The Date of Agricola's Governorship of Britain Author(s): R. Knox McElderry Source: The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 10 (1920), pp. 68-78 Published by: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/295789 . Accessed: 17/06/2014 07:34

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Roman Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE DATE OF AGRICOLA'S GOVERNORSHIPOF BRITAIN By PROFESSORR. KNOX McELDERRY. Did the seven years' governorshiprecorded by begin in A..D. 77 or in 78 ? The question has been often discussed: it is of some importance for the history of the time, and of special interest in our own country. Most authorities have hitherto supported the later date; but recent writers are still divided, and the latest and fullest discussion seems to require some additions and qualifications. 1 In the absence of evidence directly conclusive, the decision depends upon a series of indirect arguments, which raise subsidiary questions of some independent interest. Hence it may be permissible to return to the subject. I. The dates of 's term as Agricola's predecessor would be important or conclusive if we could fix them exactly. But there is no precise evidence. A fragmentary inscription has been thought to fix Frontinus's consulship to July, 74; and since Cerialis, his next recorded predecessor, was at for his second consulship not later than May I, 74, another governor has been assumed as implied, though not named, by Tacitus, in order to fill the resulting interval of at least six months between the two in Britain: so long an interregnum would have been improbable. Frontinus's govern- ment has thus been dated as late as 76-78.2 But only the letters ON remain in the inscription from which to restore his full name- a very insecure foundation; and, even if the interpretation given to Tacitus were possible in itself, we cannot suppose that he would thus exceptionally have passed over the name and deeds of the unknown governor. Frontinus was rather the immediate successor of Cerialis, and his consulship must be dated conjecturally not later than 73,3 which accords sufficiently with the other known facts of his career. He was thus qualified for the governorship before Cerialis's recall. If then he governed until the middle of 78, his tenure was con- siderably longer than the average,4 without any probable justification from Tacitus' narrative. The final conquest of the Silures need not

1 Asbach, Gsell, Dessau (Hermes 46, 191I, p. 159, Tac. Agr. 17, 3, 'et Cerialis quidem alterius suc- n. 5, which presumably corrects P.I.R. I, 84) and cessoris curam famamque obruisset . . . .'; and lastly Gaheis (P.W. x, 130) support 77; Mommsen, Dessau, P.I.R. I, 216 (1897) seems to agree; but Furneaux, Haverfield, Weynand (P.W. vi, 2671-2), cf. n. I. Tac. and Mr. G. C. Sleeman (on Agr. 9) especially J. 3So Asbach, and Waddington, Fastes, 1o3, fol- Anderson (Cl. Rev. 34, I920, PP. I58-i6I) prefer 78. lowed by Furneaux and Kappelmacher in P.W. But Prof. Haverfield in P.W. viii, 1389-perhaps his last reference-seems to suspend judgment. ' 2 So Borghesi, followed by Hiibner and recently 4Dio 52 23, 2, Kal'Xc\rrov dpXToav ferT by Vaglieri (s.v. Consules in Ruggiero's Dizionario ErTv TptWv, el t"f 7-s da6&KcjreL TL, t Tre 7rXeov Epigrafico, ii, 1027), interprets C.I.L. vi, 20o6, and vr4vre: in practice the lower limit was usual.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE DATE OF AGRICOLA S GOVERNORSHIP OF BRITAIN. 69 have meant a long war, seeing that Agricola disposed of North Wales- in the end of a single summer. II. A primary consideration is the exact dating of Agricola's consulship, which qualified him for his British command. Not the year (which was 77) but the particular nundinium is in dispute; if it did not fall within the first half of 77 the earlier date for his governorship becomes impossible, because he must have left Rome by July at latest. So it is argued that the imperial consules ordinarii of that year must have held office to the end of April and that the suffecti probably also had a four-months' term; and, if so, Agricola could 1 not have been free by July I. For no year of Vespasian's or Titus's reigns have we full records; but, such as they are, they do not afford sufficient warrant for such a view.2 No ordinary consulship of four months is certain except in 78 and possibly in 76, and no suffect consulship except in 71, when Domitian was colleague of two bi-monthly suffecti in succession, and in 80, when Lamia probably had a similar honour; the first certain case of a four-months' pair of suffecti is in 89. On the other hand, two-months' consuls are certain for 71 (four pairs, if Domitian is counted twice) and for 8I (three pairs) including the ordinarii in each case; also for 80 as noted. For these three years our records are most nearly complete. It may be added that Vespasian's own first consulship was held in the last two months of 5I. There is thus no difficulty or improbability in assigning a two-months' term to Agricola in the first half of 77. The instances of 71 and 8i show that even March-April is a possible nundinium3; in any case, May-June is open. Again, Tacitus4 implicitly excludes a later term. Agricola had long been on the waiting-list for the consulship; the governorship of Aquitania was recognised as a stepping-stone, and in fact the emperor had informally designated him to the office. His term in Aquitania was shortened from the normal three years, evidently in order that he might be the sooner available for higher office-the word detentus is significant. And we are expressly told that his recall carried with it the immediate prospect of the consulship.5 1 Mr. Anderson, p. I59 b. 5The date of the consular comitia under the 2 1 have consulted Liebenam, Fasti consulares Flavii is somewhat uncertain, and no strong argu- Imp. Romani, and Vaglieri, s.v. Consulescited above; ment can be based thereon. But since Nero on also Mommsen, Staatsr. Fr. trans. iii, pp. 96-9; Jan. 3, 59, was cos. desig. for 60 (Acta Arval.) and esp. p. 97, n. 2, ' La division de l'annee (A.D. 69) under Trajan the suffecti also were elected at the en une fraction de quatre mois et quatre fractions beginning of their year (Plin. Pan. 65 ff, 92) it is de deux mois etablie soit par Neron, soit par Galba, very probable that the coss. ordinarii for the next semble avoir servi de modele 'a la pratique pos- year and the suffecti for the current year were terieure.' normally chosen together in the first days of Jan. 3 Even if Domitian held office till April 30, Cf. Mommsen, Staatsr. Fr. trans. ii, pp. 252, n. 5; Vespasian may have resigned on Feb. 28; and so 253, nn. 4, 5; 255, n. 3. Agricola may have returned Agricola might well have been Domitian's colleague. to Rome before the end of 76, in good time for that We should rather expect Tacitus to be silent in date, though the presence of candidates was not that case. Suet. Dom. 13 states Domitian's own necessary. If he had an interval of private life practice, which favoured short terms. (Dio 52, 23, 3) it was before the consulship rather 4 Agr. 9, passim. than after it.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 70 THE DATE OF AGRICOLA'S GOVERNORSHIP OF BRITAIN.

Furthermore,we may fairly think that he was deliberatelypreferred as being pre-eminently qualified for the British command. He had repeated experienceof the province; his later servicesthere had been rewarded by the patriciate and other promotion; his return as governorhad been foreshadowedby popularrumour. The greatness of the task assigned to him and the abnormal lengthening of his command sufficiently justify by retrospect the impression left by Tacitus of his value in the eyes of the government. The special honour of the pontificate is additional confirmation. In the face of all this it is and somewhat to that that perilous ' arbitrary argue impressionis due merely to skilful eulogy,' and that there is ' not a jot or tittle of evidence to show that Agricola did not enter on office (as consul)in Septemberor November.'1 If he was kept waiting so long, for a less honourablenundinium, and thereforeleft for Britain only by midsummer78, Tacitus is indeed misleading. And he is our sole authority. However high his characteras an historian,it seems to be almost necessaryto disparagehis testimony if the later date for the consulshipis to be accepted. ' Statim post nuptiasBritanniae praepositusest '-not ' post consulatum'-is certainlythe strict inter- pretation of that clause; but it is incredible that any considerable delay is so implied. Surely Julia's marriageneed not and would not have obstructed the public convenience? It had already been postponed, presumably not to interfere with her father's consular activities. Nor would the ceremonial duties of the pontificate have been a bar. That 'praepositus' should imply designation only seems improbable, if not impossible, in the absence of any parallel, especially in the case of an office bestowed not by the formalitiesof election, but by direct imperial appointment. ' Media iam aestate transgressus' is natural and easily intelligible for 77, whether March-April or May-June was the term of the consulship; it is hard to explainit plausiblyfor 78. The phraseis quite justified if Agricola left Rome even so late as, say, July 10-it applies to the whole journey and not merely to the crossingof the Channel; and so 'quamquam transvectaaestas' falls naturally into place later in the same chapter.2 III. Next comes the argument from the Cohors Usiporum. It is held that this levy was connected with the campaign of 83 upon the upper Rhine, which would thus coincide'with Agricola's sixth campaign, to which the story belongs.3 It is true that the Usipi had been expelled from a territory upon the right bank of the lower Rhine; but some of them at least were still in the same neighbour-

Mr. Anderson, I.c. 3 Agr. 28, as interpreted by Mommsen and 2 Agr. I8. With transgressusso interpreted may Furneaux, followed by Mr. Anderson, p. I60 b. we compare the use of proficiscens to cover the So too L. Schmidt, Gesch. der deutschen Stamme whole journey of a governor from Rome to his ii, 4, p. 412 (in Sieglin's Quellen und Forschungen province ? 29, 30, Berlin 1915-8).

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE DATE OF AGRICOLA S GOVERNORSHIP OF BRITAIN. 7I hood in 58,1 and we do not know of any sufficient occasion for the migration of this section southward in the period immediately fol- lowing. Possibly the enforced evacuation of their frontage on the Rhine had produced undue congestion in the eastern part of their territory; a partial migration would naturally follow, and would sufficiently explain the appearance of the tribe-name in the region of Moguntiacum in 70. But it is more probable that a remnant of the tribe had remained there when the main body was displaced by the in 's time2 ; and thus we need not assume any later migration southward at all. Now, if these southern Usipi as is claimed were forcibly conscribed at the beginning of the campaign of 83, the procedure was surely abnormal'in dealing with a people supposed to be still independent, and only mutiny could be expected from such a levy. Tacitus's statement that the cohort was ' per Germanias conscripta' at least does not support the belief in a concentrated raid beyond the frontier. But if, as seems possible, the name of the little river Wisper is a trace of the southern remnant, 3 that small territory, lying close to Wiesbaden on the west, suits the theory of a southern levy; for it was within the new limes of 83. But like Wiesbaden itself it may have been Roman long before.4 The Mattiaci, likewise within the limes, neighbours of the Usipi and associated with them in the attack upon Moguntiacum in 70, supplied cohorts to the not later than 74.5 Yet Tacitus, twenty years later, contrasts the two tribes and seems to exclude the Usipi entirely from the empire.6 Probably, if any Usipi were within the limes, they were only a negligible fraction of the tribe and were absorbed by the Mattiaci, if indeed they were not expelled after the mutiny. On the other hand, the northern and probably the larger section of the tribe-recorded by Tacitus, though not in the -must have lain within the sphere of Rutilius Gallicus's campaign of 77, to which we shall presently return; and pressure in that direction was clearly maintained, since in 97 or perhaps

1 Tac. Ann. xiii, 56, 5, 'Ampsivariorum eischen Zeit bis zur Einbeziehung in das Reichsgebiet, retro ad Usipos et Tubantes concessit '-i.e. from als dland behandelt worden ist, um die Chatten the lands formerly held by the Usipi on the Rhine. von dem Strom zu trennen.' Tac. Germ. 29, 4 Mr. Anderson, p. I60 b, thinks that all the Usipi supports this view; also Front., Strat. i, 3, 0o. 5 had been displaced probably by Germanicus and Coh. II Mattiacorum appears in a diploma of had gone southward. Schmidt, p. 411, placing Moesia Inf. in 99 (Dessau 2000). Veterans of that all the tribe in the north up to 58, says ' Bald darauf year must have enlisted not later than 74. We may werden aber auch die Usipier und Tubanten, ohne infer a Coh. I, not yet traced. Cichorius, P.W. iv, Zweifel auf Veranlassung der Romer, weiter nach 314 ; Tac. Hist. iv, 37. Siiden gezogen sein.' 6 Germ. 29, 3; 32, I, Proximi Chattis certum 2 So Jullian, Hist. de la Gaule, iii2, p. 46, n. 5, iam alveo Rhenum quique terminus esse suficiat Usipi referring to Caes. B.G. iv 4, I ; p. 329, n. 7. et colunt.' But Schmidt, p. 412, boldly 3 Ib. iv2, pp. 104, n. 4; 204, n. 2; 462, n. 3. assumes that all the Usipi were under Rome from 4 It may perhaps be suggested that the older of 58 ' and subject to conscription. the two earthen forts at Marienfels, in the Miihl Schmidt, p. 412, n. 2, says, rather inconsistently, valley N. of the Wisper, being some distance behind 'Ob sie im J. 77 mit den Brukterern, die ... the limes, is a trace of earlier control (C.I.L. xiii 2, Gallicus besiegte, verbiundet waren, lasst sich nicht i, p. 478). Cf. von Sarwey inWestd. Zeitschrift, I8, mit Sicherheit sagen.' The omission in the p.. 12: 'Es liegt die Vermutung nahe, dass der Germania need not be significant, since other, Landstreifen entlang des Rheines von der august- tribes also are omitted.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 72 THE DATE OF AGRICOLA'S GOVERNORSHIP OF BRITAIN.

earlier a king was imposed upon the .1 It has lately been discoveredthat in Flavian times there lay beyond the lower Rhine a great tile-factory-tegularia Transrhenana-whence came supplies for the whole garrisonof Lower Germany.2 The enlistment of the Frisiavonesfor Britain would indicate Flavian policy for that region. The Cohors I Frisiavonum first appears in a British diploma of I05; since it had time-expired men then, they must have been enrollednot later than 79-80. The same tribe also supplied' singulares from Flavian times, and even legionaries. The neigh- bouring likewise were recruited as singulares and auxiliares, but not for tribal unit traceable before the of Alexander any' reign Severus, when cives Tuihanti' are recorded as serving in a 'cuneus Frisiorum' upon Hadrian's wall. Geography would favour the identification of these Tuihanti with the Tubantes, but philology seems to raise difficulties. In any case the name of the district Twenthe, the eastern part of the Dutch province of Oberyssel,is derived from them and indicates their position.3 Thus they form a connecting link between the Frisii and the Usipi and Bructeri, whose relations with the Empire may well have been similar. Indeed, Lower Germanywith the closely adjacent districts of Belgica was, quite naturally,by far the most important recruiting ground for British , especially under the Flavii. Three alae and sixteen cohorts, I3,000 men, or about half of Agricola's auxilia, were drawn thence, and only four cohorts, 2,500 men, from Tacitus be taken to Roman control Upper Germany.4 ' may imply of the Frisii.5 The Veronensis' preserves a possible or probable trace of the northern Usipi, as well as of the Roman sphereof influencebeyond the lower Rhine, late in the third century, when the Agri Decumates had been lost.6

1 Plin. Ep. ii, 7. They were neighbours of the Romani possederunt. Istae civitates sub Gallieno Usipi on the east. Cf. P.I.R. V 308 for date. imperatore a barbaris occupatae sunt.' Muller (on 2 Lehner, Novaesium (reprint from Bonn. yahr- Ptol. ii, II, i) and Gsell (Domitien, p. 191) refer biicher), p. 291; C.I.L. xiii, 4, p. I43. this whole passage to the Agri Decumates. So too 3 Cichorius in P.W. iv, 286; C.I.L. vi, 3230, on better grounds Jullian (op. cit. iv2, p. 565 n. 4) 3260, 3321 a, 32850, 32866; vii, 68, 427; xiii. who places the Usipi on the Wisper, the Tuvanes at 8040; D. 37 = 52 in iii, p. 879; Dessau 4760-I with civitas Ulpia Taunensium, and the Nictrenses at reff., esp. Scherer in S.B. Berl. I884, p. 573. Three col. Ulpia Sueborum Nicretum. The last identi- singulares of the Frisiavones bear the name T. fication is attractive; but Tuvanes are rather Flavius. But C.I.L. iii, 4228 records a Cattus serving Tubantes, and the Casuarii are also northern-they in an Ala Pannoniorum probably in pre-Flavian probably - the Attuari of Velleius, ii, o05. Further, times. There are no records of individual Usipi. Belgica Prima cannot have been contiguous with the 4 In the former category I reckon 5,000 , former Germ. Sup. (Notitia Galliarum,ap. Seeck, 2,500 , 2,000 , I,ooo , and op. cit. p. 265); it might more probablyhave been 500 each of the , Frisiavones, , connected with the lower Rhine below Treves. , and Sunuci; in the latter, I,500 Lingones And surely our passage describes two districts? and I,ooo . The Romanswere drivenout of the Agri Decumates 5Cf. Germ. 34 ' Romanis classibus navigatos.' before Belgica Prima was constituted. Hence I In Seeck's Notitia Dign. p. 253, 'Nomina agreewith LehnerI.c. in referringthe fir.t part of civitatum trans Renum fluvium quae sunt: the extract to Germ. Inf. Schmidt, p. 412, agrees Usiphorum, Tuvanium, Nictrensium, Novarii, with the majority, but ignores the difficulties. Casuariorum. Istae omnes civitates trans Renum The rarity of later mention of individual tribes in formulam Belgicae primae redactae. Trans is due to the substitution of the inclusive name castellum Montiacese LXXX leugas trans Renum of .

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions p. on one of Rome

THE DATE OF AGRICOLA S GOVERNORSHIP OF BRITAIN. 73 'sreference, written in 90, 'Sic leve flavorumvaleat genus Usiporum, quisquis et Ausonium non amat ' has been held to connect the levy with the Chattan war, since otherwise 'it would be strange that Martial should single out the Usipi from among anti-Romantribes.' 1 The reasoning seems faulty. The fame of the episode in no way depended upon its date, and was so great that it is preserved also in the epitome of Dio, from an independent source. If the lines are to be quoted at all, a strict interpretationof leve would rather support a more normalenlistment and so an earlierdate; it would not be fair to charge with fickleness men who had just been kidnapped. Thus it is at least unnecessaryto date this levy to 83. If it was drawn from the southern section it probably came from the part which was Roman long before 83, and as the CohortesMattiacorum prove, it had no necessary or even probable connexion with the Chattan war. For, even if we grant that the time-limits are not impossible, shipment to Britain would surely have been improbable when a war was in progresson the spot. But if, as is at least equally possible, the levy came from the northern district, it was a result of Gallicus's victory in 77-8.2 In either case there is no difficulty in dating the mutiny, and with it Agricola'ssixth campaign, to 82.. And so what is perhapsthe most plausible argument for 78 against 77 is at least neutralised. IV. Tacitus says of Domitian's reception of the news of Mons Graupius: ' Inerat conscientiaderisui fuisse nuperfalsum e Germania triumphum.' It has been suggested that this triumph may have been later than 83 3; if so, we should have a conclusiveargument for the later dating of Agricola'scampaigns. But 83 is the date generally received,4 and with good reason. There are three imperatoriae acclamationesfor the year, and one at least may fairly be assigned to this campaign. And the assumption by Domitian of the title Germanicus dates the triumph even to the month of August. 5 The coins inscribed ' Germania Capta' or ' de Germanis,' which were struck only in 85, may reasonablybe referred to the completion of the works upon the limes.6 The British victory was won ' exacta 1 Martial, vi, 6o (6i), with Mr. Anderson's 3 Tac. Agr. 39. Mr. Anderson p. I59 b. comment a. He concludes too p. I6I readily that 4 83 is the only possible date. So Gsell, Domsitien,p. I84; Weynand in P.W. 2 If Ptolemy's Outoi-ro' (ii Is, 6)=Usipi, whom vi, 2556; Schmidt, pp. 355-7. he does not otherwise mention, and if he is not The ttle on coins of struck simply in error concerning their position (as seems appears before 8 83 with mention of VK very probable, cf. Muller's n.), we should have to Aug. epM assume a later migration of the southern section (Stein in PW. , quoting Dattari, Numi Alexandrinand and on one of Rome still farther south, or else a third section of the tribe. .,ugg.Au Alexandr P- 27); With the latter alternative the levy might be con- struck before Sept. 3 (Cohen, i, 520, no. 602);. also on of nected with the annexations of 74. Schmidt, coins 84 p. 413, says Ptol's mention is ' nur nach alteren 6 Cohen,2 i, 482, no. 135, and 509, nos. 469 ff. Quellen, an ganz falscher Stelle.' So the authorities cited above.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 74 THE DATE OF AGRICOLA S GOVERNORSHIP OF BRITAIN iam aestate,' and news of it could hardly have reached Rome before the end of October. If then the year was 83 we have a sufficient interval to justify nuper'; and the general tone of Tacitus's reference indicates that the interval was indeed short and the shame quite recent. Thus, though nuper is not conclusive-it sometimes refers to longer intervals-it affords a presumption that Mons Graupius was fought in 83.

V. A draft from the Legio IX Hispana in Britain is shown by an inscription to have served in the war of 831 ; and it is claimed that Agricola's sixth campaign, in which this legion is recorded as 'maxime invalida,' must therefore have fallen in the same year. The argument is not conclusive. Such a distant reinforcement, if it was indeed requisitioned expressly for the campaign of 83, may have actually departed for Germany before the fight recorded by Tacitus, before the end of 82 if we take the earlier date for the governorship. Otherwise its coming might have been inconveniently delayed, since the Chattan war began early in 83. It has been said that the granting of a diploma to the Upper German auxilia on September I9, 82, indicates that the campaign of 83 could not then have been in contemplation.2 But three units recorded in the diploma as absent in Moesia, presumably upon active service, nevertheless share in the grants and even in honesta missio ; and there is at least one other similar record for an army on campaign. The argument therefore seems here to fail: we shall have occasion to return to it. But this diploma suggests an alternative view which is perhaps to be preferred. The withdrawal of three auxiliary units to Moesia may indicate legionary drafts also; moreover, it is probable that a Pannonian legion, the XV Apollinaris, had been sent by Titus or Domitian to reinforce the army which was then operating in Mauretania.4 Hence the IX Hispana may have been drawn upon even earlier, to help to restore equilibrium.

VI. The inscription of Baalbek has been brought into connexion with the same argument. It records drafts from all the four British legions; and it is said that the Chattan war was the occasion for these, that the draft from the IX Hispana separately recorded was one of the four, and that the legion was ' maxime invalida ' because its draft was the largest.5 There are strong arguments against this view. First, the separate record of the IX Hispana surely points to a separate and non-contemporary detachment, especially because its

C.I.L. xiv, 3612 ---Dessau 1025. 4 Domaszewski, Philologus 66, 1907, p. i68; 2 - D. 14 in C.I.L. iii Dessau 1995; Mr. Gesch. d. rom. Kaiser, ii, p. 153. Anderson, p. 161 b; Schmidt, p. 355. 6 Dessau, 9200; Ritterling, J.O.A.I. vii, 1904, 3 In Mauretania A.D. I5o, Dessau 9056. See Beiblatt, 23 ff, followed by Mr. Anderson, p. i61 b, infra, p. 76-7 and notes. and by Schmidt, without discussion, p. 355.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE DATE OF AGRICOLA'S GOVERNORSHIP OF BRITAIN. 75 commander, a 'tribunus militum laticlavius,' would hardly be subordinated to the ' primipilaris ' Velius, of the Baalbek inscription. It would have been contrary to the usual rule that the detachment from Legio IX should be larger than the three simultaneous drafts; equal proportions were customary for a general draft, unless legions ' were taken as a wliole.1 Tacitus' phrase, maxime invalida '--not 4 minus valida '-might be taken to support the view under discussion, but without confirmation from the context such an interpretation would be forced. Secondly, it is improbable that an outsider should be called in to command a mixed force which included drafts from the four legions of Upper Germany within their own province where they had their own staff. Thirdly, why should detachments be drawn from all the legions of distant Britain where vigorous warfare was in progress, and yet from none of the legions of the neighbouring Rhine province which, so far as we know, was then peaceful ? The difficulty is greater if Agricola's advent is dated 78; for thus, with two whole campaigns still to come, the end could hardly have been in sight. It is indeed supposed that the whole of the Legio XXI Rapax was brought up from Lower Germany; but this seems to be only a conjecture, which is in fact contradicted by the text of the inscription; and in any case it is assumed that it was at once replaced in Lower Germany by a new legion, the I Minervia. But a discussion of this question would be irrelevant here. Fourthly, the chief basis for this view-the tile-inscriptions found at Mirebeau in the territory of the Lingones2-is very insecure. The site was far behind the lines, and an unlikely post for an emergency force drafted from other provinces. Recent authorities indeed think it probable that the Lingones did not belong at all to Upper Germany, the military sphere, until a regular provincial government was established there, later at least than 83.3 And if we suppose that the building at Mirebeau is to be dated between 83 and 88,4 we get rid of one difficulty, so far as the British drafts are concerned, only by creating others. Velius could hardly have been available then as commander, and why should British legions have come so far merely for works of peace ? Some tiles, stamped by the Legio VIII only, which belonged to Upper Germany, certainly do belong to the years about 88, but they hardly affect the argument. On the other hand, this territory did see very active operations in 70, 5 to which year Mowat and Mommsen refer the tiles in question. Fifthly, only one British legion, the II Augusta, is actually recorded on the tiles, and that imperfectly; the conjectural addition of the

1 Philo, Leg. ad Gaium, ii, p. 576 M; , 3 Hirschfeld in C.I.L. xiii, 2, I, pp. 83-4; B.J. ii, 500; Dessau, 2726. Schulten, Bonn. Jahrb. 103, pp. 34 ff. 2 Mommsen, Hermes 19, pp. 437 ff; Ritterling, 4 So Ritterling, l.c. 1.c.; Dessau, 2285. 6 Tac. Hist. iv, 55, 67, 77; Front., Strat. iv, 3, 14.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 76 THE DATE OF AGRICOLA'S GOVERNORSHIP OF BRITAIN.

II Adiutrix and the IX Hispana is somewhat arbitrary.1 Is there not a presumptionthat Velius would handle his eight detachments as a single unit ? It would be easy to suppose with Mommsen a separate draft, otherwise unrecorded, of the II Augusta in 70 or even 73-4. Or one of the British detachmentsof 69 may have been detained here on its return.2 Lastly, with this view we should be forced to an unsvmmetricaldistribution of Velius's career. There would be too long a period of inactivity after 72, and too much would have to be crowded into the years beginning with 83. All of these difficulties are avoided if we refer the detachments to the earlier war of Rutilius Gallicus upon the Lower Rhine.a That war, alreadyrecorded by brief allusionsin and Tacitus, is now further attested by a diploma of April 15, 78, issued to time- expired men of seven auxiliary units of Lower Germany under Gallicus'scommand.4 The exact dating of the war becomesimportant for our argument, The diploma, our main evidence, is not explicit. It may indeed be argued that the withholding of honestamissio from the beneficiaries points to the imminence of active operations or to the existence of a state of war.5 But that omission is almost a constant feature in contemporary provincial diplomata down to A.D. 1056; while after I05 complete missio was regularly a condition precedent. Thus the supposed inference, however plausible in itself, cannot safely be drawn, unless we are to believe that down to I05 there was almost constant war or rumour of war, and after I05 unbroken peace. On the other hand, we have seen reason to believe that the diploma of 82, one of the few which do record full missio in the earlier time, was issued to units which either had war in prospect or were already engaged, and there is a parallel instance even more clearly recorded in the second century.7 So these grants had little reference, if any, to local conditions in this respect; which is the easier to believe ' because soldiers dimissi honesta missione' might, if necessary, be retained with the army under separate vexilla.8 Thus our diploma

Von Domaszewski, Phil. 66, p. 166, n. 26,' Die April I5, 78, but that operations were not yet Papierabdriicke dieser Ziegelstempel die mir Mowat complete. iibersandt wie nicht anders zu hat, bestatigen, 6 Of twenty-six such documents only two, or erwarten die und war, Lesungen Erganzungen perhaps three, record complete missio; in fifteen Mowats. Mit der fallen Erganzungen Ritterlings it is partially, and in eight completely withheld. auch die weitgehenden daraufgebauten Schliisse.' Contemporary diplomata issued to Italian garrisons; 2 Hist. Tac. i, 6r, ii, 57, Ioo, iii, 22. and to legionaries regularly indicate missio ; but 3 Von Phil. Tschauch- Domaszewski, 66, I64 ff.; they are not here relevant. Cf. Mommsen in ff. ner, Legionare Kriegsvexillationen, 29 C.I.L. iii, p. 20I4. Dessau (on 9052) assumes, 4 Tac. Germ. 'vidimus sub divo 8, Vespasiano probably by oversight, that missio had actually Veledam . . . Silv. 'non vacat ' Statius, i, 4, 89, been granted in 78 before the issue of the diploma. Arctoas acies rebellem Rhenumque captivaeque Dessau, 2512, is probably a concrete instance in preces Veledae ... pandere.' Dessau, 9052. of the 5 proof contrary. So Gsell, Domitien, p. i80, n. 6, of the Upper 7 See p. n. ultra. German diploma of May 2I, 74, when also there 74 3 8 was no missio. Weynand (P.W. vi, 2661-2) partly Tac. Ann. i, I7, 'ne dimissis quidem finem agrees, though he shows that Clemens' war may esse militiae, sed apud vexillum tendentes alio then have been over. Groag (P.W. 2nd series, i, vocabulo eosdem labores perferre '-which Momm- Iz6o) thinks that the decisive battle was before sen thinks true of later times also.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE DATE OF AGRICOLA'S GOVERNORSHIP OF BRITAIN 77 provides no solid argument to prove that the campaign was still in the future. On the other hand, it is unsafeto interpret the grant as a rewardto units speciallydistinguished in previousoperations. 1 The small proportion of regiments included-not half the total for the province, though nearly all the cavalry units are named-might support that view; but the restriction to time-expired men is clearly againstit. Diplomata were a matter of ordinaryroutine, and special rewards were usually quite independent of them. 2 One other argument remains. Vespasian'snineteenth ' imperatoriaaccla- matio' by general consent is referred to this war,3 and there is no reasonto disagree. It is first recordedin our diploma, and therefore the decisive victory was won not later than the end of March 78, since time must be allowedfor the news to reach Rome. A Bithynian inscription would indicate that it was not earlier than about December 20, 77.4 But stone-cutters in distant provinceswere not always fully informed; and just as Asia Provinciawas one short in its reckoningof acclamationesin 75, so may Bithyniahave been in 78,5 especially as a decisive victory in the season indicated is somewhat improbable. If so, it may have been won towards the end of the campaigningseason of 77. In either case the drafts from the four British legions were called to the Rhine early in 77, and returned at the end of the year or by April 78 at latest. This absence points to a lull in operations in Britain, which would naturally coincide with a change of governor, and which Tacitus actuallyindicates for the year of Agricola's advent -indeed, from this point of view, he seems to make the later date impossible. The weakening of the garrison may have helped to encouragethe Ordovicesin their rising; and the words ' quamquam praesumptaapud militem eius anni quies' and the surprise caused by Agricola'spromptitude may point in the same direction.6 No doubt his speedy success,which seems to have proved decisive and permanent for the region of North Wales, deserved an ' im- peratoria acclamatio.' But we have only one at our disposalfor the time in question; and since the Germancampaign was certainlymore deliberate,upon a much greaterscale, and. a more independentopera- tion, it must have the preference. The apparentinjustice may fairly be accountedfor by Agricola'smodesty: Tacitus' emphaticreference thereto, preciselyat the conclusionof his narrativeof this campaign,

'As Ritterling does, Korrespondenzb. d. Westd. Vorzeit, v, I905, pp. I84-5; Weynand, P.W. vi, Zeitschrift, I906, 26. 2671 ; Groag, P.W. znd series, i, z26o. 4 2* Dessau, 253 ; if Vespasian was cos. desig. ix at 2 No specialspecial rewardNo is even mentionedmentiod baby any * *' ' the beginning of 78 (p. n. diploma,diploma spavesave once (D Io=i=8 8 in C.I.L. iii,iii p. 85i),85I) Jan. 69, 5, supra). Wey- '.~ . . . .~~ . ' 'h nand, dating the comitia early in March, makes the when missio is recorded to have been granted? before . . . c ss., , , , , , . . . . time limits improbably and needlessly narrow. the time to men who had served loyally in the civil timelimits improbably and needlessly narrow. * / ' , . ' ~ 5 C.I.L. in, 470 7203, compared with vi, 3I48a. war of 69; the document itself conferring only Dessau, 470,' . 'i od... '. ivitasand conubim as usual. In Dessau, 252,' imp. xviiii should be read likewise; in any case ' xvii 'is impossible. The original is lost. 3 Von Domaszewski,Altertbiimer unserer beidnischen 6 Tac. Agr. I 8.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 78 THE DATE OF AGRICOLA S GOVERNORSHIP OF BRITAIN. may well have been intended to explain this very difficulty. Though the army itself may sometimes have shared the initiative, presumably acclamationes depended in the first instance mainly upon the decision of the general on the spot, wherewith his report to the emperor would naturally correspond; they could hardly be claimed or reckoned by afterthought when the moment had passed. And so the absence of laurels from Agricola's despatch and his refusal to claim a victory prevented this recognition.1 It is true that ipsa dissimulatione famae famam auxit'; but it was too late in this respect. The difficulty would rather be to explain, against Tacitus, a second acclamatio if it had taken place in this interval; and further- more, if the two campaigns, correlated as we have seen, are dated late in 78, we cannot refer to any other known occasion even for this nineteenth record of victory. Thus the Baalbek inscription guides us to 77 as the date of Agricola's advent.

VII. Lastly, whether Agricola set foot in Ireland or not, it is at least quite clear that after his fifth campaign there was a change of policy towards that island, which is only partially explained by the threat of a rising north of the Clyde and Forth.2 Further reasons may be found in the war in Mauretania and in the need for reinforce- ments upon the line of the Danube and upper Rhine. But evidently Agricola was not convinced by these military arguments,3 if indeed they were put forward; and something is gained if we may date his fifth campaign to 8I and so count the accession of Domitian, who had no personal interest in Britain, as the primary factor in the change.

Upon a general view, there seems to be no very solid evidence for 78, while the counter-arguments collectively if not singly have considerable weight. New discoveries may yet alter our perspective; but upon present evidence it is reasonable to decide in favour of 77.

1 Weynand makes his decision against 77 turn acclamationes, cf. Mommsen, Staatsr. Fr. trans. i, upon this question; Gaheis refers to Agricola's pp. 14I-4, with notes; v, pp. 42-3. modesty, but Mr. Anderson, p. I60, rejects his 2 Tac. Agr. 24, 25. Sleeman's notes refer to argument, mainly on the ground that thus a modest recent discussions. or malicious might always cheat the emperor 3 Tac. I.c. ' Saepe ex eo audivi legione una et of his due honours. But surely disloyalty in such modicis auxiliis debellari obtinerique Hiberniam high command woull be as abnormal as Agricola's posse; idque etiam adversus Britanniam pro- modesty; and if it did occur, it would hardly thus futurum ...... manifest itself. On the general question of these

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.81 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:34:04 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions