Yes, you are quite right to warn me and make sure I'm a real research
student - I sometimes think all my dissertation is associated archaeology;
it's rather like a polo mint, with lots around the outside ( associated
arch.) and not a lot of tangibles in the middle, that is to say real obvious
Roman lead mines - the hole in the middle is the bit that screams "I am
Roman". The title has already changed to "Investigating Romano-British Lead
Mines." Probably it is a matter of the change of scale of operations that
marked out the Roman from earlier workings.
At present I have listed quite a few "disciplines" / associated arch.
approaches. At the risk of grandma sucking eggs shall I email them to you?
PLEASE tell me more about your approach / research. My deadline is beginning
of Feb. but I think it sounds very important and should be included.
Again, yes about London Illustrated, etc. I treat them with the same
sceptical re-interpretation as the 19th century entrepreneurial surveys and
promotions of Spargo, Smythe, Liscombe, etc. They also talked of the Romans,
the ancients, the old ones....that is anything more than 100 years before.
A lot of recent surveys on settlements and roads in Clwyd / Powys. But even
more promising are surveys at Dylife, which has not been "tidied up" by
councils as Minera was.
Please do let me know more about your reseach.
Thanks for your excellent message.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Roe" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 7:20 PM
Subject: Roman Mining
> Your best bet Steve is not to look for mining but associated archaeology
> such as settlement sites and transport routes. I am currently looking at
the
> issue of time depth on lead mining landscapes and trying to unravel 2000
> years or more of chronology is not easy.
>
> Nothing is going to scream "i am Roman", although some features can
suggest
> that workings are probably old.
>
> I would also add to Peter's earlier comments about the assumptions made in
> the 19th and indeed 18th centuries about the age of mine workings or
indeed
> any early industrial site. Any site which is without written record or
local
> oral tradition, but that looked technologically advanced or well organised
> was simply assumed to be Roman. Remember that at the time it was assumed
> that we were savages living in mud huts before the Romans arrived and
> brought us civilisation! Now we know different.
>
> It is also worth noting the Illustrated London News was the 19th century
> equivalent of todays tabloids.
>
> Martin Roe
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
|