Sep 24
The Ninth Legion
Contents
The Ninth Legion
By D. Mark Sansom BSc. (Hons)
The Ninth Legion Hispana: The evidence for its presence and campaigns in Britain
The inspiration for this work came from the author Rosemary Sutcliff and her book ‘The Eagle of the Ninth’ which she wrote in 1954. Although a fictional book it was based on a fact believed in at that time. In the 1990’s many people still refer to the Ninth as the ‘Lost Legion’; this response has caused me to question whether a legion had been lost in Roman Britain. It seemed to be an easy task to prove this theory, or disclaim it as a fantasy. However, it soon became apparent that nobody had ever established once and for all, that the Ninth had ever been based in Britannia. It has always been assumed they were, but I had to search for evidence to satisfy myself that they were based here. Research soon revealed that there were several references, to the Ninth in Britain and a quantity of archaeological artefacts have been recovered bearing the unit’s title; however, in total there are only 3 Literary references, 1 Monumental inscription, 1 Altar, 7 Tombstones and a quantity of Stamped Tile. This is not a lot to base a theory that the whole legion was based in Britain during the Roman Occupation. From the evidence available I have attempted to reconstruct the unit’s movement around the province based on the assumption that it was indeed present at this time.
In 43AD the Ninth Legion is thought to have landed at Richborough with the rest of the Roman invasion force comprising the Second, Twentieth and Fourteenth Legions. The invasion force was under the command of Aulus Plautius who was the governor of Pannonia just prior to the Claudian invasions. The Ninth Legion would have been only a part of this massive invasion force numbering 5500 men, not including the auxiliaries who were attached to the legion; these would number approximately 5000. The Roman historian Dio writes the only known contemporary account of the invasion (DIO LX, 19-22. He does not name the Legions involved in the fight but from evidence of later years we know the numbers and names of these legions. The Ninth Legion commander, therefore, probably had 10.000 men under his command
The Ninth Legion is thought to have advanced north eastwards into Norfolk – Suffolk area.. In doing this it would have had to cross the river Medway. It is possible that at this time, the Ninth Legion was still in company of the Fourteenth and Twentieth Legions. It was during this crossing that the Romans met strong resistance by the native British army under joint command of Caratacus and Togodumnus. The battle was fierce and lasted two days, so the historian Dio tells us. Caratacus escaped the Roman onslaught, and fled to Wales.
The ninth Legion having crossed the Medway, probably advanced up into the friendly territory of the Iceni in Norfolk, a client Kingdom under the rule of King Prasutagus. The arrival of the Emperor Claudius, to take Colchester was probably only a military side show; the area is already likely to have been secured by the Ninth Legion. There is no evidence to support the fact that the Ninth took part in this action, or even if the Ninth was present in Britain during these early actions. It would, however, seem more than likely it was since Aulus Plautius was the Governor of the province they were based in, just prior to the invasion of Britain.
The archaeological evidence for the bases of the Ninth Legion is not present until it moved to a fortress at Lincoln in about 66AD; prior to that there are two strong possibilities for bases of the unit. The first has been located at Longthorpe in Cambridgeshire, near modern-day Peterborough. The second has been located at Newton on Trent in Nottinghamshire. These are vexillation fortresses, and it is possible that the Ninth Legion was, at this time, split into several small units. A third early vexillation fortress has possibly been located at Lincoln; a later fortress is known but this seems to predate it.
It is probable that the tribes of Eastern England had not been totally pacified, and as such needed constant monitoring by the Roman Military, which could explain why the Ninth Legion was split into at least two parts. These vexillation fortresses were occupied until about 66AD when the Ninth legion moved further North. Before this move, the legion and the Roman Province suffered a drastic set back.
The first positive proof of the Ninth Legion being on campaign in Britain is during the Boudican Revolt of 60-61 AD. The death of King Prasutagus of the Iceni, and the handling of his will by the Romans, caused his wife Boudica to raise an army of natives and go on the rampage in the East of England. Boudica’s first target was the colonia at Colchester, and the Romanized people who lived within the area.
The majority of the Roman army was away on campaign in Wales, under the command of Suctonius Paullinus. It would seem that the only legion available to deal with the revolt was the Ninth under the command of Petilius Cerialis. It is known that the Ninth Legion was sent to deal with the trouble and suffered appalling losses because the historian Tacitus tell us:
The victorious Britons also intercepted Petilius Cerialis, the legate of the Ninth Legion, as he was advancing to the rescue, routed the legion, and slaughtered its infantry contingent. Cerialis escaped with his cavalry to their camp and found shelter behind its defences (ANNALS,XIV, 32)
If this passage is read on its own, it would seem that the Ninth Legion was totally destroyed apart from its 120 cavalry, and Cerialis. The scale of the destruction only becomes apparent when the author Tacitus wrote:
Caesar increased troop numbers with 2000 legionary soldiers sent from Germany together with eight auxiliary cohorts and 1000 cavalry. On arrival the Ninth Legion was brought up to strength in terms of legionary troops (ANNALS XIV, 38)
The worst losses the Ninth Legion could have received was the loss of 2000 infantry, almost half of the legion. If the evidence from one of the fortresses of the Ninth Legion at Longthorpe is correct then only part of the Ninth Legion was involved in this action. The legion would have been sent to try and crush the revolt either after Suetonius Paulinus ordered the legion to crush it, or word of a revolt was received from the inhabitants of Colchester.
It would seem from Cerialis’ career that he was a rash and impetuous soldier. In the case of this revolt he seems to have pushed his men too hard; as he marched he was careless and the legion was ambushed by the Britons. It would seem likely that the Legion was ambushed on the march as if it had time to come to battle drill it could possibly have won the engagement.
The fact is that the Ninth Legion may have suffered a loss of around 2000 men and Cerialis retreated to his base with what was left of his cavalry contingent. The base he came from, and ultimately retreated to, is likely to have been the Vexillation fortress at Longthorpe in Cambridgeshire. The first fortress (Longthorpe 1) on the site is approximately 27 acres in area. It was excavated between 1967 and 1973 and shows that emergency defences cut the camp to under half this size (Longthorpe 11), an area of 1 1 acres. The buildings within Longthorpe 11 show no evidence of being reorganised and it may be possible to say that these defences were a panic measure built by Cerialis in the fear that Boudica would follow and attack what was left of the Ninth Legion.
It would seem that only half of the legion was based at Longthorpe 1 prior to the Boudican revolt; there are two other places in the area that may have housed elements of the Ninth at this time. The first may be at the vexillation fortress of Newton on Trent and the second could be at Lincoln. Wherever they were based it must be assumed that that area was also under threat of revolt since there is no evidence that they went to the assistance of Cerialis.
It is likely that after the revolt the Ninth legion, once it had been brought back up to strength, moved from Longthorpe and Newton on Trent to two new bases, the first a new fortress at Lincoln and the second at Rossington or Osmanthorpe. These have all been identified as pre-Flavian vexillation fortresses. The new fortress at Lincoln is presumed to have been built by the Ninth Legion due to the amount of burials of soldiers of the Ninth found below the fortress. There are unfortunately no monumental inscriptions to say that the Ninth built the new fortress, but it may be inferred by the presence of these burials.
It would seem that the Ninth Legion was again split into at least two, if not three parts. The next problem the Ninth Legion probably had to deal with was the feud in Brigantia between Cartimandua and her ex-husband Venutius. Trouble in Brigantia had been brewing since 52AD when the Queen, Cartimandua handed over the fugitive Leader Caratacus who had fled to Brigantia in the hope of evading the Romans. It seems that the Queen had been pro – Roman since they had invaded, although her husband Venutius seemed more cautious about the Romans. It would also seem from the evidence that she had taken on the luxuries of Rome such as fine glass wares and wines. Cartimandua must have been loyal to the Romans because in 60AD when Boudica revolted the tribe of the Brigantes did not rise in support of her.
This fragile peace to be found in Brigantia may have been the reason that over half of the Ninth Legion did not come to the aid of Cerialis. Since it was based around the edge of Brigantia it was probably expecting trouble. The peace only lasted until 69AD when the Queen divorced her husband, Venutius, and took her armour-bearer, Vellocatus, as a lover.
The Roman army at this time was in discord as each British legion supported a different candidate to become the new emperor of Rome. It is possible that elements of the Ninth Legion were removed from Britain at this time to support one of the candidates for emperor. Cartimandua was no longer supported by the Roman army and her ex-husband took the chance to take over Brigantia, Tacitus tells us that Cartimandua, was only just rescued, by a force of auxiliaries. (HIST 111,45)
When Petilius Cerialis returned to, Britain in 71 AD as the governor his first role was to invade Brigantia. The Ninth Legion at this time moved to York which was on the edge of Brigantian territory and some of the legion are likely to have been based at Malton. Brigantia was now feeling the power of the Roman force and the historical record does not tell us what happened to Venutius but it is likely that he met the might of the Ninth legion at Stanwick, the supposed centre of Brigantia, in 72AD.
After the defeat of Venutius it is likely that the Ninth legion tried to pacify the Brigantes, and under the new governor Julius Frontinus 73-77AD embarked on the consolidation of the newly conquered territory. It was during this time that the legion would have started building a new permanent base at York which could house the whole legion in comfort. It was not until the governorship of Agricola that the rest of Brigantia was subjugated, possibly agency of the Ninth Legion.
In 78AD Agricola was made governor of Britain and his first task as governor was to sort out the remnants of trouble in Brigantia. The natural choice in making this advance northwards would have been the Ninth Legion as it was based at York and must have been familiar with the surrounding area. The historian Tacitus tells us a great deal about the campaigns of Agricola in Britain, but he omits to say which legions were involved and where they were used The dates of all of Agricola’s campaigns are questioned , fiercely by historians and for the purposes of this text two years will be given in each case. Agricola started his first campaign in. 78/79AD and he is thought to have reached as far north as the Bowes-Tyne line, later to become Hadrian’s wall, by the end of the first season. Tacitus tells us that it was a two pronged attack moving up either side of the Pennines and it would seem probable that the Ninth Legion advanced up the eastern side of the Pennines, possibly as far as Corbridge where Agricola established a supply area.
In 79/80AD Agricola again advanced and it would seem likely that the Ninth went with him. It is possible at this stage that the Ninth was combined with another legion for this advance, which other legion is not known. By the end of the 79/80AD campaign it could be possible that the Ninth Legion was returned to York. No mention of it occurs until the campaigns of 82/83AD, however, it may be possible that it was responsible for the building of the new legionary fortress at Inchtuthil, and may have been stationed there.
In 82/83AD the Forth-Clyde line was crossed by Agricola and the Ninth Legion were involved; Tacitus tells us that they were attacked at night in their camp:
‘As soon as the enemy got to know of this they suddenly changed their plans and massed for a night attack on the Ninth Legion.’ (AGRICOLA,26)
Tacitus also describes the Ninth legion Maxime invalida, weakest of all. A possible reason for this is because detachments from the Ninth had been sent from Britain to Germany to fight the Chatti in Chatten wars. an inscription records the fact that a senior Tribune of the Ninth won decorations during the war (ILS 1025).
It would seem that detachments were taken from all the British legions, leaving Agricola with a smaller force than was desirable. The defeat of the Ninth would have been on a large scale for it to be worthy of a note by Tacitus. It could, however, just be another ploy to make Agricola look good when he won the day and the Ninth. It is not known where this attack on the Ninth took place but it has been suggested that a marching camp sited near Dornock (NN 890180) may fit Tacitus’s story; being 33 acres it could have easily accommodated a legion under canvas.
It is not known what happened to the Ninth after it was attacked. Depending on its condition it would either have continued to campaign with Agricola or withdrawn either to Inchtuthil or back to York. It would seem likely that, because short of troops. Agricola retained the Ninth legion in the field until the end of the campaign. After Agricola was recalled from Britain his conquests in Scotland were let go, and the army retreated back to the Bowes-Tyne line; the Ninth Legion may have moved back to York. Agricola was a prolific fort builder and it may be possible that many of the forts built in his name were constructed by the Ninth legion. From the evidence of these forts it is almost possible to plot Agricola’s campaigns.
The Ninth after its move back to York probably settled into a more mundane state of existence, patrolling the local area and bringing the unit back up to strength, after the mauling it received in Scotland. Between December 107AD and December 108AD the legion erected a monumental inscription dedicated to the Emperor Trajan (RIB665) over the south-eastern Gate of a rebuilt stone fortress. The Ninth may have used this period to redevelop the fortress at York and many of the buildings may have been replaced.
This inscription is only one of the ways that the Ninth is known to have built York, there have been three other inscriptions set up to men of the Ninth Legion, including a particularly fine one commemorating the standard-bearer Lucius Duccius Rufinius (RIB 673).
The evidence for the Ninth legion rebuilding in stone also comes from the stamped tiles that they used, these were embossed with the title LEG IX HISP. The inscription dedicated to Trajan is the last dated reference to the Ninth Legion being present in Britain, but it might not mean that the legion was absent from the province after that date. It would seem more than likely that the Ninth moved from York in about 120AD when the Sixth Legion appears to have moved into the fortress at York.
It is highly likely that the Ninth legion moved to Carlisle, which was probably established by Petilius Cerialis in 71 AD. After it vacated the fortress at York, there is evidence of the legion’s presence at Carlisle in the form of stamped tile embossed with the stamp LEG VIIII HISP. These tiles were being produced five miles south east of Carlisle at the recently identified legionary tile depot at Scalesceugh. A magnetometer survey of the site has identified 24 kilns which were probably used to produce enough tile to build the Ninth Legion’s new fortress at Carlisle.
It can be seen the Ninth started stamping the tiles from the kilns at Scalesceugh with the title LEG VIIII HISP. No tiles bearing this stamp have yet been found in the Vale of York, therefore, it can be assumed that the legion had several centres of tile production.
It should also be noted that stamped tiles bearing the title LEG VIIII HISP have also been found at Stanwix; so the legion may have again been deployed in two places in the north. Until further work is done on these two sites it will be difficult to prove that the Ninth was based at these sites. Inscriptions from the fort at Stanwix suggest that it was the home of the Ala Petriana; if this is correct then the Ninth may have built this fort. If the whole legion did move to Carlisle, there must have been a reason for the move, and one may assume that the reason was that it was used to help build the western end of Hadrian’s wall. As this half of the wall was built in turf the inscriptions would have been made of wood and that is probably why they do not survive. There must have been as many inscriptions on the turf wall as there were on the stone parts of Hadrian’s wall, but, it is a question of archaeological survival that means no inscriptions survive in wood to prove or disprove their presence.
It is unlikely that the Ninth stayed very long in Carlisle or Stanwix. The archaeological record shows that they then moved from Britain to Nijmegan in Holland to replace the Tenth Legion Gemina, where tiles and mortaria have been found bearing the Ninth legion’s stamp.
The history of the Ninth Legion in Britain and the campaigns it took part in are by no means certain. Due to so little archaeological and written evidence this task is almost impossible, but fortunately there is enough evidence to be certain of several things. Several members of the Ninth Legion are known to have been buried in this country, at both Lincoln and York. The legion built a gate in York, and dedicated it to emperor Trajan.
The Ninth Legion also stamped its tiles with the title LEG IX HISP or LEG VIIII HISP, at several locations around the north of Britain. There are only two campaigns that the Ninth are known to have taken part in during the Roman occupation, the first was the Boudican revolt and the second was with Agricola during his campaigns in Scotland.
As more archaeological discoveries are made the evidence for the Ninth legion being present in Britain may increase, and it could eventually be possible to chart their campaigns with a greater deal of accuracy.
It must, however, be remembered that the picture of Roman military occupation in Britain may be far more complicated than has been assumed by historians. This paper has used the evidence available for the Ninth legion to try and fit it into the historically known facts about the Roman campaigns in Britain. It must be noted that this article should be regarded as an individual’s interpretation and as such should be treated in this light. Due to the scope of this subject there may be many alternative suggestions to when and where the Ninth Legion campaigned in Britain.
A Brief History Of The Ninth Legion Hispana
The Ninth Legion has its origins in the pre-Augustan period and probably goes back to Julius Caesar’s Ninth legion based in Gaul during 58BC and may have come from Dubrovnic in the former Yugoslavia. Evidence suggests that at the beginning of the first century AD it may have been based at Sisca, in. Pannonia. It is known to have won battle honours in both Spain and the Balkans and in light of this carries the titles HISPANA and MACEDONICA (ILS 928). It seems, for reasons unknown that it only used the title Hispana as common practice and for official stamps.
During the units stay at Sisca it was called for service in Africa to control a riot that took place in 17-24 AD, but it returned before the end of the revolt. The legion under its commander Aulus Plautius, commander of the Roman invasion of Britain, is thought to have moved from Pannonia to Britain in 43AD as part of the invasion force.
The legion is known to have played a key role in the Boudican revolt of 60AD (ANNALS XIV,32) and after this action needed 2000 replacements (ANNALS XIV, 3 8).
In the year 69AD troops were taken from Britain to support Vitelius in his bid to become emperor, it is possible that elements of the Ninth were involved at this time (HIST.2,57).
In 79AD Agricola advanced northwards towards Scotland by an eastern route and it is likely that the Ninth Legion played a key part in this advance as at the time it was based at York (RIB 665).
During another campaign of Agricola in 83AD the Ninth Legion is known to have been attacked in camp at night by the Scots, north of the river Tay (AGRICOLA, 26).
A vexillation of the Ninth Legion was taken from Britain late in 83AD to help in the Chatten wars near the Rhine, in Germany and during that action a senior Tribune of the Ninth won decorations (ILS 1025).
The legion may have been moved up to a new legionary Fortress at Carlisle to assist in the building of Hadrian’s wall in about 122AD.
The legion was removed from Britain sometime between 120-130AD and was relocated to a base at Nijmegan in Holland (BRIT. 1978,381 fn 9).
By 180AD all trace of the lecion had disappeared and it is thought to have been lost in action whilst dealing with the Judean Revolt (DIO LXIX, 13) in 132AD. A list of all the legions found in Rome dating to around 161-180AD (ILS 2288), makes no mention of the Ninth Legion.
Evidence for the Ninth being present in Britain
LOCATION EVIDENCE
YORK INSCRIPTIONS (RIB 659/665/673/680)
TILE STAMPS (BRIT. 1978. 379-382)
LINCOLN INSCRIPTIONS (RIB 2541255/256/2571260)
TILE STAMP (BRIT. 1978,379-382)
CARLISLE TILE STAMPS (BRIT. 1978,379-382)
HILLYWOOD TILE STAMPS (BRIT. 1978, 379-282)
SCALESCEUGH TILE STAMPS (BRIT. 1978,379-382)
OLD WINTERINGHAM TILE STAMPS (BRIT. 1978, 379-382)
ALDBOROUGH TILE STAMPS (BRIT> 1978.379-382)
TEMPLEBOROUGH TILE STAMPS (BRIT. 1978, 379-382)
MALTON TILE STAMPS (BRIT..! 978, 379-382)
SLACK TILE STAMPS (BRIT. 1978, 379-382)
CASTLEF0Ki) I’ILE STAMPS (BRIT> 1979,288)
STANWIX TILE STAMPS (BRIT> 1986,,441)
B) LITERARY:
AUTHOR BOOK PASSAGE
TACITUS ANNALS XIV,32
TACITUS ANNALS XIV,38
TACITUS AGRICOLA 26
Sep 24
Roman References
Roman References
Ninth Legion activity in England
Cerialis and Agricola – Roman political background to the conquest of the Brigantes
Maps of Roman forts covering Southern and Northern Britain, Wales and Scotland.
Maps of Hadrians Wall, Antonine Wall and Gask Ridge
Sep 24
Historic Publications
Historic Publications
Tacitus grew up during a the reign of Nero, and may have been a teenager when Nero died and the Roman empire was plunged into civil war. In his later years he became interested in writing an unbiased account of those times, starting his account just before Tiberius came to the throne. We do not have a complete account of either the Annals or the Histories, but what has been preserved provides an interesting look at Roman life, written by one who lived close to those times.
Sir Mortimer Wheeler – The Stanwick Fortifications.
Sir Mortimer Wheeler was President of the Society of Antiquaries of London in 1954 when he wrote his fantastic The Stanwick Fortifications. This comprehensive analysis of the results of several excavations at Stanwick, together with his educated analysis of the presented evidence give and excellent insight into events at Stanwick between AD43-7 – 71-4. If only he had more time!
The Pre-Historic Countryside – Guy de la Bedoyere. An interesting and large discussion on the period of 0 – 500 AD, describing the way of life, industry and impact of man on the landscape.
Roman Britain – 43AD to 100AD Composite work by George Chaplin bringing together the story of the invasion through to the fall of Brigantia.
The Early Iron Age Metalwork Hoard from Stanwick This document examines the hoard found at Stanwick over a century ago.
Ptolomy – Albion and Brigantia –
Codringtons Roman Roads in Britain –
Stanwick – Colin HaselGrove – Was the Iron Age oppidum of Stanwick the seat of Queen Cartimandua? Haselgroves excavations enlarge, expand and to some extent reverse the classic work of Sir Mortimer Wheeler.
The Hill Forts of the Inverness Area – ALAN SMALL – Vitrification
Creating Space: A re-examination of the Roman Ridge – Nicholas Boldrini –
Rome Against Caratacus – Graham Webster – Chapter five – Aulus Didius Gallus and the Northern Advance. –
Anglo Saxon Chronicles – Part 1 – AD1 – 748
Caesar – The Gallic Wars and Commentories on the Civil War
Touching the void: Iron Age landscapes and settlement in the West Midlands – Andy Wigley.
Celtic and other Stone Heads – Sidney Jackson
The Vitrified Forts of Scotland – Arthur C. Clarke – Vitrification
Scotland Archaeology and Early History – Warrior Celts – Graham and Anna Ritchie.
Derbyshire in late Pre-History.
A Summary of the Excavations at Castle Hill, Almondbury, 1939-1972, W. J. Varley. – Vitrification
Excavations at Mam Tor, Derbyshire, 1965-1969 D. G. Coombs.
The virtified Forts of Scotland – Euan W. Mackie. – Vitrification
Excavations at the Breiddin 1969-1973 C. R. Musson
Traprain Law: A Summary – George Jobey 1972
Welsh Hillforts: A Reappraisal of Recent Research H. N. Savory
Rathgall and Irish Hillfort Problems – Barry Raftery
QUERNHOW: A FOOD-VESSEL BARROW IN YORKSHIRE By D. M. WATERMAN
Sep 24
Demetae
The Demetae
Location of the tribe
The south eaat coast of Wales
Principal towns and settlements in Demetae territory
Moridunum – (Carmarthen, Dyfed) – Possibly the site of a Flavian fort. The only polis attributed to the tribe by Ptolemy, the location of this settlement was also known as Muridunum. The civitas capital may have been only a vicus attached to the fort.
Other known Romano-British settlements
Aber-Cyfor – Name uncertain – Romano-British buildings included a tessalated pavement.
Cwm Brwyno – (Dyfed) – Native settlement in a loop of the Afon Rheidol
Ford – (Dyfed) – Settlement on the Afon Cleddau. There are several native hillforts in the neighbourhood of the crossing over the Afon Cleddau.
Parc-yr-Eglwys – (Eglwys Cymmyn, Dyfed) – Roman buildings near Iron Age earthworks overlooking Carmarthen Bay
Trelissey – Name uncertain – (St. David’s, Dyfed) – Roman building within an Iron Age site.
Sep 24
Celtic Warriors
Drawings of Celtic warriors as envisioned by Lucas de Heere, 1575
Though these may seem fairly accurate, more recent interpretations of how Celtic warriors looked in the late La Tène or Iron Age period before the Claudian invasions in Gaul and Britain are available. This includes depictions on coins, primarily Roman, as well as evidence from buried artifacts.
This image comes from an interesting book called Rome’s Enemies 2 Gallic and British Celts, #158 in the Men-At-Arms Series, by Peter Wilcox and Angus MacBride (ISBN: 0850456061), 1985. The paintings, done by McBride, are based on literary descriptions and archaeological finds and are said to be as accurate as possible at this time.
The Numismatics of Celtic Warriors
One of the earliest coins of the Roman Republic having a Celtic subject is a Denarius of M. Sergius Silus (116-115 BCE, Crawford 286)
The reverse alludes to his grandfather, a hero of the 2nd Punic war. Having lost his right arm in battle, he fashioned an iron arm and went on to defeat 12 enemy camps in Gaul. Note that both sword and head are held in his left hand. (Pliny)
A close up of the head shows it to be wearing a helmet similar to that on the warrior above and the coin below.
Celtic Charioteers: “In both journeys and battles, the Gauls use two-horse chariots which carry both the warrior and the charioteer.” [ Diodorus Suculus ] Since the Celts left few depictions of themselves, we are fortunate Roman coinage provides powerful images that generally confirm the written record. The 2 horse chariot (Roman ‘biga’) with six-spoked wheels seen on these 2 coins are identical to the few archaeological finds. Both coins depict a warrior, wielding a Celtic style shield and about to hurl a spear. The horses are bridled, and shown with powerful forward motion. Both warriors are naked and helmeted. The SCAURUS coin shows Bituitus, Chief of the Averni, with a spear and a typical Celtic war trumpet (carynx) with an animal shaped bell identical to those shown on the Gundestrup cauldron. L. Hostilius Saserna, denarius, (48 BCE, S312; Cr. 448/3)
Caesar, gold aureus, 48 BCE (HCRI 10)
Julius Caesar is probably best known to Celtic scholars for his description of the Gauls and Druids in his writings about the Gallic wars. This and the following two coins depict Gallic arms, trophies of war and were being used by Caesar to commemorate his victories in Gaul as well as downplaying the then current civil conflict with Pompey.
For our purposes the reverse is useful in showing us what Celtic arms looked like.
The shield is long, oval with rounded ends and is decorated.
The helmet is horned and has long ear and neck guards.
The war horn is of typical Celtic style, the bell being the head and open mouth of a fanciful animal.
The armor appears to be cloth which according to classical historians was brightly colored and patterned.
An axe is shown surmounted by a similar animal head. Though classical sources speak of spears, javelins and swords being used by Celtic warriors, the large numbers of axe heads found in Celtic territories and grave sites suggest they were almost certainly used as weapons. Caesar may have choose the axe to show since it was one of the symbols of the pontificate, and alludes to Caesar as Pontifex Maximus.
Caesar, silver denarius, 48 BCE (HCRI 11)
Caesar denarius, military mint in Spain, late 46 to early 45 BCE (HCRI 59)
For several years Caesar had been chasing Pompey’s forces around the Mediterranean with final victory in Spain. The reverses of the coins minted to pay for this campaign again celebrate his Gallic victories– propaganda for war-weary Romans. Again we see typical Gallic arms: two shields, 2 spears., an animal headed war-horn, a torque and a horned helmet. Looking closely at the battle dress, it appears to be chain or scale mail, rare among the Celts who, it is said, invented chain mail, though the torque suggests these are the Chieftain’s arms. The ‘apron’ is also decorated, perhaps studded leather or metal repoussé.
Below are 2 Gallic captives, a dejected female wearing a draped gown and a kneeling male with his hands tied behind. His pointed beard is similar to that on the next coin.
L. Hostilius Saserna, silver denarius, Rome 48 BCE (HCRI 18)
Rarely do we see portraits of actual Celts, and when done are usually idealized statuary. The following 2 coins were minted by the moneyer L. Hostilius Saserna probably under the aegis of Caesar and not the Senate.
The appearance of this portrait is much different than those of Romans, enhancing their ‘barbarian’ or foreign nature to Roman citizens. The hair is long and most likely limed, the beard and moustaches prominent and the facies peculiar. A Celtic shield is behind, and he wears a chain around his neck. This Roman has often been called Vercingetorix, most likely a Romantic notion, but then, who really knows. The reverse of this coin is the shown above.
L. Hostilius Saserna, silver denarius, Rome 48 BCE (HCRI 19)
The sister coin to the above shows a female Gaul with a typical Celtic carynx behind. She has often been called Gallia, a concept that would be absolutely foreign to the tribal Celts. More likely she represents a captive. Hear hair is long in a non-Roman fashion and almost modern in appearance, perhaps limed and forming dreadlocks. Her face is pretty in contrast to most Roman females depicted on coins.
It has been suggested that the reverse of this coin, which depicts Artemis in a Greek fashion, commemorates Caesar’s taking of Massilia which interfered with his march to Spain. Massila was an ancient Greek city and Artemis dear to her.
HCRI: Sear, DR: The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators 49-27 BC, Spink, London, 1998, ISBN: 0907605982
Sep 24
The Celts in Battle
CELTS IN BATTLE
Polybius, who lived between about 202 and 120 BC, gives a full account of how the Celts fought at the battle of Telamon in 225 BC; it is worth quoting at length because it highlights several recurring characteristics: ‘The Celts had drawn up the Gaesatae from the Alps to face their enemies on the rear … and behind them the Insubres …. The Insubres and the Boii wore trousers and light cloaks, but the Gaesatae in their overconfidence had thrown these aside and stood in front of the whole army naked, with nothing but their arms; for they thought that thus they would be more efficient, since some of the ground was overgrown with thorns which would catch on their clothes and impede the use of their weapons.’ On the other hand the fine order and the noise of the Celtic host terrified the Romans; for there were countless trumpeters and horn blowers and since the whole army was shouting its war cries at the same time there was such a confused sound that the noise seemed to come not only from the trumpeters and the soldiers but also from the countryside which was joining in the echo. No less terrifying were the appearance and gestures of the naked warriors in front, all of whom were in the prime of life and of excellent physique. All the warriors in the front ranks were adorned with gold torcs and armlets. The Romans were particularly terrified by the sight of these men, but, led on by hope of gain, they were twice as keen to face the danger. ‘… to the Celts in the rear their trousers and cloaks afforded good protection, but to the naked men in front events turned out differently to what they had expected and caused them much discomfiture and distress. For since the Gallic shield cannot cover the whole body, because they were naked, the bigger they were, the more chance there was of missiles striking home. At length, unable to ward off the javelin throwers because of the distance and the number of javelins falling upon them, in despair and distress some rushed upon the enemy in wild rage and willingly gave up their lives; others, retreating step by step towards their comrades, threw them into confusion by their manifest show of cowardice.’
The ancient writers dwelt upon the terrifying effect an army of Celts had on their opponents; their great stature, their wild cries, their gesticulations and prancings, the clashing of arms and blowing of trumpets – all combined to terrify and confuse the enemy. As long as these demonstrations of enthusiasm and bravado struck terror into the foe, the Celts would drive all before them. ‘For they were always most formidable while they were fresh.’ The whole race is war-mad, says Strabo, high-spirited and quick to fight, but otherwise straightforward and not at all of evil character. When the two armies were arrayed in line, the loud voice of the Celtic chief could sometimes be heard. ‘For they were accustomed … to come forward before the front line and challenge the bravest of the enemy drawn up opposite them to single combat, brandishing their weapons and terrifying the enemy. Whenever one accepts the challenge, they praise in song the manly virtues of their ancestors, proclaiming also their own brave deeds. At the same time they abuse and belittle their opponent, trying by their words to rob him of his boldness of spirit beforehand.’ The story of how Marcus Claudius Marcellus killed a Gallic leader at Clastidium (222 BC) is typical of such encounters. Advancing with a smallish army, Marcellus met a combined force of Insubrian Gauls and Gaesatae at Clastidium. The Gallic army advanced with the usual rush and terrifying cries, and their king, Britomartus, picking out Marcellus by means of his badges of rank, made for him, shouting a challenge and brandishing his spear. Britomartus was an outstanding figure not only for his size but also for his adornments; for he was resplendent in bright colours and his armour shone with gold and silver. This armour, thought Marcellus, would be a fitting offering to the gods. He charged the Gaul, pierced his bright breastplate and cast him to the ground. It was an easy task to kill Britomartus and strip him of his armour. These spoils Marcellus offered to Jupiter. This is the only story of its kind in which the name of the Celtic chief is recorded. In their attempts to throw the enemy into confusion and terror, the Celts made great use of noise. They yelled their war cries as they advanced, howling and singing and brandishing their spears.
Livy, in two different contexts, distant in time and place, vividly depicts the noise accompanying their mad rush into battle. Describing the battle of the river Allia, he says: ‘they are given to wild outbursts and they fill the air with hideous songs and varied shouts.’ Of the Gauls in Asia he writes: ‘their songs as they go into battle, their yells and leapings, and the dreadful noise of arms as they beat their shields in some ancestral custom – all this is done with one purpose, to terrify their enemies.’ In sharp contrast to the wild onset of the Celts, which was evident also during their invasion of Greece, was the silent, orderly advance of the Greek army. When the Gauls defeated the Roman army at the river Allia, they marched on Rome. ‘They arrived at the city and entered at first in fear lest there should be some treachery, but then, when they saw that the city was deserted, they moved forward with equal noise and impetuosity.’
On another occasion the Romans experienced a new form of noisy warfare: ‘for standing up in chariots and wagons, the armed enemies came at them with the great noise of hooves and wheels so that the unfamiliar din terrified the horses of the Romans.’ There was also the noise of trumpets. At the battle of Telamon the number of trumpeters and horn blowers was incalculable. Diodorus Siculus says they had trumpets peculiar to barbarians: ‘for when they blow upon them, they produce a harsh sound, suitable to the tumult of war.’ The Gauls also had their shouts of victory and triumph. ‘They shouted “Victory, Victory” in their customary fashion and raised their yell of triumph (Ululatus)’, and at Alesia ‘they encouraged their men with shouts of triumph (Clamore et Ululatu)’. There are several representations of Celtic trumpets on classical sculpture, most notably at Pergamon in Asia Minor, and on the triumphal arch at Orange in southern France, and a few fragments of actual trumpets have survived. The mouth of a trumpet shaped in the manner of a boar’s head was found in 1816 at Deskford (Banffshire, Grampian); although the trumpet itself no longer survives, the mouth may be compared with the representations on the cauldron from Gundestrup in Denmark, where the sectional nature of the trumpet construction is clearly shown. The Deskford trumpet may originally have had ears and a mane rather like the Gundestrup examples; when first discovered, however, it retained a movable wooden ‘tongue’ which may have added vibration to the strident sounds blown from it. The Deskford piece is usually dated to the middle of the first century AD. Among the earlier representations of trumpets are those from the temple of Athena Polias Nikephoros at Pergamon in Asia Minor dating to about 181 BC and celebrating the victories of Attalus I over the Galatian tribes in the late third century BC. Trumpets, shields, standards, indeed all the trophies are set out in a great display of spoils of war on the triumphal arch at Orange. The large number of trumpets shown at Orange underlines the impression of great noise during battle given by the classical writers. As already mentioned, Polybius describes a contingent of Gaesatae (sometimes taken as mercenaries, now more often as spearmen, which took part in the battle of Telamon; they came from beyond the Alps to help the Gauls already in north Italy (for example the Boii and the Insubres).
The Celts of north Italy wore trousers and cloaks, but the Gaesatae fought naked. At the battle of Cannae (216 BC) Polybius describes the naked Celts and the Iberians with their short linen tunics with purple borders, and Livy speaks of the Gauls naked from the navel up and of the Iberians with dazzlingly white tunics bordered with purple. The Celts in Asia Minor seem to have preserved this custom, for they too are described as naked in battle with skin white because they were never exposed except in battle. Camillus, trying to raise the morale of the Romans after the siege of the Capitol, pointed to some naked Gauls and said: ‘These are the men who rush against you in battle, who raise loud shouts, clash their arms and long swords, and toss their hair. Look at their lack of hardiness, their soft and flabby bodies, and go to it’. Dionysus of Halicarnassus expresses the same sentiments: ‘Our enemies fight bare-headed, their breasts, sides thighs, legs are all bare, and they have no protection except from their shields; their weapons of defence are thin spears and long swords. What injury could their long hair, their fierce looks, the clashing of their arms and the brandishing of their arms do us? These are mere symbols of barbarian boastfulness.’
# 556
Found By Lady Rhie
Found at: https://www.ealaghol.demon.co.uk/celtenc/celt_c3.htm
The figures beneath the entry give reference numbers for the Bibliography
Sep 24
Celtic Marriage
Celtic Marriage Customs and Status of Women
from The High Kings: Arthur’s Celtic Ancestors by Joy Chant
Pages 36-36
Marriage was usually lifelong and to one partner, but there were other
forms. One interesting custom was the “temporary marriage.” The laws
list ten kinds of marriage, of which only three were permanent. Full
marriages were marked by “bride-gifts,” by the “maiden-fee” paid to a
virgin bride or to her kinswomen, and by the woman’s removal from her
parent’s home to that of her husband. In a temporary marriage no gifts
were given, and the husband would live among the wife’s kindred. These
partnerships were open, legal, and honourable, but they were not
intended to be binding, and could be dissolved at will, without pretext,
leaving both free to marry again.
Often the husband would be a visiting stranger, from another kingdom or
another world. Princesses whose children would be heirs to a kingdom
often took such husbands. The children of these unions were not
illegitimate (though bastardy never mattered much in Celtic societies,
where illegitimate children inherited on the same terms as legitimate)
but some of the heroes who are known as sons of their mothers, like
Fergus Mac Roich, may have been the offspring of temporary marriages.
The custom seems to have been especially common in royal houses, where
marriage was likely to be for political advantage. Many of the famous
examples involve reigning Queens: the British Queen Cartimandua
discarded a husband whose political ambitions conflicted with her own
for a more reliable ally, and the legendary Maeve of Connacht changed
consorts so often that it was said of her that “she never had a King but
there was another in his shadow.”
British women enjoyed a status unusual in any time, remarkable in
theirs. They were the equals of men not only in their private lives but
in goverment and the conduct of war.
“Women-warriors” are common in the legends of Britain and Ireland, and
the divine patrons of battle were women – though when they took human
form it was often, appropriately, as “hags,” that is, sterile women. The
custom of women going into battle appalled the Romans. “A whole troop
of foreigners,” wrote one, “would not be able to withstand a single Gaul
if he called his wife to his assistance.” In Britain they learned from
Boudica the treatment a Celtic Queen expected.
Some peoples were always ruled by Queens, and the ruling house in North
Wales inherited through the female line until the ninth century AD.
Perhaps all Celtic tribes began by tracing descent through their
mothers, for there are many things which suggest it. The gods for
example have a mother but no father; and the close relationship between
a man and his sister’s son looks like the relic of a time when men were
not “related” to their own children.
Stories show one interesting result of this importance of women; many
Celtic tales portray a figure who was not to reappear in literature for
a very long time, the man defined in relation to a woman. In most
warrior aristocracies, the amorous exploites of heroes are smoking-room
stories, meant to impress men by their number and audacity; love has
little part in them. Some of these the Celts had, but they also had the
heroes, like Naoise and Diarmial, who were remarkable above all for
their beauty and tenderness, and whose merit was in their devotion and
fidelity as lovers. Lancelot is their natural son…
Sep 24
Establishment of the Tribes
The establishment of the tribes
Introduction
Tacitus
Who the first inhabitants of Britain were,
whether natives or immigrants, remains obscure;
one must remember we are dealing with barbarians.
The way in which the individual tribes developed is not known. The Celtic langauge and its dialects did not have a written form, so the recording o history had to be done orally and committed to memory. Even if they could write, the tribes did not have the advanced techniques of wax tablets the Romans possessed. History was passed on by word of mouth in the form of stories and legends. As you can imagine many of these tales became exaggerated overtime and told of great heroes, many of which never existed.
What we do know is that there was significant movement of peoples between lands and countries. Most of the British tribes began their existence in Britain and evolved from Bronze Age and pre-Bronze Age communities. We also know that many tribes, Atrebates, Belgae, Parisi for example, originated in Europe. They came to Britain as traders and settled here, making their own territories. The Belgae are included as an immigrant tribe, but it is widely believed they were actually a subset of the Atrebates.
Sep 24
Celts through Roman Eyes
CELTS THROUGH ROMAN EYES
To the Romans, the Celts presented a terrifying sight because of their tall stature and their strange appearance. They were in many respects different from Mediterranean peoples. The Celts were by far the tallest race in the world, noticeable as well for their white skin and fair hair. Although the Romans had heard about the barbarian Celts, they first encountered them as warriors, and it was in battle that their enormous size and strange appearance first struck them. The Celtic chiefs who advanced to challenge their opposing Roman leader to single combat were men of great physique, ‘of stature greater than human’; the story of the fight between Britomartus and Marcellus can be compared to that between Goliath and David.
The triumphal procession awarded to Marcellus was said to be most remarkable for the riches of the spoils and the gigantic size of the prisoners. Diodorus Siculus describes the Celts at some length: ‘the Gauls are tall of body, with skin moist and white; their hair is blond not only by nature but also because they practise to increase artificially the peculiar nature of their colouring. Some of them shave off their beards, but others let them grow moderately: the nobles shave their cheeks but let their moustaches grow freely to cover their mouths. Therefore, when they are eating, the moustaches become mixed in the food, and when they are drinking, the drink passes as if through a strainer.’ They had unusual styles of hairdressing; they used to smear their hair with limewater and then pull it back to the top of their head and over the neck to produce something like a horse’s mane.
Tacitus tells of other similar treatments of hair found among the Germanic tribes. Thus, the Suebi are distinguished from the other Germans by their particular hairstyle: ‘they comb their hair sideways and tie it in a knot … often on the very crown.’ All this elaborate hairdressing was intended to give them greater height and to terrify their enemies in battle. Silius Italicus mentions a warrior who had offered his golden locks and the ruddy top-knot on the crown of his head to Mars if he were victorious. The colour of the hair is usually referred to as fair, red or flaxen coloured and even ginger.
The men of Britain were taller than those of Gaul, but their hair was not so fair, while the Germans differed only slightly from other Celts in that they were wilder, taller and had redder hair. There is a story that Caligula, anxious to make his triumph in Rome more spectacular, considering the small number of prisoners for display, picked out some very tall Gauls and made them grow their hair longer and dye it red. Strabo, quoting an earlier source, makes a curious statement: ‘they try to avoid becoming stout and pot-bellied and any young man whose waist exceeds the measure of the normal girdle is fined.’ But such a weight-watching approach is contradicted by other writers, who tell of the Gauls gorging themselves with food and drinking wine excessively so that their bodies soon become corpulent and flabby. Consequently, when they exercised their bodies, they suffered quickly from exhaustion and breathlessness. In the minds of classical writers, the women were not only like their men in stature, but they could also rival them in strength.
Ammianus Marcellinus described how difficult it would be for a band of foreigners to deal with a Celt if he called in the help of his wife. For she was stronger than he was and could rain blows and kicks upon the assailants equal in force to the shots of a catapult. Boudica, queen of the Iceni, was said to be ‘very tall and terrifying in appearance; her voice was very harsh and a great mass of red hair fell over her shoulders.’
According to Diodorus Siculus, the Celts ‘wear striking clothing, tunics dyed and embroidered in many colours, and trousers which they call Bracae, and they wear striped cloaks, fastened by a brooch, thick in winter and light in summer, worked in a variegated, closely set check pattern.’ Strabo says that instead of the ordinary tunics they wore ‘split tunics which have sleeves and reach down to their thighs. Their wool is rough and thin at the ends, and from it, they weave thick cloaks (SAGI) which they call Laenae.’
The poet Propertius tells how the huge Celtic chief Virdomarus, skilled in hurling his javelins from his chariot and ‘clothed in striped trousers’, boasted of his descent from the Rhine God. Three pieces of clothing are thus mentioned: trousers, tunics and cloaks. The trousers would certainly be noticed by the toga-wearing Romans. Trousers were worn especially by the cavalrymen, and the Romans themselves adopted them from the mercenary Gallic cavalry they enlisted. The tunic was probably a simple garment like a shirt, made of linen and reaching down to the thighs. There was also the slightly different style mentioned by Strabo – with slits and sleeves.
The Iberians were said to wear short tunics bordered with a purple stripe and dazzlingly white. The tunics were often dyed and embroidered and worn with a gold-plated or silver-plated belt. The cloaks were made of wool; they were heavy or light according to the season, and were fastened at the shoulder by a brooch. A defeated Celtic barbarian is shown on a fragment of a monumental bronze statue from Volubilis in Roman Mauritania in North Africa; his Bracae have what Piggott has described as ‘loud and disparate check patterns’ and his cloak hangs loosely from his shoulders. Such an impression of woven designs is also given in a description of Queen Boudica, who wore a tunic of many colours, over which a thick cloak was fastened by a brooch.
An outstanding characteristic of the Celtic people was their love of decoration and ornament. ‘They collect a great quantity of gold and use it for decoration, not only the women but also the men. For they wear bracelets on the wrists and arms, necklaces of solid gold, rings of great worth and even gold corslets’ (body armour for the upper part of the torso). The torc was one of the most important ornaments worn by the Celts. It was a neck ring made of a rod of metal (sometimes twisted), of bronze or gold according to the wealth and status of the wearer. The two ends of the torc almost met, but the metal was pliant, for it had to open sufficiently to let it on or off. (See also: TORQUE). As with clothes, so with adornments, each man wore what he could afford and what status demanded.
It is obvious, however, that the Celts liked to attract attention with flamboyant clothes and rich, decorative accessories. The Roman soldiers were well aware of the splendid ornaments worn by their opponents, and before one battle they were told by their generals that soldiers should not be adorned with gold and silver but should rely on their weapons and their courage. These ornaments were more truly booty than arms, shining brightly before the battle but ugly in the midst of blood and wounds.
Athenaeus is the main authority on food; quoting Posidonius, he says: ‘Their food consists of a small quantity of bread and a large amount of meat’; and quoting Phylarchus, ‘Many loaves of bread are broken up and served lavishly on tables as well as pieces of meat taken from cauldrons.’ Bread, meat (boiled in a cauldron or roasted on a spit) and fish were the staple foods. Fish was eaten, sometimes baked with salt, vinegar and cummin’.
By contrast, the Caledonians and the Maeatae, according to Dio, never ate fish, though it was in plentiful supply. Strabo speaks of large quantities of food, milk and all kinds of meat, especially fresh and salted pork, and of the Britons, who, though they had milk in abundance, did not make cheese. A certain etiquette and precedence were observed at the table, and good eating habits were even noted.
Though they were accustomed to eating voraciously, raising whole limbs in both hands and biting off the meat, they did it in a cleanly fashion. No one started to eat without looking first to see if the chief had touched what was set before him. In extending hospitality to strangers, they did not ask them who they were and what they wanted until they had eaten.
At more formal gatherings or celebrations they sat in a circle with the chief or hero in the centre, his attendants and warriors around and behind him, each with a position according to his status. Drink was served from earthenware or bronze jugs, and the meat on plates of bronze or in baskets. When the joints of meat were served, the chief or hero took the thigh piece. But if someone else claimed it, they joined in single combat to the death. Frequently they used some chance circumstance to start an argument and then a fight during dinner. They indulged in sham fights and practice feints, and they would end up either wounding or even killing their opponent. This love of quarrelling and fighting even at a table was made all the easier, says Polybius, because they usually ate too much and drank too much.
The Celtic chiefs were accompanied in war and in piece by ‘parasites’ (the word means fellow diner and has no pejorative meaning), who sang their praises before the assembly; these entertainers were called bards. There are also descriptions of great banquets prepared by rich kings. The gestures of lordly prodigality and ostentation were typical of the autocratic tribal chief of the period.
Louernius, king of the Averni, in an attempt to win favour, is said to have ridden his chariot over a plain distributing gold and silver to all who followed him. He also gave a feast to all who wished to attend, in a vast enclosure, the sides of which were 1½ miles (2.4 km) long. He filled vats with liquor, prepared great quantities of food and ensured service without interruption for several days. A poet who arrived too late for the festivities composed a poem praising the king’s greatness and lamenting the fact he had arrived too late.
So charmed was the king by the song that he gave the poet a purse of gold and won for himself a further poetic effusion. One feature which has attracted frequent comment was the ability of the Celts to drink great quantities of liquor, though one should not take Plutarch seriously when he says that the Celts were so enthralled by the new pleasure of wine drinking that they seized their arms, took their families and set off for Italy!
Athenaeus says: ‘the drink of the wealthy is wine imported from Italy … This is unmixed, but sometimes a little water is added. The lower classes drink a beer made from wheat and prepared with honey … They drink from a common cup, a little at a time, not more than a mouthful, but they do it rather frequently.’ The Cimbri were said to be demoralised by the delights of wine, but the Nervii, a Gallic tribe famed for their indomitable ferocity, would not allow wine and other luxuries to be imported because they believed that with them the men would become too soft and effeminate to endure hardship. To Polybius, the Celts were merely a band of marauders who later became mercenaries ready to join whichever side suited them in the war between the Romans and the Carthaginians.
They were brave and ostentatiously courageous but reckless, impetuous and easily disheartened. Hannibal was eager to make use of their enthusiasm before it wore off, but the Carthaginians and the Romans too were apprehensive of the Celts, for they saw in them a lack of fidelity and a mutual treachery. It is reported that Hannibal so distrusted his new allies that he had a number of wigs made for himself, suitable for men of all ages. He was sure that by changing his wigs constantly, he would make it difficult for the fickle Celts to recognise and perhaps kill him. Some writers tend to dwell mainly on their lawlessness and savagery. Cicero, for example, makes great use of this to rail against them. ‘They thought it right to sacrifice human beings to the immortal gods’ and ‘they found it necessary to propitiate the immortal gods and to defile their altars and temples with human victims.’
Polybius and Livy concentrate on the outrages committed by the Gauls and on the barbarous character of the Galatians. There was always a tendency for Greek or Roman writers to emphasize characteristics which did not conform to their code of morality, and perhaps give too much credence to the more dramatic traveller’s tales. Strabo and Diodorus Siculus, while not ignoring the savagery of some Celtic practices, also describe some of the more pleasing traits of their character.
#556
Bibliography: 556 Ritchie, W. F. and J. N. G.
CELTIC WARRIORS Shire Publications, Princes Risborough, 1985
The Encyclopaedia of the Celts, ISBN 87-985346-0-2
Compiled & edited by: Knud Mariboe ©, 1994.
Found By Lady Rhie
Found at: https://www.ealaghol.demon.co.uk/celtenc/celt_c3.htm
The figures beneath the entry give reference numbers for the Bibliography
