Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T10:39:38.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The date of Pevensey and the defence of an ‘Imperium Britanniarum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Michael Fulford
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Reading, Reading RG6 2AA, England
Ian Tyers
Affiliation:
Museum of London Archaeology Service, Museum of London, 1 London Wall, London EC2Y 5EA, England

Abstract

New work at the late Roman fort at Pevensey has recovered oak foundation piles. The precision of a tree-ring date for them is occasion to look again at the pattern of coastal forts of which Pevensey is a part.

Type
Notes
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brulet, R. 1989. The Continental Litus Saxonicum, in Maxfield (1989): 4577.Google Scholar
Bushe-Fox, J.P. 1932. Some notes on Roman coast defences, Journal of Roman Studies 22: 6072.Google Scholar
Casey, P.J. 1994. Carausius and Allectus: the British usurpers. London: Batsford.Google Scholar
Cotterill, J. 1993. Saxon raiding and the role of the Late Roman coastal forts of Britain, Britannia 24: 227–39.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, B.W. 1968. Fifth report on the excavations of the Roman fort at Richhorough, Kent. Oxford: Society of Antiquaries of London. Reports of the Research Committee 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, B.W. 1975. Excavations at Portchester Castle I: Roman. Oxford: Society of Antiquaries of London. Reports of the Research Committee 32.Google Scholar
Fulford, M. & Rippon, S. 1994. Excavations at Pevensey Castle 1994. Reading: Department of Archaeology, University of Reading.Google Scholar
Johnson, J.S. 1970. The date of the construction of the Saxon shore fort at Richborough, Britannia 1: 240–48.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. 1976. The Roman forts of the Saxon shore. London: Elek.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. 1989. Pevensey, in Maxfield (1989): 157–60.Google Scholar
Johnson, T. 1975. A Roman signal station at Shadwell, E.l, Transactions of the London & Middlesex Archaeological Society 26: 278–80.Google Scholar
Johnston, D.E. (ed.). 1977. The Saxon shore. London: Council for British Archaeology. Research report 18.Google Scholar
Jones, G.D.B. & Shotter, D.C.A. 1988. Roman Lancaster-rescue archaeology in an historic city 1970-75. Manchester: University of Manchester Department of Archaeology. Brigantia monograph 1.Google Scholar
King, A. 1990. Bitterne redating confirmed, Hampshire Field Club & Archaeological Society: Section Newsletters (Archaeology) n.s. 13: 29.Google Scholar
Langouet, L. 1977. The 4th-century Gallo-Roman site at Alet (Saint Malo), in Johnston (1977): 3845.Google Scholar
Mann, J.C. 1989. The historical development of the Saxon Shore, in Maxfield (1989): 111.Google Scholar
Maxfield, V.A. (ed.) 1989. The Saxon Shore. Exeter: Department of History and Archaeology. Exeter Studies in History 25.Google Scholar
Mertens, J. 1977. Oudenberg and the northern section of the continental Litus Saxonicum, in Johnston (1977): 5162.Google Scholar
Philp, B. 1981. The excavation of the Roman forts of the Classis Britannica at Dover, 1970-1977. Dover: Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit.Google Scholar
Saunders, A.D. 1989. Defence of the realm: medieval and later defences, in Maxfield (1989): 96111.Google Scholar
Tyers, I. 1994. Tree-ring analysis of Roman piles from Pevensey Castle, East Sussex. London: English Heritage Ancient Monuments Laboratory. Report 65/94.Google Scholar
White, D.A. 1961. Litus Saxonicum: the British Saxon shore in scholarship and history. Madison (WI): Department of History, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Williams, T. 1993. The archaeology of Roman London 3: Public buildings in the south-west quarter of Roman London. London: Museum of London & Council for British Archaeology. Research report 88.Google Scholar