http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-mid-wales-26921202 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-mid-wales-26921202) - the eponymous Dyke, or bits of it, may be older than Offa.
"It is now likely that parts of the dyke system was in place before Offa's time but it is also likely that he would have consolidated the existing network into what we now call Offa's Dyke"
Just like Qin Shi Huangdi and his Wall, then.
Thats very interesting Duncan. I guess the next question would be who built that section and why. If its in the 500's, depending on when exactly it may not even be Mercia! Or at least Mercia as we know it.......
Quote from: Holly on April 14, 2014, 06:15:48 PM
Thats very interesting Duncan. I guess the next question would be who built that section and why. If its in the 500's, depending on when exactly it may not even be Mercia! Or at least Mercia as we know it.......
But someone capable of organising a major engineering project - lots of people, lots of supplies, able to militarily or politically stop the work being disrupted by the neighbours. Speaks of a decent-sized polity with some stability.
Might we be renaming it Arthur's Dyke? ;)
For those who have not entirely given up on attempts to find out something about Arthurian Britain, this is potentially useful indirect evidence for a strong central polity, Pendragon or whatever one may wish to call it.
Surely if it's only sections of the dyke that are early, that only bespeaks a strong local polity?
I get the impression that the entire dyke is considered to have possibly been built/excavated earlier, but as they have only dug a small portion near Chirk it is as yet not possible to say how extensive the earlier works are.
Thinking about it, as potential evidence for Arthur it is not that good: as evidence for a polity with organisation and manpower it could be promising, if the earlier work indeed extends along Offa's construction, but why would Arthur build a dyke there? It perhaps makes more sense as a work to keep Saxons out once the major part of Britain had fallen to the invaders, and if so would be connected with a rump kingdom in Wales which had not yet split into competing principalities.
Powys/Gwynedd fisticuffs?
I was wondering why Arthur would want to build a dyke there. An Earlier king of Mercia perhaps
Jim
To keep the Saxons out of Wales perhaps...?
Quote from: Tim on April 15, 2014, 04:37:12 AM
To keep the Saxons out of Wales perhaps...?
It might do that, but in theory, Arthur had defeated the Saxons in Battle and driven them back. He was probably operating further south, or further north than that, and the one thing the legends never describe him as doing is building a dike.
The other thing is that it's probably one of the few ancient monuments of a vaguely suitable age that isn't attributed to him.
Given the above, it might well be the only thing the person who became the core of the Arthur legends actually did! :-[
Jim
The odd roman or two was known to build a wall while they settled control in an area.
They were also known to then move past it for their next stage of control.
From what I've seen of Offa's Dike and from what I remember of the history, it might be more use to prevent raiding (and driving livestock home) than it would be to prevent formal invasion.
I'm not sure how much the intention was to defend the barrier by standing on it in arms.
Thinking about it, it's the sort of thing that both sides might have contributed labour to, because if it stopped livestock straying and prevented the sorts of feud that can grow up over grazing rights and whose cattle are whose, then it might well be worth the effort
Jim
I wonder if, for perfectly comprehensible reasons, we leap to military explanations. It is just as possible that this represents an agreed boundary between two post Roman states. Do we have evidence that there were garrisons along the dike?
Roy
I rather like the 'cattle wall' idea, actually
Quote from: aligern on April 15, 2014, 08:53:25 AM
I wonder if, for perfectly comprehensible reasons, we leap to military explanations. It is just as possible that this represents an agreed boundary between two post Roman states. Do we have evidence that there were garrisons along the dike?
Roy
I'd always thought the consensus was a boundary between two states rather than an early medieval Hadrian's Wall. While it is possible it is lots of little boundaries later connected together, as suggested, it seems at least possible it is part of one political settlement over a wider area.
There's also the Roman Ridge (sometimes "Rig") Dyke (sometimes "Dykes") between, very approximately, Sheffield and Doncaster in southern Yorkshire, apparently designed for defence against the south, and although modernly typically supposed as having been constructed by the Brigantes in Roman times, has also been suggested as covering part of the southern border of Northumbria at some point in maybe the 7th-9th centuries. It's undated. About the best descriptive source I've found online for it so far is here:
http://www.brigantesnation.com/SiteResearch/Iron%20Age/RomanRig/RomanRig.htm ,
though this barely mentions the early medieval option.
The Bar Dyke on Broomhead Moor is nearby as well (similarly undated, with suggested construction dates guessed-at from the Bronze Age to the 7th century AD), which might be related. This site has some brief notes and a few photos of it:
http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/2698/bar_dyke.html .
There are mixtures of banks and enclosures in various parts of England that are assumed to be for cattle handling
Jim
Quote from: Erpingham on April 15, 2014, 10:03:48 AM
Quote from: aligern on April 15, 2014, 08:53:25 AM
I wonder if, for perfectly comprehensible reasons, we leap to military explanations. It is just as possible that this represents an agreed boundary between two post Roman states. Do we have evidence that there were garrisons along the dike?
Roy
I'd always thought the consensus was a boundary between two states rather than an early medieval Hadrian's Wall. While it is possible it is lots of little boundaries later connected together, as suggested, it seems at least possible it is part of one political settlement over a wider area.
seems emminently reasonable to me. Walls/dykes/fortifications are always a way of slowing down traffic through a frontier area. We dont have to assume military in this instance. Interestingly there has been evidence for high status continuity at the Wrekin in Shropshire into the 6thC which is in the right ballpark area as this section of the Dyke............