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

The Roman Pottery of Kent by Dr Richard J. Pollard  -  Chapter 4  page 96
Doctoral thesis completed in 1982, published 1988

Hartley (1968, 174) has shown that the mortaria of the latter industry encroached upon the Kent products' markets share at Richborough in the second century, and were even able to compete in Canterbury itself with the indigenous pottery (Hartley 1963; 1973a, fig. 7) during the Antonine period. Colchester mortaria of this date have also been recorded at Dover (Hartley 1981) and Highstead (Hartley forthcoming). The most common coarse ware in use at Dover in Periods II and III (c. A.D. 155-180 and 190-210) would appear to have been BB2, and grey sandy ware roll-rim necked jars (e.g. Willson 1981, 222-9 and 235-41). The latter could conceivably be of Canterbury origin, but the lack of other characteristic Canterbury grey wares here makes this improbable. The roll-rim necked jar was a ubiquitous product of the later second and third centuries (e.g. in the lower Thames industries, such as Mucking - Jones and Rodwell 1973, Type J - and Higham - Pollard 1983b, Gross Form XVI; and at Colchester - Hull 1963, Form 268), and the possibilities of importation of these vessels from the Thames estuary or local production at Dover cannot be disregarded. A Colchester source is unlikely, as the Dover pottery does not exhibit the shoulder groove(s) characteristic of that industry.
   BB2 pie- and dog-dishes were in widespread use in east Kent prior to the collapse of the Canterbury grey ware industry. Unfortunately, a lack of independent dating evidence and well-stratified groups have frustrated attempts to assess the rate and periods of introduction of the ware to most sites in the east. There is no certain evidence of BB2 at Canterbury antedating the Hadrianic period: the vessel cited by Williams (1977, 207) from one of Jenkins' sites (1950, fig. 11, no. 28) came from a late first-century pit cut by third-century pits, and no well-sealed examples have come to light during the recent campaign of excavations undertaken by the Canterbury Archaeological Trust (Macpherson-Grant 1982; Pollard forthcoming, d). It is probable that BB2 first occurred in east Kent in the 

Hadrianic period: several pits with fills of Flavian-early Hadrianic date (Bushe-Fox 1932, Pit 34, no. 339) or late first to mid second (Bushe-Fox 1949, Pit 182: unpublished jar of Gillam 1970, Type 139; Cunliffe 1968, Pit 255: unpublished bead-rim jar of Gillam and Mann 1970, fig. 2, no. 14, and dog-dish of Gillam 1970, Type 328) contain BB2, but only a single first-century pit (Bushe-Fox 1949, Pit 76, pre-Flavian) held a BB2 vessel (a pie-dish with stubby triangular rim and lattice, unpublished), possibly to be interpreted as intrusive. The earliest BB2 in east Kent may have come from more than one source: Williams suggested a Colchester origin for a pie-dish from a late first- to early second-century deposit at Canterbury (Williams 1977, 208), but postulated a Kentish source for a group of six vessels from Richborough including lattice decorated pie-dishes and a decorated dog-dish from late first to early second century contexts (ibid., 207: Group XVII). That this source continued to supply Richborough in the late second to mid third century is implied by the inclusion of a plain pie-dish (datable by typology to c. A.D. 180-250) in this group. A third source, perhaps in the vicinity of Canterbury, is represented by a series of coarse-grained, soft, semi-matt BB2 lattice-decorated pie-dishes from Canterbury occurring in early to late second-century contexts (e.g. Pollard forthcoming, e, no. 7); the fabric is easily distinguished from the finer-grained, hard, glossy vessels from the Richborough groups, bearing a closer resemblance to the Greenhithe BB2 copies (see above).
   These Canterbury vessels, and the finer BB2 dishes that are found alongside them, formed only a small proportion of the city's pottery in the first half of the second century in comparison with the much greater numbers of vessels recovered from contexts of c. A.D. 150-220. 17 per cent of the pottery from a well filled in this period (Macpherson-Grant 1982, Well 101; quantification by the present author) comprised BB2, all of it of plain dish forms, suggesting a

Page 96

Page 95       Back to Chapter 4       Contents Page         Page 97

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