2021
DOI: 10.1080/00665983.2020.1863670
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The original plan for Hadrian’s Wall: a new purpose for Pons Aelius?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…22-3, supporting the idea, contrary to Swinbank and Spaul's thinking, that the Wall was always intended to run as far east as Wallsend. For different reasons, Bidwell (2018, 39-43) and Graafstal (2021) argued that this length was an addition to the original scheme. 58 Swinbank and Spaul 1951, table II;Breeze 2017, table 1.…”
Section: The Later Series Of Forts: Stagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…22-3, supporting the idea, contrary to Swinbank and Spaul's thinking, that the Wall was always intended to run as far east as Wallsend. For different reasons, Bidwell (2018, 39-43) and Graafstal (2021) argued that this length was an addition to the original scheme. 58 Swinbank and Spaul 1951, table II;Breeze 2017, table 1.…”
Section: The Later Series Of Forts: Stagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cobbles or even timber strapping have also been found beneath fort ramparts in Britain, though these are again usually quite ephemeral and sometimes run under only part of the structure (Jones 1975: 74;Hanson and Maxwell 1983a: 80). Why the stone base was included in the plan of the Antonine Wall when it had not been used systematically for the turf sections of Hadrian's Wall remains a point of discussion (Breeze and Dobson 1972: 199;Breeze 1982;Hanson and Maxwell 1983a: 109-111;Breeze 2006: 71-74;Graafstal 2012;Breeze 2009;Breeze 2019a: 45, 48 and 64;compare Gillam 1975). Had the planners of the Wall learnt from Hadrian's Wall?…”
Section: Base or Foundation?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here, the prevailing interpretation is that the slightly later addition of a stretch of curtain wall from present-day Newcastle upon Tyne to Wallsend points to a potential inadequacy of the original plan—perhaps a recognition of the need to provide extra protection of the eastern flank of the bridge over the River Tyne. In contrast, Graafstal (2021) has recently reviewed the evidence and argued for the possibility that the Wall had originally been intended to cross over the Tyne and run along the southern riverbank all the way to the coast and the fort at South Shields. In other words, rather than an extension of the Wall intended to resolve an inadequacy of the original plan, the section from Newcastle to Wallsend may represent a reduction in its planned length—perhaps a result of a lack of manpower, a need to hasten completion (both arguably failures of planning), a recognition that a wall south of the river was an unnecessary component (a lesson learned), or because the threat in this area had diminished (adaptation to a new reality).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%