h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

"A deep ditch with a slope: to slow up any attack, making the attacker easy to kill with missile weapons bows.
A wide flat area with obstacles: to slow up any attack, to kill the attacker with thrown missile weapons spears.
The wall and towers: more killing - they could drop things on the attacker now.
The Stanegate supply road : during peaceful times used for supplies and trade, during war for the access of troops to reinforce the wall.
Another deep ditch with a slope: to protect the rear of the wall and the road and slow up any attack."

I would rewrite this thus - keep the bullet points:

"A deep ditch with a slope to slow up any attack and make the attacking forces easier to kill with missile weapons such as bows."

"A wide flat aread with obstacles also slowed attacks and provided a further space to target attackers with missile weapons."

"The wall and towers provided a better view of the surrounding area and greater range for the defenders when firing bows and the like. If attackers reached the base of the wall or towers then heavy items could be dropped on them."

"the Stanegate supply road was vital for supplies during peace and wartime. In peacetime it could also be used for trade, while it was a way to get reinforcements to the wall during wartime."

"A further deep ditch with a slope protected the rear of the wall."

Leave the spaces out though.

Hi Anti Leer

Thank you for that, all done yes it si better I have made 1 small addition.
Please advise

Bob...

men no men=> I still don't understand this bit in Forts.

Some of the chunks of the wall you have a running total of the length of the journey, and some you don't. Is this on purpose?

I think paras 4 and 5 of the opening section should be merged to be one.

And I don't like this:

The wall was started around 122 AD, the wall was set on massive foundations and was on average 5 metres high and 2.023 meters wide. It was built of limestone blocks with a concrete and rubble core to the east of the River Irthing, to the west of the river near Gilsand Cumbria (near Castlesteads) the wall was built of turf with timber and stone reinforcements, and local sandstone was used. The front of the wall was protected with a deep ditch and a bank.

There's all sorts of problems with structure.

Hi Trout Montague

Thank you for the interest in this entry. I propose this It is in code hopeing you approve

The Romans started building the wall around 122 AD and it was set on massive foundations however there were two distinct methods of construction used. When the wall was started it was constructed of limestone blocks with a concrete and rubble core.

When the wall reached the area around the River Irthing near Gilsand Cumbria (near Castlesteads) the construction method was altered, and as the wall continued to the east it was built in turf and timber with stone reinforcementsAnd local sandstone was used.. This may have been due to the cost of the project or even the need for rapid completion of the western section due to the threat of raids from the north.
Throughout its length the front of the wall was protected with a deep ditch and a bank. When completed the wall was on average 5 metres high and 2.023 meters wide.


I hope this is suitable

Bob...

The Romans started building the wall around 122 AD.

Two distinct methods of construction were employed. When the wall was started (from x to y) it was constructed in limestone blocks with a concrete and rubble core. However, when construction reached the area around the River Irthing near Gilsand Cumbria (near Castlesteads) the construction method was altered: as construction of the wall continued to the east it was built in turf and timber with stone reinforcements ... and so on.

Hi Trout Montague

Thanks for that. I will put this in the entry.

The Romans started building the wall around 122 AD.Two distinct methods of construction were employed. When the wall was started from Wallsend to Castlesteads it was constructed in limestone blocks with a concrete and rubble core. However, when construction reached the area around the River Irthing near Gilsand Cumbria (near Castlesteads) the construction method was altered: as construction of the wall continued to the east it was built in turf and timber with stone reinforcementsAnd local sandstone was used.. This may have been due to the cost of the project or even the need for rapid completion of the western section due to the threat of raids from the north.
Throughout its length the front of the wall was protected with a deep ditch and a bank. When completed the wall was on average 5 metres high and 2.023 meters wide.


Bob

Mybe you should put the date that the construction reached Castlesteads. This may help to emphasise that the change in construction was more likely for expediency rather than, say, an engineer with different tastes or the availability of material (i.e., limestone).

The Romans started building the wall around 122 AD. Two distinct methods of construction were employed. When the wall was started from Wallsend to Castlesteads it was constructed in limestone blocks with a concrete and rubble core. However, when construction reached the area around the River Irthing near Gilsand Cumbria (near Castlesteads) in 126 AD, the construction method was altered: as construction of the wall continued to the east it was built in turf and timber with stone reinforcementsAnd local sandstone was used.. This may have been due to the cost of the project or even the need for rapid completion of the western section due to the threat of raids from the north. There was less easily available limestone at the western end, and this was the most likley reason for the change. The western section was rebuilt in stone within ten years.
Throughout its length the front of the wall was protected with a deep ditch and a bank. When completed the wall was on average 5 metres high and 2.023 meters wide.


Hows that.

Or should it be

for the change, as the western section was rebuilt in stone within ten years.
Throughout its length the front of the wall was protected with a deep ditch and a bank. When completed the wall was on average 5 metres high and 2.023 meters wide.


Perhaps better

Also I would ask your opinion here -

Do I add this (it will go at the top and push the word count to 6400. This entry is getting to big perhaps.) or do I make a seperate enty, as there is a lot more that could be added.



A decorated and inscribed bowl was found in the Staffordshire moorlands in 2003. The bowl is enamelled in red, white, light blue and bark blue and has the legend,
MAIS COGGABATA VXELODVNVM CAMBOGLANNA RIGOREVALI AELI DRACONIS

Inscribed around the rim. It was thought to be a souvenir or gift from the wall, and bears the name of the person for who it was possibly made Draco.

The translation of the inscription is thought to be,

Mais (Bowness), Coggabata (Drumburgh), Vxelodunum (Stanwix), Camboglanna (Birdoswald or Castlesteads) Rigor (the course of) Vali (the fronteer of) Aeli (Hadrians family name) Draconic (this denotes the cup was the property of Draco).
Mais, Coggabata, Uxelodunum, Camboglanna, from the line of the Aelian frontier and owned by Draco.

This is an indication that the Roman nane of Hadrians wall was however the Vallum Aelium, or the Aelian frontier.


I would like your view.


Bob

1) I think the bowl, if it is of sufficient value and interest in its own right, could justify its own entry.

2) That said, I don't know if there is any limit on the length of an entry.

Thank you Trout Montague

1) I think the bowl, if it is of sufficient value and interest in its own right, could justify its own entry.
It Has now thank you

2) That said, I don't know if there is any limit on the length of an entry.
I will let this stand then

Thanks for the advice so far, any more please.


Bob...

For informaton A28801811 The Staffordshire Moorlands Patera

There isn't a set limit to entries as such, but if you wanted to you could find a suitable point and divide it into 2 parts.

Hmm, it certainly is a pretty long entry as it stands....

How about:
Hadrians Wall Part 1: History of the Edge of an Empire

Including all the bits *before* The Start of the Journey, AND the Hadrians Wall World Heritage Site section.

Hadrians Wall Part 2: A Journey Along the Edge of the Empire

Including The Start of The Journey, and all the forts, on the wall or near it.

Then both entries could have one of those cute link header thingies at the top, and you would just need to write a short intro to Part 2, and mention fact that journey itself can be found elsewhere in intro of Part 1.

Would that make sense?
vp

Good idea VP

Having got it to this stage I think get it through PR and split when the whole thing is tickerty boo and approved, as it has taken ages to get this far. I would like this entry to form a trio. A28801811

A28868250 Part 1
A28868160 Part 2

Like this VP

Hey Bob. Not sure what you mean by getting the entry through 'when the whole thing is tickety-boo and approved'. You win points for saying 'tickety-boo', but you can't really let the subs have an entry that needs something as major doing to it as cutting it in half. Personally, as I've said before, I tend to think you put a lot of material into many of your entries and most would benefit from being split, but if you're going to do that I think you ought to do it before you get picked, not afterwards.

Hi Be

I agree and have split the entry please refer to,


A28868250 Hadrians Wall Part 2: A Journey Along the Edge of the Empire
A28868160 Hadrians Wall Part 1: History of the Edge of an Empire

Both Created: 7th November 2007 and in EGWW