08-28-2004, 01:13 PM
I have been inclined to agree with you, Tasciovanous, about the Picts being the Britons by another name. However, there is a problem with this, in that so many post-Roman sources give the Picts as a seperate group, often allied with the Scots and Saxons against the British nations (Strathclyde, Gododdin, etc). It's possible, I suppose, that the Picts might just have been a rival British group - wars don't always have to be ethnically based, and it's probably a mistake to assume that every conflict in post-Roman Britain had some tribal or 'racial' difference at its heart.<br>
<br>
However, there's an odd bit of evidence to suggest otherwise, perhaps - around the Forth estuary and just south of the old Antonine wall there's a grouping of ruined brochs, very similar to those found in the Orkneys but dating from the 2nd century AD. As this is approximately the heartland of Dio's Maeatae, it might suggest the movement of some group from the western highland area to the Roman frontier, perhaps around the time of the withdrawal to the southern wall, and the building of defensive structures by this group.<br>
<br>
Well, it's a thought, but I suppose we'll never know... <p></p><i></i>
<br>
However, there's an odd bit of evidence to suggest otherwise, perhaps - around the Forth estuary and just south of the old Antonine wall there's a grouping of ruined brochs, very similar to those found in the Orkneys but dating from the 2nd century AD. As this is approximately the heartland of Dio's Maeatae, it might suggest the movement of some group from the western highland area to the Roman frontier, perhaps around the time of the withdrawal to the southern wall, and the building of defensive structures by this group.<br>
<br>
Well, it's a thought, but I suppose we'll never know... <p></p><i></i>
Nathan Ross
