This Weeks Time Team was very Good I like the bit where Phil found the two coins. well done TT You are back in my good Books again after last weeks show
Interesting stuff, but how many times can a misleading and outdated word like 'Romanisation' be used in one programme?
Don't let Guy de la Bedoyere hear you saying that.
I think we can still use the term in a variety of contexts, but they did seem to be going OTT with it tonight. Romanized roundhouses? Because they were made with stone?
It has certainly been a good start to the new series with two interesting sites. I just wish people would stop moaning about trivialities. It certainly was a site in a hundred and to the casual viewer i,m sure the terminollogy used was understandale. If i had sites like this in my neighborhood the couple of hundred enthusiastic amateurs that turn up at our open days would understand "ROMANISATION".
Originally posted by mr w: It has certainly been a good start to the new series with two interesting sites. I just wish people would stop moaning about trivialities. It certainly was a site in a hundred and to the casual viewer i,m sure the terminollogy used was understandale. If i had sites like this in my neighborhood the couple of hundred enthusiastic amateurs that turn up at our open days would understand "ROMANISATION".
I think Nautius was alluding to the ongoing debate in archaeology concerning the validity of the concept of 'Romanisation' rather than the use of the word. I'm sure most people would understand the meaning of the word.
They have done so many Roman Villas and variations that I wonder how different a new one will be, but really enjoyed today's. The focus on the change when the Romans came was interesting. However I thought that for many years before the Romans actually arrived they had a big influence on England, and it wasn't a dramatic change in 43AD? Or was that just the south east?
Also, I presume that they don't have to sign any forms promising not to take finds off site, or even put them in their pockets...
Originally posted by Hudson: However I thought that for many years before the Romans actually arrived they had a big influence on England, and it wasn't a dramatic change in 43AD? Or was that just the south east?
South east and south, mainly around the port of Poole. Or should I say a northerly bulge above Poole. (I think)
Lovely finds, the coins were stunning. I wonder if Phil thought, as he picked up the first one that he was the first person in 2000 years to have held it in his hand.
Originally posted by Hudson: However I thought that for many years before the Romans actually arrived they had a big influence on England, and it wasn't a dramatic change in 43AD? Or was that just the south east?
I don't think we really know for sure.
........................................................................ Support the PAS Go with the FLO
Originally posted by Hudson: However I thought that for many years before the Romans actually arrived they had a big influence on England, and it wasn't a dramatic change in 43AD? Or was that just the south east?
South east and south, mainly around the port of Poole. Or should I say a northerly bulge above Poole. (I think)
Hengistbury Head near Poole was the main port of entry for foriegn imports into Britain at that time along with a site at Mount Batton near Plymouth and possibly another port at Selsey in West Sussex. The influence was pretty much confined to the South/South east of Britain though.
Originally posted by Hamric: I wondered, looking at those Iron Age coins, what the high-status Iron Age people actually did with them.
Assuming pre-Roman Britain was mostly a non-money economy, did the local chiefs just use them for foreign trade?
I think they may have been used in the exchange system, but more as a valuable item to be exchanged rather than a proper fiscal system. Dobunnic coins appear in South Wales, but they are all made of precious metals which I suspect is an indication of this possibility.
Don't let Guy de la Bedoyere hear you saying that.
I think we can still use the term in a variety of contexts, but they did seem to be going OTT with it tonight. Romanized roundhouses? Because they were made with stone?
The Romans were certainly building Roundhouses all of their own right up to the 4th Century (Stanwick, Northants, springs to mind.
The concept of there being a policy of 'Romanisation' falls apart on several levels. The main clincher for me is the absence of a single, one size fits all model of Roman Life. Rome itself was a constantly evolving melting pot of Ideas and cultures, and The Romans happily adopted indigenous practises as well as introducing their own.
I have read with interest the debates between Guy De La Bed and academics such as David Mattingly and, to be honest, I do find Mattingly's arguements far more convincing.
