Download The Flavian Invasions

1b. The Flavian Invasions – the traditional version
Aim:
To overview the traditional interpretation of the Flavian invasions .
1
“The Flavian Invasions” refer to invasions which took place whilst Vespasian, Titus and Domitian,
successively, were Emperor. These three emperors were father, eldest son, and younger son. The
invasions traditionally have been seen to start in 79AD and extend until 89AD. Governor Gnaeus
Julius Agricola, an ambitious governor for nearly 7 years, is traditionally thought to have led the
majority of the invasions into modern Scotland.
THE FLAVIAN INVASIONS
Rome never looks where she treads.
Always her heavy hooves fall
On our stomachs, our hearts or our heads;
And Rome never heeds when we bawl.
From “A Pict’s Song” by Rudyard Kipling
(Hints at the imperialistic nature of Rome)
Rome was an Empire, meaning that they sought to “extend the power and dominion of a nation
especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or
economic life of other areas; broadly: to extend or impose its power, authority, or influence.” As an
imperialistic aggressor Rome would ride rough shod over foreign powers, incorporating them into
the Empire. In this context it was virtually inevitable that at some time Rome would turn their
attention to Britain and try to incorporate the island into the Empire. It is against this imperialistic
context that we can view the Flavian Invasions.
The Flavian invasions happened at a time when Rome was recovering from the instability of
Emperor Nero’s forced suicide and a short- lived civil war.
The Flavians aimed to bring some
stability back to Rome. One of Vespasian’s main goals was to extend the borders of the empire on
every front, most of which was done to help strengthen the frontier defences, and in this context he
dispatched Governor Cerealis, Governor Frontinius and Governor Agricola to North Britain. His
eldest son, the Good Emperor Titus had been groomed for leadership by his father and shared his
imperialistic ambitions and desire to extend the empire. Following Titus’ early death at the age of
42 (rumour has it that (a) he was poisoned by his doctor on behalf of his brother or (b) a mosquito
flew in his nose and picked at his brain – once dead, he was opened up and a mosquito the size of
a bird was found in his head – this is perhaps not entirely true!) his younger brother Domitian became
Emperor. Without the grooming of his father, Domitian was not a gifted military commander, limiting
enterprises to places where he could gain propaganda victories.
The above information suggests that the Flavian invasions were motivated by a combination of
imperial ambitions, the desire for security and the desire for personal glory.
2
THE TRADITONAL ACCOUNT OF AGRICOLA’S INVASION
1st
season,
Advance through England under Emperor Vespasian
season,
Advance through England under Emperor Vespasian and “Romanising” of the
78AD
2nd
79AD
3rd
North of England
season,
Advance up to the Tay (Taus) under Emperor Vespasian and then Emperor Titus
season,
Non-advance and consolidation under Emperor Titus
season,
Non-advance and consolidation under Emperor Titus – Agricola considers
80AD
4th
81AD
5th
82AD
6th
operation into Ireland
season,
Advance beyond the Forth-Clyde isthmus under Emperor Domitian’s rule
83AD
7th season
Culmination of campaign in Battle of Mons Graupius
84AD
Recalled to Rome by Emperor Domitian
The traditional account of the invasions is that Agricola had been campaigning for two seasons in
England and Wales before Romanising in the North of England during the winter of 79. From here
he then advanced north to the Tay in his third season as governor.
By advancing north of the Brigantes (a tribe in modern-day Northumberland) he was allegedly
going into unknown territory and coming into contact with “new peoples”. Emperor Vespasian
had ordered Agricola’s predecessor, Cerealis to advance north to eliminate hostile neighbours
whilst enhancing Rome’s prestige but this had not been achieved by the time of Vespasian's
death. Upon the emperor’s death, Agricola became governor and following the new emperor
Titus’ orders, he continued advancing north, with the common aim of gaining imperial glory and
eliminating hostile enemies.
As Agricola advanced it seems that he met little opposition from the southern tribes such as the
Selgovae and Votadini. This may indicate that Agricola or even Cerealis, the previous governor,
had perhaps already penetrated the southern lowlands in the late 2 nd season. This might explain
why the army wasn’t attacked as it advanced and why it had time to stop and build substantial
forts such as Newstead near Eildon Hill North.
It seems that Agricola was able to push north to the Tay without serious opposition and spent until
81AD consolidating his gains. This 4th season was one of consolidation. There was even talk of
building a “terminus”, a physical end to the expansion. It would have seemed sensible to expand
right through Scotland to the obvious end, the North Sea, but instead Agricola identified the Forth-
3
Clyde isthmus as a possible “terminus”, halting there and dividing Britain into two islands, one
Roman, one barbarian.
Why, in the 4th season, did Agricola not push on and conquer the rest of the island?
It is possible that Emperor Titus held Agricola back from advancing further north but this seems
unlikely since the idea of halting and renunciating further conquest goes against Roman traditions
and equations of success. It is possible that Agricola didn’t extend further as he knew, as did the
Emperor, that his time as governor in Britain was almost up. He had already served almost twice
the usual length of time as a governor. He had been in Britain for four seasons and so recall to
Rome was certain any time now. To leave the job unfinished with part of the land unconquered
would not have been a glorious end to his career but to leave having established a permanent
frontier would allow Agricola and Titus the glory of “completing” the conquest of Britain.
In the 5th season there was indecision. Titus had died and Domitian was the new Emperor, his policy
unknown. It seems likely that Domitian and Agricola considered advancing west across the sea
from the Clyde into Ireland but opted instead for further conquest and glory by advancing north of
the Forth-Clyde isthmus. In the 6th season, 83AD, Agricola advanced under Domitian’s orders.
Domitian was perhaps motivated by the fact that both his father and brother had starved him of
military glory. They had both won military successes before becoming emperor, Domitian had not.
It is therefore likely that Domitian sought to consolidate his position in Rome through his governor’s
advances (indeed, Domitian received his 15th salutation as imperator because of Agricola’s
activities in Rome).
It follows that the Forth-Clyde line was crossed and the Romans gingerly penetrated into Strathmore
(Perthshire). Agricola employed the fleet to reconnoitre ahead and to support his ground forces.
At this time Agricola faced encirclement by the northern barbarians and so split his army into three
parts. One of the three parts of the Ninth Legion, the weakest of all was attacked at night by a
party of barbarians but Agricola promptly arrived the following morning to save the day.
The crucial 7th and final season then became 84AD when the fleet sailed ahead to raid and the
army marched on to Mons Graupius (the Graupian/Grampian mountain) where in 84 AD,
Agricola’s forces battled 30,000 Britons.
The 8000 auxiliary cavalry swiftly defeated the Britons,
driving off enemy chariots, foiling an attempt to be outflanked and routing the enemy. The Britons
supposedly lost 10,000 men to the Romans’ 360!
The army then went into winter quarters,
confirming that the enemy had not regrouped.
From here Agricola was recalled to Rome perhaps as Tacitus suggests because Emperor Domitian
was envious and fearful of Agricola’s success and wanted him back in Rome before he could steal
4
further glory. Whatever the reason for recall we are told that Agricola left a quiet and secure
province to his successor.
The close of Agricola’s career
Upon his return to Rome, Agricola was acclaimed with an ornamenta triumphalia (the nearest thing
possible to a triumph) and a statue was erected in his honour. So, he had clearly been seen to
achieve great feats. This triumph would have been a public ceremony honouring the military
prowess of Agricola. There would have been parades through the streets of Rome, wagons of gold
and spoils with dancers and musicians. It was truly a great honour to receive a triumph. However,
his gains in the north were not held – by the time that Tacitus was writing Agricola’s history the gains
north of the Forth had been given up although much of the Lowlands still held strong. Seven years
later when Tacitus was writing the Histories, he refers to “Britannia perdomita et statim” – Britain was
conquered and immediately let go – this suggests Agricola’s achievements did not endure, and
the fruits of his victory were sacrificed.
What happened after Agricola, in Flavian II?
Agricola’s successor took over in 84AD and it seems that he, whoever he was, failed to exploit
Agricola’s successes. This was perhaps because auxiliary forces were over-stretched or perhaps
because of a reversal in imperial policy.
Early in 85, Oppius Sabinus suffered disaster on the
Danube in central Europe – this may have caused Domitian to recall the 4 vexillations from the
North and send them to hep in the Danube.
Thus a reduction in Rome’s presence began in
earnest with II Adiutrix being recalled in 87AD and the legionary fortress of Inchtuthil being
abandoned. The fact that no coins later than 86AD have been found in camps in the North further
suggests withdrawal at this time. Sheppard Frere believes that “by 89AD the Romans held only the
Lowlands” (forts such as Dalswinton, Milton and Newstead) and even then there was a “thinning
out in the Lowlands” until final withdrawal in the first decade of the 1st century AD.
Traditionally, what can we say Agricola achieved?
Agricola personally gained his ornamenta triumphalia and was supposedly the first to expand north
of the Tay, but beyond that what else can we say he achieved?

He has been credited as being a great fort-builder - “Agricola the builder” on the basis of
the camps and forts which he built. Tacitus, in chapter 20 tells of Agricola being skilled in
choosing sites for camps. “No general ever had a better eye for ground than Agricola. No
fort of his was ever stormed, ever capitulated or was ever abandoned.” However, it is likely
that he didn’t chose the sites - this is likely to be hyperbole and indeed Agricola came close
5
to losing the camp of the Ninth Legion in the 6 th season. Despite these slightly shaky claims
he may been innovative in designing forts – in he north he widened ramparts at gateways
and in turned ramparts such as at Strageath. He introduced the double clavicula at certain
marching camps in Scotland (Dalginross) (he more conventional type of entrance was the
tituli entrance).

Traditionally he had been credited with establishing the “Flavian frontier” in Scotland. This
so-called frontier is a line of forts from Camelon to Inchtuthil. These forts were allegedly
“glen blocking forts”, used to guard against direct attacks from the Highland Massif. The
purpose of these forts may have been to block the glens as Agricola proceeded
northwards. However, this is unlikely since the Roman aim was to bring the enemy to battle
not to bottle them up and so we shouldn’t assign the glen blocking forts to Agricola.
It
seems that as David Breeze concludes “Agricola can be seen therefore not as an innovator
in camp and fort design nor as a strategist of note………….what can be said is that he was
singularly fortunate in his choice of son-in-law.”

Furthermore he has been credited with building the Gask Ridge, the first frontier in the
Roman Empire. The Gask Ridge consists of a chain of turf- and timber-built forts, fortlets and
watchtowers, strung out along the Roman road to the Tay. At present, some 37 km are
known, stretching from Glenbank, to the north of Dunblane, to Bertha, just upstream of Perth
on the Tay. The entire system was probably designed to control the strategic, potential
invasion corridor through Strathmore and Strathearn. However, recent fieldwork suggests
that he was in no way responsible for the Gask Ridge.
RM Ogilvie:
“In reflecting on Agricola’s achievement in reaching the Tay, 1900 years ago, one can only admire
the tenacity and skill of the Romans………no other governor achieved so much in terms of military
expansion, construction of roads and the Romanisation of Britain.”
TASKS
1. Explain the context and possible purposes of the Flavian invasion.
2. Describe Agricola’s invasion of the North in detail, season by season.
3. Ehat happened after Agricola was recalledto Rome?
4. If we are using only the traditional version of events, how successful was the Flavian
invasion?
5. How does R M Ogilvie reflect the traditional view of Agricola’s importance? What point
does David Breeze make about Agricola?
6