Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

lollerkeet t1_jcc8f95 wrote

They mean Romano-British, I take it, not actually Roman?

16

DisserviceToVanilla t1_jccs34f wrote

Doesn't say, but they date the body to 400AD so presumably.

>Unusually for an ancient cemetery, the remains found in Garforth belonged to people from the late Roman and the early Saxon eras. The skeleton of the late Roman aristocratic woman was found alongside the remains of 60 men, women and children from the two periods. > > Archaeologists traced the burial traditions of both cultures in the cemetery, the precise location of which is being kept secret.

16

Doctor_Impossible_ t1_jcdxoh9 wrote

There's no reason it couldn't be Roman rather than Romano-British. There was no sharp cut-off point for Romans in Britain, they were still constructing villas after 410.

4

lollerkeet t1_jcexf7p wrote

If it was, it would be a really big deal - it would only be the 2nd actual Roman body from the imperial period found in Britain.

2