What did the Romans do for Whittle-le-Woods?

“What have the Romans done for us?” Nearly everyone of a certain age is familiar with the immortal question posed in Monty Python’s Life of Brian and a worryingly large number can quote verbatim the long list of Roman achievements given in reply. But if the influence of Rome was readily apparent in the cities of 1^st century Judea, what of one of the furthest corners of the Roman empire, the North-West of England? In this article, we will look at Roman Britain, focusing on the evidence for the presence of the Romans in Lancashire. And yes, we will consider the influence of Rome on Whittle-le-Woods and the surrounding area.

Britain before the Romans

The period from around 800 BC until the coming of the Romans in the 1^st century AD is known as the Iron Age. During this time, the population of Britain, along with much of the rest of Western Europe, was divided into a large number of tribes. The British tribes were part of an extensive but loose group of peoples known as the Celts, who inhabited the middle areas of Europe from Ireland in the west to modern-day Romania in the east. The Celts shared a common language and some religious and cultural pactices, but they were far from a unified whole and tribes were often in conflict with one another. They were predominantly rural dwellers: towns and cities did not appear in Western Europe prior to the advent of the Romans.

In Britain, people mainly lived in round houses. These could be sited individually, in small hamlets, in hill or promontory forts or sometimes in small fortified lowland settlements called oppida. In modern-day Scotland, other kinds of dwelling are often found, including brochs, duns and crannogs – it is interesting that such a difference existed many centuries before Scotland and England became separate nations. People were almost exclusively illiterate, so what we know of their political arrangements or way of life has come from archaeology or from later Roman writings.

Then as now, there was a north-south divide across England. The south and east were relatively densely populated, with evidence of mixed farming and of an elite that valued luxury goods. In the first century BC these included imports from the Roman Empire and there were other signs of cross-channel trade and cultural exchange, such as the introduction by some tribes of coinage. In the north and west, there is less evidence of settlement; the population seems to have been lower and scattered in individual farmsteads, with agriculture largely pastoral.

The Romans Arrive

By 55 BC the Roman army commanded by Gaius Julius Caesar had conquered most of Gaul (broadly modern day France) and Caesar, needing to keep up the momentum to occupy his troops and maintain his status in Rome, looked across the channel for his next conquest. He undertook two missions to Britain in 55 and 54 BC, covering much of southern England before withdrawing. His subsequent Veni, vidi, vici boast was more political spin than a true report as his campaigns were little more than exploratory. They highlighted the difficulties involved in transporting an army across the ocean and subjugating uncooperative tribes in often difficult terrain. While contacts were maintained between Roman Gaul and Britain, it was over ninety years before the Romans attempted another invasion.

The next and decisive invasion was ordered by the emperor Claudius. Again, the motive was primarily political. Claudius was an unlikely emperor and needed military success to shore up his position. Completing his ancestor Julius Caesar’s mission would do much for his status in Rome. The invasion began in 43 AD and for the next forty years or so the Romans spread their authority across the country, pacifying each tribe in turn, sometimes through forging treaties and patronising local chiefs and sometimes by force. They reached the north-west of England by the early 70s AD and defeated a confederation of Scottish tribes at the battle of Mons Graupius (somewhere near Inverness) in 83 AD. On the way they destroyed the Anglesey stronghold of the Druids, the priestly caste that provided the religious and cultural glue that held Britain’s fractious tribes together. Progress was not always smooth however and the armies had to return south in 60 AD to quell a major rebellion by the Iceni tribe of East Anglia under Boudicca. The victory over the Scottish tribes was also temporary. Rome never conquered the whole of Britain and did not pursue ideas of invading Ireland.

Rome governed Britain for over 350 years. From today, such a timescale would take us back to the 1660’s, when Charles the Second was monarch and Samuel Pepys was writing his diaries. Clearly, much happened in Britain during the Roman occupation, but written history and archaeology can only provide excerpts. Taken century by century, here is an overview:

1^st century AD: As suggested above, from the invasion in 43 AD, it took most of the century for the Romans to secure their territory in Britain. By the end of the century, Scotland had been given up but England was becoming Romanised. A network of main roads covered the country and towns became established. The south of the country was mainly pacified and the army was concentrated in the north, with forts strategically placed along the road network to maintain the peace and to deter raids from Scotland. Villas began to be built in the south-east half of the country; these were the forerunners of later country houses and were the dwellings and home farms of the local elite.

2^nd century AD: This was a time of relative political stability in the Roman Empire. There were just five emperors between 98 and 192 AD. By the middle of the 2^nd century, towns in Britain had suites of public buildings, including basilicas, public baths, temples and amphitheatres. The emperor Hadrian visited Britain in 120 AD and ordered the construction of the wall across the north of England that bears his name. Later in the century, Antoninus Pius attempted to move the border north to the Clyde-Forth area with the construction of the Antonine wall, but this was abandoned after a couple of decades and Hadrian’s wall became the permanent northern border of the Roman empire.

3^rd century AD: This was a century of political turmoil in the empire, which sometimes impinged on Britain. Early in the century, the emperor Septimius Severus divided Britain into two provinces: Britannia Superior (the south) and Britannia Inferior (the north). This had more to do with preventing a strong governor developing an extensive power base than with administrative efficiency. He also waged new campaigns against the Scottish tribes, but like his predecessors he found the hostile terrain and the guerrilla tactics of the Caledonians insurmountable and worn out by the task he died at York in 211 AD.

For much of the rest of the century, emperors came and went as frequently as Premier League football managers, though at least the latter were not murdered, as often happened to the former. The turmoil sometimes reached the far outposts of the empire, with successful generals making their own bids for power. In 260 AD, Postumus, commander of the Rhine army, set himself up as ruler of an entity that became known as the “Gallic empire”, embracing Britain, Gaul and Germany. After his murder in 268, this remained independent for a few further years before being re-taken by Rome. Later in the century, another general, Carausius, established a breakaway empire embracing Britain and Gaul, which lasted until Britain was invaded in 296 AD by the legitimate emperor, Constantinius Chlorus.

Meanwhile, Britain was becoming increasingly vulnerable to attack from northern European “barbarians” (the term used by the Romans for those outwith the empire). From the middle of the century all important towns were equipped with defensive walls and a line of forts was built along the southern and eastern coasts (known as the Saxon Shore forts), probably to protect against pirates.

4^th century AD: Early in the century, the emperor Diocletian reorganised much of the empire and Britain was divided again, this time into four provinces. The century was one of increasing conflict and decline for the empire as a whole, but parts of Britain seem to have enjoyed a period of prosperity. Many villas in the south of England were rebuilt during the century and some became lavish, expanding in size and gaining intricate mosaics, sophisticated central heating systems and other signs of wealth. At the same time, Britain’s towns appear to have become somewhat neglected; their public buildings showing signs of disrepair or in some cases going out of use.

There were further rebellions and in 350 AD a general named Magentinus, who was said to have had a British father, established a short-lived breakaway empire that included Britain. Barbarian raids began to intensify and in 367 AD, Scots and Picts joined forces with Franks and Saxons in the “barbarian conspiracy”, a series of plundering attacks on Britain and Gaul. In response, London’s defensive wall was strengthened and Hadrian’s Wall underwent renovation works. By this time, the empire was divided into western and eastern halves and the western half was collapsing under its own weight, with barbarian raiders sacking Rome itself.

What did the Romans think of Britain?

Britain became part of the Roman Empire for political rather than economic or strategic reasons and for much of the period of occupation it was probably more trouble than it was worth. As elsewhere, the Romans exploited Britain for natural resources while making it a market for manufactured and luxury goods. In the late 1^st century BC, the writer Strabo listed Britain’s exports as, grain, cattle, gold, silver and iron, hunting dogs and slaves (interestingly, the Romans were not great exploiters of one of Britain’s best natural resources: coal). Roman writers regarded the British as primitive and little more than savages. In a famous passage, the 1^st century AD writer Tacitus noted that the Romans had bought aspects of their culture to Britain but, “the unsuspecting Britons spoke of such novelties as “civilisation”, when in fact they were only a feature of their enslavement”. A soldier stationed in the northern fort of Vindolanda in the late 1^st century AD described the local people as Brittunculi, a derogatory term that has echoes of today’s terms of racial prejudice and abuse. The British maintained a capacity for revolt throughout the occupation and the fact that modern Scotland was never pacified meant that a substantial army garrison needed to be maintained in northern England throughout the occupation period.

At the same time, we must remember the north-south divide that we discussed above. As we have seen, the southern half of the country became peaceful and “Romanised” relatively quickly and at least some southern Britons prospered and became rich. The north, by contrast, was never Romanised but remained a “military zone”, governed by the army, with the local population largely maintaining their Iron Age way of life. Lancashire was within this military zone and we will now focus on the evidence for the presence there of the Romans and of how the local British population lived.

Iron Age Lancashire

There isn’t much Iron Age archaeology in modern day Lancashire. This used to be taken as a sign that the area was largely uninhabited during that period. There is evidence that the climate deteriorated from around 1000 BC to be colder and wetter than today and this fact, along with the marshy or hilly terrain, was thought to have made Lancashire inhospitable to agriculture and settlement. But as archaeologists like to say, absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence and more recent discoveries have painted a more nuanced picture. It is now suggested that, at least towards the end of the first millennium BC, when the climate improved again, the area was populated by farming families mainly rearing livestock, albeit probably thinly scattered.

A Roman writer named the local tribe as the Setantii. It has been suggested that their territory may have extended from the Mersey basin to the Lune valley. They were probably part of a confederation of tribes known as the Brigantes who were based in modern day Yorkshire and dominated much of Northern Britain. The absence of finds of luxury goods have led some to suggest that the Setantii’s society may have been relatively egalitarian, but their elites may have expressed their status in other ways, such as through possession of livestock.

The main settlement types so far discovered in Lancashire are hillforts, scattered around the western Pennines and largely abandoned by the time that the Romans arrived and rectangular enclosures containing one or more round houses and interpreted as single-family pastoral farms. Most of the latter sites are in the Mersey basin, but a site has been excavated on the central Lancashire plain at Lathom, near Omskirk. It was discovered by accident during pipe-laying works and includes a series of round houses, spanning at least three generations, with outbuildings including a likely grain store and an enclosure that retains traces of cart tracks. It has been dated to the final centuries of the first millennium BC and finds of pottery and tile indicate that it was still occupied after the Romans arrived in the area around 70 AD.

The Romans in Lancashire

The story of the Romans in Lancashire can be simply told. Lancashire was part of the northern military zone and the only Roman residents were the army and its support network. There were no Roman towns other than the vici (accompanying settlements) associated with army forts. There were forts at regular intervals, housing garrisons that were there to discourage revolt and to police the local population. The forts were joined by roads that connected the region to the south with the nearest major town (and legionary headquarters) at Chester and to the north with Cumbria and the frontier of the empire at Carlisle. Only one other type of site has been discovered in Lancashire: a military-industrial complex at Walton-le-Dale, though there may have also been a port in the area, possibly at Fleetwood.

This map shows the Roman roads, forts and other sites so far discovered in Lancashire

Forts have been excavated at Manchester, Wigan, Ribchester, Kirkham and Lancaster and the routes of the connecting roads have largely been traced. The road that connected Kirkham with Ribchester ran through Fulwood and is still in use as Watling Street Road. All the forts were first built at the time of the Romans’ arrival around 70 AD. The forts at Manchester, Ribchester and Lancaster were in use for much of the Roman period, while Wigan and Kirkham appear to have been closed down by the mid-second century AD. They were manned by Auxiliaries rather than Legionaries and would have had a garrison of around 500 men. Outside each fort was a vicus, a civilian settlement that included shops, workshops, temples and places of entertainment and accommodation for soldiers’ families. The picture is however evolving, with recent investigations identifying another likely fort at Burscough.

It is likely that throughout the Roman occupation the local population largely continued with its Iron Age way of life, living in roundhouses and carrying out mainly pastoral subsistence farming. Interaction between the peoples will however have occurred in a number of ways. Findings of Roman pottery at British sites such as Lathom indicate that local farmers were trading for Roman goods. The vici adjacent to Roman forts provided a focus for local administration and trade and local artisans may have lived in their streets, along with others from across the empire. There is evidence that the pattern of agriculture may have changed, with greater production of cereals to feed the Roman garrisons. Locals may have become wives of Roman soldiers – or may have been forced to become their slaves. Finally, as the occupation wore on, local men may have sought careers in the Roman army. Army units tended to have names that reflected their geographical origins – the garrison at Ribchester originated in Eastern Europe, but after a century or two it will have included men from all over the empire, including Britain.

So what did the Romans do for Whittle-le-Woods?

There is no direct evidence for the presence of Iron Age people in Whittle-le-Woods or the surrounding townships, although John Hallam makes the tantalising suggestion that there may have been late Bronze Age or early Iron Age hillforts at Dovecotes and Hawksclough, on the ridge to the east of Cuerden Valley Park (off Cam Lane), though these will have gone out of use long before the arrival of the Romans. The whole area is likely to have been heavily wooded throughout much of the Iron Age, but settlement may have become more widespread by the end of the 1st millenium BC. The farmstead at Lathom is only twelve miles from Whittle as the crow flies and it is possible that there were more settlements on the Lancashire plain, with perhaps summer grazing pastures on the hillsides.

Hawksclough, off Cam Lane, Clayton-le-Woods. The field on top of the incline in the distance may have been the site of an early Iron Age hillfort

The Romans certainly passed near to Whittle-le-Woods. The road from Wigan to the north passed through the eastern outskirts of Leyland, roughly following the current A49. In 2018, a section of the road was excavated at Cuerden Green, as part of preparations for a major redevelopment of the area, leading experts to revise their theories about its route. The excavations showed that it was a wide and well-built road, suggesting that it was a major route from Chester to the northern frontier. The road passed through the nearest confirmed Roman settlement to Whittle-le-Woods at Walton-le-Dale, adjacent to the confluence of the rivers Ribble and Darwen and now largely buried under the Capitol Centre retail park. This site was used from the late 1^st century. During the second century, large rectangular buildings were constructed, many containing metalworking hearths and it is assumed that at this time it was an industrial complex manufacturing military equipment, presumably for use at the local forts. Later, the site’s function seems to have changed to a supply depot, with warehouses for the storage of grain and other goods, brought up the Ribble for distribution to the forts.

The most compelling evidence for the presence of the Romans in Whittle-le-Woods itself comes from a report in the Preston Chronicle of 11 March 1837 of the discovery of a hoard of Roman coins in the township. I reproduce the report in full:

“On Tuesday last, some workmen, engaged in making an excavation in the banks of the canal, in Whittle-le-Woods, about three miles from Chorley, found a considerable number of small Roman brass coins. About a dozen of them were left at the office of this paper, which bear the names of the following Roman Emperors, (whose reigns included the period of the first three centuries in the Christian era) viz: Claudius, Gallienus, Probus, Tetricus and Postumus.

The much overgrown course of the Lancaster canal, pictured from the top of the tunnel off Hilltop Lane, looking north. Whittle quarry is to the left. In this area in 1837, workers discovered a hoard of third century Roman coins, leading to the theory that the Romans had been quarrying stone in Whittle-le-Woods.

Coin hoards of this nature are generally assumed to represent an individual’s savings, hidden for safe keeping but not recovered, either because the owner suffered some misfortune or simply forgot where he had left them. Concern for the preservation of archaeological evidence was lower in the nineteenth century than today and the hoard has long been lost, presumably broken up and sold or given away. However, we can glean some information from this brief report and correct some misconceptions within it.

The author’s statement that the coins include emperors from the first three centuries AD was based on the assumption that those including the name Claudius referred to the original invader of Britain, but they would actually have dated from the reign of Claudius II (reigned 268-270 AD). The other emperors also reigned in the second half of the third century: Gallienus, 253-268; Tetricus, 271-274 and Probus, 276-282. We met Postumus earlier, as ruler from 260 to 268 of the “Gallic empire” that embraced Britain, Gaul and Germany and Tetricus succeeded him. The sample of coins from the hoard therefore covers a thirty year period from 253 to 282 AD and includes issues from most of the emperors who ruled Britain during that period. The hoard is one of over 200 found in England dating from the years following the collapse of the "Gallic Empire", suggesting that this was an unsettled and possibly conflict-ridden period.

The hoard would have comprised ‘radiate’ coins, so called because they depicted the emperor wearing a crown with sun-like rays radiating from it. This was a common style in the third century AD. This was a period when coinage was much debased and those in the hoard were made of bronze with a silver wash. Individual coins would not have been worth very much (see here for an article about a hoard from the same period discovered at Plompton, near Knaresbrough and donated to the Yorkshire museum).

The hoard was likely to have been left by a soldier. Even short-reigned emperors were keen to mint their own coins to ensure that the army, on which their authority rested, was regularly paid. The site of discovery, adjacent to the Lancaster canal and near to the modern millstone grit quarries, has been taken as evidence that the Romans were quarrying stone in Whittle in the third century; such work would have been carried out by the army. This theory is certainly plausible – there is no evidence that the Romans were in the area for any other reason and stone could have been easily transported along the nearby Wigan to Walton-le-Dale road – but any direct evidence of a Roman presence will have been destroyed by centuries of later stone removal. The discovery of the hoard (and others in seemingly random places elsewhere in Lancashire) shows that there is much about life in Roman times that is barely known to us – and much evidence that has been destroyed by nearly two thousand years of later development.

The End of Roman Rule

In 410 AD the emperor Honorius wrote to officials in Britain to tell them that they should do what was necessary to defend themselves against barbarian incursions, as Rome would no longer assist them. This letter is sometimes regarded as implying an abrupt and total withdrawal from Britain on that date. However, it was not the case that the British woke up one morning to find the Romans gone and a note on the basilica door saying (in Latin), ‘So long and thanks for all the slaves’. In fact, the Roman withdrawal was gradual, had begun some years earlier and Roman influence and culture remained for several generations. And Britain had actually declared itself independent of Rome the year before – the only Roman territory ever to do so.

The people of Lancashire probably noted the departure of the Romans before those in many parts of the country, as the army was steadily withdrawn from the late fourth century, to fight wars against barbarians on the continent, or civil wars between rival would-be emperors. Any economic or other effects of this withdrawal on the local population can only be guessed at. There is evidence that the fortifications along the coast of north-west England had been strengthened during the fourth century (Lancaster fort was completely rebuilt and expanded at this time), to provide some protection against raids from Ireland, Scotland and Anglo-Saxon pirates and it is possible that the people of Lancashire felt the force of such raids after the Romans left. Direct evidence for events in Lancashire around the time of the Roman withdrawal and the century or so afterwards is however almost completely lacking.

In the south of England the Romanised way of life faded more slowly. Towns and villas continued to be occupied for some decades after the split with Rome. By the end of the fifth century, however, the Anglo-Saxon takeover was well under way and much that the Romans had brought to Britain was lost. The incomers built with timber, not stone (so any quarries in Whittle would have fallen silent) and lived in small rural settlements and gradually the villas and towns were abandoned and became derelict. The use of coinage disappeared, as did writing. Long distance travel became largely unnecessary, so many Roman roads fell into disrepair. Even new pottery became scarce, people using old hardware or making implements from wood.  A century after Honorius’s letter was sent, Britain had new rulers and a totally different culture and way of life.

Conclusion

Imagine a family living in the Whittle-le-Woods area for many generations from the late Iron Age to the onset of Saxon rule in the sixth century AD. How did that family’s way of life change from being part of the Iron Age Setantii tribe, through the Roman occupation to the Saxon takeover? The short answer is, probably not much. They will have begun the period living in a small farm comprising one or more roundhouses and outbuildings and would have mainly reared cattle. They would have eyed the Roman army’s advance with suspicion and may even have been involved in mid-first century Brigantian resistance to the invasion. Thereafter, they would likely have settled back to their accustomed way of life, perhaps indulging themselves by acquiring some Roman homeware and perhaps putting some of their land to grain production, to sell to the army. The fort at Ribchester would have been the administrative centre for the area and the garrison of auxiliaries based there would have acted rather like a local police force, maintaining order and collecting taxes. Maybe as time went on, some of the sons of the family even joined the army and served locally, or were sent to fight wars in far-flung corners of Europe.

The departure of the Roman army may have led to some local unrest and it is possible that the area suffered raids from overseas. However, our family likely continued to live in their centuries-old way for several generations further. Eventually, however, Anglo-Saxon masters settled in the area, establishing new villages and towns that still bear Saxon place names today. Historians are still divided about whether they ‘ethnically cleansed’ their conquests by driving out or exterminating the local British population, or whether the Britons were assimilated into Saxon culture, coming to accept new overlords and a new way of life. Either way, it seems that by the sixth or seventh centuries, the Celtic, Iron Age style of living had disappeared. Let us hope that our family successfully adopted to the new regime and perhaps their descendants are still thriving in Central Lancashire today.

Sources used:

de la Bedoyere G (2013) Roman Britain: a new history (revised edition). London: Thames and Hudson.

Barowclough D (2008) Prehistoric Lancashire. Stroud: The History Pess.

Hallam J (1985) The Surviving Past: Archaeological finds and excavations in central Lancashire. Brinscall: The Countryside Press.

Haywood J (2009) The Historical Atlas of the Celtic World. London: Thames and Hudson.

Nevell M & Roberts J (2005) Towards an understanding of therural economy and society of the Iron Age and Romano-British landscape of theMersey Basin and Southern Pennines.