[2655] Hist. of Imbanking and Drayning, &c., 1662, pp. 16-7.
[2656] Agricola, 31,—corpora ipsa ac manus silvis ac paludibus emuniendis inter verbera ac contumelias conteruntur.
[2657] R. Furley, Hist. of the Weald of Kent, i, 29.
[2658] C. J. Caesar’s Brit. Expeditions, pp. 42-3.
[2659] Ib., pp. 137-8, § 11.
[2660] Archaeologia, xl, 1866, pp. 367-8.
[2661] Archaeol. Journal, xxxiii, 1876, pp. 60, 63. Cf. Roach Smith, Ant. of Richborough, &c., p. 245; Journ. Brit. Archaeol. Association, i, 1845, pp. 40-2; and A. J. Dunkin, Report of the ... Brit. Archaeol. Association, Sept., 1844, pp. 116-9. Besides pottery, many human skeletons, and also tusks of boars and horses’ teeth were discovered. Roach Smith (Retrospections, i, 1883, p. 207) concludes from these discoveries that the marsh ‘could not possibly have been submerged in the time of the Romans’. Not, certainly, at the time when the articles in question were deposited there: but why not before? ‘The time of the Romans’ amounted to nearly four centuries.
[2662] C. J. Caesar’s Brit. Expeditions, p. 136, § 9.
[2663] Archaeologia, xl, 1866, p. 372. According to Elliott (ib., p. 365), a coin of Carausius, who ruled in Britain from A.D. 287 to 293, was found near Dymchurch.
[2664] R. Furley, Hist. of the Weald of Kent, i, 29. Against these facts Appach’s argument (C. J. Caesar’s Brit. Expeditions, p. 134, § 3) that if Romney Marsh had existed ‘in the earlier period of the Roman settlement’ Stone Street, assuming that it existed, ‘would have been carried onward to Romney, the seaport,’ is of no avail. There is no evidence that Romney was ‘the seaport’ until long after the departure of the Romans.