Content uploaded by Mary E Lewis
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mary E Lewis on Sep 29, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
This article was downloaded by: [University of Reading]
On: 26 September 2014, At: 06:09
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
World Archaeology
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rwar20
People on the move in Roman Britain
Hella Eckardta, Gundula Müldnerb & Mary Lewisb
a University of Reading
b Department of Archaeology, University of Reading
Published online: 07 Jul 2014.
To cite this article: Hella Eckardt, Gundula Müldner & Mary Lewis (2014) People on the move in Roman
Britain, World Archaeology, 46:4, 534-550, DOI: 10.1080/00438243.2014.931821
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2014.931821
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)
contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our
licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or
suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication
are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor &
Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently
verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial
or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use
can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
People on the move in Roman Britain
Hella Eckardt, Gundula Müldner and Mary Lewis
Abstract
Levels of mobility in the Roman Empire have long been assumed to be relatively high, as attested by
epigraphy, demography, material culture and, most recently, isotope analysis and the skeletons themselves.
Building on recent data from a range of Romano-British sites (Poundbury in Dorset, York, Winchester,
Gloucester, Catterick and Scorton), this article explores the significance of the presence of migrants at these
sites and the impact they may have had on their host societies. The authors explore the usefulness of
diaspora theory, and in particular the concept of imperial and colonial diasporas, to illustrate the complex-
ities of identities in later Roman Britain.
Keywords
Mobility; Roman Britain; isotope analysis.
The need to travel would seem to be part of the experience of the Roman Empire, which may
partially explain its difference from barbarian lands.
(Laurence 2001b, 169)
The Roman Empire with its vast armies and wide-ranging administration is often seen as
characterized by high levels of mobility, and there is now an extensive academic literature
analysing this phenomenon (e.g. Adams and Laurence 2001; Foubert and Breeze 2014; Horden
and Purcell 2000; for the pre-Roman Mediterranean, see van Dommelen 2012). Levels of
mobility experienced in the Roman Empire are intimately linked to its highly developed
infrastructure that included detailed geographical knowledge, relatively good roads, detailed
itineraries and the cursus publicus, all of which were linked to the creation and maintenance of
the empire (Laurence 2001b, 167). Considerable distances could be covered at speed on horse-
back, or on foot, in a cart or litter, in all cases making use of regularly spaced accommodation
(Foubert and Breeze 2014, 267–71; Laurence 1999, 136–42, 2001a,81–8; Salway 2001). In
addition to the carefully planned movement of magistrates and emperors and the postal and
messenger system, people travelled for a host of reasons (cf. Casson 1994,128–299; Handley
2011,53–62), such as in search of marvels and wisdom, with Greece and Egypt seen as
World Archaeology Vol. 46(4): 534–550 Mobility & Migration
© 2014 Taylor & Francis ISSN 0043-8243 print/1470-1375 online
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2014.931821
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
particularly attractive to ancient ‘tourists’(Foertmeyer 1989; Lomine 2005,72–5). The line
between tourism and pilgrimage is not clear-cut in antiquity (Elsner and Rutherford 2005) and
one might also be advised to travel for health reasons (Casson 1994, 130–4). People also
travelled for private business and for family and other occasions, such as games, festivals,
birthdays or funerals (Adams 2001, 148–9; Lomine 2005,75–85). The army and commerce
were prominent drivers of mobility but there is also considerable evidence for seasonal migra-
tion related to agricultural practice and to major urban building projects (Laurence 1999, 146–7,
2001b, 169). Despite problems with weather and bandits, travel was reasonably safe during the
imperial period (Foubert and Breeze 2014, 271–5; Adams 2001, 154–8). While travel and
mobility were seen as attractive to some, there is also evidence for home-sickness, in particular
among those exiled against their will (Doblhofer 1987).
Much of the research on mobility in the Roman Empire relies on the analysis of literary
sources and epigraphy (e.g. Handley 2011; Noy 2000; Wierschowski 2001). Another well-
established avenue of research is to use unusual objects or burial rites as an indication of the
presence of foreigners. The problems inherent in these data sets are now also well rehearsed:
origo is recorded in only a small proportion of inscriptions and the epigraphic habit itself is not
evenly spread across ancient populations. Those who have assimilated well into their host
society are not reflected in the source material (Handley 2011, 41). Literary sources are strongly
biased towards the male elite. Further, material culture and burial rite are not direct reflections of
ethnicity, but complex expressions of identity, modified and developed through interaction and
over time (Pearce 2010). More recently, isotopic analysis (oxygen, strontium, lead, carbon and
nitrogen) of human dental tissues has been employed to establish whether selected individuals
were migrants, and in some cases to suggest where they may have originated (e.g. Evans et al.
2006; Leach et al. 2009; Montgomery et al. 2010; Müldner et al. 2011; Perry et al. 2008; Prowse
et al. 2007; Schweissing and Grupe 2003). Unlike traditional archaeological evidence, these data
are biologically determined, as the isotopic composition of tooth crowns and roots, which form
in childhood, inadvertently reflects the diet and climatic and geological setting of an individual’s
residence in early life. While the principles of this method are very well established, it also has
to be acknowledged that, as a rapidly developing scientifictechnique, the detailed interpretation
of isotope data is, to some extent, still in flux (Brettell, Montgomery, and Evans 2012; Eckardt
and Müldner 2014; Pollard 2011; see also Bruun 2010; Killgrove 2010).
Recent work on later Roman burials from Britain has attempted to address the question of
mobility through a series of case studies that contrasted isotope analysis with the archaeological
evidence from Gloucester (Chenery et al. 2010), York (Leach et al. 2009,2010; Müldner et al.
2011), Winchester (Eckardt et al. 2009), Catterick (Chenery et al. 2011) and most recently
Scorton near Catterick (Eckardt et al. forthcoming). The limitations of short scientific papers
mean that the human dimension of the evidence can often be only superficially addressed. In
order to remedy this shortcoming this article will focus on the wider implications of these
studies with regard to possible evidence for interactions between incomers and locals. In
particular, the interplay between isotope evidence and burial rite and grave goods is examined,
as are patterns of gender, age and status.
Throughout our work, we have found the concept of diasporas, and especially of imperial
and colonial diasporas, a helpful framework (Cohen 2008; Lilley 2004; see Eckardt 2010). This
model can aid in our understanding of not just ‘victim diasporas’(e.g. the Jewish and African
diaspora), but also those who leave their homeland in search of work, in pursuit of trade or to
People on the move in Roman Britain 535
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
further colonial ambitions (Cohen 2008, table 1.1). Members of trade diasporas are often distinct
from both the societies in which they originated and those in which they live, as they tend to
participate in a common commercial culture (Cohen 2008, 83). The model has been applied to
the archaeology of early modern Chinese and East Indian communities (Armstrong and Hauser
2004; Voss 2005). For the Roman world, we may see individuals such as Barates of Palmyra
(Syria) and his native British wife Regina, buried on Hadrian’s Wall, as part of such trade
diasporas or even as an example of multi-culturalism (Nesbitt, 2014; Noy 2010; cf. Carroll
2012). Indeed, there is plenty of evidence that merchants maintained a professional identity that
marked them as separate from their host communities. This was formalized in the conventus
civium Romanorum, the association of Roman citizens, which was designed to defend the
interests and privileges of incomers in interactions with host communities and the imperial
authorities; guilds of foreigners are also attested at a number of sites (Broekaert 2013; Eckardt
2012, 247; Frere and Fulford 2002; Schlippschuh 1974, 146–57; Van Andringa 2003;). Equally
applicable to the Roman world is the model of imperial diasporas, which aims to include the
experience of the colonizers who move in the service of the army and administration, rather than
just of those displaced by imperial powers (Cohen 2008, 69). The archaeology of members of
the British colonizing forces in North America and Australia illustrates how these individuals
defined and developed their identities (Casella 2005; Lawrence 2003; Lilley 2006). The themes
of colonialism and imperialism are of course major ones in Roman archaeology, and again we
may consider named individuals from Britain, such as the Gaul Classicianus who became
procurator of Britannia and was commemorated in London (Cottril 1936).
Recent work on diasporas demonstrates the maintenance of traditions but also interactions
with the host communities, which led to the acceptance (often in modified form) of new material
culture and new social practices. While much of the early research on diaspora was concerned
with the identification of ‘survivals’, i.e. cultural traits thought to link directly to a group’s
origins, more recent theoretical work generally acknowledges that culture is not static and
emphasizes the importance of context and the complexities of processes of creolization and
hybridity (e.g. Stockhammer 2012; van Dommelen and Terrenato 2007; Webster 2001; Wilkie
2004,113–14). Diaspora communities are now seen as different not only from members of the
host population but also from their original homeland communities (Lilley 2004).
Throughout this, it must be acknowledged that applying the concept of diaspora too broadly
beyond its original definition is not uncontroversial. Criticism has included that the term is at
risk of becoming too diluted to be analytically useful. The question of whether key criteria such
as dispersion, homeland orientation and boundary maintenance are met has to be addressed in
each case (Brubaker 2005). These issues are especially important in the Roman Empire, where
the notion of a single, clearly defined homeland is obviously difficult and where there is a
marked tension between globalizing or unifying forces and local diversity (e.g. Hingley 2005).
This article advocates a loose definition of the concept of ‘diaspora’as a means of asking
questions that would otherwise remain unexplored while recognizing that the defining char-
acteristics of diasporic communities sensu strictu, such as a ‘continuous social or spiritual link
to the homeland’(Lilley 2004, 291) cannot always be conclusively demonstrated. We will focus
on examples of what we assume to be imperial and colonial diasporas, that is individuals that
moved as a consequence of empire, associated with the army, administration and trade. Many of
the graves selected for isotope analysis are of high status and characterized by unusual grave
goods or burial rites; thus we do not claim to offer a representative picture of mobility in Roman
536 Hella Eckardt, Gundula Müldner and Mary Lewis
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
Britain and future work may establish evidence both for forced migration among low-status
graves and a lack of mobility in rural communities.
Migrants and locals in Roman Britain
When considering evidence that contrasts artefacts and burial rite with isotope (and, where
available, osteological) data, we can broadly distinguish four groups of people:
1. those where both burial rite/grave goods and isotopes suggest a foreign origin;
2. those that appear local archaeologically but are foreign isotopically;
3. those that appear foreign archaeologically but are probably local isotopically;
4. those that appear to be local both archaeologically and isotopically.
Examples from Roman Britain for these four categories will be briefly introduced in the
following before we explore the wider interpretative issues arising from these data in the
discussion.
Individuals where both burial rites/grave goods and isotopes suggest a foreign origin
There are now a number of cases, of both men and women, where the isotopic evidence appears
to confirm suggestions of foreign origin made on the basis of exotic grave goods and/or unusual
burial rite. Striking examples are late Roman males with impressive belt fittings and weapons,
such as the so-called ‘Gloucester Goth’whose silver belt fittings have parallels in south-eastern
Europe and south Russia and whose isotopic profile is indeed consistent with this suggestion
(Hills and Hurst 1989; see Evans et al. 2012). Another good example is a 30–40-year-old male
buried with an impressive chip-carved belt and an iron axe at Dyke Hills just outside
Dorchester; again, isotope analysis suggests an origin in a cooler, more continental climate
(Booth forthcoming).
Similarly, some of the males buried wearing belt fittings and crossbow brooches at the
cemetery of Lankhills, Winchester, are not from Britain (e.g. nos. 81 and 426: Evans et al.
2006), and the same is true of several of the young men buried with similar items at Scorton
(e.g. nos. 1, 6 and 7: Eckardt et al. forthcoming). In both these cases it has been suggested that
these men were members of the later Roman army and/or administration who had been stationed
in Britain from abroad. Some authors have even felt tempted to suggest specific places of origin
(such as the Danube provinces) for them (Clarke 1979; Evans et al. 2006). However, as we will
show below and as has been suggested by Cool (2010a,2010b) for Lankhills, the differences in
burial rite, in other words whether these belts and brooches were worn in death or not (Clarke
1979), is a poor predictor of origin. Finally, even where individuals appear united by similar,
unusual burial rites, this is no indication that they all originate from the same area or are even all
foreign. This is illustrated by the so-called ‘Headless Romans’, a group of exclusively male
burials in a high-status cemetery at York. The majority of these had been beheaded and/or
exhibited other signs of ante- or peri-mortem trauma. While a large number of them were indeed
identified as non-local, it was the considerable diversity of isotopic profiles (and therefore
People on the move in Roman Britain 537
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
geographical origins) within the group that was of particular interest (Montgomery et al. 2011;
Müldner et al. 2011).
Women also fall into this category. An exceptionally rich female burial from London
Spitalfields has been identified as that of a migrant, probably from the City of Rome, on the
basis of lead isotopes (Montgomery et al. 2010). Isotope data for a woman buried with ivory and
jet bracelets and a range of other high-status goods from York, on the other hand, are incon-
clusive; however, morphometric traits on her skull suggest that she is of African descent (Leach
et al. 2009).
While all these individuals may be classed as diasporic in a wider sense as they are living
away from their homeland and seem to be maintaining a symbolic connection to those
homelands through their artefacts and cultural practices, any such link is not clear-cut. We
will argue below that membership of their current identity groups (for the men army/admin-
istration and for the women generalized elite status) may be the overriding aspects of their
identity.
Individuals who appear local archaeologically but are foreign isotopically
In defining the burials of ‘locals’there is clearly a danger of circular arguments as all too
often graves with few or no surviving grave goods are assumed to be local. Thus at
Lankhills two ‘locals’, female 0271 and male 0281, were found to be isotopically intrusive;
however, the criteria by which they were classed as native Romano-British (pot and unworn
shoes and a coin, respectively), may be queried (Fig. 1;seeEckardtetal.2009). There are
also still many problems identifying what may have been significant organic burial goods or
subtle burial rites.
Figure 1 Oxygen and strontium isotope data for Romano-British burials from Lankhills/Winchester
(replotted after Evans et al. 2006 and Eckardt et al. 2009). Also shown is an estimate of the phosphate
oxygen stable isotope range consistent with a childhood in Britain (2SD range of 615 individuals from
Britain, after Evans et al. 2012) and the strontium isotope range for the chalk terrain around Winchester
(see Eckardt et al. 2009). Labels refer to individuals mentioned in the text (codes preceded ‘Sk’refer to
skeleton numbers from the new Lankhills excavations (Booth et al. 2010).
538 Hella Eckardt, Gundula Müldner and Mary Lewis
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
Over time, numerous aspects of Romano-British burial rites have been used to suggest
‘local’or ‘foreign’identities. Clarke’s(1979,377–89) distinction of the wearing in death of
belts and crossbow brooches as an indication of intrusive individuals (as opposed to the
placing of these objects in the grave, which Clarke saw as a ‘native’rite), was, for a time,
considered plausible among Romano-British archaeologists, but is clearly misconstrued. For
example, Skeleton 5 at Scorton had a belt and crossbow brooch placed in the grave (in what
Clarke would see as a ‘local’custom), but this young man’s isotopic signature shows he is
clearly not from Britain.
Subtle differences as to whether an individual was buried wearing a brooch and belt or
had them placed next to the feet probably contain meanings that we can no longer identify,
but the very inclusion of these objects in the grave may be indicative of incomers, especially
if the objects are typologically unusual for Britain. From the iconographic evidence it seems
likely that the wearing in life of crossbow brooches and belts was a major aspect of the
professional identities of the Scorton and Lankhills males as these probably were serving in
the Late Roman army and administration (Stout 1994,85;Swift2000a). This shared cultural
and social milieu appears to override specific origins, as may have in some cases an
individual’sdesireto‘blend in’or to adopt new practices. Another factor is, of course,
the impact mourners had on the burial rite; thus No. 5 at Scorton may have had a local wife
or local friends, who adapted and developed burial rites within a local context. For young
men in particular there may have been difficulties in preserving traditions and customs from
their homeland, which in many societies are maintained by women (e.g. Danforth 1982;
Seremetakis 1991).
There may of course be issues as to how ‘locals’are defined archaeologically (see above).
Individuals who appear foreign archaeologically but are isotopically probably local
Despite common misconceptions, isotope analysis is not actually suited to identifying locals, as
we cannot exclude the possibility that individuals whose isotopic ‘signatures’are consistent with
an upbringing close to the place where they were buried had instead moved from a more distant
area with similar environmental parameters. Indeed, in the context of investigating migration to
Roman Britain this issue has proved to be a significant constraint, since many parts of England
and Wales are isotopically indistinguishable from large areas of western Europe and even the
Mediterranean (Chenery et al. 2011; Evans et al. 2012; see Brettell, Evans, et al. 2012). While
most isotope analysts follow the principle of Occam’s razor that the simplest explanation is
usually the best and that most individuals who appear isotopically local are indeed no more than
that, it is worth bearing this restriction in mind.
An unusual burial at Catterick contained a jet necklace and bracelet, a shale armlet and a
copper-alloy anklet. Given that these typically female objects were found on what was identified
as a male skeleton, it was suggested at the time that the individual was a eunuch or transvestite
priest of the goddess Cybele (Cool 2002,41–2; Wilson 2002, 176–8). Multi-isotope analysis did
not show this individual to be very exotic; rather, the data are all compatible with a British or
western European origin (Chenery et al. 2011, 1533–4). Regardless of the problems of sexing
this individual (Chenery et al. 2011, 1526), it may be religious beliefs reflected in the lavish use
of black objects that make this individual look so unusual archaeologically rather than exotic
origins.
People on the move in Roman Britain 539
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
It has been suggested by Clarke (on the basis of beads worn around the neck and bracelets on
the wrist, as well as pots placed near the feet) that at Lankhills three females (323, 326 and 63)
were incomers (Clarke 1979, 377; Swift 2000b, 74) but the isotopic evidence is compatible with
a local origin (Fig. 1; Evans et al. 2006, 271). Similarly, a young girl (Skeleton 323) from
Lankhills who was buried wearing multiple bracelets, beads and an unusual headband, and thus
is thought to be intrusive archaeologically (Clarke 1979, 317; Swift 2000b, 74), was most likely
born and raised in Winchester (Evans et al. 2006, 271). Given that some of the bracelets are of
unmistakably British style it seems possible that one or both of the girl’s parents were foreign,
bringing with them a certain style of wearing bracelets in life and/or death but adapting this
custom by purchasing locally available jewellery. On the other hand, it may be that young girls
in particular were treated differently in death in ways that can be mistaken for indicating a
foreign origin (see below).
In summary, the apparent mismatch between archaeological evidence (cultural identity) and
biological origin may be because locals adopted new artefacts, because of the age, gender,
religion or status of an individual, or because we are dealing with second generation migrants.
Another consideration must be return migration of individuals who served or travelled abroad
and were inevitably changed by the experience (cf. Derks and Roymans 2006). These examples
serve as a useful reminder that we are not dealing with ‘pure’incomers and hosts but with
interaction and hybridity. Just as foreigners may have chosen to blend in, new burial rites and
objects may have been attractive to the host communities because (in contrast to many modern
diasporic societies) in the Roman period we are dealing with colonial/imperial diasporas where
incomers were often of high status.
Individuals who appear to be local both archaeologically and isotopically
We have already seen above (‘Individuals who appear local archaeologically but are foreign
isotopically’) that there are serious methodological problems with many archaeological attempts
to identify ‘local’burials, especially if they use ill-defined criteria or make the assumption
simply on the basis of the absence of surviving grave goods. Equally, the previous section has
shown the difficulties of employing isotope analysis to identify ‘locals’(NB In isotopic studies
this term is normally understood to mean local to the area where they were buried whereas most
archaeological investigations would take it to imply a British origin more generally). Despite
these twofold provisos, a number of examples can be considered in this fourth category. One
such is the young adult male 0932 (Grave 960, Fig. 1) from Lankhills, who was buried in what
is usually seen as a local tradition (in a wooden coffin, with two pottery vessels by his feet) and
who, isotopically, appears to be local to Winchester (Booth et al. 2010, 136–7; Eckardt et al.
2009, 2821).
At Catterick, twenty-six burials from various sites around the late Roman town and fort were
sampled; of these only one (the so-called Catterick eunuch) was truly exotic in terms of grave
goods (Wilson 2002), although the analysis gave an inconclusive isotopic profile (see above).
The ‘eunuch’aside, only one other individual from Catterick was isotopically possibly of non-
British origin, and overall the Catterick isotope data were much more homogenous than those of
other late Roman populations studied (Chenery et al. 2011). In this context it is interesting to
note that the Scorton cemetery, which, by contrast, has an unusually high proportion of intrusive
individuals isotopically and archaeologically (characterized by the frequent inclusion of
540 Hella Eckardt, Gundula Müldner and Mary Lewis
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
crossbow brooches and belts) is spatially separated from Catterick by the river Swale (Eckardt
et al. forthcoming).
One issue in adequately assessing numbers in this local/local category is that isotopic
investigations have so far focused primarily on unusual burials instead of exploring diversity
among presumed locals and ‘unpromising’burials. A shift in sampling strategy is therefore
required, in order to ensure that isotope data-sets are more representative of Roman provincial
populations as a whole (cf. Eckardt et al. 2009).
Discussion: mobility and its relation to age, gender and status
Another way of examining issues of migration in more detail is to consider the age, gender and
status of migrants and locals. The least surprising finding in relation to the isotopic investiga-
tions was the frequent identification of males, especially young males, as migrants at Scorton,
York and Lankhills. We have argued above that soldiers and administrators shared a strong
professional identity but, while often not local to Britain, they did not share a single region of
origin. People from different parts of the empire and beyond therefore experienced a sense of
shared identity through their professional practice and dress (James 2001). In the case of the so-
called ‘Headless Romans’at York we do not know the reasons for the highly unusual, shared
burial rite (it may have been a punishment or a peculiar religious belief) but again a group that is
unified in its burial rite is highly diverse in terms of its geographical origin (Müldner et al.
2011). While the movement of young males was to be expected, our work also identified
evidence for women and children experiencing migration, in either the first or second genera-
tion. For example, osteological analysis at late Roman Poundbury Camp cemetery in Dorset
identified a number of children who had died from a form of genetic anaemia (thalassemia) seen
only in Mediterranean communities. Their presence in the cemetery can be explained only by
their parents being of Mediterranean descent (Lewis 2010).
Of late Roman travellers in the western empire who left inscriptions, and where gender can be
assigned, 84 per cent were male. This represents a greater gender bias than among the
epigraphic population in general, where the ratio is c. 63 per cent male and 37 per cent female,
and perhaps suggests that more men than women were on the move (Handley 2011, 37).
Interestingly, there is some variation between different regions of the empire, with women
better represented in North Africa, Spain and Rome than in Gaul, the Balkans and Britain.
Women travelled considerable distances, as parts of family groups or with servants (Handley
2011,37–8), and the same is attested for the earlier Roman period. For example, Egyptian
evidence shows women married to soldiers travelling in Egypt (Adams 2001, 147), despite the
fact that the government appears to have discouraged such behaviour by charging the common-
law wives of army men considerable sums to leave the province (Casson 1994, 154). The reason
for this may have been the problems caused to military and official organization by the presence
of women (e.g. Tacitus Annals 3.33). While women may have followed their menfolk on army
or administrative duty and for mercantile pursuits, they may also have traded in their own right
(e.g. Lampe-Densky 2002). There are glimpses of other reasons for female travel and mobility,
too (Foubert and Breeze 2014). Thus an altar at Corbridge is inscribed in Greek to Heracles of
Tyre (Lebanon) by the priestess Diodora (RIB 1129). Diodora may have continued to worship
her god, having travelled to the north of Britain for a host of reasons, but it is possible that she
People on the move in Roman Britain 541
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
was a religious specialist. Women travelling for pleasure are also attested, as for example in a
poem inscribed on the pyramid of Cheops by a Terentia (Foubert and Breeze 2014, 184).
Returning to the archaeological evidence, very high-status women such as the so-called ‘Ivory
Bangle Lady’at York and the woman from London Spitalfields appear unusual in Britain on
account of their rich and diverse grave goods. These seem to indicate that they are members of the
elite rather than pinpointing a specific area of origin. Young girls such as Skeleton 323 from
Lankhills may stand out archaeologically, but, while she may have been the child of one or two
immigrant parents, it has been noted that the graves of young girls often contain large numbers of
jewellery items, possibly as a symbolic compensation for a non-attained wedding (Cool 2010a,
307, 2010b,30–4; see also Crummy 2010 on protective objects in infant burials).
People can adopt and adapt practices ‘en route’–and of course they are interacting with other
individuals who may be new to a location and with the established members of the local
community. This has been suggested for the cemetery at Brougham where groups possibly
originating from beyond the Danube may also have picked up ideas from the Rhineland,
possibly when stationed there (Cool 2004,464–6). At Scorton, the male No 7 was buried
with an unusual glass vessel, currently paralleled only in northern France (Price 2010, 47). The
isotope evidence suggests he is not local to Britain, and it is not impossible that this individual
purchased the glass vessel while travelling through northern France.
Mobility and diet
The investigation of diet adds yet another dimension to the study of migrant lives, as the
importance of foodways in preserving and also constructing ethnic identities has long been
noted (e.g. Brown and Mussell 1984; Kershen 2002). In diaspora theory, special emphasis is
placed on the sense of nostalgia and longing for the lost homeland conjured by familiar foods
and flavours (Sutton 2001; see Holtzman 2006). In Romano-British archaeology, studies of
food-consumption patterns have proved an extremely rewarding avenue of research. While the
main emphasis has been on how native foodways were transformed by Britannia’s integration
into the Roman Empire (e.g. Müldner 2013), the military emerges in various studies as a
separate consumer group with numerous non-British culinary traditions, although the evidence
is again more consistent with a transcultural, shared identity than with the preservation of
specific ethnic foodways by individual elements within the Roman army (e.g. Cool 2006;
Dobney 2001;King1999; van der Veen 2008, but see Swan 1992). There are of course
methodological limitations to investigating these issues as most archaeological evidence for
food consumption is no more specific than site or, at best, household level. While isotope data
lack most of the detail available from these other methods, they allow us to compare the diet of
individuals at different stages of their lives by analysing several skeletal elements with different
formation times (Sealy et al. 1995). Such investigations have already been used as an additional
tool to identify long-distance migrants and to demonstrate considerable diversity in Romano-
British populations; see Müldner 2013).
It is important not to overstate the possibilities of isotope analysis for demonstrating con-
tinuity in traditional foodways. The isotopic composition of skeletal collagen gives only a broad
characterization of the main sources of dietary protein consumed. Substantial changes in diet
between early life and adulthood may therefore be less a sign of cultural assimilation than
542 Hella Eckardt, Gundula Müldner and Mary Lewis
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
merely an issue of access. The cereal millet, for example, which is thought to have given rise to
the unusual dietary signals of individuals from York, Scorton or Kent was not cultivated in
Britain and it would probably have been simply impossible for all but the most well-connected
officials to acquire enough of it to leave a measurable trace in the skeleton (Eckardt et al.
forthcoming; Müldner et al. 2011; Pollard et al. 2011). Similarly, with the exception of teeth
which form early in life and do not change subsequently, skeletal tissues are in a constant
process of renewal and the isotopic signal obtained will reflect an average of diet over several
years of life. Even in the event of complete dietary change, childhood diet may therefore still be
at least partly reflected in bone, depending on the age at which an individual moved as well as
how long thereafter they died (see Eckardt et al. forthcoming). Despite these limitations and in
the absence of more subtle direct evidence for the foodways of individuals, it is worth asking
what the dietary isotope data may contribute to our understanding of the life experience of
migrants in Roman Britain.
Overall, the available evidence suggests that integration and change rather than continuity of
traditional ways was the predominant pattern. With the exception of one individual from Roman
York (TDC516) who may have died shortly after his arrival in Britain, it appears that individuals
with unusual childhood diets and for whom isotopic evidence for different stages of their lives is
available, were undergoing significant dietary change at the time of their deaths, presumably by
adapting to the local lifestyle at least in broad terms (see Eckardt et al. forthcoming; Müldner
2013). In the case of burial 1175 (Sk 1119) of the new Lankhills excavations, the transformation
was complete enough that the dietary signal of this older (46+ years) male who probably spent
his childhood in eastern or central Europe (Eckardt et al. 2009) and whose early diet contained
significant proportions of probably millet-based protein, was no longer distinguishable from the
local Winchester population by the end of his life (Fig. 2). While these data do not preclude the
Figure 2 Carbon and nitrogen (dietary) stable isotope ratios for humans from Lankhills Winchester (bone
and faunal data replotted after Cummings and Hedges 2010). The arrow connects isotope data obtained
from the dentine (2nd molar) and rib of burial 1175 (Sk1119), representing childhood and adult diet
respectively. The stepped error bars indicate 2 and 3 standard deviations from the mean (n= 114).
People on the move in Roman Britain 543
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
possibility that he sought to evoke the foodways of his homeland in other, more subtle ways,
through the use of certain herbs, spices or preparation techniques, they illustrate the stark
contrast that must have existed between his origins and his life in Britain. Interestingly,
1175’s burial rite may reflect both stages of his life, as he was buried with a belt of British
manufacture and a knife but, in a nod to Roman customs, a coin (Theodosius I, AD 388–95) had
been placed inside his mouth (Booth et al. 2010, 159; Cool 2010a, 286–8; Eckardt et al. 2009).
Conclusion
The very government of the Roman Empire depended on the mobility of both subjects and rulers,
and, as we have seen, this included women and children and not just the very rich (Adams 2001,
159; Laurence 2001b,172–3). It is difficult to quantify from the written sources both the
proportion of people who travelled and the distances they moved, but for Roman Oxyrhynchus
in Egypt (using documents spread over six centuries) Adams (2001, 158) suggests that 45 per cent
of individuals travelled for c. 90km, 17 per cent for 260km and 13 per cent further and outside
Egypt. Just as important as the travellers are locals who would have experienced travellers en
route and interacted with them, either doing business or, in the case of emperors and magistrates,
bringing petitions or simply viewing them (Laurence 1999,136–42, 2001b,169).
Applying the concept of ‘diaspora’, even if, as acknowledged earlier, only in very loose
terms, has motivated us to ask questions of identity and life-experience that would otherwise
have been left unexplored. The individuals discussed here clearly experienced dispersal (forced
or voluntary) from their homeland, and they may have appeared distinct from the host society in
terms of their dress, appearance and habits. Evidence for a lasting connection to the real or
imagined homeland, wherever this may have been, is harder to demonstrate. In some cases
migrants and their descendants may have curated objects or maintained rites and traditions (in
modified form) but our reading of the data actually highlights that, for many migrant indivi-
duals, the elite or professional identities that they shared with others who originated in diverse
parts of the empire or were indeed locals were more important than any link to the actual
homeland. The examples discussed here appear to be characteristic of imperial and trade
diasporas, with most of the migrants apparently of relatively high status. The article has also
highlighted the well-known difficulties of identifying origin from grave goods and burial rites,
and stressed the importance of other factors such as age and gender. New techniques such as
multi-isotope analysis offer an opportunity to enrich our understanding of ancient mobility, but
only if they are carefully combined with archaeological analysis.
Hella Eckardt
University of Reading
h.eckardt@reading.ac.uk
Gundula Müldner
Department of Archaeology, University of Reading
Mary Lewis
Department of Archaeology, University of Reading
544 Hella Eckardt, Gundula Müldner and Mary Lewis
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
References
Adams, C. 2001. “There and Back Again: Getting Around in Roman Egypt.”In Travel and Geography in
the Roman Empire, edited by C. Adams and R. Laurence, 138–66. London & New York: Routledge.
Adams, C., and R. Laurence, eds. 2001. Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire. London: Routledge.
Armstrong, D., and M. W. Hauser. 2004. “An East Indian Laborers’Household in nineteenth-Century
Jamaica: A Case for Understanding Cultural Diversity Through Space, Chronology, and Material
Analysis.”Historical Archaeology 38 (2): 9–21.
Booth, P. forthcoming. A late Roman military burial from the Dyke Hills, Dorchester on Thames,
Oxfordshire. Britannia 45.
Booth, P., A. Simmonds, S. Clough, H. Cool, and D. Poore. 2010. The Late Roman Cemetery at Lankhills,
Winchester, Excavations 2000–2005. Oxford: Oxford Archaeology.
Brettell, R., J. Evans, S. Marzinzik, A. Lamb, and J. Montgomery. 2012. “Impious Easterners’: Can
Oxygen and Strontium Isotopes Serve as Indicators of Provenance in Early Medieval European Cemetery
Populations?”European Journal of Archaeology 15: 117–45. doi:10.1179/1461957112Y.0000000001.
Brettell, R., J. Montgomery, and J. Evans. 2012. “Brewing and Stewing: The Effect of Culturally Mediated
Behaviour on the Oxygen Isotope Composition of Ingested Fluids and the Implications for Human
Provenance Studies.”Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry 27: 778–85. doi:10.1039/c2ja10335d.
Brown, L. K., and K. Mussell, eds. 1984. Ethnic and Regional Foodways in the United States: The
Performance of Group Identity. Knoxville: University of Tenessee Press.
Broekaert, W. 2013. Navicularii et negotiantes: A Prosopographical Study of Roman merchants and
Shippers. Rahden: Marie Leidorf.
Brubaker, R. 2005. “The ‘Diaspora’Diaspora.”Ethnic and Racial Studies 28 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1080/
0141987042000289997.
Bruun, C. 2010. “Water, Oxygen Isotopes, and Immigration to Ostia-Portus.”Journal of Roman
Archaeology 23: 109–32.
Carroll, M. 2012. “The Insignia of Women: Dress, Gender and Identity on the Roman Funerary Monument
of Regina from Arbeia.”Archaeological Journal 169: 281–311.
Casella, E. C. 2005. “Prisoner of His Majesty: Postcoloniality and the Archaeology of British Penal
Transportation.”World Archaeology 37 (3): 453–67. doi:10.1080/00438240500168533.
Casson, L. 1994. Travel in the Ancient World. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Chenery, C. A., G. Müldner, J. Evans, H. Eckardt, S. Lewis, and M. Lewis. 2010. “Strontium and Stable
Isotope Evidence for Diet and Mobility in Roman Gloucester, UK.”Journal of Archaeological Science 37:
150–63. doi:10.1016/j.jas.2009.09.025.
Chenery, C., H. Eckardt, and G. Müldner. 2011. “Cosmopolitan Catterick? Isotopic Evidence for
Population Mobility on Rome’s Northern Frontier.”Journal of Archaeological Science 38: 1525–36.
doi:10.1016/j.jas.2011.02.018.
Clarke, G. 1979. Pre-roman and Roman Winchester. Part 2: The Roman Cemetery at Lankhills. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
Cohen, R. 2008. Global Diasporas: An Introduction. London: Routledge.
Cool, H. E. M. 2002. “An Overview of the Small Finds from Catterick.”In Cataractonium: Roman
Caterick and its Hinterland. Excavations and Research, 1958–1997, edited by P. R. Wilson, 24–43. York:
CBA and English Heritage.
Cool, H. 2004. The Roman Cemetery at Brougham, Cumbria: Excavations 1966–67. London: Society for
the Promotion of Roman Studies.
People on the move in Roman Britain 545
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
Cool, H. E. M. 2006. Eating and Drinking in Roman Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cool, H. E. M. 2010a. “Objects of Glass, Shale, Bone and Metal.”In The Late Roman Cemetery at
Lankhills, Winchester, Excavations 2000–2005, edited by P. Booth, A. Simmonds, S. Clough, H. Cool, and
D. Poore, 267–308. Oxford: Oxford Archaeology.
Cool, H. E. M. 2010b. “Finding the Foreigners.”In Roman Diasporas: Archaeological Approaches to
Mobility and Diversity in the Roman Empire, edited by H. Eckardt, 27–44. Portsmouth, RI: JRA.
Cottril, F. 1936. “A Bastion of the Town Wall of London, and the Sepulchral Monument of the Procurator
Julius Classicianus.”The Antiquaries Journal 16: 1–7. doi:10.1017/S0003581500011343.
Crummy, N. 2010. “Bears and Coins: The Iconography of Protection in Late Roman Infant Burials.”
Britannia 41: 37–93. doi:10.1017/S0068113X1000005X.
Cummings, C., and R. Hedges. 2010. “Carbon and Nitrogen Stable Isotope Analyses.”In The Late Roman
Cemetery at Lankhills, Winchester. Excavations 2000–2005, edited by P. Booth, A. Simmonds, A. Boyle,
S. Clough, H. E. M. Cool, and D. Poore, 411–21. Oxford: Oxford Archaeology Monograph 10.
Danforth, L. M. 1982. The Death Rituals of Rural Greece. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Derks, T., and N. Roymans. 2006. “Returning Auxiliary Veterans in the Roman Empire: Some
Methodological Considerations.”Journal of Roman Archaeology 16: 121–35.
Doblhofer, E. 1987. Exil und Emigration. Zum Erlebnis der Heimatferne in der römischen Literatur.
Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Dobney, K. 2001. “A Place at the Table: The Role of Vertebrate Zooarchaeology Within a Roman Research
Agenda for Britain.”In Britons and Romans: Advancing an Archaeological agenda, edited by S. James
and M. Millett, 36–45. York: Council for British Archaeology.
Eckardt, H., ed. 2010. Roman Diasporas: Archaeological Approaches to Mobility and Diversity in the
Roman Empire. Portsmouth, RI: JRA.
Eckardt, H. 2012. “Foreigners and Locals in Calleva.”In Silchester and the Study of Romano-British
Urbanism, edited by M. Fulford, 246–56. Portsmouth: JRA.
Eckardt, H., P. Booth, C. Chenery, G. Müldner, J. A. Evans, and A. Lamb. 2009. “Oxygen and Strontium
Isotope Evidence for Mobility in Roman Winchester.”Journal of Archaeological Science 36: 2816–2825.
doi:10.1016/j.jas.2009.09.010.
Eckardt, H., and G. Müldner. 2014. “Mobility, Migration and Diasporas in Roman Britain.”In Handbook
of Roman Britain, edited by M. Millett, A. Moore, and L. Revell. Oxford: OUP.
Eckardt, H., G. Müldner, and G. Speed. forthcoming . Members of the late Roman field army in northern
Britain? Multi-Isotope Analysis of Human Remains from the Late Roman Cemetery at Hollow Banks
Quarry, Brompton-upon-Swale/Scorton (N. Yorks.). Britannia 46
Elsner, J., and I. Rutherford, eds. 2005. Pilgrimage in Graeco-Roman and Early Christian Antiquity.
Oxford: OUP.
Evans, J., N. Stoodley, and C. Chenery. 2006. “A Strontium and Oxygen Isotope Assessment of a Possible
Fourth Century Immigrant Population in a Hampshire Cemetery, Southern England.”Journal of
Archaeological Science 33: 265–72. doi:10.1016/j.jas.2005.07.011.
Evans, J. A., C. A. Chenery, and J. Montgomery. 2012. “A Summary of Strontium and Oxygen Isotope
Variation in Archaeological Human Tooth Enamel Excavated from Britain.”Journal of Analytical Atomic
Spectrometry 27: 754–64. doi:10.1039/c2ja10362a.
Foertmeyer, V. A. 1989. Tourism in Graeco-Roman Egypt. Unpublished PhD, Princeton University.
Foubert, L., and D. J. Breeze. 2014. “Mobility in the Roman Empire.”In Past Mobilities. Archaeological
Approaches to Movement and Mobility, edited by J. Leary, 175–86. Farnham: Ashgate.
546 Hella Eckardt, Gundula Müldner and Mary Lewis
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
Frere, S., and M. G. Fulford. 2002. “The Collegium Peregrinorum at Silchester.”Britannia 33: 167–75.
doi:10.2307/1558856.
Handley, M. 2011. Dying on Foreign Shores: Travel and Mobility in the Late-Antique West. Portsmouth,
RI: JRA.
Hills, C. M., and H. R. Hurst. 1989. “A Goth at Gloucester?”The Antiquaries Journal 69: 154–8.
doi:10.1017/S0003581500043456.
Hingley, R. 2005. Globalizing Roman Culture: Unity, Diversity and Empire. London: Routledge.
Holtzman, J. D. 2006. “Food and Memory.”Annual Review of Anthropology 35: 361–78. doi:10.1146/
annurev.anthro.35.081705.123220.
Horden, P., and N. Purcell. 2000. The Corrupting Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History. Oxford:
Blackwells.
James, S. 2001. “Soldiers and Civilians: Identity and Interaction in Roman Britain.”In Britons and
Romans: Advancing an Archaeological Agenda, edited by S. James and M. Millett, 77–89. York: CBA.
Kershen, A. J., ed. 2002. Food in the Migrant Experience. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Killgrove, K. 2010. “Response to C. Bruun, ‘Water Oxygen and Immigration to Ostia-Portus’.”Journal of
Roman Archaeology 23: 133–6.
King, A. 1999. “Diet in the Roman World: A Regional Inter-Site Comparison of the Mammal Bones.”
Journal of Roman Archaeology 12: 168–202.
Lampe-Densky, S. 2002. “Domitia, Marcia, and THE Nameless Smuggler: Pearl Dealers in the Roman
Empire.”In Transgressors: Towards a Feminist Biblical Theology, edited by C. Janssen, U. Ochtendung,
and B. When, 59–65. Collegeville: The Order of St. Benedict.
Laurence, R. 1999. The Roads of Roman Italy. London: Routledge.
Laurence, R. 2001a. The Creation of Geography –An Interpretation of Roman Britain. In Travel and
Geography in the Roman Empire, edited by C. Adams and R. Laurence, 67–94. London: Routledge.
Laurence, R. 2001b. “Travel and Empire.”In Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire, edited by C.
Adams and R. Laurence, 167–176. London: Routledge.
Lawrence, S. 2003. “Archaeology and the Nineteenth-Century British Empire.”Historical Archaeology 37
(1): 20–33.
Leach, S., H. Eckardt, C. Chenery, G. Müldner, and M. Lewis. 2010. “A‘Lady’of York: Migration,
Ethnicity and Identity in Roman York.”Antiquity 84: 131–45.
Leach, S., M. Lewis, C. Chenery, G. Müldner, and H. Eckardt. 2009. “Migration and Diversity in Roman
Britain: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Identification of Immigrants in Roman York, England.”
American Journal of Physical Anthropology 140: 546–61. doi:10.1002/ajpa.21104.
Lewis, M. E. 2010. “Life and Death in a Civitas Capital: Metabolic Disease and Trauma in the Children
from Late Roman Dorchester, Dorset.”American Journal of Physical Anthropology 142 (3): 405–16.
doi:10.1002/ajpa.21239.
Lilley, I. 2004. “Diaspora and Identity in Archaeology: Moving Beyond the Black Atlantic.”In A
companion to Social Archaeology, edited by L. Meskell and R. W. Preucel, 287–312. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lilley, I. 2006. “Archaeology, Diaspora and Decolonization.”Journal of Social Archaeology 6 (1): 28–47.
doi:10.1177/1469605306060560.
Lomine, L. 2005. “Tourism in Augustan Society (44 BC-AD 69.”In Histories of Tourism: Representation,
Identity and Conflict, edited by J. K. Walton, 69–87. Clevedon: Channel View.
Montgomery, J., J. Evans, C. Chenery, V. Pashley, and K. Killgrove. 2010. “Gleaming White and Deadly’:
Using Lead to Track Human Exposure and Geographic Origins in Britain.”In Roman Diasporas:
People on the move in Roman Britain 547
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
Archaeological Approaches to Mobility and Diversity in the Roman Empire, edited by H. Eckardt, 199–
226. Portsmouth, RI: JRA.
Montgomery, J., C. Knüsel, and K. Tucker. 2011. “Identifying the Origins of Decapitated Male Skeletons
from 3 Driffield Terrace, York, Through Isotope Analysis: Reflections on the Cosmopolitan Nature of
Roman York in the Time of Caracalla.”In The Bioarchaeology of the Human Head: Decapitation,
Deformation, and Decoration, edited by M. Bonogofsky, 141–78. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
Müldner, G. 2013. “Stable Isotopes and Diet: Their Contribution to Romano-British Research.”Antiquity
87: 137–49.
Müldner, G., C. Chenery, and H. Eckardt. 2011. “The Headless Romans’: Multi-Isotope Investigations of
an Unusual Burial Ground From Roman Britain.”Journal of Archaeological Science 38: 280–90.
doi:10.1016/j.jas.2010.09.003.
Nesbitt, C. 2014. “Multiculturalism on Hadrian’s Wall.”In Handbook of Roman Britain, edited by M.
Millett, A. Moore, and L. Revell. Oxford: OUP.
Noy, D. 2000. Foreigners at Rome: Citizens and Strangers. London: Duckworth.
Noy, D. 2010. “Epigraphic Evidence for Immigrants at Rome and in Roman Britain.”In Roman
Diasporas: Archaeological Approaches to Mobility and Diversity in the Roman Empire, edited by H.
Eckardt, 13–26. Portsmouth, RI: JRA.
Pearce, J. 2010. “Burial, Identity and Migration in the Roman World.”In Roman Diasporas:
Archaeological Approaches to Mobility and Diversity in the Roman Empire, edited by H. Eckardt, 79–
98. Portsmouth, RI: JRA.
Perry, M. A., D. Coleman, and N. Delhopital. 2008. “Mobility and Exile at 2nd Century A.D. Khirbet Edh‐
Dharih: Strontium Isotope Analysis of Human Migration in Western Jordan.”Geoarchaeology 23: 528–49.
doi:10.1002/gea.20230.
Pollard, A. M. 2011. “Isotopes and Impact: A Cautionary Tale.”Antiquity 85: 631–8.
Pollard, P. A., P. Ditchfield, J. S. O. McCullagh, T. G. Allen, M. Gibson, C. Boston, Clough, S., Marquez-
Grant, N., and Nicholson, R.A. 2011. “These Boots Were Made for Walking”: The Isotopic Analysis of a
C4 Roman Inhumation from Gravesend, Kent, UK.”American Journal of Physical Anthropology 146:
446–56. doi:10.1002/ajpa.21602.
Price, J. 2010. “Late Roman Glass Vessels in the Hadrian’s Wall Frontier Region.”In Finds FROM the
Frontier: Material Culture in the 4th-5th Centuries, edited by R. Collins and L. Allason-Jones, 37–49.
York: CBA.
Prowse, T. L., H. P. Schwarcz, P. Garnsey, M. Knyf, R. Macchiarelli, and L. Bondioli. 2007. “Isotopic
Evidence for Age-Related Immigration to Imperial Rome.”American Journal of Physical Anthropology
132: 510–519
Salway, B. 2001. “Travel, Itineraria and Tabellaria.”In Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire, edited
by C. Adams and R. Laurence, 22–66. London: Routledge.
Schlippschuh, O. 1974. Die Händler im römischen Kaiserreich in Gallien, Germanien und den
Donauprovinzen. Amsterdam: A.M. Hakkert.
Schweissing, M. M., and G. Grupe. 2003. “Stable Strontium Isotopes in Human Teeth and Bone: A Key to
Migration Events of the Late Roman Period in Bavaria.”Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 1373–83.
doi:10.1016/S0305-4403(03)00025-6.
Sealy, J., R. Armstrong, and C. Schrire. 1995. “Beyond Lifetime Averages –Tracing Life-Histories
Through Isotopic Analysis of Different Calcified Tissues from Archaeological Human Skeletons.”
Antiquity 69: 290–300.
Seremetakis, C. N. 1991. The Last Word: Women, Death, and Divination in Inner Mani. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
548 Hella Eckardt, Gundula Müldner and Mary Lewis
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
Stockhammer, P. F. 2012. “Conceptualising Cultural Hybridization in Archaeology.”In Conceptualising
Cultural Hybridization: A Transdisciplinary Approach, edited by P. F. Stockhammer, 43–58. Heidelberg:
Springer-Verlag.
Stout, A. M. 1994. “Jewelry as a Symbol of Status in the Roman Empire.”In The World of Roman
Costume, edited by J. L. Sebesta and L. Bonfante, 77–100. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Sutton, D. E. 2001. Remembrance of Repasts: An Anthropology of Food and Memory. London: Berg.
Swan, V. G. 1992. “Legio VI and its Men: African Legionaries in Britain.”Journal of Roman Pottery
Studies 5: 1–33.
Swift, E. 2000a. Regionality in Dress Accessories in the Late Roman West. Montagnac: Monique Mergoil.
Swift, E. 2000b. The End of the Western Roman Empire: An Archaeological Investigation. Stroud: Tempus.
Van Andringa, W. 2003. “Cités et communautés d’exptatriés installées dans l’Empire romaine. le cas de
cives romani consistentes.”In Les communautés religieuses dans le monde gréco-romaine, edited by N.
Belayche and S. J. Mimouni, 49–60. Turnhout: Brepols.
Van Der Veen, M. 2008. “Food as Embodied Material Culture –Diversity and Change in Plant Food
Consumption in Roman Britain.”Journal of Roman Archaeology 21: 83–110.
Van Dommelen, P. 2012. “Colonialism and Migration in the Ancient Mediterranean.”Annual Review of
Anthropology 41: 393–409. doi:10.1146/annurev-anthro-081309-145758.
van Dommelen, P., and N. Terrenato. 2007. “Local Cultures and the Expanding Roman Republic.”In
Articulating Local Cultures: Power and Identity Under the Expanding Roman Republic, edited by P. Van
Dommelen and N. Terrenato, 7–12. Portsmouth, RI: JRA.
Voss, B. 2005. “The Archaeology of Overseas Chinese Communities.”World Archaeology 37 (3): 424–39.
doi:10.1080/00438240500168491.
Webster, J. 2001. “Creolizing the Roman Provinces.”American Journal of Archaeology 105 (2): 209–25.
doi:10.2307/507271.
Wierschowski, L. 2001. Fremde in Gallien –“Gallier”in der Fremde : die epigraphisch bezeugte
Mobilität in, von und nach Gallien vom 1. bis 3. Jh. n. Chr. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
Wilkie, L. A. 2004. “Considering the Future of African American Archaeology.”Historical Archaeology
38 (1): 109–23.
Wilson, P. R. 2002. Cataractonium: Roman Catterick and Its Hinterland. Excavations and Research,
1958–1997. York: CBA.
Hella Eckardt teaches provincial Roman archaeology and material culture studies at the
University of Reading. Her research focuses on theoretical approaches to the material culture
of the north-western provinces and she is particularly interested in the relationship between the
consumption of Roman objects and the expression of social and cultural identity. She has
published on lighting equipment (Illuminating Roman Britain) and objects associated with
grooming and personal adornment (‘Styling the Body’). A recently completed AHRC-funded
project with Gundula Müldner and Mary Lewis examined the evidence for incomers in
Romano-British towns through a combination of material culture, skeletal and isotope research.
Gundula Müldner is a bioarchaeologist who specializes in stable isotope analysis of bone for
the reconstruction of human and animal diets. She has a background in biological anthropology
People on the move in Roman Britain 549
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
and early historical archaeology and her research interests include dietary changes related to
cultural and socio-economic transitions in the last 2000 years, as well as questions of diet, health
and social identity in the past.
Mary Lewis teaches the method and theory behind the study of human skeletal remains,
osteological techniques and palaeopathology at undergraduate and Master’s level at the
University of Reading. she specializes in non-adult skeletal pathology and in the personal
identification of children in forensic anthropology. She examines the changing pattern of disease
in children in relation to socio-economic transitions in the past (Romano-British to Anglo-
Saxon; urban to industrial) with particular focus on metabolic and infectious diseases. Her other
research interests include the use of stable isotope and trace element analysis in reconstructing
past migratory patterns in the UK.
550 Hella Eckardt, Gundula Müldner and Mary Lewis
Downloaded by [University of Reading] at 06:09 26 September 2014
