Celtic Warfare: From the Fifth Century BC to the First Century AD 9781399070171, 1399070177

Citation preview

Celtic Warfare

Celtic Warfare.indd 1

12/09/2022 21:02

Celtic Warfare.indd 2

12/09/2022 21:02

Celtic Warfare From the Fifth Century bc to the First Century ad

Gioal Canestrelli Artwork by Damiano Coppa Colour Plates by Francesca Mattioli and Alice Bulgarelli

Celtic Warfare.indd 3

12/09/2022 21:02

First published in Great Britain in 2022 by Pen & Sword Military An imprint of Pen & Sword Books Ltd Yorkshire – Philadelphia Copyright © Gioal Canestrelli 2022 ISBN 978 1 39907 017 1 The right ofCPI Gioal CanestrelliROWE to be identified Author of this work ANTONY FSC as logos has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the Publisher in writing. Typeset by Mac Style Printed in the UK by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY.

Pen & Sword Books Limited incorporates the imprints of Atlas, Archaeology, Aviation, Discovery, Family History, Fiction, History, Maritime, Military, Military Classics, Politics, Select, Transport, True Crime, Air World, Frontline Publishing, Leo Cooper, Remember When, Seaforth Publishing, The Praetorian Press, Wharncliffe Local History, Wharncliffe Transport, Wharncliffe True Crime and White Owl. For a complete list of Pen & Sword titles please contact PEN & SWORD BOOKS LIMITED 47 Church Street, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, S70 2AS, England E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.pen-and-sword.co.uk Or PEN AND SWORD BOOKS 1950 Lawrence Rd, Havertown, PA 19083, USA E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.penandswordbooks.com

Celtic Warfare.indd 4

12/09/2022 21:06

‘War should not be studied as an end in itself…we must use war as an expression of civilization, being one of the most eloquent.’ Jacques Harmand To my father, who gave me the passion for military history

Celtic Warfare.indd 5

12/09/2022 21:02

Celtic Warfare.indd 6

12/09/2022 21:02

Contents

Plates Foreword

viii xiv

Chapter 1 Aristocratic Warriors (La Tène A: approx. 480–400 bc)1 Chapter 2 Mercenaries (La Tène B1: approx. 400–320 bc)28 Chapter 3 A People’s Army (La Tène B2: approx. 320–260 bc; La Tène C1: approx. 260–180 bc)

51

Chapter 4 Soldiers and Cavalrymen (La Tène C2: approx. 180–130 bc, La Tène D: approx. 130–10 bc)

87

Chapter 5 Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts Chapter 6

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting

Appendix: Stratagems and Poliorcetics (Siege War) Dictionary Notes Bibliography Index

Celtic Warfare.indd 7

119 140 162 166 173 193 204

12/09/2022 21:02

Plates

Plate 1. La Tène A, mid of the V century bc, Central Europe, Aristocratic warlords. With the passage from Hallstatt to La Tène culture, Celtic warbands started to spread throughout Europe. These two noble combatants are an example of V century bc La Tène aristocracy. The warrior on the left wears a tall Berru helmet in copper alloy and a tube and yoke armour with a peculiar gorget-like humeralia as seen from the statues of Glanum and Roquepertuse. His full-iron javelin, a gaesum or soliferrum, is both a weapon and a status-symbol, while the sword carried on the right side is inspired by the longest specimen of that time. The structure of the shield is hardened by an iron bar running over the wooden umbo, with four bronze appliques as further reinforcements and decorative elements The warrior on the right, inspired by the Glauberg stelae and the combatants of the Hallstatt scabbard, is wearing a simple Bockweiler helmet in iron and a tube and yoke armour made of crenellated segments. His small shield and relatively short sword with a deadly point are compatible with a dynamic combat style. Plate 2. La Tène B1, mid of the IV century bc, border between Cisalpine Gaul and Ager Gallicus, Mercenary and chieftain. The conquest of a huge portion of northern Italy strongly affected the equipment of Celtic warriors. The figure on the left is a Senones mercenary, whose rich panoply may have been acquired thanks to the money earned fighting for the Greeks of Syracuse. His helmet, an iron Celto-Italic with the typical three-lobed cheek-pieces, is inspired by the find from the Euryalus fortress in Syracuse, while the tube and yoke armour, and the richly embossed bronze scabbard are taken from the finds in the Senones necropolis of S. Paolina di Filottrano. The shield, with its iron bivalve umbo covering the wooden spina and reinforcing metal

Celtic Warfare.indd 8

12/09/2022 21:02

Plates ix bar, is inspired by the depiction of a Gaulish shield on an Etruscan pottery from Volterra. The warrior on the right is a Boii chieftain and wears a bronze Montefortino helmet surmounted with a pair of metal foil horns as seen in several finds from northern Italy. The model depicted is specifically inspired by the specimen found in grave 132 of the Boii necropolis of Monte Tamburino di Monte Bibele. Furthermore, his sword comes from grave 94 of the same necropolis, and is an excellent weapon with a strong and sharp blade and a scabbard with a large pierced chape. The shield’s metal elements and the pilum javelin are also inspired by the findings from Monte Bibele, precisely the materials from Monterenzio Vecchio grave 3, while the shield decoration pattern is taken from the depiction on an Etruscan pottery from the Leipzig Museum. His tube and yoke armour is a linothorax, inspired by a passage of Silius Italicus’ Punica about the linen cuirass of the Boii chieftain Crixus, while the shape of the crossed humeralia is taken from a bronze figurine from Glauberg. Plate 3. La Tène B2, 279 bc, Northern Greece, The Great Expedition. After testing the power of Macedon with some minor expeditions in the Balkans between the last years of the IV century  bc and the first years of the III century  bc, the Pannonian Celts launched a large-scale attack against Greece thanks to the efforts of both the newly established Celtic communities of the Carpathian Basin and the fierce Volcae warbands from Bohemia and Moravia. The combatant on the left is a Pannonian levy infantryman from one of the communities settled in the Carpathian basin and was not originally a member of the warrior class. His helmet is a bronze Celto-Italic of the Eastern sub-type directly inspired by a specific finding that went through various modifications and repairs, such as the addition of a neck-guard and anatomic cheek-pieces in substitutions to the original three-lobed ones. As a main weapon he carries a long thrusting spear, the celtic lankia, inspired by the Greek dory, while his secondary weapon is a simple butcher knife, used as a weapon by the Eastern Celts as reported by Diodorus (XVI, 94, 3). The shape and decoration pattern of his shield are both taken from a Hellenistic clay figurine resembling a Celtic warrior kept in the British Museum. The second combatant is a professional from the Volcae Tectosages warbands equipped with a sword and a spear useful both as a throwing weapon and in close combat.

Celtic Warfare.indd 9

12/09/2022 21:02

x  Celtic Warfare His iron Eastern Celto-Italic helmet is attested by both actual findings and iconography, and both his shield and armour, an iron mail shirt, are inspired from the Celtic weapons depicted on the reliefs in the sanctuary of Athena Nikephoros in Pergamon. Plate 4. La Tène C, 225 bc, Etruria, Battle of Telamon. After the Romans conquered the Ager Gallicus, massacred the Senones Gauls and founded the colony of Ariminum, the Celtic peoples of Cisalpine Gaul became weary of the Roman expansionism. A mighty alliance was therefore forged between the Insubres, the Boii and the Taurini, and many Gaesatae mercenaries were recruited from the Rhône Valley. A huge Celtic army marched south and defeated the Romans in Etruria, but was confronted and soundly defeated by two consular armies at Cape Telamon while trying to return home with a rich booty. The first warrior on the left is one of the Insubres, the strong Celtic confederation whose capital city was Mesiolano, known today as Milan. He is not a noble, but a rich merchant or craftsman, which makes his equipment of fine but not best quality. His sword is a long slashing weapon, not too sharp, whose blade may be low-quality, prone to bend. The shield, rectangular in shape, is inspired by the Gaulish shields represented on Roman coins and Etruscan urns, while its decorative pattern is taken from Etruscan art. His helmet is an iron Celto-Italic as from many finds in Insubres’ territory, while the armour is a hypothetical tube and yoke in quilted felted wool, inspired by the quote of Polybius about the ‘protective clothing’ of the Insubres and Boii at Telamon. The warrior in the middle is a Boii levy spearman, a farmer conscripted in his chieftain’s army. His head is protected by a bronze Montefortino helmet, while the huge shield with the butterfly boss, perfect for tight combat formations together with a long thrusting spear, is inspired by the finding of Ceretolo. His secondary weapon is a long broad-bladed knife which may have been a multi-purpose tool in times of peace, similar to various specimen found in Cisalpine Gaul. In this picture the huge knife is suspended on the right side like a sword, but it is likely that this kind of opportunity weapons were carried according to the personal choice of the combatant. The fur jacket is inspired by the depiction of a Gaul garment on the relief on the Civitalba pediment. Finally on the right is one of the dreaded Gaesatae, inspired by the descriptions by Classical authors and the silhouettes on the Arieti grave

Celtic Warfare.indd 10

12/09/2022 21:02

Plates xi frescoes. Naked except for his weapons and jewels, his hair soaked in lime, the Gaesata runs toward the enemy, ready to throw his all-iron javelin, the gaesum from which his brotherhood takes its name, and then charges in the thickest part of the formation, swinging his sword in deadly arches. Plate 5. La Tène D1, end of the II century bc, Northern Transalpine Gaul, Heavy horseman. During the II century bc horsemanship became an increasingly important part of Celtic warfare, and the invention of the horned saddle provided a more stable stance to the Celtic riders. The horseman represented is clearly a member of the nobility or at least the Soldurios (sworn bodyguard) of a noble. His equipment, with a conical iron helmet but especially the iron mail armour, is extremely expensive. While a statue from Entremont provided the shape of the humeralia on the armour, the helmet is inspired by various findings in northern France, such as those from Rouvray and Louvieres. The sword, with a very long blade without midrib, has an almost rounded point, and is clearly a slashing weapon. On the right side, fastened to the horse’s harness, there is a quiver for javelins. The Gauls widely practiced javelin throwing from horseback, and transmitted their techniques to the Roman cavalry in the Imperial age. Plate 6. La Tène D2, 52 a.C, Transalpine Gaul, Siege of Alesia. The siege of the Gaulish fortress of Alesia was a pivotal point for Caesar’s campaign in Transalpine Gaul. After successfully using a scorched earth strategy and hit-and-run tactics, Vercingetorix, leader of the Gallic revolt, was eventually beaten in open field by Caesar’s Germanic cavalry and retreated to barricade within the city fortress of Alesia. While all Gaul sent reinforcements to help Vercingetorix, Caesar encircled Alesia with impressive siege works, and an endurance race begun. The warrior in front is a professional fighter equipped with the best offensive and defensive weapons available in I  bc Transalpine Gaul. His mail armour is fine work of artisanship that combines riveted and closed iron rings, while his helmet, an iron Port, will be the inspiration for the Roman Imperial-Gallic. The shield, with an iron butterfly boss reinforcing the wooden spina, is entirely rimmed with iron to offer formidable defence against chopping blows. His sword, long and with a slightly rounded tip, is fundamentally a slashing weapon like most of the Celtic blades of this time. The warrior on the left is an Ambactos, a militiaman committed to a noble.

Celtic Warfare.indd 11

12/09/2022 21:02

xii  Celtic Warfare He is equipped in a similar manner of the levy spearmen of the previous centuries, with a long pike with biconvex point as main weapon and a knife. His helmet is a simple bronze Coolus, while as body protection he wears a long padded jacket strongly resembling a medieval gambeson, as depicted on Roman coinage celebrating Caesar’s victories. The rounded shield without the wooden spina, lighter than the typical Celtic models, may be of Germanic origin. Both the professional warrior and the Ambactos wear their sagum, or mantle, leaving one shoulder bare. Caesar reported that the Gauls sided with the Romans used to wear the sagum leaving their right shoulder bare in order to be recognizable in the heat of the battle, so one might speculate that the Gauls normally wore their mantle in the opposite way as depicted here. The figure on the right, a hunter coming from one of the poorest and outlying villages, is an archer equipped with a simple self bow. Caesar reports that archers, normally an uncommon sight among the Celtic warriors, were mass-recruited by Vercingetorix in an effort to confront the professional Cretans skirmishers employed as auxiliary by the Roman army. He is wearing the characteristic Celtic hooded mantle named bardocucullus. Plate 7. Latest Iron Age, 43 ad, Kent, Chieftain and champion waiting for the Romans on the banks of river Medway. When emperor Claudius launched a full-scale invasion against Britain in 43 ad he was opposed by the two princes of the Catuvellauni, Caratacus and Togodumnus, that rallied to their side many different tribes from the southern region of the island. After a few skirmishes, the first proper confrontation between the Roman legions and the army of the Britons took place on the banks of Medway. The figure on the left is a rich chieftain, wearing a costly mail armour inspired by the find of Kirkburn and a horned and embossed bronze helmet resembling the specimen found in the Thames near Waterloo Bridge. His sword is inspired by the hilt found in Worton, Lancashire, while the bronze scabbard has been fashioned after the find from Isleham, Cambridgeshire. Lastly, the peculiar animal hide-shaped shield is inspired by a miniature find from the Thames. The warrior on the right, depicted with a chest naked, is the chieftain’s champion. He proudly shows his ritual tattoos resembling wild animals as described by Latin author Herodian (3.14.7). His helmet is an elaborate and embossed Coolus like the one found in Meyrick, Northumbria, while his

Celtic Warfare.indd 12

12/09/2022 21:02

Plates xiii shield, also inspired by a miniature find from the Thames, displays a red square decoration like the one on the Enderby shield. The sword, with a simple wooden hilt similar to the findings of Must Farm, Cambridgeshire, is suspended on his back in a peculiar Briton fashion and sheated in a bronze scabbard like the specimens found in Embleton, Cotterdale and Asby Scar. Plate 8. 218 bc, Cartagena, Hannibal’s mercenaries preparing for the march. After besieging Saguntum, Hannibal assembled a powerful army at Carthago Nova (modern Cartagena) before marching towards Italy. Even if Hannibal’s army mostly consisted of African troops and contingents provided by his Iberian allies and subjects, some of his soldiers were mercenaries, and part of them were Celtiberian. The standing warrior is a Celtiberian chieftain freshly arrived from the Meseta in his traditional attire: bracae of Celtic fashion as reported by Lucilius (quoted by Nonius, 227.33), a dark cloak of rough wool, and fur greaves as reported by Diodorus (V, 33). His helmet is an elaborate bronze Hispano-Chalcidic surmounted with copper alloy wings and a red horsehair crest, while his armor is a leather cardiophylax. He fights as a Caetratus, and hence carries a light round shield and an iron soliferrum with a barbed point as throwing weapon. As a primary hand-to-hand weapon he wields an arcobriga, a short subtype of espada de antenas atrofiadas with an incredibly sharp and deadly point. His secondary weapon is a biglobular dagger, ancestor of the Roman pugio. The sitting warrior is a veteran of the Carthaginian army and wears a white tunic rimmed in red. This item of clothing, of probable Iberian origin, was quite common among Hannibal’s Spaniard troops. His helmet is a simple Montefortino without cheek pieces, the most popular subtype in Spain, possibly introduced by the Carthaginians, while the sword is one of the earliest prototypes of gladius hispaniensis, with a strong blade with a solid midrib. He fights as a Scutatus and is therefore equipped with a tall Celtic shield bearing a characteristic bivalve iron umbo common in SouthEastern Spain. While usage of this type of shield was common among the Celts north of the Pyrenees and the Iberians of Catalunya, in Southern and Center Spain its spread can be mainly attributed to Carthaginian influence. In this picture, the Punic symbols are a hint that the shield may have been provided to the warrior by the Carthaginians themselves.

Celtic Warfare.indd 13

12/09/2022 21:02

Foreword

T

he image of the Celtic warrior has always held a significant position in our collective imagination. In contrast to the image of meticulous and efficient Roman warfare, our image of the Celtic warrior evokes in our minds the idea of frenzied hordes of tall, long-haired barbarians, eager to destroy and pillage; of Brennus blatantly tossing his sword onto the scales shouting out that famous, rage-filled barbarian cry: ‘Vae victis!’.1 It is easy to understand how this cliché was born by reviewing some of the most well-known Classical records guilty of creating this over-worn depiction of the fierce and untamed Celt. For example, Livy wrote ‘What are you doing, o soldiers? … we are not going to fight Latins or Sabines, who, after overcome by weapons, we can turn from foes to allies, we must wield our iron against wild beasts: if we’ll not have their blood, they will have ours…’2 Two things, subsequent to the earlier classical accounts, laid the foundation of this feral and bestial image: an ancient terror, undoubtedly resulting from such dramatic events as the Sack of Rome and Sack of Delphi, and an even more ancestral loathing for something that was perceived – at least at the first stage of interaction between the two cultures – as utterly alien. Completely dissimilar in outward appearance, in their culture and lifestyle, the first Celts looked to Greeks and Latins more like beasts than human beings. Understandably, then, their modes of warfare could not be seen to represent civilized society’s bellum gerere,3 but rather the tumultussomething chaotic, blundering and loud. Although, through a subsequent broadening of Romans’ attitudes – and a multifaceted cultural exchange – the sub-human features of this image gradually faded from the historical record. Nevertheless, this depiction of the Celts endured as tòpos in Classic culture, and contributed to establishing a formulaic depiction of the brutal and muddled savage, which was consistent with the broader representation of Celtic classic culture. In reality, in contrast to Mediterranean societies, Celts somehow appear to have managed to develop and bring to fruition both unrestrained warrior

Celtic Warfare.indd 14

12/09/2022 21:02

Foreword xv rage and a surprisingly high degree of personal initiative on the battlefield. So, despite these peculiar and distinctive features, Celtic warfare cannot be reduced just to hordes of frenzied brutes. Between the fifth century bc, when La Tène Culture Celts developed in Europe, and the first century ad, when they faced the complete subjugation or annihilation of most of their communities, their approach to warfare was subject to constant evolution, driven both by contact with Mediterranean cultures and different requirements closely related to social issues that were in constant flux. To fully understand Celtic military development, in addition to an accurate analysis of cultural interchange and social evolution, a systematic examination of the archaeological finds is required. The design and structure of a weapon can shed light on its mode of use and its application. This can then be used as an indicator of tactics used on the battlefield. Iconography and numismatic evidence can be culled from other sources, but it is imperative to carefully select those records and review them, being fully aware of the bias and artistic dissimilarities which are often likely to have created an idealized representation rather than an accurate one. Last but not least, the exegesis of literary sources combined with the analysis of other evidence allows the production of a reliable characterization of Celtic warfare and society. Concerning literary sources, one of the greatest issues to contend with relates to chronological and regional variations. It is often quite hard to establish to which timeframe classical sources refer because many Greek and Roman authors relied on earlier works without explicitly referring to them. Therefore, the picture presented by these records, with its selectivity and bias, requires a thorough and systematic analysis in order to allow the archaeological data and the historical account to correctly complement each other. Nonetheless, it is imperative to remember that Celtic culture remains highly complex in every aspect. Due to its vast geographical extent, polycentric political structure (more scattered and warlike, lacking ruling unity or centralized government typical of Rome and the hellenistic kingdoms), Celtic society has a very different appearance to its neighboring cultures. Any innovation or development would have travelled slowly, gradually radiating from a core zone and reaching the furthest areas only after a long time, or even halting when geographic or socio-cultural boundaries proved impassable. Through the next chapters we will critically examine concurrent but substantially dissimilar Celtic military contexts. Once again, chronological

Celtic Warfare.indd 15

12/09/2022 21:02

xvi  Celtic Warfare and geographical variation seems to hinder our research. Occasionally, some technical and tactical advancements occurred precociously while others remained undeveloped – or at least far from being established – and models of warfare, already outdated elsewhere, remained in use. So, would it be possible to look at Celtic military history using a linear approach? The answer is undoubtedly ‘yes’ and shows this linearity to lie along the fil rouge connecting the Cisalpine Gaul warrior to his Transalpine counterpart and on to the Brittonic and Caledonian fighter. The parameters set in order to reconstruct the milieu of Celtic warfare must always look to its complexity as well as geographic dissimilarities and chronological variations. Some military developments might look divergent, but they very likely belonged to more isolated regions where outdated warfare was retained due to social, economic, and geographical factors. Before going into an extensive analysis of the Celtic warrior and his evolution through the ages we must move past not just the conventional representation of the wild barbarian (resulting from classical imagery and literature) but also the romantic depiction created by French culture in nineteenth century. Due to a slight stratigraphic oversight during the first stage of archaeological excavations of the Alesia hillfort in 1860, weapons and armour actually of the Urnfield Culture were identified as Gallic. Despite the fact this error has been universally recognized and rectified, the historical faux-pas has endured in countless artistic representations and movies, hindering research of a more complex subject.

Celtic Warfare.indd 16

12/09/2022 21:02

Chapter 1

Aristocratic Warriors

(La Tène A: approx. 480–400 bc)

T

he transition from ancient Hallstatt to La Tène Culture represents a fundamental stage in the development of Celtic society and warfare. Unfortunately, the longstanding lack of historical records compels us to reconstruct a reliable characterization of the social and military development which relies mainly on archaeological evidence and leaves many issues and questions unresolved. The transitional phase between late Hallstatt Culture and early La Tène, is characterized by social and political displacement. Leadership, previously centered on the multifaceted figure of the ‘prince’ – a political leader belonging to an earlier cultural model – is transferred to a strong military aristocracy, following a path similar to Mycenaean culture. The gradual disappearance of princely burial mounds, to be replaced by the less impressive but more numerous chamber tombs, can be considered the indicator of a political and social process. The warrior ‘caste’, previously subordinate to the prince, developed into both a strong and independent aristocracy that acted as a leading power within the community and the hallmark of a more warlike and fast-moving culture where warfare held a significant and prominent place. The reasons for this deep social change are still uncertain but the rise of La Tène Culture could have been influenced by contact with steppe cultures such as the Scythians whose artistic influence can partially be found in La Tène art. The transformation most likely did not occur in a particularly dramatic way, as demonstrated by the circumstances of some archaeological discoveries (dating to the fifth century bc), that can be taken as case studies in point.1 La Marne cemetery, for example, holds a princely burial mound surrounded by the graves of noble warriors.2 Nevertheless, as O.H. Frey correctly observed: ‘burial customs in the Celtic world were not uniform; rather, localized groups had their own beliefs, which, in consequence, also gave rise to distinct artistic expressions.’3

Celtic Warfare.indd 1

12/09/2022 21:02

2  Celtic Warfare Moreover, the archaeological record needs to be compared with the insights of ethnographic and historical narratives deriving from Classical historians. A good example is the reference in Livy to Ambigatus, king of the Bituriges, who ‘provided a king to the Celtic people.’4 The quote, despite the very likely formulaic language which shows the influence of classical tòpos,5 could indicate the existence of an earlier event. The gradual prominence that warrior elites rose to within Celtic culture from the fifth century bc onwards, as well as a political setting that seemed to oppose any centralising initiative taken by individuals, must also be looked at.6 Figures like Bellovesus, Etitovius, Vercingetorix or Orgetorix rose only in extremely exceptional circumstances; usually whenever the community was suffering from a crisis related to heavy external pressures7 or demographic issues.8 Yet, the political role of these leaders resembled more that of a magistrate – similar to a Roman Dictator – rather than one consistent with an absolute hereditary monarch in rank and role. Ordinarily, noble war bands would have probably carried out low-ranked military operations focused on cattle raiding9 – as depicted in the Irish epic cycles10 – but their establishment as a ruling class created a cluster of scattered warlike chiefdoms resulting ultimately in a peculiar political and geographical context within which Celtic communities started to migrate from their original homelands expanding exponentially throughout Europe. The mobility of the small warbands led by highborn warriors will later become pivotal to Celtic cultural and physical expansion,11 following a set model that resembles other Indo-European cultures and sharing similarities with the so called ver sacrum of the Italic communities.12 As we can learn from some of the classical records concerning the earliest phase of Celtic history,13 the social setting was characterized by leadership vested in a warrior caste. Although the size of the ruling class was limited it was sufficient enough to provide levies when fighting was required. This warfare system, embedded within society, in turn produced what may be seen as a definitely identifiable ‘caste’ of ‘second born sons’. On the other hand, they may be seen as just youthful adventurers. Either way, these warlike groups looking for freedom, range, and better opportunities, came to constitute a military brotherhood which left their communities and became one of the driving forces that enabled Celtic expansion all through Europe.14 All these circumstances allowed the Celts to spread through most parts of Europe, initially just as scattered bands of armed men but gradually and more often followed by a more significant migratory movement.

Celtic Warfare.indd 2

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 3 Within such archaic societies warriors usually aim to be conspicuous. The warrior himself, like the heroes depicted by Homer, would belong to the noble class for whom fighting embodied not just an ordinary activity but a sacred duty that was his prerogative as a member of a military ‘caste’. With the exception of mass migration, when the whole community had to be mobilized, and to some extent ‘combat-ready’, the average military requirements of local skirmishes and raids were by and large met with a small number of fighters. The social structure of Celtic societies within this context did not require a full-scale levy on a long-term or permanent basis but, being constantly in flux, also was not able to sustain such a levy. Within this context, lacking any policy to expand its boundaries, expansionist impulses – which also weaken central power and cause political fragmentation – necessarily create unexpected operational limitations on Celtic warfare.

1.1  The panoply Classifying fifth-century bc Celtic weaponry on a typological basis appears to be very difficult. The persistence of earlier models of the Hallstatt period, as well as the huge range in appearance and size of a substantial number of the elements of the panoply, makes it almost impossible to frame the problem for further analysis except by taking a very broad approach. In addition to a recognizable lack of literary sources, the archaeological record is frequently fragmented and partial, due to the massive use of perishable materials like leather or wood – especially in the manufacture of defensive equipment. One of the more reliable sources is iconography – where statues, reliefs and engravings shed light on evidence that would have otherwise proved lost or unnoticeable. Early La Tène culture differentiates itself from the Hallstatt Culture by the development of military equipment that affords enhanced dynamism and mobility to the warrior.15 The former standard – directly inherited from the Urnfield Culture, which at some point looked towards Greek and Etruscan warfare for inspiration and design – does not seem to be consistent with the La Tène Culture’s military development. The heavy bell-shaped cuirasses and the bronze greaves are abandoned to be replaced by cheaper and more lightweight solutions. The archaeological record and evidence show the gradual development of totally

Celtic Warfare.indd 3

12/09/2022 21:02

4  Celtic Warfare new elements of the panoply fostered through the manufacture by local craftsmen and blacksmiths of different weapons soon to become a feature of all European warfare. 1.1.1  The helmet Although it was not completely alien to the former Hallstatt Culture, in the fifth century bc the helmet does not seem to have been a key element of Celtic military equipment. It appears in some cases to be more status symbol than actual protection. The helmet is designed not just to protect from an opponent’s blows aimed at the head. It also works as a safeguard against the many accidental strokes and contacts made in tight battle formation with the bearer’s own and his companion’s shields. Though, such combat occurs rather rarely in the examined period which is strongly characterized instead by small and extremely mobile war bands. Even if both archaeological evidence and representations of this period regarding headgear are scarce, it is possible to recognize two different categories of La Tène helmets that make their appearance during the last part of the fifth century bc. The first type, named Bockweiler, consists in a plain hemispherical iron skullcap (img. 1.1). The second one, named Berru, often shows an elongated and conical shape equipped with a small nape protector and topped by a riveted knob (apex) where perhaps feathers or horsehair could have been laid as decoration (img. 1.2 and 1.3). Both types were secured under the chin with leather straps, as suggested by the symmetrical clasps or hinges of the Berru and the double fasteners of the Bockweiler. If the Bockweiler helmet in its plainness might be interpreted as a merely functional item, the specific design of the Berru would seem more to serve as a status symbol rather than effective head protection. Nevertheless, the presence of the nape-guard hints at least at some 1.1  Bockweiler helmet. kind of protective function.

Celtic Warfare.indd 4

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 5 Furthermore, the pointy and strongly elongated shape, that could have represented a hindrance, could potentially have helped in diverting downwards sword blows.

1.2  Berru helmet.

1.3  Berru helmet.

While the simple design of the Bockweiler allows the headgear to be directly crafted using iron, making the Celts pioneers in making helmets out of iron in Europe, the Berru helmets, due to their more complex structure were commonly manufactured using copper-based alloys that strongly affected their defensive potential. Again, this suggests a display rather than a practical function.16 Two atypical helmet specimens have been found in Dürrnberg: one being the only example of iron Berru, the other a bronze helmet of hemispheric shape with a raised central knob, traces of a nape-guard and a rope patterned decoration around the edge. Both these findings might likely be regarded as first attempts at craftsmanship which foreshadows the two most common designs of Celtic helmets of the following century. A further and more detailed analysis will be provided in the following chapter. Concerning the fifth century  bc, as already noted, helmets held a marginal role in the Celtic warrior’s equipment. With the exception of the

Celtic Warfare.indd 5

12/09/2022 21:02

6  Celtic Warfare aforementioned archaeological finds, sporadic and datable to the end of the century, the only iconographic source for headgear is a Hallstatt scabbard, dated to the late fifth century bc. It depicts a group of riders wearing what has been interpreted as a Bockweiler helmet. On the same scabbard marching infantrymen are shown but they are bare headed like the warriors of the Glauberg stelae and figurine. In the end, even if some Celtic helmets were the first in Europe to be crafted from iron in the fifth century bc (and indeed up to the beginning of the fourth) they were still fairly uncommon – at least as stated by Dionysius of Halicarnassus who tells us that Gauls customarily went into battle bare-headed.17 Even some princely fifth-century  bc warrior burials containing a comprehensive panoply and even a chariot lack any headgear. Most of the earlier archaeological interpretations of bronze plaques and fittings such as lacings, linings, or decorations for leather helmets18 have been discarded after more accurate and recent analysis.19 It is only thanks to constant and close contact with Mediterranean cultures, which deeply altered the Celtic approach to warfare, that headgear rose to occupy a prominent position within the Celtic panoply. 1.1.2  The armour The princely grave goods of the Hallstatt period show the spreading of bellshaped bronze cuirasses inspired by the heavy armour of Mediterranean cultures, but this kind of protection is totally absent from the fifth-century bc La Tène noble warriors’ panoply. On the other hand, the noticeable presence of representations of what appears to be body armour in figurative art, in contrast to their near total absence from grave goods, might lead us to speculate that it is very likely that fifth-century bc Celts had crafted armour using perishable materials. Having to rely mostly on the iconographic record, the specific nature of the materials used to craft armour is still uncertain but leather, linen layers or felt and hemp fibers, possibly all blended together, can all be regarded as convincing choices. The overall structure of fifth-century bc Celtic armour partially resembles the so-called ‘tube and yoke’ classical armour of the same period. This panoply consisted of a cylindrical body, shoulder flaps (in Greek επωμίδες, epomides, in Latin humeralia) that were fitted to the front by a couple of pins, and a skirt-like structure for groin and leg protection (in Greek πτέρυγες, pteryges).

Celtic Warfare.indd 6

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 7 The author does not intend to assert that the origin of the ‘tube and yoke’ is Celtic. However, it is noted that despite its commonly agreed attribution to the Greek world, some scholars have hinted a potential Central European origin.20 From the surviving representations21 we can roughly identify three categories of armour: one consisting of hardened leather plate and/or stuffed pieces of quilted cloth; one with a body consisting of several strips of leather or linen, and a last one with a plain surface and uniform body, very likely crafted using leather or linen. The first type is largely seen represented in several statues from Southern France, dating between the sixth and fifth centuries bc, 22 most of them marked out by the triangular shape of the shoulder flaps shaped by a pattern of tiny, squared plates. It is quite possible, also, that armour depicted on the statues of Roquepertuse (img. 1.4), Glanum (img. 1.5) and Nimes might not have proper shoulder flaps at all, but just a single gorget-like lacing, to protect the sternum and clavicles.

1.4  Statue from Roquepertuse.

Celtic Warfare.indd 7

12/09/2022 21:02

8  Celtic Warfare The statue of Constantine, roughly dated between the sixth and fifth centuries  bc, displays instead a more ordinary pair of rectangular shoulder flaps. Both the statue of Constantine and one specimen from Roquepertuse also show a diamond-shaped pattern carved on the body of the armour that might be interpreted as a decoration or as a framework. Clearly visible in most of the statues is a kind of firm cloak equipped with neck protection, somehow linked to the rear of the armour, with the apparent function of protecting the wearer’s rear.

1.5  Statue from Glanum.

Celtic Warfare.indd 8

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 9 Probably related, even if slightly different in appearance and design, is the protection worn by some of the horsemen depicted on the Hallstatt scabbard (fifth century bc), that seems to consist of square plate riveted to a plain coat, with pteryges but without shoulder flaps or firm back protection (img 1.6). All these armours can be described as consisting of leather plates sewn or riveted, or as a quilted coat, resembling some medieval gambeson, or a combination of both.

1.6  Hallstatt scabbard detail.

The second model, represented only on the Glauberg stelae (img 1.7), presents a body in overlapping horizontal strips of leather or linen that would favour the mobility of the torso. The merlon-shaped structure of the strips was probably designed to create a double layer over most of the armour’s surface in order to provide better protection. The armour is fastened by a pair of humeralia and equipped with pteryges on its lower part. On the Roquepertuse and Glanum statues the armour of Glauberg is also equipped with a rigid cape with neck protection on the back. The last type is also shown on a bronze figurine found in Glauberg (img 1.8) which portrays an infantryman wearing plain structure armour. Besides the pteryges and the back protection with neck-guard, this model features oblique shoulder flaps with an overlapping fastening system that would provide enhanced protection for the sternum. Dendrochronological analysis applied to the wooden finds from the archaeological excavation of Glauberg, alongside the figurine and the stelae (accurately dated between 430 and 380 bc), together with a broad chronology attributed to the Constantine statue, could be used to argue for the existence

Celtic Warfare.indd 9

12/09/2022 21:02

10  Celtic Warfare

1.7  Glauberg stelae.

1.8  Glauberg figurine.

of a later fashion of rectangular shoulder-flaps, opposed to the older one of triangular lacing. This miscellaneous overview of iconographic sources unfortunately is not supported by any archaeological evidence related to armour. The only findings that could be identified as metal parts of the depicted armours are some buttons and fittings found in Dürrnberg, Germany, in La Gorge-Meillet, France, and in Novo Mesto, Slovenia. The finds from La Gorge-Meillet laid on the chest of the inhumed corpse found in a burial, could be attributed to a fastening system, or something similar, on the armour depicted on the Glauberg stelae.23 The La Gorge-Meillet buttons show remnants of hemp fabric which could possibly be the material of the conjectural armour, or at least of the fastening strings. A similar placing of the la Gorge-Meillet buttons is reported for the two corresponding rows of four bronze rings from tomb 145/1 in Dürrnberg, that have been interpreted as the fastening system of a set of leather armour.24 1.1.3  The shield Research on fifth-century bc Celtic shields and armour in general is hindered by the lack of archaeological finds. Fortunately, together with iconography, the remains of metallic elements though scarce can provide further clues. Already known in the Late Hallstatt period, 25 and possibly borrowed from the northern Etruscan world, 26 the Celtic shield (as displayed on the

Celtic Warfare.indd 10

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 11 Glauberg stelae and on the Hallstatt scabbard) was fashioned from a flat, elongated wooden surface with a central socket covered in front by a wooden spindle-shaped reinforcing element (img 1.9). In contrast to the hoplite aspis (ἀσπίς), the quintessential shield of the Greek world, the Celtic shield was not strapped to the forearm. The weapon was carried by a horizontal handle, located within the spindle-shaped element that was designed to protect the warrior’s hand.

1.9  Hallstatt scabbard detail.

This type of shield in Greek was named thyreos (θυρεός), literally ‘door stop’, because it was shaped like the oblong stones the Greeks used to prop doors open. For a full account of this shield and its structure we can turn to one invaluable contribution from a comparative study of the Hjortspring shields found in Denmark 27 (img. 1.10). These specimens, even if more recent in chronology (fourth to third century  bc), are virtually identical to Celtic shields as depicted in fifthcentury bc iconography. Well preserved, with a length ranging from 61 to 88cm and a width from 22 to 52cm, the Hjortspring shields provide a unique chance to examine in detail the manufacturing techniques and the use of the thyreos.

Celtic Warfare.indd 11

12/09/2022 21:02

12  Celtic Warfare

1.10  Hjortspring shield.

In most cases, the shield surface is made of a single wooden plank, save for some exceptions made from two or three overlaid plank layers, joined together with a resinbased putty that is used simultaneously to secure the central wooden spindle-shaped reinforcing element. The handle is secured to the sides of the central hole by a tongue and groove system (img. 1.11), extremely plain and functional, further reinforced with natural glues which fuse the grip with the rest of the shield. This structure, that shares similarities with the shields of other European cultures of the same era, will become the standard model for the Celtic shield and will never be completely discarded.28

Celtic Warfare.indd 12

1.11  Handle fixing system.

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 13 Nevertheless, it will undergo multiple alterations of the reinforcing elements, beginning in the fifth century bc, in a constant evolution aimed at finding the perfect balance between strength and maneuverability. For example, the central wooden spindle-shaped element sometimes shows a spine, as found both in some of the Hjortspring finds and in the Glauberg stelae. Furthermore, it will sometimes become much more elongated, spanning the best part of the length of the shield’s surface, to provide improved structural integrity. In this form, it falls under the definition of the archaeological term spina.29 In some cases, metal parts are attached to the shield, obviously again with the purpose of strengthening the structure and enhancing its overall integrity. Within grave goods we can also find metal bars designed as reinforcement for the handle. Other Celtic burials contain fragments of iron rims which were fastened to the upper and/or lower end of the shield, or along the entire edge, with the purpose of protecting it from cleaving blows. At the end of the fifth century bc the spina is sometimes reinforced in its central part by a partial metal cover nailed to the wood, occasionally extended to part of the shield surface, and sometimes a thin iron bar appears all along the length of the spina in the place of the midrib.30 Concerning the size of fifth-century  bc Celtic shields, the evidence is varied. Whereas the shields depicted on the Hallstatt scabbard appear to be of considerable size, covering the marching infantrymen from the shoulder to the knee, the one held by the warrior of the Glauberg stelae looks to be somewhat smaller in comparison. As for the other elements of military equipment, the archaeological and iconographic record seems to point to the lack of standard measurements for the shield. Height and width could range extensively according to personal needs and tastes. 1.1.4  Pole weapons Found amongst the oldest and cheapest weapons in history, spears have played an essential role within the panoplies of every ancient culture. Within the fifth-century bc Celtic weaponry it is possible to identify two different classes: a multifunctional spear with a leaf-shaped head, probably developed from a hunting tool, and a javelin with a leaf-shaped head, used as missile weapon. The most common type, found in graves in quantities ranging from one to eight, is the multifunctional spear which we also find recorded in the

Celtic Warfare.indd 13

12/09/2022 21:02

14  Celtic Warfare Germanic milieu as the framea. Grave goods, as evidence, reflect a warrior’s equipment in battle, and such a large number of spears strongly suggests a multifaceted use of the weapon. If an infantryman could easily carry one to three frameae on the battlefield, holding the shafts both in the free hand and in the one with the shield, a quantity of eight would have had to have been transported on a war chariot. In both cases the evidence points to its use as a throwing weapon. A clear distinction between the framea and the javelin appears problematic. If at a first sight the distinguishing factor could be represented by the length of the point,31 a more thorough examination suggests that it should be taken as design rather than size.32 A spearhead fitted with a central midrib, making it more resistant to impact, would have probably been designed as a thrusting weapon. Thus, it would have been used not just as a missile but also for hand-to-hand fighting. Furthermore, the presence of shorter and broader structured midrib spearheads, with the weight focused on the tip, implies their potential additional use as missiles, depending on the circumstances (img. 1.12). Regardless of size and shape, the absence of a midrib generally points to the spear’s primary use as a throwing weapon – there being no evidence of a design to prevent the point from bending after multiple thrusts (img. 1.13). Along with these two distinct categories, with and without midrib, we can add a third more usual one. Some points are engraved on the surface with a pattern of concentric circles creating a weak spot prone to 1.12  Midrib spearheads. bending (img. 1.14).

1.13  Spearhead without midrib.

Celtic Warfare.indd 14

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 15 The understandable purpose of this was to craft a single-use weapon that the opponent could not, in turn, throw back after its discharge. As a result, we can distinguish two sub-types of framea: a heavier one, with the spearhead fitted with a central midrib, conceived mainly but not just for melee fighting; and a lighter one, without midrib, conceived mainly, but not just, as a throwing weapon. Lastly, there were proper javelins identified as such through the score on their point that clearly indicates a missile-only function. Even if the very word javelin came from the Gallic gaballacos, this weapon itself was not that popular with Celts. We have to take into account both the artefacts (which are relatively scarce compared to the framea findings) and the statement of Dionysius of Halicarnassus who wrote about the spear as a Gallic peculiarity as opposed to the Roman javelin.33 1.14  Grooved points. The measurements of Celtic spearheads in this period are quite variable and even if there is evidence of points reaching 51cm in length, in the fifth century bc these specimens are still rare with the most common lengths ranging from 20 to 30cm. Butt-spikes – in Greek sauroter (σαυρωτήρ), literally ‘lizard-slayer’ – are relatively rare in this timeframe. The presence of sockets seems to suggest some function reinforcing the bottom of the wooden shaft. Their sharpness also indicates their purpose as a weapon of secondary or last resort (img. 1.15). Following the transition from Hallstatt to La Tène Culture in Southern France we find, along with pole weapons with a wooden shaft and iron head,

1.15 Spear-butt.

Celtic Warfare.indd 15

12/09/2022 21:02

16  Celtic Warfare a peculiar kind of javelin, forged from a single iron bar with a small tip, sometimes leaf-shaped or barbed in design34 (img. 1.16). These all-iron javelins usually reach 183cm in overall length, with a maximum shaft thickness of 2cm. The shaft displays an uneven pattern both in the profile, normally being wider in the middle and getting thinner on both edges, and in its section, that can vary from round to square to polygonal all long the shaft. This peculiar throwing weapon, which will endure unaltered to the first century  bc, is known to the Romans by the Latin term soliferrum (‘all-iron’), or by the Celtic word gaesum.35

1.16  Different types of Gaesum.

Clearly devised in its design to be a formidable weapon, this javelin proved capable of easily piercing through any protection provided by the shield and proved difficult to pull out when equipped with a barbed tip, sometimes with multiple hooks. Due to the bending which the thin iron bar would incur after impact, the weapon was very likely designed to avoid being reused by the enemy. In time, the gaesum will radiate out from Celtic culture to others,36 but will always remain bound to theirs as a distinguishing feature. Therefore, even the fifth-century ad writer Nonius refers to the soliferrum as the tela Galliarum,37 meaning ‘Gallic javelins’. And Servius in the fifth century ad will define it as a hallmark of the Gauls – much as the pilum was for the Romans and the sarissa for the Macedonians.38

Celtic Warfare.indd 16

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 17 1.1.5  The sword The sword developed by the La Tène Culture is without doubt the main and most renowned weapon in the Celtic warrior panoply. Sword specimens continue to be used to this day by archaeologists to trace evidence of Celtic influence and identity across Europe. Fifth-century  bc swords, despite in part sharing common features, are difficult to organize in a typology. Many specimens are different in size with a blade length ranging from 41 to 80cm and a blade section that might appear as lenticular or diamond shaped. Moreover, some weapons, clearly designed to mainly deliver thrusting blows, are found to have longer blades suitable both for thrusting and slashing.39 If the origin of squatter blades can be traced down to the short swords of the Late Hallstatt period,40 we can take the appearance of longer blades to mark a complete divergence in style and structure from the weapons of earlier periods.41 In fact, those Hallstatt Culture swords conceived to be slashing weapons are generally characterized by a broad leaf-shaped blade equipped with a huge central midrib, which brings to mind the bronze cast weapons of even earlier period.42 Understandably, a still immature iron forging technology would have had to resort to archaic models, and apply increased reinforcement to protect the

1.17  La Tène A swords and scabbards.

Celtic Warfare.indd 17

12/09/2022 21:02

18  Celtic Warfare blade’s integrity against strong impact with the heavy bell-shaped bronze armours that were typical of Hallstatt warfare.43 In turn, the abandonment of bronze cuirasses, along with the development of iron metalworking, brought the La Tène sword to develop a straight, harmonious profile, narrowing near the blade tip (img 1.17). The sword hilt was crafted in wood and/or bone, with a bell-shaped guard reinforced with a metal impact plate and a two or three-lobed pommel. Shaped in two riveted halves, or with a pommel, grip, and guard in three separate parts, the hilt was secured by hammering on the long tang (img 1.18). During the fifth century  bc the scabbard undergoes multiple changes resulting from the evolution of fighting techniques and sword craftsmanship. Early La Tène scabbards, like the last Hallstatt ones, were formed of two wooden halves, and were strengthened by bronze plates, chape, and locket. As a hand hold on its side, we find riveted a vertical suspension loop made of metal (usually described by the French term pontet or English strapslide), through which passed a leather strip with a ring on each side whose diameters were wider than the loop, providing a slight balance.

1.18  Hilt structure.

1.19  Scabbard structure.

The spread of increasing dynamism and speed within the Celtic fighting style, witnessed by the gradual relinquishing of the heavy armours combined with an increase in sword size, would come to make this scabbard structure obsolete and ineffective.

Celtic Warfare.indd 18

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 19 The longer the sword blade became, the stronger the leverage applied to the suspension loop as the chape moves back and forth, increasing the chance of the scabbard breaking as the result of even a minimal amount of jostling. In order to deal with this problem, at the end of the fifth century bc the scabbard came to be manufactured entirely from metal formed by two iron or bronze halves, held together by a chape (img 1.19). Through this design modification, the scabbard became one with the suspension loop, providing better resistance to the stress and strain of movement. 1.1.6  The knobbed-pommel sword Along with the typical La Tène sword, we need to focus our attention on another type of Celtic weapon much less common, but widespread through an extended area of central Europe. Known in German as the Knollenknaufschwert, in French as the Epée à rognòn or Epée a sphére, and tentatively translated into English as perhaps the ‘Knobbed-pommel sword’, this peculiar weapon accounts for a mere forty-seven findings. Most of the specimens have been discovered in eastern France, some others in Germany and Switzerland. The knobbed-pommel sword bears some distinguishing features which make it completely unlike any other specimen of La Tène blade. Entirely forged in iron (hilt included), this sword displays an overall length ranging roughly from 80 to 110cm; the blade, rhomboidal in section, is approximately 2cm wide (img. 1.20).44 The hilt shows a peculiar overall structure displaying, both in the pommel and in the guard area, a series of tiny metallic globes (of variable sizes) forged in bronze in the older specimens and in iron in the more recent ones. These globes were to be fixed on the hilt. Their function is unclear, but adornment has been considered as the most likely purpose.45

1.20  Knobbed-pommel sword.

The chronology of the knobbed-pommel sword has been long debated in the face of the difficulties encountered in analysing and assessing surviving swords which, in most cases, have been found in uncertain situations. To be

Celtic Warfare.indd 19

12/09/2022 21:02

20  Celtic Warfare precise, knobbed-pommel swords appear broadly and customarily related to the discoveries at aquatic locations such as ponds, lakes and marshes. While, according to some eminent opinions, the knobbed-pommel sword should ideally be compared to anthropomorphic daggers and attributed to the later phase of La Tène Culture,46 some findings suggest the exact opposite and place them in the last phases of Hallstatt Culture47 or, at most, at the beginning of La Tène Culture.48 While the Hallstatt origin of the knobbed-pommel sword is certain from the most archaic specimens, an in-depth analysis of the findings in Cayla à Mailhac, France has shown that, incredibly, this particular type persisted with minimal alterations, until at least 75 bc.49 The distinctive shape of the sword hilt which makes the weapon barely functional and difficult to swing,50 together with the high incidence of discovery in lake contexts, and the survival of the model through the centuries, would seem to indicate an object strictly connected to the sphere of the sacred. It was perhaps even expressly conceived as an ex voto or, as seems more likely, a sacrificial instrument. 1.1.7  Knives and daggers In a complex context like the early stage of La Tène culture, it is difficult to define a consistent typology of daggers, knives and swords. However, some weapons seem to be only recognizable and identifiable as daggers. With a broad, short, leaf-shaped blade, the weapon is frequently paired with a metal scabbard. In some cases, it has an antenna-shaped pommel which appears very similar to the later Hallstatt daggers, following a recurring stylistic feature that endures for centuries more (img 1.21). Warriors’ grave good also sporadically contained slightly curved, singleedged tools, which were likely equipped with a leather or wooden sheath (img 1.22). The presence of a metal scabbard, very similar to the one used for the sword, makes it reasonable to assume the dagger was for military use – perhaps as an emergency weapon, or as a status symbol. Interpretations concerning the knives may be different, even if the considerable length and the engraved handle of some specimens might reveal something distinct from simple domestic use. Both blades can, in fact, be associated with a ritual context predominantly connected to feasts, as can be recognized in the fragment of Posidonius which states that during feasts, the Celts ‘… eat meat in a fairly clean way but

Celtic Warfare.indd 20

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 21

1.21 Daggers.

1.22 Knives.

like lions, taking entire joints in both hands and gnawing them; and if there is one they cannot easily tear off, they cut it with a small sword.’51 The specific Greek term used by Posidonius is machaira (μάχαιρα), which could be translated using either of the generic terms ‘sword ’ or ‘curved blade’ with both ‘daggers’ and ‘knives’ as alternative options.52 1.1.8  Ranged weapons The presence of bows amongst the grave goods of Celtic warriors occurs extremely rarely and is limited to a few findings. Nevertheless, their occasional use is attested to by arrowhead findings dating from the Hallstatt period. Fifth-century  bc La Tène arrowheads can be put into four different broad classifications: a first one consisting of barbed, socketed arrows with a long ferrule; a second one consisting of leaf-shaped arrows secured to the wooden shaft by means of a nail-like tang; a third one consisting of bi-lobed, socketed arrows, and a last one consisting of tri-lobed, socketed arrows (img 1.23).

Celtic Warfare.indd 21

12/09/2022 21:02

22  Celtic Warfare The third and the fourth types, often in bronze, are clearly inherent to the steppe cultures milieu and can be connected to the influence exercized by the Scythians on the Late Hallstatt and early La Tène cultures. Which specific type, or types, of bow was used to shoot these arrows is still a matter of debate and the only element that could provide some clues is a bow in miniature from the princely grave of Glauberg (img 1.24).53 Even if its small size (51cm) clearly 1.23  Barbed arrowhead and Scythian three points to a votive offering, instead of a lobed arrowhead. functional weapon; there is no reason to deny that, in shape, the object very likely resembles an actual tool.

1.24  Miniaturistic bow from Glauberg, reconstruction.

The miniature Glauberg bow, with its multi-curved profile, closely matches Scythian recurve bows and is a further hint of Steppe influences during the transition from Hallstatt to La Tène Culture. Without any literary or iconographic evidence to rely on, it is impossible to state whether the bow, very rare among current archaeological findings, was intended as a weapon of war or just for hunting. The heavy Scythian type arrowhead can usually be connected to warfare and a human humerus bone, dated between Hallstatt and Early La Tène period, with a three-lobed arrowhead stuck in it has been found; pointing to the bow’s at least occasional use in battle. 1.1.9  The war chariot Whereas the chariots of Hallstatt princes, whose use as actual war machines is far from certain, were heavy four-wheeled wagons, La Tène war chariots develop in a completely different direction, following that strand of dynamism which, as already mentioned, was the cornerstone of Celtic warfare in the fifth century bc.

Celtic Warfare.indd 22

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 23 La Tène chariots were light and elegant vehicles, equipped with two spoked, iron-rimmed wheels (img. 1.25). Their wooden framed platforms, closed by two wooden and/or wicker sideboards, were fixed with ropes onto a pair of suspension beams that were joined to the wheel axle and beyond with a pole which extended at the front end to a yoke designed for a pair of horses. To ensure maximum speed, the metal parts were kept to a minimum, and, in addition to iron tires, there were iron wheel hubs, connecting pins and iron rings serving as joints in the rope suspension system.

1.25  War chariot structure.

Celtic Warfare.indd 23

12/09/2022 21:02

24  Celtic Warfare Analysis of the archaeological evidence shows a close relationship between chariot findings and multiple frameae and, consequently, its use as mobile platform from which to target the enemy. However, having no literary source for the fifth century bc, to fully understand the use of the chariot on the battlefield we must look to later periods for better written sources. Of particular interest are the works of Diodorus Siculus which partially rely on the previous entries written by Posidonius of Apamaea, which in turn are probably based on even older chronicles.54 I n their journeying and when they go into battle the Gauls use chariots drawn by two horses, which carry the charioteer and the warrior; and when they encounter cavalry in the fighting, they first hurl their javelins at the enemy and then step down from their chariots and join battle with their swords.55 This tactic, which strongly resembles that of the Homeric heroes of the Iliad, looks deeply connected to a concept of warfare grounded in and managed by a small military elite, heavily distinguished by ritualistic features. In the Celtic environment of the fifth century bc, where the roles of noble and warrior overlap, and where ordinary conflict was carried out by small numbers, the war chariot ideally plays a prominent role. Even if its practical applications cannot be put aside, as other elements of the warrior panoply, the war chariot does seem to have a largely ostentatious or ceremonial function.

1.2  The combat The overall social and military picture of the first period of La Tène can be imagined as one not of real battles but of skirmishes, involving small warbands, which could probably often be resolved in a series of single combats. Coming only from the aristocracy, the Celtic warriors of the fifth century  bc are to be placed within a narrow class of professionals able to commit themselves to improving their military training and combat techniques. The ritual aspect of war still played an important role and we might turn to a careful analysis of the Irish epic cycles to build a more complete image of this aspect. Born and raised in a small area isolated for a long time from the main scenery of the European continent, ancient Gaelic literature, regardless of its era, depicts a reality that remained in some ways frozen in an ancient age.

Celtic Warfare.indd 24

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 25 The reasons leading to conflict are usually linked to cattle raids or family feuds. The warriors, always part of the ruling class, fight individually or in small groups in a relentless procession of attacks and counterattacks that take place in a theatre of conventional skirmishes and asymmetric encounters where ranged weapons, as well as the chariot and sword, play a predominant role. The topos of the duel between champions highlighted in the Irish epic cycles finds an exact correspondence in Diodorus. The Greek historian’s tendency to rely on previous authors has already been noted: It is also their custom, when trained for battle, to go out on the front line and challenge the most valiant men among their opponents in a single combat, wielding their weapons in front of them to terrify their opponents. And when a man accepts the challenge in battle, he starts singing a song to praise the valiant actions of his ancestors and to brag about his high achievements, insulting and belittling his opponent and trying, in a word, to strip him of his daring spirit before the battle.56 The warrior champion portrayed by the Irish epic cycles is always a charioteer or an infantryman, never a cavalryman. Any evidence that identifies the figure of a Celtic warrior on horseback in the fifth century  bc is limited to the riders depicted on the Hallstatt scabbard. In a setting which highlights the figure of the charioteer, the cavalryman obviously does not yet have a well-defined role, and it would be wrong at this time to speak of ‘Celtic cavalry’, even though mounted warriors were not unheard of in Celtic warfare in the fifth century bc. However, a comparative study of Irish epic literature cross-referenced with archaeological evidence shows that warfare was based on mobility. The sword, although capable of both thrusting and cutting, often had to be used to deliver wide swinging blows, as can be deduced from both the evolution towards longer blades and the special care taken to protect the shoulders and collarbone in most surviving armour. Regarding armour, it is reasonable to suppose that fighting progressed through chaotic and dynamic melees without an orderly and rigorous battle line, as can be presumed from the broad, rigid protective pieces whose purpose was obviously to provide additional defense to the warrior’s back. Shield design is also clearly directed at highly dynamic combat techniques, thanks to its grip which made it highly manoeuvrable, as opposed to the older forearm-locked hoplite shield.

Celtic Warfare.indd 25

12/09/2022 21:02

26  Celtic Warfare With the warrior’s body lunging forward, the shield could considerably extend its sphere of protection, enhancing its both defensive function and its potential use as an offensive weapon. In fact, in the Irish epic tales there are many such offensive uses of the shield, and in particular one called the ‘ faencless’: an action in which the shield is held parallel to the arm and used to deliver crushing blows with its lower edge, whose metal rim could also be sharpened.57 It may be noted, also, that all shields with a Celtic-like structure and design, such as the Italic scutum, could be used in the same offensive way.58 1.2.1  The warrior’s training With fifth-century bc Celtic warriors coming from an upper class that both understood warfare as its main purpose in life, and had the free time for it – compared to lower class Celts – it is reasonable to suppose that they were engaged in training specifically connected with warfare and fighting. Irish epic poetry might, once more, provide us with some useful records on this topic. In the Tàin Bò Cuailnge (‘The Cattle Raid of Cooley’), the Gaelic epic cycle par excellence, there are obvious references to military training as well as the use of what appear to be blunted weapons designed to be used in training and competition. ‘Too long are we now in this way,’ quoth Ferdiad; ‘and what arms shall we resort to today, O Cuchulain?’ ‘With thee is thy choice of weapons this day till night time,’ answered Cuchulain, ‘ for thou art he that first didst reach the ford.’ ‘Rememberest thou at all,’ asked Ferdiad, ‘the choice deeds of arms we were wont to practise with Scathach and with Uathach and with Aifè?’ ‘Indeed, and I do remember.’ answered Cuchulain. ‘If thou rememberest, let us begin with them.’ They betook them to their choicest deeds of arms. They took upon them two equally-matched shields for feats, and their eight-edged targes for feats, and their eight small darts, and their eight straightswords with ornaments of walrus-tooth and their eight lesser, ivoried spears which flew from them and to them like bees on a day of fine weather. They cast no weapon that struck not. Each of them was busy casting at the other with those missiles from morning’s early twilight till noon at mid-day, the while they overcame their various feats with the bosses and hollows of their feat-shields.

Celtic Warfare.indd 26

12/09/2022 21:02

Aristocratic Warriors 27 However great the excellence of the throwing on either side, equally great was the excellence of the defence, so that during all that time neither of them bled or reddened the other. ‘Let us cease now from this bout of arms, O Cuchulain’ said Ferdiad; ‘ for it is not by such our decision will come.’ ‘Yea, surely, let us cease, if the time hath come.’ answered Cuchulain. Then they ceased. They threw their feat-tackle from them into the hands of their charioteers.59 It is clear from the text that the terms ‘ feats’, ‘acts of choice of weapons’ and ‘ feat-tackle’ refer to some sort of blunt equipment intended for practice, tests of skill, and performances related to military training. We can also surmise that dueling with these items fits more with competition than mortal combat. The two champions practised with blunt weapons while training under some mythical warrior queens and, as Ferdiad says, their use could not lead to a decided outcome. Further evidence of such training weapons could be presented by the discovery of a fragment of an Iron Age wooden sword in Porz-Lind, Westphalia, a complete Iron Age wooden sword in Ballykilmurry Bog, Wicklow, Ireland60 (img. 1.26), or by the bark and wicker shield of Enderby, Great Britain.61

1.26  Wooden sword from Ballykilmurry Bog.

However, it should be noted that the wooden sword from Ballykilmurry Bog shows a peculiar knob protruding from one side of its blade, probably affecting its balance, so its function is still uncertain, and it may have been crafted to be part of a sculpture or a ritual offering.

Celtic Warfare.indd 27

12/09/2022 21:02

Chapter 2

Mercenaries

(La Tène B1: approx. 400–320 bc)

T

he period between the end of the fifth and the beginning of the fourth century  bc bears evidence of the natural consequences of the breakdown of central authority that occurred within the Celtic milieu. Increasingly large numbers of groups, led by the warrior elite, moved away from their former homelands to conquer new parts of Europe. Sometimes parties on the move mingle with each other, giving rise to new migrant tribes and federations, which tame new lands and come into contact with other populations. Throughout the fourth century  bc Italy will become one of the main areas of Celtic military development. The Celto-Italic setting will become the source from which martial innovation, both in terms of tactics and military equipment, will radiate across the Alps towards the whole Celtic milieu. Moreover, the account provided by classical authors makes the entire course of the Gallic invasion and settlement in Italy one of the few well known historical sources on the Celts. The first clash between the large migratory groups and the local populations would have been dramatic. The Po River valley, already under Etruscan influence, was almost completely seized by the Gauls, just as were most of the Umbrian and Picene lands. At the same time, in the north-east, we see the area of influence of the Veneti substantially reduced. A Celtic penetration is also attested to in the lands inhabited by the Ligurians. The large number of successful Gallic incursions into Italy are due to many reasons. As already mentioned, the Celtic warrior bands were assembled by scions of the aristocracy gathered in military confraternities, whose ordinary occupation was raiding.

Celtic Warfare.indd 28

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 29 Plundering during migrations had also became their main means of subsistence. Thus, combat permeated every aspect of their ordinary life, putting them in a position of advantage over other cultures where the warrior’s role had become less prominent. The migratory nature of the Celtic social entity also played an essential role.1 Once they left their country, a group on the move in search of a new homeland realized they had nothing more to lose and were able to endure extreme situations and a number of fatalities that would be unbearable for a settled population. The force of their impact was based not only on their skill and motivation but also the psychological effect of the Celts’ culture and appearance – perceived as peculiar and unfamiliar by Greek, Italic and Roman populations. This is the historical period in which all the classical tropes that represented the Celts as savages, even beast-like mythical creatures, were forged. The Gauls who plundered Rome in 386 bc, in the chronicles of Heraclitus Ponticus became the mythical people of the ‘Hyperboreans’, 2 while in Livy’s account they are depicted as ‘a people naturally prone to senseless noise’ who marching towards the river Allia ‘made the whole region horribly reverberate with wild songs and strange screams’.3 In Livy’s quote, the Gauls are often simply named ‘beasts’,4 while Claudius Quadrigarius, quoted by Aulus Gellius, will highlight the ‘enormous’ size and ‘hideous’ appearance5 of the Gallic champion faced by Titus Manlius. Although Gallic military success on their arrival in Italy was mostly a consequence of a combination of prowess, motivation, and terror, the adoption by local populations of the Celtic warrior’s equipment at the end of the fourth century bc6 is also a sign of unquestionable quality and functionality of the Celtic panoply. The Celtic panoply was also enriched by some weapons inspired by Italic and Etruscan equipment. The Gauls improved their military skills and proficiency through organic conflict but also by serving as mercenaries in the armies of the powers which, in the fourth century bc, contended for hegemony over Italy. After their settlement in Italy, the endemic unrest typical of Celtic warrior aristocracy, surrounded by strong and belligerent nations, sought a new outlet. The warrior bands committed their prowess to a new occupation and became mercenaries. Good opportunities were to be seized, especially in the complex and intricate political theatre of central and southern Italy.

Celtic Warfare.indd 29

12/09/2022 21:02

30  Celtic Warfare Consequently, Gauls began to be recruited and hired as support troops by various competitors. The battles of the Alban district7 (367 bc), Anio river8 (361 bc), Porta Collina9 (360 bc), Pedum10 (358 bc), Alban hills11 (350 bc) and Laurentum12 (349 bc), where Roman armies clashed against the Gauls, should be examined in the light of a more elaborate strategy. These episodes, apparently linked to Celtic raids aiming for easy plunder, can be seen as the result of military interference in Latium and Etruria by Syracuse.13 Early contact between various bands of Gallic warriors and the tyrant of Syracuse Dionysius I occurred after the Sack of Rome by Brennus:14 …  while Dionysius was pursuing the war, the ambassadors of the Gauls, who had burnt Rome a few months before, came to him to desire an alliance and friendship with him; noting that ‘their country lay among his enemies, and could be of great help to him, either by supporting him in the field or by annoying his enemies in the rear when they were engaged with him’. The diplomatic mission was well received by Dionysius, who, having formed an alliance with them, and having been strengthened with the help of Gaul, renewed the war as it were.15 From that moment on, Syracuse relied on Celtic mercenaries, began to recruit them through its colony at Ancona and often settled in advance guard positions for seizing control of southern and central Italy.16 The Syracusans established Gallic settlements in Campania,17 Apulia,18 and Iapygia,19 from which Celtic warbands plundered and raided deep into Etruscan territories. The relations between Syracuse and the Celts were so deep that the clash between the Gauls moving from Iapygia and the Etruscans from Caere, and the Syracusan fleet that stormed the harbor of the same city, 20 is interpreted by modern historians as a single coordinated military action.21 It is still difficult to extrapolate the actual historical data from Classical sources, especially from the Latin chronicles, which have clearly undergone a process of revision completely focused on the Roman perspective. It is possible that the alliance between Syracuse and the Celtic warbands even precedes the Sack of Rome by Brennus. The episode appears, in essence, to be a mere consequence of Roman interference in the siege of Clusium.

Celtic Warfare.indd 30

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 31 All the Roman epics which recount the Gallic raids in Latium, with their mythical events22 and anachronistic elements, 23 appear just to be a means to ennoble and inflate the Romans. These events probably largely represented collateral damage within a larger conflict in which Syracuse was aiming to weaken the Etruscan world whose Rome was still perceived mostly as just a smaller part. This tendency is clearly exposed by comparing the chronicle of Livy, a Roman author, with the account of a Greek historian, Polybius. Besides the fact that many of the battles mentioned by Livy are missing from Polybius’s report, some events are described in a totally different way. For example, about the same year as the glorious Battle of Pedum in Livy’s work, after ‘no one from Camillus celebrated a more justly deserved triumph over the Gauls’.24 Polybius wrote instead, in rather dry prose, that ‘the Celts appeared again before Alba with a great army, and the Romans on this occasion did not venture to meet them on the field, since, because of the suddenness of the attack, they were taken by surprise and did not have the time to anticipate it by gathering the forces of their allies.’25 The correlation between these incursions and Syracuse’s strategy is plain, as well as the role of the Gauls as mercenaries. Nevertheless, we must deal with the inconsistency of many Roman accounts about Gallic military activity in Latium during the fourth century bc. Latin sources depict the occurrence as a progression of chaotic and irrational raids against Rome, driven by pillaging as the only goal. Once more, evidence of the prominent role played by Celtic mercenaries can be seen in the historical records. The Gallic raids abruptly ceased after 357 bc, when Dionysius II lost temporary control over Syracuse. They were resumed with the tyrant’s reinstatement, fully ceasing in 344 bc26 when Dionysius was eventually deposed and exiled to Corinth.27 Celtic mercenaries were deployed by Syracuse even outside the Italian theatre. In 369 bc Dionysius I sent a small but well-organized troop of Gauls to support his Spartan allies who were fighting against Thebes.28 During Agathocles’ expedition against Carthage from 310 to 307 bc, Celts are recorded among his mercenaries.29 The Greek poleis and the rulers of southern Italy were not the only ones who resorted to recruiting Gallic mercenaries. The Carthaginians also hired Celtic fighters. Carthage was accustomed to relying on foreign troops hired alongside its own soldiers. The first reference to the recruitment of mercenaries from the

Celtic Warfare.indd 31

12/09/2022 21:02

32  Celtic Warfare ‘land of the Gauls’ predates the fourth century bc and concerns preparations for the Battle of Himera in 480 bc.30 However, it is uncertain whether this specific reference actually refers to Celtic warriors and not, as is more likely, to the elusive population of the Elysicians31 whose affinity with the Celtic milieu is strongly questioned. They might also have been a mixture of Ligurians and Iberians.32 Nevertheless, the presence of Gallic mercenaries fighting alongside Carthage in 341 bc in Sicily against Timoleon appears undisputable.33 As the findings of Punic coinage indicate, these mercenaries were hired on the southern coast of France and in the Gulf of Lyon. Here, Carthage had already established a recruitment hub for Ligurians and Elysicians, outside the settled Celtic communities in Italy.34 However, by entering the Mediterranean world, the Celtic warrior elite evolved from being the bearer of Celtic expansionism to become instead a channel for the diffusion of classical culture in all its aspects. After years of service in Greek and Carthaginian armies, the aristocratic warrior leaders returned home enriched not only with plunder but also with cultural, technical, and military knowledge. All these assets would be wisely implemented when Celtic communities entered the political arena of Southern Europe, not only as secondary characters but as major players. At the end of the fourth century bc, it is possible to foresee, at least within the Gallic communities of Italy, a slow but sure change in social structure, that will come to affect how they conducted war. The growing need to participate in military operations which required a large number of troops, as well as the increasing demand for mercenaries, will require the lower tiers of Celtic society that did not belong to the warrior class to become militarily active. All this will lead to new requirements and start a chain reaction that will reach its peak in the middle of the third century  bc, initiating the development of a radically different approach to warfare that is strongly influenced by the Mediterranean world.

2.1  The panoply The fourth century  bc is a crucial moment of transition for the Celtic panoply. Some features that appear roughly sketched in the fifth century bc eventually take shape while other new elements are borrowed from the Greek and Etruscan world. Finally, some equipment is developed as result of the merging of Celtic and Mediterranean influences.

Celtic Warfare.indd 32

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 33 The fighter’s dynamism is still regarded as an asset, as the simple and plain design of his military equipment suggests. Conversely, there is a great deal of effort to strengthen and improve the defensive elements of the panoply – probably as a consequence of the strong frontal clashes which became the hallmark of a style of warfare adopted by many Mediterranean armies. In this period the warrior’s equipment is still far from having become standardized and, with the fourth  bc being a period of transition, the coexistence of features of the previous century with more recent and innovative elements is inevitable. However, the progressive development of some distinct features, that in the following century will give rise to a series of roughly defined roles within Celtic military structure, is undeniable. 2.1.1  The helmet In the first decade of the fourth century bc the helmet still represents an insignificant element of the panoply.35 Through the following years, new types are gradually adopted as a result of contact with and the influence of other Mediterranean models of warfare. At the same time, we see craftsmanship striving to provide suitable protection both for the head and the face. It is very difficult to establish a strict typology of Celtic helmets as scholars are far from agreed on a common terminology. French archaeologists are inclined to classify all Celtic helmets of the fourth century bc using the label ‘Celto-Italique’. Italian scholars prefer instead to categorize them as ‘Montefortino’ helmets. Following a thorough analysis, it is possible to group Celtic helmets of the fourth bc into two distinct categories according to design and material – even though there are various models with hybrid and shared features. The Berru helmet of the fifth century  bc, flamboyant but ineffective, progressively undergoes heavy modification and evolves into a model which can be conventionally defined as Celto-Italic.36 Initially, while retaining its conical shape, the helmet becomes progressively less elongated, developing according to a morphology clearly functional to the need to deflect downward blows.37 Later, following a development hinted at by the only iron Berru helmet, found in Dürrnberg, the real Celto-Italic helmet of the fourth century  bc begins to be crafted in iron as a consequence of the developments in craftsmanship and blacksmith technology.

Celtic Warfare.indd 33

12/09/2022 21:02

34  Celtic Warfare A pair of iron cheek pieces fixed with hinges to the helmet’s rim are added to the metal headgear (img. 2.1). The triple-disc profile of the cheek pieces, sometimes paired with a similar or simply round decoration on both sides of the headgear, can be linked to the artistic influence of the Italic milieu – it being almost impossible not to associate it with the triple-disc profile of Samnite armour. In addition to producing the iron specimen known as Celto-Italic, the fourth century  bc bears witness to the development of a bronze helmet shape that would become the most popular of the early Roman age. We are talking about the so-called Montefortino helmet (img. 2.2); the outcome of the merging of both Celtic and Etruscan cultural influences.38 Composed of a bronze headgear (practically identical to the fifthcentury bc helmet specimen with a raised central knob, neck roll and a roped decoration found in Dürrnberg) the Montefortino is equipped with a pair of anatomical cheek pieces, probably inspired by Etruscan helmets. Distinguishing the two categories is sometimes difficult and there are several hybrid models, discovered mainly in central Italy in the area inhabited by the Senones (img. 2.3). These findings feature a round shape but are

2.1  Celto-Italic helmet.

Celtic Warfare.indd 34

2.2  Montefortino helmet.

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 35

2.3  Montefortino B helmet.

2.4 ‘Horned’ Montefortino helmet.

equipped with threefold element cheek pieces which have been classified by Coarelli as Montefortino B.39 An additional sub-type of Montefortino, well liked among mainly the Boii tribes of Italy, features a pair of copper alloy foils in the shape of horns, articulated to the sides of the bowl (2.4). Probably, like the earlier Berru, the central knob of the Celto-Italic and the Montefortino could also have been decorated with feathers or horsehair. Some finds are also equipped with metal tubes, welded to the bowl or fixed to the apex, whose function was clearly to hold the feathers. So wide a range of helmets of such differing designs, along with the introduction of cheek pieces, clearly indicates active research and a desire to improve headgear as part of the panoply. Also of interest is the use of bronze in specimens with a globular or hemispherical bowl which are easier to craft, especially considering the widespread use of iron in a helmet model as complex as the Celto-Italic. The application of various materials, in some way out of place in the fifth century bc, could perhaps imply a functional distinction for some modules of the warrior’s defensive equipment. This transition might also possibly suggest the start of the involvement in military life by individuals not part of the aristocracy, with less disposable income.

Celtic Warfare.indd 35

12/09/2022 21:02

36  Celtic Warfare A helmet like the iron Celto-Italic, crafted using an expensive material that requires a long and challenging manufacturing process, was likely an expense affordable by only the wealthiest fighters. The threefold disc shape of the cheek pieces, offering less protection but also less obstruction to the wearer’s peripheral vision, could be associated with a highly flexible fighting style linked to chariot use and horsemanship. Conversely, a helmet with a plainer design, manufactured using a cheaper and more adaptable material lacking cheek pieces, could be associated with lower ranking fighters. The anatomical cheekbones, which slightly hinder the wearer’s peripheral vision but provide better protection to a broader portion of the warrior’s face, could be connected to infantry. However, it should be kept in mind that, in a military context as wide-ranging as the Celtic one, a strict categorisation cannot be applied dogmatically, especially during a transitional period such as the fourth century bc. 2.1.2  The armour Apparently neither archaeology nor classical sources provide evidence of noteworthy alterations to armour or body protection during the fourth century bc, in comparison to the previous century. The classical sources on this topic appear to be lacking and, in the face of iconographic evidence, the account of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (according to whom the Gauls who had fought in the battle at Allia river ‘have no other defence except shields’), looks to be questionable.40 Due chiefly to the ranks increasingly opening up to the lower social classes under the leadership of the warrior aristocracy, expensive articulated and composite armours, well-liked in the fifth century bc, would be found only on a minority of fighters. Nevertheless, the presence of Glauberg stele and figurine, already mentioned in the previous chapter, clearly suggests the enduring use of perishable material armour between the fifth and fourth centuries bc. This is also confirmed by some evidence from the fourth century bc. In tomb no. 2 of the necropolis of the Senones at Santa Maria di Filottrano (in the Marche region of central Italy), among the grave goods a bronze pan has been found. The vessel’s sculpted handles represent the figures of two warriors, armed with short swords, facing each other (img. 2.5). The warriors wear segmented armour with shoulder flaps which seem to be engraved with geometric decorations. The patterns on some segments might depict reinforcement plates and studs, perhaps crafted in leather or metal.

Celtic Warfare.indd 36

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 37

2.5  Filottrano pan handle, detail.

Even if the armour portrayed suggests an Umbrian influence, given the area of the discovery and the resemblance to native Etruscan and Italic armour (in particular, the one which the statue of Mars of Todi is wearing) we should not forget the presence of similar protection in genuinely Celtic sculptural contexts such as Glauberg. Not to mention the geometric decorations, which are reminiscent of the pattern engraved on the armour of the Roquepertuse statue. Undoubtedly, however, the broadening horizons of the Celtic milieu also led to the development of various models of armour that were the result of regional dissimilarities which characterized Celtic populations in different ways depending on the various places they settled. 2.6  Bust of Grézan. In Grézan near Nimes, the stone bust of a warrior was found dating back to between the end of the fifth and the beginning of the fourth century  bc.41 The warrior appears to be wearing a large belt to protect the abdomen, and also a breastplate crafted using

Celtic Warfare.indd 37

12/09/2022 21:02

38  Celtic Warfare perishable material, perhaps leather, decorated or reinforced both in the dorsal area and on the solar plexus by a metal element (img 2.6). Artistically, the statue of Grézan displays strong Greek and Iberian influences and the armour represented differs significantly from most other acknowledged Celtic models by the notable absence of shoulder flaps. This is probably, given the area of discovery, the result of the Celtic-Ligurian-Iberian koine that must have been the lesser-known people of the Elysicians. A similar set of circumstances can be found in the tomb of Canosa di Puglia, possibly the grave of a wealthy Gallic mercenary leader in the service of the Italian Greeks or the 2.7  Muscle cuirass from Canosa. Syracusans. Along with the famous Celto-Italic helmet decorated with coral appliqués, the grave goods contain an anatomical bronze thorax (θώραξ), a muscle cuirass crafted for hoplite troops (undoubtedly of great value) which was perhaps a gift, the spoils of war, or a purchase42 (img 2.7). Being in its uniqueness an isolated instance, most probably an example of a display rather than a functional use of the military panoply, the Canosa burial can not fully be considered a prototypical burial to use for reconstructing the appearance of Gallic warriors of the fourth century  bc. Nevertheless, this grave proves even more that the Celts were capable of adapting some components of their panoply by assimilating specific features of indigenous martial technology. It should be remembered, however, that aside from the questionable account of Dionysius of Halicarnassus, the figurative art of the Italic Peninsula begins to develop an image of the naked Celtic warrior fighting solely protected by his shield. Even if, without applying any rule of interpretation, this image is to be reliably considered and regarded as artistic tòpos, it is probably based on elements which were actually real. The image can be related to the birth within the Celtic milieu of those military brotherhoods of sacred nature. These war bands, highly praised for their military prowess and bravery, will arise in a more distinct way in literary sources pertaining to the third century bc.

Celtic Warfare.indd 38

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 39

2.8  Bivalve shield bosses.

2.1.3  The shield During the fourth century bc, we see a gradual circulation in archaeological records of metal reinforcing elements on shields, especially the bivalve shield bosses, which are used to enfold the central part of the wooden spine to which they are fastened (img 2.8). In some sporadic cases the surfaces of the shield bosses are enlarged to strengthen the board and create, sometimes along with a thin iron bar covering the spine, formidable reinforcement which could provide better protection against frontal strokes (img 2.9). We also find the metal flanges that run along the shield rim beginning to spread increasingly, especially in wealthy Celto-Italic settings. According to classical authors such protection was similarly adopted by the Romans for their shields in this period, immediately after their first clashes with the Gauls.43 In overall morphology, however, the Celtic shield endured no major alterations in comparison to the previous century. Furthermore, as previously stated, apart from the latest shields which benefit from the application of increasingly innovative metal elements, the essential shield entirely crafted in wood will never definitively disappear. Although the presence of specimens with a convex board has been conjectured, as a possible result of the exchange 2.9  Bivalve shield boss with iron bar covering with Italic and Etruscan populations44 (which were known for the spina. since ancient times occasionally to have used oblong and

Celtic Warfare.indd 39

12/09/2022 21:02

40  Celtic Warfare

2.10  Certosa stele, detail.

convex shields reinforced with a central wooden spine45) the only tangible evidence for this hypothesis could be provided by one interpretation of the Certosa Stele (img 2.10).46 In the absence of concrete data, therefore, it appears more advisable to rely on literary sources and archaeological evidence, which insist on the flat morphology of the board. Concerning both the size, always with no evidence of any standardization, and the diversity of the metal reinforcements, it generally appears difficult to identify specific categories of shield. However, the archaeological record can provide evidence of the birth of a range of types which, starting from the plain design typical of the fifth century bc, are individually distinguished by a substantial heterogeneity. In some cases, the joint is reinforced by means of nails pinned on the outer part of the board. Afterwards, the nails are hammered again to be secured inside the board. The scattered models which display a notably developed surface of the two fixing holes of the umbo are no longer fixed to the spine but directly to the shield body and the same nails are used to reinforce the handle’s slot in a design that will come to be established as standard. Among some populations, for example the Boii settled in Italy, the introduction of metal elements to shield design and production, except for metal flanges along the rim, did not happen until later.

Celtic Warfare.indd 40

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 41 This diversity appears to be related to the persistence of more archaic standards which probably favoured the fighters’ mobility over their protection. As already mentioned, the shield size appears to be in flux. Alongside references such as Vergil’s, who portrays the Gauls besieging the Capitoline Hill describing them as ‘bodies protected by tall shields’,47 some iconographic representations, such as the Certosa Stele, display the Celtic shield to be of medium size while archaeological evidence points at specimens no longer than 80cm in length. The collection and comparison of the various data, along with the iconography, the literary sources, and the archaeological finds, helps us to reconstruct an overview of the more diverse specimens. We find that the overall length of the shield fluctuates between 75 and 140cm. It is hard to assess whether these differences were dictated by functional or other reasons. At the current stage of research, advancing any hypothesis on the matter would be mere speculation, and so none is given. 2.1.4  Pole weapons The pole weapon technology experienced definite and substantial growth and improvement by comparison with other weapons in the fourth century bc. New categories were added to the existing javelin and frameae, both as throwing and thrusting weapons, as result both of interchange with other populations and of native Celtic creativity. Spearheads of between 40 and 50cm long, found infrequently during the fifth century bc, arise with increasing occurrence during the fourth century bc. Leaf-like in shape with a harmonious and slender profile and equipped with a strong central midrib, these points always appear associated with a long tubular butt-spike (img 2.11). This feature must have been designed both: to strengthen the lower butt of the weapon; to act as a secondary weapon were the wooden shaft to break during impact, but, above all, to balance the spear, whose overall length was, remarkably, possibly not less than 250cm.48 The primary purpose of a balancing element, which consequently leads us to suppose a weapon of decent length, is suggested above all by the morphology of the butt-spike sockets. Unlike the few fifth-century bc buttspikes, small and piercing, the fourth-century bc ones have been modified, elongated, and made blunt, given that the function of the weapon of last resort had to be absolutely secondary and subordinate. The presence of a blunt butt-spike could also suggest an intention to abandon the offensive purpose of the rear of the spear. The shaft,

Celtic Warfare.indd 41

12/09/2022 21:02

42  Celtic Warfare

2.11  Thrusting spearheads and tubular butt-spikes.

being elongated and cumbersome to use, could have accidentally injured companions in the melee. However, the adoption into the panoply of these long thrusting spears, which had probably been inspired by Etruscan and Italian Greek49 spears, arises for two reasons. Aside from its obvious functional purpose, as per the Canosa armour,50 the Celts sought to imitate the military equipment of populations whose technical and socioeconomic excellence they had, more or less, explicitly acknowledged. The phenomenon appears consistent with the sort of penchant for exoticism which was triggered in many populations of Central and Western Europe by their first contact with the classical world.51 The findings of elongated thrusting spears appear to come from the panoplies of elite individuals of high social ranking, indicating that the weapon might hold not only a practical purpose52 but one as a status symbol. This seems to corroborate the hypothesis previously stated. At the end of the fourth century bc, in addition to the elongated thrusting spears, the Gallic panoply also begins to adopt a range of highly specialized missile weapons. Among the Celts settled in Italy we begin to see the pilum appear (img. 2.12). A javelin of Etruscan origin,53 the pilum was already included within the panoply of several Italic populations and was later adopted in a systematic way by the Romans. The weapon will undergo a constant evolution, through

2.12  Different models of socketed pilum.

Celtic Warfare.indd 42

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 43 the following centuries, aimed at improving and increasing its already lethal piercing effectiveness. The first prototypes of pilum consisted of an iron shank with a pyramidal head. The shank was joined to the wooden shaft by a socket. The point was sometimes leaf shaped or barbed in design. A deadly weapon with an impressive piercing effect, similarly to the gaesum, it was able to injure the enemy even if it was intercepted by the shield – thanks to a long and slender shank capable of penetrating deeply through the enemy’s shield, embedding itself firmly in the wooden body. 2.1.5  The sword Describing the swords used by the Gauls, who in the fourth century  bc descended upon Etruria and Latium and confronted the Romans led by M. Furius Camillus, Plutarch portrays the weapons as badly manufactured, prone to getting twisted and bent.54 Actually, the archaeological evidence disproves the literary sources, and Celtic swords of the period display blades of excellent craftsmanship.55 Archaeological records attest to the adoption of the La Tène swords by practically every culture the Celts came into contact with during the fourth century bc (including Italic, Etruscan56 and even Roman ones57), and cast doubt upon Plutarch’s account of their being weapons of poor quality. The Greek historian displays a prejudice shared by Greek and Roman authors, albeit that this concept was conceived and forged in much later times and contexts. In fact, fourth-century bc Celtic swords, being the result of outstanding design and expert craftsmanship, still appear to be the exclusive prerogative of the aristocracy and are highly praised and regarded as a luxury item. The variety of sword types dating back to the fifth century  bc, in the fourth century  bc progressively develop into three different categories of sword. The first one features a blade ranging up between 5 and 6cm in width and 65 and 70cm in length. The second type is characterized by a slightly narrower and shorter blade around 60cm in length. The third category, less widespread, bears a blade 50cm long and 3 to 4cm wide.58

2.13  La Tène B1 swords and scabbards.

Celtic Warfare.indd 43

12/09/2022 21:02

44  Celtic Warfare Although the specimens display unmistakeable alterations in size, the three types of blade have a very similar structure (img. 2.13). All the varieties roughly retain the balanced and slender profile of the very early La Tène period, hindering any speculation attempting to classify them according to hypothetical differentiation of their separate purposes. The only exception is the shorter type (img 2.14) which consistently shows a notably sharpened point and a hollow grind blade section (img.  2.15), suggesting a predisposition for thrusting blows. Conversely the other types, which alternately feature a diamond or a lenticular section (img. 2.16), suggest a broader use of the weapon.

2.14  La Tène B1 sword shorter type.

2.15  Hollow grind blade section.

2.16  Diamond and lenticular blade sections.

In the fourth century bc the two-halved scabbard, entirely manufactured using metal sheets, became the standard and composite models crafted in wood and other metals disappeared completely. The two halves of the scabbard, which slide one inside the other, are secured through a joint at the chape. The system was very likely conceived and designed to enable the maintenance of the sheath and its replacement in case of damage. At the end of the fourth century bc archaeology witnesses the introduction of a new part, linked to the sword suspension system, which would develop in complexity throughout the following century. The leather strips connected to each other by metal rings that act as a carrying belt for the scabbard are discarded, to be replaced by small iron

Celtic Warfare.indd 44

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 45 rods, flat or twisted in design, placed as a connection between the rings (img. 2.17).59 Thanks to the all-metal structure, it is possible to examine in detail the belt framework, which is composed of two distinct elements, one shorter and one longer, which were fastened to the belt to wrap the warrior’s chest in opposite directions with both extremities reuniting in the frame.

2.17  Flat iron rods sword belt.

The suspension belt thus conceived stays even closer to the warrior’s body and limits, as much as possible, any jostling during running, much as did the metal sheaths invented at the end of the fifth century bc to safeguard the clasp structure. Moreover, the sheath’s securer contact with the warrior’s side, which inhibits its random movement, ensures that the scabbard does not become a hindrance and does not get in the way during running, thus allowing the fighter to considerably increase his mobility and speed. Again, for practicality, in conjunction with widespread use of the shield, the sword suspension on the right flank becomes standardized60 and will remain so through the following centuries.61 Were the sword suspended on the left side, the posture of the arm holding the shield’s handle would in fact have hindered and exposed the warrior to accidentally injuring himself in quickly drawing the weapon. In addition, unlike the Greek aspis, the Celtic shield did not feature a hollow structure to accommodate the movement of extraction of the blade, further encumbering the warrior were he to draw it from the left side. 2.1.6  Knives and daggers Concerning short blades, the archaeology does not indicate any substantial change from the previous century. We find the same scattered surviving single-edged huge knives, with ergonomic and sometimes decorated handles, along with leaf-shaped daggers with some specimens featuring antenna shaped hilts.

Celtic Warfare.indd 45

12/09/2022 21:02

46  Celtic Warfare 2.1.7  Ranged weapons Compared to the previous century, there are no relevant differences seen in ranged weapons and the archaeological evidence relating to archery proves to be quantitatively scarce, offering only a patchy overview for establishing with certainty whether the finds can be linked to war rather than hunting. The arrowheads consistently suggest a design datable to previous eras. Tomb 520 from the Austrian burial ground of Pottenbrunn, also known as the ‘physician’s burial’, contains, along with other grave goods, four barbed arrowheads (img. 2. 18).62 2.18  Arrowheads from the ‘physician’s Broadly speaking, the scattered discoveries burial’ of Pottenbrunn. seem to be mostly confined to the eastern boundaries of the Celtic milieu – namely, those areas which would have been directly affected by the influence of steppe peoples. 2.1.8  The war chariot An iconic hallmark of the Celtic warrior aristocracy, the war chariot continued to be widely used throughout the first half of the fourth century bc. Even though some settings, such as the Italic one, suffer from a chronic lack of specific archaeological evidence of war chariots, many burial grounds, in particular those located in Central Europe, retain a substantial amount of relevant findings.63 During the second half of the fourth century bc in continental Europe, however, the archaeological evidence relating to war chariots began, albeit very slowly, to become less common, indicating the major change that was beginning to take place within Celtic culture and warfare. The chariot in the West was regarded as the preserve of the nobleman and the hero rather than being an instrument of war – as it widely was in the Near East. This attitude is compatible with the still immature and partially ritualized state of Celtic military development. It is contact with Mediterranean civilizations that compels the Celtic populations to steer their warfare through an evolution, towards more practical and functional models. However, the lack of ruling unity and centralized government, together with the wide geographic range inhabited by the Celtic population, hinders

Celtic Warfare.indd 46

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 47 any swift or homogenous change. Despite the fact that, by the second half of the fourth century, some segments of the Celtic milieu are already dismissing the war chariot, these machines will endure, albeit playing a lesser role, for the whole milieu in the following century. However, in some peripheral areas, like the British islands, this did not happen and the war chariot continued to be used as before.

2.2  The combat The acquisition of new components to the panoply throughout the fourth century  bc, as well as progressive integration within the Mediterranean arena, undoubtedly led Celtic populations to acquire models of warfare different from earlier ones. However, we cannot generalize or posit absolute rules, as Celtic warfare evolved in different areas at dissimilar rates. The fourth century  bc century in particular observed very dissimilar approaches to battle and conflict, depending on contingencies, requirements, and the geographical areas or influence of the indigenous populations involved. If those pole weapons of remarkable size – according to what can be inferred from the archaeological evidence contained in burial grounds – imply their being a symbol of membership to certain social groups or specific military brotherhoods,64 their design, which suggests some precise functional needs, must be further examined. The elongated point and the presence of a blunt tubular butt-spike do not represent, on a deeper level, a distinguishing feature connected to types of combat which we might surmise have begun to involve fighters deployed in organized lines and tight formations. These weapons, discovered in both Cisalpine and Transalpine regions, denote more than any other findings a move to emulate, initially for doctrinal reasons then for practical ones, models of tactics and warfare emblematic of Greek and Etruscan populations. On the other hand, the adoption of specialized ranged weapons such as the pilum indicates an interest also consistently directed at more dynamic approaches to armed fighting, compatible with that genuinely La Tène warrior background which created such technical wonders as the sword belt. The systematic adoption of the sword’s suspension on the fighter’s right side, simplifying the extraction of the blade while holding the shield at the same time, allows its fluid and fast use even after the discharge of a ranged weapon.

Celtic Warfare.indd 47

12/09/2022 21:02

48  Celtic Warfare An extraction system devised to decrease, as much as possible, the time elapsed between javelins being hurled and the frontal onslaught with the sword thus augments the disruptive effect of the charge. The purpose of this tactic aimed to strike down sectors of the opponent’s ranks as soon as they had been sufficiently weakened by the missile volley. The notion that the Celtic sword, as already mentioned, might have operated as a versatile multipurpose tool contradicts the account reported by literary sources. In the Classical chronicles which recount clashes connected to the last military campaign led by Furius Camillus against the Gauls in 367 bc, the sword as used by the Celts is described primarily as a slashing weapon wielded with broad sweeping blows: …the barbarians’ manner of fighting, being in large measure that of wild beasts and frenzied, was an erratic procedure, quite lacking in military science. Thus, at one moment they would raise their swords aloft and smite after the manner of wild boars (savagely), throwing the whole weight of their bodies into the blow like hewers of wood or men digging with mattocks, and again they would deliver crosswise blows aimed at no target, as if they intended to cut to pieces the entire bodies of their adversaries, protective armour and all.65 According to Plutarch’s account, the initial clash with the Gauls will drive the Romans, after they were defeated, to reform their military equipment, introducing iron helmets and bronze rims to their shields, to protect themselves against these fierce slashing blows: Knowing that the prowess of the barbarians lay chiefly in their swords, which they plied in true barbaric fashion, and with no skill at all, in mere slashing blows at head and shoulders, he had helmets forged for most of his men which were all iron and smooth of surface, that the enemy’s swords might slip off from them or be shattered by them. He also had the long shields of his men rimmed round with bronze, since their wood could not of itself ward off the enemy’s blows.66 Although the reference to the adoption of metal rims to the Roman’s shields can be accepted, the reference to iron helmets does not seem to be consistent with the archaeological evidence. Broadly speaking, both Dionysius’s and Plutarch’s accounts look more likely in their entireties to be reformulations of Polybius’s narration relating to the Battle of Telamon in 225 bc. They thus, anachronistically, depict events 150 years later, which in no way represent the reality of the fourth century bc.

Celtic Warfare.indd 48

12/09/2022 21:02

Mercenaries 49 Celtic swords of the period therefore had to be used both as thrusting as slashing weapons, with different models of weapon possibly favouring one rather than the other mode of use. Even if, as the archaeological evidence seems to be suggesting, the Celts’ approach to warfare is slowly turning towards a more practical, cosmopolitan, and less ritualized one, the fourth century bc (as a transitional period) shows evidence of a wide variety of dissimilar approaches which include continued archaic aspects of Celtic warfare, such as single combat between champions. Surrounded by a halo of legend, the duels that took place between Gallic champions and Roman leaders during the clashes of the fourth century bc transcend the historical reality of specific deeds and events to provide us with evidence of great anthropological interest. We can turn, for example, to the descriptions of the fight involving Titus Manlius Torquatus: In the meantime, a Gaul came forward, who was naked except for a shield and two swords and the ornament of a torque and bracelets; in strength and size, in youthful vigour and in courage as well, he excelled all the rest. In the very height of the battle, when the two armies were fighting with the utmost ardour, he began to make signs with his hand to both sides, to cease fighting. The combat ceased. As soon as silence was secured, he called out in a mighty voice that if anyone wished to engage him in single combat, he should come forward. This no one dared do, because of his huge size and savage aspect. Then the Gaul began to laugh at them and to stick out his tongue towards the Romans.67 Or as another writer describes it: A Gaul of very large stature advanced on the bridge, then unoccupied, and says with as loud a voice as he could exert, ‘Let the bravest man that Rome now possesses come forward here to battle, that the event of an engagement between us both may show which nation is superior in war.’68 It is impossible not to create an instant connection with the accounts reported by Diodorus, and some specific features and acts, such as Celts sticking their tongues out at foes, reported by Livy. Similarly, Gellius, who quotes Quadrigarius, reports that ‘the Gaul […] rejoiced foolishly and showed his tongue’.69 Both episodes find an immediate parallel in the distinguished deeds of heroes depicted in the epic of the Irish Celts.

Celtic Warfare.indd 49

12/09/2022 21:02

50  Celtic Warfare A gesture more intimidating than mocking, whose connection with war appears to be a defining custom of various tribal cultures,70 it strongly recalls the riastradh (literally ‘contortion’, ‘deformation’) the warrior frenzy of the heroes of the Irish epic, which involved warriors contorting their features to appear dreadful in the eyes of foes: [Cú Chulainn] closed one of his eyes so that it became as narrow as the eye of a needle; he opened the other until it was as large as the mouth of a mead cup. He widened his mouth from his jaw to his ears, and he opened it so wide that it could be seen at the bottom of his throat. His head was surrounded by the halo of the champion.71 2.2.1  The cavalry Even though the decline of the war chariot was yet to come, in the fourth century  bc the cavalry already played a relevant role within the Celtic military culture. Celtic warfare highly praised horsemanship and developed distinctive methods of mounted fighting. This specific prowess was held in high regard by the Greeks, who at that time were the main recruiters of Celtic mercenaries. The engagement tactics of Celtic horsemen are accurately described by Xenophon, who reports the clashes between Thebes and a company of fifty mercenaries, most likely belonging to the Gallic nation of the Senones, sent by Syracuse to support Sparta in 369 bc. But the little body of cavalry lately arrived from Dionysius spread out in a long thin line, and one by one galloped along the front, discharging their missiles as they dashed forward, and when the enemy rushed against them, retired, and again wheeling about, showered another volley. Even while so engaged they would dismount from their horses and take breath; and if their foes galloped up while they were so dismounted, in an instant they had leapt on their horses’ backs and were in full retreat. Or if, again, a party pursued them some distance from the main body, as soon as they turned to retire, they would press upon them, and discharging volleys of missiles, made terrible work, forcing the whole army to advance and retire, merely to keep pace with the movements of fifty horsemen.72 Like the charioteer, the mounted warrior heavily relies on ranged weapons. The depiction of the battle’s course clearly shows a troop of skirmishers who weaken their opponents with incessant assaults, strategic retreats, and obstructive manoeuvres, without physically engaging in close combat, making the most of their mobility and speed.

Celtic Warfare.indd 50

12/09/2022 21:02

Chapter 3

A People’s Army

(La Tène B2: approx. 320–260 bc; La Tène C1: approx. 260–180 bc)

B

y the beginning of the third century bc the process of sedenterization of Celtic populations in Italy has concluded, and the Gauls are firmly settled within the social fabric of the Italian peninsula. A substantial area of the Marche and Romagna has become the so-called Ager Gallicus;1 and Padanian Etruria, 2 along with other large portions of Northern Italy, has come to be known as Gallia Cisalpina.3 The unstable and incredibly volatile communities of the fifth and fourth centuries  bc had to bend to the contingencies resulting from their settlement in the region. Proto-state structures were born which, despite not being comparable in complexity to their Mediterranean neighbours, nevertheless had to respond to the needs of increasingly complex, stratified, and articulated communities. Once again, the Celts’ multifaceted character gave rise to political structures which, from what little we can gather from historical sources, although similar, retained their own regional peculiarities. For example, the Insubres Gauls, who settled in central and western Lombardy and in eastern Piedmont, came together in a federation of numerous authentically Celtic or Celticized tribal entities. The political and religious capital of their domain was the city of Mediolanum, nowadays Milan. The Cenomanes Gauls,4 who settled in eastern Lombardy and in large areas of Veneto and Trentino, seem at least partially to have been accountable to the authority of a senate which sat in Brixia, nowadays Brescia. The contacts that the Celtic communities of Italy are seen to maintain with their transalpine kinsmen became vectors for the transmission of technologies and knowledge. Despite this process of transmission being limited by political heterogeneity and by natural boundaries, these communities increasingly became able to spread the innovations that they

Celtic Warfare.indd 51

12/09/2022 21:02

52  Celtic Warfare developed all over the Celtic world. This process occurred as much in the political as, consequently, in the military sector, helped by the constant ebb and flow of Transalpine Gauls to and from the Cisalpine region. The same political entities, born in the third century bc as a result of new Celtic expansion in Eastern Europe, found realization in political bodies structured as a kind of senate,5 such as the tetrarchies of the Koinon Galaton in Asia Minor.6 The switch from a semi-nomadic lifestyle driven by relentless expansion to a sedentary society, along with the constant confrontation with neighbouring Italic populations, forced the Celts to face new and difficult problems. Increasingly active involvement in the conflicts of the Mediterranean world, no longer exclusively as mercenaries or immigrants but as actual protostate entities, demanded from the Celts a level of effort never previously encountered. The necessity of proving themselves competitive, from a quantitative perspective, without losing track of the qualitative perspective, drove and pushed all social classes7 towards active involvement in warfare. All the while, the process of adopting equipment, tactics and strategies from their Mediterranean neighbours, which had been previously seen as an aristocratic pastime, became an obligatory path that the less prosperous classes found themselves having to follow. By the end of the fourth century bc, the demand for military personnel had reached a level that the Celtic military aristocracy alone, already challenged by a century of intensive mercenary work, was no longer able to sustain. The battles of the third century  bc in which Celts clashed against Greek and Roman armies involved tens of thousands of men on each side, numbers that clearly could not be covered by an elite alone. If, on the one hand, the Celtic communities relied on an economy mostly based on agriculture combined with livestock farming, with a still simple, underdeveloped social structure, lacking robust political stability, they certainly could not have politically afforded, like those made in Rome, whose leaders managed to establish an increasingly professional army.8 On the other hand, the evolution of Celtic groups into settled proto-state communities made a return to the extreme approach to warfare typical of semi-nomadic social groups, which had been one of their main assets during their expansion between fifth and fourth centuries bc, as inconceivable as it was impractical. The only feasible solution we can elucidate, as much from historical sources as the archaeological record, was the mass adoption of various features of Mediterranean equipment, warfare and fighting tactics. That,

Celtic Warfare.indd 52

12/09/2022 21:02

A People’s Army 53 exalting simple aspects of combat such as cohesion, head on clashes and coordination of forces, enabled the warrior aristocracy to turn farmers and craftsmen into good quality troops. These men, having necessarily to devote themselves to the productive cycle of their own communities through the year, had neither the time nor the resources to spend on continuous and professional military training.9 That which for the Greeks of the seventh century bc originally embodied a choice of goals imposed by an ethical-philosophical drive, was, during the course of the fourth and third centuries bc, a functional necessity for the Celts. Greek culture conceived the hoplite phalanx as a way to impose rules on the chaotic world of battle and minimize its most deleterious aspects. This application led to the development of a closed system of combat. The hoplite phalanx, as a model of combat, ends up advancing a style of confrontation which – from the ritualized warfare of the Mycenaean heroes, through the Greek Dark Ages – despite some differences and a strong ritualization, retains a recognizable developmental course maturing into a codified set of rules and phases. Celtic warfare, without ever abandoning its peculiar predisposition for swift strikes and surprise attacks,10 inherited from an older military tradition, found itself having to embrace a system of close formation because this was the only functional military system for the peasant masses, capable of rendering them, within their limits, effective and self-sufficient on the battlefield. However, the hoplite phalanx that the Celts encountered was that one interpreted by the populations of the Italic Peninsula, developed in a context distinguished by a frenetic research directed towards constantly improving weapons and fighting techniques and, unlike in Greece, by the intensive usage of missile weapons. Therefore, it is certainly not possible, much less reasonable, to claim that the Celtic combatant was remodelled after the Greek hoplite between the fourth and third centuries bc. More likely, some specific social classes within the Celtic military ranks gradually adopted various aspects of, and features peculiar to hoplite warfare, drawing on that wealth of knowledge developed in Italy where the hoplite warfare system had already been adapted and reinterpreted to fit local requirements.11 The necessity of rendering almost every male individual of enlistable age ‘fit for combat’ brought to the battlefield representatives of different social classes. This process led to the creation, recorded by historical sources, of

Celtic Warfare.indd 53

12/09/2022 21:02

54  Celtic Warfare various military units to which diverse roles were assigned. The role of these troops in the theatre of operations was influenced – as in many other military contexts of the time – as much by the equipment at their disposal as by the training they were able to obtain. Starting from the second half of the third century, along with the peasant masses, the Gallic armies began to include an increasing number of members of a new-born middle class: craftsmen, merchants, stockbreeders, and lesser landowners. These individuals, whose development had been favoured as much by urbanization as the spread of wealth, were no longer part of the peasant class, but at the same time did not belong to the aristocracy. The greater availability of wealth and resources, as well as the relative absence of obligations strictly associated with the farming production cycle, allowed the members of the Gallic middle class to devote more resources to the development of martial training, following both a practical and a social impulse. Along with the purpose of being able to protect themselves in battle through better weaponry and possibly better training than the peasant class, there was also the desire to strive for the heroic ideal, with a view to enhancing their status and position. Whenever possible, and according to their resources, the members of the middle class sought to appropriate the prerogatives of highborn warriors, in order to appear, in terms of social rank, like them on the battlefield. For their part, the military brotherhoods consisting of upper-class fighters, who had already turned to mercenary service during the fourth century bc, other than remaining the main channel for the dissemination of military innovations – thanks to that internal and external fluidity of movement within the Celtic world which still made these innovations stand out – found themselves in the newly developed social system reassuming the natural role of an authoritative driving force with the task of coordinating and managing the fighting masses. Although it seems impossible not to recognize the aristocratic military élites as the main driving force behind the great Celtic expedition to Greece in 280 bc, this endeavour in its implementation and planning differs notably from the great migrations of the fifth century bc. These events appear above all to be the consequence of spontaneous impulse where the relocation is directed, by the elements of a population or a tribal federation, at finding new and fertile lands to settle in – rather than having the well-defined features of a military campaign. The widespread recruitment that occurred, instead, among the Transalpine Celtic communities regarding the Greek expedition is symptomatic of

Celtic Warfare.indd 54

12/09/2022 21:02

A People’s Army 55 a highly militarized background. A number of warlords assembled and deployed heterogeneous armies among the Celtic communities. The evident purpose of this recruitment, which involved warbands recruited from different homelands, was to wage war against Macedonia. This event can be regarded as a conscious and well-considered response to the opposition that Alexander’s successors had exercised against Celtic penetration into the Balkans.12 With good reason, therefore, we can identify in the third century bc the moment in which, for the vast majority of the Celtic world, conflict ceased to be a self-interested initiative, a chaotic impulse to pillage or the consequence of migration, and became military science in its own right.

3.1  The panoply In the third century  bc the archaeological evidence bears out a degree of standardization of many elements of the panoply, along with their further specialization. Most of the fourth century had been marked by a range of weapons which, while retaining shared essential features, differed noticeably between geographic areas, thus demonstrating a plurality of approaches to warfare. However, in the transition between the fourth and third centuries  bc, with the exception of some geographically isolated archaic settings, many elements of weaponry tended to conform to a standard model. Paired javelins, or frameae, gradually disappear from burials are replaced by the long thrusting spear with a large point and rounded butt, more compatible with new military tactics. Furthermore, the number of singleedge blades increases exponentially in necropolis sites and, along with polearms, far exceed the number of swords. This could be interpreted as a sign of the militarization of the less prosperous ranks of the community. Concerning defensive weaponry, shields continue to be made more robust and the first chainmail metal cuirasses begin to appear. Analysing above all the Celtic continental context as a whole, it appears that, after the multiplicity of customs and practices of the fourth century, we may now have arrived at a point where we can codify a common direction of weapons development. This process is strongly influenced by new tactical needs. Along with taking into account the needs of the warrior caste, this standardization aimed to equip the other less wealthy and militarily experienced classes with the weaponry most appropriate to their capacity and requirements.

Celtic Warfare.indd 55

12/09/2022 21:02

56  Celtic Warfare 3.1.1  The helmet The helmet in the third century is a fundamental element of the panoply for the majority of Celtic fighters. In the increasingly frequent context of large-scale pitched battles, the helmet might have been a dispensable item for lightly armed fighters, most likely recruited from the very lowest ranks and probably deployed as skirmishers and screening force. It was, however, absolutely essential gear for warriors fighting in tight formations. Aside from its obvious defensive function against enemy blows, the helmet protected the skull from accidental collisions and abrasions with one’s own shield and that of one’s fellow soldiers. This situation must have occurred often in a close formation, more so with a shield such as the Celtic one. Its structure, not being in any way attached to the forearm, made its use extremely versatile and manoeuvrable. However, for the same reason, the Celtic shield was less stable in handling than its Greek counterpart. While the categories of metal helmets remain more or less the same, at the beginning of the third century their diffusion becomes more widespread. Among the necropolises that can be traced back to highly militarized populations/tribes such as the Senones, practically every combatant13 appears to be equipped with a helmet, be it a Montefortino, a Celto-Italic, or a hybrid model. The poorest variants of the above-mentioned helmets to be found, particularly popular among the Senones, are represented in necropolises by

3.1  Montefortino helmets of the Senones.

Celtic Warfare.indd 56

12/09/2022 21:02

A People’s Army 57 variated pieces, all different from each other but united in similarity by the presence of an apex, simple workmanship and, in some cases, by a barely sketched neck guard, along with the presence of supportive tubes, probably designed to hold feathers which would adorn the helmet (img 3.1). The aspect of the Celto-Italic bronze (img 3.2) or iron (img 3.3) helmets from Eastern Europe appears even cruder, though undoubtedly functional, and is attributable to participants of the great expedition to Greece.

3.2  Celto-Italic bronze helmets from Eastern Europe.

3.3  Celto-Italic iron helmet from Eastern Europe.

Celtic Warfare.indd 57

3.4  Celto-Italic bronze helmet from Eastern Europe with anatomical cheek pieces.

12/09/2022 21:02

58  Celtic Warfare Probably a product of the need to quickly but effectively arm a large number of individuals, they are characterized by numerous modifications made subsequent to their manufacture, such as the addition of reinforcements or anatomical cheek pieces to replace the threefold ones (img 3.4). We see the Montefortino type, however, generally appreciated by a large number of European populations: Iberians, Italics, Etruscans and Romans. The sub-type with copper alloy horns, born in the previous century, is still also quite popular. Other than the function of having a psychological impact on adversaries, as well as a ceremonial one – which could be suggested by the option of removing or attaching the antlers at will – the wide circulation of this model, from the Celtic homeland all the way to the Ligurian and Oscan14 regions, could also suggest its use as a practical device for the identification of leaders and war chiefs by troops in the heat of battle. The jointing system for the horns, then, rather than being designed to remove them prior to the fight and attach them for parades, may have been conceived to replace the foils that must have frequently broken during battles. At the same time the jointing system allowed the horns to be removed in the event that a blow from above intercepted them, in order to avoid serious neck trauma. During the third century  bc varied helmets adorned with decorative, meaningful, and fantastical elements begin to be seen. Among these, the Ciumesti helmet stands out, mounted by a bird of prey whose wings, equipped with a system of hinges, reproduce the illusion of flight as the warrior moves. Other remarkable specimens include the Tintignac helmet,15 decorated with a triangular structure composed of three bronze rings with a diameter of 28cm,16 and the helmet found on the Teano bronze figurine (Img.  3.5), decorated with what appear to be goat horns.17 From the third century onwards, helmets with decorative elements such as representations of animals or antlers became such a typical feature of the Celtic milieu, at least among the upper classes, that Diodorus Siculus would go on to give a 3.5  Teano bronze figurine. thorough description of them.18

Celtic Warfare.indd 58

12/09/2022 21:02

A People’s Army 59 Even though the writings of Diodorus may be, without doubt, the result of an intermingling of sources from different periods, as far as the panoply of the individual warrior is concerned, Diodorus’ depiction, which is thorough with regard to some elements that are archaeologically circumstantial to the third century, is consistent above all when describing the sword suspension system. 3.6  Coolus-Mannheim helmet. Along with the above-mentioned types, at the end of the third century we witness the introduction of a new model of helmet, the so-called Coolus-Mannheim.19 Unlike the previous ones, which displayed a constant striving and commitment for improvement of design and manufacture, the Coolus-Mannheim featured by comparison a minimal and extremely simplified design. Manufactured from a hemispherical or slightly ogive bronze cap fitted with a neck guard, the helmet was secured under the throat by fastening a leather lace (img 3.6). The development of this model, due to the absence of an expensive and demanding element such as the cheek pieces, must have been cheaper and therefore more accessible and less challenging to manufacture. This trend could be regarded as a further sign that the army was welcoming social classes from outside the aristocracy. For the same reason, besides the various types of metal helmets, the development and adoption of headgear manufactured using perishable material could be taken into consideration for the third century. If in mixed settings, distinguished nonetheless by an important Celtic influence, as with various settings of the Iberian peninsula, use of the leather helmet spread, 20 it appears difficult not to hypothesize the existence of a greater Celtic presence in a period of such widespread militarization such as the third century bc. Numismatic evidence henceforward, effectively recognizes the presence of hoods or headgear, in the transalpine area, whose representations will become more and more detailed in the centuries to come (img. 3.7). Their presence on the heads of prominent 3.7  Headgear on III bc people represented on coins, might be interpreted celtic coin.

Celtic Warfare.indd 59

12/09/2022 21:03

60  Celtic Warfare as the acquisition of symbolic qualities by a functional object – which, by this, need not have had lost its practical use in other contexts. This happens according to a process, which appears well established and consistent with the Celtic culture, that can also be observed regarding the sling, a humble weapon which in Irish epics is the hallmark of gods and heroes.21 3.1.2  The armour Research on a better armour for fighters resulted in the widespread use of a new type of armour, fashioned using tens of thousands of interlocking metal rings. The first literary reference to this is by Diodorus Siculus, who states that ‘Some of them [the Celts] have iron armour made of chains’.22 This specific type of armour is nowadays known by the Latin neologism of lorica hamata. The Roman author Varro used the term gallica23 for this kind of mail armour, indicating how the Roman world considered it to be typical of Celtic populations. The lorica hamata must have been protection designed primarily against slashing blows, and its structure of manifold rings would also have uniformly distributed the impact of rapid blows. The lorica hamata was equipped with a fastening system on the breastplates by means of humeralia or shoulder-pieces, also made of mail, in every way similar to the ‘tube and yoke’ armour of previous centuries, such as those depicted on the Filottrano pan (img. 2.5) or in the Glauberg stele (img. 1.7). The fastenings through which the humeralia would be secured to the chest fall into two categories. The first one appears to be most widespread in the northern and western areas of the Celtic milieu, the second one in the southern and eastern regions. The first example features a metal stud on each of the humeralia, fastened to the front of the armour through one of two pivoting hooks secured on the chest (img. 3.8). The second one consists of a pivoting bronze plate, rectangular (img. 3.9) or threefold in design, riveted only through the left shoulderflap and meant to engage a single stud fixed on the right flap to secure the armour. Both kinds of fastening system require that 3.8  Lorica hamata hooks fastening. the left shoulder-flap be permanently secured Reconstruction of Kirkburn finding.

Celtic Warfare.indd 60

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 61 to the armour’s front with a rivet for structural stability. Given its considerable weight, which must have ranged between 10 and 20kg depending on the number of rings used and their thickness, the mail armour would certainly have had to be worn on top of additional felt or leather protection.24 We can assume that this protection would not have been very different from the perishable suits of armour of previous 3.9  Lorica hamata rectangular plate fastening. Detail from Athena centuries. This garment protected the fighter Nikephoros relief. from rubbing against the metal rings, and cushioned the weight of the chainmail, providing a defence against thrusting blows and blunt injuries. The rings that made up the lorica hamata were produced by extruding an iron wire usually about 1–2mm thick, which was then twisted into a spring and cut. The open rings thus obtained, typically with an internal diameter varying between 6mm and 1cm, were fitted together and tightened by joining the two ends. The main items of archaeological evidence of lorica hamata consist of some fragments from the Celtic necropolis of Horny Jatov in Slovakia, followed by those from the Romanian necropolis of Ciumesti, and a fragment from Tiefenau in Switzerland. The Ciumesti fragments, initially dated to around the fourth century bc, 25 were later ascribed to the second half of the third century  bc, similar to the Tiefenau fragment, whereas the Horny Jatov ones were later ascribed to around the first half of that century.26 The rings from the fragments found at Horny Jatov and Ciumesti are constructed according to a ‘4 in 1’ pattern, with each ring joined to four others (img 3.10).27 Whereas the severely compromised state of preservation of the Slovak fragments did not allow further data to be obtained, it was possible to establish the thickness and diameter of the rings of the two Romanian fragments. The first Ciumesti fragment displays rings with an inner diameter ranging between 6.7 and 8.4mm and a thickness varying between 0.8 and 1.8mm.

Celtic Warfare.indd 61

12/09/2022 21:03

62  Celtic Warfare While the inner diameter of the rings of the second fragment varies between 5.8 and 6.3 and the thickness between 1.2 and 1.4mm. Conversely, the rings belonging to the Tiefenau fragment, with an inner diameter of 1cm and a thickness of about 2mm, are assembled in a ‘6 in 1’ pattern, 28 creating a much more tightly knitted but certainly heavier garment (img 3.11).

3.10  ‘4 in 1’ maille pattern.

3.11  ‘6 in 1’ maille pattern.

In addition to the archaeological evidence from continental Europe, a complete lorica hamata was recovered in a rich burial at Kirkburn,29 in Yorkshire. The armour has been roughly attributed to the end of the first half of the third century bc. The find features rings with a thickness ranging between 1.5 and 1.9mm and an inner diameter between 6.3 and 7.2mm. The presence in the first half of the third century bc of a lorica hamata in such a peripheral and remote context as the British Isles, as well as the rapid spread of this type of armour, would suggest it originates towards the end of the fourth century bc, which would be corroborated by statuary. The backdating between the fourth 3.12  Bust from Entremont. and third centuries  bc of the Fox-

Celtic Warfare.indd 62

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 63 Ampoux and Entremont (img 3.12) torsos,30 portraying warriors wearing a lorica hamata, would settle the chronology of this type of armour, evidently linking its invention to Celtic populations. It should be highlighted that the conception, development and spread of the lorica hamata must not completely lead us to think that earlier models of armour were to be discarded. Mail armour, due to its high cost of manufacture and the material employed, was necessarily restricted to the most prominent members of the wealthiest ranks of society, such as warrior princes and aristocrats with sufficient wealth. In the light of this consideration, it is perhaps correct to recognize the lorica hamata in those ‘complete suits of armour’ which Polybius connects to the ‘Gallic kings’.31 The exceptionally exclusive status of chainmail armour is also revealed in an excerpt from Silius Italicus. The Roman author, as a matter of fact, did not find it inappropriate to attribute even to the leader of the Boii Gauls at the Battle of Ticinus an armour made of ‘manifold layers of linen’.32 It also seems natural that a significant percentage of Celtic fighters certainly kept using more affordable protection made from perishable materials. This trend is also attested to by several other warrior busts from Entremont, whose ‘tube and yoke’ armour lacks the artistic features of the lorica hamata.

3.13  Busts from Entremont.

Probably the most interesting testimony with respect to the use of armour manufactured from organic material, however, can be found within Polybius’ account, referring to the Battle of Telamon in 225 bc. According to

Celtic Warfare.indd 63

12/09/2022 21:03

64  Celtic Warfare the Greek historian, the Insubri Gauls and the Boii Gauls, lined up on the field against the Roman skirmishers’ javelin volleys ‘were indeed well protected by their breeches and robes’.33 It thus appears that Polybius cannot be referring to mere garments, but more likely to some sort of organic protection. The fact that in the Greek text the generic term σάγος (sagos), i.e. ‘coarse cloak, plaid ’, is used rather than σπολάς (spolas) or even θώραξ λίνεος (thorax lineos) or one of its derivatives (which in Greek indicate leather and linen armour respectively), can reasonably lead us to suppose that the 3.14. Frieze of Civitalba. Detail of historian did not recognize something, with Gaul wearing a wool garment (?). which he was familiar, in the protection worn by the Celts. In all likelihood, we are confronted with the description of some protective garment, perhaps crafted from felted or quilted wool (img 3.14). These items were likely comparable to the coactilia and centones which were used by the Romans as protection against ranged and missile weapons.34 Such a garment could find a predecessor in the Celtic dominions among the various interpretations of some fifth- century  bc armours. It is also worth mentioning Pliny the Elder, who in his Naturalis Historia claims that ‘Felted wool is used to make clothes which, if treated with vinegar, resist iron,’ and in the same paragraph mentions the Gauls’ aptitude for working with wool and manufacturing quilts and padding.35 3.1.3  The shield Following a linear evolution more than any other element of the panoply, we see the Celtic shield continuing to become more robust. In order to face pitched battles of ever-increasing numbers, which were marked, especially in the Mediterranean context, by considerable frontal impacts and collisions, a new, even stronger umbo model was adopted. A single metal sheet is folded in the central area, covering the spine, and then hammered so that it follows the curvature. The umbo, thus assembled, is secured at its ends to the board by a pair of nails, then riveted on the inside.

Celtic Warfare.indd 64

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 65 The assemblage of the handle can in this case discard the dovetail system, and the interlocking tenon joints, with the help of glue and resin, are fitted into two sockets carved in the external part of the board, thus allowing the handle to support tensile forces from the entire thickness of the board itself. The umbo and spine system, on the other hand, acting as the first and main point of frontal impact, serve to absorb forces of compression. This complex mitigates the opponent’s blows uniformly, creating a whole body with the board and the umbo. It is really the umbo that guarantees the new fastening system of the handle is totally solid, holding it to the board with its lateral ends nailed in place. In some cases, it is nailed directly to 3.15 III bc umbones. the interlocking sockets, or to a further metal fixture along the outer side of the grip (img. 3.16).36 As far as dimensions are concerned, one may presume, as much from the findings as the literary sources, a general propensity for fairly large shields,37 in accordance with the new types of pitched battles which were established. Despite Diodorus Siculus’ specific reference to ‘long shields, as high as a man’,38 classical sources report differing accounts, such as Polybius reports that at the Battle of Telamon the Gaesatae Gauls were massacred by the javelin volley of the Roman Velites because of their shields which ‘did not cover the whole body.’ 39 Although following a linear evolution, the Celtic shield has always escaped any attempt at a conclusive 3.16  Shield diagram.

Celtic Warfare.indd 65

12/09/2022 21:03

66  Celtic Warfare standardization based on the historical context. It is evident that there was an infinite range of variants, from models finished with banded or guttered umbones and supporting metallic reinforcements, to older models entirely crafted in wood. These specimens are recognizable in some Hellenistic depictions of Galatian warriors (img 3.17), and must still have been widely popular if it is true, as Pausanias writes, that some warriors belonging to a unit of the Celtic army during the great expedition to Greece in 280 bc forded the Spercheios river using their shields as floats.40 On the other hand, it is plausible that 3.17  Hellenistic figurine of usually the type of shield ranged as much Galatian. according to the wealth of the individual as his role on the battlefield41 – factors nonetheless closely connected. 3.1.4  Pole weapons In the third century  bc, the thrusting spear, which became increasingly common in the fourth century bc and which we now find in most burials as a replacement for the frameae and javelins, confirmed itself definitively over all other types of shafted weapons. This is the weapon that Diodorus Siculus named lankia (λαγκία, not to confuse with Greek λόγχη longche),42 using the Celtic term but recognizing, probably on a functional basis, its role as a shafted and hence as an impact weapon, appropriately defining it also with the Greek term δόρυ (dory), which was the hallmark of the Greek hoplite. The Celtic thrusting spear which developed during the third century bc was a weapon of substantial length, on average 250cm, but which in some cases could even reach 4m,43 of which more than 40cm accommodated the point, which featured a socketed shank and leaf-shaped morphology. Points are ideally divided between two sub-types: one narrower and elongated, more widespread in western areas, and a shorter, broader one, apparently typical of the Danube and Balkan areas (img 3.18).44 In contrast to the models of previous centuries, the butt-spike of thirdcentury  bc thrusting spears is only rarely fitted with a socket. More frequently, it was secured by means of a sharp nail-like tang, which was hammered into the bottom of the shaft.

Celtic Warfare.indd 66

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 67 Although it is evident that the new butt-end fixing system completely undermines the butt-spike’s function of protecting the lower end of the shaft, its new morphology is indicative of the advent of military evolution. Rather than being sharp or tubular and cylindrical, as with the fifthand fourth-century bc models, the butt-spike of the third-century bc shafts appear as conical and truncated in a rounded, if not completely spherical or hemispherical, tip (img 3.19).

3.18  Lankia points.

While the blunt end of the spear can be regarded as a necessary counterweight element for the weapon and, moreover, as a weapon of opportunity should the shaft break off, its specific construction and design suggest that the weapon’s element was conceived to prevent accidental damage to comrades-in-arms in a rearward position. This implies, therefore, the use of highly cohesive and tight formations on the battlefield. Similarly, a cumbersome and scarcely manoeuvrable weapon such as the thrusting spear, which was no longer the privilege of the few but was now widely adopted, found its natural and most useful application when deployed exclusively from within tightly packed ranks. Although, however clearly it may appear evident that the thrusting spear has risen to a leading role among the pole weapons, the other types do not disappear. The range of missile weapons in particular is enriched by the addition of new elements.

Celtic Warfare.indd 67

12/09/2022 21:03

68  Celtic Warfare

3.19 III bc butt-spikes.

The persistence of point types ascribable to the framea of previous centuries is not surprising, considering the versatility and affordability of the instrument and its probable connection to hunting. On the other hand, projectiles such as light javelins, and such highly specialized weapons as the gaesum and pilum, demonstrate a willingness to adopt, where feasible, a flexible and varied approach to armed combat. In particular, it was the pilum which became widespread, being comparable to the gaesum but cheaper, given the lower amount of iron used to manufacture it, and certainly featuring a wider useful range. While in the fourth century bc the weapon was confined to the Gaulic-Italic milieu, third-century archaeological evidence bears out that it was also found in Transalpine Gaul. Furthermore, it is in the third century bc that, for the first time, heavy javelins with a distinctive, asymmetrical and irregular point appear. Described in detail by Diodorus Siculus and Strabo (who evidently reports the same passage of Diodorus) they were known by the Celtic name of madaris (img. 3.20). Diodorus wrote that the points of this javelin appear ‘twisted in and out in spiral figures for their whole length: the reason being that thus the blow may not only cut the flesh, but also tear it, and that the extraction of the shaft may lacerate the wound ’.45 Even if it is probable that the specific reference to the twisted design along the entire length of the point is to be attributed to more complex and elaborate types of madaris of the following centuries, those main features

Celtic Warfare.indd 68

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 69

3.20 III bc Madaris point.

of the javelin which relate to the description were already being used in the third century. Diodorus’ account would also find a parallel in Irish epics, where the hero Cú Chulainn often appears armed with a mythical javelin called Gae Bolga. According to the myth, the item, literally ‘dazzling javelin’ or ‘indented javelin’, upon hitting the target would turn into a thirty-hooked weapon which could not be pulled out without shredding the wound and killing its victim.46 Strabo also mentions, in the same passage referring to the madaris, another weapon that he claims resembles the light spear of the Roman velites, but that is entirely manufactured in wood and usually employed for hunting. Although we do not possess any certain reference for dating this wooden javelin, archaeological data reasonably indicates that it was introduced in the third century bc, at least concerning warfare, as a result of the military environment opening up to all social classes. We can also date the use of another missile weapon known as the tragula to the third century bc. The earliest mention of the word tragula appears in one play by Plautus, where it is used as a ‘jibe’ or ‘snide remark’.47 The term was later used by other authors to describe the Celtic missile weapon.48 The use of a specific term differing from iaculum to identify a projectile weapon necessarily implies its uniqueness compared to a common javelin. Paul the Deacon, quoting Sextus Pompeius Festus, claims that the tragula derives its name from the verb traho, ‘to pull’, ‘because if you put it on a shield, it can be torn off ’.49 Based on this etymology, we can conjecture it was a javelin equipped with a sort of rope or retrieval strap, similar to a gib or harpoon. However, from a semantic point of view, the correlation between the noun tragula and the verb traho seems speculative, whereas the relation with traiicio50 (‘to pierce’ but also ‘to hurl through’) quoted by Varro is more convincing.51 In addition to the correct linguistic connection, a name referring to the weapon’s piercing and ranged properties could be consistent with

Celtic Warfare.indd 69

12/09/2022 21:03

70  Celtic Warfare Caesar’s account, from which we know that the tragula was equipped with an amentum.52 The amentum, also known by the Greeks as ἀγκύλη (ankyle)53, was a leather strap attached to the javelin’s shaft. Used during the throwing phase, it gave the weapon an additional propulsive motion,54 increasing its range, piercing force and accuracy. The Romans also used a javelin, known as a solis,55 equipped with an amentum, and it is unclear in what way the tragula could differ from it, except by referring to a specific passage by Plautus which, regardless of its metaphorical value, could offer interesting references to reconstruct the features of the weapon. In the play Casina, in fact, there is a clear reference to the act of removing or cutting away the tragula which has reached its target (‘tragulam decidero’ 56), which suggests a potentially barbed tip. 3.1.5  The sword In the first half of the third century the archaeological evidence bears witness to a singular model of sword development. The longest and the shortest types of the previous century disappear. The surviving sword type features a blade of medium length, approximately 4.5cm wide and 60cm long, or slightly more (img. 3.21).

3.21  La Tène B and La Tène C1 swords and scabbards.

Celtic Warfare.indd 70

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 71 We note that for the first half of the century the shorter and sharper type, known as Hatvan-Boldog and characterized by a scabbard with a large pierced chape, survived among some very distinctive grave goods. These panoplies – typical of circumscribed contexts characterized by the absence of innovative elements, such as the banded umbo and the suspension chain – link this type of sword to archaic warfare and fighting models.57 Improvements in metallurgical craftsmanship and blacksmithing techniques, probably influenced by the interaction with the Mediterranean world, led to the introduction of new forging techniques. There are examples of blades manufactured through piling, folding and pattern welding. With ‘piling’ we refer to the welding of several small iron fragments which are then fused together by heat beating to produce a single rod with variable carbon concentration depending on the layers. The technique known as folding involves starting with a single bar and beating and bending it repeatedly to obtain a more homogeneous structure. Lastly, pattern welding is a processing technique which combines layering, folding and twisting the iron bar to obtain something like Damascus steel. The methods of sword smithing identified through metallurgical analysis of third-century bc Celtic swords appear inconsistent and do not seem to follow a well-defined standard.58 Several blades manufactured by piling show a haphazard cross-sectional structure that suggests poor planning and a neglectful application of the new technique. Other blades manufactured by piling display a pattern which indicates planning. Next to blades with steel cutting edges and a soft iron core, which have optimal mechanical properties, there are other examples with the opposite pattern. Again, this difference could be attributed to a poor understanding of the technique, which the Celtic craftsmen were still getting used to by trial and error. It appears difficult, lastly, to explain with certainty a further group of swords manufactured by piling, whose blades can cut with only a single steel edge. This may be a direct result of the smith’s lack of knowledge, or a deliberate choice indicating a lack of interest in the use of the sword as a thrust weapon in favour of a maximization of its cutting qualities. The overall picture, however, is overwhelmingly varied. We find specimens with specific and highly differentiated qualities alongside weapons of excellent workmanship, such as those manufactured with the steel from Noricum praised by Ovid,59 as well as blades of less valuable craftsmanship.

Celtic Warfare.indd 71

12/09/2022 21:03

72  Celtic Warfare This is probably due to the political fragmentation and the vast spread of Celtic culture, which did not encourage the sharing of technical knowledge. On the contrary, this fragmentation resulted in a myriad of different metalworking techniques. It is not impossible to assume that this lack of homogeneity in the quality of Celtic swords, with the best models certainly intended to be preserve of prominent figures, gave rise to the trope of the ‘magic sword’ in the folklore of Central European cultures.60 In the second half of the third century  bc, in response to a growing demand for more affordable swords, due to the progressive development and militarization of the members of the middle class, there was a greater diffusion of blades with a lenticular section,61 easier to manufacture than those with a rhomboidal one. Alongside this trend, there was an increase in the number of weapons manufactured from a single metal rod, the result of cheap workmanship using wrought iron.62 The proliferation of the lenticular section, without ribbing, manufactured in wrought iron, must have led to a significant deterioration in the mechanical qualities of the swords. In order to try as much as possible to preserve a structurally weak blade from the twisting and possible entrapment in the opponent’s body that could occur as a result of thrusting blows, the use of slashing was encouraged. This was, however, the easiest and most intuitive way to use a one-handed weapon, which was best suited to those who came from lower social ranks, not exactly distinguished by their military training. Swords became more elongated because of this preference for slashing rather than thrusting and this eventually affected the whole of Celtic swordsmanship. While the width remained on average at 4.5cm, the length of the blade came to range between 65 and and 75cm. The several negative judgements of Classical historians regarding Celtic swords seem to refer to this phenomenon. The accounts of Dionysius of Halicarnassus63 and Plutarch in particular refer to swords whose metal was ‘so soft and of such poor temper that […] they were quickly bent in half ’.64 Although ascribed to the fourth century bc, the swords referred to can reasonably be assigned to the last quarter of the third century bc. Both accounts actually appear to be reasonable facsimiles of Polybius’ depiction of the Battle of the Ollius river in 223 bc.65 The Polybian chronicle, which is based on the testimony of a primary source of the battle, Fabius Pictor, in addition to depicting the Celtic swords as exclusively cutting weapons,66 reports that in combat following the first blow ‘they at once assume the shape of a strigil, being so much bent both length-

Celtic Warfare.indd 72

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 73 wise and side-wise that unless the men are given leisure to rest them on the ground and set them straight with the foot, the second blow is quite ineffectual.’67 The wrought iron manufacturing of some specimens, along with the exacerbation of swordsmanship which favoured wide blows both contributed to the episodes of bending, since the structure of a soft blade, in increasingly long swords which retained a reduced width, saw the blade undergo excessive strain. The morphology and length of the late third-century La Tène blades, even in the best crafted models, must have been affected by repeated violent impacts.68 In this regard, the evidence of morphologically similar swords which, although in a completely different period and context, led to the exact same problems as were described by Polybius. As we read in the Icelandic Eybryggja Saga: ‘Every time he struck a shield, his richly ornamented sword bent, and he had to put his foot on it to straighten it.’69 Whereas the whole series of improvements and modifications to the Celtic sword in the third century is undoubtedly dictated by practical requirements, those involving the scabbard seem to be dictated by purely aesthetic concerns. The overall structure actually remains unchanged, just the chape enclosing the two halves of the sheath is reduced in size. On the other hand, the change in the chain loop appears connected to practical requirements. While keeping the paired chains, one long and one shorter, the system was further perfected throughout the course of the third century. Diodorus Siculus wrote that the Celts carried their swords ‘suspended from chains of iron or bronze’,70 and it is properly since the third century bc that the Celts began to wear their swords from sword belts crafted with chains entirely manufactured in metal. The two components of the belt composed of the iron links connected by the rings are transformed into two flat link chains, a short section running forward on the right-hand side and a longer section encircling the body around the back but attached at the front. Both the chains followed the same fastening method as the previous model, twisted in the earliest versions, then looped in a ‘ladder structure’, thus exponentially increasing the strength of the entire suspension system (img. 3.22). Celtic expertise in design and metalworking has reached its peak here. Following a consistent evolutionary path, the suspension belt is now designed to create a whole structure with the sheath, the sword and the warrior himself (img. 3.23). The joints of the chain links are designed to reduce the scabbard’s freedom of movement to a minimum and to favour the natural curvature of the body.

Celtic Warfare.indd 73

12/09/2022 21:03

74  Celtic Warfare

3.22  Suspension system chain models: twisted iron rods, twisted links, ‘ladder structure’.

3.23  Suspension chain fastening.

Possible jolting movements of the sheath of any kind are completely eliminated, and the two parts of the belt so designed even support the movements of running and bending the torso. With the gradual establishment of the cavalry, at the end of the third century panoplies begin to appear containing types of swords with increasingly long blades and no suspension belt.71 This can be taken as a harbinger of a further process of military evolution that will affect the following centuries. 3.1.6  Knives and daggers Knives continue to meet the simple standards of the previous century, with  straight or slightly curved single-edged blades and an ergonomic handgrip.

Celtic Warfare.indd 74

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 75 They do not usually give the impression of being conceived as exclusively weapons, but rather resemble multipurpose tools connected to farming and domestic contexts, which could become weapons of opportunity when required. Some models, curiously, despite their plain workmanship, have the right dimensions (up to an overall length of 60cm) to suggest a potential use on the battlefield. During the third century bc daggers develop a new distinguishing type. Semi-anthropomorphic daggers appeared,72 with a hilt resembling the human figure in a highly stylized manner (img. 3.24), following the style which was typical of older Antennae-hilt characteristic of Hallstatt swords.73 These weapons feature a sharp blade, ranging in length between 30 and 50cm, equipped with a metal scabbard similar in all respects to proper sword sheaths. 3.24 Semi-anthrophomorphic It is difficult to say for certain to what extent short swords. knives and daggers, especially those with a semianthropomorphic hilt, were actually weapons of common use. Their structure is identical to that of a real weapon conceived for active combat. However, the distinctiveness of the hilt decoration, if present at all, along with their depiction in the hands of prominent individuals, as in Bozouls-Aveyron figurine (img. 3.25), suggests they had a religious purpose or were status symbols.74 3.1.7  Ranged weapons Concerning the previous centuries, there is no literary reference that could positively state the use of ranged weapons in a military context, except perhaps for the exception of the sling through a comparative study of the Irish epics.75 3.25 Bozouls-Aveyron With reference to the third century bc, some data figurine.

Celtic Warfare.indd 75

12/09/2022 21:03

76  Celtic Warfare can be gathered by referring to the accounts of Strabo, which also in this case are probably based on the writings of Diodorus Siculus. The Greek historian, as well as describing the use of the bow in sacrificial settings,76 reports that among the Celtic fighters ‘some of them use the bow and sling.’77 Whereas the slingers were widely and continuously deployed by all the armies of antiquity from the dawn of history until the Middle Ages,78 the bow seemed to play a marginal role in authentically European military contexts throughout most of the same period. Unlike its eastern counterparts, the weapon suffered from a lack of technological development and retained a virtually unchanged design since the Neolithic period.79 One of the few distinct units of archers to be mentioned by classical authors, the Cretan archers, apparently used a bow whose construction was inspired by similar Near Eastern prototypes.80 Broadly speaking, the military deployment of archers among in most European contexts during antiquity can be regarded as result of direct interaction with the populations of the steppes of Central Asia and the Near East. Among the populations settled in these regions, the widespread use of the bow, especially for mounted troops, for reasons mainly related to the geographical layout of the area, played a key role in warfare. The Celtic world seems to follow this trend. The bulk of arrowhead finds in the third century  bc, which continue to correspond with the range of models from previous centuries, relate to Eastern Europe.81 This border region must have been an area of confrontation and hostile exchanges between the Celtic and Scythian worlds. It is no coincidence that in the Carpathian area there are condensed finds of the types of three-lobed and two-lobed arrowheads typical of steppe cultures. There are no certain data about the type of bow used by the Celtic populations of the third century bc. The only specimen found, from the Swiss site of La Tène, is a simple bow (self-bow) manufactured with yew wood, in the tradition of European archery (img. 3.26).

3.26  Self-bow from La Tène.

Celtic Warfare.indd 76

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 77 However, there is nothing to prevent us hypothesizing the occasional presence in the eastern areas of the Celtic milieu of composite bows of Scythian tradition, similar to the older Glauberg find mentioned above. In any case, however, it is worth remembering that the archaeological evidence, combined with the literary sources, represents an image of a Celtic fighter who, like most of his European counterparts, must not have been particularly interested in using ranged weapons. These, in fact, seem to have been relegated to the category of weapons of opportunity, conceived mainly for hunting and only in exceptional circumstances for battle (such as sieges, or as the main resort of the lesser classes recruited for military service). Since the bow seems to belong properly in the sphere of hunting, its occasional use on the battlefield could imply the use of arrows poisoned with plant extracts, according to a practice that classical historians identify as a common habit of Celtic populations in relation to deer hunting.82 3.1.8  The war chariot The first half of the third century  bc probably marks the last phase of the truly proper use of the Celtic war chariot as an instrument of war in continental Europe. According to Livy, during the Battle of Sentinum in 295 bc, the Roman horsemen twice put the cavalry of the Senones Gauls to flight and engaged their infantry, when: armed enemies arrived standing on carts and chariots, with a terrifying roar of wheels and horses that frightened the horses of the Romans who were not used to such a roar. So the Roman cavalry, who already had victory in their grasp, was scattered by panic, with horses and men falling to the ground in a hasty flight. Hence the infantry lines also suffered from the disarray, and many men of the front lines were overwhelmed by the rush of horses and chariots thrown into the middle of the ranks.83 This kind of intensive and shattering frontal assault, with the chariot no longer being used as a mobile platform for hurling javelins, differs from the likely applications of previous centuries. The tactic mentioned by Livy appears in some respects similar to Middle Eastern warfare, where chariot units were sometimes deployed as shocktroops, relying on their momentum and weaponry to break through the enemy ranks. The number of charioteers involved in dispersing and routing the Roman cavalry, which by analogy with the Campanian allies must have numbered

Celtic Warfare.indd 77

12/09/2022 21:03

78  Celtic Warfare at least five hundred,84 and then charging the enemy front, must have been substantial. That the Celtic side had enough important troops to cover the whole of the enemy’s front line could be explained by the sizeable number of aristocrats and wealthy career soldiers present among the ranks of the Senones.85 This unusual tactic seems more than not an attempt to advance, in a functional and contextual way, a device conceived within a military context which featured lower numbers, and a certain ritualized aspect. In 275 bc according to Lucian, the Galatians deployed ‘eighty scythed chariots and twice as many two-horse chariots’86 against Antiochus I. However, the mention of scythed chariots, regarded as a hallmark of the armies of the Near East rather than of the Celts,87 casts the testimony in a doubtful light. This reference could at most hint at the adoption by the Galatians of equipment and tactics specific to the warfare of Asia Minor. After the first half of the third century, however, there is no further evidence of war chariots being used in battle by the Celts in continental Europe. The chariots mentioned by Polybius among the formations of the Celtic ranks marching towards Etruria in 225 bc, although listed along with horses as roughly reaching twenty thousand in number,88 are not reported as active military units during the Battle of Telamon. The episode, thoroughly described in its development and dynamics, shows the chariots being positioned in a static position on either flank of the Celtic array, as if to protect the flanks by means of a barricade.89 This reference suggests that they were actually wagons, used for provisioning the army. Finally, Propertius’ depiction of Virdomarus, the king of the Gaesatae, who in 222 bc at Clastidium is said to have confronted Claudius Marcellus by hurling gaesa from his moving chariot,90 looks more to be the result of poetic licence rather than an historically reliable account. The inconsistency is emphasized by the comparison with Plutarch’s account of the same episode.91 Whereas the Greek scholar, whose account in other passages of his work thoroughly mentions the use of the war chariots on the battlefield, he makes no reference to the presence of such a vehicle while describing this episode. Plutarch clearly states instead that Virdomarus was fighting on horseback.92 If the war chariot gradually disappears as the focal point of hostile encounters, at least until the end of the second century it will still survive in the sphere of warfare as the distinctive means of transport of prominent individuals in much of the Celtic area. This longevity is hinted at and reinforced by the presence of Celtic war chariots recorded and identified in the representations of the triumphs of the Roman military leaders, following the wars in Cisalpine Gaul93, Asia Minor94 and Narbonensis Gaul.95

Celtic Warfare.indd 78

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 79

3.2  The combat In the third century  bc we witness the concretization of all those developments already underway in the course of the fourth century bc. The total militarization of the population resulted in the establishment of a new military structure, which increasingly resembled a real army and less and less a war band. The development of the new military model is marked by the introduction of tactical units with different skills and equipment. The movement of a considerable number of armed men requires a logistical apparatus to meet their needs, and this is inherited directly from the previous migration paradigm. This set-up is reproduced in the substantial presence of carriages, baggage trains and packhorses within the army ranks. These items, while hampering mobility, proved essential for the transport of support material. Logistics appears to be still in the development phase, and the situation for Celtic armies on the move repeats that of the migrations of the preceding centuries. Within this context there is an important female presence which, according to an archaic tradition, had the function of settling disputes and quarrels which could break out amongst the warriors.96 It is likely that at the beginning of the third century the army, whose large numbers required order and structure, was divided into smaller units. Classical sources call these units caterva,97 which indicates a group or unit of six thousand soldiers.98 Despite the lack of reliable data to support this assertion, for practical reasons it is likely that the caterva was itself subdivided into a pyramidal structure of tactical groups and squads. This division can be deduced from the analysis of an indirect account of the Latin historian Valerius Antias, quoted by Livy in his own writings. The analysis, carried out starting from the calculation of the plunder and spoils carried in triumph by Scipio Nasica in 191 bc following his campaign and victory over the Boii Gauls, allows us to draw some rough estimates. Within a Celtic army of about 50,000 armed men we can calculate the presence of one military standard for every four hundred or so combatants. Similarly, the same calculation would suggest the presence of one aristocrat on a war chariot for every two hundred or so combatants and finally one nobleman for every thirty-three or so combatants.99

Celtic Warfare.indd 79

12/09/2022 21:03

80  Celtic Warfare However much these figures may or may not correspond precisely to a division into tactical groups and subgroups, the banners do at least represent a fairly reliable indicator of internal organization and subdivision within the army. This analysis, supplemented and supported by parallel study of the military structure of the Germanic populations, could perhaps coincide with the tribal, clan and family groups.100 The presence of some kind of hierarchical military structure is also supported by Livy, who reports how during a battle in Cisalpine Gaul against the Romans, the Gauls’ retreat was stopped by ‘their officers…’, logically members of the military aristocracy ‘…who, when they quitted their posts, struck them on the back with their spears, and compelled them to return to their ranks’.101 The members of the warrior aristocracy could act as commanding officers, but they could also be organized in highly mobile and independent units, which resembled the war bands of the previous centuries. A good example is the Gaesatae, whose presence at the Battle of Telamon is mentioned in Polybius’ account of the clash. Their effectiveness was based on a destabilizing attack using specialized missile weapons such as the gaesum or pilum and madaris, which was immediately followed by an assault with swords. While professional soldiers can afford an organized and flexible approach to combat, based on appropriate training and weaponry, most Celtic fighters had no choice in the course of their soldiery. The lack of military skill would necessarily be compensated for with increased cohesion, coordination and momentum. Similarly, the adoption and development of weapons such as the long thrusting spear, along with the constant strengthening of the central section of the shield, are clear evidence of a drive to find the most straightforward approach to combat emphasizing power and mobility over manoeuvrability. Armed with cumbersome thrusting spears, the combatants had to form into tightly packed shield walls, thick with spears aligned into several rows, to deliver one or more charges with the ultimate aim of breaking through the opponent’s ranks, following a tactic which could have resembled that adopted by the hoplite phalanx. The charges were to be alternated with moments of strong pressure and compression, during which only those in the rear ranks would be able to swing their spears. At the same time the fighters in the front lines would be unable to do anything other than execute a coordinated thrust with their shields.102 This practice must have come much more naturally to those

Celtic Warfare.indd 80

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 81 who came from a farming background than those with solely training in swordsmanship. Front-line fighters also had the chance to deliver blows with short weapons, such as broken spear shafts, which would have broken off in large numbers during the first collision,103 or single-edged blades, which were cheap weapons of opportunity, easy to find but still fairly effective. These weapons favoured narrow rather than wide swings, and their use fits in perfectly with the Celtic fighters’ lack of economic resources available to invest in military equipment. This type of approach to battle can be deduced from the undoubtedly growing and increasing amount of archaeological findings relating to thrusting spears. Similar clashes are clearly described in the historical sources relating to the Roman conquest of Cisalpine Gaul. During the Battle of Sentinum ‘the Gauls stood packed together with their shields interlocked in front of them.’104 During later clashes between the Romans and the Boii: the Gauls opposed them in such close formations as to stop up the way […] nor were their hands or swords much employed in the business, but pushing with their shields and bodies, they pressed against each other 105 […] keeping their ranks close, and leaning sometimes on each other, sometimes on their shields, withstood the attack of the Romans.106 The shield, increasingly capable of withstanding frontal collisions thanks to the reinforced umbo and compressions through the spine, could also be used together with their companions to form the testudo,107 a formation designed to defend against missile attacks, usually attributed to the Romans, but which had to be instinctively typical of those armies of the time which used long shields with a handle. With the progressive establishment in the second half of the third century bc of the sword as a weapon mainly for slashing, which coincides with its diffusion among social classes other than the aristocracy, Celtic swordsmanship consists of a narrow range of simple blows, functional for the type of battle which, relying on increasing numbers, aims to restrict complex swordsmanship. Fabius Pictor, quoted by Polybius, remarked that ‘raising their hands and cutting […] is the peculiar and only stroke of the Gauls.’108 The decontextualized passage in Polybius’ chronicle about the Battle of Telamon will be used as a reference both by Dionysius of Halicarnassus and

Celtic Warfare.indd 81

12/09/2022 21:03

82  Celtic Warfare Plutarch in describing Celtic swordsmanship based on ‘slashing blows at head and shoulders’109 and ‘crosswise blows’.110 The wide and crushing blow is preferred to an accurate stroke in battle, and Dionysius mentions slashing blows ‘aimed at no target, as if they intended to cut to pieces the entire bodies of their opponents, protective armour and all’. This approach is framed in a context of combat which is dominated by large shields and swords which are neither designed nor structured for parrying. The system of engagement and combat might indeed suggest a deliberate attempt to crush the opponent’s defences, which would be reflected in the growing interest in metal rims applied along the edge of the shield. The evidence of a style of swordsmanship which seems to be limited to top-down, vertical or oblique blows, and which completely ignores side blows as well as thrusts, also suggests a structured and close-knit formation, within which certain uses of the weapon must necessarily be relinquished in order to preserve the safety of one’s companions. 3.2.1  Elite infantry The presence of grave goods sets which combine highly specialized missile weapons with the sword denotes the presence of professional fighters within the Celtic ranks. Rather than acting as leaders and officers within the close-knit ranks, these troops were most likely deployed as autonomous tactical groups. Because of their wealth of experience, prowess and military expertise, these units were able to implement and likely favoured a more dynamic and multifaceted approach to battle. These fighters could belong as much to the ranks of the tribal aristocracy as to those independent mercenary companies which had already begun to be established within the Celtic milieu from the fourth century bc onwards. The most distinctive example is undoubtedly represented by the Gaesatae Gauls who fought at the battles of Telamon and Clastidium. The word Gaesatae refers directly to the gaesum, the heavy all-metal javelin of the Celtic populations. The fact that a weapon is used to identify a group of people clearly highlights their warlike nature. Moreover, according to Polybius, the term Gaesatae refers directly to mercenary service, and hence labels those who ‘serve for hire’.111 An examination of the sources, however, suggests that the Gaesatae differ from the conventional figure of the professional fighter, due to their own distinctive features that deserve to be analysed in detail.

Celtic Warfare.indd 82

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 83 Polybius, writing about the Battle of Telamon, states that it was the habit of the Gaesatae to enter battle naked. The Insubres and Boii wore their trousers and light cloaks, but the Gaesatae had discarded these garments owing to their proud confidence in themselves, and stood naked, with nothing but their arms, in front of the whole army. […] Very frightening were the appearance and the gestures of the naked warriors in front, all in the prime of life, and finely built men, and all in the leading companies richly adorned with gold torques and armlets. The sight of them indeed dismayed the Romans.112 Diodorus is very likely referring to the Gaesatae when he claims that some individuals among the Celts ‘are satisfied with the armour which Nature has given them and go into battle naked ’,113 and perhaps their presence might be acknowledged even among the ranks of Hannibal’s army 114, whose bulk was especially composed of mercenaries and experienced fighters. This characteristic feature of the Gaesateae distinguishes them from ordinary mercenaries and professional fighters, and if Polybius appears to lack credibility, attributing the nakedness to the fear of getting their clothes caught in the brambles which grew on the battlefield,115 the meaning of the gesture is more likely to be found in a sacral/religious context. Comparable behaviour to that displayed by the Gaesatae is to be found in some Scandinavian warrior brotherhoods. The members of these groups, caught up in the heat of battle, would strip off their clothes and armour,116 emulating the godlike warriors of Odin’s retinue.117 The foundation of this practice was the belief that they were somehow invulnerable to the enemy’s weapons.118 Although these specific groups of Norse warriors shared beliefs closely linked to an overt, identifiable form of totemic animal worship, which is not established within Celtic martial culture, the parallel with the Gaesatae does not appear entirely inappropriate. Both figures probably draw on the most authentic archetype of the Indo-European warrior, who with reckless disregard for peril daunts the foe with his virile nakedness, dedicating himself to the gods and openly defying death.119 3.2.2  Light infantry The only way to be able to support the large-scale clashes that flared up in the third century bc was by the active involvement in war of all social groups

Celtic Warfare.indd 83

12/09/2022 21:03

84  Celtic Warfare of the community. This led even those belonging to the very lowest classes to find their own place and role within the war effort. For those who belonged to the lower classes, either because of a lack of martial training or because of the economic inability to afford suitable military gear, it was natural that they be organized into support units whose main use was in scouting and skirmishing. The first specific reference to the presence of light infantry units among the Celts is to be found in Polybius’ account. The Greek historian, describing the early stages of the Battle of Telamon, mentions the presence of light infantrymen in support of the cavalry.120 The use of mixing lightly armed fighters with cavalrymen would become a standard practice in Celtic armies. This habit probably stemmed from the desire to provide the cavalry with greater resistance, thus accentuating their stopping power without excessively reducing their mobility, as well as to make up for the weaknesses of light infantrymen by combining them with experienced and well-armed fighters such as horsemen. How the light Celtic infantrymen of the third century  bc were specifically equipped is not mentioned, but by deduction and by relying on the sources of the following centuries,121 the picture that can be outlined is distinctively varied. The shield probably was most likely not standard equipment, and in any case it is probable that the available shields were based on more archaic ones, smaller in size and without metal elements, both so as not to hinder the fighter’s mobility and because he could not afford anything better. As for offensive weapons, there was an infinite range of weapons of opportunity, most of which came from the hunting world. These included the wooden javelin mentioned by Strabo, the tragula, the bow, the sling and the cateia,122 a throwing stick with metal inserts123 similar to the Australian boomerang, and of course the knife and framea. Besides support for the horsemen, no other ways in which light infantry was deployed by the Celts are mentioned. The dynamics describing the stages pertaining to the Battle of Telamon indicate the application of tactical choices which differed from those of the Mediterranean armies, and which were probably heavily influenced by various elements. When skirmishers and javelin throwers emerged from the lines of the Roman army to target the Celts they were not countered by their Gallic adversaries, but appeared able to pour their javelin volleys undisturbed directly into the Gaesatae ranks.124 If the Celtic light infantrymen seem to provide support to the cavalry, they do not appear at a stage when they should be operating alone, according to a practice already in use by armies of the time.

Celtic Warfare.indd 84

12/09/2022 21:03

A People’s Army 85 On the other hand, the specific term used by Polybius to describe the members of the Gallic light infantry, euzonoi (εὔζωνοι) refers to fighters that are not burdened by heavy equipment and can move swiftly, rather than to  javelin throwers that can withstand a protracted discharge of missile weapons. It was probably the lack of standardization, the quality of the equipment, and inferior military training, (which must have been almost non-existent), which made Celtic light infantrymen totally unsuited to skirmishes in the open field with their Mediterranean counterparts. This aspect is reflected in the historical sources, which do not fail to point out the unsuitability of the Celtic armies when targeted by the intensive and persistent use of ranged and missile weapons. 3.2.3  The cavalry With the passage from the fourth to the third century bc, references to Celtic cavalry increasingly appear in classical sources, and its use and development grew in parallel with the downfall of the war chariot. Gallic mounted forces are mentioned by Livy in connection with a Roman defeat near Clusium by the Senones Gauls,125 shortly before the Battle of Sentinum, and during the same battle of the nations Livy also mentions the presence of Gallic cavalry which was twice pushed back by Roman cavalry.126 The Celtic cavalry also stands out in Polybius’ chronicles of the pan-Gallic invasion of 225 bc, which ended with the Battle of Telamon. By feigning retreat and acting as a decoy, the cavalry of the confederate army of Boii, Insubres and Taurisci lured the Roman army formed by the garrisons of Etruria to Faesulae, where the Celtic infantry waited ready to engage in battle. Six thousand legionaries were killed and the few survivors, who retreated up a hill, were held in continuous check by a dedicated cavalry detachment until the timely intervention of the consul Lucius Aemilius.127 It is evident that the cavalry had now acquired an essential role as part of the Celtic armies. According to the accounts of the Classical authors, it was a skilled and well-trained force, capable of operating in the field either independently or as part of combined infantry and cavalry formations.128 The account of classical sources demonstrates the Celts’ fondness for their mounted troops, so much so that they ranked them higher than those of other peoples.129 The passage which bears out the high level of organization of the Celtic mounted forces is found in Pausanias.

Celtic Warfare.indd 85

12/09/2022 21:03

86  Celtic Warfare For to each horseman were attached two servants, who were themselves skilled riders and, like their masters, had a horse. When the Gaul horsemen were engaged, the servants remained behind the ranks and proved useful in the following way. Should a horseman or his horse fall, the slave brought him a horse to mount; if the rider was killed, the slave mounted the horse in his master’s place; if both rider and horse were killed, there was a mounted man ready. When a rider was injured, one slave brought back to camp the wounded man, while the other took his vacant place in the ranks. I believe that the Gauls in adopting these methods copied the Persian regiment of the Ten Thousand, who were called the Immortals. There was, however, this difference. The Persians used to wait until the battle was over before replacing casualties, while the Gauls kept reinforcing the horsemen to their full number during the height of the action. This organization is called in their native speech trimarcisia, for I would have you know that marca is the Celtic name for a horse.130  If originally the mounted fighters were mainly members of the aristocracy, the only ones able to afford the cost and maintenance of a horse, Pausanias’ account mentions ‘servants’ and ‘subordinates’, also riders, who would escort the nobleman. This was a mode of military patronage that was to become standard practice in the following centuries, with the increasing amount of military instruction available to different social classes, in accordance with the aristocrats’ intentions to expand their entourage to the point of using their armed retinues to establish their own private brigades. From the perspective of combat engagement methods and tactics, the insight gained from analysing the approach to combat of third-century Celtic horsemen is quite different from that the elusive mounted fighters armed with javelins at the turn of the fourth century described by Xenophon. These fighters, however effective, were plainly deployed with the role of mounted skirmishers, which relied on spoiling tactics. The Celtic cavalry of the third century bc, on the contrary, is represented as a highly organized, multifaceted and efficient force, capable of applying itself as much to skirmishing as to direct and close combat.131 Under the leadership of a general as capable as Hannibal, the Gallic cavalry, along with the Hispanic cavalry, would prove to be as crucial for the achievement of important victories as the Numidian cavalry. The Celtic cavalrymen would prove to be such a multipurpose force that they were capable, when necessary, of dismounting and fighting as foot soldiers.132

Celtic Warfare.indd 86

12/09/2022 21:03

Plate 1. La Tène A, mid of the V century bc, Central Europe, Aristocratic warlords.

Celtic Warfare Plates.indd 1

05/09/2022 11:32

Plate 2. La Tène B1, mid of the IV century bc, border between Cisalpine Gaul and Ager Gallicus, Mercenary and chieftain.

Celtic Warfare Plates.indd 2

05/09/2022 11:32

Plate 3. La Tène B2, 279 bc, Northern Greece, The Great Expedition.

Celtic Warfare Plates.indd 3

05/09/2022 11:32

Plate 4. La Tène C, 225 bc, Etruria, Battle of Telamon.

Celtic Warfare Plates.indd 4

05/09/2022 11:32

Plate 5. La Tène D1, end of the II century bc, Northern Transalpine Gaul, Heavy horseman.

Celtic Warfare Plates.indd 5

05/09/2022 11:32

Plate 6. La Tène D2, 52 a.C, Transalpine Gaul, Siege of Alesia.

Celtic Warfare Plates.indd 6

05/09/2022 11:32

Plate 7. Latest Iron Age, 43 ad, Kent, Chieftain and champion waiting for the Romans on the banks of river Medway.

Celtic Warfare Plates.indd 7

05/09/2022 11:32

Plate 8. 218 bc, Cartagena, Hannibal’s mercenaries preparing for the march.

Celtic Warfare Plates.indd 8

05/09/2022 11:32

Chapter 4

Soldiers and Cavalrymen

(La Tène C2: approx. 180–130 bc, La Tène D: approx. 130–10 bc)

T

he widespread diffusion of state structures developed within the Celto-Italic milieu leads in the second century  bc to a process of urbanization involving all of Celtic Europe. Rather than identifying the establishment of fortified settlements, known as oppida, with specific events, such as the beginning of Germanic interference in Central and Western Europe or the end of the supposed Arvernian1 hegemony in Transalpine Gaul and the establishment of the Roman province of Gallia Narbonensis, we recognize a more plausible process of gradual and consistent development founded on the development of the proto-state formations of Cisalpine Gaul.2 The political structures which were to act and operate within the Celtic communities of the second to first century bc do not in fact seem to differ in any particular way from those already present within some specific settings of the third century.3 The main differences with respect to the previous century are rather reflected in the social framework, as a direct result of swift economic growth. Within Celtic communities, the remarkable volume of capital in circulation, more accessible and liquid thanks to the well-established use of coinage, allowed the members of the aristocracy to establish and keep military units and petty armies on a permanent basis. This was due to wealth no longer being based solely on plunder but also trade, both internal and with Mediterranean partners,4 controlled on the basis of privilege by the aristocracy.5 Rather than the mercenary service of the earlier centuries, archaeological and historical records bear out the establishment of actual loyal private militias, equipped and supported by the commercial power of the aristocracy.6 Without a doubt, the military brotherhoods, which were themselves composed of members of the aristocracy or professional mercenaries

Celtic Warfare.indd 87

12/09/2022 21:03

88  Celtic Warfare strongly bound to martial virtues did endure. We recognize them in the Soldurii mentioned by Caesar.7 Alongside these groups, it is possible to see the presence of bands of fighters or armed retinues subsidized by a certain aristocrat or bound to him by debt. This specific patronage system seems to have been well-established in Transalpine Gaul in Caesar’s time. The evolution of the purchase of imported goods, which were clearly beyond the economic reach of the bulk of the social classes, and in general of a livelier economy due to the use of coinage, led to the increasingly widespread formation of debt owed to aristocrats by members of the population, which ultimately gave rise to the social class of the Ambacti, literally ‘those who act alongside’.8 Bound by debt, the Ambacti gave up their civil rights and made themselves available as soldiers, or armed retinue, trained and maintained to be used whenever necessary.9 It seems they were an essential element of the popular army and the potential core of a standing army.10 Along with the diffusion and rise of the Ambacti class, there was an exponential increase in the warlike nature of the Celtic communities whose leaders were driven to increasingly seek greater sources of wealth to increase their retinues and to afford the costs of staffing a military force that provided them with both military power and political leverage. The possibility of identifying these dynamics prior to the second century bc, with the pre-existence of a class bound to the aristocracy11 which followed their lead in battle,12 appears largely to be limited to those specific Celtic communities closest to the Classical world, in which all features of social evolution, such as coinage and urbanization, and all this entails, were already established in the third century bc.

4.1  The panoply From a strictly technical point of view, the military evolution which occurred during the second half of the second and the first century bc was marked by remarkable developments in horsemanship. The war chariot, which survived on the mainland merely as status symbol belonging to the upper classes but lost its functional purpose on the battlefield, fell into obsolescence while there was a substantial development of cavalry. The amount of effort and resources devoted to the improvement of cavalry was due to its prominence among the aristocracy and wealthy classes.

Celtic Warfare.indd 88

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 89 The standard model of the Celtic fighter during third century bc seems to be switching from the infantryman to the horseman. If the prowess of the Gallic mounted warriors was already conspicuous in the previous century, now the technical improvements and developments in horsemanship have accomplished the evolution observed in the third century  bc, providing mounted troops with dedicated equipment and weaponry suited to their function, therefore enabling them to perform at their best on the battlefield. The social gap between infantryman and cavalryman, previously scarcely recognizable, is now more obvious, and although not all noblemen fought on horseback some components of the upper-class panoply seem particularly adapted to mounted fighting. On the other hand, some of the pole weapons continued their path of specialization towards a model that was as effective as it was evidently conceived to be used within simple and elementary tactical models. In this way, even non-professional fighters were provided with weaponry which was suitable for combatants who lacked extensive mastery of military technology. The development of weaponry in the second century  bc consisted of meticulous and consistent patterns of specialization, sometimes to a quite exceptional degree. Whereas in the previous century inspiration came from the Etruscan model, now we can recognize in the form, and mode of use, of various weapons the ideas of the Hellenistic world. The Celts had come into close contact with this milieu, both as opponents and as mercenary troops, throughout the third century bc.13 While more and more specialized elements of the panoply were being developed specifically in the field of defensive weaponry, concurrently various types of simplified, and obviously less effective, weapons were propagated out. Their low manufacturing cost would have made them affordable to less well-off fighters who, in increasing numbers, came to the military environment in a semi-professional manner. 4.1.1  The helmet Among the helmets of the second and first centuries bc archaeology bears evidence of the widespread adoption of the Coolus-Mannheim model. Its popularity outside the Celtic milieu was so great that even Caesar’s own legionnaires widely came to adopt it. Developed into countless types with a strong or somewhat developed neck-guard (img 4.1), the Coolus-Mannheim spread throughout the Celtic

Celtic Warfare.indd 89

12/09/2022 21:03

90  Celtic Warfare world, in particular in Transalpine Gaul.14 This was probably thanks to its advantageous cost in comparison to other metal helmets as well as its relative ease and speed of manufacture.

4.1  Different subtypes of Coolus-Mannheim.

Though originally conceived as a basic and affordable type, once established as a standard model in certain areas of the Celtic milieu, the Coolus-Mannheim was occasionally found embellished with luxurious and costly ornaments in specimens evidently reserved for prominent individuals. On the Gundestrup cauldron, dated between the second half of the second century and the first century bc we find embossed representations of horsemen wearing Coolus-Mannheim helmets mounted with antlers, crests or zoomorphic figures (img 4.2), according to a tradition typical of Celtic warriors already in previous centuries. The iconographic evidence would seem to be supported by the archaeological record. Among the grave goods unearthed in the burial at North Bersted, (England),15 attributable to an individual who must have

4.2  Gundestrup Cauldron, detail.

Celtic Warfare.indd 90

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 91 fought in Gaul during Caesar’s campaigns, the excavation contained a Coolus-Mannheim helmet decorated with a bulky crest consisting of two half-moon shaped sheets of copper alloy, worked with an openwork pattern. The anthropological analysis carried out on the skeletal remains of the individual from the North Bersted burial provides us with evidence vital to establishing the helmet’s function. Despite the opulence and discomfort of the large metal crest, the deterioration found in the skeleton’s cervical vertebrae suggests this was no mere ornament but, rather, it was worn continuously. This confirms, generally, the hypothesis that helmets with bulky decorative elements did see practical use on the battlefield; possibly for their psychological effect on the enemy, as well as serving to distinguish the wearer. This also applies to similar headgear from earlier centuries. Representations of leather caps are increasingly widespread on Celtic coinage, and due to the development of artistic techniques they are now more clearly visible and understandable. Towards the first century  bc we can clearly see the emergence of a radial ribbed cap entailing a kind of internal reinforcement or a framework composed of several segments stitched together, in some cases with what appear to be reinforcements and rivet joints, and a brim similar to metal helmets of the same period (img 4.3). 4.3  Transalpine Gaul coin dated II-I bc. Furthermore, the Celtic warriors depicted on the Arch of Cottius in Susa, Piedmont, seem to be wearing conical helmets that have no parallel in archaeological finds, and could be related in design to the leather headgear with radial reinforcing ribs found in Ligurian iconography. Although several Montefortino models continued to be used up to the first century  bc (img 4.4), during the second century use of the Celto-Italic declined except in a few 4.4  Second to first century bc – Montefortino helmet. peripheral areas (img 4.5).

Celtic Warfare.indd 91

12/09/2022 21:03

92  Celtic Warfare It was replaced by a different design which could be regarded as direct evolution16 of its type, again with an iron ogive-shaped cap but featuring cheek pieces which display an anatomical profile (img 4.6). The distinctive feature of this model, identifying it as something conceived exclusively for the cavalry, is a wide drooping metal brim, wavy in design, running all around the base of the bowl. This feature evokes Hellenistic cavalry helmets of the Boeotian type whose practical function, apart from protecting the face, neck and nape of the combatant from blows from above and below, was probably to limit the deafening effect of the movement of the air in 4.5  Second century bc – Celtothe helmet while galloping. Italic helmet found in Giubiasco, Finally, at the beginning of the first century bc Switzerland. archaeology bears out the development of the unchallenged masterpiece of Celtic helmet manufacturing; the so-called Agen-Port helmet, which will come to spread widely to both western and eastern Celtic areas. We can distinguish two sub types of Agen-Port, both featuring a rounded iron cap and anatomical cheek pieces.

4.6  Conical ‘cavalry helmet’.

Celtic Warfare.indd 92

4.7  Agen helmet.

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 93 The Agen, also known as Westkeltischen or Alésia,17 typical of the central and western area of the Celtic milieu, sports a metal brim slightly resembling the one of the conical cavalry helmet, but straighter, and less curved and droopy (img 4.7), and the Port, which differs from the first sub-type by having a barely noticeable brim and considerably enhanced anatomical neck guard. Some specimens of Port helmet also show curled embossed elements on the forehead section just above the metal brim, that had both reinforcing and ornamental functions 4.8  Port helmet. and which could represent eyes or eyebrows (img 4.8), according to a tradition that was common amongst other European populations. An eastern type of Agen-Port is lastly the Novo Mesto helmet,18 found mainly at sites in the Balkans (img 4.9). It is composed of an iron cap combined with a large neck-guard and an equally broad brim, both manufactured in bronze. All Agen-Port models appear to have been beautifully designed to 4.9  Novo Mesto helmet. ensure maximum protection of the skull, face and neck of the combatant. The straight metal brim, as well as protecting the face from blows, also protects the warrior’s forehead when it is used as a further support point for the shield together with the shoulder and the thigh. Meanwhile, the broad neck guard allows frontal impacts to be cushioned directly onto the shoulders and shoulder blades, protecting the cervical vertebrae. It is no coincidence that the Agen-Port, and more precisely the Port types were used by the Romans as a starting point for designing one of their most famous helmets, the one known as the Imperial Gallic.19

Celtic Warfare.indd 93

12/09/2022 21:03

94  Celtic Warfare Another type of Celtic helmet from the first century  bc, a specimen from the princely burial of Boé20 in France (img 4.10), may have had an influence on the Imperial Gallic helmet. This model, although displaying an unusual and extremely ogive bowl, is fitted with anatomical cheek pieces and with a sort of frontal visor that will come to be present in most Roman helmets of the imperial age. The Agen-Port, as well as the CoolusMannheim, generally does not feature tubes or any other feature that might suggest the application of side components with a decorative function. However, on a number 4.10  Boé helmet. of coins dating to Caesar’s time, minted to celebrate or commemorate the triumph of the Gallic War, helmets are depicted as showing what may be horns or feathers (img. 4.11).

4.11  Roman coins with Celtic panoplies.

This depictions suggests both the possibility of the application of decorative elements using leather straps, as on the Batavian helmet from Krefeld-Gelduba, 21 and the existence of more conspicuous models which archaeology has not yet revealed. Then, on the Arch of Orange (img. 4.12) we see a crested Agen-Port helmet.

Celtic Warfare.indd 94

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 95 The representation could be confirmed by one archaeological finding of an Agen helmet with a central metal crest support. The use of decorations such as horns and animal figures on the helmets of the wealthiest warriors, observed in both archaeological evidence from the end of the fourth century and the writings of Diodorus Siculus, 22 suggests the style was in constant use. Besides the aforementioned Gundestrup cauldron (img. 4.2), there is also Plutarch’s account of the horsemen of the Cimbri army, partly consisting of individuals from Celtic groups23 whose weaponry must certainly have had a considerable amount of Celtic influence. The warriors described in the Greek historian’s account wear zoomorphic helmets.24 Last but not least, among the Gallic weapons depicted on the Arch of Orange, which was built during the reign of Augustus, 25 various helmets topped with horns are clearly recognizable (img. 4.12).

4.12  Horned helmets, details from the Arch of Orange.

4.1.2  The armour At the turn of the second and first centuries  bc, there was a substantial evolution in the structure of the lorica hamata directed at increasing its strength as much as possible.26 The first known example is the chainmail found at Závist in the Czech Republic, which was manufactured from a combination of pre-closed forged

Celtic Warfare.indd 95

12/09/2022 21:03

96  Celtic Warfare rings and links manufactured using the earlier wire-drawing process, which were soundly riveted together after being assembled (img 4.13). Roughly contemporary with Závist armour is the armour from Titelberg in Luxembourg, which features a design fashioned only from riveted rings, which are curiously cut from bronze rather than iron wire. The armour of the princely burial at Boé, which is identical in both material and design to that of Závist, dates from 4.13  Example of riveted maille, modern reconstruction. the end of the first century bc. Also dated to the end of the first century is the statue of the Warrior of Vachères, 27 which represents a combatant wearing a lorica hamata (img 4.14); the armour appears clearly equipped with sleeves. In this armour the humeralia are no longer an integral part of the fastening system, but have now taken the shape of a real doubling on the shoulders and the clavicles. This design appears to have the function of protecting those parts of the body that would be the preferred target in swordsmanship, which was now characterized by longer and longer swords, used in wide slashes from above to below. One exceptional contribution to our knowledge of the use of organic padded cloth armour can be found in the Roman numismatic evidence of the second half of the first century bc. While the lorica hamata seems to 4.14  Warrior of Vachères. have remained the armour of the

Celtic Warfare.indd 96

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 97 aristocracy and wealthy warriors, organic armour continued to be used by the majority of fighters. The bronze figurine from Neuvy-en-Sullias (img. 4.15), for example, portrays a warrior wearing a diamondpatterned garment reminiscent of the statues from Glanum (img. 1.5) and Roquepertuse (img.  1.4), which could be interpreted as being padded quilted armour. Several coins minted during the Caesarian period display on one side a tropaeum (trophy) embellished with weapons of the vanquished Gauls, always a helmet, armour, a carnyx,28 one or more shields, and sometimes a pair of spears. If on some coins the armour depicted on the tropaeum appears most likely to be a lorica hamata, on others it is replaced by what initially seems to be a sort of elongated garment or tunic, also portrayed on Celtic infantrymen on the Arch of Cottius. The depiction of a garment in place of armour, as 4.15 Neuvy-en-Sullias bronze figurine. well as its presence within a commemorative context marked by items typical of a military environment, is inconclusive, and in any case a thorough analysis of its appearance could lead to a different interpretation from that of a plain tunic. Because of its presence within a commemorative context, marked by items typical of a military environment, we should be wary of concluding that the garment portrayed is a simple tunic worn instead of armour. A thorough analysis of the details of its appearance could lead us, in fact, to a different conclusion. Given the remarkable similarity with the medieval gambeson (img 4.16), the structure of embossed vertical stripes, clearly depicted on the coins, could indeed suggest we have a sort of protective garment with padded sections.29 The whole picture would fit perfectly with Polybius’ account of the protective clothing of the Insubres and Boii in the third century,30 as well as with Pliny’s references to the widespread use of felt armour and the Gauls’ expertise in weaving wool and quilts.31

Celtic Warfare.indd 97

12/09/2022 21:03

98  Celtic Warfare

4.16 Comparison between Celtic quilted protection (?) on Roman coins and Medieval gambeson from the Chroniques de St Denis (late fourteenth century, British Library, BL Royal 20 C VII).

A Gallic-Roman figurine discovered in Auxerre could also be interpreted in the same manner, where the similarity of the garment worn to the medieval gambeson is further emphasized by the presence of a sort of high collar or ruff. More problematic is the bronze sculpture from St-Maur-en-Chausse, dated around the first century bc, which portrays a warrior wearing what appears to be a metal thorax armour (cuirass/breastplate).

Celtic Warfare.indd 98

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 99 It seems highly unlikely that the use of bronze bell-shaped armours, which disappeared following the transition from the Hallstatt to the La Tène culture, and which in the La Tène context is only found in the area inhabited by the Senones (due probably to the influence of Magna Graecia), was reintroduced in the transalpine area in the first century. The bronze statuette from St-Maur-en-Chausse is more likely to be regarded as the idealized portrayal of a heroic or mythical figure. The realistic features such as the shield, that can be traced back to that era, appear alongside heroic elements, such as the classical thorax, and purely mythical elements, such as the figure’s hands, which each have six fingers. 4.1.3  The shield It can be observed from the bas-reliefs of the Arch of Cottius, the Arch of Orange and the Arch of Narbonne, that archaic types without a metal umbo (featuring only a spine or even displaying wooden boss) persisted until the end of the first century bc. They were probably part of the equipment of light infantrymen and less well-off fighters. In the second century  bc, though, we see models with iron bosses continue to be improved. The curvature of the umbo shell was increased, wrapping the central part of the spine as tightly as possible, while the side flanges expanded in size, becoming in some cases decidedly larger (img 4.17).

4.17  ‘Axe shaped’ umbo and rectangular umbo.

Celtic Warfare.indd 99

12/09/2022 21:03

100  Celtic Warfare All of this certainly worked to further increase the overall solidity of the structure. As a result, the pins securing the shield boss, in the specimens fitted with broader flanges, increase in number from two to four or even six, to fix it to the board in a more uniform manner. A wide array of shield boss design can be identified (img 4.17), distinguished by the different morphology of the side flanges, which, in addition to having a plain rectangular profile, can also range from having an ‘axe-shaped’ one to a ‘butterfly-shaped’ one (as already observed in the latter part of the previous century). If the models characteristic of the second century are distinguished by iterative technological, hence structural improvement, those of the first century, as the archaeological record bears out, reverse the trend in a way which is still hard to explain in any detail. The transformation affecting the shield during the first century  bc is certainly one of the most intriguing and controversial elements in the history of the development of Celtic weaponry. Although the types from the previous century persisted, hemispherical shield bosses increasingly began to appear, and their design prevented them from being superimposed onto a wooden spine (img 4.18). Both Celtic and Roman figurative art also bears witness to the use of shields whose board design is identical to that of earlier centuries – except reinforced in the middle by means of a hemispherical metal umbo and missing a spine (img 4.19).

4.18  Round shield boss.

Celtic Warfare.indd 100

4.19  Relief with carnyx and shield wìth round umbo.

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 101 Although such a shield was clearly lighter, it was at the same time more vulnerable, as the central strut did not cover the whole length of the board. The development of this model could be seen to be justified by its widespread use by cavalry, whose tactical role did not require them to engage in frontal clashes. While this would appear to be an obvious explanation, it is disproved by iconography, where the shield featuring a hemispherical umbo without a spine seems to be connected with infantrymen (img 4.20). Similarly, its introduction at the same period as the presumed establishment of the convex board, which would have replaced the lack of a spine with its more suitable impact cushioning morphology, is neither properly confirmed by archaeological evidence or 4.20  Infantryman on Gundestrup cauldron. historical sources – at least those referring to the beginning of the second century bc – which still refer to the flat design of Celtic shield boards.32 The archaeological evidence indicates that this new type of shield originated from the Przeworsk Culture, a substantially Germanic context, albeit with Celtic influences, located in Poland. The hemispherical umbones are supposed to have evolved from a typical local, archaic model of shield reinforcement using a spindle-shaped wooden umbo similar to the Celtic shields of the fifth century  bc. The wood was replaced by iron as the construction material for the umbo, and the spindle design, a consequence of the wood grain, gave way to the hemispherical profile.33 In a setting which was so far removed from the socio-military developmental path of the Mediterranean world, and unrelated to the forms of combat which had led the Gauls to progressively protect the shield board from frontal impacts and pressure, this spindle-shaped reinforcement would never have ended up as a spine to be subsequently strengthened with a metal umbo, but rather would have turned into a metal umbo itself. The evolution of shields within the Przeworsk culture therefore seems to be closely related to an approach to combat which was not based on close

Celtic Warfare.indd 101

12/09/2022 21:03

102  Celtic Warfare combat among tight formations but favoured more manoeuvrable warfare and combat, thus benefiting from a necessarily lighter shield. Shields with a hemispherical umbo would have been introduced into the Celtic milieu as a result of the Germanic migrations which started in the last quarter of the second century bc. The Germanic contribution to the range of metal reinforcements of Celtic shields is further proved by the unusual umbo from the North Bersted burial, which seems to possess mixed features of a Gallic butterfly umbo and a Germanic umbo belonging to the Jahn 1 type (img. 4.21).

4.21  North Bersted umbo

In spite of these circumstances, it is difficult to ignore how the Germanic populations themselves, on entering Western Europe, quickly conformed to the local tactics and structured themselves on the battlefield in tight formations,34 as well as the fact that from the second half of the second century bc a substantial portion of Gallic weaponry seems to have evolved in function for an infantry that was certainly less mobile, if not static. The only conceivable attributable reason for the adoption of the hemispherical shield boss on the part of the Celts might be the exponential escalation of conflicts in Transalpine Gaul and the subsequent demand for the quick and large-scale production of this essential piece of equipment. Trying to find an optimal balance in terms of affordability and strength, and maximising the opportunity to systematically reassemble the core

Celtic Warfare.indd 102

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 103 components of the shield, the resistance of the board would have been sacrificed in favour of an easier and faster manufacturing and assembly technique. The finished product, given the presence of the metal umbo, would at least guarantee optimal protection for the hand holding the handgrip. Looking again at the first century bc, we find a remarkable account by Caesar of the use of shields manufactured, by the Atuatuci tribe of Belgian Gaul, not from wood but from wicker and hide. After yielding without a fight at the very sight of the Roman siege apparatus, and having apparently agreed to the condition to completely disarm imposed by Caesar, the Atuatuci attempted to overtake the Romans with an abrupt and sudden night attack, armed ‘with the weapons they had kept and hidden and with shields made on the spot, in the short time available in the conditions, with bark or woven wicker and covered with hides’.35 Caesar’s passage clearly points out how the use of wicker shields relates here to the specific contingency of the situation, and although other neighbouring populations of the Gauls seem to have customarily adopted woven wicker shields,36 the episode of the Atuatuci should be regarded as exceptional. What we can reasonably assume here is, rather, a knowledge of the instrument itself, if not its customary use in battle, from previous centuries and military exercises, similar to Roman warfare.37 4.1.4  Pole weapons During the second and first centuries bc archaeological evidence bears out the creation and development of highly specialized models of pole weapons, which, due to their design and overall length, would now be more correctly described as pikes rather than spears. In the second century bc, the bayonet type became established (img. 4.22). This design was characterized by a narrow and elongated point, up to 70 centimetres long, featuring a prominent central rib presenting a cruciform section. It is clear that this weapon was specifically designed to enhance its piercing effect, so much so that in some models the point even loses its wide part to turn into a kind of simple spit.38

4.22  Bayonet spearhead.

Celtic Warfare.indd 103

12/09/2022 21:03

104  Celtic Warfare The length of the shaft became greater, probably as a result of the confirmation of a model of combat similar to the Macedonian phalanx, taken from Hellenistic military approach,39 over the Etruscan Italic one. In the first century  bc, the bayonet point was replaced by a bi-convex profile (img. 4.23), featuring a broader tip and a well-balanced leaf design which was amply widened at the bottom, thus coming to resemble a dagger blade.40

4.23  Biconvex spearhead.

Whereas the spears of earlier centuries had a point whose construction mainly focused on its piercing function, the biconvex spear, on the other hand, would appear to have been designed more to prevent the weapon from over piercing, which could have led to the weapon being discarded. This happened commonly after the first thrust resulting either in the spear becoming stuck or, in extreme cases, in the shaft breaking. While over-piercing barely affects a tactical approach established on clashes and heavy frontal impacts between opposing units of infantry it becomes unpractical, from a tactical perspective, against a wall of levelled pikes, which calls for an efficient formation capable of delivering repeated thrusts with a pole weapon. The presence of the butt-spike begins to gradually disappear from the burials, and although this event can be interpreted as a variation in differing deposition practices concerning grave goods,41 its increasing absence can be explained practically and more easily with reference to the establishment of a style of combat where the use of the broken shaft as a weapon of last resort becomes increasingly less likely to happen. The balancing of the pike, even if it was of large size, could be obtained more cost-effectively by giving the wooden shaft a greater thickness as it approached the butt, as has already been recorded in some models fitted with a butt-spike.42 It is worth remembering that due to development in Celtic military practice which was never immediate or homogenous, which was also affected by political fragmentation, and the effect of the massive extent of territory

Celtic Warfare.indd 104

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 105 involved, earlier models never quite disappeared despite the development of newer highly specialized models of pole weapons. Concerning missile weapons, there are no major changes from the previous century, aside from a substantial increase in the number of javelin heads, which indicates an approach to combat that was constantly in a flux. Improvement of the madaris points, which from the second century  bc onwards resembled the blades of Malay kryss daggers, perfectly match one thorough description detailed by Diodorus Siculus. 4.1.5  The sword From the second half of the third century bc into the second century the sword continues to increase in length, with blades ranging from a length of 70 to 85cm. More and more specimens appear that feature an ogival or even rounder tip.43 This can be taken as a sign of a rising preference in swordsmanship for slashing over thrusting blows. The demise of rhomboid-sectioned types occurring at the end of the previous century, proposes the novel challenge of providing the sword, increasingly long, with a greater stiffness without excessively increasing its weight. This will find an adequate solution in the increase of folding, blending and re-hammering using pattern welding techniques. Another treatment, known as material stripping, will lead to the creation of a type distinguished by two lateral grooves along the blade forming a central rib and a double fuller (img. 4.24).44

4.24  Double fuller blade section.

At the end of the century the blade of the sword was further elongated, reaching in some instances a length of more than 90cm. Some models of blade were also reduced in width to as little as 4cm, giving rise to a structure clearly designed for the use of mounted fighters alone. Also towards the end of the second century bc, some of the blades display an inversion of the trend in tip morphology where the rounded end is replaced by a squat and triangular one (img 4.25). This switch rather than pointing to a revival in the use of thrusting swordsmanship should be regarded as the expression of an intention to

Celtic Warfare.indd 105

12/09/2022 21:03

106  Celtic Warfare

4.25  Second century BC cavalry sword with double fuller and triangular tip.

reduce the impact surface of the blows, thus maximising their disruptive effect. The sheath’s chape, which is essential for its overall solidity, is adapted to the new blade’s length, and develops by wrapping up to 40cm of the terminal part of the two metal halves to give the sheath total cohesion. With regard to modifications made to the scabbard’s throat, we can also observe that the sword guard undergoes further development of its bellshaped design, leading to it adopting the so-called ‘à chapeau de gendarme’ structure, which will in turn be replaced by a different model with a straight guard (img 4.26) both of which will coexist until the end of the first century bc.45

4.26  First century bc cavalry sword with straight hilt and rounded tip.

Although types which by their length can be associated with foot soldiers will never completely disappear, the sword has now become predominantly a cavalry weapon as reflected in the sword’s suspension system. The metal fastening belts, whose development attained a noteworthy degree of mechanical perfection over the third century  bc, are almost disappearing, to be replaced by a much simpler system that closely resembles that of the fifth century bc. Two metal rings linked together with a loop, fastened to the sides of the joint and secured to the belt by leather straps. The potential hindrance of the sheath for the running warrior was no longer a concern, clearly because the bearer of the weapon was more and more often on horseback, or marched in tight combat formations in which the mobility, manoeuvrability and momentum needed for frontal clashes were less and less relevant.46 However, it should be noted that, as well as for the swords which were suitable for foot soldiers suspension, sword belts made of chain will continue to be included in some panoplies, though to a lesser extent, until the first century bc.47

Celtic Warfare.indd 106

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 107 4.1.6  Knives and daggers In the second half of the second century bc in the field of knife making we see significant progress starting with the continued increase of elongated types, which can be classified both as tools for everyday use and as effective fighting weapons. Although straight-bladed models remain unchanged from the previous century, we should be careful not to overlook the manufacture of the slightly curved models in particular contexts, whose blade design sometimes closely resembles the kopis (κοπίς), the forward-curving blade sword of the Mediterranean world (img 4.27).

4.27  Celtic battle knives from S. Maria di Zevio, Italy.

There is often a protuberance on the underside of the blade just above the handle, which creates what appears to be a sort of hand guard. The development of a hilt even more ergonomic than the straight-bladed knives, which seems to serve as protection for the holder’s hand, further underlines a function potentially related to war, and some specimens would rightfully be recognized as actual weapons. The practice in some burials of bending the blade to imitate the way swords are deposed and ritually destroyed48 might be taken as evidence of that this similar ritual indicates the item had a similarly warlike function. Among the Celtic communities of Eastern Europe, the proximity of the Dacian and Thracian populations led to the adoption of the sica supina, a knife or short sword featuring a blade with an obtusely angled profile (img 4.28).

Celtic Warfare.indd 107

12/09/2022 21:03

108  Celtic Warfare This weapon, whose use was undoubtedly tied to a martial context, was implemented by Eastern Celtic communities as part of their weaponry. In any case, in the second century bc the use of the knife as a weapon must have been fairly widespread, given that Posidonius of Apamea states that ‘The Gauls carry a dagger like a knife.’49 Regarding short swords and daggers, during the second century bc the pseudo-anthropomorphic design of the hilt gradually developed into a purely anthropomorphic type (img. 4.29), where the finely chiselled pommel resembles 4.28 Celtic Sica Supina from an actual human head with a highly the Balkans. detailed face.50 Their function however remains uncertain, and the possibility that they were intended to be display objects should be seriously considered.

4.29  Anthropomorphic short sword and scabbard.

4.1.7  Ranged weapons In the second century bc. there is no substantial change in the field of ranged weapons, which are marked by a limited amount of archaeological evidence. Furthermore, when such findings are available, it is difficult to attribute them with any certainty to military, rather than hunting activities. On the other hand, towards the end of the first half of the first century bc in Transalpine Gaul there is a reversal of this trend that is impossible not to connect with Julius Caesar’s military campaigns. In particular, at the fortified settlements of Alesia, Gergovia and Uxellodunum a substantial amount of arrowheads has been discovered. Their presence is closely related to the sieges that Roman legions inflicted on the two settlements. Most of the arrowheads recovered in the different sites were of a cheap and poorly manufactured model, in the form of a plain conical tip.51 This type may well also have been subject to further working whereby the tip was heated and folded to produce a different type of point equipped with a single barb, which, though it certainly unbalanced the arrow, would have

Celtic Warfare.indd 108

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 109 made its removal from the wound site difficult without worsening the damage (img 4.30). If arrowheads with more complex designs do occur, they represent a negligible minority, and in a sample of over 400 points selected from Uxellodunum they account for only 2.5%, compared 4.30  Arrowheads from Alesia. to 64% of conical tips and 33.5% of single-barbed points.52 The findings, which are closely connected with specific battle sites and never with burials, are mainly composed of basic types designed to be produced swiftly and in large quantities. These arrowheads suggest the extemporaneous introduction of an element within the military context, intended to respond as quickly as possible to the tactical requirements of fighting Caesar’s army. Regarding the use of the sling, this is mentioned exclusively in the context of skirmishes or sieges, sometimes as a weapon used by those under siege,53 but above all as one used by the force laying siege, to clear the bulwarks and ramparts of walls and fences54 or to set fire to the roofs of dwellings by using scorching hot clay projectiles.55 Like the bow, the sling does not seem to have been an object meriting any development in the military field among the Celts, so much so that Caesar states that during a night fight outside the walls of Alesia, Roman auxiliary troops slinging one-pound stones not just overcame Celtic light infantrymen armed with bows and slings but even ‘terrified the Gauls and drove them back.’56

4.2  The combat The typological development of the best part of the Celtic fighter’s weaponry which took place in this period, along with the abandonment of various elements dating from the previous period, is certainly symptomatic of yet another gradual change in the approach to combat. The effort devoted to perfecting the cavalrymen’s weaponry reflects his significance and the importance of his role on the battlefield. Similarly, the improvements made to the infantry’s equipment, indicative of a more static role compared to the preceding era, could suggest a sort of counterbalance and a certain amount

Celtic Warfare.indd 109

12/09/2022 21:03

110  Celtic Warfare of cooperation among the two corps,57 according to a multi-faceted tactical model following a Hellenistic military tradition which combined mounted forces and infantry. Infantry, although equipped with swords, as a rule no longer possessed the chainmail sword belt. This difference would suggest a change in approach to combat. The infantrymen, rather than rushing towards the enemy in an attempt to crush his front line, marched towards his ranks, with a hedge of opposed pikes in a formation which the Romans identified as the phalanx.58 This approach more likely resembled the Macedonian than the earlier Greek-Etruscan model. On the other hand, the cavalry, making the most of their excellent mobility coupled with effective weaponry, were able not just to secure the flanks of their own ranks and threaten those of the opposing army, but also to pin or drive the enemy against the ranks of its own infantry. If such a strategy could to some extent be considered as the legacy of experience acquired participating in Hannibal’s campaign,59 especially with regard to the skilful use of cavalry, the general picture reminds us mainly of Hellenistic tactics of combat on the field, which could have been acquired during the extended Celtic mercenary service within the armies of the Diadochi.60 A clear example is the evident implementation of the well-known ‘hammer and anvil’ tactic developed by Philip and perfected by Alexander61 by the Cimbri army, which contained a recognisably strong Celtic contingent. Writing about the Battle of Campi Raudii Plutarch states that the Cimbri horsemen did not charge directly upon the Romans, but swerved to the right and tried to draw them along gradually until they got them between themselves and their infantry, which was drawn up on their left. The Roman commanders perceived the crafty design, but did not succeed in holding their soldiers back; for one of them shouted that the enemy was taking to flight, and then all set out to pursue them. Meanwhile the infantry of the Barbarians came on to the attack like a vast sea in motion.62 Aside from the military approach, which is inspired by the model of the Hellenistic kingdoms, the size of the Celtic pike which was not as great as that of the Macedonian sarissa, must have allowed for a more flexible form of combat and more manoeuvrable formations. A pike of a substantial but not disproportionate length allowed continued use of the tall shield of earlier periods. The shield, even if slightly less adapted to absorbing compressive forces in the subtypes lacking the spine, appears to have retained the same

Celtic Warfare.indd 110

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 111 applications as in the third century bc regarding both offensive and defensive manoeuvres. Whereas the Gauls which Caesar confronted at Alesia proved able to form a testudo63 (tortoise) formation when required, just as the Senones did at the Battle of Sentinum, the Belgae tribes, during the Battle of the Sambre, pressed so vigorous a ‘clash and thrust’ strategy using their shields that Caesar recalled that his legionaries ‘were hard pressed, and as a result of the standards of the twelfth legion being assembled in one place, the crammed soldiers were a hindrance to themselves in the fight.’64 The sporadic use of battle formations which are also tight but different from the plain phalanx, such as the wedge,65 again suggests a tactical preference for frontal clashes. Above all it is worth remembering that even for the second and first centuries bc new tactics and approaches to battle should in no case be attributed in a generalized manner to every Celtic population. Even without taking into account those backward communities of the outermost areas (which up until the first century bc continued to use military tactics belonging to the most archaic traditions), we see a technical-military evolution that was by no means homogeneous, consistent or even present across the whole of the Celtic world, with warfare and tactical elements dating back to different centuries persisting in specific military settings. An emblematic account of this trend is the aforementioned Battle of the Sambre, fought in 57 bc between Caesar’s legionaries and the army of a confederation of several Belgae tribes. While the pressure experienced by Caesar’s legionaries closely resembles the thrusts of the Boii with their shields against the Romans led by Tiberius Sempronius Longus in the account of one of the last battles for the pacification of Cisalpine Gaul,66 the march ‘in very close ranks’67 of the main Nervii force is counterbalanced by other parts of the Belgian army who launched themselves at a furious pace into a clash with their opponents, according to a practice which was popular and widespread during previous centuries. It is no coincidence that records documenting the continued use of the suspension chain, essential equipment for the mobile Celtic warrior, point precisely to northern areas of Gaul when it was obsolete elsewhere from the second century onwards.68 Caesar’s report on the Battle of the Sambre is also a useful source of new data, concerning the internal structure of the Celtic armies, which can be indirectly deduced from this account. At the end of the battle, which was won by the Roman troops, the elders of the Nervii, who had, together with the women and children, previously

Celtic Warfare.indd 111

12/09/2022 21:03

112  Celtic Warfare been relocated to an unreachable marshy area for their own safety, sent messengers to Caesar begging for peace, declaring that following the Battle ‘their senators were reduced from 600 to three; that from 60,000 men they were reduced to scarcely 500 who could bear arms.’69 It can be inferred that the forces deployed by the Nervii at the Battle of Sabis must have numbered 60,000 armed men, corresponding to 10 catervas according to the structure of the Celtic armies as reported by classical authors, and that there were 600 ‘senators’ among them. The combination of public and military positions that can be traced back to Celtic society and culture, where the noblemen who formed the national senates established their status and power based on the number of their subordinates and retinues,70 makes it reasonable to suppose that the 600 ‘senators’ of the Nervii led and commanded their own personal contingents on the battlefield. If the patronage structure was by essence variable, relying on economic power to recruit and sustain the Ambacti, it is difficult to envisage a mathematical partition into exactly matching tactical groups. The ratio of the 600 senators to the 60,000 armed men, though, cannot be disregarded, nor can the fact that it would fit in perfectly with the 6,000 troops who formed a caterva. As theoretical as it may look, the ratio of the numbers quoted by Caesar suggests that each Gallic ‘senator’ was in fact in charge of a troop of 100 men on the battlefield.71 This subdivision of the fighting force into several units, which had already been supposed at least for the huge Cisalpine armies of the previous period, still displayed the migration model typical of earlier times and did not yet amount to a flexible and functional logistic system. Caesar again reports how the Celtic armies at the end of the first century bc still moved with an entourage with many carts and much baggage, according to the custom of the Gauls, and about six thousand men of all sorts, with their domestics and slaves; but without discipline or commander, every one following his own choice, and all marching in perfect security, as if they had nothing more to apprehend than in former times.72 4.2.1  Elite infantry Aside from the certainly more static approach to combat which is typical of the bulk of infantries of the third century bc, there is some archaeological

Celtic Warfare.indd 112

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 113 evidence which, up to the first century bc, indicates the presence of fighters distinguished by more dynamic methods, involving a combination of throwing weapon and sword. The special attention devoted to the development of increasingly effective madaris points shows a sustained interest in specialized throwing weapons. Similarly, the pursuit of increasingly complex and consequently expensive weapon designs, intended to enhance the weapon’s offensive potential, puts the madaris in the hands of wealthy professional warriors. Moreover, sustained use, however reduced, of the sword suspension system in several areas could be regarded as the will of professional foot fighters not to restrict their own freedom of movement. Of course, the overall elongation of the sword, the weapon par excellence of professional fighters, suggests that most of the latter must also have favoured horseback fighting. It is not possible to extract from the historical sources a well-defined image of hypothetical autonomous units of elite infantry despite iconography which could lead us to infer the continued role of the professional warrior leading less trained and experienced infantrymen. We find such iconography on the Gundestrup Cauldron, which portrays a dismounted warrior, equipped with a sword and a helmet that bears aloft the effigy of a wild boar, leading ranks of less identifiable helmet-less infantrymen armed with shields and spears. Caesar’s De Bello Gallico makes no mention of the Gaesatae of two centuries earlier, whose distinctive features and approach to combat had probably disappeared. Likewise, the only reference to a professional fighting unit, the six hundred Soldurii escorting the commander-in-chief of the Sotiates Adiatuanos, does not allow the reader to conclude with any certainty whether they were foot soldiers or cavalry. However, it seems plausible to accept that such units, at least in some specific contexts, actually existed. When referring to the Belgian population of the Nervii, Caesar claims that ‘since ancient times the Nervii didn’t have cavalry contingents – they don’t even concern themselves to this day with having them; instead, all their might resides in their infantry.’73 Combining Caesar’s account with information reported on the Battle of the Sambre and with archaeological evidence concerning the presence of metal suspension sword belts, it is possible to formulate a further interpretative hypothesis. On the basis of this hypothesis, it would be possible to establish that in some areas of Belgian Gaul some of the most recent military improvements had not taken hold in any striking fashion, and that

Celtic Warfare.indd 113

12/09/2022 21:03

114  Celtic Warfare the professional fighter was still to a large extent mainly an infantryman. This may be either because of areas’ peripheral position or, on the contrary, because of a long-standing martial tradition, acknowledged by Caesar himself 74 and recognizable in the cluster of professional bands of warriors around which many communities were founded.75 4.2.2  The light infantry While absent from historical sources for the whole of the second century bc, the Celtic light infantry reappears in Caesar’s account of the conquest of Gaul. The use of light infantry as support for cavalry,76 similar to the tactic reportedly used by the Cisalpine Gauls at the Battle of Telamon, would suggest some continuity with the modes of engagement of the previous centuries. The very expression used by Caesar to identify Gallic light infantry, expedites, fits perfectly with Polybius’ euzonoi (εὔζωνοι), conveying once more the concept of the agile fighter, able to act, unencumbered by heavy armour but not necessarily equipped with ranged weapons, as a screening force, or in skirmishes. Nevertheless, by analysing in depth the literary sources and cross-referencing them with the archaeological evidence, in relation to the final, heated episodes of Caesar’s campaign it is possible to detect a hectic and belated effort by the Gallic armies to plug the gaps in their utilization of light infantry. During Vercingetorix’s rebellion of 52 bc, Caesar states, the leader of the Pangallic coalition called for an extraordinary conscription of archers, requesting that the nations involved ‘recruit and send all the archers, who were very numerous in Gaul’.77 The large number of archers mentioned by Caesar is not to be read in the perspective of some specific martial tradition which had suddenly developed in first century bc Transalpine Gaul, but rather in connection with a context where, especially in the outer and less urbanized communities, hunting was a substantial component of everyday life and hunting tools would have been well known and widespread. Vercingetorix recruited large numbers of the lower classes from the Gallic nations, and having specifically requested bowmen was probably formulating a response to the tactical problems related to the great sieges he knew he would have to endure. Perhaps, also, he was thinking of how to counteract the Roman divisions of specialized auxiliaries, such as the Balearic slingers and Cretan archers. Whatever Vercingetorix’s plans were, even if in the last phases of the Gallic War both historical and archaeological sources report an increased use of archers, there are no substantial changes in the tactical quality of

Celtic Warfare.indd 114

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 115 those archers. The Gallic archers do not appear lined up as separate unit, but mixed with other lightly armed infantrymen, giving rise to heterogeneous bands of skirmishers.78 This type of formation persists, even after the Roman conquest, on account of the general and impromptu nature of recruitment.79 We should also not fail to mention that Caesar himself, at the outbreak of the civil war against Pompey, recruited and made use of Gallic auxiliary archers from the nation of the Ruteni.80 Nevertheless, even in this case, his decision should be attributed to the compelling need for troops equipped with ranged weapons who could be found among the ordinary recruiting channels from Crete and the Middle East. We should not view it as the recognition and appreciation, by the Romans, of any tradition of Celtic archery, like the Syrian or Cretan, and a commensurate will to establish units of ethnically Celtic bowmen. The sling, used during the Nervii’s ambush of the Romans during the campaign in Belgian Gaul, is also mentioned as a light infantry weapon, along with a range of unidentified weapons that were defined as ‘light’ with a very high range.81 These weapons probably also included bows, thus showing us once more that hunting tools were also weapons of first instance for light infantry and bands of skirmishers. 4.2.3  The cavalry The field of warfare in which the Celts excelled between the second and first centuries bc is undoubtedly that of mounted combat. Although an increasing deployment of mounted forces by the Celts can be recorded as early as the third century  bc, it was in the following two centuries that the art of Celtic horsemanship reached its peak. Technological developments in horsemanship and, in particular, the creation of a design based upon the solid wooden four-horned framed saddle, which has been dated to the second or first century bc, contributed to this leap forward.82 The structure of the horned saddle is designed to accommodate the rider’s pelvis, which, by adopting a posture similar to that of contemporary Western riding, is comfortably but firmly secured on the horse’s back, thus partially recovering balance lost by not having stirrups 4.31  Horned saddle. (img. 4.31).

Celtic Warfare.indd 115

12/09/2022 21:03

116  Celtic Warfare In addition to technological development, there was a will, at least in the first century, to select breeds of horses which were increasingly suitable for warfare, through cross-breeding with other imported animals, in which the Gauls took ‘the greatest pleasure, and which they procure at a great price’.83 Although the absence of any other stabilizing device such as the stirrup, combined with the smaller size of the horses of the time, which on average would have been around 1.30 metres tall at the withers,84 continued to prevent the cavalry from ruling the battlefield as it did for most of the Middle Ages, compared to the previous centuries the Gallic mounted fighter was certainly safer in the saddle and consequently more versatile in combat. Cavalry was, however, still dependant on a close collaboration with light infantry. The importance of the role of the cavalry within Celtic armies is revealed by the careful attention which was paid to their recruitment. At the outbreak of the Pangallic revolt against Caesar, Vercingetorix ‘pays particular attention to the cavalry’,85 and when new Gallic rebel nations join his army he immediately requests fifteen thousand mounted fighters in reinforcements. Regarding the infantry, ‘he says that he will be content with the infantry which he had before’.86 The excellence and prowess of Celtic horsemen is also acknowledged by Classical authors, with Strabo even stating that the Romans’ best cavalry troops were recruited from among the Celts.87 During the Gallic campaigns Caesar made extensive use of Celtic auxiliary cavalry, which was provided by those nations allied to him, in particular the Aedui.88 In fact, he relied on them so heavily that, as a result of the Pangallic revolt, he was forced to recruit mounted troops among the Germanic tribes.89 Troops of Celtic auxiliary horsemen would serve on both sides during the Roman civil war, and just as Caesar used cavalry units provided by both the Transalpine Gauls90 and the Galatians,91 king Juba of Numidia, Pompey’s ally, is mentioned as having Gallic cavalrymen amongst his troops.92 While Caesar’s Gallic enterprise undoubtedly increased the presence of Gallic auxiliaries in the ranks of the Roman army, they can be found deployed alongside regular legions as early as the third century bc. However, they can’t rightly be considered as cavalry units, but as armed groups where the percentage of infantrymen considerably exceeded that of cavalrymen.93 Thus, those substantial changes that would come to affect the Celtic cavalry were still in the making. There is no doubt that the Celtic influence on Roman horsemanship and mounted warfare was tremendous. Arrian gives us proof of this stating that the majority of technical terms used in the Roman army ‘do not belong to the language of the Romans, but to that of the Celts and the Iberians, since the Romans

Celtic Warfare.indd 116

12/09/2022 21:03

Soldiers and Cavalrymen 117 adopted these tactics which were Celtic, since they held Celtic cavalry in high regard in battle.’94 Indeed, the very term used in late Roman times to refer to cavalry formations, drungus, would appear to be of Gallic origin,95 and in Arrian’s writings three different combat approaches are named and described in detail, with their names and origins being attributed to the Celts. One technique already mentioned by Pausanias about Gallic mounted skirmishes of the fourth century bc was the petrinos, found mentioned in the Ars Tactica. This technique involved repeatedly hurling javelins backwards, with one’s back turned to the enemy while retreating.96 The text also mentions the xynema, the practice of swiftly discharging three javelins before abruptly turning the horse97 and stolutegon, the practice of raising the shield above the head while retreating and turning it to protect the back, bending the arm backwards.98 If it would appear difficult to trace the term xynema back to the Celtic language, the other two might find their counterparts in Welsh, with petrinos connected to ‘pedrain’, defining the hindquarters of the horse, and stolutegon to a complex of ‘ystle’, ‘retreat’, and the root ‘-teg’, ‘cover’.99 On the battlefield, Celtic cavalrymen proved always capable of playing a number of different tactical and military roles. If the innovation of the second century bc was the implementation of the ‘hammer and anvil’ tactic, which favoured synergy with the heavy infantry and their equipment and formations, those of the third century bc, such as the practice of luring enemy infantry into ambushes (or, more commonly, into combat with the opponent’s cavalry) remained the same.100 Of great interest in this respect is Plutarch’s thorough account of the clash between Gallic horsemen led by Publius, son of Crassus, and Parthian cataphracts following the Battle of Carrhae, in 54 bc. Publius himself, accordingly, cheered on his cavalry, made a vigorous charge with them, and closed with the enemy. But his struggle was an unequal one both offensively and defensively, for his thrusting was done with small and feeble spears against breastplates of raw hide and steel, whereas the thrusts of the enemy were made with pikes against the lightly equipped and unprotected bodies of the Gauls, since it was upon these that Publius chiefly relied, and with these he did indeed work wonders. For they laid hold of the long spears of the Parthians, and grappling with the men, pushed them from their horses, hard as it was to move them owing to the weight of their armour; and many of the Gauls forsook their own horses, and crawling under those of the enemy, stabbed them in the belly.

Celtic Warfare.indd 117

12/09/2022 21:03

118  Celtic Warfare These would rear up in their anguish, and die trampling on riders and foemen indiscriminately mingled.101 Aside from recounting the disadvantageous situation in which Publius’ Gallic cavalry was caught up, and the bravery and extreme inventiveness with which they tried to cope with it, Plutarch’s passage provides a great deal of relevant information about their equipment and the way they fought. We see that the Gallic horsemen lack armour, or are equipped with very little which we can reasonably assume would only be organic and less effective than the heavy armour of the cataphracts. Without making a generalization, one can implicitly understand the historical record in two different ways, either by emphasizing the high status of the lorica hamata among the Celts, or by suggesting that the cavalry ranks were also open to less affluent social classes, perhaps due to the spread of bonds of debt and the establishment of private troops armed and trained by the aristocracy. Though the main weapon of the mounted warriors was a ‘small and feeble’ spear, therefore reasonably suitable for hurling, the Gallic cavalry sought a direct confrontation with the Parthians, following an approach already observed in the third century  bc which we see repeated by the Gallic horsemen facing Caesar.102 This indicates that the weapon used was not used exclusively as a missile but possessed several other uses. Evidently, it was the framea, the ancient multi-purpose spear, that was being used, showing that its flexibility and simplicity would never see it disappear from the range of Celtic weapons. It is equally evident, recalling Arrian, that the rider had to be equipped with more than one spear or javelin, or tactics such as the xynema would not have been practicable. Lastly, if the Gallic cavalrymen dismounted from their horses and threw themselves under the Parthians’ animals in order to stab them in the belly, they must have been equipped with a secondary melee weapon, which could not have been the long cavalry sword, due to its cumbersome size, but was more likely a big knife. In all this, interestingly, the most distinctive weapon of the Celtic horsemen, the long sword, is not mentioned. The only acceptable explanation is to be sought in an in-depth analysis of the design and function of the weapon, which, being long and often slender, was apparently designed to be wielded by mounted fighters against unmounted ones, possibly when disrupted by a charge, and would have been unsuitable in a clash with mounted opponents.

Celtic Warfare.indd 118

12/09/2022 21:03

Chapter 5

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts

A

s has been mentioned before, the development of the Celtic populations has never been completely homogeneous and consistent, due to the extent of the area of cultural influence, political separation and natural boundaries. All these factors gave rise to the persistence, in the outermost and most peripheral areas of the Celtic milieu, of somewhat archaic structures, which at times gave rise to their own characterizing peculiarities which are absent in the rest of the Celtic world. The most striking examples are to be found in the Alpine region and in the British Isles, where, in a generally thorough and long term manner, the local Celts, irrespective of the evolution occurring in other geographical areas, continue to adhere to several traditional customs. In the majority of the Celtic milieu the approaches to armed combat and the actual devices adopted for this purpose underwent a steady evolution, driven proactively and reactively by ever-new needs and the activities of their competitors. In these areas, due to a lack of external impulses, there would seem to be a kind of impasse, where the archaic model of warfare endures more or less unaltered, and the only occasional modifications made to offensive and defensive weapons are to perfect them so that they fit in with traditional and established warfare tactics.

5.1  The British Isles Looking at both the local mythological corpus and the external accounts of classical authors, the socio-military framework of the British Isles for many reasons would appear to have remained closely connected to the Celtic tradition and heritage of the fifth and fourth centuries bc. This circumstance appears to have been caused by a localism imposed by the partial geographical isolation of the British communities.

Celtic Warfare.indd 119

12/09/2022 21:03

120  Celtic Warfare Caesar was able to identify and recognize two different ethnic and cultural groups among the inhabitants of Britain. One cluster of older origin, living in the inland areas of Britain, and another from a more recent settlement on the southern coasts of the island connected and paralleled with the Belgic populations of Gaul. However, the latter seems to have exerted only a minor influence on the former, which was also Celtic, and, if anything, it seems more to have adopted many of the local traditions and practices. The oldest Celtic element, the consequence of the migration processes which started in the fifth century bc within the La Tène Culture, along with some distinctive features probably inherited from the native populations of the islands, retains many elements of the earliest Celtic traditions. For example, the phenomenon of facial scarification, use in initiations and rituals, already recorded by the numismatic record among the continental Celts, seems to have completely vanished in Gaul by around the second century bc1, though it had probably been declining for some time previously. It is not mentioned by Greek or Roman authors. On the other hand, in the islands it survived as a common and widespread practice, so much so that it became in classical sources, a distinguishing feature identifying the Britons.2 Warfare in the British Isles does not yet seem to have lost its connection with cattle raiding and the theft of livestock is celebrated to such an extent that it becomes a major theme in epic poetry. The geographical distance from influential large scale political and military scenes, as well as the absence of rivals creates a conceptual gap in the process of military development in Britain and Ireland. Models which became obsolete on the European mainland were not only retained, but even influenced the few significant evolutions concerning weaponry and equipment. The figure of the aristocratic charioteer on the battlefield not only remained centre stage but would end up being perfected, with modifications made to his weaponry to enhance the implementation of his role and presence on the battlefield. Along with the practice of facial scarification, the use of war paint was typical of and exclusive to the Britons. This practice reveals the presence of a strongly marked magical and sacred aspect connected with warfare. Caesar writes that ‘All the Britons, indeed, dye themselves with woad, which produces a bluish colour thus giving a more terrifying appearance in battle’ 3 referring to a practice which finds no counterpart among mainland Celts, and is therefore probably to be regarded as a legacy of the native island inhabitants.

Celtic Warfare.indd 120

12/09/2022 21:03

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts   121 Perhaps the use of woad tattoos and/or war paint does find a corresponding ideal in the warrior nudity of the Gaesatae, but if the Gaesatae are a distinct and well-defined group within the European Celtic elite, the practice of using war paint is ascribed to every class of British warrior, and while the Gaesatae were vanishing from the historical record at the end of the third century  bc, the British practice of wearing woad war paint did not cease until later periods.4 The retention and preservation of an ancestral practice such as using war paint, bereft of any corresponding practical value and intimately associated with the domain of magic, indicates an immature military context embedded in a cultural model in which warfare was conducted less as a necessity and more as a ritual expression.5 The practice of ver sacrum, which in the fifth century bc was the initial driving force behind Celtic expansion, and afterwards the promoter of a dual cultural exchange, in the geographically bounded context of the British Islands becomes stagnant. The aforementioned practice, rather than broadening the perspectives of the communities, produces a continuous flow of disruptive influences, which, having no object to focus their restlessness on out with their own cultural context, hinder the local development of strong and significant political and government structures. If the Fianna of the Irish epics are actually celebrated in epic verse as a heroic archetype, an in-depth and disillusioned examination can recognize their historical characters as unruly elements and promoters of endemic political unrest, taking part in conflict only for the sake of conflict and, due to the absence of alternative adversaries, maintaining an obsolete, unevolving developmental phase of warfare. The political situation in Britain at the time of Caesar’s arrival was characterized by widespread political unrest, which made the already troublesome scenario of Transalpine Gaul pale by comparison and was reflected in a chronic incapacity to manage large-scale military conflict. A single defeat was enough to break up the temporary confederation of tribes established to oppose Caesar, and to make the Britons’ supreme military leader, Cassivellaunus, abandon any hope of facing the Romans in battle.6 This chain of events is a clear indication of both military and political immaturity. The hypothesis of a coalition led by Cassivellaunus, with which Caesar clashed in 54 bc, was probably the result of the political efforts of the populations of southern Britain.

Celtic Warfare.indd 121

12/09/2022 21:03

122  Celtic Warfare These communities, following the first Roman campaign of 55 bc, and in view of the forthcoming return of the enemy, of which they certainly had received warning through their Gallic connections, felt the urge to deploy a numerically strong opposition whose fragility, however, revealed its extemporaneous character as much as the British tactical ignorance of continental European warfare. In fact, during the first campaign in 55 bc, Caesar found himself facing much smaller forces than the following year. This phase of the conflict was most likely limited to the involvement of the military leaders of a few tribes with their own retinues, as can be deduced from the fact that just thirty Gallic auxiliary horsemen, led by the Atrebatan war chief Commius, managed to successfully confront the British war chariots.7 It is true that, when describing the expedition of 54 bc, Caesar mentions a force of four thousand chariots.8 If appears rather exorbitant at first glance, especially insofar as each war chariot includes a member the aristocracy, it is worth noting that Caesar attributes the number to chariot fighters and not to chariots. Therefore, the number of vehicles is already divided by calculating for each chariot one warrior and one charioteer, thus reducing the number of war chariots to two thousand. If we compare this with Tacitus’ account, which hints at the presence of several warriors, in addition to the charioteer, for each war chariot,9 the number of vehicles deployed by Cassivellaunus could reasonably be further reduced, to around one thousand three hundred war chariots. This is nevertheless a substantial amount, but we must remember it refers to the forces mobilized by a federation encompassing a large number of the tribal and proto-state entities of southern Britain. 5.1.1  The panoply The weaponry of the Celtic warriors of the British Isles is predominantly distinguished by the persistence, up to the first century bc and beyond, of elements which, in time, become obsolete on the European mainland. The equipment is also marked by the development of peculiar features in the weaponry specifically intended to make the best use of antiquated tactics and combat methods. Furthermore, it is possible to recognize a lack of interest in the development and spread of those components of panoply which were probably deemed unnecessary, if not counterproductive, for the combat approaches usually adopted, which had to be swift, flexible, and primarily skirmish based.

Celtic Warfare.indd 122

12/09/2022 21:03

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts   123 5.1.1.1  The helmet and armour However widely established elsewhere in Europe, body armour plays only a marginal role in the equipment of British and Gaelic warriors. Although one of the oldest chainmail armours is found at Kirkburn, Yorkshire,10 and there is further archaeological evidence in the form of remains found at Lexden, Maiden Castle, Folly Lane, Hayling Island, Baldock, St Albans, Stanwick and Woodeaton, these are all dated to between the first century bc and the first century ad. The specimens associated with these finds could be interpreted as the result of a type of manufacturing connected to the migration of Belgae from the European mainland, or even as being of Roman influence. The late fragments of Celtic chainmail discovered in Britain belong to different types, and along with three specimens manufactured with riveted and welded rings there is one composed of plain butted rings, one of butted and welded rings, one of riveted rings only and finally one of riveted and punched rings, some of which are cast in bronze.11 The very heterogeneous overview which results from the analysis of archaeological evidence is in any case related to highly valuable goods which must have been fairly uncommon and the preserve of wealthier aristocrats, since they were mainly distributed in the southern part of the island. There is no archaeological evidence, let alone historical sources, regarding the use of organic armour. The Irish epics, although they mention armour crafted from ‘horn-skin’,12 which could conceivably refer to boiled leather, are too late to be regarded as reliable source, leaving plenty of room for all sorts of further interpretation. Both Tacitus13 and Cassius Dio14 emphasize the widespread lack of armour among the Britons, and Herodian suggests that the excessive weight and bulk would have hindered fighters accustomed to skirmishing and moving swiftly over difficult ground.15 Tacitus and Herodian also mention the absence of head gear, and indeed the only known Celtic helmets associated with the insular context are three Coolus-Mannheim, found respectively at Meyrick (img  5.1), North Bersted and Canterbury, and the well-known Waterloo Bridge Helmet. 5.1 Meyrick Coolus-Mannheim helmet.

Celtic Warfare.indd 123

12/09/2022 21:03

124  Celtic Warfare

5.2  Waterloo Bridge helmet.

One type of helmet, unique in its family – the Waterloo – appears to be a very elaborate object, featuring a hemispherical bronze cap topped laterally by two conical horns and repoussé decoration on the front (img 5.2). Among the three Coolus-Mannheim helmets discovered in Britain, two of them appear to be fairly atypical, with the Meyrick specimen displaying an ogival cap and a highly jutting and embossed neck guard while the North Bersted helmet is surmounted by an intricate openwork bronze crest. As with the chainmail, the Coolus-Mannheim are also related to the ebb and flow of influences from the European continent16 between the second half of the first century bc and the first century ad. These prestige goods are from time to time interpreted as belonging to native individuals who must have served in Gaul as mercenaries,17 members of the Gallic aristocracy who fled to Britain following Caesar’s campaigns or even auxiliaries who served with the Roman army.18 5.1.1.2  The shield Unlike on the European mainland, shields on the British Isles did not undergo a long evolution leading to the strengthening of the frontal surface of the board. The findings of the all-bronze votive shields at Battersea, Chertsey, Witham, and the miniature shields from the Thames, enabled the accurate identification of the design and the varying types of British shields, which seem to be largely based on older models from the European continent.19

Celtic Warfare.indd 124

12/09/2022 21:03

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts   125 The Battersea and Witham shields display a semi-rectangular design, whereas the Chertsey shield is elliptical in shape. Whereas the Battersea shield bears round studs on the board, namely a central umbo and two reinforcements, one upper and one lower, the shields from Chertsey (img 5.3) and Witham both bear a spine, in the latter decorated, probably representing a longitudinal cover which appears to be typical of the British context (img 5.4).

5.3  Chertsey votive shield.

5.4  Briton bronze spine cover.

The remains of the metal reinforcements of the shields of Grimthorpe and Pocklington do indeed possess a bronze spine covering, accompanied by metal plates which were used to reinforce the central section of the board.

Celtic Warfare.indd 125

12/09/2022 21:03

126  Celtic Warfare Some of the Thames miniature shields20 show a very distinctive form like an ‘animal hide’ (img. 5.5), with the elliptical board featuring an upper and a lower groove, and a central reinforcement in place of the spine, that is reminiscent of those present on Hjortspring shields. The ‘animal hide’ morphology is reflected in functional shield finds, such as the complete metal flange recovered from the Mill Hill burial 21 or the fragment from the Bryher shield, and could be the result of an artistic style based on an antiquated function, supposing that the earliest shields were manufactured from a cowhide covered frame, as can be tentatively deduced from Irish epics.22 One particularly curious and unique find in the range of British shields in particular, and Celtic shields in general, is that of the 5.5  Votive ‘animal-hide shaped’ British shield. Enderby shield.23 Approximately dated between 395 and 255 bc, the Enderby shield displays a similar profile to the Battersea shield, but is smaller in size, measuring 67cm in length and 37cm in width. The particular and distinguishing feature of the shield is represented by the materials used to manufacture it. The bark board, strengthened by wooden slats and bordered with a hazel branch cut lengthwise and fitted along the edge, is combined with a hemispherical wicker umbo (img. 5.6). The reference to the ‘bark or wicker shields’ hurriedly manufactured by the Atuatuci to confront Caesar immediately comes to mind,24 and the experimental reconstruction carried out by the University of Leicester has proved both that the manufacture of such object is fast and straightforward, and that the final product, despite the materials involved, is able to withstand heavy blows and impacts. The actual purpose of the Enderby shield, however, still remains uncertain. Although the traces of wear observed on the board surface, possibly from sword and javelin blows, may suggest a practical use in combat, the find might also be interpreted in different and opposing ways. It may have been

Celtic Warfare.indd 126

12/09/2022 21:03

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts   127

5.6  Enderby shield, reconstruction.

5.7  Clonoura shield.

a weapon of last resort manufactured in an unusual circumstance, or a shield customarily adopted by less well-off fighters. Or, on the contrary, given the special care observed in its manufacture and in the decorations painted on the board, it may perhaps be regarded as one of the ‘feats/prowess weapons’ described in Irish epics, used to train young members of the aristocracy. An entirely dissimilar shield type, distinguished by a convex wooden board, was found in the peat bog of Clonoura, Ireland, 25 and seems to be consistent with Roman literary and iconographic sources referring to the Celtic warriors of Scotland. The Clonoura shield is of very small proportions, with a height of 57cm and a width of only 35cm, and is lined both internally and externally with leather (img. 5.7). The handle slot is covered by a rectangular wooden umbo, also lined with hide, and the inner surface of the board features two pairs of parallel grooves through the leather surface, probably designed to insert a carrying strap.

Celtic Warfare.indd 127

12/09/2022 21:03

128  Celtic Warfare In the same way, the Caledonian warriors depicted in many reliefs from Hadrian’s Wall carry small, rectangular shields, which are also encountered in early Medieval Pictish figurative art, and both Tacitus and Herodian 26 mention small shields when referring to Caledonian weaponry. As with helmets, there is no lack of equipment latterly imported from Gaul at the end of the first century bc in the field of shields. The shield umbones recovered from the burials at Kelvedon, Owslebury and North Bersted belong to the ‘butterfly’ type, 27 and those of the latter two in particular conform to a hybrid design, whose features appear also to have been influenced by Germanic umbones belonging to the Jahn 1 type. 5.1.1.3  Pole weapons Pole weapons in the British Isles did not undergo the same process of rigorous and manifold development as they did on the continent. Most of the recovered points belong to the category of javelins, ranging from 5 to 10cm in length, and until the fourth century bc we continue to find bone points alongside iron ones. Another statistically significant cluster is represented by framea points, measuring approximately between 15 and 38cm in length. The presence of thrusting spear points is negligible and always associated with particularly wealthy burials. In Britain the thrusting spear continues, essentially, to be a sign of status and not part of the general armoury of pole and shafted weapons which seems to be focused on missile or multipurpose weapons, presenting a strikingly archaic picture, comparable to European mainland settings dating from the fourth century bc. The majority of javelin points do not represent any particularly specialized types, although several examples of pilum with the typically elongated metal ferrule occur, related to the South Cave and Four Crosses finds (most likely imported from the European mainland) and hybrid specimens featuring a medium-length ferrule.28 Irish epics place particular emphasis on javelins with wound-shredding barbed points.29 These weapons are also mentioned in the early medieval chronicles, which describe the spears of the Picts and Scots as ‘ hooked’.30 However, the literary record does not appear to be supported by any archaeological evidence, which would rather indicate that the establishment of barbed javelin points on the islands occurred in the Roman or AngloSaxon period.

Celtic Warfare.indd 128

12/09/2022 21:03

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts   129 5.1.1.4  Swords and daggers The overall morphology of the swords of the insular Celts is not very different compared to that of European mainland swords31 and yet some features, such as the length of the blade and the suspension system, suggest that as early as the fifth century bc, Briton and Gaelic cultures adopted their own specific and distinctive standards.32 If the swords found in Ireland are small in size compared to their continental counterparts, with the blade ranging between 40 and 50cm in length,33 British blades generally tend to follow a pattern of development parallel to that of European mainland specimens.34 The blade gradually increases in length reaching 90cm, at the same time developing an increasingly rounded tip,35 so much so that Tacitus would comment on the remarkable overall length and rounded tip of Caledonian swords.36 The main difference between insular and continental Celtic swords is to be found in the scabbard sheath and the suspension system. The standardization of metal scabbards, and the subsequent homogenisation in favour of an iron design, did not occur in the British Isles. In the third century  bc and onwards the archaeological evidence indicates the co-existence of scabbards manufactured using sheets of bronze or organic material37 (the latter of which had already been discarded on the mainland at the beginning of the fourth century  bc) with more recently designed types being either imports or imitations of models from across the Channel. British and Gaelic warriors, not having to deal with external enemies, lack the conditions that would normally drive research into more effective and efficient ways of using arms, and the conservative stance in which combat stays stuck is reflected emblematically by the complete lack of any further development of the suspension system for the sword, as happened in the better part of the rest of the Celtic milieu. Those few metal components of the scabbard sword belt suspension system, which are not always present in the British Isles, are usually composed of two metal rings placed on the sides of the suspension loop. The only, eventually distinctive, innovation in the suspension system that occurs in the British Isles is the displacement of the suspension loop, which in several specimens is moved from the area immediately below the locket and centred roughly in the middle of the scabbard body (img. 5.8). Such a displacement evidently makes it impossible for the sword to hang from the wearer’s side, and analysis of the iconographic evidence, represented

Celtic Warfare.indd 129

12/09/2022 21:03

130  Celtic Warfare

5.8  Cotterdale sword scabbard.

by some plaster statuettes recovered from north-eastern England38 (img 5.9), along with the investigation of some burials, would suggest that in such instances the weapon would have been carried behind the warrior’s back.39

5.9  Garton Slack figurines.

A later type of suspension may effectively be hypothesized from a comparative study of weapons from different cultures, such as those of the Middle and Far East, which present similarly designed scabbards, i.e. with the suspension loop placed in the midpoint of the scabbard.40 Among several oriental populations, who were also distinguished by an intensive usage of the war chariot similar to that in the British Isles, the iconographic record witnessed the adoption of a sword suspension reaching approximately to the level of the combatant’s tailbone with the sheath suspension loop facing outwards (img 5.10). This last feature would also be very compatible with the decorations of scabbards equipped with an intermediately located suspension loop, on the halve of which the loop is present, and with the very large diameter of the suspension loop itself, which would have led to discomfort and inconvenience if it had been turned inwards against the body of the combatant.

Celtic Warfare.indd 130

12/09/2022 21:03

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts   131

5.10  Statue of a charioteer from the Terracotta Army, Qin Shi Huang mausoleum, China.

5.11  Witham dagger.

It is true that the Garton Slack statuettes, although stylized, without doubt depict the belt suspended between the sheath and the warrior’s body, and consequently the suspension loop facing inwards, but this could be due to the nature of the representations, which have tentatively been interpreted as defixio,41 thus belonging properly to a context of curse spell casting or ritual magic rather than realistic depictions of warfare.42 With regard to short blades, a large amount of metal-sheathed daggers similar in design to their European counterparts were already being manufactured in Britain as early as the fifth century bc.43 Even from the earliest types, it is clear that daggers were chiefly used and regarded as prestige goods rather than as actual weapons. The Minster Ditch dagger, for example, displays a rather fragile and nonfunctional suspension system, with the suspension loop manufactured not from a metal plate riveted to the outer edge of the sheath, but from the

Celtic Warfare.indd 131

12/09/2022 21:03

132  Celtic Warfare sheath panel itself, by cutting two longitudinal slits in the metal, which is subsequently raised up and adorned with small embossed studs to simulate riveting.44 Other later examples, such as the Witham dagger (img. 5.11), belonging to the same category as the anthropomorphic daggers of mainland European, have careful decoration and distinctivee symbolism which could suggest a ritual purpose. 5.1.2.5  The sling In Irish epics the sling is often mentioned as an essential component of the warrior’s equipment,45 but it is hard to assess how much and when these references are to be regarded as being mythical and allegorical rather than reflecting a realistic context. Although Roman records are silent about the widespread reliance of British people on the sling, the archaeological evidence suggests that the weapon was used extensively in connection with the defence of fortified sites, reflecting continental European practices. Deposits containing considerable amounts of stone pebbles, kept within reach of defensive earthworks, were recovered from within the inhabited defensive perimeter of the hillforts of Danebury and Maiden Castle. The development in the islands of defensive earthworks based on several concentric layers of ditches, moats and banks, is also to be regarded as a consequence of the increasingly complex use of the sling on both sides of sieges.46 5.1.1.6  The war chariot The war chariot holds a prominent place in island epics and in them is as much the preserve of the warrior hero as it was in Homeric epics.47 In the Irish myths reference is found to the use of scythed chariots, which in addition to recalling Lucian’s mention of their use by the Galatians, is confirmed by Pomponius Mela, who writes of the Britons ‘They make war not only on horseback or on foot but also from two-horse chariots and carts armed in the Gallic fashion – they call them covinni – on which they use axles equipped with scythes,’48 as well as Jordanes, who similarly claims the British use of ‘scythed two-horse chariots, which they commonly call essedas’.49 Both essedum and covinnus are words of Celtic origin, and do not appear refer to different vehicles, but to the same thing.50 The matter of the occurrence of scythed chariots among British and Gaelic armies is vigorously debated, and although a large scythe blade was

Celtic Warfare.indd 132

12/09/2022 21:03

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts   133 retrieved from excavations at Cranborne Chase in the late 19th century and was indeed tentatively attributed to a war chariot at the time,51 the opinion of modern historians is highly doubtful. Pomponius Mela, to whom Jordanes, writing in 600 ad, probably refers, is the only Roman historian who mentions scythed chariots, perhaps echoing Hellenistic references, whereas Cassius Dio, and Caesar and Tacitus (who were contemporary witnesses), never hint at blades fitted to war chariots, which they otherwise mention at length. The references in Irish epics are most likely to be traced back to literary tropes which are typical of medieval literature.52 In any case, whether or not the war chariot was armed with scythes, its extensive use is plain from Roman historical sources covering the battles fought against the Britons. Caesar writes that the Britons, in addition to cavalry, ‘customarily deployed squadrons of chariots in battle’.53 Cassius Dio describes the deployment of chariots in the crucial battle fought between the army of Suetonius Paulinus and the queen of the Iceni Boudica54 and Tacitus mentions them thoroughly in the Agricola,55 while in the Annales they are mentioned alongside the cavalry of the British forces.56 Caesar provides a particularly thorough account of how the Britons employed the war chariot, writing that: Their mode of fighting with their chariots is this: firstly, they drive about in all directions and throw their weapons and generally break the ranks of the enemy with the very dread of their horses and the noise of their wheels; and when they have worked themselves in amongst the mounted troops, leap from their chariots and engage on foot. The charioteers in the meantime withdraw some little distance from the battle, and so place themselves with the chariots such that, if their masters are overpowered by the enemy’s numbers, they may have a ready retreat to their own troops. Thus they display in battle the speed of horse, [together with] the firmness of infantry; and by daily practice and exercise attain such expertness that they are accustomed, even on a declining and steep place, to check their horses at full speed, and manage to turn them in an instant and run along the pole, and stand on the yoke, and thence betake themselves with the greatest celerity to their chariots again.57 Caesar then describes in several paragraphs a military tactic based more on ambush and sudden strike than open combat or pitched battle.

Celtic Warfare.indd 133

12/09/2022 21:03

134  Celtic Warfare Making the most of their speed and momentum, Cassivellaunus’ British chariot warriors took the legionaries by surprise as they were working on their entrenchments58 but once he realized the unsuitability of his troops to face the Romans in the open field, the British leader, with a force consisting only of charioteers, would observe our marches and retire a little from the road, and conceal himself in intricate and woody places […] and, when our cavalry, for the sake of plundering and ravaging the more freely, scattered themselves among the fields, he would send out charioteers from the woods by all the well-known roads and paths, and to the great danger of our horses, engage with them; and this source of fear hindered [our troops] from wandering far.59 In the accounts of Caesar’s British campaign, the war chariot is described as a mobile platform used primarily for: hurling javelins; as a weapon of psychological warfare and, above all, as a vehicle from which warriors dismounted to fight on foot and on which they took refuge in order to move quickly away from their opponents in a way suited to a form of combat which was both swift and evasive. This way of manoeuvring is also seen in practices described in the Irish epics. Rather differently, both Cassius Dio and Tacitus, reporting on clashes which took place in the first century ad, state that the war chariots appear to have been deployed by the Britons in squadrons and in the open field, with the precise aim of crushing the Roman lines by means of a frontal thrust. The use of chariots as a method of breaching lines in the open field, as much by Boudica at the Battle of Watling Street60 as by the Caledonian chieftain Calgacus at Mons Graupius,61 is strongly reminiscent of the tactic adopted by the Senones at Sentinum. In this instance too, this tactic could be traced back to an extemporaneous drive to reformulate notions of chariot use to fit with changes to military doctrine occasioned by the arrival of the Romans,62 as opposed to the customary doctrine which avoided direct contact.63 On the other hand, according to Tacitus himself, the customary use of the chariot by the Caledonians was more akin to that described by Caesar, with a charioteer leading the vehicle and one or more warriors dismounting at the right moment to fight on foot. Curiously, according to Tacitus the role of charioteer would have fallen to the most eminent member of the party, while his retainers would have been the attached fighters.64 This dynamic would seem to be diametrically opposed to those of previous centuries on the European mainland, and also differs from depictions found in the epics.

Celtic Warfare.indd 134

12/09/2022 21:03

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts   135 So, either it is to be considered an oversight by the historian, or a distinctive feature of the Caledonians. 5.1.2  The Combat According to historical sources, the islands’ Celts favoured an approach to combat which was marked by the intensive use of missile weapons65 and a distinct preference for skirmishes rather than pitched battles. Referring to the Britons, Caesar writes that ‘they never fought in close order, but in small parties and at great distances, and had detachments placed [in different parts], and then the one relieved the other, and the vigorous and fresh succeeded the wearied’.66 The battles fought by Caesar in Britain were an endless and gruelling sequence of ambushes and sudden attacks,67 followed by short strategic retreats connected to new unexpected assaults, in a frenetic and chaotic series of advances and retreats made possible by highly mobile light troops, horsemen and charioteers. Accustomed to battles fought against Gallic Celts, marked, with a few exceptions, by a fairly linear course and overwhelmingly by the resolve to hold their ground on the battlefield, the legionaries are initially ‘dismayed by the novelty of this mode of battle’68 typical of the Britons, and according to Caesar himself, even ‘terrified ’.69 Caesar writes: In the whole of this method of fighting since the engagement took place under the eyes of all and before the camp, it was perceived that our men, on account of the weight of their arms, inasmuch as they could neither pursue [the enemy when] retreating, nor dare quit their standards, were little suited to this kind of enemy; that the horse also fought with great danger, because they [the Britons] generally retreated even designedly, and, when they had drawn off our men a short distance from the legions, leaped from their chariots and fought on foot in unequal battle.70 If it is not surprising that bands of warriors with outdated weapons and tactics, precisely because of the archaic and therefore unconventional nature of their approach, could put better organized and trained fighting units at a disadvantage, as has already happened in both ancient and modern military history.71 However, in a protracted conflict it is clear they would struggle to meet the challenge.

Celtic Warfare.indd 135

12/09/2022 21:03

136  Celtic Warfare The Britons’ approach to combat initially disconcerted the Roman legionaries and caused them difficulties, but proved to be rather toothless and ultimately unsuccessful, especially when the legionaries, having recovered from the surprise, reacted with discipline and vehemence, coordinating infantry and cavalry in pursuit of their opponents, preventing them from regrouping and breaking their constant sequence of attacks and retreats.72 Caesar repeatedly highlights the lack of consistent deployment of the British infantry,73 which other authors describe as the major strength of the insular Celtic armies.74 This may be reflected in Celtic armament which appears to be conceived with sweeping swordsmanship and mobile combat in mind and with the use of light shields and long swords which, according to Tacitus, ‘did not allow close quarter combat with the enemy’.75 The use of weapons fundamentally conceived for individual combat rather than for formation fighting fits perfectly with the chronic tactical weakness of the Britons with regard to pitched battles and mass clashes, and an often counterproductive attachment to traditions, such as the continued use of war chariots even in obviously unsuitable contexts, with predictably disastrous results.76 Combat for the Celtic island populations is still marked by ritualism and formality as ends in themselves. The interaction with a pragmatic, efficient and effective war machine like the Roman one causes unpredictable and bizarre reactions, sometimes on both sides, representative of the incompatibility of the sides and the resultant cultural shock caused by their clashing. If Caesar’s legionaries were unprepared and initially reacted confusedly in front of the British charioteers’ manoeuvres, Calgacus’ Caledonians at Mons Graupius, faced with the systematic advance of Agricola’s ranks, ‘turned to flee, in whole armed battalions, in the face of a few pursuers, while some individuals, without weapons, charged forward, giving themselves up to death.’77

5.2  The Celts of the Alpine region The Alpine region, fertile ground for various subsequently well-rooted propagates of Celticization prior to the decline of La Tène culture, retained its own archaic characteristics up to a very late period thanks to the isolation of its valleys to which access must have been limited to a few mountain passes. Geographical barriers played an even more important role in this setting than in the British one, since the regions involved must have been as difficult to reach as they were unattractive to the best part of migrating populations.

Celtic Warfare.indd 136

12/09/2022 21:03

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts   137 Extremely similar archaeological evidence can be found throughout the Alpine region, where until the end of the first century bc several items of weaponry and equipment that seem to be closely related to weapons of the earliest Celtic cultures, such as the Hallstatt and Golasecca, survive in the panoply. Various necropolises scattered throughout the valleys of Piedmont, Switzerland, Tyrol, Vorarlberg and Bavaria are characterized by the presence of the Hellebardenaxt,78 a unique combat axe which appeared in the second century bc and is also mentioned by Horace as a distinctive weapon of the Celtic and Celtic-influenced Alpine populations.79 Several depictions of the Hellebardenaxt appear clearly engraved on graffiti from Valcamonica, which is also the principal manufacturing centre of single-edged knives with a metal sheath belonging to the Lovere and Introbio (img. 5.12) types, also typical of the whole Alpine region.80

5.12  Introbio knife.

Several helmets of the Negau type, characterized by a hemispherical bronze cap with a straight metal brim, were recovered from burials at Giubiasco81 and Molinazzo Arbedo, in Switzerland. Variants of the Negau are present in the Ticinese burial grounds. There we find: the South Eastern Alpine distinguished by a composite bowl; the Central Alpine, distinguished by an oval profile of the cap and a thick central rib;82 and the Tessin (img. 5.13), composed of a wooden bowl

Celtic Warfare.indd 137

5.13  Tessin Negau helmet.

12/09/2022 21:03

138  Celtic Warfare covered by bronze sheets fixed by a central crest, from which five sockets jut out, most likely to support a horsehair crest.83 The helmets of Giubiasco and Molinazzo Arbedo find their iconographic counterpart in two bronze statuettes dated between the third and first centuries bc, discovered near Mount Gutenberg in Liechtenstein, which depict warriors both wearing a Central Alpine helmet, with the more detailed figure, the so called ‘Mars of the Gutenberg’, sporting what appears to be organic ‘tube and yoke’ armour (img 5.14). Negau helmets belong to archaic types typical of the sixth and fifth century bc. Similarly, the metal-sheathed single5.14  Mars of the Gutenberg. edged blades match Hallstatt or La Tène specimens from the fifth century  bc. The presence of such a range of material in burials dated between the second and first centuries  bc is indicative of very conservative practices, which can only be explained by geographic isolation from events in the surrounding lowlands. The Hellebardenaxt (img 5.15), the presumed successor to the socketed axes of the Hallstatt Culture, evidently plays the role of primary slashing weapon in a setting where swords were often short and mainly designed to be used as thrusting weapons. It is no coincidence that several blades in the Alpine region, even in the late period, retain the leaf-shaped morphology typical of Hallstatt models,84 just as the existence of single-edged blades with a finely crafted metal scabbard can only be explained by the still very limited 5.15  Hellebardenaxt from Ornavasso. popularity of swords.

Celtic Warfare.indd 138

12/09/2022 21:03

Two Examples of Conservatism: Alpine and British Celts   139 It is true that in the sites of the Alpine region, alongside archaic weaponry, more recent elements can also be identified, such as the La Tène swords. From this point of view, it is worth mentioning the specific case of the CeltoItalic and the Agen helmet unearthed in Giubiasco. Considering the overall archaeological context, though, such finds should be regarded as exceptional and most likely introduced by foreign elements. The spreading influence of La Tène culture in the Lepontic area, as much as it might coincide with the descent of the first transalpine Gallic communities in Italy,85 must have been weak and intermittent in the valleys of the Alpine region. The findings that can be attributed to the later phases of La Tène culture, such as the elongated slashing swords, can be related somewhat to elements of the Insubres Gauls fleeing from the Po Valley after the Roman conquest,86 but more to the great migration movements set in motion by the Cimbri and Teutons during the second half of the second century bc. The fact that there was contact between the populations of the Alpine region and the Germanic milieu at the turn of the second and first centuries bc is confirmed by archaeological evidence from both contexts. On one of the Negau helmets recovered in Styria, the name Harigast is engraved in the North Etruscan alphabet, along with the Germanic theonym Teiwaz,87 and in burial 20 from the Ciecierzyn necropolis in the Przeworsk culture, Poland, a Hellebardenaxt blade was retrieved.88 Eventually, in the first years of the first century bc, probably as a result of their service in the legions as auxiliaries, the populations of the Alpine region began to adopt elements of Roman weaponry, specifically, by locally producing various blades in imitation of the Roman gladius.89

Celtic Warfare.indd 139

12/09/2022 21:03

Chapter 6

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting

T

he analysis of the Celtic setting of the Iberian Peninsula, which brings with it its own set of problems and distinctive features, deserves to be treated separately. Even before embarking on a discussion regarding military doctrine and weaponry, it is worth considering the possible identification, quantification and geographic delimitation of the Celtic presence in Spain. In the first place, it is still difficult to clearly identify what is Celtiberian and, furthermore, to understand the meaning of the term ‘Celtiberians’.1 Strictly adhering to the historical sources, the name Celtiberian identifies a specific country, located in a distinct region of central and northern Spain, roughly corresponding to the Meseta, 2 and composed of seven tribes, against which the Romans fought two fierce wars in the second century bc.3 According to Diodorus Siculus, the Celtiberians were created from the fusion of Celts and Iberians,4 while Strabo believes they were the result of a Celtic incursion into Spain which finished in settlement.5 An identical background, however, is also attributed to the Berones, and several classical authors mention many other communities of Celtic origin settled in different areas of Spain, such as the Celtici of Bethuria,6 the Celtici of Galicia,7 the Praestamarci, the Nerii, the Tamarici, the Astures and the Vettones.8 Finally, Strabo claims that on account of their power ‘the Celtiberians had caused all their neighbouring nations to adopt the same name’.9 In light of this, for the sake of clarity, it is agreed that the name ‘Celtiberians’ conventionally refers to all those Celtic populations who settled in the Iberian Peninsula at various times, and who, with varying degrees of contribution, took part in the development of a culture distinct from the indigenous substratum.10 Aside from previous lineages and an ‘indigenous’ Celticization, which leave many unclear elements which are difficult to interpret, the origin of the Celtiberian milieu is to be considered in the context of the arrival in Spain of elements from the La Tène culture, as a result of the migrations which

Celtic Warfare.indd 140

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  141 distinguished the Celtic world between the fifth and fourth centuries bc, affecting to varying degrees most of the European continent. The La Tène influence, in this case not so much numerically as qualitatively significant,11 around the fourth century was indicatively laid down over a previous Indo-European substratum, which according to some scholars could be interpreted as Celtic or proto-Celtic, and which in turn must have been influenced in some way by Hallstatt culture.12 The boundaries of Iberian Celtic culture and identity are, however, anything but clearly defined, and from time to time different populations and tribes join or leave it, depending on the interpretation of the linguistic roots, which are rightfully used as a yardstick to identify those borders.13 The most striking and controversial case is therefore represented by the Lusitanians, who appear, along with the Celtiberians and the Iberians, to represent one of the most important and distinctive cultural elements of pre-Roman Spain. While some leading scholars deny the Celtic character of the Lusitanians and prefer a lineage close to Italic populations,14 others advance Celtic ancestry, proposing a connection with the Lusonians,15 one of the seven Celtiberian tribes from the Meseta. Even the evidence of classical sources on the matter is conflicting. Pliny the Elder, writing about the Celts of Bethuria, declared that ‘it is evident that they originate from the Celtiberians of Lusitania because of their religion, language and city names’,16 thus taking the Celtic origin of the Lusitanians as a foregone conclusion. Shared heritage amongst the Celts, drawn on the basis of ritual analogies, could be found in Strabo, who, writing about the Gauls, claims that ‘they hit a man, who has been sentenced to death in the back with a sword, and then they draw auspices from his convulsions’.17 With regard to the divinatory practices of the Lusitanians he asserts that ‘when the victim has been struck in the vital parts by the augur, they draw the first auspices from his death’.18 Strabo again, however, clearly distinguishes between the Lusitanians and the Celts.19 Even Diodorus Siculus, while describing them as ‘the most valiant among the Iberians’, writes that ‘when it comes to having to endure the hardships of a tough fight, they are far inferior to the Celtiberians’.20 This statement again suggests a clear distinction between the two groups, also highlighted by Livy, who mentions them both as two separate components of Hannibal’s army.21

Celtic Warfare.indd 141

12/09/2022 21:03

142  Celtic Warfare In light of the inconsistent historical data, which have been interpreted through an in-depth linguistic analysis of the epigraphic evidence, it appears most likely that the Lusitanians constituted a distinct population, akin to both the Italics and the Celts but with its own well-defined cultural background.22

6.1  A warlike culture Although aspects of the development of Celtiberian society does not diverge greatly from that of other Celtic populations, there are other unique aspects which significantly characterize its expression and subsequent development. The burials and monumental architecture reveal a society deeply bound to martial values and ruled by warrior aristocracies.23 However, the lack of the opportunity and, above all, of the need to play a central role in any wide-ranging political and military situation restricts their experience of war to minor though persistent skirmishes and encounters with neighbouring tribes as well as cattle theft. Thus only mercenary service serves as the motor of military evolution. On the other hand, the adoption of an economic model and means of survival based mainly on the breeding of goats and sheep, inherited from native cultures and dictated by the type of surrounding environment, feeds and encourages continuous military activity. The military class, largely free from constraints imposed by the agricultural production cycle, 24 could devote themselves further to their martial training, living in a state of endless warfare which eventually became an integral part of the cultural and social structure.25 During the fourth and third centuries bc the military brotherhoods grew in considerable proportions with respect to the population as a whole26 and the panoply was enhanced with highly specialized and conceptually more advanced weapons, while combative traits already present in Celtic culture were further accentuated in society, reaching levels of outright fanaticism. The Celtiberian warrior is distinguished by a very intimate and sacred bond with his weapons, 27 an unshakeable loyalty to his commanders, similar to that of the Gallic Soldurii, and a complete contempt for danger.28 The ancient apparatus of rites and traditions connected to the military sphere was preserved in whole until the Roman conquest, and if the occasional practice of the ‘fight between champions’29 survives as it did with the Gauls,30 in the second century  bc the Celtiberians are the only ones

Celtic Warfare.indd 142

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  143 among the continental Celts who still regularly practise the so-called ver sacrum, a custom also shared by the Lusitanians.31 The effect of this ritual practice led to the proliferation of bands of independent and belligerent youths throughout the Iberian Peninsula, who turned to both banditry and mercenary activity, according to a pattern reflected by the Fianna groups of Gaelic culture.32 Whereas in the insular context, the activities of the military fraternities, due to geographical seclusion, were restricted to inter-tribal conflicts, Celtiberian mercenary activity spread beyond local cultural boundaries to become a resource for the armies of most of the western Mediterranean nations, not only for the major powers such as Rome and Carthage but also for the Iberians and Turdetani.33

6.2  The panoply Trying to identify and establish standards to characterize and define the weaponry of Celtiberian warriors is particularly difficult. Even more than in other Celtic populations, there is a degree of customisation of military equipment dictated by cultural practices, which responds directly to the needs and preferences of the individual and leads to a highly diverse range of weaponry. However, it is possible to recognize some common features, such as the intensive use of missile weapons and the introduction of small and mediumsized rounded shields, certainly of native conception, which are well suited to an agile style of combat and high quality swordsmanship, and a panoply which in general favours mobility. The archaeological evidence shows a break around the fourth century bc, with the disappearance from the panoplies of certain elements which were probably linked to previous Iberian cultures or were derived more or less indirectly from Hallstatt Culture. In this period, however, we don’t witness any significant replacement of these elements but an associated phase where existing equipment is modified, and the introduction of arms characteristic of La Tène culture.34 If this shift can be interpreted as a sign that the La Tène element was establishing itself more decisively, the situation in Spain differs completely from the rest of the Celtic world, except perhaps with parallels to be found in Ireland,35 as it had to adapt to the local environment which significantly conditioned its expression.

Celtic Warfare.indd 143

12/09/2022 21:03

144  Celtic Warfare 6.2.1  The helmet Headgear plays only a marginal role in Celtiberian equipment. Helmets appear to be closely associated with the most prominent figures and to function as status symbols.36 For the models from the fifth and fourth centuries bc it is hard to establish a typological classification, as the pieces are all different from each other and often fragmentary. Broadly speaking, they are relatively plain bronze helmets, consisting of two halves joined at the centre. While the proposed reconstructions of the Aguilar de Anguita model, fragmentary and in a very poor state of preservation, suggest a helmet similar to the Apulo-Corinthian or Cretan, the embossed fragments of the Alpanseque helmet are interpreted as originally being part of an ogiveshaped bowl.37 Other models are reminiscent in their simplicity of Illyrian helmets, consisting of a hemispherical bowl open at the front in the place of the warrior’s face,38 probably decorated with a crest of horsehair, as depicted in the Iberian bronze of Bastida de Mogente. Helmets of this type can only with difficulty be traced back to the La Tène culture, and are probably to be attributed to an autochthonous design, influenced by the Italic models which the populations of the Iberian Peninsula, already active in Sicily as mercenaries in the fifth century  bc,39 were familiar with. In the fourth century bc a new type of bronze helmet appeared, named Hispano-Chalcidic, also influenced by models in use amongst the populations of Southern Italy. This helmet, which can be considered a Celtiberian variant of the Chalcidic helmet directly is inspired by the sub-type known as the Southitalic Chalcidic. 6.1  Hispano-Chalcidic helmet.

Celtic Warfare.indd 144

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  145 It features a bulbous bowl with a neck guard, a vestigial nose piece, mobile anatomical cheek pieces mounted on hinges and lateral ear openings. The Hispano-Chalcidic helmet not only imitates the Italic helmets in its overall design, but also in its decoration, with tall, stylized foil horns or wings reminiscent of various Samnite, Campanian and Lucanian helmets, and a crest support similar to that found on Apulo-Corinthian helmets (img 6.1).40 Towards the end of the third century bc several types of Montefortino41 helmets eventually made their appearance in the Celtiberian milieu, but in this case, rather than being locally produced, they are to be considered as imports or the spoils of war attributable to contact with the Roman and Punic worlds. Talking about Celtiberian helmets, Diodorus Siculus writes that they were ‘manufactured with bronze, surmounted by red crests’,42 but it is not easy to establish with any certainty whether he is referring to the Hispano-Chalcidic helmets, which, though quite distinctive, must have been the preserve of the warrior aristocracy, or to imported Montefortino. The Vase of the Warriors of Numantia depicts fighters wearing helmets or hoods sporting plumes and crests, but the depiction is so crudely rendered that to try to infer any other element from it would be mere speculation. The use of metal helmets, imports or imitations of foreign models, is mirrored by a widespread adoption of helmets manufactured using organic material, can be seen by cross-referencing the testimony of Strabo against that of Diodorus Siculus. Writing of the Lusitanians, the former states that ‘most of them wear helmets constructed with sinew’,43 while the latter affirms that their headgear resembles that of the Celtiberians.44 6.2.2  The armour From the fifth century  bc onwards, the presence of the kardiophylax (καρδιοφύλαξ)45 is recorded in the Celtiberian area.46 This item is an Etruscan-Italic cuirass, composed of a medium-sized bronze disc protecting the warrior’s chest, supported by a system of leather straps crossed over the chest and back. In several models the front disc was also coupled with a posterior plate, designed to protect the fighter’s back. As with most metal helmets, the introduction of the kardiophylax is also associated with mercenary activity, in this case specifically related to the populations living around the Gulf of Lyon, especially the Elysicians, who regularly served under the Carthaginians as mercenaries.

Celtic Warfare.indd 145

12/09/2022 21:03

146  Celtic Warfare Evidence relating to the kardiophylax seems to proceed chronologically towards Spain via southern France, which holds the record for the oldest specimens of this specific type of cuirass found outside of Italy.47 In particular, various mixed characters in two statues from Languedoc – the Warrior of Grézan and the Warrior of Lattes48 – provide evidence of the presence of a Celtic-Ligurian-Iberian milieu between the sixth and early fourth centuries bc that must have intermediated in conflicts in the Spanish region bringing with it military innovations discovered through mercenary service. Evidence of relationships and cultural similarities which must have been established between the communities of the Gulf of Lion west of Marseille and the Celtiberian populations is demonstrated by the presence on the kardiophylax of the Warrior of Lattes of the same symbols and decorations as the stelae of Barros in Cantabria. The growing demand for mercenary troops amongst the warring nations of the Mediterranean, especially Carthage, progressively extended the pool of mercenary recruits, and even though it is not clear to what extent Celtiberian elements would have been involved in the wars of Sicily and Magna Graecia, like the Elysicians and Iberians they did come into direct contact with the Greek and Italic military experience. During the fifth century bc, a distinctly Celtiberian type of kardiophylax developed in the Meseta, combining the two main armour-discs with several smaller ones interconnected by a set of chains, thus strengthening the suspension belts. This type can be identified at least twice in Italic iconography of the fourth century bc, worn by a horseman displayed on the fresco of tomb 58A in the necropolis of Andriuolo at Paestum and as part of the panoply of a javelin wielding soldier depicted on Lucanian krater 918 in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. Though we can’t dispute the Campanian-Lucanian identity of the horseman, we might recognize a Celtiberian mercenary in the figure depicted on the crater.49 Otherwise, what can be deduced from this evidence is the close technicalmilitary interchange which must have occurred between mercenaries of different origins in the service of Mediterranean powers. A pair of armour-discs of an entirely different design, cast in iron rather than bronze, was found in burial 350 at La Osera, belonging to the culture of the Vettones and dated to the first half of the fourth century bc. In the Celtiberian context the La Osera find represents a unicum because kardiophylax armour in iron is confined to south-eastern Spain, and it is

Celtic Warfare.indd 146

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  147 generally accepted that the find from grave 350 may be an imported piece of Iberian manufacture. By the end of the fourth century  bc the kardiophylax disappears from Celtiberian burials50 and there is no archaeological record of any armour replacing it. The only exception we might possibly introduce comes from metallic fragments from the second century  bc which could be associated, though not without a reasonable degree of caution, with organic armour,51 whose interpretation in this sense could be corroborated by two vessels from Libisosa, a settlement within the Celtic enclave of the Oretani Germani, which depict warriors wearing ‘tube and yoke’ armour. In any case, there are no literary references to the use of armour by Celtiberian fighters, and while Polybius describes the Hispanic warriors deployed by Hannibal at Cannae as wearing only ‘short tunics lined with purple dye’,52 according to Diodorus Siculus the Celtiberians used to wear ‘rough black cloaks, the wool of which resembles the hair of goats’ and ‘about their shins and calves they wind greaves which are made of hair.’53 We might interpret these as the felt shin guards recognizable on the warriors depicted on the Vase of the Warriors at Numantia. Without being able to provide any conclusive interpretation, a possible comparison could be made with the armour used by the Lusitanians, based on the territorial proximity, the significant mutual cultural influences and the similarity regarding helmets, already confirmed by Classical authors. However, in this case as well, there is no archaeological evidence, and it is advisable to rely only on literary sources, with all due caution. When describing the Lusitanians, Strabo mentions they were supplied with armour discs as well as the widespread use of linen armour and a limited adoption of maille armour.54 According to Strabo, if the lorica hamata was adopted by the Lusitanians, it could be argued that its Celtic origin makes its presence in the Celtiberian context likely, or even that the Lusitanians borrowed it from the Celtiberians themselves, while the reference to linen armour could be consistent with the fragments from Numantia and the depictions on Oretani pottery. As for the kardiophylax, its continuity in the Celtiberian context would be confirmed by iconography of the Celtiberian fibulae with horse and rider. Its disappearance from burials at the end of the fourth century could be explained either by the adoption of similar armour crafted from organic material, or by a variation in burial practices.

Celtic Warfare.indd 147

12/09/2022 21:03

148  Celtic Warfare 6.2.3  The shield In the Celtiberian warrior’s panoply two distinct categories of shield can be identified: the classic tall Celtic model reinforced with the central wooden spine, and a macro group of round shields of earlier design, probably of native inspiration. The earliest archaeological evidence relating to the latter category are iron grips and bronze umbones that can be ascribed to the early fifth century bc. Hemispherical in design, the first Celtiberian umbones are fitted with a straight metal brim, which extends the 6.2  Iron shield stud with radial elements. surface to an overall diameter ranging between 30 and 34cm. Towards the end of the fifth century bc a second type constructed in iron and shaped like a truncated cone, with a row of radially arranged perimeter braces was introduced to replace the earlier one (img 6.2). Both models were fastened to the board by means of a central rivet that crossed the convexity. Such a peculiar fastening method, which would make these objects similar to studs, makes it reasonable to assume that they were overlapped by a wooden reinforcement that must have served as proper umbo. The frequent discovery in burials of just the remnant of the iron grips, or just the system of rings used to suspend the carrying straps, would support the hypothesis of a shield that could have been manufactured using mostly perishable material, including the umbo, which was only occasionally reinforced by an overlapping metal stud. At the beginning of the third century  bc, we see established the first actual metal umbones: cast in iron, of hemispherical design they were secured to the board by nails along the periphery (img. 6.3). However, the shields sometimes also retained the earlier fastening system by means of a central rivet, thereby indicating that, in some models, a wooden umbo was still attached underneath.55 Therefore, while archaeological evidence suggests a largely heterogeneous picture, it is also very hard to distinguish a single model for this shield type when analysing literary and iconographic sources.

Celtic Warfare.indd 148

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  149 Referring to the Celtiberian shields, Diodorus describes some of them as ‘circular, made of wicker, as large as an aspis’.56 He provides useful references regarding the material from which the board was constructed, its design and the overall diameter, which, compared to the Greek hoplites’ shield, must have reached roughly 90cm. Round shields equipped with a central boss are also depicted on coins minted in the Augustan age to celebrate the pacification of the 6.3  Round hemispherical umbo. mountain tribes of the Cantabri and Astures, but the monuments belonging to the Castro Culture provide depictions of very small round shields, such as those ascribed by historians to the Lusitanians.57 Furthermore, on the so-called Vase of the Warriors from Numantia, the shields portrayed, also circular in design, appear to be of medium size, and not as small as the ones displayed on the Galician statues (img. 6.4), but certainly not comparable to a Greek aspis. With regard to the materials the board was constructed from, there is just as much conflicting evidence as there is regarding its dimensions. Whereas Diodorus refers to osier or basketwork, Honoratus states that 6.4  Galician statues. the typical shield of the Hispanic populations was constructed out of leather and hide, like the shield which Diodorus ascribes to the Lusitanians, naming it caetra,58 using the same term used by Livy to describe the shields of the Macedonian peltasts.59

Celtic Warfare.indd 149

12/09/2022 21:03

150  Celtic Warfare

6.5  Convex plank caetra diagram.

If to the above factors can be added the convexity of the board (img. 6.5), which can be inferred from the umbo and the grip design, and which appears to be present in a discontinuous and varying manner from shield to shield leading us to assume the presence of a flat plank as much as a curved one, the conclusion can be reached that there was a range of models, depending on the taste and necessities of the individual combatant, which apart from the round design and the central grip must have been quite different to each other. The properly Celtic shield known as the thyreos60 reached Spain following the migration routes of the Celtic warrior bands of the fourth century bc.

Celtic Warfare.indd 150

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  151 Its adoption, however marginal, seems to have taken root mainly within the Iberian context, first in its double-halved umbo type, which was later to be replaced by the banded model.61 Although Diodorus mentions the use of a shield identical to the Gallic one62 among the Celtiberians, this practice is not indicated by the archaeological evidence except in later contexts, approximately during the second half of the second century bc, and at numerically insignificant levels. The limited diffusion of the thyreos must probably be connected to the weight and bulk of a weapon which, by comparison with the caetra, must not have functioned well with the extremely manoeuvrable and swift combat methods particularly favoured by the Celtiberians. During the second half of the third century bc, Carthaginian influence will lead to the widespread adoption of the Celtic shield par excellence amongst Hispanic63 populations, enabling them to respond to the tactical demands of the Barcids. A large contingent of 4,000 Celtiberians scutati, necessarily equipped with large oblong shields, is mentioned by Livy as being among the troops of the army that the Punic general Mago64 fielded against Marcus Junius Silanus. According to Polybius and Livy, the shields of the Hispanic soldiers deployed by Hannibal at Cannae were identical to those of his Gallic recruits.65 However, according to archaeological evidence, it can be confirmed that, except in the context of mercenaries in the service of the Barcids, for the Celtiberians the elongated shield was found in few settings, and may have been quite prestigious. For practicality, rounded models, lighter and easier to carry, were largely preferred. 6.2.4  Pole weapons In the field of pole weapons, the Celtiberian experience is characterized by a clear preference for missile weapons, which, according to both the sources and the archaeological evidence, would appear to represent a key component of the warrior’s equipment. Although there is no lack of relatively large spearheads as early as the fifth century  bc, equipped with a thick midrib and undoubtedly used in close combat, these represent a smaller percentage compared to smaller spearheads, which can be traced back to multifunctional weapons, effective both as a melee and as ranged weapons, which are often in numbers among the grave goods in burials. Spear and javelin points generally feature a foliate morphology, and there is an absence of models with wavy edges such as the Gallic madaris.

Celtic Warfare.indd 151

12/09/2022 21:03

152  Celtic Warfare In some cases, the javelins were equipped with an amentum, to increase their range and enhance their piercing effect, as can be observed in the depiction on the Vase of the Warriors of Numantia. From the fifth century bc onwards, the presence of the gaesum or soliferrum, an imported weapon from the regions beyond the Pyrenees66, is encountered in burials. Unlike in the Gallic regions where it must have been a weapons of the elite , its use is widespread throughout Spain, probably due to the availability and accessibility of iron ore.67 From the fourth century bc onwards the falarica also occurs. This weapon, whose design is identical to the cannon-socketed pilum, is perhaps to be regarded as the outcome of independent development, conceivably of Italic influence, which around the beginning of the second century bc began to replace the soliferrum. Livy, also quoted by Vegetius,68 attests to its use as an incendiary weapon during sieges, describing it as: a missile weapon, called falarica, with the shaft of fir, and round in other parts except towards the point, whence the iron projected: this part, which was square, as in the pilum, they bound around with tow, and besmeared with pitch. It had an iron head three feet in length, so that it could pierce through both body and armour Even if it didn’t penetrate the body but stuck in the shield, it inspired terror an account of it being launched with the middle part on fire bearing so fierce a flame that the enemy was constrained to thrown down his armour exposing him, defenceless, to subsequent strikes.69 6.2.5  The sword Thanks to the contribution of literary sources and archaeological research, the sword has been identified as the Celtiberian weapon par excellence. This weapon appears in the warrior’s equipment from the earliest centuries in various types. The earliest model, known as espada de frontón, dates back to the fifth century  bc and features a short, wide and sharp blade which indicates its preferred use was as a thrusting weapon. The espada de frontón is clearly inspired by sword designs originating in the Mediterranean area, and is a type equally widespread throughout the Celtiberian and Iberian regions. Between the end of the fifth and the beginning of the fourth century bc a new model of sword replaces the espada de frontón. It was known as the espada de antenas atrofiadas on account of its distinctive pommel design and probably descended from Hallstatt antennae-hilted swords.

Celtic Warfare.indd 152

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  153

6.6  Examples of espada de antenas atrofiadas.

Featuring an average blade length of between 32 and 40cm, pistil-shaped and with a very sharp point (img. 6.6), the espada de antenas atrofiadas developed into several subtypes, and remained part of the Celtiberian panoply until the end of the third century bc. The suspension system of the sword is completely different from that found in other Celtic areas, and is rather similar to the types used in the Mediterranean setting, with a leather or wooden scabbard, strengthened by an iron frame, suspended more towards the chest of the warrior than the side, supported by a strap that could be carried across both the right or left shoulder. The falcata (img 6.7), a curved Iberian sword with an ergonomic hilt inspired by the Greek and Italic kopis, also occurs to a lesser extent in some Celtic Spanish contexts. In comparison with the original design, the falcata generally features a tapered point and a sharp blade on both edges,70 which must have allowed it to be used as both a thrusting and a slashing weapon. It should be pointed out that the falcata is still more typical of the Iberian areas and remains widespread in the south-east of the peninsula.71 In those the areas of Spain subject to Celtic incursion it is only found rarely, and in small numbers, or in Roman iconography depicting the triumphs over the Cantabri and Astures. 6.7  Falcata.

Celtic Warfare.indd 153

12/09/2022 21:03

154  Celtic Warfare With the advance of Trans-Pyrenean influences of the La Tène Culture, Celtic swords with straight blades and iron bi-valved scabbards began to be adopted during the fourth century bc, but their design was radically changed according to a preference for earlier sword models. The bivalve sheaths were actually equipped with side loops to support the sword belt suspension system on the left side, and in the third century bc they eventually disappeared, to be replaced by sheaths manufactured from organic material. Among the Celtiberians, the fourth century bc La Tène sword underwent a unique evolution, and instead of progressively elongating as in the rest of the Celtic milieu, it developed into a hybrid blade which incorporated some features typical of local designs,72 resulting finally in the Gladius Hispaniensis (Hispanic sword) which was later adopted by the Romans. The course of evolution and hybridisation which produced the Gladius Hispaniensis can be followed by analysing remains of La Tène swords datable to the second half of the fourth century bc. The sheaths of these weapons underwent later modifications, probably connected to the development of an alternative suspension and carrying system for the weapon. In Quintanas de Gormaz, a Celtic sword of Pyrenean import was excavated, with the weapon bearing evidence of a reworked suspension system. In addition to the typical suspension loop which is attached to the right side, two metal links terminating in a hoop were later added to the scabbard, according to the local practice of wearing a cross-shouldered baldric. A similar construction was observed in another La Tène sword excavated in Zaragoza. The sword from burial 54 of the necropolis of El Cigarralejo (img 6.8), part of a very clear path of development, comes equipped with a sheath without a suspension loop, featuring a suspension system made only of straps and rings for the shoulder baldric.

6.8  Celtiberian sword from El Cigarralejo.

Celtic Warfare.indd 154

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  155 The final stage of this path is represented by the sword from burial 201 at La Osera (Img. 6.9), whose scabbard, of which only two metal bands ending in a ring survive, must have been largely composed of organic material. Similarly, to the scabbard, the sword’s structure itself undergoes subsequent changes which will gradually lead it to deviate from the trans-Pyrenean

6.9  Celtiberian sword from La Osera.

model, and indeed will lead to a diametrically opposed evolutionary development. While the La Tène swords continue to get progressively longer and in most cases lose the central rib and smoothen the curve of the point, the new Celtiberian sword model keeps the original measures, with a blade ranging between 60 and 65cm, a robust rib and a sharp point. In the third century bc, the model came to be characterized by a number of different features, such as a blade which sometimes became slightly wider with an almost unnoticeable pistillate profile, decreasingly pitched shoulders, and the occasional presence of a metal hilt and pommel, clearly inspired by the local espada de antenas atrofiadas73 model (img. 6.10). As Polybius recalls, the Gladius Hispaniensis is a versatile weapon, suitable for both slashing and thrusting swordplay,74 and due as much to the expertise of the local blacksmiths as to its construction and design, it must have been incredibly strong and solid. The swords which [the Celtiberians] carry are doubleedged and cast from the finest iron […] to fabricate their weapons they follow a very particular technique; they bury ingots of metal in the ground and leave them until, with the passing of time, the rust has eaten away the weakest part and that which remains is only the strongest part, and from this they forge excellent swords and other objects useful in war. The weapons which are made 6.10  Celtiberian ‘hybrid blade’ with metal following this procedure described cut hilt and pommel.

Celtic Warfare.indd 155

12/09/2022 21:03

156  Celtic Warfare through anything that they encounter, for there isn’t a shield, helmet or bone that is capable of withstanding one of their blows, so exceptional is the quality of the iron.75 The use of high-quality, high-purity iron is also mentioned by Philo of Byzantium, who also refers to what appears to be a customary practice of tempering and pattern welding iron.76 6.2.6  Knives and daggers Specifically mentioned by literary sources as a component of the Celtiberian fighter’s equipment,77 like the sword, the dagger seems to play an important role in the warrior’s panoply. As with much of the weapons, the Celtiberian context displays a range of types, which ranges from purely functional models to others, with metal sheaths, which probably served to show their owner’s status such as the anthropomorphic daggers of the Trans-Pyrenean Celts. Around the third century bc, the biglobular dagger became to be established in the Celtiberian world.78

6.11  Biglobular daggers.

This weapon was developed in various sub-types, all sharing two shaped globes on the handle and a leaf-shaped blade fitted with a strong central rib (img 6.11).

Celtic Warfare.indd 156

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  157 The sheath of the biglobular dagger is always crafted in leather or wood, reinforced by a metal frame resembling the sword’s sheath, with which it also shares the loop suspension system. The close resemblance to the pugio, along with the adoption of the latter by Roman legionaries, which is said to have occurred during the Celtiberian Wars,79 makes it reasonable to suppose that the weapon came to be used by the Romans just as had the Gladius Hispaniensis.80 As for the single-edged blades, these are found, sometimes in pairs, in burials ranging from the early fifth to the second century  bc, following a design presenting a markedly curved blade whose features remained unchanged over the course of time. The cuchillo afalcatado or sickle-shaped knife continued to be used, despite the development of more sophisticated types of daggers, and is often present along with the latter in burials. It seems to be an instrument having many varied functions, none of which could easily be specifically military.81 6.2.7  The double axe Writing about Larus, commander of the Cantabrian mercenaries who followed Hannibal during his campaign in Italy, Silius Italicus claims that ‘he fought holding the axe in his right hand, according to the custom of his fierce people’.82 Later in the text, Larus’ axe is described more than once as being doubleheaded.83

6.12  Double axe on Titus Carisius denarii.

Celtic Warfare.indd 157

12/09/2022 21:03

158  Celtic Warfare Indeed, on the denarii minted by Titus Carisius, who was legate in the province of Hispania Ulterior and artificer and protagonist of several decisive victories over the populations of Cantabria and Asturias,84 a long-handled double axe is depicted several times (img 6.12), along with other weapons of the vanquished to represent the celebratory tropaeum. Originally, the double-bladed axe was not conceived as a weapon, and even before rising to the status of a distinctive and prestigious object in many cultures,85 it served as a specialized tool for woodcutters. It featured two blades: one with a sharp blade, for actual cutting, and the other with a thicker blade, for splitting roots and wood knots.86 The traditional use of the double-bladed axe in battle is likely to be linked to the woodland environment of Cantabria, where the work axe must have been a standard tool, later assuming the role of a principal weapon in a specific military context in which swords mainly had short blades and were used as thrusting weapons. With the exception of the falcata, which is not archaeologically recorded from excavations or finds, but only depicted on Roman coinage related to the Cantabri and Astures, the swords portrayed on statues in the nearby Castro Culture are all relatively short in size, a feature which was echoed by the Roman poet Lucan, who described the Cantabrian weapons as short.87

6.3  The combat Next to all those aspects indicating the enormous importance of war in Celtiberian society which earned the Celtiberians their deserved reputation as outstanding fighters,88 stands the apparent contradiction of their refusal to engage in pitched battles. During the first Roman siege of Numantia, the troops led by consul Sextus Pompeius were never defeated by the Numantines in the open field, but rather retreated because they were ‘worn out day by day by the skirmishes’.89 Against the very same Sextus Pompeius, the Celtiberian Tremantines engaged in battle only after having lured the Romans ‘into a hilly place where many of the infantry and cavalry were pushed down a cliff ’,90 and although they weakened the opponent’s army with incessant skirmishing actions, they could not achieve a decisive victory on the battlefield. During the wars against Rome the Celtiberians’ operations encompassed continuous and uninterrupted ambushes and sudden attacks against the legionaries, often when the latter were engaged in military engineering rather than foraging, combined with a substantial use of missile weapons,91 and the deployment

Celtic Warfare.indd 158

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  159 of the Numantines in the open field against Scipio Aemilianus should be interpreted more as a last-ditch attempt, contrary to the standard practice of Celtiberian warfare, to break a siege lasting years.92 Although different and more direct approaches are occasionally mentioned,93 skirmishing was the preferred and most frequently used tactic. If hoplite warfare is the military expression and product of an agricultural setting, the natural approach to war for a society based predominantly on pastoralism would be one of skirmish, ambush and surprise attacks. Indeed, it was just this approach which was favoured by the Celtiberians, as by all the peoples of Spain94 – a country whose landscape lent itself to that kind of warfare. Although the penchant for skirmishing is widely understood, its almost exclusive use and inadequacy to deal with regular infantry 95 undermines Celtiberian fighting prowess, which theoretically should have resulted in more wide-ranging approaches to combat. The apparent paradox is explained by the distinctive cultural connotations of warfare in Celtiberian society. A self-centred drive, born from a conception of war as the ultimate means of achievement and self-realization for the individual, made the Celtiberian warrior unsuited to an excessively structured military discipline, which in any case would find no place within the standard organization of Iberian warfare. The absence of any form of standardization of weaponry96 reflects the warrior’s unique relationship with the military environment and his own willingness to stand out and operate as independently as possible. A different trend, however, can be observed in those Celtiberian contexts which in the second half of the third century  bc benefited from Carthaginian influences, and specifically from the Barcids. A wider spread of the elongated knobbed shield, neglected in Spain in favour of lighter native types more suitable for skirmishing, occurred during the massive recruitment of Celtiberian mercenaries on behalf of Carthage, and through Polybius’ and Livy’s accounts we learn that the Iberian troops deployed at Cannae by Hannibal were equipped with shields very similar to those of their Gallic companions, therefore suitable for combat in tight ranks. The Celtiberian fighters who served in the Carthaginian armies during the Second Punic War actually proved competent at lining up in solid and well organized formations,97 and were even able to adopt combat and fighting styles not too different from those of the Roman legionaries.98

Celtic Warfare.indd 159

12/09/2022 21:03

160  Celtic Warfare With a figure as outstanding as Hannibal training the Celtiberians, though, it is difficult to distinguish which aspects mentioned above come from him, and which from Celtiberian culture. Given raw recruits of such high quality, culturally well-endowed with a strong inclination for combat and martial activity, Hannibal succeeded in training an excellent fighting force. However, if the Carthaginian commander had the time and the determination to impose training and discipline, he did not have the chance to establish among the Celtiberians, or any other mercenary groups, leaders who could lay the foundations of a new military tradition. It is not by chance that Hannibal entrusted his brother Mago with the command of the Celtiberian units, and at Cannae it was he himself, always assisted by his brother, who led the centre of the Carthaginian array consisting of the Spanish and Cisalpine Celtic troops.99 The experience with Hannibal was too short and the absence in their homeland of any established foreign foes to fight against, along with that land being geographically and culturally more suited to skirmishing, failed to bring about any radical change to the Celtiberians’ military tactics as it more or less did to the Gauls’. The figure of the Celtiberian fighter, highly efficient in the open field and capable of fighting in close order, therefore remained applicable only to the mercenaries trained in the service of the Barcid family, while all others adhered to the tradition based on conventional tactics which were effective in skirmishing and ambush but for the most part remained unsuited to large-scale field battles. 6.3.1  The cavalry Like the Trans-Pyrenean Celts, the Celtiberians are also described by classical sources as skilful riders, and furthermore their horses ‘are like those of the Parthians, they say, on account of their being not only faster but also more comfortable to ride than others’.100 Although they never developed military equipment specifically suited for the mounted fighter, the Hispanic horsemen recruited by Hannibal distinguished themselves several times by their performances during the Second Punic War, and Appian even writes that ‘as the Celtiberian horsemen, who served under Hannibal as mercenaries, proved to be superb fighters, the Roman generals in Spain recruited an equal number from the cities under their jurisdiction, and sent them to Italy to face those others’.101 Together with the Gallic horsemen, the Hispanic horsemen at Cannae demonstrated their equal ability to fight as mounted troops and as infantrymen,102 following a tradition which Diodorus Siculus103 and Polybius104 specifically ascribed to the Celtiberians.

Celtic Warfare.indd 160

12/09/2022 21:03

The Celts of Iberia: A Particular Setting  161 Gallic and Hispanic mercenary mounted troops are mentioned side by side not only in connection with Hannibal’s troops but also in several other circumstances, often conveying the impression of belonging to the same tactical unit as in the case of the cavalry led by the Numidian king Juba.105 Arrian’s allusion to the use of Celtic and Iberian terminology in Roman equestrian warfare is explained by the Roman appreciation of Celtic cavalry and appropriation their tactics. Immediately following this he describes various clearly Celtic equestrian practices and the so-called Cantabrian circle.106 Reasonable doubt, therefore, arises that certain authors use the term ‘Iberians’ inappropriately and in a general manner, without necessarily referring to populations with a properly Iberian language and culture. On the contrary, in various cases, they are really referring to the Celtic or Celticized elements of Spain. As for the ‘Cantabrian circle’, this practice might not necessarily have been an actual military manoeuvre, but rather an equestrian practice whereby two formations of horsemen would ride in a circle, turning in the opposite direction of each other at very close range. In this exercise the riders do not use light javelins but full-sized spears without metal tips, sufficiently heavy however to cause the thrower to work. They were not without danger, also, to the men acting as their targets. For this reason, they are ordered not to aim at the helmets of the opponents and not to throw their spears at the horse, but, with as much force as possible while running, at the rider’s shield before he turns or exposes any part of his flank or back. The accuracy of this exercise is based on the fact that the man in the Cantabrian circle should get as close as possible to the runners by delivering a direct blow with his spear into the middle of the shield, either beating heavily on it or piercing straight through. The second man comes at the second of the other party, the third at the third, and so on throughout the formation in the same way. The sound is overwhelming, and in this practice the counter action looks graceful. One group practices precision and vigour in wielding the spear, the other in confident defence against an attack.107 According to Arrian, this practice derives its name from the Cantabri ‘because the Romans later adopted it for their own purposes’, and was probably originally a spectacle of military showmanship with both instructional and demonstrative purposes, similar to the ‘feats’ described in Irish epics.

Celtic Warfare.indd 161

12/09/2022 21:03

Appendix

Stratagems and Poliorcetics (Siege War)

‘You must not fight an enemy too often, otherwise you will teach him all your military skills.’ Plutarch, Life of Agesilaus, 26.3

W

e know little about the practices tied to the application of disciplines not directly connected to combat in the Celtic military context, and it is highly unlikely that there was systematic, consistent and standardized development. It is true that some very useful insights can be extracted from the classical texts. This evidence, when properly examined and placed in a geographically and chronologically circumscribed setting, can provide data that will enhance our understanding of the overall context. Thus we learn from Appian that during the siege of Numantia in 133 bc, the Celtiberian nobleman Rhetogenes Caraunius overcame the besieging Romans’ fortifications overnight accompanied by a small group of his own comrades-in-arms, patrons and retinues, by means of some sort of detachable ramp constructed in several segments, on which he was able to convey men and horses. From Caesar, we learn that the Sotiates, a Gallic tribe from Aquitaine, in an attempt to break the siege laid on their stronghold by Publius Crassus, ‘pushed tunnels in the direction of the embankment and the shelters’.1 They were evidently trying to collapse the Roman siege earthworks by means of excavating a trench through the circumvallation, relying, again according to Caesar, on their considerable mining expertise. Again in Caesar’s De Bello Gallico, there is record of one of the few if not only cases of the Celts constructing earthworks in the context of a siege. Forcing Quintus Cicero to retreat within his fortified encampment, the Nervii, due to the fact that their terms for the withdrawal of Roman troops from their territory had been refused, surrounded the winter-quarters ‘with a rampart eleven feet high, and a ditch thirteen feet in depth’.

Celtic Warfare.indd 162

12/09/2022 21:03

Stratagems and Poliorcetics (Siege War)  163 Caesar then proceeds to state that: In these things the enemy had utilized his experience from the preceding years having been instructed by prisoners and those captured from our army. The complete absence, however, of metal tools suited to the job constrained then to cut out clods with their swords and remove the earth with their hands, placing it in their cloaks. From these circumstances one can estimate the vast number of men used for in less than three hours they completed a fortification ten miles in circumference and during the rest of the days they began to prepare and construct towers the height of the ramparts, as well as grappling irons, and mantlets, all of which they had learned from those same prisoners.2 Caesar’s account requires a thorough interpretation and analysis. Whereas the reference to some unknown Roman prisoners providing the Belgae with the knowledge to construct ditches and ramparts and then to assemble grappling irons, mobile canopies and even siege towers looks rather unconvincing, the fact that this sudden development in military engineering was the product of having spent the preceding years in continuous interaction and conflict with the legionaries is indeed plausible. However, this was an isolated and extemporaneous occurrence, and if in some areas of the Celtic milieu the concept of military engineering must have become widespread due to the contact with the Roman war machine, its implementation lacked the right logistic support as well as tools, as the testimony of the soil being excavated using weapons and transported by hand and cloak would suggest. Conversely, only a few years earlier another Belgian tribe, the Atuatuci, had been struck by irrational terror at the mere sight of a Roman siege tower in motion.3 However, the Celts demonstrated remarkable resourcefulness, which could under certain given circumstances compensate for logistical and technical shortcomings. In 216 bc the Boii Gauls, having discovered that the consul Lucius Postumius Albinus was about to lead his army into the Silva Litana forest, sawed the trees in such a manner that they continued standing upright, but would fall when impelled by a slight force. Postumius had with him two Roman legions, and besides had levied so great a number of allies along the Adriatic Sea, that he led into the enemy’s country twenty-five thousand men.

Celtic Warfare.indd 163

12/09/2022 21:03

164  Celtic Warfare As soon as this army entered the wood, the Gauls, who were placed around its extreme outskirts, pushed down the outermost sawn trees, which falling on those next them, and these again on others, which of themselves stood tottering and scarcely maintained their position, crushed arms, men, and horses in an indiscriminate manner, so that scarcely ten men escaped. For most of them being killed by the trunks and broken boughs of trees, the armed Gauls, who beset the wood on all sides, killed the rest, who were panicstruck by so unexpected a disaster’.4 The striking account of the ambush at Selva Litana has been the subject of several interpretations, not least the one that would see it as a historical representation of a mythological topic typical of Celtic culture, the same described in the Câd Goddeu (‘The Battle of the Trees’), a Welsh poem where the sorcerer Gwydion enlivens a forest by turning trees into warriors.5 Actually, it seems rather unlikely that a Celtic mythological stylistic device would have become part of Roman annals, and moreover that it would have handed down the memory of an imaginary defeat.6 If anything, the opposite could be postulated, i.e. that the memory of such a daring victory was so deeply rooted in the Celtic mythology that it influenced the mythological narrative in later centuries. In fact, there is no good reason to doubt the veracity of this account, and in any case using vegetation for tactical purposes was anything but strange to the Celtic world. Caesar indeed mentions how Nervii of Belgic Gaul, in order to hinder the armies invading their lands, used the vegetation and ‘cut into young saplings and bent them over, and thus by the thick horizontal growth of boughs, and by intertwining with them brambles and thorns, they contrived that these wall-like hedges should serve them as fortifications which not only could not be penetrated, but not even seen through’.7 Other temporary fortification works are attributed by Tacitus to the Britons of Caratacus. The fighters, in order to construct a sort of makeshift rampart, stacked boulders and stones in the place where they knew they would have to face the Roman troops,8 while Caesar, when he led his army up to the Thames to face Cassivellaunus, encountered the Britons lined up across the river with the bank ‘defended by sharp stakes fixed in front, and stakes of the same kind fixed under the water […] covered by the river’.9 Another unexpected and resourceful expedient was devised by the Belgian tribe of the Bellovaci, who, in order to cover the retreat of their troops, surprised the Romans by improvising smoke screens.

Celtic Warfare.indd 164

12/09/2022 21:03

Stratagems and Poliorcetics (Siege War)  165 When the Bellovaci saw the Romans prepared to pursue them, and that they could not wait the whole night, or continue longer in the same place without provisions, they formed the following plan to secure a retreat. They handed to one another the bundles of straw and sticks on which they sat (for it is the custom of the Gauls to sit when drawn up in order of battle, as has been asserted in former commentaries), of which they had great plenty in their camp, and piled them in the front of their line; and at the close of the day, on a certain signal, set them all on fire at one and the same time. The continued blaze soon screened all their forces from the sight of the Romans, which no sooner happened than the barbarians fled with the greatest precipitation.10 Deception and stratagem are therefore not at all alien to the Celtic idea of warfare. Further evidence of this is given by Polyaenus, who tells of the conflicts between the Celts and the Illyrian population of the Autariatae during the incursion of the former into the Balkans. The Celts, who were engaged in a long and indecisive war against the Autariatae, poisoned their own food and wine with noxious herbs, and suddenly left their camp by night in pretended confusion. The Autariatae supposed that the enemy had admitted their inferiority and made a precipitous retreat. They took possession of their camp and feasted on the provisions which they found there. But soon they were seized with a violent sickness, and, while they were in that condition, the Celts attacked them, and slew them.11

Celtic Warfare.indd 165

12/09/2022 21:03

Dictionary Agen (helmet): iron helmet featuring a hemispherical iron bowl. The helmet is equipped with a metal brim, running all around the base of the bowl, and anatomical cheek pieces. Agen-Port (helmet): type of Celtic helmets manufactured in iron, dating to the second and first centuries bc. See also Agen and Port typologies. Agger: defensive ridge or embankment constructed by refilling and compressing the soil dug from the excavation of ditches. Alésia (helmet): see the Agen type helmet. Ambactos/Ambactus: literally ‘He who act alongside’. Free man bound by debt, the Ambactus gave up his civil rights in return for money and made himself available as soldier, or armed retinue, trained and maintained to be used whenever necessary by an aristocrat. Amentum: a leather strap attached to the javelin’s shaft. Used during the throwing phase, it gave the weapon an additional propulsive motion, increasing its range, piercing force and accuracy. Antennas atrofiadas: archaic type of Celtiberian sword, featuring a foliate profile blade. Antenna/Antennae sword: a sword type dating to the Late Bronze or Early Iron Age. The weapon features a hilt ending in a pair of spiral/helix ornaments resembling antennae. Anthropomorphic: hilt type typical of Celtic single-profile blades and daggers dating to the second and first centuries bc. The hilt pommel is carved and finely decorated to resemble the human figure in a highly stylised manner, representing head and face of a male figure. Ankyle (αγκυλή): see Amentum. Apex: the central knob placed on the top of the helmet’s bowl of various Celtic headgears. The apex could also have been decorated with feathers or horsehair. Metal cannulae were welded to the bowl or fixed to the apex, whose function was clearly to lodge feathers or horsehair crest. Aspis (ἀσπίς): hoplitic shield, round and convex in design. The shield’s overall diameter roughly ranged between 0.90 centimetres and 1 meter. Bayonet: bayonet spear point type. This design was characterized by a narrow and elongated point, up to 70 centimetres long, featuring a prominent central rib presenting a cruciform section Boeotian: Hellenistic helmet type, usually associated with cavalry warfare and combat.

Celtic Warfare.indd 166

12/09/2022 21:03

Dictionary 167 Berru (helmet): Celtic helmet type dating to the fifth century  bc, usually featuring a very elongated conic bowl and manufactured using copper alloy. The helmet was equipped with a small nape protector and topped by a riveted knob (see: Apex) where perhaps feathers or horsehair could have been laid as decoration. Bockweiler (helmet): Celtic helmet type dating to the fifth century bc featuring a plain hemispherical iron skullcap. Biconvex: Gaulish pike point type dating to the first century bc. This weapon featured a broad tip and a well-balanced leaf design which was amply widened at the bottom, thus coming to resemble a dagger blade. Biglobular: Celtiberian dagger type, very likely to be regarded as precursor of the Roman pugio by its close resemblance. Brennus: forename of Gaulish chieftains. The name might represent also a potential military role or position among Celts. Caetra: Iberian shield constructed from wood or wicker or rawhide, with a central metal umbo; it was then covered with leather. Shield featured a round/circular design with a diameter ranging between 0.90 and 0.60 metres. Caia: see Cateia. Cardiophylax (καρδιοφυλαξ): literarly ‘heart-protector’, a breastplate consisting in a metal disc secured to the body by leather straps Carpenta: Latin word of Celtic origin for ‘wagon’ or ‘war chariot’, used by classical authors to describe the Celtic/Gaulish war chariot. Cateia: Celtic throwing weapon with metal inserts. Its description resembles the Australian boomerang. Caterva: group or unit of six thousand soldiers, part of Celtic armies. Cento: protective garment, perhaps crafted from felted or quilted wool. Celto-Italic (helmet): Celtic helmet type manufactured in iron, very likely adopted or introduced as consequence of the Celtic invasion of Italy. The helmet features an ogival skullbowl protected by a neck-guard and threefold element cheek pieces. Central Alpine (helmet): variant of Negau helmet featuring an oval profile of the bowl and a thick central rib. Cheek pieces: armour part, often removable and laterally placed on the sides of the helmet’s skull bowl by means of horizontal hinges. Cheek pieces were designed to protect the area of the cheeks, cheekbones and jaw. Cingetos: Gaulish word, literally meaning ‘the marching one’. The word can be translated as ‘warrior’. Coactile: Latin word referring to a protective garment, perhaps crafted from felted, quilted or coarse wool. Coolus-Mannheim (helmet): Celtic helmet typey dating to the third century bc. Manufactured from a hemispherical or slightly ogive bronze bowl fitted with a neck guard, the helmet was secured under the throat by fastening a leather lace. Covinnus: Celtic word referring to war chariot in British Isles.

Celtic Warfare.indd 167

12/09/2022 21:03

168  Celtic Warfare Cuneus (wedge): battle formation, with men deployed in a triangular or trapezoid formation with the tip leading the way. Dory (δόρυ): Greek name for thrusting spear. Drungus: Gaulish/Celtic word term used in late Roman/Byzantine times to refer to cavalry formations deploying 1.000 cavalrymen. Epée à rognòn / a Spheres: see Knobbed-Pommel Sword. Epomides (επωμίδες): Greek word referring to the shoulder flaps fitted to the front of various armour typologies, in Latin ‘humeralia’ Essedum: see Covinnus. Falarica: heavy javelin used among populations of Iberian Peninsula. The weapon featured a foliate point and a very elongated tang; its overall design was almost identical to the pilum. Falcata: a curved Iberian sword with an ergonomic hilt inspired by the Greek and Italic kopis, also occurs to a lesser extent in some Celtic/Spanish and Celtiberian contexts. Fianna: independent warrior bands depicted in Irish epic. They might be regarded as the mythological trope or adaptation of youths’ war bands deriving from the practice of the ver sacrum. Framea: short multifunctional spear typical of the Germanic milieu, suitable to be used both as a melee/thrusting spear as well as missile weapon. Gaballacos: Celtic word referring to javelin. Gae Bolga: ‘Dazzling/indented javelin’, to be regarded as the mythical weapon of Irish hero Cù Chualaìnn. Its description might derive from the Madaris. Gaesatae: Celtic mercenary warriors, members of a distinct military caste distinguished by rapturous and religious features. Gaesatae used to go into battle naked. Gaesum: peculiar kind of javelin, manufactured using a single forged iron bar with a small tip, sometimes leaf-shaped or barbed in design. Following the transition from Hallstatt to La Tène Culture, this weapon was adopted by Celtic populations and always remained bound to theirs as a distinguishing feature. The Gaesum was very likely part of weaponry belonging to welloff and aristocratic fighters; the weapon radiated out from Celtic culture to others and was widespread among Celtiberians. Gambeson: Medieval armour consisting of leather plates sewn or riveted, or as a quilted coat. Gladius Hispaniensis (Iberic sword): two-edged sword featuring a broad leafshaped blade ending with a tapered tip. The sword was developed and designed by Celtiberians and later adopted by Roman legionaries. Golasecca Culture: Iron Age Celtic culture from northern Italy, dating from the ninth to fourth centuries bc. Hallstatt Culture: predominant Celtic or proto-Celtic culture of Central and Western Europe, dating from the 12th to the 6th centuries bc. Hatvan-Boldog: archaic type of La Tène sword, featuring a short blade, tapered tip and diamond-shaped section.

Celtic Warfare.indd 168

12/09/2022 21:03

Dictionary 169 Hellebardenaxt: unique combat axe which appeared in the second century bc, to be regarded as a distinctive weapon of the Celtic and Celtic-influenced populations of Alpine regions Hillfort: fortified or defended settlement. The fortification usually follows the contours of a hill and consists of one or more lines of earthworks, with stockades or defensive walls, and external ditches. This settlement was typical of Celts from British Isles. Hispano-Chalcidic: Celtiberian helmet inspired by Greek models. Humeralia: Latin word for shoulder flaps fitted to the front of armour by a couple of pins as fastening or protection. Named Epomides (επωμίδες) in Greek. Iaculum: Latin common word for javelin. Imperial Gallic (helmet): group of Roman helmets dating to the first century bc (Roman imperial age) and deriving from the Celtic helmet type known as Port. Introbio: knife/dagger type from the Celts of Alpine region, usually equipped with a metal sheath. Iuventus: Latin name indicating the military factions of independent young warriors in the Celtiberian context, similar to the Irish Fianna, resulting from the practice of ver sacrum. Kopis (κοπίς): Greek word for forward-curving blade sword of Balkan origin, adopted by Greek, Italic and Etruscan populations. Knobbed-Pommel Sword: Celtic sword bearing some distinguishing features. Entirely forged in iron (hilt included), its hilt shows a peculiar overall structure displaying a series of tiny metallic globes (of variable sizes) forged either in iron or copper alloy. These globes were to be fixed on the hilt. Their function is unclear, but adornment has been considered as the most likely. The sword was used through time since the last phases of Hallstatt Culture until 75–72 bc. Knollenknaufschwert: see Knobbed-Pommel Sword. Lankia: Celtic word referring to thrusting spear. La Tène: Celtic sword par excellence, featuring a straight blade with parallel edges. La Tène Culture: regarded as the Celtic culture par excellence, it conventionally developed and flourished during the late Iron Age (from about 450 bce to the Roman conquest in the first century bc). Lorica Hamata: chainmail armour. Lorica Musculata: bronze or iron armour, resembling the Greek thorax in design. The Lorica musculata usually featured a sculptural decoration, replicating the human body in the muscle. Lorica Musculata might be equipped with shoulder guards and fringed leather Lovere: dagger/knife from the Celts of the Alpine region, equipped with a metal sheath Madaris: Celtic heavy javelin, featuring a wavy/dented sharp point, conceived to tear and shred the opponent’s wounds.

Celtic Warfare.indd 169

12/09/2022 21:03

170  Celtic Warfare Montefortino: Celtic helmet composed of a bronze bowl equipped with a pair of anatomical cheek pieces and neck guard, probably resulting from Celtic penetration in Italy. Negau: type of bronze helmet featuring a semi-spherical bowl with a straight metal brim. Novo Mesto: Eastern Celtic helmet resembling in design the Agen-Port type. iron bowl combined with a large neck-guard and an equally broad brim, both manufactured in bronze Oppidum: large fortified Gaulish settlement. The development and spread of Oppida is usually dated back to the second century  bc, but it might have involved Cisalpine Gaul in the previous century. Pelta: a crescent-shaped wicker shield, usually carried and used by Peltasts Peltast: Greek name referring to type of light infantrymen, originating in Thrace and Paeonia, and named after the kind of shield he carried. The peltast often served as a skirmisher in Hellenic and Hellenistic armies. Petrinos: Gaulish word for a cavalry technique involving repeatedly hurling javelins backwards, with one’s back turned to the enemy while retreating. Phalanx: battle formation of Greek origin, usually featuring soldiers deployed in very tight and close ranks. Pilum: heavy javelin of Etruscan origin, consisting of an iron shank with a small point. The shank was joined to the wooden shaft by a socket. The point was sometimes leaf shaped or barbed in design. Pontet: metal loop placed on the sword’s scabbard. To the loop the suspension chain was secured, creating the sword-belt suspension system. Port: Gaulish helmet manufactured in iron featuring a hemispherical bowl and anatomical cheek pieces, equipped with a highly jutting anatomical neck guard and a front metal brim. Pteryges (πτέρυγες): skirt-like structure for groin and leg protection, usually part of ‘tube and yoke’ armour or a subarmalis. Pugio: typical dagger used by Roman soldiers as a sidearm. This weapon was adopted by Roman legionaries during the Celtiberian wars, being developed from the biglobular dagger which was the distinctive weapon of Celtiberian fighters. -Rix: Celtic name suffix, or Gaulish word meaning ‘king’ and potentially referring to a chief magistrate whose actual office is still uncertain and unidentified, potentially comparable to the Roman dictator. Sagos (σάγος): Greek term for ‘coarse cloak’ or ‘plaid’. Sarissa: a long pike typical of Macedonian phalangites, wielded with both hands due to its bulk and length. The archaic version of the sarissa measured about 5 metres, but subsequent to the tactical development introduced by Philip and Alexander of Macedonia, later carried on by the following Hellenistic armies, the pike reached an overall length ranging between 7 and 8 metres. Semianthropomorphic: distinctive design hilt, dating to the third and second centuries bc and resembling the human figure in a highly stylised manner,

Celtic Warfare.indd 170

12/09/2022 21:03

Dictionary 171 following the style which was typical of older Antennae-hilt characteristic of Hallstatt daggers and swords. Sica supina: single-blade knife or short sword featuring a blade with an obtusely angled profile. The weapon, which was typical of Dacian and Thracian populations, was implemented by Eastern Celtic communities as part of their weaponry. Soldurios: Celtic warriors or soldiers, who used to pledge their allegiance and loyalty to a nobleman/patron, following his leadership and authority until his death. Soliferrum: see Gaesum. Solis: Roman and Italic javelin, usually hurled using the amentum. South-Eastern Alpine (helmet): variant of Negau helmet featuring a composite bowl. Spina (spine): central wooden spindle-shaped element featuring a spine design; the element might become much more elongated, spanning the best part of the length of the shield’s surface, to provide improved structural integrity. The spine was attached to the shield plank over the hole for the handgrip, to protect the hand and to increase the strength and shock-absorbing concavity of the shield. Spolas (σπολάς): Greek word referring to leather/hide armours. Stolutegon: Gaulish word referring to the practice of raising the shield above the head while retreating and turning it to protect the back, bending the arm backwards. Subarmalis: padded garment or undergarment, usually worn under an armour. Suspension chain: metallic chains of different sizes attached to the scabbard’s suspension piece, a short section running forward on the right-hand side and a longer section encircling the body around back but attached at the front. Testudo: (tortoise) defensive formation deployed having soldier who would align their shields to form a packed formation covered with shields on the front and top. Thorax (θώραξ): Greek word referring to ‘armour’. Usually occurring to identify the bell-shaped bronze cuirass/breastplate. Thorax Lineos (θώραξ λίνεος): Greek word for armours constructed of multiple layers of linen. Tragula: Celtic javelin which was hurled using the amentum. The weapon was potentially equipped with a distinctive tip, similar to a gib or harpoon in design. Tessin: Negau helmet type, composed of a wooden bowl surmounted by bronze sheets fixed by a central crest, from which five pedicles jut out, most likely to support a horsehair crest. The wooden bowl was clad by a copper alloy foil. Tube and yoke: distinctive style of armour consisting of a tube wrapped around the chest, two flaps over the shoulders, and a skirt of flaps covering the hips and belly.

Celtic Warfare.indd 171

12/09/2022 21:03

172  Celtic Warfare Umbo: round, convex or conical piece of material placed the centre of a shield planks. This element acted as reinforcement and was secured to the plank by the means of glue or nails and rivets to increase the shield’s overall solidity. In some sporadic cases the surfaces of the shield bosses are enlarged to strengthen the board and create, along with the spine cover element, formidable reinforcement which could provide better protection against frontal strokes. Vergobretus: Gaulish magistrate whose actual office is still uncertain and unidentified. Relying on Cesar’s testimony (referring to the Vergobretus as princeps civitatis, principatus, and magistratus) this office might be tentatively compared to the Roman consul. Ver sacrum: the ‘sacred spring’, an archaic ritual practised in among IndoEuropean populations. In times of distress all produce of the spring (or the whole year) was originally consecrated to a deity, as a sacrifice. Later on, the practice changed: the animals were sacrificed; the humans, when of age, were sent away. This controlled over-population; led by a god or totemic animal founded new communities. Westkeltische, helmet: see Agen. Xynema: word of uncertain origin, describing the practice of the Gaulish cavalryman swiftly discharging three javelins before abruptly turning the horse.

Celtic Warfare.indd 172

12/09/2022 21:03

Notes Foreword    1. Latin for ‘woe to the vanquished’, or ‘woe to the conquered’. According to tradition, in 390 bc, an army of Gauls led by Brennus attacked Rome, capturing all of the city except for the Capitoline Hill. Brennus besieged the hill, and finally the Romans asked to ransom their city. Brennus demanded 329 kg of gold and the Romans agreed to his terms. According to Plutarch’s life of Camillus and Livy’s Ab Urbe Condita Libri (Book V Sections 34–49), the Gauls provided steelyard balances and weights which were used to measure the amount of gold. The Romans brought the gold, but claimed that the provided weights were rigged in the Gauls’ favour. The Romans complained to Brennus, who took his sword, threw it onto the weights, and exclaimed, ‘Vae victis!’ The Romans thus needed to bring more gold as they had to counterbalance the sword as well. Livy and Plutarch claim that Camillus subsequently succeeded in defeating the Gauls before the ransom had to be paid, although Polybius, Diodorus Siculus and a later passage from Livy contradict this.    2. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 24.    3. Latin saying, meaning ‘wage war’. Chapter 1    1. V. Kruta, S. Moscati, O.H. Frey, Les Celtes: catalogue de l’exposition, Venise, Palazzo Grassi, 1991.    2. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 64.    3. O. H. Frey, ‘A New Approach to Early Celtic Art.’  Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section C: Archaeology, Celtic Studies, History, Linguistics, Literature, vol. 104C, no. 5, 2004, pp. 107–129.    4. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri , V, 34.    5. Herodotus, Histories, I, 94.    6. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, I, 4, 1–4; VII, 4, 1.    7. Caesar , Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VII, 4, 4–6.    8 Livy, Ab Urbe condita Libri, V, 34–35. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, I, 2–3.    9. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 64.  10. See Tàin Bò Cuailnge.  11. Armando De Guio, Tomba ad incinerazione a Montebello Vicentino, 1977.  12. Sextus Pompeus Festus, De verborum significatione, 519.  13. Pompeus Trogus reported by Marcus Junianus Justinus, Historiae Philippicae, XX, 5, 5.  14. Plutarch, Life of Camillus, 15. See also Polybius, Roman Histories, II, 17.  15.  Andrè Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 36.  16. J.P. Demoule, Chapitre X – Les tombes à char de La Tène ancienne, in Chronologie et société dans les nécropoles celtiques de la culture Aisne-Marne du VIe au IIIe siècle avant notre ère, in Revue archéologique de Picardie, Numéro spécial 15, 1999. p. 174.

Celtic Warfare.indd 173

12/09/2022 21:03

174  Celtic Warfare 17.  Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, XIV, 9. 18. E. Fourdrignier, Sur la découverte de deux casques gaulois à forme conique dans les sépultures de Cuperly et de Thuizy (Marne), in Bulletins de la Société d’anthropologie de Paris, III°, Tome 3, 1880. pp. 323–333. 19. S. Verger, Les tombes à char de la Tène ancienne en Champagne et les rites funéraires aristocratiques en Gaule de l’est au Ve siècle avant J. –C, 1994, p. 438, and also B. Lambot and P. Ménie, La tombe à char d’Evergnicourt (Aisne) ‘le tournant du chêne’, in Revue Archeologicque de Picardie, n° spécial 22, 2005, p. 330. 20. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 37. 21 For a complete analisys, see L. Hansen, Die Panzerung der Kelten, 2003, pp. 95–105. 22. K. Fleury-Alcaraz, Marseille: Les provencaux de l’age du fer, in Archeologia (Dijon) 351, 1998, pp. 38–41; F. Lontcho, A l’origine de l’art celte, in L’Archeologue – Arch. Nouvelle 46, 2000, p. 6. 23.  A ndrè Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 39, tab. 2E, 2F. 24. L. Hansen, Die Panzerung der Kelten, 2003, pp.29–30. 25.  Andrè Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe : cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 40. 26. A. Chierici, Armati e tombe con armi nella società dell’Etruria Padana: analisi di alcuni monumenti, in La colonizzazione etrusca in Italia, Atti del XV Convegno Internazionale di Studi sulla Storia e l’Archeologia dell’Etruria, G. M. Della Fina (a cura di), 2008, pp. 220–222. 27. G. Rosenberg, Hjortspringfundet, 1937, p. 56. 28. J J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 97. 29. From the Latin word for thorn or spine. 30. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 47; M. Egg, R. Goedecker-Ciolek, M. Schönfelder, K. W. Zeller, Ein eisenzeitlicher prunkschild vom Dürrnberg bei Hallein, land Salzburg, in Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums, n° 56, pp. 95–98. 31. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 92. 32.  A ndrè Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 45. 33. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, XIV, 9.. 34. Th. Janin, O. Taffanel, J. Taffanel, H. Boisson, N. Chardenon, A. Gardeisen, F. Hérubel, G. Marchand, A. Montécinos and J. Rouquet, La nécropole protohistorique du Grand Bassin II à Mailhac, Aude (VIe-Ve s. av. n. è.), in Documents d’archéologie méridionale 25, 2002, pp. 65–122. 35. Iulius Pollux, Onomastikon, VII, 156. 36. F, Quesada Sanz, Armas de la antigua Iberia: de Tartesos a Numancia, 2010, p. 50. 37. Nonius Marcellus, De Compendiosa Doctrina, 555. 38. Maurus Servius Honoratus, In tria Virgilii Opera Expositio, VIII, 660. 39. A. Rapin, L’armament due guerrieri celte au 2e Age du Fer, L’art Celtique en Gaule, Collections des musèes de province, 1983–84, p. 70. 40. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 85. 41. E. Oakeshott, The Archaeology of Weapons, 1960, pp. 53–54. 42. J.D. Cowen, The Hallstatt Sword of Bronze: on the Continent and in Britain, 1967, p. 416.

Celtic Warfare.indd 174

12/09/2022 21:03

Notes 175 43. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe : cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 41. 44. C. Gendron, J. Gomez de Soto, T. Lejars, J. P. Pautreau, L. Uran, Deux épées à sphères du Centre-Ouest de la France, in Aquitania, vol. 4, 1986, vol. 4, pp. 39–54. 45. J. P. Millotte, Le Jura et les Plaines de Saône aux âges des métaux, 1963, pp. 195–196. 46. W. Krämer, Ein Knollenknaufschwert aus dem Chiemsee, in Festschrift für Friedrich Wagner, 1962, p. 109. See also K. Spindler, Ein neues Knollenknaufschwert aus der Donau bei Regensburg, in Germania, n° 58, 1980, pp. 105–116. K. Wehrberger; G. Wieland, Ein weiteres Knollenknaufschwert und eine Aylesford-Pfanne aus der Donau bei Ulm, in Überlegungen zu Spätkeltischen und frührömischen Gewässerfunden von der Oberen Donau, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, vol. 29, n°2, 1999, pp. 237–256. 47. J. J. Hatt, Chronique de Protohistoire VI. Pour une nouvelle chronologie de l’époque hallstattienne. Les trois phases du Premier Âge du Fer en Allemagne du Sud et en France de l’Est, in Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, vol. 59, n° 9–10, 1962, p. 662. See also B. Bouloumié, Les cistes à cordons trouvées en Gaule (Belgique, France, Suisse), in Gallia, vol. 34, n° 34–1, 1976, p. 23 as well as N. Freidin, The Early Iron Age in the Paris Basin. Hallstatt C and D., 1982, pp. 790–98. 48. A. Rapin, Epée à rognòn ou a sphére du Pont de l’Ouen a Haute-Goulaine (L.A.), in Nos Ancetres Les Gaulois aux marges de l’Armorique, 1999, pp. 115–116. 49. O. Taffanel, Les épées à sphères du Cayla à Mailhac (Aude), in Gallia, vol. 25, n° 25–1, 1967, pp. 1–10 ; see also M. Paysan, Singulàre keltische Schwerter aus den Kantonen Bern und St. Gallen, in Helvetia archaeologica, vol. 38, n° 149–150, 2007, pp. 13–29. 50. T. Lejars. Les armes des sanctuaires poitevins d’époque préromaine de Faye-l’Abbesse (Deux-Sèvres) et de Nalliers (Vendée), in Gallia, vol. 46, n° 46, 1989, p. 34. 51.  Posidonius of Apamea, Histories, XXIII, Fr. 15, reported in Athenaeus, Deipnosophistae, 151 F. 52. F. Quesada Sanz. ‘Máchaira, kopís, falcata’ in Homenaje a Francisco Torrent, Madrid, 1994, pp. 75–94 53. H. Riesch, Der ‘Bogen’ im Grab des Keltenfürsten vom Glauberg. Neue Vorschläge zur Deutung eines außergewöhnlichen archäologischen Fundes, in Karfunkel. Zeitschrift für erlebbare Geschichte, 55 (2004/2005) pp. 50–53. 54. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armement chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 64. 55. Diodorus Siculus, The Historical Library, V, 29, 1. 56. Diodorus Siculus, The Historical Library V, 29, 2–3. 57. See Tàin Bò Cuailnge 58. Claudius Quadrigarius, Annales, I, quoted by Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae, IX, 13. See also Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 10. 59. Tàin Bò Cuailnge, 20, translated by J. Dunn, 2005. 60. M. J. O’Kelly, Early Ireland: an introduction to Irish prehistory, 1989, p. 269. See also E. Rynne, Iron Age sword hilts of Ireland and Scotland, 1960, p. 189. 61. M. Beamish, The Enderby Shield. A unique 2,300-year-old bark shield found near Enderby in Leicestershire. 2019. Chapter 2    1. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armement chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 66.    2. Plutarch, Life of Camillus, 22.    3. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, V, 37.    4. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 10; see also VII, 24.    5. Claudius Quadrigarius, Annales, I, quoted by Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae, IX, 13.  

Celtic Warfare.indd 175

12/09/2022 21:03

176  Celtic Warfare    6. G. Tagliamonte, M. Raccar, Materiali di tipo e di ascendenza lateniana nel medio e basso Adriatico italiano, p. 214, in Archeologia di Frontiera, 6, 2007, pp.211–220.    7. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VI, 4–8.    8. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 9–12. See also: Polybius, Histories, II, 18.    9. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 11, 3–8.  10. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 12–14.  11. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 23–24.  12. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 25–26.  13. M. Sordi, Dionigi e il Tirreno, in N. Bonacasa, L. Braccesi, E. De Miro (Editor), La Sicilia dei due Dionisi, 1999, pp. 494–499.  14. 387–386 bc  15. Pompeius Trogus quoted by Marcus Junianus Justinus, Historiae Philippicae, XX, 5, 3–6.  16. M. Sordi, Scritti di Storia Romana, 2002, pp.119–125 and I Galli in Apulia, in InvLuc 3–4, 1981–1982, pp. 5–11. See also L. Braccesi, Terra di confine. Archeologia e storia tra Marche, Romagna e San Marino, 2007, p. 24, and C. Rolley, Contacts rencontres et influences. Grande-Gréce et monde celtique, in La Magna Grecia e il lontano Occidente, 1990 , p. 359.  17. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 11, 3.  18 Livy, Ab Urbe condita Libri, IV, 42, 8; VII, 1, 3.  19. Diodorus Siculus, The Historical Library, XIV, 117, 7.  20. Diodorus Siculus, The Historical Library, XV, 14, 3.  21. M. Sordi, Dionigi e il Tirreno, in N. Bonacasa, L. Braccesi, E. De Miro (Editor), La Sicilia dei due Dionisi, 2002, pp. 494–495; Storia del Mediterraneo nell’antichità: 9.-1. secolo a.C, 2004, p. 186 (M. Guidetti).  22. I.E. Marcus Valerius winning a single combat against a Gallic champion with the help of a raven during the Battle of Laurentum (Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 26, 1).  23. I.E. The construction of a fortified military camp before the Battle of Porta Capena (Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 23, 5); Titus Manlius wielding a Gladius Hispaniensis against a Gallic champion during his single combat at the Battle of Anio river (Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 10, 5).  24. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 14, 8.  25. Polybius, Histories, II, 18, 6.  26. Polybius, Histories, II, 18, 7–9.  27. M. Guidetti (Editor), Storia del Mediterraneo nell’antichità: 9.-1. secolo a.C, 2004, p. 188.  28. Xenophon, Hellenica, VII, 1, 20–21.  29. Diodorus Siculus, The Historical Library, XX, 11, 1; 64, 2.  30. Diodorus Siculus, The Historical Library, XI, 1, 5.  31. A ncient population settled between the Pyrenees and Atax (Aude) before the Gallic invasion. According to Hecataeus of Miletus they were Ligurians, and their capital was Narbonne. Herodotus, instead, mentioning the Elysicians among the mercenaries who accompanied Hamilcar to Sicily in 480 bc, recognizes them as a people born from the melting of Iberians and Ligurians.  32. A. C. Faiselli, I Mercenari di Cartagine, 2002, p. 243.  33. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, XVI, 73, 3.  34. Martín Almagro Basch, Ligures en España, Rivista di Studi Liguri 15.3–4, lugliodicembre 1949, 195–208.  35. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, XIV, 9.

Celtic Warfare.indd 176

12/09/2022 21:03

Notes 177  36. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 47.  37. P. Coulon, Note sur un casque gaulois trouvé dans une tombe à char, près Prunay (Marne), in Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, 1930, 27–3, pp. 183–184.  38. P. F. Stary, Foreign elements in Etruscan arms and armour: 8th to 3rd century BC in Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, Vol. 45, 1979.  39. F. Coarelli, Un elmo con iscrizione latina arcaica al Museo di Cremona in L’Italie préromaine et la Rome républicaine. I. Mélanges offerts à Jacques Heurgon. Publications de l’École Française de Rome Année 1976 27 pp. 157–179  40. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, XIV, 9.  41. T. Janin, M. Py, Le ‘Guerrier de Lattes’: réflexion sur la signification d’une statue archaïque, in Gallia 65, 2008, pp. 2–3.  42. A. Oliver, The reconstruction of two Apulian tomb groups, in Antike Kunst, 5, 1968.  43. Plutarch, Life of Camillus, 40.  44. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 99.  45. P.F. Stary, Ursprung und Ausbreitung der eisenzeitlichen Ovalschilde mit Spindeförmigen Schild buckel, in Germania 59, 1981, pp.287–306. A. Chierici, Armati e tombe con armi nella società dell’Etruria Padana: analisi di alcuni monumenti, p. 202, in La colonizzazione etrusca in Italia, Atti del XV Convegno Internazionale di Studi sulla Storia e l’Archeologia dell’Etruria, G. M. Della Fina (Editor), 2008.  46. A. Rapin, Bouclier et lances, in Gournay II, 1988, pp. 15–16.  47. Vergil, Aeneid, 662.  48. A. Rapin, Bouclier et lances, in Gournay II, 1988, p. 93.  49. The inhabitants of the Greek settlements and cities located in central and southern Italy.  50. G. Andreassi, Note sull’ipogeo Varrese di Canosa, Archivio Soprintendenza Pugliese, 25, 1972, pp. 233–259; G. Andreassi, L’ipogeo Varrese in Canosa, 1992, pp. 238–240.  51. G. Tagliamonte, I figli di Marte. Mobilità, mercenari e mercenariato italici in Magna Grecia e Sicilia, 1994, pp. 50–51.  52. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p.51.  53. J. Tomczak, Roman military equipment in the 4th century bc: pilum, scutum and the introduction of manipular tactics, p. 56; in Acta Unversitatis Lodziensis, 29/2012.  54. Plutarch, Life of Camillus, XLI, 5.  55. D. Vitali, L’armamento dei Celti nel periodo della battaglia del Metauro, in M. Luni (Editor), La Battaglia del Metauro tradizione e studi, 2002. p. 106.  56. G. Tagliamonte, Spade di tipo lateniano in contesti sabellici, pp. 241–242, in G. Tagliamonte (Editor), Ricerche di archeologia medio-adriatica I, le necropoli: contesti e materiali. Atti dell’incontro di studio Cavallino-Lecce, 27–28 Maggio 2005, pp. 231–242. G. Tagliamonte, M. Raccar, Materiali di tipo e di ascendenza lateniana nel medio e basso Adriatico italiano, p. 214, in Archeologia di Frontiera, 6, 2007, pp.211–220.  57. E. Nicosia, D. Sacco, M. Tondo, Die Schwert von San Vittore del Lazio, Provinz Frosinone, in Waffen für die Götter: Krieger. Trophäen. Heiligtümer, 2012, pp.71–73.  58. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p.51.  59. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 126.  60. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, pp. 55–57.

Celtic Warfare.indd 177

12/09/2022 21:03

178  Celtic Warfare  61. Strabo, Geography, IV, 4, 3.  62. P.C. Ramsl, Das eisenzeitliche Gräberfeld von Pottenbrunn, Niederösterreich, 2002, pp. 82–83. P.C. Ramsl, La nécropole laténienne de Pottenbrunn (Basse-Autriche) comme miroir des relations Est-Ouest, 2003, pp. 251–253.  63. A. Haffner, Les tombes a char celtiques du Rhin moyenne in Revue archéologique de Picardie, Vol.1, p. 241.  64. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p.51.  65. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, XIV, 10.  66. Plutarch, Life of Camillus, XL, 3–4.  67. Claudius Quadrigarius, Annales, I,  quoted by Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae, IX, 13.  68. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, VII, 10.   69. Claudius Quadrigarius, Annales, I,  quoted by Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae, IX, 13.  70. E.G. J.P Vernant, Figure, idoli, maschere, 2001, pp. 80–81; L.M Napoliano Valditara, Platone e le ‘ragioni’ dell’immagine, 2007, p. 102. A. H. McLintock, An Encyclopaedia of New Zealand, referring to the entry ‘Haka’, 1966.  71. Tàin Bò Cuailnge, 17b, translated by J. Dunn, 2005  72. Xenophon, Hellenika, VII, 1, 20–21. Chapter 3   1. Latin definition for ‘Gallic Land’, encompassing the territories lying north of the Esino river till the river Montone, so part of the modern Italian regions of Marche and Romagna, along the coast of the Adriatic Sea. See also Polybius, The Histories, II.19.7–13. Concerning the historical background, see also Nereo Alfieri, Le Marche e la fine del mondo antico, in Atti Mem. Deputazione Storia Patria delle Marche. 86, 1983, pp. 9–34.   2. The Etruscan settlement and dominions in the Po valley. See also Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri I, 2, 5.   3. Polybius, The Histories, XX.1–5. The Greek author referred to Gallia Cisalpina (‘Gaul on the hither side of the Alps’ from the Roman geographical viewpoint) which was the name the Romans gave to the Gallic territories of northern Italy (as opposed to Gallia Transalpina, ‘Gaul on the far side of the Alps,’ which referred to what is now France). See also: G. Sassatelli, Celti ed Etruschi nell’Etruria Padana e nell’Italia settentrionale, in Ocnus 11, 2003, pp. 231–257.    4. Tribes of Cisalpine Gauls. They occupied a geographic area stretched between the river Adda in Lombardy and the river Adige in Northern Italy. Their crossing of the Alps (among other tribes) is mentioned by Greek and Roman authors. See Polybius, The Histories, II. 17 and Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, V. 35.    5. Strabo, Geography, XII, 5, 1.    6. P. F. Esler, Galatians, 1998, p. 29. The Greek word has been translated using the meaning of ‘confederation’, ‘league’ as well as ‘political community’ or ‘commonwealth’. Galatai was the Greek word referred to the Celts from beyond the Rhine regions who invaded regions of Macedonia, Greece, Thrace and Asia Minor in the period 280– 275 bc.    7. J. L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 70.   8. O. Buchsenschutz, K. Gruel, and T. Lejars, 2012. The Golden Age of the Celtic Aristocracy in the Fourth and Third Centuries bc Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales, 67(2), pp.295–324.   9. V. Hanson, The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece, 1989, pp. 57–58.

Celtic Warfare.indd 178

12/09/2022 21:03

Notes 179  10. Polybius, Histories, III, 71, 2.  11. M. Bettalli, Guerre tra polemologi. Dodici anni di studi sulla guerra nel mondo greco antico 1998–2009, ‘Quaderni di storia’, LXXIII, 2011, pp. 270–271.  12. V. Kruta, La grande storia dei Celti, 2000, pp. 245–54.  13. M.T. Grassi, I Celti in Italia, 1991, p. 60.  14. D. Vitali, Un elmo di bronzo tra le carte d’archivio di Giovanni Gozzadini, in Studia Celtica Classica et Romana Nicolae Szabó septuagesimo dedicata, 2012, pp. 277–283: R. Benassai, La pittura dei Campani e dei Sanniti, 2001  15. C. Maniquet, Les Casques du dépôt de Tintignac, in M. Feugère, Casques antiques. Les visages de la guerre, de Mycènes à la fin de l’Empire romain, 2011, pp. 62–64.  16. C. Maniquet, Le sanctuaire antique des Arènes de Tintignac, 2004, pp. 80–82. C. Maniquet, Le dépôt cultuel du sanctuaire gaulois de Tintignac à Naves (Corrèze). In: Gallia, tome 65, 2008, pp. 293–296.  17. P. Bienkowski, Les Celtes dans les arts mineurs gréco-romains avec des recherches iconographiques sur quelques autres peuples barbares, 1928, pp. 77 – 78.  18. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 30.  19. H. Russel Robinson, The Armour of imperial Rome, 1975, p. 200.  20. Strabo, Geography, III, 3, 6.  21. See Lebor Gabala, but also Tàin Bò Cuailnge  22. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, 30  23. Marcus Terentius Varro, De Lingua Latina, V, 24.  24. M.C. Bishop, Aketon, Thoracomachus, and Lorica Segmentata, in Exercitus: the Bulletin of the Ermine Street Guard vol. 3, n°1, 1995, pp. 1–3.  25. M. Rusu, Das Keltische Fürstengrab von Ciumeşti in Rumänien, in Germania 50, 1969, pp.267–269  26. A. Rustoiu, A Journey to Mediterranean. Peregrinations of a Celtic Warrior from Transylvania, in Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai, Historia 51, n° 1, 2006, pp. 50–51  27. L. Hansen, Die Panzerung der Kelten, 2003, pp.43–49 and 163–165.  28.  F. Muller, Fragment eines keltischen Kettenpanzers von Tiefenau bei Berne, in Archaelogie der Schweiz, vol. 9, n° 3, 1986, pp. 116–123.  29. I. M. Stead, Iron Age Cemeteries in East Yorkshire, in English Heritage Archaeological Report, n°22, 1991, pp. 42–56  30. A. Rapin, 2000: La statuaire de Roquepertuse, in  J.P. Guillaumet, A. Rapin, L’art des Gaulois du Midi, in Le temps des Gaulois en Provence, catalogue d’exposition du musée de Ziem de Martigues, 2000, pp. 81–83.  31. Polybius, Histories, III, 62, 5.  32. Silius Italicus, Punica, IV, 290  33. Polybius, Histories, II, 30, 1.  34. Caesar, Commentarii De Bello Civili, III, 44.  35. Pliny, Naturalis Historia, VIII, 73, 192.   36. A. Rapin, Bouclier et lances, in Gournay II, 1988, p. 12.  37. G. Reich, Un bouclier de La Tène : de la découverte à l’utilisation, in De l’âge du Fer à l’usage du verre. Mélanges offerts à Gilbert Kaenel, (CAR 151), 2014, pp.251–255.  38. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 30.  39. Polybius, Histories, II, 30, 3.  40. Pausanias, Description of Greece, X, XX, 8.  41. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 97.  42. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 30.  43. A. Rapin, Bouclier et lances, in Gournay II, 1988, pp. 93–95.  44. A. Rapin, Bouclier et lances, in Gournay II, 1988, pp. 119–124.

Celtic Warfare.indd 179

12/09/2022 21:03

180  Celtic Warfare  45. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 30.  46. Tàin Bò Cuailnge, translation by L. Winifred Faraday, 1904.  47. Plautus, Epidicus, V, 2, 25.  48. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, I, 26; Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, XXI, 7.  49. Paul the Deacon, Excerpta ex libris Pompeii Festi de significatione verborum, 367.  50. B. Nielsen, On Latin instruments-noun in */-lo-/, in Indo-European Word Formation, Copenhagen Studies in Indo-European, vol. 2, 2004, pp. 207–209.  51. Varro, De Lingua Latina, V, 115.  52. Caesar, Commentarii De Bello Gallico, V, 35.  53. J. G. Warry, Warfare in the Classical World, 1995, pp. 50–51.  54. M. Martinelli, La lancia, la spada, il cavallo. Il fenomeno guerra nell’Etruria e nell’Italia Centrale tra età del bronzo ed età del ferro, in Toscana Beni Culturali, vol. 7, 2004, pp.94–101.  55. V. Cianfarani, Antiche civiltà d’Abruzzo, 1969, p. 19.  56. Plautus, Casina, II, 4, 18.  57. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p.55.  58. R. Pleiner, The Celtic Sword, 1993, pp.159–168.  59. V. F. Buchwald, Iron and steel in ancient times, 2005, chapter 5.  60. See epic poems like the Mabinogion or Edda.  61. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p.62.  62. J. Lang, Study of the Metallography of some Roman Sword, in Britannia 19, 1988, pp.199–216.  63. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, XIV, 10.  64. Plutarch, Life of Camillus, 41, 4.  65. D. Vitali, L’armamento dei Celti nel periodo della battaglia del Metauro, in M. Luni (a cura di), La Battaglia del Metauro tradizione e studi, 2002. p. 106.  66. Polybius, Histories, II, 30; II, 33.  67. Polybius, Histories II, 33, 3.  68. R . Pleiner, The Celtic Sword, 1993, pp.159–168.  69. Eybryggja Saga, 44 .  70. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 30.   71. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p.59.  72. L’art Celtique en Gaule, Collections des musèes de province, 1983–1984, p. 101, tab. 94.  73. J. L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 91.  74. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 90.  75. Tàin Bò Cuailnge and Lebor Gabala  76. Strabo, Geography, IV, 4, 5.  77. Strabo, Geography, IV, 4, 3.  78. R . E. Dohrenwend, The sling. Forgotten firepower of Antiquity, in Journal of Asian Martial Arts, Vol. 11 N. 2, 2002, pp.28–33.  79. E. McEwen, C.A. Bergman, R.L. Miller, Early bow design and construction, in Scientific American, June, 1991, pp. 50–56.  80. R . D’Amato, A. Salimbeti, Early Aegean Warrior 5000–1450 bc. p. 37.  81. I. V. Ferencz and L. D. Vaida, Middle La Tène Arrowheads from Transylvania, in S. Berecki (Ed.), Iron Age communities in the Carpathian Basin Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş, 2010, pp. 309–319.

Celtic Warfare.indd 180

12/09/2022 21:03

Notes 181  82. Pseudo-Aristotle, De mirabilibus auscultationibus, 86: Strabo, Geography, IV, 4, 6; Pliny, Naturalis Historia, XXV, 25; XXVII, 76; Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae, XVII, 15  83. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita LIbri, X, 28.  84. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita LIbri, X, 29.  85. M.T. Grassi, I Celti in Italia, 1991, pp. 65–80.  86. Lucian of Samosata, Zeuxis.  87. A.K. Nefiodkin, On the Origin of the Scythed Chariots, in Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, vol. 53, 2004, pp. 369–378.  88. Polybius, Histories, II, 23, 4.  89. Polybius, Histories, II, 28, 5.  90. Propertius, Elegiae, IV, 10.  91. Plutarch, Life of Sulla, XV, 1; XVI, 2; XVIII 1–4.  92. Plutarch, Life of Marcellus, VII, 4.  93. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, XXXIII, 23; XXXIII, 37; XXXVI, 40.  94. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, XXXIX, 7.  95. Florus, Epitome of Roman History, I, XXXVII, 5.  96. Polyaenus, Strategemata, VII, 50.  97. Isidore of Seville, Origines, IX, 33.  98. Vegetius, Epitoma rei militaris, II, 2.  99. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, XXXVI, 38, 6; 40, 5; 40, 12 and D. Vitali, I Celti in Italia,  Guerrieri, principi ed eroi fra il Danubio e il Po, 2004, p. 320. 100. Tacitus, Germania, 7. 101. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, XXXV, 5, 10. 102. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, XXXV, 5–6. 103. V. Hanson, The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece, 1989, p. 120. 104. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, X, 29, 6. 105. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, XXXIV, 46, 9–10. 106. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, XXXV, 5, 7. 107. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, X, 29, 11. 108. Polybius, Histories, II, 33, 5. 109. Plutarch, Life of Camillus, XL, 3–4. 110. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities, XIV, 10. 111. Polybius, Histories, II, 22. 112. Polybius, Histories, II, 28–29. 113. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 30. 114. Polybius, Histories, III, 114. 115. Polybius, Histories, II, 28. 116. Eyvindr Finnsson Skáldaspillir, Hákonarmál, 4. 117. Snorri Sturlusson, Heimskringla Saga, Ynglinga Saga, 6. 118. Snorri Sturlusson, Egill Saga Skallagrímsson, 9. 119. M. P. Speidel, Berserks: a History of Indo-European ‘Mad Warriors’, in Journal of World History, vol. 13, n. 2, 2002, pp. 253–290. 120. Polybius, Histories, II, 27, 6. 121. Tacitus, Annales, III, 43. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VII, 80, 3. 122. Isidore of Seville, Etimologie, XVIII, 7, 7. 123. L . Bordes, A. Lefort, F. Blondel, T. Meine, Etude et expérimentations autour de la découverte d’un bâton de jet gaulois sur le sited’Urville-Nacqueville (Manche), 2015.

Celtic Warfare.indd 181

12/09/2022 21:03

182  Celtic Warfare 124. Polybius, Histories, II, 30. 3. 125. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, X, 26. 126. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, X, 28. 127. Polybius, Histories, II, 25–26. 128. Plutarch, Life of Marcellus, VII, 4; Polybius, Histories II, 27, 6. 129. Plutarch, Life of Marcellus, Vi, 4. 130. Pausanias, Description of Greece, X, 19, 9–1.1.    131. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, XXII, 6. 132. Polybius, Histories, III, 115. Chapter 4   1. Celtic population dwelling in the modern Auvergne region during the Iron Age and the Roman period. They were one of the most powerful tribes of ancient Gaul, contesting primacy over the region with the neighbouring Aedui.    2. V. Kruta, La grande storia dei Celti, 2000, pp. 341–342.    3. V. Kruta, La grande storia dei Celti, 2000, p. 280.    4. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VI, 24, 5.    5. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, I, 4, 2; I, 18, 5; VI, 15, 2. See also V. Kruta, La grande storia dei Celti, 2000, pp. 353–354.    6. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, I, 4, 2; I, 18, 5; VI, 15, 2. See also V. Kruta, La grande storia dei Celti, 2000, pp. 353–354.    7. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, III, 22, 1–3. See X. Delamarre, Dictionnaire de la langue gauloise : Une approche linguistique du vieux-celtique continental, 2003, p. 277; P. Y Lambert, Gaulois Solitumaros. In: Etudes Celtiques, vol. 36, 2008. pp. 89–101; T. Vennemann, Europa Vasconica – Europa Semitica, 2003, p. 695.    8. A. Daubigney, Reconnaissance des formes de la dépendance gauloise, in Dialogues d’histoire ancienne, Vol. 5, n° 5, 1979, pp. 145–189. The word Ambactus appears to be Celtic by origin and refers to a distinct feature of Gallic social structure. The word is mentioned by Greek and Latin sources.    9. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VI, 15, 2.  10. ‘[…] Even more difficult than the others to define is the word ambactus, itself Celtic and so clearly having a precise signification within the stratification of Gaulish society, but perhaps only half understood by the Romans, who incorporated it into Latin as an exotic word. Now servi are by definition not free, and it appears that the Romans closely related servi and ambacti: Caesar himself says servi et clientes at one point, ambactos clientesque at another. The latter passage is of some interest, since it is closely related to a passage in which Polybius describes the Cisalpine Gauls, and ambacti appears to translate συμπεριφερόμενοι. Opinions have varied, but most have put the ambacti somewhere between a superior client and a slave. An examination of the various passages in Greek and Latin, together with glosses and cognate words, suggests that the ambacti were probably indeed free, but not of high status. It is a strange accident that one Celtic word describing a social degree came into the Latin language at an early stage, while another, vassus, had to wait much longer; if both had been known to and correctly used by Caesar, the results might have been enlightening […]’ The pattern of rural settlement in Roman Gaul by Edith Mary Wightman, Hamilton (Ont.) ANRW II.4, pp. 584–657.  11. Polybius, Histories, II, 17, 8.     12. Pausanias, Description of Greece, XIX, 11.  13. Livy, Ab Urbe condita libri, XXXVIII, 16. See also V. Kruta, La grande storia dei Celti, 2000, pp. 281–283.

Celtic Warfare.indd 182

12/09/2022 21:03

Notes 183  14. A. M. Ancien, Le casque gaulois de Variscourt in Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, Vol. 78, n° 2, 1981, pp. 60–64 ma anche A. Gorgues, Les casques CoolusMannheim de Vieille-Toulouse, remarques sur les transferts d’armament a l’epoque republicaine dans les provinces ocidentales, in Gladius, n° XXV, 2005, pp. 83–94.  15. A. Taylor, A. Weale, S. Ford, Bronze Age, Iron Age and Roman Landscapes of the Coastal Plain, and a Late Iron Age Warrior Burial at North Bersted, Bognor Regis, West Sussex: Excavations 2007–2010, 2014  16. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 45.  17. T. Lejars, L’armement des Celtes en Gaule du Nord à la fin de l’époque gauloise, in Revue archéologique de Picardie Vol. 3, n° 3–4, 1996, pp. 96–98.    18. U. Shaaf, Studien zur keltischen Bewaffnung, in Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanische Zentralmuseum 33, 1986, pp. 830– 833.  19. H. Russel Robinson, The Armour of imperial Rome, 1975, p. 200.  20. M.Schonfelder, Le mobilier métallique de la tombe à char tardo-celtique de Boé (Lotet-Garonne), in Aquitania 17, 2000, pp 65–66.  21. H. van Enckevort e W. J. H. Willems, Roman cavalry helmets in ritual hoards from the Kops Plateau at Nijmegen, The Netherlands, in Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, vol. 5, 1994, p. 127.  22. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 30.  23. H. Hubert, The Greatness and the decline of the Celts, 1938, IV, II.  24. Plutarch, Life of Marcellus, 25, 7.  25. H. Cleere, Southern France: an Oxford Archaeological Guide, 2001, pp. 122–123.  26. L . Hansen, Die Panzerung der Kelten, 2003, pp. 34–55.  27. G. Barruol, La statue du guerrier de Vachères (Alpes-de-Haute-Provence), in Revue archéologique de Narbonnaise Année 29, 1996, pp. 9–11.  28. A type of bronze trumpet with an elongated S shape, held so that the long straight central portion was vertical and the short mouthpiece end section and the much wider bell were horizontal in opposed directions. The bell was styled in the shape of an open-mouthed boar’s, or other animal’s head. It was used in warfare, probably to incite troops to battle and intimidate opponents, as Polybius recounts. The instrument’s significant height allowed it to be heard over the heads of the participants in battles or ceremonies.  29. D.R. Sear, The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators 49–27 B.C, 1998, tables 10–11.  30. Polybius, Histories, II, 30, 1.  31. Pliny, Naturalis Historia, VIII, 73, 192.  32. Livy, Ab Urbe condita libri, XXXVIII, 21.  33. T. Bochnak, Early Circular Umbones of the Przeworsk Culture. The Role of Local Tradition and Celtic Influences on the Diversity of Metal Parts of Shields at the Beginning of the Late Pre-Roman Period, in Analecta archaeologica Ressoviensia, 2006, pp. 164–170.  34. Caesar, Commentarii de bello Gallico, I, 52.  35. Caesar, Commentarii de bello Gallico, II, 32  36. See the Germanic fighters during the Battle of Idistaviso. Tacitus, Annales, II, 14.  37. Vegetius, Epitoma rei militaris, II, 23.  38. A. Rapin, Bouclier et lances, in Gournay II, 1988, pp. 124–125.  39. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 93.  40. A. Rapin, Bouclier et lances, in Gournay II, 1988, p. 126.

Celtic Warfare.indd 183

12/09/2022 21:03

184  Celtic Warfare  41. T. Lejars, L’armement des Celtes en Gaule du Nord à la fin de l’époque gauloise, in Revue archéologique de Picardie, Vol. 3, n° 3–4, 1996, p. 96.    42. A. Rapin, Bouclier et lances, in Gournay II, 1988, pp. 128–129.  43. T. Lejars, L’armement des Celtes en Gaule du Nord à la fin de l’époque gauloise, in Revue archéologique de Picardie, Vol. 3, n° 3–4, 1996, p. 90.    44. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 52.  45. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 63.  46. A. Rapin, L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, p. 59.  47. T. Lejars, L’armement des Celtes en Gaule du Nord à la fin de l’époque gauloise, in Revue archéologique de Picardie, Vol. 3, n° 3–4, 1996, pp. 93–94. L. Salzani, la necropoli gallica e romana di S. Maria di Zevio (Verona), in Documenti di Archeologia, n°9, 1996, p. 115, tab.43, p. 139, tab. 92, p. 140, tab. 93.  48. L . Salzani, la necropoli gallica e romana di S. Maria di Zevio (Verona), in Documenti di Archeologia, n° 9, 1996, p. 125, tab. 64, p. 139, tab. 92. L. Salzani, La necropoli gallica di Casalandri a Isola Rizza (Verona), in Documenti di Archeologia, n° 14, 1998, p. 72, tab. 6, p.76, tab. 12, p. 95 tab. 54, p. 101, tab. 62, p. 103, tab. 74, p. 115, tab. 105.  49. Posidonius of Apamaea, quoted by da Athenaeus, Deipnosophistae, XIV.  50. J. L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 91.  51. A. Duval, Les pointes de flèche d’Alésia au Musée des Antiquités Nationales, in Antiquités Nationales. St Germain-en-Laye, 2, 1970, pp. 35–51.  52. G. Renoux, F. Dabosi, J. M. Pailler, Les armes en fer d’Uxellodunum (Puy d’Issolud, Lot), dernière bataille de César en Gaule : étude paléométallurgique de pointes de flèche et trait de catapulte, in Revue d’Archéométrie n°28, 2004. p. 143.  53. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VII, 81.  54. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, II, 6; III, 4.  55. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 43.  56. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VII, 81. Diodorus Siculus 19.109.3  57. A. Rapin, Les Armes des Celtes – des messages enfouis sous la rouille, in Mélanges de l’École française de Rome., Antiquité, 1996, p. 519.  58. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, II, 25.  59. A. Rapin, L’Armamento, in I Celti, catalogo della mostra a Palazzo Grassi, 1991, p. 329  60. With this name Classical authors refer to rival generals, families, and friends of Alexander the Great who fought for control over his empire after his death in 323 bc.  61. Plutarch, Life of Alexander, 16.  62. Plutarch, Life of Marius, 26.  63. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, II, 6; V, 43; VII, 85.  64. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, II, 25.  65. Aulus Irtius, Commentarii de Bello Gallico VIII, 14.  66. Livy, Ab Urbe condita Libri, XXXV, 5–6.  67. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, II, 23, 4.  68. T. Lejars, L’armement des Celtes en Gaule du Nord à la fin de l’époque gauloise, in Revue archéologique de Picardie, Vol. 3, n° 3–4, 1996, pp. 93–94.  69. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, II, 28, 2.  70. Polybius, Histories. II, 17, 12.

Celtic Warfare.indd 184

12/09/2022 21:03

Notes 185  71. F. Vincent, Sabis 57 av. J.-C. (L’hypothèse Thuin), 2015.  72. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Civili, I, 51.  73. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, II, 17.  74. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, I, 1; II, 4.  75. V. Kruta, La grande storia dei Celti, 2000, p. 316.  76. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VII, 80, 3.  77. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VII, 31.  78. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VII, 80.  79. Tacitus, Annales, III, 43.  80. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Civili, 51.  81. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 34–35; VII, 18.  82. J. Giesler, Rekonstruktion eines Sattels aus dem frankischen Graeberfeld von WeselBislich, in Die Franken. Wegbereiter Europas, 1996, pp. 808–11. See also P. Connolly, C. van Driel-Murray, The Roman cavalry saddle, in Britannia, vol. 22, 1991, pp. 33–50.  83. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, IV, 2.  84. M. del Màr Gabaldòn Martìnez, Ponis, santuarios y guerriero: la dimensiòn ritual del caballo en el mundo galo, in Gladius, n° XXV, 2005, p. 266.  85. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VII, 4.  86. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VII, 64.  87. Strabo, Geography, IV, 4, 240.  88. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, I, 15; I, 18; I, 23; IV, 6; VI, 5–6; VI, 43; VII, 34; VII, 66.  89. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VII, 65.  90. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Civili, I, 39; I, 51; III, 22.  91. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Civili, III, 4.  92. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Civili, II, 40.  93. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Libri, XXI, 48.  94. Arrian of Nicomedia, Ars Tactica, 33, 1.  95. P. Rance, Drungus, Δροῦγγος and Δρουγγιστί –a Gallicism and Continuity in Roman Cavalry Tactics, 2004, pp. 96–130.  96. A rrian of Nicomedia, Ars Tactica, 37, 4.  97. Arrian of Nicomedia, Ars Tactica, 42, 4.  98. A rrian of Nicomedia, Ars Tactica, 43, 2.  99. W. J. Watson, Ancient Celtic Cavalry Terms, in The Celtic Review, vol. IV, 1907– 1908, p. 384. 100. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, III, 20. 101. Plutarch, Life of Crassus, XXV, 7–8. 102. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, VIII, 48. Chapter 5    1. C. Thomas, The interpretation of the Pictish symbols, in The Archaeological Journal, n° 120, 1963, pp. 91–93.    2. Claudius Claudianus, De Consulatu Stilichonis, II, 247.    3. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 14.    4. G. Carr, Woad, tattooing and identity in later Iron Age and early roman Britain, in Oxford Journal of Archaeology, vol. 24, 2005, pp. 273–292.    5. L. Capron, Florida’s ‘Wild’ Indians, the Seminole, in National Geographic Magazine, 1956, pp. 819–40.    6. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 17, 5; V, 19, 1.

Celtic Warfare.indd 185

12/09/2022 21:03

186  Celtic Warfare    7. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, IV, 35.    8. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 19.    9. Tacitus, Agricola, 12.  10. See section 3.1.2.  11. B. J. Gilmore, Folly Lane (Verulamium): The Mail Shirt, in R. Niblett, The excavation of a ceremonial site at Folly Lane, Verulamium, 1999, pp. 159–167; J. Foster, The Lexden Tumulus. A re-appraisal of an Iron Age burial from Colchester, Essex, in BAR British Series, n° 156, 1986, pp. 82–85.  12. Tàin Bò Cuailnge, 20, translation by L. Winifred Faraday, 1904.  13. Tacitus, Annales, XII, 33.  14. Cassius Dio, History of Rome, LXII, 12.  15. Herodian, Roman History, III, 14, 8.  16. Y. Inall, New light on Iron Age warfare in Britain, in P. Halkon, The Arras Culture of Eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age: Proceedings of ‘Arras 200 – celebrating the Iron Age.’, 2020, p. 68.  17. J. Farley, K. Parfitt, A. Richardson, D. Antoine, R. Pope, C. Sparey-Green, A Late Iron Age Helmet Burial from Bridge, near Canterbury, Kent, in Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 80, 2014, p. 386.  18. J. V. S. Megaw, Art of the European Iron Age: a study of the elusive image, 1970, p. 173.  19. I.M. Stead, Many more Iron Age shields from Britain, in The Antiquaries Journal, vol. 71, 1991, pp. 1–35.  20. J. Farley, The deposition of miniature weaponry in Iron Age Lincolnshire, Pallas, 2011, No. 86, The Gods of Small Things (2011), pp. 97–121  21. K. Parfitt, Iron Age Burials from Mill Hill, 1995, pp.58–95, no. 2.17.  22. Cfr. Tàin Bò Cuailnge.  23. M. Beamish, The Enderby Shield. A unique 2,300-year-old bark shield found near Enderby in Leicestershire, 2019.  24. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, II, 32.  25. A. B. A. O’Rìordàin, E. M. Prendergast, Etienne Rynne, National Museum of Ireland: archaeological acquisitions in the year 1960, in Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, 1960, p. 152.  26. Herodian, Roman History, III, 14, 8.  27. Y. Inall, New light on Iron Age warfare in Britain, in P. Halkon, The Arras Culture of Eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age: Proceedings of ‘Arras 200 – celebrating the Iron Age.’, 2020, p. 76.  28. Y. Inall, In search of the spear people: spearheads in context in Iron Age eastern Yorkshire and beyond, 2015, pp.75–81.  29. See Tàin Bò Cuailnge and Togail Bruidne Dá Derga.  30. Gildas, De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae, 19.  31. B. Cunliffe, Iron Age communities in Britain: an account of England, Scotland and Wales from the Seventh Century BC until the Roman Conquest, 1974, p. 515.  32. S. Piggot, Swords and scabbards of the British early iron age, 1950, p. 24.  33. B. Raftery, La Tène in Ireland, in Marburg: Veroffentlichung des Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars, 1984, p.72.  34. D. W. Harding, The archaeology of Celtic art, 2007, p.113.  35. B. Cunliffe, Iron Age communities in Britain: an account of England, Scotland and Wales from the Seventh Century BC until the Roman Conquest, 1974, p. 533.  36. Tacitus, Agricola, 36.

Celtic Warfare.indd 186

12/09/2022 21:03

Notes 187  37. D. W. Harding, The archaeology of Celtic art, 2007, p.110. See also: B. Cunliffe, Iron Age communities in Britain: an account of England, Scotland and Wales from the Seventh Century BC until the Roman Conquest, 1974, p. 557.  38. I.M. Stead, Chalk Figurines of the Parisi, in The Antiquaries Journal, vol. 68, no1, 1988, pp. 9–29.   39. R. and V. Megaw, Early Celtic Art in Britain and Ireland, 1986, p. 26.  40. I. Lebedynsky, De l’épée scythe au sabre mongol : Les armes blanches des nomades de la steppe : IXe siècle av. J.-C.-XIXe siècle apr. J.-C., 2008. pp. 80–89.  41. The defixio refers to a small tablet with a curse written on it from the Greco-Roman world. The tablets were used to ask the gods, place spirits, or the deceased to perform an action on a person or object, or otherwise compel the subject of the curse. This category is exemplarily represented by the so-called curse tablets (Gk. κατάδεσμος, Lat. defixio), thin lead sheets inscribed with maledictions intended to influence the actions or welfare of persons (or animals). If a motive is mentioned it is generally inspired by feelings of envy and competition, especially in the fields of sports and the (amphi)theatre, litigation, love, and commerce. Almost without exception these texts are anonymous and lack argumentation or references to deserved punishment of the cursed person (s). If gods are invoked they belong to the sphere of death, the Underworld, and witchcraft (*Demeter, *Persephone, *Gaia, *Hermes, *Erinyes, *Hecate). Oxford Classical Dictionary.  42. M.J. Aldhouse-Green, An archaeology of images: iconology and cosmology in Iron Age and Roman Europe, 2004, pp. 106–107.  43. D. W. Harding, The archaeology of Celtic art, 2007, p. 107.  44. E.M Jope, Daggers of the Early Iron Age in Britain 2000.  45. See the Lebor Gabala, Tàin Bò Cuailnge.  46. B. Cunliffe, Iron Age communities in Britain: an account of England, Scotland and Wales from the Seventh Century BC until the Roman Conquest, 1974, p. 534.  47. See Tàin Bò Cuailnge. J. K. Anderson, Homeric, British and Cyrenaic Chariots, in American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 69, N° 4, 1965, pp. 349–352.  48. Pomponius Mela, De situ orbis libri III, III, 52.  49. Jordanes, De origine actibusque Getarum, II, 14.  50. J. Yates, E’sseda or E’ssedum, in A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, 1875, p.476.  51. A. H. Pitt Rivers, Excavations on Cranborne Chase, vol. III, 1893–96, p. 109.  52. D. Greene, The Chariot as described in Irish Literature, in The Iron Age in the Irish Sea province: research report 9, 1972, p. 59.  53. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, IV, 24.  54. Cassius Dio, History of Rome, LXII, 12.  55. Tacitus, Agricola, 12.  56. Tacitus, Annales, XIV, 34.  57. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, IV, 33.  58. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 15.  59. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 19.  60. Cassius Dio, History of Rome, LXII, 12.  61. Tacitus, Agricola, 36.  62. See paragraph 3.1.8.  63. C. M. Bradley, The British War Chariot: A Case for Indirect Warfare, in The Journal of Military History, vol. 73, n° 4, 2009, pp. 1073–1089.  64. Tacitus, Agricola, 12.

Celtic Warfare.indd 187

12/09/2022 21:03

188  Celtic Warfare  65. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, IV, 26, 3; IV, 32, 3. See also Tacitus, Agricola, 36.  66. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 16, 4.  67. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, IV, 32; V, 15, 1–3; V, 17, 1–2.  68. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, IV, 34, 1.  69. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 15, 4.  70. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 16, 1–3.  71. V. D. Hanson The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece, 1989, pp. 35–39.  72. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 17.  73. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 17, 1.  74. Tacitus, Agricola, 12.  75. Tacitus, Agricola, 36.  76. Tacitus, Agricola, 36.  77. Tacitus, Agricola, 37.  78. F. Butti Ronchetti, Mobilità nelle Alpi centrali tra seconda età del Ferro e Romanità, in P. Barral, J.-P. Guillaumet, M.-J. Roulière-Lambert, M. Saracino, D. Vitali, Les Celtes et le Nord de l’Italie. Premier et Second Âges du Fer , Atti XXXVI coll. AFEAF, Verona, maggio 2012, RAE Suppl. 36, 2014, pp. 654–655; P. Piana Agostinetti, Elementi per lo studio del vestiario, dell’armamento e degli oggetti d’ornamento nelle necropoli di Ornavasso, in Popoli e facies culturali a nord e a sud delle Alpi dal V al I secolo a.C., 1983, pp. 111–138.  79. Horace, Carmina, IV, 15–20.  80. F. Roncoroni, I coltelli tipo Introbio e Lovere: inquadramento crono-tiplogico e stato degli studi, in Bulletin d’etudes prehistoriques ed archeologiques alpines XXII, 2011, pp. 215–230.  81. L .  Pernet,  E.  Carlevaro,  L.  Tori,  P.  Della Casa,  B.  Schmid-Sikimic,  G.  Vietti, La necropoli di Giubiasco, Vol. II, Les tombes de La Tène finale et d’époque romaine, in Collectio Archaeologica, n°4, 2006.  82. M. Egg, Italische helme, Studien zu den ältereisenzeitlichen Helmen Italiens und der Alpen, in Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Monographien, n° 11, 1986, pp. 23–164.  83. L . Pernet, L’armement républicain des nécropoles de Giubiasco et d’Ornavasso. Des tombes d’auxiliaires dans les vallées alpines, 2008, p. 15.  84. J.L. Brunaux and B. Lambodt, Guerre et armament chez les Gaulois, 1987, p. 185.  85. R. C. De Marinis, La civiltà di Golasecca: I più antichi Celti d’Italia, 2007, pp. 118–123.  86. U. Sansoni, I Celti e le Alpi: l’impronta celtica nell’arte della Valcamonica, in Centro Camuno di Studi Preistorici, Quaderni della Biblioteca, March 2001.  87. T. Markey, A Tale of Two Helmets: The Negau A and B Inscriptions, in Journal of Indo-Europeam Studies 29, 2001, pp. 69–172.  88. T. Bochnak, Die ostalpine Axt aus Grab 20 des Gräberfeldes der Przeworsk-Kultur in Ciecierzyn, Gde. Byczyna, in Acta Archaeologica Carpathica XXXVIII, 2003, pp. 71–86.  89. L . Pernet, Armement et auxiliaires gaulois (IIe et Ier siècles avant notre ère), 2010, p.104 and pp.143–148. Chapter 6    1. F. Burillo Mozota, Celtiberians: problems and debates, in The Celts in the Iberian Peninsula, in E-Keltoi, vol. 6, 2004, pp. 411–480.

Celtic Warfare.indd 188

12/09/2022 21:03

Notes 189    2. Strabo, Geography, III, 2, 3.    3. Appian, Roman History, VI, 42–45; VI, 76–98.    4. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 33.    5. Strabo, Geography, III, 4, 5.    6. Pliny, Natural History, III, 13; Strabo, Geography, II, 2.    7. Strabo, Geography, III, 3, 5.    8. Pomponius Mela, De Chorographia, III, 9; Lucan, Pharsalia, IV, 8–10.    9. Strabo, Geography, III, 2, 11.  10. J.L. Maya Gonzàles, Celti e Iberi,1998, p. 24  11. M. Lenerz de Wilde, Los celtas en Celtiberia, in Zephyrus, n. 53–45, 2000–2001, pp. 346–351.  12. M. Almagro-Gorbea, Los Celtas en la Península Ibérica, in Celtas y Vettones, 2001, pp.102–110.  13. J.L. Maya Gonzàles, Celti e Iberi, 1998, p. 27.  14. F. Villar e R. Pedrero, La nueva inscripción lusitana: Arroyo de la Luz III, in Religión, lengua y cultura prerromanas de Hispania, 2001, pp.663–698.  15. S. Lambrino, Les Lusitaniens, in Euphrosyne, Revista de Filologia Clàssica, 1957, pp. 117–145.  16. Pliny, Naturalis Historia, III, 13.  17. Strabo, Geography, IV, 4, 5.  18. Strabo, Geography, III, 3, 6.  19. Strabo, Geography, III, 1, 6.  20. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 34.  21. Livy, Ab Urbe condita Libri, XXI, 57.  22. V. Blazek, Lusitanian Language, in Studia minora facultatis philosophicae universitatis Brunensis, vol. 11. 2006, p. 15.  23. M. Almagro-Gorbea e A. J. Lorrio, War and Society in the Celtiberian World, in The Celts in the Iberian Peninsula, in E-Keltoi, vol. 6, 2004, pp.86–90.  24. M. Almagro-Gorbea e A. J. Lorrio, War and Society in the Celtiberian World, in The Celts in the Iberian Peninsula, in E-Keltoi, vol. 6, 2004, p. 101.  25. Cicero, Tusculanae Disputationes, II, 65.  26. M. Almagro-Gorbea e A. J. Lorrio, War and Society in the Celtiberian World, in The Celts in the Iberian Peninsula, in E-Keltoi, vol. 6, 2004, pp. 90–92.  27. P. Ciprès Guerra y Sociedad en la Hispania Indoeuropea, in Anejos de Veleia, n. 18, 1993. p.91, ma anche G. Sopeña, Dioses, Etica y Ritos: Aproximaciones para una comprensión de la religiosidad entre los pueblos celtibéricos, 1987, pp.83–87e ancora G. Sopeña, Etica y ritual: Aproximación al estudio de la religiosidad de los pueblos celtibéricos, 1995, pp. 78–79.  28. Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta Memorabilia, II, 6, 14.  29. Appian, Iberica, 53; Polybius, Histories, XXXV, 5; Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta Memorabilia, III, 2, 21.  30. Appian, Bellum Civile, I, 4, 50.  31. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 34.  32. Small, semi-independent warrior bands in Irish mythology. See N. Patterson, Cattle Lords and Clansmen: The Social Structure of Early Ireland, University of Notre Dame Press, 1994, p. 122–123.  33. Livy, Ab Urbe condita Libri, XXXIV 17–19.  34. A. J. Lorrio Alvarado, Los Celtiberos, 1997, V, II.  35. M. Lenerz de Wilde, Los celtas en Celtiberia, in Zephyrus, n. 53–45, 2000–2001, pp. 350–351.

Celtic Warfare.indd 189

12/09/2022 21:03

190  Celtic Warfare  36. A. J. Lorrio Alvarado, Los Celtiberos, 1997, V, II.  37. M. Barril Vincente, Cascos hallados en nécropolis celtibéricas conservados en el museo arqueològico nacional de Madrid, in Gladius, n° XXIII, 2003, pp. 8–23.  38. M. Barril Vincente, Cascos hallados en nécropolis celtibéricas conservados en el museo arqueològico nacional de Madrid, in Gladius, n° XXIII, 2003, pp. 49–52  39. Herodotus, Histories, VII, 165.  40. R . Graells, A. J. Lorrio, F. Quesada, Cascos hispano-calcídicos. Símbolo de las élites guerreras celtibéricas, 2014.  41. F. Quesada Sanz. El armamento ibérico. Estudio tipológico, geográfico, funcional, social y simbólico de las armas en la Cultura Ibérica (siglos VI-I a.C.), 1997, pp. 554–563.  42. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 33.  43. Strabo, Geography, III, 3, 6.  44. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 34.  45. Greek word for ‘heart-protection’.  46. A. J. Lorrio Alvarado, Los Celtiberos, 1997, V, II.  47. R . Graells i Fabregat, Discos Coraza de la Península Ibérica (s. VI-IV A.C.), in Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 59, 2012, pp. 95–119.  48. T. Janin, M. Py, Le ‘Guerrier de Lattes’: réflexion sur la signification d’une statue archaïque, in Gallia 65, 2008, pp. 1–6.  49. R. Graells I Fabregat, La influencia del mercenariado hispánico sobre el armamento de la Península Ibérica (s.VI-IV a.C.)., in R. Graells I Fabregat, D. Marzoli, Armas De La Hispania Prerromana: Actas Del Encuentro Armamento Y Arqueologia De La Guerra En La Peninsula Iberica Prerromana (s. V-I ac). Problemas, objectivos y estrategias, 2016, pp. 47–51.  50. F. Quesada Sanz. El armamento ibérico. Estudio tipológico, geográfico, funcional, social y simbólico de las armas en la Cultura Ibérica (siglos VI-I a.C.), 1997, pp. 572–576.  51. A. J. Lorrio Alvarado, Los Celtiberos, 1997, V, III.  52. Polybius, Histories, III, 114.  53. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 33.  54. Strabo, Geography, III, 3, 6.  55. A. J. Lorrio Alvarado, La guerra y el armamento celtibérico: Estado actual, in R. Graells I Fabregat, D. Marzoli, Armas De La Hispania Prerromana: Actas Del Encuentro Armamento Y Arqueologia De La Guerra En La Peninsula Iberica Prerromana (s. V-I ac). Problemas, objectivos y estrategias, 2016, pp. 255.  56. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library,V, 33.  57. Strabo, Geography, III, 3, 6; see also Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library ,V, 34.  58. Maurus Servius Honoratus, Commentarii in Vergilii Aeneidos libros, VII, 732.  59. Livy, Ab Urbe condita Libri, XXXIII, 4; XXXIII, 8. The peltasts represented a type of light infantrymen, originating in Thrace and Paeonia, and named after the kind of shield he carried. These fighters often served as skirmishers or light infantry in Classic and Hellenistic armies. They were equipped with a crescent-shaped wicker shield known as pelte as their main protection, hence their name.  60. See 1.1.4.  61.  Fernando Quesada Sanz. El armamento ibérico. Estudio tipológico, geográfico, funcional, social y simbólico de las armas en la Cultura Ibérica (siglos VI-I a.C.), 1997, pp. 538–540.  62. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 33.  63. F. Quesada Sanz, Military developments in the ‘Late Iberian’ Culture (c. 237–c. 195 bc): Mediterranean influences in the Far Wet via the Carthaginian Military, p. 227, in N. Sekunda, A. Noguera, Hellenistic Warfare I, 2003, pp. 223–227.

Celtic Warfare.indd 190

12/09/2022 21:03

Notes 191  64. Livy, Ab Urbe condita libri, XXVIII, 2.  65. Polybius, Histories, III, 114, 2; Livy, Ab Urbe condita libri, XXII, 46, 5.  66. A. J. Lorrio Alvarado, Problemas de cronologìa en la panoplia celtibérica, in La guerra en el mundo ibérico y celtibérico (ss VI-II a. de C.), in Collection de la Casa de Velàzquez, vol. 78, 2002, pp. 75–76.  67. M. Salinas de Frías, Conquista y romanización de Celtiberia, 1986, pp.126–127  68. Vegetius, Epitoma Rei Militaris, IV, 18.  69. Livy, Ab Urbe condita libri, XXI, 8.  70. F. Quesada Sanz. El armamento ibérico. Estudio tipológico, geográfico, funcional, social y simbólico de las armas en la Cultura Ibérica (siglos VI-I a.C.), 1997, p. 91.  71. F. Quesada Sanz. El armamento ibérico. Estudio tipológico, geográfico, funcional, social y simbólico de las armas en la Cultura Ibérica (siglos VI-I a.C.), 1997, pp. 61–82.  72. F. Quesada Sanz. El armamento ibérico. Estudio tipológico, geográfico, funcional, social y simbólico de las armas en la Cultura Ibérica (siglos VI-I a.C.), 1997, pp. 243–270.  73. F. Quesada Sanz, Gladius Hispaniensis: an archaeological view from Iberia, in M. Feugère (ed.) L’Equipement Militaire et l’armement de la République, in Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, 8, 1997, pp.258–266.  74. Polybius, Histories, III, 114.  75. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library,V, 33.  76. M. Salinas de Frías, Conquista y romanización de Celtiberia, 1986, pp. 138–142.  77. Appian, Roman History, VII, 4, 20; Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 33.  78. F. Quesada Sanz. El armamento ibérico. Estudio tipológico, geográfico, funcional, social y simbólico de las armas en la Cultura Ibérica (siglos VI-I a.C.), 1997, pp. 292–294.  79. P. Connolly, Greece and Rome at War, 1988, p.131.  80. F. Quesada Sanz. El armamento ibérico. Estudio tipológico, geográfico, funcional, social y simbólico de las armas en la Cultura Ibérica (siglos VI-I a.C.), 1997, p. 300.  81. C.M. Mateos Leal, D. Sánchez Nicolás, El cuchillo afalcatado. Análisis tipológico y funcional de los cuchillos de los yacimientos abulenses durante la II Edad del Hierro, in F. J. González de la Fuente, E. Paniagua Vara, P. de Inés Sutil, Investigaciones Arqueológicas en el valle del Duero, del Paleolítico a la Antigüedad Tardía. Actas iii Jornadas de Jóvenes Investigadores del Valle del Duero, 2014, pp.144–148.  82. Silius Italicus, Punica, XVI, 47– 48.  83. Silius Italicus, Punica, XVI, 56 and 63.  84. F loro, Epitome of Roman History, II, 33, 56–58. See also: Cassius Dio, Roman History, LIII, 25, 8.  85. A. T. Hodge, The Labrys: Why Was the Double Axe Double? in American Journal of Archaeology, n° 82, 1985, p. 307.  86. B. S. Mason, Woodsmanship, 1954, p. 6.  87. Lucan, Pharsalia, VI, 259.  88. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 33; Appian, De rebus Hispaniensibus, 76.  89. Appian, De rebus Hispaniensibus, 77.  90. Appian, De rebus Hispaniensibus, 77.  91. Appian, De rebus Hispaniensibus, 45; 78; 88–90.  92. Appian, De rebus Hispaniensibus, 90.  93. Livy, Ab Urbe condita libri, XXXIX, 31.  94. Strabo, Geography, III, 4, 15.  95. Appian, De rebus Hispaniensibus, 51.  96. M. Almagro-Gorbea and A. J. Lorrio, War and Society in the Celtiberian World, in The Celts in the Iberian Peninsula, in E-Keltoi, vol. 6, 2004, p. 96.  97. Livy, Ab Urbe condita libri, XXX, 8.

Celtic Warfare.indd 191

12/09/2022 21:03

192  Celtic Warfare  98. Livy, Ab Urbe condita libri, XXVII, 2.  99. Livy, Ab Urbe condita libri, XXI, 47; XXI, 54; XXII, 46. 100. Strabo, Geography, III, 4, 15. 101. Appian, De Bello Annibalico, 30. 102 Polybius, Histories, III, 115. 103. Diodorus Siculus, Historical Library, V, 33. 104. Polybius, Fragment 21. 105. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Civili, II, 40. 106. A rrian, Ars Tactica, 37–43. 107. Arrian, Ars Tactica, 40. Appendix    1. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, III, 21, 2.    2. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 42, 1–3.    3. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, II, 31, 1–2.    4. Livy, Ab Urbe condita libri, XXIII, 24, 7–10.    5. J. Markale, Les Grands Bardes Gallois, 1956, p.74.    6. V. Kruta, La Grande Storia dei Celti, 2000, p. 297.    7. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, II, 17, 4.    8. Tacitus, Annales, XII, 33.    9. Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, V, 18, 3.  10. Aulus Hirtius, Commmentarii de Bello Gallico, VIII, 15.  11. Polyaenus, Stratagemata, VII, 42.

Celtic Warfare.indd 192

12/09/2022 21:03

Bibliography Classical texts Appian, Roman History Arrian, Ars Tactica Athenaeus, Deipnosophistae, quoting Posidonius of Apamaea Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae, quoting Claudius Quadrigarius, Annales Cassius Dio, Roman History Julius Caesar, De Bello Civili Julius Caesar, De Bello Gallico Cicero, Tuscolanae Disputationes Claudianus, De Consulatu Stilichonis Diodorus Siculus, The Historical Library Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Roman Antiquities Herodian, Roman History Herodotus, Histories Sextus Pompeius Festus, De verborum Significazione Florus, Epitome of Roman History Gildas, De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae Aulus Hirtius, De Bello Gallico, VIII Honoratus, Commentarii in Vergilii Aeneidos Libros Horace, Carmina Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae Jordanes, Bellum Gothicum Julius Pollux, Onomastikon Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Lucan, Pharsalia Lucian of Samosata, Zeuxis Maurus Servius Honoratus, In tria Virgilii Opera Expositio Nonius Marcellus, De Compendiosa Doctrina Ovid, Metamorphoses Paul the Deacon, Excerpta ex Libris Pompeii Festi de Significatione Verborum Pausanias, Description of Greece Philo of Byzantium, Belopoeica Plautus, Casina Plautus, Epidicus Pliny the Elder, Naturalis Historia

Celtic Warfare.indd 193

12/09/2022 21:03

194  Celtic Warfare Plutarch, Parallel Lives, Polybius, Histories Poliaenus, Strategemata Pomponius Mela, De Chorographia Propertius, Elegiae Pseudo-Aristotle, De Mirabilibus Auscultationibus Servius Honoratus, In Tria Virgilii Opera Expositio Silius Italicus, Punica Strabo, Geography Tacitus, Agricola Tacitus, Annales Tacitus, Germania Pompeius Trogus, Historiae Philippicae Valerius Maximus, Facta et Dicta Memorabilia Varro, De Lingua Latina Vegetius, Epitoma Rei Militaris Vergil, Aeneid Xenophon, Hellenica Irish Mythology Lebor Gabala Tàin Bò Cuailnge Togail Bruidne Dá Derga Norse Sagas Eybryggja Saga Eyvindr Finnsson Skáldaspillir, Hákonarmál Snorri Sturlusson, Heimskringla Saga, Ynglinga Saga, Egill Saga Skallagrímsson Modern Studies Aldhouse-Green, M.J., An Archaeology of Images: Iconology and Cosmology in Iron Age and Roman Europe, 2004 Alfieri, N., Le Marche e la fine del mondo antico, in Atti Mem. Deputazione Storia Patria delle Marche, 86, 1983 Almagro Basch, M., Ligures en España, Rivista di Studi Liguri 15.3–4, lugliodicembre 1949, pp. 195–208 Almagro-Gorbea, M., Los Celtas en la Península Ibérica, in Celtas y Vettones, 2001, pp 95–113 Almagro-Gorbea, M. and Lorrio, A. J., War and Society in the Celtiberian World, in The Celts in the Iberian Peninsula, in E-Keltoi, vol. 6, 2004 Ancien, A.M., Le casque gaulois de Variscourt in Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, Vol. 78, n° 2, 1981, pp. 60–64 Anderson, J.K., Homeric, British and Cyrenaic Chariots, in American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 69, n° 4, Oct., 1965, pp. 349–352

Celtic Warfare.indd 194

12/09/2022 21:03

Bibliography 195 Andreassi, G., Note sull’ipogeo Varrese di Canosa, Archivio Soprintendenza Pugliese, 25, 1972, pp. 233–259 Andreassi, G., L’ipogeo Varrese, in R. Cassano (editor), Principi imperatori vescovi. Duemila anni di storia a Canosa, 1992, pp. 238–240 Barril Vincente, M., Cascos hallados en nécropolis celtibéricas conservados en el museo arqueològico nacional de Madrid, in Gladius, n° XXIII, 2003, pp 5–60 Barruol, G., La statue du guerrier de Vachères (Alpes-de-Haute-Provence), in Revue archéologique de Narbonnaise Année 29, 1996, pp. 1–12 Beamish, M., The Enderby Shield. A Unique 2,300-year-old Bark Shield Found near Enderby in Leicestershire, 2019. Retrieved 23 May 2019 from https:// le.ac.uk/news/2019/may/23-enderby-iron-age-bark-shield Benassai, R., La pittura dei Campani e dei Sanniti, 2001 Bettalli, M., Guerre tra polemologi. Dodici anni di studi sulla guerra nel mondo greco antico 1998–2009, ‘Quaderni di storia’, LXXIII, 2011, pp. 159–231 Bienkowski, P., Les Celtes dans les arts mineurs gréco-romains avec des recherches iconographiques sur quelques autres peuples barbares, 1928 Bishop, M.C., Aketon, Thoracomachus, and Lorica Segmentata, in Exercitus: the Bulletin of the Ermine Street Guard vol. 3, n° 1, 1995, pp. 1–3 Blazek, V., Lusitanian Language, in Studia minora facultatis philosophicae universitatis Brunensis, vol. 11, 2006, pp. 5–17 Bochnak, T., Die ostalpine Axt aus Grab 20 des Gräberfeldes der Przeworsk-Kultur in Ciecierzyn, Gde. Byczyna, in Acta Archaeologica Carpathica XXXVIII, 2003, pp. 71–90 Bordes, L., Lefort, A. Blondel, F., and Meine, T., Etude et expérimentations autour de la découverte d’un bâton de jet gaulois sur le sited’Urville-Nacqueville (Manche), 2015 Bouloumié, B., Les cistes à cordons trouvées en Gaule (Belgique, France, Suisse), in Gallia, vol. 34, n° 34–1, 1976, pp. 1–30 Braccesi, L., Terra di confine. Archeologia e storia tra Marche, Romagna e San Marino, 2007 Bradley, C.M., The British War Chariot: A Case for Indirect Warfare, in The Journal of Military History, vol. 73, n° 4, 2009, pp. 1073–1089 Brunaux, J.L. and Lambodt, B., Guerre et armement chez les Gaulois, 1987 Buchsenschutz, O., Gruel, K. and Lejars, T., 2012. The Golden Age of the Celtic Aristocracy in the Fourth and Third Centuries bc, Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales, vol 67, n°2, pp. 185–215 Buchwald, V.F., Iron and Steel in AncientTtimes, 2005 Burillo Mozota, F., Celtiberians: Problems and Debates, in The Celts in the Iberian Peninsula, in E-Keltoi, vol. 6, 2004 Butti Ronchetti, F., Mobilità nelle Alpi centrali tra seconda età del Ferro e Romanità, in Barral, P., Guillaumet, J.-P., Roulière-Lambert, M.-J., Saracino, M., and Vitali, D. (editors), Les Celtes et le Nord de l’Italie. Premier et Second Âges du Fer , Atti XXXVI coll. AFEAF, Verona, maggio 2012, RAE Suppl. 36, 2014, pp. 653–658

Celtic Warfare.indd 195

12/09/2022 21:03

196  Celtic Warfare Capron, L., Florida’s ‘Wild’ Indians, the Seminole, in National Geographic Magazine, Vol CX, n°6, December, 1956, pp. 819–840 Carr, G., Woad, Tattooing and Identity in Later Iron Age and Early Roman Britain, in Oxford Journal of Archaeology, vol. 24, 2005, pp. 273–292 Della Fina, G.M. (editor), La colonizzazione etrusca in Italia, Atti del XV Convegno Internazionale di Studi sulla Storia e l’Archeologia dell’Etruria, 2008, pp. 187–246 Cianfarani, V., Antiche civiltà d’Abruzzo, 1969 Ciprès, P. Guerra y Sociedad en la Hispania Indoeuropea, in Anejos de Veleia, n. 18, 1993 Cleere, H., Southern France: an Oxford Archaeological Guide, 2001 Coarelli, F., Un elmo con iscrizione latina arcaica al Museo di Cremona in L’Italie préromaine et la Rome républicaine. I. Mélanges offerts à Jacques Heurgon. Publications de l’École Française de Rome , n° 27 ,1976, pp. 157–159 Connolly, P., Greece and Rome at War, 1988 Connolly, P. and van Driel-Murray, C., The Roman Cavalry Saddle, in Britannia, vol. 22, 1991, pp. 33–50 Coulon, P., Note sur un casque gaulois trouvé dans une tombe à char, près Prunay (Marne), in Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, 1930, vol. 27, n°3, pp.183–184. Cowen, J.D., The Hallstatt Sword of Bronze : on the Continent and in Britain, in Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, vol. 33, 1967, pp. 377–454 Cunliffe, B., Iron Age Communities in Britain: an Account of England, Scotland and Wales from the Seventh Century bc until the Roman Conquest, 1974 D’Amato, R. and Salimbeti, A., Early Aegean Warrior 5000–1450 bc, 2013 Daubigney, A., Reconnaissance des formes de la dépendance gauloise, in Dialogues d’histoire ancienne, Vol. 5, n° 5, 1979, pp. 145–189 De Guio, A., Tomba ad incinerazione a Montebello Vicentino, 1977 Delamarre, X., Dictionnaire de la langue gauloise : Une approche linguistique du vieux-celtique continental, 2003 del Màr Gabaldòn Martìnez, M., Ponis, santuarios y guerriero: la dimensiòn ritual del caballo en el mundo galo, in Gladius, n° XXV, 2005, pp. 265–282 De Marinis, R.C., La civiltà di Golasecca: I più antichi Celti d’Italia, 2007 Demoule, J.P., Chapitre X – Les tombes à char de La Tène ancienne, in Chronologie et société dans les nécropoles celtiques de la culture Aisne-Marne du VIe au IIIe siècle avant notre ère, in Revue archéologique de Picardie, Numéro spécial 15, 1999 Dohrenwend, R.E., The sling. Forgotten Firepower of Antiquity, in Journal of Asian Martial Arts, vol. 11 n° 2, 2002 Duval, A., Les pointes de flèche d’Alésia au Musée des Antiquités Nationales, in Antiquités Nationales. St Germain-en-Laye, vol. 2, 1970, pp. 35–51 Egg, M., Italische helme, Studien zu den ältereisenzeitlichen Helmen Italiens und der Alpen, in Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Monographien, n° 11, 1986

Celtic Warfare.indd 196

12/09/2022 21:03

Bibliography 197 Egg, M., Goedecker-Ciolek, R., Schönfelder, M., and Zeller, K.W., Ein eisenzeitlicher prunkschild vom Dürrnberg bei Hallein, land Salzburg, in Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums, n° 56, 2009, pp. 81–103 Esler, P.F., Galatians, 1998 Faiselli, A.C., I Mercenari di Cartagine, 2002 Farley, J., The Deposition of Miniature Weaponry in Iron Age Lincolnshire, Pallas, 2011, n° 86, The Gods of Small Things (2011), pp. 97–121 Farley, J., Parfitt, K., Richardson, A., Antoine, D., Pope, R., and SpareyGreen, C., A Late Iron Age Helmet Burial from Bridge, near Canterbury, Kent, in Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 80, 2014, pp. 379–388 Ferencz, I.V. and Vaida, L.D., Middle La Tène Arrowheads from Transylvania, in Berecki, S. (editor), Iron Age communities in the Carpathian Basin: Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş, 2010 Fleury-Alcaraz, K., Marseille: Les provencaux de l’age du fer, in Archeologia (Dijon) 351, 1998, pp. 36–41; Foster, J., The Lexden Tumulus. A re-appraisal of an Iron Age burial from Colchester, Essex, in BAR British Series, n° 156, 1986 Fourdrignier, E., Sur la découverte de deux casques gaulois à forme conique dans les sépultures de Cuperly et de Thuizy (Marne), in Bulletins de la Société d’anthropologie de Paris, III°, Tome 3, 1880 Freidin, N., The Early Iron Age in the Paris Basin. Hallstatt C and D., 1982 Frey, O.H., ‘A New Approach to Early Celtic Art.’ Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section C: Archaeology, Celtic Studies, History, Linguistics, Literature, vol. 104C, no. 5, 2004 Gendron, C., Gomez de Soto, J., Lejars, T., Pautreau, J.P., and Uran, L., Deux épées à sphères du Centre-Ouest de la France, in Aquitania, vol. 4, 1986 Giesler, J., Rekonstruktion eines Sattels aus dem frankischen Graeberfeld von WeselBislich, in Die Franken. Wegbereiter Europas, 1996 Gilmore, B.J., The Mail Shirt, in Niblett, The excavation of a ceremonial site at Folly Lane, Verulamium, 1999, pp., 808–811 Gorgues, A., Les casques Coolus-Mannheim de Vieille-Toulouse, remarques sur les transferts d’armament a l’epoque republicaine dans les provinces ocidentales, in Gladius n° XXV, 2005, pp. 83–94 Graells, R., Lorrio, A.J., and Quesada, F., Cascos hispano-calcídicos. Símbolo de las élites guerreras celtibéricas, 2014 Graells i Fabregat, R., Discos Coraza de la Península Ibérica (s. VI-IV A.C.), in Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 59, 2012 Graells i Fabregat, R., La influencia del mercenariado hispánico sobre el armamento de la Península Ibérica (s.VI-IV a.C.), in Graells, R. Fabregat, I and Marzoli, D. (editors), Armas De La Hispania Prerromana: Actas Del Encuentro Armamento Y Arqueologia De La Guerra En La Peninsula Iberica Prerromana (s. V-I ac). Problemas, objectivos y estrategias, 2016, pp. 37–77 Grassi, M.T., I Celti in Italia, 1991

Celtic Warfare.indd 197

12/09/2022 21:03

198  Celtic Warfare Greene, D., The Chariot as Described in Irish Literature, in The Iron Age in the Irish Sea Province: Research Report 9, 1972, pp. 59–73 Guidetti, M. (editor), Storia del Mediterraneo nell’antichità: 9.-1. secolo a.C, 2004 Haffner, A., Les tombes a char celtiques du Rhin moyenne in Revue archéologique de Picardie, Vol.1, 1983 Hansen, L., Die Panzerung der Kelten, 2003 Hanson, V.D., The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece, 1989 Harding, D.W., The archaeology of Celtic art, 2007 Hatt, J.J., Chronique de Protohistoire VI. Pour une nouvelle chronologie de l’époque hallstattienne. Les trois phases du Premier Âge du Fer en Allemagne du Sud et en France de l’Est, in Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, vol. 59, n° 9–10, 1962, pp. 659–667 Hodge, A.T., The Labrys: Why Was the Double Axe Double? in American Journal of Archaeology, n° 82, 1985, pp. 307–308 Hubert, H., The Greatness and the Decline of the Celts, 1938 Inall, Y., In Search of the Spear People: Spearheads in Context in Iron Age Eastern Yorkshire and Beyond, 2015 Inall, Y., New Light on Iron Age Warfare in Britain, in P. Halkon (editor), The Arras Culture of Eastern Yorkshire. Celebrating the Iron Age: Proceedings of ‘Arras 200 – Celebrating the Iron Age.’, 2020, pp.67–84 Janin, Th., Taffanel, O., Taffanel, J., Boisson, H., Chardenon, N., Gardeisen, A., Hérubel, F., Marchand, G., Montécinos, A. and Rouquet, J., La nécropole protohistorique du Grand Bassin  II à Mailhac, Aude (VIe-Ve  s. av. n.  è.), in Documents d’archéologie méridionale 25, 2002, pp. 65–122 Janin, T. and Py, M., Le ‘Guerrier de Lattes’: réflexion sur la signification d’une statue archaïque, in Gallia 65, 2008, pp. 65–70 Jope, E.M., Daggers of the Early Iron Age in Britain, 2000 Krämer, W., Ein Knollenknaufschwert aus dem Chiemsee, in Festschrift für Friedrich Wagner, 1962, pp. 109–124 Kruta, V., Moscati S., and Frey O.H., Les Celtes: catalogue de l’exposition, Venise, Palazzo Grassi, 1991. Kruta, V., La grande storia dei Celti, 2000 Lambot, B. and Ménie, P., La tombe à char d’Evergnicourt (Aisne) ‘ le tournant du chêne’, in Revue Archeologicque de Picardie, n° spécial 22, 2005, pp. 327–354 Lambert, P.Y., Gaulois Solitumaros. in: Etudes Celtiques, vol. 36, 2008, pp.89– 101 Lambrino, S., Les Lusitaniens, in Euphrosyne, Revista de Filologia Clàssica, 1957, pp. 117–145 Lang, J., Study of the Metallography of Some Roman Swords, in Britannia 19, 1998, pp. 199–216 Lebedynsky, I., De l’épée scythe au sabre mongol : Les armes blanches des nomades de la steppe : IXe siècle av. J.-C.-XIXe siècle apr. J.-C., 2008.

Celtic Warfare.indd 198

12/09/2022 21:03

Bibliography 199 Lejars, T. Les armes des sanctuaires poitevins d’époque préromaine de Faye-l’Abbesse (Deux-Sèvres) et de Nalliers (Vendée), in Gallia, vol. 46, n° 46, 1989, pp. 1–41 Lejars, T., L’armement des Celtes en Gaule du Nord à la fin de l’époque gauloise, in Revue archéologique de Picardie, Vol. 3, n° 3–4, 1996, pp. 79–103 Lenerz de Wilde, M., Los celtas en Celtiberia, in Zephyrus, n° 53–54, 2000–2001, pp. 323–351 Lontcho, F., A l’origine de l’art celte, in L’Archeologue – Arch. Nouvelle 46, 2000, pp. 4–8 Lorrio Alvarado, A.J., Los Celtiberos, 1997 Lorrio Alvarado, A.J., Problemas de cronologìa en la panoplia celtibérica, in La guerra en el mundo ibérico y celtibérico (ss VI-II a. de C.), in Collection de la Casa de Velàzquez, vol. 78, 2002, pp. 65–86 Lorrio Alvarado, A.J., La guerra y el armamento celtibérico: Estado actual, in R. Graells I Fabregat and D. Marzoli, Armas De La Hispania Prerromana: Actas Del Encuentro Armamento Y Arqueologia De La Guerra En La Peninsula Iberica Prerromana (s. V-I ac). Problemas, objectivos y estrategias, 2016, pp. 229–272 Maniquet, C., Le sanctuaire antique des Arènes de Tintignac, 2004 Maniquet, C., Le dépôt cultuel du sanctuaire gaulois de Tintignac à Naves (Corrèze), in Gallia, tome 65, 2008, pp. 273–326 Maniquet, C., Les Casques du dépôt de Tintignac, in Feugère, M., Casques antiques. Les visages de la guerre, de Mycènes à la fin de l’Empire romain, 2011, pp. 59–67 Markale, J., Les Grands Bardes Gallois, 1956 Markey, T., A Tale of Two Helmets: The Negau A and B Inscriptions, in Journal of Indo-Europeam Studies 29, 2001, pp. 69–172 Martinelli, M., La lancia, la spada, il cavallo. Il fenomeno guerra nell’Etruria e nell’Italia Centrale tra età del bronzo ed età del ferro, in Toscana Beni Culturali, vol. 7, 2004 Mason, B.S., Woodsmanship, 1954 Mateos Leal, C.M. and Sánchez Nicolás, D., El cuchillo afalcatado. Análisis tipológico y funcional de los cuchillos de los yacimientos abulenses durante la II Edad del Hierro, in González de la Fuente, F.J., Paniagua Vara, E., and de Inés Sutil, P. (editors), Investigaciones Arqueológicas en el valle del Duero, del Paleolítico a la Antigüedad Tardía. Actas iii Jornadas de Jóvenes Investigadores del Valle del Duero, 2014 pp. 135–150 Maya Gonzàles, J.L., Celti e Iberi, 1998 McEwen, E., Bergman, C.A., Miller, R.L., Early Bow Design and Construction, in Scientific American, June, 1991, pp. 76–83 McLintock, A.H., An Encyclopaedia of New Zealand, 1966 Megaw, J.V.S., Art of the European Iron Age: a Study of the Elusive Image, 1970 Megaw, R. and V., Early Celtic Art in Britain and Ireland, 1986 Millotte, J.P., Le Jura et les Plaines de Saône aux âges des métaux, 1963 Muller, F., Fragment eines keltischen Kettenpanzers von Tiefenau bei Berne, in Archaelogie der Schweiz, vol. 9, n° 3, 1986, pp. 116–123 Napolitano Valditara, L.M., Platone e le ‘ragioni’ dell’immagine, 2007

Celtic Warfare.indd 199

12/09/2022 21:03

200  Celtic Warfare Nefiodkin, A.K., On the Origin of the Scythed Chariots, in Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, vol. 53, 2004, pp. 369–378 Nicosia, E., Sacco, D., and Tondo, M., Die Schwert von San Vittore del Lazio, Provinz Frosinone, in Waffen für die Götter: Krieger. Trophäen. Heiligtümer, 2012, pp. 71–73 Nielsen, B., On Latin instruments-noun in */-lo-/, in Indo-European Word Formation, Copenhagen Studies in Indo-European, vol. 2, 2004, pp. 189–213 Oakeshott, E., The Archaeology of Weapons, Oliver, A., The reconstruction of two Apulian tomb groups, in Antike Kunst, 5, 1968 O’Kelly, M.J., Early Ireland: an Introduction to Irish Prehistory, 1989 O’Rìordàin, A.B.A., Prendergast, E.M., and Rynne, Etienne, National Museum of Ireland: Archaeological Acquisitions in the Year 1960, in Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, 1960, pp. 193–173 Parfitt, K., Iron Age Burials from Mill Hill, 1995 Patterson, N., Cattle Lords and Clansmen: The Social Structure of Early Ireland, University of Notre Dame Press, 1994 Paysan, M., Singuläre keltische Schwerter aus den Kantonen Bern und St. Gallen, in Helvetia archaeologica, vol. 38, n° 149–150, 2007, pp. 13–29 Pernet, L.,  Carlevaro, E.,  Tori, L.,  Della Casa, P.,  Schmid-Sikimic, B.,  and Vietti, G., La necropoli di Giubiasco, Vol. II, Les tombes de La Tène finale et d’époque romaine, in Collectio Archaeologica, n°4, 2006 Pernet, L., L’armement républicain des nécropoles de Giubiasco et d’Ornavasso. Des tombes d’auxiliaires dans les vallées alpines, 2008 Pernet, L., Armement et auxiliaires gaulois (IIe et Ier siècles avant notre ère), 2010 Piana Agostinetti, P., Elementi per lo studio del vestiario, dell’armamento e degli oggetti d’ornamento nelle necropoli di Ornavasso, in Popoli e facies culturali a nord e a sud delle Alpi dal V al I secolo a.C., 1983, pp. 11–138 Piggot, S., Swords and Scabbards of the British Early Iron Age, 1950 Pitt Rivers, A.H., Excavations on Cranborne Chase, vol. III, 1893–96 Pleiner, R., The Celtic Sword, 1993 Quesada Sanz, F., ‘Máchaira, kopís, falcata’ in Homenaje a Francisco Torrent, Madrid, 1994, pp. 75–94 Quesada Sanz, F., Gladius Hispaniensis: an archaeological view from Iberia, in Feugère M. (editor) L’Equipement Militaire et l’armement de la République, in Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, 8, 1997, pp. 251–270 Quesada Sanz, F., El armamento ibérico. Estudio tipológico, geográfico, funcional, social y simbólico de las armas en la Cultura Ibérica (siglos VI-I a.C.), 1997 Quesada Sanz, F., Military Developments in the ‘Late Iberian’ Culture (c. 237–c. 195 bc): Mediterranean Influences in the Far West via the Carthaginian Military, p. 227, in N. Sekunda and A. Noguera (editors), Hellenistic Warfare I, 2003, 207–257 Quesada Sanz, F., Armas de la antigua Iberia: de Tartesos a Numancia, 2010

Celtic Warfare.indd 200

12/09/2022 21:03

Bibliography 201 Raftery, B., La Tène in Ireland, in Marburg: Veroffentlichung des Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars, 1984 Ramsl, P.C., Das eisenzeitliche Gräberfeld von Pottenbrunn, Niederösterreich, 2002 Ramsl, P.C., La nécropole laténienne de Pottenbrunn (Basse-Autriche) comme miroir des relations Est-Ouest, 2003 Roncoroni, F., I coltelli tipo Introbio e Lovere: inquadramento crono-tiplogico e stato degli studi, in Bulletin d’etudes prehistoriques ed archeologiques alpines XXII, 2011, pp. 215–230 Rance, P., Drungus, Δροῦγγος and Δρουγγιστί –a Gallicism and Continuity in Roman Cavalry Tactics, in Phoenix 58.1–2, 2004, pp. 96–130 Rapin, A., L’armament due guerrier celte au 2e Age du Fer, L’art Celtique en Gaule, Collections des musèes de province, 1983–1984 Rapin, A., Bouclier et lances, in Gournay II, 1988 Rapin, A., L’Armamento, in I Celti, 1991, pp. 321–331 Rapin, A., Les Armes des Celtes – des messages enfouis sous la rouille, in Mélanges de l’École française de Rome., Antiquité, 1996, pp. 505–522 Rapin, A., L’armament celtique en Europe: cronologie de son evolution technologique du V au I S. AV. J.-C., in Gladius, n° XIX, 1999, pp. 33–67 Rapin, A., Epée à rognòn ou a sphére du Pont de l’Ouen a Haute-Goulaine (L.A.), in Nos Ancetres Les Gaulois aux marges de l’Armorique, 1999, pp. 115–116 Rapin, A., La statuaire de Roquepertuse, in Guillaumet, J.P. and Rapin, A. L’art des Gaulois du Midi, in Le temps des Gaulois en Provence, catalogue d’exposition du musée de Ziem de Martigues, 2000, pp. 81–83 Renoux, G., Dabosi, F., and Pailler, J.M., Les armes en fer d’Uxellodunum (Puy d’Issolud, Lot), dernière bataille de César en Gaule : étude paléométallurgique de pointes de flèche et trait de catapulte, in Revue d’Archéométrie n°28, 2004, pp. 141–152 Reich, G., Un bouclier de La Tène : de la découverte à l’utilisation, in De l’âge du Fer à l’usage du verre. Mélanges offerts à Gilbert Kaenel, (CAR 151), 2014, pp. 231–236 Riesch, H., Der ‘Bogen’ im Grab des Keltenfürsten vom Glauberg. Neue Vorschläge zur Deutung eines außergewöhnlichen archäologischen Fundes, in Karfunkel. Zeitschrift für erlebbare Geschichte, 55 (2004/2005), pp. 50–53 Rolley, C., Contacts rencontres et influences. Grande-Gréce et monde celtique, in La Magna Grecia e il lontano Occidente, 1990, pp. 357–377 Rosenberg, G., Hjortspring fundet, 1937 Russel Robinson, H., The Armour of Imperial Rome, 1975 Rustoiu, A., A Journey to Mediterranean. Peregrinations of a Celtic Warrior from Transylvania, in Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai, Historia 51, n° 1, 2006, pp. 42–85 Rusu, M., Das Keltische Fürstengrab von Ciumeşti in Rumänien, in Germania 50, 1969, pp. 267–298 Rynne, E., Iron Age sword hilts of Ireland and Scotland, 1960

Celtic Warfare.indd 201

12/09/2022 21:03

202  Celtic Warfare Salzani, L., La necropoli gallica e romana di S. Maria di Zevio (Verona), in Documenti di Archeologia, n° 9, 1996, Salzani, L., La necropoli gallica di Casalandri a Isola Rizza (Verona), in Documenti di Archeologia, n° 14, 1998 Salinas de Frías, M., Conquista y romanización de Celtiberia, 1986 Sansoni, U., I Celti e le Alpi: l’impronta celtica nell’arte della Valcamonica, in Centro Camuno di Studi Preistorici, Quaderni della Biblioteca, March 2001, pp. 30–37 Sassatelli, G., Celti ed Etruschi nell’Etruria Padana e nell’Italia settentrionale, in Ocnus 11, 2003, pp. 231–257 Schonfelder, M., Le mobilier métallique de la tombe à char tardo-celtique de Boé (Lot-et-Garonne), in Aquitania 17, 2000, pp. 59–81 Sear, D.R., The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators 49–27 bc, 1998 Shaaf, U., Studien zur keltischen Bewaffnung, in Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanische Zentralmuseum 33, 1986, pp. 622–625 Sopeña, G., Dioses, Etica y Ritos: Aproximaciones para una comprensión de la religiosidad entre los pueblos celtibéricos, 1987, pp.83–87 Sopeña, G., Etica y ritual: Aproximación al estudio de la religiosidad de los pueblos celtibéricos, 1995 Sordi, M., I Galli in Apulia, in Invigilata Lucernis 3–4, 1981–1982, pp. 5–12 Sordi, M., Dionigi e il Tirreno, in N. Bonacasa, L. Braccesi, E. De Miro (editor), La Sicilia dei due Dionisi, 1999, pp. 493–499  Sordi, M., Scritti di Storia Romana, 2002 Speidel, M.P., Berserks: a History of Indo-European ‘Mad Warriors’, in Journal of World History, vol. 13, n° 2, 2002, pp. 253–290 Spindler, K., Ein neues Knollenknaufschwert aus der Donau bei Regensburg, in Germania, n° 58, 1980, pp. 105–116 Stary, P.F., Foreign Elements in Etruscan Arms and Armour: 8th to 3rd century bc in Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, Vol. 45, 1979, pp. 179–206 Stary, P.F., Ursprung und Ausbreitung der eisenzeitlichen Ovalschilde mit Spindeförmigen Schild buckel, in Germania 59, 1981 Stead, I.M., Chalk Figurines of the Parisi, in The Antiquaries Journal, vol. 68, no 1, 1988, pp. 9–29 Stead, I.M., Many More Iron Age Shields from Britain, in The Antiquaries Journal, vol. 71, 1991, pp. 1–35 Stead, I.M., Iron Age Cemeteries in East Yorkshire, in English Heritage Archaeological Report, n°22, 1991 Taffanel, O., Les épées à sphères du Cayla à Mailhac (Aude), in Gallia, vol. 25, n° 25–1, 1967, pp. 1–10 Tagliamonte, G., I figli di Marte. Mobilità, mercenari e mercenariato italici in Magna Grecia e Sicilia, 1994 Tagliamonte, G., Spade di tipo lateniano in contesti sabellici, pp. 231–242, in Tagliamonte, G. (editor), Ricerche di archeologia medio-adriatica I, le necropoli:

Celtic Warfare.indd 202

12/09/2022 21:03

Bibliography 203 contesti e materiali. Atti dell’incontro di studio Cavallino-Lecce, 27–28 Maggio 2005 Tagliamonte, G. and Raccar, M., Materiali di tipo e di ascendenza lateniana nel medio e basso Adriatico italiano, in Archeologia di Frontiera, 6, 2007, pp. 211–202 Taylor, A., Weale, A., and Ford, S., Bronze Age, Iron Age and Roman Landscapes of the Coastal Plain, and a Late Iron Age Warrior Burial at North Bersted, Bognor Regis, West Sussex: Excavations 2007–2010, 2014 Thomas, C., The Interpretation of the Pictish Symbols, in The Archaeological Journal, n° 120, 1963, pp. 31–97 Tomczak, J., Roman military equipment in the 4th century  bc: pilum, scutum and the introduction of manipular tactics, in Acta Unversitatis Lodziensis, 29/2012, pp. 38–65 van Enckevort, H. and Willems, W.J.H., Roman Cavalry helmets in Ritual Hoards from the Kops Plateau at Nijmegen, The Netherlands, in Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, vol. 5, 1994, pp. 125–137 Vennemann, T., Europa Vasconica – Europa Semitica, 2003 Verger, S., Les tombes à char de la Tène ancienne en Champagne et les rites funéraires aristocratiques en Gaule de l’est au Ve siècle avant J. –C, 1994 Vernant, J.P., Figure, idoli, maschere, 2001 Villar, F. and Pedrero, R., La nueva inscripción lusitana: Arroyo de la Luz III, in Religión, lengua y cultura prerromanas de Hispania, 2001 Vincent, F., Sabis 57 av. J.-C. (L’hypothèse Thuin), 2015 Vitali, D., L’armamento dei Celti nel periodo della battaglia del Metauro, in M. Luni (editor), La Battaglia del Metauro tradizione e studi, 2002, pp. 103–134 Vitali, D., L’immagine tra mondo celtico e mondo etrusco-italico : aspetti della cultura figurativa nell’antichità, 2003 Vitali, D., I Celti in Italia,  Guerrieri, principi ed eroi fra il Danubio e il Po, 2004 Vitali, D., Un elmo di bronzo tra le carte d’archivio di Giovanni Gozzadini, in Studia Celtica Classica et Romana Nicolae Szabó septuagesimo dedicata, 2012, pp. 277–284 Warry, J.G., Warfare in the Classical World, 1995 Watson, W.J., Ancient Celtic Cavalry Terms, in The Celtic Review, vol. IV, 1907– 1908, pp. 383–384 Wehrberger, K. and Wieland, G., Ein weiteres Knollenknaufschwert und eine Aylesford-Pfanne aus der Donau bei Ulm, in Überlegungen zu Spätkeltischen und frührömischen Gewässerfunden von der Oberen Donau, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, vol. 29, n° 2, 1999, pp. 237–256 Yates, J., E’sseda or E’ssedum, in A  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, 1875 L’art Celtique en Gaule, Collections des musèes de province, 1983–1984

Celtic Warfare.indd 203

12/09/2022 21:03

Index Aemilianus, Scipio, 159 Aemilius, Lucius, 85 Agathocles, 31 Ager Gallicus, 51 Alban, district, battle, 30 hills, battle, 30 Albinus, Lucius Postumius, 163 Alésia, helmet, see Helmet, Agen Alexander, 55, 110 Allia, battle of, 29 Alpine Celts, 136–9 Alps, 28 Ambacti, 88, 112 Ambigatus, 2 Anio river, battle, 30 Ankyle, see Amentum Antiochus I, 78 Appian, 160, 162 Apulia, 30 Arch of Cottius, 91, 97, 99 Arch of Orange, 94–5, 99 Archers, 76, 114–15 Cretan, 114–15 Ruteni, 115 Syrian, 115 Armour, 6–10, 36–8, 60–4, 95–9, 145–7 gambeson, 9, 97–8 horn-skin, 123 humeralia, 6, 9–10, 60 kardiophylax, 145–7 leather, 7, 9–10, 36–7, 64 linen, 7, 9, 63–4, 147 mail, 60–3, 95–7, 147 pteryges, 9 quilted, 7, 9, 64, 97 spolas, 64 thorax, 38, 98–9 tube and yoke, 6–10, 63, 138, 147 Armour-disc, see Armour, kardiophylax Arrian, 116–18, 161 Arrows, 21, 45–6, 108–109 Asia, Central, 76 Minor, 78 Augustus, 95 Austria, Dürrnberg, 5, 10, 33–4 Hallstatt, 6, 9–10, 13, 25

Celtic Warfare.indd 204

Pottenbrunn, 46 Styria, 139 Tyrol, 136 Vienna, 146 Vorarlberg, 136 Autariatae, 165 Axe, Hellebardenaxt, 136–9 Double, 157–8 Balkans, 55, 66 Barcids, 151, 159–60 Belgae, 103, 111, 113, 115, 123, 163–4 Atrebati, 122 Atuatuci, 103, 126, 163 Bellovaci, 164–5 Nervii, 111–13, 115, 162, 164 Belgian, see Belgae Bellovesus, 2 Boss, see Shield, umbo Boudica, 133–4 Bow, 22, 76–7, 84, 109, 115 Bowmen, see Archers Brennus, 30 Britons, 119–36, 164 Caledonians, 128–9, 134, 136 Iceni, 133 Brixia, see Brescia Câd Goddeu, 164 Caesar, 88–9, 91, 94, 108–109, 111–16, 118, 120–2, 126, 133–6, 162–4 Calgacus, 134, 136 Camillus, Marcus Furius, 43, 48 Campanian, 77, 145–6 Campi Raudii, battle of, 110 Cannae, battle of, 147, 151, 159–60 Caratacus, 164 Carisius, Titus, 158 Carnyx, 79 Carpathian Basin, 76 Carthage, 31–2, 143, 146, 159 Carthaginians, 30–2, 145 Cassivellaunus, 121–2, 133, 164 Castreja Culture, 149, 158 Cataphracts, 117 Cateia, 84 Caterva, 79, 112

12/09/2022 21:03

Index 205 Cavalry, 25, 50, 74, 77, 84–6, 88–9, 92, 101, 106, 109–10, 113–18, 134–5, 158, 160–1 Cantabrian circle, 161 Hispanic, 86 Numidian, 86 Parthian, 117–18 Trimarcisia, 86 Celtiberians, 140–61 Astures, 140, 158 Berones, 140 Cantabrians, 157–8 Celtici, Bethurian, 140 Celtici, Galician, 140 Lusonians, 141 Nerii, 140 Numantines, 158–9 Oretani Germani, 147 Praestamarci, 140 Tamarici, 140 Vettones, 140 Cento, see Armor, quilted Chariot, 22–4, 46–7, 77–9, 122, 132–4 scythed, 78, 132–3 Cicero, Quintus, 162 Clastidium, battle of, 78, 82 Coactile, see Armor, quilted Commius, 122 Constantine, 8–9 Covinnus, 132 see also chariot Crassus, 117 Crassus, Publius, 162 Cù Chulainn, 26, 50, 69 Czech Republic, Závist, 95–6 Dacians, 107 Daggers, 20–1, 45, 74–5, 107–108, 131–2, 156–7 Anthropomorphic, 108, 132 Biglobular, 156–7 Kryss, 105 Pseudo-anthropomorphic, 75 Defixio, 131 Denmark, 11 Hjortspring, 11, 13 Diadochi, 110 Dio, Cassius, 123, 133–4 Diodorus Siculus, 25, 49, 58–60, 65–6, 68–9, 73, 76, 83, 95, 105, 140–1, 145, 147, 149, 151 Dionysius I, 30–1 Dionysius II, 31 Dionysius of Halicarnassus, 6, 16, 36, 38, 48, 72, 81–2 Drungus, 117 Elysicians, 31, 37, 145–6 England, Battersea 124–6 Bryher, 126 Canterbury, 123

Celtic Warfare.indd 205

Chertsey, 124–5 Danebury, 132 Enderby, 27, 126 Four Crosses, 128 Garton Slack, 130–1 Kelvedon, 128 Kirkburn, Yorkshire, 62 Maiden Castle, 132 Meyrick, 123–4 Minster Ditch, 131 North Bersted, 90–1, 102, 123, 128 Owslebury, 128 South Cave, 128 Thames, river, 124, 126, 164 Waterloo Bridge, 123–4 Witham, 124–5, 132 Epée à rognòn, see Sword, Knobbed-pommel Epée a sphere, see Sword, Knobbed-pommel Epomides, 6 Essedum, 132 see also chariot Etitovius, 2 Etruscan, 3, 10, 28–9, 30–2, 34, 36, 39, 42, 47, 58, 110, 146 Europe, Eastern, 52, 57, 76, 107 Western 42, 87, 102 Faencless, 26 Far East, 130 Fianna, 121, 143 France, 7, 10, 15, 20, 146 Auxerre, 98 Boé, 94 Bozouls-Aveyron, 75 Cayla à Mailhac, 20 Entremont, 63 Fox-Ampoux, 63 Glanum, 7, 9, 97 Grézan, 36 La Gorge-Meillet, 10 La Marne, 1 Languedoc, 146 Lattes, 146 Lyon, Gulf, 32, 145–6 Marseille, 146 Neuvy-en-Sullias, 97 Nimes, 7, 36 Roquepertuse, 7, 9, 97 St-Maur-en-Chausse, 98–9 Tintignac, 58 Vachères, 96 Gaelic, 24, 26, 123, 129, 132, 143 Galatians, 66, 78, 116, 132 Galician, 149 Gallic War, 94, 114 Gaul, Aquitaine, 162 Cisalpine 47, 51–2, 78, 81, 87, 111–12 Mediolanum, 51 Narbonensis, 78, 87

12/09/2022 21:03

206  Celtic Warfare Transalpine 47, 52, 88, 90, 102, 108, 121 Alesia, 108–109, 111 Gergovia, 108 Uxellodunum, 108–109 Gauls, 28–32, 39, 41, 111 Aedui, 116 Bituriges, 2 Boii, 34, 40, 63, 79, 81, 85, 97, 111, 163 Cenomanes, 51 Gaesatae, 65, 78, 80, 82–4, 113, 121 Insubres, 51, 83, 85, 97 Ruteni, 115 Senones, 36, 50, 56, 77, 85, 99 Sotiates, 162 Taurisci, 85 Gellius, Aulus, 29, 49 Germany, 10, 19 Bavaria, Glauberg, 6, 9, 11, 13, 22, 36, 77 Krefeld-Gelduba, 94 Westphalia, 27 Porz-Lind, 27 Germanic, 14, 80, 87, 102, 116, 128, 139 Batavian, 94 Cimbri, 95, 110, 139 Teutons, 139 Golasecca, Culture, 136 Great Expedition, 54, 57, 66 Greece, 53–4, 57, 66 Corinth, 21 Crete, 115 Sparta, 50 Spercheios, river, 66 Thebes, 31 Greek, 3, 7, 15, 29, 31–2, 37, 42, 47, 52–4, 99, 110, 146 Greeks, 11, 50, 53, 70 Syracusans, 30, 38 Gundestrup, Cauldron, 90, 95, 101, 113 Gwydion, 164 Hallstatt, Culture, 1, 3–4, 6, 10, 15, 17–18, 20–2, 99, 136, 138, 141, 143 scabbard, 9, 11, 13, 25 Hannibal, 86, 110, 141, 147, 151, 157, 159–61 Hellenistic, 66, 89, 92, 104, 110 Helmet, 4–6, 33–6, 56–60, 89, 123–4, 137, 144–5 Agen-Port, 92–5 Agen, 93, 95, 138 Novo Mesto, 93 Port, 93 Apulo-Corinthian, 144–5 apex, 4, 35, 57 Berru, 4–6, 33, 35 Bockweiler, 4–6 Boé, 94 Boeotian, 92 Celto-Italic, 33–6, 38, 56–7, 91, 138

Celtic Warfare.indd 206

cheek pieces, 33–6, 58–8, 92, 94, 145 Coolus-Mannheim, 59, 89, 94, 123–4 Cretan, 144 Hispano-Chalcidic, 144–5 Imperial Gallic, 93 leather, 91 Montefortino, 33–6, 56–58, 91, 145 Negau, 137–9 sinew, 145 Southitalic Chalcidic, 144 Waterloo Bridge, 123–4 Herodian, 123 Hillfort, 132 Himera, Battle of, 31 Hispanic, 86, 149, 151, 154, 160–1 Homer, 3, 24 Hoplite, 11, 25, 38, 53, 66, 149, 159 Iberians, 32, 37–8, 58, 116, 140–3, 146, 161 Illyrian, 165 Indo-European, 2, 83, 141 Ireland, 27, 120, 127, 129, 143 Ballykilmurry Bog, 27 Clonura, 127 Irish, epic cycles, 24–7, 75, 123, 126–7, 133 Italy, 28–32, 53, 139, 146 Ancona, 30 Brescia 51 Caere, 30 Campania, 30 Paestum, 146 Canosa di Puglia, 38, 42 Certosa, 39, 41 Clusium, 30, 85 Faesulae, 85 Iapygia, 30 Latium, 30–1 Lombardy, 51 Milan, 51 Piedmont, 51, 136 Susa, 91 Picene, 28 Po, river, 28 Rome, 29–31 Sack of, 29–30 Santa Maria di Filottrano, 36 Sicily, 32, 144, 146 Teano, 58 Trentino, 51 Tyrol, 136 Veneto, 51 Javelin, 15 Juba, 116, 161 Knives, 20–1, 45, 74–5, 84, 107–108, 114–16, 118, 137, 157 cuchillo afalcatado, 157 Introbio, 137 Lovere, 137 sica supina, 107

12/09/2022 21:03

Index 207 Knollenknaufschwert, see Sword, Knobbedpommel Larus, 157 La Tène, Culture, 1, 3, 15, 17–23, 44, 99, 120, 136, 139–41, 143–4, 154 Laurentum, battle, 30 Liechtenstein, Mount Gutenberg, 137–8 Light infantry, 83–5, 99, 109, 114–15 Euzonoi, 85, 114 Expedites, 114 Peltasts, 149 Ligurians, 28, 32, 37, 58, 91, 146 Livy, 29, 31, 49, 77, 79–80, 85, 141, 149, 151–2, 159 Longus, Tiberius Sempronius, 111 Lorica hamata, see Armour, mail Lucan, 158 Lucanian, 145–6 Lucian, 78 Lusitanians, 141–2, 145, 147, 149 Luxembourg, Titelberg, 96 Macedonia, 55 Macedonians, 16, 149 Magna Graecia, 99, 146 Mago, 151, 160 Marcellus, Claudius, 78 Mela, Pomponius, 132–3 Metalworking, 18, 72–3 Damascus steel, 71 folding, 71 pattern welding, 71, 105, 156 piling, 71 wrought iron, 72 Middle Ages, 76, 116 Middle East, 115, 130 Mons Graupius, battle of, 134, 136 Mycenean Culture, 1 Nasica, Scipio, 79 Neolithic, 76 Nonius, 16 Norse, 83 Numidia, 116 Ollius river, Battle of the, 72 Oppida, 87 Orgetorix, 2 Oscan, 58 Pausanias, 66, 85–6, 117 Pedum, battle of, 30 Petrinos, 117 Phalanx, hoplite, 53, 80, 110 Macedonian, 104 Philip (II), 110

Celtic Warfare.indd 207

Pictor, Fabius, 72, 81 Picts, 128 Plautus, 69–70 Pliny the Elder, 64, 97, 141 Plutarch, 43, 48, 72, 78, 82, 95, 110, 117–18 Poland, 101, 139 Ciecierzyn, 139 Pole weapons, 13–16, 41–3, 66–70, 103–105, 128, 151–2 butt-spikes, 15, 41, 66–7, 104 javelin, 15, 55, 66, 68–70, 84–5, 105, 128 amentum, 70, 152 falarica, 152 gaballacos, 15 gae bolga, 69 gaesum, 16, 43, 68, 78, 80, 82, 152 madaris, 68–9, 80, 105, 112–13, 151 pilum, 42–3, 47, 68, 80, 128, 152 solis, 70 tragula, 69–70, 84 pike, 103–104 bayonet, 103–104 biconvex, 104 sarissa, 16, 110 spear, 13–15, 41–2 framea, 14–15, 24, 41, 55, 66, 68, 84, 118, 128 lankia, 66 Polyaenus, 165 Polybius, 31, 48, 63–5, 72–3, 78, 80–5, 97, 114, 147, 151, 155, 159–60 Pompey, 115–16 Pontet, see Scabbard, suspension loop Porta Collina, battle of, 30 Posidonius, 21, 24, 108 Przeworsk Culture, 101, 139 Punic War, Second, 159–60 Pyrenees, 152 Rhetogenes Caraunius, 162 Riastradh, 50 Romania, 61 Ciumesti, 58, 61 Romans, 30–1, 39, 42–3, 48–9, 52, 58, 81, 83, 85, 93, 103, 110–11, 115–16, 121, 133, 140, 154, 157–8, 161–2, 164–5 Saddle, horned, 115–16 Sambre, Battle of the, 111, 113 Samnite, 34, 145 Scabbard, 44–5, 71, 73, 75, 106, 129–30, 138, 153–5, 129–31 suspension loop, 18–19, 129–31, 154 Scotland, 127 Scots, 128 Scutati, 151 Scythians, 1, 22, 76–7 Semi-anthropomorphic, see Dagger, pseudoanthropomorphic Sentinum, Battle of, 77, 81, 85, 111, 134

12/09/2022 21:03

208  Celtic Warfare Servius, 16 Shield, 10–13, 38–41, 64–6, 99–103, 110, 124–8, 148–51 aspis, 11, 45, 149 caetra, 149–51 spine, 13, 39–40, 64–5, 81, 99–101, 110, 125–6, 148 thyreos, 11, 150–1, 159 training, 126–7 umbo, 38–40, 64–6, 71, 81, 99–103, 127–8, 148–51 axe-shaped, 100 butterfly-shaped, 100, 102 hemispherical, 100, 128 Jahn 1, 102, 128 wicker, 126 wooden, 11–12, 101 127 wicker, 27, 103, 126, 149 Silanus, Marcus Junius, 151 Silva Litana, Battle of, 163–4 Sling, 60, 75–6, 84, 109, 115, 132 Slingers, 76 Balearic, 114 Slovakia, 61 Horny Jatov, 61 Slovenia, 10 Novo Mesto, 10, 93 Soldurii, 88, 113, 142 Soliferrum, see Pole weapons, Gaesum Spain, 140–1, 143, 146, 150, 152–3, 159, 160–1 Aguilar de Anguita, 144 Alpanseque, 144 Asturias, 158 Barros, 146 Bastida de Mogente, 144 Cantabria, 146, 158 El Cigarralejo, 154 Hispania Ulterior, 158 La Osera, 146, 155 Meseta, 141, 146 Numantia, 145 147, 149, 152, 158, 162 Quintanas de Gormaz, 154 Zaragoza, 154 Spina, see Shield, spine Standard, military, 79 Stolutegon, 117 Strabo, 68–9, 76, 84, 116, 140–1, 145, 147 Strap-slide, see Scabbard, suspension loop Suspension chain, 44–5, 73–44, 106

Celtic Warfare.indd 208

Switzerland, 19, 136 Giubiasco, 137–8 La Tène, 76 Tiefenau, 61 Sword, 17–20, 43–4, 48, 70–4, 105–106, 129–31, 152–6 antennae-hilt, 75, 152 espada de antenas atrofiadas, 152, 155 espada de frontón, 152 falcata, 153, 158 gladius 139 hispaniensis, 154–5, 157 Hatvan-Boldog, 71 knobbed-pommel, 19–20 kopis, 107, 153 wooden, 27 Syracuse, 30–1, 50 Tacitus, 122–3, 128–9, 133–4, 136, 164 Tàin Bò Cuailnge, 26–7 Telamon, Battle of, 48, 63, 65, 78, 80–2, 84–5, 114 Testudo, 81, 111 Thracians, 107 Timoleon, 32 Torquatus, Titus Manlius, 29, 49 Training weapons, 26–7 Tropaeum, 97 Turdetani, 143 Umbrians, 28, 36 Urnfield Culture, 3 Vachères, Warrior of, 96 Velites, 65, 69 Veneti, 28 Vercingetorix, 2, 114, 116 Ver Sacrum, 2, 121, 143 Virdomarus, 78 Watling Street, battle of, 134 Wedge, 111 Welsh, 117, 164 Westkeltischen, helmet, see Agen, helmet Wicklow, 27 Woad, 120–1 Xynema, 117

12/09/2022 21:03