skip to navigation
ADS Main Website
Help
|
Login
/
Browse by Series
/
Series
/ Journal Issue
Oxford J Archaeol 22 (3)
Title
The title of the publication or report
Title:
Oxford J Archaeol 22 (3)
Series
The series the publication or report is included in
Series:
Oxford Journal of Archaeology
Volume
Volume number and part
Volume:
22 (3)
Publication Type
The type of publication - report, monograph, journal article or chapter from a book
Publication Type:
Journal
Editor
The editor of the publication or report
Editor:
Barry Cunliffe
Helena Hamerow
Nicholas Purcell
Andrew Sherratt
Publisher
The publisher of the publication or report
Publisher:
Blackwell Publishing
Year of Publication
The year the book, article or report was published
Year of Publication:
2003
Source
Where the record has come from or which dataset it was orginally included in.
Source:
BIAB (The British & Irish Archaeological Bibliography (BIAB))
Created Date
The date the record of the pubication was first entered
Created Date:
03 Feb 2004
Please click on an Article link to go to the Article Details.
Article Title
Access Type
Author / Editor
Page
Start/End
Abstract
Space and manpower in Roman camps
Alan Richardson
303 - 313
Certain aspects of space and manpower use in Roman camps were investigated using a previously published spreadsheet model. Over half the camp area was not needed for the men's tents and this was probably enough to cope with patches of unsuitable ground within the rampart. The relationship between the camp area and perimeter was such that the bigger the camp, the relatively fewer men were needed to make and defend it. Small camps, which required relatively greater effort from the men, could be made quickly. Data from the Polybian and Hyginian models suggested that the basic determinant of camp design and numerical structure of the army lay in the requirement for a man to labour upon and defend no more than five feet of perimeter. Compared with the Polybian model, the Hyginian model greatly reduced the area and perimeter length for any given force, thus enabling the army to adopt a more aggressive posture.
Appendix
312
presents four notes on elements of the equation.
Archaeology unfolding: diversity and the loss of isolation
Dan Hicks
315 - 329
British historical archaeology has seen new theoretical engagement in recent years. A diverse and distinctive body of theory has developed in this increasingly vibrant and international area of study, testing disciplinary boundaries, especially with history, social anthropology and material culture studies.\r\nThis paper takes stock of three distinct processes within the new historical archaeology: the birth of material history, the loss of antiquity, and the loss of isolation. The implications of these processes for the wider discipline are explored with reference to landscape archaeology, using the example of the Ironbridge Gorge, Shropshire. In a consideration of future directions, it is argued that historical archaeology provides particular insights to the need across the discipline for archaeology to respond with self-confidence to complexity by drawing out and celebrating diversity in theory and practice.