Points for the future and final thoughts

Excavation and recording methodologies have developed in ways that are hugely beneficial to late Roman studies. Post-colonial approaches, plus advances in excavation techniques, have led to the recognition of the importance of a huge range of site types as well as the continuance of pre-existing settlements, monuments, and natural places in the geography of Roman Britain. Excavations of towns tended to concentrate on the monumental earlier

Roman periods without recognising or recording later phases in much detail. There have also been difficulties in excavating the pre-Roman phases of sites as a result of the depth of the deposits, disturbance caused by later layers, or the preference to preserve the Roman structural layers, as in the case of the Wroxeter baths-basilica (Barker et al. 1997: 49). It is important for the research agenda to focus on the need to record all stratigraphic layers on sites in similar detail.

When late phases of towns are encountered, it has been conventional to draw upon classical viewpoints and historical frameworks for interpretation. Although these sources are useful, the theoretical and historical constraints often led to interpretations ofdecline. It is important for the archaeology to be interpreted in its own terms. Finds recovery, dating, and processing constitute a crucial aspect in this. To retrieve the most information from the latest layers of the sites, a holistic approach is necessary, whereby the structural evidence is combined with the finds data in an attempt to discern what might have been taking place on the sites in the latest Roman period. The researching of these issues is sometimes made difficult because of the way in which the finds on many sites were recorded, published, and studied in the past. Problems can include the partial recovery of artefacts, especially pottery, and the lack of sufficient contextual information for each find. Only through the careful recording of each object and its context can studies exploring the continuing and changing use of buildings over time be attempted. Pottery and stratigraphic layering can sometimes indicate later dates for activity within buildings than those suggested by coins. Debate concerning the date of the latest Roman pottery on sites, such as the late grey wares from the Lincoln forum excavations, indicates the potential for work in the future.

Theoretical approaches within the study of Roman urbanism are also crucial. As M. Johnson (2006: 132) has put it, the role and importance of theory within archaeology is 'beyond debate’. Studies of Roman towns, however, have not traditionally embraced developments in theory from archaeology and other disciplines that can bring new angles to the subject. Roman urbanism, despite appearing familiar through references to classical texts and comparisons with modern towns, was far from straightforward and is still not adequately understood. The settlement pattern and nature of ‘landscape’ prior to the conquest are also only partially known. Methods for understanding settlement, landscape, place, and space in prehistory, geography, anthropology, and other disciplines can usefully be applied to the Roman period. Archaeological theory is often perceived as a distinct body of knowledge, but it should not be separated from the theories of other disciplines, nor deemed inapplicable to late Roman studies. The traditional divide between methodologies of the late Roman and early medieval periods is as problematic as the divide between the late Iron Age and Roman periods. Because no study can take place outside, and fail to be influenced by, the context of previous scholarship, historiographical analyses are also important. Ideas and approaches are inherited from earlier generations. Examining the context of study allows the discipline to take additional directions, introducing new ways of interpreting the data and moving beyond traditional themes in urban studies, such as economic development and subsequent decline and fall, which have been influenced in part by modern assumptions and prejudices.

Using the later Roman period as the core case study, this book is about, above all, reenergising Roman urban studies not only in Britain but across the Empire. Roman towns in many ways are still alien features to us with uncertainties as to how they appeared, functioned, and formed part of wider landscapes, and how they were experienced. It is not easy to make assumptions about them. Rather than viewing urbanism in terms of greatness and decline, the Roman towns, as they changed over time, were successive expressions of the enduring importance of the sites in their landscapes. A detailed study of the archaeological record from a variety of theoretical stances can begin to provide us with a new understanding of towns in both the earlier and later Roman periods.