AB HARENIS INCVLTIS
Artikelen voor Ab Waasdorp
Van de redactie
Deze bundel is samengesteld ter gelegenheid van de pensionering van Ab Waasdorp in de archeologie. Van maart 1984 tot en met november 2019 was hij in dienst van de gemeente Den Haag. In deze periode heeft Ab tal van onder-zoeken geleid en zo bijgedragen aan onze kennis van het verleden van de stad, maar ook van ver daarbuiten. Zijn stu-dies en publicaties zijn voor menig archeoloog een bron van informatie en inspiratie geweest. Met deze verzameling van artikelen willen wij Ab bedanken en hem tonen wat zijn werk heeft betekend.
From the editors
This volume was compiled on the occasion of the retirement of Ab Waasdorp in archaeology. From March 1984 to November 2019 he was employed by the municipality of The Hague. During this period Ab lead numerous excavations and thus contributed to our knowledge of the past of the city, but also of far beyond. His studies and publications have been a source of information and inspiration for many an archaeologist. With this collection of papers we want to thank Ab and show him what his work has meant.
Colofon
Titel: AB HARENIS INCVLTIS. Artikelen voor Ab Waasdorp. Eindredactie: R.J. van Zoolingen
Redactionele begeleiding: R. Heije, A. PavloviĆ en V.L.C. Kersing
Vormgeving: J.T. de Jong
Uitgave: Gemeente Den Haag, afdeling Archeologie
The rural reach of Roman footwear: observations from
South-Holland
Carol van Driel-Murray
Ab Waasdorp is one of the few excavators to recognise the potential of recording hobnails in situ (Fig. 1), even going so far as to illustrate the neatly exposed, but not particularly artistic arrangements of rusty nails on the cover of “Van Romeinse Soldaten en Cananefaten”.1 This publication is better known for Ab’s presentation of a new type
of military installation and his discovery of a coastal defensive network, but even here, he recognized that the lowly hobnails form part of the total military complex. Furthermore, it was the carefully exposed, measurable patterns of hobnails belonging to the shoes of women amongst the large male sizes that underpinned his interpretation of the Scheveningseweg site as a vicus-like settlement attached to a fortlet or watch tower (Fig. 2). Under the usual conditions of haste few of the other excavations in the province of South-Holland have even noticed the occurrence of nails, but occasionally the actual leather shoe soles themselves survive, and taken together these give us some insight into the acceptance and spread of Roman clothing practices and the degree to which the rural hinterland was integrated into the marketing systems surrounding the urban centre of Voorburg (Forum Hadriani) and the military zone, with its string of forts along the Rhine. These large settlements have produced rich assemblages of Roman footwear that attest to the wide range of footwear available to the inhabitants: in addition to nailed shoes, sandals, slippers and soft single-piece footwear.2 But the very richness of this evidence highlights the relative paucity of leather
finds in the rural hinterland, despite the extensive excavations projects of recent years that have exposed entire rural landscapes.3 And when we look closer at these finds, we see that Roman style shoes only begin to appear towards the
end of the 2nd century and that they often turn up on sites that display other unusual features.4 Going to market and
buying a nice pair of professionally made hobnailed shoes was evidently not so simple as it might seem.
Table 1 Summary of available shoe finds from rural sites in South-Holland
Figure
De Bruin Appendix 8
number Site nailed carbatina sandal size date
Fig. 3 29 Katwijk-Industrieweg 2015 2 large x2 late 2nd
24 Katwijk-uitwateringsluizen 1982, put X 1 1 small, medium late 2nd
Fig. 4-5 24 Katwijk-uitwateringsluizen Well 1 1 large x2 mid 3rd
Fig. 9-11 105 Den Haag-Rotterdamsebaan 3 large, small x2 3rd century
Fig. 8 158 Naaldwijk-Hoogwerf, 1043 1 large
Fig. 13-14 165 Naaldwijk-Mars 2011 1 1 large ca 200
Zuidland-Bernisse 2 medium mid 2nd onwards
Fig. 15 155 Westland-Oostbuursteweg 21-23 2 large late 2nd
Fig. 6 75 Rotterdam-Binnenrotte 13-26-1426/7 1 1 large
small mid-late 2
nd century
Fig. 12 16 Delftse Schie 2011 1 large 3rd century
Fig. 7 125 Vlaardingen-Hoogstad 2230 1 medium 2nd half 2nd century
Fig. 16 Westland-Honselersdijk 2017 1 small 2nd century
1 Waasdorp 1999.
2 Van Driel-Murray 2001; Groenman-van Waateringe 1967; Hoevenberg 1993; Van Driel-Murray et al. 2014. 3 De Bruin 2019, Appendix 1; Van Londen 2006.
The appearance of Roman-style shoes in rural sites
Simply recording the shape of the sole and the nailing patterns can already give an indication of the date of the shoe and its context.5 In the later 2nd century, elaborate tendril patterns and sharply pointed soles were especially
popular in the largest sizes, as can be seen on Scheveningseweg (Fig. 2.4), and also two similar soles in the fill of a well at Katwijk-Industrieweg (Fig. 3). At the same time, less exaggerated, but still pointed shapes were also available: these are often, but not always, in smaller, female sizes. This is the case at Scheveningseweg (Fig. 2.1 and 2.4), but a sole from Vlaardingen is a bit too big to belong to a woman (Fig. 7). The lozenge-shaped nailing pattern is favoured in the later 2nd century, while S-patterns tend to be rather later in date (Fig. 2.2). These patterns match the coin spectrum and
support the conclusion that the military installation at Scheveningseweg was founded at the close of the 2nd century
and continued to be occupied during the early 3rd century.6
Two soles from the bottom of a well at Katwijk-Uitwateringssluizen (Fig. 4-5) are tantalising evidence of occupation well into the 3rd century, and suggest that the features excavated here might form the edges of the vicus associated
with the Roman fort Brittenburg.7 The wide sandal sole is typical for footwear from the 220-240’s, while the broad,
blunt shape of the shoe sole is attested from the 220’s onwards. This rounded, blunt shape is a surprising constant when the finds from rural locations in South-Holland are collected: Naaldwijk-Hoogwerf, Den Haag-Rotterdamsebaan, Delftse Schie and Naaldwijk-Mars (Fig. 8, 9, 12, 13). The first two are unusual: both display a ‘fish-hook’ pattern that can be fairly precisely dated to the 220-230’s. From this same general period comes a small shoe from Den Haag-Rotterdamsebaan (Fig. 10-11). The crumpled remains of the upper represent a type of ankle boot that was very popular in the first half of the 3rd century.8 This particular example appears to be a somewhat luxurious version of the style,
for a small scrap of the vamp leather remains, studded with tiny bronze pins, that would have made a bright contrast on the dark shoe leather. Decoration of this type on contemporary footwear is also known from military and urban contexts in Britain and Belgium.9
A few finds are to be placed more generally in the second half of the 2nd century (some other soles from
Katwijk-Uitwateringsluizen, fragments from Bernisse) with the narrow sandal from Rotterdam-Binnenrotte as a rather fine example: despite the elegant shape, it is for a large foot and thus for a man – like a similar sandal from the shipwreck De Meern I (Fig. 6).10 Following a somewhat hesitant start in the second half of the 2nd century, Roman style footwear
becomes a bit more general in the earlier 3rd century, but it would never have been a common sight in the region.
Settlements with a difference?
The lack of leather finds from this damp and extensively excavated region is surprising. Moreover, when footwear is found there often seems to be a military connection. This is most evident at the vici of Katwijk and Scheveningseweg. Some kind of military presence may be surmised near the Binnenrotte, where a shield umbo, British Black-Burnished pottery, fibulae and a cremation burial rich in imported pottery, hint at a settlement with connections overseas, perhaps under military supervision.11 The area around Naaldwijk is viewed by De Bruin and others as a strategic
location on account of the unusual concentration of tile stamps of the Classis Germanica as well as the proximity to the Corbulo Canal and the coastal road network.12 Such well-connected settlements had access to goods as well
as ideas and would have been amongst the first to obtain new styles of dress, even if soldiers were not actually stationed there. And even Westland-Oostbuurtseweg 21.23, ostensibly a conventional farmstead is distinguished
5 Van Driel-Murray 2001, p. 352 6 Waasdorp 1999, p. 32.
7 Buijtendorp 2018, p. 82-3; De Weerd 1986, p. 286. 8 Van Driel-Murray 2001, p. 367, fig. 63.
9 Van Driel-Murray 2001, Fig. 62-3. 10 Van Driel-Murray 2007.
from its neighbours: the exceptional find of a carefully shaped wooden table leg, shows that these people had Roman furniture as well as Roman shoes.13
Footwear is occasionally used in ritual depositions and is especially associated with the construction of wells, being placed on the bottom or between the planks of the lining. The two incomplete shoes in the fill of a well at Katwijk Industrieweg can be regarded as rubbish, but fine shoes at the bottom of wells such as at Katwijk (Fig. 4-5), Naaldwijk-Hoogwerf (Fig. 8) and Rotterdamsebaan (Fig. 10) are all likely to be deliberate good luck offerings. Also perhaps to be regarded as a foundation deposit is the pair of shoes from Oostbuurtseweg 21.23 with their remarkable crossed arrangement (Fig. 15). The shoes were placed between the sods of the house platform, with the toe of the right shoe pointing almost due west.14
13 Van Londen 2006, p. 142-150.
14 Van Londen 2006, p. 154, Fig. 114 bottom (note that Fig. 114 top is a medieval shoe).
2.1 2.2 2.3
2.4 2.5 2.6
Fig. 2 Diagram of the hobnails
170 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Fig. 3 Katwijk-aan-Zee,
Industieweg 2015, well fill, sole 1 (scale 1:3). (Drawing: author).
Fig. 4 Katwijk Uitwateringssluizen
1982, well, sole (scale 1:3). (Drawing: author).
Fig. 5 Katwijk Uitwateringssluizen 1982, well base,
two-layer sandal sole, upper and lower face (scale 1:3). (Drawing: author).
Fig. 6 Rotterdam Binnenrotte,
sandal (scale 1:3). (Drawing: author).
Fig. 7 Vlaardingen Hoogstad, 1043,
sole (scale 1:3). (Drawing: author).
Fig. 8 Naaldwijk Hoogwerf, well base, two layer sole,
171
3 4 5
6 7 8
9 10
11
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper
suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate
velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat
nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio
dignis-sim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis
dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, cons ectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper
suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
12 13
14
15
16
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper
suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate
velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat
nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio
dignis-sim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis
dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, cons ectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper
suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
12 13
14
15
16
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper
suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate
velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat
nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio
dignis-sim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis
dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, cons ectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper
suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
12 13
14
15
16
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper
suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate
velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat
nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio
dignis-sim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis
dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, cons ectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper
suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
12 13
14
15
16
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper
suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate
velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat
nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio
dignis-sim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis
dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, cons ectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper
suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit,
sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet
dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad
12 13 14 15 16 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Fig. 9 Rotterdamsebaan RBC14.1162,
front of a fragmentary outersole (scale 1:3). (Drawing: author).
Fig. 10 Rotterdamsebaan RBC14. 1317,
outer sole of the shoe (scale 1:3). (Drawing: author).
Fig. 11 Indication of the shoe style.
(Drawing: author).
Fig. 12 Delftse Schie BDS
1389, decayed sole (scale 1:3). (Drawing: author).
Fig. 13 Naaldwijk Mars
157, decayed sole (scale 1:3). (Drawing: author).
Fig. 14 Naaldwijk Mars 527,
fragment of a single-piece shoe (scale 1:3). (Drawing: author).
Fig. 15 Westland Oostbuurtse
weg 21.23, indication of the soles, partial reconstruction. The upper sole shows the inside of the right outer sole, with stains from the iron hobnails and the decayed remains of the leather with underneath the leather and corrosion stains of the left shoe (scale 1:3).
(Drawing: author).
Fig. 16 Westland Honselersdijk, single piece shoe.(Photograph: ADC, courtesy of L.M.B. van der Feijst).
Whose shoes?
Although the presence of smaller sized shoes characterises the assemblages from towns and military vici, women in the rural areas do not seem to have participated in the Roman fashions. When they do occur, the female shoes and the fragmentary single-piece shoes from Scheveningseweg, Binnenrotte, Rotterdamsebaan and Naaldwijk-Mars (Fig. 14) in fact reinforce the military connections of these settlements. This rather suggests that when smaller shoes are found (as at Honselersdijk Fig. 16), we should be alert to the possibility of military (or official) installations nearby. Women living in the towns and around the forts eagerly followed Roman international fashions15 but for some reason
women in rural areas were either unwilling or unable to access professionally made footwear. A connection with the continuing use of hand made pottery seems likely, and this may, in turn indicate that women were more involved in subsistence tasks, and less attuned to the market purchases.
Conclusion
The leather finds available for this study appear to show a very slow uptake of Roman-style footwear by the rural population. This is not just a question of chance survival as a consistent pattern emerges, with nailed shoes first appearing in the later 2nd century and then mostly on sites that seem to be slightly exceptional. Moreover, it is
especially men who were able to access professionally made footwear. While people living around the forts and in
Forum Hadriani were wearing varied and decorative footwear, following the changing styles and sometimes even
indulging in some quite extreme fashion statements, the farmers tended to retain their traditional clothing: they may have bought pottery and metal tools, but the new types of shoes found no favour. This lack of uptake in the rural hinterland would have formed a very clear visual distinction between people living in the countryside and those associated with the structures of authority. The lack of Roman style footwear, even in prosperous settlements such as Rijswijk-de Bult, raises questions as to the nature of the contacts between the different levels of society and the degree to which the rural communities in the frontier zones profited from the military presence.
And thus the attention paid to recording hobnails may actually contribute to the economic and social debate around integration and development during the Roman Imperial period. I hope that more archaeologists will follow Ab’s example (Fig. 1).
References
Bruin, J. de, 2019, Border Communities at the Edge of the Roman Empire. Processes of Change in the Civitas
Cananefatium. Amsterdam.
Buijtendorp, T., 2018, Brittenburg. Verdronken hoeksteen van het Romeinse Rijk. Leiden.
Carmiggelt, A., and A.J. Guiran, 1997, ‘Pre-stedelijke bewoningssporen en vondsten uit het trace van de
Willemsspoortunnel te Rotterdam: prehistorie, Romeinse Tijd en Middeleeuwen (vóór circa 1150)’, in: BOORbalans 3. Rotterdam. p. 77-111.
Driel-Murray, C. van, 2001, ‘Roman Footwear’, in: O. Goubitz, W. Groenman-van Waateringe and C. van Driel-Murray,
Stepping Through Time. Archaeological footwear from prehistoric times until 1800. Zwolle. p. 337-375.
Driel-Murray, C. van, 2007, ‘Leer: De schoenen van de Schipper’, in: E. Jansma and J.-M.A.W. Morel (eds.), Een Romeinse
Rijnaak, gevonden in Utrecht-De Meern. Resultaten van het onderzoek naar de platbodem ‘De Meern 1’. (Rapportage
Archeologische Monumentenzorg 144). Amersfoort. p. 236-242.
Driel-Murray, C. van, 2016, ‘Fashionable footwear: craftsmen and consumers in the north-west provinces of the Roman Empire’, in: A. Wilson and M. Flohr (eds.), Urban Craftsmen and Traders in the Roman World. (Oxford University Press). Oxford. p. 132-152.
Driel-Murray, C. van, K. Pollmann, and E. Richter, 2014, ‘De leervondsten van Voorburg-Arentsburg’, in: M. Driessen and E. Besselsen (eds.), Voorburg-Arentsburg. Een Romeinse havenstad tussen Rijn en Maas. (Themata 7). Amsterdam. p. 717-739.
Groenman-van Waateringe, W., 1967, Romeins lederwerk uit Valkenburg Z.H. Groningen.
Groenman-van Waateringe, W., 2001, ‘Prehistoric Footwear’, in: O. Goubitz, W. Groenman-van Waateringe and C. van Driel-Murray, Stepping Through Time. Archaeological footwear from prehistoric times until 1800. Zwolle. p. 379-396. Hoevenberg, J., 1993, ‘Leather Artefacts’, in: R.M. Dierendonck, D.P. Hallewas and K.E. Waugh, The Valkenburg
Excavations 1985-1988. (Nederlandse Oudheden 15). Amersfoort. p. 217-340.
Londen, H. van, 2006, Midden-Delfland. The Roman Native Landscape Past and Present. (PhD-dissertation Universiteit van Amsterdam). Amsterdam.
Waasdorp, J.A, 1999, Van Romeinse soldaten en Cananefaten. Gebruiksvoorwerpen van de Scheveningseweg. (VOM-reeks 2). Den Haag.
Weerd, M.D. de, 1986, ‘Recent excavations near the Brittenburg: a rearrangement of old evidence’, in: Studien zu den
![Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer [marginpar] adipiscing elit]()