It makes no sense

[mcbishop]

Almost all of the forts on Hadrian's Wall are not only attached to the wall but in fact overlap the wall with their three northern gates beyond it so that troops can come out of any of the three to defend against any attack from the north.

As you know, Brian, Castlesteads is not only detached from the Wall but even has a river between it and frontier! Even so, the Vallum builders very pointedly included it within the earthwork to make the point that it belonged to the Wall system. Equally pointedly, they excluded Carvoran and made the Vallum swerve to the north to avoid that. Being attached to the Wall was not essential and in fact other frontiers, like the Obergermanisch-Raetische Limes, had all their forts detached from the linear barrier: it was the norm, there, and it is Hadrian's Wall that is unusual.

Then as mentioned earlier how would the wall have terminated at this point with the wall not attached to the fort, would it have simply been an open ended wall that any enemy could have very easily just walked around for this fort is some five miles or so from the east coast.

As I understand it from talking to David Breeze, he and Peter Hill now think the curtain wall from Newcastle to Wallsend was primary to the Wall scheme, so the issue of a gap at the eastern end does not arise.

Mike Bishop