projects.britishmuseum.org · 2018-08-07 · dea senuna: treasure, cult and ritual at ashwell,...

Dea Senuna: Treasure, Cult and Ritual at Ashwell, Hertfordshire

Ralph Jackson and Gilbert Burleigh

Illustrations by Craig WilliamsPhotographs by Saul Peckham

With contributions from Denise Allen, Caroline Cartwright, Andrew Fawcett, Eleanor Ghey, Kay Hartley, Martin Henig, Marilyn Hockey, Catherine Johns, Susan Jones, Anthony King, Susan La Niece, Andrew Meek, Valery Rigby, Fleur Shearman, Sarah Talks, Isobel Thompson, Roger Tomlin, Gill Varndell and Neil Wilkin

PublishersThe British MuseumGreat Russell StreetLondon wc1b 3dg

Series editorSarah Faulks

Dea Senuna: Treasure, Cult and Ritual at Ashwell, HertfordshireRalph Jackson and Gilbert Burleigh

isbn 978 086159 194 7issn 1747 3640

© The Trustees of the British Museum 2018Second printing 2018

Text by British Museum contributors © 2018 The Trustees of the British Museum. All other text © 2018 individual contributors as listed on p. iii

Front cover: the Ashwell dea Senuna figurine (cat. nos A1–A3; see p. 20 and Fig. 39)

Printed and bound in the UK by Park Communications

Papers used by the British Museum are recyclable products made from wood grown in well-managed forests and other controlled sources. The manufacturing processes conform to the environmental regulations of the country of origin.

All British Museum images illustrated in this book are © The Trustees of the British Museum Further information about the Museum and its collection can be found at britishmuseum.org

Published with the support of the Thriplow Charitable Trust

Contents Acknowledgements iv

Part 1: The Hoard 1. Introduction 1 Ralph Jackson

2. The Ashwell Hoard: Conservation and 6 Scientific Study Marilyn Hockey, Fleur Shearman and Susan La Niece, with contributions from Andrew Meek and Caroline Cartwright

3. The Ashwell Hoard: Composition, Formation 18 and Deposition Ralph Jackson, with a contribution from Martin Henig

4. The Ashwell Hoard: Catalogue, A1–A29 31 Ralph Jackson

5. The Barkway Hoard: Catalogue, B1–B9 63 Ralph Jackson

6. The Stony Stratford Hoard: Catalogue, 74 SS1–SS105 Ralph Jackson

7. The Inscriptions 110 R.S.O. Tomlin

8. The Ashwell Hoard, Dea Senuna and 121 Comparable Finds from Britain and the Wider Roman World Ralph Jackson

Part 2: The Excavations 9. Ashwell in its Setting 143 Gilbert Burleigh, with contributions from Isobel Thompson and Sarah Talks

10. The Excavations at Ashwell 2003–6 157 Gilbert Burleigh

11. The Finds from the Excavations 212 Ralph Jackson, Andrew Fawcett, Eleanor Ghey, Denise Allen, Gill Varndell, Neil Wilkin, Susan Jones, Anthony King, with contributions from Valery Rigby, Kay Hartley and Catherine Johns

12. Discussion: Ashwell End, a Ritual Site 321 Gilbert Burleigh

13. Conclusions 340 Ralph Jackson and Gilbert Burleigh

Bibliography 342

Contributors 350

Index 352

iv | Dea Senuna

Acknowledgements The preparation of this book over many years has involved numerous people both within and outside of the British Museum. We offer our unreserved thanks to all. In particular we thank all those whose names appear in the list of contents.

For the discovery of the hoard, which triggered the research and excavation that revealed a new deity and a fascinating site, we thank Alan Meek, the finder, and Andrew Phillips, the leader of the North Herts Charity Detector Group, who had the presence of mind to contact Gilbert Burleigh immediately for essential archaeological assistance.

We are particularly grateful to the landowners, Sam Sheppard and his father the late Gurney Sheppard, who supported the project throughout, permitting and facilitating the excavations and generously donating the excavated finds to the British Museum. We gratefully acknowledge the generous, constant and enthusiastic support of David Hillelson and Helen Ashworth of The Heritage Network and Peter Greener, Honorary Curator of Ashwell Village Museum.

Especial thanks, too, are due to the British Museum Friends and the Art Fund for grants that enabled the acquisition of the hoard; and to the Townley Group of the British Museum Friends and the Trustees of the British Museum for very generous funding for the archaeological excavations and post-excavation analysis. In addition, we thank the BBC, Hertfordshire County Council and the Council for British Archaeology (Mid-Anglia) for grants towards the costs of the excavations. We are also grateful to the Roman Research Trust for a grant towards the analysis of the excavated faunal assemblage, and we give warm thanks to the Thriplow Charitable Trust for a grant towards the cost of publication.

At the British Museum Susan La Niece led the scientific work on the hoard, Marilyn Hockey carried out the conservation of the figurine and gold plaques and Fleur Shearman conserved the silver plaques as well as those in the Stony Stratford hoard. It was a joint endeavour and all three are owed a huge debt of gratitude. Their expertise and dedication resulted in a truly remarkable transformation as targeted scientific analysis and painstaking conservation revealed both the importance and the beauty of the hoard and secured it for the future. Andrew Meek and Caroline Cartwright, too, kindly provided specialist reports, while Antony Simpson was responsible for fine radiography and Mike Neilson made the splendid replica of gold plaque A9 for Ashwell Village Museum. Similarly, the importance of the many excavated finds was revealed by skilful and often arduous conservation by equally dedicated colleagues, above all by Pippa Pearce, Hayley Bullock, Graeme McArthur and Kathleen Swales, to all of whom we offer our thanks.

For advice on illustration we are, as ever, grateful to Stephen Crummy. But the illustrations themselves, both of the hoard and of the excavations, are by Craig Williams and we owe him the greatest thanks for his incomparable professional skills, important observations and sheer stamina which have given this book the most elegant,

Acknowledgements | v

accurate and intelligible illustrations, simply the finest drawings one could hope for. Likewise, we are indebted to Kevin Lovelock and the late Sandra Marshall for first-class photography, but above all to Saul Peckham who, with his customary professionalism and collegiality, calmly and brilliantly created the perfect series of photos of the entire hoard and the finds from the excavations.

With their usual generosity curatorial colleagues at the British Museum, most notably Richard Hobbs, Catherine Johns, Roger Bland, Stuart Needham, Jonathan Williams, Neil Wilkin, Julia Farley and Virginia Smithson, have given us valuable advice, information and support as well as joining in stimulating discussion. Many other British Museum colleagues, too, have played important parts in the Ashwell project, none more so than the team of department museum assistants led by Jim Peters, who have displayed, cared for and mediated the hoard and excavated finds. Jim was involved from the outset, critically ensuring the safety of the hoard when it was in its most vulnerable un-conserved state. Our thanks go also to Ian Richardson and the Treasure team; and to Francesca Hillier who kindly located early archive information on the Barkway Hoard and indexed this volume.

Beyond the Museum we thank Roger Tomlin and Martin Henig for their respective discussions of the inscriptions and the gem, but also for their close and generous collaboration and many invaluable suggestions and references which have enriched the book beyond measure. We also thank Patrick Sims-Williams and Patrizia de Bernardo Stempel who kindly shared their thoughts with us at an early stage on the names Senuna and Flavia Cunoris; Ernst Künzl, Annemarie Kaufmann-Heinimann, Joanna Bird and Marie-Luce Muracciole who provided much useful information on votive plaques, temple finds and precious metal hoards; Fraser Hunter and Tim Padley for discussion and photographs; and Anne Marriott for her thorough and sensitive copy-editing.

For their hard work, skills and enthusiastic commitment, without which the fieldwork and its important results would not have been accomplished, we give thanks to the volunteer excavators, recorders and finds processors (including members of the North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society, Stevenage Archaeology Group and University of London, Birkbeck College students) – Adrian Arnold, Peggy Atkins, Delvine Beckley+, Sam Beesley, Julie Benham, Sally Benham, Sue Biles, John Bollen, Tanya Bowie, Alice Brookes, Elizabeth Brookes, Sophia Brookes, Lynne Buckley, Diane Burleigh, Charlotte Cade, Jean Campbell, Michelle Clayton, Les Collins, Philip Dean, Terry Dear, Jane De Looze, Robin Densem, Brian Dickinson, Tony Driscoll, Laurie Elvin, Mervyn Evans, Jim Fairbairn, Cristina Felipez+, Liz Gatti, Greg Ford, Viv Gibson, Nicola Goode, Claire Green, Darren Green, Jackie Green, Val Guess, Maggie Hardman, Muriel Hardman, Liz Harrison, Jayne Hilton, John Hinks, Peter Hinnells, David Hodson, Helen Hofton, Mike Horgan, Deb Hudson, Kevin Hudson, John Hunt, Liz Hunter, Mick James, Owain James, Tomoko Kawauchi, Karl Keightley, Michael Keightley, Tracey Keightley, Ann Kibby, Mike Kibby, Harriet Lacey, Robert Lancaster, Bethany Larkin, Gillian Mahoney, Cliff Marshall, David Mather, Rosemary Mather, Sylvia Dean Mays, Rob Merrifield, Bilyana Milevska, Shirley Miller, Mike O’Leary, Paul Palmer, Sigrid Pardel, Mark Perks, Jayne Platt, John Pritchett, James Redfern, Sandy Redfern, Fay Reid, Julia Roberts, Mary Saltom, Amrita Saraogi, Charlotte Savey-Corkingdale, Frankie Saxton, Robert Scott, Vicky Selley, John Sharp, David Shirley, Ann Smith, Brian Smith, Mark Stevenson, Sarah Talks, Melanie Thornton, Nick Thornton, Russell Turberville, Katerina Vladimirova, Thomas Warner, Steve Wells, Lindsey Wheeler, Emma Williams, Kev Williams, Robert Williams, Matthew Wilson and Nigel Wilson; and David Brown, the earth-moving machine driver.

Figure 1 The temple treasure hoard find-spot at Ashwell, Hertfordshire, on the morning of discovery, 29 September 2002. Photo: Gilbert Burleigh

vi | Dea Senuna

Figure 2 The finder, Alan Meek (centre right), with Karl Skelton (centre left), and colleagues seeking anything that had been missed. Photo: Gilbert Burleigh

Figure 3 The unearthed hoard. Photo: Gilbert Burleigh

Acknowledgements | vii

We thank the Heritage Network staff, Helen Ashworth, David Hillelson, Alison Hudson, Hannah Firth, Ian Howard, Mark Winter, David Kaye, Faith Pewtress, Karin Semmelmann and, especially, the site supervisors, Abi Rothwell, Geoff Saunders and Chris Turner. And we thank, too, the members of the North Herts Charity Detector Group, Dave Allum, Adrian Arnold, Paula Crisp, Harvey Cross, Jim Fairbairn, Gary Freedman, Barry Hamblin, Chris Hewitt, Richard Hewitt, Eddie Hutchins, Howard Hutchins, Julie Hutchins, Colin Kane, Cyril Keating, Philip Kirk, Dave Mance, Alan Meek, Andrew Phillips, Clive Reader, Karl Skelton, Ann Smith, Brian Tattingham and Andy Wight. And also Don Varty.

For their geophysical surveys our grateful thanks go to Dr Brian Bridgland, Pat Davies, Elizabeth Livingstone, Bruce Millner, Ian Sanderson, Maureen Storey, Tony Storey and their Archaeology RheeSearch colleagues; Dr Kris Lockyear, his colleague Dr Ellen Shlasko, and the volunteers on his ‘Sensing the Iron Age and Roman Past: Geophysics and the Landscape of Hertfordshire’ community project, including Jane Buxton, Brian Dickinson, Ivor Davies, David Hall, Ruth Halliwell, Nigel Harper-Scott, Stuart Henderson, Dave Minty, Sheila Murray, Graeme Spurway, Alfie Talks, Sarah Talks and Jim West; and Professor Mark Noel of GeoQuest Associates and the University of Durham. And for plotting the distributions of the 3D recorded finds we are immensely grateful to Laurie Elvin and David Hillelson.

For identifying and recording metal detector and other finds from Ashwell over the years, Gilbert Burleigh thanks his former colleague C. Jane Read, Archaeological Illustrator for North Hertfordshire Museums, and Julian Watters, former Finds Liaison Officer for Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire, as also Mark Curteis (coins), Garth Denning and Donna Watters (illustrators for North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society), and David Thorold, Verulamium Museum.

Gilbert Burleigh also thanks Dr Murray Andrews, University College, London; Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews of North Hertfordshire Museums; Chris Green (quernstones); Gerry Doherty, Mike Kibby and David Short (aerial photographs); Mark Stevenson (video film); Philippa Walton, Finds Liaison Officer for Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire; Ashwell Archaeology Group; North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society; North Hertfordshire District Council; and Stevenage Archaeology Group.

Sarah Talks and Ashwell Archaeology would like to thank all the volunteers who helped in the Ashwell ‘All our Stories’ project as well as Access Cambridge Archaeology, Gilbert Burleigh and Will Fletcher for their advice and support, and Paul Blinkhorn and Andy Peachey for their pottery identification.

Valery Rigby thanks staff at Colchester and Ipswich Museum Service. Eleanor Ghey thanks Ian Leins and Sam Moorhead for help in identifying certain coins and their comments on her text; Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews for kindly supplying information on unpublished coins recorded by North Hertfordshire Museums; Jean-Marc Doyen and Pierre-Marie Guihard for their comments on the continental Iron Age coin; and Eleni Dafas for imaging the coins. Neil Wilkin thanks Brendan O’Connor and Stuart Needham. Anthony King and Susan Jones thank the Roman Research Trust, the University of Winchester and the British Museum for funding to support the analysis of the faunal remains.

Finally, we are immensely grateful to two people: to Nina Crummy, who interrupted a busy schedule to read the whole text and, with her customary percipience, authority and long experience of material culture and archaeological reports, made many suggestions for improvement; and to Sarah Faulks, whose editorial skills, patient perseverance and kind encouragement have not only brought this book to fruition, but have also ensured that it is elegant, accurate and user-friendly. We give our warmest thanks to both.

viii | Dea Senuna

ExcavationHoardHoard

Ashwell End

Ashwell End

Bluegates Farm

LondonLondon

VerulamiumVerulamium

ColchesterColchester

ThetfordThetford

CambridgeCambridge

Stony StratfordStony Stratford

BaldockBaldock BarkwayBarkway

HarlowHarlow

AshwellAshwell

River Rhee

525700

525600

525800

525900

240400

240300

240500

240600

N 0 100m0 100m

Beresfords

Figure 4 Maps showing 1) the location of Ashwell in eastern Britain; 2) its relation to the other two ‘temple treasure’ hoard sites at Barkway and Stony Stratford and to some key sites mentioned in the text; 3) the find-spot of the Ashwell Hoard and the area of the 2003–6 excavations within their immediate surroundings

1 2

3

Introduction | 1

Part 1: The Hoard

Chapter 1IntroductionRalph Jackson

The Ashwell Hoard (formerly known as the ‘Near Baldock Hoard’) is a find of exceptional importance. It is composed of at least 27 gold and silver objects, probably temple treasure, which had been buried in a small hole, seemingly in a textile container or wrapping, probably in the later 3rd or early 4th century ad. The objects include a silver-gilt figurine, a suite of gold jewellery and at least 20 votive ‘leaf’ plaques of gold and silver, nine of which are inscribed to the previously unknown goddess Senuna.

Discovery of the Ashwell HoardThe hoard was discovered by Alan Meek, one of a group of metal detectorists searching a ploughed field near Ashwell, Hertfordshire, on 29 September 2002 (OS NGR TL257403) (Figs 1–4). The group (the North Herts Charity Detector Group) had been active in the region over a number of years and regularly took their finds to North Hertfordshire Museums Resource Centre, Hitchin, for identification and recording. The first object Meek encountered was the figurine, which, in its fragmentary, corroded, soil-encrusted state, he did not recognize as ancient and put it to one side (Fig. 5). Once the remainder of the hoard had been unearthed, however, he took another look and recognized the figurine for what it was. Realizing the importance of their discovery the finder and his group contacted Gilbert

Figure 5 The silver-gilt figurine (A1) as found

2 | Dea Senuna

Figure 6 The Ashwell Hoard before conservation

Figure 7 The Ashwell Hoard after conservation, reassembled in the arrangement of Figure 6 in order to illustrate the transformation in appearance. For the complete disaggregated post-conservation photograph see Figure 36

Introduction | 3

Burleigh, a long-standing specialist in the archaeology of north Hertfordshire and former Keeper of Field Archaeology for the North Hertfordshire Museums Service, who had been recording the group’s finds for many years. Their prompt notification and Burleigh’s immediate response – he went directly to the site to meet them – meant that the precise location and finding circumstances of the hoard were clearly and unequivocally established.

The hoard was a structured deposit, meaning that it had been placed in the ground in a compact and ordered manner. The finder noted that the figurine lay on top of the gold jewellery and silver arms, beneath which were the closely stacked gold plaques and then the silver-alloy plaques, a sequence subsequently confirmed by optical examination of adhering transferred corrosion products on the individual pieces. The hoard lay at the base of the ploughsoil, at a depth of about 0.30m, in a small pit which measured approximately 0.25 × 0.30m and survived to a depth of only about 0.10m into the subsoil. Three small iron nails were found ‘with’ the hoard but no trace of any container was observed. Subsequently, however, during the programme of conservation, preserved textile remains were discovered in the corrosion products on one of the silver plaques, suggesting the hoard was contained in a bag when it was placed in the ground.

All the objects had been removed from the ground before Burleigh arrived. He was able to initiate archaeological recording and assist in the retrieval of many remaining small fragments of the hoard, both in the base of the hole dug by the finder and in the upcast soil. Nevertheless, the finding process had resulted in localized disintegration of the brittle and fragile thin sheet-silver objects, above all of the corroded and mineralized edges of the plaques and parts of the figurine, reducing them to minute fragments and powder which were simply irretrievable. Later the same day Burleigh was assisted in recording and packing the finds by David Hillelson and Helen Ashworth of The Heritage Network.

Treasure process, acquisition, publicity and displayBurleigh initiated the Treasure process immediately. HM Coroner for West Hertfordshire and Hitchin, Mr E.G. Thomas, was notified on 30 September 2002 and on 2 October Burleigh and Meek took the find to the author (Ralph Jackson) at the British Museum for the preparation of a report for the coroner. The hoard was assigned the Treasure number 2002 T215, and its provenance given as ‘near Baldock’.

An inventory was rapidly made and the hoard was photographed, both as a group and individually, in the state in which it arrived at the British Museum, but the compilation of the Treasure report, though it triggered exciting discoveries, was extremely time-consuming and laborious (Figs 6–7). In order properly to characterize the hoard and its individual pieces and in accordance with the requirement of the Treasure Act and Treasure Code of Practice – to report on the objects in their as-found condition and not to embark on extensive conservation – long periods of optical examination and binocular microscopy were required by the author (RJ) and by the conservators and scientists, who stabilized the most vulnerable objects and

selectively cleaned, radiographed and analysed chosen pieces.

Radiography played a particularly important role in revealing details of form, structure and iconography otherwise obscured by adhering soil and corrosion products (Fig. 8). Most immediately dramatic were the X-ray images of the exquisite jewellery and its settings. More importantly, though, radiography clarified with the aid of magnification parts of dot-punched and incised inscriptions on the plaques, permitting a provisional reading of their Latin text. Even so, the inscriptions were still hard to resolve, for they were highly abbreviated, occasionally idiosyncratic, often without punctuation and with the possibility of the use of ligature, frequently lacking spaces between words and sometimes fragmentary. Furthermore, the quality of letter form of the dot-punched inscriptions was sometimes indifferent, their arrangement erratic and their dot density insufficient readily to distinguish and read individual characters and sequences of letters. On the ‘plus’ side, the inscriptions were evidently votive and could be expected broadly to conform to a standard formula: name of deity, name of votary, expression of vow fulfilment. Furthermore, although at this time five of the gold plaques were still stuck together with a blackish waxy-looking substance (see Figs 6, 15), the great majority of the other plaques could be seen to have an embossed image of a standing goddess who was clearly identifiable by her attributes as Minerva. Armed with radiographs, a light-box and a magnifying glass, therefore, the anticipated phrase ‘Deae Minervae’ was sought at the start of those with surviving inscriptions, but to no avail. Somewhat

Figure 8 Silver plaque (A16) before conservation

4 | Dea Senuna

surprisingly, the word Deae or abbreviated D(eae) was in no case followed by a letter that could be construed as an M. Instead, the letter was mystifyingly and unswervingly an S, an initial with no obvious candidate in the pantheon of Roman female deities. In two instances the S was followed only by an E (Fig. 9), but a third appeared to be inscribed SIINA (for SENA) another SENVA and another possibly SENVN (see Fig. 18). Thus, all the plaques available at that stage with an image of Minerva and an inscribed text recording the deity to whom they had been dedicated were named not Minerva but a hitherto unencountered goddess called variously Sena/Senua/Senuna.

The Treasure report, which included the non-destructive X-ray fluorescence analyses of the surface of eight selected objects in the hoard, was sent to the Coroner on 5 March 2003: the hoard was declared Treasure at a Coroner’s Inquest on 20 March 2003; independent valuations were made and a valuation of £35,000 was set by the Treasure Valuation Committee on 28 April 2003. Of national importance, the hoard was acquired by the British Museum in September 2003, its purchase generously funded by the British Museum Friends and the National Art Collections Fund (Art Fund).

From the initial assessment of the Ashwell Hoard its significance as a uniquely important find was immediately apparent: only two similar discoveries had been made in Britain, both of them casual finds of the 18th century. In 1743 or 1744 labourers digging for chalk in Rookery Wood near

the village of Barkway, just a few miles away from Ashwell, brought to light a well-preserved hoard of silver and bronze objects – seven votive plaques with dedications to Mars and Vulcan, a figurine of Mars and the handle of a priest’s rattle (see pp. 63–73 and Figs 106–17) (Walters 1921, nos 230–6; RIB I, 218–20; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 228, GF2, fig. 176). A few decades later, in 1789, a larger but less well-preserved hoard was found in a pottery urn in Windmill Field, Stony Stratford, made up of numerous fragments of at least 20 silver votive plaques, with dedications to Mars, Jupiter and Vulcan, together with three elaborate headdresses and other priestly regalia and ceremonial utensils (see pp. 74–109 and Figs 118–70) (Walters 1921, nos 237–41; RIB I, 215–16). Both hoards, like the Ashwell Hoard, had clearly originated in temples but inevitably the context and some of the intrinsic information were lost from such early discoveries. Furthermore, neither of the earlier hoards has been fully published and much of the fragmentary Stony Stratford find has remained virtually unknown. In this book, therefore, the opportunity has been taken to publish detailed catalogues and images of the Barkway and Stony Stratford Hoards alongside those of the Ashwell Hoard (Chapters 4–6). Throughout the text the objects are referred to according to their respective catalogue numbers: Ashwell = A1–A29; Barkway = B1–B9; Stony Stratford = SS1–SS105.

Even in their encrusted, corroded and damaged state it was clear that all parts of the Ashwell Hoard were likely to yield a very considerable quantity of important new information. Equally clear was the need to consolidate and supplement that information through a controlled archaeological investigation of the context for the hoard, its find-spot. That investigation grew exponentially from the relocation of the tiny hole that had contained the hoard, to the complex ritual site on the edge of which it had been buried and beyond that to adjacent settlements and the wider landscape setting. Fortunately, the landowners, initially the late Gurney Sheppard and subsequently his son Sam Sheppard, were enthusiastic, constant and generous supporters of the excavations and the wider project.

The fieldwork results follow in Part 2 of this volume but one find, made at the outset of the first excavation, was of direct significance for the understanding of the hoard. Located close to the hole in which the hoard had been buried was the inscribed silver pedestal of a figurine (Fig. 10). Whether

Figure 9 Main fragment of silver plaque (A21) before conservation reconstruction: photograph (left) and X-radiograph (right)

Figure 10 The silver figurine pedestal (A1a)

Introduction | 5

separately buried in antiquity or detached from the figurine by recent agricultural activity, the pedestal unequivocally belonged to the hoard’s silver figurine. Crucially, its short but clear inscribed text both confirmed the name of the deity inscribed on the plaques as Senuna and identified the female figurine as a representation of that goddess.

The Ashwell Hoard received considerable public and media attention (e.g. The Guardian, 1 September 2003, 26; Abenteuer Archäologie 1/2004, 8), principally because it added a ‘new’ goddess – Senuna – to the pantheon of deities in Roman Britain. It featured in the popular BBC2 series Hidden Treasure: Digging up Britain’s Past, broadcast in September 2003, and was included in the subsequent publication (Faulkner 2003, 102–9). Part of it was also displayed in the British Museum exhibition Buried Treasure: Finding Our Past and an account of the find was given in the accompanying book (Hobbs 2003, 149).

As a response, and in order to allow immediate and continued public access to a sensational find, the entire hoard was put on display in September 2003, virtually in the condition in which it was found, in the British Museum’s Roman Britain gallery (Gallery 49), where it has remained ever since. Partly as a consequence of that, and partly owing to the extensive, advanced corrosion of the silver-alloy objects, conservation of the hoard was a long and painstaking process. In order to maintain the integrity of the display, pieces were removed individually and consecutively to the conservation laboratories for sensitive cleaning, treatment, rejoining of tiny fragments and scientific investigation before being returned to display. Their appearance was often transformed as incised inscriptions, embossed imagery and exquisite craftsmanship were revealed. The extent of change in this ‘before’ and ‘after’ process was underlined by a comment on the pair of gem-set gold disc brooches (A4 and A5) at a time when only one had been conserved (Fig. 11a–b): a museum visitor was overheard telling her young son that the soil-encrusted brooch was ‘genuine’ but the cleaned brooch was a ‘replica’!

Figure 11a–b a) (left) Gold brooch (A4) before conservation; b) (right) Gold brooch (A5) after conservation

The Ashwell Hoard and the fieldwork that followed – the Ashwell Project – generated academic and popular interest at international, national and regional levels. The archaeological investigation was very much a community project organized and directed by Gilbert Burleigh. Thus the fieldwork, reported in Part 2 of this volume, was accomplished by a team of professional archaeologists, archaeological society members, metal detectorists, university students and villagers. The discovery of the hoard was naturally of the greatest importance to the people of Ashwell, who, rightly, take pride in their village museum, one of the earliest of its kind in the country. It is a flourishing and popular local attraction with a very active team of volunteers, led by the Honorary Curator, Peter Greener. In order to supplement the Ashwell Village Museum’s prompt display of the find, which complemented that at the British Museum, a replica of one of the hoard’s gold plaques (A9), made by Mike Neilson, the British Museum’s replication specialist, was presented and installed when the new display was inaugurated on 26 April 2007.

Just a stone’s throw from Ashwell Museum, in the heart of the village, and only a short distance away from the find-spot of the hoard, is the spring which gives the present village its name. It is a source of the River Rhee, which, further downstream, becomes the River Cam, itself a tributary of the Great Ouse. Still today, with dappled light sparkling on its water, the Ashwell spring is a tranquil, evocative, numinous place. It is not difficult to imagine the similar delight, awe and reverence that it would have inspired 2000 years ago. The spring itself, or rather the springs, for there are several, and the vast drainage system to which they contributed, would have been as significant to pre-Roman people as to Romano-British communities. As at so many other spring sites it is likely that the Ashwell waters were imbued with religious significance, watched over and controlled by some divine power. That presiding deity may well have been dea Senuna: the discovery of the Ashwell Hoard reawakened a British goddess who had slept since Roman times.

6 | Dea Senuna

Condition of the hoardOn its arrival in the British Museum as a Treasure case in October 2002, the hoard could be seen to consist of four separate groups or types of object: a silver figurine, gold jewellery, gold votive plaques and silver votive plaques. These had been deposited in the ground, as far as could be ascertained from the information available, as a compact stack, with one group of objects deposited on top of another. The condition of each of the four groups of objects varied according to their material composition and, to some extent, as a result of their position in the stack. Many had sustained physical damage, either in antiquity or during burial and excavation, and all were coated in relatively thick soil and/or corrosion deposits (see Fig. 6).

Full conservation of the hoard would take many months and at this early stage, as a Treasure case, this was not the immediate responsibility of the British Museum. The most pressing task was to ensure and maintain its stability, while establishing exactly what was contained within it, in order to contribute to a fully informed Treasure report. Further investigative conservation and scientific analysis followed the completion of the Treasure process and acquisition by the British Museum (see Fig. 7).

X-radiography and microscopy were used routinely by both scientists and conservators and, together with element analysis, informed interpretation of the hoard. Investigative archaeological conservation in the laboratory carries on from excavation in the field, using the same approaches and methodologies but carried out at a forensic and microscopic level (Cronyn 1990; Shearman 1993; Watson et al. 2008). It is as important for conservators to record any relevant stratigraphy as it is to carry out standard tasks such as cleaning, stabilization and reconstruction work. The incomplete documentation of this first phase can jeopardize the survival of contextual evidence that may shed light on original intention. Equally, injudicious choices and inappropriate sequencing in applying any interventive conservation measures could damage or diminish potentially important but ephemeral evidence such as organic residues, fixatives or original polishes. At this stage in the archaeological process conservators, who work directly on excavated material which has not been fully researched, hold the balance between minimum intervention and maximum data retrieval while, it is hoped, adding to the understanding of ancient technology and the object’s wider context. In the case of the Ashwell Hoard, early documentation of any evidence for the sequence of deposition was important in order to help substantiate previous verbal reports.

The silver-gilt figurine (A1) (Figs 12–13) The most badly deteriorated and fragile of the pieces was the silver-gilt figurine, which was reported to have been at the top of the hoard, nearest the ground surface. It would thus have been exposed to severe corrosion and physical damage on its uppermost (front) surface as it lay on its back, and this is evidenced in the damage observed. The figurine is hollow, fabricated from thin silver sheet. It had been severely affected by chlorides in the soil, as well as having been torn and distorted, possibly by impact from a plough. Much of

Chapter 2The Ashwell Hoard: Conservation and Scientific StudyMarilyn Hockey, Fleur Shearman (Conservation) and Susan La Niece (Science), with contributions from Andrew Meek and Caroline Cartwright

The Ashwell Hoard: Conservation and Scientific Study | 7

the silver on the front had been torn away and what survived had been reduced to powdery silver chloride corrosion, which had contributed to the loss of the face and much of the detail on shoulders and torso.

The object was also coated, and filled, with soil. Before it was safe to handle, and certainly before any investigation could be carried out, the figurine had to be lightly cleaned externally and some local consolidation with an acrylic resin solution was applied. Later work involved extensive investigative cleaning, which revealed a good surface and well-preserved gilding on parts of the back of the figure, followed by repair, consolidation and support to the interior, particularly in the breast area.

The figurine was reported as having been deposited with two silver model arms on top of the gold jewellery.

The two silver arms (A2, A3) These were solid, well-preserved pieces, with only a light coating of soil and silver chloride corrosion. Following acquisition they were cleaned and then investigated by scientific analysis.

The pedestal for the figurine (A1a)In the early stages of the planned excavation that followed the Treasure find, a silver base for a figurine was found, not far from the hole in which the hoard had been deposited. This circular, hollow-cast pedestal bore a dot-punched inscription around the outside, and was covered, and filled

on the underside, with heavy deposits of soil. Beneath the soil, the outer surface of the silver was extremely friable, particularly on the sides in the area of the inscription. A solid core of cast silver was still present, but the outer surface had been converted into silver corrosion (sulphide and chloride), which had formed discrete layers, easily detached from the metal core. Dots forming part of the inscription could be discerned in the metal core, in areas which had already lost corrosion layers during retrieval and subsequent handling. However, the true original surface of the artefact, with fine detail and tool marks, was retained only in the sulphide layer beneath the thick, waxy chloride. In order to reveal the parts of the inscription thus obscured, the chloride layer was pared away from the sulphide layer using fine tools under magnification. The sulphide layer with original surface was secured to the substrate by the introduction of dilute acrylic resin via pipette in advance of the mechanical removal of chloride. The bulk of the soil was then removed from the rest of the surface and the underside.

The gold jewellery (A4–A7) (Fig. 14)The jewellery, consisting of a pair of disc brooches, a pair of gold discs linked by a gold chain and an oval, gem-set gold clasp-brooch, was all covered by compacted and hardened soil, which obscured the detail, inlays and filigree decoration. The compacted soil on the front surface of one of the gold disc brooches (A5) bore the imprint of silver chloride corrosion and the impression of part of the drapery from the

Figure 12 The silver-gilt figurine and arms (A1–A3) before conservation. The conserved figurine and arms, after repair and corrosion removal to reveal gilding, are shown with the associated pedestal in Figure 37

Figure 13 The silver-gilt figurine (A1) during conservation. At this intermediary stage the crack in the lower garment folds was closed up and a white gap-filler added as a support to the upper torso

8 | Dea Senuna

back of the silver figurine, thus confirming their relative positions and orientation in the ground.

As with all the other objects in the hoard, removal of the burial deposits was carried out under a stereomicroscope at ×10 to ×40 magnifications, using distilled water and solvents to loosen the soil, followed by the use of scalpels and fine picks to detach deposits. On all these objects there was a thin resistant layer of silicate underlying the soil, which took some time and patience to dislodge, revealing a pristine gold surface that bore many diagnostic features. The glass and enamel beads on the brooches and discs were much degraded and very friable, requiring consolidation with acrylic resin to preserve them in situ.

Gold in its unalloyed state is inherently stable and, unlike the silver plaques, corrosion did not pose a problem; however, physical softness and weakness are both issues to be addressed in the conservation of gold, especially where the metal has been worked into thin sheet or wire (Hockey 2004). In these cases it is prone to marking, distortion and tearing (see gold plaque A8, below). On all the jewellery there was considerable evidence of ancient damage and wear, as well as damage from burial. Where necessary, repair of burial or excavation damage was carried out with careful manipulation and the use of reversible adhesives.

The gold votive plaques (A8–A14) (Fig. 15)The seven gold plaques were reported to have been found under the jewellery and above the silver plaques. One of the gold plaques (A8) was retrieved individually. Plaque A9 became detached, after retrieval, from the remaining five plaques, which when they arrived in the conservation studio were still in a stack, compacted together with soil and silt (Fig. 15). It was possible, therefore, in the course of disassembling the stack, to determine and record their orientations and relationship. On the front surface of plaque A8 were deposits of silver chloride, bearing a small impression of the drapery from the back of the figurine (also found on brooch A5). This plaque was in four distorted pieces; on the smallest of these a tiny fragment of silver, which in thickness and corrosion appeared to match the silver of the figurine, was lodged in soil. This suggests that plaque A8 was deposited front face upwards, beneath the figurine, with the other gold plaques stacked beneath it. A9 is reported to have been originally attached to the top of the stack (above A10 and A11) and this is borne out by the impression of part of its reverse surface left in the soil on A10 and A11, showing that it had been deposited with the front face upwards. Disassembly of the stack showed that plaques A8, A9 and A11 had been deposited with the front face upwards, while A10, A12, A13 and A14 had been laid down with the reverse face upwards.

Physical damage to the gold plaques was generally minor, consisting of small cracks, tears and distortions. Some

Figure 14 The uncleaned jewellery (A4–A7) as recovered. The conserved group is shown in Figure 40

Figure 15 The gold votive plaques A8–A14 before conservation. The finder had damaged plaque A8 (left) and had detached plaque A9 (centre) from the ‘stack' (right). Figure 42 shows the gold plaques after disaggregation and conservation


instances of these could be interpreted as having occurred pre-deposition, such as the top portion of plaque A13, which was almost completely detached and where the metal showed characteristics of stress cracking and stretching along the edges of the break, perhaps indicating it had been repeatedly bent. The missing upper tip of A10 appeared to have been cut away. The severe nature of the distortion and damage to A8, which was torn into four unequal-sized pieces, is unique amongst the gold plaques. Since this plaque was relatively near the surface of the soil, damage from agricultural machinery or retrieval tools was judged to be the likeliest explanation. The plaque appears to have suffered a scuffing blow (bright scrape marks traverse the break edges in the upper right corner of the gabled shrine and the resulting detached fragment was severely crumpled) followed by tearing and distortion of the rest of the plaque (see Fig. 15). Since this damage was judged to be modern, the conservation treatment included realignment and repair – bringing cracks and breaks together to restore physical strength and integrity as well as physical and visual coherence. This has rendered the design and inscription more legible, but part of the border on the right side remains missing.

During cleaning of the gold plaques, superficial deposits of mud and disfiguring silver corrosion from association with the silver plaques was recorded and then removed from front and back surfaces, with some deposits left on the backs for future reference. The uncleaned back of plaque A10 retains a small spot of a red material that may be evidence of the use, during manufacture, of haematite or ‘jeweller’s rouge’, which has previously been identified by X-ray diffraction analysis on the inside of the large gold Roman armlet with pierced decoration from the Hoxne hoard (La Niece 2010, 187). Before separation and cleaning, scientific analysis of the silt interleaved between the plaques was carried out in order to determine whether it represented some form of organic material applied to the plaques or had simply penetrated from the surrounding soil. It had an extremely smooth, shiny and waxy appearance and had formed perfect partial impressions of the adjacent plaques. Results of analysis indicated that the material was mainly soil and although some traces of fat and protein were

present, this was likely to be contamination from the surrounding soil (Parker AR2005/25).

The silver votive plaques (A15–A28) (Figs 6, 16)Fragments of 12 individual silver plaques entered the British Museum at the first Treasure phase of the project. This number was later augmented during conservation to include a further plaque (A27), in particularly poor condition, which was reconstructed from small fragments. At the outset each of the plaques represented only parts, in some cases barely a quarter, of the expected total surface area of a plaque and it could immediately be seen that much work would be needed to integrate the multiple accompanying associated fragments. The base silver alloy of this group had become corroded and embrittled, no longer retaining metallic properties such as malleability. In this respect the Ashwell group is in substantially poorer condition than comparable plaques from the Barkway and Stony Stratford Hoards, although all three groups survive in a fragmentary or incomplete condition. Extensive losses were, in most cases, around the edge of each plaque, making an understanding of the original outlines in those cases impossible or at best conjectural. This level of fragmentation, occurring during burial and retrieval, serves to highlight the importance of a planned and managed archaeological block-lifting approach, which allows for an entirely different outcome. By using such a technique, even where fragmentation has occurred during burial, related fragments are left undisturbed and can be reassembled with confidence in the laboratory, in their original locations. This was unfortunately not the case for the Ashwell silver plaques and even though a follow-up archaeological retrieval took place it was clear that some material had not been retrieved.

Reconstruction work was particularly problematic where the opposing and symmetrical parts of the plaque were broken or in some instances had corroded away. This was also true of die-stamped pairs such as A21 and A23, where the stamped central iconographic field survived well but the hand-worked perimeter to the stamps varied in form for each plaque and had, therefore, to be individually built up without being able to refer across to a better-preserved template.

Figure 16 Silver plaques A15, A18 and A24 before conservation and removal of copper corrosion products. The reconstructed and cleaned plaques are shown after the conservation process in Figure 7

10 | Dea Senuna

The silver-gilt figurine (A1–A3)The hollow silver figurine and the two solid arms, all with areas of gilding, were analysed semi-quantitatively for the Treasure process, as was the base found at a later stage in the excavations. The two solid arms were initially thought not to belong to the figurine as their method of manufacture was clearly different and there was no apparent evidence that they had ever been attached to it. The opportunity to study the group in more detail had to wait until the Treasure process had run its course and the fragile figurine was fully conserved to allow it to be handled and analysed as well as to be displayed to the public. Even with this support, the figurine was too fragile to risk sampling for subsurface analysis, so the analytical data from non-destructive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF) must be considered semi-quantitative, but indicates that the alloy is high silver with at least 1% copper and trace impurities of gold and lead.2 The analysis detected mercury in the gilded areas, confirming that the gilt decoration was achieved by the mercury amalgam technique.

The hollow figurine was found to be composed of thin silver sheet, measured at the edges of the metal as c. 0.5mm thick. This would be extremely thin for a cast piece and indeed the figure has features diagnostic of hammer forming and embossing, finished by chasing. For example, on the interior surface the deepest crevices formed on the outside show rounded edges and are virtually closed off on the inside, as the metal was stretched and deformed by punches to create the relief. The traditional method for this sort of embossing and chasing work is to fill the object with a pitch mixture, which supports the metal and yet gives beneath the blows of the punch. The pitch is then melted out, leaving the object hollow.

Following the first stage of work, in which only the inscription fields on all plaques were revealed for epigraphic purposes, the next phase was to complete the plaques for further iconographic categorization. In order to complete the plaques as far as was possible a survey of the many hundreds of smaller detached fragments was undertaken. For this work X-radiography was an essential tool in enabling the sorting procedure to be effective (see below). A variety of diagnostic information relating to manufacture, such as directional hammer marks, could be discerned across the group and it was possible to use this evidence to help make associations between fragments and plaques (Fig. 18).

Finally, the obscuring layer of green copper corrosion (from copper in the silver alloy) was removed. As with the gold plaques, the front faces of the silver plaques were fully cleaned, but the backs of the plaques were left uncleaned in order to preserve any traces of residues which might prove to be relevant to the understanding of the plaques and be amenable to analysis in the future.

Examination and element analysisIt was essential to the understanding of the Ashwell Hoard to establish at an early stage what was present in the group and, in particular, to clarify what was embossed on the plaques and the inscriptions concealed under dirt and corrosion. To this end a careful campaign of X-radiography was carried out (Fig. 17). This preliminary work for epigraphic study was supplemented by additional conservation X-radiography to assess the gold plaques after their separation from the stack and to aid associative joining of detached silver plaque fragments.

The two-line dot-punched inscription on gold plaque A8 is rather lightly punched, so the radiography struggled to produce a legible image but in other cases the inscriptions could be interpreted sufficiently to confirm the name of the deity as Senuna (Fig. 18) and to show interesting features of the jewellery manufacture – for example, the use of beads in brooches A4 and A5 (see Fig. 20).1

Figure 17 X-radiograph of some of the gold items before conservation: the ‘stack’ of gold plaques (A10–A14) (right), gold plaque (A9) (top centre), gold neck ornament (A6) (bottom) and torn gold plaque (A8) (left)

Figure 18 X-radiograph of silver plaque (A24) before conservation revealing directional hammer marks, the evidence for which was used in the conservation process to locate smaller detached fragments from this plaque. The inscription is also visible


As a hollow piece, made from very thin silver, it is possible that the folded draperies were originally supported on some sort of core, but no evidence for what this might have been remains. No residues of any sort, nor any obvious impressions, are visible on the interior. It may be that the numerous deep ridges and furrows of the draperies and a slightly thicker edge at the hem, where it was soldered to the base, provided sufficient strength and rigidity.

The pair of forearms with hands are solid castings, so were much better preserved than the figurine. The initial impression was that they were too large to belong to it (Fig. 19), but once the conservation work allowed the figurine to be handled and analysed it became clear that the forearms did originally fit into the draperies. They were secured by a tin-lead soft solder which was very evident in all XRF analyses carried out on the ends of the arms and on the draperies at the point where arms would be set. The solid-cast arms are surprisingly heavy to have been securely held in the sheet-silver draperies by soft solder; indeed, that is perhaps why they were found separately from the figurine as they had come apart. It is possible that a putative core to the figurine also served to support the arms. XRF on the surface of both arms, avoiding the gilding and solder as far as possible, identified the silver casting alloy as approximately 90% silver, 6% copper, 0.3 % lead and 4% gold. The hollow base is also cast but the alloy is slightly richer in silver at approximately 94% silver, 4% copper, 0.4% lead and 1.5% gold.

The hollow-cast silver pedestal of the figurine has some accretions of grey corrosion products on the top surface, the most prominent of which were analysed by XRF. Most are silver chloride corrosion products which follow the expected

Figure 19 X-radiograph of the hollow figurine (A1) and associated fragments (bottom), and the solid forearms and hands (left and right) (A2–A3)

line of the draperies of the figure, assuming the inscription on the base would have been at the front. This suggests that the figurine was buried while still attached to its pedestal. In addition, two areas of high tin/lead alloy were noted, both with a ratio of tin to lead of 2:1. They are similar to the deposits detected around the sleeves and on the ends of the arms of the figure and are indicative of the solder which would appear to have attached the figurine to its pedestal.

The gold jewellery (A4–A7)The jewellery was examined by X-radiography after excavation and before cleaning was carried out. The X-ray

Figure 20 Inverted X-radiograph of brooch (A4) revealing the longitudinal perforation (seen as a pale line) through the four radial glass settings

Figure 21 Inverted X-radiograph of the gold and enamel neck ornament (A6) showing the damaged filigree work

12 | Dea Senuna

lengths (Fig. 23). The longest section comprises 52 full twists and the other four comprise 9, 18, 9 and 12 twists. The beaded wire was wound around a rod to form a spiral of consistent diameter. This can be deduced from the scraping on the inner surface of the spiral caused by the withdrawal of the rod (Fig. 24). It is not known of what material the rod or former was made but it was hard enough to flatten the beading as it was removed. The sections of the spiral were soldered at several points to both the backplate and the sides of the frame, and each of the sheet-gold acanthus leaves is attached separately with gold solder.

The results of XRF analysis of the backplates of the multi-component jewellery items from the hoard are listed in

image of gold brooches A4 and A5 indicates that the four glass settings around the central glass gem are pierced down their length but that this is not used to attach them to the brooch, suggesting they are reused beads (Fig. 20). The central settings in the two brooches are significantly different in size to each other, so perhaps these too are reused glass inlays, though not in this case pierced. The filigree work incorporates granulation and fine beaded wire soldered to the plain sheet-gold backplate. The brooches now have no pins but tearing in the sheet-gold backplate indicates where their hinges were originally fixed and the catchplates are still present (the darkest feature in Fig. 20).

Gold neck ornament A6 shows similarities to the other jewellery items in that it is composed of simple sheet-gold backplates with beaded wire decoration soldered on (Fig. 21). It differs in having enamelled decoration, for which see discussion by Andrew Meek below. The two discs are linked by a figure-of-eight loop-in-loop chain (Ogden 1982, 58).

Gold clasp-brooch A7 is set with a carnelian in a box setting. Examination under magnification of the figure of the lion shows the relatively crude engraving, which was executed with an abrasive wheel (Fig. 22), a technique commonly employed to make Roman intaglios (Maaskant-Kleibrink 1992).

The clasp-brooch has an oval sheet-gold backplate with a strip of gold soldered to the rim. A double-ended pin is soldered across the back. The front face is bordered with a fine, spiral, beaded gold wire in five sections of different

Figure 22 Detail of the wheel-cut intaglio of a lion in clasp-brooch (A7). The rounded cut marks are particularly clear on the lion’s neck and feet

Figure 23 Inverted X-radiograph of gold clasp-brooch (A7)

Figure 24 Magnified view of the inner surface of the filigree coil of clasp-brooch (A7), showing the scraping caused by the withdrawal of the rod around which the wire was wound in the form of a spring (wire diameter c. 0.5mm)

Cat. no. Object Area % Au % Ag % Cu

A5 Brooch Subsurface 93 6.5 0.6

A6 Neck ornament Surface 91 8.2 0.7

Subsurface 92 7.6 0.6

A7 Clasp-brooch Surface of brooch 93 6.5 0.6

Surface of gem setting 94 5.6 0.3

Subsurface = small area abraded with scalpel blade and silicon carbide paper to remove corroded surface metal

The relative precision (reproducibility) is c. ±1–2% of the result for gold and c. ± 10–30% of the result for silver and copper

Table 1 XRF analysis of gold jewellery2


Table 1 and can be seen to be closely similar alloys. This similarity, together with the comparison between the filigree and constructional techniques of A4–A7, supports the suggestion that the pieces were made together as a suite of jewellery for one person.

The gold and silver votive plaques (A8–A28)Owing to the nature of the metals, the silver plaques are less well preserved than the gold, so most of the illustrations and observations are based on the gold plaques, the details of which are more easily seen. The overall methods of manufacture of plaques of both metals, however, do appear to be much the same. In all cases they seem to have a ‘front’ face, more burnished and better defined than the back, and they were presumably intended to be viewed from this side.

The plaques were cut from sheet metal and the slightly stepped appearance of the edges and the overcutting in some places suggests this was probably done using shears rather than a single blade or chisel (Figs 25–6). The tight curve of cut marks on plaque A11 is badly executed and may also indicate the use of shears (Fig. 27). The metal sheets of several of the plaques exhibit some textures which may be from the supporting surface on which they were beaten out, as, for example, the fine surface texture seen on gold plaque A8 (Fig. 28).

The plaques were decorated by a combination of die-stamping, punching and chasing from front and back. The figured panels appear to have been impressed or stamped with dies from the back on to a soft material such as pitch or lead sheet (Ogden 1982, 36). The edges of the die stamp are particularly clear on silver plaque A21 (Fig. 29).

The deity and the shrine were stamped from the back on gold plaque A11 with the same die as for gold plaque A12 and silver plaque A16 and there is a notable similarity in the alloy composition (Table 2) of the two gold plaques, suggesting both that they were cut from the same sheet and that they were decorated in the same workshop. However, in the case of the pair of silver plaques, A21 and A23, which are impressed with the same die, the metal composition is not so similar as to prove them to be from the same sheet, and they may of course have been impressed at different times, but with the same die and the same dedication.

Other decorative details were applied with a blunt chasing tool, mainly from the back, and the leaf-veined borders were chased alternately from front and back, resulting in the distinctive pleated effect (Fig. 30). There is some evidence for the use of compasses for the marking out of curved designs, particularly of silver plaques A17 and A19.

The inscriptions on the plaques were carried out with different tools from those used for the decoration. They are relatively crudely pecked into the metal with a pointed tool, or scratched on. Evidently they were inscribed after purchase, rather than by the original manufacturer. Some, such as silver plaques A21 and A23, have both dot-punched and scribed marks for the inscription. Unusually, the bottom edge of gold plaque A11 was cut down after the inscription was applied (Fig. 31a–b) which may indicate reuse, and this may also be the case for silver plaque A17. Plaque A16 had a reinforcement weight attached to the back of its tab with a

Figure 25 Stepped edge of gold plaque (A8) indicating a cut with shears

Figure 26 Overcutting on gold plaque (A11)

Figure 27 Roughly cut edges of gold plaque (A11) seen from the back

Figure 28 Detail of back of plaque (A8) showing a fine texture of striations protruding from the surface of the gold (fine features running from top to bottom of the image) overlain by the chasing of the decorative details (aligned horizontally in the image) carried out from the front face

14 | Dea Senuna

of reproducibility of the measurements), which suggests the same maker, and this is further confirmed by the use of the same dies for the deity and temple pediment on plaques A11 and A12. Analysis of the replacement tab on plaque A9 indicates the use for this repair of a sheet of gold of a different composition to the main body of the plaque.

Silver plaques A16, A17, A19, A20, A21 and A23 were selected for analysis by XRF and the results calibrated using in-house alloy standards appropriate to these silver alloys. The silver was analysed on a small area at the back of the plaques which was abraded with a scalpel blade and silicon carbide paper to remove corroded metal and contamination from the surface. The results are listed in Table 3 and from these it is clear that there is a deposit on the surface of some, but not all, of the plaques of a copper-rich layer. This phenomenon of high copper on the surface of a silver alloy probably reflects the preservation of a layer of corrosion products formed on the surface during burial. Half of the plaques showed the more usual depletion of copper at the surface, as a result of corrosion loss. In all cases the subsurface alloy composition will most closely represent the original alloy and the results clearly illustrate the well-

tin-lead soft solder, while a replacement tab was added to gold plaque A9.

All seven gold plaques and six of the silver plaques were examined at low magnification to identify how they were made and XRF analysis of the metal was carried out,2 the results of which are listed in Tables 2–3. Two of the gold plaques were analysed for the initial Treasure process, on the uncleaned surface. The metal was covered in a pale film of earth and corrosion products, probably from the silver items buried close to them. All the plaques were analysed after conservation on the cleaned front surface and also on a small area on the back abraded with a scalpel blade and silicon carbide paper to remove corroded metal from the surface. A comparison of the cleaned surface and subsurface measurements indicates that, as expected, the surface changes to the metal are greater for the lower-purity alloys and that, as might be expected, copper is the element most affected by this surface corrosion.

Only gold, silver and copper were detected in the alloy, with the gold content ranging from 87% for plaque A10 to 98% for plaques A11, A12 and A13. The latter three plaques are of identical alloy composition (within the expected range

Figure 29 Detail of the relief work at the top of the right hand column capital on the front of silver plaque (A21), showing the outline of the die stamp which was impressed a little too hard from the back of the plaque, creating a raised border (scale bar = 2mm)

Figure 30 Back of gold plaque (A8) showing chasing and ‘leaf-veined’ border (on right) created with lines chased alternately from back and front faces of the gold in contrast to the column next to it, which was chased only from the front face

Figure 31a–b a) (left) Bottom edge of plaque (A11) cut down after the inscription was dot-punched onto it; b) (right) high magnification detail


The glass and enamel in brooch A5 and neck ornament A6 Andrew MeekThe XRF analysis was entirely non-destructive and did not require contact with the surface of the object.3 This has obvious advantages but the XRF can only be used to provide qualitative data about the elements present – that is, what is present, not the quantities. Even though

known inadequacy of surface analysis to indicate the composition of archaeological metalwork. Traces of zinc were detectable in the alloy of four of the plaques. Zinc is likely to have been included in the alloy accidentally with the (deliberately added) copper. The trace levels of gold and lead detected in the alloy are typical impurities of Roman silver and are also not deliberate alloying elements.

Cat. no. Analysed area % Au % Ag % Cu Comment

A8 Treasure: uncleaned 95.6 3.8 0.6 Coated with earth and corrosion products from silver plaques

Clean surface 96.5 2.8 0.8

Subsurface 96.3 2.8 0.8 Mean of 3 measurements

A9 Treasure: uncleaned 89.9 9.2 0.9

Clean surface 89.9 9.0 1.1

Subsurface 89.2 9.3 1.5

Tab surface 88.6 8.6 2.8

A10 Clean surface 86.9 12.0 1.1


A11 Clean surface 98.4 1.3 0.3 Same die used for figure and pediment as A12


A12 Clean surface 98.5 1.2 0.3 Same die used for figure and pediment as A11






Table 2 XRF analysis of gold plaques2

Subsurface = small area abraded with scalpel blade and silicon carbide paper to remove corroded surface metal

The relative precision (reproducibility) is c. ±1–2% of the result for gold and c. ± 10–30% of the result for silver and copper

Cat. no. Analysed area % Ag % Cu % Pb % Au % Zn Comment

A16 Surface 92.4 6.6 0.2 0.6 <0.2

Subsurface 1 92.8 6.3 0.2 0.6 <0.2

Subsurface 2 92.3 6.7 0.2 0.6 <0.2

Subsurface 3 92.4 6.5 0.2 0.6 <0.2

Added tab 90.1 8.8 0.2 0.7 <0.2 Attached with Sn/Pb solder

A17 Surface 60.8 38.1 0.1 0.5 0.4

Subsurface 1 94.7 4.2 0.1 0.6 0.2

Subsurface 2 94.7 4.0 0.1 0.6 0.2

A19 Surface 89.9 8.3 0.2 0.7 <0.2

Subsurface 1 87.0 11.3 0.3 0.7 <0.2

Subsurface 2 86.6 12.0 0.4 0.6 <0.2

A20 Surface 66.1 31.8 0.3 0.5 0.9 Pair to plaque A21

Subsurface 93.9 3.9 0.4 0.7 0.4

A21 Surface 93.4 4.0 0.3 0.5 0.9 Pair to plaque A20

Subsurface 90.9 6.7 0.4 0.4 1.2

A23 Surface 73.3 20.4 0.6 0.4 5.0

Subsurface 89.8 8.3 0.2 0.5 0.8

Subsurface = small area abraded with scalpel blade on the back of the plaque to remove corroded surface metal

The relative precision (reproducibility) is c. 1–2% for silver and c. 10–30% for gold and copper

Tin was not detected (less than 0.1%)

Table 3 XRF analysis of silver plaques2

16 | Dea Senuna

cobalt and copper. The presence of copper may be an unintentional addition as a component of the cobalt-rich raw material used to produce the blue colour.

The four perforated glass beads arranged radially around the central blue setting are an olive-green colour. They were produced from a high-lead glass (c. 40% PbO) also containing copper and tin. The copper in this glass is likely to be responsible for their coloration, confirming the view that they were intended to imitate the natural crystals of the emerald favoured in Roman jewellery. Present in high enough quantities, tin can act as an opacifier in glasses, but in the case of these beads it is found at low levels (<0.5 wt% SnO2). It is therefore more likely to be an unintentional addition, perhaps associated with the use of bronze rather than pure copper as the colourant. The composition of these four beads is very similar, with small variations in the levels of copper and iron present.

Gold neck ornament (A6)Unlike the inlayed glasses in the brooch, the blue decoration on this object was produced by enamelling. Small compartments were created on the discs with gold wire. These were filled with powdered glass. The discs were then fired at a temperature high enough to melt and fuse the enamel, but not so hot as to soften and distort the fine gold decoration.

The opaque enamels in this ornament all have a turquoise-blue appearance. In many cases their weathered surfaces (Fig. 32a–b) obscure their original colour. Using XRF analysis it was possible to identify which were coloured using the addition of cobalt (originally deep blue) and which with copper (originally light blue/turquoise). Figure 33a–b illustrates the current appearance of the neck ornament and a reconstruction of the original appearance suggested by the results of the XRF analysis.

All these glasses contain significant levels of lead and antimony. Antimony was used as an opacifier in Roman glass production. The cobalt-coloured glasses contain higher levels of both of these components (c. 1.5–2 wt% Sb2O5 and c. 4 wt% PbO) than the copper-coloured glasses (c. 1 wt% Sb2O5 and <0.5 wt% PbO).

measurements were made in a helium atmosphere, it has not been possible to obtain even qualitative data for elements lighter than silicon which would be expected in glass (e.g. aluminium, magnesium, sodium). Comparison with Corning A and C glass standards was able to provide some semi-quantitative data.

ResultsAll the glasses in this study are believed to be of a soda-lime-silica composition. It is not possible to measure sodium, even qualitatively, using the employed methodology. However, based on the low levels of potassium found, and the majority of evidence for glass production in this period, it seems likely that they are all of this glass type, and that they were produced using the mineral form of soda-rich alkali known as natron.

Gold disc brooch (A5)This is one of a pair of brooches with a central, oval, translucent blue glass setting of a typical antimony-decoloured Roman glass composition with the addition of

Figure 32a–b Settings of gold neck ornament (A6) a) (left), cobalt-coloured glass; b) (right) copper-coloured glass

Figure 33a–b Enamelled gold discs of neck ornament (A6): a) (top) current appearance; b) (bottom) suggested original appearance


There are published comparanda for the use of lime bast fibres in the archaeological record, sometimes coupled with experimental work on the lime bast processing, such as in the collaborative study of Swiss Lake dwelling textiles (Higgitt et al. 2011), in which Harris described some experimental work where both outer and inner bark was removed from the lime tree by cutting across the bark and pulling it away from the sapwood. Further processing by water retting for a period of six weeks was then required in order to separate the inner bark (bast fibres) from the outer bark (Harris 2007). Cartwright (2016) identified lime bast fibres used for the construction of a bag (or basket) consisting of two woven circular discs joined by a woven ‘tube’, with coarse stitching around the edges. This was excavated from an Early Bronze Age cist burial at Whitehorse Hill on Dartmoor that had unusual conditions of preservation of damp organic material within the acid peat environment ( Jones 2016). It may be that the Ashwell lime bast fibres represent a similar type of bag. It is interesting to note that Myking et al. (2005) have documented the use (until relatively recently) of lime bast fibres in Norway for bags and fishing nets (amongst other purposes), as they are resistant to decay and display minimal water absorption.

Notes1 X-radiography was undertaken using a Siefert DS1 X-ray tube.

Exposure conditions were adapted to give the best possible results for each item, but were typically around 80kV for 25mA minutes. Images were collected on Kodak Industrex film and then scanned using an Agfa RadView digitizer with a 50 micron pixel size and 12 bit resolution to allow digital processing of the images. Investigative conservation X-radiography was carried out using a TORREX TRX 5200 radiation-shielded X-radiographic/Fluoroscope inspection system with maximum voltage of 150kV, and operating at a standard 3mA.

2 The analyses of the metal were carried out using a Bruker ARTAX micro X-ray spectrometer operated at 50kV for 200 seconds using a 0.65mm collimator, and the results were calibrated using appropriate in-house alloy standards.

3 A Bruker ARTAX X-ray spectrometer was used with the following operating conditions: helium atmosphere, 50kV, 0–50keV spectral range, 0.5mA current, 0.65mm diameter collimator and 200 seconds live time.

Textile fragments on silver plaque A23 and other silver plaque fragments A28 Caroline Cartwright

Introduction and methodsAssociated with the Ashwell Hoard were a number of silver plaque fragments bearing vestiges of textile, which were submitted for scientific identification:• the non-joining scroll from the upper left side of the finial

of silver plaque A23;• two tiny unassociated silver plaque fragments (A28) and

two textile fragments in gelatine capsules.Initially the fragments were examined using the

biological microscope (Leitz Aristomet) in reflected light mode at magnifications ranging from ×50 to ×200, in order to establish the location of the vestigial textile on each fragment. Then the variable pressure scanning electron microscope (Hitachi S-3700N) was used under very carefully monitored operating conditions, given the delicate nature of the textile vestiges and the fragility of the silver plaque fragments. These operating conditions included a moderately long working distance of around 31mm (the standard analytical working distance is 10mm), accelerating voltage of 15kV, chamber pressure of 30Pa (which represents a small amount of air in the chamber) and use of the backscatter detector in 3D mode.

Results and discussionVariable pressure scanning electron microscopy enabled the identification of Tilia sp. (lime, linden) bast fibres for all the textile fragments. Identification was made in conjunction with in-house reference collection specimens and descriptive texts, such as Ilvessalo-Pfäffli (1995).

Figure 34 shows how these lime tree bast fibres have been preserved only in certain areas on the silver plaque fragments (this example is A28) and how there has been a certain amount of displacement of the fibres. Figure 35 shows how the weave of the textiles on A23, A28 and the two tiny separate textile remnants has largely become unravelled, with both individual and groups of lime bast fibres appearing to be out of their original position and orientation, sometimes on account of fragmentation.

Figure 34 The lime bast fibre textile remains on silver plaque fragment (A28)

Figure 35 The lime bast fibre textile remains on silver plaque fragment (A28)

18 | Dea Senuna

CompositionThe Ashwell Hoard consists of 27 individual gold and silver objects together with many small to tiny fragments of silver sheet. Together, the objects represent one silver-gilt figurine, a four-part suite of gold jewellery, seven gold plaques and at least 13 silver plaques. Three iron nails were also said to have been found with the hoard, though their association is uncertain. The figurine’s pedestal was found subsequently, during archaeological excavation of the hoard’s find-spot. All the objects are demonstrably or probably votive dedications, mostly to the goddess Senuna, and they evidently originated in a temple or shrine before being placed in the ground (Fig. 36). As demonstrated by the inscribed dedications, the votaries were both men and women. Their names have been emboldened in the following headings, where the individual objects are referred to according to their numbers (A1 to A29) in the catalogue that follows on page 31.

A1–A3 Silver-gilt figurine: body, arms, inscribed pedestal. 1 named female votary: Flavia Cunoris (Figs 37–9)

A silver-gilt figurine accounts for three of the objects (A1–A3), as its body and arms are numbered separately. Its inscribed pedestal, not part of the hoard as initially found, was located during the first season of excavation but has been included in the hoard catalogue (A1a).

In early interim accounts of the hoard, before conservation was complete, it was suggested that the two arms were votive objects in their own right and did not belong with the figurine ( Jackson 2007, 46). That view was based on their different mode of manufacture, their different composition and their weight, together with a perceived difference of scale and apparent lack of physical evidence for attachment to the figurine. Subsequent conservation, close examination and scientific analysis proved otherwise.

In fact, the scale of the pair of arms is consistent with that of the figurine; their differing length and gesture, together with the angle of their projecting tenons, correspond well to the requirements of the figurine; and the tenons are of the correct size to allow their insertion into the openings for the figurine’s missing arms. Indeed, the carefully rolled-back rims of the openings and the finished edges in the drapery in the region of the figurine’s missing arms are entirely consistent with the insertion of the arms. Thus the angle of the left arm (if we take it to be that of its tenon) corresponds to the semi-flexed position required both to hold the libation dish/sacrificial cake appropriately and to be seen to support a fold of the cloak at the figurine’s left arm. The fact that only the lower forearm is modelled is also consistent with the modelling of the figurine in which much of the arm is concealed by the fold of drapery itself. Similarly, the much more open angle of the tenon of the right arm is in accordance with the held attribute and with the relaxed position of the figurine’s right arm. The portion of arm revealed also conforms to the position of the figurine’s drapery. An important additional indicator that the arms do belong with the figurine came in the form of scientific analysis: remains of degraded tin-lead solder were found

Chapter 3The Ashwell Hoard: Composition, Formation and DepositionRalph Jackson With a contribution from Martin Henig

The Ashwell Hoard: Composition, Formation and Deposition | 19

both on the arms and on the corresponding edge of the figurine’s arm openings. Significantly, too, reserved gilding was used both on the arms and the drapery.

The figurine is unusual because it appears to have been hammer-formed from sheet metal, not hollow cast, a method that used the silver very economically and resulted in a figure with very thin walls. The arms were attached as solid castings probably for the reason that they were simply too small to be formed from sheet metal, especially given the amount of detail that was required for their physiology, drapery and held attributes. It is possible, once the arms were soldered in position in the arm openings and the figurine was soldered to the sturdy pedestal, that the hollow (complete and uncorroded) figurine was sufficiently robust and stable to support the relatively heavy arms. It may be, however, that additional stability was provided by some sort of core material – a wooden core with a pinned metal baseplate that was soldered to the upper face of the pedestal, perhaps – and the tenons at the inner end of the arms, if they were not purely to facilitate the soldered join, might be taken to support such an idea.

The incompleteness and fragility of the corroded figurine, its instability caused by the loss of its soldered attachment to the pedestal and a degree of distortion at the arm openings, especially that for the right arm, prevent the physical reuniting of the arms and figurine. However, careful examination of the points of attachment of the arms and the arm openings has permitted a photographic reconstruction of the arms in positions that are probably those of the figurine

Figure 36 The Ashwell Hoard after conservation, including plaque (A27) and with the addition of the figurine pedestal (A1a)

Figure 37 The silver-gilt figurine (A1), with the belonging arms and pedestal, after conservation

20 | Dea Senuna

The jewellery is not a random assortment of individual pieces but a belonging suite of exquisitely crafted goldwork. The disc brooches were clearly made as a pair but further than that the close correspondence between the gold beaded wire filigree, the cambered components, the overall design and layout and the constructional techniques indicate that all the pieces were made together, probably as a suite of jewellery for one person. Scientific analysis points to the same conclusion for the alloy composition is closely similar for all the pieces. There is further confirmation, too, in the chosen combination of colours of the glass and enamel settings – cobalt blue and green glass on the brooches, cobalt blue and turquoise enamel on the neck ornament. Finally, a comparison of the weights, using the formula 27.29g = 1 uncia (cf. RIB II.2, 1–2), also reveals a striking unity:

• Brooch A4, 15.14g, 1 unit = ½ uncia (13.65g)• Brooch A5, 13.69g, 1 unit = ½ uncia (13.65g)• Neck ornament A6, 13.70g, 1 unit = ½ uncia (13.65g)• Clasp-brooch A7, 25.95g, 2 units = 1 uncia (27.29g)• Total 68.48 g, 5 units = 2½ unciae (68.24g)

The jewellery bears only minor damage, consistent with its use over a period of time, except for the pair of disc brooches, both of which lack their pin and hinge assembly. Their forceful removal may have occurred at the time of the deposition of the hoard but is more likely to have taken place on the occasion of their dedication as a votive gift at a temple

as it was originally constructed. Likewise, physical reattachment of the figurine to its pedestal is not an option, but it can be photographically joined and orientated in its probable original position by matching the line of the figurine’s surviving back lower-edge drapery and the predicted front outline with the silhouette of the base drapery preserved on the upper face of the pedestal – a sinuous line of silver corrosion and scratched keying (Fig. 38). Some confirmation of that orientation comes from the fact that it correlates with a logical position for the dot-punched inscription, which was competently and confidently marked on the lower, fuller, convex moulding of the pedestal. The inscription has an accurate text, well-formed letters of an even size, regular spacing and appropriate punctuation, and the front of the figurine would have stood above the words D. SENUNE. FLAVIA. CVNORIS. That would have ensured that the image of the goddess as well as her name and that of her votary – a woman with a distinctively British name (see Tomlin this volume, p. 111) – were prominently displayed to the viewer (Fig. 39).

A4–A7 Gem-set gold jewellery: pair of brooches, neck ornament, clasp-brooch. Probably 1 votary, presumably female: unnamed (Fig. 40)

The gold jewellery consists of a pair of large disc brooches, a neck ornament comprising a pair of small discs linked by a chain, and an oval clasp-brooch set with a large carnelian intaglio. Survival in a sealed archaeological context of such costly objects is very rare – such objects usually found their way back into the melting pot when they fell out of fashion or favour. Indeed, such a process of recycling is evidenced by the jewellery itself, for the gold parts of brooches A4 and A5 were carefully designed to incorporate reused glass gems, including beads adapted to a different use. The focus of the flamboyant oval clasp-brooch A7, a large carnelian gem strikingly engraved with the figure of a lion, may also have been reused.

Figure 38 The figurine pedestal (A1a), showing the traces of solder and drapery outline on the upper face and the dot-punched inscription on the lower moulding

Figure 39 The Ashwell dea Senuna figurine (A1–A3), photographically joined and orientated in its probable original position


of another material or colour. But a lion, as the most powerful animal known, was inevitably apotropaic, which is one reason why it was so often employed sculpturally as a grave marker, another being that it provided an allegory of the ravening power of death (Henig 1977, 359–60, pl. 15.v a and b). In the Middle Ages, indeed, the lion as king of beasts was the epitome of strength and fortitude, and amongst personal seals that contained reused gems of the type of the Ashwell intaglio we may note one from Luddesdown, Kent bearing the legend ‘Sum leo quovis eo non nisi vera veo’ (Roach Smith 1857, 73–4, pl. xviii, 3 = Henig 1978, no. M.27) and another, a red jasper, the seal of John de Laval found at St Albans, Herts, whose matrix is inscribed ‘+Ecce vicit leo. +Sigill. Iohannis de Laval’ (Nelson 1936, 24–5 no. 31 = Henig 1978, no. M.26).

or shrine, an act that was perhaps intended to transform them from mortal to divine possessions.

The lion intaglio in clasp-brooch A7 (Fig. 41) Martin Henig

The material of the gem is a dark carnelian, upon which a lion has been engraved in intaglio. The animal, depicted in profile to the left (reversed in impression), has a heavy mane and a long curving tail. Its left leg rests on the head of a bull. There is a ground line. The body, head and mane were worked with a wide lap wheel; a narrow wheel was employed for the tail and ground line, while the hairs on the top of the mane and beneath the belly were executed with a thinner wheel (see Fig. 22).

The subject is fairly common, although this is a particularly striking specimen of the gem cutter’s craft. Other examples of this type include intaglios from Rome (Henig and MacGregor 2004, no. 9.16), Aquileia (Sena Chiesa 1966, nos 1152–4; Zwierlein-Diehl 1991, no. 1819), Mont Beuvray, Saône-et-Loire (Guiraud 1988, no. 647), the Rhineland (Krug 1980, no. 207), Carnuntum (Dembski 2008, no. 822) and the Vratsa district in Bulgaria (Dimitrova-Milcheva 1981, no. 190) and there are a great many others whose provenance has been lost. A common variant shows the lion with the head of the animal clasped in its jaws – for example on intaglios from Herculaneum (Pannuti 1983, no. 249), Lyon (Guiraud 1988, no. 649) and Naix-aux-Forges, Meuse (Guiraud 2008, no. 1326), the river Waal at Nijmegen (Maaskant-Kleibrink 1986, no. 128) and Wroxeter, Shropshire (Henig 1978, no. App. 173).

Sometimes we may suspect an element of sympathetic magic in the frequent choice of yellow jasper, the colour of a lion’s pelt, though that is not applicable in the case of a gem

Figure 40 The suite of gem-set gold jewellery (A4–A7): disc brooches, neck ornament and clasp-brooch

Figure 41 The carnelian lion intaglio in clasp-brooch (A7)

22 | Dea Senuna

A8–A14 Seven gold votive leaf plaques: six with stamped imagery; five inscribed. Seven plaques, representing five named votaries (four male, one female): Claudius Celsus, Nerus, Quintianus, Bell( ) Memorianus, Cariatia Ressa; and two (presumably different) unnamed votaries (Fig. 42)

The Ashwell votive leaf plaques, which number at least 20, are precious metal examples of a type found widely, though not commonly, in the Roman Empire (Toynbee 1964, 328–31; 1978; Künzl 1997, 66–8, figs 8–9; Crerar 2006; Birkle 2013, 44–8, table 1, 186, maps K1–K4). The Ashwell plaques are made from thin or very thin sheets of gold or silver, virtually all of them with a roughly triangular form incorporating a midrib and lateral veining, which gives them the appearance of a stylized leaf, feather or tree. Most of the seven gold plaques have an overall uniformity, which they share with most of the silver plaques (of which there are at least 13), and which sets them apart from both the other British finds and those from further afield. They generally incorporate a basal projection, a rectangular figured panel and a pointed finial with lateral scrolls or lobes, usually in two or three registers, and their margins are often decorated with a hatched motif reminiscent of the ‘veining’ on leaves or feathers (plaques A8 and A11–A14). No two are the same, however, and most vary in several different ways. Rather than a single craftsman or workshop for the Ashwell plaques, therefore, this suggests manufacture over a period of time following a regional tradition. Set slightly apart from the other Ashwell plaques is gold plaque A9, with its distinctive slender tulip shape and fleur-de-lys finial. The form, seen again very much enlarged in Barkway silver plaque B3 (see Fig. 111) and, slightly adapted, in Barkway plaques B4 and B6 (see Figs 112, 114), is one encountered quite frequently, in silver and in gold, in hoards of votive plaques outside Britain (e.g. Klein-

On some intaglios the lion might be depicted with a star or crescent moon beside it, suggesting that here the device denotes the constellation and zodiac sign Leo (note two examples set on the Shrine of the Three Kings in Cologne cathedral (Zwierlein-Diehl 1998, nos 149–50)). Although no such symbol occurs on the Ashwell intaglio, a lion may have been selected by the owner as the central device for her brooch for that reason.

The somewhat impressionistic style of cutting, typical of the middle Empire, is far removed from the classicizing manner employed, for example, for a plasma (chrome chalcedony) gem bearing the same device formerly amongst the Marlborough gems (Boardman 2009, no. 729). However, it is a remarkably spirited production of above-average quality, as befits its high-value setting.

This is the first engraved gem employed as the centrepiece of a brooch to be found in Roman Britain, with the exception of an intaglio found near Lincoln, depicting Victory crowning Caracalla as Hercules. That intaglio, however, was set in a low-quality copper-alloy disc-brooch, evidently a secondary role after Caracalla’s fall from favour (Marsden and Henig 2002). Otherwise a gilded copper-alloy brooch set with a nicolo glass intaglio portraying the head of a woman, from the villa site of Abbots Ann, Hampshire, provides an illusion of such magnificence (Henig 1995, 134–5, ill. 82).

Outside Britain, other brooches set with gems include one with an amethyst depicting Dionysus, from Dura Europos in Syria (Pfeiler 1970, 76, pl. 17), but the closest parallel to a high-quality gem in a similar setting to the Ashwell brooch was found in the late Antonine sarcophagus of Crepereia Tryphaena, Rome. The gold setting of that example contains an amethyst gem depicting a griffin leaping on to the back of a caprid (Stefanelli and Devoto 1983).

Figure 42 The seven gold votive leaf plaques (A8–A14)


Memorianus, has a name of Celtic derivation, while Claudius Celsus and Quintianus bear Latin names. There are hints, both in their names and in the form of their dedications, that some may have been incomers rather than native Romano-Britons (see Tomlin this volume, p. 116).

The die-stamped deities on the gold plaques are all female. Five depict Minerva in her characteristic full-length drapery and with her principal attributes: a crested helmet on her head; a spear (often represented only by its slender shaft) held in her raised right hand and supported in the crook of her arm; and a shield leaning against her left side, her left hand resting on its upper rim. Occasionally her aegis is included – a bib-like breast-plate bearing the head of the Gorgon Medusa – and, in one instance (gold plaque A8), also her owl. The sixth gold plaque (A13) shows Victory, with her normal attributes: billowing drapery; a diadem in her hair; feathered wings; a garlanded wreath in her outstretched right hand; and a palm branch held in the crook of her left arm. However, the addition of a crested snake and a globe beneath her right foot might link the plaque to those with Minerva imagery (and hence to Senuna), for a snake was sometimes associated with both Victory and Minerva, as, for example, on an engraved red jasper gemstone from London, showing a standing Minerva with a small Victory on her outstretched right hand and a rearing snake at her feet, an image that has been thought to reflect the Pheidian statue of Athena Parthenos (Henig 1978, 303, App. 126, pl. XXIX; and, for a flying Minerva with snake, ibid, 215, no. 245, pl. VIII, a nicolo intaglio from Sleaford, Lincolnshire; and another, a fine early carnelian intaglio, from recent excavations at Silchester, Insula IX, SF 6019, context 10730 – information kindly given by Nina Crummy in advance of publication).

On gold plaques A11 and A12 the same die was used to stamp the images of Minerva (Fig. 43). As their overall design and freehand embossed work are also closely similar and the composition of the gold sheet used to form them is to all intents identical, there can be very little doubt that they were made by the same craftsman. He may also have been responsible for making silver plaque A16, for the same die was used to emboss the Minerva figure on that plaque, too. However, the design and craftsmanship of the freehand embossed work of plaque A16 is rather different to that of

Winternheim, Germany: Birkle 2013, 281, Kl. W. 01, pl. 46a; Mauer an der Url, Austria: Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 301, fig. 266; Birkle 2013, 290–2, M. U. 01 and 02, pl. 51; Germisara/Geoagiu, Romania: Birkle 2013, 233–6, pls 17–18; and Carnuntum, Austria: Birkle 2013, 308, Ca. 02, pl. 68b).

One of the gold plaques (A10) is a small, simple, stylized leaf, but the other six are designed around an embossed figured panel which, in all instances, depicts a standing deity within a stylized shrine (aedicula). The shrine consists of a pair of columns on a simple ground line or stylobate supporting a pediment (usually enclosing a garlanded wreath) or an open gable, sometimes with acroteria and other cornice decorations. The figures were invariably formed using dies stamped from the back of the plaque as were, often, elements of the shrine if not its whole façade. Sometimes, however, the columns, cornices and architrave of the shrine, singly or in combination, were hand-embossed, as were, invariably, the ornate upper finials and margins.

All the gold plaques have (or had) a small projecting basal tab, of squat trapezoid or simple rectangular form, and all the silver plaques are provided with a similar tab or with a keeled base. In view of the fact that none of the plaques has any perforation as a point of attachment it is clear that they were free-standing, probably secured by means of their tab or keel in individual or combined slotted wooden stands, within the temple building or precinct. Elsewhere, two slotted silver stands, part of the votive deposit in the Sacred Spring at Bath, have been tentatively proposed as individual holders for votive plaques (Henig 1988, 7–9, figs 4, 7 and 8). Although the tabs were sufficiently strong to support their plaque they were, nevertheless, evidently vulnerable to damage or breakage: the tab is broken away on gold plaque A8, replaced on A9, adapted on A11 and A17 and strengthened on A16. Tabs or torn tabs are also present on most of the Barkway plaques, which also lack perforations, implying that the plaques at both Ashwell and Barkway were displayed in the same way. By comparison, only one of the Stony Stratford plaques (SS3) has a basal tab while several bear small perforations, seemingly the preferred means of attachment in that temple context.

Five of the Ashwell gold plaques bear an inscription. Only four name a deity and in every case it is Senuna. In a few instances a simple reserved space (as on gold plaque A9) or a more formal bordered ansate panel (as on gold plaque A8) was provided between the basal tab and the floor of the shrine, in anticipation of the addition of an inscribed text. However, the lack of a predetermined space did not deter those who wished to label their votive gift, and inscriptions have been ingeniously contrived, if a little clumsily accomplished, in seemingly unpromising spaces on gold plaques A11, A12 and A14 (see Figs 71, 73, 77). In all the inscribed dedications it is the name of the votary that is most prominent, not that of the deity, which is either abbreviated (A11, A12), relegated to the lower line (A8, A14) or entirely omitted (A9). Self-advertisement, addressing one’s contemporaries in addition to the deity, was certainly an integral part of the inscribed vow process at Ashwell, as it was more widely (Nemeti 2012, 178). Four of the votaries named on the gold plaques are men and one a woman. The latter, Cariatia Ressa, like the men Nerus and Bell(…)

Figure 43 X-radiographs of the embossed figure of Minerva on gold plaques (A11 and A12), showing use of the same die to stamp the image

24 | Dea Senuna

surface or to the thickness of the sheet from which the plaque was made. That the latter was sometimes the cause is suggested by comparing gold plaques A13 and A14: A14 is made from a relatively thick gold sheet and the die-stamped image is correspondingly ‘soft focus’; A13 is made from a relatively thin sheet and every detail of the image appears as crisp as the day it was stamped (see Figs 44, 74). Interestingly, on plaque A13 and some others there is a probably deliberate visually pleasing contrast between the comparatively matt surface of the die-stamped figure and the shiny surface of its background and that of the freehand embossed finial.

A15–A27 Thirteen silver votive leaf plaques (including one silver-gilt): 11 with stamped imagery; five inscribed. Thirteen plaques, representing five named votaries (four male (one dedicated twice), one female): Lucius L ( ) Herbonianus, Servandus (x two), Firmanus, Lucilia Sena; and seven (presumably different) unnamed votaries (Fig. 45)

The Ashwell silver votive leaf plaques, like the gold plaques, have an overall uniformity, the majority consisting of a basal tab or keel, a figured panel and a more or less elaborate pointed finial – plaques A15–A17, A20–A21, A23, A25, A27. However, they display considerable variation in size and craftsmanship, in the figured imagery and in the degree of elaboration of the finial. Plaques A22 and A26 are simple forms while A18, A19 and A24 are exceptional and idiosyncratic. The silver plaques are also considerably less well preserved than the gold plaques and it is evident that as well as the 13 individually catalogued examples there are, amongst the non-joined fragments (A28), parts of maybe three or more other plaques.

Eleven of the Ashwell silver plaques are centred on an embossed figured panel, which in all but two instances shows a standing deity framed by the columns of a stylized shrine. The majority of the shrines have a triangular pediment, usually enclosing a garlanded wreath, but three have instead a distinctive omega-shaped arched niche, while one has a pair of standing deities in a double shrine with open gables. Excepting only the shrine cornices of plaque A20 all of the shrine components, like the embossed figures, were die-stamped. Unique amongst the Ashwell plaques as, indeed, amongst the Barkway and Stony Stratford plaques, is the leaf-veined outer hemispherical arch of silver-gilt plaque A19 which frames/encloses the inner pedimented shrine. It is an architectural feature seen again in slightly variant form on silver plaques from Vic-sur-Seille, France, Martigny, Switzerland and Niederbieber, Germany (Birkle 2013, 370–1, V.-S. 01, pl. 87d; 288–9, Ma. 01 and 02, pl. 50a and c; 305–6, Ni. 01, pl. 66) and, more significantly perhaps, on a copper-alloy plaque, over-arching a dot-punched dedication to Mercury, from the excavations of the temple site at West Hill, Uley, Gloucestershire (Woodward and Leach 1993, 103–4, fig. 91, no. 1; RIB II.3, 2432.6; Birkle 2013, 341, Ul. 14, pl. 85e) and, in an even more schematic form, on a copper-alloy plaque found on the floor of the shrine of Apollo at Nettleton, Wiltshire, enclosing an inscription to Apollo above a bust of the god (Wedlake 1982, 143–5, fig. 61; RIB

A11 and A12, and we do not know whether the dies were the possessions of individuals or groups of craftsmen, so A16 is less certainly by the same hand.

The quality of the freehand embossed work of the gold plaques is quite variable. On plaques A8, A9, A10 and A13 the central rib of the finial is vertical and the lateral components are symmetrical and competently or, in the case of A13, very competently formed. On plaque A14 those elements are rather less accomplished while the workmanship of plaques A11 and A12 is comparatively crude: the central rib of their finial is markedly off-vertical and, in the case of A12, its base does not coincide with the apex of the pediment; and the lateral curved components and perforations are very clumsily rendered. The rudimentary workmanship of A11 and A12 is rather surprising as it is in contrast to their die-stamped imagery, which is of very high quality. A similarly unexpected conjunction of fine craftsmanship and asymmetry can be seen on one of the plaques from Weissenburg, Germany (Kellner and Zahlhaas 1993, 72, no. 32, col. pl.16 and pl. 60; Birkle 2013, 384–5, pl. 119a).

The sharpness of the die-stamped figures varies quite considerably but it is seldom evident whether this is due to the use of a worn die, or to subsequent wear of the plaque

Figure 44 X-radiograph of gold plaque A13


originally extensive marginal décor and its double-gabled shrine (double-aedicula), accommodating a figure of Minerva at left and a second standing figure at right, it is broadly paralleled by Stony Stratford plaque SS1, whose double-gabled shrine twins Mars with Victory. The double-aedicula, particularly prevalent in the Balkans, is also found in the upper register of a silver votive leaf plaque of Mercury from Niederbieber, where it is occupied by Mars and Fortuna (Künzl 1999, 562–3, fig. 15; Birkle 2013, 305–6, Ni. 01, pls 66–7). Curiously, the deities on SS1 are shown back to back rather than facing each other, as they are more logically depicted on another Stony Stratford plaque, SS6b. The malposition was probably a consequence of die-stamping from the back of the plaque, a mistake easily made and not readily rectified. Such an explanation cannot, however, be applied to another curiosity – uniquely, the figure of Minerva on Ashwell plaque A17 has been reversed, resulting in a left-handed goddess who supports her shield with her right hand and holds her spear in her left hand. Adaptation of the die-stamped imagery, probably dictated by a restricted range of available dies, occurs on plaque A20, where the height of Minerva/Mars exceeded that of the columns, necessitating elevation of the architrave into the pediment, and on plaque A15, where a similar size disparity was probably responsible for the omission of Minerva’s feet.

A notable feature of several of the embossed figures is the equivocal nature of their identity. The figure on plaque A19 depicts a priestess with veiled head and libation dish, but at her side is an eagle-like bird, while the spear-like shaft in her left hand and her full-length drapery appear more appropriate to Minerva. On plaque A20 the figure was

II.3, 2432.3; Birkle 2013, 303–4, Ne. 01, pl. 64c). The arched feature developed as a shell canopy is seen on at least one of the silver plaques from Brumath, France (Birkle 2013, 221–2, Br. 01, pl. 11c) and is included in the imagery of the aediculae on Roman pipeclay and lead portable shrines (Henig 1990, 158–60, figs 11.11 and 11.13). As a schematic representation of shrine architecture it is entirely appropriate that the silver plaques from Hagenbach, Germany appear to have been displayed at a shrine within a large outer arched silver frame of this kind (Bauchhenss 2006, 154–5, fig. 184).

Of the nine Ashwell silver plaques with a single standing deity six show Minerva (in one case, A20, seemingly conflated with Mars), one (A19) a priestess, possibly as Minerva, one (A25) Mars and one (A27) Mercury. The figures are very varied, both in their iconography and in their height and their orientation (Table 4). The only die-linkages are between plaques A21 and A23 (Fig. 46), and between plaque A16 and gold plaques A11 and A12 (Fig. 47). That plaque A15 may also have shared its manufacture with A21 and A23 is suggested by its omega-shaped arched niche. Tantalisingly, the arched niche of plaque A15 is most closely paralleled by that of Stony Stratford plaque SS8, with which it also shares other stylistic features – the form of the columns and capitals and the particular form of the figure’s right hand. However, although there are die-linkages within the Stony Stratford Hoard – the figure of Mars on plaques SS1, SS2 and SS7 – as there are, too, within the Barkway Hoard – the figure of Vulcan on plaques B8 and B9 – there are no die-linkages between the three hoards.

Also linked to the Stony Stratford Hoard is Ashwell plaque A24: unique amongst the Ashwell plaques, with its

Figure 45 The thirteen silver votive ‘leaf’ plaques (A15–A27)

26 | Dea Senuna

Perhaps most enigmatic of all is the idiosyncratic, highly embossed plaque A18. The free form of the plaque’s design is both imaginative and unparalleled, and the expansive imagery of the principal scene is very competently worked and skilfully merged with the hatched margins. Beneath its broken fleur-de-lys finial an inverted Y-shaped rib, probably representing the open gable of a shrine or the vault of the heavens or both, defines a triangular space occupied by a bust of the sun-god Sol beneath a crescent moon (for the goddess Luna). The identity of the very large figure in the principal scene, however, is by no means so certain. The scene itself, a figure seated on a pile of trophies, is entirely in line with Roman trophy imagery. Indeed, excepting only the addition of the supplicating barbarian with his dropped sword, the scene could have been directly derived from the imagery on the reverse of a gold aureus of Nero of ad 64–5, which shows Roma, seated on a near-identical pile of trophies, being presented with a wreath by Victory on her outstretched hand (RIC 1 54, p.153 (type), Fig. 48). The coin bears an inscription which confirms that the figure is Roma, the personification of Rome. The plaque, however, is uninscribed and the drapery and physiology of the seated figure are insufficiently clear to determine unequivocally whether Mars or Roma was intended. The seemingly ample breasts imply Roma, but the rather indiscreet, partly bared, drapery and the musculature of the legs seem more appropriate to Mars. A free and not fully comprehending

evidently intended as Minerva, who is shown with her normal drapery and attributes of spear and shield, but the head, which seems to have been separately stamped, is that of a bearded Mars. A similarly unexpected combination of die-stamped male and female parts in one figure has been observed on one of the silver plaques from Weissenburg (Birkle 2013, 42–3, fig. 5; Birkle 2016). On Ashwell plaque A27 the figure bears the principal attribute of Mercury, a winged caduceus, but has others that appear more appropriate to Apollo – a tripod and a raven-like bird wearing a collar. However, though clearly not the cockerel usually associated with Mercury, the raven, in Roman Gaul, was one of the birds linked to Mercury through his conflation with Celtic gods (Ross 1967, 249–51; Toynbee 1973, 275).

21

23

0 5 cm

1cm

1cm

0 5 cm

Figure 46 Silver plaques (A21 and A23) embossed with the same die and identically inscribed

Figure 47 Drawings of the embossed shrines of gold plaque A11 and silver plaque A16 superimposed to demonstrate use of the same die

Figure 48 Reverse of a gold aureus of the emperor Nero, showing trophy iconography similar to that on Ashwell silver plaque (A18). British Museum, C&M R.6530

21

23

0 5 cm

1cm

1cm

0 5 cm


plaques. In addition there are many unallocated finial and margin fragments, most of which also probably belong to the catalogued plaques, though several are clearly parts of additional plaques. Corrosion products on two small plaque fragments preserved the remains of a textile, which appear to be the last vestiges of a bag made from woven lime bast fibres (see p. 17 and Figs 34–5).

A29 Iron nailsThree hand-forged iron nails, not securely associated with the hoard, are not intrinsically datable.

FormationHow was the hoard assembled before its deposition? As a prelude to considering that question a glance at the hoard in its conserved state (see Fig. 36) forcefully makes the point that it consists exclusively of glittering gold and silver objects, some enhanced with colourful gems. It was a compact and select group of finely crafted precious metal objects, fancy

copying of Roman imagery may have been the cause because there is another small but notable variation, namely the rendering of the muscle cuirass. Deviating from the norm it has acquired a human arm which may have originated in a ‘misread’ adjacent leg-greave. The ambivalence of these plaques is a salutary reminder of the possible layers of meaning that can be embodied in objects that at first sight appear straightforward.

As on the gold plaques, reserved spaces or formal bordered panels were sometimes provided in anticipation of the addition of an inscribed text (A16, A17, A24). Some panels, however, remained uninscribed – though there is the possibility that they received a painted text instead (A19, A20, A26, A27) – while plaques A21 and A23 were adventitiously inscribed in the space between the shrine’s arched niche and cornices. All the five inscribed silver plaques include the name of a deity, which in every case is Senuna (or Sena). The one female votary on the silver plaques, Lucilia Sena, has a name of Celtic etymology, while the names of the three male votaries, Servandus, son of Hispanus, (…) Firmanus and Lucius L(…) Herbonianus, are all Latin, the latter an unusual name and one which suggests he might have come from outside Britain (see Tomlin this volume, p. 114). The name Servandus, widespread and fairly common, is encountered again on a silver votive plaque in the plunder hoard found at Brumath in France (Birkle 2013, 221–2, Br. 01, pl. 11b–c). Whoever marked the two Ashwell Servandus inscriptions, whether the man himself or an intermediary, endeavoured to give particular prominence to his name, though at the expense of exact symmetry, and having struggled with the arrangement of the first inscription gained in confidence with the marking of the second plaque. Similarly challenged was the inscriber of Firmanus’ dedication, whose need to work in reverse from the back of the plaque posed him some difficulties. The slight bungling at the start of Lucilia Sena’s inscription and the much more confident way that her name was inscribed on the second line presents us with the interesting possibility that she marked her own dedication. The lightly incised, elegant, flowing script of Herbonianus’ text, on the other hand, is suggestive of someone much more at ease with writing.

Just as the group of gold plaques includes one small, simple, leaf-marked plaque, the silver plaques include two such examples. One incorporates a tiny uninscribed ansate panel (A26), the other (A22) a tiny unoccupied hand-embossed shrine, similar to a type seen in the hoards from Hagenbach and Mauer an der Url (Engels 1990, fig. 3; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 301, fig. 266). Plaque A22 is notable, too, because it employs a distinctive form of decoration, a ‘quilted’ motif, which links it to two plaques in the Barkway Hoard (B5, B8). There are additional ‘quilted’ fragments in A28 which, since they do not belong to plaque A22, are evidently remains of a second plaque incorporating the motif.

A28 Silver plaque fragments and figural fragments, not individually catalogued (see Figs 104–5)The many fragments, mostly small or tiny, include non-joining parts of the drapery of the silver figurine as well as belonging, but non-joining, pieces of some of the catalogued

Cat. no. Orientation HeightA8 Minerva, faces right 47mm

A9 Minerva, angled left 41mm

A11* Minerva, faces left 50mm


A13 Victoria, faces right 57mm

A14 Minerva, faces left 44mm

A15 Minerva, faces right 50mm


A17 Minerva, faces right 47mm

A18 Roma/Mars, faces right 85mm

A19 Priestess/Minerva, faces right

41mm

A20 Minerva/Mars, faces left 54.5mm



A24 Minerva, angled left 42mm

A25 Mars, faces right 53mm

A27 Mercury?, faces right 35.8mm

* die-linked

B4 Mars, faces left 45mm

B5 Mars, faces right 42mm

B6 Mars, faces left 39mm

B7 Mars, faces left 42.4mm

B8* Vulcan, faces left 38.9mm

B9* Vulcan, faces left 38.9mm

* die-linked

SS1* Mars, head to right 53.4mm



SS6b Mars and Victory both c. 40mm

SS8 Apollo, head to right, broken

* die-linked

Table 4 Orientation, height and die-linkages of the embossed figures on the Ashwell plaques compared to those on the plaques from Barkway and Stony Stratford

28 | Dea Senuna

As Roger Tomlin observes (p. 116), the votive inscriptions of the Ashwell Hoard are very brief and formulaic, with little elaboration. Despite their brevity, however, they provide information both on the deity to whom they were dedicated and on the votaries themselves. Furthermore, although the inscriptions follow the norm for most metal votives, comprising stereotypical written vows, they exhibit considerable variety in the wording of the vow and especially in the word order, which hints at a variety in the geographical origins of the votaries who visited Senuna’s shrine and dedicated their gifts to her (see Tomlin this volume, p. 116). The appeal of her shrine seems to have transcended the purely local.

The vow process itself was common and widespread throughout the Roman world (see e.g. Henig 1984, 32–3, 142; Derks 1998, 215–39). As a religious act it was a straightforward two-part two-way transaction between the individual and their god. The first part involved the declaration of the vow, the nuncupatio, which was an announcement of intention to make a gift to the god in return for something requested. The second part, the completion of the vow, the solutio, took place once the god had fulfilled the request and the votary kept his or her side of the bargain by making the promised payment. For the vast majority of votive gifts, especially those of low value, the nuncupatio and solutio were undoubtedly usually spoken or simply thought, not written. Notable exceptions are the lead-alloy ‘curse’ tablets (defixiones) inscribed principally with requests to the gods to restore stolen property and punish the perpetrators. Typically, then, a written nuncupatio was made at a time when the votary had suffered theft, was in ill health or was about to embark on a risky venture or dangerous journey.

In the confident expectation of divine protection the votary requested the god’s assistance and promised a gift once the divine side of the bargain had been fulfilled. Sometimes, as on defixiones, the reason for the request was inscribed, together with the precise nature of the vow and the form that the votive gift was to take. This happened also quite frequently on votive stone altars, and the vow process may be seen most clearly, perhaps, on an altar to Tutela Boudiga set up and dedicated by Marcus Aurelius Lunaris in thanks (and fulfilment of his earlier specific vow) for a safe voyage from York to Bordeaux in ad 237. Lunaris, who was a sevir Augustalis, one of the board of six men responsible for the conduct of emperor-worship in the towns of York and Lincoln, was probably a merchant plying his trade across the sea between Britain and Gaul and as such would have had a heavy dependence on the goodwill of the gods. Accordingly, in order to emphasize his fulfilment of the vow, he used pictures as well as words and the carved scene above the inscription on the altar is self-referencing for it shows Lunaris himself in the act of dedicating his altar to the goddess (Courteault 1921; Birley 1979, 127, 149).

Votive plaques of gold, silver or bronze were also one of the types of gift that was sometimes inscribed, though they rarely shed light on the first part of the vow, the nuncupatio. Occasionally, however, as in the case of one of the plaques in the Stony Stratford Hoard, there is at least a degree of detail concerning the value of the promised gift (see p. 118, no.

pieces made to impress. Many bear divine imagery and inscribed votive formulae, a combination which demonstrates that the hoard came from a temple or shrine. The inscriptions, on the gold and silver plaques and on the pedestal of the figurine, are overtly religious and specifically votive in nature, so the suite of jewellery, though lacking inscribed information, is surely also to be regarded as votive. The removal of the fastening pins from the back of the brooches is perhaps instructive as it very effectively defunctionalized them: it was an act, perhaps, that removed the jewellery from the sphere of mortal activity. Whether the incision of the letter X on one of the peripheral gems of brooch A5 was also connected to the votive act is unknown.

The form and composition of the jewellery indicate that it was made together and that it was in all likelihood the votive gift of a single votary, probably a female devotee of Senuna. The fine silver figurine was certainly the votive gift of a woman, as were at least one of the gold votive plaques (A9) and at least one of the silver plaques (A16). Indeed, since a good proportion of those who inscribed their gift were women dedicating high-value votives, it may be that Senuna served a particular role for women. Nevertheless, gold plaques were dedicated by at least four male votaries (A8, A11, A12, A14) and silver plaques by at least three (A17, A21/A23, A24). One of the latter, Servandus, dedicated twice and the two plaques (A21, A23) were clearly made by the same craftsman and inscribed by the same hand – which may, or may not, have been that of Servandus himself. Whoever it was, their second inscription was more assured (see Tomlin, pp. 114–15).

As already seen, two gold plaques and one silver plaque (A11, A12, A16), and two silver plaques (A21, A23) are linked stylistically and by their mode of inscription as well as by the use of shared figural dies (see Figs 46–7), which suggests relative contemporaneity of manufacture and, probably, dedication. But there is a quite wide variety in the form of the other votive plaques, in the names of their votaries and in their inscribed dedications. That suggests that they might between them represent dedications over a longer period of time. It also implies that there was no single workshop or manufacturer of the plaques and no single ‘approved’ dedicatory formula determined by a priest or priestess of the cult. Rather the impression is of individuality, both in the first place in the selection of the votive gift and then, in the case of the plaques, in the choice of their metal and their size, in their figural imagery, in the form of their finial and décor, and in the provision (or not) of an inscription. The inscription itself was generally marked directly on to the front of the plaque. It might be lightly and elegantly incised in a flowing script, or more deeply cut, or it might be dot-punched, sometimes with a minimum of dots, in other cases given greater clarity by increasing the density and regularity of dots. An alternative was to incise a reversed text from the back to provide an embossed inscription that complemented the repoussé imagery and décor of the plaque. Whether incised or dot-punched the inscriptions could be made using a simple implement with a pointed tip – perhaps a custom-made writing stilus of bronze or iron, or even a hairpin – without the need for a craftsman’s engraving tool.


which were not selected for concealment, were presumably: copper-alloy plaques, inscribed or not; other metal objects, including coins; ceramic, glass, wooden or other organic objects, inscribed or not; and sacrificial animals, cakes, fruit or other foodstuffs. The proliferation of such everyday votive gifts might clutter a temple and require clearance at intervals. As divine property, their disposal had to be within the confines of sacred space and pits dug for such material have occasionally come to light in sanctuaries. The Ashwell Hoard is not of that type. It is, instead, a selection of votive gifts restricted to those that were intrinsically valuable and consequently vulnerable to theft. The objects appear not to have been in a damaged condition when they were placed in the ground, nor had they been folded up or crushed. Rather the impression is of care and reverence in the controlled placing and precise positioning of the various parts of the hoard. That process could be interpreted as the act of someone for whom the objects had powerful religious meaning. Crucially, the archaeological evidence from the 2003 excavation strongly consolidated the internal evidence of the hoard. It revealed that the place of burial was intimately linked to a ritual site, indicating that the concealment of the hoard as well as its origin was likely to be religious in nature rather than, for example, the hiding of stolen goods or loot. It can be assumed that the location for the concealment of any hoard, even if hurried, was carefully selected. In the case of the Ashwell Hoard, we can anticipate that whoever concealed it at the periphery of a defined zone of ritual activity did so in the belief that by choosing a sanctified space divine protection would be secured. Additionally, and of equal importance perhaps, such a location might facilitate the relocation and retrieval of the hoard when required.

Clearly, the Ashwell Hoard was never retrieved. We do not know whether or not that was intentional. Was it placed in the ground as a permanent act, part of a final process of temple closure, or was it a temporary expedient, perhaps waiting for troubled times to pass? The latter seems more likely, for the excavation revealed no further evidence which might be interpreted as temple closure deposits and, significantly, the hoard was not placed within the area of ritual deposition but immediately outside the perimeter. Uncertainty and insecurity were doubtless to some extent endemic, part of daily life in Roman Britain, but there must have been times of particular instability, whether on account of sporadic brigandry or as a result of the more widespread, larger-scale conflict caused by the various rebellions, warring imperial factions or raids across the North Sea that characterized the later 3rd and 4th centuries in the province. At such times temple treasures, above all objects of gold and silver, were an obvious target and it was the 3rd-century troubles in Gaul that precipitated the burial there of many temple hoards, including precious metal votive plaques, whether interpreted as precautionary measures or the proceeds of plunder (Künzl 1997, 65–8; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 243, GF21; 276–7, GF66; 301–2, GF105; Birkle 2013, 142–3; Painter 2015, 68–73). Although it is possible that a different form of conflict was responsible for the secretion of the Ashwell Hoard, religious tensions caused by the rise of Christianity, there is virtually no evidence that

SS6a). As is almost invariably the case with the surviving inscribed material the Stony Stratford plaque records the second part of the vow process, its completion, the solutio. That is the case with all the inscribed votives in the Ashwell Hoard and all those in the Barkway and Stony Stratford Hoards.

The votary would have needed to visit the shrine to dedicate the plaque, the commissioning and manufacture of which is perhaps more likely to have taken place at a workshop somewhere near the shrine than at the shrine itself. The precise mechanism is unknown: did the votaries supply the material – gold, silver or bronze – or did they purchase it from the craftsman? Or did they purchase a ready-made plaque, choosing from a selection of existing stock? Was the craftsman a resident in a settlement adjacent to the shrine or was he peripatetic? Did all the craftsmen possess dies for embossing figural images and if so how did they acquire them? Once the plaque was made, who added the written dedication on those that were inscribed and who decided/advised on the form and order of words? The formulaic nature of the inscriptions might be taken to imply the influence of a priest or priestess but perhaps the texts of existing dedications displayed in the shrine were simply imitated. Even allowing for a possibly long period over which the Ashwell plaques were dedicated the very wide variety in the form of their inscriptions tends to suggest that literate votaries were dictating or physically marking their own written dedications. The very particular form of the dot-punched text of silver plaque A16 certainly allows the possibility that the votary Lucilia Sena inscribed her own plaque.

DepositionAs a concealed collection of precious metal objects the hoard is susceptible to a number of interpretations and elsewhere hoards have been identified as, for example, plunder or the stock-in-trade of a metalsmith. However, the very particular make-up of the Ashwell Hoard makes identification as ‘temple treasure’ most probable, even if unprovable (cf Johns 1996b, 14). Although it is possible that the pieces derived from more than one temple the fact that the great majority of the votive inscriptions name a single deity, Senuna, makes it virtually certain that in fact the hoard had its origin in only one temple, and the same may be said of the Barkway Hoard. The feature identified in the 2003 geophysical survey, alongside which the Ashwell Hoard had been deposited, had the appearance of a temple. In the subsequent excavations, however, no formal temple structure was found. Instead, the feature proved to be the perimeter of a subcircular enclosure in which ritual activities had taken place. The truncated remains of a small rectangular structure off-centre within the enclosure may have been those of a modest building, but if so it was one not readily interpreted as a temple. While such a possibility cannot be ruled out it seems more likely that the temple from which the hoard derived was located in one of the adjacent settlements revealed in the geophysical surveys (see Part 2, Fig. 360), if not from a little further afield.

Wherever the hoard originated its gold and silver objects would have been merely the costly tip of a much larger votive ‘iceberg’. The great majority of the other votive objects,

30 | Dea Senuna

naturally occurring deposit rather than any kind of deliberate interleaved protection for the plaques (see p. 9). Though practical considerations may have contributed to the sequence in which the objects were placed it was a carefully controlled action: the plaques, which were flat and therefore likely to have been considered most suitably positioned at the base, were divided into two groups according to their metal – first silver, then gold – next above them came the jewellery and finally the figurine, which, as the bulkiest piece, was most comfortably placed on top but may also or alternatively have been given the prime position as the most significant piece in the hoard – the image of dea Senuna.

The precious, hallowed votive gifts in their small bag could have been quite unobtrusively taken to their chosen burial spot and the equally small hole required to accommodate them would have taken little time to dig. We can only speculate on the precise circumstances surrounding that act, which, to judge from the likely date of the jewellery and from stratigraphical data, took place in the 3rd or 4th century ad.

can be mustered in support of such a suggestion. In fact, the rural Romano-British pagan shrines were probably better protected than their urban counterparts from imperial legislation that gave preference to Christianity.

Whatever the reason for doing so, the physical act of removing the Ashwell objects and placing them in the ground was probably quite simply accomplished. All the objects were mobile and of modest size: the figurine was free-standing and the plaques, too, were not of the type that was pinned to a board or wall but had been simply held in a slotted stand by their basal tab or keel. From the vestigial textile remains preserved by corrosion products on two of the silver plaque fragments, it would seem that the objects had been placed in a small bag made from woven lime bast fibres, a form of textile particularly useful for its water- and decay-resistant properties (see p. 17). There is no evidence for any other container or for separate wrapping or interleaving of objects: no trace of wood survived and the three loosely associated iron nails are unlikely to represent a decayed box, while scientific analysis of the ‘waxy-looking’ substance sandwiched between the gold plaques proved it to be a

The Ashwell Hoard: Catalogue | 31

Figural silver

A1. Silver-gilt figurine (2003,0901.1) (Fig. 49)Height 147.5mm; weight 63g

A high-quality, but poorly preserved, hollow silver figurine of a standing woman dressed in an ankle-length tunic and cloak, her left shoulder bare and her left arm supporting a fold of the cloak. The figurine, made from very thin silver sheet, is corroded and fragmentary, especially at the front, most of which is lacking, including the woman’s face and the entire drapery below waist level. Only the neck, shoulders and left breast remain, the latter very corroded. A tiny raised knob, and the remains of at least one other, aligned on the outer curve of the right shoulder, detected during conservation, may be the remains of buttons or other detailing of the tunic, corresponding to incised treatment on the right forearm which may represent an undergarment (see A3, below).

The back and sides have fared better, the back much more so, being almost intact from the crown of the head to the lower hem of the tunic (the only remaining place where an expanse of the tunic is visible), where a short stretch of what appears to be the finished lower edge of the figurine survives. Furthermore, the original surface of the metal has been preserved in the folds of the cloak. It reveals both the fine modelling of the garment and the presence of reserved gilding along its edges, seen most clearly at the hem across the shoulders, on the fold running obliquely downwards from the left elbow and on the lower fold running obliquely at knee level. The carefully rolled-back rims of the arm sockets are also partially preserved in the cloak drapery at left and right. Although the surface is less well preserved from the shoulder up the treatment of the woman’s hair is clear enough – it is parted on the crown, brushed out to side curls and formed into a bun on the nape of the neck.

The main body of the figurine incorporates no distinctive attribute indicative of the woman’s identity. It is almost certain, however, that the cast arms and their attributes (A2 and A3) originally belonged to the figure, while the inscribed pedestal (A1a) on which she stood reveals the identity of the goddess the figurine was perceived to represent at the time of its dedication.

Metal analysis by surface XRF indicates that the alloy is high silver with at least 1% copper and trace impurities of gold and lead. Analysis confirms that the gilt decoration was achieved by the mercury gilding technique. Remains of tin-lead soft solder were detected around the edge of the arm sockets.

A1a. Silver pedestal (2011,8012.1) (Figs 50–1; see also Fig. 38) Height 25.3mm; diameter 72.4mm; weight 123.24g

A silver base for a figurine, found in the 2003 excavation (BGF 03, SF 49, Context 103) close to the hole from which the hoard had been unearthed in 2002. It consists of a circular, hollow-cast pedestal, with a flat upper face and finely cut upper and lower cambered mouldings on the wall. On the lower, broader, moulding is a single-line dot-punched inscription.

Chapter 4The Ashwell Hoard: Catalogue, A1–A29 (British Museum, 2003,0901.1–29)Ralph Jackson

32 | Dea Senuna

Figure 49 Four views of silver-gilt figurine (A1)


To the goddess Senuna, Flavia Cunoris has paid her vow, willingly, deservedly

Most of the punched lettering survives only in the substrate, but the final part of the inscription – RIS.V.S.L.M. – preserves the crisp lettering as it was marked in the original surface of the metal.

The first part of the inscription, D(eae) Senun(a)e, is comparable to the inscriptions on plaques A8, A14, A17 and A24 (D(eae) Senun(ae), D(eae) Senun(a)e, D(eae) Senunae, Deae Senuna[e]) and may be taken to imply that the votary, Flavia Cunoris, intended the figurine that surmounted the pedestal to represent an image of the goddess Senuna, whether or not it was originally made as such.

XRF analysis of the wall of the pedestal indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 95% silver, 3.5% copper, 1.4% gold and less than 1% lead. Areas of tin and lead enrichment, indicative of soft solder, were detected on the upper surface.

A2. Silver-gilt arm (2003,0901.2) (Fig. 52) Length 40.4mm; weight 29.28g A cast silver, female, left lower forearm and hand, holding a circular object, which was differentially gilded to give it prominence. The object takes the form of a thick disc, its upper face plain and slightly dished, the lower face convex, with a central dimple and six incised rays. It is possible that the object represents both a phiale (a dish for pouring libations) – the plain dished face – and a placenta (a sacrificial cake) – the segmented convex face, both of which would be appropriate

The patina is a light purple-grey colour, very similar to that of the figurine (A1), as is the appearance of both the surviving surface and the depleted surface of the metal. The size and proportions of the pedestal also correspond closely to those of the figurine even though the wall thicknesses are very different. Furthermore, the upper circular surface bears traces not only of its manufacture – a dimpled lathe centre point – but also of its assembly – an amorphous spread of degraded tin-lead solder, which is partly defined and infilled with what appear to be corresponding ‘keying’ grooves and scratches. That was the means by which the figurine was originally attached to the pedestal and the extent of the solder and its sinuous outline match the surviving and predicted volume and outline of the figurine’s lower drapery. By juxtaposing the solder outline with the surviving lower edge at the back of the figurine it is further possible to predict that the inscription, unsurprisingly, was positioned on the pedestal centrally below the front of the figurine. There is no doubt, therefore, that the figurine and pedestal, although made separately, originally belonged together, whatever the precise deposition circumstances.

A shallow gouge, with central shiny scrape, in the upper surface of the pedestal, substantial enough to cause a corresponding dent in its underside, has the appearance of recent agricultural damage, probably from a plough or cultivator.

The dot-punched inscription (Tomlin 2008, 306, no. 1; and this volume p. 111, A1a) reads:

D. SENUNE. FLAVIA. CVNORIS. V.S.L.M.

d(eae) Senun(a)e Flavia Cunoris u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito)

Figures 50–1 Silver pedestal (A1a) and the dot-punched inscription

34 | Dea Senuna

A matching pair of large gem-set gold disc brooches complete except for their pin and hinge assemblies, which appear to have been already lacking at the time of their deposition. When the hoard was received at the British Museum in its uncleaned state soil still adhered to the brooches and that on the front face of A5 incorporated fragments and corrosion products derived from the drapery of figurine A1, with which it was evidently in contact in the ground.

Each brooch has a central ovoid setting with a quartered beaded wire filigree design based on a further four rectangular radial settings. The central setting contains an oval blue glass inlay. Its convex surface appears to have suffered post-depositional spalling and peripheral fissuring. This is especially noticeable on the gem in brooch A4, which owes its ‘shrunken’ appearance both to the loss of its upper surface and of a substantial amount of glass from the edges and, perhaps, to the loss of an underlying adhesive/packing. The original colour of the glass inlays in the rectangular settings is uncertain (after conservation their iridescent surface is of an opaque olive-green colour), but it is likely to have been green. X- radiography revealed that all are perforated longitudinally, and, taken together with the fact that the bevelling of their long sides implies they are of flattened hexagonal cross-section (none is loose, so their undersides are concealed from view by the setting), it is probable that they are reused green glass beads made in imitation of crystalline emeralds. On the surface of one of the rectangular glass inlays of brooch A5 there is a lightly scratched X (Fig. 55). It appears both to have been intentionally marked and to have occurred in antiquity since it was revealed during conservation work only after removal of soil and encrustations.

The brooches were clearly intended as a matching pair but are not quite identical, brooch A4 having a substantially larger central stone than that on brooch A5, while all four of its radial settings are narrower than their counterparts on A5. The alternate large:small ratio provides a kind of symmetry between the brooches, no doubt an intentional balancing out by the jeweller of the assorted sizes of available gems. Clearly the design of the brooches was adapted to an existing stock of oval and rectangular glass stones.

The elegant design of these brooches, which combines bold coloured gems with fine openwork gold filigree and granulation, is of sophisticated and labour-intensive manufacture, for the complex, composite construction of each required the making, assembly and joining of 216

in a temple/religious context. The modelling of the hand is extremely accomplished both in musculature and position of fingers and in the inclusion of finger nails. The modelling is restricted to the hand and the lower forearm and finishes at an oblique line not far above the wrist. Beyond that point a short tenon of suboval cross-section projects at an angle of roughly 135 degrees. Scientific analysis of the grey-coloured deposit which runs over the join showed it to be the degraded remnants of a tin-lead soft solder corresponding to similar remains on the arm sockets of the figurine.

A3. Silver-gilt arm (2003,0901.3) (Fig. 52) Length 57.2mm; weight 28.19g

A cast silver, female, right forearm and hand, holding a pair of corn ears, which have been differentially gilded to attract the viewer’s attention. It is the pair to A2, sharing the same detailed and very accomplished modelling, though extending a little further, almost to the elbow. The ears of corn are smoothly curved rather than straight, seemingly an original feature, and are detailed with incised lines. Further incised work on the arm, comprising a series of overlapping curves culminating in a pair of hoops, was perhaps intended to represent an undergarment – the folds of a light sleeve ending at the wrist with a hem or cuff, or a bracelet. Like A2, the arm finishes with an oblique ‘step’ which forms a short tenon with the same suboval cross-section. The tenon of A3 projects at a much more open angle than that of A2. As on A2, traces of tin-lead soft solder were detected which correspond to similar remains on the arm sockets of the figurine.

XRF analysis on the surface of A2 and A3 indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 90% silver, 6% copper, 0.3% lead and 4% gold.

Jewellery

A4, A5. Gold disc brooches (2003,0901.4–5) (Figs 53–6)

A4: Diameter (at axes of rectangular settings) 42.9mm, 43.6 mm; height of wall 2.1mm; length of central oval setting 15.9mm; length of rectangular settings 9.4–10.2mm; weight 15.14g A5: Diameter (at axes of rectangular settings) 43.3mm, 44.1mm; height of wall 2.1mm; length of central oval setting 13.7mm; length of rectangular settings 9.6–10.2mm; weight 13.69g

Figure 52 Silver-gilt arms (A2 and A3)


The rear face of the backplate, which has an overlap join at the outer base of the perimeter wall, bears light manufacture striations as well as the clear impression of the outlines of the central oval setting and the four radial rectangular settings, probably the result of manufacture rather than pressure in the ground. This is implied by tiny

separate gold components prior to the setting of the five glass inlays. The front face of the flat, thin sheet-gold discoid backplate has a perimeter ‘wall’ formed from a plain gold strip surmounted by a simple gold wire (twisted and rolled to a circular cross-section), which stands slightly proud of an encircling fine gold beaded wire filigree (c. 0.3mm diameter). Plain gold sheet was also used to construct the rubbed-over oval and rectangular box settings. The settings are linked by a symmetrical beaded wire filigree design, which comprises: four 5-rayed stars interspersed with the four rectangular settings; an additional ray linking each rectangular setting to the central oval setting; and an arc of three further rays along the perimeter, between each pair of rectangular settings. The rays, which are cambered and raised from the backplate, comprise a splayed strip with a beaded wire filigree edging (c. 0.1mm diameter) on both sides. At their nodal points are tiny, gold, granulated rosettes, each consisting of a central grain surrounded by six others. These are set on the top of a gold mount, the tubular construction of which is revealed by brooch A5, on which one of the perimeter rosettes is lacking.

Figure 53 Gold disc brooch (A4)

Figure 54 Gold disc brooch (A5)

Figure 55 Gold brooch (A5), showing the raised openwork design and settings and incised X on the gem in the foreground

36 | Dea Senuna

A6. Gold neck ornament (2003,0901.6) (Figs 57–60) Diameter disc (a) 24.7–24.9mm, disc (b) 25.6–25.9mm; total length of chain and discs 350mm; total weight 13.70g

A pair of small, ornate, enamelled gold discs linked by a fine gold chain. Both discs have suffered a little damage to their coiled wire edging, that on (a) in antiquity but that on (b) probably dislodged at the time of discovery of the hoard and now restored to its former position. There is further slight damage to the fastener at the back of disc (b). Additionally, the backplate of disc (a) is a little distorted and the rear of the rim of both discs bears dented and creased damage (Figs 58, 60).

The discs are a matching pair with an umbonate backplate and a near-identical rosette-type design laid out in three concentric zones – a central focus surrounded by a quartered design encircled by an ornate perimeter. Like brooches A4 and A5, their symmetrical décor is based on the use of coloured settings and fine gold beaded wire filigree (c. 0.15–0.25mm diameter), but in this case in even more exquisitely miniature form. The front face of their sheet-gold backplate has a central hollow which accommodates the recessed circular focus of their design – a rosette of tiny

splits and perforations along the lines of contact – likely to be a product of the application of heat in fusing the settings to the backplate. The same traces – loss of gold – are present at the point of fusion contact of the base of some of the tubular rosette mounts. Rather different is a larger subcircular torn area behind one of the rectangular settings on both brooches, clearly damage attributable to the ancient breakage of the pin and hinge assembly (Fig. 56). The subtriangular catchplate for the pin, still in place and in perfect condition (slightly flattened on brooch A4), is fused to the backplate behind the opposing rectangular setting. It is interesting to note that with the pin assembly in a vertical position the rectangular settings form a (St George) cross but the central ovoid setting is obliquely aligned. In fact, it is probable that the design rather than the pin alignment (if either) dictated the exact orientation of the brooches for, in the ‘natural’ position, with the long axis of the central setting horizontal, which results in a St Andrew cross arrangement of the radial rectangular settings, the raised openwork gold design is also seen to best effect.

XRF analysis of the subsurface of the backplate of brooch A5 (see Table 1) indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 93% gold, 6.5% silver and 0.6% copper.

Figure 56 The reverse of gold brooches (A4 and A5), showing the pin catchplate and torn scar where the pin was once attached

Figure 57 Gold neck ornament (A6), disc b (left) and disc a (right)


intersperse dark and light blue enamel. A slight anomaly of the rosettes is that disc (b) has six cells but disc (a) only five, a discrepancy that is not obviously attributable to damage and appears more likely to be an error/adaptation of the jeweller.

The chain, a well-made, simple figure-of-eight loop-in-loop construction, formed from fine rectangular-sectioned gold strip, has 82 links, all in near-perfect and functioning articulated condition (Fig. 57). It is attached to the rear of the discs, each end-link engaging with a looped and tapered fastening hook at one end of a slender, rectangular-sectioned, lozenge-shaped strip, soldered to the umbo and rim at the back of each disc. A second looped hook-fastener at the other end of the strip survives on disc (a) but is broken on disc (b). On disc (a) a tiny slip of gold is interleaved at the point of fusion of the lozenge strip and the umbo. This is, perhaps, a repair of a heat flaw at the time of manufacture, for it is both the point of contact of the mount for the central cell of the rosette at the front and that of the lozenge strip at the back.

XRF analysis of the subsurface of the backplate of one of the discs of neck ornament A6 (see Table 1) indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 92% gold, 7.6% silver and 0.6% copper.

raised circular settings formed from beaded wire. The central slightly larger setting is supported on a tubular gold mount while the outer settings, elevated and linked by their position on a beaded wire filigree coil, appear to float on the crest of coiled waves. The rosette is surrounded by four large petals interspersed with four heart-shaped motifs enclosing smaller petals. All are made from beaded wire filigree and are given prominence by the cambered surface of the backplate in this zone. There are single granulated pellets at the inner pointed tip of all the petals and additional pairs at the inturned upper scrolls of the hearts (Fig. 59). Encompassing the whole design, inside a beaded wire perimeter, is a beaded wire filigree coil, which fills the hollowed perimeter channel of the disc. It is surmounted by eight symmetrically placed tiny circular beaded wire settings (external diameter 2mm) which contain coloured enamel, four of dark blue interspersed with four of light blue or turquoise. One of the light blue perimeter settings of disc (a) is distorted out of position in the damaged arc of filigree coil which now lies at the rear of its backplate. The larger petal motifs are also set with dark blue enamel, while the smaller petals within the heart motifs contain light blue enamel. The tiny rosette cells, like those of the perimeter,

Figure 58 The front and back of the enamelled gold discs of neck ornament (A6), disc b (left) and disc a (right)

Figure 59 Gold disc (A6b), showing the raised openwork design and enamel settings

Figure 60 The reverse of the gold discs of neck ornament (A6), showing damage to the coiled wire edging of A6a (left) and to the end of one fastener of A6b (right)

38 | Dea Senuna

upward return of the beast’s tail ending in its distinctive tuft. A slight scratching of the polished surface along the line of the mane and back and in other prominent places is indicative of a little wear. The very close proximity of the lion’s mane and tail to the edge of the stone might suggest that the gem was reused in a cut-down form. However, since the gem is not detachable from its setting it is not possible to examine its side and rear faces for further indications. The slight axial bulge of the sheet-gold base of the setting would indicate that the back of the gem is convex.

The quality of the beaded wire is so high, the coiling so accomplished and the preservation so good that no join is visible to the naked eye, though scientific examination showed that it comprises five joined unequal sections (see Figs 23, 63). Nor is it possible to determine whether the few other minor irregularities to the coil are a consequence of damage or manufacture, but the former seems more likely. Equally remarkable is the manufacture and assembly of the acanthus leaves, whose shiny convex repoussé surface is highlighted by the (undoubtedly deliberately) duller gold surface of the plain backplate.

At the rear, the fastening clasp, soldered to the flat sheet-gold backplate, comprises a pair of in-turned looped spikes made from a single, circular-sectioned wire with tapered, blunt-pointed terminals. Most of the traces of fusion, along the line of contact with the wire, were carefully

A7. Gold clasp-brooch (2003,0901.7) (Figs 61–3) Length 44.8mm; width 36.9mm; length between loops 60.6mm; length of setting 20.5mm; width of setting 17.4mm; thickness of gem in setting 6.5mm; total weight 25.95g; weight of clasp-brooch 20.43g; weight of gem and setting 5.52g

A large, oval, gem-set gold clasp-brooch, intact and in extremely fine condition.

The design is based on three concentric zones: around the perimeter a coiled gold filigree beaded wire is set within a pair of walls made from plain gold strip; the intermediate zone comprises a fine openwork arrangement of 18 sheet-gold stylized acanthus leaves, with repoussé veining and serrated edging, cambered and raised from the backplate; and the central zone is occupied by an oval cell made from very thin gold sheet into which was inserted a large shiny red carnelian gemstone in a gold box setting with a plain flanged collar which overlaps and tightly encloses the gem. Removal of the box setting, which is now loose, discloses light scratching at the base of the cell, perhaps keying for an adhesive (Fig. 62). The convex surface of the gem is engraved with the figure of a standing lion, its front left paw resting on a bull’s head or ox-skull (bucranium). There is a simple horizontal ground line. What at first sight appears to be a strand of foliage behind the lion’s rear legs is, in fact, the

Figure 61 Gold clasp-brooch (A7)

Figure 62 Gold clasp-brooch (A7), showing the seating for the box setting of the carnelian intaglio

Figure 63 Gold clasp-brooch (A7), showing the raised openwork design and gem setting


Votive leaf plaques: gold

A8. Gold plaque (2003,0901.8) (Figs 64–5; see also Figs 15, 17) Height 182mm; figure height 47mm; weight 13.19g

This plaque suffered considerable post-depositional damage, probably at the point of discovery. It had evidently been the uppermost plaque in the stack of gold plaques, lying immediately below the gold jewellery and above gold plaque A9. As received at the British Museum it was in four torn and distorted fragments. The damage appeared to have

removed and the resulting fine striations can just be discerned. No other manufacture marks are visible and the only damage sustained appears to be a very slight dented distortion of one long side. The slight irregularity of the looped spikes is probably a product of usage, rather than damage, and is entirely consistent with the repeated securing of a textile garment.

XRF analysis of the subsurface of the backplate of clasp-brooch A7 (see Table 1) indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 93% gold, 6.5% silver and 0.6% copper, and that of the surface of the gem setting approximately 94% gold, 5.6% silver and 0.3 % copper.

1cm

mc 50

Figures 64–5 Gold plaque (A8) (scale 1:1)

40 | Dea Senuna

presumably originally with its pair at the (now missing) right. Within the shrine stands a die-stamped figure of Minerva shown frontally, with her head turned to her right. She wears a crested helmet and a full-length garment, with worn aegis, holds a spear in her right hand and supports a shield at her left side. On the ground next to the spear butt perches her owl, distinctively depicted with large round head and eyes and plump ovoid body. The wide reserved rectangular space beneath the shrine is occupied by an ansate panel, with neatly embossed border, which provided for a two-line dot-punched inscription. At the centre of the lower edge of the plaque, within a narrow veined border, is a 10.1mm-wide scar, which marks the point of breakage (in antiquity) of the plaque’s basal tab.

The inscription (Tomlin 2008, 306–7, no. 8; and this volume, p. 111, A8) reads:

CL CELSVS VOTVM FECIT DE

SENVN L B: M

Cl(audius) Celsus uotum fecit de(ae) | Senun(ae) l(i)b(ens) m(erito)

Claudius Celsus has made his vow to the goddess Senuna, willingly, deservedly

been inflicted from the right side, affecting principally the area above and to the right of the gabled shrine though the lower right corner of the inscribed ansate panel had also been detached. Painstaking conservation work restored the form of the plaque and rejoined the fractured pieces, but a small part of the border at the centre right was found to be lacking.

The plaque is a large example with an ornate three-tiered finial above a gabled shrine. It was carefully designed and crafted to combine three components: a tall ornate finial; a relief image of the goddess Minerva in a gabled shrine; and a reserved ansate panel with inscribed text. With the exception of the figure of the goddess all the decoration is freehand embossed. Like the majority of the Ashwell plaques the finial has a central elongated veined triangle (leaf/feather/obelisk), its axial rib slightly off-vertical. This is flanked by lateral expansions of triangular, semicircular and lobate form, respectively infilled with veining, rosettes and garlands, and looped swags. The veining also extends down the borders of the shrine, which is itself constructed from slender veined units. Within its pediment is a central veined triangle and a veined leaf (acroterion) projects at the left,

1cm

mc 50Figures 66–7 Gold plaque (A9) (scale 1:1)


Within the shrine Minerva stands frontally, her head turned slightly to her left, her feet accurately aligned on the floor line. She wears a crested helmet and holds a spear shaft in her right arm and hand (its head out of view – upstaged by the cornice) and a shield at her side in her left hand. The drapery of her full-length garment is skilfully depicted and a beaded line is used to show the edge of her aegis. In the reserved space beneath the shrine is a compact dot-punched inscription, its tiny dot-punched lettering impressed with a finely pointed implement. The lower edge of the second line of lettering is partially obscured by the slender tapered tab, its lower end bent back, which had been added as a separate strip of gold. It is conceivable that it conceals the end of the inscription – a single letter (M) on a third line. A small subcircular perforation was made near the end of the second line of the inscription. The fact that it partly obliterated the letters VS – votum solvit, ‘paid her vow’ – strongly suggests that Cariatia Ressa ‘fixed’ her vow as well as paying it.

The inscription (Tomlin 2008, 307–8, no. 9; and this volume, p. 112, A9) reads:

CARIATIA

RESSAVSL

Cariatia | Ressa u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens)

Cariatia Ressa has paid her vow willingly

XRF analysis of the subsurface of the plaque (see Table 2) indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 89.2% gold, 9.3% silver and 1.5% copper. That of the surface of the tab indicates that it comprises approximately 88.6% gold, 8.6% silver and 2.8% copper.

A10. Gold plaque (2003,0901.10) (Figs 68–9) Height 72.1mm; weight 1.59g

This plaque was positioned third from top of the stack of gold plaques, between plaques A9 and A11, and was still in

The text, competently incised with fine, regular, dot-punched lettering, is unpunctuated. The name of the votary, Claudius Celsus, has been inscribed before that of the deity, an unusual occurrence in Roman Britain (Tomlin 2008, 307) (see also A14, below).

XRF analysis of the subsurface of the plaque (see Table 2) indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 96.3% gold, 2.8% silver and 0.8% copper.

A9. Gold plaque (2003,0901.9) (Figs 66–7) Height 138.1mm; figure height 41mm; weight 5.18g

Like gold plaque A8 this plaque had also been detached from the stack by the finder. It had lain between plaques A8 and A10 and the negative impression of its embossed decoration was clearly identifiable in the ‘shiny’ soil accretion on the surface of the underlying plaques A10 and A11, demonstrating that its front (obverse) face had been uppermost.

The plaque is a slender tulip-shaped example with a triple-lobed finial and a small distorted basal tab. The freehand leaf-marked decoration extends along the sides to the finial tip. The veining was formed by embossing ridges from the back and emphasizing them with lateral grooves scored or impressed from the front. As is often the case, the curved components were achieved with more difficulty than the straight sections and with less regularity. The image of Minerva standing in a narrow gabled shrine was die-stamped and appears to have been struck slightly off-centre, for the apex of the shrine’s gable lies a little to the left of the axis of the central leaf-marked rib. The shrine is simply rendered, its floor line marked by a single raised rib, its sides framed by a pair of plain flanking columns. The top of the shrine, depicted as an open gable, rather than a pediment, with cornices but no architrave, is, nevertheless, more elaborately formed. Ribs rise from the moulded cornices and there are foliate acroteria at the apex and the right corner – that at the left was either never present because of misalignment of the die or was trimmed away when the edges of the plaque were clipped to shape.

mc 50 Figures 68–9 Gold plaque (A10) (scale 1:1)

42 | Dea Senuna


This plaque was positioned fourth from top of the stack of gold plaques, between plaques A10 and A12, and was still in situ in the stack as received at the British Museum. Its front (obverse) face was uppermost and the shiny soil accretion on its surface bore the negative impression of part of the back of plaque A9 as well as the positive impression of the front of small plaque A10. Its left side projected somewhat from the stack, a vulnerability which resulted in a tear (c. 12mm) and slight distortion to the left of the tab extending from the base of the plaque to the lower end of the drapery which descends from Minerva’s right shoulder. This damage probably occurred during discovery and retrieval by the finder and the broken edges have been carefully realigned by British Museum conservators.

The plaque is composed of a two-tiered finial above a gabled shrine. The freehand embossing of the finial and

situ in the stack as received at the British Museum. Its reverse face was uppermost. The end of its finial had been bent back, probably during discovery and retrieval by the finder, and was carefully repositioned by British Museum conservators. Its tip is lacking.

The plaque is a small, neatly crafted, uninscribed, slender triangular example of classic leaf form. The simple freehand embossed decorative scheme, worked both from front and back, is in two parts: the upper elongated triangle has a ribbed margin enclosing a veined leaf with raised midrib; the lower part incorporates an arrow-like motif, the central part of which forms effectively the stem of the leaf. Its lower end projects beyond the base of the plaque to provide a small trapezoid tab. No provision was made for an inscription and none exists.


1cm



ḌSỊỊ (in left field)

ḶẠMỊỊḶ (on panel)

NỊỊRVS (in right field) d(eae) Se(nunae) | lamel(lam) | Nerus

To the goddess Senuna, Nerus (has given) this plaque



This plaque was positioned fifth from top of the stack of gold plaques, between plaques A11 and A13, and was still in situ in the stack as received at the British Museum. Its reverse face was uppermost and it was preserved intact and undamaged, excepting a slight distortion of the angles of the basal tab which was carefully corrected by British Museum conservators.

The plaque has an elaborate three-tiered finial centred on an obelisk-like veined triangle – slightly askew of the plaque’s vertical axis – its tip flanked by tiny triangles, below which is a series of three scrolled and subtriangular lateral expansions, their edges and perforations contrived with similar difficulty to those of plaque A11. As on plaque A11 the embossed leaf-veining at the foot of the ‘obelisk’ extends down both sides of the plaque to enclose the shrine. It varies slightly, however, in the margins flanking the shrine, where the angle of the veining is reversed in order to complement that of the freehand ‘spiral fluting’ of the stylized columns. The shrine’s pediment, composed of cable-moulded cornices and architrave and containing a large symmetrical garlanded wreath, is identical in form and size to that of plaque A11 although slightly less crisply struck. The image of Minerva within the shrine, though differentially preserved, is also identical to those of plaque A11 and plaque A16. The goddess is shown frontally with her head turned to her left. She wears a crested helmet, a full-length garment with a long fold of drapery descending from her right shoulder and her feet are just visible below the hem of her dress. With her right hand she holds the top of a slender spear shaft (though the spearhead is lacking, ‘hidden’ behind the pediment) and further supports it in the crook of her right arm. Her left hand rests on the upper edge of her low-domed circular shield, which, with its prominent beaded rim, she holds at her left side. The only substantial difference, owing to distortion of the stamped image by subsequent adjacent freehand embossing, is at the upper left, where the goddess’s hand grips the spear shaft but where a crease distortion ‘erased’ the outer edge of her forearm and also gives the false impression that the hand continues towards the head. The cause was simply that the die-stamped columns that accompanied the figure and pediment on plaque A11 were for some reason omitted from plaque A12 to be substituted by stylized freehand embossed versions, without base or capital, which were of greater width and therefore encroached further on to the plain background and even impinged on the figure itself, resulting in a somewhat cramped and less imposing setting for the goddess.

sides, while carefully executed, is rather irregular and misaligned and contrasts with the regularity of the die-stamped imagery of the shrine. In particular the central obelisk-like veined triangle (its uppermost tip raggedly trimmed) is markedly tilted away from the vertical; the form and size of the flanking subtriangular and scrolled expansions and the treatment of their infill is distinctly asymmetric; and the edges and perforations of the lateral expansions were rather irregularly cut. The embossed leaf-veining at the foot of the ‘obelisk’ extends down both sides of the plaque to enclose the shrine. The shrine’s pediment, which contains a large symmetrical garlanded wreath, is composed of cable-moulded cornices and architrave. The cabling mirrors the even spiral fluting of the columns, which have moulded bases and ornate capitals. The shrine’s stylobate is also marked by a cabled line. Within the shrine is an embossed image of a standing Minerva, struck from the same die as that used for plaques A12 and A16. A light depression around her head creates a slight but distinct ‘halo’ effect (also discernible on plaque A12) and must be a consequence of the process of die-stamping. It would imply that the shrine and figure were formed from separate dies, an implication supported by the fact that on plaque A12 only the figure and pediment were die-stamped. The goddess is shown frontally with her head turned to her left. She wears a fine crested helmet and a full-length garment with a long fold of drapery descending from her right shoulder. Her feet are just visible below the hem of her dress. With her right hand she holds the top of a slender spear shaft (though the spearhead is lacking, ‘hidden’ behind the pediment) and further supports it in the crook of her right arm. Her left hand rests on the upper edge of her low-domed circular shield, which, with its prominent beaded rim, she holds at her left side. What appears to be compressed creasing of the die-stamped imagery must have occurred at the time of manufacture, rather than at any subsequent time, because it is not seen on the freehand parts of the plaque. Although it obscures the imagery to some extent the high quality of the die is still evident, whether in the face, drapery or architecture.

Below the shrine’s stylobate is a narrow undecorated strip – a slender reserved panel – with, at the centre, a projecting rectangular tab. Rather irregular dot-punched lettering is present on both the strip and the tab (horizontal lettering) as well as in the reserved space flanking the goddess (vertically aligned lettering read from top to bottom). Although some individual letters are clear the exact arrangement and sequence and the text itself are hard to discern. The indifferent finish of the lower edge of the plaque contrasts with that of its other parts and it is fairly certain that it was reworked: the base strip was originally a broader (inscribed) panel that was subsequently clipped away at both sides to provide a tab, possibly a replacement for a broken tab. Certainly that explains the presence of only the truncated lower part of dot-punched lettering on the strip flanking the tab.

The inscription (Tomlin 2008, 308, no. 11; and this volume, p. 112, A11) appears to read:

44 | Dea Senuna

D SE LAMEL (on panel)

QVINTIAṆVS (in field) d(eae) Se(nunae) lamel(lam) | Quintianus

To the goddess Senuna, Quintianus (has given) this plaque



This was the penultimate of the gold plaques, sixth in the stack, between plaques A12 and A14. Its reverse face was uppermost. Its size, position and alignment in the stack ensured its fine state of preservation, complete and virtually undamaged – all the more remarkable since it is one of the thinnest gold sheets in the find. Even the tip of its finial was intact.

The plaque is a pristine, finely crafted, symmetrical example, uninscribed and ornamented throughout in embossed work. The ornate three-tiered finial comprises a

Below the shrine’s stylobate is a reserved rectangular panel with, at the centre, a projecting trapezoid basal tab. On this panel is a dot-punched inscription (horizontal lettering) and a second line has been inserted in the narrow field within the upper right border of the shrine, its final two letters running on to the pediment (horizontally aligned lettering in a vertical space read from bottom to top). As on plaque A13 there is a noticeable contrast between the shiny surface of the freehand work of the finial and margins and the duller surface of the die-struck figure and pediment.

In terms of overall design and the style of the freehand embossed work this plaque and plaque A11 are closely similar and the same dies were used to strike their figural image and the pediment of the gabled shrine. In addition, the gold composition of both is so similar as to suggest manufacture from the same metal sheet. It seems certain, therefore, that plaques A11 and A12 were the product of the same craftsman.

The inscription (Tomlin 2008, 308, no. 12; and this volume, p. 113, A12) appears to read:

1cm



toes of her bare left foot are depicted. Her right foot rests on a small globe and on the lower body of a crested snake, symbol of eternal rebirth, its scaly hood suggestive of a cobra. Immediately beneath the globe a small rectangular tab with simple ribbing projects from the base of the plaque.

There is a clear contrast between the freehand embossing of the upper finial and the crispness of the gabled shrine and figure, the former with a shiny surface, the latter with a more matt appearance. It seems probable that both the figure and the shrine (excepting its stylobate) were die-stamped. A slight ‘dislocation’ of the head and a light depression of the metal around it raise, too, the possibility that the body and head of the figure were struck from separate dies. The very close proximity of the outer edges of the columns and their capitals to the cut edge of the plaque suggests that trimming of the plaque followed the die-stamping process.


very slender central veined midrib, with spear-shaped tip, flanked by finely formed engaged scrollwork. It surmounts the pediment of a large gabled shrine with vegetal projections and acroteria on its slender cabled cornices. In the centre of the pediment is a garlanded wreath, its long trailing ribbons elegantly substituting for the architrave. The flanking columns have plain plump bases, intricate ‘Corinthian’ capitals and very tightly and evenly wrought spiral-fluted shafts. A narrow band of ribbing at the base of the plaque represents the stylobate. Within the shrine is a finely rendered standing figure of a winged Victory, shown frontally, with her head turned to her right, wearing a diadem with hairnet and/or ribbons and with billowing diaphanous drapery – chiton and over-chiton – which skilfully reveals the female form. She holds a garlanded wreath in her raised right hand and supports a palm branch in the crook of her left arm, gripping its stem with her left hand, which rests at her side. The form and feathering of the wings is finely wrought and fingers and thumbs as well as the

mc 50

Figures 74–5 Gold plaque (A13), front conserved, back original state (scale 1:1)

46 | Dea Senuna

bulbous butt resting on the ground, but the spearhead, seemingly ‘upstaged’ by the pediment, is not visible. Her left hand holds the upper rim of a convex ribbed shield which she rests at her left side. Her feet are not visible, the space where they would have appeared being occupied by an inscribed text. In the absence of a reserved panel, a four-line inscription, competently written in neatly incised capitals, was contrived on the plaque’s narrow lower margin (one line) and the proportionately large trapezoid basal tab (three lines).

The surface of the figure and pediment wreath is distinctly worn, in contrast to that of the freehand work of the finial, margins and inscription, all of which appear quite fresh. That might imply either that the die used to impress the embossed imagery was worn or that the thickness of the gold sheet was too great to take a crisp impression. Additionally, two horizontal ‘creases’ or ‘seams’ run across the shrine and figure at neck and waist level and there are traces of linear ‘background noise’ running vertically through the shrine, both of which are presumably remnants of the manufacturing process.

The inscription (Tomlin 2008, 308, no. 14; and this volume, p. 113, A14) reads:

BELL. MEMORIANVS

VOTVM

F.D. SE

NVNE


This was the lowermost (seventh) plaque in the stack of gold plaques. With its reverse facing upwards it lay below gold plaque A13 and above the silver-alloy plaques. Like plaque A13 it was preserved intact and undamaged.

The plaque is a slender example but made from comparatively thick sheet – compare its weight with the much larger but thinner plaque A13. It combines a die-stamped shrine and figure with freehand embossed work on the finial and sides and an incised inscription on the basal edge and tab. The finial has a prominent, central, very regularly veined, obelisk-like triangle flanked by a series of interspersed ribbed and veined triangular and lobate expansions, the curved components rendered rather less competently than the straight-line work. A further zone of simple ribbed veining extends from the finial down the sides of the plaque to enclose the stylized gabled shrine. The pediment, which contains a wreath, is defined by simple beaded cornices and the columns, too, are simple, very slender and highly stylized, without bases or capitals. Within the shrine is a standing figure of Minerva shown frontally, with her head turned to her left. She wears a crested helmet and the drapery of her full-length garment is naturalistically depicted. In her upraised right arm and hand she holds a spear shaft, its

1cm

mc 50

Figure 76–7 Gold plaque (A14) (scale 1:1)


veined triangle, which surmounts the shrine’s pediment. It is flanked by a running-chevron motif which traverses a pair of lobate expansions and ends at the two corners of the shrine. The die-stamped shrine is composed of pediment, columns, stylobate and figure: the pediment, with slender cable-moulded cornices, incorporates an omega-shaped arched niche defined by a slender beaded rib; the spiral-fluted columns have a twin-moulded base and vegetal-ornamented capital; the stylobate is a simple plain rib. The figure of Minerva is finely rendered and detailed and in quite high relief. The standing goddess is shown frontally with her head turned to her right. She wears an exuberantly crested helmet and a full-length garment which is naturalistically depicted, its folds and hems clearly shown, and one end falling as a fold of drapery over her left shoulder. The hand of her extended left arm holds the upper rim (braced between fingers and thumb) of her circular shield, with prominent domed boss, which rests at an angle at her left side. Her right hand grasps a spear, its head marked by a small lateral expansion, its slender shaft supported in the crook of her arm. In addition to the fingers of her right hand there is a slender projection ending in a small knob which appears to be a held object, of uncertain identity, to the lower end of which a short ?ribbon or ?cord seems to be attached – indicated by a very slender cable-moulded line descending from her lower palm. Unusually, the goddess is shown without feet. The base of the figure

Bell... Memorianus | uotum | f(ecit) d(eae) Se|nun(a)e

Bell... Memorianus has made his vow to the goddess Senuna

Like Celsus (plaque A8), Memorianus (or his agent) has deviated from the normal formula by placing his name first and relegating that of the goddess Senuna to the cramped (and not necessarily visible) space on the tab.


Votive leaf plaques: silver

A15. Silver plaque (2003,0901.15) (Figs 78–9) Height 116.2mm; figure height 50mm; weight 5.72g

On arrival at the British Museum, this was one of the least-damaged of the silver plaques, although very brittle. It is a neatly made, uninscribed example of modest size which retains its full height and lacks only the left edge of the finial.

The plaque comprises two unequal parts, a comparatively small subtriangular two-tiered finial and a prominent rectangular lower section with an image of Minerva in a gabled shrine. The relatively simple freehand embossed finial is dominated by a central obelisk-like, tall

mc 50Figures 78–9 Silver plaque (A15) (scale 1:1)

48 | Dea Senuna

A16. Silver plaque (2003,0901.16) (Figs 80–1) Plaque: height 184mm; figure height 50mm; weight 24.92g Tab strengthener: height 31.9mm; weight 7.34g

An originally large but now damaged example which lacks the upper part of its finial and both lateral edges: only the base of the plaque, with its broad central tab, preserves the original cut edge. Despite a painstaking search of the plaque fragments found with the hoard few joining or belonging pieces were identified. It is likely that post-depositional corrosion and mineralization of the metal, combined with the rudimentary manner in which the plaques were removed from the ground, reduced the thin metal of the edges and upper finial to unidentifiable minute shattered fragments and dust.

The plaque consists of three main parts: a tall ornate finial; a die-stamped image of Minerva in a gabled shrine – pediment, columns, figure and stylobate; and a reserved ansate panel containing an inscribed text. The finial, the sides flanking the shrine and the frame of the ansate panel were hand-embossed from the back with incised finishing from the front. The central part of the finial comprises an

terminates with the lower edge of the garment, which rests directly on the stylobate. Immediately beneath, with virtually no margin, is the lower, complete, edge of the plaque. Although untabbed it has a slight central keel which may have served the same purpose. The sides flanking the shrine are slender plain margins which preserve their original cut edge. A curiosity is an extraneous embossed open V (chevron) motif in the margin at the upper left of the shrine. It is quite worn and may be a remnant of a previous design, not fully erased, from a reworked plaque. Certainly it has no place in the carefully organized décor of the present plaque. There is a further indication of design reworking in the faint ‘pelleted’ line which runs obliquely in front of the peak of the goddess’s helmet – it looks like embossed work that has been erased by smoothing down the surface. A further fragment of it is visible between the goddess’s right elbow and the adjacent column shaft. It is further possible that the ?ribbon or ?cord was also part of the same feature – it lies on the same line – which, because of its cramped position between the right forearm and spear shaft, could not be erased.

1cm

mc 50

Figures 80–1 Silver plaque (A16) with its tab reinforcement (scale 3:4)

1cm

mc 50


view of the full spelling of DEAE and the lack of ligaturing elsewhere.

A large trapezoid tab survives on the lower edge. A thick silver sheet, now detached, was originally fastened to the back of the tab. It is a slightly bowed shield-shaped plate, c. 1.4mm thick at the centre, its broader lower edge matching the size and form of the tab. It was held in place behind the ansate panel and tab – in a position that ensured it could not be seen from the front of the plaque – by a blob of solder at top and bottom: the corresponding attachment marks are visible at the back of the tab and panel. Its function was presumably to provide greater basal weight and stability for this large plaque, which may originally have measured about 270 × 140mm.

XRF analysis of the subsurface of the plaque (see Table 3) indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 92.4% silver, 6.5% copper, 0.2% lead, 0.6% gold and <0.2% zinc. That of the tab strengthener indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 90.1% silver, 8.8% copper, 0.2% lead, 0.7% gold and <0.2% zinc and that it was attached to the plaque with tin-lead solder.

A17. Silver plaque (2003,0901.17) (Figs 82–3) Height 181mm; figure height 47mm; weight 21.08g

This large, quite thick and fairly complete plaque with well-preserved original cut edges consists of a subrectangular lower section surmounted by an ornate subtriangular finial. The tip and upper left side of the finial and the lower left corner of the plaque are broken and mostly missing, although a small non-joining fragment of the finial side survives.

The major part of the plaque is ornamented with freehand embossed work which surrounds the die-stamped image of Minerva in a simple stylized gabled shrine. Above the shrine a large and prominent tightly veined obelisk rises, its centre axis markedly askew. It is flanked by paired lobate and circular expansions, their infill design competently rendered despite the challenge of curved lines. A bold running chevron motif occupies the margins between the shrine and the plaque edge. The slender, rather spindly, structural units of the gabled shrine – pediment, columns and simple ground line – and the figure of Minerva were die-stamped. The empty pediment has cable-moulded cornices with vegetal projections; the spiral-fluted columns have stylized Corinthian capitals and moulded bases; and the stylobate is represented by a thin embossed line. The goddess stands to the front, her head turned to her right. She wears a crested helmet and a full-length garment, naturalistically depicted with one end draped over her left shoulder and the aegis just discernible at her breast. Exceptionally, the position of her held attributes – invariably spear at right, shield at left – has been reversed. Thus, her right hand grips the upper rim of the circular bossed shield that rests at her right side, while the hand of her raised left arm supports the slender beaded shaft of a stylized spear – no spear-head is visible – its upper end slightly off-set and mistakenly shown behind rather than in the crook of the arm. Her feet are shown on the stylobate, beneath which is a rectangular panel, framed on each side by a ridged line. Within is a five-line inscription lightly incised in elegant

elongated veined triangle which rises, like an obelisk, above, and on the axis of, the shrine’s pediment. Its top is broken, as are the sides, but sufficient remains to show that it was flanked by a pair of engaged outward-curving swags, which emerge from the corners of the shrine. Below them on either side of the shrine is further simple angled veining which ceases at the point of contact with the embossed border of the ansate panel, indicating that the latter was completed before the veining. At the more complete left side of the panel’s border is the remnant of a finer-veined motif, presumably complemented by one at the right. The markedly irregular spacing position and alignment of design features of the freehand embossed work contrasts with the regularity of the shrine’s stamped imagery: Minerva is flanked by a pair of spiral-fluted columns, with simple moulded bases and ornate two-tiered capitals, which support a pediment whose cabled cornices and architrave frame a garlanded wreath with trailing ribbons. The standing figure of the goddess (die-linked to the figures on gold plaques A11 and A12) is in quite high relief, especially the head, breast, belly and right knee. She is shown frontally, but with her head turned to her left, and wears a crested helmet and a full-length garment, quite naturalistically depicted, with a long fold of drapery descending from her right shoulder. In her right hand she holds the upper end of a spear, its slender shaft resting in the crook of her arm and its arrow-like butt on the ground. Her left hand steadies the upper beaded (or cabled) rim of her circular domed shield, with its central boss and rayed motif, which rests on the ground at her left side. Beneath the lower hem of her dress her feet encroach on the simple cabled stylobate, which is positioned directly above the upper border of the ansate panel.

The large and prominent, rather rudimentarily formed, ansate panel is broken at the right, along the ridge of its right frame, with the resulting loss of the right ansa, and the right edge of the ultimate inscribed letter on the upper two lines of the inscription.

The three-line dot-punched inscription (Tomlin 2008, 309–10, no. 16; and this volume, pp. 113–14, A16) reads:

DAIIAII SIINAII

LVCILIA SIINẠ

V S L M

d{a}eae Senae | Lucilia Sena | u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito)

To the goddess Sena, Lucilia Sena has paid her vow willingly, deservedly

The punched lettering, possibly by a left-handed writer, is decidedly ungainly, especially in the first line. In view of the fact, too, that the second letter of deae was bungled and over-written and that there was an apparent attempt to ‘erase’ the original letter by multiple light score marks, it is conceivable that Lucilia herself marked the inscription since it is less likely that a ‘professional’ scribe would make the errors or write so inelegantly. It may be significant that the most clearly written word was Lucilia’s own name. It is possible, too, that Lucilia, if she were indeed the writer, accidentally omitted a syllable from the goddess’ name, but it is perhaps more likely that Sena was a cognate form of Senuna. Multiple ligaturing – NA for NVNA – is unlikely in

50 | Dea Senuna

XRF analysis of the subsurface of the plaque (see Table 3) indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 94.7% silver, 4.0% copper, 0.1% lead, 0.6% gold and 0.2% zinc.

A18. Silver plaque (2003,0901.18) (Figs 84–5) Height 164.5mm; figure height 85mm; weight 11.64g

This plaque is a highly embossed, uninscribed, idiosyncratic example, largely complete, though with damage to much of the left side and a broken (non-joining) voluted finial. Unusually, the freehand embossed work is a minor component and serves only to frame the large expanse of figured decoration. At the top is a voluted finial and gabled cornice formed from an inverted Y-shaped pelleted rib bordered by unequal narrow margins of angled veining. Further angled veining flanks the gabled panel (a space which alludes to that of the more frequently encountered gabled shrine) in which two figured scenes were skilfully and inventively contrived. The smaller occupies the triangular apex and shows a crescent moon (for Luna) above a prominent, frontal, draped bust of the Sun god Sol, with his long, thick, curling hair, nine-point radiated diadem and distinctive short whip at the left shoulder.

‘Rustic Capitals’ with elongated serifs. The lower edge of the plaque has a truncated appearance, at odds with the careful finish of the side edges, and the upper part of the final letter (M) of the inscription is isolated on the tiny, vestigial, off-centre tab. The most likely explanation is that the plaque was originally made with a straight lower edge and then found subsequently to require a tab. In order to contrive that a strip of metal was cut from both ends of the lower edge leaving a small rectangular projection which both provided a tab and preserved the final M of the inscription.

The inscription (Tomlin 2008, 310–11, no. 17; and this volume, p. 114, A17), first recognized by Roger Tomlin, reads:

D. SENV

NAE LL.

HERBONI

ANVS V S L

M

d(eae)Senu|nae L(ucius) L(...)| Herboni|anus u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens)| m(erito)

To the goddess Senuna, Lucius L(…) Herbonianus has paid his vow willingly, deservedly

1cm

mc 50

Figures 82–3 Silver plaque (A17) (scale 3:4)


the point of highest relief on the plaque, is quite rudimentarily depicted and devoid of detail – it appears naked below the lower thigh and no footwear is visible. This is in complete contrast to the right leg, the lower-relief modelling of which shows the kneecap and quite naturalistic musculature as well as an ankle boot or laced sandal. The right foot is placed commandingly and symbolically on the domed bowl of a helmet while the left foot rests on one of a pile of nine oval midribbed shields, the heart of the trophy on which the figure is seated. Just behind lies what was surely intended to be a military cuirass – the normal central component of Roman trophy imagery – but with the disconcerting and potentially gruesome addition of what appears to be an arm.

The keeled base may have been recut, for its apex is markedly off-centre (to the left). Furthermore, its present edge truncates both the right side of the cable-moulded lower border and the right end of another sinuous cable-moulded motif asymmetrically placed below the border. Might this be a stylized snake/serpent, to be associated with Victory?

The principal scene below shows a large, slightly equivocal figure seated on a pile of trophies. Is this Mars or Roma? The figure wears a crested helmet, a short tunic and a mantle slung across the left shoulder, the lines and folds of the drapery quite schematically shown. The left arm is raised behind and supports a spear grasped just below the spearhead with the fingers and thumb of the left hand. The slender spear shaft is skilfully integrated into the angled veining of the border (the veining was carefully applied subsequent to the imagery). The figure looks to his/her right, at the open hand of his/her outstretched right arm on which stands a tiny winged Victory, her wind-blown lower drapery billowing out behind her, raising aloft a garlanded wreath which she presents to the deity. At the feet of the deity, incorporated into the angled veining of the left margin, is another figure, perhaps kneeling, a curly-haired and bearded defeated barbarian with his arms outstretched and open palms uppermost in supplication. His may be the sword lying on the ground in front of him. The deity’s left leg, which with his/her breast and the face of Sol is

mc 50Figure 84–5 Silver plaque (A18) (scale 3:4)

52 | Dea Senuna

wrought garlanded wreath. Immediately below the wreath is a tiny deeply impressed dimple. It corresponds precisely to the centre of the semicircular arch and was evidently the centre point used for the compass-incised setting-out lines of the design. The pediment was given further prominence by the differential gilding that was applied across its entire surface but which elsewhere was present only on the column bases and capitals. The slender spiral-fluted columns have a twin-moulded base and Corinthian-style capital, with the one on the left slightly damaged. Within the shrine stands a veiled female figure shown frontally with her head turned to her right. She wears a full-length garment, one end of which is draped across her left shoulder. In her lightly extended right hand she holds a circular phiale, which, with her veiled head, indicates that she is a priestess pouring a libation. That there may also have been some sort of conflation with Minerva is suggested by the hint of an aegis at her breast as well as the spear-like shaft that she holds in her left hand. Beneath, a bird stands at her side, its head turned towards her. Its overall shape and posture, large curved beak and thick feathered legs give it the appearance of an eagle. The embossed upper margin of a large rectangular panel beneath the shrine effectively formed the shrine’s stylobate. The upper right corner and a fragment of the lower margin of the panel are also preserved. Although clearly intended to receive a written text, no trace of incised lettering was identified. As in the case of plaque A20 it is possible that a text was brushed on with ink or paint.

A19. Silver-gilt plaque (2003,0901.19) (Figs 86–7) Height 112.6mm; figure height 41mm; weight 11.90g (including non-joined fragment)

No certain original edge of this plaque survives, and it is likely that the border was originally a little more extensive, though perhaps only with a narrow plain edge. Breakage occurred very frequently along the embossed arched ridge and a number of belonging pieces were identified and joined by British Museum conservators.

The plaque has a freehand embossed arched border with central rib and leaf-veining. The quite deeply incised inner edge of the arch is visible in a number of places, notably at the top and at the base at each side, where they extended a little beyond their intended end. Further ‘over-runs’ of incised setting-out lines are also visible at the inner base of the arch’s straight sides. From the configuration of the veining it is likely that the two straight sides (‘columns’) were embossed first, then the arch (‘roof’) starting at the top of the left side. The freehand embossed border is finely contrasted with the smooth plain expanse of the arched interior. At the centre, like an aedicula within a temple, is a die-stamped gabled shrine comprising a pediment, two columns and a standing figure. The imagery is finely rendered but not very sharp, perhaps owing to the thickness of the metal rather than to the use of a worn die or subsequent wear to the plaque. The pediment, with triple-moulded cornices and architrave, and hints of projecting roof ornaments, encloses a large, finely

Gildingmc 50

Figures 86–7 Silver-gilt plaque (A19) (scale 1:1)


which rises above the shrine’s gable, flanked by a scrolled motif. Simple, neatly applied, freehand embossed veining borders the shrine and the ansate panel and an angled leaf projects from the top of the right-hand column capital, presumably complemented by another at the left (now broken). The large embossed shrine has a composite construction. The simple ridged cornices which made its gabled roof were formed as part of the freehand embossing of the finial, with which they are skilfully integrated, but the architrave, columns and figure of Minerva were die-stamped. The cable-moulded architrave was placed much higher than the expected normal position – spanning the column capitals. This resulted in a short architrave and a diminutive, cramped pediment in which, in place of the normal garlanded wreath (for which there was insufficient space), there are what appear to be two tiny embossed motifs, perhaps a crescent moon and a star. The eccentric setting of the architrave was dictated by the large size of the figure of the goddess, whose height slightly exceeded that of the columns. On other plaques where this occurred the architrave was simply omitted in order to accommodate the figure, but in this instance there was evidently a desire to include a pediment. The unevenly spiral-fluted columns have a twin-moulded base and elaborate capitals. Beneath the base of that on the right is the impression of the edge of

XRF analysis of the subsurface of the plaque (see Table 3) indicates that the alloy comprises approximately 86.6% silver, 12.0% copper, 0.4% lead, 0.6% gold and <0.2% zinc.

A20. Silver plaque (2003,0901.20) (Figs 88–9) Height 125.2mm; figure height 54.5mm; weight 5.98g

This plaque lacks most of its finial and virtually all of the original edge – only at the base are there what appear to be two short surviving lengths. However, it is likely that the sides would have been only a little wider than they now are. The thinness of the plaque, especially at the edges, would suggest that in many places corrosion had mineralized the original cut edge to a brittle, even powdery, state, much of which would not have survived removal from the ground. Nevertheless, from the unassociated fragments conservators were able to identify and join several belonging pieces of the finial, sides and base.

It is clear that there were three parts to the plaque – finial, gabled shrine and ansate panel – and, although the exact form and size of the finial cannot be determined, the plaque would seem to have been dominated by the proportionately large central shrine. The remnant of the lower right side of the freehand embossed finial shows part of the base of a central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle,

mc 50


54 | Dea Senuna

ansate panel the projecting plain margin, which incorporates two levels of probable original cut edge, could be the fractured remains of a central trapezoid basal tab.


A21. Silver plaque (2003,0901.21) (Figs 90–1; see also Fig. 9) Height 146.5mm; figure height 44mm; weight 7.58g

A finely crafted plaque, made from very thin sheet, now brittle, which lacks its top, base and most of the side edges. The plaque was very fragmentary when it arrived at the British Museum, where conservators rejoined many fragments, including almost the entire finial. The surface has a distinctive form of corrosion which has the appearance of a rash of tiny blisters.

In its present state the plaque comprises two main parts, a prominent leaf-marked and voluted finial above an ornate

the die, a feature that can also be seen beneath the feet of the figure of Minerva. Within the shrine is a somewhat equivocal image. The body is surely that of Minerva, as disclosed by the frontal standing posture, the full-length garment, with finely observed drapery and prominent breast, and the normal attributes – spear, with slender beaded shaft and flame-shaped spear-head, held in the right hand, and circular rayed and bossed shield rested at the left side. The crested helmet, too, is another anticipated attribute, but the face beneath has a clearly depicted beard and the head can only be that of Mars. In fact, the form and position of the head and neck would appear to indicate that it was stamped separately from the body. A further oddity is that the figure’s left hand is lacking – an absence probably to be attributed to a damaged die. The upper margin of the prominent freehand embossed ansate panel below the shrine effectively forms its stylobate. In view of the equivocal imagery, it is especially sad that no trace of an inscription was detected in the panel – if one ever existed it must have been brushed on with ink or paint. Below the

1cm

mc 50



The text is unpunctuated. The letters are well shaped, evenly spaced and regular, formed by careful dot-punching of very even density which followed the track of lightly incised guide lettering. The dot-punched letters are capitals, excepting only the H, which is of cursive form; the Es are true Es, formed with crossbars; the As are open (without the crossbar); the Vs have a rounded (U-like) base. Many of the incised letters are still visible and in some places, most notably the word SERVANDVS, there is a palimpsest of at least two attempts. The intention was evidently to position Servandus’ name in the centre. That was contrived by the expedients of an extreme abbreviation of deae Senunae and the overspill of the final three letters of hISPANI beyond the end of the cabled cornice.


A22. Silver plaque (2003,0901.22) (Figs 92–3) Height 135.1mm; weight 2.69g

A very slender, freehand embossed, leaf-marked plaque with a central beaded rib flanked by veining, a slightly damaged

embossed shrine. The freehand embossed design of the finial and sides is regularly laid out and finely applied. A central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle is flanked by two pairs of volutes (probably originally topped by a third pair) infilled with a rayed motif well adapted to the form of the space. Beneath the lower volutes angled ribs form a triangular space above the shrine and integrate with running chevrons at the sides elegantly enclosing the shrine. The die-stamped shrine is composed of a pair of columns, an omega-shaped ceiling/roof line, a stylobate and a figure of Minerva. The columns are cigar-shaped, with a spiral-fluted shaft and a twin-moulded base. Their exotic capitals, with plump abacus and tripartite foliate ornament – giving the columns a palm-like appearance – support an arched niche defined by a slender cable-moulded cornice. The pediment itself is suggested by the hand-embossed triangular space between the shrine and finial. Within the shrine Minerva stands to the front, her head turned to her left. Like the other components of the die-stamped imagery the goddess is in high relief, with a fresh surface, crisply formed and sharply defined.

Minerva wears a crested helmet and a full-length garment, its folds and hems clearly depicted, and a double fold of drapery descends from her right arm. A distinct ‘shadowing’ to the left of her hand, arm and hanging drapery appears to be a product of the stamping process, presumably a result of slightly excessive pressure on the left side of the die. The outline and scaly surface of her bib-like aegis are clearly shown, together with a central boss – a simplified rendering of the Medusa mask. The anticipated spear in her right hand is, in fact, as depicted, a staff with a slender beaded shaft, its globular butt resting on the ground, for her hand is clear of the top, which is formed by a small knob, not a spear-head. Her left hand steadies the upper beaded rim of her circular domed shield, with its central boss and rayed motif, which rests on the ground at her left side. Her left foot is shown in profile, while her right foot points forward. Both rest on a discontinuous line, slightly higher than the floor line on which the columns are set, giving the appearance of a pedestal and thus reinforcing the impression of the image as a cult statue in a temple. The stylobate consists of a slender cable moulding underlying the simple floor line. Beneath, only a tiny fragment of the apparently plain basal margin remains. The original cut edge of the plaque survives only on the two right-hand volutes and for a short distance on the right-hand margin adjacent to the top of the shrine, where it is straight, suggesting that the lower part of the plaque originally had a square or rectangular profile. Into the narrow plain space of the pediment-like arc above the shrine’s arched niche and also within the niche itself a two-line dot-punched inscription was inserted.


D SE SERVANDVS hISPANI

V S L

d(eae) Se(nunae) Servandus Hispani (filius) | u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens)

To the goddess Senuna, Servandus son of Hispanus has paid his vow willingly

mc 50


56 | Dea Senuna

relocation and reattachment of fragments by British Museum conservators.

The plaque bears identical die-stamped imagery (it was struck from the same die) to that on plaque A21 (see Fig. 46). It also shares the same inscription and the same distinctive blistered corrosion. In addition, the freehand embossed work, though of a different design, is so similar in its motifs and technique of manufacture as to have been made, almost certainly, by the same craftsman. As on plaque A21 the shrine is enclosed by a finely applied and symmetrical hand-embossed running chevron motif which also extends across the basal margin. The same central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle rises above the shrine but in this instance it is flanked by elegant and finely wrought interlocking scrolls with veined edging, giving the finial a more flowing profile. The non-joining scroll on the left side has a small patch of

ovate finial at the upper end and a miniature gabled shrine at the lower end. The neatly formed shrine, enclosed by the veining, is unoccupied. It comprises pediment and columns, their lines enhanced by dot-punching, and a simple stylobate. The semicircular space between the stylobate and the smoothly keeled base (left edge lacking) is filled with a ‘quilted’ motif – a cross-hatched lattice with embossed central pellets.

A23. Silver plaque (2003,0901.23) (Figs 94–5) Height 161mm; figure height 44mm; weight 10.20g

This finely crafted plaque, made from very thin sheet, is slightly distorted at the lower right corner and the edge is chipped in a number of places but it is substantially complete, lacking only the upper part of its finial, following

1cm

mc 50



helmet and full-length garment, one end of which is draped over her right shoulder. Her right hand grasps the upper shaft of her spear (its head missing), which is – presumably mistakenly – shown as descending behind her upper arm rather than in the crook of her elbow. Her left hand steadies the upper edge of the circular shield, with rayed dome and cabled rim, which leans against her left side. Only fragments of the right shrine survive. They show the left end of the stylobate and the central part of the right column as well as the partial left and right sides of a standing figure, probably male, the head, torso and left leg lacking. The right hand is raised aloft and a fold of drapery can be seen descending from shoulder to mid-calf. There is also a hint of the lower hem of a garment at knee level, and the foot can be seen encroaching on the stylobate. No attribute is visible on the figure’s right, but faint traces at top and bottom are suggestive of something ‘erased’. The surviving fragment of the figure’s left side is insufficient to indicate exactly what is depicted, though the appearance is of bunched drapery at waist level. Both figures display traces of ‘shadowing’ which, like those on plaque A21, are likely to be a consequence of uneven pressure in the die-stamping process. Beneath the double shrine is an ansate panel, broken at the right, containing a two-line inscription. The panel has the appearance of being supported on an inverted triangle flanked by broad plain swags. The embossed midrib and veining of the cone is so faint as to appear to have been deliberately ‘erased’. At the upper end of the plaque the counterpart to the lower triangle and curve motif is a central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle flanked by engaged outward-curving veined swags.


DEAE SENVṆ[....]

FIRMANVṢ[....]

deae Senun[ae ..] | Firmanus [u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito)]

To the goddess Senuna, [..] Firmanus [has paid his vow willingly, deservedly]

The lettering was heavily incised from the rear in mirror-image capitals, apparently with some difficulty – the EN of Senun[ae] was cut twice. By projection there would have been space for the AE of Senunae together with a further one or two letters at the broken end of the first line, presumably either Firmanus’ abbreviated praenomen and nomen (as on plaque A17) or an abbreviated two-letter imperial nomen (as on plaque A8). Similarly, the missing part of the second line was probably sufficient to accommodate VSLM after the S of Firmanus.

A25. Silver plaque (2003,0901.25) (Figs 98–9) Height 127.6mm; figure height 53mm;weight 5.95g; original width c. 63mm

This plaque, though of similar form and size to plaque A20, was far less complete and in a far worse condition when received at the British Museum. Only through painstaking conservation work has it been possible to identify and join many small belonging fragments. Although much of the original cut edge is still lacking, its partial presence at upper

green corrosion which preserves the vestiges of a textile (see p. 17). The intact cut edges of the lower part of the plaque preserve its waisted sides and smoothly keeled base. The shrine and image of Minerva are identical in every respect to those of plaque A21 except that there is no ‘shadowing’ of the left side and all components are distinctly worn at the points of higher relief, most notably on the aegis, drapery, column shafts, shield rim and staff tip. This wear must be related to the subsequent ‘life’ of the plaque rather than to the die-stamping process. As on plaque A21 the same pediment-like space was contrived above the slender cable-moulded cornice of the arched niche and the same two-line dot-punched text was inserted above the arched niche and within the niche itself.


D SE SERVANDVS hISPANI

VSL



The lettering is evidently by the same hand as that on plaque A21, with which it shares the cursive H, true Es, open As and rounded Vs. The shape, form and spacing of the dot-punched letters is even more regular and controlled, and a greater confidence, also implied by only a single, clearer, set of incised guide lettering, suggests that this plaque was made after plaque A21.


A24. Silver plaque (2003,0901.24) (Figs 96–7)Height 146.5mm; figure height 42mm; weight 12.09g; original dimensions probably c. 250 × 150mm

Part of a large and complex but very incomplete plaque, broken on all sides. Although no belonging fragments now remain amongst the finding debris that was brought to the British Museum with the hoard, conservators were able to join several important small pieces and juxtapose other belonging but non-joining pieces, to provide a tolerably clear picture of the principal part of the plaque and to enable a tentative reconstruction of its overall composition: a double shrine above an ansate panel forms the central focus of an elaborate design based on an eight-pointed leaf-veined star. The leaf-marked veining and other components of the star are freehand embossed work, as is also the ansate panel and its inscription, while the figures in the shrines, together probably with the shrines themselves, are die-stamped. The two shrines have an open gable, simple linear stylobate and spiral-fluted columns – the central one shared – with simple vestigial capital and base. The gable cornices comprise an embossed plain moulding under-shadowed by a slender rib but too little survives to indicate whether or not there were decorative projections at each apex. In the left shrine stands Minerva. She is shown frontally, with her head turned slightly to her left and her left foot overlapping the stylobate. She wears a crested

1cm

mc 50

58 | Dea Senuna

1cm

mc 50Figures 96–7 Silver plaque (A24), front conserved, back original state (scale 3:4)


the facts that the wear is not restricted to the high points of the embossed work and the freehand embossed parts all appear to be still quite crisp it is probable that a worn die was used. Within the shrine stands a figure of Mars, shown frontally with his bearded face turned to his right. He wears a helmet with prominent crest, a knee-length garment and either greaves or footwear. His right hand grasps the upper end of his spear, the slender shaft of which passes behind his elbow and terminates at ground level in an arrow-shaped butt. On the ground at his left side is an elliptical-shaped object with beaded rim on the upper edge of which his left hand appears to rest. This was evidently his shield, but part of the lower arm and shield were ‘erased’ by an embossed plain subcircular ‘object’ impressed from the back. Whether this occurred at the time of manufacture or subsequently is not clear. At the centre of the plaque’s lower edge is a low trapezoid basal tab, its corners chipped.

A26. Silver plaque (2003,0901.26) (Figs 100–1) Height 101.9mm; weight 2.62g

A small leaf-marked plaque, with ansate panel and keeled base, assembled from several fragments after its arrival at the British Museum. It lacks its upper tip and its lower end is slightly distorted. Finely veined margins flank the

right, lower left and base permits a confident estimate of the original size and appearance of all but the upper end of the finial.

The plaque has two principal parts, a large die-stamped gabled shrine surmounted by an ornate freehand embossed finial. The finial has a stout central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle which rises from the roof of the shrine and is flanked by scrolled lobes set against a veined background (that on the left now lacking). It is possible, but by no means certain, that a second tier of small lobes flanked the tip of the finial. Beneath the neatly cut lower curved edge of the lobe the sides of the plaque were straight. The narrow margin between the shrine’s columns and the cut edge, as also the zone between the stylobate and the basal tab, was filled with freehand embossed veining. The shrine consists of a pediment, columns and a stylobate. The triangular pediment, with cable-moulded cornices and architrave, encloses a garlanded wreath with trailing ribbons. It is rather unrealistically raised above the top of the column capitals in order to accommodate the figure of Mars, whose helmet crest would otherwise encroach on the architrave. The spiral-fluted columns have a twin-moulded base and apparently elaborate (damaged) capital. They stand on a cable-moulded stylobate. All the die-stamped components, including the figure of Mars, show signs of wear. In view of

mc 50Figure 98–9 Silver plaque (A25) (scale 1:1)

60 | Dea Senuna

mc 50Figures 100–1 Silver plaque (A26) (scale 1:1)

mc 50



stylized pair of wings. His left arm, from the shoulder of which a fold of drapery appears to descend, is concealed behind a tall object, seemingly a tripod, with a moulded base and three slightly converging, slender, segmented legs supporting a bowl from which rise stylized flames (?). On the ground to his right stands a bird with a ring-like collar around its neck, its head turned and raised to face him. To judge from its size and posture and the form of its legs and bill the bird rather resembles a raven, the prophetic bird of Apollo, than the cockerel that usually accompanies Mercury.

A28. Silver fragments (2003,0901.28) (Figs 104–5) Despite the prolonged and intensive conservation process some of the silver fragments defied attempts to unite them with the catalogued plaques and figurine. Several non-joining fragments of the drapery of the silver figurine survive, including what appears to be part of the front lower edge. Further fragments are identifiable as non-joining pieces of individual silver plaques – for instance, finial fragments from plaques A17 and A18. In addition there are finial volutes and small to tiny leaf-veined finial and margin fragments which remain unallocated. While it is likely that most belong to the catalogued plaques one or two quite substantial leaf-veined fragments (Fig. 105, upper) and several small fragments with an embossed ‘quilted’ motif (Fig. 105, bottom), which are not part of plaque A22, may be parts of additional plaques. Two small leaf-veined fragments bear vestiges of a mineral-replaced woven textile (Fig. 104 and see also Cartwright this volume, p. 17).

Other

A29. Iron nails (2003,0901.29) Length c. 40–45mm Three iron nails were said to have been found with the hoard. They are corroded hand-wrought nails of a form consistent with examples of the commonest type of Roman nail (Manning 1985, 134, Type 1b). One lacks its head and all three have a bent shank. However, the hoard was unearthed without respect to stratigraphy, which leaves open the possibility that they were not originally part of it. There is nothing to suggest they were from a wooden container for the hoard and it is most probable that they were part of the wider site scatter of Roman and later debris.

A fourth fragmentary nail, of the same type, together with two broken hobnails or studs, was said to have been found above the hoard.

prominently embossed central tall veined triangle. Beneath it, further angled veining is adapted to the spaces around the neatly embossed edging of the small ansate panel. The panel is uninscribed.

A27. Silver plaque (2003,0901.27) (Figs 102–3) Height 107.8mm; figure height 35.8mm; weight 3.27g

A very incomplete example ‘discovered’ in the hoard’s finding debris by British Museum conservators and assembled from many tiny fragments.

The plaque is finely made from very thin sheet and comprises three parts: a leaf-marked finial, a gabled shrine and an ansate panel. The shrine is die-stamped, the other parts freehand embossed. The top and flanks of the finial are lacking. What survives is the lower part of a central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle which rests on the gabled roof of the shrine. To the right side, at the lower angle of the shrine’s pediment (and perhaps representing an acroterion), is the lower part of a projecting leaf (presumably mirrored by one on the left), like those on plaques A8 and A20. Descending from the leaf an embossed running chevron motif occupies the border between the shrine and the edge of the plaque and another part survives in the lower left margin. It would have continued down to the corners of the now lacking base where it flanked the sides of a small ansate panel with embossed borders beneath the shrine. Only the right side of the ansa is preserved and no lettering is visible within. The die-stamped shrine is fine, ornate work in miniature. The pediment cornices and architrave are formed from a double-cable moulding and the cornices have an additional upper row of ornament with a floral projection at the apex. Sufficient of the interior of the pediment survives to show that it was occupied by a large garlanded wreath with trailing ribbons. The pediment is supported by a pair of spiral-fluted columns with twin-moulded base and elaborate ‘Corinthian’ capital. As on plaques A17, A19 and A24 the spiral fluting follows the same line on both columns rather than the mirror-image pairing found on the majority of the Ashwell plaques. The stylobate is a simple embossed line. Within the shrine is a rather enigmatic standing male figure, shown frontally with his head turned to his right. Much of his face is lacking but the nose is visible as, too, the back of the head and part of the cheek and jaw line. He wears a full-length garment with finely depicted rather archaic-looking drapery falling in straight folds to a marked lower border or hem. A prominently brandished object in front of the figure implies that he is Mercury, for with the hand of his flexed right arm he grasps a short, slender-stemmed staff, seemingly a caduceus, with a stylized entwined snake finial set above a still more

Figure 104 Silver plaque fragments (A28)

62 | Dea Senuna

1cm

Figure 105 Silver plaque fragments A28, scale 1:1

The Barkway Hoard: Catalogue | 63

The Barkway Hoard (Fig. 106) is one of only two other British finds with which the Ashwell Hoard may be compared. As it has never been fully published, the following detailed catalogue has been prepared. It includes new illustrations together with photographs of the fine coloured engravings from Samuel Lysons’ Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae (1817), a very rare book to which few people today have access.

The Barkway Hoard was found in 1743 or 1744 during the digging of a chalk pit in ‘Rookery Wood’ (Camden 1789 ‘Rockley Wood’; now known as Rokey Wood or Rookey Wood), in the parish of Barkway, Hertfordshire – about 1.2km west of the village of Barkway and about 1.6km east of the line of Ermine Street (TL 374 358; English Heritage Monument No. 368078). The chalk pit cannot now be located with any certainty.

The hoard was bequeathed to the British Museum by John Peachey, 2nd Baron Selsey (1749–1816) and dispatched there in 1817 by his son Henry John Peachey, 3rd Baron Selsey (1787–1838). It is not known how Lord Selsey came into possession of the hoard, whether directly or whether passed down in his family. On entering the British Museum the bequest was briefly recorded in the Officers Reports, Vol. 4, 1816–17, p. 965: ‘Mr C. has received from the Rt. Hon.ble Lord Selsey, some Roman silver ornaments, and a bronze figure of Mars, which were bequeathed by his late father to the British Museum. These antiquities were found in a chalk pit, near the side of Rooky Wood, in the parish of Barkway, in Hertfordshire’; and even more succinctly described on page 52 of the Donations Register of the Department of Antiquities and Coins, under the date 8 March 1817, as ‘Some Roman Silver Ornaments and a large bronze figure of Mars found in the Parish of Barkway in Hertfordshire’. In the same year the hoard was published by Samuel Lysons in the second volume of his Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, together with the hoard from Stony Stratford. The

Chapter 5The Barkway Hoard: Catalogue, B1–B9 (British Museum, 1817,0308.1–9)Ralph Jackson

Figure 106 The Barkway Hoard

64 | Dea Senuna

appear to have been restricted to the most valued and valuable component of a much larger assemblage of votive material. In terms of deities it is a tightly focused group with Mars as principal – his image appears both on the figurine and on four of the plaques and he is named on two of the three inscribed plaques, once with the epithet ‘Toutatis’ and once with ‘Alator’. Vulcan, the only other deity, is depicted on two plaques, one of which is inscribed with his name.

Figurine and handle

B1. Bronze figurine (1817,0308.1) (Fig. 110; see also Figs 106–7, 171) Height 168mm; weight 633.1g

A solid-cast* copper-alloy figurine of a youthful Mars. The god has lost both of his held attributes, together with his left hand and wrist, the fingertips of his right hand, his right leg from below the knee and his left ankle and foot, and the left side of his face is corrosion-pitted. Otherwise the figurine is in good condition, with a fine green patina which preserves much of the original surface detail and finish.

The young naked god stands upright, his weight on his right leg, his left leg advanced and flexed at the knee, his raised right arm extended at shoulder level and flexed at the elbow, his left arm closer to his side and flexed at waist level. The musculature and physiology are well observed, finely crafted and subtly accentuated to depict an ‘ideal’ body in

accompanying text for both hoards was minimal but they were comprehensively and very finely drawn (by Richard Smirke) and reproduced at actual size as coloured engravings (Lysons 1817, pls xxxiv–xxxix, Stony Stratford; plates xl–xli, Barkway) (Figs 107–9).

LiteratureS. Lethieullier and C.B.M. Frederick, BM Addl. MS. 27349, fol. 100; Society of Antiquaries of London, Minute Books 5 (4 April 1745), 2, and 33 (3 June 1813), 303; J. Ward, Philosophical Transactions 43 1746, 349, pls 1 and 2; W. Camden, Britannia, ed. R. Gough, 1789, vol. I, 341, 2nd edn, 1806, vol. II, 65–6; Lysons 1817, II, 2, pls 40–2; CIL vii, 84–6; Taylor 1914, 149–50, pl. x; Walters 1921, nos 230–6; British Museum Guide to Roman Britain 1922, 34–6, figs 25–7 and 1951, 62, fig. 31; Toynbee 1964, 328–30; RIB 1, 70–2, nos 218–20; Toynbee 1978, 137–41; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, GF2, 228; Henig 2006; Birkle 2013, 209–13.

OverviewThe hoard clearly originated in a temple or shrine for, though of modest size, it combines both votive and ceremonial objects – seven silver votive plaques together with the handle from a priest’s rattle (or from a libation dish). The remaining object, the fine figurine, was also very likely a votive gift with probably an inscribed dedication on its now missing pedestal (as with the Ashwell figurine). Like the Ashwell Hoard, too, the contents of the Barkway Hoard

Figure 107 Bronze figurine (B1) and bronze handle (B2), coloured engraving by Richard Smirke (Lysons 1817, plate xlii, upper)


Figure 108 Silver plaque (B3), coloured engraving by Richard Smirke (Lysons 1817, plate xl)

66 | Dea Senuna

Figure 109 Silver-gilt plaque B4 and silver plaques B5–B9, coloured engraving by Richard Smirke (Lysons 1817, plate xli)


of the central plump band and one on both faces of the inner stem. It is unclear whether this damage was sustained in antiquity or subsequent to the discovery of the hoard, but they were already present when Lysons’ pl. xlii, 3 was drawn. They are near-identical to the form of the cut mark on the left calf of the figurine.

Lysons 1817, pl. xlii, 3.

Votive plaques

B3. Silver plaque (1817,0308.2) (Fig. 111; see also Figs 106, 108, 171) Height 529mm; width 261.5mm; weight 286.2g

An enormous silver plaque of idiosyncratic form dedicated to Mars Toutatis. Virtually complete and in good condition, it is made from sheet which varies in thickness from 0.1mm to 0.4mm (tab 2.2mm). There is a single fracture, a horizontal break across the upper half of the plaque with associated edge loss on each side. A row of four punched holes above and below the fracture line appear to have been made as part of a repair, presumably at or soon after the time of discovery of the hoard (though damage and repair in antiquity cannot be ruled out). It is possible that the fracture occurred on the line of a fold when it was opened out. Creases near the base of the three elements of the finial and vertical creasing at both lower sides of the plaque might

the full vigour of life. A slender sash or baldric encircles his upper torso diagonally from his right shoulder to his left waist, and he wears a finely rendered domed helmet with narrow neck guard, diadem-like brow guard and large crested plume, the lower rear tip of which descends as far as his left shoulder blade. Two tiny circular holes, one at the rear of the helmet, the other adjacent to it in the side of the plume, are probably blowholes, though no other casting flaws are visible on the figurine. Incised work depicts the ‘feathering’ on the sides of the crest and a medallion at the centre of the brow guard, while the locks and curls of the god’s hair emerge from beneath the helmet at the nape of the neck, above the ears and on the forehead. The missing attribute in the right hand is likely to have been a spear, its head sloped a little forward, to judge from the angled joining groove in the palm of the hand. Midway along the left forearm an outward-facing small oval disc secured by a strap probably originally had Mars’s other principal attribute, a shield, fastened to it. No solder is visible but post-discovery cleaning probably removed any surviving trace.

Unlike the surface of the left arm break, which appears ancient, the leg breakages bear fairly fresh sawn faces indicating that they were ‘trimmed’ after discovery of the hoard. However, that trimming, perhaps at the time the dowels were inserted to allow the figurine to stand, removed very little metal, for the points of breakage as they now exist are the same as those shown in Richard Smirke’s illustrations of the figurine (Lysons 1817, pl. xlii, 1–2). Abrasions on the sides of the right thigh and left calf look contemporary with that intervention, as also do scuffs on the right flank and on the right arm above the elbow. A chisel-like cut mark at the lower rear of the left calf (of the same form as those on the handle, B2, below) may also have occurred at that time. The figurine is currently supported on two brass rods dowelled into the broken ends of the legs.

1st century ad. Lysons 1817, pl. xlii, 1–2; Taylor 1914, 149–50, pl. x (left); Toynbee 1964, 66; Pitts 1979, 51 no. 13, pl. 7; Henig 1984, 50–2, ill. 12; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 228, GF2, fig. 176; Henig 2006, 202, no. 184.

*NB not hollow-cast as specified by Toynbee (1964, 66).

B2. Bronze handle (1817,0308.9) (see Figs 106–7, 171) Length 112.6mm; weight 151.1g

A solid-cast copper-alloy handle, probably from a priest’s rattle, heavily patinated and with soil accretions surviving in many places. At the complete end beyond a plain stem, of circular cross-section, is a series of one plain and three ribbed mouldings surmounted by a plump knob and a tiny rayed button finial; at the centre of the handle there is a plump band flanked by pairs of ribbed mouldings; and, beyond a short stem of softened octagonal cross-section, there is a pair of ribbed mouldings, a rectangular zone with incuse eight-rayed device on the planar faces and the damaged remains of a curved junction. The inner (concave) face of the junction ‘arms’ (one damaged) preserves a white metal coating, probably remains of tin-lead solder, and the central area is deeply grooved, probably to seat over the projecting ribbed rim binding of the two domed rattle-plates. The handle has three deep cut marks, one on the side

Figure 110 Bronze figurine (B1)

68 | Dea Senuna

Figure 111 Silver plaque (B3) (scale 1:2)

0 10 cm

0 10 cm


disproportionately large. He is depicted frontally with his bearded head turned to his right. Beneath the crested helmet his long curly hair is visible. Likewise, the epaulettes of his muscle cuirass are rendered and the details of ankle boots, greaves and tunic are also clear. His right arm supports the near-vertical, slender, beaded shaft of his spear (its head not shown), while his extended left hand grips the rim of the circular domed and ribbed shield that rests at his side. He is flanked by a pair of tightly spiral-fluted columns, with twin-moulded base and fine vegetal capital. They support a triangular pediment, with cable-moulded architrave and cornices, within which is a large symmetrical circular wreath with trailing garlands. Beneath the shrine’s simple moulded stylobate is the second focus of attention, a large ansate panel with rather irregularly embossed borders. It contains a four-line dot-punched inscription, the lettering and interpunct competently rendered with fine, deep and very closely spaced dot-punching. The layout is good but not perfect and the ultimate ‘S’ of the second line encroaches on the embossed border.

Surmounting the shrine is a markedly off-vertical, obelisk-like, elongated veined triangle flanked by further veined motifs and, at the broken top, by one surviving

represent further depositional fold lines which were more successfully ‘straightened out’ after discovery of the hoard. If actually deposited in this manner the folded plaque would have measured about 320 × 180mm.

The plaque is tulip-shaped with a small basal tab, an inscribed ansate panel, a pronounced midrib and a triple-lobed finial, the tip of that on the right broken. The freehand embossed leaf-marked decoration is competently applied though not entirely regular in its layout. In contrast the ansate panel (143.5 × 67.4mm) has a symmetrical and neatly embossed border while its inscription is both symmetrically organized and stylishly written. It comprises five lines of dot-punched text with interpunct and word spacing as appropriate. The letters are well spaced and very regularly formed with a generous density of dots. The lightly incised guide lines for the dot-punched letters are still visible in places, most noticeably the first two letters of MARTI. With Mars’ name on the first line and the epithet Toutatis on the second the deity has primacy and pride of place but prominence is also given to the name of the votary by enlarging the first and last letters of his tria nomina, a flourish which neatly frames and elevates the longest line of text.

The inscription (Tomlin this volume, p. 116, B3) reads:MARTI

TOVTATI

TI:CLAVDIVS:PRIMVS

ATTII LIBER

V.S.L.M

Marti | Toutati | Ti(berius) Claudius Primus | Attii liber(tus) | u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito)

To Mars Toutatis, Tiberius Claudius Primus, freedman of Attius, willingly and deservedly has paid his vow

Lysons 1817, pl. xl; CIL vii, 84; Taylor 1914, 149–50, pl. x (right); Walters 1921, 59–60, fig. 67, no. 230; British Museum Guide to Roman Britain, 1922, 34–5, fig 25; Toynbee 1964, 328, pl. lxxvi; RIB I, 219; Toynbee 1978, 138, no. 26, fig. 6 (right); Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 228, GF2, fig. 176; Crerar 2006, 73, fig. 3; Birkle 2013, 209, Ba. 01, pl. 6b, c.

B4. Silver-gilt plaque (1817,0308.3) (Fig 112; see also Figs 106, 109, 171) Height 183mm; width 104.3mm; figure height 44.9mm; weight 17.64g

A large, quite well-preserved, silver plaque, made from thin sheet, its entire front face gilded. The upper finial, much of the right edge and the lower right corner are lacking and there is further damage to the left side and to the centre of the lower edge. Additionally, two joins run the entire width of the plaque – one at the narrowest point of the finial and the other at the level of the shrine’s architrave.

The focus of the plaque is the image of Mars standing in a stylized gabled shrine. The figure of the god and all elements of the shrine – columns, pediment and stylobate – were die-stamped, while the remaining decoration of the plaque was freehand embossed work. The figure of Mars is extremely detailed and finely observed, though the head is

1cm

mc 50

Figure 112 Silver-gilt plaque B4 (scale 3:4)

70 | Dea Senuna

d(eo) Marti Alatori | Dum(...) Censorinus | Gemelli fil(ius) | u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito)

To the god Mars Alator Dum(…) Censorinus, son of Gemellus, has paid his vow willingly, deservedly

Lysons 1817, pl. xli, 2; CIL vii, 85; Taylor 1914, 149–50, pl. x (right); Walters 1921, 60–1, fig. 68, no. 231; British Museum Guide to Roman Britain, 1922, 35–6, fig 26; Toynbee 1964, 328–9, pl. lxxvi; RIB I, 218; Toynbee 1978, 140–1, no. 27, fig. 7.1; Henig 1984, 40–1, ill. 4; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 228, GF2, fig. 176; Henig 2006, 202–3, no. 185; Birkle 2013, 209–10, Ba. 02, pl. 6d, e and 127b.

B5. Silver plaque (1817,0308.4) (Fig. 113; see also Figs 106, 109, 171) Height 206.5mm; width 111.1mm; figure height 42.2mm; weight 21.95g

A large, near-complete and quite well-preserved silver plaque, made from thin sheet. It lacks only the tip of the left upper and lower finial volutes, part of the left edge and most of the basal tab. The overall symmetrical layout of the plaque, which skilfully integrates freehand embossed work and die-stamped imagery, was carefully calculated and competently crafted. It comprises a lower broad rectangular section and an upper subtriangular finial.

At the centre of the lower section is a die-stamped image of Mars standing within a stylized gabled shrine. The bearded god is shown frontally, his head turned to his left. With his upraised right arm he supports a slender-shafted spear (though the spear-head itself is not depicted), while the hand of his extended left arm holds the rim of a domed circular shield that rests at his side. He wears an ornate crested helmet, muscle cuirass, tunic and greaves and a long fold of his cloak descends from his right shoulder. The ground line and the flanking spiral-fluted columns with simple base and capital were also die-stamped as, too, probably, were the cornices of the shrine’s open pediment. Unusually, the gabled shrine is enclosed by a larger, freehand embossed, outer shrine of similar form, the leaf-veining of its cornices complementing both the spiral twist of its broad columns and the veining of the surmounting finial. Linking the pediments is an embossed ovoid object, possibly a leaf, though its right side has suffered damage – part of an oblique cut mark which extends as far as Mars’ right hand – which presumably occurred at the time of discovery of the hoard. In various places in the reserved zone between the two shrines there are scatters of dots, but none can be resolved into any semblance of dot-punched lettering.

Above the shrine a central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle is flanked by a pair of basal swags and three tiers of lateral expansions of lobate, scrolled and triangular form infilled variously with ribbing and veining. At the junction of the first and second tier is a pair of dot-punched eight-rayed stars. Four elongated veined leaves, which project from the base and capital of the columns of the outer shrine, give focus to the shrine as well as dividing the plaque’s upper, side and base margins. Embossed chevrons fill the sides while a distinctive ‘quilted’ (dot-in-lozenge) motif occupies the lower margin either side of a central inverted triangular veined

scrolled expansion (at left) of the finial’s lower tier. The original form of the finial is uncertain but there were probably two further tiers. Smaller triangular veined leaves mark the ‘corners’ of the main plaque and divide up the simple veining of the upper, lower and side margins. One pair projects from the column capitals, the other from the lower corners of the ansate panel. Rather like rays they focus attention on the figure of the god, the shrine and the inscription. The ragged broken edge, which has destroyed the tip of an inverted veined triangle at the centre of the lower side, is very probably damage associated with the breaking away of a central basal tab, as is more certainly the case with plaque B5.

The inscription (Tomlin this volume, p. 117, B4) reads:.D.MARTI.ALATORI

DVM.CENSORINVS

GEMELLI.FIL.

.V.S.L.M.

mc 50



mc 50


figured panel and an upper ornate finial, a simple fairly symmetrical design, but the craftsmanship is less than perfect. In particular, the right side of the central motif of the finial was slightly bungled.

In the lower panel is a die-stamped standing figure of Mars, shown frontally, his head turned to his right. He is bearded and wears a crested helmet and tunic. Distortion and flattening of the chest region have partially obliterated what was probably a muscle cuirass. Similarly it is not possible to determine whether or not he wears greaves and ankle boots, as is likely. With his right arm he holds a spear while the left arm rests on the upper rim of a domed circular shield at his side. In place of the normal gabled shrine the god is framed by freehand embossed narrow leaf-veined panels. Beneath the lower panel a simple tab has been formed by cutting away the corners.

Above the upper panel a pair of veined triangles project outwards. They flank the base of a central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle, near the missing top of which is a pair of simple curved veined leaves and a fragment of another tier of leaf ornament.

Lysons 1817, pl. xli, 6; Taylor 1914, 149–50, pl. x (right); Walters 1921, 61, fig. 70, no. 233; Toynbee 1964, 328, pl. lxxvi; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 228, GF2, fig. 176; Birkle 2013, 211–12, Ba. 04, pl. 7b and 127d.


A broken, slender, silver plaque made from thin sheet. The sides are intact but the upper finial and the lower edge and corners are lacking. Softening and loss of detail of the

leaf, the end of which is broken. A slight but distinct torn projection to the left of the breakage proves the original existence there of a central tab. Two tiny circular perforations just below the apex of the finial may have been made to suspend the plaque, perhaps as a consequence of the breakage of its basal tab.

Lysons 1817, pl. xli, 1; Taylor 1914, 149–50, pl. x (right); Walters 1921, 60–1, fig. 69, no. 232; Toynbee 1964, 328–9, pl. lxxvi; 1978, 140, nos 28–34, fig. 6 (top left); Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 228, GF2, fig. 176; Henig 2006, 203, no. 186; Birkle 2013, 210–11, Ba. 03, pl. 7a and 127c.


A small, slender, silver plaque made from very thin sheet, complete except for the tip of the finial. There are a number of horizontal creases – at calf, waist and shoulder level of the figure, and, at the narrow point of the finial, four close together. Evidently the plaque has been ‘flattened’, probably soon after discovery of the hoard, a process that has significantly affected the embossed work, most notably of the figure and flanking margins, where much detail is softened, distorted or ‘erased’. The plaque has two parts, a lower

mc 50


72 | Dea Senuna

Lysons 1817, pl. xli, 3; Taylor 1914, 149–50, pl. x (right); Walters 1921, 61, fig. 71, no. 234; Toynbee 1964, 328, pl. lxxvi; 1978, 140, nos 28–34, fig. 6 (bottom right); Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 228, GF2, fig. 176; Birkle 2013, 212, Ba. 05, pl. 7c.


A near-complete and well-preserved silver plaque made from thin sheet, slightly bowed in places. Only the lower edge and corners are lacking. The plaque, which is composed of a large finial, a gabled shrine and an inscribed panel, was carefully planned, symmetrical and competently crafted.

Within the shrine is a die-stamped standing figure of Vulcan, shown frontally, his weight on his right leg, his head turned to his right. He is bearded, and wears a narrow-brimmed pointed cap, a belted workman’s tunic (sleeveless, and with the right breast and shoulder bare) and long ankle boots. His cloak is draped over his left wrist and he holds a long-handled smithing hammer or sledge in his left hand, its weight supported by the crook of his left arm. In his extended right hand he brandishes a pair of blacksmith’s tongs, with the distinctive bowed jaws uppermost. On the ground beneath is a small stylized hearth, with quartered design and projecting flame, especially appropriate to the god of smithing and of fire. The ground line and the flanking spiral-fluted columns with simple base and capital were also die-stamped as, too, were the moulded cornices of the shrine’s open pediment, with their projecting ribs and floral acroteria. In fact at one point, immediately above the acroterion at the apex of the pediment, the shape of the edge of the die is visible as a discontinuous thin embossed line. The figure of Vulcan together with the hearth and enclosing gabled shrine are die-linked to those of plaque B9.

Four elongated veined leaves, projecting obliquely from the base and capital of the columns, give added focus to the god and his shrine. The leaves, the finial, the sides, the ansate panel and the lower margin are all freehand embossed work. The embossing of the finial is very assured and skilfully rendered, with a central, obelisk-like, tall and slender veined triangle flanked by two ornate scrolled tiers and topped with a pair of triangles. The sides, framed by the projecting leaves, are infilled with a neatly applied distinctive ‘quilted’ motif, which consists of a lattice of tiny lozenges, each centrally impressed with a C-shaped punch. Beneath the shrine is an ansate panel with a simple embossed border enclosing a short inscription on one line. The broken lower edge and a ragged tear and split running upwards to the stylobate from the centre of the lower edge indicate the former presence of a basal tab. As on plaque B5, a tiny punched perforation near the apex of the finial was probably made as a means of suspending the plaque after the demise of its basal tab. In contrast to the assured workmanship of the plaque the inscription is only rudimentarily incised and, perhaps, semi-literate. It may be read (Tomlin this volume, p. 117, B8):

embossed imagery may have occurred as a consequence of ‘flattening’ at or soon after discovery of the hoard.

The plaque was evidently in two main parts, a figured rectangular panel and a slender finial. All that remains of the finial is the base of a single vertical element – a slightly tapered plain central rib flanked by simple veined margins.

In the lower panel, within a stylized shrine, is a standing figure of Mars, shown frontally, his head turned to his right. He is bearded and wears a crested helmet and a tunic. As on plaque B6 the details of the figure are insufficiently well preserved to determine whether or not a muscle cuirass, greaves and boots were originally shown. His right hand grasps the top of his spear shaft while his left arm rests at his side, the hand seemingly a little above the circular domed shield which leans against his leg. A rod-like object of uncertain identification projects behind his wrist. The god is flanked by a pair of tightly spiral-fluted columns – the sides of the plaque trimmed closely along their outer edge – with fine vegetal capitals which support a slender cabled moulding in place of a pediment. A simple raised rib marks the floor line, beneath which is the fragmentary remains of what appears to have been a reserved space. The figure of the god, the flanking columns and, possibly, the cabled moulding are die-stamped.

mc 50

1cm



NVVLCO

n(umini) Vulc(an)o

To the deity Vulcanus

Lysons 1817, pl. xli, 4; CIL vii, 86; Taylor 1914, 149–50, pl. x (right); Walters 1921, 61–2, fig. 72, no. 235; British Museum Guide to Roman Britain, 1922, 36; Toynbee 1964, 328, pl. lxxvi; RIB I, 220; Toynbee 1978, 140, nos 28–34, fig. 6 (bottom left); Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 228, GF2, fig. 176; Crerar 2006, 73, fig. 2; Birkle 2013, 212–13, Ba. 06, pl. 7d.


A small, slender, silver plaque made from very thin sheet. The lower rectangular part is complete but the upper part of the finial is broken. There is a horizontal crease at the midline of the figure and another at the apex of the shrine. Both appear to have been ‘straightened out’, probably soon after discovery. The marked ‘flattening’ of the columns and loss of detail on the figure and shrine are likely to be casualties of that event, too.

The stamped figure of Vulcan in a gabled shrine, though more worn and lacking in some detail, is identical to that of plaque B8 with which it is die-linked. There is even a slight trace of the die edge in the same position above the shrine. A ?repaired hole at the apex of the pediment obscures the detail at that point.

The freehand embossed work is competent, though perhaps not quite as accomplished as that on plaque B8. Of the finial only the lower section of the central obelisk-like elongated veined triangle survives, flanked by a lower scrolled tier. The slender, slightly unequal side margins are infilled with simple veining while the lower margin has a central inverted veined triangle flanked by small zones of the ‘quilted’ dot-in-lozenge motif, as on plaque B5. Beneath the inverted triangle at the centre of the lower edge is a small intact basal tab.

Lysons 1817, pl. xli, 5; Taylor 1914, 149–50, pl. x (right); Walters 1921, 236; British Museum Guide to Roman Britain, 1922, fig. 27; Toynbee 1978, 140, nos 28–34, fig. 6 (bottom centre); Birkle 2013, 213, Ba. 07, pl. 8a.

mc 50


74 | Dea Senuna

The large Stony Stratford Hoard, the second of the two other British finds that is comparable to the Ashwell Hoard, has received even less attention than the Barkway Hoard. The full, illustrated catalogue in this chapter is intended to reveal both the importance of the find and its close connection to the Ashwell Hoard. It includes new drawings and photography together with photographs of the invaluable but rarely seen engravings from Samuel Lysons’ Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae (1817).

The Stony Stratford Hoard was found near Stony Stratford, Buckinghamshire in 1789 in an urn at Windmill Field, Passenham, Old Stratford, Northamptonshire, on the line of Watling Street (SP 779 403; English Heritage Monument No. 343084). The hoard is less widely published and less well known than that from Barkway, probably because even though larger it is more fragmentary. It was described by Samuel Lysons in 1813 as ‘a considerable number of plates of silver, of a base quality in form of leaves, much resembling those at Barkway, together with many other articles of silver and brass of various shapes’ (Society of Antiquaries of London, Minute Book 33 (3 June 1813), 306). Lysons published the hoard in 1817 in the second volume of his Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, together with the earlier find from Barkway, as ‘Remains of Roman military ensigns discovered near Stony Stratford, Bucks. and Barkway, Herts.’ Both assemblages were very finely and accurately drawn by Richard Smirke and reproduced at actual size as coloured engravings (pls xxxiv–xxxix, Stony Stratford; pls xl–xli, Barkway) (Figs 118–24). In his introduction to the Stony Stratford engravings Samuel Lysons succinctly described the hoard as ‘Pl. XXXIV. XXXV. IIIVI. XXXVII. Various fragments of Roman military ensigns of brass, found with the articles figured in Pl. XXXVIII and XXXIX, fig. 4. 5. 6. in Pl. XLII, and several others of the same kind, in an urn; in the Windmill field near Stony-Stratford, Bucks, in the year 1789: and now deposited in the British Museum.’ As Lysons’ title indicates, he interpreted both hoards as remains of Roman military standards. He also noted that both hoards had by then been deposited in the British Museum. At such an early time in the history of the Museum a routine registration process had not been established and although the Barkway Hoard was briefly noted in the Donations Register for 8 March 1817 no such entry appears to have been made for the Stony Stratford Hoard. Subsequently, therefore, as was normal practice in such cases, the Stony Stratford Hoard was assigned an ‘Old Acquisition’ number on April 5 1950. Its basic details were entered in the Old Acquisition register under the number OA.252 (though the three brooches (SS103–SS105) were allocated different numbers) and in 1995–6 individual numbers were assigned to each object and fragment as OA.252.1–139.

LiteratureSociety of Antiquaries of London, Minute Book 33 (3 June 1813), 306; Lysons 1817, II, 2, pls 34–9; CIL vii, 80–2; VCH Buckinghamshire 2, 11–12; Walters 1921, nos 237–41; British Museum Guide to Roman Britain, 1922, 36–7, figs 27–8; Toynbee 1964, 328–30; RIB 1, 70, nos 215–17; Toynbee 1978, 135–8; Birkle 2013, 323–32.

Chapter 6The Stony Stratford Hoard: Catalogue, SS1–SS105 (British Museum, OA.252.1-139; OA.244; Lysons 6699)Ralph Jackson

The Stony Stratford Hoard: Catalogue | 75

SS16, SS18–SS22, SS24, SS25) which have been less comprehensively cleaned. Several of the plaques bear horizontal ‘crease marks’ perhaps indicating that they had been folded at the time of deposition and opened out after discovery. Some of the plaque fragments (e.g. SS17, SS21, SS22, SS38) have hammer marks adjacent to points of breakage, probably to be interpreted as damage caused at the time the plaques were folded.

XRF analysis of some of the silver plaques was carried out under the same analytical conditions as for the Ashwell plaques (pp. 14–15). Surface metal was removed from a small area on the back of each piece to reach relatively fresh metal for analysis. This preparation was of particular importance because at some point in the past the Stony Stratford plaques were evidently subjected to a chemical conservation treatment which would not normally be carried out today. Some interesting differences were noted, not least that all the Stony Stratford plaques analysed are made of much more debased silver alloy than the Ashwell analysed plaques: 54–70% silver for the Stony Stratford plaques compared to 87–92% silver for the Ashwell plaques.

The analysed Ashwell plaques are high silver alloys with copper and accidental traces of lead and gold. No tin was detected and only in the case of the pair of plaques A21 and A23 were there trace levels of zinc, which would indicate that some brass was included with the copper in their production.

OverviewThe hoard, which includes religious objects – votive plaques, ceremonial utensils and priestly regalia – as well as three plate brooches, bears evidence of various vicissitudes and interventions that have occurred in the centuries since discovery: several of the objects, especially the frailest plaques and their vulnerable edges, have been broken or damaged; on many objects an area of patina has been abraded – sometimes minimally, sometimes more invasively – presumably in order to determine the type of metal; the front face of most of the plaques has been cleaned; adhesive, infill and supporting backing have been variously applied to broken and fragile pieces; and headdress 93 has been carefully reassembled. Smirke’s fine, accurate, actual-size coloured engravings have been of considerable use in rejoining and reassociating broken fragments and in illustrating the more complete condition of some of the objects at the time he drew them (e.g. SS6, SS7, SS8, SS18/20, SS51/55/74, SS130).

Votive plaques (see Figs 122–48)In addition to two fragmentary copper-alloy plaques (SS41 and SS75) there are the incomplete remains of many silver plaques – the original number was probably about thirty. Not all of the fragments were included as drawings in Lysons’ publication. Many of the plaques preserve remnants of their superficial black patina, mostly surviving on the back face of the lesser plaques and fragments (e.g. SS14,

Figure 118 Copper-alloy headdress SS93, coloured engraving by Richard Smirke (Lysons 1817, plate xxxiv)

76 | Dea Senuna

Figure 119 Copper-alloy headdress and regalia SS95, SS96 and SS98, coloured engraving by Richard Smirke (Lysons 1817, plate xxxv)


Figure 120 Copper-alloy rattle plates and attachments SS77-82, coloured engraving by Richard Smirke (Lysons 1817, plate xxxvi)

78 | Dea Senuna

Figure 121 Copper-alloy ceremonial utensils and regalia SS76, SS85–86, SS88–91, SS99–100, coloured engraving by Richard Smirke (Lysons 1817, plate xxxvii)


Figure 122 Silver and copper-alloy plaques: top left to bottom right, SS40, 14, 5, 3, 17, 24, 15, 26, 25, 19, 23, 16, 41, 27, 4, 21/22/58/59/69, 38, coloured engraving by Richard Smirke (Lysons 1817, plate xxxviii)

80 | Dea Senuna

Figure 123 Silver and copper-alloy plaques: top left to bottom right, SS7, 2, 1, 6b, 6a, 8, 75, 18/20, 37, 51/55/74, 36, 13, 32, 33, 34, 30 and (top and bottom) fragments SS97 and SS83, coloured engraving by Richard Smirke (Lysons 1817, plate xxxix)


much of the left side and the broad lower part of the ornate finial. There is considerable perforation damage and fracturing, in particular a zone running vertically down the line of and adjacent to the god’s spear. That zone has been conserved with infilling and there is strengthening, too, of the partly fractured wing of the goddess. It is unclear whether the damage occurred in antiquity or at/after discovery of the hoard. Plaque fragments SS9 and SS40 belong to this plaque – respectively part of the left side and the upper finial – and SS12, too, is probably part of the missing right-hand corner, as indicated stylistically and supported by scientific analysis.

In overall form the plaque evidently consisted of a rectangular lower unit with a surmounting subtriangular finial (SS40). The die-stamped embossed component took the form of a twin portico or double-gabled shrine, of which only the left and central columns (and probably a fragment of the right column (SS12)) survive. In the near-complete left shrine is a standing figure of Mars, shown frontally but with his head turned to his right. Damage has removed much of his face, though the profile of forehead and nose is preserved as well as the back of the neck and a row of curls projecting beneath his crested helmet. He wears a short-sleeved tunic beneath a muscle cuirass, a lappeted skirt and ankle boots, that on the left foot rather inelegantly formed. With his right hand he grips the upper end of the spear shaft supported in the crook of his elbow, while his left hand secures the upper edge of a rudimentarily depicted low-domed shield at his left side.

In the right shrine is a damaged figure of Victory turned to her left. What survives is well preserved, above all her distinctive and neatly formed feathered left wing and the projecting end of the palm branch which she held in her left arm. She wears a billowing chiton and over-chiton and stands on tiptoes on a simply rendered ground line that is

The Stony Stratford alloys, on the other hand, while including similar accidental trace levels of gold, contain more lead and detectable tin in all the analysed plaques, and significant levels of zinc in most of them, too. This indicates a much broader mix of alloys in the production of the Stony Stratford plaques, with the copper contribution to the silver alloy including recycled brass, bronze or the quaternary alloy of copper, zinc, tin and lead.

The diversity of alloys also enabled the analytical results to answer or shed valuable light on a number of specific questions. Thus, it may be confidently stated that SS6a and SS6b were separate plaques and do not belong together. They have different alloy compositions (SS6a has barely detectable tin and significantly more zinc than SS6b) and were not made from the same sheet of silver. Conversely, SS1 and SS12, both with the same zinc and tin contents, are almost certainly parts of the same plaque. Similarly, SS8 and SS10, which differ from the other analysed Stony Stratford plaques in containing tin but no zinc, are of a closely similar alloy and also very probably belong together as parts of one plaque. While plaques SS1, SS2 and SS7 are die-linked by their Mars figure the alloy composition of their silver sheet reveals no such uniformity indicating that the die was used to emboss silver plaques sourced from different silver alloys and perhaps on different occasions.

SS1. Silver plaque (OA.252.1 – incorporates SS9, SS12 and SS40) (Figs 125–6; see also Figs 122–3) Height 92.3mm; width 76.3mm (originally at least 100mm); figure height (Mars) 53.4mm; weight 5.35g

A broken and fragmentary silver plaque made from thin sheet. A short angled stretch of original edge survives at bottom left, and joining fragments SS9 and SS40 preserve

Figure 124 Copper-alloy brooches SS103–105, coloured engraving by Richard Smirke (Lysons 1817, plate xlii, lower)

82 | Dea Senuna

A broken and fragmentary silver plaque made from thin sheet, with no certain original edge surviving. There is an irregular hole near the top and another at the bottom as well as a zone of fracture and perforation damage (conserved with infilling) running vertically down the left part of the plaque. Plaque fragment SS5 may be the missing finial.

Originally substantially larger, the fragmentary plaque preserves a standing figure of Mars, shown frontally, his head turned to his right. His facial features are naturalistically depicted and he wears a crested helmet (the top of the crest destroyed by the lower edge of the hole) beneath which curls of his hair are visible. It is not clear whether he is bearded. The details of his short-sleeved tunic and chest have been partially obscured by crushing but a muscle cuirass with lappeted skirt appears to have been shown. Damage has also erased his lower right (weight-bearing) leg and has distorted the appearance of his left foot, but it is at least evident that he was depicted with the normal ankle boots – the top of the left boot survives. His right hand grips the upper end of the vertical spear shaft supported in the crook of his elbow, while his left hand rests on the upper rim of a low-domed circular shield which stands on the ground at his left side.

The god is flanked by a pair of finely worked spiral-fluted columns with moulded base (that on the right lacking) and ornate capital (that on the left lacking). The columns support an open triangular pediment defined by a cable-moulded cornice, only the lower ribbed edge of which survives on the left gable. Critically, above the capital on the right side there is a right-sloping return of the cable-moulding and rib. This is evidently the lower left corner of a second pediment, which demonstrates that the plaque originally showed a twin portico, like that of plaque SS1, with a shared central column and a second deity beneath an identical pediment to the right

markedly higher than that of the adjacent shrine. Her face and breast are missing as is her right arm, with the raised hand of which she would probably have brandished a garlanded wreath.

The shrines’ surviving columns at left and centre are spiral-fluted with moulded base and ornate capital. They support an open triangular gable or pediment above each shrine, defined by a ribbed, cable-moulded cornice. The inverted triangular space between the pediments is leaf-marked, with midrib and veining, now very worn. The space beneath the shrines, of uncertain extent apart from the short surviving edge at left, appears to have been plain. A tiny perforation within the pediment to the left of the central capital appears to have been intentionally made, perhaps, in conjunction with others now missing, as a means of attaching the plaque.

The figures of the deities, the flanking columns and the pediment cornices are all die-stamped embossed work while the leaf-veining is freehand chased work.

It is curious and illogical that the deities are depicted turned away from each other rather than facing as they do on plaque SS6b. The reason for this reversal may be simply a mistake, resulting from the need to stamp the figural dies into the back face.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, 6, and xxxviii, top left; Walters 1921, 63, fig. 76, no. 239; British Museum Guide to Roman Britain, 1922, 36, fig 28 (lower); Toynbee 1978, 138, no. 25 and 140, no. 32; Crerar 2006, 72, fig. 1; Birkle 2013, 325, St. 03, pl. 74d, 129b, 132c.

SS2. Silver plaque (OA.252.2) (Figs 127–8; see also Fig. 123) Height 73.2mm; width 60.6mm (originally probably at least 110mm); figure height 50.2mm; weight 3.03g

mc 50

Figures 125–6 Silver plaque (SS1, incorporating SS9, SS12 and SS40) (drawing 1:2; photograph not to scale)


chased from front and back. The pronounced central rib, enhanced by a row of dot-punching, is flanked by simple leaf-veining. The concave base is complete, as are the sides, though chipped in places, but the apex and basal tips are all broken.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 331, St. 31, pl. 79a.

SS5. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.5) (see Figs 122, 137)Height 126.3mm; width 89.2mm; weight 7.19g

A large finial, broken at tip and base, made from thin silver sheet, with an embossed design (now rather flattened) chased from front and back. A central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle is flanked by a series of four paired lateral expansions (one on the left and two on the right damaged), each enclosing a central triangle bordered by a meandering scroll. The uppermost surviving pair of lateral expansions is symmetrical and the two successive pairs, from what can be seen of their remains, are also likely to have been symmetrical. However, the lowermost pair of expansions are distinctly and intentionally different, for, while that on the left matches the arrangement of the upper expansions, that on the right is larger and has an additional leaf-veined border – the normal edging motif for most of the silver votive plaques. This move away from symmetry would suggest that the finial was the right-hand component of a double-finial plaque, probably plaque SS2.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 331, St. 29, pl. 78c.

SS6a. Silver plaque (OA.252.6a) (Figs 129–30; see also Fig. 123) Height 70.8mm; width 76.3mm; weight 4.87g

A sub-trapezoid silver plaque made from thin sheet. It consists of a rectangular panel flanked on each side by an embossed rib, now flattened, which is bordered by a narrow leaf-veined margin. At top and bottom is a narrow horizontal plain strip. Within the panel is a ten-line inscription lightly

of Mars. It is likely that plaques SS1 and SS2 were made by the same craftsman using the same dies and it is probable, therefore, that the Mars figures are die-linked and that the missing second deity on SS2 was Victory, as on SS1. A small part of the leaf-marked left margin of the plaque survives.

The figure of the god, the flanking columns and the pediment cornices are all die-stamped embossed work while the leaf-veining is freehand chased work.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, 5; Walters 1921, 64, fig. 78, no. 241, which follows Lysons in showing two erroneously attached leaf-marked margin fragments to the right of the right (originally central) column; Birkle 2013, 326, St. 05, pl. 75b, 129d.

SS3. Silver plaque (OA.252.3) (see Figs 122, 138) Height 144.6mm; width 46.5mm; weight 7.56g

A near-complete tall triangular plaque made from silver sheet, with a slightly irregular embossed leaf-marked design chased from front and back. The strong central rib, enhanced by a row of dot-punching (now rather worn and flattened), is flanked by symmetrical chevron veining. The upper end of the plaque is damaged and the tip lacking, as is the lower edge and right-hand corner of the shallow trapezoid basal tab. There are two small perforations, asymmetrically placed, near the lower edge of the plaque. They were made from the front of the plaque with a pointed implement of rectangular cross-section, perhaps an iron bradawl or simply a nail. If for fastening the plaque – as opposed to ‘fixing’ a vow – they would suggest that the role of the tab had been superseded.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 331, St. 30, pl. 78d.

SS4. Silver plaque (OA.252.4) (see Figs 122, 138) Height 85.9mm; width 43.5mm; weight 2.95 g

A near-complete small triangular plaque made from silver sheet, with a slightly irregular embossed leaf-marked design

mc 50Figures 127–8 Silver plaque (SS2) (scale 1:1)

84 | Dea Senuna

SS6b. Silver plaque (OA.252.6b) (Figs 131–2; see also Fig. 123) Height 145.2mm; figure height (left) c. 38.5mm, (right) c. 40mm; width 64.7mm; weight 5.72g

A damaged and distorted silver plaque made from very thin sheet. The right side is near complete, as is the upper left side and most of the finial, but the finial tip, lower left side and base are broken.

The form of the plaque is close to that of SS38. The finial (similar to several others in the Stony Stratford find) has a rather rudimentarily applied embossed and chased design (now partially flattened and distorted) with a central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle flanked by a series of four pairs of lateral expansions enclosing leaf-veined lobes within a rather indifferently accomplished meandering scrolled border.

In contrast, the principal rectangular panel has an idiosyncratic design, with a narrow, die-stamped, repeating leaf border which frames a scene of two embossed confronted figures with a large empty expanse above them. Though badly damaged the workmanship of these figures appears of good quality. The figure on the right, a standing male, his head turned to his right, has long curly hair and a full beard. Part of his torso is broken away, but he appears to wear a tunic that finishes above the knee and a low-domed shield stands against his left leg. He appears to hold something in his upraised right hand, possibly the upper shaft of a spear. Opposite him on the left with face turned towards him is a bare-headed female figure, even less well preserved, wearing a full-length garment, its lower part seemingly billowed, and brandishing what looks like a wreath in her upraised hand. A small sphere below her drapery looks more like a globe than her foot. She was doubtless intended as Victory and the facing male figure as Mars. These figures were formed and composed in a very different manner to the other Stony Stratford die-stamped plaque images, though their iconography was clearly based upon that of plaques SS1 and SS2. SS6b appears to be a

incised in capitals, the As open (without the crossbar). The plaque sides are near complete though a little damaged; the upper edge has a tiny projection at the left corner but appears to be complete (though alternatively it may have broken along a chased line); and the lower edge appears incomplete. Near the centre of the lower border an irregular ‘rosette-like’ impression has been punched into the face of the plaque, encroaching on the middle part of the last two lines of the inscription, but not necessarily obliterating any letters.

It is unclear why Walters associated this plaque with SS6b: they do not join, the thickness of their silver sheet differs, and their design, motifs, method of manufacture and alloy compositions are all distinctly different.

The inscription (Tomlin this volume, p. 118, SS6a) may be read:

DEO

IOVI ET [..]LCA

VASSINVS

CVM VELL[.]

NT ME CON

SACRATVM

CON…VA[.]Ẹ

PROMISI DENẠ

RIOṢ SEX P ṚỌ ṾỌ

TO ḶAṂ[...]ẠP

deo | Ioui et [Vo]lca(no) | Vassinus | cum uell[e]|nt me con|sacratum | con[ser]ua[r]e | promisi dena|rios sex pro uo|to lam[ell]a (posita est)

Vassinus to the god Jupiter and Volcanus. Since they were willing to sanctify and preserve me, I promised them six denarii. This plaque is placed to represent my vow

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, 7; CIL vii, 80; Walters 1921, 62–3, fig. 74, no. 237 (1); British Museum Guide to Roman Britain, 1922, 36–7, fig. 28 (upper); RIB I, 215; Toynbee 1978, 135, no. 13; Birkle 2013, 323–4, St. 01, pl. 74a.

mc 50Figures 129–30 Silver plaque (SS6a) (scale 1:1)


A broken and fragmentary silver plaque made from thin sheet, with no certain original edge surviving. There are two joins, one running obliquely up from the top of Mars’ shoulder to the broken right edge, the other vertically down the right side of Mars’ torso.

The focus of the plaque is a shrine with a standing figure of Mars shown frontally, his head turned to his right. His face is broken away but the crested helmet is complete and well preserved. In addition to his cuirassed and lappeted torso his left arm, both legs and left foot survive; the short sleeve of his tunic is visible below the shoulder; the fingers of his left hand grip the rim of the low-domed shield at his side and an ankle boot is shown on his left foot. Of his upraised right arm just the fingertips of the hand grasping the top of the spear shaft are preserved. The figure of Mars appears identical to that on plaques SS1 and SS2, so it is likely that all three plaques are die-linked.

The apex of the shrine’s open triangular pediment, with ribbed and cable-moulded cornices, is preserved together with the moulded base and lower section of the spiral-fluted

free version of the Mars and Victory pairing, but set in a single shrine and with the two deities more appropriately integrated face to face rather than the slightly odd back-to-back arrangement of SS1 and SS2.

It is not possible to see any connection at all with plaque SS6a (which was made from sheet of a different alloy composition) and it is unclear why Walters associated them – he gave no reason for doing so in his publication. He did not take his cue from Lysons who had each drawn and numbered separately.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, 4; Walters 1921, 237 (2); British Museum Guide to Roman Britain, 1922, 36–7, fig. 28 (middle); Toynbee 1978, 140, no. 31; Birkle 2013, 323–4, St. 01, pl. 74a and b, 129a, 132b.

SS7. Silver plaque (OA.252.7) – incorporates SS11 and part of SS74 (Figs 133–4; see also Fig. 123) Height 137.4mm; width 58.7mm; figure height 53.1mm; weight 4.77g

mc 50Figures 131–2 Silver plaque (SS6b) (scale 1:1)

86 | Dea Senuna

SS8. Silver plaque (OA.252.8, incorporates SS10) (Figs 135–6; see also Fig. 123) Height 85.8mm; width 54.2mm (originally c. 70mm); weight 3.23gA fragmentary plaque made from thin silver sheet. The lower part, upper finial and left side are lacking, but the original edge is preserved at the right side and top right angle. Style and alloy composition indicate that plaque fragment SS10 is almost certainly the missing left-hand corner of this plaque.

The main body of the plaque was evidently originally subrectangular, with near-straight sides that appear to slope very slightly inwards towards the top where an angled shoulder reduces the width of the finial. At the centre of the plaque is an embossed figure of Apollo shown frontally, his head turned to his right. His face is quite naturalistically depicted, with careful treatment of eye, nose and mouth, and he wears a wreath in his luxuriant hair. His arms and torso are naked, but there is a hint of drapery at his left hip. In his upraised right hand he holds a laurel spray, the pair of

right-hand column. Above the shrine’s pediment is an obelisk-like tall veined triangle, its tip broken, flanked by lateral expansions enclosing triangles within a scrolled border.

The figure of Mars, the flanking column and the pediment cornices are all die-stamped embossed work while the leaf-veining and scrolled expansions are freehand chased work.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, 1, where the plaque is shown substantially more complete, including Mars’ face, right leg and spear shaft as well as the lower left side and corner of the plaque, incorporating the left column of the shrine, and additional parts of the finial at both left and right; Walters 1921, 64, fig. 77, no. 240, where the plaque has already lost the parts shown in Lysons; the two major fragments are unjoined, reproduced at different scales and incorrectly juxtaposed, and the measurements for the upper fragment are incorrectly given; Birkle 2013, 325–6, St. 04, pl. 75a, 129c.

mc 50Figures 133–4 Silver plaque (SS7, incorporates SS11 and part of SS74) (scale 1:1)


SS9. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.9) – part of SS1 (see Figs 125–6) Height 67.8mm; width 34.1mm; weight 1.63g

Part of the left side of plaque SS1, comprising the straight edge, a marginal zone of simple leaf-veining, now rather worn, and the left side of a decorative column capital.

Birkle 2013, 327, St. 09, pl. 76a.

SS10. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.10) – probably part of SS8 (see Fig. 135) Height 32.1mm; width 26.3mm; weight 0.64g

The corner of a plaque made from thin silver sheet, preserving the lower part of a spiral-fluted column with moulded base. To the left of the column is a leaf-veined marginal zone while immediately to the right of the column base is an angled embossed object, possibly a lower leg and foot. Below the column base a simple raised rib extends across the plaque, delimiting a narrow plain panel within the complete lower plaque edge. Within the panel is an inscription (Tomlin this volume, p. 119, SS10) on a single line, in lightly incised capitals:

DVDRC • IIB[...]

The two complete plaque edges meet at an angle slightly greater than a right angle.

The fragment is evidently the complete lower left corner from a plaque showing a deity in a shrine. Juxtaposition with the lower left corner of plaque SS8 indicates that although no join can be made the space is appropriate and the scale, style, alloy composition, appearance and arrangement of the

leaves and flower buds clearly depicted, and a plectron. His lowered left hand rests on the outer edge of his lyre, its distinctive frame and four strings also clearly shown even though the lower part is broken away. At the right, between the lyre and the column shaft, a raised rectangle (its lower edge broken) may be the top of a flanking pillar (cippus).

The god stands in a gabled shrine with columns and pediment. The pediment, with slender cable-moulded cornices, incorporates an omega-shaped arched niche defined by a slender beaded rib. The surviving column at the right lacks its base but has a tightly spiral-fluted shaft and an elaborate vegetal-ornamented capital. A very slender remnant of the upper inner edge of the left column shaft survives together with vestiges of the inner edge of its capital and the angle of the pediment niche.

Surmounting the shrine’s pediment is the base of a (probably obelisk-like) leaf-marked finial, with markedly off-vertical midrib. It appears to have been flanked by a plain embossed rib, beyond and below which are further zones of simple leaf-marking, now lacking much of their original crispness, which continue down the remaining right side of the plaque.

Just within the upper right corner of the plaque are two tiny perforations which very probably were used, together with a further pair at the missing upper left corner, as a means of attachment.

The figure of the god, the flanking columns and the pediment are all die-stamped embossed work while the leaf-veining of finial and sides is freehand chased work.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, 8; Walters 1921, 63, fig. 75, no. 238; British Museum Guide to Roman Britain, 1922, 36–7; Toynbee 1978, 135, no. 14; Birkle 2013, 324–5, St. 02, pl. 74c, 125c.

mc 50Figures 135–6 Silver plaque (SS8, incorporates SS10) (scale 1:1)

88 | Dea Senuna

A finial, broken at tip and base and damaged at the sides, made from thin silver sheet, with an embossed design (now rather flattened) chased from front and back. A central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle is flanked by a series of four paired lateral expansions (the uppermost triangular, the remainder lobate), each enclosing a central triangle bordered by a meandering scroll. At the base of the ‘obelisk’ the slender cable-moulded cornices at the apex of the pediment of a gabled shrine are preserved.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix; Birkle 2013, 326, St. 06, pl. 75c.


A tall subtriangular plaque, lacking only its pointed tip, made from silver sheet, with a slightly irregular embossed leaf-marked design chased from front and back. A central obelisk-like leaf-veined triangle with midrib (its embossing now almost completely flattened) is flanked by simple veined borders. Near the centre of the straight lower edge is a tiny circular perforation pierced from the front, presumably for fixing the plaque.

From base to tip there are several horizontal crease lines, implying that the plaque had been folded up at the time of deposition and unfolded following discovery of the hoard.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 327, St. 10, pl. 76b.

SS15. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.15) (see Figs 122, 137) Height 67.3mm; width 62.6mm; weight 2.78g

A broken plaque made from thin silver sheet, with embossed leaf-marked design chased from front and back. A central broad triangular unit with embossed midrib and leaf-

two pieces so similar as to show that SS10 is the missing left corner of SS8 (see Fig. 135).

Birkle 2013, 327, St. 08, pl. 75e.

SS11. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.11) – part of SS7 (see Fig. 133) Height 24.3mm; width 13.1mm; weight 0.24g

A small subrectangular fragment of embossed thin silver sheet consisting of two joining, roughly square fragments. Together they incorporate all bar the right-hand side of the muscle cuirass and lappeted skirt of the Mars figure on plaque SS7.

Birkle 2013, 327, St. 07, pl. 75d, 129e.

SS12. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.12) – probably part of SS1 (see Figs 125–6) Height 41.9mm; width 28.3mm; weight 0.77g

Part of one side of a plaque made from thin silver sheet, preserving the lower part of a spiral-fluted column with moulded base. The margin between the complete right plaque edge and the right side of the column is simply decorated with leaf-veining which extends a little below the line of the column base.

Like plaque fragment SS10 this fragment was clearly part of a plaque showing a deity in a shrine, and its scale and arrangement as well as the style of workmanship and the appearance and alloy composition of the silver suggest it very likely belonged to plaque SS1 as the right-hand side and column of its right-hand (Victory) shrine (see Figs 125–6).

Birkle 2013, 327–8, St. 12, pl. 76d.

SS13. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.13) (Fig. 137; see also Fig. 123)Height 72.9mm; width 31.1mm; weight 1.59g

Figure 137 Silver plaques (left to right, SS13, 5, 33, 35, 15/65)


plaque’s double rhombus finial. As on so many of the Stony Stratford plaques, three horizontal creases run the width of the plaque in its upper section.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 329, St. 21, pl. 77d.

SS18. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.18) – part of SS20 (see also Figs 123, 139) Height 46.7mm; width 40.9mm; weight 1.86g

A small trapezoid sheet silver plaque fragment, the base for plaque fragment SS20. The rather irregular embossed design, chased from front and back, consists of an inverted triangle with ribbed edge and striated upper margin flanked by further side striations and a striated basal margin. The top is broken along a slightly oblique line but the sides and base appear to be as originally cut with only slight damage at the (conserved and reattached) upper left corner. As on some other Stony Stratford plaques there is a small but marked projection at the lower left corner. A small rectangular perforation near the base, at the apex of the triangle, and another smaller one above, at the centre of the upper edge, both punched from the front face, were presumably for fixing the plaque.

The width and configuration of the oblique broken upper edge corresponds exactly to that of the lower edge of plaque fragment SS20 and is consistent with a fracture caused by the folding and unfolding of a plaque originally comprising the two pieces.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, where SS18 and SS20 are shown as a complete plaque; Birkle 2013, 328, St. 14, pl. 76f and g.


veining (now rather flattened) is bordered by a pair of converging embossed ribs flanked by a pair of veined lobate expansions. The top is broken but the base may be largely intact and the expansions appear to preserve their original cut edge. Fragment SS65 joins the upper right side as an additional lobate expansion, and fragment SS67, too, is evidently part of this plaque.


SS16. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.16) (Fig. 138; see also Fig. 122) Height 63.6mm; width 23.8mm; weight 1.18g

The upper end of a slender triangular plaque, its tip complete, made from thin silver sheet. The embossed leaf-marked design, chased from front and back, comprises a central midrib flanked by symmetrical chevron veining.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 328, St. 13, pl. 76e.


A near-complete plaque made from quite sturdy silver sheet. The idiosyncratic embossed and incised design, competently chased from front and back, features a stylized gabled shrine comprising a rectangle surmounted by a triangle. Ribbed and striated bordering bands around both components represent the columns and the pediment cornices and architrave. The pediment is empty but a large unequal embossed cross spans the shrine. Beneath it is an area of breakage and distortion and the lower edge is lacking. Rising from the midpoint of the cornices are two pedestal-like projections with ribbed triangular finials, flanked by chevron and triangle edge decoration, and a simple triple-ribbon garland dangles above the pediment’s apex from the

Figure 138 Silver plaques (left to right, SS4, 23, 14, 3, 16, 19, 21/22/58/59/69)

90 | Dea Senuna

back, consists of simple leaf-veining with a strong midrib. The manufacture marks at the back of the midrib – a series of parallel striations – and the form and dimensions of the plaque and its design are identical to those of plaque fragment SS22. No certain join can be made but it appears that the two pieces fractured at a horizontal crease. The opposing broken edges of both fragments also display similar crease fractures, indicating that the plaque, measuring (well) in excess of 70mm, was folded at least three times at the time of deposition.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii, where SS21 and SS22 are more complete.


A small, roughly rectangular fragment of a leaf-marked, near-parallel-sided, sheet-silver plaque, almost certainly part of SS21. The top and bottom edges are broken but the sides are complete. The embossed design, identical to that of SS21, consists of simple leaf-veining with a strong midrib.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii, where SS21 and SS22 are more complete.


A fragment of the upper leaf-marked finial of an embossed plaque, made from very thin silver sheet, chased from front and back. The design, symmetrical and neatly applied, consists of a central elongated zone, with midrib, dense leaf-veining and converging channelled sides, flanked by reversed leaf-veined margins. A short stretch of the right edge survives, but much of the right margin, virtually all of the left margin, the tip and the lower part of the plaque, are all broken.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii.

A fragment of the upper part of an embossed leaf-marked plaque made from very thin silver sheet, chased from front and back. The base, top and left side are all lacking but much of the right edge survives. The design, near symmetrical and competently applied, consists of a central elongated zone, with midrib, dense leaf-veining and converging sides, flanked by converging, more open, leaf-veined margins.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 328, St. 15, pl. 76h.

SS20. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.20) – part of SS18 (Fig. 139; see also Fig. 123) Height 53.5mm; width 28.2mm; weight 1.38g

A small, triangular sheet-silver plaque fragment, its tip missing, the upper part of plaque fragment SS18. A little above the midpoint is another ( joined and conserved) broken horizontal crease. The rather irregular embossed design, chased from front and back, is a smaller version of that on SS18, namely an inverted triangle with ribbed edge and striated upper margin flanked by further side striations. The tapered zone above is filled with simple leaf-veining, within which are two small irregular rectangular piercings, like those on SS18.

Thus, the original design of plaque SS18/SS20 was a double inverted triangle motif topped by a leaf-veined finial, and the plaque height was originally in excess of 100mm.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, where SS18 and SS20 are shown as a complete plaque.


A small, roughly rectangular fragment of a leaf-marked, near-parallel-sided, sheet-silver plaque, almost certainly part of SS22 (see also SS58, SS59, SS69). The top and bottom edges are broken but the sides are complete though damaged at the edge. The embossed design, chased from front and

Figure 139 Silver plaques (left to right, SS25, 27, 18/20, 37)


by a pair of simple striated ribs and the base is elaborated by a pair of hatched triangles above its straight beaded edge.



A tall elongated triangular plaque made from silver sheet, seemingly complete except for localised breakage at the centre of the lower edge. As on plaque SS14, a tall, slender, obelisk-like leaf-veined triangle (its embossed midrib and veining now almost completely flattened) is flanked by simple veined borders. At the lower end, however, there is a very stylized embossed image of a shrine with domed roof supported on columns. Two tiny dimples appear to be centre points for the compass-drawn hemisphere of the arch. The truncated floor appears to be an original feature. Damage in the lower part of the shrine may be connected to the (?rapid) removal of the plaque, for the two torn edges radiate from a small subrectangular perforation punched from the front of the plaque and probably intended for fixing the plaque.

Measuring from the base, two horizontal crease lines (now partially fractured), at 65.2mm and 132.5mm, would appear to indicate that the plaque was detached and folded twice in antiquity and unfolded following discovery of the hoard.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 330, St. 23, pl. 77e.


Part of a triangular leaf-marked plaque made from thin silver sheet. The upper end (and possibly the lower end, too) is broken away, but the straight edges of the sloping sides are

SS24. Silver plaque (OA.252.24) (Fig. 140; see also Fig. 122) Height 109.1mm; width 44.9mm; weight 4.41g

A subtriangular plaque with slightly convex sides, made from quite robust silver sheet. The upper end, broken on the line of a horizontal crease, has been rejoined and backed slightly out of position. There is further crease damage running obliquely down from the left end of the fracture line to the lower right edge of the plaque. The embossed design, chased from front and back, is now almost completely flattened. It consists of a domed arch, probably intended as a stylized shrine, surmounted by an obelisk-like tall triangle, with midrib and dense leaf-veining, flanked by leaf-veined margins. The compass-inscribed hemispherical arch is elaborated with a central dot-punched raised rib. Each end terminates a little above a horizontal line which demarcates the top of the narrow plain basal margin. A small ragged rectangular hole, perhaps for fixing the plaque, pierces the centre of the empty space within the arch. Tiny dot-punched setting-out points for the design are present at the base of the midrib and at the base of each end of the arch.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 329, St. 22, pl. 77f.

SS25. Silver plaque (OA.252.25) (see Figs 122, 139) Height 81.7mm; width 52.4mm; weight 3.24gThe lower section of a triangular leaf-marked plaque made from silver sheet (now conserved in four joined pieces with extensive backing), its upper end broken away in part along a horizontal crease. The embossed design, chased from front and back, consists of a narrow vertical central zone with midrib, leaf-veining and very slightly converging incised sides, flanked by leaf-veined margins with straight, sloping edges. The marginal leaf-veining is enhanced part way up

Figure 140 Silver plaques (left to right, SS26, 24, 32, 34)

92 | Dea Senuna

deliberate erasure of the former text, and there are two small punched dents near the lower end of the panel.

Birkle 2013, 331–2, St. 32, frg. 8, pl. 79i.

SS30. Silver plaque (OA.252.30) – part of SS28 (see Figs 123, 141)Height 49.5mm; width 58.4mm; weight 4.27g Surviving overall height of fragments SS28 and SS30: 84.1mm

A near-rectangular fragment made from silver sheet preserving the original edge at the base and at the two gently sloping sides. The rudimentarily embossed design, chased from front and back and now rather flattened, depicts a stylized shrine portico, its plain rectangular opening framed by a simple ribbed architrave and a pair of ribbed columns flanked by a running chevron motif in the narrow margin. The upper edge, broken on the line of the architrave, joins the broken lower edge of plaque fragment SS28. At the centre base of the portico is a small suboval perforation, pierced from the front, probably a point of attachment of the plaque. There are tantalising traces of incised lettering in the reserved space of the portico, but nothing capable of resolution.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix; Birkle 2013, 331–2, St. 32, frg. 2, pl. 79c.

SS31. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.31) (Fig. 142) Height 67.6mm; width 57.9mm; weight 1.97g

An irregular and extensively damaged fragment of a plaque made from very thin silver sheet (hardly more than foil) with no certain original edge surviving (although the two sides may be close to their original edge). The embossed design (now virtually flattened), chased from front and back, shows a highly stylized image of a shrine with domed roof supported on columns. The small remaining area above the dome on the left is leaf-veined with a D-shaped motif. Both arch and columns are simply hatched and the space within appears to have been plain and empty, though surface scratching, multiple creasing and fragmentation prevent

intact. The well-crafted embossed design, chased from front and back, is now rather flattened, especially in the centre. It consists of the low triangular pediment of a shrine, with simply hatched moulded cornices enclosing a dot-punched garlanded wreath, surmounted by an obelisk-like tall triangle, with midrib and leaf-veining, flanked by leaf-veined margins. The surviving lower edge is nearly straight, but there is a slight projection at the right corner and it is perhaps more likely that the plaque has been truncated by a fracture along an embossed line between the pediment and the (now missing) shrine than that the pediment alone was intended to represent the shrine.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 330, St. 24, pl. 77g.

SS28. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.28) – part of SS30 (Fig. 141) Height 34.1mm; width 44.5mm; weight 0.92g

An irregular fragment made from thin silver sheet, lacking its left side and top but preserving part of the original edge at the sloping right side. The rudimentarily embossed design, chased from front and back and now rather flattened, depicts the pediment of a shrine, with plain open gable and simple ribbed cornices with flanking leaf-veining surviving at the right. The lower edge, broken on the line of the architrave, joins the broken upper edge of plaque fragment SS30.

Birkle 2013, 331–2, St. 32, frg. 6, pl. 79g.

SS29. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.29) (see Fig. 142) Height 52.4mm; width 45.5mm; weight 2.27g

A fragment made from thin silver sheet with no certain remaining original edge. In a layout similar to that of plaque SS6a, much of a reserved rectangular panel survives, demarcated by a rudimentarily incised line with surrounding plain embossed margins, now fragmentary and flattened. At the ?upper end of the panel are the remains of a line of at least four incised letters. They are partly obscured by a series of vertical scratches which have the appearance of

Figure 141 Silver plaques (left to right, SS28/30, 17, 41, 36)


moulding. The panel within the portico contains several lines of incised lettering.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix; Birkle 2013, 331, St. 28, pl. 77i.

SS35. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.35) (see Fig. 137)Height 38.3mm; width 38.2mm; weight 1.12g

Part of a finial made from thin silver sheet, all edges broken. The embossed design, chased from front and back, now virtually flattened, shows the middle section of an obelisk-like tall veined triangle flanked by fragmentary remains of a pair of lateral expansions with scrolled borders.

Birkle 2013, 329, St. 19, pl. 77b.


The lower subrectangular part of a small (probably tall triangular) plaque made from thin silver sheet, the upper finial lacking but the sides and base apparently largely complete. The embossed design, rather rudimentarily chased from front and back and now partially flattened, is a smaller version of that on plaque SS28/SS30, comprising a stylized gabled shrine. The rectangular portico has simple ribbed margins (perhaps intended as columns) and a narrow ribbed architrave supporting a tall triangular pediment with hatched cornices. At either side and above the shrine are converging leaf-veined margins. The lower part of the portico is occupied by an embossed device within a lozenge-shaped frame, stamped from the back. It may have been a garlanded wreath but it lacks clarity and is further obscured by a central small subrectangular perforation quite roughly pierced from the back.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxi; Birkle 2013, 328, St. 17, pl. 77a.


The upper end of a leaf-marked finial, now in two joined pieces, made from thin silver sheet. The lower edge is broken but the converging sides and rounded tip, although a little irregular, appear to be intact. The neatly embossed symmetrical leaf-veined design, chased from front and back, is now completely flattened and partially distorted.

certainty. A horizontal incised line may have been intended to indicate the shrine floor, though the columns appear to extend some distance further down. Below the line the plaque surface appears to have been deliberately obliterated by dense irregular punching.

Birkle 2013, 331–2, St. 32, frg. 1, pl. 79b.


Part of a plaque made from thin silver sheet, broken at top and bottom but preserving the original edge on the remaining part of the sides. The embossed design (now rather flattened) chased from front and back, consists of a low-domed pediment with dot-punched arched cornice and ribbed base enclosing a rayed motif. It is probable that a stylized portico originally extended below the lower broken edge. Above the dome, within converging sides, is a zone of leaf-veining, probably the lower part of the finial.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix; Birkle 2013, 331–2, St. 32, frg. 5, pl. 79f.


An irregular finial fragment, all edges broken, made from very thin silver sheet. The embossed design, chased from front and back, comprises part of an obelisk-like tall veined triangle flanked by fragmentary lateral expansions enclosing triangles within a scrolled border. An angular rib at the broken lower edge of the veined triangle looks like part of the moulded cornice near the apex of the pediment of a shrine.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix; Birkle 2013, 331–2, St. 32, frg. 7, pl. 79h.


Part of a plaque made from silver sheet, possibly substantially complete though with no certain intact edges. The embossed design, chased from front and back, is composed of a domed portico with flanking columns. The columns are dot-punched ribs with plain margins supporting a low-domed arch with double-hatched

Figure 142 Silver plaques (left to right, SS49, 29, 39, 31)

94 | Dea Senuna

be a right-hand margin. If so, an oblique linear rib may be the lower right gable corner of a stylized shrine. Part of a rayed motif is present at the lower broken edge.

Birkle 2013, 331–2, St. 32, frg. 3, pl. 79d.

SS40. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.40) – part of SS1 (see Figs 122, 125–6) Height 89.6mm; width 114.2mm; weight 7.51g

Part of the large finial of plaque SS1 made from thin silver sheet with embossed design, chased from front and back, now much flattened. The base and upper tip are broken and the sides are incomplete, though the original edge is preserved at lower left and upper right. The design comprises a large obelisk-like tall veined triangle with a broad ribbed margin flanked by a series of lobate lateral expansions – remains of three opposing pairs survive – enclosing triangles within a scrolled border edged by leaf-veining. Near the upper broken edge a small subrectangular perforation has been pierced from the front.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii, top left; Birkle 2013, 330, St. 25, pl. 78a.

SS41. Copper-alloy plaque fragment (OA.252.41) (see Figs 122, 141) Height 47.9mm; width 50.8mm; weight 1.74g

Part of a plaque, made from thin copper-alloy sheet, with embossed design, chased from front and back, all edges broken. What survives is a triangular shrine pediment, its lower edge broken on the line of a moulded architrave. The stylized cornices comprise a leaf-veined moulding flanked by plain ribs. Above the apex of the pediment is the fragmentary base of a leaf-veined finial.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii, A. Birkle 2013, 330–1, St. 27, pl. 77h (where it is erroneously described as ‘Silber, vergoldet?’).

SS42. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.42) Height 38.1mm; weight 0.29gA tiny narrow fragment of flattened ribbed margin with an apparently complete edge.

SS43. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.43) Height 29.8mm; weight 0.19g

A tiny narrow flattened ribbed fragment.


A tiny, irregularly shaped fragment with remnants of a dot-punched and embossed design.


A narrow plain fragment broken along the line of a rib.


Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix; Birkle 2013, 331–2, St. 32, frg. 4, pl. 79e.

SS38. Silver plaque (OA.252.38) (Fig. 143; see also Fig. 122) Height 108.7mm; width 47.9mm; weight 3.38g

A near-complete plaque made from very thin silver sheet. The embossed design, chased from front and back, now rather flattened, is in two parts, a rectangular panel, its lower right corner broken, surmounted by a subtriangular finial, lacking only its tip. The finial is made up of a central, obelisk-like, tall veined triangle flanked by a series of four paired lobate expansions linked by a running scroll. One oblique and several horizontal crease lines are visible. The rectangular panel, with a plain embossed frame, has suffered some fairly severe damage. In addition to a prominent horizontal crease there are several dents from a small hammer (or similar) adjacent to the distorted, torn and broken lower edge and right-hand corner. No figured design is visible nor can any inscribed lettering be seen. Similar to SS6b, though smaller and plainer.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxviii; Birkle 2013, 330, St. 26, pl. 78b.


Part of a plaque, in two joined pieces, made from thin silver sheet, all edges broken. Most of the broken edges appear to follow deliberate crease lines. The orientation of the fragment is uncertain, but simple linear embossing (now flattened) may

Figure 143 Silver plaque (SS38)


Tomlin (this volume, p. 119, SS51) has read the inscription as:DEO

MA[R]TI S

AN[..]O

[ ]S

deo | Ma[r]ti s|an[ct]o | […]s

To the holy god Mars …

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, 10; CIL vii, 81; RIB I, 216; Birkle 2013, 332, St. 35.

SS52. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.52) Height 24.6mm; width 33.2mm; weight 0.87g

A small trapezoid fragment with a flattened design, quite rudimentarily incised, comprising a plain inverted triangle flanked by triangular zones with angled striations. The size, shape and decor recall those of plaque SS18/SS20 so it may have been part of a similar triangular plaque.


An irregularly shaped fragment preserving one original edge, two incised lines which run parallel with the edge and the remnant of a zone of incised chevron or meander. There is a tiny irregular perforation between the pair of incised lines.


A rectangular-shaped fragment preserving one original cut edge, probably the left side of the plaque; a margin decorated with an incised tendril-and-berry motif (?vine scroll); a flattened triple-line rib, and a vestige of embossed décor on a plain background.

SS55. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.55) – part of SS51 (see Figs 123, 144–5) Height 28.1mm; width 17.7mm; weight 0.26g

Part of the fragmentary plaque SS51, this small irregularly shaped piece is the junction between one side and the gabled

A ?margin fragment, joined from two pieces, with flattened linear ribbing and remnants of a dot-punched design or inscription.


An irregularly shaped fragment with flattened linear ribbing and adjacent leaf-veining.

SS48. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.48) Width 32.0mm; weight 0.66g

A heavily flattened fragment with remnants of a linear and dot-punched design.

SS49. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.49) (see Fig. 142)Height 54.7mm; weight 0.92g

A slender margin fragment preserving a narrow veined border within the original cut outer edge on one long side and one short side. Most of the plaque is broken away but one end of a rectangular ribbed panel survives.


An irregularly shaped, heavily flattened fragment preserving traces of parallel and angled ribbing.

SS51. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.51) – part of SS55 (Figs 144–5; see also Fig. 123) Height 45.9mm; width 35.1mm; weight 0.85g

Part of a gabled plaque, made from very thin silver sheet, lacking the base and much of one side. Although Wright (in 1954 for RIB I, 216) did not see them, fragment SS55 and a smaller fragment incorporating the letter N (now one of the fragments listed as SS74) are parts of this plaque, which had suffered breakage since Lysons illustrated it. The plaque is quite small, with vertical sides and a gabled top. It contains inscribed lettering on at least five lines but is otherwise devoid of decoration. The lettering is irregular in form, spacing and arrangement and includes both incised and dot-punched letters.

0 3 cm

Figures 144–5 Silver plaque (SS51/55) (scale 1:1)

96 | Dea Senuna

A tiny fragment, possibly part of plaque SS38 to which it is similar in appearance and with which it shares a dent of similar character.

SS65. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.65) – part of SS15 (see Fig. 137) Height 19.1mm; weight 0.20g

The broken ribbed edge of this veined fragment, which preserves a curved edge, joins the right side of the upper end of plaque SS15, of which it was an upper lobe.


An irregular-shaped fragment, probably part of a finial, with midrib and leaf-veining and part of a curving ribbed component at one side.

SS67. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.67) – part of SS15 Height 26.1mm; weight 0.18g

This veined fragment, broken on the line of a rib, is a non-joining part of plaque SS15.


A tiny undiagnostic fragment.

SS69. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.69) (see Fig. 138) Height 12.6mm; width 16.1mm; weight 0.36g

A tiny rectangular-shaped veined fragment, as SS58 and SS59, and originally almost certainly part of plaque SS21/SS22.


A tiny irregularly shaped fragment of a leaf-veined plaque with veined borders, similar in appearance to plaque SS14.


An irregularly shaped leaf-veined fragment with a subrectangular perforation.

SS72. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.72) (Fig. 146) Height 50.1mm; weight 0.98g

An enigmatic irregularly shaped fragment of very thin silver sheet, with one apparently original straight edge within which is a plain slender margin defined by a single incised line. Beyond is a zone of scored and embossed motifs (now flattened) followed by an area of dot-punched lines, which do not readily resolve themselves into coherent lettering. If the front face of the plaque is taken to be that into which the dots were punched and if the surviving

top. It incorporates part of three lines of the inscription with the letters D| MA|A

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, 10; CIL vii, 81; RIB I, 216.


A tiny fragment with flattened angled veining, perhaps from a plaque margin. Its rhomboid shape is probably a product of breakage along incised lines.


A tiny fragment of the flattened veined margin of a plaque made from very thin silver sheet.


A tiny rectangular-shaped fragment preserving one original side, part of a midrib and simple leaf-veining. The upper and lower edges show clear evidence of folding breakage. In all respects identical to, and evidently part of, plaque SS21/SS22.

SS59. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.59) (see Fig. 138)Height 21.5mm; width 28.4mm (originally c. 32mm); weight 0.97g

As SS58, a larger fragment, with leaf-veining, strong midrib, upper and lower folding breaks and one original side. Part of plaque SS21/SS22.

SS60. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.60)

Height 37.7mm; weight 0.44gA flattened simple leaf-veined margin fragment preserving a short part of one edge.


A neatly leaf-veined margin fragment. One side preserves the original edge, while the other is broken at an incised line.


An irregularly shaped fragment with one probably original edge and leaf-veining either side of an incised line.

SS63. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.63). Height 23.2mm; weight 0.27g

A tiny irregular fragment with leaf-veining and curvilinear embossed ribbing; probably part of a finial.



DOE MAR

[.]I SAN

D S D

d(eo) Mar|[t]i san(cto) | d(ono) s(acrum) d(edit)

Sacred to the holy god Mars: (…) has given this as a gift

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, 9; CIL vii, 82; RIB I, 217; Birkle 2013, 332, St. 34 (where it is erroneously described as ‘Bronze, vergoldet’).

Ceremonial utensils (see Figs 120–1, 149–57)These comprise a bell, two rattles and two plates with flattened omega-shaped sides. The rattles were made from several components – a pair of domed plates, decorative attachments, a perimeter binding and a handle – all of which were originally soldered together but which had become detached (because of the degradation of the solder) probably at or before the time of discovery. It has been possible to reassociate both pairs of domed rattle plates and their decorative attachments together with, tentatively, the remains of their perimeter bindings (comparable to those of the Felmingham Hall rattle: Gilbert 1978, 181–3, fig. 9; Boon 1983), but the two probable handles cannot be unequivocally assigned to the rattles: their ends do not correspond to the handle-fastenings on the perimeter of the rattle plates

complete edge is taken to be the top then the scored motifs appear to consist of two large capital letters: an M (broken at lower left), followed by an O (its circular interior broken away). However, if the other face is taken to be the front it would enable a possible reading of the scored letters as: [I(uppiter)] O(ptime) M(axime) – see Tomlin this volume, p. 120, SS72.


A small irregularly shaped fragment which preserves an original veined curved edge, perhaps part of a finial.

SS74. Silver plaque fragments (OA.252.140)

Very tiny fragments, 81 in total, with a combined weight of 4.27g. They include the missing (N inscribed) part of plaque SS51; and a tiny fragment of plaque SS7, showing Mars’ right lower leg.

SS75. Copper-alloy plaque (OA.252.109) (Figs 147–8; see also Fig. 123) Height 56.8mm; width 54.3mm, originally c. 63mm; weight 3.13g

A subcircular fragment of copper-alloy sheet, its left and lower right sides cut away. The surviving curved upper edge, with simple inner incised line, was probably intended as an arch, for the remaining part of the right side preserves part of a stylized spiral-fluted column flanked by a narrow leaf-veined margin. In the centre of the enclosed arched space is a circular medallion-like motif with concentric double embossed border, the outer circle enhanced by dot-punching. A tiny perforation in the middle of the circle is the compass centre point for the motif and for the arched upper border. A three-line dot-punched inscription, marked retrograde from the reverse, occupies most of the arched space, with the enlarged S of the second line occupying the centre of the circular ‘medallion’.

The inscription (Tomlin this volume, p. 120, SS75) may be read:

0 3 cm

Figure 146 Silver plaque SS72, both sides shown (scale 1:1)

0 3 cm Figures 147–8 Copper-alloy plaque (SS75) (scale 1:1)

98 | Dea Senuna

They indicate both the position and shape of two former attachments. The halo shape of the central solder mark is exactly matched by the size, form and curvature of SS81 and there can be no doubt that it was formerly attached to SS77. A grey-coloured degraded solder deposit is also present on the outer surface of the rim. There is a slight wear-shine on the wall of the central perforation.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxvi, 3–4.

SS78. Copper-alloy rattle plate (OA.252.101) (Figs 150–1; see also Fig. 120) Diameter, exterior 112.1 × 113.5mm, interior 110.5mm; central solder deposit 29.5 × 28.5mm; perimeter solder deposit 31.5mm wide; weight 93.21g

As SS77, but without the central perforation. The central, subcircular, grey-coloured degraded solder deposit is exactly matched by the size, form and curvature of SS82 and there can be no doubt that it was formerly attached to SS78.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxvi, 1–2.These two plates (SS77, SS78) are a matching pair. When

their rims are placed together with the crescent-shaped solder marks in apposition they fit precisely, and the height of their resulting slightly recessed perimeter wall is about 10.0–11.5mm. The crescent-shaped solder marks evidently mark the position of the crescentic flanges of the handle by means of which it was soldered to the rattle plates, as on the example in the hoard from Felmingham Hall, Norfolk (Boon 1983, fig. 1).

SS79. Copper-alloy rattle plate (OA.252.102) (Figs 152–3; see also Fig. 120) Diameter, exterior 115.7 × 115.3mm, interior 110.1mm; central solder deposit 43.3 × 42.2mm; perimeter solder deposit 22mm wide; weight 96.89gAs SS77, but without the central perforation, with a taller rim, a larger central solder deposit and a smaller perimeter solder deposit. A substantial dent in the perimeter rim is exactly matched by one on plate SS80. A tiny central hole, which at first sight looks like a lathe centre pip, is very regular, with a fresh metallic inner surface, and may have been made in the 18th/19th century.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxvi, 7–8.

SS80. Copper-alloy rattle plate (OA.252.103) (Figs 152–3; see also Fig. 120) Diameter, exterior 116.1 × 115.3mm, interior 110.2mm, perforation 13.3 × 14.3mm; central solder deposit 51.7mm; perimeter solder deposit 24mm wide; weight 90.59g

(crescent-shaped solder patches) and they may alternatively be from composite sceptres.

SS76. Copper-alloy bell (OA.252.113) (Fig. 149; see also Fig. 121) Diameter 42.2 × 39.5mm (originally c. 40mm); height 24.9mm; weight 22.43g

A small circular domed bell, of cast copper alloy, with flared rim and paired incised linear decoration near the rim and near the top of the dome. The circular apex aperture is filled with a grey-coloured metal, probably lead or lead alloy, by means of which the now missing clapper would have been secured to a looped finial. At two points the rim and part of the dome are broken away and there is a crack across the top of the dome.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxvii, 6.

SS77. Copper-alloy rattle plate (OA.252.100) (Figs 150–1; see also Fig. 120) Diameter, exterior 112.5 × 113.5mm, interior 110.5mm, perforation 12.0 × 12.2mm; central solder deposit 29.5 × 28.5mm; perimeter solder deposit 31.5mm wide; weight 88.61g

A circular low-domed plate with a small circular central perforation and a narrow down-turned rim. The original smooth surface of the outer convex face is preserved in a fine green patina, which in some places is coated with a light soil accretion. The inner concave face has a more extensive light soil accretion. Substantial deposits of a grey-coloured degraded solder are preserved as a circle surrounding the central perforation and a crescent shape at the perimeter.

Figure 149 Copper-alloy bell SS76

Figure 150 Copper-alloy rattle plates SS77–78 and attachments SS81–82


rattle bindings. It is likewise possible that the two tubular objects SS85 and SS86 are the rattle handles.

SS83. Copper-alloy applied strip (OA252.116; 117; 138; 139) (Fig. 154; see also Fig. 123) Length OA252.116 and 139, 114.9mm; OA252.117 and 138, 122.9mm; width 10.5–11.0mm; weight (total) 5.16g

Four fragments of a narrow, parallel-sided strip made from thin copper-alloy sheet, conceivably a rattle perimeter binding. The strips are decorated with a simple embossed chevron motif enhanced with vertical lines incised from the front. The reverse face of all the fragments is coated with a grey-coloured degraded solder. The oblique ends of the fragments are a result of breakage along the embossed chevron lines. Two fragments (OA252.117 and 138) have a certain join and it is clear from Smirke’s drawing in Lysons that the other two fragments (OA252.116 and 139) were also joined at that time. One fragment preserves the vertical end of the strip with a small circular ?rivet hole and solder on both faces indicating that the two ends of the strip were overlapped and secured with solder as well as with a rivet. The three longer fragments are all slightly curved and it is likely that they became flattened and broken on/after discovery of the hoard if they had not already been dismantled at the time of its deposition. In size and character they are consistent with identification as the perimeter binding for rattle SS77/SS78.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, two unnumbered pieces at the foot of the plate.

SS84. Copper-alloy applied strip (OA252.118–126 and 132-134) (Fig. 155) Total length c. 335mm; width 14.9mm; total weight 11.68g

As SS77, but with a slightly larger, more ovoid, central perforation, a taller rim, a larger central solder deposit and a smaller perimeter solder deposit. A substantial dent in the perimeter rim is exactly matched by that on plate SS79.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxvi, 5–6.These two plates (SS79, SS80) are a matching pair. When

their rims are placed together with the crescent-shaped solder marks in apposition they fit precisely and their indentations correspond exactly, confirming that they were originally joined together in this way. The height of their resulting slightly recessed perimeter wall is about 17–19mm. As on the pair of rattle plates SS77 and SS78, the crescent-shaped perimeter solder marks correspond to the fastening points for the flanged end of a handle like that in the Felmingham Hall Hoard (Boon 1983, fig. 1).

SS81. Copper-alloy rattle plate attachment (OA.252.137) – part of SS77 (see Figs 120, 150–1) Diameter 29.1 × 28.7mm; perforation 12.7 × 13.3mm; weight 0.94g

A very slightly convex annular disc which retains traces of grey-coloured degraded solder on its inner (concave) face. The white metal coating of its outer (convex) face is either tin or silver. Its size, form and curvature, including the dimensions of its aperture, indicate that it was originally attached to the perforated apex of rattle plate SS77. In fact, it appears to have been shown in position in Smirke’s drawing in Lysons.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxvi, 3.

SS82. Copper-alloy rattle plate attachment (OA.252.111) – part of SS78 (see Figs 120, 150) Diameter 28.5 × 27.7mm; weight 1.11g

A very slightly convex subcircular disc which retains traces of grey-coloured degraded solder on its inner (concave) face. The white metal coating of its outer (convex) face is either tin or silver. Its size, form and curvature indicate that it was originally attached to the apex of rattle plate SS78. In fact, like SS81, it appears to have been shown in position in Smirke’s drawing in Lysons.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxvi, 1.There are no pieces in the hoard (as it survives) to match

the crescent-shaped solder marks on the four rattle plates. Nor are there any edging strips which can be identified unequivocally as the bindings for the two rattle perimeter walls. It is likely, however, that two types of decorative strip (SS83 and SS84) are the surviving fragments of the two

Figure 151 Copper-alloy rattle plates SS77–78 and attachments SS81–82, re-assembled

Figure 152 Copper-alloy rattle plates SS79–80

100 | Dea Senuna

A tapered, open-socketed tube – possibly the handle for one of the rattles or a sceptre handle – made from copper-alloy sheet, its edges butting only at the broader end. Both ends are complete, though there is a little damage at the narrower end. The finely smoothed original surface of its outer face is well preserved in the green patina. At the broader end a grey-coloured band (degraded solder), about 6mm wide, encircles the rim. There is a similar band at the slightly flared narrower rim, where remains of a lead or lead-alloy packing partially fill the socket. The ?solder bands may have secured decorative collars of a contrasting-coloured metal while the lead/lead alloy may have been part of a composite fastening. The small disc, SS87, may have been a decorative cap for the broad end of the handle.


SS86. Copper-alloy ?handle (OA.252.104) (see Figs 121, 156) Length 146.6mm; diameter 12.9mm; weight 19.62g

A slender tube – possibly the handle for one of the rattles or a sceptre handle – made from copper-alloy sheet, with an overlapping soldered seam. Both ends are complete, though slightly damaged. The finely smoothed original surface of its outer face is well preserved in those places where the green patina remains. Simple incised lines encircle each end near the rim and there are three more near the centre.


SS87. Copper-alloy ?handle cap (OA.252.136) (Fig. 156)Diameter 21.7mm; weight 2.51g

Twelve fragments, some joining, of a narrow, parallel-sided strip made from thin copper-alloy sheet. The finely embossed ‘reeded’ decoration of the outer face was enhanced with a white metal coating, either silver or tin. Several of the longer fragments have a light curvature and it is conceivable that the strip was the perimeter binding for rattle SS79/SS80. Certainly, the width of the strip corresponds quite closely to the wall height of rattle SS79/SS80 and the surviving total length is not far short of that anticipated for the perimeter binding.

SS85. Copper-alloy ?handle (OA.252.105) (Fig. 156; see also Fig. 121) Length 100.3mm; diameter broader end 18.6 × 17.8mm; weight 30.67g

Figure 153 Copper-alloy rattle plates SS79-80, re-assembled

Figure 154 Copper-alloy applied strip (SS83)

Figure 155 Copper-alloy applied strip (SS84)


SS91. Copper-alloy edging strip (OA.252.114) – part of SS89 (see Figs 121, 157) Length 110.8mm; weight 3.71mm

As SS90, but dented at the centre. Originally attached to one side of SS89.


SS92. Copper-alloy attachment (OA.252.131) Length 27.3mm; width 18.5mm; weight 3.26g

A small, carinated, subrectangular, copper-alloy sheet of indeterminate function. The two longer sides – one straight, the other slightly convex – appear complete and the shorter sides may be substantially complete, too. The outer face appears a little worn; the inner face retains a grey-coloured degraded solder deposit along both long sides. Perhaps a reinforcing plate.

Priestly regalia (see Figs 118–19, 158–70)This collection consists of two composite headdresses and part of a third as well as a more complex and incomplete suite of fittings which may have been some form of chest harness. A domed cap may be a vestige of a fourth headdress, while a fragmentary bust of Sol or Apollo may also have been a headdress finial. The regalia were all richly ornamented, distinctive and individual in

A small, neatly formed, low-domed disc with flattened rim. On the inner (concave) face a grey-coloured deposit of degraded solder is visible around the perimeter. Those remains, together with its shape and size, are consistent with its former attachment to the broader end of the tubular ?handle SS85.

SS88. Copper-alloy plate (OA.252.108) (see Figs 121, 157) Length 107.0mm; width 76.9mm; weight 21.98g

A distinctively shaped plate made from thin copper-alloy sheet, its slightly convex shorter sides and flattened omega-shaped longer sides emphasized by marginal embossing. The plate is complete, with only slight damage to the short sides and a split and crease at one corner. There is no obvious trace of any means of attachment, but its distinctive shared form associates it with SS89–SS91.


SS89. Copper-alloy plate (OA.252.107) (see Figs 121, 157)Length 95.9mm; width 65.2mm; weight 9.43g

A distinctively shaped plate made from very thin copper-alloy sheet, its edges extensively damaged. Sufficient survives to indicate that the shorter sides were probably slightly convex while the longer sides had a flattened omega-shaped profile. Furthermore, on one (seemingly smoother – thus outer?) face both long sides preserve traces of a narrow band of grey-coloured degraded solder which follows the line of the flattened omega-shaped edge. The traces conform precisely to the size, shape and solder traces on strips SS90–SS91, which were undoubtedly formerly attached to SS89.


SS90. Copper-alloy edging strip (OA.252.115) – part of SS89 (see Figs 121, 157) Length 107.3mm; weight 4.71mm

A slender, flattened omega-shaped strip with angled tips, one face completely coated with a grey-coloured degraded solder deposit. Originally attached to one side of SS89.


Figure 156 Copper-alloy handles (SS85–87)

Figure 157 Copper-alloy plates and edging strip (SS88–91)

102 | Dea Senuna

links and 26 links) to form the chinstrap, which is joined and released by means of a twisted figure-of-eight link with one open loop. From the lower terminal loop of the four ivy-leaf plates a link and ring descend to engage a series of five 14-link chains which encircle the neck and join the chinstrap at a point midway along its chain.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxiv.

SS94. Copper-alloy chain (OA.252.93) Length 49.8mm; links c. 10 × 5.5mm; weight 2.00g

A short length of copper-alloy chain comprising six simple butted oval links with a small figure-of-eight link – one loop a little open – at one end. The form and dimensions of the chain correspond closely, but not exactly, to those of the chains of headdress SS93. In view of the fact that it does not appear to belong with any other part of the hoard, and there are no obviously missing parts of the chain network of SS93, it is possible that it was made as an extension of the chain that formed the chinstrap of SS93 in order to accommodate the fuller face of one of the wearers of that headdress.

SS95. Copper-alloy headdress (OA.252.74) (Fig. 160; see also Fig. 119) Diameter cap disc 65.5mm; diameter peripheral discs 34mm, 34.5mm, 35.8mm and 35.5mm; rings c. 7 × 5mm and c. 5.5 × 5mm; links c. 9.5 × 4.5mm; weight 80.65g

A colourful composite headdress made from five ornate silver, copper and copper-alloy discs assembled with copper-alloy chains and rings. The state of the headdress is unchanged from when it was illustrated for Lysons by Richard Smirke in 1817, excepting only that Smirke showed one of the silver embossed rosette appliqués on the peripheral disc with the candy-twisted border. It is unclear whether this was done to record the actuality or to show what it would have looked like in antiquity.

The large low-bossed cap is made from a copper-alloy concavo-convex disc. Around its perimeter a fine slender trim, made from a flattened candy-twist of copper and silver wire, is soldered in position. Soldered to the centre is a small circular appliqué of thin silver sheet with an embossed beaded border. Its central motif is almost completely broken away but remaining traces suggest it may have been a star. Four approximately symmetrically placed tiny circular holes are pierced through the perimeter just inside the trim. Each engages a small butted subcircular ring to which one end of a chain of tiny twisted figure-of-eight links is attached. The other end of the four chains joins the cap disc to four small peripheral discs by means of a similar small ring in one of the perforations on their perimeter. Three of the chains are made of 12 links but the fourth, which attaches the disc with a candy-twisted perimeter trim, arguably that at the back of the head, has 15 links. The front peripheral disc retains its soldered thin sheet-silver appliqué, which has an embossed design consisting of an eight-petalled rosette with central and peripheral pellets within a beaded border. A slightly damaged version of the same applique is soldered to the disc at left, but the disc at

appearance. It is likely that the chain crowns SS95 and SS98, as well, perhaps, as headdress SS93, were originally provided with a leather or textile cap or lining, as has been suggested for the Farley Heath chain headdresses (Bird 2007a, 29). Small repairs, modifications and damage on parts of the regalia imply usage over a protracted period of time.

SS93. Copper-alloy headdress (OA.252.0) (Figs 158–9; see also Fig. 118) Height 30.5mm; cap diameter 114.5 × 118.0mm; height central lobate plate 83.1mm; height ivy-leaf plate, large 58.1–63.8mm, small 42.7–51.8mm; diameter of circular bossed plate 30.5–32.5mm; rings c. 12.5 × 9.5mm; chain links c. 9.5 × 7mm

A composite, seemingly complete and only slightly damaged headdress made from embossed copper-alloy sheet components and assembled with copper-alloy loop-in-loop chains and rings (consisting of simple oval butted loops made from circular-sectioned wire). No trace of any solder survives on any of the components to suggest that there were ever any additional attachments. A little conservation work has been done and the various parts have been carefully reassembled, as is evident when comparing the headdress in its present state with that shown in Smirke’s drawing in Lysons. It is not certain, therefore, that its current arrangement corresponds precisely with that of its appearance in antiquity.

The elegantly profiled conical cap has a damaged apex – disconcertingly, a blow appears to have been struck to one side of the peak. The extent of the damage makes it impossible to tell whether any provision was made for an additional finial or fitting, but there is no sign of any central perforation, solder or other means of attachment. Around the plain, slightly flared perimeter of the cap is a series of tiny circular holes, eight of which engage a small, butted oval or subcircular ring, from which eight embossed plates are suspended. Seven plates are in the form of an elongated stylized ivy leaf with prominent midrib while the eighth, at the front, which would have rested against the centre of the wearer’s forehead, is larger, with a central circular boss surrounded by lobate expansions. The eight holes are fairly regularly set and it is unclear what might have been the purpose of an additional four similar perimeter holes pierced at rather irregular intervals around the back of the cap. It is possible, as Nina Crummy has suggested (in litt., 29 March 2016), that they were used for detachable organic accessories, such as streamers, foliage or feathers, which might vary from ritual to ritual. Descending from the lower terminal loop of each of the seven ivy-leaf plates is a short chain of three butted oval links, the lowermost of which engages the upper loop of a triple-looped circular bossed plate. A pair of six-link chains unite the lower sides of the central lobate plate to the flanking circular bossed plates and all seven bossed plates are joined together by three-link chains engaged in their side loops and descending to unite in a butted oval ring. To four of these rings a plump, midribbed ivy-leaf plate is attached via a single butted oval link, while from the forward-most pair of rings long chains descend (27


Figure 158 Copper-alloy headdress (SS93), front view Figure 159 Copper-alloy headdress (SS93), detail of cap

Figure 160 Copper-alloy headdress (SS95)

104 | Dea Senuna

engaging a small flat baluster-shaped pendant and three rectangular strips with an outer hinged end. Two of the hinges are broken and stained with the iron corrosion products of their now lacking iron hinge pin, while the third retains a truncated second strip secured by a copper-alloy hinge pin (Fig. 163).

The third unit consists of a squat T-shaped junction plate with crescent-shaped mouldings in the inner angles and a small perforation at the end of the three arms. Rings in the perforations engage the perforated proximal end of three rectangular strips with an outer broken hinge, one of which retains the broken end of a second strip. One of the rings is of different character and may be an ancient repair (Fig. 164).

The three unattached hinged strips are all hinged at both ends, with an iron hinge pin at one end and a copper-alloy hinge pin at the other, which in two instances secures a truncated second strip.

Although the arrangement of the regalia is uncertain, its outer and inner faces are at least clearly determined: the front face of every component except the flat baluster plates preserves an extensive and quite thick deposit of grey-coloured degraded solder, by means of which decorative appliqués were once attached; the rear face of all components is plain and unadorned and the hinged strips bear lightly incised ‘assembly’ marks. Two of the circular junction discs preserve a central fragment of their appliqué, a ribbed rosette of very thin copper-alloy sheet, and the solder deposit on the third, larger, junction disc would correspond to a similar appliqué. On all the hinged strips the solder deposit preserves the imprint of a line of three small rectangles and that arrangement is repeated on the fourth junction plate where, in conformity to its shape, there is an additional single lower rectangle. In view of the fact that the surviving appliqué fragments on the junction discs are of copper alloy it is perhaps more likely that the missing rectangular appliqués were of copper alloy than of silver sheet, and it is conceivable that the three tiny ornate copper-alloy panels (SS97), which are of precisely the right size, are the surviving few of the rectangular appliqués. Such thin sheet metal would be very vulnerable to corrosion, as indicated by the vestigial disc appliqués.

On the rear face of all 15 rectangular strips a simple mark was incised with a pointed implement (Fig. 165). Unfortunately these appear not to be assembly marks, which would have enabled or at least facilitated the correct juxtaposition of the various units and unattached pieces. The marks ( / (four); // (one); A (one); N (one); reversed N (one); V (three); X (one); Ж (three)) do not conform to the arrangement of the complete units in any coherent or consistent way. If they were assembly marks rather than manufacture marks the regalia may have been reassembled at some point during its period of use. The only instance in which a join is assured is a broken hinge, which unites one of the strips of the largest unit with one of the strips of the third unit. There the conjunction of two six- pointed stars (Ж) is accompanied by a certain physical join.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxv, 1.

the right has lost its appliqué and retains only partial remains of its degraded solder backing. The back disc, likewise, has lost its central appliqué, preserving only traces of degraded solder, but it retains a fine perimeter trim made from a flattened candy-twist of three contrasting coloured metals which appear to be silver, brass and copper. The four peripheral discs are united by chains secured by small butted rings in their two lateral perforations. Each chain consists of 15 tiny twisted figure-of-eight links. The front and back discs have only three perforations but the two side discs have an additional outer perforation to which the ring and chain of the chinstrap are attached. The chain at the left consists of 11 figure-of-eight links, with an additional intermediate small ring and a broken terminal double-twisted wire loop. That at the right has 15 figure-of-eight links, also with an additional intermediate small ring, and three long, slender, twisted wire loops terminating in an S-shaped open loop by means of which the chinstrap was joined and released. All the discs have plain backs; the concave back of the cap disc has traces of degraded solder at its centre.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxv, 2 and 4.

SS96. Copper-alloy regalia (OA.252.75-80) (Figs 161–5; see also Fig. 119) Maximum length of largest unit 289mm; diameter junction discs 35mm, 35mm and 38mm; length of strips, mostly 45–50mm; width of strips 14–15.5mm; weight (total) 156.47g

An articulated suite of decorative copper-alloy fittings, possibly some sort of chest harness, made from ornate discs and plates assembled with hinged strips, chain and rings. As it survives it consists of three major (but incomplete) units and three unattached hinged strips. In total there are three junction discs and one junction plate; two linking flat baluster plates and one smaller flat baluster plate pendant; 15 rectangular hinged strips; 15 small junction rings; and a four-link chain. Even though it is clear that all the parts belong together, the juxtaposition of those parts and the precise original overall arrangement of the regalia have proved elusive (Fig. 161). The situation is not helped by the fact that the component parts of the three major units are not all in the same position as they were when Smirke illustrated them for Lysons. The following descriptions apply to the three units as they are at present.

The largest unit is broadly symmetrical. Two small twisted figure-of-eight chain links are held in the eye of flanking S-shaped loops, the outer end of which is engaged in the perforated end of a pair of opposing flat baluster-shaped plates; a small butted circular ring in the perforation at their other end secures each plate to one of four symmetrically placed projecting loops on the perimeter of two junction discs; rings in the other three loops of both discs engage in the circular eye of three rectangular strips, each with a broken hinged outer end which preserves part of the iron hinge pin and/or localized brown-coloured iron corrosion products (Fig. 162).

The arrangement based on the junction discs is closely mirrored by the second unit, which comprises a slightly larger junction disc with rings in the four projecting loops


Figure 161 Copper-alloy regalia (SS96)

Figure 162 Copper-alloy regalia (SS96), detail of the largest unit Figure 163 Copper-alloy regalia (SS96), detail of the second unit

106 | Dea Senuna

SS98. Copper-alloy headdress (/regalia) (OA.252.81-99) (Figs 167–8; and see Fig. 119) Overall width perhaps c. 540mm; diameter junction discs 48.5–50.0mm; length of strips 39.5–41.5mm; width of strips 9.6–10.3mm; rings c. 8.5 × 9mm; length of links c. 13–14mm; weight (total) 48.06g

A rather fragmentary, composite copper-alloy and silver headdress (or, possibly, chest regalia) made from four ornate junction discs and five narrow decorative strips assembled with small rings and short chains. One of the discs is near complete, two are damaged and one is very fragmentary. Four strips are complete (three of which are broken in two joining pieces) and the fifth lacks one end. It is possible that there were originally more discs and strips, but a symmetrical and coherent arrangement can be made with the pieces as they survive.

The near-complete disc, which may have been the central component, consists of a very slightly concavo-convex copper-alloy sheet pierced with four tiny holes, only approximately symmetrically placed, around the perimeter. The holes are set just within a slender embossed copper-alloy

Figure 164 Copper-alloy regalia (SS96), detail of the third unit

Figure 165 Copper-alloy regalia (SS96), rear face of three rectangular strips showing incised symbols – asterisk, cross and reversed N

SS97. Copper-alloy applied sheet (OA252.127–129) (Fig. 166; see also Fig. 123)Length 15.7mm, 14.8mm and 15.5mm; width 14.8mm (originally c. 17mm); weight (total) 0.75g

Three tiny rectangular panels, made from very thin copper-alloy sheet, decorated with an embossed repeating ‘top to tail’ heart motif with triple pellets in the small remaining spaces. The edges, partly damaged, are defined by a simple raised rib. Two of the panels, which were cleaned on their front face, correspond to Lysons pl. xxxix, 2 (where they were erroneously coloured as silver). One piece, still unconserved, is part of a strip Smirke illustrated for Lysons as pl. xxxix, 3; the remainder of the strip is now lacking. All three fragments are coated on their back face with a grey-coloured degraded solder deposit. The dimensions of the three pieces are very similar to the missing, apparently tripartite, rectangular appliqués that have left their solder ‘shadow’ on the rectangular components of regalia SS96.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix, 2–3.

Figure 166 Copper-alloy appliqués (SS97)


cable-moulded border (part of it now lacking) which is soldered to the rim. Solder was also used to attach to the centre of the disc a finely embossed triangular appliqué of thin silver sheet, showing a three-petal motif with interspersed triple pellet clusters enclosed by a triangular raised rib and beaded border. The remains of a triangular zone of degraded solder on the three other damaged discs, together with fragments of their cable-moulded border and/or its underlying solder deposit (there are many unattached border fragments), indicate that the appliqué was almost certainly identical on all four discs. Each of the four perimeter holes engages a small butted circular copper-alloy ring, to each of which a short copper-alloy chain is attached. Two are broken short; the third comprises a twisted figure-of-eight link followed by four oval links terminating in a tiny perforated copper-alloy sheet fragment; the fourth is complete, comprising four twisted figure-of-eight links, the last held in the eye of one of the five decorative strips. The strip, in two joining pieces, is, like all the others, a slender rectangle with embossed decoration – an axial rib flanked by cable-moulded borders (which also recall the leaf-veining

of votive plaques). The silver-coloured surface of four of the strips is a white metal coating, either silver or tin. To a perforation in the other end of the strip another four-link chain is attached, its distal end engaging a second decorative strip in two joining pieces, joined by a further four-link chain and small butted ring to one of the damaged junction discs. The surviving decorative strips, broken chain and second damaged junction disc permit a mirror-image arrangement on the other side of the near-complete junction disc, while the remaining fragmentary junction disc, broken strip and chain fragments can be placed beyond the fourth perimeter ring.

Lysons 1817, pl. xxxv, 3.

SS99. Copper-alloy headdress cap (OA.252.112 and 135) (Fig. 169; see also Fig. 121) Diameter rim 59.7mm; dome c. 40mm; weight 10.60g

A circular mount with flanged rim and mushroom-shaped dome. Rather over one-third of the rim is lacking and the upper dome (where the metal sheet is very thin) is crushed

Figure 167 Copper-alloy headdress (SS98)

Figure 168 Copper-alloy headdress (SS98), detail of central unit

108 | Dea Senuna

degraded solder around the rim. Its convex face is extensively, and in places quite thickly, coated with the same degraded solder deposit. The form of the corrosion products and solder on the convex face correspond precisely to those on the concave face of SS102 and it is evident that they were originally fastened together as part of a composite object. This disc is virtually the same size as, though a little flatter than, the cap of headdress SS95 and it is conceivable that it was part of another headdress.

SS102. Copper-alloy disc mount (OA.252.110) (see Fig. 169) Diameter 65.8mm; weight 12.30g

As SS101 but made from a much thinner sheet. The corrosion products and solder on the concave face correspond precisely to those on the convex face of SS101, to which it was originally attached. The convex face appears plain but is extensively coated with a black-coloured patina.

SS103. Copper-alloy brooch (Lysons.6699) (Fig. 170; see also Fig. 124) Diameter 34.4mm; weight 11.25g

A large circular plate brooch with central circular recess and wide outer register with six green enamelled pellet-in-ring motifs set in a blue enamelled field. The catchplate and pierced hinge lug survive but the pin is lacking.

A 2nd-century ad type (Hattatt 1987, nos 1031–4; Mackreth 2011, 156, Type Plate 2.a1, pl. 105).


SS104. Copper-alloy brooch (OA.244) (see Figs 124, 170)Height 34.8mm; width 27.8mm; weight 15.73g

An oval plate brooch gilded on the front face and set with an oval conical black glass gem, partially fractured and spalled, which is encircled by two outer zones stamped with the repeating motif of a raised saltire in a sunken square. The grey colour of the rear face indicates that it was tinned, in common with most other examples of this type of gilded plate brooch. The catchplate and pierced lug are preserved but the bilateral spring, intact when the brooch was drawn for Lysons by Richard Smirke, is now lacking.

and very fragmentary. Because it lacks its summit it is not possible to determine whether the dome was plain or had been surmounted by a decorative finial. There were originally four tiny perforations in the rim. One still retains two small figure-of-eight chain links; a second is empty; breakage occurred across the third; and the fourth is lacking. The perforations are set within a narrow perimeter band of grey-coloured degraded solder deposit, which is identical to that on the decorative discs of regalia SS98. That would imply that this cap was similarly ornamented with an applied cable-moulded perimeter border. The chain links differ slightly from those of SS98, indicating that the cap was probably not part of that headdress. Additional damage occurred after Smirke’s drawing in Lysons and there is a crude solder join on the dome as well as a joining but detached dome fragment.


SS100. Copper-alloy head of Sol (OA252.130) (see Figs 121, 169) Width 21.2mm; height 23.3mm; weight 7.23g (originally about 65 × 55 × 45mm)

A fragment of a fine hollow-cast copper-alloy head, originally a very substantial piece, possibly a broken statuette or a headdress cap. All the broken edges are old breaks. The outer face preserves two luxuriously curled locks of hair beneath two projecting rays of a radiate diadem. At the time of Smirke’s drawing in Lysons’ publication there were several other joining fragments, now lacking, which preserved almost the whole forehead and diadem as well as the underside of the chin and part of the back of the head. The missing face appears to have been that of Sol/Helios or Apollo.


SS101. Copper-alloy disc mount (OA.252.106) (see Fig. 169) Diameter 66.5mm; weight 34.79g

A large plain circular disc of very slightly concavo-convex form. The concave face preserves bands of finishing striations in the fine green patina, a small subcircular corrosion patch at the centre and three irregular, but approximately evenly spaced, patches of grey-coloured

Figure 169 Copper-alloy headdress cap (SS99), fragmentary head of Sol (SS100) and disc mounts (SS101–2)


two outer zones stamped with an S motif, the inner one with the addition of a scalloped motif at the junction with the setting. Like SS104 the grey colour of the rear face indicates that it was tinned. The catchplate and pierced lug are intact, but the bilateral spring, complete and in position when the brooch was drawn for Lysons, is now missing.

A 3rd- to 4th-century ad type (Hattatt 1987, nos 1210–13; Mackreth 2011, 162–3, Type plate 3.b4, pl. 107).


A 3rd- to 4th-century ad type (Hattatt 1987, nos 1210–13; Mackreth 2011, 161–2, Type Plate 3.b2, pl. 107).


SS105. Copper-alloy brooch (no number) (see Figs 124, 170) Diameter 45.5mm; weight 33.23g

A large circular plate brooch gilded on the front face, lacking its central gem, the setting for which is encircled by

Figure 170 Copper-alloy brooches (SS103–5)

110 | Dea Senuna

The inscriptions on the figurine pedestal and votive plaques are fundamentally important to an understanding of the Ashwell Hoard. Brief as they may be, they help to connect us to the people who dedicated them. The same applies to the inscribed plaques in the Barkway and Stony Stratford Hoards. The inscriptions from all three hoards are discussed in this chapter.

Inscriptions are first transcribed letter-by-letter in capitals, including medial points which sometimes mark word separation, but more often abbreviation. But for greater clarity, other words too (including abbreviated words) have been separated in this transcript, even if it was not always the case in the original; for the exact spacing, see the drawing. The drawings of the inscriptions are by Craig Williams, in consultation with Ralph Jackson and Roger Tomlin. Damaged and incomplete letters where the reading is not certain are marked by subscript dots; see also the notes. Areas of damage where letters have been lost altogether are marked by square brackets, the number of stops indicating the number of letters lost, if this can be estimated.

Then the text is restored and abbreviations expanded in lower-case italics, except that the initial letters of personal names have been capitalised. The letter V, which in Latin served both as a vowel (u) and a consonant (v), is transcribed lower-case as u. Square brackets enclose lost letters which have been restored; round brackets enclose letters omitted in the original by abbreviation.

In the translations which follow, round brackets enclose verbs which are implicit in the Latin text, but not demonstrative and possessive pronouns. Finally there is a commentary, which first notes the condition of the lettering and its state or style, and then other points worth elucidating or of interest.

Abbreviations of epigraphical corpora

AE L’Année ÉpigraphiqueCIL Corpus Inscriptionum LatinarumILS Inscriptiones Latinae SelectaeJRS Journal of Roman StudiesRIB I Collingwood, R.G. and Wright, R.P. 1965. The

Roman Inscriptions of Britain: Vol. I, Inscriptions on Stone, Oxford

RIB II Collingwood, R.G. and Wright, R.P. 1990–5. The Roman Inscriptions of Britain: Vol. II, Instrumentum Domesticum (eight fascicules) (ed. S.S. Frere and R.S.O. Tomlin), Oxford

RIB III Tomlin, R.S.O., Wright, R.P. and Hassall, M.W.C. 2009. The Roman Inscriptions of Britain: Vol. III, Inscriptions on Stone Found or Notified between 1 January 1955 and 31 December 2006, Oxford

Tab. Sulis

Tomlin, R.S.O. 1988. Tabellae Sulis: Roman Inscribed Tablets of Tin and Lead from the Sacred Spring at Bath, Oxford; also in Cunliffe, B. (ed.) 1988. The Temple of Sulis Minerva at Bath: II, Finds from the Sacred Spring, 59–277, Oxford

Tab. Vindol. IV.1

Bowman, A.K., Thomas, J.D. and Tomlin, R.S.O. 2010. ‘The Vindolanda writing-tablets (Tabulae Vindolandenses IV, Part 1)’, Britannia 41, 187–224

TLL Thesaurus Linguae Latinae

Chapter 7The InscriptionsR.S.O. Tomlin

The Inscriptions | 111

IV.1, 863B); and from Gaul Iulia Aduorix uxor (CIL xiii, 750), Senorix mater (CIL xiii, 4403) and Iulia Bellorix (CIL xiii, 5665).

The inscribed votive plaquesThe plaques are fully described elsewhere in this volume, and the description here is summary, being intended only to locate the inscription. They are typically of trilobate leaf form incorporating a gabled shrine (aedicula) towards the base, within which is a standing figure of the deity. Below the shrine is generally an ansate panel or a plain reserved panel, which was inscribed by means of a stilus (a sharp, needle-like writing instrument) or in letters formed by punched dots. Sometimes a dot-punched inscription was awkwardly inserted in the field around the deity. At the very foot is a basal tab for insertion into a wooden base or grooved framework; the unusual format of A14 may be because the tab was obscured when the plaque was displayed. There is no sign that plaques were nailed to the temple wall.

Ten plaques are inscribed, five of gold and five of silver. The other ten (two of gold, eight of silver, as well as many small fragments) are not inscribed, or at least no inscription is now visible. In spite of the plaques being made from precious metal, and the skilled workmanship involved, the inscriptions are surprisingly simple, and the lettering undistinguished, with the exception of A17, features they share with Barkway and Stony Stratford (except for Stony Stratford SS6a with its long text), and with leaves dedicated in other provinces. The deity is named, the dedicator is named (but not described any further) and there is usually a brief formula such as V S L M, the initial letters of u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito) (‘… has paid his vow willingly, deservedly’). This convention of brevity may only have been due to the lack of space, but considering how expensive a plaque must have been, it is surprising how little of the visible surface was inscribed by comparison with (say) a stone altar.

A8. Gold plaque (2003,0901.8)Figure of Minerva with aegis, crested helmet, spear and shield and an owl at her right foot, standing within a gabled shrine. Below, an ansate panel inscribed in letters formed by punched dots:

1 cm

mc 50

CL CELSVS VOTVM FECIT DE

SENVN L B : M

Cl(audius) Celsus uotum fecit de(ae) | Senun(ae) l(i)b(ens) m(erito)

Claudius Celsus has made his vow to the goddess Senuna, willingly, deservedly

At the end of line 1, D and E have been made with more dots than necessary, giving the impression that ‘X’ has been squeezed between them. It does not really look like a cramped A for DAE, although this ‘Vulgarism’ is fairly common (see note to A16). Perhaps the curve of D was simply elaborated.

DE is not an abbreviation for deae, which is generally abbreviated to D (A1, A11, A12, A17, A21 and A23). It is a

Ancient authors citedApuleius, Metamorphoses Cicero, de legibusMarcellus Empiricus, de medicamentisAnonymi Valesiani pars posteriorJerome, Letters; uita HilarionisLucan, Bellum CivilePliny (the Elder), Natural HistoryPliny (the Younger), epistulaePomponius Mela, de chorographiaRavenna CosmographyVirgil, Aeneid

AshwellThe discovery of the Ashwell inscriptions was noted in Britannia 36 (2005), 489, no. 30 (AE 2005, 900). This final account is based on Tomlin (2008), which was ‘incomplete and provisional’ and written in concert with Jackson (2007). Their readings are reported in AE 2007 and 2008 respectively, but these and other interim accounts will not be further cited. In all of them, the numbering of items has remained the same. The present account incorporates the results of two further examinations, in 2011 and 2014, after the pedestal and plaques had been fully cleaned and conserved.

A1a. Silver pedestal (2011,8012.1)Circular, hollow-cast plinth, with an upper and a lower cambered moulding, which supported the silver figurine of the goddess. On the lower moulding, in letters formed by punched dots:

0 3cm

Solder - tin/lead (2:1ratio)Silver chloride (AgCl)Figurine outline

D • SENVNE FLAVIA • CVNORIS • V • S • L • M •

d(eae) Senun(a)e Flauia Cunoris u(otum) s(oluit) l)ibens) m(erito)

To the goddess Senuna, Flavia Cunoris has paid her vow willingly, deservedly

The original surface has been lost as far as the O of Cunoris, but the punch-point penetrated deeply enough for the letters to be still quite legible. There is no medial point between Senun(a)e and Flauia.

The name of the goddess is also inscribed on the plaques in various forms, and will be discussed at the end. The dative termination -e for -ae, which would have been correct, is also found in A14; it is a trivial ‘Vulgarism’ owing to e and the diphthong ae both being pronounced the same.

The name of the dedicator is not attested elsewhere, but is probably a variant of Cunorix, which is compounded from the well-known Celtic elements *cuno- (‘hound’) and *rix (‘king’); -ris can be a form of the latter. Names compounded from *cuno- are typically found in Britain, with the exception of Cunopennus (CIL v, 4216), but they are masculine except for Cuniovende mater (Edwards 2007, P136), presuming this to share the same element. Cunorix has previously occurred only in a sub-Roman inscription from Wroxeter (RIB III, 3145(b)), where it is apparently the name of an Irishman, but names compounded in -rix are sometimes borne by women: examples from Britain are Tancorix mulier at Old Carlisle (RIB I, 908) and Manduorix Vastini filia at Vindolanda (Tab. Vindol.

112 | Dea Senuna

a Latin cognomen popular in Celtic-speaking provinces because it recalled the Celtic name-element *caro-s (‘dear’); compare Welsh cariad (‘darling’). For her cognomen, compare the derived nomen Ressius (Alföldy 1969, 115), and the elaborated cognomina Ressatus, Ressilla and Ressimarus (Alföldy 1974, 236), which are found in Noricum and Pannonia.

This is the only inscribed plaque to omit the name of the goddess, whether it was thought to be obvious, or simply because space was short.

A11. Gold plaque (2003,0901.11)Figure of Minerva with crested helmet, spear and shield, standing within a gabled shrine. The figure was struck from the same die as that used for A12, but the shrine is different. The inscription in dot-punched letters has been awkwardly inserted either side of the figure and in the reserved panel below, which was subsequently cut back to make a tab. The text reads (1) downwards, to the left of the figure; (2) across the reserved panel below; (3) downwards, to the right of the figure:

1cm

mc 50

ḌSỊỊ

ḶẠMỊỊḶ

NỊỊRVS

d(eae) Se(nunae) | lamel(lam) | Nerus

To the goddess Senuna, Nerus (has given) this plaque

It is not certain, from position alone, that (3) should be taken after (2), but this is the sequence in A12, which shares the same standing figure and formulation. In any case, in the absence of V S L M or similar formula, the dedicator’s name might be expected in emphatic position at the end. In (1), D and S taken together resemble a large S, but they can be resolved into a circular D with S crowded against it from below. E here and in (2) and (3) consists of two verticals, II rather than E: a cursive-influenced form often found in graffiti and also in A16. In (2), part of the central M, and most of the two letters either side of it, were removed when the bottom of the plaque was recut to leave a projecting tab.

In (1), deae Senunae has been abbreviated to D SII (i.e. D SE), as in A12, A21 and A23. In (2), the tips of the letters

‘Vulgar’ reduction of deae, due to e and the diphthong ae both being pronounced the same. For another example of DE for de(ae), see RIB I, 1523 (Carrawburgh).

At the end of line 2, two dots like a modern colon separate B from M, but not B from L, which would suggest that L and B were meant to be taken together, and were an abbreviation like M. Abbreviation by contraction is rare, but is occasionally found in dedicatory formulas: compare ILS 2105 (Rome), uotum l(i)b(entes) s(oluerunt), and AE 1927, 17 (Djemila), uotum sol(uit) l(i)b(ens) animo. This expansion is more likely than l(ibens) b(ene) m(erenti), although in RIB I, 322 (Caerleon), a fragmentary dedication to Mithras, the editors restore and expand the three-letter abbreviation [.] M F as [b(ene)] m(erenti) f(ecit). But the formula B M, b(ene) m(erenti), although frequent, is confined to epitaphs.

In Britain it is rare for dedications to name the dedicator before the deity, although it does occur elsewhere. The exceptions are RIB I, 140 (Bath, ciuis Trever), 148 (Bath, origin not stated), 149 (Bath, ciues Car[nu]tenus), 652 (York, origin not stated), 1057 (South Shields, origin not stated), III, 3131 (Dover, an Italian?), 3332 (Vindolanda, ciues Galli). Other possible exceptions are RIB I, 1458 (Chesters) and III, 3140 (Wroxeter), where the meaning is unclear, and III, 3489, which may not be of British provenance. The inversion is also found in two of the Bath ‘curse tablets’ (Tab. Sulis 10 and 60), but may be attributed there to the epistolary format; most of the tablets put the deity’s name first. The inversion in A14 can be attributed to lack of space.

It follows that Celsus may have been an incomer, perhaps from Gaul, but this is by no means certain; only one of the 21 inscribed plaques at Mauer an der Url, for example, displays this inversion (Noll 1980, 60, no. 19). Nothing can be deduced from Celsus’ name, since Celsus is a common Latin cognomen.

A9. Gold plaque (2003,0901.9)Figure of Minerva with crested helmet, spear and shield, standing within a narrow gabled shrine. Below, a reserved panel inscribed in letters formed by punched dots:

1cm

mc 50

CARIATIA

RESSA V S L

Cariatia | Ressa u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens)

Cariatia Ressa has paid her vow willingly

SS in Ressa is made with only a slight turn rightward at the top, and almost no tail. V has been partly lost in a hole. The second stroke of L turns upwards to avoid the edge. As in A21 and A23, there is no M to complete the usual V S L M formula.

The dedicator’s names are both Celtic, but they seem to be unique in this form. For her nomen, compare the cognomen Cariatus (attested only in CIL xiii, 4545), which is elaborated from the nomen Carius, itself derived from Carus,


(epistulae viii.8), when referring to ‘the many inscriptions of many persons on all the columns and walls’, is not more specific: multa multorum omnibus columnis omnibus parietibus inscripta (for Pliny’s description see p. 142).

A14. Gold plaque (2003,0901.14)Figure of Minerva with crested helmet, spear and shield, standing within a gabled shrine. There is no panel below, but a four-line inscription has been squeezed into the bottom margin (line 1) and the basal tab (lines 2–4). In sans-serif capitals, written by an assured hand with a blunt stilus:

1cm

mc 50

BELL • MEMORIANVS

VOTVM

F • D SE

NVNE

Bell(...) Memorianus | uotum | f(ecit) d(eae) Se|nun(a)e

Bell(...) Memorianus has made his vow to the goddess Senuna

Although bellus is a Latin adjective (‘pretty’, ‘charming’), the dedicator’s nomen is derived from the Celtic name element bello- /belo-, as seen for example in the tribal name Bellouaci. It was almost certainly Bellius or Bellicius, both well attested in Gaul; the derived cognomina Bellinus, Bellicus and Bellicianus are quite frequent in Britain. The dedicator’s cognomen is elaborated from the Latin Memor, which is well attested in Celtic-speaking provinces, but Memorianus is surprisingly rare: Kajanto (1965) cites only CIL x, 7211 (Sicily).

In Britain, as already noted for A8, it is unusual for the dedicator’s name to precede that of the deity, and may even suggest that he came from Gaul. In A14, however, the inversion may be due to lack of space: the dedicator’s name, if written on the tab, would have been obscured when the plaque was inserted into its stand.

In Senun(a)e, the dative termination -e for -ae, which would have been correct, is also found in A1a; it is a trivial ‘Vulgarism’ due to their both being pronounced the same.

A16. Silver plaque (2003,0901.16)Figure of Minerva with crested helmet, spear and shield, standing within a gabled shrine. Below, an ansate panel, its right edge missing, inscribed in letters formed by punched dots:

1 cm

mc 50

either side of M are consistent with LA and IIL (i.e. EL), but they are visually far from certain. But in view of A12, lamel(lam) can be read with confidence. For the term lamella, see the note to A12.

The dedicator’s name is Celtic, and is well attested in Gaul as that of a lamp manufacturer (CIL xiii, 10001.228, stamped NERI in the genitive); but despite CIL xiii, 10001.1419, it is doubtful that there was also a samian potter of this name (Hartley and Dickinson 2010, 230–1, s.v. {Nerus}). It was probably cognate with the tribal name Nerusi (one of the tribes of the Alpes Maritimes listed on the Arch of Augustus, Pliny, Natural History iii.136 = CIL v, 7817), whence the nomen Nerusius.

A12. Gold plaque (2003,0901.12)Figure of Minerva with crested helmet, spear and shield, standing within a gabled shrine. The figure was struck from the same die as that used for A11, but the shrine is different. The inscription, in dot-punched letters begins (1) across the reserved panel below, and continues (2) to the right of the figure, reading upwards from its elbow into the gable:

1cm

mc 50

D SE LAMEL

QVINTIAṆVS

d(eae) Se(nunae) lamel(lam)|Quintianus

To the goddess Senuna, Quintianus (has given) this plaque

In (1), deae Senunae has been abbreviated to D SE, just as in A11, which alone among the Ashwell plaques shares two other distinctive features, the use of the term lamel(lam) and the absence of any formulation after the dedicator’s name.

Inscribed gold and silver votive plaques or leaves are quite widely distributed, but except for Stony Stratford SS6a, A11 and A12 seem to be unique in calling themselves a lamella. This is surprising, since it is the regular term used by modern writers (for example Kotansky 1994) for amulets inscribed on a thin sheet of metal, especially gold or silver. Their usage follows Marcellus Empiricus (de medicamentis), who gives instructions for writing medical amulets on sheets of gold (lamella aurea, 8.59) or tin (lamella stagnea, 21.2 and 21.8).

lamella is the diminutive of lamina (‘metal plate’), which is the term more often used by literary sources for inscriptions on metal, for example by Cicero (de legibus ii.58) for the inscribed plate which gave its name to the Temple of Honour when discovered, quom lamina esset inventa et in ea scriptum lamina: ‘Honoris’. Thus lamina is used of metal ‘curse’ tablets (Apuleius, Metamorphoses iii.17; Jerome, uita Hilarionis 21), the inscribed gold plate worn by the High Priest ( Jerome, Letters 64) and even the gold stencil used by the illiterate King Theoderic to endorse documents (Anonymi Valesiani pars posterior, 14.79). By contrast, Virgil uses the term brattea (‘gold leaf’) for the Golden Bough (Aeneid vi.209), which may have been suggested to him by the sight of votive leaves fluttering in a temple. Unfortunately Pliny, in his evocative description of the source of the Clitumnus and its temple

114 | Dea Senuna

D • SENV

NAE L L •

HERBONI

ANVS V S L

M

d(eae) Senu|nae L(ucius) L(…) | Herboni|anus u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) | m(erito)

To the goddess Senuna, Lucius L(…) Herbonianus has paid his vow willingly, deservedly

In line 3, H is of exaggerated width; B is written over a diagonal stroke, as if V was begun by mistake; I descends far below the line and curves to the left, its cramped position suggesting that the scribe miscalculated the space available. The medial point to mark abbreviation was not used consistently throughout.

The praenomen of a Roman citizen was regularly abbreviated to its initial letter, and quite often all three names (tria nomina) were reduced to their initials (for some British examples, see RIB II, Epigraphic Indexes, p. 18, and compare RIB I, 1445), but it is unusual for praenomen and nomen to be abbreviated as here, but not the cognomen. However, this might be done to save space, especially if the cognomen were distinctive. The best example from Britain is the stone plaque at Coventina’s Well (Carrawburgh) dedicated by the prefect T(itus) D(…) Cosconianus (RIB I, 1534).

The dedicator’s cognomen Herbonianus is apparently unique, but it derives from the nomen Herbonius (usually written unaspirated as Erbonius) which is quite localized: it is typical of north-eastern Italy, especially Iulium Carnicum and Aquileia, but is otherwise rare (Calderini 1930, 493; Alföldy 1969, 83).

A21. Silver plaque (2003,0901.21)Figure of Minerva with aegis, crested helmet, spear and shield, standing within a gabled shrine. In the pediment there is an arched niche, and in an arc above it (line 1) and below (line 2), an inscription formed by punched dots:

D SE SERVANDVS HISPANI

V S L

d(eae) Se(nunae) Seruandus Hispani (filius) | u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens)


DIIAII SIINAII

LVCILIA SIINẠ

V S L M

deae Senae | Lucilia Sena | u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito)

To the goddess Sena, Lucilia Sena has paid her vow willingly, deservedly

As in A11 (see note), E is inscribed as II. In line 1, initial DII contains more dots than are necessary. This may only be over-elaboration, but it looks like a correction of DA, which might have been inscribed first by mistake. DAE for deae, which is due to the identical pronunciation of e and the diphthong ae (see the notes to A1a and A14), is quite common in Britain: see RIB I, 645, 730, 1449, 1528, 1537, 1903 and a silver ring (RIB II.3, 2422.33) dedicated to Senuna. Subsequent letters in lines 1, 2 and 3 are larger and clearer, as if the scribe was gaining in confidence. The last letter of lines 1 and 2 has been caught by the broken edge, but a few dots of the second element can just be seen. The original width of the panel can also be calculated, confirming that no letters have been lost entirely.

This is the only plaque dedicated to the goddess as Sena. Abbreviation of her name by contraction is very unlikely. Sena might be a cognate form, and would share the same etymology (see the note at the end), but it is easier to suppose that the scribe omitted a syllable by confusion with the dedicator’s cognomen; there is even a hint, in the boldness of LVCILIA SIINA (line 2), that the dedicator was inscribing her own plaque, in which case, the confusion of Senuna with Sena is understandable.

The dedicator’s cognomen is Celtic. It may have been intentionally derived from Senuna, and thus be ‘theophoric’, but *seno-s (‘old’) is a frequent Celtic name-element, and typically British – compare AE 1956, 249 (Cologne), the tombstone of Aemilius son of S(a)enus, a British tribesman who served in the Rhine fleet: Aemilio Saeni f(ilio) ... ciui Dumnonio. This element accounts for the popularity of ‘Latin’ cognomina like Senecianus in Britain and other Celtic-speaking provinces. But if Sena really is theophoric here, it would mean that the cult of Senuna was already flourishing when and where the dedicator was born. Her nomen is Latin, but probably ‘conceals’ the Celtic name-element *lucio-s like other ‘Lucius’ names.

A17. Silver plaque (2003,0901.17)Figure of Minerva with aegis, crested helmet, spear and shield, standing in a gabled shrine. Below, a rectangular recessed panel lightly inscribed with a chisel-pointed stilus in stylish and assured ‘Rustic Capitals’ with exaggerated serifs:

1cm

mc 50

1 cm

mc 50


1cm

mc 50

DEAE SENVṆ[....]

FIRMANVṢ[....]

deae Senun[ae ..] | Firmanus [u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito)]

To the goddess Senuna, [..(...)] Firmanus has paid his vow willingly, deservedly

The third stroke of A is represented by a single dot. EN of Senun[ae] was cut twice, suggesting the scribe found it difficult to work retrograde. He used short straight strokes wherever possible.

The broken edge cuts the last surviving letter of lines 1 and 2. It can be calculated that four more letters have been lost from each. In line 1, therefore, two letters are missing after Senun[ae], and they must belong to the dedicator’s name, whose cognomen begins in line 2. They might be his praenomen and nomen abbreviated to two letters as in A17, but much more likely is an imperial nomen abbreviated to two letters, either Fl(avius) as in A1a or Cl(audius) as in A8. In line 2, the space after Firmanus would accommodate the usual formula V S L M, as in A1a, A16 and A17.

The dedicator’s cognomen is elaborated from the common Latin cognomen Firmus, and itself is widely attested. It has occurred once in Britain, at Corbridge (RIB II.8, 2503.263).

The goddess and her votariesThe goddess Senuna was unknown until her Treasure was discovered, but Senuna was already attested as a personal name scratched on a samian bowl found in Kent (see Fig. 190) (RIB II.7, 2501.505); and a silver ring (RIB II.3, 2422.33), said also to have been found in Kent, can now be recognized as dedicated to her. Its bezel carries a two-line incised inscription: S | DAE | ENV, where S is enlarged to span both lines; thus d(e)ae Senu(nae), ‘to the goddess Senuna’.

Who then – and what – was Senuna? Her name must be compounded from the adjective *seno-s (‘old’), a frequent Celtic name-element, as noted already (A16), and the suffix -una, the latter being found for example in the British river name Ituna. The first element is found in the place name Sena, an island off the west coast of Brittany (now Île de Sein), where the geographer Pomponius Mela reports an oracle and healing shrine (de chorographia iii.48); he does not name the deity, but since it was attended by nine virgin priestesses called the Gallizenae, it may well have been female, and quite possibly called Sena like the island itself. But this remote island was far from Ashwell, and the priestesses specialized in conjuring up storms and predicting the future for seafarers, so a direct connection with the inland cult of Senuna seems unlikely.

It is quite possible, though, that Senuna was the goddess of a spring or river source. Somewhere in southern Britain, according to the Ravenna Cosmography (108.31), there was a river called Senua (108.40) or Sena (108.31, taking the first

The inscription is in capitals except for H, which is of cursive form; A is ‘open’ (without a third stroke). The inscription is the same as A23, and identically placed. Both shrines were struck from the same die. Both inscriptions were neatly and evenly punched over letters lightly incised with a stilus (here drawn as if separate), but A21 must have been drafted first, since SERVANDVS was written twice, the scribe evidently trying to position it in the centre. This he achieved, but at the cost of abbreviating the name of the goddess, and extending HISPANI too far to the right for symmetry.

In A21 and A23, deae Senunae is abbreviated to D SE, as in A11 and A12. As in A9, there is no M to complete the usual V S L M formula.

The name Seruandus is frequent in Gaul and Germany, but occurs widely elsewhere. Kajanto notes (1965, 199) that 17 of the 56 instances of Hispanus come from Hispania (CIL ii).

A23. Silver plaque (2003,0901.23)Figure of Minerva with aegis, crested helmet, spear and shield, standing within a gabled shrine. In the pediment there is an arched niche, and in an arc above it (line 1) and below (line 2), an inscription formed by punched dots:

1cm

mc 50

D SE SERVANDVS HISPANI

V S L



The lettering is by the same hand as A21, but the shape, form and spacing of the dot-punched letters is even more regular and controlled, and there is a greater confidence, as also implied by the single set of incised guide lettering (here again drawn as if separate). This all confirms that A23 was inscribed after A21.

For the text, see the notes to A21.

A24. Silver plaque (2003,0901.24)This plaque is now very fragmented but, unlike the others, it carries a double shrine with two gables. In the left shrine stands the figure of Minerva, with crested helmet, spear and shield. In the right shrine stands an unidentified figure with one arm raised, now largely lost. Below the double shrine is an ansate panel of which most of the right half is lost, but the original width can be calculated. It is inscribed in raised letters which were incised retrograde from behind:

116 | Dea Senuna

date supported by the ‘Rustic Capitals’ in A17 which also look quite ‘early’.

This is only a hint of quite a close grouping by date, but it is supported by the uniformity of style among the plaques themselves, including those which are not inscribed, by the fact that two pairs at least are surely contemporary (A11 and A12, A21 and A23) and by the simple message they all share (‘ABC has paid his vow to Senuna’). That said, it is surprising that the inscriptions and their formulation should still be so varied. In this sample of ten inscriptions (including the pedestal A1a, and counting A21 and A23 as one), seven are dot-punched, two are stilus-written, either in crude but assured capitals (A14) or in very stylish ‘Rustic Capitals’ (A17), and one is embossed (A24). Despite the simplicity of the message just noted, the formulation is surprisingly varied. In all but three inscriptions, the deity’s name conventionally precedes the dedicator’s; A8 and A14 reverse the sequence and A9 omits it. Four conclude with the conventional V S L M (A1a, A16, A17 and A24 restored), but two reduce it to V S L (A9 and A21/A23) and two substitute the variations uotum f(ecit) (A14) or uotum fecit LB M (A8); the latter is unique. The other two (A11 and A12) are also unique in using lamel(lam) instead.

In such a small sample, confident generalization is again not possible, but this lack of uniformity suggests a multiplicity of scribes. As already suggested for A16, it may be that some were the dedicators themselves. If so, they clearly followed local convention, or were advised what would be suitable. This is the pattern also suggested by the much larger collection of handwritten texts on metal tablets found in the Spring of Sulis at Bath (Tomlin 1988, 98–101).

Barkway

B3. Silver plaque (1817,0308.2)Lysons 1817, pl. xl; CIL vii, 84; ILS 4540; RIB I, 219.

Unusually large votive plaque without the usual shrine with standing figure; instead, only an ansate panel, inscribed in letters made by punched dots:

1cm

10 cm 0

MARTI

TOVTATI

TI : CLAVDIVS : PRIMVS

ATTII LIBER

V • S • L • M

Marti | Toutati | Ti(berius) Claudius Primus | Attii liber(tus) | u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito)

To Mars Toutatis, Tiberius Claudius Primus, freedman of Attius, willingly and deservedly has paid his vow

element of the transmitted Leugosena to be conflated from Leuca in 108.29). Rivet and Smith (1979, 455, s.v. Sena) compare *Seni, the Shannon in Ireland, and the Gallic river name Senona [Sélune]. The Treasure was found quite near the small river which issues from copious and still-numinous springs 2km away at Ashwell. This, with other springs in the same valley, is the source of the rivers Rhee and Cam, tributaries which combine with the Granta to flow through Cambridge and join the Ouse and Great Ouse.

The plaques, but not the figurine, identify Senuna visually with Minerva; this is neither confirmed nor denied by the inscriptions themselves, and the presence of uninscribed plaques depicting other deities (Victory, Rome and perhaps Mars and Mercury) may only mean that votaries bought the most appropriate one available. Thus at Barkway, where the god was Mars, to judge by the figurine (B1), the two inscribed plaques (B3 and B4) and three other plaques (B5, B6 and B7) which portray him, there are also two plaques (B8 and B9) which portray Vulcan; and at Stony Stratford, where two plaques (SS51 and SS75) are dedicated to Mars, and four others portray him (SS1, but paired with Victory, SS2, SS7 and SS11), there is one which portrays Apollo (SS8) and two are dedicated to Jupiter (SS6a and SS72) and Vulcan (SS6a). The visual identification of Senuna with Minerva recalls Sulis Minerva at Bath, supporting the idea that Senuna, like Sulis, was the eponymous goddess of a spring or river. Although the Treasure is not a spring deposit but a temple treasure, it might be compared with the votives found in the source of the River Seine (Sequana) near Dijon.

The ten votaries who dedicated the silver figurine (A1a), the five gold plaques (A8, A9, A11, A12, A14) and the five silver plaques (A16, A17, A21, A23 and A24), are unfortunately no more than names. The sample is too small for confident generalization, but it may be noted that three of them are women (A1a, A9 and A16). An even higher proportion of women has been noted among the dedicators at Mauer an der Url: of the 21 votive plaques there which are inscribed, no fewer than ten were dedicated by women (Noll 1980, 70).

Like the formulation they used, the dedicators’ names are apparently Latin, but this can really be said only of four, Celsus (A8), Quintianus (A12), Seruandus (A21 and A23) and Firmanus (A24). The other six bear names which are of Celtic etymology, even if they are superficially Latin like Cariatia and Lucilia and, if masculine, have been given the Latin termination -us. There is an obvious Celtic substrate, but whether it was British or Continental is uncertain. Flavia Cunoris and Lucilia Sena may well have been British, but the names Seruandus Hispani (filius), Ressa, Nerus and Herbonianus all suggest a Continental origin. This is also suggested by the inversion of A8 (Claudius Celsus) and perhaps A14 (Bell(...) Memorianus). Seven dedicators are Roman citizens, the three exceptions being Nerus, Servandus with his peregrine patronymic, and probably Quintianus (unless he omitted his nomen for want of space). Three of the citizens bear imperial nomina, Flauia (A1a), Claudius (A8) and Flauius or Claudius (A24, since abbreviated to two letters), which derive from 1st-century ad emperors. This of course is only a terminus post quem, but there is no Ulp(ius), Ael(ius) or Aur(elius), a negative indication of early


Latin, whether from the noun ala (‘wing’), alatores being ‘wingers’, beaters on the wings of a hunt, according to the late etymological writers quoted by TLL (s.v. alator), or from the verb alare (‘support’, ‘nourish’), but although this verb is common, *alator in this sense is never found. Neither sense of alator seems appropriate to Mars, and a Celtic etymology has been suggested by analogy with the Welsh personal name Aladur (Green 2007).

In line 2, the abbreviated word DVM is ambiguously placed; it might be either a second title of Mars, or a second name of the dedicator, Censorinus. The text is lavishly supplied with medial points, but two pairs of words have not been thus separated, Alatori Dum(...) and Censorinus Gemelli. The implication is that each pair should be taken together, and that Dum(...) applies to Mars. The dedicator’s name, ‘Censorinus, son of Gemellus’ is already of typically peregrine form, meaning that he was not a Roman citizen, but he is unlikely to have borne two names as well as a patronymic, let alone to have been a new Roman citizen who took the nomen Dum(...). There is almost no instance of such a nomen, and any reference to the tribal name Dumnonius (in what is now Devon and Cornwall) would be far-fetched.

B8. Silver plaque (1817,0308.7)Lysons 1817, pl. xli.4; CIL vii, 86; RIB I, 220.

Figure of Vulcan with hammer, tongs and hearth at his feet, standing within a gabled shrine, identical to that of B9, which is not inscribed. Below, an ansate panel on which is crudely incised:

mc 50

1cmNVVLCO

n(umini) Vulc(an)o

To the deity Vulcanus

The first downstroke of N is completed by a short horizontal stroke near its foot, and the first V is completed by a short horizontal stroke just above it, both serving as serifs. L is damaged by the split, but the end of its horizontal stroke can just be seen. The apparent ‘tail’ of C is casual damage. O is made quite neatly by two semicircular strokes.

The first two letters could be read either as AN or NV, but NV is required by the context. RIB expands the two abbreviated words as nu(mini) V(o)lc(an)o, since Volcanus is the usual form of the deity’s name, as in SS6a, but Vulcanus is attested; in Britain, compare RIB I, 899 (Old Carlisle), VLK, V(u)lk(an)o. To read V(o)lc(an)o, it would be necessary to abbreviate numini to NV, but this would be the only instance from Britain, where there are many instances of N for n(umini).

This abbreviation of the deity’s name by contraction is very unusual, but must have been prompted by the lack of space. Visually it was obvious to whom the plaque was dedicated: no inscription was thought necessary for B9.

The third stroke of A is indicated by a single dot. Vertical strokes have been given a lower serif consisting of a dot either side. In line 3, the exaggerated initial T is balanced by the exaggerated final S. This was done to save the width required by both letters at normal height, in a line which it was anticipated was going to be rather wide; the lettering of PRIMVS shows signs of becoming cramped. The abbreviation of TI and the separation between CLAVDIVS and PRIMVS is indicated by two dots or more, like a modern colon. In line 5, abbreviation is indicated by a single dot.

Epigraphic evidence for the cult of Toutatis, as the god’s name is most often written, is widespread in Britain, notably in the many ToT silver finger-rings found especially in Lincolnshire (Daubney 2010). The cult originated in Gaul, to judge by Lucan’s reference to ‘grim Teutates’ in his Bellum Civile (i.445), and inscriptions have been found along the Roman frontier in Continental Europe. This information was not available to Lysons, who understandably read Smirke’s perfectly accurate drawing of line 2 as IOVIANI.

The dedicator was a former slave called Primus, who was probably manumitted by one Tiberius Claudius Attius (Attius being a cognomen as well as a nomen, despite its form), but it was more usual for a freedman to use his former owner’s (and now patron’s) praenomen in his nomenclature, if the latter was a Roman citizen. Thus Ti(berius) Claudius Ti(beri) l(ibertus) Primus might have been expected, but Primus may have preferred to call himself Attii liber(tus) since it was more specific.

B4. Silver-gilt plaque (1817, 0308.3)Lysons 1817, pl. xli.2; CIL vii, 85; ILS 4541; RIB I, 218.

Standing figure of Mars with helmet, spear and shield, standing within a gabled shrine. Below, an ansate panel inscribed in letters made by punched dots:

1cm

mc 50

• D • MARTI • ALATORI

DVM • CENSORINVS

GEMELLI • FIL •

• V • S • L • M •

d(eo) Marti Alatori | Dum(...) Censorinus | Gemelli fil(ius) | u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito)

To the god Mars Alator Dum(...) Censorinus, son of Gemellus, has paid his vow willingly, deservedly

The third stroke of A is indicated by a single dot. G, with its short diagonal second stroke, is influenced by the cursive form.

There is only one other instance of the title Alator applied to Mars, RIB I, 1055 (South Shields), where it is abbreviated to Ala(tori) (dative). Its meaning is unknown. It could be

118 | Dea Senuna

transcript records what is still visible, which can be supplemented from Smirke and Wright.

This is much the longest text among the 18 votive plaques, but it only elaborates their formulation: they name the deity, they name the dedicator, they conclude with a votive formula like V S L M, u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens) m(erito). SS6a is dedicated like them in payment of a vow (uotum), which for once is described in detail.

Line 1: D E O has been spaced out to form a heading to the whole inscription, and probably to balance the dedicator’s name, which filled the width of line 3. This meant abbreviating Volcano in line 2, although it would have been easy to have written DEO IOVI | ET VOLCANO instead.

Line 2: The letter(s) between ET and LCA are no longer visible, but Smirke drew them as Vo (the O reduced in size) in dotted outline, as if they were already indistinct. Otherwise the space available would suit the restoration of [V]LCA, [V(u)]lca(no); compare B8, Vulc(an)o.

Line 3: Vassinus. This seems to be the only instance of the name, but it is cognate with names such as Vassillus, Vassius and Vassorix, which incorporate the Celtic name-element *uasso-s (‘servant’).

Lines 4–5: uell[e]|nt. The letter after VELL has now disappeared, but Smirke drew it as a short vertical stroke with a wide bottom serif. This can easily be understood as the remains of a cramped E, for the imperfect subjunctive uellent. Wright drew it as I in dotted outline, and read uellint, which nonetheless he understood as uellent since he translates it as ‘they might be pleased’, not as a variant spelling of the present subjunctive uelint (‘they may be pleased’). The use of the imperfect subjunctive means that promisi is better understood as an aorist (‘I promised’) than a perfect (‘I have promised’) with Wright.

Lines 5–6: con|sacratum. The verb consecrare, as it is conventionally spelled, is more often applied to the ‘consecration’ of ground or buildings, than of people. It is unclear whether Vassinus is referring to a formal initiation by the gods, or is being metaphorical; but probably the latter.

Line 7: con[ser]ua[r]e. Between CON and VA is space for three letters, with a vertical stroke in the middle, but almost nothing else. Smirke read this stroke as an incomplete E, preceded by S (now lost), and followed by R in dotted outline (the tail survives). His reading is better than Wright’s SER, with E reversed and ligatured to R, since this misrepresents the vertical stroke and would introduce a ligature into the text, which otherwise has none, and a type of ligature appropriate to stone-cut ‘monumental’ inscriptions, not to handwriting. Wright saw traces of the second R, which was not drawn by Smirke and is no longer visible.

Lines 9–10: pro uo|to is now badly worn, but was confidently read by Smirke. It is quite well attested as a votive formula, but there is no other instance from Britain except a Carvoran altar (RIB I, 1801) now lost, presuming this to conclude with [p]ro u(oto) | p(osuit) l(ibens) m(erito) (‘… set this up to represent his vow, willingly, deservedly’). pro uoto prompted Wright’s reading of the next word as SOLVTO (‘on the fulfilment of my vow’), but this cannot be accommodated to the surviving traces.

The first letter after TO consists of a vertical stroke with a bottom horizontal stroke probably too long for a serif; it can be

Stony StratfordThe Stony Stratford plaques, like those from Barkway, were carefully drawn for Lysons’ 1817 publication by Richard Smirke, who died in 1815. His drawings of SS6a and SS51, on which Lysons based his transcript, are prime witnesses of the text when it was better preserved.

SS6a. Silver plaque (OA.252.6a)Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix.7; CIL vii, 80; RIB I, 215.

Inscribed votive panel with most of a narrow leaf-veined margin surviving to left and right, suggesting it is the lower portion of a leaf plaque which has broken off neatly along the chased line which marks its top edge. The text is in capitals lightly incised with a stilus. The illustration superimposes Smirke’s reading on a scanned image of the plaque. For the present state of the inscription see Figure 129.

0 2cm

Stony Stratford6a

D E O

IOVI ET [..]LCA

VASSINVS

CVM VELL[.]

NT ME CON

SACRATVM

CON...VA[.]Ẹ

PROMISI DENẠ

RIOṢ SEX P ṚỌ ṾỌ

TO ḶAṂ[...]ẠP

deo | Ioui et [Vo]lca(no) | Vassinus | cum uell[e]|nt me con|sacratum | con[ser]ua[r]e | promisi dena|rios sex pro uo|to lam[ell]a p(osita est)

Vassinus to the god Jupiter and Volcanus. Since they were willing to sanctify and preserve me, I promised them six denarii. This plaque is placed to represent my vow

A few letters which are well preserved show signs of a practised hand, but the drawings by Smirke in Lysons 1817 and R.P. Wright in RIB 1, 215 are not of sufficient scale to show this. E of DEO, for example, is written with a long horizontal stroke above (as if for T), a short medial stroke, and a sinuous stroke below; N of CON|SACRATVM is completed by short horizontal strokes at bottom left and top right as serifs. But the lettering was shallowly inscribed, and has been further reduced by subsequent wear and cleaning, as evidenced by the numerous vertical scratches. The


There is no horizontal line above II to confirm it is a numeral rather than the alternative form of E (see note to A11).

This is apparently an abbreviated dedication, now incomplete, the expansion of which is altogether unclear. In view of the dedication of SS6a, perhaps DV is for d(eo) V(olcano), followed by a second deity such as Romulus, d(eo) R(omulo) (compare RIB I, 132 and 2067), or Rome, d(eae) R(omae) (thus abbreviated in RIB I, 1270, and compare A18). C • IIB[...] might then be the dedicator, whether G(aius) Eb[...] (but names in Eb- are very uncommon) or a reference to c(ohors) II B[...] (but the only possibility, Cohors II Batavorum, left Britain in 66 ad). But these are only guesses.

SS51. Silver plaque fragments (OA.252.51 and 55)Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix.7; CIL vii, 81; RIB I, 216.

Three conjoining fragments of a gabled (pentagonal) plaque, preserving most of the apex and part of both sides, but none of the base. Only the largest fragment (SS51) was available to Wright in 1954, so he reproduced Smirke’s drawing in Lysons 1817, but this inadvertently reverses the smallest fragment (that inscribed with N). The text on the plaque is quite simple, but its inscribing was complex, the sequence being as follows. (1) D was incised rectograde top left, as if DEO | MARTI were intended, but the inscription was not continued. (2) DEO was then incised retrograde top right, from right to left, O being incised twice. The intention must have been to produce an embossed text visible rectograde on the other face, but the letters now hardly show through. Perhaps that is why O was incised twice. (3) This retrograde inscription was continued from right to left in the line below with MART. R and T are now lost except for the tip of the horizontal stroke of T, but Smirke’s drawing (of the other face) shows the upper portion of these letters still surviving. (4) At this point the incised text was abandoned, presumably because it was not sufficiently visible on the other face, and the letters IS were first scribed lightly retrograde and then rendered by means of punched dots. (5) This punched-dot text continued retrograde in the line below, again from right to left, which consisted of AN[..]O, with two letters lost in the damage. (6) The text continued in the line below, but is now almost entirely lost, except for three dots below N, and the upper curve of the final letter, which was evidently S.

There were thus two texts, the first rectograde but abandoned after the first letter; the second retrograde, to be read on the other face, at first incised (line 1, and the first four letters of 2) and then continued in punched dots (the last two letters of line 2, and the whole of lines 3 and 4):

read as L with top serif perhaps, or even as a defective E, but not as S, although Wright drew it as T with a tail to the left. For the same reason, Huebner’s conjecture (in CIL vii, 80) of SA[LVTIS] is unacceptable, even though the next letter is A: this is what Smirke and Wright drew, and it can still be seen. After A there is damage, but also a diagonal stroke which may be part of M; after this, there is space for another three letters. Finally, at the very end of line 10, there is trace of two letters which Smirke drew as four near-vertical strokes. The first letter begins with a diagonal stroke, and is apparently A; the second is a vertical stroke with a second, downward curving stroke trending from the top to the right, which could be P or (less likely) R. Wright read them as P (but drew it with the diagonal rake of A) and an incomplete D, which he expanded as p(ecuniam) d(edi) (‘I have paid the money’).

After pro uo|to, therefore, LAM[...]A can be read, which in the light of A11 and A12 now suggests the restoration of lam[ell]a (‘this plaque’). In writing no more than P after it, the scribe was pressed for space, but in dedicatory formulas this letter often abbreviates p(osuit) (‘… has placed’): see for example RIB I, 213, u(otum) p(osuit) l(ibens) m(erito), and compare RIB I, 888, ex uoto posuit l(aetus) l(ibens) m(erito). Note also the possible reading of RIB I, 1801 (above), and the inherent probability already noted that SS6a concluded with a formula equivalent to V S L M. If lam[ell]a is nominative, the formulation would have been passive: pro uoto lam[ell]a p(osita est), ‘this plaque is placed to represent my vow’. But lam[ell]a is possibly a ‘Vulgar’ accusative, the final -m not being sounded, with the scribe intending lam[ell]a(m) p(osui), ‘I have placed this plaque …’ It may be noted that A11 and A12 both avoid the question by abbreviating lamellam to LAMELL.

The dedicator promised ‘six denarii’, and it would seem that they were represented by this plaque, as witnessed by the phrase pro uoto lamella (‘this plaque to represent my vow’). The plaque now weighs 4.87g, which is equivalent to about one and a half denarii (a silver coin the weight of which fluctuated slightly according to its date, but was just over 3.20g), but unfortunately we do not know how much of the plaque is missing. Perhaps we have lost three-quarters (equivalent to four and a half denarii), but more likely this sum of ‘six denarii’ included the cost of workmanship, which would make the plaque rather smaller. The statuette of Mars found in the Foss Dike (RIB I, 274) cost 100 sestertii (or 25 denarii) but the bronze of which it was made cost only 15 denarii (for further discussion see p. 129).

SS10. Silver plaque fragment – probably part of SS8 (OA.252.10)Not in RIB.

Lower left corner of a plaque showing a deity in a shrine. Below, part of a narrow plain panel incised in well-formed capital letters:

0 5 cm

Stony Stratford10

DVDR C • IIḄ[...]

The plaque has split between R and C, making it unclear whether there was a medial point here, like that after C.

0 3 cm

120 | Dea Senuna

SS75. Copper-alloy plaque fragment (OA.252.109)Lysons 1817, pl. xxxix.9; CIL vii, 82; RIB I, 217.

Most of the rounded top survives, with a chased line running parallel to it, and also the upper part of the right side (as viewed from the front) with a leaf-pattern border. This suggests, as it does for SS6a, that the fragment may be the panel of a votive leaf plaque. The left side has been cut back, removing the border and almost all of the first letter in line 2, and about half of the first letter in lines 1 and 3. The base is lost, but its position is suggested by part of a horizontal chased line. The text was inscribed retrograde from the back in letters formed by punched dots, so as to be read embossed on the front:

0 5 cm

Stony Stratford75

DOE MAR

[.]I SAN

D S D

d(eo) Mar|[t]i san(cto) | d(ono) s(acrum) d(edit)

Sacred to the holy god Mars: (...) has given this as a gift

In line 1, DOE was inscribed by mistake for DEO; like the mistake already noted in A24, it was probably due to the difficulty of working retrograde. In the centre of the plaque, in the middle of lines 2 and 3, there is a large S within a roundel, which was evidently meant to be taken by itself, not as part of the formula D S D, d(e) s(uo) d(edit). RIB is surely right to expand it as s(acrum): its placing is analogous to that of the numeral VI on RIB I, 2061 (Bowness), which was centred within a garland below the word legio, so as to be taken first before V(ictrix) and P(ia) either side of it. The dedicator’s name was never added to SS75, but there was space for it below the roundel and above the chased line. There is a small hole here, which RIB is probably right in seeing as a nail hole, although there are smaller holes elsewhere.

The adjective sanctus (‘holy’) is also applied to Mars in SS51; for its further application, see note on SS51.

(Text 1)

D vacat

(Text 2)

DEO

MA[R]TI S

AN[..]O

[ ]S

deo | Ma[r]ti s|an[ct]o | [...]s

To the holy god Mars ...

In line 4, S may be the last letter of a masculine personal name ending in -us, the name of the dedicator. The text would probably have concluded in the next line with a formula such as V S L M.

The adjective sanctus (‘holy’) is often applied to deities. For sancto of Mars in Britain, see RIB I, 1987 (Castlesteads) and 2190 (Balmuildy), as well as SS75.

SS72. Silver plaque fragment (OA.252.72)Not in RIB.

The top straight edge is apparently original, but the other edges are broken. The drawing below shows both front and back faces. There are two incised letters parallel with the top edge:

0 5 cm

Stony Stratford72

[...]OM[...]

Below, punched dots, which apparently belong to two lines of letters. They have perforated and weakened the very thin sheet, which has broken along them, and subsequently been reinforced by the conservator. This has obscured the letters, which are too damaged and ambiguous to be resolved.

[I(ovi)] O(ptimo) M(aximo)

...

...

To Jupiter, Best and Greatest ...

The sheet has broken away completely within the letter O. If the dedication was to Jupiter alone, the broken edge adjacent to the M would approximate to the original edge.

The Ashwell Hoard, Dea Senuna and Comparable Finds from Britain and the Wider Roman World | 121

The Ashwell Hoard is an unprecedented find both in Britain and in the wider Roman world. In Britain there has been no equivalent discovery of ‘temple treasure’ within living memory. It is paralleled only by the 18th-century finds from Barkway, Hertfordshire and Stony Stratford, Buckinghamshire and, less directly, by that said to be from Backworth, Tyne and Wear, found around the year 1811. In contrast to the Ashwell Hoard those three finds preserve almost no information concerning their discovery or archaeological context.

The Barkway Hoard (B1–B9, pp. 63–73)The earliest find, the Barkway Hoard, was unearthed in 1743 or 1744 by labourers digging for chalk in woodland outside the village of Barkway. Sadly there is no further record of the discovery or of the post-discovery history of the hoard before its bequest to the British Museum in 1817. The hoard as it exists today – one silver-gilt and six silver votive plaques, a bronze figurine of Mars and a bronze handle (probably from a ceremonial rattle) – has survived in surprisingly good condition considering its casual finding circumstances so long ago (Fig. 171). Nevertheless, there are some all-too-apparent signs of fairly rudimentary interventions, presumably made quite soon after discovery, namely a compression of the embossed work on the plaques, probably a consequence of straightening and flattening, and some trimming and abrasion of the figurine and handle. There are signs, too, that the plaques may have been opened out, implying that they were folded when they were placed in the ground. Unfortunately that potentially significant information cannot be confirmed because of the lack of an account at the time of discovery. It is quite possible also that corroded or fragmentary objects were overlooked or intentionally discarded by the labourers – the thin sheet-

Chapter 8The Ashwell Hoard, Dea Senuna and Comparable Finds from Britain and the Wider Roman World

Ralph Jackson

Figure 171 The Barkway Hoard

122 | Dea Senuna

about 300m south-west of the hoard’s find-spot, a cropmark site, marked by a stone scatter and revealed during survey work by the Northamptonshire National Mapping Programme, has been interpreted as a Roman temple. Consistent with that interpretation, metal detecting of the site in 1986–90 yielded a substantial collection of metal objects, including a few miniature votives and Roman coins ranging from Claudius I to the House of Theodosius (English Heritage/Milton Keynes Council, Stony Stratford. Historic Town Assessment Report, Draft, 25–8, fig. 15). It is possible, therefore, that the hoard was connected with that site and had been secreted at no great distance from the actual temple in which the plaques and regalia had been used.

Although there is no surviving account of the discovery of the Stony Stratford Hoard we know, at least, that it was contained in a pottery vessel – Samuel Lysons recorded that it was found ‘in an urn’. However, Lysons did not include an illustration of the vessel and its subsequent fate, if it had not already become separated from the hoard, is unknown. As now preserved the hoard consists of numerous, mostly fragmentary and wafer-thin, votive plaques as well as ceremonial objects, several sets of ornate priestly regalia and three brooches. The plaques are of silver, with two exceptions, SS41 and SS75, which are made of copper alloy. The good preservation of those two fragmentary plaques would suggest that it is unlikely that other copper-alloy plaques were included but perished in the ground. That might imply either that votive plaques of copper alloy were not the norm at Stony Stratford or that the two examples were specifically selected, SS75, perhaps, because of its sacred inscription to Mars. The fragmentary silver plaques, probably representing what were originally about 30 plaques, are very varied in form, size, ambition and craftsmanship. The majority are in the form of either elongated subtriangular stylized leaves or highly stylized shrines with arched or triangular pediment. Some of the leaf plaques are similar to Continental examples but most of them, together with the stylized shrines, have a distinct, idiosyncratic, air de famille, both in design and in execution, suggesting predominantly local manufacture. Scientific analysis is also suggestive of local manufacture: the Stony Stratford plaques are made from a significantly more debased silver alloy (54–70% silver) than the Ashwell examples analysed (87–92% silver). A much broader mix of alloys was used for the Stony Stratford plaques, with the copper contribution to the silver alloy including recycled brass, bronze or quaternary alloy of copper, zinc, tin and lead.

The better-known Stony Stratford plaques are those with die-stamped imagery which, in their overall design and manufacture, quite closely resemble their equivalents at Barkway and Ashwell. Mars may have been the principal god if the plaques all came from the same shrine, for the deities depicted are either Mars – singly (SS7) or in the company of Victory (SS1, SS2, SS6b) – or Apollo (SS8). Mars is further attested in the inscriptions on plaques SS51 and SS75, while the inscription on SS6a reveals that Jupiter and Vulcan were the recipients of that votive gift. The figures of Mars and Victory on plaque SS6b would appear to be

bronze component once attached to the handle, for example, would have been particularly vulnerable if it had not already disintegrated in the ground. Nor, in the bare surviving details, is mention made of any sort of container for the hoard so it is likely that if anything of the kind had once existed it would have been made of wood or textile or other organic material, and any surviving remains, if similar to those discovered in the corrosion products on some of the Ashwell plaques, would long since have been removed in one of the past interventions.

In its existing range of objects, however, the Barkway Hoard is clearly similar to, though smaller than, the Ashwell Hoard, comprising just the more costly votive gifts from a shrine or temple – those of silver and fine bronze. In terms of deities, too, it is a tightly focused group dominated by Mars, who is represented by six of the votive objects: he is depicted in four different die-stamped images as well as the figurine and he is named in two inscriptions, though in each case with an epithet – Mars Toutatis on the enormous unfigured plaque B3 (the largest leaf plaque from anywhere in the Empire) and Mars Alator on the die-stamped silver-gilt plaque B4. Vulcan, the only other deity, is represented by a die-linked image on the remaining two votive silver plaques B8 and B9, the former being inscribed with his name. Vulcan is rather infrequently encountered in Roman Britain so it is interesting to note another occurrence on a votive plaque, the joint dedication to Jupiter and Vulcan on silver plaque SS6a from Stony Stratford.

Barkway is less than 16km east of Ashwell and, like the Ashwell site, lay within easy reach of several Roman towns (Baldock, Braughing, Cambridge, Godmanchester) via two principal lines of north–south and east–west communication – the Roman road later known as Ermine Street and the long-standing Roman and pre-Roman route, the Icknield Way. The editors of RIB I (1965, 71) suggested the Barkway Hoard had probably been looted from a shrine somewhere on the line of Ermine Street. It seems more likely, however, that the Barkway objects, like the Ashwell Hoard, were carefully secreted by temple personnel at a time of insecurity, a scenario perhaps supported by the inclusion of the ceremonial rattle B3 which is probably better regarded as a treasured cult object than loot.

The Stony Stratford Hoard (SS1–SS105, pp. 74–109)The Stony Stratford Hoard, less well known than the Barkway Hoard, was found in 1789 in Windmill Field, Passenham, a few hundred metres south-west of Stony Stratford. It, too, was buried in very close proximity to a major Roman road, Watling Street, the principal south-east–north-west route of the province, and at a strategic point on that road, at the crossing of the River Ouse, midway between the Roman towns of Magiovinium (Fenny Stratford) to the south and Lactodurum (Towcester) to the north. Travelling west along the Icknield Way then turning north on to Watling Street at Dunstable (Roman Durocobrivis), Ashwell and Barkway were just 60–80km distant from Stony Stratford. Little evidence for Roman occupation in Stony Stratford itself has yet been discovered, and it may be that the settlement was focused at Old Stratford on the other side of the river crossing. However,


Clermont-Ferrand (Puy-de-Dôme), France, the latter incorporating a central aperture in one plate. Such rattles, perhaps particular to native religion in the north-west provinces, were probably designed to attract the attention of the deity and/or drive away demons. They may also have been intended for use in divination, for the small aperture in one of the plates would have enabled ‘casting’ of the pellets contained in the rattle bowl (Gilbert 1978, 180–3, figs 6C, 8A, 9; Boon 1983; Henig 1984, 138; Fauduet 1992, 145, no. 1070; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 230–1, GF5, fig. 179, 248–9, GF26, GF27, fig. 199, fig. 200; Bird 2011, 285–6).

The Stony Stratford rattles combined polished bronze and tinned components, giving them an impressive and colourful – silver and gold – appearance. Still more colourful and spectacular are the Stony Stratford regalia, which consist of headdresses and chest harness. There are two near-complete chain crowns (SS93, SS95) and a less well-preserved third example (SS98), as well as a more complex but incomplete accoutrement of linked medallions and plates that may have been an ornate harness-like chest ornament (SS96). Chain crown SS93 drew its effect from a range of embossed plates of varied shape and size suspended from a conical cap finial while all the other regalia made a more flamboyant use of silver appliqués and colourful combinations of copper, silver and brass components. Chain crown SS95, with its interlinked five discs and chains, is closely similar to one in the small hoard of priestly headgear from Cavenham Heath, Suffolk (Layard 1925, pl. xxviii, figs 1–2) and to a more fragmentary example from West Stow, Suffolk (Brown et al. 2011; Worrell and Pearce 2011, 422–5, fig. 20). Headdress SS98 has been described as ‘a web of discs “feathers” and short chains’ (Bird 2011, 278) and there is certainly a significant similarity between its leaf-veined plates and the silver votive leaf plaques in the hoard, suggesting that the regalia and votive plaques may have been made by the same craftsmen. A similar observation has

freehand versions of the die-stamped figures of those deities on plaque SS1, presumably made by a craftsman without access to figured dies. However, the similarity in form and style between the finial on plaque SS6b and that on die-stamped plaque SS7 (as well as that on plaque SS38 and several others in the Stony Stratford Hoard) would not exclude manufacture in the same workshop.

The Stony Stratford Hoard is especially notable for the inclusion of several sets of regalia and a range of implements that were probably used in religious processions and ritual acts at the shrine in which the votive plaques had been dedicated. This ensemble and its uses is brought vividly to life by Martin Henig’s carefully researched reconstruction of the scene at a Romano-British sanctuary on a festival day (Henig 1984, 39–41; see also Bird 2011). The ceremonial objects include a small bell (SS76), two rattles (SS77/SS78, SS79/SS80) and two enigmatic plates (SS88, SS89), as well as two possible sceptre handles (SS85, SS86). The plates, together with the sceptres, may have been a part of the sacred objects carried in ceremonial processions by priests and their assistants, while the bell, a common religious accoutrement in many parts of the Roman Empire (e.g. examples from the religious sites at Wanborough, Surrey: Bird 2007b, 218–19, fig. 33, no. 51, and Springhead, Kent: Schuster 2011, 270–1, fig. 119, no. 304), might have been used, as at other times and places, to mark stages in the religious rites. The distinctive form of the rattles, which differs from that of the sistrum found Empire-wide and especially associated with the cult of Isis, connects them to an example of closely similar form and size, complete with its handle, in the 3rd-century ad Felmingham Hall Hoard (Fig. 172), and it is probable that similar domed rattle plates were also once attached to the handle in the Barkway Hoard (B3). Continental finds include one from Vieil-Evreux, Cracouville, (Haute Normandie) and single examples in the hoards from La Comelle-sous-Beuvray (Saône-et-Loire) and

Figure 172 The Felmingham Hall Hoard, 3rd century ad. British Museum, 1925,0610.1–32

124 | Dea Senuna

may be the surviving element of a fourth headdress. Its form and size are close to those of one of the headdress caps from the Farley Heath temple (Bird 2007a, 47–8, fig. 18, no. 76) and one of the five headdresses from Wanborough, which consisted of a domed cap with wheel finial at the apex of a network of chains (O’Connell and Bird 1994, 93–105, fig. 24, pls 16–17, headdress 6). Because the top of SS99 is broken it is uncertain whether it, too, once had an additional finial. An additional tantalizing fragment (SS100), part of a bronze bust of Sol or Apollo, similar in form and size to one in the Felmingham Hall Hoard (see Fig. 172) (Gilbert 1978, 165–6, fig. 3C), may have been a headdress finial or a sceptre head for use in the processions (cf. Henig 1984, 138–41). Three brooches (SS103–SS105) make up the final component of the Stony Stratford Hoard. In his short text, Lysons specified that they were found with the hoard: ‘Pl. XLII, fig. 4, 5, 6, Roman Fibulae of Brass found near Stony-Stratford with the Articles in Pl. XXXIV &tc.’ That firm association is important because the brooches are the most readily datable component of the hoard. One is a 2nd-century ad circular disc brooch inlaid with green and blue enamel; the other two are gilded gem-set plate brooches of a type that had its heyday in the 3rd century ad. Together they indicate a deposition date for the Stony Stratford Hoard in the late 3rd or 4th century ad. Although brooches were a common class of votive gift it is not clear why these three were selected for inclusion in the hoard. However, they are large, colourful examples and in ambition, if not in actuality, they mirror the much more costly jewellery included in the Ashwell Hoard (A4–A7).

The Backworth Treasure (Fig. 174)The so-called Backworth Treasure from Tyne and Wear – its precise find-spot is unknown – was probably buried

been made regarding the embossed silver appliqués showing stylized shrines which were attached to the crown headdresses from Hockwold cum Wilton, Norfolk (crown and five diadems) (Fig. 173) and Cavenham Heath (two crowns and a chain and disc headdress) and which follow closely the iconography of some of the silver votive plaques (Layard 1925, pl. xxvii, figs 1–2; Toynbee 1962, 177–8, nos 127–8, pls 139–41; Henig 1984, 145; Gurney 1986, 90–2; Stead 1995, 72–86, esp. 81–3 and fig. 31).

In addition to the composite headdresses there is a domed headdress cap with two remaining chain links (SS99) which

Figure 173 Headdress from Hockwold cum Wilton. British Museum, 1956,1011.1

Figure 174 The Backworth Treasure, 1st–2nd century ad. British Museum, 1850,0601.1–17.


on the handle, which reads MATR.FAB DVBIT, ‘To the Mother-Goddesses from Fabius Dubitatus’ (Fig. 175). The same goddesses are invoked on the only other inscribed object in the hoard, one of the gold finger rings (Fig. 176). The treasure attests to a shrine of the Mother Goddesses in the region near the eastern end of Hadrian’s Wall in the 2nd century ad. It may represent a single costly gift from a wealthy devotee, for the jewellery has the appearance of the belongings of an individual.

The Ashwell Hoard (A1–A29, pp. 31–62; Fig. 177)The combination of ceremonial objects and priestly regalia with precious metal votive plaques in the Stony Stratford Hoard implies that it was concealed by one or more priests

around the middle of the 2nd century ad. It comprises a silver pan (trulla) with a highly ornamented handle, a silver mirror plate, three silver spoons, 11 pieces of high-quality gold and silver jewellery, including a fine pair of Romano-British trumpet brooches, and one silver denarius of Antoninus Pius struck in ad 139, the latest issue and sole survivor of an original total of approximately 290 coins (Hawkins 1851; Walters 1921, nos 183–7; RIB II.2, 2414.36; RIB II.3, 2422.9; Johns 1996a, 211–13). It is likely that all the objects had been placed in the ground inside the pan with the mirror plate on top as a lid. The pan is of a type similar to those found in ritual contexts at Bath (Cunliffe 1988, 15–20, nos 24–32, 44–9, pls xi–xvi). Its votive nature and that of the find as a whole is implied by the inlaid gilt inscription

Figure 175 The inscribed silver-gilt pan handle in the Backworth Treasure, 1st–2nd century ad. British Museum, 1850,0601.1

Figure 176 The inscribed gold finger ring in the Backworth Treasure, 1st–2nd century ad. British Museum, 1850,0601.10

Figure 177 The Ashwell Hoard

126 | Dea Senuna

silver plaque, perforated for suspension – perhaps from the ring-band by means of a linking chain. The plaque is inscribed with a dot-punched text indicating that the statuette was dedicated as a votive gift: ‘To the Victory of the Sixth Legion Victrix Valerius Rufus willingly and deservedly fulfilled his vow’ (RIB I, 582). The figure of Victory was naturally selected for the Sixth Legion with its title Victrix, ‘victorious’, and it has long been suggested that the Tunshill find was a small hoard, perhaps loot, that had its origin in the shrine of the Sixth Legion in their fortress at York.

Recent examination of the two very large silver statuettes of Mercury (height 563mm and 405mm) in the hoard of treasure buried in the 3rd century ad in the corner of the colonnade of the Gallo-Roman sanctuary at Berthouville (Eure), France has demonstrated that they too were fabricated from sheet-metal components soldered together and differentially gilded. The smaller statuette also combined a solid-cast left hand (Lapatin 2014, 17–23, 111–17, figs 7, 64). The composite construction of the Tunshill and Berthouville statuettes is in part comparable to that of the much smaller Ashwell figurine, but a closer parallel is the silver-gilt statuette of Aphrodite from Antioch (Ross 1953, 39), and the precise mode of manufacture of the Ashwell figurine is most closely paralleled by the silver figurine in the Chaourse (Aisne) treasure and the silver statuettes in the Lyon/Vaise (Rhône) treasure, all of them regarded as Gallo-Roman work of the 2nd–3rd centuries ad. The Chaourse Hoard, deposited in the second half of the 3rd century ad and found in 1883, includes an extensive silver table service together with a figurine and the pedestal of a second, probably (together with the stylistically similar silver-gilt pepper pot in the form of a sleeping slave) part of the table decoration, but possibly from a lararium (Walters 1921, nos 144–82; Baratte et al. 1989, 110–37; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 246, fig. 197). The Lyon/Vaise treasure, deposited sometime after ad 258 and found in 1992, consisted of two adjacent deposits, one with silver vessels, coins and gold jewellery, the other with silver statuary. The latter, partly damaged through disturbance, included a bust, two broken heads, two broken arms, a wing and a crown fragment, together with three silver-gilt statuettes complete with their pedestals (Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 253–4, fig. 205; Aubin et al. 1999).

The Ashwell figurine combines solid-cast arms with tenons, a hollow-cast pedestal and a hollow body apparently hammer-formed and surface-worked from a single very thin sheet of silver (about 0.5mm thick) and soldered to the pedestal. The goddess measures 147.5mm but is elevated to a full height of 173mm when reunited with her pedestal. The silver figurine of Fortuna in the Chaourse Hoard (Fig. 179) is of very similar dimensions – it measures 128mm but has a full height of 165mm on its hexagonal (uninscribed) pedestal. It, too, combines cast arms (the right arm, broken shortly after discovery, missing) with a hollow pedestal and a hollow body, both formed from thin silver sheet (about 1mm thick). Like the Ashwell Senuna, too, the Chaourse Fortuna has reserved gilding, on her drapery and diadem (Baratte et al. 1989, 135–6, no. 83). The statuettes in the Lyon/Vaise treasure – Sol (300mm on pedestal), Fortuna (287mm on

or other religious personnel, as does the single ceremonial object in the Barkway Hoard. Even if the inscribed pan in the Backworth Hoard can be considered part of the ceremonial equipment at a temple or shrine the complete absence of contextual information for the find prevents any assessment of the manner in which it was deposited and by whom. The Ashwell Hoard, on the other hand, while it lacks such overtly ‘priestly’ material, was discovered, and its context investigated, in a relatively controlled manner. That enabled a reasoned assessment of its chosen location and of the way in which it was placed in the ground, which were suggestive of concealment by religious personnel intent on safeguarding, probably for retrieval, precious religious belongings. The religious personnel may well have included or even been restricted to priestesses, as is implied by plaque A19 which shows a veiled priestess preparing for sacrifice. In terms of its finding circumstances, then, the Ashwell Hoard is exceptional even amongst the small number of precious metal votive hoards from Roman Britain. But it is exceptional in other ways, too, most notably in the inclusion of a silver figurine, unique gold jewellery and votive plaques of gold and by the proportionately large number of plaques with votive inscriptions and with die-stamped figural decoration.

The figurine (Fig. 178)The silver figurine of Senuna is unparalleled in Roman Britain, where very few other silver examples of deities have survived: Emma Durham lists just two silver figurines of Mars Nodons from Cockersand Moss (now lost) and the silver Harpocrates from London (Durham 2012, 147 and 216–17). Images and dimensions have not survived among the sparse details of the Mars Nodons figurines (RIB I, 616–17), but it is recorded that both stood on inscribed rectangular pedestals, the lesser of which (RIB I, 617), inscribed on all four faces, was specified as a votive gift: D(eo) M(arti) N(odonti)/ Lucianus/ colleg(ae) Aprili Viato/ ris u(otum) s(oluit), ‘To the god Mars Nodons, Lucianus fulfilled the vow of his colleague, Aprilius Viator’. The London Harpocrates has a simple stand but no pedestal, and it is perhaps more likely to have been a figurine in a domestic shrine (lararium) than a votive object. At a height of just 70mm it is much smaller than the Ashwell Senuna figurine. It differs also in being solid cast like a number of other modest-sized silver figurines – for example, the Venus Anadyomene (height 126mm, weight 232.9g) in the Kaiseraugst Treasure, and the eight rather smaller figurines, probably from a lararium, in the Mâcon hoard (Walters 1921, nos 27–35; Cahn and Kaufmann-Heinimann 1984, 318–21, pls 179–81; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 254–5, fig. 206).

A unique British survival of part of a very much larger silver statuette is the extended female right arm (length 224mm) found in a slate quarry at Tunshill Farm, near Rochdale, Lancashire in 1793 (Potter and Johns 1986; Painter 2005). The arm is hollow, made from sheet silver with a well-concealed seam, while the solid-cast hand was attached to the wrist by means of a flange and solder. The arm is from a statuette of the goddess Victory, probably almost half life-size. It was found with a silver ring-band, which fits on the arm as a bracelet, and a small rectangular


occur much less frequently and the silver example supporting the statuette of Sol in the Vaise hoard, with a dedication to the Cult of the Emperor (numen augusti), has an incised, not a dot-punched, text (Baratte 1999, 92–3). A dot-punched inscription on a copper-alloy pedestal from Magdalensberg, Austria records the gift of the statuette by one Philodamus to the Lares (Fleischer 1967, 197, pl. 132, no. 292). The dot-punched inscription on the Ashwell pedestal considerably enhances the importance of the figurine, for it confirms not only that it was a votive gift but that its recipient was the goddess Senuna. Furthermore, it names the votary as Flavia Cunoris, a woman whose name, as we have seen (p. 111 above), indicates a Celtic origin, probably British, and perhaps of the 1st century ad.

The inscribed information might well have aided those who viewed Flavia’s votive gift, for the figurine itself, excepting the held attributes, is rather generic. The goddess has her hair centrally parted and brushed out to side curls with a bun at the back and she is dressed in a chiton and cloak, a combination broadly suitable for Juno, Ceres and Fortuna amongst others. Unfortunately, too little of the face and forehead survives to tell whether she was in fact bare-headed or whether she wore a modius, as the corn goddess Ceres sometimes did (e.g. a bronze Ceres from Grewelthorpe, North Yorkshire: British Museum, 1875,0306.1), or a diadem of the type often depicted on Fortuna (e.g. the Chaourse silver Fortuna (Fig. 179): Baratte et al. 1989, 135–6, no. 83; and a bronze Fortuna from excavations of the temple site at Pulst, Kärnten, Austria:

pedestal) and a goddess with birds (230mm on pedestal) – were carefully examined to determine their manufacture. Though rather bigger than the Ashwell figurine, and with pedestals made from silver sheet, the construction of the figures themselves was closely similar to that of the Ashwell Senuna: they have hollow bodies, were hammer formed and surface-worked from silver sheet and soldered to their pedestal, solid-cast arms soldered in position in the arm sockets and reinforced with tenons, and reserved gilding highlighting attributes and selected parts of the drapery (Baratte 1999, 92, 96, 104). As Baratte observed, this particular combination of manufacturing techniques was applicable to silver statuettes of a certain size (1999, 96), figures ranging in height, perhaps, from about 120mm to 350mm, those that were too large for solid casting and too small for the kind of composite soldered construction applied to the statuettes from Tunshill and Berthouville. It is interesting to note that the weight of the fine hollow Chaourse Fortuna figurine is about half that of the smaller solid Augst Venus figurine, a substantial saving in silver but requiring considerable skills in embossing and chasing.

The two-tier circular form of the Ashwell pedestal is closely paralleled by a detached copper-alloy example found in a well near the Iron Age ‘chieftain’s’ burial during excavations at Baldock (BAL 83, SF 5502) and, further afield, by silver and copper-alloy examples supporting both male and female deities (e.g. Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, fig. 215 (Reims, France), fig. 245 (Muri, Switzerland) and fig. 271 (Svilengrad, Bulgaria)). Inscribed pedestals, however,

Figure 178 The Ashwell silver-gilt Senuna figurine Figure 179 The Chaourse silver-gilt Fortuna figurine, early 3rd century ad. British Museum, 1890,0923.16

128 | Dea Senuna

deity, archaizing in style, with attributes appropriate to both Minerva and Tyche-Fortuna – Minerva’s helmet, aegis and (predicted) spear and the cornucopia and (predicted) ears of corn of Tyche-Fortuna. But with its proximity to the Ashwell Hoard this little figure may represent not only Minerva-Tyche-Fortuna but also (or instead) a dedication to Senuna conflated with Minerva-Fortuna, to reflect the various equivalent powers of the British goddess – powers over fertility and abundance as well as crafts, wisdom and waters. The corn ears also recall the first of Strabo’s listed British exports – grain (Strabo, Geographia IV 5.2) – and the famous gold coin issues of Cunobelin featuring an ear of corn (see e.g. Hobbs 1996, cat. nos 1772–1855).

Perhaps, then, the Ashwell figurine was from the outset commissioned as a likeness of Senuna, holding attributes distinctive of her and linked to fertility. Senuna alone is named on the inscription, and in the eyes of the votary Flavia Cunoris, at least, the figurine was presumably an embodiment of that goddess. This prompts the question, as Martin Henig has reminded us (in litt.), of how often, when we look at a figurine without an accompanying inscription depicting what we take to be Fortuna or Minerva or Mars or Mercury, are we looking at an image that was actually intended to represent a parallel British or other provincial deity. At all events, whether the Ashwell figurine was originally made as Fortuna or Senuna the image is certainly not that of Minerva and in that respect it is at variance with the Ashwell plaques, which combine dedications to Senuna with unequivocal images of Minerva. That might be seen as support for the suggestion that the Minerva plaques were used for the fulfilment of vows to Senuna because they were the only available figured plaques depicting a female deity rather than for the idea that they were selected on account of a perceived divine power shared by the two goddesses. Alternatively, and preferably, Senuna may have shared the powers of both Fortuna and Minerva (p. 140 below).

No figurine was included in either the Stony Stratford Hoard or the Backworth Treasure, but in the Barkway Hoard the accomplished solid-cast copper-alloy figurine of a youthful Mars, regarded as a Continental import, probably of the 1st century ad from Italy or south Gaul (Toynbee 1964, 66; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 228, GF2), is the counterpart to the Ashwell Senuna figurine. It is a very fine version of the ‘striding Mars’ (Mars gradivus) type, frequently seen on gems and coins, evoking the fertility aspect of the god as well as his martial power (Henig 2006, 202). Henig has also connected this image of a youthful dancing Mars with the ritual leaping of the Salian priests marking the approach of spring and the growth of crops as described in Ovid’s Fasti (3.387) (Henig 1984, 50–1). Just as Senuna is the only deity named on the many inscribed plaques that accompany her figurine in the Ashwell Hoard, so Mars is the principal deity named and depicted on the votive plaques that accompanied his figurine in the Barkway Hoard. Both hoards, presumably, indicate temples devoted principally to the worship of Mars and of Senuna, even if other deities also ‘shared’ the shrine, and both cults may well have been underpinned by that basic urge and need for fertility. Sadly, however, the Barkway Mars figurine is broken from the lower legs down. That damage, presumably

Fleischer 1967, 89–90, no. 107, pl. 58, 107). In Britain, the iconography is quite closely matched by that of a smaller bronze figurine (height 114mm) from Exeter, part of a group of deities, perhaps from a lararium, found in 1778 and now lost (Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 229–31, GF4, fig. 178). Intriguingly, too, a small copper-alloy figurine of Fortuna (height 77mm, weight 114g) with diadem, cornucopia and steering oar, on the antiquities market in 2013, was described as ‘found near Hitchin, Hertfordshire, precise find-spot unknown’, a provenance that would certainly not exclude the Ashwell region. The Exeter figurine, which lacks the left hand but retains a cornucopia in the right hand, is identified as Fortuna, and it may be that the Ashwell figurine, too, was made as a Fortuna. However, while the Ashwell attributes are individually similar to those of Fortuna and other deities they are not exactly paralleled in their detail and combination. Both Ceres and Fortuna occasionally hold a libation dish as the counterpart to their principal attribute of, respectively, corn ears and cornucopia (e.g. Walters 1899, nos 811, 1539; Menzel 1986, 40, pl. 47, no. 86; Henig 1978, 305, App. 139). As a pantheistic deity Fortuna’s attributes also sometimes include ears of corn (e.g. Walters 1926, nos 1728, 1753), presumably reflecting her role as Fortuna Annonaria, protector of grain crops and bringer of good fortune to the harvest. However, she is generally shown with her distinctive combination of cornucopia and steering oar (e.g. Walters 1899, no. 1525; and a silver-gilt example in the Vaise hoard: Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 253–4, GF32).

It is possible, therefore, that the pair of corn ears held by the Ashwell goddess was, as a symbol of fertility and increase, considered distinctive of Senuna, who may have shared some of the agriculture and fertility powers of Ceres and Fortuna. A more overt assimilation of deities may be seen in the tiny bronze figurine found at Hinxworth, just 1km away from Ashwell, in 2004 (Burleigh and Jackson 2009). The figurine (Fig. 180) depicts a standing female

Figure 180 The Hinxworth copper-alloy Minerva-Tyche-Fortuna figurine, 1st–2nd century ad. British Museum, 2016,8015.1


median to approximate the relative value of gold to silver (Equivalent Gold Weight), but his calculations for the earlier Roman Empire suggested a ratio of about 1:12 (Hobbs 2006, 17–20). Applying the latter ratio to the Ashwell gold jewellery suite (total weight 68.5g) and silver figurine results in a crude measure of equivalence of about 3:1 – the bullion value of the jewellery was about three times that of the figurine (and that of the enormous Barkway silver plaque B3). We can speculate a little further on the value of the Ashwell votive gifts by relating their bullion value to military pay rates. From the time of the emperor Domitian to that of Septimius Severus the annual pay for a legionary soldier was 300 silver denarii, a rate that was raised to probably 600 denarii by Severus (Alston 1994, 114–15; Goldsworthy 2004, 94–5). If we take the gold equivalents of 12 and 24 aurei and compare the total weight of the Ashwell gold jewellery (68.5g) to the weight of the aureus in the 2nd–3rd centuries ad (6.5g) it can be seen that the ten aurei whose weight corresponds to that of the Ashwell jewellery would be equal to almost the entire year’s pay of a legionary soldier in the 2nd century ad and around half in the early 3rd century, while the cost of the Senuna figurine might amount to about one-third or one-sixth of his pay. Of course, these are at best crude approximations and the correspondence between bullion value and ‘real’ value cannot be accurately measured. One of the silver plaques from Stony Stratford highlights the uncertainties: the inscribed text on SS6a implies that the plaque represents the promised gift of 6 denarii, but in its present form the plaque weighs just under 5g rather than the

sustained before the hoard was buried, has removed both the feet of the god and the pedestal on which he stood, thus denying us any inscribed dedicatory information to compare with that from Ashwell. Was the figurine, for example, dedicated to Mars alone and was the image intended purely as Mars or as a representation of one of the many conflations of Mars with a native deity, like the Barkway Mars Toutatis and Mars Alator votive plaques or the figurine base from Martlesham, Suffolk inscribed with a dedication to Mars Corotiacus (RIB I, 213)?

By comparison, the copper-alloy statuette of Mars from Torksey, Lincolnshire was dedicated to the ‘Deities of the Emperors’ as well as to Mars, and its detailed inscription provides an intriguing indication both of the monetary value of these figural votive gifts and of the complex form and division of costs that might be involved (Toynbee 1964, 66; RIB I, 274; Birley 1979, 131, 143) (Fig. 181). The statuette, intact on its pedestal, measures 270mm in height, and was found shortly before 1774 on the course of the Foss Dike at Torksey, seemingly an unaccompanied object. The inscribed Latin text, on the front and left panels of its rectangular pedestal, translates:

To the god Mars and the Deities of the Emperors the Colasuni, Bruccius and Caratius, presented this at their own expense at a cost of 100 sesterces; Celatus the coppersmith created it and gave a pound of bronze made at the cost of 3 denarii.

The inscription reveals that the Colasuni brothers paid Celatus 100 sestertii (= 25 denarii or 1 aureus) to make the statuette, which weighs 1645g – about 5 Roman pounds (librae). Celatus wished to join in the dedication and donated one pound (libra) of the metal at a cost to him of 3 denarii. Thus, 1 libra of metal cost Celatus 3 denarii (= 12 sestertii) in which case the remaining 4 librae of metal would have cost the Colasuni brothers 12 denarii (= 48 sestertii). Deducting that sum from their total payment of 100 sestertii we are left with a residue of 52 sestertii, which was, therefore, the cost of manufacture. The total cost of the statuette was 112 sestertii (or 28 denarii) with a ratio of about 60:52 for the respective cost of metal and manufacture.

Turning to Ashwell, the combined weight of the surviving parts of the Senuna figurine is about 250g but the weight of the figurine in its original complete state was probably in excess of 300g (about 1 libra, perhaps) of silver. How might that votive gift have compared to the known costs of the Torksey dedication? If we take the cost of the metal of the Torksey statuette (15 denarii) and compare the weight of those 15 silver coins (about 50g of silver using the post-Nero denarius weight of 3.4g) to the predicted total weight of the silver of the Ashwell figurine (about 300g), we arrive at a ratio of about 1:6, which might suggest that purely on cost of metal (and even allowing for a slight over-valuation of the coinage) the silver figurine that Flavia Cunoris dedicated to dea Senuna might have had a value about six times that of the Torksey Mars.

It is hard to estimate the relative values of the Torksey and Ashwell figurines but the relative value of the Ashwell figurine and the Ashwell gold jewellery is a little more readily estimated. In his study of Late Roman precious metal deposits Richard Hobbs established a ratio of 1:15 as a

Figure 181 The Torksey copper-alloy Mars statuette, mid-2nd century ad. British Museum, OA.248

130 | Dea Senuna

(Yeroulanou 1999, 241, no. 245; Sena Chiesa 2012, 260, no. 180). The reuse of gems on the Ashwell jewellery, together with the use of the same beaded gold wire filigree, other shared stylistic traits and scientific evidence, indicates that the jewellery was made as an ensemble.

Finding meaningful parallels for the Ashwell jewellery is complicated by the fact that so little gold jewellery of the period has survived. The design and size of the disc brooches is loosely reflected in those of some copper-alloy plate brooches (e.g. Mackreth 2011, pl. 114, no. 14345; pl. 115, no. 8281), including a large enamel-inlaid and gilded disc brooch from a later 3rd-century ad context in the excavations at 36–39 Poultry, London (Pitt and Seeley 2013, 36–7, fig. 20), which may be the ‘budget’ versions of the Ashwell brooches, but there is no direct and close parallel. Similarly, the symmetrical quartered rosette form of the enamelled discs on Ashwell neck ornament A6 has a less costly counterpart in a series of small colourful enamelled copper-alloy disc brooches (Hattat 1989, figs 203–5; Mackreth 2011, pls 105–6) but, again, it has no close parallel.

Enamelling on gold, as Catherine Johns observed in her discussion of the enamelled gold hinged bracelet in the small jewellery hoard from Rhayader, Powys (Fig. 183), was not part of the Celtic or provincial Roman tradition ( Johns 1996a, 112–13). Thus, the Rhayader bracelet follows a purely classical tradition, but the style of its enamelled ornament hints at native British taste: Romano-British manufacture of the bracelet and the other jewellery in the hoard cannot be ruled out. Indeed, Hilary Cool proposed a Romano-British goldsmith’s workshop on the strength of the Rhayader jewellery, the gem-set gold hair ornament from Southfleet and the enamelled gold ‘club of Hercules’ earrings from Roman Britain (Cool 1986). The early (1st- to 2nd-century ad) examples of those earrings, from Ashtead, Birdoswald

c. 20g equivalent of the weight of the six coins – either the broken plaque was originally much larger or the price was not simply that of the bullion value.

Although their true value is unattainable we can at least gain some impression of the order of magnitude of votive gifts in the Ashwell Hoard. The hierarchy, in descending order, and estimating the likely original weight of the silver plaques, is: jewellery suite A4–A7; figurine A1–A3; gold plaques A8, A11, A12, A13, A14, A9; silver plaques A16, A17, A24; gold plaque A10; and silver plaques A19, A18, A23, A21, A20, A25, A15, A27, A22 and A26; and the maximum ratio ( jewellery suite A4–A7: silver plaque A26) is 274:1. Amongst other things this underlines the value and significance of the hoard because even the smallest silver plaque, A26, with 2.62g of silver, had a value in excess of the many other votive gifts that would have been dedicated at the shrine but not included in the hoard.

The jewellery (Fig. 182)If the dedication of a large, high-quality, silver-gilt figurine is evidence of a votary of some means amongst the followers of Senuna so, too, and even more so, is the gold jewellery, which may be interpreted as a suite. It is fine polychrome work with intricate filigree gold designs inlaid with blue- and green-coloured glass and enamel and a large red carnelian. There is clear evidence for reuse of the gems on the pair of disc brooches A4–A5, for their central settings were adapted to the slightly differing size of the blue glass stones while their radial rectangular cells were set with reused glass beads. An alternative use of beads also occurs on other fine jewellery, as is the case with a gold opus interrasile bracelet from a 4th-century ad tomb on the Severinstrasse in Cologne which incorporated individually set perforated pearls interspersed with emerald beads secured on gold rods

Figure 182 The Ashwell suite of gold jewellery


137, fig. 187; Martin-Kilcher 2000, 64–5, figs 7.1, 7.2). Crepereia Tryphaena’s clasp-brooch is near identical in size to the Ashwell example and it has the same double hook fastening on the backplate. Its large oval amethyst, engraved with the image of a winged griffin attacking an ibex, is the counterpart to the Ashwell clasp-brooch’s large oval carnelian, engraved with the image of a lion with its paw on an ox skull, and the gems share the same setting – a tight-

and London (Allason-Jones 1989, 11–12, nos 2, 5, 46), and the Rhayader hinged bracelet (probably 2nd century ad), with their combination of gold wire filigree and blue and green enamel, are the best British parallels for the discs of the Ashwell neck ornament. There are further connections between the Ashwell and Rhayader jewellery, for the gem-set gold collar/diadem in the Rhayader Hoard intersperses dark blue glass and carnelian gems, a combination reflected in the Ashwell ensemble. Furthermore, the Rhayader gems are set in gold rectangular plaques with a raised openwork border and, at the corners, a cambered raised ray with filigree edging (Fig. 184) which is nearly identical to the cambered rays on Ashwell brooches A4 and A5. It is likely that the two groups are broadly contemporary and it leaves open the possibility that the Ashwell jewellery might also have been made in Britain in the 2nd or 3rd centuries ad.

However, it is more probable that the Ashwell jewellery was made outside Britain, for the form of fastening on the back of the discs of neck ornament A6 is very closely paralleled on 3rd-century ad Roman gem-set gold earrings on the Continent (e.g. Deppert-Lippitz 1985, 23, no. 73, pl. 31) and the magnificent clasp-brooch A7 is unique in Roman Britain. While parallels for its gem are quite numerous and widespread (see Henig this volume, pp. 21–2), as are those for its general form – though more often as pendants than clasp-brooches – (e.g. Marshall 1911, 316, no. 2726, pl. lix; Stefanelli 1992, fig. 162; Yeroulanou 1999, 204, no. 15, fig. 33), the distinctive design of the brooch is most closely paralleled by two finds from Rome – oval, gem-set, gold clasp-brooches in richly appointed sarcophagus burials of two young women. One, on the Via Laurentina at Vallerano, was excavated in 1993; the other, the celebrated find of Crepereia Tryphaena at Prati di Castello, was discovered in 1889. Both are dated to the 2nd century ad (Stefanelli 1992, 251–2, no.

Figure 183 The Rhayader Hoard, 1st–2nd century ad. British Museum, 1900,1122.1–4

Figure 184 One of the gem-set gold rectangular plaques of the Rhayader collar/diadem, 1st–2nd century ad. British Museum, 1900,1122.2

132 | Dea Senuna

Antinoopolis (Walker 2000, 88–9, no. 49). The image (Fig. 185) is of a young woman in her finery, which includes a gold hair ornament and matching gem-set earrings together with a large, oval, gem-set, gold clasp-brooch positioned centrally on her breast to secure a luxurious textile wrap or mantle. The portrait is instructive, for it gives an impression of the appearance of the Ashwell jewellery ensemble in use and of the status of the woman who once wore and then dedicated it. That she was a wealthy devotee is suggested by the weight of her gold jewellery, 68.48g, well in excess of the combined weight of seven other costly votive gifts in the hoard, namely the gold votive plaques, which totalled 53.79g in weight.

The votive leaf plaques (Figs 186–7)Numerically, the greater part of the Ashwell Hoard is the collection of 20 gold and silver votive leaf plaques, which, in form and number, are a unique survival. They are precious metal examples of a distinctive type found unevenly and sparsely throughout the Roman Empire but especially in Britain and the north-western provinces (Toynbee 1964, 328–31; 1978; Künzl 1997, 66–8, figs 8–9; Crerar 2006; Birkle 2013, 44–8, table 1, 186, maps K1–K4). The origin of the leaf form is uncertain, but in accord with the distribution Ernst Künzl has proposed a connection with the ‘tree affinity’ of the Romanized Celts, citing, too, the importance of leaf decoration on the Gallo-Roman Jupiter columns (Künzl 1996, 462). On those inscribed examples that name a deity the majority were dedicated to Graeco-Roman gods and goddesses, especially Mars, Mercury and Minerva, while a significant number were dedicated to eastern deities, especially Jupiter Dolichenus and Mithras, and native deities assimilated to Roman counterparts, mostly conflations with Mars. Of the purely native deities four of the seven, including Senuna, are from Britain (Birkle 2013, 83–6, 123–5, table 9). The earliest securely dated context for a leaf

fitting sheet-gold box with flanged collar which was itself secured in the brooch’s central oval cell.

Crepereia Tryphaena’s clasp-brooch was found on her chest, a position indicating the way in which it was worn, and the function of such clasps is further illustrated in an encaustic mummy portrait of about ad 120–30 from

Figure 185 Encaustic mummy portrait from Antinoopolis, c. ad 120–30. Musée du Louvre, MND2047 (© Musée du Louvre, Dist. RMN-Grand Palais / Georges Poncet)

Figure 186 The Ashwell gold leaf plaques


base of the tab (A14); and Lucilia Sena equated her name with that of the goddess Sena both in terms of position and letter size (A16).

Most eye-catching and best preserved of the Ashwell plaques are the seven gold examples A8–A14 (Fig. 186) which, as a proportion of the whole group, about 35%, is well above the 7% calculated for gold leaf plaques throughout the Roman Empire (Birkle 2013, 44–8, fig. 6). The expense of dedicating votives of gold readily explains the rarity of gold leaf plaques and the Ashwell group is closely paralleled by only one other find, the group of eight gold leaf plaques retrieved, together with over 600 Roman bronze and silver

plaque is ad 77/78 for a simple example from a temple of Isis and Magna Mater in Mainz (Moguntiacum) (Birkle 2013, 287–8, pl. 49b). The easternmost (by far) find comprises four silver plaques, part of a once larger group, from the ancient city of Pessinus in Phrygia (modern Ballihisar, Eskişehir province, Turkey) (Fig. 188). Situated on the high Anatolian plateau about 120km south-west of Ankara, Pessinus was also the location of one of the principal cult centres of the goddess Cybele, but it is not known exactly where in Pessinus the plaques were found (Walters 1921, 58–9, nos 227–9; Toynbee 1978, 133–5, 141–2, nos 9, 10, 38; Birkle 2013, 199–200, pl. 2a–c).

Such plaques were dedicated and displayed in temples and the form of the Ashwell plaques, as also those from Barkway, indicates that they were not fastened to a wall or panel but were stood upright by means of a projecting tab or keel on their lower edge which would have secured them in individual or shared slotted stands. The thin sheets of gold and silver with their images of deities would have trembled evocatively in the half-light or candlelight of the shrine (for lighting in shrines see e.g. Bird 2011, 282–5). That they were in a part of the shrine visible to other visitors is suggested by the positioning and layout of the text of those that were inscribed: most of the votaries ensured that their names were given prominence, doubtless to be seen by their peers as well as the deity. Thus, Servandus centred his name in an arc at the expense of the goddess Senuna, whose peripherally placed name was reduced to the abbreviation D SE (A21, A23); Claudius Celsus placed his name on the first line ahead of that of Senuna on the second (A8); Cariatia Ressa gave her name without even mentioning that of the deity (A9); Bell() Memorianus gave himself pride of place on the top line and relegated Senuna to the likely invisible space at the

Figure 187 The Ashwell silver leaf plaques

Figure 188 The silver plaques from Pessinus, 3rd century ad. British Museum, 1896,0620.1–3

134 | Dea Senuna

The Germisara plaques owe their preservation to the fact they were relatively inaccessible, having been deposited in a hot spring. Elsewhere, the enduringly high value of gold is likely to have led to the theft and/or reuse of gold votive plaques that were not as successfully protected or hidden as the Ashwell examples. Several singletons have been found and at Petronell (Carnuntum), Austria three examples, one of which is stylistically similar to the Germisara plaques (Birkle 2013, 44–5, table 1, 307–9, pl. 68a-c). The gold plaque from Wroxeter, uniquely in the form of a pair of eyes, is nevertheless part of the same tradition, for it has leaf-marked borders (Painter 1971; Barker et al. 1997, 213–16, fig. 315). The tiny broken tip of a gold leaf plaque was recently found at Barton-in-Fabis, Nottinghamshire ( Jackson 2010), while complete examples have been found at Stonea, Cambridgeshire ( Johns 1981; Hassall 1981; RIB II.3, 2430.1) (Fig. 189) and at Thun-Allmendingen, Switzerland (Birkle 2013, 337, Thun. 01, pl. 83a–b). The Thun-Allmendingen plaque is uninscribed and leaf-marked, and the tiny Stonea plaque is leaf-marked and inscribed to Minerva. The Stonea plaque was a casual find but the plaque from excavations of the sanctuary at Thun-Allmendingen was discovered with a wide range of other votive gifts on the cella floor of one of the temple buildings (Tempel 6) (Martin-Kilcher 2013, 215–23, fig. 3, fig. 9). It appears that the votives were accumulated and displayed there, alongside the images of the deities, from the 1st to the late 4th century ad. We may envisage a similar situation in the temple that once housed the Ashwell Hoard.

Just as conspicuous as the Ashwell gold plaques is the proportionately very high number of plaques in the hoard, both gold and silver, with figural decoration and with inscribed texts: 17 of the 20 plaques are embossed with the image of a deity and ten (five gold, five silver – 50%) bear dot-punched, incised or embossed dedications. Using a sample of 522 votive leaf plaques from 84 sites Empire-wide Nicole Birkle has shown that only about 20% of them (105)

coins, from the excavation of the sacred pool served by the hot spring at Geoagiu-Băi, Hunedoara, Romania (ancient Germisara, Dacia) (Piso and Rusu 1990; Rusu and Pescaru 1993; Rusu 1994; Birkle 2013, 233, G.01–08, pls 17–18). In the 2nd–3rd century ad, when Dacia was a Roman province, the thermal spring and nymphaeum will have attracted a steady stream of pilgrims and visitors, including Marcus Aurelius Theodotus, who dedicated an altar thanking the Nymphs, Diana and their spring ‘for having been thrice fortified in the waters of Germisara’ (retulit sua vota libens saluti ter refirmatus aquis Germisarae) (Nemeti 2012, 189). It is probable that the gold plaques were dedicated for similar restorative or curative experiences, though none records the reason.

Just three of the Germisara plaques have figured decoration. One shows three seated Nymphs, while the other two – the largest, heaviest and most elaborate of the group – are nearly identical, one depicting Diana and the other Hygieia. Both the latter, together weighing about 50g, are inscribed with a votive dedication by the same woman, Cornelia Marcellina, and a third inscribed plaque (to the Nymphs) was also dedicated by a woman, Licinia Cale. Just two plaques, again inscribed to the Nymphs, bear dedications by men – Decebalus Lucius and Baebius Ingenuus – and it may be that the Germisara sacred spring and its female deities, like Senuna at Ashwell, perhaps, had a special appeal for female devotees. Interestingly, although the Germisara plaques share a fairly distinctive and uniform design and manufacture there is no standardization in their size and weight. They have a height range of 71–170mm and a weight range of 1.09–26.10g. The same may be said of the Ashwell gold plaques, which are equally distinctive and which have a height range of 72–182mm and a weight range of 1.59–13.19g. There is no regular correspondence to the weight of gold coinage and presumably the size and (more importantly) the weight of the plaque simply varied according to the means of the votary.

Figure 189 The gold leaf plaque from Stonea, probably 2nd–3rd century ad. British Museum, 1980,0301.1


were inscribed, of which 67 were dedicated by men and 22 by women (Birkle 2013, 62, table 5). At Ashwell seven men (one twice) and two women dedicated inscribed plaques, but the gender ratio is closer when the figurine (dedicated by Flavia Cunoris) and the jewellery (presumably, too, the gift of a woman) are taken into account. By comparison, three of the seven Barkway plaques bear inscriptions – a relatively high percentage, close to that of the Ashwell plaques – but the two named votaries are both men. Unfortunately, the fragmented nature of the Stony Stratford plaques prevents a proper assessment of the proportion of inscribed plaques, but in a group of originally around 30 plaques there are five separate remaining inscriptions, one of which is on a copper-alloy plaque, and the only named votary is a man.

The brief, stereotypical and formulaic nature of the Ashwell inscriptions, as on other votive leaf plaques, provides a limited range of information, but it still sheds valuable light on both the votaries and their chosen deity. Most immediately striking is the fact that only one deity is named in all ten inscriptions – dea Senuna. She is invoked on the figurine and by the devotees on nine of the plaques and we may assume that she was silently invoked, too, by Cariatia Ressa on the tenth inscribed plaque, on which the name of the deity was omitted but which, like the other nine, included an image of Minerva. Similarly, it is probable that those who dedicated the four uninscribed plaques with an image of Minerva also did so to Senuna as well, perhaps, as the dedicator of the Victory plaque (which was iconographically linked to Minerva).

Senuna, a previously unattested goddess, with a name of Celtic origin, was a native British deity. Her name (and its cognates) is close to that of a river in southern Britain, Senua/Sena, listed in the Ravenna Cosmography (108.30, 108.40) but so far unassigned to a specific river (Rivet and Smith 1979, 455). Her name has also been found on two objects from Kent – a graffito on a samian bowl (Fig. 190, RIB II.7, 2501.505) and a dedication on the bezel of a silver finger ring (RIB II.3, 2422.33) which, following the discovery of the Ashwell Hoard, may now be read D(E)AE SENV(NAE). We may anticipate the recognition of further examples of dea Senuna in both existing collections and new finds. Such evidence as there is, therefore, suggests a sphere of activity for Senuna in the south-east, perhaps associated with water. That her realm was centred on Ashwell itself is perhaps implied by silver plaque A16, which was dedicated by a woman called Lucillia Sena. For if Lucilia was a local votary and if, as is possible, her second name was

intentionally derived from that of the goddess, that would indicate a regional cult going back at least a generation before Lucilia’s dedication (see pp. 113–14). Furthermore, Senuna’s name appears to have been sufficiently well known in the Ashwell region to be abbreviated on several of the inscribed plaques. Herbonianus, Memorianus and Firmanus gave her name in full, as did Flavia Cunoris on the figurine, but Celsus shortened her name to Senun while in four instances – the plaques of Nerus, Quintianus and Servandus (two) – the first two letters only of her name were used.

The votive formulae are quite varied. Most of the Ashwell devotees used the commonest abbreviation v(otum) s(olvit) l(ibens) m(erito), a few omitting the m(erito), but in his dedication (A8) Celsus, in addition to inverting the normal word order, used the idiosyncratic form votum fecit l(i)b(ens) m(erito), while Memorianus (A14), who also inverted the word order, substituted v(otum) f(ecit). Nerus and Quintianus (A11, A12) employed another common expedient and omitted the formula altogether, the fulfilment of the vow being taken as read. Their dedications are of interest for another reason, too, for Roger Tomlin has been able to discern the term lamella, used by each of them to describe their leaf plaque (see pp. 112–13). That is a notable discovery, strengthened by the inclusion of what appears to be the same term on another British leaf plaque, that of Vassinus from Stony Stratford (SS6a), for there has long been debate over the name by which the leaf plaques were known (Birkle 2013, 158–64).

From their inscribed names alone it is impossible to determine for sure how far the Ashwell votaries had travelled to dedicate their plaques to Senuna. Some of those with names of Celtic etymology may have been native Britons, perhaps locals, but others have names suggestive of homes further afield, some probably from outside Britain (see p. 116). That they purchased their votive gifts at or near the shrine rather than bringing them with them is implied by the distinctive and comparatively uniform appearance and method of manufacture of the plaques. Gold plaques A11 and A12, for example, dedicated by two different men, Nerus and Quintianus, were not only stamped with the same die and ornamented by the same craftsman but appear even to have been cut from the same sheet of gold (see p. 14), while Lucilia Sena’s large silver plaque was also stamped with the same die. That die imprinted the image of Minerva; a second Minerva die was used to emboss the image of the goddess on Servandus’ two silver plaques; and a further eight plaques were embossed with images of Minerva using

Figure 190 The name SIINVNΛ scratched on a samian bowl from Wingham, Kent. British Museum, 1854,1201.1

136 | Dea Senuna

Stony Stratford plaque SS8; between the cornice and acroteria of the open gable of Ashwell plaque A9 and Barkway plaques B8 and B9; between the outline of Ashwell plaque A9 and Barkway plaque B3; and between the ‘quilted’ motif of Ashwell plaque A22 and Barkway plaques B5, B9 and B8; while the complex leaf-veined design of Ashwell plaque A24 is similar to that of Barkway plaque B4. The implication is that some of the craftsmen may have been peripatetic rather than static. That impression is strengthened by one of the few other surviving silver leaf plaques from Britain, a single near-complete example found within an aisled temple at Thistleton, Leicestershire (RIB II.3, 2431.3; Britannia 31 (2000), 447, f, fig. 12). For, although lacking an embossed figure, the overall design, the form of the finial and the incorporation of zones of ‘quilted’ ornament all link it closely to plaques from Barkway, Stony Stratford and Ashwell. The dot-punched inscription, mainly contained within a prominent ansate panel, is a dedication to the Celtic god Veteris, who is otherwise recorded only in Britain and almost exclusively on numerous small stone altars in the northern frontier region (Birley 1979, 107–8).

Also connected to the military in northern Britain are the only other surviving silver leaf plaques, two figured examples from the fort at Bewcastle (Fanum Cocidii), Cumbria (Fig. 191). They were found with debris of the 3rd century ad, sealed by a 4th-century floor in the underground strongroom of the principia (JRS 28 (1938), 203–4, no. 15 and pl. 34; RIB I, 986–7; Toynbee 1978, 140, nos 35–6). Both followed in the leaf plaque tradition, showing a deity in an arched shrine with leaf-marked margins and a basal inscription, and they must have been commissioned or made by those who knew what they were aiming to portray. However, the unaccomplished workmanship would have made it hard for us to identify their embossed deity without the inscribed dedications. As it is, we know that they were intended to depict the local god Mars Cocidius and that the name of the man who dedicated the ‘cruder’ of the two was

different dies. Seventeen of the 20 Ashwell votive plaques were embossed with the image of a deity (including A24, which was embossed with a pair of deities) and 13 of those plaques, including all those with an inscription, depicted Minerva. The other four were uninscribed singletons of Victory, Mars, Roma and Mercury. Just three plaques lacked divine imagery.

The disproportionately high number of figured plaques in the Ashwell Hoard is unusual when compared to finds from the Continent. It may be something distinctive of Britain, for six of the seven Barkway plaques are figured, as well as at least five of the Stony Stratford plaques. Of the Barkway figures two are of Vulcan and four of Mars, though only one of each is accompanied by an identifying inscription. The Stony Stratford plaques, less well preserved and all uninscribed, feature single figures of Mars and Apollo while on three double plaques Mars is twinned with Victory. Just as there are die-linkages between the Ashwell Minerva plaques A11/A12/A16 and A21/A23 so there are die-linkages between the Barkway Vulcan plaques B8/B9 and between the Stony Stratford Mars plaques SS1/SS2/SS7. Moreover, the figures on one of the Stony Stratford plaques, SS6b, appear to be a freehand version of the die-stamped Mars and Victory combination of plaques SS2 and SS7. These internal links and use of common dies within each of the three British hoards would appear to imply relatively localized manufacture of the plaques, either at or near the respective temple sites. That there may have been an additional wider network of manufacture, however, is at least suggested by the stylistic similarity between, for example, the right arm of the figure of Apollo on silver plaque SS8 from Stony Stratford and the right arm of the figure of Minerva on silver plaque A15 from Ashwell. Similarly, there are close correspondences in the freehand work of the finials and margins between the projecting veined leaf acroteria of Ashwell plaque A8 and those of Barkway plaques B5 and B8; between the omega-shaped arched niche of Ashwell plaques A15, A21 and A23 and

Figure 191 The two silver plaques of Mars Cocidius from Bewcastle, probably 3rd century ad. Tullie House Museum and Gallery, Carlisle (© Tullie House Museum and Gallery, Carlisle)


single craftsmen. The inscriptions, on the other hand, would evidently be added later, in a separate action, probably not by the maker of the plaques but by temple personnel or the devotees themselves. It is possible, therefore, that the workshop for the manufacture of the Ashwell plaques (and, perhaps, other purpose-made votive objects) was located near but not necessarily immediately adjacent to the shrine in which they were to be dedicated – as was probably the case at other sites also. It might well have been thought better to keep the heat and noise of production at some distance from religious sites. Possibly a range of plaques, some figured, some not, were made to supply a number of shrines and a variety of deities. They may have been purchased or commissioned directly from the workshop or from stock carried by the craftsman for sale at temples, especially on festival days, or at fairs.

Outside Britain the norm is for relatively plain leaf-marked examples, as in the deposit at Hagenbach, Germany, which, with 129 silver votive leaf plaques, is the largest single surviving group. Found in dredging between 1961 and 1973, the deposit also included silver jewellery, vessel fragments and spoons, many copper-alloy vessels and much ironwork – tools and equipment, weapons, vehicle fittings and so on – and has been interpreted as a plunder hoard of the late 3rd century. The plaques are very similar and distinctive, mostly very slender and gently tapered and surmounted by a small stylized shrine (aedicula). A few have figured decoration, though generally quite rudimentarily applied, and there are no stamped images. Thirty-four have inscribed (mostly incised) dedications, almost all to Mars, made by 29 votaries. Over half of the name-elements are non-Roman. The great majority of them find parallels in the names of the Novem populi of the central French Pyrenees, and it has been concluded that the plaques were taken as plunder from a sanctuary of Mars in that region (Bernhard et al. 1990, 18, 44–6).

At Vichy, France (the Roman spa town of Aquae Calidae), too, the hoard of around 80 silver leaf plaques consists principally of relatively simple forms with only six stamped images and just two inscriptions. Found in 1864/5 in a stone-lined pit in what may have been a temple zone, the hoard has been interpreted as consisting of votive objects from a shrine of Jupiter Sabazios, deposited after ad 238–44 (Kellner and Zahlhaas 1993, pl. 114, 2; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 264, GF47; Birkle 2013, 345–70, pl. 88–111). Again, at Mauer an der Url (Locus Felicis), Austria the 28 silver plaques are mainly slender leaf-marked examples with just a few stamped images (Toynbee 1978, 133–4, nos 6–7, fig. 4.1). The hoard was found in 1937 near the Roman fort in a pit covered with stone slabs. As well as many copper-alloy vessels, bells, lamps and fittings and much ironwork, there were three statuettes of Jupiter Dolichenus, his counterpart Juno Regina and Victoria, all with inscribed pedestals, and two triangular cult standard finials with Dolichenus imagery and votive inscriptions. Many of the plaques are also inscribed to Jupiter Dolichenus, Juno Regina and Hercules, by ten male and ten female votaries and the find has been interpreted as a hoard of votive and other objects from a shrine of Jupiter Dolichenus, deposited in the 3rd century, probably at the time of the invasion of ad 233 (Noll

Aventinus. Precious metal was used and the dedication made so Aventinus may have been completely satisfied with what we might regard as the rather displeasing effect of unskilled manufacture. However, rudimentary imagery and inscriptions are encountered in other media in the region and may, therefore, have been part of the cultural norm (Charlton and Mitcheson 1983).

A more ‘mainstream’ figured, but uninscribed, leaf plaque from Moorgate Street, London depicts a trio of Mother Goddesses (Tres Matres), the only example from Britain. It has been described variously as made of silver or tin (Wheeler 1930, 47; Green 1976, 225, no. 110, and 292–3, pl. xvib; Toynbee 1978, 128–9, fig. 1, 142, no. 39) but, unusually, is actually made of lead alloy. It has a prominent basal tab and leaf-marked margins but lacks its finial. The Mothers are seated on a bench within a triple-arched aedicula, the outer pair turned towards the central figure, a freer arrangement than the more rigid hieratic depiction of the Tres Matres on one of the plaques from Brumath, near Strasbourg (Birkle 2013, 221–2, pl. 11c).

Many surviving votive leaf plaques from Roman Britain are made of copper alloy. At Godmanchester, Cambridgeshire a group of five was found, comprising four simple triangular leaves and one more complex plaque with an incised dedication by one Vatiaucus to the god Abandinus. They had been rolled up together and deposited in the late 3rd century ad in the disused baths aqueduct channel between the temple (in which they had almost certainly formerly been displayed) and the adjacent inn (mansio) (Britannia 4 (1973), 325, 328, fig. 19, pl. xl, A; Green 1986, esp. 29–34, 53 and fig. 10; RIB II.3, 2432.4; Birkle 2013, 237–8, pl. 19a–e). Other copper-alloy examples include one from Cavenham, found with the hoard of headdresses (Layard 1925, 261, fig. 4; Green 1976, 213, pl. xxive and f ), three in the hoard of votive material and priestly regalia from West Stow, Suffolk (Brown et al. 2011; Worrell and Pearce 2011, 422–5, fig. 20), an important assemblage from the temple site at West Hill, Uley, Gloucestershire (Henig 1993, 103–7, figs 91–3; RIB II.3, 2432.6) and further site finds from the temples at Woodeaton, Oxfordshire (Bagnall Smith 1996, 186-9, figs 12–13, one leaf-marked plaque depicting Cupid and an arched fragment depicting Mars), Nettleton, Wiltshire (Wedlake 1982, 53, 135–45, fig. 61; RIB II.3, 2432.3.), Lydney Park, Gloucestershire (RIB I, 307), Maiden Castle, Dorset (Wheeler 1943, 75–6, 131, 133, pl. 39B; Green 1976, 200, SY 68, no.7, pl. viiih) and Hockwold and Sawbench, Norfolk (Gurney 1986, 69–70, 90–2, fig. 43, no. 50). The embossed image of Minerva on the Maiden Castle plaque has been described as ‘crudely worked’ (Toynbee 1978, 138, no. 22), and her frontal-facing posture is abnormal, but the goddess, who bears her normal attributes, is nevertheless readily identifiable. Certainly the plaque, with its rectangular aedicula and leaf-marked finial and margins, is within the tradition of leaf plaques.

Although the exact mode of manufacture of votive plaques and the mechanism of their purchase or commission are not known, it is probable that their creation – from the making of the metal sheet to the die-striking of the figural motif to the addition of the freehand finial and border infill – was accomplished in individual workshops, perhaps by

138 | Dea Senuna

fragmentary silver plaques with figured imagery, including the deities Mercury, Apollo, Mars, Minerva, Diana, Victory, Genius and the Mother Goddesses (Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 243, GF21; Birkle 2013, 221–8, pls 11–15). The hoard from Weissenburg (Biriciana), Bavaria, found in 1979 near the baths in the vicus of the frontier fort, had been wrapped in organic material in a chest and placed in a pit. Also interpreted as a plunder hoard, it was deposited in the first half of the 3rd century, linked to the invasion of ad 233 or ad 254. It comprises 18 figurines from several lararia, votive plaques and vessels from a shrine, and vessels and equipment from the fort (Kellner and Zahlhaas 1993; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 276–7, GF66). There are 15 stamped images on the 11 ornate figured silver plaques – two portray the triad of Apollo, Minerva and Mercury and nine individual plaques depict Mercury, Mars, Luna (?),Victory, Fortuna (3), Genius and Hercules. The aediculae in which they stand are similar in their range to those represented at Ashwell – triangular pediment, curved arch, open gable and omega-shaped niche. The form and manufacture of the Weissenburg plaques, above all their distinctive finials, together with the composition of the silver, indicate that they are products of the same workshop and were probably all made at the same time (Kellner and Zahlhaas 1993, 67–79, 159, pls 57–69, col. pls 14–19; Birkle 2013, 34–42, 377–86, pls 116–19). Just one (Kellner and Zahlhaas 1993, 73, no. 33, pl. 61) has an inscription, the first of three lines only, naming the god – DEO HERCULI – as though ‘prefabricated’ in preparation for the addition of a votive text when required. It is quite possible that the Weissenburg plaques were unused stock looted from a workshop supplying a number of different shrines or that they were votive gifts derived from a single shrine in which a wide range of deities were worshipped together. The triad of Apollo, Minerva and

1980; Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 301–2, GF105; Birkle 2013, 290–301, pls 51–63).

Jupiter Dolichenus is also invoked on three inscribed silver leaf plaques from Heddernheim (Nida), near Frankfurt, Germany, now in the British Museum (1896,0620.1–3; Walters 1921, 55–7, figs 64–5, nos 224–6; Toynbee 1978, 130–1, nos 1–3, figs 2.2, 2.2) (Fig. 192), and on a further two in the Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin (Birkle 2013, 267–71, pls 39–42). The plaques are part of an early 19th-century find of a group of objects, including a cult standard, a votive hand and two altars, that had evidently come from a Dolichenus shrine. The most ornate, though fragmentary, of the British Museum plaques, which figures Jupiter Dolichenus with Juno Regina, has an omega-shaped arched niche like those on Ashwell plaques A15, A21 and A23 and Stony Stratford plaque SS8. The maker of another, a beautifully crafted example with an exuberant finial (stylistically similar to those of the Weissenburg and Thun-Allmendingen plaques), a die-stamped image of Jupiter, and a finely applied, extremely regular, six-line dot-punched inscription (‘To Jupiter, Best and Greatest, of Doliche, where iron was born. Flavius Fidelis and Quintus Julius Posstimus by command (of the god), on behalf of themselves and their families (dedicated this)’), used reserved gilding to highlight the deity and shrine, a technique also used on Ashwell plaque A19 as well as on the figurine of Senuna (A1–A3).

Only the group of leaf plaques in a hoard from Weissenburg, Germany and, perhaps, those in the poorly preserved Brumath Hoard have such a high percentage of die-stamped imagery as the Ashwell plaques. The hoard from Brumath (Brocomagus), just to the west of the Rhine near Strasbourg, France, probably plunder from a shrine, was brought to light in 1973. In addition to figurines, vessels and other objects of bronze there were at least 20 very

Figure 192 Three silver leaf plaques from Heddernheim, 2nd–3rd century ad. British Museum, 1896,0620.1–3


Mercury is an unusual combination and is additional evidence for probable local manufacture (Kellner and Zahlhaas 1993, 71).

Interestingly, there is evidence among the Weissenburg plaques for the use of more than one die to make a single embossed figure: the figure of Mars appears to combine a female upper torso with a male lower torso (Birkle 2013, 42–3, fig. 5). The same feature has been observed on some of the Ashwell figured plaques, especially silver plaque A20 where the body of Minerva has been provided with the head of Mars. It is probable, therefore, that the craftsmen who made the figured plaques had a range of different dies, some of which might be complete figures and some the component parts. Likewise, some of the embossed aediculae on the Ashwell plaques appear to have been formed using a single die while others were more clearly ‘constructed’ using several dies, notably separate columns and pediments. No manufacturing workshops nor dies for figured leaf plaques have yet been found (though three 3rd-century ad matrices for making another form of embossed votive plaque have been identified: Künzl 1999), but the imagery of a deity in an aedicula or deities in a portico is found more widely, in particular on the thin copper-alloy sheet casing for wooden boxes and caskets as, for example, on those from Trier (Menzel 1966, 121–2, pl. 95, no. 299) and Kaiseraugst (Clauss 2007, 211, fig. 1). The motifs – spiral-fluted columns and garlanded wreaths in triangular pediments – as well as the heights of the figures are closely matched by those of the figured votive leaf plaques. Therefore, we may perhaps anticipate a common source of dies (whether made of metal or hardwood) for both box fittings and votive plaques, used by craftsmen skilled in the manufacture of decorative repoussé work, whether in copper-alloy, silver or gold sheet and whether for religious or secular use.

In Britain, a remarkable resilience of tradition can be observed in the design and manufacture of votive leaf plaques and in the continuity of votive practice from pagan cults to early Christianity. Specifically, the pagan form of silver votive leaf plaque, in use at Ashwell, Barkway and Stony Stratford, as at Thistleton and Bewcastle, was adapted

to Christian use in the 4th century ad by a community at Water Newton, near Peterborough, Cambridgeshire (Painter 1977; 2006). The Water Newton Treasure includes 17 leaf-marked silver plaques of which nine had been overtly ‘Christianized’ by the addition of the Chi-Rho monogram or the Alpha Chi-Rho Omega formula (Fig. 193). One of them even retains, virtually unchanged, the pagan votive formula – Iamcilla uotum quo[d] promisit conpleuit, ‘Iamcilla fulfilled the vow that she promised’ (RIB II.3, 2431.1) (Fig. 194), the counterpart to that on, for example, Ashwell plaque A9 – Cariatia Ressa u(otum) s(oluit) l(ibens), ‘Cariatia Ressa has paid her vow willingly’. The Christian god had simply replaced the pagan deity. Whether such an appropriation indicates a peaceful coexistence of pagan and Christian communities in the area or whether instead it suggests suppression and conflict between them is at present impossible to say. That the design, manufacturing technique and religious use of leaf-marked plaques endured still longer is suggested by a silver plaque of the 7th or 8th century ad from Hexham, Northumberland (Webster and Backhouse

Figure 193 The Water Newton Treasure, late 4th century ad. British Museum, 1975,1002.1–27

Figure 194 The Iamcilla silver plaque in the Water Newton Treasure, late 4th century ad. British Museum, 1975,1002.12

140 | Dea Senuna

excavation indicates a probable deposition date for the hoard in the 3rd or 4th century. That coincides with a peak in the deposition of coin hoards in the region in the later 3rd century (Moorhead 2015, 161–2) and may be indicative of troubled times.

Dea Senuna and her shrineThe Ashwell Hoard is remarkable in its consistency. The images on the votive plaques overwhelmingly depict Minerva while all the inscribed dedications name Senuna alone. Were it not for the inscriptions a shrine to Minerva would have been predicted. Why, then, was the image of Minerva selected for those making dedications to Senuna? Elsewhere we have suggested, as one possible explanation, that it was simply a matter of expediency – that no image of Senuna existed either in the form of a prefabricated plaque or as a die, and that the image of Minerva was either the closest ‘fit’ or, indeed, the only female deity available in that medium ( Jackson and Burleigh 2007, 48). However, there is an alternative, namely that the Minerva plaques were selected not by default but specifically for their appropriateness: Minerva may have been chosen for her equivalence, because one or more of the powers she possessed was regarded as similar to one or more of those of Senuna.

Minerva’s broad realm of influence was predominantly concerned with war, wisdom, learning and the crafts. As Minerva Victrix her martial guise was appropriated in 3rd-century ad Britain as the basis for a representation of the warlike goddess Dea Brigantia (RIB I, 2091; Henig 1984, 210–13, pl. 103) (Fig. 196). But Minerva was also associated with healing – sometimes generically, sometimes specifically as Minerva Medica – and with waters (Sauer 1996). Thus, on the handle of a silver-gilt pan, part of the hoard found at Capheaton, Northumberland (Walters 1921, no. 192; Henig 1984, 43–6, pl. 8), Minerva is shown presiding over a sacred spring with adjacent temple and altar (Fig. 197). Likewise, she controlled the sacred spring and thermal complex at Bath. Springs, especially thermal springs, were both revered and highly valued in the ancient world for their healthy, health-preserving and restorative powers, as at Germisara, and most Roman provinces had at least one major spa. In Britain, accordingly, the Bath hot springs were developed very early in the history of the province, their powers credited to the native goddess Sulis twinned with Minerva and known both as fons Minerva and fons Sulis (Henig 1984, 43; Tomlin 1988, 226–7, no. 94,5).

While Ashwell lacks a thermal spring, the area of the settlement and ritual site beside which the hoard was buried is one of springs, and nearby is the source of the River Rhee, a tributary of the Great Ouse. It is conceivable, therefore, that Senuna controlled one or more sacred springs near the ritual site and that her powers, which, as implied by the figurine dedicated by Flavia Cunoris, may also have included fertility, extended to the life-sustaining element, water; and in dedicating gifts at her shrine some of her devotees specifically selected votive plaques depicting Minerva in order to reflect that part of her powers. However, it would appear that there was no formal conflation or twinning of the two deities – unlike Sulis, whose name appears alongside that of Minerva on some of the

1991, 138, no. 104) (Fig. 195). It shows, within a rectangular frame (shrine?), a head and shoulders image of a haloed figure, perhaps a saint or Christ, wearing vestments with a cross-decorated central panel. Quite rudimentarily formed in a simple linear style, it was, like the Roman leaf plaques, incised from front and back and its outer margins neatly finished with the same leaf-marked border.

DateThe objects that make up the Ashwell Hoard do not include any that are closely datable, but they do incorporate a number of chronological indicators. Roger Tomlin has observed that the epigraphic evidence of the figurine pedestal and some of the inscribed plaques is at the least suggestive of a comparatively early date, since three votaries have nomina derived from those of 1st-century ad emperors while there is no instance of a 2nd-century imperial nomen; that the form of script used by the votary Herbonianus is also in line with an early date; and that the stylistic similarities between some of the plaques are also suggestive of a relatively compressed chronology (p. 116). Although the idiosyncratic form of other plaques hints at a longer span of time it is likely that the Ashwell gold and silver plaques and the silver-gilt figurine were manufactured and dedicated between the mid 1st and 2nd centuries ad. The manufacture and dedication of the suite of jewellery may have taken place slightly later, for the comparanda date to the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Such a date range would be consistent with the interpretation of the hoard as the most valuable component of a much larger collection of votive gifts dedicated at a shrine between the 1st and the 3rd century. The date of the jewellery together with stratigraphical data from the

Figure 195 The silver plaque from Hexham, 7th–8th century ad. British Museum, 1858,0814.1


(Wheeler and Wheeler 1932; Wedlake 1982; Woodward and Leach 1993). Alternatively, and especially for official travellers, Godmanchester (Roman Durovigutum), with its substantial inn (mansio), adjacent bathhouse and shrine of Abandinus, was not far distant. The arrangements at Ashwell may not have been so very different from those of a

inscriptions from Bath (RIB I, 146, 150; II.2, 2417.5–7), the Senuna inscriptions from Ashwell do not include Minerva’s name. Senuna may additionally have been goddess of the presently unassigned River Sena/Senua of the Ravenna Cosmography (108.30, 108.40), a possibility in accord with the theonymic variations – Sena/Senuna – of her name. If so, she was perhaps similar to the Gallo-Roman deity Dea Sequana who shared her name with that of the River Seine and was also goddess of the sources of that river (fontes Sequanae), 35km north-west of Dijon, where her sanctuary, with a healing aspect, was established in the 2nd or 1st century bc (Martin 1965; Deyts 1994; Kiernan 2012, passim).

In that case we might anticipate that the devotees of Senuna who visited her shrine included both those who lived in the immediate locality and nearby region as well as those from further afield. To the former group of votaries might belong Lucilia Sena since her likely theophoric cognomen suggests a family connection to the goddess extending back at least one generation (see p. 114). For the latter group a prime candidate is Lucius L(…) Herbonianus, with his distinctive cognomen suggestive of an origin in north-east Italy (see p. 114). The Ashwell site, like many rural temples in the western provinces (Fauduet 2010, 43–4), was not directly connected to a major road but it was close to key communication routes so it would have been relatively accessible, whether to regular visitors or to longer distance travellers. Frequent visitors from the local community probably went to the shrine to perform small acts of individual worship and make offerings as well as to participate in a cycle of special days and festivals throughout the year. Longer distance travellers might have included those journeying to and through the province principally for other reasons, who called in en route (compare, for example, the evidence from the Nehalennia sanctuary at Colijnsplaat, Netherlands: Derks 1998, 143–4), but also perhaps some for whom the journey was focused primarily on a visit to the shrine of Senuna or was part of a more comprehensive pilgrimage to a succession of religious sites. Such sacred travel is usually associated with sites in the eastern Mediterranean but Philip Kiernan has sought to demonstrate its existence in the West, too (Kiernan 2012).

At Ashwell there would not have been a developed spa complex like that at Bath or of the kind the ailing emperor Caracalla included in his ‘tour of the shrines’ during the years ad 211–17 (Cassius Dio, 78 15.3–7). Nevertheless, as a spring site and probably already the focus of religious activity in the pre-Roman Iron Age, it might have attracted numbers of travellers or pilgrims on account both of its deity and of its salubrious setting, beneficial to all, especially those in ill-health ( Jackson 1990). At sacred sites like Thun-Allmendingen, Switzerland or Springhead, Kent (Martin-Kilcher and Schatzmann 2009; Andrews 2011; Andrews and Smith 2011, esp. fig. 4.2) an agglomeration of temples and shrines to a variety of deities developed into a religious settlement, and the same may have occurred at Ashwell. It is conceivable that hostel or other accommodation for travellers was available not only in the nearby small town of Baldock but also within the settlement at Ashwell itself, as it appears to have been at the temple sites of Mars Nodens at Lydney Park, Apollo at Nettleton and Mercury at Uley

Figure 196 Inscribed stone relief from Birrens, showing Minerva Victrix as Dea Brigantia. National Museums Scotland, X.FV 5 (© Trustees of the National Museums Scotland)

Figure 197 Silver-gilt pan handle from the Capheaton Hoard, showing the goddess Minerva presiding over a spring, 2nd–3rd century ad. British Museum, K/Vases.64

142 | Dea Senuna

The bridge which spans it marks the sacred water off from the ordinary stream: above the bridge boats only are allowed, while below bathing is also permitted. The people of Hispellum, to whom the deified Emperor Augustus presented the site, maintain a bathing place at the town’s expense and also provide an inn; and there are several houses picturesquely situated along the river bank. Everything, in fact will delight you, and you can also find something to read: you can study the numerous inscriptions in honour of the spring and the god which many hands have written on every pillar and wall. Most of them you will admire, but some will make you laugh – though I know you are really too charitable to laugh at any of them.

near contemporary rural spring site in Umbria so vividly described by the Younger Pliny (Letters 8.8; trans. B. Radice):

The banks are clothed with ash trees and poplars, whose green reflections can be counted in the clear stream as if they were planted there. The water is as cold and as sparkling as snow. Close by is a holy temple of great antiquity in which is a standing image of the god Clitumnus himself clad in a magistrate’s bordered robe; the written oracles lying there prove the presence and prophetic powers of his divinity. All round are a number of small shrines, each containing its god and having its own name and cult, and some of them also their own springs, for as well as the parent stream there are smaller ones which have separate sources but afterwards join the river.

Ashwell in its Setting | 143

IntroductionAshwell is the most northerly parish in Hertfordshire (Fig. 198). A tongue of land at the northern end of its triangular shape lies between Bedfordshire to the west and Cambridgeshire to the east. On the west the boundary abuts the Hertfordshire parishes of Hinxworth, Caldecote, Newnham and Bygrave, while on the east its whole length is shared with the Cambridgeshire parish of Guilden Morden. The village itself lies more or less in the centre of the parish at the source of the River Rhee, which here emerges from the spring line along the foot of the escarpment of the Chiltern Hills. Northwards from the chalk Claybush Hill, standing at 100m above Ordnance Datum (OD), the land falls to 32m OD on the flat clayland near Mob’s Hole. The springs emerge where the chalk of the hills meets the impermeable clay of the lowlands. At Ashwell Springs, and outcropping elsewhere in the parish, is a band of hard chalk, Totternhoe Stone, which has been used for building since the Roman period. Several streams combine to form the river. The main one, immediately called the Rhee, flows from Ashwell Springs, near the medieval parish church. A second, flowing from the west end of the village at Westbury, has a confluence with the Rhee in Pricem’s Field at Ashwell End, while a third, which has springs to the north-west at Quarry Hills Farm, Love Lane, by a former Totternhoe Stone quarry (now a nature reserve) makes a confluence with a stream from Hinxworth on the parish boundary at TL 2515 4045. The fourth, west again, has a spring in the adjoining Hinxworth parish, on the boundary with Caldecote parish, and makes a confluence with the Rhee at the north tip of Ashwell End at the sewage works, on the site of the mid–late 19th-century coprolite quarrying, and by Hart’s Spring.

The parish and county boundaries with Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire run along two of these streams – the one on the west being the Rhee, the one on the east, the Ruddery, rising at Ruddery Springs, on the parish/county boundary with Guilden Morden – northwards to their confluence at Mob’s Hole, where the three counties meet, and where the Rhee and Ruddery become the Cam. The northern half of the parish is on the low-lying clay, originally marshy along the watercourses, and in the area of Ashwell End, at least, there seem to have been further springs, some seasonal perhaps, up to the fairly recent past (Trevor James, pers. comm.). South of the village is the escarpment of the Chilterns, rising to more than 90m OD and dominated by the Iron Age hillfort of Arbury Banks. Part of the parish boundary on the south-west with Newnham and Bygrave runs along the Cat Ditch, a stream that rises in Sandon parish to the south-east and here flows east–west to meet the River Ivel just beyond the county boundary in Bedfordshire, in Astwick parish. The Ivel in turn flows north into the River Ouse at Tempsford (Thompson 2003, 1–2). To the south-east the boundary is with Sandon parish along a short stretch of the Icknield Way, now the A505 road.

Discovery of the Ashwell Hoard and the preliminary archaeological investigation of its contextAt about 10.30am on the morning of Sunday 29 September 2002, I received a telephone call at home from Andrew Phillips, the leader of the North Herts Charity Detector

Part 2: The Excavations

Chapter 9Ashwell in its SettingGilbert BurleighWith contributions from Isobel Thompson and Sarah Talks

144 | Dea Senuna

526000

525000

524000

527000

528000

529000

239000

238000

237000

240000

241000

242000

526000

525000

524000

527000

528000

529000

239000

238000

237000

240000

241000

242000

243000

244000

245000

243000

244000

245000

Figure 198 Ordnance Survey map of Ashwell parish area, sheets TL23 and TL24; scale 1:25,000. OS © Crown copyright 2018


individually or in groups, while the former then carefully wrapped them in acid-free tissue paper and packed them in bags and boxes, labelled by me. The finds and records were then removed from the site to my house where I took further photographs and made more notes the following day.

I notified the District Coroner of the discovery the following morning, Monday 30 September 2002. At the request of the landowner, the late M. Gurney Sheppard, I took the finds to his house on Tuesday 1 October for him to view and take his own photographs. In the company of Alan Meek, I took the objects to the British Museum on Wednesday 2 October, where they were left in the care of Dr Ralph Jackson, Curator of Romano-British Collections, for recording, conservation, analysis and reporting (Hobbs 2003, 149).

The site was a known Romano-British settlement. The hoard, as understood at the beginning, consisted of a badly damaged silver-alloy female figurine, two silver model arms, four pieces of gold jewellery, and seven gold and twelve poorly preserved silver-alloy, thin, leaf-shaped, votive plaques. Some of the plaques were decorated with images of Minerva standing in a temple portico and several were inscribed with dedications, not to Minerva, but to a hitherto unrecorded British goddess, Sena/Senua/Senuna, whom the Romans clearly equated with Minerva, as with Sulis-Minerva at Bath ( Jackson 2003b; 2004a; 2004b).

Soon after the discovery, I began planning a field project designed to place the temple treasure hoard into an archaeological context. The willing permission of the landowner was obtained, and the enthusiastic help of a number of local interest groups was recruited. These were the North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society, of which I have been the Honorary Field Officer since 1974, the North Herts Charity Detector Group, The Heritage Network Ltd and the Stevenage Archaeology Group. Originally, the excavation was planned to take place in December 2002, but it was delayed because the BBC, who had heard of the discovery from the British Museum, wanted to film the dig for a television series it was preparing, Hidden Treasure, which was broadcast in autumn 2003 (Faulkner 2003, 102–15).

Before the excavation commenced, the author organized three complementary surface field surveys in February 2003. They were all based on the same gridded layout over four hectares of the field where the hoard was found. First, a sample of surface artefacts and ecofacts was collected by walking lines at 20m intervals and plotted the resulting distributions against the grid layout measured on to an Ordnance Survey map. These highlighted several concentrations of Romano-British material, including an especially dense one in the vicinity of the hoard. Next, a controlled metal detecting survey was carried out on the same basis. A concentration of material around the hoard find-spot of Iron Age and Roman coins and artefacts – brooches, rings, dress pins, other personalia and some Bronze Age bronzes – was known already from reported detectorists’ finds prior to the discovery of the hoard. In the event, on the day, this controlled metal detecting survey did not reveal many new finds, with the exception of some coins. Finally, a geophysical survey using a magnetometer was commissioned from GeoQuest Associates and conducted by Professor Mark Noel of the University of Durham.

Group, a band of metal detectorists who had been reporting their finds to the author for recording since they formed their group in 1993. By late 2002 I was a freelance archaeologist and also acting as occasional archaeological adviser to the local coroner (a Finds Liaison Officer for Hertfordshire under the Portable Antiquities Scheme was not appointed until late 2003), having been for the previous 28 years, until July 2002, the Keeper of Field Archaeology with North Hertfordshire Museums Service.

Andrew’s voice on the telephone was excited and he said they had found something very important in Great Buttway, Ashwell, a field where the group had made many Iron Age and Roman finds over the years, finds that had been recorded by the author and his museum colleagues. Andrew asked me to come out to see it straight away as he was sure it would be of great interest since there were several objects together – a hoard. I asked Andrew and his group to leave any artefacts in the ground that had not been removed already. However, although I was at the find-spot within an hour of taking the telephone call, by then all the artefacts were piled on the finder’s yellow jersey at the side of the rough hole he had dug.

The finder was Alan Meek. He had first detected the crumpled silver-alloy figurine, but he had thought it was a piece of tin-foil and had backfilled the small hole he had dug and placed the ‘tin-foil’ beside the hole for later tidying away from the field. After detecting on other parts of the field, Alan returned sometime later to collect the ‘tin-foil’. On looking at it again, however, he could see it was not tin-foil, although he was not sure what it was (it was the figurine). He ran his detector over the infilled hole and found he was still receiving a big signal. He uncovered the hole again and discovered next the arms of the figurine and the gold jewellery, beneath which were the closely stacked gold plaques and then the silver-alloy plaques. I observed that it was evidently a structured deposit, having been carefully placed in a small hole in the ground in a compact and ordered manner.

I asked the detectorists to ‘sweep’ the hole and surrounding area again, including the upcast from Alan Meek’s hole, to see if any artefacts had been missed. In turn, about eight detectorists repeatedly and diligently searched an area of several square metres with their different machines, but all that was found were small fragments from the silver-alloy plaques, which were in poor condition and flaking. Two of the group, who were off-duty police officers, together with myself, also undertook a fingertip search of the soil from the excavated hole. This produced even tinier fragments from the silver-alloy plaques. Everything found was collected and kept. I took photographs of the finds on the jersey, the finder’s hole and the general location and scene (see Figs 1–3). Examining the finds in the bright sunshine on the day of discovery, I realized not only that the plaques were Roman votive leaves, but that some of them bore inscriptions. It was obvious to me that this was a very rare temple treasure hoard.

That afternoon I recorded the location of the find-spot in the field with the assistance of Helen Ashworth and David Hillelson of the Heritage Network Ltd, whom I had called for help. The latter photographed all the artefacts, either

146 | Dea Senuna

Humphrey 2000). Most of the flints from the site were Late Neolithic, although there were a few demonstrating Mesolithic and Early Neolithic techniques, and some from the later Bronze Age. Four potsherds were also found in the pits. They confirm a date for occupation here in the early 2nd millennium bc. A collection of 258 Late Neolithic–Early Bronze Age flints (HER 6979) from a garden close to the springhead of the Rhee in Ashwell village is perhaps indicative of ritual activities here too (Burleigh et al. 1990, 3–12).

Other casual finds, of polished stone axe-heads, may be special deposits. Three came from Westbury Farm by the springs there (HER 0206-7). Two are of greenstone; another is of unspecified stone (and is possibly the same as a ‘polished flint’ axe said to be from the vicinity of Mob’s Hole, HER 6257). At least three flint arrowheads also came from Westbury Farm (HER 0209). The finest axe-head, now in the British Museum (1961,0703.1), is recorded only as coming from ‘Ashwell’ before 1877, possibly from the then coprolite works, now the sewage works (HER 4878), by the confluence of the Rhee with a stream flowing north from Hinxworth parish. The axe-head was analysed for Project Jade and identified as jadeite from Monte Viso, Piedmont, Italy. Monte Viso is the location of a Neolithic jadeite quarry that was used to make cult axes which are found throughout western Europe.

Bronze Age finds include at least one bronze axe from Ashwell End (HER 0214, 2840), and another from Bluegates Farm, also at Ashwell End (HER 0437). These are probably related to the numerous Bronze Age bronze weapons and tools, including axes, ritually deposited on the ceremonial site in Great Buttway Field, Bluegates Farm, Ashwell End, reported in this volume. A bronze palstave and several barbed and tanged flint arrowheads are merely listed as from ‘Ashwell’.

Late Bronze Age–Iron AgeFor a good part of the 1st millennium bc Ashwell was dominated by the hillfort now called Arbury Banks. The only excavation to have taken place there was by Joseph Beldam, before alterations to the landscape brought about by enclosure in 1863 (Beldam 1856–9). It is classified as a slight univallate hillfort, although Beldam’s work showed that the bank and ditch was doubled at the north-west and south-east at least, and it may originally have been a bivallate enclosure. As is normal for this class of hillfort, there are two entrances, at the north-north-west and south-south-east. Beldam also noted that the ditch, though infilled, was in good condition, and it is clearly seen on aerial photographs. Very little is known about the interior, which covers 6 hectares, but cropmarks and aerial photographs show rectangular, square and curvilinear enclosures, house circles and pits. Such hillforts elsewhere have revealed roundhouses, granary structures, stock enclosures and storage pits, and presumably the marks here represent similar features, although one circular structure in a rectangular ditched enclosure might be a Late Iron Age/Romano-British shrine or temple (Burleigh 2008; 2015).

Arbury Banks may have been constructed in the later Bronze Age (perhaps the 8th century bc – a Late Bronze

The magnetometry results were spectacular. An area of approximately 160 × 160m showed clear traces of a Romano-British settlement. Subrectangular ditched enclosures lay either side of a linear ditched strip, which was interpreted as a street. At least two enclosures contained the foundations of large timber buildings, one in the form of substantial postholes for timber uprights and another in the form of rectilinear trenches for supporting timber beams. In an isolated position to the north-east of the street lay a subcircular or polygonal enclosure, about 14m across. It was at the heart of the greatest concentration of potsherds, tile, oyster shells, coins and other metalwork plotted by the surveys and recorded in earlier years from metal detectorists’ finds. The temple treasure was located on the outer western edge. In order to provide a context for the hoard as well as to investigate the unusual looking subcircular feature, I decided that this was the place to excavate.

Earlier finds and fieldwork in and around AshwellThe following section is intended to place the 2003–6 excavations at Bluegates Farm, Ashwell End, in the context of the archaeological landscape of Ashwell parish. It also summarizes what is known about prehistoric and Roman sites and finds in the parish as background and context to the discovery of the temple treasure hoard and excavation of its find-spot.

It is taken largely from Ashwell: An Extensive Urban Survey (2003), with the kind permission of its author, Isobel Thompson. This is based on data in the Hertfordshire County Council Sites and Monuments Record (SMR), now known as the Historic Environment Record (HER). I have added to or changed only a little of Thompson’s work, sufficient to bring it up to date, and included some interpretation of my own.

Neolithic and earlier Bronze AgeAshwell parish has been settled, apparently densely, since the Neolithic period. There is a great deal of evidence for burials on the higher ground, although the Neolithic long barrows and Bronze Age round barrows are known almost entirely as ring-ditches from cropmarks and soilmarks. Most of them have been ploughed flat. Only one still has its mound, one of the group on Highley Hill (HER 0081), on the parish boundary with Guilden Morden and the county boundary with Cambridgeshire. This is still 35m across and 4–5m high; it is a Scheduled Monument. The long barrows are placed where they would be visible against the skyline from below. Most of the ring-ditches are in similar positions, clustering near three of the earlier long barrows and sometimes in ‘cemeteries’. Other groups are in positions which also appear to have had special meaning: on the slope overlooking the springs at Ruddery Spring, and at Ashwell End near the confluence of two of the streams forming the River Rhee. So many burial mounds would have made an impressive sight and may have been placed as markers on local boundaries between different communities (extended families or clans).

Few non-burial features have been recorded, but excavations at Westbury Farm in 1997, near the springs of a tributary of the Rhee, uncovered pits associated with flintworking and perhaps ritual activity (Gibson and


pre-Conquest, and/or not even from Ashwell. One other probably pre-Conquest vessel was found in 1877 in the coprolite diggings north of Ashwell End, in the same field as the late 2nd-century Roman hoard of silver coins, by the confluence of the Rhee with another stream (Thompson 1982, 587; Robertson 2000; Burleigh 2015). In addition, a fine bridle cheekpiece in bronze and red enamel was found in the fields near Mob’s Hole at the north point of the parish (HER 2843), near the confluence of the Rhee and the Ruddery. Just across the county and parish boundary in Guilden Morden parish, however, the Roman cemetery near Ruddery Springs included at least two or three burials of pre-Conquest Late Iron Age date, one with a 1st-century bc brooch (Thompson 1982, 715–16).

In the Roman period the Ashwell region developed into a well-organized rural area with at least three high-status masonry buildings in close proximity. Many questions have yet to be answered, however, as the evidence consists of cropmarks recorded in aerial photographs and poorly recorded finds mostly discovered in the 19th century. Very little sustained archaeological fieldwork has been carried out, and many finds made by metal detectorists have not been recorded.

There appear to be concentrations of finds around the springs and confluences, as for example, at Ashwell Springs in the village, by Ruddery Springs and by the confluence of the streams at Ashwell End, in Pricem’s Field, where Morris (see below) found pottery and other material indicating a ‘Roman building’. There were concentrations of finds also by Hart’s Spring at the confluence of the Rhee and the unnamed stream from Hinxworth parish and by the confluence of the Rhee and the Ruddery at Mob’s Hole. However, that is certainly only part of the whole picture and the nature of the activity here is still obscure: the contexts of many finds of potsherds and coins are unknown, and others survive which come only from ‘Ashwell’. In Pricem’s Field, Ashwell End, debris from a large building, including clunch blocks, roof and flue tile and pottery, was ploughed up in 1970 (HER 1912; Morris 1971, 268; Short and Collins 1997, 63). It has been assumed that this building was domestic, possibly a villa, but it is at least equally likely to have been a temple (Burleigh 2008; 2015; see also below). Cropmarks of another substantial masonry building, which must have dominated the higher ground, are known on Claybush Hill (HER 1681). Traces of an extensive field system are visible around it, and several ditches containing Roman pottery were recorded in 1991 (Burleigh and Richmond 1992), together with the course of a road, all making it likely to have been a villa.

There is a possibility of a temple on the higher ground above the springs inside Arbury Banks hillfort. Cropmarks on aerial photographs reveal a circular building, 12m diameter, with an entrance on the south-east side, enclosed by a rectangular ditch, about 50 × 30m, with an entrance on its south side (Burleigh 2008, 192, 214, fig. 10; 2015, 94–5, fig. 5.3). Two Roman coin hoards reputedly found within the hillfort, one in 1820, the other before 1914 (Robertson 2000, 261), might further suggest a religious dimension to the site in the Roman period, and may represent votive deposits.

On the west side of the unnamed stream, in Hinxworth parish, the cropmarks of another large structure have been

Age spearhead is reputed to have been found there), but it flourished during the Early–Middle Iron Age. The defences are not on a large scale, and the place evidently had functions other than the purely defensive. There was domestic occupation within it, and signs of cultivation outside it (lynchets and cropmarks, HER 4444). Beldam excavated several storage pits and drainage ditches, and found carbonized grain and animal bones. He also found pottery, although only one vessel can now be identified, an Early Iron Age pot now in Cambridge (Fox 1923, fig. 14). Beldam was told of previous finds of potsherds and animal bones from the interior, and of human skulls found when part of the bank was removed (Beldam 1856–9, 288).

In addition to a setting for domestic and agricultural activity, the hillfort may have functioned as a ‘special place’, a focus for the population of a wider landscape. Beldam (1856–9, 287) noted that from each of the entrances a track led down to the springs, and these must have continued to be significant. It is also possible that in the past there was a seasonal spring by the hillfort itself, perhaps owing to a perched water table caused by a layer of hard chalk. During the exceptionally wet winter and spring of 2014, for the first time in living memory and maybe for centuries, a spring appeared just to the east of the hillfort defences, and flowed for several weeks before disappearing again.

Cropmarks of pit alignments (HER 0766, 2415, 7892), which are taken to be of Late Bronze Age–Iron Age date, have been interpreted as one element in the landscape of a single territorial unit in the eastern Chilterns, centred upon Arbury Banks (Burleigh 1995, 107). Divisions of this territory, continuing into the late pre-Roman Iron Age, may have been marked by double and triple ditches (Mitchell Hill, HER 1664; Slip End, HER 7898; Newnham Way triple ditch: Turner 1999). At least some of the dense accumulation of cropmarks in the vicinity of Highley Hill and Slip End should belong to this period. Others extend well beyond Ashwell parish and include the regular division of the Chilterns by cross-dykes (Bryant and Burleigh 1995, 92–5). Through this organized landscape ran the Icknield Way.

Iron Age finds are few, but include a decorated bone weaving comb found in 1882 in coprolite digging near the confluence of the Rhee with the unnamed stream from Hinxworth parish, north of Ashwell End, and now in the Ashmolean Museum (HER 0173).

Late Iron Age and Roman (c. 100 bc–ad 400)By the mid 1st century bc the focus of this territory had shifted from Arbury to Baldock, where a settlement with religious as well as domestic functions grew up (Stead and Rigby 1986; Fitzpatrick-Matthews and Burleigh 2007a; Burleigh and Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2010). In the Roman period this was the nearest small town to Ashwell, which is likely to be on the northern edge of the town’s territory (Burleigh 2008, 189–219; 2015). It seems likely that the Roman farmsteads in Ashwell parish also had Late Iron Age antecedents, although little excavation has taken place to confirm this. Only a few finds of undoubted Late Iron Age date are known, and none from a secure context. Most are old discoveries from ‘Ashwell’: a few bronze coins (HER 0103-4, 1324) and two pots (HER 1869-70), which may not be

148 | Dea Senuna

1973, 223). West of the village its ancient line is unknown. The tithe map shows a number of routes fanning out from the street grid at West End, some of which are labelled ‘roads’ and some green ways into the common fields. The present road pattern was established at the time of enclosure, when some of the green ways disappeared. One had carried the line of Ashwell Street on towards the road to Newnham. Another climbed the hill to Arbury Banks, and until the mid 19th century went on via Ash Hill to join the lane to the main road south-east of Newnham; part of this route survives as a footpath. During the Roman period there may have been alternatives connecting the farms and villas.

Clearly there is more to be discovered about the layout of this well-populated landscape in the Roman period, and the possibility of a religious focus centred on the springs should be considered. Many coins have been found in the parish, including hoards. One of these (HER 2845) is Late Roman and possibly never retrieved because the coins had lost their value, but a hoard of 500 silver coins in an iron container, dug up in the coprolite workings north of Ashwell End in 1876, at the confluence of the Rhee and the unnamed stream flowing from Hinxworth parish, was buried in the late 2nd century (HER 0415). A note with the Late Iron Age pot found in the same field as this hoard in 1877 suggests that other (1st- to 2nd-century ad?) Roman remains were present (Thompson 1982, 587). Other coins have been found near the springs themselves.

Fieldwork adjacent to the Ashwell End site 1970–2The following account, supplemented by the author, is based on a typescript by the late Dr John Morris, formerly Senior Lecturer in Ancient History at University College, London, and a resident of Ashwell. The document, dated 19 March 1971, is held in the archives of the Ashwell Village Museum and a copy is held by the North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society.

NOTE on Ashwell End.

The name Ashwell End is now confined, in normal local usage, to the house at TL 2576 4040, now occupied by Mrs. Beresford [the house subsequently and today is called ‘Beresfords’ and the surrounding area ‘Ashwell End’] situated in an exceptionally large Moat [later filled in] with unusually deep ditches and high ground within. The general name is Bluegates, from the larger house of Mr. Wallace at TL 2565 2552, whose agricultural outbuildings are used by Mr. Sheppard [the owner of Ashwell Bury].

The villa lies near the south end of a continuous scatter of Roman, and earlier and later material, that extends for at least 1200 yards southward from the north end of the Sewage Farm TL 254 410, along the left bank of the main stream [the River Rhee]. At some date the lesser stream [from Ashwell village], now diverted by the pipe, appears to have run along the side of the road, where a deep hollow continues its course from the Ashwell End Moat to Bluegates, also a moat [later filled in too].

The most striking later 19th century finds, including coin hoard, many coins and pots, concentrate in the coprolite digging area, in what is now the Sewage Farm, field 50, OS 25” [Bailey’s field]. Further casual finds have been made there more recently; and also at various points in between. Most of the finds are in Ashwell Museum, but the find spots are rarely exactly recorded.

recorded (HER 1181) – a curious configuration of three rectangular ditched enclosures, one inside the next, the outermost measuring at least 130 × 110m, the innermost 90 × 65m, an arrangement with similarities to the Late Iron Age/Early Roman ceremonial religious enclosures at Fison Way, Thetford. Nearby, debris from a range of severely plough-damaged buildings, extending over an area measuring 160 × 140m, has been found and is visible as soilmarks on aerial photographs (HER 1178). This is, perhaps, the remains of a courtyard villa, but it has been suggested alternatively – as a result of surface finds – that the remains may be those of a temple complex (Gregory 1991; Burleigh 2008, 195–6, 217, fig. 13; Burleigh and Jackson 2009, 63; Burleigh 2015, 99–101, fig. 5.4).

Burials have been recorded at Foxley Hill and Hinxworth Place (HER 1414, 4037), but are known only at the edges of the present parish of Ashwell. Near Slip End, overlooking the Cat Ditch, a cemetery was found in 1824 and again in 1968 when a water pumping station was constructed. Part of it was excavated in 1991, revealing a mixed-rite burial ground of the Late Iron Age and Roman periods (HER 1321; Atkinson et al. 1991). Another cemetery on higher ground nearby, on the Guilden Morden and Cambridgeshire boundary, was of mainly unaccompanied inhumations. Sherds of Romano-Saxon pottery from the fills of some of the features suggest that the burials were Late or sub-Roman (HER 0242; Burleigh 1976, 18; Rutherford Davis 1982, 142; Burleigh et al. in prep). As noted above, the large Roman cemetery at Guilden Morden has pre-Conquest origins. Of uncertain date are the inhumations and one cremation found on the east side of the Shire Balk, an earthwork with Iron Age origins, which forms the county boundary with Cambridgeshire/parish boundary with Guilden Morden (HER 1789; Burleigh and Richmond 1992). However, they may be comparable to the Slip End cemeteries.

Icknield Way and Ashwell StreetThe road network constructed by Roman engineers soon after the Conquest included the road from Baldock (and Braughing) to Biggleswade, Sandy and Godmanchester. Pre-Conquest settlement at Baldock and Sandy suggests that the Roman highway was a rebuilding of an earlier route. The long-distance prehistoric route along the Chiltern ridge and scarp foot, the Icknield Way, may have originated as long ago as the Neolithic period, and this also was used as part of the Roman road network. The Baldock–Godmanchester road was connected via this route with Ermine Street, the main highway from London to York. The Icknield Way was not one track, but a number of parallel tracks along and below the ridge, not necessarily all used at the same time. These provided alternatives in wet or dry seasons, and at different periods of time, and would have been drove roads as well as lines of communication. The route along the spring line has been called Ashwell Street since the medieval period. There is no certain evidence that it was constructed in the Roman period, although it was probably already used as a route at that time (Taylor 1997, 2). The present road is in part the product of post-enclosure straightening in the later 19th century, but the green lane in the parish of Ashwell itself is not a 19th-century road (Taylor


Morris continues]: The plough dragged to the surface building debris, pottery etc. Since it had not been disturbed or distributed by previous ploughing, the material was exposed on the surface immediately above the places where it had lain, and remained within the outline of the building whence it had come.

I noticed the site during a walk before lunch on Sunday November 1st 1970; in the course of routine looking at local plough-land. Since it was immediately obvious that the field was littered with Roman material, nothing was immediately picked up. I returned after lunch with Mr. Richard Higham and a quantity of paper bags. We measured the site by pacing.........the concentrations of material........We then.......bagged separately the finds of each part of the site.

The plan was not intelligible until subsequently drawn, since it was cut across by a diversion of the stream, not later than the late 19th or very early 20th century; and by a more recent piping of the stream; on the plan, the piped line, cross hatched, connects the outfall and intake; the black course is copied from OS 25” sheet. Upcast from the pipe trench and soil taken to filling the stream bed clearly disturbed the north angle of the villa in particular.

Each of the areas shown and numbered was distinct and clear; where lines are drawn round the shading, they indicate visible straight edges to the scatter; where no such line is drawn, the edges of the scatter were not distinct, the material thinning out over a space of a few feet.

There is an indeterminate scatter, rather thin, of sherds and tesserae in field 67, near the road, opposite Ashwell End [Great Buttway Field].

In the northern part of Pricem’s Field, north [sic, actually south] and east of Ashwell End, there is a confused pattern of mounds and hollow ways, to a depth 4 or 5 feet; evidently related to the hollows north of Common Lane in field 54 (TL 256 and 257 407), marked on 6” and 25” map, which were filled in last year [1970. Aerial photographs show clearly a large infilled moated enclosure in that field, known as Bluegates Meadow, reputed locally to have contained a Tudor mansion].

Since the Pricem’s Field hollows will be filled soon, they were surveyed, with trial excavation trenches, by Mr. David Lewis, of the Field Centre, Merchant Taylor’s, Ashwell, in September 1970. An earlier supposition that they were due to coprolite digging was dispelled by positive local assurance that the coprolite working did not extend significantly south of the Sewage Farm. It was found that the course of the stream from TL 2577 4050 to TL 2570 4053 followed a rough flint wall; in and by the wall was a considerable quantity of coarse Roman pottery, with a little Samian and many oyster shells. Cobbling suggests a floor adjoining the wall. Mr. Sheppard reports that his men have met a flint wall or roadway at intervals along the left bank of the stream at least as far as TL 2606 4044, with scatters of flint and potsherds at various places in field 99 to its south; east of about grid line 260 Pricem’s Field has been continuously ploughed. The negative evidence of the southern end of the scatter came from the erection of a new battery dairy in 1969/70 [Bluegates Dairy] in the field SW of Elbrook Cottage, centred on TL 2635 4019. There 96 large foundation holes were carefully examined by Mr. Albert Sheldrick of Ashwell Museum, and produced only 1 scrap of Samian, 1 Roman sherd and 1 sherd perhaps medieval.

The September Survey will be fair copied shortly. Sections across the hollows did not warrant the idea that they might be sunken paths. Trenches did not satisfactorily accommodate the suggestion that the ground between them was artificially raised in recent times. Several holes produced Roman coarse pottery and scraps of Samian near the top; with in two places cobbling, apparently in situ. Despite the proximity of the Ashwell End Moat, no medieval sherds seem to have been found.”

[Reproduced here is another typescript by Morris, the original also held in Ashwell Village Museum and a copy with the North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society].

“ROMAN VILLA Ashwell End, Pricem’s Field, TL 2589 4038. 1 Nov 70. [Fig. 199]

The lower part [south-eastern] of Pricem’s [or Prycem’s] Field was pasture before the Enclosures [of 1863] and has remained pasture since that time. It was [deep] ploughed in October 1970 [probably for the first time ever] by Mr. Gurney Sheppard, the new [1967] owner of Ashwell Bury and Bluegates Farm. Before ploughing, the field was levelled; the levelling was confined to filling in hollows, to a depth of not more than 8 or 10 inches [20 or 25 centimetres] with the top soil scooped from the higher parts of the surface. The largest hollow so filled was above the villa courtyard.”

[Evidently, the field contained low archaeological earthworks before this earthmoving, as did apparently, the north end of Great Buttway Field, to the north-west, across the lane from Pricem’s, where the landowner carried out a similar operation in 1969, but with no archaeological fieldwork or record by anyone.

N0 20m

Figure 199 Morris and Higham’s plot of fieldwalking in Pricem’s Field in 1970 showing the locations of Lewis’s six trenches (unshaded)

150 | Dea Senuna

by Sarah Talks, Chairman of the Friends of Ashwell Museum. The Village Museum seems to have some of the finds from the 1972 trenches, but apparently not all. Likewise, the whereabouts of the surface artefact collections from 1970 seem to be currently unknown.

Higham’s 1972 drawings with annotations and notes record that about ten trenches were excavated, presumably entirely by hand, varying in size from about 30 × 6ft (10 × 2m) to 6 × 6ft (2 × 2m) (Fig. 200). Structures noted include flint surfaces and walls, rammed chalk surfaces, chalk rubble walls, chalk rubble tumble from walls and postholes. Finds noted include Roman tile and mortar, pottery sherds of coarse wares, fine wares, plain and decorated Samian, glass sherds¸ iron nails, animal bones and oyster shells, many in a ‘dump’ (presumably a midden). One of the finds, apparently from these excavations and amongst the finds boxes in the Village Museum, but not noted in the excavation records, is a marble ornamental volute, maybe from a composite capital of a column, identified as a fine piece of architectural decoration, possibly from a temple or tomb (Ralph Jackson, pers. comm.).

Finds by metal detectorists on and around the Ashwell site 1986–2006A selection of finds from Great Buttway Field are recorded in the 2003–6 excavations report in Chapter 10. A selection of other finds from some surrounding fields are recorded here. For the location of the fields by name at Bluegates Farm see Figure 201. All finds are of copper alloy unless stated otherwise.

Bluegates Meadow: a Romano-Celtic enamelled panel from a hexagonal flask, 1st–2nd century ad (North Hertfordshire Museums (NHM) Enquiry No. 1863 (1998)) (see Fig. 283, no. 9); part of a military-style dolphin-ornamented openwork buckle plate, 4th–5th century ad (NHM Enq. No. 1868 (1998)); one Iron Age coin; one Roman 1st-century ad coin; six Roman 3rd-century ad coins; 13 Roman 4th-century ad coins, the latest dating to ad 364–78 (NHM Enq. Nos 1681, 1868 (1998); 2338 (2000)); a mid 14th-/early 15th-century ad dagger (NHM Enq. No. 2338 (2000)).

Bluegates Paddock: six Roman coins; a panther-head mount; a boar-head mount (NHM Enq. Nos 2335 (2000) and 2517 (2002)).

Beresford’s Field: a Late Saxon, 11th-century ad stirrup – strap mount (NHM Enq. No. 2338 (2000)).

Pricem’s Field: 2 Iron Age coins; 2 Roman 1st-century ad coins; 42 Roman 3rd-century ad coins; 48 Roman 4th-century ad coins, the latest dating to 354–63; a silver memorial penny of St Edmund, dated c. 890–915 ad; two folded together silver coins, the outer of which is a penny of William II, c. 1092–5 (NHM Enq. Nos 1851, 1855, 1856, 1858, 1861 (1998); Portable Antiquities Scheme No. BH-E654B1 (2013)).

Bennett’s Field: a Roman enamelled seal box (see Fig. 283, no. 8) and two Roman seal-box lids; a Roman Alcester-type brooch; a Roman trumpet-head-type brooch, 2nd–3rd century ad (NHM Enq. No. 1662 (1997)); a dolphin mount (NHM Enq. No. 2502 (2001)); a Late Roman military-style dolphin buckle (NHM Enq. No. 2334 (2000)); a lead-alloy model hand or foot, complete with only three digits (NHM

Block D (SW wing) contained well dressed clunch, thin roof tiles with peg holes in the corner, much fine quality pottery, and a good deal of Samian, including one sherd with a graffito LAB, scratched after firing, and several decorated sherds. The finds for M and L were similar, so also J. E contained an unusually thick concentration of oyster shells, fine and coarse pottery, but much less building material.

B contained much coarse pottery, much of it thick and gritted, with some fine wares and Samian, proportionately noticeably less than A; the building material was flint, with flanged and perhaps imbrex tiles, though those noted were towards the SW end and might have come from H. C contained only rougher wares, including some blackened bases of cooking pots, and flint material. H contained flue and imbrex tiles, tesserae, but no pottery; and may therefore be the bath house.

Most concentrations contained pieces of half round tile, with an angled step on the outside......They may be unusually small imbrex tiles.

To date, neither the survey of the earthworks by Lewis, nor his excavation finds or records have come to light; they do not seem to be in the Ashwell Village Museum, but apparently were in the former Ashwell Field Studies Centre in 1975 (David Short, pers. comm.). Further excavations in the form of more trial trenches were carried out in September 1971, and beginning on 9 September 1972, for six days, led by Richard Higham, also an Ashwell resident, and John Morris, using up to 22 volunteers per day from the village and students from Morris’s extra-mural classes. There does not appear to be an excavation report of any sort, but there are some sketch drawings and plans with measurements, annotations and notes, arranged in diary form, giving the varying sizes of the trenches and a few sections. These were made in September 1972 by, among others, Richard Higham (who has for many years now resided in New Zealand, but visits family in Ashwell from time to time), and kindly copied by him to the Village Museum, whence they were, in turn, shared with the author

Figure 200 Plot of the location of trenches by Richard Higham during the Pricem’s field dig of 1972

N 0 20m


Enq. No. 2503 (2001)); a bronze coin of Tasciovanus; a silver coin of Cunobelin; one Roman 1st-century ad coin; two Roman 2nd-century ad coins; one Roman 2nd-/3rd-century ad coin; four Roman 3rd-century ad coins; 18 Roman 4th-century ad coins, the latest dating to 364–78 (NHM Enq. Nos 1857, 1858 (1998); 2338 (2000) and 2502 (2001)); a Middle Saxon decorated zoomorphic strap end, broken at the rivet holes end, dated early 9th century ad (NHM Enq. No. 2501 (2001)).

Bailey’s Field: a Late Iron Age bow brooch; a Roman Colchester brooch; one Roman votive model axe; a lead-alloy model human jaw; two Roman 1st-century ad coins; six Roman 3rd-century ad coins; 27 Roman 3rd-/4th-century ad coins; 30 Roman 4th-century ad coins, the latest dating to 367–78 (NHM Enq. Nos 1347 (1996); 1681 (1998); 2527 (2002); KS 2006)).

Fieldwork during and subsequent to the 2003–6 excavations at Ashwell

Geophysical surveys 2003–6, 2008–9 and 2013–15Professor Mark Noel, of GeoQuest Associates and the University of Durham, carried out magnetometry surveys using a hand-held fluxgate gradiometer on Great Buttway Field in February 2003, December 2004 and December 2006. A total of 10.25ha of the field was recorded by these three surveys. The results of the 2003 survey have been noted already above (pp. 145–6). Broadly, at the north end of the field the surveys revealed an area of probable Roman rectilinear ditched enclosures, some including sill beams and postholes for timber buildings, as well as pits, flanking a

Baileys

Bluegates Paddock

Beresfords

Buttway

Prysom

Whiteheads

Bennetts

Morden Road

Little ButtwayNew Meadow

Bury Meadow

Church Mead

Ducklake Paddock

Dairy Paddock S

Dairy Paddock N

ElbrookCow Lane

BaileysBluegates

MeadowBluegates

Meadow

Bluegates Paddock

BeresfordsAshwell EndAshwell End

Great Buttway

Prycems

Whiteheads

Bennetts

Morden Road

Little ButtwayNew Meadow

Bury Meadow

Church Mead

Ducklake Paddock

Dairy Paddock S

Dairy Paddock N

ElbrookCow Lane

CemeteryCemetery

Figure 201 Field names at Bluegates Farm, Ashwell

N ASHWELL END, HERTFORDSHIRELocation of Geophysical Survey Areas

SURVEYBY SPONSOREDBY The BBC,North Hertfordshire

Archaeological Society& The British Museum

0 100m1:2500

ASSOCIATES

FIGURE1

MeadowView

Drain

Pond

Path (unmarked)

Bluegates Farm

RiverRhee

Pond

Pond

Cablestay

Feeder

AshwellEnd

Beresfords

BluegatesPaddock

Great Buttway

2003

2004

2006

Figure 202 Location of geophysical survey areas at Ashwell End, 2003–6. Copyright: Prof. Mark Noel and GeoQuest Associates

152 | Dea Senuna

N

ASHWELL END, HERTFORDSHIREResults of Geophysical Survey (Great Buttway)

SURVEY BY SPONSORED BY The BBC,North Hertfordshire


Drain

Pond

0 80m1:1500

ASSOCIATES

FIGURE 2

Path (um)

Great Buttway

Beresfords

AshwellEnd

ANOMALIES, nT/m

Figure 203 Results of geophysical surveys 2003–6 at Great Buttway Field, Ashwell End. Copyright: Mark Noel and GeoQuest Associates

N

ASHWELL END, HERTFORDSHIREArchaeological Interpretation (Great Buttway)



Drain

Pond

0 80m1:1500

ASSOCIATES

FIGURE 6

Path (um)

Great Buttway

Beresfords

AshwellEnd

KEY

Post hole, pit

Burnt feature

Ironpipe

Rectilinear patternofpost holes / footings

Brick / ferrous litter

Soil-filledditch

ConjecturedlineofRomanroad

f1

f1

f1

f2

f2

f3

f3

f1

f4

f5

T1

T2

T3

T4

f6

f7

f8

f8

f9

f11

f12

f10

f1

f13

f14

f15

f16

f17

f8 f18

f19

f20

f21

Figure 204 Archaeological interpretation (keyed) of geophysical surveys 2003–6 at Great Buttway Field, Ashwell End. Copyright: Mark Noel and GeoQuest Associates


Cable stay

Feeder

N

ASHWELL END, HERTFORDSHIREResults of Geophysical Survey

(Beresfords and Bluegates Paddock)



Pond

RiverRhee

Ashwell End

Pond

Bluegates Farm

0 80m1:1500

ASSOCIATES

FIGURE 3

ANOMALIES, nT/m

Great Buttway

Beresfords

BluegatesPaddock

Figure 205 Results of geophysical survey 2006 at Beresfords and Bluegates Paddock, Ashwell End. Copyright: Mark Noel and GeoQuest Associates

Cablestay

Feeder

N

ASHWELL END, HERTFORDSHIREArchaeological Interpretation

(Beresfords and Bluegates Paddock)



Pond

RiverRhee

Ashwell End

Pond

Bluegates Farm

0 80m1:1500

ASSOCIATES

FIGURE 7

Great Buttway

Beresfords

BluegatesPaddock

KEY

Ironpipe


Soil-filledditch

f1

f1f2

f3

f4

f5f6

f7

f1

f2

f3

Figure 206 Archaeological interpretation (keyed) of geophysical survey 2006 at Beresfords and Bluegates Paddock, Ashwell End. Copyright: Mark Noel and GeoQuest Associates

154 | Dea Senuna

his volunteers also surveyed Wayman’s Field immediately to the north of Great Buttway, revealing that the ditched road and rectilinear enclosures and structures extended further in that direction (Fig. 208; Lockyear 2013–15).

Field walking Sale’s Acre, Pricem’s and Wayman’s Fields 2012 Sarah Talks, Friends of Ashwell Village MuseumIn 2012 Ashwell Archaeology, a group of local volunteers and enthusiasts, were awarded Heritage Lottery funding as part of a project called ‘All our Stories’. The funding was to cover a field walking project close to known archaeological sites in the village.

Over three fields, close to the dea Senuna treasure find and subsequent excavations, 343 10m grids and 66 10m lines were walked.

The first field, Sale’s Acre, was closest to the present village centre and produced a range of finds: pot, glass, metal, brick and tile and some worked flint. The pottery ranged in date from Roman to Victorian. Roughly a third of the pot was Roman but the size and scatter of the fragments suggest manuring rather than settlement.

The second field, which we called Wayman’s Field, was located to the north of the dea Senuna site in Great Buttway Field. This field also produced a wide range of finds, but the considerable quantity and variety of pot from the Roman period suggests that a settlement of some size existed here. We were able to link up with Kris Lockyear’s 2013–15 geophysical survey on the same field, which showed that a road or trackway went across the field with rectangular enclosures and structures clearly visible.

In total, 395 sherds of Roman pottery weighing 3493g were collected. Many of these were local coarse wares but there were some imported Gaulish samian fine wares. Mortarium and amphora fragments, the latter imported

north–south-aligned ditched road or trackway. Isolated on the east side of the road, in the vicinity of the temple treasure hoard find-spot, was an apparent polygonal enclosure. To the south was an extensive area of probable later prehistoric circular and subcircular ditched enclosures, other structures and pits, overlain by the linear road ditches and possible later rectilinear ditched enclosures. The underlying ditched features were arranged in a radial fashion, like a spider’s web, as Mark Noel aptly described it at the time. In 2006, Noel extended his surveys into the adjacent Beresfords Field and Bluegates Paddock. In the former, possible Roman rectilinear tenements were revealed, while in the latter, the results were uncertain (Figs 202–6; Noel 2003; 2004; 2006).

In September 2004 Dr Kris Lockyear of University College, London, assisted by university students, did a resistivity survey at the northern end of Pricem’s field, where Morris and Higham had discovered substantial Roman structures in 1970–2 (see above). The survey revealed some pits, ditches and parts of three monumental masonry buildings or enclosures, one of which measured at least 45 x 30m (see Fig. 361).

In 2008–9, Archaeology RheeSearch from Cambridgeshire, on behalf of the North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society, carried out magnetometry and resistivity surveys on parts of Pricem’s Field using hand-held machines. The results may be viewed on Figure 207.

In 2013–15, Kris Lockyear, as part of his ‘Sensing the Iron Age and Roman Past: Geophysics and the Landscape of Hertfordshire’ community project, funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council, resurveyed the area covered by Noel’s previous surveys on Great Buttway Field, and extended the area surveyed to the east and south. The survey used a Foerster 4-probe magnetometry cart system, which allows for rapid survey and yields higher data density, resulting in sharper, clearer and more detailed images. Lockyear and

0 80m

Beresfords

Ashwell EndAshwell End

N

Figure 207 Results of geophysical surveys of Pricem's Field, Ashwell End, by Archaeology RheeSearch, 22 June 2009. Copyright: Archaeology RheeSearch


Figure 208 Magnetometry survey 2013–15 of Great Buttway and Waymans fields, Ashwell End. Copyright: Dr Kris Lockyear, University College London

Figure 209 Map of the fields walked in 2013 around Ashwell End

156 | Dea Senuna

preparation and imported foodstuffs. There is a significant component of tableware of moderate to high status present in the assemblage. Metal finds of brooches and coins suggest occupation on this site throughout the Roman period. Previous fieldwalking and excavation on this site in the 1970s (unpublished) indicate that a high-status building existed here, a suggestion backed up by the finds of our field walking project (Fig. 209).

[Gilbert Burleigh notes that the two main concentrations of Roman pottery in Pricem’s Field correspond to the evidence for substantial structures located by Morris and Higham in 1970–2, by Lockyear’s 2004 and Archaeology RheeSearch’s 2008–9 geophysical surveys, at the northern end of the field (see above), proposed in this volume to be one or more temples.]

from southern Spain, indicate domestic occupation. The 64 sherds of medieval pottery were local coarse wares and the 98 post-medieval sherds, sparsely distributed, point to later agricultural processes on the site.

The presence of imbrex, tegula and large quantities of brick indicates that buildings of some size and status existed on or near this site during the Roman period. A number of heat-cracked flint ‘potboilers’ also point to domestic or light industrial processes.

The third site, known as Pricem’s Field, is to the east of the dea Senuna site, across a small lane. Here, 996 pot sherds were collected, weighing 8262g, the bulk of which are of Roman date. Of the assemblage, 8% was from five different types of imported samian ware. The presence of mortaria and imported amphorae sherds again indicates food

The Excavations at Ashwell 2003–6 | 157

IntroductionThe first season’s excavation took place over two long weekends, 6–10 and 15–17 March 2003. Topsoil was stripped by mechanical excavator from four conjoining trenches, three on the first weekend and the fourth on the second weekend, making the total area opened about 112 square metres. Within that area archaeological layers and features were sampled by hand excavation. The find-spot of the hoard was located once more. Close to it was found an inscribed silver base for the figurine, later fully read, after cleaning in the British Museum conservation laboratory, as D. SENUNE. FLAVIA. CVNORIS. V.S.L.M., ‘To the goddess Senuna, Flavia Cunoris has paid her vow, willingly, deservedly’. Funding for the first season’s work was provided by the BBC, which filmed the first long weekend of the excavation, the North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society and the Hertfordshire County Council. Most participants worked voluntarily although there were paid staff members from The Heritage Network Ltd on site during the first weekend’s digging. Otherwise the latter organization adopted the project as its pro bono contribution.

The subsequent seasons of excavations, in the September of 2004, 2005 and 2006, were carried out with the kind permission of the new landowner, Mr S. Sheppard. The work was funded by generous grants from The Townley Group of the British Museum, supplemented by assistance from the North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society and a grant towards the organizational costs from the Council for British Archaeology Mid-Anglia Group. The project was a community one involving the same organizations that had participated in the preliminary surveys and 2003 excavation. Again, most of the excavators were volunteers, with The Heritage Network Ltd providing paid supervisors in 2005 and 2006, under the direction of the author. The North Hertfordshire Museums Service allowed their Archaeological Officer, Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews, to participate, and we were assisted also by archaeology students and Robin Densem from Birkbeck College, University of London.

Excavation sequence and methodologyFollowing the surface artefact collection and geophysical and metal-detector surveys in February 2003 (see Chapter 9), a five-day excavation took place from 6–10 March 2003. It was designed by the author, in partnership with David Hillelson of The Heritage Network Ltd, as a one-off excavation to examine the Roman temple treasure hoard find-spot and place it in an archaeological context. Three linked trenches were excavated and deposits, layers and features sampled. The main trench, Trench 1, 7.5m square, was sited over part of the polygonal or circular feature revealed by the geophysical survey. Thought to be a possible temple, this was where the greatest concentration of finds had been collected by the surface surveys and previous casual searches. Trench 2, a 4m square on the north-west side of Trench 1, was located over the hoard find-spot. Extended south-west from Trench 1 was a 12 × 1.2m arm, Trench 3, intended to pick up a possible temenos ditch, if one existed (Ashworth and Burleigh 2003).

As a result of the spectacular and highly significant finds and features recorded during that first weekend’s excavation,

Chapter 10The Excavations at Ashwell 2003–6Gilbert Burleigh

158 | Dea Senuna

general spoil heaps but also sometimes to pinpoint in advance metal finds within the excavation area before recording and retrieval. Spoil from individual contexts was often separated and searched with metal detectors to maximize the recovery rate of coins and other metal artefacts.

A single context recording system was employed as far as possible, but modified if necessary to cope with the mainly homogeneous layers of soil in the artificial hollow, i.e. new context numbers were often issued to the same or similar layers/deposits, with the hope of maximizing our ability to notice possible changes in depositional patterns of finds at the post-excavation stage.

Three-dimensional recording was used not only for single contexts but also for many individual and multiple finds. Some plans were drawn in the traditional way on site, while others were reconstructed from survey records off site later. Sections were drawn on site. Photography used traditional single lens reflex (SLR) cameras and film strip, as well as digital (including SLR) cameras.

Environmental samples were taken from a selection of contexts.

The archiveThe entire excavated finds assemblage was generously donated to the British Museum by the landowner, Mr S. Sheppard. The site archive, too, is stored at the British Museum.

Phasing and dating of contextsAlthough there was some horizontal and vertical stratigraphy, and some cut and a few intercutting features, with some sequencing of structures, the generally homogeneous character of the soil deposits within the excavated area has posed difficulties for phasing and dating.

a team returned (15–17 March 2003) to excavate an additional area, Trench 4 (5.10 × 3.40m), in the angle between Trenches 1 and 2.

At the conclusion of that second weekend in 2003, it was thought to be the end of excavations on the site, but in 2004, because of the significance of the results and finds from 2002/3 and the interest, support and resources provided by the British Museum and others, a second season’s excavation was organized and took place between 17 and 28 September 2004. This time a larger excavation area, 16m square, was sited over the positions of Trenches 1, 2 and 4 and the north-west end of Trench 3. Again, at the end of the season, it was thought that there would be no more excavation, but additional resources were found for two further seasons’ excavation, in 2005 and 2006. The excavation area in 2005 was the same as in 2004, and the excavation ran between 1 and 21 September. In 2006 the excavation area was extended on its north side by 2m to examine more of the centre of the enclosure defined by the polygonal gully and chalk pebble surface (see below), while a trench measuring 10 × 3m was extended to the west from the north-west corner to reveal a larger area of the later Romano-British gravelled surface and to seek any relationship with an approximately north–south road shown by the geophysical survey. A 10 × 7m extension from the south-east edge of the area was designed to define the southern extent of the deposits. The 2006 excavation ran from 31 August to 21 September (Burleigh 2005; 2006; 2007; 2008; Figs 210–15).

The excavations were carried out using both conventional and unconventional methods. Ploughsoil was stripped by mechanical excavator with a toothless bucket, and all further excavation was stratigraphic by hand using standard tools. Sieving of a sample of some contexts was employed. Skilled metal detectorists from the North Herts Charity Detector Group were utilized not only to search the

2006

2004-2005

2003

Trench 1Trench 2

Trench 3

Trench 4

Trench 5

Trench 5

Trench 5

N 0 10mFigure 210 Excavation trench locations 2003–6


represent, in the main, activities on the site from the Late Iron Age/Early Roman period through to the late 4th century ad. Any other former stratified later Roman and post-Roman deposits have been lost to ploughing, and now are represented only by unstratified finds in the plough soil. Nevertheless, these provide some evidence for the continuing use of the site and aid interpretation. All these things have made the phasing and dating less than straightforward.

Context numbers appear in square brackets, thus: [123]. Small find numbers are preceded by SF, thus: SF 234. Catalogue (Cat.) numbers refer to the sections within Chapter 11: thus, for example, Cat. 10.8 refers to catalogued item 8 in section 10 (‘Prehistoric objects’) of Chapter 11 (Fig. 212).

Phase 0: Bronze Age to Late Iron Age – ritual activities around a springhead?It is probable that the creation of the ceremonial hollow in Phase 1 (see below) disturbed the remains of earlier activities on the site, possibly from the Early Bronze Age, and certainly from the Middle/Late Bronze Age, to Late Iron Age periods. From later contexts came a considerable amount of Bronze Age metalwork, including 29 objects in

Although on most sites, coins and brooches usually provide some dating evidence, they can give only a terminus post quem for a particular deposit and any associated artefacts. Furthermore, Iron Age coins can rarely be closely dated. However, the Ashwell site is exceptional in that many Iron Age and Early Roman coins and brooches were deliberately deposited in much later contexts, so dating depends on the pottery, much of which is residual and in mixed contexts, thus providing only very broad dates for most phases. In light of this, some phases, identified by contextual stratigraphy and interpreted relationships, have broadly similar dating. A large element of the cult practice on this unique site appears to have involved the curation of antiques and antiquities, Bronze Age bronzes being a notable example, and their votive deposition or redeposition in much later contexts.

Deep ploughing since the late 1960s and the apparent constant trampling of the central deposits in the Roman period – the former removing the upper Late Roman/post-Roman deposits into the ploughsoil and thus rendering them unstratified, the latter causing the mixing of the soil deposits, pottery and other finds – exacerbate the problem. The surviving stratified deposits below the ploughsoil

138/629

570

gravel surface104,302,332

N 0 5m

210

211

304

640

632 351

139/523

114/342 102/334

353/554

546

599

535

389/556

311

platform 529

chalk surface 103/327 etc.

road

cut edge of ceremonial hollow

634


634


634


634

Figure 211 Overall excavation plan 2003–6 showing selected principal features excavated

160 | Dea Senuna

chalk block

N 0 1m

2.53

SF198

SF195

6.196.18

SF1972.61

2.202

8.38

207

212

211

202

201

210

208

Figure 212 Trench 4 excavation plan from 2003 used here as an example to show how SF numbers refer to uncatalogued finds and numbers in the form of 6.18 etc relate to catalogued finds detailed in this publication

Figure 213 Aerial view of the excavation in 2006 from the south-east. Photo: Mike Kibby


[345] (6 sherds) and [594] (1); Phase 5: [324] (10 sherds), [349] (2), [350] (27), [385] (1) and [521] (3); Phase 6: [568] (1 sherd).

The only extant excavated feature belonging to this phase was [633], a shallow path or trackway (0.10m deep and nearly 2m wide) on the western edge of the excavated area. Its line was later followed by numerous road surfaces from Phase 1 to at least Phase 7.

Metal-detected finds made before the excavations from the ploughsoil over and in the immediate vicinity of the excavation area that are earlier than the very Late Iron Age include three Late Bronze Age objects, a damaged socketed

one placed deposit, [635] in Phase 5, and residual Late Bronze Age to Late Iron Age pottery spread across numerous contexts and most phases.

Deposit [635] comprised seven axe-heads: two dated to the Early Bronze Age (EBA) (Cat. 10.8 & 10.9) and five to the Late Bronze Age (LBA) (Cat. 10.36, 10.37, 10.38, 10.39 & 10.40); 15 spearheads and spear parts: nine dated to the Middle Bronze Age (MBA) (Cat. 10.10a, 10.10b, 10.12, 10.13, 10.16, 10.17, 10.18, 10.19 & 10.20), four MBA/LBA (Cat. 10.25, 10.26, 10.27 & 10.52) and two LBA (Cat. 10.29 & 10.30); a LBA gouge (Cat. 10.51); two LBA chisels (Cat. 10.46 & 10.47); two awls, one MBA and one LBA (Cat. 10.42 & 10.43); a LBA sword blade (Cat. 10.34); and a MBA dagger (Cat. 10.31). Table 5 lists the Bronze Age metalwork from other stratified contexts.

It is likely that this metalwork was originally deposited on the site during rituals and ceremonies, probably at a springhead (compare Bradley et al. 2015), in the Early to Late Bronze Age, before being disturbed by the construction of the open-air hollow in Phase 1, when it was retrieved and curated, maybe in a nearby temple building or shrine, and finally redeposited during ritual ceremonies and over various subsequent phases of activity on the site during the Roman period.

The excavations produced 30 Late Bronze Age to Early/Middle Iron Age residual pottery sherds: Phase 1: [371] (1 sherd); Phase 2: [362] (2 sherds), [392] (3), [520] (1); Phase 3: [320] (7 sherds), [335] (1) and [384] (3); Phase 4: [334] (4 sherds); Phase 5: [101] (1 sherd), [324] (2) and [350] (1); Phase 6: [304] (2 sherds), [305] (1) and [568] (1).

Context [517] (Phase 3/4) produced ten Early Iron Age to Middle Iron Age residual pottery sherds.

There are 131 Middle Iron Age to Late Iron Age residual pottery sherds: Phase 0: [340] (1 sherd trampled into the natural geology); Phase 1: [359] (4 sherds) and [564] (2); Phase 2: [362] (2 sherds), [392] (1) and [609] (1); Phase 3: [320] (41 sherds), [341] (6), [377] (6), [384] (12) and [612] (1); Phase 4:

Figure 214 View south at the end of the 2006 excavation showing the whole excavated area including the plough-rutted yard and road surfaces in the western extension. Photo: The Heritage Network Ltd

Figure 215 View east at the end of the 2006 excavation showing the dark organic soils at the centre of the ceremonial hollow, ovens, buildings, chalk pebble and flint gravel surfaces. Photo: The Heritage Network Ltd

Context Phase Type Period Cat. No.

312 1 Spear MBA 10.28

608 1 Sword M/LBA 10.35

355 2–3 Spear MBA 10.24

341 3 Chisel LBA 10.49

341 3 Spear M/LBA 10.54

607 3 Axe BA 10.59

377 3–4 Axe BA 10.58

320 3–7 Spear MBA 10.21

551 2–5 Ingot LBA 10.57

203 5 Spear MBA 10.14

203 5 Spear MBA 10.15

350 5–6 Dagger MBA 10.33

350 5–6 Awl M/LBA 10.44

111 5–6 Chisel LBA 10.48

324 5–6 Chisel LBA 10.5

350 5–6 Ingot LBA 10.56

101 5–7 Spear MBA 10.11

311 6 Dirk MBA 10.32

538 6 Awl M/LBA 10.45

Table 5 Bronze Age metalwork from other stratified contexts

162 | Dea Senuna

wide, was laid on to the natural clay, perhaps to provide hard-standing for a congregation to observe participants and rituals at the centre (Figs 217, 280). Seventeen abraded potsherds dated from the Late Iron Age to c. ad 70 came from [373], as well as a copper-alloy 1st-century ad brooch (Cat. 5.33). A copper-alloy tweezers blade (Cat. 5.95) was recovered from [602].

On the western edge of the hollow, a pre-existing pathway, [633], nearly 2m wide, was replaced by a laid clay road surface, [613], the pottery from which is dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st century ad.

At the centre of the hollow, four circular or subcircular, probably domed, clay ovens were constructed, [386], [599], [608] & [622], each about 1.5–2m across. Oven [386] was at least 2 × 1m in size; [599] was at least 1.6 × 0.85m (Fig. 218); [608] was of uncertain dimensions as it ran under the north baulk of the excavation trench; and [622] was subcircular and at least 0.60 × 0.50m. Ovens [599] and [608] contained pottery dated Late Iron Age to c. ad 70.

Silt [401] and homogeneous organic soil [360], containing abraded Roman pottery, formed over gravel surface [373]. A soft, dark brown, organic, fine-grained, silty loam, [208], under [201], developed over the natural, [213]. It contained

axe-head, a socketed knife fragment and a fragment of a sword blade from near the hilt (found 1986–88; NHM Enq. No. 1332, 12.09.1996), and an Early Iron Age one – a rare La Tène I copper-alloy bow brooch dated to the 4th century bc (found May 1998; NHM Enq. No. 1865, 12.08.1998). The nearest parallel to it is a brooch from Barrington, Cambridgeshire, about 13km north-east of Ashwell End, a probable sacred site which produced several other Early Iron Age brooches (Fox 1923, 109–10; Hull and Hawkes 1987, 89, 96, 109, and pl. 32, cat. no. 2931).

Phase 1: late 1st century bc to ad 70 – creation of an open-air hollow and construction of ovens for ritual feasting and other ceremonies (Fig. 216)A possibly pre-existing dip in the natural clay, [213], [340], [526], [619], perhaps formed by a seasonal spring, was stripped of topsoil and subsoil down to the natural clay geology in the Late Iron Age to create a circular or subcircular artificial hollow, about 26m in diameter, with a near-vertical cut edge, [634], into the natural clay, [526]. Originally this artificial hollow may have been up to 1m deep.

At least, on the periphery of the base of the hollow, a flint gravel surface, [373], [513], [563], [602] & [615], at least 6.5m

602

615

373

386

road 613 599

608

403/503

PHASE 1

309, 312, 325, 513, 563

gravel surface

N 0 5m


634


634

622

Figure 216 A selection of key contexts for Phase 1


The contexts attributed to Phase 1 contained about 4069 pottery sherds dated Late Iron Age/late 1st century bc to c. ad 70.

Phase 2: mid 1st century ad to late 2nd century ad – a central clay platform, ovens and ritual feasting (Fig. 219)Organic soil [360] was sealed by a laid chalk pebble surface, [355] (see Fig. 231). The latter contained 35 potsherds dating from mid/late 1st century ad to early/mid 2nd century ad and 105 fragments of animal bone (only four burnt). Small finds: a glass bead (Cat. 9.28); a copper-alloy MBA spearhead fragment (Cat. 10.24); a copper-alloy IA coin of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.159).

Ovens [599] and [622] continued in use, while additional ovens [139]/[523], [351], [353]/[554], [534], [535] & [551]/[609] were constructed and used. The base of oven [139]/[523] measured 2.6 × 1.80 × 0.20m deep (Fig. 220); oven [351] measured a minimum of 2.0 × 1.0m (Fig. 221); oven [353]/[554] was c. 1.70m diameter (Fig. 222); oven [534] measured a minimum of 1.10 × 0.40m × 0.15m deep; oven [535] had a diameter of 1.60m; and oven [551]/[609] measured at least 2.0 × 1.40m. The fired clay structures of the ovens incorporated a variety of materials. Oven [139]/[523] contained Late Iron Age/mid 1st-century ad to late 2nd-century ad pottery, 189 fragments of animal bone, 358 fragments of burnt/calcined bone and small pieces of oyster shell. Small finds: half a chalk spindle whorl (Cat. 7.22); an iron sheet or blade fragment (SF 1205); a copper-alloy sheet

three abraded Roman potsherds, two animal bone fragments and a tiny iron hobnail (Cat. 8.17). These deposits and structures produced pottery, tile, glass, shell, iron objects (SF 881 & 956), a copper-alloy Iron Age coin (Cat. 2.22, a unit of Tasciovanus from [513]) and an illegible Early Roman coin (Cat. 2.228, from [563]).

At the base of post pit cut [397] (Phase 3), east of oven [353]/[554] (Phase 2), was a chalk, with occasional flint, rubble deposit, [403]/[503], running out of the sides of [397], which cut it, and below soil [393] (Phase 2). Its limits were not ascertained, but it measured at least 0.56 × 0.56m, although probably not much more. It was cut into the natural chalky clay geology. It appeared to be the base of a structure, maybe a hard-standing for a timber post, or an altar base. It contained two minute abraded sherds of Roman pottery and a tiny quantity of animal bone, all of which may have been contamination from [399], the lowest fill of intrusive cut [397].

Phase 1 contained only 1% of the total animal bone assemblage from the site (43,909 fragments), including 31 fragments of burnt/calcined bone (6% of the phase total). In order of prevalence, the identified species represented are sheep/goat (121 fragments), equal numbers of cattle and pig (45 each), sheep (4), dog (3), horse (2) and goat (1). Also present are large mammals (69 fragments), medium mammals (171) and small mammals (4). Species percentages in this phase include 58% sheep/goat and 20% each cattle and pig.

Figure 217 Laid flint gravel surface [602]. Photo: The Heritage Network Ltd

Figure 218 Plan of oven [599]

598

600

599

521

603

606

Stone

Shell

Pot

Bone

Iron

N 0 1m

164 | Dea Senuna

burnt/calcined bone fragments; 168 oyster shells, including one perforated; burnt materials; molluscs; and charcoal. Small finds: iron objects, including SF 1188 & 1194, and an iron fitting for a box (Cat. 8.8); part of a puddingstone rotary quern (SF 1190); a pottery spindle whorl (Cat. 7.14); a perforated Late Iron Age (LIA) potsherd (Cat. 8.33) and another LIA potsherd (SF 1189); two 1st- to 2nd-century ad bone hairpins (Cat. 5.82 & 5.88); two IA coins of Cunobelin, one a silver unit (Cat. 2.60), the other a copper-alloy unit (Cat. 2.109); and the copper-alloy catch-plate of a small brooch. The Small Finds Register sequence SF 1183–1195 includes ten special finds from this context all found close together at the same time, which may be a placed deposit not recognized during the excavation. It was given the context number [643] during post-excavation analysis. If it was indeed a placed deposit, it is possible that it belongs to Phase 5.

Clay oven [551]/[609] was constructed on the surface of [529]. The base was well compacted with patches of soft silt and two patches of ash each approximately 300mm in diameter. Its surface was scattered with 263 abraded potsherds dated from the mid 1st to the early/mid 2nd century ad, 305 fragments of animal bone, 610 fragments of burnt/calcined bone, charcoal, flint and 77 shell fragments,

fragment; an iron fragment (SF 1211); a bone pin point (SF 1212).

Oven [139]/[523] was constructed on soil [557], a firm, friable dark greyish-brown silty clay, lying over the natural clay, burnt and discoloured by the intense heat from the oven base above (Figs 223–4). This context contained finds apparently clustered in small groups, including 38 pottery sherds dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st century ad to early 2nd century ad, 124 fragments of animal bone, 118 fragments of burnt/calcined bone, 20 oyster shells and burnt organic matter. Small finds: iron objects and a 1st-century ad copper-alloy brooch (Cat. 5.12).

A central clay platform, [529] (in use during Phases 2–5), was constructed over clay oven [599] (Fig. 225). It measured at least 10m east–west by 2m north–south. It ran out of the excavation area to the north. Its east end was cut by the oyster midden pit [632], [364]/[511]/[525]/[601] (Phase 6). Its surface was covered with a light, fine, silty, ashy dust, but otherwise the clay was similar to that used for the various ovens. The surface was spread with numerous artefacts and ecofacts, including 544 abraded potsherds dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st- to early/mid/late 2nd-century ad; 12 fragments of ceramic building material; 361 animal bone fragments; 515

599

622

139/523

353/554 351

535534

platform 529

PHASE 2

road 627617

623

N 0 5m

551/609

chalk surface 355


634


634



bones, snail shell, burnt materials and fired clay fragments belonging to the oven superstructure (SF 938).

Context [315]/[350] consisted of a light grey-brown, friable, silty clay loam, [315] being uppermost and subject to some plough disturbance, while [350] was not. Rounded pebbles and flint fragments (size less than 50mm) were recorded in clusters in the soil matrix.

Context [315] (Phase 6) included here, as with [350], on account of their relevance to the continuing and central activities over platform [529], produced potsherds of the Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, tile fragments, animal and cremated bones and oyster shells. Small finds: an iron object; four IA coins, one of Addedomarus, two of Cunobelin and one uninscribed silver half-unit (Cat. 2.3, 2.90, 2.130 & 2.174); a copper-alloy Roman nummus of the House of Valentinian, ad 364–78 (Cat. 2.303), thought to be intrusive in this context, and an illegible silver IA/Roman coin (Cat. 2.334); a ceramic spindle whorl (Cat. 7.16); an iron object with a residue (SF 772); a toilet implement (Cat. 5.97); a copper-alloy brooch head (Cat. 5.49). It was observed by the excavator that the finds occurred in clusters of stone, bone and pottery.

Context [350] (Phase 5/6), the undisturbed continuation of [315], contained pottery sherds of the Late Iron Age/mid 1st to early/mid 2nd century ad and many special finds, including [641], a placed deposit of several Bronze Age and later artefacts arranged in an arc on the north-west side of oven [353]/[554]. Small finds: placed deposit [641] – a MBA copper-alloy rapier tip (Cat. 10.33); a LBA copper-alloy awl (Cat. 10.44); an iron object (SF 911); a LBA copper-alloy ingot fragment (Cat. 10.56); a fragment of copper-alloy sheet (SF 914); a copper-alloy penannular brooch (Cat. 5.47); other – a copper-alloy channelled binding (Cat. 8.29); iron objects (SF

mainly oyster. Small finds: four iron fragments; an iron object (SF 1258); a bone bobbin for weaving (Cat. 7.25); a copper-alloy fragment of possible statuary (Cat. 8.47); a copper-alloy brooch pin fragment (SF 1259). Platform [529] was edged by the other ovens recorded.

The base of oven [351] comprised several lenses of hard, compact, very dry, grey chalky clay, lying below layer [349]. Context [386], an underlying and earlier part of [351], a dark, red-brown, friable, silty clay, showed clear signs of burning. Oven [351] yielded 37 potsherds dated mid 1st to early/mid 2nd century ad, 58 animal bone fragments, and 230 pieces of burnt/calcined bone. The overlying context [349], a loose, friable, brown silty loam, seemed to be a continuation of homogeneous soil layer [314], but less disturbed by ploughing. It contained over 600 Late Iron Age/mid 1st- to mid/late 2nd-century ad potsherds, 688 burnt/calcined animal bones, 695 unburnt animal bones and 396 oyster shells. Small finds: iron swordblade and iron objects (Cat. 6.16 & SF 832); a bone spindle whorl (Cat. 7.23); a stamped samian sherd (Cat. 1.20); an illegible, uncertain Iron Age coin (Cat. 179a) and a broken finger ring (Cat. 5.64); a pottery spindle whorl (Cat. 7.18); a decorated glass fragment (Cat 9.16); and flint debitage (SF 858).

The base of oven [353]/[554] was below layer [350] (Phase 5/6). It comprised a pale yellowish, firm, clayey silt with traces of red staining from heat and charcoal flecks. About 60 fragments of burnt/calcined bone lay just above the oven base while large charcoal fragments surrounded its edge. Fired clay daub fragments spread over the top of the oven base in [315]/[350] were part of its superstructure. Finds included mainly burnt pottery and bone fragments, potsherds dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to early/mid 2nd century ad, animal

139/523

353

397

N 0 1m

Stone Pot


166 | Dea Senuna

351

351

349

351

314340

S

S N

N

386

349

N 0 1m

0 50cm

Stone ShellPot

Bone Chalk

Clay oven

Figure 221 Plan and section of oven [351]


353

AB

N 0 1m

Stone


Quadrant 1

Quadrant 2

523

552549547

557

557523

N 0 50cm

Stone

Figure 223 Plan of oven [523] under excavation

168 | Dea Senuna

(Phase 2) was below deposit [506] and above oven [534] and layer [564] (Phases 1–2). Oven [351] (Phases 2–5) was above oven [534]. Deposit [506] (Phase 6) was above oven [139]/[523] (Phases 2–5) (Table 6).

Clay-built oven base [534] contained pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to 2nd century ad and 101 animal bone specimens, 11 of them burnt/calcined. Small finds: a copper-alloy boss packed with lead-alloy (Cat. 8.19); an iron nail head (SF 1197); a LIA pottery rim sherd (SF 1199).

Layer [564], a very dark greyish brown silty loam with patches of clay, produced pottery dated Middle/Late Iron Age to 2nd century ad, 451 animal bone fragments, including unburnt and burnt/calcined, 38 shell fragments, mainly oyster, iron objects and burnt clay.

Subcircular clay oven base [535], approximately 1.60m across, constructed over soil [564], had a very loose, ash-like

850 & 923); polished bone fragments (SF 924, 926, 929 & 933).

Ovens [139]/[523], [351], [534] & [535] provide stratigraphic sequences. Oven [534] (Phase 2) was below ovens [351] and [535] and above layer [564]. Oven [535]

557

557

523

523

523

548550 553

547 549 552

W E

W E

WE

Stone Shell Bone

0 50cm

Figure 224 Sections of oven [523]

Stone

Shell

Pot

Bone

Flint

Iron

529

511632

cinder

ash

hard clay

hard clay

N 0 2m

charcoal

oven 599oven

551/609

Figure 225 Plan of part of the central clay platform [529]

506

I I

351 535 139/523

I I

386 534

I

564

Table 6 A matrix of oven relationships (numbers refer to oven contexts)


silt on its surface and yielded 62 pottery sherds, dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to later 2nd century ad, as well as 515 animal bone fragments, including burnt/calcined and unburnt, 41 shell fragments, mainly oyster, and a calcined human bone fragment (Figs 226–7).

On the west side of the hollow, gravel road surface [627] was laid over clay surface [613] (the latest potsherds from which are dated mid/late 2nd century ad), then later repaired by gravel [614]. Context [627] produced no datable finds but [613] contained pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st century to mid late 2nd century ad, tile, 65 animal bone fragments, both unburnt and burnt/calcined, and 81 shell fragments, mostly oyster. Context [614] had pottery dated mid 1st to later 2nd century ad, metal, animal bones and shell.

The fired clay oven structures incorporated Late Iron Age to late 2nd-century ad pottery sherds, suggesting that they may have been repaired over a long period of time.

Extensive homogeneous soils began to accumulate within the ceremonial hollow, [634]. Generally these soils ([362], [378], [392], [393], [395], [400]/[520] & [559]) were very dark brown, medium-firm to loose, friable, organic, clayey, silty loams, with occasional large stones (100mm+), frequent rounded pebbles (60% 20–30mm size) and chalk and charcoal flecks.

Soil [362], below soil [341] (Phase 3), itself below chalk pebble surface [327] (Phase 4 and 5), produced very abraded Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age to Late Iron Age/Roman potsherds. Small finds: two copper-alloy brooches (Cat. 5.8 & 5.56), two copper-alloy IA coins of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.103 & 2.148), a copper-alloy ring fragment (SF 892) and an iron ring fragment (SF 865).

506

523 535

351

oven base

N 0 1m

Stone

Figure 226 Plan of oven base [535]

Quadrant 1

Quadrant 2

535

564

564

535

N 0 1m

Stone Bone

Figure 227 Plan of oven [535] under excavation

170 | Dea Senuna

abraded pottery, dated mid 1st to early 2nd century ad, 48 unburnt and 61 burnt/calcined animal bone fragments, shell, charcoal and an iron object. It was cut by post pit [397] (Phase 3) and lay over chalk rubble deposit [403]/[503] (Phases 1, 2).

Context [400] was a dark greyish brown, firm, friable, silty clay loam, below [394] (Phase 3), containing very abraded mid 1st- to early 2nd-century ad pottery and 93 unburnt animal bone fragments.

Context [575] was a reddish grey, compact, clay surface, above coarse flint pebble surface [602] (Phase 1) and below contexts [540], a hard-packed, dark grey, clay layer, and [576], a chalk pebble surface (both Phase 3), which in turn lay beneath chalk pebble surface [536] (Phases 4, 5). Context [575] had abraded pottery, dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to later 2nd century ad.

Subcircular pit [617] was cut through oven base [608] (Phase 1) and into the natural geology (Fig. 228). It was 0.60m in diameter and 0.42m deep, 0.24m of which was into the natural. It contained a light brownish grey, loose, friable, ashy loam, [616], which had in it burnt stone, infrequent pebbles (less than 50mm in size), some dark soil in clods, abraded pottery, dated Late Iron Age to late 1st/early 2nd century ad, 532 animal bone fragments, mostly burnt/calcined and charcoal. Small finds: two iron objects (SF 1313 & 1314); a drilled animal bone, probably a bobbin for weaving (Cat. 7.24); a copper-alloy IA coin of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.108); a copper-alloy bracelet fragment, possibly deliberately broken (Cat. 5.3).

A second pit, [623], was cut through oven base [608] and into the natural below. It was oval, with dimensions of 0.40 × 0.24m at the surface, cone-shaped, with steep, sloping sides to a rounded base point at a depth of 0.19m. Its fill, [624], a grey/light brown, friable, soft, ashy clay, contained potsherds dated Late Iron Age to Roman, 62 calcined bone fragments and an iron nail (Fig. 229).

Deposits from Phases 2–6 produced 95% of the animal bone assemblage. In Phase 2, of the three predominant mammal species identified, sheep/goat, pig and cattle, the comparative percentages are 68%, 24% and 8% respectively. In the total bone assemblage from this phase there are significant numbers of fragments from medium mammals (2942 fragments), sheep/goat (612), large

Soil [378], below soil [369] (Phase 3), itself beneath context [327], had abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to 2nd century ad and 209 animal bone fragments, mainly unburnt.

Soil [392], below homogeneous soil [350] in the central area enclosed by chalk pebble surface [327], contained abraded pottery dated Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age to mid 1st to early 2nd century ad, 105 animal bone fragments, including 22 burnt/calcined bone, shell and six polished bone fragments (SF 943).

Soil [395], with an undulating surface beneath gravel deposit [391] (Phase 3), itself beneath chalk pebble surface [339] (the same as [103], [327], etc.), contained a fragment of abraded Roman pottery, shell and animal bone.

Soil [400]/[520], below soil [394] (Phase 3), itself below chalk pebble surface [374] (same as [327], etc.), had abraded potsherds, dated Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age to 2nd century ad, and 93 unburnt animal bone fragments.

Soil [559], below homogeneous central soil deposit [543] (Phase 3), produced animal bone and shell.

Soil [393], below [350], a very dark greyish brown, fine, loose and powdery, silty, sandy deposit, east of oven [353]/[554], yielded fragments of fired clay oven superstructure,

617608

616

N 0 50cm

Stone

608

608624

617

623623

SE

SE

NWNW

IronStoneN 0 50cm

0 1m

Figure 228 Plan of pit [617]

Figure 229 Plan and section of pit [623]


This soil lay over [362], 60% of which consisted of small rounded flint pebbles in a friable brown clayey silt matrix. This appeared to be a disturbed laid surface probably originating in Phase 2. It contained very abraded potsherds dating from the Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age to the Late Iron Age/Roman period. Small finds: two copper-alloy brooches (Cat. 5.8 & 5.56); two iron rings (SF 865 & 892); two copper-alloy IA coins of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.103 & 2.148).

Disturbed surface [362] lay above [371], a soft and loose mid brown/grey silty clay soil, dated by pottery as Late Iron Age to c. ad 70, so belonging to Phase 1.

Other homogeneous organic soils developed elsewhere within hollow [634], such as [308], [320], [318]/[335]/[346], [368], [377], [382], [384], [517], [518], [519], [543] & [573].

Dark greyish brown, fairly compact, friable, chalky loam [573], lying below chalk pebble surface [566], contained abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to early 2nd century ad, 143 animal bone fragments and a copper-alloy Iron Age coin of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.123).

Below homogeneous soil [517] and above homogeneous soil [559] was [543], a greyish brown, firm, friable, silty loam. It produced very abraded pottery, dated Middle Iron Age to Late Iron Age/c. ad 70, and 281 animal bone fragments.

mammals (224), pig (221), cattle (74), goat (40), sheep (30), small mammals (20), frog (120), toad (66) and amphibians (543), the latter three suggesting wet/damp conditions, perhaps around a spring. Other species represented in this phase include birds (36 fragments), horse (7), domestic fowl (6), hare (5), dog (4), domestic goose (4), partridge (1), teal (1), fish (1) and human (1). Phase 2 yielded 3049 burnt/calcined bone specimens, 43% of the phase animal bone total.

Phase 3: mid 1st century ad to late 2nd century ad – ritual feasting continues (Fig. 230)A dark brown, compact, clayey, organic soil, [341], developed over chalk surface [355]. It contained pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad and 365 small unburnt fragments of animal bone. Small finds: a copper-alloy Roman bracelet (Cat. 5.6); an as of Gaius (Cat. 2.184a); a decorated samian sherd (SF 764); a BA copper-alloy tanged chisel (Cat. 10.49); a copper-alloy object (SF 821); a fragment of a BA copper-alloy socketed spearhead (Cat. 10.54); an IA coin of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.34); and an iron object (SF 836).

Soil [344] was the same as [341], although looser. Small finds: an iron 1st-century ad knife (Cat. 7.6); and a copper-alloy IA coin of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.105).

chalk surface 355

PHASE 3

387

121/136139/523351

platform 529

397

road 584

618

551/609

N 0 5m


634


634


172 | Dea Senuna

slightly to very abraded Late Bronze Age to late 2nd-century ad pottery, most of which was dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st century ad to early/mid 2nd century ad. The excavators noted much animal bone – in fact, 1549 unburnt and 151 burnt/calcined fragments – and an apparently large number of pottery rims and bases. Other finds included metalwork, glass, tile, brick, 144 oyster shells, including five burnt, and other burnt materials. Small finds include: a fragment of lead (SF 560); a copper-alloy hairpin (Cat. 5.73); a glass rim sherd of a cup (Cat. 9.7); a copper-alloy wire bracelet (Cat. 5.2); an iron strip box fitting (Cat. 8.9); a glass bead (Cat. 9.24); a silver IA half-unit inscribed VEP (Cat. 2.177); 20 copper-alloy IA coins, two of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.13 & 2.21), one of Sego (Cat. 2.170), and 17 of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.63, 2.64, 2.66, 2.69, 2.89, 2.91, 2.92, 2.101, 2.114, 2.115, 2.116, 2.117, 2.118, 2.143, 2.146, 2.154 & 2.158); six Roman coins, two of Hadrian (Cat. 2.220 & 2.221) and four of the 4th century ad, ranging from 330–1 to 388–402 (Cat. 2.265, 2.285, 2.298 & 2.314); four copper-alloy Roman brooches, three dated to the 1st century ad (Cat. 5.9, 5.35, 5.38, 5.55); iron objects (SF 581, 608, 615 & 664); an iron disc (Cat. 8.30); an iron spearhead (Cat. 6.22); a silver finger ring (Cat. 5.61); a copper-alloy finger ring (Cat. 5.62); a copper-alloy ring (Cat. 5.71); a MBA copper-alloy spearhead (Cat. 10.21); a copper-alloy tack (Cat. 8.21); a copper-alloy possible scabbard binding (Cat. 6.11); a copper-alloy possible military chape (Cat. 6.3); copper-alloy fragments (SF 653 & 658); glass fragments (SF 656, 735, 736); two joining fragments of marble (Cat. 4.14); half a pottery spindle whorl (Cat. 7.15), the other half found in the ploughsoil ([300]); trimmed potsherd counters (Cat. 5.105 & 5.106); a bone counter (Cat. 5.108); a bone pin fragment (Cat. 5.85); and a fragment of brown/gold-coloured mica schist (Cat. 8.54), perhaps a votive offering like most of the above.

It is possible that 15 of the Iron Age coins, 13 of Cunobelin, one of Sego and one inscribed VEP, were from a disturbed votive hoard, given the closeness of their finding, as indicated by the Small Finds Register numbers issued on site (SF 557–613); if so, the hoard may have included others of the objects within that range of SF numbers, such as the copper wire bracelet, a coin of Hadrian and the Bronze Age spearhead. It may also be the case that the four 4th-century coins should have been ascribed the context number [101] rather than [320]. If it is an error, it is understandable given the homogeneous nature of the soil deposits. Alternatively, they may have been intrusive, owing to later trampling, burrowing animals and/or modern ploughing.

Homogeneous soils [517], [518] & [519] lay below chalk pebble surface [103], [327], etc., forming part of the slowly accumulated soil deposits in the central area of ceremonial hollow [634]. Context [517], a very dark greyish brown, compacted, friable, silty loam contained abraded pottery dated Middle/Late Iron Age to mid/later 1st century ad, 317 animal bone fragments, both unburnt and burnt/calcined, and a glass rim sherd (Cat. 9.11).

Contexts [318]/[335]/[346]/[382] made up an homogeneous, very dark greyish brown, friable, silty loam soil below chalk rubble floor [102]/[334] and produced abraded pottery dated Late Bronze Age/mid 1st century to mid/late 2nd century ad, 132 unburnt and 19 burnt/calcined animal bone fragments, a few oyster shells, charcoal, a fragment of glass (Cat. 9.13), a Mesolithic flint blade (Cat. 10.7), and three flint flakes (SF 781, 784 & 786).

From [377], a mid to dark brown, loose, friable, silty loam soil layer below chalk pebble surface [376], part of [327], etc., came very abraded Middle/Late Iron Age to mid 1st/2nd century ad pottery, 276 unburnt and 11 burnt/calcined animal bone fragments, 11 oyster shells and a fragment of a copper-alloy Bronze Age axe blade fragment (Cat. 10.58).

Below this layer, [377], was a similar soil, [384], a mid brown/grey, compact loam with hard patches of clay and silt, including occasional gravel, pebbles, charcoal and chalk. The recorder of the context noted a ‘patch of burnt flint, burnt bone and charcoal in a circular deposit of 60–70 cm diameter’ – this was not given a separate context number on site, but was instead allocated number [644] during post-excavation analysis. Soil [384] yielded very abraded pottery, dated Late Bronze Age to Late Iron Age/Roman, 420 bone specimens, including 35 burnt/calcined, 11 oyster and 62 snail shells, eight burnt stones, a struck flint, a tiny copper-alloy ferrule (Cat. 8.24) and an iron bradawl (Cat. 7.3).

A mid brown/grey, hard, friable, clayey silt soil matrix containing 70% angular and rounded flint gravel stones, [368], may be interpreted as a laid surface (although it was not recognized during the excavation) below homogeneous soil layer [320]. There were no finds. It was cut by posthole [370] (Phase 4).

Immediately below chalk pebble surface [327] and homogeneous soil [110] lay [320] (Phases 3–7), an homogeneous mid brown, friable, silty loam with a high organic content. Within the layer, an inverted tegula sealed a 10mm-thick layer of decayed chalk or mortar, beneath which was a spread of burnt clay. Layer [320] contained

313

320

376

N

N S

S

304327

341

355

373

377384

373

375

387

360401

Chalk

0 2m

A B

A B

381

0 1m

Figure 231 Section of gully [387]


natural chalky clay. It produced abraded pottery dated mid 1st to 2nd century ad, 26 unburnt and 15 burnt/calcined animal bone fragments, and mortar. Layer [117] was a very dark greyish brown, friable, clayey silt, containing a mortary lens and abraded pottery dated mid/late 1st to early–mid 2nd century ad.

There was a deposit of 105 oyster shells, [352], within homogeneous layer [320], dated by associated abraded pottery to mid 1st to early 2nd century ad.

Context [369] was a very hard and compact chalk and stone pebble surface in a grey/white chalky silt matrix, also including yellow sandy gravel, the latter material similar to observed repairs to overlying chalk pebble surfaces. It lay below [327], a chalk pebble surface, both sealing part of the outer area of homogeneous soils in hollow [634]. Surface [369] sealed layer [378], a very dark brown, friable, organic clay silt, containing abraded Late Iron Age/mid 1st- to 2nd-century ad pottery.

Context [397] was the cut of a substantial subcircular probable post pit, 0.56m long, 0.50m wide and 0.20m deep, to the east of oven [353]/[554], containing fills [398] and [399]. This pit cut [393] and [403]/[503]. Fill [398] was a loose brown silt with pottery dated Late Iron Age to the later 2nd century ad and three polished bone hairpin fragments (Cat. 5.83). It lay above circular fill [399], 0.12m diameter × 0.04m deep, a very dark brown, soft, crumbly/powdery soil, possibly the remains of the tip of a decayed timber post, containing pottery of late 1st- to late 2nd-century ad date. Both fills contained animal bone fragments, 32 unburnt and 21 burnt/calcined, and [399]

Context [308], another homogeneous soil, much like contexts [320], etc, was a mid brown deposit of silt clay loam, mostly friable, but with some more compact patches, principally where more clayey. The excavator noted ‘potsherds mostly lying horizontally … most oyster shell is vertically placed … no signs of tip lines or sloping interfaces. All the artefactual material was confined to the top 150mm of deposit; below this level, only animal bones were found. This lack of bedding planes may suggest boggy ground, with periodic redistribution of material by churning up.’ The context contained slightly to very abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age to 4th century ad, the majority being mid 1st to 2nd century ad. The later pottery may have been intruded by modern plough action, or by later trampling or burrowing animals. Other finds include tile, 105 unburnt and three burnt/calcined animal bone fragments, burnt materials and 12 oyster shells.

Cut [387] was filled with a very dark greyish brown, loose, chalky, silt, [381]. This was sealed below chalk pebble surface [376] and its repair [375]. It contained no finds and cut contexts [320], [373], [377] & [384] (Fig. 231). The excavated section of [387] was the terminal of a linear gully at least 0.59m long, 0.32m wide and 0.23m deep. It ran approximately east–west with steep, concave sides and a narrow rounded base. Its function was possibly a setting for timber posts, and certainly a boundary marker (Fig. 232).

Under [350] and [385] was a very dark greyish brown, organic silt, [392], soft in some patches, firm in others, with chalk and charcoal inclusions, as well as some larger stones (greater than 100mm) that tended to be in groups. It butted against oven [353]/[554] and layer [393]. It contained very abraded pottery, dated Late Bronze Age to mid 1st/early 2nd century ad, a polished bone fragment, 22 burnt/calcined and 83 unburnt animal bone fragments and shells.

Layer [393], a very dark greyish brown, loose, powdery, fine silt, lay below [350]. It produced abraded mid 1st- to early 2nd-century ad pottery, fragments of fired-clay oven superstructure, 61 burnt/calcined and 48 unburnt animal bone fragments, an iron object, 13 oyster shells, four of which were burnt, and snail shells.

Context [394], a very dark greyish brown, firm, friable, silty loam, lay below chalk pebble surface [374], itself part of [327], etc., and layer [362] and above [400] (Phase 2). It contained abraded pottery dated mid 1st to early 2nd century ad, 176 unburnt animal bone fragments, 18 oyster shells, a copper-alloy bow brooch (Cat. 5.17) and a copper-alloy Iron Age coin of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.149).

A very dark brown, friable, and loose, patchy organic silty loam, [395], with an undulating surface, produced a tiny quantity of abraded Roman pottery, animal bones and snail shells. It lay below [391], a firm flint gravel surface in a silty sand matrix, which in turn lay below chalk pebble surface [339], part of [103], [327], etc. It contained a fragment of burnt animal bone (Fig. 233).

The central clay platform, [529], continued to be used for ritual ceremonies associated with the surrounding ovens [139]/[523], [351] & [551]/[609]. Oven [121]/[136] was newly constructed. Its base, at least 1.50m across, was a very dark grey/brown, friable, silty clay, and its surface was spread with charcoal patches. It lay below [117] and above [132], the

387

384

384

N 0 50cm

Figure 232 Plan of gully [387] terminus

W E

339

391 395

324

Stone

0 50cm

Figure 233 Section showing [339], [391], [395]

174 | Dea Senuna

567

edge of 389/536 removed

594

565

612

314

351oven base

618

N 0 1m

Stone Shell Chalk

556chalk rubble

556chalk rubble

Figure 234 Plan of pit [618]


containing abraded pottery of Late Iron Age/mid 1st to 2nd century ad, 75 animal bone fragments and 12 oyster shells.

Context [607], above [614] (Phase 2) and below [584], was a packed flint gravel road surface, perhaps a substantial repair to [614], itself a repair to gravel road surface [627]. It produced abraded pottery attributable to the Roman period (Fig. 236). The layer above it, [584], was a hard, flint gravel road surface, with small flints in a light brownish grey silty clay matrix, below gravel road surface [578] (Phase 4). It produced abraded pottery dated mid 1st to mid/later 2nd century ad. Apparently the same as [584], and perhaps a repair to it, was [604], a compact flint gravel road surface in a light yellowish brown sandy clay matrix. It was below surfaces [583] and [591] (Phase 4). It contained pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to 2nd century ad, a copper-alloy scabbard ring (Cat. 6.13), animal bones and shells.

In Phase 3, of the three predominant mammal species identified, sheep/goat, pig and cattle, the comparative percentages are 74%, 17% and 9% respectively. In the total assemblage from this phase there are significant numbers of bone fragments from medium-sized mammals (2267), sheep/goat (700), large mammals (219), pig (164), cattle (85), sheep (19) and goat (9). Other species represented include birds (12 fragments), toad (11), dog (9), domestic fowl (7), hare (4), frog

contained some shell. A hard chalk rubble surface, [403], exposed in an area measuring 0.56 × 0.56m and to a depth of only 0.05m, not its bottom, was cut into the natural chalky clay geology at this point.

Surface [540], a hard-packed, dark grey clay, with sand and stone pebble inclusions, lay under chalk pebble surface [536] (Phases 4/5) and above chalk pebble surface [576]. It yielded abraded pottery of Late Iron Age to Roman date, 73 animal bone fragments, 11 oyster shells, glass, a circular lead object (SF 1234) and a copper-alloy Iron Age coin of Dubnovellaunos (Cat. 2.164). Chalk pebble surface [576] lay in turn above reddish grey clay surface [575] (Phase 2); it produced one small sherd of abraded Roman pottery and 36 animal bone fragments.

Cut [618] was a shallow subcircular pit, with gently sloping sides and a flat base, measuring 0.92 × 0.89m × 0.09m deep, containing fill [612], a greyish brown, fine, ashy silt, including abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, 89 animal bone fragments, including calcined, six oyster shells, charcoal and a copper-alloy possible brooch fragment (Figs 234–5). Pit [618] cut oven base [622] and may have been the base of a post pit. It lay between later structures [102]/[334] and under [389]/[556], closest to the latter. Pit [618] and its fill [612] lay under [594], a light brownish grey, compact, chalky sandy loam beneath structure [389]/[556],

618

594

IronStone Bone

N 0 1m

Figure 235 Plan of pit [618] excavated

Figure 236 Flint gravel road surface [607]. Photo: The Heritage Network Ltd

176 | Dea Senuna

coin of Rues (Cat. 2.53). Two 1st-century ad copper-alloy brooches were recovered from [339] (Cat. 5.26 & 5.34), while [536] also produced a 1st-century ad brooch (Cat. 5.42). Context [596] contained a dome-headed iron stud (Cat. 8.15).

The limit of the central area defined by the chalk pebble surface seems at first to have been emphasized, at least in places, by large timber posts. The evidence for these were a number of semi-circular cut-outs, measuring approximately 0.40–0.50m diameter, on and near the inner edge of the surface. In time, the posts had evidently been removed since there were no surviving post pipes or complete postholes, only the cut-outs. Eventually, the accumulating homogeneous soils in the central area covered the cut-outs, context [645] (Fig. 239).

Later, a circular or polygonal gully, [138]/[629], was cut through chalk pebble surface [103], etc. It was steep-sided and flat-bottomed and measured 0.70m wide by 0.20m deep. It was on the eastern edge of the western side of the chalk pebble surface, and followed it closely, helping to demarcate the central area with its organic, homogeneous soils, ovens and central clay platform. It may have held a timber sill beam and/or timber uprights, creating a fence, further defining and enclosing the central space and its ritual

(4), horse (3), partridge (2), roe deer (1), brent goose (1), bantam (1), wood pigeon (1) and fish (1). Phase 3 yielded 397 burnt/calcined bone specimens, 10% of the phase animal bone total.

Phase 4: mid/late 1st century ad to late 2nd/3rd century ad – ritual feasting continues (Fig. 237)The accumulated homogeneous soils ([320], etc.) and laid surfaces ([540], etc.) in the outer area of ceremonial hollow [634] were sealed by an extensive laid chalk pebble surface ([103], [108], [121], [130], [131], [134], [202], [209], [212], [303], [327], [338], [339], [374], [376], [380], [536], [566], [583], [595], [596] & [605]), leaving a sub-circular area, c. 14m in diameter, open for further soils to develop as a result of continuing ritual activities on and around the central clay platform [529] and ovens (Fig. 238). Abraded pottery associated with this chalk pebble surface is dated mid 1st to late 2nd century ad. The finds from [103] included ceramic building material, animal bones, oyster shell, iron nails, iron objects, stone, flint, burnt flint and slag. From [202] came animal bone, oyster shell, an iron nail and another iron object. Small finds: a small droplet of silver (Cat. 8.41); a pottery spindle whorl (Cat. 7.13); an Iron Age copper-alloy

PHASE 4

road 578

102/334114/342

139/523

351

370


138/629

121/136

platform 529551/609

N 0 5m


634


634



two glass beads (Cat. 9.25 & 9.26); and a fragment of glass (SF 782).

When the chalk rubble floor of building [102]/[334] was dismantled it was found to incorporate abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, ceramic building material, 128 unburnt animal bone fragments, 100 burnt/calcined animal bone fragments, 80 oyster shells, including one burnt, stone, flint, burnt flint and charcoal. Small finds: an iron drill-bit (Cat. 7.2); a tiny decorative iron stud or hobnail (Cat. 8.16); iron fragments; a coin of Vespasian, ad 71–2 (Cat. 2.208); a glass fragment; and a copper-alloy sheet fragment (SF 936).

Plough ruts in [102], the upper surface of the floor, yielded pottery of the late 3rd/4th century ad. The weight of the building caused a considerable depression in the surface of layer [335].

Central clay platform [529] and ovens [121]/[136], [139]/[523], [351] & [551]/[609] continued in use.

Homogeneous soils [125], [133], [308], [320], [363], [365], [367], [377], [384], [517], [518], [519] & [573] in the central area, now defined by the chalk pebble surface [103], etc. and by the gully/fence [138]/[629], continued to build up through the activities taking place there. Abraded pottery associated with these soil contexts is dated mostly mid/late 1st to 2nd century ad. Contexts [308], [377] & [384] had a few residual sherds dated Late Bronze Age to Late Iron Age. Contexts [125], [308] & [320] had also some 3rd- to 4th-century ad sherds, probably contamination as a result of ploughing or other activities. Within homogeneous soil [320] was a structured deposit of 105 oyster shells, [352], with a few sherds dated mid 1st to early 2nd century ad, perhaps all residual. Context [133] produced sherds dated mid/late 1st to early 2nd century ad, a few unburnt animal bone fragments, a calcined bone fragment and an iron nail; from [308] came pottery and tile, 108 animal bone fragments, 12 oyster shells and burnt

activities. Its fill, [137]/[628], was a mid grey, loose to friable, clay silt that produced no finds.

A small building with a chalk rubble floor, [102]/[334], measuring 2.10 × 1.40m, was constructed on the south side of the central soil-filled area, as it was now defined by the chalk pebble perimeter. The building measured approximately 2.5 × 2.0m overall, including a foundation gully for a sill beam, [114]/[342], around it. The gully had timber corner posts, and probably other timber uprights springing from the sill beam. The walls were most likely constructed of timber, clay and stone and there was a tiled timber roof, the evidence for which was a spread of tile and stone across the surface of [320] to the west, presumably deposited there as a result of demolition or collapse from decay. Foundation gully [114]/[342] was vertical-sided with a flat base, 0.13–0.20m deep, and 0.18–0.28m wide. It cut [335], part of the homogeneous fill of hollow [634] (Figs 240–2).

Context [335], the same as [320] (Phase 3), was a dark brown, friable, silty loam, below homogeneous layer [101], [333] & [334] and above [309] (Phase 1), the same as [373], a gravel surface laid on [340], the natural clay geology forming the base of [634]. Layer [335] contained abraded pottery dated Late Bronze Age/mid 1st century ad to mid/late 2nd century ad, 132 unburnt and 12 burnt/calcined animal bone fragments, 118 snail shells, charcoal and four flint flakes (SF 781, 784, 786 & 788). A fragment of a copper-alloy decorated votive plaque was placed immediately under chalk rubble-floored structure [102]/[334], possibly a foundation deposit (Cat. 3.6).

The foundation gully, [114]/[342], of the small building had two fills, which might suggest two phases of construction. The lower fill, [345], was a greyish brown, loose, silty loam which might have been the decayed remains of a timber sill beam. A post setting was observed within this fill, evidenced by a cluster of large pottery and stone fragments arranged as a post packing above a flat chalk stone base on which to rest a post (Figs 243–5). This lower fill produced abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to early/mid 2nd century ad, 316 burnt/calcined and 165 unburnt animal bone fragments and 33 oyster shells. Small finds: a small glass bead (Cat. 9.27); a fragment of calcined bone (SF 852); and an iron object (SF 888).

The upper fill, [118]/[343], consisted of a dark greyish brown, loose, friable, silty clay loam, containing abraded pottery dated mid/late 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, ceramic building material, 161 unburnt and 231 burnt/calcined animal bone fragments, 258 oyster shell fragments, including 22 burnt, a burnt stone (recorded under [114]) and an iron nail. Small finds: an iron brooch (Cat. 5.44); a copper-alloy object (SF 766); a copper-alloy wire (SF 774);

SW NE40.57

natural

139

117 117

121 132

111

SWNE

topsoil

subsoil

natural

117

121132

FlintChalk

0 2m

Figure 238 Sections showing chalk pebble surface [121]

Figure 239 View east of part of chalk pebble surface [327] showing cut-outs for posts. Photo: Gilbert Burleigh 2004

178 | Dea Senuna

oyster shelldeposit

chalkdeposit

chalkfoundation

chalk/rubble foundation

352

320

320

gravel

334

334

320

342

320

342

320

SS

N

N

N 0 1m0 1m

oyster shelldeposit

chalkdeposit

chalkfoundation

chalk/rubble foundation

352

320

320

gravel

334

334

320

342

320

342

320

SS

N

N

N 0 1m0 1m

Figure 240 Plan of excavated chalk rubble floored building [102]/[334] and east-facing section through chalk rubble floored building [102]/[334]

NS

E SW N

108 108108304

312

325

325309340

327

321

335

335

337335

335334114114

309

0 2m

321

Figure 241 East-facing section along Trench 3 showing [102]/[334]


345

334

underlying chalk

N 0 50cm

Stone Pot Flint

114/342

E W E W

334

342

345

334

343

346

Bone

0 50cm

Chalk

334343345 334345

334

346

342N S

Stone Shell Pot

Bone

N 0 50m

Figure 242 Chalk rubble floored building [102]/[334] under excavation in 2005 showing foundation trench [114]/[342]. Photo: Gilbert Burleigh

Figure 243 Chalk rubble floored building [102]/[334] showing foundation trench [114]/[342] and corner stone post-pad

Figure 244 Sections through [102]/[334]

Figure 245 Plans and sections of foundation gully [114]/[342]

180 | Dea Senuna

[140], [321], [333] & [375] consisted of a compact yellow to orange to brown, sandy, flint gravel mix. From [107] came three abraded Roman sherds, an animal bone and two oyster shells; [321] produced pottery dated Late Iron Age to later 2nd century ad and eight animal bone specimens; and some tile and eight animal bone specimens were recovered from [375]. Contexts [561] and [562] were very dark greyish brown, friable, clayey silts that formed over that part of the chalk pebble surface given the context number [339] and below pig deposit [528]/[555] (see below). They contained abraded pottery dated mid 1st to mid/later 2nd century ad, 139 animal bone fragments, 48 oyster shells, one of them burnt, and other burnt materials. Context [562] also produced a copper-alloy pin fragment (SF 1241).

Boundary gully [138]/[629], cut into chalk pebble surface [103], etc. on the west side of the central hollow ([634]), was recut as a beam slot ([115], [328], [330], [347] & [570]) and contained a soil fill ([116], [310], [326], [329], [533] & [571]) (Figs 248–9). The recut gully was a series of short, straight, near-vertical-sided, flat-bottomed, lengths, giving the appearance of a polygonal boundary enclosing the central hollow. It was 0.20–0.25m wide and 0.10–0.15m deep. It very likely contained ground beams supporting timber uprights, constituting a fence or wall (Figs 250–1). Context [570] was the butt end of the beam slot at its north end, presumably adjacent to an entrance passageway (Fig. 252). The single fill of the beam slot was a friable, dark greyish-brown, slightly sandy silt containing abraded pottery of mid 1st to later 2nd century ad date, one oyster shell, five animal bone fragments, including a calcined bone, and a copper-alloy hairpin (Cat. 5.74).

On the south side of the building with chalk rubble floor, [102]/[334], a placed deposit ([123]) lay at the base of homogeneous layer [101] and over foundation gully cut [114]/[342] and its fill [118]/[343]. The deposit consisted of a small, compact group of 18 oyster shells associated with an Early Roman potsherd, three iron nails and a flint.

Building [102]/[334] was replaced by a similar structure, [389]/[556], on a slightly different alignment and very close by, above soils [365], [574] and [594] and below soil [314] (Figs 253–4). It lay on the eastern edge of the excavation area and ran out of it, so its full plan was not recovered, although it was probably of similar dimensions to [102]/[334], at least 1.50m by at least 1.20m. There was no sign of a foundation gully for this structure, but a very substantial post pad, [565], constructed from flint and sandstone rubble, was sited at its north-west end. Post pad [565] had pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to 2nd century ad. The floor of building [389]/[556] consisted of chalk rubble blocks which had been badly damaged and disturbed by ploughing (Fig. 255). It yielded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/later 2nd century ad, four tile pieces, 19 daub pieces, 388 animal bone fragments, including four burnt/calcined, charcoal and fire-cracked stone. Small finds: a copper-alloy brooch (Cat. 5.25), three copper-alloy fragments, possibly brooch parts (SF 1240, 1242 & 1243) and a copper-alloy rod fragment (SF 1265).

Structure [389]/[556] lay within homogeneous soil layer [365], which was a dark brown, friable, clayey silt, containing abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to

materials; a copper-alloy brooch (Cat. 5.27) was recovered from [365]; context [367] produced pottery, 86 animal bone fragments and five copper-alloy Iron Age coins, one each of Tasciovanus, Dias and Rues, and two of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.38, 2.50, 2.59, 2.104 & 2.131). For [320], [377], [384], [517], [518], [519] & [573], see above in Phase 3.

Context [370] was the cut of a very shallow, small pit, possibly the base of a posthole, in central homogeneous soil [368] (Phase 3). It was subcircular, measuring 0.22–0.27m across, 0.04m deep, with a flat base. Its fill, [402], was a very dark greyish brown, friable, chalky, organic silt, possibly the decayed tip of a timber post. There were no associated finds (Fig. 246).

On the western side of ceremonial hollow [634], gravel road surface [584]/[604] was replaced by a laid chalk pebble surface with flint gravel inclusions, [591], with areas of denser, firmer, flint gravel in silt, [578]/[583]; surface [591] merged into chalk pebble surface [327] to the east. These contexts represent a new north–south road surface on the west, and to the east a continuation of courtyard surface [327], etc. Context [591] yielded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to 2nd century ad, tile fragments, animal bones and shells. Context [578] produced pottery dated mid 1st to 2nd century ad, tiles, animal bones and shells. Contexts [578], [583] & [591] lay under gravel surfaces [542], [560] and [586] (Phase 5).

In Phase 4, of the three predominant mammal species identified, sheep/goat, pig and cattle, the comparative percentages are 69%, 13% and 18% respectively. In the total assemblage from this phase there are significant numbers of bone fragments from medium mammals (1240), large mammals (291), sheep/goat (277), cattle (76), pig (56), small mammals (10), sheep (9) and goat (1). Other species represented include birds (13 fragments), domestic fowl (4), dog (3), horse (2) and frog (1). Phase 4 yielded 1515 burnt/calcined bone specimens, 58% of the phase animal bone total.

Phase 5: end of 2nd century ad to 3rd century ad – ritual feasting continues alongside placed structured deposits and other votive offerings (Fig. 247)The chalk pebble surface, [103], etc., was repaired in various places, presumably because of wear. Mortar repairs [107],

N

Stone

0 50cm

368

370

402

Figure 246 Plan of posthole [370]


PHASE 5

138/629

389/556

cut 210

139/523351


121/136

platform 529road 577/590 542 586/631560

N 0 5m

cut 570

551/609

clay surface 356/357


634


634

Figure 247 Plan of a selection of key contexts for Phase 5

SWNE

40.63110

116 115

topsoil

110

41.01

103

103

115

SW NE

116133

Stone

0 50cm

Figure 248 Sections of beam-slot [115]

182 | Dea Senuna

and a fragment of the base of a glass vessel (Cat. 9.18). A very similar deposit in the same vicinity, [582], had a high concentration of finds, including abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/later 2nd century ad, one tile, 30 pieces of daub, 556 animal bone fragments, much of it burnt/calcined, stone, a glass fragment (SF 1261), a lump of iron slag and an iron object (SF 1264) (Fig. 256).

In the central area enclosed by the chalk pebble surface and the timber fence homogeneous dark brown, friable, loamy, organic soils continued to accumulate ([101], [110], [111], [117], [133], [135], [201], [204], [207], [208], [324], [349], [350], [354], [363], [365], [366], [372], [379], [383], [385], [390], [396], [512], [521], [531], [539] & [567]) (Fig. 257). Abraded pottery dated these soils Late Iron Age/mid 1st to late 4th century ad. Very large numbers of finds in these soils included, from [101] (which continued to accumulate through the following Phases 6 and 7), pottery dated mid 1st/early 2nd to mid/late 3rd century ad, 201 pieces of ceramic building material, 33 pieces of opus signinum, 765 animal bone specimens, only 13 of which were burnt/calcined, 247 oyster shells, stone and flint. Small finds: an IA gold coin of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.6); two silver coins, one an IA unit of Dias, the other a denarius of Augustus (Cat. 2.49 & 2.181); 36 copper-alloy coins, five of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.11, 2.12, 2.24, 2.29 & 2.33), one of Dias (Cat. 2.51), eight of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.71, 2.79, 2.85, 2.99, 2.106, 2.110, 2.126 & 2.139), two Roman 1st-century ad (Cat. 2.200 & 2.204), two 2nd-century (Cat. 2.217 & 2.225), six 3rd-century (Cat. 2.232, 2.238, 2.239, 2.243, 2.255 & 2.256) and 15 4th-century, the latest dated ad 364–78

mid/late 2nd century ad, 857 animal bone fragments, of which 390 were burnt/calcined, 189 oyster shells, including six burnt, and one cockle shell, eight tile fragments and eight daub pieces. Small finds: glass fragments (Cat. 9.6 & SF 890), a copper-alloy Flavian coin dated c. 69–96 ad (Cat. 2.215), an illegible copper-alloy IA coin (Cat. 2.179), a copper-alloy brooch (Cat. 5.27) and two fragments of burnt polished bone (SF 891 & 893). Soil [574] yielded a perforated oyster shell.

The central clay surface, [529], with its clay oven [551]/[609] and surrounding clay ovens [121]/[136], [139]/[523] & [351], continued to be the focus of ritual activities in the centre of hollow [634]. Near the base of oven [551]/[609] was a very dark greyish brown, soft, friable, ashy deposit, [572], containing a tightly packed collection of abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, 222 animal bone fragments, many burnt/calcined, an oyster shell, a sherd of burnt samian, charcoal

decayed chalk 326

324

339

EW 328

Stone Chalk

0 50cm

347 390

339

N 0 50cm

Figure 249 South-facing section of beam-slot [328]

Figure 250 Plan of beam-slot [347] cut into chalk pebble surface [339]

Figure 251 View south along beam-slot [328]/[330] cutting chalk pebble surface [303]/[338]/[339]. Photo: Gilbert Burleigh 2004


(Cat. 2.263, 2.266, 2.267, 2.272, 2.273, 2.274, 2.278, 2.284, 2.287, 2.293, 2.299, 2.305, 2.317, 2.319 & 2.323); a placed deposit of seven BA axes, 14 spears, a sword, a dagger, a gouge, two awls and two chisels (see [635] below); two votive leaf fragments (Cat. 3.1 & 3.5); pipeclay figurine fragments of Mercury and Venus (Cat. 4.3, 4.4, 4.6 & 4.7); a LIA copper-alloy scabbard chape (Cat. 6.2); two copper-alloy possible scabbard bindings (Cat. 6.8 & 6.10); a copper-alloy military mount (Cat. 6.32); a copper-alloy bracelet (Cat. 5.4), two 1st-century ad copper-alloy brooches (Cat. 5.15 & 5.37); a copper-alloy finger ring (Cat. 5.63); copper-alloy tweezers (Cat. 5.94); a copper-alloy nail cleaner (Cat. 5.96); a copper-alloy drop hinge from a box (Cat. 8.1); a copper-alloy binding (Cat. 8.28); a copper-alloy bar (Cat. 8.45); iron objects, including the possible tip of a military standard (Cat. 6.20); an iron arrowhead (Cat. 6.26); two iron spearheads (Cat. 6.21 & 6.25); an iron axe-head (Cat. 7.1); an iron finger ring (Cat. 5.69); an iron strap hinge from a box (Cat. 8.4); an iron binding from a box (Cat. 8.10); an iron wall hook (Cat. 8.13); an iron door stud (Cat. 8.14); a folded lead-alloy sheet (Cat. 8.31); a lead-alloy pot repair (Cat. 8.34); a rim fragment of a glass bowl and a glass handle fragment (Cat. 9.5 & 9.21); and a stone ring (Cat. 5.110).

Soil [110] (which continued into Phase 6) produced pottery dated mid/late 1st to mid/later 2nd century ad, metal, 63 pieces of ceramic building material, mortar, 68 animal bone fragments, of which only five were burnt/calcined bone, 40 oyster shells, slag, stone and flint. Small

chalk surface 103/339

521

579

570

571

580 568

midden

N 0 1m

Pot Bone

plough rut

Figure 252 Plan of beam-slot terminus [570] cut into chalk pebble surface [103]/[339]

365365

365365

389389

Chalk floored building

N 0 1m

Figure 253 Plan of chalk rubble floored building [389] in 2005

184 | Dea Senuna

75 oyster shells, charcoal, six pieces of stone, 22 of flint and 30 iron objects. Small finds: a rim fragment of a glass bowl (Cat. 9.4); a copper-alloy possible scabbard binding (Cat. 6.9); a copper-alloy possible scabbard fragment (Cat. 6.4); a deliberately broken copper-alloy military bracelet, an armilla (Cat. 6.33 & 6.34); a copper-alloy 1st-century ad brooch (Cat. 5.29); a copper-alloy buckle fragment (Cat. 8.44); a copper-alloy needle (Cat. 5.90); five IA coins, one of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.44), three of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.61, 2.72 & 2.127) and one Agr (Cat. 2.162); two Roman coins, one of Claudius I (Cat. 2.202), and one of Nero, ad 66 (Cat. 2.206). With the sequential Register numbers SF 190–194 five of these coins may in themselves have constituted a placed, structured votive deposit, not recognized when excavated on site. From [204] there were eight abraded Roman potsherds, 51 animal bones, an oyster shell and an iron object; and from [207], an iron finger ring (Cat. 5.70).

Context [324] produced pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid to late 1st to early/mid 2nd to early 3rd century ad (over 200 sherds are dated to the 2nd–3rd centuries ad), 15 Roman

finds: a Venus pipeclay figurine fragment (Cat. 4.4); an iron hinge strap (Cat. 8.5); an iron staple for a drop hinge (Cat. 8.12); eight iron objects; a copper-alloy nail cleaner fragment (Cat. 5.98); a copper-alloy handle staple for a box (Cat. 8.6); part of the base of a glass vessel (Cat. 9.12).

Soil [111] yielded pottery dated mid/late 1st to mid/later 2nd century ad, 20 pieces of ceramic building material, 19 pieces of mortar, daub, 52 pieces of animal bone, including 14 burnt/calcined, 33 oyster shells, iron nails, other iron objects, copper-alloy Iron Age coins of Addedomaros (Cat. 2.2) and Dubnovellaunos (Cat. 2.167) and other coins. From [117] came pottery dated mid/late 1st to early/mid 2nd century ad, 34 animal bones, an oyster shell, stone and flint; from [133] there was pottery dated mid–late 1st/early 2nd century ad and animal bone; and from [135] came animal bone and an iron object.

The finds from [201] consisted of 374 abraded potsherds, dated Late Iron Age to 2nd century ad, 40 pieces of ceramic building material, 11 pieces of daub, 428 fragments of unburnt animal bone, 319 fragments of burnt/calcined bone,

556

565

601

N S

601525 556

351

Stone Pot Bone

N 0 50cm

Chalk

Figure 254 Section and plan of chalk rubble floored building [389]/[556] in 2006

Figure 255 View east of chalk rubble floored building [389]/[556] and its stone post-pad [565]. Photo: The Heritage Network Ltd


fragments, including 688 burnt/calcined, 396 oyster shells, of which 33 were burnt, four Roman tiles, 39 daub and fired clay fragments, and charcoal. Small finds: a bone spindle whorl (Cat. 7.23); a stamped samian sherd (Cat. 1.20); a copper-alloy finger ring (Cat. 5.64); an illegible uncertain Iron Age copper-alloy coin (Cat. 2.179a); a copper-alloy toilet implement (Cat. 5.99); a LIA iron sword blade, deliberately bent and snapped (Cat. 6.16); an iron object (SF 832); a pottery spindle whorl (Cat. 7.18); a decorated glass vessel fragment (Cat. 9.16); flint debitage (SF 858).

Context [350] (Phase 5/6), the undisturbed continuation of [315], contained pottery sherds of Late Iron Age/mid 1st- to early/mid 2nd-century ad date, 16 Roman tile pieces and 59 fragments of daub and fired clay, 627 animal bone fragments, including 272 burnt/calcined, charcoal and 19 oyster shells, two of them burnt. Many special finds came from this soil layer, including [641], a placed deposit of several Bronze Age and later artefacts arranged in an arc on the north-west side of oven [353]/[554]. Small finds: from [641], a MBA copper-alloy rapier tip (Cat. 10.33); a LB copper-alloy awl (Cat. 10.44); an iron object (SF 911); a LBA copper-alloy ingot fragment (Cat. 10.56); a fragment of copper-alloy sheet (SF 914); a copper-alloy penannular brooch (Cat. 5.47); from other contexts, a copper-alloy binding (Cat. 8.29); iron objects (SF 850 & 923); polished bone fragments (SF 924, 926, 929 & 933). SF 925 was recorded on site as prehistoric pottery, but is more likely to be fired-clay fragments of the superstructure of oven [353]/[554].

tile fragments and 58 pieces of daub, 4537 animal bone specimens, including 2207 burnt/calcined, 233 oyster shells and charcoal. Small finds: ten glass fragments, including drinking vessels and bottles of the 1st to 3rd centuries ad and a window fragment dated earlier than ad 300 (Cat. 9.10 & 9.19); a head stud and five other 1st-century ad copper-alloy brooches (Cat. 5.18, 5.20, 5.21, 5.22, 5.30 & 5.45); an iron brooch (Cat. 5.48); iron nails and other fragmentary objects (SF 998, 1013, 1014, 1015 & 1017); part of a bone hinge from a box (Cat. 8.2); ten IA coins, including gold and copper-alloy coins of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.7 & 2.31), a copper-alloy coin of Rues (Cat. 2.57) and seven copper-alloy coins of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.65, 2.73, 2.74, 2.119, 2.120, 2.142 & 2.144); four Roman coins, one each of Claudius I (ad 41–54; Cat. 2.198), Antoninus Pius (ad 153–55; Cat. 2.224), Constans (ad 337–40; Cat. 2.277) and House of Valentinian (ad 364–78; Cat. 2.300), although the last two could be intrusive in the context; a copper-alloy hairpin fragment (Cat. 5.77) and a probable pinhead (Cat. 5.81); a copper-alloy seal box (Cat. 5.100); copper-alloy fragments (SF 1016); a copper-alloy sheet (SF 857); three copper-alloy objects (Cat. 8.45 & 8.46, SF 765); a copper-alloy stud (Cat. 8.18); a copper-alloy boss (Cat. 8.20); a copper-alloy LBA tanged chisel (Cat. 10.50); a stamped ceramic handle (Cat. 1.18); a clunch stone spindle whorl (Cat. 7.21); a worked flint borer (Cat. 10.4); a stone counter (Cat. 5.107); and a burnt fossil amulet (Cat. 8.53).

The finds from [349] consisted of pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to early/mid 2nd century ad, 1383 animal bone

101

topsoiltopsoil

111

136

113120108112

107122125

Stone Chalk

0 2m

NW SEWE

Figure 256 View west in 2006 showing central clay platform on right, clay oven bases on left, pig [538], chalk and gravel yard and road surfaces. Photo: The Heritage Network Ltd

Figure 257 Section showing soil layers [101]/[111] in 2003

186 | Dea Senuna

fragments, including much burnt/calcined, placed pig deposits [538] and [592] (see below), two fragments of burnt polished bone, 336 oyster shells, including 45 burnt, seven mussel shells, 194 snail shells and charcoal. Small finds: a silver Continental IA coin (Cat. 2.178); six copper-alloy IA coins, two of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.14 & 2.26), one of Andoco (Cat. 2. 47), one of Rues (Cat. 2. 52) and two Eastern British (Cat. 2.171 & 2.172); two copper-alloy Roman coins, an as of Claudius I, ad 41–54, and a radiate of Tetricus II, c. ad 274–96 (Cat. 2.186 & 2.245); a copper-alloy brooch pin (Cat. 5.54); a 1st- to 2nd-century ad bone hairpin (Cat. 5.84); an iron stylus (Cat. 5.102); six other iron objects (Cat. 6.24, SF 1178, 1251, 1255, 1262 & 1268); a pierced oyster shell (Cat. 8.50); and a natural (?) stone nodule with gold mica on its surface (SF 1263). It is probable that much of this material was deliberately deposited as votive offerings.

Within these homogeneous soils a number of special structured deposits were placed. An assemblage of seven objects, [206], was found in a discrete, compact group within homogeneous soil [201], a dark brown, fine-grained, organic, silty loam. The assemblage was tightly concentrated in an area measuring c. 0.20 × 0.15m, on the north-facing edge of chalk pebble surface [202]. It consisted of a gold stater of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.5), a silver uniface uninscribed quarter-stater (Cat. 2.176), a copper-alloy coin of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.98), two iron spearheads placed side by side (Cat. 6.18 & 6.19), a glass vessel rim sherd, possibly from a Roman bottle (SF 184) and a copper-alloy sheet fragment, possibly the tip of a decorated votive leaf plaque (Cat. 3.7).

Structured placed deposit [203] included about 248 objects in a dark brown, fine-grained, friable, organic loam, which was soft, easily worked and almost indistinguishable from homogeneous soil context [201]. The objects were found together in a discrete deposit buried at one time in a shallow, subrectangular pit, [210], its long axis oriented north-west–south-east, measuring 0.82 × 0.46m wide and 0.20m deep; it was cut into homogeneous soil layer [201], filling the interior of the defined subcircular enclosed hollow [634]. This shallow pit, [210], cut into the eastern edge of defining chalk pebble surface [202]. The placed deposit was about 0.35m below the field surface. It extended over an area of about 0.80 × 0.45m and lay adjacent to, and immediately inside, chalk pebble surface [103]/[202], which marked the boundary of the centre of the hollow at the time of deposition. An isolated chalk block measuring c. 0.48 × 0.22 × 0.20m lay on the south-east side of the pit, just overlapping the edge of cut [210]. This may have been a marker or possibly the last remnant of an original cairn over the pit (Figs 258–9).

The finds from [203] included pottery dated to the early to later 2nd century ad, a tile, glass, 38 animal bone fragments, including a calcined bone fragment, an oyster shell and charcoal. Small finds: about 140 cut up pieces of iron mail armour in four groups (Cat. 6.1); seven IA coins, six of copper alloy, two of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.19 & 2.25) and four of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.83, 2.96, 2.157 & 2.161), and one silver uninscribed unit (Cat. 2.175); three very worn copper-alloy Roman coins of Claudius I, Vespasian and Hadrian (Cat. 2.185, 2.212 & 2.222) – the coin of Claudius has been reused as an amulet, attested by the perforation drilled from

From soil [354] there was pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to 3rd century ad, eight Roman tile fragments, a copper-alloy bow brooch (Cat. 5.16), 22 oyster shells and 174 animal bone fragments, including three burnt/calcined. From [365] there was pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad; eight Roman tile fragments and eight daub and fired clay fragments, 857 animal bone fragments, including 390 burnt/calcined, 189 oyster shells, including six burnt, one cockle shell, flints and opus signinum. Small finds: glass sherds of a bowl (Cat. 9.6) and another vessel (SF 890); two copper-alloy coins (Cat. 2.179 & 2.215), an illegible IA unit and a Flavian dupondius; a copper-alloy brooch (Cat. 5.2); two pieces of burnt polished bone (SF 891 & 893).

Context [366] yielded 11 animal bone fragments, including two burnt/calcined bone. From [372] there was pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to early 2nd century ad, including four platters, 401 animal bone fragments, of which 132 were burnt/calcined, and 11 oyster shells. Small finds: a copper-alloy brooch (Cat. 5.14); two copper-alloy fragments (SF 895); a copper-alloy IA coin of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.132).

From [383] there was pottery dated Late Iron Age to 2nd century ad, 31 animal bone fragments, of which 12 were burnt/calcined, and charcoal. Small finds: three copper-alloy IA coins, one of Tasciovanus and two of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.30, 2.130 & 2.147); a pottery spindle whorl (Cat. 7.16); a Roman pot base containing a residue (SF 772); a pounder stone? (SF 779); a copper-alloy needle (SF 783); a glass sherd (SF 803); an iron object (SF 861); a sherd of figured samian (Cat. 1.25); a copper-alloy fragment (SF 901); and a copper-alloy brooch head (SF 808).

Context [385] produced very abraded potsherds dated Middle/Late Iron Age to 2nd century ad, 65 animal bone fragments, including 17 burnt/calcined, one oyster shell and 37 snail shells. From [390] there were potsherds dated mid 1st to late 2nd century ad, 72 snail shells and an iron object (SF 937). From [396] came 66 animal bone fragments, including two burnt/calcined, one oyster shell and a copper-alloy finger ring (Cat. 5.67). Pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to later 2nd century ad came from [531], together with metalwork, 231 animal bone fragments, three oyster shells, 30 snail shells and charcoal. Thirty-six animal bone fragments were recovered from [539]. From [567] came pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to early 2nd century ad and 52 animal bone fragments, and from [571] came one piece of calcined bone. From [512] came pottery dated mid 1st to late 2nd/3rd century ad, 1876 animal bone fragments, including [642], a placed deposit of larger ovicaprid bones, 2 unburnt horn fragments, 8 fragments of burnt bone and a fragment of a burnt bone pin (SF 1169). Small finds: iron objects (SF 1160, 1165 & 1166); an iron fitting for a box (Cat. 8.7); and a copper-alloy IA coin of Andoco (Cat. 2.46).

Context [521], part of the homogeneous soils in the area defined by chalk pebble surface [103], [327], etc., lay on the north edge of the main excavation square, between the majority of pig deposits to the west and oven base [551] to the east, above clay platform [529] and oven [608] and below homogeneous soil [510]. It was a very dark brown, firm, silty loam, containing abraded pottery, dated Middle/Late Iron Age to early/mid 2nd century ad, 3081 animal bone


(Cat.10.9 and 10.25) were located further away. Both were 3.5m from the main concentration, one to the north and one to the west. There are good archaeological reasons to believe that these Bronze Age artefacts were all deposited at the same time and constitute a scattered collection. First, the vast majority of the artefacts were located in a relatively confined area. Although a few were scattered to a greater distance this may be explained if the majority were deposited together while some were individually cast into hollow [634] at the same time. Second, the fact that the artefacts were located through a 0.2m depth of the soil context can be explained by our interpretation of the soil as soft, forming from decaying rubbish and, occasionally, perhaps boggy, at the time of deposition. This would mean that artefacts of different weights would sink to different depths and some might be trampled to greater depths than others by people and animals moving over the ground. Third, all the artefacts were recovered from the same archaeological soil layer.

Although all 29 artefacts date from various times within the Bronze Age, they were found in an homogeneous soil context that also contained numerous and various Iron Age and Roman coins, potsherds and other artefacts and ecofacts. Our interpretation of many of these latter objects is that they were deposited as offerings to one or more deities in connection with the ritual activities around the

obverse to reverse; a 1st-century ad copper-alloy bow brooch (Cat. 5.39); an iron bar with a splayed end (Cat. 8.46); an iron reinforcing strip from a chest or box (Cat. 8.11); the pipeclay head of a figurine representing a character from Roman comedy (Cat. 4.8), found under iron mail group SF 158 (Cat. 6.1); a thick ceramic tile fragment found to one side (south) and beneath the comic figurine head, apparently used as its pedestal (Cat. 4.13); a copper-alloy panel decorated with the rear hooves of a bull and a vine spray (Cat. 4.19), possibly the base of a bull mount from homogeneous soil [314] (Phase 6) (Cat. 4.18); part of the blade of a copper-alloy MBA spearhead (Cat. 10.14); part of a copper-alloy socketed MBA spearhead (Cat. 10.15); a copper-alloy socket (Cat. 8.27); a copper-alloy tanged finial, probably a decorative stud (Cat. 8.22).

A partially scattered collection of 29 Bronze Age copper-alloy objects, [635], was recovered from homogeneous soil context [101]/[110]/[111]/[117]/[201]. The objects were found at depths below the present field surface varying from 0.3m to 0.5m. As they were recovered, a random sample (20 artefacts) of their positions in the ground was recorded three-dimensionally. Most of those so recorded (18 artefacts) were confined to an area measuring c. 3.0 × 2.5m. The vast majority of the artefacts that were not recorded three-dimensionally in situ also came from the concentration at this location. Two artefacts recorded three-dimensionally

N 0 1m

chalk block

201202

209 210211

203

204

205

202

2.206 2.127

10.52

2.25

2.185

2.83

2.1574.13

8.43

6.1

5.39

2.185 2.83

2.1572.1612.161

5.39

10.15

10.31

2.97

6.33

Figure 258 Plan of structured placed deposit [203] in cut [210]

188 | Dea Senuna

10.20, 10.25, 10.26, 10.27, 10.29, 10.30 & 10.52), a gouge (Cat. 10.51), two chisels (Cat. 10.46 & 10.47), two awls (Cat. 10.42 & 10.43), a sword blade (Cat. 10.34) and a dagger (Cat. 10.31).

Eight copper-alloy coins of Claudius I, [639] (Cat. 2.188–2.195), were buried on edge in a tight line, as if they had been contained by an organic bag or purse, or in a box, long since decayed, wedged between some chalk lumps. The hoard was deposited in homogeneous soil context [110]/[324], a mid yellowish brown, friable, silty loam in central hollow [634]. Soil [110]/[324] produced abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to late 2nd century ad.

An extensive, concentrated, placed deposit of material, [522], covering an ovoid area measuring about 2.20m east–west by 1.55m (maximum) north–south, lay on the surface of central clay platform, [529], and at the base of homogeneous soil [505]. The deposit included numerous artefacts and ecofacts, including 505 abraded potsherds dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to early/mid 2nd century ad – among which were many large jar sherds, such as a frilled sherd dated Late Iron Age/mid/late 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad – tile, three pieces of daub, a perforated grey ware pot base (Cat. 8.49), about 30% of the hemispherical lower stone of a Hertfordshire Puddingstone rotary quern (SF 1170), dating from about ad 50–150, with a small conical socket drilled in the top centre. This took a wooden plug with an iron spike driven into it, around which the top conical stone was rotated (Chris Green, pers. comm.). Also, 344 animal bone fragments, including burnt/calcined, and 152 oyster shells, including 13 burnt and one perforated, in a soil matrix consisting of a dark greyish brown, compacted, friable, chalky loam, with many pebbles and flint stones (Fig. 260).

On the west side of hollow [634], a new, narrower, road surface, [577]/[590], was created by cut [626], made through five earlier road surfaces, [578], [584], [607], [614] & [613], in order to lay make-up material, [597], a black soil layer under [590] (Fig. 261). Layer [597] produced abraded pottery dated mid/late 1st to early/mid 2nd century ad, 87 animal bone fragments, 134 oyster shells, four snail shells and two

hollow. Unlike the Bronze Age artefacts, the types of material seem too varied to have been deposited at one time. What this other material does demonstrate, however, is that the Bronze Age artefacts must have been deposited, or rather, redeposited in the Roman period.

The group consisted of seven axe-heads (Cat. 10.8, 10.9, 10.36, 10.37, 10.38, 10.39 & 10.40), 15 spearheads and spear parts (Cat. 10.10a & b, 10.12, 10.13, 10.16, 10.17, 10.18, 10.19,

Figure 259 View of Trench 4 in 2003 showing part of placed deposit [203] including iron objects, copper alloy brooch and coin and iron mail on right. Photo: Dave Mather

Figure 260 Part of placed deposit [522] over central clay platform [529] looking west in 2006. Note the puddingstone rotary querns (SF 1170) in the foreground and SF 1190 (centre left) Photo: The Heritage Netwok Ltd


result of erosion, perhaps from wear by the passage of people and animals. It had worn through gully [115]/[328]/[330]/[347]/[570] and the earlier gully [138]/[629], as well as their fills, obliterating them at this point (Fig. 263). A number of possible posthole bases cut into [202] to the east of [211] might indicate the presence of a gateway.

To the south-west was a possible footway, [640], through to the central area of the ritual hollow from the road on the west side. This was a shallow, 0.20m-deep, flat-based linear depression running from south-west to north-east in the south-west corner of the main excavation square, worn through chalk pebble surface [327] (Phase 4/5), probably by human and animal traffic, to the layers below, [312] and [325] (Phase 1). It was filled by [304], a mid brown, silty clay loam, generally friable but with some compact patches, containing 65 very abraded potsherds, dated Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age to early 2nd century ad, 33 of them late 1st century bc to ad 70, tile, 312 animal bone fragments, calcined bone fragments, oyster shells, a copper-alloy brooch pin (Cat. 5.57), a tiny copper-alloy ferrule (Cat. 8.25) and nine iron objects.

Homogeneous soil [505], the same as [314] and [315], overlying structured deposit [522] on the central clay platform [529], and on the northern edge of the excavation area at the east end, was a compact, light grey-brown clayey loam. It yielded well over 500 abraded potsherds dated mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, with a small amount of 3rd-century and even fewer 4th-century sherds (the latter may be intrusive), 757 animal bone specimens, of which 467 were burnt/calcined, 496 oyster shells, including 21 burnt, two iron objects (SF 1130 & 1139), a copper-alloy pin fragment (SF 1129), a copper-alloy mount in the form of a bull (Cat. 4.18) and a pipeclay figurine fragment (Cat. 4.10).

In the north-east corner of the excavation area and running beyond the east baulk was pit [632], filled with large quantities of oyster shell, animal bone, pottery and other materials, all deposited at one time. It lay beneath homogeneous soil [314] and cut [389]/[556]/[565], the Phase 5 small, rubble-floored building, [349], part of the homogeneous soil fill of the hollow, which also belonged to Phase 5, central clay platform [529], and oven base [351], whose final uses must have been in Phase 5 also. It was a midden, consisting of the debris from a ritual feast.

copper-alloy brooches (Cat. 5.23 & 5.31). Context [577]/[590] was a chalk pebble surface with gravel and yellow sand inclusions that yielded almost no finds. This road surface was soon replaced by another, [542], a hard-packed gravel surface that produced tile, animal bone and four oyster shells. Road [542] merged to the east into [560], a firm gravel in silt surface, which in turn merged yet further east into flint gravel surface [586]/[631], a courtyard surface reaching over chalk pebble surface [103]/[327], etc. Surface [560] contained abraded pottery dated mid 1st to 3rd century ad, tile, 44 animal bone fragments, 247 oyster shells, a copper-alloy brooch spring fragment (Cat. 5.53), an iron stylus (Cat. 5.103) and an iron knife (Cat. 7.4). Courtyard surface [586]/[631] produced abraded pottery of mid 1st to mid 2nd century ad date, 110 animal bone fragments, four oyster shells and charcoal.

In Phase 5, of the three predominant mammal species identified, sheep/goat, pig and cattle, the comparative percentages are 65%, 26% and 9% respectively. In the total assemblage from this phase there are significant numbers of bone fragments from medium mammals (3227), sheep/goat (676), large mammals (378), pig (290), cattle (102), sheep (30), small mammals (21) and goat (9). Other species represented include birds (25 fragments), dog (22), hare (18), horse (11), domestic fowl (11), domestic goose (3), toad (3), brent goose (2), woodcock (1), mallard (1), amphibian (1), roe deer (1), house mouse (1), field vole (1), partridge (1) and bass (1). Phase 5 yielded 4438 burnt/calcined bone specimens, 57% of the phase animal bone total.

Phase 6: 3rd century ad – feasting and other rituals continue, as well as the placement of further structured deposits, including partially articulated pig remains (Fig. 262)Context [211] was a shallow, worn, depression in the chalk pebble surface, [202]/[209], surrounding the homogeneous soils filling the centre of hollow [634]. It covered an irregular oval area, about 1.9m in length by about 1.3m in width. It contained a single fill, [204]/[205]/[388], a mid brown, fine-grained, humic, silty soil, which was soft and easily worked and produced a few small, very abraded, Roman potsherds, 51 animal bone fragments, an iron object and one oyster shell. Depression [211] appeared to have been the

Chalk Cobbles

A B C D

502

586

591604604

502

537

507

560584614

607578

502

507

537

590597

613

560

584

584

614607

578

W E

A B C D

0 1m

0 5m

502

524

541

542590597613

507

Figure 261 Sections of road surfaces

190 | Dea Senuna

PHASE 6

211

632

545

311

606603

pig burials

546

gravel surface 358

304

640

road 541

N 0 5m


634


634

Figure 262 Plan of a selection of key contexts for Phase 6

203/210

211

Figure 263 View of Trench 4 in 2003 looking south-east showing chalk pebble surface [202], postholes and worn depression [211]. Photo: Dave Mather


three iron objects (SF 894, 1200 & 1302); two copper-alloy objects (SF 1303 & 1305); a copper-alloy scabbard ring (Cat. 6.15); a copper-alloy finger ring (Cat. 5.66); another copper-alloy ring (SF 1152); three copper-alloy brooches (Cat. 5.15 (1st century ad), 5.52 & 5.58); a copper-alloy seal-box fragment (Cat. 5.101); six fragments of high-quality glass drinking vessels (Cat. 9.14 & 9.17); a burnt samian sherd decorated with a ram’s head and a bird (Cat. 1.23, SF 1229), perhaps deliberately selected for deposition; a pottery spindle whorl made from a sherd of amphora (Cat. 7.17); and two copper-alloy coins, an Iron Age one of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.136) and a probable 3rd-century ad illegible nummus (Cat. 2.324).

Running out of the northern baulk of the main excavation square, an extensive area of partially articulated dismembered pig and wild boar remains appeared to have

Excavated over two seasons, 2005 and 2006, its single fill was given four context numbers: [364], [511], [525] & [601] (Figs 264–5). The soil matrix was a dark greyish brown, firm, friable, silty clay loam. The majority of the fill, some 70–80%, was made up of 5055 oyster shells, including 89 burnt, two with iron concretions and six perforated, stacked one on top of another, often with no silt between. In addition, there were two cockle, one periwinkle, one whelk and 28 snail shells. Present too was chalk, flint and other stone rubble disturbed and redeposited from building [389]/[556]/[565]. The pit fill produced about 2200 potsherds dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to late 2nd/3rd century ad. Other finds included 2372 animal bone specimens, predominantly sheep/goat, two unburnt horn fragments, including 751 burnt/calcined, an unburnt possible human phalange, charcoal, burnt flint and iron nails. Small finds:

N

S

314

364

404

632

314

364

404

632

Stone

Shell

Pot

Bone

0 50cm

Chalk

Figure 264 Section through oyster midden pit [632]

Figure 265 Oyster midden pit [632] (bottom left), ovens and buildings. Photo: Deb Hudson

192 | Dea Senuna

This was an extensive placed deposit of partially articulated pig bones. It occupied an area measuring about 2.0m north–south by 1.0m east–west, to the immediate east of the east edge of the chalk pebble surface [103]/[338], in [315], a light grey-brown, friable, silty clay loam, one of the homogeneous soil layers in the central hollow. Soil [315] produced abraded potsherds dated mid/late 1st to early/mid 2nd century ad, tile, 1439 animal bone specimens, including 849 burnt/calcined, in a small concentrated area, 520 oyster shells, including six burnt, and burnt daub. Small finds: four coins, including two IA – one of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.130) and one an uninscribed silver half-unit (Cat. 2.174) – a nummus of the House of Valentinian ad 364–78 (Cat. 2.303), probably intrusive, and an illegible IA or Roman coin (Cat. 2.334); a ceramic spindle whorl (Cat. 7.16); four glass fragments, including two cups and a bottle (Cat. 9.3 & 9.7); an iron object with a residue (SF 772); copper-alloy scabbard fittings (Cat. 6.7 & 6.12); a copper-alloy needle (SF 783); a copper-alloy brooch head (Cat. 5.49).

The pig bones [311] were spread out in small separated groups which were labelled A–K and lifted separately (Fig. 267). Group A consisted of 52 bones, three of which were burnt/calcined; Group B 21 bones; Group C 148 bones, including 27 burnt/calcined; Group D 46 bones, of which five were burnt/calcined; Group E 69 bones; Group F 128

been all deposited at one time, quite possibly during the same feasting event that produced the great quantity of oyster shells deposited in pit [632].

By the inner eastern edge of chalk pebble surface [103]/[131] was a shallow, subcircular scoop, [127] (Fig. 266), measuring about 0.10m deep and at least 1.68m east–west by at least 0.86m north–south. It was dug into homogeneous soil [110]/[133] and filled with a dark greyish brown, friable, clayey silt, [128], which contained 271 abraded potsherds dated mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, shells, charcoal, stone, flints, a partially articulated pig skeleton, [126] (associated with much broken pottery) and 16 iron objects. Small finds: a LBA socketed axe-head (SF 48); two copper-alloy coins (Cat. 2.209, Vespasian ad 71, and Cat. 2.184, Gaius ad 37–41); a lead-alloy sheet (Cat. 8.39); a lead-alloy fragment (SF 39); two iron nails (SF 41& 46); a headless pipeclay figurine of Apollo (Cat. 4.2); two fragments of a pipeclay pedestal, but apparently not that for the Apollo figurine (Cat. 4.12).

Context [306]/[307], the upper part of layer [315], was a layer of friable, light grey-brown silty clay loam. It contained abraded pottery dated mid/late 1st to later 2nd century ad, tile, daub, 79 animal bone specimens, including three burnt/calcined, 58 oyster shells, iron objects and burnt flint. It lay above deposit [311], which was excavated in 2004 and 2005.

128

126

133

127

131

110

8.28

SF 39

4.2

N 0 50cm

Pot

Figure 266 Plan of placed pig deposit [126] in scoop [127]


Figure 267 Placed pig deposit 311; Groups J–K were below Groups A–F

edge of Trench 5

Group J Group K

311

N 0 1m0 1m

Stone

Oyster

Pot

Bone

edge of Trench 5

edge of Trench 2

103 311

edge

of c

halk

gravel surface

Group A

Group B

Group C

Group E

Group D

Group F

N 0 1m0 1m

Stone

Oyster

Pot

Bone

194 | Dea Senuna

bones; Group J 40 bones, including seven burnt/calcined; and Group K 502 bones, including 12 burnt/calcined. It is possible that Groups D and F may in fact have been part of pig deposit [126], which was excavated in 2003, but there was no evidence for scoop cut [127] that defined [126] and fill [128] continuing northwards (see above). Besides the pig remains, deposit [311] also contained about 270 abraded potsherds dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to later 2nd century ad, 204 other animal bone specimens, including 35 burnt/calcined, 48 oyster shells, charcoal and burnt stone. Small finds: a stone pounder (SF 779); a painted pottery sherd (SF 785); decorated samian (SF 866); two glass sherds (SF 803 & 813); six copper-alloy IA coins, two of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.28 & 2.30), one of Rues (Cat. 2.58) and three of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.70, 2.133 & 2.147); a copper-alloy pin with spatulate end (SF 555); a copper-alloy fragment (SF 847); a copper-alloy MBA dagger fragment (Cat. 10.32); a copper-alloy scabbard ring (Cat. 6.14); a copper-alloy brooch (Cat. 5.10); two iron objects (SF 848 & 861); a pottery spindle whorl (Cat. 7.20); and a bone pin fragment (SF 845).

The excavator of [311] noted that ‘many of the finds were almost vertical in the ground, rather than flat, suggesting post-depositional disturbance. Much of the animal bone was highly fragmented, consisting of slivers. There is a distinct tendency for finds to be clustered in small groups, not always

510

516

pipeclay figurine frags. 4.5,4.9

N 0 50cm

Pot Bone Iron

538

N 0 50cm

Stone

Shell

Pot

Bone

tile

Figure 268 Plan of part of placed pig deposit [516]

Figure 269 Plan of placed pig deposit [538]


conjoining glass sherds (SF 1217 & 1218). Only towards the east, where the deposit merged imperceptibly with the central ‘midden’ deposits, did the finds become more frequent and less abraded. Plough ruts were visible throughout the deposit, as they were through the overlying gravel surface, [507].

Context [555] was a collection of pig remains in [528], just inside (i.e. to the east of ) the chalk pebble perimeter of the central area. The latter was above [561] and [562], two very similar friable, dark grey, clayey silt soils lying over chalk pebble surface [339]. Context [561] also lay over the butt end of the perimeter gully, [570], and its fill, [571], cut into surface [339]. The majority of the finds – abraded mid 1st- to mid/later 2nd-century ad pottery, tile, 59 animal bone specimens, including two burnt/calcined, 28 oyster shells and charcoal – were at the base of the deposit, suggesting its origin was the last activity on chalk pebble surface [339]. Context [562] produced finds of mid 1st- to mid/later 2nd-century ad abraded pottery, a copper-alloy pin fragment (SF 1241), 80 animal bone specimens, including 22 burnt/calcined, and 20 oyster shells, including one burnt. The finds tended to be clustered in small groups, although it is likely that much of the disarticulated pig bone had been scattered by scavengers.

Deposited within layer [324], which continued to accumulate in this phase, was a concentrated group of artefacts and ecofacts, [331]. The deposit was spread within 1.0m and 1.5m of the eastern edge of chalk pebble surface [103]/[303]. The group comprised abraded pottery dated mid 1st to early/mid or later 2nd century ad, tile fragments, 12 animal bone specimens, including two burnt/calcined, seven oyster shells, burnt flint and four iron objects.

Another group of pig and other animal bones, [538], was deposited in soil [521], to the east of the edge of chalk pebble surface [103]/[339] and within the homogeneous soils accumulated within the centre of the hollow [634] (Figs 269–70). The group consisted of the partially dismembered skeleton of a pig, including some articulated parts, such as

of the same material class (e.g. potsherds often accompany oyster shell). Some of the finds appear to be lying against the edge of the chalk pebble surface perimeter, [338]/[103] … but some lie over the chalk surface. The pig joints appear to have been trodden on after deposition, suggesting that people were walking across.’

The deposition of a partially dismembered pig, [516] (Fig. 268), partly articulated as three separate ‘joints’ in soil [510], was accompanied by a fragmentary pipeclay figurine of Venus, consisting of her base and feet (Cat. 4.5) and a large potsherd with a group of ribs, while an iron nail lay on top of another group of pig ribs. The residual abraded potsherds are dated mid 1st to early 2nd century ad. Homogeneous soil layer [510] was a plough-disturbed, very dark greyish brown silty clay loam, containing much pottery, dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, 530 animal bone specimens, including 227 burnt/calcined, 251 oyster shells, including 14 burnt and 3 perforated, plus three mussel shells and one cockle shell, burnt flint, charcoal and iron nails. Small finds: a fragment of a glass ring from the neck of a jug (Cat. 9.20); pipeclay figurine fragments (Cat. 4.5 & 4.9); a copper-alloy rod fragment (SF 1146); a copper-alloy bow brooch (Cat. 5.41); two copper-alloy Roman coins, an illegible radiate or nummus from the 3rd or 4th century (Cat. 2.325) and a nummus dated ad 379–87, probably intrusive (Cat. 2.310); and an iron object (SF 1221).

Contexts [516] and [510] were above [521], a very dark brown, firm, silty loam, the same as layer [510], but undisturbed by ploughing (see above in Phase 5).

Context [528], a friable, dark greyish brown sandy silt containing about 10% angular and rounded flints, was beneath the final flint gravel surface, [507] (see below). For the most part, the finds were sparse and consisted mostly of very abraded pottery, dated mid 1st to mid/later 2nd century ad. There were also 230 animal bone specimens, including 17 burnt/calcined, 176 oyster shells, including four burnt, one mussel shell, a copper-alloy Roman coin of Domitian, ad 86 (Cat. 2.214), a penannular iron object (SF 1216) and

Figure 270 Part of placed pig deposit [538]. Photo: The Heritage Network Ltd

196 | Dea Senuna

dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to late 2nd century ad, and 62 oyster shells, including seven burnt, one mussel shell and 16 snail shells. The pig deposits continued under the northern baulk and beyond the excavation area.

Deposit [579] contained three residual potsherds and 261 bones, mainly belonging to one pig. Deposit [580] contained abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age to later 2nd century ad and the partial remains of possibly three pigs/boars, in association with other animal bone specimens, including a sheep/goat mandible and 34 burnt/calcined bones. Three groups were defined by the excavator, one comprising 213 bone specimens, another 360 and the third 241. Ten oyster shells also came from this context, including one perforated (Fig. 271).

Another partially articulated pig, [592], was deposited within soil [521] and above the base of oven [608] (Phase 1). Layer [521] was a very dark brown, firm, silty loam, part of the homogeneous soils filling the centre of hollow [634]. It contained abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st century to early/mid/late 2nd century ad, 3081 animal bone specimens, including 1732 burnt/calcined, charcoal, 336 oyster shells, including 45 burnt, three mussel shells and flakes of fired-clay oven superstructure (for details, see Phase 5 above).

Pig deposit [592] lay by the eastern edge of chalk pebble surface [103]/[131]. It comprised 126 bones and was associated with abraded pottery dated mid 1st to 2nd century ad, charcoal and a fragment of a Roman glass handle (Cat. 9.22).

Context [545] was a shallow circular feature measuring 0.27 × 0.24 × 0.04m, by fired-clay oven base [546] and cut

ribs and vertebrae and a leg, and, separately, a complete pig skull with lower mandible in situ; also present were sheep/goat mandibles and 992 other animal bone specimens, including 274 burnt/calcined. Associated with this group of animal bones were 341 abraded potsherds, dated mid 1st to mid/later 2nd century ad, a piece of plaster, 151 oyster shells, including 12 burnt, two mussel shells, one cockle shell, 24 snail shells and charcoal. Small finds: five iron objects (SF 1224, 1228, 1230, 1231 & 1248); a copper-alloy object (SF 1232); a worked and polished bone point (Cat. 7.26); a perforated oyster shell, presumably used as an amulet (Cat. 8.51).

Pig skull [558] was inverted in a plough rut, part of [508]. This was a series of plough ruts running through upper gravel surface [507]. The ruts are the result of deep ploughing in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the field was ploughed for the first time in the modern period, and possibly the first time ever. The fill of the plough rut [509] was a very dark greyish brown silty loam containing many flint stones derived from the disturbed surface of [507]. Pig skull [558] was associated with a couple of abraded 2nd-century ad potsherds, 18 oyster shells, 17 burnt, and some post-cranial pig bones. The excavator thought it likely that the remains that were given the context number [558] were actually part of [579] (below).

Soil [568] was a continuation of layer [521] (Phase 5), one of the homogeneous ‘midden’ soils filling the central hollow. It was a compact, dark greyish brown silty clay, containing 771 animal bone specimens, including 356 burnt/calcined, as well as two separate deposits of articulated pig bones, [579] and [580], a considerable quantity of abraded pottery,

Pig 2

Pig 1

Pig 3

580

579

Stone

Shell

Pot

Bone

Flint

Iron

N 0 2m

Figure 271 Plan of placed pig deposits [579] and [580]


Context [588] was a shallow subovoid pit cutting layer [506] and the edge of oven [353]/[554]. It was 0.30m long, 0.20m wide and 0.10m deep. It had concave sides and a rounded base. The pit was filled by a dark greyish brown, loose, very fine silty soil, [589]. It contained Late Iron Age to Roman abraded potsherds and 18 animal bone specimens, including 14 burnt/calcined.

Two small pits were cut into deposit [582], which overlay the central clay platform, [529] (see above, Phase 5). The first, [603], by oven base [599], was subcircular, 0.28 × 0.30m by 0.09m deep, with steeply sloping sides leading to a rounded base (Fig. 274). Its fill, [598], was a grey, very fine, loose ash containing charcoal, calcined bone and very small fragments of animal bone. The second small pit, [606], was kidney-shaped, 0.36 × 0.25m by 0.19m in depth, with near-vertical sides and a slightly bowled base. Its fill, [600], was a greyish brown, loose, sandy, silty loam, which produced 14 abraded potsherds dated mid/late 1st to early 2nd century ad, ten unburnt animal bones, 24 calcined bones and charcoal.

The base of another small, circular, flat-bottomed pit, [610], within compact soil [506], measured 0.22m in diameter and only 0.05m in depth. Its fill, [611], was a greyish brown, fine, light ash, containing five small pieces of animal bone. A similarly shallow circular pit cut in [506] was 0.28m in diameter and contained a fine, grey ash, [621], which yielded one residual abraded potsherd dated late 1st century bc to c. ad 70.

Homogeneous, dark greyish brown, friable, loamy soils continued to build up in the central area of hollow [634], and

into dark homogeneous soil layer [539]. Layer [539], below soil [531], produced 36 animal bone specimens, including seven burnt/calcined, and 99 snail shells. Cut [545] had a yellowy, chalky, sandy fill which contained small fragments of animal bone. Oven base [546] was heavily truncated on all but its east side and measured 0.70m north–south by 0.66m east–west. It yielded late 1st- to mid 3rd-century ad pottery, and 81 animal bone specimens, including 16 burnt/calcined (Figs 272–3).

Small circular pit [547], measuring 0.15m in diameter and 0.08m in depth, was one of three similar pits cut into the south-east edge of oven [139]/[523]. It had near-vertical sides and a rounded base; its fill, [548], was a light grey, very fine, loose, friable ash. It produced clay flakes from the oven structure, calcined bone, charcoal, animal bone, oyster shell and an iron object. Close by were small pits [549] and [552]. Pit [549] was 0.20m in diameter and 0.08m in depth, with near-vertical sides and a flat base. It held fill [550], a light brownish grey, loose, friable ash, with a concentrated patch of light grey ash. This ash fill contained 13 animal bone specimens, including two burnt/calcined, and one sherd of residual pottery, dated late 1st century bc to c. ad 70. Small shallow pit [552] was 0.10m in diameter and 0.06m in depth. It had a very fine, light grey, loose, friable ash fill, [553], that produced no finds. These three small pits were covered by [506], a homogeneous soil fill (see below). They seemed to be the bases of postholes that were almost certainly intended for wattle rods to enable the renewal of the clay superstructure of oven [139]/[523].

546512

N 0 1m

W E546

ash

silt

clay

0 50cm

Figure 272 Plan of oven base [546]

Figure 273 South-facing section of oven base [546]

198 | Dea Senuna

5.76); a copper-alloy finger ring (Cat. 5.68); and the head of a copper-alloy bow brooch (Cat. 5.51).

Burnt soil [506], to the immediate east of, above and later than, clay oven base [139]/[523] and layer [564], contained abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st century to 4th century ad, part of the trochlea of a mature human humerus, 2976 animal bone specimens, including 1741 burnt/calcined, 325 oyster shells, including ten burnt and one perforated, and 192 snail shells. The context recorders wrote, ‘Finds appear to be grouped together. Layer previously allocated as “part of” context [111]. Much calcined bone found mostly on east edge of oven (associated) with burnt fossil sea urchin [Cat. 8.52], and the cordoned carinated jar large sherd [SF 1163]. Contains an articulated pig foot. Contains partially fired clay fragments [parts of oven superstructure].’ Context [506] may well have been a placed deposit, possibly the final contents of oven [139]/[523] (Fig. 276). Small finds: a copper-alloy bracelet (Cat. 5.5); two copper-alloy IA coins of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.16 & 2.27); a large sherd of a mid 1st- to early/mid 2nd-century ad cordoned carinated jar with calcined bone (SF 1163), associated with a burnt fossil sea urchin (Cat. 8.52); a small fragment of a deliberately bent and broken silver decorated votive leaf plaque (Cat. 3.2); a broken iron knife blade (Cat. 7.8); an iron ring (SF 1180); a flint scraper (Cat. 10.3); and a flint core (Cat. 10.2).

On the west side of ritual hollow [634], the north–south compact flint gravel road surface, [542], was replaced with a looser, but still firm, flint gravel surface, [541]. Later [524], a dark greyish brown, firm, friable in places, clayey silt, thinly formed over [541], and a similarly thin, but less stony, silt, [537] and [630], formed over flint gravel courtyard surface, [586]/[631], to the east. Road surface [541] held abraded pottery, dated mid 1st to 2nd century ad, a lump of plaster, 102 animal bone specimens, including four burnt/calcined, 557 oyster shells, including two burnt, one mussel shell and a copper-alloy phallic mount (Cat. 4.17). Silt [524] over [541] produced no finds. Silt [630] yielded no finds. Silty soil [537] had abraded pottery dated mid 1st to 2nd century ad and two medieval sherds introduced by modern ploughing, tile and 190 oyster shells, two mussel shells and 24 snail shells. Small finds: a copper-alloy rod fragment (SF 1213); a copper-alloy possible brooch catch plate (SF 1220); and a copper-alloy ligula (Cat. 5.91).

In Phase 6, of the three predominant mammal species identified, sheep/goat, pig and cattle, the comparative percentages are 59%, 33% and 8% respectively. In the total assemblage from this phase there are significant numbers of bone fragments from medium mammals (8646), pig (1222 + 2382 in associated bone groups), sheep/goat (1660), large

included contexts [101], [109], [112], [120], [125], [305], [306], [314], [315], [350], [505], [506], [510] & [521] (Fig. 275). There were very large numbers of finds in these soils. For soil [101], which accumulated from Phase 5 through to Phase 7, see Phase 5 above.

Soil [112] produced abraded pottery dated mid 2nd to 4th century ad, animal bone, a calcined bone, a copper-alloy probable brooch pin fragment (Cat. 5.59) and an iron nail. Soil [120] contained pottery dated mid 2nd to mid 3rd century ad. Soil [125] produced 34 potsherds dated late 3rd to 4th century ad, tile and a few oyster shells. Soil [306] yielded a trumpet brooch (Cat. 5.46).

Soil [314] lay beneath the ploughsoil on the east side and at the north-east corner of the excavation area. The recorder for the context wrote, ‘Finds occur usually in clustered groups.’ In addition to a large placed deposit, it contained abraded Late Iron Age to 4th-century ad pottery, 41 oyster shells and 16 animal bones. Small finds: a decorated samian sherd (Cat. 1.24); a placed deposit comprising a 1st-century ad copper-alloy military buckle (Cat. 6.27); another 1st-century ad copper-alloy military buckle (Cat. 6.28); a copper-alloy military belt fitting (Cat. 6.29); a 1st-century ad military iron dagger blade and inlaid sheath fragments (Cat. 6.17); a tiny copper-alloy tube (Cat. 8.26); another copper-alloy object (SF 838); iron objects (SF 773 & 807); glass sherds (SF 535, 804 & 859), including a base fragment of a jar or bowl (Cat. 9.15); a copper-alloy, probably military belt plate (Cat. 6.29); four copper-alloy IA coins of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.20), Dubnovellaunos (Cat. 2.163 & 2.168) and Cunobelin (Cat. 2.84); four Roman coins – a 2nd-century as (Cat. 2.226), an illegible 3rd-/4th-century coin (Cat. 2.331), a nummus of the House of Constantine, c. 355–64 (Cat. 2.289) and a nummus of Gratian, ad 375–8 (Cat. 2.309); a copper-alloy hairpin (Cat.

582

599

598

603

N 0 50cm

Figure 274 Plan of pit [603] by oven [599]

101

topsoiltopsoil

111

136

113120108112

107122125

Stone Chalk

0 2m

NW SEWE

Figure 275 Section showing soils [112], [120] and [125]


Figure 276 Plan of placed deposit [506] on oven base [139]/[523]

139/523

353

397

N 0 1m

Stone Pot

351 139/523

506506

oven sectionoven section

ash

ash

ashash

cinder and ash

N 0 1m

Stone

Shell

Pot

Bone

Flint

Iron

200 | Dea Senuna

hairpins, nail cleaners, a 3rd-/4th-century ad inscribed silver spoon (2004 T269), a toilet spoon, bracelet fragments, copper-alloy and silver finger rings and four vessel escutcheons (NHM Enq. Nos 1324, 1332, 1339, 1340, 1341, 1343, 1345, 1346, 1347 (1996); 1684, 1691, 1699, 1700, 1852, 1856, 1863, 1865, 1880 (1998); 2528 (2002); 8 (2003); Verulamium Museum Enq. No. 05/72 (2005); see selection of finds in Chapter 11, Fig. 283).

Recorded metal-detected coins from the same vicinity include 26 Iron Age, 12 Roman 1st-century ad and 36 Roman 2nd-century ad (NHM Enq. Nos 1323, 1325, 1326, 1327, 1339, 1340, 1341, 1343, 1345 (1996); 1670, 1685, 1699, 1700, 1854, 1856, 1861, 1865 (1998); 2338 (2000); 2526, 2528 (2002); 6 (2003).

Phase 7: later 3rd and 4th centuries ad – a decline in ritual activities (Fig. 277)Homogeneous soil [101], which formed through Phases 5 and 6, continued to accumulate as a result of activities in the ceremonial hollow. Its upper levels produced 737 late 3rd- to late 4th-century ad potsherds and 14 coins from the 4th century ad. The latest of these were minted in ad 364–78

mammals (815), cattle (200), sheep (61), small mammals (30) and goat (7). Other species represented include birds (63 fragments), dog (37), hare (25), horse (16), domestic fowl (32), frog (13), domestic goose (5), bantam (5), toad (3), brent goose (3), partridge (3), fish (3), crow (2), wild boar (1+), roe deer (1), wood pigeon (1), house mouse (1), bass (1) and human (1). Phase 6 yielded 8557 burnt/calcined bone specimens, 48% of the phase animal bone total.

Recorded metal-detector finds (all copper-alloy unless stated otherwise) on Great Buttway Field which were made prior to or during the excavations from the ploughsoil over and in the near vicinity of the excavation area, and which would fit into Phases 1–6, include 16 Colchester brooches, two dolphin brooches, a thistle brooch, five Hod Hill brooches, a Nauheim-derivative brooch, an Aucissa brooch, an enamelled sitting hen brooch, an enamelled chatelaine brooch, an enamelled disc brooch, a lozenge-shaped plate brooch, a silvered equal-ended brooch, a P-shaped brooch, a T-shaped brooch, part of a male figurine, a ?Minerva bust mount, a boar’s head mount, a duck mount, a phallic mount, five miniature shield-shaped mounts, a folded miniature silver leaf, a model votive axe, an enamelled seal-box lid,

PHASE 7

gravel surface 104, 302, 332

road 507

hoard 636,637figurine pedestal 638

N 0 5m


634


634

Figure 277 Plan of selected key contexts for Phase 7


in chalk pebble surface [103] marked the location of a second pit, [638], dug at the same time as [637], which had held the silver inscribed figurine pedestal from the temple treasure (Cat. 4.1). The great majority of each pit had been destroyed by modern ploughing (Fig. 279).

Unfortunately, deep ploughing from the late 1960s/early 1970s onwards has destroyed any other 4th-century ad contexts which may have existed, together with all contexts accumulated after the end of the 4th century ad. The evidence for those missing contexts is provided by the unstratified finds in the ploughsoil as revealed by the various surface and subsurface artefact collections, particularly the finds reported by responsible metal detectorists. Some of these finds are detailed below and elsewhere in this report.

Animal bones from Phase 7 include medium mammals (252 fragments), sheep/goat (55), large mammals (51), cattle (19), pig (18), bird (3), domestic fowl (1), bantam (1), woodcock (1), hare (1), and fish (1). Phase 7 had 1.5% of the site animal bone assemblage and yielded 64 burnt/calcined bone specimens, 10% of the phase animal bone total.

Metal-detected finds recorded before 2006 from the ploughsoil over and in the vicinity of the excavation area included 137 Roman 3rd-century ad and 200 Roman 4th-century ad coins, the latest being issues of the House of Theodosius, 388–402, showing that activity on the site continued into the 5th century ad (NHM Enq. Nos 1323, 1325, 1326, 1327, 1339, 1340, 1341, 1343, 1345 (1996); 1669, 1670, 1679, 1683, 1691, 1699, 1854, 1856, 1857, 1861, 1865 (1998); 2338 (2000); 2528 (2002); 6 (2003); Verulamium Museum Enq. No. 05/72 (2005)), and a 3rd-/4th-century ad inscribed silver spoon (British Museum 2004 T269).

Phase 8: post-Roman to post-medievalContexts [113], [301], [313], [500], [501], [502] & [530] were soil layers recorded at the bottom of the ploughsoil during

and 367–75, suggesting that activities continued here well into the last quarter of the 4th century. The fragments of votive plaques from soil [101] that were found in 2003 most likely belong to this Phase (Cat. 3.1 & 3.5). A pottery face-mask of the mid 3rd to late 4th century was from this context also (Cat. 4.20). The context was affected by plough ruts, but only two post-medieval sherds were recorded from it.

Silty soil [524] was covered by a new flint gravel road surface, [507], which merged to the east into the renewed flint gravel courtyard surface, [104]/[302]/[332] (Fig. 278). Road surface [507] contained abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/later 2nd century ad. Courtyard surface [104]/[302]/[332] produced abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age to 4th century ad, tile, glass, animal bone, mussel and oyster shell. Small finds: a copper-alloy IA coin of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.36); a late 3rd-century ad coin (Cat. 2.240); a 1st-century ad copper-alloy brooch (Cat. 5.10); a copper-alloy brooch catchplate (Cat. 5.36); a copper-alloy 2nd-/3rd-century ad belt fitting (Cat. 6.30); a copper-alloy mount depicting Silenus (Cat. 4.15); a complete copper-alloy hairpin (Cat. 5.72); a tinned copper-alloy hairpin head (Cat. 5.75); a copper-alloy needle (Cat. 5.89); a copper-alloy fragment of a buckle (Cat. 8.48); two once molten lead droplets (SF 506 & 508); a small rounded lead ball, perhaps a pistol shot (Cat. 11.11); a polished decorated bone knife handle (Cat. 7.5); and an iron object (SF 513).

There were another two probable 4th-century ad deposits. A small pit was dug from a now destroyed upper level through flint gravel courtyard surface [104]/[302]/[332] and into chalk pebble surface [103]. All that was left to record of this pit in 2003 was its base, showing as a slight depression in the chalk pebble surface, and recorded as a cut ([637]), although too little of it survived to take any meaningful measurements. It had held the Roman temple treasure hoard, [636]. About a metre to the north, a slight indentation

502 topsoil

507 gravel road

542 gravel road

590 (as 577) chalk 578 silty gravel

584 gravel in silt

607gravel road

614 clay597 dark soil

613 clay

613 clay road

577 chalk

524 soil 541

541 loose gravel

560 gravel courtyard

507 gravel road

637 loose gravel

537 (as 524/541) 586gravel and soil phases


327 chalk courtyard

630soil


619natural

633

604 (as 584)small gravel in sandy clay

605 chalk weathered626

Figure 278 Section drawing of the road context numbers and their relationships

202 | Dea Senuna

dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to the end of the 4th century ad, one possible Saxon sherd, a significant group of post-medieval sherds from the vicinity of [527]/[625] (see below) and a lead fragment (SF 1193). Context [502] overlay gravel road surface [507] in the 2006 westwards extension from the north-west corner of the main excavation square. It produced very abraded pottery, mostly dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to the end of the 4th century ad, with a few post-medieval sherds, a pottery spindle whorl (Cat. 7.19), a perforated oyster shell and a post-medieval iron buckle (Cat. 11.8). Context [530] lay towards the southern end of the 2006 southern extension area. It contained some abraded Late Iron Age/Roman pottery, but yielded mostly post-medieval potsherds, tile, brick, animal bone and oyster shell.

Subrectangular posthole [316] measured about 0.52m west-south-west to east-north-east and 0.63m south-south-east to north-north-west and was 0.16m deep with near-vertical sides. It cut chalk rubble-floored structure [102]/[334] and surrounding soil [318]/[335] and contained a mid yellowish brown, friable, silt loam fill, [319], with a little dark, decayed organic matter towards the base of the cut, perhaps the remains of a timber post. Fill [319] yielded four Roman, one medieval and one 17th-century potsherd, tile, flint and oyster shell.

Linear cut [625] was very shallow, running east–west across the northern end of the 2006 southern extension to the main excavation square. It was below ploughsoil [300] and cut contexts [501], [540], [575], [530], [602] and the natural clay geology (Fig. 280). It contained context [527], which consisted of three lines of stones, flint and sandstone, tile and brick fragments, also arranged east–west and including some abraded Roman and post-medieval pottery, animal bone, oyster shell, a possible 1st-century ad copper-alloy scabbard tip (Cat. 6.6), two copper-alloy brooch pins (Cat. 5.60) and an iron nail (SF 1225). It is interpreted as a

clearance and cleaning of the excavation area. Recorded as the interface between the ploughsoil and the in situ archaeological horizons they were all light to dark greyish brown, friable to firm loams, heavily scarred by plough ruts. Layer [113] lay above [101], [106], [108], [110] & [116] on the east side of the main excavation of 2003. It produced six sherds of indeterminate Roman pottery; [301] overlay chalk pebble surface [303] and contained abraded pottery dated mid 1st to 4th century ad, tile, daub, opus signinum, animal bone, oyster shell, two copper-alloy brooches (Cat. 5.32 & 5.43), perhaps a placed deposit on surface [303], and six iron objects.

Context [313], above contexts [108], [304], [320], [321], [324], [327], [354], [375] & [376], contained abraded pottery dated mid/late 1st to late 2nd/3rd century ad, 59 animal bone specimens, including 1 burnt/calcined, and 87 oyster shells. Small finds: a 1st-century ad Roman coin, a 3rd-century ad coin and four 4th-century ad coins, the latest dated ad 388–402 (Cat. 2.210, 2.244, 2.275, 2.297, 2.306 & 2.315); half a pottery spindle whorl (Cat. 7.15), the other half being found in [320] (Phases 3–7); a copper-alloy bracelet (Cat. 5.1), together with a pair of copper-alloy tweezers, the latter deliberately bent (Cat. 5.93), perhaps a placed deposit; a copper-alloy bossed plate, perhaps a fragment of a religious headdress (Cat. 8.23).

Layer [500] overlay [510] and other contexts in the main 2006 excavation area. It yielded abraded pottery mostly dated mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, with some from the 3rd and 4th centuries as well as the medieval and post-medieval periods, tile, animal bone and oyster shell. Small finds: a fragment of a pipeclay figurine (Cat. 4.11); a copper-alloy possible finger ring fragment (SF 1112); a copper-alloy pin fragment (SF 1123); and a copper-alloy coin (Cat. 2.218).

Lying over the southern extension to the main excavation square in 2006 was [501]. It had very abraded pottery, mostly

Edge of Trench 2Edge of

ceremonial hollow Hoard findspot

Figurine pedestalfindspot

Figure 279 View south in 2004 showing perimeter chalk and flint gravel surfaces, beam-slot, edges of Trench 2 from 2003 and find-spots of temple treasure hoard and figurine pedestal. Photo: Gilbert Burleigh


hairpin (Cat. 5.87), a 20th-century potsherd, clay tobacco pipe stems, tile, glass, animal bone, a pig skull and other bones ([558]) and oyster shell, including one perforated. These were some of the only plough ruts specifically excavated separately from the general soil layers, others being noted as visible in certain contexts, for example, in the surface of the chalk floor, [102]/[334]. Other plough ruts were excavated individually in the southern extension in 2006, such as [514], whose fill, [515], produced a tiny brooch (Cat. 5.28), and others that affected some of the pig deposits (e.g. [311] and [558]).

The numbers [100], [200], [300] & [504] were given to the ploughsoil – a dark greyish brown, friable, clayey loam. Finds included abraded pottery dated LIA to 4th century ad, to medieval, to post-medieval, to modern, tile, brick, animal bone and oyster shell. Small finds: a Roman lead-glazed potsherd (SF 646); a droplet of gold (Cat. 8.37), a droplet of silver (Cat. 8.39), a droplet of silver copper-alloy and a droplet of lead alloy (Cat. 8.40), a droplet of lead (Cat. 8.41); a copper-alloy LBA axe (Cat. 10.40); copper-alloy MBA spearhead fragments (Cat. 10.22 & 10.23); a copper-alloy MBA/LBA implement fragment (Cat. 10.55); two Roman silver-alloy leaf fragments, parts of the same votive plaque (Cat. 3.3 & 3.4); copper-alloy Roman brooches (Cat. 5.7, 5.11, 5.13, 5.28, 5.40 & 5.50); a copper-alloy Roman ligula (Cat. 5.92); a copper-alloy fragment (SF 1111); a copper-alloy possible finger ring fragment (SF 1112); a copper-alloy hairpin (Cat. 5.78); a lead alloy pot repair (Cat. 8.35); a copper-alloy and iron object (SF 130); two copper-alloy ?pin heads (SF 715 & 716); a copper-alloy fragment (SF 213); a copper-alloy Silenus mount (Cat. 4.16); the bow and shaft of a copper-alloy small key or scale-beam terminal (Cat. 7.11); copper-alloy objects (Cat. 10.53, 5.104, SF 717, 978, 1116, 1351 & 1367); a copper-alloy armilla bracelet fragment (Cat. 6.34); a copper-alloy rod fragment (SF 756); a copper-alloy military strap fitting (Cat. 6.31); a copper-alloy post-medieval strap fitting (SF 719); a lead weight (Cat. 7.12); a possible lead sealing (Cat. 6.35); a small rolled lead strip (SF 1144); a lead blob (SF 526); lead fragments (SF 548, 759, 886 & 1364); an iron projectile, possibly a spearhead, deliberately bent and broken (Cat. 6.23); a post-medieval iron key (Cat. 11.3); an iron shaft fragment (SF 524); an iron knife blade (Cat. 7.7); iron nails (SF 755 & 1366); iron object (SF 501);

drain from the now demolished brick cottage that stood nearby to the east, on the corner of Great Buttway Field, where the lane forms a dog-leg round the site and where the geophysical survey detected a spread of brick debris, still visible on the surface.

Animal bones from Phase 8 include medium mammal (331 fragments), sheep/goat (104), large mammal (92), pig (50), cattle (24), bird (6), dog (5), horse (3), sheep (2), goat (1), hare (1) and small mammal (1). Phase 8 had 2% of the site animal bone assemblage and yielded 132 burnt/calcined bone specimens, 17% of the phase animal bone total.

Phase 9: modern ploughingThe field eventually became permanent pasture sometime during the post-Roman period. Conversations with local residents suggest that until the late 1960s there were low-relief earthworks at the northern end of the field in the vicinity of where the temple treasure hoard was found and our excavations were located. In 1969 the landowner deep-ploughed the meadow, probably for the first time in its history, and ploughing has continued most years since. The ploughing, generally to a depth of about 0.30m, but initially considerably deeper (see below), though in more recent years often much shallower, levelled any earthworks and destroyed most stratified deposits later than the 3rd century ad. Almost the only evidence for the existence of these deposits are the unstratified finds from the plough-soil, from which we may extrapolate a little information regarding continuing activities on the site (see above).

A series of five closely spaced east–west-aligned plough ruts, [508], deeply scarred road surface [507] and yard [332] in the 2006 westward extension to the main excavation area. The rut fills were excavated for lengths of between 12m and 16m. They measured c. 0.26m wide at the top and c. 0.08m wide at the base, by c. 0.10m deep, and had steep, near-vertical sides. Taking into account the approximate 0.30m depth of ploughsoil machined off the excavation area, these plough ruts would have been c. 0.40m deep originally, and seemed to belong to the first deep ploughing in 1969 when the field was converted from pasture to arable. The fill of these plough ruts, [509], consisted of a very dark greyish brown, compacted, silty loam, containing mid 1st- to 4th-century ad abraded pottery, a fragmentary bone

N S

N S501

plough ruts501

540 527 530575

536576

602

602

625Bone Flint

gravelChalk pebbles

N0 2m

575

Figure 280 West-facing section of cut [625]

204 | Dea Senuna

(Cat. 2.196, 2.205, 2.207 & 2.211), one to the 2nd century (Cat. 2.219), 16 to the 3rd century (Cat. 2.231, 2.234, 2.235, 2.236, 2.241, 2.242, 2.247, 2.248, 2.249, 2.250, 2.251, 2.253, 2.254, 2.257, 2.258 & 2.259) and 28 to the 4th century (Cat. 2.261, 2.264, 2.268, 2.269, 2.270, 2.271, 2.279, 2.280, 2.281, 2.282, 2.286, 2.288, 2.292, 2.295, 2.296, 2.302, 2.307, 2.308, 2.311, 2.312, 2.313, 2.316, 2.318, 2.320, 2.321, 2.328, 2.329 & 2.330). Third-century radiate coins SF 1368–1372 (Cat. 2.231, 2.248, 2.251, 2.257 & 2.258) may be a dispersed placed deposit, or their finding in sequence by metal detector in the excavation backfill at the end of the 2006 season may simply have been coincidence.

The latest coin issues from the excavated ploughsoil are dated ad 388–95, and the latest issues from both the excavated stratified contexts and the metal-detecting finds prior to the excavation are dated ad 388–402, a strong indication that activities on the site continued into the 5th century ad.

post-medieval iron knife handle (Cat. 11.5); Roman glass sherds (Cat. 9.2 & 9.9); a hone (Cat. 7.10); a perforated spindle whorl; a silver IA coin of Andoco (Cat. 2.45), a silver coin of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.10), seven copper-alloy IA coins of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.15, 2.17, 2.18, 2.32, 2.39, 2.40 & 2.41), two copper-alloy coins of Addedomaros (Cat. 2.1 & 2.4), three copper-alloy coins of Rues (Cat. 2.54, 2.55 & 2.56), a copper-alloy coin of Andoco (Cat. 2.48), 18 copper-alloy coins of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.68, 2.75, 2.82, 2.87, 2.94, 2.95, 2.100, 2.102, 2.107, 2.122, 2.125, 2.128, 2.129, 2.138, 2.145, 2.151, 2.155 & 2.156), and a copper-alloy coin of Dubnovellaunos (Cat. 2.169). It is possible that Cat. 2.17, 2.18, 2.68, 2.102, 2.128, 2.129 & 2.145 (SF 625, 627, 628, 629, 630, 631 & 632) may be a dispersed hoard/placed deposit of Iron Age coins (two of Tasciovanus, five of Cunobelin) that was found by metal detecting on context [300] spoilheap in 2004. Finds of Roman coins included a silver one of the Roman Republic dated 87 bc (Cat. 2.180), four dated to the 1st century ad


Context Same as Type Phase

2003

100 200, 300, 504 Plough soil 9

101 110, 111, 117, 120, 201, 304, 305, 320, 324, 335, 377, 382, 384, 505, 517, 518, 519

Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 5, 6, 7

102 334 Chalk rubble floor of building 4

103 107, 108, 130, 202, 303, 321, 327, 338, 339, 374, 375, 376, 536, 605

Chalk pebble surface 4, 5

104 332 Gravel surface 7

105 Unexcavated 6

106 Unexcavated 6

107 103 etc. Chalk pebble surface mortar repair 5

108 103 etc. Chalk pebble surface 4, 5

109 111, 314, 315, 350, 510, 521 Soil layer 6

110 101 etc. Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 5, 6


112 Soil layer 6, 7

113 500, 501, 502, 530 Sub-plough soil layer 8

114 342 Cut of foundation trench 4

115 328 Re-cut of gully or beam-slot 629 5

116 326, 329, 571 Fill of gully or beam-slot 5


118 343 Soil fill of foundation trench 4

119

120 101 etc. Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 6

121 136 Surface of clay oven 3, 4, 5

122 321 Chalk pebble surface repair 4, 5

123 Oyster deposit over 102/334 5

124

125 320 etc. Soil layer 6

126 Pig deposit in 127 6

127 Cut in 131 6

128 Placed structured deposit in 127 6

129 Soil layer Unphased

130 103 etc. Part of chalk surface 4, 5

131 134 Re-deposited chalk layer 5

132 Natural chalky clay Geology

133 Silt layer 4, 5

134 131 Re-deposited chalk layer 5

135 Soil layer 5

136 121 Surface of clay oven 3, 4, 5

137 628 Fill of gully or beam-slot 4

138 629 Cut of gully or beam-slot 4

139 523 Clay oven base 2, 3, 4, 5

140 Gravel patch repair to 107 5

141 Soil layer Unphased

200 100, 300 Plough soil 9


202 103 etc. Chalk pebble surface 4. 5

203 fill of 210 Placed structured deposit 5

204 205, 388 Soil fill of cut 211 6

205 204, 388 Soil fill of cut 211 6

206 Placed structured deposit in 201 5

Table 7 Phasing of all contexts at Ashwell, Herts, Bluegates Farm, 2003–6

206 | Dea Senuna


207 201,101,120, 320 etc. Soil layer 5, 6

208 Soil layer 1


210 cut into 201 Cut for 203 5

211 Worn hollow filled with 204, 205, 388 6

212 103, 327 etc. Chalk pebble surface 4, 5

213 340, 526, 619 Natural chalky clay Geology

2004

300 100, 200 Plough soil 9

301 Base of plough soil 8



304 Fill of 640 6


306 Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 6

307 Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 6

308 320 etc. Soil layer 3, 4

309 325,373,etc. Gravel surface 1


311 Pig deposit 6

312 373, 513, 602, 615 Gravel surface 1

313 301 Base of plough soil 8

314 109 etc. Organic soil layer in hollow 6

315 109 etc. Organic soil layer in hollow 6

316 Posthole cut containing 319 8

317 102/334 Stoney deposit 4

318 335 Soil deposit 3

319 Fill of 316 8

320 101 etc. Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 3, 4, 5, 6, 7


322 Fill of 323 4

323 Cut of p-h for fill 322 4

324 101, 390 etc. Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 5, 6

325 309, 373,etc. Gravel surface 1

326 116, 310,329 Fill of gully or beam-slot 5


328 115 Re-cut of gully or beam-slot 629 5


330 Cut for 329 5

331 Deposit of artefacts/ecofacts in 324 6

332 104, 507 Gravel surface 7




336 118 Fill of slot 114 on S side 102/334 4

337 Lense of decayed chalk in 335 3



340 213 etc. Natural chalky clay Geology

Table 7 continued



2005

341 344 Soil layer 3

342 114 Cut of foundation trench 4

343 118 Soil fill of foundation trench 4

344 341 Soil layer 3

345 Soil fill of foundation trench 4

346 335,etc. Soil layer below 342 3

347 328, 330, 570 Cut of gully/beam-slot 5

348 Silt layer between 327 & 631 5

349 350, 372, 385 etc. Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 5

350 349, 372, 385 etc. Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 5, 6

351 Clay oven base 2, 3, 4, 5

352 Oyster shell deposit in 320 3, 4

353 554 Clay oven base 2

354 Soil layer 5

355 Chalk pebble surface 2, 3

356 Clay surface beneath 332 5

357 Clay surface beneath 332 & 356 5

358 332,etc. Gravel surface 5, 6

359 360, 361, 575 Clay soil layer 1

360 359 etc. Clay soil layer 1

361 359 etc. Ditto 1

362 320 etc. Soil layer below 341,above 371 2, 3

363 320 etc. Soil layers below 341, above 371 4, 5

364 511, 525, 601 Fill of oyster midden pit 632 6

365 101, 349, 567 etc. Soil layer below 314, above 389 4, 5

366 101, 324 etc. Soil layer 5, 6


368 Soil layer 3

369 Chalk & stone surface below 327 3

370 Cut of posthole in 368, contains 402 4

371 Soil layer below 362 1


373 309, 312, 325, 513, 602, 615 Gravel surface 1





378 Soil layer below 369 2

379 Repair to 338 5

380 Repair to 338 5

381 Silt layer under 375 & 376 3

382 101 etc., 335 Silt below 332 3, 4

383 311, 315 Layer 5

384 101 etc. Soil fill 3, 4



387 fill is 381 Cut of gully or beam-slot 3

388 204 Fill of 211 6

Table 7 continued

208 | Dea Senuna



390 324, 101 etc. Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 5, 6

391 Gravel surface beneath 339 3

392 Silty layer below 350, butts oven 353 2, 3

393 Silty sand layer below 350, butts 392, 353 2, 3

394 Silty layer below 374 3

395 324 Silty layer below 391 2, 3

396 101 etc. Silty organic layer below 202/327 5, 6

397 Cut containing 398,399, near oven 353 3

398 Fill of 397 3

399 Fill of 397 3

400 Silty clay layer below 394 2

401 Silt layer 1

402 Fill of posthole 370 4

403 503 Chalk surface cut by 397; below 393 1

404 Natural chalky clay below 351, 364 Geology

2006

500 113 etc. Sub-soil layer 8



503 403 Chalk surface cut by 397; below 393 1

504 Ploughsoil 9

505 101 etc, 314 Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 6

506 111 Placed deposit above ovens 139/523, 546 6


508 Modern plough-ruts 9

509 Fill of 508 9


511 364, 525, 601 Oyster midden 6

512 101,110 etc. Soil layer 5, 6

513 373 etc. Gravel surface 1

514 Plough-ruts cut 536 9

515 Fill of 514 9

516 Pig deposit 6

517 101 etc., 320, 518, 519 Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 3, 4

518 101, 320 etc, 517, 519 Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 3, 4

519 101, 320 etc. 517, 518 Organic soil fill of ceremonial hollow 3, 4

520 400 Silty clay layer below 394 2

521 109 etc. Soil layer 5, 6

522 Placed deposit above 529 5

523 139 Clay oven base 2, 3, 4, 5

524 630 Silty soil over gravel road 631 etc. 6

525 364, 511, 601 Oyster midden 6


527 Post-med. drain 8

528 555 Pig deposit 6

529 including 551 oven Central clay platform 2, 3, 4, 5

530 Soil layer at base of plough soil 8

531 101,110, 324 etc. Organic soil fill of central hollow 5,6

532 570, 347, 115 Gully/beam-slot cut 5

Table 7 continued



533 310 etc. Gully fill 5

534 Clay oven base 2



537 524, 631 Soil over 560 6

538 Pig deposit 6

539 Soil layer below 531, cut by oven 546 5

540 Clay surface under 536 3

541 Disturbed gravel surface of 542 6

542 631 etc. Gravel road surface 5

543 Soil layer below 517, above 559 3

544 Fill of cut 545 6

545 Shallow pit cut into 539 6

546 Oven base in 539 6

547 Small pit cut into oven 523 6

548 Fill of 547 6


550 Fill of 549 6

551 529, 609 Clay oven base, part of 529 surface 2, 3, 4, 5


553 Fill of 552 6


555 528 Pig deposit 6


557 Burnt layer below oven 523 2

558 Pig deposit 6

559 101, 320 etc. Layer below 543 2


561 Clayey silt deposit on 339 5,6

562 Clayey silt deposit on 339 5,6

563 373, 602 etc. Gravel surface 1

564 Layer below 535 1, 2

565 Stone rubble post-pad assoc. 556/389 5

566 103, 327, 339 etc. Chalk pebble surface 4,5

567 365 etc. Soil layer below 314, above 389 5

568 Pig etc. deposit 6

569

570 115, 347, 532 Butt-end of gully/beam-slot cut 5

571 Silt fill below 561, above 570 5

572 Deposit within 529/551 5

573 120, 320 etc. Layer below 566 3,4

574 365 Silty layer below & around 389 5

575 359 etc. Clay layer 2

576 Chalk pebble surface 3

577 ?327 etc. Chalk layer below gravel road 542 4

578 585 Gravel road surface 4

579 Pig deposit 6

580 Pig deposit 6

581 Soil layer below 559 & above natural 1

582 Ashy deposit on clay surface 529 5

Table 7 continued

210 | Dea Senuna


583 591, ?327, ?590, ?577 Chalk surface below 560, above 604 4

584 604 Gravel road surface 3, 4

585 Part of 578 Amorphous silt deposit in 578 4

586 631,etc. Gravel surface 5

587 Silty layer between 599 & 609 5

588 Cut of small pit in oven 353 6

589 Fill of 588 6

590 Gravel road surface 5

591 583 Chalk surface below 586, above 604 4

592 Pig deposit 6

593 619, 526, 404, 340, 213 Natural chalky clay Geology

594 Soil layer at base of 389 4


596 595, 327 etc. Chalk pebble surface 4, 5

597 Soil make-up layer for 590 5

598 Fill of 603 6

599 Clay oven base 1, 2

600 Fill of 606 6

601 364, 511, 525 Oyster midden 6


603 Cut of small pit in 582 contains 598 6

604 584 Gravel road surface 3


606 Cut of small pit in 582 6

607 Gravel road repair 3


609 529, 551 Clay oven base 2, 3, 4, 5

610 Cut of small pit 6

611 Fill of 610 6

612 Fill of 618 3

613 Packed clay road surface above 633 1

614 Gravel road repaiir 2


616 Fill of 617 2

617 Cut of small pit into 608 2

618 Cut of small pit into 622; fill 612 3



621 Fill of 620 6

622 Clay oven base 1, 2


624 Fill of 623 2

625 Cut containing 527 8

626 Cut containing 597, 590 5

627 Gravel road surface 2

628 137 Fill of 629 4

629 138 4

630 Soil between 332 and 631 5,6

631 560, 586 Gravel surface 5

632 Cut for oyster midden 364,511,525,601 6

Table 7 continued



633 Pathway below 613 0

634 Cut edge of ceremonial hollow 1

635 in 101, 110, 111, 117, 201 Placed deposit of BA artefacts 5

636 Roman temple treasure hoard 7

637 Base of pit cut for temple treasure hoard 7

638 Base of pit cut for silver figurine pedestal 7

639 Hoard of 8 Claudian coins in 110/324 5

640 Cut of hollow-way filled by 304 6

641 in 350 Placed deposit of BA & later artefacts 5

642 in 512 Placed deposit of ovicaprid bones 5

643 Placed deposit on 529 5

644 in 384 Patch of burnt flint, bone & charcoal 3, 4

645 4

Table 7 continued

212 | Dea Senuna

Introduction: overview of the small findsRalph Jackson

This overview is focused principally on the small finds of metal, pipeclay, pottery, stone and worked bone. It is intended to identify key aspects of the finds assemblage which shed light on the character and use of the site and to highlight particularly significant objects and groups of objects, for which full descriptions may be found in the catalogue entries. For the important assemblages of pottery, coins, Bronze Age metalwork and animal bone, individual detailed discussions are included in their relevant section below. (Abbreviations used in the catalogue entries: Ht = height; W. = width; L. = length; Diam. = diameter; Wt = weight). Catalogue (Cat.) numbers refer to the sections within this chapter: thus, for example, Cat. 10.8 refers to catalogued item 8 in section 10 (‘Prehistoric objects’) of Chapter 11.)

Immediately apparent is that the overall composition of the Ashwell excavated small finds, and their relative numbers, corresponds closely to that of finds assemblages from Romano-British temples, including especially those from Great Chesterford and Harlow, but also to that of other forms of religious site, as at Springhead (France and Gobel 1985; Major 2011; Schuster 2011). The Ashwell excavations did not reveal a temple structure, but all the finds derive from a ceremonial hollow and its margins and, as objects deposited at a ritual site, may be regarded as reflecting ritual acts and activities.

The deposition of coins was evidently a customary act at the Ashwell site and there is an exceptionally large number of Late Iron Age units (Fig. 281). They are principally (over 90%) low denominations of local copper-alloy coinage of the Catuvellauni and Trinovantes and date from the late 1st century bc to the mid-1st century ad (see Figs 297–300). The Roman coinage echoes this peak of activity especially during the Conquest period and extends it further into the 1st century ad. As Eleanor Ghey has observed (pp. 227–8), the Ashwell Iron Age coin assemblage is characteristic of coinage on the western side of the North Thames area. Dominated by the Later Western North Thames group of Cunobelin’s bronze coinage, it is closely matched by the assemblages from Harlow and from Baldock, both sites of ritual activity. There are a few coins from other parts of Britain and from the Continent, perhaps indicating, like the hoard of temple treasure, that the Ashwell religious site was mainly visited by local people but also occasionally attracted people from further afield.

There are a few overtly religious objects, notably the pipeclay figurines of Apollo, Mercury and Venus (see Figs 307–9). As often in Britain, Venus is well represented with four examples, though all are fragments – feet, buttocks and lower legs. The fine Apollo, probably a product of the Cologne modeller Servandus, lacks only his head. The head is also missing from the upper torso fragment of the once large and splendid figurine of Mercury. Conversely, the head alone survives of the distinctively grotesque caricature of a head-scratching reclining elderly man, possibly chosen for its similarity to images of Silenus (see Fig. 310). Closely paralleled by complete figurines in the celebrated Colchester grave group (Eckardt 1999), it was part of a placed deposit

Chapter 11The Finds from the Excavations

The Finds from the Excavations | 213

N 0 5m

Roman coins

Iron age coins


634


634

Figure 281 Distribution of three-dimensionally recorded Iron Age and Roman coins

Figural objects

Personalia (brooches)

Personalia (other)

Militaria

Bronze Age bronzes

N 0 5m


634


634

Figure 282 Distribution of three-dimensionally recorded figural objects, personalia, military equipment and Bronze Age metalwork

214 | Dea Senuna

idiosyncratic form (Cat. 6.20) and may even have been a component of ceremonial regalia.

However, the small finds are dominated by personal objects: 54 brooches, 9 finger rings, 6 beads, 15 hairpins, 4 or 5 bracelets, 9 toilet implements, 5 writing implements, 5 counters and several box or casket fittings (see Figs 319–29, 340). To those groupings might also be added six knives and 14 spinning and weaving accoutrements – spindle whorls, bobbins and pin beater – which, as objects connected to domestic activities, combined a personal aspect with their craft use (see Figs 338–9). Virtually absent from the Ashwell site are the transport items, craft and agricultural tools and structural fittings which usually dominate finds assemblages from domestic sites. As has been widely recognized at other religious sites of the period in Britain, the personal nature of the majority of the Ashwell small finds made them particularly appropriate as offerings, gifts or dedications.

Above all it is the brooches that predominate, with 43 identified examples, three unidentified and eight pins/springs (Table 8). Some 90% of the brooches are 1st-century ad types (see Figs 320–3); Colchesters, Nauheim-derivatives and Colchester-derivatives account for 68%; and there are no plate brooches. Even allowing for the long life of some objects this appears to indicate, as do the coins, a peak of activity in the 1st century ad.

It is interesting to note that the foregoing range of objects is mirrored quite closely by the metal-detected finds that came from the field that included the Ashwell site (Great Buttway Field) and from the fields immediately surrounding it which were reported to the North Hertfordshire District Council Museums Service in the years prior to the excavations (Fig. 283). The metal-detected coins are discussed below (pp. 231–2) and reveal that the distinctive composition of the Iron Age coins is quite similar to that of the excavated assemblage, while the differing composition of the Roman coins suggests that the specific activity at the excavated site was localized.

Among the metal-detected non-coin objects recorded from the Great Buttway Field are a slender, silver, leaf-decorated strip, possibly a form of votive leaf plaque (Fig. 283, no. 1); a copper-alloy phallic mount (Fig. 283, no. 2) similar to one from the excavations (Cat. 4.17); a boar’s head mount (Fig. 283, no. 3); five copper-alloy mounts, probably from military belts or straps; the bezel and shoulders of a large copper-alloy finger ring with double-pelta motif inlaid with red enamel (Fig. 283, no. 4), almost identical to one from the excavations (Cat. 5.62); parts of a copper-alloy bracelet and two hairpins; a La Tène I brooch (Fig. 283, no. 5) and a range of other brooches similar to that from the excavations – Colchesters, Hod Hills and an Aucissa. This range of finds, probably in part from the plough-damaged upper levels of the excavated site, underlines the religious/ritual nature of the site and its environs. The copper-alloy finds from the immediately adjacent fields are also suggestive of related religious activity. They include many brooches, from a Birdlip type to a seated hen plate brooch and a chatelaine brooch (Fig. 283, no. 6), but predominantly Colchesters; a small bust of Atys (Fig. 283, no. 7); a panther’s head mount; a duck mount; a miniature axe; three

and was found in association with a plinth-like object, on which it may originally have been positioned.

Also of direct religious intent are the four silver and copper-alloy votive leaf plaques (see Fig. 305). Just as the coins are mainly low-value units so the plaques, in contrast to those in the hoard, are small and simple. In form, number and state of preservation they are very similar to their counterparts at, for example, Uley, Great Chesterford and Hockwold cum Wilton – small or modest-sized subtriangular ribbed and veined ‘leaves’ predominantly of copper alloy or, less often, of silver (Gurney 1986, 69–70; Henig 1993, 103–8; Major 2011, 264–5).

Probably all chosen for their religious significance, too, are the figural objects of copper alloy, which include two images of Silenus, a fine low-relief bull appliqué and a phallic mount (see Fig. 312). Silenus, as a principal participant in the Bacchic revel, may have been selected to evoke that god; the bull, an important sacrificial animal, was often included in the figurines in household shrines; and the power of the phallus in averting evil was widely and enthusiastically believed in Roman Britain as in other parts of the Roman Empire. A ritual and/or a religious purpose undoubtedly also lay behind the deposition of the fossil sponge and sea urchin (see Fig. 342). Their amuletic use in antiquity is well attested, and examples have been found in burials and at temple sites in Britain and France, some in association with prehistoric axes (Bird 2007b, 33; Williams 2007, 250–1).

A noteworthy, if enigmatic, military component includes mail armour, weapon parts, belt and strap fittings and an armilla bracelet (see Figs 332, 334–5). What remained of the high-quality mail tunic was cut into many small pieces; of the sword only the cut and doubly bent middle part of its blade survived; the dagger and its inlaid sheath was represented by the tapered lower tip only of both components; and the armilla had been broken in pieces and further distorted. Whether these fragments were dedicated as spoils or by soldiers or their families cannot be ascertained from the objects or their context. Moreover, the status of spearheads is seldom clear cut and the Ashwell examples are no exception: it is impossible to determine whether they were for military or civilian use as their roles in battle or in hunting cannot be differentiated intrinsically. Furthermore, one is of

Brooch type Number %

Rosette and Langton Down 3 7

Colchester 9 21

Nauheim-derivative 12 28

Aucissa 2 5

Colchester-derivative 8 19

Hod Hill 4 9

Durotrigan 1 2

Headstud 1 2

Trumpet 1 2

Penannular 2 5

Total 43 100

Unidentified 3

Pins and spring 8

Table 8 The brooches from the Ashwell excavations

0 5cm

1

2

3

4

5

6 7 8

9


the minimum of metal and with very little decoration, as are also a number of the finger rings and bracelets. A few brooches are truly miniature (Fig. 284), and miniaturization appears to be seen, too, in one or two of the iron spearheads (see Fig. 334). Strikingly, this tendency for the deposition of small and light objects is seen also in the idiosyncratic range of Bronze Age bronzes from the site (see pp. 310, 312; Figs 346, 348).

enamelled seal boxes (Fig. 283, no. 8); a panel from a composite enamelled hexagonal perfume flask (Fig. 283, no. 9) (cf. Hunter 2012, 91–3, fig. 9.4, left, fig. 9.5i); a nail cleaner; and three Bronze Age bronzes.

A notable feature of the excavated Ashwell finds is their frequently diminutive size and simplicity. The brooches in particular are mostly small and extremely simple, made with

Figure 283 A selection of the metal-detected finds reported from the area of the Ashwell site prior to the excavations. Scale 1:1. Drawings: C. Jane Read; copyright North Hertfordshire Museum

Figure 284 Miniature brooches. Left to right: Cat. 5.22, 5.15, 5.16, 5.38Figure 285 Distorted and modified brooches. Left to right: Cat. 5.10, 5.15, 5.31, 5.35

216 | Dea Senuna

1. Pottery and ceramic building materialsAndrew Fawcett

The Late Iron Age and Roman pottery

IntroductionThis report presents the results of research undertaken on the pottery collected from four seasons of archaeological investigation at Bluegates Farm, Ashwell.

The first section outlines the methodology employed and highlights a number of controlling factors that have influenced the research strategy and therefore its overall conclusions. Thereafter the analysis continues on a chronological basis, beginning with the Late Bronze to Middle/Late Iron Age, continuing with the late pre-Roman Iron Age (c. 20 bc–c. ad 70) and the post-Conquest period to ad 150/200, and finishing with the 3rd and 4th centuries ad.

The overall conclusions follow the same chronological divisions and include commentaries on what the pottery assemblage represents in terms of status, function and economy.

MethodologyA total of 24,433 sherds with a combined weight of 135,977g were recovered from the combined excavations, which took place between 2003 and 2006. All the sherds were examined at ×20 magnification using a binocular microscope. They were then assigned to a fabric group based on matrix colour, inclusions present and surface treatment. These fabrics were then subdivided into sourced and unsourced fine wares and coarse wares. The fabric identification codes used are based upon those developed by Going (1987) and further enhanced by Tomber and Dore (1998). A comprehensive list of all these codes, as well as the number of sherds, weight and rim measurements pertaining to each fabric, can be found in the site archive held in the British Museum (this also holds a more detailed set of references concerning form).

It became apparent at an early stage of the analysis that in many respects this assemblage is not typical. One of the main problems during analysis was the high level of fragmentation of the pottery, the overall average sherd weight standing at just 5.56g, with weights of around 4g being common and the lower end of the range extending to 2.5g. At the higher end of the range, few sherds weighed more than 10g, with weights of 7–8g being more common. Certainly if it had not been for the occasional presence of sherds from storage or larger jar types, the overall average weight would have been lower.

Understandably, this fragmentation has made the identification of individual vessels very difficult. Almost none of them could be categorized beyond their general class, such as jar or dish. Despite this, some form types could be placed with a little more accuracy, allowing a better assignment of dates. Good examples of this are jars of the channel-rimmed style and bowls with a reed rim, though such accurate form matches were rare. The lack of diagnostic data meant that date ranges were more likely to be assigned on the basis of fabric analysis than form combinations.

Some groups of juxtaposed objects were clearly placed deposits and can be taken to have had very particular, if unrecoverable, meanings. In fact, that is likely to be true of all the finds within the ceremonial hollow, the focus of the site, whether individually placed or grouped. A concentration of objects just within the perimeter of the ceremonial hollow, seemingly placed by those circumambulating the sacred spot, is particularly evocative of what must have been important acts in peoples lives (see Fig. 282).

Droplets of alloys of gold, silver, copper and lead are more probably the remains of melted objects (perhaps derived from cremations) than remnants of metalworking – for which the site yielded little other evidence. Much burning is also evident on ceramic and bone objects – pipeclay and samian especially (see Figs 289, 308). Both types of burning episode – the melting of metals and blackening of ceramic objects – are perhaps to be connected with the ovens and evidence for ritual feasting.

Some objects had clearly been deliberately broken, bent or modified – sometimes severely so – before deposition, probably in order to put them beyond human use, to move them out of the realm of mortal activity into that of the divine (Fig. 285). Most obvious is the cutting up of the mail armour, the double distortion and breakage of the sword blade and armilla bracelet and the damage inflicted on several of the brooches (see Figs 332, 334, 336–7). The many fragmentary Bronze Age spearheads, broken sword blades and damaged and distorted socketed axes may also have resulted from such acts (see Figs 346, 349–50). A similar process may have been the cause of the incompleteness of the pipeclay figurines – a pedestal without a figure, figures without pedestals, feet without bodies, bodies without heads, a head without a body, and the clear breakage impact point on the burnt chest of the Mercury figurine (for fragmentation of pipeclay figurines see Fittock 2015, 125–30) (see Figs 307–11).

Another selective process was the trimming of pottery and metal objects in order to highlight a head, a face, a figure or a particular motif. Most prominent are the carefully adapted bronze head of Silenus and the moulded pottery face mask, but also the ‘cutting out’ – or selection from broken sherds – from decorated samian vessels of a gladiator, a ram’s head and bird, a draped female figure and a cantharus as well as at least some of the potters’ stamps (see Figs 288–9, 312–13). A much more extreme process was the fragmentation of glass and pottery, both assemblages of which are dominated by vessels associated with feasting (see Fig. 343).

Overall, it may be seen that the careful choice of the objects deposited at the Ashwell site, and the variety of actions that adapted or transformed those objects before deposition, resulted in a very distinctive artefact assemblage. The complexion of that assemblage may be attributed in part to ritual feasting. Probably, however, it was mostly a product of the alteration of votive and other given objects taken from nearby temples and shrines to be involved in rituals and feasting before being ceremonially placed, by groups or by individuals, in the favissa-like enclosed hollow.


southern Italy (Wilson 1984; Stead and Rigby 1986; Tyers 1996). It is, however, southern British grog-tempered ware (SOB GT) (Tomber and Dore 1998, 214), a ware produced mainly in the south-east of England, which is the most prolific. This fabric straddles the Conquest period and, by its association with other fabrics (or not, as the case may be) and the study of the forms within it (Thompson 1982), contexts can often be dated to either side of the Conquest.

Gallo-Belgic potteryAt Bluegates Farm the Gallo-Belgic wares (GAB TR, GAB TN) suffered badly from both abrasion and fragmentation, their average sherd weight being just 2.99g. It is possible that a number of sherds remain unallocated to these categories, as the surface of these wares is often almost completely worn away, making identification very difficult. The total number of sherds is 132 and they have a combined weight of 395g, the majority being in the terra rubra category, occurring intermittently across contexts. The Gallo-Belgic form assemblage (whose total rim measurement amounts to only 0.87 of the total form assemblage which stands at 125.40) contains only a small number of positive identifications, including three cups, Camulodunum form (Cam) 51a (from [324]), Cam56 ([398]) and Cam56c ([568]), and a plate, possibly a Cam16, in fill [572] (Symonds and Wade 1999, 468–70). For stamps see below, ‘Potters’ stamps on coarse wares’, Cat. 1.16–1.18.

AmphoraeAmphorae fabrics are quite scarce and of the 20 sherds noted for this phase, 17 belong to the Baetican olive oil carrier category (BAT AM 1), while the remaining three belong to Campanian wine amphorae (CAM AM 1).

Coarse waresSouthern British grog-tempered ware (SOB GT) is the third largest fabric grouping, represented by 3562 sherds (14.5% of the whole assemblage) with a weight of 35,991g (26.5%), though its rim percentage stands at only 10.49 (8.5%).

This fabric is consistently present across contexts and its incidence increases over the last two seasons of excavation (2005 and 2006). However, there is not one instance where SOB GT either stands alone in significant numbers or appears with fabrics that are solely indicative of the pre-Conquest era. Instead it is always to be found alongside Roman pottery, although in some of these instances its presence is quite significant ([324], [349], [506], [521], [525], [529] & [582]). There are, nevertheless, several contexts where there are hints of pre-Conquest activity, in which pedestal bases are noted or where other earlier fabrics are present, such as [320], [372], [517] & [543].

The form assemblage is very limited, with jars overwhelming all other types, but most are identifiable only as bead-rimmed fragments (163 in total). There are a small number of jars in the ‘channel-rimmed’ category (Thompson 1982, 245–56), as well as jars displaying either rilled or stabbed decoration. There are 22 examples of large storage jars. Five platters, two sieved bases, one lid and six beakers make up the remainder of the assemblage. In the latter category one G4 girth beaker (ibid., 501–6) is worthy of

Complicating this situation was the high level of abrasion encountered across the entire assemblage. This ranged from ‘very’ to ‘slight’, leading to a ‘variable’ classification in terms of wear. Furthermore, this pattern repeated itself across individual fabric types occurring within the same context, making it impossible to identify date ranges within given wares, and thus date ranges for the context.

This lack of clarity was compounded by the mixed nature of the assemblages within virtually all the contexts. At the most extreme, fills might contain pottery ranging in date from the Late Iron Age all the way through to the later Roman period. However, the vast majority of fills had a date range that spanned the Late Iron Age through to the 2nd century ad (a pattern also repeated, where applicable, by form types).

Unsourced coarse wares have been classified using basic (although useful) fabric divisions only. Further fundamental subdivisions have been employed (where appropriate) on the pottery recording sheets, which form part of the site archive. In practical terms, however, the lack of securely dated contexts meant that it was impossible to glean meaningful information from a more detailed examination of the unsourced coarse ware fabrics.

Finally, few sherds have been selected for illustration, both for the reasons listed above, and because similar examples have been liberally illustrated elsewhere. In the absence, too, of secure contextual data, the strategy has been to select only newly identified types or types that demonstrate a significant variation from other known examples.

Late Bronze Age to Middle/Late Iron AgeThe earliest dated pottery within the entire assemblage is unsourced flint-tempered ware (UNS FT). This handmade fabric is very distinct, containing varying amounts of crushed flint, and dates from the Late Bronze Age to the Early/Middle Iron Age. However, none of the sherds in this fabric are diagnostic and it occurs only sporadically across contexts. Only 28 sherds, with a combined weight of 92g, are present and it is found only alongside Roman or later fabrics, never within its own dated fill.

The next phase, defined by a ceramic presence, is the Early/Middle to Late Iron Age, the two main fabrics being unsourced sand and organic ware (UNS SO) and unsourced coarse sanded ware (UNS CS). These, and two minor fabric variations combined, account for just 1% and 0.5% (sherd count and weight) of the entire pottery assemblage. The larger part of UNS SO is noted in [320] and includes two jars, one displaying a slashed rim. The remainder is spread across mixed contexts, a pattern which is repeated by UNS CS, although [350] contained some 27 sherds with a single jar rim.

It is entirely possible that both these fabrics may continue through to the next phase (below) but the lack of secure data makes this impossible to prove.

Late pre-Roman Iron Age (c. 20 bc to c. ad 70)Across Hertfordshire this phase is defined by a number of very distinctive pottery types, including Gallo-Belgic wares from north-west Europe, Dressel 20 olive oil amphorae from southern Spain, and Dressel 1 and 2/4 wine amphorae from

218 | Dea Senuna

Heiligenberg, Rheinzabern and Trier. All of these production centres exported to Britain from the early/mid 2nd century ad, and some continued into the early/mid 3rd century ad.

Continental fine waresOnly four sourced Continental fine wares have been identified. The first of these is Central Gaulish colour-coated ware (CNG CC), with a total of 35 sherds having a combined weight of 88g. Most of these are body sherds and of the three beaker rims present all that can be said is that one has a cornice rim. This fabric is generally dated in Britain from around the mid/late 1st century ad to the early 2nd century ad and equates to Baldock fabric CC2 (Stead and Rigby 1986, 266).

Also from the same area four sherds (4g) are in a Central Gaulish glazed fabric (CNG GL), which is fairly uncommon in Britain. One of the small fragments relates to a flagon rim.

A third Central Gaulish fabric found on the site is Lyon colour-coated ware (LYO CC), represented by just four beaker sherds weighing 7g. The fabric dates from ad 40 to ad 70 and all the sherds in this group display roughcast decoration; it equates to Baldock fabric CC1 (ibid.).

The fourth and largest group amongst the sourced fabrics is represented by Cologne colour-coated ware (KOL CC) from the Cologne area, a fabric that has a much longer lifespan in Britain (late 1st to mid 3rd century ad). The 54 sherds, with a combined weight of 89g, all derive from beakers. Three cornice rims have been identified and several of the body sherds are decorated in roughcast and barbotine styles.

The remaining 55 colour-coated sherds, with a combined weight of 112g, are unsourced (UNS CC), and the only diagnostic element present is a single cornice beaker rim.

Romano-British fine waresThe most popular Romano-British colour-coated fabric in this phase (dating from the early to the later 2nd/early 3rd century ad) is from Colchester (COL CC). At Baldock this fabric is listed as CC5 (Stead and Rigby 1986, 267), and at Bluegates its presence is marked by 148 sherds with a combined weight of 247g. The diagnostic element is dominated by beakers, mostly in the cornice style although one plain version has been noted, the remainder of the rims being unidentifiable. Accompanying these are two small examples of ‘castor box’ lids. The only identified decorative scheme is overall roughcasting.

A comparable number of unsourced colour-coated wares, 165 sherds with a combined weight of 451g, have been grouped together, although many of these may relate to the later Roman period. Many of the body sherds derive from beakers, though only one cornice rim is present; other form types include bead- and plain-rimmed dishes, as well a bowl and two jars.

Southern British glazed ware (SOB GL) is fairly rare on most sites and is thought to originate from Staines in west London (Tyers 1996, 178). Only nine sherds, with a combined weight of 16g, are present, and a single beaker rim is the only diagnostic piece amongst them.

further attention. It has an everted rim, a single cordon at the waist with a low point of carination (Cat. 1.1; Fig. 287), and probably dates to the period from ad 5 to ad 50/60.

Roman (mid 1st century ad to mid/later 2nd century ad)This phase accounts for the majority of the pottery assemblage but, owing to the circumstances described above, it has not been possible to provide a more refined dating sequence. There are nevertheless several valid indicators that, backed up by the evidence of fabric and form, suggest what the most intense period of activity may have been.

SamianAlthough a reasonable quantity of samian ware has been collected (1383 sherds, with a total weight of 4090g and a rim percentage of 9.89), a great proportion of it is fragmented and abraded (with an average sherd weight of 2.95g), in addition to which a large quantity has been affected by heat. The samian ware represents 5.5% by sherd count and 3% by weight of the whole pottery assemblage.

Samian from La Graufesenque (LGF SA) is by far the most common fabric, making up 52% of the samian assemblage by sherd count and 50.5% by weight, and dating from ad 40 to the early 2nd century ad. Although unidentified samian represents the second largest element in the assemblage, 22% by sherd count and 21% by weight, it is likely that most of this is also from La Graufesenque.

The bulk of the identifiable forms is made up of Dragendorff form (Drg) 27 cups (19), Drg18 plates (33), Drg29 bowls (7) and Drg15/17 platters, all typical mid 1st- to early 2nd-century ad types. In addition, there are one or two examples of individual bowls (Drg30, Drg36, Drg37, Drg78), cups (Drg24/35, Drg35, Drg46, Curle 11) and transitional plates (Drg18/31). A further 33 rim fragments are simply too small to be placed in a category. A single stamp from the topsoil [300] reads …VIM, the remainder being illegible (for the other stamps see below, Cat 1.20–1.21). A few sherds have decoration on them, of a common type such as ovolo and bordering. Occasional fragments exhibiting other decorative schemes are so minute or abraded as to be not worth investigating further. A small exception to this is an almost complete gladiatorial figure, [314], with the leg of a fellow combatant just in view (Cat. 1.22; Figs 286, 289); a similar pose was recorded at Colchester (Symonds and Wade 1999, 44).

The second largest samian group is that of Lezoux in Central Gaul (LEZ SA 2), dating from the early to the later 2nd century ad, and accounting for 16% by sherd number and 18% by weight of the samian assemblage. The form range of LEZ SA 2, which is more limited than that of LGF SA, includes Drg33 cups (8), Drg37 bowls (6), Drg31 dishes (4) and single examples of a Drg27 cup and an Oswald and Pryce no. 13 cup (cited in Webster 1996).

Montans in southern Gaul provides a small number of sherds, and single examples of Drg27, 35 and 46 cups, bowls 29 and 38, as well as dishes 31 and 79, have been identified in this fabric.

Also present is a very limited quantity of sherds from eastern Gaul, namely Argonne, Blickweiler, Chemery,


are also present) it is impossible to say how many of the body sherds relate to this phase alone.

Colchester white ware (COL WH) is the first fabric of note, represented by 91 sherds with a combined weight of 464g. This fabric, especially when abraded, is difficult to identify, sharing many similarities with a number of other white wares, particularly from north-west Europe. A small number of sherds are diagnostic, among them two flagons (one of which is ring-necked), two bowls, a dish, a mortarium base and a narrow-necked jar.

Verulamium white (VER WH) is a very distinct fabric and is one of the most consistently occurring in the entire assemblage. In this area of Hertfordshire it dates from around the late 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, and at Chells, Stevenage (Waugh 1999, 91–2) from the later part of that sequence, representing between 7–10% of the assemblage (based on sherd count, weight and rim measurements). On the present site, the figures are a little less, ranging between 4% and 6.5%, but as the site lies further north than Chells, this seems a reasonable statistic.

The VER WH assemblage is dominated by three form groups: reed-rimmed bowls, jars and flagons. The reed-rimmed bowl is one of the VER WH signature form types and some of its more common versions (nos 2444 and 2447 from Verulamium) are noted here (Wilson 1984). Although there are more than 20 jars present, 30% are in the bifid-rimmed style, typical of the early to mid/late 2nd century ad (e.g. nos 2246 and 2250 from Verulamium) (ibid.). One of these jars occurs in a fabric that appears to be a Verulamium offshoot (Cat. 1.4; Fig. 287). It displays a thin slip-like cream surface, with the remainder of the fabric being an intense orange. The inclusion suite is not in the classic Verulamium style, though it does bear some resemblance to an example described at Folly Lane in St Albans (Lyne 1999, 240). Twenty flagons have also been identified, of which five are of the ring-necked variety, in the style of no. 1940) (Wilson 1984). The remaining vessels include one beaker and dish, eight mortaria and 11 lid fragments.

Fifteen sherds of Verulamium reduced ware (VER RE), with a combined weight of 99g, have also been identified in this phase.

Four Hadham variations have been identified on the present site: Hadham white-slipped ware (HAD WS), oxidized ware (HAD OX) and reduced fabrics, categories 1 and 2 (HAD RE 1, HAD RE 2).

The number of HAD WS sherds is negligible, though the fabrics encountered, for the most part, appear to be earlier versions of the ware (Fawcett unpub. b).

HAD OX is represented by 404 sherds with a combined weight of 1206g (1.6% by sherd count and 1% by weight of the entire assemblage). It is spread rather thinly across contexts and, judging by the form range, most of the sherds are likely to date to the later Roman period (see below).

In many respects HAD RE 1 follows a similar pattern to HAD OX, at least in the fact that there is a significant late Roman element to it. However, this fabric is more frequent across contexts (1375 sherds with a combined weight of 6788g) and represents 5.5% by sherd count and 5% by weight of the total pottery assemblage. Earlier form types are in evidence in the shape of platters (five), flat and triangular-

London fine reduced ware (LON FR) probably has several sources, including Hadham (ibid., 170). The fabric often imitates samian forms and was produced from the late 1st to the early/mid 2nd century ad; it is listed as fabric 6 at Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986, 262). Forty-eight sherds, with a combined weight of 319g, have been identified and four bowls have been noted, two of which are worthy of illustration: the first, from [364], has parallels in form and decoration at Verulamium (Wilson 1984, no. 2371) and Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986, no. 314), though neither is a direct match for this highly burnished example, with a cordon and an almost feather-like but incomplete design below (Cat. 1.2; Fig. 287); the second, from [525], displays some affinity to no. 484 at Baldock (ibid.), though the design is more like spaced rouletting, with a cordon above and a line of carination below (Cat. 1.3; Fig. 287).

Romano-British mica-dusted ware (ROB MD) represents the last true fine ware in this section, represented by 150 sherds with a combined weight of 798g. There is little consistency in terms of fabric, though a number do contain common black iron ore as one mineral trait, and both silver and gold mica types occur (Stead and Rigby 1986, 266; Going 1987, 5; Tomber and Dore 1998, 211). Again, for the reasons described above, no meaningful grouping of these wares can be carried out.

The form assemblage is fairly typical of the fabric, and includes dishes such as types 2513–16 from Verulamium, and bowls such as type 2377 (Wilson 1984), as well as a small number of beakers (including one cornice-rimmed type), lids and jars. Mica-dusted fabrics are thought to be at their most popular from around ad 69 to the early/mid 2nd century ad (Going 1987, 5).

Although not true fine wares in terms of their mineral suite, a group of white wares have been included in this section because their surface treatment includes a cream slip and painted brown/orange designs, mostly dots, circles and lines. The fabric is fairly dense with ill-sorted quartz and occasional voids, but it is the sparse ill-sorted red iron ore that is most distinctive, and some silver mica is also noted. Unfortunately, none of the sherds are diagnostic, though the fabric appears to share some traits with Baldock fabric 16 (Stead and Rigby 1986, 264). The fabric consistently occurs in assemblages up to the 2nd century ad, but it could easily be dated much earlier in this sequence.

Colour-coated pottery from the Lower Nene Valley (LNV CC) has generally been found on the present site in contexts containing both early and later Roman material. However, because it can be demonstrated from elsewhere that this ware occurs principally in 3rd- to 4th-century ad assemblages, discussion of it has been included below in this later phase. Nene Valley fine wares account for 3.2% of the entire pottery assemblage by sherd count, and 2% in weight.

Romano-British coarse waresThis is a fairly limited grouping and should be treated with some caution, especially with respect to the Hadham oxidized and reduced wares. These fabrics span almost the entire Roman period, and in the absence of form (particularly in the fills where 3rd- and 4th-century ceramics

220 | Dea Senuna

burnished with two cordons, in between which is a zone of rounded rouletting; it probably dates from about ad 120 to 150/80 (Cat. 1.5; Fig. 287).

The largest category of fabrics consists of black-surfaced/Romanizing grey wares (BSW), which are associated with the early Roman period (Going 1987, 9). These represent 16% of the entire assemblage by sherd count, 14% by weight and 17% in terms of rim percentage.

This fabric, like UNS OX (see above), includes a large number of unidentified jars. In this case over 200 have been recorded. The remaining form assemblage consists of reed-rimmed bowls (9), platters (15), beakers (20), lids (15), triangular-rimmed dishes (10), flat-rimmed dishes (5), flagons (4) and a further selection of jar types, including channel-rimmed (12), lid-seated (10), narrow-necked (2), storage (2), bifid (7) and a number displaying cordon and bulge decoration (6). Four examples are worthy of illustration, all from [521]: a reed-rimmed bowl with a burnished rim (Cat. 1.6; Fig. 287) has a close match from Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986, no. 418) and is also comparable with no. 2437 from Verulamium (Wilson 1984); a bowl, with the zone between the two-beaded rim decorated with a wavy line design and burnished (Cat. 1.7; Fig. 287), has similar characteristics to nos 2383 and 2384 from Verulamium (ibid.); a jar decorated in the cordon and bulge style (Cat. 1.8; Fig. 287) is similar to nos 262–266 from Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986) and is typical of the mid 1st- to early 2nd-century period (Going 1987, 45); a neckless jar with a cordon and a zone of rilling (Cat. 1.9; Fig. 287) is similar to no. 467 from Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986) and may date to the mid to later 1st century ad.

The GRS grouping encompasses a variety of sandy grey ware fabrics, representing 9% of the whole site assemblage by sherd count and 8% by weight, with a rim percentage of 12%. The number of late forms present suggests that a large proportion of this fabric group belongs to the 3rd and 4th centuries ad. Once again jars dominate, with over 100 unidentifiable rims relating to this form. The identifiable part of the assemblage that can be readily dated to this phase is very small, consisting of reed-rimmed bowls (6), triangular-rimmed (7) and flat-rimmed dishes (7), platters (3), a single channel-rimmed jar and a copy of a Drg18 dish. Once again, several of the dish forms, such as the plain- and bead-rimmed types, have long lifespans and it is thus not possible to phase them confidently.

Of note is a reed-rimmed bowl in the style of no. 2432 from Verulamium (Wilson 1984), which occurs in [522] (Cat. 1.10; Fig. 287). It has a burnished band directly under the rim and the point of carination is just evident. No. 2432 from Verulamium is similar and dates from the early to mid 2nd century ad, though it is likely to have a broader range than that (Wilson 1984).

A second form of interest is a lid recorded in [315], which has no direct match and is of an unknown date. The fabric is distinctive in containing black iron ore and calcite, and part of the surface exhibits a lattice pattern (Cat. 1.11; Fig. 287).

A stamped base was recovered from [336] (Cat. 1.16; Fig. 286) which contained no later material and is therefore likely to fall within this phase. The base is whole and the stamp consists of two numerals, X and X, with a blurred element in between them.

rimmed dishes (five) and single examples of a reed-rimmed bowl and ring-necked flagon. Over 50 jar rims have been identified and some of these, at least, appear to date from the late 1st to the 2nd century ad.

Thirty-eight sherds with a combined weight of 299g have been assigned to HAD RE 2, though only one, representing a triangular-rimmed dish, can safely be allocated to the 2nd century ad.

Another fabric that contributes a restricted number of sherds is Highgate Wood reduced ware C (HGW RE C), represented by 34 sherds with a combined weight of 94g. The numbers present here are below the 1% recorded at Chells (Waugh 1999, 109), perhaps influenced, like VER WH, by this site’s geographic position. All the sherds belong to beakers, some exhibiting barbotine dots, while a single rim relates to a poppy-head beaker.

Unsourced coarse waresAs discussed above in connection with the Hadham products, it is uncertain what percentage of the unsourced wares should be assigned to which phase. This applies in particular to the sandy grey wares (GRS), the unsourced oxidized wares (UNS OX) and the unsourced shell-tempered wares (UNS SH).

A small group of unsourced white-slipped wares (UNS WS), 168 sherds with a combined weight of 675g, contains a limited number of early forms. These include a poppy-head beaker, a ring-necked flagon and several jars, one of which has a bifid rim.

UNS WH is represented by a fairly large group of 2057 sherds with a combined weight of 6458g. This represents 8.5% of the whole assemblage by sherd count and 5% by weight. Interestingly the form suite is quite limited, with bead-rimmed jars being by far the largest category (42). Other forms represented include lids, bifid-rimmed jars, beakers, reed-rimmed bowls and ring-necked flagons, with bead- and plain-rimmed dishes, platters and cups being represented by fewer than five examples. It is likely that a large proportion of this assemblage falls within this phase, its peak being from the mid 1st to 2nd century ad (Going 1987, 7).

Despite the large size of the UNS OX group, which consists of 3692 sherds with a combined weight of 14,453g and represents 15% of the total assemblage by sherd count and 10.5% by weight, the form range that can be assigned to this phase is very restricted; more than 172 jar fragments cannot be assigned to either Roman phase on account of their size. Examples which can be comfortably assigned to the present phase include reed-rimmed bowls (5), channel-rimmed jars (10), platters (6), ring-necked flagons (2), beakers (17), cups (2) and flat-rimmed bowls (2). The remaining form types, such as plain- and bead-rimmed dishes, date from the early/mid 2nd century ad and continue to the end of the Roman era.

An indicator that most of the sherds do in fact relate to this phase is the ‘Romanizing’ aspect of many of the fabrics, which often contain some grog alongside the quartz sand. Furthermore, there is a distinct lack of later form types within the assemblage, in contrast, for example, to the Hadham wares and sandy grey wares (GRS).

Context [315] includes a bifid jar, the nearest parallel for which is no. 2153 from Verulamium (Wilson 1984). The jar is


assemblage. This is made up of dishes, including flanged (5), plain (2) and beaded (2), and one with an incipient flange. The remaining forms include 14 jars and single instances each of a flagon and a bowl.

The two reduced wares from Hadham also include late forms. HAD RE 1 includes dishes that are flanged (7), beaded (10), plain (12) and incipient (2). Also noted are bowl-jars (8), and it is certain that a number of the unclassified jar rims will also be dated to this phase.HAD RE 2 includes plain dishes (5), a flanged dish, jars (2) and a lid.

A very small number of other fabrics have been noted, the first being East Anglian reduced ware (EAA RE), represented by one mortarium sherd from [324]. This ware has a number of potential sources in the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex (Tomber and Dore 1998, 130).

Alice Holt reduced ware (ALH RE) is also noted, mostly from the topsoil ([101]) where the OXF RS mortaria, as well as many other late fabric and form types, occurred. None of the sherds in this fabric, which originates from the Surrey/Hampshire border area, are diagnostic but it is likely to date from the late 3rd to the 4th century ad.

Sherds of Dorset black-burnished ware category 1 (DOR BB 1) are present, again mainly from [101], probably dating to between the 3rd and the early 4th centuries ad. A small collection of DOR BB 1 sherds was recorded at Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986, 265) and the fabric also occurred in later contexts at Chells (Waugh 1999, 42). Six dish rims are present – four are plain, one is in the flat style and the final example is unidentifiable.

A single undiagnostic sherd of Horningsea reduced ware (HOR RE) comes from [502]; the fabric dates from the 2nd to early/mid 4th centuries ad and was produced near Cambridge.

Another fabric represented by a single sherd is lower Nene valley reduced ware (LNV RE). This is also from [502], and dates from the mid 3rd to the 4th century ad.

Unsourced coarse waresAs discussed above, GRS is the main fabric grouping in this category to include late form types. However, UNS OX includes two vessel types, plain-rimmed (10) and bead-rimmed (11) dishes, which have a long time span and could therefore be placed in this phase. Only two forms, a flanged dish and a bowl, date securely from the mid 3rd to the 4th century ad.

Within GRS the long-lived dishes amount to 18 plain-rimmed and 19 bead-rimmed types. One of the plain-rimmed vessels ([110]) unusually has a lattice pattern on its walls. There are no similar examples in the Verulamium (Wilson 1984) or Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986) corpora, this sort of decoration being more commonly found on bead and triangular rimmed dishes (Cat. 1.14; Fig. 287). The true late forms in GRS consist of six flanged dishes, one indented beaker and three bowl-jars. One bowl-jar from [101] (Cat. 1.15; Fig. 287) has form matches from both Chells (Waugh 1999, no. 345) and Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986, no. 816). It displays an everted rim and a ‘notched’ cordon at its girth and dates from the late 3rd to the 4th century ad.

The UNS SH wares form a group of fabrics that encompasses much variety in terms of the quantity and size of shell present. Like Southern British grog-tempered ware (SOB GT) (above) the form suite is restricted, being dominated by bead- and channel-rimmed jars. All other forms, such as bowls and dishes, are represented by fewer than four examples each.

The most common identifiable form is the channel-rimmed jar, of which two are of particular interest. The first has a slashed rim and is oxidized. It appears to be handmade with ill-sorted shell within the paste, and was recovered from [311]. It equates to form C5-2 (Thompson 1982) and could potentially be pre-Conquest (Cat. 1.12; Fig. 287). The second is a larger version for which there is no direct match, either from Baldock or in Thompson’s corpus. A cordon occurs just below the neck, after which the jar is rilled with a patchy black outer surface (Cat. 1.13; Fig. 287).

Roman (3rd to 4th century ad)No single context contains pottery that is dated uniquely to this period; it always occurs alongside earlier Roman ceramics. It is notable, however, that most of the contexts that do contain later material tend to be unstratified or topsoil fills. In addition, it appears that the occurrence of late Roman pottery reduced considerably in the final two seasons of excavation.

Romano-British fine waresThe main fine ware associated with this period is lower Nene valley colour-coated ware (LNV CC), represented by 240 sherds with a combined weight of 669g. The identifiable form assemblage is made up of five cornice-style beakers, one funnel-necked beaker, three plain-rimmed dishes, four ‘castor box’ lids and one bowl-jar.

The only other recorded late fine ware is Oxford red colour-coated ware (OXF RS), a fabric whose appearance in north Hertfordshire occurs around the late 3rd century ad. However, at Chells, for instance, the majority of sherds date from ad 350 to 410 (Waugh 1999, 90). Only eight sherds, weighing just 27g, are present in this collection and the one identifiable form (a mortarium) was found in [101].

Romano-British coarse waresFive lower Nene valley white ware sherds (LNV WH) with a combined weight of 92g have been identified, all relating to mortaria. This fabric type expands into this part of Hertfordshire from around the mid 3rd century ad onwards (Tyers 1996, 128).

Another fabric that is present in very small numbers is Mancetter-Hartshill white ware (MAN WH). Although none of the four sherds (combined weight 90g), are diagnostic they all belong to mortaria, as demonstrated by the presence of ‘grits’. The fabric dates from the mid 2nd to the early 4th century ad.

A final mortarium fabric is Oxford white ware (OXF WH), but again none of the seven sherds (combined weight 88g) are diagnostic and it is likely that the fabric’s date on this site is from the mid 3rd to the 4th century ad.

As mentioned previously, most of the HAD OX sherds are likely to belong to this period, based upon the form

222 | Dea Senuna

later ceramics may not even demonstrate a pattern of use for the site similar to that of the earlier period.

EconomyThe pottery from the late pre-Roman Iron Age is virtually all locally made, the only exceptions being the small percentage of Gallo-Belgic imports.

The period from the Conquest to the early 2nd century ad demonstrates some diversity, but the overwhelming majority of the pottery is unsourced though fine wares from southern France and north-west Europe, as well as amphorae (in negligible amounts) from southern Spain, are represented.

Most of the sourced coarse wares are from Hertfordshire, such as VER WH from the south and Hadham products from the east. Sources further afield are few. From London come HGW RE C and SOB GL, and from Essex COL WH. Further, it is likely that a large quantity of unsourced shell-tempered ware (UNS SH) came from Bedfordshire.

Interestingly, the east and south Hertfordshire trend is repeated for the early to mid/late 2nd-century ad pottery, as is the trend for regional imports, the only addition being COL CC from Essex. As discussed above, the samian presence dips, the amounts represented being mainly from central France, with a very limited number of fabrics from the Rhine valley area.

The later Roman assemblage (mid/late 3rd to 4th century ad) incorporates a variety of fabrics but this diversity is generally represented only in extremely small quantities. Moreover, because of the widespread presence of later fabrics in contexts that also contain earlier material, is not possible to be very accurate about the pottery supply in this phase.

This aside, the only sourced fine ware derives from the Peterborough area (LNV CC), whilst the sourced coarse ware assemblage is dominated by Hadham products. Undoubtedly unsourced coarse wares account for the majority of the assemblage for this phase and, as noted before, the UNS SH is more likely to have originated from Bedfordshire.

The vast majority of unsourced pottery fabrics are of a local or regional nature. When these are considered alongside the sourced elements of the assemblage, the conclusion is that the ceramic economy is not very dynamic, being mostly confined to or satisfied by local markets. Had the site been serving a population arriving consistently from further afield, and bringing with them personal vessels for use at the site, this would certainly have been reflected in the assemblage.

StatusFor the most part this current assemblage cannot be subjected to a typical ceramic analysis and its attendant comparative exercises. Some basic facts do, however, stand out.

The fine ware content is low, as is the variety of identified sources that are aligned with the main phase of activity. Even if it were possible to construct secure ceramic groups, based upon the overall character of the assemblage, there would still be nothing to suggest high status.

Using cremation assemblages as a comparison it is clear that pottery is generally used as an expression of status

Discussion

DatingThere is little ceramic evidence for intensive activity on the site during the Late Bronze Age to the Middle/Late Iron Age.

Activity during the late pre-Roman Iron Age (c. 20 bc– c. ad 70) is attested by the presence of southern British grog-tempered ware (SOB GT) and Gallo-Belgic wares (GAB TR, GAB TN), but dividing this between pre- and post-Conquest assemblages has proved impossible, for the reasons outlined above.

Sound evidence for the pre-Conquest use of the site does exist in the form of Campanian wine amphora fabric (CAM AM 1), one or two forms within GAB TR and GAB TN, as well as a limited number of vessels in SOB GT. Unfortunately, by far the majority of SOB GT form types span the entire period, so using these to measure pre-Conquest activity in comparison with the early post-Conquest period is unfeasible.

Despite this, the presence of La Graufesenque samian ware (LGF SA), whose main export range covers the period from the Conquest to the early 2nd century ad, is helpful. This fine ware, and the forms associated with it, mark the start of the site’s most intensive period of use, beginning in the second half of the 1st century ad. The high percentages of black-surfaced Romanizing grey ware (BSW), the Romanizing elements of unsourced oxidized ware (UNS OX) and unsourced white ware (UNS WH) and many of the forms associated with them, all support this fact.

The site continues in intensive use from the late 1st to the early 2nd century ad, as attested by the presence of new fabrics, including Central Gaulish colour-coated ware (CNG CC), southern British glazed ware (SOB GL), Romano-British mica-dusted ware (ROB MD), London fine reduced ware (LON FR) and Highgate Wood reduced ware C (HGW RE C)), and new forms, such as reed-rimmed bowls, poppy-head beakers and channel-rimmed jars.

The changeover from LGF SA to Lezoux (category 2) samian ware (LEZ SA 2) marks a huge drop in the amount of samian found on the site, a trend that is well documented on Romano-British sites across the region (Tyers 1996, 41). This gap in supply is somewhat filled by the presence of Colchester colour-coated ware (COL CC), which starts arriving around the early 2nd century ad. The amount of Verulamium white ware (VER WH) and its attendant forms, such as the bifid-rimmed jar and the reed-rimmed bowl, demonstrates that activity on the site remained fairly intense up to the mid/late 2nd century ad.

At some point after the mid 2nd century ad, there is a marked downturn in activity that continues at least to the mid/late 3rd century ad. There is a clear gap in the form and fabric assemblages, for example a lack of indented beakers and bowl-jars and of obvious fabrics such as lower Nene valley colour-coated ware (LNV CC) and Hadham oxidized ware (HAD OX).

Activity on the site resumes from the mid/late 3rd century ad and continues into the 4th century ad, although where it ends in the 4th century is completely unclear. This renewed activity is at a very much reduced level, and these


Despite the many unanswered elements in this analysis, there appears to be a ‘commercial/practical’ element to the shrine in respect of the ceramics. It is likely that a variety of vendors were established on the site to serve or exploit the visitors. The site fits well into the religious landscape of Baldock and its environs, a town that has been described as producing a disproportionate amount of religious or ritual finds (Niblett 1995, 54). The ceramics could have been purchased in or around the site, and may have already been ‘sanctified’. The vendors would have been geared to provide the types of vessel required, and conceivably the food and drink too. The adjacent settlement may well provide further clues, as religion and the economy were intriguingly interlinked in the Roman era.

The Romans were always interested in incorporating other religious beliefs and rituals into their own way of life. This is demonstrated, for instance, in the writings of Pausanias, who was very attentive about ritual (Levi 1984a; 1984b). He wrote in the 2nd century ad, a time when many of the Roman elite were tourist visitors (in the sense of worshipping or paying respect) to the main religious sites across Greece. The present site takes its place as one of many sites of religious importance in the Baldock hinterland, visited by all strata of the population. The Romans may well have been responsible for popularizing the shrine, a site that possibly had its origins in the pre-Conquest period (Niblett 1995, 97).

Whatever the extent of any commercial enterprise at or near the site, the nature of the key ritual element is unclear. It may have been centred around an organic component (food and drink), the pottery being nothing more than a practical conveyance.

The Roman building materials

IntroductionOver the four seasons of excavation, a small collection of building materials has been identified. In total this amounts to 1618 fragments with a combined weight of 41,728g.

The aim of this report is to describe the various features of the recorded assemblages, and assess their contribution to the socio-economic interpretation of the site as a whole.

ConditionGenerally the building materials are in a poor state of preservation, being small in size and suffering from high levels of abrasion. For instance, the average weight recorded in the catalogue of the 2006 assemblage stands at just 12g. The only small variation from this occurs in the assemblage from the 2003 season, which may be described as being only slightly abraded.

FormThere are very few examples of identifiable form within the tile assemblage, and although one keyed piece was collected in 2003 (Trench 1, 101), the only other types present are tegula and imbrex. However, total numbers are very low (20 and 13 respectively by individual count), and when expressed as a combined percentage for all four years, they stand at 2% by fragment number and 10% of the tile assemblage by weight.

during this period (Fawcett in prep a and b). Unless we can conclude that the pottery recovered from the present excavations is not representative, or that the ceramics are not being used to express individual status, then the status of the population using the site appears to be low. In fact, expression of individual status may not have been at issue here: as Nina Crummy has suggested (in litt. 20 September 2016), the pieces selected for destruction may have been the most easily replaced utilitarian vessels.

FunctionAnalysis of the form assemblage is quite revealing, despite the overall fragmentation of the pottery. Jars are undoubtedly the dominant form type, followed by dishes, bowls, beakers, plates and cups. It is, however, the low showing of mortaria, amphorae, storage jar and flagons that perhaps indicates what the function of vessels may or may not have been on the present site.

One interpretation of this evidence is that the main body of pottery, in the form of dishes, beakers and so on, may have been used nearby for some sort of feasting. Without doubt the form assemblage deposited in the shrine area has a strong ‘dining’ element to it, despite the inability to quantify it in the normal way. The means by which these vessels arrived and their subsequent fragmentation is open to debate.

Deposition, breakage and abrasionAny discussion of the deposition, breakage and abrasion patterns on the present site is significantly hampered by the limited scope of the excavation, and it is impossible to ascertain whether the recovered pottery assemblage is representative. It is unclear whether vessels were purchased nearby or brought along by individuals, whether they were broken at the site or elsewhere, whether they were deposited in their entirety or only in part. Certainly without a broader study of the site itself and of its broader archaeological context these questions are impossible to answer.

The assemblage that is available to use demonstrates a wide variability in terms of sherd size and abrasion, and few joins have been found. It appears likely that this mix of slightly to very abraded sherds has been created by the particular characteristics of the site.

The position of the shrine, next to a spring, indicates that ground conditions may have ranged from boggy to silty, possibly varying seasonally, with the pottery being suspended at different depths according to viscosity of the matrix. Periodic maintenance of the shrine may have disturbed the deposits, as might later ploughing. The nature of the examined ceramic assemblage would fit well with this kind of scenario.

ConclusionsIn many respects this study poses more questions than it answers. Nevertheless, analysis of the pottery has provided some facts and a base from which future ceramic finds may be considered. The ceramic trends (in terms of form, fabric and distribution) hold up well in comparison with other published material from the area, such as Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986) and Chells (Waugh 1999).

224 | Dea Senuna

ad. The small crumbled pieces, identified in [101], are variable in size and are composed of crushed tile in a lime matrix.

ConclusionsThe presence of roof tile may indicate that some type of covered building existed nearby. However, the condition, quantity and diagnostic element all suggest that the material may have arrived in its place of deposition for other reasons – as material discarded at a later date, for instance, or as part of manuring or some other form of reuse/robbing out. The flat tile (the most prolific category) may be interpreted similarly, although its use in flooring or in low-key construction (such as walls) cannot be ruled out entirely.

A large percentage of the better-quality material was recovered in the earlier stages of the excavation. The presence of Hadham and Harrold-type products (both of which are more likely to have produced tile in their later periods of activity) suggests that the tile debris may not be contemporary with the majority of the pottery (i.e. that which accounts for the shrine’s main period of activity). In fact, most of the later pottery that does occur on the site is also noted in these initial stages of the excavation, thereafter fading out.

In this situation, when considering any interpretation of this assemblage, it must be remembered that the four seasons of excavation on the site might not have provided a representative sample of the building materials (see pottery report, above). Further exploration of the shrine and its immediate vicinity may provide more evidence for the true extent of nearby structures.

Potters’ stamps on coarse wares (16–18, Figs 286, 288) Valery RigbyThree potters’ stamps were identified in the Roman pottery assemblages, all single small and weathered sherds. They have been included in the unpublished Rigby Archive Database of Stamps on Coarse Wares.

Abbreviations used in the archive entries:• V = vessel number• C = coarse ware potter number prefix• ZM = non-literate mark using simple letter motifs; a

prefix to aid database searches• ZP = abstract motifs or patternsDie codes:• A = die with no border frame• B = bordered die

Stamps

1.16. BGF 04, [336], Phase 4 (see Figs 286, 288) Stamp: a bordered pattern mark reading XoX [V658 Potter C170 ZP XoX Die 01B01]. A second example is also recorded at Piddington, Northamptonshire, on a flanged cup copying the Gallo-Belgic import Camulodunum form 58 (not published; VR CW Database V249 Potter C170 Die 01B01).

Form: a tall functional foot-ring which could be from a rounded cup; Ht 10mm, Diam. 44mm. Probably a hemispherical flanged cup similar to the Piddington example.

The only other measurement worth recording is the thickness of the tile. Fragments range between 23mm and 28mm for the tegula and 12mm and 17mm for the imbrex, all within acceptable parameters.

The majority of the identified tile assemblage may be classified as ‘flat’, with a combined percentage for all four years of 15% in fragment count and 27% in weight. Again the only useful measurement is thickness, although at least the results demonstrate some consistency. By far the most common thickness measurement is between 12mm and 14mm. The frequency of this thickness range rules out the suggestion that they represent mid-sections from broken tegulae (as the depth variation is too great), and it seems more likely that they represent some other form of constructional tile.

The brick assemblage consists of 45 recorded fragments. Thickness is the only useful measurement to consider, and two consistent ranges are noted: 32–35mm and 40–44mm.

The catalogue from the 2006 season clearly demonstrates how few form types were identifiable within that assemblage. The unidentified pieces account for 76% of the entire brick assemblage; this figure is similar when all four seasons are considered together (75%).

FabricOnly one fabric noted within this collection can be identified, and that originates from the Hadham area in east Hertfordshire. The Hadham ware accounts for only a small percentage of the entire range of fabrics within the ceramic building material assemblage, 1% by fragment count and 3.5% by weight, although every form is represented within the fabric. Although the author has previously encountered large percentages of building materials in the Hadham style, at Knights Hill near Westmill in east Hertfordshire (Fawcett unpub. a), it is impossible to assess if its occurrence on the present site is typical. This is mainly because little work has been done in terms of identification, and thus in terms of distribution patterns relating to this part of the Hadham industry.

Another fabric that occurs with approximately the same frequency (1.5% by fragment count and 4.5% by weight) within the ceramic building material assemblage is a shell-tempered fabric that probably derives from Bedfordshire. Indeed, the corpus of shell-gritted pottery from Harrold includes a section on tile that illustrates and discusses imbrex and tegula, both of which are present on this site in a similar fabric (Brown 1994, 79–93).

The overwhelming majority of the tile assemblage has been allocated to the category of unsourced oxidized ware. There are a number of very minor subdivisions within this broad ‘umbrella’ but the majority of examples fall into one consistent mineral pattern of ill-sorted quartz in a medium range. The fabric is defined, however, by the presence of sparse large flint, smaller and more common red and/or black iron ore, calcite and occasionally clay pellets.

Other building materialsAlthough a very small amount of daub has been noted, the only other significant building material noted is opus signinum, which fell out of use by the end of the 2nd century


Form: the handle was applied at a right angle to the rim edge of a straight-sided neck; it tapers from over 50mm at the mouth to 25mm and is 10mm thick. There is no evidence of how the mouth was finished. It is an unexpected form in a Romano-British context with no obvious local parallels. The surviving curvature suggests a sizeable diameter which may have required a pair of matching handles and so relates it to a large, rimless two-handled flagon in mica-coated ware with a diameter of 120mm found at Colchester (Symonds and Wade 1999, fig. 5.19, 66).

Fabric: the sherd is abraded, smoked and discoloured but was originally a fine-grained sandy oxidized ware; red surfaces with a mica coating.

Function: the combination of the handled form and the golden surfaces suggests it was for use in formal feasting and ritual libations.

Source: kiln-fired, source unknown. Mica-coated vessels were imported but were also made around London and the local region. They are not uncommon fine wares on Roman settlements in the area between ad 70 and ad 160, before metallic colour-coated wares were mass-produced in the kilns of the lower Nene valley (Stead and Rigby 1986, fig. 132, 362–3); made any time from ad 70 to ad 250.

Condition: burnt after fracture with weathered surfaces and fracture edges. Residual and redeposited sherd unrelated to its context.

DiscussionThere is considerable archaeological evidence that broken pots were repaired or recycled throughout the Roman period as, for example, foot ring bases from broken cups, platters and bowls, which were regularly trimmed as discs, spindle whorls and scoops etc. for use in settlements.

Cat. 1.16 & 1.17 are from domestic vessels of types common on Roman settlements in the later 1st century to

Fabric: grey fine-grained smooth textured ware; weathered surfaces; no finish survives but weathered surfaces of probably a glossy burnished finish overall.

Source: kiln-fired and made from the same clay as Cat. 1.17 in the region of the upper Nene and upper Ouse valleys; ad 70–120.

Condition: probably trimmed to foot ring in antiquity; weathered surfaces and fracture edges. Residual redeposited sherd unrelated to context.

1.17. BGF 05, SF 761, [314], Phase 6 (see Figs 286, 288)Central stamp: a mark reading I/\/\/\/\/\/ [V659 Potter C277 ZM Repeated \ / motifs Die 01A01]. A stamp from this die is also recorded on a platter excavated at East of the Railway Yard site 1978–82 (in preparation), Ashton, Northamptonshire, where evidence for pottery kilns was found (in preparation; VR CW Database V539 P277 Die 01A01).

Form: a platter base with a functional foot ring; Ht 8mm, Diam. 52mm.

Fabric: same fabric as Cat. 1.16; weathered surfaces but probably a glossy burnished finish overall.

Source: kiln-fired and made from the same clay as Cat. 1.16 in the region of the upper Nene and upper Ouse valleys; ad 70–120. The Ashton example has a six-pronged combed wreath encircling the stamp, a characteristic typical of products local to the region.

Condition: appears to have been trimmed to edge of foot ring in antiquity; weathered surfaces and fracture edges. Residual and redeposited sherd unrelated to context.

1.18. BGF 05, SF 727, [324], Phase 5/6 (see Figs 286, 288) [V660 Potter C324 Die 1A01]Impression: an indistinct worn impression parallel to the edges of a horizontal handle or thumb-rest which may have been stamped or is a series of motifs cut into the clay before firing. The reading is uncertain – possibly EDR.

Figure 286 Selected potters’ stamps and decorated samian. Cat. 1.16–1.25

0 10cm

0 5cm

1.22

1.16

1.17

1.18

1.19

1.20 1.21

1.23 1.24

1.25

226 | Dea Senuna

was particularly important. Since it crossed the upper reaches of the river systems of the Nene and Ouse the traffic presumably encouraged the trade and markets in pottery already established in the 2nd century bc. As a result, for example, platters with double foot rings typical at Baldock and Felmersham-on-Ouse, Bedfordshire, occur in the assemblage from High Cross, Leicestershire, sited on the Fosse Way (Watson 1949, fig. 11, 13; Greenfield and Webster 1964–5, fig. 10, 67; Stead and Rigby 1986, fig. 100, 6–7). Regional traits in the typology of Late Iron Age grog-tempered vessels appear to indicate the presence of clan, tribal and religious associations which survived absorption into the extended Catuvellauni power base in the 1st century bc.

Mortarium stamp (see Figs 286, 288) Kay Hartley

1.19. BGF 05, SF 819, [110], Phase 5/6 (see Figs 286, 288). L. 84.2mm, W. 34.6mm, Wt 43.84gPart of the rim of a mortarium with an incompletely impressed and damaged stamp reading MI[….]/ΓII[..] retrograde and in two lines. When complete the stamp reads MIILVS/ΓIICI (for MELVS FECIT, ‘made by Melus’), with two verticals representing E, and the F lacking its lower bar; see Hartley 1972, fig. 145, no. 28, for a restored stamp from the same die. Melus 1 worked at Brockley Hill,

early 2nd century ad. Like many complete base circuits they appear to have been retrieved after the vessels were broken and then trimmed for other use. Later, as single worn and weathered sherds they were discarded and finally redeposited in the contexts from which they were excavated. Whilst they could have been introduced to the shrine area in their trimmed state they are more likely to have been domestic rubbish introduced to the site by centuries of later agricultural activity.

However these two vessels reached the site they emphasize the trading networks in domestic wares produced in the region of the upper and middle reaches of the rivers Nene and Ouse, along with their source tributaries, from the Iron Age onwards and previously noted at Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986, 243–5). In the Conquest period the east–west route from Camulodunum to frontier posts on the Fosse Way and beyond

0 20cm

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.5 1.10

1.9

1.7

1.8

1.6

1.11

1.12

1.13

1.14

1.15

1.4

Figure 287 Selected Iron Age coarse ware (1), Romano-British fine ware (2-3) and Romano-British coarse ware (4–15) vessels. Scale 1:4

Figure 289 Decorated samian sherds. Left to right: Cat. 1.22, 1.23, 1.24, 1.25

Figure 288 Potters’ stamps on coarse wares, samian and mortarium. Upper left Cat. 1.16, upper right Cat. 1.21, upper centre Cat. 1.18, lower left Cat. 1.17, lower centre Cat. 1.20, lower right Cat. 1.19


to Oswald’s O.924a, though larger, but probably corresponds with Hermet’s type 124 (Planche 20). This type and the similar O.925 were used by a number of potters at La Graufesenque from the Claudian to early Flavian periods, and most of the examples cited by Oswald are on vessels of Dragendorff form 30. South Gaulish, Neronian to Flavian.

1.25. BGF 05, SF 866, [311], Phase 6 (see Figs 286, 289)Small sherd from a Dragendorff form 37 bowl, with most of a panel featuring a leaf-wreath containing a cantharus. The slip is dull and battered, and there are traces of burning. South Gaulish, Flavian.

2. CoinsEleanor Ghey

IntroductionThe coin assemblage from the Ashwell site consists of 180 Iron Age coins, 156 Roman coins, three coins of uncertain date and one modern coin (an 1864 silver florin). The Iron Age coins include one gold stater, two gold quarter-staters, and 11 silver units and half-units (one Continental), with the remainder being copper-alloy units. This is an exceptional quantity of Iron Age coins from an excavated site, making it a highly important assemblage. Of the Roman coins recovered, one is a Republican silver denarius and two are Imperial silver denarii (one a plated hybrid with a Republican reverse). There are 51 1st- to 2nd-century ad copper-alloy coins (including copies), 30 radiates, 59 nummi and 14 coins of uncertain denomination.6

This discussion is followed by a complete catalogue of the coins from the site. This is presented in a traditional numismatic sequence, rather than by context, owing to the fairly scattered distribution of coins across the site, although certain important contexts are discussed below. About one-third of the coins came from unstratified contexts; some of these were recovered by metal-detector use on spoil heaps. Prior to identification the coins were cleaned by Hayley Bullock of the British Museum’s Department of Conservation and Scientific Research.

In addition to the finds from the site, a large number of Roman and Iron Age coins have been found by the North Hertfordshire Charity Metal Detector Group over a long period and recorded by the Portable Antiquity Scheme (PAS) and the Celtic Coin Index (CCI). These have been considered separately below and the Iron Age coins are listed individually as an appendix to the catalogue.

The Iron Age coins

Summary by issuer (Table 9)The Iron Age coinage from the site is predominantly local in origin, dating from the late 1st century bc (the earliest coin issued from about 30 bc) to the mid 1st century ad (ad 40s). These local coinages consist of coins traditionally associated with the tribal areas of the Trinovantes and Catuvellauni, issued in the area north of the Thames (and in some cases including Kent). The coinage of this region is referred to by

Middlesex, where 28 of his mortaria have been found. One mortarium, found in the first excavations there, has stamps from two different dies (Suggett 1954, fig. 6, no. 9), the inner stamp being from the same die as the Ashwell stamp. The stamp near the outside has an identical reading, but the upper and lower borders differ. At least 46 mortaria of Melus 1 have been noted from occupation sites in the south and midlands, but none has yet been found north of Lincoln. His range of profiles fits overall with activity within the period ad 95–135, but he is one of the potters whose profiles changed considerably during their activity so that a closer dating is possible when the profile survives.

Selected samian (20–1, see Figs 286, 288. 22–5, see Figs 286, 289) Catherine Johns

1.20. BGF 05, SF 823, [349], Phase 5 (see Figs 286, 288)Centre base from a South Gaulish Dragendorff form 18 dish stamped SEVERI. Severus III, Flavian.

1.21. BGF 06, SF 1114, [311] Phase 6 (see Figs 286, 288)Stamped Dragendorff form 33 cup, in Central Gaulish fabric. The stamp is illegible. From the form and fabric, probably early Antonine.

1.22. BGF 06, [314], Phase 6 (see Figs 286, 289)A small body sherd from a bowl of Dragendorff form 30, in a thin, hard fabric with an excellent bright, glossy slip. The decoration shows a confronted pair of gladiators standing on a fine, wavy ground line within an arch, which would have been one of a series of arches. The right-hand gladiator is complete apart from his head, but only one of his antagonist’s legs survives. The gladiator is Oswald’s O.1017 (Déchelette 604 and Hermet 142), and was normally paired with O.1016. These figures were used in many South Gaulish workshops from the Claudian to late Flavian periods, and on all three common forms, Dragendorff 29, 30 and 37. The fabric, and the detail of the arch, are therefore the main guide to the dating. South Gaulish, probably Claudio-Neronian.

1.23. BGF 06, SF 1229, [525], Phase 6 (see Figs 286, 289)Rim and upper-zone sherd from a Dragendorff form 29 bowl. A panel in the upper zone contains a bird to right, wing raised, confronting a very finely designed and moulded detached ram’s head facing left. The bird is Oswald’s O.2309 (Hermet 47), and the ram, 1859A (Hermet 34), both types recorded only for the important South Gaulish manufacturer Germanus. Hermet pl.101, 37 shows a stamped Dragendorff 37 bowl from Nijmegen in which these two types are juxtaposed. It seems reasonable to attribute this vessel to the workshop of Germanus. The fabric is slightly burnt. South Gaulish, early Flavian.

1.24. BGF 05, SF 830, [314], Phase 6 (see Figs 286, 289)Two small joining fragments from a Dragendorff form 30 bowl with a vertical ‘twist’ motif and part of a draped female figure standing with her left hand cupping her right elbow, and her bowed head resting on her right hand. This is close

228 | Dea Senuna

Allen (1964, 4), who observed similar patterning in the coins from the temple site at Harlow (although the Braughing/Puckeridge area is also a likely mint site on the basis of more recent finds (Landon 2009)). This observation is echoed by Hobbs (2011, 264) in his discussion of the coins from Great Chesterford, in contrast to those from Heybridge (nearer to Camulodunum). The absence of gold coins of Cunobelin is also striking, given that there are two gold coins of Tasciovanus from the site.

The copper-alloy units of Cunobelin that make up a large proportion of the assemblage are known to have a long period of circulation. The ‘developed’ types (Allen 1967) of Cunobelin prevalent at the site have been given a slightly later production date (ad 25–40; Haselgrove 1989, 79) than the broad ad 10–40 period given above. The predominance of these types at Harlow (62%), when compared to the background regional pattern of loss, is seen by Haselgrove (1989, 82–3) as supporting a relatively late deposition date. Although the pattern is perhaps not quite so striking at Ashwell, it has a similar bias towards the later types of Cunobelin with the Tasciovanus legend (Cottam et al. 2010 (ABC ), nos 2957, 2960, 2963, 2966, 2969 & 2972). This corresponds exactly to Morris’ (2013) Later Western North Thames grouping, which has been defined both chronologically and geographically.

Another close parallel for the Ashwell assemblage is that from Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986; Burleigh and Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2010), studied by Curteis (2001; 2006). A series of excavations since the 1960s has yielded a large assemblage of Iron Age coins with remarkable similarity to that from Ashwell in the predominance of the Later Western North Thames group of Cunobelin’s bronze coinage. Unlike

numismatists as belonging to the Eastern British Iron Age, following the scheme established by Haselgrove (1987). There are a small number of coins issued in other regions: two silver coins from East Anglia and two silver coins from the North-Eastern region (the coinage of Lincolnshire and the East Midlands), as well as one silver coin from Continental Europe.

The bulk of the coins consists of copper-alloy coins issued by Tasciovanus, his possible contemporaries and his ultimate successor Cunobelin. The high proportion of copper-alloy coins at the site (92%) is a reflection of the denominational balance of the Eastern area at this date, in contrast to other areas of Britain, for example the site at Hallton, Leicestershire, in the North-Eastern region, where the assemblage was dominated by local silver (Leins 2012). The issue of copper-alloy coinage in the area may be related to the impact of the Roman/Continental monetary system on the region. If the coins are indeed present at the site in the form of ritual deposits, this illustrates the acceptability of this metal as an alternative to the local precious metal coinage still in use. Precious metal had traditionally been used in ritual deposits prior to the introduction of copper alloy and continued to be used in other parts of the country where copper alloy was not available.

Another notable feature of the assemblage is the dominance of coins of Cunobelin from the group jointly inscribed with the name of Tasciovanus, rather than with the legend naming Camulodunum, which fits the westerly location of the site within the North Thames area according to distributions already described for Cunobelin’s silver (De Jersey 2001) and bronze (Morris 2013) coinage. A mint for this ‘Tasciovanus’ group at Verulamium was suggested by

Eastern Gold Silver Copper alloy Total

Addedomaros (c. 30–10 bc) – – 4 4Tasciovanus (c. 20 bc–ad 10) 2 3 35 40ANDOCO (c. 20 bc– ad 10) – 1 3 4Dubnovellaunos (c. 20 bc–ad 10) – – 7 7DIAS (c. ad 1–10) – 1 2 3RVES (c. ad 1–10) – – 8 8SEGO (c. ad 1–10) – – 1 1Cunobelin (c. ad 10–40) – 1 101 102AGR (c. ad 30–45) – – 1 1Unidentified – – 3 3East AnglianUninscribed (c. ad 5–20) – 1 – 1Uninscribed (c. ad 20–50) – 1 – 1North-EasternUninscribed (c. 40 bc–ad 20) – 1 – 1Vep Corf (c. ad 20–50) – 1 – 1ContinentalUninscribed – 1 – 1Uncertain Unidentified – – 2 2Total 2 11 167 180

Table 9 Summary of issuer of the Iron Age coins from Ashwell


Ashwell the presence of potin, a greater number of Continental imports and gold coins from the site as a whole1 suggest an earlier phase that is lacking at Ashwell. However, this includes material from a much wider area with multiple phases and it may not be appropriate to consider it as a coherent assemblage. The parallels with Harlow and Baldock are significant given that they seem to represent coinage deposited in the course of ritual activity, with the focus of this activity at Baldock integrated within a wider settlement and cemetery (Curteis 2006).

Numismatically, there are a number of coins of interest from Ashwell. That of AGR (Cat. 2.162) was the first copper-alloy coin of this issuer to be found. Another specimen from the Basingstoke area has since been published by Rudd (2012). The coin, with a Romanized head right on the obverse and butting bull left on the reverse, is similar to a unit issued by Cunobelin (ABC no. 2948) but with AGR in place of CVN in the reverse exergue. Also of interest are a copper-alloy half-unit tentatively attributed to Andoco (Cat. 2.48) and a Continental silver unit of previously unrecorded type (Cat. 2.178).

The Roman coins

Summary by issuer/type (Table 10)About one-third of the Roman coins from the site date from the 1st to 2nd century ad. The 1st-century ad coins include a small number of pre-Conquest coins and a larger proportion of Claudian copies (the only coin of Claudius that is not an imitation has been pierced, Cat. 2.185). Eight of these copies were found together (recorded as SF 541, Cat. 2.188–2.95) and can be seen as a small hoard. The denominations of the early coins are largely dupondii and asses, including two cut sestertii (one half and one quarter: Cat. 2.229 & 2.230). Silver coins are rare, and Roman Republican denarii are represented by a single example (Cat. 2.180 and another copy with an Augustan reverse type, Cat. 2.181). This seems unusual for an early site but probably reflects the local tendency for deposition of Iron Age copper-alloy coinage mentioned above. There is then a gap in datable material from the Antonine period until the mid–late 3rd century ad, which is represented by Gallic Empire radiates and barbarous radiates (including a number of the small module sometimes referred to as a minim), although radiates are not present in large numbers. The 4th-century nummi from the site date until the end of the 4th century.

When the datable Roman coins are grouped into the 21 ‘Reece periods’ used for numismatic analysis (after Reece 1991) (Fig. 290), peaks can be seen in periods 2 (ad 41–54), 13 and 14 (ad 260–96), 17 (ad 330–48) and 19 (ad 364–78). The peaks from the site in periods 13–14, 17 and 19 are perhaps unsurprising, as they reflect the pattern of coin loss in Britain as a whole, although at the level of the site they are still suggestive of occupation or activity during these periods. Furthermore, many of the uncertain radiates and nummi are likely to have belonged to these periods. In fact, when compared to the typical British site and the typical pattern for coin loss in Hertfordshire (Fig. 291), the peaks in these periods are about the same or smaller than might be expected.

What is, however, unusual about the pattern of coin loss at the site is the high level of activity throughout the 1st century ad, and particularly during the Conquest period. When the Iron Age coins are overlaid on to this picture (Fig. 292) (split broadly into pre- and post- ad 10), the pattern is even more striking. The picture is therefore overwhelmingly one of a 1st-century ad site, with a gap in the coin record for the late 2nd to mid 3rd century. Although the absence of any late 2nd-century ad coins is perhaps unusual, site losses are typically small for this period and particularly for the subsequent one up to the middle of the 3rd century ad. It should be noted that the PAS finds from the area surrounding the site fill this lacuna (see Fig. 295). In the late 3rd to 4th century ad the site shows fairly typical levels of coin loss, with a strong final phase.

Coins in the placed depositsA note should be made here on the coins from the particular assemblages designated as Treasure. As discussed elsewhere in this report, there were a number of groups of artefacts

Regular Irregular Reece period

Roman Republic (to 27 bc) 1 – 1

Augustus (27 bc–ad 14) 1 1 1

Gaius (ad 37–41) 1 2 1

Claudius (ad 41–54) 1 19 2

Nero (ad 54–68) 3 – 3

Vespasian (ad 69–79) 6 – 4

Domitian (ad 81–96) 2 – 4

Trajan (ad 98–117) 4 – 5

Hadrian (ad 117–38) 3 – 6

Antoninus Pius (ad 138–61) 3 – 7

Uncertain 1st to 2nd century ad

6 1 –

Gallienus (ad sole reign, 260–8)

2 – 13

Claudius II / Divo Claudio (ad 268–70)

1 4 13 + 142

Victorinus (ad 269–71) 1 – 13

Tetricus I and II (ad 271–4) 3 3 13 + 14

Uncertain radiates 1 15 13 + 14

House of Constantine (ad 317–30)

4 – 16


19 2 17


3 10 18

House of Valentinian (ad 364–78)

11 – 19

House of Theodosius (ad 378–88)

1 – 20


5 – 21

Uncertain 4th century ad 4 – –

Uncertain 3rd to 4th century ad

11 2 –

Uncertain date 3 – –

Total 100 59

Table 10 Summary by issuer/type of the Roman coins from Ashwell

230 | Dea Senuna

and implements and a fragment of a pipeclay figurine) (Cat. 4.8, 4.13, 4.19, 5.39, 6.1, 8.11, 8.22, 8.27, 8.46) and part of two Bronze Age spearheads (Cat. 10.14, 10.15), in addition to fragments of pottery, animal bone and cremated bone. The as of Hadrian places deposit (5) in the 2nd century ad at the earliest, a time for which the coin evidence as a whole suggests a reduction in activity at the site.

Group 2002 T215 (6) was a ‘placed deposit’ in [201]/[206] (see p. 330) which included three coins – a gold stater of Tasciovanus, a silver North-Eastern half-unit and a copper-alloy unit of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.5, 2.98, 2.176). The non-coin objects consisted of two iron spearheads, a sherd of Roman glass and a fragment of copper-alloy sheet (Cat. 3.7, 6.18, 6.19 and SF 184). This deposit is difficult to date from the artefacts but falls within the Roman period, possibly the 1st century ad.

from the site considered as potential Treasure under the Treasure Act 1996, including Roman precious metal artefacts and a hoard of Bronze Age metalwork. Those from the 2003 excavations were all given the Treasure number 2002 T215, with separately numbered subgroups within this. Two of these contained coins as well as the other artefacts discussed elsewhere.

Group 2002 T215 (5) was composed of items in a ‘placed deposit’ in [203] (see pp. 328–9). This deposit consisted of two copper-alloy units of Tasciovanus, four copper-alloy units of Cunobelin, one silver Icenian unit, a pierced dupondius of Claudius, an as of Vespasian and an as of Hadrian (Cat. 2.19, 2.25, 2.83, 2.96, 2.157, 2.161, 2.175, 2.185, 2.212, 2.222). The non-coin objects consisted of 2nd-century ad Roman objects (a brooch, mounts, numerous fragments of iron mail armour

Figure 290 Roman coins from the site by Reece period (per mill.)

Figure 291 Roman coins from the site by Reece period (per mill.) against British and Hertfordshire means3

Figure 292 Coins from the site by Reece period including Iron Age coins (per mill.)4


activity at the site. Other contexts of potential significance are those from below chalk surface [327] ([341], [344], [355], [362] & [367]). Some of the contexts containing Iron Age coins only also contained cremated bone. None contained large numbers of Iron Age coins; pig burial [311] contained the greatest number (7), but also contained samian, which was rare in the pre-Conquest period. The absence of Roman coins in these contexts does not mean that they can be confidently dated to the pre-Conquest period. They need to be interpreted alongside pottery dating of these phases from the Late Iron Age to the 2nd century ad, suggesting a long period of use or exposure of certain features and/or some residuality and disturbance.9 It is perhaps relevant here to note the disturbance and possible redeposition of material at Baldock (Curteis 2006, 73).

The dating of the chalk platform [334] is unclear, as it contained a dupondius of Vespasian and an imitation nummus (though the latter was metal-detected from spoil). There certainly do not seem to be any contexts containing particularly high concentrations of Roman coins, such as one might expect from a Roman ritual site. A gravel surface and midden deposits can be dated to the later phases of the site, but the presence of Iron Age coins in some of these deposits suggests a degree of disturbance of the earlier deposits. Contexts with exclusively 3rd- and 4th-century ad coins were situated in and immediately below the ploughsoil and in contexts disturbed by ploughing. Those contexts containing later Roman coins and residual Iron Age coins were also predominantly located below the ploughsoil.

When the pattern of dated Roman coins from Ashwell (excluding Iron Age coins) is compared to that for two other sites in Hertfordshire (Verulamium (composite) and Cow Roast, using data from Reece (1991)) and the site of Harlow in Essex (using data from Gobel 198510) (Fig. 293), it can be seen that Harlow is the closest comparable site, with a similar 1st-century ad peak and broadly comparable 3rd- and 4th-century ad patterns (Fig. 294), although Ashwell appears to have increased activity in the final phase (in keeping with the ‘British Temple mean’ and also noted for Cow Roast and Baldock (Moorhead 2015)). The unusual Claudian peak (period 2, ad 41–54) reinforces the picture of a significant period of 1st-century ad activity, but it should be noted that the Claudian coins from the site were (with one exception) copies, and so could have been struck well into period 3 (ad 54–69) (Haselgrove 1989, 83).

Metal-detected finds from the areaAnalysis of the dated coins from the PAS recording of metal-detected finds in the parish of Ashwell (from the fields surrounding the site only) gives a pattern much closer to the standard British mean (Fig. 295), with the exception of the Iron Age coins from the area (66 coins which would account for 94% of the coins from pre-Claudian period 1 if included in the analysis). The conclusions that can be drawn from this are thus limited, but they suggest that the 1st-century ad activity at the site is fairly localized after the Iron Age and is not reflected in its immediate surroundings. The composition of the PAS Iron Age coins from the site and surrounding area is not dissimilar to the excavated

These deposits show clear evidence of selection and redeposition of objects, a common feature of Roman votive deposits. It is likely that the inclusion of a variety of types and denominations is significant; they contain two of the five Iron Age coins minted outside the local region found on the site, and one of the three gold coins. The piercing of the coin of Claudius I (Cat. 2.185) is also of likely significance; piercing is known to be associated with Roman period ritual practice (P. Walton, pers. comm.). As with the Bronze Age spearhead, it is likely that the Iron Age coins were rediscovered and/or curated before their reburial rather than still being in circulation as coinage.

The group of eight Claudian copies (Cat. 2.188–2.195) should also be mentioned in this context. Although they do not meet the criteria of the Treasure Act (being fewer than ten base metal coins), they nevertheless constitute a hoard, as a group of coins buried together ([639], see p. 330).5 Collectively, these deliberately deposited groups of material can be interpreted as indicative of ritual activity at the site in the first two centuries ad.

DiscussionViewed as a whole, the assemblage of Iron Age and Roman coins appears to indicate a significant phase of 1st-century ad activity at the site. The relative scarcity of gold and silver coins contrasts with the large numbers of such coins from the ritual deposits at Hallaton (Leins 2012), something that is consistent with the absence of Roman Republican coins on the site. However, such a comparison may be inappropriate given the differing regional patterns of Iron Age coinage, base metal coinage being widely available in this area but not in the North-Eastern region at this time.

The coins from contexts from the site containing Iron Age coins only can be grouped into two phases by approximate dates of production, the earlier one ending c. ad 10 (Haselgrove’s (1987) phase 7), containing predominantly the coins of Tasciovanus and constituting 39% of the local Iron Age coinage from the site, the later phase ending c. ad 40 or later (Haselgrove’s phase 8/9), dominated by the coins of Cunobelin and constituting 61% of the local coinage from the site. Although a number of contexts contained solely Iron Age coins, relatively few contained coins from the earlier group alone.7 According to the phasing made available to the author, none of these contexts have been interpreted as being stratigraphically earlier than those containing later Iron Age coins (with the possible exception of hearth [535]) and so they do not represent conclusive evidence for a chronologically distinct phase of occupation, unless they are residual from disturbed contexts. The condition of the coins in terms of wear is sometimes very good when compared to, for example metal-detected finds from the site, but it varies considerably within the assemblage and there is no patterning in the relative condition of the earlier and later groups of coins.

The contexts containing only Iron Age and pre-Conquest Roman coins8 are more numerous, although they are spread throughout Phases 2–6. A number of the hearths ([523], [535] & [608]) and contexts associated with the pig burial deposits ([311]/[372], [538]) contained Iron Age coins only, suggesting that these features could relate to the earlier phases of ritual

232 | Dea Senuna

assemblage, with 23 out of 55 coins that could be at least tentatively identified consisting of 66 copper-alloy units of Cunobelin and 15 of Tasciovanus. Of particular interest are a Gallo-Belgic E stater found in the area (BH-8D4135) and a potin (BH-DEE798), both suggestive of an earlier phase of activity at the site, pre-dating the earliest coins from the excavation. The presence of the former is likely to be indicative of a votive deposit rather than a casual loss.

As mentioned above, the Roman coins recorded by PAS adjust the picture presented by the excavation assemblage somewhat, giving an overall pattern closer to the mean for Hertfordshire (Fig. 296). This perhaps has implications for the use of PAS data, in that the data for a parish (or even smaller area in this case) can mask what is happening at the level of the site. It is also the case that the site itself may have lost coins to metal detecting prior to its excavation and that the PAS records complement the excavated assemblage (although some caution is required with spatial information, as many finds were plotted to the level of the parish or field only). This does seem to be the case with the Iron Age coins, which, when plotted, appear to overlie areas of settlement features identified in geophysical survey of the site and so need to be considered alongside the coinage from the site. Notable quantities of denarii and a group of 2nd- to 3rd-century ad sestertii in the PAS database may indicate scattered hoards, though the lack of high-quality spatial information makes this difficult to verify.

Hoards from Ashwell parishThere are several known hoards from the parish of Ashwell but there has been some confusion relating to these in the record, which it is timely to address. Three other hoards are

reported from the same parish in Robertson’s corpus (2000): nos 1326A, 1093 and 234.

Robertson 1326A (HER 2845) is a group of Magnentian nummi identified as a probable hoard by A.W. Sheldrick from a bag of coins donated to Ashwell Village Museum in 1934. The donor’s husband had collected coins from local farmworkers but no further details of the provenance are known.

Robertson 1093 is a group of 11 nummi of the House of Constantine found at the hillfort or defended settlement known as Arbury Banks (Hertfordshire HER 1322) before 1914 (according to Sheldrick). They were discovered during ploughing and were contained in a pot which was destroyed by the finder. The size of the original find is not known and the 11 coins in question are those donated to the Ashwell Village Museum.

In the Hertfordshire HER under the same entry (1322) is an earlier report of Roman coins, pottery and a bone die (found in one of the vessels) being ploughed up in the area in 1820. The wording in the original account (Anon. 1856, 287) clearly does not imply that the coins were also contained within the vessel and the account may therefore be a general reference to Roman coins being found at Arbury Banks. However, it is clear from this and other accounts that the site (likely to be of Iron Age date) was a focus for Roman-period activity and or deposition.

The HER also records a ‘possible coin hoard’ as a find from excavations within the enclosure of Arbury Banks by J. Beldam in September 1858 but no further details are provided. The given reference (Beldam 1856–9) does not mention a hoard. It reports that coins that were ‘probably Roman’ were found by labourers working on the ditch the

Figure 293 Excavated Roman coins from Verulamium, Cow Roast, Harlow and Ashwell by Reece period (per mill.)

Figure 294 Excavated coins from Harlow and Ashwell compared by Reece period (per mill.)


autumn before his excavations began. He recounts that Roman coins were frequently dug up there, according to Camden, but that no coins were found in his own excavations. The ‘enamelled shield-shaped fibula’ noted as having been found there in the HER record was reported by Dr Lethbridge in 1925 (Taylor and Collingwood 1925, 235) and is not connected to Beldam’s excavation.

Robertson 234 reports a ‘quantity’ of denarii – over 500 dating from Nero (ad 54–68) to Marcus Aurelius (ad 161–80) found in 1876 in an iron vessel (or possibly a wooden vessel bound with iron) ‘at the coprolite works at Ashwell End’. The account of the discovery also mentioned small copper coins (‘dating into the 5th century ad’), pottery, a quern and

Figure 295 PAS finds from Ashwell parish by Reece period (per mill.) compared to coins from the excavation11

Figure 296 PAS finds from Ashwell parish and excavated finds combined

animal bone found in the same area, suggesting a general area of occupation. This is a significant denarius hoard, sited in HER records in a field just north of Ashwell End Farm, near the boundary with Hinxworth, although contemporary historic maps show coprolite workings extending through a wider area north of Ashwell End Farm to the Ridgeway in Hinxworth. This large silver hoard may be evidence for 2nd-century ad activity in the slightly wider area around the site. It is a period when there were low levels of activity at the site (and indeed in the parish as a whole) and the hoard may suggest a shift in focus of activity or a one-off depositional event that is not reflected in the wider coin distribution pattern.

234 | Dea Senuna

Table 11 Number of coins in each context and date of latest coin (excluding unstratified finds)

Context no. Period/date (century ad) Date (ad) of latest coin (approx.)

Iron Age 1st 2nd 1st– 2nd 3rd 4th 3rd–4th Uncertain

[101] 16 3 3 6 11 1 367–75

[101]/[110] 1 2 330–5

[101]/[111] 1 2 1 347–8

under [108] 1 from 41–54

[110] 4 9 41–54

[111] 2 20 bc–ad 10

[113] 1 337–40

[128] 2 71

[201] 5 2 66

[201]/[206] 3 10–40

[201]/[203] 3 10–40

[202]/[201] 1 10–40

under [202] 1 10–40

[202] 2 10–40

[203] 4 2 1 117–38

[300] 10 1 1 6 1 388–95

[301] 1 1 2 c. 355–64

[302] 1 1 367–75

[304] 2 2 from 41–54

[306] 1 1 80s

[309] 1 20 bc–AD 10

[311] 6 10–40

[312] 1 10–40

[313] 1 1 4 388–402

[314] 4 1 2 2 375–8

[315] 4 1 1 364–78

[320] 20 2 4 388–402

[320]/[101] 1 10–40

[324] 10 1 1 2 364–78

[328] 1 10–40

[330] 1 10–40

under [332] 1 1st–2nd century

[332] 1 20 bc–ad 10

[334] 1 1 c. 355–64

[339] 2 1 37–40

[341] 1 20 bc–ad 10

[344] 1 10–40

[355] 1 10–40

[358] 1 20 bc–ad 10

[362] 2 10–40

[365] 1 1 c. 69–96

[367] 5 10–40

Appendix


[372] 1 10–40

[378] 1 10–40

[394] 1 10–40

[396] 2 1 from 41–54

[400] 2 10–40

[500] 1 2 2 c. 355–64

[500] spoil 1 1 c. 274–96

[501] 1 modern 1864

[506] 2 20 bc–ad 10

[509] 1 364–78

[510] 1 379–87

[510] spoil 1 3rd–4th century

[512] 1 20 bc–ad 10

[513] 1 20 bc–ad 10

[520] spoil 1 10–40

[521] 6 1 1 c. 274–96

[521]/[551] 1 1–10

[523] 1 10–40

[525] 1 1 3rd–4th century

[528] 1 86

[529] 2 10–40

[535] 1 20 bc–ad 10

[538] 1 20 bc–ad 10

[540] 1 20 bc–ad 10

[560] 1 112–14

[563] 1 1st–2nd century

[566] 1 from 41–54

[572] 1 10–40

[574] 1 10–40

[576] 1 10–40

[586] 1 20 bc–ad 10

[600] 1 10–40

[605] 1 20 bc–ad 10

[616] 1 10–40

Context no. Period/date (century ad) Date (ad) of latest coin (approx.)

Iron Age 1st 2nd 1st– 2nd 3rd 4th 3rd–4th Uncertain

Table 11 Continued

236 | Dea Senuna

Figure 297 Coins catalogue numbers 1–40

238 | Dea Senuna


240 | Dea Senuna


242 | Dea Senuna


244 | Dea Senuna

Catalogue of excavation coins (Figs 297–304)The catalogue uses Ancient British Coinage (ABC ) (Cottam et al. 2010) as the type reference for Iron Age coins, this being the most up-to-date work incorporating the numerous new types that have been discovered since the publication of Van Arsdell (1989) and Hobbs (1996). A full concordance of types is given in ABC.

Iron Age Coins

Eastern British Iron Age

North Thames area Attributed to Addedomaros – bronze units (c. 30 bc–10 bc)

Cat. Context no. SF Obverse Reverse ABC Wt (g) Axis

2.1 [300] 636 Head, left Horse, left 2541 1.53 6



2.4 [300] 635 Horse, right Horse, right 2547 1.52 12

North Thames area and Kent TasciovanusGold stater (c. 20 bc–ad 10)


2.5 [201]/[206] 182 Abstract crossed wreath design

[T]ASC horseman right, with carnyx

256212 5.5 –13

Gold quarter-staters (c. 20 bc–ad 10)Cat. Context no. SF Obverse Reverse ABC Wt (g) Axis

2.6 [101] 108 Crossed wreath […] Horse, left 2586 1.34

2.7 [324] 591 TASC in rectangular panel on vertical wreath14

Winged horse, left 2601 1.38 5

Silver units (c. 20 bc–ad 10)Cat. Context no. SF Obverse Reverse ABC Wt (g) Axis

2.8 [586] 1342 TA·SC[ ] in rectangular panel on vertical wreath

[VER] Stag left, head turned back

2634 1.13 12

2.9 [538] 1284 TASC in rectangular panel on vertical wreath

Pegasus, left 2637 1.36 3

2.10 Unstratified topsoil

1133 TASC in rectangular panel within three rings

Horseman, left, with shield 2640 1.36 12

Copper-alloy units and half-units (c. 20 bc–ad 10)


2.11 [101] 35 VERL Bearded head, right VIIR Hippocamp, left 2658 2.29 9

2.12 [101] 74 VIR Bearded head, right V[IR] Hippocamp, left 2658 2.47 12

2.13 [320] 796 VER Bearded head, right [VIR] Hippocamp, left 2658 2.63 12

2.14 [521] 1179 […] Bearded head, right VER Hippocamp, left 2658 2.65 1

2.15 Unstratified 771 […]Bearded head, right Hippocamp(?), left cf. 2658ff. 1.38 6

2.16 [506] 1256 […]Bearded head, right? […]Hippocamp, left cf. 2658 2.06 10?15

2.17 [300] 628 T[ASC] Head, right […] Pegasus, left 2664 2.42 2

2.18 [300] 625 […] Head, right […] Pegasus, left 2664 2.24 12

2.19 [203] 176 [T]ASC Head, right VIR Pegasus, left 2664 2.72 616

Key to abbreviations usedSF = Small Find numberAxis = die-axis (expressed as o’clock)Wt (g) = weight (grammes)(i) = irregular/imitation(m) = smaller module (minim)(p) = platedFTR = FEL TEMP REPARATIO typeRef. = RIC unless stated for Roman coinsABC = Ancient British Coinage (Cottam et al. 2010)RRC = Roman Republican CoinageRIC = Roman Imperial CoinageNby = Normanby (Bland and Burnett 1988)DT = Nouvel Atlas des Monnaies Gauloises: II (Delestrée and Tache 2004)



2.20 [314] 778 Abstract wreath17 V[I]R Boar, right 2667 2.31 –

2.21 [320] 791 Abstract wreath VER Boar, right 2667 1.62 –

2.22 [513] 1147 Abstract wreath VER Boar, right 2667 2.71 –

2.23 [339] 1334 Abstract wreath […] Boar, right 2667 1.88 –

2.24 [101] 1400 Abstract wreath VI[R] Boar, right 2667 2.53 –

2.25 [201]/[203] 175 VER across field Grazing horse, right 2673 1.56 918

2.26 [521] 1181 TAS Head, right Horseman, right, with carnyx, V[ER] in exergue

2676 2.29 2

2.27 [506] 1327 VERLAMIO Eight-pointed star Bull, left 2679 2.55 –



2.30 [311]/[383] 863 Eight-pointed star? Bull, left ? 2679? 2.20 –19

2.31 [324] 621 Eight-pointed star Bull, right 2685 2.37 –

2.32 Unstratified 711 Geometric pattern […] Horse, left 2688 0.4720 –

2.33 [101] 105 Geometric pattern [T]AS[CI] Horse, left 2688 1.94 –

2.34 [341] 837 Geometric pattern […] Horse, left 2688 1.10 –

2.35 [309] 740 TASCIO Head, laureate, right TASCIO Lion, right 2691 1.39 12

2.36 [332]21 882 [TASCIO] Head, laureate, right TASCIO Lion, right 2691 1.96 6

2.37 [358]22 896 TASCIO Head, right TA[SCIO] Lion, right 2691 1.6623 11

2.38 [367] 902 TASCIO Head, right TASCIO Lion, right 2691 2.67 9

2.39 Unstratified 1423 Head, left Horse left; four pellets below 2697 0.90 624

2.40 Unstratified 991 Lion, right Sphinx, left 2700 1.04 2

2.41 Unstratified 1110 VER Head, left Goat, right 2709 0.92 9

2.42 [535] 1326 […] Head, left Goat, right 2709 0.91 10

2.43 [400] 961 VER Head, left Goat, right 2709 1.17 10

2.44 [201] 194 VER[.] Head, left Goat, right 2709 0.93 5

ANDOCOSilver units (c. 20 bc– ad 10)


2.45 Unstratified 706 Bearded head, left, in interlaced border; a behind head

[A]NDOC[O] Winged horse, left 2721 1.15 9

Copper-alloy units and half-units (c. 20 bc – ad 10)Cat. Context no. SF Obverse Reverse ABC Wt (g) Axis

2.46 [512] 1155 ANDOCO Head, right ANDO[C]O Horse, right 2727 1.51 12

2.47 [521] 1295 [AN]DOCO Head, right [ANDOCO] Horse, right cf. 2727 1.64 9

2.48 Unstratified 1416 Head, laureate, right [….]O Boar, right, with circle (or O) above and below, three pellets either side of upper O

–25 0.91 12

North Thames areaDIASSilver unit (ad 1–10)


2.49 [101] 20 Saltire cross, in border of snakes [TASCIO DI]AS Boar, right 2742 1.31 –

Copper-alloy units (ad 1–10)Cat. Context no. SF Obverse Reverse ABC Wt (g) Axis

2.50 [367] 967 DIAS[.] Head, diademed, right26 VIR Seated figure, left 2751 1.42 12

2.51 [101] 102 […] Head, diademed, right VER Seated figure, left 2751 2.14 11

246 | Dea Senuna

RVESCopper-alloy units and fraction (ad 1–10)


2.52 [521]/[551] 1289 […] Head, bearded, right [R]V[II] Horseman, right 2754 2.34 1

2.53 [202] 205 [R]VE[ ] Head, bearded, right R[VII] Horseman, right27 2754 1.98 6

2.54 Unstratified 178 […] Head, bearded, right [R]VII Horseman, right 2754 1.71 12

2.55 Unstratified 710 [R]VI Lion, right, within hatched border

[RVII] Eagle standing left 2760 2.51 4

2.56 Unstratified 1415 […] Lion, right, within hatched border

[...]Eagle standing left 2760 1.39 7

2.57 [324] 582 […] Illegible […]Eagle standing left 2760 2.25 ?

2.58 [311] 871 […] Lion, right, within hatched border

[...]Eagle standing left cf. 2760

2.20 12

2.59 [367] 898 Concentric concave squares [RV..] Eagle standing left 2763 0.83 ?

North Thames area and KentCunobelinSilver unit (ad 10–40)


2.60 [529] 1201 CVNO/BELI in two panels […] Horseman right 2858 0.91 6

Copper-alloy units (ad 10–40)Cat. Context no. SF Obverse Reverse ABC Wt (g) Axis

2.61 [201] 192 CVNOBE/[L]INI in two panels […] Victory seated left 2918 2.35 12

2.62 [312] 538 CVNOB/ELINI in two panels […] Victory seated left 2918 2.14 1

2.63 [320]/[101] 557 CVNOBE/LINI in two panels […] Victory seated left 2918 2.55 2

2.64 [320] 601 [C]VNOBE/[L]INI in two panels TASC F Victory seated left 2918 2.36 4

2.65 [324] 723 CVNOB[E]/LINI in two panels […] Victory seated left 2918 2.50 12

2.66 [320] 742 CVNOB[E]/LINI in two panels […] Victory seated left 2918 2.44 6

2.67 under [202] 977 CVNOB/ELINI in two panels [T]AS[C] Victory seated left 2918 2.48 5

2.68 [300] 631 [CVN]O[B]/[ELI..] in two panels […] Victory seated left 2918 1.88 12

2.69 [320] 602 CVNOBEL Helmeted bust, left TASC·FIL Boar, left 2933 1.93 12

2.70 [311] 853 CVN[…]Helmeted bust, left […]II Boar, left 2933 1.54 9

2.71 [101] 99 CVNOBII Helmeted bust, left TASC·FI[L] Boar, left 2933 2.20 9

2.72 [201] 190 […] Head, laureate, left TAS[CIOVA...] Centaur, right 2957 2.25 1

2.73 [324] 575 CVNOBEL[…] Head, laureate, left TASCI[…] Centaur, right 2957 2.17 1

2.74 [324] 599 […]NI Head, laureate, left […]VA[…] Centaur, right 2957 2.76 6

2.75 Unstratified 770 CVNOBEL[…] Head, laureate, left TASCIOVA[...] Centaur, right 2957 2.33 10

2.76 [378] 920 CVNOBELINI Head, laureate, left TASCIOVA[...] Centaur, right 2957 2.42 3

2.77 [396] 954 CV[…] Head, laureate, left TASCIOVA[...] Centaur, right 2957 2.49 7

2.78 [396] 955 […] Head, laureate, left TAS[…] Centaur, right 2957 2.02 9

2.79 [101] 975 CVNOBEL[…] Head, laureate, left […] Centaur, right 2957 3.52 12

2.80 [520] spoil 1173 […]NI Head, laureate, left TASCIOVANI[.] Centaur, right 2957 2.19 2

2.81 [339] 1332 […]BE[…] Head, laureate, left TAS[…] Centaur, right 2957 2.42 10

2.82 Unstratified 1421 […] Head, laureate, left […] Centaur, right 2957 2.13 1

2.83 [201]/[203] 172 CVNOBELIN Head, laureate, left TAS[CIO]VANI F Centaur, right 2957 2.45 728

2.84 [314] 970 […] Head, laureate, left […] Centaur, right cf. 2957

1.65 9

2.85 [101] 117 CVNOBELINVS Helmeted head, right

TASCIIOVAN[II] F Boar, right 2960 2.38 12

2.86 [110] 119 [CVNOB]ELI[NVS] Helmeted head, right

[…] Boar, right 2960 2.37 1

2.87 Unstratified 149 CVNOBE[…] Helmeted head, right [TASCIIO]VANTI F Boar, right29 2960 2.61 4

2.88 [306] 504 [CVNO]BELINVS Helmeted head, right

[…]VANTI [F] Boar, right 2960 2.45 6



2.89 [320] 578 […] Helmeted head, right […] Boar, right 2960 3.03 5

2.90 [315] 594 CVNOBELIN[VS] Helmeted head, right

[…] Boar, right 2960 2.20 12

2.91 [320] 598 [CV]NOBELIN[VS] Helmeted head, right

[TASCI]IOVANIT [F] Boar, right 2960 3.04 2

2.92 [320] 603 CVN[O]BEIIN[VS] Helmeted head, right30

TASCIIO[…] F Boar, right31 2960 2.66 5

2.93 [300] 622 […] Helmeted head, right […] Illegible. Boar, right? 2960 0.96 9

2.94 Unstratified spoilheap

701 […] Helmeted head, right [TASCII]OVANII [F] Boar, right 2960 2.01 6

2.95 Unstratified 795 […BELIN..] Helmeted head, right […] Boar, right 2960 2.41 10

2.96 [203] 150 [CVNO]BELINV[S] Helmeted head, right

[TAS]CIIOVANII Boar, right 2960 2.33 1232

2.97 [202]/[201] 168 CVNOB Horseman, right, with spear and shield

TASCIIOVANTIS Warrior standing left, with spear and shield

2963 2.15 10

2.98 [201]/[206] 186 […] Horseman, right, with spear and shield

TASCIIOVA[…] Warrior standing left, with spear and shield

2963 2.49 333

2.99 [101] 13 CV[NOB] Horseman, right, with spear and shield

TASC[IIO]VANTIS Warrior standing left, with spear and shield

2963 2.29 1

2.100 Unstratified 70 CV[NOB] Horseman, right, with spear and shield

TASC[IIOVANT]IS Warrior standing left, with spear and shield

2963 2.20 3

2.101 [320] 595 CVNOB Horseman, right, with spear and shield


2963 2.56 11

2.102 [300] 632 […] Horseman, right, with spear and shield.

[…] Warrior standing left, with spear and shield.

2963 2.10 8

2.103 [362] 868 [CV]NOB Horseman, right, with spear and shield

[…] Warrior standing left, with spear and shield

2963 2.13 1



2963 2.18 5

2.105 [344] 969 [CV]NOB Horseman, right, with spear and shield

[TAS]CIIOVA[NTIS] Warrior standing left, with spear and shield

2963 2.34 5

2.106 [101] 985 […] Horseman, right, with spear and shield

[…] Warrior standing left, with spear and shield

2963 1.89 9

2.107 Unstratified 1103 […] Horseman, right, with spear and shield

[TASCIIOVA]NTIS Warrior standing left, with spear and shield

2963 2.11 6


TASCIIO[VANTIS] Warrior standing left, with spear and shield

2963 1.98 5

2.109 [529] 1195 […] Illegible […] Warrior standing left, with spear and shield

2963 1.90 12

2.110 [101] 19 […] Bust, right [T]AS[C] Bull butting, right 2966 2.39 7

2.111 [101]/[111] 134 […] Bust, right TASC Bull butting, right 2966 2.20 9

2.112 [304] 533 CVNOBELI[NVS ...] Bust, right […] Bull butting, right 2966 1.75 1

2.113 [110] 542 CVNOBE[LINVS RE]X Bust, right TA[SC] Bull butting, right 2966 2.45 9

2.114 [320] 576 […] Bust, right TA[SC] Bull butting, right 2966 2.09 5

2.115 [320] 583 CVNOBELI[NVS ...] Bust, right […] Bull butting, right 2966 2.36 12

2.116 [320] 584 CVNOBELINVS RE[X] Bust, right […] Bull butting, right 2966 2.45 11

2.117 [320] 586 CVNOB[…] Bust, right […] Bull butting, right 2966 1.93 12

2.118 [320] 596 CVNOBELI[NVS ...] Bust, right TAS[C] Bull butting, right 2966 2.50 6

2.119 [324] 738 […] Bust, right […] Bull butting, right 2966 2.17 10

2.120 [324] 751 CVNOBE[LINVS ...] Bust, right […] Bull butting, right 2966 1.90 12

2.121 [110] 841 CVNOBELINVS REX Bust, right TASC Bull butting, right 2966 2.56 3

2.122 Unstratified 1109 CVNOBELIN[VS REX] Bust, right […] Bull butting, right 2966 2.39 4

2.123 [574] 1252 […LIN...] Bust, right […] Bull butting, right 2966 2.39 3

2.124 [523] 1329 [CVNO]BELINVS REX Bust, right TASC Bull butting, right 2966 2.45 4

2.125 Unstratified 1424 CVNOBELIN[VS REX] Bust, right TASC Bull butting, right 2966 2.62 8

2.126 [101] 30 CVNO[…] Winged head, left [T]ASCIO Metalworker seated right

2969 2.11 12

2.127 [201] 165 CVNOBE[LIN] Winged head, left […] Metalworker seated right 2969 2.15 2

248 | Dea Senuna


2.128 [300] 629 […] Winged head, left […] Metalworker seated right 2969 2.00 11

2.129 [300] 630 CVNO[BE]LIN Winged head, left [TA]SCIO Metalworker seated right

2969 2.64 9

2.130 [315]/[383] 728 CVNO[…] Winged head, left […] Metalworker seated right 2969 1.45 6

2.131 [367] 878 CVNO[B]ELIN Winged head, left TASCI[O] Metalworker seated right

2969 2.43 4

2.132 [372] 899 [CVNO]BELIN Winged head, left TASCIO Metalworker seated right 2969 2.03 11

2.133 [311] 927 CVNO[B]ELIN Winged head, left [TA]SCIO Metalworker seated right

2969 2.48 3

2.134 [330] 972 CVNOBELIN Winged head, left TASCIO Metalworker seated right 2969 2.14 9

2.135 [501] 1113 CVNOBELIN Winged head, left TASCIO Metalworker seated right 2969 2.35 8

2.136 [525] 1208 [C]VNO[…] Winged head, left […] Metalworker seated right 2969 1.58 7

2.137 [600] 1306 [C]VNO[…] Winged head, left TAS[CIO] Metalworker seated right

2969 2.34 7

2.138 backfill 1375 CVNOBEIIN Winged head, left TASCIO Metalworker seated right 2969 2.13 12

2.139 [101] 104 CV[NO] Pegasus, right TASCI Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.37 2

2.140 [202] 147 […] Pegasus, right TASCI Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.17 1

2.141 [304] 527 […] Pegasus, right […] Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 1.96 1

2.142 [324] 607 CV[NO] Pegasus, right […] Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.18 4

2.143 [320] 613 [CV]NO Pegasus, right TASC[I] Victory sacrificing bull, right

2972 2.34 11

2.144 [324] 614 […] Pegasus, right [TASCI] Victory sacrificing bull, right

2972 2.66 2

2.145 [300] 627 [CV]NO Pegasus, right […] Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.38 7

2.146 [320] 748 [CV]NO Pegasus, right TASCI Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.42 12

2.147 [311]/[383] 860 [CV]N[O] Pegasus, right T[ASCI] Victory sacrificing bull, right

2972 2.34 2

2.148 [362] 872 […] Pegasus, right TASCI Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.17 3

2.149 [394] 950 CVNO Pegasus, right TASCI Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.40 12

2.150 [400] 960 CV[NO] Pegasus, right [TASCI] Victory sacrificing bull, right

2972 2.42 3

2.151 Unstratified 1100 CV[NO] Pegasus, right […] Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.11 11

2.152 [572] 1260 [CV]NO Pegasus, right […] Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 1.88 9

2.153 [576] 1323 CVNO Pegasus, right […] Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.27 12

2.154 [320] 1345 CVNO Pegasus, right […] Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.26 12

2.155 backfill 1373 […] Pegasus, right […] Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.16 2

2.156 Unstratified 1420 [CV]NO Pegasus, right [TASCI] Victory sacrificing bull, right

2972 2.08 9

2.157 [201]/[203] 173 CV[NO] Pegasus, right TASCI Victory sacrificing bull, right 2972 2.30 334

2.158 [320] 733 CVNO Head of Jupiter Ammon, right

CAM Lion crouching, right 2984 2.14 4

2.159 [355] 839 CVNO Head of Jupiter Ammon, right

CAM Lion crouching, right 2984 1.86 6

2.160 [328] 1285 […] Head of Jupiter Ammon, right CAM Lion crouching, right 2984 2.46 12

2.161 [203] 154 CVNO Sphinx, right [C]AM Figure standing left with severed head and club; behind, altar

2987 2.24 535

AGR Copper-alloy unit (ad 30–45)


2.162 [201] 193 CAM Laureate head, right AGR Bull butting, left –36 2.07 10


Essex and KentDubnovellaunosCopper-alloy units (20 bc–ad 10)


2.163 [314] 794 Head, right Horse, left 2410 1.62 2



2.166 [605] 1336 Head, right Illegible cf. 2410 1.09 12?

2.167 [111] 75 Head, right Horse, left cf. 2410 0.94


2.169 Backfill 1374 Head, left […] Horse, left 2407 1.62 10

KentSEGOCopper-alloy unit (ad 1–10)


2.170 [320] 590 Star Sphinx, left 453 2.28 –

Uncertain Eastern British Iron AgeCopper-alloy units


2.171 [521] 1246 Star? Animal, left cf. 2679ff.? 1.29 –

2.172 [521] 1286 Head, right? Horse, right cf. 2727? 1.61

2.173 Unstratified 776 Illegible Horseman, right? cf. 2676? 1.3637

East Anglian British Iron Age

Norfolk and neighbouring countiesUninscribedSilver half-unit ad 5–20


2.174 [315] 812 Stylized boar, right Stylized horse, right 1624 0.50 9

Silver unit ad 20–50Cat. Context no. SF Obverse Reverse ABC Wt (g) Axis

2.175 [203] 152 Head, right Horse, right 1567 1.05 1238

North-Eastern British Iron Age

Lincolnshire and neighbouring countiesUninscribedSilver half-unit (c. 40 bc–ad 20)


2.176 [201]/[206] 183 Die obliterated Horse, left cf 1839/1807 39 0.3940 –

Vep CorfSilver half-unit (c. ad 20–50)


2.177 [320] 600 Die obliterated VEP Horse, right cf. 1887 0.39 –

250 | Dea Senuna

Continental Iron AgeSilver unit

Cat. Context no. SF Obverse Reverse Ref. Wt (g) Axis

2.178 [521] 1202 Abstract design with arrowheads and animal

Horse right, wheel below cf. DT 342–5, 347 0.4341 –

Uncertain Iron AgeUnidentified copper-alloy coins

Cat. Context no. SF Obverse Reverse ABC Wt (g)

2.179 [365] 879 Illegible Illegible –42 2.66

2.179a [349] 825 Illegible Illegible – 2.90

Roman coins

Roman RepublicCat. Context no. SF Denomination Issuer Date RRC Wt (g) Axis

2.180 Unstratified 1267 denarius L Rubrius Dossenus 87 bc 348/2 3.34 1243

Roman EmpireCat. Context no. SF Denomination Issuer Reverse / type Date (ad) Ref. Wt (g) Axis

2.181 [101] 56 denarius (p) Augustus (reverse type)

Tetrastyle temple 18 bc cf. 117ff 44 2.73 6

2.182 [304] 843 denarius Augustus Gaius and Lucius Caesar

2 bc–ad 4 207 3.70 8

2.183 [339] 1335 as Gaius Vesta seated left 37–38 38 10.25 7

2.184 [128]45 45 as (i) Gaius Neptune standing left from 37–41 cf. 58 6.21 6

2.184a [341] 732 as (i) Gaius Neptune standing left from 37–41 cf. 58 9.21 3

2.185 [203] 161 dupondius Claudius I Ceres seated left 41–50 94 11.9246 6

2.186 [521] 1238 as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100 6.37 6

2.187 [396] 953 as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100 7.37 6

2.188 [110] 541a47 as (i) Claudius I Libertas standing left from 41–54 cf. 97/113 9.77 7

2.189 [110] 541b as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 5.56 6

2.190 [110] 541c as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 6.94 6

2.191 [110] 541d as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 8.59 1

2.192 [110] 541e as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 7.95 6

2.193 [110] 541f as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 5.06 6

2.194 [110] 541g as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 6.53 1

2.195 [110] 541h as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 7.49 4

2.196 Unstratified 713 as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 7.84 6

2.197 [566] 1247 as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 6.96 6




2.201 Under [108] 986 as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 8.07 7


2.202a [609] 1324 as (i) Claudius I Minerva advancing right from 41–54 cf. 100/116 4.80 6

2.203 [110] 543 dupondius (i) Claudius I Figure standing left from 41–54 cf. 92/104 6.24 1

2.204 [101] 107 as Nero Victory flying left 65 478 10.59 6

2.205 Unstratified 1412 as Nero Victory flying left 66 540–545 10.14 6

2.206 [201] 164 as Nero Victory flying left 66 543 10.52 6

2.207 [300] 637 dupondius Vespasian Victory flying left 71 1153 12.51 6

2.208 [334] 916 dupondius Vespasian Pax sacrificing left 71–2 1144/1191 11.4 7


Cat. Context no. SF Denomination Issuer Reverse / type Date (ad) Ref. Wt (g) Axis

2.209 [128] 43 as Vespasian Victory advancing left 71 1176 9.9848 6

2.210 [313] 552 as Vespasian Eagle on globe 72 1202 10.05 6

2.211 Unstratified 1435 as Vespasian Spes advancing left 77–8 cf. 1290 7.38 6

2.212 [203] 162 as Vespasian Fides or Felicitas 69–79 cf. 1163 ff49 9.84 650

2.213 [306] 505 as Domitian Illegible 80s ?51 7.65 ?

2.214 [528] 1214 as Domitian Moneta standing left 86 493 10.65 6

2.215 [365] 877 dupondius Flavian Standing figure c. 69–96 ?52 12.8 ?

2.216 [560] 1343 dupondius Trajan Via Traiana 112–14 641 var.53 11.7 6

2.217 [101] 120 dupondius/as Trajan Roma standing left, captive at feet

104–11 cf. 486/7 10.75 6

2.218 [500] 1124 dupondius? Trajan Emperor riding right, raising spear

98–117 cf. 54554? 14.71 6?

2.219 Unstratified 708 as? Trajan Uncertain standing figure

98–117 ? 8.33 6

2.220 [320] 797 denarius Hadrian Victory advancing right 119–25 101 3.02 6

2.221 [320] 561 as Hadrian Britannia standing left 117–38 577b 9.39 6

2.222 [203] 151 as Hadrian Salus standing left 117–38 678 8.42 655

2.223 [101] 87 sestertius Antoninus Pius Pax standing left 145–61 777 26.22 11

2.224 [324] 620 dupondius Antoninus Pius Felicitas standing left 153–5 cf. 924 var.56 11.88 12

2.225 [101] 15 as Antoninus Pius (Marcus Aurelius as Caesar)

Mars advancing right 154–155 1322 10.89 6

2.226 [314] 992 as Uncertain Seated figure right 2nd century –57 7.00 ?

2.227 under [332] 974 dupondius/as (i)

Uncertain (Claudian?)

Illegible 1st–2nd century

– 4.97 ?58

2.228 [563] 1236 dupondius/as Uncertain Illegible 1st–2nd century

– 4.50 ?59

2.228a [364] 987 dupondius/as Uncertain Illegible 1st–2nd century

– 11.66 ?

2.229 [301] 520 sestertius (cut half)

Uncertain Illegible 1st–2nd century

– 9.99 ?

2.230 [500] spoil 1119 sestertius (cut quarter)

Uncertain Standing figure? 1st–2nd century

– 5.80 ?60

2.231 backfill 1369 radiate Gallienus Pegasus, right 260–8 cf. 282/3 0.7961 11

2.232 [101] 54 radiate Gallienus Aequitas standing left with scales and cornucopia

260–8 cf. 159 2.35 12

2.233 [101]/[111] 134b radiate Claudius II Standing figure? 268–70 – 1.1062 6

2.234 Unstratified 136 radiate Victorinus Sol advancing left 269–71 cf. Nby. 1412

1.74 ?

2.235 [300] 521 radiate Tetricus I Salus standing left, feeding snake twined round altar and holding sceptre

271–4 Nby. 1492ff. 2.15 12

2.236 Unstratified 1118 radiate Tetricus I Uncertain standing figure

271–4 1.52 6

2.237 [101]/[111] 134c radiate Tetricus II Spes advancing left 271–4 Nby. cf. 1526 rev.

1.91 6

2.238 [101] 16 radiate Uncertain Female figure standing left

c. 260–96 – 3.16 12

2.239 [101] 7 radiate (i) Claudius II Jupiter standing left with thunderbolt and sceptre

c. 260–96 – 1.34 11

2.240 [302] 509 radiate (i) Claudius II? Standing figure c. 260–96 – 1.27 11

2.241 Unstratified 78 radiate (i) Divus Claudius II Altar c .260–96 cf. 261 1.20 6

2.242 spoil heap 547 radiate (i) Divus Claudius II Eagle c. 260–96 – 1.45 6

2.243 [101] 863 radiate (i) Tetricus I Hilaritas standing left c. 274–96 cf. Nby. 1487ff –

1.93 11

252 | Dea Senuna


2.244 [313] 544 radiate (i) Tetricus I Standing figure (Salus?) c. 274–96 1.07 564

2.245 [521] 1239 radiate (i) Tetricus II Priestly implements c.274–96 – 1.61 11

2.246 [101]/[110] 47 radiate (i) Uncertain Gallic Female figure (Victory?) advancing left

c. 274–96 – 2.78 6

2.247 Unstratified 703 radiate (i) Uncertain Illegible c. 260–96 – 0.8465

2.248 backfill 1372 radiate (i) Uncertain Illegible c. 260–96 0.7966 12

2.249 Unstratified sondage

1408 radiate (i) Uncertain Standing figure with transverse spear

c. 260–96 1.63 6

2.250 Unstratified 1419 radiate (i) Uncertain Illegible c. 260–96 0.7267

2.251 backfill 1371 radiate (i) Uncertain Illegible c. 260–96 1.168

2.252 [301] 519 radiate (i) Uncertain Standing figure with sceptre

c. 260–96 1.32 3

2.253 Unstratified 1140 radiate (i) (m) Uncertain Illegible c. 274–96 0.41


2.255 [101] 55 radiate (i) (m) Uncertain Altar c. 274–96 0.9269

2.256 [101] 1347 radiate (i) (m) Uncertain Illegible c. 274–96 0.37

2.257 backfill 1368 radiate (i) (m) Uncertain Illegible c. 274–96 0.29

2.258 backfill 1370 radiate (i) (m) Uncertain Illegible c. 274–96 0.46


2.260 [500] spoil 1121 radiate (i) (m) Uncertain Illegible c. 274–96 0.66

2.261 Unstratified 1434 nummus Constantine I BEATA TRAN[…] 321–4 –70 3.02 6

2.262 [500] 1134 nummus Constantine II BEATA TRANQVILLITAS VO/TIS/XX //.STR.

322–3 382 2.88 6

2.263 [101] 2971 nummus Constantine II PROVIDENTIAE CAESS //PTR

324–5 455 2.60 12

2.264 [300] 624 nummus Helena SECVRITAS REIPVBLICE //PTR[.]

325–8 cf. 465ff. 3.25 12

2.265 [320] 579 nummus Urbs Roma Wolf and Twins TRS. 330–1 529 1.93 6

2.266 [101] 38 nummus Urbs Roma Wolf and Twins TRP[.] 330–5 cf. 529ff. 2.88 7

2.267 [101]/[110] 42 nummus Urbs Roma Wolf and Twins 330–5 – 1.63 6

2.268 Unstratified 6172 nummus Urbs Roma Wolf and Twins 330–5 – 2.05 6

2.269 [300] 638 nummus Constantinopolis Victory on prow TRS. 330–1 530 1.43 6

2.270 Unstratified 1401 nummus Constantinopolis Victory on prow 330–5 – 2.18 6

2.271 Unstratified 1422 nummus Constantinopolis Victory on prow [.]PLG 330–1 246 2.74 12

2.272 [101] 23 nummus (i) Constantinopolis Victory on prow c. 330–5 0.82 6

2.273 [101] 121 nummus Constantine II Gloria Exercitus 2 branch //TRS[.]

333–4 556 2.36 12

2.274 [101] 24 nummus House of Constantine

Gloria Exercitus 2 330–5 1.74 6


Gloria Exercitus 1 chi-rho [.]

335–40 2.03 1273


Gloria Exercitus 1 chi-rho // PLG

337–40 cf. 4ff. 1.05 6

2.277 [324] 722 nummus Constans Gloria Exercitus 1 [.]PL[G]

337–40 1.58 7

2.278 [101] 10 nummus Constans Gloria Exercitus 1I // SARL

340 cf. 55 1.52 6

2.279 Unstratified 1432 nummus (i) House of Constantine

Gloria Exercitus c. 330–40 0.78 6

2.280 Unstratified 705 nummus Helena [PAX PVBLICA]//•[TR.] 337–40 cf. 47ff. 1.55 6

2.281 Unstratified 1106 nummus Theodora [PIETAS ROMANA] 337–41 1.16 12

2.282 Unstratified 1431 nummus Constans Two victories [./T]R[P] 347–8 cf. 180ff. 1.25 6

2.283 [301] 514 nummus Uncertain Two victoriesleaf // [TR.]

347–8 cf. 183ff. 1.31 12

2.284 [101]/[111] 134a nummus House of Constantine

Two victories Є//[TRP] 347–8 cf. 197ff. 1.26 12




Two victories 347–8 1.15 6

2.286 Unstratified 1418 nummus Uncertain FTR galley 348–50 1.43 674

2.287 [101] 12 nummus Magnentius VICTORIAE DD […] 350–3 2.04 6


FTR fallen horseman 353–361 2.59 1275

2.289 [314] 809 nummus (i) House of Constantine

FTR fallen horseman c. 355–64 0.71 11

















2.298 [320] 957 nummus (i) (m) House of Constantine


2.299 [101] 22 nummus House of Valentinian

GLORIA [ROMANORVM] (Emperor)

364–78 1.7 12


[GLORIA ROMANORVM] (Emperor)

364–78 1.7 6

2.301 [509] 1151 nummus Valens [GLORIA ROMANORVM] (Emperor)

364–78 2.18 6

2.302 Unstratified 1433 nummus Valens [SECVRITAS] REIPVBLICAE //[.]CO[..]

364–78 cf. 9bff.76 2.45 12


SECVRITAS [REIPVBLICAE] OF / [.]// CON[..]

364–78 cf. 9ff. 1.65 12

2.304 [302] 739 nummus Gratian GLORIA NO[VI SAECVLI] 77

367–75 15 1.72 12

2.305 [101] 25 nummus Valens GLORIA ROMANORVM (Victory) *-//TRS

367–75 31b 2.04 12

2.306 [313] 1348 nummus Uncertain […](Victory advancing left)

364–78 1.97 12

2.307 [300] 623 Nummus Uncertain […](Victory advancing left)

364–78 1.99 6

2.308 Unstratified 1177 Nummus Uncertain […](Victory advancing left)

364–78 1.7 12

2.309 [314] 838 Nummus Gratian SECVRITAS REIPVBLICAE //SCON

375–8 19b 1.82 6

2.310 [510] 1135 nummus Uncertain [REPARATIO REIPVB] 379–87 1.14 12

2.311 Unstratified 707 nummus Valentinian II VICT[ORIA AVGGG] //[.CO]N

388–92 cf. 30a 0.86 12

2.312 Unstratified 7378 nummus Valentinian II [VICTORIA AVGGG] 388–92 1.00 12

2.313 [300] 626 nummus Uncertain [VICTORIA AVGGG] 388–95 0.43 6

2.314 [320] 958 nummus Uncertain [SALVS REIPVBLICAE] Chi-rho –//[.Q.]

388–402 0.85 679

2.315 [313] 647 nummus Uncertain [SALVS REIPVBLICAE] 388–402 1.04 12

254 | Dea Senuna


2.316 Unstratified 704 nummus Illegible Illegible 4th century 0.85 ?

2.317 [101]/[110] 44 nummus Illegible Illegible 4th century 1.76 ?

2.318 Unstratified 1117 nummus Illegible Illegible 4th century 0.7780 ?

2.319 [101] 981 nummus Illegible Illegible 4th century 1.79 ?82

2.320 Unstratified 720 radiate/nummus

Uncertain Illegible 3rd–4th century

0.5283

2.321 backfill 1376 radiate/nummus


1.09

2.322 [500] 1136 radiate/nummus


0.32



0.98



1.9284

2.325 [510] spoil 1174 radiate/nummus


0.33



0.56



1.39



0.7885



0.32



0.4886

2.331 [314] 768 radiate/nummus (i) (m)


0.65

2.332 [314] 789 radiate/nummus (i) (m)


0.67

Uncertain Iron Age or Roman coinsCat. Context no. SF Metal Obverse Reverse Wt (g)

2.333 Unstratified 1101 Copper alloy Illegible Illegible 1.17

2.334 [315] 798 Silver [.]S[F] Illegible [O] Illegible 0.2387

2.334a [365] 990 Copper alloy Illegible Illegible 4.94

ModernSilver florin

Cat. Context no. SF Issuer Date Reference Wt (g)

2.335 [501] 1150 Victoria 1864 Spink 2012, no. 3892; Cope and Rayner 1975, 119, no. 1550 11.23


Catalogue of Iron Age coins recorded on the Portable Antiquities Scheme database from the Ashwell areaThe following coins are recorded on the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) database (finds.org.uk) as coming from the parish of Ashwell. Many come from the area later excavated and have been included here as a record of the coins from the site. A number (including most of the Celtic Coin Index (CCI) coins) are centred to the parish and there are no further find-spot details.

Gallo-Belgic E gold stater c. 60–50 bc

Cat. PAS ref. Obverse Reverse ABC Comments Wt (g)

2.336 BH-8D4135 Blank Horse, right n/a Class i-ii 6.32

Kent

PotinCat. PAS ref. Obverse Reverse ABC Comments Wt (g)

2.337 CCI-982063 Head, left Butting bull, right 120 Probably the same as BM–3DDC11

2.81

2.338 BH-DEE798 Stylized head, right Stylized bull, left 174 1.71

UninscribedCopper-alloy unit


2.339 CCI-963302 Head, right, with torc Lion, left 291 1.57

DubnovellaunosCopper-alloy unit


2.340 BH-288F73 Boar standing right, […] below Eagle standing right, wings spread 345 1.95

East Anglia Silver units and fractions


2.341 BH-06C004 Opposed crescents in hexagonal border

Horse, right cf. 1684ff. Base forgery of a half-unit, identification uncertain

0.6

2.342 BH-225167 Opposed crescents Horse, right; pellets below base? Appears base 0.83

Eastern British Iron Age

UninscribedSilver unit


2.343 BH-F762C2 Two opposed animal heads, animals around

Horse, right cf. 2267/ 2270ff.

Incomplete 0.99

2.344 CCI-970037 Helmeted head left Horse left, leaves above and below

2380 1.28

DubnovellaunosGold stater, contemporary forgery


2.345 CCI-962688 Not described Not described [DVBNOV]ILL[AVN]

2392 Described as copper alloy so assumed to be a forgery; image not seen

3.16

It was not possible to verify the identification of all the coins. Those prefixed with ‘BM’ were recorded from paper records without images and so the identification was assumed to be correct. In the other cases, the coin was seen only from an image and the original identification was taken into account where the image was unclear.

256 | Dea Senuna

Uninscribed, attributed to DubnovellaunosCopper-alloy unit


2.346 BH-C16B31 Head, right Horse, left cf. 2410 1.76

Uninscribed, attributed to AddedomarosCopper-alloy units


2.347 BH-F98655 Head, left Horse, left, front leg raised, sun below

cf. 2541 1.56

2.348 BH-B2E7E2 Head, left Horse, left, front leg raised, sun below

cf. 41 Could also be seen as head right? 1.6

TasciovanusSilver units


2.349 BH–1B7036 Bearded head, left Horseman right, raising spear […]

2610 1.08

2.350 CCI-963301 Crossed wreath Pegasus right […] 2619 Base (plated) 1.05

2.351 BH-E60AB3 Horseman left, with shield TASC within rectangle 2640 1.16

2.352 CCI-9633 Head, right [TASC]IA Bull, left 2643 1.21

Copper-alloy unitsCat. PAS ref. Obverse Reverse ABC Comments Wt (g)

2.353 BM-3DB996 Bearded head, right Ram, left TASC 2655 Obverse described on form as jugate heads right)

1.4

2.354 BH-50B028 Bearded head, right [VIR]

Hippocamp, left VIR 2658? 2.03

2.355 BH-1ED132 ?Bearded head, right [VER]

Horse (?), left [TAS] 2661? Identification uncertain 0.99

2.356 BM-2B2745 Head, right Horse, left TAS 2661 Unknown

2.357 BH-338061 Head, right [TA]SC Winged horse left 2664 2.06

2.358 BH-2096C1 Head, right Winged horse left cf. 2664? Or cf. 2694? 3.46

2.359 BM-508EF5 Cruciform pattern of lines, pellets and rings

Boar right, crescent above VER

2667 Unknown

2.360 BM-4FF8A4 Head, right Horseman, right, raising spear [VER]

2676 1.2

2.361 BH-0D1321 Bearded head right ? Horse, right cf. 2676? Or possibly ABC 2754 (RVES) 1.67

2.362 BH-656924 Eight-pointed star, pellet in centre [VERLAMIO]

Bull, left 2679 1.61

2.363 BM-29E1C7 Eight-pointed star, pellet in centre VERLAMIO


2.364 BM-3DE736 Eight-pointed star, pellet in centre VERLAMIO


2.365 BM-8DED87 Eight-pointed star, pellet in centre VERLAMIO

Bull, left 2679 Unknown

2.366 BM-4FC873 Star with central pellet in circle

Bull standing right on exergual line

2685 2.29

2.367 CCI-961678 Head, right Ram, left VIR 2694 2.56

2.368 CCI-961679 Head, right Ram, left 2694 2.29

2.369 BH-7BBA91 Head, right (bearded?) Animal (?right) TASC[…] No exact parallel found. Head cf. 2655ff.?

2.32

2.370 BH-45F0C2 Bearded head? Hippocamp (?) left 1.52


ANDOCOSilver unit


2.371 CCI-961677 Head left with interlaced border A

Pegasus left ANDO[O.] 2721 Incomplete 0.98

Copper-alloy unitCat. PAS ref. Obverse Reverse ABC Comments Wt (g)

2.372 BH-C7D2A6 Romanized head right […] Horse, right, ANDOC[O] around

2727 Incomplete, poor condition 1.03

DIASCopper-alloy units


2.373 BH-33B484 Bearded head right Centaur (?) right VIR 2748 Obverse in poor condition 1.24

2.374 BH-198F01 Bearded head right; behind [TA]SC, before [DIAS]

Centaur right [VIR] 2748 0.72

RVESCopper-alloy unit (or fraction?)


2.375 BH-581EE8 Pellet in ring inside lozenges

Eagle standing left [R]V[II] 2763 Pellet triad at feet of eagle? 12.6mm diameter

1.01

CunobelinCopper-alloy units


2.376 BH-BE4B43 Inscription on tablet [CVNOBE/LINI]

Victory seated left //[TASC] 2918 1.90

2.377 BM-2A8755 Inscription on tablet. CVNOBELINI

Victory seated left 2918 Unknown

2.378 BM-7DCCB5 Illegible Sphinx crouching left, wings extended [CVNO]

2924 2.27

2.379 BH-2909D6 Helmeted head, left [CVNOBIL]

Boar standing left, [T]ASC FII

2933 Reverse image only 1.64

2.380 BH-28C940 Quadruped right [Quadruped right] 2945?? Uncertain, possibly 2945, 2972 1.75

2.381 CCI-610249 Head left CVNOBELI[NI] Centaur right TASCIOVANI F

2957 2.66

2.382 BM-796361 Bust left Centaur right 2957 Unknown

2.383 BH-89E9D5 [Head left][…] [Centaur right][…] 2957 2.27

2.384 BH-7A2DB7 Helmeted head right C[VN]O-[BELINVS]

Boar right [TASCIIOVANII] 2960 1.82

2.385 CCI-930560 Horseman, right [CV]NOB Standing warrior 2963 1.61

2.386 CCI-930561 2963 Not described, no image 1.28

2.387 BM-3D4FA3 Horseman, right CVNOB Warrior standing left with spear and shield TASCIIOVANTIS

2963 2.25

2.388 BM-500C18 Warrior on horse right, holding shield and spear [CVNOB]

Standing warrior with spear and shield [TASCIIO]VANTIS

2963 2

2.389 BM-7DF9E2 Mounted warrior, right CVNOB

Standing warrior TASCIIOVANTIS

2963 Unknown

2.390 BH-33DA96 Romanized bust right [CVNOBELINVS REX]

Bull butting right, TASC 2966 2.23

2.391 BH-957CE7 Head right [CVNOBE]-LINVS REX

Bull butting right [TASC] 2966 2.65

2.392 BM-2B4047 Bust, right CVNOBELINVS REX

Bull butting, right TASC 2966 Unknown

2.393 BM-509BF3 Bust right [CVNOBELINVS REX]


258 | Dea Senuna


2.394 BM-8E7507 Bust, right CVNOBELINVS REX


2.395 BM-284B14 cf. 2966 Described only as ‘cf. VA 2095-’ Unknown

2.396 BH-515985 [Head right] Bull butting right (possibly) [TASC]

2966?? Illegible – uncertain identification 2.51

2.397 BH-52F225 Head left CVNO-BEIIN Seated metalworker 2969 1.99

2.398 BH-675652 Head left CVNO-[BEIIN] Metalworker seated right [TASCIO]

2969 1.84

2.399 CCI-030933 Head, left CVNOBELIN Metalworker seated right TASCIO

2969 1.96

2.400 BH-FA02C8 Head, left […] Metalworker seated right […] 2969 Illegible – uncertain identification 1.97

2.401 BM-377277 Head, left CVNOBELIN Metalworker seated right TASCIO

2969 Unknown

2.402 BH-7976D1 Winged horse right CV-NO] Victory sacrificing bull right [TASCI]

2972 Possible 2.59

2.403 BH-21FBF2 Winged horse right [CV]NO Victory sacrificing bull [TASCI]

2972 Possible 1.76

2.404 BH-88BCB2 Winged horse right? Victory sacrificing bull? 2972 Image wrong way round on PAS 1.46

2.405 BH-1BAF21 Winged horse right [CV NO] Victory sacrificing bull right [TASCI]

2972 1.95

2.406 BH-1E5A86 Winged horse right [CV NO] Victory sacrificing bull right [TASC]

2972 Poorly legible 1.38

2.407 BH-652943 Winged horse right [CV NO] Victory sacrificing bull right TASCI

2972 1.62

2.408 BM-3D9A32 Head of Jupiter Ammon, right CVNOB

Lion crouching, right CAM 2984 2.25

2.409 BH-223503 Bearded head left [CAMV] Horse to left CVNO ? Could not be verified from image 0.64

2.410 BM-2888B6 Not described Not described ? Recorded as possibly Cunobelin – could not be verified

2.12

Uncertain issuerStater


2.411 BH-318E56 Abstract head? Horse right, wheel below cf. 2240 ?

Contemporary forgery – Eastern; uninscribed

2.89

Copper-alloy units and fractionsCat. PAS ref. Obverse Reverse ABC Comments Wt (g)

2.412 BH-B31345 Illegible Uncertain animal 3.09

2.413 BH-100874 Illegible Horse (or centaur?), right cf. 2957?

2.32

2.414 BH-91B7C5 Head right? Uncertain; recorded as horse left

1.31

2.415 BH-D71D91 Crossed wreaths Bull, right; pellet in ring below; above [VIR]

Tasciovanus? Reverse cf. style of ABC 2685 but no exact parallel. Or base quarter cf. obverse of 2586ff.

0.71

Uncertain region

Uncertain issuerCopper-alloy units


2.416 BH-C20991 Head, right? Standing quadruped right? 0.86

2.417 BH-09F9D3 Illegible Illegible 0.64

2.418 BH-50ED21 Illegible Illegible 1.23

2.419 BH-7A0A02 Illegible Illegible 1.79


Uncertain issuer and denominationCat. PAS ref. Obverse Reverse ABC Comments Wt (g)

2.420 BH-07A6D7 Uncertain – wreath? Horse, left Possibly a base quarter-stater? North Thames or Eastern in style

0.79

2.421 BH-512BB1 Cross with pellets/loops Stylized horse, ring in field

On PAS as forgery of a silver unit, corrosion obscures design

0.68

Summary of Roman coins recorded on the PAS database from Ashwell areaThe coins summarized below are from the geographical area described above. Although some of the identifications were checked when assigning records to Reece periods in order to obtain the data in Figures 295–6, the PAS records were not systematically checked before compiling this list and so these identifications should be considered provisional. This list includes PAS records which could not be assigned to Reece periods.

Issuer Denarius As Dupondius Dupondius/As

Sestertius Radiate Radiate/Nummus

Nummus Other

Republic 1

Mark Antony (32–31 bc) 2

Augustus (27 bc–ad 14) 2

Nero (ad 54–68) 2 4 1

Galba (ad 68–69) 1

Vitellius (ad 69) 1

Vespasian (ad 69–79) 4 5

Titus (ad 79–81) 1

Domitian (ad 81–96) 4 1 1

Uncertain Flavian (ad 69–79) 4 1

Nerva (ad 96–8) 2

Trajan (ad 98–117) 9 2 3

Hadrian (ad 117–38) 7 3 1 2

Antoninus Pius (ad 138–61) 5 2 3 2

Marcus Aurelius (ad 161–80) 2 1 1 3

Commodus (ad 180–92) 1 3

Septimius Severus (ad 193–211)

6 1

Geta (ad 209–11) 1

Caracalla (ad 211–17) 6

Elagabalus (ad 218–22) 3 188

Severus Alexander (ad 222–35)

4 1 1

Maximus (ad 235–8) 1

Gordian III ad 238–44) 3

Valerian and Gallienus (ad 253–60)

3

Gallienus (ad 260–8) 41

Claudius II (ad 268–70) 36

Divus Claudius (ad 270) 21

Quintillus (ad 270) 3

Aurelian (ad 270–5) 2

Probus (ad 276–282) 1

Postumus (ad 260–9) 6

Marius (ad 269) 1

Victorinus (ad 269–71) 30

260 | Dea Senuna

Issuer Denarius As Dupondius Dupondius / As

Sestertius Radiate Radiate/nummus

Nummus Other

Tetricus I and II (ad 271–4) 51

Uncertain Gallic (ad 260–74) 46

Carausius (ad 286–93) 32

Allectus (ad 293–6) 11 1689

Barbarous radiates 118

Tetrarchic (ad 296–317) 26


56


206

House of Constantine (348–64)

83 290

House of Valentinian (ad 364–78)

152 1



12 3

Uncertain 1st–2nd century ad 4 14 1 5 9 491

Uncertain 3rd century ad 211

Uncertain 4th century ad 158

Uncertain 3rd–4th century ad 153

Notes1. I would like to thank Ian Leins and Sam Moorhead for their help in

identifying certain coins and their comments on the text.2. Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews kindly supplied information on

unpublished coins recorded by North Hertfordshire Museums.3. Irregular radiates have been included in period 14 for the purposes

of analysis.4. I would like to thank Sam Moorhead for providing me with his

mean figures for all coin finds from Hertfordshire (54 excavated sites and PAS finds from 23 parishes). These are taken from his article on Hertfordshire (Moorhead 2015) and were compiled from www.finds.org.uk in June 2013. The figures for the British mean are taken from Reece (1995). Iron Age coins have been excluded here and by Moorhead (although some were included in the British Mean by Reece).

5. The totals of Iron Age coins and Roman coins per mill. were calculated separately for this graph rather than as per mill. of the total number of coins found, for illustrative purposes.

6. Information on their spatial proximity was not available to the author (they were found in a subsoil context and not in situ) but can be assumed on the basis of the fact that they shared the same Small Find number.

7. Contexts containing Iron Age coins dated prior to ad 10 and no later coins: [111], [309], [332], [341], [358], [506], [512], [513], [535], [538], [540], [586] & [605].

8. Contexts in addition to those above: [202], [311], [312], [328], [330], [339], [344], [355], [362], [367], [372], [378], [394], [400], [523], [529], [572], [574], [576], [600] & [616].

9. Detailed stratigraphic interpretation was not available at the time of writing.

10. The Roman coins from the excavations at Harlow in the late 1980s are as yet unpublished.

11. The Ashwell parish figures are based on PAS data for a total of 1161 coins assigned Reece periods on the PAS database in May 2014. The coins are all from the parish of Ashwell and from an area centred on the excavated site and surrounding fields. Iron Age coins have been excluded but are individually catalogued below. They include coins found on the site both before and after the excavations took place. The other sources of data are as for Figure 291.

12. Cf. BMC 1620.13. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (6).

14. Bar across C on obverse, cf. CCI 04.0130.15. Reverse uncertain.16. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (5).17. Border of pellets visible.18. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (5).19. Identification tentative.20. Fragment.21. Metal-detected from spoilheap.22. Metal-detected from spoilheap.23. Broken.24. Obverse unclear. Four pellets under horse cf. 268225. Or half-unit of Tasciovanus? The style of the head on the obverse is

similar to that of the silver unit of ANDOCO ABC 2724, although no obverse inscription appears to be present. The boar with the groups of three pellets is similar to the style of the reverse of the half-unit of Tasciovanus ABC 2712, and others listed on the CCI under VA 1826 (cf. CCI 83.0379, 01.0223 etc). The lettering on the reverse is yet to be determined. This coin appears to be a half-unit from the weight.

26. Obverse legend clearly visible. There seems to be another letter after the S but the condition is poor. ABC notes that the legend for type 2751 seems to read DIAS[V].

27. Star in front of horseman.28. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (5).29. N retrograde.30. First N retrograde.31. S retrograde.32. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (5).33. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (6).34. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (5).35. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (5).36. Cf. ABC 2948 but CAM / AGR. See Rudd 2012.37. Incomplete.38. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (5).39. Similar to ABC 1839 / VA 889, but ‘kite’ above horse does not

appear to be present, having been replaced by a ring motif (cf. ABC 1809 / VA 887), although the design is unclear. There are units and half-units of the Van Arsdell type 887.01 listed on the CCI.

40. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (6).41. Broken. This obverse type compares well with that of the


3. Votive plaques

Ralph Jackson

3.1. Leaf plaque, BGF 03, SF 11, [101] (= 2002 T215(4)), Site Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 305–6) Ht 34.4mm, W. 20.5mm, Wt 0.57gTwo joining fragments of silver sheet, together comprising the base and converging sides of a small triangular plaque. The layout of the simple embossed and incised leaf-marked design is distinctly asymmetric. There is no midrib and the veining simply slopes down from the centre, decreasing in width as the converging sides approach the (now missing) top. A dimple at the centre of the lowermost leaf pair, at the apex of the pediment-like triangular space, may have been the setting-out point for the design. The projection at the centre of the lower edge is a rudimentarily cut basal tab.

3.2. Leaf plaque, BGF 06, SF 1328, [506], Phase 6 (Figs 305–6) Ht 16.7mm, W. 21.6mm, Wt 0.45gA small fragment of silver sheet with converging sides broken at top and bottom. Additional bending at the broader (lower) edge indicates that it was probably deliberately bent and broken. The embossed design comprises a central midrib with flanking leaf-veining and interspersed pellets along both margins. Probably originally a simple triangular plaque.

3.3. Leaf plaque, BGF 05, SF 988, MD topsoil find: backfill (Figs 305–6) Ht 56.6mm, Wt 2.65gA fragment of copper-alloy sheet with converging sides, broken at top and bottom and with the lower right side torn away, part of Cat. 3.4. The simple leaf-marked decoration, formed by embossed ‘corded’ ridges emphasized by lightly incised lines, consists of a central midrib flanked by leaf-

‘monnaies lamellaires’ of the Ambiani (cf. DT series 31B) but no exact parallel has been found with a wheel below the horse (similar coins have a boar below the horse). This may be an unrecorded type ( J.-M. Doyen, pers. comm.). It has also been suggested (P.-M. Guihard, pers. comm.) that this may be an insular hybrid.

42. Burnt, possibly the core of a plated stater?43. Two V-shaped punch marks on obverse.44. Plated ancient forgery of hybrid type with Roman Republican

obverse type of Philippus RRC 425/1 (56 BC) and reverse type of Augustus cf. RIC 117ff.

45. This context was noted as a placed deposit after the author had completed this report.

46. The coin has been pierced at 9 o’clock on the obverse, by drilling from the obverse side. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (5).

47. The group of eight coins with SF number 541 were found together.48. Double-struck on obverse.49. Probable globe at point of bust.50. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (5).51. Obverse inscription and reverse illegible.52. Surface appears burnt. Obverse illegible, head right.53. Bust A3 viewed from back (MIR Trajan 477b).54. Radiate bust, right.55. In placed deposit 2002 T215 (5).56. Not in RIC as dupondius, cf. as RIC 924 (ad 153–4) or RIC 937 (ad

154–5). Obverse legend uncertain.57. Obverse: uncertain Antonine emperor, draped right.58. Probably a Claudian copy – possibly bust of Antonia?59. Illegible – burnt?60. Illegible, upper part of standing or seated figure visible on reverse.61. Incomplete.62. Poor fabric – possibly a copy.63. 2003 T37 addenda.64. Smaller module.65. Smaller module.66. Smaller module67. Smaller module.68. Smaller module.69. Slightly larger module than other ‘minims’.70. Helmeted bust right, CONSTANTINVS AVG.71. 2003 T37 addenda.72. 2003 T37 addenda.73. Possibly a copy?74. Small module.75. Poor condition, probably regular?76. Mint of Arles?77. Type issued by mint of Arles.78. 2003 T37 addenda.79. Rome or Aquileia?80. Fragment.81. 2003 T37 addenda.82. Possibly fallen horseman type.83. Possibly an irregular minim.84. In poor condition, burnt?85. Probably irregular.86. Cut (?) half.87. Or obverse / reverse vice versa. Very small fragment, could also be

a fragment of a denarius.88. Roman provincial bronze of Cius in Bithynia.89. Q-radiates.90. The 4th-century ad coins listed under ‘other’ are siliquae.91. 1st- to 3rd-century AEs of unidentified denomination.

Figure 305 Silver and copper-alloy votive leaf plaques. Upper left Cat. 3.1, lower left Cat. 3.2, upper centre Cat. 3.4, lower centre Cat 3.3, right Cat. 3.5.

262 | Dea Senuna

A fragment of thin sheet with one probable complete edge and two zones of linear embossing. Possibly part of a votive plaque.

3.7. Plaque?, BGF 03, SF 185, [201]/[206] (= 2002 T215 (6)), Phase 5/6 L. 29.1mm, Wt 0.2gA tiny fragment of very thin copper-alloy sheet, of slender triangular shape. X-radiography reveals two converging lines of minuscule dot decoration. Possibly the tip of a votive leaf plaque.

4. Figural objectsRalph Jackson

4.1. Senuna figurine, BGF 03, SF 49, [103] (= 2002 T215(2)), Phase 4/5The inscribed silver pedestal for the figurine of Senuna. See A1a (Chapter 4).

4.2. Apollo figurine, BGF 03, SF 106, [128], Phase 6 (Figs 307, 314) Ht 138.4mm, W. 76.3mm, Wt 241.96gA pipeclay figurine of Apollo, cast in a two-piece mould and luted together, complete except for the head, feet and pedestal. The god stands, semi-nude, the weight of his body resting on his left leg, his right leg crossed in front. His left arm is flexed to enable the hand to support the top of his kithara, which rests on a high, slender, fluted column (cippus) with simply moulded capital. His clearly defined right arm rests at his side with the hand against the groin, holding an arrow-shaped plectrum between thumb and forefinger. The anatomy and musculature are carefully rendered, with prominent breasts, dimpled navel, slightly protruding belly, understated genitals and the fingers of both hands depicted. The himation is draped over the left shoulder and covers the left side of the back, its rolled margin passing obliquely across the front and back of the body, leaving naked the torso, the right arm, right thigh, right buttock and the right side of the back. The heaviness of the garment, which extends to the feet, is apparent in the treatment of the intertwined and overlapping folds but still reveals the major underlying anatomy. The kithara is of a distinctive and unusual form. Its sound box is flat and smooth, with a slightly convex outer edge. The prominently depicted seven strings taper quite acutely downwards to give a distinctly triangular appearance to the instrument. The globular tuning pins on the pin block that secured the tops of the strings are also clearly shown, though two are concealed by the god’s fingers. The clay is hard and creamy white and the surface smooth, though the front torso appears slightly eroded. Areas of paring and trimming of the surface before firing, especially at the luted sides and back, are visible, and tiny raised globules, the distinctive feature of production in gypsum-plaster moulds, are present in many places, and are especially well preserved in folds and hollows.

Apollo figurines are not common in Roman Britain. Broadly similar moulded pipeclay examples made in Central Gaul have been found at Bedford and Hacheston, Suffolk

veining. A downward return below the lower left vein forms an open triangle and the adjacent midrib is doubled, suggesting a slightly more complex design in the missing part of the plaque below that point.

Scientific analysis (file number PR 7443) indicated that the plaque was probably tinned and its front face polished prior to the addition of the embossed and incised decoration.

3.4. Leaf plaque, BGF 06, SF 1352, MD topsoil find: backfill (Figs 305–6) Ht 28.7mm, Wt 1.7gA small fragment of copper-alloy sheet with converging sides broken at top and bottom. The simple leaf-marked decoration, formed by embossed ‘corded’ ridges emphasized by lightly incised lines, consists of a central midrib flanked by leaf-veining. The midrib stops before the upper (narrower) end, implying that the finial tip was plain. In form, dimensions and patina this fragment is identical to fragment Cat. 3.3 and although no join can be made it is evident that this is part of the upper part of that plaque fragment.

For copper-alloy plaques with similar simple embossed decoration from the temple sites at West Hill, Uley, Great Chesterford and Leylands Farm, Hockwold cum Wilton see Gurney 1986, 69–70, fig. 43, no. 48; Woodward and Leach 1993, 104–5, fig. 92, no. 1; Major 2011, 264–7, fig. 17.3, T3–T14.

3.5. Leaf plaque?, BGF 03, SF 122, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 305) L. 42.3mm, Wt 1.44gA fragment of thin copper-alloy sheet folded longitudinally and broken at both ends. The central fold follows a scored line and there are embossed angled lines on both sides, suggesting that this is a broken and crushed votive plaque with a central midrib and flanking leaf-veining.

3.6. Plaque?, BGF 05, SF 980, [320] (under [334]), Phase 3/4 W. 29.4mm, Ht 25.9mm, Wt 1.43g

3.1

3.3

3.4

3.2

0 3cm

Figure 306 Silver and copper-alloy votive leaf plaques (Cat. 3.1–3.3). Scale 1:1


(Blagg et al. 2004, 140–1, pl. xiii, fig. 100), but the Ashwell Apollo was not a product of Central Gaul. It is most closely paralleled by an example from Arentsburg, Netherlands: they are of identical form and size and it is likely that they are products of the same mould (van Boekel 1987, 257–8, no. 4). They are from the Rhine-Mosel manufactories, and as van Boekel attributes the Arentsburg example to the modeller Servandus from Cologne we can cautiously suggest the same origin for the Ashwell Apollo. It is likely that the missing pedestal was in the shape of a cube and it was probably inscribed with Servandus’ name, as were others of his figurines. Servandus is a common name so it is no more than coincidence that two of the Ashwell silver votive plaques to Senuna were dedicated by a man of that name (A21, A23, Chapter 4). 2nd century ad.

4.3. Mercury figurine, BGF 03, SF 90, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 308, 315) Ht 86.9mm, W. 81.2mm, Wt 68.81gFive fragments, four of which join, from a very large and accomplished moulded pipeclay figurine of Mercury wearing a chlamys. The four joining fragments are part of the anterior face of the figurine, which would have been luted by its rear edges to the posterior face. They comprise much of the front drapery, part of the neck and the bare upper left arm, including the inner crease of the flexed elbow. The fifth fragment is from the posterior face and shows part of the rear drapery. All the breaks are ancient, implying fragmentation in antiquity, and a spall at the main point of breakage in the centre of the chest may be the scar of a deliberate blow. The clay is hard and white and the surface very smooth and finely burnished particularly on the carefully finished areas of exposed flesh. A shaded grey discoloration of the surface of the drapery on both anterior and posterior fragments is

Figure 307 Pipeclay figurine of Apollo (Cat. 4.2)

Figure 308 Pipeclay figurine of Mercury (Cat. 4.3)

indicative of burning. The inner face preserves clear traces of manufacture prior to firing – impressions of fingertips and fingerprints in the removal of excess clay.

With an original height of about 250mm, even without the pedestal, the Ashwell Mercury would have been a very striking figure, an imposing and high-quality figurine. Though unparalleled in its form and scale, it is similar to Rouvier-Jeanlin’s Mercury Type I, Group D, which portrays the god with purse but without caduceus, and closest to her nos 487 and 490, both from the Allier valley at Saint-

264 | Dea Senuna

edge of held drapery, next to the figure’s left foot. The clay is creamy-white with a smooth surface and fingerprint-smoothing in several places. There is no trace of pigments.

Another Venus figurine of the same type and origin as Cat. 4.4. 1st–2nd century ad.

4.6. Venus figurine, BGF 03, SF 209, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 309, 316) Ht 63.2mm, W. 40.6mm, Wt 24.24gA fragment of the posterior face of a moulded pipeclay figurine of Venus. It consists of the goddess’s lower back, buttocks, the back of her thighs and part of her lower left arm, below and behind which, in the normal position for this type of figurine, is part of the quite large circular air hole for casting. The clay is creamy-white and very similar to that of pedestal Cat. 4.5 to which it might belong. The surface is very smooth and finely burnished in those few places where it has not been eroded. No pigment remains.

Like Cat. 4.4 & 4.5, this fragment is probably an example of Rouvier-Jeanlin’s Type II Venus figurine. Complete and near-complete British examples include one from Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986, 168–9, fig. 73, no. 688), one from Wroxeter in an early 2nd-century ad context (Bushe-Fox 1913, 31, pl. xi, 1), three from a richly furnished child’s burial in London’s Eastern cemetery (Barber and Bowsher 2000, 186–9, B392.9–11) and one from the Sanctuary site at Springhead, Kent (Biddulph et al. 2011, 379–80, fig. 147). Recently, with reference to a fragmentary example from Binchester Roman fort, County Durham, attention has been drawn to the possibility of deliberate ‘trimming’ of broken pipeclay Venus figurines before deposition, perhaps to create a form of anatomical votive with likely links to childbirth and fertility (Ferris 2014). However, although the Ashwell fragment preserves much the same portion of the figurine as that from Binchester, there is no specific trace of deliberate cutting of the upper and lower edges as there is on the Binchester fragment. 1st–2nd century ad.

4.7. Venus figurine, BGF 03, SF 1402, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 309, 316) Ht 28.2mm, W. 31.3mm, Wt 4.70gA small fragment of the posterior face of a moulded pipeclay Venus figurine, consisting of the lower legs (lacking feet) and the lower part of the overlapping folds of the held drapery to the left of the left leg. The clay is white. No pigment survives.

Another fragment of Rouvier-Jeanlin’s Type I or II Venus figurine (compare, e.g., Rouvier-Jeanlin 1972, no. 31). A near-identical fragment was found in a 1st-century ad drain at the Cattle Market site, Chichester (Down 1989, 213, fig. 27.15, no. 3). 1st–2nd century ad.

4.8. Comic figurine, BGF 03, SF 160, [203] (= 2002 T215(5)), Phase 5 (Figs 310–11, 317) Ht 52.7mm, W. 47.3mm, Wt 34.22gA hollow pipeclay head of a grotesquely caricatured elderly man, broken obliquely at the neck. The high crown is bald, with a small scar above the right temple, and the hair restricted to a prominent tuft brushed forward above the ears; the right ear is disproportionately large and outward-projecting; the triple-wrinkled forehead and eyebrows are

Pourçain-sur-Besbre (Rouvier-Jeanlin 1972, 209–10). Both of those examples – one an anterior, the other a posterior fragment –also lack their head and lower legs but share the same style of drapery with the Ashwell Mercury – a chlamys slung over one shoulder and fastened at the other, leaving part of the chest and the rest of the body naked. At the front is a descending series of lightly drooped horizontal folds, at the back a series of V-shaped folds. The principal difference is a reversal of the imagery: on the French examples the left arm is covered, the right arm bare and flexed at the elbow to allow the god to hold a purse in his right hand; on the Ashwell example it is the left arm that is bare and flexed and the right arm covered. 1st–2nd century ad.

4.4. Venus figurine, BGF 03, SF 1404, [110], Phase 5/6; and SF 210, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 309, 316) Ht 36.9mm, Diam. 43.1mm, Wt 26.70gA fragmentary plain, domed, circular pipeclay pedestal, luted to the base of a figurine, in three joining pieces. Both the anterior and posterior faces of the base of the moulded figure are preserved. All that survives of the standing female figure are the two bare lower calves, ankles and feet, which are placed closely together, and the lower edge of held drapery, next to the figure’s left foot. The feet are quite rudimentarily finished, with a blemish across the right foot. The clay is cream-coloured with a smooth surface. No trace of pigment survives.

This is the distinctive base of a Venus figurine, another product of the Allier valley of Central Gaul, and one of the most popular types of pipeclay figurine in Roman Britain. It would have shown the goddess in traditional pose, standing, nude, her right hand raised to adjust her hair, her left hand resting on a draped support.

Cf. Rouvier-Jeanlin 1972, Type I or II, e.g. nos 29, 51, 78. 1st–2nd century ad.

4.5. Venus figurine, BGF 06, SF 1153, [510], Phase 6 (Figs 309, 316) Ht 36.8mm, Diam. 33.5mm, Wt 19.32gA small, plain, domed, circular pipeclay pedestal, luted to the base of a moulded figurine. The posterior face of the base of the figure has broken away at the luted interface. What is preserved is the front face of the figure, comprising the bare lower shins, ankles and feet, together with the lower

Figure 309 Pipeclay figurines of Venus. Upper left Cat. 4.7, lower left Cat. 4.4, centre Cat. 4.5, right Cat. 4.6


not well understood and the function of the Colchester figurines is unknown (Eckardt 1999, 79). Equally impossible to establish is the exact purpose and meaning of the deposition of the Ashwell head. Nevertheless, as part of a placed deposit it was found in association with Cat. 4.13 which may have served as its pedestal. Furthermore, the distinctive physiognomy of the head mirrors that of the images of Silenus which prompts the thought that it may have been selected, venerated and dedicated as such. Mid-1st century ad.

4.9. Figurine fragment, BGF 06, SF 1145, [510], Phase 6 (Figs 313, 316) L. 47.9mm, W. 24.4mm, Wt 10.56gUncertain figural fragment, probably from an animal figurine, perhaps part of the neck of a hen, cf. van Boekel 1987, 748, no. 236. The clay is creamy-white with a smooth shiny surface.

4.10. Figurine fragment, BGF 06, SF 1162, [505], Phase 6 (Figs 313, 316) 30.0 × 25.9mm, Wt 6.65gUncertain figural fragment, perhaps a haunch from an animal figurine. The clay is white with a shiny surface.

4.11. Figurine fragment, BGF 06, SF 1161, [500], Phase 8 24.5 × 20.5mm, Wt 2.14gA tiny plain curved figural or pedestal fragment, all edges broken. The clay is white with a smooth shiny surface.

4.12. Pedestal for figurine, BGF 03, SF 127, [128], Phase 6 (Figs 311, 317) L. 71.5mm (orig.c. 86.5mm), W. 54.1mm, Ht 32.8mm, Wt 53.14gTwo joining fragments of a hollow rectangular pipeclay pedestal, with plain walls and a simple base moulding. Along all three surviving margins of the slightly convex, slightly overhanging upper face (44 × c. 62mm) are the scars left by the detachment of the base of the figurine, which had been luted to the pedestal. A small rectangular air hole was punched through the upper face before the firing of the assembled figurine. The construction is simple and the finish quite rudimentary; the clay is creamy-white with many manufacture marks on the surface; the break is ancient;

raised high above the wide oval eyes with bulging eyeballs; the nose is large with broad fleshy nostrils; the cheeks are hollowed, especially the right cheek; the pointed beard is schematically rendered with gashed angled striations on the lower cheeks and chin; and the mouth, below the full upper lip, is a gaping slot-like open perforation as though the man is speaking. At the back an oval scar indicates that the head was broken away at the point where it had been luted on to the neck of the figurine. An enigmatic series of small ferrous blobs encircles the scar. It is unclear whether they represent simply a naturally occurring post-depositional concretion or perhaps the corrosion products of a now-perished iron stand, or similar, on which the detached head had been placed.

The head, made in a Central Gaulish workshop, was once part of a full-length pipeclay figurine of an elderly man, reclining, as though on a couch. The figurines were made from several part-moulds for assembly prior to firing, and the point of attachment of the separately moulded heads was evidently susceptible to breakage. Similar detached heads include one from Vichy, France, where moulds for the figurine components have also been found (Rouvier-Jeanlin 1972, 318, no. 942 and 238–9, nos 577–8), and a much closer parallel possibly from Nijmegen, Netherlands (van Boekel 1987, 597, 606–7, no. 147). But a significantly more spectacular survival is the group of ten comic pipeclay figurines in the so-called ‘Child’s Grave’ from Colchester (Toynbee 1962, no. 143, pl. 172; van Boekel 1987, 597–602, figs 114–16; Eckardt 1999, 61–5, pls x–xii). Within that group the Ashwell head is most closely paralleled by the heads of the five seated toga-clad figures, who lean forwards to read from a scroll on a tray, and those of two of the reclining figures. In fact, it is probable that the Ashwell head belonged to a figurine that directly matched one of those reclining figures (Eckardt 1999, 7/1134), for the small raised scar on the crown above the right eye of the Ashwell head precisely corresponds to the point of contact of the hand of the Colchester recliner who is scratching his head (Toynbee 1962, pl. 172, bottom right). The image of the old fool, with coarse exaggerated features, is a stock figure in classical art and Roman comedy, and the pipeclay versions appear to be either satirical caricatures of learned men, whether philosophers, teachers or lectores, or burlesques of reciters or mime-players performing at a banquet. Although Roman clay figurines are associated with ritual and burials they are

Figure 310 Pipeclay head of comic figurine Cat. 4.8

266 | Dea Senuna

Two joining fragments of white marble, perhaps part of a plinth, with a pecked and partially ground flat ‘underside’ and a more smoothly finished undulating convex ‘upper’ surface. One corner is intact; at the second corner the surface is rounded; and a slight surface flange at the top of the major broken edge opposite is suggestive of a former vertical sculpted element.

4.15. Silenus mount, BGF 04, SF 512, [302], Phase 7 (Figs 312, 318) Ht 36.1mm, orig.Diam. c. 46mm, spike L. c. 21mm, Wt 18.69gA circular medallion-like copper-alloy mount with central high-relief image of the head of Silenus. The immortal companion and wise teacher of Dionysus is shown in characteristic and distinctive guise, with satyr ears, balding head with prominent locks flanking the forehead, slightly bulbous eyes (the eyebrows, eyelids and pupils all accurately rendered), broad fleshy nose, and mouth framed by a large curly moustache and luxuriant beard. The originally flat rim has a series of incised concentric rings within a neat edge-moulding. The mount appears to have been fastened by means of a stout central rearward spike, its tapered bent end detached but deposited in association with the mount. Around the base of the spike are the remains of a white metal (presumably lead/lead-alloy) packing. The broken rim appears to have been selectively cut/torn in order to frame the head, for the surviving arc of the rim, bent inwards, forms a symmetrical crescent above the head. In addition to the trimming and bending, presumably after removal of the mount from its original fixing, a heavy hammer blow has left an elongated oval dent above Silenus’ brow, symmetrically disposed between his forehead sidelocks.

This type of medallion-like mount, at least some instances of which were probably decorative fittings for wooden caskets or chests, lent itself well to incorporating a central bust. Similar-size examples are widespread and

there is no trace of pigment. Although part of the same placed deposit as the figurine of Apollo (Cat. 4.2) the pedestal does not belong to that figure. Nor does it belong to the figurine of Mercury (Cat. 4.3). It is probable that it was part of another Central Gaulish figurine.

4.13. Pedestal?, BGF 03, SF 167, [203] (= 2002 T215(5)), Phase 5 (Figs 311, 317) L. 41.2mm, W. 38.4mm, Th. 25.7mm, Wt 37.95gA thick ceramic fragment, probably part of a tile, with original planar faces and one original edge. A slender, smooth, U-sectioned groove runs along one of the broken sides. The clay is creamy-buff with red grog inclusions visible in the broken edges. The original and subsequent uses of this object are not clear, but the juxtaposition with the pipeclay comic figurine head Cat. 4.8 raises the possibility that it was a makeshift pedestal for that object.

4.14. Statuary?, BGF 05, SF 939 & 946, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 L. 90.7mm, W. 76.1mm, Ht 29.4mm, Wt 318.53g

Figure 311 Pipeclay head and pedestals. Top Cat 4.8, lower left Cat 4.13, lower right Cat. 4.12

Figure 312 Copper-alloy Silenus and phallic mounts and bull appliqué. Upper left Cat. 4.15, lower left Cat. 4.16, centre Cat. 4.17, upper right Cat. 4.18, lower right Cat. 4.19


(Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 94–127, nos S329, S337, 291, 289, S333, 290, S325, S336, 295, S330, S321, S331, S335 & S344). 1st–2nd century ad.

4.18. Bull appliqué, BGF 06, SF 1105, [314], Phase 6 (Figs 312, 318) L. 89.8mm, Wt 89.73gA solid-cast copper-alloy appliqué depicting a striding bull, with downward-tilted head and upward-looped tail. This was clearly a very accomplished piece of relief sculpture with well-observed and finely rendered anatomical detail but the surface has been badly affected by corrosion, in addition to which the horns, lower limbs and looped tail are all broken/corroded away. The flat back preserves patches of a grey-coloured deposit, identified as a lead-rich material by scientific analysis, which is probably the decayed remains of a soft solder – there is no other means of attachment of the object.

For a parallel mount of similar size in the form of a reclining bull, from Calbourne, Isle of Wight, dated to the 1st century ad, see Johns 2011, 182–3 and Worrell and Pearce 2011, 429–30, fig. 25. For similar animal appliqués (lion, ewe, scorpion) from a temple find at Angleur, Belgium see Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 234–5, GF10, fig. 184.

Figurines of bulls in the round occur in some numbers at Augst, in contexts regarded as probably belonging to household lararia (ibid., 95–7, no. 92, 103–6, no. 91, 110–12, S49) and an example was found with a lararium group at Sybaris, Italy (ibid., 299, GF102, fig. 263).

4.19. Figured appliqué, BGF 03, SF 171, [203] (= 2002 T215(5)), Phase 5 (Figs 312, 318) L. 68.2mm, Ht 12.8mm, Wt 20.39gA cast, near-parallel-sided copper-alloy panel, with a plain, flat, rear face, complete at one end, broken at the other and with its lower edge intact. The upper edge is also intact but some low-relief figured work has broken away. The surviving fragments are two broken hooves, probably the rear hooves of a bull. The panel below is decorated with a very finely applied repeating motif set in a cambered and channelled cordon. The motif, probably a highly stylized vine spray,

include a Jupiter head from Nijmegen, Netherlands (Zadoks-Josephus Jitta 1973, 74, no. 124) and a Medusa mount from a 2nd- to 3rd-century ad destruction deposit at a villa at Brabant Flamand, Belgium (Sas and Thoen 2002, 266–7, cat. 283a). Close parallels, with slightly less accomplished Silenus heads, include one from Richborough (Bushe-Fox 1949, 142, pl. xlvi, 175) and two from Augst, Switzerland (Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 115–16, S150, 93–4, S151).

4.16. Silenus mount, BGF 04, SF 546, spoilheap (Figs 312, 318) Ht 22.2mm, spike L. 7.5mm, Wt 2.59gA small tear-shaped copper-alloy mount, probably a decorative stud for a wooden casket or box, in the form of a low-relief profile of the head of Silenus. This is accomplished work in miniature showing clearly Silenus’ distinctive facial features – a prominent bulbous balding head, a sidelock above his pointed satyr ear, a heavy-lidded eye, a flared nose, slightly parted lips and full curly beard. From the centre of the slightly hollowed back a short tapered fastening spike projects.

Near-identical examples from Britain include two from ‘near Colchester’ (Bonhams Antiquities,Thursday 21 April 2005, Sale no. 11597, p. 129, Lot 297) and one, with disc backing plate, from Hampshire. For a stud of similar size and form, but with a frontal image of the head of Pan, from a 1st-century ad context at Lion Walk, Colchester, see Crummy 1983, 118, fig. 122, no. 3222. The purpose of such mounts is not known, but similar small studs with a single fastening spike often take the form of Amor or Bacchus masks or lion heads, the latter occasionally associated with boxes or caskets (see, e.g. Zadoks-Josephus Jitta 1973, 69, nos 115–17 and 99, nos 174–86).

4.17. Phallic mount, BGF 06, SF 1207, [541], Phase 3 (Figs 312, 318) L. 21.6mm, Wt 1.33gA small flat-backed copper-alloy mount in the form of a corrugated phallus with notched glans. At the base of the seven transverse ribs is a pair of angled notches flanked by the simple globular testicles. One of the two rearward fastening spikes is broken.

Probably a belt or strap fitting selected for its amuletic properties especially in averting the malign influence of the Evil Eye. For a set of three identical examples (which could even have derived from the same mould as that used for the Ashwell mount), found in a pit also containing an assemblage of late 1st- to early 2nd-century pottery, including a grey ware face pot, within the site of the small town at Pakenham, Suffolk, see Plouviez 2005, 159–61, figs 2–3. For a similar ribbed phallic mount from the fort at Zugmantel, Germany, and a range of other phallic mounts and amulets from military contexts see Oldenstein 1977, pl. 42, esp. no. 412. For a slightly longer ribbed example, described as a brooch lacking its pin, from the limes region in Belgium or France, see Sas and Thoen 2002, 265, cat. 280. As an indicator of the importance and popularity of the phallus as an amulet, in civilian as well as military settings, see the widespread distribution of bronze examples throughout the Roman town of Augusta Raurica (Augst)

Figure 313 Pipeclay figurine fragments and pottery face mask. Upper left Cat 4.9, lower left Cat. 4.10, right Cat. 4.20

268 | Dea Senuna

smooth, thick, pinkish cream slip. Matt dark brown slip was used to paint in the pupils, the mouth and the hair. The interior surface was left unfinished leaving the thumb depressions made by the potter while impressing the mould in situ on the neck.

In antiquity the mask had been trimmed from the neck around the edge of the face as a single sherd but was later broken horizontally so losing the forehead, hair and headdress. The surviving features were skilfully portrayed in relief in classical style with nicely rounded cheeks and chin. The eyes have upper eyelids and pupils, the nose (now damaged) is to scale, the mouth is naturally shaped and lightly closed and some hair covers the position of the ears.

The form and style of the face together with the fabric, suggest that it belongs to Dövener’s ‘Colchester-Gruppe’, Typus A (Dövener 2000, 99–141). To date there is no archaeological evidence for the manufacture of this particular group of face flasks around Colchester but their relative consistency of form and fabric suggests that possibility (ibid., 99–101). Examination of a selection of examples found at Colchester identified a close parallel in the form of an entire rim and neck circuit complete with headdress and ‘pseudo-handle (May 1930, 167, text figure 4, inv. no. 702.04; see also pl. xli, 138). In contrast to the

closely resembles that on the decorative cambered mouldings of some statuette pedestals (e.g. Kaufmann-Heinimann 1998, 221, fig. 167). It appears, therefore, that the panel is the base of an animal-figured appliqué, the low-relief equivalent of pedestalled bull figurines like that in a lararium group from Scafati, Italy (ibid., 226, GF47, fig. 174). In the configuration and dimensions of the hooves it is even possible that the panel was once part of the bull appliqué Cat. 4.18.

4.20. Face mask, BGF 03, Trench 1, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 313, 318) Ht 46.5mm, W. 57.3mm, Wt 37.10g Valery RigbyPart of a hollow moulded pottery face mask which originally ornamented the rim and neck of a flask; it survives from the eyeline to below the chin. The overall date for the manufacture of face flasks in Britain is mid 3rd to late 4th century ad depending on the working life of the identified kiln site.

In the hand the fabric is an iron-rich fairly coarse quartz sand-tempered ware fired in an oxidizing atmosphere to orange with a thin grey core at the face where additional clay had been luted into place. Finally it was coated with a

0 5cm

4.2

Figure 314 Pipeclay figurine of Apollo (Cat. 4.2)


including Colchester, showing evidence that they were trimmed to complete oval discs in antiquity (Symonds and Wade 1999, figs 5.39, 63; 5.46, 63; 5.56, 155–7). Such faces may have been kept as ritual objects, as lucky charms or as decorative items for those who could not afford to acquire a complete flask.

Ashwell face, which is hollow and with an uneven inner surface, the interior of the Colchester parallel has been smoothed and evenly finished so making it easier to pour out the liquid. Judging from the fabric and finish they were certainly not manufactured in the lower Nene valley.

Many similar masks survive on other settlements,

0 5cm

4.3

Figure 315 Pipeclay figurine of Mercury (Cat. 4.3)

270 | Dea Senuna

Figure 316 Pipeclay Venus figurine and other fragments (Cat. 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.9, 4.10)

0 5cm

4.7

4.4

4.9

4.10

4.5

4.6


0 5cm

4.8

4.13

4.12

Figure 317 Pipeclay and pottery objects (Cat. 4.8, 4.12, 4.13)

272 | Dea Senuna

4.16 4.17

4.18

4.19

4.15

0 3cm

4.20

Figure 318 Copper-alloy and pottery figural objects (Cat. 4.15–4.20). Scale 1:1


near the middle, neither end certainly intact. On the front face are three small recessed rectangular panels, one of which retains remnants of its enamel inlay – a central white-coloured strip with circular focus, now empty (presumably for a further inlay of contrasting colour), flanked (one side mostly lost) by strips of a greyish (originally green?) inlay.

5.7. Brooch, BGF 03, SF 1411, Trench 2, unstratified (Fig. 323) L. 26.8mm, Wt 4.12gA copper-alloy rosette brooch, the upper part only, with the spring remaining in the spring-cover, which has been crushed. The disc has simple perimeter mouldings and a central hole for a stud to secure a (now lacking) repoussé sheet.

Mackreth’s Rosette Type 8.b (Mackreth 2011, I, 31–2, II, pl. 18). 1st century ad. Mackreth’s date range is c. 30–65 ad and he notes a dominance of the type in Essex and Hertfordshire.

5.8. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 864, [362], Phase 2/3 L. 21.7mm, W. 11.5mm, Wt 1.86gThe copper-alloy reeded fan-shaped broken foot of a rosette brooch. The partially crushed catchplate has a central small circular perforation.Probably a broken example of Mackreth’s Rosette Type 4b (Mackreth 2011, I, 29, II, pl. 17, 5879). 1st century ad.

5.9. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 580, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Figs 320, 330) L. 57.9mm, Wt 6.88gA plain copper-alloy Colchester brooch, lacking only the pin, half of the spring and part of the rim of the pin groove. The wings are short, the bow plump and rounded, and the catchplate pierced by a group of three rectangular cut-outs.

Mackreth’s standard British Colchester Type 2b (Mackreth 2011, I, 36–8, II, pl. 22, 211). 1st century ad.

5.10. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 752, [302], Phase 7 (Figs 285, 320) L. 52.9mm, Wt 9.42gA plain copper-alloy Colchester brooch, with short wings and plump rounded bow, complete except for the catchplate, much of which is broken away, probably across one or more

5. PersonaliaRalph Jackson

5.1. Bracelet, BGF 04, SF 549, [313], Phase 8 (Fig. 319) L. 51.9mm, Wt 14.90gCopper alloy. One terminal and part of the hoop survive. The vase-shaped (or poppy-head) terminal has a central dimple in its end face. The remaining part of the subcircular-sectioned hoop appears to have been opened out or straightened.

For similar bracelet types in 1st-century ad votive and cult contexts at sites in Belgium see Sas and Thoen 2002, 172–3, nos 85–7.

5.2. Bracelet, BGF 04, SF 572, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 319) Diam. c. 47.9mm, Wt 2.16gA plain penannular copper-alloy wire bracelet. One end of the hoop is turned back to form an eye; the other end of the hoop, now distorted and broken just beyond an angular in-turn, doubtless had a hooked terminal to engage in the eye.

5.3. Bracelet?, BGF 06, SF 1321, [616], Phase 2 L. 53.2mm, W. 4.3mm, Wt 2.57gA slender plain copper-alloy rod of oval cross section distorted at two points and broken at one end. The complete end has a simple slightly expanded plain terminal. Probably a broken penannular bracelet.

5.4. Bracelet?, BGF 03, SF 21, [101], Phase 5/6/7 L. 45.9mm, W. 4.6mm, Wt 4.72g

5.5. Bracelet?, BGF 06, SF 1149, [506], Phase 6. L. 60.3mm, W. 3.1mm, Wt 3.40gThese two fragments of smoothly curved plain copper-alloy rod of oval cross section, broken at both ends, may be from the hoops of simple bracelets.

5.6. Bracelet? or fitting?, BGF 05, SF 731, [341], Phase 3 (Fig. 319) L. 47.7mm, Wt 5.59gA slender parallel-sided copper-alloy strip, bent and bowed

Figure 319 Copper-alloy bracelets. Left Cat. 5.2, upper right Cat 5.1, lower right Cat. 5.6

Figure 320 Copper-alloy Colchester brooches. Left to right, upper Cat 5.9, 5.10, 5.11, 5.12, lower Cat. 5.13, 5.14, 5.15, 5.16, 5.17

274 | Dea Senuna

Mackreth’s Late-Small Colchester, Type 7.ab (Mackreth 2011, I, 44, II, pl. 26, 11923). 1st century ad.

5.15. Brooch, BGF 03, SF 60, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 284–5, 320) L. 24.3mm, Wt 2.04gA tiny, complete copper-alloy Colchester brooch, one side of the spring coil deliberately bent in and down. The external chord of the bilateral spring is held by a forward-facing hook, the spring is covered by short wings with grooved mouldings, the bow has a simple central groove and the catchplate has a central circular perforation surrounded on its outer face by rocked scorper/graver decoration.

Another Late-Small Colchester, Type 7.ab (Mackreth 2011, I, 44, II, pl. 26, 727 and 11923). 1st century ad.

5.16. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 952, [354], Phase 5 (Figs 284, 320, 330) L. 26.5mm, W. 13.7mm, Wt 2.31gA tiny, complete copper-alloy Colchester brooch. The external chord of the bilateral spring is held by a forward-facing hook, the spring is partly covered by vestigial wings, the bow has a plain outer facet and the catchplate has a pair of tiny circular perforations.

Mackreth’s Late-Small Colchester, Type 7.ac (Mackreth 2011, I, 44, II, pl. 27, 747). 1st century ad.

5.17. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 942, [394], Phase 3 (Fig. 320) L. 33.5mm, Wt 3.72gA small copper-alloy Colchester brooch lacking its spring and pin, its forward-facing hook and catchplate damaged. The vestigial wings have grooved mouldings. One wing has been bent back against the plain rounded bow. It is not possible to determine whether the catchplate was perforated.

Mackreth’s Late-Small Colchester, Type 7 (Mackreth 2011, I, 44, II, pl. 26, 11922–3). 1st century ad.

5.18. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 767, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 321) L. 48.1mm, Wt 3.02gA copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch lacking the spring and pin. The carefully finished, narrow, flat bow is plain with squared sides.

Mackreth’s ‘utterly plain’ Nauheim-derivative Type 3.b2 (Mackreth 2011, I, 16–17, II, pl. 8). 1st century ad.

piercings. The foot of the bow, spring coil and pin have been distorted.

Another standard British Colchester (Mackreth 2011, I, 36–8, II, pl. 22). 1st century ad.

5.11. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 760, unstratified (Fig. 320) L. 60.5mm, Wt 4.58gA plain copper-alloy Colchester brooch lacking its pin, spring, tip of the forward-facing hook and tip of the catchplate. The wings are tiny and irregular, the slightly sinuous bow is D-sectioned and the catchplate is long and slender with a quite rudimentarily made single central triangular perforation.

Another standard British Colchester (Mackreth 2011, I, 36–8, II, pl. 22). 1st century ad.

5.12. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1233, [557], Phase 2 (Fig. 320) L. 44.8mm, Wt 3.21gA plain copper-alloy Colchester brooch complete except for the tip of the pin. The pin, half of the spring and the catchplate flange are distorted. The wings are vestigial, the slightly sinuous hexagonal-sectioned bow has a plain central facet and terminates in an expanded foot and the triangular catchplate has three quite rudimentarily made tiny perforations, two circular, one rectangular.

Another standard British Colchester (Mackreth 2011, I, 36–9, II, pls 22–3). 1st century ad.

5.13. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 702, Unstratified (Fig. 320) L. 30.6mm, Wt 6.74gA copper-alloy Colchester brooch lacking its foot and catchplate. The D-sectioned bow is plain; the external chord of the bilateral spring is held by a forward-facing hook which terminates in an expanded circular disc, the spring is covered by wings with fluted mouldings and the pin is bent, its tip probably missing.

Mackreth’s Colchester Type 4d (Mackreth 2011, I, 41, II, pls 24–5). 1st century ad.

5.14. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 900, [372], Phase 5 (Fig. 320) L. 32.7mm, Wt 3.53gA small copper-alloy Colchester brooch lacking only the lower part of the pin. Damage to one side of the spring coil is probably recent. The external chord of the bilateral spring is held by a forward-facing hook which extends over the head of the plain bow, the spring is covered by wings with neatly grooved mouldings and the catchplate has two circular perforations revealed by X-radiography.

Figure 321 Copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooches. Left to right Cat. 5.18, 5.20, 5.21, 5.22, 5.23

Figure 322 Copper-alloy Colchester-derivative brooches. Left to right, upper Cat. 5.32, 5.33, 5.34, 5.35, lower Cat. 5.36, 5.37, 5.38, 5.39


A copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch, with very slender bow, lacking the foot, pin and one half of the four-coil spring.

Probably another Nauheim-derivative Type 3.b3 (Mackreth 2011, I, 17–18, II, pls 8–9). 1st century ad.

5.27. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 889, [365], Phase 4/5 L. 19.1mm, Wt 1.69gA copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch, the upper bow and four-coil spring only surviving.


5.28. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1159, [515], Phase 9 L. (distorted) 22.9mm, Wt 0.66gA tiny fragmentary copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch. The very slender slightly tapered bow, of rounded rectangular cross section, is distorted and broken at the recurved junction with the spring, which is lacking. The distorted catchplate lacks its flange.

Another Nauheim-derivative Type 3.b3 (Mackreth 2011, I, 17–18, II, pls 8–9).

5.29. Brooch, BGF 03, SF 195, [201], Phase 5/6 L. 32.9mm, Wt 1.75gA fragmentary copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch. The slender tapered bow, with distinctive angular head, is broken at the recurved junction with the spring. At the lower end it is broken at the point where it starts to splay to form the catchplate.


5.30. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 605, [324], Phase 5/6 (Figs 323, 330) L. 46.1mm, Wt 2.26gA copper-alloy Aucissa brooch intact except for the tip of the hinged pin. A tiny cut-out is preserved on one side of the plain headplate. The slender and very thin bow has a central raised slightly knurled ridge flanked by flutes and a border knurled ridge. There is a transverse groove at the junction with the foot which ends in a tiny moulded knob.

Mackreth’s Uninscribed Aucissa, Type 2.b (Mackreth 2011, I, 132–3, II, pl. 90, 8687). 1st century ad. Mackreth suggests an end date of c. ad 60/65 for the type.

5.19. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 849, [311], Phase 6 L. c. 40mm, Wt 2.33gA small copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch, with four-coil spring, in fragments. The very narrow flat bow is plain with squared sides.

Another Nauheim-derivative Type 3.b2 (Mackreth 2011, I, 16–17, II, pl. 8). 1st century ad.

5.20. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 588, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 321) L. 42.9mm, Wt 3.24gA copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch, with four-coil spring and narrow D-sectioned bow, lacking only the tip and flange of the catchplate.

Mackreth’s Nauheim-derivative Type 3.b3 (Mackreth 2011, I, 17–18, II, pl. 8). 1st century ad.

5.21. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 606, [324], Phase 5/6 (Figs 321, 330) L. 42.2mm, Wt 3.06gA copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch, with four-coil spring and narrow D-sectioned bow, lacking only the tip of the catchplate.


5.22. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 609, [324], Phase 5/6 (Figs 284, 321) L. 22.8mm, Wt 0.51gA minuscule plain copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch, with four-coil spring and very slender D-sectioned bow, lacking only the tip of the catchplate.

Another Nauheim-derivative Type 3.b3 (Mackreth 2011, I, 17–18, II, pl. 9, 4372). 1st century ad.

5.23. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1300, [597], Phase 5 (Fig. 321) L. 46.8mm, Wt 3.30gA copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch with narrow D-sectioned bow lacking only the pin and one side of the four-coil spring.


5.24. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 907, [364], Phase 6 L. 33.8mm, Wt 1.72gA copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch, with four-coil spring and small, very slender bow, lacking only the pin and edge of the catchplate.

Another Nauheim-derivative Type 3.b3 (Mackreth 2011, I, 17–18, II, pls 8–9). 1st century ad.

5.25. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1266, [556], Phase 5 L. 31.1mm, Wt 0.68gA copper-alloy Nauheim-derivative brooch, with slender rectangular-sectioned bow, lacking the pin, one half of the four-coil spring and most of the catchplate.

Another Nauheim-derivative Type 3.b3 (Mackreth 2011, I, 17–18, II, pls 8–9). 1st century ad.

5.26. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1288, [339], Phase 4/5 L. 27.3mm, Wt 1.23g

Figure 323 Copper-alloy rosette, Aucissa and Hod Hill brooches. Left to right, upper Cat. 5.7, 5.30, 5.31, lower Cat. 5.40, 5.41, 5.42, 5.43

276 | Dea Senuna

held in the crest-like false hook with stepped end. The wings are small and plain, but too little of the bow survives to determine its form.

Mackreth’s Colchester-derivative Harlow, Type 1.a (Mackreth 2011, I, 50–2, II, pl. 31). 1st century ad.

5.35. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1349, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Figs 285, 322) L. 38.1mm, Wt 3.95gA small copper-alloy Colchester-derivative brooch lacking the lower bow and catchplate and one half of the bilateral spring. It has plain curved wings, a prominent angular head and a low fake hook which tails on to a flat face with a line of walked-graver decoration flanked by concave surfaces with squared sides. The pin is complete though it is turned to one side and its tip is bent.

The clean (ancient) break of the bow together with notches cut into the left wing and upper left side of the bow and the distortion of the pin are suggestive of deliberate defunctionalizing of the brooch.

Another Colchester-derivative Harlow, Type 1.a (Mackreth 2011, I, 51, II, pl. 31). 1st century ad.

5.36. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 510, [302], Phase 7 (Fig. 322) L. 40.9mm, Wt 9.83gThe lower bow, foot and catchplate from a very large copper-alloy Colchester-derivative brooch. The flat-backed bow has a plain raised central rib flanked by concave surfaces. The foot is plain and flat and the catchplate has a flanged top, a group of three triangular and circular piercings and a cut-out for the pin.

Another Colchester-derivative Harlow, Type 1.a, probably 1.a3b (Mackreth 2011, I, 51, II, pl. 31, 1028). 1st century ad.

5.37. Brooch, BGF 03, SF 124, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 322, 330) L. 51.3mm, Wt 14.40gA complete copper-alloy Colchester-derivative brooch with rearhook spring system, its spring coil and pin deliberately distorted and detached. The central element of the flat-sided bow is a recessed corded moulding and the wings terminate in a double groove.

Similar to Mackreth’s Colchester-derivative Rearhook Type 3.b (Mackreth 2011, I, 63, II, pl. 40, 13405). 1st century ad.

5.38. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 593, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Figs 284, 322) L. 25.3mm, Wt 2.17gA tiny copper-alloy Colchester-derivative brooch with rearhook spring system, undistorted and complete except for the tip of the pin and the edge of the catchplate. The extremely short wings and slender bow are plain.

Similar to Mackreth’s Colchester-derivative Rearhook Type 3.k (Mackreth 2011, I, 64–5, II, pl. 40, 13354). 1st century ad.

5.39. Brooch, BGF 03, SF 155, [203] (= 2002 T215(5)), Phase 5 (Figs 322, 330) L. 48.9mm, Wt 8.29g

5.31. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1304, [597], Phase 5 (Figs 285, 323) L. 35.3mm (distorted) Wt 4.84gA copper-alloy Aucissa brooch complete except for the tip of the hinged pin. The headplate has transverse mouldings and a cut-out is preserved on one side. The bow has a central raised ridge flanked by flutes and a border ridge. There is a transverse moulding at the junction with the foot which ends in a moulded knob. The bow has been bent right back on itself so that the back of the catchplate almost touches the back of the head.

Another Uninscribed Aucissa, Type 2.b (Mackreth 2011, I, 132–3, II, pl. 90). 1st century ad.

5.32. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 516, [301], Phase 8 (Fig. 322) L. 42.3mm, W. 17.6mm, Wt 5.75gA copper-alloy Colchester-derivative brooch, its bow intact but slightly distorted and the spring and pin assembly lacking. The wings are plain. The crest-like false hook and bow ridge are worn and the tapered bow, with flat back, has a line of walked-graver decoration on its central flat ridge which is flanked by concave surfaces with squared sides. The foot is plain and flat and the catchplate has an upper pierced circle, a lower modified pierced triangle and a pin-groove.

Mackreth’s Colchester-derivative Harlow, Type 1.a1b (Mackreth 2011, I, 50–1, II, pl. 31, 1118). 1st century ad.

5.33. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 963, [373], Phase 1 (Figs 322, 330) L. 32.6mm, W. 18.1mm, Wt 7.68gA small, stout, intact and finely finished copper-alloy Colchester-derivative brooch. The bilateral spring is covered by curved wings with a simple moulded rim. The crest-like false hook has a stepped end. The bow has a tapered, striated, flat face flanked by concave surfaces with squared sides, the foot is plain and flat and there is a flange across the top of the catchplate with a cut-out for the pin.

Mackreth’s Colchester-derivative Harlow, Type 1.a2 (Mackreth 2011, I, 51, II, pl. 31, 1062). 1st century ad.

5.34. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1333, [339], Phase 4/5 (Fig. 322 L. 17.6mm, W. 18.8mm, Wt 2.67gThe broken upper part of a small copper-alloy Colchester-derivative brooch. Only the chord of the spring survives,

Figure 324 Copper-alloy trumpet and headstud brooches. Left to right Cat. 5.46, 5.45


5.44. Brooch, BGF 03, SF 86, [118], Phase 4 (Fig. 325) L. 21.5mm, W. 13.8mm, Wt 1.84gThe upper part of an iron strip brooch, with its axis bar still present in the rolled-under head, but the pin and most of the bow lacking. One side of the lightly tapered bow is damaged.

An example of Mackreth’s Durotrigan Type 7.b (Mackreth 2011, I, 146–50, II, pl. 102, 6898).

5.45. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 570, [324], Phase 5/6 (Figs 324, 330) L. 60.3mm, Wt 17.4gA complete copper-alloy headstud brooch in fine condition, with hinged pin, cast head-loop and stepped wings. At the head of the bow is a circular stud with annular recess, its enamel inlay, probably originally green, now whitish in colour. Below is a panel of enamelled lattice ornament, blue rhombuses flanked by green triangles. The foot has transverse mouldings with a terminal knob and the upper edge of the catchplate has a sinuous profile.

Mackreth’s ‘classic’ Headstud Type 5.a (Mackreth 2011, I, 107, II, pl. 72, 7298). Later 1st–early 2nd century ad.

5.46. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 532, [306], Phase 6 (Figs 324, 330) L. 49.6mm, Wt 9.44gA copper-alloy trumpet brooch complete except for the pin. The collar has three mouldings, the head is plain and the all-round knop decoration consists of a central disc flanked by four petals and a plain moulding. The lower bow is ridged with a groove down both sides and the foot-knob has a triple moulding. The upper bow has been distorted downwards and sideways.

Mackreth’s standard Trumpet Type 1.a1b (Mackreth 2011, I, 115–17, II, pl. 78, 5042). 2nd century ad.

5.47. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 915, [350], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 325) 31.9 × 20.1mm, Wt 2.27gA distorted copper-alloy penannular brooch lacking its pin, the hoop crushed and the terminals overlapping. The hoop is circular-sectioned and the terminals, which are turned back tightly on to the hoop, have a single grooved moulding.

Mackreth’s Folded, Plain and Simply Grooved Pennanular Type 2.f1b (Mackreth 2011, I, 210, II, pl. 144, 3235).

A copper-alloy Colchester-derivative brooch of Polden Hill type, complete and undistorted, though the spring and pin are corroded and the pin fractured. The bilateral spring is intact on the axis bar, its chord secured in the rearward-facing hook. The wings have neatly cut mouldings, the very lightly faceted bow and foot are plain and the catchplate has a triangular opening.

Mackreth’s Colchester-derivative Polden Hill Type 3.b (Mackreth 2011, I,71, II, pl. 46, 1806/ 12023). 1st century ad.

5.40. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1131, unstratified (Figs 323, 330) L. 49.8mm, Wt 5.38gA copper-alloy Hod Hill brooch lacking only its pin and the knob and casing at one end of the axis bar. The upper bow, slender and near parallel-sided, has a central raised ridge, with transverse incisions, flanked by flutes between an incised line and lateral ridge, also with transverse incisions. A set of three transverse ribs (with transverse incisions) divides the upper bow from the lozenge-shaped lower bow, on which are traces of a dot-punched design. The everted foot is elliptical and flat and the flanged catchplate is plain.

The Hod Hill series of brooches is infinitely varied. This example is closest to Mackreth’s Type 1.b1 (Mackreth 2011, I, 136, II, pl. 91, 8870). 1st century ad.

5.41. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1219, [510], Phase 6 (Figs 323, 330) L. 48.5mm, Wt 8.33gA copper-alloy Hod Hill brooch lacking only its pin, one lateral lug, part of the catchplate and the tip of the foot. The bow has a central broad rib, with transverse incisions, flanked by flutes between a pair of narrow ridges. At the head is a single narrow transverse ridge and one of the pair of lateral knobbed lugs. A more elaborate set of transverse mouldings divides the upper bow from the plain lower bow, the (presumably knobbed) foot of which is broken. The catchplate has been distorted and the whole brooch slightly flattened.

Close to Mackreth’s Type 4.c2 (Mackreth 2011, I, 138, II, pl. 94, 9315). 1st century ad, probably ad 43–65.

5.42. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1346, [536], Phase 4/5 (Fig. 323) L. 25.7mm, Wt 1.92gA copper-alloy small Hod Hill brooch lacking only its pin, part of one hinge lug and part of the catchplate. The upper bow has a pair of vertical flutes flanked by three ribs and a pair of lateral knobbed lugs. The lower bow is plain. Tinning is visible in several places.

Similar to Mackreth’s Type 4 (Mackreth 2011, I, 137–9, II, pls 92–4). 1st century ad.

5.43. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 515, [301], Phase 8 (Figs 323, 330) L. 37.4mm, Wt 2.81gThe lower part of a copper-alloy Hod Hill variant brooch with plain, flat, lateral lugs, a line of fine transverse incisions down the central rib and a plain, flat foot below a transverse ridge. The catchplate and adjacent bow are damaged and the lateral lugs bent backwards. Small patches of white metal coating are visible.

Figure 325 Iron and copper-alloy Durotrigan and penannular brooches. Left to right Cat. 5.44, 5.48, 5.47

278 | Dea Senuna

5.55. Brooch-pin, BGF 04, SF 592, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 L. 30.7mm, Wt 1.17gHalf of a four-coil copper-alloy spring and pin, its tip lacking.

5.56. Brooch-pin, BGF 05, SF 897, [362], Phase 2/3 L. 36.1mm, Wt 0.47gThe copper-alloy pin from a simple one-piece brooch, broken at the curved junction with the spring.

5.57. Brooch-pin, BGF 04, SF 529, [304], Phase 6 L. 40.3mm, Wt 0.93gA hinged copper-alloy brooch-pin, its eye disclosed by X-radiography.

5.58. Brooch-pin, BGF 06, SF 1154, [364], Phase 6 L. 26.2mm, Wt 0.31gA hinged copper-alloy brooch-pin, its eye disclosed by X-radiography, the tip lacking.

5.59. Brooch-pin?, BGF 03, SF 62, [112], Phase 6/7 L. 34.1mm, Wt 0.55g

5.60. Brooch-pin?, BGF 06, SF 1291, [527], Phase 8 L. 24.9mm, Wt 0.48gTwo very slender, tapered, circular-sectioned copper-alloy rods, broken at both ends and bent near the middle. Probably brooch-pins.

5.61. Finger ring, BGF 05, SF 979, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Figs 326, 331) W. 20.7mm, Ht 16.1mm, internal diam. 15.3 × 12.2mm, W. bezel 9.4mm, Wt 4.89gA small silver ring with plain oval hoop and convex shoulders, slightly flattened and widened at the bezel to accommodate a simple hollow oval setting, now devoid of its gem.

Henig’s Type II (Henig 1978, 35–6, fig. 1). 1st or 2nd century ad.

5.62. Finger ring, BGF 05, SF 921, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Figs 326, 331) W. 22.8mm, Ht 26.2mm, internal diam. 19.7 × 20.4mm, W. bezel 10.3mm, Wt 4.71g

5.48. Brooch, BGF 04, SF 566, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 325) W. 33.5mm, L. pin 34.1mm, Wt 5.01gAn oval iron penannular brooch with closely abutted, seemingly simple turned-back terminals and a slightly sinuous pin with looped head.

Similar in form and size to an example in the phase 3 grave 460 at King Harry Lane, St Albans, dated ad 40–60 (Stead and Rigby 1989, 204, 390, 396).

5.49. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 808, [315], Phase 6 W. 27.7mm, Ht 18.8mm, Wt 6.56gThe head of a copper-alloy brooch, probably a Langton Down type, comprising the cylindrical spring casing and the stub of the upper bow. X-radiography confirms the presence of part of the spring coil in the casing and a pair of incised lines running down the centre of the bow. 1st century ad.

5.50. Brooch, BGF 06, SF 1167, unstratified L. 23.6mm, Wt 1.13gA copper-alloy brooch, probably a Nauheim-derivative, comprising the lower plain, slender bow and upper part of the triangular catchplate only.

5.51. Brooch, BGF 05, SF 805, [314], Phase 6 W. 17.8mm, Ht 12.9mm, Wt 2.03gThe head of a copper-alloy brooch of indeterminate type comprising the cylindrical casing and the stub of the upper bow. X-radiography reveals a central hinge slot.

5.52. Brooch?, BGF 06, SF 1186, [525], Phase 6 L. 27.6mm, Wt 1.40gA curved copper-alloy strip of plano-convex cross section with expansions at both ends. The hint of a broken catchplate behind one of the expansions and the form of the other expansion are suggestive of a simple hinged brooch.

5.53. Brooch-spring, BGF 06, SF 1244, [560], Phase 5 L. 19.5mm, Wt 3.23gOne half of a broken copper-alloy spring coil comprising seven turns.

5.54. Brooch-pin, BGF 06, SF 1287, [521], Phase 5/6 L. 40.2mm, Wt 1.17gCopper-alloy pin and spring coil fragment.

Figure 326 Silver, copper-alloy and iron finger rings and rings. Left to right, upper Cat. 5.70, 5.62, centre Cat 5.71, 5.61, 5.64, lower Cat. 5.67, 5.66, 5.65, 5.63


A circular copper-alloy ring comprising one-and-a-half turns of a rhomboid-sectioned hoop.

5.68. Finger ring?, BGF 05, SF 844, [314], Phase 6 Diam. c. 20mm, Wt 0.37gAn evenly curved segment of a slender, oval-sectioned, copper-alloy rod, possibly about one-third of the hoop of a simple finger ring.

5.69. Finger ring?, BGF 03, SF 112, [101], Phase 5/6/7 Ht 18.7mm, W. 12.9mm, Wt 1.7gA curved, subtriangular iron object, probably one shoulder of a finger ring broken across the flat bezel and the narrow circular-sectioned hoop.

5.70. Ring, BGF 03, SF 203, [207], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 326) External diam. 28–29mm, internal diam. 17–18mm, Wt 10.3gA simple but carefully made subcircular iron ring of subcircular cross section. The size and finish are consistent with identification as a finger ring, but many other uses are possible.

5.71. Ring, BGF 04, SF 604, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 326) External diam. 27.4 × 26.6mm, Wt 8.22gA carefully made annular copper-alloy ring, with a flat inner face, convex outer face and slightly flattened smooth sides. The circuit consists of four arcs, two broad and two constricted, disposed symmetrically opposite each other. The constricted arcs have a very worn, slightly raised, central rib. Function uncertain, but probably not a finger ring.

5.72. Hair pin, BGF 05, SF 945, [302], Phase 7 (Figs 327, 331) L. 90.6mm, Wt 4.65gA complete copper-alloy pin with cushion-shaped head above a pair of cordons. The tapered, circular-sectioned shank is bent and distorted at three points.

The pin is an example of Cool’s Group 6, which has a distribution concentrated in eastern England and which she dates to the second half of the 1st–early 2nd century ad (Cool 1990a, 157–8, fig. 5, 3 and 8).

A large copper-alloy ring, presumably for a man. The very slender hoop, of oval cross section, is slightly distorted at the back, probably through use. The shoulders expand to a prominent raised circular bezel with straight sides enclosing an inlaid double-pelta motif. The inlay appears to be enamel, now decayed and covered with iridescence obscuring its original colour, but a tiny arc of red surrounding a spot(?) of green(?) suggests the original colouring may have been composite.

5.63. Finger ring, BGF 03, SF 67, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 326, 331) Internal diam. 15.1 × 15.7mm, W. bezel 5.1mm, Wt 0.86gA small copper-alloy ring with extremely slender slightly distorted hoop and plain expanded shoulders. A countersunk tiny circular setting in the bezel retains a fragment of its inlaid glass or enamel gem.

Henig’s Type II (Henig 1978, 35–6, fig. 1). 1st or 2nd century ad.

5.64. Finger ring, BGF 05, SF 856, [349], Phase 5 (Figs 326, 331) Surviving W. 23.7mm, w. bezel 9.7mm, Wt 1.4gAlthough much of the slender hoop is broken this copper-alloy ring appears to have been of quite large diameter – possibly over 22mm internally. The shoulders are strongly splayed to form an eye-shaped bezel with an inlaid motif comprising a dot within a crescent, perhaps a lunar/solar symbol. The inlay, now white-coloured and glassy, appears to be decayed enamel.

5.65. Finger ring, BGF 05, SF 790, [315], Phase 6 (Figs 326, 331) Bezel 12 × 10mm, Wt 3.2gAlthough almost the whole of the very slender hoop is broken away, the curvature of the surviving stubs and the underside of the bezel of this copper-alloy ring indicate a quite large original inner diameter. The raised quite thick ovoid bezel has a corroded quartered design, three units of which preserve all or part of their inlay, one of glassy translucent red colour.

5.66. Finger ring, BGF 06, SF 1198, [525], Phase 6 (Figs 326, 5.13) Bezel 8.4 × 4.2mm, Wt 0.19gThe bezel and part of the hoop of a small copper-alloy finger ring made from a very slender, thin strip of metal. The raised lozenge-shaped panel on the bezel has a finely beaded surface, perhaps intended as a stylized Bacchic grape cluster.

There are similar rings from the Great Chesterford temple and precinct (Major 2011, 272–3, T105, T106) and the Sources de Seine (Guiraud 1989, fig. 55, no. 4), and near-identical examples from Verulamium, in a Flavian context (Wheeler and Wheeler 1936, 215–16, fig. 47, 81), from Baldock (Stead and Rigby 1986, 128–9, no. 194) and from Stonea ( Johns 1996c, 329, no. 10).

5.67. Finger ring?, BGF 05, SF 951, [396], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 326) Diam. 18–19mm, Wt 1.06g

Figure 327 Copper-alloy and bone hair pins. Left to right, upper Cat. 5.74, 5.72, 5.75, 5.76, 5.78, 5.73, 5.83, lower Cat. 5.84, 5.82

280 | Dea Senuna

The form is not identical to any of Cool’s groups but is close to examples in her Group 11B (Cool 1990a, 160, 162, fig. 8, nos 1–2).

5.77. Hair pin, BGF 04, SF 571, [324], Phase 5/6 L. 40.2mm, Wt 0.48gTwo joining fragments of the upper section of a very slender copper-alloy pin with minuscule baluster-moulded head (disclosed by X-radiography).

A tiny example, similar to Cool’s Groups 2 and 3 (Cool 1990a, 153–5, figs 2–3).

5.78. Hair pin, BGF 04, SF 639, [300], Phase 9 (Figs 327, 331) L. 31.7mm, Wt 5.74gThe upper part of a stout, finely made, copper-alloy pin of circular cross section, its lower shank lacking, with an incised cordon beneath the sloped underside of the low-domed head.

The form is similar to that of Cool’s Group 1 (Cool 1990a, 151–4, fig. 1).

5.79. Hair pin?, BGF 05, SF 716, unstratified (backfill) Diam. 7.7mm, Wt 1.7gA small solid mushroom-shaped copper-alloy knob, probably the head of a hair pin; cf. e.g., Cool 1990a, Groups 1 and 2.

5.80. Hair pin?, BGF 05, SF 715, unstratified (backfill) Diam. 8.6mm, Wt 2.1gA small solid cushion-shaped copper-alloy knob, probably the head of a hair pin, cf, e.g., Cool 1990a, Group 6.

5.81. Pin head?, BGF 04, SF 585, [324], Phase 5/6 Diam. 6.7mm, Wt 0.92gA tiny solid spherical copper-alloy knob, possibly the head of a hair pin, though no trace of a shank junction is visible.

5.82. Hair pin, BGF 06, SF 1184, [529], Phase 2/3/4/5 (Fig. 327) L. 37.1mm, W. 3.7mm, Wt 0.59gThe upper shank of a slender, slightly tapered, bone hair pin of circular cross section, with two transverse grooves beneath

5.73. Hair pin, BGF 04, SF 565, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Figs 327, 331) L. 81.7mm, Wt 5.45gA complete copper-alloy pin, its head in the form of a low cylindrical socketed finial, once containing a glass setting, above two square flanges, the upper one with an incised chevron design. The tapered, oval- to circular-sectioned shank is bent and its rather rudimentarily formed tip may be the result of reworking following breakage of the point.

The pin is an example of Cool’s Group 14, Subgroup C (Cool 1990a, 163-4, fig. 9, no. 6). A near-identical example from Lydney retains its green glass setting (Wheeler and Wheeler 1932, 84–5, fig. 18, 67).

5.74. Hair pin, BGF 04, SF 564, [329], Phase 5 (Fig. 327) L. 50.9mm (‘unbent’, c. 90mm), Wt 1.31gA very slender, tapered, circular-sectioned copper-alloy pin, with a tiny conical head, its shank distorted and the tip broken.

Possibly an example of Cool’s Group 5 (Cool 1990a, 156–7, fig. 4, nos 10–11).

5.75. Hair pin, BGF 04, SF 641, [302], Phase 7 (Figs 327, 331) L. 29.5mm, Wt 2.75gThe decorative head of a copper-alloy pin, with tinned surface, consisting of a double baluster finial of circular cross section above a rectangular-sectioned block of three transverse mouldings. Just the uppermost part of the tapered, finely striated, circular-sectioned shank is present.

The pin is an example of Cool’s Group 3 (Cool 1990a, 154–5, fig. 3, esp. no. 9).

5.76. Hair pin, BGF 05, SF 835, [314], Phase 6 (Figs 327, 331) L. 55.3mm, Wt 3.5gA copper-alloy pin with decorated head, its lower shank broken. The head, of square cross section, has a small panel on all four faces incised with a pair of crosses, flanked top and bottom by moulded cordons and surmounted by a pyramidal finial.

Figure 328 Copper-alloy toilet implements. Left to right, upper Cat. 5.98, 5.96, 5.97, 5.94, 5.93, lower Cat. 5.91, 5.92


5.88. Hair pin (?), BGF 06, SF 1187, [529], Phase 2/3/4/5 L. 15.5mm, W. 3.1mm, Wt 0.17gThe lower end of a slender circular-sectioned bone pin, with short round-pointed tip. The relative thickness of the tip suggests this is the repointed end of a broken hair pin.

5.89. Needle?, BGF 04, SF 528, [302], Phase 7 L. 73.3mm, Wt 3.07gA slender, very slightly tapered, circular-sectioned copper-alloy rod, broken at both ends and bent near the middle. At the broader end a flattening of the shank resembles the form of the base of the eye of a needle.

5.90. Needle?, BGF 03, SF 144, [201], Phase 5/6 L. 60.9mm, Wt 1.59gA slender circular-sectioned copper-alloy rod, broken at both ends and bent near the middle. A flattening of the shank at one end resembles the form of the base of the eye of a needle. As Cat. 5.89, but narrower gauge.

5.91. Ligula, BGF 06, SF 1223, [537], Phase 6 (Fig. 328) L. 67.6mm, Wt 1.39gA distorted copper-alloy example of normal form comprising a slender circular-sectioned stem with a point at one end and an angled, flat, spatulate terminal at the other.

A multi-purpose toilet/cosmetic implement.

5.92. Ligula, BGF 05, SF 827, unstratified (Fig. 328) L. 32.5mm, L. ‘unbent’ c. 80mm, Wt 1.32gA distorted copper-alloy example of normal form comprising a slender circular-sectioned stem with an angled, flat, spatulate terminal, the other end broken.

5.93. Tweezers, BGF 04, SF 550, [313], Phase 8 (Fig. 328) L. (‘unbent’) c. 50mm, Wt 3.42gA complete pair of simple copper-alloy tweezers of standard form, with looped head for suspension, plain, flat. parallel-sided blades and inturned, square-ended jaws. The object was defunctionalized by a single blow from one side which bent the blades almost to a right angle.

Cf. Eckardt and Crummy 2008, 148–9, fig. 91.

its small conical head. A definitive join cannot be made, but this is almost certainly the decorated head of pin fragments Cat. 5.83. The combined total length, 105.1mm, is within the range of other complete examples (Crummy 1983, 21).

Crummy’s Type 2 bone hair pin (Crummy 1983, 21, fig. 18). 1st–2nd century ad.

5.83. Hair pin, BGF 05, SF 971, [398], Phase 3 (Fig. 327) L. 68.0mm, 23.6mm, Wt 0.58 g, 0.68gThree polished bone pin fragments: (1) two join to form the lower end of a slender tapered pin with circular cross section and round-pointed tip, almost certainly the lower end of Cat. 5.82; (2) the third, from a different pin, is from the upper, broader end of a circular-sectioned pin, both ends broken.

5.84. Hair pin, BGF 06, SF 1353, [521], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 327) L. 36.3mm, W. 3.0mm, Wt 0.41gThe upper shank of a slender, slightly tapered bone hair pin of circular cross section, with two transverse grooves beneath its small conical head. The pin has the distinctive appearance of calcined bone – a white coloration and shrinkage distortion – and had presumably been part of a cremation group.

Crummy’s Type 2 bone hair pin (Crummy 1983, 21, fig. 18). 1st–2nd century ad.

5.85. Hair pin, BGF 04, SF 655, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 L. 34.5mm, W. 3.3mm, Wt 0.48gA broken section of the slender, slightly tapered shank of a bone hair pin or needle, the manufacture facets and file marks still visible.

5.86. Hair pin, BGF 04, SF 569, [315], Phase 6 L. 23.5mm, W. 2.9mm, Wt 0.24gAs Cat. 5.85; a shorter, more slender, tapered bone fragment broken at both ends, and possibly a lower section of the shank of the same pin/needle.

5.87. Hair pin, BGF 06, SF 1158, [509], Phase 9 L. 27.5mm, W. 2.7mm, Wt 0.23gThe lower end of a tapered circular-sectioned bone hair pin, its round-pointed tip displaying evidence of use wear.

Figure 329 Writing implements, counters and ring. Left to right, upper Cat. 5.102, 5.100, centre Cat. 5.110, 5.105, 5.104, 5.106, lower Cat. 5.107, 5.108

282 | Dea Senuna

Seal boxes were used to protect from damage seals made with the imprint of an author’s signet ring, which were themselves designed to preserve the integrity of letters or packages secured with cord ties. As such they might be considered an indicator of literacy. Circular seal boxes date from the 1st to the 3rd century ad. For the range of types and decorated lids see e.g. Derks and Roymans 2002, pl. 7.I–7.XII.

5.101. Seal box?, BGF 06, SF 1308, [601], Phase 6 L. 26.5mm.A piece of copper-alloy sheet metal corroded to a potsherd. X-radiography revealed that it appears to be of lozenge shape with four perforations. Possibly, therefore, the lower component of a rhombic seal box, a type which dates to the late 1st–3rd century ad (Derks and Roymans 2002, 92–3, fig. 7.4).

5.102. Stylus, BGF 06, SF 1227, [521], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 329) L. 34.2mm, Wt 1.8gThe tulip-shaped iron eraser, its edge chipped, and part of the slender stem only.

5.103. Stylus?, BGF 06, SF 1249, [560], Phase 5 L. 62.2mm, Wt 5.9gA slender iron rod, broken at one end, flattened and tapered at the other. Possibly a broken stylus preserving a narrow wedge-shaped eraser and part of the stem.

5.104. Pen?, BGF 06, SF 1143, unstratified (Fig. 329) L. 47.6mm, W. 5.8mm, Wt 3.11gA slender regular copper-alloy tube made from thin sheet with a close-fitting butted seam. One end appears complete, the other end is broken.

In form and dimensions this object closely resembles the upper end of copper-alloy tubular split-nib pens from various sites in Britain, including examples from Baldock and London (Stead and Rigby 1986, 139–40, fig. 61, no. 393).

5.105. Counter, BGF 05, SF 941, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 329) Diam. 20.0mm, Th. 5.5mm, Wt 2.25gA coarse ware pottery sherd, with buff outer and inner surface and grey core, that has been carefully trimmed to form a circular disc.

5.106. Counter, BGF 05, SF 947, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 329) Diam. 21.6mm, Th. 5.2mm, Wt 2.86gA coarse ware pottery sherd with buff outer and inner surface and red core that has been trimmed to form a circular disc.

5.107. Counter, BGF 05, SF 743, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 329) Diam. 18.3mm, Th. 6.2mm, Wt 3.27gA circular bun-shaped counter, of smooth fine-grained black stone (or opaque glass), with a slightly ‘lumpy’ planar ‘underside’ and a more polished convex ‘upper’ face.

5.108. Counter, BGF 06, SF 1325, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 329)

5.94. Tweezers, BGF 05, SF 965, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 328) L. 35.6mm, Wt 1.59gA simple pair of copper-alloy tweezers of standard form, with looped head for suspension. The slender, flat, parallel-sided blades have the simplest form of decoration – marginal grooves. Both jaws are broken and the blades are distorted from their correct position.

Cf. Eckardt and Crummy 2008, 149–50, fig. 92.

5.95. Tweezers?, BGF 06, SF 1298, [602], Phase 1 L. 29.2mm, Wt 0.87gA thin, parallel-sided copper-alloy strip, one end inturned, the other broken. Probably a broken tweezers blade.

5.96. Nail cleaner, BGF 03, SF 18, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 328) L. 41.1mm, W. 22.6mm, Wt 3.48gA flat subcircular copper-alloy plate with a turned-back loop for suspension and a short, slender, parallel-sided blade with bifid tip.

This is an exaggerated version of Eckardt and Crummy’s swollen-bladed nail cleaner group. It is also similar in form to the lower component of a swollen-bladed nail cleaner strap end from the Butt Road cemetery, Colchester (Eckardt and Crummy 2008, 122, fig. 61, 250, 139–40, fig. 82, 1368).

5.97. Toilet implement, BGF 05, SF 783, [315], Phase 6 (Fig. 328) L. 25.9mm, Wt 0.46gA tiny copper-alloy ear scoop or nail cleaner, the functional end lacking and the tiny discoid suspension loop broken across its eye. The slender baluster stem is decorated with fine horizontal ribbing.

5.98. Toilet implement?, BGF 03, SF 71, [110], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 328) L. 31.1mm, Wt 1.99gAn elongated triangular copper-alloy strip with a pair of angular lugs below a perforated discoid terminal. There is a notch at the centre of the other (broken) end. Probably the upper part of a nail cleaner of a form similar to one from Burgh, Suffolk (Eckardt and Crummy 2008, 125, fig. 65, no. 471).

5.99. Toilet implement?, BGF 05, SF 816, [349], Phase 5 L. 22.8mm, W. 10.1mm, Wt 1.12gA small, slender, parallel-sided copper-alloy strip of plano-convex cross section with a perforated spatulate terminal, the other end broken and bent. Probably the broken upper section of a nail cleaner from a toilet set, cf. Eckardt and Crummy 2008, 132–3, fig. 75, no. 463.

5.100. Seal box, BGF 04, SF 556, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 329) L. 21.4mm, Diam. 17.5mm, Th. 5.5mm, Wt 1.09gA circular copper-alloy seal box made from thin sheet metal, with three irregular perforations in its base. The iron hinge is preserved but the lid and part of one side are lacking.


‘doubled’ as the lathe centre point – there is none on the back face of the counter.

5.109. Counter?, BGF 06, SF 1365, backfill Diam. 14.1mm, Th. 2.0mm, Wt 0.63gA tiny thin disc of shell, perhaps chosen to be made as a counter because of its ‘sparkling’ appearance.

Diam. 17.5mm (orig.c. 20mm), Th. 5.5mm, Wt 1.85gA circular counter made from a disc of bone, with a projecting flange (mostly broken away) around the front face. The drilled decoration comprises a rosette-like cluster of ring-and-dot motifs – one in the centre encircled by seven round the periphery, with a tiny slot of unclear purpose at one side. The dot of the central ring-and-dot motif may have

0 3cm

5.21

5.9

5.16

5.30

5.33

5.43

5.45

5.37

5.39

5.415.46

5.40

Figure 330 Copper-alloy brooches (Cat. 5.9, 5.16, 5.21, 5.30, 5.33, 5.37, 5.39, 5.40, 5.41, 5.43, 5.45, 5.46). Scale 1:1

284 | Dea Senuna

5.73

5.76

5.755.78

5.72

8.22

5.96

5.61

5.62

5.63

5.645.65

5.66

0 3cm

Figure 331 Silver and copper-alloy finger rings, hair pins, nail cleaner and stud (Cat. 5.61–5.66, 5.72, 5.73, 5.75, 5.76, 5.78, 5.96, 8.22). Scale 1:1


Ashwell mail by cutting it into small, mainly rectangular, pieces are identical to those seen in the case of the mail found in an Iron Age ‘chieftain’s’ burial excavated at Baldock, where about 30 fragments were recovered and dated to the late 1st century bc. Such mail armour of the Late Iron Age is very rare in Britain and, apart from three sites with a single fragment each and one site with fragments of butted rings manufacture, only the princely burials at Lexden, Essex (20–15 bc) and Folly Lane, St Albans, Hertfordshire (Verulamium – c. ad 50) have yielded directly comparable mail (Foster 1986a; Gilmour 1999). The latter site find was a complete tunic. It could be considered that the Ashwell and Baldock mail is of a finer quality than the Lexden and Folly Lane finds since the former two examples comprise mail with smaller rings and finer wire gauge. Its rarity suggests it is likely that mail such as this would have been owned by individuals of high status, and its manufacture accomplished by highly skilled blacksmiths.

6.2. Scabbard chape, BGF 03, SF 94, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 332) L. 86.5mm, W. 29.5mm, Wt 22.53gAn elongated, U-shaped, copper-alloy binding of circular cross section with a narrow slot running along the inner edge. The binding is markedly thickened at the base of the U with an additional low knop on the lowermost edge.

This is the lower part of a simple chape from a sword scabbard, its sides distorted inwards giving it a misleadingly narrow appearance. It corresponds to Stead’s Type e chape, which can be seen in place on swords from Isleham, Cambridge and Congham, Norfolk, which belong to his Type D swords (Stead 2006, 12, fig. 6, 175–6, figs 75, 77, nos 101 and 103). Late 2nd century bc–1st century ad.

6.3. Chape?, BGF 05, SF 949, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 332) W. 29.1mm, Ht 15.3mm, Wt 4.97gA small cast copper-alloy object with symmetrical moulded and perforated ‘wings’ and a central slot terminating in a knob.

6.4. Scabbard fragment?, BGF 03, SF 200, [201], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 332) L. 41.1mm, Wt 5.77g

5.110. Ring, BGF 03, SF 211, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 329) Diam. 40.7mm, perforation 20.5mm, Th. 6.7mm, Wt 8.55gA little over one half of a ring, of maroon-coloured, fossiliferous and crystalline stone, with a softened rectangular cross section. The ring was very carefully and particularly made with a definite ‘front’ and ‘back’ face: the ‘back’, with a smooth ground surface, is lightly outward-sloped from the centre; the ‘front’, with a polished surface, is markedly inward-sloped towards the centre. There is wear polish on the inner surface and the ring may have been a fancy belt accoutrement.

6. Military equipment Ralph Jackson

6.1. Mail, BGF 03, SF 148, 150, 153 & 158, [203] (= 2002 T215(5)), Phase 5 (Fig. 332 = SF 158. Fig. 333 = SF 153, SF 158)This placed deposit included about 140 variously sized cut-up fragments of iron mail armour (‘chain-mail’) – about 30 pieces measuring from 91 × 68mm down to 40 × 35mm, and about 110 pieces measuring from 40 × 35mm down to 5 × 5mm as well as several individual links. Some fragments have a single layer of mail, many have a partial double layer and just one appears to be a folded fragment.

One of the largest fragments (part of SF 158), which consists of two layers of mail set almost at right angles to each other, measures 72.6 × 70.5mm across the more complete layer and weighs 79.04g. There are about 20 rows of rings with about 18 rings per row in the more complete layer and about two-thirds that number in the other layer, giving a total of perhaps 600 rings for this single fragment.

The mail is made from alternate rows of interlinked riveted and butt-welded rings (Fig. 333). The outer diameter of each ring is approximately 5.5mm and the gauge of the circular iron wire used to form the rings is about 1mm. All the fragments may originally have been parts of a single mail tunic which was later deliberately cut into small pieces, perhaps to ritually ‘kill’ the garment and prevent its further use before burial in the ground. The method of construction, size and gauge of the rings and the ritual ‘killing’ of the

Figure 332 Iron mail armour and copper-alloy scabbard fittings. Left to right Cat. 6.1, 6.2, 6.5, 6.7, 6.3, 6.4, 6.6

286 | Dea Senuna

A solid-cast, circular-sectioned, mushroom-shaped copper-alloy knob, possibly the broken tip from a 1st-century ad sword scabbard. Cf. Bishop and Coulston 1993, 69–74, fig. 37, and Miks 2007, pls 202–4.

6.7. Scabbard fitting, BGF 05, SF 750, [315], Phase 6 (Fig. 332) W. 19.2mm, Wt 3.14gThe annular head from a copper-alloy scabbard slide, broken across the slender stem short of the offset which formed the belt slot. It is flat at the back and neatly bevelled at the front, with an everted moulding and a pelta-shaped eye.

This type of scabbard slide is found in large numbers on the German limes and in Britain in the 2nd and 3rd centuries ad. For complete examples with identical head from the Roman forts at Corbridge and Niederbieber, Germany see Bishop and Coulston 1993, fig. 90, no. 6 and Oldenstein 1977, pl. 13, no. 55; for the numerous other examples, above all those from Vimose, Denmark, see Miks 2007, pls 223–8. 2nd–3rd century ad.

6.8. Binding?, BGF 03, SF 113, [101], Phase 5/6/7 L. 65.3mm, Wt 5.63gA slender channelled copper-alloy binding, its cross section a little over a semicircle, in three joining fragments, broken at both ends. At one end is a hollow domed expansion which marks a change of angle of the binding.

6.9. Binding?, BGF 03, SF 198, [201], Phase 5/6 L. 53.1mm, Wt 3.18gA slender channelled copper-alloy binding, its cross section a little over a semicircle, broken at both ends.

6.10. Binding?, BGF 03, SF 83, [101], Phase 5/6/7 L. 25.8mm, Wt 2.05g

6.11. Binding?, BGF 04, SF 662, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 L. 24.9mm, Wt 1.71gThese four related bindings (Cat. 6.8–6.11) may be from sword or dagger scabbards. They appear too slender for shield bindings.

6.12. Ring, BGF 04, SF 559, [315], Phase 6 External diam. 25.3mm, Wt 6.3g

A fragment of thin copper-alloy sheet with a low axial ridge and midrib. All edges broken.

6.5. Scabbard fragment?, BGF 03, SF 202, [208], Phase 1 (Fig. 332) L. 34.7mm, Wt 5.18gA fragment of thin copper-alloy sheet with a low axial ridge and midrib. All edges broken.

The profile, form and dimensions of these two fragments correspond quite closely to those of some copper-alloy scabbard plates. Cf. Stead 2006, fig. 56, no. 55, fig. 68, no. 89.

6.6. Scabbard tip?, BGF 06, SF 1350, [527], Phase 8 (Fig. 332) W. 14.9mm, Ht 15.9mm, Wt 11.52g

Figure 333 X-radiograph of iron mail armour Cat. 6.1 showing alternate rows of interlinked riveted and butt-welded rings

Figure 334 Iron sword blade, dagger blade and sheath, and spearheads. Left to right Cat. 6.16, 6.17,(1) and (2), 6.20, 6.21, 6.24, 6.26, 6.22


6.18. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 187, [201]/[206] (= 2002 T215(6)), Phase 5/6 L. 106.8mm, Wt 58.01gAn intact iron spearhead with a relatively flat leaf-/lozenge-shaped blade and a split socket.

An example of Manning’s mid 1st-century ad Hod Hill Group Ia spearheads (Manning 1985, 161–4, esp. V38–V52).

6.19. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 188, [201]/[206] (= 2002 T215(6)), Phase 5/6 L. 105.8mm (orig.c. 124.5mm), Wt 38.80gAn iron spearhead of idiosyncratic form, with a small, short and very slender blade, its tip bent right back on the blade. The split socket has a partially damaged sloping open end.

It is possible that this was a flat-bladed catapult bolt-head rather than a spearhead (cf. Manning 1985, 175–6, esp. V254).

6.20. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 82, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 334, 337) L. 92.6mm, Wt 19.35gAn intact iron spearhead with small, flat, flame-shaped blade and long, slender, near-parallel-sided split socket. A fragment of copper-alloy sheet is corroded to the upper end of the socket.

It is difficult to determine the exact purpose of this object, for while it resembles the smaller range of slender spearheads, lance-heads and some artillery bolt-heads, such as some of those from the fort at Hod Hill, Dorset (Manning 1985, V58, V254), for example, it is uncertain if its blade edges were ever sharp. In that respect, and with its distinctive elongated tip, it bears some similarity to, though it is rather smaller than, the series of probable military standard tips, like those from the fort at Vindolanda ( Jackson 1985, 132–5, nos 6–12). Alternatively, it may have been the finial of a priest’s staff or other ceremonial object.

An annular copper-alloy ring with a ribbed perimeter moulding.

6.13. Ring, BGF 06, SF 1297, [604], Phase 3 External diam. 22.1mm, Wt 3.46gAn annular copper-alloy ring with a ribbed perimeter moulding.

6.14. Ring, BGF 04, SF 540, [311], Phase 6 25.5 × 19.1mm, Wt 3.03gAn oval copper-alloy ring with a keeled and ribbed perimeter moulding.

6.15. Ring, BGF 05, SF 906, [364], Phase 6 External diam. c. 25mm, Wt 1.20gAn arc of an annular copper-alloy ring with a ribbed perimeter moulding.

These distinctively profiled rings, perhaps scabbard rings or components of other military fittings, are similar to examples from Camerton and Harlow temple (France and Gobel 1985, 87–8, fig. 45, no. 91; Jackson 1990, 48, pl. 14, no. 141; Bishop and Coulston 1993, fig. 38).

6.16. Sword blade, BGF 05, SF 828, [349], Phase 5 (Figs 334, 337) L. 106.2mm, W. 35.3mm, Wt 89.73gA mid section of a near-parallel-sided iron sword blade, with strong medial thickening, preserving much of the two cutting edges. The blade was purposefully bent and snapped at both ends.

Too little survives to enable a specific identification. The form and dimensions are consistent with those of some British Iron Age swords – for example, one from Kelvedon, Essex, of Stead’s Group D, dated late 2nd century bc–1st century ad (Stead 2006, 177, fig. 79, no. 105) – but also with Roman swords (Manning 1985, 150; Bishop and Coulston 1993, 70–4, fig. 36, no. 2; Miks 2007, nos A440, A528,1, A736; James 2011, 151–2). For similar breakage and bending of blades see, for example, the iron weaponry from South Cadbury (Macdonald 2000, 122, and fig. 62, nos 44, 49, 50).

6.17. Dagger blade and inlaid sheath fragments, BGF 05, SF 903, [314], Phase 6 (Figs 334–5) (1) L. 62.1mm, Wt 32.78g; (2) L. 41.3mm, Wt 6.05g; (3) L. 31.8mm, Wt 6.51gThree fragments of an iron dagger and its sheath: (1) the pointed tip of a lozenge-sectioned blade with mineralized remains of the wooden sheath amongst the corrosion products on both faces; (2) the tip of the iron front plate of the dagger sheath, identifiable from X-radiography; this reveals inlaid decoration of silver or copper-alloy – two converging slender bands, which merge near the tip, enclose an elongated triangular field at the top of which is the lower remnant of a tendril-like design in inlaid wire; (3) a tapered bar of rectangular cross section, the narrower end apparently intact, perhaps the dagger handle tang.

For the inlaid sheath see, for example, Bishop and Coulston 1993, fig. 41. 1st century ad.

Figure 335 X-radiograph of tip of iron dagger sheath front plate Cat. 6.17, (2) showing inlaid decoration

288 | Dea Senuna

lacking. The stub of each end of the broken axis bar is corroded in the perforated spatulate hoop terminals.

Probably 1st century ad.

6.28. Buckle, BGF 05, SF 876, [314], Phase 6 (Fig. 336) W. 26.5mm, Wt 3.58gA D-shaped copper-alloy buckle hoop, its axis bar and buckle tongue lacking.

Probably a 1st century ad military buckle, though it is slightly larger than the examples on lorica segmentata armour.

6.29. Belt fitting, BGF 04, SF 618, [314], Phase 6 (Fig. 336) L. 43.5mm, W. 13.9mm, Wt 10.94gA rectangular copper-alloy plate with four rearward-fastening spikes at the corners and a central rivet, its small low-domed head a little proud of the front face. It is likely that the rivet secured a now missing decorative panel, perhaps of repoussé silver foil. Probably a military belt plate.

6.30. Belt fitting, BGF 04, SF 507, [302], Phase 7 (Fig. 336) L. 22.7mm, W. 12.6mm, Wt 2.31gA vase-shaped copper-alloy mount with a terminal knob, a broken looped head and two rearward-fastening spikes. 2nd–3rd century ad.

6.31. Strap fitting, BGF 06, SF 1107, west end Trench C, unstratified (Fig. 336) Diam. 26.2mm, Wt 10.03gAn annular copper-alloy ring with a decorative strap loop, consisting of a simple strap bar at the back and at the front a raised rectangular panel containing a row of four cells, each inlaid with coloured enamel, red alternating with blue.

For the type compare, for example, an example from Stanwick, North Yorkshire (Palk 1992, no. 488).

6.32. Mount, BGF 03, SF 100, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 336) W. 36.4mm, Ht 21.5mm, Th. 8.1mm, Wt 18.16gA peltate copper-alloy mount with a lightly incised trident-like motif on the front gently convex face. At the rear the flat wall of the hollowed cavity still bears traces of solder.

A 2nd-century ad type.

6.33. Bracelet, BGF 03, SF 169, [201], Phase 5/6 (Figs 336–7)

6.21. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 6, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 334) L. 50.8mm, Wt 8.3gA small socketed iron spearhead lacking the side and end of its socket and the upper part of its slender leaf-shaped blade.

6.22. Spearhead, BGF 05, SF 981, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 334) L. 89.6mm, 21.4mm, Wt 39.3gA broken iron spearhead with large open socket, its rim lacking. Only the base of the blade and a separate fragment survive. Both display a strong midrib.

6.23. Spearhead?, BGF 03, SF 76, unstratified L. 48.1mm, Wt 15.32gOnly the upper part of the split socket and lower part of the flat iron blade survive. The blade appears to have been bent and broken.

6.24. Spearhead?, BGF 06, SF 1254, [521], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 334) L. 38.3mm, Wt 2.1gA slender, flat, triangular iron blade tip, probably from a small spearhead.

6.25. Spearhead?, BGF 03, SF 53, [101], Phase 5/6/7 L. 68.7mm, Wt 21.9gA socketed iron object, probably a spearhead lacking the blade. The well-formed socket has a broken rim.

6.26. Arrowhead, BGF 03, SF 57, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 334, 337) L. 47.1mm, Wt 6.3gA tiny, flat, flame-shaped iron blade with a short socket lacking part of the rim. More probably an arrowhead than a spearhead.

Compare examples from Hod Hill and Segontium (Manning 1985, V273; Chapman 2005, If01).

6.27. Buckle, BGF 05, SF 851, [314], Phase 6 (Fig. 336) W. 32.5mm, Wt 4.92gA D-shaped copper-alloy belt-buckle hoop of distinctive form, with flat inner face and ridged outer face, probably from a military belt. The buckle tongue and axis bar are

Figure 336 Copper-alloy buckles, belt fittings, mount and armilla fragments. Left to right, upper Cat. 6.27, 6.29, 6.31, 6.34, lower Cat. 6.28, 6.30, 6.32, 6.33


and then further defunctionalized by distorting both components.

This distinctive type of wide strip penannular bracelet with transverse decorative panels at the terminals has been convincingly identified as a male accoutrement, a type of military armilla awarded to soldiers in the early stages of the Roman Conquest of Britain (Crummy 2005). Distributed in the south and especially the east of England there are particular concentrations in Essex and Hertfordshire and, significantly, examples from the Harlow temple site, the Hockwold cum Wilton sanctuary sites at Leylands Farm and Sawbench (ibid., fig. 2, tables 1–2, cat. nos 11, 29 & 30) and from the religious site at Springhead (Schuster 2011, 235–6, fig. 100, nos 145–6). But the closest parallels to the Ashwell bracelet are two examples from Baldock with exactly the same décor on hoop and terminal, one of which was found in a context dated ad 50–70 (Crummy 2005, nos 16 & 18). 1st century ad.

L. 21.1mm (‘unrolled’ c. 51mm), hoop W. 12.2mm, terminal W. 13.1mm, Wt 4.13gOne terminal and part of the hoop of an armilla-type penannular copper-alloy bracelet, made from a flat parallel-sided sheet, bent in two places and broken at one end. The decorative moulding on the outer face of the hoop comprises a plain central fluting flanked by a pair of cabled ribs. The neatly incised transverse decoration on the terminal comprises a four-petalled floret with five interspersed dot-and-ring motifs.

6.34. Bracelet, BGF 05, SF 718, unstratified (Figs 336–7) L. 22.5mm (‘unrolled’ c. 43mm) W. 12.2mm, Wt 3.4gBent in two places and broken at both ends, one of which joins the broken edge of Cat. 6.33.

The joining edges of the two fragments are patinated old breaks and it is clear that the bracelet was deliberately broken in antiquity, presumably at the time of deposition,

0 3cm

6.33,6.34

6.26

6.20

6.16

Figure 337 Iron sword, spearhead and arrowhead, and copper-alloy armilla including expanded view (Cat. 6.16, 6.20, 6.26, 6.33, 6.34). Scale 1:1

290 | Dea Senuna

For plate-tang knives see Manning 1985, 108–13, fig. 28, Type 7, pls 53–4, Q17–Q23.

7.5. Knife handle, BGF 05, SF 737, [302], Phase 7 (Fig. 338) L. 29.2mm, W. 12.9mm, Th. 5.8mm, Wt 2.84gA fragment of a slender, polished, decorated bone handle plate, of plano-convex cross section, broken at both ends, at one end across a small circular rivet hole. The incised decoration with linear borders consists of a panel of hatching near the rivet and cross-hatching at the other end. There are traces of wear at the apex of the cross-hatching.

This is a fairly standard form of decorative handle plate for iron knives. A near-identical combination of hatching, cross-hatching and rivet holes can be seen, for example, on the complete bone handle plates of two iron knives from London, of Manning’s Type 7B (Manning 1985, 112, pls 53–4, Q17, Q18). 1st–2nd century ad.

7.6. Knife, BGF 05, SF 968, [344], Phase 3 L. 145.5mm, W. 22.0mm, Wt 36.68gA complete rod-handled iron knife. The straight square-sectioned handle, with expanded flat terminal, arches into the straight blade back. The cutting edge is slightly sinuous, possibly as a result of whetting.

Manning 1985, 113, Q26–Q28, Type 8, an early Roman form. For an example in a Flavian context at Baldock see Stead and Rigby 1986, 152–3, no. 525. 1st century ad.

7.7. Knife?, BGF 04, SF 645, [300], Phase 9 L. 63.7mm, W. 16.1mm, Wt 11.08gA near-parallel-sided iron strip of thin triangular cross section, broken at both ends. Probably a broken knife blade.

7.8. Knife?, BGF 06, SF 1132, [506], Phase 6 L. 50.7mm, W. 18.1mm, Wt 9.45gA near-parallel-sided iron strip of thin triangular cross section, broken at both ends. Probably a broken knife-blade.

7.9. Knife?, BGF 04, SF 597, [315], Phase 6 L. 66.5mmAn elongated triangular iron blade (?) fragment, perhaps the tip of a broad-bladed knife.

6.35. Sealing?, BGF 03, SF 142, Trench 4 unstratified (ploughsoil) L. 23.1mm, W. 16.3mm, Th. 19.1mm, Wt 13.09gA small subrectangular lead-alloy object with irregular flanges on one face which has an impressed flat rectangular recess.

In form and size similar to legionary sealings, but the recessed face is completely plain with no trace of figured or inscribed impressions.

7. Tools and utensils

Ralph Jackson

7.1. Axe-head or spud, BGF 03, SF 84, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 338) L. 67.1mm, W. blade 40.5mm, Wt 36.7gA splayed iron blade with slightly convex cutting edge. The broad, subrectangular flanged open socket, much broken, preserves carbonized remains of its wooden haft, the grain running towards the blade.

7.2. Drill bit?, BGF 04, SF 616, [334], Phase 4 L. 71.0mm, Wt 25.57gA broken, slender, rectangular-sectioned iron rod with an elongated pyramidal head. More probably a broken drill bit than a broken pilum-head.

7.3. Bradawl?, BGF 05, SF 913, [384], Phase 3/4 L. 78.2 mm, W. 7.5 mm, Wt 12.25gA slender, tapered, rectangular-sectioned iron rod with an elongated pyramidal head and a narrow chisel-shaped tip.

Manning 1985, 28, B77.

7.4. Knife, BGF 06, SF 1250, [560], Phase 5 (Fig. 338) L. 84.6mm, Wt 13.50gA parallel-sided iron plate tang with one thickened edge and two rivet holes, one still retaining the rivet (L. 11.6mm) for securing the pair of bone or wooden handle plates. Beyond the empty rivet hole the stub of a blade survives, of very flat triangular cross section, too little to determine its original shape.

Figure 338 Iron axe-head and knife, bone knife handle, stone hone, copper-alloy scale-beam terminal and lead weight. Left to right Cat. 7.1, 7.4, 7.5, 7.10, 7.11, 7.12


A perforated pottery disc, with central small hourglass perforation and carefully trimmed edges, made from an early Roman grey ware sherd of about ad 80–120 (identified by Valery Rigby).

7.15. Spindle whorl, BGF 04, [313], Phase 8 and BGF 05, SF 724, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 339) Diam. 39–40mm, perforation 6.2mm, Th. 9.7mm, Wt 17.63gTwo joining halves (ancient break) of a pottery disc, with central hourglass perforation, made from a sherd of an Iron Age combed jar, with brown to orange-red outer surface and grey core (identified by Valery Rigby).

7.16. Spindle whorl, BGF 05, SF 730, [315], Phase 6 (Fig. 339) Diam. 30–31mm, perforation 7.8mm, Th. 8.3mm, Wt 7.80gA small perforated pottery disc, with central hourglass perforation and roughly trimmed perimeter, made from a sherd of a Late Iron Age buff-orange jar (identified by Valery Rigby).

7.17. Spindle whorl, BGF 06, SF 1307, [601], Phase 6 (Fig. 339) Diam. 35–36.5mm, perforation 5.9mm, Th. 13.9mm, Wt 20.97gA thick perforated pottery disc, with central hourglass perforation and smoothly cut perimeter, made from a South Spanish amphora sherd (identified by Valery Rigby).

7.18. Spindle whorl, BGF 05, SF 833, [349], Phase 5 (Fig. 339) Diam. c. 53–56 mm, perforation 7.5mm, Th. 10.3mm, Wt 33.61gA perforated pottery disc, made from a grey ware sherd, with a regularly cut, very slightly hourglass central perforation and a roughly trimmed perimeter.

7.19. Spindle whorl?, BGF 06, SF 1137, [502], Phase 8 Diam. c. 40mm, perforation c. 6mm, Th. 6.8mm, Wt 4.98gSlightly under one half of a perforated pottery disc, made from an orange-red coarse ware sherd, with a neatly formed flat perimeter and a small surviving arc of the hourglass perforation.

7.10. Hone, BGF 04, SF 640, [300], Phase 9 (Fig. 338) L. 51.2mm, W. 11.5mm, Th. 8.7 mm, Wt 9.08gA tiny example, of fine-grained grey stone, comprising a slender, tapered, rectangular-sectioned rod with a countersunk circular perforation near the neatly formed butt. Wear attrition is visible on the two planar faces, one of which is very heavily worn while the other has horizontal striations. The lower end is broken and there is damage at one side.

7.11. Scale-beam terminal or key handle?, BGF 04, SF 643, [300], Phase 9 (Fig. 338) L. 26.5mm, Wt 4.12gAn oval-sectioned, tapered, copper-alloy rod terminating in a flat ovoid plate with circular perforation. The broader end is broken. Possibly the handle from a small rotary key, or one end of the scale beam of a libra-type balance, the eye of which would have engaged the looped head of a double hook from which the scale pan was suspended – see, for example, a complete libra from Finsbury Circus, London (Wheeler 1930, 85, fig. 22, 1).

7.12. Weight, BGF 03, SF 132, Trench 2, unstratified (Fig. 338) W. 31.8mm, Ht 29.8mm (including iron rod 37.5mm), Wt 137.37gA biconical lead-alloy steelyard weight with broken iron suspension loop in situ.

Although steelyard weights did not need to correspond to an exact unit of weight this one appears to have been made as a five ounce weight for it is very close to the 136.44g of a quincunx using the formula 1 libra = 327.45g. (RIB II.1, 1–5).

7.13. Spindle whorl, BGF 03, SF 52, [103], Phase 4/5 (Fig. 339) Diam. 35–38mm, perforation 7.5mm, Th. 12.5mm, Wt 18.58gA thick grey ware pottery disc with a slightly hourglass central perforation and partially damaged convex perimeter. One face is dished, with a series of five concentric rings around the perforation; the other face is flat with a concentric rib-and-ring motif.

7.14. Spindle whorl, BGF 06, SF 1191, [529], Phase 2/3/4/5 (Fig. 339) Diam. 36.5–37.5mm, perforation 4.0mm, Th. 7.0mm, Wt 11.56g

Figure 339 Pottery, stone and bone spindle whorls, bone bobbins and bone pin beater. Left to right, upper Cat. 7.24, 7.25, 7.13, 7.16, 7.21, 7.26, centre Cat 7.14, 7.17, 7.22, lower Cat. 7.15, 7.18, 7.23

292 | Dea Senuna

been used in the weaving process as bobbins and/or spindles.

7.25. Bobbin?, BGF 06, SF 1237, [551], Phase 2/3/4/5 (Fig. 339) L. 93.6mm, Wt 12.51gA worked bone object made from an unfused ovicaprid metapodial. There is a longitudinal perforation in one end, much of which has broken away. The other end is imperforate. Near the centre of the shaft is a pair of transverse perforations of irregular ‘heart shape’, their opening made from the flat face of the shaft only.

The similarity in dimensions and form to Cat. 7.24 might be taken to suggest that this object, too, was a spindle or bobbin or a related type of weaving implement.

7.26. Pin beater?, BGF 06, SF 1280, [538], Phase 6 (Fig. 339) L. 107.4mm, Wt 17.54gA worked bone point made from an ovicaprid tibia. The broader end has been cut and there is a small countersunk perforation near the top of one side, perhaps to secure a suspension loop. Wear polish around the margin of the round-pointed tip is suggestive of use as an awl, but it may have been a more general-purpose implement.

This type of bone implement, usually made from sheep metapodia and tibiae, is commonly found in Iron Age contexts, and this example is closely paralleled at Danebury (Sellwood 1984, 382–7, fig. 7.34, especially no. 3.122) and at South Cadbury (Britnell 2000, fig. 94, 1–9), where it is suggested that some, at least, may have been used in the weaving process as pin beaters. Greep has noted that the type continues in use into the Roman period, especially at rural sites (Greep 1996, 532–5, figs 197–8).

8. Other objectsRalph Jackson

8.1. Drop hinge, BGF 03, SF 2, [101], Phase 5/6/7 L. 44.7mm, Wt 10.79gA small copper-alloy drop hinge consisting of a short subrectangular plate with a large circular perforation at one end and a loop to engage with the hinge staple at the other. Such hinges are usually larger and of iron. The use of copper alloy and the small size would suggest this example was probably from a box or cupboard.

8.2. Hinge, BGF 04, SF 562, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 340) L. 30.5mm, Diam. c. 30mm, Wt 4.88gPart of a cylinder, made from a long bone, with polished outer face and a pair of incised rings near the intact end. Part of a drilled hole, diameter c. 8mm, preserved in the broken edge on the other side of the incised rings, confirms that this is a fragment of one segment of a composite bone hinge from a box or cupboard.

For the type and its method of use see MacGregor 1985, 203–5, fig. 110 and Croom 2007, 126–7, fig. 62.

8.3. Hinge, BGF 04, SF 551, [315], Phase 6 (Fig. 340) L. 34.1mm, Diam. c. 22mm, Wt 6.10g

7.20. Spindle whorl?, BGF 05, [311], Phase 6 Diam. c. 60mm, perforation c. 9.5mm, Th. 14.1mm, Wt 20.91gAbout one-third of a quite rudimentarily formed perforated pottery disc, made from a coarse ware sherd with buff/orange surface and grey core, broken across its central hourglass perforation.

7.21. Spindle whorl, BGF 05, SF 746, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 339) Diam. 41.5mm, perforation 8.3mm, Th. 14.1mm, Wt 32.43gA thick circular disc, of soft light cream-beige chalky stone, probably clunch, with a regularly cut, very slightly hourglass central perforation, convex perimeter and slightly dished planar faces, which preserve light surface scratching, probably manufacturing marks. On one face there is a rudimentarily incised circle around the perforation, probably a simple decorative feature.

7.22. Spindle whorl, BGF 06, SF 1204, [523], Phase 2/3/4/5 (Fig. 339) Diam. 47.8mm, perforation 10.5mm, Th. 15.4mm, Wt 18.11gAbout half of a quite rudimentarily formed thick, circular, soft white chalky disc with a regularly cut, slightly hourglass central perforation, a convex perimeter and one planar, one slightly convex face.

The dimensions, form and mass of these pottery and stone perforated discs correspond well to those of spindle whorls, though alternative uses as simple flywheels are possible, too. It is instructive to note from the larger sample of 49 pottery examples excavated at Baldock that few, if any, were in use as spindle whorls at the site after the end of the 1st century ad as was apparently also the case at Verulamium, suggesting perhaps that spinning and weaving were no longer domestic activities (Foster 1986b).

7.23. Spindle whorl, BGF 05, SF 806, [349], Phase 5 (Fig. 339) Diam. 42.2mm, Ht 21.3mm, Wt 15.47gA domed bone object with polished surface and central, slightly hourglass circular perforation, made from the head of a long bone, probably the proximal epiphysis of a bovine femur.

Form and size are consistent with identification as a spindle whorl, and there are near-identical examples from, for example, York (MacGregor 1985, 186–7, fig. 101, no. 6), Chichester (Down 1989, 208, fig. 27.13, no. 8) and South Cadbury (Britnell 2000, 180–1, fig. 92, 3–4) as well as from the temple precinct at Great Chesterford (Major 2011, 290–1, fig. 17.16, B37).

7.24. Bobbin?, BGF 06, SF 1316, [616], Phase 2 (Fig. 339) L. 105.6 mm, Wt 12.69gA worked bone object made from an unfused ovicaprid metapodial. There is a longitudinal perforation in one end where part of one side has broken away. Near the centre of the shaft is a transverse ovoid perforation (5.7 × 4.4mm), its countersunk opening made from both sides.

This implement is closely paralleled by examples from South Cadbury (Britnell 2000, 253–4, fig. 126, 3) and Danebury (Sellwood 1984, 389–92, Class 1, fig. 7.37, especially no. 3.178), where it is suggested some may have


with a flat ivy-leaf-shaped terminal with central small circular perforation. The other end is broken.

8.10. Reinforcing strip/binding, BGF 03, SF 5, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 340) L. (‘unbent’) c. 160mm, Wt 25.45gAs Cat. 8.9, bent centrally.

These are probably iron bindings or broken/distorted angle brackets from a box or casket. At Fishbourne a group of four complete angle brackets of near-identical form, with nails in place in the perforations, almost certainly in position on a wooden box, were found on the floor of Room N12 sealed by debris of the final destruction (Cunliffe 1971, 134, 137, fig. 62, nos 61–2).

8.11. Reinforcing strip/binding, BGF 03, SF 157, [203] (= 2002 T215(5)), Phase 5 L. 214mm, Wt 65.46gA long flat iron strip with slightly converging sides, broken across a small central perforation at the broader end. Radiography reveals the bent shank of a nail in situ in another perforation near the narrower end. Probably a reinforcing strip or binding from a chest, box or door.

8.12. Hinge, BGF 05, SF 831, [110], Phase 5/6 L. 69.1mm, Ht 29.1mm, Wt 24.87gA small L-shaped iron staple for a drop hinge, with a rectangular-sectioned longer arm tapering to a spike and a circular-sectioned shorter arm on which the hinge turned.

Manning 1985, 125–7, R12.

8.13. Wall-hook?, BGF 03, SF 91, [101], Phase 5/6/7 L. 40.4mm, Ht 20.4mm, Wt 3.46gA small, slender, tapered iron rod of rectangular cross section, one end terminating in a spike, the other turned to a right angle. Probably a small wall hook.

8.14. Stud, BGF 03, SF 32, [101], Phase 5/6/7 W. 43.5mm, Wt 158.09gA broken iron shank with a large, thick, slightly domed square head, probably a door stud.

Part of a slender cylinder, made from a long bone, with polished plain outer face and both ends intact. Although no peg hole survives, the form, dimensions and intact ends – which have wear striations – demonstrate that this is a segment from another composite hinge.

8.4. Hinge, BGF 03, SF 115e, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 340) L. 51.9mm, W. 12.6mm, Wt 21.1gPart of a small, stout, iron strap hinge, with a pair of pierced pates and a small nail still in position in its tapered strap. This is one arm of a simple strap hinge, probably from a wooden box or casket.

For a complete example from London and for further references see Manning 1985, R13.

8.5. Hinge, BGF 05, SF 826, [110], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 340) L. 51.9mm, W. 10.8mm, Wt 15.7gAn iron hinge strap, as Cat. 8.4 and nearly identical, with a pair of pierced pates and a small nail still in position in its tapered strap.

8.6. Handle staple, BGF 05, SF 824, [110], Phase 5/6 L. 44.3mm, Wt 7.76gA copper-alloy split spiked-rod with looped head, of a type more often encountered in iron. Possibly a handle staple or other box fitting.

8.7. Double-spiked loop, BGF 06, SF 1182, [512], Phase 5/6 L. 73.7mm, Wt 54.35gAn iron split spiked-rod with looped head. As frequently occurs, the bent-out spikes are broken short. Probably a ring or handle staple or other box fitting.

8.8. Double-spiked loop, BGF 06, SF 1183, [529], Phase 2/3/4/5 L. 35.1mm.Another small broken example.

8.9. Reinforcing strip/binding, BGF 04, SF 573, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 340) L. 99.8mm, Wt 21.33gA slender parallel-sided iron strip, of D-shaped cross section,

Figure 340 Bone and iron hinges, iron box bindings and copper-alloy stud. Left to right, upper Cat. 8.2, 8.5, 8.22, 8.10, 8.9, lower Cat 8.3, 8.4

294 | Dea Senuna

boss intact but only a fragment of the plate surviving, with a short arc of the outer edge.

The size and likely form are reminiscent of the caps of some religious headdresses (e.g. Farley Heath Roman temple: Bird 2007a, 47–8, fig. 18, no. 76), but with no surviving loops or perforations in the perimeter fragment that identification cannot be made.

8.24. Object, BGF 05, SF 909, [384], Phase 3/4 L. 33.8mm, Wt 0.39gA tiny, slender, elongated conical ferrule of copper alloy, in three joining fragments, with a rivet through the broader end.

8.25. Object, BGF 04, SF 649, [304], Phase 6 L. 27.7mm, Wt 0.39gA tiny, slender, flattened ferrule, made from a tapered copper-alloy strip. Perhaps a lace terminal.

8.26. Object, BGF 05, SF 787, [314], Phase 6 L. 28.4mm, W. 2.6mm, Wt 0.57gA very slender tube made from a tightly folded copper-alloy strip. X-radiography revealed a tiny perforation near one end. It is unclear if either end is intact.

8.27. Object, BGF 03, SF 150, [203] (= 2002 T215(5)), Phase 5 L. 15.8mm, Wt 0.93gA curved copper-alloy sheet fragment, with both sides and one end broken, probably part of a small tubular object or socket.

8.28. Binding/casing, BGF 03, SF 37, [101], Phase 5/6/7 L. 36.4mm, W. c. 16.5mm, Wt 3.21gA slightly tapered semi-cylindrical casing made from thin copper-alloy sheet, its two ends intact but both side edges broken.

8.29. Binding?, BGF 05, SF 834, [350], Phase 5/6 L. 52mm, Wt 1.55gFragments of a channelled copper-alloy strip of low, broad, U-shaped cross section made from very thin sheet.

8.30. Disc, BGF 05, SF 944, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 Diam. 26.4–28.9mm, Wt 7.8gAn ovoid iron disc of uncertain function, with mineral-replaced wood in the corrosion products on one face.

8.15. Stud, BGF 06, SF 1310, [596], Phase 4/5 L. 27.2mm, Diam. c. 30mm, Wt 6.74gA short iron spike with a large hollow domed head with flanged perimeter.

8.16. Stud, BGF 03, SF 110, [102], Phase 4 L. 15mm.

8.17. Studs, BGF 03, SF 202, [208], Phase 1 L. 15mm and 9mm.Tiny domed/cone-headed decorative iron studs or hobnails.

8.18. Stud?, BGF 05, SF 973, [324], Phase 5/6 Diam. 10.2mm, Wt 2.59gA small, hollow, flattened copper-alloy sphere with a rivet in the outer flat face. The rims of the inner face are grooved, indicating attachment to a convex linear object. Probably a decorative stud.

8.19. Boss, BGF 06, SF 1196, [534], Phase 2 Diam. 22.8mm, Wt 8.21gA low-domed boss of thin copper-alloy sheet filled with a much-mineralized white metal (presumably lead-alloy) packing.

Perhaps a box fitting. Cf. Crummy 1983, 119, fig. 124.

8.20. Boss, BGF 04, SF 611, [324], Phase 5/6 Diam. c. 20mm, Wt 0.37gA broken moulded boss of thin copper-alloy sheet with central perforation. Presumably the head of a decorative stud.

8.21. Tack, BGF 04, SF 617, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 L. 13.8mm, Wt 0.16gA tiny flat-headed copper-alloy tack, the tip bent and broken.

8.22. Finial, BGF 03, SF 177, [203] (=2002 T215 (5)), Phase 5 (Fig. 340; see also Fig. 331) L. 24.6mm, W. 5.9mm, Wt 1.74gA tiny, slender, tapered, square-sectioned copper-alloy spike with a fine, neck-moulded, elongated piriform head. Probably a decorative stud.

8.23. Bossed plate, BGF 05, SF 801, [313], Phase 8 (Fig. 341) Diam. boss 21.9mm, plate c. 53mm, Wt 15.32gA copper-alloy low-domed integral bossed plate, the central

Figure 341 Copper-alloy bossed plate, lead sheet and repairs. Left to right Cat. 8.23, 8.31, 8.34, 8.36


8.36. Repair, BGF 03, SF 40, [128], Phase 6 (Fig. 341) L. 40.5mm, W. 34.9mm, Wt 46.98gA run-in repair, consisting of a lead-alloy sheet with double flanging at three sides.

8.37. Droplet, BGF 03, SF 138, Trench 3 ploughsoil, unstratified 8.2 × 5.5 × 4.0mm, Wt 1.72gA small, once molten, droplet of gold. XRF analysis indicated that the metal is a gold alloy with a surface composition of 96% gold, 4% silver and a trace of copper.

8.38. Droplet, BGF 03, SF 204, [202], Phase 4/5 Diam. 5.3–6.7mm, Wt 1.07gA small, once molten, droplet of silver.

8.39. Droplet, BGF 04, SF 644, [300], Phase 9 10.3 × 8.1 × 5.3mm, Wt 2.41gA small, once molten, droplet of silver with a projecting strand.

8.40. Droplets, BGF 05, SF 714, unstratified (1) 13.4 × 9.7 × 4.5mm, Wt 2.47g; (2) 13.8 × 10.8 × 4.6mm, Wt 4.17g(1) A small, once molten, droplet. XRF analysis indicated that the metal is a silver copper-alloy with a surface composition of approximately 70% silver and 30% copper, with traces of gold and zinc.

(2) A small, once molten, droplet. XRF analysis of the surface indicated that the metal is lead with a trace of tin.

8.41. Droplet, BGF 03, SF 139, Trench 3 ploughsoil, unstratified 13.9 × 6.7 × 3.5mm, Wt 1.70gA small, once molten, droplet with a projecting strand. XRF analysis of the surface indicated that the metal is lead with a trace of antimony.

All these droplets may be the remains of objects or parts of objects from cremations rather than remnants of metalworking.

8.31. Sheet, BGF 03, SF 1403 (1), [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 341) Folded dimensions 67.6 × 35.3 × 11.1mm (‘unfolded’ c. 100 × 62mm) Wt 44.32gA subrectangular piece of thin lead-alloy sheet, with irregular edges, folded twice (one side then the other).

Although similar in general appearance to some of the curses from Uley and Bath no trace of writing is visible and it may be simply a piece of waste sheet awaiting reuse.

8.32. Sheet, BGF 03, SF 58, 181, 189, 196 & 214, [101], Phase 5/6/7, and [201], Phase 5/6Five unidentifiable small irregular fragments of curved copper-alloy sheet.

8.33. Pot repair, BGF 06, SF 1192, [529], Phase 2/3/4/5 L. 28.0mm, Wt 4.30gA small sherd from a Late Iron Age jar pierced for repair (identified by Valery Rigby), broken across its small elongated hourglass perforation.

8.34. Pot repair, BGF 03, SF 31, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 341) L. 52.2mm, Wt (including pot sherds) 27.77gA pair of plump D-sectioned lead-alloy strips joined by a ‘rivet’ at both ends which engaged in drilled holes either side of the pot fracture. There is a metal overspill at one end. Part of the pot survives, a fractured sherd of buff ware remaining in situ between the strips.

See, for example, a repaired samian bowl from Stonea ( Jackson and Potter 1996, 410–11, no. 5).

8.35. Pot repair, BGF 03, SF 129, Trench 2, unstratified L. 34.3mm, Wt 4.9gAnother, as Cat. 8.34, a pair of lead-alloy strips joined by a ‘rivet’ at both ends.

Although these pot repairs do not come from a specific burial context it is perhaps significant in the broader site context that repaired pots found in graves may reference sickness, death and regeneration as, for example, a flagon in an early burial at Farley Heath (Cool and Leary 2012; Bird 2013), an observation and references I owe to Nina Crummy.

Figure 342 Copper-alloy blade and object, pierced oyster shells and fossils. Left to right, upper Cat. 8.46, 8.50, 8.51, lower Cat. 8.53, 8.52, 8.45

296 | Dea Senuna

Another oyster valve with an irregular square perforation and a countersunk circular perforation made from the outer face at the edge of the thickened hinge area.

Pierced shells of the flat oyster Ostrea edulis have been found on a number of sites, including those in 3rd- to 4th-century ad contexts at Stonea, Cambridgeshire (Cartwright 1996, fig. 201, 1–3). Their function is seldom apparent but the form of the piercings of the Ashwell examples indicates that they were probably fastened with nails.

8.52. Fossil, BGF 06, SF 1164, [506], Phase 6 (Fig. 342) L. 34.7mm, W. 31.4mm, Ht 27.3mm, Wt 40.12gA small, well-marked, ‘shepherd’s crown’, fossil sea urchin, with five-rayed star on its prominently domed upper (aboral) surface and on its slightly concave lower (oral) surface. Its pinkish surface coloration and ashy encrustation is indicative of burning, probably in one of the ovens.

Sea urchins (Echinoids), with their domed shape and five-fold symmetry, are an eye-catching type of fossil that was often selected as a grave good in antiquity and prehistory. It is very likely that this example, too, was collected and used in ritual activity.

8.53. Fossil, BGF 05, SF 745, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 342) Diam. c. 30.5mm, Ht 27.2mm, Wt 25.77gA sub-spheroid naturally perforated grey flint nodule, probably a fossil sponge, perhaps Porosphaera globularis. A patchy white and black surface discoloration and light encrustation may be a result of burning or contact with oven rake-out.

It is probable that this fossil, like Cat. 8.52, was an objet trouvé selected for amuletic or ritual use. As Nina Crummy has reminded me, fossils of both sponge and sea urchin have been found at the temple sites of Farley Heath, Wanborough and Titsey and it has been suggested that they may perhaps be identified with the Druidic ‘snake-stones’ recorded by Pliny the Elder (Bird 2011, 289; see also Eckardt 2004).

8.54. Schist, BGF 05, SF. 792, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 L. 18.2mm, Wt 0.80gA small flake of unaltered dull brown-gold coloured mica schist, perhaps collected as an objet trouvé.

9. GlassDenise Allen

The Roman assemblage comprises 64 vessel fragments (although some fragments may be from the same vessels, making the total vessel count lower than this). There are also two fragments of window glass and six beads.

A further eight fragments are post-medieval/modern in date.

Vessels

Cups and bowls

Rim fragmentsEleven rim fragments represent a variety of cups and bowls, and those that can be dated with any certainty include forms

8.42. Object, BGF 03, SF 3, [101], Phase 5/6/7 L. 46.9mm, Wt 45.27gPart of a thick copper-alloy bar of rectangular cross section, broken at both ends and with amorphous patches of once part-molten metal fused to it.

Perhaps an object from a cremation if not waste from metalworking.

8.43. Object, BGF 03, SF 156, [203] (= 2002 T215(5)), Phase 5 L. 217mm, Wt 118.60gA slender rectangular-sectioned iron bar which broadens out to a broken splayed end. Function indeterminate.

8.44. Object, BGF 03, SF 197, [201], Phase 5/6 L. 28.8mm, Wt 3.87gAn oval-sectioned copper-alloy rod curved to a D shape, with broken tapered ends, possibly a broken buckle hoop.

8.45. Object, BGF 04, SF 610, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 342) L. 21.2mm, W. 16.6mm, Wt 9.45gA cast copper-alloy object, broken at both ends and slightly curved/distorted in profile, with small protuberances on both faces and sides and the remains of casting flashes at the sides. One end is of plain rectangular cross section, the other has mouldings rising from the protuberances and a lentil-shaped cross section. Function indeterminate.

8.46. Object, BGF 04, SF 619, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 342) L. 76.7mm, Wt 10.63gA crescent-shaped copper-alloy blade, of flat triangular cross section, with a convex back and a slightly concave cutting edge, complete at one end, broken at the other – a narrow tang.

8.47. Object, BGF 06, SF 1357, [551], Phase 2/3/4/5 14.5 × 13.2 ×3.2mm, Wt 3.17gA tiny, thick, flat, cast copper-alloy fragment, all edges broken. Possibly a fragment of statuary.

8.48. Buckle?, BGF 05, SF 729, [302], Phase 7 L. 19.4mm, Wt 0.73gAn elliptical copper-alloy strip, broken at both ends, with an oval recess, perhaps part of a small buckle frame.

8.49. Perforated pot base, BGF 06, SF 1172, [522], Phase 5 Diam. c. 60mm, perforation c. 23mm, Wt 12.99gAbout half of the base of an early Roman grey ware vessel, probably ad 80–120 (identified by Valery Rigby), adapted to alternate use by a roughly cut central circular perforation. Well used.

8.50. Pierced shell, BGF 06, SF 1276, [521], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 342) L. 69.2mm, Wt 31.68gAn oyster valve (Ostrea edulis) with a countersunk square perforation made from the outer face at the edge of the thickened hinge area.

8.51. Pierced shell, BGF 06, SF 1235, [538], Phase 6 (Fig. 342) L. 66.2mm, Wt 15.80g


appearing black, glass. Rim out-flared and slightly rounded and thickened, with some rotary polishing inside and out; side sloping in. Diam. of rim c. 100mm (see base fragment Cat. 9.12 below).

9.4. BGF03 SF 137, [201], Phase 5/6, unstratified Rim fragment of a bowl of blue-green glass. Rim folded outward and down forming flattened hollow tube; Diam. c. 200mm.

9.5. BGF03, Trench 1, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 343)Rim fragment of a bowl of blue-green glass; top part of a tubular folded rim extant; Diam. c. 220mm.

9.6. BGF05, SF 867, [365], Phase 4/5 (Fig. 343)Fragment of royal blue glass with part of a broken fold extant in the wall. This may be part of a broken folded tubular rim, Diam. possibly c. 220mm.

9.7. (1) BGF04, [315], Phase 6; (2) BGF04, SF 567, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 343)Two fragments from the same cup or bowl of blue-green glass.

(1) rim fragment; fire-rounded and thickened and slightly out-flared; Diam. c. 120mm.

(2) rim fragment; fire-rounded and thickened; Diam. 120mm.

9.8. BGF04, Trench 5, unstratified (Fig. 343)Blue-green rim fragment, fire-rounded and thickened, slightly distorted by fire; Diam. indeterminable.

9.9. BGF03, SF 111, unstratified (Fig. 343)Rim fragment of a cup of colourless glass; rim fire-rounded and thickened; Diam. c. 100mm.

9.10. BGF04, SF 553, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 343)Rim fragment of a cup of colourless glass, thick flaking iridescence. Rim fire-rounded and thickened and slightly in-turned (Isings 85b?); Diam. c. 100mm.

9.11. BGF06, SF 1168, [517], Phase 3/4 (Fig. 343)Tiny rim fragment of colourless glass. Rim fire-rounded and thickened and turned slightly inwards (possibly Isings 85b?); Diam. indeterminable.

Base and body fragments, vessel type unknownMost of these fragments have already been discussed above, but the ribbed fragments, 17 and 19, may be from bowls, jugs or jars of forms which were common in the later 1st and 2nd centuries.

9.12. BGF05, SF 811, [110], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 343)Base of a vessel of very dark green/brown glass, appearing black. Solid folded base-ring; Diam. c. 30mm.

9.13. BGF04, SF 657, [335], Phase 3 (Fig. 343)Fragment of royal blue glass with part of two marvered opaque white blobs.

and colours of the 1st century ad, through to perhaps the late 2nd or early 3rd century ad. The body and base fragments catalogued as Cat. 9.12–9.19 may also be from cups and bowls, but this is less certain, and indeed it is possible that some may be different parts of the same vessel (e.g. Cat. 9.3 & 9.12; Cat. 9.6 & 9.13–9.15 – these fragments of ‘black’ glass and the blue glass with marvered blobs are not that common). Their presence indicates that some good-quality vessels were included in the range used on the site.

There are two fragments (Cat. 9.1–9.2) of strongly coloured ‘pillar-moulded’ or ribbed bowls. These are easily recognized because of their finish, and are very commonly found on 1st-century ad sites (Price and Cottam 1998, 44–6, fig. 7). The experimental work of Mark Taylor and David Hill (2003) has done much to explain how these sturdy vessels were probably made (Taylor and Hill 2003).

The rim fragment of a cup of ‘black’ glass (Cat. 9.3) may be from the same vessel as base Cat. 9.12, probably a ‘bowl with out-turned fire-rounded rim’ (Price and Cottam 1998, 106–8). Price and Cottam cite fragments from Castleford, West Yorkshire from 2nd-century ad contexts in the vicus, and there is a rim fragment very similar to this one from an unstratified context at Colchester (Cool and Price 1995, 92–3, no. 615, fig. 5.17). Work on this strongly pigmented glass is being conducted by Cosyns and Hanut involving both analysis of the glass itself and its use in both domestic and funerary contexts (Cosyns and Hanut 2005, 117–22; Van der Linden et al. 2009, 822–44)

There are also two, or possibly three, rim fragments (Cat. 9.4–9.6) from tubular-rimmed bowls, which were common both in a shallow and a deep form during the later 1st and 2nd centuries ad (Price and Cottam 1998, 77–80, figs 24–5). The blue fragment, Cat. 9.6, may be part of the same vessel as Cat. 9.13–9.15, which have opaque white marvered blobs, and it is possible that some of the indeterminate royal blue fragments listed below may also belong with these. However, many vessel forms were decorated with marvered blobs (e.g. a blue and white oil flask from Richborough, Harden et al. 1968, 58, no. 70) so this identification is very uncertain. The blue-green cup rims, Cat. 9.7–9.8, cannot be closely identified since many forms are finished in this way.

The colourless cup rims, Cat. 9.9–9.11, may similarly represent any of a number of forms, but Cat. 9.10 & 9.11, with their slightly inturned profiles, may be examples of the very common cylindrical drinking cups of the later 2nd and earlier 3rd centuries ad, often referred to as ‘Isings 85b’ (Isings 1957, form 85b; Cool 1990b; Price and Cottam 1998, 99–101, fig. 37).

9.1. BGF04, SF 563, [305], Phase 6 (Fig. 343)Rim fragment of a pillar-moulded bowl of blue glass. Part of rotary-polished rim extant; Diam. indeterminable.

9.2. BGF05, SF 763, unstratified (Fig. 343)Rim fragment of a pillar-moulded bowl of amber glass, some flaking iridescence; part of two ribs extant, slightly distorted by fire; Diam. c. 140mm.

9.3. BGF04, [315], Phase 6 (Fig. 343)Rim fragment of a bowl or cup of very dark yellow/green,

298 | Dea Senuna

9.19. BGF04, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 343)Body fragment of amber glass, single optic-blown or tooled rib extant, possibly a jar or jug.

Flasks/jugsLittle can be said with certainty about these three fragments of flasks or jugs, but Cat. 9.20 is probably a trail from around the neck, and the possible yellow colour may identify it with the ‘snake-thread’ glasses popular in the later 2nd and 3rd centuries ad – if so it was once a finely made vessel (Cottam and Price 1998, 32). Cat. 9.21–9.22 may be from the commonest jug form of the later 1st and 2nd centuries ad – long-necked jugs with conical or bulbous bodies – which often had handles shaped like these (Price and Cottam 1998, 152–7, figs 67–8).

9.20. BGF06, SF 1138, [510], Phase 6 (Fig. 343)Half a glass ring, likely to be an applied trail from around the neck of a flask or jug. Colourless glass, with possibly a

9.14. BGF05, SF 962, [364], Phase 6 (Fig. 343)Fragment of royal blue glass with part of four marvered blobs of opaque white glass.

9.15. BGF05, SF 747, [314], Phase 6 (Fig. 343)Base fragment of a jar or bowl of royal blue glass. Open base-ring, but much distorted by fire; Diam. indeterminable.

9.16. BGF05, SF 840, [349], Phase 5 (Fig. 343)Fragment of blue-green glass with two ribs which have been tooled or pinched together; Diam. indeterminable.

9.17. BGF06, SF 1185, [525], Phase 6 (Fig. 343)Fragment of pale blue-green glass with an optic-blown or tooled rib.

9.18. BGF06, SF 1253, [572], Phase 5 (Fig. 343)Base of a cylindrical vessel of colourless glass (beaker, flask or bottle-jug). Flattened base; Diam. c. 80mm.

9.7(1)

9.19

9.7(2)

9.13 9.15

9.20

9.1

9.12

9.169.14

9.17 9.189.22

9.6

9.2

9.119.109.9

9.5

9.21

9.8

0 3cm

9.3

Figure 343 Vessel glass (Cat. 9.1–9.22)


thin strand of opaque yellow incorporated within it; flattened at one end, which would have been where trail was attached. Diam. of neck c. 15mm.

9.21. BGF03, Trench 1, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 343)Fragment of a handle of blue-green glass – flat-sectioned with central raised rib; W. 28mm.

9.22. BGF06, SF 1290, [592], Phase 6 (Fig. 343)Fragment of a handle of pale blue-green glass. Flat-sectioned, with central raised rib; W. 25mm.

BottlesThere is an unusually low proportion of bottle fragments – only four out of a total of 64 Roman vessel fragments – but it is impossible to say whether this is significant! These bottles were some of the commonest glass forms in the 1st and 2nd centuries ad, used for transporting a variety of liquids (Price and Cottam 1998, 191–8).• BGF03, SF 50, [102], Phase 4 = Prismatic bottle body

fragment; blue-green;• BGF04, [315], Phase 6= Prismatic bottle fragment;

blue-green;• BGF04, SF 654, [324], Phase 5/6 = Prismatic bottle

body fragment (probably square); blue-green;• BGF04, Trench 5, unstratified = Rim fragment of a

bottle, folded outward, upward and inward; blue-green; Diam. c. 50mm.

Indeterminate vessel fragments

Blue-green (14)• BGF03, SF 109, [101], Phase 5/6/7 = 1 fragment;• BGF04, SF 525, [314], Phase 6 = 1 fragment;• BGF04, [315], Phase 6 = 1 fragment;• BGF05, [110], Phase 5/6 = 2 tiny fragments;• BGF05, SF 859, [314], Phase 6 = 1 fragment;• BGF05, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 = 1 fragment;• BGF05, SF 736, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 = 2 fragments

slightly distorted by fire;• BGF05, SF 1018, [324], Phase 5/6 = 1 fragment,

distorted by fire;• BGF05, [345], Phase 4 = 2 fragments;• BGF05, [364], Phase 6 = 1 fragment; • BGF05, SF 890, [365], Phase 4/5 = 1 fragment.

Colourless (14)• BGF04, SF 663, [311], Phase 6 = 1 fragment;• BGF04, SF 656, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 = 1 fragment;• BGF04, [324], Phase 5/6 = 4 fragments;• BGF04, SF 652, [324], Phase 5/6 = 1 fragment;• BGF05, SF 804, [314], Phase 6 = 1 small fragment;• BGF05, SF 917, [334], Phase 4 = 1 fragment;• BGF05, SF 782, [343], Phase 4 = 1 fragment;• BGF05, SF 1022, [343], Phase 4 = 1 fragment;• BGF05, unstratified = 1 fragment;• BGF06, SF 1217, [525], Phase 6 = 1 fragment;• BGF06, SF 1218, [525], Phase 6 = 1 fragment.

Blue (7)• BGF05, SF 966, [101], Phase 5/6/7 = 1 fragment, slightly

damaged by fire;• BGF05, [314], Phase 6 = 1 tiny fragment, ?blue;• BGF05, SF 777, [314], Phase 6 = 1 royal blue fragment;• BGF05, SF 735, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 = 1 royal blue

fragment;• BGF05, [349], Phase 5 = 1 royal blue fragment;• BGF05, [364], Phase 6 = 1 royal blue fragment, slightly

distorted by fire;• BGF06, SF 1222, [525], Phase 6 = 1 royal blue fragment.

Pale green (2)• BGF05, SF 803, [311], Phase 6 = 1 fragment, thick

iridescence;• BGF05, SF 813, [311], Phase 6 = 1 fragment, thick

iridescence, distorted by fire.

Amber (1)• BGF05, [343], Phase 4 = 1 tiny fragment.

BeadsSix tiny beads, or fragments of beads, are all of forms commonly used throughout the Roman period, and so cannot be closely dated (Guido 1978, 92–7, fig. 37, 2–4).

9.23. BGF04, [305], Phase 6Small cylindrical bead of green glass. L. 7mm, maximum Diam. 4mm.

9.24. BGF04, SF 574, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 Small segmented bead of green glass, three segments extant. L. 11mm, Diam. 4mm.

9.25. BGF05, SF 780, [343], Phase 4Single segment of a small segmented bead of green glass. L. c. 5 mm, maximum Diam. c. 5mm.

9.26. BGF05, SF 887, [343], Phase 4Segmented bead of green glass – three segments extant. L. 10mm, Diam. c. 5mm.

9.27. BGF05, SF 815, [345], Phase 4Tiny cylindrical bead of pale blue-green glass or faience. Slightly segmented. L. 8mm, Diam. 2mm.

9.28. BGF05, SF 940, [355], Phase 2/3Single segment of a small segmented bead of green glass. L. c. 5mm, maximum Diam. c. 4mm.

Window glassThere are just two fragments of window glass, both of the ‘cast’ matt-glossy (blue-green) variety in use to about ad 300 (Allen 2002).• BGF03, Trench 1, [101], Phase 5/6/7 = 1 fragment;• BGF04, SF 652, [324], Phase 5/6 = 1 fragment.

Post-medieval/modern fragments• BGF04, SF 525, [314], Phase 6 = 1 fragment pale green

glass; thick golden iridescent weathering;

300 | Dea Senuna

The rest of the flint consists of unretouched flakes and chips. These were recovered from: [102], Phase 4 (1); Trench 4 [201], Phase 5/6 (2); [304], Phase 6 (2); [335], Phase 3 (3); [349], Phase 5 (1); [360], Phase 1 (1); [371], Phase 1 (1); [506], Phase 6 (1); [521], Phase 5/6 (1); and unstratified (1).

Of the tools, a Neolithic date would be acceptable for all but the crested blade, which is Mesolithic, and, perhaps, the denticulate scraper, which might be later Neolithic–Bronze Age.

Flint was freely available locally from gravels and clay-with-flints.

Bronze Age metalwork Neil Wilkin

Flanged axes

10.8. Axe, BGF 03, SF 115B, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 345, 355) L. 96.2mm, W. 22.6mm, W. blade 56.3mm, Wt 134.76g A complete plain, flanged axe-head with a flared lower blade. The sides of the body are raised into a flange about 1.5mm high. Although no stop ridge or other decoration is visible, the surfaces of the axe are heavily corroded and may have obscured the finer features. The axe falls into Needham’s (1983) Class 5B and Schmidt and Burgess’s (1981) Long-Flanged axes of Type Arreton, belonging to the Arreton metalwork phase (Needham 1996).

Early Bronze Age, Arreton phase (c. 1700–1500 bc).

10.9. Axe-chisel, BGF 03, SF 34, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 345, 355) L. 52.9mm, W. 14.5mm, W. blade 27.9mm, Wt 26.30g A diminutive, plain, flanged axe-chisel, with a flared lower blade, intact, but slightly damaged by corrosion at the butt. The sides of the body are raised into a flange about 1mm high and there is a very low horizontal rib/stop ridge midway along the planar faces. The axe belongs to Needham’s (1983, 258–9) eclectic ‘axe-chisel’ type.

Early Bronze Age, Arreton phase (c. 1700–1500 bc).

Spearheads

10.10a. Spearhead (refits with Cat. 10.10b), BGF 03, SF 79, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 346, 355) L. 85.6mm, W. blade 30.9mm, orig.c. 35mm, Wt 46.96g A socketed spearhead with a broad leaf-shaped blade and a very prominent rounded-section midrib. Part of one side of the blade is broken. The socket is also broken shortly below the blade, but Cat. 10.10b joins the break and confirms that the spearhead had side loops. The flame-shaped blade is consistent with Davis’s (2012) Group 6A, Developed Side-looped spearheads, although owing to corrosion to the surface of the blade it is not possible to establish whether the blade was bevelled or flat.

Middle Bronze Age (Acton Park to Penard phase, c. 1500–1100 bc).

10.10b. Spearhead socket fragment (refits with Cat. 10.10a), BGF 03, SF 80, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 346, 355)

• BGF04, Trench 5, unstratified = Bottle neck, pale green, thick; 3 fragments, various; post-medieval;

• BGF05, SF 818, [110], Phase 5/6 = 1 colourless fragment, thick iridescence;

• BGF05, [300], unstratified = 1 blue-green fragment, possibly post-medieval;

• BGF05, SF 793, [314], Phase 6 = 1 green fragment, thick golden iridescence; possibly post-medieval;

• BGF05, unstratified = 1 green fragment, post-medieval.

10. Prehistoric objectsPrehistoric pottery and flint Gill Varndell

Pottery

10.1. Sherd, BGF 05, SF 762, [324], Phase 5/6 One very small, plain body sherd, eroded. Red externally and internally, dark grey core. Visible temper is grog. Too small to identify categorically, but possibly Late Neolithic–Bronze Age.

FlintWorked flint recovered includes one core and four tools.

10.2. Core, BGF 06, SF 1269, [506], Phase 6 (Fig. 344) L. 57mm, W. 37mm, Th. 21mmA single-platform blade core showing edge preparation, probably at the end of its useful life as a core. Mottled grey-white.

10.3. Scraper, BGF 06, SF 1257, [506], Phase 6 (Fig. 344) L. 50mm, W. 25mm, Th. 10mmAn end-scraper on a tertiary plunging flake. Mottled grey-white.

10.4. Borer, BGF 05, SF 934, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 344) L. 44mm, W. 27mm, Th. 7mmA borer on a tertiary flake. Fine continuous edge retouch laterally, tapering sharply to a point at the distal end. Mottled grey-white.

10.5. Knife/scraper, BGF 05, SF 1007, [384], Phase 3/4 (Fig. 344) L. 37mm, W. 28mm, Th. 4mmA small knife and/or scraper on a thin cortical flake. Acute, fine and continuous retouch; broad leaf-shaped, tapering to a tiny area of remnant cortex at the proximal end. Mottled grey-white.

10.6. Scraper, BGF 03, Trench 4, [201], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 344) L. 43mm, W. 36mm, Th. 8mmA denticulate scraper on a secondary flake, with steep retouch at the undulating proximal edge. Dark grey-brown.

10.7. Blade?, BGF 05, SF 788, [335], Phase 3 L. 39mm, W. 4mm, Th. 4mmA possible small crested blade. White patina.


10.4

10.610.5

10.3

10.2

0 3cm

Figure 344 Neolithic flint core and tools (Cat. 10.2–10.6). Scale 1:1

302 | Dea Senuna

symmetrical and similar to Cat. 10.12. It is unlikely that the original length of the spearhead was in excess of 70–80mm. The form is suggestive of Davis Group 6 spearheads.


10.14. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 163, [203] (= 2002 T215 (5)), Phase 5 (Fig. 346) L. 41.1mm, W. 11.7mm, Wt 9.11gThe upper, gently tapering part of a spearhead blade with an angular lozenge-sectioned midrib, its tip missing. The blade form is similar to the other Davis (2012) Group 6 spearheads in the Ashwell assemblage and the cross section is very similar to the spearhead socket fragment Cat. 10.15, the two pieces having been part of a placed deposit but seemingly not from the same blade.


10.15. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 174, [203], (= 2002 T215 (5)), Phase 5 (Fig. 346) L. 57.6mm, W. socket 15.2mm, Wt 17.10gA socketed spearhead, with a grey-coloured (tin-enriched?) surface, lacking the socket mouth and much of the blade. It retains a pair of small side loops and the base of a slender blade with lozenge-sectioned midrib. The spearhead probably belongs to Davis’s (2012) Group 6E. This fragment was found together with Cat. 10.14 in a placed deposit but is seemingly not from the same blade.


10.16. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 59, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 346) L. 48.1mm, W. 16.0mm, Wt 9.46gThe upper part of the blade of a slender elongated leaf-shaped spearhead, with a prominent angular lozenge-sectioned midrib, the pointed tip lacking. The blade form is similar in size and form to the other Davis (2012) Group 6 spearheads in the Ashwell assemblage.

? Middle Bronze Age.

10.17. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 72, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 346) L. 46.7mm, W. 13.6mm, Wt 7.06gThe undamaged upper part of the blade of a slender elongated leaf-shaped spearhead with an angular lozenge-sectioned midrib. The bottom corners of the blade are broken off but enough survives to suggest that the blade did not extend beyond the extant part. The length of the original spearhead would therefore have been relatively small, c. 80–90mm. The blade form is similar in size and form to the other Davis (2012) Group 6 spearheads in the Ashwell assemblage.


10.18. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 95, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 346) L. 104.2mm, W. blade 21.7mm, orig.c. 33mm, Wt 53.09gA socketed spearhead with a broad leaf-shaped blade and a

L. 36.6mm, L. side loop 17.5mm, W. side loop 6.8mm, Wt 17.69g A joining part of the socket of spearhead Cat. 10.10a with one surviving side loop, but lacking the socket mouth. See Cat. 10.10a for details. The combined length of fragments 10.10a and 10.10b is c.125mm.


10.11. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 115A, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 346, 355) L. 102.1mm, W. blade 14.4mm, int. diam. socket 12.9mm, Wt 24.19g A near-complete socketed spearhead, in two joining pieces, with only the very tip of the blade and the socket mouth lacking. The very slender elongated leaf-shaped blade has a prominent lozenge-sectioned midrib. The broken stub of the side loop is preserved on both sides of the socket. The slender blade of this spearhead is difficult to parallel closely but probably belongs to Davis’s (2012) Groups 6C and 6E.


10.12. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 215, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 346) L. 75.2mm, W. 14.3mm, Wt 20.10gA socketed spearhead lacking the socket mouth. The narrow blade, with pronounced lozenge-sectioned midrib, lacks most of the cutting edge on both sides. The cross section of the blade is symmetrical. The spearhead is too corroded to determine whether it originally had side loops, but the form is suggestive of Davis’s (2012) Group 6.


10.13. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 89, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 346) L. 45.6mm, Wt 9.29gA very corroded fragment of a small socketed spearhead. The narrow triangular-shaped blade, with lozenge-sectioned midrib, lacks its tip, and most of the socket is lacking. The projections of a side loop can be identified on one side of the socket. The cross section of the blade is

Figure 345 Bronze Age flanged axes. Left to right Cat 10.8, 10.9


other Davis (2012) Group 6 spearheads in the Ashwell assemblage.


10.22. Spearhead, BGF 04, SF 642, [300], Phase 9 (Fig. 346) L. 21.5mm, Wt 4.89gPart of the upper end of a narrow triangular-shaped spearhead with prominent midrib, the blade edges chipped and distorted. This short preserved section of the blade is at the point of change from hollow to solid midrib. In addition to breakage at both ends the blade has also been bent. The blade form, size and even the pattern of distortion is similar to Cat. 10.20. The blade form is similar in size and form to the other Davis (2012) Group 6 spearheads in the Ashwell assemblage.


10.23. Spearhead, BGF 05, SF 814, unstratified (Fig. 346) L. 14.2mm, Wt 2.67gA small fragment of the upper end of a narrow triangular-shaped spearhead with prominent midrib, the tip broken. The blade form is similar in size and form to the other Davis (2012) Group 6 spearheads in the Ashwell assemblage.


10.24. Spearhead, BGF 05, SF 829, [355], Phase 2/3 (Fig. 346) L. 35.5mm, Wt 6.34gThe lower part of the blade of a narrow leaf-shaped spearhead with a lozenge-sectioned midrib. The tip and main body are lacking and the cutting edges chipped. The blade form is similar in size and form to the other Davis (2012) Group 6 spearheads in the Ashwell assemblage.


10.25. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 17, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 346) L. 39.6mm, W. 18mm, Wt 10.40g

rounded-section midrib. One side of the blade is lacking and the socket is broken and partially crushed. Breakage of the socket is too close to the base of the blade to determine whether it was side looped or pegged. The form and size of the blade is very similar to Cat. 10.10a.

Middle or Late Bronze Age.

10.19. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 97, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 346) L. 39.5mm, W. 14.7mm, Wt 9.60gThe upper, slightly distorted, part of the blade of a slender leaf-shaped spearhead, with a lozenge-sectioned midrib, its pointed tip lacking. The blade form is similar in size and form to the other Davis (2012) Group 6 spearheads in the Ashwell assemblage.


10.20. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 146, [201], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 346) L. 51.6mm, W. 14.6mm, Wt 8.60gA slender leaf-shaped spearhead fragment with a prominent round-sectioned midrib. Both edges of the blade are damaged and distorted, one edge having a thumb-shaped deformation. Although the socket is completely absent, the blade appears to be intact and is flame-shaped. The length of the original spearhead would therefore have been relatively small, c. 80–90mm. The blade form is similar in size and form to the other Davis (2012) Group 6 spearheads in the Ashwell assemblage.


10.21. Spearhead, BGF 04, SF 612, [320], Phase 3/4/5/6/7 (Fig. 346) L. 57.5mm, Wt 12.3gThe upper end of a narrow triangular-shaped spearhead with prominent midrib, the blade edges chipped and corroded, and a tiny non-joining fragment of the tubular socket. The blade form is similar in size and form to the

Figure 346 Bronze Age spearheads. Left to right, upper Cat. 10.10, 10.11, 10.12, 10.13, 10.14, 10.16, 10.17, 10.18, 10.19, 10.21, centre Cat. 10.23, 10.27, lower Cat. 10.25, 10.20, 10.15, 10.22, 10.24, 10.26

304 | Dea Senuna

10.29. Ferrule, BGF 03, SF 114, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 347) L. 62.8mm, Diam. 13.5–12.5mm, Wt 21.74gA carefully finished, tapered tubular ferrule from a spear shaft. Both ends are broken and open but slightly curved surfaces on opposite sides of the wider end indicate the possible presence of rivet holes.

Late Bronze Age (Wilburton to Ewart Park, c. 1100–800 bc).

10.30. ?Ferrule, BGF 03, SF 96, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 347) L. 81.5mm, Diam. c. 23–5mm.A possible large tubular ferrule from a spear shaft, apparently complete (but open) at one end, crushed and broken at the other. This object is, however, larger than any currently known ferrule and may be a socket fragment from a spearhead with a moderate to long socket (S. Needham, pers. comm.).

Late Bronze Age (Wilburton to Ewart Park, c. 1100–800 bc).

Dirks, daggers/knives

10.31. Dirk, knife or dagger, BGF 03, SF 170, [201], Phase 5/6 (Figs 348, 355) L. 75.8mm, W. 30.4mm, L. tang 6.0mm, Wt 16.31gA small tanged and riveted dirk or dagger blade. The point of the blade is missing. The blade is a narrow concave triangular shape, broadening towards the hilt, where there are four rivet holes. While it is possibly an example of Burgess and Gerloff’s (1981) Group IV blades, the rivet arrangement is difficult to parallel and this blade may originally have been a knife (S. Needham, pers. comm.). A small number of parallels can also be found among Early Bronze Age blades (Gerloff 1975, nos 65 & 87).

Bronze Age.

10.32. Dirk/dagger, BGF 05, SF 846, [311], Phase 6 (Fig. 348) L. 73.5mm, Wt 19.76g

The end of the leaf-shaped blade of a spearhead with bent tip and a round-sectioned pronounced midrib. The tip of the socket is visible in the centre of the broken edge, suggesting this is not the tip of a very substantial spearhead. It is not possible to be certain of its typo-chronology. Bridgford’s study of Bronze Age spearheads notes that tip damage is a likely result of warfare in the course of throwing and stabbing (2000, 145–8).

Middle/Late Bronze Age.

10.26. Spearhead, BGF 03, SF 103, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 346) L. 47.5mm, W. 25.6mm, Wt 18.77gThe upper part of the blade of a broad leaf-shaped spearhead with a prominent rounded-sectioned midrib. It is not possible to determine the typo-chronology of the blade from the surviving fragment alone but the length of the original spearhead would have been substantial (probably in the range of 200–250mm) relative to others from the assemblage.


10.27. Spearhead?, BGF 03, SF 141, [201], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 346) L. 24.6mm, Wt 2.25gThe tip of a blade, with midrib and damaged edges, probably from a spearhead.

Bronze Age.

Ferrules

10.28. Ferrule, BGF 04, SF 537, [312], Phase 1 (Figs 347, 355) L. 35.8mm, Wt 5.65gAn elongated conical ferrule, its tip complete, the broad end broken. Possibly the broken tip of a conical ferrule from the end of a spear shaft or a conical, socketed fitting with another (e.g. decorative) function.

Middle Bronze Age (Penard phase, c. 1300–1150 bc).

Figure 347 Bronze Age ferrules. Left to right Cat. 10.28, 10.29, 10.30 Figure 348 Bronze Age dirks/ daggers/ knives. Left to right Cat. 10.31, 10.32, 10.33


10.37. Socketed axe, BGF 03, SF 4, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 350) L. 62.1mm, W. 23.9mm, W. blade 34.1mm, Wt 108.50g.Part of a socketed axe-head, crush-distorted and broken short of the socket mouth. An original, marked facet on one face of the blade gives it a distinctly adze-like profile. Owing to its condition it is not possible to assign this axe to a particular typological grouping.

Late Bronze Age.

10.38. Socketed axe, BGF 03, SF 115C, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 350, 355) L. 60.3mm, W. socket mouth 30.5mm, W. blade 31.3mm, Loop, external 15.3 × 6.3mm, Wt 69.47gA complete small, plain, looped and socketed axe-head with a slightly flared lower blade, in good condition. The subrectangular socket mouth (internally 24 × 19mm) has a double mouth moulding. This axe belongs to Needham’s (1990) Class A – South-eastern type, A1 plain, based on the presence of a double mouth moulding, with the upper moulding more prominent than the lower, and the lower moulding giving rise to the loop. Axes of this type date to the Ewart Park phase of the Late Bronze Age.

Late Bronze Age (Ewart Park Phase, c. 900–800 bc).

10.39. Socketed axe, BGF 03, SF 128, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Figs 350, 355) L. 96.7mm, W. 23.7mm, W. blade 42.5mm, Wt 135.16g A complete, plain, looped and socketed axe-head with slender, faceted body angles that produce an octagonal cross section. The cutting edge of the neatly faceted, flared blade is heavily damaged; the butt end is severely twisted and distorted; the socket is crushed out of shape, its rim dented, and the loop squashed. This axe belongs to Needham (1990, 41) Class D1, with a trumpet-shaped moulding with flat top.Late Bronze Age (Ewart Park Phase, c. 900–800 bc).

10.40. Socketed axe, BGF 04, SF 523, [300], Phase 9 (Fig. 350) Ht 36.3mm, W. 58.9mm, Wt 93.92gThe broken lower blade of a socketed axe, preserving the tapered base of the socket and remains of a casting seam on one side. The slightly asymmetric splayed cutting edge is

A slender triangular blade, with broad, flattened midrib on both faces, from a small dirk or dagger, possibly reworked, lacking its tip and part of its hilt plate. Near the top the inner edge of a pair of rivet holes survives.

Middle Bronze Age.

10.33. Rapier reworked as dagger/knife, BGF 05, SF 908, [350], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 348) L. 132.2mm, W. 22.3mm, Wt 40.82gA slender blade, slightly bent at its midpoint, with lentoid cross section, slightly sinuous profile, rather obtuse tip and hollowed cutting edges. A subtriangular facet on both faces at the upper end suggests that this is a reworked rapier blade.

Middle Bronze Age.

Swords

10.34. Sword, BGF 03, SF 135, [201], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 349) L. 37.5mm, W. 34.6mm, Wt 40.52gA fragment of a Carps Tongue sword blade with an oval-sectioned midrib defined by lateral grooves. Both ends broken/cut.

Late Bronze Age (Ewart Park Phase, c. 900–800 bc).

10.35. Sword, BGF 06, SF 1344, [608], Phase 1 (Fig. 349) L. 63.1mm, Wt 19.02gThe convexly tapered tip of a blade, probably from a sword, slightly asymmetrical (possibly as a result of reworking), with a midrib on both faces that runs all the way to the tip, the cutting edges intact except for the extreme point.


Socketed axes

10.36. Socketed axe, BGF 03, SF 1, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 350) L. 59.2mm, W. 36.3mm, W. blade 47.3mm, Wt 96.47gBlade-end fragment of a socketed axe-head, broken and crush-distorted socket end. The cutting edge of the flared blade is damaged. Owing to its condition it is not possible to assign this axe to a particular typological grouping.

Late Bronze Age.

Figure 349 Bronze Age swords. Left to right Cat. 10.34, 10.35 Figure 350 Bronze Age socketed axes and winged axe. Left to right, upper Cat. 10.37, 10.38, 10.39, 10.41, lower Cat. 10.36, 10.40

306 | Dea Senuna

10.43. Awl, BGF 03, SF 81, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 351) L. 59.3mm, W. 5.4mm, Wt 7.16gA complete awl, of elongated unequal rhombus shape. The shorter end has a square cross section, morphing to a round section and tapering to an intact blunt-pointed tip. The longer end, of rectangular cross section, tapers to a tiny ‘chisel’ tip which may have been used as a bradawl in addition to its principal function as a handle tang.

Middle/Late Bronze Age (probably Late Bronze Age).

10.44. Awl, BGF 05, SF 910, [350], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 351) L. 93.2mm, Wt 12.11gA complete awl, of elongated unequal rhombus shape. The longer end, of square cross section, tapers evenly to an intact rounded and pointed tip. The shorter end, of rectangular cross section, tapers to a chisel-like edge. While the shorter end might have functioned solely as a tang to secure the awl in a handle it is conceivable that it also served as a tool – a bradawl – for a dual-purpose implement with interchangeable handle.


10.45. Awl, BGF 06, SF 1279, [538], Phase 6 (Fig. 351) L. 68.7mm, Wt 6.27gA complete awl, of elongated rhombus shape. One end, of square cross section with lightly chamfered corners, tapers evenly to an intact tip. The other end, of rectangular cross section, tapers to a slender, slightly damaged, chisel-like tip. Like Cat. 10.44 it is conceivable that this was a dual-purpose implement – an awl and bradawl combined – with an interchangeable handle.

For examples from Baldock and a note on the type see Needham 1986, 141–2. Middle/Late Bronze Age.

10.46. Socketed chisel, BGF 03, SF 143, [201], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 351) L. 57.1mm, W. socket mouth 19.3mm, W. blade 24.4mm, Wt 22.92gA socketed chisel in good condition, lacking only a small fragment of the socket mouth.

Late Bronze Age.

10.47. Tanged chisel, BGF 03, SF 93, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 351)

intact and in good condition. Owing to its condition it is not possible to assign this axe to a particular typological grouping.

Late Bronze Age.

Winged axe

10.41. Winged axe, BGF 03, SF 115D, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 350) L. 77.4mm, W. (excluding loop) 30.6mm, Loop, external 24.8 × 8.3mm, Wt 178.89gPart of a winged axe-head with a loop on one side for attachment to a haft. The end of the butt is damaged, the ends of the wings on one face of the butt are broken and the entire blade end of the axe is missing. Winged axes are often associated with Carps Tongue fragments and can be dated to the Ewart Park phase and, less often, with Wilburton phase hoards. In this case the form of the butt and relatively straight outline suggest a Wilburton date is more likely (B. O’Connor, pers. comm.).

Late Bronze Age (Wilburton or Ewart Phase, c. 1100–800 bc).

Small wood- and craftwork tools

10.42. Awl, BGF 03, SF 77, [117], Phase 5/6 (Figs 351–2) L. 36.6mm, W. 4.1mm, Wt 2.27gA tiny complete awl, of elongated unequal rhombus shape. The shorter (working) end, of circular cross section, tapers evenly to an intact pointed tip and retains a distinct wear polish. The longer (handle) end, of rectangular cross section, also tapers to a point. A grooved double spiral twist at the junction of the two zones appears to be an intentional feature though its purpose is unclear. It may reflect the reuse of a spiral twisted section of copper-alloy bar such as from a Taunton phase spiral twisted torc.

Bronze Age.

Figure 351 Bronze Age small wood- and craftwork tools. Left to right Cat. 10.42, 10.43, 10.44, 10.45, 10.46, 10.47, 10.48, 10.49, 10.50, 10.51

Figure 352 Bronze Age awl Cat. 10.42 showing the grooved double spiral twist


Socketed implement fragments, either from tools or weapons

10.52. Socketed tool or weapon (spearhead?), BGF 03, SF 166, [201], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 353) L. 22.7mm, Wt 4.34gA socket fragment preserving part of the simple socket mouth and a side casting flash. The dimensions and cross section (which appears ovoid, though that may be a result of crushing) are similar to those of spearhead sockets.

Middle/Late Bronze Age?

10.53. Socketed tool or weapon (spearhead?), BGF 06, SF 1142, unstratified (Fig. 353) L. 35.4mm, Wt 7.30gA curved-section fragment with a simple rim from a socketed tool or weapon, possibly part of the socket of a spearhead.


10.54. Socketed tool or weapon (spearhead?), BGF 05, SF 822, [341], Phase 3 (Fig. 353) L. 11.9mm, Wt 0.77gA tiny curved fragment with a simple rim, possibly part of the socket of a spearhead.


10.55. Socketed tool or weapon, BGF 05, SF 775, Unstratified (Fig. 353) L. 15.4mm, Wt 2.42gA small, cast, curved fragment with a thickened rim and side casting flash. Probably part of the mouth of a small socketed tool or weapon but seemingly too thin to be from a substantial socketed axe.


Casting waste and ingot material

10.56. Casting waste or ingot, BGF 05, SF 912, [350], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 354) L. 55.3mm, W. 41.8mm, Th. 26.9mm, Wt 249.01gAn irregular ingot fragment, the upper and lower faces intact.

Bronze Age.

10.57. Casting waste or ingot, BGF 06, SF 1274, [551], Phase 2/3/4/5 (Fig. 354)

L. 73.6mm, W. blade 26.9mm, L. tang 48.5mm, W. tang 9.6mm, Wt 23.12gA plain, tanged chisel, complete and in good condition. The rectangular-sectioned tang tapers to a point.

Late Bronze Age.

10.48. Tanged chisel, BGF 03, SF 131, [111], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 351) L. 78.1mm, W. blade 27.5mm, L. tang 49.5mm, W. tang 7.5–4.5mm, depth of stop ridge 3.5mm, Wt 17.02gA complete tanged chisel, in good condition, with a broad, triangular blade and a pronounced stop ridge or collar between the tang and the blade. The rectangular-sectioned tang tapers towards the chisel-like butt end.

Middle (Penard Phase) or Late Bronze Age.

10.49. Tanged chisel, BGF 05, SF 802, [341], Phase 3 (Fig. 351) L. 79.6mm, W. blade 32.2mm, Wt 22.96gA complete chisel, with tapered rectangular-sectioned tang, stop ridge/collar and a broad triangular blade with increasing curvature towards the tip. It is unclear whether this occurred through particular usage or whether it was an original design feature.

Late Bronze Age.

10.50. Tanged? chisel, BGF 05, SF 725, [324], Phase 5/6 (Fig. 351) L. 45.6mm, Wt 7.97gA small chisel or awl, complete, with tapered rectangular-sectioned tang and a triangular blade, its broad cutting edge angled to one side.

Bronze Age.

10.51. Socketed gouge, BGF 03, SF 63, [101], Phase 5/6/7 (Fig. 351) L. 88.1mm, L. blade 49.7mm, W. blade 14.3mm, socket internal Diam. 14.8mm, external Diam. 21.5mm, depth of collar 3.5mm, Wt 69.65gA complete, undamaged, socketed gouge with a narrow collar at the mouth of the socket and a slightly flared cutting edge in good condition. The carefully finished gouge furrow tapers evenly towards the mouth.

Late Bronze Age.

Figure 353 Bronze Age socketed implement fragments. Left to right Cat. 10.52, 10.53, 10.54, 10.55

Figure 354 Bronze Age casting waste and ingot material. Left to right Cat. 10.59, 10.58, 10.57, 10.56

308 | Dea Senuna

10.11

0 3cm

10.31

10.8

10.9

10.10

10.28

10.38

10.39

Figure 355 Bronze Age flanged axes, spearheads, ferrule, dirk and socketed axes (Cat. 10.8, 10.9, 10.10, 10.11, 10.28, 10.31, 10.38, 10.39). Scale 2:3


underpinning which objects were selected and deposited from part of a presumably larger pool of discovered finds. Comparisons are made throughout the discussion sections and brought together in the final summary.

Flanged axesFlanged axes and flanged axe-chisels of the type represented by Cat. 10.8 & 10.9 belong to the Arreton metalwork phase (c. 1700–1500 bc) and have mostly been found in south-east England, with a smaller number from north of the Humber and Cornwall and a number from northern France (Needham 1983, 215, fig. 225). Arreton phase hoards and single finds have generally also been found in south-east England, with fewer finds in the north of England and fewer still in Scotland (Needham 1983, 519–22 and passim; Needham 1988; Davis 2012, 30–47, pls 96–7).

It is feasible that Cat 10.8 & 10.9 were precisely contemporary and formed part of an Early Bronze Age association. A similar association occurred as ‘residual’ finds within a Late Bronze Age hoard from early in the sequence of Danebury hillfort in Hampshire (Cunliffe and O’Connor 1979, nos 1–2; Britton et al. 1984, 335–40). As well as featuring in hoard deposits, a number of diminutive axes of this period have been found in Early Bronze Age graves (Needham 1988, 233–6). It may be noted that metalwork from this phase of the Bronze Age is generally rare (relative to Middle and Late Bronze Age finds) and the low number of Early Bronze Age finds in the Ashwell assemblage is likely to be a reflection of biases of preservation and recovery before deposition rather than an intentional feature of selection and deposition.

SpearheadsSpearheads are the most numerous object group in the Ashwell Bronze Age assemblage, with 18 examples identified (Table 12). Of these, 14 spearheads can be securely assigned to the Middle Bronze Age and to Davis’s (2012) Group 6 Developed Side-Looped spearheads, with five assigned to Types A and E within Davis’s Group 6 scheme (Table 12; ibid., 66–111). Davis (2012, 109) has placed Group 6 spearheads in the Middle Bronze Age, from the end of the Acton phase through to the Penard phase, although Needham (2013) has noted that this may be slightly conservative, with evidence for association and metalwork from composition and a radiocarbon date from the Thames (Needham et al. 1997, 61, DOB no. 31), to indicate an earlier Acton phase start date.

Group 6 spearheads are by far the most common Middle Bronze Age type of spearhead, represented by 483 examples in Davis’s corpus, although only two come from Hertfordshire: from Croxley Common Moor and Hinxworth (Davis 2012, nos 547 & 565), both metal-detecting finds. The next largest group in Davis’s scheme (Group 9) is represented by only 155 examples. Although the presence of Group 6 spearheads in the Ashwell assemblage is therefore predictable to some extent, associations between Group 6 spearheads and other objects are relatively rare during the Middle Bronze Age. They can occur in small to moderate-sized assemblages, most notably the Taunton phase Ornament Horizon hoards from Stump Bottom (nine objects) and Monkswood, Bath (26 objects), but usually only

L. 41.7mm, W. 29.8mm, Th. 12.6mm, Wt 47.40gAn amorphous lump, probably a piece of raw metal.

Bronze Age.

Miscellaneous axe fragments

10.58. Axe, BGF 05, SF 905, [377], Phase 3/4 (Fig. 354) L. 30.3mm, W. 20.8mm, Wt 29.99gA wedge-shaped fragment of a cast axe blade, broken at the top and one side. Although carefully worked the surface of the surviving side bears traces of a casting seam. Most of the cutting edge is chipped but a short length survives at the junction with the preserved side. The fragment may be from a winged axe or a palstave but is not from the blade of a socketed axe.

Bronze Age.

10.59. Axe, BGF 06, SF 1312, [607], Phase 3 (Fig. 354) L. 44.9mm, W. 39.2mm, Wt 39.35gA broken blade from an axe-like object, possibly a palstave or a winged axe. The sides splay evenly to form the slightly convex cutting edge. The corrosion products incorporate much organic material.

Bronze Age.

DiscussionThe most salient points regarding the typology, chronology and significance of the Ashwell Bronze Age assemblage are discussed below arranged by broad functional grouping, from earliest to latest where possible. Although all three broad periods of the British Bronze Age are represented within the assemblage – Early (c. 2200–1500 bc), Middle (c. 1500–1100 bc) and Late (c. 1100–800 bc) – more detailed typological assessment suggests that the objects were deposited (and therefore discovered) on many more than three occasions during or prior to the Romano-British period as single finds or several hoard deposits, although the possibility of long-term curation cannot be ruled out. It is likely that Romano-British farmworkers and those labouring in fields and construction came across Bronze Age objects in the same way that finders did until the invention of metal detectors, aided by working closer to the land than their modern-day counterparts.

The overall composition of the Ashwell assemblage is unusual and partial in several respects when compared with the ‘typical’ Bronze Age deposits regularly recorded in southern England. This is hardly surprising given the subjective nature of the practices involved, reflective of contemporary concerns and decisions regarding which objects to select, retain and deposit (cf. Needham 1988; 2001). Discoveries of anachronistic Bronze Age objects in later Bronze Age, Iron Age and Roman contexts are not uncommon (Robinson 1995; Stead 1998; Hingley 2009; Ferris 2012, ch. 4), but they are still poorly understood because of the difficulties of perceiving intention and the less than ideal contextual data that accompanies many of the finds made by metal detectorists. The key patterns that emerge from the Romano-British deposition can be contrasted to the Bronze Age ‘baseline’ hoard/assemblage composition in order to understand better the rationale

310 | Dea Senuna

pre-depositional practices. They both belong to a placed deposit of two fragments, found with Roman coins and objects. On first inspection they appear to form two halves of a single, complete, spearhead. However, on closer inspection the condition and patina of the fragments and, more decisively, the thickness at the break make it impossible for the two fragments ever to have formed a single object. It is possible, however, that they were placed to represent a complete spearhead or that, already broken at the time of original deposition, they were mistaken during the Romano-British period as once belonging to the same object. Either scenario suggests an available supply of already broken spearheads in a location prior to Roman-period deposition.

A plot of the spearheads against a background of all (complete) Group 6 examples from Britain demonstrates that the Ashwell spearheads are relatively small in both dimensions (Fig. 356; Table 12). It is possible that this represents an intentional selection of smaller spearheads for deposition. Just as some miniature axes appear to have been suspended or worn as pendants during the Roman period in imitation of Bronze Age prototypes (Robinson 1995; Kiernan 2009, 118–19), it is possible that some small spearheads were worn in a similar fashion. Although this is difficult to prove, it may explain why looped Middle Bronze Age spearheads have also been recovered from the temple sites at Hayling Island and Wanborough (Hingley 2009, 156; O’Connell and Bird 1994, 98–9).

FerrulesThree possible ferrules (one certain) are present in the Ashwell assemblage. The earliest is a possible incomplete conical ferrule (Cat. 10.28), datable to the Penard phase of the Middle Bronze Age. Conical ferrules are relatively rare and the Ashwell example, if indeed a ferrule, is a notable addition (Needham 1982, 38; updated in Needham et al. 2013, 82–4; also see two recent Portable Antiquities Scheme discoveries from Gloucestershire and Hampshire: GLO-428CF4 and HAMP-A36D91). The majority of finds to date have come from south-east England, especially the lower

one or two spearheads feature in these hoards (Wilkin 2017). Indeed, Davis’s (2012) corpus records only eight instances of Group 6 spearheads being associated with a spearhead of any type: two spearheads in six cases, three spearheads on one occasion and 28 spearheads on one occasion. The last instance is from the exceptional hoard from Yattendon, Berkshire (ibid., no. 598), and is particularly noteworthy as it represents a ‘multi-period’ hoard that contained Early, Middle and Late Bronze Age metalwork comparable to the Ashwell assemblage (Evans 1878). Within Middle Bronze Age contexts the largest number of associated Group 6 (and other) spearheads is therefore three and this, taken together with their contexts, suggests that the Ashwell and Yattendon assemblages are the product of collection over a period of time rather than being representative of a single hoard discovery.

It is surprising that none of the spearheads are complete. Davis’s (2012) catalogue of Middle Bronze Age spearheads suggests that most (c. 75%) Group 6 spearheads have been found intact (from a sample of 423 illustrated spearheads from across Britain), consistent with York’s study of Middle Bronze Age spearheads from the River Thames (York 2002, table 4). The higher rate of fragmentation among the Ashwell spearhead assemblage probably represents an intentional act during the Romano-British period. It is notable that the Middle Bronze Age spearhead found in a posthole at the entrance to the Iron Age and Romano-British temple on Hayling Island, Hampshire, was found in a broken condition (according to secondary authors) (Hingley 2009, 156; Ferris 2012, 82). The Middle Bronze Age Group 6 spearhead from the Roman temple at Wanborough was probably burnt, perhaps during the Roman period (O’Connell and Bird 1994, 98–9). The intentional destruction of objects for ritual and symbolic purposes is a well-known feature of depositional practices in many periods and cultures (e.g. Nebelsick 2000; cf. Bloch’s (1992) theory of ‘rebounding violence’).

Spearheads Cat. 10.14 & 10.15, a blade/tip and socket/loops respectively, are particularly notable in relation to

Figure 356 Length and width of group 6 spearheads (data: Davis 2012 with additions)


The shape of the hilt plate and side notches of Cat. 10.32 suggests this is also a small Middle Bronze Age dirk, and can be best placed within Burgess and Gerloff’s Group IV of ‘damaged weapons with reworked butts’ (ibid., 99–103). As is the case with Cat. 10.31, this is amongst the smallest dirks recorded and can be best appreciated as a dagger. Some of the reworking to the hilt plate could, feasibly, have taken place at a later (i.e. Roman-period) date as it does not look typical of Bronze Age modification.

Cat. 10.33 is a probable reworked Middle Bronze Age rapier blade, likely to be of Burgess and Gerloff’s Group IV. A number of rapiers and dirks were reworked later, including examples with single perforations to the butt end (e.g. ibid., no. 10.937), but this does not rule out the possibility that the modification was undertaken at a later (i.e. Roman-period) date as notches/rivets placed on either side of the hilt are a more common modification for repurposing blades during the Middle Bronze Age (ibid., 97–105).

SwordsOnly two sword fragments are present in the assemblage. Cat. 10.34 is from a Carp’s Tongue sword, a type that is almost invariably found in fragments within Late Bronze Age ‘scrap’ hoards of the Ewart Park phase (c. 900–800 bc) (Brandherm and Moskal-del Hoyo 2014), particularly in the Thames valley and south-east England. The other sword fragment (Cat. 10.35) may belong to the Middle or Late Bronze Age. The key diagnostic feature, the raised midrib, occurs, albeit rarely, on a range of sword types of Middle and Late Bronze date (Colquhoun and Burgess 1988, passim).

Socketed axesThe socketed axes from the assemblage are typical of the Late Bronze Age, Ewart Park phase (c. 900–800 bc), in

Thames valley (Needham 1982, 38, fig. 15). It is also possible that the object is a fitting rather than a spearhead ferrule. Two conical objects were recovered from the Taunton phase Monkswood hoard (Smith 1959, GB 42, 2 (1), nos 17–18), in association with a developed side-looped Group 6 spearhead, although they have been described as ‘terminals’ rather than ferrules (ibid.).

The other two ferrules from Ashwell date to the Wilburton and Ewart Park periods of the Late Bronze Age (c. 1100–800 bc) (cf. Burgess et al. 1972, 216). The diameter of Cat. 10.30, if indeed a ferrule, is amongst the largest recorded, suggesting it was designed for a relatively thick spearshaft, in contrast to the size of the spearhead assemblage noted above. It is also possible that the fragment belongs to the socket of a spearhead. Tubular ferrules such as Cat. 10.29, with slightly tapering forms, can be paralleled in a number of cases, including the very long examples from the Broadness hoard, Kent (ibid., fig. 14).

Dirks and daggers/knivesThe small tanged and riveted dirk or dagger/knife blade (Cat. 10.31) is difficult to place among Middle Bronze Age dirks owing to its very small size, but the form of the hilt plate and rivet notches suggests it belongs to this category. It shares some features in common with Burgess and Gerloff’s (1981) Type Cornacarrow blades, which are distinguished by their four rivet holes or notches and their relatively diminutive size: most are under 300mm in length, with many under 200mm long (ibid., 86–8). However, even with a broken tip, at just under 76mm, the Ashwell blade is amongst the smallest of its type, suggesting it functioned as a dagger rather than a dirk proper (cf. ibid., 5). It is also possible that it belongs to a small group of knife-daggers of Early Bronze Age date.

Cat. SF Length (projected) (mm) Length (surviving) (mm) Width (maximum) (surviving) (mm)

Type (Davis 2012, Groups)

10.10a & 10.10b

79, 80 c. 125? 120 34 6A

10.11 115A c. 105? 102.1 15 6C or 6E

10.12 215 c. 77 75.2 13 6

10.13 89 c. 80–90 45.6 c. 15 6

10.14 163 c. 105 41.1 c. 15 6

10.15 174 c. 105 57.6 c. 15 6E

10.16 59 c. 110–120?? 48.1 c. 17?? 6?

10.17 72 c. 80–90 46.7 c. 14 6?

10.18 95 c. 105 104.2 c. 30–35 ?

10.19 97 c. 80–90 39.5 c. 15–17 6?

10.20 146 c. 80–100 51.6 c. 15–17 6?

10.21 612 >100?? 57.5 >17?? 6?

10.22 642 ? 21.5 c. 17 6?

10.23 814 ? 14.2 ? 6?

10.24 829 c. 70–100 35.5 c. 15 6?

10.25 17 >100?? 39.6 ? ?

10.26 103 ? 47.5 ? ?

10.27 141 ? 24.6 ? ?

Table 12 Summary details and projected lengths and widths of the Ashwell Bronze Age spearheads

312 | Dea Senuna

the Late Bronze age, Ewart Park phase (c. 900–800 bc). Although the tanged chisels (Cat. 10.47–10.50) could feasibly be of Middle Bronze Age date, the majority discovered so far are of Late Bronze Age date.

SummaryIt has been noted that many of the major artefact groupings in the Ashwell assemblage show some tendencies towards the diminutive. Larger Bronze Age objects, and particularly those that we might reasonably expect to find in considerable numbers within Late Bronze Age hoards (such as sword fragments and socketed axes), are either scarce or absent. Attention should be paid to the religious context of deposition at Ashwell and other indications of Iron Age and Romano-British predilections towards miniaturization, including Bronze Age socketed axes made into miniaturized votive offerings and amulets during the Roman period (Robinson 1995; Hingley 2009, 149, 155; Kiernan 2009, 118–18 and passim), suggesting a symbolic or ritual rationale.

It has been suggested that the material was brought together following a series of discoveries during the Romano-British period (or earlier) and that these discoveries numbered in excess of the minimum number suggested by typo-chronology, given the paucity of spearhead hoards containing more than two or three examples. There is no indication that any of the material was foreign to the immediate region of discovery. The complete Group 6E spearhead found in 2003 near Hinxworth, close to Ashwell (PAS BH-D94D66; Davis 2012, no. 565; Fig. 357), illustrates the availability of this type within close proximity. Similarly, the Late Bronze Age bugle-shaped ‘harness fitting’ found in the course of metal detecting near Ashwell (PAS BH-1A85D5) (I am grateful to Brendan O’Connor for this identification) indicates the presence of material characteristic of Late Bronze Age Ewart Park phase and Carp’s Tongue complex hoards in the immediate vicinity (cf. Burgess et al. 1972, 216–17). More generally, large Bronze Age hoards are well known from Hertfordshire and the surrounding regions (e.g. Coombs 1971).

Hingley (2009, 148–9) has indicated the problems that discovery and redeposition can pose for constructing clear typo-chronologies. Anachronistic combinations stand out very clearly from the vast majority of hoards discovered to date and there is no danger of mistaking them for the normative depositional practices and traditions of the Bronze Age. It is, however, possible that many of the mixed hoards so far discovered do not date to the period of the latest object present but are (potentially substantially) later. The multi-period hoards such as Yattendon (Berkshire) (Evans 1878), Danebury (Hampshire) (Britton et al. 1984, 335–40; Hingley 2009, 163–4), ‘Batheaston’, Somerset (ibid., 162), Salisbury, Wiltshire (Stead 1998) and Wardour, Wilsthire (Portable Antiquities Scheme: WILT-E8DA70) that contain Early Bronze Age to Iron Age objects are typically dated by their latest object but could be from a much later period (Hingley 2009, 148–9), especially when we consider that Iron Age hoards were far less prevalent discoveries long before the rise of metal detecting. Indeed, the addition of objects to mark the contemporary world is

southern England. Only two of the six axes can be securely assigned to a typological grouping (Cat. 10.38 & 10.40, of Needham’s (1990) Class A1 and D1, respectively). At least one winged axe (Cat. 10.41, and possibly Cat. 10.58) is represented in the assemblage, again a common feature of Late Bronze Age hoards in southern England (O’Connor 1980, 134, List 97). The only other remarkable feature of the socketed axes in the Ashwell assemblage is that there are so few examples, given both the number of smaller tool types (see below) and the prevalence of socketed axes in most Late Bronze Age hoards. This may be a feature of the selection process and a similar point could be made regarding the sword blade fragments. Comparison with the large, well-preserved and relatively representative Late Bronze Age hoard from Petters Sports Field in Surrey (Needham 1990) is instructive in lieu of work on the standard composition of these hoards. The Petters hoard contains fewer small tools (gouges, awls and chisels) but includes 12 complete or near-complete socketed axes and 21 sword fragments. The only complete, undistorted, socketed axe-head in the Ashwell assemblage (Cat. 10.38) is diminutive, which again may be an intentionally selected feature.

Small wood and craftwork toolsThere are ten small tools suitable for wood- or craftworking activities (awls, chisels and gouges), a surprisingly high number given their size and the relative paucity of larger tools. Bronze awls have a wide currency, beginning in the Early Bronze Age, although Coombs (2001, 287–8) has noted that examples with two pointed ends are earlier in date. Cat. 10.42 has two pointed ends and a grooved double spiral twist to its body that is comparable to spiral twisted rod ornaments of the Taunton phase (c. 1300–1150 bc). This may be a functional feature or evidence that it has been reworked at a later date from an earlier object, such as a spiral twisted torc of the Taunton phase. Later awls, with one pointed and one chisel-like rounded end date to the Late Bronze Age (ibid., 288) and are represented by Cat. 10.43–10.45. The other smaller tools (one socketed gouge, one socketed chisel and four tanged chisels) are all woodworking tools typical of

Figure 357 The complete Group 6E spearhead from Hinxworth, Hertfordshire (from PAS: https://finds.org.uk/database/images/image/id/36038)


L. 51.8mm, W. 14.5mm, Wt 8.41gThe junction of handle plate and blade back with two rivets is preserved.

Post-medieval, probably 18th–19th century.

11.6. Clothing fastener, BGF 06, SF 1340, [586], Phase 5 (Fig. 358) L. 23.2mm, Wt 2.31gA one-piece, U-shaped, blunt-hooked, copper-alloy clasp comprising two looped rods and a spatulate plate. Used with a corresponding eye to fasten tunics, jackets, breeches, etc.


11.7. Buckle, BGF 03, SF 1409, unstratified L. 46.5mm, W. 46.8mm.A large buckle with subrectangular frame and off-centre pin, the tongue lacking.


11.8. Buckle, BGF 06, SF 1128, [502], Phase 8 L. 45.0mm, W. 34.1mm, Wt 17.18gA complete buckle, with rectangular frame and simple tapered tongue.

Post-medieval, probably 19th century.

11.9. Thimble, BGF 06, SF 1363, unstratified L. 14.6mm, Wt 0.52gA small fragment of a machine-made copper-alloy thimble, with finely textured lower wall and part of the rim.


11.10. Ring, BGF 06, SF 1318, [327], Phase 4/5 Diam. 24.2mm, Wt 1.97gA quite rudimentarily made plain annular copper-alloy ring of flat oval cross section.

Probably post-medieval.

11.11. Shot, BGF 04, SF 511, [302], Phase 7 Diam. 8.2mm, Wt 3.23gA tiny lead-alloy sphere, its hemispherical casting flash visible. A flattened impact facet demonstrates that it was used. To judge by the gauge, perhaps pistol shot.

Post-medieval.

not essential or even likely if the objects drew their significance from being relics from ‘another world’. It is quite possible that Bronze Age multi-period hoards are substantially younger than we realize and, in the absence of absolute dating, the evidence from composition and depositional practice may be the best way of determining the nature and dating of these assemblages.

It is therefore especially important that attention is paid to the composition and combination of hoards: the objects present (and their respective quantities) and the way in which they were arranged, treated or deposited (cf. Wilkin 2017). These factors have been shown to vary through time and space (e.g. Needham 1988; 2001). Even ‘random’ selections of objects for deposition in hoards are contextually specific, belonging to a particular attitude and set of normative depositional practices. The Ashwell assemblage is Bronze Age material seen through the eyes of Romano-British people. It provides the valuable opportunity to learn the patterns and predilections that can help make sense of other multi-period hoards and assemblages with less secure archaeological contexts and to avoid the suggestion that existing typo-chronologies are forever to be misleading or flawed (cf. Hingley 2009, 148–9).

11. Post-medieval objectsRalph Jackson

11.1. Horseshoe, BGF 06, SF 1337, [527], Phase 8 (Fig. 358) L. 131.5mm, W. 130.9mm, Wt 385gA large horseshoe, complete, ‘keyhole’ type, with chamfered heels and four holes in a rim-fullered groove on each branch.

Post-medieval, 17th–18th century.

11.2. Decorative mount, BGF 06, SF 1317, [327], Phase 4/5 (Fig. 358) L. 45.2 mm, W. 7.5mm, Wt 4.70gPart of a large, oval, copper-alloy frame. Within the inner corded rim the symmetrical repeating decoration consists of a five-petalled rosette motif interspersed with low pyramidal bosses.

18th century.

11.3. Key, BGF 05, SF 757, unstratified L. 101.8mm, Wt 35.63gA rotary key complete except for its bow handle. The solid octagonal shank is rebated behind the rectangular bit which has inner and outer warding.


11.4. Knife, BGF 03, SF 130, unstratified L. 112.5mm, L. handle plate 55.8mm, W. 15.2mm, Wt 28.85gThe handle of an iron knife, with one ‘pistol-grip’ handle plate surviving, the blade broken immediately beyond the ferrule. X-radiography reveals the riveted construction.


11.5. Knife, BGF 05, SF 758, unstratified

Figure 358 Horseshoe Cat. 11.1, decorative mount Cat 11.2, clothing fastener Cat 11.6

314 | Dea Senuna

the soil. Of the total assemblage 74% showed no sign of weathering relative to characteristics suggested by Behrensmeyer (1978), whilst 22% showed moderate signs of weathering (Stage 1) and only 4% severe signs of damage (Stage 2 and above). This may suggest that the majority of bone deposits were quickly covered over and not left on the surface for lengthy periods of time. No sign of damage caused by acidic burial conditions was observed in the assemblage.

Variation in the pattern created by weathering damage was observed across the different phases. The majority of bone from Phases 1, 7, 8 and 9 showed signs of cracking or slight surface deterioration, suggesting that deposition practices during these phases may have differed slightly from those of the main Phases 2–6, when the bone demonstrated much lower levels of weathering. This higher proportion in Phases 1 and 7–9 suggests some of the bone may have been redeposited, churned up through ploughing or left on the surface for a period of time before becoming incorporated into the burial environment. Deposits from Phases 2–6 all portrayed similar characteristics with two-thirds or more of the fragments showing no sign of weathering at all, which suggests that most of the bone was covered over very soon after its deposition.

Only a handful of fragments in each phase demonstrated signs of striations or pitting such as may have resulted from abrasive activity where bones are scraped or knocked against rough surfaces through, for example, footfall, animal trampling or scavenging. As might be expected, the majority of these fragments came from gravel, clay or chalk pebble surfaces in Phases 1–5. However, in the later phases these finds came from fragments within soil/silt or pits. It is possible that some of these fragments from later deposits may have been residual from earlier phases or resulted from deposits swept up from harder surfaces and incorporated into the soil matrix.

Overall, only 26% of the assemblage showed signs of abrasion identified through the rounded appearance of fracture edges. Smoothing of surface edges or outer bone surface may happen as a result of redeposition, movement within the burial environment, water damage or by movement created by actions prior to burial. A low proportion of abraded bone supports the hypothesis that most bone was incorporated into the burial matrix around the time of deposition and only a relatively small amount exposed to other factors. Again, variation was observed across the phases. Bone deposits from Phases 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 all showed low levels of abrasion, with over 70% of fragments demonstrating no sign of abrasion at all, whereas deposits from Phases 3, 7, 8 and 9 contained much higher levels of abraded fragments, suggesting these deposits may have been affected by different taphonomic processes. In Phase 3 46% of fragments, in Phases 8 and 9 over half the deposit, and in Phase 7 as many as 70% of fragments were abraded. It is possible that the higher levels may imply greater levels of bone residuality than in earlier phases. In Phases 3 and 8, 14% of fragments were rated as severely abraded, compared to other phases that all showed less than 10% of severely abraded specimens.

Despite the good state of preservation, bone deposits were highly fragmented. On average each bone fragment in the disarticulated assemblage was only 8% complete. This

12. Animal bone

Susan Jones and Anthony King

IntroductionThis summary report gives the main results of osteological analysis of the faunal remains. Bone identification and analysis was undertaken by Susan Jones; Anthony King co-ordinated the project and contributed to interpretation of the results. A full report, including detailed tabulation of skeletal elements, metrical and ageing data, butchery and taphonomy, will be published separately.

The excavations produced a total of 43,909 bone specimens. Of those, 41,527 came from deposits of fragmented, disarticulated and commingled material whilst 2382 specimens were associated bone groups (ABGs) deposited in an articulated or partially articulated state. In total 192 contexts produced bone specimens that were associated with nine phases of activity across the site.

Finds derived from the Late Iron Age/Early Roman transition period (late 1st century bc to 70 ad (Phase 1), the Roman period from the 1st century ad to the 4th century ad (Phases 2 to 7), the post-Roman to the post-medieval period (Phase 8) and from modern activity (Phase 9). Phases 2–6 have date boundaries with considerable overlap, from the Roman transition period through to the 3rd century ad; 96% of the bone derived from contexts of these phases. All ABGs were from Phase 6, which may represent a culmination of activity on the site. Activity in subsequent periods seems to have drastically reduced with combined deposits forming only 3% of the assemblage. It is possible that much of the bone associated with the later phases contains a high level of residual material from earlier phases where contexts were disturbed by ploughing.

MethodologyAll the bones were identified to species and element with the aid of a comparative osteological reference collection and standard reference publications. Where species could not be identified, bone was placed into size categories such as medium mammal (approximately sheep-size) or large mammal (approximately cattle-size), medium or large bird or small mammal. Each bone was recorded with reference to a zoning system (Dobney and Rielly 1988) to enable the calculation of the minimum numbers of individuals (MNI) in the assemblage. Where possible the state of epiphyseal fusion was recorded for all species. Mandibular toothwear or eruption state was recorded for cattle, pig and sheep/goat, and tooth crown height for equid teeth. These results were then utilized to calculate the estimated age at death. Metrics were taken using the criteria laid out in von den Driesch (1976). Each bone was scanned for signs of pathological change or taphonomic alteration.

Taphonomy, fragmentation and butcheryBone preservation was generally good. All bones were examined for signs of degradation such as exfoliation, cracking, splitting and surface erosion to assess whether bone had been affected by exposure to the weather on the ground surface or by soil leaching and the chemical composition of


was not left sitting on the surface for lengthy periods of time in open settings.

Breakage patterns were examined across the unburnt assemblages to enable further determination of fragmentation processes. Modern breaks are indicated by colour differentiation and a flat rough appearance to the break. Overall only 1% of the assemblage was impacted by modern breakage, which is likely to have occurred during recovery and cleaning processes. In all phases shaft fragments showed evidence of impact scars, longitudinal splits and helical fractures with concave or convex fracture lines. These markers may indicate that bone was deliberately smashed or split up while it was still fresh. The high fragmentation rates and signs of fracturing whilst bones were still fresh may also have related to marrow extraction processes, which indicates that across all the main species carcasses were heavily divided, presumably to extract as much utility and nutritional value as possible. It is possible that many bones were boiled up to create stock or to release marrow, fats or grease that could be utilized in other ways than for food consumption. Wilson (1989) suggests that high levels of division may suggest that fats and proteins were being extracted that could be utilized for stews or candles, soap and glue.

Percentages of helical fractures present on unburnt shaft fragments ranged from only 10% in Phase 7 to 32% in Phase 5. The proportions of longitudinal splits ranged from 21% in Phases 3, 4, 5 and 7 to 34% in Phase 6. Phase 2 showed the highest level of impact scars (38%) created by hitting bone with a blunt instrument or against a surface to break the shaft open. Low proportions of bones that had been divided by sharp-bladed instruments to create a point or oblique flat edge were observed in the assemblages from Phases 1–6. Interestingly these marks were not apparent in the later bone deposits. Low levels of columnar and transverse breaks were also observed across all deposits, which may suggest a level of breakage that occurred after it had dried out and become brittle. The highest level occurred in Phase 7 deposits. This may occur when bone is redeposited or disturbed or when it becomes eroded or dried out in the ground.

In all phases shaft fragments with serrated edges were observed. Often these bones showed slight signs of scorching or a pre-burn line. This can be created when fleshed or partly fleshed bone is exposed to low-level heat. The retraction of flesh through the impact of heat can expose a small section of bone, which can become slightly discoloured through the heating process. Heating bone midshaft can make it easier to break open, which in itself can create a serrated appearance to the edge of the bone. This may imply that some bones may have been slightly heated before breakage to ease the extraction of marrow and breakage process.

Butchery marks created with bladed instruments like knives and cleavers were observed on 1% of the whole assemblage; 1.5% of the unburnt assemblage displayed cut or chop marks whilst less than 0.5% of the burnt assemblage displayed evidence of butchery processes. Overall this proportion is low and shows little variation across the different phases. In Phase 1, 4% of the bones showed signs of butchery processes whilst in all other phases the proportion of bone affected was 1% or less. In reality it is likely that only

extremely high level of fragmentation reflects a high proportion of burnt bone in the assemblage. Indeed 41% of the total assemblage had been exposed to heat (see below). As would be expected, fragmentation levels were highest in phases with more burnt deposits. Burnt fragments made up 10% or less of the assemblage in Phases 1, 3 and 7, while Phases 7 and 8 contained between 15% and 25% of burnt bone fragments and the proportion in the other phases ranged between 43% and 58%.

The fragmentation pattern of unburnt specimens showed that the average bone was only 13% complete. This high fragmentation level suggests that taphonomic processes other than burning influenced the nature of the deposits. Only Phases 1 and 7 stood out as being significantly different. In Phase 1, bones were more complete, being on average approximately 24% complete, whereas in Phases 2–6, 8 and 9 there were fairly consistent fragmentation levels ranging between 10% and 15% complete. This shows that unburnt bone was less intensively fragmented in Phase 1, perhaps as a result of different taphonomic processes. The close similarity across the later phases suggests that the same taphonomic processes may have operated on these deposits – similar processing and deposition practices – or that there was a level of residuality from earlier deposits. Phase 7 fragments were on average only 6% complete, which may support the idea of a high level of residuality within contexts from this phase. The higher levels of abrasion within this phase also differentiated it from the earlier phases.

Carnivore gnawing was evident in all phases. Whether as a deliberate act of feeding or through scavenging, carnivores had access to relatively fresh bone deposits in all phases. Marks observed on bones were largely consistent with canid gnawing although some marks suggestive of feline gnawing were visible on five bones from Phase 6. In addition, one bone from Phase 3 had V-shaped marks on the shaft that may have been the result of bird scavenging. Other unusual gnawing marks observed in Phase 1 deposits included a pattern of puncture marks that could have been made by the cusps on a young pig’s molar. This may tentatively imply that some pigs were brought to the site alive and had some access to bone deposits on the site.

The proportions of bones displaying signs of canid gnawing varied across phases from 0.5% in Phase 7 to 9% in Phase 3. Only 10% or fewer contexts from Phases 1, 3 and 7 produced gnawed bone, whilst in Phases 2, 4, 5 and 6 canid gnawing was present in between around 40% and 60% of contexts. Whilst Phases 2 and 6 produced gnawed bone from a broad range of features, bone in Phases 3, 4 and 5 demonstrated a tighter distribution pattern. In Phases 3 and 5, deposits were largely in soil, pit or layer contexts, whilst in Phase 4 the majority of specimens came from one soil context, [101]. Overall, the broad distribution of gnawed bone fragments across contexts in Phases 3, 5 and 6 may suggest that dogs had free access across the site, while the more restricted distribution in Phase 4 perhaps suggests a level of control of access to the site.

Rodents are often attracted to dry bone on which to sharpen their teeth. Signs of rodent gnawing were identified on only three bone specimens, which derived from Phase 3 and 4 deposits. This minimal quantity implies that dry bone

316 | Dea Senuna

probably an underestimate, since there are large quantities of unmeasurable pig fragments, as well as of juvenile bones that are less capable of differentiation. However, the presence of even a small number of wild boar specimens needs to be placed in the context of the important place that this species held in pre-Roman and Romano-Celtic religion (Foster 1977; Green 1992, 218–19).

Other mammal and bird species in Phases 2–6 include a relatively low representation of cattle, in the range 8–18%, together with small numbers of dog, horse, domestic fowl and other bird species, roe deer and hare (Table 13). Of these only hare has overt ritual significance – eating hare was mentioned by Caesar as being taboo in Late Iron Age Britain (Bellum Gallicum 5.12), though it seems that this taboo was not adhered to during the Roman period (Green 1992, 50). Red deer stags are linked to deities and ritual practice (ibid., 230–4) and are found at other religious sites (King 2005), but roe deer is present only very rarely and in low numbers, for example at Harlow (Legge and Dorrington 1985) and Tabard Square, Southwark (Rielly 2015, 212). Dog skeletons as specific burials are found at various ritual sites, for instance at Hallaton (Score and Browning 2010, 147–50; Score 2011, 26) and Springhead (Grimm 2011, 30), but the remains from Ashwell are scattered bones, and not in placed deposits.

The heterogeneity of the species in Phases 2–6 may imply that, apart from sheep/goat and pig, their presence represents not sacrifice or ritual deposition, but food debris and general waste deposition. As such, they are more typical of a ‘domestic’ site, and would not be out of place in a villa or urban bone assemblage. A caveat to this interpretation is the observation that a wide range of species is present in the burnt bone deposits (see below) and thus may have formed part of the ritual deposition on the site. A non-ritualistic interpretation, in the traditional sense of not being sacrificial remains, would especially apply to the scatter of dog bones, as it has been noted above that canid-gnawed bone is present, indicating that live dogs were scavenging the bone deposits to a measurable but limited extent. An additional implication is that the ritual activity took place not in a closed-off space, but in one that also saw deposition of a range of animal species in the same zone. It is possible that

some of the butchered bones ended up in the burial matrix for various taphonomic reasons and differential depositional practices. It must be remembered also that some butchery processes may not leave distinct marks on the bone if processes like filleting or skinning are undertaken with great care and skill. Burning and other fragmentation processes may have further contributed towards low visibility within the site’s archaeological record.

Quantification and species representationDeposits from Phases 2–6 produced the greatest volume of bone (Table 13), forming 95% of the assemblage. By contrast, Phase 1 had 1%, Phase 7, 1.5%, Phase 8, 2% and Phase 9 only 0.5%. In Phase 1, the pattern of high sheep/goat numbers is already established (Fig. 359), with 58% of the main domesticates (cattle, sheep/goat and pig). The ratio of sheep to goats, at 20% goats, is also a pattern that is roughly maintained in subsequent phases (Table 13). Cattle numbers are higher, however, than in subsequent phases, and may imply that the ritual processes seen in Phases 2–6 were still in course of being established during Phase 1, and that the orthopraxy of the religious site had not yet settled down.

Phases 2–6 cover the main period of ritual practice at Ashwell, and in general the pattern of species representation is remarkably stable across this period of time. Sheep, and to a lesser extent goats, form the basis of ritual deposition, rising to a peak percentage of 74% in Phase 3. They also form the main species represented in the burnt bone deposits (see below), and it is possible that a ritual involving holocaust sacrifice of sheep (i.e. the offering of burnt remains of sacrificed sheep) was a central element of the orthopraxy (but see ‘Conclusions’, below, for a discussion of alternative interpretations). The second species in terms of percentages is pig, with variable representation in the range 13–33%. Pig figures less in the burnt bone deposits, but is present in sufficient numbers to indicate that this species, too, was important in this ritual practice at the site.

Of relevance here is the presence of wild boar in Phase 6. Wild boar is differentiated from domestic pig largely through metrical analysis (Bull and Payne 1982; Rowley-Conwy et al. 2012), and so the number given in Table 13 is

Figure 359 Species percentages for cattle, sheep/goat and pig, by phase


(Table 13). House mouse in Phases 5 and 6 is interesting, since this species is not common in Roman Britain.

Specific mention must be made of the two human bones, both calcined and burnt, from [506] and [535] (Phases 6 and 2 respectively). One is part of the trochlea of a mature humerus, and the other a scaphoid bone or carpal. It is

‘domestic’ and ‘ritual’ deposition was taking place together, including deposition of burnt remains, and that this was not regarded as problematic for the officiants at the Ashwell ritual feasting site.

The presence of rodents, albeit in very small numbers, also indicates some limited scavenging by these species

Species Phase Total1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Human 1 1 2

Cattle 45 74 85 76 102 200 19 24 5 660

Sheep/goat 121 612 700 277 676 1660 55 104 12 4217

Sheep 4 30 19 9 30 61 2 155

Goat 1 4 9 1 9 7 1 32

Pig* 45 221 164 56 290 1222 18 50 2 2068

Dog 3 4 9 3 22 37 5 83

Horse 2 7 3 2 11 16 3 44

Wild boar 1+ 1

Roe deer 2 1 1 1 5

Hare 5 4 18 25 1 1 54

Large mammal 69 224 219 291 378 815 51 92 4 2143

Medium mammal 171 2942 2267 1240 3227 8646 252 331 59 19135

Unidentified mammal 18 2112 646 626 2894 5121 246 159 8 11830

Rodent 2 2

House mouse 1 1 2

Field vole 1 1

Small mammal 4 20 6 10 21 30 1 87

Domestic fowl 6 7 4 11 32 1 61

Bantam 1 5 1 7

Partridge 1 2 1 3 7

Domestic goose 4 3 5 12

Brent goose 1 2 3 6

Crow 2 2

Woodcock 1 1 2

Wood pigeon 1 1 2

Teal 1 1

Mallard 1 1

Small bird 1 1

Medium bird 35 9 13 23 59 3 6 148

Large bird 1 3 2 3 9

Bass 1 1 2

Other fish 1 1 3 1 6

Frog 120 4 1 13 131

Toad 66 11 3 3 78

Amphibian 543 1 544

Total 483 7037 4172 2609 7730 17978 649 779 90 41527

Table 13 Species represented (NISP) by phase (* Additionally, there were 2382 pig bones in associated bone groups (ABGs) from Phase 6)

318 | Dea Senuna

however, contained large volumes of burnt bone in specific contexts: [315] and [324] contained over 2000 burnt fragments, [506] between 1000 and 2000 fragments and [311], [349], [505], [529], [535] and [538] between 500 and 1000 fragments.

Across all phases except for Phase 7 the majority of bone was fully calcined, being white in colour (Table 15). In Phases 1–6 between 70% and 85% of the burnt remains were fully calcined. Phase 7 was the only phase to show a greater proportion of incompletely burned bones, the majority of which (75%) were grey and may imply that deposits here were created with different variables to the earlier deposits. In all the burnt bone deposits from Phases 1–6 fewer than 10% of fragments showed mixed coloration patterns and low levels of black, tan or grey fragments. The incompletely burnt fragments that had mixed colours or were black and tan fragments tended to be mainly distributed in contexts containing only a few burnt bones. Deposits and contexts with large volumes of burnt bone were very evenly coloured, with almost all bone fully calcined, and displayed characteristics similar to human cremation deposits.

Variability in coloration relates to a number of variables within the burning process, such as temperature, time exposed to heat, the presence of minerals or metals in the fire and the processes involved in the method of heating. General domestic fires, where food remains or general butchery waste may have been disposed of, would be expected to create a wide variety of colour patterns with many fragments likely to show incomplete combustion owing to the variability of temperatures and conditions across a fire. Cooking or roasting may blacken areas of bone exposed to low level heat (c. 300 ºC: Holden et al. 1995a; 1995b) and leave clear bands of colour where meat around the bone may still be adhering to the bone protecting it from direct heat. Buikstra and Swegle (1989, 252) suggest that only defleshed bone can become uniformly black during the heating process. Whilst it is likely that some fragments of bone may have been created in these conditions it is clear that for the majority of bone deposits at Ashwell other processes were being applied.

The large deposits of evenly calcined bone in many contexts suggest that effort was made to create a highly efficient burning process. Holden et al. (1995a; 1995b) and Shipman et al. (1984) suggest that fully oxidized bone (calcined bone) occurs when it is exposed to temperatures of greater than 600 ºC for periods of time long enough to oxidize the bone fully. The presence of warping, cracking or fissuring on long bones, articular surfaces and cranial vault fragments was also observed on many fragments of bone within the calcined assemblages. These conditions occur as a result of dehydration during the heating process and can vary according to whether bone was fleshed or defleshed at the time of heating (Lange et al. 1987; McKinley 1994; Pope and Smith 2004; cf. Schmidt and Symes 2008). Curved fracture patterns on long bones, concentric and mosaic fracture patterns on articular surfaces, warping and delamination of trabecular bone are taken as signs of thermal alteration of fleshed bone whilst bone that has longitudinal or transverse cracks can be indicators of bone burnt in a dry or defleshed state (Baker 2003, 22). All

difficult to account for their presence in terms of ritual practice (apart from noting that they had been cremated), since they are the only two specimens. Any ritual practice at the site that involved human remains in a regular or systematic way would almost certainly have led to many more bones being present in the assemblage (cf. King in prep.). The possibility of redeposition of burnt deposits from elsewhere that fortuitously contained human remains, or the chance incorporation of scattered human remains into a couple of burning episodes, may account for their presence.

Within Phases 2–6, there are some changes in the composition of the bone assemblage. Of most interest in terms of the local ecology of the excavated area is the strong representation of amphibians in Phase 2 (Table 13), implying wet/damp conditions. Later phases have a much lower representation, and suggest that the site became dryer or had more water control and management.

Another chronological aspect worthy of note is that the numbers of bones deposited reaches a peak in Phases 5 and 6, which together have over 60% of the total assemblage. This also coincides with the deposition of ABGs in Phase 6, and there is a definite implication that these two phases are the culmination of ritual activity.

By contrast, the number of bones in Phase 7 is very low, and the ritual deposition of sheep and pigs appears to have ceased. In all probability this phase marks the end of ritual orthopraxy or, at least, its transformation into practices that are not visible in terms of bone deposition. Phases 8 and 9 are of post-Roman to modern date, and it is likely that many redeposited bones from earlier phases form the bulk of the assemblages of these periods.

Burnt bone depositsOverall, burnt bone was observed in 74% of the contexts across the site and contributed to 41% of the total assemblage (Table 14). Results from different phases varied. In Phase 1, only 6% of the total deposit contained burnt bone whilst Phases 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 contained between 43% and 64% of fragments exposed to heat in some way. Phases 3, 8 and 9 contained between 10% and 25% burnt fragments.

Burnt bone was well distributed across contexts in all phases. In Phases 7–9 the total number of contexts were too low to make viable contributions to overall patterning, but in Phases 1–6 between 60% and 91% of contexts contained burnt bone, suggesting that broad dispersion patterns across features were present across all phases. Some phases,

Phase Number % of Phase total

1 31 6

2 3049 43

3 397 10

4 1515 58

5 4438 57

6 8557 48

7 64 10

8 132 17

9 23 25

Table 14 Incidence of burnt bone at Ashwell


The range of elements included in the burnt deposits comprised all areas of the body for the main domesticates. Dog remains were limited to limb and axial bones. No foot bones or cranial fragments were identified. Identifiable horse remains included cranial fragments, teeth and carpals. Bird bones that were identifiable were mainly wing bones, except for the femur and synsacrum of a bantam-sized fowl. Fish vertebrae and ribs were observed.

It was noted that the vast majority of bones for pig, cattle and sheep/goat that showed evidence of fusion/unfusion were unfused, suggesting that it was mainly young juvenile animals that were included in the burnt deposits. In the burnt sheep/goat remains some neonatal remains were observed, suggesting that some burnt deposits were made around the time of lambing, possibly in spring. No neonatal pigs or cattle were identified in the burnt assemblage. One juvenile hare [556] and a mature one were observed in the assemblage.

Questions arise from this consideration of the burnt bone deposits. Was the offering of burnt animal remains, largely sheep and pigs, a core ritual at the site? If so, the high temperature suggests that joints of meat were completely consumed by fire as an offering to Senuna. Alternatively, are the burnt deposits part of a ritual of cleansing or purifying the sanctuary? If the latter, which would account for the wide species range overall, this activity may represent a secondary ritual that took place periodically after sacrificial and feasting activity.

Associated bone groupsA number of partially articulated pig skeletons remains were recovered from Phase 6 deposits. Overall, eight contexts produced articulated pig ([126]/[127]/[128], [516], [592], [580]/[568], [579], [538], [555] and [311]) deposited as jointed sections rather than complete pig skeletons. Specifically, ten vertebral sections, eight cranial groups, eight front left leg sections, seven right front leg sections, nine right rear leg sections and eight left rear leg sections were identified in the assemblage. Through comparisons of size, fusion status and tooth wear patterns, a minimum of ten individual pigs were recognized in the articulated groups. In many contexts more than one pig was represented in the deposits. Common groups were a front or rear right or left leg with or without the pelvis or lower limb bones. Sometimes the right and left rear legs of the same pig were buried together. Feet were sometimes buried separately. Crania and vertebral sections with right or left ribs, rarely both, were also identified in the deposits. The skulls all came from female pigs, one of which was likely to have been wild.

deposits from Phases 1–7 contained variable quantities of fragments with curved cracking and articular mosaic cracking patterns whilst only a small handful of longitudinal splits were observed, and only in Phases 5, 6 and 8. This would suggest that dry bone made a minimal contribution to the deposits. Thus the burning process used joints of meat, not defleshed bone.

Fragmentation patterns across the burnt deposits suggested that most specimens were under 20mm in size. Phases 4 and 6 had a slightly greater proportion of fragments that lay in the 20–50mm range. Such high fragmentation levels combined with the highly calcined nature of deposits may suggest that bone may have been raked or agitated during the heating process to break up bones and help complete the combustion process. It is possible that some smaller fragments were also missed during the collection process. Even coloration across fractures and fracture patterns did not suggest that a high level of post-depositional breakage was present in the assemblage. The presence of significant proportions of bone under 10mm, ranging between 20% and 48% in Phases 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7, may mean that the place of combustion was close to the place of deposition and that ashes were covered over fairly soon after deposition. Fluvial action and wind can disperse smaller fragments quickly if remains are left out in the open. It is often thought that for many cremation burials a selection of the material on the pyre is chosen for deposition (McKinley 1994) and when this occurs the deposits can be biased towards larger fragments. In these deposits smaller fragments are present and may reflect a true selection of pyre or burnt material. Phase 3 was the only period that favoured slightly larger fragments. Deposits in this phase may well have reflected greater selectivity in burial practice.

The range of species represented in the burnt deposits was quite diverse, including cattle, sheep/goat, sheep, goat, pig, horse, dog, hare, roe deer, domestic fowl, domestic goose, medium and large bird, fish and human remains. The species range for Phases 1, 7, 8 and 9 was limited to the main domesticated species; a small amount of horse and dog in Phase 8 may have originated from earlier deposits. The deposits in Phases 2–6 clearly reflected a more diverse species range with bird and fish amongst the vertebrates included in the cremated material. The presence of two human bones was noted in the calcined deposits from Phases 2 and 6, and has been discussed above. The presence of these human bones in the assemblage suggests that it is possible that some of the other small unidentifiable fragments may also be human, but no other obvious characteristics were observed.

Colour Phase

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

White 79 75 73 83 84 77 21 63

Grey 0 11 7 5 9 10 75 0

Black 0 3 12 6 4 3 2 10

Tan 21 1 6 2 0 1 2 0

Buff, black, grey, pink, white, etc., indicative of partial burning 0 2 1 0 <1 1 0 11

Complete coloration of fragment but showing a range of combined colours 0 8 1 4 3 8 0 16

Table 15 Colour characteristics of the burnt bone assemblage, given as a percentage of the burnt total per phase

320 | Dea Senuna

sacrifices. As such, it relates to Iron Age practice, seen for example at Llanmaes (Madgewick and Mulville 2015), Ferry Fryston (Orton 2007) and Hallaton (Score 2011). Ashwell does not show a clear selection of parts of the carcass for deposition, such as the dominance of right pig forelimbs at Llanmaes, or the preference for right-hand cattle elements at Ferry Fryston or, by contrast, the under-representation of right pig forelimbs at Hallaton (Score 2011, 26), but this may in part be because evidence for selection has been obscured by the burning activity and fragmentation. Other Roman-period ritual sites, such as Springhead (Grimm 2011, 29), also have a lack of evidence for sidedness and selectivity of this sort, so it is possible that the practice was not so prevalent after the end of the Iron Age.

When put alongside temple assemblages from Roman Britain, it can be seen that Ashwell falls into King’s Group A (King 2005, 357–9), particularly by virtue of the high number of bones overall – second only indeed to Uley (Levitan 1993) – but also because of the predominance of sheep and, to a lesser extent, pigs. However, the site also displays some of the characteristics of Group B (King 2005, 359–60) in Phase 6, by virtue of the partial pig skeletons deposited as ABGs. This type of deposition has been linked to acts of individual ritual rather than group activity (ibid., 359), but the particular circumstances of an apparent change in Phase 6 may still be the result of communal ritual soon before the end of the main phase of use of the site.

The factor that sets Ashwell apart from all other similar ritual assemblages in Roman Britain is the extent of high-temperature burning and calcination of the animal bone. As discussed above, the processes involved have most similarity to cremation pyres for human remains, and it seems that a specific ritual was developed for the cult, possibly part of a holocaust-style rite involving the high-temperature complete incineration of joints of meat, mainly sheep and pigs, as offerings to the deity. An alternative interpretation may be the use of high-temperature burning for purification of the precinct, both to honour the goddess, and for the more prosaic motivation of keeping the sacred area wholesome and clean.

Metrical measurements from astragali suggests that both wild pig and domestic pigs were included in the deposits. All pigs were immature, most under 12 months old, the remainder being between one and two years old.

It is likely that portions of animals or joints of meat were deposited in the ground as votive offerings as part of ritual practice associated with the site in its last major phase of activity.

ConclusionsThe large but highly fragmented bone assemblage from Ashwell is indicative of intensive utilization of a range of species, predominantly sheep and pigs, in rituals at the shrine. The rituals certainly involved the killing of animals, division of the carcass and consumption of at least part of the meat by the participants. There was also considerable evidence of burning and further fragmentation of the osseous material. One scenario to account for this is the making of burnt offerings, the subsequent consumption of cooked meat by the participants and the burial of burnt remains on site. Alternatively, the animal offerings may not have taken the form of holocaust sacrifices, but of live sacrifice and offering of the animals to Senuna, then preparation of consumable cuts of meat for feasting purposes and their cooking by boiling or roasting on site. Subsequently, further burning activity took place, to a high temperature, with evidence of raking and break-up of calcined fragments. This was perhaps also an offering to the deity, and to cleanse or purify the area after a festival or feast. The implication of this is that there was a measure of control of the sacred environment by officials of the cult.

The presence of pig ABGs in Phase 6 suggests a change of ritual practice before the site ceased to be used as a place of animal sacrificial activity in Phase 7. Possibly the partial skeletons had been destined for burning and deposition as calcined fragments, but for unknown reasons, this never took place.

The large assemblage almost certainly represents communal ritual activity in a feasting or festival setting, rather than an accumulation of many individual private

Discussion: Ashwell End, A Ritual Site | 321

IntroductionBelow the chalk scarp, 6km north of Baldock and to the north of Ashwell village, near the west bank of the River Rhee, at Ashwell End, the hoard of Romano-British temple treasure that is the subject of the first part of this book was found in September 2002.

Subsequent fieldwork revealed a Late Iron Age and Romano-British settlement extending mainly along the west bank of the river (Noel 2003; 2004; 2006). At the hoard site on Great Buttway Field, the excavations exposed a circular open hollow, approximately 26m in diameter, used at the end of the Iron Age and in the Romano-British period for ritual ceremonies involving feasting, the deposition of votive objects and possibly the commemoration of the dead (Ashworth and Burleigh 2003; Burleigh 2005; Jackson and Burleigh 2005; Burleigh 2006; 2007; Jackson and Burleigh 2007; 2008). About 35m to the north of this feature, geophysical survey located a 35m-square ditched enclosure, of more than one phase, which contained a timber building, approximately 30m square (Fig. 360). Could this have been the temple that originally housed the hoard of gold and silver votive plaques, figurine and jewellery?

Another possibility is that the temple treasure was associated originally with a walled enclosure, at least 45 × 30m, found together with other monumental walled enclosures or buildings, ditches and pits, located by Kris Lockyear’s 2004 geophysical resistivity survey at the north end of an adjacent field to the east (Pricem’s Field), a feature that might well have contained a temple building (Fig. 361). This possibility is emphasized by the recovery, during some archaeological field walking and trial trenching at the same location in the early 1970s, of stone structural evidence, including a marble ornamental volute, perhaps from the composite capital of a column, which could have been a decorative architectural element on a Roman temple.

There were other substantial buildings in this field too, around the confluence of the River Rhee, flowing from Ashwell Springs, with another stream flowing from springs at Westbury at the west end of the present village (Figs 362–3). The locations of both these sets of springs appear to have been sacred places in prehistory, and the former seems to have continued as such into the medieval period, judging by the finds from there (see Chapter 9). One building, revealed by grass marks suggesting robbed-out wall lines, visible on aerial photographs (HHER 13371), is a massive rectangular structure, possibly as much as 85m long by 35m wide, with a possible narthex or propylaeum, hall, aisles and an apse at its south-east end, perhaps a basilica, temple or church. Many Late Roman coins have been detected in its vicinity, the latest issues dating to ad 354–63. The 2009 geophysical surveys by Archaeology RheeSearch detected significant structural remains in this area of the field (see Fig. 207). I am grateful to Gerry Doherty for bringing this image to my attention and to Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews for plotting it.

Although these buildings, and perhaps one or more temples or shrines with associated structures, might have been subject to periodic flooding, this could have been regarded positively by the cult practitioners as the cleansing power of the streams and nature. Elsewhere Roman temples

Chapter 12Discussion: Ashwell End, A Ritual SiteGilbert Burleigh

322 | Dea Senuna

N

ASHWELL END, HERTFORDSHIRE

Archaeological Interpretation (GreatButtway)



Drain

Pond

0 80m1:1500

ASSOCIATES

Path (um)KEY

Posthole, pit

Burnt feature

Ironpipe

Rectilinear patternofpostholes / footings


Soil-filledditch

Conjectured lineof Romanroad

f1

f1

f1

f2

f2

f3

f3

f1

f4

T1

T2

T3

f6

f8

f8

f9

f11

f12

f10

f1

f13

f14

f15

f16

f17

f8 f18

f19

f20

f21

F5F5

F7F7

T4T4

Beresfords

Great Buttway

Ashwell End

Figure 360 Geophysical (magnetometry) survey interpretation plan from 2006 of Great Buttway Field, Ashwell, showing possible timber temple in a ditched enclosure, marked F5 & T4; F7 is the excavated ritual ceremonial hollow. Survey: Prof. Mark Noel, University of Durham and GeoQuest Associates

Figure 361 Geophysical (resistivity) survey interpretation plan from 2004 of Pricem’s Field, Ashwell, showing walled enclosures, buildings, pits and other structures at the north end of the field. Survey: Dr Kris Lockyear, University College, London


William II minted c. 1092–5 and thought to have been deposited c. 1095–1100 ad (Portable Antiquities Scheme Record no. BH-E654B1; Treasure Annual Report 2013 no. T666). Folded medieval coins deposited at ‘old places’, such as Bronze Age barrows and Iron Age hillforts, and elsewhere, are thought to be votive offerings, the folding intended to ritually ‘kill’ the coin and make it unusable. There is medieval documentary evidence to confirm this practice, undertaken to facilitate saintly or divine intercession. There is a similar medieval hoard with a folded coin from the Wanborough Roman temple in Surrey (Murray Andrews, pers. comm.). It could be that the deposition of these coins were deliberate acts intended as votive offerings, maybe with Christian intent, but perhaps with a folk memory that this ‘old place’ was sacred. Although the two deposits were separated by about 200 years, it is possible that stone robbing took place on each occasion to

and shrines are found in areas that were liable to flooding, for example, outside the fort at Vindolanda, near Hadrian’s Wall.

Interestingly, in May 1998 at this location, TL 26054045, a silver memorial penny of St Edmund (c. 890–915 ad) was found (North Herts Museums Enquiry No. 1851 (02.06.1998). It is possible that this may have been dropped when the stone walls of this building were being robbed, perhaps to utilize in constructing an earlier church on the site of the present medieval parish church in Ashwell village. The Domesday Book records a priest in Ashwell, suggesting the existence of a church by 1086 ad. In 2017 the parish celebrated its 1100th anniversary, although the exact year of the first construction of the church is not known for certain.

In 2013 a hoard of two silver coins folded together so that only the reverse of the outer could be identified was found nearby at TL 25984038. The outer coin is a penny of

Figure 362 Aerial photograph from 2007 showing grass marks of a possible basilical building at the east end of Pricem’s Field, Ashwell. Copyright: MSvirtualEarth

Figure 363 Interpretive plot of possible basilical building at Pricem’s Field, Ashwell. By Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews of North Hertfordshire Museum

324 | Dea Senuna

Apollo, Atys, Silenus and Venus, although any one of the images found could have been regarded by worshippers as representing other local deities with similar attributes and powers to the classical deities portrayed (see below). The Romano-British community at Ashwell End was worshipping a pantheon associated with the temple building from which the hoard originated and with the nearby excavated ritual feasting and votive deposition site.

Metal-detected finds from over and around the excavation area and elsewhere in the settlement provide examples of other religious objects and their iconography. Most obvious are two votive model axes, associated with a Celtic sun deity and with animal sacrifice, and two phallic mounts, symbolic of virility and fertility and employed to ward off evil spirits, but there were also zoomorphic mounts, brooches and other personalia. Animals represented include lions and a panther, symbols of aggression, power, strength and courage; birds, perceived as spirits, perhaps the souls of the dead, and a link with ancestral spirits; a duck, which may have been seen as a link between the elements of air and water; a hen, a symbol of fertility; dolphins, associated with Cernunnos and other deities; a hare, associated with speed, hunting and feasting; and boars, symbolic of strength and aggression, hunting and feasting.

European Iron Age peoples were animists. They believed that the natural world, animals and landscape features were divine and possessed spirits. It is probable that these beliefs were prevalent throughout prehistory and continued into the Romano-British period. Not only were these animal representations used as votive offerings because of their symbolism, but also because, simultaneously, the votaries were worshipping the animals themselves and their spirits (Green 1992; 1995b).

The numerous metal-detected finds recorded over the last 20 years show that the settlement area extended a further kilometre to the north of the Ashwell End site, to the confluence of the Rhee flowing northwards from the springhead in Ashwell village with another stream flowing north-eastwards from a spring in Hinxworth parish. It was at this confluence in 1876 that coprolite diggers found a hoard of more than 500 Roman silver coins in an iron or iron-bound container which had been buried in the late 2nd century ad (Cussans 1881; Robertson 2000). It is suggested that this coin hoard may have been a ritual votive offering at the highly significant location of the meeting of two rivers and by Hart’s Spring. Many other Iron Age and Roman finds made in this area by the 19th-century coprolite diggers, including pottery vessels, coins and personalia, indicate that there may well have been a religious shrine at the confluence.

It is possible that other shrines existed in the landscape around the sanctuary at Ashwell End, as well as at Hinxworth (see below). For instance, 1.5km to the east, finds of Roman pottery and building materials at Ruddery Springs, together with an Iron Age and Roman cemetery, from which a stream winds northwards to a confluence with the Rhee at Mob’s Hole, might suggest such a possibility. At Mob’s Hole, 3km north of Ashwell End, other notable finds have been made, including a fine Late Iron Age enamelled bridle cheekpiece, hinting at the possibility of another shrine

provide material for building works at the medieval parish church and that the offerings were made in gratitude for the easily available stone. Indeed, there may have been standing Roman fabric at the site even as late as the 12th century ad which would have attracted people as a readily available source of building stone.

Interestingly, the geophysical surveys indicate that the 35m gap between the excavated ceremonial hollow on Great Buttway Field and the possible temple to its north is devoid of many detectable features, as is the approximately 30m distance between the ceremonial hollow and the present field boundary to its east, probably beyond. In fact, there is an area about 350m in length between the possible temple and the field boundary to its south-east which is largely lacking in features on the geophysical surveys, apart from many possible small pits. The area to the west of the ceremonial hollow and the adjacent road, on the other hand, is dense with settlement features, ditched enclosures, buildings and pits, of many phases, both Iron Age and Roman. Moreover, at the southern end, this apparent relatively empty space extends to the east towards the proposed temples in Pricem’s Field, a distance of approximately 120m. It could be that this large open area, which lay between the three possible temple sites and enclosed the ceremonial hollow near one of them, was a sacred public space for religious ceremonies, assemblies, festivals, funerals, fairs and markets, perhaps music, drama and other performances, maybe even administrative and legal proceedings (Fernández-Götz 2014).

At Ashwell End, the excavated ritual site seems to have had its origins at the very close of the Iron Age, following earlier ritual activity on the site, and to have continued throughout the Roman period. Here, the emphasis on the curation and eventual ritual deposition of antiquities – Iron Age coins and Bronze Age artefacts – and antiques – earlier Roman coins and artefacts – is singular, and may have been a tradition specifically associated with the Romano-Celtic goddess, Senuna. Since she was clearly equated with the Roman Minerva, it seems reasonable to assume that Senuna had powers similar to those of Minerva. Minerva was associated with, among other things, crafts, healing, warfare, water and wisdom. Many of the finds from the Ashwell End shrine could be taken to reflect these powers.

It may be no coincidence that the Ashwell End shrine and its rituals, and their association with Senuna, are situated on a spring line and by a river. The Ravenna Cosmography refers to a river somewhere in southern Britain with the name Senua (Richmond and Crawford 1949; Rivet and Smith 1979, 213). The name has been ascribed to the River Rhee, which later in its course becomes the Cam, because of its association with the goddess Senuna, and based on place-name evidence (Yeates 2009), though that claim has been disputed (Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2013).

On the gold and silver figured and inscribed plaques from the Ashwell End temple treasure hoard the following deities are represented: Minerva, equated with Senuna as evidenced by the votaries’ inscriptions, Mercury, Victory, Mars and Roma. The hoard’s figurine with inscribed base clearly equates Fortuna with Senuna, too. Finds from the cult site add the following to the list of deities venerated:


human bone (Chapter 11.12). It may be viewed as a stage, even an altar. As an altar it could have accommodated multiple animals being sacrificed at the same time (see the important conclusions by Anthony King in Chapter 11.12). Although sheep/goat, followed by pig, are the most common species represented on site, there are cattle bones too, and maybe the bull figurine found in [314] above [529] indicates that bulls were sacrificed occasionally as well. Or perhaps it supported one or more permanent or temporary altars, where priests and priestesses performed sacrifices, libations, offerings and other ceremonies and rituals, watched by a surrounding congregation of worshippers. These ritual ceremonies and the subsequent feasting would doubtless have been accompanied by public prayers, chanting, recitals, storytelling, magic (Green 1995a), music provided by musicians on a variety of instruments, singing, dancing and, at times, much noise.

If so, it may not have been the first altar on the site. At the base of Phase 3 post pit [397], east of oven [353]/[554], and cut into the natural chalky clay, was rubble deposit [403]/[503], which may have been a hard standing for a timber post or, more probably, an altar base (Phase 1). Although its limits were not ascertained, it measured at least 0.56 × 0.56m, but probably not much more.

The clay platform was surrounded by clay ovens in use in Phases 2–6. These appear to have been domed structures, probably with bottom flues and chimneys (perhaps simple openings at the top) to achieve the draught necessary for the evidently very high temperatures, visible in the condition of the calcined bone. The high temperatures may account also for some of the extreme fragmentation of much of the bone, although deliberate fragmentation by breakage seems to have occurred too (Chapter 11.12, ‘Taphonomy, fragmentation and butchery’). The bases of the ovens, where excavation revealed their full extent, ranged in size from 1.60m diameter to 2.60 × 1.80m. That is a considerable size, large enough to take whole carcasses.

On the surface of the clay platform were two placed deposits, [522] and [643]. The former, [522], covered an ovoid area about 2.20m east–west by 1.55m (maximum) north–south on the surface of the clay platform. The deposit included numerous artefacts and ecofacts, including 505 abraded potsherds dated from the Late Iron Age/mid 1st century ad to the early/mid 2nd century ad – among which were many large jar sherds, such as a frilled sherd (SF 1171), dated Late Iron Age/mid/late 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad – tile, three pieces of daub, a perforated grey ware pot base (Cat. 8.49), about 30% of the hemispherical lower stone of a Hertfordshire Puddingstone rotary quern or handmill (SF 1170), dating from c. 50–150 ad, together with three fragments broken off it in antiquity, 344 animal bone fragments, including burnt/calcined, and 151 oyster shells, including 13 burnt. The soil matrix holding the artefacts and ecofacts in [522] also contained a significant number of flint stones and pebbles, and the laid surface of the whole deposit was noticeably flat, probably due to trampling by people, in effect making it a standing place, perhaps a holy spot where rituals were performed.

The second placed deposit, [643], only identified during post-excavation work, comprised a group of small finds

at this significant location too. There may have been a further shrine in the vicinity of Kirby’s Manor Farm, about 2km north of Ashwell End, near the west bank of the stream flowing from Ruddery Springs, where a Roman mount depicting a male laureate head emerging from a calyx was found in 2005.

The ceremonial hollowA dip in the natural clay, perhaps formed by a permanent or seasonal spring feeding into the stream, the River Rhee, flowing northwards from the permanent springs in what is now Ashwell village, seems to have been utilized by Bronze Age to Late Iron Age peoples for ritual activities, including the deposition of metalwork and, probably, ritual feasting (Phase 0). Before that the site was used in the Neolithic period for an unknown purpose, maybe simply by people visiting the spring and hunting by the river, as evidenced by the few flint tools found.

Towards the end of the Iron Age, people stripped the area of topsoil to excavate and create a circular or subcircular hollow about 26m in diameter with a near-vertical cut edge into the natural clay. Originally this artificial hollow may have been up to 1m deep. On the base of the hollow, at the periphery at least, a flint gravel surface at least 6.5m wide was laid on to the natural clay, perhaps to provide a hardstanding for a congregation of worshippers to observe priests performing rituals at the centre of the hollow. From Phase 1 onwards, clay ovens were constructed near the centre of the hollow, which was the focus of ritual feasting and cult ceremonies, including the deposition of votive objects and remains from the feasting.

It is likely that the presumed spring continued to flow at least seasonally for some time afterwards, for the ground within the hollow seems to have been wet and boggy, certainly at times, and to have attracted amphibians whose bones have been found in some numbers from the homogeneous soil deposits within the hollow. From Phase 2, there were 120 frog, 66 toad and 543 other amphibian bones, while in subsequent phases very few amphibian bones were found (Phase 6 had the most), suggesting that the ground became much drier, at least in the excavated part of the hollow.

The central clay platform and ovensA central clay platform, [529], in use during Phases 2–5, was constructed over the Phase 1 clay oven [599]. It measured at least 8.00–10.00m east–west by 2.00m north–south and extended beyond the excavation area to the north. Its east end was cut by the Phase 6 oyster midden pit, [632]. Its surface, covered with a light, fine, silty, ashy dust, was spread with numerous artefacts and ecofacts, two placed deposits, [522] and [643], both Phase 5, and two ovens, [551] and [609], which remained in use through Phases 2–5. The clay used for the platform was very similar to that of the various oven superstructures.

This platform was not only central to the ceremonial hollow but clearly central to the rituals and cult activities associated with it, such as feasting, the sacrifice of animals, the cooking and burning of joints of meat in the ovens and, presumably, their subsequent offering to the gods, the deposition of votive objects and the treatment of animal and

326 | Dea Senuna

Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2010; Ingemark 2014; Fitzpatrick-Matthews et al. 2015; 2016). Such pottery vessels are also present in the assemblage from Ashwell (Chapter 11.1). At communal feasts one might expect the ritual sharing of wine and other alcoholic drinks, perhaps using shared vessels.

The buildingsThere were two buildings within the part of the ceremonial hollow that was excavated. The first was small, aligned north-east to south-west, and with a chalk rubble floor, [102]/[334]. Measuring approximately 2.5 × 2.0m overall, it was constructed on the south side of the central soil-filled area, as it was then defined by a chalk pebble perimeter. The building had a perimeter foundation gully for a sill beam, with timber corner posts on stone post-pads; there were probably other timber uprights springing from the sill beam as well. The walls were most likely constructed of timber, clay and stone and there was a tiled timber roof, the evidence for which was a spread of tile and stone across the surface of [320] to the west, presumably deposited there as a result of demolition or collapse from decay.

Lying over the foundation gully and its fill was a compact group of 18 oyster shells associated with an Early Roman potsherd, three iron nails and a flint nodule – a placed deposit ([123]). Flint, being a hard and long-lasting local stone, seems to have been seen as symbolic of strength, endurance, longevity and eternity. Flint nodules were used to accompany burials, support heads, line and cover graves in cemeteries at Baldock and Kelshall, for example (Fitzpatrick-Matthews and Burleigh 2007b; Burleigh and Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2010; Fitzpatrick-Matthews et al. 2015; 2016).

A similar structure, [389]/[556], on a slightly different alignment and very close by replaced this small building. It lay within and beyond the eastern edge of the excavation so its full plan was not recovered, although it was probably of similar dimensions to the earlier building, at least 1.50m by at least 1.20m. There was no sign of a foundation gully, but a very substantial post-pad, [565], constructed from flint and sandstone rubble, was sited at its north-west end. The floor of the structure also consisted of chalk rubble blocks which had been badly damaged and disturbed by ploughing. The north-west corner of the building was cut by oyster midden pit, [632] (Phase 6).

What was the purpose of these buildings? They could have been shrines used to house cult figures, perhaps wooden, perhaps stone, even marble, like the Venus-type statue from the related cult sanctuary at Hinxworth (see below), and/or other cult paraphernalia. Perhaps Senuna’s treasure was displayed in them at religious festivals or other ceremonial cult events. The buildings may have been decorated, possibly with carved and painted timber uprights. They may have had one or more open sides so that onlookers could view their contents. Ralph Jackson (pers. comm.) has suggested that the size of building [102]/[334] might indicate it was used to display human bodies, shrouded or coffined or clothed or not, perhaps during funeral feasts, before cremation and interment and/or scattering.

The fact that we found no similar structures later than Phase 5 does not necessarily mean that there was a change in

including iron objects SF 1188 and 1194 and an iron fitting for a box (Cat. 8.8), a large part, measuring 230mm long x 145mm wide x 79mm deep, of the underside of another hemispherical lower stone from a Hertfordshire Puddingstone rotary quern (SF 1190) of similar date to SF 1170 (Chris Green, pers. comm.; Green 2016), a pottery spindle whorl (Cat. 7.14), a perforated Late Iron Age potsherd (Cat. 8.33), and another LIA potsherd (SF 1189), two 1st- to 2nd-century ad bone hairpins (Cat. 5.82 & 5.88), and two Iron Age coins of Cunobelin, a silver unit (Cat. 2.60) and a copper-alloy unit (Cat. 2.109). Both quernstones retain evidence of the drilled holes for their handles. These two rotary querns made of Hertfordshire Puddingstone, a very hard and durable material comprising flint pebbles in a concrete-like matrix, may well have been deliberately broken and ‘killed’ as part of a ritual closing ceremony at the end of the use of platform/stage/altar [529]. During their life, they would have been utilized to grind grain, producing flour to make loaves of bread, presumably baked in the ovens and shared by priest celebrants and worshippers during ritual communal feasts and ceremonies. Interestingly, another fragment of a puddingstone quern had been found in the near vicinity by the surface artefact collection survey of February 2003. It is a fragment of a possible top stone, measuring 150 x 95 x 67mm, with evidence of the drilled hole for a handle. Both [522] and [643] belong to the end of Phase 5 and seem to have been deposited together, perhaps forming one deposit in fact, when the use of platform [529] came to an end. Nonetheless, this central area continued to be the focus of cult activities.

Placed deposit [522] was overlain by homogeneous soil [505] (the same as and the base of soils [314] and [315]). Soil [505] produced large quantities of pottery, animal bone, burnt/calcined bone, oyster shells and special finds, such as a copper-alloy pin fragment (SF 1129), a copper-alloy mount in the form of a bull (Cat. 4.18) and a pipeclay figurine fragment (Cat. 4.10). Likewise, [314] and [315] yielded huge quantities of similar finds. This indicates that the central area continued to be the focus of cult activities in Phases 6 and 7, through the later 3rd and 4th centuries ad, even though the central clay platform was allowed to become buried by the homogeneous soils building up as a result of the continuing feasting and other activities. Since the whole ceremonial hollow was not excavated, it is not known whether other ovens, besides [546] (Phase 6), continued in later phases beyond the excavation area, or whether there was another altar or stage in any phase later than Phase 5.

In addition to the vast quantities of animal bones and oyster shells, other evidence for feasting is represented by the excavated glass vessel fragments, which include drinking cups and bowls (Chapter 11.9). The consumption of alcohol, in the form of wine and beer, was an important element of Iron Age and Roman feasting, as indicated by glass, metal, pottery and wood vessels, such as amphorae, wine-mixing buckets and jugs in Welwyn-type La Tène III burials, and samian and other pottery and metal tableware, as well as glassware, in Roman-period graves and other assemblages (Stead 1967; Burleigh 1983; Stead and Rigby 1986; Fitzpatrick-Matthews and Burleigh 2007b; Burleigh and


have borne symbols, carvings, paintings, inscriptions, pennants, flags or other decorations.

In Phase 5, the boundary gully was recut as a beam slot. The recut gully was a series of short, straight, near-vertical-sided, flat-bottomed, lengths, giving the appearance of a polygonal boundary enclosing the central hollow. It was 0.20–0.25m wide and 0.10–0.15m deep. It very likely contained ground beams supporting timber uprights, constituting a fence or wall. Again, this could have been decorated in various ways. The butt end of the beam slot at its north end, [570], presumably marked an entrance passageway to the central clay platform and its surrounding ovens.

In Phase 6, a shallow depression [211] was worn in the chalk pebble surface surrounding the homogeneous soils filling the centre of the ceremonial hollow. It covered an irregular oval area, about 1.90m in length by about 1.30m in width and appeared to have been the result of erosion, probably caused by the movement of people, and maybe of animals. Perhaps it was a place from which to view and participate in proceedings in the defined sacred space. It would have also been the place where people gathered to venerate the warrior-hero commemorated by the chalk-block covered memorial [203]/[210] (see section on placed deposits below). This lay just in front of where they were standing, on the inner edge of the chalk pebble perimeter enclosing the central sacred space The depression had worn through the perimeter gullies and their fills, obliterating them at this point. The bases of a number of probable postholes around this depression perhaps indicate the presence of a gateway or other timber structure (see Fig. 263).

To the south-west (in the south-west corner of the main excavation square) was a shallow, flat-based, irregular linear depression [640]. It had been worn through chalk pebble surface [327] (Phase 4/5), probably by human and animal traffic, and may have been a footway through to the central area of the ritual hollow from the road on the west side.

On the west side of the ceremonial hollow, later in Phase 5, a flint gravel courtyard surface was laid over the earlier chalk pebble surface. To the west it merged with the gravel road surface.

The homogeneous soilsIt is thought that these dark organic soils accumulated as a result both of feasting and of deliberate deposition. Tip lines were not discernible, although clusters of materials sometimes were – for example, the observed and inferred placed deposits. Because of the homogeneous nature of these soils it is likely that there were other phases of activity not visible in the archaeological record (Faulkner 2017). For a detailed analysis and discussion of a range of processes involved in the formation of midden deposits, see Needham and Spence 1997.

Placed deposits ([203], [635], [350], [206], [639], [632], [128], [352])One of the remarkable aspects of the Ashwell ritual site is the series of placed deposits. These were concentrated at certain points in the ceremonial hollow – particularly near its

the associated rituals. It is possible that one or more similar buildings belonging to later phases may exist within the part of the ceremonial hollow that lay outside the excavated area.

The chalk and flint gravel surfacesChalk pebble and flint gravel surfaces were regularly laid within ceremonial hollow [634] from Phase 1 through to Phase 7. In Phase 1, a flint gravel surface was laid on the natural clay bottom of the newly excavated ceremonial hollow to provide a dry hardstanding for people. At first it was thought that this base gravel surface covered a width of at least 6.5m around the outer edge of the cut ceremonial hollow, but some of these contexts are near the centre of the hollow and it is more likely that the entire base of the hollow was laid with flint gravel. Less of it survives near the centre because that is where most activity and movement, thus wear and erosion, took place.

As organic homogeneous soils accumulated in the hollow, resulting from feasting debris and deliberate deposition, from time to time further flint gravel, clay and chalk pebble surfaces were laid to provide dry hardstanding, since the soils would have been soft and muddy in wet weather. Some of these surfaces covered smaller areas than others, presumably as needed.

Context [381] was the silt fill of cut [387] (Phase 3), sealed below chalk pebble surface [376] and its repair [375] (Phases 4 and 5). Context [387] was the terminal of a linear gully at least 0.59m long, 0.32m wide and 0.23m deep. It ran approximately east–west with steep, concave sides and a narrow rounded base. Its function was possibly a setting for timber posts, and certainly a boundary marker. Presumably [387] marked an entrance into the central area. Thus already a smaller central area of the ceremonial hollow was being defined.

In Phase 4 that smaller area, about 14m across, was defined by a continuous laid chalk pebble surface ([103], etc.) over the outer accumulated soils. At first, the limit of the central area defined by this chalk pebble surface seems to have been emphasized, at least in places, by large timber posts. The evidence for these was a number of semicircular cut-outs measuring approximately 0.40–0.50m diameter, scalloped on the inner faces of the surface. In time, the posts had evidently been removed since there were no surviving post pipes or complete postholes, only the cut-outs. Eventually, the accumulating homogeneous soils in the central area covered them over. The posts do not seem to have been regularly spaced or continuous around the perimeter of [103], etc. They may have been symbolic markers, or marking particular positions for certain rites, perhaps carved and painted, even inscribed, bearing labels or decorated in other ways.

Later in Phase 4, a circular gully was cut through the chalk pebble surface [103], etc., 0.70m wide by 0.20m deep, steep-sided and flat-bottomed. It was on the eastern edge of the western side of the chalk pebble surface and followed it closely, helping to demarcate the central area with its organic, homogeneous soils, ovens and central clay platform. It may have held a timber sill beam and/or timber uprights, creating a fence and further defining and enclosing the central sacred space and its ritual activities. The fence may

328 | Dea Senuna

presence in deposit [203] of what seems to be a part of the bull figurine mount from [505]/[314] (Cat. 4.18 & 4.19) suggests that pit [210], containing [203] was cut into chalk pebble surface [202] at the end of Phase 5, while the main part of the bull mount was deposited over the central clay platform [529] at the commencement of Phase 6.

The similarities of Ashwell [203] to Baldock F106 and F95 and to other contemporary cremation burial features suggest that the placed deposit was either a cremation burial (only one calcined bone fragment was found), or was intended as a memorial (perhaps more likely), a cenotaph in effect. The items in the deposit indicate an individual of very high status indeed, especially the rare and finest-quality mail, which, together with the weapons present, suggests a soldier/warrior, perhaps a ‘hero’ from an elite family, maybe even one descended from the ‘chieftain’ or ‘prince’ buried c. 30 bc in the Large Burial Enclosure on Upper Walls Common, Baldock.

The objects in [203] are of great interest and undoubted significance. They are most likely the personal possessions of the deceased person being commemorated. Apart from the iron mail and weapons (two Bronze Age spearheads and another possible iron weapon), suggesting the honouring of a soldier/warrior hero, all the other objects present must have been deliberately and carefully chosen for deposition either by the mourners/votaries or by the deceased while still alive. The difficulty is answering why each was selected and one can only speculate.

There are ten coins – seven Iron Age (one of silver and six of copper alloy) and three Roman (copper alloy). The reverses of the Iron Age coins depict a boar, a centaur, horses, Pegasus, Victory sacrificing a bull, and a naked man holding a human head in front of an altar. All these could be taken as warrior subjects. The reverses of the Roman coins depict Ceres, Fides or Felicitas and Salus. These could represent powers and virtues that the deceased admired and to which he/she aspired: fertility, trust, loyalty, plenty, happiness, luck, health, prosperity and welfare (Curteis 2005, 207–25).

The coin of Claudius I with Ceres on the reverse has been drilled through and reused as an amulet. Perhaps Ceres was one of the deceased’s favourite deities, associated as she is with agriculture and fertility. Maybe the deceased had been a farmer as well as a soldier. The reverse of the coin of Vespasian displays Fides or Felicitas holding a cornucopia (horn of plenty), which could also fit with the idea of its owner being a farmer. Given that the cornucopia is an attribute of Fortuna as well, and that the silver figurine, with its silver base and inscribed dedication to the goddess Senuna, looks much like Fortuna, while the copper-alloy figurine from the nearby related site at Hinxworth holds a cornucopia and is suggested as a representation of Minerva-Fortuna-Senuna (Burleigh and Jackson 2009), could it be that the deceased also had in mind Senuna when choosing the coin as a personal possession? The extreme wear on the Roman coins, and the drilling for suspension of one of them, suggests that they may have been family heirlooms.

The presence in the deposit of the pipeclay figurine head depicting a male character from Roman comedy is particularly intriguing. It may be suggested that the head’s

centre, close to and inside the chalk pebble perimeter of later phases, and on and over the central clay platform – but were generally spread throughout the homogeneous soils in all phases, notably single object deposits (see finds distribution plots for the three dimensionally recorded Bronze Age bronzes, Iron Age and Roman coins, figural objects, personalia and militaria: Figs 281–2). Not all such finds were 3D recorded.

Ashwell pit [210], which contained placed deposit [203] (Phase 5; see Figs 212, 258, 365), had a similar orientation to grave-pit F106 in the centre of the Late Iron Age Large Burial Enclosure at Baldock, although it was smaller in area (Burleigh 1983; Fitzpatrick-Matthews and Burleigh 2007b; Burleigh and Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2010). Some of the contents of [203] are the same as, or similar to, the contents of Baldock F95, the pyre-pit associated with F106 in the Large Burial Enclosure. For example, the cut-up pieces of rare mail armour in both features are apparently identical and one wonders whether they came from the same tunic, even though buried up to 250 years apart (Fig. 364). The Ashwell and Baldock mail is finer and of a higher quality and strength than that from either the Folly Lane, Verulamium (Niblett 1992; Gilmour 1999, 159–66), or Lexden, Camulodunum princely burials (Foster 1986a). It must have been painstakingly crafted by the most skilled blacksmith and would have belonged to individuals of the highest status (Cat. 6.1). Even if not from the same tunic as the Baldock example, the Ashwell mail pieces appear to have been a prized treasure, curated as an heirloom or antiquity for up to 250 years from the likely date of manufacture, maybe by an elite family or priests in a temple, before being buried with placed deposit [203].

Other types of objects present in both Baldock F95 and Ashwell [203] include animal bone and calcined bone, and box or casket fittings (Cat. 8.11). Among the differences observed were the fact that F95 had many copper-alloy box or furniture fittings while [203] did not, and that [203] had Bronze Age bronzes, Iron Age and Roman coins and a Roman pipe-clay figurine head which F95 was lacking. The

Figure 364 Cut-up pieces of Iron Age iron mail armour from the pyre-pit [F95] associated with the princely burial [F106] in the Large Burial Enclosure at Baldock excavated in 1981. Photo: Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews; Copyright: North Hertfordshire Museum


contained Bronze Age bronze weapons (Middle Bronze Age spearheads: Cat. 10.14 & 10.15). Deposit [635] may well have been ceremonially placed/cast at the same time as [203] or shortly thereafter.

Deposit [635] (Phase 5) was a partially scattered collection of 29 Bronze Age bronze objects within homogeneous soil [101]/[110]/[111]/[117]/[201]. They were found at depths varying between 0.3m and 0.5m below the present field surface. As they were recovered, a random sample (20 artefacts) of their positions in the ground was recorded three-dimensionally. Most of those so recorded (18 artefacts) were confined to an area measuring approximately 3.0 × 2.5m. The vast majority of the artefacts that were not recorded three-dimensionally in situ also came from the concentration at this location. Two artefacts recorded three-dimensionally were located further away. Both were 3.5m from the main concentration, one to the north and one to the west. There are good archaeological reasons to believe that these Bronze Age artefacts were all deposited at the same time and constitute a scattered collection. First, the great majority of them were located in a relatively confined area. Although a few were scattered to a greater distance this may be explained if the majority were deposited together while some were cast into the ceremonial hollow individually at the same time. Second, the fact that the artefacts were located through a 0.2m depth of the soil context can be explained by our interpretation of the soil as soft, forming from decaying rubbish, and occasionally perhaps boggy at the time of deposition. This would mean that artefacts of different weights would sink to different depths and some might be trampled to greater depths than others by people and animals moving over the ground. Third, all the artefacts were recovered from the same archaeological soil layer.

Although all 29 artefacts date from various times within the Bronze Age, they were found in an homogeneous soil context that also contained numerous and various Iron Age and Roman coins, potsherds and other artefacts and ecofacts. Our interpretation of many of these latter objects is that they were deposited as offerings to one or more deities in connection with the ritual activities around the hollow. Unlike the Bronze Age artefacts, the types of material seem too varied to have been deposited at one time. What this other material does demonstrate, however, is that the Bronze Age artefacts must have been deposited, or rather, redeposited in the Roman period.

The group comprised seven axe-heads, 15 spearheads and spear parts, a gouge, two chisels, two awls, a sword blade and a dagger and was deposited in the later 2nd/3rd century ad. Other Bronze Age artefacts found were deposited in 3rd-century ad contexts, while several Bronze Age artefacts recovered from the ploughsoil might suggest that these curated antiquities continued to be deposited into the 4th century ad.

Layer [350] (Phase 5/6), an undisturbed continuation of [315], contained many special finds, including six Bronze Age and later artefacts arranged in an arc on the north-west side of Phase 2 oven base [353]/[554] (placed deposit [641]: Cat. 10.33, a copper-alloy rapier blade; Cat. 10.44, a copper-alloy awl; SF 911, an iron object; Cat. 10.56, a small copper-

use in this structured deposit was a secondary reuse of an object whose meaning to its owner was now different to its original purpose. The meaning may have been that the head was intended, because of some similarity, to represent Silenus, the immortal Greek patron of wine-making and drunkenness and companion of the god Dionysus/Bacchus. Two Silenus head mounts were found during the excavations, appropriate on a cult feasting site.

Also remarkable, and something evident in other structured deposits here and throughout the contents of the ceremonial hollow, is the presence of antiques and antiquities. From [203] there are two Bronze Age spearheads, seven Iron Age coins, three 1st- and early 2nd-century ad Roman coins – the latter all very worn from circulation whereas the Iron Age coins are not particularly worn, as if they have been out of circulation for a long time, perhaps curated in a nearby temple – and the 1st-century bc mail armour. By the time the contents of [203] were deposited in the late 2nd or early 3rd century ad, many of the objects present were up to 250 years old, and in the case of the Bronze Age spearheads more than a thousand years old. This suggests an interest in, even fascination or reverence for, antiquities, maybe connected to religious belief, honouring the power of the works of the ancestors, and indeed ancestor worship.

The grave or memorial was clearly of great significance for it seems to have been marked by a covering cairn of chalk blocks that would have protected it from disturbance by people and animals moving and trampling in the vicinity, the kind of activity that disturbed and affected most of the homogeneous soil deposits and their contents throughout the ceremonial feasting hollow, including other structured placed deposits, such as the group of Bronze Age bronzes, [635] (Phase 5).

During the excavation of placed deposit [203], it was considered that SF 161 (a coin of Claudius I; Cat. 2.185), 172 (a coin of Cunobelin; Cat. 2.83), 173 (a coin of Cunobelin; Cat. 2.157) and 175 (a coin of Tasciovanus; Cat. 2.25) were in fact part of the deposit, even though they were each a little outside the surviving limits of cut [210]. It is also considered that SF 168 (a coin of Cunobelin; Cat. 2.97), 191 (a coin of Claudius I; Cat. 2.202) and 192 (a coin of Cunobelin; Cat. 2.61) may be votive objects deposited in memory/respect of the individual buried/commemorated in [203]/[210]. The marking cairn would have made it easy to find the right place. This may well have been true also of the placement in [201] of a military armilla bracelet (Cat. 6.33), a particularly appropriate dedication if the cairn marked the memorial/grave of a soldier, or warrior hero. This armilla is of interest too because a joining part of it (Cat. 6.34) was found unstratified elsewhere during the excavations. The bracelet had been deliberately broken and bent in antiquity, ritually ‘killed’, and the two parts probably deposited separately, like the bull figurine parts found in [203] and [314]. A Middle Bronze Age dagger fragment (Cat. 10.31) was close to deposit [203]/[210] too, and is considered an element of the scattered and extensive placed deposit [635], all Bronze Age bronzes, mostly weapons, with some tools. It may be that [635] was dedicated and deposited in honour of the warrior represented by [203] also, and no coincidence that [203]

330 | Dea Senuna

and filled with 5055 oyster shells, including 89 that were burnt and six that were perforated, 2372 animal bone specimens, predominantly sheep/goat, including 751 burnt/calcined and unburnt horn specimens, about 2200 sherds of pottery, dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st century ad to late 2nd/3rd century ad, and other materials, all deposited at one time. It lay beneath homogeneous soil [314] (also Phase 6). Pit [632] cut the Phase 5 small, rubble-floored, building ([389]/[556]/[565]), the central clay platform ([529], Phases 2–5), layer [349], part of the homogeneous soil fill of the hollow, also belonging to Phase 5, and oven base [351], whose final use must have been in Phase 5. It was a midden – the debris from a ritual feast.

A number of the metal and other finds from [632] seem to be not just rubbish, but possibly deliberately selected and placed in the midden, perhaps for dedicatory reasons. These include a scabbard ring (Cat. 6.15), a finger ring (Cat. 5.66), a 1st-century ad brooch (Cat. 5.15), fragments of two other brooches (Cat. 5.52 & 5.58), part of a seal box (Cat. 5.101), fragments of high-quality glass drinking vessels (Cat. 9.14 & 9.17), a burnt samian sherd (Cat. 1.23), unusually decorated with a ram’s head and a bird apparently attacking it (no doubt highly symbolic and perhaps telling a story or myth), a ceramic spindle whorl made from an amphora sherd (Cat. 7.17) and two coins, an Iron Age unit of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.136), the reverse depicting a metalworker, and an illegible 3rd-century ad radiate (Cat. 2.324). Indeed, it is possible that the entire contents of the pit, apparently the debris from feasting, were deposited for dedicatory and reverential reasons.

The great quantity of sheep/goat bones in this pit is not dissimilar to the ‘flock of sheep’ butchered and buried in a pit dated c. ad 60 in the area of a later temple enclosure at Baldock, apparently the remains of a religious feast (Stead and Rigby 1986, 85–6; Burleigh 2008, 190).

If it is estimated that at least half of pit [632] lies outside the area excavated, it may be suggested that the complete pit originally contained at least 10,000 oyster shells (an unknown number has been dragged up into the ploughsoil). If each participant in the feast consumed ten oysters during the festival then there may have been an assembly of about 500 people.

Apart from the over 5000 oyster shells recovered from this one pit, there were of course thousands more in other placed deposits and soils generally, a total of more than 19,000 from the excavated area, spread across Phases 2–6. Clearly the consumption of oysters at feasts was of great importance to the cult practitioners and their beliefs. The ritual deposition of the shells after consumption, either in groups, e.g. contexts [123] – 18 shells and [352] – 105 shells, or singly was highly significant also. How special oysters and their shells were to the believers is perhaps highlighted by the piercing of some shells for apparent use as amulets or charms to ward off evil spirits (e.g. Cat. 8.50 and 8.51).

A total of 19 perforated oyster shells was found during the excavations, 16 of them in placed deposits, three in Phase 5 and 13 in Phase 6. Most of these perforated shells were deposited singly, but there were 3 in soil fill [510] and six with the placed midden deposit in pit [632], fill [525], all Phase 6. A variety of implements was used to pierce the shells,

alloy ingot; SF 914, a fragment of copper-alloy sheet; and Cat. 5.47, a copper-alloy penannular brooch).

The tip of a Middle/Late Bronze Age sword blade was incorporated within the structure of Phase One oven [608] (Cat. 10.35), and a Late Bronze Age piece of casting waste (Cat. 10.57) was incorporated into the structure of oven [551] (Phases 2–5). These apparently deliberate inclusions perhaps emphasize both the symbolic importance of the Bronze Age antiquities and the ovens and their relationship, linking the ovens to the works of the ancestors and to the ancestral spirits.

Placed structured deposit [206] in homogeneous soil [201] (Phase 5) was an assemblage consisting of a gold stater of Tasciovanus, the reverse depicting a helmeted warrior horseman flourishing a carnyx (Cat. 2.5), a silver uniface uninscribed quarter-stater, with a horse on the reverse (Cat. 2.176), a copper-alloy coin of Cunobelin, the obverse showing a helmeted warrior horseman with spear and shield and the reverse a standing warrior with helmet, spear and shield, both apparently naked (Cat. 2.98), two iron spearheads placed side by side (Cat. 6.18 & 6.19), a glass vessel rim sherd, possibly from a Roman bottle (SF 184) and a copper-alloy sheet fragment, possibly the tip of a decorated votive leaf plaque (Cat. 3.7). This is a distinctive selection both of materials (gold, silver, copper alloy, iron and glass) and of objects. The possible leaf plaque fragment itself indicates a votary. The gold and copper-alloy coins have warrior themes and the silver coin reverse depicts a horse, possibly warrior-associated. The choice of both the objects and the materials from which they are made seems deliberate; perhaps the distinctive colours of the objects also had an influence on their selection. It is notable that this assemblage was placed not much more than 1m north-west of [203]/[210], the proposed warrior burial/memorial, and also on the edge of chalk pebble surface [202] (Phase 5). Deposit [206] may have been ceremonially placed at the same time as deposit [203], or shortly thereafter, like [635]. Like [203], this deposit must have been protected from disturbance by people and animals moving across the site, maybe by placed tiles, of which there were a number of fragments in soil [201].

Placed hoard [639] (Phase 5; Cat. 2.188–2.195) consisted of eight copper-alloy coins of Claudius I buried on edge in a tight line, as if they had been contained by an organic bag or purse, or in a narrow box, long since decayed, and wedged between some chalk lumps. The hoard was deposited in homogeneous soil [110]/[324]. Seven of the eight coins have an image of Minerva on their reverses; the eighth was of Libertas. Given that many of the gold and silver votive plaques from the temple treasure hoard ([636]) have images of Minerva, but inscriptions dedicating them to Senuna, one wonders whether this placed deposit of coins might have been a votive offering to Senuna. In fact, of 19 Claudius I coins from the excavations, 16 display Minerva reverses (Cat. 2.185–2.203). Might they have been specifically selected as votive offerings with Senuna in mind?

Placed deposits [522] and [643] (both Phase 5) are discussed above in the section on the central clay platform, on which they were located.

In the north-east corner of the excavation area, and running beyond the east baulk, pit [632] (Phase 6) was dug


also posts with scallop shells nailed to them guide pilgrims on their physical and spiritual journey along the way (Perigrinatio Compostellana).

What was the source of the edible oysters (Ostrea edulis) at the Ashwell cult site? Very likely they were obtained from oyster beds along the Essex coastline, around the Blackwater and Colne river estuaries and off Mersea Island near Colchester (Roman Camulodunum), where an annual oyster feast is still celebrated. It is possible that they were transported to Ashwell by boat along the Essex coast to the Thames estuary, up the rivers Thames and then Lea, the final stage being overland to the Ashwell site. Alternatively, they were transported overland from Colchester along the road to Baldock via Braughing and then on to Ashwell. Either route would have taken several days and to keep them fresh the live oysters were presumably transported in containers of brine. If there were pilgrims to the Ashwell cult sanctuary, maybe one or more of the pierced oyster shells comes from further afield than the Essex coast.

Running out of the northern baulk of the main excavation square were separate, but closely spaced, deposits of partially articulated dismembered pig and/or wild boar remains, which all appear to have been deposited at one time, quite possibly during the feasting that produced the great quantity of oyster shells deposited in pit [632]. These

judging by the size and shape of the holes produced (Table 16). For whatever reasons, several shells were pierced two or more times, including examples from [502], [506], [522], [529], [538] and [525]/[632]. Perhaps some were used in one way and then re-used in another. The example from [538] has a square hole and a circular hole: possibly it was first nailed to a timber and then drilled for a suspending cord, or the other way round (11.8.51). Maybe it was thought that the efficacy and potency, perhaps the magic, of the shells was increased by piercing with nails and other implements, like other defixiones, such as some lead curses. A lead sheet inscribed with a curse found in a grave on Walls Field, Baldock, is pierced by iron nails and lead wire still in situ (North Herts Museums accession no. 1930,5789; RIB no. 221; Collingwood and Wright 1965, 72; Collingwood 1931; Dungworth 1998). Some piercing instruments were clearly square-shanked nails, maybe to hammer the amulets on to timber posts, while others are small round holes drilled probably to pass a cord through, maybe to enable suspension around the neck of a believer, or possibly for attachment to a garment (Cartwright 1996, 538–40, fig. 201, 1–3). Perhaps the medieval and modern religious custom of sewing a scallop shell to a hat or other garment, or wearing around the neck, has antecedents in cults of antiquity, as with pilgrims on the way to the shrine of St James of Compostella, Spain, where

Context Type No. of shells

Length Weight Size/shape of hole

SF. no.

Phase Cat. no. (Chapter 11)

522 Placed deposit

1 58mm 11.66g 13x4mm Ovoid 5

529 Central platform

1 69mm 14.67g 16x11mm Sub-circular 5

574 Soil fill 1 68mm 22.71g 6x7mm Sub-circular 5

506 Placed deposit

1 70mm 17.79g 15x5mm Ovoid 6

510 Soil fill a 3 60mm 11.28g 4x3mm Diamond 6

510 b 38mm Fragment 7.38g 6x2mm Sub-rectangular

6

510 c 36mm Fragment 2.99g 8x7mm Sub-circular 6

521 Soil containing 538

1 69.2mm 31.68g Square 1276 6 8.50

538 Pig deposit 1 66.2mm 15.80g Square and circular

1235 6 8.51

580 Pig deposit 1 73mm 6.69g 7 x 3mm Ovoid 6

632 525 Oyster midden pit a

6 70mm 16.81g 20x10mm Sub-rectangular

6

632 525 b 69mm 18.35g 11x5 max Sub-circular x 2

6

632 525 c 69mm 18.01g 13x5mm Ovoid 6

632 525 d 66mm 12.10g 16x6mm Semi-circular

6

632 525 e 75mm 22.13g 8x8mm Square 6

632 525 f 67mm 11.96g 8x3mm Ovoid 6

501 Sub-soil 1 8

502 Sub-soil 1 57mm 19.28g 10x6mm Ovoid 8

509 Fill of plough-rut

1 44mm 9.78g 4x3mm Sub-rectangular

9

Table 16 Table of perforated oyster shells

332 | Dea Senuna

too, such as a fragment of lead (SF 560), a coin of Hadrian (Cat. 2.221), a copper-alloy hairpin (Cat. 5.73), a glass rim sherd of a cup (Cat. 9.7), a copper-alloy wire bracelet (Cat. 5.2), an iron strip box fitting (Cat. 8.9), a glass bead (Cat. 9.24), three copper-alloy brooches, two dated to the 1st century ad (Cat. 5.9, 38 & 55), two iron objects (SF 581 & 608), a copper-alloy ring (Cat. 5.71) and a Bronze Age spearhead (Cat. 10.21). It is possible that all these objects are from one disturbed placed deposit group or more than one.

In homogeneous soil [201] (Phase 5/6), with the sequential Register numbers SF 190–194, five coins – a copper-alloy unit of Tasciovanus, with a goat on the reverse (Cat. 2.44), two copper-alloy units of Cunobelin, one with Victory, the other with a Centaur on the reverse (Cat. 2.61 & 2.72), a copper-alloy unit inscribed AGR, with a butting bull on the reverse (Cat. 2.162), and an as of Claudius I, with Minerva on the reverse (Cat. 2.202) – may have constituted a placed structured votive deposit, not recognized when excavated on site. It may have been associated also with a copper-alloy 1st-century ad brooch (Cat. 5.29), two fragments of copper alloy, one burnt (Cat. 8.32), a copper-alloy buckle fragment (Cat. 8.44), a copper-alloy possible scabbard binding (Cat. 6.9), an unretouched flint flake (SF 199), and a copper-alloy possible scabbard fragment (Cat. 6.4). The military fittings and the coin reverses suggest warrior and sacrificial themes, similar to placed deposit [203] (see above). All these objects were found in an area of about one square metre lying between placed deposits [203] and [206]. They may well represent one slightly disturbed placed deposit, or perhaps more than one. They appear to be closely related to deposits [203] and [206] and thus probably belong to Phase 5.

There seems little doubt that human and animal traffic across the homogeneous soils, as well as burrowing animals, would have mixed up and separated other placed deposit groups, making them no longer recognizable as groups.

Apart from an unknown amount of the pottery and bone, it is considered that the majority of finds, whether deposited in groups or singly, were probably placed votive offerings, including fragmentary objects, at least some of which seem to have been deliberately broken.

Possible cremation burialsPits [617], [618] and [623] with their fills [616], [612] and [624] may have been cremation burials.

Subcircular pit [617] (Phase 2) was cut through oven base [608] (Phase 1) and into the natural geology. It was 0.60m in diameter and 0.42m deep. It contained ashy fill [616], which had in it burnt stone, some dark soil in clods, abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age to late 1st/early 2nd century ad, 532 animal bone fragments, mostly burnt/calcined, charcoal, two iron objects (SF 1313 & 1314), a drilled animal bone, probably a bobbin for weaving (Cat. 7.24), a copper-alloy Iron Age coin of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.108) with a warrior on each side and a copper-alloy bracelet fragment, possibly deliberately broken (Cat. 5.3).

Pit [618] (Phase 3), cut into oven base [622] (Phase 1–2), was a shallow, subcircular pit with gently sloping sides and a flat base, measuring 0.92 × 0.89m by 0.09m deep, containing fill [612], an ashy silt that contained abraded

deposits include contexts and associated bone groups [126] (in placed deposit [128]), [311], [516], [538], [555], [558], [579], [580] & [592] (all Phase 6; Chapter 11.12). It perhaps raises the prospect that more of the pigs were in fact wild boar than has so far been realized (Chapter 11.12), and that the religious festival may have commenced with a ritual hunt. Only parts of the pigs/boars were consumed by the participants in the feast, the other parts being deposited uncooked as votive offerings in the ground near the centre of the ceremonial hollow (portions for the gods perhaps); other objects and the bones of other animals were often included in the deposits. Presumably the bones of the other animals may have been remnants of the feast too. This, cannot, however, be confirmed as, regrettably, the author has not had access to the list of identifications of species by context.

Pig deposit [126], associated with placed deposit [128] in scoop [127], was closely related to pig deposit [311] to its immediate north, although they do seem to have been separate deposits. Scoop [127] was shallow and subcircular, about 0.10m deep and at least 1.68m east–west by at least 0.86m north–south, by the inner eastern edge of chalk pebble surface [103]/[131]. It was dug into homogeneous soil [110]/[133] and filled by [128], a dark greyish brown, friable, clayey silt, containing 271 abraded potsherds dated mid 1st century ad to mid/late 2nd century ad, shells, 16 iron objects, charcoal, stone and flints, a partially articulated pig skeleton, [126] (associated with much broken pottery), two copper-alloy coins (Cat. 2.209: Vespasian, ad 71, with Victory on the reverse; Cat. 2.184, Gaius, ad 37–41, with Neptune on the reverse), a lead-alloy repair (Cat. 8.36), a lead-alloy fragment (SF 39), two iron nails (SF 41 & 46), a headless pipeclay figurine of Apollo (Cat. 4.2) and two fragments of a pipeclay pedestal, apparently not for the Apollo figurine (Cat. 4.12). It is possible that the head of Apollo is deposited elsewhere in the unexcavated part of the ceremonial hollow; and the same might be true of the body of the pipeclay figure from Roman comedy whose head was deposited in [203]. This could apply also to other fragmentary and deliberately broken pipeclay figurines in other contexts, and indeed to objects of other materials, as exemplified by the copper-alloy bull figurine mount from [314] (Phase 6; Cat. 4.18), a missing part of which was found in [203] (Phase 5; Cat. 4.19), and the two joining halves of a pottery spindle whorl found separately in [313] and [320] (Cat. 7.15). Pipeclay figurine fragments were associated also with at least one other placed pig deposit, [516].

Deposit [352] (Phase 3/4) consisted of 105 oyster shells within homogeneous soil layer [320], associated with abraded pottery dated mid 1st century ad to early 2nd century ad.

It is possible that 15 of the Iron Age coins from homogeneous soil [320] (Phase 3) – 13 of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.63; [576], Cat. 2.114; [578], Cat. 2.89; [583], Cat. 2.115; [584], Cat. 2.116; [586], Cat. 2.117; [595], Cat. 2.101; [596], Cat. 2.118; [598], Cat. 2.91; [601], Cat. 2.64; [602], Cat. 2.69; [603], Cat. 2.92; and [613], Cat. 2.143), one of Sego (Cat. 2.170) and one Vep (Cat. 2.177) – were from a disturbed votive hoard, given the closeness of their finding, as indicated by the Small Finds (SF) Register numbers issued on site (SF 557–613). This range of SF numbers included other objects


In Phase 0 it was a shallow pathway, the line of which was later followed by numerous road surfaces. In Phase 1 the pathway was replaced by a laid clay road surface. In Phase 2 it was gravelled, then later repaired. In Phase 3 it was given a packed flint gravel surface, perhaps another substantial repair, and subsequently another hard flint metalling. In Phase 4 there was a renewed surface of gravel and then a laid chalk pebbling. This merged with the chalk pebble surface on the perimeter of the ceremonial hollow to the east. On the west these contexts represented a new north–south road surface, while those to the east represented a continuation of the courtyard surface. In Phase 5, a new, narrower road surface was created by a cut made through five earlier road surfaces in order to lay make-up material, a black soil layer. This underlay another chalk pebble surface. This road surface was soon replaced by yet another, a hard-packed gravel surface. At this time, the road merged to the east into a firm gravel in silt surface, which in turn merged yet further east into yet another flint gravel surface, a courtyard surface reaching over the chalk pebble surface to the east. In Phase 6, the north–south compact flint gravel road surface was replaced with a looser, but still firm, flint gravel surface. Later, a clayey silt thinly formed over this road surface, and a similarly thin, but less stony, silt formed over the flint gravel courtyard surface to the east. In Phase 7, the silty soil was covered by a new flint gravel road surface which merged to the east into a renewed flint gravel courtyard surface.

The life of this north–south road on the west side of the ceremonial hollow lasted from at least the 1st century bc to the 5th century ad. The surviving evidence for a minimum of a dozen road surfaces and extensive repairs to them suggests a considerable amount of traffic, both human and animal no doubt, and perhaps also including wheeled vehicles although no wheel ruts were noticed. The road was a major north–south routeway within the settlement and clearly at this point intimately related to the ceremonial hollow and its use.

Festive religious cult processions doubtless passed along it, composed of votaries and devotees making their way to services and ceremonies in the hollow and the adjacent public sacred space between the temples, and to other shrines and temples in this sanctuary settlement on the banks of the sacred River Rhee. These processions would have been led by priests and priestesses in their regalia, accompanied by animals to be sacrificed, musicians, singers, dancers, votaries bearing banners, pennants, standards and gifts to be offered to the ancestral and divine spirits and the excited noise and babble of the worshippers; funerary processions may have been more muted.

After dark, such religious processions along the road, and the congregations in the public open spaces between the temples and around any shrines, would no doubt have been lit by candles, lanterns or torches. Their light may have been seen as divine guidance and the rising smoke from them as prayers and pleas to the ancestral spirits and deities in the heavens above. The light and smoke from the sacrificial animals cooked and burnt in the ovens may have been viewed similarly. Jones and King suggest that there may have been candle-making associated with the ovens, as well as the making of stews, soap or glue, although the last may

pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st to mid/late 2nd century ad, 89 animal bone fragments, including some calcined, six oyster shells, charcoal and a copper-alloy possible brooch fragment.

Like pit [617], pit [623] was also cut through oven base [608] (Phase 1) and into the natural geology below. It was oval, with dimensions of 0.40 × 0.24m at the surface, cone-shaped, with steep, sloping sides to a rounded base point at a depth of 0.19m. It contained a grey/light brown, friable, soft, ashy, clay fill ([624]), potsherds dated Late Iron Age to Roman, 62 calcined bone fragments and an iron nail.

Like most of the burnt/calcined bone from all contexts, it has not been possible to identify whether it is animal or human because it is so fragmentary. King and Jones agree in their report (Chapter 11.12) that more of the very fragmentary calcined bone may be human than just the two fragments they identified. If they were not cremation burials, these pits were certainly special placed deposits, perhaps dedicating some of the contents of the ovens to the deities at the end of their use.

Soil [506] (Phase 6), to the immediate east of and later than oven [139]/[523], contained abraded pottery dated Late Iron Age/mid 1st century ad to 4th century ad, part of the calcined trochlea of a mature human humerus (Chapter 11.12), 2976 animal bone specimens, including 1741 burnt/calcined, 324 oyster shells, including ten burnt, 192 snail shells, a copper-alloy bracelet (Cat. 5.5), two copper-alloy Iron Age coins of Tasciovanus (Cat. 2.16 & 2.27), a large sherd of a mid 1st- to early/mid 2nd-century ad cordoned carinated jar with calcined bone (SF 1163), associated with a burnt fossil sea urchin (Cat. 8.52), a small fragment of a deliberately bent and broken silver decorated votive leaf plaque (Cat. 3.2), a broken iron knife blade (Cat. 7.8), an iron ring (SF 1180), a flint end scraper (Cat. 10.3) and a flint core (Cat. 10.2). The excavators noted that the finds were grouped together. This may well be a placed deposit, possibly the final contents of oven [139]/[523] with added votive offerings. Is it evidence perhaps that human bodies were cremated in the ovens, as well as animals?

A number of once molten metal droplets were found during the excavation – a droplet of gold (Cat. 8.37), three of silver (Cat. 8.38, 8.39, 8.40(1)) and two of lead (Cat. 8.40(2) & 8. 41). Most were unstratified or in the ploughsoil, except Cat. 8.38, which was from [202] (Phase 4/5), part of the extensive chalk pebble surface surrounding the central area of the ceremonial hollow. Ralph Jackson suggests in Cat. 8.41 how these droplets may be the remains of objects or parts of objects from cremations rather than remnants of metalworking. Cremations may not have taken place on this site, but could have occurred elsewhere in the settlement or further afield, with all or part of the cremated remains being brought to the Ashwell End ceremonial hollow for ritual deposition by scattering on the ground or burial in a pit (Burleigh and Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2010, 226).

The roadThe road that ran approximately north–south and led to the west side of the ceremonial hollow was first identified by the 2003 geophysical survey (Noel 2003). Excavation of a section through it in 2006 revealed its long usage (Phases 0–7).

334 | Dea Senuna

dolphin buckle and many Roman coins, the latest dated ad 367–78, suggests the existence of a healing shrine beside the stream. The boxes with personal seals may have been attached to petitions placed at the shrine beseeching a healing deity to intercede on behalf of sick and disabled supplicants. Indeed, a proportion of the considerable numbers of coins and personal dress items found in and around the ceremonial hollow in Great Buttway Field may well have been deposited with written as well as vocalized prayers and requests for cures to healing deities, Senuna being one, for a few seal boxes have been found there too (Woodward 1992, 77). The shrine may have spanned the river at this point, for in the small meadows on the west bank metal detectorists have found Roman coins, the head of a snarling panther, a boar’s head and personalia, including an enamelled duck brooch. A lead-alloy model human jaw found in Baileys Field, north-west of Bluegates Farm, on the west bank of the Rhee, may be connected with a healing cult also.

The archaeological evidence suggests the settlement was a major religious cult sanctuary which no doubt would have had accommodation for visitors and pilgrims, the priests and priestesses and their acolytes, together with stables, shops, taverns, as well as the houses, farms and outbuildings for the local population that serviced the cult sanctuary, and the farmers who produced the agricultural crops that fed the permanent and transient populations. No doubt there would have also been itinerant traders, vendors and craftsmen, such as blacksmiths, other metalworkers, carpenters, scribes, etc. The roads and tracks would have been used by carts and carriages drawn by horses and bullocks, horsemen and

be the least likely on a ritual feasting site, such as this (see Chapter 11.12).

The settlementExcavations, geophysical surveys, casual and metal-detected finds have established that the settlement extended along the banks, mostly the west bank, of the River Rhee for at least 1km south of the Rhee’s confluence with the stream from Hinxworth at the Sewage Farm/Hart’s Spring, and possibly as far as the springs, the source of the Rhee/Cam, towards the east end of Ashwell village, a total distance of about 2km.

On the west bank, from Pricem’s Field to the Sewage Farm, it was about 250m wide; far less than that on the east bank. It may not have been continuously built up for the whole distance between the springs and the Sewage Farm. Finds suggest a concentration of occupation and activity around the spring source of the Rhee/Cam in the centre of Ashwell village (Burleigh et al. 1990) but only a scattering of finds between there and Pricem’s Field, where major buildings and activity were concentrated. Geophysical surveys, excavations and finds in the fields around Bluegates Farm, Ashwell End, and north to the Sewage Farm show that this 1km length was the main area of settlement and cult activities. It is possible that there were two temples in Pricem’s Field, one in Great Buttway Field associated with the excavated ceremonial feasting hollow and a shrine at the confluence of the two streams by the Sewage Farm.

Another shrine was perhaps located on the east bank of the Rhee in Bennett’s Field. A concentration there of several enamelled seal boxes, a lead-alloy miniature hand or foot complete with only three digits, a fish mount, a late Roman

Figure 365 Iron Age large burial enclosure and ritually modified natural doline at Baldock Upper Walls Common. Drawing: C. Jane Read; Copyright: North Hertfordshire Museum


seems to have been a part of the rituals too. The brooches indicate that activity continued from the later 1st century bc through to the late 1st century ad. Early in the 2nd century ad the entire hollow was sealed by a very carefully laid flint gravel surface, which followed the contours of the hollow. Interestingly, at the lowest point, at the centre of the now-metalled hollow, a flat area of about the same size as the floor of the now-sealed shrine was left. Apparent rubbish deposits that subsequently accumulated over the gravel surface may also have been a consequence of ritual feasting.

Although not representing one event associated with one burial, but several phases of activity, there are possible similarities here with the mortuary house in a large pit associated with the princely burial at Folly Lane, Verulamium (Niblett 1992, 917–29; 1999). It may be that at least some of the elements of the ritual and structures involved with both the Folly Lane cremation burial and some high-status cremation burials at Camulodunum (Crummy 1993, 4–6; Crummy et al. 2007) had their origins in precedents which are perhaps partly represented by these discoveries at Baldock.

There are clear similarities between the artificial ceremonial hollow at Ashwell End and the modified natural hollow adjacent to the Large Burial Enclosure in the Baldock settlement (Burleigh 1982a, 7–14; Fitzpatrick-Matthews and Burleigh 2007b; Burleigh 2008, 190–1; Burleigh and Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2010, 15–16; Burleigh 2015, 98; Burleigh forthcoming b; Burleigh et al. in prep): both involve ritual activities centred on a hollow; both involve the apparent treatment and commemoration of the dead; both involve ritual feasting associated with hearths or ovens; both have small chalk-floored shrines or mortuary houses; and both seal earlier ritual deposits by carefully laid metalled surfaces. In detail, of course, there are also clear differences between these two broadly contemporary features, but that is to be expected if the rituals and purpose of each site were not identical. They do, however, seem to belong to a similar native Late Iron Age/Romano-British cultural and religious tradition. At Baldock the specific rituals seem to have developed from much earlier Iron Age antecedents and perhaps came to an end in the mid-Roman period, whereas at Ashwell the cult and its rituals appear to have continued to the end of the Roman period, if not beyond.

Ashwell End and HinxworthThe site in the adjacent parish of Hinxworth is intimately connected to the religious settlement at Ashwell End, both physically and archaeologically. It is near the spring line at the foot of the chalk scarp and the confluence of two small streams, 1km west of the Ashwell End/Bluegates Farm Romano-British settlement, on the west bank of the stream that has a confluence with the Rhee at the north end of the Ashwell End settlement, suggesting a close connection between the two sites. They were probably both elements in a larger cult sanctuary area. At the Hinxworth site, two features lying in close proximity are visible as crop and soil marks on aerial photographs. One, in Clacketts Field, Middle Farm, is the severely plough-damaged masonry remains of a possible temple complex of buildings within a

women, livestock and pedestrians. At times around the temples and shrines, where there may have been a market place, the hustle and bustle of crowds no doubt creating considerable commotion and noise.

Ashwell End and BaldockAn interesting feature excavated at Baldock in the early 1980s bears some similarities to the ceremonial hollow and its associated rituals at Ashwell End. Adjacent to the south-west corner of the 1st-century bc Large Burial Enclosure at the California end of Upper Walls Common (now the Clothall Common housing estate), Baldock, was a natural solution hollow, or doline, about 18m in diameter and at least 2m deep, in the chalk bedrock (Fig. 365). It had been modified in the Iron Age for a number of ritual activities. Near its base were two Late Iron Age inhumations in graves and evidence for the deposition of fragmentary human bone as early as the 5th century bc. Above the inhumations, a chalk rubble-floored structure, about 4 × 3m, revealed several phases, as did its hearth. A sequence of associated deposits in the hollow, sometimes separated by carefully laid chalk and flint gravel surfaces, contained much charcoal, burnt and calcined bone, pottery (including imported), once molten bronze and glass fragments, unburnt human bone, brooches, finger rings, other personalia, an unusually large concentration of Iron Age coins (and another in a smaller hollow, similarly rich in finds, on the opposite side of an adjacent road; this compares with the exceptional quantity of Iron Age coins from the ritual hollow at Ashwell End, see Ghey this volume 11.2), amphorae sherds, nails, slag, fragments of quernstone, a clay loom weight, spindle whorls, a pottery disk, daub and a fragment of painted plaster (Burleigh 1982a; 1982b; 1983; 1984a; 1984b; 2007a; 2008; 2015; Burleigh and Stevenson 1991; Burleigh et al. 1991; 1993; Curteis 2001, 2005, 2006; Fitzpatrick-Matthews and Burleigh 2006; Fitzpatrick-Matthews and Burleigh 2007b; Burleigh and Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2010; Burleigh et al. in prep).

These features were broadly contemporary with the use of the Large Burial Enclosure, although several phases of activity were observed, and they may represent the evidence for ritual involving both high-status as well as ‘domestic’ activities associated with the adjacent burial enclosure. It has been suggested, in connection with a major Late Iron Age ceremonial centre and temple further east along the Icknield Way at Thetford, that weaving was a high-status activity, while spinning was a domestic activity (Gregory 1991). At Thetford weaving was represented by finds, but not spinning; at Baldock and Ashwell End both activities were in evidence. The paraphernalia associated with spinning and weaving, as well as being practical utensils, may have been seen also as personalia, like brooches and other dress items, and may have been deposited as votive offerings at sacred sites, in the same way as dress items (Ralph Jackson, pers. comm.).

The structure with the nearby inhumations could be interpreted as a mortuary house or shrine, where bodies were exposed before cremation and burial. The sequence of hearths in the structure may have been where offerings were ritually burnt. From the finds of animal bones, feasting

336 | Dea Senuna

enamelled base stand of a model Roman altar, a 5th-century ad Anglo-Saxon cruciform long brooch and a well-preserved Middle Bronze Age spearhead of the same type as the numerous examples found in the Ashwell End ceremonial hollow (see Fig. 357). Coins from this field include a 1st-century bc Roman Republican denarius, a silver unit of Cunobelin, two Roman 1st-century ad issues, seven from the 2nd century, 20 from the 3rd century and 93 from the 4th century, the latest issue dated ad 375–92.

From Waller Field (HHER 0181) coin finds include an issue of Augustus, 27 bc–ad 14, three from the 1st century ad, one from the 2nd century, eight from the 3rd century and 40 from the 4th century, the latest dated ad 388+ (NHM Enq. Nos 1654 (1997); 1694 (1998); 1883, 1994 and 2312 (1999)).

In about 1911 a local antiquary recovered from the farmer of these fields a small headless and armless marble Roman statue resembling Venus, now in Ashwell Village Museum (Fig. 367). The statue may well have come from one of these two fields (Westell 1926, 270; 1938, 231; Toynbee 1964, 82; Burleigh and Jackson 2009, 63; Coombe et al. 2014, no. 10). In Roman Britain, representations of Venus are thought sometimes to represent local divinities rather than the classical goddess – perhaps in this case, Senuna (Green 1995a, 86). This could be equally true for images of other classical deities.

In 2004 an unusual Roman bronze figurine was found by a metal detectorist in Clacketts Field (Fig. 368; see also Fig. 180). Small, but finely worked, it depicts a standing female deity in Graeco-Roman dress. On her head she wears a Greek-style helmet, which is pushed back to reveal her face and hair. On the top of the helmet, the fixing for a crest is evident. Her face is very worn, comparative to the rest of the

walled temenos enclosure, measuring 150 × 100m overall (HHER 1178). Nearby to the north, in Waller Field, is an arrangement of three square, ditched enclosures, the outer measuring 120m overall, each one set within the next so that each in turn is smaller than the enclosing one. In the north corner of the central enclosure is a polygonal structure, about 20m across, which may have been a temple building (HHER 0181; Fig. 366).

It resembles the Late Iron Age ritual ceremonial enclosure and temple excavated at Fison Way, Thetford, Norfolk (Gregory 1991; Burleigh 2008, 196; Burleigh and Jackson 2009, 63; Burleigh 2015, 99–101; Burleigh forthcoming b), which was of similar appearance and dimensions and is now thought to lie on the tribal boundary between the Iceni and Catuvellauni. Independently, the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England also thought the Hinxworth site (HHER 0181) was a temple because it resembles the plan of the Gosbecks temple and enclosure at Colchester (Lewis 1966, 196, fig. 112; Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England (RCHME) 1992; 2011; Burleigh 2008, 196 and 217, fig. 13; Burleigh 2015, 100, fig. 5.4). HHER 0181 and 1178 are Scheduled Monument No. 1015852, incorrectly listed as a Roman fortlet and associated enclosure.

Finds made by metal detectorists from the area of the features at Hinxworth consist almost entirely of Roman coins, with one or two Iron Age examples. Apart from much Romano-British pottery, there are very few other finds except a handful of Romano-British personal civilian dress items. Finds from Clacketts Field (HHER 1178) include a complete Roman dress pin and part of another, a complete button-and-loop fastener dated 1st century bc–2nd century ad of Wild’s class Va (Wild 1970, 139–40, fig. 1), the

Figure 366 Crop and soil marks of Iron Age and Romano-British temples plotted from aerial photographs of Hinxworth Middle Farm. Redrawn from a Hertfordshire CC 1:10000 map and RCHME (1992) by Kris Lockyear

Figure 367 Marble statue of a Venus-like deity from Hinxworth Middle Farm, 1st–2nd century ad. Ashwell Village Museum. Photo: Gilbert Burleigh


mark the northern limit of this territory. Likewise, the Barkway Roman temple and treasure hoard (see Chapter 5 this volume; Burleigh 2018) helps to mark the eastern boundary, and the Pegsdon Iron Age mirror burial and Roman gold coin hoard the western boundary (Curteis and Burleigh 2002, 65–74; Burleigh and Megaw 2007, 109–40) (Fig. 369). I am grateful to Gerry Doherty for bringing this image to my attention.

Discoveries continue to be made in the surrounding landscape – for example, the 2014 discovery of a well-furnished Roman burial and massive ditched enclosure on the chalk ridge at Kelshall, Hertfordshire (Fitzpatrick-Matthews et al. 2015; 2016), between Ashwell and Barkway, and the very recent identification by the author of a possible Roman temple and its temenos on an aerial photograph taken by him in October 1976. The ditched enclosure had been photographed in the 1960s by the University of Cambridge (HHER 1028), but the masonry footings of the possible temple within only came to light when the 1976 photographs were re-examined in 2016. It is sited on Gallows Hill, also in Kelshall parish. The polygonal ditched temenos encloses the apparent masonry footings of at least one building, possibly a temple. The shape of the temenos resembles that of the temple at Farley Heath, Surrey (Poulton 2007). About 5km south of Ashwell End, at Bygrave, another large polygonal ditched enclosure, visible on a 1973 aerial photograph (University of Cambridge BLR 77), contains a large circular structure, possibly another temple. Both enclosures are sited within prehistoric barrow cemeteries. These sites mark further elements in a definable sacred landscape bounding the Late Iron Age and Romano-British town of Baldock (Burleigh forthcoming b).

A ritual site with similarities to Ashwell End is Hallaton, Leicestershire in the territory of the Corieltavi (Score 2011). This was a Roman Conquest-period open-air ritual site on a hilltop defined by a polygonal ditch with an entrance

figurine, perhaps from devotional touching and kissing. On her torso is a cuirass of scale armour with traces of an aegis in the form of a gorgon’s head on the breastplate. Underneath the cuirass, she wears a long folded and draped dress which entirely covers her legs. Her left hand and crooked arm support a cornucopia, the horn of plenty, while her right arm is bent upwards at 90° from the elbow. The right hand is clenched allowing a hole between fingers and palm, suggesting that the figure once held a spear in a throwing or flourishing motion.

This figurine seems to represent an amalgamation of the Greek twinned deities, Athena-Tyche, and the very unusually – perhaps uniquely – Roman twinned deities, Minerva-Fortuna. In view of the character of the figurine, the find-spot and its riverine link with the Ashwell End cult site, it may be suggested that this unique figurine is another manifestation of the rediscovered goddess Senuna – in this case, not simply Senuna-Minerva, but Senuna-Minerva-Fortuna. This is paralleled by the silver Fortuna-like figurine from the Ashwell End hoard, discussed above, which had a silver base with an inscribed dedication to the goddess Senuna (Burleigh and Jackson 2009, 63–7; Burleigh 2015, 101; Burleigh forthcoming b).

Other related sacred sitesDetails of some other temples, shrines and cults within the town of Baldock, its territorium and further afield in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire are published elsewhere (Burleigh 2008, 189–219; 2015, 89–116; Burleigh forthcoming a and b). In these papers I have proposed that a civitas may be defined around the Iron Age and Romano-British town of Baldock by the positions at its limits of temples, shrines, multiple dykes, elite burials, landscape features, and the deposition of coin and metalwork hoards, creating a social and sacred space. The temples, shrines, coin hoards and Senuna’s treasure hoard at Ashwell and Hinxworth help to

Figure 368 Copper-alloy Minerva-Tyche-Fortuna figurine from Hinxworth Middle Farm, 1st–2nd century ad. British Museum, 2016,8015.1. Scale 1:1

338 | Dea Senuna

around the spring site at Oughton Head, Hitchin, which has also produced many apparent votive offerings from the Late Iron Age and Roman periods, suggests perhaps even earlier ritual activities (Burleigh forthcoming b).

Indeed, a tradition of communal feasting around a spring originates much further back in prehistory. At Blick Mead, near Stonehenge, excavations since 2005 have revealed animal bone evidence of elaborate feasts – over 35,000 worked flints (some at least perhaps ritually deposited) with a spread of radiocarbon dates ranging between the eighth and fifth millennia bc (7900–4050 cal bc), firmly within the Mesolithic period ( Jacques 2016).

Durrington Walls, a settlement on the banks of the river Avon associated with the period c. 2500 BC on account of the erection of two sarsen stone pillars surmounted by a connecting sarsen stone lintel at nearby Stonehenge, has yielded scientific evidence for ritual feasting involving the unusual consumption of honey-sweetened pork and dairy products (Observer, 15 October 2017 reporting an exhibition in the Stonehenge Visitor Centre; Greaney et al. 2018).

Ritual feasting and prehistoric midden sitesPrehistoric midden sites appear in Britain in the Late Bronze Age and continue into the Iron Age, and some into

‘guarded’ by sacrificed dogs which had been ritually bound and buried. Numerous silver and gold coin hoards were deposited in the ditch near the entrance, totalling over 5000 coins, the largest group of Iron Age coin hoards from Britain. Other votive deposits close by included an ornately decorated Roman silver-gilt helmet and the silver-gilt cheekpieces of similar helmets, a unique silver bowl and items of military equipment. The activities on the hill involved feasting on sacrificed pigs, attested by a mass of bones buried by the entrance (ibid.).

There is a long British prehistoric tradition of ritual feasting, ritual treatment and commemoration of the dead, and cult activities, including ancestor veneration and worship, at Neolithic henge monuments, such as that recently discovered and excavated at Norton, near Baldock, Hertfordshire (Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2013, figs 1, 4, 5; 2015). This tradition provides antecedents to some of the ritual cult activities at our Ashwell site.

It has been proposed here that the origins of the cult activities at Ashwell End started perhaps in the Middle/Late Bronze Age. Finds from other Romano-British religious ritual sites in the Baldock sacred landscape suggest similar ancient origins. For instance, the finding of some Bronze Age bronze tools and numerous Neolithic flint tools in and

Figure 369 Aerial view of cropmarks of a possible Romano-British temple at the north end of Rokey Wood, Barkway, showing possible buildings/enclosures and the enclosing temenos ditch. The temple treasure hoard was found in the wood


a midden feature with distinct similarities to the ceremonial hollow at Ashwell End, with evidence for large-scale feasting, but in this case associated with metalworking ovens, moulds, crucibles and huge amounts of iron slag (Thomas and Knox 2015).

One of the key characteristics at Ashwell End, perhaps a tradition specifically associated with the recently rediscovered Romano-British goddess Senuna, is the apparent curation and deposition of antiquities and antiques as votive offerings. This includes not only the Bronze Age artefacts discussed above, but also Iron Age coins and other objects, in addition to Early Roman coins and personalia, such as brooches, deposited in much later contexts. Of 40 dated brooches from the excavated open-air shrine, only one is dated to the 2nd century ad and none are later. Many of these 1st-century ad brooches were found in later contexts, for example, the brooch (Cat. 5.39) in placed deposit [203], dated to the end of the 2nd/3rd century ad, which included also seven Iron Age late 1st-century bc and early 1st-century ad coins and three Roman 1st- and early 2nd-century ad coins. Another example is placed deposit [632], dated to the 3rd century ad, where, amongst its many and extensive contents, were a 1st-century ad Roman brooch (Cat. 5.15) and an Iron Age coin of Cunobelin (Cat. 2.136). Placed deposit [128], dated to the 3rd century ad, contained amongst other components two 1st-century ad coins and a Late Bronze Age axe-head. Further examples are given in the discussion above.

These findings may have implications for other excavated temples and shrines. It could mean that earlier finds in later deposits are not necessarily residual, as is often understandably assumed. The evidence seems clear when dealing with placed deposit groups. Single finds may be more problematic, but if there are several or many of them individually in one or more later contexts then careful consideration should be given to their interpretation.

It has been suggested above that this apparent curation and deposition of antiquities and antiques was intimately connected not just with respect and reverence for the ancestors and their works but also with profound veneration of the spirits of the ancestors, amounting to ancestor worship. Ancestor worship is now increasingly recognized as a key part of earlier prehistoric and Iron Age religious beliefs, both on the Continent and in Britain. In fact, it was central to the rise and development of cult sanctuaries, territorial oppida, such as Baldock, and urbanization (Fernández-Götz 2014; Burleigh 2015). Clearly this long tradition of ancestor worship continued into the Romano-British period and beyond, as evidenced by the cultic practices at Ashwell End, which seemingly continued from around 1500 bc to the 5th century ad. As the ritual activities at Ashwell End seem to commence in the Bronze Age, we may wonder how far back in time the cult of Senuna extended.

the Romano-British period. Some of their characteristics have similarities to much of the evidence from the Ashwell site, and thus provide antecedents to the ritual cult practices at the latter. Among these sites are: All Cannings Cross (Barrett and McOmish 2008), East Chisenbury (McOmish 1996; McOmish et al. 2010) and Potterne (Lawson 2000), all in Wiltshire; Runnymede, Surrey (Needham 1991; Needham and Spence 1996; 1997); Wallingford, Oxfordshire (Thomas et al. 1986; Barclay and Lambrick 2006; Cromarty et al. 2006); Cliffs End Farm, Thanet, Kent (Bradley 2015; McKinley et al. 2015); Llanmaes, Glamorganshire (Madgewick and Mulville 2015); and Worth Matravers, Dorset (Ladle 2017).

Features shared by the Ashwell site with some or all of these prehistoric midden sites include ritual feasting (all sites), the accumulation of homogeneous, dark, organic midden soils (all sites), the deposition of votive offerings (all sites), the deposition of personalia as votive offerings (all sites), large quantities of animal bones (all sites), the presence of Bronze Age metalwork (all sites), the presence of human bones (All Cannings Cross, East Chisenbury, Potterne, Llanmaes and Worth Matravers), and the presence of spindle whorls and/or loom weights (All Cannings Cross, Llanmaes and Worth Matravers).

Evidence shows that some of these cult sites may have continued in use as ritual feasting centres and sacred places for the deposition of votive offerings into the Romano-British period, like Ashwell. East Chisenbury is the best example. It has a Romano-Celtic temple built over the ‘midden’ mound, and to the north-west of the temple temenos is a low oval mound 40m long and 28m wide, which survives as an earthwork. Excavations on this mound and the surrounding area in 1803, 1893 and 1924 revealed a large quantity of objects, including samples of painted plaster, brooches, tweezers, spoons, bracelets, coins and pottery dating from the Late Iron Age to the Late Roman period, which were probably votive deposits (Colt Hoare 1812; Goddard 1897; Nan Kivell 1927). This suggests that the prehistoric cult practices at East Chisenbury continued through the Late Iron Age and throughout the Roman period, possibly making this site one of the closest parallels to the site at Ashwell End, along with the Baldock doline. The midden at Llanmaes contained Roman pottery, possibly hinting at continuity there too.

ConclusionFrom the Middle/Late Bronze Age through the Iron Age and Roman periods, and possibly beyond, the people using the ceremonial hollow at Ashwell End continued some of the rituals and practices evident from prehistoric midden and other feasting and votive deposition sites elsewhere in Britain. Elements of these traditions continued into the early Anglo-Saxon period at the Lyminge site in Kent, which has

340 | Dea Senuna

The discovery of the Ashwell Hoard, sensational in its own right, led to a series of further astonishing revelations as its contents were painstakingly conserved and examined. Foremost was the emergence from soil and corrosion of the name of a hitherto unknown goddess, Senuna, the principal, perhaps only, recipient of the votive plaques in the hoard. The sheer number and quality of those plaques – figured and inscribed gold and silver votive leaves – is also unparalleled, while the corroded and damaged, once splendid, silver-gilt figurine proved to be a unique survival in Britain. Unique, too, is the exquisite suite of gem-set gold jewellery.

The research that followed this discovery enabled a full assessment of the hoard, maximizing the extraction of its intrinsic information and placing it in the context of similar hoards throughout the Roman Empire. Especially illuminating was the process of examining it alongside the two other British hoards of precious metal votive leaf plaques, from Barkway and from Stony Stratford. This enabled a reassessment of both hoards and the first full publication of the Stony Stratford Hoard, with its numerous fragmentary plaques and important priestly regalia. Of huge benefit to the present account were the clear and accurate drawings of Richard Smirke, made soon after the discoveries and splendidly reproduced as full-size coloured engravings in 1817 in the second volume of Samuel Lysons’ Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae. That is a rare book that few see, so the opportunity has been taken to reproduce the images here, alongside the equally splendid modern drawings by Craig Williams.

We shall never know the exact circumstances behind the burial of the Ashwell Hoard, but its contents demonstrate clearly that it consisted of a selection, or perhaps all, of the most precious votive gifts from a temple or shrine of the goddess Senuna. Many of those gifts had written dedications which included the name of their votary, and the range of names is suggestive both of local worshippers and of visitors from further afield. The goddess to whom they made their vows clearly had British origins, but to judge by the iconography of the votive plaques some at least of Senuna’s powers and characteristics were similar to those of Minerva, even if there is no evidence for a formal conflation of the two deities. In fact, greater complexity and subtlety is likely, for the figurine dedicated to Senuna has similarities also to the imagery of the goddess Fortuna. Both water and fertility were perhaps central to the cult of Senuna.

The importance of the hoard, whose ‘new’ goddess caught the imagination of the public as well as the academic world, was such that it demanded an archaeological investigation of the find-spot. Its discovery triggered the fieldwork that illuminated the immediate setting of the hoard and then expanded that setting into the wider landscape. The progressive results of fieldwalking, geophysical surveys and excavations led to a fuller understanding of the circumstances surrounding the choice of site for the burial of the hoard, of the nature and use of the site itself and of its relationship to surrounding structures, settlements and natural landscape features.

The initial geophysical survey yielded dramatic results. It showed that the hoard had been buried next to a large

Chapter 13ConclusionsRalph Jackson and Gilbert Burleigh

Conclusions | 341

feasting, including prodigious quantities of oysters and animal bones as well as partially articulated pig/boar remains and the accumulation of dark organic soils. Above all, the ovens appear to have been integral to the feasting events, even if they served other purposes too.

Equally striking, if not readily intelligible, are the concentrations of placed deposits. They were carefully chosen groups of objects positioned with care, especially in the centre of the hollow and at points just inside its perimeter edge. Some may have been discreetly deposited by individuals, others more ceremoniously dedicated, perhaps on the occasion of religious festivals. One of the most remarkable features of these placed deposits is the disparity in date between manufacture and deposition: it is clear that many of the chosen objects were old, some ancient, at the time they were placed in the ground. That was immediately apparent in the case of the large number of Bronze Age bronzes but appears to have applied, too, to some of the Celtic coins and to some of the Roman-period brooches and other small finds. Whether or not we interpret this evidence as a product of ancestor worship, its recognition is of profound importance in its own right both to the Ashwell site and to ritual sites elsewhere.

The evidence of excavation and geophysical survey seems to indicate that the Ashwell ritual site was intimately related to, and integrated with, a wider religious community and landscape. It is probable that it served the ritual needs of a temple complex and religious centre over a long period of time. Under those circumstances, as a long-standing and venerated sacred place, it is not difficult to understand why a small pit immediately outside its perimeter was chosen as a secure burial place for the Ashwell Hoard – Senuna’s treasure.

circular or polygonal feature, reminiscent of the ground plan of some Romano-British temples. That feature occupied an extensive and apparently open space just to the north-east of a road linking a complex of curvilinear compounds and buildings to the south to a gridded rectilinear complex of buildings to the north. A subsequent geophysical survey added significant detail to the extent and form of the structures in the northern complex and, in combination with other surveys and fieldwork, appeared to show a settlement, perhaps a religious site, of some size and complexity.

Almost the first find from the excavations was the missing silver pedestal from the silver-gilt figurine, a key find, and, better still, inscribed. In reconnecting the image of the female deity to the dedicatory vow, inscribed for the votary Flavia Cunoris, it instantly multiplied the meanings and hugely enhanced the significance of an already important object. That discovery set the tone for the excavations, which went on to reveal not a formal temple building, as initially suspected, but a unique and fascinating open-air ritual site, where feasting, religious activity and ritual deposition took place over a long period of time, seemingly extending as far back as the Bronze Age.

The immediate area of the excavations is one of water sources and at the heart of the site was a ceremonial hollow which appears to have had its origins in a spring. At its centre a clay platform was made and a succession of large ovens formed a prominent part of the ritual space. Metalled surfaces within and around the ritual space were repeatedly made and renewed, as was the surface of an access road, and a small enigmatic rectangular structure was built and replaced. The surviving remains of concentrated and long-lived religious activity provide vivid evidence for ritual

342 | Dea Senuna

Abdy, R.A., Leins, I. and Williams, J. 2002. Coin Hoards from Roman Britain Volume XI, Royal Numismatic Society, London.

Alföldy, G. 1969. Die Personennamen in der Römischen Provinz Dalmatia, Heidelberg.

Alföldy, G. 1974. Noricum, London.Allason-Jones, L. 1989. Ear-Rings in Roman Britain, Oxford.Allen, D.A. 2002. ‘Roman window glass’, in Artefacts and Archaeolog y:

Aspects of the Celtic and Roman World (ed. M. Aldhouse-Green and P. Webster), 102–11, Cardiff.

Allen, D.F. 1964. ‘Celtic coins from the Romano-British temple at Harlow, Essex’, British Numismatic Journal 33, 1–6.

Allen, D.F. 1967. ‘Celtic coins from the Romano-British temple at Harlow, Essex: Part II’, British Numismatic Journal 36, 1–7.

Alston, R. 1994. ‘Roman military pay from Caesar to Diocletian’, Journal of Roman Studies 84, 113–23.

Andrews, P. 2011. ‘Springhead religious complex’, in Andrews et al., 13–134.

Andrews, P. and Smith, A. 2011. ‘The development of Springhead’, in Andrews et al., 189–213.

Andrews, P., Biddulph, E., Hardy, A. and Brown, R. 2011. Settling the Ebbsfleet Valley: High Speed 1 Excavations at Springhead and Northfleet, Kent. The Late Iron Age, Roman, Saxon, and Medieval Landscape: Vol. 1, The Sites, Oxford.

Anon. 1856. ‘Proceedings at meetings of the Royal Archaeological Institute May 2nd 1856’, Archaeological Journal 13, 281–90.

Ashworth, H. and Burleigh, G. 2003. ‘Bluegates Farm, Ashwell – provisional summary of results’, unpublished Heritage Network report.

Atkinson, M, Burleigh, G. and Richmond, A. 1991. ‘Slip End, Ashwell to Wicker Hall, Royston pipeline’, unpublished NHDC Museums Field Archaeology Section report.

Aubin, G., Baratte, F., Lascoux, J.-P. and Metzger, C. 1999. Le trésor de Vaise à Lyon, Lyon.

Bagnall Smith, J. 1996. ‘Interim report on the votive material from Romano-Celtic temple sites in Oxfordshire’, Oxoniensia 60, 177–203.

Baker, A.J. 2003. ‘A taphonomic analysis of human remains from the Fox Hollow Farm homicide site’, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Indianapolis.

Baratte, F. 1999. ‘La statuaire du trésor de Vaise’, in Aubin et al., 80–117.

Baratte, F. et al. 1989. Trésors d’orfèvrerie gallo-romains, Paris.Barber, B. and Bowsher, D. 2000. The Eastern Cemetery of Roman London:

Excavations 1983–1990, Museum of London Archaeological Service Monograph 4, London.

Barclay, A. and Lambrick, G. 2006. Late Bronze Age Ritual and Habitation on a Thames Eyot at Whitecross Farm, Walling ford: The Archaeolog y of the Walling ford Bypass, 1986–92, Oxford.

Barker, P., White, R., Pretty, K., Bird, H. and Corbishley, M. 1997. The Baths Basilica Wroxeter. Excavations 1966–90, London.

Barrett, J.C. and McOmish, D. 2008. ‘Early Iron Age transformations: middens around the Vale of Pewsey and the problems of process’, unpublished conference paper, University of Cardiff.

Barrett, J.C., Freeman, P.W.M. and Woodward, A. 2000. Cadbury Castle, Somerset: The Later Prehistoric and Early Historic Archaeolog y, London.

Bauchhenss, G. 2006. ‘Aus Heiligtümern geraubt: Votive und Sakralobjekte’, in Stadler (ed.), 151–5.

Behrensmeyer, A.K. 1978. ‘Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering’, Paleobiolog y 4, 150–60.

Beldam, J. 1856–9. ‘Memoir on some excavations recently made at the Arbury Banks, near Ashwell, Hertfordshire’, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of London, 1st series, 4, 285–91.

Bernhard, H., Engels, H.-J., Engels, R. and Petrovszky, R. 1990. Der Römische Schatzfund von Hagenbach, Mainz.

Biddulph, E., Seager Smith, R. and Schuster, J. 2011. Settling the Ebbsfleet Valley: High Speed 1 Excavations at Springhead and Northfleet, Kent. The Late Iron Age, Roman, Saxon, and Medieval Landscape: Vol. 2, Late Iron Age to Roman Finds Reports, Oxford.

Bird, J. 2007a. ‘Catalogue of Iron Age and Roman artefacts discovered before 1995’, in R. Poulton, ‘Farley Heath Roman temple’, Surrey Archaeological Collections 93, 28–69.

Bird, J. 2007b. ‘The brooches and non-ferrous small objects’, in D.

Bibliography

Bibliography | 343

Burleigh, G.R. 1983. ‘Baldock’, Current Archaeolog y 86, 70–4.Burleigh, G.R. 1984a. ‘Baldock’, Council for British Archaeolog y Group 7

Newsletter 2, 28–33.Burleigh, G.R. 1984b. ‘Baldock, Hertfordshire’, in ‘Roman Britain in

1983’ (ed. S.S. Frere), Britannia 15, 304.Burleigh, G.R. 1995. ‘A late Iron Age oppidum at Baldock,

Hertfordshire’, in Holgate (ed.), 103‒12.Burleigh, G.R. 2005. ‘Fieldwork at the Near Baldock hoard site,

Hertfordshire’, Council for British Archaeolog y Mid-Anglia Newsletter, Spring 2005, 6–10.

Burleigh, G.R. 2006. ‘Near Baldock’, in ‘Roman Britain in 2005’ (ed. A.P. Fitzpatrick), Britannia 37, 411–13.

Burleigh, G. R. 2007a. ‘Part 2: the Senuna shrine’, in Jackson and Burleigh, 49–54.

Burleigh, G.R. 2007b. ‘Ashwell, near Baldock’, in ‘Roman Britain in 2006’ (ed. P. Booth), Britannia 38, 278–80.

Burleigh, G.R. 2008. ‘Temples, shrines and deities in Iron Age and Romano-British Baldock and its territorium, Hertfordshire, GB’, in Divindades indigenas em analise — divinités pré-romaines, bilan et perspectives d’une recherché: actas do VII workshop FERCAN, Cascais, 25‒27.05.2006 (ed. J. d’Encarnação), 189‒219, Coimbra.

Burleigh, G.R. 2015. ‘Burials, ditches and deities: defining the boundaries of Iron Age and Romano-British Baldock’, in Lockyear (ed.), 89–116.

Burleigh, G.R. 2018. ‘Finds from sacred places in the landscape around the Romano-British Baldock’, Lucerna 54, 5–12.

Burleigh, G.R. forthcoming a. ‘Cults in and around an Iron Age and Romano-British town in Hertfordshire – the Baldock and Ashwell area’, in The Dynamics of Religious Individualisation in the Roman Empire (2nd c. B.C.–3rd c. A.D.), Roman Archaeology Conference, Oxford 2010 (ed. R. Häussler and A.C. King).

Burleigh, G.R. forthcoming b. ‘Temples, treasures, heroic burials and deities: a sacred landscape bounding Iron Age and Romano-British Baldock, Hertfordshire, U.K.’, in Sacred Landscapes. Proceedings of a Conference held at Lampeter, 2014 (ed. R. Häussler and A.C. King), Oxford.

Burleigh, G.R., Colley, C. and Went, D. 1990. A Catalogue of the Archaeological Finds from the Garden of ‘The Steppes’, Springhead, Ashwell, Hertfordshire, NHDC Museums Archaeological Report 10, Letchworth Garden City.

Burleigh, G.R. and Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K.J. 2010. Excavations at Baldock, Hertfordshire, 1978‒1994: Vol. 1, An Iron Age and Romano-British Cemetery at Wallington Road, NHDC Museums Archaeological Monograph 1, Letchworth Garden City.

Burleigh, G.R. and Jackson, R. 2009. ‘An unusual Minerva-Fortuna figurine from Hinxworth, Hertfordshire’, Antiquaries Journal 89, 63–7.

Burleigh, G.R. and Megaw, V. 2007. ‘The Iron Age mirror burial at Pegsdon, Shillington, Bedfordshire: an interim account’, Antiquaries Journal 87, 109‒40.

Burleigh, G.R., Read, C.J. and Stevenson, M.D. 1991. ‘Baldock: report no. 2: Iron Age Burials and burial practices’, unpublished monograph, North Hertfordshire District Council Field Archaeology Section.

Burleigh, G.R., Read, C.J. and Stevenson, M.D. 1993. Baldock: report no. 3: Roman burials and burial practices: the investigation of three cemeteries: California, The Tene and Icknield Way East’, unpublished monograph, North Hertfordshire District Council Field Archaeology Section.

Burleigh, G.R. and Richmond, A.D.W. 1992. ‘Recording a pipeline in Ashwell and Guilden Morden: interim summary’, unpublished NHDC Museums Field Archaeology Section report.

Burleigh, G.R. and Stevenson, M.D. 1991. Baldock: report no. 1: an Iron Age and Romano-British cemetery at Wallington Road’, unpublished monograph, North Hertfordshire District Council Field Archaeology Section.

Burleigh, G.R, Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K.J, Read, C.J. and Stevenson, M.D. in prep., Excavations at Baldock, Hertfordshire, 1978–1994: Vol. 2, Iron Age Burials and Burial Practices.

Bushe-Fox, J.P. 1913. Excavations on the Site of the Roman Town at Wroxeter, Shropshire, in 1912, London.

Bushe-Fox, J.P. 1949. Fourth Report on the Excavations of the Roman Fort at Richborough, Kent, Oxford.

Williams, ‘Green Lane, Wanborough: excavations at the Roman religious site 1999’, Surrey Archaeological Collections 93, 208–21.

Bird, J. 2011. ‘Religion’, in Artefacts in Roman Britain: Their Purpose and Use (ed. L. Allason-Jones), 269–92, Cambridge.

Bird, J. 2013. ‘An elaborately repaired flagon and other pottery from Roman cremation burials at Farley Heath’, Surrey Archaeological Collections 97, 151–9.

Birkle, N. 2013. Untersuchungen zur Form, Funktion und Bedeutung Gefiederter Römischer Votivbleche, Bonn.

Birkle, N. 2016. ‘A Mars with breasts from Weissenburg in Bavaria’, in Small Finds and Ancient Social Practices in the North-West Provinces of the Roman Empire (ed. S. Hoss and A. Whitmore), 68–74, Oxford.

Birley, A. 1979. The People of Roman Britain, London.Bishop, M.C. and Coulston, J.C.N. 1993. Roman Military Equipment,

London.Blagg, T., Plouviez, J. and Tester, A. 2004. Excavations at a Large

Romano-British Settlement at Hacheston, Suffolk in 1973–4, East Anglian Archaeology Report 106, Ipswich.

Bland, R. and Burnett, A. 1988. The Normanby Hoard and other Roman Coin Hoards, Coin Hoards from Roman Britain 8, London.

Bloch, M. 1992. Prey into Hunter: The Politics of Religious Experience, Cambridge.

Boardman, J. 2009. The Marlborough Gems formerly at Blenheim Palace, Oxfordshire, Oxford.

Boekel, G.M.E.C. van 1987. Roman Terracotta Figurines and Masks from the Netherlands, Groningen.

Boon, G.C. 1983. ‘A priest’s rattle of the third century A.D. from the Felmingham, Norfolk, find’, Antiquaries Journal 63, 363–5.

Bowman, A.K., Thomas, J.D. and Tomlin, R.S.O. 2010. ‘The Vindolanda writing-tablets (Tabulae Vindolandenses IV, Part 1)’, Britannia 41, 187–224.

Bradley, P. 2015. ‘On sacred ground: mass graves and migrants at Cliff Ends Farm’, Current Archaeolog y 306, 12–19.

Bradley, R., Lewis, J., Mullin, D. and Branch, N. 2015. ‘“Where water wells up from the earth”: excavations at the findspot of the Late Bronze Age hoard from Broadward, Shropshire’, Antiquaries Journal 95, 21–64.

Brandherm, D. and Moskal-del Hoyo, M. 2014. ‘“Both sides now”: the carp’s-tongue complex revisited’, Antiquaries Journal 94, 1–47.

Bridgford, S.D. 2001. ‘Weapons, warfare and society in Britain 1250–750 bc’, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sheffield.

Britnell, W.J. 2000. ‘Weaving’, ‘Bone spindle whorls’ and ‘Worked bone’, in Barrett et al., 180–6, 253–5.

Britton, D., O’Connor, B. and Cunliffe, B. 1984. ‘The late Bronze Age hoard’, in B. Cunliffe (ed.), Danebury: An Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire. The Excavations 1969–1978: The Finds. Council for British Archaeology Research Report No 52b, York.

Brown, A. 1994. ‘A Romano-British shell-gritted pottery and tile manufacturing site at Harrold, Bedfordshire’, Bedfordshire Archaeolog y 21, 19–107.

Brown, A. et al. 2011. ‘Archaeology in Suffolk 2010’, Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeolog y 42.3, 361–2.

Bryant, S.R. and Burleigh, G.R. 1995. ‘Late prehistoric dykes of the eastern Chilterns’, in Holgate (ed.), 92‒5.

Buikstra, J.E. and Swegle, M. 1989. ‘Bone modification due to burning: experimental evidence’, in Bone Modification (ed. R. Bonnichsen and M.H. Sorg), 247–58, Orono, ME.

Bull, G. and Payne, S. 1982. ‘Tooth eruption and epiphyseal fusion in pigs and wild boar’, in Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites, British Archaeological Reports British Series 109 (ed. C. Grigson, S. Payne and B. Wilson), 51–71, Oxford.

Burgess, C. and Gerloff, S. 1981. The Dirks and Rapiers of Great Britain and Ireland, Munich.

Burgess, C., Coombs, D. and Davies, D.G. ‘The Broadward complex and barbed spearheads’, in Prehistoric Man in Wales and the West (ed. F. Lynch and C. Burgess), 211–84, Bath.

Burleigh, G R. 1976. ‘A cemetery near Slip End, Ashwell’, Hertfordshire’s Past 1, 18.

Burleigh, G.R. 1982a. ‘Excavations at Baldock, 1980‒81: an interim report’, Hertfordshire’s Past 12, 3‒18.

Burleigh, G.R. 1982b. ‘Baldock, Hertfordshire’, in ‘Roman Britain in 1981’ (ed. N.B. Rankov), Britannia 13, 369.

344 | Dea Senuna

Cunliffe, B. 1971. Excavations at Fishbourne 1961–1969: Vol. 2, The Finds, London.

Cunliffe, B. (ed.) 1988. The Temple of Sulis Minerva at Bath: Vol. 2, The Finds from the Sacred Spring, Oxford.

Cunliffe, B. and Davenport, P. 1985. The Temple of Sulis Minerva at Bath: Vol. 1, The Site, Oxford.

Cunliffe, B. and O’Connor, B. 1979. ‘The Late Bronze Age hoard from Danebury, Hampshire’, in Bronze Age Hoards. Some Finds Old and New (ed. C. Burgess and D. Coombs), British Archaeological Reports British Series 67, 235–44, Oxford.

Curteis, M. E. 2001. ‘The Iron Age coinages of the south Midlands, with particular reference to distribution and deposition’, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Durham; available online at http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/1231/ (accessed 6 February 2017).

Curteis, M. 2005. ‘Ritual coin deposition on Iron Age settlements in the south Midlands’, in Iron Age Coinage and Ritual Practices (ed. C. Haselgrove and D. Wigg-Wolf ), 207–25, Mainz.

Curteis, M. 2006. ‘Distribution and ritual deposition of Iron Age coins in the south Midlands’, in Celtic Coinage: New Discoveries, New Discussion (ed. P. de Jersey), 61–79, Oxford.

Curteis, M. and Burleigh, G.R. 2002. ‘Shillington A & B, Bedfordshire: 127 aurei to ad 78, 18 denarii to ad 128’, in Abdy et al., 65–74.

Cussans, J.E. 1881. History of Hertfordshire: Vol. 3, Part 2, The Hundred of Cassio, Hertford.

Daubney, A. 2010. ‘The cult of Totatis: evidence for tribal identity in mid Roman Britain’, in A Decade of Discovery: Proceedings of the Portable Antiquities Scheme Conference (ed. S. Worrell, G. Egan, J. Naylor, K. Leahy and M. Lewis), 109–20, Oxford.

Davis, R. 2012. The Early and Middle Bronze Age Spearheads of Britain, Munich.

Delestrée, L.-P. and Tache, M. 2004. Nouvel Atlas des Monnaies Gauloises: II, De la Seine à la Loire moyenne, Saint-Germain-en-Laye.

Dembski, G. 2008. Die Antiken Gemmen und Kameen aus Carnuntum, Vienna.

Deppert-Lippitz, B. 1985. Goldschmuck der Römerzeit im Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseum, Bonn.

Derks, T. 1998. Gods, Temples and Ritual Practices. The Transformation of Religious Ideas and Values in Roman Gaul, Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 2, Amsterdam.

Derks, T. and Roymans, N. 2002. ‘Seal-boxes and the spread of Latin literacy in the Rhine delta’, in Becoming Roman, Writing Latin? Literacy and Epigraphy in the Roman West, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series 48 (ed. A.E. Cooley), 87–134, Portsmouth, RI.

Deyts, S. 1994. Un peuple de pèlerins. Offrandes de pierre et de bronze des Source de la Seine, Revue Archéologique de l’Est et du Centre-Est Supplément 13, Dijon.

Dimitrova-Milcheva, A. 1981. Antique Engraved Gems and Cameos in the National Archaeological Museum in Sofia, Sofia.

Dobney, K. and Rielly, K. 1988. ‘A method for recording archaeological animal bones: the use of diagnostic zones’, Circaea 5.2, 79–96.

Dövener, F. 2000. Die Geschichtskrüge der römischen Nordwestprovinzen, Oxford.

Down, A. 1989. Chichester Excavations 6, Chichester.Driesch, A. von den 1976. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from

Archaeological Sites, Peabody Museum Bulletin 1, Cambridge, Mass.Dungworth, D. 1998. ‘Mystifying Roman nails: clavus annalis, defixiones

and minkisi’, TRAC 97, 148–59. Durham, E. 2012. ‘Depicting the gods: metal figurines in Roman

Britain’, Internet Archaeolog y 31, http://dx.doi.org/10.11141/ia.31.2 (accessed 6 February 2017).

Eckardt, H. 1999. ‘The Colchester “Child’s Grave”’, Britannia 30, 57–89.

Eckardt, H. 2004. ‘Remembering and forgetting in the Roman provinces’, in TRAC: Proceedings of the Thirteenth Theoretical Roman Archaeolog y Conference, Leicester 2003 (ed. B. Croxford, H. Eckardt, J. Meade and J. Weekes), 36–50, Oxford.

Eckardt, H. and Crummy, N. 2008. Styling the Body in Late Iron Age and Roman Britain: A Contextual Approach to Toilet Instruments, Monographies Instrumentum 36, Montagnac.

Edwards, N. 2007. A Corpus of Early Medieval Inscribed Stones and Stone Sculpture in Wales: II, South-West Wales, Cardiff.

Cahn, H.A. and Kaufmann-Heinimann, A. 1984. Der spätrömische Silberschatz von Kaiseraugst, Derendingen.

Calderini, A. 1930. Aquileia Romana: ricerche di storia e di epigrafia, Milan.Cartwright, C.R. 1996. ‘Pierced oyster shells’, in Jackson and Potter,

538–40.Cartwright, C.R. 2016. ‘Report on the scanning electron microscope

(SEM) examination of the basketry container and other organic artefacts from Whitehorse Hill cist’, in Preserved in the Peat: an Extraordinary Bronze Age Burial on Whitehorse Hill, Dartmoor, and its Wider Context (ed. A.M. Jones), 267–73, Oxford.

Chapman, E.M. 2005. A Catalogue of Roman Military Equipment in the National Museum of Wales, Oxford.

Charlton, D.B. and Mitcheson, M.M. 1983. ‘Yardhope. A shrine to Cocidius?’, Britannia 14, 143–53.

Clauss, M. 2007. ‘Die alten Kulte’, in A. Demandt and J. Engemann, Konstantin der Grösse, 210–18, Trier/ Mainz.

Collingwood, R. 1931. ‘The Baldock curse tablet’, in Westel, 290–2.Collingwood, R.G. and Wright, R.P. 1965. The Roman Inscriptions of

Britain, Volume 1, Oxford.Colquhoun, I. and Burgess, C. 1988. The Swords of Britain, Munich.Colt Hoare, R. 1812. The Ancient History of Wiltshire: Vol. 1, London.Cool, H.E.M. 1986. ‘A Romano-British gold workshop of the second

century’, Britannia 17, 231–7.Cool, H.E.M. 1990a. ‘Roman metal hair pins from southern Britain’,

Archaeological Journal 147, 148–82.Cool, H.E.M. 1990b. ‘The problem of 3rd-century drinking vessels in

Britain’, Annales du 11e Congrès de l’Association Internationale pour l’Histoire du Verre (Basel 1988), 161–75, Amsterdam.

Cool, H. and Leary, R. 2012. ‘Aspects of the use of samian pottery in Romano-British funerary practices’, in Dating and Interpreting the Past in the Western Roman Empire: Essays in Honour of Brenda Dickinson (ed. D. Bird), 305–18, Oxford.

Cool, H.E.M. and Price, J. 1995. Roman Vessel Glass from Excavations in Colchester, 1971–85, Colchester Archaeological Report 8, Colchester.

Coombe, P., Grew, F., Hayward, K. and Henig, M. 2014. Roman Sculpture from London and the South-East, Corpus Signorum Imperii Romani, Great Britain, Vol. 1, Fasc. 10, Oxford.

Coombs, D. 1971. ‘A Late Bronze Age hoard from Cassiobridge Farm, Watford, Hertfordshire’, in Bronze Age Hoards: Some Finds Old and New (ed. C. Burgess and D Coombs), 197–234, Oxford.

Coombs, D. 2001. Metalwork, in The Flag Fen Basin. Archaeolog y and Environment of a Fenland Landscape (ed. F. Pryor), 255–317, Swindon.

Cope, G.M. and Rayner, P.A. 1975. The Standard Catalogue of English Milled Coinage in Silver, Copper and Bronze, 1661–1972, London.

Cosyns, P. and Hanut, F. 2005. ‘Black glass of 2nd to 3rd century date in northern Gaul: a preliminary survey’, in Annales du 16e Congrès de l’Association Internationale pour l’Histoire du Verre (Londres 2003), 117–22, Nottingham.

Cottam, E., de Jersey, P., Rudd, C. and Sills, J. 2010. Ancient British Coinage, Aylsham.

Courteault, P. 1921. ‘An inscription recently found at Bordeaux’, Journal of Roman Studies 11, 101–7.

Crawford, M.H. 1974. Roman Republican Coinage, Cambridge.Crerar, B. 2006. ‘Votive leaves from Roman Britain’, in Roman Art,

Religion and Society. New Studies from the Roman Art Seminar, Oxford 2005 (ed. M. Henig), 71–89, Oxford.

Cromarty, A.-M., Barclay, A, Lambrick, G. and Robinson, M. 2006. The Archaeology of the Walling ford Bypass, 1986–92: Late Bronze Age Ritual and Habitation on a Thames Eyot at Whitecross Farm, Walling ford, Oxford.

Cronyn, J.M. 1990. The Elements of Archaeological Conservation, London.Croom, A.T. 2007. Roman Furniture, Stroud.Crummy, N. 1983. The Roman Small Finds from Excavations in Colchester

1971–9, Colchester Archaeological Report 2, Colchester.Crummy, N. (ed.) 2005. Image, Craft and the Classical World. Essays in

Honour of Donald Bailey and Catherine Johns, Monographies Instrumentum 29, Montagnac.

Crummy, N. 2005. ‘From bracelets to battle-honours: military armillae from the Roman conquest of Britain’, in Crummy (ed.), 93–106.

Crummy, P. 1993. ‘Aristocratic graves at Colchester’, Current Archaeolog y 132, 4–6.

Crummy, P., Benfield, S., Crummy, N., Rigby, V. and Shimmin, D. 2007. Stanway: An Elite Burial Site at Camulodunum, Britannia Monograph 24, London.

Bibliography | 345

Goddard, E.H. 1897. ‘Notes on the opening of a tumulus on Cold Kitchen Hill’, Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 27, 279–93.

Going, C.J. 1987. The Mansion and Other Sites in the South-east Sector of Caesaromagus: The Roman Pottery, CBA Research Report 62/Chelmsford Archaeological Trust Report 3.2, Chelmsford.

Goldsworthy, A. 2004. The Complete Roman Army, London.Greaney, S., Hilts, C., Madgwick, R. and Parker Pearson, M. 2018.

‘Neolithic food miles: feeding the “builders of Stonehenge”’, Current Archaeolog y, issue 334, 26–31.

Green, C. 2016. ‘The exploitation of silcretes (sarsen and puddingstone) in England and Normandy since Stonehenge’, Proceedings of the Geologists Association 127, 349–58.

Green, H.J.M. 1986. ‘Religious cults at Roman Godmanchester’, in Pagan Gods and Shrines of the Roman Empire (ed. M. Henig and A. King), 29–55, Oxford.

Green, M.J. 1976. A Corpus of Religious Material from the Civilian Areas of Roman Britain, Oxford.

Green, M.J. 1992. Animals in Celtic Life and Myth, London.Green, M.J. 1995a. Celtic Goddesses: Warriors, Virgins and Mothers,

London.Green, M.J. (ed.) 1995b. The Celtic World, London and New York.Green, T. 2007. A note on Aladur, Alator and Arthur, Studia Celtica 41,

237–41.Greenfield, E. and Webster, G. 1964–5. ‘Excavations at High Cross 1955’,

Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological and Historical Society 40, 3–41.Greep, S. 1996. ‘Objects of worked bone and antler’, in Jackson and

Potter, 525–38.Gregory, A. 1991. Excavations in Thetford, 1980–82: Fison Way, East

Anglian Archaeology Report 53, Norwich.Grimm, J.M. 2011. ‘Animal bone. Springhead Sanctuary Site (ARC

SPH00)’, in Settling the Ebbsfleet Valley: High Speed I Excavations at Springhead and Northfleet, Kent. The Late Iron Age, Roman, Saxon, and Medieval Landscape: Vol. 3, Late Iron Age to Roman Human Remains and Environmental Reports (ed. C. Barnett, J.I. McKinley, E. Stafford, J.M. Grimm and C.J. Stevens), 15–31, Oxford and Salisbury.

Guido, M. 1978. The Glass Beads of the Prehistoric and Roman Periods in Britain and Ireland, London.

Guiraud, H. 1988. Intailles et camées de l’époque romaine en Gaule: I, Paris.Guiraud, H. 1989. ‘Bagues et anneaux à l’époque romaine en Gaule’,

Gallia 46, 173–211.Guiraud, H. 2008. Intailles et camées de l’époque romaine en Gaule: II, Paris.Gurney, D. 1986. ‘Leylands Farm, Hockwold cum Wilton; excavations

by Charles Green, 1957’, in Settlement, Religion and Industry on the Fen-edge: Three Romano-British sites in Norfolk (ed. D. Gurney), East Anglian Archaeology Report 31, 49–92, Norwich.

Hanemann, B. 2006. ‘Versteckt, versenkt, verschüttet – Hortfunde und Hortarten’, in Stadler (ed.), 186–8.

Harden, D.B., Painter, K.S., Pinder-Wilson, R.H. and Tait, H. 1968. Masterpieces of Glass, London.

Harris, S. 2007. ‘Cloth in prehistoric societies: the social context of cloth in prehistory, with case studies from northern Italy and the Alpine region from the Neolithic to Bronze Age’, unpublished PhD thesis, Institute of Archaeology, University College London.

Hartley, B.R. and Dickinson, B.M. 2010. Names on Terra Sigillata: Vol. 6, Masclus I-Balbus to Oxittus, London.

Hartley, E., Hawkes, J., Henig, M. and Mee, F. (eds) 2006. Constantine the Great: York’s Roman Emperor, York.

Hartley, K.F. 1972. ‘The mortarium stamps’, in Verulamium Excavations: Vol. 1 (ed. S.S. Frere), Report of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London, 371–81, London.

Haselgrove, C. 1987. Iron Age Coinage in South-East England: The Archaeological Context, Oxford.

Haselgrove, C. 1989. ‘Iron Age coin deposition at Harlow Temple, Essex’, Oxford Journal of Archaeolog y 8.1, 73–88.

Haselgrove, C. 2005. ‘A trio of temples’, in Iron Age Coinage and Ritual Practices (ed. C. Haselgrove and D. Wigg-Wolf ), 381–418, Mainz.

Haselgrove, C. and Wigg-Wolf, D. (eds) 2005. Iron Age Coinage and Ritual Practices, Studien zu Fundmunzen der Antike, Band 20, Mainz am Rhein.

Hassall, M.W.C. 1981. ‘The inscription on the votive plaque from Stonea’, in Potter, 104.

Hattat, R. 1987. Brooches of Antiquity, Oxford.

Engels, H.-J. 1990. ‘Die Votivbleche’, in Bernhard et al., 8–14.Evans, J. 1878. ‘A hoard of bronze antiquities found in Berkshire’,

Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of London 7, 480–5.Fauduet, I. 1992. Musée d’Evreux. Collections archéologiques. Bronzes

gallo-romains. Instrumentum, Argenton-sur-Creuse.Fauduet, I. 2010. Les Temples de Tradition Celtique, Paris.Faulkner, N. 2003. Hidden Treasure: Digging up Britain’s Past, London.Faulkner, N. 2017. ‘Invisible phases’, Current World Archaeolog y, issue 85,

vol. 8, no. 1, 65.Fawcett, A.R. in prep a. ‘The Late Iron Age and Roman pottery’, in

Late Iron Age and Roman Sites on the Cambridge to Matching Tye Pipeline.Fawcett, A.R. in prep b. ‘The Late Iron Age and Roman pottery’, in A

Roman Cremation Cemetery South of Hailey Hall, near Hoddesdon.Fawcett, A.R. 2000. ‘The Distribution of Early Hadham Wares’,

Research Paper 2000, Study Group for the Promotion of Roman Pottery, unpublished.

Fawcett, A.R. 2002. ‘The Roman Pottery from Knights Hill, Westmill, Herts’, unpublished.

Fernández-Götz, M. 2014. ‘Sanctuaries and ancestor worship at the origin of the oppida’, in Residential Centres (dava, emporium, oppidum, hillfort, polis) and Cult Places in the Second Iron Age of Europe, Mousaios 19 (ed. V. Sirbu and S. Matei), 111–32, Buzău; available online at https://www.academia.edu/11924743/Sanctuaries_and_ancestor_worship_at_the_origin_of_the_Oppida (accessed 7 April 2017).

Ferris, I. 2012. Roman Britain Through its Objects, Stroud.Ferris, I. 2014. ‘A pipeclay pseudo-Venus figurine from Binchester

Roman fort, County Durham’, in Life in the Limes (ed. R. Collins and F. McIntosh), 105–8, Oxford.

Fittock, M.G. 2015. ‘Broken deities: the pipe-clay figurines from Roman London’, Britannia 46, 111–34.

Fitzpatrick, A. P. 1985. ‘The Celtic coins’, in France and Gobel, 49–66.Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K. J. 2013. ‘Britannia in the Ravenna

Cosmography: a reassessment’; available online at https://www.academia.edu/4175080/BRITANNIA_IN_THE_RAVENNA_COSMOGRAPHY_A_REASSESSMENT (accessed 6 February 2017).

Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K. J. 2015. ‘The Baldock bowl: an exceptional prehistoric landscape on the edge of the Chilterns’, in Lockyear (ed.), 68–88.

Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K. J. and Burleigh, G.R. (eds) 2006. Excavations at Baldock 1978–1994 – fieldwork by G.R. Burleigh’, unpublished monograph, North Hertfordshire District Council.

Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K.J. and Burleigh, G.R. 2007a. Ancient Baldock: The Story of an Iron Age and Roman Town, Letchworth Garden City.

Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K. J. and Burleigh, G.R. (eds) 2007b. Excavations at Baldock 1978–1994: Fieldwork by G R Burleigh; available online at https://www.scribd.com/document/45915206/Excavations-at-Baldock-1978-1994-fieldwork-by-G-R-Burleigh (accessed 6 February 2017).

Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K. J. and Fitzpatrick-Matthews, T. 2016. The Archaeolog y of Kelshall: the Hill of Pots, Letchworth Garden City.

Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K. J., Kirk, P. and Watters, J. 2015. ‘A grave at Kelshall: recreating the glory of a wealthy Roman citizen’, British Archaeolog y 142 (May/June), 14–21.

Fleischer, R. 1967. Die Römischen Bronzen aus Österreich, Mainz.Foster, J. 1977. Bronze Boar-Figurines in Iron Age and Roman Britain, Oxford.Foster, J. 1986a. The Lexden Tumulus: A Reappraisal. Oxford.Foster, J. 1986b. ‘Reused ceramic material’, in Stead and Rigby, 170–1.Fox, C. 1923. Archaeolog y of the Cambridge Region, Cambridge.France, N.E. and Gobel, B.M. 1985. The Romano-British Temple at

Harlow, Gloucester.Friendship-Taylor, R. M. 1979. ‘The excavation of the Belgic and

Romano-British settlement at Quinton, Northamptonshire: Site B, 1973–7’, Journal of the Northampton Museum and Art Gallery 13, 2–176.

Gerloff, S. 1975. The Early Bronze Age Daggers in Great Britain, Munich.Gibson, C. and Humphrey, R. 2000. ‘An archaeological excavation at

Westbury Farm, Ashwell’, unpublished Hertfordshire Archaeological Trust report.

Gilbert, H.M. 1978. ‘The Felmingham Hall Hoard, Norfolk’, Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies 28, 159–87.

Gilmour, B.J. 1999. ‘The mail shirt’, in Niblett, 159–66.Gobel, B.M. 1985. ‘Roman coins’, in France and Gobel, 67–70.

346 | Dea Senuna

Jackson, R. 2003b. ‘A new treasure and a new goddess for Roman Britain’, Lucerna 26, 2–4.

Jackson, R. 2003c. ‘A new goddess for Roman Britain’, Hertfordshire Life (November), 52–4.

Jackson, R. 2004a. ‘Baldock area, Hertfordshire: about 25 votive finds, including a statuette, 19 plaques and jewellery (2002 T215)’, Treasure Annual Report 2002, 38–43, London.

Jackson, R. 2004b. ‘A hoard of Roman gold and silver votives found near Baldock (G-B)’, Instrumentum 20, 10–11.

Jackson, R. 2007. ‘Part 1: the Senuna treasure’, in Jackson and Burleigh, 37–49.

Jackson, R. 2010. ‘Barton-in-Fabis, Nottinghamshire: gold sheet (Treasure: 2008 T394; PAS: DENO-49C065)’, Portable Antiquities and Treasure Annual Report 2008, 85, 296, no. 107, London.

Jackson, R. in prep. Dea Senuna and the Ashwell hoard of gold and silver votives, in Objets figurés en métal dans les dépôts des sanctuaires à l’époque romaine. Autour du dépôt de Neuvy-en-Sullias. Mélanges à Claude Rolley (ed. A. Kaufmann-Heinimann and J.-P. Guillaumet), Dijon.

Jackson, R. and Burleigh, G. 2005. ‘From Senua to Senuna’, British Museum Magazine 52, 32–5.

Jackson, R. and Burleigh, G. 2007. ‘The Senuna treasure and shrine at Ashwell (Herts)’, in Continuity and Innovation in Religion in the Roman West: Vol. 1, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series 67 (ed. R. Häussler and A.C. King), 37–54, Portsmouth, RI.

Jackson, R. and Potter, T.W. 1996. Excavations at Stonea, Cambridgeshire 1980–85, London.

Jacques, D. 2016. ‘Mesolithic dog’s long walk’, Current Archaeolog y 321, 9.James, S. 2011. Rome and the Sword, London.Jersey, P. de 2001. ‘Cunobelin’s silver’, Britannia 32, 1–44.Johns, C. 1981. ‘A gold votive leaf and a bust of Minerva from Stonea’,

in Potter, 101–4.Johns, C. 1996a. The Jewellery of Roman Britain: Celtic and Classical

Traditions, London.Johns, C. 1996b. ‘The classification and interpretation of Romano-

British treasures’, Britannia 27, 1–16.Johns, C. 1996c. ‘Finger-rings’, in Jackson and Potter, 327–34.Johns, C. 2011. Cattle: History, Myth, Art, London.Jones, A.M. (ed.) 2016. Preserved in the Peat: an Extraordinary Bronze Age

Burial on Whitehorse Hill, Dartmoor, and its Wider Context, Oxford.Kajanto, I. 1965. The Latin Cognomina, Helsinki.Kaufmann-Heinimann, A. 1998. Götter und Lararien aus Augusta Raurica:

Herstellung, Fundzusammenhänge und sakrale Funktion figürlicher Bronzen in einer römischen Stadt, Forschungen in Augst 26, Augst.

Kellner, H.-J. and Zahlhaas, G. 1984. Der Römische Schatzfund von Weissenburg, Mainz.

Kellner, H.-J. and Zahlhaas, G. 1993. Der Römische Tempelschatz von Weissenburg i. Bay., Mainz.

Kiernan, P. 2009. Miniature Votive Offerings in the Roman North-West, Möhnesee.

Kiernan, P. 2012. ‘Pagan pilgrimage in Rome’s western provinces’, HEROM: Journal on Hellenistic and Roman Material Culture 1, 79–106.

King, A.C. 2005. ‘Animal remains from temples in Roman Britain’, Britannia 36, 329–69.

King, A.C. in prep. ‘Religious individualization in extremis: human remains from Romano-Celtic temples in Britain and Gaul’, in Religion in the Roman Empire: The Dynamics of Individualization (ed. R. Häussler et al.), Oxford.

Kotansky, R. 1994. Greek Magical Amulets: The Inscribed Gold, Silver, Copper and Bronze Lamellae: Part I, Published Texts of Known Provenance, Cologne.

Krug, A. 1980. ‘Antike Gemmen im Römisch-Germanischen Museum Köln’, Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 61, 152–8 (reprinted as a catalogue of the Römisch-Germanischen Museum, Cologne 1981).

Künzl, E. 1993. Die Alamannenbeute aus dem Rhein bei Neupotz. Pflünderungsgut aus dem römischen Gallien, Mainz.

Künzl, E. 1996. ‘Anmerkungen zum Hortfund von Weissenburg’, Germania 74, 453–76.

Künzl, E. 1997. ‘Römische Tempelschätze und Sakralinventare: Votive, Horte, Beute’, Antiquité Tardive 5, 57–81.

Künzl, E. 1999. ‘Eine Patrize für Votivreliefs an die Unterweltgötter aus Dakien’, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 29, 557–66.

Ladle, L. 2017. ‘What lies beneath: revealing 5,000 years of occupation at “Football Field”’, Current Archaeolog y 327, 42–8.

Hattat, R. 1989. Ancient Brooches and Other Artefacts, Oxford.Häussler, R. and King, A.C. (eds) 2007. Continuity and Innovation in

Religion in the Roman West: Vol. 1, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series 67, Portsmouth, RI.

Hawkins, E. 1851. ‘Notices of a remarkable collection of ornaments of the Roman period, connected with the worship of the Deae Matres, and recently purchased for the British Museum’, Archaeological Journal 8, 35–44.

Haynes, I. 2013. ‘Advancing the systematic study of ritual deposition in the Greco-Roman world’, in Rituelle Deponierungen in Heiligtümern der hellenistisch-römischen Welt: Internationale Tagung Mainz, 28–30 April 2008 (ed. G. Lindström, A. Schäfer and M. Witteyer), 7–19, Mainz.

Henig, M. 1977. ‘Death and the maiden: funerary symbolism in daily life’, in Roman Life and Art in Britain. A Celebration in Honour of the Eightieth Birthday of Jocelyn Toynbee (ed. J. Munby and M. Henig), 347–66, Oxford.

Henig, M. 1978. A Corpus of Roman Engraved Gemstones from British Sites, 2nd edn, Oxford.

Henig, M. 1984. Religion in Roman Britain, London.Henig, M. 1988. ‘Objects from the sacred spring’, in Cunliffe (ed.), 5–53.Henig, M. 1990. ‘A house for Minerva: temples, aedicula shrines, and

signet rings’, in Architecture and Architectural Sculpture in the Roman Empire (ed. M. Henig), 152–62, Oxford.

Henig, M. 1993. ‘Votive objects: images and inscriptions’, in Woodward and Leach, 89–112.

Henig, M. 1995. The Art of Roman Britain, London.Henig, M. 2006. ‘Barkway assemblage’, in Hartley et al. (eds), 202–3.Henig, M. 2007. A Corpus of Roman Engraved Gemstones from British Sites,

3rd edn, Oxford.Henig, M. and MacGregor, A. 2004. Catalogue of the Engraved Gems and

Finger-rings in the Ashmolean Museum: Vol. 2, Roman, Oxford.Higgitt, C., Harris, S., Cartwright, C.R. and Cruickshank, P. 2011.

‘Assessing the potential of historic archaeological collections: a pilot study of the British Museum’s Swiss lake dwelling textiles’, British Museum Technical Research Bulletin 5, 81–94.

Hingley, R. 2009. ‘Esoteric knowledge? Ancient artefacts from Iron Age contexts’, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 75, 143–65.

Hobbs, R. 1996. British Iron Age Coins in the British Museum, London.Hobbs, R. 2003. Treasure: Finding our Past, London.Hobbs, R. 2006. Late Roman Precious Metal Deposits, c. ad 200–700:

Changes over Time and Space, Oxford.Hobbs, R. 2011. ‘Coin finds from Great Chesterford’, in Medlycott,

255–64.Hockey, M. 2004. ‘Approaches to the conservation of gold at the

British Museum’, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Metals Conservation: Metal 2001 (ed. I. MacLeod, J.M. Theile and C. Degrigny), 263–9, Perth.

Holden, J.L., Phakey, P.P. and Clement, J.G. 1995a. ‘Scanning electron microscope observations of incinerated human femoral bone: a case study’, Forensic Science International 74, 17–28.

Holden, J.L., Phakey, P.P. and Clement, J.G. 1995b. ‘Scanning electron microscope observations of heat-treated human bone’, Forensic Science International 74, 29–45.

Holgate, R. (ed.) 1995. Chiltern Archaeolog y: Recent Work. A Handbook for the Next Decade, Dunstable.

Hull, M.R. and Hawkes, C.F.C. 1987. Corpus of Ancient Brooches in Britain by the late Mark Reginald Hull: Pre-Roman Bow Brooches, BAR British Series 168, Oxford.

Hunter, F. 2012. ‘Frontier finds, frontier art – views of enamelled vessels’, in The First Souvenirs. Enamelled Vessels from Hadrian’s Wall (ed. D.J. Breeze), Cumberland Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society, Extra Series 37, 85–106.

Ilvessalo-Pfäffli, M.-S. 1995. Fiber Atlas. Identification of Papermaking Fibers. Berlin.

Ingemark, D. 2014. Glass, Alcohol and Power in Roman Iron Age Scotland, Edinburgh.

Isings, C. 1957. Roman Glass from Dated Finds, Archaeologica Traiectina 2, Groningen.

Jackson, R. 1985. ‘The objects of iron’, in The Roman Fort of Vindolanda at Chesterholm, Northumberland (ed. P.T. Bidwell), 130–51, London.

Jackson, R. 1990. ‘Waters and spas in the Classical world’, in The Medical History of Waters and Spas (Medical History Supplement 10) (ed. R.S. Porter), 1–13, London.

Jackson, R. 2003a. ‘A new goddess for Roman Britain’, British Museum Magazine 46, 7.

Bibliography | 347

Thun-Allmendingen und Loreto Aprutino’, in Rituelle Deponierungen in Heiligtümern der hellenistisch-römischen Welt, Mainzer Archäologische Schriften 10 (ed. A. Schäfer and M. Witteyer), 215–32.

Martin-Kilcher, S. and Schatzmann, R. (eds) 2009. Das römische Heiligtum von Thun-Allmendingen, die Regio Lindensis und die Alpen, Bern.

May, T. 1930. Catalogue of the Roman Pottery in the Colchester and Essex Museum, Colchester.

Medlycott, M. 2011. The Roman Town of Great Chesterford, East Anglian Archaeology Report 137, Chelmsford.

Menzel, H. 1966. Die Römischen Bronzen aus Deutschland: II, Trier, Mainz.Menzel, H. 1986. Die Römischen Bronzen aus Deutschland: III, Bonn,

Mainz.Miks, C. 2007. Studien zur Römischen Schwertbewaffnung in der Kaiserzeit,

Rahden.Moorhead, S. 2015. ‘A survey of Roman coin finds from Hertfordshire’,

in Lockyear (ed.), 135–64.Morris, F.M. 2013. ‘Cunobelinus’ bronze coinage’, Britannia 44, 27–83.Morris, J. 1971. ‘Ashwell End, in Roman Britain in 1970’ (ed. D.R.

Wilson), Britannia 2, 268.Myking, T., Hertzberg, A. and Skrøppa, T. 2005. ‘History,

manufacture and properties of lime bast cordage in northern Europe’, Forestry 78, 65–71.

Nan Kivell, R. de C. 1927. ‘Objects found at Cold Kitchen Hill, Brixton Deverill’, Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 43, 327–32.

Nebelsick, L. 2000. ‘“Rent asunder”: ritual violence in Late Bronze Age hoards’, in Metals Make the World Go Round (ed. C. Pare), 160–75, Oxford.

Needham, S.P. 1982. The Ambleside Hoard, British Museum Occasional Paper 39, London.

Needham, S.P. 1983. ‘The Early Bronze Age axeheads of central and southern England’, unpublished PhD thesis, University College, Cardiff.

Needham, S.P. 1986. ‘Late Bronze Age artefacts’, in Stead and Rigby, 141–3.

Needham, S.P. 1988. ‘Selective deposition in the British Early Bronze Age’, World Archaeolog y 20, 229–48.

Needham, S.P. 1990. The Petters Late Bronze Age Metalwork. An Analytical Study of Thames Valley Metalworking in its Settlement Context, British Museum Occasional Paper 70, London.

Needham, S.P. 1991. Excavations and Salvage at Runnymede Bridge 1978: The Late Bronze Age Waterfront Site, London.

Needham, S.P. 1996. ‘Chronology and periodisation in the British Bronze Age’, Acta Archaeologica 67, 121–40.

Needham, S.P. 2001. ‘When expediency broaches ritual intention: the flow of metal between systemic and buried domains’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 7, 275–98.

Needham, S.P. 2013. ‘Book reviews: The Early and Middle Bronze Age Spearheads of Britain, The Prehistoric Society’; available online at http://www.prehistoricsociety.org/files/reviews/Davis_MBA_spearheads_final_review.pdf (accessed 14 March 2017).

Needham, S.P. and Spence, T. 1996. Refuse and Disposal at Area 16, East Runnymede, London.

Needham, S.P. and Spence, T. 1997. ‘Refuse and formation of middens’, Antiquity 71, 77–90.

Needham, S., Bronk Ramsey, C., Coombs, D., Cartwright, C. and Pettit, P. 1997. ‘An independent chronology for British Bronze Age metalwork: the results of the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Programme’, Archaeological Journal 154, 55–107.

Needham, S., Parham, D. and Frieman, C. (eds). 2013. Claimed by the Sea: Salcombe, Langdon Bay and Other Marine Finds of the Bronze Age, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 173, York.

Nelson, P. 1936. ‘Some British medieval seal matrices’, Archaeological Journal 93, 12–44.

Nemeti, S. 2012. ‘Pagan dialogues: religious messages and social representation in the votive inscriptions from Dacia’, Ephemeris Dacoromana 14, 177–97.

Niblett, R. 1992. ‘A Catuvellaunian chieftain’s burial from St Albans’, Antiquaries Journal 66, 917–29.

Niblett, R. 1995. Roman Hertfordshire, Stanbridge.Niblett, R. 1999. The Excavation of a Ceremonial Site at Folly Lane,

Verulamium, London.Noel, M.J. 2003. ‘Geophysical survey on the site of a Roman hoard at

Ashwell, Hertfordshire’, unpublished GeoQuest Associates report.

Landon, M. 2009. ‘Making a mint: the archaeology of a Late Iron Age industry’, Current Archaeolog y 234, 20–5.

Lange, M., Schutkowski, H., Hummel, S. and Herrmann, B. 1987. A Bibliography on Cremation, Strasbourg.

La Niece, S. 2010. ‘Roman gold- and silver-smithing and the Hoxne treasure’, in C. Johns, The Hoxne Late Roman Treasure: Gold Jewellery and Silver Plate, London.

Lapatin, K. (ed.) 2014. The Berthouville Silver Treasure and Roman Luxury, Los Angeles, Calif.

Lawson, A.J. 2000. Potterne 1982–5: Animal Husbandry in Later Prehistoric Wiltshire, Wessex Archaeology Report 17, Salisbury.

Layard, N.F. 1925. ‘Bronze crowns and a bronze head-dress, from a Roman site at Cavenham Heath, Suffolk’, Antiquaries Journal 5, 258–65.

Legge, A.J. & Dorrington, E.J. 1985. ‘The animal bones’, in France and Gobel, 122–33.

Leins, I. 2012. ‘The coins’, in Score (ed.), 39–45.Levi, P. (trans.) 1984a. Pausanias: Guide to Greece: Vol. 1, Central Greece,

London.Levi, P. (trans.) 1984b. Pausanias: Guide to Greece: Vol. 2, Southern Greece,

London.Levitan, B. 1993. ‘Vertebrate remains’, in Woodward and Leach,

257–301.Lewis, M.J.T. 1966. Temples in Roman Britain, Cambridge.Lockyear, K. 2013–15. ‘Sensing the Iron Age and Roman past:

geophysics and the landscape of Hertfordshire’; available online at https://hertsgeosurvey.wordpress.com/ (accessed 7 February 2017).

Lockyear, K. (ed.) 2015. Archaeolog y in Hertfordshire: Recent Research. A Festshrift for Tony Rook, Hatfield.

Lyne, M. 1999. ‘The pottery from the lower slope’, in Niblett, 233–70.Lysons, S. 1817. ‘Remains of Roman military ensigns discovered near

Stony-Stratford, Bucks. and Barkway, Essex’, in S. Lysons, Reliquiæ Britannico-Romanæ, Containing Figures of Roman Antiquities Discovered in England, Vol. II (dated February 1818), London.

Maaskant-Kleibrink, M. 1986. Description of the Collections in the Rijksmuseum G.M. Kam. at Nijmegen: X, The Engraved Gems, Nijmegen.

Maaskant-Kleibrink, M. 1992. ‘Three gem-engravers at work in a jeweller’s workshop in Norfolk’, Bulletin Antieke Beschaving 67, 151–67.

Macdonald, P. 2000. ‘The ironwork’, in Barrett et al., 122–32.MacGregor, A. 1985. Bone, Antler, Ivory and Horn: The Technolog y of

Skeletal Materials Since the Roman Period, London.Mack, R.P. 1975. The Coinage of Ancient Britain, London.McKinley, J.I. 1994. ‘Bone fragment size in British cremation burials

and its implication for pyre technology and ritual’, Journal of Archaeological Science 21, 339–42.

McKinley, J.I., Leivers, M., Schuster, J., Marshall, P., Barclay, A.J. and Stoodley, N. 2015. Cliffs End Farm, Isle of Thanet, Kent: A Mortuary and Ritual Site of the Bronze Age, Iron Age and Anglo-Saxon period, Oxford.

Mackreth, D.E.F. 2011. Brooches in Late Iron Age and Roman Britain, Oxford.

McOmish, D. 1996. ‘East Chisenbury: ritual and rubbish at the British Bronze Age–Iron Age transition’, Antiquity 70, 68–76.

McOmish, D., Field, D. and Brown, G. (eds) 2010. ‘The Late Bronze Age–Early Iron Age midden site at East Chisenbury, Wiltshire’, Wiltshire Archaeolog y and Natural History Magazine 103, 35–101.

Madgewick, R. and Mulville, J. 2015. ‘Feasting on fore-limbs: conspicuous consumption and identity in later prehistoric Britain’, Antiquity 89, 629–44.

Major, H. 2011. ‘Small finds’, in Medlycott, 264–300.Manning, W.H. 1985. Catalogue of the Romano-British Iron Tools, Fittings

and Weapons in the British Museum, London.Marsden, A. and Henig, M. 2002. ‘Caracalla as Hercules on an

intaglio found near Lincoln’, Oxford Journal of Archaeolog y 21, 419–22.Marshall, F.H. 1911. Catalogue of the Jewellery, Greek, Etruscan and Roman,

in the Departments of Antiquities, British Museum, London.Martin, R. 1965. ‘Wooden figures from the source of the Seine’,

Antiquity 39, 247–52.Martin-Kilcher, S. 1995. Das Römische Heiligtum von Thun-Allmendingen,

Archäologische Führer der Schweiz 28, Bern.Martin-Kilcher, S. 2000. ‘Mors immatura in the Roman world – a

mirror of society and tradition’, in Burial, Society and Context in the Roman World (ed. J. Pearce, M. Millett and M. Struck), 63–77, Oxford.

Martin-Kilcher, S. 2013. ‘Deponierungen in römischen Heiligtümern:

348 | Dea Senuna

RIC = Mattingly, H. et al. 1923–1984. The Roman Imperial Coinage, London.

Richmond, I.A. and Crawford, O.G.S. 1949. ‘The British section of the Ravenna Cosmography’, Archaeologia 93, 1–50.

Rielly, K. 2015. ‘Animal bone’, in Temples and Suburbs: Excavations at Tabard Square, Southwark (ed. D. Killock, J. Shepherd, J. Gerrard, K. Hayward, K. Rielly and V. Ridgeway), 206–24, London.

Rivet, A.L.F. and Smith, C. 1979. The Place-names of Roman Britain, London.

Roach Smith, C. 1857. ‘Medieval seals set with ancient gems’, Collectanea Antiqua 4, 65–78.

Robertson, A.S. 2000. An Inventory of Romano-British Coin Hoards, London.

Robinson, P. 1995. ‘Miniature socketed axes from Wiltshire’, Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 88, 60–8.

Ross, A. 1967. Pagan Celtic Britain, London.Ross, M.C. 1953. ‘A silver treasure from Daphne-Harbie’, Archaeolog y

6.1, 39–41.Rouvier-Jeanlin, M. 1972. Les Figurines Gallo-romaines en Terre Cuite au

Musée des Antiquités Nationales, Gallia Supplement 24, Paris.Rowley-Conwy, P., Albarella, U. and Dobney, K. 2012.

‘Distinguishing wild boar from domestic pigs in prehistory: a review of approaches and recent results’, Journal of World Prehistory 25.1, 1–44.

Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England (2011), Cropmarks in Hertfordshire: A Report for the National Mapping Programme, Air Photography Unit, November 1992 (PDF version).

RRC = Roman Republican Coinage (as Crawford 1974 above).Rudd, C. 2012. ‘Agr and his brothers’, Chris Rudd List 124 ( July), 2–8.Rusu, A. 1994. ‘Die goldenen Votivbleche aus dem Nymphaeum von

Germisara (heute Geoagiu, Jud. Hunedoara)’, in Goldhelm, Schwert und Silberschätze. Reichtümer aus 6000 Jahren rumänischer Vergangenheit (ed. W. Meier-Arendt and L. Marinescu), 217–19, Frankfurt am Main.

Rusu, A. and Pescaru, E. 1993. ‘Germisara Daco-Romaine’, in D. Alicu and H. Boegli (eds), La politique édilitaire dans les provinces de l’Empire romain. Actes du 1er Colloque Roumano-Suisse, Deva 1991, 201–14, Cluj-Napoca.

Rutherford Davis, K. 1982. Britons and Saxons. The Chiltern Region 400–700, Chichester.

Sas, K. and Thoen, H. (eds) 2002. Schone Schijn/Brillance et Prestige: Romeinse juweelkunst in West-Europa/La joaillerie romaine en Europe occidentale, Leuven.

Sauer, E.W. 1996. ‘An inscription from northern Italy, the Roman temple complex in Bath and Minerva as a healing goddess in Gallo-Roman religion’, Oxford Journal of Archaeolog y 15(1), 63–93.

Sauer, E.W. 2011. ‘Religious rituals at springs in the late antique and early medieval world’, in The Archaeolog y of Late Antique ‘Paganism’ (ed. L. Lavan and M. Mulryan), 505–50, Leiden.

Schmidt, P. and Burgess, C. 1981. The Axes of Scotland and Northern England, Munich.

Schmidt, C.W. and Symes, S.A. 2008. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains, Oxford.

Schuster, J. 2011. ‘Springhead metalwork’, in Biddulph et al., 189–291.Score, V. 2011. Hoards, Hounds and Helmets. A Conquest-period Ritual Site at

Hallaton, Leicestershire, Leicester.Score, V. and Browning, J. 2010. ‘Ritual, hoards and helmets: a Late

Iron Age shrine at Hallaton, East Leicestershire’, in In Search of the Iron Age. Proceedings of the Iron Age Research Student Seminar 2008, University of Leicester (ed. M. Sterry, A. Tullett and N. Ray), 145–63, Leicester.

Sellwood, L. 1984. ‘Objects of bone and antler’, in B. Cunliffe, Danebury: An Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire: Vol. 2, The Excavations, 1969–1978: The Finds, CBA Research Report 52, 371–95, London.

Sena Chiesa, G. 1966. Gemme del Museo Nazionale di Aquileia, Aquileia.Sena Chiesa, G. 2012. ‘Catalogo’, in P. Biscottini and G. Sena Chiesa,

Costantino 313 d. C., Milan.Shearman, F.N. 1993. ‘Excavation, examination and conservation of

Anglo-Saxon jewellery from Bosshall, Ipswich’, The Conservator 17, 26–41.

Shipman, P., Foster, G. and Schoeninger, M. 1984. ‘Burnt bones and teeth: an experimental study of colour, morphology, crystal structure and shrinkage’, Journal of Archaeological Science 11, 307–25.

Noel, M.J. 2004. ‘Archaeological geophysical survey at Ashwell End, near Baldock, Hertfordshire, phase 2: 2004’, unpublished GeoQuest Associates report.

Noel, M.J. 2006. ‘Archaeological geophysical survey at Ashwell End, near Baldock, Hertfordshire, phase 3: 2006’, unpublished GeoQuest Associates report.

Noll, R. 1980. Das Inventar des Dolichenusheiligtums von Mauer an der Url (Noricum), Der Römische Limes in Österreich 30, Vienna.

O’Connell, M.G. and Bird, J. 1994. ‘The Roman temple at Wanborough, excavation 1985–1986’, Surrey Archaeological Collections 82, 1–168.

O’Connor, B. 1980. Cross-Channel Relations in the Later Bronze Age, British Archaeological Reports International Series 91 (2 vols), Oxford.

Ogden, J. 1982. Jewellery of the Ancient World, London.Oldenstein, J. 1977. ‘Zur Ausrüstung römischer Auxiliareinheiten.

Studien zu Beschlägen und Zierat an der Ausrüstung der römischen Auxiliareinheiten des obergermanisch-raetischen Limesgebietes aus dem zweiten und dritten Jahrhundert n. Chr.’, Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 57, 49–284.

Orton, D. 2007. ‘A local barrow for local people? The Ferry Fryston cattle in context’, in TRAC 2006. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeolog y Conference (ed. B. Croxford, N. Ray, R. Roth and N. White), 77–91, Oxford.

Painter, K.S. 1971. ‘A Roman gold ex-voto from Wroxeter, Shropshire’, Antiquaries Journal 51, 329–31.

Painter, K.S. 1977. The Water Newton Early Christian Silver, London.Painter, K.S. 2005. ‘The Tunshill Roman silver arm’, in Crummy

(ed.), 107–17.Painter, K.S. 2006. ‘The Water Newton treasure; The Water Newton

plaques’, in Hartley et al. (eds), 210–22.Painter, K.S. 2015. ‘Emergency or votive? Two groups of late-Roman

gold and silver hoards’, in Hoarding and the Deposition of Metalwork from the Bronze Age to the 20th Century: A British Perspective (ed. J. Naylor and R. Bland), 67–91, Oxford.

Palk, N.A. 1992. Metal Horse Harness of the British and Irish Iron Ages, Oxford.

Pannuti, U. 1983. Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli. Catalogo della Collezione Glittica: I, Rome.

Petrovszky, R. 2006. ‘Der Hortfund von Hagenbach’, in Stadler (ed.), 192–5.

Pfeiler, B. 1970. Römischer Goldschmuck des ersten und zweiten Jahrhunderts n. Chr. nach datierten Funden, Mainz.

Piso, I. and Rusu, A. 1990. ‘Nymphaeumul de la Germisara’, Revista Monumentelor Istorice 59, 9–17.

Pitt, K. and Seeley, F. 2013. ‘Excavations at 36–39 Poultry, London EC2’, Transactions of the London and Middlesex Archaeological Society 64, 13–56.

Pitts, L.F. 1979. Roman Bronze Figurines from the Civitates of the Catuvellauni and Trinovantes, Oxford.

Plouviez, J. 2005. ‘Whose good luck? Roman phallic ornaments from Suffolk’, in Crummy (ed.), 157–64.

Pope, E.J. and Smith, D.C. 2004. ‘Identification of traumatic injury in burned cranial bone. An experimental approach’, Journal of Forensic Science 49, 431–40.

Potter, T.W. 1981. ‘The Roman occupation of the central Fenland’, Britannia 12, 79–133.

Potter, T.W. and Johns, C. 1986. ‘The Tunshill Victory’, Antiquaries Journal 66, 391–2.

Poulton, R. 2007. ‘Farley Heath Roman temple’, Surrey Archaeological Collections, 93, 1–147.

Price, J. and Cottam, S. 1998. Romano-British Glass Vessels: A Handbook, London.

Reece, R. 1991. Roman Coins from 140 Sites in Britain, Cotswold Studies 4, Cirencester.

Reece, R. 1995. ‘Site-finds in Roman Britain’, Britannia 26, 179–206.RIB I Collingwood, R.G. and Wright, R.P. 1965. The Roman Inscriptions

of Britain: Vol. I, Inscriptions on Stone, Oxford.RIB II Collingwood, R.G. and Wright, R.P. 1990–5. The Roman

Inscriptions of Britain: Vol. II, Instrumentum Domesticum (eight fascicules) (ed. S.S. Frere and R.S.O. Tomlin), Oxford.

RIB III Tomlin, R.S.O., Wright, R.P. and Hassall, M.W.C. 2009. The Roman Inscriptions of Britain: Vol. III, Inscriptions on Stone Found or Notified between 1 January 1955 and 31 December 2006, Oxford.

Bibliography | 349

Tyers, P. 1996. Roman Pottery in Britain, London.Van Arsdell, R.D. 1989. Celtic Coinage of Britain, London.Van der Linden, V., Cosyns, P., Schalm, O., Cagno, S., Nys, K.,

Janssens, K., Nowak, A., Wagner, B. and Bulska, E. 2009. ‘Deeply coloured and black glass in the northern provinces of the Roman Empire: differences and similarities in chemical composition before and after ad 150’, Archaeometry 51:5, 822–44.

Walker, S. 2000. Ancient Faces: Mummy Portraits from Roman Egypt, London.

Walters, H.B. 1899. Catalogue of the Bronzes, Greek, Roman and Etruscan in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, British Museum, London.

Walters, H.B. 1921. Catalogue of the Silver Plate (Greek, Etruscan and Roman) in the British Museum, London.

Walters, H.B. 1926. Catalogue of the Engraved Gems and Cameos, Greek, Etruscan, and Roman, in the British Museum, London.

Watson, J., Fell, V. and Jones, J. 2008. Investigative Conservation, London.Watson, W.W. 1949. ‘Belgic bronzes and pottery found at Felmersham-

on-Ouse, Bedfordshire’, Antiquaries Journal 29, 37–61.Waugh, K. 1999. Excavations at Boxfield Farm, Chells, Stevenage,

Hertfordshire, Hertford.Webster, L. and Backhouse, J. (eds) 1991. The Making of England:

Anglo-Saxon Art and Culture, ad 600–900, London.Webster, P. 1996. Roman Samian Pottery in Britain, York.Wedlake, W.J. 1982. The Excavation of the Shrine of Apollo at Nettleton,

Wiltshire, 1956–1971, London.Westell, W.P. 1926. ‘Roman and pre-Roman antiquities in Letchworth

Museum’, Transactions of the East Hertfordshire Archaeological Society 7, 270.

Westell, W. 1931. ‘A Romano-British cemetery at Baldock, Herts’, Archaeological Journal 88, 247–301.

Westell, W.P. 1938. ‘Roman and pre-Roman antiquities in Letchworth Museum’, Transactions of the East Hertfordshire Archaeological Society 10, 231.

Wheeler, R.E.M. 1930. London in Roman Times, London.Wheeler, R.E.M. 1943. Maiden Castle, Dorset, London.Wheeler, R.E.M. and Wheeler, T.V. 1932. Report on the Excavation of the

Prehistoric, Roman and Post-Roman Site in Lydney Park, Gloucestershire, Oxford.

Wheeler, R.E.M. and Wheeler, T.V. 1936. Verulamium: A Belgic and Two Roman Cities, Oxford.

Wild, J.P. 1970. ‘Button-and-loop fasteners in the Roman provinces’, Britannia 1, 137–55.

Wilkin, N. 2017. ‘Combination, composition and context: readdressing British Middle Bronze Age ornament hoards (c. 1400–1100 cal. BC)’, in Dress and Society: Contributions from Archaeolog y (ed. T.F. Martin and R. Weetch), 14–47, Oxford.

Williams, D. 2007. ‘Green Lane, Wanborough: excavations at the Roman religious site 1999’, Surrey Archaeological Collections 93, 149–265.

Wilson, M.G. 1984. ‘The other pottery’, in Verulamium Excavations: Vol. III (ed. S.S. Frere), 200–6, Oxford.

Wilson, R. 1989. ‘Trade, industry and domestic activity at the Old Clothing Factory Site, Abingdon’, Oxoniensia 54, 279–86.

Woodward, A. 1992. Shrines and Sacrifice, London.Woodward, A. and Leach, P. 1993. The Uley Shrines: Excavation of a

Ritual Complex on West Hill, Uley, Gloucestershire 1977–9, London.Worrell, S. and Pearce, J. 2011. ‘Roman Britain in 2010. II. Finds

reported under the Portable Antiquities Scheme’, Britannia 42, 399–437.

Yeates, S. 2009. ‘Senuna, goddess of the river Rhee or Henney’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society 98, 65–8.

Yeroulanou, A. 1999. Diatrita: Gold Pierced-work Jewellery from the 3rd to the 7th Century, Athens.

Young, C.J. 1977. Oxfordshire Roman Pottery, Oxford.York, J. 2002. ‘The life cycle of bronze metalwork from the Thames’,

Oxford Journal of Archaeolog y 21(2), 77–92.Zadoks-Josephus Jitta, A.N., Peters, W.J.T. and Witteveen, A.M. 1973.

Description of the Collections in the Rijksmuseum G.M. Kam at Nijmegen, VII: The Figural Bronzes, Nijmegen.

Zwierlein-Diehl, E. 1991. Die Antiken Gemmen des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien: Vol. 3, Die Gemmen der späteren römischen Kaiserzeit, Munich.

Zwierlein-Diehl, E. 1998. Die Gemmen und Kameen des Dreikönigenschreines, Cologne.

Short, D. and Collins, P. 1997. Snippets of Ashwell’s History: Vol. 1, Ashwell.

Smith, M.A. 1959. ‘Middle Bronze Age hoards from southern England’, Inventaria Archaeologica Great Britain 7, 42–7.

Spink 2012. Coins of England and the United Kingdom, 47th edn, London.Stadler, J. (ed.) 2006. Geraubt und im Rhein Versunken: Der Barbarenschatz,

Speyer.Stead, I.M. 1967. ‘A La Tene III burial at Welwyn Garden City’,

Archaeologia 101, 1‒62.Stead, I.M. 1995. ‘The metalwork’, in K. Parfitt, Iron Age Burials from

Mill Hill, Deal, 58–111, London.Stead, I.M. 1998. The Salisbury Hoard, Stroud.Stead, I.M. 2006. British Iron Age Swords and Scabbards, London.Stead, I.M. and Rigby, V. 1986. Baldock: The Excavation of a Roman and

Pre-Roman Settlement, 1968–1972, Britannia Monograph 7, London.Stead, I.M. and Rigby, V. 1989. Verulamium: The King Harry Lane Site,

English Heritage Archaeological Report 12, London.Stefanelli, L.P.B. 1992. L’Oro dei Romani, Rome.Stefanelli, L.P.B. and Devoto, G. 1983. ‘Spilla d’oro con un intaglio su

ametista’, in Crepereia Tryphaena. Le scoperte archeologiche nell’area del Palazzo di Giustizia (ed. U. Vetere, P.L. Severi and R. Nicolini), 42–5, Rome.

Suggett, P.G. 1954. ‘Excavations at Brockley Hill, March 1952 to May 1953’, Transactions of the London and Middlesex Archaeological Society 11:3, 259–76.

Symonds, R.P. and Wade, S. 1999. Roman Pottery from Excavations at Colchester, 1971–86, Colchester Archaeological Report 10, Colchester.

Taylor, A. 1997. Archaeolog y of Cambridgeshire: Vol. 1, South-west Cambridgeshire, March.

Taylor, C. 1973. The Cambridgeshire Landscape, London.Taylor, M.V. 1914. ‘Topographical index of Romano-British remains’,

in The Victoria County History of the County of Hertford: Vol. 4 (ed. W. Page), repr. 1971, 147–72, London.

Taylor, M.V. and Collingwood, R.G. (eds) 1925. ‘Roman Britain in 1925’, Journal of Roman Studies 15, 235.

Taylor, M. and Hill, D. 2003 (2001). ‘Ribbed bowls and their manufacture’; available online at http://www.theglassmakers.co.uk/archiveromanglassmakers/bmribbed.htm (accessed 28 March 2017).

Taylor, T. 2002. The Buried Soul: How Humans Invented Death, Boston, Mass.

Thomas, G. and Knox, A. 2015. Lyminge Excavations 2014: Interim Report; available online at http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/archaeology/Lyminge_2014_Interim.pdf (accessed 8 February 2017)

Thomas, R., Robinson, M., Barrett, J. and Wilson, B. 1986. ‘A Late Bronze Age riverside settlement at Wallingford, Oxfordshire’, Archaeological Journal 143, 174–200; available online at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00665983.1986.11021132 (accessed 8 February 2017).

Thompson, I. 1982. Grog-tempered ‘Belgic’ Pottery of South-eastern England, Oxford.

Thompson, I. 2003. Ashwell: An Extensive Urban Survey, Hertford.Tomber, R. and Dore, J. 1998. The National Roman Fabric Reference

Collection: A Handbook, London.Tomlin, R.S.O. 1988. Tabellae Sulis: Roman Inscribed Tablets of Tin and

Lead from the Sacred Spring at Bath, Oxford; also in Cunliffe (ed.), 59–277.

Tomlin, R.S.O. 2008. ‘Dea Senuna: a new goddess from Britain’, in Instrumenta Inscripta Latina II: Akten des 2. Internationalen Kolloquiums, Klagenfurt, 5.–8. Mai 2005 (ed. M. Hainzmann and R. Wedenig), Aus Forschung und Kunst 36, 305–16, Klagenfurt.

Toynbee, J.M.C. 1962. Art in Roman Britain, London.Toynbee, J.M.C. 1964. Art in Britain under the Romans, Oxford.Toynbee, J.M.C. 1973. Animals in Roman Life and Art, London.Toynbee, J.M.C. 1978. ‘A Londinium votive leaf or feather and its

fellows’, in Collectanea Londiniensia: Studies in London Archaeolog y and History Presented to Ralph Merrifield, London and Middlesex Archaeological Society Special Paper 2 (ed. J. Bird, H. Chapman and J. Clark), 128–47, London.

Turner, C. 1999. ‘New grain store, Newnham Way, Ashwell’, unpublished Heritage Network report [R686].

350 | Dea Senuna

Contributors Ralph Jackson was senior curator of Romano-British collections at the British Museum until 2016. Now, as a Visiting Academic, his research is focused on the history and archaeology of Greek and Roman medicine. His previous publications include Doctors and Diseases in the Roman Empire; Camerton: A Catalogue of Late Iron Age and Early Roman Metalwork; Excavations at Stonea, Cambridgeshire 1980–85; Cosmetic Sets of Late Iron Age and Roman Britain; and (with Richard Hobbs) Roman Britain.

Gilbert Burleigh was field archaeologist for North Hertfordshire Museums and is now an independent archaeologist and honorary field officer for North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society. His previous publications include Excavations at Baldock, Hertfordshire, 1978–1994, Vol. 1 (with Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews), and papers in national and local journals as well as conference proceedings.

Denise Allen completed her PhD on Roman Glass from Britain in 1983, and has continued to work as a Roman glass specialist, whilst working for an archaeological travel company. She has been on the Board of the Association for the History of Glass for a number of years.

Caroline Cartwright is a Senior Scientist in the Department of Scientific Research at the British Museum. Her primary areas of scientific expertise encompass organics such as wood, charcoal, fibres, shell, ivory and bone. Reconstructing past environments, vegetation and climate changes and investigating bioarchaeological evidence all form an important part of her research.

Andrew Fawcett has worked as a specialist in the study of late Iron Age/Roman pottery and ceramic building materials within commercial archaeology for 20 years. He has produced a large number of evaluation, assessment and publication reports (principally from around the Midlands and south-eastern areas of England) as well as undertaking several outreach and teaching roles.

Eleanor Ghey is Curator of Iron Age and Roman Coin Hoards in the British Museum’s Department of Coins and Medals. She was a researcher on the AHRC-funded Hoarding in Roman and Iron Age Britain project and has a particular interest in the Iron Age to Roman transition.

Kay Hartley has been a freelance consultant on all ceramic mortaria, their production, history and usage for many years. This provides a necessary background to her study of the potters who stamped many of them. Whilst her primary interest is in stamps found in Britain, it also extends to stamps found throughout the Roman Empire.

Martin Henig has worked on ancient gems for more than 40 years, and published his doctorate on Engraved Gems from British Sites in 1974 (reissued 1978 and 2007) and has continued to work on it and on other aspects of Classical art. He has been fascinated by the culture of the Middle Ages and its use of Roman Antiquity. For 23 years he edited the

Contributors | 351

Valery Rigby was curator 0f the Iron Age collection at the British Museum from 1977 until 2000.

Fleur Shearman has specialised in metalwork conservation and allied X-radiography at the British Museum since 1980. She acquired the Museums Association Conservation Certificate in Archaeology in 1985 and is an ICON-accredited conservator-restorer. Her specialist interests are the collections of the Departments of Britain, Prehistory and Europe; Greece and Rome and Ancient Egypt.

Sarah Talks was born and brought up in Ashwell, and had her first archaeological experience close to the Senuna site in the 1970s. She gained a BA Hons in Archaeology from Durham University, and now runs the community group Ashwell Archaeology. She is also the Assistant Curator at Ashwell Museum.

Isobel Thompson gained her PhD on Late Iron Age grog-tempered pottery from UCL. As well as freelance pottery work, she compiled the St Albans Urban Archaeological Database and was co-author of the resulting monograph on Verulamium and the medieval abbey and town. Since 1998 she has worked for the Historic Environment team at Hertfordshire County Council on projects such as Extensive Urban Surveys (including Ashwell), and as Historic Environment Record Officer.

Roger Tomlin, FSA, is the retired University Lecturer in Late-Roman History at Oxford, who has published newly discovered Roman inscriptions annually in Britannia since 1975. His recent books are Roman Inscriptions of Britain III (2009), Roman London’s First Voices (2016) and Britannia Romana: Roman Inscriptions and Roman Britain (2017).

Gill Varndell is a Visiting Academic in the Department of Britain, Europe and Prehistory at the British Museum where she worked as Curator (Neolithic) until her retirement in 2016. Her specialisms are in flint procurement and distribution, Neolithic art and Bronze Age gold work.

Neil Wilkin is curator of the European Bronze Age collection at the British Museum. His specialisms are in funerary practices, ceramics and metalwork from the first age of metal. He is Honorary Secretary of the Prehistoric Society.

Journal of the British Archaeological Association, and is now an Assistant priest in the Anglican benefice of Osney, Oxford.

Marilyn Hockey was, until her recent retirement, Head of Ceramics, Glass and Metals Conservation at the British Museum and a Fellow of the International Institute of Conservation. She joined the Museum in 1976 and after training in silversmithing and archaeological conservation became a metals specialist, working on many of the Museum’s major collections, national and international projects.

Catherine Johns was a curator of the Romano-British collections at the British Museum from 1967 to 2002. Her principal research interests are in Roman jewellery and silver plate, but she has also worked and published extensively on Roman sculpture, pottery and some museological topics.

Susan Jones is a freelance osteoarchaeologist who has written specialist contributions on human and animal bone assemblages from multi-period sites published in numerous site publications and research papers. Her specialist research interests are burnt bone deposits,complex commingled human bone deposits and animal palaeopathology.

Anthony King is Professor of Roman Archaeology at the University of Winchester. He has research interests in Romano-Celtic religion and faunal remains. Recent publications include Celtic Religions in the Roman Period (ed. with R. Häussler, 2017), A Sacred Island. Iron Age, Roman and Saxon Temples and Ritual on Hayling Island (with G. Soffe, 2013), and ‘Animal remains from temples in Roman Britain’, Britannia 36, 2005.

Susan La Niece held the position of metallurgist and analyst in the Department of Scientific Research at the British Museum. She has published extensively on techniques and materials of decorative metalwork, with special interests in surface finishes and the coppersmiths’ contribution to Limoges painted enamel wares.

Andrew Meek is a scientist in the Department of Scientific Research at the British Museum. His specialism is the analysis of vitreous materials – glass, faience, glazes and enamels. He is a board member of the Association for the History of Glass and co-editor of Glass News.

352 | Dea Senuna

Page numbers in italics refer to illustrations; throughout the book, the objects in the Ashwell Hoard and those in the hoards from Barkway and Stony Stratford are referred to according to their respective catalogue numbers: Ashwell = A1–A29; Barkway = B1–B9; Stony Stratford = SS1–SS105

A1 silver-gilt figurine, 1, 19, 20 catalogue description of, 31, 32 comparable finds, 126–30, 127 conservation of, 6–7, 7 contextual evidence, 6, 30 discovery of, 1 manufacture of, 10–11, 18–20 relative value of, 129–30 X-radiography of, 10–11, 11 XRF, analytical data from, 10–11, 31A1a silver figurine pedestal, 4, 19, 20, 33, 341 catalogue description of, 31–3 comparable finds, 127 conservation of, 7 contextual evidence, 7 discovery of, 5, 157, 200, 201, 202, 341 Flavia Cunoris, votary dedication, 18, 20, 20, 33, 111, 127 inscription on, 18, 20, 33, 111, 157 XRF, analytical data from, 11, 33A2–A3 silver-gilt arms, 19, 20 catalogue description of, 33–4, 34 conservation of, 7 manufacture of, 18–20 X-radiography of, 11, 11 XRF, analytical data from, 11, 34A4 gold brooch, 21, 35, 36 catalogue description of, 34–6 comparable finds, 130 conservation of, 5, 7–8, 8 glass beads, and re-use of, 130 manufacture of, 12, 20, 34–6 X-radiography of, 10, 11–13, 11, 34A5 gold brooch, 21, 35, 36 catalogue description of, 34–6 comparable finds, 130 conservation of, 5, 7–8, 8 contextual evidence, 7–8, 34 glass beads, and re-use of, 130 manufacture of, 12, 16, 20, 34–6 X-radiography of, 10, 11–13, 34 XRF, analytical data from, 12–13, 15–16, 36A6 gold neck ornament, 21, 36, 37 catalogue description of, 36–7 comparable finds, 130–1 conservation of, 7–8, 8 manufacture of, 12, 16, 16, 20, 36–7 X-radiography of, 10, 11–13, 11 XRF, analytical data from, 12–13, 15–16, 37A7 gold clasp-brooch, 21, 38 catalogue description of, 38–9 comparable objects and finds, 131–2, 132 conservation of, 7–8, 8 function of, and evidence for, 132, 132

Index

contextual evidence, 8, 44 manufacture of, 13–15, 22–4, 44–5 pre-deposition condition of, 9 Victory, depiction of, 23, 24 X-radiography of, 10, 24 XRF, analytical data from, 14, 15, 45A14 gold votive plaque, 22, 46 Bell (.) Memorianus, votary dedication, 23, 46, 113, 133 catalogue description of, 45–7 conservation of, 8–9, 8 contextual evidence, 8, 46 inscription on, 23, 46, 113 manufacture of, 13–15, 22–4, 46 Minerva, depictions of, 46 X-radiography of, 10 XRF, analytical data from, 14, 15, 47A15 silver votive plaque, 25, 47 catalogue description of, 47–8 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7, 47 Minerva, depiction of, 47–8A16 silver votive plaque, 25, 48 catalogue description of, 48–9 before conservation, 3 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9, 48 design of, 23–4 embossed shrine detail, 26 inscription on, 49, 113–14 Lucilia Sena, votary dedication, 49, 113–14, 135 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7, 48–9 Minerva, depiction of, 23, 49 post-depositional condition, 48 votive dedication, 49 XRF, analytical data from, 14–15, 49A17 silver votive plaque, 25, 50 catalogue description of, 49–50 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 inscription on, 50, 114 Lucius L(.) Herbonianus, votary dedication, 50, 114, 133 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7, 49 Minerva, depiction of, 25, 49 XRF, analytical data from, 14–15, 50A18 silver votive plaque, 25, 51 catalogue description of, 50–1 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 design of, 26, 50–1 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7 Roma, possible depiction of and comparable imagery, 26–7, 26, 51A19 silver-gilt votive plaque, 25, 52 catalogue description of, 52–3 comparable finds, 24–5 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 design of, 24, 25, 52 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7, 52

intaglio from, 12, 12, 21–2, 21, 38 manufacture of, 12, 12, 20, 38–9 X-radiography of, 11–13, 12 XRF, analytical data from, 12–13, 39A8 gold votive plaque, 22, 39 catalogue description of, 39–41 Claudius Celsus, votary dedication, 23, 40–1, 111, 112, 133 conservation of, 8–9, 8 contextual evidence, 8 depositional condition, pre and post, 9, 39–40 inscription, and epigraphic study, 10, 23, 40–1, 111–12 manufacture of, 13, 13, 14, 40 Minerva, depiction of, 23, 40 X-radiography of, 10 XRF, analytical data from, 14, 15, 41A9 gold votive plaque, 22, 40 Cariatia Ressa, votary dedication, 23, 41, 112, 133 catalogue description of, 41–2 conservation of, 8–9, 8 contextual evidence, 8, 41 design of, 22 inscription on, 23, 41, 112 manufacture of, 13, 22–4, 41 Minerva, depiction of, 41 X-radiography of, 10 XRF, analytical data from, 14, 15, 41A10 gold votive plaque, 22 catalogue description of, 41–2 conservation of, 8–9, 8 contextual evidence, 8, 42 design of, 23 haematite, evidence for use of, 9 manufacture of, 13, 22–4, 42 pre-deposition condition of, 9 X-radiography of, 10 XRF, analytical data from, 14, 15, 42A11 gold votive plaque, 22, 42 catalogue description of, 42–3 conservation of, 8–9, 8 contextual evidence, 8, 42 embossed shrine detail, 26 inscription on, 23, 43 manufacture of, 13, 13, 14, 22–4, 42–3 Minerva, depiction of, 43 Nerus, votary dedication, 23, 43, 112–13 X-radiography of, 10, 23 XRF, analytical data from, 14, 15, 43A12 gold votive plaque, 22, 44 catalogue description of, 43–4 conservation of, 8–9, 8 contextual evidence, 8, 43 inscription on, 23, 44, 113 manufacture of, 13–15, 22–4, 43 Minerva, depiction of, 43 Quintianus, votary dedication, 23, 44, 113 X-radiography of, 10, 23 XRF, analytical data from, 14, 15, 44A13 gold votive plaque, 22, 45 catalogue description of, 44–5 conservation of, 8–9, 8

Index | 353

354 | Dea Senuna

catalogue description of, 59–61 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7A27 silver votive plaque, 25, 60 catalogue description of, 61 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 design of, 61 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7, 61 Mercury, depiction of, 25, 26, 61 post-depositional condition, 61A28 silver plaque fragments and figural fragments, 61, 62 catalogue description of, 61 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 design of, 27 fragments of, 24, 27 manufacture of, 13–15 textile fragments, remains of, 16, 16A29 iron nails, 27 catalogue description of, 61animal bone finds abrasion, signs of, 314 articulated pig skeletons, 319–20, 332 associated bone groups (ABGs), 319–20 burnt bone, 315, 318–19 butchery, evidence for, 315–16 carnivore activity, evidence for, 315 condition of finds, 314 discussion of assemblage, 314–20 fragmentation and breakage of, 315 human bone finds, 317–18, 319 introduction to and methodology, 314 oyster shell finds, perforated, 295, 296, 330–1 Phase 1 (late 1st century ad–ad 70), 163 Phase 2 (mid 1st century–late 2nd century ad), 170–1 Phase 3 (mid 1st century–late 2nd century ad), 175 Phase 4 (mid/late 1st century–late 2nd/3rd century ad), 180 Phase 5 (end of 2nd century ad–3rd century ad), 189 Phase 6 (3rd century ad), 191–2, 198–200 Phase 7 (later 3rd and 4th centuries ad), 201 Phase 8 (Post-Roman–Post Medieval), 203 pig deposit [126], in scoop [127], 192, 192 pig deposit [311], and other finds from, 192–5, 193 pig deposit [516], and other finds from, 194, 195 pig deposit [538], and other finds from, 194, 195–6, 195, 332 pig deposit [592], and other finds from, 196 pig deposits [579] & [580], and other finds from, 196, 196 pig skull [558], 196 pit [632], midden deposits and ritual feasting, 189–91, 191 quantification of, 316, 318 ritual activity, evidence for, 316–17 ritual deposits, 320 species representation, 316, 316, 317 structured placed deposits, 330–2 taphonomy, 314–16Aphrodite statuette (Antioch), 126

Minerva, depiction of, 25 XRF, analytical data from, 14–15, 53A20 silver votive plaque, 25, 53 catalogue description of, 53–4 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 design of, 25–6, 53–4 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7 Minerva, depiction of, 25, 26, 53–4 XRF, analytical data from, 14–15, 54A21 silver votive plaque, 25, 26, 54 catalogue description of, 54–5 conservation of, 4, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 die-linkage, with A23, 25, 27, 56, 57 inscription on, 55, 114–15 manufacture of, 13–15, 14, 24–7, 54–5 Minerva, depiction of, 55 Servandus son of Hispanus, votary dedication, 55, 114–15, 133 X-radiograph of, 4 XRF, analytical data from, 14–15, 55A22 silver votive plaque, 25, 56 catalogue description of, 55–6 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 design of, 27 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7A23 silver votive plaque, 25, 26, 56 catalogue description of, 56–7 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 design of, 56–7 die-linkage, with A21, 25, 27, 56, 57 inscription on, 57, 114–15 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7 Minerva, depiction of, 57 Servandus son of Hispanus, votary dedication, 57, 115, 133 textile fragments, remains of, 16 XRF, analytical data from, 14–15, 15, 57A24 silver votive plaque, 25, 58 catalogue description of, 57 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 design of, 25, 57 Firmanus, votary dedication, 57, 115 inscription on, 57, 115 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7, 57 Minerva, depiction of, 25, 57 post-depositional condition, 57 X-radiography of, 10A25 silver votive plaque, 25, 59 catalogue description of, 57–9 conservation of, 9–10 contextual evidence, 9 design of, 59 manufacture of, 13–15, 24–7 Mars, depiction of, 25, 59 post-depositional condition, 57A26 silver votive plaque, 25, 60

BBC filming of excavations, 145, 157 Hidden Treasure, 145Bedlam, Joseph, 146, 232 Arbury Banks, excavations at, 147Berthouville statutes (France), 126, 127Birkle, Nicole, 134Bluegates Farm (Ashwell End), 146 bronze axe find from, 146 field names, 151 finds from, 150–1, 214–15, 215British Museum acquisition of hoard, 4 arrival of hoard at, 3, 145 display of hoard, 5 Stony Stratford hoard, acquisition of, 74brooch finds see also individual finds, 214, 215, 283, 339 Aucissa brooches, catalogue of finds, 275–6, 275 brooch pins/springs, catalogue of finds, 278 Colchester brooches, catalogue of finds, 273–4, 273 Colchester-derivative brooches, catalogue of finds, 274, 276–7 Durotrigan brooch, catalogue of finds, 277, 277 Headstud brooch, catalogue of finds, 276, 277 Hod Hill brooches, catalogue of finds, 275, 277 miniature brooches, 215, 215 Nauheim-derivative brooches, catalogue finds, 274–5, 274 overview of, 214 Pennanular brooches, catalogue of finds, 277–8, 277 rosette brooches, catalogue of finds, 273, 275 Trumpet brooch, catalogue of find, 276, 277Brumath Hoard, 27, 138buildings [102]/[334], and finds from, 176–7, 178–9, 180, 326–7 [389]/[556], and finds from, 180–2, 183–4, 326–7 evidence for, 321, 326–7 flood risk associated with, 321–3Bullock, Hayley, 227burials cemetery sites, evidence for, 148 cremation burials (?), 332–3 finds relating to, 148

ceramic building materials brick finds, 224 condition of, 223 fabric, 224 form of, 223–4 introduction and methodology, 216–17, 223 tile finds, 223–4ceremonial hollow chalk/flint gravel surfaces, 327 formation and use of, 325 Large Burial Enclosure (Baldock), comparison with, 335 later use of, 339 Phase 1 (late 1st century ad–ad 70), 162, 162, 163 structured placed deposits, 327–32ceremonial utensils comparable finds, 123–4

Apollo, depictions of pipeclay figurine, 262–3, 263 SS8 plaque, 86–7Arbury Banks coin hoard finds, 147, 232–3 finds from, 147 hill fort at, 146–7Archaeology RheeSearch, vii, 154, 321Ashwell: An Extensive Urban Survey (Thompson, I.), 146Ashwell End (Ashwell Parish), 144, 146, 201 Baldock find, comparison with, 335 Beresfords field, 153, 154 Bluegates Paddock, geophysical survey, 153, 154 bronze axe find from, 146 fieldwalking survey, 154–6, 155 fieldwork adjacent to, 148–50 geophysical survey, 151–4, 151–2 Great Buttway Field, other finds from, 145, 146, 150 Hinxworth (parish of ), comparison with, 335–7 Morris, Dr John, record of fieldwork, 148–9 ritual site, origin of and comparisons with, 324, 337–8 Sale’s Acre field, fieldwalking survey and finds from, 154–6 Wayman’s Fields, fieldwalking survey and finds from, 154Ashwell Hoard see hoardAshwell Project (fieldwork), 4, 5Ashwell Street, 148Ashwell Village Museum, 5, 150 Ashwell End fieldwork, records of, 148Ashworth, Helen, iv, 3, 145

Backworth Treasure, 124–5, 124–5Baldock Ashwell coin finds, comparison with, 228–9 Ashwell End (Ashwell Parish), comparison with, 335 burial enclosure, evidence for, 333 Icknield Way, and Roman road network, 148 Large Burial Enclosure, 335 mail fragments, finds of, 285 pedestal find from, 127 Roman settlement at, 147Barkway hoard, 63, 121, 340 Ashwell hoard, comparisons with plaques from, 25, 27, 121–2, 121 B1 bronze figurine, 64–7, 64, 67, 128–9 B2 bronze handle, 64, 67 B3 silver plaque, 22, 65, 67–9, 68, 116 B4 silver-gilt plaque, 22, 66, 69–70, 69, 117 B5 silver plaque, 66, 70–1, 70 B6 silver plaque, 22, 66, 71, 71 B7 silver plaque, 66, 71–2, 71 B8 silver plaque, 25, 66, 72–3, 72, 117 B9 silver plaque, 25, 66, 73, 73 discovery of, 4, 63, 121–2 inscriptions, 116–17 Mars, depictions of, 122 overview of, 64 plaques from, 9 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 64–6 Rokey Wood, site of finds, 338 Vulcan, depictions of, 122

Index | 355

356 | Dea Senuna

A1a silver figurine pedestal, 7 A2–A3 silver-gilt arms, 7, 7 A4 gold brooch, 7–8, 8 A5 gold brooch, 7–8, 8 A6 gold neck ornament, 7–8, 8 A7 gold clasp-brooch, 7–8, 8 A8–A14 gold votive plaque, 8–9, 8 A15–28 silver votive plaques, 9–10 preliminary investigations, 6 sequence of, 5Cool, Hilary, 130Crepereia Tryphaena (Prati di Castello), clasp-brooch, 131, 132Crummy, Nina, 102

Densem, Robin, 157Doherty, Gerry, 321, 338Durham, Emma, 126

encaustic mummy portrait (from Antinoopolis), 132, 132excavations at Ashwell, 4 2003 excavation, plan and view of, 160, 190 2004 excavations, view of, 202 2006 excavations, view of, 160–1 animal bone finds, 163, 314–20 archive relating to, 158 bracelet finds, catalogue of finds, 273, 273 Bronze Age metalwork finds, 159–61, 161 brooches, catalogue of finds, 273–8, 273–8, 283 clay ovens, evidence of, 162, 163–5, 163, 165, 166 coin finds, 212, 213, 236-243 counters, catalogue of finds, 281, 282–3 Deposit [635], Bronze Age finds, 159–61 discovery of hoard, 145 Early Iron Age–Middle Iron Age period, finds from, 161 figural objects, catalogue of finds, 262–72, 263, 264, 265, 266 finger rings and rings, catalogue of finds, 278–9, 278 fossil finds, catalogue of, 296, 296 geophysical survey, 145–6, 151–4, 151–4 glass finds, catalogue of, 296–300, 298 hair pins, catalogue of finds, 279, 280–1 hinges, catalogue of finds, 292–3, 293 history of site and fieldwork, 145, 146–7 introduction to, 157 Late Bronze-Iron Age period, finds from, 146–7, 161 Late Iron Age and Roman period, finds, 147 location and environment of site, 143, 144 metal detecting finds, 150–1, 161–2, 200, 201, 203 Middle Iron Age–Late Iron Age period, finds from, 161 needles, catalogue of finds, 281 other bone and metal small finds, catalogue of, 293–6, 293–4, 295 Phase 0 (Bronze Age–Late Iron Age), 159–62 Phase 1 (late 1st century ad–ad 70), 162–3, 162 Phase 2 (mid 1st century–late 2nd century ad), 163–71, 164 Phase 3 (mid. 1st century–late 2nd century ad), 171–5, 172 Phase 4 (mid/late 1st century–late 2nd/3rd century ad), 176–80, 176

Hockwold cum Wilton, head-dress from, 124, 124 Stony Stratford hoard, 77–8, 97–101, 98–101, 123–4Ceres 127–8, 328Chaourse (Aisne) Hoard, 126 Fortuna figurine from, 126–7, 127clay ovens, 325–6 2006 excavations, view of, 185 contexts [315] and [350], finds from, 165 finds from, 163–8 oven [121]/[136], and finds from, 173 oven [139]/[523], and finds from, 164, 165, 167–8, 198, 199 oven [351], and finds from, 165, 166 oven [353]/[554], and finds from, 165, 167 oven [534], and finds from, 168 oven [535], and finds from, 168–9, 169 oven [551]/[609], and finds from, 164–5, 182 oven [599] and platform [529], and finds from, 164, 168, 173, 176, 182, 325 oven base [546], and finds from, 197, 197 oven relationships, 168 Phase 1 (late 1st century ad–ad 70), 162, 163 Phase 2 (mid 1st century–late 2nd century ad), 163–5 and ritual ceremonies, 325 structured placed deposits relating to, 325–6, 330Claybush Hill (Ashwell Parish), building, evidence for, 147coin finds Arbury Banks, hoard from, 147, 232–3 Ashwell parish hoards, 232–3, 233 Baldock finds, comparison with, 228–9 British means, comparison with, 230, 231 coin loss, patterns of, 229 coin numbers, catalogue of, 236–43 contexts of finds, and date of latest coin, 231, 234–5 dating analysis and ‘Reece periods’, 229, 230, 232, 233 excavated finds, and comparative sites, 232, 244–54 folded coin finds, 323–24 Harlow temple site, comparison with, 228–9, 231 Hertfordshire means, comparison with, 230, 232 hoards, 148, 232–3 introduction and overview, 212, 227 Iron Age, 172, 212, 213, 227–8, 228, 230, 231, 244–50, 255, 255–9 metal detecting finds, 227, 231–2 Phase 3 (mid 1st century–late 2nd century ad), 172 pierced coins, 231 placed deposits of, 229–31 Portable Antiquities Scheme, recorded finds (Iron Age), 255–9 Portable Antiquities Scheme, recorded finds (Roman), 259–60 Robertson’s coin corpus (2000), 232–3 Roman, 213, 227, 229–31, 230, 231, 250–4, 259–60 and structured placed deposits, 328, 330 summary by issuer (Iron Age), 227–9, 228 summary by issuer (Roman), 229–31, 229 Treasure finds, 229–31comparable finds, 4, 121–42 Barkway hoard, 121–2, 121 Stony Stratford hoard, 122–4conservation A1 silver-gilt figurine, 6–7, 7

metal detecting finds, 145, 146, 150, 214–15, 215 as ritual site, 321Greener, Peter, iv, 5gullies [114]/[342], and finds from, 177, 179 [138]/[629], and finds from, 176, 180 [387], and finds from, 172, 173, 173

haematite, evidence for use of, 9Hagenbach (Germany) hoard, 137hair pin finds bone finds, 280–1 catalogue of finds, 279, 280–1 copper-alloy finds, 279, 280Harpocrates figurine (London), 126Heddernheim (Germany) plaques, 138, 138Heritage Network, The, iv, v, 3, 145, 157Hexham (Northumberland), plaque from, 139–40, 140Higham, Richard, 149 Pricem’s Field, dig at, 150, 150Highley Hill (Ashwell Parish), 146Hillelson, David, iv, 3, 145, 157Hinxworth (parish of ) Ashwell End (Ashwell Parish), comparison with, 335–7 building, evidence for, 147–8 Clacketts Field, 336 coin finds, 336 figurine from, 128, 128, 336–7, 337 hoard from, 324 marble statue (Venus-like), find from, 336, 336 ritual site at? 324 temple sites, view of and finds from, 335–6, 336 Waller Field, 336Historic Environment Record (HER), 146hoard (see also individual object finds) 125 Barkway hoard, comparison with plaques from, 25, 27 British Museum, arrival at, 145 comparative finds, 4, 121–42 composition of, 18 conservation of, 2, 5 contextual evidence, 3, 6 date, 140 deposition of, 29–30 discovery of, v–viii, 1–3, 29, 145, 200, 202 display of (British Museum), 5 excavation project, 4 figurine, and comparable finds, 18–20, 19–20, 126–30 find-spot, and discovery of, v–viii, 1–3, 29, 145, 200, 202 inscriptions, decipherment of and votive dedications, 3–4, 27 inventory and initial examination of, 3 jewellery, and comparable finds, 20–2, 130–2, 21, 130 media coverage of, 5 nature of deposit, 3 overview of, 125–6, 145 plaques, and comparable finds, 22–7, 132–40, 132–3 post-conservation, 19 pre-deposition, assemblage of, 27–9 radiographical examination of, 3 replica of, 5

Phase 5 (end of 2nd century ad–3rd century ad), 180–9, 181 Phase 6 (3rd century ad), 189–200, 190 Phase 7 (later 3rd and 4th centuries ad), 200–1, 200 Phase 8 (Post-Roman-Post Medieval), 201–3 phasing and dating of contexts, 158–9, 205–11 pottery finds, 161, 216–21 prehistoric objects, catalogue of finds, 300–9, 301–8 preliminary investigations, 143–6 previous finds from site, 145–8, 150–1 sequence of and methodology, 157–8, 159 small finds, overview of, 212–16, 213 surface field surveys, 145, 154–6 toilet implements, catalogue of finds, 280, 281–2 tools and utensils, catalogue of finds, 290–2, 290–1 trench locations (2003–6), 158 votive leaf plaques, catalogue of finds, 261–2, 261, 262 weaponry and military equipment, catalogue of finds, 285–90 writing implements, catalogue of finds, 281, 282

Felmingham Hall hoard, 97, 98, 123, 123figurines and figural objects from the excavations (see also individual objects), 267, 268, 269–72 Apollo figurine, 262–3, 263 bull appliqué, 266, 267 comic figurine, 264–5, 265 excavation finds, catalogue of, 262–72 face mask, pottery, 267, 268–9 fragments of, finds, 265 Mercury figurine, 263–4, 263 pedestals for, 265–6, 266 phallic mount, 266, 267 Silenus mounts, 266–7, 266 statuary, marble fragments, 266 Venus figurines, 264, 264Fitzpatrick-Matthews, Keith, 157, 321Fortuna 126–8, 127, 328

geophysical survey, 340–1 Ashwell End, results from, 151–4, 151 buildings, evidence for, 324 Great Buttway Field, results from, 151–2, 322 Pricem’s Field, results from, 154, 322 results from, 324 ‘Sensing the Iron Age and Roman Past: Geophysics and the Landscape of Hertfordshire’, 154GeoQuest Associates, 145Germisara (Dacia), finds from, 134 plaques from, 134glass finds beads, catalogue of finds, 299 bottles, catalogue of finds, 298–9 catalogue of finds, 296–300, 298 cups and bowls, catalogue of finds, 296–8, 298 flasks and jugs, catalogue of finds, 298–9, 298 post-medieval/modern fragments, catalogue of finds, 299–300 window glass, catalogue of finds, 299Great Buttway Field geophysical survey, 151–5, 322

Index | 357

358 | Dea Senuna

SS6a plaque, 84, 118–19 SS10 plaque fragment, 87, 119 SS51 plaque fragment, 95, 119–20 SS72 plaque fragment, 96–7, 120 SS75 plaque, 97, 120 Stony Stratford hoard, 118–20 Torksey (Lincolnshire), figurine, 129 votive dedications, 18, 23, 24, 27, 28–9, 33, 49, 57, 111, 133, 135 votive formulae, and variations of, 135 votive plaques, summary of, 111 X-radiography, and epigraphic study, 3–4, 10intaglio (A7 gold clasp brooch), 12, 12, 21 comparable finds, 21, 22 design and manufacture of, 21–2, 38 lion imagery, 21–2

Kirby’s Manor Farm, shrine site (?), 325Künzl, Ernst, 132

Late Bronze Age–Iron Age period Arbury Banks (hill fort at), 146–7 finds from, 146–7 pottery finds, 161, 217Late Iron Age and Roman period, 147 buildings, evidence for, 147–8 cemetery sites, evidence for, 148 coin finds, 147 finds from, 147Late pre-Roman Iron Age period, pottery finds, 217–18, 226Lewis, David, 149, 150Lockyear, Kris, 154, 321Lyon/Vaise (Rhône) treasure, 126 pedestal find from, 127 statuettes from, 126–7Lysons, Samuel, 63 Stony Stratford hoard, description of, 74, 122

Mars, depictions of A25 silver votive plaque, 25, 25, 59, 59 B1 bronze figurine, 64–7, 64, 128–9 B3 silver plaque, 68, 69, 116 B4 silver-gilt plaque, 69, 69 B5 silver plaque, 70, 70 B6 silver plaque, 71, 71 B7 silver plaque, 72 Barkway hoard, 122 and inscriptions, 116, 117, 120 SS1 plaque, 81 SS2 plaque, 82 SS7 plaque, 85 Torksey (Lincolnshire), figurine, 129, 129Mars Cocidius, 136, 136Mars Nodons figurine (Cockersand Moss), 126Mauer an der Url (Austria) hoard, 137–8Meek, Alan, iii, 1, vii discovery of hoard, 145Mercury, depictions of A27 silver votive plaque, 25, 25, 26, 60, 61 pipeclay figurine, 263–4, 263

Rhayader jewellery hoard, comparisons with, 130, 131, 131 Senuna, identification of, 4, 5 Stony Stratford hoard, comparison with plaques from, 25, 27, 122–4 temple, find associated with, 29 textile fragments, remains of, 16, 16 Treasure process, 3, 4 votive nature of, 28 X-radiography of, 4, 10, 10, 11, 12Hobbs, Richard, 129Hockwold cum Wilton, head-dress from, 124, 124

Icknield Way, 147 origin of, 148 and Roman road network, 148inscriptions A1a silver figurine pedestal, 18, 33, 111, 157 A8 gold votive plaque, 10, 23, 40–1, 111–12 A9 gold votive plaque, 23, 41, 112 A11 gold votive plaque, 23, 43, 112–13 A12 gold votive plaque, 23, 44, 113 A14 gold votive plaque, 23, 46–7, 113 A16 silver votive plaque, 27, 49, 113–14 A17 silver votive plaque, 27, 50, 114 A21 silver votive plaque, 27, 55, 114–15 A23 silver votive plaque, 27, 57, 115 A24 silver votive plaque, 27, 57, 115 abbreviations of epigraphical corpora, 110 Ashwell hoard, 111–16 B3 silver plaque, 69, 116 B4 silver-gilt plaque, 70, 117 B8 silver plaque, 72–3, 117 Barkway hoard, 116–17 Bell (.) Memorianus (A14 gold plaque), votary dedication, 23, 46, 113, 133 Cariatia Ressa (A9 gold plaque), votary dedication, 23, 41, 112, 133 Claudius Celsus (A8 gold plaque), votary dedication, 23, 40–1, 111, 112, 133 Firmanus (A24 silver plaque), votary dedication, 57, 115 Flavia Cunoris (A1a figurine pedestal), votary dedication, 18, 20, 20, 33, 111, 127 form of, 28 Germisara plaques, votive dedications, 134 importance of, 110 lamella, use of term, 113, 135 Lucilia Sena (A16 silver plaque), votary dedication, 49, 113–14, 135 Lucius L(.) Herbonianus (A17 silver plaque), votary dedication, 50, 114, 133 Mars, depictions of, 116, 117, 120 Nerus (A11 gold plaque), votary dedication, 23, 43, 112–13 overview and methodology, 110 plaques, variations of, 134–5 production of, 13 Quintianus (A12 gold plaque), votary dedication, 23, 44, 113 Senuna, use of name, 23, 27, 40, 43, 55, 57, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 135 Servandus son of Hispanus (A21 silver plaque), votary dedication, 55, 114–15, 133

Neolithic and Early Bronze Age period, activity, 146Noel, Mark, 145 geophysical survey, carried out by, 151–4North Hertfordshire Archaeological Society, v, 145North Hertfordshire Museums, Resource Centre (Hitchin), 1North Herts Charity Detector Group, iv, vii, 1, 143–5 coin finds, 227

Peachey, Henry John (3rd Baron Selsey), 63Peachey, John (2nd Baron Selsey), 63personalia bracelets, catalogue of finds, 273, 273 brooches, catalogue of finds, 273–8, 273–8, 283 counters, catalogue of finds, 282–3 finger rings and rings, catalogue of finds, 278–9, 278, 284 hair pins, catalogue of finds, 279, 280–1, 284 needles, catalogue of finds, 281 toilet implements, catalogue of finds, 280, 281–2, 284 writing implements, catalogue of finds, 281, 282Pessinus, plaques from, 133, 133Petters Sports Field (Surrey), Late Bronze Age hoard from, 312Phase 0 (Bronze Age–Late Iron Age) Bronze Age metalwork finds, 159–61 pottery finds, 161 ritual deposits, 161Phase 1 (late 1st century ad–ad 70), 162–3 [633], path-trackway, 161 animal bone finds, 163 ceremonial hollow, 162, 162, 163 clay ovens, 162, 163 finds from, 162–3 key contexts, 162Phase 2 (mid 1st century–late 2nd century ad), 163–71 animal bone finds, 170–1 clay ovens, and continued use of, 163–9, 165, 166, 167–8, 169 finds from, 163–71 key contexts, 164 pit [617], and finds from, 170, 170 pit [623], and finds from, 170, 170 soil accumulations, and finds in, 169–70Phase 3 (mid 1st century–late 2nd century), 171–5, 172 animal bone finds, 175 coin finds, 172 context [308], and finds from, 172–3 context [369], and finds from, 173 context [394], and finds from, 173 context [397], and finds from, 173 context [607], and finds from, 175, 175 finds from, 171–5 gully [387], and finds from, 172, 173, 173 key contexts, 171 oven [121]/[136], and finds from, 173 oven [139]/[523], and finds from, 173 oven [599] and platform [529], and finds from, 173 pit [618], and finds from, 174–5, 175 soil accumulations, and finds in, 171–3, 173

metal detecting finds, 150–1, 161–2, 324 1986–2006, 150–1 coin finds, 200, 201, 231–2 overview of, 214–15 post-Roman finds, 203 pre-excavation finds, 215metalwork finds see also individual object finds bracelet finds, copper-alloy, 273, 273 Bronze Age, 159–61, 300–13, 302, 303, 308 brooches, catalogue of finds, 273–8, 273–8, 283 bull appliqué, copper-alloy, 266, 267 dirk, daggers, knives, catalogue of finds, 304–5, 304, 308, 311 ferrules, catalogue of finds, 304, 304, 308, 310–11 figural objects, catalogue of finds, 268, 269 figured appliqué, copper-alloy, 266, 267–8 finger rings and rings, catalogue of finds, 278–9, 278, 284 flanged axes, catalogue of finds, 300, 302, 308, 309 hair pins, catalogue of finds, 279, 280, 284 hinges, catalogue of finds, 292–3, 293 mail fragments, finds of, 328 needles, catalogue of finds, 281 other objects, 292–6, 293–5 overview of, 214 phallic mount, 266, 267 Silenus mounts, copper-alloy, 266–7, 266 socketed axes, catalogue of finds, 305–6, 305, 311–12 spearheads, catalogue of finds, 300–4, 303, 308, 309–10, 310, 311, 312 swords, catalogue of finds, 305, 306, 311 toilet implements, catalogue of finds, 280, 281–2, 284 tools and utensils, catalogue of finds, 290–2, 290–1 weaponry and military equipment, catalogue of finds, 214, 285–90, 285–9 winged axe, catalogue of find, 305, 306 writing implements, catalogue of finds, 281, 282Middle Iron Age–Late Iron Age period [633], path/trackway, 161, 162 pottery finds, 161Minerva, depictions of A8 gold votive plaque, 22, 23, 39, 40 A9 gold votive plaque, 22, 40, 41 A11 gold votive plaque, 22, 42, 43 A12 gold votive plaque, 22, 43, 44 A14 gold votive plaque, 22, 46, 46 A15 silver votive plaque, 25, 47–8, 47 A16 silver votive plaque, 23, 25, 48, 49 A17 silver votive plaque, 25, 25, 49, 50 A19 silver-gilt votive plaque, 25, 25, 52 A20 silver votive plaque, 25, 25, 26, 53–4, 53 A21 silver votive plaque, 25, 26, 54, 55 A24 silver votive plaque, 25, 25, 57, 58 Senuna, identification with, 116, 128, 140, 324, 330, 337, 337, 340 and uses of image, 140, 141Mob’s Hole (Ashwell Parish) bridle cheekpiece find from, 147, 324–5 finds from, 324–5 stone-axe heads, finds from, 146Morris, Dr John, 148, 150 Ashwell End fieldwork, records of, 148–9, 149

Index | 359

360 | Dea Senuna

metal detecting, finds (post-Roman), 203 posthole [316], and finds from, 202 soil accumulations and surfaces, and finds from, 201–2Phase 9 (modern ploughing), 203–4 finds from, 203–4Phillips, Andrew, iv, 143pipeclay finds Apollo figurine, 212, 262–3, 263 comic figurine, 264–5, 265, 266, 328–9 figural objects, catalogue of finds, 267, 268, 269–72 figurines, 212 Mercury figurine, 212, 263–4, 263 pedestals for figurines, 265–6, 266 Venus figurines, 212, 264, 264pits [617], and finds from, 170, 170, 332 [618], and finds from, 174–5, 175, 332–3 [632], and finds from, 189–91, 191 Phase 6 (3rd century ad), small pits, 197, 198 scoop [127], and finds from, 192, 192plaques see also individual object finds Ashwell hoard, 132–3, 133 Bewcastle, Mars Cocidius plaques, 136–7, 136 Brumath Hoard, 138 ‘Christianization’ of (Water Newton Treasure), 139 comparable finds, 132–40 dating of, 140 die use and die-linkages, plaque design and manufacture, 136, 139 and divine imagery, 135–6 excavation finds, catalogue of votive leaf plaques, 261–2, 261, 262 figured decoration, 136 function of, 133 Germisara (Dacia), finds from, 134 Godmanchester, finds from, 137 Hagenbach (Germany), finds from, 137 Heddernheim (Germany), finds from, 138, 138 Hexham, find from, 139–40, 140 leaf design, 132–3, 139 manufacturing techniques, 137 Mauer an der Url (Austria), finds from, 137–8 military connections, 136 Moorgate Street (London), plaque from, 137 overview of, 214 Pessinus, finds from, 133, 133 Stonea, finds from, 134 Thun-Allmendingen, finds from, 134 Tres Matres, depictions of, 137 Vichy (France), finds from, 137 votive dedications, votary names and origins, 133, 135–6, 324 Water Newton Treasure, plaques from, 139 Weissenburg Hoard, 138–9 Pliny the Younger, Letters 8.8, 142Portable Antiquities Scheme Iron Age coin finds, database of, 255–9 Roman coin finds, database of, 259–60post-medieval finds, 313 horseshoe, 313, 313

Phase 4 (mid/late 1st century–late 2nd/3rd century ad), 176–80 animal bone finds, 180 building [102]/[334], and finds from, 176–7, 178–9 context [335], and finds from, 177 context [370], and finds from, 180, 180 gully [114]/[342], and finds from, 177, 179 gully [138]/[629], and finds from, 176 key contexts, 176 oven [599] and platform [529], and finds from, 176 soil accumulations and surfaces, and finds from, 176, 177–80, 177Phase 5 (end of 2nd century ad–3rd century ad), 180–9 animal bone finds, 189 Bronze Age copper-alloy finds, 187 building [389]/[556], and finds from, 180–2, 183–4 context [350], and finds from, 165, 185 context [366], and finds from, 186 context [570], and finds from, 180, 183 gully [138]/[629], and finds from, 180, 181–2 key contexts, 181 oven [551]/[609], and finds from, 182 oven [599] and platform [529], and finds from, 182 soil accumulations and surfaces, and finds from, 182–6, 185, 186, 188–9, 189 structured placed and ritual deposits, finds, 186–7Phase 6 context [315], and finds from, 165 context [350], and finds from, 165Phase 6 (3rd century ad), 189–200 2003 excavations, view of, 190 animal bone finds, 191–2, 198–200 footway? [640], and finds from, 189 key contexts, 199 oven [139]/[523], and finds from, 198, 199 oven base [546], and finds from, 197, 197 pig deposit [126], in scoop [127], and other finds from, 192, 192 pig deposit [311], and other finds from, 192–5, 193 pig deposit [516], and other finds from, 194, 195 pig deposit [538], and other finds from, 194, 195–6, 195 pig deposit [592], and other finds from, 196 pig deposits [579] & [580], and other finds from, 196, 196 pit [632], and finds from, 189–91, 191 scoop [127], and finds from, 192 small pits, and finds from, 197, 198 soil accumulations and surfaces, and finds from, 189, 192, 195, 196–7, 198, 198 structured placed deposit [506], and finds from, 198, 199, 333Phase 7 (later 3rd and 4th centuries ad), 200–1 animal bone finds, 201 finds from, 200–1 key contexts, 200 road surface contexts, relationships, 201, 333 soil accumulations and surfaces, and finds from, 200–1Phase 8 (post-Roman–post-Medieval), 201–3 animal bone finds, 203 finds from, 201–2 linear cut [625], and finds from, 202, 203

Stony Stratford hoard, illustrations of, 74, 75, 76–81, 118–19Rhayader jewellery hoard, 130, 131, 131Rhee, River, 5, 143 sacred spring site (?), 140, 321Rigby Archive Database of Stamps on Coarse Wares, 224ritual deposits, 339 folded coin finds, 323–4 miniaturized votive offerings, 312 Phase 5 (end of 2nd century ad–3rd century ad), 187–8 and ritual/shrine sites, 324, 325 and structured placed deposits, 186–7, 188, 310ritual feasting, 338–9 alcohol consumption, evidence for, 326 animal bone finds, evidence for, 316–17 burning of materials, 216 clay ovens/platform, placed deposits relating to, 325–6 evidence for, 321 overview of, 216 pit [632], midden deposits and ritual feasting, 189–91, 191 prehistoric midden sites, 338–9road surface, 333–4 context numbers and relationships, 201 and religious significance of road, 333Roma, possible depictions of, 25, 26–7, 26, 51, 51Roman period (mid–1st ad to mid/later 2nd century ad), pottery finds, 218–21, 226

Senuna A1a silver figurine pedestal, inscription on, 20, 20, 33, 111 A8 gold votive plaque, inscription on, 40–1, 111 A11 gold votive plaque, inscription on, 23, 43, 112–13 A14 gold votive plaque, inscription on, 23, 46, 113 A17 silver votive plaque, inscription on, 50, 114 A21 silver votive plaque, inscription on, 55, 114 A24 silver votive plaque, inscription on, 57, 115 Dea Senuna, shrine of, 140–2 depictions of, 128 and her votaries, 115–16, 141 identification of, 4, 5, 340 inscriptions of name, 10, 23, 135 Minerva, identification with, 116, 128, 140, 324, 340 origin of, 115–16, 135, 141 rituals and traditions associated with, 339 sacred spring site (?), 141–2 shrine of, 28 use of name in other contexts, 115, 135, 135settlement, evidence for, 146, 334–5 related finds, 334–5Sheldrick, Albert, 149, 232Sheppard, Gurney, iv, 4, 145, 149Sheppard, Sam, iv, 4, 157Silenus 212, 214, 216, 265–7, 266, 329Sites and Monuments Record (SMR) see Historic Environment Record (HER)Smirke, Richard, 74, 340 Barkway hoard, illustrations of, 64, 64, 65, 66 Stony Stratford hoard, illustrations of, 75, 76–81, 118–19SS1 plaque, 25, 82 catalogue description of, 81–2 manufacture of, 25

potters’ stamps, 225 coarse wares, 224–6, 226 mortarium stamps, 226–7, 226 stamps, and form, fabric and source, 224–5pottery finds amphorae, 217 coarse wares, 217–18, 226 Continental fine wares, 218 counters (pottery), catalogue of finds, 281, 282–3 dating of finds, 222 deposition, breakage and abrasion, 216, 223 Early Iron Age–Middle Iron Age period, 161 economy, local and regional, 222 face mask, 267, 268–9 figural objects, catalogue of finds, 268, 269–72 fragmentary nature of finds, 216, 223 function of, 223 Gallo-Belgic pottery finds, 217 introduction and methodology, 216–17 Iron Age coarse wares, 217–18, 226 Late Bronze Age–Iron Age period, 161, 217 Late pre-Roman Iron Age period, 217, 226 Middle Iron Age–Late Iron Age period, 161 mortarium, and stamps, 226–7, 226 Neolithic and Early Bronze Age period, 146 potters’ stamps, 224–7, 225, 226 Roman (3rd–4th century ad), 221 Roman (mid–1st ad to mid/later 2nd century ad), 218–21 Romano-British coarse wares, 219–20, 221, 226 Romano-British fine wares, 218–19, 221, 226 samian ware, and stamps, 218, 222, 225, 226, 227 status of, 222–3 unsourced coarse wares, 219–20, 221prehistoric objects (catalogue of finds), 300–9, 301–8 axe fragments (miscellaneous), 309 axe-chisel, 300, 302, 308 Bronze Age metalwork finds, 300–4, 302, 303, 308 casting waste and ingot material, 307–9, 307 craftwork and wood tools, 306–7, 306 dirk, daggers, knives, 304–5, 304, 308, 311 ferrules, 304, 304, 308, 310–11 flanged axes, 300, 302, 308, 309 flint finds, 300, 301 pottery finds, 300 socketed axes, 305–6, 305, 311–12 socketed implement fragments, 307, 307 spearheads, 300–4, 303, 308, 309–10, 310, 311, 312 swords, catalogue of finds, 305, 306, 311 winged axe, catalogue of find, 305, 306Pricem’s Field (Ashwell End) aerial photograph of site, 323 basilical building, possible evidence for, 323 building, evidence for, 147 fieldwalking survey, 156 fieldwork at, 149–50, 149, 150 finds from, 150, 155 geophysical survey, 154, 322

Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae (Lysons, Samuel), 63, 74, 340 Barkway hoard, illustrations of, 64, 65, 66

Index | 361

362 | Dea Senuna

SS29 plaque fragment, 92, 93SS30 plaque, 92, 92 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS31 plaque fragment, 92–3, 93SS32 plaque fragment, 91, 93 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS33 plaque fragment, 88, 93 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS34 plaque fragment, 91, 93 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS35 plaque fragment, 88, 93SS36 plaque, 92, 93 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS37 plaque fragment, 90, 93–4 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS38 plaque, 94, 94 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS39 plaque fragment, 93, 94SS40 plaque fragment, 82, 94 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS41 plaque fragment, 92, 94 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS42–SS50 plaque fragments, 93, 94–5SS51 plaque fragment, 95, 95 inscription on, 95, 119–20 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS52–SS54, plaque fragment, catalogue descriptions of, 95SS55–SS71, 88, 89, 95–6, 95 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS72 plaque fragment, 97 inscription on, 120 Stony Stratford hoard, 96–7SS73–SS74 plaque fragments, catalogue descriptions of, 97SS75 plaque, 97 catalogue description of, 97 inscription on, 97, 120 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS76 bell, 98, 98 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 78SS77 rattle plate & attachment, 98, 98–9 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 77SS78 rattle plate & attachment, 98, 98–9 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 77SS79 rattle plate & attachment, 98, 99–100 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 77SS80 rattle plate & attachment, 98–9, 99–100 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 77SS81 rattle plate & attachment, 98–9, 99 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 77SS82 rattle plate & attachment, 98–9, 99 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 77SS83 applied strip, 99, 100 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS84 applied strip, 99–100, 100SS85–86 ?handles, 100, 101 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 78SS87 ?handle cap, 100–1, 101SS88–91 plates and edging strip, 101, 101 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 78SS92 copper-alloy attachment, 101

Mars, depiction of, 81 Victory, depiction of, 81–2SS2 plaque, 83 catalogue description of, 82–3 Mars, depiction of, 82SS3–SS5, plaques, 83 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS6a plaque, 29, 84 catalogue description of, 83–4 inscription on, 84, 84, 118–19, Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS6b plaque, 84–5, 85SS7 plaque, 25, 81, 86 catalogue description of, 85–6 design of, 85–6 Mars, depiction of, 85 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS8 plaque, 25, 81, 87 Apollo, depiction of, 86–7 catalogue description of, 86–7 design of, 86–7 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS9 plaque fragment, 82SS10 plaque fragment, 87 catalogue description of, 87–8 inscription on, 87, 119SS11 plaque fragment, 86, 88SS12 plaque fragment, 82, 88SS13 plaque fragment, 88, 88, Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS14 plaque, 88, 89 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS15 plaque fragment, 88–9, 88 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS16 plaque fragment, 89, 89 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS17 plaque, 89, 92 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS18 plaque fragment, 89, 90 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS19 plaque fragment, 89–90, 89 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS20 plaque fragment, 90, 90 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS21 plaque fragment, 89, 90 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS22 plaque fragment, 89, 90 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS23 plaque fragment, 89, 90 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS24 plaque, 91, 91 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS25 plaque, 90, 91 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS26 plaque, 91 catalogue description of, 91 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS27 plaque fragment, 90, 91–2 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 79SS28 plaque fragment, 92, 92

Index | 363

depositional practices and ritual destruction of objects, 310 mail fragments, finds of, 285, 285, 286 nature of deposits, 309 overview of, 214, 216 oyster shell finds, perforated, 295, 296, 330–1 Phase 5 (end of 2nd century ad–3rd century ad), 186–7, 188 pig deposit [126], in scoop [127], 192, 192, 332 pig deposit [311], and other finds from, 192–5, 193 pig deposit [516], and other finds from, 194, 195 pig deposit [538], and other finds from, 194, 195–6, 195 pig deposit [592], and other finds from, 196 pig deposits [579] & [580], and other finds from, 196, 196 pipeclay finds, 328–9 pit [210]/deposit [203], 328–9 placed hoard [639], 330 and pre-deposition modification, 216 soil [506], finds, 198, 199, 333 Treasure finds, 229–31

textile fragments, 16 A23 silver votive plaque, 16 A28 silver votive plaque, 16Thomas, E.G., 3Thun-Allmendingen (finds from), gold leaf plaque, 134toilet implements, catalogue of finds, 280, 281–2, 284tools and utensils (catalogue of finds), 29–91, 290–2 bobbins?, 291, 292 hone, 290, 291 knives, 290, 290 pin beater?, 291, 292 spindle whorls, 291–2, 291 weight and scale-beam terminal?, 290, 291Torksey (Lincolnshire), figurine, 129, 129Townley Group (British Museum), 157Treasure process, 3 coin finds, 229–31 coroner, notification of, 3 Coroner’s inquest, and Treasure declaration, 4 placed deposits, 230 Treasure Valuation Committee, 4Tunshill Farm figurine (arm of ), 126, 127

Venus (and depictions of ), figurines, 212, 264, 264, 336, 336Via Laurentina (at Vallerano), clasp-brooch find, 131Vichy (France), plaques from, 137Victory, depictions of A13 gold votive plaque, 22, 23, 24, 45 SS1 plaque, 81–82 Tunshill Farm figurine (arm of ), and depiction of, 126Vulcan, depictions of B8 silver plaque, 72, 72, 117 B9 slver plaque, 73, 73 Barkway hoard, 122 SS6a plaque, 84, 118–19, 118, 122

Water Newton Treasure, 139, 139weaponry and military equipment, catalogue of finds, 285–90

SS93 head-dress, 103, 123 catalogue description of, 102 design and manufacture of, 102 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 75SS94 chain, catalogue description of, 102SS95 head-dress & regalia, 103, 123 catalogue description of, 102–4 design and manufacture of, 102–4 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 76SS96 regalia, 104, 105–6 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 76SS97 applied sheet, 106, 106 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 80SS98 head-dress and regalia, 106–7, 107 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 76SS99–100 head-dress and regalia, 107–8, 108 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 78SS101–SS102 disc mounts, 108, 108SS103 brooch, 108, 109 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 81SS104 brooch, 108, 109 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 81SS105 brooch, 109, 109 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 81Stevenage Archaeology Group, v, 145stone tools, finds Neolithic and Early Bronze Age period, 146, 300, 301, 308 Westbury Farm, finds from, 146Stonea (finds from), gold leaf plaque, 134, 134Stony Stratford hoard, 88, 340; see also individual SS object finds alloys from, 81 analytical results, 81, 122 Ashwell hoard, comparisons with plaques from, 25, 27, 122–4 British Museum, acquisition of, 74 ceremonial utensils, 77–8, 97–8, 98–101, 123–4 contextual evidence, 122 discovery of, 4, 74, 122 inscriptions, 118–20 Mars, depictions of, 81 overview of, 75, 122 plaques from, 9, 28–9, 75, 79–80, 81 priestly regalia, 75, 101–2, 103, 105–6, 107, 108, 109, 123 Reliquiae Britannico-Romanae, illustrations of, 75, 76–81, 118–19 Roman settlement, evidence for, 122 Victory, depictions of, 81–2 XRF, analytical data from, 75structured placed deposits, 327, 32, 341 animal bone finds, 330–2 armilla-type bracelet, and catalogue of find, 288–9, 288, 289, 329 articulated pig skeletons, 319–20, 332 Baldock F95 and F106, finds from, 328 clay ovens, deposits relating to, 325–6, 330 coin finds, 229–31, 328, 330, 332 comic figurine, deposit of, 264–5, 265, 266, 328–9 deposit [206], 330 deposit [635], 329

364 | Dea Senuna

A12 gold votive plaque, 23 A13 gold votive plaque, 24 A21 silver votive plaque, 4 A24 silver votive plaque, 10, 10 and element analysis, 10 epigraphic study, 10 methods, 17n1X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF) A1 silver-gilt figurine, 10–11, 31 A1a silver figurine pedestal, 11, 33 A2–A3 silver-gilt arms, 11, 34 A5 gold brooch, 12–13, 15–16, 36 A6 gold neck ornament, 12–13, 15–16, 37 A7 gold clasp-brooch, 12–13, 39 A8 gold votive plaque, 14, 15, 41 A9 gold votive plaque, 14, 15, 41 A10 gold votive plaque, 14, 15, 42 A11 gold votive plaque, 14, 15, 43 A12 gold votive plaque, 14, 15, 44 A13 gold votive plaque, 14, 15, 45 A14 gold votive plaque, 14, 15, 47 A16 silver votive plaque, 14–15, 49 A17 silver votive plaque, 14–15, 50 A19 silver-gilt votive plaque, 14–15, 53 A20 silver votive plaque, 14–15, 54 A21 silver votive plaque, 14–15, 55 A23 silver votive plaque, 14–15, 57 methods, 17n2, 17n3 Stony Stratford hoard, 75

armilla-type bracelet, 288–9, 288, 289, 329 arrowhead, 286, 288, 289 bindings, 286 buckles and belt fittings, 288 dagger blade and sheath, 286–7, 287 mail fragments, 285, 285, 286 mount, 288, 288 rings, 286–7 scabbard fragments and chapes, 285–6, 285 sealing?, 290 spearheads, 286, 287–8, 289 sword blade, 286, 287, 289Weissenburg Hoard, 138–9Westbury Farm (Ashwell Parish) excavations at, 146 stone-axe heads, finds from, 146Williams, Craig, 340writing implements, catalogue of finds, 281, 282

X-radiography A1 silver-gilt figurine, 10–11, 11 A4 gold brooch, 10, 11–13, 11, 34 A5 gold brooch, 10, 11–13, 34 A6 gold neck ornament, 10, 10, 11–13, 11 A7 gold clasp-brooch, 11–13, 12 A8 gold votive plaque, 10, 10 A9 gold votive plaque, 10, 10 A10–A14, 10, 10 A11 gold votive plaque, 23

projects.britishmuseum.org · 2018-08-07 · dea senuna: treasure, cult and ritual at ashwell,...

Documents