Each of the five studies listed above concentrated their efforts within the boundaries of the town (2). Their principal method of investigation was excavation, but their results were later combined with the results of aerial photography to produce an accurate plan of the site. However, since each investigation is separated by a considerable amount of time their techniques will not be the same.
Therefore each excavation will not have the same degree of accuracy. And although it is impossible to re-excavate in the hope of collecting a systematic study, each can be compared against the other to achieve a more accurate account of the archaeology. What follows is a brief description of each investigation, showing the areas that were excavated.
Wright first started his excavation around the Old Work (3) in 1859. His workmen uncovered what has become known today as the Baths Basilica. Later they uncovered the unheated and warm rooms of the main baths, the latrine with the shops in front of them, and part of the macellum. They extended their investigation to the northern and eastern defences of the city, eventually uncovering several cremations outside the city walls.
This became the framework for further studies of the site. Immediately quoted in the Illustrated London News (1859) as saying 'the discovery has a similar interest for the history of Roman Britain as that of Pompeii had for Roman Italy', Wright published his results in 1864.
Wright's studies were followed by Bushe-Fox in 1913, 1914, and 1916 and Atkinson in the years between 1923-27. These investigations also focused on the city itself, with Bushe-Fox uncovering the regularly spaced plans of buildings and the street fronts that separated each Insula. Atkinson excavated the area known as Insula 4 where he uncovered the Forum, and so the area of the site was spreading as each study followed its project design. However, although their investigations give us vital information, their accuracy is questionable.
Wilson (1984: 118) contrasts their plans with the modern studies undertaken by Kenyon (1936-1937) and Webster 1955) and considers them a 'poor and inaccurate rendering of the site plans'. This criticism stems from the fact that walled enclosures on their plans have a different size and orientation to the modern plans, which were aided by referencing them to aerial photography. This leaves Wilson concluding that 'either that some excavated walls were wrongly measured in, or that these walls no longer survive' (1984: 118). Clearly, modern investigation must include a re-interpretation of previous studies.
The later excavations of Kenyon and Webster were also focused on the area of the baths, but were extended to include the palaestra and the macellum. By using more accurate techniques, which involved separating a regular grid of boxes by standing sections, more data was collected. This method of data collection allowed for the features and the layers of a given area to be seen at the same time. Thus a more detailed methodology was used which allowed for questions to be raised about the growth of the city. By fixing a relative chronology for the buildings the town can then be seen as evolving over a period of time.
After the discovery of the remains of the legionary fortress beneath the public buildings (4) the only interpretation that is possible is that the public buildings were constructed after the fortress. This allows for a further hypothesis - that at some stage the military function of Viroconium was given less priority, and a civilian function took over. The archaeology can thus be placed within an historical period that is provided by an analysis of the narrative sources. This methodology broadens the focus from the alignment of the particular buildings themselves, to where they fit in within the stages of development of the city.
Following these studies the aerial photographs of Baker (5) added more information. This allowed a more detailed plan of the city to be constructed, which was further enhanced by Wilson's analysis (6). The inclusion of aerial photographs enabled a new type of strategy to be used. Instead of excavation, which is needless to say expensive, the site could be studied from a distance, as it were.
The shift in methodology allowed for information to be collected without destroying the site. Aerial surveys added more and more information to the understanding of the size and structure of the site. They broadened the scope of study, not only to include the spatial relationship of each building to the others, but the spatial relationship of the site to the surrounding landscape.
We can thus conclude from these studies that with the inclusion of each new technique, and with new technologies, the study of Viroconium has changed considerably. From an initial study of buildings on the ground with questionable methodologies, new excavation techniques allowed for different interpretations to be made of the site. The data collection was principally excavation until aerial photography enabled the focus to shift to a much broader field.
It is in this context that the Wroxeter Hinterland Project should be placed. With the introduction of computers, specifically GIS, the increasing amounts of data that are collected can be more easily analysed and interpreted. Moreover, modern non-destructive techniques used in tandem with computers enable archaeological areas to be investigated without destroying the evidence. By using GIS the accuracy of the site plan that was achieved by the combined efforts of Baker and Wilson has been superseded.
It must be emphasised here, however, that this essay is not an advocacy of the replacement of traditional archaeological methods with new technologies. It is more an assessment of how far new technologies can supplement them. Unquestionably, computers make it easier to store and retrieve data. Moreover, their value to archaeological investigation lies in the fact that researchers can repeatedly ask questions about the database. This means that the record becomes flexible, such that many hypotheses can be tested against the data from remote computers. Research strategies and project designs could therefore be formulated provided sufficient data has been collected from the site or area.
2. Although Wright did excavate small areas outside the city walls. See White, R. 1998: 18.
3. This was the only example of existing architecture at the site, which prompted Wright's study. See White R., 1998: 18.
4. See White R., 1998: 26.
5. Baker, A. 1967-8: 197-219.
6. Wilson, D. R. 1984:117-120.