Ptolemy's description is the only detailed one we have till we come down to the 16th century. It is matter for regret that the Antonine Itinerary, so useful an aid to the identification of the Ptolemaic towns in the southern part of the island, does not extend to the north, and that the lists of the anonymous geographer of Ravenna are so corrupt as to be almost useless. About the middle of the last century a new element of confusion was introduced into what was tangled enough previously, by the publication of Bertram's well-known forgery De Situ Britanniæ, falsely ascribed to Richard of Cirencester, which being accepted as genuine by Roy, Chalmers, Stuart, and others, has been the means of giving currency to many unfounded notions regarding the nature and extent of the Roman conquests in North Britain.
The written history of Caledonia as well as of the rest of what is now Scotland commences with the warlike operations in Britain of Agricola, the lieutenant of the Emperor Domitian. (See Britannia, p. 353.) In the third year of his command this famous general, who was fortunate enough to have his son-in-law Tacitus as his biographer, determined to attempt the annexation of the northern portion of the island. Accordingly, in 80 A.D., he advanced as far as the estuary of the Taus, or as Wex reads, the Tanaus. Whatever the true reading may be, the supposition that on this occasion Agricola reached the Tay is untenable; though, whether the river referred to be the English Tyne, the Tweed, or the Scotch Tyne, it is impossible to say. The succeeding summer found him as far north as the isthmus formed by the firths of Clota and Bodotria (Clyde and Forth). On it he erected a line of forts, with the intention apparently of making it the northern boundary of the empire in those parts. In the following year he crossed the Clota, and overran additional territory “in that part of Britain which looks towards Ireland.” Information having now reached him that the remoter and still unconquered tribes were forming a combination against the Romans, he resolved to anticipate them, and (83 A.D.) carried the war beyond the Bodotria into the country of the Caledonians. That summer an engagement was fought, which, though it resulted in favour of the invaders, taught the Romans that they had no ordinary foe to cope with. On the approach of winter both sides retired to their quarters to make preparations for renewing the struggle. Next season (84) Agricola, on resuming the offensive, found himself confronted by a grand union of all the tribes of Caledonia, under a leader whom Tacitus names Galgacus. The Roman general had previously despatched a fleet to ravage the coast, and on continuing his march northwards, encountered the enemy, upwards of 30,000 strong, near Mount Graupius; for there can be little doubt that this, the reading of Wex and Kritz, ought to be adopted instead of the Grampius of the common editions. The exact locality of the conflict that ensued has been the theme of much profitless controversy; but we shall probably not greatly err in placing it somewhere on the borders of Kincardineshire. General Roy, whose conjecture is usually followed, fixed on Ardoch in Perthshire. A careful study, however, of the whole narrative leads one to look for the field of battle farther north, and nearer the coast. Tacitus, writing on the model of Thucydides and Livy, has put into the mouth of each leader, on the eve of the engagement, a speech of his own composition, in which he describes the feelings that may be supposed to have actuated the hostile armies. That ascribed to Galgacus is a splendid specimen of polished sarcasm, mixed with impassioned appeals to the patriotism of his hearers. Might, however, prevailed over right, and the Caledonians were defeated with a loss of 10,000 men. Agricola, now thinking he had pushed his conquests far enough, made no attempt to pursue his beaten foe, but at once led his army back to the territory of the Boresti (al. Horesti), whose name is probably preserved in the modern Forfar. Here he gave orders to the commander of his fleet to sail round the island, a feat which the latter accomplished. Soon after he himself was recalled to Rome by his jealous master.
Notwithstanding Agricola's success, the Romans seem to have been quickly obliged to abandon part of their conquests, for in less than forty years (129 A.D.) Hadrian's wall, which ran from the Tyne to the Solway, became the northern limits of their empire in Britain. About twenty years later a second Agricola appeared in the person of Lollius Urbicus, the lieutenant of Antoninus Pius. Almost nothing is known of his actions, but he seems to have once more carried the arms of Rome to the Clyde and Forth, if not beyond them, and to have erected on the line of Agricola's forts the more substantial work now known by the name of the emperor he served (see Antoninus, Wall of). The natives must soon have recovered the lost ground; but scarcely anything is known henceforth of the state of affairs in the north till 208, when, if we may trust the historian Dion Cassius, as abridged by Xiphiline, the Emperor Severus determined to attempt the subjugation of the whole island. At that time the two most powerful tribes of North Britain were the Mæatæ, close to Hadrian's Wall, and the Caledonians beyond them. Protected by their native fastnesses, the latter offered him such a resistance that, without being able to bring them to a decisive engagement, he lost through disease, fatigue, and the sword, no fewer, it is said, than 50,000 men. Having reached what is termed the northern extremity of the island, but which was in all likelihood merely the northern coast of Aberdeenshire, Severus retreated southwards in a very feeble state of health, partly induced by the fatigues he had undergone. A league formed the next year between the Caledonians and the Mæatæ, both of whom had already cast off his authority, led him to make preparations for a new campaign, with the avowed determination of extirpating the whole race. In the midst of these, however, he died at York in 210.
