Defenses like Hadrian's Wall or the Great Wall of China were not intended to act like the Maginot Line and provide absolute defenses against hostile armies. They were symbolic structures meant to define the boundary between "civilization" and "barbarians," to manage traffic between the areas (merchants and travelers would have to pass through gates), to discourage casual raiding and brigandage, and to act as a tripwire, giving warning of serious attacks. Ancient empires simply didn't have the manpower to defend miles and miles of fortifications in force, a serious attacker could always find a thinly-manned stretch of wall to climb over.
Yes - the Picts repeatedly breached it but the threat they represented is probably overstated. After the withdrawl of the Romans from Britain it was systematically damaged as there was no-one to repair it - and for about 600 years there was no quarries worked in Britain due to the availability of material left by the invaders. It never really served much of a military purpose more a grand gesture to honour Hadriam - Scotland was pretty sparsely populated and the locals had no great wish to attack Britain - apart from the odd foray. There was another wall (The Antonine wall about 100m north) and this fared worse but more as a result of the Romans failure to take Caledonia than anything else. Left undefended of course Hadrian's Wall was repeatedly attacked - looted might be a more accurate term as people from both sides of the border pottered off with the stone.
Although the wall stood as a symbol of Rome’s ultimate power, the Picts were not intimidated. In 158 AD, they successfully attacked Hadrian’s Wall, and seriously damaged it. They also destroyed the Antonine Wall (north of Hadrian’s wall) at this time. Later, in 306 AD, the Picts grew bold and raided far south of the wall—as far south as modern day London. In 383 AD, they again breached Hadrian’s Wall. This time it was so badly damaged that it took the Romans 24 years to rebuild it. In 396 AD, the Picts attacked the wall again. Soon afterwards, in 409 AD, the Romans finally decided to pull out of Britain.
I did a trip to China back in 2001 and visited The Great Wall and asked out guide, 'did the Wall ever really keep anybody out..?' and He laughed and said, 'A wall is only as good as the men guarding it..!' I asked him what He meant by that and he said, 'The Mongols paid a few bit of silver to the guards and passed freely, without a fight, because the wall os something if the guards are really soldiers and really ready to fight.'
My guess is, Hadrian's Wall must have been much the same.
I believe that Hadrian's Wall (twice) and the Great Wall of China (twice) were successful in that they were only breached by enemy forces a couple of times. What the walls did do was keep the everyday knuckle head from wandering in without some type of control. Additionally, should someone enter their country or conquered territory, they (Rome of China) did not provide them with all the things that their citizens were taxed for and provided.
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
Defenses like Hadrian's Wall or the Great Wall of China were not intended to act like the Maginot Line and provide absolute defenses against hostile armies. They were symbolic structures meant to define the boundary between "civilization" and "barbarians," to manage traffic between the areas (merchants and travelers would have to pass through gates), to discourage casual raiding and brigandage, and to act as a tripwire, giving warning of serious attacks. Ancient empires simply didn't have the manpower to defend miles and miles of fortifications in force, a serious attacker could always find a thinly-manned stretch of wall to climb over.
Yes - the Picts repeatedly breached it but the threat they represented is probably overstated. After the withdrawl of the Romans from Britain it was systematically damaged as there was no-one to repair it - and for about 600 years there was no quarries worked in Britain due to the availability of material left by the invaders. It never really served much of a military purpose more a grand gesture to honour Hadriam - Scotland was pretty sparsely populated and the locals had no great wish to attack Britain - apart from the odd foray. There was another wall (The Antonine wall about 100m north) and this fared worse but more as a result of the Romans failure to take Caledonia than anything else. Left undefended of course Hadrian's Wall was repeatedly attacked - looted might be a more accurate term as people from both sides of the border pottered off with the stone.
Although the wall stood as a symbol of Rome’s ultimate power, the Picts were not intimidated. In 158 AD, they successfully attacked Hadrian’s Wall, and seriously damaged it. They also destroyed the Antonine Wall (north of Hadrian’s wall) at this time. Later, in 306 AD, the Picts grew bold and raided far south of the wall—as far south as modern day London. In 383 AD, they again breached Hadrian’s Wall. This time it was so badly damaged that it took the Romans 24 years to rebuild it. In 396 AD, the Picts attacked the wall again. Soon afterwards, in 409 AD, the Romans finally decided to pull out of Britain.
I did a trip to China back in 2001 and visited The Great Wall and asked out guide, 'did the Wall ever really keep anybody out..?' and He laughed and said, 'A wall is only as good as the men guarding it..!' I asked him what He meant by that and he said, 'The Mongols paid a few bit of silver to the guards and passed freely, without a fight, because the wall os something if the guards are really soldiers and really ready to fight.'
My guess is, Hadrian's Wall must have been much the same.
I believe that Hadrian's Wall (twice) and the Great Wall of China (twice) were successful in that they were only breached by enemy forces a couple of times. What the walls did do was keep the everyday knuckle head from wandering in without some type of control. Additionally, should someone enter their country or conquered territory, they (Rome of China) did not provide them with all the things that their citizens were taxed for and provided.
yeah........................................