Post by redraven on Sept 23, 2009 18:02:22 GMT -1
This book, by Stuart Laycock, was short listed for Archaeology Book of the year 2009. It is an attempt to suggest a possible history of Britain (primarily South, Central and Eastern England), from pre-Roman to Anglo Saxon England using the archaeological evidence provided by the coinage finds from all over the British Isles.
It is recognized that the decorations crafted onto these coins from different ages reflect the current thinking at that particular stage in time. Using these and any other available archaeological finds, the author attempts to create a history using generally accepted definitions of these finds and using his experience as an aid worker in former Yugoslavia, shows how breakdowns in tribal communities tend to follow a well defined course of action.
Because Britain was made up of tribes with no notion of any larger entity (country), his thesis is based upon actual experience and as such, is very plausible. The author states that his is not the divinative history, but is a starting point for more debate but, importantly, provides one of the very few efforts that attempts to address all of the first millenium in a cohesive manner and for that, is to be applauded.
As mentioned, this history is targeted at the areas from which the archaeology derived from, the Western and Northern areas of Britain, being more archaeologically scarcer provide less evidence but to the author's credit, he points this fact out, concentrating to build his idea's on the evidence with greater statistical significance.
I found this to be a very worthwhile attempt, with the author being very upfront about what could be reasonably theorized by the evidence and what was supposition based upon "best" guesses. He stated it was a first attempt and as such, was a very worthwhile attempt. A good example of how to develop a thesis based upon actuality, keeping suppositions down to a minimum.
RR
It is recognized that the decorations crafted onto these coins from different ages reflect the current thinking at that particular stage in time. Using these and any other available archaeological finds, the author attempts to create a history using generally accepted definitions of these finds and using his experience as an aid worker in former Yugoslavia, shows how breakdowns in tribal communities tend to follow a well defined course of action.
Because Britain was made up of tribes with no notion of any larger entity (country), his thesis is based upon actual experience and as such, is very plausible. The author states that his is not the divinative history, but is a starting point for more debate but, importantly, provides one of the very few efforts that attempts to address all of the first millenium in a cohesive manner and for that, is to be applauded.
As mentioned, this history is targeted at the areas from which the archaeology derived from, the Western and Northern areas of Britain, being more archaeologically scarcer provide less evidence but to the author's credit, he points this fact out, concentrating to build his idea's on the evidence with greater statistical significance.
I found this to be a very worthwhile attempt, with the author being very upfront about what could be reasonably theorized by the evidence and what was supposition based upon "best" guesses. He stated it was a first attempt and as such, was a very worthwhile attempt. A good example of how to develop a thesis based upon actuality, keeping suppositions down to a minimum.
RR
