next »

Archaeology News
Articles
Calendar
Downloads
Forum
Gallery
In the Media
Links
Member Map
Our News Feeds
Submit Article
Video Channel

Treasure hunting with direct-arrival transmission imaging	1703
Stonehenge	1102
Archaeology assessor's kit	1071
The Industrial Role of Copper at Jamestown	1065
Projectile Points from Jamestown	1042
Magnetism - The First Records	1042
Origins of Oysters at James Fort	1041
Arlington Report	988

[Bart]

Principal sites in Roman Britain

Roman Britain refers to those parts of the island of Great Britain controlled by the Roman Empire between AD 43 and 410. The Romans referred to their province as Britannia. Prior to the Roman invasion, Iron Age Britain already had cultural and economic links with Continental Europe, but the invaders introduced new developments in agriculture, urbanization, industry and architecture, leaving a legacy that is still apparent today.

Historical records beyond the initial invasion are sparse, although many Roman historians mention the province in passing. Most of the knowledge of the period stems from archaeological investigations and especially epigraphic evidence.

By AD 43, the time of the main Roman invasion of Britain, Britain had already frequently been the target of invasions, planned and actual, by forces of the Roman Republic and Roman Empire. In common with other regions on the edge of the empire, Britain had enjoyed diplomatic and trading links with the Romans in the century since Julius Caesar's expeditions in 55 and 54 BC, and Roman economic and cultural influence was a significant part of the British late pre-Roman Iron Age, especially in the south.

Between 55 BC and the 40s AD, the status quo of tribute, hostages, and client states without direct military occupation, begun by Caesar's invasions of Britain, largely remained intact. Augustus prepared invasions in 34 BC, 27 BC and 25 BC. The first and third were called off due to revolts elsewhere in the empire, the second because the Britons seemed ready to come to terms. According to Augustus's Res Gestae, two British kings, Dumnovellaunus and Tincomarus, fled to Rome as suppliants during his reign, and Strabo's Geography, written during this period, says that Britain paid more in customs and duties than could be raised by taxation if the island were conquered.

By the 40s AD, however, the political situation within Britain was apparently in foment. The Catuvellauni had displaced the Trinovantes as the most powerful kingdom in south-eastern Britain, taking over the former Trinovantian capital of Camulodunum (Colchester), and were pressing their neighbours the Atrebates, ruled by the descendants of Julius Caesar's former ally Commius.

Caligula planned a campaign against the British in 40, but its execution was bizarre: according to Suetonius, he drew up his troops in battle formation facing the English Channel and ordered them to attack the standing water. Afterwards, he had the troops gather sea shells, referring to them as "plunder from the ocean, due to the Capitol and the Palace". Modern historians are unsure if that was meant to be an ironic punishment for the soldiers' mutiny or due to Caligula's derangement. Certainly this invasion attempt readied the troops and facilities that would make Claudius' invasion possible 3 years later (e.g. a lighthouse was built by Caligula at Boulogne-sur-Mer, the model for the one built soon after 43 at Dubris).

Three years later, in 43, possibly by re-collecting Caligula's troops, Claudius mounted an invasion-force to re-instate Verica, an exiled king of the Atrebates.[6] Aulus Plautius, a distinguished senator, was given overall charge of four legions, totalling about 20,000 men, plus about the same number of auxiliaries. The legions were:

    * Legio II Augusta
    * Legio IX Hispana
    * Legio XIV Gemina
    * Legio XX Valeria Victrix

The II Augusta is known to have been commanded by the future emperor Vespasian. Three other men of appropriate rank to command legions are known from the sources to have been involved in the invasion. Gnaeus Hosidius Geta, who probably led the IX Hispana, and Vespasian's brother Titus Flavius Sabinus II are mentioned by Dio Cassius (Dio says that Sabinus was Vespasian's lieutenant, but as Sabinus was the older brother and preceded Vespasian into public life, he could hardly have been a military tribune). Gnaeus Sentius Saturninus is mentioned by Eutropius, although as a former consul he may have been too senior, and perhaps accompanied Claudius later.


'Priceless' Roman find in farmer's field

Gary Skentelbery

A RARE solid silver Roman bracelet unearthed in a farmer's field has been declared treasure trove.

The snake-shaped ornament could be the only one of its kind in the world, making it priceless, it was revealed at a Stockport coroner's hearing.



     Archaeologist James Balme didn't even need his metal detector to make the discovery, gleaming in the soil in the field at Lymm near Warrington.  The ancient jewellery will now be valued by a panel of experts at the British Museum in London.

     Warrington Museum has already expressed an interest in displaying the item and James will consider selling it - if the price is right.

     He will share the proceeds with farmer Tony Cookson, who owns the land on which James made his important find. James, who says it is impossible to put a value on the find, has previously discovered an unknown Roman fort and numerous prehistoric sites in the area, where he has recovered large quantities of prehistoric flint tools and weapons.

     All his finds have been recorded by the portable antiquities scheme, the official body working in conjunction with the British Museum.

     His discovery has provided new, exciting information about the wealth and social standing of the Roman citizens who lived and farmed in the area almost 2,000 years ago.

Zoomorphic bracelet

     James said: "This is a very rare Roman solid silver snake bracelet, known as a zoomorphic bracelet, dating from the first to the second centuries. But what is really amazing is that it has been reworked in ancient times, possibly by the Saxons, who straightened the bracelet and pierced holes in it to use as a form of decoration or ornamentation.

     "The actual bracelet is unique in its design and the attention to detail, especially the creature's head, is stunning.

     "The head represents either a snake or possibly a sea serpent. There is little doubt that the bracelet would have been worn by a wealthy Roman citizen who lived in the area and could possibly be someone who was regarded as being of importance in the region."

     Stockport coroner John Pollard recommended that the British Museum, where the find is in safekeeping, should now contact Warrington Museum after it has been valued with a view to acquisition.



     Coroner's hearings are carried out on rare finds to determine if they are genuine treasure trove. James said: "This could indicate that I am very close to what was once the site of an opulent Roman villa."

     His discoveries are set to be featured on Channel 4's Time Team in March.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/233/233048_priceless_roman_find_in_farmers_field.html

[Solomon]

Nice story, Bart, though it is in error in a number of regards.

Warrington Museum has already expressed an interest in displaying the item and James will consider selling it - if the price is right.

If the artefact is 90% or more silver, as it appears to be, then it is 'treasure' and belongs to the government. James cannot sell that which is not his and has been reported to the local Finds officer.

Even the reported comments of the coroner do not seem likely, as they are factually in error.

It looks to have no patina. If this is because it was cleaned by James, then the value will be very considerably less.

Without a patina, it could have been made the day of the photograph.

I doubt that this is the only example of Roman jewellery modified later.

All the references to Romans in this story are misleading.

The idea that only a Roman citizen (and my implication, not a Romano-Briton) could afford a small and rather simple piece like this is plain silly. Look at Fisbourne Palace, built for Tiberius Claudius Cogidubnus, to see what a Briton could own.

Solomon

[Bart]

Yes , I saw a few of them, " if the price is right " - this guy is in for a rude awakening. I'm thinking his hat size grew to about size 32 when he made the find. He'll return to earth some day, the air up there is too thin to breath for very long. I hope no one is standing nearby, he's going to hit pretty hard, and it could be messy. 

- Bart

[Solomon]

Very nicely put, Bart 

I can return to this piece when I need a source of laughter.

"This could indicate that I am very close to what was once the site of an opulent Roman villa."

Imagine a trinket indicating great wealth, or ever heard of a poor Roman villa?

Yours in mirth,
Solomon

[Sovereign]

Bickmarsh, HEREFORD AND WORCESTER, England: Roman coin: nummus of Valens (Obverse and reverse).

Object Type:    Coin
Roman coin: nummus of Valens.
Findspot: OS Grid ref: SP1050 [Limited], 10k Map: SP15SW, 25k Map: SP4125, Parish: BICKMARSH, County: HEREFORD AND WORCESTER
Dates: ROMAN (Certain), 364 AD - 378 AD

Further information
Method of Manufacture:    Struck or hammered    
Quantity:    1   
Material:   Copper alloy         
Diameter:    17.77 mm      
Completeness:    Incomplete   
Weight:   2 grams
Discovery Information
Found by:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Method of Discovery:    Metal detector   

Additional Information
Primary Identifier:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Secondary Identifier:   not defined
Recorded by:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Other Reference:   Finders Referecne: 9.101.269

Coin-specific information
Ruler:   Valens (Roman: 364-378 )
Denomination:   nummus (AE 1 - AE 4)
Obverse Description:   Bust facing right, wearing a pearl diadem and is draped and cuirassed.
Obverse Inscription:   DN VALEN - S P F [AVG]
Reverse Description:   Emperor draped with right hand dragging a captive and the left holding a labarum.
Reverse Inscription:   GLORIA RO - MAN[ORVM] 'The glory of the Romans'
Reverse Mintmark:   Illegible.
Degree of wear:   Worn: fine
Die Axis Measurement:   11
Die Axis Certainty:   Certain

[Sovereign]

Bickmarsh, HEREFORD AND WORCESTER, England: Roman coin: nummus of Gratian (Obverse and reverse).

Object Type:    Coin
Roman coin: nummus of Gratian.
Findspot: OS Grid ref: SP1050 [Limited], 10k Map: SP15SW, 25k Map: SP4125, Parish: BICKMARSH, County: HEREFORD AND WORCESTER
Dates: ROMAN (Certain), 367 AD - 375 AD

Further information
Method of Manufacture:    Struck or hammered     
Quantity:    1   
Material:   Copper alloy          
Diameter:    18.29 mm      
Completeness:    Complete   
Weight:   2.1 grams   

Discovery Information
Found by:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Method of Discovery:    Metal detector   

Additional Information
Primary Identifier:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Secondary Identifier:   not defined
Recorded by:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Other Reference:   Finders Reference: 9.101.302

Coin-specific information
Ruler:   Gratian (Roman: 367-383 )
Denomination:   nummus (AE 1 - AE 4)
Mint Name:   Siscia (Sisak, Croatia) (Roman)
Type:   LRBC Nos. 1302 to 1488
Obverse Description:   Bust right, wearing a diadem, and is draped and cuirassed.
Obverse Inscription:   DN [GRA]TIANVS P F AVG
Reverse Description:   Emperor draped with right hand dragging a captive and the left holding a labarum.
Reverse Inscription:   GLORIA [ROMANORVM]
Reverse Mintmark:   F / [ ]/[ ] // ASIS[ ]

References: Carson, R A G; Hill, P V and Kent, J P C Late Roman Bronze Coinage Spink [ ref: Nos. 1302 to 1488]

[Bart]

I am curious, what happens to all those Roman sites once the dig is finished? And what in particular will happen here if this turns out to be something unusual or spectacular? Will the conservation and preservation efforts of the "ancient woods" be chucked out the window? Something is just bothersome to me about this one. Should they really even be digging here?

- Bart


REMAINS OF LARGE ROMAN BUILDING UNEARTHED IN CAMBS

By Richard Moss
24/01/2007

     An historic woodland just outside Peterborough could hold the key to finding out more about the area?s Roman past as archaeologists prepare to lift the lid on 2,000 years of history.

     Funding has been made available for a study of the 208-hectare woodland of Bedford Purlieus in Cambridgeshire, which archaeologists believe contains the remarkably intact and undisturbed remains of a large but hitherto unknown Roman structure.

     ?There was some indication of Roman building in the area,? explained Paul Malcolm, Forester with the Forestry Commission. ?The site is marked on the OS map but we didn?t know this was going to turn out to be the size that it has. I think the extent of it was a surprise.?

     Measuring an impressive 80 metres by 30 metres with several rooms arranged in two ranges by the side of the building, archaeologists believe the hidden structure could possibly be the remains of a villa, or a mansio, which is a kind of Roman way station.

     Q: What lies beneath? A: A very large Roman building. Picture ? Northamptonshire County Council/ Forestry Commission     

     The ancient wood also contains two other sizeable structures, which could also date to the Roman period.

     The finds came to light after the Forestry Commission conducted walk-through surveys of the land under the supervision of archaeologist David Hall. The larger building was found later once they started clearing the scrub.

     A follow up survey in February 2005 turned up Roman mosaic tiles, tegulae roof tiles and shards of pottery comprising a grey Nene Valley colour body - all dated to the Roman period.

     ?It could be a villa ? but it?s almost too big for that,? said Mr Malcolm. ?The outline of the building is very large and within it are several component cell buildings."

     All around the site are Anglo Saxon iron workings and one theory has it that the Romans may have took on the iron working and built a structure to oversee operations as the site is also situated next to two Roman roads.



     A plan of the remains has been mapped out by Northamptonshire Archaeology. Picture ? Northamptonshire County Council/ Forestry Commission

     Peterborough City Council historic environment officer, Ben Robinson said: ?It could be incredibly important because being in woodland it has been protected from the ravages of ploughing, which is what has happened to most other villas in the area.?

     ?The tree roots may have caused damage but we have what appear to be some reasonably high walls. It depends on the depth of woodland soil, but if we?re lucky we?ll have several intact pieces of walling and interior.?

     The problem for archaeologists will be to not disturb the delicate eco-system that the wood contains. Declared a National Nature Reserve by English Nature in 2000, Bedford Purlieus is home to more plant and insect species than most other woods in the UK.

     ?We?ll be treading very carefully,? added Mr Robinson. ?There are some very important species in the woodland and although any archaeology involves moving soil, we simply can?t go in and start whipping soil out of there like you might do with a dig on open pasture land.?

     Archaeologists might attempt a limited geophysical survey, but this could be very difficult because of the sheer depth of roots and scrub so they are hoping that, with guidance from English Nature and the Forestry Commission, they will be able to undertake some carefully controlled test pitting.

     ?We?re lucky in that the Forestry Commission are very supportive,? added Mr Robinson. ?They take a very holistic approach towards their holdings.?

     The Forestry Commission has managed Bedford Purlieus since 1933 and the fact that it has been continuously wooded means the archaeology it contains has survived the ravages of 2,000 years.

     Mr Robinson said the area boasts a surprisingly varied array of archaeological remains from a variety of time periods, with evidence of later stone structures, medieval boundaries and ditches. ?There are even WWII remains including shelters and hut bases," he explained.

     ?If a massive Roman building could lay undetected it makes one wonder what else there could be in there that hasn?t been spotted. The amazing thing about the site is that you could be standing five metres away and you wouldn?t know it was there.?

     Work on the site is due to begin during February or March 2007. ?The timing of the dig will be down to agreeing a window with the Forestry Commission, but within a week or two on site we should have a much better idea of what we?re looking at,? said Mr Robinson.

http://www.24hourmuseum.org.uk/nwh_gfx_en/ART43116.html

[Solomon]

Some Roman sites are so important - such as Fishbourne palace, above - that they are on permanent display. I remember the excavation of this very well. Everyone was staggered to find that it belonged to a British king.

London has preserved much of its Roman architecture.


Statue of Trajan in front of a section of the Roman wall, Tower Hill

A family friend discovered this:

The Museum of London's preserved Roman amphitheatre at the Guildhall yard

What happens to Roman architecture will depend on what and where. Something important will tend to be displayed, even if, as in the City of London, this is architecturally difficult and expensive. Something less important - say the foundations of a villa in the countryside - may be covered with a protective layer.

I walked through the wood decades ago and noted the Roman architecture and archaeology. I am surprised that it was left until now, especially as it is open to vandalism.

I do not know how to balance ecology versus archaeology. Northampton was the working capital of England and is surrounded by royal forests for their hunting. Much has been cleared for development. In the 1960s, London slums were cleared (plus bomb damage) and people moved to the area into new towns (e.g. Milton Keynes).

Yes, both the woods and archaeology have value. The archaeologists will probably only excavate part and have to exercise great care.

This is an example of what I mentioned in my first thread in this forum: archaeology is destructive. When treasure hunters, or metal detectorists are attacked, this should be remembered. There is no perfect solution.

Solomon

[Bart]

Ancient homes found in road dig


The finds are thought to link to a larger settlement

Ancient settlements from Roman times and the Iron Age have been found by the side of a major road development. Archaeologists were called in to survey the A66 in North Yorkshire to ensure nothing valuable would be destroyed.

Their work has now uncovered the remains of a roundhouse, square buildings, ditches and pits by the Melsonby crossroads, by Scotch Corner.

The finds are thought to link to a larger settlement which would have been on the other side of the road.

The Highways Agency wants to upgrade the section of road, between Scotch Corner and Carkin Moor, from a single to dual carriageway.

The project is expected to cost ?22m and should be finished by the end of the year.

Roman Route

The present A66 follows an original Roman route, which dates back to the first century AD.

Experts using metal detectors in the nearby Black Plantation, in Co Durham, have also found a silver christening spoon dating back to the 17th or 18th century.

They said a summary of the findings would be released to the public when the investigations were complete. Anything of importance would be saved and could be handed to a local museum.

Highways Agency project manager Lynne Biddles said: "It's fantastic that we've been able to uncover all these settlements and artefacts ahead of these schemes.

"We can now piece together the history of this area and preserve it for the wider community to enjoy." 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/north_yorkshire/6316349.stm

[Solomon]

Good that the metal detectorists are working on this.

People built either side of Roman roads just as they do today. Most were shops and workshops, selling to travellers. This would be the Romano-Brits using their enterprise to make money from the Romans.

I have always sought out Roman roads for driving in Europe. In much of Europe, you have to pay on the motorways. On the Roman roads, it is free, they are straight, raised above the landscape so afford a good view, lead from town to town, and are often avenues, which is pretty.

For some reason, others prefer motorways, which suits me fine. I find the Roman roads much faster, because as they are empty, you can drive as fast as you like 

Solomon

[Sovereign]

There is a chain of 'Saxon Shore' forts along the south-east coast of England. Here, I will argue that they are misnamed and instead, built by Carausius to defend against an expected Roman invasion.

Carausius

Marcus Aurelius Mausaeus Carausius (d. 293) was a military commander of the Roman Empire in the 3rd century. He was a Menapian, born in the western part of Batavia, who usurped power in 286, declaring himself emperor of Britain and his homeland northern Gaul. He did this only 13 years after the Gallic Empire of Batavian Postumus was ended in 273. He held power for seven years, before being assassinated by his finance minister Allectus.


Carausius coin from Londinium mint. On the reverse, the lion, symbol of Legio IIII Flavia Felix

History

Carausius was a man of humble origin, a Menapian from Germania Inferior who distinguished himself during Maximian's campaign against the Bagaudae rebels in northern Gaul in 286. This success, and his former occupation as a pilot, led to his appointment to command the Classis Britannica, a fleet based in the English Channel, with the responsibility of eliminating Frankish and Saxon pirates who had been raiding the coasts of Armorica and Belgia. However, he was suspected of keeping captured treasure for himself, and even of allowing the pirates to carry out raids and enrich themselves before taking action against them, and Maximian ordered his execution. In late 286 or early 287 Carausius learned of this sentence and responded by declaring himself Emperor of Britain and northern Gaul.[1] His forces comprised not only his fleet, augmented by new ships he had built, and the three legions stationed in Britain, but a legion he had seized in Gaul, a number of foreign auxiliary units, a levy of Gaulish merchant ships, and barbarian mercenaries attracted by the prospect of booty.[2]

Sheppard Frere wonders how Carausius was able to win support from the army when his command had been sea-based, and speculates that he had perhaps been involved in an unrecorded victory in Britain, connected with Diocletian's assumption of the title Britannicus Maximus in 285, and signs of destruction in Romano-British towns at this time.[3] However, the campaign against the Bagaudae was evidently land-based, and may be responsible for Carausius's popularity with the army. Equally, if the accusations of larceny are true, he could perhaps afford to buy their loyalty.

Maximian prepared an invasion of Britain in 288 or 289 to oust him,[4] but it failed. A panegyric delivered to Constantius Chlorus attributes this failure to bad weather, but notes that Carausius claimed a military victory.[5] Eutropius says that hostilities were in vain thanks to Carausius's military skill, and peace was agreed.[6] Carausius began to entertain visions of legitimacy and official recognition. He minted his own coins and brought their value in to line with Roman issues as well as acknowledging and honouring Maximian and then Diocletian. Coinage is the main source of information about the rogue emperor; his issues were initially crude but soon became more elaborate and were issued from mints in Londinium, Rotomagnus and a third site, possibly Colonia Claudia Victricensis.

Carausius appears to have appealed to native British dissatisfaction with Roman rule: he issued coins with legends such as Restitutor Britanniae (Restorer of Britain) and Genius Britanniae (Spirit of Britain). However, he also used coins for far more sophisticated propaganda. He issed the first proper silver coins that had appeared in the Roman Empire for generations, knowing that good quality bullion coinage would enhance his legitimacy and make him look more successful than Diocletian and Maximian. Some of these silver coins bear the legend Expectate veni, 'Come long-awaited one', recognised to allude to a line in the Aeneid by the Augustan poet Virgil, written more than 300 years previously. So he was trying to suggest that not only was he, Carausius, a kind of messianic new ruler, but was also showing his association with Roman culture rather than any kind of remote provincial culture.

Some of the silver coins bear the legend RSR in the exergue (an area on a coin below the legend). This was considered to be a mystery for a long time. Two Carausian medallions, now in the British Museum have also been found. One has RSR in the exergue, the other has INPCDA. Since 1998 these letters have been recognised as representing the sixth and seventh lines of the Fourth Eclogue of Virgil, which reads Redeunt Saturnia Regna, Iam Nova Progenies Caelo Demittitur Alto, meaning 'The Golden Ages are back, now a new generation is let down from Heaven above'. This poem was as famous in the Roman world as Shakespeare's works are today so there is no question that anyone who was literate and educated would have known what the initials represent (it was commonplace in antiquity to reduce slogans and phrases to abbreviations).

No other Roman emperor in history ever made such an explicit reference to famous Roman literature. It is quite extraordinary that in a remote province like Britain a rebel emperor should utilise such a method to appeal to his public. He was claiming to represent a revival of traditional Roman virtues and the great traditions of the Empire as established by Augustus back in the last few decades of the first century BC, not in Rome but in Britain.

A milestone from Carlisle with his name on it suggests that the whole of Roman Britain was in Carausius' grasp.[7]

This situation continued until 293, when Constantius Chlorus, now the western Caesar, marched into Gaul and reclaimed it for the empire. He isolated Carausius by besieging the port of Bononia, and invading Batavia in the Rhine delta, securing his rear against Carausius's Frankish allies. He could not yet mount an invasion of Britain until a suitable fleet could be built.[8] Nevertheless, Carausius's grip on power was fatally undermined. Allectus, whom he had put in charge of his treasury, assassinated him and assumed power himself.[9] His reign would last only three years, after which he was defeated and killed by Constantius's subordinate Asclepiodotus.[10]

Legend

In Geoffrey of Monmouth's legendary History of the Kings of Britain (1136) Carausius is a Briton of humble birth, who by his courage persuades the Roman Senate to give him command of a fleet to defend Britain from barbarian attack. Once given the fleet, however, he sails around Britain stirring up unrest, and raises an army against Bassanius, king of Britain. Carausius defeats Bassanius by persuading his Pictish allies to desert him in exchange for grants of land in Scotland, and sets himself up as king. Hearing of Carausius's treachery, the Romans send Allectus to Britain with three legions. Allectus defeats and kills Carausius and sets himself up as king in his place.[11]

References

   1. C. E. V. Nixon & Barbara Saylor Rodgers (ed & trans), In Praise of Later Roman Emperors: The Panegyrici Latini, University of California Press, 1994, 8:6; Aurelius Victor, Book of Caesars 39:20-21; Eutropius, Abridgement of Roman History 21; Orosius, Seven Books of History Against the Pagans 7:25.2-4
   2. Panegyrici Latini 8:12
   3. Sheppard Frere, Britannia: a History of Roman Britain, third edition, Pimlico, 1987, pp. 326-327
   4. Panegyrici Latini 10:12.1
   5. Panegyrici Latini 8:12.2
   6. Eutropius, Abridgement of Roman History 22
   7. Frere, Britannia, p. 327-328
   8. Panegyrici Latini 6:5, 8.6-8
   9. Panegyrici Latini 8:12; Aurelius Victor, Book of Caesars 39.40; Eutropius, Abridgement of Roman History 22; Orosius, Seven Books of History Against the Pagans 7:25.6
  10. Eutropius, Abridgement of Roman History 9.22; Aurelius Victor, Book of Caesars 39.42
  11. Geoffrey of Monmouth, Historia Regum Britanniae 5.3-4



Broughton, HAMPSHIRE, England: Roman coin: Radiate of Allectus

Object Type:    Coin
A late 3rd-century copper-alloy Roman radiate of Allectus (293-296 AD), 'PROVIDENTIA AVG', London mint (cf. R.I.C. 36)
Findspot: Broughton CP
Dates: ROMAN (Certain), 293 AD - 296 AD

Further information
Method of Manufacture:    Struck or hammered      Length:    22.5 mm      Quantity:    1   
Material:   Copper alloy   Width:    21.2 mm      Wear:       
   Decoration:      Thickness:    1.8 mm      Preservation:       
Surface Treatment:          Diameter:    not defined      Completeness:    Complete   
Weight:   3.7 grams      Evidence of reuse:   

Discovery Information
Found by:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED, 09.07.2006
Method of Discovery:    Metal detector   

Additional Information
Primary Identifier:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Secondary Identifier:   not defined
Recorded by:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Other Reference:   E2094

Coin-specific information
Ruler:   Allectus (Roman: 293-296 )
Ruler Qualifier:   Certain
Denomination:   Radiate (antoninianus)
Denomination Qualifier:   Certain
Mint Name:   London (Londinium) (Roman)
Mint Qualifier:   Certain
Type:   R.I.C. 36 variant (possibly)
Obverse Description:   Bearded bust radiate and cuirassed facing right
Obverse Inscription:   IMP C ALLECTVS P F AVG
Reverse Description:   Providence standing left holding globe in right hand and ?transverse sceptre in left
Reverse Inscription:   PRO[VID]ENTIA AVG
Reverse Mintmark:   S/A//MSL
Degree of wear:   Slightly worn: very fine
Die Axis Measurement:   7 o'clock
Die Axis Certainty:   Certain

References: Mattingly, H and Sydenham, E A Roman Imperial Coinage 1936 Spink [pages: 561 vol: V.ii ref: 36]


Allectus on a coin, with a galley on the reverse.

Allectus
Allectus (d. 296) was a Roman usurper-emperor in Britain and northern Gaul from 293 to 296.

History
Allectus was treasurer to Carausius, a Menapian officer in the Roman navy who had seized power in Britain and northern Gaul in 286. In 293 Carausius was isolated when the western Caesar, Constantius Chlorus, retook some of his his Gallic territories, particularly the crucial port of Bononia (modern Boulogne), and defeated his Frankish allies in Batavia. Allectus assassinated him and assumed command himself.

His reign has left little record, although his coin issues display a similar distribution to those of Carausius. They are found in north western Gaul, indicating that the recapture of Bononia did not spell the end of the rebel empire on that side of the English Channel.[1]

Constantius launched an invasion to depose him in September 296. His forces sailed in several divisions. Constantius led one division from Bononia, but seems to have been delayed by bad weather. Another division, under the praetorian prefect Asclepiodotus, took advantage of fog to avoid Allectus's ships stationed at the Isle of Wight, and landed near Southampton Water, where they burnt their ships. Allectus's forces were forced to retreat from the coast, but were cut off by another of Constantius's divisions and defeated. Allectus himself was killed in the battle, having removed all insignia in the hope that his body would not be identified. Archaeology suggests that Calleva Atrebatum (Silchester) was the site of his defeat.[2] A group of Roman troops, who had been separated from the main body by the fog during the channel crossing, caught up with the remnants of Allectus's men, mostly Franks, at Londinium (London), and massacred them. Constantius himself, it seems, did not reach Britain until it was all over, and his panegyrist claims he was welcomed by the Britons as a liberator.[3]

Legend
Geoffrey of Monmouth included Allectus in his legendary History of the Kings of Britain (ca. 1136). Here, Allectus is an officer sent with three legions by the Romans to depose Carausius, a native British king. He does so, but his rule proves oppressive, and he is in turn deposed by Asclepiodotus, here the duke of Cornwall. The last of Allectus's troops are beseieged in London, and surrender on the condition they are granted safe passage out of Britain. Asclepiodotus agrees, but the surendering soldiers are massacred, and their heads thrown into the river Galobroc, by his allies the Venedoti.[4]

References
   1. ^ Sheppard Frere, Britannia: A History of Roman Britain, third edition, 1987, p. 330
   2. ^ Frere, Britannia p. 331
   3. ^ Panegyrici Latini 8:12-19; Aurelius Victor, Book of Caesars 39; Eutropius, Abridgement of Roman History 21-22; Orosius, Seven Books of History Against the Pagans 7:25
   4. ^ Geoffrey of Monmouth, Historia Regum Britanniae 5.4

[Sovereign]

Brickmason, HEREFORD AND WORCESTER, England: Roman: nummus of Valens (Obverse and reverse).

Object Type:    Coin
Roman: nummus of Valens.
Findspot: OS Grid ref: SP1050 [Limited], 10k Map: SP15SW, 25k Map: SP4125, Parish: BICKMARSH, County: HEREFORD AND WORCESTER


Dates: ROMAN (Certain), 364 AD - 378 AD
Ascribed Culture:    Roman: 4th century   

Further information
Method of Manufacture:    Struck or hammered      Length:    not defined      Quantity:    1   
Material:   Copper alloy   Width:    not defined      Wear:       
   Decoration:      Thickness:    not defined      Preservation:       
Surface Treatment:          Diameter:    18.88 mm      Completeness:    Complete   
Weight:   2.5 grams      Evidence of reuse:   

Discovery Information
Found by:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Method of Discovery:    Metal detector   

Additional Information
Primary Identifier:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Secondary Identifier:   not defined
Recorded by:   UNKNOWN OR ACCESS RESTRICTED
Other Reference:   Finders Ref. 9.101.250

Coin-specific information
Ruler:   Valens (Roman: 364-378 )
Denomination:   nummus (AE 1 - AE 4)
Obverse Description:   Bust facing right, wearing a diadem, and is draped and cuirassed.
Obverse Inscription:   [DN] VALEN - S PF AVG
Reverse Description:   Victory advancing right holding a wreath.
Reverse Inscription:   SECVRITAS - [REIPVBL]ICAE 'The security of the State'
Reverse Mintmark:   Illegible.
Degree of wear:   Slightly worn: very fine
Die Axis Measurement:   6 o'clock
Die Axis Certainty:   Certain

[Sovereign]

See also: England: Roman: nummus of Valens

[Sovereign]

Valens
Flavius Iulius Valens (Latin: IMPERATOR CAESAR FLAVIVS IVLIVS VALENS AVGVSTVS; 328 ? 9 August 378) was Roman Emperor (364 - 378), after he was given the Eastern part of the empire by his brother Valentinian I. Valens, sometimes known as the Last True Roman, was defeated and killed in the Battle of Adrianople, which marked the beginning of the decline of the Roman Empire.

Appointment to emperor
Valens and his brother Flavius Valentinianus (Valentinian) were both born 48 miles east of Sirmium, in the town of Cibalae in 328 and 321, respectively. They had grown up on estates purchased by their father, Gratian the Elder, in Africa and Britain. While Valentinian had enjoyed a successful military career prior to his appointment as emperor, Valens apparently had not. He had spent much of his youth on the family's estate and only joined the army in the 360s, participating with his brother to the Persian campaign of Emperor Julian.

In February 364, reigning Emperor Jovian, while hastening to Constantinople to secure his claim to the throne, was asphyxiated during a stop at Dadastana, 100 miles east of Ancyra. Among Jovian's agents was Valentinian, a tribunus scutariorum. He was proclaimed Augustus on 26 February, 364. Valentinian felt that he needed help to govern the large and troublesome empire, and, on 28 March of the same year, appointed his brother Valens as co-emperor in the palace of Hebdomon.

Valens obtained the eastern half of the Balkan peninsula, Greece, Egypt, Syria and Asia Minor as far east as Persia. Valens was back in his capital of Constantinople by December 364.

Revolt of Procopius
Valens inherited the eastern portion of an empire that had recently retreated from most of its holdings in Mesopotamia and Armenia because of a treaty that his predecessor Jovian had made with Shapur II of the Sassanid Empire. Valens's first priority after the winter of 365 was to move east in hopes of shoring up the situation. By the autumn of 365 he had reached Cappadocian Caesarea when he learned that a usurper had proclaimed himself in Constantinople. When he died, Julian had left behind one surviving relative, a maternal cousin named Procopius. Procopius had been charged with overseeing a northern division of Julian's army during the Persian expedition and had not been present with the imperial elections when Julian's successor was named. Though Jovian made accommodations to appease this potential claimant, Procopius fell increasingly under suspicion in the first year of Valens' reign.

After narrowly escaping arrest, he went into hiding and reemerged at Constantinople where he was able to convince two military units passing through the capital to proclaim him emperor on 28 September 365. Though his early reception in the city seems to have been lukewarm, Procopius won favor quickly by using propaganda to his advantage: he sealed off the city to outside reports and began spreading rumors that Valentinian had died; he began minting coinage flaunting his connections to the Constantinian dynasty; and he further exploited dynastic claims by using the widow and daughter of Constantius II to act as showpieces for his regime. This program met with some success, particularly among soldiers loyal to the Constantinians and eastern intellectuals who had already begun to feel persecuted by the Valentinians.

Valens, meanwhile, faltered. When news arrived that Procopius had revolted, Valens considered abdication and perhaps even suicide. Even after he steadied his resolve to fight, Valens's efforts to forestall Procopius were hampered by the fact that most of his troops had already crossed the Cilician gates into Syria when he learned of the revolt. Even so, Valens sent two legions to march on Procopius, who easily persuaded them to desert to him. Later that year, Valens himself was nearly captured in a scramble near Chalcedon. Troubles were exacerbated by the refusal of Valentinian to do any more than protect his own territory from encroachment. The failure of imperial resistance in 365 allowed Procopius to gain control of the dioceses of Thracia and Asiana by year's end.

Only in the spring of 366 had Valens assembled enough troops to deal with Procopius effectively. Marching out from Ancyra through Pessinus, Valens proceeded into Phrygia where he defeated Procopius's general Gomoarius at the Battle of Thyatira. He then met Procopius himself at Nacoleia and convinced his troops to desert him. Procopius was executed on 27 May and his head sent to Valentinian in Trier for inspection.

War against the Goths
The Gothic people in the northern region had supported Procopius in his revolt against Valens, and Valens had learned the Goths were planning an uprising of their own. These Goths, more specifically the Tervingi, were at the time under the leadership of Athanaric and had apparently remained peaceful since their defeat under Constantine in 332. In the spring of 367, with the support of his nephew Gratian, the Western Roman Emperor, Valens crossed the Danube and marched on Athanaric's Goths. These fled into the Carpathian Mountains, and eluded Valens' advance, forcing him to return later that summer. The following spring, a Danube flood prevented Valens from crossing; instead the emperor occupied his troops with the construction of fortifications. In 369, Valens crossed again, from Noviodunum, and attacked the north-easterly Gothic tribe of Greuthungi before facing Athanaric's Tervingi and defeating them. Athanaric pled for treaty terms and Valens gladly obliged. The treaty seems to have largely cut off relations between Goths and Romans, including free trade and the exchange of troops for tribute. Valens would feel this loss of military manpower in the following years.

Conflict with the Sassanids
Among Valens' reasons for contracting a hasty and not entirely favorable peace in 369 was the deteriorating state of affairs in the East. Jovian had surrendered Rome's much disputed claim to control over Armenia in 363, and Shapur II was eager to make good on this new opportunity. The Sassanid ruler began enticing Armenian lords over to his camp and eventually forced the defection of the Arsacid Armenian king, Arsakes II, whom he quickly arrested and incarcerated. Shapur then sent an invasion force to seize Caucasian Iberia and a second to besiege Arsaces' son, Pap, in the fortress of Artogerassa, probably in 367. By the following spring, Pap had engineered his escape from the fortress and flight to Valens, whom he seems to have met at Marcianople while campaigning against the Goths.

Already in the summer following his Gothic settlement, Valens sent his general Arinthaeus to re-impose Pap on the Armenian throne. This provoked Shapur himself to invade and lay waste to Armenia. Pap, however, once again escaped and was restored a second time under escort of a much larger force in 370. The following spring, larger forces were sent under Terentius to regain Iberia and to garrison Armenia near Mount Npat. When Shapur counterattacked into Armenia in 371, his forces were bested by Valens' generals Traianus and Vadomarius at Bagavan. Valens had overstepped the 363 treaty and then successfully defended his transgression. A truce settled after the 371 victory held as a quasi-peace for the next five years while Shapur was forced to deal with a Kushan invasion on his eastern frontier.

Meanwhile, troubles broke out with the boy-king Pap, who began acting in high-handed fashion, even executing the Armenian bishop Narses and demanding control of a number of Roman cities, including Edessa. Pressed by his generals and fearing that Pap would defect to the Persians, Valens made an unsuccessful attempt to capture the prince and later had him executed inside Armenia. In his stead, Valens imposed another Arsacid, Varazdat, who ruled under the regency of the sparapet Musel Mamikonean, a friend of Rome.

In 375, Valens' older brother Valentinian suffered a burst blood vessel in his skull, which resulted in his death on 17 November, 375. Valentinian's two sons and Valens' nephews, Gratian and Valentinian II, were evelated to Augusti by the imperial troops in Pannonia upon his death.

None of this sat well with the Persians, who began agitating again for compliance with the 363 treaty. As the eastern frontier heated up in 375, Valens began preparations for a major expedition. Meanwhile, trouble was brewing elsewhere. In Isauria, the mountainous region of western Cilicia, a major revolt had broken out in 375 which diverted troops formerly stationed in the east. Furthermore, by 377, the Saracens under Queen Mavia had broken into revolt and devastated a swath of territory stretching from Phoenicia and Palestine as far as the Sinai. Though Valens successfully brought both uprisings under control, the opportunities for action on the eastern frontier were limited by these skirmishes closer to home.

Gothic War
Valens' plans for an eastern campaign were never realized. A transfer of troops to the western empire in 374 had left gaps in Valens' mobile forces. In preparation for an eastern war, Valens initiated an ambitious recruitment program designed to fill those gaps. It was thus not unwelcome news when Valens learned that the Gothic tribes had been displaced from their homeland by an invasion of Huns in 375 and were seeking asylum from him. In 376, the Visigoths advanced to the far shores of the lower Danube and sent an ambassador to Valens who had set up his capitol in Antioch. The Goths requested shelter and land in the Balkan peninsula. An estimated 200,000 Goths were along the Danube in Moesia and the ancient land of Dacia.

As Valens' advisers were quick to point out, these Goths could supply troops who would at once swell Valens' ranks and decrease his dependence on provincial troop levies ? thereby increasing revenues from the recruitment tax. Among the Goths seeking asylum was a group led by the chieftain Fritigern. Fritigern had enjoyed contact with Valens in the 370s when Valens supported him in a struggle against Athanaric stemming from Athanaric's persecution of Gothic Christians. Though a number of Gothic groups apparently requested entry, Valens granted admission only to Fritigern and his followers. This did not, however, prevent others from following.

When Fritigern and his Goths undertook the crossing, Valens's mobile forces were tied down in the east, on the Persian frontier and in Isauria. This meant that only riparian units were present to oversee the Goths' settlement. The small number of imperial troops present prevented the Romans from stopping a Danube crossing by a group of Goths and later by Huns and Alans. What started out as a controlled resettlement mushroomed into a massive influx. And the situation grew worse. When the riparian commanders began abusing the Visigoths under their charge, they revolted in early 377 and defeated the Roman units in Thrace outside of Marcianople.

After joining forces with the Ostrogoths and eventually the Huns and Alans, the combined barbarian group marched widely before facing an advance force of imperial soldiers sent from both east and west. In a battle at Ad Salices, the Goths were once again victorious, winning free run of Thrace south of the Haemus. By 378, Valens himself was able to march west from his eastern base in Antioch. He withdrew all but a skeletal force ? some of them Goths ? from the east and moved west, reaching Constantinople by 30 May, 378. Meanwhile, Valens' councilors, Comes Richomer, and his generals Frigerid, Sebastian, and Victor cautioned Valens and tried to persuade him to wait for Gratian's arrival with his victorious legionaries from Gaul, something that Gratian himself strenuously advocated. What happened next is an example of hubris, the impact of which was to be felt for a years to come. Valens, jealous of his nephew Gratian's success, decided he wanted this victory for himself.

Battle of Adrianople and death of Valens
After a brief stay aimed at building his troop strength and gaining a toehold in Thrace, Valens moved out to Adrianople. From there, he marched against the confederated barbarian army on 9 August 378 in what would become known as the Battle of Adrianople. Although negotiations were attempted, these broke down when a Roman unit sallied forth and carried both sides into battle. The Romans held their own early on but were crushed by the surprise arrival of Visigoth cavalry which split their ranks.

The primary source for the battle is Ammianus Marcellinus.[2] Valens had left a sizeable guard with his baggage and treasures depleting his force. His right wing, cavalry, arrived at the Gothic camp sometime before the left wing arrived. It was a very hot day and the Roman cavalry was engaged without strategic support, wasting its efforts while they suffered in the heat.

Meanwhile Fritigern once again sent an emissary of peace in his continued manipulation of the situation. The resultant delay meant that the Romans present on the field began to succumb to the heat. The army's resources were further diminished when an ill timed attack by the Roman archers made it necessary to recall Valens' emissary, Comes Richomer. The archers were beaten and retreated in humiliation.

Gothic cavalry under the command of Althaeus and Saphrax then struck and, with what was probably the most decisive event of the battle, the Roman cavalry fled. From here, Ammianus gives two accounts of Valen's demise. In the first account, Ammianus states that Valens was "mortally wounded by an arrow, and presently breathed his last breath," (XXXI.12) His body was never found or given a proper burial. In the second account, Ammianus states the Roman infantry was abandoned, surrounded and cut to pieces. Valens was wounded and carried to a small wooden hut. The hut was surrounded by the Goths who put it to the torch, evidently unaware of the prize within. According to Ammianus, this is how Valens perished (XXXI.13.14-6).

When the battle was over, two-thirds of the eastern army lay dead. Many of their best officers had also perished. What was left of the army of Valens was led from the field under the cover of night by Comes Richomer and General Victor.

J.B. Bury, a noted historian of the period, provides specific interpretation on the significance the battle: it was "a disaster and disgrace that need not have occurred."

For Rome, the battle incapacitated the government. Emperor Gratian, nineteen years old, was overcome by the debacle, and until he appointed Theodosius I, unable to deal with the catastrophe which spread out of control.

Legacy
Adrianople was the most significant event in Valens' career. The battle of Adrianople was significant for yet another reason: the evolution of warfare. Until that time, the Roman infantry was considered invincible, and the evidence for this was considerable. However, the Gothic cavalry completely changed all that. Although J.B. Bury states that records are incomplete for the 5th century, all during the 4th and 6th centuries, history shows that the cavalry took over as the principal Roman weapon of war on land.

"Valens was utterly undistinguished, still only a protector, and possessed no military ability: he betrayed his consciousness of inferiority by his nervous suspicion of plots and savage punishment of alleged traitors," writes A.H.M. Jones. But Jones admits that "he was a conscientious administrator, careful of the interests of the humble. Like his brother, he was an ernest Christian."[3] To have died in so inglorious a battle has thus come to be regarded as the nadir of an unfortunate career. This is especially true because of the profound consequences of Valens' defeat. Adrianople spelled the beginning of the end for Roman territorial integrity in the late empire and this fact was recognized even by contemporaries. Ammianus understood that it was the worst defeat in Roman history since the Battle of Cannae (31.13.19), and Rufinus called it "the beginning of evils for the Roman empire then and thereafter."

Valens is also credited with the commission of a short history of the Roman State. This work, produced by Valens' secretary Eutropius, and known with the name Breviarium ab Urbe condita, tells the story of Rome from its founding. According to some historians, Valens was motivated by the necessity of learning Roman history, that he, the royal family and their appointees might better mix with the Roman Senatorial class.[4]

Struggles with the religious nature of the empire
During his reign, Valens had to confront the theological diversity that was beginning to create division in the Empire. Julian (361?363), had tried to revive the pagan religions. His reactionary attempt took advantage of the dissensions between the different factions among the Christians and a largely Pagan rank and file military. However, in spite of broad support, his actions were often viewed as excessive, and before he died in a campaign against the Persians, he was often treated with disdain. His death was considered a sign from God.

Like the brothers Constantius II and Constans, Valens and Valentinian I held divergent theological views. Valens was an Arian and Valentinian upheld the Nicene Creed. When Valens died however, the cause of Arianism in the Roman East was to come to an end. His successor Theodosius I would endorse the Nicene Creed.

Notes
   1. ^ a b Lendering, Jona, "Valens", livius.org
   2. ^ Historiae, 31.12-13.
   3. ^ Jones, Arnold Hugh Martin, The Later Roman Empire, 284-602: A Social, Economic and Administrative Survey (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1986), p. 139.
   4. ^ Eutropius, Breviarium, ed. H. W. Bird, Liverpool University Press, 1993, p. xix.

[Sovereign]

Medallion of Valens
(R?misch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Mainz)