DE 14C-CHRONOLOGIE VAN DE NEDERLANDSE PRE- EN PROTOHISTORIE VI: ROMEINSE TIJD EN MEROVINGISCHE PERIODE, DEEL A: HISTORISCHE BRONNEN EN CHRONOLOGISCHE SCHEMA’S J.N. LANTING Jachtlaan 60, 9751 BW Haren, the Netherlands J. VAN DER PLICHT University of Groningen, Centre for Isotope Research, Groningen, the Nederlands ABSTRACT: Lack of time, but especially limitations regarding the size of papers in this volume forced us to divide our last contribution on chronology into two parts. This part, A, contains a survey of the historical sources and summaries of the major chronological schemes. Part B will appear in Palaeohistoria 53/54 (2011/12) and will contain a summary of the archaeology of the Netherlands during the Roman and Merovingian periods, and a list of radiocarbon dates. After some introductory remarks in chapter 1, this paper deals with the historical sources in chapter 2. Special atten- tion is given to the recent publication by Scharf (2005) who convincingly demonstrates the Notitia Dignitatum Occidentis to be a present to emperor Iohannes, produced in AD 423, and not a partly out-of-date state almanack. Consequently, the Roman military and civil administration of Britannia was still intact in that year. On archaeological grounds this had already been shown by Böhme (1986b). That the province Germania II still existed in AD 418 is demonstrated by the letter of emperors Honorius and Theodosius II concerning the creation of the diocese Septem provinciae and yearly con- ventions of representatives of all 17 provinces in Arles (Weidemann, 1980). The Notitia Dignitatum Occidentis mentions civil administrators of Germania prima and Germania secunda, but no military commander in Germania secunda. Scharf (2005) points out that this omission is due to haste and sloppiness. Germania prima had been divided in 422 or 423 into two military districts: the Tractus Argentorantensis and the district of the Dux Mogontiacensis, and was no longer con- trolled by a Dux Germania prima. Therefore, the Dux Germania prima mentioned in chapter I of the Notitia should be the Dux Germania secunda. The missing chapter XXXIX (probably not produced in time) would have contained the list of troops under the command of this Dux. Chapter 3 deals with the areas occupied by the historically known tribes. The area occupied by the Batavians became largely depopulated around AD 250 after this tribe lost its special status in AD 212 and its economy collapsed. Usurper Postumus, ruler of the Gallic empire, allowed Franci (i.e. Frisii and Chamavi) to settle in former Batavian territory after AD 260. When these Franci were forced out of the area by Constantius Chlorus in AD 293 the prisoners of war were partly compelled to join the Roman army (the later crack units Batavi and Equites Batavi), partly resettled as serfs on state- owned estates in present-day northern France and Belgium (the Laeti Batavi). In 341/2 emperor Constans seems to have allowed other Frankish intruders (the Salii) to settle in former Batavian territory. The name Salii appears to have been adopted for the occasion. It means just ‘companions’ (Springer, 1996; 1997). The Lex Salica has nothing to do with these Salii; its name means ‘common law’, not ‘law of the Salii’. In the latter case the name would have been Lex Saliorum. The Saxons first appear in contemporary sources in AD 356. The name must have been given by the Romans to seaborne marauders on the British and Gallic coasts after their favourite weapon, the sax. Springer (2003; 2005) has shown that Saxons were never a tribe living on the west coast of Schleswig-Holstein. That misconception is based on the Geographica of Ptolemaeus (II, 11, 11 and 13), where originally ABIONEC (Tacitus’ Aviones of Germania 40) must have been mentioned. This was subsequently copied as AΞONEC, translated as Axones and later ‘improved’ to Saxones, because that name was well known by then. The Germanic invaders of Britannia were largely Angles who therefore called their new homeland England. The name Saxones may have been used for German auxilia from north-west Germany in the late Roman army in Britannia. That may explain why the Anglo-Saxon monk Beda in the 8th century was unable to choose between Anglian or Saxon origin for the leaders of the first group of auxilia employed by the British leaders. For Beda the area of origin of the Antiqui Saxones stretched as far south as the Lippe, whereas Angulus, the area of origin of the Angles, seems to have been restricted to the coastal zones of Lower Saxony and Schleswig-Holstein (and not present- day Angeln on the east-coast of Schleswig-Holstein). The Adventus Saxonum is dated by an entry in the Gallic Chronicle of 452 to AD 441/2 (Muhlberger, 1983; Burgess, 1990). This date is confirmed by archaeological evidence. Until about AD 350 the Frisii occupied the coastal areas between the mouths of the rivers Rhine and Ems. After that date the population of Holland and the western part of the province of Friesland dwindled considerably. In the eastern part of Friesland numbers dropped as well, whereas in Groningen and northern Drenthe population remained more or less stable. Re-population of Friesland and Noord-Holland started around AD 440, and after AD 455 (?) Frisians also occupied the coastal areas of Zuid-Holland south of the Rhine and of Zeeland. In the second half of the 7th century they occupied the Palaeohistoria 51/52 (2009/2010), pp. 27-168 28 J.N. LANTING & J. VAN DER PLICHT still largely unpopulated coastal areas of the Lower Saxony. The Lex Frisionum of 803/4 mentions Frisians living between the Zwin in Zeeland and the mouth of the river Weser. Chapter 4 deals with provincial Roman chronology in northern Gaul, and especially with its extension into the late 5th century. Of crucial importance is the short Forschungsbericht by Böhme (1987) in which he introduces the Fundgruppen A and B into which the grave goods of German soldiers and their wives in the western part of the empire can be divided. This Forschungsbericht replaces Böhme’s monograph of 1974 and re-dates most of the material Böhme dealt with in 1974. Strangely enough this Forschungsbericht has not got the attention it deserves, although the new dates have serious implications for chronology elsewhere, as well. Later Böhme (1994) dealt with the phase of the swords of type Krefeld and the sword-belt buckles of type Krefeld-Gellep and other products of late-Roman fabricae in the period c. AD 465– 485. These products were formerly seen as early-Frankish/Alamannic. Other late-Roman products have also been shown to be produced much later than previously thought. According to Hübener (1968), Rädchensigillata ceased to be made around AD 425. Nowadays the youngest examples of this type of pottery are dated to c. AD 525. Similar re-dating has taken place with other types of pottery and with glass. In chapter 5 the chronology of the Merovingian and early-Carolingian cemeteries is dealt with. Important is that Böhme’s Fundgruppen A and B and his phase of the swords of Krefeld-type c.a. (see above) have been incorporated in the late Roman-Merovingian chronology of the German Lower Rhine area by Aouni (1998) and in the Rheinland-chronology of Nieveler & Siegmund (1999). Böhme’s Fundgruppe A corresponds with Rheinland-stage 1, Fundgruppe B with stage 2a, and the phase of the Krefeld swords with stage 2b, That means that the dates given to both Fundgruppen and to the phase of the Krefeld swords by Böhme (1987; 1994) are valid. Chapter 6 deals with relative and absolute chronology in Germania libera during the Roman and early-Merovingian period. Until now an updated version of the chronological system introduced by Eggers (1951; 1955), but based on work by O. Tischler (1880), Blume (1912) and Plettke (1921), has been used. This system comprises the periods B1 (AD 0–70), B2 (AD 70–160/180), C1 (AD 160/180–250/260), C2 (AD 250/60–310/320) and C3 (AD 310/320–375). Thanks to Bemmann (1993) this Eggers-chronology can be extended with phases D1 and D2, that correspond with zones 3 and 4 in the cemetery of Perdöhl in Mecklenburg. Zone 3 is characterized a.o. by brooches of type Nydam, and zone 4 a.o. by early cruciform brooches. Bemmann synchronises D1 with Zeitstufe II, but seems to be unaware of Böhme’s renouncement of these Zeitstufen in 1987, and replacement by the Fundgruppen A and B. Brooches of type Nydam can be shown to be contemporary with Fundgruppe A, and the earliest cruciform brooches with Fundgruppe B. Therefore D1 can be dated to c. AD 390–435, and D2 to c. AD 435–465. That means that C3 must have ended around AD c. 390 instead of AD c. 375. Probably the C2/C3 transition of AD 310/320 will have to be re-dated, as well. In section 6.2.3 the differences between Böhme’s Zeitstufen I–III of 1974 and Fundgruppen A and B of 1987 are analysed. In 1974 Böhme combined material found in Gallia and in Germania libera, in 1987 he only used material found in the western part of the Roman empire. As a result, a number of objects included in 1974 is no longer represented in 1987 (for example equal-armed Kerbschnitt brooches). On the other hand, the Forschungsbericht of 1987 includes glass objects and bone combs which were largely ignored in 1974 but turned out to be of chronological importance and which occur both in male and female graves. Core elements in the Fundgruppen are the military belts: Kerbschnitt belts being characteristic for Fundgruppe A and simple belts for Fundgruppe B.