Roman Rule After The 3rd Century
The Diocese of Britain was placed under the overall authority of the praetorian prefecture for the Gaullic region. Even though the late Roman civil administration of Britain is shadowy, it is only because of the survival of the Notitia Dignitatum that we can sketch the outline of Roman Britain. This document is the primary source of the changes and alterations made to the province of Britannia by the Roman government. The primary objective for the creation of new provinces was to improve the link between Britain and the near Continent, where the praetorian prefect had a main base at Trier. Britannia Prima had two legions, the Second Augusta at Caerleon and the Twentieth at Chester. Of the four provinces in the Diocese of Britain, Britannia Prima was the largest, and it was generally focused on western England, with either Cirencester or Gloucester as the capital. The main reason to believe that Cirencester was the capital of Britannia Prima is an inscription from Cirensester itself, referring poetically to a rector or ruler of Britannia Prima by the name of L. Septimius. The governors of Britannia Prima were of equestrian rank, although few are known by name. The province is named in the Verona List and probably encompassed all of what is now south western England as well as Wales, stretching from Cornubia to North Wales and east to the Gloucester and Cirencester area.
Read more about this topic: Britannia Prima
Famous quotes containing the words roman, rule and/or century:
“Uprises there
A mother’s form upon my ken,
Guiding my infant steps, as when
We walked that ancient, thoroughfare,
The Roman Road.”
—Thomas Hardy (1840–1928)
“Freedom of men under government is to have a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society, and made by the legislative power vested in it; a liberty to follow my own will in all things, when the rule prescribes not, and not to be subject to the inconstant, unknown, arbitrary will of another man.”
—John Locke (1632–1704)
“The general feeling was, and for a long time remained, that one had several children in order to keep just a few. As late as the seventeenth century . . . people could not allow themselves to become too attached to something that was regarded as a probable loss. This is the reason for certain remarks which shock our present-day sensibility, such as Montaigne’s observation, “I have lost two or three children in their infancy, not without regret, but without great sorrow.””
—Philippe Ariés (20th century)