The publication of PPG 16 in England in 1990, with parallel guidance in Wales (1991) and Scotland (1994), marked a significant watershed in the process of archaeological investigation and funding and introduced the system of commercial archaeology with which we are all familiar. The result has been an enormous increase in the amount of information available for the study of all aspects of British archaeology. This volume represents part of a wider attempt to assess the contribution of developer-funded archaeology to our understanding of the Roman period, in this case the principal (English) towns of Roman Britain, here taken to include most of the major towns (with the exception of the largely greenfield sites), together with a handful of ‘small towns’ and the legionary fortress at Chester. Most of the papers were presented at a one-day conference held in Reading in 2013, with others being commissioned in the aftermath.
Following a brief introduction by one of the editors (Holbrook) and an introduction to the planning and legislative framework inherent in PPG 16 and its successors (Bryant and Thomas), the core of the volume comprises eight papers which cover site-specific, regional and thematic issues. Pride of place inevitably goes to London and Southwark, where Perring estimates that over 200 excavations have produced significant evidence for Roman activity, much of it from the core of the City itself. The result is that ‘we can now offer a much more ambitious and nuanced description of urban change than was possible 25 years ago’ (39). This contrasts with York, where Ottaway notes that most opportunities have been relatively small scale and confined to the suburbs and cemeteries, with very little work being undertaken in the historic core itself. The resulting picture is more fragmentary, therefore, with much critical detail residing in grey-literature reports, to the extent that ‘unless there is some way of bringing [the] parts together and relating them one to another, then the whole that is Roman York will be a lot less coherent than it ought to be’ (56).
Three regional surveys follow, covering the towns of South-East England (Fulford), the South-West (Holbrook) and the Midlands and the North (Bidwell). Though each is approached slightly differently, they all emphasise the significant new information which has accumulated over the last 25 years. While certain sites inevitably stand out in this respect — among them Colchester, Exeter and Leicester — it has proved possible to clarify and refine existing urban narratives in all cases, not least with respect to origins, urban morphology and infrastructure, suburbs and cemeteries. Reference is also made to wider thematic studies — among them consumption and distribution, identity and the economy — as and when significant results have been forthcoming from developer-funded investigation. No attempt has been made to provide a comprehensive overview of all the work undertaken since 1990, though this is overcome to some extent by the decision to include a separate appendix for each region, listing the significant investigations up to 2013, with appropriate details about the responsible organisations, the principal findings, and the nature of any documentation and relevant references. All three authors emphasise their concern about the lack of final publications for many of the key excavations.
These regional surveys are complemented by three thematic studies covering death rituals and the dead (Pearce), archaeobotany and food supply (Robinson) and zooarchaeology and towns (Maltby). All three emphasise the rich potential of the material which has accumulated since 1990 for our understanding of urban life and death. Pearce, in particular, notes that more than 4,000 burials have been excavated over the last 25 years, to add to the more than 7,000 from the three preceding decades (138); his paper also stresses the potential such material has for the study of ritual processes and demography. Despite the potential, all three authors express concerns about the state of their particular areas of interest, with Robinson emphasising a pressing ‘need to maintain skills in all aspects of archaeobotany’, whether within organisations or in the training provided by universities (172), while Maltby draws attention to the fact that ‘in some cases there has been insufficient funding for the full analysis of important bone assemblages’ (188). All three also note issues of methodological consistency and the appropriate dissemination of results in readily accessible forms, without which research progress can be compromised.
The concluding retrospect and prospect by Mike Fulford forms an especially valuable conclusion to the volume. The first part provides a succinct summary of the contribution of developer-led work to our knowledge and understanding of towns, arranged under four discrete headings — origins, intramural, extramural/suburban and characterising urban life. The second section examines a range of methodological issues of relevance to the excavation process, not least the recovery of material culture and biological data. In doing so one suspects Fulford is reflecting experience derived from his research excavations at Silchester, elements of which might profitably be incorporated into those large-scale developer-funded excavations where the evidential returns are likely to be of especial significance. In the final section, Fulford recognises that the issue of publication (or the lack thereof) remains a persistent problem, both for the pre- and post-1990 eras. While he makes several suggestions as to how the situation might be improved, more radical solutions may well be needed at the initial stages of evaluation when decisions are taken about funding, excavation and research strategies, and publication. It is also clear that there is an urgent need to review what currently resides only in grey literature or museum archives.
This is an important volume on several levels, in part because it recognises the important contribution made by developer-funded excavations since 1990 and in part because it does not shy away from highlighting the attendant problems and concerns which remain to be addressed. The overall tone, however, remains broadly optimistic for the future. Credit should go to all involved: the individual authors, the editors, Historic England as the funder and The Roman Society as the publisher.
