Recent reading has made me a little sceptical of claims made by the ‘victors’ in battle. As noted recently, Oliver Cromwell was not above spinning his victories, to the extent of turning losing draws into wins and generally bigging up his role in all and every combat he took part in.
I suspect that Julius Caesar was another such spinner of the truth. As you
might recall, I have been fighting my way through his first invasion of
Britain. The invasion onto the beach was a close run thing but Julius finally
managed to overcome the opposition. The second action was the Ancient Britons
attempting to stop the Romans from collecting their corn. A lucky bow shot felled
the Celtic general at an unfortunate time and Caesar managed to rescue his
troops.
The third and final action is described in The Conquest of Gaul
VI.35. After the hazardous extrication of his foragers, bad weather stopped
military activity. The natives spent the time gathering a large force of
infantry and cavalry. Julius drew up his forces in front of the camp and
‘before the engagement had lasted long the enemy were overpowered and took to
flight. Julius boasts that he had acquired thirty horsemen, and the Romans
pursued. The Britons then sued for peace, according to our Julius, and so the
Romans sailed back to Gaul.
Forgive me for being a little suspicious, but why, after all that, did
the Romans sail away? If he had been that successful why not conquer the place
and have done with it? After all, the Romans had largely supplied themselves
from the Celtic grain, had they not? Or is it all just a tissue of half-truths
put forward by Jules to cover over an not very successful foray to the edge of
the known world?
Still, the third battle was to be wargamed. A Roman force of twenty
infantry bases (17 legionaries, 2 bows and a bolt shooter) against twenty
Ancient Britons (3 light chariots, 3 light cavalry, 3 skirmishers and 11 tribal
foot infantry). The Romans would miss their cavalry, but I did not think
Caesar’s claim of having thirty and implying that they were important, at least
in the pursuit phase, merited representation.
The problem Caesar has is that he has an entirely pedestrian army against
one which is fifty per cent light troops and the rest heavies who can charge
any of his bases that might be disrupted. He cannot afford to wait for the
enemy to come to him, as they will come and slowly shoot him to bits. So he has
to attack.
The key combats were in the left centre, where Celtic charges saw off four cohorts, and on the near side (Roman right) where the skirmishers flanked a charge and turned a recoil result into a rout. The centre-left of the Roman lines also, slightly earlier, disintegrated under the impact of the tribal foot charging cohorts which were no longer in a group with their neighbours due to heavy fire from the skirmishers.
You can also see some rather exposed Roman archers in the centre, who are
about to be charged and routed by some tribal foot and, on the near side, the
British skirmishers who did for the nearest cohorts of Jules’ other legion. Caesar
was later heard to describe them as ‘those flankers’. At least, it is thought
that is what he said. By contacting the Roman flank as the charge went in they
turned a recoil result, which the legion could have stood, into a rout.
At that point, the Romans had lost eight bases out of twenty, and their
morale slumped to rout. The British were not undamaged, having lost two tribal
foot bases in the centre and the right flank skirmishers to Roman archery.
Slightly amusingly, these routing tribal foot and some Roman cohorts landed up
running practically side by side…
And so another campaign finished, this one based on Caesar’s own account.
With the exception of the final battle, it went fairly much as Julius claimed it
did. It seems to me that it might have been rather tougher than his spin
allowed for. As for the final wargame, well, Julius’ luck did rather abandon
him; some of his rolls were unfortunate. On the other hand, his total lack of
cavalry was always going to make it a tough game. He has to attack to have any
chance, and that lays the legions open to disruption from the skirmishing light
horse and chariots and then the disrupted cohorts being picked off in detail by
charges of the tribal foot.
Having played through the games and pondered Caesar’s accounts with a bit
more of a sceptical eye, I suspect that Julius was spinning his adventures a
bit. After all, if he won such an emphatic victory at the end as he claimed,
why did he so readily agree to terms and push off back to Gaul more or less on
the same day?
Ramesses was another great spinner of tales.
ReplyDeleteI suspect that behind every 'great' general was a spin doctor, if it wasn't the man himself.
Delete"Winning the debrief" has always been the most important skill for any officer on the make...
ReplyDeleteThat certainly describes our Julius. As, I think Churchill said 'Of course history will treat me kindly. I intend to write it'.
DeleteTrash talk through the ages. :)
ReplyDeleteThe ancient Britons didn't exactly have a Rome correspondent to give their side of the story.
DeleteFind me one who leader, general, domestic press who did not! The English histories love to report the expression 'to lie like a bulletin', but they ALL spun like tops. It was Wellington who told Beresford to 'write me a victory' after Albuera.
ReplyDeleteBig Juli is an interesting case. No doubt inflation and aggrandisement for the readers at home, but don't forget he had heaps of troops and generals to call b.s. on his claims. They were not above calling him the 'queen of Bithynia' after all. It was standard Roman history to say that half a dozen Romans beat 10 000, we killed them all and two of us got a scratch! If it was complete bunkum though, we'd have heard about it in some way. So, likely correct in general if not in the specifics. That is the general, learned conclusion that I have heard.
Regards, James
Well, as Churchill is reported to have said 'Of course history will be kind to me. I intend to write it.' Again, the Romans won the war but perhaps not as many battles as Julius might like to claim. Battles are the highlights of any campaign, after all. Getting into the field before the natives have planted their crops, and staying there until after they have harvested them leads to victory but not spectacular or heroic victory. But that is what we like to read about.
Delete