The remains of the roman Watchtower can be visited
Roman Watchtower 1/8
This site has no photo yet. Sign in to contribute one.
The Upper Germanic-Rhaetian Limes, with a length of 550 km, from Eining near Regensburg to Rheinbrohl on the Rhine, is the largest archaeological monument in Germany and has been recognized by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site. Limes (Latin: border path/wall) refers to the border fortifications of the Roman Empire, which were erected towards the end of the 1st century AD.
This border was monitored by more than 900 towers, which were built in timber construction during the initial phase, starting around 80 AD. Stone towers followed, which were plastered from 150 AD onwards. Excavations have shown that the white plaster often had incised joints, which were painted in terracotta. This created the impression of beautiful ashlar masonry.
Roman Watchtower 1/8+
Preserved site of two stone towers and one wooden tower. The tower site was discovered in 1894 by the Imperial Limes Commission and excavated under the direction of district commissioner Georg Loeschcke. Over a century later, in 2005 and 2006, the General Directorate for Cultural Heritage Rhineland-Palatinate carried out an archaeological re-examination and subsequent conservation of the site in a total of three campaigns. This had become necessary because the excavation trenches with the findings from the early excavators had not been refilled, so they were severely damaged by the subsequent 110 years of erosion. Compounding the problem were repeated improper exposures since the early 1970s, as well as massive destruction due to the quarrying of stone material, which was used in 1974 for the pseudo-reconstruction of tower site Wp 1/10.
Wooden Tower
Under the western stone tower, a wooden predecessor tower could be identified based on two post holes, one of which still contained the post imprint. The wooden tower had a square ground plan with a side length of 4.25 m. It was surrounded by an uninterrupted ditch 2.0 m to 2.4 m wide, which had a square ground plan with rounded corners and a preserved residual depth of 70 to 94 centimeters. The side lengths – measured from ditch center to ditch center – were approximately nine meters. The infill consisted of sandy loam with rubble of greywacke and sandstone slate. In the uppermost area of the infill, pottery shards were found, which are probably in context with the fire debris of the subsequent stone tower. The lower layers of the ditch were mixed with vitrified clay and charcoal particles.
Western, Older Stone Tower
This stone tower was erected after the middle of the second century AD exactly on the site of the wooden tower, after the latter had fallen victim to a fire. It had a rectangular ground plan with side lengths of 4.4 m and 4.3 m. Its wall thickness averaged 90 cm in the rising masonry, resulting in a relatively small interior area of approximately 2.5 m by 2.5 m. The foundation plinth projected by five to ten centimeters and was embedded 30 cm deep in the ground. At a distance of only just over four meters from the base of the rampart ditch and around seven meters from the palisade ditch, the tower was aligned with its sides parallel or at right angles to the course of the Limes. The tower construction consisted of greywacke stones bonded with clay/lime mortar, which were probably later secondarily used for the construction of the younger stone tower. On the northeastern side of the tower, post traces of a possible scaffolding were found, which may have served for construction or maintenance.
Eastern, Younger Stone Tower
The eastern stone tower had a square ground plan with a side length of 4.4 m (2.6 m inside) and a wall thickness of 90 cm in the rising masonry. The 0.60 m deep foundations projected by six to ten centimeters. Like its predecessor, the tower was made of greywacke, bonded with clay/lime mortar. Also, as with its predecessor, no remains of plaster could be observed. A strip of clayey loam, about 30 cm wide and 20 cm deep, running parallel to the masonry at a distance of 0.7 m on the southeast side of the tower, was interpreted as a possible drip channel. In this case, the small distance would allow a roof overhang between 0.7 m and a maximum of 1.0 m, so that an outer circumferential walkway would almost certainly be excluded.
Source: Wikipedia · Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0
This description draws on the facts documented in the linked Wikipedia article; Wikipedia content is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0. Wording and editing: Mobile History.
Location: 50.5132, 7.3658