From the Hexham Courant:

THREE intriguing Roman finds are to be unveiled at Corbridge Roman Site.

The three stones have advanced the knowledge of historians about the Roman occupation of Tynedale.

“The stones are pretty hideous in that they are all quite damaged,” said English Heritage curator Georgina Plowright, “but it’s because of the importance of the information they give us that we are putting them on display.

“The three of them together enlarge the knowledge we have of the Roman settlement of Corbridge.”

The largest and most intriguing stone was unearthed last year by Tyne and Wear Museums during the excavations of the Roman Bridge at Corbridge.

The octagonal stone finial was found amongst the collapsed stones of the road running up to the south end of the bridge.

This stone would have crowned a large octagonal column or drum and stood at the approach to the bridge, or on the bridge itself.

Despite its weathered appearance, the crispness of the monument is still apparent from the moulding at the base of the finial, although what was originally placed underneath it is yet to be determined.

The Roman bridge at Chesters had pillars spaced along its parapet and therefore, the octagonal finial may have formed part of a similar architectural feature.

Another possibility being researched is that the stone is from a rather exceptional and elaborate milestone.

The second stone was discovered during the 1906 excavations at Corbridge, and was published the following year.

Having been lost became lost, the stone was recently rediscovered in a local farmyard.

It was originally one of a pair, re-used in a Roman building to the south west of the English Heritage site. A voussoir, the stone is thought to have formed part of an arch.

The third stone to go on display was found lying on the side of an excavated trench during the installation of a new water main, north of Corbridge.

Two freshly made light-coloured scars on the stone’s two longer edges show that it originally had raised sides, which have subsequently broken off. The excavation is therefore thought to be an aqueduct stone.