• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

What is the Evidence for the Roman Occupation of the Antonine Wall?

Extracts from this document...


What is the Evidence for the Roman Occupation of the Antonine Wall? In 138 AD Antoninus Pius succeeded Hadrian as Emperor of Rome and immediately initiated a change of frontier policy in Britain. After re-conquering the Lowlands, Antoninus decided to build a wall to rival that of his predecessor to mark the new northern extent of Roman territory and Hadrian's Wall was abandoned. The Antonine wall spans the narrowest portion of lowland Scotland, between the Firth of Forth and the Firth of Clyde, and the whole exercise probably had a propaganda view point, as expanding the empire would have improved Antoninus' reputation and credibility. However, the events only rated a single sentence in Capitolinus' biography of Antoninus: 'Through his legates he carried on many wars; for he conquered the Britons through Lollius Urbicus the governor, and, after driving back the barbarians, built another wall, of turf.' As the Antonine wall was built of turf it's identity with the quote is reasonably certain. There is evidence to suggest that Antoninus probably needed a quick military success and that the decision for the construction of a new frontier was made as early as 139 AD. An inscription at Corbridge shows that Lollius Urbicus was making preparations for the campaign in 139 AD and coins of Antoninus show that the re-conquest of the Lowlands had been completed by late 142 or early 143 AD. Corbridge had been the site of one of Agricola's bases and at this time was re-garrisoned and re-equipped, and as earlier military aspects of Corbridge's history always reflect events happening in Scotland, it is reasonably safe to assume it was being used as a supply route to move further north. ...read more.


However, if this were the case we would expect the distances built by Legio II to be far greater than those constructed by the other two and this is not so. There is further evidence to suggest that each legion was divided up into two working parties, so we may assume that the greater part of all three legions were present. Duplicate stones were set up at the end of the lengths built by each party, but no cohorts or centuries left records as they did on Hadrian's Wall. Aerial photography discovered fourteen marching camps near the line of the Wall which were probably the housing for the construction parties. There seems little doubt that the occupation of the Antonine Wall was developed into a complex frontier system, but the question remains as to why it was built, particularly after so much time, effort and expense had been put into the Hadrianic system. There is very little direct evidence so most theories depend heavily upon assumptions and circumstantial evidence. It is thought that the Greek writer Pausinias refers to these events when he says, 'Antoninus Pius never willingly made war; but when the Moors took up arms against Rome he drove them out of all their territory.....Also he deprived the Brigantes in Britain of most of their land because they too had begun aggression on the district of Genunia whose inhabitants are subject to Rome.' However, this suggests that Pausinias thought the Brigantes were outside the province, but they had been within it for more than sixty years, so he may well have his facts mixed up and probably meant a tribe further north. ...read more.


Excavators found evidence that the fortlet at Lynne was replaced by a full sized fort and that Loudoun Hill and Carzield were abandoned and not rebuilt. The second occupation of the Antonine Wall was strong and nothing much happened on the Wall or north of it, suggesting that the trouble may have been in southern Scotland and the purpose of the Wall was to separate the tribes in Scotland, preventing conflict between them. Whilst Antoninus Pius lived, Scotland continued to be held, probably because it was the major military achievement of his reign. However after his death in 161, he was succeeded by Marcus Aurelius and policy in the north was re-assessed objectively. It had become obvious that there were just not enough troops to control the vast area between the Pennines and the Forth and in 163 Calpurnius Agricola was sent as governor, the Scriptores Historae Augustae says 'War was threatening in Britain and Calpurnius was sent to deal with it.' Calpurnius rebuilt a number of forts in northern England so it was probably he who implemented the decision to, yet again, withdraw Roman troops from Scotland. Certainly small quantities of late Antonine pottery, found by excavators at Glenlochar proves that the area was sparsely populated and that there was no occupation of the Antonine Wall by 165 AD. Under Marcus Aurelius, Scotland was not totally abandoned, but troops were needed to keep a firmer grip on territory further south and he was probably responsible for the reorganisation and re-occupation of Hadrian's Wall. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE History Projects section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE History Projects essays

  1. Cold War, Berlin Wall Crisis-1961

    Kennedy described West Berlin as an island of freedom in a sea of communism, and stated that the west "cannot and will not permit the Communists to drive us out of Berlin, either gradually or by force"2. He then announced a substantial increase in the US defence budget amounting to $3.25 billion3.

  2. From the evidence available, trace the development of the Jewellery Quarter in the ...

    For the 90 to 100 headers, boys and girls, there was only one toilet, which, when the commissioners visited, had excrement all over the floor and was completely unfit for the use of humans. On the commissioners' last visit, the place had been emptied, and the floor washed, but it was still in a filthy state.

  1. Roosevelt's New Deal

    the audience is; if it were indeed for an audience a black, or racial equality group, or for those who criticised Roosevelt's ways, than it would be obviously and efficiently high-lighting the rising unemployment, and the little, or short-lived success of the New Deal.

  2. Using evidence from the site, and documentary evidence, present your own explanation of what ...

    In contrast, Jean de Molinet, the contemporary French historian, claims that King Richard had "around 60,000 combatants". A Spanish historian, Diego de Valera, claimed that King Richard stood with 70,000 men. From my visit to the site, I believe that Polydore Vergil's claim is more likely, because I do not

  1. What does archaeology show about the life of a Roman soldier in Roman Britain?

    It also shows a soldier would always have to be prepared for battle, as the unexpected could come at any time at all. The other purpose of polishing the armour was so that the glare off the armour from the sun would scare the enemy.

  2. The evidence at housteads fort shows that the roman solders on Hadrian's Wall lived ...

    fort accordingly for example the fort was changed numerous times for numerous reasons some of them we cant know for sure though In the 3rd centaury the bathhouse was moved inside this was to do with families moved into the fort this happened in the 3rd centaury .

  1. What Factors Led to a Roman Emperor

    his genius is officially allowed to be worshiped whilst he is still alive; from this comes divine honours granted on behalf of the cult of a community. Many emperors, beginning with Julius Caesar, received honours ranging from libations being poured to their genius to temples being built in association with

  2. Huangdi versus Hadrian. Who ruled their empire more effectively?

    The army used the most advanced weaponry of his time. Their weapons were made of iron, while the other independent states used bronze ones.They defeated powerful Nomads called Huns, who constantly invaded its borders. As far as the armies are concerned, I think the Roman army and the Qin?s army were both effective in helping the empires to be controlled.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work