AD 450 Cultural Identity in Sub Roman BR

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 Anglo-
Saxon 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
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 south-
east 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 early-
Anglo-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 near-
contemporary 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’ 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.
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.
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
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 Anglo-

Saxon Chronicle. Of the seven source
documents for this text the earliest, the Parker
Chronicle can be tentatively dated to the late-
9th/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 2.6: Vergilius Romanus
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. 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 Romano-
British 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 early-
Anglo-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, 46-
49). About 500m north-west of EPR it
was occupied in two phases, an Iron
Age phase and an early-Anglo-Saxon
phase. There is some evidence that
this site remained in occupation
4.6: Empingham North (EPN) plan

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-Anglo-
Saxon ‘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’, linking Ratae
Corieltauvorum 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 cemetery includes
cremation and inhumation 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 4.12: ‘High status’ female burial South Cliffe Farm, Lincs.
regions in the late-5th Century (ibid, 20,

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 activity being
undertaken. There is also
evidence of metalworking
waste and a furnace being
found in the macellum
(market place) and the late-
Roman building in Vine
Street (with hammerscale and
other indications of crafting
such as glass-working
5.2: SFB post holes from Bonners Lane, Leics.
(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 Century Anglo-Saxon
occupation. 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. The city is divided into
two 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 early-
Anglo-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 sub-
Roman development of the settlement, is
in the forum and in the conflicting
interpretations of the church of St Paul-in-
the-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, 160-
61) 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 re-
align 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 sub-
Roman Britain.
In any artefact
assemblage you are always going to 6.1: Hanging bowl, late-4thC, Finningley.
get a bias towards the 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 sub-
Roman ceramic industry from Imperial influences
rendering the industry moribund producing the same 4th
Century styles of ceramics for the dwindling Romano-
British 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 Romano-
British 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 late-
Roman 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 Anglo-
Saxon 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, 279-
300. 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 post-
Medieval 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-silver-
street-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 Anglo-
Saxon 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 Anglo-

Saxon 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 77-
92.
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: 2651-
2657.
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.

AD 450 Cultural Identity in Sub Roman BR

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AD 450 Cultural Identity in Sub Roman BR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AD 450:

Cultural Identity in Sub-Roman Britain

School of Archaeology and Ancient History

Dissertation submitted for BA (EU) degree in Archaeology

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,

CHAPTER THREE: Modern Interpretations ................................................................... 10

CHAPTER FOUR: Rural Living ........................................................................................ 14

Cossington, Leicestershire (Thomas 2008) ......................................................................... 14

CHAPTER FIVE: Urban Living ......................................................................................... 24

Ratae Corieltauvorum (Leicester) ....................................................................................... 24

CHAPTER SIX: Material Culture ...................................................................................... 30

CHAPTER SEVEN: Conclusion ......................................................................................... 34

Ancient Sources ................................................................................................................... 37

CHAPTER TWO: Historical Sources

Dr. Neil Christie

For his keen incisiveness and motivational skills in the

Diana & David Sorrill

Dr. Terry Hopkinson

Gildas’ De Excidio Britanniae, Zosimus’ Historia Nova, the Chronica Gallia,

“Britanniae a Romanis amissae in dicionem Saxonum cedunt”

There are still some issues over the accuracy

operating in sub-Roman Britain. Dating aside

This submission is underlined in a brief entry in Prosper of Aquitaine’s Contra Collatorum

‘class war’ at this time. Even taking that into

2.4: Vergilius Romanus

Bede’s ‘Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum’, Nennius’ ‘Historia

between the Church, the Anglo-Saxon hegemony and

Finally we shall look at The Anglo-

Abingdon and Worcester versions of The 2.6: Vergilius Romanus

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Of note is the

durability of many aspects of pre-Roman Iron Age Briton is considered?

beginning of the end’ of Roman Britain:

factions. The raising in Britain of three ‘emperors’ culminating in the ‘usurpation’ of

the contemporary records discussed above.

melting pot of different ‘cultural’ identities interacting in a confused political framework.

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

‘settlement’ into Romano-British communities (Dark 2000, 58-9). This interpretation is

their theories on archaeo-genetic research on the Y-chromosome of the modern British

relies on a significant immigrant population of ‘late-coming’ Saxons (Härke 2011, 5)

estimating the potential figures at:

evidence it has to be noted that the similarities between North-Western European

‘Anglo-Saxon’ cannot necessarily be taken as having belonged to a ‘Saxon’ (Esmonde-

Cossington can be interpreted either as a way of securing land right or as a continuity of

settlement despite changing styles and patterns.

Eleven kilometres north of Leicester

4.3: Empingham site complex

EPR (Cooper 2000, 4-16) is believed to be a Roman farmstead with occupation

4.4: Empingham Roman (EPR) plan

4.5: Empingham I Anglo-Saxon Cemetery (EPS) plan

burials (male 45+) shared both the

4.6: Empingham North (EPN) plan

4.7: Empingham West (EPW) plan

Empingham II – Anglo-Saxon Cemetery

The excavation of the cemetery at Empingham II found 153 individuals in 135

Great Easton, Leicestershire

4.11: Excavation of east-west oriented, supine burials at proposed Christian

South Cliff Farm, Lincolnshire.