KENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY  -- RESEARCH   Studying and sharing Kent's past      Homepage

The Roman Pottery of Kent by Dr Richard J. Pollard  -  Chapter 4  page 38
Doctoral thesis completed in 1982, published 1988

classes, and the conical cups, are clearly derived from Gallo-Belgic prototypes; the platters were certainly widely-used prior to the Claudian conquest, and occur in several fabrics (Fig. 17). The grog-tempered wares are characteristic of east Kent, and are similar to Camulodunum forms (Hawkes and Hull 1947). Camulodunum 21/22 (Thompson 1982, Form G1-1) appears to have been produced in the pre-Conquest period, and occurs mainly at Canterbury (e.g. Frere 1954, nos. 40-43), but also at Wye (unpublished). The apparent absence of this form from Richborough and its rarity in Neronian as opposed to pre-Conquest and Claudian deposits at Canterbury (Frere 1954; Macpherson-Grant 1982; Pollard forthcoming, d) are suggestive of a predominantly pre-Conquest period of usage. Camulodunum 24/27 (Thompson 1982, Form G1-6) is the most common post-Conquest platter, being found in grog-tempered ware in east Kent, flint-tempered ware at Radfield and Rochester, and sandy wares throughout Kent but primarily in central and western districts. The form is almost certainly confined to the Claudian-early Flavian period, as at Camulodunum itself. Other platter forms copied in local wares include Camulodunum 13, 14 and 16, but not, it should be noted, the more intricate forms 4-9. The flagons occur in grog-tempered ware throughout east Kent (Fig. 17); the high degree of similarity between vessels on the various sites is suggestive of a common source, perhaps Canterbury itself. The 'collar-rim' 'Hofheim' forms, (e.g. Camulodunum 144, 161: here nos. 35, 37-39), particularly the two-handled type, are far more common than the disc-rim (no. 36) which has only been noted by the present author at Richborough itself. There does not seem to have been an equivalent range of indigenous products in west Kent, all early flagons in that area being in fine untempered or sandy wares of a higher quality, usually in white-slip wares. The grog-tempered forms of east Kent are found predominantly in Claudio-Neronian layers at Canterbury, Richborough and Wingham; an origin in the late pre-Conquest period cannot be ruled

out, however, as the prototype forms of 'collar-rim' flagons were undoubtedly circulating at that time (particularly the white ware Camulodunum 161, on which no. 35 here was based).
   Fine ware flagons from several sources are also found on many sites in Kent. Local production is known at Canterbury (Jenkins 1956a, fig. 8, no. 1: no. 56 here) and Eccles (Detsicas 1977a) whilst a large group of white-slipped vessels found on the Medway estuary at Hoo (Blumstein 1956) may indicate a third source. The fabric is recorded at Southwark (Tyers and Marsh 1978, form IA 1) alongside vessels in granular sandy buff ware probably from Brockley Hill (ibid., IA 2-collar-rim, lB 1-ring-neck cf. no. 60 here, and ID 1 - disc-rim, cf. no. 36 here; see also Castle 1973a, fig. 2, and 1973b, fig. 2), and fine buff ware (Tyers and Marsh 1978, form IA 3). The Brockley Hill wares of the pre-Flavian period do not seem to have penetrated Kent itself, however.
   The end of the Neronian period saw several changes in the supply of fine pottery to Kent. Production and importation of Terra Nigra declined markedly, Terra Rubra having already fallen from favour in the 50s (Rigby 1973, 20). The Lyon industry suffered a catastrophic series of setbacks in the late 60s from which it was unable to recover, and exports of this ware to Britain undoubtedly ceased at this time (Green 1978a; 1979a). Central Gaulish glazed ware also ceased to be produced during, if not slightly earlier than, the early Vespasianic period (c. A.D. 70-75; Greene 1978b, 31). The samian industry of South Gaul continued its expansion, however, with some simplification of forms presumably designed with acceleration of production in mind. Lyon beakers were replaced by slightly different forms of rough-cast ware from the Lower Rhineland and North Gaul (Greene 1978a; Anderson 1980) and perhaps British sources also, though this has yet to be positively demonstrated. However, these wares do not seem to

Page 38

Page 37      Back to Chapter 4    Contents Page         Page 39

For details about the advantages of membership of the Kent Archaeological Society   click here

Back to Publications On-line               Back to Research Page            Back to Homepage                 

This site is hosted by nVeracity      Kent Archaeological Society is a registered charity number 223382
© Kent Archaeological Society 2004   
 

This website is constructed by enthusiastic amateurs. Any errors noticed by other researchers will be to gratefully received so
 that we can amend our pages to give an accurate record as possible. Please send details too research@kentarchaeology.org.uk