Ancient and Archaeology听 permalink
'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.听
Posted by TheodericAur (U14260004) on Thursday, 11th March 2010
In March 2010 an 'End of Roman Britain Conference' is being organised at the British Museum by the Roman Society & the Museum's Department of Portable Antiquities and Treasure.
This was posted last November and leads to the point that it is now imminent...does any one have any clues as to what may emerge?
Kind Regards - TALink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 2
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Tuesday, 16th March 2010
Hi TA,
Just back from the 'End of Roman Britain' conference. Absolutely brilliant, although it will take weeks to incorporate my notes.
All the exciting topics discussed: was English spoken in Iron Age Britain? To what extent was there post-Roman contact with Europe? Where did Patrick come from? Are there small finds markers of the Romano-British? What do coin imports and precious metal hoards tell us?
You will be pleased to learn that Constantine III's expedition to Europe may have left the British northern army largely untouched. But did he travel to Europe to defend against a barbarian invasion, or were the barbarian hoards summoned to Europe by Honorius to defeat him?
Nobody seems to believe in the 'Rescript' of Honorius any more; and nobody mentioned the 'A word' once.
Great stuff.
TPLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 3
Posted by TheodericAur (U14260004) on Tuesday, 16th March 2010
Hi TP
Managed the most of the first day but missed the second due to Gastric Flu and spent the whole of Sunday in bed - Disaster!!!! Especially as day 2 seemed to have a great deal about the West so I could really do with a proper update.
Emailed Sam yesterday and he said they were going to publish but not until after Cardiff.....
The first day blew me away - loved the 4Gs on the coins, not sure I totally agree with the findings but loved the concept that Stilicho could call on the Barbarians to help him protect his and Rome's interests.
What about the brigaudic Rebellions? They had a Revolution in France but it never got to Britain so could it be possible that the Brigaudic revolt never happened here - thought the link with Gildas was interesting in that context though.
Glad to hear that you got to see it all!!
Best Wishes - TALink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 4
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Wednesday, 17th March 2010
Hi TA,
That was really bad luck; I hope that you are fully restored now.
Ken Dark spoke very well on the western British kingdoms but his work is well-known and accessible. Andrew Breeze and Stephen Yeates spoke on place name and language problems. I found their presentations very challenging since I am no linguist, but the importance of their work is unquestionable.
The significance of coin and precious metal hoards, and the place of Magnus Maximus in later Welsh literature, have been discussed on these boards on several occasions. It was valuable to hear expert views.
Although interpretation is difficult it is astonishing how much is known about this exciting period of our history.
TPLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 5
Posted by Stoggler (U14387762) on Wednesday, 17th March 2010
and nobody mentioned the 'A word' once.
听
May I enquire, what's the 'A word'...?
Apus squared (formerly Stoggler)Link to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 6
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Wednesday, 17th March 2010
My pleasure: Arthur.
TPLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 7
Posted by Stoggler (U14387762) on Wednesday, 17th March 2010
Thanks TP. Glad to hear his name wasn't uttered!
Sounds like it was a fascinating conference - always good to hear news of serious studies in this area.Link to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 8
Posted by TheodericAur (U14260004) on Wednesday, 17th March 2010
Hi TP
Fully recovered now - many thanks for asking.
Reflecting on how successful Constantine III was until Gerontius rebelled against him taking a large part of his army.
Also wondering if it was possible that Stilicho used the Vandals against the wishes of Honorius that got him executed?
Kind Regards - TALink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 9
Posted by AlanR (U14322264) on Sunday, 21st March 2010
It does not sound like an interesting start, but I trust that when at the end of the year I look at the results (www.410.org.uk)it will answer some of these questions or at least have a precis of the discussions.
Accepting the current thought that 鈥榯he Romans left Britain in 410AD鈥 I still need to know what is meant by this statement. Romans are a very misleading word at this date all citizens had been made Roman, so it cannot be the whole population. Clearly it was the three garrisons at Chepstow, at Chester and the other third which I assume was on the Scottish Border.
I assume that a proportion of the civil servants and other administrators went with them, but what proportion. If they left did the British take over these jobs, or did we run our own laws? With the majority of the educated population not knowing more than 100 words could this have been achieved? We gather from Tacitus that within 20 years no Latin was spoken in Britain.
There was a strong church in Britain (British Irish, Scotch and Gallic), but what is not realised is that services were in British not in Latin. This is clearly stated in the writings of Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople (AD 402). I have always assumed that the churches in the South East were destroyed by the English (Angels and Saxons) when they invaded. Perhaps they were not destroyed but just weakened, therefore easily fell when the Roman Catholics invaded. (We know Rome fell to the Papacy in 606AD.)
When then did England and Wales stop speaking British?
There is much else that we need to know and from a lunch time lecture at the UCL given by one of UK鈥檚 better lecturers to a packed audience which I attended it would appear that great things will come about. Unfortunately these lectures do not allow questions but the impression that I had was that it would not only be dreary old Professors reading a paper that they gave 40 years ago, but modern research presented and not read.
AlanRLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 10
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Sunday, 21st March 2010
Hi AlanR,
Well, it all depends what you are interested in; I found it the most absorbing conference I have attended in 20 years. The lecture theatre at the BM was packed to bursting with 200-250 delegates and lecturers.
There was a good deal of 'internal criticism' over the title of the Conference in fact. Naturally the selection of AD410 for 'the end' means conveniently we can celebrate the 1600th anniversary this year, but one could argue for 402 (when base metal coins stop), or 407 (when Constantine III was elevated) or 411 (when he died). One could equally argue that any single year date is misleading since Roman influence continued in Britain, and until the fall of the Western Empire the reoccupation of the diocese was always faintly possible. Rome lost Britain because in could not maintain itself in Gaul.
It is far from easy to say who the Romans were in the early 5th century. In AD 212 the Constitutio Antoniniana extended citizenship to all free men within the Empire. Slaves were not Roman citizens of course, and the status of rural peasants (who may have made up 90% of the population) is debatable. I think it is quite likely that the Latin speaking British elite thought of itself as 'Roman', but whether individuals also felt loyalty to their province or to the local group of north-western provinces is impossible to say.
The position of the late Roman army in Britain is not much easier. The three 2nd century legionary bases were Chester, Caerleon on Usk, and York. The status and numbers of legionary units had diminished by the late 4th century and according to the Notitia Dignitatum legio II Augusta had been moved from Caerleon to Richborough. The late Roman army was divided an actively campaigning field army (comitatensis) and a border protection force (limitanei); I think that Constantine III would have taken the field army to Europe. It now appears (and TA has always advocated this position) that the auxiliary forces garrisoning Hadrian's wall and 50% of the east coast shore fort garrisons remained. Of course knowing that a fortification was garrisoned doesn't tell you how many men were actually present.
There may have been two 'sets' of officials in early 5th century Britain, those loyal to Honorius and those loyal to Constantine III. Some would have left certainly. Without central government tax to collect a substantial part of their duties would have disappeared.
As usual Alan you provide as established facts statements which seem highly questionable, and for which you don't really provide any evidence.
What makes you think that the majority of the educated population did not know more than 100 words (of Latin I assume you mean)? Gildas wrote his work in Latin and must have had the language of his readers in mind. Early Christian monuments in Wales have Latin inscriptions for centuries after the notional end of Roman Britain.
Why should the statements of a 1st 鈥 early 2nd century historian influence your view of the languages spoken in Britain three hundred years later.
I admit that my knowledge of the writings of St John Chrysostom are reprehensibly slender, but why should an eastern empire Patriach be an authority on the language used in British churches?
What do you mean by the phrase 'when the Roman Catholics invaded'?
Is there any chance that in this thread, or in that on Cornish tin, we could indulge in an enjoyable exchange of evidence and explanations?
TPLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 11
Posted by TheodericAur (U14260004) on Sunday, 21st March 2010
Hi Alan R
I agree with TP, the part of the conference that I was able to attend was brilliant and far from being boring or having papers presented by dreary old Professors there was a great mix of people of all ages from their late twenties to their early seventies presenting in all styles (there was even someone who did a 鈥減roxy defence鈥 for a professor in his nineties).
I think the title of a presentation I liked most was 鈥淕ildas the Red Monk鈥 or something like that.
Another subject that I expect appealed to TP, was about coinage struck by Constantine III and this proving that Constantine鈥檚 III soldiers were on both sides of the Pyrenees but also that perhaps Stilicho used 鈥淏arbarians鈥 to fight Constantine III, and that some of the coins minted were found in Britain, some quite amazing ideas.
These presentations / papers are to be published after the Conference in Cardiff so hopefully some of your questions may be answered however often when these papers are published they raise other questions for instance - 鈥淲as there a peasant鈥檚 rebellion around AD407 in Britain?鈥 What do you think?
Kind Regard - TALink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 12
Posted by AlanR (U14322264) on Thursday, 25th March 2010
Hi TP and TA
We appear to have been taught a different History. I was taught that the Roman Catholics invaded circa 600AD captured Canterbury and then progressed through the East of Britain, converting Anglo-Saxons to Catholicism and forcing a population that had a to change from Christianity and to recognise the Pope. That this war raged until c920 when the last British Churches capitulated. I have always thought perhaps incorrectly that it was this invasion and not the Romans that caused the spread of Latin.
What I hope to learn from 410 is why Britain divided into the soft East of Britain which failed to resist the Angels, Saxons, and the rest? Had it been romanised? Is that why it did not resist Catholicism?
The West of Britain fought the Saxons (Yes they did although you may not accept Arthur was the Pendragon)They rejected the Catholic approach and gladly tore out of their churches the Catholic Idols when they were recaptured by Henry.
In other words did the Romans change the culture, and make the citizens more subservient in the East and more subversive in the West? Please do not jump at me for using the divide East and West I appreciate that it is not as clear cut as this.Link to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 13
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Thursday, 25th March 2010
Hi AlanR
Thanks for the reply. Now, where could you have been taught history like that? Protestant Ulster perhaps? Anyway could we perhaps agree to a moratorium on words like: 'war', 'invaded', 'captured' and 'capitulated' in favour of some more neutral terms when talking about the progress of Christianity? What is an 'idol' to you, may simply be an 'image' to others.
It is certainly true (as I'm sure that you know very well) that in 'Dark Age' Britain there were two distinct Christian traditions which we might, as a convenient shorthand, call Celtic and Catholic Christianity. I'm not a theologian, and I am happy to be corrected, but I don't think that there were great doctrinal differences between the two bodies. But they calculated Easter in different ways, organised their churches and monasteries differently, and even tonsured their monks in their own distinct fashions.
There is general agreement that Christianity arrived in Britain during the Roman period. Some, like myself, see this as late event at the end of the 3rd and 4th centuries; others regard the first British Christians as a 1st century phenomenon and see fit to attach the name 'Joseph of Arimathea' to the occurrence. (As you may guess I regard this as a pious medieval fiction, not history.) Anyway by the early 5th century there were substantial bodies of British Christians. The situation in Ireland is more complicated. The Romano-British Patrick famously brought Christianity to Ireland, but although he is an important source for the 5th century his exact dates are uncertain. There is also St Palladius who was an evangelist to the Irish at the behest of Pope Celestine. The same Pope is believed to have sent St Germanus to Britain. I mention this to demonstrate that there was Papal involvement with British and Irish Christianity long before St Augustine in AD 597.
What happened to the east of Britain is complex and difficult. Was there an Anglo-Saxon invasion? Was it more an elite migration leading to the adoption by the inhabitants of eastern Britain of Anglo-Saxon language and customs? Did the east of England "fail to resist the Angles, Saxons and the rest" or did it show flexibility in adopting the new ways and technology. We have discussed this on many occasions on this board without really reaching a conclusion.
Clearly, whatever the mechanism, a new type of paganism was introduced. The adoption of this paganism may not have been as uniform as is sometimes imagined. The place name element 'eccles' is found in northern and eastern England and may reflect the presence of an 'ecclesia' or British church. I imagine however that there must have been a period when the British and Irish churches found it difficult to communicate with their co-religionists in Gaul and Italy. But by the mid-late 6th century things were changing. Irish St Columba had founded Iona and visited the Picts. Aethelberht of Kent had already married a Christian queen and was visited by St Augustine, of the Catholic tradition, at the request of Pope Gregory. In the next generation King Oswald invited St Aidan, of the Celtic tradition, from Iona to Anglo-Saxon Northumbria. In the circumstances it seems understandable that the Pope would wish to unit his British and Irish provinces with the Catholic and European tradition he led, which leads us to AD 663 and the Synod of Whitby (if indeed Whitby is Streonshalh). The change in organisation must have been very painful to some who loved the Celtic Christian traditions, but to call the process a 'war' seems an exaggeration.
Turning to secular affairs it is true that the Western kingdoms of Britain retained Roman traditions for centuries after AD 410. Presumably the language of the people was Old Welsh but Latin was still being taught, and written. But the east of Britain retained elements of 'Britishness' too. Here in West Yorkshire the British kingdom of Elmet survived until the early 7th century. Berenicia, Deria and Kent may have been Anglo-Saxon kingdoms but they have British names. Even Cerdic, the founder of Wessex, had a British name. However I would agree that Latin was reintroduced into eastern Britain by the church for ecclesiastical and diplomatic purposes. What gave the west and eastern parts of Britain their different trajectories is important certainly, and was much discussed at the 'AD 410 End of Roman Britain Conference'. Was it simply the division between highland and lowland zones, or could there have been Germanic speaking Iron Age tribes in pre-Roman eastern Britain?
By the way I have no idea what a Pendragon is, let alone whether Arthur was one. But I'm sure that nowhere in the Arthurian romances does Arthur fight Saxons. He fights Romans (echoes of Magnus Maximus perhaps), and he fights his own extended family, but not Saxons. Gildas does not name (contrary to a widespread belief) the victor at Mount Badon. The section in Nennius that recounts Arthur's 12 battles follows a comment about Hengist and Octha but is quite separate. Nennius also famously places Arthur at Badon, but this time it is the enemy that is not named!
Best wishes,
TPLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 14
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Thursday, 25th March 2010
Thankyou for the excellent and balanced post TP, a great relief after AlanR's rather alarming post above.
Link to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 15
Posted by AlanR (U14322264) on Thursday, 25th March 2010
For information
A Pendragon is a person elected by a group of tribes to lead them into battle, I believe his powers were limited to the battlefield. This person may have been King of one of the tribes.
British Christianity pre dates the Roman Catholic Church by 150 years at least in my opinion longer. I have found no evidence of Christians ever worshiping idols. Please provide references to such Christian worship.
I must admit ignorance but I thought some time British changed into North Welsh, South Welsh and West Welsh (now called Cornish. Why in the East did it change so drastically?
If there is anyone from Barnstaple out there do we no when Barnstaple changed its name from Abertaw?
Alan RLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 16
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Thursday, 25th March 2010
Hi AlanR
Thanks for the information about a pendragon. Clearly it is akin to Nennius's phrase 'dux bellorum' applied to Arthur.
I think if we are going to exchange any useful views about the development of early British Christianity we need to know when you think the Roman Catholic Church came into existence. You clearly don't believe it originated with St Peter; do you use the term Roman Catholic to mean the 'church within the western Roman Empire' that was (at the very least) sponsored by Constantine the Great after 317, and made 'official' by his successors?
My comment on idols originated in a remark in your post no. 12: "they rejected the Catholic approach and gladly tore out of their churches the Catholic Idols when they were recaptured by Henry". I assume that 'they' are the (Tudor period) inhabitants of western Britain, and the Henry in this context is King Henry VIII. Although I personally do not find images helpful in religious practice I do not consider your description of those in Catholic churches as 'idols' is acceptable neutral language. If you now feel that you "have found no evidence of Christians ever worshipping idols" (with which I of course agree) would you please explain why you originally used the phrase?
I am no linguist but I think it is reasonable to assume that an older British Celtic language evolved into modern Cornish and Welsh, together presumably with lost dialects once spoken in Cumbria and Strathclyde. Clearly this didn't happen in lowland Britain. The analysis of what did happen is greatly hindered by the fact that during the period that interests us the only language that was written, indeed the only language that could be written, was Latin. We may reasonably surmise that the elite of Roman Britain spoke Latin, but to what extent had in percolated into the ordinary population? By the end of the Roman period had the original Celtic language been replace by a 'vulgar' Latin or the type that elsewhere evolved into Romance languages? Alternatively had there been Germanic speaking Iron Age Belgic tribes, or Roman period foederati, present in sufficient numbers so that a venacular proto-English was spoken in eastern Britain even during the Roman period? We have some formidable liguists and place name analysts on this board so let's hope one of them picks up this thread.
TPLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 17
Posted by TheodericAur (U14260004) on Thursday, 25th March 2010
Hi TP
Time to be a bit contentious.
I agree that the understanding of what was the lingua franca by AD400 is key.
It would seem to make sense that Latin was the bridging language of the Empire that many different nationalities would communicate through.
This would mean that most people would have in fact still have remained tribal in their language which would also imply that there was an infrastructure of tribalism.
In this way a Celtic British language could have still thrived in various areas but for Administration purposes Latin would have been used.
This would also seem to allow for the fact that so many Latin words are inserted into many languages which is also true to a lesser extent of 鈥淣orman鈥 words pervading our language. The common denominator being the use of a 鈥渓ingua franca鈥 for communication with the ruling class or power.
I am starting to feel that the Christian Church started to fill the void of the 鈥渓ost鈥 Administration of the Roman State and actually perhaps would then have become attached to the various war bands perhaps as Administrators and in a secondary context as religious advisers.
This would seem to allow for the Church to be both protected and for it to flourish internationally and as I have stated before be the centre for education as much for the continuance of government as well as religious guidance.
Kind Regards - TALink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 18
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Thursday, 25th March 2010
Hi TA,
I can't help being reminded, in your idea of the church being associated with war bands, an echo of the purported role of the Druids. Am I being over imaginative or could there have been a remembered folk tradition?
Just a bit of late night speculation.
regards
fervalLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 19
Posted by bandick (U14360315) on Thursday, 25th March 2010
Reply to message 15
Alan R鈥
Have you by chance ever had any dealings with the extremely popular, (so I鈥檓 informed) 鈥榳ar hammer鈥 games fraternity鈥 my youngest son became interested years ago. Initially I thought it a good idea, a pleasant enough harmless hobby鈥 he spent hours in his room painting his model soldiers and playing complex games with a group of his friends and their fathers. But they seemed to talk a different language, and take themselves off into another dimension, inventing historical events and facts to suit themselves鈥 and the downside of all this was his sudden detachment from reality.
He developed a strange 鈥榯ake鈥 on life, and at one point I honestly thought I鈥檇 鈥榣ost鈥 him to this fantasy world of make believe鈥 I even had letters from his school about it鈥
I really don鈥檛 mean to be rude about this, but where do you get a Pendragon from鈥 and
鈥淏ritish Christianity pre dates the Roman Catholic Church by 150 years at least in my opinion longer.鈥 Alan what鈥檚 all that about鈥?
鈥淚 have found no evidence of Christians ever worshiping idols. Please provide references to such Christian worship.鈥
Alan I do believe it was you that suggested they did鈥 but it鈥檚 become so confusing following your post鈥
鈥淚f there is anyone from Barnstaple out there do we no when Barnstaple changed its name from Abertaw?鈥
I sincerely hope there is鈥 then perhaps they can come on over and help put meaning to some of this.
Kind regards bandick鈥Link to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 20
Posted by TheodericAur (U14260004) on Friday, 26th March 2010
Hi ferval
I think there may be some validity (however speculative) that the structure of the tribes were still run on the same lines as before the supposed massacre of the Druids on Anglesea.
We only have the Roman acoounts of what happened to the Druids and I suspect that much of this is propoganda. It is from the Romans that the Druids have their reputation of human sacrifice, wild women running between the ranks of the massed Druids on the foreshore etc.
I could understand animal sacrifice which was common place for the Romans and other societies but Roman propoganda portrays this use of human sacrifice that was so unforgiveable that they were then "fair game to be slaughtered".
The propaganda was there to justify their actions.
Does anyone else know of proof that the Druids sacrificed humans?
Yet the Druids were known to be law givers, teachers, doctors, judges, professors and artists why on earth would they be warriors?
This could well have been (and would have suited the Romans who had been trying to eradicate the Druids at least since Julius Caesar) a total massacre to try and destroy the rival culture to the Romans that they had been fighting for some time.
I cannot buy in to the fact that all the Druids were killed or that they would make a "last stand" at Anglesea. They knew the Romans and would have known that their whole society would be at risk.
This was still a set of people who took many years for the Romans to subdue, they were not ignorant savages but a well educated peoples with wonderful technical skills across the board.
Although we understand a lot about the Roman society in Britain we have very little knowledge of the lifestyles of the majority of the peoples and it is thought that there were around three million of them, not slaves but owing perhaps an allegiance to their chieftans who had their interaction (and were possibly part of) the Roman Administration.
In earlier threads it has been surmised that Christianity lived and worked along side other religions and perhaps we can see this in the fact that Christion ceremonial days are based around an earlier religion.
So I think your late night musings may indeed have some merit...others of course may disagree.
Best Wishes - TALink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 21
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Friday, 26th March 2010
Hi TA,
Thanks for that full and considered response.
It is in relation to the societal role of the Druids that I thought there was a possible parallel to your suggestion about the position of the church. I'm sure that to regard the mass of the population during the Roman period as some kind of homogeneous whole is mistaken and that every combination of subservience, accommodation and open or covert resistance occurred. Society must have been a mass of appropriations and hybridisations with the imported Roman structures and mores and I see no reason to think that their reactions to the Christian faith were any different. As to the military aspect, having god, any god, on your side has always been a big plus.
Coincidentally, I'm off to North Wales tomorrow and I'll be in Anglesey on Tuesday so I'll try to commune with the spirits and see if they'll give me any hints!
regards
fervalLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 22
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Friday, 26th March 2010
Hi ferval
I think you make a good point. Warriors understandably seek divine aid before risking their lives in battle. The fact that Roman legionaries prayed to Mars or Augustus, and that later King Edwin prayed to a Christian God, doesn't mean that the Christians 'lifted' the practice from paganism.
Life in the country has always been built round the seasons and the agricultural cycle. My guess is that festivals for a good harvest (for example) are as old as farming and need not again represent some type of continuity from paganism to Christianity.
Occasionally artefacts indicate a transitional phase. Sutton Hoo has both Christian and pagan artefacts. As you will know the Water Newton treasure has silver plaques and gold discs which are almost certainly Christian since they carry the chi-rho monogram. But the silver plaque itself is a well known Roman pagan form.
Have fun in Anglesey. There is a wonderful ruined brick works at Porth Wen on the north coast. Much better than all this ancient stuff!
TPLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 23
Posted by TheodericAur (U14260004) on Friday, 26th March 2010
Hi ferval
Have a great time in North Wales and Anglesey, it really is a beautiful and haunting area.
It has been known for ever that soldiers are extremely superstitious, especially the Romans and I think that the propaganda raised by the Romans may well in truth have been to convince the soldiers themselves to massacre men, women and children who would have been looked on as evil when dressed up as Druids
You are right as TP says about the military needing a religious deity on their side but it is also good for the leaders and politicians to have right on their side.
You must tell us the results of your communing with the spirits on Anglesey鈥..
Kind Regards - TALink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 24
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Friday, 26th March 2010
Thanks for your good wishes, TP and TA, I'm sure I'll enjoy Wales a lot. As a Strathclyder there should surely be some fellow feeling between the Cymru and the Cymri. I fear though that the spirits I'll be communing with will most likely be bottled.
Sorry, TP it's going to be the ancient stuff, the brickworks will have to be reluctantly postponed.
regards
fervalLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
-
Message 25
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Friday, 26th March 2010
Hi ferval,
Big mistake, but if you really mean it at all costs don't miss Din Lligwy and Bryn Celli Ddu.
Enjoy your trip,
TPLink to this forum: 'End of Roman Britain Conference' - will it throw light on the Darkness?
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or 听to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
麻豆约拍 iD
麻豆约拍 navigation
麻豆约拍 links
麻豆约拍 漏 2014 The 麻豆约拍 is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.