Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:36:20.374Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Turf Wall of Hadrian, 1895–1935*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

Extract

The turf-built sector of Hadrian's Wall was discovered in 1895 by the Cumberland Excavation Committee, at Appletree, east of Wall Bowers milecastle, 51. In the next three years, the associated ditch was traced underneath Birdoswald Fort and under the Stone Wall at milecastles 49 (Harrow's Scar) and 51, forming thus a two-mile loop-line (pl. 1) with the ditch of the Stone Wall which it preceded. The recognition of the new Wall as turf-built was made easy by the analysis of the Antonine Wall three years earlier, and Dr. Arthur Raistrick's pollen-analysis, given below in an Appendix (p. 18), puts the exact nature of the material beyond doubt.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright ©F. Gerald Simpson and I. A. Richmond 1935. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society's Transactions, Old Series, xiv, 185 ff. (Haverfield), 399–401 (Mrs. Hodgson). The titles of these volumes are abbreviated below as CW 1 and CW 2, for the old and new series; Archaeologia Aeliana as AA 1, etc.

2 CW 1 xv, 180–83 (Haverfield), 201–209 (Mrs. Hodgson).

3 CW1 xv, 347–51 (Haverfield), 365–73 (Mrs. Hodgson).

4 Antonine Wall Report, pp. 124–5, 169–70.

5 CW 2 xiii, 303–359.

6 CW, 335 (coins, 49b); 341–44 (pottery).

7 Haverfield, , Roman Britain in 1913, pp. 3941Google Scholar.

8 CW 2 xxx, 175–6.

9 Vain, because the trenches were cut behind the line of the Turf Wall, on the assumption that the turrets would be found projecting behind it. This explains why turret 50b TW was not found in 1911.

10 Since 1931, Mr. James McIntyre has joined us in the work during his vacation; while in 1933 and 1934 Miss K. S. Hodgson and Mr. K. St. Joseph have also given valued assistance.

11 CW 2 xxviii, 380.

12 CW 2 xxviii, 379–381, fig. 1.

13 CW 2 xxviii, 382–3.

14 CW 2 xxviii, 383.

15 7b, AA 4 vii, 174, pl. xxxvii; 17a, b, AA 4 ix, 258, pl. xlv; 18a, b, CW, pl. xlvii; 19a, b, AA 4 x, 101, pl. vi; 26b, 29a, b, 44b, AA 3 ix, 56, pl. ii; 49b, 50a, b, CW 2 xiii, 310, pl. vii. At 12a (AA 4 viii, 322, fig. 9), 39b (unpublished), 48a (CW 2 xxvi, 432, fig. 2) and 48b (CW 2 xxvii, 236) the difference is six to eight inches, and at 13a (AA 4 viii, 322, fig. 9) and 39a (unpublished) under six inches. 45a (AA 3 ix, 68, fig. 5) is structurally independent.

16 CW 2 xxxiv, 151.

17 CW 2 xxix, 306.

18 Noted, CW 2 xxxii, 146; figured, CW, xxxiii, figs. 23, 24.

19 Bruce, Handbook to the Roman Wall, Edn. 2, p. 199. This point became confused in later editions of the Handbook, until rectified in the ninth. It was noted by Mr. James McIntyre.

20 CW 2 xxxiii, 263–5 (53a), 270 (53b).

21 CW 2 xxxiv, 130 (54a), 131 (54b, 55a), 132 (56b, 57a).

22 CW 2 xxxv, forthcoming report.

23 CW 2 xxxv, forthcoming report.

24 CW 2 xxxv, forthcoming report.

25 CW 2 xxix, 138–165 and fig. 2, p. 144 (Risehow Tower).

26 CW 2 xxvi, 433, fig. 2 (48a; xxvii, 236 (48b).

27 CW 2 xxxiv, 147 (52); xxxiii, 269 (53); xxxiv, 144 (54); i, 81, fig. 1 (55).

28 CW 2 xxxiv, 146.

29 CW 2 xxxiv, 147–8.

30 CW 2 xxxv, forthcoming report.

31 cf. Atkinson, , Norfolk Archaeology, 1931, p. 123Google Scholar.

32 CW 2 xxxiv, 145, fig. 9.

33 Curle, , A Roman Frontier-Post, pl. liii, no. 1Google Scholar.

34 The coin has been examined by Sir George Macdonald, to whom we are duly grateful.

35 For these uses of leather, see CW 2 xxxiv, 62–90, figs. 4–6, 10.

36 CW 2 xiii, 341.

37 Varro, de L.L., V. 166 (Müller), s.v. lectica; Frontinus, Strat. iv. 1, 43.

38 Segontium and the R. occupation of Wales, 40, fig. 9 (Gellygaer); Arch. Journal, lxxxix, 21, fig. 3 (Cawthorn); Cichorius Traianssaüle, Taf. 14, sc. xvi–xvii.

39 This illuminating suggestion was made on the spot by Mr. Robert Hogg.

40 The Roman Wall in Scotland, edn. 2, p. 86.

41 Northumberland County History, xiii, 535. The Broad Wall is now eliminated, however, west of the Irthing.

42 CW 2 xiii, 360.

43 ibid., loc. cit.

44 De mun. castr. 50: ‘vallum … extrui debet caespite aut lapide.’

45 CW 2 xxviii, 379, fig. 1.

46 Roman Forts on the Bar Hill, p. 22.

47 Cichorius, Traianssaüle Taf. 15, sc. xix, where the logs appear on an unfinished turf rampart.

48 At Fondi, merlons of the Sullan age stand 7 ft. 10 in. apart and are 3 ft. 8 in. long; on the Tiberian wall of the Castra Praetoria they are about 19 ft. 6 in. apart and 4 ft. 0 in. long, and on its towers about 18 ft. 6 in. apart, and of the same width but higher; see Papers of the British School at Rome, x, pl. vi.

49 Cichorius, Traianssaüle Taf. 99, sc. cxxxiv.

50 The Roman Wall in Scotland, edn. 2, p. 87.

51 CW 2 xxxiv, 132.

52 Report forthcoming: the remains were too slight for photographic record, but were seen and clearly recognised by ourselves, Mrs. Hodgson and Miss Hodgson.

53 CW 2 xxxvi, 154.

54 ibid., 163.

55 Known as the ‘Brampton kame belt,’ Geol. Survey. Mem., Sheet 18, p. 149.

57 CW 2 xxxiv, 140.

58 ibid., 136, both sites.

59 JRS, xxiv, 200, fig. 2, pls. viii, ix.

60 These are: (i) CIL vii, 662, Housesteads milecastle (37), leg. ii … A. Platorio N …; (2) CIL vii, 661, presumably from Hotbank milecastle (38), near which one half of it was found, Imp. Caes. Traian. Hadriani Aug. leg. ii Aug. A. Platorio Nepote leg. pr. pr.; (3) CIL vii 660, believed to come from Castle Nick milecastle (39), though the late J. P.Gibson, in a letter to Haverfield now at Oxford among the Haverfield MSS., asserts that on the evidence it must have come from Hotbank. Same text as the last; (4) CIL vii, 663, Cawfields milecastle (42) Imp … H …le … A. Pla …, in which the spacing and cutting of the letters are exactly similar to those of nos. 2 and 3, and therefore it is to be inferred that the same legion was named. All four texts are therefore identical.

61 Even apart from this argument, I can see no way in which the inscription could be plausibly restored so as to contain the name of Antoninus Pius.

62 The possibility that the Turf Wall was designed to be a merely temporary structure I assume to have been already ruled out by the Cumberland Excavation Committee's work in 1933, CW 2 xxxiv, 133–36; see above, p. 15.

63 Curle, A Roman Frontier-Post, p. 310.