Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T17:39:17.713Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Whetstones in Roman Britain: Character, Distribution, Provenance and Industries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2022

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A substantial database of published excavation and other reports has been used to map the character and distribution in Roman Britain of whetstones, those unprepossessing implements essential in the home, farmstead, workshop and barracks for the maintenance of edge-tools and weapons. The quality of the geological identifications in the reports varies considerably, but a wide range of lithologies are reported as put to use: granite, basalts-dolerites, lava, tuff, mica-schist, slates/phyllites, Brownstones, Pennant sandstone, micaceous sandstones, grey sandstones/siltstones, Millstone Grit, Coal Measures, red sandstones, ferruginous sandstones, sarsen, Weald Clay Formation sandstones, sandy limestones, shelly limestones, cementstones, and (Lower) Carboniferous Limestone. On distributional evidence, some of these categories are aliases for alternatively and more familiarly named lithologies. Bringing ‘high-end’ products to the market, the long-running industry based on sandstones from the Weald Clay Formation (Lower Cretaceous) emerges as a British economic feature, evidenced from the Channel coast to the Scottish Borders, and with a recently demonstrated, substantial representation on the Roman near-continent. The distribution maps point to another and more complete British industry, based on the Brownstones (Old Red Sandstone, Devonian) and Pennant sandstone (Upper Carboniferous), outcropping close together in the West Country. A more systematic and geology-based treatment of excavated whetstones in the future is likely to yield yet more insights into the role these artefacts played in the economy of Roman Britain.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

INTRODUCTION

Whetstones are small and unprepossessing but necessary implements, likely to be found in all Romano-British homes, farmsteads, villas, workshops and garrisons, wherever iron edge-tools, implements and weapons required maintenance or finishing. In the published archaeological record, however, their presence is distinctly limited, having been overlooked or given limited and generally unsystematic attention on the ground and subsequently in the laboratory. Attitudes and practice towards those of Roman date are nevertheless slowly changing, especially on the near-Continent, where geological methods have been more wholeheartedly and systematically applied.Footnote 1 It is becoming appreciated, in Britain and overseas, that many kinds of whetstone are the products of major stone-based extractive industries, with a considerable geographical reach through trade and other means of dispersal.Footnote 2 Their geological provenance and methods of manufacture are becoming increasingly clear. Whetstones are proving to have been valued if not also valuable objects, and some had a role in Roman ritual.Footnote 3

The aim of this paper is to raise the profile of Romano-British whetstones as objects of archaeological significance worthy of detailed study, by means of a review of their distribution, character and geological provenance, using published descriptions and illustrations in printed excavation and related reports numbering upwards of 200. As they stand, however, these records are far from uniform in quality and value, ranging from one-word, open-ended, unqualified and almost useless descriptions, such as ‘sandstone’, to, much more rarely, detailed, technical accounts founded on thin-section petrography or geochemical analysis. Consequently, the outcome of the survey necessarily includes much that remains uncertain and subject to review, while also revealing previously unknown geographical patterns that should prompt further research and lead on to a more balanced and systematic understanding of these widely spread finds.

PRELIMINARY MATTERS

Many kinds of rock have been exploited for whetstones. Whichever is selected, it is generally agreed that what makes a good whetstone is a rock composed of a mixture of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ particles or elements.Footnote 4 The hard particles could be angular, uniformly sized grains of quartz (7 on Mohs’ hardness scale), as in a sandstone, or well-shaped, angular phenocrysts of quartz, feldspar (Mohs’ 6) or pyroxene (Mohs’ 5–6), as in a lava or tuff. All of these can act as the tiny chisels needed to remove slivers of metal from an object being sharpened or finished. Although not strictly particles, a similar role is played by the edges of empty gas bubbles dispersed in glassy or finely crystalline lavas when used for whetstones. The soft element in whetstones is played by voids and by mineral cements, such as gypsum (Mohs’ 1.5–2), clay (Mohs’ 2–4), calcite (Mohs’ 3), dolomite (Mohs’ 3.5–4), or by a clayey matrix formed of soft rock fragments squeezed tightly together during burial of the rock (Mohs’ 2–4). The weakness of these materials allows the sharp edges of the hard grains in whetstones to be continually undercut and kept exposed during use.

The quality of the edges produced by whetstones is determined not only by the composition of the mixture of hard and soft elements, but also by the general size and size-spread of the hard particles. Keen edges, and also fine polishes, can be produced only by using fine-grained whetstones, such as those of siltstone, cementstone, or slate. Coarse particles abrade metals quickly but afford only ragged edges to blades.

As there is at present no generally agreed typology for whetstones, it is convenient to use the scheme applied to the assemblage found in Iron Age and Roman Silchester (Calleva Atrebatum), the largest and most varied from any published British site.Footnote 5 Bar-shaped whetstones (or simply bars) are up to a Roman foot or so in length, square to rectangular in section when unworn, of the order of 20 mm in thickness and up to about twice as wide as thick. They are manufactured items, made in one mode of production by grooving with a saw the opposite faces of a prepared slab of stone and then snapping off the individual whetstones like pieces of chocolate.Footnote 6 Proof of this origin is the presence of rebates of rectangular section along each long edge of the whetstone, as seen on the 100 or so bars found in the forum gutter at Wroxeter (Viroconium),Footnote 7 an exceptionally rare and extraordinary ‘pre-use’ assemblage.Footnote 8 In an alternative mode of production, known from two British military sites,Footnote 9 and widely used on the near-Continent,Footnote 10 the grooving is done using a mason's chisel or point driven by a mallet. In this case the grooves in appearance are ragged and irregular, as well as V-shaped in profile, leading to uneven bevels along the edges of the detached whetstones. In use, bar-shaped whetstones are intended to be held in the hand, and either kept stationary, as when a knife-blade is drawn along them, or swept to and fro on larger items such as a sword or scythe.

Bar-shaped whetstones as a class may be either primary or secondary: they are primary when directly made from quarried rock, but secondary when prepared from such as a roofing tile or milling stone. Other primary whetstones are ‘found’, or natural, objects, such as suitable pieces of rock detached from natural outcrops, pebbles collected from stream beds or beaches, or fragments of suitable stone (‘brash’, ‘float’) picked up from cultivated fields or construction sites.

Secondary whetstones are objects with a demonstrable biography,Footnote 11 which began life in some other form, such as a stone rooftile, or a piece of broken quern or millstone. These repurposed items are commonly tablet-shaped, that is, thin, platy and irregularly tabular in form, but they are also found as bars. That many derive from stone rooftiles is shown by their thickness, typically in the range 15–20 mm, and the survival on the larger examples of punched holes for fixing nails.Footnote 12 They can vary in size and portability from just a few centimetres across, suitable for use in the hand as in a toolkit, to examples which are almost complete tiles and clearly intended to be laid flat and kept stationary in use. Secondary whetstones derived from millstones or querns are typically more robust and commonly irregular in shape and, as evidence of their origin, may display curved faces on which traces of pecking or rasping have survived.

WHETSTONE FORMS

BARS

Most of the whetstones recorded in the database are best classed as bar-shaped, as defined above, occurring at 99 findspots. They occur throughout Roman Britain (fig. 1A), but are most plentiful at southern sites, forming an east–west belt that ranges from the Thames Estuary area through the south Midlands to the shores of the Severn Estuary and Bristol Channel. Their findspots otherwise straggle northward, but at a lower density, mainly through eastern England and south-east Scotland as far as the southern Scottish Highlands. Most bar whetstones are likely to have been made as described above, but convincing direct evidence for this is at present sparse.

FIG. 1. Distribution of whetstone forms in Roman Britain: (A) bars; (B) tablets.

TABLETS

Localities yielding tablet-shaped whetstones (n=52) are only about half as common, and have a different distribution (fig. 1B). They are clustered in the same east–west belt as the bar-shaped forms, but are seldom found elsewhere. It is no coincidence that this concentration is also the area – aptly named the ‘stone-tile belt’ – which chiefly saw the use of quarried roofing materials such as the Swithland slate (Precambrian), Brownstones (Devonian Old Red Sandstone), Pennant sandstone (Upper Carboniferous), Stonesfield slate (Middle Jurassic), Collyweston slate (Middle Jurassic) and Purbeck limestone (Upper Jurassic),Footnote 13 as well as the perhaps more familiar ceramic tiles (CBM).

FOUND OBJECTS

The database shows these lithologically varied, primary whetstones to be present at 21 localities. There is no particular pattern to their distribution, but most of the sites are in southern Britain.

WHETSTONES OF IGNEOUS/METAMORPHIC ROCKS

Rocks of igneous or metamorphic origin occur widely in Britain, mainly in the geologically older and more altitudinous west, but particularly in the Scottish Highlands. Never much used for whetstones, they have been recorded from seven military sites, six settlements, five towns and two villas.

GRANITE

There are only two recorded occurrences of possibly granite whetstones (fig. 2A), from the Flavian fort at Elginhaugh on the southern shores of the Firth of Forth.Footnote 14 The location is consistent with such a provenance, but the description of one whetstone as of ‘very fine grain’ points to a different type of rock. The name granite can be misleading, as the name is widely used, even in the trade, for any kind of hard rock, including many not of igneous origin.

FIG. 2. Distribution of recorded whetstone lithologies in Roman Britain: (A) granite, lava and tuff; (B) basalt/dolerite; (C) mica-schist; (D) slate.

BASALTS-DOLERITES

Basalts-dolerites constitute a family of very finely to coarsely crystalline basic igneous rocks of intrusive to extrusive origin, to be found in several parts of Britain.Footnote 15 Whetstones attributed to this family, in some cases under a local name, are recorded from eight sites (fig. 2B). The distribution is in two parts.

There is a northern cluster (n=4), dominated by military sites associated with Hadrian's Wall, with whetstones described as ‘whinstones’, and a doubtful whetstone of tholeitic basalt (by thin-section) from the settlement to the south at Shiptonthorpe on the eastern main road north.Footnote 16 The well-known Carboniferous intrusion of the Whin Sill, on the crags of which Hadrian's Wall partly stands, was clearly an important and readily accessible local source of suitable material.

The other cluster of sites (n=4) lies far to the south in the West Country and South Midlands (fig. 2B). The source of the whetstone from the most westerly locality, Marshfield north of Bath, is assigned to intrusive basaltic dykes that crop out near Bristol.Footnote 17 At the other localities the whetstones are variously described as dolerite or basalt (?including a Leicestershire source).

LAVA

Lavas are extrusive igneous rocks, of acid to basic composition, but typically very fine to fine-grained in terms of matrix, or even glassy, with dispersed larger vesicles and phenocrysts. A whetstone of this sort is recorded in the database at only one site (fig. 2A), and is suggested to be of a German lava. It is possibly a discarded fragment of an imported Mayen quern.

TUFF

Tuffs are indurated volcanic ashes, deposited on land or on the sea, varying from very fine-grained to coarsely fragmental, with abundant crystals and rock fragments. They are widely known from the geologically older parts of western Britain, up to and including southern Scotland. The single whetstone of this kind is described as ‘fine-grained’,Footnote 18 but the findspot, Stowmarket in East Anglia, is a long way from any plausible primary source and the object may be of the found kind, perhaps brought south as a glacial erratic (fig. 2A).

MICA SCHIST

Metamorphic rocks, such as mica schist, arise chiefly when mudrocks and muddy sandstones buried deep in the Earth's crust are subjected to substantial heat and stress. They acquire new fabrics and mineral compositions, but without significant overall chemical change.

Mica schist is a high-grade metamorphic rock making whetstones at three, highly dispersed localities (fig. 2C). The Scottish Highlands are almost certainly the ultimate primary source, but the finds in eastern and southern England suggest that these could be found objects introduced glacially from the north.

SLATES/PHYLLITES

Slates/phyllites are formed from shales and mudrocks that have recrystallised under conditions of low-grade metamorphism, so as to acquire a more or less pronounced slaty cleavage due to the parallel orientation of the contained micas. They abound in the Lower Palaeozoic sequences of Wales, Cumbria and the Southern Uplands of Scotland, in the Upper Palaeozoic rocks of Devon and Cornwall, and to a small extent in the Precambrian rocks of the East Midlands.

Typically fine-grained, whetstones of slate/phyllite are recorded from nine sites dispersed chiefly in the West Midlands and southern Britain (fig. 2D). None of the findspots lie near putative sources; an item from County Hall in Dorchester (Durnovaria) has been attributed to a source in Devon/Cornwall.Footnote 19 A small whetstone at Silchester (Calleva Atrebatum) was considered to resemble a coarse slate from the Silurian of south-west Cumbria.Footnote 20 Does the clustering of findspots near the Channel coast point to importation from potential sources on the near-Continent, or by sea from (south-west) Wales or south-west England (see Dorchester above)?

BROWNSTONES AND PENNANT SANDSTONE

The Brownstones and Pennant sandstone are two Upper Palaeozoic sandstone formations of particular importance as sources of whetstone material in Roman Britain. Although most of the tools appear to be secondary, based on roofing tiles, a probably small, early Roman, military manufactory making primary whetstones from the local Brownstones is known to have been established at Usk (Burrium) in south-east Wales.Footnote 21 The possibility that there were others, the Pennant sandstone included, cannot be excluded (see below).

BROWNSTONES

The Brownstones is an upward-coarsening sequence of very fine- to coarse-grained and pebbly sandstones of Lower Devonian (Lower Old Red Sandstone) age that crops out in the Forest of Dean, south-east Wales and the Bristol area.Footnote 22 The beds most suited to the direct manufacture of whetstones and to making roof tiles are the flaggy, micaceous, finer-grained sandstones in the lower part of the sequence. There are no known Roman quarries, but the outcrops on the east side of the Forest of Dean, in the Wye Valley and, especially, on the coast of the Severn Estuary at Portishead, near the mouth of the River Avon, are all favourable sites. For example, the gently shelving shore at the latter place would have allowed vessels to be beached at high tide for later loading within site of the outcrop.

Whetstones attributable to the Brownstones are recorded in the database at 24 findspots (fig. 3A). They lie squarely in the stone-tile belt alluded to above (fig. 2B), in a geographical distribution closely similar to that of Brownstones roofing tiles.Footnote 23 The findspots show a distinct fall-off in spatial density eastward into East Anglia, a pointer to the westerly provenance of the tools. Most of the whetstones are tablets, but there is a substantial proportion of bars. Their occurrence is from the first century onward, but mostly in the later Roman period, as at Silchester.Footnote 24

FIG. 3. Distribution of recorded whetstone lithologies in Roman Britain: (A) Brownstones; (B) Pennant sandstone.

FIG. 4. Distribution of recorded whetstone lithologies in Roman Britain: (A) micaceous sandstone; (B) grey sandstone; (C) Millstone Grit; (D) Coal Measures.

PENNANT SANDSTONE

Pennant sandstone is a generic term for thick series of relatively coarse-grained sandstones with thin shales and coals of late Carboniferous age that outcrop in the South Wales Coalfield,Footnote 25 the central Forest of DeanFootnote 26 and the structurally complex basins of the Bristol-Somerset Coalfield.Footnote 27 The rocks are closely similar in outcrop to the Brownstones and, given the co-distribution (see below) of Pennant with Brownstones products in terms of location and date, may have contributed to the basis of a single, large Roman quarrying industry in the West Country. Where the Roman quarries lay is unknown. A very convenient site, however, would have been the banks of the River Avon in what is now part of the city of Bristol, from which, in the nineteenth and earlier twentieth centuries, Pennant sandstone preferred for building was extracted.Footnote 28 A perhaps less accessible location is the valley of the River Frome, entering the Avon from north-east of the city.

In contrast to the Brownstones, Pennant sandstones seen as whetstones are greenish grey to dark grey in colour and medium to coarse grained. The strata are well bedded and flaggy, with abundantly micaceous partings. Distinctive under the microscope, the rocks are seen to be lithic sandstones, composed about equally of quartz, with a little feldspar, and many rock fragments, chiefly shales, mudrocks and phyllites with scattered microschists, metaquartzites and acid lavas. Coalified plant fragments and grains of clay ironstone and siderite are not uncommon. A distinctive feature of the sandstones is that the softer rock fragments during post-depositional burial were tightly squeezed between the harder quartzes and feldspars to produce an overall ‘condensed’ fabric and soft matrix lacking cement-filled voids.

In harmony with the proximity of the outcrops themselves, and the findspots of roofing tiles,Footnote 29 the spatial distribution of Pennant whetstones (n=24) is virtually identical within the stone-tile belt (fig. 3B) to that of Brownstones implements (fig. 3A), the two lithologies being found together at many sites. Like the Brownstones, the whetstones are recorded as far eastward as London and East Anglia, but are not known to range further to the north than Wroxeter. Most are tablets, but many bars are recorded. As work at Silchester has shown,Footnote 30 Pennant sandstone whetstones are most prevalent in the later Roman period, in harmony with their Brownstones equivalents.

SOME OTHER SANDSTONES

The database has abundant references to whetstones of ‘sandstone’, in many cases in association with a simple qualifier, such as ‘micaceous’, ‘grey’, ‘red’, or ‘ferruginous’. There is also a scattering of whetstones diagnosed as ‘Millstone Grit’ or ‘Coal Measures’. These are all reviewed below. A total of 51 whetstones is involved.

MICACEOUS SANDSTONES

Tablet and bar sandstone whetstones are described as ‘micaceous’ at 20 sites. Their distribution is in two parts (fig. 4A), with most findspots in the stone-tile belt, between the Severn and Thames Estuary regions, but four at a distance in northern England.

Micaceousness is a property of both the Brownstones and Pennant sandstone flaggy source rocks. Given this, and the distribution recorded in fig. 4A, it seems possible that the signifier micaceous is an alias for Brownstones/Pennant rocks (see fig. 3) in the case of the main findspot cluster.

The northern cluster is dominated by military sites linked to Hadrian's Wall. The micaceous whetstones here could have been brought from the south, but local Carboniferous sandstones in the north Pennines, or even the Midland Valley of Scotland, also micaceous, may instead have been exploited. The outlying site in this cluster, at Shiptonthorpe,Footnote 31 yielding two whetstones, lies on a main road north from the landing place of Petuaria (Brough) on the Humber Estuary.

GREY SANDSTONES/SILTSTONES

Bar and tablet whetstones described as formed of grey sandstone/siltstone are recorded at a total of 18 sites, with a distribution in two parts (fig. 4B). Like the micaceous whetstones (fig. 4A), the findspots of most of these tools lie firmly in the stone-tile belt between the Severn and Thames Estuary regions. Three are dispersed at a distance, in the north-west Midlands (Nantwich), eastern England (Shiptonthorpe, also micaceous whetstones) and Cumbria (Carlisle, also micaceous whetstones).

Arguing as before, it is plausible this this signifier is at least a partial alias for Pennant sandstone, given that greyness is a property of these beds, and the findspots lie mainly in the stone-tile belt, along with whetstones identified as Pennant (fig. 3B). Other grey sandstones could have been exploited at the three outlying sites.

MILLSTONE GRIT

The Millstone Grit is a thick formation of shales and sandstones of early Upper Carboniferous age with extensive outcrops in the Pennine region of northern England. The sandstones are distinguished by being feldspathic and coarse to very coarse grained, with a partial siliceous cement.

Whetstones attributed to the Millstone Grit are reported at nine dispersed sites (fig. 4C), most of which are remote from the main outcrop. This need not mean that some other source rock should be sought, for millstones of Millstone Grit are widely present in the Midlands of Roman Britain as far south as the Thames valley.Footnote 32

COAL MEASURES

The Coal Measures are thick series of shales, sandstones and substantial coals that define the exposed coalfields widespread throughout Britain. They are younger than the Millstone Grit and date to the late Upper Carboniferous. Whetstones referred to as the Coal Measures are recorded from 18 highly dispersed sites, though tending to be concentrated in the south at the western end of the stone-tile belt (fig. 4D). As described in excavation reports, the group lacks consistency, the rocks ranging in colour from grey or buff to grey-brown or purple-brown, with some being micaceous. The buff varieties may well be true Coal Measures, as represented by generic York stone from the south Pennine region,Footnote 33 but the clustering in the stone-tile belt perhaps suggests other aliases (Technically, the formations yielding Pennant sandstone are part of the Coal Measures in a broad sense). Sandstone whetstones from Strageath in central Scotland are attributed to the Coal Measures of the Midland Valley.Footnote 34

RED SANDSTONES

Whetstones described as red sandstone are reported from nine findspots arranged in two widely separated groups (fig. 5A). Of the northern cluster of five locations, with the exception of the Ingleby Barwick villa, four are military in character. The southern group is more dispersed, only two findspots having military links. Red sandstone whetstones are conspicuously absent from middle England.

FIG. 5. Distribution of recorded whetstones lithologies in Roman Britain: (A) red sandstone; (B) ferruginous sandstone.

The sources of these whetstones appear to lie mainly in the very considerable outcrop of the Permo-Triassic – broadly, New Red Sandstone – rocks that can be traced from south-west England through the English Midland and the Pennine flanks to the Scottish Borders. Sandstone units occur at many levels within this thick sequence, but many are comparatively soft and friable, and only those with a calcareous, dolomitic, or siliceous cement are hard enough to be of much use for whetstones. The Penrith Sandstone (Permian) from the Vale of Eden and the St Bees Sandstone (Triassic) of the Cumbrian coast are mentioned as possible sources of the pink sandstone whetstones found at Carlisle,Footnote 35 and the same source(s) may have been exploited for the pink whetstones from Housesteads.Footnote 36 The Triassic Sherwood Sandstone is suggested as the source of whetstones at Ingleby Barwick, on the outcrop at the foot of the North Yorkshire Moors.Footnote 37 A whetstones found at St Albans may be of the Triassic Arden Sandstone,Footnote 38 a stone much favoured for building with an extensive outcrop in the English Midlands.

The Brownstones, discussed above, is not the only early Devonian (Lower Old Red Sandstone) formation to have been exploited for whetstones. The whetstones of red, micaceous sandstone found at Caerleon,Footnote 39 in south-east Wales, are plausibly from the slightly older St Maughan's Group, on the outcrop of which the fort and settlement stand. The amphitheatre, for example, is largely built of this material. Red siliceous sandstones of Devonian age also occur in the Borders and Midland Valley of Scotland, and are possible sources of Scottish finds.

FERRUGINOUS SANDSTONES

Five sites in south-central England have yielded whetstones attributed to ferruginous sandstone or ironstone (fig. 5B), also called ironpan, of which the best known to date are from Silchester.Footnote 40 These rocks are very fine- to medium-grained sandstones composed of angular to well-rounded quartz grains, with a little feldspar and rock fragments, set in a dense, opaque, pervasive matrix of iron oxy-hydroxides. The source of the whetstones appears to be local sandy deposits of various ages that were ferruginised in Pleistocene times in the zone of water-table fluctuation. Similar materials, potentially the source of other ferruginous sandstone whetstones, are widespread in the Pleistocene deposits of East AngliaFootnote 41 and the London Basin.Footnote 42 Of probably another origin is the ferruginous sandstone whetstone from Ewell, south of London, described as carstone from the local Lower Cretaceous Folkestone Beds.Footnote 43

SARSEN

Sarsen stone or silcrete is an off-white, well-sorted, fine- to medium-grained pure quartz sandstone with a secondary quartz or, less commonly, flint-like cement and a saccharoidal, partly open texture. It formed superficially in southern England on a number of occasions during Tertiary times, as the result of the leaching and silicification of sands, sandstones and flint gravels (these yield puddingstones).

Whetstones of sarsen stone are recordedFootnote 44 only from Silchester and Little Oakley, Essex, and are extremely rare. They appear to be mainly found objects.

WHETSTONES OF WEALDEN ORIGIN

An extraordinary discovery was made when the site of the forum at Roman Wroxeter (Uriconium) was excavated in the early twentieth century. Second-century deposits in the portico gutter along the east side yielded a considerable, and very rare, ‘pre-use’ assemblageFootnote 45 of nested samian vessels, Midlands mortaria and a consignment of about 100 unused, foot-length, sandstone whetstones, evidently manufactured by snapping individual bars off slabs of rock into which corresponding grooves had been sawn into the opposite faces, affording rebates of rectangular section along the long edges.Footnote 46 Atkinson considered the whetstones – patently a high-end product – to be evidence of a large and widespread business in Roman Britain, a view amply supported by subsequent work on their age and distribution (figs 6A, B). It is now clear that whetstones essentially identical to those at Wroxeter, dating from the first to the fourth centuries,Footnote 47 are widespread in Roman Britain (n=57) and also, on the basis of detailed petrological work,Footnote 48 across the English Channel in Gallia Belgica and Germania Inferior (n=21). In Britain, Wealden whetstones are reported from seven villas, 18 settlements and rural sites, 20 towns, three ritual sites and nine military contexts, including Hadrian's Wall and the Scottish Borders. At these locations, the average numbers of whetstones vary from 2.56 at the military sites to 3.9 in the towns and 3.3 at the ritual centres. On the near-Continent the whetstones appear chiefly in military contexts and in towns.

FIG. 6. Recorded whetstones of Wealden lithology in Roman Britain: (A) Distribution; (B) Distribution of whetstones of Wealden provenance in Roman Gallia Belgica and Germania Inferior, according to Reniere et al. (Reference Reniere, Thiébaux, Dreesen, Goemare and De Clercq2018); (C) Comparative spatial distributions (exponential) of Wealden whetstones over the land area of Roman Britain based on marketing from London or the quarry site in the north-west Weald, using a random sample of 20 sites (after Allen Reference Allen2016).

Views have changed considerably on the geological provenance of these whetstones. On palaeontological grounds, CantrillFootnote 49 assigned them to a horizon in the Middle Jurassic Great Oolite Series of the south Midlands. The most popular attribution has been to the Kentish rag facies of the Lower Cretaceous Hythe Beds of the Wealden area.Footnote 50 Neither proposal can now be supported by geological evidence. Allen and ScottFootnote 51 concluded on multiple grounds that the source rocks lay among the 30 or so thin, locally developed sandstone units present in the thick Weald Clay Formation of the north-west Weald, an older formation in the Lower Cretaceous sequence than the Hythe Beds. These Wealden sandstones, so the sedimentology of the whetstones showed, had accumulated on the shores and in the estuaries of a wooded landmass subject to frequent, seasonal wildfires. The rocks are greenish grey, delicately parallel-laminated, very fine- to fine-grained, firmly cemented, slightly micaceous, calcareous quartz sandstones. The quartz is angular, very well sorted and accompanied by a little chert, occasional feldspar and sporadic glauconite (a few grains only per thin section). Also present are variable amounts of bioclastic material, chiefly ostracod/pelecypod and sea-urchin debris, and scattered grains of charcoal, commonly showing anatomical structure.Footnote 52 Large, disarticulated shell fragments, attributable to the pelecypods Cardium and Ostrea, are found in some whetstones. Typically, the calcite cement, the soft element in the whetstones, is lustre-mottled on a millimetre scale.

The precise location in the north-west Weald of the quarries/mines where the sandstones were extracted remains unknown, but it is not necessarily true that the whetstones were also manufactured and marketed there. As has been shown,Footnote 53 and as is also evident in figure 6A, there is a clear, essentially northerly, exponential fall-off in the density of the sites that yield Wealden whetstones. Statistical analysis of the site distributionFootnote 54 reveals that the variance in plots of density–distance is significantly less when Roman London rather than a plausible location in the north-west Weald is chosen for the origin of the spread (fig. 6C). This is good evidence that the whetstones were marketed from London, probably by an agent, rather than from the Weald.

Speculating, the whetstones could also have been made in London. The River Wey, directed north-eastward to join the east-flowing Thames at Weybridge, is a tributary that offers a plausible route for the transport to London of sandstone slabs quarried in the north-west Weald. In that case, a waterfront location would be an appealing site for both a workshop and a trading centre. There is also a main road into London which emerges from the north-west Weald at Dorking.

Attention is convincingly drawn by Reniere and colleaguesFootnote 55 to the presence of low numbers of Wealden whetstones at Roman sites spread over the near-Continent (fig. 6B), especially military ones and towns, echoing the presence in the same region of pottery and other artefacts of British manufacture. A few of the sites are coastal, but most are concentrated in the middle River Scheldte basin. There are several possible explanations, including direct trade, for their presence,Footnote 56 but perhaps the most persuasive of those discussed by Morris, given the low numbers of finds and their locations, is the movement, with their families and goods, of especially Roman officials and military personnel from one posting to another during their career,Footnote 57 in keeping with the well-known ethnic diversity of Roman urban populations.

LIMESTONE WHETSTONES

Generally speaking, limestones do not make good whetstones, typically lacking the requisite hard and soft elements. It is therefore not surprising that they are represented only 17 times in the database, at sites limited to southern Britain.

SANDY LIMESTONES

The commonest (n=9) are described simply as sandy limestones, but those at NeathamFootnote 58 and ChichesterFootnote 59 are further reported to be glauconitic. Their findspots form a thin dispersion across southern Britain, without any obvious local concentration (fig. 7A). The sources of these whetstones are unknown, but it is worth noting that calcareous sandstones and sandy limestones are found at several horizons in the Lower and especially the Middle Jurassic of this general area. The two examples of glauconitic sandy limestone could be evidence for the exploitation of either an uppermost Jurassic formation or the true Lower Cretaceous Kentish rag (Hythe Beds), outcropping around the Weald in the south-east of the area.

FIG. 7. Distribution of recorded whetstones of limestone lithology: (A) sandy limestone; (B) shelly limestone; (C) Carboniferous Limestone; (D) Lias cementstone and sandy oolite.

SHELLY LIMESTONES

Just four locations have yielded whetstones described as shelly limestone. They occur in a loose string from Nantwich in the north-west Midlands to Portchester on the shores of the Solent (fig. 7B). Such rocks can be found in the Carboniferous Limestone Series of North Wales and the southern Pennines, but especially in the Jurassic strata of southern England.

(LOWER) CARBONIFEROUS LIMESTONE

There are two reports of whetstones of Carboniferous limestone (fig. 7C). That from St Albans (Verulamium) is remote from any outcrop of the Lower Carboniferous Limestone Series, and only the three finds from the military site of Castleford in West YorkshireFootnote 60 are at all nearby.

OTHER LIMESTONES

A whetstone from Roman Alcester (fig. 7D) is attributed to the Lower Jurassic Blue Lias,Footnote 61 a formation of alternating, thin shales and cementstones, outcropping near the site. A whetstone of these clay/silt-dominated materials may be expected to have afforded a fine edge or polish.

A solitary whetstone of sandy oolite is reported from the remote East Anglian site of Scole (fig. 7D).Footnote 62 Possibly a glacial erratic, an ultimate Middle-Upper Jurassic source is likely.

DISCUSSION

The database for the mappings described above has many clear and serious limitations, but these are not sufficient to cloud entirely the importance and role of whetstones in the economy of Roman Britain. A large and long-lived industry based on sandstones from the Weald Clay Formation (fig. 6) emerges with particular clarity, but there are hints of the existence of other significant industries based on the Millstone Grit and the Brownstones-Pennant sandstone.

BRITISH STONE-BASED INDUSTRIES

There is now a fair understanding of Roman industries procuring stone for building and the sources of stone exploited for other purposes. Formations used variously for rotary querns, millstones and mortars include the Upper Old Red Sandstone of the Welsh Borders,Footnote 63 the Millstone Grit of the Pennines,Footnote 64 the uppermost Jurassic of the Channel coast,Footnote 65 the Lower Cretaceous Lodsworth stone in south-east EnglandFootnote 66 and the silcretes (puddingstones) of the London Basin and East Anglia.Footnote 67

The millstone industry based on the Millstone Grit of the Pennines could have been more complex than is suggest by the millstones alone,Footnote 68 co-distributed with the whetstones mapped in figure 4C. Millstone Grit rotary querns/millstones and a few reused items are known from some of the findspots, but there are also bar and tablet whetstones from at least four locations. Are these items reused grinding stones, and therefore secondary, that have lost through wear all traces of their origin, or are they primary whetstones co-produced at, and co-marketed from, quarry sites along with the milling stones?

For whetstones of Brownstones-Pennant sandstone (fig. 3) and their possible aliases, micaceous sandstone (fig. 4A) and grey sandstone (fig. 4B), the case is supported by better evidence, and therefore more secure, although also more complex (fig. 8). These whetstones are co-distributed in the stone-tile belt that ranges from the Severn to the Thames.

FIG. 8. Speculative model for the entangled whetstone industry based on the Brownstones and Pennant sandstone of the West Midlands.

The outcrops of the Brownstones and Pennant sandstone in the Welsh Borders and West Country are essentially identical, and the roofing tiles produced from these formations are co-distributed in terms of both place and date, seemingly made available as decorative alternatives (red-brown or grey).Footnote 69 There is abundant evidence that the numerous tablet whetstones recorded from the findspots (fig. 3) have been made secondarily from roofing tiles,Footnote 70 but is this also true of the very many bar-shaped whetstones known? Some could plausibly have been manufactured at local centres from imported tiles – the size and shape of the latter is not inappropriate – and others co-produced and co-marketed at the primary quarry sites along also with tiles. A plausible picture tentatively presents itself of an entangled, multi-layered, mainly later Roman industry in Britain based on dispersed primary and secondary production centres, possibly affording for southern and eastern markets a range of stone products, including primary and secondary whetstones. Such an industry could be centrally controlled.Footnote 71

APPROACHES TO WHETSTONES

Three sequential steps of increasing difficulty are needed in order to gain a full appreciation of the archaeological significance of a stone artefact. The first step is to characterise petrologically and name the rock-type (mineral composition, texture, fabric, structures), emphasising critical diagnostic features. The second is to identify the geological formation from which the material for the item came (name, age, outcrop location and extent), together with its geological context (intrusive/extrusive igneous, low/high-grade metamorphic, sedimentology). The third step – the most difficult of the three – is to locate the exposure, quarry or mine from which the stone was extracted, or at least the likely district from which it came, and to place this in the context of a wider geographical distribution of the artefacts.

When the database exploited above is matched against this ambitious programme, its limitations and weaknesses – many surely avoidable – are at once exposed. How might matters turn out differently in the future? Several options for change are available, each with its particular attractions, disadvantages and resource implications: mount appropriate collaborative research programmes between professional geologists and archaeologists, as has been successful in the case of Roman Belgium;Footnote 72 prevail on commissioning and funding bodies to fund more generously, and monitor more rigorously, post-excavation work on stone artefacts; create accessible collections with commentaries of appropriate rocks in hand-specimen and thin-section form; invite appropriately resourced university departments to offer (for a fee) short residential courses in geology with an emphasis on British stratigraphy and petrography; encourage universities to include in their undergraduate degree programmes a module in geology, emphasising British stratigraphy and petrography. Perhaps the last option is the one most likely in the longer term to produce a significant change in the appreciation and treatment of whetstones.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am indebted to Dr Ruth Shaffrey for help with sources, and to Dr Rob Fry (University of Reading) for base maps.

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

For supplementary material for this article, please visit <https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068113X22000277>.

Footnotes

Deceased

14 Allason-Jones in Hanson Reference Hanson2007.

16 Allason-Jones in Millett Reference Millett2006.

17 Barford in Blockley Reference Blockley1985.

18 Crummy in Nicholson and Woolhouse Reference Nicholson and Woolhouse2016.

19 Copson and Healy in Smith Reference Smith1993.

23 Allen Reference Allen2014, fig. 13.4.

24 Allen Reference Allen2014, fig. 13.2.

28 Lloyd Morgan Reference Lloyd Morgan1885–8.

29 Allen Reference Allen2014, fig. 13.4.

30 Allen Reference Allen2014, fig. 13.2.

34 Frere and Roe in Frere and Wilkes Reference Frere and Wilkes1989.

35 Shaffrey in Howard-Davis Reference Howard-Davis2009.

36 Allason-Jones in Rushworth Reference Rushworth2009.

37 Hunter and McLaren in Willis and Carne Reference Willis and Carne2013.

38 Goodburn and Grew in Frere Reference Frere1984.

39 Evans and Metcalf Reference Evans and Metcalf1992.

47 e.g. Allen Reference Allen2014, fig. 13.2.

51 Allen and Scott Reference Allen and Scott2014.

52 Allen and Scott Reference Allen and Scott2014.

54 Allen Reference Allen2015b, fig. 5.

58 Timby and Peacock in Millett and Graham Reference Millett and Graham1986.

59 Peacock in Down Reference Down1989.

60 Clarke in Cool and Philo Reference Cool and Philo1998.

61 Booth and Crossling in Booth and Evans Reference Booth and Evans2001.

69 e.g. Allen Reference Allen2014, figs 13.2, 13.4.

71 e.g. Fulford Reference Fulford2014.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexander, J. and Pullinger, J. 2000: ‘Roman Cambridge: excavations on Castle Hill 1956–1988’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society 88 (for 1999), 85105Google Scholar
Allason-Jones, L. and Miket, R. 1984: The Catalogue of Small Finds from South Shields Roman Fort, Newcastle upon TyneGoogle Scholar
Allen, J.R.L. 2004: Carstone in Norfolk Buildings: Distribution, Uses, Associates and Influences, British Archaeological Reports British series 371, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Allen, J.R.L. 2014: Whetstones from Roman Silchester (Calleva Atrebatum), North Hampshire. Character, Manufacture, Provenance and Use. Putting an Edge on It, British Archaeological Reports British series 597, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, J.R.L 2015a: ‘A whetstone of Wealden sandstone from the Roman villa at Great Holts Farm, Boreham, Essex’, Britannia 46, 247–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, J.R.L. 2015b: ‘Exponential decline in the dispersal of stone artefacts in Roman Britain: further expressions of trade’, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 34, 97108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, J.R.L. 2016: ‘Four whetstones from Roman Fiskerton; a Wealden (Surrey/West Sussex) product in Lincolnshire’, Lincolnshire History and Archaeology 48 (for 2013), 70–4Google Scholar
Allen, J.R.L. 2017: ‘Wealden whetstones at Roman Silchester and beyond: a case study’, in Allen, M., Lodwick, L., Brindle, T., Fulford, M., and Smith, A., The Rural Economy of Roman Britain, Britannia Monograph 30, London, 352–5Google Scholar
Allen, J.R.L. 2018a: ‘A whetstone from southern England at Newstead, Melrose (Trimontium): the reach of a major Roman stone industry’, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 146 (for 2016), 113–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, J.R.L. 2018b: ‘The whetstones from Roman Silchester at Reading Museum: the Victorian–Edwardian excavations’, Hampshire Studies 73 (for 2016), 156–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, J.R.L. 2019: ‘Tilestones into whetstones in seven steps: the Brownstones, Pennant sandstone, and Stonesfield Slate at Silchester (Calleva Atrebatum), North Hampshire’, Britannia 50, 321–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, J.R.L., and Scott, A.C. 2014: ‘The whetstone blanks from the forum gutter at Roman Wroxeter: the case for provenance’, Transactions of the Shropshire Historical and Archaeological Society 87 (for 2012), 112Google Scholar
Allen, T., Brady, K. and Foreman, S. 2016: A Roman Villa and other Iron Age and Roman Discoveries at Bredon's Norton, Fidlington and Pamington along the Gloucester Security of Supply Pipeline, Oxford Archaeology Monograph 25, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Allen, T., Darvill, T., Green, S. and Jones, M. 1993: Thames Valley Landscapes: The Cotswold Water Park. Volume 1. Excavations at Roughground Farm, Lechlade, Gloucestershire: A Prehistoric and Roman Landscape, Oxford Archaeological Unit, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Anderson, A.S., Wacher, J.S., and Fitzpatrick, A.P. 2001: The Romano-British ‘Small Town’ at Wanborough, Wiltshire, Britannia Monograph 19, LondonGoogle Scholar
Arrowsmith, P and Power, D. 2012 : Roman Nantwich: A Salt-making Settlement. Excavations at Kingsley Fields 2002, British Archaeological Reports British Series 557, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Ashwin, T. and Tester, A. 2014: A Romano-British Settlement in the Waveney Valley: Excavations at Scole,1993–4. East Anglian Archaeology, Report 152, DerehamGoogle Scholar
Aston, M. 1974: Stonesfield Slate, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Atkins, R., Popescu, E., Rees, G. and Stansbie, D. 2014: Broughton, Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, The Evolution of a South Midlands Landscape, Oxford Archaeology Monograph 22, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, D. 1942 : Report on Excavations at Wroxeter (the Roman City of Viroconium) in the County of Salop 1923–1927, Birmingham Archaeological Society, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Austen, P.S. 1991: Bewcastle and Old Penrith. A Roman Outpost Fort and a Frontier Vicus, Excavations 1977–78, Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society Research Series 6, Kendal.Google Scholar
Barber, A.J., and Walker, G.T. 1998: ‘Home Farm, Bishop's Cleeve: Excavation of a Romano-British Occupation Site 1993–4’, Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 116, 117–39Google Scholar
Barford, P.M. 2002: Excavations at Little Oakley, Essex: Roman Villa and Saxon Settlement, East Anglian Archaeology Report 98, IpswichGoogle Scholar
Bedwin, O., and Place, C. 1995: ‘Late Iron Age and Romano-British occupation at Ounces Barn, Boxgrove, West Sussex: Excavations 1982–83’, Sussex Archaeological Collections 133, 45–10Google Scholar
Bennett, P. Ridler, I., and Sparey-Green, C. 2010: The Archaeology of Canterbury. Volume V. The Roman Water Mills and Settlement at Ickham, Kent, CanterburyGoogle Scholar
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. Volume 2: Late Iron Age to Roman Finds Reports, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Bidwell, P., and Speak, S. 1994: Excavations at South Shields Roman Fort, Volume I, Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle Upon Tyne Monograph Series 4, Newcastle upon TyneGoogle Scholar
Birbeck, V. 2009: ‘Balkerne Heights, Colchester: Roman suburban development and cemetery use’, Essex Archaeology and History 40, 98141Google Scholar
Bishop, M.C., and Dore, J.N. 1988: Corbridge. Excavations of the Roman Fort and Town, 1947–80, Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England Archaeological Report 8, LondonGoogle Scholar
Bishop, M.C., Sherlock, D., and Rowntree, A. 1996: Finds from Roman Aldborough. A Catalogue of Small Finds from the Romano-British Town of Isurium Brigantum, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Blagg, T., Plouviez, J., and Tester, A. 2004: Excavations at the Large Romano-British Settlement at Hacheston, Suffolk, in 1973–4, East Anglian Archaeology Report 106, IpswichGoogle Scholar
Blockley, K. 1985: Marshfield. Ironmongers Piece. Excavations 1998–3, An Iron Age and Romano-British Settlement in the South Cotswolds, British Archaeological Reports British Series 141, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Blockley, K., Blockley, M., Blockley, P., Frere, S., and Stow, S. 1995: The Archaeology of Canterbury. V. Excavations in the Marlowe Car Park and Surrounding Areas, CanterburyGoogle Scholar
Booth, P., and Evans, J. 2001: Roman Alcester: Northern Extramural Area, Roman Alcester Series Volume 3, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 127, YorkGoogle Scholar
Booth, P., Bingham, A.-M., and Lawrence, S. 2008: The Roman Roadside Settlement at Westhawk Farm, Ashford, Kent: Excavations 1998–9, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Booth, P.M. 1997: Asthall, Oxfordshire: Excavations in a Roman ‘Small Town’ 1992, Thames Valley Landscape Monograph 9, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Booth, P.M., Evans, J., and Hiller, J. 2001: Excavations in the Extramural Settlement of Roman Alchester, Oxfordshire, 1991. Oxford Archaeology Monograph 1, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Boyle, A., and Early, R. 1999 : Excavations at Springhead Roman Town, Southfleet, Kent, Oxford Archaeological Unit Occasional Paper 1, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Branigan, K. 1977: Gatcombe. The Excavation and Study of a Romano-British Villa Estate, 19671976, British Archaeological Reports British Series 44, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brett, M. 2013: Prehistoric, Romano-British and Medieval Occupation in the Frome Valley, Gloucestershire. A Beaker Pit and Romano-British Settlement at Foxes Field, Ebley Road, Stonehouse: Excavations in 2010–2011, Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Report 8, KembleGoogle Scholar
Brodribb, A.C.C., Hands, A.R., and Walker, D.R. 2005: The Roman Villa at Shakenoak Farm, Oxfordshire. Excavations 1960–76, British Archaeological Reports British Series 395, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A. 1994: ‘A Romano-British shell-gritted pottery and tile manufacturing site at Harrold, Bedfordshire’, Bedfordshire Archaeology 21, 19–10Google Scholar
Cantrill, T.C. 1931: ‘Geological report on Uriconium’, Archaeologia Cambrensis 86, 8798Google Scholar
Catchpole, T. 2002. ‘Excavations at West Drive, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, 1997-9’, Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 120, 89101Google Scholar
Cave, R. 1977: Geology of the Malmesbury District, Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, LondonGoogle Scholar
Coles, S., Lowe, J., and Ford, S. 2011: ‘Excavations of a Roman enclosure at Park Prewett Hospital, Basingstoke, Hampshire’, Hampshire Studies 66, 3974Google Scholar
Cool, H.E.M., and Philo, C. 1998: Roman Castleford. Excavations 1974–85. Volume 1. Small Finds, LeedsGoogle Scholar
Cotton, J. 2001. ‘Prehistoric and Roman settlement in Reigate Road, Ewell: fieldwork conducted by Tom K. Walls 1945–52’, Surrey Archaeological Collections 88, 142Google Scholar
Cowan, C. 2003: Urban Development in North-West Roman Southwark. Excavations 1974–9, LondonGoogle Scholar
Croom, A.T. 2016: Segedunum. Excavations by Charles Daniels in the Roman Fort at Wallsend (1975–1984). Volume 2: The Finds, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Crummy, N. 1983: Colchester Archaeological Report 2: The Roman Small Finds from excavations in Colchester 1971–9, ColchesterGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, B. 1971: Excavations at Fishbourne 1961–1969, Society of Antiquaries of London Reports of the Research Committee 27, LeedsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, B. 1975: Excavations at Portchester Castle. Volume I: Roman, Society of Antiquaries of London Reports of the Research Committee 32, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, B. 1987: Hengistbury Head, Dorset. Volume 1: The Prehistoric and Roman Settlement, 3500 BC–AD 500, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph 13, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Dalwood, H., and Edwards, R. 2004: Excavations at Deansway, Worcester, 1988–89: Romano-British Small Town to Late Medieval City, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 139, YorkGoogle Scholar
Darling, M.J., and Gurney, D. 1993: Caister-on-Sea. Excavations by Charles Green 1951–1955, East Anglian Archaeology Report 60, DerehamGoogle Scholar
Down, A. 1989: Chichester Excavations V, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
Dreesen, R., Coquelet, C., Creemers, G., De Clercq, W., Deonteau, G., Gluhak, T., Hartoch, E., Einrich, P., Lafitte, J.-D., Picavet, P., Reniere, S. Ruppienne, V., Thiébaux, A., Vanderhoeven, Al., Vynkier, G., and Goemaire, E. 2014: ‘Unravelling geological and geographical provenance of lithic materials during Roman times in Belgium: a fruitful collaboration between geologists and archaeologists’, European Geologist 38, 1420Google Scholar
Drury, P.J. 1988: The Mansio and Other Sites in the South-Eastern Sector of Caesaromagus, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 66, YorkGoogle Scholar
Durham, E., and Fulford, M.G. 2014: A Late Roman Townhouse and its Environs: The Excavations of C. D. Drew and K. C. Collingwood-Selby in Colliton Park, Dorchester, 1937–8, Britannia Monograph 26, LondonGoogle Scholar
Edgeworth, M. 2008: ‘Excavation of a Romano-British enclosure complex at Burton Wood Farm, Burton Latimer, Northamptonshire’, Northamptonshire Archaeology 35, 2743Google Scholar
Ellis, E. 1969: ‘The petrography and provenance of Anglo-Saxon and medieval English honestones, with notes on some other hones’, Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Mineralogy 2.3, 133–87, LondonGoogle Scholar
Ellis, P. 1987: ‘Sea Mills: the 1965–1968 excavations in the Roman town of Abonae’, Proceedings of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 105, 15108Google Scholar
Ellis, P. 2000: The Roman Baths and Macellum at Wroxeter. Excavations by Graham Webster 1955–85. English Heritage Archaeological Reports 9, LondonGoogle Scholar
Evans, D.R., and Metcalf, V.M. 1992: Roman Gates Caerleon. The ‘Roman Gates’ Site in the Fortress of the Second Augustan Legion at Caerleon, Gwent: The Excavations of the Roman Buildings and Evidence for Early Medieval Activity, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Evans, E. 2000: The Caerleon Canabae. Excavations in the Civil Settlement 1984–90, Britannia Monograph 16, LondonGoogle Scholar
Field, N., and Parker Pearson, M. 2003: Fiskerton. An Iron Age Timber Causeway with Iron Age and Roman Votive Offerings: the 1981 Excavations, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Frere, S. 1984: Verulamium Excavations Volume II, Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph 1, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Frere, S.S., Bennett, B.A., Rady, J., and Stow, M.A. 1987: The Archaeology of Canterbury. VIII. Canterbury Excavations: Intra- and Extra-Mural Sites, 1949–55 and 1980–84, MaidstoneGoogle Scholar
Frere, S.S., and Wilkes, J.J. 1989: Strageath. Excavations within the Roman Fort 1973–86, Britannia Monograph 9, LondonGoogle Scholar
Fulford, M. 1984: Silchester. Excavations on the Defences 1974–80, Britannia Monograph 5, LondonGoogle Scholar
Fulford, M. 1989: The Silchester Amphitheatre. Excavations of 1979–85, Britannia Monograph 20, LondonGoogle Scholar
Fulford, M.G. 2014: ‘Shops, stalls, stores: pre-consumption deposits and centrally organised distribution in Antonine Britain’, Britannia 45, 279–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulford, M. and Timby, J. 2000: Late Iron Age and Roman Silchester. Excavations on the site of the Forum-Basilica, 1977, 1980–86, Britannia Monograph 15, LondonGoogle Scholar
Fulford, M., Clarke, A., and Eckardt, H. 2006: Life and Labour in Late Roman Silchester. Excavations in Insula IX since 1997, Britannia Monograph 22, LondonGoogle Scholar
Germany, M. 2003: Excavations at Great Holts Farm, Boreham, Essex, 1992–1994, East Anglian Archaeology Report 105, DerehamGoogle Scholar
Godwin, C.G. 1984: ‘Mining in the Elland Flags: a forgotten Yorkshire industry’, British Geological Survey Report 16.4, 117Google Scholar
Gosden, C., and Marshall, M. 1999: ‘The cultural biography of objects’, World Archaeology 31.2, 169–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, C. 2011: ‘Hertfordshire puddingstone querns – working with a difficult rock’, in Williams and Peacock 2011, 123–30Google Scholar
Green, G.W., and Welch, F.B.A. 1965: Geology of the Country Around Wells and Cheddar, Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, LondonGoogle Scholar
Greene, J.P. 1993: ‘Excavations at Dorchester Hospital (Site C), Dorchester, Dorset’, Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society 115, 71100Google Scholar
Gurney, D. 1986: Settlement, Religion and Industry on the Fen-edge; Three Romano-British Sites in Norfolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report 31, GressenhallGoogle Scholar
Hands, A.R. 1993: The Romano-British Roadside Settlement at Wilcote, Oxfordshire. I. Excavations 1990–92, British Archaeological Reports British Series 232, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hands, A.R. 1998: The Romano-British Roadside Settlement at Wilcote, Oxfordshire. II. Excavations 1993–96, British Archaeological Reports British Series 265, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Hands, A.R. and Cotswold Archaeology 2004: The Romano-British Roadside Settlement at Wilcote, Oxfordshire. Excavations 1997–2000, British Archaeological Reports British Series 370, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Hanson, W.S. 2007: Elginhaugh: A Flavian Fort and its Annexe. Volume 2, Britannia Monograph 23, LondonGoogle Scholar
Hey, G. 1995: ‘Iron Age and Roman settlement at Old Shifford Farm, Standlake’, Oxoniensia 60, 93175Google Scholar
Holbrook, N. 2004: ‘Turkdean Roman villa, Gloucestershire: archaeological investigations 1997–1998’, Britannia 35, 3976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, N. 2003: Excavation of Roman Sites at Cramond, Edinburgh, Society of Antiquaries of Scotland Monograph 23, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
Hostetter, E., and Howe, T.N. 1997: The Romano-British Villa at Castle Copse, Great Bedwyn, Bloomington and IndianopolisGoogle Scholar
Howard-Davis, C. 2009: The Carlisle Millennium Project: Excavations in Carlisle, 1998–2001. Volume 2: The Finds, LancasterGoogle Scholar
Houliston, M. 1999: ‘Excavations at The Mount Roman villa, Maidstone, 1994’, Archaeologia Cantiana 119, 71172Google Scholar
Hughes, G. 1996 : The Excavation of a Late Prehistoric and Romano-British Settlement at Thornwell Farm, Chepstow, Gwent, 1992, British Archaeological Reports British Series 244, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurst, D. 2006: Roman Droitwich: Dodderhill Fort, Bays Meadow Villa, and Roadside Settlements. Council for British Archaeology Research Report 146, YorkGoogle Scholar
Ingham, D., Oetgen, J., and Slowikowski, A. 2016: Newnham: A Roman Bathhouse and Estate Centre East of Bedford, East Anglian Archaeology Report 158, GressenhallGoogle Scholar
Jackson, R. 2012: Ariconium, Herefordshire. An Iron Age Settlement and Romano-British ‘Small Town’, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Jarrett, M.J. and Wrathmell, S. 1981: An Iron Age and Roman Farmstead in South Glamorgan, CardiffGoogle Scholar
Jennings, D., Muir, J., Palmer, S., and Smith, A. 2004: Thornhill Farm, Fairford, Gloucestershire. An Iron Age and Roman Pastoral Site in the Upper Thames Valley, Thames Valley Landscapes Monographs 23, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Jones, A. 2011 : Roman Birmingham 3. Excavations at Metchley Roman Fort 1999–2001 and 2004–2005: Western Settlement, the Livestock Complex and the Western Defence, British Archaeological Reports British Series 534, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, A. 2012: Roman Birmingham 4. Excavations at Metchley Roman Fort 2004–2005: The Western Fort Interior, Defences and Post-Roman Activity, British Archaeological Reports British Series 552, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellaway, G.S., and Welch, F.B.A. 1993: The Geology of the Bristol District. Memoir for 1:63,360 Special Sheet, Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, LondonGoogle Scholar
Kopytoff, I. 1986: ‘The cultural biography of things: commodification as process’, in Appadurai, A. (ed.), The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, Cambridge, 6492Google Scholar
Lambrick, G., and Robinson, M. 1979: Iron Age and Roman Riverside Settlements at Farmoor, Oxfordshire. Council for British Archaeology Research Report 32, YorkGoogle Scholar
Lavender, N.J. 1997: ‘Middle Iron Age and Romano-British settlement at Great Dunmow: excavations at Buildings Farm 1993’, Essex Archaeology and History 28, 4791Google Scholar
Leach, P. 1982: Ilchester. Volume 1. Excavations 1974–1975, Western Archaeological Trust Excavation Monograph 3, BristolGoogle Scholar
Leach, P., and Ellis, E. 1991: ‘Ilchester Archaeology: excavations on the eastern defences and suburbs, 1985’, Proceedings of the Somerset Archaeological and Natural History Society 135, 1184Google Scholar
Leach, P., and Evans, C.J. 2001: Fosse Lane, Shepton Mallet, 1990, Britannia Monograph 28, LondonGoogle Scholar
Leech, R. 1982: Excavations at Catsgore 1970–1973. A Romano-British Village, Western Archaeological Trust Excavation Monograph 2, BristolGoogle Scholar
Lloyd Morgan, C. 1885–8: ‘Bristol building stones’, Proceedings of the Bristol Naturalists’ Society n.s. 5.2, 95115Google Scholar
MacGregor, A. 1976: The Archaeology of York. The Small Finds. Finds from a Roman Sewer System and an Adjacent Building in Church Street, YorkGoogle Scholar
Manning, W.H. 1995: Report on the Excavations at Usk 1965–1976. The Roman Small Finds, CardiffGoogle Scholar
Marvell, A.G., and Owen-John, H.S. 1997: Leucarum. Excavations at the Roman Auxiliary Fort at Loughor, West Glamorgan, 1982–84 and 1987–88, Britannia Monograph 12, LondonGoogle Scholar
May, J. 1996: Dragonby. Report on Excavations at an Iron Age and Romano-British Settlement in Northern Lincolnshire, Oxbow Monograph 61, Oxford LondonGoogle Scholar
McWhirr, A. 1988: ‘The Roman Swithland slate industry’, Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological and Historical Society 62, 18Google Scholar
Medlycott, M. 2011: The Roman Town of Great Chesterford, East Anglian Archaeology Report 137, GressenhallGoogle Scholar
Miket, R. 1983: The Roman Fort at South Shields: Excavation of the Defences 1977–1981, Newcastle upon TyneGoogle Scholar
Miles, D., Palmer, S., Smith, A., and Jones, G.P. 2007: Iron Age and Roman Settlement in the Upper Thames Valley. Excavations at Claydon Pike and other Sites within the Cotswold Water Park, Thames Valley Landscape Monograph 26, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Miller, L., Schofield, J., and Rhodes, M. 1986: The Roman Quay at St. Magnus House, London. Excavations at New Fresh Wharf, Lower Thames Street, London 1974–7, London and Middlesex Archaeological Society Special Paper 8, LondonGoogle Scholar
Miller, T.E. 1995: ‘The Romano-British temple precinct at Great Chesterford, Essex’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society 84, 1557Google Scholar
Millett, M. 2006: Shiptonthorpe, East Yorkshire: Archaeological Studies of a Romano-British Roadside Settlement, Yorkshire Archaeological Report 5, LeedsGoogle Scholar
Millett, M., and Graham, D. 1986: Excavations on the Roman-British Small Town at Neatham, Hampshire, 1969–1979, Hampshire Field Club and Archaeological Society Monograph 3, WinchesterGoogle Scholar
Morey, J.E., and Dunham, K.C. 1953: ‘A petrographical study of medieval hones from Yorkshire’, Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society 29, 141–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, F.M. 2010: North Sea and Channel Connectivity during the Late Iron Age and Roman Period (175/150 BC–AD 409), British Archaeological Reports International Series S2157, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neal, D.S. 1974: The Excavation of the Roman Villa at Gadebridge Park, Hemel Hempstead, Society of Antiquaries of London Reports of the Research Committee 31, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niblett, R., Manning, W., and Saunders, C. 2006: ‘Verulamium: excavations within the Roman town’, Britannia 37, 53188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholson, K., and Woolhouse, T. 2016: A Late Iron Age and Romano-British Farmstead at Cedars Park, Stowmarket, Suffolk, East Anglian Archaeology Report 160, Bury St EdmundsGoogle Scholar
Palmer, J. 2001: ‘Roman Purbeck stone: a new database’, Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society 123, 104–9Google Scholar
Palmer, J. 2004: ‘Database of the Roman Purbeck stone industry: a progress report’, Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society 126, 170–1Google Scholar
Parfitt, K. 2000: ‘A Roman occupation at Dickson's Corner, WorthArchaeologia Cantiana 129, 107–48Google Scholar
Peacock, D.P.S. 1987: ‘Iron Age and Roman quern production at Lodsworth, West Sussex’, Antiquaries Journal 67, 6185Google Scholar
Philp, B. 1981: The Excavation of the Roman Forts of the Classis Britannica at Dover, 1970–1977, Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit Monograph Series Research Report 3, DoverGoogle Scholar
Philp, B. 1996: The Roman Villa at Orpington, Kent, Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit Monograph Series Research Report 7, DoverGoogle Scholar
Pick, M.C. 1964: ‘The stratigraphy and sedimentary features of the the Old Red Sandstone, Portishead coastal section, northeast Somerset’, Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 75, 199221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, J. 2001: ‘The London Basin's gravel churches: indications of geology, medieval history and geographical distribution’, Landscape History 23, 528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, T.W., and Trow, S.D. 1988: ‘Puckeridge-Braughing. Herts: the Ermine Street excavations, 1971–1972. The Late Iron Age and Roman settlement’, Hertfordshire Archaeology 20, 1191Google Scholar
Price, E.D., Wright, W.B., Jones, R.C.B., Tonks, L.H., and Whitehead, T.H. 1963: Geology of the Country Around Preston, Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, LondonGoogle Scholar
Rees, H., Crummy, N., Ottaway, P.J., and Dunn, G. 2008: Artefacts and Society in Roman and Medieval Winchester. Small Finds from the Suburbs and Defences 1971–1986, WinchesterGoogle Scholar
Reniere, S., and De Clercq, W. 2018: ‘Gallo-Roman whetstone building deposits: the cultural biography of the domestic sphere in northern Gaul’, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 51, 6776Google Scholar
Reniere, S., Thiébaux, A., Dreesen, R, Goemare, E. and De Clercq, W. 2018: ‘Cross-Channel connectivity: Wealden whetstone imports from Roman Britain to the Continent’, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 373, 313–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, M. 1986: ‘Hones’, in Miller, Schofield, and Rhodes 1986, 240–3Google Scholar
Robertson, T. 1927: The Geology of the South Wales Coalfield. Part 2. Abergavenny (2nd edn), Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, LondonGoogle Scholar
Rodwell, W., and Rodwell, K. 1993 : Rivenhall: Investigations of a Roman Villa, Church and Village. Volume 2 – Specialist Studies and Index to Volumes 1 and 2, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 80, ChelmsfordGoogle Scholar
Rogerson, A. 1977: Excavations at Scole, 1973, East Anglian Archaeology Report 5, GressenhallGoogle Scholar
Rook, T. 1987: ‘The Roman villa site at Dicket Mead, Lockley, Welwyn’, Hertfordshire Archaeology and History 9, 79–17Google Scholar
Rushworth, A. 2009: Housesteads Roman Fort – the Grandest Station. Excavations and Survey at Housesteads, 1954–95, by Charles Daniels, John Gillam, James Crow and Others, SwindonGoogle Scholar
Shaffrey, R. 2006: Grinding and Milling. A Study of Romano-British Rotary Querns and Millstones made from Old Red Sandstone, British Archaeological Reports British Series 409, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaffrey, R. 2015: ‘Intensive milling practices in the Romano-British landscape of southern England: using newly established criteria for distinguishing millstones from rotary querns’, Britannia 46, 5592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaffrey, R., and Allen, J.R.L. 2014: ‘A complete whetstone of Wealden lithology from the Roman site at Tackley, Oxfordshire’, Britannia 45, 288–93Google Scholar
Shaffrey, R., and Roe, F. 2011: ‘The widening use of Lodsworth stone: Neolithic to Romano-British quern distribution’, in Williams and Peacock 2011, 309–24Google Scholar
Simmonds, A., Biddulph, E., and Welsh, K. 2018: In the Shadow of Corinium. Prehistoric and Roman Occupation at Kingsmill South, Cirencester, Gloucestershire, Thames Valley Landscapes Monograph 41, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Smart, C. 2014: A Roman Military Complex and Medieval Settlement on Church Hill, Calstock, Cornwall: Survey and Excavations 2007–2010, British Archaeological Reports British Series 603, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Smith, R.J.C. 1993: Excavations at County Hall, Colliton Park, Dorchester, Dorset, 1988, Wessex Archaeology Report 4, SalisburyGoogle Scholar
Speake, G. 2012: ‘An early Romano-British villa at Coombe East End’, Oxoniensia 77, 190Google Scholar
Stansbie, D., Smith, A., Laws, G., and Haines, T. 2008: ‘Excavations of Iron-Age and Roman Occupation at Coln Gravel, Thornhill Farm, Fairford, Gloucestershire, 2003 and 2004’, Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 126, 3182Google Scholar
Stead, I.M. 1976: Excavations at Winterton Roman Villa and three Roman Sites in North Lincolnshire, 1958–1967, HMSO Department of the Environment Archaeological Report 9, LondonGoogle Scholar
Strahan, A., and Cantrill, T.C. 1912: The Geology of the South Wales Coalfield. Part 3. The Country Around Cardiff (2nd edn), Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, LondonGoogle Scholar
Sutherland, D.S. 1982: Igneous Rocks of the British Isles, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
Thiébaux, A., Feller, M. Duchêne, B., and Goemare, E. 2016: ‘Roman whetstone production in northern Gaul (Belgium and northern France)’, Journal of Lithic Studies 3, 565–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiébaux, A., Goemaere, E., and Herbosch, A. 2012: ‘Un atelier gallo-romain de pierre à aiguiser découvert a Buizingen (Hal, Belgique): reconstitution des étapes de fabrication et détermination des origines géologique at géographiques du matériau’, Revue du Nord 94, 145–57Google Scholar
Thomas, I.P. 1974: ‘The Westphalian (Coal Measures) in South Wales’, in Owen, T.R. (ed.), The Upper Palaeozoic and Post-Palaeozoic Rocks of Wales, Cardiff, 130–60Google Scholar
Timby, J. 1998: Excavations at Kingscote and Wycomb, Gloucestershire. A Roman Estate Centre and Small Town in the Cotswolds with Notes on Related Settlements, CirencesterGoogle Scholar
Trotter, F.M. 1942: The Forest of Dean Coal and Iron Ore Field, Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, LondonGoogle Scholar
Wainwright, G.J. 1967: Coygan Camp. A Prehistoric, Romano-British and Dark Age Settlement in Carmarthenshire, AberystwythGoogle Scholar
Walker, G., Thomas, A., and Bateman, C. 2004: ‘Bronze Age and Romano-British sites south-east of Tewkesbury: evaluations and excavations 1991–7, Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 122, 29–9Google Scholar
Ward, J. 1903: The Roman Fort of Gellygaer in the County of Glamorgan, excavated by the Cardiff Naturalists’ Society in the Years 1899, 1900 & 1901, CardiffGoogle Scholar
Watts, L., and Leach, P. 1996: Henley Wood, Temples and Cemetery. Excavations 1962–69 by the late Ernest Greenfield & Others, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 99, YorkGoogle Scholar
Wedlake, W.J. 1958: Excavations at Camerton, Somerset, CamertonGoogle Scholar
Welch, F.B.A., and Trotter, F.M. 1961: The Geology of the Country Around Monmouth and Chepstow, Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, LondonGoogle Scholar
Wenham, I.P., and Heywood, B. 1997: The 1968 to 1970 Excavations in the Vicus at Malton, North Yorkshire, Yorkshire Archaeological Report 3, LeedsGoogle Scholar
White, R. and Barker, P. 2002: Wroxeter. Life and Death of the Roman City, StroudGoogle Scholar
Wickenden, N.P. 1988: Excavations at Great Dunmow, Essex: a Romano-British Town in the Trinovantian Civitas, East Anglian Archaeology Report 41, ChelmsfordGoogle Scholar
Wickenden, N.P. 1992: The Temple and Other Sites in the North-eastern Sector of Caesaromagus, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 75, YorkGoogle Scholar
Williams, D. and Peacock, D. (eds) 2011: Bread for the People: The Archaeology of Mills and Milling. British Archaeological Reports International Series 2274, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Williams, H. 1923:’The Romano-British site at Rhostryfan, Caernarvonshire, III’, Archaeologia Cambrensis 78, 291–30Google Scholar
Williams, R.J., Hart. P.J., and Williams, A.T.L. 1996: Wavendon Gate. A Late Iron Age and Roman Settlement in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire Archaeological Society Monograph Series 10, AylesburyGoogle Scholar
Willis, S. 2013: The Roman Roadside Settlement and Multi-period Ritual Complex at Nettleton and Rothwell, Lincolnshire. Volume 1, CanterburyGoogle Scholar
Willis, S., and Carne, P. 2013: A Roman Villa at the Edge of Empire. Excavations at Ingleby Barwick, Stockton-on-Tees, 2003–04, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 170, YorkGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D., Bagnall, A., and Taylor, B. 2014: Report on the Excavation of a Romano-British Site in Wortley, South Gloucestershire, British Archaeological Reports British Series 591, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, P.R. 2002: Cataractonium: Roman Catterick and its Hinterland. Excavations and Research, 1958–1997, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 129, YorkGoogle Scholar
Woodward, A., and Leach, P. 1993: The Uley Shrines. Excavations of a Ritual Complex on West Hill, Uley, Gloucestershire 1977–9. English Heritage Archaeological Report 17, LondonGoogle Scholar
Woodiwiss, S. 1992: Iron Age and Roman Salt Production and the Medieval Town of Droitwich. Excavations at the Old Bowling Green and Friar Street, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 81, YorkGoogle Scholar
Woodward, P.J., Davies, S.M., and Graham, A.H. 1993: Excavations at the Old Methodist Chapel and Greyhound Yard, Dorchester, 1981–1984, Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society Monograph Series 12, DorchesterGoogle Scholar
Wright, W.B., Sherlock, R.L., Wray, D.A., Lloyd, W., and Tonks, L.H. 1927: The Geology of the Rosendale Anticline, Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, LondonGoogle Scholar
Zienkiewicz, J.D. 1986: The Legionary Fortress Baths at Caerleon. II. The Finds, CardiffGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

FIG. 1. Distribution of whetstone forms in Roman Britain: (A) bars; (B) tablets.

Figure 1

FIG. 2. Distribution of recorded whetstone lithologies in Roman Britain: (A) granite, lava and tuff; (B) basalt/dolerite; (C) mica-schist; (D) slate.

Figure 2

FIG. 3. Distribution of recorded whetstone lithologies in Roman Britain: (A) Brownstones; (B) Pennant sandstone.

Figure 3

FIG. 4. Distribution of recorded whetstone lithologies in Roman Britain: (A) micaceous sandstone; (B) grey sandstone; (C) Millstone Grit; (D) Coal Measures.

Figure 4

FIG. 5. Distribution of recorded whetstones lithologies in Roman Britain: (A) red sandstone; (B) ferruginous sandstone.

Figure 5

FIG. 6. Recorded whetstones of Wealden lithology in Roman Britain: (A) Distribution; (B) Distribution of whetstones of Wealden provenance in Roman Gallia Belgica and Germania Inferior, according to Reniere et al. (2018); (C) Comparative spatial distributions (exponential) of Wealden whetstones over the land area of Roman Britain based on marketing from London or the quarry site in the north-west Weald, using a random sample of 20 sites (after Allen 2016).

Figure 6

FIG. 7. Distribution of recorded whetstones of limestone lithology: (A) sandy limestone; (B) shelly limestone; (C) Carboniferous Limestone; (D) Lias cementstone and sandy oolite.

Figure 7

FIG. 8. Speculative model for the entangled whetstone industry based on the Brownstones and Pennant sandstone of the West Midlands.

Supplementary material: File

Allen supplementary material

Allen supplementary material

Download Allen supplementary material(File)
File 69.9 KB