The Antonine advance and return in Hadrian's Wall

The Antonine advance moved Rome’s northern frontier beyond Hadrian’s Wall. Under the emperor Antoninus Pius, Roman forces constructed the Antonine Wall across the Central Belt of Scotland, and occupation of that new frontier probably began around 142 CE. Hadrian’s Wall therefore ceased, for a time, to be the principal forward boundary of Roman Britain.

The change was not the creation of a completely separate military world. Hadrian’s Wall had begun during the reign of Hadrian, probably in 122 CE, and had developed into a frontier installation containing a barrier, milecastles, turrets, forts, roads, bridges, military settlements, supply bases and civilian settlements. Its eastern part was generally built in stone, while the western sector between the River Irthing and the Solway was initially a turf wall. By the time of the Antonine advance, this was an established military and administrative zone rather than a single line of masonry.

Moving the frontier northwards altered the role of that zone. Some forts on Hadrian’s Wall may have been abandoned or reduced, but the exact extent of abandonment at individual forts remains uncertain. That uncertainty matters: the return was not necessarily a simple sequence in which every post was emptied and later reoccupied. The evidence allows different arrangements at different sites, and the surviving remains do not provide one uniform story for the entire 117-kilometre frontier.

By the early 160s, Roman forces had returned to Hadrian’s Wall. The Antonine Wall was no longer the principal permanent frontier, and Hadrian’s Wall again formed the main Roman frontier installation in northern England. The return preserved the importance of the older forts and communications system, even though their buildings, garrisons and precise functions could change.

For visitors, the most important consequence is archaeological rather than monumental. There is no single surviving structure on Hadrian’s Wall labelled “the return”. Instead, the period is detected through the changing occupation of forts and the continued presence of a frontier system whose parts had different histories. At Hadrian’s Wall’s principal sites, the wall, forts, milecastles, turrets and Vallum should be read as connected elements of a military landscape whose importance continued after the army moved back from Scotland.

The physical evidence for the Antonine advance and return is spread along Hadrian’s Wall rather than concentrated in one monument. The frontier ran from Wallsend on the River Tyne to Bowness-on-Solway on the Solway Firth, approximately 117 kilometres or 73 modern miles, although the measurement varies according to which sections and terminal structures are included. The modern Hadrian’s Wall Path is longer, at approximately 135 kilometres or 84 miles, because it is a walking route rather than the Roman line.

At Wallsend, Segedunum was built as part of the Hadrianic frontier and remained in use into the late Roman period. Excavated remains include the fort plan, headquarters building, barracks, granaries, commanding officer’s house and bathhouse remains. This is useful evidence for continuity: the site was not merely a marker of the frontier’s original construction, but a fort with activity extending well beyond the Antonine occupation of Scotland.

Further west, the surviving frontier can be read through its different construction methods. The eastern part was generally built in stone. In the western sector between the River Irthing and the Solway, the initial barrier was turf, with timber used in associated milecastles and turrets. Where wall masonry survives, it does not automatically represent an untouched second-century surface. Some visible masonry reflects reconstruction and conservation work carried out after John Clayton acquired substantial stretches of the frontier in the nineteenth century.

The Vallum is another important survival. It is a major earthwork consisting of a broad ditch with banks south of much of the wall. Its exact function and chronology remain debated, so it should not be presented as a feature with a single securely proven purpose. At Benwell, a surviving section of the Vallum can be seen near the Temple of Antenociticus, providing a clear example of how the frontier included substantial earthworks as well as the barrier itself.

At Chesters, the ancient fort of Cilurnum guarded the bridge over the North Tyne, and its well-preserved Roman bathhouse remains visible. At Carrawburgh, ancient Brocolitia, visitors can see the remains of a Mithraic temple and the shrine known as Coventina’s Well; the identification of the water shrine with Coventina depends on an inscription and associated finds. Housesteads preserves the headquarters, granaries, barracks, commanding officer’s house, hospital and latrines. These sites do not display a complete sequence of the Antonine return on their walls, but they show the forts and supporting installations whose occupation made the frontier function.

For a broader choice of places, the self-guided tours around Hadrian’s Wall can be used to compare forts, barrier remains and earthworks rather than treating the frontier as one continuous surviving wall.

The central named individual in this episode was Antoninus Pius, the emperor under whom Rome constructed the Antonine Wall across central Scotland. The decision placed the imperial frontier farther north, probably from about 142 CE. The surviving evidence establishes his association with the advance, but it does not explain his personal motives in enough detail to support a confident account of why the move was made.

Hadrian was the earlier emperor whose reign saw the beginning of Hadrian’s Wall, probably in 122 CE, after his visit to Britain in that year. His frontier was not simply a masonry barrier. It included forts, milecastles, turrets, roads, bridges, military settlements, supply bases and civilian settlements. Those components remained relevant when Roman forces returned from the Antonine frontier in the early 160s.

The soldiers themselves are less easy to identify in this particular episode. Individual forts may have experienced different degrees of abandonment, and the exact extent of that abandonment remains uncertain. It is therefore unsafe to describe every garrison as having marched north, or every post on Hadrian’s Wall as having been left empty. The archaeological record supports a varied pattern rather than a single known movement of named units.

The wider frontier had already been built and administered by a mixture of military personnel and civilian communities. The legions II Augusta, VI Victrix and XX Valeria Victrix supplied detachments for construction during the earlier building of the frontier, while civilian settlements developed beside several forts. These facts help explain the human infrastructure that the returning army inherited, but they do not identify the particular men who served at each site during the Antonine return.

For named modern figures, John Clayton belongs to a later period. He acquired substantial stretches of the wall and undertook excavation and conservation in the nineteenth century, so some masonry now visible reflects reconstruction rather than untouched Roman survival. The places connected with John Clayton help separate the Roman evidence from the later history of its preservation.

Hadrian’s Wall during and after the Antonine advance was a military and administrative zone, not simply a barrier separating two empty territories. Its forts, roads, milecastles, turrets, settlements and supply bases supported the movement and organisation of people. Civilian settlements developed beside several forts, so daily activity included military work as well as the needs of communities living near the garrisons.

The surviving buildings show the range of work carried out within a fort. At Segedunum, excavated remains include barracks, granaries, a headquarters building, a commanding officer’s house and a bathhouse. At Housesteads, the visible structures include barracks, granaries, a headquarters, a commanding officer’s house, a hospital and latrines. These remains identify storage, administration, accommodation, medical care, hygiene and command as parts of life on the frontier.

A milecastle controlled movement through the barrier. It was a small fortified enclosure built astride and integrated with the wall, containing a gateway through which passage could be controlled. Milecastles were normally spaced at approximately one Roman mile, although their actual intervals varied. This arrangement made the frontier a sequence of staffed access points rather than an uninterrupted wall with no openings.

Vindolanda provides a particularly direct form of evidence, although it lies south of Hadrian’s Wall near modern Bardon Mill. It was a major fort and settlement on the Stanegate road before and during the construction of Hadrian’s Wall, and several successive timber and stone forts were built there from the late first century onwards. Its writing tablets preserve letters, lists and military records. They show the kinds of documents that could be produced in a frontier community, even though they do not by themselves provide a complete account of the Antonine advance and return.

Belief also left physical traces. Carrawburgh preserves the remains of a Mithraic temple and the shrine known as Coventina’s Well. The identification of that water shrine with Coventina depends on an inscription and associated finds. At Benwell, the separate Temple of Antenociticus stands near the surviving Vallum. Together these sites show that religious activity formed part of the frontier landscape, alongside administration, accommodation and transport.

The surviving evidence says much less about spoken language, meals and household routines than it does about buildings and movement. It is better to distinguish what the sites demonstrate—military organisation, storage, medical provision, controlled passage, civilian settlement and religious practice—from details that cannot be securely reconstructed for every fort during this short period.

Begin at Wallsend with Segedunum. The excavated fort plan, headquarters, barracks, granaries, commanding officer’s house and bathhouse remains establish the scale of the installation and its continued use into the late Roman period. From there, treat the frontier as a chain of sites rather than expecting one surviving feature to explain the whole Antonine episode.

At Benwell, look for the surviving Vallum and the nearby Temple of Antenociticus. The Vallum’s broad ditch and banks make the military zone visible in a different way from the wall itself, while the temple adds evidence for religious activity. The function and chronology of the Vallum remain debated, so read it as an important surviving earthwork rather than a feature with one certain interpretation.

Continue to Chesters for the bridge fort and its well-preserved bathhouse. At Carrawburgh, compare the Mithraic temple with Coventina’s Well, remembering that the shrine’s identification depends on inscriptional and associated archaeological evidence. Housesteads then provides the fullest concentration of visible fort buildings, including the headquarters, granaries, barracks, hospital, commanding officer’s house and latrines.

Use the Hadrian’s Wall destination guide to place these sites within the full route from Wallsend to Bowness-on-Solway. If you want the later history of excavation and conservation alongside the Roman remains, compare the route with the places connected with Eric Birley. The Antonine return is best understood by comparing these different kinds of evidence: forts that continued in use, earthworks with debated chronology, religious buildings and masonry affected by later conservation.