In 43 AD, the Roman Empire invaded Britain, although we have only recently learned that its “conquest” began earlier. Historian Cassius Dion wrote in the third century that Verica, ruler of the Atrebates in southern Britain and allied with Rome, had fled “outcast”. That escape served as an excuse and made it easier for Claudio to attack the island. Until now, we believed that Verika, a descendant of King Komio, was a human. Miles Russell, archaeologist and professor at Bournemouth University, argues that she was a woman.
The king was actually the queen. The British archaeologist revealed in Current Archeology and in his later book “Caratacus: Great King of Britain” that Verica was the queen and he does so based on three reasons: her name ends in “a”, which is common among female names of the time and which we see in Cartimandua, Queen of the Brigantes (in Yorkshire, Yorkshire) and in Yorkshire (Norsenica) (Norsenica).
Most of the arguments are found on coins minted in his name and in Hampshire and Sussex. The second reason is that the word “Rex” appearing in them is a gender-neutral title, so it doesn’t preclude her from being a woman. A third depicted figure: “While other Iron Age British leaders minted on coins are clearly depicted as masculine warriors, Verica is depicted as a slender, feminine, bare-chested figure on a horse,” the archaeologist explained.
Coins as written text only. Since there are almost no written texts from Iron Age Britain, it appears that coins are virtually the only written evidence that lasted for those 2,000 years. “COMF” also appears on coins, interpreted as the son of Comeo, but could also mean daughter.
Claudio’s chance. For Claudius, an emperor who was derided by Roman historians such as Dion Cassius as weak and easily swayed by his wives, this invasion was the perfect occasion to demonstrate his military prowess. Russell maintains that the campaign in Cassius’s account of Dion’s victory is born of the whispers of a “barbarous femme fatale,” which fits the image of a cunning Claudius and a womanizer of Verica.
Why is it important?. So why assume from the start that Verica was human? Russell explains that this is often attributed to “the patriarchal mindset of 19th-century classical historians,” as he puts it for EurekAlert. And his role was fundamental in the special relationship between Great Britain and Rome at the beginning of the first century. If C. Russell is correct, there were at least three leading political leaders in pre-Roman Britain, all from the 1st century AD. C. Furthermore, archaeologists consider Verica to be the most significant of the three. According to archaeologists, the fact that he used the word rex on the coins proves that Verica ruled with the emperor’s full approval.
Miles Russell’s theory also fits with a DNA study in which more than 50 genomes from a cemetery in Dorset, regions of Durotriges and not Atrebates, were analyzed and a conclusion was reached: most individuals descended from the same ancestor through the maternal line, and approached the maternal line in society. Their wives live with the community.
In Xataka | The Roman Empire set foot in Britain in 43 AD. We now know that its “conquest” began long ago.
In Xataka | History’s first “diaspora” lived next to the Vatican: Rome had an English quarter in 950
cover Jenny Wikimedia Commons
