DOCSLIB.ORG

The Development of the Mural Frontier in Britain from Hadrian to Caracalla* by David J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Development of the Mural Frontier in Britain from Hadrian to Caracalla* by David J The Development of the Mural Frontier in Britain from Hadrian to Caracalla* by David J. Breeze and Brian Dobson In 1936 in a short paper in the Journal of Roman Studies,1 Sir lan Richmond effectively demonstrated tha Antonine th t frontiery t 'ato e no t actuallWals bu ' wa l y embodied structural advances ove s Hadrianiit r c predecessor somd an , e year sRomans latehi n i r Britain gave h 2 e briea t concisbu f e accoun improvemente th f o t s introduce Antonine th y db e planners inte oth later Wall developmene Th . resula s ta experiencf to murae th f eo l barrier from Hadria Carao nt - calla has, however, never been examined in detail: the purpose of this paper is to study this development. Hadrian's Wall, from the start of building in the early 120s to its abandonment when the Antonine earl e Walbuils th ywa n l ti 140s, underwent several modifications. When first planned the units closesfrontiee th o t Romaf ro n Britain appea havo rt e been accommodate seriea n di s of forts base Agricola'n do s road from Carlisl Corbridgeo et Stanegatee th , lina ,f com o e - munication through one of the few convenient east-west gaps.3 The forts were at half the normal interval of one day's march, allowing the rapid assembly of a force to meet an attack on whatever scale or to go on the offensive, striking up from Corbridge or Carlisle. Beyond the road to the west Kirkbride - and possibly Drumburgh4-may have housed units to control the localpopulation guard an Solwaye d th ease newle th th t o t ;y discovered for t Whickhaa t havy mma e formed part of a system of protection of the south bank of the Tyne, unbridged below Corbridge. Between Stanegate fortcertaith e n th so f no e from Corbridg Carlislo et e fortlets have been discovered- Haltwhistle Burn and Throp as yet are the only two certainly known - and the system, such as it wascompletes wa , numbea y db lookouf o r t posts, most placed forwar line fortf th ed o f dso an fortlets. The fortlets may have housed units which were more concerned with control of movement, tha patrollins i t watchtower-mannind an g g duties functioe th , n later assume Wale d th an ly db milecastles it watchtowerd san s (turrets). This syste mf deploymeno f unitso t , however satisfactor r dealinyfo g with major attacks, could not deal with the problem of infiltration by raiding parties or cope with the whole business of contro movementf o l . Hadrian decide construco dt onle th t y for f effectivmo e controe th n i l absence of a natural barrier, an artificial barrier which could only be crossed at controlled points. This gave securit provinc e possibilite th th o yt d ean economif yo c developmene th t o right p u t frontier. This barrie originalls a r y planne consiso t s stona f dwa o t e wal Roma0 1 l n feet wide and perhaps 15 high to a parapet walk for the eastern 45 miles, and a turf wall 20 Roman feet wide at base and probably 14 high5 to parapet walk for the western 31 miles. In front of the Wall * This article is based on the paper read by the first author to the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland at their one-day conference, 'The Two Walls', 1st May 1971. I PROCEEDING 0 11 SOCIETYE TH F SO , 1969-70 1 :T~«—""tr- • i f u» • » J —L • • u • TJ-TT LJ• • LJ • • LJ • • U *^ r LJr • LJ L- ______'::::;' J------_-_ 1^3——I———————————' '.-INjji . .——"~~~T ~t:-;=.;-.:.-:;|.-J-~ ~ Li'lJ^~ ---/ - ——- -- UJ^- - —T — __._-- CD—————CD—————HC3——-——CJ d "FI 1 GHadrian' Antonine s th Wal d an l e Wal diagrammatin li c form . Hadrian'a . s Wal originalls la y plannet dbu not completed. Main features: wall and ditch with turrets, pierced by milecaste gateways; pre-existing forts behind the line . Hadrian'b . s Wall original pla modifies na d under Hadrian. Main features: walditcd an l h with turrets, pierce milecastly db e gateways; forts astrid walle eth , Vallum behind with crossing t fortsa s only . Antonin.c e Wall. •Main features: rampart with ditch; forts, with annexes, attache rampartdto ; fortlet beacon-platformsand s where -necessary; Military Way . Hadrian'd . s Wall from early third century. Main features: wall with ditch; some turrets; pierced by reduced milecastle gateways; forts; Military Way there was to be a ditch wherever necessary. This ditch varied in width from 26 to 34 feet, with emphasie th lowee th abous n r o sfigure wa fee9 td tan , deelittla r po e more t regulaA . r mile intervals along the Wall gates were to be placed, each guarded by a fortlet or milecastle BREEZ DOBSOND EAN MURAL E TH : FRONTIE BRITAIN RI N FROM HADRIA CARACALLO NT | A11 1 containing one or two small barrack-blocks, and each apparently provided with a lookout tower ove norte th r h gate.6 Between each milecastle therturreto tw e r lookoue werso b o et t towers, regularly spaced. Along the exposed west flank of the Wall, the Cumberland coast, milecastles d turretan s (for convenience distinguishe s milefortletda d towersan s ) wer ee built b als o ot , though no continuous wall was provided, the sea being considered a sufficient barrier. The line of frontier control was thus to extend from Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Hadrian's new bridge across the Tyne, for possibly nearly 120 miles to St Bee's Head. There is also some evidence that the south bank of the Tyne was defended, and certainly a new fort was built at South Shields, at the mouth of the river, though this may be a later addition. The troops to garrison the mile- 7 castle turretd an s s were probabl providee b auxiliare o yth t y db y units statione line f th eo n di forts already in existence on the Stanegate a mile or two behind the Wall; there is no evidence for a separate force. In the event of an impending invasion from north of the Wall, these units would be expected to move up through the milecastle gateways to fight the enemy in the field. purpose Wale Th th f l e Romao e itself th s a , n biographe Hadriaf o r divido t s e ne th wa tell , sus barbarians from the Romans. The military units had no special part to play in the control of movement unles militarsa y threat8 developed; they remaine thein do r natural lin communicaf eo - tion. The fortlets were presumably abandoned as the milecastles were occupied and the lookout towers were either incorporate systew d ne int r abandonedme o oth . In the course of putting this scheme into operation, when it was something over half- completed importann a , t chang frontiee mads th ewa o et r complex. decides wa t abando9I o d t n the forts immediately south of the Wall and replace them by new forts actually on the line of Walle th . This decisio clearls nt wa undertake yno n lightly t involvei r fo , t onl abandone dno yth - ment of permanent forts and the erection of new ones but also the demolition of milecastles, turret lengthd san Walf so l already constructe infilline th d ditche partf gdo an th f so . Thesw ene forts, placed about seven miles apart astridy la , Wale eth l whereve locae rth l topography allowed, with three twin-portal gates providin equivalene gth milecastlx si f o t e gates Walle nortth f h.o The purpose behind this change seems to have been to allow unrestricted access for major aree forceth a o Wale t norts th f l ho whic h would hitherto have been difficult with milecastle gate negotiateo st extremels i t I . y unlikely tha milecastle th t e gate kine s werth use dw r deno fo of sorties that have sometimes been envisaged,10 with the enemy rolled up against the Wall; this type of warfare was not in keeping with normal Roman practice. The new forts were only 1 part of the Wall complex for convenience; the conversion of a mobile1 field army into a frontier police force had not yet begun, though the temptation to make this conversion now existed. All the forts would seem to have been planned to project north of the Wall wherever possible. However, it was soon realised that, with the forts on the line of the Wall itself, so many gates opening north of the Wall were unnecessary. Hence at Halton Chesters both portals of the west gate were apparently blocked before the erection of the gateway was completed, and at Housesteads, with only one double gate opening north of the Wall, the east portal was built up at a similar stage.12 The fort of Greatchesters, one of the last of the primary series of forts completede b o t buils wa ,t wholly sout , thoughof h still attache Wale th , l dto althoug t coulhi d perfectly well have projected. The same is also true of Carrawburgh, added at a late stage in building to plug the long gap between Chesters and Housesteads. At Birdoswald too modifica- tions, probably lat Hadrian'n ei s reign, reduce numbee dth f portalo r s Wale nortth f lh o fro m six to two.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Roman Britain
    Roman Britain Hadrian s Wall - History Vallum Hadriani - Historia “ Having completely transformed the soldiers, in royal fashion, he made for Britain, where he set right many things and - the rst to do so - drew a wall along a length of eighty miles to separate barbarians and Romans. (The Augustan History, Hadrian 11.1)” Although we have much epigraphic evidence from the Wall itself, the sole classical literary reference for Hadrian having built the Wall is the passage above, wrien by Aelius Spartianus towards the end of the 3rd century AD. The original concept of a continuous barrier across the Tyne-Solway isthmus, was devised by emperor Hadrian during his visit to Britain in 122AD. His visit had been prompted by the threat of renewed unrest with the Brigantes tribe of northern Britain, and the need was seen to separate this war-like race from the lowland tribes of Scotland, with whom they had allied against Rome during recent troubles. Components of The Wall Hadrian s Wall was a composite military barrier which, in its nal form, comprised six separate elements; 1. A stone wall fronted by a V-shaped ditch. 2. A number of purpose-built stone garrison forti cations; Forts, Milecastles and Turrets. 3. A large earthwork and ditch, built parallel with and to the south of the Wall, known as the Vallum. 4. A metalled road linking the garrison forts, the Roman Military Way . 5. A number of outpost forts built to the north of the Wall and linked to it by road. 6. A series of forts and lookout towers along the Cumbrian coast, the Western Sea Defences .
    [Show full text]
  • Gloucestershire Castles
    Gloucestershire Archives Take One Castle Gloucestershire Castles The first castles in Gloucestershire were built soon after the Norman invasion of 1066. After the Battle of Hastings, the Normans had an urgent need to consolidate the land they had conquered and at the same time provide a secure political and military base to control the country. Castles were an ideal way to do this as not only did they secure newly won lands in military terms (acting as bases for troops and supply bases), they also served as a visible reminder to the local population of the ever-present power and threat of force of their new overlords. Early castles were usually one of three types; a ringwork, a motte or a motte & bailey; A Ringwork was a simple oval or circular earthwork formed of a ditch and bank. A motte was an artificially raised earthwork (made by piling up turf and soil) with a flat top on which was built a wooden tower or ‘keep’ and a protective palisade. A motte & bailey was a combination of a motte with a bailey or walled enclosure that usually but not always enclosed the motte. The keep was the strongest and securest part of a castle and was usually the main place of residence of the lord of the castle, although this changed over time. The name has a complex origin and stems from the Middle English term ‘kype’, meaning basket or cask, after the structure of the early keeps (which resembled tubes). The name ‘keep’ was only used from the 1500s onwards and the contemporary medieval term was ‘donjon’ (an apparent French corruption of the Latin dominarium) although turris, turris castri or magna turris (tower, castle tower and great tower respectively) were also used.
    [Show full text]
  • The Antonine Wall, the Roman Frontier in Scotland, Was the Most and Northerly Frontier of the Roman Empire for a Generation from AD 142
    Breeze The Antonine Wall, the Roman frontier in Scotland, was the most and northerly frontier of the Roman Empire for a generation from AD 142. Hanson It is a World Heritage Site and Scotland’s largest ancient monument. The Antonine Wall Today, it cuts across the densely populated central belt between Forth (eds) and Clyde. In The Antonine Wall: Papers in Honour of Professor Lawrence Keppie, Papers in honour of nearly 40 archaeologists, historians and heritage managers present their researches on the Antonine Wall in recognition of the work Professor Lawrence Keppie of Lawrence Keppie, formerly Professor of Roman History and Wall Antonine The Archaeology at the Hunterian Museum, Glasgow University, who spent edited by much of his academic career recording and studying the Wall. The 32 papers cover a wide variety of aspects, embracing the environmental and prehistoric background to the Wall, its structure, planning and David J. Breeze and William S. Hanson construction, military deployment on its line, associated artefacts and inscriptions, the logistics of its supply, as well as new insights into the study of its history. Due attention is paid to the people of the Wall, not just the ofcers and soldiers, but their womenfolk and children. Important aspects of the book are new developments in the recording, interpretation and presentation of the Antonine Wall to today’s visitors. Considerable use is also made of modern scientifc techniques, from pollen, soil and spectrographic analysis to geophysical survey and airborne laser scanning. In short, the papers embody present- day cutting edge research on, and summarise the most up-to-date understanding of, Rome’s shortest-lived frontier.
    [Show full text]
  • Antonine Wall - Castlecary Fort
    Property in Care (PIC) ID: PIC170 Designations: Scheduled Monument (SM90009) Taken into State care: 1961 (Guardianship) Last reviewed: 2005 HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT SCOTLAND STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE ANTONINE WALL - CASTLECARY FORT We continually revise our Statements of Significance, so they may vary in length, format and level of detail. While every effort is made to keep them up to date, they should not be considered a definitive or final assessment of our properties. Historic Environment Scotland – Scottish Charity No. SC045925 Principal Office: Longmore House, Salisbury Place, Edinburgh EH9 1SH ANTONINE WALL – CASTLECARY FORT BRIEF DESCRIPTION The property is part of the Antonine Wall and contains the remains of a Roman fort and annexe with a stretch of Antonine Wall to the north-east of the fort. The Edinburgh-Glasgow railway cuts across the south section of the fort while modern buildings disturb the north-east corner of the fort and ditch. The Antonine Wall is a linear Roman frontier system of wall and ditch accompanied at stages by forts and fortlets, linked by a road system, stretching for 60km from Bo’ness on the Forth to Old Kilpatrick on the Clyde. It is one of only three linear barriers along the 2000km European frontier of the Roman Empire. These systems are unique to Britain and Germany. CHARACTER OF THE MONUMENT Historical Overview Archaeological finds indicate the site was used during the Flavian period (AD 79- 87/88). Antonine Wall construction initiated by Emperor Antoninus Pius (AD 138-161) after a successful campaign in AD 139/142 by the Governor of Britain, Lollius Urbicus.
    [Show full text]
  • A Roman Altar from Westerwood on the Antonine Wall by R
    A Roman Altar from Westerwood on the Antonine Wall by R. P. Wright The altar here illustrated (PI. 23a) was found3 in ploughing in the spring of 1963 perhaps within r moro , e likel fore f Westerwoowesth e o ty , th jus of to t tAntonine th n do e Walle Th . precise spot could not be determined, but as the altar was unofficial it is more likely to have lain outsiddragges fortboundare e wa aree th th t I ef .fieldth e o d a o t th f ,y o wherrecognise s wa t ei d two days later by Master James Walker and was transferred to Dollar Park Museum. The altar4 is of buff sandstone, 10 in. wide by 25 in. high by 9£ in. thick, and has a rosette with recessed centr focus e plac n stonei e th severas f Th eo .e ha l plough-score bace d th kan n so right side, and was slightly chipped when being hauled off the field, fortunately without any dam- age to the inscription. Much of the lettering was at first obscured by a dark and apparently ferrous concretion, but after some weeks of slow drying this could be brushed off, leaving a slight reddish staininscriptioe Th . n reads: SILVANIS [ET] | QUADRVIS CA[E]|LESTIB-SACR | VIBIA PACATA | FL-VERECV[ND]I | D LEG-VI-VIC | CUM SVIS | V-S-L-M Silvanis Quadr(i)viset Caelestib(us) sacr(wri) Vibia Pacata Fl(avi) Verecundi (uxor) c(enturionis) leg(ionis) VI Vic(tricis) cum suis v(ptum) s(olvii) l(ibens) m(erito) 'Sacred to the Silvanae Quadriviae Caelestes: Vibia Pacata, wife of Flavius Verecundus, centurion Sixte oth f h Legion Victrix, wit r familhhe y willingl deservedld yan y fulfille r vow.he d ' Dedications expressed to Silvanus in the singular are fairly common in Britain,5 as in other provinces.
    [Show full text]
  • Spain) ', Journal of Conflict Archaeology, Vol
    Edinburgh Research Explorer Fought under the walls of Bergida Citation for published version: Brown, CJ, Torres-martínez, JF, Fernández-götz, M & Martínez-velasco, A 2018, 'Fought under the walls of Bergida: KOCOA analysis of the Roman attack on the Cantabrian oppidum of Monte Bernorio (Spain) ', Journal of Conflict Archaeology, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 115-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/15740773.2017.1440993 Digital Object Identifier (DOI): 10.1080/15740773.2017.1440993 Link: Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer Document Version: Peer reviewed version Published In: Journal of Conflict Archaeology Publisher Rights Statement: This is the accepted version of the following article: Brown, C. J., Torres-martínez, J. F., Fernández-götz, M., & Martínez-velasco, A. (2018). Fought under the walls of Bergida: KOCOA analysis of the Roman attack on the Cantabrian oppidum of Monte Bernorio (Spain) Journal of Conflict Archaeology, 12(2), which has been published in final form at: https://doi.org/10.1080/15740773.2017.1440993 General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
    [Show full text]
  • A MESAMBRIAN COIN of GETA Luchevar Lazarov Unlike The
    TALANTA XXXIV-XXXV (2002-2003) A MESAMBRIAN COIN OF GETA Luchevar Lazarov Unlike the abundant production during the Classical and Hellenistic periods, the activity of the mint at Mesambria Pontica in Roman times was relatively 1 limited . Until now, the following mints are known: Hadrian (117-138 AD), Septimius Severus (193-211 AD), Caracalla (198-217 AD), Gordian III (238- 244 AD), Philip the Arab (244-249 AD), Philip II (247-249 AD) and the empress Acilia Severa, wife of the emperor Elagabalus (218-222 AD) (Karayotov 1992, 49-66). Recently, a Mesambrian coin from the time of the emperor Augustus (27 BC - 14 AD) was found in the private collection of N. Mitkov from Provadija (NE 2 Bulgaria) , showing the beginning of the Roman mint in the city (Karayotov 1994, 20). In this present note, a Roman Mesambrian coin of the emperor Geta (209-212 AD) is presented, testifying that in the beginning of the 3rd century AD, also coins bearing the name of this son of Septimius Severus were minted in Mesambria. AUKPÇEP Obv.: / GETAC, showing a bust of Geta with laurel wreath and wearinMgEaÇcAuMiraBssR anId pAaNluPdaN mentum (Fig. 1). Rev.: / / , showing a naked Hermes with a purse in his right and a caduceus in his left hand. The face is turned to the left (Fig. 2) > AE; — ; D: 23-24 mm. Taking the size of this coin in account, it probably belongs to nominal III (Schönert-Geiss 1990, 23-99). 1 On Mesambrian coinage of the pre-Roman period, see: Karayotov 1992, Karayotov 1994, Topalov 1995. 2 I would like to thank mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Romans in Cumbria
    View across the Solway from Bowness-on-Solway. Cumbria Photo Hadrian’s Wall Country boasts a spectacular ROMANS IN CUMBRIA coastline, stunning rolling countryside, vibrant cities and towns and a wealth of Roman forts, HADRIAN’S WALL AND THE museums and visitor attractions. COASTAL DEFENCES The sites detailed in this booklet are open to the public and are a great way to explore Hadrian’s Wall and the coastal frontier in Cumbria, and to learn how the arrival of the Romans changed life in this part of the Empire forever. Many sites are accessible by public transport, cycleways and footpaths making it the perfect place for an eco-tourism break. For places to stay, downloadable walks and cycle routes, or to find food fit for an Emperor go to: www.visithadrianswall.co.uk If you have enjoyed your visit to Hadrian’s Wall Country and want further information or would like to contribute towards the upkeep of this spectacular landscape, you can make a donation or become a ‘Friend of Hadrian’s Wall’. Go to www.visithadrianswall.co.uk for more information or text WALL22 £2/£5/£10 to 70070 e.g. WALL22 £5 to make a one-off donation. Published with support from DEFRA and RDPE. Information correct at time Produced by Anna Gray (www.annagray.co.uk) of going to press (2013). Designed by Andrew Lathwell (www.lathwell.com) The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development: Europe investing in Rural Areas visithadrianswall.co.uk Hadrian’s Wall and the Coastal Defences Hadrian’s Wall is the most important Emperor in AD 117.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Rescue Excavation on the Line of the Antonine Wall, 1973-6
    Some rescue excavatio Antonine linth e f th e o n no e Wall, 1973-6 KeppiF J byL e The Antonine Wall is 60 km (37 miles) in length, but only 4-3-4-8 m (14-16 ft) wide; if the ditch which accompanies the Wall on the N side and the Military Way on its S side are included, we have her zonea f archaeologicaeo l importanc potentiad widem an 0 e6 runninc l g across central Scotland. As the Wall passes through some of the most populous districts of Scotland it particularls i y expose modero dt n development t merel No fort .e t als yWalth e sbu oth l curtain itsel constantle ar f t riskya , fro extensioe mth housinf no g estate industriad san l premises, from constructioe th improvemenr o n roaf o t d links frod layine an m, th pipelinef go cablesd an sr fo , electricity (Skinnel ,oi waterr o s r ga ,thi1973 n I . s respect,8) Antonine th , e Wall frontie hardls ri y unique t wherea provbu ,y ma et s i possibl rerouto et e road pipeliner so avoio st d known archaeo- logical sites or field monuments, the Wall runs across Scotland without a break: roads and pipe- lines wit hnorth-souta h alignment hav croso et t somewheresi followine Th . g pages give details excavation2 o1 f watching-briefr so Antonine linth e f sth e o carrie n o e t Waldou l curtain between June 197 Octobed 3an r 1976. Where possible, excavation took plac advancn ei f constructioeo n work or pipelaying, but in some cases all that could be achieved was for the archaeologist to be on hand as an observer, to collect as much information as could be gleaned in the short time available.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Excavations on the Line of the Antonine Wall, 1994–2001
    Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 132 (2002), 259–304 Some excavations on the line of the Antonine Wall, 1994–2001 Prepared for publication by Andrew Dunwell*, Geoff Bailey†, Alan Leslie‡ & Andrea Smith** from reports and contributions by J Atkinson, G Bailey, K Cameron, A Duffy, C Ellis, J Evans, B Glendinning, J Gooder, M Hastie, A Leslie, R McCullagh, E Photos-Jones, P Robins, K Speller & R Strachan ABSTRACT The results of over 30 separate excavations and watching briefs along the line of the Antonine Wall are presented. The alignment and character of the frontier works and fort defences were clarified in several places. New information was obtained regarding a possible enclosure on the north side of the Wall near Auchendavy. INTRODUCTION Roman Temporary Camp (Lowe & Moloney 2000), Falkirk Roman fort (Bailey, forthcom- This report pulls together the results of over ing a), Kinneil (Glendinning 2000), and Mum- 30 excavations and watching briefs conducted rills annexe (Bailey, forthcoming b). A ford along the line of the Antonine Wall between discovered near Rough Castle, which was 1994 and 2001. Preliminary accounts of the originally thought to have been Roman, as it results of these investigations have been pub- lay beside the Military Way, was subsequently lished in the relevant issues of Discovery and proved to have been prehistoric (Discovery Excavation in Scotland and Britannia. Excav Scot 1995,12&1996, 42; Hamilton et Summary mention is made of some of the al 2001). interventions recorded here in the recently The format of this report follows those of revised fifth edition of The Antonine Wall: A previous compilations (most recently Keppie Handbook to the Surviving Remains (Robert- et al 1995) in many respects.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political and Military Aspects of Accession of Constantine the Great
    Graeco-Latina Brunensia 24 / 2019 / 2 https://doi.org/10.5817/GLB2019-2-2 The Political and Military Aspects of Accession of Constantine the Great Stanislav Doležal (University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice) Abstract The article argues that Constantine the Great, until he was recognized by Galerius, the senior ČLÁNKY / ARTICLES Emperor of the Tetrarchy, was an usurper with no right to the imperial power, nothwithstand- ing his claim that his father, the Emperor Constantius I, conferred upon him the imperial title before he died. Tetrarchic principles, envisaged by Diocletian, were specifically put in place to supersede and override blood kinship. Constantine’s accession to power started as a military coup in which a military unit composed of barbarian soldiers seems to have played an impor- tant role. Keywords Constantine the Great; Roman emperor; usurpation; tetrarchy 19 Stanislav Doležal The Political and Military Aspects of Accession of Constantine the Great On 25 July 306 at York, the Roman Emperor Constantius I died peacefully in his bed. On the same day, a new Emperor was made – his eldest son Constantine who had been present at his father’s deathbed. What exactly happened on that day? Britain, a remote province (actually several provinces)1 on the edge of the Roman Empire, had a tendency to defect from the central government. It produced several usurpers in the past.2 Was Constantine one of them? What gave him the right to be an Emperor in the first place? It can be argued that the political system that was still valid in 306, today known as the Tetrarchy, made any such seizure of power illegal.
    [Show full text]
  • Antonine Wall Suggested Route
    AntonineHeritage Trail Wall Location of Antonine Wall Suggested Route OLD KILPATRICK FORT DUNTOCHER FORT CLEDDANS FORTLET On the 7th July 2008 the Antonine Should a visitor to West Dunbartonshire Wall was listed as an extension to the today visit Roman Crescent in Old World Heritage Site “The Frontiers Kilpatrick they would be standing at the of the Roman Empire”, by UNESCO, most northern frontier of the Roman joining Hadrian’s Wall and the Limes Empire, as Roman soldiers did over one Germanicus, the Germanic and Raetian thousand eight hundred years ago – an Frontiers, in Germany. The structure was empire which stretched from West named after the Emperor Antoninus Pius Dunbartonshire to present day Egypt and (86AD–161AD) who had ordered the the eastern shores of the Black Sea. reconquest of southern Scotland moving the Roman Frontier north from his predecessor’s frontier of Hadrian’s Wall between the Solway and the Tyne. A Victory Coin depicting the Emperor Antoninus Pius (reigned 138–161AD) © The Hunterian, University of Glasgow 2012 OLD KILPATRICK FORT DUNTOCHER FORT CLEDDANS FORTLET Map Data ©2013 Google The Antonine Wall The Antonine Wall enters West Dunbartonshire from the east near to the farm The Antonine Wall was constructed between named Cleddans, between Drumchapel and the present day settlement of Bo’ness, on Faifley and continues west through Duntocher the Firth of Forth, and Old Kilpartick, on and then down towards Old Kilpatrick the River Clyde, stretching to a length of 39 terminating on the banks of the Clyde close to miles (63 km) with construction beginning Gavinburn School.
    [Show full text]