Celtic siege abilities

[Kosmo]

Any evidence that these Greek colonies were defended by fortified walls?

 

Yes, all had stone walls and, probably all, a wall defending the acroplis.

A link (not great) about Histria that had several walls from arhaic period to late roman era.

http://www.cimec.ro/Arheologie/web-histria...cetarea_eng.htm

[M. Porcius Cato]

From the northern people is sure that dacians had good siege abilities in the times of Caesar as they razed several greek colonies in western and northen Pontus/Black Sea (Histria, Olbia and another one?) and controlled the rest when they were ruled by Burebista.

 

Unless I missed something, the images you referred to depict walls that were built long after the time of Caesar. Isn't it possible that these walls were built precisely because the Dacians lacked siege works?

[Furius Venator]

From the lips of Caesar himself (describing the seige of Cicero's Camp)

 

...the Nervii surrounded the camp with a rampart ten feet high and a trench fifteen feet wide...in less than three hours they completed a fortified line three miles in circumference and during the next few days...[erected] towers... and [made] grappling hooks and sappers huts' Gallic War V 43.

 

Now they did this with the aid of Roman deserters and POWs but they were clearly capable of conducting sieges by 53BC.

 

Elsewhere he mentions the timber and stone constructed walls that were immune to Roman rams. Really, Caesaer is a mine of information on all this.

Edited March 6, 2006 by Furius Venator

[Tobias]

I myself know little about the abilities of the Celts to besiege; all i can offer is that they weren't unfamiliar with fortifications; as mentioned above, the "Murus Gallica" walls made of intertwined timber and stone were extremely strong and made for formidable defense. Yes that probably has little to do with building them for besiegement, but i thought i'd mention it.

Related; wasn't there in instance during Caesar's Gallic wars when the Celts used roman siege engines i.e. ballistae or catapultae, that they had captured from the rout of Sabinus' and Cotta's Legion and copied, against Quintus Cicero and his legion? This would suggest, at least, that they were adaptable to new ideas and were capable of breaking down fortifications.

Edited March 7, 2006 by Tobias

[Virgil61]

I myself know little about the abilities of the Celts to besiege; all i can offer is that they weren't unfamiliar with fortifications; as mentioned above, the "Murus Gallica" walls made of intertwined timber and stone were extremely strong and made for formidable defense. Yes that probably has little to do with building them for besiegement, but i thought i'd mention it.

Related; wasn't there in instance during Caesar's Gallic wars when the Celts used roman siege engines i.e. ballistae or catapultae, that they had captured from the rout of Sabinus' and Cotta's Legion against Quintus Cicero and his legion? This would suggest, at least, that they were adaptable to new ideas and were capable of breaking down fortifications.

 

I just came across something I'd forgotten from "Conquest of Gaul"; the Gauls used captured Roman soldiers to show them how to approach the siege against Quintus Cicero (the famous one's brother). The siege lasted two weeks or so and most of his troops were injured by the time Caesar got the word and appeared with relief.

[M. Porcius Cato]

OK--some Celts once captured some Romans and their siegeworks and, using them both, some Celts were able to make use of the siegeworks on one occasion. Is there any evidence that this was anything but a temporary and short-lived gain? Were any Celts able to use this capture to build their own? To operate their own? For how long?

 

Getting back to the overarching question--the one that gave rise to this thread--were the Celts a threat to walled cities? If the answer is--Yes, but only if they can manage to get their hands on Roman siegeworks, I'd say that Roman cities were pretty safe, as siegeworks were not normally left out for a bunch of long-haired Celts to come and get.

[Furius Venator]

Well the Celts seldom attacked walled cities. But their lack of seige activity is likely more due to their social structure and its inability to sustain field armies except in times of extreme crisis.

 

At Cicero's camp, the Celts didn't use captured equipment, they constructed it themselves with aid from POWS and deserters.

 

At Alesia the Gauls 'prepared a great quantity of fascines, ladders and grappling hooks' (Civil War VII 81). Vercingetorix 'sallied with fascines, poles, sapper's huts, grappling hooks and other implements (ibid VII 84).

 

Now Caesar's defences at Alesia were impressive (as were Cicero's in his winter camp, the winter camps were considerably better fortifed than the marching camps).

 

Quite clearly the Gauls are capable of conducting offensive siege operations when necessary. The evidence is in Caesar. It is not lack of ability that prevented them from assaulting towns but lack of opportunity. Sensibly they attacked Caesar's armies in Gaul, not allied townships and they lacked the organisation to maintain a field army for long enough to invade Italy.

 

Also there is evidence on Trajan's column of the Dacians using siege equipment. If you really want me to I'll dig out some references.

[Germanicus]

I guess what Cato is really getting at is that he'd like an example of Gauls taking a walled city, or camp for that matter.

 

I agree that they probably didn't have or build sophisticated siege equipment or use siegcraft largely due to the nature of their armies. This kind of proves the point though doesn't it - that they did not in fact have the capability....for whatever reason.

 

Obviously if shown the technology, and having the inclination, they could have bent their will to it....but they didn't, with any great success.

[Furius Venator]

The implication I got from most of his posts was that he felt they were incapable of conducting siege operations at all. Which is clearly untrue. They could and did use siege equipment. When Cicero was saved by a relieving force 90% of his command were wounded. Had Caesar not received Cicero's message his camp would undoubtedly have fallen.

 

Cato: if that wasn't what you meant, sorry.

[Germanicus]

Don't get furious Furius....

 

They could and did use siege equipment

 

Okay, they used ladders, and grappling hooks, and other techniques when Romans were on hand to show them how.

 

But the fact seems to remain - they didn't take any cities, or camps...or do you have an example of success.

 

If we compare the number of Celtic strongholds taken and stormed by Caesar in Gaul, to one failed siege of a Roman camp using Roman knowledge...sorry I'm comming to the conclusion that whether due to the transient nature of their armies, lack of desire...they never developed a consistant siege technology and were able to put it into successful practice.

[Furius Venator]

I think there are two separate questions:

 

Did the Celts have siege technology?

 

The answer is patently yes. The evidence is in Caesar and on Trajan's column.

 

Did the use this technology effectively?

 

No. Largely because of cultural factors that limited their ability to conduct offensive war.

[M. Porcius Cato]

Did the Celts have siege technology?

The answer is patently yes. The evidence is in Caesar and on Trajan's column.

 

The evidence from Caesar is not yes--the evidence is that a small group of Celts had some siege tech for a single engagement, but never before or after. Classifying ladders and grappling hooks as siege tech is also a long, long stretch.

[Furius Venator]

Oh good grief! They used siege equipment in all the sieges of Vercingetorix's campaign as well as in the preceding rebellion.

 

At Cicero's camp they construct field works, build towers, sappers huts and grappling hooks. You'll find this in the Gallic Wars V 42 and 52. They also use incendiaries against the camp. Now I grant you, this was done with the assistance of prisoners but also through observation of Roman methods.

 

At Avaricum 'the Gauls resorted to all sorts of devices; for they are a mosyt ingeneous people and very clever at borrowing and applying ideas...they pulled aside our wall hooks with lassoes...and hauled them inside with windlasses. They made our terraces fall in by undermining, at which they are expert, they had also equipped the whole circuit of the wall withtowers, furnished with platforms and covered with hides...they made frequent sorties...As our towers were raised...they increased the height of theirs...They countermined the subterreanean galleries that we were digging toward the walls and prevented their continuation by throwing into them stakes..boiling pitch and very heavy stones.' Gallic Wars VII 22.

 

Now all the above are techniques of siegecraft being expertly applied against experts. You think they just picked that up overnight from some prisoners that were taken by another tribe a considerable distance away? And then promtly forgot it? (Except of course at Alesia).

[caldrail]

Did the Celts have siege technology?

The answer is patently yes. The evidence is in Caesar and on Trajan's column.

 

The evidence from Caesar is not yes--the evidence is that a small group of Celts had some siege tech for a single engagement, but never before or after. Classifying ladders and grappling hooks as siege tech is also a long, long stretch.

 

No it isn't. Ladders and hooks are basic stuff but it definitely is siege technique. Most of siegework is actually very basic stuff. Forget all that nonsense about towers and catapults - they were very rarely used anyway and only if an assault on a large scale was taking place. Getting the doors open was the easiest way of getting in. If you can't bribe a disgruntled enemy, then slip a few men over at night. It happened a lot more than people realise. Other than that, sit tight and wait for the food to run out like Caesar did in Gaul. The big impressive stuff requires a lot of manpower and engineering which wasn't always within the romans capabilities, never mind their enemies. But they might get over the wall.....

[Furius Venator]

Caldrail, I completely agree with you.

 

Further to my previous post, I'd like top point out that Trajan's column depicts Dacians using rams etc against Roman forts.