true that ‘west Kent’ shelly wares are occasionally found on east Kent
sites, but these need not all be of post-Conquest importation and in any
case may well have been acquired through indigenous mechanisms of trade
and exchange rather than through any method consequent upon the imposition
of the Roman systems of taxation and administration (Pollard 1983a, 474—535).
‘Patch Grove’ ware provides a link between Kent and Surrey that is
not clearly visible in the Iron Age, but little is known of the Surrey
area in the century before the Conquest, and it is possible that this ‘link’
may have been established prior to the Conquest through other wares. The
forms of ‘Patch Grove’ ware, and the infrequency with which it is
found on urban and ‘small town’
|
|
sites (see Tyers and Marsh 1978, and Appendix 5 below), do not
suggest that it was particularly influenced by fashions and institutions
introduced by Continental immigrants. Rather, it is best seen as a purely
indigenous development coincident with the establishment of Roman rule. That
it achieved a wide distribution in the pre- to early Flavian period within
an essentially rural area supports this view, for it clearly contrasts
markedly with the highly localised distribution of the wares of the two ‘Roman’
industries of the pre-Flavian period, the Eccles and ‘Reed Avenue/St.
Stephen’s Road’ concerns. Moreover, it is thought that the
|