What do you think?
Rate this book
Hadrian's Wall: Archaeology and History at the Limit of Rome's Empire
Built around AD 122, Hadrian's Wall was guarded by the Roman army for over three centuries and has left an indelible mark on the landscape of northern Britain. It was a wonder of the ancient world and is a World Heritage Site. Written by a leading archaeologist who has excavated widely on the Wall, this is an authoritative yet accessible treatment of the archaeological evidence. The book explains why the expansion of the Roman empire ground to a halt in remote northern Britain, how the Wall came to be built and the purpose it was intended to serve. It is not a guidebook to the remains, but an introduction to the Wall and the soldiers and civilians, men, women and children, who once peopled the abandoned ruins visited by tourists today.
- GenresHistoryNonfiction
224 pages, Hardcover
First published July 14, 2017
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
April 18, 2026
This excellent book gives a full and well-researched account of the functions, structure, history and development of Hadrian’s Wall, as well as of what life was like along the wall in Roman times.
Hodgson’s book therefore has to be compared to Breeze and Dobson’s book (with the same title), which Hodgson himself describes as the “standard history” of the wall. I’m not an expert on the wall, so I am not qualified to say whether or not this book might usurp Breeze and Dobson as the “standard history”. But I can point out some differences between the two books.
Firstly, this book includes the results of more recent research. The latest edition of Breeze and Dobson was published in 2000, so we have had 17 years of archaeology at the wall between then and the publication of this book.
Secondly, this book is a more attractive one, particularly because it contains lots of colour photographs and illustrations.
Thirdly, Hodgson includes more discussion than Breeze and Dobson on the native British population on each side of the wall, though he acknowledges that there is not much evidence on this subject.
Fourthly and finally, Hodgson has something rather different to say about the functions of the wall. He points out that in recent decades the orthodox view has played down the defensive functions of the wall and has instead posited functions relating to border control, security, and the collection of taxes on cross-border trade.
Hodgson wants to swing the pendulum back towards emphasising the defensive importance of the wall. He says that it could “function as a fighting platform for a small delaying force while at the same time the Roman army as a whole still operated against the enemy in the open.” In other words, soldiers on the wall could hold off a surprise raid until troops arrived from the wall forts.
But whatever the immediate functions of the wall, its broader significance was as a symbol of the fact that the Empire had ceased to expand. Hodgson mentions this, and it is a very important point for Breeze and Dobson, who say that the wall signified the “concept” of a frontier. This was a new idea for the Romans at that time. In the preceding centuries Rome had been constantly expanding. It had been assumed that this expansion would go on and on.
But now the Empire was reaching its limits. Expansion was no longer so easy. In the East there was the Parthian Empire, which was a tough nut to crack. Elsewhere Rome had reached what historian Neil Faulkner calls the “plough line”, beyond which expansion would not pay for itself because the land was not fertile enough to produce much of a surplus. Hadrian ordered the building of frontier barriers in various parts of the Empire, including Germany, where it consisted of a timber palisade, and North Africa. Hadrian's Wall is simply the best known, best preserved and most impressive of these barriers.
Expansion did not come to a complete end with the building of the wall. For example, the frontier was for a short time moved northwards to the Antonine Wall; and the Emperor Septimius Severus later made an unsuccessful attempt to conquer the whole of Britain. Nevertheless the wall does signify a new stage in the development of the Roman Empire. And from this point of view it can be seen as a sign of weakness rather than strength.
In his magnificent book, “The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World”, G.E.M. de Ste. Croix argues that the end of Rome's expansion led eventually to its decline. Conquered provinces were a source of taxation in cash and kind. But they were also a source of slaves, especially during the process of conquest itself. But when expansion ceased, the supply of slaves began to dry up. To make up for this, Rome’s rulers began to squeeze the free peasants more and more, to the point where many peasants preferred “barbarian” invaders to Roman rule.
All this suggests that Hadrian's Wall symbolises a turning point in Roman history. Although its building was followed by a long period of continuing Roman power, the pinnacle had been reached. There was nowhere else to go but backwards.
Hodgson’s book therefore has to be compared to Breeze and Dobson’s book (with the same title), which Hodgson himself describes as the “standard history” of the wall. I’m not an expert on the wall, so I am not qualified to say whether or not this book might usurp Breeze and Dobson as the “standard history”. But I can point out some differences between the two books.
Firstly, this book includes the results of more recent research. The latest edition of Breeze and Dobson was published in 2000, so we have had 17 years of archaeology at the wall between then and the publication of this book.
Secondly, this book is a more attractive one, particularly because it contains lots of colour photographs and illustrations.
Thirdly, Hodgson includes more discussion than Breeze and Dobson on the native British population on each side of the wall, though he acknowledges that there is not much evidence on this subject.
Fourthly and finally, Hodgson has something rather different to say about the functions of the wall. He points out that in recent decades the orthodox view has played down the defensive functions of the wall and has instead posited functions relating to border control, security, and the collection of taxes on cross-border trade.
Hodgson wants to swing the pendulum back towards emphasising the defensive importance of the wall. He says that it could “function as a fighting platform for a small delaying force while at the same time the Roman army as a whole still operated against the enemy in the open.” In other words, soldiers on the wall could hold off a surprise raid until troops arrived from the wall forts.
But whatever the immediate functions of the wall, its broader significance was as a symbol of the fact that the Empire had ceased to expand. Hodgson mentions this, and it is a very important point for Breeze and Dobson, who say that the wall signified the “concept” of a frontier. This was a new idea for the Romans at that time. In the preceding centuries Rome had been constantly expanding. It had been assumed that this expansion would go on and on.
But now the Empire was reaching its limits. Expansion was no longer so easy. In the East there was the Parthian Empire, which was a tough nut to crack. Elsewhere Rome had reached what historian Neil Faulkner calls the “plough line”, beyond which expansion would not pay for itself because the land was not fertile enough to produce much of a surplus. Hadrian ordered the building of frontier barriers in various parts of the Empire, including Germany, where it consisted of a timber palisade, and North Africa. Hadrian's Wall is simply the best known, best preserved and most impressive of these barriers.
Expansion did not come to a complete end with the building of the wall. For example, the frontier was for a short time moved northwards to the Antonine Wall; and the Emperor Septimius Severus later made an unsuccessful attempt to conquer the whole of Britain. Nevertheless the wall does signify a new stage in the development of the Roman Empire. And from this point of view it can be seen as a sign of weakness rather than strength.
In his magnificent book, “The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World”, G.E.M. de Ste. Croix argues that the end of Rome's expansion led eventually to its decline. Conquered provinces were a source of taxation in cash and kind. But they were also a source of slaves, especially during the process of conquest itself. But when expansion ceased, the supply of slaves began to dry up. To make up for this, Rome’s rulers began to squeeze the free peasants more and more, to the point where many peasants preferred “barbarian” invaders to Roman rule.
All this suggests that Hadrian's Wall symbolises a turning point in Roman history. Although its building was followed by a long period of continuing Roman power, the pinnacle had been reached. There was nowhere else to go but backwards.
December 10, 2018
Author Hodgson reviews the archeological and historical evidence surrounding Hadrian's Wall built in 122 AD and describes why the wall was built (mostly as an early warning system for large invasion parties) and what happened to the wall over time. A most informative read - a good accompaniment to our hike of the wall.
September 1, 2021
Well-researched, mostly chronological account of the wall from archaeological evidence available.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews