Login   |   Register   |   

To get back to the Romans

Started by: compingnut (54)

Talking to my barber yesterday,he came up with a story that during refurbishment to Wigan Parish Church (don't know when) a Roman temple was discovered. Can anyone throw a light on this? Also that Wigan was a stop on the march from Manchester to Ribchester, and therefore was probably just an area surrounded by stakes. Where the heck Coccium was, I do not know!
Another of his snippets was that a farmer at Appley Bridge digging in his fields found the statue of a Roman God! He gave it in to the police and from there it was taken to Manchester. Since then, not a whisper has been heard of the statue. Perhaps Appley Bridge was Coccium!

Started: 19th Jan 2010 at 17:23

Posted by: danni (inactive)

there is a roman altar built into the church wall

altar

Replied: 19th Jan 2010 at 20:19
Last edited by danni: 19th Jan 2010 at 20:21:31

Posted by: compingnut (54)

Wow! Brilliant!

Replied: 19th Jan 2010 at 23:31

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

When you consider that the Romans occupied Britain for nigh on 400 years it's easy to understand how they got, more or less, everywhere.

Replied: 19th Jan 2010 at 23:45

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

400 years wow I wonder if anyone doing their ancestry have found any direct connection, I have got back to 1457 on my fathers side but no directt link my next ancester after that date came from Belgium

Replied: 23rd Jan 2010 at 15:20

Posted by: compingnut (54)

Just changing the subject a bit, Elizabeth, what records do you use to get back to 1400's. Can't be parish records, can it?

Replied: 27th Jan 2010 at 22:37

Posted by: nicola (3236) 

Recent work before the Grand Arcade was built added to the Roman evidence for Wigan being coccium, have a look at the Wigan Arch Soc website...I worked for Oxford Archaeology North who did all the excavations, I was there when we put in an evaluation trench close to Penningtons, chatting away as you do when you're not really expecting to find a great deal (thought we had a lot of 19th century overburden to get through)then having a look at the section of the trench and pulling out Roman pottery, for me, it was better than winning the lottery!

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 11:06

Posted by: ©art© (6154)

Next time you find owt Nicola.
You keep the pottery
I'll have the lottery..

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 11:39

Posted by: nicola (3236) 

I have my own personal "collection", bit that have gone in pockets for bagging up later, then 6 months down the line you can't remember what site it was from!

I still wouldn't mind the Lottery as well......

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 11:54

Posted by: the_gwim_weaper (inactive)

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 13:27

Posted by: dave marsh (inactive)

They gave lots of work to archaeologists.

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 17:03

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

The only way to prove that Wigan stands where Coccium once stood, would be to uncover a sign with 'Welcome to Coccium - Drive Carefully' written on it.

Although there was definately Roman activity, it's already been said that Coccium wasn't where Wigan now is.
The Romans were in England for over 400 years, they got everywhere.

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 17:28

Posted by: danni (inactive)

and they came to Wigan for a bath!

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 19:38

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Next, you'll be claiming that the first Roman Department Store, Marcus et Spencius, was formed in Coccium.
Which would, of course, be rubbish because everybody knows it was formed in Mancunium!

According to the Antonine Local Directory!

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 19:49
Last edited by tonker: 29th Jan 2010 at 19:51:57

Posted by: danni (inactive)

did they or did they not find the remains of a Roman BATH house at the bottom of Millgate WIGAN? I rest my case

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 19:51

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Indeed they did, danni, indeed they did. However, it didn't have Coccium Municipal Swimming Pool written on it. In mosaic.

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 19:54

Posted by: danni (inactive)

no but it does mean the Romans came to WIGAN for a bath!

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 20:12

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

They'd have had some big Wigan women, with big legs, to scrub their backs!

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 20:22

Posted by: danni (inactive)

really? you reckon?

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 20:51

Posted by: the_gwim_weaper (inactive)

Is there any knees for that?

Replied: 29th Jan 2010 at 21:14

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

Comp-- you asked for records , well a lot of mine in that period came from Devon / Cornwall and they are very good for looking for details up to a point the other way is finding the name you are looking for in a particular period say Surname - Syme go into Family search and type in just surname Syme , place lancashire ( which inmy case was Devon/cornwall) whichever that will bring up thousands of names so you have to have the patience to scroll through them looking for the particular place (Wigan) and find siblings ( and some cases which in my case I went through over 5 thousand names )around the same birth date and place and if you are lucky belonging to them will give you the parents and also you can find other children. and so it goes on, if I can help you further let me know and make the heading Elizabeth, because I forget where I found things ,taken me 2 days to find the original message from you enquiring

Replied: 30th Jan 2010 at 07:56

Posted by: compingnut (54)

Thanks Elizabeth. I have used the Mormon site a lot but not like you say. I have been given the task of finding if my family are Scottish but none back to 1766, all in Wigan. Tales of Bonnie Prince Charlie calling in at Wigan when gathering his army abound. But then they would not be born Scottish! Genealogy is fascinating but irritating at the same time. The site Lancashire bmd is also good especially for marriages! Still no use for Cornwall. Try Cornwallbmd!

Replied: 31st Jan 2010 at 14:58

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

if you want me to help you let me know give me some dates and names etc area I will leave my mail on here for 24 hours then I will delete it that is if you want me to . edited e mail

Replied: 31st Jan 2010 at 15:10
Last edited by elizabeth: 1st Feb 2010 at 10:39:44

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

Hi Tony whereabouts in scotland are you looking and the Surname,as you didnt take up my offer on e mail i will try this way for you ,by the way are you any relation to the Wilsons arounf Swinley lane are 1950-60

Replied: 1st Feb 2010 at 10:47

Posted by: compingnut (54)

Sorry Elizabeth, not been in touch. Been away and not attending to my Wigan World posts! This will continue for a while but I get back every 8 days or so.

Replied: 13th Feb 2010 at 10:04
Last edited by compingnut: 14th Feb 2010 at 23:18:06

Posted by: compingnut (54)

Elizabeth, I am not related to Swinley Wilsons, mine are Pemberton, Orrell, IOM, Cheadle,Appley Bridge, Billinge all cousins. I had an uncle who had Wilsons grocers on corner Gidlow lane, Spencer Road West.

Replied: 13th Feb 2010 at 10:08
Last edited by compingnut: 14th Feb 2010 at 10:53:31

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

Hi compingnut you can edit your e mail now if you want i have made a note of it and will tomorrow start and have a look for you .as I am in the middle of making Kitchen units not flat pak I am making my own ,mind you it takes me a bit longer these days ,now I am longer in the tooth ha ha

Replied: 13th Feb 2010 at 16:19

Posted by: compingnut (54)

Wow! Do you do foreigners? Oh by the way, my cousin wears a kilt!

Replied: 14th Feb 2010 at 10:56

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

'Wow! Do you do foreigners'?

Are you insinuating that Elizabeth is a 'man of the world'?

Replied: 14th Feb 2010 at 11:15

Posted by: compingnut (54)

no Im insinuating my cousin thinks hes Scottish!

Replied: 14th Feb 2010 at 23:19

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Has he got red hair and is he called Jimmy?

Replied: 14th Feb 2010 at 23:20

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

Comp did ou get my e mail please as I am having trouble at this end
No do not do foreigners have enough to do with my own, I have got fed up with being on my own being ripped of with so called professionals , in the past I put C H in my large Tudor house apart from the boiler I had that done ,I make fences as once seen on this site somewhere build Porches , you say it I most likely have done it over the years having lost my husband age 47yrs and no money .Any way back to the Clan

Replied: 15th Feb 2010 at 09:08

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Elizabeth, you'd make a fine Hillbilly! Why don't you nip over to Erin's and test the water. Or the possum stew?

And I thought you said you liked Volvos best?

Replied: 15th Feb 2010 at 11:20
Last edited by tonker: 15th Feb 2010 at 11:23:27

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

Tonker dont be cheeky if you look at my photo you will see I am no Hill billy as you say just a lady who has had to struggle to have a nice home , WITHOUT going into debt, and I still like and want a Volvo again but def not from E Bay

Replied: 15th Feb 2010 at 14:48

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

'I make fences as once seen on this site somewhere, build Porches, .....'?

Me too, Elizabeth!

Replied: 15th Feb 2010 at 16:41
Last edited by tonker: 15th Feb 2010 at 16:42:26

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

I like the car ,, wonder what you edited

Replied: 15th Feb 2010 at 18:10

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

the link didn't turn out right first time!

Replied: 15th Feb 2010 at 18:13

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

Comp-go to Links and scroll nearly to the bottom and you will fins a research into the Wilsons all over Wigan

Replied: 21st Feb 2010 at 16:30

Posted by: compingnut (54)

is that links on familysearch (mormon site)

Replied: 21st Feb 2010 at 22:06

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

No it is the Links on this site at the top of the page

Replied: 22nd Feb 2010 at 09:42

Posted by: compingnut (54)

Yes I think I have got it OK. Filled in my family tree in Gene part await developments. Thanks very much!

Replied: 22nd Feb 2010 at 21:53

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

I am still looking at the Wilsons in Scotland have you got any further

Replied: 23rd Feb 2010 at 09:24

Posted by: compingnut (54)

No . Have done many peoples family trees but am convinced it cannot work from the furthest date away to the present time.Looking for fathers is easier than looking for sons! Possibly I may be persuaded! Its kind of you to try .
I have a friend whose gfarther was a foundling. He and others were lined up in beds in a ward and given surnames beginning A, b etc. Ernies gdad got J and from then to Jones so Ernest Jones was not his real birth name. My friend Ernie ,also is my only failure at doing a family tree!

Replied: 23rd Feb 2010 at 22:36

Posted by: compingnut (54)

Elizabeth, looking on Upholland St Thomas the Martyr's site, I have found John Wilson b. 1766's father is William Wilson Christened 4 May 1735.That is assuming all the family still lived in Upholland. Its a good site tho obviously just for that area

Replied: 25th Feb 2010 at 10:38

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

regarding the Scottish clans I am completly fazed I have registered and accepted but can I get any further I am lost in the Scottish mists can you try as they have 3 wilson for the period looking for go and type in Scottish Clans see if you can fathom it out please

Replied: 25th Feb 2010 at 14:53

Posted by: compingnut (54)

I clicked on Wigan Genealogy, entered Wilson clan in search, got Yahoo , signed up email, seached more Wilson claNS AND GOT LOADS OF yANKS. wILL TRY AGAIN WHEN i HAVE CALMED MY NERVES.

Replied: 25th Feb 2010 at 19:58

Posted by: elizabeth (5439) 

oh what a gay day we are having

Replied: 26th Feb 2010 at 17:30

Posted by: compingnut (54)

Ahem!

Replied: 26th Feb 2010 at 23:01

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

You might be related to Wilson Pickett. Although I doubt it, because he was a blackie!

Replied: 27th Feb 2010 at 00:18

Posted by: the_gwim_weaper (inactive)

Lest ye forget=

Replied: 27th Feb 2010 at 10:27

Posted by: compingnut (54)

By gum, you lot are a tonic!

Replied: 27th Feb 2010 at 11:36

Posted by: chrisnich (175)

Just googled Coccium and found a lot of sites. One said it was the Roman name for Wigan, also could be cookhouse or brothel.Apparently Wigan was a minor roman settlement.

Replied: 27th Feb 2010 at 12:15

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

You don't say? Tell us more!

Replied: 27th Feb 2010 at 12:43

Posted by: chrisnich (175)

Sorry Tonker, only meant to say I found subject interesting.
Will write 100 lines- Don't irritate Tonker.

Replied: 28th Feb 2010 at 18:06

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

I'm only having a larf! It's what's expected of me, you see.
And it's a thousand word essay on 'the contents of an empty box', on my desk by lunchtime, Friday!

Replied: 28th Feb 2010 at 18:15

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

PS.

So, Wigan, in Roman times, was a cookhouse, brothel and a minor settlement.

Wigan still IS a cookhouse, brothel and a minor settlement.

Nothing's changed over the last 1600 years then?

Replied: 28th Feb 2010 at 18:21

Posted by: vera howarth (2584) 

Coccium has not been definetly located but the best probability is that it was Wigan.
I think it was more than a minor Roman settlement as ship building is known to have gone on .The R. Douglas then ran where Station road is and what became known as Stairgate was the approach to the river from the higher defensive ground and settlement.

Replied: 24th Mar 2010 at 10:05

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Vera, academics who specialise in Roman Studies have concluded that Wigan * was NOT Coccium, and they know their stuff as regards Romans. The position recorded in the Antonine Itinerary is not where Wigan is.
If their measurements were wrong, in this case by a few miles, it would be a first because the Romans weren't daft either!

* (disclaimer) Wigan is, not probably, definately, on the site of some form of Roman settlement. As I said earlier, the Romans occupied Britain for over 400 years, so it's not unusual for an area to be previously occupied by them. However, it's unlikely that it was called Coccium.

Replied: 24th Mar 2010 at 12:56

Posted by: vera howarth (2584) 

source please tonker

Replied: 24th Mar 2010 at 22:15

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Vera. Seek and ye shall find!

Replied: 24th Mar 2010 at 22:53

Posted by: nicko (inactive)

Tomatoe Sorce?

Replied: 25th Mar 2010 at 01:25

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Replied: 25th Mar 2010 at 10:36

Posted by: nicola (3236) 

Tonker, can you please give us the source for that little bit of info?

Replied: 25th Mar 2010 at 11:08

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Nicola, I can't give you one source, all I can say is that there's many.

What's in question here is not 'was there Romans in Wigan'. As I've said before, of course there were, they were everywhere, for over 400 years, and 400 years is long enough to firmly establish themselves. Which they did.
The question is - was it called Coccium?

To think that Wigan used to be called Coccium is very easy. Everybody says it did. But, they only believe a local myth that others tell them, and they are only guessing.

To make an 'educated' guess, you need evidence.

The only evidence available is contained in the Antonine Itinerary, and that evidence clearly gives the proof that Coccium was NOT where Wigan now stands.

I once read that the location of Coccium, recorded by the Romans, can be centred on an area of several square miles.
However, this area was a long way from Wigan, the nearest to Wigan being between Belmont and Blackrod, with the Belmont to Edgeworth area being more probable.

Of course Wigan stands on the site of Roman occupation, that fact is well proven. But any inscription that proves the site was called 'Coccium', will rewrite the history book, ie: the Roman Record Book, the 'Antonine Itinerary'.


Replied: 25th Mar 2010 at 12:21

Posted by: nicola (3236) 

One honset Q Tonks, you're not taking Roman iles to be the same as latter ones are you t'is all.

Replied: 25th Mar 2010 at 15:30

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

I've translated that one. And the answer is, no.

In fact, 'I' haven't taken any miles at all, the experts have and they've used Roman miles.
They have used the distances given for the location of other, known, Roman settlements, which have proved to be correct.

I've pointed this out to the Wigan Archaeological Society, in contradiction to one of their daft publications, and they e-mailed me with, "yes, we already know, but it's nice to speculate and we enjoy doing so".

So, there you have it. The Wigan Archaeological Society enjoy talking 5hite and making people believe things that are NOT true.
Teachers in local schools will carry on teaching their pupils 5hite, and the kids will believe it because they know no better.
Then the kids will tell their kids. And so it goes on.

What's not true, will become accepted as true and fact, even though it's false!

Just like Marks and Spencers was founded in Wigan (and not Manchester, like it really was).

And the Trencherfield Mill Steam Engine is the 'World's Biggest Steam Engine' (even though it's clearly not).

Q: Did you have a couple of drinks with your lunch, Nicola?

Replied: 25th Mar 2010 at 20:10

Posted by: nicola (3236) 

I've just re-read what I wrote, and apart from a few coffees, no I hadn't!! I'm appaled reading it again haha!!


Well how about we continue to think that Wigan is Coccium until someone comes along with a better version of events? (After all we are still having the evolution V's intelligent design debate).

I'll set my stall out and say Wigan is most likely Coccium..

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 09:54

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

But, Nicola, you'd may as well set out your stall and say that the entire recorded history of Roman Britain IS WRONG!

Don't you think it's better, and more logical, to go along with factually recorded material, knowing that Wigan was NOT Coccium, until someone comes up with 'absolute proof' that the Romans, who put all those correct locations in the Antonine Itinerary, were p155ed when they wrote the bit about Coccium?

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 10:54

Posted by: nicola (3236) 

But aren't you making your own interpretation of the available data to hand and surmising?

Roads
Iter X: N (15) to Walton le Dale (Lancashire)
Iter X: ESE (16) to MAMVCIVM (Manchester, Greater Manchester)
S (13) to Wilderspool (Cheshire)

"The classical evidence for this minor settlement is slight, with only a single entry in the Antonine Itinerary of the late second century. This document lists a road-station named Coccium, 20 miles from Bremetenacum (Ribchester, Lancashire) and 17 miles from Mancunium (Manchester, Greater Manchester). These distances match the location of the Wigan settlement quite well."



Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 11:26

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

'These distances match the location of the Wigan settlement quite well'?

My ar5e they do!

Nicola, that statement is equivalent to saying 2 + 3 = 7 and, like the experts have pointed out, these distances mark the location well away from Wigan.
I'm prepared to go along with the mathematics of recorded figures, rather than an untruth.

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 11:47

Posted by: nicola (3236) 

Go on then Tonks, to get back to my original Q - which bit of expert interpretation are you referring to?

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 11:51

Posted by: black staff (inactive)

The modern mile is 1,760 yards.

A Roman Mile however was 1,620 yards.

So, which of these would the Antonine Itinerary have used?

EDIT: Ahhh, sorry Tonker, I see you have already factored this in.

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 12:29
Last edited by black staff: 26th Mar 2010 at 12:42:30

Posted by: danni (inactive)

With Nicola being an archeologist and Tonks being well TOnks I'm with Nicola on this

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 17:52

Posted by: the_gwim_weaper (inactive)

Veni Vidi Velcro

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 18:44

Posted by: dustaf (inactive)

That your final answer and you're sticking to it Gwim?

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 18:47

Posted by: the_gwim_weaper (inactive)

Like a stickybob to a sheeps bottom.

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 18:51

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Danni, this is not between Nicola and Tonker. It's between Nicola and the historical Roman records.

The Romans, who built places and the roads connecting these places, made records of the whereabouts of each one and gave each one a name.

Now, 1600 years later, Nicola is trying to say they were wrong.

Example:

Question: In the English Civil War, the 'battle of Wigan Lane' took place in Wigan Lane, Wigan.

Historical fact? Yes!

How do you know?

Answer: Because records of the incident exist, and we believe them.


So. Question: In Roman Britain, Coccium was 'NOT' where Wigan is now.

Historical fact? Yes!

How do you know?

Answer: Because records of Coccium's location exist, yet you refuse to believe them.

Why?



Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 20:15

Posted by: nicola (3236) 

Hang on - don't put words in my mouth - I have not said anyone is wrong, don't take it like that! I have not been "definate" in any of my statements - i have said "likely" - not absolutely - let me have my bubble!

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 20:28

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Ah., backing off now, eh.,?

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 20:29

Posted by: danni (inactive)

Tonks love put your dummy back in, I chose to agree with Nicola cos she's my friend and I felt like it. Plus she is a very good archeologist

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 20:38

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Being an archaeologist is irrelevant. In fact, her being an archaeologist, she should be more in keeping with Roman Britain than to promote something which is only a supposition rather than important recorded evidence.

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 20:45

Posted by: danni (inactive)

go cook a pizza

Replied: 26th Mar 2010 at 21:33

Posted by: nicola (3236) 

I'll default on a technicality I would still like to believe it was here, but Tonks if you had actually answered my question in the first place and given either of your sources as Ian Miller or David Shotter then it would have been dealt with quicker (i've had a weekend of quick reading! ), BUT you never answered my question so ner ner to you Tonks, who was ducking the issue there!!

Danni - Wiggin was probably a staging post or resources depot type place - but I will remain to live in hope for the "Coccium - Please Drive Carefully" sign (which i am currently working on in the shed, but i'm not much of a stone mason!)

Replied: 29th Mar 2010 at 09:24

Posted by: black staff (inactive)

Did they decide what type of building the hypocaust system belonged to?

I am no expert by any means, but the site looks perfect for a bath house, with the Douglas close by... running its original course. I walked Hadrian's Wall in 2007 and we visited a few forts... and the bath houses always stood on a hill above a river. Maybe Wigan began as a Vicus to the fort?

EDIT: Just done a bit of searching, I see it was a bath house.

Replied: 29th Mar 2010 at 15:16
Last edited by black staff: 29th Mar 2010 at 15:50:19

Posted by: danni (inactive)

and did they have bath houses at staging posts?

Replied: 29th Mar 2010 at 18:16

Posted by: black staff (inactive)

Not too sure on that to be honest, but I have read that three Roman roads met in the Wigan area, if that is true it would have more than a staging post I reckon. It would have been a trading post as well perhaps, and yes... maybe a place to get drunk and get laid. That alone would suggest a military presence, it would after all be the Roman Soldier who was the customer. They would also administer the roads if other places are anything to go by.

A bath house is usually in a fairly high status site I understand?

Replied: 29th Mar 2010 at 22:20

Posted by: nicola (3236) 

It may have formed part of a Mansio - rest-up place, ale house, bath, B+B that type of thing..

Replied: 30th Mar 2010 at 08:18

Posted by: compingnut (54)

OK weapons down. I know I have mainly kept out of the argument because up to now I have been ignorant of the facts. I realise the Paddy Gore School of Rome has its limitations. One last question- What Roman artefac will be found next and where?

Replied: 1st Dec 2010 at 14:46

Posted by: empress (9667) 

If artifacts are found its likely it will be kept quiet , lets face it, nothing stops more eyesores being built in Wigan regardless of its historical importance . I'd love it to be proved to be Coccium one day.

Replied: 1st Dec 2010 at 17:26

Posted by: mswigan (inactive)

Can you believe they built over Roman remains to build the Grand Arcade and also in the Wiend.

Replied: 1st Dec 2010 at 19:12

Posted by: mojim (1679)

Don't that just sound like Wigan officials...anything of historical interest...just get rid of it...I wouldn't pay em with washers.

Replied: 1st Dec 2010 at 19:18

Posted by: dr wat (inactive)

tonker so the Romans where here for 400 years they kept well away from Ashton and Haydock

Replied: 2nd Dec 2010 at 19:33

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

The Roman's are believed to have travelled northerly from Warrington.

With Haydock and Ashton being north of Warrington and south of Wigan, it follows that the Romans were in Haydock and Ashton before they got to Wigan. Clearly!


Replied: 2nd Dec 2010 at 19:44

Posted by: dr wat (inactive)

no they came from Manchester and missed them out

Replied: 2nd Dec 2010 at 20:05

Posted by: bennyball (15)

Most major towns and citys are built on historical remains, if we didnt we would just have lots of big holes with odd shaped pieces of stone sticking out. Only the very high status historical sites are kept for posterity.

Replied: 6th Dec 2010 at 13:22

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

A bit of a sensible comment there, from that Standish lad. He's clearly not a Wiganer!

Replied: 6th Dec 2010 at 14:24

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

Anyroadup, one of my mates, over in Spain, is an archaeologist (of some standing). I told him about Nicola and Wigan Archaeology Group arguing with me, all them years ago. He just laughed!

Replied: 6th May 2019 at 20:50

Posted by: MarieM (5563)

When I go passed the Moon Under Water and look up the Wiend. If you can imagine when there were no buildings, the Romans would have been able to see for miles in all directions. Tonker, let your mate laugh

Replied: 7th May 2019 at 18:26

Posted by: tonker (29779) 

M, Wigan is in a hole, surrounded all round by higher ground. It follows that nobody could see "for miles" in any direction!

My mate, Rogan, is an authority on archaeology but mainly in paleontology. He agrees with me on most things!

Replied: 7th May 2019 at 20:13

Posted by: baker boy (15758)

wigan is in a hole,an interesting observation.
my theory is the douglas played a big part in choosing coccium as a hill fort.its quite possible it went round two or three sides of coccium.

Replied: 13th May 2019 at 09:58

Posted by: MarieM (5563)

tonker, ask your mate where was he stood when he was in a hole in Wigan town centre near where the Wiend and Coccium was.

Replied: 24th May 2019 at 17:50

 

Note: You must login to use this feature.

If you haven't registered, why not join now?. Registration is free.