Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] t1_jcamey8 wrote

[removed]

121

[deleted] t1_jcarpmh wrote

[removed]

94

[deleted] t1_jcaxroj wrote

[removed]

50

[deleted] t1_jcaojqk wrote

[removed]

12

[deleted] t1_jcb3211 wrote

[removed]

21

[deleted] t1_jcba71u wrote

[removed]

8

[deleted] t1_jcaffbo wrote

[removed]

89

MainOld697 t1_jccros9 wrote

I'm pretty close to Garforth, I'd love to know where abouts it was to try and go have a nosey.

>Although the exact location remains a secret, the excavation was in part prompted by a discovery nearby of late Roman stone buildings and a small number of Anglo-Saxon-style structures.

They (the council) recently finished a large project to build a trunk road connecting north Leeds with the A1 motorway, I'm almost certain this was what caused the initial discovery.

79

chris5689965467 t1_jcd1mz3 wrote

I believe the site is for a housing development to the south side of Garforth. I had a look on Google earth yesterday and you could see the evaluation in the last air photos.

20

[deleted] t1_jca2mfm wrote

[removed]

47

CorgisHaveNoKnees t1_jcc3wx6 wrote

I thought Romans cremated.

27

ZippyParakeet t1_jcd6yzb wrote

They stopped it after the Christianisation of the Empire. People forget that the Roman Empire was Christian in its later years.

45

PM_ME_YOUR_WIRING t1_jcd3sop wrote

That was the more common method from the formation of Rome to the mid-2nd century AD, inhumation (or burial) eventually took over as the preferred method.

18

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

FrodoUnderhill t1_jcdxhkb wrote

My old professors at Leeds classics department will be absolutely pumped to hear about this

9

dontbanmeagainreddi7 t1_jcf84mr wrote

This gives me hope that archeology isn't dead despite what everyone keeps telling me (including myself). I'm planning on joining the field 😎

5

MeatballDom OP t1_jcjoszk wrote

I don't know who's telling you archaeology is dead but it certainly isn't historians, we're moving more and more towards archaeology. Traditionalists are pretty much all dead or retired in most fields, and we're more and more embracing archaeology and noting how important it is.

3

MeatballDom OP t1_jcd7dyk wrote

>What's with the deleted posts?

About 80% of them are people asking why the comments are being deleted.

It's a super secret method, only few know about it, but I'll tell you if you promise not to tell anyone else: Want to not get your comment deleted? Read the article, comment on the article. Tada.

How to get your comment deleted: "Archaeology is a scam!" "I heard from my cousin's sister's cousin's dad's son's only sister's sibling that Rome isn't real" "lol guys I'm practicing for my first standup routine, check out this one" "insert overused quote from a movie" "WhY aRe ThE ComMeNTs AlL DeLetTeDeDEDd"

It's really not that hard.

1