Feeding the Roman Army

The Archaeology of Production and Supply in NW Europe

Richard Thomas, Sue Stallibrass

• Publisher: Oxbow Books
• Year: 2008
• eBook ISBN: 9781782975267
• Topic: Histoire
• Subtopic: Histoire de la Rome antique

These ten papers from two Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference (2007) sessions bring together a growing body of new archaeological evidence in an attempt to reconsider the way in which the Roman army was provisioned. Clearly, the adequate supply of food was essential to the success of the Roman military. But what was the nature of those supply networks? Did the army rely on imperial supply lines from the continent, as certainly appears to be the case for some commodities, or were provisions requisitioned from local agricultural communities? If the latter was the case, was unsustainable pressure placed on such resources and how did local communities respond? Alternatively, did the early stages of conquest include not only the development of a military infrastructure, but also an effective supply-chain network based on contracts? Beyond the initial stages of conquest, how were provisioning arrangements maintained in the longer term, did supply chains remain static or did they change over time and, if so, what precipitated those changes? Addressing such questions is critical if we are to understand the nature of Roman conquest and the extent of interaction between indigenous communities and the Roman army. Case studies come from Roman Britain (Alchester, Cheshire, Dorset), France, the Netherlands and the Rhine Delta, looking at evidence from animal products, military settlements, the size of cattle, horses, pottery and salt. The editors also provide a review of current research and suggest a future agenda for economic and environmental research.

1. For starters: producing and supplying food to the army in the Roman north-west provinces

Richard Thomas and Sue Stallibrass

“The huge quantity of resources needed by the army and the impact this might have had on the local native populations seem to me to be areas which cry out for investigation” (Reece 2002: 187)

Introduction

Recent years have seen growing awareness of the significance that studies of the production/ acquisition, supply, preparation and consumption of food have in aiding our understanding of the nature of past societies. Beyond physiological necessity, anthropological and archaeological research has demonstrated the way in which patterns of food preparation and consumption can reflect upon multiple, often intersecting aspects of past communities, including group identities, gender relations, religious/ritual practices and status differences (e.g. Daróczi-Szabó 2004; Goody 1982; Hastorf 1990; Scott 2007; Thomas 2007). Moreover, studies of food acquisition/production and supply have been used to reveal evidence for interaction both within and between past societies through trade, distribution, exchange and market networks, for example, as well as the demands and responses consequent to the development of such relationships (e.g. Boenke 2005; Landon 1997; Schia 1994; Van der Veen 1996). This volume contributes to the growing literature on the latter topic through the consideration of the nature of military food production and supply in the Roman north-west provinces (Fig. 1.1).

The success of the Roman army was clearly predicated upon the adequate provision of supplies. Indeed, the supply needs of the army, whether on campaign, during periods of conquest or settled occupation were considerable (e.g. Roth 1999). But what form did those supply networks take? Did the army rely on long distance supply lines, or were basic provisions acquired regionally or from local communities, and to what extent was this dependent on the nature of particular foodstuffs (e.g. bulk, cost, preservation qualities)? Following on from this, what was the nature of procurement strategies (e.g. compulsory requisition, direct purchase, taxation/tribute collection, military contracts) and what impact did these have on different communities within the provinces (urban, rural and military), and the relationships between them? Were procurement policies dictated centrally, or orchestrated regionally or locally? Did the presence of the Roman army stimulate economic development and specialised modes of production at local, regional or provincial levels, or lead to unsustainable pressure being placed on resources and/or the destabilisation of local production? Alternatively, were the occupying forces met with an agricultural landscape already capable of surplus production and able to absorb the increased demands placed upon it? To what extent was the production and supply of food to the Roman army situational and constrained or aided by local circumstances, such as the environment, pre-conquest patterns of production and the fluctuating fortunes of the military presence in the north-west frontier? These are some of the questions that this volume hopes to begin to address, through the consideration of multiple lines of archaeological evidence.

Figure 1.1. Map of the Roman north-west provinces c. A.D. 120 with the principal sites mentioned in this volume highlighted. Key: 1: Chester; 2: Alchester; 3: Arras; 4: Dutch River Area (see Cavallo et al. and Groot, this volume, for more detailed maps of this area); 5: Isle of Purbeck, Dorset.

Sources of evidence

The range of archaeological sources that can be employed to tackle questions connected to the production and supply of food is diverse. They include direct evidence in the form of the remains of plants, animals and processed food products that were supplied to military settlements (e.g. Cavallo et al., Derreumaux et al., Filean, Groot, Thomas this volume; Kimpe et al. 2002) and written records (e.g. Pearce 2002; Whittaker 2002) as well as indirect evidence for foodstuffs, such as the vessels used to store and transport food and even food-pest infestations (e.g. Buckland 1981; Gerrard this volume; Peacock 1986). Numismatic evidence, changing settlement patterns, the presence of particular archaeological features within settlements (e.g. field boundaries, horticultural terraces, corn driers and storage facilities), palynological analysis, and material culture can also be used to elucidate aspects of agricultural production and supply (e.g. Carrington this volume; Dark and Dark 1997; Greene 1986; Maguire 1983; Morris 1979; Rees 1979; Van der Veen 1989), while both direct and indirect evidence for different modes of transportation can be identified archaeologically (e.g. Johnstone this volume; Parker 1992).

Unfortunately, as Cool (2006: 1) has recently emphasised, specialist reports on direct evidence (plant and animal remains, ceramics etc.) are often hidden away at the end of excavation reports. They are seldom integrated into comprehensive discussions concerning wider theoretical questions within Roman archaeology. This is for a range of reasons, many relating to working conditions and publication formats in contract archaeology, where the majority of studies are now conducted. Specialists working with one class of evidence often do not have the opportunity to work alongside those dealing with other types of material, and may have to work with ‘their’ material from a very wide range of sites and periods. This can lead to a lack of awareness of what the major research questions are for any particular type and period of site, and to a specialist rather than holistic basis to interpretations. Moreover, the existence of many specialist reports as ‘grey literature’ i.e. client and archive reports that are not available as publications with ISSN or ISBN registrations makes it difficult even for specialists to be aware of what other relevant data exist (e.g. Lauwerier and de Vries 2004; Van der Veen et al. 2007). This isolated mode of working together with the incomplete publication of data has undoubtedly contributed to the absence of synthetic accounts that explicitly deal with the archaeology of Roman military food production and supply, despite the recognised centrality of these issues to military studies (e.g. Reece 2002: 187). Through this volume, therefore, we hope to demonstrate not only the wider economic and social significance of studying the nature and impact of the production and supply of food to the Roman military in the north-west provinces, but also demonstrate the importance of using multiple classes of archaeological evidence in testing theoretical models. Studies of plant and animal remains feature strongly in the volume, since these are classes of archaeological evidence that have been under-utilised in the past (Cool 2006), and we hope to raise their profile for non-environmental specialists and environmental specialists alike, but the main aim is to illustrate the academic value of integrating a range of different types of evidence to address key research questions.

Research context

Introduction

In order to contextualise the new research presented within this volume it is apposite to provide a brief overview of some of the key themes that have emerged from previous studies of military food production and supply in the Roman north-west provinces.

Regional trends

Although the application of broad-scale regional analyses are not unproblematic, not least because they likely disguise more subtle patterns of inter- and intra-regional variation, neglecting the subtleties of environmental context and spatial variation within sites, for example, they do serve to illustrate wider patterns in military procurement strategy. Currently, the number of regional studies into the nature of Roman military food provisioning within the north-west provinces is limited; however, there is evidence to suggest that broader scale analyses are increasingly being adopted (Campbell and Hammon in prep.; Cavallo et al. this volume; Livarda in prep).

While clear regional differences in the proportions of different cereal crops have been identified on Roman settlements within the north-west provinces (Van der Veen 1988: 363), comparison of the archaeobotanical evidence from military settlements in Scotland, Wales, northern England and Germany has revealed remarkable conformity in the range of staple plant foods consumed (Dickson and Dickson 1988; Dickson 1989). Previous archaeobotanical and palynological research has demonstrated that the primary staple crops of the Roman north-west provinces were two glume wheats (emmer: Triticum dicoccum and spelt: Triticum spelta), a free-threshing wheat (bread wheat: Triticum aestivum) and barley (Hordeum vulgare), with oats (Avena sativa) and rye (Secale cereale) of lesser significance (e.g. Cool 2006: 69–71; Dark 1999).

Such broad conformity is supported to a certain extent by the analysis of the relative proportions of the three major domestic mammals: cattle, sheep and pig (King 2001: 220). This is a diet that consisted mostly of beef, with a greater emphasis on mutton on British sites, and pork in Germany, possibly reflecting pre-conquest patterns of food consumption and the origins of the soldiers (King 2001; Mattingly 2006: 222). A combination of differences between military and non-military sites (contra Davies 1971: 136) and the broad similarity of the military diet in the north-west provinces had led King (2001: 220) to conclude that ‘for the most part…the army, particularly the legions, would have been able to adopt a command economy, and exercise dietary preferences’. Despite King’s observation that legionary garrisons may have had some privileges regarding the supply of resources, there has been a tendency for sites to be classified on a rather simple basis as ‘military’ or ‘civilian’. Many forts saw changes in their garrisons, particularly between initial campaigns of invasion and conquest that often featured legionary forces in considerable strength, and subsequent ‘peace-keeping’ occupation which often made comprehensive use of auxiliary forces. Many of the forts in the north-west provinces had relatively short-lived or small-scale legionary garrisons, and these troop movements may be reflected in changes in food supply. A further complication concerns the relationship between military establishments such as forts and fortresses and urban settlements. The Roman military forces moved relatively swiftly through parts of the north-west provinces, such as southern and eastern England. Here, urban settlements developed that can be regarded as civilian towns (Burnham and Wacher 1990; Wacher 1995) and considerations of how the Roman army was supplied is simplified by the fact that it is possible to consider rural settlements, villas, towns and forts (cf. King 1999a) as relatively discrete entities, although this not to completely deny the presence of military personnel at such sites (e.g. Bishop 1991; Miles et al. 2007: 348). In the frontier provinces, however, such as northern England and the lower Rhine, the military occupation persisted for centuries, and the relationship of the forts to the vici that developed immediately outside their gates is still unclear, with recent investigations highlighting the interdependence of the sites, and the possibilities that some civilians lived in the forts and that some retired soldiers lived in the vici (James 2006; Scheidel 1996).

One common pattern seen on many military sites in the north-west provinces is higher proportions of pig bones, compared with neighbouring rural sites (e.g. Alchester: Thomas this volume; Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Lauwerier 1988; Oedenburg, France: Schibler et al. 2005). It is of course essential to consider the norms for each area that is being investigated: in Italy, a ‘high’ proportion of pig bones might comprise over 60%, whereas in Britain a proportion greater than 20% might be considered unusually high (King 1999b). That said, the consumption of relatively larger quantities of pork meat has often been viewed as characteristic of highly ‘romanised’ diets, because pig is often the most abundant domestic mammal on sites in western central Italy (King 1999b, 2001; Mackinnon 2004). However, there are other explanations which could account for their prevalence on military sites. For example, the fecundity and large litter size of pigs has been cited as a factor that may have contributed to their prevalence on early military sites, in addition to its suitability for preservation (Cavallo et al. this volume; Grant 2004: 373; Thomas this volume), an idea supported by the sharp decline in the proportions of pig bones seen at some military sites in later periods (Grant 1989: 137; King 2001: 217–8). In some localities the high proportions of pigs may reflect environmental factors (e.g. Luff 1982: 248) and/or ear...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Appetizer: preface and acknowledgements
• 1. For starters: producing and supplying food to the army in the Roman north-west provinces
• 2. Feeding the wolf in Cheshire: models and (a few) facts
• 3. Supply-chain networks and the Roman invasion of Britain: a case study from Alchester, Oxfordshire
• 4. Food supply at two successive military settlements in Arras (France): an archaeobotanical and archaeozoological approach
• 5. Food supply to the Roman army in the Rhine delta in the first century A.D.
• 6. Surplus production of animal products for the Roman army in a rural settlement in the Dutch River Area
• 7. A biometric perspective on the size of cattle in Roman Nijmegen, The Netherlands: implications for the supply of urban consumers and the Roman army
• 8. Feeding the army from Dorset: pottery, salt and the Roman state
• 9. Commodities or logistics? The role of equids in Roman supply networks
• 10. Food for thought: what’s next on the menu?