Romans in Ireland?

[Chilperic]

Martin,
Your initial argument was first of all to express surprise that 'someone of [my] qualifications' should be surprised to hear of 'evidence' for an invasion of Ireland, and then to assert that that must be because I'm not a specialist in Irish prehistory, the implication being that if I was then I would agree with you. In other words 'if you knew what you were talking about you'd know I was right'. Then you say you don't have time to set out your arguments but give a bibliography (from another work) and assert that if I read that I'd see that you were right, and then claim (incorrectly, I'm afraid) that everyone who does know about this period agrees with you and that there is more evidence for a Roman invasion than for a Celtic one (which really is just not true).

I don’t wish to cause offence, but that is not how one conducts an historical debate. If someone said to me "Guy I disagree with your reading of late Roman history and the barbarians; can you defend your view?" and I responded by saying "well, clearly you don't know what you're talking about; read everything on the 80-page bibliography to my book; then you'll know what you're talking about and thus see that I'm right" that would correctly be derided as the height of arrogance. If I took the tone of your reply somewhat amiss then that is why. I hope you can see that. Thanks for the apology, though.

You’re right: I am not a specialist on things Irish - I would not pretend to be - but I think I'm fairly well informed on the area as part of my work on the relationships between the Empire and the polities beyond the imperial limites, and indeed as part of my other early medieval historical research. Certainly your bibliography contained little that I wasn't aware of.

You state: “Granted, we've not found a dead Roman soldier buried in the middle of St. Patrick street in Cork with a piece of paper stuck in his hand saying "Go forth young man and kill the Paddy's [sic]" or "Guinness - by Royal appointment to his majesty Hadrian Caesar Augustus" but by the same token the writings and finds to date can hardly be described as circumstantial.â€

[Nerva]

Guy

I take my hat off to you sir, an excellent reply, bravo!. Now, I have a few things to say.

Firstly I offer you a public apology for the way I 'attacked' you in my previous post. To be fair you did not deserve that and it was very 'unprofessional' and childish of me. I was going to write this in a PM to you after I read you latest post, but if a man wrongs another in public then he should have the decency to apologies in public as well.

I do have to say that when I initially saw the bold type face and italic text in your posts, and the lack of detail to substantiate your arguments (what I perceived to be lack of detail anyway), I was more than a little annoyed, especially if read in the context of an Englishman trying to tell an Irishman his history :evil:

Now, on to business. I intend to write a full reply to your post but I'm just back from a reenactment event with a large heamtoma in my Left knee where a spear was thrust into it yesterday - you'd think a man of my age would have more sense.

I, like many people started off thinking a Roman 'invasion' of Ireland was a myth but I was introduced to Richard Warner some time back and began to research publications that he suggested to me. This lead to meeting some very interesting researchers of early Irish history and culture that changed my mind.

One of the problems 'we' Irish have is that academia seems very reluctant to engage an a comprehensive argument of the whole Roman Irish question so getting co-hairnet references is difficult.

Anyway, please accept my apology and await my reply.

[Chilperic]

No worries at all, Martin. Thanks for the apology, which is much appreciated but goes way further than was necessary!

And as Keith Richards once said in a similar situation, 'It's all rock 'n' roll, man'.

Seriously, one thing about being an 'academic' is that we are used to 'robust' discussion with no hard feelings. Sometimes that makes us a bit more forthright than other people and we don't quite understand why people take things amiss. So, if I came across as being too blunt, or trying to talk down to you or as being patronising, then please accept my apologies. It wasn't intended like that.

I hope the spear wound heals quickly!

Cheers,
Guy

[Nerva]

Cheers Guy :wink: You might be used to Robust argument, but I did make it personal and to be fair somewhat nasty and questioned your professional position which was cheap and very low, even for me, even I cringe when I read my posts again :oops: There is no justification for my remarks.

So once again I do apologize - especially since we have at last have an academic willing to engage in a discussion on the subject.

Anyway, I have a few questions to present to you all, only right now I'm in an Airport waiting for the last flight to Brussels, bloody Ambiorix is acting the 'maggot' again! So I'll post up tomorrow sometime.

[Ceannt]

The Irish standered Latin Grammer,