Roman road near Leiden

[Jona Lendering]

The discovery of a Roman road near Leiden is mentioned in this Dutch article:

[url:1osbh9o8]http://www.leidschdagblad.nl/nieuws/regionaal/leidenenregio/article518100.ece[/url]

It says more or less that it was found, that it is probably 2nd century, and that dendro-dating is expected. It also mentions the location, which is close to the ancient Roman castle of Matilo ([url:1osbh9o8]http://www.livius.org/ga-gh/germania/matilo.html[/url]).

Because the Dutch soil is very wet (peat), roads were constructed on a dike and only the wooden foundation of the road could be found. They looked like this:

The archaeological remains of a Roman road in Holland are, therefore, something like two parallel lines of poles.

[D B Campbell]

Very interesting, Jona. Thanks for posting this.

I know that, speaking personally, a lot of Dutch discoveries pass me by, because of language difficulties.

[drsrob]

That's practically around the corner for me...

.. I might just take a look there, but Idoubt whether it will be accessable.

[Jona Lendering]

a lot of Dutch discoveries pass me by, because of language difficulties.

I have collected a great deal over here: [url:1h4q0gd3]http://www.livius.org/ga-gh/germania/inferior.htm[/url].

If you prefer a book: Maureen Carroll, Romans, Celts & Germans. The German Provinces of Rome (2002 Stroud).

[Jona Lendering]

a lot of Dutch discoveries pass me by, because of language difficulties.

I have collected a great deal over here: [url:36cpurl9]http://www.livius.org/ga-gh/germania/inferior.htm[/url].

Reports about archaeological discoveries from Holland are usually to be taken with a pinch of salt:

• [url:36cpurl9]http://www.livius.org/opinion/opinion0004.html[/url]
  [url:36cpurl9]http://www.livius.org/opinion/opinion0002.html[/url] (the nameless archaeologist mentioned in this article has written to me that he was quoted correctly, but during a party, and that he spoke carelessly; I must revise this article a bit, but the outline is more or less correct)

If you prefer a book: Maureen Carroll, Romans, Celts & Germans. The German Provinces of Rome (2002 Stroud).

[D B Campbell]

That's a fine resource you've built, Jona.
And beautifully designed, too. Many thanks!

(I especially like the photo of Masada!! :wink: )

[Jona Lendering]

(I especially like the photo of Masada!! :wink: )

So do I!

[Praefectusclassis]

Speaking of pinches of salt, you have to wonder whether that is due to the archaeologist alone, to the journalist writing the article (interesting angle needed!) or due to the interesting relationship between the two when an expert has the unenviable task of explaining what he found to a layman who probably needs to simplify things again for his audience, but does not always bother to ask whether he (journalist) understood everything correctly.

[Jona Lendering]

In my opinion, this case is quite simple. A scholar or a scientist who speaks to the press, can and must check the story. I remember a Dutch historian, Emily Hemelrijk, who was interviewed by a feminist journal Opzij, and in the end rewrote the entire article because too many mistakes had been made. A good journalist -and I know several of them- will gladly accept.

[Praefectusclassis]

True, and in the case of a magazine the journalist will probably allow/can be 'forced' to have the story checked. Local and national newspapers though...?

[Jona Lendering]

I happen to know something about the scientific supplement of a Dutch newspaper, De Volkskrant, which is published on Friday. On Wednesday, it is more or less known what's in it, and the journalists who write commentaries are notified. So I think that leaves sufficient time to check.

Besides: archaeological discoveries are not so very urgent. The article I have once complained about ([url:1qz11sx7]http://www.livius.org/opinion/opinion0002.html[/url]) was published after the excavation had been finished. There was no need not to delay it for a day or so. The archaeologist could have asked.

So, I think that there is no valid reason why scholars should refrain from checking what is written about their research. If news becomes exaggerated, it is their own responsibility.

An interesting parallel: the Cave of John. A cave was discovered near the estuary of the river Jordan, and it was immediately suggested that this was where John the Baptist had preached. A couple of weeks ago, it turned out to be untrue (archaeological remains too old), but that was after the funds had miraculously expanded: [url:1qz11sx7]http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-03/uonc-ndp033106.php[/url].

So I fully endorse Hulspas' accusation that many archaeologists use the press to impress politicians to pay more money: [url:1qz11sx7]http://www.livius.org/opinion/opinion0004.html[/url]. Professionally, I am quite happy with this, but as a citizen and taxpayer, I feel cheated.

Here in Holland, many archaeological museums are just unnecessary. Maastricht used to have one, but it is closed now, and no one has complained. In fact, nobody has even noticed it. In my view, Holland has more than enough with two archaeological museums devoted to the Roman age, the RMO ([url:1qz11sx7]http://www.rmo.nl/[/url]) and the Valkhof ([url:1qz11sx7]http://www.museumhetvalkhof.nl/[/url]).

[Praefectusclassis]

I agree with your sidebar there. On that same note, I would vote for less artmuseums, starting with the art department in the Valkhof museum.