09-29-2021, 11:54 AM
(09-29-2021, 07:37 AM)Steve Kaye Wrote: Deryk, I looked up the details of Godmanchester because you said the fort had been destroyed which made me assume that some new evidence had been recently found. It hasn't. Plus, the comment immediately made me question Tacitus' "the barbarians ... passed by the fortresses with military garrisons" - was this incorrect, what else might be wrong with his account? However, Godmanchester fort was not destroyed in the rebellion and so the veracity of Tacitus' account remains as it was.
Silchester - Prof. Fulford et. al. have been busy at Silchester in recent years, including this year, re-excavating the Victorian excavations on Insula 3, the temples and the Roman baths. Reports on the work at https://research.reading.ac.uk/silchester/interim/; the Facebook site (available from the preceding URL) has a number of films, including the 2021 season.
The question of whether Silchester was attacked by the rebels is still open - unresolved. Undoubtedly something odd was happening during the period.
We have to hope that the excavations will continue in some form and that an answer to the oddities of the mid-to-late 1st C. will be found
Steve
Many thanks for the link and update on Silchester. I totally agree that during the Neronian period there was something very strange happening. Were the Atrebates a Client Kingdom or part of the Roman Province? Nero was certainly disbanding Client Kingdoms elsewhere.
Tacitus as you say is correct around the forts that he says were bypassed but obviously it would seem that Godmanchester was burnt. Was this because towns were seen as a Roman construct, alien to the Brythons?
What happened at Silchester? Was burning a way of demolishing buildings for the town planners? Was the burning linked to the revolt? Was this an indication that with Godmanchester there were local uprisings across the country? Was this why the Second didn't march to aid Seutonius Paulinus?
As you say much to consider.
Deryk
