The Brigantes

[Pertinax]

A generalised assumption regarding Brittania is that as one proceeded northward, the less civilised and the less sympathetic to Rome the tribes became,the less prosperous and cohesive , hence the less susceptible to Romanisation and the infiltration of civilisation.

It was only in the 4th Century BC that Pythus of Massila (Marseille) made it clear to the educated person that Britain was not a mythical country, even in the time of Caesar many ordinary Romans were still uncertain of the truth. Caesars interest may well have been to gain a working equilibrium in SE Britain to assure him of a secure flank whilst campaigning in Gaul ie: no cross channel interdiction.

Mandubraucias was the Trinovante (essex area) leader that Caeser worked with , as a client counterweight to the Catuvellauni,(Kentish area).The Atrebates (of sussex and hampshire ) emerged as strongly philo-roman through trade .There is strong physical evidence of trade .No surprises then that Silchester was the Atrebatic capital.In Augustan times the Trinovantes were pushed aside as the suzerainty of Cunobelinus in Camulodunum came to hold sway.

Mandubracius is lost to us, but note the name of the later ,great queen of the Brigantes ,Cartamandua .

Trade with Britain flourished regardless of political leanings until the time of the invasion.

Claudius took on the policies of Caligula -we do not know if Caligula was truly desirous of conquest , no matter his uncle achieved it.

The Brigantes (Yorkshire,Lancashire ,Cumbria and Northumbria ) were favoured client associates (of Rome)and the marriage of Cartamandua and Venuntius (Yorks and Lancs respectivley) was the great welding together of the most numerous tribe in Britain.Also a very prosperous tribe, the Cumbrian plain then as now is a forgotten area of great agricultural wealth.To have a client like this in the North secured the rear of potentially fractious aggresors.The strategic aim was to ,as far as we can see , to allow action against the Ordovicees and the Druidic centre of Yns Mon .

 

to be continued...

http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?act=mo...&cmd=si&img=353

 

this map is included as a key to understanding the Hadrianic defences , but it happens to show a lot of the key Brigantine territory.The Carvetti were centred on Luguvallum and the Parissi were the N Yorks coast neighbours that the Brigantines kept casting a wolfish eye over.Brigantine influence continued into the Scottish Lowlands.The Brigantines actually held sway from two capitals-each loyal to the male and female monarchs respectivley.

Edited June 6, 2006 by Pertinax

[Pantagathus]

It was only in the 4th Century BC that Pythus of Massila (Marseille) made it clear to the educated person that Britain was not a mythical country, even in the time of Caesar many ordinary Romans were still uncertain of the truth.

 

But then again, even many 'eductated' people after Caesar considered Pytheas a liar...

[Pertinax]

I suppose you could argue that their ignorance enhanced GJCs prestige, what would be the equivalent strategic reach today?

 

NB:Pantagathus:as you know we've pmd on the topic of the "lost port" in the Brigantine seaboard ,contemporary Fleetwood is not favoured by any commentators now as Setantiorium. My personal suggestion was modern Glasson Dock which has a much more effective linkage to the military road system,however Newby Bridge is also suggested as it appears that amphibious operations heavily demoralised local combatants and the Lune , Ribble and leven were all used for such purposes.This also adds an additional dimension to Bremetenacum's importance as a land and water route.

 

http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?act=mo...y&cmd=si&img=74

 

dont forget we have had massive sea level changes and silting since Roman times.

[Pertinax]

main entry :second part.

 

The marriage of Cartimandua and Venutius was in essence a pro-Roman treaty, keeping the marriage stable was unfortunately another matter. Cartimandua was a monarch in her own right and no makeweight in the the treaty/marriage.Venutius's armour bearer turned out to be rather handsome and dashing...and the scandalised loyalists from the Eastern territory de-stabilised the whole carefully constructed edifice.

 

Venutius is described as second only to Caractacus as a strategist (Tacitus) and the Romans found that they had to oppose him if they needed a stable and complaisant province.The Boudiccan revolt was contemporary , so if dissafection with Roman rule existed in tribal nationalist communities general ill feeling would have been maximised. It is rumoured that Druidic influence sharpened the clash of the two married monarchs.

 

Venuntius drove Cartimandua out of her own tribal capital and we lose sight of her and her toyboy.Tacitus (in Agricola) gives the campaign outlines to us, IX Hispana moved north on the east of the Pennines, XX Valeria Victrix took the west and moved parallel. Marine ops were coordinated by II Adiutrix to meet the XX units. Campaign forts are plentiful in my home region as the Legions pushed north to conquer and establish Luguvallum and Chesters as key strategic forts.The lake District was cut into defensible chunks and the prosperous "cumbrian" farmers given protection from steely eyed neighbours.New dig evidence suggests completion of the subjugation of the Brigantes by approx AD 70.Having subjugated this area the way was open to finish the tricky business of N Wales and then press on to the Caledonian and Hibernian fringe.

 

AD 77 is a key date for destruction of a generation of Ordivician warriors in N Wales , likewise Mons Graupius is the elimination of a similar "cohort" in the Scottish Highlands( AD 83) after which "containment " of an emasculated enemy was required). Hibernia of course never happened.

Edited April 6, 2006 by Pertinax

[Pertinax]

http://www.janeraeburn.com/brigantia/ccw.htm

 

a link to index celtic/brigantine deities and Roman conflated deities.Belatucadrus was the central cult deity of the Queen Cartimanduas capital.

Edited April 6, 2006 by Pertinax

[Pertinax]

I omitted to mention that it was Cartimandua who handed over Caractacus to the Romans, this added to her rather flighty personal life lead her (it is said by Tacitus) "to be hated by the Brigantes on account of her cruelty and lust". Venuntius' rebellion of course happened to occur at the apex of confusion in the Roman world-AD 69 , that of the Four Emperors.

[WotWotius]

A generalised assumption regarding Brittania is that as one proceeded northward, the less civilised and the less sympathetic to Rome the tribes became,the less prosperous and cohesive , hence the less susceptible to Romanisation and the infiltration of civilisation.

It was only in the 4th Century BC that Pythus of Massila (Marseille) made it clear to the educated person that Britain was not a mythical country, even in the time of Caesar many ordinary Romans were still uncertain of the truth.

 

I don't mean to pedantic, but isn't it Phythias of Marseille.

[Pantagathus]

I don't mean to pedantic, but isn't it Phythias of Marseille.

 

Actually Pytheas of Massalia to give the proper transliteration from Greek of both his personal name & the name of the city before the Romans & the French...

[phil25]

Also to be pedantic, where did the usage "Brigantine" spring from?

 

Surely the tribe/people were the BrigantES, living in Brigantia, and the usage should be BrigantIAN?

 

Phil

[Pertinax]

Also to be pedantic, where did the usage "Brigantine" spring from?

 

Surely the tribe/people were the BrigantES, living in Brigantia, and the usage should be BrigantIAN?

 

Phil

Thats a good point Phil and I shall alter the title, I myself of course would be Brigantine (if the tribe were still hereabouts), and my kin might be Brigantines-we would be in Brigantia and collectively we are indeed Brigantes. I think it was a late night posting as to the real explanation!

Edited June 6, 2006 by Pertinax

[Dodge]

Great post! As a Northumbrian I have read this with interest, good stuff!

Edited June 7, 2006 by Dodge

[WotWotius]

There is even evidence to suggest that during the years AD 69-71, under the governorship of Vettius Bolanus, the Romans penetrated beyond Brigantia. A poem written by Statius, presented to Bolanus' son mentions that Bolanus took an army as far as '...the plains of Caledonia (Scotland)'. However, despite this evidence Tacitus fails to mention this campaign, and is highly critical of Bolanus' character, describing him as having an 'innocuous' personality (Agricola). The only military achievement Tacitus credits him with is rescuing Queen Catimandua from the civil war in her kingdom against her husband Venutius: and even then he only mentions 'indecisive engagements' (Histories).

 

Why did Tacitus not mention the Campaign?

1) Tacitus dislikes Bolanus immensely; he fails to mention his campaign in Caledonia because doesn't want an achievement put to his name.

 

2) In his book, The Agricola, Tacitus says that Agricola was the first governor to reach Scotland. Seeing as Agricola was the father-in-law of Tacitus, Tacitus probably didn't want Bolanus to steal his thunder by mentioning that a previous governor was there 10 years earlier.

 

The validiety of the Poem

1) The reference to Caledonia may be geographical error on Statius' part. I am assuming the average Roman poet knew very little about the geography of recently conquered territory (kinda like the Americans with Iraq).

 

2) Tacitus also mentions that Venutius summoned help from outside his kingdom; the poem could be referring to how Bolanus fought against Caledonian mercenaries.

 

3) If we are to believe Tacitus, the state of the army at this time was in no fit state to reach Scotland: Various emperors during the civil war of 69AD had summoned detachments of British legion to aid them. Further, Britain, under her previous governor, had suffered from a series of mutinies.

[Pertinax]

Yes Tacitus is very terse as regards Bolanus-but pacifying the tribal area , in terms of physical scale and number of opponents could not have been a simple task. The Queen's armed support seems to have been relatively limited (a bit like rescuing Mussolini from Grand Sasso!) , the tribe seems to have swung into action behind Venuntius much more wholeheartedly.

Given the penetrative power of marine units I am now inclined to believe that II Adiutrix could have easily made incursions via the Solway and Tyne , and supplied and acted in concert with XX and IX units.This may have been recce only of course .

Also remember that not all the Northern tribes were hostiles, clients existed here as well, with varying degrees of friendship/neutrality the Pictii and Maetae who were hostile but relatively remote.

[WotWotius]

Plus the loyalty of Bolanus' troops may have been questionable: each legion could have supported different candidate for the troubles of 69AD. Additionally the legions of Britain at that time had participated in a series of mutinies. One in AD69 was so bad that XXVV legion (commanded by the renegade legate, Rocius Coelius) ousted Bolanus

[Pertinax]

69 AD made everyone take their "eyes off the ball" , Vespasian was in an excellent position to finish the work off having already pacified the roughnecks of the SW in the toughest of the Claudian battlegroup actions . I tentatively suggest that the new Emperors' local knowledge and a desire to legitimise the Flavian regime by a resoundingly agressive military action ,made Venuntius' revolt exactly the the right enemy action to satisfy his (Vespasians)requirements. I know that ,time and again, we see an Emperor awarded a victory achieved by other mens good soldiery and generalship but I am nowinclined to think this was one job that went all the way to the Chiefs desk.It is said that it was most specifically II Adiutrix who were involved in raiding and support because of their loyalty-pia fidelis.So I think your comment on loyalty is most valid-II Adiutrix was in the mix to stiffen resolve in the province as a whole.