Population Composition – “Foreigners” and “natives”

Over the four centuries of Roman occupation, it is estimated that one million people would have lived within Roman London (Barber and Hall 2000: 112). Despite this, little is known

103

about the composition of people who called this town their home and the names of only 235 individuals are known (Holder 2007: 29).

Without an existing settlement or nearby native centre from which to draw its population, it is thought that a significant number of people, particularly in its early years, would have come from outside the province. Indeed, the establishment of a conventus civium Romanorum, and the level of importation observed from Roman London’s inception, would have required contacts with the established Roman world that precluded these initial settlers from being native Britons (Millett 1996). Rather, they were more likely to have been wealthy citizens, traders and merchants from the Mediterranean or nearby provinces seeking to enlarge pre- existing trade networks (Millett 1996). One such individual known to have lived in Londinium is Aulus Alfidius Olussa, a Greek merchant from Athens who died and was buried in London within the first century AD (RIB I, 9).

Another group of incomers that would have been resident within Roman London would have been imperial administrators. As the base of the provincial governor, procurator and later the

vicarus, numerous officials would have been present to assist them with their duties (Perring

1991: 38-42, 109-112; Mattingly 2008). Consequently, it is thought that Roman London would have had the highest number of citizens and officials of any town in Roman Britain prior to the universal bestowing of citizenship throughout the empire by Caracalla in 212 AD (Millett 1996: 36). Amongst these officials would undoubtedly have been imperial slaves and freedman, at least two of which (Anencletus and Aquilinus) are known epigraphically (RIB I: 21 and Hassall 1980). Unfortunately, the full extent of slavery within Roman London is at present unknown as only one further inscription concerning slavery, namely an instruction to sell a slave, has been recovered (RIB II.4, 2443.7) (see Section 4.5.2).

Alongside the imperial officials, the governor, and later the vicarus, was also accompanied by a military contingent made up of men from every legion stationed in Britain , themselves

consisting of men drawn from across the different provinces of the empire (Hassall 2000: 54). Furthermore, various military campaigns, particularly in the third and fourth century, would have also brought additional Roman troops to the city, albeit on a temporary basis in some cases (Marsden 1980: 166). Epigraphic evidence for at least three of the six legions stationed in Britain has been recovered from London (Yule and Rankov 1998), alongside coincidental finds of uniform, weaponry, and tombstones (Hassall 1973). In addition to active soldiers, evidence for veterans settling within the town has also been recovered in the form of a second century AD bronze military diploma conferring citizenship on its recipient (Roxan 1983).

104

Due to the paucity of recovered inscriptions, further identification of non-natives within the general population must be derived from Roman London’s cemeteries. The presence of rare and fine burial goods is one method that has been utilised to identify potential non-natives (Cool 2010; Pearce 2010). However, the often portable nature of many of these items makes assigning geographical origins problematic as their presence may instead be a reflection of the range of goods available within a Roman town (see Pearce 2010 for issues with identifying migration using grave goods). One method that circumvents this issue is the analysis of the skeletal remains themselves. Isotopic investigations of the ratios of strontium, oxygen and lead found within the skeleton have been successfully used to ascertain geographical origins

(Killgrove 2010; Prowse et al. 2010). Within Roman London, three such studies have identified the presence of non-natives, including a high-status female whose lead ratios are consistent with a childhood spent in the Mediterranean (Montgomery et al. 2010; Shaw 2013; Millard et

al. in prep). Further to this, a previous examination of stress markers within Londinium’s

cemetery population also alludes to the presence of non-natives (Gowland and Redfern 2010) (see 2.3).

While it appears that a significant proportion of its population came from outside the province, Roman London was not just a town of foreigners. The establishment of a new town would have undoubtedly created social and economic opportunities that would have encouraged the migration of native Britons from the countryside (Pearce 2010). This rural-urban migration would have been further facilitated by the breakdown of existing social networks after the Roman conquest, enabling an increased degree of population mobility for those within province as well as those coming into it (Pearce 2010). As Reece (2008: 46) surmised ‘[while] the person hoisting the packages out of the hold, or off the deck of the ship was foreign, the person on the dock guiding the packages down to the ground was probably British’.

Despite this, direct evidence for native Britons within Roman London is sparse, predominantly consisting of a limited number of inscriptions of names containing Celtic language elements, or words thought to have had Celtic roots, such as “Thames” or “Londinium” itself (Holder 2007). Further indirect evidence for their presence within the first years of the town’s establishment is attested to by the discovery of several Iron Age-style circular buildings dated to the c. AD 50s (Watson with Heard 2006: 14). However, the small amount of evidence found for the presence of native Britons within the town should not be seen as an indication of their absence, or small numbers (Holder 2007: 31). Rather, the blurring of British and Roman identities over time, particularly in major towns such as Roman London, would have meant the adoption of

105

would have happened surprisingly quickly, inhibiting the identification of native portions of the population from material culture alone.

Overall, the current evidence described above does not allow us to quantify the extent of migration to Roman London throughout its occupation, nor does it enable us to ascertain the ratios of “foreigners” and “natives” that made up its population. However, the evidence suggests that Roman London had a remarkably complex and heterogeneous community.