Gate Widths of Legionary Forts

[antiochus]

Has there been a systematic study conducted concerning the width of gates of Roman legionary forts? Everett Wheeler states that the porta praetorian at Saalburg in the Taunus (2nd century AD) would permit only a width of four men abreast. This certainly matches Arrian’s marching width.

[PhilusEstilius]

I would think that four men abreast sounds just about right for here is the Vallum crossing gate to the fort of Condercum on Hadrian's Wall at Newcastle, as can be seen with the people standing there shows just about that width and of course it is being guarded by a Roman pussy cat.
This road would have continued up to the south twin portal gate of the fort itself and this is the way that there was good security to stop locals going up to the fort, for if they wanted to pass through the wall they would have had to have gone to the milecastles left or right of the fort.
The reconstruction shows just how secure the south entrance to the fort was the steps after the gateway are going over the north mound of the vallum complex, the fort is a little further north the reconstruction does show there would have been a gap for the road.
[attachment=10577]VallumCross11.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=10578]fr_201005_1391.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=10579]benwell-vallum-causeway-reconstruction1Medium.jpg[/attachment]

[Vindex]

As close as you'll get is Mike Bishop's book "A handbook to Roman Legionary Fortresses". I am sure there is a link on RAT somewhere to the web page.

[antiochus]

Thanks for the replies. Looks like a study is needed.

[PhilusEstilius]

Here is a picture of myself in the north gate of milecastle 37 to the west of Housteads fort however the ground level has changed some what since it was excavated, the springers for the arch would be at around 2 meters in height and of course the width can be clearly seen.
These gates and and the twin portals of the wall forts would all appear to be of a standard construction but then with most of the wall forts at least one of the portals was closed off, in fact in some situations even both were closed but this was due to the amount of traffic needed.
[attachment=10580]easyshare164.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=10581]img182.jpg[/attachment]

[Mark Hygate]

When thinking of 'how many men abreast'...

Do we have actual widths of said gates? For, as far as I am aware, apart from such statements as to the Romans marching 6-abreast (Josephus) and 4-abreast (Arrian), we don't necessarily know their spacing.

[PhilusEstilius]

Mark.
I think looking at the gate I have shown I would go with what we have from Arrian but then that is only to go through a gate but out on a substantial road it could well be 6, in having said that I have found that most Roman roads throughout my area in north Britain might only have been able to take 4 abreast.

[PhilusEstilius]

Here is a picture of a Roman road in my area that is three lanes wide the central track shows its ditches at the sides, however there are two others to left and right of these beyond the two grass lanes.
This road runs parallel with the Roman Dere Street to Scotland but on the east side of the Cheviot hills, it was discovered by the late Raymond Selkirk and his Northern Archaeology Group that I was once a member of.
The width of this road is about 5 meters maximum therefore I think the 4 abreast sounds like a good figure for those who traveled along it the soft grass tracks at the sides being for unshod animals.
[attachment=10582]Devils20Highway20at20Longlee2011Medium.jpg[/attachment]

[antiochus]

Brian wrote:
I think looking at the gate I have shown I would go with what we have from Arrian but then that is only to go through a gate but out on a substantial road it could well be 6, in having said that I have found that most Roman roads throughout my area in north Britain might only have been able to take 4 abreast.

You’re a man after my own heart Brian. Josephus’ mention of six abreast being commanded by one centurion does not work, and I have never been able to get it to work. Four abreast works perfectly. However, the answer to Josephus’s six abreast could be found in Arrian, when he writes

“the cavalrymen organic to the units should guard both flanks of the formation.”

So four legionaries abreast flank by a single line of cavalry on either flank works for me as the cavalry belong to the cohort, the numbers match.

[66kbm]

Firstly, great pics as always Brian, thank you.
Re your name , Antiochus? Have not heard that before....I like it.
As Brian has posted in the previous pics, the gates in the UK that we know of can pass very few men marching. I think the best example is at the Lunt fort. It has been archaeology reconstructed following the post holes of the gate. Its a double gate that maybe 3 at max could pass through wearing kit on one side....so 6 abreast though a partitioned/separated gate....3 either side.
That's working on the Lunt.......other forts are available in different sizes.
Kevin

[antiochus]

Kevin wrote:
Antiochus? Have not heard that before....I like it.

Antiochus commanded the Seleucid army at Magnesia and got walloped by the Romans.

Kevin wrote:
As Brian has posted in the previous pics, the gates in the UK that we know of can pass very few men marching. I think the best example is at the Lunt fort. It has been archaeology reconstructed following the post holes of the gate. Its a double gate that maybe 3 at max could pass through wearing kit on one side....so 6 abreast though a partitioned/separated gate....3 either side.

A gate allowing three men abreast makes me wonder what about provisions? A one horse cart would be the maximum to fit through.

[Renatus]

A gate allowing three men abreast makes me wonder what about provisions? A one horse cart would be the maximum to fit through.

This is the gateway at The Lunt. I reckon that two men passing either side of the central division would be more comfortable, giving you your column of four men abreast.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/coventry/features/d...ort-1.html

[Mark Hygate]

................. Josephus’ mention of six abreast being commanded by one centurion does not work, and I have never been able to get it to work. Four abreast works perfectly. .................

That's an interesting view - for me the details of 6-abreast that Josephus mentions has been one of the most illuminating corroborations for me on Roman army organisations - that the legionaries most probably marched in the formations they they formed in - ie 6-men wide turning to 6-men deep. Let alone the obvious suggestion that one-quarter of each century are missing (half of those being directly accounted for in the text and the other half also possibly covered).

Arrian's 4 men wide, however, I see as a straight result of his decision to adopt a less deep formation (allowing greater deployment width or reserves) along with his change in weapons-mix against his cavalry opponent. He then chooses to march in the same formation.

[antiochus]

Mark wrote:
That's an interesting view - for me the details of 6-abreast that Josephus mentions has been one of the most illuminating corroborations for me on Roman army organisations - that the legionaries most probably marched in the formations they they formed in - ie 6-men wide turning to 6-men deep.

If memory serves me well I think Germanicus marched with flank guards while in open terrain. Now Judea could be considered open terrain, and therefore possibly the six deep could be with flank guards. Arrian recommends using flank guards if need be. As for the depth of six “all that glitters is not gold.”

Mark wrote:
Arrian's 4 men wide, however, I see as a straight result of his decision to adopt a less deep formation (allowing greater deployment width or reserves) along with his change in weapons-mix against his cavalry opponent. He then chooses to march in the same formation.

You take the low road and I’ll take the high road and I’ll be in Scotland before yee.

[Nathan Ross]

Arrian's 4 men wide, however, I see as a straight result of his decision to adopt a less deep formation.

You're not going with Wheeler's suggestion of a change in contubernium size - and corresponding change in march and deployment - between the 1st and 2nd centuries then? ;-)