The great wave of immigration by Celtic tribes into Italy in later times is reported on by numerous ancient historians. The main source is Polybius (Walbank 1957). He became a friend of Scipio Aemilianus after having been brought to Rome as a hostage; because of the friendship to Scipio, he became involved in politics in the second century BC. His universal History starts with Hannibal’s war around 220 BC and the ascent of Rome to a ‘world power’. He goes back to the more distant past to explain the growth and development of power politics. This is particularly relevant for his treatment of the wars against the Celts in Italy. From the relatively more recent past, he could look back to the Roman suppression of the Insubres and the other Gauls in the plain of the river Po after their defeat at Telamon in 225 BC, as well as the fighting with Hannibal, in which the Celts had been involved. Concerning Hannibal’s crossing of the Alps, Polybius remarks (lll.48.12) that he got his information from contemporaries and that he knew the area from personal observation. He had to use older sources for the Roman wars with the Celts before that
Time: it is likely that the main source was the lost work of the Roman senator Fabius Quintus Pictor from fifty years earlier.
Polybius gives the date of 387/386 BC (the battle of Allia and the following conquest of Rome) as the starting-point of the fighting between Celts and Romans. Contemporary with this he mentions, among other things, the siege of Rhegion by Dionysius I (i.6,2). The two events arc also connected by other ancient historians, too. Probably they had a common source in Timaios’s History of the Greek West, which presumably derived information from Philistos.
Polybius gives an account of the migration of the Celts to Italy and their earlier history, ‘which should touch only upon the main points, but goes back to the beginnings, when this people settled in the country’ (11.14.1; 35.10). Thus there is only a general reference to the expulsion of the Etruscans, the former rulers of the plain of the river Po, the reasons for it and the immigration itself.
Of particular importance is the enumeration of the various Celtic tribes (u, 17.4-7), which from west to east successively settled the land as far as the Adriatic Sea. Among others, he mentions the Insubres in western Lombardy, the Cenomani to the east as far as the river Adige, the Boii in the area around Bologna, the Llngones as far as the Adriatic Sea and the Senoncs further to the south in the Picenum area, probably extending as far as the region around Ancona (Figure 27.1). The Insubres are described as the most numerous people among the Celts. In the whole of the northern Italian plain, only the area north of the river Etsch, controlled by the
Veneti, remained free from invaders. According to Polybius, this all happens only a ‘short time’ before the conquest of Rome (ll.2.18.1).
Following Diodorus (xiv.113) and other sources, we may conclude that a rapid sequence of events ensued. Pliny, for example, gives us an account of a certain Cornelius Nepos, who came from the Transpadana, the north-west of Italy {Natural History III.125). It was reported that the old town of Melpum - presumably an Etruscan foundation - was conquered by the confederation of Boii, Insubres and Senones on the same day as the occupation of Veii by Camillus, i. e. in 396 BC. The intention, by this equation, to bring together the history of his country and that of Rome is unmistakable. It is, however, possible that the date is based on a similar chronology for the Celtic invasions as that of Polybius. The weakness of the historical tradition becomes clear from this biased report.
On the other hand, Livy gives a different account in his Roman History, which was written in the time of Augustus (v.34f.; cf. Ogilvie 1965: /ooff.). On the one hand, he lists the tribes of the Celts or ‘Gauls’ invading Italy in the same sequence as Polybius, so that a common source is likely. But, on the other hand, another tradition seems to have become incorporated into his account; thus he begins his report by stating that Ambigatus, the king of the Gaulish Bituriges, had sent his two nephews away with a great retinue in order to avoid overpopulation in his own country - and that had already happened under the rule of Tarquinius Priscus. This would bring us back to the sixth century BC. Following the signs of the flights of birds, one Bellovesus marched into Italy, accompanied by an entire population wave. The names of the groups are as follows; the Bituriges, Arverni, Senones, Aedui, Ambarri, Carnutes and Aulerci.
At first, the crossing of the Alps seems to have been impossible for this campaign. The Gauls, however, interpreted the arrival of Greeks looking for a homeland on the lower Rhone as a sign from the gods. They supported the Greek foundation of Massilia (Marseilles) against the efforts of the Salii, the rulers of this area. After this divinely favoured action, they succeeded in crossing the Alps. They defeated the Etruscans at the Tessin, as Flannibal later did the Romans. Since they heard that the region was called ‘Insubrian’, the same name as an area occupied by the Aedui in central Gaul, they regarded this as another divine omen that they should settle there. Thereupon they founded a town which they called Mediolanum (Milan). The Cenomani followed shortly afterwards; later the Boii, Lingones and Senones arrived.
Probably this report of the migrating groups under Bellovesus is founded on a Greek source (Grilli f98o). This conclusion is based on linguistic peculiarities and the association with the history of Massilia. Thus, the writings of Timagenes or Poseidonios come into question. In addition, traces of a Celtic migration legend are considered as a possibility (Dobesch 1989). Without any doubt, Livy’s Roman history is influenced by the spirit of the Augustan era. It is in this context that the piety of the Gauls must be understood, a piety which finds its expression in their invariable obedience to signs of the gods. Internal discrepancies, which derive from the ideas of that time, can only be hinted at here.
The huge host of warriors under the leadership of Bellovesus consisted of a multiplicity of levies which, following later Roman reports, lived very close to each other in central Gaul. Therefore it is suspected that Livy, in this point, is influenced by the ideas of his time. In addition, the occupation of a country by founding a town is a Roman pattern, which should not be applied to the Gauls for such an early period since archaeological evidence is missing for towns north of the Alps at this time. More credible is the description of Polybius who, in his text In the Beginnings, states that the Celts lived in undefended villages and simple houses and that their occupation, apart from warfare, was agriculture alone. Thus, they lived a ‘simple life’. ‘Other knowledge and technical skills (which are preconditions for town life) were completely unknown’ (ll. i 7.9-10).
It could be suggested that Livy, by presuming such an early immigration, was trying to characterize in a positive light the descendants of the Insubres and CenomanI, who had already held Roman citizenship In his time. Did he want to contrast these two tribes with the later-arriving Boii and Senones, who had been expelled by the Romans after long hostilities? Yet questions of this kind cannot be further dealt with here. We do not have other texts which could verify Livy, even If there are sporadic indications of a Celtic presence in northern Italy as early as the sixth century BC (Dobesch 1989: 57). All In all, the sequence of the Celtic immigration to Italy remains problematic because of the contradictory and. In part, very fragmentary nature of the documentary evidence.
However, these sources yield other important details. The names of the major Celtic tribes, which had unquestionably settled in Italy and which are clearly mentioned In further sources, are met with in Caesar’s Gallic War north of the Alps about 50 BC. We must conclude that only splinter groups from the tribes crossed the Alps. The correspondence of the names makes clear that the development of Celtic tribes had progressed considerably at the time of the immigration and that, in consequence, they possessed an awareness of their own identity.
The subsequent fate of the Celts In Italy can be readily documented after the military struggles for Etruscan Clusium (ChiusI), the first Roman defeat at the Allla and the conquest of Rome (397/386 BC) (e. g. Polybius 1.6.2-3; II.18.2). Livy gives more details about the conquest of Rome. He informs us that it was carried out by the Senones (v.35.3), who later on were also at the centre of the fighting; he describes the events In vivid detail and with a bias towards Roman policy (v.37ff.). On the whole, the surviving historical sources concentrate predominantly on the fighting between Celts and Romans.
In the later fourth and early third centuries BC, numerous military expeditions were made according to the reports of Polybius and Livy, which make it clear that raiding and plundering was the everyday life of the Celts (see Dobesch 1982: 57L). The statement of Polybius has already been noted; ‘apart from agriculture, the Celts were exclusively dedicated to war’ (ll.17.10). ‘In the beginning they had suppressed many of the neighbouring peoples’ (11.18.1). In addition, the Celts often served as mercenaries, for example under the tyrants of Syracuse from Dionysius I onwards Qustin 20.5.6; Xenophon, Hellenica viii.1.20, 28-32; Diodorus xv.70,1), or under the Carthaginians (Griffith 1935). On the other hand, the Celts, who became rich in Italy, were repeatedly attacked by the people of the Alps and by more distant tribes (Polybius 11.18.4; I9-0- Time and time again, they recruited auxiliary troops from beyond the mountains for their battles In Italy (for example Polybius Il. i9ff.;
111.48.6). It is self-evident that such connections beyond the mountains presuppose further contacts of considerable extent.
In the course of time, Rome developed and strengthened its military affairs. Thus, a Joint force of Senones and Samnites was utterly destroyed at Sentinum in 295 BC. Ten years later, after an initial reverse at Arretium (Arezzo), the Romans definitively conquered the Senones (Polybius II.19.7-12). In the middle of their old territory, the Roman colony at Sena (Senigallia) was founded. The final partition of the country, the ‘Ager Gallicus’, was carried out in 232 BC (Polybius II.21.7-8).
Conflict with the Boii and Insubres dragged on longer. Following an initially successful Gaulish campaign their forces, reinforced by Gaesatae from the Rhone valley, were destroyed at Telamon in 225 BC (Polybius Il.27ff.). Shortly afterwards, the Romans advanced into the Po valley (Polybius II.3iff.) and inflicted further decisive defeats on these tribes. Then they founded the first colonies in the area: Placentia (Piacenza) and Cremona (Polybius III.40.3ff.; Velleius 1.14.8). Hannibal was extensively supported by the Celts on his move to Italy (Polybius llI.6off.; Livy XXl.39ff.). But according to Livy’s testimony, this revolt was quickly suppressed after the Second Punic War had ended. Surprisingly, the Cenomani, who up to then had avoided fighting, now turned against the Romans; they were, however, soon pacified. After many expeditions, the Insubres were finally defeated in 194 BC. The fighting with the Boii dragged on until 191 BC. They were hit hardest by their defeat because they were forced to vacate half of their lands (Livy XXXVI.39.3). We must, in all probability, reckon with a significant population withdrawal back across the Alps (Strabo v.213, 216). Already two years after their defeat, their capital Felsina (Bologna) was transformed into the Roman colony with Latin status, Bononia (Livy XXXVII. 5 7.7-8). The two other tribes were treated less harshly. The process of ‘romanization’ extended rapidly to the whole of the Po valley. As early as 49 BC ‘Gallia Cisalpina’, the term by which the area was now known, obtained Roman citizenship (Dio Cassius XLI.36.3).
In 186 BC a Celtic group attempted to settle in the area where Aquileia was founded five years later; they were, however, forced to withdraw (Livy XXXIX.22.6-7, 54ff.). This also happened to another Celtic group shortly afterwards (Livy XL.53.5-6). A series of confrontations with the Alpine peoples continued into the time of Augustus.
The descriptions of the fighting by Polybius and Livy contain, in addition, numerous accounts which tell us more of the daily life of the Celts. We learn of their competitiveness, their personal appearance and their clothes, their golden bracelets and torques, as well as the weapons of their warriors (e. g. Polybius ll.28ff.). Their long swords, only usable for slashing, were inferior to the Roman weapons in close combat (Polybius II.30.8; 33.5). Amongst other things, as for example their inferior defensive weaponry, this might have been one of the reasons why the Celts, as so often emphasized, had so little staying power in battle. But their attack was feared nonetheless. The references to standards and war trumpets (e. g. Polybius II.29.6; 31.5, and especially frequent in Livy) might point to the development of mobile warrior-bands. With this type of fighting, ambushes were common (Polybius III.71.2). A typical Celtic weapon, the chariot, seems no longer to have played a major role in the fighting in Italy (maybe still in the battle of Sentinum: Livy
X.28.9-11; chariots are only mentioned at the battle of Telamon: Polybius II.23.4; 28.5). Of importance too is the ‘knightly’ character of Celtic fighting, which is especially reflected in the single combats which precede battles (Livy VII.9L; VII.26.1-6). Such a challenge was then unknown to the Romans and, therefore, filled them with consternation. An additional sign of such a ‘knightly ethos’ is the fact that whole bands swore an oath of allegiance to their leaders (Polybius II. 17 12).
It is particularly significant that the social order was transformed during the Celtic rule in northern Italy. Kings are mentioned time after time during the initial battles. Yet the Boii, Insubres and Cenomani no longer had kings at the time of their defeat. Kings are only mentioned at this time with reference to the Celts beyond the Alps. Instead, a ruling aristocracy seems to have evolved. Polybius generally talks about ‘leaders’. On the other hand, Livy repeatedly uses such terms as ‘senate’ or ‘principes’ and ‘seniores’ for the leading figures.
During the same period, the system of settlement was changing. While a rural population Is frequently mentioned during the later battles, there is now a greater number of towns which may be considered as tribal capitals (Mediolanum: Polybius II.34. 10; Strabo V. i. 6; Brixia: Livy XXXII.30.6; Felsina: Livy XXXIII.37.4). In the case of Felsina (Bologna), it Is evident that this was a development of an earlier Etruscan centre. The towns must also have had fortifications, as is apparent from the sieges of Acerrae and Clastidium (Polybius II.34.4-5; Livy also reports on the siege of Comum Oppidum (XXXIII.36.14). How the buildings within the towns looked and whether the shrines were situated within the walls (compare e. g. Polybius II.32.61) is not revealed to us.
It emerges clearly, however, that the Gauls adapted themselves gradually to the developed urban cultures which they encountered In northern Italy. It was inevitable that the initiation of such urban culture brought about not only social but also great economic changes.
World History
