We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 November 2011
In 1884 during the construction of a new road on the south side of Muncaster Fell in Eskdale, West Cumbria (grid ref. SD 131986), a Roman tile-kiln was uncovered and brought to the attention of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society. Since that date a number of chance finds of Roman material have been made and small-scale excavations have been conducted on the site. The most recent work, directed by R. L. Bellhouse from 1957 to 1960 was published in Transactions, together with a summary of the present state of knowledge concerning the site. In his excavations at Ravenglass from 1976 to 1978, Dr T. W. Potter identified a distinctive fabric type in the Roman fort which by its frequency suggested that it may have been produced locally. He also found one vessel in a fabric apparently identical to that described by Miss Fair as having been found in the fort at Ravenglass and at the kiln site itself, and thought by her to have been produced there. Potter published 22 vessels as Muncaster products from Ravenglass and one from Watercrook, as well as suggesting that vessels in an identical fabric and, therefore, presumably from the same source had been found at a number of sites in the area ranging from Watercrook in the south to Beckfoot and Papcastle in the north.
1 Trans. Cumb. & West. Ant. Arch. Soc.2 viii (1908), 67.Google Scholar
2 Trans. Cumb. & West. Ant. Arch. Soc.2 lx (1960), 1–12; lxi (1961), 47–56.Google Scholar
3 A little further information on the location of structures at the site is provided by a sketch plan of the area by Miss Fair dated 26/10/46. Four kilns, A to D, are marked on the plan, Kilns A and E being located as on the plan published by Bellhouse (op. cit. (note 2), 50). Kiln C lies in the north-west angle of field 50, while Kiln D is marked immediately north of the field wall at the junction of fields 50 and 81. A further possible kiln is situated on the line of the field wall on the north-west side of field 81 south east of the bracken kiln. An area of paving lies directly north west of Kiln C between the Old Road and the Drive while directly north west of Kiln B, again between the two roads, is marked ‘?Site of House, Lumps of Daub with Wattle impressions’ (Group E). ‘Mr Ogilvie's Ditch’ (Group G), is marked on the north-west side of the Drive by the House site and the ‘Lorry slicing’ (Group D) lies along the north-west side of the Drive by the bracken kiln. ‘Flue 2’ (Group C), and a deposit of soot are marked probably behind the bracken kiln.
4 Potter, T. W., Romans in North-West England (1979), 120 no. 39.Google Scholar
5 A photograph of this sherd is appended to a letter by Miss Fair to Dr I. A. Richmond dated 13/10/46, where she implies that it was found in her excavations in 1922–23.
6 Gillam, J. P., Glasgow Arch. Journ. iv (1976), 62 no. 2.Google Scholar
7 cf. Gillam, , op. cit. (note 6), 71 no. 65.Google Scholar
8 cf. ibid., 71 nos. 63–6.Google Scholar
9 cf. Miket, R., The Roman Fort at South Shields (1983), 117 no. 140.Google Scholar
10 Also Potter, op. cit. (note 4), Ravenglass nos. 10, 81, 82, 29?, 83?, 84?.
11 Also ibid. no. 77.
12 Similar form to ibid. no. 45.
13 Fair, M. C., Trans. Cumb. & West. Ant. Arch. Soc.2 xxv (1925), 374.Google Scholar
14 Potter, , op. cit. (note 4), 14.Google Scholar
15 Wright, R. P., Trans. Cumb. & West. Ant. Arch. Soc.2 lxv (1965), 169–75.Google Scholar
16 Wilson, D. R., J.R.S. lv (1965), 203.Google Scholar
17 Collingwood, R. G., Trans. Cumb. & West. Ant. Arch. Soc.2 xxi (1921), 1–42.Google Scholar
18 It is not known whether the bath-house at Hardknott was built when the site was first occupied, probably in the late first century, or during the reign of Hadrian when the fort defences were constructed in stone.
19 Purdy, and Manby, , Yorks. Arch. Journ. xlv (1973), 96–107.Google Scholar
20 Ward, J., Trans. Cardiff Naturalist Soc. xlvi (1913), 1–20.Google Scholar
21 Gillam, J. P. in Detsicas, A. (ed.), Current Research in Romano-British Coarse Pottery (1973), 53.Google Scholar
22 Richmond, I. A., Trans. Hist. Soc. Lancs, and Cheshire cv (1953), 12.Google Scholar
23 cf. Hird, L., Vindolanda V: The Pre-Hadrianic Pottery (1977), all the vessels similar to No. 482 and Vessels 165, 177 and 375.Google Scholar
24 cf. Bellhouse, R. L. and Richardson, G. G. S., Trans. Cumb. & West. Ant. Arch. Soc.2 lxxxii (1982), 35–50, No. 21.Google Scholar
25 P. Austen, personal comment.
26 Charlesworth, D., Trans. Cumb. & West. Ant. Arch. Soc. lxiv (1964), 63–75, nos. 5 and 6.Google Scholar
27 McCarthy, M. R. et al. , Britannia xiii (1982), 83.Google Scholar
28 J. Taylor, personal comment. It must be remembered, however, that only a very small area of the Scalesceugh site has been excavated, and that much of the pottery recovered was probably made in only one kiln. At least 25 kilns have been located by magnetometer survey: Richardson, G. G. S., Trans. Cumb. & West. Ant. Arch. Soc.2 lxxiii (1973), 82.Google Scholar
29 cf. Hanson, W. S. et al. , Arch. Ael.5 vii (1979), 1–98.Google Scholar
30 Greene, K. T. in Detsicas, A. (ed.), Current Research in Romano-British Coarse Pottery (1973), 35.Google Scholar
31 In the absence of an alternative pottery supply the site at Brampton could have continued in production supplying the new Hadrianic fort at Castlesteads. There is no evidence that it did so.
32 Breeze, D. J. in Dore, J. N. and Greene, K. T. (eds.), Roman Pottery Studies in Britain and Beyond, BAR S30 (1977), 141.Google Scholar
33 Gillam, , op. cit. (note 21), 54.Google Scholar
34 Gillam, , op. cit. (note 6), 57.Google Scholar
35 Buckland, P. C. et al. , Britannia xi (1980), 157.Google Scholar
36 Simpson, G., Britannia v (1974), 324–5.Google Scholar
37 Hartley, K. F., Glasgow Arch. Journ. iv (1976), 81–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38 Swan, V. G., The Pottery Kilns of Roman Britain (1984), 723.Google Scholar
39 Hassall, M., in McWhirr, A. (ed.), Roman Brick and Tile BAR S68 (1979), 265.Google Scholar
40 Purdy, and Manby, , op. cit. (note 19), 96.Google Scholar
41 Nash-Williams, V. E., The Roman Frontier in Wales (1969), 44 note 8.Google Scholar
42 Carrington, P. in Dore and Greene, op. cit. (note 32), 147 note 3.Google Scholar
43 Perrin, J. R. in Dore and Greene, op. cit. (note 32), 102.Google Scholar
44 Potter, , op. cit. (note 4), 107 no. 19.Google Scholar
45 Gillam, , op. cit. (note 6), 65 no. 11.Google Scholar
46 Note the total absence of rusticated vessels at Hardknott which contrasts markedly with the appreciable quantities of these vessels from Kirkbride, Old Penrith and Watercrook.
47 Gillam, J. P. and Greene, K. T. in A. C. and Anderson, A. S. (eds.), Roman Pottery Research in Britain and North-West Europe, BAR S123 (1981), 1–24.Google Scholar
48 Holbrook, N., Some Pottery from the Roman Fort at Wallsend, unpub. BA dissertation Newcastle (1984), fig. 8 and table 2.Google Scholar
49 Kindly made available by the excavator, Dr T. W. Potter.
50 It has proved impossible to trace the several thousand sherds recovered from the excavations in 1889–93 which were examined by R. G. Collingwood in 1920. Most of the pottery that has been studied was found within the fort between 1959 and 1969 largely as a result of Miss D. Charlesworth's excavations. Most of this is now stored in the DOE store at South Ruislip but there are a few sherds in Tullie House Museum, Carlisle. A small amount of pottery presented to Tullie House Museum in 1984 by Miss E. Crowle has also been studied.
51 Webster, P. V. in Dore and Greene, op. cit. (note 32), 167–76, fig. 11.3.Google Scholar
52 Potter, , op. cit. (note 4), 121.Google Scholar
53 The writer would like to thank Messrs C. Richardson and P. Austen for allowing the thin-sectioning of sherds from Ravenglass and Old Penrith. Through the goods offices of Dr D. Manning the thin sections were produced by the Department of Geology at the University of Newcastle upon Tyne. Dr Manning also kindly examined all the sections, the identification and possible origins of the inclusions present in the samples are largely the result of his brief examination of the thin sections.
