02-26-2014, 06:58 PM
With only a cursory review of its situation...
Perhaps it makes a great deal more sense to have the fort detached from the wall so that it is less vulnerable to attack from the river in case of an amphibious attack/raid around the end of the wall and up the Tyne.
If the fort were attached to the wall, then an attack from the rear would be able to scale the wall away from the fort and then attack along the battlements.
The one puzzling thing, for me, I would like to ask is - is there no evidence for an additional 'barrack block' in the SW corner (in the gap)? My 'research & theory' would rather like there to be 10 in total.
Perhaps it makes a great deal more sense to have the fort detached from the wall so that it is less vulnerable to attack from the river in case of an amphibious attack/raid around the end of the wall and up the Tyne.
If the fort were attached to the wall, then an attack from the rear would be able to scale the wall away from the fort and then attack along the battlements.
The one puzzling thing, for me, I would like to ask is - is there no evidence for an additional 'barrack block' in the SW corner (in the gap)? My 'research & theory' would rather like there to be 10 in total.
