Boudicca's Heirs

Women in Early Britain

Dorothy Watts

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2005
• Print ISBN: 9780415280686
• eBook ISBN: 9781134463084
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Ancient History
• Index: History

Affording a clearer depiction of women in the Late Iron Age and Roman Britain than currently exists, Dorothy Watts examines archaeological, inscriptional and literary evidence to present a unique assessment of women and their place during the Romanization of Britain.

Analyzing information from over 4,000 burials in terms of age, health and nutrition, Watt draws comparison with evidence on men's lives and burials. Effectively integrating her archaeological findings with the political and social history of the late Iron Age and Roman period, she expertly places women in their real context.

This fascinating study of women's status, daily life, religion and death is an invaluable insight into the lives and loves of women in Roman Britain, and students of history, women's studies, classical studies and archaeology will find this book an indispensable aid to their studies.

1
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

There is a tide in the affairs of women, Which, taken at the flood, leads – God knows where.

(Byron: Don Juan 6.2)

Britain became part of the Roman Empire in AD 43, with the arrival of the emperor Claudius and the subsequent surrender of the British chiefs. The province of Britannia was set up and pacification was complete by about the end of the second century, by which time the major Romano-British towns were well established and Roman practices widely adopted. Yet this adoption of Roman ways did not start with the Occupation. Even before Julius Caesar’s campaigns of 55 and 54 BC, the attractions of Rome were known in Britain, mainly because of Roman advances in Gaul and Spain. In the following century, Roman imports and luxury goods, and native coins with Latin inscriptions or with designs which reflected those of the Graeco-Roman world became widespread; and, even if diplomatic influence waned along with the links set in place at the time of Caesar’s invasion, increased commercial contact showed that Britain was coming more into Rome’s sphere of influence. British entrepreneurs, leaders in their own societies, in turn provided Rome with various commodities.¹

Close ties existed with the tribes across the Channel, and they increased in the century before the Conquest. The ties were both commercial and social. Considerable trade had been carried on between Gaul and ports on the southern British coast, especially Hengistbury Head. It was probably controlled at the continental end by the Veneti (Caes. B.G. 3.8; Strabo 4.4.1), and conducted out of their ports on the south Armorican coast.² There was also contact with the Gallo-Belgic tribes. This was revealed in the archaeological record of the tribes of the Trinovantes, Catuvellauni and Cantii, those people of the south-eastern part of Britain, formerly believed to be of Belgic origin, but now seen as native and referred to as the ‘Aylesford-Swarling’ culture or, more commonly, the ‘Aylesford’ culture.³

The influence from the Continent may have increased political tensions in Britain, as the aggressive Catuvellauni came to dominate their neighbours, moving from Verulamium to take over the territory of the Trinovantes and their capital nearColchester. This was in contravention of the settlement of Caesar in 54 BC. In the central south, the ‘Belgic’ Atrebates formed a pro-Roman bloc based on an area from Chichester to Winchester and north to Silchester, with Roman or Gallo-Roman influence progressively diminishing to the north and west.

Contact with Rome was through the native leaders, and even at this early stage there would be considerable kudos in being able to demonstrate their familiarity with Roman ways. Nevertheless, it might be questioned to what extent Roman influence filtered down to the lower classes.

By the beginning of the first century BC, Britain had settled into a tribal society, although the situation was sufficiently fluid that some of the tribes Caesar mentioned had disappeared before the Occupation. Society seems to have become fairly peaceful, with the result that many hill forts of the previous period were deserted, and fortified or unfortified oppida replaced them as tribal foci in locations more conducive to trading activities. These oppida could not always be considered proto-towns, but centres such as Colchester had some of the features of a town, with comparatively large-scale industry (see below) and a mint; and Silchester has yielded evidence of a Roman-style street system about 60 years before the Claudian invasion. Besides these larger centres, there were many settlements ranging from villages to hamlets of two or three houses. Such settlements were often of very long standing, and it was here that most of the population were to be found.⁴

As land control and ownership replaced communal use, the hierarchical nature of society was strengthened, and the ordinary native Briton was less able to see himself as the equal of his wealthier fellows. Only the leaders of society would be able to indulge in the trappings of wealth: imported pottery, wine, oil and fish sauce from the Continent, and the gold and silver coins which played little part in the economy but probably had more of a political use as payment of tribute, for mercenaries, or as means of gaining support.

The economy was centred on the land and its produce. Industry was generally cottage based (such as the wool ‘industry’ at Danebury), and any mass-production was still small-scale as compared with Roman times. Even so, regional resources could provide the impetus for some specialisation or production beyond subsistence requirements: salt, glass, bronze, copper-alloy, silver and gold works are known at sites ranging from north to south. Some areas were particularly productive, so much so that the scale of industry may have necessitated the use of slave labour. This is suggested for the ancillary ‘industrial’ zones of pre-Roman Colchester, which yielded metal working of various types, much glass, bone and pottery.⁵

The Claudian Conquest, while resulting in the conspicuous changes brought about by presence of the Roman Army, may not initially have had a great impact on the lives of ordinary Britons – although hardship and bloodshed did occur in some parts.⁶ A number of chieftains submitted at once to Rome’s authority; and Tacitus’ oft-quoted passage from Agricola 21 illustrates the willingness of the native aristocracy to adopt Roman customs, language and dress; yet the revolt of the Iceni as early as AD 47 shows that, even of this class, not all welcomed the conquerors. Tribal disturbances continued sporadically until the end of the second century.

Roman legions built forts and roads, and probably had input into the planning of some towns which were often, but not always, established on the site of earlier tribal or civitas capitals. The major towns were constructed in the wake of the army’s advance on its way to conquering Britain and parts of Wales. A wall begun in the reign of Hadrian separated the pacified areas from those in the north which were unable to be conquered or were hard to hold. The towns were an important factor in spreading Roman culture and customs and the Latin language. Smaller settlements sprang up along the main roads and around forts. The governor was based first at Colchester (Camulodunum), and then London, and a large administrative base set up there. In the civitates, it was not practicable to have large Roman establishments, and so Rome made use of the services of the former tribal leaders and local aristocracy. Local senates or councils were established, and magistrates appointed. The reward for service as a local magistrate was Roman citizenship, so there would have been no shortage of offers, at least at the outset. This was to change by the fourth century, when civic duties became a burden to be avoided if possible. The emperor Diocletian then made positions on local councils hereditary.

The amenities offered by the towns were commonly a market place ( forum or macellum), an administrative building (basilica), public baths, and a temple or temples to various deities, all built on a street grid. Water was reticulated by aqueducts to baths and, for the lucky few, to houses. These facilities were provided by the civic leaders in their capacity as members of the local council. They also erected arches, statues and columns, as appropriate for a Roman town. In the second century, town walls appeared. The houses of the ordinary people were both inside and outside these walls.

Wealth was, as it had been in the pre-Roman Iron Age, in the land, and the wealthy – almost certainly the same local aristocratic families as before – who probably had already built town houses for themselves in the Roman style, now spent vast sums on converting their primitive homesteads into villas. This was for some an on-going process over many generations, with the most elaborate and best-appointed emerging by the end of the third and the beginning of the fourth century. Improved farming techniques had increased production and created surpluses for local consumption or export.

Organised industry, previously rare, now became more widespread and varied. Salt production and mining increased at the source as did ironworking, but some also occurred in the towns. The wheel was now used for pottery, and what might be seen as mass-production for the ancient world occurred where the clays were of the highest quality, south-east of the Jurassic ridge. The military was a major market. But that does not mean that Britain became an industrialised nation in the modern sense. Home-based industries continued: villas in particular were probably self-sufficient in basic needs. Wool-working by women would continue to be done in the home, although a late development was a ‘factory’ staffed by women wool weavers set up by an imperial official at ‘Venta’ (either Caistor-by-Norwich or Winchester),⁷ probably for the purpose of making the birrus Britannicus, a popular hooded coat exported to the Continent.

The process of Romanisation was slow and at times superficial, especially in rural areas. However, it can be traced to some extent in the classical sources and the inscriptions from Roman Britain. These sources, together with archaeological evidence, can be used to build up a picture of Romano-British society. On the other hand, very little can be extracted from the ancient writers about life and society in Britain before the coming of the Romans. The evidence we do have is second hand, selective, frequently generic, and often little more than propaganda.⁸

When we look specifically for women from the immediate pre-Roman period, there is even less material. The notable exceptions are Boudicca and Cartimandua whose lives spanned the pre-Roman/Roman divide. They must be considered as pre-Roman. The best and in most cases the only evidence for other women is archaeological.

There is little published modern research on the women of Roman Britain, apart from the studies by Allason-Jones and the more specialised works by Johns and Redfern.⁹ For the pre-Roman period, there is still less: a handful of scholars have dealt with various aspects of the topic, but no overall study has been made. The women of early Britain have usually been dealt with as part of general research on European Iron Age communities, or on women in antiquity.¹⁰

This present study looks at the available literary and inscriptional sources, but it is also to a considerable extent based on archaeological evidence, in particular on material from the remains of burials. The period covered is generally from about the first century BC to the beginning of the fourth century AD, but some pre-Roman material has been drawn from earlier centuries. It is hoped to produce a clearer picture of the women of early Britain, and to assess the effects of the Roman occupation.

The identity of a number of women from Roman Britain is known from the inscriptions, and others can be gleaned from prosopographical studies. They are introduced according to their rank and origin, or their religious affiliation. The position of such women in society is not difficult to ascertain. But for the majority of women whose names and backgrounds are lost and who are only known through cemetery archaeology, determining their status is much more difficult.

According to the first century BC writer Posidonius, quoted in the third century AD by Athenaeus (4.152b), status was achieved by martial skill, family nobility or wealth. How status in the Late Iron Age and Roman period could be determined with regard to burial evidence is not so clear cut, since the first two would not be readily apparent. The obvious equation would be status = wealth, but one has only to look at that most famous of Roman poseurs, Trimalchio (in Petronius’ Satyricon), to acknowledge that having extraordinary wealth did not necessarily equate with what modern society would term ‘high class’. Even so, to some Romans – slaves, freedmen and the poor free, who made up a large percentage of the population – a real-life Trimalchio would seem the epitome of success. ‘Status’ is thus a subjective term.

It does appear, however, that the display of wealth was equated with status by both pre-Roman and Roman societies. The well-known possession and wearing of gold torcs by British leaders and their families (shown even on the Ara Pacis at Rome, where a small boy, presumably a Celtic high-status hostage at the court of the emperor Augustus is depicted wearing not only Roman dress but also this distinctive neckwear), and barrow burials with complete chariots, may be compared with the jewellery, objets d’art and splendid mausolea in the possession of upper class families at Rome. In other words, manifestations of wealth and status are very hard to separate.

The relationship between status in life and burial practices in the immediate pre-Roman period has recently been examined,¹¹ and it was concluded that, in areas where the social structure was unstable and there was need for strong ‘native’ leadership, burials would demonstrate status in a non-native or Romanised way; whereas in those areas which were already familiar with the ways of Rome, status would be defined in the more traditional way of barrows and impressive imported grave goods, especially pottery.

Difficulties arise when one has to determine what constitutes items of value and status to society. In the pre-Roman period, certain objects, especially imported Roman pottery vessels (and presumably the oils, wines and sauces which filled them), dinner ware and glass, were highly desirable commodities and are found in what can be assumed to be high status graves. After the Conquest, and particularly as the exclusiveness and novelty of Roman imports gave way to availability and familiarity, these types of grave goods became less common. It could well be, too, that the economic situation at certain times reflected a reluctance to consign to the earth perfectly usable objects for a purpose which might or might not ensure a happy afterlife for the deceased. Practicalities might dictate that only fragmentary glass, broken pots and dress pins, small-value bronze coins or similar modest items be included in burials. Fashions also change: an unfurnished rural grave in the late second century AD may have a different significance from an urban one in the fourth.¹²

Moreover, there is the problem of not being able to determine with any degree of certainty what religious beliefs, if any, underlay the deposition of certain types of grave goods or influenced burial practices, and to what extent these relate to status. Some foods such as the imported wines and oils might be seen as demonstrating wealth, rather than religious beliefs. But others, such as the cheap cuts of pork found in British chariot burials, suggest a de...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Plates
• Tables
• Preface
• Abbreviations
• 1 Historical Background
• 2 Identification, Numbers and Status in the Late Iron Age
• 3 Identification in the Roman Period
• 4 Numbers and Status in the Roman Period
• 5 Living and Dying
• 6 Daily Activity
• 7 Religion
• 8 Conclusions
• References