@ramtopsgrum @Gerrarrdus @ArchdruidEileen Phoenician trade with Britons is known (check with @caitlinrgreen). But Stones unbusinesslike.
-
-
Replying to @Gerrarrdus
@Gerrarrdus I doubt they would have. It would seem so unbusinesslike. Too much effort for some stones.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Gerrarrdus
@Gerrarrdus On that, talk with@caitlinrgreen. As far as I'm concerned she's the expert I know of; whatever she says goes on this.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Gurdur
@Gurdur@Gerrarrdus Most kind of you to say :) Fwiw, my thoughts on the topic of Punic contact are here: http://www.caitlingreen.org/2015/04/thanet-tanit-and-the-phoenicians.html … >2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
@Gerrarrdus From@caitlinrgreen's post; evidence from Poole Harbour alone seems to bear out Punic/Cornwall links. But I am not a historian3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Gurdur
@Gurdur Plymouth in@caitlinrgreen's second link would make more sense for Cornwall, but is still not a clincher that it's Phoenician.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Gerrarrdus
@Gerrarrdus@Gurdur I was going to mention Plymouth ;) The name of the Iron Age fort at the entrance is v suggestive + clear Punic use of >2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
@caitlinrgreen@Gerrarrdus God I love it when linguistics gets involved & cited. (Linguistics tho mostly only morphosyntactics was my area)1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
@Gurdur @Gerrarrdus It's the combination of numismatic, textual and linguistic evidence that def works for me---weight of evidence etc!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.