First off, ancient terminology is anything but fixed. Much to our regret, of course. 
However, at least Bede is quite specific:
Said "vallum" Bede ascribes to Septimius Severus. Consequently there is mention of a second 'rampart' built somewhen during the early 5th century:
This is, by its following course, quite possibly the 'Antonine Wall'. Then, at the very end of the period, the actual stone wall is erected, before the Romans leave Britain for good:
So, in the 8th century there's a clear distinction between three lines of "walls". Calling the southernmost rampart "vallum" is a recent convention derived from that erroneous classificiation, just because there's no better alternative. We must not assume that Bede, whose chronology is clearly mixed up as well, had access to actual Roman terminology. But at the same time he doesn't attribute 'the Wall' to Hadrian. This is a relatively modern consensus, based on the antiquarian reading of inscriptions and the Historia Augusta (namely vita Hadriani 11.2). I'm referring here to Richard Hingley's 'Hadrian's Wall. A Life' (Oxford 2012).
Anyway, my point is: "vallum Aelium/Aeli" most likely was a Roman name for Hadrian's Wall, but we've no clue if it was the name.
However, at least Bede is quite specific:
Quote:Historia Ecclesiastica 1.5
Murus etenim de lapidibus, uallum uero, quo ad repellendam uim hostium castra muniuntur, fit de cespitibus, quibus circumcisis, e terra uelut murus exstruitur altus supra terram, ita ut in ante sit fossa, de qua leuati sunt cespites, supra quam sudes de lignis fortissimis praefiguntur.
For a stone wall (murus) is made of stones, a rampart (vallum), with which camps are fortified to repel the assaults of enemies, is made of sods, cut out of the earth, and raised high above the ground all round like a wall, so that there is in front the ditch whence the sods were taken and very strong wooden stakes fixed before it.
Said "vallum" Bede ascribes to Septimius Severus. Consequently there is mention of a second 'rampart' built somewhen during the early 5th century:
Quote:Historia Ecclesiastica 1.12
At insulani murum, quem iussi fuerant, non tam lapidibus quam cespitibus construentes, utpote nullum tanti operis artificem habentes, ad nihil utilem statuunt.
But the islanders raising the wall, as they had been directed, not of stone, as having no artist capable of such work, but of sods, it was of no use.
This is, by its following course, quite possibly the 'Antonine Wall'. Then, at the very end of the period, the actual stone wall is erected, before the Romans leave Britain for good:
Quote:ibid.
Quin etiam, quia et hoc sociis, quos derelinquere cogebantur, aliquid commodi adlaturum putabant, murum a mari ad mare recto tramite inter urbes, quae ibidem ob metum hostium factae fuerant, ubi et Seuerus quondam uallum fecerat, firmo de lapide conlocarunt…
Thinking, too, that it might be some help to their allies [the Britons], whom they [the Romans] were forced to abandon, from sea to sea, in a straight line between the towns that had been there built for fear of the enemy, they built from strong stone a wall where Severus had erected a rampart…
So, in the 8th century there's a clear distinction between three lines of "walls". Calling the southernmost rampart "vallum" is a recent convention derived from that erroneous classificiation, just because there's no better alternative. We must not assume that Bede, whose chronology is clearly mixed up as well, had access to actual Roman terminology. But at the same time he doesn't attribute 'the Wall' to Hadrian. This is a relatively modern consensus, based on the antiquarian reading of inscriptions and the Historia Augusta (namely vita Hadriani 11.2). I'm referring here to Richard Hingley's 'Hadrian's Wall. A Life' (Oxford 2012).
Anyway, my point is: "vallum Aelium/Aeli" most likely was a Roman name for Hadrian's Wall, but we've no clue if it was the name.
Tilman
