Roman Ireland
The 12th-century former inner gatehouse at Chester Castle is known as the "Agricola Tower", but of course the tower itself has nothing to do with Gnaeus Julius Agricola (13 June AD 40 to 23 August AD 93), a Roman general and governor of the province of Britannia from AD 78-84, so why name it after him?
Agricola is a well-known Roman figure due to the works of his son-in-law, the Roman historian and politician Publius Cornelius Tacitus, and certainly had close contacts with the Roman army in Britain. It is worth noting at the outset that Tacitus' eulogy/biography may be biased, but if he is he hides it fairly well to superficial inspection, except that he paints a gloomy picture of the relationship between Agricola and the Emperor Domitian (who had just been assassinated when the biography was written). There have been endless debates about how far Tacitus can be trusted but they are outside the scope of this article. It is also worth noting that "Agricola" was a standard text for many Victorian's learning latin and supported prejudices about the benefits of the Empire educating more primitive people (in his case the Welsh and the Scots).
Agricola is almost unique among non-ruling Romans in that a full biography of him exists. The majority of other Romans on which we have a similar level of detail are various Caesars. At Bath, his Victorian statue stands with those of a few Caesars who briefly visited Britain, while Agricola spent fifteen years of his career here, first as an officer, then a legionary commander and finally as governor. Despite this, apart from the biography the only evidence for his existence in Britain is an inscription from St Albans, a writing tablet from Carlisle and a lead pipe from Chester bearing his name as discussed below.
The Tower
The tower itself has rich historical associations. It is described at length in Samuel Lewis's 1831 Topographical Dictionary of England:
- Of the ancient castle, built by the Conqueror, there remains only a large square tower, called "Julius Agricola's Tower," now used as a magazine for gunpowder. Though of modern appearance, having been newly fronted, it is undoubtedly of great antiquity, and interesting as the probable place of confinement of the Earl of Derby, and the place in which Richard II., and Margaret, Countess of Richmond, were imprisoned. In the second chamber James II. heard mass, on his tour through this part of the kingdom, a short time previously to the Revolution. This apartment, when opened after many years of disuse as a chapel, exhibited, from the richness of its decorations, a splendid appearance, the walls being completely covered with paintings in fresco, as vivid and beautiful as when executed; and the roof, from the fine effect produced by the ribs of the groined arches, springing elegantly from slender pillars with capitals in a chaste and curious style, was equally striking.
Lewis is right about Derby, Richard II and James II, but probably gets Margaret, Countess of Richmond mixed-up with Eleanor Chobham the Dutchess of Gloucester. Over the years the tower had been known as "Julius Caesar's Tower" or "Agricola's Tower". It is very clearly, from its architecture dated to the transition between the Romansque style to the Early English (so about 1190-1210). William Camden wrote, about 1590:
- "But to testifie the Romanes magnificence, there are remaining indeede at this day very few tokens, besides pavements of foure square checker worke: howbeit in the former ages it presented many, which Ranulph a Monke of this Citie shall tell you out of his Polychronicon in these his owne words: There be waies heere under the ground vaulted marvelously with stone worke, chambers having arched roofes over had, huge stones engraven with the names of ancient men. Heere also are sometimes digged up peeces of money coined by Julius Caesar and other famous persons, and stamped with their inscriptions."
The Polychronicon was written by Chester monk Ranulf Higden (c.1280 - c.1363). In Daniel King's "Vale Royal", written c.1651, the castle is described as follows:
- "Upon the south side of the city, near unto the said water of Dee, and upon a high bank or rock of stone, is mounted a strong and stately aud round in form; the base-court likewise enclosed with a circular wall, which to this day retaineth one testimony of the Romans magnificence, having therein a fair and ancient square tower; which, by testimony of all writers I have hitherto met withal, beareth the name of Julius Caesar's Tower. ..a fair draw-well of water in the middest of the court, divers sweet and dainty orchards and gardens, besides much of the ancient buildings, for want of care, fallen to ruin and decay."
It therefore seems that the name "Agricola Tower" dates from after the publication of the "Vale Royal" in 1651 and Lewis writing in the 1830's. In fact a search of some of the early guidebooks to Chester finds plenty of references to Agricola the general, but it is only in Seacome (1828) that the tower is mentioned as Julius Caesar's or Agricola's. Earlier writers such as Broster, Pigot and Hanshall do not mention it by name. Hughes in 1858 again mentions both names, but seems to prefer "Julius Caesar's Tower". Ormerod does not mention it as Agricola's Tower in his original text of 1819 (Julius Caesar gets the credit), but in Thomas Helsby's 1882 second edition it has become Agricola's Tower in the alternative. Thereafter it is generally referred to as the Agricola Tower although E. W. Cox in an 1895 paper refers to it as "Caesar's Tower". Some of the less well-written Victorian guidebooks mention that it is thought to be Roman, but these are so full of other errors that they can be discounted.
It is probably true that by late Georgian or Victorian times it would have been known to many writing guidebooks that Julius Caesar is highly unlikely to have visited anywhere much north of the Thames and following his "invasion" in 54 BC left no living Roman forces behind. They might also have been misled by Richard of Cirencester's De Situ Britanniae ("On the Situation of Britain") which was actully a forgery by Charles Bertram. The text was treated as a legitimate and major source of information on Roman Britain from the 1750s through the 19th century, when it was progressively debunked. Effects from the forgery can still be found in works on British history and it is generally credited with having named the "Pennine" Mountains. By late Victorian times the name "Agricola Tower" seems to have been firmly established.
Bertram's local influence was that his fake map of the area around Chester led some of the early members of the Natural History society astray. His map shows no mouth of the Mersey being present in Roman times leading to the theory being perpetuated that the Mersey at the time discharged into the Dee via the "Backford Gap". The Mersey possibly did flow this way during the Ice Ages, but not, as some Victorians believed, continue this course up to sometime around the year 400.
Agricola
Gnaeus Julius Agricola was born AD 40 and "came from" Forum Julii (Fréjus), on the Cote d'Azur, Transalpine Gaul. Latin can be difficult to translate, so he may have been born in Rome.
He was the son of Lucius Julius Graecinus, a senator who was executed by Caligula for refusing to prosecute one of the emperor’s personal enemies, possibly in the months before Agricola was actually born. His mother was Julia Procilla. Both parents were wealthy. Around AD 52 he moved with his mother to Marseilles for his education. Marseilles, previously a Greek colony, was probably a far more relaxed place than Rome and was notable as having been the base from which Pytheas had explored the waters around Britain.
Being from the senatorial class Agricola began his career in Roman public life, aged 18 as a military tribune of which six were assigned to each legion and occupied the rank above centurions and below the legionary commander. Of these, the senatorial tribune was effectively the second in command of the legion. In Chester the tribunes probably lived along the south side of Eastgate Street. Agricola served in Britain under governor Gaius Suetonius Paulinus from 58 to 62. He was probably attached to the Legio II Augusta, but was chosen to serve on Suetonius's staff and thus almost certainly participated in the suppression of Boudica's uprising in 61. At the time Legio II Augusta was probably based at Exeter, and this is not the same as Legio II Adiutrix. Who would only be stationed at Chester c.74/77 - 86/87. Legio XX was at the time based at Usk. Exeter was in a quiet part of the country and did not take part in Suetonius' campaign into Wales, but the young Agricola appears to have been selected by Suetonius to accompany him in the field. Tacitus states that they "shared a tent". This, and other evidence indicates that Agricola enjoyed the benefits of some patronage and it has been suggested that his father had been a friend of Suetonius. Although there is no conclusive archaeological evidence, the Romans may well have used the harbour and crossing-point at Chester during the Welsh campaign, defending them perhaps by a small fort. If so, their occupation then is likely to have been short-lived, since the Boudiccan uprising in 60 demanded the governor's immediate attention elsewhere and an abrupt cessation to his campaigns in north Wales.
Returning from Britain to Rome in 62, Agricola married Domitia Decidiana, a woman of noble birth. Their first child was a son. Agricola was appointed as quaestor in 64, which he served in the province of Asia under the corrupt proconsul Lucius Salvius Otho Titianus (brother of the later emperor Otho). While he was there, his daughter, Julia Agricola, was born, but his son died shortly afterwards. He was tribune of the plebs in 66 and praetor in June 68.
During the civil war of 69 AD, Agricola supported Vespasian, possibly another friend of his father. His mother was killed during this war when Otho's rampaging sailors raided her estate in Liguria. After Vespasian had established himself as emperor, Agricola was appointed to the command of the Legio XX Valeria Victrix, stationed in Britain, in place of Marcus Roscius Coelius, who had stirred up a mutiny against the governor, Marcus Vettius Bolanus. Legio XX would only move to Chester c.90, and in 71, and when Agricola was appointed commander may still have been based at Usk, but by 75 had moved to Viroconium Cornoviorum. It is very likely that Agricola was in command when they moved.
Britain had revolted during the year of civil war, and Bolanus was (according to Tacitus) a "mild" governor. If fact, his legions may simply have been under-strength due to the refusal of Legio XX to fight. Agricola reimposed discipline on the legion and helped to consolidate Roman rule. Placating the rebellious Legio XX seems to have been done without decimating them. Bolanus was replaced by a "more aggressive" governor, Quintus Petillius Cerialis who brought back Legio II Adiutrix, who were originally based at Lincoln but soon moved to build their fortress at Chester. With the benefit of now having control of a legion prepared to fight, Agricola was able to display his talents as a commander in campaigns against the Brigantes in northern England. A main adversary was Venutius. Cerialis appears to have given Agricola control of more than just Legio XX including the Ala Sebosiana (cavalry), who probably accompanied on a thrust up the north-west coast towards Carlisle where he founded a fort. The campaign was probably supported by the Classis Britannica and Legio II who had been formed at least in part from marines. Acting as an essential reserve force (the meaning of Adiutrix), supplying the northward-moving army by sea, building the fortress at Chester and perhaps preparing for the conquest of Ireland, the men of the Legio II are unlikely to have been heavily used by Agricola in his northern campaigns.
When his command ended in 73, Agricola was enrolled as a patrician and appointed to govern Gallia Aquitania (southwest France, between the Pyrenees and the Loire). There he stayed for almost three years. In 76 or 77, he was recalled to Rome and appointed suffect consul, and betrothed his daughter to Tacitus. The following year, Tacitus and Julia married; Agricola was appointed to the College of Pontiffs, and returned to Britain for a third time, now as its governor (Legatus Augusti pro praetore). He would be governor for the uncommonly long period of seven years.
Arriving in midsummer of 77, Agricola discovered that the Ordovices of north Wales had virtually destroyed the Roman cavalry stationed in their territory. Despite being advised of the danger he immediately moved against them and defeated them, carrying out a campaign of slaughter to the point where the Ordovices were almost completely wiped out. Agricola also expanded Roman rule north into Caledonia (modern Scotland). In the summer of 79, he pushed his armies to the estuary of the "River Taus", usually interpreted as the Firth of Tay, virtually unchallenged, and established some forts. Though their location is left unspecified, the close dating of the fort at Elginhaugh in Midlothian makes it a possible candidate. He established himself as a good administrator by reforming the widely corrupt corn levy as well as through his military successes. He introduced Romanising measures, encouraging communities to build towns on the Roman model and gave a Roman education to sons of native nobility; albeit, as Tacitus notes, for the cynical reason of pacifying the aggressive tribes in Britannia for the servitude of Rome.
In the summer of 83, Agricola faced the massed armies of the Caledonii, led by Calgacus, at the Battle of Mons Graupius. Curiously, Tacitus wrote a speech which he attributed to Calgacus, saying that he gave it in advance of the battle. The speech describes the exploitation of Britain by Rome and rouses his troops to fight (against Agricola). The speech ends with a much quoted passage:
- "Robbers of the world, having by their universal plunder exhausted the land, they rifle the deep. If the enemy be rich, they are rapacious; if he be poor, they lust for dominion; neither the east nor the west has been able to satisfy them. Alone among men they covet with equal eagerness poverty and riches. To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a desolation and call it peace."
In 82/83 Agricola established a fort at Inchtuthil overlooking the north bank of the River Tay in Scotland and stationed Legio XX there. Agricola returned to Rome in 85. He was offered the governorship of the province of Africa but declined it, either due to ill health or, as Tacitus claims, the machinations of Domitian. There is no historical source describing the decades that followed Agricola's recall. Even the name of his replacement is unknown. Not long after Agricola's recall from Britain, the Roman Empire entered into war with the Kingdom of Dacia in the East. Reinforcements were needed, and in 87 or 88, Domitian ordered a large-scale strategic withdrawal of troops in the British province. In the early 80s part of the Second Legion had been posted to the Rhine frontier. Although there was probably nothing new in the sending of detachments to other parts of the Empire while the main body of the legion remained in Britain, in the late 80s, the remaining fighting strength of the Legio II was sent to the Danube. Placed as it was in reserve at Chester, well south of the frontier zone, the Second was the legion which could most easily be spared. Its removal appears to have been related to the gradual abandonment of recent conquests in Scotland. Agricola would die in AD 93 aged 53. Domitian was assassinated on 18 September 96 in a conspiracy by court officials.
The fortress at Inchtuthil was dismantled and the Caledonian forts and watchtowers abandoned, moving the Roman frontier some 120 kilometres (75 mi) further south. The army command may have resented Domitian's decision to retreat, but to him the Caledonian territories never represented anything more than a loss to the Roman treasury. Tacitus' statement in his account of Roman history between 68 AD and 98 AD: Perdomita Britannia et statim missa (Britain was completely conquered and immediately let go), denotes his bitter disapproval of Domitian's failure to unify the whole island under Roman rule after Agricola's successful campaign. The legionary depot at Wroxeter was abandoned c. 90, and Legio XX, Valeria Victrix, established itself instead at Chester, possibly after a short stay at Gloucester.
A gallery of the Agricola Tower
Doorway of the Agricola Tower
Ground floor of the Tower
Up the stairs..
...down the stairs
The Chapel of St Mary de Castro
Fresco in the Agricola Tower: "The Visitation"
The upper room at the Agricola Tower
Markings in upper room at the Agricola Tower
Ireland
The name Hibernia (the Latin name for Ireland) was taken from Greek geographical accounts. During his exploration of northwest Europe (c. 320 BC), Pytheas of Massalia called the island Iérnē (written Ἰέρνη).
Rome knew of the existence of Ireland, but never annexed Hibernia into the Roman Empire. It did exert influence on the island, although only a small amount of evidence of this has survived.
The geographer Ptolemy, in his "map" of the 1st century AD, called the island Iouerníā (written Ἰουερνία, where "ου"/ou stands for w). Ptolemy pinpointed the coastal settlements and tribes of Ireland, showing a knowledge that (it has been suggested) only merchants could have achieved in that century. Ptolemy's work may have been produced with actual "maps" but none have been discovered. Instead, the present form of the map was reconstructed from Ptolemy's coordinates and written description.
Additionally, there are many Roman archaeological objects (mainly jewellery and Roman coins) found in areas of central and southern Ireland (such as Tara and Cashel), that reveal a relationship. Roman coins have also been found at Newgrange. Given that Chester would later become a major trading post with Ireland (see: Chester and Ireland), can any links be found between Roman Chester and Ireland?
Evidence
There is no firm evidence that the Romans invaded Ireland, and one would expect that if there were any long-term presence of the Romans then there would be clear archaeological remains. There is however clear evidence that the Romans came close to an expedition across the Irish Sea. A logical place from which to mount such an expedition would be Chester. A difficulty with such an invasion is that afterwards the Romans would have to maintain an occupation force of probably a single legion, which would be effectively isolated and unavailable once in place. Apart from Britain, Ireland would be the only large island on the border of the Empire.
Ptolemy, who wrote towards the middle of the second century, devotes a special chapter to Ireland. He mentions ten 'cities', of which seven are said to be inland, but of the seven two are called "Regia" and are obviously the capitals of chiefs about which Ptolemy knew nothing. He mentions further sixteen tribes, four of which repeat names of cities in their own names. He enumerates, lastly, six headlands and fifteen estuaries. The identification of these forty-seven names is not easy. A few can be equated with medieval or modern names with some certainty. Others are wholly doubtful, but we know enough to see that Ptolemy's knowledge of the south and west coast was less than his knowledge of the north and east. Nearly half of his names belong to the northern two‑thirds of the east coast, and to the eastern part of the north coast. We do not know whether this knowledge was simply gathered from traders or was a relic of information gathered with the intention of invasion.
Tacitus
The Roman historian Tacitus was the son-in-law of Agricola and therefore had direct access to his sources. He is writing shortly after the death of Agricola and his audience would have included many who lived through the events discussed. He mentions that Gnaeus Julius Agricola, while governor of Roman Britain (AD 78 - 84), entertained an exiled (and unnamed) Irish prince ("regulus"), thinking to use him as a pretext for a possible conquest of Ireland:
- "In the fifth year of the war Agricola himself crossed in the leading ship, and subdued in a series of victories tribes hitherto unknown. In that part of Britain which looks towards Ireland, he posted some troops, hoping for fresh conquests rather than fearing attack, inasmuch as Ireland, being between Britain and Spain and conveniently situated for the seas round Gaul, might have been the means of connecting with great mutual benefit the most powerful parts of the empire. Its extent is small when compared with Britain, but exceeds the islands of our seas. In soil and climate, in the disposition, temper, and habits of its population, it differs but little from Britain. We know most of its harbours and approaches, and that through the intercourse of commerce. One of the petty kings of the nation, driven out by internal faction, had been received by Agricola, who detained him under the semblance of friendship till he could make use of him. I have often heard him say that a single legion with a few auxiliaries could conquer and occupy Ireland, and that it would have a salutary effect on Britain for the Roman arms to be seen everywhere, and for freedom, so to speak, to be banished from its sight." (Agricola, 24)
This reads very much like a repetition of an actual list of well thought-out arguments put forward by Agricola for an invasion. The involvment of an exiled prince mirrors the case of Cartimandua, queen of the Brigantes. She came to power during the time period that Rome was campaigning against Britain. She was widely influential during her reign. As ruler of the Brigantes, she united various British tribes that eventually surrendered their loyalty to Rome. It is also worth noting that Agricola may have gained experience of naval operations during his advance on Carlisle with the assistance of Legio II and the Classis Britannica.
At about the same time, Juvenal (Satires 2.159–160) specifically tells us, Roman "arms had been taken beyond the shores of Ireland" and there has been much debate as to what is actually meant by this comment. Juvenal may have served in Britain under Agricola. He supposedly wrote this around 100 CE, some two decades after Agricola and his ‘Irish Prince’ could have landed there.
Drumanagh
In recent years archaeology has challenged the belief that the Romans never set foot on the island. Roman and Romano-British artefacts have been found primarily in Leinster, notably a fortified site on the promontory of Drumanagh, fifteen miles north of Dublin - perhaps the name of the fortified promontory itself holds clues as to its Roman origin: Drumanagh has as a possible root (D)ruman, which could be a reference to Romans (however Gaelic "Droim Meánach" means "Ridge of Meanach", giving another explanation). Drumanagh has produced a number of artefacts of Roman origin, found during illegal metal detecting. These included coins dating to the reigns of Titus (74-81 CE), Trajan (98-117 CE) and Hadrian (117-138 CE), as well as Roman brooches and copper ingots. If Agricola did land in Ireland it would have been during the period that Titus was emperor. It has been sggested that Drumanagh was ptolemy's town of Manapia. The evidence for this is strong, including the name and the fact that in the Ulster cycle tale "The Wooing of Emir" a Gaulish merchant residing at or near Drumanagh is named as "Forgall Monach".
In addition, a group of burials on Lambay Island, just off the coast near Drumanagh, contained Roman brooches and decorative metalware of a style also found in Roman Britain from the late first century (this could be invasion or trade). The source for one of the objects at Lambay, a decorated mount, might have been the Gaulish tribe of Menapii at the mouth of the Rhine. The distribution of these mounts heads straight through midland Britain to Lambay. It is possible therefore that the invaders included a substantial element of Gaulish Menapian freebooters, ex-auxiliaries from Agricola's army (there were Menapian auxiliaries in Britain).
There are at least two good reasons why Ireland would not have been attractive to the Romans. First, purely economically Ireland was not of particular interest: it did not have rich natural resources that could be plundered. Secondly, the Irish posed no threat to the Roman Empire. Ireland could have been easily invaded, but it would have brought the Romans nothing but unnecessary expense and as noted above the isolation of troops that might suddenly be needed elsewhere.
Túathal Techtmar
Túathal Techtmar ("the legitimate"), was the son of Fíachu Finnolach, and himself a High King of Ireland according to medieval Irish legend and historical tradition. He is said to be the ancestor of the Uí Néill (O'Neil) and Connachta (Connor) dynasties through his grandson "Conn of the Hundred Battles". There is no hard evidence for his actual existence.
The political situation in Ireland at the time was that a single “High” figure took the throne, with the lesser Kings of Ireland’s four provinces underneath him: at least that was the idea - in reality the situation could be considerably more complicated. According to legend, Fíachu faced an internal rebellion of all four sub-kings, was defeated and killed with the King of Ulster, Elim mac Conrach, taking over in his place. Túathal is said to have been exiled from Ireland either unborn or as a child, but to have returned, defeated the then king and waged extensive war. In one version his mother Eithne, daughter of the king of Alba (Scotland), who was pregnant, fled home to Alba, where she gave birth to Tuathal Techtmar. Tacitus does not mention her at all, which is a little odd given that both Túathal and Agricola were born as a "Widow's Son". Back in Ireland, Elim’s reign was turned out to be a harsh one, as famine struck the land which was "without corn, fruit, milk or fish", seen as divine punishment apparently for the deposition of the rightful King. Unfortunately, the mythical nature of the tale means that it appears in several versions and there is at least one earlier story with different characters which closely matches the narrative of Túathal.
The Romans were known to use "restoration of an exile" as a pretext of invasion. For example, one reason given for the invasion of Britain in 43 CE was to reinstate Verica, the exiled king of the Atrebates.
According to one version of the Irish myth Túathal returned home to claim his birthright, possibly landing in Malahide Bay, Dublin, with a sizable force. Joining up with two brothers, Fiacha Cassan and Findmall, who had been raiding the Irish coast for the last few decades he marched with his army and their 600 men to Tara, the seat of the High Kings, where he had himself declared the monarch of the country. Elim, naturally, wasn’t inclined to let him and a battle was fought between the two at the Hill of Achall, near Tara, where Elim was defeated and killed, along with most of his army. Despite the death of the “usurper”, Túathal seemingly still had a lot to do to secure his birthright. In line with exaggerated depictions of his martial prowess – he is recorded as fighting over a hundred battles against the provinces, which even if it is taken from aggrandised raids seems fanciful – he eventually made safe his rule, and proceeded to make a massive re-organisation of the land, introducing new laws and making a new province from territory taken from the others. This was “Mide” (Meath), which would be the private domain of the High King himself. He went on to build many settlements and forts to help shore up his dominion. Despite these constant victories, fort-building and general sense of being a good and just King, he was never free of war and forced to fight rebellious provinces again and again. It was in just such a fight that he was killed, against Mal mac Rochride of Ulster, at the Battle of Mag Line, Antrim, sometime in the early second century AD. The story is repeated again: Mal took the High Kingship, and was later killed and supplanted by Túathal’s son Fedlimid.
Both Roman sites at Drumanagh and Lambay are close to where the semi-mythical Túathal is supposed to have landed. Some other archaeological discoveries inside Ireland, including Roman jewellery and coins at Tara, the midland ritual complex, and at Clogher, further support the possibility of a Roman invasion of Ireland. It has been suggested that the distribution of Roman remains in Ireland fits well with the places associated with Túathal's campaign. The traditional date of his return is 76-80 CE.
Speculating somewhat, it is notable the the unique "Elliptical Building" in Chester (see below) bears some resemblance to the ritual structures at Tara, and comes from roughly the same period as the supposed invasion by Agricola and the presence of the "prince", who may (possibly) have been Túathal, in Britain. The lead pipe from the elliptic building is dated to 79 CE and, Tacitus (Chapter 24), as noted above, says that in 82 CE Gnaeus Julius Agricola "crossed the sea and defeated people hitherto unknown to the Romans". While he does not specify which sea they crossed (many scholars think that Tacitus refers to the Clyde or the Forth), it should be noted that after this statement, Tacitus writes only about Ireland for the remainder of the chapter, which suggests that the people he was referring to were, in fact, the Irish.
There are many problems with linking the legendary Túathal to the exiled prince mentioned (briefly) in Tacitus. The Irish legends make no mention of the Romans and if Agricola had managed to re-instate him as ruler of Ireland then surely Tacitus would have elaborated on it.
The Elliptical Building
Since it first came to light in 1939, the 'Elliptical Building' has been one of the great mysteries of Roman Chester, and indeed has been described as the most mysterious building in Roman Britain. It has been suggested that the entire layout of the city was designed so that it could be accommodated. The ruins of this unique building were first uncovered during the demolition of "slums" in 1939, the remainder was exposed during "rescue excavations" in the late 1960's. The Elliptical Building appears to be a unique building to Chester, as no other example of such a building is known to exist in the whole Roman Empire, and is of international importance. Its function is still not fully understood any evidence from it is highly valued. During the refurbishment of the Forum Shopping Center (1995) its foundation was once again uncovered. However much of the northern part of this unique building was destroyed during the construction of the underground car park beneath the Market Hall in the 1960's.
While the overall footprint is oblong, and fronted by a colonnaded portico. The shape of the central part of the building is roughly that of a "vesica piscis". That is the shape formed by the overlap of two circles. The core comprises 12 radiating chapel-like spaces that faced inward onto a colonnaded portico that supported an attic with sculptural decoration. These chambers were entered not by conventional doorways but by arched entrances 4 metres wide and nearly 6 metres high raised on massive stone piers. A little way into each room was a low wall which would have supported either a screen or balustrade. The workmanship was performed to a high standard with finely dressed stonework and good quality concrete used in the foundations. The building can be dated by the inscription on a lead water-pipe leading to the central courtyard fountain which records its manufacture:
- "during the ninth consulship of the emperor Vespasian and the seventh consulship of the emperor Titus, in the governorship of Gnaeus Julius Agricola" -
..the pipe is one of those mentioned above, now in the Grosvenor Museum), that is during the first half of AD 79.
The building work seems to have been stopped after a very short period of time. While the degree to which the construction of the building had progressed varied throughout the complex, in many cases work had hardly progressed beyond the laying of foundations and the completion of masonry up to ground level. In other places not even the foundation material had been laid. In no area had the process of forming the internal floors or external surfacing been started. The original drain from the fountain was re-routed during the early work, but this modification was incomplete when the building work stopped. The Elliptical Building was not the only construction project to be interrupted at this time; work on a massive complex to its east was clearly delayed as was the completion of buildings to the north. It has been suggested that the deployment of much of the Chester garrison, Legio II Adiutrix, to Scotland for Agricola’s campaigns (80-83) is the most likely explanation for this interruption. This would put the cessation of work before or around AD 79, meaning that at most around five years of work had been done on the site.
The site of the Elliptical Building lay derelict for most of the next 150 years, and many of the monolithic blocks of stone employed in the foundations of the colonnades and piers were removed for re-use elsewhere. Part of the site was briefly occupied by a group of timber workshop buildings. After the demolition of these workshops at the beginning of the 2nd century, the site of the Elliptical Building still remained derelict and was used as a general dumping-ground for various forms of rubbish. By the time the decision was taken to construct a new building on the area c AD 225 the rubbish was a metre deep. Gold-working crucibles were found at the north end of the building, together with a gold solidus of the Emperor (and usurper) Magnentius (350-353 AD). Remarkably, the design of the new building (c. 225) followed that of it's unfinished predecessor in some ways and was an improvement of it in others. It has been suggested that this must have meant that the designers of the new building had access to the plans of the original from a century and a half earlier. A small bath-house was found on the site, which further argues for a high-status association.
Alternative Theories
Some imaginative hypotheses have been put forward for the purpose of the building. These have have included a theater, a market-hall and a retirement palace for Cartimandua (ruled c. 43 – 69) following her ejection from Brigantia by the anti-Roman party. The theater theory is particularly ironic, as part of the redevelopment of the site in the 1960's placed the "Chester Gateway Theater" almost on top of the building. Others have speculated that the each of the twelve chambers around the central courtyard may have each had as its focus a statue of one of the principal deities of the Roman State - Jupiter, Juno, Mars, Minerva, Vesta, Diana, Apollo, Ceres, Neptune, Janus, Mercury, and either Dea Roma or Vulcan.
Other theories have suggested that the Ellipical Building was something to do with astrology, or that it was a palace (possibly for the provincial governor), a weapons-training school, a schola, or a market - have been proposed. However, none of these suggestions is really convincing. The form of the principal chambers endows the building with a monumental and commemorative, even quasi-religious character; an impression reinforced by the fact that the foundation of the courtyard fountain sealed a rock-cut trench which seems likely to have been the focus for a ritual ceremony associated with its inception.
Túathal and Chester
There are many examples from later times of exiles from one side of the Irish Sea, seeking and sometimes finding help from the other, or merely fleeing across it. Examples include Ingamund and other Vikings, Ælfgar, Harold Godwinson and Gruffydd ap Cynan.
There is no evidence that Túathal, if he even existed, was actually in Chester, but it does seem to have a contender for Gnaeus Julius Agricola's "capital" and there is the remarkable co-incidence of dates:
- ~74 CE: then governor of Roman Britain, Sextus Julius Frontinus constructed an "auxiliary fort" at Deva Victrix (Chester).
- 77 CE: Agricola becomes Governor of Britain;
- 79 CE: Elliptical building lead pipe (stamped on it);
- ~76-80 CE: Túathal returns to Ireland (traditional);
- 82 CE: Agricola "crosses the sea" (Tacitus);
The Annals of the Four Masters gives the date of Túathal's exile as 56 CE, his return as 76 CE and his death as 106 CE. Geoffrey Keating's Foras Feasa ar Érinn broadly agrees, dating his exile to 55 CE, his return to 80 CE and his death to 100 CE. The Lebor Gabála Érenn places him a little later, synchronising his exile with the reign of the Roman emperor Domitian (81–96 CE), his return early in the reign of Hadrian (122–138 CE) and his death in the reign of Antoninus Pius (138–161 CE). Agricola was governor of Roman Britain from 78–84 CE.
As noted above Tacitus mentions that Gnaeus Julius Agricola frequently said that Ireland could be conquered with "a single legion and a few auxiliary troops", which suggests the Romans expected some special advantage if they invaded Ireland. This could have been knowledge of local troop dispositions, geography and local rivalries, but could it also have been the presence on the Roman side of a credible claimant to the Kingship of Ireland.
This has led some to suggest that the Elliptical Building had been connected to this - a palace for a potential client king, with a design similar to the ritual site at Tara and a fountain that must have seemed magical at the time? A bauble to show Túathal the advantage of being a client of Rome?
Sadly, all traces of the Elliptical Building seem to have been destroyed by subsequent development of the shopping center contained in the ironically named "Forum".
Even if there was no invasion there was almost certainly trade. Tacitus states that Ireland’s "approaches and harbours are known from merchants who trade there". It is likely that the Irish exchanged items such foodstuffs, woollen garments, hides, slaves and even wolfhounds.
Tacitus claims Domitian ordered Agricola's recall in 85, Tacitus suggests that this was because his successes outshone the emperor's own modest victories in Germany. In 93, Agricola died on his family estates in Gallia Narbonensis aged fifty-three. He had never returned to Britain but was sent to quell disturbances on the Danube frontier. Rumours circulated attributing the death to a poison administered by or on behalf of the emperor Domitian, but no positive evidence for this was ever produced. Even so, the works of Tacitus were to strongly influence later views of Agricola as the noble soldier and Domitian as the evil emperor.
Following the governership of Agricola, it is unclear whether there was an unknown governor of Roman Britain, and very little is known of the next governor, Sallustius Lucullus - simply that the emperor Domitian had him executed for allowing a new type of lance to be named after him. Inchtuthil was abandoned around this time and Legio XX moved to Chester: it is likely that demands for troops elsewhere in the empire denied Sallustius enough manpower to continue to hold the far north. A single document mentions the next governor, Aulus Vicirius Proculus, and only in passing. In 122 Hadrian visited the island of Britain, and decreed numerous reforms for the province, which included the construction of the fortifications known as Hadrian's Wall with which Legio XX would be much involved.
Conclusions
The fact that Chester had Roman origins was known from an early date, even at the time when "historians" had only a partial view of the details of the Roman occupation. The biographical work of Tacitus gave Agricola a prominence not shared by others. How exactly he became associated with the former gatehouse of Chester Castle, which appears to have happened just before or during Victorian times, is not entirely clear, and may simply be that this was obviously a very old building and Agricola was associated with the foundation of Roman Chester. The only link between the legendary Túathal Techtmar and Agricola is an assumption based on a brief mention in Tacitus, who does state that Agricola had entertained plans to invade Ireland and been involved with an Irish exile, but does not name him or describe his return to Ireland. Chester would have been the logical place to base such an invasion, but if it had happened one would expect this to have been mentioned by historians, especially Tacitus. Whether the unique Elliptical Building played any part in the story is pure speculation and since its archaeology was presumably completely destroyed in the 1960s will probably never be known.
Sources and Links
Related Pages
Online
- Hibernia Romana? Ireland & the Roman empire;
- Tuathal Techtmar: a myth or ancient literary evidence for a Roman invasion;
- THE ROMAN ELLIPTICAL BUILDING AT CHESTER: DEVA;
- Hiberno-Roman relations;
- Ancient Rome and Ireland: (1913);
- Did the Roman Empire Invade Ireland?;
Books
- "Agricola: Architect of Roman Britain": Simon Turney (2022);
