A Roman Aqueduct, in the UK?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 тра 2022
- Welcome to this weeks little Map Mystery. We would love to know your thoughts on the big question the video raises.
Huge thanks to David Archer for lots of his dronage here, plus maps and lots of ideas and input on this.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
A few quick notes:
We aren't historians, we just love to explore and tell you the stories we learn along the way.
Most recent research suggests that the Romans didn't take over the Hill Fort as such, as it wasn't in use at the time. The tribes had gone and abandoned the site around 100 years prior to their arrival.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If you are interested in ways in which you can help support the channel please do consider clicking on any of the links below or alternatively the join button on here.
/ everydisusedstation
www.paulwhitewick.co.uk
ko-fi.com/everydisusedstation
PayPal: whitewickpaul@gmail.com
Media contact: whitewickpaul@gmail.com
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @pwhitewick - Розваги
Massive thanks to David Archer for lots of drone shots used here and his amazing map.
Hi Paul & Rebecca.
Yes, a good contribution from David Archer. Tell him I often listen out for him when he's appearing on BBC Radio 4's 'The Archers'! 😀
Paul.
Ref lining material/clay, if you pound chalk into a slurry with aggregate say max 5mm size, when you compact this, & let it dry, it becomes hard & waterproof. We used to use it as a 'poor mans' temporary path on construction sites back in the day. Perhaps the Romans used something like this as they had plenty of both?
Fantastic xx
It should be borne in mind that back in Roman times, the height of the water table was likely to have been a lot higher as they did not have the ability to pump out groundwater the way we do now. What is now a miserable water flow in a tiny brook could once have been much higher. The pumping out of groundwater in modern times has had that effect on a lot of chalk rivers in the Chilterns, which now only flow after sustained periods of rain over a period of months.
I agree
This is a really good point. There's a great modern and reasonably well documented example of Optima Lake in the US: when construction began the average flow of the river was over 900liters per second but that had dropped to less than 200 by the time the dam was completed and by a decade later it was about 5, subsequently often drying up. The reason was increased pumping from the source aquifier. The maximum surface elevation ever reached was 1.2 meters less than the design minimum pool.
Makes bugger all difference to an aquaduct sourcing a river to supply water to several miles away. They didnt need pumps, because the aquaducts dropped about 4inches in every mile. Less and the water did not flow, more and it accelerated. It was entirely gravity fed.
@@christianbuczko1481 You appear to ahve entirely missed the point. If the water table has been lowered by modern techniques of pumping out ground water, what may once have been a very good flow at the source could well be reduced. This has precisely nothing to do with the fall in the aqueduct, and everything to do with the amount of water that flows at the source.
@@TheEulerID water table doesnt determine the height of a river, rain does. If the river is at a particular altitude, it wont change, the flow rate of the river arriving at the start would then flow down under gravity.
Fabulous views of Maiden Castle, it's a staggering construction, imagine what it looked like with a full palisade.
In a world of madness, hatred and division I love it when a Paul and Rebecca video comes out. So I can escape, to enjoy the tranquility, to enjoy Paul and Rebecca's enthusiasm, and learn something at the same time. And I don't even live in the UK. Thanks guys please don't stop doing what you do.
Couple of thoughts. From the most recent Time Team revival dig, the Romans certainly knew how to manage a water source over distance. Several stepped ponds slowing a stream down and possibly used for fish farming were identified in the landscape.
Depending on the flow rate of the Church Brook back in those days, it is highly probably that the dam would not have had to be as watertight as the aqueduct itself. If the aqueduct was not diverting the entire flow of the stream/river, then the rest overflows the dam and continues downstream in the original bed. Permeation into the chalk is not a concern then and maybe only the wall was lined to preserve the structure.
Contrast that to the aqueduct, what goes into the top of the channel is the absolute maximum that can get out, so any loses to permeation into the chalk would be unacceptable losses and thus the extra expense of sealing the channel was required.
Expanding a bit on what @QALibrary contributed about the sources that the Romans preferred for supply stability, the Romans often used groundwater sources via well intakes or infiltration galleries. A well intake collected groundwater in a chamber from slits and openings in the walls of the chamber, which acted as a sediment settlement tank as well, and then discharged at the bottom of the chamber into the aqueduct. An infiltration gallery is a channel across a hill that groundwater flowed into via slits in the walls, then flowed into a settlement basin before discharging into the aqueduct.
Diversions straight from a river are very rare as sediments and dirt would flow directly into the aqueduct and clog it up. Maybe they placed the dam on the Church Brook and fed it with additional flow from the main river along the same or slightly higher contour, with the dam being the settlement basin before discharging into the aqueduct.
There is a very interesting site called Engineering Rome with quite a bit of information and then links to more scholarly sources.
Thanks Bruce, that helps a lot!
@@pwhitewick You have to bear in mind that the Romans were not always inclined to use the simplest or cheapest engineering method to supply their needs, quite often (particularly in provinces where their rule was in question) they would put on a show of strength by engineering the most over-the-top scheme to supply water or cross a river or assault a hilltop fortress. Their engineering prowess is STILL impressive, imagine the effect if you were a tribesman or woman living in a wattle-and-daub thatched round house.
@@AnthonyIlstonJones probably think "those Romans are a bunch of nutters!"
Just as they would today
I learn so much from you about the land of my ancestors. I keep stopping the video and looking up all sorts of things I knew nothing about. Thanks for continual entertainment.
It's only when you are on the ground that you get a real sense of exactly how huge it is. Great vid as usual, thanks Paul and Rebecca.
Cheers Colin. Yep agreed, it difficult to capture it on camera well
Hi Paul. My family lived in Bradford Peverell, and were from the local area. Our neighbour had a vegetable patch in that groove up from Whitfield Farm in the 1970's! My dear mum and dad lived in the area all their lives, he was a coppice worker by trade and served his apprenticeship in Compton Valance. He always said that the Roman aqueduct source was there, and that it was 'always bl**dy wet there'
I hope this local 'knowledge' may help, and is just not another tale....
The Romans had a preference for high quality of water. They build a lot of aqueducts including a real stone aqueduct to transfer water of high quality out of the Eifel mountains to Cologne in Germany
direct at the river Rhine.
If the small river was possible polluted, it is very high likely for the longer route.
A fascinating account. Please do consider a series about Roman aqueducts and any other Roman infrastructure that you find. I've always been interested in ancient routes and tracks so I'd definitely be keen to see what you find.
I`m lucky to live next to the oldest Roman canal in the UK. Fossdyke, Saxilby, Lincolnshire. Next door has a narrow boat I should ask him if he could take them out for a video for the channel.
Hi Both, There are remains of a Roman aquaduct on Aylestone road , Leicester. It's called the Raw Dykes. And also while I am on here Great Central Railway, Quorn and Woodhouse station are putting out a new video at 7pm 11/2/23 on you tube.
It's like the Romans did to mine in Wales. I say mine but it was wash away the hillside to access the seems of gold, tin, lead whatever rather than dig.
In that area you're in the future Roman emperor Vespasian was a young officer in the 43AD invasion and he fought from London down to the south west.
They usually surrounded the occupied hill forts and used catapults and machine gun like large heavy catapults to wipeout the opposition. The bolts are still there in the ground and found in archaeological digs.
Their engineering works are always much larger and unbelievable than we expect but was routine to them. The Roman legions would march about 20 miles a day and build a fortified camp with wooden palisade walls and a large ditch all round before anything else.
With Roman colonization lasting over 400 years, I would expect that they would have constructed many of these aqueducts for their towns and cities, as well as the shorter ones that supplied the villas in the regions that they occupied. Thank you for showing us this one.
More like 350ish
Aquaducts like this are rare, villas had conduits which were tiny. Its the difference between a canal and a water pipe. They normally used wells around the uk aswell with the two best and most advanced wells in the entire empire being in london, look up hadrians wells.
The Romans occupied Britain from 43 AD until 410 AD, when the Western Roman emperor Honorius withdrew his forces because of conflict in Central Europe and approaching Rome.
There is more than enough evidence of the occupation and withdrawal of the Roman Empire.
You should educate yourself in the history and while you’re at it try the English language and grammar also.
@Alex Holmes By the way 5 spelling mistakes and 6 grammatical mistakes in 10 lines. Outstanding effort.
Are you aware of Ham Hill at Stoke-sub-Hamdon? Talking to someone from Bournemouth university when they were doing a dig at Ham Hill they stated that it was the largest Iron Age hill fort in Europe rather than Maiden Castle. It is so large that it is much more difficult to see the whole to get a scale of it, with fields and woods it doesn’t stand out like the beautiful Maiden Castle.
Really enjoyed the rest of the video 😀
Beautiful explore. Footage stunning. So interesting. Very enthusiastic. Views from the drone were amazing. Thank you.
Where I live & before mechanization the lumber jacks built and, used flumes to deliver their lumber to a river/ lake location. All you need is a water supply.
Maybe ...the dam came later. I suppose its obvious to say that wherever the aquaduct came out, it would have to be at a lower level than where it started - just to get the flow. I suspect that ground penetrating radar might reveal something (where is Time team when you need them). Its a fascinating bit of archeology though.
If you havent been, I recommend visiting the Pont du Gard and wandering around the countryside either side to see how a Roman Mega project aquaduct was made. (What have the Romans ever done for us?)
Great video. Impressed.
Like most of your videos, this one turned into a rabbit hole. This time looking up leat/leet/lete from a recent video, linked with aqueduct building, and getting dragged into Roman hydraulic mining methods in Britain. The thing that always sticks out about the Romans, their confidence in their engineering skills, and treating a problem as something to be resolved, with a bit of elegance.
Very nice video, I be knackered after walking 15 miles around that, I possibly would had gone for the easy option as well
I was part of the team that did the 4 week excavation at Frampton dam in 1998
Really interesting topic and well done😊
When archaeologist, Sir Mortimer Wheeler excavated some of the site in the inter war years of the last century, he incurred the wrath of the archaeological elite by actually letting the public in to view the digs in progress. Furthermore, digging had revealed millions of carefully graded stones all over the site. These were 'ammo dumps' of sling stones to defend the site. Wheeler had loads of these bagged up, and sold to visitors as a souvenir of their visit.
I've been there, many years ago, and it is so vast, sheep grazing on it's banks looked like grains of rice from a distance.
An incredible place.
I'm sure that I once saw a TV show called 'What The Romans Did For Us', which demonstrated an aqueduct, and indeed, how the Romans persuaded water to run uphill. Nothing ever surprises me about the ingenuity of those blokes.
I know some concrete flooring contractors who can make water run uphill. Just have them put in a drain, and the water will go anywhere else but into it.
@@Vinemaple - Did they all take their Stetson hats when they left?
My next door neighbours had some contractors like yours - they took nearly a year to build an extension. When they finished, it was utter shite.
it's possible to start from the river to the aquaduct before the 80m line, that would make the water move quickly, which they must remove this speed to a slow meander as the speed would over time ruin the wood lined aquaduct as water is abrasive.
Note. They had settling tanks for debris removal so that would loose some height for this process as it would have to be quite big.
Excellent Drone Work, enjoyed seeing the Fort & near 2,000yr old Earthworks.
Thanks Paul & Rebecca with regards sent from an old Roman Town in East Dunbartonshire.
Lots of clay at nearby Wareham, great video thanks.
So it’s chalk underneath, and looks like it has been farmed for a very long time, so maybe the 80m contour and the river channel are not where they were back then? There would possibly be 5-10m of soil on top of the original contour, and the river would have eroded deeper, or even moved from it’s original course.
That was really interesting 😊.... I never knew that fort was there ... I agree with your first theory about where the aqueduct starts ..
You were very quiet Bec.... 😶
There is a very good description and write up about this Aqueduct and its excavations in chapter 4 of the book Roman Dorset by Bill Putnam.
greetings from New Zealand you 2 make great videos to watch my dad was born in Dorchester been there many times before i came to nz 😊
Rebecca doing a marvelous job of looking lovely, never uttering a single word. A good vlog suggesting different option, but not many definite answers. I would have thought the Romans wouldn't have shied away from work and liked to make things to last. I do hope you solve this mystery and share your answers. Thanks, and take care.
very impressed by the quaility of your filming and editing. You keep our attention nicely.
Great video which I came across by accident. I regularly walk over the fields you describe and will look at them in a new light now. Thank you.
I've been to Maiden Castle many times but I didn't know about the aqueduct. That valley near the end of the video seems bloomin big for the Romans to have dammed it, As Mick Aston used to say on time team: "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". ie: Aqueduct could have been more to the west but nothing remains today. Lots of little Dorset brooks and streams seem to have much less water that just 40 years ago. not sure why? They used to be full of water, Lots of clay in the Isle of Purbeck. would that have been too far away for the Romans? Purbeck clay mining was going on in Roman times (according to the Purbeck clay mining museum). Great video!! Is that an "Ant & Dec" thing? Paul on the right and Rebecca on the left. I reckon the river Frome, smaller brooks, streams and smaller man made structures for water seem much more likely than a big dam in a relatively big valley. PS: So Bournemouth Uni reckon this dam was there for about 70 years or more. This make it seem even more unlikely.
Just a joy to vicariously visit such terrific countryside. Thanks for a great video.
Great and informative vid as always both. Made me think, and will have to research, how water was obtained at my local hill fort in Oswestry. never gave it a thought before, so now you have the "Grey matter" going !!
The Whitewicks are on the search again ! Thank you Rebecca , thank you Paul for entertaining me this Sunday and Cheers from California ! (Erm, I’m not actually California)
Hi Paul and Rebecca, thank you for another lovely video, it's very therapeutic to see such glorious countryside, unfortunately, I'm temporarily incapacitated at the moment, ( I injured my knee), so I won't be going very far any time soon, but Mary and I used to enjoy going for long walks in the countryside, she's waiting for a hip operation, so we're both having to curtail our travels, anyway, stay safe, all the best from Scotland, Stephen.
Best wishes to you both
Great video Paul & Rebecca. When I go for walks I try to find places with history as it makes it more interesting
Ummm...... mystery indeed! There was much reference to the 80m contour. However, a water supply MUST flow downhill and so the source must have been 5m or more higher than Dorchester. This would have made it even harder to identify the location of the source as it would have been above 80m (or was Dorchester already lower than 80m?). Whatever the answer, the aqueduct must have had a descending gradient else the water would have been nearly stagnant. You quoted a supposed flow rate of 3.6 tonnes per minute, and so the gradient would have been noticeable.
The Elan valley aqueduct to Birmingham has an average gradient of 1 in 2350. That is an average drop of 6.8m every 10 miles. Apply this to Dorchester and you see where I’m coming from.
The mystery thickens!
I used to live in Weymouth. It's full of clay that's really good at keeping water in. Weymouth is so close to Dorchester and there was also a Roman settlement there so I think getting the clay wouldn't have been too hard for them.
Please forgive me, but as a wild colonial from Australia who has spent scant time in the UK, every time I hear of Dorchester, I think of the Fawlty Towers episode:
Oh, um...Your chef. Has he been with you long?
About six months. He used to work at Dorchester.
At the Dorchester?
No. In Dorchester, about 14 miles away.
Sybil should have googled the distance from Dorchester to Torquay is in fact 75miles - not 14!! I🤣
@@rachelt-s Sybil was a woman. Surely her ignorance of mileage is understandable? 🤔🙄😁
Your videos are so interesting- better than the BBC - love them.
Paul, when you mentioned a dam. I came to the same conclusion as you have. Where is the dam's liner? Without it any water that flowed into the reservoir would be absorbed into the ground and very little would been left to supply an aqueduct.
I think that it would take a much larger water source, such as the nicely sized waterway (/river) to supply the city with an adequate based water supply to meet its needs. Thus, I favor the valley theory.
This was a very nice video that probed an interesting question. Thank you for making it.
Just as an idea.........is is possible that once the chalk becomes saturated, that is enough to allow further water to flow ? Not very efficient initially, all the initial water is lost but gradually over time the chalk becomes water logged ?
Or perhaps a layer below the chalk prevents water loss.
Streams wouldn't exist at all in chalk land areas if the water always passed through the rock ?
@@nigelprice3929 Soil would cover over the chalk for a flowing body of water like a stream and prevent leakage. But, it would take a long time.
I guess it could also work that way for a reservoir. If you waited a very long time for soil to form a water impervious layer.
Somehow I would think that chalk since itself does not dissolve in water. Your theory might be true. But, it would be a very leaky reservoir and not hold water very long.
@@mkendallpk4321 it's possible that the area was once saturated and with water extraction not only has the stream dried out but the ground has dried as well, if there was originally a saturated area then maybe daming would have made sense, from watching the likes of time team over the years if you have a large body of still water then you get settlement of mud at the bottom as evidence
Oh, interesting! Beek en Dal, near Nijmegen has an aquaduct that fed the Roman army camp just East of present day Nijmegen. A substantial part was dug into the hill, but also natural contours were used.
Fascinating video as ever. Nunnery mead is situated just outside Maiden Newton where I used to live (I was told that Maiden comes from the association with the Nuns at the nunnery that once stood on or near Nunnery Mead) so I know the area well. Interesting to learn about the Roman history there though. I knew about the existence of the aqueduct but amazing to see it from the air.
That was a really interesting video. Thank you SO much. Your explorations are always entertaining and thought provoking.
Keep them coming!
As my friend, the civil engineer (USA definition), keeps reminding people: "Water runs down hill." And remember Occam and his razor.
Thank you so much for doing this video. I live nr Winterbourne abbas. I knew that there was an aquaduct but didn't know the route of it or where it started. I shall be off to explore it very soon x
Your in such an ancient landscape there, excellent production as usual,your enthusiasm is exasperatingly refreshing,well done.
I am so jealous of your mini-adventures. Thank you for sharing.
G’day from Australia! Like the hikes, like the history, love the antics! What a great couple you are! I really enjoy the passion you have for exploration.
There was a very ambitious Roman water course with aqueducts from the north of Lincoln coming to supply Lincoln. They have found plenty of evidence of it but there is a mystery as there is little supporting evidence it was ever used. I will be near Dorchester in a few weeks 👍
This is great and super interesting . I lived in Dorchester for years and know that whole area real well and have walked maiden castle a bunch
Love it when you make me have to think :) Interesting video.
Another very interesting video - I can only theorise that the water table was higher back then - we certainly take a great deal out of it - far more than the romans would have done.
great video. water causes and flow can change through time . The university of bournmouths idea sounds credible. more aquaducts and canals *please*
I'm enjoying them. That's for sure.
As far as I can remember from high school and beyond. The Romans were masters at moving water. In London they used a massive water pump deep in a well. Also in other places uses water wheels and Archimedes screws.
The water from the river may have been carried on elevated wood sections in places to be possibly be converted to stone later
There would be little evidence of a shorter raised aqueduct if they used one.
Also if water loss was minimal due to higher water flow they may not have needed to invest as much into sealing it.
Well the climate may have been wetter long ago, so the brook may have had more flow, but even if its flow was seasonal, the reservoir created by the dam would have allowed for a supply of water well into the dry season if there was one.
Great video, thanks. I spent many a time climbing over maiden Castle when I was young totally unaware of the viaduct. On the clay front; though dorchester don't have clay weymouth does, I grew up radipole side of weymouth and clay was everywhere.
You two must be the foremost commentators on history in the English landscape, Iron Age to abandoned railways. Well done, but most importantly THANK YOU.
Thanks for another great presentation xxx thanks.
@1:43 ... glad to see you using the passing gate (again). Tut tut Rebecca, always shut the gate !! 🙂🤣🤣
hello again Paul and Rebecca , i love when you get the drone out , interesting video as always , well done and thank you guys :)
A brilliant and enlightening video once more, great work P&R.
P.S. Rebecca's facial expressions and poses are always entertaining!
Fascinating, it often takes the eye of an outsider to question these things with a bit of common sense, I like your thinking Paul. I'm sure the Romans preferred the easy option in engineering. However, I suppose the brook could have been more substantial all those years ago.
Yep the Brook simple has to have had more water in even during summer months
I haven't seen it written or said, but an aqueduct would need a continuous fall in grade, perhaps 1%, so the 10km distance for the source to meet the contour of the town, would need to be at least 120m above that level, which would push it perhaps 12km distance away, assuming the river was their source.
It should also take into account, that they would have used all the tributaries/seepage from along one side of the aqueduct.
8:14 Rebecca going "Anna ou-"
I also wonder how changes in the exact curvatures and water levels in the respective bodies of water have changed over time. It takes quite a while, usually much longer than 2000 years, for anything significant to happen, but even small alterations or deviations could have an impact on historic engineering.
I think the dam theory is feasible as the river may well have changed over the last 2 millennia, for instance Corbridge, Hadrian's wall the river is far away from the remains of the original bridge.
I must go back and have another look as I've not been up there in at least 25yrs.
Thanks for the inspiration.👍
One point about Church Brook. Just because it’s not flowing today doesn’t necessarily mean it wasn’t like that in the past. Any sort of earthworks could potentially changed the flow.
Wonderful history beautiful pictures thanks paul & rebecca cheers bob from down under.
I've watched most of your content on railways and canals. Thank you so much for all of it.
This aqueduct is something of which I was never aware, and Dorchester was my place of birth and childhood home. And I was supposed to be a Classicist. Oh well.
Know matter how much we know there is always scope to learn more ;-)
I found out about it as I go thru Dorchester every year to play in purbeck (musician). Could see it on the hill and wondered to check OS Map. Bam! Very cool.
I remember seeing about a similar one I think up near the Welsh goldmines
6:00 - just yesterday I found out the Romans hated to take water directly from a stream.
It gave them issues due to the supply, as in incostatance water levels, which affected the consistency in water flow.
This led to aqueducts needing a certain level of water flow and supply for them to work, too much or not enough water would damage the materials they were made out of. Also too little water flow you get stagnant water when then get issues and too much people will end up too much water and flooding/over flowing etc.
Add in water contamination from rivers eg mud, silt also poor water taste... this would affect the lining of the aqueduct by wearing it out
Thus where at all possible they took water from springs, ponds first and then wells - but a dam would work for them.
I love videos like this one! Thanks, Paul and Rebecca!
Another great & interesting program, keep them coming 👍
Thank Guys for a fascinating vlog & challenging, was it fusible that the river feed the reservoir as well as the brook and the reservoir kept a stock of water ?
Amazing work team 👏
Thank you
Omg my fav couple ❤️ happy Sunday evening
I’ve been waiting for this one, it didn’t disappoint! Great vid again guys, thank you ☺️
If I was the romans, I would set up where it’s easier. Not think we’ll set up here, then worry about how we going to get the water to here. Especially if it’s miles away.
Love the videos, it’s got to be a great achievement when you solve the problems of the past 👍👍
Very confused today; but lovely scenery! Love your enthusiasm:).
I do love your exploring. Doing all the things I'd love to do. I have no theories on the dam, mostly because I know bugger all about them 🤣
Lovely part of the world, Thomas Hardy country, I wonder if part of the Mayor of Caster bridge was based in that Hill Fort?
Perhaps they used water wheels to raise the level of the water?. Various operational examples can be seen in the Valle de Ricote in Murcia southern Spain, these are used to provide irrigation water.
I really enjoy these videos where you delve into the long lost past looking for clues. It will be interesting to see what others also comment.
Good luck from Spain!!
It's worth noting that many of the rivers and streams that you see now are flowing much less water than they did even 100 years ago, primarily due to the water being extracted for agriculture and, well, the modern equivalent of Roman aqueducts!
Thank you. Very interesting as always.
Stumbled on your content today! Love the perspectives you give here, between maps (and overlays), drone footage and being right there, at the actual site. Love it! Look forward to following your adventures! :)
love your vids. drone shots are awsome!
Cracking vid love Roman history, found a piece of Roman pot in our garden crazy to think it’s 2,000 years old!
Always enjoy your video’s. Another unusual topic and interesting insight 👍
A nice tour today. Thank you! Cheers mates!
The Romans were known for their water management abilities and building a 15km aqueduct would not have taxed their abilities much. You have to remember that drainage projects over the past 1900 years have drastically changed the normal flow of water in Britain, so a creek that is dry today might have been an adequate source of water in Roman times. The Romans also would not have used river water for drinking, they understood the health problems of rivers, plus rivers tend to carry sediment and trash downriver that would have plugged any aqueduct. As soon as my time machine is perfected I'll make a point of going back and watching the Romans to settle the matter.
Very interesting clip... Does raise some interesting questions.
The climate in Roman Britain may have had greater rainfall, particularly in the later period, so maybe the feeder streams had far greater volumes of water in them...(when did the dam collapse?)
That's a very good point. I think around 150AD.
A great video as usual and I am slightly ashamed that you have walked more of the route than me who lives in Dorchester
Get walking Stephen. Plenty we missed.
This is not unusual. I was born and brought up in London but visited only a few of the many attractions thinking "oh we can go there anytime". My wife, a Slovak, has seen more of London than I :-(
Thx for the conundrum! Difficult to know where the aqueduct began. Obviously it would have been gravity fed but looking from ground level hard to decide where it started.
Many aqueducts often had multiple input sources so it is possible. The recent and ongoing lidar and ground penetrating synthetic aperture radar work might upon review and interpretation might help prove or disprove the history. The technologies have helped at many other cultural history and archaeology sites.
A lovely video, but seems a bit obsessed with the 80m contour. Aqueducts must have a fall of maybe 1 in 1000 for the water to flow. If the route is 10 kilometres, you need to find where the 90m contour crosses the river to see the source.
i always enjoy your video's, the music, the beautifull landscpapes and you both friendly couple. The UK is beatifull!
What we think is irrelevant; it's what the research evidence shows that matters.
vis a vis aquaducts in the UK, roman hydraulic engineering was well developed and they were very fond of a nice bath. Any roman settlement that had any status would have had a piped water supply; that would included every major town. roman aquaducts are quite common.
Any Roman Aqueducts that I have seen in Italy were built of stone and had a gradient of 1:100 with settling cisterns at regular intervals. The channel was simple a deep groove cut in stone blocks. It could not have just followed the 80 meter contour line as there would have been no gradient. Even if it was built of wood there must have been some stone supports. Did you not find any stone remains?
Still, a very good and thought provoking video.
Greetings from New Zealand.I see that the Old Country is as beautiful as ever.Love your videos.