Chapter II: The Roman Province in Scotland (3)

It has generally been supposed that the province had at this time only
extended to the wall between the Solway and the Tyne, and that
Theodosius added the additional territory, which now for the first
time became a province under the name of Valentia. But the words of
the historian are directly opposed to this: ‘Recuperatamque
provinciam, quæ in ditionem concesserat hostium, ita reddiderat statui
pristino.’—Am. Mar. B. xxviii. c. 3.

Footnote 94:

The Notitia Imperii, compiled subsequently to this expedition, has the
following bodies of Atecotti in the Roman army who were stationed in
Gaul:—

Atecotti.
Atecotti juniores Gallieani.
Atecotti Honoriani seniores.
Atecotti Honoriani juniores.—
Not. Dig., _ed._ Böcking.

St. Jerome says that he saw in Gaul the Atticotts, a British nation,
which implies that they were inhabitants of Britain. He says (_Adv.
Her._ ii.), ‘Quid loquar de cæteris nationibus, quum ipse
adolescentulus in Gallia viderim Atticotos, gentem Britannicam,
humanis vesci carnibus.’ As St. Jerome says that he was then
‘adolescentulus,’ and was born in the year 340, it is supposed that
this could not have been later than 355; but this is a mistake arising
from overlooking the lax sense in which Jerome uses the word
‘adolescentulus,’ which he stretches into very mature age. He uses the
expressions of ‘puer’ and ‘adolescens’ for himself when he was at
least thirty years old. St. Jerome was in Gaul at only one period of
his life, and that we know from other circumstances must have been
about the period of Theodosius’s conquest. That the Atecotti were
inhabitants of the district between the walls appears from the fact
that they only joined the invading tribes after the latter had been
four years in possession of that territory; and that no sooner was it
again wrested from the invaders by Theodosius, than we find them
enlisted in the Roman army.

Footnote 95:

The three bodies of infantry were the Victores Juniores Britanniciani,
the Primani Juniores, and Secundani Juniores. The six bodies of
cavalry, the Equites Catafractarii Juniores, the Equites Scutarii
Aureliaci, the Equites Honoriani Seniores, the Equites Stablesiani,
the Equites Syri, and the Equites Taifali. The Equites Catafractarii
were stationed at Morbium, supposed by Horsley to be Templeburgh on
the south bank of the river Don. The provinces are twice given in the
Notitia, and the order is the same in both—Maxima Cæsariensis,
Valentia, Britannia Prima, Britannia Secunda, Flavia Cæsariensis. The
position usually assigned to these provinces rests entirely upon the
authority of the spurious Richard of Cirencester, and involves the
supposition that when Constantine divided the provinces into four, he
substituted the name of Maxima Cæsariensis for that of Lower Britain,
and divided Upper Britain into three provinces, forming the district
of Wales into a separate province called Britannia Secunda; but if the
order in the Notitia is geographical, and proceeds from north to
south, Maxima Cæsariensis is the most northerly, then Valentia and
Britannia Prima extend across the island from west to east. Then south
of them Britannia Secunda, and farther south Flavia Cæsariensis; and
thus, before Valentia was formed, Maxima Cæsariensis and Britannia
Prima would represent what had been Lower Britain, and the Dux
Britanniæ would command the troops within it; Britannia Secunda and
Flavia Cæsariensis what had been Upper Britain, and the Comes tractus
maritimi, the troops within it. The new province would be formed in
the west to meet the invasion in a new quarter from a new people, the
Scots; and a new commander, the Comes Britanniarum, or Count of the
two Britannias, would be placed there to protect the western frontier.

Footnote 96:

Incursantes Pictos et Scotos Maximus strenue superavit.—Prosper.
Aquit. _Gratian._ iv.

Footnote 97:

... Quæ Saxona frenat
Vel Scotum legio ... (xxxi. 89).
Me quoque vicinis pereuntem gentibus, inquit,
Munivit Stilichon.... (xxii. 250).
Venit et extremis legio prætenta Britannis
Quæ Scoto dat fræna truci, ferroque notatas
Perlegit exsangues Picto moriente figuras
... Ne tela timerem
Scotica, ne Pictum tremerem, ne litore toto
Prospicerem dubiis venturum Saxona ventis (xxii. 253).

Footnote 98:

Of the four bodies of Attecotti in the Roman army, the first two were
those probably enrolled by Theodosius, and seen by St. Jerome in Gaul.
The two last, which are termed Honoriani, must, from their name, have
been enrolled by Stilicho, the minister of Honorius. Orosius called
the latter ‘Barbari ... qui quondam in fœdus recepti atque in militiam
adlecti Honoriaci vocabantur’ (Oros. vii. 40). Thus, on the two
occasions in which the territory between the walls was recovered,
Attecotti were enrolled in the Roman army. They were Barbari who
ravaged Britain, when the Barbarians occupied this part of the
province. They were ‘in fœdus recepti et in militiam adlecti’ when the
Romans recovered it—a combination only applicable to the
half-provincial half-independent tribes between the walls; and they
were probably the same people whom Ptolemy called the Ottedeni and
Gadeni, who extended from the southern wall to the Firth of Forth. The
same word seems to enter into the composition of the names Ottedeni
and Attecotti.

Footnote 99:

The army is mentioned in Britain in 406. Stilicho was consul the
preceding year. The Notitia Imperii refers to a state of matters after
Theodosius, for the province of Valentia is mentioned, and the army
there described must have been in Britain at this time.

Footnote 100:

Adversus hos Constantinus Constantem filium suum, proh dolor! ex
monacho Cæsarem factum, cum barbaris quibusdam, qui quondam in fœdus
recepti atque in militiam adlecti, Honoriaci vocabantur, in Hespanias
misit.—Orosius, vii. 40.

Footnote 101:

This account of the usurpation of Constantine, and its consequences,
is taken from Zosimus and Olympiodorus, two contemporary historians.
The opinion generally entertained that the Roman troops returned to
Britain after the year 410 rests upon no direct authority, and is
opposed to the testimony of those contemporary historians. Mr. Bruce,
in his _Roman Wall_, makes the pertinent remark (43): ‘The series of
coins found in the stations of the north of England, and in the camps
and Roman cities of the south, extends from the earlier reigns of the
Empire down to the times of Arcadius and Honorius, and then ceases.
Any legion coming later must have been destitute of treasure.’

The mistake has arisen from the false chronology of the invasions of
the Scots and Picts, and of the assistance of the Romans in repelling
them, applied to the narrative of Gildas. No dates are given in the
work of Gildas; but if the mind is disabused of preconceived
conceptions in this respect, it is impossible to compare Gildas’s
narrative with the notices of the legion sent by Stilicho, and of the
army which elected Constantine, the attack which followed, and the
repelling of the invaders by the provincial Britons, without seeing
the absolute identity of the events.

The following comparison will show this more clearly:—

Roman and Greek Authors. Narrative of Gildas.
383 Maximus revolts. Revolt of Maximus, who
withdraws the army with the
youth from Britain.
387 Withdraws Roman army from
Britain.
396 A legion sent by Stilicho, who First devastation of Picts and
drive back Picts and Scots, Scots. Britons apply for
and garrison wall. assistance. A legion sent, who
build northern wall.
402 Legion withdrawn. Legion withdrawn.
Second devastation of Picts and
Scots.
Britons again apply for
assistance.
406 A Roman army in Britain — Roman troops sent, who fortify
stationed ‘per lineam valli.’ southern wall.
407 Constantine withdraws Roman Roman troops withdrawn, ‘never
army. to return.’
Picts seize up to wall.
Break through wall and ravage.
409 Gerontius invites Barbarians. Provincials take courage and
Honorius frees province. repel them.
Provincials raise and repel Vortigern invites Saxons.
invaders.