Article contents
Batavians and the Roman Conquest of Britain*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 November 2011
Extract
Tacitus's account of the Claudian invasion of Britain and the campaigns that followed it down to the year 47 is unfortunately lost, and historians have to be content with Dio, who gives the only consecutive account, supplemented by scattered references in other sources. This short note is an attempt to extract a few more fragments of information from these literary sources and in particular it concerns the part played by Rome's Batavian auxiliaries.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © M. W. C. Hassall 1970. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies
References
1 The initial stage of the conquest probably came at the end of Annals, ix, subsequent events down to 47 in the first half of Annals, xi. See R. Syme, Tacitus, p. 260.
2 Dio, lx, 19–21.
3 Tac, Hist., i, 6 with i, 59 and ii, 27; cf. iv, 15.
4 Tac, Ann., ii, 8.
5 Tac, Hist., ii, 17.
6 Tac, Hist., iv, 12.
7 Dio, lxix, g, 6; cf. I.L.S. 2558, under Hadrian.
8 Dio, lx, 20.
9 Tac., Germ., 29, where the Batavians are included among tribes of German origin.
10 Riese, A., Forschungen zur Geschichte der Rheinlande (Frankfurt am Main 1889), p. 14, note 4. κελτικµ ist für Dio Germanien. Die Gallier nennt er ταλάται, die Germanen κελτοι, τερμαμάνια ist ein Ausdruck, der für ihn mit den rheinischen Legionen verbunden ist. Dies ist sein stetiger Sprachgebruch (with supporting references).Google Scholar
11 Tac, Ann., xiv, 29.
12 Tac, Hist., iv, 19.
13 Tac, Ann., xiv, 38.
14 R.E., iv i, 250.
15 Frere, S. S., Britannia (London 1967), p. 61, note 1.Google Scholar
16 Tac, Agric., 16.
17 The view of M. Bang for whose discussion of the history of Batavian auxiliary units see Die Germanen im Römischen Dienst (Berlin 1906), pp. 32–39.Google Scholar
18 Tac, Hist., i, 13, regia stirpe.
19 Tac, Hist., iv, 16 and 32.
20 Tac, Hist., iv, 32.
21 Suet., Caligula, 43, where Suetonius says that Gaius undertook his expedition to Germany in order to get new recruits for his Batavian bodyguard. The immediate reason in fact was to suppress the revolt of Gaetulicus in Upper Germany. However, P., Bicknell argues persuasively in the ‘The Emperor Gaius’ Military Activities in A.D. 40’ Historia, xvii (1968), 496–505 that Gaius did at least visit Lower Germany in A.D. 40 and that the army of the Lower Rhine carried out minor operations against the Canninefates from the Insula Batavorum (cf. especially Tac. Hist., iv, 15).Google Scholar
22 Tac, Hist., v, 26.
23 Cf. Brunt, P. A., Latomus, xix (1960), p. 510.Google Scholar
24 Suet., Vesp., 4 with Tac, Hist., iii, 44.
25 Cf. G. Walser: Rom, das Reich und die fremden Völker, p. 91: ‘Vermutlich bestanden zwischen den batavischen Truppen und Vespasian alte Beziehungen aus der Zeit, als Vespasian Legionslegat in Germanien und Britannien war.’
26 Dio, lx, 20.
27 Tac, Ann., xii, 40.
28 Birley, E., Roman Britain and the Roman Army (Kendal, 1953). 47.Google Scholar
29 Not discussed by I. Kajanto: The Latin Cognomina, p. 52, cognomina from conquered towns, peoples, etc. Lewis and Short derive Briganticus from Brigantes, v. sub Brigantes. A derivation from the Brigantii of the Lake Constance region is also theoretically possible.
30 Velleius, ii, 116.
31 Suet., Div. Claud., 24.
32 Dio, lx, 22.
33 E.g. I.L.S. 2243, M. Billienus M.f. Rom(ilia) Actiacus legione XI proelio navali facto in coloniam deductus, with the other examples quoted in the article by Ensslin cited below. Dig., xxxvi, 1, 48 (Oceanus), Tac, Ann., xi, 16 (ltalicus). The name of Arminius himself may be a geographical cognomen ‘Armenius’— the Armenian, given him as one of the companions of C. Caesar to the east and Armenia in A.D. I. See the discussion of the suggestion of E. Hohl by Ensslin, W., ‘Arminius-Armenius?’ Das Gymnasium liv/lv 1943/1944, P. 64 ff. Ensslin however tentatively supported a Teutonic derivation. Examples of cognomina used by the aristocracy and derived from some special geographical connection could be multiplied under the empire.Google Scholar
34 Momigliano, , J.R.S., xl, 1950, p. 41f.Google Scholar
35 Tac, Agric, 36. quattuor—so the best MS. See Ogilvie, R. M. and Richmond, Sir Ian, De Vila Agricolae (Oxford 1967), introduction, p. 78.Google Scholar
36 Tac, Agric, 18.
37 E. Stein, Römische Beamte und Truppenkörper in Deutschland, p. 167.
38 Ed. Richmond and Ogilvie. De Vita Agricolae, p. 78.
39 For these units see most conveniently Cichorius in R.E., iv, (249 f.) and the indexes of C.I.L., xvi.
40 C.I.L., xvi, 69.
41 Bang, op. cit., thought that Agricola's Batavian cohorts were quingenary and that the Cohors I Batavorum later attested in Britain was one of them. After their withdrawal to the continent cohorts II and III were made up to milliary strength and a new milliary cohort I was added to complete the series.
42 It has recently been suggested by Bogaers, J. E., Studien zu den Mililärgrenzen Roms (Beihefte der Bonner Jahrbücher, xix, p. 75)Google Scholar that finds of North British trumpet fibulae and of a late La Tene mirror of British type from Nijmegen are to be connected with the presence of the IXth legion there in the early years of the second century. This is perhaps true of those trumpet fibulae whose provenance is adequately recorded, since these came from the legionary cemetery. But the mirror came from the Gräberfeld unter Hees which belongs to the civil settlement of Ulpia Noviomagus, and this, at least, could equally well have been brought back by a returning Batavian veteran.
- 4
- Cited by