[304] “Acie
triplici
instituta.
Napoleon - History of Julius Caesar - b
(_See Plate 2.
_)
[245] The retrenchments of this tête-du-pont, especially the side
parallel to the Aisne, are still visible at Berry-au-Bac. The gardens of
several of the inhabitants are made upon the rampart itself, and the
fosse appears at the outside of the village in the form of a cistern.
The excavations have displayed distinctly the profile of the fosse.
[246] The excavations undertaken in 1862, by bringing to light the
fosses of the camp, showed that they were 18 feet wide, with a depth of
9 or 10. (_See Plates 8 and 9. _) If, then, we admit that the platform of
earth of the parapet was 10 feet wide, it would have measured 8 feet in
height, which, with the palisade of 4 feet, would give the crest of the
parapet a command of 22 feet above the bottom of the fosse.
[247] The following localities have been suggested for Bibrax: _Bièvre_,
_Bruyères_, _Neufchâtel_, _Beaurieux_, and the mountain called
_Vieux-Laon_. Now that the camp of Cæsar has been discovered on the hill
of Mauchamp, there is only room to hesitate between Beaurieux and
Vieux-Laon, as they are the only localities among those just mentioned
which, as the text requires, are eight miles distant from the Roman
camp. But Beaurieux will not suit, for the reason that even if the Aisne
had passed, at the time of the Gallic war, at the foot of the heights on
which the town is situated, we cannot understand how the re-enforcements
sent by Cæsar could have crossed the river and penetrated into the
place, which the Belgian army must certainly have invested on all sides.
This fact is, on the contrary, easily understood when we apply it to the
mountain of Vieux-Laon, which presents towards the south impregnable
escarpments. The Belgæ would have surrounded it on all parts except on
the south, and it was no doubt by that side that, during the night,
Cæsar’s re-enforcements would enter the town.
[248] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 7. --(_Plate 9_ gives the plan of the camp,
which has been found entire, and that of the redoubts with the fosses,
as they have been exposed to view by the excavations; but we have found
it impossible to explain the outline of the redoubts. )
[249] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 12. --Sabinus evidently commanded on both
sides the river.
[250] _De Bello Gallico_ II. 12. --Sabinus evidently commanded on both
sides the river.
[251] See the biographies of Cæsar’s lieutenants, _Appendix D_.
[252] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 11.
[253] The _vineæ_ were small huts constructed of light timber work
covered with hurdles and hides of animals. (Vegetius, Lib. IV. c. 16. )
See the figures on Trajan column.
In a regular siege the _vineæ_ were constructed out of reach of the
missiles, and they were then pushed in file one behind the other up to
the wall of the place attacked, a process which was termed _agere
vineas_; they thus formed long covered galleries which, sometimes placed
at right angles to the wall and sometimes parallel, performed the same
part as the branches and parallels in modern sieges.
[254] The terrace (_agger_) was an embankment, made of any materials,
for the purpose of establishing either platforms to command the ramparts
of a besieged town, or viaducts to conduct the towers and machines
against the walls, when the approaches to the place presented slopes
which were too difficult to climb. These terraces were used also
sometimes to fill up the fosse. The _agger_ was most commonly made of
trunks of trees, crossed and heaped up like the timber in a funeral
pile. --(Thucydides, _Siege of Platæa_. --Lucan, _Pharsalia_. --Vitruvius,
book XI. , _Trajan Column_. )
[255] Antiquaries hesitate between Beauvais, Montdidier, or Breteuil. We
adopt Breteuil as the most probable, according to the dissertation on
Bratuspantium, by M. l’Abbé Devic, cure of Mouchy-le-Châtel. In fact,
the distance from Breteuil to Amiens is just twenty-five miles, as
indicated in the “Commentaries. ” We must add, however, that M. l’Abbé
Devic does not place Bratuspantium at Breteuil itself, but close to that
town, in the space now comprised between the communes of Vaudeuil,
Caply, Beauvoir, and their dependencies. --Paris, 1843, and Arras, 1865.
[256] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 15.
[257] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 14, 15, 16. Mons is, in fact, seated on a
hill completely surrounded by low meadows, traversed by the sinuous
courses of the Haine and the Trouille.
[258] According to scholars, the frontier between the Nervii and the
Ambiani lay towards Fins and Bapaume. Supposing the three days’ march of
the Roman army to be reckoned from this point, it would have arrived, in
three days, of twenty-five kilomètres each, at Bavay.
[259] If Cæsar had arrived on the right bank of the Sambre, as several
authors have pretended, he would already have found that river at
Landrecies, and would have had no need to learn, on the third day of
this march, that he was only fifteen kilomètres from it.
[260] It is worthy of remark, that still at the present day the fields
in the neighbourhood of the Sambre are surrounded with hedges very
similar to those here described. Strabo (II. , p. 161) also mentions
these hedges.
[261] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 17.
[262] “The signal for battle is a purple mantle, which is displayed
before the general’s tent. ” (Plutarch, _Fabius Maximus_, 24. )
[263] _Signum dare_, “to give the word of order. ” In fact, we read in
Suetonius: “Primo etiam imperii die signum excubanti tribuno dedit:
_Optimam matrem_. ” (_Nero_, 9; _Caligula_, 56. --Tacitus, _Histor. _, III.
22. )
[264] The soldiers wore either the skins of wild beasts, or plumes or
other ornaments, to mark their grades. “Excussit cristas galeis. ”
(Lucan, _Pharsalia_, line 158. )
[265] Except the Treviran cavalry, who had withdrawn.
[266] According to Titus Livius (_Epitome_, CIV. ), 1,000 armed men
succeeded in escaping.
[267] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 28.
[268] According to the researches which have been carried on by the
Commandant Locquessye in the country supposed to have been formerly
occupied by the Aduatuci, two localities only, Mount Falhize and the
part of the mountain of Namur on which the citadel is built, appear to
agree with the site of the _oppidum_ of the Aduatuci. But Mount Falhize
is not surrounded with rocks on all sides, as the Latin text requires.
The countervallation would have had a development of more than 15,000
feet, and it would have twice crossed the Meuse, which is difficult to
admit. We therefore adopt, as the site of the _oppidum_ of the Aduatuci,
the citadel of Namur.
Another locality, Sautour, near Philippeville, would answer completely
to Cæsar’s description, but the compass of Sautour, which includes only
three hectares, is too small to have contained 60,000 individuals. The
site of the citadel of Namur is already in our eyes very small.
[269] We translate _quindecim millium_ by 15,000 feet; the word _pedum_,
employed in the preceding sentence, being understood in the text. When
Cæsar intends to speak of _paces_, he almost always uses the word
_passus_.
[270] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 33.
[271] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 35. --Plutarch, _Cæsar_, 20. --Cicero,
_Epist. Famil. _, I. 9, 17, 18.
[272] This passage has generally been wrongly interpreted. The text has,
_Quæ civitates propinquæ his locis erant ubi bellum gesserat_. (_De
Bello Gallico_, II. 35. ) We must add the name of Crassus, overlooked by
the copyists; for if Anjou and Touraine are near Brittany and Normandy,
where Crassus had been fighting, they are very far from the Sambre and
the Meuse, where Cæsar had carried the war.
[273] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 6
[274] Some manuscripts read _Esuvios_, but we adopt _Unellos_, because
the geographical position of the country of the Unelli agrees better
with the relation of the campaign.
[275] They leagued with the Osismii (_the people of the department of
Finistère_), the Lexovii (_department of Calvados_), the Namnetes
(_Loire-Inférieure_), the Ambiliates (_on the left bank of the Loire, to
the south of Angers_), the Morini (_the Boulonnais and bishopric of
Saint-Omer_), the Diablintes (_Western Maine_), and the Menapii
(_between the Rhine and the mouths of the Scheldt_). (_De Bello
Gallico_, III. 9. )
[276] Orosius (VI. 8) confirms this fact as stated in the Commentaries.
[277] “The Veneti fought at sea against Cæsar; they had made their
dispositions to prevent his passage, into the isle of Britain, because
they were in possession of the commerce of that country. ” (Strabo, IV.
iv. , p. 162, edit. Didot. )
[278] We must not confound him with M. Junius Brutus, the assassin of
Cæsar. Decimus Junius Brutus was the adopted son of A. Postumius
Albinus. (See Drumann, IV. 9, and _Appendix D_. )
[279] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 40.
[280] We suppose, in this enumeration, that the legion of Galba,
cantoned the preceding winter among the Allobroges, had rejoined the
army.
[281] I borrow this interpretation of the Roman works from the very
instructive book of General de Gœler.
[282] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 13. --Strabo, IV. , p. 162.
[283] The fleet of the Veneti, superior to that of the Romans in number,
in the magnitude of their vessels, and in their rigging and sails, must
have issued from the river Auray by the Morbihan entrance to the gulf,
and met Brutus to fight him, instead of waiting for him at the head of
the bay, where retreat would be impossible. This follows from Cæsar’s
account: _ex portu profectæ, nostris adversæ constiterunt_. According to
the memoir by M. le Comte de Grandpré, a post-captain, inserted in the
_Recueil de la Société des Antiquaires de France_, tom. II. , 1820, the
wind must have been east or north-east, for it was towards the end of
the summer. It appears that these winds usually prevail at that period,
and that, when they have blown during the morning, there is a dead calm
towards the middle of the day: it is just what happened in this combat;
the calm came, probably, towards midday. It was necessary, indeed, that
the wind should be between the north and the east, to allow, on one hand
the Roman fleet to leave the Loire and sail towards the Point
Saint-Jacques, and, on the other, to permit the fleet of the Veneti to
quit the river Auray. These latter, in this position, could, in case of
defeat, take refuge in the Bay of Quiberon, or fly to the open sea,
where the Romans would not have dared to follow them.
With winds blowing from below, it matters not from what point, the
Romans could not have gone in search of their enemies, or the latter
come to meet them. Supposing that, in one tide, the Roman fleet had
arrived at the mouth of the Loire towards five o’clock in the morning;
it might have been towards ten o’clock, the moment when the battle
commenced, between Haedik and Sarzeau. Supposing similarly that, as
early as five o’clock in the morning, the movement of the Roman fleet
had been announced to the Veneti, they could, in five hours, have issued
from the river Auray, defiled by the entrance of the Morbihan, rallied
and advanced in order of battle to meet the Romans in the part of the
sea above described.
As to the place where Cæsar encamped, it is very probable, as we have
said, that it was on the heights of Saint-Gildas; for from thence he
could see the dispositions of the enemy, and perceive far off the
approach of his fleet. In case of check, the Roman galleys found, under
his protection, a place of refuge in the Vilaine. Thus, he had his rear
secured; rested upon the towns of the coast which he had taken; could
recall to him, if necessary, Titurius Sabinus; and lastly, could cross
the Vilaine, to place that river between him and his enemies. Placed, on
the contrary, on the other side of the Bay of Quiberon, he would have
been too much enclosed in an enemy’s country, and would have had none of
the advantages offered by the position of Saint-Gildas.
[284] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 41.
[285] We see, in fact, in Vegetius, that the word _falces_ was applied
to the head of a battering ram, armed with a point, and with a hook to
detach the stones from the walls. “Quæ (trabes) aut adunco præfigitur
ferro, et falx vocatur ab eo quod incurva est, ut de muro extrahat
lapides. ” (Vegetius, IV. 14. )
[286] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 17.
[287] This position is at the distance of seven kilomètres to the east
of Avranches. The vestiges still visible of Chastellier are probably
those of a camp made at a later period than this Gallic war, but we
think that Sabinus had established his camp on the same site.
[288] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 19.
[289] Cæsar, after having said, in the first book of his “Commentaries”,
that Aquitaine was one of the three parts of Gaul, states here that it
formed the third part by its extent and population, which is not
correct.
[290] Nicholas of Damascus (in _Athenæus, Deipn. _, VI. 249) writes in
this manner the name of King _Adiatomus_, and adds that the _soldurii_
were clothed in royal vestments.
[291] This combat is remarkable as being the only one in the whole war
in Gaul in which the Romans attack a fortified Gaulish camp.
[292] Of this number were the Tarbelli, The Bigerriones, The Ptiani, the
Vasates, the Tarusates, the Elusates, the Gaites, the Ausci, the
Garumni, the Sibusates, and the Cocosates.
[293] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 27.
[294] Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _, III. x. 6.
[295] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 44.
[296] Cæsar never entirely subjugated the north-west of Gaul. (See
Sallust, cited by Ammianus Marcellinus, XV. , 15. ) Still, under the reign
of Augustus, in 724 and 726, there were triumphs over the Morini.
[297] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 29.
[298] “In praetura, in consulatu præfectum fabrum detulit. ” (Cicero,
_Orat. pro Balbo_, 28. )
[299] Mamurra, a Roman knight, born at Formiæ. (Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _,
XXXVI. 7. )
[300] From Xanten to Nimeguen, for a length of fifty kilomètres, extends
a line of heights which form a barrier along the left bank of the Rhine.
All appearances would lead us to believe that the river flowed, in
Cæsar’s time, close at the foot of these heights; but now it has removed
from them, and at Emmerich, for instance, is at a distance of eight
kilomètres. This chain, the eastern slope of which is scarped, presents
only two passes; one by a large opening at Xanten itself, to the north
of the mountain called the Furstenberg; the other by a gorge of easy
access, opening at Qualburg, near Cleves. These two passes were so well
defined as the entries to Gaul in these regions, that, after the
conquest, the Romans closed them by fortifying the Furstenberg (_Castra
vetera_), and founding, on the two islands formed by the Rhine opposite
these entries, _Colonia Trajana_, now Xanten, and _Quadriburgium_, now
_Qualburg_. The existence of these isles facilitated at that time the
passage of the Rhine, and, in all probability, it was opposite these two
localities just named that the Usipetes and Tencteri crossed the river
to penetrate into Gaul.
[301] The account of this campaign is very obscure in the
“Commentaries. ” Florus and Dio Cassius add to the obscurities: the
first, by placing the scene of the defeat of the Usipetes and Tencteri
towards the confluence of the Moselle and the Rhine; the second, by
writing that Cæsar came up with the Germans in the country of the
Treviri. Several authors have given to the account of these two
historians more credit than to that of Cæsar himself, and they give of
this campaign an explanation quite different from ours. General de
Gœler, among others, supposes that the whole emigration of the Germans
had advanced as far as the country of the Condrusi, where Cæsar came up
with them, and that he had driven them from west to east, into the angle
formed by the Moselle and the Rhine. From researches which were kindly
undertaken by M. de Cohausen, major in the Prussian army, and which have
given the same result as those of MM. Stoffel and De Locqueyssie, we
consider this explanation of the campaign as inadmissible. It would be
enough, to justify this assertion, to consider that the country situated
between the Meuse and the Rhine, to the south of Aix-la-Chapelle, is too
much broken and too barren to have allowed the German emigration,
composed of 430,000 individuals, men, women, and children, with wagons,
to move and subsist in it. Moreover, it contains no trace of ancient
roads; and if Cæsar had taken this direction, he must necessarily have
crossed the forest of the Ardennes, a circumstance of which he would not
have failed to inform us. Besides, is it not more probable that, on the
news of the approach of Cæsar, instead of directing their march towards
the Ubii, who were not favourable to them, the Germans, at first spread
over a vast territory, would have concentrated themselves towards the
most distant part of the fertile country on which they had seized--that
of the Menapii?
[302] The Ambivariti were established on the left bank of the Meuse, to
the west of Ruremonde, and to the south of the marshes of Peel.
[303] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 13.
[304] “Acie triplici instituta. ” Some authors have translated these
words by “the army was formed in three columns;” but Cæsar, operating in
a country which was totally uncovered and flat, and aiming at surprising
a great mass of enemies, must have marched in order of battle, which did
not prevent each cohort from being in column.
[305] Attacked unexpectedly in the afternoon, while they were sleeping.
(Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 48. )
[306] The study of the deserted beds of the Rhine leads us to believe
that the confluence of the Waal and the Meuse, which is at present near
Gorkum, was then much more to the east, towards Fort Saint-André. In
that case, Cæsar made no mistake in reckoning eighty miles from the
junction of the Waal and the Meuse to the mouth of the latter river.
[307] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 14, 15.
[308] The following reasons have led us to adopt Bonn as the point where
Cæsar crossed the Rhine:--
We learn from the “Commentaries” that in 699 he debouched in the country
of the Ubii, and that two years later it was a little above (_paulum
supra_) the first bridge that he established another, which joined the
territory of the Treviri with that of the Ubii. Now everything leads to
the belief that, in the first passage as in the second, the bridge was
thrown across between the frontiers of the same peoples; for we cannot
admit, with some authors, that the words _paulum supra_ apply to a
distance of several leagues. As to those who suppose that the passage
was effected at Andernach, because, changing with Florus the Meuse
(_Mosa_) into Moselle, they placed the scene of the defeat of the
Germans at the confluence of the Moselle and the Rhine, we have given
the reasons for rejecting this opinion. We have endeavoured to prove, in
fact, that the battle against the Usipetes and the Tencteri had for its
theatre the confluence of the Meuse and the Rhine; and since, in
crossing this latter river, Cæsar passed from the country of the Treviri
into that of the Ubii, we must perceive that after his victory he must
necessarily have proceeded up the valley of the Rhine to go from the
territory of the Menapii to the Treviri, as far up as the territory of
the Ubii, established on the right bank.
This being admitted, it remains to fix, within the limits assigned to
these two last peoples, the most probable point of passage. Hitherto,
Cologne has been adopted; but, to answer to the data of the
“Commentaries,” Cologne appears to us to be much too far to the north.
In fact, in the campaign of 701, Cæsar, having started from the banks of
the Rhine, traversed the forest of the Ardennes from east to west,
passed near the Segni and the Condrusi, since they implored him to spare
their territory, and directed his march upon Tongres. If he had started
from Cologne, he would not have crossed the countries in question.
Moreover, in this same year, 2,000 Sicambrian cavalry crossed the Rhine
thirty miles below the bridge of the Roman army. Now, if this bridge had
been constructed at Cologne, the point of passage of the Sicambri,
thirty miles below, would have been at a very great distance from
Tongres, where, nevertheless, they seem to have arrived very quickly.
On the contrary, everything is explained if we adopt Bonn as the point
of passage. To go from Bonn to Tongres, Cæsar proceeded, as the text has
it, across the forest of the Ardennes; he passed through the country of
the Segni and Condrusi, or very near them; and the Sicambri, crossing
the Rhine thirty miles below Bonn, took the shortest line from the Rhine
to Tongres. Moreover, we cannot place Cæsar’s point of passage either
lower or higher than Bonn. Lower, that is, towards the north, the
different incidents related in the “Commentaries” are without possible
application to the theatre of the events; higher, towards the south, the
Rhine flows upon a rocky bed, where the piles could not have been driven
in, and presents, between the mountains which border it, no favourable
point of passage. We may add that Cæsar would have been much too far
removed from the country of the Sicambri, the chastisement of whom was
the avowed motive of his expedition.
Another fact deserves to be taken into consideration: that, less than
fifty years after Cæsar’s campaigns, Drusus, in order to proceed against
the Sicambri--that is, against the same people whom Cæsar intended to
combat--crossed the Rhine at Bonn. (Florus, IV. 12. )
[309] The following passage has given room for different
interpretations:--
“Hæc utraque insuper bipedalibus trabibus immissis, quantum eorum
tignorum junctura distabat, binis utrimque fibulis ab extrema parte
distinebantur; quibus disclusis atque in contrariam partem revinctis,
tanta erat operis firmitudo atque ea rerum natura, ut, quo major vis
aquæ se incitavisset, hoc arctius illigata tenerentur. ” (_De Bello
Gallico_, IV. 17. )
It has not been hitherto observed that the words _hæc utraque_ relate to
the two couples of one row of piles, and not to the two piles of the
same couple. Moreover, the words _quibus disclusis_, &c. , relate to
these same two couples, and not, as has been supposed, to _fibulis_.
[310] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 20.
[311] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 4.
[312] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 13.
[313] Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _, IV. 30, § 16.
[314] Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _, IV. 30, § 16. --Tacitus, _Agricola_, 10.
[315] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 12.
[316] Strabo, IV. , p. 199.
[317] _Agricola_, 12.
[318] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 12.
[319] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 13 and 14.
[320] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 20.
[321] _Annales_, XIV. 33.
[322] Although the greater number of manuscripts read _Cenimagni_, some
authors have made two names of it, the _Iceni_ and the _Cangi_.
[323] The _Anderida Silva_, 120 miles in length by 30 in breadth,
extended over the counties of Sussex and Kent, in what is now called the
_Weald_. (See Camden, _Britannia_, edit. Gibson, I. , col. 151, 195, 258,
edit. of 1753. )
[324] Diodorus Siculus, V. 21. --Tacitus, _Agricola_, 12.
[325] IV. , p. 200.
[326] _Agricola_, 11.
[327] Diodorus Siculus, V. 21.
[328] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 21.
[329] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 14.
[330] Strabo, IV. , p. 200.
[331] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 14.
[332] Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _, XXII. 1.
[333] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 14.
[334] Diodorus Siculus, V. 22.
[335] Diodorus Siculus, V. 22. --Strabo, IV. , p. 200.
[336] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 12.
[337] _De Bello Gallico_, VI. 13.
[338] _Agricola_, 11.
[339] Strabo, IV. , p. 199.
[340] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 12.
[341] Diodorus Siculus, V. 22.
[342] Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _, IV. 30, § 16.
[343] Tacitus, _Agricola_, 36.
[344] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 16.
[345] Tacitus, _Agricola_, 12.
[346] Frontinus, _Stratagm. _, II. 3, 18. --Diodorus Siculus, V.
21. --Strabo, IV. , p. 200.
[347] The account on page 213 confirms this interpretation, which is
conformable to that of General Gœler.
[348] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 32 and 33.
[349] Strabo, IV. , p. 200.
[350] Strabo, IV. , p. 201.
[351] From what will be seen further on, each transport ship, on its
return, contained 150 men. Eighty ships could thus transport 12,000 men,
but since, reduced to sixty-eight, they were enough to carry back the
whole army to the continent, they can only have carried 10,200 men,
which was probably the effective force of the two legions. The eighteen
ships appropriated to the cavalry might transport 450 horses, at the
rate of twenty-five horses each ship.
[352] The port of Dover extended formerly from the site of the present
town, between the cliffs which border the valley of the Dour or of
Charlton. (_See Plate 17. _) Indeed, from the facts furnished by ancient
authors, and a geological examination of the ground, it appears certain
that once the sea penetrated into the land, and formed a creek which
occupied nearly the whole of the valley of Charlton. The words of Cæsar
are just justified: “Cujus loci hæc erat natura, atque ita montibus
angustis mare continebatur, uti ex locis superioribus in littus telum
adjici posset. ” (IV. 23. )
The proofs of the above assertion result from several facts related in
different notices on the town of Dover. It is there said that in 1784
Sir Thomas Hyde Page caused a shaft to be sunk at a hundred yards from
the shore, to ascertain the depth of the basin at a remote period; it
proved that the ancient bed of the sea had been formerly thirty English
feet below the present level of the high tide. In 1826, in sinking a
well at a place called _Dolphin Lane_, they found, at a depth of
twenty-one feet, a bed of mud resembling that of the present port, mixed
with the bones of animals and fragments of leaves and roots. Similar
detritus have been discovered in several parts of the valley. An ancient
chronicler, named Darell, relates that “Wilbred, King of Kent, built in
700 the church of St. Martin, the ruins of which are still visible near
the market-place, on the spot where formerly ships cast anchor. ”
The town built under the Emperors Adrian and Septimus Severus occupied a
part of the port, which had already been covered with sand; yet the sea
still entered a considerable distance inland. (_See Plate 17. _)
It would appear to have been about the year 950 that the old port was
entirely blocked up with the maritime and fluvial alluvium which have
been increasing till our day, and which at different periods have
rendered it necessary to construct the dykes and quays which have given
the port its present form.
[353] “Constat enim aditus insulæ esse munitos mirificis molibus. ”
(Cicero, _Epist. ad Atticum_, IV. 16. )
[354] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 51.
[355] The Emperor Julian (p. 70, edit. Lasius) makes Cæsar say that he
had been the first to leap down from the ship.
[356] It is in the text, _in scopulum vicinum insulæ_, which must be
translated by “a rock near the isle of Britain,” and not, as certain
authors have interpreted it, “a rock isolated from the continent. ”
(Valerius Maximus, III. ii. 23. )--In fact, these rocks, called _Malms_,
are distinctly seen at low water opposite the arsenal and marine
barracks at Deal.
[357] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 51.
[358] Cæsar himself had only carried three servants with him, as Cotta
relates. (Athenæus, _Deipnosophist. _, VI. 105. )
[359] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 53.
[360] At the battle of Arcola, in 1796, twenty-five horsemen had a great
influence on the issue of the day. (_Mémoires de Montholon, dictées de
Sainte-Hélène,_ II. 9. )
[361] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 36 and 37.
[362] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 38.
[363] Dio Cassius, XL. 1. --See Strabo, IV. , p. 162, edit. Didot.
[364] _De Bello Gallico_, V. I.
[365] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 56. XL. 1.
[366] This opinion has been already supported by learned archæologists.
I will cite especially M. Mariette; Mr. Thomas Lewin, who has written a
very interesting account of Cæsar’s invasions of England; and lastly, M.
l’Abbé Haigneré, archivist of Boulogne, who has collected the best
documents on this question.
[245] The retrenchments of this tête-du-pont, especially the side
parallel to the Aisne, are still visible at Berry-au-Bac. The gardens of
several of the inhabitants are made upon the rampart itself, and the
fosse appears at the outside of the village in the form of a cistern.
The excavations have displayed distinctly the profile of the fosse.
[246] The excavations undertaken in 1862, by bringing to light the
fosses of the camp, showed that they were 18 feet wide, with a depth of
9 or 10. (_See Plates 8 and 9. _) If, then, we admit that the platform of
earth of the parapet was 10 feet wide, it would have measured 8 feet in
height, which, with the palisade of 4 feet, would give the crest of the
parapet a command of 22 feet above the bottom of the fosse.
[247] The following localities have been suggested for Bibrax: _Bièvre_,
_Bruyères_, _Neufchâtel_, _Beaurieux_, and the mountain called
_Vieux-Laon_. Now that the camp of Cæsar has been discovered on the hill
of Mauchamp, there is only room to hesitate between Beaurieux and
Vieux-Laon, as they are the only localities among those just mentioned
which, as the text requires, are eight miles distant from the Roman
camp. But Beaurieux will not suit, for the reason that even if the Aisne
had passed, at the time of the Gallic war, at the foot of the heights on
which the town is situated, we cannot understand how the re-enforcements
sent by Cæsar could have crossed the river and penetrated into the
place, which the Belgian army must certainly have invested on all sides.
This fact is, on the contrary, easily understood when we apply it to the
mountain of Vieux-Laon, which presents towards the south impregnable
escarpments. The Belgæ would have surrounded it on all parts except on
the south, and it was no doubt by that side that, during the night,
Cæsar’s re-enforcements would enter the town.
[248] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 7. --(_Plate 9_ gives the plan of the camp,
which has been found entire, and that of the redoubts with the fosses,
as they have been exposed to view by the excavations; but we have found
it impossible to explain the outline of the redoubts. )
[249] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 12. --Sabinus evidently commanded on both
sides the river.
[250] _De Bello Gallico_ II. 12. --Sabinus evidently commanded on both
sides the river.
[251] See the biographies of Cæsar’s lieutenants, _Appendix D_.
[252] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 11.
[253] The _vineæ_ were small huts constructed of light timber work
covered with hurdles and hides of animals. (Vegetius, Lib. IV. c. 16. )
See the figures on Trajan column.
In a regular siege the _vineæ_ were constructed out of reach of the
missiles, and they were then pushed in file one behind the other up to
the wall of the place attacked, a process which was termed _agere
vineas_; they thus formed long covered galleries which, sometimes placed
at right angles to the wall and sometimes parallel, performed the same
part as the branches and parallels in modern sieges.
[254] The terrace (_agger_) was an embankment, made of any materials,
for the purpose of establishing either platforms to command the ramparts
of a besieged town, or viaducts to conduct the towers and machines
against the walls, when the approaches to the place presented slopes
which were too difficult to climb. These terraces were used also
sometimes to fill up the fosse. The _agger_ was most commonly made of
trunks of trees, crossed and heaped up like the timber in a funeral
pile. --(Thucydides, _Siege of Platæa_. --Lucan, _Pharsalia_. --Vitruvius,
book XI. , _Trajan Column_. )
[255] Antiquaries hesitate between Beauvais, Montdidier, or Breteuil. We
adopt Breteuil as the most probable, according to the dissertation on
Bratuspantium, by M. l’Abbé Devic, cure of Mouchy-le-Châtel. In fact,
the distance from Breteuil to Amiens is just twenty-five miles, as
indicated in the “Commentaries. ” We must add, however, that M. l’Abbé
Devic does not place Bratuspantium at Breteuil itself, but close to that
town, in the space now comprised between the communes of Vaudeuil,
Caply, Beauvoir, and their dependencies. --Paris, 1843, and Arras, 1865.
[256] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 15.
[257] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 14, 15, 16. Mons is, in fact, seated on a
hill completely surrounded by low meadows, traversed by the sinuous
courses of the Haine and the Trouille.
[258] According to scholars, the frontier between the Nervii and the
Ambiani lay towards Fins and Bapaume. Supposing the three days’ march of
the Roman army to be reckoned from this point, it would have arrived, in
three days, of twenty-five kilomètres each, at Bavay.
[259] If Cæsar had arrived on the right bank of the Sambre, as several
authors have pretended, he would already have found that river at
Landrecies, and would have had no need to learn, on the third day of
this march, that he was only fifteen kilomètres from it.
[260] It is worthy of remark, that still at the present day the fields
in the neighbourhood of the Sambre are surrounded with hedges very
similar to those here described. Strabo (II. , p. 161) also mentions
these hedges.
[261] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 17.
[262] “The signal for battle is a purple mantle, which is displayed
before the general’s tent. ” (Plutarch, _Fabius Maximus_, 24. )
[263] _Signum dare_, “to give the word of order. ” In fact, we read in
Suetonius: “Primo etiam imperii die signum excubanti tribuno dedit:
_Optimam matrem_. ” (_Nero_, 9; _Caligula_, 56. --Tacitus, _Histor. _, III.
22. )
[264] The soldiers wore either the skins of wild beasts, or plumes or
other ornaments, to mark their grades. “Excussit cristas galeis. ”
(Lucan, _Pharsalia_, line 158. )
[265] Except the Treviran cavalry, who had withdrawn.
[266] According to Titus Livius (_Epitome_, CIV. ), 1,000 armed men
succeeded in escaping.
[267] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 28.
[268] According to the researches which have been carried on by the
Commandant Locquessye in the country supposed to have been formerly
occupied by the Aduatuci, two localities only, Mount Falhize and the
part of the mountain of Namur on which the citadel is built, appear to
agree with the site of the _oppidum_ of the Aduatuci. But Mount Falhize
is not surrounded with rocks on all sides, as the Latin text requires.
The countervallation would have had a development of more than 15,000
feet, and it would have twice crossed the Meuse, which is difficult to
admit. We therefore adopt, as the site of the _oppidum_ of the Aduatuci,
the citadel of Namur.
Another locality, Sautour, near Philippeville, would answer completely
to Cæsar’s description, but the compass of Sautour, which includes only
three hectares, is too small to have contained 60,000 individuals. The
site of the citadel of Namur is already in our eyes very small.
[269] We translate _quindecim millium_ by 15,000 feet; the word _pedum_,
employed in the preceding sentence, being understood in the text. When
Cæsar intends to speak of _paces_, he almost always uses the word
_passus_.
[270] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 33.
[271] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 35. --Plutarch, _Cæsar_, 20. --Cicero,
_Epist. Famil. _, I. 9, 17, 18.
[272] This passage has generally been wrongly interpreted. The text has,
_Quæ civitates propinquæ his locis erant ubi bellum gesserat_. (_De
Bello Gallico_, II. 35. ) We must add the name of Crassus, overlooked by
the copyists; for if Anjou and Touraine are near Brittany and Normandy,
where Crassus had been fighting, they are very far from the Sambre and
the Meuse, where Cæsar had carried the war.
[273] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 6
[274] Some manuscripts read _Esuvios_, but we adopt _Unellos_, because
the geographical position of the country of the Unelli agrees better
with the relation of the campaign.
[275] They leagued with the Osismii (_the people of the department of
Finistère_), the Lexovii (_department of Calvados_), the Namnetes
(_Loire-Inférieure_), the Ambiliates (_on the left bank of the Loire, to
the south of Angers_), the Morini (_the Boulonnais and bishopric of
Saint-Omer_), the Diablintes (_Western Maine_), and the Menapii
(_between the Rhine and the mouths of the Scheldt_). (_De Bello
Gallico_, III. 9. )
[276] Orosius (VI. 8) confirms this fact as stated in the Commentaries.
[277] “The Veneti fought at sea against Cæsar; they had made their
dispositions to prevent his passage, into the isle of Britain, because
they were in possession of the commerce of that country. ” (Strabo, IV.
iv. , p. 162, edit. Didot. )
[278] We must not confound him with M. Junius Brutus, the assassin of
Cæsar. Decimus Junius Brutus was the adopted son of A. Postumius
Albinus. (See Drumann, IV. 9, and _Appendix D_. )
[279] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 40.
[280] We suppose, in this enumeration, that the legion of Galba,
cantoned the preceding winter among the Allobroges, had rejoined the
army.
[281] I borrow this interpretation of the Roman works from the very
instructive book of General de Gœler.
[282] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 13. --Strabo, IV. , p. 162.
[283] The fleet of the Veneti, superior to that of the Romans in number,
in the magnitude of their vessels, and in their rigging and sails, must
have issued from the river Auray by the Morbihan entrance to the gulf,
and met Brutus to fight him, instead of waiting for him at the head of
the bay, where retreat would be impossible. This follows from Cæsar’s
account: _ex portu profectæ, nostris adversæ constiterunt_. According to
the memoir by M. le Comte de Grandpré, a post-captain, inserted in the
_Recueil de la Société des Antiquaires de France_, tom. II. , 1820, the
wind must have been east or north-east, for it was towards the end of
the summer. It appears that these winds usually prevail at that period,
and that, when they have blown during the morning, there is a dead calm
towards the middle of the day: it is just what happened in this combat;
the calm came, probably, towards midday. It was necessary, indeed, that
the wind should be between the north and the east, to allow, on one hand
the Roman fleet to leave the Loire and sail towards the Point
Saint-Jacques, and, on the other, to permit the fleet of the Veneti to
quit the river Auray. These latter, in this position, could, in case of
defeat, take refuge in the Bay of Quiberon, or fly to the open sea,
where the Romans would not have dared to follow them.
With winds blowing from below, it matters not from what point, the
Romans could not have gone in search of their enemies, or the latter
come to meet them. Supposing that, in one tide, the Roman fleet had
arrived at the mouth of the Loire towards five o’clock in the morning;
it might have been towards ten o’clock, the moment when the battle
commenced, between Haedik and Sarzeau. Supposing similarly that, as
early as five o’clock in the morning, the movement of the Roman fleet
had been announced to the Veneti, they could, in five hours, have issued
from the river Auray, defiled by the entrance of the Morbihan, rallied
and advanced in order of battle to meet the Romans in the part of the
sea above described.
As to the place where Cæsar encamped, it is very probable, as we have
said, that it was on the heights of Saint-Gildas; for from thence he
could see the dispositions of the enemy, and perceive far off the
approach of his fleet. In case of check, the Roman galleys found, under
his protection, a place of refuge in the Vilaine. Thus, he had his rear
secured; rested upon the towns of the coast which he had taken; could
recall to him, if necessary, Titurius Sabinus; and lastly, could cross
the Vilaine, to place that river between him and his enemies. Placed, on
the contrary, on the other side of the Bay of Quiberon, he would have
been too much enclosed in an enemy’s country, and would have had none of
the advantages offered by the position of Saint-Gildas.
[284] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 41.
[285] We see, in fact, in Vegetius, that the word _falces_ was applied
to the head of a battering ram, armed with a point, and with a hook to
detach the stones from the walls. “Quæ (trabes) aut adunco præfigitur
ferro, et falx vocatur ab eo quod incurva est, ut de muro extrahat
lapides. ” (Vegetius, IV. 14. )
[286] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 17.
[287] This position is at the distance of seven kilomètres to the east
of Avranches. The vestiges still visible of Chastellier are probably
those of a camp made at a later period than this Gallic war, but we
think that Sabinus had established his camp on the same site.
[288] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 19.
[289] Cæsar, after having said, in the first book of his “Commentaries”,
that Aquitaine was one of the three parts of Gaul, states here that it
formed the third part by its extent and population, which is not
correct.
[290] Nicholas of Damascus (in _Athenæus, Deipn. _, VI. 249) writes in
this manner the name of King _Adiatomus_, and adds that the _soldurii_
were clothed in royal vestments.
[291] This combat is remarkable as being the only one in the whole war
in Gaul in which the Romans attack a fortified Gaulish camp.
[292] Of this number were the Tarbelli, The Bigerriones, The Ptiani, the
Vasates, the Tarusates, the Elusates, the Gaites, the Ausci, the
Garumni, the Sibusates, and the Cocosates.
[293] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 27.
[294] Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _, III. x. 6.
[295] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 44.
[296] Cæsar never entirely subjugated the north-west of Gaul. (See
Sallust, cited by Ammianus Marcellinus, XV. , 15. ) Still, under the reign
of Augustus, in 724 and 726, there were triumphs over the Morini.
[297] _De Bello Gallico_, III. 29.
[298] “In praetura, in consulatu præfectum fabrum detulit. ” (Cicero,
_Orat. pro Balbo_, 28. )
[299] Mamurra, a Roman knight, born at Formiæ. (Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _,
XXXVI. 7. )
[300] From Xanten to Nimeguen, for a length of fifty kilomètres, extends
a line of heights which form a barrier along the left bank of the Rhine.
All appearances would lead us to believe that the river flowed, in
Cæsar’s time, close at the foot of these heights; but now it has removed
from them, and at Emmerich, for instance, is at a distance of eight
kilomètres. This chain, the eastern slope of which is scarped, presents
only two passes; one by a large opening at Xanten itself, to the north
of the mountain called the Furstenberg; the other by a gorge of easy
access, opening at Qualburg, near Cleves. These two passes were so well
defined as the entries to Gaul in these regions, that, after the
conquest, the Romans closed them by fortifying the Furstenberg (_Castra
vetera_), and founding, on the two islands formed by the Rhine opposite
these entries, _Colonia Trajana_, now Xanten, and _Quadriburgium_, now
_Qualburg_. The existence of these isles facilitated at that time the
passage of the Rhine, and, in all probability, it was opposite these two
localities just named that the Usipetes and Tencteri crossed the river
to penetrate into Gaul.
[301] The account of this campaign is very obscure in the
“Commentaries. ” Florus and Dio Cassius add to the obscurities: the
first, by placing the scene of the defeat of the Usipetes and Tencteri
towards the confluence of the Moselle and the Rhine; the second, by
writing that Cæsar came up with the Germans in the country of the
Treviri. Several authors have given to the account of these two
historians more credit than to that of Cæsar himself, and they give of
this campaign an explanation quite different from ours. General de
Gœler, among others, supposes that the whole emigration of the Germans
had advanced as far as the country of the Condrusi, where Cæsar came up
with them, and that he had driven them from west to east, into the angle
formed by the Moselle and the Rhine. From researches which were kindly
undertaken by M. de Cohausen, major in the Prussian army, and which have
given the same result as those of MM. Stoffel and De Locqueyssie, we
consider this explanation of the campaign as inadmissible. It would be
enough, to justify this assertion, to consider that the country situated
between the Meuse and the Rhine, to the south of Aix-la-Chapelle, is too
much broken and too barren to have allowed the German emigration,
composed of 430,000 individuals, men, women, and children, with wagons,
to move and subsist in it. Moreover, it contains no trace of ancient
roads; and if Cæsar had taken this direction, he must necessarily have
crossed the forest of the Ardennes, a circumstance of which he would not
have failed to inform us. Besides, is it not more probable that, on the
news of the approach of Cæsar, instead of directing their march towards
the Ubii, who were not favourable to them, the Germans, at first spread
over a vast territory, would have concentrated themselves towards the
most distant part of the fertile country on which they had seized--that
of the Menapii?
[302] The Ambivariti were established on the left bank of the Meuse, to
the west of Ruremonde, and to the south of the marshes of Peel.
[303] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 13.
[304] “Acie triplici instituta. ” Some authors have translated these
words by “the army was formed in three columns;” but Cæsar, operating in
a country which was totally uncovered and flat, and aiming at surprising
a great mass of enemies, must have marched in order of battle, which did
not prevent each cohort from being in column.
[305] Attacked unexpectedly in the afternoon, while they were sleeping.
(Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 48. )
[306] The study of the deserted beds of the Rhine leads us to believe
that the confluence of the Waal and the Meuse, which is at present near
Gorkum, was then much more to the east, towards Fort Saint-André. In
that case, Cæsar made no mistake in reckoning eighty miles from the
junction of the Waal and the Meuse to the mouth of the latter river.
[307] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 14, 15.
[308] The following reasons have led us to adopt Bonn as the point where
Cæsar crossed the Rhine:--
We learn from the “Commentaries” that in 699 he debouched in the country
of the Ubii, and that two years later it was a little above (_paulum
supra_) the first bridge that he established another, which joined the
territory of the Treviri with that of the Ubii. Now everything leads to
the belief that, in the first passage as in the second, the bridge was
thrown across between the frontiers of the same peoples; for we cannot
admit, with some authors, that the words _paulum supra_ apply to a
distance of several leagues. As to those who suppose that the passage
was effected at Andernach, because, changing with Florus the Meuse
(_Mosa_) into Moselle, they placed the scene of the defeat of the
Germans at the confluence of the Moselle and the Rhine, we have given
the reasons for rejecting this opinion. We have endeavoured to prove, in
fact, that the battle against the Usipetes and the Tencteri had for its
theatre the confluence of the Meuse and the Rhine; and since, in
crossing this latter river, Cæsar passed from the country of the Treviri
into that of the Ubii, we must perceive that after his victory he must
necessarily have proceeded up the valley of the Rhine to go from the
territory of the Menapii to the Treviri, as far up as the territory of
the Ubii, established on the right bank.
This being admitted, it remains to fix, within the limits assigned to
these two last peoples, the most probable point of passage. Hitherto,
Cologne has been adopted; but, to answer to the data of the
“Commentaries,” Cologne appears to us to be much too far to the north.
In fact, in the campaign of 701, Cæsar, having started from the banks of
the Rhine, traversed the forest of the Ardennes from east to west,
passed near the Segni and the Condrusi, since they implored him to spare
their territory, and directed his march upon Tongres. If he had started
from Cologne, he would not have crossed the countries in question.
Moreover, in this same year, 2,000 Sicambrian cavalry crossed the Rhine
thirty miles below the bridge of the Roman army. Now, if this bridge had
been constructed at Cologne, the point of passage of the Sicambri,
thirty miles below, would have been at a very great distance from
Tongres, where, nevertheless, they seem to have arrived very quickly.
On the contrary, everything is explained if we adopt Bonn as the point
of passage. To go from Bonn to Tongres, Cæsar proceeded, as the text has
it, across the forest of the Ardennes; he passed through the country of
the Segni and Condrusi, or very near them; and the Sicambri, crossing
the Rhine thirty miles below Bonn, took the shortest line from the Rhine
to Tongres. Moreover, we cannot place Cæsar’s point of passage either
lower or higher than Bonn. Lower, that is, towards the north, the
different incidents related in the “Commentaries” are without possible
application to the theatre of the events; higher, towards the south, the
Rhine flows upon a rocky bed, where the piles could not have been driven
in, and presents, between the mountains which border it, no favourable
point of passage. We may add that Cæsar would have been much too far
removed from the country of the Sicambri, the chastisement of whom was
the avowed motive of his expedition.
Another fact deserves to be taken into consideration: that, less than
fifty years after Cæsar’s campaigns, Drusus, in order to proceed against
the Sicambri--that is, against the same people whom Cæsar intended to
combat--crossed the Rhine at Bonn. (Florus, IV. 12. )
[309] The following passage has given room for different
interpretations:--
“Hæc utraque insuper bipedalibus trabibus immissis, quantum eorum
tignorum junctura distabat, binis utrimque fibulis ab extrema parte
distinebantur; quibus disclusis atque in contrariam partem revinctis,
tanta erat operis firmitudo atque ea rerum natura, ut, quo major vis
aquæ se incitavisset, hoc arctius illigata tenerentur. ” (_De Bello
Gallico_, IV. 17. )
It has not been hitherto observed that the words _hæc utraque_ relate to
the two couples of one row of piles, and not to the two piles of the
same couple. Moreover, the words _quibus disclusis_, &c. , relate to
these same two couples, and not, as has been supposed, to _fibulis_.
[310] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 20.
[311] _De Bello Gallico_, II. 4.
[312] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 13.
[313] Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _, IV. 30, § 16.
[314] Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _, IV. 30, § 16. --Tacitus, _Agricola_, 10.
[315] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 12.
[316] Strabo, IV. , p. 199.
[317] _Agricola_, 12.
[318] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 12.
[319] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 13 and 14.
[320] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 20.
[321] _Annales_, XIV. 33.
[322] Although the greater number of manuscripts read _Cenimagni_, some
authors have made two names of it, the _Iceni_ and the _Cangi_.
[323] The _Anderida Silva_, 120 miles in length by 30 in breadth,
extended over the counties of Sussex and Kent, in what is now called the
_Weald_. (See Camden, _Britannia_, edit. Gibson, I. , col. 151, 195, 258,
edit. of 1753. )
[324] Diodorus Siculus, V. 21. --Tacitus, _Agricola_, 12.
[325] IV. , p. 200.
[326] _Agricola_, 11.
[327] Diodorus Siculus, V. 21.
[328] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 21.
[329] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 14.
[330] Strabo, IV. , p. 200.
[331] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 14.
[332] Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _, XXII. 1.
[333] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 14.
[334] Diodorus Siculus, V. 22.
[335] Diodorus Siculus, V. 22. --Strabo, IV. , p. 200.
[336] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 12.
[337] _De Bello Gallico_, VI. 13.
[338] _Agricola_, 11.
[339] Strabo, IV. , p. 199.
[340] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 12.
[341] Diodorus Siculus, V. 22.
[342] Pliny, _Hist. Nat. _, IV. 30, § 16.
[343] Tacitus, _Agricola_, 36.
[344] _De Bello Gallico_, V. 16.
[345] Tacitus, _Agricola_, 12.
[346] Frontinus, _Stratagm. _, II. 3, 18. --Diodorus Siculus, V.
21. --Strabo, IV. , p. 200.
[347] The account on page 213 confirms this interpretation, which is
conformable to that of General Gœler.
[348] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 32 and 33.
[349] Strabo, IV. , p. 200.
[350] Strabo, IV. , p. 201.
[351] From what will be seen further on, each transport ship, on its
return, contained 150 men. Eighty ships could thus transport 12,000 men,
but since, reduced to sixty-eight, they were enough to carry back the
whole army to the continent, they can only have carried 10,200 men,
which was probably the effective force of the two legions. The eighteen
ships appropriated to the cavalry might transport 450 horses, at the
rate of twenty-five horses each ship.
[352] The port of Dover extended formerly from the site of the present
town, between the cliffs which border the valley of the Dour or of
Charlton. (_See Plate 17. _) Indeed, from the facts furnished by ancient
authors, and a geological examination of the ground, it appears certain
that once the sea penetrated into the land, and formed a creek which
occupied nearly the whole of the valley of Charlton. The words of Cæsar
are just justified: “Cujus loci hæc erat natura, atque ita montibus
angustis mare continebatur, uti ex locis superioribus in littus telum
adjici posset. ” (IV. 23. )
The proofs of the above assertion result from several facts related in
different notices on the town of Dover. It is there said that in 1784
Sir Thomas Hyde Page caused a shaft to be sunk at a hundred yards from
the shore, to ascertain the depth of the basin at a remote period; it
proved that the ancient bed of the sea had been formerly thirty English
feet below the present level of the high tide. In 1826, in sinking a
well at a place called _Dolphin Lane_, they found, at a depth of
twenty-one feet, a bed of mud resembling that of the present port, mixed
with the bones of animals and fragments of leaves and roots. Similar
detritus have been discovered in several parts of the valley. An ancient
chronicler, named Darell, relates that “Wilbred, King of Kent, built in
700 the church of St. Martin, the ruins of which are still visible near
the market-place, on the spot where formerly ships cast anchor. ”
The town built under the Emperors Adrian and Septimus Severus occupied a
part of the port, which had already been covered with sand; yet the sea
still entered a considerable distance inland. (_See Plate 17. _)
It would appear to have been about the year 950 that the old port was
entirely blocked up with the maritime and fluvial alluvium which have
been increasing till our day, and which at different periods have
rendered it necessary to construct the dykes and quays which have given
the port its present form.
[353] “Constat enim aditus insulæ esse munitos mirificis molibus. ”
(Cicero, _Epist. ad Atticum_, IV. 16. )
[354] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 51.
[355] The Emperor Julian (p. 70, edit. Lasius) makes Cæsar say that he
had been the first to leap down from the ship.
[356] It is in the text, _in scopulum vicinum insulæ_, which must be
translated by “a rock near the isle of Britain,” and not, as certain
authors have interpreted it, “a rock isolated from the continent. ”
(Valerius Maximus, III. ii. 23. )--In fact, these rocks, called _Malms_,
are distinctly seen at low water opposite the arsenal and marine
barracks at Deal.
[357] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 51.
[358] Cæsar himself had only carried three servants with him, as Cotta
relates. (Athenæus, _Deipnosophist. _, VI. 105. )
[359] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 53.
[360] At the battle of Arcola, in 1796, twenty-five horsemen had a great
influence on the issue of the day. (_Mémoires de Montholon, dictées de
Sainte-Hélène,_ II. 9. )
[361] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 36 and 37.
[362] _De Bello Gallico_, IV. 38.
[363] Dio Cassius, XL. 1. --See Strabo, IV. , p. 162, edit. Didot.
[364] _De Bello Gallico_, V. I.
[365] Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 56. XL. 1.
[366] This opinion has been already supported by learned archæologists.
I will cite especially M. Mariette; Mr. Thomas Lewin, who has written a
very interesting account of Cæsar’s invasions of England; and lastly, M.
l’Abbé Haigneré, archivist of Boulogne, who has collected the best
documents on this question.
