Richard Hingley

Ancestors and identity in the later prehistory of Atlantic Scotland: the reuse and reinvention of Neolithic monuments and material culture

Abstract The Neolithic chambered cairns of Atlantic Scotland were monumental constructions. To an observer living in the later prehistoric period they would have seemed impressive structures, but dark, subterranean and gloomy. The human remains and cultural relics on the floors of some of these tombs, if they were visible or disturbed, would have drawn attention to their ancient construction and links with the dead. The chambers of a number of chambered cairns in Atlantic Scotland have produced later prehistoric finds. The activities that occurred within some chambered cairns at this time may have related to the value of the human remains that they contained. It is possible that these resources were being curated, removed and used and that other objects were substituted. Rather more substantial changes occurred to the structures of a number of chambered cairns when later prehistoric houses were built. In these cases later prehistoric people, by actively rebuilding the houses of the dead as the dwellings o...

Archaeologies of Landscape Excavating the Materialities of Hadrian’s Wall

This article interrogates the materiality of Hadrian’s Wall beyond its widespread perception as a monument of/to Ancient Rome. Encounters with this monument have generated multitudinous materialities: hegemonic, conflicting and ambiguous. These trajectories have their own material circulations in both solid and narrative forms. Here, we consider materiality through the cultures inspired by/of the Wall. Through the formulation of an interdisciplinary methodology and praxis, we contribute to landscape studies generally and Romano—British frontier studies in particular. Firstly, we consider the genealogies of thought through which the Wall has been created, including its definition as a contested border and its use to inform discourses of nation and empire. Secondly, the material landscapes of the Wall are considered through phenomenon and encounter informed by contemporary debates in anthropology, archaeology and cultural geography. As part of the Arts and Humanities Research Council funded Tales of the Frontier project (http:// www.dur.ac.uk/roman.centre/ hadrianswall/), the authors aim to provide an enriched account of the materialities of the Wall beyond traditional narratives generated by fieldwork and ancient historical texts.

Iron Age ‘Currency Bars’: The Archaeological and Social Context

It will be proposed that the common utilitarian or functional explanation for the deposition of currency bars is too simple and should be amended to allow greater emphasis on the social context of the acts of production and deposition. Research indicates that currency bars—both as single finds and as hoards—occur in a limited range of archaeological contexts. It would appear that the act of deposition occurred under strict control and that the majority of currency bars were deposited as part of acts of ritual. The archaeological contexts of the three major types of currency bar are considered. All three types of currency bar—spit-shaped, sword-shaped, and plough-share—occur in similar contexts. Two major types of context are identified and in turn these define at least two distinct regions in the distribution of the bars. One zone is characterized by the deposition of the bars in varying sized hoards, but almost always in close relationship to a hill-fort rampart or a settlement boundary ditch. This may r...

Not so Romanized? Tradition, reinvention or discovery in the study of Roman Britain.

Abstract Recent scholarship has claimed that the history of Roman Britain has been discussed in terms of ‘Romanization’ since the beginning of the seventeenth century. In fact, it is wrong to think that there is a single tradition in the understanding of Roman Britain. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Camden and his followers were primarily interested in the bringing of ‘civility’ to England, with only a minimal consciousness of material culture (coins, inscriptions and sites). Discussion of Roman Britain was already overshadowed by an emphasis on military identity, viewing Roman soldiers and civilian subjects as essentially separate, the latter little influenced by the former. Only in the later nineteenth century, and particularly in the work of Francis Haverfield, did an idea of cultural ‘Romanization’ find its way to the centre of scholarly discussions. Far from there being a single scholarly understanding of the history of Roman Britain, accounts have been continually rewritten to reflect the nature of the relationship between the English and their empire.

Projecting empire The mapping of Roman Britain

This article reviews the mapping of Roman Britain, from Roman antiquity to the contemporary age. By reviewing the classical mapping of the British Isles and three particular examples of cartographic representation produced during early modern and modern times, it is argued that the Roman past of Britain has been made to perform particular roles with regard to the creation of early modern and modern imperial discourse. By generating a Roman ancestry for English civilization, the evidence derived from the classical past was used to provide intellectual justification for the colonization of territories abroad, in Ireland, Scotland and the New World. Recent examples of mapping do not challenge the terms through which these ideas of imperial inheritance were defined. Alternative approaches to mapping in the future may seek to communicate different ideas about the relevance and character of Britannia.

Life of an ancient monument: Hadrian's Wall in history

The Romans are Britains favourite invaders, and Hadrians Wall is among the largest and finest of the relics they left behind on the island. However, as our authors urge, we should demand more intellectual depth from our monuments today. Not simply a cultural asset anchored in the Roman empire, Hadrians Wall had a busy afterlife, a material history reflecting the uses, attitudes and emotions of later centuries. Its ‘biography’ not only captures new information about the last two millennia, it offers a story that the modern visitor deserves to hear.

Struggling with a Roman inheritance. A response to Versluys

I am very grateful to Miguel John Versluys for this paper, which raises several important issues that derive from current debates in Roman archaeology. I am aware of the context of Versluyss arguments as I am a contributor to the forthcoming volume Globalization and the Roman world (which Versluys has jointly edited; Pitts and Versluys 2014). I am pleased to be able to develop some of the themes outlined in my chapter for that volume (Hingley 2014b) through this reflection upon Versluyss contribution to the developing debate. The issues raised by Versluys are particularly timely since a number of younger colleagues have observed that the critical focus provided by what I shall term ‘post-colonial Roman archaeologies’ (PCRAs) is stifling innovative research. PCRA is the term I use to address the body of research and publication characterized by Versluys as ‘Anglo-Saxon Roman archaeology’ (for reasons given below). I did not attend the TRAC session at Frankfurt to which Versluys refers, but I recognize his observation that there is a genuine concern about the form and content of PCRAs arising from Roman archaeologists both in Britain and overseas. PCRAs have focused around two core themes: (1) critiquing the concept of Romanization and (2) the development of new ways of approaching the Roman Empire. Versluys suggests that this discussion has culminated in ‘an uncomfortable ending’ (p. 1) for the Romanization debate and his proposal includes the reintroduction of this concept. Taking a rather different perspective, I shall propose that a dynamic and transformative agenda is spreading across several continents and that PCRAs form an important aspect of this developing perspective.

Alexander Smith, Martyn Allen, Tom Brindle & Mike Fulford. The rural settlement of Roman Britain (Britannia Monograph 29). 2016. xxv+469 pages, 400 colour illustrations. London: The Roman Society; 978-0-907764-43-4 paperback £40.

One of the strengths of this report is the combined analysis of vessel glass and small finds, which allows for a more nuanced reading of the material culture. Furthermore, some important and intriguing topics are considered within this volume, such as the debate surrounding whether rubbish was brought back into the city to use for fill levels. This is a point of discussion that surfaces repeatedly and Cool offers some valuable contributions to the debate.

Constructing the nation and empire : Victorian and Edwardian images of the building of Roman fortifications.

This paper explores four images that date to the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that show building operations in Roman Britain. These include two paintings, an engraving and a book illustration. The images show scenes derived from the Roman northern frontiers in Britain and also the building of the Roman fort at Manchester. A series of human characters included in these scenes provide insight into the ways that the Roman past was envisaged in Victorian and Edwardian Britain. This paper seeks to relate these images of ancient scenes of building to the concerns of contemporary communities about national identity and the imperial role of Britain at a time of heightening international insecurity. It is clear that Romans and ancient Britons represented powerful ancestor figures and the images show a variety of ways in which the past was received and communicated.

The Frontiers of the Roman Empire World Heritage Site and Transnational Heritage

This chapter provides an initial assessment of current discussions about the Frontiers of the Roman Empire (FRE). It addresses the variable regional response to the idea of the incorporation of Roman frontier structures into this transnational World Heritage Site (WHS). It addresses the genealogy of the idea of classical Rome, exploring how this image was appropriated by the “West” in colonial times along with the potential difficulties this creates with the image of Rome in certain areas that rim the Mediterranean. It addresses the ways that the Roman frontier is drawn upon in heritage discourse as an inclusive structure, an idea that draws upon the culturally inclusive nature of the Roman Empire. It also explores the potentially divisive nature of the FRE as landscapes built to control and limit access into a former empire, assessing the ways that this function reflects current EU frontier policy. This chapter forms part of a provisional attempt to commence a discussion of the range of values of Roman frontier heritage at a variety of local, national and global scales throughout the lands that once formed the periphery of the Roman Empire.