The Romano-British Countryside

[caldrail]

The native British had developed a disorganised system of agriculture dating from the Iron Age, whose purpose was primarily subsistence farming. Archaeology has shown signs of grids of ancient tracks across valleys used to link the more important routes following the high ground. These farms weren't always as primitive as might be imagined. Rectangular celtic fields, or Lynchets, were intensively farmed with ploughing and basic crop rotation.

 

The success of these primarily subsistence farms led Caesar to comment that he found the island well populated, the countryside thickly studded with homesteads, and the cattle numerous. In fact, some of this can be traced to the migration of Belgae into Britain ahead of Caesars expeditions, whose people had introduced more advanced metal working, the potters wheel, rotary querns for milling flour, the first real towns, or Oppida as Caesar called them, plus gold, silver, and bronze coinage based on greek and roman currency the Belgae had become familiar with in Europe.

 

Although the towns became the centers of population in Roman Britain, the majority of people lived and worked in the countryside, continuing the subsistence lifestyle until roman roads and organisation began to improve trade, allowing farms to sell surplus and therefore prosper under the new regime.

 

Roman methods brought improvements over a period of time that included new crops, new growing patterns, expansion of livestock farming, grain storage, horticulture, gardening, and perhaps most important from a cultural point of view, the country villa, of which over a thousand are thought to have been built spread largely over southern England.

 

Originally the iron-age farms of the Celts and Belgae continued to be farmed by their owners after the roman occupation, with some of the more successful farmers becoming the Romano-British aristocracy under whose ownership the country estate became established. There is a pattern of development of these villas, beginning with native wooden houses or roundhouses, replaced with basic stone houses that form the nucleus of extended dwellings that sometimes grew to almost palatial sizes. There are four generally recognised styles of roman villa - The wooden cottage, the corridor villa, the courtyard house, and the aisled villa.

 

The villa was not simply accomodation for a wealthy land-owning family. Adjacent buildings might be provided for slaves and household servants, threshing floors, corn driers, tanning, pottery, tile production, timber management, metal working, and wool production. In later centuries even viticulture became established after the prohibition of foreign wine-making by Augustus had been set aside, although this was never widespread in Britain.

 

It might be expected that stables for horses existed in grander homes, and the lack of evidence for cattle barns suggests that such buildings were generally wooden, although drains have been unearthed. Some archaeologists have argued they were uncommon, given that breeds of the day were hardier than modern stock and may well have spent all year outdoors.

 

There is also evidence of major villas being linked by special roads. It might also be tempting to see these villas as something akin to modern country retreats, but in general this isn't true. The large cost of building and decorating these grand homes was offset by the introduction of rural industry and agricultural specialisation. The owners were therefore seeking to maximise the profits that could be obtained from their property, and it worked. The roman occupation of Britain was all about profit, whatever Rome could obtain from its conquest, and there would always be enterprising men to fill that need. Iron working is especially noted for its widespread trade, with many country villas operating forges. Timber management to supply building materials and fuel for fires is believed to have become increasingly important as the scale of roman occupation grew. Pottery remained a rural industry from pre-roman times, often found linked to important villas in the area, and there was an attempt in Britain to recreate the desirable styles of tableware found on the continent

 

In the first century AD country villas were simple affairs, typically wooden cottages on stone foundations, replaced by the more prosperous families by the next century into something more like the expected large multi-storey house, yet some did not evolve further than cottages, so the improvement in wealth and produce was not guaranteed. The earliest villas might well be those belonging to Britons who co-operated with the Roman occupation. As Roman towns developed in size the spread of governmental systems went with it, and as time progressed country villas may well have become owned by 'foreign' romans, or even the imperial family, with agents and tenants running the properties for their masters.

 

The military had a significant effect on the development of industry within Roman Briatain. For example, in the supply of metals the military initially controlled this as a reserved resource, later allowing concessions to chosen individuals (Conductores), or even primitive commercial companies (Societates), who might then base their business in towns or country estates as appropriate. In fact, particularly with such things as leather or pottery, the output of a country estate might be geared to supplying the military and this was something they encouraged, even to the extent of bringing in experts from abroad to instruct the locals on styles and techniques required.

 

The site of country homes was typically chosen on the basis of good arable land, so its fairly obvious the owners had every intention of profitting from the land, and since many were sited on existing homesteads, continuing to do so. In some cases, these homes were built with a view to privacy, using the lay of the land to conceal the presence of a nearby villa. This is further reinforced by a trend toward parkland, especially nearer the road linking the villa to the roman system, leaving the productive land away from the casual spectator.

 

One reason for this would be the use of slave labour on rural estates, something perhaps the owner wouldn't wish advertised both for aesthetic and humanitarian reasons. Visitors may not have been impressed with gangs of slaves working the fields and preferred something more visually appealing on arrival, and the harshness of estate mastery might have given a poor impression of the owners personality. Clearly life could be hard for rural slaves and evidence of chain-gangs has been uncovered. Yet despite this, there is possible evidence of more humane treatment, as in at least one villa mosaics have been found in the servants quarters, although this might represent the changing use of certain buildings.

 

Each villa then formed an independent economic unit supplying produce, processed goods, and manufactured items for sale. The country villas remained centres of rural acivity until the end of the third century AD, when the economic situation begins to destabilise with the fortunes of some villas rising and falling. Nonetheless, many were occupied by anglo saxons after the roman retreat though often in a reduced capacity, with some former grand houses employed as grain stores or animal shelters.

 

The coin circulation quickly disappears at the start of the fifth century which suggests an economic collapse, yet Gildas recorded that immediately after the roman withdrawal there was a period of prosperity, presumably because no-one was paying taxes. Its more generally accepted that after Constantine III took the bulk of the roman legions in Britain across to Gaul in AD406-7 the government of Britain collapsed within fifty years, although its clear that the villa system survived in a fragmented form and endured under the Saxon settlers who may well have adopted some of the roman ways, and there is some reason to believe that this formed the basis of the manorial system of the medieval period to come.

 

[docoflove1974]

Excellent post, Caldrail...I do have one question. You state that Romano-British landowners didn't want the casual passer-by to know about slaves that they might have owned. This strikes me as being different than the attitudes on the Continent. Or am I misguided? I thought that owning slaves was one of many signs of prosperity, and therefore wouldn't be something to hide from public view?

[caldrail]

Owning slaves is indeed a sign of prosperity, but the scene of idyllic rural bliss, so beloved of the romans, is somewaht ruined by the sight of 'swing low sweet chariot' don't you think? We know that rural slaves were worked hard and not particularly well treated. Estates were generally away from the public eye so there was less chance of attracting unfavourable comment by the treatment of them. Whilst it was an accepted part of roman society for these people to earn their keep with physical toil, appearances mean everything. Think about it. You've invited a senior magistrate to your home with a view to getting his support for your own campaign. What impresses him more? A landscaped front approach with carefully tended meadows, or ploughed fields full of men under the whip? Thats perhaps an extreme example, but the rural idyll is a roman cliche and one they liked to see. In fact, the house owner wasn't worried about whether the casual passer-by knew how many slaves he owned (far from it, it might actually be the sort of thing you would advertise), just that you don't want to advertise how cruel you can be. Public image was very important to wealthy romans and even in the country this must have been important to them, or they wouldn't have gone to such lengths to create such a visible sign of wealth and success.

[docoflove1974]

Ah, ok, that makes sense now. Same sort of idea still exists among the blue-bloods: the hired help is often out of sight, but their work is always up for show.

[sullafelix]

Indeed the British aristocracy invented the Ha Ha a sort of trench below a platform meaning that there was an uninterrupted view of the countryside unblemished by such eyesores as sheperds.

 

The idea of a rural idyll is denifatley a literary construct in Roman times. It is certainly an ideal stemming from the perfect Roman virtues being summed up by characters from their early history like Cinncinatus who was tending his small plot in a loincloth when the call came for him to lead Rome in an emergency. In reality the advent of intensive farming meant that slave labour was extensively used and abused. In Sicily in the Second Century BC one of the reasons why the slaves revolted was that were expected to wander the hills (shepherds again) naked. This could not have been comfortable in high summer or indeed in winter!

 

They did work in chain gangs (although not all of them all of the time) and we have found some chains in the UK.

 

SF

 

Good post by the way!

[M. Porcius Cato]

In Sicily in the Second Century BC one of the reasons why the slaves revolted was that were expected to wander the hills (shepherds again) naked. This could not have been comfortable in high summer or indeed in winter!

 

News to me. Where did you read this?

[Pertinax]

That is indeed quite startling, what is the given reason for this enforced nudity?

[caldrail]

If that's indeed true then it's intended as humiliation surely? I can't think of any other eason for it.

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

If that's indeed true then it's intended as humiliation surely? I can't think of any other reason for it.

 

 

I agree, If at all it is true then it's surely got to be at the hands of a vindictive landowner's idea of punishment and indeed humiliation, to maybe show the slaves who's boss and what will happen if they don't tow the line, I suppose it makes a change from a good thrashing, mix up the punishment a bit??

 

Again though it's just speculation, a source would certainly help to back up the statement.

[Nephele]

Since this thread is nearly two years old and the original author (sullafelix) of that extraordinary claim hasn't been around UNRV since November of last year, I doubt that he is going to oblige anyone here too soon with the requested reference source.

 

-- Nephele

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

Since this thread is nearly two years old and the original author (sullafelix) of that extraordinary claim hasn't been around UNRV since November of last year, I doubt that he is going to oblige anyone here too soon with the requested reference source.

 

-- Nephele

 

Maybe Sullafelix won't be able to provide us with a reference but some of our newer members might have heard this statement before and just possibly know of a source to back it up.

 

But I'm not holding my breath

[Nephele]

Maybe Sullafelix won't be able to provide us with a reference but some of our newer members might have heard this statement before and just possibly know of a source to back it up.

 

But I'm not holding my breath

 

I agree. Looks like sullafelix did a drive-by in this thread, and we've now returned to the scene of the crime.

 

btw, belated cheers, Caldrail, on a nice article!

 

-- Nephele

[caldrail]

I've found an obscure reference to the point about nakedness...

 

The Sicilians, having shot up in prosperity and acquired great wealth, began to purchase a vast number of slaves, to whose bodies, as they were brought in droves from the slave markets, they at once applied marks and brands.

 

The young men they used as cowherds, the others in such ways as they happened to be useful. But they treated them with a heavy hand in their service, and granted them the most meagre care, the bare minimum for food and clothing. ...

 

...And because of the despiteful punishments received from them both, the slaves were filled with rage against their masters, and conceiving that they could encounter nothing worse than their present misfortunes began to form conspiracies to revolt and to murder their masters.

 

On one occasion when approached by a group of naked domestics with a request for clothing, Damophilus of Enna impatiently refused to listen. "What!" he said, "do those who travel through the country go naked? Do they not offer a ready source of supply for anyone who needs garments?" Having said this, he ordered them bound to pillars, piled blows on them, and arrogantly dismissed them.

Books 34/35 (?) by Diodorus Siculus