Re: Archaeological dating methods, was: ARCHAEOLOGY VERSUS TACITUS' AGRICOLA was to Paul Burke Re: Grænlendinga þáttur

From: Doug Weller (dweller_at_ramtops.removethisdemon.co.uk)
Date: 03/20/05 

Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:01:56 +0000

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 16:44:05 GMT, in sci.archaeology, I.E_Johansson wrote:

>Doug,
>so you don't know? Well I take it that you haven't read Imperial Rome
>message today 05,24 PM? Haven't seen you there anytime btw so you obviously
>haven't read what one who knows these things say in discussion. Observe not
>on any of my questions:
>"Were there a lot of Romans in Britain?" then you can say perhaps not. But
>there is archaeological evidence for the presence of the Roman army along
>the wall. "
>And that Doug is all you ever could be able to put up. Not the fort or
>fortress itself but the specific detail in found artifacts.

The post you quote from continued "The archaeology of Bouidica's Rebellion
shows that her forces
certainly believed that there were a lot of Romans since they slaughtered
them and burned the cities. It is hard to believe that there could be
that
many assimilated British in that short a period."

Doug

 Other places and
>roads can't be used at all to argue Roman conquest of Britian without usage
>of written sources.
>But I guess you simply tried once again to imply that you knew and
>understood but I didn't when it's actually is that you couldn't present
>valid argument.
>If I am wrong here please present such argument
>
>Inger E
>-
>
>
>
>
>"Doug Weller" <dweller@ramtops.removethisdemon.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
>news:f5ln31haa6gdvfms8t3n4b3kdebgqg4tnk@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 07:20:14 GMT, in sci.archaeology, I.E_Johansson wrote:
>>
>> >Doug,
>> >no I most certainly not would have any problem understanding your proofs
>for
>> >Roman precense and occupation of England if you put them forward.
>> >I guess you aren't prepared to test it, but you know there are a lot of
>> >others here who would like to hear how and if you could.
>> >
>> >Roman roads? Well there are a lot of Roman roads in England, but in what
>way
>> >do you believe that they prove Roman occupation? Diffusionism could very
>> >well have been the case. Prove that it can't.
>>
>> There are patterns of relationships you don't understand -- roads and
>> camps, forts and oppida, etc. I'm not going to waste my time on you.
>>
>> >You doubt that I can read and understand excavation reports.
>>
>> You give daily proof that you have problems understanding and writing
>> English. So yes, I doubt that you can read and understand reports written
>> in English.
>>
>> [SNIP]
>> --
>> Doug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply
>> Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com
>> A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
>> Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
>>
>>
> 

-- 
Doug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply
Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk

Relevant Pages