Editing Fishbourne Roman Palace (section)

==History and description==

[[File:Reconstruction Fishbourne 1.JPG|thumb|Reconstructed wall painting]]

The first buildings on the site were [[granary|granaries]], over {{cvt|33|m|ft}} long, apparently a supply base for the [[Roman army]] constructed in the early part of the [[Roman invasion of Britain|conquest]] in 43&nbsp;AD. Later, two residential timber-frame buildings were constructed, one with clay and mortar floors and plaster walls which appears to have been a house of some comfort.<ref>[[Barry Cunliffe|Cunliffe, Barry]] (1998), Fishbourne Roman Palace. The History Press. {{ISBN|0752414089}} p.39</ref>

These buildings were demolished around 60&nbsp;AD and replaced nearby with an elaborate and substantial stone-walled villa, or proto-palace, in about 65&nbsp;AD which included a courtyard garden with colonnades and a bath suite, together with two other buildings, and using material taken from the earlier buildings. It was decorated with wall paintings, stucco mouldings and ''[[opus sectile]]'' marble polychrome panels. The life-size head of a young man carved in marble, found during excavations in May 1964, and identified as a likeness of [[Nero]] aged 13 created at, or shortly after, his formal adoption by the [[emperor]] [[Claudius]] in 50&nbsp;AD<ref>{{Cite journal |doi=10.11141/ia.32.5 |title=Finding Nero: shining a new light on Romano-British sculpture |journal=Internet Archaeology |issue=32 |year=2013 |last1=Russell |first1=Miles |last2=Manley |first2=Harry |doi-access=}}</ref> probably originated from the proto-palace. Foreign, probably Italian, craftsmen had to be employed at this early period. This building was not unique in this area as the villa at [[Angmering]] was similar in many respects and suggests a number of aristocrats living in the area who must have used the same workforce.

The full-size palace with four residential wings surrounding a formal courtyard garden of {{convert|250|by|320|ft|m|abbr=off|round=5}} was built in around 75–80&nbsp;AD and took around five years to complete, incorporating the proto-palace in its south-east corner.<ref>[[Barry Cunliffe|Cunliffe, Barry]], ''Excavations at Fishbourne 1961-1969'', Society of Antiquaries (1971), p.49 et seq.</ref> Massive levelling of the vast site reached up to {{convert|5|ft|m|1|abbr=off}} in places. The gardens were surrounded by [[colonnades]] in the form of a [[peristyle]].

[[File:Unfinished hypocaust 2.JPG|thumb|left|Hypocaust]]

The north and east wings each consisted of suites of rooms built around courtyards, with a monumental entrance in the middle of the east wing. In the north-east corner was a huge aisled assembly hall. The west wing contained state rooms, a large ceremonial reception room, and a gallery. The south wing probably contained the owner's private apartments although the north wing has the most elaborate visible [[mosaic]]s. The palace included as many as 50 excellent mosaic floors, [[Hypocaust|under-floor central heating]] and an integral bathhouse. The garden was shown to contain elaborate plantings of shaped beds for hedges and trees with water supplies for fountains. In addition the south wing overlooked a vast artificial terrace laid out as a rectangular garden extending 300&nbsp;ft towards the sea where there was a quay wall. This garden was planted as a "natural" landscape with trees and shrubs, and with a pond and stream. It also had colonnades on at least one side.

[[File:Dolphin mosaic.JPG|thumb|The Cupid on a Dolphin mosaic]]

The decoration of the palace was elaborate, including wall paintings, stucco mouldings and ''opus sectile'', marble polychrome panels, examples of which are in the museum. As in the proto-palace, foreign craftsmen had to be employed at this early period.The palace outlasted the original owner and was extensively re-modelled early in the 2nd century, and maybe subdivided into two or more separate villas with the addition of a baths suite in the north wing. A remarkable new Medusa mosaic was also laid over an earlier one in the centre of the north wing in about 100&nbsp;AD.

In the middle of the second century AD, further major redesign included demolition of the recent baths suite and the eastern end of the north wing, probably due to subsidence from underlying earlier infill. New baths were built in the garden and peristyle in front of the east wing and a wall across the garden enclosed the northern half. The north wing was also extensively altered in plan, with four new polychrome mosaics including the Cupid mosaic dating from about 160&nbsp;AD. Further redevelopment was done at times in the late third century. The final alterations were incomplete when the north wing was destroyed in a fire {{circa|270&nbsp;AD}}.

=== Owner ===

The accepted theory, first proposed by [[Barry Cunliffe]], is that the early phase of the palace was the residence of [[Tiberius Claudius Cogidubnus]] (or Togidubnus), a pro-Roman local chieftain who was installed as king of a number of territories following the first stage of the conquest. Cogidubnus is known from a reference to his loyalty in [[Tacitus]]'s ''[[Agricola (book)|Agricola]]'',<ref>[[Tacitus]], ''[[Agricola (book)|Agricola]]'' [[Wikisource:Agricola#14|14]]</ref> and from an inscription commemorating a temple dedicated to [[Neptune (mythology)|Neptune]] and [[Minerva]] found in nearby [[Chichester]].<ref>J. E. Bogaers (1979) "King Cogidubnus in Chichester: another reading of RIB 91", ''Britannia'' 10, pp. 243-254</ref> Furthermore, around 60&nbsp;AD, Cogidubnus was granted the prominent title of [[Legatus Augusti pro praetore|''legatus Augusti'']], which normally restricted to the statesmen and aristocrats of Rome. Cunliffe correlates this event with the construction of a large masonry extension of the palace in 70&nbsp;AD, which was fitting for an individual of such a high status in order to support his theory.<ref name=":32"/>

Another theory is that it was built for another native, [[Sallustius Lucullus]], a [[Roman governor]] of Britain of the late 1st century who may have been the son of the British prince [[Adminius]].<ref>Norman Hammond, [https://archive.today/20070308194055/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,61-2292526.html "Whose busts are they?"], ''[[The Times]]'', 31 July 2006, retrieved 31 August 2006; Miles Russell, ''Roman Sussex'', Tempus (2006); Miles Russell, ''Bloodline - the Celtic Kings of Roman Britain'', Amberley (2010)</ref> Two inscriptions recording the presence of Lucullus have been found in Chichester and the re-dating, by Miles Russell, of the palace to the early 90s&nbsp;AD, would fit far more securely with such an interpretation. If the palace were designed for Lucullus, then it may have only been in use for a few years, for the Roman historian [[Suetonius]] records that Lucullus was executed by the delusional emperor Domitian in or shortly after 93&nbsp;AD.<ref>[[Suetonius]], ''[[The Twelve Caesars]]: Domitian'' [https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Suetonius/12Caesars/Domitian*.html#10.3 10.3]</ref>

Additional theories suggest that owner of the palace was either [[Verica]], a [[United Kingdom|British]] [[Roman client kingdoms in Britain|client king]] of the [[Roman Empire]] in the years preceding the [[Roman invasion of Britain|Claudian invasion]], or even one Tiberius Claudius Catuarus, whose gold [[signet ring]] was discovered nearby in 1995.<ref name="Britain AD, Episode I">{{cite web |url=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1674914830350674131# |title=Britain AD, Episode I}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Aldhouse-Green |first=Miranda |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dox9AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA51 |title=Boudica Britannia |date=2014 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-86630-5 |page=51}}</ref>