Although relatively abundant from Roman Britain, burials still remain, to a large extent, an overlooked source of archaeological evidence and this is particularly true in the case of cremation, the predominant rite of the early and mid-Roman period (first to third centuries a.d.), where the skeletal evidence is, for the most part, fragmentary. Sadly, this has meant that the recognised trend towards inhumation and the managed cemetery during the later Roman period (fourth century a.d.) has come to dominate the burial narrative.
However, this volume shows that cremation can be as vital an archaeological resource as inhumation, thereby opening up previously restricted avenues of archaeological analysis. It highlights that only an examination of the entire context of burial (e.g. evidence of the funerary pyre, spatial and geographical location of the burial, type and range of grave goods, provision (or not) of burial container, the use of monuments and grave markers) can provide a more complete and rounded interpretation of Romano-British attitudes to, and relationships with, their dead.
Updated from the author's PhD research, the data under analysis are taken from burials from St Albans (Verulamium), Winchester (Venta Belgarum) and the neighbouring minor small towns, from the conquest through to the end of the Roman period, and these are compared with burial traditions within rural regions in southern Britain. This comparative approach, between distinct regions and site contexts and through time, allows a large quantity of detailed evidence to be considered and this is highlighted throughout with clear and useful maps and tables. One example of the detailed analysis is tracing the transition in grave good provision from feasting, leisure and care of the body (Tacitus’ ‘Humanitas’) in the early Roman period to those associated with appearance and rank in the fourth century, plausibly argued by the author as indiating a socio-cultural shift from displaying cultural savoir faire to an increasing social rigidity.
However, it is in the detailed analysis of the spatial arrangement of burials that the importance of the author's contextual approach is especially informative. Pearce identifies multiple theatres within the geography of burial in the different locales under consideration; for example, identifying zones of display in the placement of monuments and burial assemblages in large urban environments and polyfocal centres of burial in small town contexts. In contrast, rural burials showed a tendancy towards association with agricultural (corn-driers, kilns, storage areas) and landscape features (boundaries and trackways), with zones of burial radiating out from infants within, or adjacent to, settlements and older children and adults at, or just beyond, the boundary features.
P. argues that the spatial location of the dead may have had a range of complex meanings which went beyond the mere disposal of the body. Within urban environments, for example, the positioning of burials within the zones of display visible from different vantage points may have been linked to urban euergetism, while rural burials may have been associated with bringing the dead into the rhythms of the agricultural cycle and defining a group's identity in relationship to the land through time.
What this volume shows is that the context of burial has enormous potential to shed light on the wider socio-cultural dynamics and the construction of regional and group identities. To the people of the province the dead remained a continuing and important part of their physical and mental landscape and, for archaeologists, any analysis of burial needs to consider in greater detail how space may have constituted social relations in Roman Britain. This is an important volume for all those interested in burial archaeology and Roman Britain and it brings home the necessity of fully considering the entire context of burial, from death to funeral pyre and/or interment in space and time, in order to fully understand Romano-British burial practices.
