‘Hadrian’s Wall … has long ceased to matter as a major historical problem.’ So opined Sir Mortimer Wheeler in his review of volume 50 of the Journal of Roman Studies in Antiquity (35, 1961, 159). Indeed, Wall Studies may have fossilized themselves following a perceived ‘golden age’ of exploration between 1900 and the 1930s, a period which included the definition of the long-lived concept of the ‘Wall Periods’. In the ensuing years many of the main researchers emerged from the same ‘school of thinking’, having been privileged to have been taught by Eric Birley, John Gillam or Charles Daniels, all of whom in their own way challenged what went before but can, to varying degrees, be seen to have created new orthodoxies or reinforced aspects of those that already existed.

Fortunately, the current generation of Wall scholars have proved immune to Wheeler’s musings, and while some ‘received wisdom’ proved resistant to change for a very long time, change there certainly has been. In the 1970s David Breeze and Brian Dobson challenged many established views with their Hadrian’s Wall. This momentous work, first published in 1976 and now in its fourth edition, can be regarded as representing the current ‘orthodoxy’ – a status that both authors might find uncomfortable. What should be clear from the present volume, even to those who have not sat at the feet of recent giants, or dug year on year at Corbridge, is that we are far from ‘knowing all there is to know’ about Hadrian’s Wall. Indeed, it is possible to read the papers in this volume, be appropriately impressed by the scholarship of the authors and revel in the advances in our knowledge, but put it down wondering if we actually understand less now that we thought we did pre-Breeze and Dobson!

Understanding Hadrian’s Wall largely consists of papers given at a conference held in 2006 to launch the fourteenth edition of R Collingwood Bruce’s Handbook to the Roman Wall, edited by David Breeze – itself a landmark contribution to the Wall bibliography. Papers by Breeze and Dobson briefly trace the history of Wall studies, identifying key players, issues and publications. An important paper by Nick Hodgson reviews where we stand following the demise of the ‘Wall Periods’ concept that dominated or straitjacketed Wall Studies for nearly four decades. Utilizing a series of clearly written chronological summaries, Hodgson provides not a new straitjacket but rather a characterization of ‘the major periods of life on the Wall as indicated by the archaeological evidence’; he follows the lead given by Breeze and Dobson in their Hadrian’s Wall by not giving primacy to the limited historical evidence.

Hingley poses a series of questions that he challenges Wall scholars to address, although the use of the word ‘theory’ in his title may cause many to ignore them. Rachel Newman considers Hadrian’s Wall in the context of the real world, examining the Wall in relation to tourism, the once-controversial National Trail and the need to squeeze every drop of data from the normally limited opportunities to undertake research, particularly excavation, in the Wall Zone, given the need to balance our wish to understand against ‘the need for conservation’ of this iconic monument and landscape.

Finds are often treated as a poor second to the structural archaeology of the Wall, but Lindsay Allason-Jones and the late Vivien Swan demonstrate the insights and fundamental understandings that have flowed from their own work, and that of other finds specialists; or rather, in the case of Allason-Jones, what might flow, if we had the material. In a thoughtful paper she reviews ‘those finds that must have been used but for which no actual objects emerge from the archaeological record’, focusing attention on the partiality of the archaeological record – something of which we are all acutely aware, but rarely consider. Swan’s study of ‘Builders, suppliers and supplies’ is a thorough and wider-ranging discussion of Wall ceramics and the contribution they can make to the overall picture.

Andreas Thiel’s consideration of the Antonine frontier in Germany serves to remind those specializing in Roman Britain that it is but one part of a greater whole. It is possible that ‘Wall scholars’ are perhaps the least likely to need that reminder, courtesy of the triennial Roman Frontiers Congresses, but consideration of the nature and purpose of other Frontiers is key to understanding the motivation for and functioning of Hadrian’s Wall – Thiel provides much food for thought. David Woolliscroft demonstrates the value of such an approach by drawing on his research into signalling on the German limes and referencing work elsewhere to underpin his discussion of the topic on Hadrian’s Wall.

John Poulter’s consideration of the planning of Hadrian’s Wall has been superseded by his recent BAR (2009), but is none the less a useful contribution to the volume, drawing attention to a superficially esoteric but, in reality, fundamental study. In a similar vein, David Shotter’s paper waves the flag for the subject of the Roman military conquest west of the Pennines – a subject that often seems to be overshadowed by studies focused on the eastern side of the country, although that may reflect this writer’s preoccupations rather than reality. While work in Carlisle and at other fort sites has added significantly to our data, the synthesis of data from the north west is a study area that Shotter has made his own.

The final three papers of the volume focus on particular issues and all in their way are significant contributions to the subject. Paul Austen discusses ‘projecting forts’, a subject that the author describes as ‘opaque’ with respect to the design of Hadrian’s Wall but, very like Poulter’s study, one that addresses key questions, in this case extending to the subjects of design, intended function and dating. Tony Wilmott’s paper considers the Vallum, in many ways the ‘Cinderella’ of major features in the Wall complex. This paper draws substantially on Wilmott’s own excavations, now published in Wilmott 2009, but acknowledges the importance of other work, particularly the fundamental contribution made by Dr Brenda Heywood’s 1950s excavations, now published in Archaeologia Aeliana. The paucity of data relating to the Vallum (Wilmott: ‘empirical data … is extraordinarily sparse’) is emphasized by the fact that the publication of excavations undertaken more than fifty years ago can be seen as a landmark. Wilmott’s discussion, despite the difficulties of the data, neatly summarizes the issues and disposes of a number of theories from past researchers.

Bidwell finishes the volume with one of the most contentious questions of ‘detail’, but a detail that is fundamental to how the Wall is viewed in terms of function: ‘did Hadrian’s Wall have a wall-walk?’ Breeze and Dobson are sceptics; Bidwell is a believer and presents the evidence in a typically thorough and persuasive manner. Discussion since the publication of this volume has demonstrated that the subject is far from closed.

Understanding Hadrian’s Wall is an important contribution to the subject and should, with the Hadrian’s Wall Research Framework, help set the Research Agenda for years to come.