2025 and all that . . . . matters Arthurian

2025 has been a relatively quiet year on the Arthurian front, a noticeable absences of new claims of having identified King Arthur's grave or the usual pseudo-historical books claiming to have identified the 'Real King Arthur'. I'm sure they will be back next year! We have had a remarkable development in scientific techniques in reading a lost Merlin manuscript stitched into the cover of an Elizabethan register without the need to unfold it. And there have been several academic works published.

Rare Merlin manuscript read for the first time in hundreds of years
In 2019 fragments of a manuscript were found hidden in the binding of a 16th-century Elizabethan archival register for nearly 400 years at Cambridge University Library. The fragile 13th century manuscript fragment was found to contain rare medieval stories of Merlin and King Arthur.

The manuscript was identified as part of the French-language Suite Vulgate du Merlin, part of the Lancelot-Grail cycle, which was a very popular medieval work but few now remain, has been identified as having been written between 1275 and 1315, a time when Arthurian romances were particularly popular among noblewomen, although the fragment is from a lost copy dated to around 1300.

'The Merlin', or the 'Merlin en Prose', or simply 'Prose Merlin', is the second part in the five part Lancelot-Grail cycle. The first section of the work recounts the life of Merlin and his efforts to promote the cause of Uther Pendragon, the father of Arthur, followed by Arthur’s ultimate rise to kingship and his coronation. The second section, called variously the 'Vulgate Suite de Merlin' also known as 'the Sequal section of the Prose Merlin', describes the events at Arthur’s court after his coronation, which serves as an introduction to the third part of the Lancelot-Grail cycle, entitled the 'Lancelot en prose'. The 'Vulgate Suite de Merlin' should not be confused with the Suite de Merlin or the Prophesies de Merlin which while treating similar material both stem from different textual traditions.

Today there are less than 40 surviving manuscripts of the Suite Vulgate du Merlin, with each one uniquely handwritten by individual medieval scribes. 

These fragments have now been digitised using cutting-edge techniques in a ground-breaking three-year project at Cambridge University Library. 

The medieval tale of Merlin tells the early years of King Arthur's court, positioned as a sequel to an earlier text written around 1200 in which Merlin is born a child prodigy with the gift of foresight and casts a spell to facilitate the birth of King Arthur, who proves his divine right to rule by pulling the sword from the stone. In the tale the magician becomes a blind harpist who later vanishes into thin air. He later reappears as a balding child who issues edicts to King Arthur wearing no underwear. Being the child of a woman impregnated by an incubus gave Merlin his shape-shifting powers. He asks to be Arthur's standard bearer on the battlefield. Arthur agrees and Merlin turns up with a magic, fire-breathing dragon.

After being recycled and repurposed in the 1500s as the cover for a property record owned by the Vanneck family of Heveningham from Huntingfield Manor in Suffolk, this rare manuscript fragment miraculously survived through the centuries after being folded, torn, and stitched into the binding of the book making it almost impossible for the experts at Cambridge to access it, read it, or confirm its origins without risking any damage in unpicking the binding.

Using  multispectral imaging (MSI), CT scanning and 3D modelling the researchers at the library were able to digitally capture the most inaccessible parts of the fragile parchment without unfolding or unstitching it. This preserved the 700 year old manuscript in situ and avoided irreparable damage while at the same time allowing the heavily faded fragment to be virtually unfolded, digitally enhanced and read for the first time in centuries in March 2025.

>> Lost manuscript of Merlin and King Arthur legend read for the first time after centuries hidden inside another book

Arthurian books published in 2025

The Arthurian World edited by Victoria Coldham-Fussell, et al, (Routledge, first paperback edition published 2025). This book includes several essays on the Arthurian legend, covering topics like Arthur in early Welsh tradition and post-medieval interpretations.

This collection provides an innovative and wide-ranging introduction to the world of Arthur by looking beyond the canonical texts and themes, taking instead a transversal perspective on the Arthurian narrative. Together, its thirty-four chapters explore the continuities that make the material recognizable from one century to another, as well as transformations specific to particular times and places, revealing the astonishing variety of adaptations that have made the Arthurian story popular in large parts of the world.

Divided into four parts—The World of Arthur in the British Isles, The European World of Arthur, The Material World of Arthur, and The Transversal World of Arthur — the volume tracks the legend’s movement across temporal, geographical, and material boundaries. Broadly chronological, each part views the unfolding Arthurian story through its own lens, while temporal and geographical overlaps between the sections underscore the proximity of these developments in the legend’s history.

Studies in Arthurian and Chronicle Traditions in Memory of Fiona Tolhurst, Edited by Dorsey Armstrong, K S Whetter (DS Brewer, 2025). A collection of essays from Boydell & Brewer that examines Arthurian and Chronicle texts.

Essays examining Arthurian and Chronicle texts, contexts, and reception, in honour of Fiona Tolhurst's contributions to Arthurian Studies. In her all-too-short but ground-breaking academic career, Fiona Tolhurst made significant contributions to the discipline of Arthurian Studies, advancing, amongst much else, understanding of Geoffrey of Monmouth, Arthurian Women, the English Mortes, and modern Arthuriana, including cinematic versions of the legend. The essays assembled here reflect her commitment to explication of Arthurian and Chronicle texts and contexts. Several engage with Geoffrey of Monmouth, examining, among other topics, the depiction of women in his narrative of British origins; the function of giants and significance of landscape and geography in his writings; the contrast between Geoffrey's Trojan-British empire and the Graeco-Egyptian foundation narratives of Scottish and Irish chronicles; and the reception and use of his writing from the sixteenth through nineteenth centuries. Other contributors consider characterization and politics in the Brut tradition and Malory; the puzzling dualities of the alliterative Morte; the reception of Malory's "Trystram"; continuities between medieval and modern readings of the Morte Darthur; and the uses, adaptation, and appropriation of Arthurian themes and ideals in the twenty-first century. 

King Arthur: Medieval British Literature and Modern Critical Tradition, Andrew Breeze (Uppsala Books, 2025). A scholarly analysis of the Arthurian legend from medieval sources to modern criticism, including chapters on Arthur's historicity, Merlin, and key texts like Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.

King Arthur: Medieval British Literature and Modern Critical Tradition is a book that revolutionizes our understanding of Britain’s history and early literature. It begins with a compelling demonstration of ‘King’ Arthur as no figure of legend, but a flesh-and-blood warrior of the sixth century. He was not a ruler, but a North British champion fighting other North Britons during the terrible ‘volcanic winter’ of 536-7, and dying a soldier’s death in the latter year at Camlan or Castlesteads on Hadrian’s Wall. Arguments for this are followed by chapters on Arthur in the literatures of medieval Britain as perceived by scholars of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. They include chapters on modern understanding of the Welsh Mabinogion, Geoffrey of Monmouth’s History of the Kings of Britain, Layamon’s Brut, the alliterative Morte Arthure, and Sir Thomas Malory’s prose Morte Darthure, the last printed in 1485 by William Caxton. Besides these is dramatic proof on the Arthurian romance Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, using evidence set out by Ann Astell to identify its author as the Cheshire magnate Sir John Stanley (d. 1414), who will have written it in late 1387 for Christmas revels that year at Chester Castle. Solving problems which have baffled scholars for centuries, King Arthur: Medieval British Literature and Modern Critical Tradition is a volume that will fundamentally alter our view of Britain’s past. 

King Arthur and the Languages of Britain: Examining the Linguistic Evidence - Bernard Mees, (Bloomsbury Academic, 2025)

Medievalists have denied the historical existence of King Arthur for over 50 years. Arthur and the Languages of Britaindemonstrates how linguistic evidence can be employed to see if the earliest historical records that mention Arthur are reliable. The book begins with an analysis of the evidence for the Anglo-Saxon invasions and the response of the Britons, and introduces the main methodological approaches employed in the linguistic analysis of historical records. 

It then provides evidence for Arthur as a Cumbric-speaker active in the region about Hadrian’s Wall, before assessing the linguistic evidence which supports the validity of the references to Arthur in the Welsh Annals and the Historia Brittonum. Bernard Mees reflects on how Arthur is recorded as having taken part in the Battle of Mount Badon, a site that has never been located, and dying at Camlann, now Castlesteads on Hadrian’s Wall. 

Mees uses linguistic analysis of the evidence recorded for the existence of Arthur to support the historical reliability of these records. Mees concludes with a summary of how Geoffrey of Monmouth created pseudo-historical stories from the references to Arthur in these early sources, turning Ambrosius Aurelianus into Merlin and Mordred into King Arthur’s nephew and the lover of his queen Guinevere. 

Arthurian Literature XL edited by K.S. Whetter and Megan G. Leitch (DS Brewer, 2025).
The 40th volume in a series of academic essays on Arthurian literature and history.

Appropriately for the journal’s fortieth milestone, this volume of Arthurian Literature offers an especially wide range of topics, from printers’ modifications in early Arthurian books to a study of archetypal characters in several linguistic traditions. It begins with the winner of the Derek Brewer Essay Prize, which has this year been awarded to an original and intriguing investigation of how and why Wynkyn de Worde (or various of his staff working under his direction) modified his 1529 printing of Sir Thomas Malory’s Le Morte Darthur. 

Thereafter, literary-critical explorations range across French, Welsh, and Middle English Arthurian literatures, including examinations of marriage in Chrétien’s Chevalier au Lion, Peredur in the Welsh Grail texts, fairies and cosmic providence in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, and the shifting degrees of agency possessed by Malory’s Gwenyvere. 

The volume also features a lively reconsideration of the Arthurian tomb at Glastonbury from the point of view of material culture, and an examination of Arthur’s hagiographical characterisation in Latin-Breton Saints Lives’. It closes with a survey of twentieth-century English-language retellings of Arthurian fiction that highlights female authors’ many contributions to the genre. 

 
Arthur, Origins, Identities and the Legendary History of Britain by Jean Blacker (Brill, 2024). A book addressing how Arthurian histories contributed to British identity. Although published in 2024 this book was awarded the Dhira B. Mahoney prize in 2025.

Geoffrey of Monmouth’s immensely popular Latin prose Historia regum Britanniae (c. 1138), followed by French verse translations – Wace’s Roman de Brut (1155) and anonymous versions including the Royal Brut, the Munich, Harley, and Egerton Bruts (12th -14th c.), initiated Arthurian narratives of many genres throughout the ages, alongside Welsh, English, and other traditions.

Arthur, Origins, Identities and the Legendary History of Britain addresses how Arthurian histories incorporating the British foundation myth responded to images of individual or collective identity and how those narratives contributed to those identities. What cultural, political or psychic needs did these Arthurian narratives meet and what might have been the origins of those needs? And how did each text contribute to a “larger picture” of Arthur, to the construction of a myth that still remains so compelling today?

Happy New Year!

* * *

Agricola and the Conquest of the North

The Return of Agricola
Our knowledge of the fortification and conquest of North Britain in the Flavian period is largely derived from the account of the Roman historian Publius Cornelius Tacitus (AD c.56-120). More commonly known simply as ‘Tacitus’ he wrote two major historical works, ‘Annals’ and ‘The Histories’ for which he is widely regarded by modern scholars as one of the greatest Roman historians. His other works include ‘Germania’ and a biography of his father-in-law Gnaeus Julius Agricola, ‘De vita et moribus Iulii Agricolae’ known as ‘The Agricola’ an account of the governor of Britain from AD 77-84, which has been largely accepted for many years as the historical narrative for the Roman conquest of Scotland. The Agricola has been described as a eulogy for his deceased father-in-law which made Agricola the best known of all governors of Britain and elevated him to the Flavian dynasty’s greatest military leader. However, Tacitus’s Agricola is generally accepted as a narrative history for the Roman conquest of North Britain.

Flavian Sites in Scotland (copyright David Breeze)

Agricola served in Britain on three occasions, as military tribune during the Boudiccan revolt, Legionary legate of Legio XX, and finally governor, the only senator to do have served all three ranks in the same province. Tacitus is our only near-contemporary source for this period of British history that presents Agricola during his term of office as provincial governor leading the 1st-century conquest of ‘Calendonia’, the term the Romans used for the region beyond the Solway-Tyne isthmus, modern Scotland. Such was Tacitus’s admiration of his father-in-law that he is often accused of bias by historians, as we have seen above, Tactitus is not-so-complimentary on Agricola's predecessors particularly Bolanus and provides just a single sentence on the governorship of Frontinus.

Following his recall from Britain as commander of Legio XX in AD 74 Agricola was sent to govern Aquitania. Two years later he was back in Rome and elected suffect consul. In AD 77 the historian Tactitus married Agricola’s daughter. Agricola was then appointed Governor of Britain by emperor Vespasian. The previous governor of Britain Frontinus (AD 73/74-77) had been recalled by Rome in AD 77 and by the summer of that year Agricola had been appointed governor of Britain. The date of Agricola’s appointment is a matter of debate between scholars, some favouring AD 78, but most now follow the chronology proposed by the late Anthony Birley that his tenure was AD 77-84, an unprecedented seven years in office as Governor of Britain. 

Agricola fought seven campaigns in Britain, the first in Wales and then the following year against the Brigantes in northern England. As governor of Britain it would seem that Agricola was briefed by the emperor to complete the conquest of the whole island, subsequently, his next five campaigns were conducted in the far north of the Province as the Romans intended to conquer Scotland.

AD 77 First Campaign: North Wales
His first mission was to subjugate the Ordovices and complete the conquest of North Wales and Mona (Anglesey). Immediately prior to his arrival the Ordovices were still active against Rome having massacred a cavalry unit in North Wales in AD 77. Accordingly, Agricola’s first task was to deal with the last troublesome tribe in Wales, by the winter of that year he had established a series of forts in North Wales. The Ordovices were pursued as they fled to Mona where the last vestiges of resistance held out. According to Tactitus [The Agricola, 18] he was ruthless in dealing with them; “The result of the action was almost the total extirpation of the Ordovices”.

Agricola reorganised the British legions in preparation for his planned conquest of the Caledonian tribes in Scotland. Legio II Adiutrix were moved from Lincoln to Chester at the mouth of the River Dee on the northern Welsh border, to construct a legionary fortress with harbour. No doubt their expertise in amphibious operations would be a crucial factor in their deployment at Chester in support of the northern campaign. 

AD 78 Second Campaign: Northern England
The summer of AD 78 was spent in preparation for the northern campaigns. Agricola assembled his army for the conquest of the north Britain, comprising Legio IX with vexillations from Legio XX, Legio II Augusta and Legio II Adiutrix supplemented with a large number of auxiliaries. It would appear that during this year Agricola concentrated on consolidating the Roman hold over the territory largely occupied by the Brigantians, constructing forts and roads up to the Solway – Tyne line.

Tacitus tells us that Agricola “marked out the encampments, and explored in person the estuaries and forests. At the same time he perpetually harassed the enemy by sudden incursions until they lay aside their animosity, and to deliver hostages. These districts were surrounded with castles and forts, disposed with so much attention and judgment, that no part of Britain, hitherto new to the Roman arms, escaped unmolested”. [The Agricola, 20]

He then set about ‘Romanising’ these tribes by encouraging the natives to erect temples, courts of justice, and dwelling-houses, rewarding those that complied with his intentions.[The Agricola, 21] 

Reconciling the account of Tacitus with archaeology he is credited by historians in the construction of temporary marching camps, forts and roads in northern England in preparation for movement into southern Scotland. He extending Dere Street and establishing the Stanegate road from Carlisle to the fort at Beaufront Red House, effectively the northern border, running east-west on the line of the Solway Firth – Tyne isthmus. Vexillation sized forts were established along this line, such as Chesterholm (Vindolanada), roughly a day’s march apart. Hadrian’s Wall would later be built along this line but slightly north of the Stanegate.

Dere Street would eventually be extended to the Forth. Many Flavian forts were sited to guard river crossings such as Piercebridge on the Tees, Binchester (Vinovia) on the Wear, Ebchester (Vindomara) guarding the crossing on the Derwent in County Durham. The Beaufront Red House (Sandhoe) fort was constructed at the point were Dere Street crossed the Stanegate, and would become the main support base of Agricola’s campaigns as he ventured further north between during his tenure as governor. 

The earlier fort at Beaufront Red House was replaced sometime after AD 85 with the establishment of the Roman station at Corbridge (Coira) 0.5 mile away. Coria would later become the legionary base for Legio XX and Legio VI Victrix in supporting the Hadrian’s Wall garrison. The fort at Coira was completely levelled around AD 163 after the Roman withdrawal from the Antonine Wall and fall back to Hadrian’s Wall, converting the site into a market town and administrative centre for the northern frontier, the most northerly town in the Roman world.

AD 79 Third Campaign: Southern Scotland to the Tay
The Agricola 22 states that the military expeditions of the third year discovered nations new to the Romans, being the occupants of the land north of the Stanegate. Accepting that Cerialis ventured as far as Carlisle and no further north, although there is some debate to how far he actually reached which we will come to later, it is generally accepted that Agricola’s third campaign was the subjugation of the tribes of south-east Scotland. According to Tacitus the Romans met little resistance from the Votadini with Agricola making a lightning advance as far as the estuary of the Tay.  

In the spring of AD 79 Agricola continued the march north, ravaging as far as the ‘Taus’, usually interpreted at the estuary of the river Tay. Tacitus writes that the northern tribes failed to confront the Romans which allowed the legions to erect fortresses. Tacitus adds, “no general had ever shown greater skill in the choice of advantageous situations than Agricola; for not one of his fortified posts was either taken by storm, or surrendered by capitulation”. [The Agricola, 22] 

In addition to fortifying the Southern Uplands, historians have interpreted chapter 22 of ‘The Agricola’ as including the construction of the Gask Ridge, a fortified road with eighteen known watchtowers running from the fort at Ardoch to Bertha at the Tay.

The Gask Line

This ridge is about 70m above sea level in the Midland Valley (Central Lowlands) between the Highland massif and the Southern Uplands. The ridge forms part of a natural corridor dividing the Highland Line from Fife leading northwards to the coastal strip of rich agricultural land skirting around the Highlands extending to the Moray Firth. The ridge provides clear views north to the Highlands and south over the hollow of Strathearn in the Earn Valley and the Firth of Forth. Near to the River Earn lay the Roman Camp at Strageath, one of a series used by the Romans to consolidate their newly gained territory. Historians attempt to trace the progress of the Roman invasion of Scotland by the many temporary marching camps and fortifications constructed as the army moved north, numbering over several hundred in total with some better known than others, such as Ardoch, Stracathro, Battledykes, Raedykes and Normandykes. 

But the evidence is far from straightforward, many sites are known only from cropmarks detected by aerial survey, dating evidence from the few excavations has been extremely limited and many sites have been re-used and built over by later Roman invasions of Scotland, such as the Antonine and Severan interventions.  The comment by Tacitus that ‘not one of the fortified posts were ever taken by storm’ is supported by the archaeology, from excavations to date, which shows the forts were abandoned by the Romans, some dismantled, with no evidence of hostile attack.

Furthermore, historians fail to agree on the function of the Gask line; is it simply a fortified supply line, an invasion corridor leading to Moray, constructed to monitor Fife, or the first northern frontier constructed by the Romans. We will return to this issue later, however it is a massive understatement to say that tracing the various Roman campaigns in Scotland is challenging at best.

Around this time the construction of a series of elite buildings were commenced within the legionary fortress at Chester by Legio II Adiutrix. Two lead water pipes found at Chester, one inscribed to Vespasian and the other to Agricola, have been dated to AD 79, which confirms the construction of the later legionary fortress commenced in the decade AD 70-80, during the early Flavian period. One lead pipe is supposed to have connected to a water feature at the centre of a elliptical building, unique in the Roman world and usually seen as indicating that Agricola intended Chester, the largest legionary fortress in Britain, to be the new capital of the province and a base for an invasion of Ireland. The fortress at the mouth of the Dee was ideally located to be the capital of an expanded British province including Scotland and Ireland; perhaps this was Vespasian’s grand plan for Roman Britain that Agricola was putting into effect. But on 24 June AD 79 Vespasian died after a long illness and his eldest son Titus became emperor and the campaign in the north, while seeming to stall while Agricola consolidated his new gained grounds, would continue the following year. However, the concept of an invasion of Ireland died with Vespasian.

AD 80 Fourth Campaign: Consolidating Southern Scotland
Tacitus tells us that on Agricolas second year in Scotland the Roman army, having the Tay the previous year, paused its northward advance and spent the next summer securing the country which had been ‘overrun’. Having secured the south eastern lands of the Votadini Agricola must have encountered the Selgovae in the hills of Central Southern Scotland. Marching camps along the Tweed and Lyne valleys shows the Romans progress into the heartland of the Selgovae. To the north of this Agricola came upon the Dumnonii territory where he established forts across the narrow neck of land between the estuaries of Clota and Bodotria (Clyde and Forth). This natural line of defence across the narrowest landmass of the mainland, about 35 miles, would be re-used by the builders of the Antonine Wall some sixty years later. Tacitus adds that all the territory on the southern side of this line was held in subjection while the remaining hostile tribes were pushed beyond it “as it were, into another island”. [The Agricola, 23]

AD 81 Fifth Campaign: Galloway and Dumfries
In his fifth year as governor Agricola conquered the Novantae in what is now Galloway and Carrick, in south-westernmost Scotland, opposite Ireland (Hibernia) which he considered invading. Tacitus gives an outline of Ireland and why it would be advantageous to the Romans to possess the island adding that Agricola had received into his protection one of the Irish petty kings who had been expelled suggesting that the man could be useful tot he Romans should they decide to invade the island across the Gallic Sea. Tacitus claims that he heard Agricola mention on more than one occasion that he could take Ireland with a single legion and a few auxiliaries. [The Agricola 24]

On 14 September Titus died and his younger brother Domitian became emperor, the last of the Flavian dynasty.

AD 82 Sixth Season: Angus and Aberdeenshire
In the summer of the sixth season Agricola explored the eastern seaboard beyond Bodotria (The Firth of Forth) possibly named after the Proto-Celtic *vo-rit-ia meaninhg 'slow running'. The new emperor Domitian recalled vexillations from Britain’s legions for the war in Germania, however Agricola’s campaign continued as he advanced to confront the Caledonians. By the summer he was campaigning in Angus and Aberdeenshire by land and sea. There are reports of attacks by the Caledonii on Roman forts. Agricola receives reports of a Caledonian three-pronged advance who carry out a night attack on the camp of Legio IX Hispana, probably at Dalginross. Agricola responded in a timely manner and came to the aid of the embattled legion.

By the autumn Agricola had created a defensive line comprising of a series of forts blocking the glens to control movements of the northern tribes. It is thought that around this time construction started on the legionary fortress at Inchtuthil probably by Legio XX. [The Agricola, 25-27]

Tacitus records the campaign year ended with the ‘flight and debacle’ of “a cohort of Usipii, which had been levied in Germany and sent over into Britain, performed an extremely daring and memorable action.” The Usipii killed a centurion then set sail in three vessels, driven by the waves, they sailed around the island of Britain but lost their ships. They were treated as pirates, intercepted first by the Suevi then by the Frisii, and sold as slaves. [The Agricola , 28]

This is often interpreted as the Usipii sailed around the whole of the island of Britain but the later Roman historian Cassius Dio (AD 165-235), probably following Tacitus, also records the extraordinary expedition of the Usipii. According to Dio, the Usipii set out from the western side of the island, sailed through the difficult waters of northern Scotland and came around to the eastern side. They were then driven to the Baltic Sea where they lost their ships and attempting to reach their homeland were captured by the Suevii and then the Frisii.

AD 83 Seventh Season: Mons Graupius
The following summer Agricola received the devastating news of the loss of his son. Tacitus writes that “war was one of the remedies of his grief”.

The Caledonii persisted in hit and run tactics, favouring guerilla warfare rather than face the legions in the field where they knew they would almost certainly be defeated by the better armed and well disciplined Roman war machine. Agricola knew that to defeat them he would need to pull the Caledonii into the open field of battle. In summer of AD 83 he ordered the lands to the Moray Firth to be ravished while the Roman navy harassed the coast. The Romans finally drew the Caledonians to battle at a place called Mons Graupius, the battle site still lacking positive identification to date. Tacitus records some 10,000 Caledonians were killed, a generation of fighting men wiped out that would bring stability to the area for the next twenty years. While The Romans only experienced 360 casualties without the need to engage the Legions, the battle was won by auxiliaries alone.

Agricola then instructed his fleet to sail around the north coast to confirm that Britain was an island. This is claimed to be the first circumnavigation of Britain.

AD 84: Withdrawal and Recall
Tacitus wrote that having now conquered all of the island of Britain Agricola was recalled by Domitian in the spring of AD 84, ending an unusually long tenure as governor of Britain. The change in Provincial Governor would see a dramatic turn in events and the surrender of all the lands won by seven years campaigning by Agricola. Tacitus writes: "Britain was completely conquered and immediately let go". [Histories]

Domitian’s main concern was unrest on the Danube and he needed all available resources to control the restless Dacian tribes. Clearly the Roman occupation of North Britain was not the emperor’s priority. With the loss of Agricola and the appointment of a new (un-named governor) the Romans started to withdraw from Scotland, the uncompleted fortress at Inchtuthil was abandoned and demolished. Legio II Adiutrix was withdrawn from Britain as the emperor Domitian decided he could not afford four legions in Britain and needed to reinforce forces on the lower Danube. Legio XX were moved from Inchtuthil to Chester which would now be its permanent base, but work on the 'Elliptical building' and other prestigious building at the centre of the fortress, planned to be Agricola’s new capital of an expanded province that included Ireland and Scotland, all stopped and failed to extend beyond the foundations.

Tactitus is quite hostile in his reaction to Domitian’s surrender of Scotland and accuses the emperor of jealousy of Agricola’s success, eclipsing the emperor’s own 

Agricola died on 23 August AD 93 at his family estates in Gallia Narbonensis aged 53. Rumours circulated that Domitian was responsible for his death by administering poison but no evidence has been produced to confirm this. Writing some years later Cassius Dio was rather more forthright and directly accused Domitian of Agricola’s murder “because his deeds were too great for a mere general”.

Domitian died AD 96 and Tacitus’s eulogy to his father-in-law was written within two years.

* * *

The Arthurian Texts of the Percy Folio

Listen,  lords  great  and  small
What  adventures  did  befall
In  England,  where  hath  beene
Of  knights  that  held  the  round  table
Which  were  doughty  and  profittable,
Of  kempys  cruell  and  keene.
[The Turke and Gowin]

THE ARTHURIAN TEXTS OF THE PERCY FOLIO edited by John Withrington, first published as an expensive hardback edition (£125) in 2023, has just been published (November 2025) by Liverpool University Press as a new paperback edition  at a more affordable price of £29.99.*

When visiting his friend Humphrey Pitt at Shifnal, Shropshire, the 18th-century Anglican clergyman and antiquarian Bishop Thomas Percy found an old manuscript on the floor from which Pitt's maid had been pulling out pages to light fires. Percy had the manuscript bound but the bookbinder carelessly trimmed the edges of the leaves, losing the first or last lines on many pages. Percy caused additional damage to the manuscript by writing notes and comments on the pages making his own corrections and revisions and even removed some of the pages himself after binding.

The manuscript today known as the 'Percy Folio' (British Library, Additional MS. 27879) was originally compiled between 1640 and 1660, and formed the basis of a huge collection of ballads and popular songs collected by Percy that he published in 1765 over three volumes with the full title "Reliques of Ancient English Poetry: Consisting of Heroic Ballads, Songs, and other Pieces of our earlier Poets (Chiefly of the Lyric Kind) Together with some few of Later Date."

Percy's work is more commonly known by the shorter title 'The Reliques of Ancient English Poetry' or simply as 'Percy's Reliques' and considered "one of the founding texts of English literature, an epoch-making collection of historical and lyrical ballads that defined the canon of popular poetry. It dramatically influenced Romanticism and the writing of Wordsworth and Coleridge, Walter Scott, and even Lewis Carroll." [Oxford Dictionary]

The Percy Folio contains eleven Arthurian texts all of which are published as critical editions with transcriptions taken directly from BL MS Add. 27879 in Withrington's 'The Arthurian Texts of the Percy Folio':

King Arthur and King Cornwall,
Sir Lancelot of Dulake,
The Turke & Gowin,
The Marriage of Sir Gawaine,
Sire Lambewell,
Merline,
Kinge Arthurs Death,
The Grene Knyght,
Boy and Mantle,
Libius Disconius,
Carle off Carlile.

The Arthurian Texts of the Percy Folio
Edited by John Withrington
Published by Liverpool University Press*
ISBN:9781836245230 (Paperback), 388 pages
Contributors: John Withrington, Gillian Rogers, Elizabeth Darovic, Maldwyn Mills, Raluca Radulescu, Diane Speed, Marion Trudgill and Elizabeth Williams.

*at the time of posting the publisher (LUP) is currently offering a 20% discount*

* * *

The Twentieth Legion Goes North

The Fate of the Twentieth Legion Part 2

In AD 49 the Roman governor of Britain Publius Ostorius Scapula campaigned against the Deceangli in north-east Wales and engaged with the Brigantes in the north of Britain. It is thought that at this time Scapula constructed a small fort or marching camp on the highest part of the ridge above the mouth of the River Dee, the first military construction at Chester. However, positive evidence of a fort of this date has yet to be found.

The Dee was navigable to this point where it formed a natural harbour, enabling the Romans to support operations into North Wales and northern Britain by land and sea. Significantly the fort at Chester (Deva) drove a wedge between the Ordovices and the Brigantes, a gap in the Roman defences exploited when Caratacus was defeated in AD 51 in Mid-Wales/Shropshire and fled to the territory of the Brigantes. Chester was therefore sited in a critical position in the Roman tactic of ‘divide and rule’ in which they would position forts between hostile tribes.

Archaeologist David Mason has carried out extensive excavations at Chester over forty years and concedes there is distinct evidence for two military bases that pre-date the legionary fortress at Chester. He suggests that the primary fort could belong to Paulinus’s campaigns in the late AD 50’s – early 60’s which culminated in the attack on the Druids at Mona. Although we lack precise dating evidence for the beginning of construction of the legionary fortress at Chester two inscriptions, lead ingots dated to AD 74 and lead water pipes AD 79, confirm construction of the later legionary fort commenced in the decade AD 70-80, during the early Flavian period.

At this time the northern frontier of the Province effectively formed a boundary from the estuary of the Dee in the west to the estuary of the Humber in the east. Immediately north of this boundary, up to the river Tyne, and centred on Yorkshire, was the territory of a confederation of British tribes known as the Brigantes. They were bordered by the Parisi in the east, the Setantii in the west and the Carvetii to the north west. Beyond this was the land of the Caledonians, the name ancient writers used for Scotland.

The Brigantes had been a key ally to the Romans, perhaps since shortly after the invasion of AD 43 as with the south-eastern kingdoms of the Britons, and under the rule of their Queen Cartimandua turned Caratacus over to the Romans after he fled from Wales in AD 51. But this betrayal of a king who had led the early resistance of the Britons against the Romans caused division in the Brigantes.  Cartimandua detached herself from her consort Venutius and took up with his armour-bearer Vellocatus, and asked the Romans for protection. 

Venutius and the anti-Roman elements of the Brigantes took advantage of the turmoil of the ‘Year of the Four Emperors’ in AD 69 and rebelled. This year saw four emperors Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and Vespasian fight for the throne following the death of Nero in AD 68.

The Governor of Britain at this time was Marcus Trebellius Maximus who was at odds with many of his legionary commanders, particularly Roscius Coelius, legate of Legio XX. According to Tactitus, Trebellius “had no military experience, and kept the province in hand by a mild-mannered administration.” Trebellius had lost all authority with the army, which sided with Coelius, and in AD 69 left Britain for the protection of Vitellius in Germania. 

The British garrison did not put forward its own candidate for emperor but vexillations and auxiliaries from all three legions, about 8,000 men, were sent to the continent to support Vitellius. Legio XIV Gemina that had been withdrawn from Britain by Nero around AD 68 were now, along with the other legions of the Balkans, supporting Otho. 

Vitellius defeated Otho at the first battle of Cremona, near the village of Bedriacum, and was declared emperor.  Legio XIV Gemina arrived too late to take part in the battle and declared that they were undefeated. Vitellius appointed Marcus Vettius Bolanus as governor of Britain and sent Legio XIV Gemina back to Britain with him. When Bolanus arrived in Britain he found the legions at half strength and his demands for more troops from Vitellius to bring the British garrison back to its full compliment were ignored by the new emperor. Discipline in the legions had been lost under the last year of Trebellius’s governorship, and, if we are to believe the writings of Tacitus, Bolanus was apparently not capable of restoring control. Indeed Tacitus was not very complimentary of Bolanus; he wrote that the governor was despised by the legions for his greed and meanness, being too mild mannered to control a warlike state such as Britain and never got the province under complete control.

Later in AD 69, Vespasian was declared emperor by the legions of the eastern provinces. While Vespasian was still in Egypt the Danubian legions led by Marcus Antonius Primus marched on Rome and defeated Vitellius at the second battle of Cremona. By December Vespasian was the fourth emperor of the year and the Flavian dynasty had begun. Vespasian kept Bolanus as governor of Britain for the time being as he had quickly sworn allegiance to the new emperor. Regardless of Tacitus’s low opinion of Bolanus he had engaged the Brigantes during their revolt and despatched auxiliary troops to answer Cartimandua’s plea for help and rescued her. The fallen queen was forced into exile and not heard of again. The rebellious Venutius now ruled the Brigantes on his own.

Contra Tacitus the Latin 1st century poet Publius Papinius Statius (Silvae) writes that Bolanus established forts and captured trophies from a British king, suggesting that the British governor did engage with the Brigantes and had some success against them. Statius clearly states that Bolanus penetrated the “Caledonian plain” building roads, forts and watchtowers, and stripped a British king of his armour. Ancient writers references to the Caledonian plain is usually interpreted as a generic term for the Scottish borders. This raises the question of how far can we trust poetry in a historical context particularly when in this instance the poet also claims Bolanus reached the mythical island of Thule, the northernmost part of the known world; yet on the other-hand, how far can we trust the account of Tacitus who clearly did not rate the governors of Britain, except Cerialis, immediately prior to Agricola and fails to mention any of them campaigning as far north into Caledonia.

It is all too easy to dismiss Statius’s account of Bolanus campaigning in Caledonia as simple poetic licence. But then we find the writings of Pliny the Elder (Natural History) which imply that the Romans may have been operating north of the Forth as early as the governorship's of Bolanus (AD 69-71) and Cerialis (AD 71-74). Pliny died the year of the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in AD 79 and Statius around AD 96. They were writing within living memory of the events making it unlikely their accounts were complete fabrications.

David Woolliscroft, co-director of The Roman Gask Project, suggested that Statius’s reference to the roads, forts and watchtowers could be an allusion to the earliest fortifications constructed on the Gask Ridge. Considered the earliest Roman land frontier in Britain, the Gask Ridge is as a series of military installations running for about 22 miles from Glenbank, north of Dunblane, to Bertha on the River Tay along the Highland line in Scotland. The construction of the Gask system has traditionally been credited to Agricola, governor of Britain AD 77-84 largely owing to the narrative of Tacitus. However, archaeologist and historians are now of the opinion that the foundations of the system were laid prior to Agricola’s governorship. 

Regardless of how far north he campaigned, there is no record of Bolanus removing Venutius. Vespasian, perhaps concerned that the rebellious Brigantes with Venutius still at large would escalate and pull in other tribes, withdrew Bolanus from Britain after two years as governor. Soon after his return to Rome Bolanus was honoured by Vespasian, the poetry of Statius in his ‘Silvae’ suggestions that Vespasian awarded Bolanus with a ceremonial breastplate for his military success. Poetry aside, Bolanus was given patrician rank and a little later appointed as proconsul of Asia which suggests that his performance in Britain had been satisfactory in the opinion of the emperor who himself was very familiar with the province having led Legio II Augusta in the Claudian invasion of AD 43. No doubt Tacitus had his own agenda to follow in heaping so much praise on his future father-in-law Agricola.

Vespasian appointed Quintus Petillius Cerialis as governor of Britain in AD 71 to replace Bolanus. Cerialis had fought for Vespasian in the civil war of AD 69 and totally loyal to the new emperor. In AD 70 Legio XIV Gemina were withdrawn from Britain for a second time and sent to Germania to support Cerialis in suppressing the Batavian rebellion of Julius Civilis. Cerialis called the Legion the ‘Conquerors of Europe’ no doubt with memories of their victory against the Boudiccan rebellion in Britain in AD 61. However, this time they would not return to Britain. Cerialis’s army in Germania Inferior included a new legion, Legio II Adiutrix, raised by Vespasian in early AD 70 from Roman Navy marines at Ravenna. 

Cerialis was certainly presented with a challenge on accepting the post of governor of Britain; the legions remained in a mutinous state and the northern tribes were in a rebellious mood. Cerialis arrived in Britain with the new legion, Legio II Adiutrix, restoring the British garrison back to four legions. In contrast to his not-so-complimentary writings on Cerialis’s predecessors Tacitus remarked that this appointment signified the first in a series of distinguished commanders.

With Legio II Augusta based at Gloucester, Legio XX at Wroxeter and Legio IX at Lincoln, the addition of a fourth legion to the British garrison was intended to carry out emperor Vespasian’s orders to conquer the entire island. Within a few years of Cerialis’s governorship Brigantian territory up to a line from the Solway Firth to the Tyne would be under Roman control. 

In AD 70, during Bolanus’s governorship, Vespasian had replaced Roscius the treacherous commander of Legio XX with Gnaeus Julius Agricola. It is likely at this time that the new emperor purged all the legionary commanders that had not shown loyalty to him during the civil war. Agricola reimposed discipline on the rebellious Legio XX that had supported Vitellius during the civil war and had been dragging their feet in swearing allegiance to the new emperor. Agricola began his career as a military tribune having served in Britain under Gaius Suetonius Paulinus, governor of Britain from AD 58-62, campaigning in Wales culminating in the attack on the Druids of Mona and the suppression of the Boudiccan Revolt in AD 61. 

There is little activity recorded for Agricola’s first year as commander of Legio XX and it is uncertain where the legion was stationed at this time. It is generally assumed that Legio XX transferred from Usk (Burrium) in South Wales to to Wroxeter (Viroconium) in Shropshire, to replace Legio XIV Gemina who had been withdrawn from Britain by Nero in AD 68. However, it is possible that Legio XX was stationed at Gloucester (Glevum) for a period before moving to Wroxeter. It is also possible that during this time Agricola and Legio XX continued the work of Bolanus in the north consolidating the Roman advance in preparation of the arrival of Cerialis.

With the arrival of the new governor Cerialis in AD 71 the Romans were now actively campaigning in Brigantian territory, north of line roughly from the Dee to the Humber. Agricola was evidently highly regarded by Cerialis and on occasion given independent command and, according to Tacitus, he conducted himself with great modesty crediting his success in the field to his general (Cerialis) who had planned operations.

Initially Legio II Adiutrix were based at Lincoln while Cerialis took Legio IX Hispana north into the lands of the Brigantes where it founded a new legionary fortress at York (Eboracum). It is probable that around this time Legio XX had moved up from Wroxeter through Chester for the launch of the campaign against the Brigantes. Supported by the Classis Britannica Agricola and Legio XX advanced up the west coast. With Cerialis and Legio IX coming in from the east the two legions formed a pincer movement to close in on Venutius’s rebellious Brigantes.

Dere Street 

Tacitus provides little detail of the campaign of Cerialis in Brigantian territory during his tenure as governor yet the new fortress at York indicates the legions must have been active north of this at this time. Cerialis must have reached the river Tees where the Roman fort at Piercebridge (Morbium?) was established at this time. The fort was located at a strategic crossing point of the Tees by the Roman Road known as Dere Street, the Great North Road. The construction of this road is accredited to Agricola c.AD 79-81 during his tenure as governor of Britain for his campaigns further north into Scotland, however it is likely that Cerialis laid part of the southern end of this road through the territory of the Brigantes, linking the new fort at York with Piercebridge. Later Agricola would extend this road into Scotland. 

By now Cerialis must have at least reached as far north as the Solway Firth as features of the early fort at Carlisle (Luguvalium) have been firmly dated to AD 72 and cannot be attributed to Bolanus or Agricola’s later campaign as some commentators have claimed. It is also supposed that the Beaufront Red House vexillation fort near Corbridge was established around this time, linked to Carlisle by a Roman road that Agricola would develop into the Stanegate. Before Hadrian’s Wall was constructed in the AD 120’s a little further north, the line of the Stanegate would effectively act as the northern frontier of the Roman Empire.   

Legio XX were now at Carlisle. Agricola led the legion south east from Carlisle, through the Stainmore Pass system which he is generally supposed to have founded, deep in tot he territory of the Brigantes. The Stainmore system was a military corridor of road and watchtowers that would link Carlisle to York, along the line of the modern A66 road. Agricola and Cerialis closed in on the Brigantes and defeated them at, or close to, their Stanwick camp. The fate of Venutius is not recorded but he is not heard of again. A series of forts were then established in the territory of the Brigantes to monitor and police the northern Britons. Cerialis was now campaigning north of the line of the Stanegate into at least southern Caledonia. 

The following year in AD 73 both Cerialis and Agricola were recalled from Britain with Sextus Julius Frontinus appointed as governor of Britain. Frontinus was an accomplished soldier having written manuals on military strategy (Stratagems) and participated in the suppression of the Batavian revolt on the Rhineland in AD 70 with Cerialis. Tactitus provides just a single sentence on his governorship in Britain in the ‘Agricola’. This lack of detail on the achievments of Frontinus in Britain by Tacitus has been interpreted by some commentators that Frontinus failed to consolidate the gains of Cerialis in the north. Yet Frontinus was held in high regard by subsequent emperors and held his third consulship under Trajan, indeed Anthony Birley desribes him as “one of the most important figures of the Flavio-Trajanic era”. 

Frontinus’s first task in Britain was to campaign against the Silure in Wales. He moved Legio II Augusta to the legionary fortress at Caerleon and may have been responsible for starting the construction of the new legionary fortress at Chester by II Adiutrix who were transferred in from Lincoln. 

The exact start of Frontinus’s tenure is uncertain, usually stated at AD 73-74, however Cerilais was back in Rome in May AD 74. Tacitus limits the achievements of Frontinus to subjugating the Silures of South Wales and constructing a series forts in Mid Wales. Often accused of ignoring North Wales Frontinus clearly had active units in the region as the Ordovices massacred a cavalry unit there in AD 77. However, Frontinus was recalled shortly after and succeeded by Gnaeus Julius Agricola in midsummer of that year.

Sources
The Complete Tacitus, Delphi Classics, 2014.
The Complete Works of Statius, Delphi Classics, 2014.
The Complete Works of Pliny the Elder, Delphi Classics, 2015.
Anthony R Birley, The Roman Government of Britain, Oxford University Press, 2005.
Eric Birley, Roman Britain and the Roman Army, Titus Wilson, 1961
David J. Breeze, Northern Frontiers of Roman Britain, Batsford, 1993.
Simon Elliott, Agricola in Scotland, Pen & Sword Military, 2025.
Simon Forder, The Romans in Scotland, Amberley Publishing, 2022.
Stephen James Malone, Legio XX Valeria Victrix: Prosopography, archaeology and history, BAR Publishing, 2006.
David Mason, Roman Chester: Fortress at the Edge of the World, The History Press, 2012.
Nigel Pollard & Joanne Berry, The Complete Roman Legions, Thames & Hudson, 2015 (Reprint edition 2024).
David Shotter, The Roman Frontier in Britain, Carnegie Publishing, 1996.
David Shotter, Roman Britain, Second Edition, 2004.
Simon Turney, Agricola, Architect of Britain, Amberley, 2022.
David Woolliscroft and Birgitta Hoffmann, Rome's First Frontier: The Flavian Occupation of Northern Scotland, The History Press, 2006.
The Roman Gask Project, Directors David Woolliscroft  and Birgitta Hoffmann (online resource
[https://www.theromangaskproject.org/

]

* * *

The Fate of the Twentieth Legion - Part I

From Invasion to Rebellion
In the 19th century a large number of Roman tombstones were discovered in the infill of the north wall of Chester City Walls. Initially thought to have simply been re-used as building materials as was the Roman way, it has since been noted that many of the tombstones had been badly mutilated and defaced with references to Legio XX obliterated. This legion was part of the Roman invasion force of Britain in AD 43 and fought in the Iceni Revolt of AD 60-61 and later permanently based at the legionary fortress at Chester (Deva).

The origins of the legion’s name ‘Valeria Victrix’ ("Valiant and Victorious") are uncertain and the subject of much debate; the title is generally thought to have been bestowed on Legio XX following the Iceni Revolt led by their queen Boudicca.

As the ruthless Romans war machine moved through Britain conquering all before it Legio XX transferred to Kingsholm, Usk and then Wroxeter, before campaigning in the north. The legion then formed the Chester garrison where they remained until Legio XX disappears from the historical record in the late 3rd-early 4th centuries. 

Some historians argue that Legio XX was still stationed in Britain when Magnus Maximus withdrew the bulk of the British garrison in pursuit of his imperial ambitions in AD 383. Numismatic evidence certainly suggests the fortress at Chester was occupied at this time but what this occupation was has been the subject of much debate. 

The legions were restructured around this time resulting in a much reduced Chester garrison. Yet the last days of Legio XX is somewhat of a mystery; the legion disappears from the historical and archaeological record at the end of the 3rd century. Legio XX is notably absent from the Notitia Dignitatum, a document containing a list of military and civilian commands in both eastern and western parts of the Roman empire from the late-4th to early-5th century.

Further, we have seen how a large number of the Legio XX tombstones from the Roman cemetery at Chester have been broken up and recycled into the north wall during repairs to the defences of the fortress. But these tombstones were not just re-used as convenient building materials: many of the inscriptions referencing Legio XX have been obliterated if not snapped off resulting in the loss of the inscription; many faces defaced beyond recognition and legionary emblems chiseled out. 

Rather than using the nearest available tombstones as building material for hurried repairs to the north wall this deliberate mutilation of the funerary monuments dedicated to Legio XX must have taken effort and time. As the tombstones were used as infill for the north wall, hidden behind the facing stones, why was necessary to go to such effort to deface the stones? It appears the memory of Legio XX was purposefully removed at Chester. 

This destructive treatment of the tombstones of Legio XX immediately brings to mind the Roman practice of ‘Damnatio memoriae’ (condemnation of memory), the erasure of the subject from the historical record including the destruction of depictions and the removal of names from inscriptions and documents. Without an inscription a memorial stone is meaningless. The practice was usually exercised for usurping emperors or failed conspirators. 

The treatment of the legion’s tombstones at Chester suggest the legion fell from grace at a late point in its history; what could cause a once illustrious legion to become denigrated overnight?

Foundations
When and where Legio XX was founded is not known for certain yet the legion is first recorded during the reign of Augustus, also known as 'Octavian'. Gaius Octavius officially became known as Augustus in 27 BC when he was granted the title marking the beginning of his reign as the first Roman emperor and founder of the Roman Empire. Thereafter ‘Augustus’ was used as a title for all subsequent emperors.

Symbolized by the emblem of a boar, Legio XX is thought to have been established around 31 BC when the legion is recorded as fighting at the battle of Actium when Octavian defeated Mark Antony. Legio XX fought for Antony at the battle but following their defeat his troops, including Legio XX, deserted and joined Octavian's army. At the time there were two legions named "XX" which were were brought together as one unit by Octavian after Actium. 

Legio XX then played a significant part in the Cantabrian Wars from 25-19 BC, the Roman conquest of Hispania. The legion was then stationed in Illyricum from AD 6 during the Great Illyrian Revolt (Bellum Batoninum) and was relocated to Germania Inferior following the massacre of three Roman legions under the command of Publius Quinctilius Varus in the Teutoburg Forest in AD 9. 

Legio XX was then moved from its fortress at Novaesium (Neuss) in Germania to northern Gaul where the legions were mustering in anticipation of Caligula’s planned invasion of Britain in AD 40. The biographer Suetonius tells us that the invasion was aborted and it became known that the emperor intended to discipline Legio XX for their mutiny against his father Germanicus. Suetonius claims Caligula intended to decimate the legion, that is execute every tenth man. Caligula apparently abandoned the idea when the legionaries became aware and started to arm themselves. 

Legio XX went on to play a key role in the Claudian invasion force of Britain in AD 43. Thereafter, the legion remained in the country for most of the Roman occupation which officially ended in AD 410 when Honorius, Emperor in the West, officially acknowledged that the Britons were no longer under imperial protection and should take to their own defences.

Four legions and some 20,000 auxilaries are said to have taken part in the Roman invasion of Britain under the command of Aulus Plautius, but only Vespasian’s Legio II Augusta is directly mentioned in contemporary sources. However, the four legions that made up the invasion force are generally accepted as the same four legions mentioned during the later Boudiccan revolt of AD 60-61: II Augusta, IX Hispana, XIV Gemina and XX. 

Richborough in Kent is the favoured landing site of the Romans. The invasion force rapidly moved through the south-eastern corner of Britain. Then the Romans crossed the Thames and headed north to the territory of the Trinovantes who inhabited an area roughly encompassing modern Essex and southern Suffolk. They were bordered to the west by the Catuvellauni and in the north by the Iceni.

Dio tells us that the emperor Claudius joined the legions at the Thames and led them across the river where they defeated the Britons who had gathered there. Claudius then took Camulodunum (‘fortress of the war god Camulos’) the tribal capital of the Trinovantes, where he received the submission of 11 British Kings. Claudius declared the foundation of the province of Britannia, establishing Camulodunum (Colchester) as its capital with Plautius appointed as first governor. 

The Roman’s now consolidated their foothold in Britain. Vespasian would lead the south-westward campaign with Legio II Augusta, Legio XIV Gemina were moved to Leicester while Plautius would take Legio IX Hispana to Longthorpe and Newton on Trent. 

Legio XX remained at the newly founded Roman Colchester and constructed a legionary fortress next to the oppidum of the Trinovantes, the first permanent legionary fortress to be built in Britain. In one of the ditches of the fortress at Colchester six human skulls were found, all displaying signs of a violent end. These are the remains of members of Trinovantes who had been beheaded by soldiers of Legio XX. Whether they were part of a minor uprising against the Romans is unclear, their heads were likely impaled on stakes outside the fortress as a warning to others, in a similar manner to the Dacian heads shown on Trajan’s Column. 

Trajan's column

An inscription on the tombstone of Marcus Favonius Facilis, a centurion from the unit (RIB 200), attests the presence of Legio XX at Colchester. The absence of wording typical of later funerary inscriptions and the absence of the legion’s cognomina ‘Valeria Victrix’ suggests that the tombstone was erected in the first half of the 1st century, before Legio XX suppressed the Boudiccan Revolt of AD 60-61, a victory said to have led to the legion being awarded the honorific title.

Breakout
Plautius and Vespasian returned to Rome in AD 47. Plautius was replaced as governor by Publius Ostorius Scapula who was intent on expanding the territory of the Province further west and north. Following initial success defeating the Iceni, the following year Ostorius turned his attention to the  Deceangli in north Wales and campaigned against the Brigantes in the north. 

The legions had pushed out from the territory gained in the initial years of the invasion, establishing a series of vexilliation forts along a line roughly from Exeter to Lincoln, which would later be used as logistics bases in the next phase of conquest. The western limit of Roman conquest became known as the ‘Fosse Way Frontier’, following the line of the later Roman road running across the country from the south-west to the north-east. 

The Fosse Way

During AD 48-49 Ostorius moved Legio II Augusta to Dorchester and Legio XX from Colchester to a new vexillation-sized fort at Kingsholm near Gloucester. We lack firm evidence for the movement of Legio XX after it left Colchester yet epigraphic evidence indicates a presence at Kingsholm, but we cannot be certain of the size of the unit based there. 

This fort would typically accommodate around half-a-legion plus axillaries, between 2,500 – 4,000 men. The remainder of Legio XX were, presumably, left behind at Colchester and formed a colony of veterans, making Camulodunum the first Roman colonia in Britain officially named Colonia Claudia Victricensis. The majority of the colony's citizens would have come from Legio XX who had completed their service but were also complimented with retired soldiers from other British legions. 

The Romans were now pushing westward beyond the Fosse Way Frontier with Legio XX engaged with the Silures in southern Wales and Legio XIV Gemina positioned in the Welsh Marches to confront the Ordovices. Following the refusal of the Silures to surrender Ostorius was determined to completely wipe them out, as was the Roman way with tribes they could not pacify. The conflict rumbled on until the death of Ostorius in AD 52.

We find epigraphic evidence for Legio XX at Kingsholm, again in the form of a tombstone. A funerary inscription for Lucius Octavius Martialis (RIB 3073), fragmented into two large pieces and many minor fragments, unusually lacks the years of service and age at death and as we saw at Colchester (RIB 200) the legion’s cognomina ‘Valeria Victrix’ is again absent.  

Between the death of Ostorius and the arrival of his replacement, Tacitus tells us that the legion under the command of Manlius Valens had been defeated by the Silures. The only legion engaged with the Silures at this time was Legio XX.

Aulus Didius Gallus, a member of the Roman Senate, was sent to Britain to replace Ostorius as governor of Britain (AD 52-57). His brief to expand Roman territory, accordingly he moved Legio IX Hispana to Lincoln, Legio II Augusta to Exeter and relocated Legio XX to Usk (Burrium) in south-east Wales and Legio XIV Gemina to Wroxeter (Viroconium Cornoviorum) to continue the campaign against the Silures and Ordovices respectively. Archaeological excavations have confirmed that construction of the Roman fort at Usk (Burrium) commenced around AD 50. It is uncertain if Legio XX originally built the fort yet by AD 57 the legion occupied the fort which proved to be a key site in the conquest of the Silures of south Wales. 

Didius is accused of being rather inactive during his tenure, with the ongoing conquest of the troublesome Britons becoming a frustration to Rome. Didius may have been following instructions from Claudius who began to doubt whether further conquest in the difficult terrain in Wales and the North was worth the risk. In AD 54 when Claudius died, Nero, the new emperor is said to have considered abandoning the province of Britannia entirely. Didius returned to Rome after five years as governor of the Province to be replaced by Quintus Veranius Nepos in AD 57. The new governor immediately reversed Didius’s policy of maintaining existing territory and resumed military operations against the Silures.

Veranius’s tenure was short, he died later that year, and was replaced as Governor by Gaius Seutonius Paulinus in AD 58. Paulinus continued the campaign against the Silures with relatively quick results. He then turned his attention to what he considered to be at the heart of the Briton’s resistance to Rome; Mona (Anglesey) the island home of the Druids, the leaders of Celtic religion. 

Boudicca and the Druids
In AD 60 Paulinus led a force of around 20,000 soldiers, consisting of Legio XIV Gemina, a division of Legio XX with a similar number of auxiliaries to attack and destroy the seat of the Druids at Mona. This was likely a division from Legio XX on battle orders with the remainder of the legion remaining stationed at their parent fort. 

The historians Tacitus and Cassius Dio, our only sources for this event, tell us that Legio XX were in Mona supporting the Roman governor Paulinus on a mission to exterminate the Druids who had been influencing the Celtic tribes of Britain. Paulinus was also intent on destroying the Druids' sacred groves and temples on the island but he had to abandon his conquest of Mona to take the legions south to deal with a rebellion of the Britons. 

Boudicca

Boudicca, Queen of the Iceni, had protested to the Romans how badly they were treating her kingdom. The Romans gave a brutal response; centurions pillaged the territory, the dead king’s household ransacked, the Queen flogged and her daughters raped. Boudicca’s response was to lead a savage rebellion against the Romans.

Boudicca led her tribal warriors south and besieged the now thriving town at Roman Colchester. As the governor Paulinus was engaged in Mona exterminating Druids, the veterans appealed to the procurator Catus Decianus in London for assistance. Decianus sent 200 poorly equipped Roman soldiers to defend Colchester to little effect. Quintus Petillius Cerialis (Rufus) commander of Legio IX Hispana, brought a division of his troops, probably 2,000 men, south from Lincoln but they were ambushed and annihilated by the wrath of the Iceni Queen. Cerialis fled with his cavalry, leaving his legionaries to suffer the slaughter, and hid in a nearby fort. Seeing the size of the rebellion Decianus fled to Gaul.

After a two-day siege, the destruction of Camulodunum was intense and complete with Colonia Claudia Victricensis burnt to the ground. Archaeologists refer to the ‘Boudiccan destruction layer’ as evidence of a widespread fire. The Iceni and Trinovantes then headed south to Londinium (London) before turning northwards to Verulamium (St Albans) where the destruction continued. Boudicca then turned her Celtic rebel army north to engage the Roman legions coming south from Mona for the final battle somewhere near the meeting place of the Roman roads Fosse Way and Watling Street. The Roman war machine was absolutely brutal in ensuring that this did not become a repeat of the Teutoburg Forest disaster.

The Trinovantes joined Boudica’s rebellion which now numbered as many as 230,000 Britons according to Dio, which is certainly an exaggeration although it was clearly a sizeable force. Modern estimates gauge the strength of the Britons at around 100,000 Iceni and Trinovantes joined by groups of other Celtic tribes and around 12,000 Romans consisting of Legio XIV Gemina and divisions from two other legions including Legio XX, plus several thousand auxiliaries and cavalry.

On shear strength of numbers the Britons should destroyed the much smaller Roman force, then British history may have been totally different. But as we know it was not to be.

Paulinus called upon Legio II Augusta at Isca Dumnoniorum (Exter) to join his force but the legion under acting-commander Poenius Postumus, the praefectus castorum, failed to respond and kept the legion safely in the south away from the action. Postumus clearly expected the Romans to fall and was ready for a speedy exit from the Province. But the disorganised Britons proved to be no match for the well-disciplined and better armed Roman forces. Having brought shame on Legio II Postumus committed suicide.

Boudicca's rebellion

The battle site where the Iceni were slaughtered by the Romans has never been positively identified but Mancetter near Atherstone on the modern A5 road, roughly following the line of the Watling Street, is favoured. Tacitus writes that 80,000 Britons and just 400 Romans were killed in the battle. According to Tacitus Boudicca poisoned herself rather than face the humiliation of being taken captive by the Romans. The rebellion was over.

__________________________________________________________________________________

The cognomina of Legio XX
It is often said that both Legio XX and Legio XIV Gemina were awarded honorific titles for their courageous behaviour in the Boudiccan campaign; it is generally accepted from this point on Legio XX used the cognomina ‘Valeria Victrix’ (Valiant and Victorious) and XIV Gemina ‘Martia Victrix’ (Warlike and Victorious). Therefore the date of the Boudiccan rebellion AD 60-61 is assumed as the dating horizon for the honorific titles as we have seen with the epigraphic evidence at Colchester and Kingsholm. However, it should be noted that no ancient writer explains when or why these titles were awarded to Legio XX.

Tomlin ponders if the whole legion of Legio XX would have been awarded a honorific title for their part in quelling the Boudiccan Revolt as they only supplied a division whereas a full legion was provided by Legio XIV Gemina who accordingly did the bulk of the fighting at the battle of Watling Street. If Legio XX were not awarded the title for the Boudiccan campaign, as Tomlin questions, when did they receive it?

There are inscriptions to Legio XX in Illyricum where they fought in the Great Illyrian Revolt from AD 6 to AD 9 but none use the cognomina ‘Valeria Victrix’. We find three inscriptions which honour officers of Legio XX known to have served in Britain prior to AD 61 where the cognomina are also absent, whereas there are over fifty inscriptions to Legio XX from the 2nd and 3rd centuries, of which all but four contain the cognomina.

The cognomia does not appear to have been awarded early in the 1st century and there is a lack of evidence to confirm it was awarded to Legio XX after the Boudiccan Revolt. Was there a later event that would warrant such an award? Tomlin puts forward the suggestion that the cognomina ‘Valeria Victrix’ may have awarded after Legio XX distinguished itself for the campaign in Scotland under Agricola from AD 79, culminating in the Battle of Mons Graupius in AD 83. This is a distinct possibility, yet we must conclude that the current evidence does not allow us to determine the first instance of ‘Valeria Victrix’.

________________________________________________________________________________

Aftermath: Ravaged with Fire and Sword
The consequences of the Boudiccan revolt proved to be devastating for the Iceni. Nero immediately sent a further 2,000 legionaries with 1,000 cavalry and auxiliaries to replace the Roman losses and aid Paulinus in recovering the Province.

Paulinus was determined to carry out harsh reprisals against the Iceni and their allies. Many of the rebellious Britons that had supported Boudicca were put to the sword, their homes burned and crops destroyed. So effective was the retribution of the Romans that the homelands of the Iceni in Norfolk remained derelict and deserted for many years.

Concerned that this ruthless retribution had gone too far and would only lead to continued hostilities with the native Britons Paulinus was recalled by Emperor Nero in AD 62 and replaced by Publius Petronius Turpilianus. Taking a more conciliatory approach, the new governor’s aim was to stabilize the region and prevent further uprisings, consequently Petronius carried out few military operations. A year later Petronius was replaced by Marcus Trebellius Maximus.

The New Frontier
It is thought that Legio XX was involved with the defeat of Caratacus and the Ordovices in AD 51. The Iron Age hillfort at Caer Caradoc near Church Stretton in Shropshire is traditionally claimed as the site of Caratacus’s last stand. However, he managed to evade capture and headed north to the land of the Brigantes. It is often assumed that Legio XX was withdrawn from Usk and posted to Viroconium (Wroxeter, Shropshire) taking possession of the fortress from Legio XIV Gemina which had been withdrawn from Britain in AD 68. Wroxeter would have been the perfect base to pursue the Ordovices in mid-Wales.  

However, there is little direct evidence to support the presence of Legio XX at Wroxeter; it has been suggested that the legion may have been at Gloucester from AD 67 to AD 75. As noted above the movement of Legio XX once it left Colchester is poorly documented at this time and apart from involvement in the Boudiccan Revolt we know little for certain of their exact whereabouts.

Even so, it is generally accepted that the Roman presence at Gloucester was probably maintained by Legio II Augusta, transferred up from Isca Dumnoniorum (Exeter) who may have constructed the new legionary fortress at Glevum (Gloucester) replacing the smaller vexillation fort nearby at Kingsholm.

With the possible movement of Legio XX to Wroxeter the fort at Usk (Burrium) had been totally evacuated, and probably demolished, by AD 69 with construction of a new legionary fortress commenced at  Isca Silurum (Caerleon) about 7 miles further downstream. Usk was liable to frequent flooding and not accessible by boat. The new fortress at Caerleon was sited where the river was navigable. It is of course possible that Legio XX had spent the period AD 67 – AD 75 building the new fortress at Caerleon, but again we lack firm evidence for this.

Caerleon legionary fortress

On completion of the new fortress Legio II Augusta were transferred to Caerleon which remained as the legion’s headquarters until the 4th century. With Legio II Augusta firmly established at Caerleon the Roman fort at Glevum become a "colonia" of retired legionaries as Colonia Nervia Glevensium by AD 97.

Appointed as governor of Britain in AD 63, Trebellius continued the policy of consolidation taken by Petronius avoiding expansion of Roman territory. He continued the Romanisation of Britain and set about repairing the destruction caused by the Boudiccan revolt at Colchester and London. Five years later we can only assume that the province was relatively peaceful and sufficiently secure to permit the withdrawal of Legio XIV Gemina from Britain by the emperor Nero in AD 68 who considered the legion the best he had. Nero had plans for them in an eastern campaign but owing to his death the legion remained in the Balkans.

The Balkerne Gate, Colchester

The remaining British legions became restless with the lack of activity and sure enough mutinies followed. Lacking military experience Trebellius was unable to restore discipline in the legions and soon came into conflict with Marcus Roscius Coelius, commander of Legio XX.

The Year of the Four Emperors
With the death of Nero in AD 68 the Julio-Claudian dynasty ended. Chaos ensued in the following year; The Year of the Four Emperors, the first civil war of the Roman Empire which would see four different individuals proclaimed as emperor.

Following Nero's suicide after being declared a public enemy by the Senate, Galba was appointed Emperor. Galba quickly fell out of favour and was assassinated by Marcus Salvius Otho with the assistance of the Praetorian Guard. Otho's reign was also turned out to be brief after he was challenged by Aulus Vitellius, governor of the province of Germania Inferior. Vitellius and the legions of the Rhine with others marched on Rome. Otho was supported by the legions of the Balkans including Legio XIV Gemina. The rival armies met near Cremona in Italy in the First Battle of Bedriacum with Vitellius triumphant. Legio XIV Gemina declared they had not been defeated as the main body arrived too late for the battle; to prevent any threat of further rebellion Vitellius sent the legion back to Britain where they remained for the rest of the civil war. Vitellius continued to march on Rome and was declared Emperor by the Senate. 

Meanwhile back in Britain the turmoil presented Roscius with opportunity to rebel against the British Governor Trebellius who then quickly fled to the continent. Roscius supported Vitellius and had sent units from Legio XX to fight for him as had the other legions in Britain. Roscius the most powerful of the legionary commanders now effectively governed Britain until Vitellius, now emperor, sent Marcus Vettius Bolanus as the new governor in AD 69, who must have arrived in Britain around the same time as Legio XIV Gemina. Roscius remained in post even after the arrival of the new governor.

Vitellius’s position as emperor was not accepted by all, notably Titus Flavius Vespasian, the governor of Judaea, who had the support of the legions in the eastern provinces. Vespasian marched on Rome and emerged victorious ending Vitellius’s eight month reign. By the end of AD 69, Vespasian, who had earlier distinguished himself by leading Legio II Augusta in the invasion of Britain, established himself as emperor marking the beginning of the Flavian Dynasty and bringing stability back to the empire. Roscius and Legio XX being among the last to swear allegiance to Vespasian.

Titus Flavius Vespasian

In AD 70 Vespasian replaced Roscius the treacherous commander of Legio XX with Gnaeus Julius Agricola. Agricola reimposed discipline on the rebellious legion that had supported Vitellius during the civil war. Agricola began his career as a military tribune having served in Britain under Gaius Suetonius Paulinus, governor of Britain from AD 58-62. During this time Agricola almost certainly took part in the attack on the Druids of Mona and the suppression of the Boudiccan Revolt in AD 60-61. 

Bolanus remained as governor, reclaiming some of the territory lost in the revolt. In the same year Vespasian sent Legio XIV Gemina back across the Channel to form an army under Quintus Petillius Cerialis (formerly commander of Legio IX Hispana during the Boudiccan Revolt) to deal with a Batavian rebellion led by Julius Civilis who was attacking the garrisons on the Rhine. Cerialis was Vespasian’s son-in-law and had been taken hostage by Vitellius during the civil war. He escaped and joined the army that took Rome for Vespasian.

Vespasian rewarded Cerialis’s loyalty and success in Germania by appointing him as governor of Britain in AD 71, replacing Bolanus. Cerialis brought Legio II Adiutrix with him to Britain where he was closely supported by Agricola, commander of Legio XX.

Tacitus attributes the unrest within the British legions to their troops having too much time on their hands while being under-utilised by governors Petronius and Trebillius. The northern frontier had been consolidated at a line roughly from the River Dee to the Humber estuary in the east. Cerialis and Agricola would form a successful partnership that would result in expansion of the Roman occupation deep into the north of Britain.

Sources:
Simon Elliott, Agricola in Scotland, Pen & Sword Military, 2025.
Nic Fields, Boudicca’s Rebellion AD 60–61, Osprey, 2011.
Stephen James Malone, Legio XX Valeria Victrix: Prosopography, archaeology and history, BAR Publishing, 2006.
Robert McPake, A Note on the Cognomina of Legio XX, Britannia, Vol. 12, 1981.
Nigel Pollard & Joanne Berry, The Complete Roman Legions, Thames & Hudson, 2015 (Reprint edition 2024).
I.A. Richmond and R.P. Wright, The Catalogue of the Roman Inscribed and Sculptured Stones in the Grosvenor Museum, Chester, Chester Archaeological Society, 1955.
RSO Tomlin, The Twentieth Legion at Wroxeter and Carlisle in the First Century: The Epigraphic Evidence, Britannia, Vol. 23, 1992.
Graham Webster, the Roman Invasion of Britain, Routledge, revised edition 2003.
Graham Webster, A Short Guide to the Roman Inscriptions & Sculptured Stones in the Grosvenor Museum Chester, Grosvenor Pubication, 1970. 

- Edited 05/11/25

* * *