Abstract
ABSTRACT The past 15 years have seen a lively discussion of the building sequence of the Antonine Wall, focusing on the apparent changes of plan at an early stage of its construction. Key issues in this debate are the change from stone to turf as the main building material and the choice for an unprecedented 2-mile spacing norm for forts, making this the most densely fortified frontier line of the Roman world. This paper reviews the main arguments and proposes a return to the central thought of John Gillam’s seminal 1975 paper: the army that came to build the Antonine Wall took with it the experience of Hadrian’s Wall and naturally started replicating this legacy on the Forth–Clyde isthmus – in stone, initially. In this light, the switch to turf and timber, very early in the sequence, stands out as a major breakaway from Hadrianic legacy. The structural and, consequently, operational implications of this decision are considered, in an attempt to make sense of the unique disposition of the Antonine Wall.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
