Britain

[greekwarrior34]

Right. The idea of world conquest, so important in Republican and Augustan propaganda, had been abandoned during the reign of Tiberius, who had in Germania seen the problems it generated. Claudius essentially continued this new policy - Britain being the atypical conquest.

Right. I do also think that the plans for conquering Britain finally ended with Hadrianus and its Vallum hadriani....

[Quintus Aurelius Lepidus]

right. i understand the economical question. i once heard that every war, every campaign has a economical factor; it may be that it's not THE
casus belli but it's always somewhere in.

but don't you think that building a wall, manning it and maintaining it, is also very costful?

[greekwarrior34]

but don't you think that building a wall, manning it and maintaining it, is also very costful?

Ok, you know that no one knows why Hadrianus did so. One reason might be economic, why not, but in my opinion it is also transcendental that Hadrianus knew that for the Roman empire expanding his frontiers was not as necessary as in previous times. Indeed he pacified them.

Anyway, I repeat myself: I only speculate.

[Q. Vipsanivs Praetextatvs]

Another reason to the construction of Hadrian's wall is to keep legions busy, for not to lost discipline during a peaceful period begun by Hadrian.

[PhilusEstilius]

The building of Hadrians' Wall was not a costly project at all, for something that is built by a military who are already payed by the state is ok. The reason for the construction of it is infact simply the continuance of a barrier that was already there, all that Hadrian did was swing it around to encompass the river Erthing and give a western logistics supply route for it.

[Count Theo]

The reasons for not taking a lot of the North and Scotland could have been many but ecconomics would have most likely have played a major role and the construction of the wall would suggest a final physical limit to the Empire and what was beyond it was not really worth having.

A physical statement can be suggested by the construction and continious occupation of the wall in that it would suggest 'Here is the Empire, either stay out or become part of it by accepting our values and way of life'. and/ or 'You are not worthy of the Empire, now keep out'

Anything that was needed by the Empire from outside the limits of the wall could be had by trade and not through very expensive and costly military campaigns.

Count Theo/ Darren

[PhilusEstilius]

The building of Hadrians' Wall appears to have been an excuse for many to say that the Empire was saying go away Scotland and shutting out the Barbarian. This is not the situation at all for infact the Romans withdrew from Scotland some 20yrs before Hadrian came along as Emperor, this happend around AD98 and becomes a very difficult thing to understand. If we try to consider Imperial plans and the progress towards the implementation of them, such a plan may have been drawn up by the Emperor Domitian and took until 98 for it to go into action. The plan would have been considered in 96 when Domitian was assasinated however it even did not come about until the death of Nerva. We are now looking at a withdrawl some three Emperors before Hadrian, the Emperor Trajan has to also feature in this process. There is evidence that another Limes was put in earlier possibly by Trajan and in the same area as Hadrians' Wall, and indeed had forts every Roman mile from north sea to the Irish sea so Hadrian was simply copying somthing that was already there.

[mcbishop]

There is evidence that another Limes was put in earlier possibly by Trajan and in the same area as Hadrians' Wall, and indeed had forts every Roman mile from north sea to the Irish sea so Hadrian was simply copying somthing that was already there.

There may be hypotheses that this was so, but scarcely evidence for such a sophisticated system. There are apparently earlier structures re-used by the Wall - Pike Hill signal station and turret 45a are often cited as examples - but the Stanegate 'system' (if such it was, and academic opinion chops and changes on that one - I think it's back in favour this week, but blink and it might change ;-) has not produced evidence of forts (or even fortlets) every mile and I don't think there has been a serious suggestion that Hadrian's Wall has an underlying Trajanic predecessor (not really Trajan's style).

Mike Bishop

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

The reasons for not taking a lot of the North and Scotland could have been many but ecconomics would have most likely have played a major role and the construction of the wall would suggest a final physical limit to the Empire and what was beyond it was not really worth having.

A physical statement can be suggested by the construction and continious occupation of the wall in that it would suggest 'Here is the Empire, either stay out or become part of it by accepting our values and way of life'. and/ or 'You are not worthy of the Empire, now keep out'

Anything that was needed by the Empire from outside the limits of the wall could be had by trade and not through very expensive and costly military campaigns.

Count Theo/ Darren

Yes, I would say that sums it it up.
Now, if they had needed oil back then........ :wink:

[PhilusEstilius]

The Stanegate system is not what I refer to Mike, it is the work of the late Raymond Selkirk with his discoveries on his 255 line. Indeed one of the forts on this line was given mention by both Camden and Horsley, and there may well be another more major one where the evidence of the Ala Petriana came from (not Corbridge) prior to it's stay at Stanwix. I would even suggest that one might find it very interesting to use some of the Grid ref's given by Raymond in his book "On The Trail of The Legions" it helps to show what he meant by 255 degrees west.

[mcbishop]

The Stanegate system is not what I refer to Mike, it is the work of the late Raymond Selkirk with his discoveries on his 255 line. Indeed one of the forts on this line was given mention by both Camden and Horsley, and there may well be another more major one where the evidence of the Ala Petriana came from (not Corbridge) prior to it's stay at Stanwix. I would even suggest that one might find it very interesting to use some of the Grid ref's given by Raymond in his book "On The Trail of The Legions" it helps to show what he meant by 255 degrees west.

Read it when it came out - I liked his alternative route for Stanegate round the hillside to Fourstones, found the idea of a link from Red House to the Devil's Causeway interesting, but was unconvinced by the 255 line. It needs more tangible evidence, but you never know - the Roman occupation in Northumberland north of Hadrian's Wall is hugely under-researched and it may yet come to light. I am convinced of a Roman predecessor for the A1 and have identified several other roads in the area, although none that match any of RS's suggestions, except for the continuation of the Devil's Causeway north of the Tweed, where he and I were in complete agreement (I took his suggestion of Press Mains as a fort seriously enough to fieldwalk it).

Mike Bishop

[PhilusEstilius]

I think Mike it is time that archaeologists should go have a look at this 255 line and stop all the foolish comment about it, infact you have read the book so you should know where to go to look for it.