Cantiaci (Celtic tribe)

Caligula’s Northern Campaign and the Aborted Invasion of Britain (40 CE)

The northern campaign of Emperor Caligula in 40 CE, intended as an invasion of Britain, was ultimately abandoned, leading to widespread mockery from ancient historians. Accounts describe his troops gathering seashells as "spoils of war", and his triumph in Rome featuring Gauls dressed as Germanic captives. However, modern historians dispute the nature and purpose of this expedition, offering alternative explanations.

Possible Explanations for Caligula’s Actions

Since primary sources differ, historians have put forward several theories:

1. A Training and Scouting Mission

   • The journey to the English Channel may have been a preliminary reconnaissance for a future invasion.
   • It is possible that Caligula intended to test logistics and troop movements before launching a full-scale campaign.

2. A Diplomatic Encounter: The Surrender of Adminius

   • Adminius (Amminus), son of Cunobelinus, the king of the Cantiaci in eastern Kent, had been exiled by his father around 39–40 CE.
   • He fled to continental Europe with a small group of followers and surrendered to the Romans.
   • Caligula may have exaggerated this event, claiming it as a great victory over Britain.
   • He even had an extravagant report read before the Senate, declaring a triumph over "foreign tribes."

3. Interpretations of the "Seashells" Incident

   • Suetonius and Dio Cassius mock Caligula for ordering his troops to collect seashells, supposedly as spoils of war.
   • Some modern historians suggest "seashells" (conchae in Latin) could be a metaphor for:
     • Boats, meaning that Caligula’s troops had captured British ships.
     • Female genitalia, implying the troops were visiting brothels.

4. A Potential Mutiny at Boulogne

   • Another theory is that Caligula’s troops refused to embark on the invasion, leading to a breakdown in the campaign.
   • Roman legions had previously shown reluctance to cross into unknown territories, and a mutiny could explain why the invasion was abandoned.

Adminius’ Exile and Its Political Consequences

• Cunobelinus, King of the Cantiaci, had maintained friendly relations with Rome, but by 40 CE, an anti-Roman faction may have emerged in Britain.
• His other sons, Togodumnus and Caratacus, might have forced Adminius out of power, consolidating an anti-Roman resistance.
• Alternatively, the Cantiaci could have revolted against Cunobelinus’ rule, prompting Adminius’ flight to the Romans.

The Failure of Caligula’s Expedition and Its Long-Term Effects

• Caligula’s refusal to return Adminius to his father contributed to growing anti-Roman sentiment in Britain.
• This eventually led to increased hostilities, necessitating the successful Roman invasion under Claudius in 43 CE.
• While Caligula’s ambitions in Britain failed, his actions planted the seed for later Roman intervention.

Conclusion: A Misunderstood Expedition?

• While ancient historians derided Caligula’s British campaign, modern scholars suggest it may not have been as absurd as depicted.
• His gathering of seashells and triumph in Rome were likely propaganda efforts to maintain prestige, masking the invasion’s failure.
• Ultimately, his expedition proved inconsequential, but it foreshadowed Rome’s inevitable conquest of Britain under Claudius.

Though remembered as an eccentric display of imperial delusion, Caligula’s campaign to Britain in 40 CE may have been a stepping stone for Rome’s eventual annexation of the island three years later.

Londinium, situated on a terrace near the north bank of the tidal River Thames, forty miles (sixty-four kilometers) from its estuary on the North Sea, is established as a town by the Romans after the invasion of CE 43 led by the Roman Emperor Claudius.

Archaeologists now believe that Londinium was founded by CE 50 as a civilian settlement or civitas.

A wooden drain by the side of the main Roman road excavated at No. 1 Poultry has been dated by dendrochronology to CE 47, which is likely to be the foundation date.

Before the arrival of the Roman legions, the area was almost certainly lightly rolling open countryside traversed by streams such as Walbrook.

Londinium is established at the point where the Thames is narrow enough to build a bridge, but deep enough to handle seagoing marine vessels.

Remains of a massive Roman pier base for a bridge will be found in 1981, close to the modern London Bridge.

It was traditionally thought that Londinium started as a civilian settlement, although there is also slight evidence that there was a Roman fortress.

However, archaeological excavation undertaken since the 1970s by the Department of Urban Archaeology of the Museum of London, now called MOLAS, has failed to unearth any convincing traces of military occupation on the site, so many archeologists now believe that Londinium was the product of private enterprise.

Its site on a busy river-crossing makes it a perfect place for traders from across the Roman Empire to set up business.

The name Londinium is thought to be pre-Roman (and possibly pre-Celtic) in origin, although there has been no consensus on what it means.

It is common practice for Romans to adopt native names for new settlements.

A common theory is that the name derives from a hypothetical Celtic placename, Londinion which may have been derived from the personal name Londinos, from the word lond, meaning 'wild'.

A theory proposed by Richard Coates, which does not have widespread acceptance, suggests that the name derives from a Celticized Old European river-name forming part of the oldest stratum of European toponymy, in the sense established by Hans Krahe; Coates suggested a derivation from a pre-Celtic Plowonida — from two roots, plew and nejd, possibly meaning "the flowing river" or "the wide flowing river".

Therefore, Londinium would mean "the settlement on the wide river".

He suggests that the river was called the Thames upriver where it was narrower, and Plowonida downriver, where it is too wide to ford.

Inscriptions and graffiti found by archaeologists confirm that Latin was the local language.

It has been implied by modern scholars that many of the local people spoke the Celtic language now termed Brythonic, called lingua Gallica (Gaulish) by the Romans; this language is ancestral to Welsh, Cornish and Breton.

The status of Londinium is uncertain.

It was not the capital of a civitas, though Ptolemy lists it as one of the cities of the Cantiaci.

Starting as a small fort guarding the northern end of the new bridge across the River Thames, it will grow to become an important port for trade between Britain and the Roman provinces on the continent.

The lack of private Roman villas (plentiful elsewhere) suggests military or even imperial ownership.