Newcastle (Pons Aelius) Bridge, Vallum and Fort (info needed

[PhilusEstilius]

I think that will be ok Yuri the reason for 90 degrees is that most Wall forts do over lay the Wall, the reason being it's a defensive aspect with also three gates north of the Wall the best form of defence being attack.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Right.

Just one detail, other articles mention this fort was unusual in that it was positioned with only one gate going through the wall, meaning the other 3 would be behind the wall.

I will take this into account when talking to Steve for the reconstruction.

As discussed in other threads, the stanegate may also make an appearence, although this is also conjectural (but most likely) and will be noted as such.

Regards,
Yuri

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

This is what its looking like at the moment. Please note it is not to scale, is not final, and is just a general layout of what its going to look like.

A small settlement may also be included in the east, as a this is known to have existed.

Also note the view is not north but rather North-west ish.

[PhilusEstilius]

I have mentioned in other threads about the Stanegate, which may well have gone through this area on the north side of the Tyne. I am sure that this road would have been of great use to the Romans, should they have wanted to travel along the Tyne valley for the Wall does take the higher ground to the north of the river. It must also have been of great use to many of the Roman Villas through the Tyne Valley, in the form of trade and movement.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

I have mentioned in other threads about the Stanegate, which may well have gone through this area on the north side of the Tyne. I am sure that this road would have been of great use to the Romans, should they have wanted to travel along the Tyne valley for the Wall does take the higher ground to the north of the river. It must also have been of great use to many of the Roman Villas through the Tyne Valley, in the form of trade and movement.

My thoughts exactly Brian, which is why I am including it. The settlement's location east of the fort is also conjectural as it is buried beneath the city and we shall probably never know its exact location in relation to the fort, so im locating it east of the fort and west of the milecastle, this does make some sense.

[PhilusEstilius]

I have no dought there would be a civil settlement, for these would spring up as fast as the forts themselves. Indeed the very fact of a bridge would also have helped to bring many people into the area, infact I recall that in recent times a civil settlement was excavated on the south side of the bridge.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

I have no dought there would be a civil settlement, for these would spring up as fast as the forts themselves. Indeed the very fact of a bridge would also have helped to bring many people into the area, infact I recall that in recent times a civil settlement was excavated on the south side of the bridge.

Yes, it is speculated there may have been an earlier fort at Gateshead. It is possible the settlement existed at both sides of the bridge, but this will be left out of the reconstruction.

[PhilusEstilius]

There is one thought concerning the Vallum which comes from knowledge of the river front in the centre of the City, the Castle and it's Keep where this fort was built is very high above the river bank. It might even be said that the road coming off the Roman bridge may have been very near to a one in one climb to the fort. It may well be there was no need to have it at this point, for indeed it does not travel from the City eastward to Segadunum.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

There is one thought concerning the Vallum which comes from knowledge of the river front in the centre of the City, the Castle and it's Keep where this fort was built is very high above the river bank. It might even be said that the road coming off the Roman bridge may have been very near to a one in one climb to the fort. It may well be there was no need to have it at this point, for indeed it does not travel from the City eastward to Segadunum.

Sorry, what exactly are you referring to Brian? The defensive ditches surrounding the fort?

[PhilusEstilius]

The situation of fort ditches has nothing to do with the Vallum, there would indeed have been fort ditches. The Vallum is the system that lies behind the wall going west from Newcastle, however as mentioned this has never been traced east of milecastle 5. This milecastle 5 however is not FIVE milecastles west of Pons Aelius, it is approximately Five miles from Segadunum to the east end of the wall. Where mentioned that the Pons Aelius fort is on a high plateau above the Tyne river, the fort is well enough protected from the south by the river and the Vallum system behind this fort may not have been needed. There is no Vallum east from Newcastle to Wallsend, for indeed yet again the proximity of the river to the wall becomes a southerly defence system.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

The situation of fort ditches has nothing to do with the Vallum, there would indeed have been fort ditches. The Vallum is the system that lies behind the wall going west from Newcastle, however as mentioned this has never been traced east of milecastle 5. This milecastle 5 however is not FIVE milecastles west of Pons Aelius, it is approximately Five miles from Segadunum to the east end of the wall. Where mentioned that the Pons Aelius fort is on a high plateau above the Tyne river, the fort is well enough protected from the south by the river and the Vallum system behind this fort may not have been needed. There is no Vallum east from Newcastle to Wallsend, for indeed yet again the proximity of the river to the wall becomes a southerly defence system.

So you are saying the there is a high probability there would not be a Vallum in the Newcastle fort? If this is the case we will omit the vallum from the reconstruction.

Thanks Brian.

[PhilusEstilius]

It might be worth it to mention there are only two Roman forts on Hadrians' Wall that are anything near the river Tyne these are "Pons Aelius" and "Segedunum". The wall leaves the Pons Aelius in a West of N'west direction, hence the need to correct your drawing Yuri. The first time it comes near a river again is at Cilurnum on the north branch of the river Tyne. The Vallum goes with the wall over the high ground of the Tyne Valley and westward or rather West of S'west from Limestone Corner some 3 miles or so west of Chesters....This clearly shows that Hadrians' Wall is not straight but is an inverted V shape, with the apex at Limestone Corner.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

It might be worth it to mention there are only two Roman forts on Hadrians' Wall that are anything near the river Tyne these are "Pons Aelius" and "Segedunum". The wall leaves the Pons Aelius in a West of N'west direction, hence the need to correct your drawing Yuri. The first time it comes near a river again is at Cilurnum on the north branch of the river Tyne. The Vallum goes with the wall over the high ground of the Tyne Valley and westward or rather West of S'west from Limestone Corner some 3 miles or so west of Chesters....This clearly shows that Hadrians' Wall is not straight but is an inverted V shape, with the apex at Limestone Corner.

Hi Brian, could you make me a sketch of what you mean? Im not entirely sure, in my drawing the wall leaves the fort in that direction!

[PhilusEstilius]

Hi Yuri Where I mention your drawing change was from the first drawing you did, that was where you had the wall and river parallel to one another which you changed correctly. Where I have said West of N'west is the approximate 30 degree change which you made and correctly so, for anyone who is not familiar with Hadrians' Wall tends to think that the wall runs along with the river. It does not do this for leaving the Pons Aelius fort it heads straight towards the high north side of the Tyne Valley, indeed by the time it reaches Chesters it is over two miles north of the Tyne. Indeed by the time it even reaches the next fort at Condercum it is about a mile from the river.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Hi Yuri Where I mention your drawing change was from the first drawing you did, that was where you had the wall and river parallel to one another which you changed correctly. Where I have said West of N'west is the approximate 30 degree change which you made and correctly so, for anyone who is not familiar with Hadrians' Wall tends to think that the wall runs along with the river. It does not do this for leaving the Pons Aelius fort it heads straight towards the high north side of the Tyne Valley, indeed by the time it reaches Chesters it is over two miles north of the Tyne. Indeed by the time it even reaches the next fort at Condercum it is about a mile from the river.

Ohh right, good. I spoke to M.C Bishop and he said the wall did not connect to the fort. Im awaiting confirmation from the NAS (Newcastle Antiquaries Society) to see what they have to say.