¹⁴⁰ W. Camden, Britannia (1586). J. Horsley's comprehensive early study of the subject, Britannia Romana (1732). For a less considered debate see, for example, the acrimonious exchange between Messrs Ferguson and Nicholson in the third issue of the Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society, CW¹ iii (1877), 64-94, 167-74, 182-9.

¹⁴¹ A.L.F. Rivet and C. Smith, The Place-names of Roman Britain (1979), 141-2, 170-2, 209-11, 220-3, 232-3.

¹⁴² Throughout this paper, distances are given in Roman miles; 1 Roman mile = 1.48 km.

¹⁴³ Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 170-2.

¹⁴⁴ Richmond, I.A., ‘The Sarmatae, Bremetennacum Veteranorum and the Regio Bremetennacensis’, JRS xxxv (1945), 15–29; RIB 583.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁵ Haverfield, F., ‘The Romano-British names of Ravenglass and Borrans (Muncaster and Ambleside)’, Arch. Journ. lxxii (1915), 77–84.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁶ Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 367.

¹⁴⁷ ibid., 243-4. W.F.H. Nicolaisen, Scottish Place-names (1976), 186-7.

¹⁴⁸ E. Ekwall, English River-names (1928), 226-8. The meaning of the name remains obscure; see also Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 328.

¹⁴⁹ ibid., 171.

¹⁵⁰ Rivet, A.L.F., ‘The British section of the Antonine Itinerary’, Britannia i (1970), 54.Google Scholar

¹⁵¹ Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 171. Wilson, T.. ‘The Roman road over Whinfell’, CW¹ vii (1884), 90–5.Google ScholarBirley, E., ‘The Roman fort at Low Borrow Bridge’, CW² xlvii (1948), 16–8Google Scholar , endorses Wilson's route.

¹⁵² R.G. Collingwood and R.P. Wright, The Roman Inscriptions of Britain, 1: Inscriptions on Stone (1965), RIB 600.

¹⁵³ Shotter, D.C.A., ‘The Roman name for Lancaster’, in Jones, G.D.B.et al, Roman Lancaster, Brigantia Monograph 1 (1988), 220–2.Google Scholar Repeated in D. Shotter and A. White, The Roman Fort and Town of Lancaster (1990), 12-15.

¹⁵⁴ D. Shotter, Romans and Britons in North-West England (1993), 105-9.

¹⁵⁵ Hildyard, E.J.W., ‘Excavations at Burrow in Lonsdale. 1952-53’. CW² liv (1955). 88–9, 93.Google Scholar Also a summary in D. Shotter and A. White, The Romans in Lunesdale (1995), 40-5.

¹⁵⁶ Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 172. Camden. op. cit. (note 140), 431-4, also proposed this sequence.

¹⁵⁷ Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 150-3.

¹⁵⁸ E. Ekwall, The Place-names of Lancashire (1922), 167-8. Ekwall, op. cit. (note 148), 270-1. Early forms of the name are Loin, Lon, Loon, Lonn (twelfth century), Lone (thirteenth century), Loone (fourteenth century) and Lune (sixteenth century). The currently preferred derivation of Lune is from Welsh llawn, equivalent to Old Irish slan, meaning ‘health giving’, ibid., 271.

¹⁵⁹ Richmond, I.A., ‘Excavations on the site of the Roman fort at Lancaster, 1950’, Trans. Historic Soc. Lanes. & Cheshire cv (1953), 22–3Google Scholar , is also of the view that Contrebis refers to the district covering the lower Lune valley.

¹⁶⁰ Birley, E., ‘The Roman site at Burrow in Lonsdale’, CW² xlvi (1947), 135–7Google Scholar , considers the possible import of Contrebis from Contrebia via the cohors I Celtiberorum (recorded in Britain by CIL xvi.51, 69, 93, and possibly at Caersws in RIB 2471.1) but rejects this because of the association of the name with Gallia Narbonensis, through Ialonus, and because of the probable civilian dedication by Vatta. However, in ‘The Deities of Roman Britain’, Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt 11.18.1 (1989), 67, he maintains an open mind on the subject.

¹⁶¹ A.L.F. Rivet, Gallia Narbonensis (1988), 163, 166 (map). The only remotely comparable river name in the region is the Alzon (*Alisos/*Alisone) at the head of the town's aqueduct.

¹⁶² The inscription dates to the second century (Birley, op. cit. (note 160, 1947), 136) or third century (Collingwood and Wright in RIB 600). K.H. Jackson, ‘The British Language during the Period of the English Settlements’, in N.K. Chadwick (ed.), Studies in Early British History (1954), 68-9, proposes British au>δ [o:] by the late first century, >ū by the late third century. P.Y. Lambert, ‘Welsh Caswallawn: The Fate of British *au’, in A. Bammesberger and A. Wollman (eds), Britain 400-600, Language and History (1990), 203-15, argues that au>δ[o:] and remained as such.

¹⁶³ Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 244.

¹⁶⁴ ibid., 216-25.

¹⁶⁵ Jarrett, M.G. and Stephens, G.R., ‘The Roman garrisons of Maryport’, CW¹ lxxxvii (1987), 65.Google ScholarDavies, R.W., ‘Cohors I Hispanorum and the garrisons of Maryport’, CW¹ lxxvii (1977), 7–16. See also n. 171 below.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁶ T.W. Potter, Romans in North-West England: Excavations at the Roman Forts of Ravenglass, Watercrook and Bowness on Solway (1979), 180.

¹⁶⁷ Shotter, op. cit. (note 154), 90.

¹⁶⁸ An early fourth-century date for the compilation of the Notitia for northern England has been mooted, prompted by the old-fashioned regimental names recorded there, but this possibility now seems unlikely. The debate is summarized in Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 218-25.

¹⁶⁹ D.C.A. Shotter, ‘The Roman garrisons at Lancaster’, in Jones et al., op. cit. (note 153), 212-19.

¹⁷⁰ This quingenary unit ma y have been at Chesterholm in the second century if the largely illegible RIB 1691 is accepted. On e of the unit's lead seals was also found at Newstead; Richmond, I.A., ‘Roman leaden sealings from Brough-under-Stainmore’, CW² xxxvi (1936), 125.Google ScholarJarrett, M.G., ‘Non-legionary troops in Roma n Britain: Part One, The Units’, Britannia xxv (1994), 64.Google Scholar Civilian occupation may also have occurred within the fourth-century fort at Lancaster following destruction of much of the earlier vicus. Shotter and White, op. cit. (note 153), 33.

¹⁷¹ Derivation of Alione from Alauna fails to explain the intrusion of-i- which is regarded as a scribal error by Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 245.

¹⁷² The absence of the relevant detail is also illustrated in the careless restoration to by W.T. Watkin, Roman Lancashire (1883), 28.

¹⁷³ Shotter and White, op. cit. (note 155), 101.

¹⁷⁴ For the importance of river deities, with British examples, see Alcock, J.P., ‘Celtic water cults in Roma n Britain’, Arch. Journ. cxxii (1965), 1–12.Google Scholar For some place-name examples see also G. Webster, The British Celts and their Gods under Rome (1986), 72-3.

¹⁷⁵ A. Campbell, Old English Grammar (1959), 254.

¹⁷⁶ In compound names, ea usually, but not always, forms the last element as in Mersey, Waveney, Sweeney and Twineham. A contrasting form is Yeadon/Eaton.

¹⁷⁷ K.H. Jackson, Language and History in Early Britain (1953), 195 (sound substitution), 214-18 (Anglo-Saxon ascendancy).

¹⁷⁸ ibid., 305-17. British ū was retained in Anglo-Saxon as ū in the fifth-sixth centuries but was rendered as either u or i in words adopted in the sixth-seventh centuries and as u or y in the seventh-eighth centuries.

¹⁷⁹ Campbell, op. cit. (note 175), 148. Alne and Allan, from Alauna, are obvious examples of this process.

¹⁸⁰ Lambert, op. cit. (note 162), 203-15. The Notitia name Alione, dating to the end of the fourth century, unless a fossilized form, undermines Jackson's third-century δ>ū and supports Lambert's case for a retained δ[o:].

¹⁸¹ Richmond, op. cit. (note 159), 22. Derivation based on G. Dottin, La langue gauloise (1920), in, 262. Examples in Holder, A., Alt-Celtischer Sprachschatz 11 (1904), 7.Google Scholar

¹⁸² Ekwall, op. cit. (note 148), 124, 161; Jackson, op. cit. (note 177), 345.

¹⁸³ K. Miller, Itineraria Romana (1916), cols 29-30 (map), 387. Wissowa, G. and Kroll, W. (eds), Paulys Real-Encyclopadie ix.i (1914), col. 545Google Scholar , equate the Iala with Pliny's Iactus (Natural History III.118).

¹⁸⁴ Nicolaisen, op. cit. (note 147), 177-9, for this formation with numerous examples. Watkins, C., ‘“River” in Celtic and Indo-European’, Eriu xxiv (1973), 80, for an alternative explanation.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁵ Nicolaisen, op. cit. (note 147), 186, proposes a -nā extension to a uā- formation. Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 243, Lambert, op. cit. (note 162), 214, and E.P. Hamp, ‘Alauno-, -ā. Linguistic change and proper names’, Beiträge zur Namenforschung² x (1975), 173-8, discuss alternative etymologies.

¹⁸⁶ Nicolaisen, op. cit. (note 147), 186-7. See also Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 243-4, for a discussion of alternative derivations.

¹⁸⁷ Pokorny, J., Indogermanisches Etymologisches Worterbuch 1 (1959), 285.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁸ See, for example, the distribution map of British Alauna names in Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 243.

¹⁸⁹ Jackson in Rivet, op. cit. (note 150), 74.

¹⁹⁰ A Roman shield was apparently found near the village in 1800. C. Rothwell, Garstang Town Trail (1983), 2.

¹⁹¹ Shotter and White, op. cit. (note 153), 50.

¹⁹² B.P. Hindle, Roads and Trackways of The Lake District (1984), 49-61 (medieval), 62-79 (modern).

¹⁹³ Ekwall, op. cit. (note 148), 31.

¹⁹⁴ Shotter, D., ‘Recent finds of Roman Coins in Cumbria’, CW² xciv (1994), 293.Google Scholar D. Shotter, Roman Coins from North-West England: First Supplement 1995 (1995), 77-81.

¹⁹⁵ Villy, F., ‘A Roman road north-west from Overborough’, CW² xxxvii (1937), 49–51.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁶ Jackson, op. cit. (note 177), 70; Rivet, op. cit. (note 150), 53-4.

¹⁹⁷ D.C.A. Shotter, ‘Watercrook and Ravenglass: the names and the garrisons’, in Potter, op. cit. (note 166), 316-17. Shotter subsequently accepts the ‘aquatic’ relationship in P. Graystone, Walking Roman Roads in East Cumbria (1994), 5.

¹⁹⁸ Collingwood, R.G., ‘The exploration of the Roman fort at Ambleside: Report on the second year's work (1914)’, CW² xv (1915), 2–62.Google ScholarLeech, R.H., ‘The Roman fort and vicus at Ambleside: Archaeological research in 1982’, CW² xciii (1993), 51–74.Google Scholar Shotter, op. cit. (note 154), 35.

¹⁹⁹ Richmond, I.A. and Crawford, O.G.S., ‘The British section of the Ravenna Cosmography’, Archaeologia xciii (1949), 35Google Scholar , contemplate the River Rothay ‘bursting’ into Lake Windermere to justify the identification of Galava with Ambleside.

²⁰⁰ The location was first proposed by Horsley in 1732. op. cit. (note 140), 102-4. Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 380-1, reject the identification out of hand.

²⁰¹ ibid.. 381.

²⁰² Shotter, op. cit. (note 154), 107. Potter, op. cit. (note 166), 42. RIB 2411.94.

²⁰³ A.R. Burn, The Romans in Britain: an Anthology of Inscriptions (1932), 111. for the translation.

²⁰⁴ Hassalland, M.W.C.Tomlin, R.S.O., Britannia xxvi (1995), 389–90.Google Scholar This army unit, located in a frontier coastal outpost, may have retained its naval tradition although similar units in Aquitaine (Villeneuve-sur-Lot), Lower Germany (Cologne), and Syria (archers at Beirut) appear to have been regular army regiments. P.A. Holder, Studies in the Auxilia of the Roman Army from Augustus to Trajan, BAR Int. Ser. 70 (1980), 67, 238, 333-4. For a discussion of this issue, see Hind, J.G.F., ‘Agricola's fleet and Portus Trucculensis’, Britannia v (1974), 287 (n.14).Google Scholar If cohors I Aelia classica had operated around the Cumbrian coast in a naval capacity, this might possibly explain the distribution of the two artefacts discussed. Another diploma recording the unit's name has been found at Chesters (RIB 2401.10/CIL XVI.93).

²⁰⁵ Ptolemy's Ituna estuary, from its relative position (Geography 11.3.3), must refer to the Solway Eden and not to the smaller inlet at Ravenglass.

²⁰⁶ D.J. Breeze and B. Dobson, Hadrian's Wall (1976), 272-3, for a typical summary of the evidence.

²⁰⁷ Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 408-9.

²⁰⁸ P.S. Austen, ‘How big was the second largest fort on Hadrian's Wall at Bowness-on-Solway’, in V.A. Maxfield and M.J. Dobson (eds), Roman Trontier Studies 1989—Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies (1991), 6-8. Bellhouse, R.L., ‘Hadrian's Wall: the forts at Drumburgh’, CW² lxxxix (1989), 35Google Scholar , gives a slightly smaller figure of 2.2 h a (5.46 acres).

²⁰⁹ A tribune, Sulpicius Secundianus, is recorded at the fort in a.d. 251-3 (RIB 2057, 2058), but by this date the title may not be indicative of a milliary cohort command. A naval tribune is recorded in CIL 11.2224.

²¹⁰ Cowen, J.D. and Richmond, I.A., ‘The Rudge cup’, Arch. Ael.⁴ xii (1935), 310–42.Google Scholar

²¹¹ ibid., 324. Heurgon, J., ‘The Amiens Patera’, JRS xli (1951), 22.Google Scholar

²¹² Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 233, as just one example among many.

²¹³ Cowen and Richmond, op. cit. (note 210), 319 (n. 17), 331, 333.

²¹⁴ The on-going confusion is more recently illustrated in N. Hodgson, ‘The Notitia Dignitatum and the later Roman garrison of Britain’, in Maxfield and Dobson, op. cit. (note 208), 90-1.

²¹⁵ Bowness appears to have been occupied into the late fourth century but possibly only with a reduced garrison. Potter, op. cit. (note 166), 323.

²¹⁶ Mann, J.C., ‘Birdoswald to Ravenglass’, Britannia xx (1989), 76.Google Scholar It is clear, from the largely intact chain of Roma n defences around the north Cumbrian coast, that any coastal changes are unlikely to have been substantial enough to allow for such a lost feature.

²¹⁷ Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 315.

²¹⁸ Potter, op. cit. (note 166), 333-4, 337–9, 344-5.

²¹⁹ I.A. Richmond and J.P. Gillam, ‘Report of the Cumberland Excavation Committee for 1947-49: 3. Milecastle 79 (Solway)’, CW ² lii (1953), 28-37. They report an absence of ‘carinated bowls, handled mugs and debased rustic ware’ at the MC79 site.

²²⁰ Bellhouse, R.L. and Richardson, G.G.S., ‘The Roman site at Kirkbride, Cumberland’, CW² lxxv (1975), 79–89.Google Scholar

²²¹ Bellhouse, R.L., ‘Roman sites on the Cumberland Coast: Hadrian's Wall. The fort at Bowness-on-Solway, a reappraisal’, CW² lxxxviii (1988), 33–53.Google ScholarSimpson, F.G., Richmond, L.A. and McIntyre, J.M., ‘The Stone Wall, Turf Wall and Vallum west of Burgh-by-Sands’, CW² xxxv (1935), 213–20.Google Scholar

²²² Accepting the timetable proposed by Breeze and Dobson, op. cit. (note 206), 77.

²²³ Austen, P.S., ‘Recent excavations on Hadrian's Wall, Burgh-by-Sands’, CW² xciv (1994), 49–53.Google ScholarCollingwood, R.G., ‘Exploration at the Roman fort of Burgh-by-Sands’, CW² xxiii (1923), 2 (map).Google Scholar

²²⁴ Breeze and Dobson, op. cit. (note 206), 68-9.

²²⁵ ibid., 47. Simpson, F.G. and Richmond, L.A., ‘Report of the Cumberland Excavation Committee for 1947-49: 1. The Roman fort at Drumburgh’, CW² lii (1953), 13.Google Scholar

²²⁶ Potter, T., ‘The Biglands milefortlet and the Cumberland coastal defences’, Britannia viii (1977), 149–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Richmond and Gillam, op. cit. (note 219), 17-37. Simpson, F.G., Hodgson, K.S.et al., ‘The coastal mile-fortlet at Cardurnock’, CW² xlvii (1948), 78–127.Google ScholarJones, G.D.B., ‘The western extension of Hadrian's Wall: Bowness to Cardurnock’, Britannia vii (1976), 236–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²²⁷ Jarrett and Stephens, op. cit. (note 165), 61, date the foundation of Maryport to about a.d. 122–3. Bellhouse, R.L., ‘Roman sites on the Cumberland Coast, 1968–1969’, CW² lxx (1970), 40–7Google Scholar , established that the coastal chain was set-out from Maryport at the same or later date. Bellhouse, R.L. (Jarrett, M.G.), ‘Roman sites on the Cumberland coast, 1954’, CW² liv (1955), 40, 49–50Google Scholar , reports the find of a coin in near mint condition and dated to a.d. 119-21 which appears to have been placed in the foundations of Tower 13a and this suggests that the coastal system and fort were contemporary.

²²⁸ Bellhouse, R.L., ‘Roman sites on the Cumberland Coast 1966–1967’, CW² lxix (1969), 69–74.Google ScholarJones, G.D.B., ‘The Solway frontier: Interim report 1976–81’, Britannia xiii (1982), 296.Google Scholar

²²⁹ Potter, op. cit. (note 166), 324-35; Richmond and Gillam, op. cit. (note 219), 28-37.

²³⁰ Collingwood, R.G., ‘Roman signal-stations on the Cumberland coast’, CW² xxix (1929), 149–50.Google Scholar The spacing of Collingwood's sites is not consistent, however, with a Wall terminus at Drumburgh nor with an extension of either the milecastle or milefortlet systems. Sites some 200 m west of Milecastles 77-80 would be more suited to a potential Drumburgh-Biglands milefortlet arrangement.

²³¹ Higharn, N.J. and Jones, G.D.B., ‘Frontier, forts and fanners—Cumbrian aerial survey 1974–5’, Arch. Journ. cxxxii (1975), 20–3.Google Scholar

²³² Simpson, Richmond and McIntyre, op. cit. (note 221), 214-15.

²³³ Simpson and Richmond, op. cit. (note 225), 14. Some stones are still located at NY 2625 6027.

²³⁴ Frere, S.S., ‘Roman Britain in 1985: 1. Sites explored’, Britannia xvii (1986), 376–8.Google Scholar The conjectural fort outline encloses about 0.85 ha (2 acres) but should probably be larger.

²³⁵ Birley, E., ‘The Beaumont inscription, the Notitia Dignitatum, and the garrison of Hadrian's Wall’, CW² xxxix (1939), 190–4.Google Scholar

²³⁶ Birley, E., ‘The Roman fort at Moresby’, CW² xxxxviii (1949), 55–6.Google ScholarRIB 797, 803, 804.

²³⁷ Accepting Davies, op. cit. (note 165), 7-16. Jarrett and Stephens, op. cit. (note 165), 61-6, are inconclusive and depend on dubious identifications for other forts in the region. Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 221, regard the Notitia name Axeloduno as a copying error and rather arbitrarily correct it to Mais (= Bowness). This is based on the need to find a place for Bowness in the list of Notitia commands and to retain the Rudge Cup name for Stanwix as Uxelodunum while arguing that Petrianis, also located by the Notitia Dignitatum at Stanwix, is a ghost name. Mann, op. cit. (note 216), 78 (n. 13), makes a persuasive case for rejecting Petrianis as a ghost name and an alternative explanation for this problem, requiring no re-writing of the Notitia, may be that both Maryport and Stanwix were initially named Uxelodunum. However, the proximity of the two forts and the resulting confusion may have led to the latter being renamed after its garrison which was the premier auxiliary unit in Britain, the ala Petriana.

²³⁸ Bellhouse, R.L., ‘The Roman fort at Burrow Walls, near Workington’, CW² lv (1956), 40.Google Scholar

²³⁹ Ptolemy's estuary at Moricambe, meaning ‘curved or crooked sea’ and probably located on the Cumbrian coast, might provide a comparable native name. Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141), 420-1.

²⁴⁰ Richmond and Crawford, op. cit. (note 199), 1-50. B. Jones and D. Mattingly, An Atlas of Roman Britain (1990), 31 (Map 2:14). See also Dilleman, L., ‘Observations on Chapter V.31, Britannia, in the Ravenna Cosmography’, Archaeologia cvi (1979), 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁴¹ Names as restored by Rivet and Smith, op. cit. (note 141) and numbered 110-20 in Richmond and Crawford, op. cit. (note 199), 18.

²⁴² Richmond and Crawford, op. cit. (note 199), 40, see the sweeping landscape there reflecting the name. However, Shotter, op. cit. (note 154), 107, favours the more meaningful association of Mediobogdo with Watercrook.

²⁴³ The site will be the subject of a forthcoming report by the Canterbury Archaeological Trust which will be published in Archaeologia Cantiana, the journal of the Kent Archaeological Society.