Robert Collins, University of Newcastle

An Archaeology of Identity: Soldiers & Society in Late Roman Britain by Andrew Gardner (2007) is a work that strives to push forward the current understanding of the Roman Empire, accepting the challenge of incorporating social theory into Roman army studies (James 2002) and contextualizing the milites (soldiers) as social agents, continuing the trend over the past decade of perceiving the Roman army as a social group and not faceless cogs of an imperial military machine (eg Goldsworthy and Haynes 1998; James 2001).
The origins of the book are in AG’s (2001) PhD thesis in Archaeology at the Institute of Archaeology, University College of London, but incorporates further developments post-dating the submission of the PhD. The book is separated into six chapters. Chapter 1 (Introduction: the Roman Empire in the 21st century) sets the agenda for the volume, indicating that the soldiers of late Roman Britain serve as a case study for an exploration of much broader issues in archaeology, namely the exploration of the concept of identity and advancing its study in a more theoretically informed fashion. Chapter 2 (The practice of identity) explores the theory behind identity and argues that Gidden’s (1979; 1984; 1993) theory of structuration transcends the duality of (individual) agency and the larger structure(s of society). From this theory, AG distills three themes by which to assess changing identity in late Roman Britain: materiality, temporality, and sociality. The following three chapters explore each of these themes in turn (Chapter 3: The material dimensions of 4th century life: objects and spaces; Chapter 4: The temporal dimensions of 4th century life: traditions and change; and Chapter 5: The social dimensions of 4th century life: interactions and identities). The final chapter, Chapter 6 (Conclusion: Roman Britain in the 4th century) brings the thematic case studies of the previous chapters together to provide an interpretive overview of change through 4th century Britain, drawing on the detailed assessments of military sites and assemblages discussed throughout the work.

It is important to state at the outset that the book is primarily about the concept of identity, and our theoretical understanding of it. Late Roman Britain and its military provide the data and exemplar material for the exploration of identity and promotion of the theory of structuration. Considered in this light, An Archaeology of Identity is not a book about the late Roman military in Britain, but it is a book that challenges our understanding of the late Roman military in Britain. Fans of Elton’s (1996) Warfare in Roman Europe and Nicasie’s (1998) Twilight of Empire will not find text dedicated to the traditional structural aspects of the Roman military, nor a military history as found in the traditional volume on Roman Britain, for example Frere’s Britannia. On the whole, this is an asset, and the student of the Roman military or Roman Britain will find AG’s contribution to be different from other books that line their shelves.
For those interested in theoretical considerations of the fundamental concepts of human existence (in this case, identity), there is a large amount of text which is dedicated solely to theory, and the theoretical underpinning’s of AG’s study are interwoven into those sections of text not explicitly theoretical in content. Structuration provides the theoretical framework, with considered discussion of how the theory relates to both Roman Britain and the concepts under consideration. The concept and theory of agency is found throughout the work, both as it relates to social entities (the individual and larger social formations) as well as the materiality of society. The amount of text dedicated to these topics is interesting, but with it comes a sacrifice.
Those readers unfamiliar with the major military sites of late Roman Britain may find it difficult to fully contextualize the data and images that supplement the theory. The only map locating the sites discussed can be found on page 54, and as a locational map it serves its purpose well. However, the map is selective in the sites located, so contextualizing the site of Housesteads, for example, in its relationship to other forts in the frontier zone is difficult. In this instance, it is unclear to readers that Housesteads is a fort on Hadrian’s Wall, and according to the map, the closest forts are Birdoswald to the west and Wallsend to the east. This is clearly not the case, and there are a considerable number of 4th century forts (let alone smaller military structures) that do not appear on the map. Students of Roman Britain will be aware of this, but students of other archaeological periods are less likely to know so. In the example of Housesteads, I would argue that this is important. Another issue of illustration is the depiction of site plans. Those knowledgeable in the topic will have no difficulties reading the site plans, but again, those less intimately familiar may find interpretation difficult, particularly when only a portion of the site is depicted, requiring the reader to flip back through pages to find the full site plan.
For all readers, the size of the illustrations may be difficult. It is clear that the images were originally in color, but the reproduction seems to have reduced their size and limited the color to black-and-white. This makes reading and interpreting many of the charts, graphs, and plans difficult, even when the reader is familiar with a site, its deposits, and the distributions of artefacts from that site. To be fair, this is a publishing issue and not the author’s fault. Unfortunately, it does negatively impact on the reader’s experience. This is a shame, as it is clear that a lot of effort went into the collation of data and production of images specifically meant to convey important information relating to AG’s thesis.
Readers specifically interested in soldiers and society in late Roman Britain are directed to Chapters 3, 4, and 5. These chapters can be read without the preceding chapters, and a number of interesting conclusions and important observations are provided with a summarizing section relating the information back into the theoretical models espoused. Materiality is addressed primarily in reference to built space – the form, position, and function of structures. Temporality is examined through artefacts and changes in assemblages over time. The chapter is accompanied by a number of graphs of different classes of artefact and disposal practices at various sites. Chapter 5 brings the contents of the previous two chapters together, but questioning current conceptions of the Roman military. Significantly, AG concludes (p 262) that multiple identity categories are needed; the data does not support a distinct and uniform military identity, and this invalidates the whole question of defining a ‘military assemblage’. The implications of this conclusion are important, particularly when considered in conjunction with changes to the structural archaeology of the late military installations in Roman Britain. It leaves one asking if there is a distinct archaeology of Britain’s late Roman military? The answer is undoubtedly “Yes”, but we are forced to reconsider fundamental elements of the Roman military and our current understanding of it
An Archaeology of Identity: Soldiers & Society in Late Roman Britain, is an intriguing read for the theoretical archaeologists, specialists in Roman Britain or the Roman military, or students taking courses with any of these topics. Whether the reader agrees or disagrees with AG’s thesis, I suspect that many readers will be stimulated by a different approach to the much published province of Britannia.
References
Elton, H. 1996. Warfare in Roman Europe, AD 350–425, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Frere, S. 1987. Britannia: A History of Roman Britain, 3rd edition, London: Routledge.
Gardner, A. 2001. “Military” and “Civilian” in Late Roman Brtain: an Archaeology of Social Identity (3 volumes), PhD these, University of London.
Giddens, A. 1979. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis, Houndmills: Macmillan.
Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A. 1993. New Rules of Sociological Method, 2nd edition, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Goldsworthy, A. and Haynes, I. (eds.) 1999. The Roman Army as a Community, Portsmouth: Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series 34.
James, S. 2001. “Soldiers and civilians: identity and interaction in Roman Britain”, in S. James and M. Millett (eds.), Britons and Romans: advancing an archaeological agenda, York: Council for British Archaeology: 77–89.
James, S. 2002. “Writing the Legions: The Development and Future of Roman Military Studies in Britain”, Archaeological Journal 159:1–58.
Nicasie, M. 1998. Twilight of Empire: the Roman Army from the Reign of Diocletian until the Battle of Adrianople, Amsterdam: J. C. Geiben.