The preceding chapters have presented a description and analysis of the
trends in the development of production, importation and dispersal of
pottery in Kent from the first to the fifth century A.D. The patterns that
have been propounded evince complex networks of trade/exchange connections
both within the region and between it, neighbouring and more distant
regions, which change in directions and intensity several times during the
course of the period. These changes may be gradual, as with the expansion of
the Oxfordshire industry’s market during the third century, or abrupt,
such as the flood of samian that entered Britain in the Flavian period.
Certain elements of the network remain comparatively stable over a period of
centuries, such as the parallel development of forms and fabrics in north
Kent and south Essex, the apparent dominance of the Upchurch industry of the
market for beakers, and the isolation of east Kent from west Kent in
|
|
coarse ware exchange.
The principle adopted in defining the various elements in these
networks has been to work from known production units, whose styles are
frequently quite distinct from one another. These units, — the Canterbury
sandy ware kilns, the ‘BB2’/grey ware kilns of the lower Thames area,
the Brockley Hill-Verulamium kilns, for example — form a framework for
discussion of many aspects of production, importation and dispersal, but
they only produced a part of the total pottery found in Kent. The remainder
has been divided on the grounds of fabric and form into ‘wares’ such as
‘Patch Grove’, early shelly, and late grogged. The system is not
dissimilar to that employed by Cunliffe (1978) in his work on Iron Age
pottery. In this, Cunliffe argues that ‘the only value to be gained from
defining minor regional variations
|