Saxon Shore Forts

[Zen9]

More evidence adds up to undermine simple narratives

The traditional narrative is that the so-called Saxon Shore forts were built to defend Channel shipping and protect Roman Britain from incursions by Saxons and other North Sea pirates.

The archaeology suggests that the forts on the British side of the Channel were finished under a breakaway Roman administration.

This was led by a Roman naval officer called Carausius (a native of what is now Belgium) who in AD 285 set himself up as Emperor in Britain and northern Gaul. An expedition led by Constantine Chlorus (father of the Empeor Constantine) took back northern Gaul and prepared to invade Britain.

At Pevensey a combination of dendrochronology, and the presence of coins of both Carausius and Allectus (finance minister, assassin and successor to Carausius ) give a last possible of AD 293 for its original construction.

On this evidence, this Saxon Shore fort was built as “a Roman frontier against Rome” - a first line of defence against an expected Roman (re)invasion of Britain which finally came in AD 296.

There’s evidence for more building work on other Roman forts in the south-east. At Richborough, the triple ditches around the quadrifons were backfilled in preparation for the fort’s construction after about AD 273. At Dover, the ‘Painted House’ was occupied until about AD 280, after which it was sealed by a fort rampart. Stratified coinage at Portchester also indicates construction under Carausius in about AD 286–290.

Bradwell, Burgh and Lympne are dated after AD 260 on architectural grounds, though a small coin sample from Bradwell is reminiscent of that from Pevensey, also suggesting a Carausian date.

From: Frontiers of the Roman Empire: The Saxon Shore and the Maritime Coast, open access at:
https://www.archaeopress.com/Archaeopre ... 1803273044

[Nik_SpeakerToCats]

Fascinating...

Raises the splendid 'What If' Carausius had not gone down as a mere foot-note to history...

And , a little later, 'Vikings vs Legions' ??

[Micael]

Fascinating...

Raises the splendid 'What If' Carausius had not gone down as a mere foot-note to history...

And , a little later, 'Vikings vs Legions' ??

Given that the Scandinavians seems to have frequently signed up for the Roman auxilia until the fall of West Rome (and centuries later formed the Varangian Guard in the East), plus seemingly whole tribe constellations moving back into Scandinavia at that point, and that the experiences from that were translated into the local warfare*, that could have been quite interesting.

*For instance, an eyewitness account of the Siege of Paris in 845 notes that the Viking invaders constructed siege engines and utilized the Roman testudo formation. Most likely retained from the auxilia days.

[jemhouston]

If the Vikings are building and using siege engines, the popular image of them being a mob is taking a hit.

[warshipadmin]

"Carausius (a native of what is now Belgium) who in AD 285 set himself up as Emperor in Britain and northern Gaul."

I didn't know that. I've been to at least 3 of those nominated sites, and can't remember anything about them.

[Micael]

If the Vikings are building and using siege engines, the popular image of them being a mob is taking a hit.

Yeah, the popular image of them in general is unfortunately very inaccurate. A lot of it traces back to the old prejudices surrounding ”pagans” and ”barbarians.”

They were quite skilled at woodworking/wooden construction, as evidenced by ship and temple builds etc. As long as they were aware of the concept of what a siege engine was it shouldn’t have presented too much of an obstacle for them to actually build them when necessary.