Location
Despite its former importance, the original location of Dommoc has been lost for many centuries and forms the subject of scholarly debate. This reflects rival claims staked during the 13th century by the monks of Eye, Suffolk (for Dunwich, Suffolk), and of Rochester in Kent (for Walton, Suffolk). The uncertainty therefore arose between the tenth and twelfth centuries. William Camden, in his Britannia, promoted general acceptance of the identification with Dunwich, formerly a splendid city on the Suffolk coast between Aldeburgh and Southwold, all but a tiny part of which has now been lost to coastal erosion. The Rochester claim for Walton refers to the place near or in Felixstowe, Suffolk, at the tip of the Colneis peninsula between the River Deben and the River Orwell. This Walton is not to be confused with Walton-on-the-Naze, Essex, which stands on the south side of the Orwell and Stour estuary mouth, and which has never been seriously considered as a candidate for Dommoc. The scholarly revival of the claim for Walton as Dommoc was the work of Stuart Rigold.
Bede records that Sigeberht ruled East Anglia together with Ecgric, his relative or cognatus, who until Sigeberht's abdication had ruled over part of the kingdom, and afterwards succeeded to the rule of all of it. The meaning of the arrangement is not clear, but there is no difficulty in accepting that during his own reign Sigeberht had the power to grant a coastal site to Felix either at Dunwich or Felixstowe, since it was he who granted the land, possibly an old shore fort, at Cnobheresburg to Saint Fursey (Historia Ecclesiastica, iii.17-18).
Bede's use of the term civitas for Dommoc, (which is also occasionally called Domnoc or Dommoc-ceastre), suggests that the site had once been a Roman settlement, possibly fortified. The re-use of Roman forts or fortified enclosures for early Anglo-Saxon ecclesiastical and monastic purposes is well-attested, for instance at Othona (Bradwell-on-Sea, Essex), Rochester and Reculver (Kent), Durobrivae (Castor, Cambridgeshire), and in East Anglia at Fursey's monastery (probably Burgh Castle, or Gariannonum). It is certain that there was a stone fort at Walton, like other shore-forts of about 6 acres (24,000 m2) enclosure, and that it was adjacent to a large Roman settlement, most of which (including the fort) is now lost into the sea. The nature of Roman Dunwich is less well understood, for although some important Roman roads lead towards it, the site was lost to the sea too early for archaeological records. However it formerly had an important harbour which might have been protected by a fort. (Similarly Aldeburgh (which means 'old burgh' in Old English) may also have possessed a fort defending the Alde estuary.) The placename evidence is also indecisive.
G.E. Fox and C.E. Stevens suggested that the fort at Walton might be the Portus Adurni of the Notitia Dignitatum, usually identified as Portchester. Be that as it may, the existence of additional forts not mentioned in the Notitia presents no difficulty since that is not a list of all fortresses, but of military units and their stations under the command of the Count of the Saxon Shore.
Read more about this topic: Dommoc