History of Julius Caesar Vol. 2 of 2

As to the place where Cæsar encamped, it is very probable, as we have said, that it was on the heights of Saint-Gildas; for from thence he could see the dispositions of the enemy, and perceive far off the approach of his fleet. In case of check, the Roman galleys found, under his protection, a place of refuge in the Vilaine. Thus, he had his rear secured; rested upon the towns of the coast which he had taken; could recall to him, if necessary, Titurius Sabinus; and lastly, could cross the Vilaine, to place that river between him and his enemies. Placed, on the contrary, on the other side of the Bay of Quiberon, he would have been too much enclosed in an enemy’s country, and would have had none of the advantages offered by the position of Saint-Gildas.

283

Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 41.

284

We see, in fact, in Vegetius, that the word falces was applied to the head of a battering ram, armed with a point, and with a hook to detach the stones from the walls. “Quæ (trabes) aut adunco præfigitur ferro, et falx vocatur ab eo quod incurva est, ut de muro extrahat lapides.” (Vegetius, IV. 14.)

285

De Bello Gallico, III. 17.

286

This position is at the distance of seven kilomètres to the east of Avranches. The vestiges still visible of Chastellier are probably those of a camp made at a later period than this Gallic war, but we think that Sabinus had established his camp on the same site.

287

De Bello Gallico, III. 19.

288

Cæsar, after having said, in the first book of his “Commentaries”, that Aquitaine was one of the three parts of Gaul, states here that it formed the third part by its extent and population, which is not correct.

289

Nicholas of Damascus (in Athenæus, Deipn., VI. 249) writes in this manner the name of King Adiatomus, and adds that the soldurii were clothed in royal vestments.

290

This combat is remarkable as being the only one in the whole war in Gaul in which the Romans attack a fortified Gaulish camp.

291

Of this number were the Tarbelli, The Bigerriones, The Ptiani, the Vasates, the Tarusates, the Elusates, the Gaites, the Ausci, the Garumni, the Sibusates, and the Cocosates.

292

De Bello Gallico, III. 27.

293

Pliny, Hist. Nat., III. x. 6.

294

Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 44.

295

Cæsar never entirely subjugated the north-west of Gaul. (See Sallust, cited by Ammianus Marcellinus, XV., 15.) Still, under the reign of Augustus, in 724 and 726, there were triumphs over the Morini.

296

De Bello Gallico, III. 29.

297

“In praetura, in consulatu præfectum fabrum detulit.” (Cicero, Orat. pro Balbo, 28.)

298

Mamurra, a Roman knight, born at Formiæ. (Pliny, Hist. Nat., XXXVI. 7.)

299

From Xanten to Nimeguen, for a length of fifty kilomètres, extends a line of heights which form a barrier along the left bank of the Rhine. All appearances would lead us to believe that the river flowed, in Cæsar’s time, close at the foot of these heights; but now it has removed from them, and at Emmerich, for instance, is at a distance of eight kilomètres. This chain, the eastern slope of which is scarped, presents only two passes; one by a large opening at Xanten itself, to the north of the mountain called the Furstenberg; the other by a gorge of easy access, opening at Qualburg, near Cleves. These two passes were so well defined as the entries to Gaul in these regions, that, after the conquest, the Romans closed them by fortifying the Furstenberg (Castra vetera), and founding, on the two islands formed by the Rhine opposite these entries, Colonia Trajana, now Xanten, and Quadriburgium, now Qualburg. The existence of these isles facilitated at that time the passage of the Rhine, and, in all probability, it was opposite these two localities just named that the Usipetes and Tencteri crossed the river to penetrate into Gaul.

300

The account of this campaign is very obscure in the “Commentaries.” Florus and Dio Cassius add to the obscurities: the first, by placing the scene of the defeat of the Usipetes and Tencteri towards the confluence of the Moselle and the Rhine; the second, by writing that Cæsar came up with the Germans in the country of the Treviri. Several authors have given to the account of these two historians more credit than to that of Cæsar himself, and they give of this campaign an explanation quite different from ours. General de Gœler, among others, supposes that the whole emigration of the Germans had advanced as far as the country of the Condrusi, where Cæsar came up with them, and that he had driven them from west to east, into the angle formed by the Moselle and the Rhine. From researches which were kindly undertaken by M. de Cohausen, major in the Prussian army, and which have given the same result as those of MM. Stoffel and De Locqueyssie, we consider this explanation of the campaign as inadmissible. It would be enough, to justify this assertion, to consider that the country situated between the Meuse and the Rhine, to the south of Aix-la-Chapelle, is too much broken and too barren to have allowed the German emigration, composed of 430,000 individuals, men, women, and children, with wagons, to move and subsist in it. Moreover, it contains no trace of ancient roads; and if Cæsar had taken this direction, he must necessarily have crossed the forest of the Ardennes, a circumstance of which he would not have failed to inform us. Besides, is it not more probable that, on the news of the approach of Cæsar, instead of directing their march towards the Ubii, who were not favourable to them, the Germans, at first spread over a vast territory, would have concentrated themselves towards the most distant part of the fertile country on which they had seized – that of the Menapii?

301

The Ambivariti were established on the left bank of the Meuse, to the west of Ruremonde, and to the south of the marshes of Peel.

302

De Bello Gallico, IV. 13.

303

“Acie triplici instituta.” Some authors have translated these words by “the army was formed in three columns;” but Cæsar, operating in a country which was totally uncovered and flat, and aiming at surprising a great mass of enemies, must have marched in order of battle, which did not prevent each cohort from being in column.

304

Attacked unexpectedly in the afternoon, while they were sleeping. (Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 48.)

305

The study of the deserted beds of the Rhine leads us to believe that the confluence of the Waal and the Meuse, which is at present near Gorkum, was then much more to the east, towards Fort Saint-André. In that case, Cæsar made no mistake in reckoning eighty miles from the junction of the Waal and the Meuse to the mouth of the latter river.

306

De Bello Gallico, IV. 14, 15.

307

The following reasons have led us to adopt Bonn as the point where Cæsar crossed the Rhine: —

We learn from the “Commentaries” that in 699 he debouched in the country of the Ubii, and that two years later it was a little above (paulum supra) the first bridge that he established another, which joined the territory of the Treviri with that of the Ubii. Now everything leads to the belief that, in the first passage as in the second, the bridge was thrown across between the frontiers of the same peoples; for we cannot admit, with some authors, that the words paulum supra apply to a distance of several leagues. As to those who suppose that the passage was effected at Andernach, because, changing with Florus the Meuse (Mosa) into Moselle, they placed the scene of the defeat of the Germans at the confluence of the Moselle and the Rhine, we have given the reasons for rejecting this opinion. We have endeavoured to prove, in fact, that the battle against the Usipetes and the Tencteri had for its theatre the confluence of the Meuse and the Rhine; and since, in crossing this latter river, Cæsar passed from the country of the Treviri into that of the Ubii, we must perceive that after his victory he must necessarily have proceeded up the valley of the Rhine to go from the territory of the Menapii to the Treviri, as far up as the territory of the Ubii, established on the right bank.

This being admitted, it remains to fix, within the limits assigned to these two last peoples, the most probable point of passage. Hitherto, Cologne has been adopted; but, to answer to the data of the “Commentaries,” Cologne appears to us to be much too far to the north. In fact, in the campaign of 701, Cæsar, having started from the banks of the Rhine, traversed the forest of the Ardennes from east to west, passed near the Segni and the Condrusi, since they implored him to spare their territory, and directed his march upon Tongres. If he had started from Cologne, he would not have crossed the countries in question. Moreover, in this same year, 2,000 Sicambrian cavalry crossed the Rhine thirty miles below the bridge of the Roman army. Now, if this bridge had been constructed at Cologne, the point of passage of the Sicambri, thirty miles below, would have been at a very great distance from Tongres, where, nevertheless, they seem to have arrived very quickly.

On the contrary, everything is explained if we adopt Bonn as the point of passage. To go from Bonn to Tongres, Cæsar proceeded, as the text has it, across the forest of the Ardennes; he passed through the country of the Segni and Condrusi, or very near them; and the Sicambri, crossing the Rhine thirty miles below Bonn, took the shortest line from the Rhine to Tongres. Moreover, we cannot place Cæsar’s point of passage either lower or higher than Bonn. Lower, that is, towards the north, the different incidents related in the “Commentaries” are without possible application to the theatre of the events; higher, towards the south, the Rhine flows upon a rocky bed, where the piles could not have been driven in, and presents, between the mountains which border it, no favourable point of passage. We may add that Cæsar would have been much too far removed from the country of the Sicambri, the chastisement of whom was the avowed motive of his expedition.

Another fact deserves to be taken into consideration: that, less than fifty years after Cæsar’s campaigns, Drusus, in order to proceed against the Sicambri – that is, against the same people whom Cæsar intended to combat – crossed the Rhine at Bonn. (Florus, IV. 12.)

308

The following passage has given room for different interpretations: —

“Hæc utraque insuper bipedalibus trabibus immissis, quantum eorum tignorum junctura distabat, binis utrimque fibulis ab extrema parte distinebantur; quibus disclusis atque in contrariam partem revinctis, tanta erat operis firmitudo atque ea rerum natura, ut, quo major vis aquæ se incitavisset, hoc arctius illigata tenerentur.” (De Bello Gallico, IV. 17.)

It has not been hitherto observed that the words hæc utraque relate to the two couples of one row of piles, and not to the two piles of the same couple. Moreover, the words quibus disclusis, &c., relate to these same two couples, and not, as has been supposed, to fibulis.

309

De Bello Gallico, IV. 20.

310

De Bello Gallico, II. 4.

311

De Bello Gallico, V. 13.

312

Pliny, Hist. Nat., IV. 30, § 16.

313

Pliny, Hist. Nat., IV. 30, § 16. – Tacitus, Agricola, 10.

314

De Bello Gallico, V. 12.

315

Strabo, IV., p. 199.

316

Agricola, 12.

317

De Bello Gallico, V. 12.

318

De Bello Gallico, V. 13 and 14.

319

De Bello Gallico, V. 20.

320

Annales, XIV. 33.

321

Although the greater number of manuscripts read Cenimagni, some authors have made two names of it, the Iceni and the Cangi.

322

The Anderida Silva, 120 miles in length by 30 in breadth, extended over the counties of Sussex and Kent, in what is now called the Weald. (See Camden, Britannia, edit. Gibson, I., col. 151, 195, 258, edit. of 1753.)

323

Diodorus Siculus, V. 21. – Tacitus, Agricola, 12.

324

IV., p. 200.

325

Agricola, 11.

326

Diodorus Siculus, V. 21.

327

De Bello Gallico, V. 21.

328

De Bello Gallico, V. 14.

329

Strabo, IV., p. 200.

330

De Bello Gallico, V. 14.

331

Pliny, Hist. Nat., XXII. 1.

332

De Bello Gallico, V. 14.

333

Diodorus Siculus, V. 22.

334

Diodorus Siculus, V. 22. – Strabo, IV., p. 200.

335

De Bello Gallico, V. 12.

336

De Bello Gallico, VI. 13.

337

Agricola, 11.

338

Strabo, IV., p. 199.

339

De Bello Gallico, V. 12.

340

Diodorus Siculus, V. 22.

341

Pliny, Hist. Nat., IV. 30, § 16.

342

Tacitus, Agricola, 36.

343

De Bello Gallico, V. 16.

344

Tacitus, Agricola, 12.

345

Frontinus, Stratagm., II. 3, 18. – Diodorus Siculus, V. 21. – Strabo, IV., p. 200.

346

The account on page 213 confirms this interpretation, which is conformable to that of General Gœler.

347

De Bello Gallico, IV. 32 and 33.

348

Strabo, IV., p. 200.

349

Strabo, IV., p. 201.

350

From what will be seen further on, each transport ship, on its return, contained 150 men. Eighty ships could thus transport 12,000 men, but since, reduced to sixty-eight, they were enough to carry back the whole army to the continent, they can only have carried 10,200 men, which was probably the effective force of the two legions. The eighteen ships appropriated to the cavalry might transport 450 horses, at the rate of twenty-five horses each ship.

351

The port of Dover extended formerly from the site of the present town, between the cliffs which border the valley of the Dour or of Charlton. (See Plate 17.) Indeed, from the facts furnished by ancient authors, and a geological examination of the ground, it appears certain that once the sea penetrated into the land, and formed a creek which occupied nearly the whole of the valley of Charlton. The words of Cæsar are just justified: “Cujus loci hæc erat natura, atque ita montibus angustis mare continebatur, uti ex locis superioribus in littus telum adjici posset.” (IV. 23.)

The proofs of the above assertion result from several facts related in different notices on the town of Dover. It is there said that in 1784 Sir Thomas Hyde Page caused a shaft to be sunk at a hundred yards from the shore, to ascertain the depth of the basin at a remote period; it proved that the ancient bed of the sea had been formerly thirty English feet below the present level of the high tide. In 1826, in sinking a well at a place called Dolphin Lane, they found, at a depth of twenty-one feet, a bed of mud resembling that of the present port, mixed with the bones of animals and fragments of leaves and roots. Similar detritus have been discovered in several parts of the valley. An ancient chronicler, named Darell, relates that “Wilbred, King of Kent, built in 700 the church of St. Martin, the ruins of which are still visible near the market-place, on the spot where formerly ships cast anchor.”

The town built under the Emperors Adrian and Septimus Severus occupied a part of the port, which had already been covered with sand; yet the sea still entered a considerable distance inland. (See Plate 17.)

It would appear to have been about the year 950 that the old port was entirely blocked up with the maritime and fluvial alluvium which have been increasing till our day, and which at different periods have rendered it necessary to construct the dykes and quays which have given the port its present form.

352

“Constat enim aditus insulæ esse munitos mirificis molibus.” (Cicero, Epist. ad Atticum, IV. 16.)

353

Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 51.

354

The Emperor Julian (p. 70, edit. Lasius) makes Cæsar say that he had been the first to leap down from the ship.

355

It is in the text, in scopulum vicinum insulæ, which must be translated by “a rock near the isle of Britain,” and not, as certain authors have interpreted it, “a rock isolated from the continent.” (Valerius Maximus, III. ii. 23.) – In fact, these rocks, called Malms, are distinctly seen at low water opposite the arsenal and marine barracks at Deal.

356

Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 51.

357

Cæsar himself had only carried three servants with him, as Cotta relates. (Athenæus, Deipnosophist., VI. 105.)

358

Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 53.

359

At the battle of Arcola, in 1796, twenty-five horsemen had a great influence on the issue of the day. (Mémoires de Montholon, dictées de Sainte-Hélène, II. 9.)

360

De Bello Gallico, IV. 36 and 37.

361

De Bello Gallico, IV. 38.

362

Dio Cassius, XL. 1. – See Strabo, IV., p. 162, edit. Didot.

363

De Bello Gallico, V. I.

364

Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 56. XL. 1.

365

This opinion has been already supported by learned archæologists. I will cite especially M. Mariette; Mr. Thomas Lewin, who has written a very interesting account of Cæsar’s invasions of England; and lastly, M. l’Abbé Haigneré, archivist of Boulogne, who has collected the best documents on this question.

366

Strabo, IV. 6, p. 173.

367

According to the Itinerary of Antoninus, the road started from Bagacum (Bavay), and passed by Pons-Scaldis (Escaut-Pont), Turnacum (Tournay), Viroviacum (Werwick), Castellum (Montcassel, Cassel), Tarvenna (Thérouanne), and thence to Gesoriacum (Boulogne). According to Mariette, medals found on the road demonstrate that it had been made in the time of Agrippa; moreover, according to the same Itinerary of Antoninus, a Roman road started from Bavay, and, by Tongres, ended at the Rhine at Bonn. (See Jahrbücher des Vereins von Alterthums Freunden, Heft 37, Bonn, 1864. Now, admitting that there had been already under Augustus a road which united Boulogne with Bonn, we understand the expression of Florus, who explains that Drusus amended this road by constructing bridges on the numerous water-courses which it crossed, Bonnam et Gesoriacum pontibus junxit. (Florus, IV. 12.)

368

Suetonius, Caligula, 46. – The remains of the pharos of Caligula were still visible a century ago.

369

Suetonius, Claudius, 17.

370

Ammianus Marcellinus, XX. 1.

371

Ammianus Marcellinus, XX. 7, 8.

372

Eumenius, Panegyric of Constantinus Cæsar, 14.

373

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, cited by Mr. Lewin.

374

“Qui tertia vigilia Morino solvisset a portu.” (Florus, III. 10.)

375

Strabo, IV. 5, p. 166.

376

“Ultimos Gallicarum gentium Morinos, nec portu quam Gesoriacum vocant quicquam notius habet.” (Pomponius Mela, III. 2.) – “Μορινὡν Γησοριακον ἑπἱνειον.” (Ptolemy, II. ix. 3.)

377

“Hæc [Britannia] abest a Gesoriaco Morinorum gentis litore proximo trajectu quinquaginta M.” (Pliny, Hist. Nat., IV. 30.)

378

The camp of Labienus, during the second expedition, was, no doubt, established on the site now occupied by the high town. From thence it commanded the surrounding country, the sea, and the lower course of the Liane.

379

Histoire du Consulat et de l’Empire, tom. IV., I. 17.

380

What is now called Romney Marsh is the northern part of a vast plain, bounded on the east and south by the sea, and on the west and north by the line of heights at the foot of which the military canal has been cut. It is difficult to determine what was the aspect of Romney Marsh in the time of Cæsar. Nevertheless, the small elevation of the plain above the level of the sea, as well as the nature of the soil, lead us to conclude that the sea covered it formerly up to the foot of the heights of Lymne, except at least in the part called Dymchurch-Wall. This is a long tongue of land, on which are now raised three forts and nine batteries, and which, considering its height above the rest of the plain, has certainly never been covered by the sea. These facts appear to be confirmed by an ancient chart in the Cottonian collection in the British Museum.

Mr. Lewin appears to have represented as accurately as possible the appearance of Romney Marsh in the time of Cæsar, in the plate which accompanies his work. The part not covered by the sea extended, no doubt, as he represents it, from the bay of Romney to near Hythe, where it terminated in a bank of pebbles of considerable extent. But it appears to us that it would have been difficult for the Roman army to land on a bank of pebbles at the very foot of the rather steep heights of Lymne. Mr. Lewin places the Roman army, in the first expedition, at the foot of the heights, on the bank of pebbles itself, surrounded on almost all sides by the sea. In the second expedition, he supposes it to have been on the heights, at the village of Lymne; and, to explain how Cæsar joined his fleet to the camp by retrenchments common to both, he admits that this fleet was drawn on land as far as the slope of the heights, and shut up in a square space of 300 mètres each side, because we find there the ruins of an ancient castle called Stutfall Castle. All this is hardly admissible.

381

Word for word, this expression signifies that the ships set sail four days after the arrival of the Romans in England. The Latin language often employed the ordinal number instead of the cardinal number. Thus, the historian Eutropius says, “Carthage was destroyed 700 years after it was founded, Carthago septingentesimo anno quam condita erat deleta est.” Are we, in the phrase, post diem quartum, to reckon the day of the arrival? – Virgil says, speaking of the seventeenth day, septima post decimam. – Cicero uses the expression post sexennium in the sense of six years. It is evident that Virgil counts seven days after the tenth. If the tenth was comprised in this number, the expression septima post decimam would signify simply the sixteenth day. On his part, Cicero understands clearly the six years as a lapse of time which was to pass, starting from the moment in which he speaks. Thus, the post diem quartum of Cæsar must be understood in the sense of four days accomplished, without reckoning the day of landing.