HADRIAN’S WALL: Boundary Monument for the 
		Northern Frontier of Roman Britannia!    
		John F. BROCK, Australia 
		 
		
		  
		John F. Brock  
		
		1) 
		This paper will be presented at the FIG Working Week 2017 in Helsinki, 
		Finland, 29 May – 2 June. Much hypotheses and over-thinking has taken place over hundreds of 
		years in an effort to attribute purposes for the raison d’etre of the 
		wall across northern Britain erected at the behest of the formidable 
		Roman Emperor whose name has been ultimately used to describe this 
		intriguing edifice. John Brock makes his own offering to the discussion 
		table about what served as the main reasons for the erection of such a 
		notable memorial to the time of the renowned civilization during the 
		second century. 
		ABSTRACT   
		
			
				 “A man’s worth is 
				no greater than his ambitions.”  
				– Marcus Aurelius  | 
				
				  | 
			 
		 
		
		  
		Fig. 1 A section of Hadrian’s Wall in north England showing material and 
		construction type 
		Much hypotheses and over-thinking has taken place over hundreds of 
		years in an effort to attribute purposes for the raison d’etre of the 
		wall across northern Britain erected at the behest of the formidable 
		Roman Emperor whose name has been ultimately used to describe this 
		intriguing edifice.  
		Was it built for defence, border control, a 
		demonstration of power or any number of associated intentions as a 
		strategic military device at the extremity of the territorial outskirts 
		of the Great Empire?  Many postulations have been advanced by engineers, 
		stone masons, clerks of works, military experts, academics, 
		archaeologists, historians, paleontologists and all the usual suspects. 
		However I have only sourced one other opinion for its creation put 
		forward by another land surveyor like myself having been offered by my 
		very good friend from the US Mary Root who I see at least once a year at 
		the Surveyors Rendezvous held annually in different locations within the 
		USA to celebrate the local Surveying history of many notable places in 
		the Land of the Free and President Surveyors (please note that US 
		Presidents Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln were all land surveyors!). 
		Well it just so happens that I am not just a practising “historical 
		detective” (as I label those involved in my profession!) but I am an 
		active field historian with a Masters degree in Egyptology from 
		Macquarie University in Sydney.  In addition to this area of 
		personal and professional interest I have done considerable research 
		into ancient Greek and Roman surveying together with a diversion into 
		the surveyors of China’s antiquity as a background to my paper “The 
		Great Wall of China: The World’s Greatest Boundary Monument!”  
		With such a cursory introduction to my own research base 
		I will be making my own offering to the discussion table about what 
		served as the main reasons for the erection of such a notable memorial 
		to the time of the renowned civilization during the second century.  
		After I elaborate further about my analysis of the wall’s design with 
		specific attention drawn to certain features not before grouped together 
		along with a focus on the desires and intentions of Emperor Hadrian 
		himself there may be some agreement that this iconic line across the 
		topography is a true boundary monument in the ancient Roman traditions 
		as a demarcation line of the northern limit of the Empire’s frontier in 
		the north western territory of its second century enforced tenure.  
		1. INTRODUCTION
		  
			
				
				  | 
				“It is not what 
				you look at that counts; it is what you see!”  
				- Henry David Thoreau, Philosopher/Surveyor.  | 
			 
		 
		
		On the five occasions that I have travelled to the United Kingdom on 
		only one instance have I gone by road northwards to Scotland during 
		which I only caught a fleeting glimpse of Hadrian’s Wall in 1998.  
		After nearly 19 years I will actually be staying at the town of Wall in 
		accommodation adjacent to this legendary symbol of Roman times within 
		the area such premises having been constructed with stones from the 
		original structure itself.  My subsequent curiosity with this 
		ancient Roman masterpiece was propagated by initial readings of various 
		texts and web articles most of which I procured from the UK itself.  
		Most authors have proposed that the Wall had multiple purposes for its 
		installation dismissive of a principal motive for placement as a 
		defensive barrier or fortification suitable for the Roman forces from 
		which to mount an armed resistance.  Through my interpretations of 
		the various features of the Wall’s design combined with an instinctive 
		feeling for the mood of the Roman Ruler himself I will mount a 
		convincing proposition that the main purpose of Hadrian’s Wall was as a 
		boundary monument placed to delineate the dividing territorial line for 
		the northern limit of Roman Britannia at the same time serving notice to 
		any would-be interlopers that any transgressions past that line would 
		bring great trauma.  
		May I emphasise that my research is not totally exhaustive but I 
		have obtained many excellent publications issued over many hundreds of 
		years which have provided me with a quite broad understanding of how 
		many surveyors were employed by the great Empire to maintain and 
		supervise all matters pertaining to matters of civic jurisdiction and 
		orderly inhabitation of the lands over which claims had been 
		established.  Roman Surveying Law and Doctrines were well versed 
		and enforced by a Surveying Profession which bore great esteem and 
		respect along with a dependency on such experts to solve boundary 
		disputes and facilitate the creation and operation of new towns, roads 
		and aqueducts considered vital for the convenience and livelihood of its 
		citizens and vast military regiments.  
		2. JULIUS CAESAR INVADES BRITANNIA
		
			
				“Veni, vidi, vici” 
				(“I came, I saw, I conquered.”)      
				– Julius Caesar (47 BC)  | 
				
				  | 
			 
		 
		The first incursions by Rome across the sea into 
		Britannia were made by Julius Caesar in 55 and 53 BC with continuing 
		intensity over the years under the reigns of subsequent emperors 
		Augustus, Tiberius and Caligula.  It would not be until almost another 
		hundred years before the Romans finally conquered Britain in 43 AD when 
		Claudius dispatched four legions to finalise the job and even from then 
		on there was still formidable opposition to keep the usurping legions 
		south of what is considered Caledonia (visa vie later most of 
		Scotland).  There was the perception that there was little wealth or 
		suitably arable lands upon which income could be generated added to the 
		tenacity of the battle hardened highlanders whose fight to the death 
		toughness would make many a seasoned soldier reluctant to take them on 
		in their own surroundings.  These eras of Rome’s expansionary ambitions 
		are not the basis for this paper but they do serve as a salutary source 
		as to what drove Hadrian to bring about the laying of what has become a 
		renowned landmark of the Roman Empire at its mightiest during the second 
		to the fourth centuries after Christ.  What has been labelled “the Fall” 
		of the Roman Empire was already well into its death rolls by the time 
		the Romans ultimately evacuated their Britannic stronghold in 411 during 
		the rule of Emperor Jovinus and his Consul Honorius et Theodosio.    
		3. HADRIAN BECOMES ROME’S EMPEROR
		
		 
			
				
				  | 
				“Better than a thousand hollow words is one word that brings 
				peace”- Buddha  | 
			 
		 
		
		If the word “wall” was inserted where “word” is in this 
		quote it may go some way to explain Hadrian’s strategy to put up his 
		wall in northern Britannia when he toured his western colony in 122.   
		
		  
		Fig. 2  Roman Emperor Hadrian 
		In 117 AD Rome’s second “friendly” regent Trajan passed 
		away leaving control of Rome’s extensive holdings to his successor 
		Hadrian who was 41 (born Publius Aelius Hadrianus in 76 possibly in 
		Itallica which is now part of Spain – but it has been suggested that in 
		fact he was born in Rome itself?) when taking over control.  Rebadging 
		himself as Caesar Traianus Hadrianus Augustus the new ruler clearly 
		portrayed his traditionalist attitude with a distinct bias towards the 
		classical culture of the ancient Greeks along with archaic literature 
		and writings of folklore as well as displaying his veneration for his 
		First Emperor Augustus through the inclusion of his name in that which 
		he had adopted.  One writer says that he was a “dedicated devotee of 
		Octavian-Augustus, and had a bust of Octavian in his bedroom.”  I am 
		sure that his wife was delighted!  Shelving the expansionist policies of 
		some of his predecessors which had stretched the capacity of the 
		governing regime to maintain control and order at the extreme edges of 
		those regions far removed from the Rome-based Senate responsible for its 
		existence Hadrian saw the need for more passive measures to be 
		employed.  The new ruler embarked on a program to consolidate the 
		current holdings of the dominion in order to minimize the exposure of 
		invasions and raids against the thinly spread legions guarding the 
		vulnerable outer limits of the Empire’s furthest perimeters.  Hadrian 
		had a resolute character as well as having been remembered as a leader 
		with moderation along with Nerva (96-98), Trajan (98-117) and his 
		successors Antoninus Pius (138-161) and Marcus Aurelius (161-180) 
		collectively referred to as “The Five Good Emperors.”  In a paradox of 
		his personality his moderation in areas of governance were matched by 
		his extravagance in public works such as the enlargement of The Pantheon 
		and of course the placement of the Britannic Wall.  The concept of 
		territorial limits had more to do with the identification of lands 
		currently under Roman control and those destined to be, rather than a 
		declaration that the lines identified would remain at the outermost 
		edges of the Empire.  There was also a paranoic perception, sometimes 
		justified, that the far removed generals at a tyranny of distance would 
		be driven to forge alliances with those nearby chieftains outside the 
		designated lines and sever ties with the Empire.  Emperor Domitian 
		(81-96) introduced frontier works in Germany with timber towers linking 
		forts while Trajan had added fortlets just prior to Hadrian erecting a 
		timber palisade in this colony (PH p.15).  Where naturally occurring 
		major landscape features such as rivers, cliffs or water table crest 
		lines existed they were charted as the boundary of the Empire lands for 
		the outside regions.    
		In legalistic parlance rightful ownership of property is 
		demonstrated by what are referred to as “Acts of Dominion” such as 
		maintaining an estate in good order, paying the required Council rates 
		and land taxes (if applicable), plus various other actions but with one 
		very specific action being tantamount to secure a right of ownership 
		which is the construction of a dividing barrier between one claimant and 
		his neighbour usually being a fence or wall along the property line of 
		subdivision.  Hence Hadrian saw an urgent need to clearly demarcate 
		where he believed his line of dominion had reached along the northern 
		frontier of his western colony of Britannia.  Done without mutual 
		consent clearly the non consentual parties could only regard the 
		placement of this Wall as an act of aggression or at the very least a 
		provokatory signal to future confrontations by the angry rebels.  
		Through his extensive tour de force inspecting his absolute realm to 
		its entirety Hadrian formulated a capital works program to clearly 
		designate the limits of his power through the placement of artificial 
		lines of demarcation where no natural geography presented itself to 
		adopt as suitable frontier perimeters known as “limes” which were those 
		external boundaries as compared with “limites” being dividing lines 
		between provinces within the overall total regime.  During his 
		visit of 122 AD to Britannia he oversaw the erection of the great 
		construction dividing wall 80 Roman miles (a Roman mile was 5,000 Roman 
		feet being equivalent to 4,854 Imperial feet – a pace was equal to 5 
		Roman feet) from Wallsend-on-Tyne to Bowness-on-Solway along the 
		northern territorial rim of his western colony (a distance of  about 120 
		kms). 
		
		  
		Fig. 3  A postcard showing Emperor Hadrian’s bust looking over 
		his impressive wall 
		The new leader was determined to enforce “peace through 
		strength” thus devoting his efforts to erect clear symbols of might 
		enclosing all that was his.  In so doing he was giving defiant notice to 
		any tribes outside those fortifications who contemplated crossing these 
		barriers with ill intent they most certainly would attract the full 
		retribution of the Roman legions in response.  Clearly the Wall was 
		solidly and substantially built but with the relatively sparse 
		positioning of fortlets (with gates) between quite extended stretches of 
		narrow stone walls it was far from impregnable.  The gates placed were 
		to allow passage to and from the adjoining lands with a tacit intent of 
		frontier control for selective admissions and exclusions as decreed.  
		For many years after the refocus directed towards the royal edifice 
		since the 17th century “rediscovery” of the Wall there was much dispute 
		about who actually issued the decree to bring about its construction but 
		subsequently two powerful items have emerged to prove conclusively that 
		its paternity belongs to Hadrian himself.  Hadrian’s alleged biographer 
		Aelius Spartianus from the Scriptores Historiae Augustae (translated as 
		Augustan History) estimated to have been compiled some time between AD 
		285 and 335 declares in Hadrian XI, 2-6: “And so, having reformed the 
		army quite in the manner of a monarch, he set out for Britain, in 122. 
		There he corrected many abuses and was the first to construct a wall, 
		eighty miles in length, which was to separate the barbarians from the 
		Romans.”  Then as though the ancient emperor was watching over the 
		modern proceedings and discussions concerning the archaeological 
		investigations and restorations of his paean glorious in 1715 at Hotbank 
		Milecastle No. 38 an inscribed slab of stone (now held in the Museum of 
		Antiquities, Newcastle) was discovered dated to the time of Britannic 
		Governor Nepos from 122-126 AD which in Latin states: “Imp(eratoris) 
		Caes(aris) Traiani / Hadriani Aug(usti) / A(ulo) Platorio Nepote 
		leg(ato) pr(o) pr(aetore)”, translated into English saying: “Of the 
		emperor Caesar Traianus Hadrianus Augustus, the legion II Augusta (built 
		this), while Aulus Platorius Nepos was legate with powers of a praetor.” 
		     
		
		  
		Fig. 4  Stone inscribed c. 122-124 to 
		verify that Hadrian’s Wall had been authorised by the 
		Emperor personally around 122 that section having been built by Legion 
		II Augusta 
		Indeed another monumental artefact bore witness to the 
		approximate completion date of the Wall around 136 adding testimony to 
		one of the other total of three legions which carried out the massive 
		project found near the east gate of Moresby fort translated to read: 
		“(This work) of the Emperor Caesar Trajan Hadrian Augustus, father of 
		his country, the XX Legion Valeria Victrix (built).” (stone dated 
		128-138). Fig. 5  A section of the Great Wall of China showing some 
		fortlets. Another parallel for a stone wall erected as a solid symbol of 
		ownership to those outside hordes are the early stages of China’s Great 
		Wall initiated by the first Emperor some time around 200 BC.  The wall’s 
		height and breadth could not prevent them crossing it but any such 
		breach of the stone ramparts was a sure passport to big trouble for 
		those warlike groups not remaining on their side of it.  The more well 
		known Great Wall of China with high walls lined with castellations along 
		wide interconnecting fortifications was modified and amplified to this 
		impressive megastructure during the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) but this 
		battle-ready bastion saw very little wartime activity during the tenure 
		of this legendary ruling clan famous for their ornate blue pottery.    
		4. THE APPARENT ENIGMA OF THE VALLUM – ITS REAL FUNCTION
		
			
				
				  | 
				“Once we accept our limits, we go beyond 
				them”   – Albert Einstein | 
			 
		 
		
		  
		Fig. 6 Cross sectional diagram of the 
		Wall construction 
		Many writers have dismissed the inclusion of the Vallum as 
		inexplicable in its function. The Vallum is a trench dug inside the 
		south side of the Wall with earth mounds lining the top edges on both 
		sides running for its entire length apart from where natural features 
		like rocky outcrops or river banks interrupt its progress.  One 
		author states that it has been surveyed like a road but is unlikely to 
		have been used for this reason while another pronounces it may have been 
		included as an additional defensive mechanism as an obstruction to 
		invading armies.  At its depth and location in addition to the many 
		lengths of narrow wall too thin from which to wage even defence by a 
		single line of archers let alone catapults or pots of boiling oil it 
		would appear less probable that the Vallum was placed to serve any 
		credible second line of resistance after this first ineffective barrier 
		had been breached by any sizeable swarms of invading marauders. 
		If I may digress now to a much earlier archaic period in 
		pre-Roman history in support of my suggestion that the Vallum in fact 
		formed part of the traditional techniques of construction adopted for 
		the creation of boundaries first attributed to Aeneas who is said by 
		mythology to be the direct ancestor of Romulus and Remus, the mythical 
		wolf-suckling twins who founded Rome.  As an illustration of the 
		extent to which the Romans incorporated the establishment of new towns 
		into their folkloric sagas the writer Virgil describes how Aeneas 
		founded a city in Sicily:  
		“Meanwhile Aeneas marks the city out 
		By ploughing; then he draws the homes by lot” 
		All Roman Surveyors were aware through their training of 
		the old custom whereby the limits of a new town were marked out by the 
		consul by ploughing a furrow around it.  Another author Ovid, a studier 
		of the law including that pertaining to surveying, said that the 
		dividing up of land with balks (limites) by a “careful measurer” (cautus 
		mensor) emphasised the importance attached to the art of surveying.    
		The line drawn around a town was referred to by Virgil 
		as sulcus primigenius (“the original furrow”) and was monumented with 
		boundary stones according to Tacitus and Plutarch.  Actual boundary 
		stones have been discovered at Capua placed during the Second 
		Triumvirate bearing inscriptions “By order of Caesar (Octavian), on the 
		line ploughed”.  When the Emperor wanted to extend the limits of Rome he 
		maintained the traditional inclusion of the “original furrow” placing 
		inscriptional carved boundary stones which are still present today in 
		evidence to his realignment of the boundaries of the eternal city.  
		
		  
		Fig. 7 Caesar Augustus coin (29-27 BC) 
		with the ploughing of  Rome’s first boundary furrow  
		Revered first Emperor Caesar Augustus so much cherished 
		the ancient folklore of Rome that he had a Denarius coin struck dated c. 
		29-27 BC with his bust on the obverse and the ploughing of Rome’s first 
		boundary furrow on the reverse during his reign for the citizens to bear 
		recognition of their hallowed traditions.  Emulating his legendary idol 
		Caesar Augustus Hadrian was not going to miss a chance to present 
		himself in a similar portrayal of himself as the City Founder ploughing 
		the new boundaries with a team of oxen on a coin from Aelia Capitolina 
		(Jerusalem) in about 131-136 AD in a very clear demonstration of his 
		admiration for his predecessor together with the folkloric divine 
		creation of a limes in the form of a Vallum or Pomerium.    
		
		  
		Fig. 8 Hadrian coin (c.131-136 AD) with 
		the symbolic ploughing of  a new first boundary furrow 
		Indeed the folklore of the birth of Rome itself said to 
		be in 753 BC has Romulus and Remus as direct descendants of the Trojan 
		Prince Aeneas founding the new city.  One version of the myth has 
		Romulus cutting a sulcus primigenius (first furrow) around the perimeter 
		of where he decreed the city limits to be incorporating the Palatine and 
		Capitoline Hills just as his ancestor Aeneas had done in other towns 
		before him in what is believed to be an Etruscan ritual which was 
		inclusive of the proposed line undergoing selection and final placement 
		by auguries exercising divine control. In this recital of the folkloric 
		epic when Remus ridicules this action by his brother by jumping back and 
		forth over the sacred furrow Romulus kills him in what must be regarded 
		as an extreme act in border control indeed.  Subsequently a 
		substantial wall was erected outside this trench with the area between 
		the inside of the wall up to and including the ditch being termed “The 
		Pomerium” within which building construction was forbidden together with 
		other bans prohibiting various legal actions otherwise enforceable 
		within the inner property zone by the duly empowered judicial 
		appointees.  Entry from outside this line of strong delineation 
		could take place only with permission granted by those authorities 
		entrusted with the protection of the livelihoods of the citizens of 
		Rome.  In fact the dictator Lucius Cornelius Sulla expanded the limits 
		of the City of Rome in 80 BC in an act of absolute power with his new 
		town limits further marked out by white marker stones called cippi which 
		were commissioned by Claudius to delineate his extension of The Pomerium 
		some of which survey monuments are still in situ today as recorded by 
		Tacitus and outlined by Aulus Gellius. 
		The Romans even had a god called Terminus - God of the Boundary 
		Stones closely affiliated with the principal deity Jupiter.  Indeed 
		it is the Romans who introduced the Feast of Terminalia which is an 
		annual ceremony with pomp, pageantry and identification of the boundary 
		stone monuments designating the area within which protection is 
		guaranteed and order maintained.  Boundary stones took many 
		different forms with particular types of monuments being set to indicate 
		the nature of the tenure under which the enclosed properties were held. 
		 
		
			
				Another absolutely 
				splendid effort in scholarly publishing is Brian Campbell’s 
				handsome volume on “The Writings of the Roman Land Surveyors” 
				(in Latin Corpus Agrimensorum Romanum) which most astutely 
				translates the Latin texts of the Roman authors who compiled a 
				veritable instructional handbook on how surveying was to be 
				conducted within the Roman Empire.  May I say that this work is 
				extraordinary and has given me a detailed appreciation for the 
				technical and judicial expertise which was vested in the 
				Surveyors privileged to undertake such activities for the 
				administratively thorough control imposed upon its charges.
				 
				I need to clarify the interpretation of the word Vallum as 
				literally it means a “mound of earth” but in the context of 
				Hadrian’s Wall it more specifically describes the trench 
				following the line of the limes or boundary line which has 
				mounds of earth along its top edges just as the sulcus 
				primigenius (“first furrow”) had placed along its upper edges 
				formed from the earth excavated from the trench itself.  | 
				
		  
				Fig. 9 Terminus as a boundary stone  | 
			 
		 
		To 
		my amazement and delight on page 273 of Brian’s superb book he deciphers 
		the original Latin text in the Section “…Discussion About Lands” to say: 
		“Villa comes from vallum, that is, a heap of earth, which is normally 
		established in front of a limes” which is actually the borderline of the 
		outside extremity of a Roman frontier dividing it from international 
		lands held by neighbouring nations or peoples.  Furthermore on page 
		263 under the title: “Here Begins a Discussion of Boundary Markers Set 
		Up in Various Provinces” is stated: 
		“I have established a small ditch, which was dug out, on 
		a boundary as a marker.  
		Bigger ditches you will also certainly find as boundary markers. 
		You will undoubtedly discover a raised limes, that is, a balk. 
		I have built walls from limestone to mark boundaries. 
		I have established banks that have been dug out to mark boundaries. 
		You will find piles of earth marking boundaries.”  
		These incredible discoveries add firm weight that the 
		Vallum incorporated within the design specifications for Hadrian’s Wall 
		was following those strict instructions laid down in the Roman Surveyors 
		Instruction Manual for the presentation of an International Border Line.  
		This invaluable nexus to the times of the Roman surveyors translates a 
		voluminous corpus of texts providing all historians but more especially 
		surveyors with a detailed overview of what types of boundary marking 
		were carried out, classifications of land types, as well as all manner 
		of natural feature which could be adopted as boundary lines where 
		suitable.  There are even descriptions and diagrams of what style 
		boundary markers and boundary stones were to take in given 
		circumstances.  For any interested Surveyor historian this 
		publication is a must-have and I would recommend the supplier “Book 
		Depository” on the internet who have the best price together with free 
		delivery anywhere in the world! 
		In an historical essay in what has been termed by its 
		composer as “the puzzle of the Vallum” this scholar went one giant step 
		towards explaining “the inexplicable!”  Published in a 1921 issue of a 
		journal called “The Vasculum” R.G. Collingwood titled his work: “The 
		Purpose of the Roman Wall” in which he says: “… the continuous line was 
		at first designed to serve simply as a mark to show where the Roman 
		territory ended.”  Precisely Mr. C as any suggestion that the Vallum was 
		a defensive earthwork is itself indefensible.  For rampaging bands of 
		villains it was merely a ditch with a speed hump.  He goes on to 
		reiterate: “The puzzle of the Vallum simply disappears when it is 
		suggested that it was not a defensive work but a frontier-mark, a line 
		indelibly impressed upon the earth to show the wandering native where he 
		might not go without accounting for his movements.”  Could not have said 
		it better myself!    
		Well I am now going to propose a more definitve reason 
		and origin for the placement of the Vallum combined with its true 
		purpose.  It surprises me that none of these astute writers who are 
		perplexed by the Vallum have not seized upon the very first indicator of 
		why this structure was an essential element of this territorial border 
		line – the Roman names first applied to it were the Vallum Hadriani or 
		the Vallum Aeliani or Aelium (Hadrian’s family name was Aelius).  
		With strict adherence to the instructions issued to the Roman land 
		surveyors to delineate a limes (international line of demarcation) it 
		was an explicit directive to make a Vallum (literally “earth mound”).  
		Naturally to form the earth mound required to construct this visible 
		line of subdivision the quickest way available the legionary project 
		supervisors devised the earthwork technique of digging the required 
		quantity of material from the ground leaving a trench alongside then 
		stacking the spoil solidly along the edge of this continuous excavation.  
		Hence once again illustrating the interpretation of the meaning of a 
		Vallum evolved to include the trench AND the mound in its description. 
		With the benefit of the aforementioned facts to 
		corroborate my following pronouncement may I propose that the Vallum was 
		the first inclusion in the design for the limes (boundary line) to 
		demarcate the northern limit of Rome’s Empire with the famous Wall an 
		additional barrier added to provide a show of power.  The western 
		part of this limes was initially placed consisting of a Vallum only 
		until the stone creation was extended sometime later to complete the 
		imagery of dominance.  Thus the creation of the Vallum was the 
		first step in the establishment of this northern borderline once again 
		with the more sturdy stone divider being set at some time well after the 
		first delineator had been laid down.  
		5. WALL DESIGN AND CHARACTERISTICS
		
			
				“Make the 
				workmanship surpass the materials.”     
				- Ovid (43 BC-17 AD) | 
				
				  | 
			 
		 
		A burning question which has divided all scholars on the 
		planning, design and project management of this major construction in 
		the Roman capital works program has been just how much direct personal 
		association the Emperor Hadrian himself had in its detail and execution.  
		Well another author with whom I forthrightly concur is Paul Frodsham who 
		mounts a compelling argument in his book: “Hadrian and His Wall” that 
		the architecturally inclined Ruler not only had input into the 
		pre-planning of the Wall’s design but also personally directed some 
		aspects of the building work while on his site inspection during the 
		Britannic leg of his Royal Tour.  With such a notion in mind it is 
		not hard for me to further incorporate Hadrian’s penchant for history 
		and tradition as alluded to previously in hypothesizing that the Vallum 
		was added during the erection of the Wall at its earliest incarnation to 
		create the true legendary image of a boundary line as had been initiated 
		by Aeneas, Romulus and a host of his predecessors in very much a 
		recreation of The Pomerium originally enclosing the Eternal City of Rome 
		itself.  Such a final masterpiece with historic overtures would 
		most certainly have pleased the man mostly honoured with the exceptional 
		monument bearing his name for posterity to admire and marvel upon.  
		Within the wall were incorporated what have been called 
		milecastles due to their occurrence at every Roman mile thus totalling 
		80 with two turrets in between each of these structures to provide look 
		out posts at each intervening 1/3 Roman mile thus adding up to be about 
		160 thereto.  Apart from offering a view to the north to detect 
		foreign troop movements all of the manned stations looked more clearly 
		towards the south to allow for a continuous ability to forewarn 
		regiments of soldiers camped within the forts and villages of impending 
		assault. 
		As has been irrefutably established by many more learned 
		of the Wall than I for a considerable percentage of its length it was 
		not a fortified bastion or even bore formidable dimensions to singularly 
		deflect any major incursions.  The size of the Wall varied from a 
		nominal height of 10 feet (3 metres) with an equivalent width up to 20 
		feet (6 metres) high also with a matching girth so for much of its 
		coverage the sections with the lesser height presented no significant 
		restriction to those warring groups who wished to create conflict on 
		their foreign oppressors.    
		
			
				
				  
				Fig. 10 Photo of the US/Canada borderline which is the 
				unfenced trench at Blaine in Washington state  | 
				A modern example of a trench being 
				placed to demonstrate the division between two countries can be 
				found even today on the US/Canadian borderline at the north 
				western US town of Blaine within the which my very good friends 
				Denny and Delores Demeyer reside.  Even though the depth and 
				width of this sunken barrier does not preclude access there will 
				always be a very interested US Border Patrolman staking out his 
				continuous vigil on the southern side of the border keeping a 
				very concerned eye over anyone making an unauthorized or 
				uninvited crossing of this line of division with a similar 
				intent as those Roman sentries who manned the turrets along the 
				lengths of Hadrian’s Wall.  | 
			 
		 
		6. SURVEYING AND BUILDING THE WALL 
		
			
				
				  | 
				 “Every wall is a door” 
				– Ralph Waldo Emerson.  | 
			 
		 
		I am quite sure that Hadrian had no desire to make his Wall anything 
		like a door to encourage hostile northern tribes to cross into the Roman 
		domain but the deterrent qualities of his Wall were not so physical 
		rather than more indicative for in some ways his Wall was very passable 
		not representing a true decisive barrier to opposing camps. Three 
		legions were assigned the duty of erecting this symbol of territorial 
		division II Augustus, VI Victrix and XX Valeria Victrix but upon its 
		completion it was manned by auxiliaries rather the legions themselves 
		which were called to other pressing duties somewhere removed within the 
		extensive perimeter of the Roman Empire.  There is some 
		inscriptional evidence for a detachment of the British Fleet making some 
		of the granaries at the forts. 
		All materials used upon the Wall construction were 
		quarried locally thus giving the final product a variety of finish only 
		possible through the utilisation of natural resources sourced from the 
		surrounding geological deposits with their distinctive evolutionary 
		origins and nearby timber where such wooden carpentry was included or 
		necessary. 
		Through a very excellent and thoroughly researched 
		publication by Peter Hill titled: “The Construction of Hadrian’s Wall”, 
		Peter has estimated just how many legionary surveyors were available to 
		carry out the task of surveying the long straight sections of the wall 
		construction as well as the likely work schedule providing a likely time 
		for completion of the survey work required.  For the reconnaissance and 
		surveying required to facilitate the site selection and final 
		positioning of the Wall I have formulated the Survey Work Statement for 
		the activities necessary for a project of this proportion.  Departing 
		from any possible ritual selection of the Wall’s location by the Consul 
		or auguries the ultimate function of this divisional barrier was to 
		signify the limit of territorial governance while also setting an 
		adequate line of sight both northerly and southerly for the sentries on 
		watch to detect any likely trouble which may have been brewing along 
		with the dual capacity to sound the alert of any likely attack.    
		Later I am going to inform you of how many surveyors 
		were available to each Roman legion as indicative of just how much 
		manpower was devoted to the vital capacity of carrying out the survey 
		requirements for the Roman nation throughout its widely distributed 
		colonies.    
		The first duty was to survey and fix the exact line of the Wall such 
		location governed by the preceding parameters of sight lines and 
		prevailing topography taking into account interceding natural features 
		which themselves could serve as obstructions to foreign access such as 
		cliffs, riverbanks and whinsills.  Due to the extensive period of 
		time during which the nearby land had already been under occupation it 
		is quite likely that the preliminary scouting party had a fairly 
		definitive idea of where the Wall would be best placed with the crags of 
		the whinsills dividing the future work into western and eastern sectors 
		punctuated by this extant natural barrier building westerly towards the 
		Solway Firth and in the opposite direction to the Tyne River.  
		During this reconnaissance the surveyors would have left small rock 
		cairns possibly with a small line of stones in the direction towards the 
		next visible marker or landmark as well as stakes between which the 
		later construction survey parties could align straight sections of wall 
		and make realignments for angles where necessary.  As these 
		probably wooden stakes may not have been painted another contemporary 
		author on the Roman surveyors observed these men placing stakes with 
		flags on them for easier sighting against a camouflaging background of 
		similarly textured vegetation.  The ultimate route chosen ran 
		between the banks of the River Tyne near Wallsend on the eastern 
		seaboard and the shores of Solway Firth at the western end.  Peter 
		Hill estimates that there were about 10 mensores (surveyors) present in 
		each legion forming part of a group known as the immunes as with their 
		fellow professional compatriots such as architects, engineers, builders 
		et al as they were immuned from carrying out other military work due to 
		the requirements of their designated speciality.  The surveyors 
		were called mensori (singular mensore) with a team of them referred to 
		as a metatore.  This meant that there was a surveying pool of 
		around 30 surveyors to lay out the straight lines where they could fit 
		the landscape as well indicating the spots for the erections of 
		milecastles (every Roman mile) with two intermediate turrets (or look 
		out towers) at around 1/3 mile separation in addition to selecting sites 
		for troop encampments for the total workforce. 
		Without reiterating the specifics of Peter’s 
		calculations if I may I will summarise the final approximations of the 
		various sections into which the legionary surveyors may have split their 
		overall task.  In Wall miles the likely sections surveyed were Wallsend 
		to Ouseburn 3 miles; Ouseburn to Dere Street 18 miles; Dere Street to 
		North Tyne 5 miles; North Tyne to the eastern end of Whin Sill (MC34) 7 
		miles; Whin Sill 13 miles; Western end of Whin Sill (say MC46) to 
		Irthing 3 miles; Irthing to the Eden 17 miles; Eden to Bowness 14 miles. 
		 Peter’s predicted time to complete the initial survey, setting out the 
		milecastles and turrets most probably from one end together with 
		straight alignments and angles when required could have done in about a 
		month.  Subsequent construction of the Wall itself is believed to 
		have taken at least fourteen (14) years with some later modifications 
		being added after this time where such additions were regarded 
		necessary.  Thus the anticipated completion date for the Wall came 
		only two years before Hadrian’s passing which meant that he never got to 
		finally witness his testimonial before his death. 
		7. HOW LONG DID HADRIAN’S WALL LAST?
		
			
				
				  | 
				“The reward of a thing well done is 
				having done it.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson  | 
			 
		 
						
			
				Between 139 and 140 (or 
				some say 142) Hadrian’s successor Antoninus Pius had what is now 
				known as The Antonine Wall built of earth and timber 
				substantially further north at about 140 miles (224 kms) by road 
				than the Wall we are more concerned with connecting a shorter 
				overall distance of 37 miles (59 km) from the Firth of Forth to 
				the Firth of Clyde. 
				Once again the antiquarian Roman name given for this newly 
				positioned limes was the Vallum Antonini and this new 
				construction conformed rigidly to the written regulation to make 
				it a Vallum with the compacted earth mound along the rim of the 
				dug out channel.  This earth wall standing at approximately 10 
				feet (3m) tall with an average width of 16 feet (5m) so making 
				this structure an even less imposing deterrent to possible 
				invasion than Hadrian’s Wall did. As monitoring and observation 
				of foreign troop movements was vital watch towers and fortlets 
				made of timber were inserted along this shorter territorial 
				limit around 100 miles (160 kms) directly north of its more 
				impressive southern counterpart. | 
				
		  
		Fig. 11 Map showing the location of Hadrian’s Wall and the later 
		Antonine Wall | 
			 
		 
		Even though it had been further 
		strengthened with the insertion of more forts along its length the order 
		to abandon this later less substantial barrier was given in 163 with a 
		troop withdrawal back to the more substantial wall.  With reasons 
		unclear there are some who attribute this retreat to an uprising by the 
		Brigantes with 15 years of revolts ensuing with other tribes joining the 
		feisty Caledonians.  Periods of rebuilding Hadrian’s Wall due to 
		damage incurred during this ongoing resistance served to reinforce the 
		importance of this northern bastion in Rome’s colonies along with 
		providing it with greater longevity which allows us to enjoy and study 
		it in the 21st Century.  Along with a letter sent in 410 from Roman 
		Emperor Honorius to the Roman Britannic forces “to look to their own 
		defences” against the accelerating hostility from the Saxons, Scots, 
		Picts and Angles came a refusal by Rome to send any reinforcements thus 
		sounding the death knell for Roman Britain.  However Hadrian’s Wall 
		had represented the symbol of the northern frontier of the Roman Empire 
		in the West for nearly 300 years being now a celebrated treasure for 
		archaeologists, historians and land surveyors to swoon and walk over 
		instead of the hordes of angry tribesmen intent on vengeance during its 
		time as a boundary divider.  
		8. SURVEYORS – ROME’S ULTIMATE LAND EXPERTS! 
		
			
				| “Waste no more time 
				arguing what a good man should be. Be one!” – Marcus Aurelius
				 | 
				
				  | 
			 
		 
		We know that surveyors were on the list of immunes 
		because a list of specialists for the legions was compiled in the sixth 
		century in a law code copied from an earlier (list) put together by a 
		man known under many similar aliases as Taruttiensus Paternus, 
		Tarruntiensis or Tarrutenius who was possibly the same individual 
		mentioned by writer Dio as ab epistulis Latinis  (secretary for Latin 
		correspondence) to Marcus Aurelius then acting as independent military 
		commander in 179 AD.  The military manual written by this man was titled 
		De Re Militare or Militiarium  listing the tasks to be carried out by 
		stone cutters, carpenters, glass workers, plumbers, cartwrights, 
		blacksmiths, coppersmiths, lime-burners and charcoal-burners, surveyors 
		and ditchers as well as several clerical immunes keeping legionary 
		records of strength, enlistments, discharges, transfers, expenses and 
		pay records. Architecti were also included as most essential with two 
		known to be Amandus at Birrens and Aelius Verines at Mainz.  
		
			
				
				  
				Fig. 12  Stone altar of Attonius Quintianus | 
				A most exciting discovery was a record of the discovery of 
				stone altar in 1709 at a place called Coniscliffe which I can 
				gather is near Piercebridge which unfortunately is now lost.  
				From the adjacent sketch the inscription is interpreted to say: 
				 
				D(eo) M(aris)  
				Condati  
				Attonius  
				Quintianus 
				Men(sor) evoc(atus) imp(erratum)   
				Exins(su) sol(vit) l(ibens) a(nime)  | 
			 
		 
		This inscription translates to be: “To the god Mars 
		Condates, Attonius Quintianus, Surveyor Evocatus, gladly fulfilled the 
		command by order.”  What a brilliant find decoded by Gales, Thoresby and 
		Horsley said to be placed between 43 and 410 AD so most probably during 
		the time frame associated with Hadrian’s Wall but more thrillingly it 
		was funded by a Surveyor who is purported to be at the time a Mensor 
		Evocatus which is a military specialist having completed in excess of 16 
		years service purported to be receiving a most impressive salary of 
		200,000 sesterces per annum and may even have attained the rank of chief 
		centurion or praefect which is of great eminence within the realms of 
		the Roman legions. To understand the value of the Roman currency at the 
		time that this surveyor lived please see Appendix C at the end of this 
		paper.  However I will quantify our man’s salary through comparison with 
		other amounts paid to differing levels of officials and legionaries.  
		From the time of Domitian (81-96 AD) a legionary was paid 1,200 
		sesterces per annum, a Centurion 20,000, a Chief Centurion 100,000, a 
		Procurator 60,000-100,000 while a Senior Proconsul, the Prefect of Egypt 
		and a senior Legate were on a hefty 400,000 pa.  A small farm was valued 
		around 100,000 while an upmarket seaside villa in Italy or large estate 
		in the same country would set you back 3 million sestarces.  Thus our 
		man Attonius was doing very very well indeed so it is not unexpected 
		that another erudite Roman official would portray the land surveyor in 
		the image of some sort of wizard or great mediator in his illustrious 
		5th century dissertation.  It is heartening to note that a Councillor in 
		some Italian towns was paid 100,000 per annum being half of what our 
		surveyor Attonius was believed to be worth!  
		Without having to explain to other surveyors the essential and 
		indispensable work done by all of our illustrious colleagues it is time 
		for me to once again cite the description of a Roman official from a 
		time late in the civilisation’s existence even after the crushing 
		defeats at the hands of at a time when it would be contemplated that all 
		authority had been usurped from those legionary surveyors which were 
		part of an elite squad of professionals known as “the immunes.”  
		Enriching the status already attained by the land surveyors of Rome 
		during the mightiest eras of this imperious Empire it is not surprising 
		that erudite and astute Roman officials such as Cassiodorus when 
		referring to the agrimensore (land surveyor) could proclaim: 
		“He walks not as other men walk !”      
		
			
				| To see the entire quotation of this 
				very wise and astute man please look up my previous paper “Four 
				Surveyors of Caesar: Mapping the World” to understand a full 
				appreciation for just how well regarded the Roman surveyors were 
				combined with the awe with which their activities were held in 
				Roman society.      | 
				
				  | 
			 
		 
		CONCLUSION
		Hence to summarise my analysis of Hadrian’s Wall may I 
		please pronounce that the Wall had a principal function as a boundary 
		demarcation monument which designated the limit of the territory for 
		which Rome claimed jurisdiction and control over while being built with 
		symbolic recognition for the traditional formation adopted by the mighty 
		Empire for the limits of its cities and lands from the very first sulcus 
		primigenius marked out by the Founder of Rome which included such a 
		first furrow or trench adjoining the earthen mound known as the Vallum 
		which was the actual boundary of the limes or International Boundary 
		Line for the Roman Colony of Britannia.    
		For such a idyllic model of Roman greatness in engineering and 
		surveying to be so widely recognised by anyone anywhere in the world 
		truly links our profession with another legendary landmark which serves 
		as testimony to all who hear about or study this ancient edifice to the 
		skills that surveyors have demonstrated from the earliest times of 
		history even before such feats were recorded by the first historians. 
		
			
				
				  | 
				
				  | 
			 
			
				| 
				Fig. 12  Hadrian’s mausoleum in Rome at the  | 
				
				Fig. 13  Hadrian the Great Emperor | 
			 
		 
		It makes me proud and truly grateful to see a nation 
		like Finland whose surveyors have been forthright in claiming their 
		rightful status within the community and with whom it is a delightful 
		privilege and distinction to share this memorable FIG Working Week at 
		Helsinki in 2017 amongst men and women of dignity and achievement of all 
		ages from all corners of the globe (even though the globe is an oblate 
		spheroid?).   
		DEDICATION AND APPRECIATION
		May I take this opportunity to dedicate this paper and presentation 
		to my very best friend in the World of Surveying History Jan De Graeve, 
		Chairman of our FIG International Institution for the History of 
		Surveying and Measurement from Brussels in Belgium for his dedicated and 
		tireless devotion to preserving and highlighting the marvels of the 
		History of Surveying across the entire planet demonstrative of his 
		passionate love of our most colourful Profession.  Jan’s 
		encouragement and support to me over the many years during which we have 
		known each other since the wonderful XX FIG Congress in Melbourne in 
		1994 have always driven me to go further than circumstances would permit 
		and my obsessive love of Surveying History is matched only by my love 
		for him.  
		APPENDIX A 
		Reproduction of a 1250’s Map of Britain by Matthew Paris (who was a 
		monk at St. Alban’s Abbey) showing both Hadrian’s Wall and the Antonine 
		Wall despite being depicted incorrectly in a geographical perspective. 
		
		  
		APPENDIX B
		Table of Roman Standards of Distance Measurement 
		
		 
			
				| 1 Roman inch = uncia = 0.97 Imp. inch = 24.6 mm  | 
			 
			
				| 1 Roman foot = pes = 0.97 Imp. foot = 0.296 metre  | 
			 
			
				| 1 pace (passus) = 5 Roman feet = 4.854 Imp. feet = 1.48 metres 
				 | 
			 
			
				| 1/8 Roman mile = 125 paces = a stadium = 625 Roman feet = 607 Imp. ft 
		(185m)  | 
			 
			
				| 1 Roman mile = 1000 paces = a miliarium = 5000 Roman feet = 4854 Imp. 
		feet = 1479.5 metres  | 
			 
			
				| 1500 paces = a lewa = 7500 Roman feet = 7281 Imp. feet = 
				2219 metres  | 
			 
		 
		
		APPENDIX C 
		Table of Roman monetary values 
		
			
				| 1 gold aureus = 25 silver denarii = 100 
				bronze sesterii = 400 asses  | 
			 
			
				| 1 silver denarius =  4 bronze sesterii = 16 asses | 
			 
			
				| 1 bronze sestertius = 4 asses  | 
			 
		 
		APPENDIX D
		List of Roman Emperors during the Imperial Period from Augustus to 
		the abandonment of Hadrian’s Wall in 411 AD 
		
			
				| Julio-Claudian Dynasty | 
				27 BC – 69 AD | 
			 
			
				| Augustus  | 
				27 BC – 14 AD | 
			 
			
				| Tiberius  | 
				14 – 37 AD | 
			 
			
				| Gaius Germanicus (Caligula) | 
				37 – 41 AD | 
			 
			
				| Claudius | 
				41 – 54 AD | 
			 
			
				| Nero | 
				54 – 68 AD | 
			 
			
				| Galba | 
				68 – 69 AD | 
			 
			
				| Otho | 
				69 AD | 
			 
			
				| Vitellius | 
				69 AD | 
			 
			
				| Flavian Dynasty | 
				69 – 96 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Vespasian | 
				69 – 79 AD | 
			 
			
				| Titus | 
				79 – 81 AD | 
			 
			
				| Domitian | 
				81 – 96 AD | 
			 
			
				| The Five Good Emperors  | 
				96 – 180 AD | 
			 
			
				| Nerva | 
				98 -117 AD | 
			 
			
				| Trajan | 
				98 -117 AD | 
			 
			
				| Hadrian | 
				117 – 138 AD | 
			 
			
				| Antoninus Pius | 
				138 – 161 AD | 
			 
			
				| Marcus Aurelius | 
				161 – 180 AD | 
			 
			
				| Antonine Dynasty  
				 | 
				138 – 193 AD | 
			 
			
				| Antoninus Pius | 
				138 – 161 AD | 
			 
			
				| Marcus Aurelius | 
				161 – 180 AD | 
			 
			
				| with Lucius Verus | 
				161 – 169 AD | 
			 
			
				| Commodus | 
				177 – 192 AD | 
			 
			
				| with Marcus Aurelius | 
				177 – 180 AD | 
			 
			
				| Pertinax | 
				193 AD | 
			 
			
				| Didius Julianus   | 
				193 AD | 
			 
			
				| Pescennius Niger  | 
				194 AD | 
			 
			
				| Severan Dynasty | 
				193 – 235 AD | 
			 
			
				| Septimus | 
				193 – 211 AD | 
			 
			
				| Caracalla | 
				211 – 217 AD | 
			 
			
				| with Geta | 
				211 – 121 AD | 
			 
			
				| Macrinus | 
				217 – 218 AD | 
			 
			
				| Diadumenianus | 
				218 AD | 
			 
			
				| Elagabalus | 
				218 – 222 AD | 
			 
			
				| Alexander Severus | 
				222 – 235 AD | 
			 
			
				| The Soldier Emperors | 
				235 – 305 AD | 
			 
			
				| Maximinus I | 
				235 – 238 AD | 
			 
			
				| Gordian I and II (in Africa) | 
				238 AD | 
			 
			
				| Balbinus and Pupienus (in Italy) | 
				238 AD | 
			 
			
				| Gordian III | 
				238 – 244 AD | 
			 
			
				| Philip the Arab | 
				244 – 249 AD | 
			 
			
				| Trajan Decius | 
				249 – 251 AD | 
			 
			
				| Trebonianus Gallus (with Volusian) | 
				251 – 253 AD | 
			 
			
				| Aemilianus  | 
				253 AD | 
			 
			
				| Gallienus  | 
				253 – 260 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Gallic Empire (West)
				 | 
				  | 
			 
			
				| following the death of Valerian | 
				  | 
			 
			
				| Postumus | 
				260 -269 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Laelian | 
				268 AD | 
			 
			
				| Marius | 
				268 AD | 
			 
			
				| Victorinus | 
				268 – 270 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Domitianus | 
				271 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Tetricus I and II | 
				270 – 274 AD | 
			 
			
				| Palmyrene Empire | 
				  | 
			 
			
				| Odenathus  | 
				c.250 -267 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Valballathus (with Zenobia) | 
				267 – 272 AD | 
			 
			
				| The Soldier Emperors 
				(continued) | 
				  | 
			 
			
				| Claudius II Gothicus | 
				268 – 270 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Quintillus | 
				270 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Aurelian | 
				270 – 275 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Tacitus | 
				275 – 276 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Florianus | 
				276 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Probus | 
				276 – 282 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Carus  | 
				282 – 283 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Carinus  | 
				283 – 284 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Numerianus  | 
				283 – 284 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Dioclatian (and Tetrarchy) | 
				284 – 305 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Western Roman Empire
				 | 
				  | 
			 
			
				| Maximianus  | 
				287 – 305 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Constantinus I  | 
				305 – 306 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Severus II   | 
				306 – 307 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Constantine I (The 
				Great) | 
				307 – 337 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Eastern Roman Empire
				 | 
				  | 
			 
			
				| Diocletian  | 
				284 – 305 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Galerius  | 
				305 – 311 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Maxentius (Italy) | 
				306 – 312 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Maximinus Daia  | 
				309 – 313 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Licinius  | 
				308 – 324 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Constantine Dynasty  | 
				337 – 364 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Empire reunited by Constantine’s defeat 
				of Licinius  | 
				  | 
			 
			
				| Constantine II  | 
				337 – 340 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Constans  | 
				337 – 350 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Constantius II  | 
				337 – 361 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Magnentius  | 
				350 – 353 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Julian  | 
				361 – 363 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Jovian  | 
				363 – 364 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Western Roman Empire (after 
				death of Jovian) | 
				  | 
			 
			
				| Valentinian  | 
				364 – 375 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Gratian  | 
				375 – 383 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Valentinian II  | 
				375 – 392 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Eugenius  | 
				392 – 394 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Honorius  | 
				395 – 423 AD | 
			 
			
				| Eastern Roman Empire (after death of 
				Jovian)  | 
				  | 
			 
			
				| Valens  | 
				364 – 378 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Theodosius I  | 
				379 – 395 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Arcadius  | 
				395 – 408 AD  | 
			 
			
				| Theodosius II  | 
				408 – 450 AD  | 
			 
		 
		BIBLIOGRAPHY
		
			
				| 1 | 
				Breeze, David | 
				Hadrian’s Wall – English Heritage Guidebook (English 
				Heritage, 2015) | 
			 
			
				| 2 | 
				Breeze, David | 
				The Antonine Wall, (Birlinn Ltd., UK, 2009) | 
			 
			
				| 3 | 
				Brock, John F. | 
				“Four Surveyors of Caesar: Mapping the World”  
				FIG History Symposium, (FIG Working Week 2012, Rome, Italy) | 
			 
			
				| 4 | 
				Brock, John F. | 
				“The Great Wall of China: The World’s Greatest Boundary 
				Monument”,  
				FIG History Symposium, (XXV FIG Congress 2014, Kuala Lumpur, 
				Malaysia.) | 
			 
			
				| 5 | 
				Bruce, John Collingwood | 
				The Wall of Hadrian, With Especial Reference to Recent 
				Discoveries – Two Lectures (1874) (Kessinger Publishing) | 
			 
			
				| 
				6 | 
				Burton, Anthony | 
				Hadrian’s Wall Path – Official National Trail Guide, (Aurum 
				Press Ltd., London, 2016) | 
			 
			
				| 
				7 | 
				Campbell, Brian | 
				The Writings of the Roman Land Surveyors; Introduction, Text 
				and Commentary, (The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies, 
				London, 2000) | 
			 
			
				| 
				8 | 
				Carter, Geoff | 
				“Theoretical Structural Archaeology” 40. Reverse engineering 
				the Vallum (29 November, 2014) | 
			 
			
				| 9 | 
				
				Collingwood, R. G. (MA, FSA) | 
				“The Purpose of the Roman Wall”, The Vasculum, The North 
				Country Quarterly of Science and Local History, Vol. VIII No. 1 
				October, 1921) | 
			 
			
				| 10 | 
				De La Bedoye | 
				
				Guy, Hadrian’s Wall: History and Guide, (Amberley, 2010) | 
			 
			
				| 
				11 | 
				Dietrich, William | 
				Hadrian’s Wall: A Novel, (HarperTorch, NY, 2005) | 
			 
			
				| 12 | 
				Dijokiene,Dalia | 
				“The Impact of Historical Suburbs on the Structural 
				Development of Cities (based on examples of European 
				cities)”, Department of Urban Design, Vilnius 
				Gediminas Technical University | 
			 
			
				| 13 | 
				 Eliot, Paul | 
				
				Everyday Life of a Soldier on Hadrian’s Wall, (Fonthill 
				Media, 2015) | 
			 
			
				| 14 | 
				Fields, Nic | 
				Hadrian’s Wall AD 122-410, (Osprey Publishing Ltd., Oxford, 
				UK, 2010) | 
			 
			
				| 15 | 
				Fields, Nic | 
				Rome’s Northern Frontier AD 70-235, (Osprey Publishing Ltd., 
				Oxford, UK, 2008) | 
			 
			
				| 
				16 | 
				Frodsham, Paul | 
				Hadrian and His Wall, (Northern Heritage Publishing, UK, 
				2013) | 
			 
			
				| 
				17 | 
				Geldard, Ed | 
				Hadrian’s Wall – Edge of an Empire, (The Crowood Press Ltd., 
				Wiltshire, 2011) | 
			 
			
				| 18 | 
				Gonzale-Garcia | 
				A.C. Rodriguez-Anton, A. and Belmonte, J.A.,  “The 
				Orientation of Roman Towns in Hispania: Preliminary Results”, 
				Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, Vol.14 No. 3 (2014), 
				pp 107-119 | 
			 
			
				| 
				19 | 
				Hill, Peter | 
				The Construction of Hadrian’s Wall, (Tempus Publishing Ltd., 
				Great Britain, 2006) | 
			 
			
				| 20 | 
				Jones, Clifford | 
				Hadrian’s Wall: An Archaeological Walking Guide,(The History 
				Press UK, 2012)  | 
			 
			
				| 21 | 
				Mark, Joshua J. | 
				“Hadrian’s Wall” (15 Nov., 2012.)  
				
				www.ancient.eu/Hadrians_Wall/  | 
			 
			
				| 
				22 | 
				Moorhead | 
				Sam and Stuttard, David, The Romans Who Shaped Britain 
				(Thames & Hudson Ltd., London, 2012) | 
			 
			
				| 23 | 
				Mothersole, Jessie | 
				Hadrian’s Wall, (Lightning Source UK Ltd.) | 
			 
			
				| 24 | 
				Pham, Mylinh Van | 
				“Hadrian’s Wall: A Study in Function” (2014). Master’s 
				Thesis, Paper 4509, San Jose State University | 
			 
			
				| 25 | 
				Poulter, John | 
				Surveying Roman Military Landscapes Across Northern 
				Britain: The Planning of Romand Dere Street, Hadrian’s Wall and 
				the Vallum, and the Antonine Wall in Scotland, (Archaeopress and 
				John Poulter, 2009) | 
			 
			
				| 
				26 | 
				 Richards, Mark | 
				Hadrian’s Wall Path Map Booklet: 1:25,000 Route Mapping’ 
				(Cicerone Press, 2015) | 
			 
			
				| 27 | 
				Richards, Mark | 
				The Spirit of Hadrian’s Wall, (Cicerone, Cumbria, 2008) | 
			 
			
				| 28 | 
				Shotter, David C.A. | 
				The Roman Frontier in Britain: Hadrian’s Wall, the Antonine 
				Wall and Roman Policy in Scotland, (Carnegie Pub., 1996) | 
			 
			
				| 
				29 | 
				Simpson, Gerald | 
				The Turf Wall of Hadrian 1895-1935, (Read Books, 2011) | 
			 
			
				| 30 | 
				Southern, Patricia | 
				Hadrian’s Wall: Everyday Life on a Roman Frontier, (Amberley 
				Pub., UK, 2016) | 
			 
			
				| 
				31 | 
				UNESCO | 
				“Frontiers of the Roman Empire WHS – Hadrian’s Wall 
				Management  Plan 2008-14 | 
			 
			
				| 32 | 
				Wilmott, Tony | 
				Hadrian’s Wall – Archaeological Research by English Heritage 
				1976-2000, (English Heritage, 2009) | 
			 
		 
		
		 
		On the net: 
		 
		
			
				| 1 | 
				Northumberland History – England’s North East, Hadrian’s 
				Wall: 
				
				www.englandsnortheast.co.uk/HadriansWall.html | 
			 
			
				| 2 | 
				 “The history of Hadrian’s Wall” – (22/01/2017): 
				explore-hadrians-wall.com/history/   | 
			 
			
				| 3 | 
				h2g2 – “A Short History of the Roman Legion from the 
				Republic to the Imperial Era” (created Dec. 5, 2016) 
				h2g2.com/edited_entry/A87874096  | 
			 
		 
		BIOGRAPHY
		
		Private land surveyor since 1973, Bachelor of Surveying (UNSW 
		1978), MA (Egyptology) from Macquarie Uni., Sydney (2000), Registered 
		Surveyor NSW 1981. Now Director of Brock Surveys at Parramatta (near 
		Sydney). Papers presented worldwide inc. Egypt, Germany, France, Hong 
		Kong, Canada, Brunei, New Zealand, Greece, UK, USA, Israel, PNG, Sweden, 
		Italy, Nigeria, Malaysia, Morocco and Bulgaria. Since 2002 regular 
		column Downunder Currents, RICS magazine (London) Geomatics World. 
		Stalwart of FIG Institution: History of Surveying & Measurement awarded 
		FIG Article of the Month March 2005 for: “Four Surveyors of the Gods: 
		XVIII Dynasty of New Kingdom Egypt (c.1400 BC)”, January 2012 – “Four 
		Surveyors of Caesar: Mapping the World” & June 2014 – “The Great Wall of 
		China: The World’s Greatest Boundary Monument.” Institution of Surveyors 
		NSW Awards – Halloran Award 1996 for Contributions to Surveying History, 
		Fellow ISNSW 1990 & 2002 Professional Surveyor of the Year. First 
		international Life Member of the Surveyors Historical Society (USA), 
		Rundle Foundation for Egyptian Archaeology & Parramatta Historical 
		Society, Foundation Member Australian National Maritime Museum & Friends 
		of National Museum of Australia. Member of Bradman Crest, International 
		Map Collectors Society, Royal Australian Historical Society, Hills 
		District Historical Society, Prospect Heritage Trust, Friend of Fossils 
		(Canowindra), Friends of May’s Hill and St. John’s Cemeteries.   
		CONTACTS
		
		John Francis Brock  
		P.O. Box 9159,  
		HARRIS PARK NSW 2150, AUSTRALIA  
		Tel:  +61(0)414 910 898  
		Email: 
		brocksurveys@bigpond.com
		 
		 |