oday, the city of Chester in northwest England is generally regarded as little more than one of a large number of relatively small county towns that are scattered throughout Great Britain and which are perhaps better known as retail or administrative centres, rather than being sites of any national or regional historical importance. However, unlike some of its more modern counterparts, Chester is able to boast a history and heritage that stretches back thousands of years and has seen the city host some of the most notable characters in England’s long, troublesome and colourful history. To fully understand the historical importance of the city and its almost inevitable later decline into the regional obscurity that faces it today, it is necessary to look at the history of the site prior to the arrival of the Roman Legions, who first brought the area to national significance and to examine each subsequent period of settlement which has made the city what it is today.

Around twelve thousand years before the birth of Christ, the last great ice age was slowly coming to an end and the vast glaciers and ice sheets that had scoured and shaped Britain for millennia, slowly began to recede northward. As they did so, it exposed the countless features that had been created by their very presence, the valleys, lakes and the plateaus that are part of our own modern day landscapes. The rich red sandstone layers which are a common geological feature of northwest England were easily moulded by the glacial erosion caused by these vast ice sheets and the subsequent flow of tidal watercourses. This was probably the case for the sandstone outcrop, on which our modern city stands. This extensive ridge of sandstone, stretching from Handbridge in the south, through to Upton in the north was no doubt first breached by the massive fingers of ice which stretched inland from the Irish Sea. Following the end of the ice age and the northerly retreat of the glaciers, the newly formed river no doubt added to the feature, by further deepening and widening the chasm which the ice had first created.

Historically, Cheshire’s flat expanse of green pasture land was made up of both Glacial and Triassic clays and as a result had relatively poor drainage. This inevitably resulted in the heavy growth of trees and thick undergrowth, as well as the development of numerous marshes and bogs which would have prevented the widespread settlement of the region by its early indigenous people. Easy access through these lands would have been extremely slow and arduous, with extensive forests covering the Wirral Peninsula to the north and boggy marshland inhibiting easy access to the east of the county.

At Upton, just outside of the city, pollen analysis of samples taken on the site in 1997 revealed that at the time a Roman marching camp had been built there, the area was partially made up of woodland which was dominated by Oak, Alder, Hazel and Heather. The extensive forests of self-seeding Ash, Oak and Birch trees would have offered good cover for the many deer, wild boar and wolves that roamed throughout the region at the time and the local meres and ponds would have been filled with a wide variety of fish and their attendant waterfowl. Prior to the later arrival of the more technically advanced Roman engineers and their ability to build both military and civilian road networks, it has been speculated that travelling for the native peoples of Cheshire, would almost certainly have been limited to their using ancient and well established paths and tracks, as well as employing local water courses that ran throughout the area.
The native settlement which may have pre-dated the Roman garrison at Chester was probably sited on or near the same river-cut sandstone outcrop as does the present-day city. It would clearly have offered its early settlers lighter vegetation to clear and was in a highly defensible position, which would have given them easy access to the river which ran through the gorge below. Although the site itself does not appear to have been of any regional or national significance, it has been suggested by some historians that Roman military bases were often built on or near sites that were extremely important to the local population. Assuming that such an approach was common, it seems entirely plausible to suggest that some sort of religious or cultural centre existed close to the site of the later Roman military camp, but evidence of its earlier presence has long since been lost over time.

Whether or not the first people to settle the site were simply native hunter-gatherers, Iron Age farmers or some other foreign seaborne traders, isn’t entirely clear, but there is evidence that all such peoples existed during the period. Throughout the lower reaches of the Dee Valley, evidence of cultivation and shards of Iron Age pottery, indicating pre-Roman activity and settlement, have been recovered. It is therefore not inconceivable to suggest that a large number of small farming and fishing communities existed along the banks of the River Dee at the time and that trading or bartering with local and foreign merchants formed part of their everyday lives. Both seed corn and domestic animals are thought to have arrived in Britain sometime around 4000 BC and their introduction is said to mark the real beginning of widespread settlement, land management and crop cultivation.

A small number of sites in Cheshire have produced tangible evidence which supports the existence of hunter gatherer groups living within the area well before the Roman Empire was even established. When the ancient Bache Pool was finally drained in the middle of the 19th Century a number of Mesolithic flint microliths were found in its residual layers. The site, which is located just a couple of miles outside of the present city centre was thought to be one such place which these groups regularly visited, in order to hunt and gather fish, water-fowl and other aquatic wildlife.

At Carden, which is approximately 10 miles from Chester, a large number of flints dating from around 6000BC have been recovered, similar to those found at Poulton, Aldford and Tarvin. These flints were thought to have been used for a variety of daily tasks, including fishing and scraping animal hides. At Poulton, a ring-ditch provisionally dated to the Late Bronze Age / Early Iron Age has been discovered in recent years and finds from the site included a horse’s skull, shards of coarse pottery and associated fragments of cremated human bone.

In 1966 evidence of pre-Roman ploughing was found during excavations in the Frodsham Street area of Chester. Similar striations were later found in the sandstone bedrock at Abbey Green in the centre of the city and pottery fragments which were found in the remains of the city’s defensive ramparts have also since been identified as being from this Iron Age period. Given these finds, it does not seem to be too fanciful to suggest that a British Iron Age settlement had indeed existed on the site for hundreds of years before a legionary even set foot there and that they were simply displaced or destroyed by the later Roman military presence. One suggested reason for the lack of intensive archaeological evidence which would clearly identify Chester’s earliest inhabitants, is that these people almost certainly lived in temporary timber built dwellings, which were eventually obscured or completely obliterated by later Roman and medieval development. Evidence of Iron Age hill forts in the wider region do still exist to the present day, including those at Eddisbury Hill, Beeston Castle, Oakmere, Peckforton Mere, Kelsborrow Castle, Helsby Hill, Woodhouses and Maiden Castle. The suggested similarities between some of these sites and others found in the Welsh Marshes, have led some experts to speculate that all of these sites may have all been constructed by a native tribe called the Cornovii who lived in the area of what is now modern-day Shropshire. The first examples of hill forts were thought to have been constructed around 1200 BC and been modified and adapted throughout the subsequent centuries. Some 200 years later, horses were known to be commonplace in Britain and were being employed as personal transports and pack animals. Around the same time, carts were being manufactured to transport goods and the formidable English war chariot was in the process of being developed.

Eddisbury Hill Fort is a double bank and ditch enclosure which lies on the eastern flank of the Mid Cheshire Ridge and close to the ancient Delamere Forest. It has been clearly identified as being of Iron Age construction and during the early 19th Century a number of human cremations and five stone axes were discovered on or near the site. All of these finds have been dated from the Late Neolithic to Early Bronze Age periods and seem to indicate continuous use of the site for the best part of 2500 years. Given the relatively inhospitable nature of the immediate area around the site which was later to become the city of Chester, the native population would have been extremely sparse and was likely to consist of different itinerant groups from the surrounding tribal homelands. It is not hard to imagine the idea of individual hunter-gatherer groups wandering in and out of the general area to trap and hunt the wildlife that existed there and then returning to their homes at the end of each hunting trip, laden down with much needed meat and fish for their families. Assuming that this is the case, then it is entirely possible that at least one of these travelling bands eventually made the life changing decision to settle the site and make it their permanent home.

Many noted historians believe that the first British settlers were Celts who had migrated from the continent, via a land bridge which had existed in the long and distant past. Around 6000 BC however, a general rise in sea levels had caused this link to disappear and isolated the British people from their European forebears forever. Although these land based migrations probably represented the first influx of settlers to Britain, later sea based travellers would almost certainly have supplemented and added to the general population. Recent studies undertaken by historians and archaeologists seem to indicate that Britain has been subject to several inundations of immigrants during its history, often being reflected in an east west division of the country. Migrants from northern Europe have often settled in the eastern counties of Britain, while incomers from southern Europe have settled to the west of Britain. In addition to this, migrants or refugees coming from northern France have typically chosen to settle in the southern counties of England, before dissipating throughout the country.

By 4000 BC, Stone Age agricultural settlements were known to have existed and a number of the native British tribes were erecting large stone monuments to mark significant times of the year or in deference to their ancient gods. It is also known, that by around 4300 BC stone tombs were beginning to appear in Britain, reflecting a general change in burial practices in certain parts of the country and perhaps suggesting a change of beliefs within the general population, caused possibly by outsiders coming into Britain.

Bronze Age Britain, which lasted from around 2200 BC through to the later Iron Age, saw the advent of the Barrow or burial mounds, especially in the regions of N E Wales and S W Cheshire, although many of these early constructions have been subsequently destroyed by ploughing and rural development. These Barrows were rarely established in isolation but generally formed part of a cemetery complex that was closely associated with or related to a nearby civilian settlements. Cheshire archaeologists have speculated that there are numerous undiscovered Barrows within the county, which have since been obliterated or hidden by later periods of development and still remain to be detected.

It is also worth noting, that at the same time that the dead were being interred in one place, in other areas bodies were simply left to decay or were cremated, the different methods often reflecting a tradition on the part of individual tribes or peoples with regard to burial rites. Religious or spiritual practices of the age also saw the sacrificing of animals or even people to individual gods or deities, as well as the depositing of valuable items in rivers, lakes or other stretches of open water, which were thought to mark the boundaries between the living and the dead, or heaven and earth.

By around 700 BC the Iron Age in Britain was well underway and would continue largely unabated through to the arrival of the Roman Legions some 800 years later. During these intervening years the country remained largely a collection of small farms, villages and protected settlements which were ruled over by an assortment of tribal warlords and consisting of numerous independent kingdoms. Few historical records exist to easily define the lives of these ancient Britons, but it has been suggested that the population was extremely diverse, with various dialects and traditions in everyday use.

It was also around this time that the city of Rome was said to have been established in Italy, although the people who constructed the city were thought to have arrived in the area some 300 years earlier. Historians suggest that about 1000 BC the Prisci Latini people had migrated to the area of the later city and had established a number of small settlements there. There are indications that these early settlers were rural homesteaders, who in common with their European counterparts kept a range of domesticated livestock including, pigs, sheep, goats and cattle. In later centuries these settlements began to attract Greeks and Etruscan migrants who brought with them their education and their experience as sea-going traders, helping to develop these early Latini settlements into the modern and vibrant city of Rome.

History suggests that the first people responsible for actually recording the lives and traditions of the early British tribes were the Druids, a pagan religious order that existed in both Britain and France and had its roots in more ancient times. No written records are known to exist regarding the day to day lives of Iron Age Britons, which may in itself suggest that such historic records were passed on by word of mouth, rather than in a written form. The later annihilation of the Druidic religion by the armies of Rome may well have caused these extensive tribal histories to have been lost forever, always assuming of course that they ever existed in the first place. Modern day excavations of Iron Age settlements and individual burial sites have done much to help enlighten present day historians about our early ancestors and how they lived their lives. It has become apparent for instance, that their lives were extremely hard and relatively short, with an average life expectancy of between 30 and 40 years of age. Infant mortality amongst these tribes seems to have been particularly high and might well indicate regular periods of malnutrition caused by crop failures or just generally poor diets.

From the little that is known about our early ancestors, it seems likely that they were generally smaller in stature than modern day Britons and were far more susceptible to common ailments and diseases than we would be today. Given the limited availability of cures and remedies, as well as the regular outbreaks of communicable diseases, it seems entirely likely that an individual’s survival was as much a matter of luck rather than any sort of prevention or treatment. Common health problems, such as colds, flu or even toothache would have more readily incapacitated a person and perhaps been more prevalent given the relatively poor quality housing, clothing and diet which existed at the time.

Most of Britain’s Iron Age population seems to have lived in fairly small agricultural communities or on individual farmsteads. Their homes appear to have been fairly basic constructions, made up of timber-built round houses with thatched roofs, which often housed their livestock, as well as the family members. Most people did not own any items of great value and their personal possessions tended to be functional rather than ornamental. Where valuable personal possessions did exist, they were more likely to be made of Bronze, or possibly a shale bracelet, an animal fur, a comb made out of deer antler or animal bone. Items made from precious metals or minerals were almost entirely owned by the wealthier classes or by royalty and were rarely possessed by the average Iron Age citizen. Much of what was worn by these early people was taken from their livestock and no doubt consisted mainly of leather and wool, both of which were derived from their domesticated animals. Men, women and children of the time would almost certainly have been dressed in woollen shirts, with men wearing trousers, women wearing skirts and both sexes having a woollen blanket wrapped about their shoulders. Occasionally, people would possess one or more animal furs which could be used for warmth, or simply used as part of their bedding.

Thought to originate from around 450 BC, La Tène or early Celtic Art form, was an abstract pattern which primarily employed curves into the design and was generally associated with the southern regions of Britain and specific areas of continental Europe. Typically this design feature was used on high status and high value items such as torcs, scabbards and mirrors, which were made of silver or gold and commonly owned or gifted to kings, tribal chiefs or noted warriors. Later archaeological finds have indicated that there was indeed a militaristic aspect to Iron Age life, but to what extent isn’t entirely clear. The weaponry that has been found, has tended to be of a high quality and it has been suggested that such items were generally owned by high ranking individuals that had great status in their own particular communities. Given the avaricious nature of the human race, it also seems likely that regular regional confrontations took place, as the individual tribes vied with one another for the ownership of land, livestock or mineral deposits. It is also possible, that by the time of the Roman invasion of Britain, the actual number of individual tribal homelands and independent kingdoms had been seriously reduced both by regional takeovers and the consolidation of certain areas of the country by the bigger, more militaristic tribes.

In northwest Britain at the time there were at least 4 indigenous tribes known to have inhabited the region, any one of which may have held control of the Iron Age settlement at Chester. In what is now modern-day Shropshire, the Cornovii tribe were thought to have led a mainly pastoral lifestyle and appear to have had little in the way of centralised government. They were said to have had many hill-forts, but it is thought that the majority of the people lived in timber built dwellings which left little or no evidence of their actual existence. It also appears that they had little in the way of coinage and ceramics, which suggests that payment and tribute were generally made through a basic bartering system.

In the mountains of North Wales lived the Ordovices tribe, who were primarily farmers and shepherds but who appear to have had a very strong military tradition. They lived in or around heavily defended hill-forts and were thought to have built a range of fortresses around the North Wales coastline. They were said to be one of the few Celtic tribes that physically opposed the later Roman invasion of Britain and it was within their lands that the rebel British chieftain Caractacus carried on his fight against Rome. Their continued opposition to the rule of the Emperor’s and ongoing support for the rebel warlord was said to have eventually led to their near total destruction by the Roman General Julius Agricola in around 78 AD.

The Deceangli people occupied what is now modern-day Flintshire and lived in a chain of hill-fort settlements along the Clwydian mountain range. Unlike the Cornovii, the Deceangli did have a tribal capital, which was located at Canovium, but like their neighbours, they seem to have had little in the way of a centralised structure and it seems probable that their tribal leadership operated at a more local level.

To the north of the River Mersey lived the Brigantes people, who it was thought were an amalgam of a number of much smaller local tribes who had joined together for their mutual benefit and security. They were said to be an extremely war-like tribe that did not flinch from the prospect of military engagements against any enemy, regardless of their potential threat. As with the Ordovices, the Brigantes continued to fight against the Roman army for years after the initial invasion and are thought to have been involved in at least one major uprising against the Legions of Rome following the occupation of Britain. Their tribal name is believed to translate to the “Hill People” and has led to speculation that they generally occupied a series of well defended hill-forts throughout their homeland region, the capital of which was Stanwick Hill in modern day Yorkshire. As yet no definitive archaeological evidence exists to suggest whether any or all of these tribes actually held direct control over the site that would later house the city of Chester. It may well be that the site was actually inhabited by yet another unknown group who came from outside of the region and chose to settle on the sandstone outcrop overlooking the River Dee. It does seem sensible to conclude however, that the area was indeed inhabited by at least one of a small number of disparate groups that were very well established by the time the first Roman soldiers arrived in Britain.

Typically, such people would have lived in circular huts, which would have been built of timber and straw, or possibly of wattle and daub. Within these accommodations there would have been a central hearth, where the occupants warmed themselves and cooked their meals. The floor of their homes would have been covered with animal skins or dried grasses, helping to retain the warmth which was generated by the fire. Their diet would have depended on their lands and surroundings, but given the easy access to the River Dee, it is likely that fish and shellfish would have formed a good part of their everyday meals. Unlike the richer soils of southern England, it has been suggested that the lands of northwest Britain generally supported coarser grain crops, such as wheat and barley, implying that the bulk of the local people’s diet consisted mainly of meat and milk, both of which could be easily provided by their own livestock. Typically, the average farmer may well have owned a minimum number of domestic animals, possibly a cow, a female pig, maybe a goat or a small flock of sheep. Either way, these animals would have provided the settlers family with the very basics of life, fresh milk, meat and the natural materials to make his clothes.

It is to be supposed that these early settlements would have been surrounded by a rudimentary ditch topped with a wooden palisade, within which their homes and valuable animals would have been protected from harm. Also within this same enclosure would have been the forges, kilns and ovens which helped to produce and support the local smithing and pottery industries which were thought to have existed in most small rural communities. Gold, Copper, Bronze and Iron were reported to have been used to produce the settlements tools, jewellery, weapons and the more mundane everyday objects, such as handles and pots. With a readily available supply of animal skins, bones and fleeces, it is likely that weaving, spinning and leather crafts would have dominated the local economy, producing goods which could be used by themselves or traded with travellers and merchants that regularly visited the settlement, in exchange for goods that they could not produce themselves or generally had little access to.

When judged against modern standards, the lives of our Bronze Age and Iron Age ancestors would appear to be fairly rudimentary or even primitive and yet they would have been simply typical of the time, given the processes and technologies that existed throughout most of Europe. Although the tribes of Britain had not yet received the road networks, sanitation systems and centralized government which would inevitably come with Roman occupation, it would be wrong to suggest that the Celtic world was in any way backward or uncivilized. Ample archaeological evidence has been uncovered to suggest that in certain areas of Europe new methods of construction and other technological advances were in fact being discovered and employed by these pre-Roman societies. It has long been suggested that many of the early Celtic world’s achievements were deliberately overlooked and omitted by the Romans, who were keen to justify their military invasion and occupation of foreign lands by pointing out the uncivilized and savage nature of the indigenous tribes and the desperate need for Roman control which brought about these interventions. In truth, this Roman altruism was little more than a “land grab” which was often driven by individual Emperor’s who were keen to enhance their position within the fledgling Empire and to further enlarge the sphere of Roman influence throughout the European continent.

As the Roman Empire slowly exerted its military control over much of continental Europe and brutally suppressed its native peoples, Britain became a sanctuary for the thousands of refugees that crossed the channel in a desperate bid to escape Roman rule. They brought with them information and stories about the new military threat that was facing northern Europe and suggesting to British tribal leaders that they too should begin to prepare to face a similar invasion of their own lands and possessions. In the northwest of Britain a local tale relates the story of a legendary king of the Britons, called Marius, who was said to have built an Iron Age fortress at Chester in order to defend the region from the Roman invaders. The story continues that these defences were themselves fairly rudimentary and provided little challenge to the professional legionaries, who easily overcame them, defeated the British defenders and built their own military fortress on or close to the same site. Another legend attributed to the same period, tells of a Druidic Temple that may have stood at the British Iron Age settlement, during the time of the British king Marius and which was located close to a local spring. The Romans having seized the settlement were then thought to have built a Temple to their deity Apollo on the site, which was located on the very same spot as the later Saxon Abbey.

Whether or not these people or places actually existed is impossible to say, given that some 2000 years have passed since these events were said to have occurred. What is certain however, is that it was during this particular period, that this relatively wild and inaccessible area of northwest England would eventually begin its long and turbulent transformation into the city that stands on the Dee today. Driven by greed, a growing demand for essential metals and a fear for their northern frontiers, the Roman Empire, the military superpower of the age, finally turned its face towards Britain and began to covet its lands, its peoples and the rich mineral deposits that it possessed.

On to part II: The Long March to Chester

phillip.freelancer@virgin.net