Offa's off?

[Duncan Head]

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.

[Imperial Dave]

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.......

[Erpingham]

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.

[Patrick Waterson]

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.

[Duncan Head]

Surely if it's only sections of the dyke that are early, that only bespeaks a strong local polity?

[Patrick Waterson]

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.

[Imperial Dave]

Powys/Gwynedd fisticuffs?

[Jim Webster]

I was wondering why Arthur would want to build a dyke there. An Earlier king of Mercia perhaps

Jim

[Tim]

To keep the Saxons out of Wales perhaps...?

[Jim Webster]

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

[Mark G]

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.

[Jim Webster]

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

[aligern]

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

[Mark G]

I rather like the 'cattle wall' idea, actually

[Erpingham]

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.