The first reconnaisance of Britain took place late in the season of 5 5 BC as Caesar had first to deal with the Germans. Total ignorance of the neap tide almost led to disaster (lV.23-38). This could be considered, therefore, as no more than a raid, and the twenty days of thanksgiving decreed by the Senate must appear as an overreaction or the result of misinformation. Caesar may have regarded it as one of his rare failures, to be rapidly expunged from the record. But he was more determined than before to seize the rich financial rewards which he calculated were available for the taking. He had been made aware of the difficulties of transporting a large army across the Channel, but he had also discovered that the Britons were still using war-chariots, long obsolete in Gaulish fighting practice. In the winter of 55-54 BC, he ordered more extensive and thorough preparations, which included the gathering together of 600 ships and building 28 men-of-war (v.2). After waiting twenty-five days for fair weather, he set sail with his legions and 4,000 Gallic cavalry. The Britons were so alarmed at the size of this armada that they withdrew from the coast; Caesar stated that 800 ships could be seen altogether and if 628 were used by the army, this leaves 172 hired or built by the traders (v.8; annontinis privatisque quas sui quisque commodi fecerat). One could have no clearer indication of Caesar’s main intention, that of continuing to loot and plunder in hostile terrain, all of which would be skilfully disguised behind the glory of victories for Rome with the extra lustre of their being achieved in a far-off land beyond the stormy seas and any horizon familiar to Rome.
In this first season in Britain, Caesar had to rely on the tribal leader Commius to win over those Atrebates who had settled in Britain from Gaul but, in accomplishing this task, Commius had been captured by other Britons (IV.27). He was later returned to Caesar, but the net result was that only two of the British tribes sent hostages (IV.38). In 54, Caesar was better prepared since he now had a new ally in Mandubracius, a prince of the Trinovantes (v.20), whose father had been killed by Cassivellaunus. This information is only given by Caesar during the course of the campaign, almost as an afterthought, whereas his whole strategy was clearly based on the ability of this tribe to supply his army and for their territory to be used as a base for his operations on the north bank of the Thames.
The campaign had in fact been carefully planned when Mandubracius had visited Caesar at his winter quarters in Gaul. The tribal affiliation of the British Commander, Cassivellaunus, was not stated, only the information that the tribes hostile to Caesar had appointed him as their leader. It is stated that this tribe occupied a territory north of the Thames and it appears later in Caesar’s narrative that it bordered that of the Trinovantes (v.21). His stronghold would therefore most probably have been in Epping Forest and would fit Caesar’s phrase cum silvas impeditas.
Caesar lists the British tribes which had become his allies, i. e. the Cenimagni, Segontiaci, Ancalites, Bibroci and Cassi. Unfortunately, only one of these, the Cenimagni (the great Iceni), is known at a later date. There is a coin of Tasciovanus with the word SEGO (van Arsdell 1989: 385-7), which, if it refers to a tribe, may have been a shortened form of Segontiaci. If so, this tribe was later absorbed into one of the larger units. It must be assumed that the others also later became sub-units of the Catuvellauni or the Trinovantes.
To secure success in Britain, as in Gaul, it was Caesar’s continued practice to form alliances. This enabled him to pursue a further aim, which was the deliberate breaking of the Gallic trading monopoly with the Britons, mainly in wine. He was then able to sell this valuable right to the Italian traders. Trading posts were set up in the territories of the friendly tribes for the sale and distribution of wine and fine silver utensils associated with its use. The evidence for this is quite positive since not only has one of the trading posts been discovered at Skeleton Green (Partridge 1981) on the river Lea but there are also the amphorae and other objects found in the rich burials of tribal notables found in the Welwyn area (Stead 1967: 1-62). This has enabled Barry Cunliffe to publish a map of their distribution, which clearly indicates a sudden shift in the direction of trade from the coast of northern Gaul to the shorter crossings to the east and even to the Rhine (Cunliffe 1984: fig. 9). The wine and the metal drinking utensils were now coming from Italy.
Although Caesar’s immediate objective was personal financial gain, he must have been aware that this trade, once established, would be highly advantageous to Rome through the heavy export duty charged on goods leaving the empire. There was also a long-term effect of Britons becoming accustomed to Roman goods and with it the establishment of a currency and the more extensive use of it for commercial exchange. To that extent it could be seen as a ‘softening-up’ process towards eventual conquest.
But ninety-seven years were to elapse before conquest and the absorption of Britain into the Roman Empire were to become an actuality and during this time the British tribes of the south-east underwent considerable changes. They maintained contact with their compatriots and became aware of the advantages and disadvantages of becoming provincials under Rome. But the most important aspect which Romans may not have fully appreciated was the link between the Gaulish druids and Britain. Caesar had skilfully built up a programmed hostility towards these high priests and arbiters in Rome, mainly, perhaps, as a diversion for his own dubious practices. He was fully aware (vi.13) that they were the one and only unifying force among the Celts and thus a powerful force to combat his drive towards division of the tribes into friends or foes. The effect of this was that the Gaulish druids fled from their country and united themselves with those of Britain (whence, Caesar tells us, came the origins of druidism), where they began to instil a hatred of Rome in the ruling tribal families and especially into the children whom they educated. But Rome was always anxious to maintain a close contact with friendly client-rulers by flattery and rich gifts from the classical world. Another policy, developed by Augustus, was to require these rulers to send their children to Rome to be educated with the imperial family (Braund 1984: 9-22). They were then, in effect, hostages but also they became thoroughly romanized. An excellent British example of this policy was, most probably, Cogidubnus, whose aspirations as a builder on the grand roman scale are demonstrated by the Fishbourne palace and the Chichester inscription (Bogaers 1979: 243-5). ... . .
Concerning the tribal affiliations and boundaries of the Catuvellauni and the Trinovantes north of the Thames, the imported goods would seem to imply that the former were the more favoured recipients. But the coin distribution provides a more complicated pattern which has prompted van Arsdell to abandon any attempt to separate them. He considers that the two tribes can only be seen ‘as a single economic group’ (van Arsdell 1989: 319). There was a succession of rulers who put their names on coins; the first to do so was Addedomarus and the distribution of his coins spreads over what are assumed to be the areas of both tribes (ibid.: 494, map 67), but there is no help with mint names. Those of a successor or possibly contemporary, Dubnovellaunus, for a short time appear to be concentrated in the Trinovantian area. There followed a more powerful ruler, Tasciovanus, who controlled both tribes with mints at Camulodunum and Verulamium, as the names CAM and VERO on the coins clearly demonstrate (ibid.: 365). Another point of great interest is that some of the coins are modelled on Roman types. This can only indicate a close link with Rome, possibly the better trade opportunities being now officially recognized by the loan of Roman die-cutters with a range of coin types of the Republic offered for choice by the rulers.
After a brief interregnum, the most powerful of all British kings, Cunobelinos, took control. The coins were gradually improved in quality, but continued to copy Roman types (now of Augustus), Cunobelinos now being designated as REX, the Eatin for king. His coinage was vast and is still in need of close study, but it must indicate a considerable increase in trade with the Roman Empire. There is even a hint of the introduction of a rudimentary currency, in the appearance of the strange potin coins, which may have been intended as small change.
Cunobelinos was a great statesman who was able to maintain a balance between the anti - and pro-Roman elements. He clearly saw the economic advantages of trade and also that maintaining a friendly relationship to Rome strengthened him politically. In AD 14-16 in the war against the Germans, some Roman soldiers were shipwrecked on the shores of his kingdom and he promptly sent them back to Gaul. Although his policy was opposed by the druids, they were forced to bide their time and concentrated on their influence on the sons of the king, Caratacus and Togodubnus. Their indoctrination was possible as they were responsible for the children’s education. Their father had managed to avoid having to send them to Rome as he had presumably refused to become an actual client-king.
Cunobelinos must have exercised influence or even control over the neighbouring tribes, especially those south of the Thames. The succession of rulers whose names appear on coins offers a very confusing sequence of events. This applies particularly to the Atrebates-Regni alliance. The native ruler from c. AD 10 was Verica, who was deposed by Epaticcus, who claimed to be a son of Tasciovanus, thus bringing thus tribes under the Trinovantian control. This would probably have been the maximum extent of the influence of Cunobelinos. As the great king became enfeebled c. AD 40, the northern part of the kingdom of Verica was invaded by Epaticcus, whose Trinovantian origins appear on the coin-types he issued (van Arsdell 1989: 179). He pushed south and forced Verica out: as an ally of Rome, Verica fled there to seek help from Claudius for his restoration.
At this critical stage, Cunobelinos died and his great kingdom was inherited by his two sons Togodubnus and Caratacus. The former was presumably the elder since he held this homeland while his brother took over the Atrebatic/Regnian kingdom. The two brothers were radically opposed to Rome and it is possible that they ended the trading relationship with Rome which had been started by Caesar and developed under their father. This came at the very beginning of the reign of Claudius and he was faced with the loss of a lucrative trading partner and a client kingdom demanding restoration. Claudius himself was in a delicate position as he had been thrust into the purple by the praetorian guards. Meantime, the Senate had overlooked his existence, had annulled all the Imperial acts, and declared a republic. This august body was somewhat shocked when the praetorians marched into the Senate with a reluctant Claudius and demanded that he should be the new emperor. To Claudius, Britain would have been seen as a heaven-sent opportunity to divert public attention from his precarious position and also to gain the support of his frontier armies, thus reducing his dependence on the guards.
This was the background for the invasion of Britain in AD 43. In Britain there was considerable support for Rome. The old alliances created by Caesar had collapsed, although that with the Iceni probably survived, but for others Rome offered an escape from the dominance of Cunobelinos. Those who had suffered most were the Catuvellauni and the Atrebates/Regni but it would also appear that tribes on their western and northern boundaries had felt the strong arm of the British ruler. Plautius received supplication from the northern Dobunni on his arrival (Dannell 1977: 231). Many tribes saw Rome as their salvation against their British oppressors: the Catuvellauni in particular from the Trinovantes. They took the earliest opportunity of an alliance with Rome. This is demonstrated by the favours they later received and the hatred they incurred of the anti-Roman faction which was later responsible for the destruction of their capital, Verulamium, in the Boudican revolt of AD 6o. The Dobunni had split into two tribes, due doubtless to an early dynastic quarrel. The southern half, south of the river Avon, were allied to the Durotriges, who had a bitter hatred of Rome, due mainly to Caesar’s destruction of the Veneti with whom they had a close trading and possibly tribal relationship. The northern half of the tribe had felt the distant hand of Cunobelinos, according to Dio, and small-scale excavations at their great oppidum at Bagendon have produced evidence of early trade in the form of imported samian (Royal Commission on Historical Monuments 1976: 7). It is possible that they had been obliged to supply levies to the anti-Roman forces gathered together by Caratacus.
World History
