info needed

[dandrige]

Hello. I'm in the process of writing a book and require some details. The book is not about ancient Rome, but draws some parallels to it. The subject that I need information on has to do with the occupation of Britain. I was told that the roman army employed an early form of propaganda to maintain control in Britain by spreading rumors that they had powerful forces stationed in France, ready to crush any rebellion in Britain at a moments notice. Is this true? And if so, Does anyone know of any sites were some information on this subject can be found? I would be very grateful if anyone could help with this, thanks a lot

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

Hello. I'm in the process of writing a book and require some details. The book is not about ancient Rome, but draws some parallels to it. The subject that I need information on has to do with the occupation of Britain. I was told that the roman army employed an early form of propaganda to maintain control in Britain by spreading rumors that they had powerful forces stationed in France, ready to crush any rebellion in Britain at a moments notice. Is this true? And if so, Does anyone know of any sites were some information on this subject can be found? I would be very grateful if anyone could help with this, thanks a lot

 

This is one of the best sites around on Roman Britain

 

http://www.roman-britain.org/

 

Hope it helps.

[Primus Pilus]

While I am not trying to say that the Romans did not do this... who can be sure for certain... I don't believe you'll find a good deal of evidence to support this theory either. However, if you are applying this theory to the era between the Julian and Claudian invasions (54 BC to AD 43), you can assume that the people of Britain remembered the invasion of Caesar. Though this invasion was hardly the smashing success that would lead us to believe the people of Britain would've been forever intimidated. Consider too that Caesar did maintain a massive army in Gaul, at least prior to the generational civil war that followed, it's entirely possible that the Britains were wary of a renewed invasion. Consider too that Caesar's books were meant for the Roman people and political enemies and less so for tribal adversaries across the channel.

 

With that said, once the Roman invaded and occupied after AD 43 why threaten against revolt when they had 3 legions and numerous auxilia already stationed in Britain? Even if they did threaten this, it wouldn't really be considered propaganda when there were up to 4 legions stationed along the Rhine at any given time. When Boudicca revolted, heavy losses by Legio VIIII Hispana were in fact heavily reinforced by men from these Rhine legions.

 

I'll admit that it would be surprising if the Romans did not make it known that they controlled a vast empire with claims of limitless reinforcement, but Romans methods of consolidation and control was much more invasive than simple threats. Threats and intimidating positioning certainly played it's role, but it was only one piece of the "Romanization" puzzle. The Romans divided tribes and played them against one another diplomatically and economically. They supported strong tribes and elevated or rewarded other that were compliant and/or tolerant of the occupation. They used receptive tribes to influence and to bring resistant fringe tribes into the fold, etc.

 

Coinage and architecture from Roman Britain do not indicate any grand campaign to intimidate the Britannic natives with threats of increased occupational forces above those already there. The propaganda on Roman coinage relating to Britain was intended more to impress Roman citizens (ie praising Claudius for his triumph). In fact this particular coin of Hadrian at the British Museum "Exercitus Brittanicus" makes it quite clear that the Army of Britain was in itself quite important.

[Gaius Octavius]

"...spreading rumors that they had powerful forces stationed in France,...."

 

The Brits and the Gauls had trade relations. The Brits would have known of the Roman power, without Roman 'propaganda'.

[dandrige]

Thanks a lot for the info. Based on this I don't think the idea seems plausable, seems like I was given some crap info to start off with. It's much better to see it picked apart on a forum rather than when it's in print though, so thanks a lot for the help