Pub Date : 2022-11-01DOI: 10.1017/S0068113X22000253
A. Gardner
ABSTRACT Hadrian's Wall remains one of the most iconic elements of Roman frontier infrastructure, with considerable symbolic capital in all kinds of contemporary situations and representations. Whether inspiring the fictional ice wall in Game of Thrones or illustrating debates about English–Scottish relationships in Brexit-era Britain, the Wall has a powerful legacy. In more scholarly circles, the Wall sometimes figures in the literature of the emerging field of Border Studies, too, and in this paper I examine some of these representations, as a prelude to discussing what Border Studies offers to Wall studies within Roman archaeology. While the interdisciplinary nature of Border Studies can mean that Hadrian's Wall is misunderstood when taken out of context, this does not mean that the broader insights of Border Studies have no value to Roman archaeologists in better interpreting the Wall and its place in Roman Britain. To the contrary, the combination of innovative theories of frontiers and borderlands with detailed, nuanced understanding of the Wall communities through time has much to offer the archaeology of Britain in the Roman empire. Indeed, this field has the potential to connect frontier studies better with other dimensions of Roman provincial archaeology than has been typical in our discipline over much of the last half-century.
{"title":"Hadrian's Wall and Border Studies: Problems and Prospects","authors":"A. Gardner","doi":"10.1017/S0068113X22000253","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068113X22000253","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Hadrian's Wall remains one of the most iconic elements of Roman frontier infrastructure, with considerable symbolic capital in all kinds of contemporary situations and representations. Whether inspiring the fictional ice wall in Game of Thrones or illustrating debates about English–Scottish relationships in Brexit-era Britain, the Wall has a powerful legacy. In more scholarly circles, the Wall sometimes figures in the literature of the emerging field of Border Studies, too, and in this paper I examine some of these representations, as a prelude to discussing what Border Studies offers to Wall studies within Roman archaeology. While the interdisciplinary nature of Border Studies can mean that Hadrian's Wall is misunderstood when taken out of context, this does not mean that the broader insights of Border Studies have no value to Roman archaeologists in better interpreting the Wall and its place in Roman Britain. To the contrary, the combination of innovative theories of frontiers and borderlands with detailed, nuanced understanding of the Wall communities through time has much to offer the archaeology of Britain in the Roman empire. Indeed, this field has the potential to connect frontier studies better with other dimensions of Roman provincial archaeology than has been typical in our discipline over much of the last half-century.","PeriodicalId":44906,"journal":{"name":"Britannia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43274948","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-01DOI: 10.1017/S0068113X22000265
M. Charles, M. Singleton
Abstract Narratives of the Claudian invasion of Britain in a.d. 43 have regularly referred to elephants being part of Claudius’ force, with some accounts even suggesting that Claudius paraded the beasts through Colchester (Camulodunum), or even rode on top of one. This study investigates these claims, which derive solely from a somewhat ambiguous reference in Cassius Dio's (60.21.2) description of the invasion. Temporal and logistical constraints, together with military and iconographic considerations, however, make it highly unlikely that the animals, even if they had been assembled on the Channel, made their way across to Britain. Overall, the study shows that Dio's testimony should be treated with extreme caution, and should be accorded only parenthetical importance in treatments of the Claudian invasion.
{"title":"Claudius, Elephants and Britain: Making Sense of Cassius Dio 60.21.2","authors":"M. Charles, M. Singleton","doi":"10.1017/S0068113X22000265","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068113X22000265","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Narratives of the Claudian invasion of Britain in a.d. 43 have regularly referred to elephants being part of Claudius’ force, with some accounts even suggesting that Claudius paraded the beasts through Colchester (Camulodunum), or even rode on top of one. This study investigates these claims, which derive solely from a somewhat ambiguous reference in Cassius Dio's (60.21.2) description of the invasion. Temporal and logistical constraints, together with military and iconographic considerations, however, make it highly unlikely that the animals, even if they had been assembled on the Channel, made their way across to Britain. Overall, the study shows that Dio's testimony should be treated with extreme caution, and should be accorded only parenthetical importance in treatments of the Claudian invasion.","PeriodicalId":44906,"journal":{"name":"Britannia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43425095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-01DOI: 10.1017/s0068113x22000435
A. Lyons
{"title":"6. EAST ANGLIA","authors":"A. Lyons","doi":"10.1017/s0068113x22000435","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0068113x22000435","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44906,"journal":{"name":"Britannia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41926777","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-01DOI: 10.1017/s0068113x22000460
J. Salvatore
the second to fourth centuries A.D., with an emphasis on the late Roman period. The buildings may have been constructed using a combination of stone and timber, with the stone elements providing the foundation for the timber elements. The function of the buildings is unclear, in part hampered by the truncated nature of the remains. It is possible that these buildings may have served a variety of agricultural functions, perhaps being used on a seasonal basis. One phase of the site is associated with small-scale iron-working. Large quantities of industrial waste were recorded from two of the buildings, one of which was associated with a probable bowl furnace. An east– west ditch that appears to be contemporary could suggest the division of the area west of the boundary ditch into smaller plots. The identified buildings could define part of a wider complex of Roman buildings extending beyond the limit of excavation. Alongside the structural remains a series of ditches were recorded. These include the L-shaped section of ditch which could reflect the remains of a small pen or enclosure. Other small ditches may represent shallow drainage gullies.113
{"title":"9.1. SOUTHERN COUNTIES (WEST)","authors":"J. Salvatore","doi":"10.1017/s0068113x22000460","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0068113x22000460","url":null,"abstract":"the second to fourth centuries A.D., with an emphasis on the late Roman period. The buildings may have been constructed using a combination of stone and timber, with the stone elements providing the foundation for the timber elements. The function of the buildings is unclear, in part hampered by the truncated nature of the remains. It is possible that these buildings may have served a variety of agricultural functions, perhaps being used on a seasonal basis. One phase of the site is associated with small-scale iron-working. Large quantities of industrial waste were recorded from two of the buildings, one of which was associated with a probable bowl furnace. An east– west ditch that appears to be contemporary could suggest the division of the area west of the boundary ditch into smaller plots. The identified buildings could define part of a wider complex of Roman buildings extending beyond the limit of excavation. Alongside the structural remains a series of ditches were recorded. These include the L-shaped section of ditch which could reflect the remains of a small pen or enclosure. Other small ditches may represent shallow drainage gullies.113","PeriodicalId":44906,"journal":{"name":"Britannia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47224883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-01DOI: 10.1017/s0068113x22000496
{"title":"BRI volume 53 Cover and Front matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/s0068113x22000496","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0068113x22000496","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44906,"journal":{"name":"Britannia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45822092","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-01DOI: 10.1017/S0068113X22000344
The Weald of Sussex was one of the major sources of iron in Britain. However, questions still remain regarding the organisation and control of such production sites in the Roman era. This thesis explores the social organisation of Roman-period iron production through the investigation, analysis and discussion of two case studies located at Chitcombe and Standen. The research identifies and interprets archaeological features, particularly deposits of technological waste, to look at the processes of iron production, the role of the sites within the wider landscape, their connectivity and level of influence. In summary, the scale of iron-production sites across the Weald was found to vary greatly. Chitcombe is identified as a large-scale industrial iron-production site most likely under military control, with evidence for high-level spatial planning with distinct areas for smelting activities and workshops. Standen, meanwhile, represents a small-scale site with evidence for a much lower intensity of smelting and no indication of control or organisation. Coupled with a programme of excavation, the application of a multi-faceted geo-prospection methodology, incorporating magnetometry, electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), induced polarisation (IP) and electromagnetic surveys, offering both horizontal and vertical images of the sites, is shown to offer an understanding of waste deposits as a whole. The strategy designed for the investigations of these sites has created a system of repeatable and comparable datasets that can be built upon with further studies.
{"title":"IV. SPOTLIGHT ON NEW RESEARCH","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/S0068113X22000344","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068113X22000344","url":null,"abstract":"The Weald of Sussex was one of the major sources of iron in Britain. However, questions still remain regarding the organisation and control of such production sites in the Roman era. This thesis explores the social organisation of Roman-period iron production through the investigation, analysis and discussion of two case studies located at Chitcombe and Standen. The research identifies and interprets archaeological features, particularly deposits of technological waste, to look at the processes of iron production, the role of the sites within the wider landscape, their connectivity and level of influence. In summary, the scale of iron-production sites across the Weald was found to vary greatly. Chitcombe is identified as a large-scale industrial iron-production site most likely under military control, with evidence for high-level spatial planning with distinct areas for smelting activities and workshops. Standen, meanwhile, represents a small-scale site with evidence for a much lower intensity of smelting and no indication of control or organisation. Coupled with a programme of excavation, the application of a multi-faceted geo-prospection methodology, incorporating magnetometry, electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), induced polarisation (IP) and electromagnetic surveys, offering both horizontal and vertical images of the sites, is shown to offer an understanding of waste deposits as a whole. The strategy designed for the investigations of these sites has created a system of repeatable and comparable datasets that can be built upon with further studies.","PeriodicalId":44906,"journal":{"name":"Britannia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43364246","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-04DOI: 10.1017/S0068113X22000204
A. Thiel
Abstract Germania Inferior and Germania Superior, along the Rhine, and neighbouring Raetia were provinces inherited by Hadrian which lacked major external threats and had the potential to become flourishing parts of the Roman Empire. Relying on his personal knowledge of the regional situation he strengthened civilian self-government by gradually reducing the role of the military. Apart from the legions, all other units were stationed in a small defined cordon at the edge of Roman territory. Together with the now well-dated building of the palisade as a continuous running barrier, Hadrian's initiatives might be seen as an imperial gift to the provincials.
{"title":"Hadrian in Germany and the Construction of the Limes Palisade in a.d. 120","authors":"A. Thiel","doi":"10.1017/S0068113X22000204","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068113X22000204","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Germania Inferior and Germania Superior, along the Rhine, and neighbouring Raetia were provinces inherited by Hadrian which lacked major external threats and had the potential to become flourishing parts of the Roman Empire. Relying on his personal knowledge of the regional situation he strengthened civilian self-government by gradually reducing the role of the military. Apart from the legions, all other units were stationed in a small defined cordon at the edge of Roman territory. Together with the now well-dated building of the palisade as a continuous running barrier, Hadrian's initiatives might be seen as an imperial gift to the provincials.","PeriodicalId":44906,"journal":{"name":"Britannia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45874939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-29DOI: 10.1017/s0068113x22000186
P. Bidwell
The following collection of seven papers marks the passing of 1900 years since Hadrian travelled through Germany and Britain, setting many things right according to the ancient historians. The emperor left Roman in A.D. 121, probably in the early spring, progressing through Gaul to the German frontier provinces, where he spent the winter. By the summer of the following year he was in Britain, where he almost certainly inspected the building of his great wall on the northern frontier. Winter found him in Tarraco, the principal city of Hispania Tarraconensis. In A.D. 123, he crossed to Africa and then travelled to the east, eventually returning to Rome in A.D. 125. More journeys were to follow, and the amount of time that Hadrian spent in the provinces was exceptional: his successor, Antoninus Pius, never left Italy after he gained power. Consolidation of the frontiers and the prosperity of the provinces were priorities for Hadrian in his administration of the empire. Wolfram Thill argues that the iconography of the Anaglypha Panels in the Roman Forum reflected concerns in the Senate about these policies and reminded the emperor not to neglect matters closer to home. Work on defining the frontier in Upper Germany with a wooden palisade began shortly before Hadrian’s visit, as Thiel explains. This barrier followed a line previously controlled by watch towers, fortlets and forts. Hadrian’s Wall in Britain, also following an existing line of control, was a much stronger fortification, reflecting the troubled state of the frontier which contrasted with the settled conditions in Germany when the palisade was built. Bidwell nevertheless proposes that the first of four stages in the development of the Hadrian’s Wall system incorporated the Devil’s Causeway, a road controlled by forts which ran for 87 km north of the Wall, along the western edge of the densely settled coastal plain of Northumberland. Thiel also refers to Hadrian’s promotions of towns and cities in Upper Germany and Raetia, part of a wider policy of urban development also discussed by Fulford and by Reddé and Mees. In the absence of the rich epigraphic record in the eastern parts of the empire, it is unclear how extensive Hadrian’s benefactions were in the western frontier provinces. Some of his policies had a less welcome effect on some local populations. The building of Hadrian’s Wall, as Bruhn and Hodgson demonstrate, soon disrupted the pattern of settlement which had flourished in north-east England during the late Iron Age and survived the early decades of conquest. Beyond the Wall there seems to have been a shift to more pastoral agriculture supporting far fewer people. To the south, there is increasing evidence for the settlement of immigrants in parts of modern County Durham and North Yorkshire, corresponding to the Britannia 53 (2022), 3–4 doi:10.1017/S0068113X22000186
{"title":"Themed Section: Hadrian's Progress through the North-Western Provinces in a.d. 121–122","authors":"P. Bidwell","doi":"10.1017/s0068113x22000186","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0068113x22000186","url":null,"abstract":"The following collection of seven papers marks the passing of 1900 years since Hadrian travelled through Germany and Britain, setting many things right according to the ancient historians. The emperor left Roman in A.D. 121, probably in the early spring, progressing through Gaul to the German frontier provinces, where he spent the winter. By the summer of the following year he was in Britain, where he almost certainly inspected the building of his great wall on the northern frontier. Winter found him in Tarraco, the principal city of Hispania Tarraconensis. In A.D. 123, he crossed to Africa and then travelled to the east, eventually returning to Rome in A.D. 125. More journeys were to follow, and the amount of time that Hadrian spent in the provinces was exceptional: his successor, Antoninus Pius, never left Italy after he gained power. Consolidation of the frontiers and the prosperity of the provinces were priorities for Hadrian in his administration of the empire. Wolfram Thill argues that the iconography of the Anaglypha Panels in the Roman Forum reflected concerns in the Senate about these policies and reminded the emperor not to neglect matters closer to home. Work on defining the frontier in Upper Germany with a wooden palisade began shortly before Hadrian’s visit, as Thiel explains. This barrier followed a line previously controlled by watch towers, fortlets and forts. Hadrian’s Wall in Britain, also following an existing line of control, was a much stronger fortification, reflecting the troubled state of the frontier which contrasted with the settled conditions in Germany when the palisade was built. Bidwell nevertheless proposes that the first of four stages in the development of the Hadrian’s Wall system incorporated the Devil’s Causeway, a road controlled by forts which ran for 87 km north of the Wall, along the western edge of the densely settled coastal plain of Northumberland. Thiel also refers to Hadrian’s promotions of towns and cities in Upper Germany and Raetia, part of a wider policy of urban development also discussed by Fulford and by Reddé and Mees. In the absence of the rich epigraphic record in the eastern parts of the empire, it is unclear how extensive Hadrian’s benefactions were in the western frontier provinces. Some of his policies had a less welcome effect on some local populations. The building of Hadrian’s Wall, as Bruhn and Hodgson demonstrate, soon disrupted the pattern of settlement which had flourished in north-east England during the late Iron Age and survived the early decades of conquest. Beyond the Wall there seems to have been a shift to more pastoral agriculture supporting far fewer people. To the south, there is increasing evidence for the settlement of immigrants in parts of modern County Durham and North Yorkshire, corresponding to the Britannia 53 (2022), 3–4 doi:10.1017/S0068113X22000186","PeriodicalId":44906,"journal":{"name":"Britannia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46703402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-28DOI: 10.1017/s0068113x22000356
R. Tomlin
1 Inscriptions on STONE (‘Monumental’) have been arranged as in the order followed by R.G. Collingwood and R.P. Wright in The Roman Inscriptions of Britain Vol. i (Oxford, 1965) and (slightly modified) by R.S.O. Tomlin, R.P. Wright and M.W.C. Hassall, in The Roman Inscriptions of Britain Vol. iii (Oxford, 2009), which are henceforth cited respectively as RIB (1–2400) and RIB III (3001–3550). Citation is by item and not page number. Inscriptions on PERSONAL BELONGINGS and the like (instrumentum domesticum) have been arranged alphabetically by site under their counties. For each site they have been ordered as in RIB, pp. xiii–xiv. The items of instrumentum domesticum published in the eight fascicules of RIB II (Gloucester and Stroud, 1990–95), edited by S.S. Frere and R.S.O. Tomlin, are cited by fascicule, by the number of their category (RIB 2401–2505) and by their sub-number within it (e.g. RIB II.2, 2415. 53). Non-literate graffiti and graffiti with fewer than three complete letters have generally been excluded. When measurements are quoted, the width precedes the height. No curse tablets from Uley have been included this year. The whole corpus will now be published by Oxford University Press in its series Oxford Studies in Ancient Documents, as R.S.O. Tomlin, The Uley Tablets: Roman Curse Tablets from the Temple of Mercury at Uley (Gloucestershire). 2 Later in the same series of excavations as the two Purbeck Marble fragments published as Britannia 46 (2015), 383, No. 1 (SF 1964) and 384, No. 2 (SF 2577), neither of which it conjoins (SF 3527). Mike Fulford made it available. 3 The first vertical stroke is no more than a ‘chamfer’ on the broken left edge, preserving half the original width; and the very slight broadening downwards of both strokes suggests they should be viewed this way up, as in FIG. 1. The two letters cannot be identified, but the first would have been an abbreviation; and together they would have resembled the middle part of T Δ T in RIB 87 (Silchester).
{"title":"III. INSCRIPTIONS","authors":"R. Tomlin","doi":"10.1017/s0068113x22000356","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0068113x22000356","url":null,"abstract":"1 Inscriptions on STONE (‘Monumental’) have been arranged as in the order followed by R.G. Collingwood and R.P. Wright in The Roman Inscriptions of Britain Vol. i (Oxford, 1965) and (slightly modified) by R.S.O. Tomlin, R.P. Wright and M.W.C. Hassall, in The Roman Inscriptions of Britain Vol. iii (Oxford, 2009), which are henceforth cited respectively as RIB (1–2400) and RIB III (3001–3550). Citation is by item and not page number. Inscriptions on PERSONAL BELONGINGS and the like (instrumentum domesticum) have been arranged alphabetically by site under their counties. For each site they have been ordered as in RIB, pp. xiii–xiv. The items of instrumentum domesticum published in the eight fascicules of RIB II (Gloucester and Stroud, 1990–95), edited by S.S. Frere and R.S.O. Tomlin, are cited by fascicule, by the number of their category (RIB 2401–2505) and by their sub-number within it (e.g. RIB II.2, 2415. 53). Non-literate graffiti and graffiti with fewer than three complete letters have generally been excluded. When measurements are quoted, the width precedes the height. No curse tablets from Uley have been included this year. The whole corpus will now be published by Oxford University Press in its series Oxford Studies in Ancient Documents, as R.S.O. Tomlin, The Uley Tablets: Roman Curse Tablets from the Temple of Mercury at Uley (Gloucestershire). 2 Later in the same series of excavations as the two Purbeck Marble fragments published as Britannia 46 (2015), 383, No. 1 (SF 1964) and 384, No. 2 (SF 2577), neither of which it conjoins (SF 3527). Mike Fulford made it available. 3 The first vertical stroke is no more than a ‘chamfer’ on the broken left edge, preserving half the original width; and the very slight broadening downwards of both strokes suggests they should be viewed this way up, as in FIG. 1. The two letters cannot be identified, but the first would have been an abbreviation; and together they would have resembled the middle part of T Δ T in RIB 87 (Silchester).","PeriodicalId":44906,"journal":{"name":"Britannia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47033398","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：