| Summary : Slight remains of a small fortified Roman town, possibly Clausentum; it occupies a promontory caused by a bend in the River Itchen. The site was occupied from circa 70 AD, excavations uncovered a hut site and possible wharves; lead pigs, now lost, were also found. A ditch cut off the promontory enclosing an area of 27.5 acres. During the early second century timber houses were built and circa 150 AD a palisade was put across the promontory inside the ditch reducing the area enclosed to eight acres. The first stone buildings, including a bath-house, were erected circa 170-80 AD. In about 350-70 AD the palisade was replaced by a stone wall which seems to have enclosed the whole settlement. At this time the bath-house was also rebuilt and the other stone buildings demolished. This late 4th century phase has been interpreted as a possible Saxon Shore fort, replacing Portchester, though it could be just a small fortified town. Bitterne is recorded as a Saxon burh and presumably the stone defences were utilised during the Anglo-Saxon period. |
More information : (SU 4340 1331) Clausentum Roman Town (R) (Site of)
(SU 4348 1336) Ditch (R) (SU 4370 1352) Vallum (R)
(SU 4333 1337) Roman Building (Remains of) (R)
(SU 4335 1338) Wall (Remains of) (R)
(SU 4348 1326) Roman Well (Site of) (R)
(Name centred SU 4322 1328) Roman Pigs of Lead found AD 1918 (NAT) (1)
Some 3 miles above its junction with Southampton Water, the River Itchen takes an almost semi-circular bend and encloses a promontory of land on which is situated a Roman site. In Md times the area became the Manor of Bitterne. Bitterne is mentioned by Leland and Camden, but it remained to a local antiquary Dr John Speed to demonstrate the identification of Bitterne with the Clausentum of the Antonine Itinerary. Following the RO. conquest, Bitterne assumed importance as the site of a small port which was probably not founded before c AD 70., the Flavian period. A few rubbish pits and occupation levels, a hut site and perhaps wooden wharves and some lost lead pigs of Vespasianic date represent the present evidence. Possibly the outer earthwork is of this date. Traces of timbered houses of the Trajanic period have been uncovered, and c 150 AD or later, a wooden stockade was built across the neck of the promontory inside and parallel to the outer earthwork, reducing the defended area from 27 1/2 acres to less than 8 acres. The inner ditch may be contemporary with the stockade. c AD 170/180 the first stone buildings appeared, of which a bath house and the W wall of an important building now beneath the manor house, have been located. These buildings were altered some time before c AD 350/370, at which time the bath house was rebuilt and the other buildings demolished. At this time also, the inner area within the stockade was provided with a stone wall. There was a renewal of building activity c AD 390, but over this last occupation is a debris level which shows no structural activity until Md times. The first recording of existing remains was in 1779-1801 when Northam Bridge and the road across the area were constructed, and in 1804-5 during work in the grounds of the Manor house. The area was extensively developed c 1900, but the first excavations were in 1935-7 by Messrs Waterman and Maitland Muller, continued until the outbreak of war, and resumed by Muller in 1946. In the same year, Mrs A Cotton commenced excavations, which were continued in 1951. A further rescue excavation was carried out by P W Gathercole in 1954 prior to land development in Steward Road. (2)
The sole visible structural remains at Clausentum comprise the restored foundations of the bath house and a fragment of the town wall on the N side, now reduced to an overgrown bank. (See Map Diagram)
Published 1/1250 survey revised. (3)
Richmond, Frere and Cunliffe subscribe to the view that Bitterne/Clausentum was a Saxon Shore fort, which replaced Portchester in the Theodosian reorganisation. The evidence being (i) that the coin sequence at Portchester, in marked contrast to that at other forts such as Pevensey and Richborough, shows a sharp decline in numbers after 367 AD, and (ii) that the wall at Clausentum has been proved by excavation to date to approximately that same year, and has the round ballistaria towers typical of the period. But this is hardly more than a hypothesis:-
a The thought did not occur to the excavators (6-7).
b The 'promontory' - type fort would be very unusual.
c The dating evidence for the wall at Clausentum is decidedly slender. It rests on the wall being later than, but immediately following on, an occupation layer containing late New Forest pottery and a single badly corroded coin of Valens; this last in the lowest part of the layer at a place where it was some 6" thick. But such a coin is surely likely to be at least 10 years old when deposited, and another few years ought to be allowed for accumulation of the layer. So that the wall is likely to be later than Theodosian, and might be very much later, even Medieval. Nothing categorically Roman was found in the wall structure, and Waterman does not venture on any closer dating than 'Valens +'.
d The wall turrets are not well authenticated, and depend entirely on a note and sketch of 1804. None were located in the modern excavations.
e) In the Richborough Report Cunliffe argues (against his later opinion) that as the relevant part of the Notitia Dignitatum is considered to derive from post-Theodosian military lists, Clausentum, if replacing Portchester, should be mentioned, but Portus Adurni (if Portchester) should not. And that as the contrary is the case, Clausentum could never have been more than a fortified town. And he takes this to imply that the south coast west of Pevensey was left undefended after about 370 AD. In the present state of knowledge, it is perhaps best to assume that the wall at Clausentum was Roman, and Theodosian or sub-Theodosian. But what it defended may have been a sea-port cum garrison town rather than a purely military base. (4-9)
Four Roman milestones and three possible milestones were found at Bitterne between 1800 and 1850. Four of them had apparently been built into the Roman wall. Two are in the Tudor House Museum, Southampton; the remainder are lost. (10)
(Name 'CLAVSENTVM'? accepted for 4th. edition R.B. Map.)
Antonine Iter VII begins at Chichester but the identity of "CLAUSENTUM' has still to be established. Although it is recorded as 20 Roman miles from Chichester and 10 from Winchester. Clausentum has been attributed, since the 18th century, to the Roman town and naval base at Bitterne, but there is no corroborative evidence for this. The actual mileage from Bitterne to Winchester is about 10 Roman miles, but to Chichester is more like 30, rather than the 20 Roman miles mentioned in the Iter. A site which more readily agrees with the Iter mileages is the suggested settlement at Wickham (see SU 51 SE 18) lying just 20 Roman miles from Chichester but 14 1/4 from Winchester. (11)
The fort at Bitterne can be tentatively accepted as a Saxon Shore fort. It is very like one in situation and style of building although its plan has been dictated by its topographical situation. The fort is omitted from the Notitia Dignitatum (c400) which lists Portchester but this may signify no more than the absence of a garrison or that it was not, then, under the command of the Count of the Saxon Shore. It certainly superseded Portchester, its wall being built about 367, but this may have been due to eustatic changes in sea level from the 3rd century which may have made Portchester useless. The Saxon burgh recorded in the Burghal Hidage of about 920 AD probably utilized the defences of the Roman fort at Bitterne which were not taken down until Elizabethan times. The stated number of hides, 150, gives an estimate of the length of the defences which is within a few feet of the known length of the Roman wall. (12-15)
Roman Remains Bitterne (Clausentum) Roman station Monument 143. (16)
A Roman altar to Ancasta (a), a bronze Hercules with Celtic hair-style and a pipe-clay Venus, all from Clausentum, and an ithyphallic lead figurine probably from Clausentum, are in Southampton Museum (which one is not stated). (17)
Two Roman milestones, Nos, 2222 and 2223 (a), apparently lost since 1805, have been rediscovered built into a wall in a Bitterne garden. (exact site not mentioned). (18)
SU 433321332. A gravel surface and possible wall footings were uncovered at 28 Hawkeswood Road. Pottery ranged from the early 2nd century to the 4th century. A mid-3rd century coin was also found. (19) |