All Things Roman (History)

[Mick Harper]

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Wile E. Coyote]

If you consider as another example Irish round towers, there does not seem to be examples of these as part of (a corner) of a fort?

Why were they not enclosed by a defensive stone wall.

Yet we are to believe that some of these were constructed at a time of multiple Viking raids. Or, if earlier, constructed during a period of warring Kings. If later you have the Normans.

All your folks get around without military roads.

[Hatty]

Wouldn't droving roads/trackways be usable for foot soldiers? It's not uncommon to see a trackway marked as 'herepath' on OS maps because it's assumed they were military routes, named for the Anglo-Saxon word for army or somesuch. Long-distance drovers' routes tend to be fairly straight and wide so it's easy to see how sections could get mislabelled.

[Wile E. Coyote]

When you look at Roman military roads, you look for a combo of road, camps, forts, with camps relating to marching distances?

[Hatty]

It's a similar pattern for droving roads with stopovers, mostly named hillforts, castles, camps and so on, a day's journey apart. But I take your point, Roman soldiers presumably could cover longer distances in a day.

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Wile E. Coyote]

Not that I am bitter. The North Sea folks and the Romans created the English by invading and then enclosing us.

We should thank them.

[Wile E. Coyote]

There is, rather mysteriously, lots of Mediterranean pottery found at coastal sites in western Britain and Ireland in (err) the post-Roman centuries.

The ortho narrative developed to take into account that the invasion took place on the east of Britain and, following the success of the second invasion, trade shifted cross-channel. This was done in part as the assumption was that Londinium (the future capital and port) was perceived as very important.

This meant that the trade with the West and Ireland that previously existed, has had to be downplayed during the centuries the centurions were here.

The western Mediterranean finds have had to be inserted in the period just before the Romans left, so that the trade routes with the West and Ireland could fully re-emerge once the Romans had gone.

In reality the invasion took place in the west. Logistics were from the west. That is the reason why Deva Victrix is the largest and most securely defended fort in Britain, it was in fact the invasion base. Folks in the west welcomed the Romans.

Far reign over us.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Having been unable to study or post at all for a while, I can't say I have given this much thought....... it was more a I must look at this when I get back, as it was a example of paradigm busting, sort of.

I caught it on Alice's "Digging Britain".... (Iplayer now?)

During an excavation of a Roman mosaic at the world-famous Chedworth Roman Villa in the Cotswolds, Gloucestershire, led by National Trust archaeologist Martin Papworth, he got an odd dating result, namely a mosaic was created in the 5th century. Anyway, as ortho has always thought the withdrawal of the Roman Empire from Britain took place around 410 AD, and villas were largely abandoned and fell into decay within a few years, this was thought to be some sort of anomaly, and ignored. Anyway time passes and Papworth returns to his site, uncovers the mosaic again and dates a soil sample under the mosaic (stratigraphy) using Optically-Stimulated Luminescence (OSL) dating (that is a new one for me). The dating was 5th century again.......

[Hatty]

Archaeologists are reportedly somewhat wary about relying on the accuracy of OSL for dating

[Wile E. Coyote]

The way "Digging Britain" interpreted it was that the first dating meant that the mosaic fell outside orthodox historic interpretations of either when or how the Romans left Britain, so they redated the mosaic by alternative means. That simply confirmed the original dating.

The archaeology was showing that the history was wrong.

Now, no doubt a whole series of relooking at the end dates of Roman villas will follow.

[Wile E. Coyote]

The ortho interpretation of the conquest of Roman Britain goes something like this.

The first attempt starts in 55 BC when Julius Caesar crosses the Oceanus, leaves, and then returns the next year, nothing much happens for the next ninety or so years before nutty Caligula prepares, and fails miserably, for reasons no-one is quite sure. Caligula blames the cowardice of the troops.The next attempt is by Claudius in 43 AD, ortho has it that he suceeds and by 46 AD you have coins featuring a triumphal arch and “De Britann” to show he had conquered the island and added it to the Roman empire. The coins, it is said, show the historical sources are correct.

Less well known is that Claudius also minted a didrachm at the Caesarea mint in Cappadocia. This coin features Claudius in a quadriga (Chariot with 4 horses), assumed to be returning from Britain as on the reverse of the coin is the legend “DE BRITANNIS”. The obverse also contains clues: it is marked “TI CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG GERM P M TR P”

“GERM” is short for Germanicus, which is a title Claudius only used at the Rome mint in 41-42 AD. “TR P” refers to his first “Tribunicia Potestate” (Tribunician power; the power to veto legislation) which was awarded annually. Claudius' first Tribunicia Potestate ran from the 25th of January 41 AD to the 24th of January 42 AD.

The coin often gets dated to 43-48 according to source, although it's clearly according to the legend 42, i.e. before the invasion takes place. To get round this it is also speculated that maybe the coin was issued to celebrate the impending victory.......