|
Finally take a
look at some most complicated linear features, which represent the Roman road(s) possibly an aqueduct and to confuse matters even further soil slip. Leave the tombs, right and continue along the track, climb the short
rise past a stile, and in front of you the road can be seen terracing the hill, see it ran following the field boundary from the stream, but there seems to be another road in parallel with it, this could simply represent an up
hill road and a down hill road to ease the gradient for the carts used by the military, this was common Roman practice, and indeed still current today, as the summit of Shap Fell on the M6 motorway still uses this
principle. So climb to the centre of the field and take a look around, further up the field is another linear feature, this could be an aqueduct to the bath house as it seemed very similar to one seen at Dorchester.
Walk to the stile at the edge of the wood, Coed y Arw and look back towards the two bottom linear features, one is absolutely the road as kerb stones and a ditch can be viewed for the length of the field. To the non
expert it is difficult to say what the three earthworks are, soil slip could be a possibility, geophysics would prove it once and for all. The stile at Coed y Arw is 1000 metres from the north gate of the fort, if Roman
features extend further north cannot yet be answered as the ground seems very disturbed within the wood, the footpath does not generally seem on line of the Roman road. Baillie Reynolds excavated the road jst as it drops
down to the river at the north vicus, it was found to be the usual gravel structure, which he hinted at it being Roman but would not say for definite, but said the usual ‘who else would have constructed a gravel road
here’ During August of 2002 the field containing the linear features was ploughed. No doubt this field has been ploughed before, but it graphically represents the continuing damage being done to the earthwork
remains here. Something that I first viewed ten years ago may no longer be visible, this is sad. First the field was ploughed, followed by bieng rolled several days later, before rolling the cobble surface of a
Roman road, very damaged, was evident, but after rolling the field looked like a snooker table and absolutely no linear features could be seen. Field walking during this period did not reveal much of interest, though I
know it had been searched previously to me, several pieces of Roman pottery being the only evidence of their presence, there was however many pieces of pottery some dating back to Tudor times, though most was the common Buckley
ware, a solitary Mesolithic arrowhead bieng an enigmatic pointer to much earlier use of this land. Please see image bottom of this page to see the ploughed field.
Finally go back to the fort and view the south
vicus, from the area of the bath-house it can be seen to have been artificially leveled by the Romans and the causeway can be seen exiting the south gate, in the middle of the field is a large tree, it turns right here to head
towards the modern road, and this was the area of the other tomb listed in Kanovium which must confirm the road course. This whole field shows the characteristic humps and bumps, air reconnaissance showed the vicus
extended as least as far as the north’s, to the wood boundaried by the stone wall. This is the extent of the visible remains but from this wood to Coed y Arw must be 2000 metres, add to this the area of docks and bath house,
there was probably a west vicus too, which might have featured the fort parade ground, and possible construction camps and cart parks, this now sadly is beneath Caerhun Hall, P.K. Baillie Reynolds adds that digging anywhere
between the fort and the Hall produced evidence of Roman occupation. Curiously no road was found to emerge from the west gate, a trial trench just outside the gate produced no evidence, while also a trench which extended
for the entire lenght of this field found no road. This trench, and the first one however did find occupation debris, therefore the Roman settlement here must have sprawled over much of the area, (add land for agriculture
which would have been necessary too) it might be fair to say that the settlement extended for over 1000 square metres not including farmland.
|