If you’ve just joined, there’s no pressure to post anything formal or polished here. Worldmind Society is meant to be a place for thinking out loud about history, culture, places, and long-term patterns, not a place for hot takes or certainty. So let’s start simply: - What subject, place, period, or idea do you find yourself returning to again and again? It can be ancient or modern. Academic or personal. Fully formed or half-understood. One sentence is enough.

When we talk about Roman Britain, the language is often one-directional: conquest, control, Romanisation. But that framing can hide something more interesting. Rome did not simply impose itself on Britain. It had to adapt to local landscapes, existing power structures, belief systems, and resistance in ways that differed markedly from province to province. Wales is a good example. The terrain alone forced Rome into different strategies: hill forts instead of open towns, military roads that followed valleys rather than grids, prolonged campaigns against groups like the Silures rather than swift absorption. Even after conquest, Roman presence in Wales remained heavily military, suggesting negotiation and containment rather than full cultural replacement. Across Britain more broadly, we see a similar pattern. Local elites adopted Roman material culture selectively. Indigenous traditions persisted alongside Roman ones. In many places, “Roman Britain” looks less like Rome transplanted and more like a hybrid culture shaped by compromise. This raises a wider question: - Should Roman Britain be understood less as a finished imperial product and more as an ongoing experiment in adaptation? I am interested in whether others see Roman rule as primarily transformative, or whether it is better understood as layered on top of existing societies in uneven and sometimes fragile ways.

One of the things that interests me most about history is how provisional it really is. Not in the sense that “anything goes,” but in the sense that what we accept as settled truth is often shaped by the evidence available at the time, the methods used to interpret it, and the assumptions we bring with us. Many of us were taught versions of history that later turned out to be incomplete, oversimplified, or quietly wrong. Sometimes new archaeology changes the picture. Sometimes it is a shift in perspective. Sometimes it is just reading one good book at the right moment. So I’m curious: - Is there a historical belief you once held that you later revised or abandoned? - Was it because of new evidence, or a new way of looking at old evidence? - Did it change how you think about a period, a place, or a people? It does not have to be ancient history. It can be modern, political, cultural, or even something very local. Short answers are fine. Long answers are welcome. This community is about thinking in public, not being “right.”

The Roman presence in Britain has long been understood as extensive, organised, and militarily efficient, yet uneven in its depth. England, particularly the south and east, has traditionally dominated the narrative, while Wales has often been framed as a more marginal, frontier zone. Recent discoveries and renewed attention on certain sites may suggest that this picture deserves re-examination. Roman Britain formally begins in AD 43 under Emperor Claudius. Over the following decades, the Roman army pushed west and north, constructing a network of forts, roads, and supply routes designed to control territory and suppress resistance. Wales was never peripheral to this process. Sites such as Segontium near modern Caernarfon, Y Gaer at Brecon, Caer Gybi on Anglesey, and Burrium near Usk demonstrate a sustained Roman military footprint across the region. What is increasingly interesting is not the existence of Roman Wales, which has never been in doubt, but its density and complexity. Two recent articles have brought this back into focus. The first concerns Welshpool (Smithfield, Powys), where local reporting suggests that evidence beneath the former livestock market site may point to a previously unrecognised Roman fort. While this remains unconfirmed and preliminary, the suggestion alone is notable. If a Roman military installation existed at Welshpool, it would indicate a more structured Roman presence in mid-Wales than has traditionally been assumed. https://www.countytimes.co.uk/news/25754050.welshpool-smithfield-truly-roman-fort/ The second article, published by the BBC, sits within a wider body of research emerging from aerial surveys and drought-year imaging across Wales. These surveys have already revealed Roman marching camps, roads, and possible civilian sites that had gone undetected for decades. Together, they suggest a far more interconnected Roman landscape than older maps implied.

I am pleased to welcome Niklas George as the first invited expert in the Worldmind Society. Niklas’s work focuses on Welsh history and culture with an international perspective, and I am delighted to have his voice involved as this community takes shape. This is exactly the kind of thoughtful, grounded collaboration we want this space to be built around. You can explore Niklas' work here: https://linktr.ee/welshhistories