Mons Graupius Identified

Previous Section

Factor 1. The Primary Source: Tacitus’s The Agricola

By 82 AD the governor Agricola had already spent three long years campaigning and subduing the tribes of what is now southern Scotland.
In these years the Imperial directive he had received – Governors followed and enforced Imperial foreign policy, they did not create it - had undergone a staccato beat of stop followed by start followed by stop caused by a rapid succession of Emperors to power.

First the old warhorse Emperors Vespasian died and he was succeeded by his son Titus who himself soon followed, dying in suspicious circumstances shortly thereafter. Upon this he was succeeded by his younger brother Domitian.

It is a matter of debate and interpretation as to exactly why Agricola cast his eyes north of the Forth Clyde line in 82 AD. Some reckon the new Emperor will have wished to see military success auguring his ascendancy to power. Others reckon that Agricola – who must have realised that his own extraordinarily lengthy tenure in the post of governor would soon be nearing its end - strove for a confrontation with the fabled Caledonians. In the provocative manner in which he did so he actively initiated the chain of events where military success in battle could be pursued and the attendant glory secured.

After his death in 93 AD the life and achievements of Agricola were recorded in a funerary eulogy by the noted orator- his son in law and future senator- Tacitus in or around 98 AD.

Luckily Tacitus work has survived substantially complete and in it he dwells in some detail on his father- in- laws Scottish campaigns and in particular on the battle he won against the Caledonians at Mons Graupius.

It is therefore a unique source of information for those keen to understand the Battle of Mons Graupius better and required reading for those who would take the well trodden path of trying to identify the location where the fateful encounter took place.

Modern revisionist historians attempt to muddy matters. Some question if the battle even took place, some others take the unsustainable view that “we should grow up and throw out Tacitus”. Rarely has such detailed primary Roman material been so haughtily dismissed!

What is certain is this. As a funerary eulogy a degree of prudence should be exercised in many respects concerning the fine detail contained within “The Agricola”. The work was originally designed to mark and indeed praise the life and deeds of the man Iulius Agricola and as Cornelius Tacitus was “family” and actively undertaking the cursus honorium he stood to gain in no small measure through any reflected prestige the work engendered.

Tacitus is remarkably forthright in describing this work as a piece of “filial piety”, and while it boastfully extols the virtues and deeds of the great man in a way we are not used to in this cynical modern era, it should be borne firmly in mind that this is simply what all ancient eulogies did.

There was nothing extraordinary or out of the normal in what Tacitus undertook to do to the reputation of his father in law.

Rare were such works that dwelt on the failures and examples of poor judgement made by the deceased, or those that took time out to praise the deeds and achievements of those other than the subject. Those would be expected to be covered in other types of work or indeed in their own eulogies.

By not recognising this, modern scholars have criticised Tacitus’s work - a “garrulous embroiderer” to one. Interestingly Tacitus describes such attacks on eulogies in ancient times hinting that the same may be expected for his. Insightful prophecy indeed!

Many people struggle with the dated style of Tacitus’s diction, and the quantity of stock standard phraseology and metaphor contained in it which makes the work appear alien to the modern reader.
It is a work of its time and we should not allow this to deflect us from the core story within the text, while exercising caution in fully accepting some of the grander claims made there. For example the numbers of enemies slain as well the great mans ubiquitous energies and abilities. He is unlikely for instance to have, as claimed, planned all and every fort sight that was built during his term in office.

Other parts, notably the pre battle speeches are pieces of pure theatre and most certainly literary invention designed to fill out the plot and raise the tempo of the piece in anticipation of the battle. Sadly, Calgacus, the Caledonian warlord is most probably an invention too, fabricated to create an individual to enable the Roman public to identify with the opponents leadership – it would in reality have been a council of tribal elders from the many tribes present – and as an individual counterpoint to Agricola himself.

However what has to be borne in mind is that the work is a piece of “oration”. As such it was intended for verbal public delivery to the ordinary citizens of Rome, not merely published as reading material restricted to the salons of the elite in Rome.
Its compositional style and the stock standard phraseology it commonly uses is also readily found in other ancient works and would not be thought at the time any the less of for it.

Those who criticise it for a lack of fine detail have not recognised that the piece was aimed at an audience of the ancient era which was not particularly interested in forensic levels of detail on foreign landscapes and the complex military manoeuvres that took place there.

For the time the contents were sufficient to give a context meeting its audience’s expectations, while the latter would slow the pace of a narrative which Tacitus clearly strove to keep both fast moving and interesting.

Critically, we must not lose sight of the fact that many of those who would have heard the piece at the time will have been intimately involved in the events being described.

We can reasonably expect them to tacitly wink an eye but at the same time still nod along in agreement with some of Tacitus magnified boasts as clearly this would reflect well on themselves by association.
What we cannot however expect is for them to have accepted a fiction which was a fabrication of complete fable no matter how skillfully it was woven within a web of clever wordsmithing.

Cornelius Tacitus work “The Agricola” therefore is something we dismiss out of hand only at our peril and its survival to the modern era is a rare and great boon.

NEXT SECTION: The Agricola

Return to the Contents

©2009 Roman Scotland. All Rights Reserved
First Published February 2009

SPQR