No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 January 2009
This is no place, and to-day there should be no need, to attempt to justify the inclusion of a study of Roman Britain in the school curriculum, nor to stress its fundamental purpose of demonstrating the power, grandeur, and humanity of Roman civilization as expressed in one of the least and most remote—yet to us the most familiar—of the Imperial provinces. This article is concerned with ways and means of teaching the subject and is intended as a response from an archaeologist to the difficulties expressed by teachers in handling unfamiliar material.
As I see it, the problem of relating a study of Roman Britain to the study of Latin is part of the larger problem of devising methods of introducing the archaeological approach to the past into school teaching. And by the archaeological approach I mean getting in touch with the past through material things, the things that man has lost, or thrown away, the ruins of his home, his tomb, or his city for instance, the things that happen to survive to the present time; in short the things that are generally called ‘Roman Remains’. It is in this respect that Archaeology differs from History (even Ancient History), not in the aim, which they share—the recovery and interpretation of man's past—but in its methods and in the nature of its evidence. Of course it is not suggested for an instant that the textual and archaeological approach are conflicting, for it is generally recognized that they are complementary and must work together.
page 42 note 1 Given as an address to a conference of classical teachers and Oxford tutors at Somerville College, Oxford, in August 1945.
page 44 note 1 The reconstructions by Alan Sorrell were commissioned by the National Museum of Wales, Cardiff.
page 44 note 2 Nash-Williams, V. E., The Legionary Fortress at Caerleon, Mon. (National Museum of Wales, Cardiff, 1940)Google Scholar, with reconstructions by the same artist.
page 42 note 1 See Maiden Castle, Dorset, Wheeler, R. E. M., Soc. Antiquaries Res. Rep.Google Scholar
page 42 note 2 Slide collections organized on a regional basis with a central catalogue are much needed; their provision should concern the Local Education Authority.
page 46 note 1 Haverfield, F., The Romanization of Roman Britain (1915)Google Scholar; The Roman Occupation of Britain (1924): Collingwood, R. G., Roman Britain (1932)Google Scholar; with Myres, J. N. L., Roman Britain and the English Settlements (1936).Google Scholar
page 47 note 1 Everyday Life in Roman Britain, by M. and Quennell, C. H. B. (Batsford, 1924).Google Scholar
page 47 note 2 In the British Museum.
page 47 note 3 As given in Collingwood's, R. G.Archaeology of Roman Britain (Methuen, 1930).Google Scholar