Page images
PDF
EPUB

at a period when the discipline of those corps was most perfect, and when they were commanded by the greatest of their generals, was certainly very unequal; but less so (even without taking into account the superiority of numbers and other advantages, all on the side of the invaded) than is generally imagined and represented. A brief examination of the arts and practices of war of the two contending parties may serve to explain, in a great measure, what is past, and render more intelligible the events which are to ensue. The first striking result of such an examination is a suspicion, and, indeed, a proof, that the Britons were much farther advanced in civilization than the savage tribes to which it has been the fashion to compare them. Were this not the case, the somewhat unsuccessful employment against them of so large an army as that of Caesar, would be disgraceful to the Roman name. Their war-chariots, which several times produced tremendous effects on the Romans, and the use of which seems at that time to have been peculiar to the Britons, would of themselves prove a high degree of mechanical skill, and an acquaintance with several arts. These cars were of various forms and sizes, some being rude, and others of curious and even elegant workmanship. Those most commonly in use, and called esseda or essedæ by the Romans, were made to contain each a charioteer for driving, and one, two, or more warriors for fighting. They were at once strong and light; the extremity of their axles and other salient points were armed with scythes and hooks, for cutting and tearing whatever fell in their way, as they were driven rapidly along. The horses attached to them were perfect in training, and so well in hand that they could be driven at speed over the roughest country, and even through the woods, which then abounded in all directions. The Romans were no less astonished at the dexterity of the charioteers than at the number of the chariots. The way in which the Britons brought the chariots into action was this: at the beginning of a battle they drove about the flanks of the enemy, throwing darts from the cars; and, according to Cæsar, the very dread of the horses, and the noise of the rapid wheels, often broke the ranks of his legions. When they had succeeded in making an impression, and had winded in among the Roman cavalry, the warriors leaped from the chariots, and fought on foot. In the meantime the drivers retired with the chariots a little from the combat, taking up such a position as to favour the retreat of the warriors in case of their being overmatched. In this manner," says Cæsar, "they perform the part both of rapid cavalry and of steady infantry; and, by constant exercise and use, they have arrived at such expertness, that they can stop their horses when at full speed, in the most steep and¦ VOL. I.

[ocr errors]

difficult places, turn them which way they please, run along the carriage-pole, rest on the harness, and throw themselves back into their chariots with incredible dexterity."

For a long time the veteran legions of Rome could not look on the clouds of dust that announced the approach of these war-chariots, without trepidation. The Gauls had once the same mode of fighting, and equally distressed the Romans with their war-chariots. Nearly 300 years before the invasion of Britain, when the Gauls were established in parts of Italy, and in close alliance with the Samnites, a successful charge of the Roman cavalry was repulsed, and the whole army thrown into dismay, by a mode of fighting to which they were utter strangers. "A number of the enemy," says Livy, "mounted on chariots and cars, made towards them with such a terrible noise, from the trampling of the horses and the rolling of the wheels, as affrighted the horses of the Romans, unaccustomed to such operations. By this means the victorious cavalry were dispersed, and men and horses, in their headlong flight, were thrown in heaps to the ground. The same cause produced disorder even in the ranks of the legions: through the impetuosity of the horses, and the carriages they dragged through the ranks, many of the Roman soldiers in the van were trodden or bruised to death; and the Gauls, as soon as they saw the enemy in confusion, followed up the advantage, nor allowed them breathing-time." The use of war-chariots, however. seems to have fallen out of fashion among the Gauls during the long period that had intervened; for Cæsar never makes mention of them in describing his many battles with that people on the Continent.

The existence of the accessories-the hooks and scythes attached to the wheels or axles-has been questioned, as neither Cæsar, nor Tacitus, nor any early writer, with the exception of the geographer Pomponius Mela (who wrote, however, in the first century), expressly mentions them in describing the war-chariots. Weapons answering to the description have, however, been found on the field of some of the most ancient battles. Between the Roman invasion under Cæsar, and that ordered by the Emperor Claudius, the cars or chariots of the British attracted notice, and were exhibited in Italy. They were seen in the splendid pageantry with which Caligula passed over the sea from Puteoli to Baix, on his mole of masonry and bridge of boats. The emperor, Suetonius tells us, rode in a chariot drawn by two famous horses, and a party of his friends followed, mounted in British chariots. Probably Cesar had carried some of the native war-cars to Rome as curiosities,

Tit. Liv. lib. x. c. xxviii. 4

just as our navigators brought the canoes of the | This, indeed, was so much the case in the ens Indians and South Sea Islanders to England. At wars, that the turn of a battle was often le subsequent periods, the war-chariots of the Bri- depend, not on the legions, but on their barb auxiliaries, some of w were as lightly equippe the Britons themselves coming to their offer arms, we reach a where they were decid inferior to the Romans; a cause, perhaps, as cipal as any other, of t invariable defeat when came to close combat. Their swords were wieldy, awkward, and offenceless weapons, c pared to the compact, manageable, cutthrust swords of their enemies, which could used in the closed mélée. But an import circumstance, which throws the advantage more on the side of the Romans, is, that w their weapons were made of well-tempered st the swords and dirks of the Britons were, in probability, only made of copper, or of cop mixed with a little tin. We are told that swords of their neighbours, the Gauls, were m of copper, and bent after the first blow, w gave the Romans a great advantage over th In addition to their clumsy sword, the Brit

BRONZE WEAPONS, answering to the description of hooks or scythes appended to the axle of
British war-chariots.-Drawn by J. W. Archer, from specimens in the British Museum.

tons were frequently alluded to by the poets as
well as historians of Rome.

The ancient Britons were well provided with horses, of a small breed, but hardy, spirited, and yet docile. Their cavalry were armed with shields, broad-swords, and lances. They were accustomed, like the Gauls, and their own chariot-men, to dismount, at fitting seasons, and fight on foot; and their horses are said to have been so well trained, as to stand firm at the places where they were left, till their masters returned to them. Another common practice among them was, to mix an equal number of their swiftest foot with their cavalry, each of these foot-soldiers holding by a horse's mane, and keeping pace with him in all his motions. Some remains of this last custom were observed among the Highland clans in the last century, in the civil wars for the Pretender; and in more modern, and regular, and scientific warfare, an advantage has often been found in mounting infantry behind cavalry, and in teaching cavalry to dismount, and do the duty of footsoldiers. A great foudness for horses, and a skill in riding them, and breaking them in for cars and chariots, were observable in all the nations of the Celtic race. The scythe-armed cars of the Britons may be assumed as one of the many links in that chain which seems to connect them with Persia and the East, where similar vehicles were in use in very remote ages.

The infantry of the Britons was the most numerous body, and, according to Tacitus, the main strength of their armies. They were very swift of foot, and expert in swimming over rivers and crossing fens and marshes, by which means they were enabled to make sudden attacks and safe retreats. They were slightly clad; throwing off in battle the whole, or at least the greater part, of whatever clothing they usually wore, according to a custom which appears to have been common to all the Celtic nations. They were not encumbered with defensive armour, carrying nothing of that sort but a small light shield; and this, added to their swiftness, gave them, in some respects, a great advantage over the heavily armed Romans, whose foot could never keep pace with them.

BRITISH SWORDS, DAGGER, SPEAR HEADS, and JAVELIN HEAT of bronze.-Drawn by J. W. Archer, from examples in t British Museum.

TH

infantry carried a short dirk and a spear. spear was sometimes used as a missile weapon having a leather thong fixed to it, and retaine in the hand when thrown, in order that it migh be recovered again: at the butt-end of this spea

was sometimes a round hollow ball of copper, or mixed copper and tin, with pieces of metal inside; and, shaking this, they made a noise, to frighten the horses when they engaged with cavalry.

war proceeded, we frequently find them giving more attention to the defence of their night camps;

Thun.-From Roy's Military Antiquities.

and some of the more permanent positions they took up were strengthened with deep ditches and stone walls.

With the exception of the Druids, all the young men among the Britons and other Celtic nations were trained to the use of arms. Frequent hostilities among themselves kept them in practice; and hunting and martial sports were among their principal occupations in their brief periods of peace. Even in tactics and strategics, the more difficult parts of war, they displayed very considerable talent and skill. They drew up their troops in regular order; and if the form of a wedge was not the very best for infantry, it has been BRITISH FORTIFIED CAMP, in Strathmore, called White Cathorfound, by the Turks and other Eastern nations, most effective for cavalry appointed to charge. They knew the importance of keeping a body in reserve; and in several of their battles they showed skill and promptitude in outflanking the enemy, and turning him by the wings. Their infantry generally occupied the centre, being disposed in several lines, and in distinct bodies. These corps consisted of the warriors of one clan, commanded each by its own chieftain; they were commonly formed in the shape of a wedge, presenting its sharp point to the enemy; and they were so disposed, that they could readily support and relieve each other. The cavalry and chariots were placed on the wings, but small flying parties of both manœuvred along the front. In the rear and on their flanks they fixed their travelling-chariots and their waggons, with their respective families in them, in order that those vehicles might serve as barriers to prevent attack in those directions, and that their courage might be inflamed by the presence of all who were most dear to them.

Some of the native princes displayed eminent abilities in the conduct of war. According to the Roman writers, Cassivellaunus, Caractacus, and Galgacus, all formed combined movements and enlarged plans of operation, and contrived stratagems and surprises which would have done honour to the greatest captains of Greece and Rome. Their choice of ground for fighting upon was almost invariably judicious, and they availed themselves of their superior knowledge of the country on all occasions. In the laborious arts of fortifying, defending, or attacking camps, castles, and towns, they were, however, deficient. Their strongest places were surrounded only by a shallow ditch and a mud wall, while some of their towns had nothing but a parapet of felled trees placed lengthwise. While the Roman camps, though made to be occupied only for a night, were strongly fortified, the British camps were merely surrounded by their cars and waggons-a mode of defence still common among the Tartar and other nomadic tribes in Asia. But, as the Roman

The armies of the ancient Britons were not divided into bodies, mixed, but distinct as a whole, consisting each of a determinate number of men, recruited from different families and in different places, and commanded by appointed officers of various ranks, like the Roman legions and our modern regiments; but all the fighting-men of each particular clan or great family formed a separate band, commanded by the chieftain or head of that family. By this system, which had other disadvantages, the command was frittered away into minute fractions. All the several clans which composed one state or kingdom were commanded in chief by the sovereign of that state; and when two or more states formed an alliance, and made war in conjunction, the king of one of these states was chosen to be generalissimo of the whole. These elections gave rise to jealousies and dissensions; and all through the system there were too many divisions of command and power, and too great a disposition in the warriors to look up only to the head of their own clan, or at furthest to the king of their own limited state. Far different from these were the thoroughly organized and inter-dependent masses of the Roman army, where the commands were nicely defined and graduated, and the legions (each a small but perfect army in itself) acted at the voice of the consul, or its one supreme chief, like a complicated engine set in motion by its main-wheel. As long as Rome maintained her military glory, the legions were composed only of free Roman citizens, no allies or subjects of conquered nations being deemed worthy of the honour of fighting in their ranks. Each legion was divided into horse and foot, the cavalry bearing what is considered, by modern scientific writers, a just proportion, and not more, to the infantry. Under the old

This camp is 1480 ft. long, and $30 ft. wide.

kings a legion consisted of 3000 foot, and 300 | but in Britain, where mention of the barbarian horse; under the consuls, of 4200 foot, and 400 auxiliaries constantly occurs, and where, as we horse; but under Cæsar and the emperors it have intimated, they performed services for which amounted to 6100 foot, and 726 horse. Like our the legions were not calculated, they seem to have regiments, the legions were distinguished from been at least as numerous as the Roman soldiers. each other by their number; being called the Three legions, say the historians, were competent first, the second, the third, &c. In the early ages to the occupation of Britain; but to this force of of the Republic they had no more than four or five 20,478 we must add the auxiliaries, which will legions kept on foot, but these were increased swell the number to 40,956. Gauls, Belgians, with increase of conquest and territory, and under Batavians, and Germans were the hordes that acthe Empire they had as many as twenty-five or companied the legions in our island. thirty legions, even in time of peace. The infantry of each legion was divided into ten cohorts. The first cohort, which had the custody of the eagle and the post of honour, was 1105 strong; the remaining nine cohorts had 555 men each.

Such were the main features and appointments of the Roman legions in their prime, and such they continued during their conflict with the Britons, and long after all the southern parts of our island were subjugated by their might. They were afterwards sadly diminished in numbers and

men threw off their defensive armour as too heavy for them to wear; changes were made in their weapons; and, not to notice many intermediate variations, a legion, at the final departure of the Romans from Britain, consisted only of from 2500 to 3000 indifferently armed men.

Instead of a long, awkward sword of copper, every soldier had a short, manageable, well-tem-in consideration. They lost their discipline; the pered Spanish blade of steel, sharp at both edges as at the point; and he was always instructed to thrust rather than cut, in order to inflict the more fatal wounds, and expose his own body the less. In addition to a lighter spear, the legionary carried the formidable pilum, a heavy javelin, six feet long, terminating in a strong triangular point of steel, eighteen inches long. For defensive armour they wore an open helmet with a lofty crest, a breastplate or coat of mail, greaves on their legs, and a large strong shield on their left arms. This shield or buckler, altogether unlike the small, round, basket-looking thing used by the Britons, was four feet high, and two and a half broad; it was framed of a light but firm wood, covered with bull's hide, and strongly guarded with bosses or plates of iron or bronze.

The cavalry of a legion was divided into ten troops or squadrons; the first squadron, as destined to act with the strong first cohort, consisting of 132 men, while the nine remaining squadrons had only sixty-six men each. Their principal weapons were a sabre and a javelin; but at a later period they borrowed the use of the lance and iron mace or hammer from foreigners. For defensive armour they had a helmet, a coat of mail, and an oblong shield.

The legions serving abroad were generally attended by auxiliaries raised among the provinces and conquests of the Empire, who for the most part retained their national arms and loose modes of fighting, and did all the duties of light troops. Their number varied according to circumstances, being seldom much inferior to that of the legions;

"The slow progress of the Romans in the reduction of Britain, is a fact which has not been sufficiently considered by historians. It forms a remarkable deviation from the ancient policy, and, indeed, a striking contrast to the conquest of Gaul, though that country was the last great acquisition in the West, and defended by a people as brave as the Britons, more improved, and far more numerous. It is an instance of the sudden change produced in their foreign volicy by a revolution in

After Cæsar's departure, Britain was left undisturbed by foreign arms for nearly 100 years.' But few of the events that happened, during that long interval, have been transmitted to us. We can, however, make out in that dim obscurity that the country, and more particularly those maritime parts of it occupied by the Belge, and facing the coast of Gaul, made considerable advances in civilization, borrowing from the Gauls, with whom they were in close communication, some of those useful and elegant arts which that people had learned from the Roman conquerors, now peaceably settled among them. Besides their journeys into Gaul, which are well proved, it is supposed that during this long interval not a few of the superior class of Britons, from time to time, crossed the Alps, and found their way to Rome, where the civilization and arts of the world then centred.

This progress, however, does not appear to have been accompanied by any improvement in the political system of the country, or by any union and amalgamation of the disjointed parts or states. Internal wars continued to be waged; and this disunion of the Britons, their constant civil dissensions, and the absence of any steady system of defence, laid them open to the Romans whenever those conquerors should think fit to revisit their fair island, and renew the struggle in earnest.

their internal government. The patriciate steadily advanced to
universal dominion, by adherence to the traditional policy of
their body. The measures of each emperor fluctuated with his
temper and his personal circumstances.
Wise and good
emperors, desirous of securing a civil and legal government.
reasonably avoided conquests which might once more tempt vic-
torious commanders to overthrow their work."-Sir J. Mackin-
tosh, vol. i. p. 20.

CHAPTER II.-CIVIL AND MILITARY HISTORY.

THE INVASION UNDER CLAUDIUS TO THE ARRIVAL OF THE SAXONS.-A.D. 43-419.

Roman invasion of Britain in the reign of the Emperor Claudius-Progress of the Roman generals Plautius, Vespasian, Ostorius-Brave resistance and defeat of Caractacus-Capture of Mona by Suetonius-Revolt of the Britons under Boadicea-Her defeat and death-Agricola appointed governor of Britain-His successful and wise adininistration-His northern campaigns and their progress-His victory at Mons Grampius over the Caledonians-Operations of his fleet, and its voyage round the island-Inconclusive result of his victories over the Caledonians-The Caledonians, after a long peace, attack the province of South Britain-Graham's Dyke built to repress them-Unsuccessful northern campaign of Severus-Builds a new wall of stone to protect the province-Carausius governor of Britain-Decay of the Roman power in Britain-Invasions of the Scots and Picts-Weakness of the South Britons and its causes-Their feeble resistance to the Scots and Picts-Their religious controversies-Their appeal to Rome in vain for military assistance-They invite the Saxons to their aid-Arrival of Hengist and Horsa.

I

N the ninety-seventh year after Csar's second expedition (A.D. 43), the Emperor Claudius' resolved to seize the island of Britain, and Aulus Plautius, a skilful commander, landed with four complete legions, which, with the cavalry and auxiliaries, must have made above 50,000 men. The Britons, who had made no preparations, at first offered no resistance; and when they took the field under Caractacus and Togodumnus, sons of the deceased Cunobelinus, who is supposed to have been King of the Trinobantes, they were thoroughly defeated in the inland country by the Romans. Some states or tribes detaching themselves from the confederacy, then submitted; and Aulus Flautius, leaving a garrison in those parts which included Gloucestershire and portions of the contiguous counties, followed up his victories beyond the river Severn, and made considerable progress in subduing the inhabitants. After sustaining a great defeat on the right bank of the Severn, the Britons retreated eastward to some marshes on the Thames, where, availing themselves of the nature of the ground, they made a desperate stand, and caused the Romans great loss. In these campaigns Plautius made great use of his light-armed barbarian auxiliaries (chiefly Germans), many of whom, on this particular occasion, were lost in the deep bogs and swamps. Though Togodumnus was slain, it does not appear that the natives were defeated in this battle; and Plautius, seeing their determined spirit, withdrew his army to the south of the Thames, to await the arrival of the Emperor Claudius, whose presence and fresh forces he earnestly solicited. Claudius embarked with reinforcements at Ostia at the mouth

Pomponius Mela, who wrote in the time of Claudius, expresses a hope that the success of the Roman arms will soon make the island and its savage inhabitants better known.

of the Tiber, landed at Massilia (Marseilles), and proceeded through Gaul to Britain. It is said that some elephants were included in the force he brought, but we hear nothing of those animals after his arrival in the island. There is some confusion as to the immediate effect of the emperor's arrival, the two brief historians of the events contradicting each other; but we believe that, without fighting any battles, the pusillanimous Claudius accompanied his army on its fresh advance to the north of the Thames, was present at the taking of Camalodunum, the capital of the Trinobantes, and that then he received the proffered submission of some of the states, and returned to enjoy an easily-earned triumph at Rome, whence he had been absent altogether somewhat less than six months.

While Vespasian, his second in command, who was afterwards emperor under the same name, employed himself in subduing Vectis (the Isle of Wight), and the maritime states on the southern and eastern coasts, Aulus Plautius prosecuted a long and, in great part, an indecisive warfare with the inland Britons, who were still commanded by Caractacus. Between them both, Plautius and Vespasian thoroughly reduced no more of the is land than what lies to the south of the Thames, with a narrow strip on the left bank of that river; and when Plautius was recalled to Rome, even these territories were overrun and thrown into confusion by the Britons. Ostorius Scapula, the new proprætor, on his arrival in the island (A.D. 50), found the affairs of the Romans in an all but hopeless state; their allies, attacked and plundered on all sides, were falling from them, the boldness of the unsubdued states was rapidly increasing, and the people they held in subjection were ripe for revolt. But Ostorius, who had pro

2 Dio Cass. (in the abridgment by Xiphilinus), lib. Ix.; Suetonius in C. Claud. c. xvii.

« PreviousContinue »