06-30-2008, 06:57 PM
Quote:According to that 1985 sketch you provided me (I again forgot who drew it), the scale seems to indicate the fort was located 5 meters behind the wall, if we interpret (as I did a few pages back) that the big black patch to the north is hadrians wall (the one he claims is the northen rampart of the fort) and the smaller black patch 5 meters down (which he doesn't label) as the northern rampart of the fort.Hadrian's Wall does not appear in John Nolan's 1985/6 site plan, Yuri. The "big black patch" is the fort wall, comprising a footing (measured at 2.10m wide) and a first course (1.70m wide). In 1992 excavations, a gravel street (the so-called via sagularis) was found running along behind, apparently 3-4m wide.
You can see that the fort rampart must have been running approximately NW-SE, whereas Hadrian's Wall generally runs WSW-ENE in this sector.
Quote:But again, like Brian said, untill someone discovers the wall itself, all we have is speculation, interpretation and conjecture.Don't forget topography. The fort doesn't exist in a vaccuum, but must be sited on the ground. The problem at Newcastle is the nature of the ground. The position of the fort is isolated on a promontory, cut off from the north by the Lort Burn. Early observers saw the Hadrian's Wall curtain to the north of this burn, whereas the fort's northern rampart lies to the south.
That clinches it for me. There must have been a good 70m between fort and Wall.
