Figure 39 – uploaded by Dr Hannah Russ FSA

See full PDF downloadDownload figure

Figure 182: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 54, 55, 64, 65, 67) — Figure 182 South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 54, 55, 64, 65, 67)

Related Figures (171)

Figure i: The route of the motorway scheme Construction of the upgrade between Dishforth and Leeming Bar commenced in late March 2009 and, with

Figure ii: Field locations, Fields 1-54 Figure iii: Field locations, Fields 55-127 The main excavation works on the Dishforth to Leeming Bar section, undertaken in 2009-2010, were concentrated on the major Roman settlement site at Healam Bridge to the south of Leeming Bar, where the alignment of the new road unavoidably had an impact on parts of the periphery of the settlement area. This volume presents the results of this work, together with excava- tions at other Roman sites along the route including a

No - sherd count; Wt - weight; ENV - estimated number of vessels; Diam. - diameter; EVE - estimate vessel equivalent; BS - body sherd; U/Dec - undecorated; U/ID - unidentified; int - interior; ext - exterior; Pre-H - prehistoric; PRIA - pre-Roman Iron Age; LPRIA - Late pre-Roman Iron Age.

Table 100: Fabric groups for handmade pottery

Table 101: Handmade pottery vessel forms

Table 103: Handmade pottery fabric groups from Field 63 (all areas and phases)

Table 104: Handmade vessel types from Field 63 (all areas and phases)

In the fabric description hyphenated colours indicate the variation in colour expected from poorly controlled Figure 147: Late prehistoric and Roman period handmade pottery The co-occurrence of datable material of Roman and Romano-British type alongside the handmade wares was useful, indicating the late continuation of handmade pottery production and the persistence of traditional

Table 105: Quantities of Romano-British pottery by field

Figure 148: Fields 23 and 25 relative quantities of vessel types (EVEs)

Table 108: Fields 23 and 25 relative quantities of wares; sherd count, weight (g), and estimated vessel equivalents (EVEs) for Romano-British pottery

Figure 150: Relative proportion of calcite-gritted ware and Crambeck grey ware by count

Figure 161: Proportion of burnt sherds by field, phase, and sub-phase SJITTTAL 5 UYU UL DUTTIL CEPA S VWWEIre di5nVU THOU TIT Field 63, Phase 1c, structures 6949 and 7952, charcoal- rich layer 5596 within structure 6949, Phase 1d layer 5042/5237, and group 5009. The pottery in these groups belonged predominantly to the early to mid-2nd century and included samian dating after AD 150. The coarse wares were less diagnostic sherds but included fragments from FLB1 flagons, a BB1 flat-rim bowl of the mid-2nd century, a grooved-rim dish, and other indeterminate types as well as fragments from the collared bowl also present in Phase 1c spread 5596, Phase 3c ditch group 7966, and Phase 3, context 5321; a group overlying ditch 5323. The activity in structure 6949 may have resulted in sherds in make-up layers being scorched and burnt and those in Phase 1d may be derived from this group having been later redistributed in levelling layers and dug features in Phase 1d. The peak in brokenness in Phase 1d (see above) may reflect the redeposition of this material in the layers making up structure 5009. Another small group of burnt samian sherds were present in Field 63, Phase 1, structure 5729. When considered as a proportion of the whole assemblage for each phase the burnt sherds peak in Field 63 Phases 1b and c perhaps suggesting two incidents which resulted in burnt sherds of all types. It should be noted that some of the coarse ware sherds in these groups indicated intense heat resulting in distortion, blistering and bubbling through a section of sherds of pottery particularly in 5596 and group 6949 and that these included imported wares such as Cologne colour-coated wares. Similar sherds were also found in the Phase 1d group in 5009 suggesting redeposition of The Phase 1b and 1c groups mentioned above from Field 63 appear to be largely burnt either in situ or during processes going on in the vicinity. Their scorching may be the result of burning which had taken place on the layer in which they were incorporated after being discarded rather than while in active service. Other vessels show signs of being burnt while in use and this was associated with sooting or with localised burning. A total of 21 groups of Dressel 20 amphora sherds seemed to be burnt or discoloured and two of these had handles broken or sawn off suggesting reuse perhaps in cooking.

Figure 160: Comparison of average weight and brokenness (sherd nos/EVEs) values

Table 109: Relative quantities of vessel types from Healam stratified groups (using EVES)

Figure 162: Percentage of samian and amphora at Hadrianic-Antonine sites in the region and at NW vicus/urban/industrial sites of Middlewich, Wigan, and Manchester Barton St. vicus

Figure 163: Ratio of specialist to coarse wares from excavated areas, phases and sub-phases (using sherd count) In Phase 3, although the relative quantities of jars rise and the bowls and dishes fall overall, the presence of large amounts of 2nd century material distorted the results so profoundly that raw figures were of little value other In Phase 1c the functional profile was similar to Phase 1b but with most groups going down slightly and medium-necked jars increasing. Narrow-necked and wide-mouthed jars also increased in number mirroring a chronological trend in Yorkshire. Most of the, pottery came from the levelling layers and the structure 6949. Burnt material was very common (see above) and much of a severely burnt narrow-necked jar came from charcoal rich layer 5596 inside structure 6949. Half an OAB1 segmental bowl came from layer 5039. Although lids were less common overall, there was a high percentage in structure 6949. There was also a peak in the number

Figure 164: Proportions of bowl/dishes to jars at specific sites in the region with values from range of rural (grey triangles) and urban/vicus (grey circles) sites in north shown for comparative purposes (see table 111 for details of all sites). Data sources: Manchester Barton St, Leary 2007b, table 3.5; Wigan, Leary and Williams 2008; Middlewich (M’wich), Leary 2008a, table 7; Hawling Rd, Beadlam, Lingcroft Farm, and York Rougier St., all Evans 1993, appendix 1; Shiptonthorpe (Shipton), Evans 2006, table 7.7; Doncaster, Leary 2004; Reighton, Leary unpublished d; York Micklegate (York col) and Swinegate, Monaghan 1997, tables 134-5; and Bainesse and Catterick Racecourse, Evans 2002, tables 22 and 49. Comparative urban data = Doncaster Church Walk, Leary 2008c; Chester, Segontium, and Carlisle, Evans 1993, appendix 1; Leicester, period 2, Clarke 1999, table 12; and rural sites = Armthorpe sites, Leary 2007a and 2008d; Byram Park, Leary unpublished a; Normanton, Leary unpublished b; Holme Hall Farm, Stainton, Leary 2005; Don Gorge, Leary unpublished c; Thurnscoe, Didsbury 2004b

Figure 165: Ratios of jars to bowls/dishes on 4th century AD sites. The values for Field 63 Phases 3b and 3c exclude redeposited material from Phases 2 and 3. S = Skeldergate, urban; M = Malton, urban; SS = South Shields fort; GB = Greta Bridge fort; CB6 = Catterick Bridge phase 6 urban periphery; B = Beadlam villa; C = Castleford urban?; V = $Vindolanda fort; AD = Apperley Dene rural settlement; CB5 = Catterick Bridge phase 5 urban periphery; 3b and 3c = Healam Field 63 phases; F23 25 = Fields 23 and 25

Table 111: Relative percentages of vessel types from sites in region. Data from following sources: Hawling Rd, Beadlam, Ling: croft Farm, and York Rougier St, all Evans 1993, appendix 1; Shiptonthorpe, Evans 2006, table 7.7; Doncaster, Leary 2004, Reighton, Leary unpublished d; York Micklegate and Swinegate, Monaghan 1997, tables 134-5; Bainesse and Catterick Race- course, Bell and Evans 2002, tables 22 and 49 Ut Tht It CENA EARARAL LY: UIT LAVID VVAIC OS. TL bTIido ARRAY: WE suggested that, although dating to the late 4th century, the features in Phase 3b contained pottery redeposited from the earlier 4th century and this may have accounted for the higher level of tableware. Certainly compared with other 4th century groups, the Phase 3b bowl/dish to jar ratio was at the high end with groups from forts and urban sites, as was the group from Fields 23 and 25, whereas the Phase 3c group fell firmly at the bottom end (Fig. 165). By Phase 3c in the late 4th to early 5th century,

Stamps and decorated vessels - Field 63 southern section Figure 166: Chronological distribution of the decorated and stamped samian ware from the southern section of Field 63

Stamps and decorated vessels - Field 63 northern and Field 64 Figure 167: Chronological distribution of the decorated and stamped samian ware from the northern section of Field 63 and Field 64 (MNV)

Stamps and decorated vessels - Field 61A Figure 168: Chronological distribution of the decorated and stamped samian ware from Field 61A (MNV)

Table 117: Occurrence of samian vessels with cross-joins or sherds recorded in different phases (sherd count)

Table 118: Occurrence of burnt samian (MNV) in each main field

Figure 169: Average weight for the samian fabric groups in each sub-phase of Field 63

Figure 170: Samian fabrics brokenness index for each phase (sherd count/EVE)

Figure 171: Occurrence of burnt samian in each sub-phase of Field 63 southern section

Table 119: South Gaulish samian forms by EVE and MNV

Table 120: Les Martres-de-Veyre samian forms

Table 122: East Gaulish samian forms Figure 173: Samian forms represented in Phases 3b and c (EVE) The forms represented in each sub-phase illustrated again clearly the high level of redeposition on the deeply stratified southern part of Field 63. With the exception of

Figure 175: Samian forms represented in each phase on Field 64 and Field 63 northern section (EVEs) Only two graffiti on samian were recorded; one from Field 61A and one from Field 63, both illiterate: one large X type on a Dr.31R from Phase 3b (fill 5821) which was burnt and repaired and joined with a sherd from Phase 1c (spread 5596), and one large X type on a Dr.33 wall from machining in Field 61A (8010). This low number fit with the rest of the Roman pottery assemblage where no literate graffiti was uncovered (Leary, above), but contrasted sharply with the relatively high number of graffiti on samian ware recovered from the sites of Catterick (Tomlin 2002, 505-10) and Carlisle Southern Lanes (Tomlin 2010, 79-80), the majority of which

Figure 176: Occurrence of repaired vessels in each sub- phase of Field 63 Dr.37 rim, one bodysherd Les Martres-de-Veyre Dr.37, repaired, and one rim Central Gaulish Dr.18/31, dove- tail repair and rivet from context 7473 (orange sandy layer) and finally, one sherd joining with the one from 7151, Central Gaulish Dr.37 (no. 117, AD 135-160) from context 7613, fill of horse burial 7614.

Figure 177: South Gaulish samian rubbings (Cat. no. 1)

Figure 178: South Gaulish samian rubbings (Cat. nos. 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 16, 18)

Figure 179: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Les Martres-de-Veyre (Cat. nos. 29, 30, 35, 36, 39, 43, 46, 47, 48

Figure 180: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Les Martres-de-Veyre (Cat. no. 41)

Figure 181: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 51, 52, 53)

Figure 183: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 73, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80)

Figure 185: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. no. 91)

Figure 186: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 93, 95, 96, 98)

Figure 188: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 117, 118)

Figure 189: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 119, 122, 123, 125,

Figure 190: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 120, 121)

Figure 191: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. no. 127)

Figure 192: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 133, 134, 136, 137, 138,

Figure 193: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. no. 140)

Figure 194: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 173, 176, 177, 179)

Figure 195: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 180, 181, 183, 185, 193, 194, 202, 203, 204

Figure 196: South Gaulish samian rubbings, Lezoux (Cat. nos. 222, 223, 228, 229)

In the 4th century only three or four potteries supplied mortaria: Mancetter-Hartshill, the lower Nene Valley kilns and the Crambeck industries. Of these the Crambeck

Figure 203: Healam Field 64 mortaria by half decade using rim percentage values

Table 127: Handmade post-Roman pottery from Field 63 context 5028. No - sherd count; Wt - weight; ENV - estimated number of vessels; BS - body sherd; U/Dec - undecorated; U/ID - unidentified; int - interior; ext — exterior. Context 5990, the fill of a pit, contained a sherd of Anglo-Saxon pottery decorated with ring and wheel stamps, similar in terms of its fabric to the sherd from Field 64, context 6883 (fig. 209, 1; below). The sherd from 5990 appears to be broadly contemporary with the glass bead from the same context (section 11.2, no. 41).

Figure 210: Statistical summary of the Roman coins

Figure 211: Suggested plausible dates of deposition for 95 coins minted before AD 260

Figure 223: Armour, spear butt, and personal fittings

(14) Copper alloy U-sectioned binding fragment. L 36mm, W 5mm, H 3mm. A1DBO9, RF 469, context 6924. Fig. 224 Figure 225: Military Diploma RF 462

Figure 228: Spindle whorls, needles, and bobbin (10) Possible bobbin. Sheep metatarsal, right. Shaft with a pair of drilled perforations set either side of the mid- shaft. The drill was set on the naturally flattened surface of the shaft and the same holes were carried through to the opposite surface. Though bone next to the holes on one side — presumably it was drilled from behind — had spalled away, there was scant discernible trace of wear of the holes, so their use cannot have been heavy or prolonged. Abraded overall, with both ends eroded. L 95mm, W 12mm, Th 11mm, perforation D 4mm. Weight 11g. RF 543, context 7473, Field 63, Phase 1b. Fig. 228

Figure 231: Adze, chisels/punches, metalworking set, spud, and knives

Figure 232: Anglo-Saxon knives, tanged spatulate tool, and tool handle

(16) Complete hone. Sandstone: pale grey, fine to very fine grained (almost siltstone), with sparse minute black plant debris. North York Moors or coastline Middle

Figure 234: Structural fastenings and lead sheet

Table 130: Blue-green bottle fragments (36 in total)

Table 131: Indeterminate blue-green glass fragments (22 total)

Table 132: Indeterminate colourless glass fragments (11 total) Vessels

Table 133: Indeterminate coloured glass fragments (8 total)

Figure 238: Vessels of other materials and related objects

Table 134: Romano-British ceramic building material by context, Fields 20, 25, and 39

The number of fabrics could indicate multiple sources of manufacture. Two fabrics, based on the published descriptive text only, could potentially equate with a local? and a York fabric identified at Cataractonium (Isserlin 2002b, appendix 12.1): Fabric 3a =? TF3 (locally produced) and Fabric 4a =? TF1b from York (Isserlin 2002a, 525). Some of the other Brompton fabrics may also have been York products (Tibbles and Tibbles 2004a), though the source is currently inconclusive. Kiln sites currently unknown should also be considered as a source.

Table 135: Romano-British ceramic building material at Healam by context

Table 135 continued: Romano-British ceramic building material at Healam by context Table 136: Romano-British ceramic building material fabrics at Healam by form

Table 137: Romano-British ceramic building material forms at Healam by phase and field

[able 138: Ceramic building material fabric type by area

Table 138 continued: Ceramic building material fabric type by area Fabric 6a: Hard.

Table 141: Summary of quern stone lithology Table 140: Chronology of the dated querns and millstones at Healam

Analysis of the relative wear of the stones also suggested that in the 4th century AD, usage was more intensive than it had been earlier. Whereas the Phase a/c beehives were lightly worn, by Phase 1d only one of the three disc querns (no. 12) was modestly used (retaining a rim height of 115mm). By the late Roman period (Phase 3), none of the seven stones were similarly thick, but were either worn down to 45-60mm, or had uneven profiles through heavy usage. So the move to larger millstones was also accompanied by more intense wear. CHRONOLOGY

Figure 240: Saddle, beehive, and disc hand querns

Figure 241: Disc hand quern, imported lava quern, and millstone

Table 143: Summary of quern stone interpretations using criteria from Table 141 The other small millstone (no. 13, Fig. 242) was found in topsoil in Field 61A, but from its absence of medieval features, it was assumed to be related (in some way) to the adjacent concentration of later Roman cereal processing equipment. It had three distinctive features. First, it was a rare example of an intact stone (only broken during excavation), which raised questions about its taphonomy (discussion below). Second, although its profile included a modest 80mm deep hopper, it also had a 20mm wide groove around the rim of the hopper (whose significance is also considered below). Third, from its complete survival, we can be sure that it had no handle holes or rynd-slots cut into its central perforation, The power to an upper millstone was provided from a central vertical drive-shaft via a horizontal metal rynd, which was usually fixed into opposed rynd-slots cut into the lower face of the stone. However, no. 18 had no such rynd-slots. Instead, it had five inclined vertical slots that were cut into the stone’s skirt, which were interpreted as the fixing points for a possible iron band around the circumference. If the drive shaft rose through the central perforation and the stone was then rotated via horizontal

Figure 39 – uploaded by Dr Hannah Russ FSA

Related Figures (171)

Connect with 287M+ leading minds in your field