I am quite satisfied, in my own mind, that the general character of the work on the Wall was adapted to suit the time, the country, and more especially, the labourers employed on the work. The Wall, being a work of defence, had to be constructed in haste; the country was wild, rude, and without roads, excepting such as the Romans caused to be made. This ‘caused to be made’ is I think, the key to the character of the masonry chosen.... The form of construction is the easiest and strongest which rude, uneducated men could accomplish; and, with good mortar, such as the Romans knew so well how to make, is the kind of work calculated to endure for centuries, as we find it has done.... The works of the Wall I consider to have been chiefly constructed by the natives, under the armed superintendence and teaching of the soldier. The Roman knew no right but that of the conqueror; his object was conquest for use; use of the land, and the labour that was upon it. The Roman soldier was a fighting animal, and was so far civilized as to know how to make the comparative savage do his work upon his plan, and this was shaped to suit the labour used. Consider the length of the Wall, and the extent of the works upon it, and it will be seen that for the army to have constructed it, would have been to have kept them constantly working instead of watching and fighting. Some years ago I had a large quantity of heavy masonry to construct on one of the railways. It was not unlike the Roman Wall in character. I found a difficulty in dealing with the regularly educated mason, and bought several scores of trowels and hammers; these I placed in the hands of uneducated labourers, set them to work under the superintendence of educated foremen, looking after the whole myself. This is a case similar to the one I have imagined for the great Wall; only the work my labourers performed had more difficulties about it than the Wall, and yet, these uneducated men performed the work perfectly.[40] Think of the Roman bringing in at the sword’s point, hundreds of captive natives, placing for the first time tools in their hands, indicating the work to be done, and compelling the trembling slaves to do it![41] The stones employed in building the Wall and stations were very carefully selected. When good stones were to be had near at hand, they were taken; but those of inferior quality were never used to avoid the labour of bringing better from a distance. In some parts of the line, in Cumberland especially, the stone must have been brought from quarries seven or eight miles off. A quartzose grit was generally selected not only on account of its hardness, but because its rough surface gave it a firmer adhesion to the mortar. The stone which has been used in the works at Wallsend is of a much coarser grit than any that is found in the neighbourhood. [Sidenote: THE QUARRIES USED.]