|
There would seem to be no compelling evidence to support the view that the
Claudian conquest brought about any rapid, radical change in the
production and distribution of pottery in Kent. Developments that can be
traced during the pre- to early Flavian period either affected only a very
small portion of the population, or can be attributed to the craft of
indigenous potters. There remains one great exception to this rule, and
that is the introduction of the flagon as an object of common usage.
Pre-Flavian forms in a variety of fabrics are present on sites of all
types in every locality, particularly in east Kent and along the Thames
flood plain. Although the stratigraphic evidence does not provide firm
proof,
|
|
there is a strong possibility that the widespread adoption of the flagon was
a direct result of the Conquest. Dannell (1979, 178) has observed that even
in Essex the numbers of later first-century B.C. amphorae do not suggest
that wine-drinking became a widespread habit. Finds in Kent of these
amphorae (Dressel 1B) are more thinly scattered than north of the Thames
(see Appendix 3), although the buckets found in burials at Aylesford and
Swarling possibly provide supporting evidence for the consumption of wine at
this period (Stead 1971). The lack of known examples of Greco-Roman wine
amphorae (except perhaps at Canterbury), the small number of finds of
Gallo-Belgic fine
|
