High above the Hope Valley lie the remains of Navio — a Roman fort built not for spectacle, but for logistics. Positioned among lead mines, roads, and rugged frontier landscapes, Navio reveals how the Roman Empire functioned at its edges: through supply chains, administrators, and auxiliary soldiers far from home.

In this episode, we explore Rome’s quiet machinery in Derbyshire: the roads, the ore, the soldiers, the civilians, and the slow decline that turned an imperial outpost into grass.

*Hidden Derbyshire: Landscapes of Time*

A documentary storytelling podcast about the places where history, archaeology, and landscape intersect.

**Primary Archaeological & Excavation Sources**

* **St. Joseph, J.K.** (1955). *Air Reconnaissance of Roman Britain*.

— Early aerial photography confirming fort layout & ditch systems.

* **Derbyshire Archaeological Journal** (various vols., late 19th–20th c.).

— Excavation notes, measurements, fort plan interpretations.

* **Jones, G.D.B. & Mattingly, D.J.** (1990). *Atlas of Roman Britain*.

— Regional context; positioning of Navio in northern frontier network.

* **Hart, Cyril** (1981). *North Derbyshire Archaeology*.

— Site-specific synthesis; lead industry + Roman infrastructure.

* **Historic England Scheduling Records** — Navio / Brough Fort.

— Official designation, phase notes, earthwork mapping.

**Roman Roads & Infrastructure Sources**

* **Margary, I.D.** (1967). *Roman Roads in Britain*.

— Numbering system & proposed routes linking Navio to Buxton, Chesterfield, Manchester.

* **Webster, G.** (1985). *The Roman Imperial Army*.

— Fort typologies & logistical rationale for frontier placements.

* **Shotter, D.** (2004). *Roman Britain*.

— Short but useful synthesis, logistics > conquest framing.

**Lead Mining & Industrial Context**

* **Willies, Lynn** (1999). *Lead Mining in the Peak District*.

— Industry continuity from pre-Roman through post-medieval.

* **Barnatt, John & Smith, K.** (2004). *The Peak District: Landscapes Through Time*.

— Integrates mining, settlement, and military impact.

**Frontier & Garrison Culture**

* **Mattingly, D.** (2006). *An Imperial Possession: Britain in the Roman Empire*.

— Crucial for understanding frontier hybridity & provincial identity.

* **Simpkins, J.** (2018). *Auxiliaries in Roman Britain*.

— Material culture + mixed-garrison ethnography.

**Religion, Identity & Cultural Blending**

* **Henig, Martin** (1995). *Religions in Roman Britain*.

— Altars, syncretism & local cult integration; relevant to Buxton context (Aquae Arnemetiae).

* **Hingley, Richard** (2000). *Roman Officers and English Gentlemen*.

— Reception studies + imagined frontiers.

**Chronological Context**

* Fort phases:

✔ **Late 1st century AD** timber/turf

✔ Later **stone rebuilds**

✔ **Gradual contraction** in late empire

* Withdrawal from Britain: early **5th century AD** (approx.)

### **Consensus Statements**

Most archaeologists agree:

✔ Navio’s primary purpose = **logistics + administration + mineral control**

✔ Fort sits within Peak District lead-mining network

✔ Roads linked Navio ↔ Buxton ↔ Chester ↔ northern routes

✔ Garrison included **auxiliaries**, not legionaries

✔ Decline was gradual, not catastrophic

✔ Little monumental architecture expected at a frontier cog

**Open Questions / Interpretive Gaps**

Still debated:

• exact scale of mining operations supplying Rome

• proportion of civilian vs military population in vicus

• role of local tribes in ore extraction (labour vs taxation)

• religious footprint inside the principia (altars now lost)

### **Accessible Public Sources**

For general listeners:

* Peak District NPA heritage notes

* Buxton Museum & Art Gallery (Roman + mining exhibits)

* Derbyshire Archaeological Society publications

* Local walking trails with Roman heritage overlays