04-05-2010, 05:40 PM
Quote:You should probably pre-order this. :wink:
I was wondering whether Mr Campbell would take this opportunity
... In the meantime, however, and lacking his expertise, I would suggest the following points:
1. Legions - there were actually four of them available to Agricola: II Augusta, II Adiutrix, IX Hispana and XX Valeria Victrix. Adiutrix was transferred to the Danube at some point in the later 80s or early 90s, probably following one of the disasters inflicted by Dacians or Sarmatians. However, we do know that a vexillation of at least one British legion (IX Hispana) was sent to the Rhine frontier at some point in the 80s (probably - the inscription to L. Roscius Aelianus Maecius Celer, tribune of the IX, who participated in a 'German expedition' with a vexillation of the legion is undated. It's usually assigned to the period of Domitian's Chattian war, c83, but the dating for this campaign is as disputed as that of Graupius, and as the date of the one in part depends on the date of the other it's all a bit hazy...). The missing vexillation of the ninth has been seen as explanation for their being the weakest legion in the army (Agricola 26), although this could just as easily mean that detachments had been left back in southern Britain. Agricola's army could well have been composed of vexillations rather than full legions - we just don't know. What does appear certain, however, is that the British army were being used as a pool for troops needed elsewhere; it's unlikely, therefore, that any legions or other units would be transferred to Britain during this same period. Agricola's four legions would have been the maximum available to him. Agricola 29 states that the general marched with an army 'equipped for expedition' - thus a light fast moving column. This might suggest vexillations drawn from the four available legions, rather than full units - but since we know so little about the dispositions of the rest of the army we can't be sure.
2. Auxiliaries - The three Batavian and two Tungrian cohorts are mentioned (Agricola 36) as the spearhead of the Roman attack, but this doesn't mean that they were necessarily the majority of the 8000 auxiliary infantry under Agricola's command. Tacitus might have mentioned them in particular because they were the most obviously 'barbarian' unit in the Roman force - the Batavian revolt of the 70s being within fairly recent memory - and thus a good contrast with the legionary troops used as a reserve. We don't know how big these cohorts actually were - quite possibly by this date they were all milliary (1000-strong), giving a total of 5000 men. The writing tablets from Vindolanda suggest that certain Batavian and Tungrian cohorts in Britain were milliary in the late Domitianic/early Trajanic period, but there are discrepancies in the 'strength report' of the First Tungrian Cohort, dated c.90, suggesting that they may have been in a period of transition at that point (Bowman & Thomas, 'A Military Strength Report from Vindolanda', JRS 91 1991). In any case, even with five milliary cohorts there are still 3000 auxiliaries left unaccounted-for!
Another possible clue - the only Roman casualty at Graupius was one Aulus Atticus, a cohort prefect. The name is unusual in Tacitus, who usually gives Roman names as nomen+cognomen. A.R. Birley (The Roman Government of Britain 2005 p93), following a suggestion of Syme, notes that the officer's full name might have been Aulus Julius Atticus, and he the son of Julius Atticus, a writer on viticulture from Narbonensian Gaul and a friend of Agricola's own father. The Batavian and Tungrian cohorts of this period, however (according to Tacitus on the Batavian revolts, and the names of officers on the Vindolanda tablets) were possibly Romanised nobles of the Batavi and Tungri - many of them have the imperial nomen Julius, but none the unusual praenomen Aulus. Atticus was clearly not a Batavian or Tungrian. So either these cohorts were sometimes led by non-native officers (Romans or Romanised Gauls), or there were cohorts in the thick of the battle who were neither Tungrian nor Batavian... Birley also mentions a Gaius Julius Karus, prefect of Cohors II Asturum Equitata, decorated for his part in a British campaign: he too was from Narbonensian Gaul, as was Agricola himself - the battle was probably Graupius, and the Asturian mounted cohort would therefore have been present and in action.
Since several drafts were made on the British army during the Domitianic period, and (as far as I know) no units are attested as being moved from elsewhere to replace them, the force in Britain during Agricola's campaign would presumably by the same as that of a decade of so later, minus II Adiutrix. A military diploma exists giving at least part of this complement for the year 98 - I would imagine, then, that most if not all of the units on that diploma would have been in Britain under Agricola's command. I don't have the full text of the diploma - a helpful person might - but in the meantime the following site provides a handy listing of all available evidence for Roman forces in Britain. Look under auxiliaries, and any that are mentioned as featuring on the 98 diploma, plus a few others (ala Gallorum Sebosiana, for example, noted on a tablet from Carlisle) would probably have been available to Agricola for the Graupius campaign:
[url:2qfcwbgn]http://www.romanbritain.freeserve.co.uk/Auxilia.htm[/url]
Regards - Nathan
Nathan Ross
