No CrossRef data available.
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.
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: 02 January 2015
[1] Arch.J., CXIX, 1964, 103.Google Scholar The article has been revised to include new evidence and will be reprinted in (ed.) J. S. Wacher, Civitas Capitals of Roman Britain (Leicester University Press, forthcoming).
[2] J. S. Wacher, Excavations at Brough-on-Humber, 1958–61 (forthcoming). See Antiq. J., XL, 58–64, for the sequence of town defences. The figure of 120 years is based on a recent examination of all the finds from 18 sections. The t.p.q. for the rampart is a.d. 150, while that for the wall is a.d. 270.
[3] See Antiq. J., XLI–XLIV, for interim reports. The t.p.q. for the early rampart is provided by Hadrianic-Antonine pottery, and for the stone wall by a large group of pottery containing late Antonine and early 3rd-century pieces (notably Gillam Types 226, 314, Arch. Ael., 4, XXXV, 1–72). Eight sections have now been cut across the defences.
[4] B. R. Hartley, Dating Town Buildings and Structures, in (ed.) J. S. Wacher, Civitas Capitals of Roman Britain (forthcoming).
[5] S. S. Frere, , ‘Verulamium—Then and Now’, Bull. Inst. Arch., IV, 1964, 69 Google Scholar.
[6] Antiq. J. XLI, pl. XVIII (section AB).