There was a settlement after the Romans left, yes. The Roman city though, stretches for acres and acres, and it's all buried under level fields (with locked gates and 'keep out' warnings to metal detectorists). It's just amazing to me that it could all have appeared over 2,000 years.
Actually, less than that. Wroxeter could have been occupied into the dark ages, so perhaps 1,200 years?
But anyway, given that settlements and worms and wind and dead trees and bushes can completely cover a city so deep, in a relatively short time, does that mean there are load and loads of megalithic monuments buried in the same way?
 Reply | with quote | Posted by suave harv
18th October 2017ce
12:30 |
Why is Roman stuff buried, & Neolithic stuff not? (suave harv, Oct 18, 2017, 11:33)- Re: Why is Roman stuff buried, & Neolithic stuff not? (common era, Oct 18, 2017, 11:56)
- Re: Why is Roman stuff buried, & Neolithic stuff not? (suave harv, Oct 18, 2017, 12:03)
- Re: Why is Roman stuff buried, & Neolithic stuff not? (suave harv, Oct 18, 2017, 12:11)
- Re: Why is Roman stuff buried, & Neolithic stuff not? (Monganaut, Oct 18, 2017, 12:19)
- Re: Why is Roman stuff buried, & Neolithic stuff not? (suave harv, Oct 18, 2017, 12:30)
- Re: Why is Roman stuff buried, & Neolithic stuff not? (tjj, Oct 18, 2017, 20:55)
|
|
Head To Head 
Re: Why is Roman stuff buried, & Neolithic stuff not? (Monganaut)