quote:Originally posted by truropaul: Sorry Vlad, is that yes they did destroy defences at inchtuthill or no they didn't
sorry -yes they did dismantle the fort mind you the hoovering up was rather less efficeint since they left behind (buried) a rather large quantity of nails
quote:Originally posted by Chris Walker: "The Romans set fire to this when they left"
The Romans???? Why??? Proof?? Awful.
I think this is the conclusion for why there is burning for a number of Roimans forts on Hadrian's Wall and around the country. The old theory was that they were set fire to by attackers, but archaeologists now think the burning looks planned.
The geophys was so detailed that I am not sure why it was thought to be a good idea to dig so many test pits. I think that it would have been useful to get more of an indication of the chronology of the site by using the time to excavation one trench in a lot more detail.
The trench that Kerry was working looked as though there might be evidence of the different stages in the development. Was that the principia?
Isn't it the case that Geophys still need to know what there results show. It seems that the one stone building asks the question "why wasn't the rest of the fort in stone". That would suggest that further investigation was necessary. It could give Historic Scotland years of work.
quote:Originally posted by Chris Walker: Apparently they hoovered up everything before setting fire to it, and then moved on. Or .... all the finate metal artifacts have been removed and recorded with PAS by detectorists.
I doubt if they could have hoovered up everything. and we were told this site was untouched, before this excavation. As there were at least two detectorists working on site, I'm surprised nothing else showed up. Unless there were items we didn't see ? The TT crew must have been pretty confident there was nothing in the topsoil, otherwise they wouldn't have used a JCB to rip it up would they ?
........................................................................ Support the PAS Go with the FLO
At the beginning of the programme Tony said that in that part of the country forts were built of timber & turf, so shouldn't the question be "Why was this building made of stone" rather than "Why were the other buildings NOT made of stone"?
Perhaps not the most impressive programme, in so much as the format placed a lot of restrictions on what could be excavated, but at least it was a beginning that someone else can surely follow up on? It's possible that any follow-up dig would reveal whether the fort was deliberately destroyed as the Romans retreated south, offering the proof that others have needed/sought from this effort.
True, it was already known that there was something there...but they didn't really know dates, importance, etc. Maybe they didn't get all the answers - indeed, it seemed as though they could only scratch the surface of the site, so to speak - but it has at least raised awareness of the site among those who knew nothing of it (such as me), and those who thought Roman Britain ended at Hadrian's Wall and never went further.
but then the records dont show dracos having a load of discs on the shaft either
they were mixing up different Roman standards
Glutius Maximus, darn this bad memory your right of course, it IS a carnyx that i was thinking of and NOT the draco which i had mixed it up with so sorry Script writers for doubting you. But the chineese whistle ?
I think they missed a chance with the Draco by only building one. If they had made a number, and just allowed the wind to whistle through them rather than adding a flute, but had tuned them all to precisely the same note, they would certainly have made an eerie sound, consisting of a number of notes.
The method of creating overtones was known back in the Bronze Age. Four huge side-blown horns were discovered over several decades in Ireland - in different parts of Ireland as well. No-one knew how they were blown - an Irish professor in the 19th century managed a note by blowing one like a trumpet, and then dropped dead after bursting a blood vessel. Then, in around 1967 someone thought maybe the mouthpiece was so large it was blown like a didgeridoo - a vibration through a wide funnel can be created that way, as it can through any funnel crafted right - and they proved it by getting Rolf Harris to do it. They then discovered that of the 4 horns, 3 were tuned to exactly the same note and the 4th has something caught in it they can't remove, but it is the same size. When recording one and overdubbing they suddenly heard several overtones, presumably the third, fifth, seventh, octave and greater third. This method of creating extra volume was also used by Stuart Adamson in Big Country, by having 2 guitars playing exactly the same sound and tune, it was nicknamed the bagpipe sound.
If several Dracos were carried the volume and sound could have been extremely strange.
Incidentally, for the first time since the series began my girlfriend and I didn't have any suitable drink for our shots game - one shot every time Tony says "geofizz" and not geophysics. Last 2 weeks, 3 or 4 shots at most. If we had played this week we would be in a coma...........
Valterie - the draco caught my dog's attention too! And he's not normally interested in anything on TV (except fireworks!).
Lesley - I agree with your first comments. The geophysics confirmed the cropmarks and the actual digging didn't really provide any additional information.
Ian - I was waiting for your comments about your friend's appearance!
quote:Originally posted by Jenni: Lesley - I agree with your first comments. The geophysics confirmed the cropmarks and the actual digging didn't really provide any additional information.
I suppose it did answer the question "What condition is the archaeology in?" which I suppose is crucial to what the Duke is or is not allowed to do on the site, which I suppose is why Historic Scotland gave them a fairly free hand.
Otherwise, ditto to Jenni and Lesley! And ditto to whoever suggested one large trench being dug in detail to try to get some chronology of the site might have been more useful.
Also, they kept talking about the "earlier" and "second" forts. Was that just conjecture or was there any real evidence for two forts and I just missed it.
quote:Originally posted by humus: Angry with Tony's line that, the Dragon horn has never been built before,thats an out and out lie! it HAS on another program and they did a bloomin sight better job of it! it didnt have Chinese whistles in it either but was black with a red tounge that mooves and emitted sound !
Hi Humus. I think you may well be thinking of a carnyx there (in which case you might be interested in watching the Wemyss Caves programme on 20th Feb.) which is in fact a musical instrument. Although it does look similar, it is used in a very different way, to the draco and has different problems associated with making it work. As regards the draco itself, replicas have been made before (and some very lovely ones at that) but none of them had ever made a sound before (to the very best of our knowlege.) It is because these other replicas had been made, that we were able to know that the draco does not make a sound simply by virtue of its shape, and that there much be some lost extra part (whistles?). Because of this, Tony said in the programme that "we’re going to attempt an experiment that’s never been done before" rather than that nobody else had made a draco before. If you're interested, do have a look at the 'making a draco' link on the website, which will also direct you to another fantastic site on the subject by 'fectio'. Hope this clears it up!
UNLIKE Hadrians wall the antonine wall was built of turf with stone footings around the same time as the second fort at Drum according to the dating /history. Did they abandon the forts north of hadrians wall because some of the troops were needed elsewhere in the empire or they found local opposition too strong? (or it was too cold in a short skirt!) THey moved south to consolidate seeing nothing of agricultural or industrial worth in Central and SOuthern Scotland?
On a lighter note if stuart adamson was still alive he could have come along and demonstrated how the effect of his sound might have scared the natives.
I knew the whistles question would pop up! The thing is that most of the work that was done on the draco was not seen in the programme. We tried out all sorts of contemporary noise-making devices... you briefly saw us playing with an aeolean harp there, but we found tha one small enough to fit in the dragon head wouldn't make enough sound, and one on the outside would just be too fragile. A reed inside the head couldn't work, as a reed is simply a squeaker, and needs the instrument around it to work as a resonating chamber. As we have a surviving German draco, we know the shape of the metal head, and that it cannot work in this way. The whitles were the only one of several ancient noise-making technologies which seemed to fit the bill. As you will have seen, we did want to put them inside the head, but this did seem to prevent the tail flying, and also the disruption of the air flow over the teeth of the draco meant that the whistles stopped working. The only obvious solution was to try them on the outside. As you can see, there was a lot of careful work done by the very creative team who worked on the draco (Tim, Peter and Valerie)!
I have enjoyed the new TT serries so far but I feel that this one has been the best so far.
One thing that I did find interesting was the Dracos. It seems that it is now not known how they would have been played as a while back I saw anouther archaeological show & it clearly showed the Dracos being blown, much like a trumpet. They were held high in the air with the long pipe with the dragons head on top of the pipe it turned at the end for the person to blow in to it. It made quite a wierd sound, diferent to the sound that was made on it on TT. I will say though, each gave out a very strange sound. The one being blown though was the louder of the two.
I will say though that Helen made a very interesting remark about the round knobs on the standards depicted on coins.
I wonder which was the right way that they where used, the way depicted on last Sundays Time team or on the other arhaeological programe with them being blown. interesting all the same.
Hi Eddie. I think theat, like Humus, you might be confusing the draco with a carnyx. The carnyx is a Pictish war trumpet, and looks similar to a draco, but is not a standard, has no tail, and is not carried on horseback. A good site about the carnyx can be found at http://www.carnyx.musicscotland.com/carnyx/carnyx.htm and it really is a very interesting object in its own right. If you are intersted in the draco, you might want to have a look at the 'fectio' site which can be found on a link at the 'making the draco' piece on the Time Team website in the Drumlanrig section. Glad you liked it!
Well, I still think the excavation was worthwhile. Should the fact that there are crop marks, prevent people from digging to see what lies under the ground ?. If so, why did they bother with Turkdean, one of the best TT's ever (in my opinion anyway).
There seems to be a feeling that to dig "Roman" is "naff". I don't subscribe to this opinion, I think there is still a lot to learn about their occupation of Britain.
........................................................................ Support the PAS Go with the FLO
I think you are probably right Tet although there is probably no need for any more of the site to be excavated now the test pits and the wall cross section dug.
Hi Humus. I think you may well be thinking of a carnyx there (in which case you might be interested in watching the Wemyss Caves programme on 20th Feb.) which is in fact a musical instrument. [snip] If you're interested, do have a look at the 'making a draco' link on the website, which will also direct you to another fantastic site on the subject by 'fectio'. Hope this clears it up!
Thank's, Vlad the Impala, and you have given me all the info i need.
jenni my angel. Thank you very much for your support It is nice to know that in the eyes of some I am still predictable
hudson/truropaul. Please refrain from putting words in my mouth. I neither said nor implied that certain team members are present for specific time periods. What I want to know is; why an Anglo Saxon [there, I have spelt it out] expert is doing on a R/B site and why, being at Cambridge, she is "in with an Oxford crowd?" It may be as stated, that she is a Carenza substitute although those of you who are aware of the reason for my dislke of the woman would know that I do not consider her to be 'eye-candy'. So she made a contribution by thinking that the 'knobs' on a Draco staff could be whistles. I know I am on thin ice here, but Legions had a standard bearer, usually dressed in a leopard skin, carrying the Legion Standard with battle honours attached to the staff. Cavalry units did not have a comparable unit so would it not be logical to carry battle honours on the staff of the Draco? Does anybody know, or guess, how many Dracos were carried by a cavalry cohort? However, we seem to have hooked on to the Draco, a rather less than academic approach considering the site as a whole. I agree with many posters. Why was excavation necessary with such overwhelming geophysical and aerial photog. evidence? What questions did it answer [or even pose?]. To me, and I repeat, what was the strategic/tactical importance of such a site in that location and with 2 other forts nearby? Are we implying that this was the only ford on the river? Again I say, that this region of Scotland did not achieve military importanc at least until the 11/12 centuries when it was the English as a whole who were the invaders and not a "handful" of Romans. To reiterate, it was the east side of the Lowlands which were of importance to the Romans. After crossing the Tay any army is forced to move North East via The Mounth the Mearns and then the Gairn because of the highlands on the left and the Germanic Ocean on the right. This produced a rather over-extended logistics problem when Picts swarmed out of the dry valleys on the eastern escarpment of the highland zone to harry the route. To overcome this the Romans built fortlets on the road directly opposite these valleys. But I digress. This part of my argument is appropriate to my growing conviction that the Deva Fluvus was of extreme strategic importance to Agricola and whether there was ever in fact a Battle of Mons Graupius.
One final point. Unless the team did not make us aware of ALL the finds, what was displayed was dismal if the fort was as important as the team made out. As a rule Roman military sites are rich in artefacts
One final point. Unless the team did not make us aware of ALL the finds, what was displayed was dismal if the fort was as important as the team made out. As a rule Roman military sites are rich in artefacts
Cheers
Ian G.
_Resurgam_
The TT website says:
"Test pits were excavated over other features, including a 5m x 10m anomaly. This revealed a clay-lined wall. Burning debris was discovered across the fort site. This indicated that the second phase of the fort had been demolished when the Romans left. Finds were scarce, suggesting that the Romans had kept the site clean."
your right of course, it IS a carnyx that i was thinking of and NOT the draco which i had mixed it up with 
so sorry Script writers for doubting you.
