82 Casterley Camp Excavations. 



prototype, and the developed wheel-turned bowls were only made 

 there under Roman influence, the developed wheel-turned bowl 

 may be considerably later in date at Casterley than at Haltern, 

 but it can scarcely be earlier. 



It is not known with any certainty how long this type survived, 

 but as at Casterley it was found — in the critical positions as far 

 as date is concerned — without intermixture of later Romano-British 

 types, this point does not materially affect the case. It would be 

 more to the point to know how soon the later types, including the 

 early Samian, appeared, for it is clear that the ditches had already 

 begun to silt up before they arrived at Casterley. 



Samian ware seems to have been imported into Britain to some 

 extent even before the Roman conquest of A.D. -A3, but it is not 

 at all common till after that date. Its absence, and the absence 

 of all the other common Romano-British types from the lower 

 strata of the ditches, point to the earthworks not having been kept 

 in repair, and the consequent silting up of the ditches, soon after 

 the date of the Roman conquest. It seems, therefore, not im- 

 probable that the earthworks became obsolete, and were allowed 

 to fall into decay, as a consequence of the Roman occupation of 

 the country. 1 Thus it appears that the earthworks as a whole 

 were made in the period somewhere between about 10 A.D. and 

 the latter part of the century, but probably before the year 43 A.D. 

 It may be that some of the inner works were actually made some- 

 what before the earlier date, but it is remarkable that, except in 

 the pits themselves, only some half-dozen fragments were founc 

 of any pottery earlier than that of the wheel-turned " bead- 

 rim" bowls. It does not, therefore, seem likely that the site was 

 inhabited to any extent before the period of this particular type 

 of wheel-turned pottery. 



Professor Haverfield, to whom we are greatly indebted for 

 reading these notes, and for his valuable criticisms, writes: — 

 " I think that you are probably right in your dating of 

 Casterley. The objects which you have found in the lowest strata 



1 Professor Haverfield writes : — " There is certainly no recognisable trace 

 of Italian or Roman influence in the plan of the village." 



