Completed in the year 128 C.E., Hadrian’s Wall was one of
the most famous civil engineering projects undertaken by the Roman Empire. The
wall ran a distance of 73 miles (117.5 kilometers), crossing the English countryside
from the waters of Solway Forth to the mouth of the River Tyne. It took the
effort of three Roman legions working over the course of six years to complete,
and required a garrison of more than 10,000 men to guard its length. Built by
the Emperor Hadrian, many people believe this wall represents the limit of
Roman expansion as well as the northernmost reach of the Empire.
The truth of the matter is that the mortar was hardly dry on
Hadrian’s wall when plans began for another wall across the southern portion of
what is now Scotland. Construction of this new wall began four years after
Hadrian’s death. Though shorter than its famous cousin, the new wall would take
twice as long to build and run along a stretch of countryside a 100 miles north
of Hadrian’s Wall.
When Hadrian died in 128 C.E., a new emperor ascended to the
title of Caesar. His name was Imperator Caesar Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus
Augustus Pontifex Maximus, or as he is better known, Antonius Pius. Though one
of the four great emperors of the empire’s golden age, he was remembered as
being quietly competent, ruling from Rome, focused on the promotion of the arts
and sciences, and introducing significant reforms to the Roman legal system
rather than leading armies of invasion as his predecessors had done. His timing
was fortunate because he was able to avoid the armed conflict that would come
later.
During the first year of his reign, Antoninus appointed
Quintus Lollius Urbicus to be the governor of Britannia. This was not the sort
of political appointee one would expect if the Emperor was looking to maintain
a quiet northern border. Lollius Urbicus had been one of the men who had put
down the Jewish revolt led by Simon bar Kokhba in 132-136 C.E. The revolt had
been suppressed with a violence and ferocity that was shocking even by Roman
standards.
Lollius got to work immediately and between 138 and 140 C.E.
strengthened the fortifications behind Hadrian’s Wall for use as launching points
for an invasion. Once his army was trained, he launched a two year long
campaign to conquer the Votadani, Selgovae, Damnonii, and the Novantae tribes living
in the Scottish lowlands. On the heels of his victory he began the construction
of a new wall.
This one stretched across a distance only a little more than
half the length of Hadrian’s Wall, requiring fewer troops to garrison its
defenses and freeing men to keep order among the conquered tribes to the south.
This wall would be of a simpler construction, using a berm made of sod
overlooking a deep cut ditch. Fortresses would be spaced every two miles for
the garrisoning of troops, and a military road would run alongside the berm. To
help improve the defensive capabilities of this smaller, less durable wall, a number
of forts and outposts were built to the north of the wall, to act as an early
warning system for the garrisons stationed at the Antonine Wall.
Started in 142 C.E, the new wall would not be finished until
154 C.E. The Caledonian tribe, immediately to the north, proved to be a
constant thorn in the side of those constructing the wall, and their
recalcitrance would not be ended by its completion. The garrisons in the forts
to its north, as well as those manning the wall, would be under constant pressure
from this adversarial tribe.
After the death of Antoninus in 161 C.E. his successors
(Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus) ordered the abandonment of the Antonine Wall.
The Roman legions fell back to Hadrian’s Wall, leaving the previously conquered
tribes to act as a buffer against the Caledonians. Though additional forays in
197 would lead to a brief reoccupation of the wall, Hadrian’s Wall would remain
as the northern border of the Roman Empire until sometime around the turn of
the 5th century.
James Hinton is a life
time learner and U.S. Army veteran. He has a fascination with history for both the lessons it can teach and the
high drama its stories can produce.
2 comments:
Good post, some good points about the reasons for its construction.
Hadrian's Wall was a failure, and its construction was a strategic mistake, which set them back quite seriously in the province; it was their Maginot line, probably with similar consequences.
NB. there is evidence of an timber phase [Garnhall] just as at Hadrian's Wall.[IMO].
The case can certainly be made, Geoff. Hadrian's and Antonine's walls can be seen as a shift in focus to desperately holding on rather than extending the imperial safety net through expansion. To be fair, though, Roman rule remained in place for another 200 years, so it could also be argued that the overall strategy did keep Roman Britain safe for some time afterward.
Post a Comment