Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T17:38:07.666Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Archaeobotany of Roman Britain: Current State and Identification of Research Priorities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2010

Marijke van der Veen ,
Alexandra Livarda  and
Alistair Hill
Marijke van der Veen
Affiliation:
School of Archaeology & Ancient History, University of Leicester, mvdv1@leicester.ac.uk
Alexandra Livarda
Affiliation:
School of Archaeology & Ancient History, University of Leicester, mvdv1@leicester.ac.uk
Alistair Hill
Affiliation:
School of Archaeology & Ancient History, University of Leicester, mvdv1@leicester.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The archaeobotanical record of Britain in the Roman period is reviewed. The data are plotted against area of the country, phase of occupation, type of site, and mode of preservation. Lacunae in the dataset are identified and research priorities formulated. More data are needed, especially from South-Western and North-Western England, Wales and Scotland, from major towns (especially from waterlogged deposits), from rural sites with waterlogged preservation (all parts of the country), and from burials and temple/shrine sites. Matters of concern are the identification of a downward trend in the average number of samples analysed from the 1990s onwards, and poor access to unpublished archaeobotanical reports (grey literature). Possible solutions to redress these are offered.

Keywords

Roman Britainarchaeobotanyplant remainsagriculturehorticulturesamplingresearch priorities
Type
Articles
Information
Britannia , Volume 38 , November 2007 , pp. 181 - 210
Copyright
Copyright © Marijke van der Veen, Alexandra Livarda and Alistair Hill 2007. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bakels, C., and Jacomet, S. 2003: ‘Access to luxury foods in Central Europe during the Roman period: the archaeobotanical evidence’, World Archaeology 34(3), 57–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackburn, K. 1951: ‘Appendix I. Report upon the natural pine-cones from the temple of Mithras at Carrawburgh’, in Richmond, I.A. and Gillam, J.P., ‘The temple of Mithras at Carrawburgh’, Arch. Ael. 4 29, 92–92 (at 86)Google Scholar
Bouby, L., and Marinval, P. 2004: ‘fruits and seeds from Roman cremations in Limagne (Massif Central) and the spatial variability of plant offerings in france’, Journal of Archaeological Science 31(1), 86–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charles, M., Colledge, S., and Monk, M. 1997: ‘Appendix 6: plant remains’, in Barker, P., White, R., Pretty, K., Bird, H. and Corbishley, M., The Baths Basilica, Wroxeter. Excavations 1990–1990, English Heritage Archaeological Report 8, London, 49–49Google Scholar
Cooper, A., and Poinar, H.N. 2000: ‘Ancient DNA: do it right or not at all’, Science 289, 113CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davenport, P. 2004: ‘Exotic food remains from Roman Bath’, Salon, The Society of Antiquaries of London Online Newsletter 104Google Scholar
Davis, A. (with de Moulins, D.) 2000: ‘The plant remains’, in Barber, B. and Bowsher, B. (eds), The Eastern Cemetery of Roman London; Excavations 90–90, MoLAS Monograph 4, London, 71–71 and 78–78Google Scholar
Durrani, N. 2004: ‘Luxury Bath’, Current Archaeology 195, 105Google Scholar
Elbaum, R., Melamed-Bessudo, C., Boaretto, E., Galili, E., Lev-Yadum, S., Levy, A.A., and Weiner, S. 2006: ‘Ancient olive DNA in pits: preservation, amplifcation and sequence analysis’, Journal of Archeological Science 33, 88–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
English Heritage 2002: Environmental Archaeology: A Guide to the Theory and Practice of Methods, from Sampling and Recovery to Post-Excavation, English Heritage, Centre for Archaeology Guidelines 2002/01, SwindonGoogle Scholar
Greig, J.R.A. 1991: ‘The British Isles’, in van Zeist, W., Wasylikowa, K. and Behre, K.-E. (eds), Progress in Old World Palaeoethnobotany, Rotterdam, 334–334Google Scholar
Hall, A. 2004: Environmental Archaeology Bibliography, http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/resources. html?eab_eh_2004Google Scholar
Hall, A.R., and Kenward, H.K. 1990: Environmental Evidence from the Colonia: General Accident and Rougier Street, The Archaeology of york 14(6), London/yorkGoogle Scholar
Hall, A.R., and Kenward, H.K. 2006: ‘Development-driven archaeology: bane or boon for bioarchaeology?’ Oxford Journal of Archaeology 25(3), 24–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, S.A., Robinson, J.P., and Juniper, B.E. 2002: ‘Genetic clues to the origin of the apple’, Trends in Genetics 18(18), 30–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillman, G. 1981: ‘Reconstructing crop husbandry practices from charred remains of crops’, in Mercer, R. (ed.), Farming Practice in British Prehistory, Edinburgh, 62–62Google Scholar
Jones, G. 2005: ‘Garden cultivation of staple crops and its implications for settlement location and continuity’, World Archaeology 37(2), 76–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, G., Bogaard, A., Charles, M., and Hodgson, J.G. 2000: ‘Distinguishing the effects of agricultural practices relating to fertility and disturbance: a functional ecological approach in archaeobotany’, Journal of Archaeological Science 27, 84–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, G., Bogaard, A., Halstead, P., Charles, M., and Smith, H. 1999: ‘Identifying the intensity of crop husbandry practices on the basis of weed foras’, Annual of the British School at Athens 94, 89–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, M. 1981: ‘The development of crop husbandry’, in Jones, M. and Dimbleby, G. (eds), The Environment of Man: the Iron Age to the Anglo-Saxon Period, BAR Brit. Ser. 87, Oxford, 127–127Google Scholar
Kenward, H., and Hall, A. 2007: ‘Developer-funded archaeology and studies of biological remains’, British Archaeology 94: 51 (April 2007)Google Scholar
Kreuz, A. 2000: ‘function and conceptual archaeobotanical data from Roman cremations’, in Pearce, J., Millett, M. and Struck, M. (eds), Burial, Society and Context in the Roman World, Oxford, 51–51Google Scholar
Manen, J.-F., Bouby, L., Dalnoki, O., Marinval, P., Turgay, M., and Schlumbaum, A. 2003: ‘Microsatellites from archaeological Vitis vinifera seeds allow a tentative assignment of the geographical origin of ancient cultivars’, Journal of Archaeological Science 30, 9–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattingly, D. 2006: An Imperial Possession. Britain in the Roman Empire, 54 BC–AD 409, LondonGoogle Scholar
Miller, J., Ramsay, S., and Alldritt, D. 2000: ‘Charred and waterlogged plant macrofossils’, in Haselgrove, C. and McCullagh, R., An Iron Age Coastal Community in East Lothian: the Excavation of Two Later Prehistoric Enclosure Complexes at Fishers Road, Port Seton, 5–5, Edinburgh, 9–9, 1–1, 33–33Google Scholar
Millett, M. 1992: The Romanization of Britain. An Essay in Archaeological Interpretation, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Moffett, L, Ciaraldi, M., and Monckton, A. 1999: ‘Charred plant remains and waterlogged plant remains’, in Palmer, S.C., ‘Archaeological excavations in the Arrow Valley, Warwickshire’, Trans. Birmingham and Warwicks. Arch. Soc. 103, 73–73Google Scholar
Murphy, P. 2004: ‘Carbonised plant remains’, in Havis, R. and Brooks, H., Excavations at Stansted Airport, 91–91, Volume 1: Prehistoric and Romano-British, East Anglian Archaeology 107, Chelmsford, 39–39Google Scholar
OASIS: Online AccesS to the Index of archaeological investigations http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/project/oasis/england/Google Scholar
Petrucci-Bavaud, M., and Jacomet, S. 1997: ‘Zur Interpretation von Nahrungsbeigaben in römerzeitlichen Brandgräber’, Ethnographisches Archäologisches Zeitschrift 38, 93–93Google Scholar
Petrucci-Bavaud, M., Schlumbaum, A., and Jacomet, S. 2000: ‘Bestimmung der botanischen Makroreste’, in Hintermann, D. (ed.), Der Südfriedhof von Vindonissa, Zug, 9–9Google Scholar
Pollmann, B., Jacomet, S., and Schlumbaum, A. 2005: ‘Morphological and genetic studies of waterlogged Prunus species from the Roman vicus Tasgetium (Eschenz, Switzerland)’, Journal of Archaeological Science 32, 80–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Probert, F. 1997: ‘Report on the burnt grain’, in Marvell, A.G. and Owen-John, H.S., Leucarum. Excavations at the Roman Auxiliary Fort at Loughor, West Glamorgan 84–84 and 88–88, Britannia Monograph 12, London, 30–30Google Scholar
Robinson, M. 2002: ‘Domestic burnt offerings and sacrifces at Roman and pre-Roman Pompeii, Italy’, Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 11, 9–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Threadgold, J., and Brown, T.A. 2003: ‘Degradation of DNA on artifcially charred wheat seeds’, Journal of Archaeological Science 30, 76–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomlinson, P., and Hall, A. 1996: ‘A review of the archaeological evidence for food plants from the British Isles: an example of the use of the ArchaeoBotanical Computer Database (ABCD)’, Internet Archaeology 1 (http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue1/tomlinson_index.html)Google Scholar
Van der Veen, M. 1992: Crop Husbandry Regimes. An Archaeobotanical Study of Farming in Northern England 1000 BC–AD 500, SheffeldGoogle Scholar
Van der Veen, M. 2003: ‘When is food a luxury?’ World Archaeology 34(3), 27–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Veen, M. 2005: ‘Gardens and felds: the intensity and scale of food production’, World Archaeology 37(2), 63–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Veen, M. 2007: ‘Formation processes of desiccated and carbonised plant remains — the identifcation of routine practice’, Journal of Archaeological Science (available on-line; expected paper publication summer 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Veen, M., and Fieller, N. 1982: ‘Sampling seeds’, Journal of Archaeological Science 9, 98–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Veen, M., and Livarda, A. in prep.: ‘formation processes of carbonized and waterlogged plant remains’, Journal of Archaeological ScienceGoogle Scholar
Van der Veen, M., Livarda, A., and Hill, A. in press: ‘The introduction of new food plants into Roman Britain —s dispersal and social access’, Environmental ArchaeologyGoogle Scholar
Yang, D.Y., and Watt, K. 2005: ‘Contamination controls when preparing archaeological remains for ancient DNA analysis’, Journal of Archaeological Science 32, 6–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zach, B. 2002: ‘Vegetable offerings on the Roman sacrifcial site in Mainz, Germany — short report on the frst results’, Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 11, 6–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar