The Antonine Wall

[superkablam]

I just wondered what peoples' opinions and theories were on the reasons behind Antoninus Pius' decision to build his Wall in Scotland.

 

Do people think it was a mostly political choice or based more on strategy and a military decision?

 

Also what do people think are behind the reasons for its abandonment only 20 years (or so) later?

[GhostOfClayton]

My own opinion (and lets face it, nobody knows) is that Antoninus Pius saw the success of Hadrian's Wall, and thought it would be easy enough to move the line forward and repeat. He didn't know the area (he didn't have Hadrian's itchy feet, and very much ruled from Rome), and was sufficiently insecure that an easy addition to the empire would be quite useful. The tribes just to the north of Hadrian's Wall weren't particularly hostile, so occupation would be relatively risk free. The border would be shorter, which in very simple management terms seems easier and cheaper to defend. What's not to like about that idea?

 

As usual, the devil is in the detail. Having a nice 'buffer state' of Roman friendly people just outside your border was a very succesful policy, and the Antonine Wall put the border right in the thick of none too Romanised Caledonians. This is reflected by the huge amount of extra troops required to man it, despite its shorter length. Did Anotnoninus Pius do this specifically to pick a fight with the Caledonians? I personally doubt it - there was nothing to gain materially (apart form some good arable land on the east coast, which was owned and operated to Rome's benefit by a friendly tribe anyway).

 

Although there is some doubt about the exact date of the abandonment, the clever money is that it was soon before his death in 161, though a withdrawal following his death is supported by some evidence, and also by logic. That sort of "Alright lads, he's dead now - let's put it back how it was" happened a fair bit when the Emperor wanted something and the yes-men weren't prepared to point out the drawbacks.

 

Also, worth remembering is that the Antonine Wall was briefly reoccupied during the Severan campaigns against the Caledonians in 208. Although Septimius Severus picked a fight with the Caledonians because one of them had upset his wife, rather than for glory per se, maybe a parallel can be drawn. If you want to fight the Caledonian's, occupy the Antonine Wall. Maybe Antoninus Pius did want to have a go at the Caledonians, after all.

 

Another potential parallel is the withdrawal following Septimius Severus' death in 211 in the middle of the campaign. His son carried on a little bit, but his heart wasn't in it. Again, death of Emperor leads to things returning to normal.

[Axel Wers]

Romans had some plans for territory behind Hadrian's wall. Maybe settling or overcome and defeat tribes who lived there. Antonine wall had enclose this area and later, after total romans victory, should be north border of empire. But Romans weren't able to pacify this area. It seemed war with tribes would be longer and some other parts of empire were more important (eastern borders). So military campaign failed and Romans abandoned Antonine wall.

[caldrail]

Domitian had cancelled the campaign to conquer Caledonia fearing that a successful general with a victorious army behind him might get ambitious (Agricola realised the danger he was in because of Domitians paranoia). The Romans then set up a border control zone, usually referred to as The Stanegate, which Hadrian then upgraded to his famous wall. Antininus Pius authorised a campaign to extend Roman influence to establish his martial credibility - it was very import fopr a Roman leader to show he was willing to go to war - but the impetus for the campiagn may not have been his alone. However, the establishment of the Antonine Wall was merely to defend and secure the territory wrested from the Picts. It may not have been intended to remain permanent, and inded, a withdrawal to former frontiers was soon ordered. Bear in mind however that the region occupied up to the Antonine Wall was the same region patrolled and secured by Roman forces, with a few forts established in 'wild country' as 'forward Operating BAses' in modern parlance - which means they were based north of the wall to prevent attacks from forming. As far as I'm aware, after tghe Antonine Wall was built, there were no further forts established north of that, thus the Antonine Wall may well have been considered vulnerable or even untenable as a permanent defense.