+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed (/showthread.php?tid=12365)
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS - 07-03-2008
Quote:At its closest, as Collingwood Bruce suggests above, Hadrian's Wall probably followed the line of Collingwood Street and passed close to St Nic's. A good 100m to the north of the north wall of the fort identified by its excavators (I suspect at least some modern scholars would place it slightly further south than that, but only by the width of a cathedral, still leaving 50m of clear air between HW and the north wall of fort). I see no reason to doubt the excavators' delineation of the fort, and plenty to carp at with Horsley's and Collingwood Bruce's conjectures, but they are not to blame over this as they simply did not have the evidence to work with, as somebody had been inconsiderate enough to plonk a medieval town on top of the fort; now, however, we have the north wall of the fort.
Which ever way you cut it, application of a glinting, keen-edged Occam's Razor suggests the fort was not attached to the Wall.
Mike Bishop
Thanks Mike. The reconstruction is particularly helpful for me and Steve. One thing though, is that fort reconstruction not far too large? John Nolan's sketch suggests its much smaller, and even I think it is smaller than that. We have discussed the possibility the fort was of smaller size than an ordinary mixed infantry/cavalry fort as the nearby milecastles, turrets and possible fort at gateshead may have provided additional barracks spaces.
So on these grounds, has Bruce not exaggerated maybe?
ALso, I was unaware of other theories that the wall was way north of the fort. That being the case, as I have mentioned above, I have no trouble believing it may have been free standing.
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - D B Campbell - 07-03-2008
Quote:I was unaware of other theories that the wall was way north of the fort.unaware :?: :!:
Quote:It seems to have sat quite far behind the wall ...
Quote:No-one is quite sure where Hadrian's Wall lies in relation to the Newcastle fort, but it certainly seems that the fort was free-standing, some way behind the Wall.Well ... I suppose it has become a rather lengthy thread to keep track of. :lol:
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - PhilusEstilius - 07-03-2008
I was just pondering Yuri about this whole discussion of the Pons Aelius and Hadrians' Wall, and of course the relationship of the Fort to the wall. It has become the accepted view that the Wall from Newcastle to Wallsend was a later construction to the overall plan of this Roman structure, then if this is the case why indeed does Hadrians' Wall come down from the top of the Tyne Valley on a heading of ESE to meet the north end of the Bridge. There is another situation to consider which has up until now never been mentioned, just how did the Roman road traveling north go through the Wall was it simply an unguarded gate ?? It does appear to be a bit strange indeed, for this is not the case at the forts of Hunnum, Procolitia, or Magna. It may be well to mention that the Fort of Magna stands behind the wall from the fact that it was originaly a Stanegate Fort guarding the Maiden Way.
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - Vincula - 07-03-2008
Quote:It has become the accepted view that the Wall from Newcastle to Wallsend was a later construction to the overall plan of this Roman structure, ..How is it different than the rest of the wall? Was there just a big gap then? (I dont know much about it.)
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - PhilusEstilius - 07-03-2008
Well Lucy the thing about Hadrians' Wall is that as it was being built things kept changeing. The original idea we believe is that it was to be a wall with only Milecastles, then they put in Forts for garrisons also at various places the Wall changes width. There is also due to the Wall being only 7ft.6inchs wide from Pons Aelius to Segedunum, (ie Newcastle to Wallsend) that this may have been a later build. However the Wall still did not go all the way to the east coast for at Segedunum the Wall leaves the fort at it's south east corner and runs down to the river. I won't try to explain where it goes from there for this would become yet another very long discussion.
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS - 07-07-2008
Quote:MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS:pi86k2en Wrote:I was unaware of other theories that the wall was way north of the fort.unaware :?: :!:
Quote:It seems to have sat quite far behind the wall ...Quote:No-one is quite sure where Hadrian's Wall lies in relation to the Newcastle fort, but it certainly seems that the fort was free-standing, some way behind the Wall.Well ... I suppose it has become a rather lengthy thread to keep track of. :lol:
Yes it is quite a lengthy thread and I hve sadly had to rely on a library to access the internet wich means time is not on my side
Sorry for having overlooked what you wrotte Duncan.
Newcastle fort - D B Campbell - 07-07-2008
Quote:Sorry for having overlooked what you wrotte Duncan.No problem, Yuri. It is a very long thread, and it's easy to get mixed up.
The main points are: (1) the fort probably lay some way behind Hadrian's Wall -- that's our best bet based on the archaeology; (2) the fort is probably considerably later than Hadrian's Wall, perhaps Severan -- again, that's our best bet based on the archaeology; and (3) the fort doesn't appear to conform to our preconceived notions of a fort layout -- the peculiar lay of the land and the probably later date together hold out the possibility that it may not even be rectangular!
That's really why I originally suggested that you choose a "simpler" fort!
Re: Newcastle fort - MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS - 07-08-2008
Quote:MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS:bxtqx80b Wrote:Sorry for having overlooked what you wrotte Duncan.No problem, Yuri. It is a very long thread, and it's easy to get mixed up.
The main points are: (1) the fort probably lay some way behind Hadrian's Wall -- that's our best bet based on the archaeology; (2) the fort is probably considerably later than Hadrian's Wall, perhaps Severan -- again, that's our best bet based on the archaeology; and (3) the fort doesn't appear to conform to our preconceived notions of a fort layout -- the peculiar lay of the land and the probably later date together hold out the possibility that it may not even be rectangular!
That's really why I originally suggested that you choose a "simpler" fort!
Hi Duncan,
It will please you to know all of your points have been taken into account in the reconstruction. From earlier discussions, some on this thread and some on others, I have instructed Steve to make the fort square rather than the traditional rectangular, based as you said, on the terrain, on the fact this was a later fort (with the experience on the Antonine Wall to bear) and that extra barrack space may have been accomodated elsewhere.
The fort will roughly be about 50-60 meters behind the wall, I thought it was a rough middle ground to what has been proposed here.
All in all, the fort and bridge and hadrians wall are finished, just need the vicus and the stanegate, which I think could plausibly have extended beyond Corbridge.
Yuri
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - PhilusEstilius - 07-08-2008
The Stanegate most certainly did continue east of Corbridge, I have traced it as far east as Heddon on the Wall. Infact as I have mentioned in an earlier thread some where, there was a major fort and river crossing at Bywell where it crosses the Dere Street. The fort has now been lost under a lot of landscaping, however there is still the Roman Dam on the river bank with it's pound lock and sluice gate.
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS - 07-09-2008
Quote:The Stanegate most certainly did continue east of Corbridge, I have traced it as far east as Heddon on the Wall. Infact as I have mentioned in an earlier thread some where, there was a major fort and river crossing at Bywell where it crosses the Dere Street. The fort has now been lost under a lot of landscaping, however there is still the Roman Dam on the river bank with it's pound lock and sluice gate.
Yes Brian, it was from this point in the topic, and based on your evidence, that I decided to include it.
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - PhilusEstilius - 07-09-2008
Where mentioned that the Stanegate comes east of Corbridge, from my personal experience of traceing it I find that it does not go too far away from the river Tyne. However not so far east after Heddon we begin to come towards the outer limits of the City of Newcastle, here it becomes lost under the modern expansion of this. I would still consider that it does not stray so far from the river, indeed it may have even come near to the Castle keep as does Hadrians' Wall where that decends on the westgate road. It might even raise a question of was there a Bridge and fort there before Hadrian came along, as indeed there was a frontier here running from coast to coast before Hadrian got here Raymond Selkirk called it the 255 line.
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - Eleatic Guest - 07-11-2008
newly created: [url:jdo3fkgq]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_bridges[/url]
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS - 04-06-2009
So, much work and one year later, this is what it has come up to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pons_Aelius
Obs: Any discrepancies on the part of the reconstruction are my fault, either due to ignorance, or lack of archaeological evidence. Please revisit this thread to see what a painstaking job it is to try and remake a fort which has barely been excavated.
There are still some images missing, will upload them soon. Hope you all liked it!
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - Pons Aelius - 10-11-2009
Helio i'm an A2 ASncient History student who is doing a project on Roman Newcastle, i was just wondering if you had any plans of the archaeological remains for the fort and military buildings because this is where i am lacking in evidence.
If anyone can help then please reply on here or email me at:[email protected]
Many thanks Pons Aelius=am from Newcastle so decided to use its roman name as my username
Re: Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed - D B Campbell - 10-11-2009
Quote:i was just wondering if you had any plans of the archaeological remains for the fort and military buildings because this is where i am lacking in evidence.We all are, where Newcastle's concerned! Good luck! :roll: