How far does the evidence help us understand the aims of the Romans in their construction of
Hadrian’s Wall? (36 marks)
There is limited evidence to help historians understand the aims of the Romans in building Hadrian’s
Wall, particularly where written sources are concerned. However, we are able to access evidence
which may inform us of the various reasons for which the wall was built. It may be seen as a reaction
to the violence of the Britons, a defensive measure, a barrier which marked the end of Roman
expansionist policy, or as a way of attempting to keep peaceful coexistence between the Britons and
the Romans.
The evidence may show that the reason the wall was built was as a reaction to British violence. For
example, the tombstone of Titus Pontius Sabinus not only suggests that there were deaths as a
result of British violence, but that there was a lot of change in the legions stationed across Britain
and there was a large number of troops overall. This suggests the British were causing trouble for
Rome at the time, which was around AD119, not long before the wall was built. However, the
information to be gained from this tombstone is limited – there is no real information on the actions
of the British. Nevertheless, the idea of the wall as a reaction to British attacks may be supported by
the structure of the wall itself, which was built into a natural ridge wherever possible, suggesting
that the Romans wanted to ensure an advantage over the British if they ever tried to attack again.
The As of Hadrian from AD119 suggests that the attacks of the British had been quelled by the time
Hadrian’s wall was built, as it seems to signify a complete victory over Britain. This coin is a form of
propaganda which would have been minted to improve Hadrian’s military reputation so this victory
is probably an exaggeration. The issues in Britain are unlikely to have been completely quashed so
quickly, which may suggest that Hadrian needed to build this wall to keep control of an unstable
area.
Another reason that the sources suggest Hadrian’s Wall was built is simply as a barrier to mark the
end of Rome’s expansion. According to the SHA, the wall was built to separate Roman and British
territory. Though the SHA may have been referring to the prevented communication between the
Brigantes and the Caledonians, a barrier of this kind suggests a reversal of the Romans’ earlier
expansionist policy. Little is known about the providence of the SHA, though it is thought it was
written hundreds of years later (in the late 4 th century AD), so there is no proof that the given reason
for Hadrian’s Wall being built was accurate to Hadrian’s intentions. However, the wall being
intended as a barrier may be supported by the establishment of a demilitarised zone around the wall
marked by a vallum, which created a clear divide between the territory on either side. The wall may
be taken as a signal of the change in foreign policy which came about when Hadrian became
emperor.
The evidence may also suggest that one of the principal aims of Hadrian’s Wall was to ensure
peaceful coexistence between Romans and Britons. This may be seen through the Vindolanda
tablets. These indicated that the Britons and Romans did peacefully coexist in Britain, relatively close
to the time of the wall being constructed. One tablet was an invitation to a birthday celebration,
clearly showing that the situation on the Stanegate road at the time was safe enough for Romans to
travel for leisure. Though this was approximately 20 years before Hadrian’s wall was built, it
illustrates a time of peace in that area of Britain. Therefore, when the wall was built along the
Stanegate road, one of its key aims may have been to preserve this peace. These tablets are
archaeological evidence, so the information we can glean from them is reliable; however, the tablets
don’t necessarily portray the experience of every Roman living there, only a select few. The SHA also
Hadrian’s Wall? (36 marks)
There is limited evidence to help historians understand the aims of the Romans in building Hadrian’s
Wall, particularly where written sources are concerned. However, we are able to access evidence
which may inform us of the various reasons for which the wall was built. It may be seen as a reaction
to the violence of the Britons, a defensive measure, a barrier which marked the end of Roman
expansionist policy, or as a way of attempting to keep peaceful coexistence between the Britons and
the Romans.
The evidence may show that the reason the wall was built was as a reaction to British violence. For
example, the tombstone of Titus Pontius Sabinus not only suggests that there were deaths as a
result of British violence, but that there was a lot of change in the legions stationed across Britain
and there was a large number of troops overall. This suggests the British were causing trouble for
Rome at the time, which was around AD119, not long before the wall was built. However, the
information to be gained from this tombstone is limited – there is no real information on the actions
of the British. Nevertheless, the idea of the wall as a reaction to British attacks may be supported by
the structure of the wall itself, which was built into a natural ridge wherever possible, suggesting
that the Romans wanted to ensure an advantage over the British if they ever tried to attack again.
The As of Hadrian from AD119 suggests that the attacks of the British had been quelled by the time
Hadrian’s wall was built, as it seems to signify a complete victory over Britain. This coin is a form of
propaganda which would have been minted to improve Hadrian’s military reputation so this victory
is probably an exaggeration. The issues in Britain are unlikely to have been completely quashed so
quickly, which may suggest that Hadrian needed to build this wall to keep control of an unstable
area.
Another reason that the sources suggest Hadrian’s Wall was built is simply as a barrier to mark the
end of Rome’s expansion. According to the SHA, the wall was built to separate Roman and British
territory. Though the SHA may have been referring to the prevented communication between the
Brigantes and the Caledonians, a barrier of this kind suggests a reversal of the Romans’ earlier
expansionist policy. Little is known about the providence of the SHA, though it is thought it was
written hundreds of years later (in the late 4 th century AD), so there is no proof that the given reason
for Hadrian’s Wall being built was accurate to Hadrian’s intentions. However, the wall being
intended as a barrier may be supported by the establishment of a demilitarised zone around the wall
marked by a vallum, which created a clear divide between the territory on either side. The wall may
be taken as a signal of the change in foreign policy which came about when Hadrian became
emperor.
The evidence may also suggest that one of the principal aims of Hadrian’s Wall was to ensure
peaceful coexistence between Romans and Britons. This may be seen through the Vindolanda
tablets. These indicated that the Britons and Romans did peacefully coexist in Britain, relatively close
to the time of the wall being constructed. One tablet was an invitation to a birthday celebration,
clearly showing that the situation on the Stanegate road at the time was safe enough for Romans to
travel for leisure. Though this was approximately 20 years before Hadrian’s wall was built, it
illustrates a time of peace in that area of Britain. Therefore, when the wall was built along the
Stanegate road, one of its key aims may have been to preserve this peace. These tablets are
archaeological evidence, so the information we can glean from them is reliable; however, the tablets
don’t necessarily portray the experience of every Roman living there, only a select few. The SHA also
