The significance of the Roman presence in south east Scotland has been widely acknowledged, but it has received surprisingly little co-ordinated research in the past 25 years. The four key sites in the region of Cramond, Inveresk, Newstead and Elginhaugh provide most of the information we have on the Roman presence in this region. However, its position within the shifting pattern of Roman control and influence, moving backward and forward between frontier, borderland and hinterland over a period of centuries is distinct and presents unique opportunities. This becomes particularly significant with the juxtaposition of the exceptional Iron Age landscape, allowing the Roman presence to be placed into an indigenous context.
The rich data set available in south east Scotland should be employed to contribute to wider perspectives on topics such as imperialism, identity and ethnicity, and how these changed over time. What was the experience of daily life for the various peoples in Roman Scotland and how did interactions between incomers and local communities develop and change over the period in question and, indeed, at and after its end?
In contrast to Hadrian’s Wall and to an extent the Antonine Wall, most Roman remains are invisible to the public in south east Scotland. Only Cramond has any publicly visible remains, and even there the excavated and well-preserved bath house is buried. While visible remains may appear to have only a marginal direct impact of research, they are important to maintain and build profile. Physical remains promote further research through public engagement. Community engagement with sites can directly enhance their protection as well understanding.
The separation of the Roman presence from the Iron Age in the structure of SESARF follows that in the National ScARF, however, it must be emphasised that a consideration of the Roman presence, and the direct influence of Romans even during periods when there was not a permanent presence in the region, cannot be divorced from the contemporary occupation of south east Scotland. The Iron Age communities reacted to the Roman presence in complex ways and the Romans operated in a space shaped by those communities and the landscape that they had created. These relationships were fluid and evolving. This section, therefore, must be read in conjunction with the SESARF 6 Iron Age chapter. Equally, this research framework should be seen in the wider context of the northern military zone and broader studies of Roman frontiers.
Aims
The aim of this chapter is to set out a Research Framework that will help to shape the future research into the archaeology of the Roman Iron Age within south east Scotland. It will briefly summarise the baseline of existing archaeological knowledge for the Roman period of occupation and influence within the study area, highlight data and interpretation gaps and propose a strategy to address these data gaps.
Key themes for future recommendations occur throughout:
- Investigation of the nature of the frontier, being at different times both within the Roman Empire during the occupation of the Antonine Wall and outside it but close to the frontier, within the wider context of Roman frontier studies.
- Investigation of the short- and long-term impacts of Roman occupation and the influence on the area and its people, using current and emerging archaeological techniques, theoretical perspectives and historical models.
- Integration of the site-based record within a wider landscape analysis, including remote sensing techniques (eg LiDAR, aerial survey and geophysics). While previous fieldwork will form a core part of this, additional fieldwork will be necessary and this should form part of an ambitious future programme.
- Full utilisation of scientific techniques, integrated with more traditional approaches to fieldwork, environmental and artefactual analysis.
- Detailed attention to understanding the environmental context within which Roman occupation and interaction occurred, acknowledging that this was not static.
- Attention to the preservation of archaeological remains and public engagement with both the process and outcomes of research.
7.1.1 Chronology and Terminology