Killing Fields of Scotland

by R J M Pugh

  Tacitus describes how the Caledonian chariots raced across the slopes of the battlefield, driving aggressively against the 3,000 Roman cavalry and momentarily throwing them into confusion. However, it was a different matter attacking the disciplined lines of Roman infantry, marching forward in faultless step. Confounded by the solid mass of Roman troops and the broken ground, the Caledonian charioteers lost their initial impetus, becoming intermingled with each other, which further reduced their effectiveness.

  The Batavian and Tungrian auxiliaries were gripped by a bloodlust; veterans well trained in the use of the gladius, they smashed into the mass of Caledonian warriors, striking their faces with the bosses of their long shields and stabbing with their short swords, ideally suited to hand-to-hand combat. This frontal attack wrong- footed the Caledonians; then the arrival of the re-organized 3,000 Roman cavalry on their flanks spread panic in the brawling mob. The Caledonian host shivered, then crumbled in the onslaught on their front and flanks. The host quickly disintegrated, the warriors fleeing in panic. In what must have lasted only a few minutes, Agricola had won the day, committing only slightly more than half his entire force. This may have been deliberate; Agricola probably husbanded the rest in reserve for mopping-up or reinforcing the Batavian and Tungrian cohorts if they had come to grief.

  The carnage was great. When night fell, 10,000 Caledonian warriors lay stark and stiff in the heather. Twelve centuries would pass until a defeat of similar magnitude would befall Scotland.6 According to Tacitus, Agricola suffered only 400 casualties. Even so, he allowed 20,000 tribesmen to escape into the surrounding mountains – hardly a desirable result, given the nature of the type of warfare practised by the Caledonians. Agricola’s force was now equal in number to his enemy and half of his men were as yet untried. Why did he fail to follow up his spectacular victory? We shall never know.

  Tacitus’s account briefly described the scene on the day following the battle:

  The next day revealed the effects of the victory more fully. An awful silence reigned on every hand; the hills were deserted, houses [sic] smoking in the distance, and our scouts did not meet a soul.

  Viewing the devastation of burning, smoking settlements, Tacitus may have reflected on the nature of the politics, if not the morality, of the Pax Romana.

  The precise location of the battle of Mons Graupius has never been accurately or satisfactorily identified. Some accounts7 favour the Perthshire moor or muir of Ardoch whose topographical and physical features seem to fit the description in Tacitus’s narrative. Also, General William Roy’s Military Survey of Scotland8 includes a detailed report on the Roman camp at Ardoch; Roy estimated that the camp was capable of accommodating an army of 30,000, a figure suspiciously close to the strength of Agricola’s army.

  However, on balance, most accounts9 consider the battle took place near Bennachie, in Aberdeenshire. In this author’s view Bennachie seems more likely for two reasons; it is only eighteen miles inland from the Aberdeenshire coast and we know that Agricola’s army was provisioned by the Roman navy. Also, Tacitus calls the battle Mons Graupius – the Grampian Mountain. After his victory, Agricola probed further north into Morayshire, beyond the Grampians, creating a further ten stations or marching camps, remains of which can still be seen today.

  Despite the victory at Mons Graupius and the creation of mighty fortifications at Ardoch, Inchtuthil and Strageth in Perthshire, Camelon in Stirlingshire, the various stations on the Antonine Wall, the naval base at Cramond, Edinburgh, Inveresk near Musselburgh, Newstead, Melrose, Cappuck, near Jedburgh, Birrens, Dumfriesshire, Lynne in Peebleshire and Hadrian’s Wall – all built between AD 80 and 128 – the Roman hold on Scotland was far from secure. Roman occupation between AD 80 and 380 was at best fragmentary; ultimately, for strategic and economic reasons, the legions abandoned Scotland, confining their activities behind Hadrian’s Wall from AD 380 until their departure from Britain in 410. During these three centuries, other battles were fought between the Romans and the Caledonians, although none of these is described in anything approaching the detail of Tacitus’s account of Mons Graupius.

  In AD 86 Agricola was recalled to Rome by the Emperor Titus Flavius Domitianus Augustus because, as a general, Agricola was entitled to a ‘triumph’ or public celebration in the streets of Rome bestowed on Roman leaders successful in war. However, Agricola’s triumph was mere window-dressing as Emperor Domitian was jealous of his achievements which dwarfed his own; this was the real reason for his recall from Britain. Domitian’s subsequent ill-treatment of Agricola spurred Tacitus on to write his father-in-law’s biography – one of the finest ever written – five years after Agricola’s death in AD 93. As for Domitian, he was universally hated by his people; his cruel and corrupt reign (AD81 – 96) came to an end with his murder by a freedman.

  As for Gaius Cornelius Tacitus, all we know of him derives from his fragmentary writings10 and the Letters of his friend Pliny the Younger. A successful barrister, then Consul of Rome in AD 97, Tacitus was closely associated with Pliny in the prosecution in AD 99 of Marius Priscus, the extortionate and rascally governor of Africa. Despite his scant works, Tacitus’s reputation is unsurpassed by most other Roman prose writers of his time.

  Tacitus’s best known work in Britain is, of course, his De Vita et Moribus Julii Agricolae (The Agricola) for its description of conditions in Roman Britain. To understand The Agricola fully, we have to examine its author’s mindset. On the surface, the account was a tribute to a famous father-in-law and remarkable for its attention to a historical event which, had Tacitus not set it down in words, would have been lost to posterity. On the one hand, The Agricola is the seamless dovetailing of Agricola’s achievements; on the other, it is Tacitus’ propaganda vehicle criticizing the Emperor Domitian – as opposed to a sweeping condemnation of the Roman Empire – and his unjust treatment of a famous son of Rome of whom Domitian was obsessively jealous.

  Tacitus’s account reflects both its author’s bitterness and that of his late father-in-law. The main thrust of his criticism of Domitian was expressed through Calgacus, a man he believed to be a valiant – if barbarous – Caledonian leader who addressed his embattled people before Mons Graupius. His speech was pure Tacitus, words he put into the Caledonian hero’s mouth to criticize a corrupt and inefficient emperor whose misrule had created a ‘desolation’ or a desert in his own empire, masquerading as peace. Tacitus believed Domitian had betrayed the lofty principles enshrined in the Pax Romana, which had promised a better life for the peoples Rome had conquered. Tacitus is a master of the biting phrase, innuendo, force and conciseness, all these being the hallmarks of a successful lawyer, which he was.

  As for Calgacus, had he been slain at Mons Graupius, Tacitus would undoubtedly have written of his death and the manner of it. Calgacus was never taken prisoner; if he had been, he would have been dragged in chains behind Agricola’s chariot through the streets of Rome to serve as a warning to other tribes and peoples who dared to oppose Roman rule.

  After Mons Graupius, Calgacus disappears from the pages of history – if he ever in fact existed and was not simply a figment of Tacitus’s imagination, an invention he put to use in his propagandist account. Today, there is no memorial to Calgacus in Scotland, no stone or even cairn to commemorate his heroic stand against the Roman invaders. It is not too late for Scotland to honour him in some small way.

  Although Mons Graupius is unique in being the sole battle recorded – albeit by a Roman eyewitness – we know from contemporary Roman sources that the war between the Caledonians (Picts) and the Romans raged on for the next three centuries. On account of the increasing unrest caused by the Picts and the Maetae, Emperor Severus (AD 197 – 211) came to Britain and marched north in AD208. Carried on a litter on account of old age and infirmity, Severus was determined to lead a punitive expedition into Caledonia and subdue the rebellious tribes once and for all. Ambition does not always guarantee success however, as we know from countless examples in history.
The legions of Severus were attacked time and time again by an elusive foe, although Severus was able to exact terms from the Picts who conceded a considerable part of their territory. Details of Severus are scant and very little is recorded about his conquests, not even his line of march into north Britain. He is said to have constructed a new defence between the river Tyne and the Solway; it may be that he simply repaired an existing earth or turf wall built by Agricola. The treaty Severus imposed on the Picts was hardly inscribed before the Picts and the Maetae were again menacing Roman territory south of the Tyne – Solway line. Only Severus’s death at York in AD 211 prevented further action against the rebellious tribes.

  For the next century and a half, we know nothing of events in north Britain until AD 368, when the Emperor Valentinian despatched Theodosius (father of the emperor of the same name) to Britain to subdue the Picts. In two campaigns, Theodosius is said to have broken the power of the Picts and their allies; he also recovered territories whose precise location is unknown to us but which were called Valentia in honour of Emperor Valentinian. However, Theodosius’s campaigns only postponed the inevitable – the evacuation of Britain when Alaric, King of the Visigoths, sacked Rome in AD 410.

  After the Romans departed, the peoples of Britain were left to shift for themselves. As in southern Britain, the northern territories would confront new and challenging invaders in the coming six centuries, as we shall see.

  Notes

  1 Tacitus, De Vita et Moribus Julii Agricolae (The Agricola).

  2 Cassius Dio, A History of Rome.

  3 Ibid.

  4 Tacitus, De Vita etc.

  5 Other translations of Tacitus give ‘desert’ and ‘desolation’.

  6 The battle of Dunbar, 1296.

  7 Brotchie, The Battlefields of Scotland, pp.16 – 17.

  8 Roy, Military Survey of Scotland 1747 – 55.

  9 Notably Oliver, A History of Scotland, p.33.

  10 In addition to De Vita et Moribus Julii Agricolae, Tacitus (AD 55 – 120) wrote Dialogus de Oratoribus (AD 76), a treatise on the Roman educational system; De Germania, a propaganda pamphlet exploiting the fallacy of the concept of ‘the noble savage’ in order to attack the degeneracy and servility of contemporary Rome; the Histories (AD 69 – 97) and the Annals, a record of the reigns of the Emperors Tiberius to Nero, excluding the reign of Caligula and most of Claudius’s and Nero’s reigns.

  Chapter 2

  The Dark Ages

  After the departure of the Romans, north Britain enjoyed a period of development, although progress was hampered by unrest. In western Europe, various races and peoples freed from the restraining power of the Roman Empire migrated to Britain. The newcomers, Angles and Saxons, came into conflict with the indigenous tribes although, at first, northern Britain was spared. The main trouble in the north was caused by internecine warfare. This struggle went on for nearly six centuries, those known as the Dark Ages – not in the sense of the absence of light but because we know very little about post-Roman Britain. However, Pictish art blossomed, particularly after north Britain experienced the unifying influence of Christianity. The link with the educated western world had been broken with the departure of the Romans; it would be re-established by the evangelical saints who converted the north in the coming centuries. What was ‘dark’ during the fifth to the eleventh centuries was the absence of recorded history; even what has survived is fragmentary and obscure. We are obliged to rely on the early chronicles, many of which were written several years after the events they describe. These chronicles offer a window – albeit opaque – through which we catch glimpses of the main drift and character of the several forces which would ultimately transform northern Britain into Scotland.

  Christianity was the key. The missionary Saint Ninian (AD? – 550) began the task of converting the Picts in the lower, or southern part of the Pictish kingdom; he was ordained bishop of the southern Picts by Pope Siricius in AD 394. Ninian made his chief seat at Candida Casa, or Whithorn, Wigtownshire, although his mission was centred on the south, it extended to the Grampians; his death in AD 550 prevented conversion of the northern Picts. This was completed by Saint Columba (AD 521 – 597). Columba originated in Donegal, coming to north Britain in AD 563 and making Iona his chief seat. Around AD 565 he went on a mission to convert the whole of northern Pictland, preaching the Christian faith and founding monasteries. About the same time Saint Kentigern, or Mungo, (AD 518 – 612), who was born in what is now East Lothian, carried the Word to the west, becoming Bishop of Glasgow. The process was completed by Saint Cuthbert (AD 633 – 687) who evangelized parts of the modern counties of the Borders and Northumberland, where he established himself at Lindisfarne. These evangelical preachers united the pagan tribes of north Britain by preaching peace, just as the Romans had united them through war.

  By the fourth century AD, the Caledonians and their sub-tribes were known as Picts, the name first given to the tribes by the Romans. Afterwards, the tribal name Caledoni dropped out of use; the territory called Caledonia became known as Pictland, or Pictavia. The Picts became the predominant tribe, although other tribes such as the Goidelic Celts, or Gaels, later known as the Scots, established their kingdom of Dalriada in Argyleshire. For two centuries after the Roman withdrawal, a twilight descended on north Britain and we know nothing whatsoever about the history of this period. We must assume that it was an age dominated by the use of axe, spear and sword, as the Picts and the Scots struggled for mastery of the country.

  The ethnological divisions in north Britain at this time are complex; in the interests of clarity however, we need only concern ourselves with the four main peoples – the Picts, the Scots, the Britons of Strathclyde and, in the seventh century AD, the Angles of Bernicia, or modern Northumberland. Of these four peoples, the Picts and the Britons had established themselves over an indeterminable period prior to AD 500. The Dalriadic Scots originated in Antrim, Ireland, and arrived in north Britain around AD 500. The Angles settled in Northumberland in AD 547 and would invade Strathclyde in AD 603, then Lothian in AD 638. These four powerful and disparate peoples vied with each other for supremacy over what would become the kingdom of Scotland.

  The Picts were the predominant race. As mentioned in the previous chapter, of the Picts we know little apart from the haunting images they carved in stone – obscure symbols, animals and occasionally warriors. The Pictish language is completely unknown to us. The kingdom of Pictland stretched from Caithness in the north to the Firth of Forth in the south, although until the ninth century AD, it was constantly under threat from the Dalriadic Scots and, to a lesser extent, the Britons of Strathclyde. The greatest threat would come from the Angles of Bernicia, in the seventh century, as we shall see.

  However, let us examine the Picts’ main adversaries in the sixth century, the Scots of Dalriada. The Scots made their capital at Dunadd, near the modern Crinan Canal. Dunadd began its existence as an Iron Age hill-fort. It is situated near Kilmartin, Argyle, rising out of the barren flatness of the Crinan Moss. Today, Dunadd is enveloped in an eerie silence broken only by the random cawing of rooks, or the wind. The natural fortress has several entrances, some blocked artificially with loose stones for defence. It is renowned for its unique stone carvings below the uppermost enclosure; these include a human footprint and a basin hollowed from the stone, symbols thought to be linked to the coronation rituals of Dalriadic kings. On the same flat outcrop is the image of a boar in the Pictish style, with an example of ogham script – a form of writing consisting of straight lines and dots which appears in ancient British inscriptions and named for the Gaulish Ogmios, the god of language – a language unknown to us. Dunadd is surrounded by vitrified hill-forts, prehistoric structures found in Scotland, Ireland and Europe. (Their peculiarity is that the stones of which they are constructed are wholly or partly vitrified, transformed into a kind of glass by the action of heat effected deliberately by means of piled-up fuel set alight.)

  Occupied from about AD 500, D
unadd was evacuated around AD 850 because it was vulnerable to Viking raids. It was relocated in Scone, Perthshire, the centre of the Picto-Scottish kingdom of Alba, as ancient Scotland was named. The graveyard in the nearby village of Kilmartin, Argyle, contains many intricately carved stones dating from the early Christian period to the Middle Ages. It is possible some originated in Dunadd.

  The Strathclyde Britons were descended from a Celtic-British tribe known as the Damnoni. Their kingdom was centred on Dumbarton, which they made their capital. The kingdom of Strathclyde stretched from the modern shires of Dumbarton, Renfrew, Lanark, Ayr, Peebles, Dumfries and across the Border to Cumberland and Westmorland. The kingdom survived intact until the Norman Conquest, when Cumberland and Westmorland were annexed by William Rufus, William II (1056 – 1100) into Norman England.1 Before that, the Strathclyde Britons were probably joined by the remnants of the Votadini (or Gododdin) whose kingdom in the Lothians was annexed by the Angles of Bernicia who occupied Din Eidyn or modern Edinburgh in AD 638.

  This rich and colourful broth of Picto-Scottish cultures would survive until Kenneth mac Alpin, King of the Dalriadic Scots – his mother was a Pict – united the Picts and Scots in AD 844. Before that, the chief threat to the area north of the modern Border came from the Bernician Angles.

  Degsastan

  We first learn of the Angles in AD 547, when they established a kingdom based at Bamburgh, in Northumberland under their ruler, Ida. Ida’s kingdom was known as Bernicia and Deira, the neighbouring province of modern Yorkshire which the Bernician Angles annexed in AD 588. The northern part of Bernicia would extend over the river Tweed into the kingdom of the Votadini, as we shall presently see.