Re: Isle Maree - Scotland - Disputed Antiquity | Forum

Isle Maree 1

Isle Maree — Scotland — Disputed Antiquity

more_vert

thesweetcheat Nov 13, 2019 18:44:25

Replying to James Maclennan

Nordic and Pictish are too young for TMA really, it only includes prehistoric sites. The cut-off for British sites* is when the Romans arrived, which is obviously problematic in Scotland, where they didn't :)

Basically you're fine with Iron Age and we've certainly nudged into Romano-British a few times (Chysauster is an example of the latter).

*The cut-off for the Med etc would be much earlier of course.

thesweetcheat Nov 13, 2019 18:47:02

Replying to thesweetcheat

PS, wells are notoriously difficult to date, on the basis that most have a medieval or post-medieval well structure but may be the site of a much earlier site. I think they're kind of tolerated on here with the "disputed" tag.

Goffik would be yer man for more info on them though.

James Maclennan Nov 13, 2019 18:52:18

Replying to thesweetcheat

thesweetcheat wrote:

Basically you're fine with Iron Age and we've certainly nudged into Romano-British a few times (Chysauster is an example of the latter).

*The cut-off for the Med etc would be much earlier of course.

Thanks for clarifying!! I will do a bit more digging but it looks like one for Flicker rather than TMA :)