THE Itinerary of Antonine and the Table of Peutinger are often referred to in this Index. They were road-books, compiled under the Roman Empire, which stated the distances, reckoned in Gallic leagues, each of which was equivalent to one Roman mile and a half, from town to town. The edition of the Itinerary from which I shall quote is that of Wesseling; of the Table that of Desjardins. I shall also refer occasionally to O.Seeck's edition of the Notitia provinciarum.

It must be remembered that the Roman mile was shorter than the English mile. Its length, neglecting a small fraction, was 1,617 yards, so that 13 Roman miles were nearly equal to 12 English ones (C.G., p.350).

At the time when the Itinerary of Antonine was compiled most of the chief Gallic towns had two names, - the old Gallic name and the name of the tribe in whose territory the town was situated. In the Itinerary the old names were used, but it was from the others that the modern names were derived (C.G., p.407, n.3). Thus Paris, the old Gallic name of which was Lutecia, is derived from the tribal name, Parisii; Bourges is derived from Biturgies, but its old name was Avaricum; Amiens, the old name of which was Samarobriva, is derived from Ambiani. The great Gallic towns having been thus identified, it becomes easy to identify many of the lesser towns mentioned in the itineraries. For instance, a town called Brivodurum is mentioned in the Itinenary of Antonine (p.367), and its distance from Cenabum was 38 Gallic leagues. Cenabum, otherwise called Aureliani, is known to have been Orleans; and the distance identifies Brivodurum with Briare.

When the reader looks at the map he will see that the boundaries of most of the tribes are traced, and if, as I hope, he is determined to test, as far as he can, the truth of what I say, he will ask himself, How does Holmes know what the boundaries were? Well, I frankly admit that, except in a very few cases, where there is direct evidence, I do not know, - precisely: but I can give satisfactory reasons for believing that the frontiers which I have traced are approximately correct; and I thought that this amount of information would be better than none. When the provinces of Gaul were organized by Augustus, sixty tribal cantons, or civitates, were recognized; and, generally speaking, the boundaries of these civitates were the same as they had been in the time of Caesar. At a later time, when Christianity was adopted as the religion of the Gauls, the boundaries of the civitates generally became the boundaries of the episcopal dioceses, though here and there a large civitas comprised more than one diocese. The reader will understand that; these general rules were subject to exceptions: indeed he will see on the map that in some places boundaries are wanting. That means that there is not enough evidence to define them In this little book it would be out of place to discuss the exceptions; but that has been done in Caesar's Conquest of Gaul. However, one instance will show how difficulties arise. Caesar (vii, 75, §2) mentions the Aulerci Brannovices, who were dependents (clientes) of the Aedui, and of course possessed territory. This territory was afterwards included in one of the dioceses which were formed out of the territory of the Aedui; but we cannot find out how much of the diocese belonged to the Brannovices.

Agedincum, the chief town of the Senones, stood upon the site of Sens, which preserves their name, and which tourists pass on their way to Dijon (C.G., pp.353 - 4).

Alesia covered the plateau of Mont Auxois, on the southwestern slope of which stands the village of Alise-Saint-Reine, about 32 miles north-west of Dijon. Although seven other sites have been proposed, this identification is regarded as absolutely certain by all competent inquirers. I will state as briefly as I can the principal reasons upon which it is founded.

First, Mont Auxois is the only hill the geographical position of which agrees with what Caesar says about his own position on the day before he reached Alesia and with what he says about his distribution of the legions after the capture of Alesia (vii, 90 §§1 - 4). On the day before he reached Alesia he fought a battle with Vercingetorix (67); on the night before this battle, when he was marching `through the furthest part of the country of the Lingones towards the country of the Sequani, that he might be in a better position for reinforcing the Province', he encamped 10 Roman miles from the encampment of Vercingetorix (66, §§2 - 3). It follows that the encampment of Vercingetorix, close to which the battle was fought, was either in `the furthest part of the country of the Lingones' or in the country of the Sequani, less than 10 Roman miles from the Saone, which separated them from the Lingones. The beaten Gauls fled to Alesia. Caesar pursued them till nightfall and reached the outskirts of Alesia on the next day. It is therefore evident and is universally admitted that Alesia could not have been more than 35, or perhaps at the very outside 40 miles from the battle-field. South of the Saone the only conceivable site - the only site that has ever been suggested - answering to these conditions, is Alaise. North of the Saone the only conceivable site - the only site that has ever been suggested at all is Mont Auxois. Alesia had been provisioned by Vercingetorix in advance (see the second note on vii, 68, ). Therefore, supposing that Alesia was Alaise, he must not only have known several weeks beforehand that Caesar intended to march through the country of the Sequani, but must have left the all-important city of Bibracte exposed to Caesar's attack. At Mont Auxois, on the other hand, he would have been in a central position, from which he could strike at Caesar, whatever route Caesar might take. Furthermore, on the south of the Saone it is impossible to discover any satisfactory site for the battle that immediately preceded the blockade of Alesia. Again, after the fall of Alesia Caesar `directed Labienus to march ... into the country of the Sequani'. If Alesia was Mont Auxois, this order is intelligible: if Alesia was Alaise, Labienus received orders to go from the country of the Sequani into the country of the Sequani, and we are forced to suppose that the country of the Mamlubii, in which Alesia was situated, was part of the country of the Sequani! Secondly, Mont Auxois corresponds exactly with Caesar's description of Alesia: any one can see this for himself if he will study the plan which faces page 339, and better still if in his holidays he will take the train from the Gare de Lyon in Paris to the station of Les Laumes-Alesia and walk up to the top of Mont Auxois. Neither Alaise nor any other hill within two days' march from any point in the `furthest part of the country of the Lingones' corresponds in the least with Caesar's description. Thirdly, excavations which were made fifty years ago round Mont Auxois and others which have been made on Mont Auxois within the last few years have revealed (a) remains of a Gallic town, (b) traces of two lines of earthworks which correspond with Caesar's description (69, 72 - 4) of the works that he constructed during the blockade, (c) various weapons both Roman and Gallic, as well as numerous bones of men and of horses, (d) five barbed spikes such as Caesar describes under the name of stimuli (73, §9), (e) Gallic pottery, and (f) 619 coins, one of which bears the image and superscription of Vercingetorix. Of these coins 132 were Roman, 487 Gallic. None of the former are of a later date than 52 B.C., the year of the siege. The latter include specimens belonging to twenty-four tribes, - more than half of those that sent contingents to the army which attempted to relieve Vercingetorix (75, §§2 - 4); no less than 103 belonged to the Arverni, - the countrymen of Vercingetorix; and, like most of the bones, all the coins were found in the trenches of the camp on Mont Rea, which, assuming that Alesia was on Mont Auxois, must have been the scene of the final struggle (83, §2). Fourthly, a Gallic inscription, in which occurs the word ALI/SIA - the Gallic form of the name which Caesar called Alesia - has been discovered in Alise-Sainte-Reine. Lastly, in the territory which, assuming that Alesia was on Mont Auxois, belonged to the Mandubii (68, ), there has been found an inscription, now preserved in the museum of Dijon, containing the name Mandu-bilos, a spelling which agrees with the Mandiboulwn of Strabo, iv, 2, §3 (C.G., pp.354 - 63).

Allobroges. - The Allobroges, as we learn from i, 6, §2, were separated from the Helvetii by the Rhone; they possessed certain lands on its right bank between the Lake of Geneva and Lyons (11, §5); their territory was conterminous with the territories of the Vocontii, the Segusiavi, and the Nantuates (6, §3; 10, §5; iii, 1, ; 6, §5); and their chief towns were Geneva (i, 6, §3), Vienna, or Vienne (Ptolemy, Geogr, ii, 10, §7), and Cularo, or Grenoble (Cicero, Fam., x, 23, ). It is clear, then, that the greater part of their territory lay between the Rhone, the Isere, and the Lake of Geneva. The boundary which separated them on the southern bank of the lake from the Nantuates (iii, 1, §1) coincided, at least approximately, with the eastern boundary of the diocese of Geneva (C.G., pp.363 - 5).

Ambarri. - The name Ambarri is probably derived from Ambi-arari, which means `those who dwell on both banks of the Arar', or Saone; and any one who has carefully read Caesar's narrative (i, 10, §5 - 12, §2) will have seen that they dwelt between the Rhone and the Saone. Their neighbours on the south were the Segusiavi and the Allobroges; on the west and north the Aedui; and on the north-east and east the Sequani. Their territory, then, corresponded approximately with the department of the Ain (C.G., pp.365 - 6).

Ambiani. - The chief town of the Ambiani was Samarobriva (v, 24, ; 47, §2; 53, §3; La Table de Peutinger, p.14, col.2 - 3; p.15, col.3), which in the Itinerary of Antonine (pp.362, 380) is called Ambiani (see p.403); and we may infer that their territory embraced the diocese of Amiens (see p.403), which nearly corresponds with the department of the Somme. (C.G., p.366).

Ambibarii. - The Ambibarii are included in Caesar's list of the Aremorican, or maritime, tribes (vii, 75, §4), which dwelt between the Seine and the Loire; but this is the only passage in ancient literature in which they are named. Their position is therefore uncertain; but it is generally believed that they were identical with the Abrincatui, who are mentioned by Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 8, §8), but not by Caesar, and who occupied the diocese of Avranches (C.G., pp.366 - 7).

Ambiliati. - B.G., iii, 9, §10 is the only passage in ancient literature in which the Ambiliati are mentioned; and for want of evidence I have not marked them on the map.

Ambivariti. - The geographical position of this tribe is unknown (C.G., pp.367 - 8).

Ambivariti. - This tribe is mentioned by no ancient writer except Caesar, and its whereabouts cannot be determined: we only know that it was west of the Meuse. This much is certain, because the Usipetes and Tencteri, who sent their cavalry across the Meuse (trans Mosam) into the country of the Ambivariti (iv, 9, §3), were then in the territories of the Eburones and Condrusi (6, §4), of whom the former dwelt mainly and the latter wholly on the east of the river (C.G., pp.368 - 70).

Anartes. - The Anartes dwelt in Dacia, on the northern bank of the Theiss.

Ancalites. - The Ancalites, the Bibroci, and the Cassi do not reappear in history after the time of Caesar. They were evidently dependent tribes, and nothing is known about their geographical position except that they lived somewhere in the basin of the Thames, probably west of Essex, which belonged to the Trinovantes. Professor Haverfield suggests that the Bibroci may have been in Berkshire (A.B., p.346 and n.4). I am inclined to believe that all three lived south of the Thames; for otherwise they would have been dependants of Cassivellaunus, whose territory (v, 18, §1) was on the northern bank, and would probably have been prevented by fear of Cassivellaunus from surrendering.

Andes. - Their chief town was Juliomagus, or Angers (Ptolemy, Geogr., ii, 8, §8); and their territory corresponded approximately with the diocese of Angers, that is to say, the department of the Maine-et-Loire and part of the Sarthe (C.G., p.370).

Aquileia was on the northern coast of the Adriatic, about 25 miles west by north of Tergeste (Trieste).

Arar. - The river Saone.

Aremoricae (civitates). Aremoricus means `maritime'. In vii, 75, §4 Caesar says that the Aremorican states bordered on the sea, and mentions eight of them - the Coriosolites, Redones, Ambibarii, Caleti, Osismi, Veneti, Lexovii, and Venelli - all of whom, except the Caleti, who were on the right bank of the estuary of the Seine, dwelt between the Seine and the Loire. Caesar did not count any of the maritime tribes south of the Loire as Aremorican, for in 75, §3 he mentions the Pictones and Santoni, who possessed the seaboard between the Loire and the Garonne, separately; nor, apparently, did he include under this head any tribe east of the Caleti, for in the same chapter he mentions the Morini, who dwelt between the Canche and the Scheldt, separately. Evidently, then, according to Caesar's informants, all the Aremorican tribes, except the Caleti, were between the Loire and the Seine (C.G., pp.370 - 1).

Arverni. - The country of the Arverni comprised the departments of the Cantal and Puy-de-Dame and parts of those of the Allier and Loire-Superieure (C.G., p.371).

Atrebates. - The territory of this tribe corresponded with the diocese of Arras, that is to say, the south-eastern part of the department of the Pas-de-Calais and the adjacent part of the department of the Nord (C.G., p.371).

Atuatuca was the place where Titurius Sabinus and Auruncoleius Cotta encamped in the autumn of 54 B.C., and close to which their army was destroyed by Ambiorix, one of the two kings of the Eburones (v, 24, §4; 26 - 37; vi, 32, §§3 - 4).

Atuatuca is generally identified with Tongres, 12 miles N.of Liege The reasons are, first, that Tongres was undoubtedly the site of a Gallo-Roman fortress called Atuaca, which is mentioned in the Table of Peutinger (p.12, col.1) and which Ptolemy called >Atouatoukon; secondly, that this fort was situated, as the camp of Sabinus and Cotta probably was, at the junction of great roads; thirdly, that Atuatuca was in the kingdom of Ambiorix, which formed the western part of the territory of the Eburones, and which may have been separated from the kingdom of his colleague, Catuvolcus, by the Meuse; and lastly, that nobody has succeeded in finding another site which corresponds satisfactorily with Caesar's narrative. There are, however, strong arguments against identifying Atuatuca with Tongres. When Caesar said that Atuatuca `is nearly in the centre of the territory of the Eburones' (fere est in mediis Eburonum finibus [vi, 32, §4]), he could hardly have meant what his words appear, at first sight, to convey; for neither Tongres nor any other place which could reasonably be identified with Atuatuca is near the centre of that territory: probably he meant that Atuatuca was near the common frontier of the two kingdoms of which the whole territory was composed. But it is difficult to believe that he would have used the words in mediis Ebruronum finibus to indicate a site which lay 10 miles west of the Meuse and yet belonged to a people `the greater part of whose territory is between the Meuse and the Rhine' (v, 24, §4). There are several other passages which suggest that Atuatuca was between the two rivers. Ambiorix, in his interview with Gaius Arpineius and Quintus Junius, stated that a body of Germans, who were coming to the assistance of the Gallic rebels, had crossed the Rhine, and would arrive at Atuatuca in two days (v, 27, §8). Sabinus, in the council of war which immediately followed the interview, remarked that the Rhine was close by (subesse Rhenum [29, §3]), - a phrase which, one would think, he would hardly have used if the broad flood of the Meuse had intervened between the Rhine and Atuatuca. We are told that when the Sugambri invaded the country of the Eburones they crossed the Rhine (vi, 35, §6); but we are not told that, in order to reach Atuatuca, they crossed the Meuse. When they left Atuatuca `they recrossed the Rhine' (trans Rhenum sese receperunt [41, ]); and this phrase would be misleading if they had first had to cross so important a river as the Meuse. Furthermore, readers who have seen Tongres will not easily believe that Caesar would have described it as a naturally strong position. Except on the south and south-east, where it is approached by a very gentle ascent, it is naturally defenceless; and it was against this side that the first attack of the Sugambri would have been directed. How, then, could Caesar have said that `the strength of the position entrenchments forbade any attempt to enter elsewhere' (reliquos aditus locus ipse per se munitione defendit [37, §5])'? It has been argued that Caesar was thinking of marshes which protected the camp; but where could they have been except between the south-east and the south-west, where they may have been formed by the river Geer? And even they would not have extended up to the supposed site of the camp.

No less than twenty-five other sites have been proposed; but I doubt whether any of them is worth mentioning except Embourg, near Liege, east of the Meuse and between the Ourthe and the Vesdre, and Limbourg, which is about 15 miles east of Liege. The latter is the less objectionable, but it does not answer satisfactorily to Caesar's description. For these reasons I have omitted Atuatuca from my map (C.G., pp.371 - 83).

Atuatuci. - The territory of this people was between the Nervii and the Eburones (v, 38, §§1 - 2), and the Eburones bad some territory west of the Meuse - east of the Nervii and south of the Menapii - though the greater part was between the Mense and the Rhine (24, §4). South of the Meuse, in the district of Condroz, were the Condrusi. Accordingly the Atuatuci are placed in the valley of the Meuse, principally along its left or northern bank, between the Nervii and the Condrusi; in other words, they possessed Namur and its neighbourhood, that is to say, the district of Hesbaye, and perhaps also some little territory in the western part of Condroz. If the reader will study the passages of Caesar to which I have referred and consult the maps, he will agree with this conclusion.

But although the Atuatuci were confined within this small area after their chief town had been captured by Caesar (see ii, 29 - 33), it is possible that before their treachery provoked his vengeance they may also have possessed a tract between the Meuse and the Rhine: for they had originally settled somewhere in this region (ii, 29 §§4 - 5); before Caesar subdued them they had compelled the Eburones to pay tribute (v, 27, §2), which implies that they were then strong and had a comparatively large territory; and as Caesar forced them to abandon this claim, he may also have given some of their land to the Eburones. Moreover, when we compare names, it seems likely that Atuatuca, which in 54 B.C.belonged to the Eburones, had originally belonged to the Atuatuci (C.G., pp.384 - 7).

Atuatucorum oppidum. - The Atuatuci possessed the country round Namur and the district of Hesbaye; and, before Caesar attacked them, they may also have occupied some territory on the right bank of the Meuse. Besides this we have nothing to help us in looking for their chief stronghold, except Caesar's description and his account of the siege. He says that the place was `a fortress of extraordinary natural strength', and adds that `all round it presented a line of high rocks and steel declivities, which at one point left a gently sloping approach, not more than two hundred feet wide' (ii, 29, §§2 - 3). The fort was large enough to shelter at least 57,000 people (33, §§S7), and the entrenchment with which Caesar surrounded it was traced along ground comparatively high but of varying elevation (33, §2), and measured, according to the MSS., 15 Roman miles, but there is no doubt that the number was grossly exaggerated by a copyist (see the second note on 30, §2). A great many sites have been suggested, but nearly all may be ignored, for either they do not correspond with Caesar's description, or they are in territory which did not belong to the Atuatuci. Good judges are now agreed that the choice lies between the hill on which stands the citadel of Namur and Mont Falhize, which is opposite Huy and about midway between Namur and Liege. This hill is within an easy walk from the railway station of Huy, which may be reached by express train in 30 minutes from Namur

Both these sites are open to objection, and it is hard to decide; but after carefully exploring them I am inclined to prefer Mont Falhize. The chief objection to Namur is that it appears much too small. Its area is only about 27 acres, which would have allowed little more than two square yards for each individual, to say nothing of the numerous cattle (33, §2) which they had with them ! It has, indeed, been argued that additional room might have been gained if some of the garrison had encamped on the flanks of the hill; but even so it would hardly have been possible to find a greater space than 52 acres, or 40 square feet for each man. If the hill had been covered by houses several stories high, the Atuatuci might have had room; but can we believe that they were packed for days, like the crowd at the Boat-race, along with their cattle, nearly four times as tightly as the garrison of Alesia? Moreover, the only slope which can be said to answer at all to Caesar's description can hardly be called `a gently sloping approach' (leniter acclivis aditus): Caesar's entrenchment would necessarily have been carried up the steep and rocky flanks of the hill and over ground considerably higher than that on which the fort is supposed to have stood; and since the hill of Namur is only one of a chain of continuous heights, it is hard to see why the Atuatuci should have restricted the fort within absurdly narrow limits. Again, supposing that the fort was on the hill of Namur, in what direction could the garrison have made the sortie which Caesar describes in 33, §2? Not down the gentle slope, which would have been occupied by the Roman agger, or siege terrace. As far as I can see, they must either have headed north-westward along the low ground parallel with the Sambre, or southward along the eastern flank of the hill or the narrow strip of ground parallel with the Meuse. But in either case, if they had succeeded in storming the contravallation (33, §3 - 4), would they not have been trapped between river and hill?

Mont Falhize was an ideal site for a Gallic stronghold; but no Gallic antiquities have been found on it, and although it is approached on the eastern side by a col, or saddle, about 200 feet wide, this approach does not, so far as I could see, slope upward towards the hill. Possibly the slope may have been obliterated by the earth and rubble of which Caesar's terrace would have been largely composed. Von Goler, indeed, insists that there is a slope, which rises 20 feet: but I believe my eyes; and I affirm that, if it exists at all, it is quite insignificant.

The reader may perhaps have noticed that there is one objection common to Namur and to Mont Falhize. The former is between the Meuse and the Sambre, and the latter is washed on its southern side by the Meuse; but Caesar does not mention any river. Yet, if there was one, he might have been expected to say so, for it would have served as a natural contravallation and thus have enabled him to make his entrenchment much smaller than it would otherwise have been (C.G., pp.387 - 93). Aulerci Brannovices. - The territory of the Brannovices, who were dependants of the Aedui, is perhaps represented by the canton of Brionnais, on the eastern bank of the upper Loire; but we have no clue except the name (C.G., p.393).

Aulerci Cenomani. - The territory of the Cenomani corresponded roughly with the department of the Sarthe (C.G., p.393).

Aulerci Eburovices. - The Eburovices occupied the diocese of Evreux, which preserves their name, and which embraces the central and the southern part of the department of the Eure (C.G., pp.393 - 4).

Ausci. - This tribe possessed the southern part of the diocese of Auch, that is to say, the central and the southern part of the department of the Gers (C.G., p.394).

Avaricum stood upon the site of Bourges.

Bacenis (Silva). - This forest probably extended southward from the mountains of Thuringia.

Belgium is mentioned in the Fifth Commentary three times (12, §2; 24, §2; 25, §4), or, according to the MSS., which in the second passage have Belgis instead of Belgio, twice. In chapter 12, which is perhaps spurious, Belgio apparently means the country of the Belgae; for if it meant only a part of that country, how could the reader tell what part was meant? Again in 25, §4 Belgio seems to mean the country of the Belgae. But 24, §2 presents a difficulty. The reading Belgis would seem to have no point; for besides the three legions which Caesar stationed in Belgis (or in Belgio) all the others except one, were also quartered in the country of the Belgae. On the other hand, supposing that Belgio is the true reading, it is obvious that, unless Caesar was very careless, Belgium can only mean a part of the whole territory of the Belgae. If so what part? We learn from 46, §1 that one of the three legions which were quartered in Belgium was in the country of the Bellovaci, and from Birtius (viii, 46, §6) that within the limits of Belgium was Nemetocenna, the chief town of the Atrebates: it is clear, then, that Belgium must also have comprised the country of the Ambiani, which was between the other two. The right reading is probably Belgio; for it seems more likely that the word Belgium was used in a restricted as well as in a general sense than that Caesar used the word Belgae, the meaning of which he had himself defined at the outset of his work, in a way which would have been certain to mislead.

Bellovaci. - The Bellovaci possessed the diocese of Beauvais. which preserves their name (C.G., pp.397 - 8).

Bibracte was identical, not, as was formerly believed, with Augustodunum - the Gallo-Roman town which stood upon the site of Autun - but with a great manufacturing town on Mont Beuvray, 12 miles west of Autun, whose defences, houses, and workshops have been revealed by excavation (see p.lii). It was abandoned early in the era of the Roman Empire, and succeeded by Augustodunum, which, as the late Professor Freeman said (Hist. Essays, 4th ser., pp.103 - 5), `was a new city on a new site, deliberately laid out from the beginning on a great scale' (C.G., p.398).

Bibrax was 8 Roman miles from the camp which Caesar made in 57 B.C.immediately after crossing the Aisne, and was situated on or near the road by which the Belgae advanced against him (ii, 6, §1). Only two of the many places with which it has been identified, namely Beaurieux and Vieux-Laon, answer sufficiently to his description to call for discussion; and as we cannot tell with absolute certainty what was the road by which the Belgae advanced (see the first note on 5 §4), we cannot positively decide between them. Beaurieux is about 8 Roman miles west of the hill of Mauchamp, on which if Caesar crossed the Aisne at Berry-au-Bac, he encamped; but as I have shown in the note on 8, §§3 - 5, it is very doubtful whether he did cross there. Another objection is that Beaurieux, which is about two miles north of the Aisne, could have been entirely surrounded by the Belgae, and therefore the force which Caesar sent to the relief of the garrison could not have got into the fort (7, §§1 - 2) unless the Belgae were extremely careless.

Vieux-Laon is at the required distance both from the hill of Mauchamp and from the plateau of Pontavert, on which Caesar must have encamped if he did not cross the Aisne at Berry-au-Bac. The hill which is now occupied by the town of Laon was once called Bibrax, and a little south of the plateau of Vieux-Laon is a village which was once called Bebrieux. It has been suggested that the inhabitants of Vieux-Laon abandoned it in the fifth century and migrated to Laon; that emigrants from Laon in their turn built a town upon the site of Bebrieux and named it after Bibrax, which their forefathers had inhabited and that the name Bibrax was given to Laon because the inhabitants of the old Bibrax had migrated to it. Napoleon III observes, further, that Vieux-Laon, on its southern side, was unassailable by the Gallic method of assault (6, §§2 - 3), and he argues that the Belgae, with the carelessness of a half-barbarous people, would have neglected to invest it on that side (C.G., pp.398 - 400).

Bibroci. See ANCALITES.

Bigerriones. - This people, whose name is preserved in Bigorre, inhabited the department of the Hautes-Pyrenees (C.G., p.400).

Bituriges. - The Bituriges occupied the diocese of Bourges (Avaricum), which preserves their name, and which included the departments of the Cher and Indre and the north-wester, part of the department of the Allier (C.G., p.400).



Bratuspantium cannot be identified with certainty. We only know that it was on or near the road by which Caesar marched from Noviodunum, which was almost certainly on the hill of Pommiers, about 21 miles north-west of Soissons, into the country of the Ambiani, whose chief town was Samarobriva (Amiens); and that it was not the same as Caesaromagus (Beauvais), the Gallo-Roman capital of the Bellovaci, which was built on virgin soil. It would be useless to mention here all the sites that have been proposed. There is something to be said for Breteuil, which is on a strong position near the Roman road from Soissons to Amiens, and close to which, in the valley of Vandeuil, a few Gallic and numerous Gallo-Roman antiquities have been found; but a French antiquary, Dr.V.Lebloud, who bas explored every yard of the country that belonged to the Bellovaci, prefers Mont-Cesar, between 6 and 7 miles ESE.of Beauvais. The hill is perfectly suitable for a stronghold: but it is about 251 feet above the plain; and this seems hardly consistent with Caesar's statement that when he was encamping on the outskirts of Bratuspantium `the women and children stretched out their hands from the wall ... and begged the Romans for peace' (ii, 13, §3). I have marked Bratuspantium on the map on the site of Breteuil, but with a note of interrogation (C.G., pp.400 - 2).

Cadurci. - The territory of the Cadurci corresponded with the diocese of Cahors, which preserves their name, in other words with the department of the Lot. In the last passage (vii, 7;, §2) in which Caesar mentions them we find the words Eleutetis Cadurcis or, according to the group of MSS.known as , Heleutetis et Cadurcis. It has been supposed that Eleuteti, like Aulerci, was a name common to several tribes; but if so, why was it not applied by any ancient writer to any other tribe besides the Cadurci? It has also been suggested that Eleutetos was the Celtic equivalent of the Greek eleuteros, free', and accordingly that the Eleuteti Cadurci were independent, while the rest of the Cadurci were already under Roman rule. But if so, the country of the latter was part of the Roman Province; and when Caesar was emphasizing the danger that was likely to threaten the Province if the Helvetii were allowed to settle in the country of the Santoni (i, 10, §§1 - 2), he would have said that the country of the Santoni was not far from the country of the Cadurci instead of saying that it was not far from the country of the Tolosates. Some editors suppose that Caesar wrote not Eleutetis but Helviis, but the Helvii fought against Vercingetorix (vii, 65, §2), whereas Eleutetis occurs in the list of tribes which sent troops to help him. I doubt whether Caesar wrote Eleutetis; but if he did, the Eleuteti were distinct from the Cadurci (C.G., pp.402 - 3).

Caerosi. - This tribe is believed to have occupied a tract called in the eighth century pagus Caros or Carascus, north of Treves and on the banks of the Prum (C.G., p.403).

Caleti. - The territory of this people included the Pays de Caux (pagus Caletus), or the western and the central portion of the department of the Seine (C.G., p.404).

Cantabri. - The Cantabri inhabited the northern part of Spain between the Basque Provinces and the neighbourhood of Oviedo.

Cantium corresponded approximately with Kent.

Carcaso stood upon the site of the modern Carcassonne.

Carnutes. - The territory of the Carnutes comprised the dioceses of Chartres, Orleans, and Blois, or the greater part of the departments of the Eure-et-Loire, Loiret, and Loire-et-Cher (C.G., p.404).

Cassi. - See ANCALITES.

Caturiges. - The Caturiges were an Alpine tribe; and Caesar says that they, as well as the Ceutrones and the Graioceli, occupied the heights when he was crossing the Alps in 58 B.C. on his way from the Cisalpine to the Transalpine province (i, 10, §4). The route which he followed led over Mont Genevre, thence to Brigantio (Briancon), and thence, most probably, past Ebrodunum (Ennbrun), Caturigae or Caturigomagus (Chorges), and Vapincum (Gap) to Dea (Die) in the country of the Vocontii (see the note on 10, §§3 - 5). He does not mention any of the towns of the Caturiges. Ebrodunum, the only one which is mentioned by Ptolemy (Geogr., iii, 1, §35), was, according to Strabo (iv, 1, §3), on their western frontier; but the itineraries mention another, Caturigomagus, and, if it belonged to them in Caesar's time, their western frontier was almost certainly west of Ebrodunum. If the reader will compare Caesar's account of his march with the map, he will see that they must also have possessed Brigantio, though Ptolemy (Geogr., iii, 1, §36) assigns it to the Segusiani; unless, indeed, the latter, whom Caesar does not notice, were dependants (see p.404) of the Caturiges. Thus the territory of the Caturiges corresponded with the southern part of the department of the Hautes-Alpes (C.G., pp.404 - 5).

Cavillonum was on the site of Chalon-sur-Saone.

Cenabum. - Most scholars are by this time convinced that Cenabum stood upon the site of Orleans, although a few still cling to the theory, which formerly had many defenders, that it ought rather to be identified with Gien, about 35 miles higher up the Loire.[1][Many of the antiquaries who refused to identify Cenabum with Orleans maintained that it stood on high ground at Gien-le-Vieux, which is about a mile and a quarter north-west of Gien. But, as the words oppidum Cenabum pons fluminis Ligeris contingebat (vii, 11, §6) prove, the town was in actual contact with the bridge. The antiquaries were therefore compelled to assume that it extended from Gien-le-Vieux right down to the banks of the river. This imaginary Cenabum would have been far larger than any other Gallic town.] Everybody now admits that Orleans grew out of a Gallo-Roman town called Cenabum, for the fact is proved by the itineraries, by the testimony of Ptolemy and various mediaeval writers, by the Discovery of numerous coins, and by an inscription which was unearthed in 1846 in the Faubourg St.Vincent at Orleans; but it has been maintained that this town was different from the Cenabum mentioned by Caesar.

The principal arguments that have been brought against the orthodox view are that Caesar, marching from Agedincum (Sens) to relieve Gorgobina (vii, 9, §6; 10, §4), which was probably between the Allier and the Loire, would not have gone so far out of his way as Orleans; that the distance from Orleans to Gergovia is considerably more than 160 Roman miles, which, according to Caesar (3, §3), was the distance from Cenabum to the country of the Arverni; that Orleans is not on a hill, whereas Gallic strongholds generally were; and that Caesar would not have been able to march from Sens to Orleans in four days, - the time which he says that it took him to march from Agedincum to Cenabum (11, §§1 - 5). All these objections can be easily answered. First, there is no reason why Caesar, even though his ultimate object was to relieve Gorgobina, should not have gone out of his way to capture a town so important as Cenabum, for it was desirable to punish, first of all, the Carnutes, who had been the first to rebel, and who, by the massacre of Roman citizens, had outraged the majesty of Rome (2; 3, §1; 17, §7; 28, §4). Besides, how can we tell that, east of Orleans, any bridge spanned the Loire in that part of its course which crossed Caesar's line of march, or that, if there were bridges, Vercingetorix had not destroyed them (see 34, §3)? Secondly, one cannot be sure that Caesar's estimate of the distance from Cenabum to the country of the Arverni was exactly right, or that when he said `the country of the Arverni' (3, §3) he meant Gergovia. Thirdly, some of the Gallic strongholds - for instance, Avaricum and Lutecia - were not built upon hills, and we may gather both from Caesar's narrative (3, §1, 11, §§4 - 9) and from Strabo (iv, 2, §3) that Cenabum was rather a trading town than a stronghold. If it had been really strong, is it likely that the Carnutes would have run away without making the slightest attempt to stand a siege? Lastly, the distance from Sens to Orleans by the longest road was not more than 81 miles; and Caesar gives us to understand (11, §3) that he was making haste. The distance by the shortest road was only about 67 miles.

The arguments for identifying Cenabum with Gien are hardly worth mentioning: they really amount to this, that if it was not Orleans it must have been Gien. There is no evidence that at Gien there was either a bridge or a Gallic town. As, however, Colonel Stoffel (see p.xxxv) was an advocate of Gien, we must not ignore his reasons. He identified Vellaunodunum, from which Caesar marched in two days to Cenabum (11, §§1 - 5), with Toucy, which is 37 miles east of Gien; and he insisted that this was just the distance which Caesar would have covered in two marches. But there is no evidence whatever that Vellaunodunum was at Toucy.

On the other hand, there is conclusive evidence that Cenabum was not at Gien. First, after the conquest of Gaul Gien was not in the territory of the Carnutes, but in that of the Senones; and there is no reason to suppose that since Caesar's time it had changed hands. Secondly, it was not called Cenabum in the Middle Ages, but Giemus. Thirdly, in 51 B.C.Caesar left two legions at Cenabum to overawe the Carnutes (viii, 6, §1). If Cenabum was at Gien, even assuming that Gien was in the country of the Carnutes, the legions were posted on the eastern limit of the Carnutian territory. From such a position how would they have been able to keep the Carnutes in check?

The conclusion, that Cenabum and Orleans were one, is as certain as that Lutecia stood upon the island of Notre-Dame and Alesia upon Mont Auxois (C.G., pp.405 - 15).

Cenimagni. - This tribe may perhaps have been identical with the Eceni or Iceni, who dwelt in Suffolk and Norfolk (A.B., p.317).


Ceutrones (a). - The Alpine Ceutrones (i, 10, §4) occupied the valley of the Tarentaise and the adjoining mountains. Their frontier has been determined by an inscription which was discovered at Forclaz, between Chamonix and Sallanches (C.G., pp.364, 415).

Ceutrones (b). See NERVII.

Cocosates. - Coequosa, between Dax and Bordeaux, which is mentioned in the Itinerary of Antonine (p.456), was doubtless the chief town of the Cocosates. Their territory was therefore in the western part of the department of Les Landes, between Castetz and Mimizan (C.G., p.415).

Condrusi. - The Condrusi were conterminous with the Eburones (iv, 6, §4), `the greater part of whose territory', says Caesar (v, 24, i 4), `is between the Meuse and the Rhine'; and they were between the Eburones and the Treveri (vi, 32, §1). Accordingly they are generally believed to have inhabited Condroz, which extends along the right bank of the Meuse, between Liege and Dinant, and which in the ninth century was called Condrustum (C.B., p.403).

Coriosolites. - This people inhabited the country round Corseul in the department of the Cotes-du-Nord. Their frontiers cannot be certainly defined, because the geography of this part of Gaul is obscure. The number of dioceses in the Aremorican peninsula (Brittany) greatly exceeds the number of states all of them, except those of Vannes, Nantes, and Rennes, were created after the Gallo-Roman period by invaders from Britain, and when those invaders formed their dioceses they took no account of the existing political divisions. On the south, however, the territory of the Coriosolites was probably separated from that of the Veneti by the natural barrier of the Montagnes Noires; and westward it may have extended as far as Feins, which is supposed to represent a town called Fines, mentioned in the Itinerary of Antonine (p.387). Thus the territory of the Coriosolites corresponded more or less closely with the Cotes-du-Nord (C.G., pp.415 - 18).

Daci. - The Dacians possessed Hungary, east of the river Theiss, Transylvania, Wallachia, Moldavia, west of the Pruth, &c.

Decetia is represented by the modern Decize, which is on the Loire, about 20 miles south east of Nevers.

Diablintes. - Caesar does not help us to determine the territory of this tribe; but Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 8, §7) says that their chief town was Noeodunum, which in the Table of Peutiuger (p.23, col.1) appears as Nu-Dionnum, on the road between Le Mans and Bayeux. Accordingly it is believed that they occupied the neighbourhood of Jublains, which preserves their name, and on the site of which the remains of a Gallo-Roman town have been discovered. Moreover, a document of the eighth century mentions condita Diablintica (a district or canton of the Diablintes) as situated in pago Cenomannico. The conclusion is that the Diablintes possessed the northern part of the diocese of Le Mans, the rest of which belonged to the Aulerci Cenomani (C.G., pp.418 - 22).

Dubis was the Gallic name of the river Doubs.

Durocortorum, the chief town of the Remi, was on the site of Reims.

Eburones. - The greater part of their country was between the Rhine and the Meuse (v, 24, §4); so we may infer that the remaining part was west of the Meuse. Their neighbours on the south were the Treveri, the Segni, and the Condrusi (vi, 32, §1); on the north the Menapii (33, §§1 - 2), and on the south-west the Atuatuci (v, 38, §1). Their territory may also have been conterminous on the west with that of the Nervii. But it is impossible to define the frontiers of any of these people except perhaps the Nervii, and therefore it is impossible to define the frontier of the Eburones. We only know that it extended westward of Bonn and Cologne and included parts of the provinces of Limbourg and Liege (C.G., p.387). See TREVERI.


Elaver was the Gallic name of the river Allier.

Eleuteti. See CADURCI.

Elusates. The name of this people survives in that of Eauze, the country round which they possessed (C.G., p.422)

Esuvii. - The Esuvii were one of the tribes from whom Crassus requisitioned corn (iii, 7, §4) when he was sent to receive the submission of the states of Normandy and Brittany. Their position has been determined with reasonable probability in this way. Pliny (Nat. Hist., iv, 18, §107) mentions the Baiocasses, or, as he calls them, Bodiocasses, whose chief town was Augustodurus (Bayeux), and the Viducasses, whose chief town was Aregenua or Araegenue (Vieux, near Caen). The Notitia Provinciarum (p.263 [ii, 6]) mentions a people called the Saii, whose territory corresponded with the diocese of Seez. None of these three tribes figures in the Commentaries. As Caesar (ii, 34) notices the Esuvii side by side with the Aulerci (Cenomani and Eburovices), who possessed the dioceses of Le Mans and Evreux, it is generally believed that they inhabited the diocese of Seez, which is adjacent to those two dioceses. If this opinion is right, the Esuvii and the Saii were the same, and the Esuvii were not a maritime people, though Caesar (ii, 34) says that they were. It seems more probable that they also possessed the territories of the Baiocasses and the Viducasses, and that, just as the Helvetii were divided into four pagi, or clans (i, 12, §4), so the Baiocasses, the Viducasses, and the Saii were part of the Esuvii (C.G., pp.422 - 4).

Gabali. - The Gabali, who were dependants of the Arverni (vii, 75, §2), inhabited the Gevaudan, in the department of the Lozere (C.G., p.371).

Garumna was the native name of the Garonne.

Garumni. - The Garumni probably dwelt in the upper valley of the Garonne (C.G., p.425).

Gates. - I cannot find any satisfactory evidence for locating this Aquitanian tribe (C.G., p.425).

Geidumni. See NERVII.

Genava was, I need hardly say, the Gallic name of Geneva.

Gergovia was long ago identified with a mountain which rises fully 1,200 feet above the plain, about 4 miles south of Clermont-Ferrand. It is the only mountain in Auvergne - the country of the Arverni - which corresponds with Caesar's narrative (vii, 35; 36, §§1 - 2, 5; 44 - 6).

Gorgobina was the stronghold, or the chief stronghold, of the Boi (vii, 9, §6). Caesar says (i, 28, §5) that after he had defeated the Helvetii he allowed the Boi, at the request of the Aedui, to settle in Aeduan territory, and he adds that the Aedui made this request because they knew that the Boi were brave. One might be inclined to infer that the Boi were established in the western part of the Aeduan territory, where they would serve as an outpost against those old rivals of the Aedui, the Arverni. Indeed, unless their settlement was in that neighbourhood, Caesar's account (vii, 11, §9; 12 - 13) of his march from Cenabum (Orleans) to Noviodunum and thence to Avaricum (Bourges), taken in conjunction with his statement that Vercingetorix, marching from the country of the Arverni to Gorgobina, passed through the country of the Bituriges (9, §6), cannot be explained. Besides, while Caesar was besieging Avaricum he expected a supply of corn from the Boi (17, §2); and he would hardly have done so unless they had been near enough to forward the supply, - that is, somewhere in the western part of the Aeduan territory. M.Jullian, however, thinks that they were intended to serve as an outpost, not against the Arverni but against the Bituriges, and accordingly he believes that, besides the country between the Allier and the Loire, they also possessed a strip of land between the Aedui and the Bituriges, south of that part of the Loire which separated those two tribes (5, §4), that is, south of the confluence of the Allier and the Loire (see HAEDUI). I cannot see what reason the Aedui had for establishing an outpost against the Bituriges, who were in a state of friendly dependence upon them (5, §2). To identify Gorgobina is at present impossible. Numerous guesses have been made; but most of them may be ignored for the proposed sites are either outside the Aeduan frontier or otherwise irreconcilable with Caesar's narrative. Three only are worth considering: - (1) St.Parize-le-Chatel, between the Allier and the Loire, stands upon ground which is better adapted for a Gallic stronghold than any other in this district. (2) Sancerre, on the left bank of the Loire, about 30 miles north by west of Nevers, is also a very strong position. Its earliest known name was Castrum Gordonicum, and if Caesar wrote Gortona, which is found in the MSS., it is more than likely that the stronghold of the Boi was Sancerre. But Sancerre is in the ancient diocese of Bourges, and therefore most probably belonged to the Bituriges. (3) La Guerche-sur-l'Aubois about 11 miles west by south of Nevers, has the support of vonGoler and of M.Jullian, who supposes that the site of the stronghold was the rising ground on which the church now stands. I do not agree with them, because, as I have already argued, it is unlikely that the Boi had any territory except in the peninsula formed by the Allier and the Loire. I have, therefore, marked Gorgobina on the map on the site of St. Pariz ele-Chatel, but with a note of interrogation (C.G., pp.425 - 30).

Graioceli. This tribe, as the name shows, inhabited the Graian Alps. Where was their town, Ocelum? Caesar (i, 10, §5) passed through it when he was returning from Italy to Transalpine Gaul, to deal with the Helvetii. He says that it was the last, that is to say, the westernmost town in Cisalpine Gaul, and that he marched thence into the country of the Vocontii (q.v.) in 7 days. He crossed the Alps by way of Mont Genevre (see the note on 10, §§3 - 5), and in order to reach the pass he must have moved along the river Dora Riparia. According to Strabo (iv, 1, §3), Ocelum was 99 Roman miles from Epeprodunum (Embrun), and, within a mile or two, this is the distance from Embrun, along the Roman road which ran past Brigantio (Briancon) and over Mont Genevre to Avigliana. Four vases, on each of which an itinerary is inscribed, have been discovered at Bagni di Vicarello: three of them place Ocelum at 20 Roman miles from Turin, and two of them at the same distance from Susa. These figures nearly correspond with the actual distances of Avigliana and of Drubiaglio from Turin and from Susa respectively, Drubiaglio being on the northern, and Avigliana opposite it on the southern bank of the Dora Riparia. According to the fourth vase, there was a station called Ad Fines, 23 Roman miles from Turin; but the Itinerary of Antonine (p.341) gives 18 Roman miles as the distance, and in another passage (pp.356 - 7) 16. An inscription, containing the words FINIB(us) COTTI - `on the frontier of Cottius' - has been found at Drubiaglio; and Strabo (iv, 1, §3) says that Ocelum was the boundary of Cottius's kingdom. The inscription proves that at a town which stood upon the site of Avigliana was collected the duty of 21 per cent. (quadragesima or one fortieth) which was levied upon merchandise; and on the fourth vase Ad Fines is called Ad Fines XXXX, which means Ad Fines quadragesimae. Accordingly Desjardins identified Ad Fines with Avigliana and Ocelum with Drubiaglio. If he was right, there were two Roman roads in the valley of the Dora Riparia, one on the left bank and the other on the right. He asserts that there were, and that mile-stones found between Turin and Susa prove it. I can find no evidence for his assertion; and Mommsen (C.I.L., v, pars ii, pp.811 - 12) denies it. Mommsen points out, further, that, according to the anonymous geographer of Ravenna (ed. M.Parthey and G.Pinder, p.250, 1 - 3) Ad Fines and Ocelum were on the same road, the former being nearer to Turin. He concludes that these two towns were very close to one another; and this much at all events is certain (C.G., pp.430 - 2).

Grudii. See NERVII.

Haedui. - This tribe was so called by Caesar; but as the form Aedui is more familiar, we may use it except when we are quoting from Caesar's book. The territory of the Aedui comprised the dioceses of Autun (Augustodunum), Chalon-sur-Saone (Cavillonum), Macon (Matisco), and Nevers (Noviodunum). This territory corresponded with the departments of the Saone-et-Loire and Nievre and parts of the Cote-d'Or and the Allier. A mile-stone erected in A.D.259 at the distance of 72 Roman miles from Augustodunum on the road to Autessiodurum (Auxerre) stood, as we learn from the inscription which it bears, Aeduorum Finibus, and was also in the territory that belonged to the civitas Autessiodurum. Therefore, if Desjardins is right in saying that Aeduorum finibus means `in the country of the Aedui', in A.D.259, if not in the time of Caesar, the Aedui also possessed the Auxerrois. Desjardins argues that unless finibus means `territory', the diocesan boundary does not represent the boundary between the imperial civitates, Autessiodurum and Augustodunum; but Mommsen (C.I.L., xiii, pars2, fasc.2 p.682) is probably right in holding that finibus is here equivalent to confinio (C.G., pp.351 - 3, 473 [here modified]).

Helvii. - This tribe (vii, 7, §5) possessed the Vivarais, which forms the southern part of the department of the Ardeche (C.G., p.432).

Illyricum extended east of the Adriatic, as far southward as Epirus and Macedonia and eastward as far as Moesia.

(Portus) Itius. - Between Dieppe and Ghent there is not a harbour, a roadstead, or a fishing-port which has not been at one time or another during the last four centuries identified with Portus Itius. But the reader will be quite safe in ignoring almost all of them. Caesar had ascertained before he embarked for Britain in 54 B.C.that Portus Itius was the most convenient starting-point for his fleet, which numbered over 800 small craft (v, 2, §3; 8, §6): he sailed from it to the eastern coast of Kent, certainly north of Walmer and almost certainly between Sandown Castle and Sandwich (see the note on iv, 23, §6); and he reckoned the length of the passage at about 30 Roman miles (v, 2, §3). It has been said that any such calculation, made before the time of scientific mapmaking, was worthless; but in the twelfth century an Arab geographer estimated the distance between Wissant and England correctly, and early in the seventeenth century English seamen told the German geographer Cluver, that the run from Dover to Boulogne was 32 English miles, - an estimate which erred by less than a mile (A.B., p.562, n.3). Anyhow Caesar's account of his voyage (v 8, §§2 - 4) proves that his statement was not far wrong. It is ciear, then, that we need not look for Portus Itius south of Boulogne or east of Calais. Calais is out of the question: it was not a port at all in Caesar's time, indeed it was not even mentioned before the twelfth century, and to sail from it to any place in England with a south-west wind (8, §2) would have been impossible. Ambleteuse and Sangatte may also be rejected: the former was a tiny port, in which Caesar's huge fleet could not have found room; the latter had no recommendation at all. Only two places remain, - Boulogne and Wissant, which is between Cape Blanc-Nez and Cape Gris-Nez. It is now generally believed that Portus Itius was Boulogne. But without excavating for traces of Caesar's camps it is not possible to do more than show that this opinion is highly probable.

It is certain that the harbour from which Caesar sailed in 55 B.C.was Boulogne. This has been proved in Ancient Britain (pp.558, 581 - 2, 588), and the argunuent is summarized in the note on iv, 22, §4. It is there shown by the unanimous testimony of nautical experts that if Caesar had sailed from any other port, his cavalry transports which, after they were caught by a storm, returned to the port from which they had started (iv, 28), could not have done so. Bnt Caesar does not say that the port from which he started in 55 B.C.was Portus Itius: indeed he does not mention Portus Itius in the Fourth Commentary, and the former of the two passages in which he mentions it in the Fifth ('2, §3) might suggest that in 54 B.C. he used it for the first time. For he tells us that he `ordered all the ships to assemble at the Itian harbour, from which he had ascertained that the passage to Britain was most convenient'. Certainly these words do not prove that he had not sailed from the Itian harbour in 55; but they might suggest that he had since found that it would be better to use a new harbour, as his fleet was now eight times as numerous as it had been in the previous year. Now there is not the slightest doubt that even in 54 Boulogne was in most respects by far the most convenient port for his purpose. It was then considerably larger and deeper than when NapoleonI chose it as the principal port for his intended invasion of England, and it could have sheltered the whole of Caesar's fleet. It was connected by roads with the interior, and therefore the supplies which he needed for his army could easily have been transported to it. The country near it is fertile, whereas the country near Wissant is barren. Ships could have been built at Boulogne, but not at Wissant, where there could have been no dockyards: therefore if Portus Itius was Wissant, Labienus who was left by Caesar in charge of `the ports' (8, §1), must have ordered the sixty ships which were built while Caesar was in Britain (23, §4) to be built at Boulogne. Lastly, Caesar could have sailed to Britain with a south-west wind more conveniently from Boulogne than from Wissant. But Boulogne may have been open to one serious objection: I say `may have been', because we do not know enough about the ancient harbour of Boulogne to be sure that the objection existed. When Napoleon was preparing to invade England the admiral in charge of the flotilla at Boulogne found it impossible, in the most favourable circumstances, to get more than 100 vessels out of the harbour in one tide; and therefore it was necessary for each successive relay of ships to anchor outside in the roadstead until the whole flotilla had cleared the harbour. But experience proved that it was dangerous to keep more ships in the roadstead than would be able, in case an unfavourable wind arose, to returu for shelter into the harbour; for south-westerly winds, which were favourable for the voyage, generally made the roadstead unsafe. Now Caesar says (8, §2) that he `set sail towards sunset' (ad solis occasum naves soluit); and these words appear to mean that his fleet began to move out of the harbour towards sunset. If so, assuming that Portus Itius was Boulogue, the whole business of clearing the harbour must have been completed within an hour and a half, or the fleet would have been strung out over a space of at least 7 nautical miles. Perhaps, if the harbour was sufficiently large and deep, such a feat would have been just practicable; but, as there were more than 800 ships, the crews could not have accomplished it unless they were very smart and perfectly organized. It is indeed, possible to interpret Caesar's words in the sense that the leading ships had begun to move out some hours before sunset and anchored in the roadstead until the whole fleet had cleared the harbour; but Caesar, like Napoleon, may perhaps have feared that freshening winds would make the anchorage unsafe. On the other hand, from Wissant, or rather from the beach between Cape Gris-Nez and Cape Blanc-Nez, the shallow flat-bottomed vessels, which had been specially constructed `to enable them to be ... hauled up on shore' (1, §2), could have started simultaneously; and Caesar may perhaps have thought that this advantage would outweigh all the disadvantages of Wissaut.

The upshot of the matter is this. The balance of probability is greatly in favour of Boulogne; but unless the question is settled by excavating for traces of the Roman camps, an element of doubt, however slight, will remain (A.B., pp.552 - 95; C.G., pp.432 - 8).

Latobrigi. - The Latobrigi, the Rauraci, and the Tulingi were near neighbours of the Helvetii (i, 5, §4). According to Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 9, §9), the chief towns of the Rauraci were Augusta (Augst), about 7 miles east by south of Basle, and Argentovaria, which was probably near Heidolsheim, close to the common frontier of Upper and Lower Alsace: but this evidence is not decisive; for, like the Ubii and other Rhenish tribes, the Rauraci may have changed their abode before Ptolemy wrote, or their territory may have been smaller in Caesar's time than in Ptolemy's. It is impossible to do more than guess at the positions of the other two tribes; for we have no clue except doubtful similarity of names. The Latobrigi are commonly placed in the neighbourhood of Brugge, on the rivers Brege and Briggach, tributaries of the upper Danube; the Tulingi in the country round Stuhlingen, a town near Schaffhausen (C.G., pp.438 - 42).

Lemonum, the chief town of the Pictones (viii, 26, §1), stood upon the site of Poitiers.

Lemovices. - This tribe possessed the ancient diocese of Limoges, which corresponded roughly with the departments of the Haute-Vienne, Correze, and Creuse (C.G., pp.442 - 4).

Lepontu. - The Lepontii inhabited those parts of Switzerland and Italy which lie south of the sources of the Rhone and the Rhine and north of Lake Maggiore. Their name survives in that of the Lepontine Alps.

Leuci. - The Leuci (i, 40, ). whose chief town was Tullum (Toul), possessed the diocese of Toul, or the department of the Vosges, and perhaps also the diocese of Verdun, or the southern parts of the departments of the Meuse and Meurthe-et-Moselle. This diocese corresponded with the territory of the Verodunenses, who are not mentioned in any document earlier than the Nolitia provinciarum; and we do not know whether they were grouped with the Leuci or the Mediomatrici (C.G., p.444).

Levaci. See NERVII.

Lexovii. - This tribe possessed the diocese of Lisieux, which comprised adjacent parts of the lepartments of the Calvados and the Eure (C.G., p.444).

Liger was the Gallic name of the Loire.

LingoneS. - The territory of the Lingones comprised the dioceses of Langres and Dijon (C.G., pp.444 - 5).

Magetobriga. - It is impossible to locate Magetobriga: we only know that it was either in the country of the Aedui or in that of the Sequani (i, 31, §§6 - 12). The only one of numerous guesses which rests upon anything like a solid foundation identifies it with Broie, close to a marsh called Moigte-de-Broie near the confluence of the Oignon and the Saone. According to d'Anville, a piece of pottery, bearing the inscription MAG. ETOB was found at Moigte-de-Broie; but if it ever existed, it was long ago lost (C.G., pp.445 - 6).

Mandubii. - The Mandubii possessed Alesia, or Mont Auxois (vii, 68, ), which is about 32 miles north-west of Dijon. Their territory therefore comprised part of the Cote-d'Or, but how much it is impossible to tell. As Caesar says (90, §1) that after he had captured Alesia he `started for the country of the Aedui' (in Haeduos profiscitur), it may be concluded that the Mandubii were not in Aeduan territory; but they were probably dependants of that people (C.G., pp.446 - 7).

Matisco (vii, 90, §7) was on the site of Macon.

Matrona (i, 1, §2) was the Celtic name of the Marne.

Meclosedum was on an island in the Seine, opposite the site of Melun.

Modiomatrici. - The Mediomatrici are mentioned by the writer of iv, 10, between the Sequani and the Triboci (q.v.), among the tribes whose territories bordered on the Rhine, but if that statement holds good for the time of Caesar, they must have possessed the country round Worms and Spires, which in Ptolemy's time belonged to the Vangiones and the Nemetes. Their chief town was Divodurum (Metz). Their territory probably included that of the Verodunenses, whose name survives in 'Verdun', aud who are not mentioned by Caesar (C.G., p.447). See LEUCI.

Meldi. - A tribe called Meldi, which was mentioned by Strabo (iv, 3, §5), Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 8, §11), and other writers, certainly occupied the diocese of Meaux, that is to say, the northern part of the department of the Seine-et-Marne and a fraction of the south-eastern part of the department of the Oise; but some conumentators deny that Caesar's Meldi were the same. For Caesar says (v, 5, §2) that on arriving at Portus Itius, where he had ordered his fleet to assemble, he found that 60 ships, which had been built in the country of the Meldi, had been prevented by contrary winds from reaching the harbour, and had returned to the place from which they had started. Portus Itius was either Wissant or, much more probably, Boulogne. The troops who built the fleet had wintered in the country of the Belgae (iv, 38, §4; v, 1, §1): therefore all the ships had been built on or east of the Seine; and Strabo (iv, 3, §3) says that Caesar's naval arsenal was at the mouth of that river. It has been argued, first, that as the wind prevented those ships which had been built in the country of the Meldi, but not the others, from reaching Portus Itius and as the bulk of the fleet must have been constructed in or south of that harbour, we must look for the Meldi to the north of it; secondly, that Caesar would not have built ships so far from the sea as Meaux; and thirdly, that even if he had done so, the 60 ships would not have sailed back up the Seine and the Marne. Accordingly it has been suggested that Caesar's Meldi inhabited the country round Maldeghem, about 10 miles east of Bruges! But the 60 ships may have sailed from the same side of Portus Itius as the rest, for the wind which stopped them may not have arisen until after the others had reached port; it is certain that in the eighteenth century timber used for constructing barges at Rouen came from the neighbourhood of Meaux; and Caesar does not say that the 60 ships returned to the couutry of the Meldi, but only that they returned to the place from which they had sailed, - probably the mouth of the Seine, where they may have remained for a time after they had dropped down the river from Meaux. The word Maldeghem has no connexion with Meldi, but is derived from the Dutch plant-name, melde; and it is absurd to suppose that Caesar would have established a dockyard on the North Sea, near Bruges (C.G., pp.447 - 9).

Menapii. - The Menapii possessed land on the right bank of the Rhine, not far from the sea, as well as on the left (iv, 1, §1; 4, §2); `the island of the Batavi', which is mentioned by the writer of iv, 10, may have belonged to them as well, for perhaps it was not occupied by the Batavi before the time of Augustus (see the first note on iv, 10); and their country was bounded on the south by that of the Eburones (vi, 5, §4) and on the west by that of the Morini (Strabo, iv, 3, §5, Pliny, Nat. Hist., iv, 17, ). The land which belonged to them on the right bank of the Rhine was in the neighbourhood of Cleve and Xanten (see the note on iv, 1, §1 [non longe a mari]). So much is certain; but to trace the frontier which separated the Menapii from the Morini is difficult, if not impossible.

According to Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 9, §§4 - 5), the eastern limit of the Morini was the Tabula. This river, which is not mentioned by any other writer, is generally supposed to have been the Scheldt, and if it was not, Ptolemy does not mention the Scheldt at all. But every other ancient writer who mentions the Scheldt calls it Scaldis; and Walckenaer maintains that the Tabula was the Aa. The known ancient name of the Aa was, however, Agnio or Agniona: so it is clear that either the Aa or the Scheldt had two names; and the balance of probability is evidently in favour of identifying the Tabula with the Scheldt. Here a difficulty arises. A place called Castellum Menapiorum, which is mentioned in the Table of Peutinger (p.13, col.2), was undoubtedly Cassel, about 11 miles northeast of St.Omer: therefore, unless Menapiorum was written by mistake for Morinorum, the Scheldt was not the eastern boundary of the Morini when the Table was compiled. But the castellum of the Menapii is also mentioned by Ptolemy, and as he makes the Meuse their western frontier, it is clear that unless he defined their position wrongly, the castellum which he mentions was not Cassel. Perhaps the Morini were punished for their repeated revolts in the time of Caesar by being forced to surrender the eastern part of their territory to the Menapii; if so, we may suppose that Castellum Menapiorum (Cassel) was not built or did not belong to the Menapii until after they migrated into this district. My own belief is that in Caesar's time the Scheldt, as a natural boundary, formed the common frontier of the two tribes: if the Menapii had then possessed the country between the Scheldt and the Aa, it would be difficult to understand why they only contributed 7,000 men to the Belgic host in 57 B.C.(ii, 4, §9), while the Morini contributed 25,000 (C.G., pp.449 - 53).

Morini. - The Morini were bounded on the west by thc Ambiani, from whom they were separated by the river Canche, on the south by the Atrebates (and perhaps also by the Nervii), and on the east by the Menapii (Strabo, iv, 3, §5, Pliny, Nat. Hist., iv, 17, §106). Their eastern frontier, as I have shown in the preceding article, was probably the Scheldt (C.G., pp.449 - 53).

Namnetes. - The territory of this tribe corresponded with the ancient diocese of Nantes, or that portion of the department of the Loire-Inferieure which lies on the right bank of the Loire and is bounded on the north-east by the Semnon (C.G., p.453).

Nantuates. - The Nantuates possessed the territory that extended on the south of the lake of Geneva as far west as the frontier of the Allobroges (iii, 1, §1), which was probably formed by the river Dranse. As their chief town, Agaunum stood upon the site of St.Maurice, and their eastern neighbours the Veragri (q.v.), occupied the western part of the Valais, the territory of the Nantuates comprised the eastern part of the Chablais and the north-western part of the Valais (C.G., pp.453 - 4).

In iv, 10, which was not written by Caesar, it is said that the Rhine rises in the country of the Lepontii, and flows through the countries of the Nantuates, Helvetii, Sequani, Mediomatrici, Triboci, and Treveri. If the unknown writer did not make a blunder, these Nantuates were different - different as a group, if not in blood - from the Nantuates mentioned in iii, 1, §1, who lived in the Chablais and the Valais; and there is no evidence for fixing their whereabouts (C.G., pp.454 - 5).

Narbo is now Narbonne.

Nemetes. - The Nemetes are mentioned by Caesar (i, 51, §2) among the tribes who fought in the army of Ariovistus; and he says that the entire army of Ariovistus took part in the campaign (38, §1), and that the few individuals who survived the battle and the retreat recrossed the Rhine (a3, §§1 - 2). If these statements were accurate, the Nemetes who were settled on the left bank round Spires in the time of Pliny (Nat. Hist., iv, 17, §106) must have been immigrants, descended from a portion of the tribe which had not followed Ariovistus into Gaul; but when Caesar wrote that Ariovistus had taken the field cum suis omnibus copiis (i, 38, §1) he may only have meant `with all his [available] forces'. In that case, however, we should have expected to find that those Nemetes who did not take part in the campaign had remained in the country which Ariovistus wrested from the Sequani (31, ), - that is to say, the plain of Alsace.

I have not marked the Nemetes on the map, because I only profess to represent Gaul as it was in the time of Caesar; and we do not know exactly what territory was occupied by the Nemetes before the defeat of Ariovistus (C.G., pp.455 - 6).

Nemetocenna was identical with Nemetacum (Ptolemy, Geogr., ii, 9, §4), which stood upon the site of Arras (C.G., p.456).

Nervii. - The Nervii are not mentioued in the Notitia provinciarum: but in their stead we find the civitas Camaracensium; and accordingly it has been concluded that their territory corresponded with the ancient diocese of Cambrai (Camaracum), which comprised Hainault, that part of Brabant which lies west of the Demer and the Dyle, East Flanders, and part of the province of Antwerp. Perhaps it extended as far northward as the estuary of the Scheldt; for Caesar (ii, 28, §1) says that the Nervii, before encountering him in 57 B.C., sent their non-combatants for safety in aestuaria, which can only mean the low-lying tracts bordering that estuary. But it is not certain that the aestuaria were in Nervian territory (C.G., pp.4S6 - 7).

The geographical positions of the dependants of the Nervii - the Ceutrones, Geidumni, Grudii, Levaci, and Pleumo - are unknown. Various attempts have been made to fix them; but there is no evidence except doubtful resemblance of names; for example, between Geidumni and Geidines, near Dinant. (C.G., pp.457 - 8).

Nitiobroges. - The Nitiobroges possessed the diocese of Agen (Aginnum) and perhaps also that of Condom, which was originally included in it, - that is to say, the greater part of the department of the Lot-et-Garonne and a small fraction of the department of the Tarn-et-Garonne. It is doubtful, however, whether they had any territory south of the Garonne; for the Bituriges Vivisci possessed lands on its left bank, and therefore if the river in its central course did not separate the Celtae from the Aquitani, it did so nowhere, and Caesar's statement in i, 1, §2 was inaccurate. But, as I have already remarked in the note on that passage Caesar's statements about frontiers were sometimes loose (C.G., pp.458 - 9).

Noreia stood upon the site of Neumarkt in Styria.

Noricus ager, or Noricum, comprehended, roughly speaking, that part of Austria which lies between the Ino, the Danube, Hungary, and Italy.

Noviodunum (Biturigum). - The only clues that Caesar gives as to the position of this town are, that it was on the road from Cenabum (Orleans) to Gorgobina; that Vercingetorix on hearing that Caesar was marching from Cenabum, abandoned the siege of Gorgobina and marched against Caesar; that his cavalry appeared before Noviodunum on the day on which Caesar reached it, and apparently a few hours after Caesar's arrival; that Caesar, after receiving the surrender of Noviodunum, marched against Avaricum (Bourges), and that Vercingetorix followed him by easiy stages (vii, 11, §9 - 13; 16, ). Probably Caesar had intended to march to Gorgobina by way of Avaricum; for by attacking or threatening so important a town he would have compelled Vercingetorix to raise the sieve.

Not to mention mere guesses, Noviodunum has been identified with ten different towns; but some of them do not satisfy the requirements of Caesar's narrative; and, with one exception there is no evidence for the rest. Readers of this book need only consider what is to be said for that one, - Villate, near Neuvy-sur-Barangeon. Villate is on the Roman road from Cenabum to Avaricum; and though it is only 18 miles from Bourges, Caesar probably marched a much greater distance, in order to avoid the forests on the north and the marshes which nearly surrounded the town, and to reach his camping ground on the south-eastern side (15, §5; 17, §1): so he might fairly have said that Vercingetorix had followed him by easy stages (minoribus itineribus). Celtic remains, Roman coins belonging to the period comprised between the reigns of Augustus and Gratian, and the ruins of a building which is supposed to have been a Gallo-Roman theatre have been discovered at Villate. All this, indeed, only shows that Villate may have been Noviodunum; but as every conceivable site seems to have been proposed, and as there is more to be said for Villate than for any other, I mark Noviodunum there on the map with a note of interrogation (C.G., pp.459 - 64).

Noviodunum (Haeduorum). - Although direct evidence is wanting, this town undoubtedly stood upon the site of Nevers. Caesar (vii, 55, ) simply describes it as `advantageously situated on the banks of the Loire' (ad ripas Ligeris oportuno loco positum). The Gallo-Roman town of Nivernum, which, as the itineraries show, was at Nevers, was identified by mediaeval writers with Noviodunum: mless Noviodunum perished, which, as it was a most important place, is hardly conceivable, it was certainly Nivernum, because there was no other Gallo-Roman town with which Noviodunum can be identified; and the great strength of the site of Nevers would have recommended it to Caesar (C.G., p.464).

Noviodunum (Suessionum) was a strongly fortified town (ii, 12, §2): it was a long day's march from Caesar's camp on the Aisne (S, §4), or perhaps from another camp a little lower down the valley (see the note on 12, §1); and we may fairly suppose that it was the chief stronghold of the Suessiones. Caesar's camp on the Aisne was either on the hill of Mauchamp, about a mile and a half NE.of Berry-au-Bac, or on the plateau of Chaudardes, about 5 miles nearer Soissons (see the note on 8, §§3 - 5)

Noviodunum was certainly not Augusta Suessionum (Soissons), the Gallo-Roman capital of the Suessiones; for this was an entirely new town. There is only one site for which any real evidence can be produced; but that evidence is very strong. An important Gallic fortress on the hill of Pommiers, about 21 miles north-west of Soissons, has been excavated. The ruins have yielded over 2,500 Gallic coins and 19 Roman ones earlier than 57 B.C., - the year in which Caesar captured Noviodunum; and quite close to Pommiers, on its eastern side, the entrenchments of a Roman camp, which may well have been Caesar's, have also been revealed. Probably the fortress of Pommiers was the old capital of the Suessiones, which was succeeded by the Gallo-Roman Augusta Suessionum, just as Bibracte (i, 23, ) was succeeded by Augustodunum (C.G., pp.464 - 6).

Ocelum. See GRAIOCELI.

Octodurus. See VERAGRI.

Oppidum Cassivellauni. - Caesar does not give details enough to enable us to locate this fort with certainty. Immediately after the sentence (v, 21, ) in which he says that he prohibited his soldiers from plundering the Trinovantes, he informs us that the stronghold of Cassivellaunus was not far off. We may fairly conclude that it was near the common frontier of the Trinovantes and Cassivellaunus. Verulamium, which was situated immediately west of St.Albans, fulfils this condition; it was the capital of Tasciovanus, the son and successor of Cassivellaunus; and the marshes which Caesar mentions (§2) might have been formed by the river Ver. Accordingly the oppidum is generally identified with Verulamium; and the conclusion is not improbable (A.B., pp.699 - 702).

Osismi. - According to Pomponius Mela (iii, 6, §48), the island of Sena, or Sein, about 30 miles south by west of Brest, was opposite territory which belonged to the Osismi; and Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 8, §§5 - 6) implies that the country of the Veneti extended northward as far as the Gobaean promontory, - the Pointe du Raz. The Osismi, then, inhabited the department of E`inistere, and we shall not go far wrong if we assume that the Montagnes Noires - a natural boundary - separated the two peoples (C.G., pp.466 - 7).

Paemaui. - The Paemani, who are mentioned by Caesar conjointly with the Condrusi, Eburones, and Caerosi (ii, 4, §10), most probably occupied the Pays de Famenne, which appears to retain their name, and adjoins on the west Condroz, the territory of the Condrusi (C.G., p.404).

Parisii. - The territory of the Parisii corresponded with the modern diocese of Paris, that is to say, the department of the Seine and part of the department of the Seine-et-Oise (C.G., p.467).

Petrocorii. - This tribe possessed the ancient diocese of Perigueux, which was nearly identical with the department of the Dordogne (C.G., p.467).

Pictones. - The Pictones occupied the ancient diocese of Poitiers, which included the departments of the Vendee, Deux-Sevres, and Vienne, the southern part of the Loire-Inferieure and the western part of the Maine-et-Loire (C.G., p.467).

Pirustae. - This tribe, according to Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 16, §5), dwelt in the eastern part of Albania, east of Dyrrachium (Durazzo); but Strabo (vii, 5, §3) says that they (or a people of the same name?) were in Pannonia. According to Caesar, they were not in Illyricum; therefore he probably meant the tribe which Strabo mentions.

Pleumoxii. See NERVII.

Ptianii. - The position of this tribe cannot be determined (C.G., p.467).

Rauraci. See LATOBRIGI.

Redones. - As the Redones are twice called a maritime people (ii, 34; vii, 75, §4), they must have possessed, besides the diocese of Rennes, the strip of coast between the Rance and the Couesnon, which separated the Venelli from the Coriosolites (C.G., pp.467 - 8).

Remi. - Besides the ancient diocese of Reims, the Remi probably also possessed that of Chalons, formed out of the territory of the Catuvellauni, who are not mentioned by any writer before the time of Constantine. According to Caesar (ii, 3, ), the Remi were conterminous with the Celtae. This would be true whether the Catuvellauni were grouped with the Remi or the Lingones; but most probably their territory belonged to the former, who were the more powerful (vi, 12, §7). See C.G., pp.468 - 9.

Rhenus, - the Rhine.

Rhodanus, - the Rhone.

Ruteni. - The territory of this people was identical with the ancient diocese of Rodez, that is to say, the greater part of the department of the Aveyron and the northern part of that of the Tarn (C.G., p.469).

Sabis, - the Sambre.

Samarobriva stood upon the site of Amiens. See p.403 and C.G., p.465.

Santoni. - The Santoni possessed the dioceses of Saintes and Angouleme and the Pays d'Aunis; in other words, the departments of the Charente and Charente-Inferieure and part of the Gironde (C.G., p.470).

Seduni. - The name of this tribe (iii, 1, ) is preserved by the town of Sion, or Sitten, which is in the valley of the upper Rhone, about 17 miles ENE.of Martigny (C.G., p.454).

Segni. - The name of this tribe, which, as Caesar says (vi, 32, §1), was between the Eburones and the Treveri, is apparently preserved in that of Sinei or Signi, a town in the county of Namur (C.G., p.404).

Segontiaci. - Judging by coins, the territory of this tribe (v, 21, ) may have been conterminous with and was probably north of that of the British Atrebates, who possessed parts of Hampshire and Berkshire (A.B., pp.346 - 7).

Segusiavi. - Caesar says (i, 10, §5) that the Segusiavi were `the first people outside the Province, beyond the Rhone'; and it is evident from 12 - 13 that when he entered their country he was on the eastern bank of the Saone. The greater part of their territory, however, was on the western bank; for two of their towns, Rodumna (Roanne) and Foruun Segusiavorum (Feurs), which Ptolemy mentions (Geogr., ii, 8, §11), were on that side, and indeed Rodumna was west of the Loire. Their chief town was Lugdunum (Lyons); and the western part of their country seems to have comprised that part of the diocese of Lgons which was on the right bank of the Rhone and of the Saone. It is impossible to define the tract which they possessed between the Rhone and the Saone; but it was probably very small, for Trevoux, which is 25 miles south of Macon, being situated between two places called Amberieux, may be supposed to have belonged to the Ambarri (C.G., pp.170 - 1).

Senones. - The Senones certainly posseased the diocese of Sens; and the dioceses of Auxerre (Autessiodurum) and Troyes are generally attributed to them as well. Autessiodurum, which is not mentioned by any writer earlier than Ammianus Marcellinus, is assigned in the Notitia provinciarum (p.265 [iv, 4]) to the Senones; but see HAEDUI. The diocese of Troyes represented the territory of the Tricasses, who are not mentioned by Caesar. Probably, then, as the reader will see if he looks at the map, they were dependants or a subdivision of the Senones (C.G., pp.471 - 3).

Sequana, - the Seine.

Sequani. - The Sequani were separated from the Helvetii by the Jura (i, 2, §3), from the Leuci by the Vosges, from the Aedui, according to Strabo (iv, 3, §2) and Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 8, §12), by the Saone, and from the Allobroges, in part (see B.G., i, 11, §5), by the Rhone. The Aedui, however, probably possessed those parts of the dioceses of Chalon (Cavillonum) and Macon (Matisco) (vii, 90, §7) which extend eastward of the Saone, and the Sequani were cut off from the lower reaches of that river by the Ambarri and the Segusiavi. Roughly speaking, their territory corresponded with the diocese of Besancon (Vesontio) and comprised Franche-Comte and the greater part of Alsace (C.G., pp.473 - 4).

Sibusates. - The Sibusates probably dwelt in the neighbourhood of Sobusse, between Dax and Bayonne; but there is no evidence except the resemblance between the names.

Sotiates. - The Sotiates possessed the country round Sos in the department of the Lot-et-Garonne. The evidence for identifying Sos with the stronghold of the Sotiates which Crassus captured (iii, 21) is this. Sos was in the Middle Ages called Sotium: the Jerusalem Itinerary (p.550) mentions a place called Scittium, which is identified by the statement of its distances from Elusa (Eauze) and Vasata (Bazas) with Sosand the form Scit[t]ium may have been due to a misreading of Sotium, the scribe mistaking an ill-formed o for ci. Crassus, having passed through the country of the Nitiobroges (see the note on iii, ao, §2), entered Aquitania, and the Sotiates were the people whom he first encountered (20, §3), which condition is satisfied by the position of Sos. Moreover, recent excavations at Sos prove that it was a Gallic stronghold (R.E.A., 1913, p.81). Only one objection is worth noticing here. The principal Gallic towns did not, as a rule, exchange their names for those of the tribes to which they belonged (for example, Lutecia became Parisii) before the close of the third century, and by that time the Sotiates were incorporated with the Elusates; accordingly it has been argued that the name of the town which Crassus captured could never have been effaced by the name Sotiates and therefore that the town was not identical with Sos. But the answer is easy. The Tricasses, who are not mentioned by Caesar, were incorporated with the Senones; yet Augustobona, the name of their chief town, was effaced by the name Tricasii (Troyes). See C.G., pp.414 - 7, one argument in which is here modified.

Suessiones. - The Suessiones possessed the diocese of Soissons, that is to say, the greater part of the department of the Aisne, and probably also the diocese of Senlis, formed out of the territory of the Silvanectes, who were between them and the Bellovaci. Caesar implies (ii, 13, ) that the territories of the Bellovaci and the Suessiones were conterminous, and he does not mention the Silvanectes in his list of the Belgic tribes (4, §§5 - 10). We may therefore infer that they were dependants of or included anuong either the Bellovaci or the Suessiones, and as the latter, according to Caesar (4, §6), had a very extensive territory, the diocese of Senlis probably belonged to them (C.G., pp.397, 477).

Sugambri. - This German tribe dwelt between the river Sieg, which preserves their name, and the Lippe. It would appear, then, that the territory of the Ubii, who were south of the Sugambri (iv, 18, §2; 19, ), was bounded on the north by the Sieg; but some writers maintain that they also possessed a strip of land north of the Sieg as far as Cologne and between the Rhine and the Sugambri. If so, the Sugambri must have crossed their territory in 53 B.C.when they made their raid into the country of the Eburones (vi, 35, §§4 - 6). But do not Caesar's words, Sugambri qui sunt proximi Rheno, prove that they crossed the Rhine immediately from their own territory? Cf. 1; 54, , and iii, 11, .

Tarbelli. - The territory of the Tarbelli, according to Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 7, §8), extended southward from the frontier of the Bituriges Vivisci to the Pyrenees and therefore included the territories of the Cocosates and the Sibusates. The Tarbelli were really separated from the Bituriges Vivisci by the Boiates, who are not mentioned by Caesar; but under the Roman Empire several smaller tribes, of whom the Boiates were probably one, were evidently annexed to the Tarbelli and grouped with them under their name; and even in Caesar's time certain tribes whom he does not name may have been included with them (C.G., pp.477 - 9).

Tarusates. - The Tarusates are generally believed to have been identical with the Aturenses, who are not mentioned by Caesar, and who possessed the country round Aire (Atura). Some writers believe that the district of Tursan in the diocese of Aire preserves their name; while others place them, for the same reason, in the neighbourhood of Tartas, which is about 15 miles north east of Dax (C.G., pp.479 - 80). See VOCATES.

Tergestini. - The Tergestini were the inhahitants of Tergeste, a town which is represented by the modern Trieste.

Tigurini. - An inscription containing the words PAG(i) TIGOR(inorum) has been found near Avenches, south of the lake of Morat; and accordingly the Tigurini are supposed to have inhabited that part of Switzerland (C.G., p.480). The reader will understand that the letters printed in small italics are not in the inscription; but he may be as sure that they have been rightly supplied as that M.C.C.stands for Marylebone Cricket Club. The art of deciphering Latin inscriptions was acquired gradually.

Tolosa stood upon the site of Toulouse.

Tolosates. - The Tolosates possessed that part of the territory of the Volcae Tectosages which corresponded with the ancient diocese of Toulouse (Tolosa), that is to say, the greater part of the department of the Elaute-Vienne and a part of the department of the Gers (C.G., p.480).

Treveri. - Caesar says that the territory of the Treveri, whose name is recognizable in Treves, extended to the Rhine (iii, 11, §1; vi, 9, §5); that it was conterminous with the territory of the Remi (v, 24, §2), and that it was separated from the Eburones by the Segni and Condrusi (vi, 32, ). It cannot be defined exactly, because we do not know whether the Treveri or the Mediomatrici, who were their southern neighbours, possessed the territory which afterwards belonged to the Vangiones, and because we cannot trace the frontiers of the Eburones, Segni, and Condrusi, with which no dioceses correspond. The northern boundary of the Treveri may have been the rugged valley of the Ahr or perhaps the river Vinxtbach, between the Ahr and the Moselle; and their territory comprised the greater part of the province of Lusembourg, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, and the southern part of Rhenish Prussia (C.G., p.481).

Triboci. - The Triboci were one of the tribes that fought in the host of Ariovistus (i, 51, §2), which had for some time been settled in the northern part of the country of the Sequani (31, §10), that is to say, in the plain of Alsace. Caesar says (38, §1) that the whole host of Ariovistus took part in the campaign, and (53, § - 3) that after his defeat the very small remnant of his host that escaped destruction was driven across the Rhine. According to Strabo, however (iv, 3, §4), the Triboci had taken up their abode in the country of the Mediomatrici. If the ancestors of these Triboci had invaded Gaul under Ariovistus, then, Caesar's statement notwithstanding, those who fought in the army of Ariovistus were only a portion of the tribe. Anyhow it is obviously impossible to determine the frontiers of the Triboci as they existed in the time of Caesar (C.G., pp.481 - 2).

Trinovantes. - This tribe inhabited Essex, for their chief town, Camulodunum (Ptolemy, Geogr., ii, 3, §11), was on the site of Colchester.

Tulingi. See LATOBRIGI.

Turoni. - The territory of the Turoni corresponded with the diocese of Tours, or, roughly speaking, the department of the Indre-et-Loire (C.G., p.483).


Uxellodunum. - Hirtius says that Uxellodunum was in the country of the Cadurci, which is represented by the department of the Lot; that the stronghold, which stood opon a hill was protected on all sides by steep rocks; that the ascent was difficult even when unopposed; that through the valley, which nearly surrounded the hill, there flowed a stream, that the stream flowed at the very foot of the hill in such a way that it was impossible to divert its course; that the descent to it for the townspeople was difficult and steep; that 3,000 men got out of the town, although it was blockaded by Caninius with two legions, and sent back a string of pack-horses, loaded with corn, into the peninsula; that below the stronghold, on that part of the hill which, for a space of about 300 feet, was not surrounded by the stream - in other words, on a part which overlooked the isthmus - there was a spring, that opposite the spring Caesar constructed an embankment 60 feet high, on which he erected a tower with 10 stories, high enough to overtop the spring, but not to reach the level of the wall of the town, and that the Roman engineers drove subterranean galleries towards the source of the spring and diverted its flow (viii, 32, §§1 - 2; 33, §1; 34, §1; 35, §3; 40, §§2 - 4; 41, §§1, 4 - 5; 43, §4).

Of the various sites that have been proposed for identification with Uxellodunum two only - Luzech (pronounced `Luzesh') and the Puy d'Issolu - need be noticed here.

Luzech, which is about 7 miles west-north-west of Cahors, is situated on an isthmus, at the foot and on the north of a hill which rises 287 feet above the level of the Lot, and is nearly surrounded by that river. The hill occupies 42 acres, - not more than one-third of the peninsula. No spring is to be found, only a slight oozing, so to speak, of water above the isthmus.

The only point which tells in favour of Luzech is that, alone among all the sites that have been proposed, it is almost entirely surrounded by a river, and that the breadth of the isthmus approximately corresponds with the statement of Hirtius. The hill is scarped on its northern side only: on the south and west the slopes are so gentle that even carriages can ascend without difficulty, and the rocks of which the hill is composed are so hard that they cannot have suffered any considerable change of form. The Lot does not flow at the very foot of the hill, the least distance which separates them is over 100, the greatest 500 yards. The oozing of water is not more than 13 or 14 feet above the level of the isthmus, and the gigantic works which the Romans constructed in order to place themselves on a level with the spring would therefore have heen unnecessary. There is a hill immediately north of Luzech and considerably higher, on which are the remains of a Gallic fort, called Impernal, the nearness of which makes it unlikely that Luzech was a stronghold at all. Lastly, if Uxellodunum was on a peninsula with an isthmus only 300 feet wide, how could 3,000 men have got out of it, how could a string of pack-horses have got into it again when it was blockaded by two legions? They could not have done so if the Roman general knew his business; and his generalship throughout the campaign had been excellent (cf. Caesar, B.C., ii, 34, §4).

The Puy d'Issolu, near Vayrac, rises about 650 feet above the valley of the Tourmente, a tributary of the Dordogne: it is nearly surrounded by steep escarprnents of rock and isolated on every side except the north-east, where it is connected by a col, or saddle, with the Pech Demont. On the north, east, and south the plateau is practically impregnable; while the western slopes, where, between the hamlets of Loulie and Leguillat, there is a break in the escarpment, are steep enough to justify the statement of Hirtius that even if no resistance had been offered, the ascent would have been difficult for armed men. On this side, about 72 feet below the line which the walls of the alleged fortress would have followed, there was a spring. The other topographical features will be plain to any one who studies the plan (facing p.385). A charter, dated 944, proves that the hill was then called Uxellodunum; and there is no evidence that any other place in the country of the Cadurci was ever called by any such name. The Puy commands the northern entrance to the country of the Cadurci; and therefore it is the very stronghold which Lucterius, fleeing from Caninius (32, §1), might have been expected to choose. Paths such as those by which Hirtius says (35, §3) that Lucterius endeavoured to send his pack-horses up the hill, are easily recognizable. Traces of lines of investment have been discovered, and also a gallery, driven through the western side of the hill to the source of the spring. But there is one serious objection. The Puy d'Issolu is not almost entirely surrounded by a river, but half surrounded by two rivers; and therefore there is no isthmus at all. It comes to this, then, that Luzech is the only place where there is an isthmus approximately corresponding with the descliption of Hirtius; while the Puy d'Issolu is the only place which, in other respects, corresponds with his description. But one can understand that Hirtius, if he never saw Uxellodunum, misunderstood the report which he followed; whereas it is hardly credible that he should have blundered wholesale as he must have done if Uxellodunum was the same as Luzech. Uxellodunum, then, must be identified with the Puy d'Issolu, though doubts may recur (C.G., pp.483 - 93).

Vangiones. - The Vangiones, one of the German tribes which fought under Ariovistus (i, 51, §2), occupied, in the time of Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 9, §9), the country round Borbetomagus (Worms); but it is doubtful whether they were settled there in the time of Caesar (C.G., pp.493 - 4). See NEMETES and TRIBOCI.

Veliocasses. - The Veliocasses, whose name survives, perhaps, in `Vexin', dwelt in the southern part of the department of the Seine-Infelieure and the eastern part of the department of the Eure (C.G., p.494).

Vellaunodunum was in the country of the Senones, on a road leading from Agedincum (Sens) to Cenabum (Orleans). Caesar marched from Agedincum to Vellaunodunum in two days, and proceeded to besiege it on the day of his arrival. In a couple of days he surrounded it with a contravallation, and on the third day the garrison surrendered. After making arrangements for disarming them Caesar moved on, and reached Cenabum in two days, - too late in the afternoon to begin the siege, but not too late to begin the `needful preparations' (vii, 10, §4 - 11, §5). One would infer that Vellaunodunum was about midway between Agedincum and Cenabum, but perhaps rather nearer to the former than to the latter. There was a Roman road, 67 miles long, from Agedincum to Cenabun, which passed by Chateau-Landon, Sceaux, and Beaune, another mentioned in the Table of Peutinger (p.26, cols.1 - 2), which passed a little north of Gien, was 74 miles, a third road, about 72 miles long, passed through Montargis and Ladon. We cannot prove that any of these roads existed in the time of Caesar; but it is highly probable that they all did.

I need not here mention all the places that have been identified with Vellaunodunum. Some of them may unhesitatingly be ruled out, because they were chosen on the wrong, assumption that Cenabum was at Gien: others are either much too far from Sens or otherwise objectionable. Only two are worth considering, - Montargis and a site about a mile and a half east of Sceaux. Roman antiquities have been found in the neighbourhood of the former, Celtic remains and Roman coins at the latter: both are a little nearer to Sens than to Orleans. Sceaux, however, stands upon low-lying marshy ground; and although Avaricum did the same, M.Jullian agrees with me in thinking that the site of Vellaunodunum is probably Montargis (C.G., pp.494 - 8).

Vellavii. - The territory of this tribe corresponded with Velay, or the department of the Loire-Superieure (C.G., p.499).

Venelli. - The Venelli dwelt in the Cotentin, - the department of the Manche (C.G., p.499).

Veneti. - Roughly speaking, the Veneti occupied the department of the Morbihan. According to Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 8, §§5 - 6), their territory extended northward as far as the Pointe du Raz: if so, their northern frontier could not have coincided with the northern frontier of the diocese of Vannes, which struck the coast far south of that promontory. All that can be safely said is that Venetia did not extend further northward than the natural boundary formed by the Montagnes Noires (C.G., p.499). See OSISMI.

Veragri. - This Alpine tribe lived in the western part of the Valais, their chief town, Octodurus (iii, 1, §4), being situated between Martigny-la-Ville and Martigny-Bourg, on the left bank of the Rhone, near the point where it bends northward towards the lake of Geneva (C.G., p.454).

Vesontio is now represented by Besancon.

Vienna was on the site of Vienne, on the left bank of the Rhone, about 20 miles south of Lyons.

Viromandui. - The Viromandui, whose name survives in Vermandois, inhabited the diocese of Noyon, - the northern part of the department of the Aisne and the eastern part of that of the Somme (C.G., pp.499 - 500).

Vocates. - Caesar says (iii, 23, §1) that Crassus, after he had defeated the Sotiates, marched for the country of the Vocates and the Tarusates. According to him, then, those two tribes were conterminous. The Sotiates occupied the country round Sos, and the Tarusates dwelt either in the district of Aire or in the neighbouring district of Tartas. The Vocates are generally identified with the Boiates, who occupied tlle district of Buch, near Arcachon. But this will not do; for Arcachon is far away from Aire and from Tartas, whereas the Vocates were close to the Carusates. Whether the Vocates possessed Buch or not, their country must have extended southward into the department of Les Landes (C.G., pp.500 - 1).

Vocontii. - The chief towns of this Alpine people were Vasio (Vaison), Lucus Augusti (Luc), and Dea (Die), and on the north they were conterminous with the Allobroges (i, 10, §5). But it is impossible to define their frontiers, because the territory which undoubtedly belonged to them was surrounded by the territories of minor peoples - the Memini, Vulgientes, Quariates Bodiontici, Avantici, Tricorii, and Uceni - whom Caesar ignores and who may have been pagi of theirs, actually included within their territory, or may only have been their dependants (clientes); while some of these peoples may have been pagi or dependants of the Caturiges or of the Allobroges (C.G., pp.501 - 2).

Volcae. - The Volcae (Arecomici and Tectosages) possessed the country between the Rhone, the Cevennes, the upper Garonne, and the Mediterranean. According to Strabo (iv, 1, §12), Narbo belonged to the Arecomici; according to Ptolemy (Geogr., ii, 10, §6), to the Tectosages. A passage in B.G., vii, 7, §4 - praesidia in Rutenis provincialibus, Volcis Arecomicis, Tolosatibus, circumque Narbonem ... constituit - seems to imply that Narbo was not, at all events in 52 B.C., in the country of the Arecomici.