Noviomagus

Attested:  (1) Νοιομαγος Ptolemy 2,3,28, a πολις of the Ρηγνοι.
    (2) Νοιομαγον in Ptolemy's introduction 1,15,7.
    (3) Noviomagno at position 39 in the Ravenna Cosmography.
    (4) probably not Navimago regentium at 44 in the Cosmography.
    (5) Noviomago on iter 2 of the Antonine Itinerary.

Where:  (1) Chichester Roman civitas capital at SU854044.
(2)   Ptolemy commented about the work of Marinus of Tyre, that ‘having said that Noviomagus is 59 miles further south than Londinium, he then shows it further north in latitude’.  Although this exemplifies the uncertainty about Ptolemy's map coordinates, it has been generally accepted that both 1 and 2 refer to Chichester.
(3)   This name is highly unlikely to belong to Chichester.  Old Sarum hillfort at SU13773267 (often misdescribed as *Sorviodunum) is more likely.
(4)   The assumption that this name too also belongs to Chichester is highly questionable, as is the habit of inventing a name Noviomagus Regentium.
(5)   Croydon at about TQ323655, located by Itinerary mileages.  Not Crayford or Chichester as often mistakenly suggested.

Name Origin:  Noviomagus was a common name throughout the Roman Empire.  France alone has 3 definite and 12 probable instances.  The Novio- part naturally means ‘new’, but is confusable with *navis ‘river.  The -magus part meant some flat ground, like a platter, and suitable for a trading place, as explained under Magis, more likely than ‘power place, administrative centre’, from PIE *magh- ‘to have power’.  The N in (3) may be a trivial scribal error.

Notes:  Notice also Novia somewhere nearby, most likely at Pevensey.  Peutinger's name fragment madus was probably not one of these places.  See Caesaromagus for more discussion of -magus.  The foundation of a Novimagus at Nijmegen may have been ordered by the Romans after the Batavian revolt.  For place (5), this analysis used to focus on West Wickham Roman settlement (Cook and McCarthy 1933), south of London by the source of the river Ravensbourne, at about TQ379649, which appears to lie on the possible Roman road towards Vagniacis reported by Philp (2002).

You may copy this text freely, provided you acknowledge its source as www.romaneranames.uk, recognise that it is liable to human error, and try to offer suggestions for improvement.   Last edited 10 February 2023.    to main Menu