Keith Briggs wrote:
> There is some discussion of this in Andrew Pearson, The Roman shore
> forts (Tempus 2002). But ultimately Pearson can add little
> to Rivet and Smith. The only other candidate he allows is Walton
> Castle. But he adds to the confusion by placing a dot (unlabelled,
> but intended to be Walton Castle) on his map on page 131 at Walton on
> the Naze, instead of the correct location at Felixstowe.
> Pryor makes the same error in Britain AD.
The problem is that we have nine names for 10 forts! Looking at the forts,
the only obvious "odd one out" is Pevensey, which was built about 60 years
later. Are we absolutely certain that it was Anderita?
The only forts for which we think we don't know the names are Portchester
and Walton Castle - which is why Portus Adurni alternates between them!
John Briggs
|