotating the opening of The Department of Prehistoric and Romano-British Antiquities, 156-175. London: The Trustees of The British Museum. Pattison, J. E. 2008. Is it necessary to assume an apartheid-like social structure in Early AngloSaxon England. Proceedings of The Royal Society B, 275: 3423-2429. Powlesland, D. 2012. Twenty-five Years of Digging. http://www.landscaperesearchcentre.org/html/25_years_digging.html (17 March 2012) Priest, V. and Cooper, N. 2004. Time Team Big Dig: Archaeological investigations at Great Easton, Leicestershire. Leicester: University of Leicester Archaeological Services. Pryor, F. 2004. Britain AD: A quest for Arthur and the Anglo-Saxons. London: Harper Perennial. Reece, R. 1980. Town and Country: The End of Roman Britain. World Archaeology, 12: 1 7792. Riddler, I., Cameron, E. and Marzinziki, S. 2006. Early Anglo-Saxon Personal Equipment and Structural Ironwork from Saltwood Tunnel, Kent. CTRL Specialist Report Series. 43 Rodgers, A. 2011. Late Roman Towns in Britain: Rethinking change and decline. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Savage, A. 1982. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles. London: Guild Publishing. Sawyer, P. 1998. Anglo-Saxon Lincolnshire: A history of Lincolnshire Volume III. Lincoln: The Society of Lincolnshire History and Archaeology. Score, V. 2007. Archaeological Investigations North West of Medbourne, Leicestershire. Leicester: University of Leicester Archaeological Services. Speed, G. 2005. An Archaeological Evaluation at Shires West, Site 11, Freeschool Lane, Leicester, NGR SK 584 047 (centre). Leicester: University of Leicester Archaeological Services. Steane, K. 2006. Lincoln Archaeological Studies No. 3: The Archaeology of The Upper City and Adjacent Suburbs. Oxford: Oxbow. Suzuki, S. 2000. The Quoit Brooch Style and Anglo-Saxon Settlement. Woodbridge: Boydell Press. Thomas, C. 1981. Christianity in Roman Britain to AD 500. Berkeley: University of California Press. Thomas, J. 2008. Monument, Memory and Myth. Use and Reuse of Three Round Barrows at Cossington, Leicestershire. (Leicester Archaeology Monograph 14). Leicester: University of Leicester. Thomas, M. G., Stumpf, M. P. and Härke, H. 2006. Evidence for an Apartheid-like social structure in early Anglo-Saxon England. Proceedings of The Royal Society B, 273: 26512657. Thompson, E. A. 1956. The settlement of the barbarians in southern Gaul. Journal of The Royal Society, 46: 65-75 Timby, J. R. 1996. The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Empingham II, Rutland. Oxford: Oxbow. Todd, M. 1973. The Coritani. London: Duckworth. Tyers, P. 1996. Roman Pottery in Britain. London: Batsford. 44 ULAS. 2006. Highcross St., Leicester - excavations on the street frontage Aug 2005 - Aug 2006. http://www.le.ac.uk/ulas/projects/highcross_street.html (17 March 2012) Vince, A. 2003. 8. Lincoln in the Early Medieval Era, between the 5 th and 9th Centuries: A. The Archaeological Account. In M. Jones, D. Stocker, & A. Vince (eds), The City by the Pool. Assessing the Archaeology of the City of Lincoln (Lincoln Archaeological Studies 10), 141-156. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Vince, A. 2006. The Anglo-Saxon Period (c.400-850) In N. Cooper (ed), The Archaeology of the East Midlands: an Archaeological Resource Assessment and Research Agenda (Leicester Archaeological Monograph 13), 161-184. Leicester: University of Leicester Archaeological Services (ULAS). Wacher, J. 1974. The Towns of Roman Britain. London: BCA. Ward-Perkins, B. 2000. Why Did the Anglo-Saxons Not Become More British. The English Historical Review, 115: 462 513-533 Watts, D. 1991. Christians and Pagans in Roman Britain. London: Routledge. Weale, M. E., Weiss, D. A., Jager, R. F., Bradman, N. & Thomas, M. G. 2002. Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 19: 7 1008-1021 Wessex Archaeology. 2003. South Cliff Farm, South Carlton, Lincolnshire: evaluation (Time Team). Salisbury: Wessex Archaeology. Williams, D. 1996. Description of Fabrics. In J. Timby (ed), The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Empingham II, Rutland, 69-71. Oxford: Oxbow.