Ghent 2006 Pictures

Contents (click title to go straight there)
Secretary’s News
ANNUAL S.G.R.P. CONFERENCE 2007  
Committee News
Ghent Conference 2006
   The following are abstracts of some of the papers given at this years’ Conference.
        Surface treatments of Roman ceramics  Kevin Greene
        Roman pottery from rural sites in the Boulogne Channel Coast area (France)  Raphaël Clotuche 
        Mortaria in northern Gaul: forms and fabrics. Sonja Willems and Aurélie Michaux: 
        Transforming traditions; the distribution of Gallo-Belgic pottery to Britain.Jane Timby
        A mid- to late- 3rd century pottery dump at the Saxon Shore fort at Oudenburg (West-Flanders, Belgium)
                 Sofie Vanhoutte, Wouter Dhaeze & Wim De Clercq: 
Further Survey Feedback Andrew Peachey
The Future of SGRP Printed and Online Publication Pam Irving
KeramicTAG  - This will be held at the RGK at Frankfurt am Main on the 9th December 2006.
The IFA FG Register of Specialists
Of Other Interest Useful Links etc

Secretary’s News (secretary@sgrp.org)
I would first like to thank Jane for the great job she did during her stint as secretary – surely a very hard act to follow (gulp). The majority of this issue is given over to abstracts from our very successful conference in Ghent as can be seen by the photos of delegates enjoying themselves. Next year the group will be meeting in Cardiff. Pam Irving has produced a thought provoking paper suggesting ways in which the group can be run more inclusively as well as efficiently for the benefit and enjoyment of all. We also have Andrew Peachy’s report on the survey of SPRG members he has been working on.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNUAL S.G.R.P. CONFERENCE 2007
   The SGRP 2007 conference will take place on the weekend of July 13^th-15^th in Cardiff. We will be staying at Aberdare Hall, a university hall of residence in Cathays Park, the attractive civic centre of Cardiff, only 10 minutes walk from the National Museum of Wales. The conference will run from 2 pm on the Friday to lunchtime on the Sunday and the cost is likely to be about £100 + the cost of one evening meal at an outside restaurant.
   Provisional arrangements indicate that the weekend will include papers by staff of Cardiff University (Prof W. Manning and Peter Webster) and others involved in recent excavations and research in the region. Richard Brewer, Keeper of Archaeology at the National Museum of Wales has kindly expressed his willingness to lay out at the museum pottery for handling from military and civilian sites in Wales and local kiln assemblages. On Saturday afternoon, we will tour the remains of the Caerleon fortress and amphitheatre; in the legionary museum, there will be a chance to examine pottery from Usk and other sites. We will then visit Caerwent, with its remarkably preserved town walls and recent excavations displayed. Richard Brewer has offered to be our guide.
   Further information will be sent out in the spring.
                             OFFERS OF PAPERS WOULD BE WELCOME NOW and should be sent to :--
                                                Dr Vivien Swan, Sunny Lea Cottage, Flaxton, York, YO60 7RP.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Committee News
   A number of committee members completed their 3 year term in office at this year’s AGM. Those standing down comprised: Steve Willis (President), Jane Evans (Secretary), Ed Biddulph, Charlotte Thompson, Roy Friendship Taylor and Fiona Seeley (Ordinary members). The new committee now comprises:

   President: Roberta Tomber       Membership secretary/Hon. Treasurer: Louise Rayner
   Hon. Secretary: Phil Mills        Hon. Editor: Steve Willis
   Ordinary Members: Andrew Peachey, Chris Lydamore, Ruth Leary, Gwladys Monteil, Laura Griffin, Alan Jacobs

   The following members also have active roles:
      Production Manager: Pam Irving   Reviews Manager: Vivien Swan
      Website Manager: Ted Connell      Bibliography: Colin Wallace

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ghent Conference 2006
   This years conference in Ghent was a huge success, and very informative, not only because of the wide range of interesting papers given, but also the very interesting excursions. Once again many thanks to the conference organisers and our hosts: The research unit for Provincial-Roman Archaeology of Ghent University (Belgium),Wim De Clercq, Arjen Bosman (Ghent University); Steve Willis (University of Kent), Wouter Dhaeze (Flemish Heritage Institute) and Xavier Deru (Univ. Lille-3) and was aided by grants from the Research-Foundation Flanders, The Faculty of Arts & Philosophy of Ghent University and The University of Lille.

   The following are abstracts of some of the papers given at this years’ Conference.

Surface treatments of Roman ceramics    Kevin Greene    
   The eastern Mediterranean and south-western Asian area had a particularly complex cultural trajectory from the emergence of civilisations and city states right to the present. Egypt and Mesopotamia, because of their early development of agriculture and then urban civilisation, led the way in technological inventions such as monumental architecture and irrigation systems. Hellenistic kingdoms, notably Egypt and Syracuse, added Greek science and mathematics and generated a number of machines associated with warfare, water-lifting and food processing (catapults, Archimedean screws, water-powered mills etc). However, invention is not the same thing as innovation, the process by which inventions are transformed into 'technology-in-use'. The scale of the Roman Empire was critical in allowing technology transfer to take place, and to provide resources for the transformation of inventions into common practices: pumping systems in mines, water-powered mechanical processes, utilitarian blown glass vessels, military machinery etc.
   How did the decorative or functional surface treatments of Roman ceramics fit into this cultural and technological trajectory from the first millennium BC to the first millennium AD? The Hellenistic period was a switch-point in the colour of the finish of plain tablewares, which were consistently made with an oxidised red surface (instead of the earlier Greek ‘black glaze’) down to the early Byzantine period. The same switch-point can be observed in moulded decoration on Greek and Roman pottery. A novelty was the use of clay moulds with impressed decoration that could be mounted on a potter's wheel; having been introduced by 200 BC for the manufacture of so-called Megarian bowls in Greece, this method of decorating pottery vessels persisted for many centuries - especially in the terra sigillata industries that flourished in Spain, Gaul, Germany and the Danube provinces after Arretine and other Italian production had ceased in the first century AD.
   Vitreous glazes were also well known in the ancient world. The technique of creating hollow faience objects and vessels by forming them over a removable clay core may well have given rise to the idea (around 1500 BC) of coating earthenware vessels with an alkaline slip that would fire to become a glaze. The use of lead (rather than alkaline) glazes was a late Hellenistic or early Roman invention, apparently in or near Asia Minor. The first lead-glazed wares were mostly relief-moulded bowls that clearly imitated contemporary metal vessels. Like the oxidised firing of eastern sigillata tablewares, this lead-glazing technique reached Italy and Gaul by the Augustan period. Once established, Roman lead-glazed pottery remained rare but widespread around the Western Mediterranean and in the northwestern provinces (and was even quite common along the late Roman middle Danube). It did not become significant in the East until the middle Byzantine period, by which time lead-glazing had been introduced into former Roman provinces by Islamic conquest.
   Note: this wide-ranging perspective was gained during a Research Readership funded by the British Academy, for which I am extremely grateful.

Roman pottery from rural sites in the Boulogne Channel Coast area (France)  Raphaël Clotuche:
   Determining the provenance of hand-made pottery in the northwest of Gallia Belgica by technological criteria is especially difficult, since the kiln sites were small and the pottery has not been widely diffused. In certain cases it is possible to define larger production zones, but the differences and risks in fabrication are too abundant to enable a clear characterisation. Therefore one must trust in morphological criteria and their diffusion. The pottery has certainly not been distributed in function of civitas limits or main Roman roads, but rather in function of the geographical zone or landscape one belonged to.
   During the 1^st c. and the first half of the 2^nd c. AD, the barrel-shaped pots (pots tonnelets) are the typical cooking pots of the Morini in the coastal area, on the plateau, as well as south of the region of Boulogne. Though, after the creation of the large Gallo-Roman kiln sites, the export of the pottery follows geological and topographical limits, creating basins of diffusion (Bruay/La Calloterie).
   In the export area of the kiln site of Bruay Labuissière, in the west limited by the high plateaus, in the north by the Yser and in the south limited by the Lys, the hand-formed pot with oblique rim appears during the 2^nd c. The continuation of this technique for a particular form is certainly significant, while it could have been replaced by the wheel-turned pottery with sandy fabric.
   The Boulogne region is provisioned by the kilns at La Calloterie and Boulogne, which do not export their pottery to the other side of the plateau. From the 2^nd c. onwards this sandy wheel-turned pottery totally replaces the hand-formed pottery.

Mortaria in northern Gaul: forms and fabrics.  Sonja Willems and Aurélie Michaux 
   Pottery research in Belgium and Northern France has in recent times changed from a mere counting of sherds and defining types to a full study of types and fabrics, thus taking into account reflections on e.g. economical aspects of pottery. For the sites Tienen and Tongeren (Eastern Belgium) this study of fabrics started with a closer look at mortaria, leading to an overview of fabric groups and enabling archaeologists in Flanders to link their pottery to other sites. The information in this communication is based on pottery research at Tongeren, Tienen, Reims, Bavay, Pont-sur-Sambre, Arras and Noyon.
   We have tried to define different production zones in Northern Gaul and their area of diffusion, describing forms and fabrics and using information from Flemish, French, Dutch and German collegues. In this way it should contribute to the future identification of mortaria and it gives an idea of what to expect on a site. Several examples show that potters have moved from the south to the north, applying their knowledge by using local clays. The popularity of this typical Roman cooking-device leads to questions on the romanisation of the northern provinces and the application of mediterranean cooking habits.
   The following production zones are described: local zones in Belgium, the Meuse-Rhine region with the Tienen, Heerlen and Soller kilns, the Eifel region, Italian and Rhône Valley region, the Champagne region, the Bavay region and the soapy ware fabric and the production at Noyon.
   We can conclude that import and afterwards production started with the Italian and Rhone valley mortaria, but it is surely the Bavay region which became most popular for its mortaria. Samples can be found on most of the sites in the Netherlands, Belgium and the North of France. The Rhine and Eifel regions have exported in minor quantities to most of these sites as well and towards Britain, while the Meuse Valley products have been mainly diffused in Belgium and the Netherlands. The Champagne region and Noyon on the other hand have mainly diffused in the north of France and to the west.

Transforming traditions; the distribution of Gallo-Belgic pottery to Britain.   Jane Timby 
  The paper discussed a 3-year (2003-2006) project being carried out by Val Rigby and Jane Timby to prepare a corpus of Gallo-Belgic pottery in Britain. The project has been funded by a Leverhulme Research Grant administered through the Institute of Archaeology, Oxford University.
   The outcome of the project will be a corpus of potters stamps and other finds of Gallo-Belgic pottery from Britain, which will be available as a web site from later this Autumn. This will be accompanied by a book, currently in preparation, which will describe the industry, its products, chronology and distribution.

A mid- to late- 3^rd century pottery dump at the Saxon Shore fort at Oudenburg (West-Flanders, Belgium)
   Sofie Vanhoutte, Wouter Dhaeze & Wim De Clercq:
   This paper presented the results of the detailed study of the pottery collected from a large pit in the south west corner at the Saxon Shore fort at Oudenburg (Belgium) during the recent archaeological campaign carried out by the Flemish Heritage Institute from august 2001 until April 2005.
   The study comprises 5486 sherds with a minimum number of individuals of 718. This large pottery assemblage was found as a dump in a waste pit of originally approx. 10 by 10 m just inside the earthen wall right in the south west corner of the fort. According to stratigraphical data this pit has been dug out in the last but one fort phase, to be dated to the 3^rd quarter of the 3^rd cent. AD and maybe somewhat later. The sherds are remarkably well preserved, with fresh breaks and little tear and wear.
   The sherd-counts and the minimal number of individuals (MNI) demonstrate a strong presence of samian, next to a dominance of coarse reduced and of handmade wares, at first glance surprisingly for a military context.
For the samian group only the Massenfund (c. 240-260) and the assemblage of the Louis-Linz-Strasse at Trier (c. 260-275) offer references. The Moselkeramik black-slipped ware doesn’t yet display the late Trier fabric of the period c.260-300 but shows the earlier sandwich-fabric. A Mayen lid-seated jar of transition NB 89/Alzey 27 points rather to the late 3^rd cent.
   As for the samian group this assemblage gives new insights into the consumption of this ware in a later 3^rd cent. context in Northern Flanders. Moreover this context sheds an important light on the late phases of production and export of samian from the Trier and Rheinzabern workshops clearly dominating and equally supplying their products to Oudenburg. The Argonne and North-Gaulish workshops obviously supplied their products on a moderate scale.
If we consider the different pottery production centra, it is clear that the military unit of Oudenburg had access to the supply of pottery from the different production regions. Being located on a passing through towards Britannia, Oudenburg benefited and was influenced obviously from the commerce between Britannia and the continent. This is for example reflected in the large amount of samian and the influences of the Romano-British industry such as Black Burnished, New Forest and Oxfordshire imports and the BB imitations in the handmade ware. It is surprising that although there was a large supply of imports, the regionally produced pottery takes in the major share of the assemblage.
   Functionally the assemblage represents no average pottery context and shows a spectrum that is rather simple in diversity. The pottery for preparation and consumption stands for the majority of the assemblage in which the cooking pot takes an important position. Surprisingly storage pottery is hardly present. The little amount of flagons is also striking and is maybe related to the military context or a different consumption culture after mid 3^rd century. Table ware is much better represented. Beakers in fine ware are rather little in amount but their function seems to be taken over by the fine reduced ware and even the handmade beakers.
   The remaining question is how this pottery spectrum is a reflection of the military context and its food consumption and how this culture is influenced by the local surroundings. Anyhow this pottery assemblage is an important key context for Northern Flanders for this period being the first large pottery study established in this region.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further Survey Feedback Andrew Peachey
   The recent SGRP survey was prompted by concerns over the falling income of specialists, and was broadened to canvas the opinions and status of SGRP members. The income concerns were highlighted by the annual review of Jobs in British archaeology (TA56). This demonstrated that the average annual income of general ‘specialists’ had plummeted to £15,254 from £17,170 between 2003/2004, after several years of fluctuating but generally positive progress. The 2005 annual review (TA60) indicated that the annual income of a general ‘specialist’ had recovered to £17,011, which while a recovery of sorts is still short of the 2003 figure especially when inflation is taken into account. An interim statement on the survey was distributed in TA58 and a previous newsletter, with further results presented here.
   Just fewer than 50% of professionals in the group are involved in the day to day recording and analysis of pottery, with several more unprompted comments from those involved in other post excavation, management and academic roles indicating that they are also still irregularly involved in pottery studies at this level. Academic members are clearly the best paid, illustrating a gap that remains between the developer funded and academic archaeology, and a suggestion why many students follow the latter career path and perhaps one of many reasons why there is a lack of young pottery specialists. Managers in archaeological units are also understandably relatively very well paid but as the structure of archaeology has changed there are now very, very few opportunities for pottery specialists to rise to this level (also reflected in IFA level membership, see below). This problem is highlighted by many unprompted comments, and by answers to whether members would be leaving pottery studies in the next 3-5 years. Only two members would definitely be leaving due to retirement, but several commented that they may consider leaving due to conditions in commercial or freelance archaeology. Numerous comments relating to job position and job titles make it clear that, as in field archaeology, many are frustrated by the lack of structure and career development in all but the largest of organisations. These concerns came both from those working as specialists and those wishing to become specialists.
  Income brackets vs. Type of Job
(33 professional members responded to the question on salary, with 1 student, 6 retired and 4 amateur members not included in this table)

    The average income brackets of pottery specialists in archaeological units and freelance specialists is similar with the specialists within units progressing to higher levels as they have the opportunity to advance through a company pay scale. A similar progression either in or between companies also allows pottery specialists to move up to other post-excavation and management roles, therefore higher incomes, but as mentioned above curtails active/everyday involvement in pottery recording/analysis. This progression is reassuring on one level: in that it indicates a loose possible career structure; but on another level it does mean that many recent recruits to pottery studies may only be involved directly with pottery recording/analysis for 3-6 years before moving on if they are career minded resulting in an unstable level of personnel, and possibly knowledge, retention. While only one field archaeologist responded to the survey they are probably not a typical excavator considering their salary bracket, and clearly more should be done to involve and encourage those in field archaeology.
Age Group vs. Type of Job
(48 members responded to the question on age, some still prefer to keep us guessing)

   It is not possible to discern any progression in roles relative to age, although it is encouraging to note a concentration in the younger age brackets as Specialists in Archaeological Units. However it is noticeable that despite the IFA’s influence on Archaeological Units and the profession as a whole very few respondents are members of the IFA. Just over 70% of members are not members of the IFA at any level while a total of 13.6% are either Practitioner or Associate (PIFA & AIFA), and 13.6% are Members (MIFA). It remains unclear whether or not the IFA membership figures reflect lack of opportunity, relevance or interest in the viewpoint of SGRP members towards the IFA.
   In order to judge concentrations of knowledge and interest members were asked which geographical/thematic areas accounted for their principal areas of work/interest. Members could register multiple areas and most did. The results (illustrated below) indicate that there are slightly higher concentrations of interest in the East Midlands, South East and South West, however this is only slight and may reflect the members that responded to the questionnaire

   A further 10 people registered interests ‘overseas’, although only two of these were solely so. Geographically these included the Roman Empire or Mediterranean as a whole, Italy, Luxembourg and Egypt. Respondents also included comments on more tightly focused thematic areas including black-burnished ware, the New Forest, statistical analysis, nationwide fabric analysis (twice) and four instances of Ceramic Building Materials.
   The diverse range of interests recorded by members is reflected in their desire for a greater forum in which to discuss them. 82% of SGRP members were in favour of some form of message board, and of the 18% that were against this half thought an improved or more active forum for queries only would be a good idea. Clearly any such forum would have to be web based, and this area provoked most debate with the most popular issue being that of more frequent updates and removal of old material. Suggestions and debate over the web page’s content were extensive and varied, and I have attempted to summarize the opinions below:
   Introduce a members section that may include digitally published papers/grey literature and more illustrations (12 suggestions).
   Expand and update sections on study aids/guides for both professionals and amateurs (6 suggestions).
Updated bibliographies possibly including grey literature (3 suggestions)
      Some form of online fabric series (3 suggestions)
      Member profiles (3 suggestions)
      Regional group sections (2 suggestions)
      More back issues of JRPS
      Promotion of new initiatives/research projects/funding sources
      More extensive links

   Clearly the SGRP web page is a source of much consternation, with many commenting that they would use it more often if some of the above changes could be implemented. Currently 81% of members access the SGRP web pages only rarely or sometimes, with 11% accessing them moderately, and only 8% accessing them either often or frequently. Conversely the JRPS was a source of satisfaction and pleasure with over half of the survey replies including praise and gratitude for the journal. The few comments on the journal indicate a preference towards collections of papers rather that single site/kiln volume, possibly with a theme running through each collection although it is acknowledged that this is difficult to achieve. A suggested solution to this may be volumes that contain a large single site or focal paper followed by a few smaller papers. The only specific requests for publication were three responses that asked for JRPS to publish Steve Willis’ e-monograph as hard copy (none of these requests to my knowledge were from Steve). Several replies also state that a set publication date for each volume would improve the journals standing even further. Currently a total of 74% of members use the journal moderately, often or frequently, with only 4% saying they look at it rarely.
   One issue thrown up by free form answers on the journal, the web page and mentoring was how to encourage the submission of more papers for the journal and possibly for electronic publication. It has been noted by several members that there must be younger archaeologists/specialists/members that have great potential to submit papers given the correct guidance, which brings us to the tricky topic of mentoring. The idea of a system of mentoring for younger or less-experienced mentors was backed nearly unanimously, but equally it was agreed that this is an immensely difficult or even impossible idea to implement and may be better left to the current practice of informal requests for advice. 40% of replies thought that this idea should be free, but many acknowledged that in practice this would not be viable. 45% of replies thought that this could be provided as some form of service, with several commenting such review should be budgeted into developer funded projects or funding applications/grants. The issue stimulated a lot of discussion and clearly remains wide open for the future.
   Once again, I would like to take the opportunity to thank everybody who responded and took part!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Future of SGRP Printed and Online Publication Pam Irving
The Study group was originally a small group of people with an interest in Roman pottery who met once a year to exchange information and views. The newsletter and all subsequently circulated material evolved from the wish to communicate to those members of the group who could not come to the meeting what had occurred there, ie the meeting was central and the publications ancillary. The membership of the Group has grown in membership considerably since its foundation and a significant number of members do not find it possible to attend the annual meetings.
   Whatever its original impetus, the Group has over time, in response to the many changes in the archaeological and academic environment adapted its range of activities and the way it is run. Laterly there have been problems securing volunteers to fill vacant posts on the committee and to find volunteers to progress the many ongoing group projects. Since member involvement is essential for the short term running and the long term survival of the Group, this is a moment for the Group to evolve again especially by recognising that the nature of employment of pottery studies practitioners restricts time available for voluntary tasks for the Group.
   The Committee are now looking at ways to make it possible for these members to take a more active part in the activities of the Group. Following discussion in Committee it has been agreed to move to a more task based means of managing Group projects, the bones of which are already in place as set out in detail below. Later newsletters will be used to advise members when volunteers are needed. Members who have specific skills they are willing to offer, who are wiling to volunteer for currently unallocated tasks, or would like to build up experience working on Group projects are invited to contact the Secretary, or relevant project co-ordinators at any time.
   The Group are aiming in future to produce:
      1) Newsletter (for general/administrative limited life information)
      2) Web
            a) general information on Roman pottery
            b) links to other useful sites
            c) promoting the group
            d) professional level information time critical or liable to revision
      3) The Journal for reference material where the longer production lead times are outweighed by the perceived life
             after publication.

   Initially we aim to produce the journal bi-annually. The other two formats will appear at regular but as yet to be determined intervals. All Group projects are likely to end up in one of these outlets It will generally be obvious which is the most appropriate; where this is not clear, or where author’s wishes have to be considered, (for articles submitted prior to the web option) the Committee will decide (seeking appropriate advice where necessary)
   This task based structure will need
       1) a project manager, tasked to record all work in progress
       2) someone to co-ordinate academic standards
       3) project co-ordinators for each project; this will be an administrative role, rather than undertaking all the work 
             for a given project.
       4) participants in projects/authors
   This structure aims to involve more people and therefore needs
       a) a reliable record of who is doing what, and when they expect to complete it
       b) a clear structure with identifiable entry points for new projects and a clear and simple decision making process.
   The first tasks, now underway involve the creation of
       1) a reliable list of projects, and the people with responsibility for them, what the status and purpose of the project,
             timetable and any costs are
       2) identify progress and make sure they are appropriately resourced with a project co-ordinator in place.
       3) circulate a list of projects needing volunteers to take charge and/or contribute then ask for volunteers

The structure at present in place is
      1) Academic/Managing Editor Steve Willis
      2) Production editor Pam Irving (honorary)
      3) Webmaster Ted Connell
      4) Electronic publications editor/manager Jude Plouviez
      5) Review Editor Vivien Swan  (in future single reviews may go online for greater relevance and immediacy, while
              review articles will be sought for the Journal)
      6) Individual project liaison as set out below

JRPS
     Vol 12: finally printed and distributed early in 2006 (having been delayed by 5 months in the final stages because
            Oxbow wanted a 12 month gap between 11 and 12)
     Vol 13: in proof with PVI 12.10.06, , could be out late 2006 or early 2007
     Vol 14: A collection of articles collated by Colin Wallace and Scott Martin, mainly already submitted, editing 
            by PVI will begin in February 2007

Online publication proposals
    Potdate paper, Maggi Darling as author has agreed to our making this the launch piece, It is a significant
         methodological contribution badly in need of publication, and will initiate web publication

    Other publications are under review for inclusion in vol 14 or web publication, or need status resolved

    Guidance on procedures for authors offering articles will be issued in later newsletters and on the web

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

KeramicTAG  - This will be held at the RGK at Frankfurt am Main on the 9th December 2006.
Einladung zum Keramiktag 2006
am Samstag, den 9.12.2006 ab 9.30 Uhr
in der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission Frankfurt am Main
Haus 1: Palmengartenstrasse 10-12, 60325 Frankfurt am Main (Lesesaal)
 Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, auch in diesem Jahr wollen wir interessierte Keramikbearbeiter zum Informationsaustausch an einen Tisch holen!
Es soll hierbei insbesondere um die einfache Keramik in den Keramikprovinzen Ober- und Niedergermanien und den angrenzenden Gebieten gehen. Gedacht ist an 20-minütige Kurzvorträge – vor allem zu aktuellen Ergebnissen und aus laufenden Projekten. In Ausnahmefällen können auch Themen zu Terra Sigillata oder Amphoren – also reichsweit erforschbarer Keramik – vorgetragen werden, wenn sie einen lokalen Anlass bieten.
Das Keramiktreffen soll zudem eine Möglichkeit sein, scheinbar nicht bestimmbare Keramik zu präsentieren und diese den Kollegen zur Diskussion zu stellen. Außerdem können Poster gezeigt werden.
 Der Tag soll weiterhin regelmäßig und an unterschiedlichen Orten (Köln, Mainz, Frankfurt etc.) stattfinden. Weitere Vorschläge sind willkommen.
Die Bewirtung mit Getränken sowie belegten Brötchen etc. in den Pausen wird voraussichtlich von der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission übernommen, so dass der Unkostenbeitrag von 5 Euro pro Person, den wir normalerweise erheben, in diesem Jahr entfallen könnte.
 Nach den Vorträgen bietet sich die Möglichkeit, den Tag in einer Kneipe oder auf dem Frankfurter Weihnachtsmarkt ausklingen zu lassen.
 Wir bitten um Anmeldung (mit und ohne Vortrag) bis zum 15.11.06 unter keramiktag@yahoo.de oder schriftlich an:
Keramiktag, Römisch-Germanische Kommission des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Palmengartenstrasse 10-12, 60325 Frankfurt am Main

Bitte reichen Sie die Einladung auch an interessierte Kollegen weiter!
 
Wir hoffen auf Ihr Interesse,
Susanne Biegert (Bonn), Markus Helfert (Frankfurt a.M.) und Constanze Höpken (Köln)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The IFA FG Register of Specialists
The IFA Finds group is considering the setting up of a Register of Specialists ( including non-members of the IFA) which would be available on-line. If you are interested please contact Finds.group@hotmail.co.uk

Of Other Interest
The Amphora databases is available at ADS at http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/archive/amphora_ahrb_2005/index.cfm
   (my thanks to Ruth Leary for passing that on)

The successor to MAP2 can be found here, via the English heritage publications site
    http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/upload/pdf/MoRPHE-Project-Managers-Guide.pdf

The archaeological Archives forum is producing a guide to best practice
    http://www.britarch.ac.uk/archives/index.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please remember to keep your contact details up to date, including any new e-mail addresses.

Membership Secretary: Louise Rayner
Flat 2, 121 Church Road, Teddington, Middlesex TW11 8QH.
Email: louise@lourayner.freeserve.co.uk

Hon. Secretary SGRP:   Phil Mills
28, Park Road, Anstey, Leicester, LE7 7AX
E-mail: secretary@sgrp.org

Back to Newsletters                 Back to SGRP Homepage

The Group would welcome comments upon its WebPages and any information that may be useful to Group members 
and those interested in aspects of pottery of the Roman period. Please send details too