Andrew Tibbs
My primary research interest is in Roman Britain, with particular reference to the depth and extent of military engagement in the north of England and Scotland, including the early frontier in the north as well as the later counterparts of Hadrian’s Wall and the Antonine Wall. I am interested in the construction, positioning and orientation of Roman fortifications, with a particular focus on the 1st century and the Flavian invasion of Scotland. I am also interested in Roman military landscapes, and the influence of the military on this, and how they altered and adapted to suit the landscape, but also their ability to make the topography work for their own purposes.
I have a wider interest in frontiers of the Roman Empire, and the parallels which can be drawn between the military operating in different territories, and what can be learnt from this. I have additional interests in remote sensing, particularly LiDAR, and the application of these within Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and various analyses which can be undertaken and can increase archaeological knowledge of the Iron Age and Roman landscapes in north Britain. I am further interested in public engagement and education in relation to Roman archaeology, and methods of encouraging and supporting local groups and individuals to engage with their historic environment, helping to create ‘citizen archaeologists’, while also increasing participation in the subject. As an extension of this, I have recently published a book, Beyond the Empire: A Guide to the Roman Remains in Scotland, which promotes Roman archaeology in Scotland to public audiences.
My PhD, “An Examination of the Location, Intervisibility, Orientation & Interconnectivity of early Roman Military Structures in Scotland” uses archaeological analyses and GIS to explore the 1st century military installations across Scotland. Little research has been undertaken into the decision to position and orientated a Roman fortification in a certain direction or location; based on the writing of various classical authors, they state that a forts and camps should face either east, the enemy or the direction of marching and that the locating of the site should make use of the natural topography for defence. However, the research undertaken for this thesis indicates that these were secondary to the positioning of the fortification towards and adjacent to rivers. The thesis postulates that use of watercourses and river valleys played a significant role in the Flavian invasion of Scotland.
Supervisors: Professor Richard Hingley and Dr Robert Witcher
I have a wider interest in frontiers of the Roman Empire, and the parallels which can be drawn between the military operating in different territories, and what can be learnt from this. I have additional interests in remote sensing, particularly LiDAR, and the application of these within Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and various analyses which can be undertaken and can increase archaeological knowledge of the Iron Age and Roman landscapes in north Britain. I am further interested in public engagement and education in relation to Roman archaeology, and methods of encouraging and supporting local groups and individuals to engage with their historic environment, helping to create ‘citizen archaeologists’, while also increasing participation in the subject. As an extension of this, I have recently published a book, Beyond the Empire: A Guide to the Roman Remains in Scotland, which promotes Roman archaeology in Scotland to public audiences.
My PhD, “An Examination of the Location, Intervisibility, Orientation & Interconnectivity of early Roman Military Structures in Scotland” uses archaeological analyses and GIS to explore the 1st century military installations across Scotland. Little research has been undertaken into the decision to position and orientated a Roman fortification in a certain direction or location; based on the writing of various classical authors, they state that a forts and camps should face either east, the enemy or the direction of marching and that the locating of the site should make use of the natural topography for defence. However, the research undertaken for this thesis indicates that these were secondary to the positioning of the fortification towards and adjacent to rivers. The thesis postulates that use of watercourses and river valleys played a significant role in the Flavian invasion of Scotland.
Supervisors: Professor Richard Hingley and Dr Robert Witcher
less
InterestsView All (15)
Uploads
Papers by Andrew Tibbs
Monographs/Books by Andrew Tibbs
In this period, Roman military engineers took several factors into consideration when selecting a site for a fortification. This often included the defensive capacity of the surrounding topography, intervisibility between sites, proximity to transport networks (roads and rivers), and to a lesser extent, how close indigenous settlements were. Primarily focussing on those sites established during the 1st century Flavian campaigns, this study combines remote sensing techniques with archaeological and historical legacy data, and topographical information in a GIS. It undertakes computational analysis to explore the relationship between early Roman military structures in Northern Britain, and the landscape in which these are located. This is the first time that a ‘big data’ GIS-based study has been undertaken into the location and positioning of early Roman sites, in Scotland, and their relationship with the landscape surrounding them.
By exploring the positioning and location of early Roman fortifications in the Scottish landscape, this study concludes that the military strategy in the 1st century was not to control the wider landscape, as has been argued, but to manage the main corridors of movement around the fortifications. This enabled the army to exert visual control and authority over the indigenous population, and negate the need to manage the entirety of the landscape.
PhD Thesis by Andrew Tibbs
This investigation demonstrates that Flavian fortifications in Scotland, were almost always located near bodies of water, as well as positions which enabled visual control of movement through the landscape, while those located on the coast may also have controlled access to the river networks and those fortifications located further upstream.
The thesis concludes that the military strategy in Flavian Scotland was not to block all movement through the landscape as such a strategy would have been impossible in such a varied landscape, but rather to enable visual control of the main corridors of movement through the Roman frontier-zone.
Reviews & Reports by Andrew Tibbs
Public Lectures and Adult Education Courses by Andrew Tibbs
At the same time modern understanding of the control of image in the media and the feasibility of political discourse through images has progressed. This course takes the Zanker arguments and discusses them between an archaeologist and a modern media and public relations expert to establish, how far the arguments still hold and what limitations the emperors faced.
Conferences & Lectures by Andrew Tibbs
The paper covered coastal and river fortifications in Flavian Scotland, with particular emphasis on the Firths of Forth and Clyde.
The evidence from the Flavian forts (and some camps) on the proto-frontier in the north of Scotland, is that the fortifications rarely are orientated towards the enemy or east. Instead, most sites are orientated towards bodies of water, with many being located at the confluences of rivers. It is not immediately apparent why this should be; is it to secure important crossings or is it because they are acting as transport routes before the construction of roads?
The orientation of these sites also calls into question their role as 'glen-blocking' forts. If these were constructed to guard arterial routes to/from the Empire, or to act as launch pads for an invasion of the Highlands, then it would be expected that the forts would be orientated to face up these glens, something which is not reflected in the evidence.
Abstract for RAC/TRAC (Edinburgh) 2018
This paper will look at the wider issue of fort orientation in relation to monumentality and whether or not there is a purpose to the positioning of forts; is it a symbolic act of power designed to influence and intimidate the local populations, or is there a more practical reason based on topographical positioning and nearby resources.
‘Pseudo’ Hyginus
“The Praetorian gate should either front the east or the enemy. In a temporary camp it should face the route by which the army is to march.”
Vegetius
The direction that a Roman fort faces is often presumed, based on the writings of several classical authors, to face either the enemy or east towards the rising sun, although the forts of the northern frontiers of Roman Britain generally appear not to follow this advice and initially seem to be orientated in random directions.
The exception to this are the forts along the West Cumbrian coast which would appear to be orientated towards indigenous settlements (hill forts) on the Dumfriesshire coast, and towards the Isle of Man. Could these Roman forts be deliberately orientated towards the enemy?
This poster will highlight research into the orientation of this small group of forts on the Cumbrian coast, and forms part of a PhD research project to be undertaken at Durham University.
Conference & Session Organisation by Andrew Tibbs
Proposals for sessions should be emailed to: [email protected]
www.trac.org.uk
We look forward to welcoming you to Durham!
In this period, Roman military engineers took several factors into consideration when selecting a site for a fortification. This often included the defensive capacity of the surrounding topography, intervisibility between sites, proximity to transport networks (roads and rivers), and to a lesser extent, how close indigenous settlements were. Primarily focussing on those sites established during the 1st century Flavian campaigns, this study combines remote sensing techniques with archaeological and historical legacy data, and topographical information in a GIS. It undertakes computational analysis to explore the relationship between early Roman military structures in Northern Britain, and the landscape in which these are located. This is the first time that a ‘big data’ GIS-based study has been undertaken into the location and positioning of early Roman sites, in Scotland, and their relationship with the landscape surrounding them.
By exploring the positioning and location of early Roman fortifications in the Scottish landscape, this study concludes that the military strategy in the 1st century was not to control the wider landscape, as has been argued, but to manage the main corridors of movement around the fortifications. This enabled the army to exert visual control and authority over the indigenous population, and negate the need to manage the entirety of the landscape.
This investigation demonstrates that Flavian fortifications in Scotland, were almost always located near bodies of water, as well as positions which enabled visual control of movement through the landscape, while those located on the coast may also have controlled access to the river networks and those fortifications located further upstream.
The thesis concludes that the military strategy in Flavian Scotland was not to block all movement through the landscape as such a strategy would have been impossible in such a varied landscape, but rather to enable visual control of the main corridors of movement through the Roman frontier-zone.
At the same time modern understanding of the control of image in the media and the feasibility of political discourse through images has progressed. This course takes the Zanker arguments and discusses them between an archaeologist and a modern media and public relations expert to establish, how far the arguments still hold and what limitations the emperors faced.
The paper covered coastal and river fortifications in Flavian Scotland, with particular emphasis on the Firths of Forth and Clyde.
The evidence from the Flavian forts (and some camps) on the proto-frontier in the north of Scotland, is that the fortifications rarely are orientated towards the enemy or east. Instead, most sites are orientated towards bodies of water, with many being located at the confluences of rivers. It is not immediately apparent why this should be; is it to secure important crossings or is it because they are acting as transport routes before the construction of roads?
The orientation of these sites also calls into question their role as 'glen-blocking' forts. If these were constructed to guard arterial routes to/from the Empire, or to act as launch pads for an invasion of the Highlands, then it would be expected that the forts would be orientated to face up these glens, something which is not reflected in the evidence.
Abstract for RAC/TRAC (Edinburgh) 2018
This paper will look at the wider issue of fort orientation in relation to monumentality and whether or not there is a purpose to the positioning of forts; is it a symbolic act of power designed to influence and intimidate the local populations, or is there a more practical reason based on topographical positioning and nearby resources.
‘Pseudo’ Hyginus
“The Praetorian gate should either front the east or the enemy. In a temporary camp it should face the route by which the army is to march.”
Vegetius
The direction that a Roman fort faces is often presumed, based on the writings of several classical authors, to face either the enemy or east towards the rising sun, although the forts of the northern frontiers of Roman Britain generally appear not to follow this advice and initially seem to be orientated in random directions.
The exception to this are the forts along the West Cumbrian coast which would appear to be orientated towards indigenous settlements (hill forts) on the Dumfriesshire coast, and towards the Isle of Man. Could these Roman forts be deliberately orientated towards the enemy?
This poster will highlight research into the orientation of this small group of forts on the Cumbrian coast, and forms part of a PhD research project to be undertaken at Durham University.
Proposals for sessions should be emailed to: [email protected]
www.trac.org.uk
We look forward to welcoming you to Durham!
Roman frontier scholarship stands at a crossroads. Recent scholarship has been innovating approaches to Roman frontiers which far exceed the traditional boundaries of the field, yet at the same time the decades-old theory of Romanisation is still the best known and most debated frontiers theory. We believe it is time to boldly go beyond traditionally defined 'Roman frontiers' scholarship, and interrogate the new ways in which scholars from across our discipline are engaging with frontiers both Roman and otherwise. Theory has progressed far beyond the days of Romanisation, and we suspect there are many theoretical approaches embedded within present scholarship that are equally worthy of discussion. Frontiers/borders with the associated movement of people remains a hot topic in contemporary society, yet it is Romanisation that is featured within political debates regarding UK immigration policies. This session aims to capture a range of diverse research which deals with aspects of frontier theory or self-identifies as related in any way to Roman frontiers, examples including (but not limited to) multiculturalism, mobility, bordering, networks, transnationalism, or globalisation. Discussion will be a key aspect of this session, and in order to make it so we ask speakers to consider how theory structures their research and impacts its relationship to contemporary society.