THE ESSEX FIELD CLUB.
237
pottery site, as fragments are found on either side, and for 20 or 30 feet down the
lane, a complete section having been thus preserved intact for ages, and kept dry
by being surmounted by a thick hedge, and a few inches of compact gravel on the
field side (which yet remains unopened).
" More competent judges may differ from me, but my own idea is that of a very
remote date for the period of this pottery—perhaps the first century of our era. I
think I am borne out in this opinion by the character of the fragments, and the
absence of all traces of brickwork—not one piece of brick or tile to be seen any-
where. The pieces have no ornamentation whatever, beyond the impress of thumb
and finger, or a few raised lines around the necks or down the handles. I have
not yet found any glaze on the pieces, though I searched carefully for it, but there
is no doubt as to the excellence of the workman, perhaps some poor colonist, who
brought his art with him from Italy (see the shapes restored from fragments as
shown in enclosed sketch). With admirable skill he worked up the clays of the
district, and tempering them with fine ashes and charcoal, formed them so thin,
clean, and level, that it would not be an easy matter for a workman of this day,
with only such materials as he had, to improve on his work. I note that his wheel
must have worked very truly indeed, probably being tuned by other hands, while
his own were solely engaged in the process of throwing.
" But what, in my own mind, enhances the importance of the discovery, is the
fact of the section showing a smaller pit near the larger one (the 'kiln'), and I can
only come to the conclusion that the burner who used this pit was employed in
raising the heat of the kiln artificially i.e., by the use of bellows, which being thus
employed (and it may have been by several thus at work around the kiln) would
have raised a fire so intense as to account for the sides of the kiln being burned
through to bright redness for a thickness of 12 inches or more. The question
arises, 'Were all the early pottery kilns so fired, and if so, would not this have
been the mode also used by the ancient workers in metal, and in the smelting
furnaces of remote times?' The mound or wall of clay around the upper part of
the furnace could well protect the burner, while but little of the heat so raised
would escape.
" I ought to mention that there is no likelihood of perfect vessels being found on
the spot, but have no doubt, that if well opened up, it would yield abundance of
fragments with all sorts of curves to indicate good shapes in great variety. I may
at some future time (if having leisure) examine the site again, and if anything
worthy of a subsequent communication occurs, I shall feel happy to tell you the
result."
With reference to the above, Mr. Cole said that he was of opinion that the
remains were not those of a kiln, but that the deposit was one of the curious
rubbish-pits which had been noticed in so many parts of Essex. The fragments of
pottery had been examined by Mr. F. W. Rudler, Mr. T. V. Holmes and others,
and they were of opinion that the ware was Romano-British, but they united in
thinking that there was not sufficient evidence of the existence of a kiln. Mr. T. V.
Holmes wrote :—
" In the Essex Naturalist here and there are records of the finding of some-
what similar pits with pottery, &c., where there seemed nothing in the nature of a
kiln, and where the evidence seemed to show the existence of either cremation or
rubbish pits. ... On looking through my notes from the 'Archaeologia' I can
find no record of pits shaped like those at Sible Hedingham. Those I have
noticed, from Essex and elsewhere, are all of a shaft or well-like pattern. How-
ever, in Essex Naturalist, vol. i, p. S2, Mr. Reginald Christy writes of pits
resembling them, near Roxwell, though there seems nothing there suggesting a kiln.
Indeed their abundance in certain localities seems to tell against the kiln theory,
though doubtless a considerable amount of burning took place in them. For one
cannot imagine any reason for the existence of a large number of very small
primitive kilns all close together in particular spots, in Romano-British times.
The Roman Potter's kilns figured on pp. 24, 25 and 26, of Llewellyn Jewitt's
'Ceramic Art of Great Britain' are all elaborate brick structures, and on p. 42