gilius 0 Report post Posted August 3, 2013 Bede says that there were formerly 28 cities in Britain, and also mentions forts. Since we only know of 21 Roman Towns (Bede's Cities) it seems like there's still 7 to be found, so I wonder where they were? Bede states that Caerleon (City of the Legions) was one such city (or Roman Town), and I guess with the recent archaeological discoveries then that is close to being confirmed? Personally, I suspect Corbridge, Carlisle or perhaps somewhere close by like Penrith. Some of the "small towns" may be "potential cities" such as Rochester. Recently a theatre was discovered at Faversham (Durolevum), so a Forum-Basilica may yet to come! Brough? Any other candidates? Possibly somewhere round Lewis perhaps? Another interesting thing reading Bede is that St Martin's Church in Canterbury was most definitely a Roman Church, hence the remains there may actually be a retaining wall of the Roman nave. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GhostOfClayton 25 Report post Posted August 7, 2013 Interesting topic. All of your theories hold water, and Brough sprang to my mind also. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GhostOfClayton 25 Report post Posted August 7, 2013 Interesting topic. All of your theories hold water, and Brough sprang to my mind also. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grondhammar 2 Report post Posted May 7, 2014 I can't speak to other cities, but in The Last Legionary, (p. 70 and elsewhere), Paul Elliott states that Coria/Corbridge was the primary industrial city supplying the fort at Praesidium. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sonic 42 Report post Posted May 8, 2014 Does Elliott give any evidence for the claim about Corbridge? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grondhammar 2 Report post Posted May 8, 2014 He doesn't... but on a reread, nor does he use the term "city" but rather "town" in each mention of Corbridge. He doesn't say specifically he's making the distinction between civitas and vicus, but by avoiding "city" he's probably steering away from that particular claim. Sorry for the misinformation there! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sonic 42 Report post Posted May 9, 2014 Don't worry about the 'misinformation'. Most ancient historians tend to avoid the phrase 'city' for exactly that reason: it also leaves them less open to dispute by other historians with a different view. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
caldrail 152 Report post Posted May 12, 2014 I wonder - do these lost cities include those that failed such as Venta Icenum, a town that is only known via archaeology and not linked to a surviving settlement? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites