Skip to main content Skip to navigation


<?xml version="1.0"?>

<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "base.dtd">




<title>Roman Britain</title></titleStmt>

<publicationStmt><distributor>BASE and Oxford Text Archive</distributor>


<availability><p>The British Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading, under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Centre for English Language Teacher Education, Warwick) and Paul Thompson

(Department of Applied Linguistics, Reading), with funding from BALEAP,

EURALEX, the British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. The

original recordings are held at the Universities of Warwick and Reading, and

at the Oxford Text Archive and may be consulted by bona fide researchers

upon written application to any of the holding bodies.

The BASE corpus is freely available to researchers who agree to the

following conditions:</p>

<p>1. The recordings and transcriptions should not be modified in any


<p>2. The recordings and transcriptions should be used for research purposes

only; they should not be reproduced in teaching materials</p>

<p>3. The recordings and transcriptions should not be reproduced in full for

a wider audience/readership, although researchers are free to quote short

passages of text (up to 200 running words from any given speech event)</p>

<p>4. The corpus developers should be informed of all presentations or

publications arising from analysis of the corpus</p><p>

Researchers should acknowledge their use of the corpus using the following

form of words:

The recordings and transcriptions used in this study come from the British

Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus, which was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Warwick) and Paul Thompson (Reading). Corpus development was assisted by

funding from the Universities of Warwick and Reading, BALEAP, EURALEX, the

British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. </p></availability>




<recording dur="00:57:09" n="6352">


<respStmt><name>BASE team</name>



<langUsage><language id="en">English</language>

<language id="cel">Celtic</language>

<language id="la">Latin</language>



<person id="nm0051" role="main speaker" n="n" sex="m"><p>nm0051, main speaker, non-student, male</p></person>

<personGrp id="ss" role="audience" size="m"><p>ss, audience, medium group </p></personGrp>

<personGrp id="sl" role="all" size="m"><p>sl, all, medium group</p></personGrp>

<personGrp role="speakers" size="3"><p>number of speakers: 3</p></personGrp>





<item n="speechevent">Lecture</item>

<item n="acaddept">Classics and Ancient History</item>

<item n="acaddiv">ah</item>

<item n="partlevel">UG2/3</item>

<item n="module">Roman Britain</item>





<u who="nm0051"> # <pause dur="0.4"/> last week i was dealing with the invasions of Julius Caesar <pause dur="0.4"/> and from the point of view <pause dur="0.7"/> of <pause dur="0.4"/> the reasons that he gives <pause dur="0.9"/> for the fifty-five and fifty-four invasions i hope that the main message <pause dur="0.4"/> came across <pause dur="0.8"/> was that he actually does give us some form of reasoning <pause dur="0.6"/> and motivation for his fifty-five <pause dur="0.4"/> invasion <pause dur="1.9"/> even if we have to read between the lines to establish it <pause dur="1.3"/> whereas for the <pause dur="0.3"/> fifty-four invasion <pause dur="0.4"/> there is very little <unclear>concrete</unclear> evidence <pause dur="0.3"/> within his commentaries <pause dur="0.7"/> and the reason for this i think is fairly clear <pause dur="1.6"/> that <pause dur="0.2"/> if he had actually stated <pause dur="0.4"/> when he came to write his <pause dur="0.3"/> commentaries years later <pause dur="0.4"/> if he'd actually stated <pause dur="0.7"/> a motive <pause dur="0.2"/> in coming to Britain that year <pause dur="0.6"/> he could well have found himself in difficulties <pause dur="1.1"/> with a charge of not having achieved <pause dur="0.4"/> that particular aim <pause dur="0.5"/> after all <pause dur="0.2"/> if <pause dur="0.2"/> conquest <pause dur="0.8"/> was his aim then he <pause dur="0.3"/> singularly failed to

achieve it <pause dur="0.5"/> if economic gain <pause dur="0.3"/> was his aim <pause dur="0.5"/> as it was and certainably <pause dur="0.3"/> was certainly for some of his # <pause dur="0.4"/> companions <pause dur="0.6"/> those extra five ships that went along with him <pause dur="0.3"/> then that too <pause dur="1.1"/> was <pause dur="0.5"/> not forthcoming there was no profit to be made from the fifty-four <pause dur="0.4"/> invasion <pause dur="0.6"/> hence the silence <pause dur="0.3"/> about motivation <pause dur="1.6"/> the relative failure <pause dur="0.5"/> of the fifty-four invasion from the point of view of propaganda and real achievement <pause dur="0.5"/> can also be seen in the reaction that it produced <pause dur="0.3"/> within Rome itself <pause dur="1.0"/> there was no great thanksgiving celebration <pause dur="0.4"/> such as had greeted the fifty-five invasion <pause dur="0.4"/> when there was a twenty <pause dur="0.4"/> day <pause dur="0.5"/> # period <pause dur="0.3"/> of thanksgiving <pause dur="0.9"/> and what evidence we have <pause dur="0.6"/> of the way that the fifty-four invasion was looked at <pause dur="0.7"/> suggests that it was something <pause dur="0.5"/> of <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> a fiasco <pause dur="0.5"/> in the Roman eyes <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> we look for instance in the source book on page thirty-four <pause dur="0.2"/> for the verdict of somebody like Cicero somebody at the heart <pause dur="0.3"/> of senatorial government <pause dur="0.4"/> and you

can hear <pause dur="0.7"/> the irony <pause dur="0.2"/> in what the <trunc>ap</trunc> absolute sarcasm <pause dur="0.7"/> in the words that he <pause dur="0.3"/> puts in his letters <pause dur="0.3"/> to <pause dur="0.4"/> Atticus his friend <pause dur="0.8"/> he says <pause dur="0.7"/> <reading>it's also become clear that there isn't an ounce of silver in the island <pause dur="0.6"/> nor any prospect of booty except slaves <pause dur="0.9"/> i don't suppose you're expecting any of them to be accomplished in literature <pause dur="0.2"/> or music</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> in other words <pause dur="0.3"/> pretty poor quality material <pause dur="1.4"/> and then later on he says <pause dur="0.3"/> <reading>the campaign in Britain is complete <pause dur="0.4"/> hostages have been received <pause dur="0.5"/> there's no booty <pause dur="0.8"/> tribute has however been imposed <pause dur="0.3"/> and they're bringing back the arm <pause dur="0.3"/> from Britain</reading> <pause dur="4.0"/> as i said last time <pause dur="0.2"/> Caesar's involvement <pause dur="0.6"/> with Britain after his return from the fifty-four <pause dur="0.8"/> # invasion <pause dur="0.7"/> simply ceased so far as we can tell <pause dur="0.6"/> he had <pause dur="0.4"/> his hands full in Gaul with the great uprising <pause dur="0.2"/> of Vercingetorix <pause dur="0.4"/> and thereafter <pause dur="0.3"/> never had the opportunity <pause dur="0.4"/> to renew <pause dur="0.4"/> any plans he may have had <pause dur="0.4"/> for a third expedition <pause dur="2.4"/> the terms though <pause dur="0.4"/> that

he'd imposed upon people like Cassivellaunus <pause dur="0.2"/> at the end of the fifty-four campaign <pause dur="0.6"/> do suggest however <pause dur="0.2"/> that Caesar saw <pause dur="0.6"/> that campaign as a preliminary <pause dur="0.5"/> to an eventual Roman takeover <pause dur="1.3"/> the very fact that he imposed tribute <pause dur="1.0"/> is one of the first stages <pause dur="0.9"/> in <pause dur="0.4"/> a Roman takeover of <unclear>an area</unclear> <pause dur="1.2"/> but it was to be <pause dur="0.5"/> something like ninety years <pause dur="1.3"/> before the Romans actually got round <pause dur="0.5"/> to a third <pause dur="0.4"/> and this time successhful successful <pause dur="0.4"/> invasion <pause dur="0.4"/> or conquest <pause dur="0.6"/> now what i want to start doing today <pause dur="0.4"/> is to look at what happened in those <pause dur="0.2"/> ninety years <pause dur="1.0"/> we have to admit that our sources of information are pretty <pause dur="0.2"/> poor <pause dur="1.7"/> if you read one of the handbooks like that by Salway you will get established there <pause dur="0.3"/> a history for the period <pause dur="1.4"/> that is based upon <pause dur="0.2"/> such information as does exist <pause dur="0.8"/> but that information <pause dur="1.6"/> comes from two sources <pause dur="0.5"/> neither of them <trunc>p</trunc> <pause dur="0.5"/> particularly <pause dur="0.7"/> # overflowing with detail <pause dur="0.3"/> or ostensible accuracy <pause dur="1.1"/> there's the literary record <pause dur="0.4"/> that i'll be looking at soon <pause dur="1.0"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> there is <pause dur="0.2"/>

the coin evidence <pause dur="0.4"/> of developments in coinage <pause dur="0.8"/> within Britain itself <pause dur="0.8"/> because we have to look at this process not only from the point of view <pause dur="0.4"/> of what was happening in Rome <pause dur="0.8"/> that prevented a third invasion <pause dur="0.4"/> until <pause dur="0.2"/> ninety years later and the reign of the emperor Claudius <pause dur="0.4"/> but we have to look at what was going on <pause dur="0.3"/> in Britain as well because in neither case <pause dur="0.8"/> was the situation static <pause dur="2.6"/> certainly from the point of view of the native tribes of south-east Britain <pause dur="0.5"/> immediately after the departure <pause dur="0.5"/> of Caesar <pause dur="0.4"/> there was <pause dur="0.2"/> every <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> incentive <pause dur="0.4"/> on the part of some of them <pause dur="0.4"/> to maintain <pause dur="1.1"/> close and friendly relations with Rome <pause dur="1.5"/> Mandubracius for instance of the Trinovantes <pause dur="0.3"/> had a vested interest <pause dur="0.8"/> in that <pause dur="0.9"/> connection <pause dur="1.0"/> because it was upon the <pause dur="0.2"/> protection <pause dur="0.4"/> of Caesar <pause dur="0.6"/> that he owed <pause dur="0.3"/> his <pause dur="0.3"/> very existence <pause dur="0.4"/> as King <pause dur="0.5"/> of <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="0.4"/> Trinovantes down in Essex <pause dur="1.7"/> and yet even people like Cassivellaunus <pause dur="1.1"/> shows no signs of having broken the agreement <pause dur="0.6"/> that he made with Caesar <pause dur="1.6"/> but the one thing to bear in mind about such agreements is

that they are not interstate <pause dur="0.4"/> agreements they're not like present day treaties <pause dur="0.4"/> between one country and another <pause dur="0.7"/> they're agreements between one individual commander <pause dur="0.5"/> and another <pause dur="0.9"/> and any of such an agreement <pause dur="0.4"/> undergoes a radical change when one of those two people dies <pause dur="0.3"/> in other words <pause dur="0.7"/> the treaty <pause dur="0.2"/> the agreement <pause dur="0.3"/> dies with them <pause dur="0.8"/> and this is one of the reasons <pause dur="0.3"/> no doubt <pause dur="0.3"/> that changes <pause dur="0.4"/> didn't come about <pause dur="4.5"/> perhaps the first <pause dur="1.0"/> event <pause dur="0.2"/> that happened which has a bearing upon Romano-British relations <pause dur="0.7"/> is <pause dur="0.2"/> the history of Commius <pause dur="1.3"/> Commius the Atrebate who was so helpful <pause dur="0.5"/> to Caesar in the <pause dur="0.4"/> invasions <pause dur="0.8"/> because during the great Gallic uprising Commius <pause dur="0.5"/> changed sides <pause dur="0.2"/> took the sides of the Gauls <pause dur="0.8"/> and <pause dur="0.3"/> was eventually forced <pause dur="0.6"/> to quit Gaul <pause dur="0.6"/> and become a refugee <pause dur="0.5"/> within Britain where he seems to have <pause dur="0.5"/> set himself up <pause dur="0.5"/> as king <pause dur="0.2"/> among the Atrebates <pause dur="0.2"/> of the Hampshire region <pause dur="1.3"/> and that's one of the tribes <pause dur="0.4"/> that's important <pause dur="0.4"/> for the next <pause dur="0.4"/> ninety years <pause dur="4.4"/> this is where the coin record comes in <pause dur="2.5"/> in those ninety

years we have a succession of coin issues being produced <pause dur="1.1"/> by a number of dynasts or kings within Britain <pause dur="1.9"/> in no case <pause dur="1.6"/> does that coin actually signify <pause dur="0.3"/> which tribe it came from <pause dur="2.0"/> we're reliant upon that kind of information <pause dur="0.4"/> from looking at the concentration of find spots <pause dur="2.6"/> so this particular series of coins <pause dur="0.4"/> is Atrebatic <pause dur="0.5"/> that particular series of coins <pause dur="0.3"/> belongs to the Catuvellauni <pause dur="0.4"/> that particular series of coins <pause dur="0.3"/> belongs <pause dur="0.3"/> to <pause dur="0.3"/> the Trinovantes and so on <pause dur="0.4"/> but there is a complication <pause dur="0.6"/> in this that has arisen <pause dur="1.0"/> in recent years in fact there are two complications <pause dur="1.2"/> one is that one of the prime <pause dur="0.3"/> characters of the period <pause dur="0.4"/> seems to have changed his name <pause dur="2.0"/> the successor to Commius of the Atrebate <pause dur="0.3"/> has for a long time <pause dur="0.6"/> been known in the handbooks <pause dur="0.2"/> and you'll find it in Salway <pause dur="0.2"/> as <pause dur="0.3"/> Tincommius <pause dur="0.4"/> this was a a restoration <pause dur="0.7"/> of his name <pause dur="0.4"/> based upon what was extant <pause dur="0.3"/> in two sources <pause dur="0.3"/> one of those sources <pause dur="0.3"/> is a copy of <pause dur="0.7"/> the achievements of the emperor Augustus <pause dur="0.4"/> that he himself wrote <pause dur="0.3"/> and which <pause dur="0.9"/> is extant <pause dur="0.4"/> as a monumental <pause dur="0.4"/>

piece of # <pause dur="0.7"/> epigraphy <pause dur="0.3"/> in Ankara <pause dur="0.2"/> within Turkey <pause dur="0.4"/> but unfortunately <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="writes on board" iterated="y" dur="8"/> the only letters <pause dur="0.2"/> available <pause dur="1.0"/> are tin or <pause dur="1.9"/> tim <pause dur="2.0"/> and # putting that together with what else was found <pause dur="0.4"/> at the last of the at the end of the last century suggested that <pause dur="0.2"/> here we will have we have <pause dur="0.2"/> evidence of <pause dur="0.4"/> a ruler called Tincommius <pause dur="0.4"/> the similarity with the name of Commius <pause dur="0.4"/> provided an obvious <pause dur="0.5"/> dynastic link <pause dur="1.6"/> with all the coins themselves of this ruler <pause dur="0.3"/> we get as far as Tincom <pause dur="4.2"/><kinesic desc="writes on board" iterated="y" dur="3"/> and that actually seemed to be very good in so far as it <pause dur="0.3"/> took us one stage further but it didn't supply the end of the name <pause dur="0.6"/> in nineteen-ninety-six in Hampshire was found a <pause dur="0.4"/> hoard <pause dur="1.0"/> of coins <pause dur="0.3"/> produced by <pause dur="1.1"/> Tincommius <pause dur="1.0"/> but unfortunately <pause dur="0.4"/> or fortunately rather <pause dur="0.5"/> the name was complete <pause dur="1.2"/> and we now know this character is Tincommarus <pause dur="0.5"/><vocal desc="clears throat" iterated="n"/> which basically translates as big fish <pause dur="0.9"/> an important man obviously <pause dur="1.3"/> so <pause dur="0.7"/> that is one of the problems <pause dur="0.6"/> presented by the coin <pause dur="0.2"/> record sometimes names change <pause dur="1.2"/>

another problem <pause dur="0.4"/> comes from interpretation <pause dur="0.8"/> of the coin record <pause dur="0.6"/> if you read Salway <pause dur="0.4"/> you'll see the coin record being used <pause dur="0.5"/> for <pause dur="1.4"/> the establishment of a period <pause dur="0.3"/> of <pause dur="0.3"/> aggrandisement <pause dur="0.8"/> on the part of the Catuvellauni of Hertfordshire <pause dur="0.7"/> and the surrounding counties <pause dur="0.6"/> against their eastern neighbours the Trinovantes <pause dur="0.6"/> against their southern neighbours <pause dur="0.6"/> the Cantiaci of Kent <pause dur="0.4"/> and the Atrebates <pause dur="0.5"/> of <pause dur="0.3"/> Hampshire <pause dur="3.4"/> this has recently <pause dur="0.3"/> been put into question <pause dur="0.7"/> by <pause dur="0.5"/> # a numismatist based actually in New York <pause dur="0.8"/> called Van Arsdell <pause dur="1.2"/> and if you read the various sections <pause dur="0.4"/> of his book on Celtic coinage <pause dur="0.5"/> you'll see that he in fact <pause dur="0.3"/> he postulates <pause dur="0.6"/> not conflict <pause dur="0.6"/> between <pause dur="0.2"/> the Catuvellauni <pause dur="0.4"/> and the Trinovantes <pause dur="1.3"/> but an actual coming together <pause dur="0.3"/> of those two <pause dur="0.6"/> peoples <pause dur="0.6"/> into a single unit <pause dur="0.4"/> to explain why we find <pause dur="0.4"/> coins <pause dur="0.3"/> which seem to have been <pause dur="0.2"/> produced by <pause dur="0.4"/> the king of <pause dur="0.2"/> one tribe <pause dur="2.0"/> produced <pause dur="0.3"/> at the capital <pause dur="0.4"/> of the other tribe <pause dur="2.2"/> all this is nicely set out if at some <pause dur="0.7"/> great length <pause dur="0.4"/> by a book by David Braund <kinesic desc="holds up book" iterated="n"/> which i'll put back into the library <pause dur="0.3"/>

after this lecture <pause dur="0.8"/> it's called <pause dur="0.2"/> Ruling Roman Britain <pause dur="0.3"/> and has a good <pause dur="0.2"/> section on the coinage <pause dur="0.2"/> and <pause dur="0.3"/> on this particular period <pause dur="0.5"/> in particular <pause dur="1.2"/> # <pause dur="1.9"/> my <pause dur="1.4"/> complaint about Braund and about Van Arsdell though is that they tend to be totally <pause dur="0.3"/> literal <pause dur="1.1"/> for instance <pause dur="0.4"/> as we saw last time <pause dur="0.7"/> Cassivellaunus <pause dur="0.9"/> # the <pause dur="0.4"/> main linchpin <pause dur="0.5"/> of the resistance to the <pause dur="0.7"/> fifty-four invasion by Caesar <pause dur="0.5"/> is usually made <pause dur="0.2"/> the king of the Catuvellauni <pause dur="0.6"/> that fact is nowhere mentioned <pause dur="0.2"/> in any of the ancient <pause dur="0.2"/> evidence <pause dur="0.4"/> of the fifty-four invasion <pause dur="0.4"/> and people like <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> Braund <pause dur="0.2"/> and Van Arsdell <pause dur="0.2"/> would <pause dur="0.4"/> question whether it's valid <pause dur="0.6"/> they pooh-pooh the similarity of the name Catuvellauni as the tribe <pause dur="0.3"/> and Cassivellaunus <pause dur="0.3"/> as the individual <pause dur="1.3"/> it's that kind of <pause dur="0.2"/> literalism if it isn't stated in the <pause dur="0.2"/> ancient authorities it can't be true <pause dur="0.3"/> which <pause dur="0.2"/> <trunc>cre</trunc> # causes these people <pause dur="0.3"/> to go too far <pause dur="0.5"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> really <pause dur="0.9"/> to <pause dur="1.0"/> prevent any meaningful establishment <pause dur="0.5"/> of the history <pause dur="0.5"/> of the period <pause dur="0.9"/> but what i want to give you though is first of all the traditional view of what was

happening within Britain <pause dur="0.4"/> and then we can have a look <pause dur="0.5"/> at <pause dur="0.2"/> the problems <pause dur="0.2"/> created by the new evidence <pause dur="0.7"/> so we go back to Commius <pause dur="0.4"/> who establishes himself <pause dur="0.6"/> in <pause dur="0.7"/> the <trunc>t</trunc> the territory of the Atrebates round about <pause dur="0.2"/> fifty-two <pause dur="0.4"/> B-C <pause dur="0.6"/> he's eventually <pause dur="0.3"/> succeeded by Tincommarus <pause dur="4.1"/> and it's at this point <pause dur="0.3"/> that we get <pause dur="0.2"/> some evidence <pause dur="0.2"/> within the sources for <pause dur="0.3"/> relations with Rome <pause dur="2.1"/> according to our main source who is really Strabo a Greek writer who <pause dur="0.3"/> completed <pause dur="0.4"/> his geographical work and i stress that it is a geographical work <pause dur="1.1"/> # round about A-D twenty <pause dur="1.0"/> we find <pause dur="0.2"/> that <pause dur="1.7"/> from the Roman point of view <pause dur="0.8"/> intervention in Britain was something to be put on hold <pause dur="1.2"/> Strabo says <pause dur="0.2"/> that <pause dur="1.9"/> taxing <pause dur="0.6"/> the exports <pause dur="0.9"/> from the Roman empire into Britain <pause dur="0.2"/> before they left the continent <pause dur="0.5"/> brought in more money <pause dur="1.0"/> than <pause dur="0.7"/> theoretically <pause dur="0.4"/> # an outright takeover of Britain <pause dur="0.4"/> would realize and therefore it just simply wasn't working <pause dur="0.3"/> on economic grounds <pause dur="1.5"/> we also hear <pause dur="2.0"/> of <pause dur="1.6"/> dedications <pause dur="0.9"/> by <pause dur="0.2"/> British kings <pause dur="0.8"/> made <pause dur="0.7"/> to the <trunc>r</trunc> to Rome and its gods <pause dur="0.2"/> on the Capitol hill <pause dur="0.3"/> within Rome itself <pause dur="0.8"/>

an indication <pause dur="0.3"/> of close and friendly contacts <pause dur="0.3"/> so in this period there were from time to time contacts they were friendly <pause dur="0.5"/> there was obviously something to be gained <pause dur="0.3"/> one way <pause dur="0.4"/> or another <pause dur="0.2"/> for both sides <pause dur="1.6"/> but nevertheless <pause dur="1.5"/> the threat <pause dur="0.7"/> of <pause dur="0.2"/> a Roman invasion of Britain <pause dur="0.9"/> could be <pause dur="0.2"/> a very valuable diplomatic tool <pause dur="1.9"/> and this is why i think we hear <pause dur="0.4"/> of projected <pause dur="0.2"/> expeditions to Britain <pause dur="0.5"/> by Julius Caesar's <pause dur="0.7"/> successor <pause dur="0.4"/> the first emperor Augustus <pause dur="0.8"/> on a number of occasions <pause dur="1.6"/> we hear for instance <pause dur="0.4"/> of a projected invasion <pause dur="0.3"/> in thirty-four B-C from Dio Cassius <pause dur="2.0"/> we hear of another one <pause dur="0.4"/> in twenty-seven B-C <pause dur="0.4"/> another one <pause dur="0.3"/> in twenty-six B-C <pause dur="0.3"/> in each case <pause dur="0.8"/> Dio Cassius alleges that there was something more important happening <pause dur="0.5"/> that <pause dur="0.2"/> diverted Augustus' attention <pause dur="0.3"/> away from Britain <pause dur="1.4"/> a rebellion <pause dur="0.2"/> for instance <pause dur="0.3"/> elsewhere within the empire <pause dur="2.5"/> there's also <pause dur="1.0"/> the idea of <pause dur="0.3"/> a <pause dur="0.2"/> Roman takeover of Britain <pause dur="0.2"/> being kept alive <pause dur="0.4"/> through <pause dur="0.3"/> the non-historical literature <pause dur="0.2"/> of the period <pause dur="1.5"/> poets like <pause dur="0.7"/> Tibullus <pause dur="0.2"/> and Propertius <pause dur="0.5"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> Horace <pause dur="0.8"/>

all mention from time to time within their <pause dur="0.5"/> writings <pause dur="0.2"/> the possibilities <pause dur="0.5"/> of <pause dur="0.3"/> a Roman <pause dur="0.5"/> intervention <pause dur="0.5"/> within Britain <pause dur="1.3"/> we hear about it <pause dur="0.3"/> shortly before <pause dur="0.2"/> twenty-seven B-C from Tibullus <pause dur="0.9"/> actually in twenty-seven B-C <pause dur="0.4"/> from Propertius <pause dur="0.5"/> the same in the case of Horace <pause dur="1.5"/> Horace mentions it again <pause dur="1.1"/> in the context of twenty-six B-C <pause dur="0.4"/> and again <pause dur="0.2"/> in the context <pause dur="0.4"/> of twenty-three B-C <pause dur="3.1"/> now <pause dur="0.5"/> why <pause dur="0.5"/> would <pause dur="0.6"/> Augustus <pause dur="0.2"/> sanction <pause dur="1.6"/> such overt references <pause dur="0.5"/> within literature <pause dur="2.2"/> people like Horace were court poets <pause dur="0.5"/> what they wrote <pause dur="0.6"/> was sanctioned <pause dur="1.1"/> wasn't <pause dur="0.3"/> a free agent <pause dur="1.2"/> well as i've said <pause dur="1.2"/> there is a diplomatic <pause dur="0.7"/> element here <pause dur="1.3"/> the very threat of a Roman takeover <pause dur="0.5"/> presented to Britain <pause dur="1.3"/> the suggestion <pause dur="0.9"/> that <pause dur="0.4"/> a <pause dur="0.8"/> friendly relationship with Rome <pause dur="0.3"/> was better <pause dur="0.3"/> than a hostile one <pause dur="0.3"/> which would provide the pretext <pause dur="0.6"/> for <pause dur="0.9"/> intervention <pause dur="1.5"/> there was also something for Augustus <pause dur="0.4"/> to gain <pause dur="0.5"/> from such a possible <pause dur="0.4"/> intervention <pause dur="1.8"/> especially in in the early years of Augustus' reign <pause dur="1.7"/> by associating himself <pause dur="2.0"/> with <pause dur="0.2"/> the achievements <pause dur="1.2"/> of Julius Caesar <pause dur="2.1"/> through <pause dur="0.5"/> the fifty-five

and fifty-four invasions <pause dur="0.2"/> Augustus <pause dur="0.8"/> may well have thought that he was strengthening his own position <pause dur="0.6"/> as the legitimate <pause dur="0.4"/> successor <pause dur="1.3"/> to one of the <pause dur="0.2"/> major figures <pause dur="0.3"/> of the first century <pause dur="0.8"/> # B-C <pause dur="1.9"/> and so from the Roman point of view <pause dur="0.9"/> that kind of thing <pause dur="0.9"/> was something to be <pause dur="0.5"/> kept <pause dur="0.2"/> on the <pause dur="0.7"/> back burner <pause dur="0.2"/> if not on the front burner <pause dur="5.3"/> with time though <pause dur="0.4"/> things <pause dur="0.5"/> did shift <pause dur="4.6"/> it's likely <pause dur="0.6"/> that at some period <pause dur="0.4"/> before <pause dur="1.4"/> A-D seven <pause dur="0.4"/> and we can't put it <pause dur="0.3"/> better than that <pause dur="1.2"/> # Tincommius <pause dur="0.7"/> was forced <pause dur="0.2"/> to leave Britain <pause dur="0.2"/> and to take refuge <pause dur="0.8"/> in <pause dur="0.4"/> Rome or rather <pause dur="0.2"/> let's call him Tincommarus <pause dur="1.2"/> we know this <pause dur="0.2"/> from the evidence <pause dur="0.7"/> of Augustus <pause dur="0.2"/> himself <pause dur="0.4"/> in that <pause dur="0.4"/> monument <pause dur="0.5"/> in Ankara <pause dur="1.8"/> he lists for <pause dur="1.4"/> the period <pause dur="0.3"/> well the last date that we can actually <pause dur="0.4"/> be certain about on the list <pause dur="0.4"/> is <pause dur="0.4"/> # twenty-five B-C <pause dur="0.8"/> but he gives us the list of the <pause dur="0.2"/> of <pause dur="1.0"/> ruling <pause dur="0.2"/> princes and kings <pause dur="0.3"/> who sought refuge with him in Rome <pause dur="1.0"/> and he gives us two British <pause dur="0.2"/> rulers <pause dur="0.9"/> one <pause dur="0.2"/> Dubnovellaunus <pause dur="0.8"/> and the other <pause dur="0.6"/> this <pause dur="0.2"/> Tincommarus figure <pause dur="0.5"/> that we've dealt with <pause dur="4.1"/> i give the the the date A-D seven because that's the

date that you'll find in the handbooks <pause dur="0.6"/> if you read Van Arsdell <pause dur="0.8"/> he seems to limit <pause dur="0.3"/> Tincommarus' reign <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="1.0"/> between <pause dur="0.6"/> thirty B-C <pause dur="0.4"/> and ten B-C <pause dur="0.8"/> though Van Arsdell's record for <pause dur="0.2"/> dating within his book <pause dur="0.4"/> has been <pause dur="0.5"/> # a matter of some concern <pause dur="0.4"/> to the viewers <pause dur="2.6"/> now what might have caused Tincommarus <pause dur="1.0"/> to leave <pause dur="0.6"/> the territory of the Atrebates and seek refuge <pause dur="0.2"/> with Augustus <pause dur="0.8"/> well there are two possibilities either <pause dur="0.3"/> an external <pause dur="0.4"/> invasion <pause dur="0.4"/> or a palace coup <pause dur="1.4"/> and the fact that he seems to be replaced <pause dur="0.4"/> not by somebody from outside but by another Atrebate <pause dur="0.3"/> this case <pause dur="0.2"/> this case Eppillus <pause dur="0.3"/> suggests that it was a palace coup <pause dur="0.6"/> that # <pause dur="0.7"/> produced the change <pause dur="0.8"/> just as Eppillus <pause dur="0.4"/> seems to have been replaced in time <pause dur="0.7"/> by <pause dur="0.5"/> another figure called Verica <pause dur="1.2"/> now each of these <pause dur="0.6"/> on some of their coins describes himself <pause dur="0.6"/> as son of <pause dur="0.3"/> Commius <pause dur="0.2"/> it has the Latin <pause dur="0.8"/> # tag <pause dur="0.3"/> <distinct lang="la">com</distinct> <pause dur="0.2"/> F <distinct lang="la">com filius</distinct> <pause dur="3.2"/> whether this is actually a dynastic link <pause dur="1.0"/> or whether it's a little bit of fiction <pause dur="0.5"/> in order to establish <pause dur="0.5"/> the legitimacy <pause dur="0.4"/> of their rule <pause dur="0.3"/> nobody knows <pause dur="0.4"/> but it is there <pause dur="0.2"/> and

it's also significant <pause dur="0.6"/> that the language <pause dur="0.3"/> that starts appearing upon these coins <pause dur="0.6"/> is Latin <pause dur="1.9"/> it's rare that one is getting <pause dur="0.2"/> anything <pause dur="0.9"/> Celtic <pause dur="1.2"/> the only Celtic <pause dur="0.9"/> term that we find <pause dur="0.5"/> on the coins <pause dur="0.6"/> is <pause dur="8.1"/><kinesic desc="writes on board" iterated="y" dur="3"/> that term <pause dur="0.2"/> which seems to be <pause dur="0.2"/> Celtic for <pause dur="0.3"/> king <pause dur="0.7"/> Celtic equivalent <pause dur="0.3"/> of the Latin <pause dur="0.5"/> <distinct lang="la">rex</distinct> <pause dur="2.1"/> when in fact a number of these # <pause dur="0.9"/> kings <pause dur="0.6"/> especially people like Verica <pause dur="0.2"/> do put the Latin title <distinct lang="la">rex</distinct> <pause dur="0.8"/> king <pause dur="0.4"/> upon <pause dur="0.3"/> their kings <pause dur="0.3"/> and the very fact that they choose to do it in Latin <pause dur="1.0"/> suggests a <pause dur="0.9"/> a recognition <pause dur="0.5"/> by Rome <pause dur="0.5"/> of their position <pause dur="0.3"/> within Britain in other words that they are <pause dur="1.3"/> in a state of some kind of an agreement <pause dur="0.4"/> with the central Rome authorities <pause dur="3.3"/> of all the Catuvellauni to the north <pause dur="0.2"/> of the Atrebates <pause dur="0.9"/> we know that Cassivellaunus <pause dur="0.3"/> was succeeded <pause dur="0.3"/> at some stage the traditional date is round about twenty B-C <pause dur="0.7"/> by a ruler called Tasciovanus <pause dur="0.7"/> and he's producing coins <pause dur="0.4"/> from <pause dur="0.8"/> a new capital <pause dur="0.4"/> of <pause dur="0.2"/> Verulamium <pause dur="0.7"/> which is now <pause dur="0.2"/> Saint Albans <pause dur="0.3"/> we know this because he puts V-E-R <pause dur="0.9"/> on

his coins <pause dur="0.6"/> a shortened form of the name <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> Verulamium is simply a Latinized form of <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 word"/> <distinct lang="cel">Verulam</distinct> <pause dur="1.4"/> the Celtic term <pause dur="1.6"/> in effect <pause dur="0.4"/> Tasciovanus was the first king of this tribe <pause dur="0.3"/> to produce <pause dur="0.3"/> inscribed coins <pause dur="1.6"/> there's a mystery here though <pause dur="1.4"/> because some coins produced by Tasciovanus <pause dur="0.9"/> have another <pause dur="0.3"/> set of letters <pause dur="0.5"/> on the reverse C-<pause dur="0.2"/>A-<pause dur="0.3"/>M <pause dur="0.9"/> which can only stand for <pause dur="0.3"/> Camulodunum <pause dur="1.4"/> modern <pause dur="0.2"/> Colchester <pause dur="1.4"/> Camulodunum <pause dur="2.3"/> was the capital of the Trinovantes <pause dur="1.5"/> so according to the traditional <pause dur="0.2"/> interpretation <pause dur="1.9"/> this particular issue of coins bearing the letters C-A-M <pause dur="0.8"/> which is a rare <trunc>ed</trunc> <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> edition of coins it's a rare edition <pause dur="1.2"/> suggesting that not very many were produced <pause dur="0.4"/> which itself suggests <pause dur="0.2"/> a short period <pause dur="0.4"/> of issue <pause dur="0.5"/> the <pause dur="0.4"/> traditional interpretation <pause dur="0.3"/> is that at some stage <pause dur="1.5"/> the Catuvellauni <pause dur="0.2"/> under Tasciovanus <pause dur="0.2"/> overran <pause dur="0.2"/> the Trinovantes <pause dur="0.7"/> took over their capital <pause dur="0.8"/> and as a sign of the takeover Tasciovanus <pause dur="0.3"/> began <pause dur="0.2"/> minting coins <pause dur="0.4"/>

from <pause dur="0.2"/> the Trinovantine <pause dur="0.2"/> capital <pause dur="4.4"/> when might this have happened <pause dur="2.6"/> well at what stage <pause dur="0.2"/> in <pause dur="0.4"/> Romano-British relations <pause dur="0.8"/> could a takeover have happened <pause dur="0.7"/> that was immediately abandoned because of some threat <pause dur="0.4"/> from Rome <pause dur="1.2"/> and again the traditional date for this is round about sixteen B-C <pause dur="0.9"/> when <pause dur="1.2"/> A <pause dur="1.4"/> Rome <pause dur="0.2"/> was <pause dur="0.2"/> diverted <pause dur="1.0"/> in its # <pause dur="0.3"/> attention <pause dur="0.9"/> by <pause dur="0.6"/> difference elsewhere in the empire <pause dur="0.9"/> and then the presence <pause dur="0.3"/> of the emperor Augustus personally <pause dur="0.4"/> in Gaul shortly afterwards <pause dur="8.9"/> other evidence that has usually been <pause dur="0.2"/> brought out <pause dur="0.5"/> as sign of <trunc>p</trunc> a sign of power struggle <pause dur="0.3"/> is the dichotomy the change between <distinct lang="la">rex</distinct> on some coins <pause dur="0.3"/> and <distinct lang="cel">rico</distinct> or <pause dur="0.2"/> <distinct lang="cel">rigo</distinct> <pause dur="0.8"/> on others <pause dur="1.3"/> does the <pause dur="0.2"/> use of <pause dur="0.2"/> a Celtic <pause dur="0.5"/> title for king <pause dur="0.4"/> suggest a <pause dur="0.2"/> more <pause dur="0.3"/> British oriented <pause dur="0.4"/> and therefore anti-Roman <pause dur="0.9"/> view of things <pause dur="0.2"/> whereas <distinct lang="la">rex</distinct> emphasized the Roman connection <pause dur="0.5"/> we don't know <pause dur="1.6"/> later on <pause dur="0.3"/> we find coins issued <pause dur="0.2"/> by <pause dur="0.4"/> Verica <pause dur="0.2"/> and i've got a few slides that might show this later on <pause dur="0.8"/> which have as their motif on them <pause dur="0.4"/> a vine leaf <pause dur="0.9"/> now the vine is <pause dur="0.3"/> not a native plant to this country <pause dur="0.7"/> and <pause dur="0.5"/> at

this particular period of ancient history it is very unlikely that there were any vines whatsoever <pause dur="0.5"/> within <pause dur="0.5"/> Britain at all <pause dur="1.2"/> so why does <pause dur="0.2"/> Verica <pause dur="0.3"/> choose to put a vine leaf <pause dur="0.6"/> and the title <distinct lang="la">rex</distinct> <pause dur="0.5"/> on his coins <pause dur="1.3"/> is there anything <pause dur="1.2"/> that one can say from the fact that <pause dur="0.4"/> the coins of the Catuvellauni <pause dur="0.2"/> their neighbours to the north who were traditionally regarded as imperialistic <pause dur="0.4"/> and pressurizing <pause dur="0.5"/> the <pause dur="0.2"/> # Atrebates <pause dur="1.1"/> put an ear <pause dur="0.2"/> of <pause dur="0.5"/> barley <pause dur="1.0"/> on their <pause dur="0.8"/> # coins <pause dur="1.2"/> is this again <pause dur="0.4"/> an element of emphasizing <pause dur="0.4"/> the British aspect <pause dur="0.3"/> as opposed to the Mediterranean motif <pause dur="0.6"/> of the Atrebates <pause dur="1.2"/> we can't <pause dur="0.2"/> really say we note <pause dur="0.4"/> what is there <pause dur="0.5"/> but the interpretation <pause dur="0.4"/> is something of a mystery <pause dur="4.8"/> at some stage <pause dur="2.2"/> Tasciovanus of the Catuvellauni was himself <pause dur="0.2"/> replaced succeeded <pause dur="0.4"/> by <pause dur="0.2"/> a new character Cunobelinus <pause dur="0.2"/> the Cymbeline of Shakespeare <pause dur="2.7"/> an important figure <pause dur="0.5"/> one of our sources <pause dur="0.5"/> Suetonius for instance calls him <pause dur="0.4"/> King of the Britons <pause dur="0.6"/> which suggests that he has <pause dur="0.6"/> control of a number of tribal areas <pause dur="4.0"/> he too <pause dur="2.0"/> begins issuing coins <pause dur="0.2"/>

with those letters C-A-M <pause dur="0.9"/> on them <pause dur="0.7"/> Camulodunum <pause dur="2.1"/> and this is a <pause dur="0.2"/> long period of issue <pause dur="1.6"/> so do we take it <pause dur="0.4"/> that there has been <pause dur="1.8"/> takeover a military takeover once again <pause dur="0.4"/> of Trinovantine territory <pause dur="1.6"/> if this is the case <pause dur="1.2"/> is there a date that one can use <pause dur="1.0"/> to pinpoint it <pause dur="1.6"/> at what stage might Roman <pause dur="1.1"/> attention <pause dur="0.2"/> be diverted away from Britain <pause dur="1.3"/> the traditionally <pause dur="0.3"/> suggested date is A-D nine <pause dur="0.8"/> when Rome <pause dur="0.3"/> suffered <pause dur="0.5"/> a tremendous disaster <pause dur="1.3"/> on <pause dur="0.7"/> the Rhine <pause dur="3.0"/> in an attempt to shorten the overall frontier of of the empire <pause dur="0.6"/> Augustus had sought to push <pause dur="0.8"/> eastwards from the Rhine to a new line at the Elbe <pause dur="0.9"/> this would cut out in fact <pause dur="0.4"/> a rather troublesome kink <pause dur="0.7"/> in <pause dur="0.6"/> the <pause dur="0.8"/> northern frontier of the Roman empire caused by the <pause dur="0.4"/> almost confluence <pause dur="0.3"/> of the sources <pause dur="0.3"/> of the Rhine <pause dur="0.5"/> and the Danube <pause dur="2.3"/> it was a failure as a policy <pause dur="2.3"/> in the great <pause dur="0.5"/> German <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="2.0"/> forest of Teutoburger Wald <pause dur="1.2"/> Varus at the head of three legions <pause dur="0.7"/> was <pause dur="0.2"/> pretty well <pause dur="0.2"/> annihilated <pause dur="1.6"/> and it was a tremendous shock <pause dur="0.3"/> to Roman

morale <pause dur="1.9"/> in fact you've probably heard about the <pause dur="0.5"/> story of Augustus <pause dur="0.3"/> wandering <pause dur="0.7"/> in a state of dismay <pause dur="0.2"/> round his palace <pause dur="0.5"/> for years afterwards saying Varus Varus give me back my legions <pause dur="0.6"/> the thought of the the loss of <pause dur="0.4"/> over eighteen-thousand men <pause dur="2.5"/> and that could well have been the signal <pause dur="0.8"/> for <pause dur="0.6"/> any <pause dur="1.6"/> # Catuvellaunian takeover <pause dur="0.3"/> of Trinovantine territory <pause dur="0.4"/> if <pause dur="0.4"/> it happened <pause dur="0.8"/> and if <pause dur="0.6"/> what we're seeing is not simply <pause dur="0.6"/> a merging together <pause dur="0.6"/> of two tribes <pause dur="2.4"/> on the level of <pause dur="1.0"/> interstate <pause dur="0.2"/> relations then we have <pause dur="0.8"/> a number of possible <pause dur="0.4"/> scenarios to look at <pause dur="0.7"/> on an economic level <pause dur="1.1"/> relations between the continent <pause dur="0.4"/> the Roman empire that is <pause dur="0.4"/> and Britain <pause dur="1.6"/> were going <pause dur="0.6"/> from good <pause dur="0.3"/> to better <pause dur="1.6"/> there is plenty of evidence <pause dur="0.7"/> of <pause dur="0.3"/> massive imports <pause dur="0.2"/> of <pause dur="0.3"/> gold luxury goods <pause dur="0.4"/> into Britain <pause dur="0.4"/> throughout this period <pause dur="1.3"/> we hear of some of them <pause dur="0.6"/> we find others <pause dur="0.2"/> in archaeological contexts <pause dur="4.8"/> the number of <pause dur="0.7"/> wine amphoras <pause dur="1.0"/> that are found <pause dur="0.2"/> either in a broken state <pause dur="0.5"/> or intact <pause dur="0.2"/> because they'd been preserved within high status graves <pause dur="1.5"/> suggests <pause dur="0.7"/> a <pause dur="0.3"/> large scale import of

things like wine <pause dur="0.7"/> in order to <pause dur="0.3"/> quench the thirst <pause dur="0.4"/> of the upper echelons of native British society <pause dur="1.1"/> the same is true of <pause dur="0.6"/> fine pieces <pause dur="0.2"/> of <pause dur="0.2"/> pottery <pause dur="1.0"/> and silverware <pause dur="2.0"/> again <pause dur="0.4"/> these come out of <pause dur="0.2"/> native graves of the period <pause dur="0.6"/> and are well preserved <pause dur="2.1"/> what Britain gave to the continent gave to the Roman empire <pause dur="0.6"/> is best exemplified <pause dur="0.4"/> from people <pause dur="0.4"/> like Strabo <pause dur="1.0"/> who lists <pause dur="0.2"/> items like <pause dur="0.4"/> corn <pause dur="0.5"/> cattle <pause dur="1.1"/> gold silver <pause dur="2.6"/> these would be the normal things that you would exchange <pause dur="0.7"/> for <pause dur="0.5"/> the # <pause dur="0.2"/> luxury goods of the empire the gold and silver in the form of coins <pause dur="0.5"/> and it's surprising how much <pause dur="0.5"/> # reliance <pause dur="0.6"/> native British society placed upon <pause dur="0.5"/> gold coinage <pause dur="1.7"/> but also things like slaves <pause dur="0.8"/> and slaves itself suggests a an intertribal <pause dur="1.0"/> element of strife <pause dur="0.2"/> because where would the slaves come from <pause dur="0.2"/> except <pause dur="0.5"/> prisoners of war <pause dur="1.8"/> and <pause dur="1.2"/> hunting dogs <pause dur="3.0"/> for which the Romans always had <pause dur="0.7"/> an element <pause dur="0.4"/> of admiration <pause dur="0.5"/> British hunting dogs <pause dur="0.5"/> # were almost as good <pause dur="0.4"/> as the famed Molossians <pause dur="0.4"/> from the Balkans </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="nm0051" trans="pause"> now if <pause dur="0.3"/> the <pause dur="1.4"/> Catuvellauni did take

over the Trinovantes by an armed <pause dur="0.2"/> intervention <pause dur="1.5"/> this brought no reaction from Rome so far as we can tell <pause dur="2.0"/> the evidence all the evidence suggests a long term <pause dur="0.6"/> involvement by that tribe <pause dur="0.5"/> within Trinovantine territory <pause dur="1.0"/> and if it if it wasn't # an armed <pause dur="0.5"/> invasion <pause dur="1.4"/> then <pause dur="0.3"/> we can say that Cunobelinus was able <pause dur="0.2"/> by diplomacy <pause dur="0.7"/> to prevent <pause dur="1.1"/> a Roman <pause dur="1.2"/> invasion <pause dur="0.4"/> to restore Trinovantes <pause dur="1.3"/> and a way perhaps of doing this was to show that <pause dur="0.3"/> although they'd taken over <pause dur="0.4"/> the the basic situation in Britain <pause dur="0.3"/> was in fact <pause dur="0.6"/> no worse <pause dur="0.4"/> no better <pause dur="0.8"/> no different <pause dur="2.8"/> that <pause dur="0.4"/> even then <pause dur="0.7"/> Britain posed no threat <pause dur="0.4"/> to <pause dur="0.8"/> the continental empire <pause dur="2.2"/> but things were not to stay like that for ever <pause dur="5.5"/> in A-D thirty-seven <pause dur="0.5"/> Augustus' successor Tiberius who had always had a policy of non-involvement <pause dur="0.5"/> beyond the established confines <pause dur="0.3"/> of <pause dur="0.4"/> Augustus' <pause dur="0.2"/> empire <pause dur="1.9"/> Tiberius died <pause dur="0.4"/> and was succeeded <pause dur="0.6"/> by <pause dur="0.2"/> Gaius Caligula <pause dur="0.7"/> of ill repute <pause dur="2.0"/> now <pause dur="0.4"/> Gaius Caligula has come down to us <pause dur="0.3"/> through the writings of people like Suetonius <pause dur="2.3"/> as <pause dur="1.5"/> an insane monster <pause dur="2.5"/> there is nothing good that <pause dur="0.9"/>

ancient writers <pause dur="0.4"/> have to say <pause dur="0.4"/> about him <pause dur="1.3"/> if you <pause dur="0.5"/> remember back <pause dur="0.6"/> to the depiction <pause dur="0.5"/> that you got in I Claudius you can see why <pause dur="3.3"/> in A-D thirty-nine <pause dur="1.8"/> Caligula was engaged in a campaign <pause dur="0.2"/> in Germany <pause dur="1.3"/> when he was visited <pause dur="0.3"/> by another <pause dur="1.6"/> refugee from Britain <pause dur="0.8"/> a young <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> prince called Adminius <pause dur="3.8"/> and we're told that he was driven out of Britain by his <pause dur="0.4"/> father <pause dur="0.4"/> Cunobelinus <pause dur="1.2"/> now there is a small issue <pause dur="0.4"/> of coins <pause dur="1.1"/> # from northern Kent <pause dur="1.6"/> that <pause dur="0.4"/> were produced by somebody called Aminius <pause dur="1.5"/> and it's tempting <pause dur="0.5"/> to <pause dur="0.4"/> equate these two people <pause dur="0.2"/> for there's only a <pause dur="0.2"/> one letter difference <pause dur="1.0"/> and to see <pause dur="0.2"/> Adminius or Aminius established in northern Kent <pause dur="0.3"/> by Cunobelinus <pause dur="0.4"/> but then falling out with his father <pause dur="0.3"/> and being forced from Britain altogether <pause dur="0.4"/> onto the continent <pause dur="0.6"/> this was enough to persuade Caligula <pause dur="0.6"/> that an expedition <pause dur="0.4"/> to Britain <pause dur="1.5"/> was something <pause dur="0.2"/> that warranted <pause dur="0.4"/> his special <pause dur="0.3"/> attention <pause dur="0.5"/> after all there was a lot of <pause dur="0.7"/> # kudos <pause dur="0.2"/> to be gained <pause dur="0.6"/> from such an expedition <pause dur="1.3"/> at this point though <pause dur="0.9"/> the account <pause dur="0.2"/> that is left to us <pause dur="0.8"/> by Suetonius <pause dur="0.4"/> and later <pause dur="0.4"/> by Dio Cassius

who was obviously sitting embroidering <pause dur="0.5"/> upon <pause dur="0.5"/> # Suetonius <pause dur="0.8"/> # comes to the fore <pause dur="1.4"/> various attempts have been <pause dur="0.2"/> made to try to <pause dur="1.5"/> rationalize and explain <pause dur="0.4"/> the utter fiasco that took <pause dur="0.7"/> place <pause dur="0.4"/> on the shore <pause dur="0.7"/> of Gaul <pause dur="0.6"/> prior <pause dur="0.4"/> to <pause dur="0.4"/> what turned out to be an aborted <pause dur="0.3"/> expedition <pause dur="1.9"/> but i think any attempt to <pause dur="0.6"/> produce <pause dur="0.4"/> a rational <pause dur="0.2"/> explanation <pause dur="1.6"/> really founders upon the fact that there was <pause dur="0.4"/> there is no evidence <pause dur="0.5"/> for <pause dur="0.4"/> any support <pause dur="0.3"/> of such rationality <pause dur="1.8"/> Suetonius tells us that # he arrived at the camp where all the troops <pause dur="0.3"/> were gathered <pause dur="2.5"/> didn't like what he found <pause dur="1.3"/> went on the rampage sacked people left right and centre <pause dur="5.0"/> then ordered <pause dur="0.3"/> that his <pause dur="0.4"/> artillery his <trunc>bal</trunc> ballistas be drawn up into position <pause dur="1.3"/> all his men should be ready to embark and then suddenly <pause dur="1.4"/> he ordered them to <reading>fill their helmets and the folds of their tunics <pause dur="1.4"/> with seashells <pause dur="2.2"/> calling them spoils from ocean <pause dur="0.5"/> owed to the Capitol and Palatine <pause dur="1.3"/> and then as a monument to his victory</reading> over ocean that is <pause dur="0.3"/>

<reading>he erected a very high tower from which fires were to shine out at night <pause dur="0.4"/> to guide the passage of ships</reading> in other words <pause dur="0.7"/> a # <pause dur="0.4"/> a pharos like the one <pause dur="0.3"/> at <trunc>ank</trunc> # Alexandria <pause dur="0.9"/> a lighthouse <pause dur="1.8"/> Dio Cassius makes the story even more ridiculous <pause dur="1.8"/> he has Caligula embark on a trireme <pause dur="1.1"/> putting out to sea <pause dur="0.2"/> a little bit <pause dur="0.3"/> then he sailed back <pause dur="0.9"/> then he took his <pause dur="0.2"/> position on a high platform <pause dur="0.8"/> <reading>gave the soldiers a signal as if for battle and urged them on by means of trumpeters <pause dur="0.7"/> then suddenly he ordered them to gather seashells and having got these spoils <pause dur="0.2"/> for it was clear he needed booty for his triumphal procession <pause dur="0.4"/> he became very excited <pause dur="0.3"/> as though he'd enslaved ocean itself</reading> <pause dur="1.9"/> well <pause dur="1.9"/> how does one rationalize this one could say it's not to be rationalized Caligula was mad <pause dur="1.1"/> and there are various other <pause dur="0.6"/> bits of evidence which suggest that Caligula was mad for instance # according to Suetonius he was standing beside the <pause dur="0.4"/> great statue of Jupiter in the temple of Capitoline Jupiter and asked people who was the greater <pause dur="0.8"/> and of course <pause dur="0.2"/> you always gave

the right answer <pause dur="1.6"/> there's that scandalous <pause dur="0.2"/> story <pause dur="0.7"/> which will probably have some of you fainting <pause dur="0.5"/> of him <pause dur="0.2"/> having got <pause dur="0.3"/> his sister pregnant <pause dur="1.1"/> # and then conducted <pause dur="0.6"/> a Caesarean abortion <pause dur="0.6"/> and ate the foetus <pause dur="1.6"/> # because he thought that he was a god <pause dur="0.5"/> and this is what Cronos <pause dur="0.2"/> one of the pre-Zeus gods actually did <pause dur="2.4"/> so all the evidence that comes out of this <pause dur="0.3"/> suggests # an insane monster <pause dur="0.8"/> and this is the kind of behaviour you would expect <pause dur="0.6"/> from <pause dur="0.5"/> somebody who was <pause dur="0.3"/> not quite firing on all four cylinders <pause dur="1.9"/> others though have suggested <pause dur="0.2"/> that <pause dur="1.0"/> the troops <pause dur="0.4"/> gathered at <pause dur="1.0"/> the coast <pause dur="0.2"/> of <pause dur="0.4"/> northern Gaul principally at Boulogne <pause dur="1.0"/> didn't want to go across the channel <pause dur="1.2"/> it <pause dur="0.4"/> but Britain was still regarded <pause dur="0.4"/> as a place of mystery <pause dur="1.1"/> of unknown dangers and potential <pause dur="0.5"/> of all <pause dur="0.2"/> the stories filtered down <pause dur="0.8"/> for the best part of <pause dur="0.2"/> eighty to ninety years <pause dur="0.6"/> from the time of Julius Caesar why go on <pause dur="0.2"/> was there a mutiny <pause dur="1.0"/> and was the <pause dur="0.3"/> victory over ocean <pause dur="0.4"/> exemplified by picking up seashells <pause dur="0.6"/> his way <pause dur="0.4"/> of <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> shaming them <pause dur="2.4"/> others have

suggested that seashells <pause dur="0.4"/> doesn't mean seashells in Latin it means <pause dur="0.2"/> sappers' huts <pause dur="1.0"/> that he simply abandoned the expedition and told them to <pause dur="0.2"/> dismantle <pause dur="0.4"/> the huts on the shore <pause dur="0.3"/> and went off <pause dur="0.2"/> we don't know <pause dur="0.9"/> all we have <pause dur="0.2"/> is the evidence <pause dur="0.3"/> of people like Suetonius <pause dur="0.7"/> and # <pause dur="1.8"/> Dio Cassius <pause dur="3.0"/> in A-D forty-one <pause dur="0.3"/> Rome tired <pause dur="0.7"/> of Caligula four years of him was quite enough <pause dur="1.0"/> and # if <pause dur="2.1"/> don't mind the pun <pause dur="0.4"/> he had a very bad attack of iron poisoning <pause dur="0.6"/> caused by a lot of swords stuck in <pause dur="0.6"/> all at once <pause dur="0.6"/> and that was the end of him <pause dur="0.5"/> thank goodness the Rome <pause dur="0.2"/> that Rome was able to <pause dur="0.8"/> heave a sigh of relief <pause dur="0.5"/> but this <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="1.4"/> unplanned change <pause dur="0.6"/> in <pause dur="0.7"/> succession <pause dur="0.6"/> created its own problem <pause dur="0.8"/> who was to succeed <pause dur="2.0"/> the suddenness <pause dur="0.2"/> had some people suggesting that the republic should be restored <pause dur="1.1"/> but <pause dur="0.2"/> the republic was now a vague memory <pause dur="0.6"/> the whole system <pause dur="0.3"/> of imperial government had shifted away from it <pause dur="0.9"/> those <pause dur="0.7"/> who <pause dur="0.5"/> were historians and remembered the republic <pause dur="0.4"/> remembered <pause dur="0.5"/> an age <pause dur="0.2"/> of # <pause dur="0.5"/> civil war <pause dur="3.5"/> the imperial family <pause dur="0.6"/> had not been

particularly fortunate <pause dur="0.3"/> in producing a lot of surviving <pause dur="0.4"/> offspring <pause dur="2.1"/> and this is where <pause dur="0.8"/> a collateral branch <pause dur="0.4"/> comes on the scene <pause dur="0.6"/> the famous episode of <pause dur="0.5"/> poor old Uncle Claudius <pause dur="0.5"/> being found hiding behind a curtain <pause dur="0.7"/> by members of the Praetorian Guard the imperial bodyguard <pause dur="1.2"/> of him being taken off to their camp outside Rome <pause dur="0.2"/> and hailed as emperor <pause dur="0.5"/> thereafter <pause dur="0.3"/> foisted <pause dur="0.3"/> upon the senate <pause dur="0.6"/> who <pause dur="0.3"/> without forces of their own had no choice <pause dur="0.5"/> but to <pause dur="0.2"/> accede <pause dur="2.4"/> that change <pause dur="0.2"/> of <pause dur="2.5"/> government <pause dur="0.8"/> the accession <pause dur="0.3"/> of Claudius was in fact to bring in <pause dur="0.4"/> one of the <pause dur="0.3"/> major <pause dur="0.4"/> changes of policy as well <pause dur="3.5"/> it seems to have coincided <pause dur="0.2"/> give or take a year or two <pause dur="0.6"/> with the arrival within Rome of another refugee <pause dur="1.7"/> a man that our sources <pause dur="0.9"/> writing in Greek <pause dur="0.9"/> give the name <pause dur="0.8"/> of <pause dur="1.1"/> Berikos <pause dur="1.0"/> who i've given up here <pause dur="0.4"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on board" iterated="n"/> and that name <pause dur="0.3"/> is usually interpreted as the Greek form <pause dur="0.3"/> of Verica <pause dur="0.7"/> Verica <pause dur="0.3"/> King <pause dur="0.4"/> of the Atrebates of Hampshire <pause dur="2.2"/> we're also told <pause dur="0.7"/> that Britain at this period <pause dur="2.2"/> was in tumult <pause dur="1.4"/> as a result <pause dur="0.4"/> of <pause dur="0.2"/> Roman failure <pause dur="0.7"/> to return to the island <pause dur="0.7"/> a number <pause dur="0.4"/> of <pause dur="0.7"/> refugees <pause dur="8.7"/> and

undoubtedly <pause dur="0.4"/> Verica or Berikos <pause dur="0.4"/> would have been one of these <pause dur="2.1"/> you'll find this on page forty-five <pause dur="0.4"/> of the source book <pause dur="2.2"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> <reading>Aulus Plautius who was # <pause dur="0.2"/> to be <pause dur="0.4"/> Claudius' <pause dur="0.2"/> general of the expedition <pause dur="0.7"/> made a campaign to Britain since a certain Berikos <pause dur="0.3"/> who had been driven out of the island as a result of an <trunc>up</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> uprising <pause dur="0.3"/> had persuaded Claudius to send a force there</reading> <pause dur="0.7"/> so Berikos <pause dur="0.5"/> ostensibly <pause dur="1.2"/> according to our sources and it's Dio Cassius who's fairly late but perhaps <pause dur="0.4"/> to be believed <pause dur="1.9"/> was one element <pause dur="0.2"/> suggesting <pause dur="0.2"/> that Claudius might invade Britain there were other <pause dur="0.8"/> things coming together <pause dur="0.2"/> at this same time <pause dur="1.3"/> which would <pause dur="0.3"/> lead to <pause dur="0.4"/> that expedition <pause dur="0.3"/> into Britain <pause dur="0.4"/> and what were these <pause dur="1.0"/> well first of all i've already mentioned that there's a shortage <pause dur="0.3"/> of <pause dur="1.1"/> dynastic links <pause dur="2.2"/> essentially <pause dur="0.4"/> the Julian line <pause dur="0.3"/> the Julian family <pause dur="2.2"/> as rulers of Rome <pause dur="0.4"/> established by Julius Caesar <pause dur="0.5"/> died with Gaius Caligula <pause dur="0.7"/> Claudius <pause dur="0.7"/> was related to the royal family <pause dur="1.7"/> but not <trunc>di</trunc> directly <pause dur="0.2"/> through a blood link <pause dur="2.4"/> his line goes back in fact to the empress

Livia <pause dur="0.9"/> Augustus' wife <pause dur="1.2"/> by children that she had had <pause dur="0.7"/> as a result of a previous marriage <pause dur="0.7"/> so there's a collateral line <pause dur="0.3"/> so Claudius doesn't have the immediate kudos <pause dur="0.7"/> of being of the Julian line <pause dur="0.9"/> direct <pause dur="0.2"/> descendance <pause dur="0.4"/> even if that's a bit of a fiction <pause dur="0.6"/> of # <pause dur="1.2"/> Julius Caesar himself <pause dur="1.9"/> secondly <pause dur="0.2"/> there was the personality of Claudius himself <pause dur="1.7"/> from birth Claudius had been something of a physical wreck <pause dur="2.1"/> he <pause dur="0.3"/> limped <pause dur="1.4"/> probably as the result of a <pause dur="0.6"/> of a type of infantile polio <pause dur="1.8"/> he stammered <pause dur="0.6"/> very badly especially when he was nervous <pause dur="0.9"/> he had a nervous <pause dur="0.2"/> tic <pause dur="0.2"/> which caused his <pause dur="0.2"/> head <pause dur="0.5"/> to flick <pause dur="0.4"/> every now and again <pause dur="1.8"/> and <pause dur="0.7"/> he had a tongue <pause dur="0.2"/> which we're told was <pause dur="0.3"/> too large for his mouth <pause dur="0.4"/> protruded <pause dur="0.5"/> and caused him to dribble <pause dur="1.3"/> he was given to epileptic fits on occasion <pause dur="4.0"/> and he had a head <pause dur="0.4"/> perched on the top of a very long neck <pause dur="0.5"/> so he was something akin to an ostrich <pause dur="1.0"/> and if <pause dur="0.2"/> the representations of him especially the <pause dur="0.3"/> bronze representation that was fished out of from the British rivers <pause dur="0.5"/> is anything to go by <pause dur="0.4"/> he had <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="1.7"/> jug <pause dur="0.3"/>

handle <pause dur="0.2"/> ears <pause dur="0.2"/> very protruding ears <pause dur="0.2"/> so he's not <pause dur="0.2"/> the Hollywood picture <pause dur="0.8"/> of <pause dur="0.4"/> a great <pause dur="0.5"/> Roman emperor <pause dur="3.3"/> as a result of this <pause dur="0.2"/> he'd spent virtually the whole of his life in seclusion <pause dur="0.6"/> as an imperial joke <pause dur="0.8"/> and an embarrassment <pause dur="0.3"/> you can well understand why <pause dur="0.5"/> the few times <pause dur="0.2"/> according to Suetonius that he was trundled out <pause dur="0.3"/> in order to make a public appearance <pause dur="0.4"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> to be installed even <pause dur="0.6"/> theoretically <pause dur="0.2"/> in some kind of official <pause dur="0.5"/> capacity <pause dur="0.8"/> the whole thing fell to pieces because he'd either have an epileptic fit or he couldn't <pause dur="0.2"/> manage the words <pause dur="4.2"/> so <pause dur="1.9"/> he was an <pause dur="0.2"/> an unprepossessing figure as emperor <pause dur="1.6"/> because he'd been kept in seclusion he'd never <pause dur="0.5"/> had any experience <pause dur="0.4"/> of military <pause dur="0.3"/> life <pause dur="1.3"/> and Roman <pause dur="0.8"/> emperors were not simply <pause dur="0.7"/> figurehead <pause dur="0.6"/> civil <pause dur="2.7"/> quasi-kings <pause dur="2.6"/> each one who had sat upon the throne <pause dur="0.6"/> had felt it <unclear>incumbent</unclear> upon himself <pause dur="0.4"/> to <pause dur="0.2"/> establish <pause dur="0.2"/> a military <pause dur="0.5"/> prowess <pause dur="0.3"/> now this was easy enough for Julius Caesar because <pause dur="0.4"/> by the time he became dictator of Rome <pause dur="0.4"/> he had a long history <pause dur="0.6"/> of military

activity <pause dur="0.2"/> behind him <pause dur="1.7"/> his successor Octavian and then there was Augustus <pause dur="0.9"/> did the same <pause dur="0.3"/> not only did he <pause dur="0.8"/> come out victorious against <pause dur="0.4"/> his <pause dur="0.3"/> rival <pause dur="0.3"/> from imperial <unclear>honours</unclear> <pause dur="0.7"/> # Mark Antony <pause dur="1.5"/> but he was also <pause dur="0.5"/> engaged in a number <pause dur="0.3"/> of campaigns <pause dur="0.6"/> his successor Tiberius <pause dur="0.5"/> was in his youth <pause dur="0.3"/> a prominent <pause dur="0.3"/> military <pause dur="0.2"/> figure <pause dur="0.3"/> a prominent general and a successful one <pause dur="1.2"/> Gaius Caligula <pause dur="1.3"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> well Gaius Caligula had to rely upon the fact that his father <pause dur="0.6"/> was an extremely successful <pause dur="0.4"/> Roman <pause dur="0.5"/> general <pause dur="0.9"/> his father Germanicus <pause dur="0.3"/> brother to <pause dur="0.2"/> Tiberius <pause dur="1.8"/> none of that <pause dur="0.3"/> was applicable <pause dur="0.5"/> to <pause dur="0.3"/> Claudius <pause dur="0.3"/> yet Roman <pause dur="0.3"/> emperors <pause dur="0.2"/> were equated with <pause dur="1.4"/> military success <pause dur="3.4"/> Claudius <pause dur="0.2"/> was the choice <pause dur="0.3"/> of the Praetorian Guard <pause dur="2.2"/> they made him <pause dur="1.2"/> Claudius probably realized that they could just as easily <pause dur="0.3"/> unmake him <pause dur="1.1"/> and probably more quickly <pause dur="1.0"/> via well a well aimed knife <pause dur="2.1"/> so <pause dur="0.7"/> from the point of view of sheer survival <pause dur="0.7"/> Claudius <pause dur="0.2"/> really had to <pause dur="0.4"/> prove himself <pause dur="1.8"/> a worthy

successor <pause dur="0.8"/> to the great military figures <pause dur="0.4"/> who had gone before him <pause dur="2.6"/> and what better way <pause dur="0.5"/> to do that <pause dur="2.4"/> than to go beyond the achievements <pause dur="0.4"/> of the <pause dur="0.5"/> founder of the dynasty <pause dur="0.4"/> Julius Caesar himself <pause dur="0.6"/> who had invaded Britain on two occasions but had not conquered it <pause dur="0.5"/> if Claudius could now invade Britain and <pause dur="0.2"/> conquer it <pause dur="0.6"/> that would link him directly <pause dur="0.6"/> with <pause dur="0.4"/> somebody like Julius Caesar <pause dur="0.9"/> and would take him <pause dur="0.6"/> into an altogether different <pause dur="0.5"/> echelon <pause dur="0.2"/> from the point of <pause dur="0.8"/> of # <pause dur="1.4"/> standing within <pause dur="0.4"/> Rome <pause dur="2.4"/> there were other things that <pause dur="0.2"/> suggested <pause dur="0.7"/> an expedition to Britain would make sense <pause dur="3.6"/> Gaius Caligula's expeditions <pause dur="0.3"/> onto the Rhine frontier <pause dur="0.7"/> had <pause dur="1.7"/> produced two new legions which were stationed there <pause dur="1.9"/> this meant <pause dur="0.4"/> that the Rhine frontier was now the <pause dur="0.2"/> most heavily defended frontier of the whole empire <pause dur="1.1"/> and that Claudius probably realized that where there was a concentration of troops there was also a concentration of power <pause dur="1.8"/> all emperors realized that the true <pause dur="0.8"/> source of their power <pause dur="0.7"/> was not with the senate <pause dur="0.3"/> but <trunc>arc</trunc> actually

with the Roman army <pause dur="0.8"/> this is why they were all very careful to keep the army <pause dur="0.5"/> happy <pause dur="0.7"/> and employed <pause dur="0.2"/> idle hands <pause dur="0.3"/> start <pause dur="0.2"/> hatching plots <pause dur="2.4"/> so the Rhine army is overmanned <pause dur="0.7"/> what can you do about it he couldn't simply dissolve those two extra legions that Gaius <trunc>ci</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> Caligula <pause dur="0.6"/> had # <pause dur="0.7"/> had created that <pause dur="0.3"/> dissolving a legion <pause dur="0.4"/> cashiering it <pause dur="0.2"/> was a mark of disgrace wouldn't do that <pause dur="1.3"/> but move legions into Britain <pause dur="0.6"/> as a an occupying force <pause dur="0.7"/> did make sense <pause dur="0.8"/> they would be cut off by the channel <pause dur="0.6"/> they would have quite enough <pause dur="0.5"/> on their hands <pause dur="0.5"/> to keep them busy <pause dur="0.3"/> and out of any thoughts of creating trouble <pause dur="2.0"/> additionally Britain <pause dur="0.7"/> who had been made to pay <pause dur="0.5"/> for that occupying <pause dur="0.2"/> power <pause dur="0.7"/> leave them on the continent <pause dur="0.5"/> and the empire as it <pause dur="0.2"/> is currently <pause dur="0.9"/> # established <pause dur="0.2"/> has to pay <pause dur="0.5"/> expand the empire slightly <pause dur="0.3"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> the new opened areas <pause dur="0.3"/> themselves have to pay <pause dur="1.9"/> there was also the fact that Gaius Caligula had been very very <pause dur="0.3"/> profligate in spending money <pause dur="2.1"/> and the treasury <pause dur="0.6"/> was somewhat bare <pause dur="0.8"/> Britain <pause dur="1.2"/> offered <pause dur="1.1"/> by the time that we get to the forties A-D <pause dur="1.3"/> a

better prospect <pause dur="0.3"/> of producing a profit for the Roman empire <pause dur="0.5"/> than had been the case <pause dur="0.7"/> in Julius Caesar's day <pause dur="2.7"/> Britain also of course <pause dur="0.4"/> offered the potential of a pool of manpower <pause dur="0.4"/> Rome was always on the lookout for new <pause dur="0.7"/> sources of manpower <pause dur="0.2"/> especially for providing auxiliary troops in the army <pause dur="2.0"/> so there were a lot of things within Britain <pause dur="0.7"/> that <pause dur="0.4"/> made sense <pause dur="0.7"/> for anybody looking around <pause dur="0.5"/> for military activity <pause dur="1.2"/> there was also one other factor <pause dur="0.2"/> that i want to bring out before we end today <pause dur="1.2"/> and that is a <pause dur="1.2"/> a religious factor <pause dur="0.5"/> and also a sociological factor <pause dur="0.7"/> and this comes down to the Druids <pause dur="1.4"/> we know from our sources that Britain was the centre of <pause dur="0.9"/> well Druidism in inverted comma <pause dur="0.6"/> because what Druidism <pause dur="0.3"/> was we really don't know we know that there were Druids <pause dur="2.2"/> well let's say that there was the Druid problem <pause dur="1.1"/> now the Druids <pause dur="0.4"/> were <pause dur="0.2"/> a pagan <pause dur="1.3"/> priesthood <pause dur="1.0"/> which would normally have been <pause dur="0.3"/> perfectly <pause dur="0.4"/> easily accommodated <pause dur="0.4"/> within <pause dur="0.2"/> the pantheon <pause dur="0.4"/> of <pause dur="0.2"/> Rome <pause dur="0.6"/> the one thing that the Druids did that the Romans didn't

particularly like <pause dur="0.5"/> was <pause dur="0.3"/> human sacrifice and we'll come back to this when i <pause dur="0.3"/> talk about <pause dur="0.5"/> religion <pause dur="1.6"/> because human sacrifice was <pause dur="1.1"/> tantamount to murder it was murder in Roman law <pause dur="0.2"/> and was therefore illegal <pause dur="1.3"/> # <pause dur="1.6"/> Roman emperors in the past had tried to <pause dur="0.7"/> # mitigate <pause dur="0.9"/> the worst effects the worst behaviour of the Druids <pause dur="0.5"/> in their continental <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> <pause dur="0.4"/> of all the Celts <pause dur="0.3"/> in Gaul for instance <pause dur="2.2"/> but Claudius seems to have set his sights upon <pause dur="0.7"/> getting rid of human sacrifice altogether <pause dur="0.4"/> and the only way that he could do this was <pause dur="0.3"/> to overcome the problem <pause dur="0.5"/> in its <trunc>s</trunc> at its centre <pause dur="0.4"/> within Britain itself <pause dur="0.7"/> so the message today is that though we have problems <pause dur="0.5"/> in establishing some kind of <pause dur="0.4"/> viable <pause dur="0.7"/> #

history <pause dur="1.1"/> for the period between the departure of <pause dur="1.0"/> <trunc>s</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> Julius Caesar <pause dur="0.4"/> and the advent <pause dur="0.4"/> of the Claudian invasion <pause dur="0.5"/> but our <pause dur="0.2"/> evidence <pause dur="0.9"/> is thin on the ground <pause dur="1.1"/> and the <pause dur="0.8"/> recent interpretation or reinterpretation of that <trunc>ed</trunc> for that <pause dur="0.2"/> evidence <pause dur="0.3"/> creates problems for us <pause dur="0.3"/> in seeing movements and developments <pause dur="0.3"/> within Britain <pause dur="2.8"/> when we come to Claudius we see the convergence <pause dur="0.4"/> of a number of factors <pause dur="0.6"/> which all point <pause dur="0.6"/> to the advantage for the emperor <pause dur="0.6"/> of <pause dur="0.9"/> physical <pause dur="0.4"/> military intervention <pause dur="0.4"/> by Rome <pause dur="0.4"/> into Britain <pause dur="0.6"/> and what <pause dur="0.4"/> form that military intervention took <pause dur="0.6"/> we'll deal with tomorrow