The gravestone of a centurion of the Twentieth Legion, M. Favonius Facilis, which was found in the Roman cemetery at Colchester to the south-west of the colonia in 1868 is of particular interest for the history of Romano-British art, since it is one of the earliest sculptures known in the province. It is carved of Bath oolite and bears in a round-arched niche a full-length figure of Facilis (PL. IX), who is bare-headed but is otherwise dressed in the complete uniform of a centurion and carries a uitis in his right hand. Below the niche is the inscription, which reads: M(arcus) Fauoni(us) M(arci) f(ilius) Pol(lia tribu) Faci/lisc(enturio) leg(ionis) xx. Verecund/us et Nouicius lib(erti) posu/erunt. h(ic) s(itus) e(st).

The use of ornamental stonework in buildings was one of many important innovations introduced by the Romans into Britain. The demand for floor mosaics spread rapidly throughout the province and has been the subject of detailed study but other aspects of decorative stonework, including opus sectile paving and wall veneers, which were no less a sign of conspicuous wealth, have attracted little attention. This paper, therefore, attempts to trace the fashion for ornamental stones in interior and exterior design by examining the evidence from London. Despite the severe limitations of the archaeological evidence, shifts in taste and changes in the types of stone used can be discerned from the London material, which seem to reflect wider commercial activities within the Roman empire. When the material is compared with other parts of the province regional differences become apparent, emphasising the high status London enjoyed from the late first century A.D.

The contrasting fortunes of Christianity in Britain and on the Continent in the late fourth and fifth centuries are one of the truisms of history. Why did Roman Britain fail to follow the example of other provinces in the West and preserve a powerful and episcopally-led Christian Church, so that despite the destruction wrought by the barbarian invasions the continuity between Roman province and Germanic kingdom could be maintained? Why, alone among the western provinces, did Catholic Christianity have to be replanted in an almost wholly pagan environment whence all records of previous Christianisation appear to have perished?

The scarcity of Romano-British human remains from north-west England has hindered understanding of burial practice in this region. Here, we report on the excavation of human and non-human animal remains1 and material culture from Dog Hole Cave, Haverbrack. Foetal and neonatal infants had been interred alongside a horse burial and puppies, lambs, calves and piglets in the very latest Iron Age to early Romano-British period, while the mid- to late Roman period is characterised by burials of older individuals with copper-alloy jewellery and beads. This material culture is more characteristic of urban sites, while isotope analysis indicates that the later individuals were largely from the local area. We discuss these results in terms of burial ritual in Cumbria and rural acculturation. Supplementary material is available online (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068113X20000136), and contains further information about the site and excavations, small finds, zooarchaeology, human osteology, site taphonomy, the palaeoenvironment, isotope methods and analysis, and finds listed in Benson and Bland 1963.

There has been a considerable amount of discussion of the apparent lack in London of later Roman evidence of all kinds compared with earlier Roman evidence, and there is general agreement that this probably represents a substantial decline in the urban population. If this interpretation is true, it has fundamental implications for the understanding of the economic and political status of the Roman city and of all structures, public, domestic, commercial, and industrial; and it would not be an exaggeration to say that this is one of the most important research topics associated with the archaeology of Londinium.

The recent excavations at La Graufesenque have uncovered a number of new graffiti. One of these (A25b) is considered here for the light it sheds on the Latin name for samian ware or terra sigillata.

The potteries that produced samian ware at La Graufesenque have long been known for the graffiti, now numbering about a hundred, which were scratched onto the plates made in the kilns there. The graffiti have been used to elucidate the organization and the possible methods of production at the potteries, although the cryptic and fragmentary nature of most of them has made detailed discussion difficult. The common formula of the texts consists of a list of potters, each coupled with a name of a particular vessel and a number representing the amount of that pottery produced within a time-span that is not now ascertainable. A25b, and a small portion of a similar text, A26b, stand out from amongst these, however, as they appear to give a monthly tally of tasks carried out by various slaves. The names of these slaves also appear on other graffiti of the more usual sort and it can be reasonably assumed that A25b is also connected with the pottery industry. In fact, certain words in it bear this out, as the text and translation which follow demonstrate.

Excavations at Knobb's Farm, Somersham, Cambridgeshire, uncovered three small late Roman cemeteries, positioned at the edge of a farming settlement. The 52 burials found included 17 decapitated bodies and 13 prone burials – far higher than the British average. In two cases, cut marks show decapitation to have been the mechanism of death, and cuts on two other bodies indicate they experienced extreme violence. We conclude that the decapitations were the result of judicial execution. The significance of the prone burials is less clear, but it is demonstrably related to decapitation. Supplementary material is available online (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068113X21000064) and comprises a detailed osteological report and skeleton catalogue, specialist reports, DNA and isotopic analyses, and a complete description of the settlement's development.

It is now ten years since the first discovery of the Roman amphitheatre in London, and under ordinary circumstances it might be expected that final publication of this important monument would now be imminent. However, what is perhaps not realized is that excavation was still taking place until late in 1996. It has been a massive project, generating more than 20,000 contexts and, although a preliminary assessment has been completed, it will clearly be some time before a final publication is possible. In view of the long time-scale of the project, therefore, it has been suggested that a provisional statement on the amphitheatre should be disseminated, partly, of course, with the intention of generating interest among, or receiving feedback from, other archaeologists and historians. To some extent it is also necessary to establish the limits of the project to counter some of the slightly misleading information and speculation that has already appeared in a number of other sources. It should, however, be remembered that the interpretations offered below are only provisional.

This paper offers a post-colonial analysis of past and present representations of the archaeological remains of Roman Britain and Roman London in the British Museum and Museum of London respectively. Since post-colonial criticism of Romano-British archaeology is highly relevant to such an analysis, a brief description is provided at the outset. Thereafter follows a series of six case studies — three for each museum. The first four focus on the history of the Romano-British collections at both museums and sometimes draw on post-colonial insights to explain the development of these collections and the ways in which they were exhibited. The last two case studies investigate how British post-colonial criticism of Roman archaeology has (or has not) impacted on the current displays of the Romano-British collections at both museums. Finally, some recommendations will be offered based on the outcomes of these two case studies. Recurring themes are the representation of: the Roman military; Roman imperialism; the (material) culture of Roman Britain and Roman London.

The absence of immediately post-Roman evidence from fourth-century Roman military sites in western and northern Britain, forming a pattern of widespread disuse in the fifth and sixth centuries, has been strongly established. South of the Mersey the post-Roman finds from Segontium are not certainly of pre-eighth-century date, and the apparent evidence at Brecon Gaer has now been discounted by J.L. Davies. So – unless we accept a post-Roman dating for the penannular brooch from Castell Collen – only Pen Llystyn, where there is a single, possibly fourth-century, potsherd, has produced what might be considered convincing evidence of immediately post-Roman occupation at a fourth-century fort site. At Pen Llystyn the evidence, albeit enigmatic, seems to indicate fifth- or sixth-century reuse (perhaps even by the Irish notable named on a nearby Class-I inscribed stone) of the disused Roman fort for the site of a palisaded enclosure. It must, however, be doubted whether the site was in use in the fourth century. In the North, sites with fifth- and sixth-century evidence are only a little more plentiful – Manchester, Piercebridge, and Ribchester have possible, or probable, evidence of such use.

The fort of Hayton, south-east of Pocklington, North Humberside (Yorkshire), was first located from the air by Professor J. K. St. Joseph in 1974. His photographs showed a small fort surrounded by double ditches: the crop-mark of these was distinct on the SE, NE and NW sides (PL. IX) and at the rounded northern and eastern angles. Further reconnaissance in 1975 produced more photographs which introduced the possibility that the fort also had an annexe to its north-east. A single ditch appears to continue the line of the inner fort ditch on the south-eastern side and form an enclosure with rounded angles to the north-east of the fort. Examination of Ordnance Survey photographs taken in 1968 showed that the platform of the fort had been just visible then. In view of the sudden clarity of the fort cropmarks, it was decided to undertake a small-scale excavation to discover whether the remains of the fort were being eroded by the constant ploughing to which thearea is subject. The first campaign, in February 1975) took place in the field south of the minor road which runs through the fort site (FIG. I, Areas A–F) and located the eastern angle, parts of the angle-tower and the south-east gateway. A second season, in October and November of the same year, examined the state of preservation of the remains in the northern field after removal of the crop (FIG. I, Areas G–S) locating the line of the ditches on the three remaining sides as well as the north-east gateway, the north angle-tower and remains of two of the interior buildings.

Chanctonbury Ring (NGR TQ 139 121) is one of the best known landmarks in Sussex. It consists of a clump of trees, mostly beech, but with occasional sycamore, situated on the very northern edge of the South Downs, about 8 km (5 miles) from the coast (FIG. I). The height above sea-level is 234 m (780 ft.), and the subsoil is Upper Chalk, though several local patches of Clay-with-flints were encountered during the excavation.

Recent excavations in Romano-British towns have produced evidence that property-boundaries, once fixed, often persisted over long periods. St. Albans, Cirencester, Leicester, Winchester, and Gloucester have furnished examples, while the results of earlier excavations at Caerwent, Wroxeter and Caistor-by-Norwich can probably be interpreted along similar lines. European parallels may be cited from Augst, Kempten, Xanten and, possibly, Cologne. On those sites where modern excavation has taken place the property-boundaries appear to have been fixed at an early date in the history of their respective towns. It would be of great interest to establish on what basis the original distribution of building-plots was made, especially those sited on street-frontages close to town-centres, where building-land was at a premium and where a systematic allocation of property might be expected.