VALLUM ROMANUM. The origin of the barrier may have been the forts and stationary camps which Agricola (a. d. 79) caused to be erected in Britain (Tac. Agr. 20); but the account which Tacitus gives of this measure is so vague that it is quite impossible to found any certain conclusion on his words. In a. d. 120, Hadrian visited Britain, where he determined on fixing the boundary of the Roman Empire consi- derably to the S. of the most N. conquests of Agri- cola. He chose this boundary well, as it coincides with a natural one. The Tjne flows almost due E., just S., and nearly parallel to the 55° N. lat., for more than two thirds of the breadth of the island. The valley of the Tyne is separated from that of the Irthing, a branch of the Eden, by the N. extremity of the great chain of hills sometimes called the Back- bone of England; and the Irthing, with the Eden, completes the boundary to the Solwmj Frith. In order to strengthen this natural frontier, Hadrian, as we are informed by Spartianus, "drew a wall (jiiurus) 80,000 paces in length, to divide the barbarians from the Romans;" which wall followed the same general direction as the line above indicated. Eutropius (viii. 19) states that the Emperor Septimius Severas, who was in Britain during a. t>. 208 — 2 1 1 , constructed a rampart (vallimi) from sea to .sea, for the protection of the Roman provinces in the S. of the island. Now, as will be seen from the following descrip- tion, the lines of works designated by the general name, Roman Wall, consist of two main parts, a stone wall and an earthen rampart; and most writers on the subject have regarded these as two distinct, though connected, works, and belonging to two dif- ferent periods; the earthwork has generally been ascribed to Hadrian, the stone wall to Severus. Such is the opinion of Horsley, whose judgment, as Mr. Bruce emphatically admits, is always deserving of the highest consideration. Mr. Bruce himself ex- presses an opinion, founded on repeated and careful examination of all the remains of the wall, " that the lines of the barrier are the scheme of one great military engineer The wall of Hadrian was not a fence such as that by which we prevent the straying of cattle; it was a line of military ope- ration, similar in its nature to the works which Wel- lington raised at Torres Vedras. A broad belt of country was firmly secured. Walls of stone and earth crossed it. Camps to the north and south of them broke the force of an enemy in both directions; or, in the event of their passing the outer line, enabled the Romans to close upon them both in front and rear. Look-out stations revealed to them the movements of their foes; beacons enabled them to communicate with neighbouring garrisons; and the roads, which they always maintained, assisted them in concentrating their forces upon the points where it might be done with the best eflect. Such, I am per- suaded, was the intention of the Roman wall, though some still maintain that the murus and vallum are independent structures, the productions of different periods" (pp. ix. x. Pref. 2nd ed.) We confess that the reasoning here does not seem to us to be very conclusive. Grant that the system of defence has consistency and unity, yet it by no means follows that the whole was executed at one time. The earliest works were probably detached stationary camps; the next step would naturally be to connect them together by a wall, whether of earth or stone; and if experience should afterwards prove that this barrier was insufBcient, it would be an obvious pro- VALLUM ROMANUM. 1255 ceeding to strengthen it by a parallel fortification. The common opinion, therefore, that Agricola com- menced the defensive line, Hadrian strengthened it, and Severus completed it, appears to be probable in itself, and is supported by the little that we find upon the subject in the classical writers. If we may assume that the words murus and valbim were used by Spartianus and Eutropius in their strict signifi- cations, it would seem that the stone wall was the work of Hadrian, the earthen rampart of Severus. That some portion of the barrier was executed under the direction of the latter, is rendered still more pro- bable by the fact that the Britons called the wall gual Sever, gal Sever, or mur Sever, as Camden states. It has been designated by various names in later times ; as the Picls' Wall, the Thirl Wall, the Kepe Wall; but is now generally called the Roman Wall. The following description is taken almost entirely from Mr. Bruce's excellent work, mentioned at the end of this article. The barrier consists of three parts: (i.) a stone wall or nmrus, strengthened by a ditch on its northern side; (ii.) an earthen wall or vallum, south of the stone wall; (iii.) stations, castles, watch- towers, and roads: these lie for the most part be- tween the stone wall and the earthen rampart. The whole of the works extend from one side of the island to the other, in a nearly straight line, and comparatively close to one another. The wall and rampart are generally within 60 or 70 yards of each other, though the distance of course varies accord- ing to the nature of the country. Sometimes they are so dose as barely to admit of the passage of the military way between them; while in one or two instances they are upwards of half a mile apart. It is in the high grounds of the central region that they are most widely separated. Here tlie wall is carried over the highest ridges, while the rampart runs along the adjacent valley. Both works, 'however, are so arranged as to afford each other the greatest amount of support which the nature of the country allows. The stone wall extends from Wallsend on the Tyne to Boicness on the Solivay, a distance which Horsley estimates at 68 miles 3 furlongs, a measurement which almost exactly coincides with that of General Roy, who gives the length of the wall at 68J miles. The vallum falls short of this length by about 3 miles at each end, terminating at Netvcaslla on the E. side, and at Drumhurgh on the W. For 19 miles out of Newcastle, the present high- road to Carlisle runs upon the foundations of the wall, which pursues a straight course wherever it is at all possible, and is never curved, but always bends at an angle. In no part is the wall jierfect, so that it is difiicult to ascertain what its original height may have been. Bede, whose monastery of Jarrow was near its eastern extremity, and who is the earliest authority respecting its dimensions, states that in his time it was 8 feet thick and 12 high. Sir Christ. Ridley, writing in 1572, describes it as 3 yards broad, and in some places 7 yards high. Samson Erdeswick, a well-known antiquary, vi.'jited the wall in 1574, when he ascertained its height at the W. end to be 16 feet. Camden, who saw the wall in 1599, found a part of it on a hill, near Carvoran, to be 15 feet high and 9 broad. Allowing for a battlement, which would probably soon be destroyed, we may conclude that the average height was from 18 to 19 feet. The thickness vajles from C to 9^ feet. 4 L 4
