08-04-2012, 10:53 PM
I think there is a debate here about the year of the revolt.
Seutonius Paulinus arrived in AD58 and had two years successful campaigning against the Silures / Ordovices before he invaded Anglesey according to Tacitus.
Then again the Governor was replaced in the second half of AD61 (Publius Petronius Turpilianus resigned his consulship early in AD61 to take on the Governorship of Britain).
Yet according to Tacitus, Seutonius received re-inforcements after the big battle and continued campaigning past the end of the normal "season" into the winter with the troops being under canvass.
I think that it is because of these conflicts in timings that AD60 is reasoned to be a reasonable date for the rebellion.
So its not cherry picking it is just trying to make sense of the timescales which are all too important in the interpretations.
Seutonius Paulinus arrived in AD58 and had two years successful campaigning against the Silures / Ordovices before he invaded Anglesey according to Tacitus.
Then again the Governor was replaced in the second half of AD61 (Publius Petronius Turpilianus resigned his consulship early in AD61 to take on the Governorship of Britain).
Yet according to Tacitus, Seutonius received re-inforcements after the big battle and continued campaigning past the end of the normal "season" into the winter with the troops being under canvass.
I think that it is because of these conflicts in timings that AD60 is reasoned to be a reasonable date for the rebellion.
So its not cherry picking it is just trying to make sense of the timescales which are all too important in the interpretations.
Deryk
