longshotgene Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Maty, I am not sure I agree with you. You have to remember that Hadrian's Wall was really more of a sign of Roman Limitations. Hadrian consolidated the empire unlike the previous emperor Trajan who expanded it to the point of breaking. Also, remember that there were several auxillary forts along the wall. These forts held several hundred men with specialties from various parts of the Empire. These forts also had hot/cold water baths, graineries, and brothels on the outside. These boys were here to stay. Last summer, my experiences along Hadrian's wall led me to believe it may have started off as a military border, but quickly turned into a commerce funnel. I think the famous painting of the wall being built while the barbarians harass the legionairres is what leads people to believe there was constant warfare up in those parts. Also remember that York was almost 100 miles away. At a 13 mile per day march, that meant almost 10 days would pass before the ACTUAL Legions would have arrived. By that time, the barbarians would have been back across the border and back in their home. I don't think this happened on a normal basis. On another note, I subscribed to the blog. I find it to be very informative and enlightening. Thank you for showing us! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Neil Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 ...I think the famous painting of the wall being built while the barbarians harass the legionairres is what leads people to believe there was constant warfare up in those parts... Collingwood Bruce's Handbook to the Roman Wall (Updated by David Breeze) has references to some interesting archaeological findings. Some of the signal turrets which, although occupied, had their doors open for decades at a stretch (in other words, no doors at all to the lower floor). This would indicate long periods in which there was no warfare at all. Also, it must be pointed out, the tribes to the immediate North of the wall were not Picts, but Britons - Selgovae and Votadini, who were pro Roman, and in whose lands there were additional Roman outpost forts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Bewcastle, Netherby & Birrens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antiochus III Posted May 24, 2008 Report Share Posted May 24, 2008 I knew that Rome didn't salt the land around carthage, based on archaeological evidence and ancient sources, but guess what? In wolrd history, they actually teach you that. I'm completely serious. No joke. They also teach you that the Romans lost so many battles to hannibal thanks to elephants (since they "hadn't seen them before"), which clearly isn;t true. obviously elepnats played a fairly minor role, and none were even present at cannae. The whole "romans had never seen them before" thing is ridiculous because theyfought and beat them against pyrrhus. well, lost but inflicted casualties. Anyway, i just wanted to point out how mush false crap they teach in many high schools. Antiochus III Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miloslavius Posted May 7, 2021 Report Share Posted May 7, 2021 Hadian's wall is primarily a permanent legal fact and proof of continuity with Roman law. I don't know whether continuity with Roman law has not been interrupted at a later time and something tells me that it happened about 17 century. It does not matter the materials used, architecture in order to understand the timeless act of Hadrian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.