The Ancients - The Roman Invasion of Britain

Episode Date: January 16, 2025

43 AD. A large Roman armada sails across the perilous English Channel intent on conquest. It is the dawn of one of the most seminal moments in Britain’s ancient history.In this episode of The Ancients, Tristan Hughes is joined by archeologist Duncan Mackay to follow in the footsteps of Emperor Claudius, his general Aulus Plautius and the thousands of Roman soldiers charged with conquering Britain - a mysterious island at the edge of the world. Together they unpack the story of the invasion, exploring the rationale of the Roman leaders, the political contours of the British tribes who faced up to them and the arrival of the Emperor to Colchester on elephant-back.Presented by Tristan Hughes. Audio editor is Aidan Lonergan, the producer is Joseph Knight. The senior producer is Anne-Marie Luff.Theme music from Motion Array, all other music from Epidemic SoundThe Ancients is a History Hit podcast.Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week and ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe. You can take part in our listener survey here: https://uk.surveymonkey.com/r/6FFT7MK

Hi, I'm Tristan Hughes and if you would like the ancient ad free, get early access and bonus episodes, sign up to History Hit. With a History Hit subscription, you can also watch hundreds of hours of original documentaries, including my recent documentary all about Petra and the Nabataeans, and enjoy a new release every week. Sign up now by visiting HistoryHit.com slash subscribe. that is today the English Channel. On board these ships are thousands of soldiers, infantry, cavalry, siege equipment, engineers, you name it. This is an invasion force. For more than a hundred years the Romans have known of Britain, this mysterious island on the edge of the known world. Now they sought to conquer it. It's the Ancients on History hit.

I'm Tristan Hughes, your host. Today we're covering one of the most seminal moments in Britain's ancient history, the Roman invasion of Britain by the Emperor Claudius, his general Aulus Claudius and their legions in 43 AD. We're going to cover everything from the context behind the invasion, why the Romans decided to invade Britain then, to the events of the invasion itself, including the arrival of Emperor Claudius in Colchester with elephants, to accept the surrenders of British chiefs. So yes, a Roman Emperor complete with his personal Praetorian guard and elephants once

saw the sunny sights of Essex. As always, it's quite the story. Now our guest for today's episode is the author Duncan Mackay. Duncan is the author of the book Echo Lands, a brilliant in-depth exploration of Boudicca and her revolt, so naturally there will be some talk on Boudicca and the Iceni in this chat too. Duncan, he is an expert on these early years of Roman rule in Britain, including the initial invasion and the resistance to the Romans. This was a great chat. Duncan's a wonderful speaker and I really do hope you enjoy.

Duncan it is such a pleasure to have you back on the podcast. Welcome back. Thank you, Tristan. Absolute pleasure to be back. Love coming on The Ancients. Wonderful. It's been over a year now since we last chatted about Budica and Budica's battles against the Romans, largely aligning with your very interesting book, Echo Lands. But what we're talking about now, what happens before the Roman invasion of Britain, this is an important precursor to that, isn't it? It explains how and why the Romans, they are able to set up this significant foothold in the south of Britain. Yeah, the Roman conquest of Britain, I mean, really it's one of the most monumental events

that ever takes place in British history. It really defines what will happen to Britain for the next three and a half centuries. And with very long lasting echoes after that right through to the present day, Britain wasn't unknown to the Romans obviously and Julius Caesar came across in 55 and 54 BC. And I think that's what really sets this story in motion. You could question if Caesar hadn't been to Britain, what would have happened in AD 43? Would anybody ever have attempted it? It's because Caesar really opens up this possibility, the idea that Britain can be invaded. For the Romans, Britain was a rather mystical place. Caesar was obviously in northern Gaul and so to him, it was just an island across the sea. I

don't think he saw it in those terms. But to the people back in Rome, it was just an island across the sea. I don't think he saw it in those terms. To the people back in Rome, it was this mystical place that some people might even have questioned whether it really existed at all. For Caesar, getting over to Britain, taking an expeditionary force, no matter what he did, no matter how successful or unsuccessful those campaigns were, and it must be said, they weren't really that successful. Getting an army there, getting back, he's gone beyond the edge of the world. This is, as they say, moon landing stuff. That really brings the idea of Britain into the Roman mindset. Keeping on Caesar then, first of all, isn't it? Because they say you have those Julius

Caesar ventures to Britain, but conquest is not really on his agenda, shall we say at that time, or conquering the whole island. It is for him just to say, just as he did when he crossed the Rhine into Germany, no one's done this before. I have, adding to my reputation as an extraordinary person. When we get to the invasion we're talking about today, this is a completely different Kessler fish to Caesar some 100 years earlier. Yeah.

Caesar uses the excuse that the Britons raiding the Gauls, so he needs to go over there. This is about Caesar's personal glory and it works. Yeah, there are massive celebrations in Rome after Caesar's got there. It turns him into an absolute hero. When he goes away, he doesn't actually bring much plunder with him. People make jokes about how little plunder he's brought, but it's been important in the fact that he's fact that he's made that first step. He also brings a lot of hostages with him. So the tribes that lay down their arms, some of which do it willingly, some of which he defeats, like the Catevalonni under Catevalonius, he beats in open battle. These people give lots of hostages and he takes those away. Now these aren't slaves, they're not prisoners as such. They're taken probably back to Rome and raised and educated as little

Romans. And this is part of that long reach of Rome because when these kids reach adulthood, they're going back to their roles in the elite of ancient British society. And they're coming with an appreciation of wine, the use of coins, Roman artwork, a knowledge of Latin. So in that hundred years after Caesar, particularly the tribes immediately north and south of the Thames, there's a lot of Roman influence there. And you could argue that Rome already has a sort of suzerainty over those southern tribes. I think we're going to be coming back to Colchester in a bit of time. And I know that it's a very important part of the work you've done Duncan as well. But are there these nodes of areas in southern Britain where these traders were going to and

from? In that period before the Roman invasion, if you were in that area, you would see more Roman imported goods or more Roman traders coming for whatever Britain's got or not that the Romans want. Do you see more of them in those areas compared to other areas that say further inland? Yeah, the interior of Britain, as Caesar would call it. He saw the interior of Britain as very backward. He said they wore fur and they just ate meat and didn't grow crops and things, which obviously we know is nonsense. But yeah, that was the interior of Britain was cut off. And it's interesting in that hundred years after Caesar, there's a tribe whose heartlands are in modern Hertfordshire, the Catavallone, who are really

dominating the south of Britain, it seems, both north and south of the Thames. Their heartlands are north of the Thames, but in that century, they assimilate the Trinivantes to the east and take over their capital at Camelord Dunan, what is now Colchester, and use that as their capital. But they also clearly have a lot of influence west of their territory going into the west country, but also they seem to hold sway over the whole south of the Thames area. They therefore seem quite aggressive, politically strong, but that means they dominate the trade across the channel. They dominate anything coming from the interior of Britain down to those southern ports. And so in many respects, I must make them very wealthy. And it's in

those territories, particularly north of the Thames, where in Hertfordshire and in Essex, where you're seeing huge amounts of amphorae of wine, you're seeing lots of Roma prestige goods. There's an amazing burial just outside Colchester where this presumably royal personage, one of the richest graves from pre-Roman Britain, has a medallion of the Emperor Augustus. It's that sort of thing. They're buying into the Rome in some ways. It's a seductive brand, if you like. The Leggiston burial is one of my favourite stories of Iron Age Britain.

You kind of said it in motion there already. In let's say 42 AD, what does it look like then? Is there this dominant power in the southeast of Britain that is looking a bit menacing at that time? What do we know about the whole state of Iron Age Britain just before the Romans decide to invade? Well, it's in a state of flux and I think that all ties into this idea of AD 43 and it being a good time to come. From about AD 9 or 10 through to about AD 40, you'd had a king, a very famous, very powerful king called Cunebellin or Cunebellinus, Shakespeare's Cymbeline or Kimbellline, all the same character. The Romans seem to see him as the quote unquote, King of the Britons. He's the guy. I think the general feeling is,

is that he was very friendly to Rome. He was probably perhaps, stroke we don't know, saw himself as a client of the Romans even before the conquest. Very friendly relations with the Romans. It's his death in 3940 that perhaps triggers one invasion attempt that's mooted but not carried out under Caligula, the Emperor Gaius. He assembles an invasion force. He takes his troops to the north coast but doesn't actually go over. They might have mutinied, but there's this whole strange story about him making them collect seashells in their helmets as the spoils of war. Oh yes. Conquering the sea kind of thing, isn't it? Yeah, madness. Absolutely. We don't know what happens there. Perhaps they mutiny, but he doesn't come over.

But that coincides with Cunabelin's death. Cunebelin had several sons. The two most important ones were Caroticus and Togedumnus. These sons seem to be much less pro-Roman. Somehow, there's a break from Rome with them and they carry on their empire building across the south and south of the Thames. One king of a tribe called the Atrebates is ousted by these sons, and he comes across to the continent to beg help from Claudius. He's a king that we call Verica based on the coins that were found of him, but Cassius Dio, who's our main source for this period, calls him Bericos, but it's clearly the same person. This gives Claudius the reason that he needs to come and invade. And Claudius is a brand new emperor. He's

come to the throne in AD 41 as part of a palace coup. Emperor Caligula, Gaius, has been assassinated by the Praetorian guard. and the man that most people would see as the least likely contender for emperor is raised to be emperor by the Praetorian Guard. And this is Claudius. His own family thought he was an idiot. He was far from being an idiot. He dribbled, he drooled, he had a stutter, he had a limp. He was not what the Romans saw as a natural emperor. Having been raised to be emperor, he needed military kudos. And so the invasion of Britain, what had Caesar done? Caesar had crossed to Britain and become almost a god in his own lifetime. So this is a fantastic propaganda stunt if Claudius can carry it out. And I'm guessing Claudius himself doesn't carry it out.

Who does he task with overseeing the invasion of Britain? Right. He picks a man called Aulus Plautius. Now, Plautius is an experienced general at that time. He's the governor of Pannonia, which I suppose northern Balkans, sort of Croatia sort of area. He's tasked with the invasion. And what we know is that he assembles an invasion force. Our main source for this period is Cassius Dio. There are a few other references, but really we're working from Dio and we should consider ourselves blessed. We have this account. It's a tragedy we don't have Tastis's account of this, but we do have Dio and it's a pretty good account.

Cassius Dio Duncan, for our listeners, he's writing in the third century, isn't he? In the early third century AD, so over 100 years after the invasion. Tacitus is writing close to the time, but as you say, we don't have Tacitus' account. We have this account by Cassius Dio, which he is writing later. But as you said, we should still be blessed that we do have this account. What does he say? He tells us that an invasion force is assembled on the north coast of France. He doesn't tell us how many legions, he doesn't tell us who. What we can work out is that we can say with, shall I say, tolerable certainty, there were four legions, the second, the ninth, the 14th and the 20th. That was about 20,000 legionaries and probably a similar number

of auxiliaries. So an expeditionary force of about 40,000 men. This is an extraordinarily large army to be taking across the channel. They cobbled together a huge fleet, many of which are probably left over from Caligula's aborted campaign. They build new ships, they commandeer lots. But by the summer of AD 43, they're ready to go across. The Ninth Legion has come from Pannonia with Plotius. They were based there and the others were based on the Rhine frontier and they've all come north to northern France. The Roman army doesn't really enjoy getting into ships to cross the English Channel. It was always problematic. Caesar had suffered terrible storms on both of his expeditions that really hampered him. But I think crucially in AD 16, a general called Germanicus had his army

in the North Sea coming to winter quarters and they met a storm and he lost a lot of ships. He lost a lot of men. This was easily within living memory. It wasn't very long before. A lot of those soldiers had been drowned, a lot were shipwrecked. Some were taken as slaves, some were ransomed back. Some ended up in Britain, shipwrecked in Britain and were handed back by the British tribes. They came back with these terrifying tales, sea monsters, were-creatures, headhunters, the lot. So crossing the channel was this terrifying prospect. They refused to board the boats. There is basically a mutiny of this entire army just saying, we're not going. And Claudius has

no idea what to do. The emperor's freedman, Claudius' freedman, a man called Narcissus, eventually addresses the troops. This is an ex-slave who's been freed, isn't he? You see them associated with some of these Julio-Claudian emperors, these kind of advisor figures. Very much so. A Greek ex-slave. So for the troops, he's so much below them, even though he's the emperor's man, they're citizens, they're Romans. This is a Greek ex-slave who's trying to implore them to get into the boats instead of their own general doing it. So they start shouting at him and heckling him and shouting about Saturnalia, this feast when slaves exchange clothes with their masters.

And it seems that they're then shamed into boarding the transports. This clearly takes quite a long time to resolve because Dio Cassius says that they then embark late in the season. Because of this, it's taken a while to resolve. They're going over much later, but he gets them on their ships and they do embark for Britain. Mason- We've late in the season, as a campaigning season, we don't mean like November, December, is this let's say like August time or September time do we presume? The Roman campaigning season I suppose started in fairly early spring, so how late in the season he's talking about. As we will see, we actually need quite a lot of time to fit

all of the events into this summer because of what's going to come. So when we say late in the season, yeah, we're not talking August, September, We're talking sort of later spring or earlier summer, I think. Understood. Because we still have a lot to fit into this campaigning season. Right. Because I remember when Caesar crosses the first, like his first invasion of Britain, it's like late in August or something like that and everyone's just like, this was his worst planned bag one, but it seems it's not the same case here. Okay, so they've boarded the boats finally, and this huge army is sailing across this scary stretch of water, a channel to Britain.

Big question, and one I love. Where do they land? Right. They're probably crossing at night. We're told that when they're mid-channel, everything goes horribly wrong. They're met by a contrary wind that starts blowing them off course. You've got to imagine the scene on that deck. The men are vomiting. They're terrified. It's nighttime. They can't see land. You're crossing at night without lighthouses or anything like that. That feels like a recipe for disaster at the start. Absolutely. This is the thing. It's utterly terrifying crossing the channel at that time. This is a hugely tidal, stormy water. It's not the Mediterranean. Everything looks black and

dark and terrifying. But DO tells us that while they were crossing and while everything was going horribly wrong, a shooting star crosses the sky from east to west. He says the direction in which they were bound, possibly. They were probably sailing from Boulogne. They would have been heading north probably. but this shooting star would have fallen over the great black hulk of Britannia in the distance. They take this as a great sign, a sign from Jupiter. They get their onshore breeze and they go. Where did they land? The shortest crossing is to Eastern Kent. This is what Caesar did. We don't know how many ships. Caesar had 800 ships when he came with five legions, but he didn't have auxiliaries.

Caesar came with a smaller number of men. There must have been a thousand ships or more. Logistically, this is a nightmare, getting that scale of army across the channel. The shortest hop, the safest hop, is to Kent. There's another argument that the fleet went to the Solent. Now, I think irrespective of where the army would eventually land, they still headed for Kent. And then if there was an army going across to the Solent, they'd have hugged the coast and gone west. But getting an army straight across from France, directly to the Solent, huge distance, against the prevailing winds, very difficult task. So they're heading for Kent, and I would suggest that that's where the main beachhead is landed, at a place called Richborough. So let's explore Richborough then. So is this when we start seeing actual archaeological evidence for the invasion force landing here? Yeah, it's a fascinating landscape because it's in many aspects is the same, but it's

changed a lot because the Isle of Thanet, which is now that bulbous bit on the East Cain coast, that was an actual island and it was separated from the mainland by the Wandsome Channel. Ridgeborough was itself a tiny island just off the coast at the mouth of the Wandsome Channel. But it was close enough that you could actually need to take boats to the mainland. You could build a causeway across to the mainland. It's an absolutely superb place to land. It's got a lot going for it. And of course, this was old territory. Julius Caesar had also harbored his ships in the Wandsome Channel. The first Caesarian fort

has actually recently been found there on the Isle of Thanedd in Ebb's fleet, in almost the same harbour. This is good ground that they know is a good sheltered place. One thing we've got to consider is how much – you're not just landing an army. You're not just landing animals. You need a logistics base. Until that army of 40,000 men and many thousands of animals, until they can gain the hinterland, gain enough fields, enough landscape of fodder and forage and a clean water source to provide for that many people, every single thing they eat, everything they drink needs to come off those ships. It's a huge logistical task.

You need a base. And Richborough, the little island of Richborough is a very, very good place to turn into that base. It's a secure landing base. And remarkably, DO tells us they land without opposition. It's absolutely great. These men who have been so terrified, they've crossed the channel, they've had a sign from Jupiter, they've landed, there's been no opposition and they've got this fantastic beachhead where they can unload the ships. Mason- So they unload and how long is it before they start heading in land and they ultimately do face opposition? As you say, it's lovely that they have this beachhead so ships can go to and from there behind them so they're ferrying in more goods all the time and extending that beachhead. How long before they face opposition?

Pesce- We don't know how long they spend making the beachhead. There are very early Claudian ditches there at Richborough, so this is the fantastic archaeology. They clearly are landing there, even if they also land elsewhere. The confusing bit of Dio is that he says they're split in three divisions to ensure a landing, which would be more problematic if they only came across in one division. shore a landing, which would be more problematic if they only came across in one division. Now we do not know what that means, whether it means they landed in three waves at the same place, whether they had three separate landing places. The logistical nightmare of having three separate beachheads and splitting the fleet into three, I think would strongly

argue that they were going for one beachhead but coming in separate waves, but that's an unknown. What DO does tell us is that they initially don't meet much opposition. The Britons have assembled an army to face this invasion. It never comes. There's been a mutiny. They find out about it and you can't have an enormous army just sitting there waiting. It'll exhaust all local pasture, all local food supplies. It either needs to move or just disperse. So presumably the Britons have dispersed and they need to be recalled and that takes time. Plotius begins to forge inland. He's not met by a great battle. He's met by guerrilla warfare. It's hit and run tactics, it's attacking his lines of communication. It's the sort of warfare that the Romans absolutely hate. It's very

much playing to the Britons' strength. The Britons are being very, very sophisticated in their warfare in this early phase. They were refusing to meet, perhaps unable to initially, but they're still refusing to meet the Romans in open battle. The Romans want an open battle. For the Britons, that's more problematic. Stig Brodersen The average warrior, the average ancient Britain warrior at that time, what should we be imagining? Should we imagine painted all over, spear, sling, shield, heavily armoured? What should we be imagining? Tristan McNeill It's a great point to bring in at this moment actually, Tristan. We really should take a very quick look at how these armies differed. Your average British warrior, it's very difficult.

We don't know what the normal average British warrior would have looked like, but you would have had an elite who would have been very richly adorned, very well armed. They may well have had male shirts, bronze helmets, big oval shield, spear, richly decorated sword, but that's the elite. Your average British warrior is a farmer. It's a citizen militia, if you like. So they would have been going into battle with very little in the way of armor. Perhaps some of them would have had shields made of birch bark, some perhaps of wicker, some with more sophisticated shields perhaps. Probably only few had swords and many would have been armed with spears. Certainly slings. The bow and arrow is actually fairly absent in the

late Prussian age. So certainly slings are the weapon for long range firing. But if you contrast that to the Romans, every single Roman soldier is armored. Every single one has a helmet. Every single one has a sword and a spear and a shield. So the lowest ranking soldier, your lowest auxiliary soldier in the Roman army is at least as well armed and armoured as your richest British warrior. The legionaries in this period, it's a debatable point, but I think the Roman legionary of the mid-first century was probably the best armed, armoured, equipped, trained, disciplined soldier of the entire ancient world. You always have a compromise of armouring soldiers. You can

make any soldier invulnerable, but they're so heavy they can't do their job. That mid-first century Roman legionary, the Gallic Weisenhauer style helmet, the Lorica segmentata armor, the big curved rectangular shield, the Gladius Hispaniensis short sword, I think that's probably the greatest compromise and balance of armor versus mobility and being equipped for the job you need to do that any soldier has ever achieved on any battlefield in history. Should we also mention quickly then also that other kind of psychological weapon that the Romans have that I'm presuming the Britain certainly didn't have, which was catapult siege equipment. I guess that other part, which is I don't want to say special forces,

but those scouts, those special units they also had, exploring the terrain in front of the Roman army, the speculatories or what have they called, these whole different parts of the army that make the legions so formidable alongside these heavily armoured individual soldiers. Yeah. And then that's the thing. The Roman army is so modern in that sense. It looks to us like a modern army and it sets up lines of communication and it's lines of command. It's very, very regimented. As you say, it has heavy artillery, field artillery, and absolutely reconnaissance is absolutely key. They're very big on reconnaissance. That's not to say that the British army wasn't well organized and that they didn't have scouts, but they don't have that same control over large numbers of troops. The Britons, it's a mishmash of different tribes,

different loyalties, different leaders all trying to work together. They might come under a commander like Karatikas or Togadumnus and all fight under that one command, but it's much more fragmented. I think the army of the Britons, when you start having big numbers, it's very difficult to control in many respects in the way that a Roman commander can control with his lines of command and their signaling equipment and whatever else they have. Yeah. So are there any attempts as the Romans are advancing, there's this guerrilla warfare kind of harassing the Roman column as they go along, then fading back into the trees and the terrain that they know. Are there any attempts by the Britons to make more of a stand? Do they have a defensive

position that they decide that they actually probably have a potential opportunity of holding the Romans out? They see an advantage there. Do their tactics ever change from guerrilla warfare as the Romans keep marching on? They finally make their first stand from behind a river. I think this again, you could argue that's because they have yet to reach full strength, but it's the first major obstacle the Romans come to, so they decide to make a stand there. It's also very clever. They know you should not be meeting the Romans in the open field, man to man, if you like. If you're going, you put Trump or the Romans at a disadvantage and that disadvantage here is going

to be a river crossing. Which river, Tristan, is the big question. This has become known, this first stand of the Britons has become known as the Battle of the Medway. Britain's has become known as the Battle of the Medway. Based on the Kent landing theory, if they forge inland from Richborough westwards, they're going to eventually come to the River Medway somewhere near Rochester, modern day Rochester. That does seem to be the most likely candidate for the site of this battle. Obviously, if they're landing in the Solent, they might be crossing another river somewhere else, perhaps near Poulbre. But let's stick with the most established narrative, which is that they're being halted at the Medway. The Medway isn't a vast river, but it's a very wide valley, very wide, very shallow valley. So it's got extensive river margins. So we know with no idea what state the river was in. But the Romans need to get across. It's heavily guarded on the other side. So the Romans have a

ploy of attacking in more than one place. They send across this wonderful unit called the Batavians. Now, Dio doesn't call them the Batavians. He's writing in Greek and he calls them Keltoi, which are actually Celts. But everybody's happy he's talking about these German auxiliaries, the Batavians from the Rhine Delta. And they're about the closest thing the Romans have to an amphibious unit. They're absolutely famed for being able to cross rivers fully armed, fully armored, both infantry and cavalry. And if they're doing a combined assault, the cavalry will go across swimming their horses and taking infantrymen with them. So these guys are effectively amphibious troops. These are used as a faint, they're sent around for a surprise attack and they attack the British cavalry horses and chariot horses. They don't target the men, they target

the animals because if you just hamstring all the chariot pon. They don't target the men, they target the animals because if you just hamstring all the chariot ponies, you've disabled the chariots, you've got rid of a lot of the cavalry and wounded horses make a terrible noise. That's immediately going to draw terror, apprehension, attention. The Britons are going to, what's going on over there. That's where all our attention is diverted to. And while that's happening, the legionaries can cross the river. So you have this combined two-pronged assault. It's an absolutely vicious two-day battle. Huge casualties on both sides. There's nothing easy about this. The second legion win great glory in this under their leader Vespasian who at that time was a legionary legate. But obviously, in AD 69,

he's the last man standing in the year of the Four Emperors and will become emperor. His elder brother is also there winning laurels. So it's a great day for the Flavians this battle. But ultimately, they cross the Medway or whichever river it was, and the Britons fall back again. It is such an interesting battle. I know, as I said, we focus largely on the Medway and I don't think we have time to largely dissect that other potential of, as you say, Pooleboro, West Sussex. I was born in West Sussex, I was born in Chichester, so obviously got a bit of love for that other theory and it being the River Arran and not the River Medway. But that's

for another day. Regardless of what river it is, as you say, a bit of a tangent here because I've been studying Hannibal recently and it's interesting how you have either Gallic or Celtic tribes or Iron Age Britons, whoever, if they hear about a large army marching through their lands, they make the stand at a river boundary because they say it's menacing, it's a defensive place and sometimes they'll just expect the other army to go away. It happens with Hannibal when he's crossing the River Rhone and similar tactics there. Hannibal sends part of his army upriver, they cross and get behind, and then he's able to cross the rest of his army from up front. It's so interesting that you've got a similar case

with the Britons and seeing it as a river boundary, which brings us on actually to talk about another river boundary. Because of course, you get past this unnamed river, but sooner or later, the Romans are going to hit the Thames. Is this another place where the Britons decide to make their stand? Is this another big obstacle for the Romans to cross? It is. This is where the different threads come together because firstly, he names the Thames. We know it is the Thames where the next stand takes place. Secondly, whether they're coming from Kent, whether they're coming from West Sussex and Hampshire, they're on much more confident ground here that they are crossing the Thames at whichever

landing theory you go for or even a combined landing theory with armies coming in different directions. They're going to be meeting somewhere on the Thames in the similar sort of area. Now then, that does open up the entire question of where on the Thames. Now, Dio says that the Britons crossed the Thames and the Romans tried to go after them, close to where the Thames turns into a great lake at high water. Now, that makes us think of the Thames estuary, the widest part of the Thames, where you saw at least that eastern end of the Thames where you're going to get a lot of flooding at high tide. That has brought about the theory that perhaps this crossing took place to the east of, well, east of London, perhaps out towards Graves End, Tilbury, that sort of area. It is possible other people have long said that they would need to go across a narrow part of the

Thames, a long way west of that, perhaps as far as Westminster, that sort of area. Now that's a distance of well over 20 miles along the Thames to choose from. I think the greatest confusion comes here because I'll just read you what Dio actually says when they reach the Thames. However, the Germans swam across again, and some others got over by a bridge a little way upstream, after which they assailed the barbarians from several sides at once. Fantastic. There's a bridge across the bridge. It's an off the cuff detail. But then you think, what bridge? Where? How far upstream is this bridge? Who built it? How long has it been there? That's

very interesting because the first bridgeable part of the Thames at that period is meant to be at London Bridge. That's a South Bank area. Yeah, absolutely. Even there, remember that when you stand and look at the Thames at London Bridge, it's what, a couple of hundred metres wide, it would have been double that at this point. It's a very controlled river today compared to what it was. It's been very much canalised. If you stand on the northern bank at London Bridge, the Roman riverfront is a hundred metres inland of that. So, the river's much wider. So, it's a big deal to make a bridge even then. Now, the arguments are, were the Britons capable of

building bridges over rivers? Yes, they were. Were they capable of bridging the Thames? More of a moot point. Was this a pontoon bridge that the Romans have thrown up that he's talking about? Did they bring pontoons with them? Have they had to build it? It's an off the cuff, very useful little piece of information that just raises so many questions. So we don't know where this river crossing took place anywhere in that 20-mile stretch. One tantalizing detail is that in London, where Roman Londinian would build up just over from their London Bridge, which is the same site as present London Bridge, there have been some very early, very early military ditches found that were clearly in use for a very short time before being backfilled. It has been mooted that possibly, just possibly,

this is Plotius' encampment on the north bank of the Thames after this initial crossing. Now, that doesn't mean he crossed there. He could have gone across much further east and then gone along the north bank of the Thames to the first suitable bridging point and built his bridge. But we don't know where they crossed, is the basic answer to that. But there's another battle on the Thames. The Romans cross again. Again, the amphibious troops go across and some cross by this enigmatic bridge, and the Britons are beaten again. By this point, Caraticus, one of the main war leaders, he's abandoned this fight. He's decided this is no longer worth fighting and

he's gone west. He will ultimately end up in what we now know as Wales, fomenting resistance amongst the hill tribes. His brother, Togedumnus, is, according to Dio, is killed in one of these fights, perhaps wounded and then killed. However, after the invasion, there is a very, very rich king who is not called Togedumnus, but he's called Togedumnus in the Chichester area after the invasion for many, many years, an incredibly rich, incredibly loyal client king. Now, those names are so similar that I keep getting them mixed up, Togadumnus, Togadumnus. And it has also been suggested, and it's such a convincing and likable story, that actually Togadumnus wasn't killed in these fights, he was turned. He lays down his arms on

the condition that he then gets a big chunk of territory, lots of cash. And of course, possibly this enormous, vast, incredibly rich, early Roman, very early Roman palace at Fishbourne might be part of that gift. So, son of Cunebelin, Togadumnus, was it the same as Togadumnus? It's very tantalizing. They're so similar, even when I'm talking about it. I constantly get the names mixed up. So, maybe he wasn't killed, but Caratacus certainly flees west. And at that point, Dio tells us that Claudius needs additional help here. So, he sends to Rome for Claudius. I don't think Claudius needed any help at all, but Claudius wants a piece of the action. Claudius wants to be in there at the kill when they seize this amazing regional power

base of Camelodunum, and that's going to be Claudius' triumph. So they dig in, they stop, they wait, and they sit for about a month and wait for Claudius to come all the way from Rome. In respect to Prodigy, he knows his place. He doesn't want to overstretch, does he, and potentially get the ire of the amphora and then maybe get his head on the chopping block or whatever. So he waits. Claudius comes, I'm guessing, and what does he bring with him?

Elephants, Tristan. He brings supposedly war elephants. Now, I think some people are thinking, really, Razor Library, did he bring elephants? Why not? I mean, this is his great triumph. This is the way that Claudius absolutely cements his claim to the Roman Empire and his right to be this amazing triumphal victorious military leader. So yeah, why not bring elephants? That's certainly written in the history. So Claudius, having arrived, Plotius then dusts his army down, they start marching and they go straight for Camillodunum. It is difficult to get by the assumption, the sneaking suspicion, and it's even mentioned in a later Roman text, that this was really just a stage show. It was put on for Claudius to earn his triumph. The Britons had already pretty much laid down their arms. But anyway, whether

it was a vicious fight for Camillodunum or whether it had already been pre-arranged, Claudius marches his war elephants into Camillodunum. The most important thing is that when he's there, he receives submissions. And this is really what will, I suppose, dictate the landscape of the Roman conquest for decades to come. We're told from a surviving chunk of a triumphal arch from Rome that 11 British kings laid down their arms to Claudius. What's interesting is that we don't know exactly where this happened. Two Colchester archaeologists, Christopher Hawkes and Philip Crummy, made a very good case for Claudius' temporary camp being tucked into the Iron Age dike systems that surround Colchester

at Lexton next to something called the Triple Dike. They've made a plan of the fortress sitting there, very, very convincing. They've got the river next to them to water all of their animals, a huge area for all of their baggage train. If we take that as being read, if we say that yes, that probably is the place, and if we, for the sake of fancy, say that the British kings came to lay down their arms at the Principia or headquarters of that fortress, they would have laid down their arms and Claudius would have accepted their submissions directly beneath what is now the Lexton Crown Public House in Colchester. So, it's a wonderful place to go and have a pint and actually contemplate the monumental shift of fortune and sovereignty

that takes place there, where these kings have come and laid down their arms and effectively sealed the fate of their peoples forevermore and returned to those peoples a little less kingly than they had left them. The kings and their territories, correct me if I'm wrong, is there one source which says what territories they controlled? Is there one which says one of these kings was from as far away as Orkney? It does. It is a much later writer suggests Orkney and we have to be suspicious of that. Certainly there's pottery up on Orkney from this period, but for the news to have got to Orkney that he was going to be there for them to lay down their arms to and for that

messenger to have got up there and people to have come down. Remember, Claudius is only in Britain for 16 days. He leaves very soon after that, doesn't he? Yeah. Yeah. So he's not in Britain for long. So yeah, the later reference to Orkney might be garbled, but it is certainly mentioned. It is certainly a possibility. I would get the impression it's much more the tribes of Southern Britain that are laying down their arms. But a lot of these will then become what we call client states. They rule with the approval of the Romans for at least the lifetime of that ruling monarch. They will be left relatively unmolested. And of

course, Roman warfare, I always use the word, perhaps I overuse it, but it was apocalyptic. If you went up against the Romans, they would slaughter your warriors wholesale. They would take slaves, devastate your areas, plunder it. You don't go into that unless you're pretty confident of winning or you're pretty confident that it's worth going down that path to save what you've got. If you can become a client, you're now ruling with Roman approval. You probably have to provide tribute, you have to provide young men for the auxiliary regiments, but you are left to get on with it with perhaps only a minimal Roman presence in your territory.

I'm presuming this would include that people that you've done a lot of work around, of course, with Boudicca and the like. I'm guessing that would include the Iceni. Yes, very much so. They were almost certainly one of the tribes that laid down their arms at that time. It may well have been their King Presutagus, who later comes in during Boudicca's story in AD 60. He dies in AD 59, AD 60. It may well have been him that laid down the arms of them. Let's move on now to the end. It feels like that moment is the official end of the Roman invasion of Britain, but we can almost leave it as a cliffhanger here, Duncan. This isn't

the end, is it? There's much more conquest, there's much more fighting to come for the Romans. The invasion is at an end, but in regards to the Roman consolidation and expansion in Britain, there's a lot more to come in the years that follow this event. Yes, there's 40 years of fighting ahead of them just to actually say that the Roman conquest itself is over. All that's flautious remains in Britain until AD 47, by which time he's really conquered and pacified a line behind the rivers Severn and Trent, pretty much delineated by what we call the Fosse Way, the Roman road, the Fosse Way, which I think contrary to some suggestions wasn't actually a frontier in any real terms. But that's the line that he'd

conquered pretty much, I suppose, from the Humber in the northeast to the X in the southwest. By and large had friendly buffer states beyond that. That was part of this process of them laying down their arms and accepting Roman suzerainty. You had a buffer beyond that of tribes which were fairly amenable, very heavily factionalized. The Brigantes in the north, huge buffer state under a very loyal client monarch, Cartimandua, queen, but they're very heavily factionalized. The Romans are always going in and out to prop her up and to put down anti-Roman factions. I think you're seeing a lot of that. This would eventually go on the conquest of what we now call Wales would go on as a guerrilla

war for many years. Terrible, terrible guerrilla war, very, very bloody on both sides until finally you have Boudicca's great rebellion in AD 60, which is very nearly took the province away from the Romans, but that they then snatched back and put down with the enormous, enormous, almost eye watering brutality. That brings the Roman conquest pretty much to a halt for almost a decade, I suppose, while they reconsolidate. But with the arrival of the Flavian dynasty, Vespasian again, at the end of the year of the four emperors in AD 69, that juggernaut of conquest goes through. They want to finally close this conquest. They push

north, they overwhelm the brigantes, they go into what is now Scotland, and then under Agricola, who'd been a junior officer during Boudicca's war, he's now the general, the governor, and in AD 83, having devastated the Highland line, he brings the Caledonians to bay at a place called Mons Graupius. Again, a lost battlefield. We don't know where it is. But then finally, they can say that they've completed the conquest of Britain. His fleet circumnavigates Britain for the first time. He subjugates Orcane. That's interesting as to whether they had already laid down their arms. They can finally say in some respects,

the Roman conquest is over, but there'll be a lot of fighting to come for many years. Britain was always a troublesome province. There were always wars and uprisings. Absolutely. And like that far north, it's never completely conquered, is it? Then Hadrian's Wall in the second century. There's still so much more to come. Duncan, you've teed us up also nicely for the previous episode we've done together, which was an in-depth exploration of Boudicca's revolt and really how devastating it was. That was one of my favourite episodes of last year. Definitely, those who've listened listened to this also check out Duncan's previous episode

about Boudicca's Battle of Britain almost. Duncan, this has been fantastic. Last but certainly not least, I must also ask you about your book which covers this and Boudicca's revolt. It is called Echo Lands, A Journey in Search of Boudicca. Although Boudicca's war is very much the focus Vault, it is called. Duncan McDonnell, Editor, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The

Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The

Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, The Guardian, time to come back on the podcast today. Thank you for inviting me, always my pleasure, Tristie. Well there you go, there was Duncan Mackay talking through the Roman invasion of Britain in 43 AD. I hope you enjoyed today's episode, thank you for listening to it. Please follow The Ancients on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts, it really helps us and you'll be doing us a big favour. Don't forget you can also listen to us and all of History Hits podcasts at free and watch hundreds of TV documentaries when you subscribe at historyhit.com slash

subscribe. That's enough from me and I'll see you in the next episode. you