No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
THE SUPPRESSION OF THE DRUIDS IN CAESAR'S GALLIC WAR
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 31 October 2023
Abstract
Ancient testimonia on the Druids are few in number and sparse on details, and they have yielded a broad range of scholarly opinions on the Druids’ function among the Gauls. This article examines the suspiciously limited role played by the Druids in Julius Caesar's Gallic War (= BGall.). Considering the work of both classicists and archaeologists, it argues that, given Caesar's demonstrated propensity for tailoring his portrayals of northern Europeans to fit with his narrative objectives, he deliberately omitted the Druids from nearly all of the Gallic War save for a brief ethnographic digression on the Gauls. This he did in order to downplay the sophistication of the Gauls, and the threat they posed to the Romans, since the Druids were likely a potent source of anti-Roman sentiment during Caesar's time in Gaul, just as they seem to have been in the Early Imperial period.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association
Footnotes
My thanks to J.E. Lendon for his encouragement, first in setting aside and then in pursuing the idea that led to this article. All translations (as well as any errors) are my own.
References
1 For general discussions of this tendency in the Gallic War, see Stevens, C.E., ‘The Bellum Gallicum as a work of propaganda’, Latomus 11 (1952), 165–79Google Scholar; Walser, G., Caesar und die Germanen (Wiesbaden, 1956)Google Scholar; Rambaud, M., L'art de la deformation historique dans les commentaires de César (Paris, 1966 2)Google Scholar; Welch, K. and Powell, A. (edd.), Julius Caesar as Artful Reporter (London, 1998)Google Scholar.
2 For sceptical examinations of Caesar's digressions on the Gauls, see Gardner, J.F., ‘The Gallic menace in Caesar's propaganda’, G&R 30 (1983), 181–9Google Scholar; Walser, G., ‘Zu Caesars Tendenz in der geographischen Beschreibung Galliens’, Klio 77 (1995), 217–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the Germans, see Krebs, C.B., ‘“Imaginary geography” in Caesar's Bellum Gallicum’, AJPh 127 (2006), 111–36Google Scholar; Allen-Hornblower, E., ‘Beasts and barbarians in Caesar's Bellum Gallicum 6.21–8’, CQ 64 (2014), 682–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the ethnographic digressions more generally, see Schadee, H., ‘Caesar's construction of northern Europe: inquiry, contact and corruption in De Bello Gallico’, CQ 58 (2008), 158–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Creer, T., ‘Ethnography in Caesar's Gallic War and its implications for composition’, CQ 69 (2019), 246–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
3 Aldhouse-Green, M., Caesar's Druids (New Haven, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar uses passages from Caesar as jumping-off points from which to examine relevant archaeological evidence, but is generally more trusting of Caesar and other ancient authors than the majority of classicists.
4 A subject of considerable speculation. Although Caesar is our earliest surviving source on the Druids, there is some evidence of accounts about Gauls and Druids by Timaeus (~356–270 b.c.) and Pytheas of Massalia (350–285 b.c.), both of whom may have been sources for Posidonius and the later Alexandrian tradition (contra R. Wiśniewski, ‘Deep woods and vain Ooacles: Druids, Pomponius Mela and Tacitus’, Palamedes 2 [2007], 143–56, at 144; summarized by N.K. Chadwick, The Druids [Cardiff, 1966], 32–4). Diogenes Laertius also cites Aristotle's apocryphal Magicus and Sotion's lost Diadochai as authoritative texts on the Druids (Vit. Phil. 1.1), which, if true, would make these the earliest Graeco-Roman sources to mention Druids (R. Hutton, Blood and Mistletoe [New Haven, 2009], 2; A.C. Johnston, The Sons of Remus [Cambridge, 2017], 252). For more on the Celtic ethnographic tradition, its earliest authors and Posidonius’ place within it, see Lampinen, A., ‘Fragments from the “middle ground”—Posidonius’ northern ethnography’, Arctos 48 (2014), 229–59Google Scholar.
5 Posidonius is considered the fountainhead of Celtic ethnography because of the similar descriptions of the Gauls given by ancient authors (see n. 6 below), who generally cite Posidonius as a source. While scholars have long agreed on the topics Posidonius wrote about, they differ on what precisely his work contained and how much later authors relied on Posidonius or on their own experience with the Celts. Tierney, J.J., ‘The Celtic ethnography of Posidonius’, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 60 (1960), 189–275Google Scholar sought to reconstruct Posidonius’ Celtic ethnography from fragments found in later authors, believing that most of these other ethnographies were copied from Posidonius. Tierney's work met initially with acceptance (Chadwick [n. 4], 6–7; S. Piggott, The Druids [New York, 1985], 97–8; more recently Wiśniewski [n. 4], 144–5), but was heavily criticized by classicists beginning with Nash, D., ‘Reconstructing Poseidonios’ Celtic ethnography: some considerations’, Britannia 7 (1976), 111–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar, who pushed back against the idea that an entire ethnographic tradition should be blithely ascribed to a lost work, a view shared by Webster, J., ‘At the end of the world: Druidic and other revitalization movements in post-conquest Gaul and Britain’, Britannia 30 (1999), 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hutton (n. 4), 10; Lampinen (n. 4), 244.
6 The terms βάρδοι/bardos, δρυΐδαι/drysidas and μάντεις/ὀυάτεις/euhagis are used in the same way by the three primary authors of the Posidonian tradition, Diodorus, Strabo and Ammianus Marcellinus (Diod. Sic. 5.31.2–3, Strabo 4.4.4, Amm. Marc. 15.9.8), and the functions attributed to the three by each author are more or less identical. The debate on whether to classify Ammianus’ digression on the Druids as a fragment of Posidonius (because of the similarity of its content to other Posidonian sources) or of Timagenes (because Ammianus names Timagenes as a source for the origins of the Gauls [Amm. Marc. 15.9.2]) remains unresolved, although, given Ammianus’ frequent tendency to copy earlier ancient authors without attribution (T. Creer, ‘Ethnography and the Roman digressions of Ammianus Marcellinus’, Histos 14 [2020], 255–74, at 256, 264–7), it seems likely that his account of the Druids was derived primarily from earlier Posidonian sources. For a detailed table of every mention of the Druids in Graeco-Roman literature, complete with dates and summaries of their content, see Webster (n. 5), 2–4.
7 See n. 5 above.
8 Laid out clearly by Webster (n. 5), 2–6.
9 illi rebus diuinis intersunt, sacrificia publica ac priuata procurant, religiones interpretantur (BGall. 6.13.4). administrisque ad ea sacrificia druidibus utuntur (6.16.2). The verbs in these passages (intersunt, procurant, interpretantur) and the noun administris suggest that the Druids were integral to Gallic ritual, but they remain too ambiguous for us to be certain whether the Druids were performing the rituals or just supervising them. Chadwick (n. 4), 28 argued that the Druids were administrators of Gallic rituals, especially human sacrifice; Piggott (n. 5), 100–2 and Aldhouse-Green (n. 3), 11 are more emphatic that the Druids carried out rituals, including sacrifices, rather than just overseeing them.
10 Piggott (n. 5), 202; Wiśniewski (n. 4), 152.
11 Chadwick (n. 4), 6–17; Piggott (n. 5), 202; Wiśniewski (n. 4), 144, 156.
12 Expressed most forcefully by Wiśniewski (n. 4) and Johnston (n. 4), 247–58. Johnston in particular argues that the Druids were ‘in large part an ethnographic myth’ (253), and that representations of the Druids in Roman literature were ‘subordinated to and determined by the requirements and constraints of particular imperial narratives’ (253). He also contends that Caesar's depiction of the Druids embodies this trend, since the Druids ‘are entirely invisible, and are given no real agency’ in the narrative of the Gallic War (253–4), a view incompatible with the present argument.
13 Krebs (n. 2); Schadee (n. 2); Allen-Hornblower (n. 2); Creer (n. 2).
14 Beginning with the Helvetii near Cisalpine Gaul, followed by the Germans under Ariovistus, the Belgae of north-eastern Gaul, the Veneti of the western coast, the Britons and, finally, the Germans.
15 The lex Vatinia of 59 b.c. granted Caesar Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum as his consular provinces for five years; his assignment to Transalpine Gaul was intended only for the temporary purpose of dealing with the Helvetii.
16 The Carnutes seem to have been among the least submissive to Roman rule of the Gallic tribes, and their territory was home to several legions’ winter quarters (BGall. 2.35.3, 5.25.4, 8.4.2–3, 8.46.4). They probably began planning the revolt of 52 when they killed their king Tasgetius, Caesar's ally (5.25.1–3), and sought the support of other tribes (5.56, 6.2–3). Their rebellion persisted even after Vercingetorix's defeat at Alesia, and they were among Caesar's primary opponents in 51.
17 The Aedui had been considered ‘brothers and kinsmen’ (BGall. 1.33.2 fratres consanguineosque) of the Romans since 121 b.c., when they had appealed to the Romans for aid against the Arverni and the Allobroges (see also Cic. Att. 1.19.2, Fam. 7.10.4). Caesar relies heavily on the Aedui for support in the first several books of the Gallic War (BGall. 1.15.1, 1.35.4, 1.43.6–9, 5.54.4, 6.4), and reminders of his favours nearly prevent them from joining in the revolt of 52 (7.41.1, 7.54.3–4).
18 L. Rawlings, ‘Caesar's portrayal of Gauls as warriors’, in K. Welch and A. Powell (edd.), Julius Caesar as Artful Reporter (London, 1998), 179–92; Riggsby, A.M., Caesar in Gaul and Rome (Austin, 2006), 97–102Google Scholar; Creer (n. 2), 260.
19 For historians using ethnographies to build narrative anticipation, see G. Woolf, Tales of the Barbarians (Malden, 2011), 87–90. For Caesar's ethnographies and use of ethnographic topoi, Creer (n. 2) examines each digression in detail.
20 BGall. 1.39.1, 4.1.9–10, 6.21.3, 6.28.1–3.
21 For comparison of the German ethnographies of Books 4 and 6, see Allen-Hornblower (n. 2), 683–4; Creer (n. 2), 254–8.
22 The traditional view of Caesar's anticlimactic expeditions against the Germans is that he included the digressions of Book 6 in order to distract from his failure to actually fight them, or portray the venture as if it was exploratory all along. For this view, see Schadee (n. 2), 170; Allen-Hornblower (n. 2), 683 n. 4. For Caesar considering himself the victor for scaring away the Germans, see J.E. Lendon, ‘Julius Caesar, thinking about battle and foreign relations’, Histos 9 (2015), 1–28, at 18–19; Creer (n. 2), 257.
23 ut non nequiquam tantae uirtutis homines iudicari deberet ausos esse transire latissimum flumen, ascendere altissimas ripas, subire iniquissimum locum; quae facilia ex difficillimis animi magnitudo redegerat.
24 BGall. 6.24.4–6. For other mentions of the Volcae Tectosages, see Woolf (n. 19), 74–6.
25 Strabo, citing Posidonius, says that the Gauls hang the heads of their enemies from their horses’ bridles and later affixed them to their gates, and that they valued highly the heads of notable men, which they would embalm with expensive oils (4.4.5). Diodorus gives a similar description (5.29.4–5), strengthening the belief that this feature of Gallic ethnography originated with Posidonius. Livy describes the practice among the Boii, whom he depicts in 216 b.c. decapitating the Roman consul L. Postumius and lining the head with gold to use it thereafter as a vessel for libations (23.24.11–12).
26 Early examples have been found mostly in southern Gaul, including at Entremont the remains of a fifth-century b.c. ‘head-pillar’ thought to represent a large number of head trophies, along with a group of fourth-to-third-century warrior statues each of which holds one or several heads (see P. Arcelin and A. Rapin, ‘L'iconographie anthropomorphe de l'Age du Fer en Gaule Méditerranéenne’, in O. Büchsenschütz, A. Bulard, M.-B. Chardenoux and N. Ginoux [edd.], Decors, images, et signes de l'Age du Fer européen [Tours, 2003], 183–220; P. Arcelin and G. Congès, ‘La sculpture protohistorique de Provence dans le Midi Gaulois’, Documents d'Archéologie Méridionale 27 [2004], 10–12; P. Arcelin, ‘Entremont et la sculpture du second Age du Fer en Provence’, Documents d'Archéologie Méridionale 27 [2004], 71–84; I. Armit, ‘Inside Kurtz's compound: headhunting and the human body in prehistoric Europe’, in M. Bonogofsky [ed.], Skull Collection, Modification, and Decoration [Oxford, 2006], 1–14), at Roquepertuse a series of skull-niches in a portico and other head-centric statuary and painting (F. Benoit, L'art primitif méditerranéen de la vallée du Rhône [Aix-en-Provence, 1969]; R. Coignard and O. Coignard, ‘L'ensemble lapidaire de Roquepertuse: nouvelle approche’, Documents d'Archéologie Méridionale 14 [1991], 27–42; F. Delamare and B. Guineau, ‘Roquepertuse: analyse des couches picturales’, Documents d'Archéologie Méridionale 14 [1991], 83–6), and at Le Cailar depositions of embalmed heads alongside weapons (S. Ghezal et al., ‘Embalmed heads of the Celtic Iron Age in the south of France’, Journal of Archaeological Science 101 [2019], 181–8). Similar, simpler constructions have been found in northern Gaul at Gournay-sur-Aronde and Ribemont-sur-Ancre, where ritual pits attest to deliberate collection and deposition of human and animal heads, and head-sized niches in the porticoes adorning the shrines’ entrances suggest a function similar to those in southern Gaul (see J.L. Brunaux, The Celtic Gauls [London, 1988], 13–23, ‘Être Prêtre en Gaule’, in V. Guichard and F. Perrin [edd.], Les Druides. L'Archéologue hors série No. 2 [Paris, 2000], 5–9; B. Lambot, ‘Les morts d'Acy Romance (Ardennes) à La Tène finale. Pratiques funèraires, aspects religieuses et hiérarchie sociale’, Études et Documents Fouillés 4. Les Celtes. Rites Funéraires en Gaule du Nord entre le Vie et le Ier siècle avant Jésus-Christ [Namur, 1998], 75–87, ‘Victimes, sacrificateurs et dieux’, in V. Guichard and F. Perrin [edd.], Les Druides. L'Archéologue hors série No. 2 [Paris, 2000], 30–6; G. Fercoq du Leslay, ‘L'Image du Trophée’, L'Archéologue 46 [2000], 9–13). These sites were in use up until the time of Caesar's conquest of Gaul, confirming the presence of head-taking in northern Gaul and suggesting suppression at that early date. For synthesis and interpretation of the reports on these sites, see Aldhouse-Green (n. 3), 131–6.
27 Some evidence for ritual decapitation in Britain has been found at Bredon Hill (A.G. Western and J.D. Hurst, ‘“Soft heads”: evidence for sexualized warfare during the later Iron Age from Kemerton Camp, Bredon Hill’, in C. Knüsel and M. Smith [edd.], The Routledge Handbook of the Bioarchaeology of Human Conflict [London, 2013], 161–84).
28 Tierney (n. 5), 213–15, 224 argued that the Druids’ role in Gallic society was unduly magnified by Caesar and that Diviciacus cannot be considered a source of information on Druidism since he could not speak Latin. His view is echoed by Piggott (n. 5), 104. See also Nash (n. 5), 126; Wiśniewski (n. 4), 145–6; Hutton (n. 4), 5.
29 Originally proposed by Dunham, S.B., ‘Caesar's perception of Gallic social structures’, in Arnold, B. and Gibson, D.B. (edd.), Celtic Chiefdom, Celtic State (Cambridge, 1995), 110–15Google Scholar, who views Caesar's description of Druids and Gallic equites as Caesar's decidedly Roman perspective of Gallic society; see also Maier, B., The Celts (Edinburgh, 2003), 65CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
30 Posited by Johnston (n. 4), 253 among the greatest sceptics of ancient sources on the Druids.
31 Drinkwater, J., Roman Gaul (London, 1983), 108Google Scholar; Woolf, G., Becoming Roman (Cambridge, 1998), 228CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Aldhouse-Green (n. 3), 51–2; Johnston (n. 4), 242–5. The French bibliography is collected by Lamoine, L., ‘La pratique du vergobret: la témoignage de César confronté aux inscriptions’, Cahiers du Centre Gustave Glotz 17 (2006), 81–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Le pouvoir local en Gaule romaine (Clermont, 2009), 106–16.
32 Chadwick (n. 4), 111; Aldhouse-Green (n. 3), 32, 49, 82.
33 See n. 29 above.
34 A young Caesar was elevated to the office of flamen Dialis by Cinna (Vell. Pat. 2.43.1; Suet. Iul. 1.1), then co-opted into the collegium pontificum in 73 (Vell. Pat. 2.43.1), and elected pontifex maximus in 63 (Suet. Iul. 13; Vell. Pat. 2.43.3).
35 See n. 16 above.
36 Pompon. 3.2.18–19; Luc. 1.422–65; Tac. Ann. 14.30; Dio. Cass. 62.6–7. Most scholars have interpreted the Druids’ secluded instruction as a sign of Roman persecution, and that they sought in this manner to keep the oral tradition of the Druids alive despite the government's increasing hostility toward them (see Chadwick [n. 4], 73–4; D. Rankin, Celts and the Classical World [London, 1987], 290). Focussing on Pomponius Mela's version of this topos (probably derived from Caesar), Wiśniewski (n. 4), 147–8 argues that Mela's description of the Druids teaching in caves or deep in the forest (Pompon. 3.2.18) is not meant to be taken literally but rather as a way of conveying Caesar's description of the Druids’ reliance on memory and oral instruction to prevent their teachings from being spread among Gallic commoners. On the problems presented by Lucan's description of the groves Caesar's men supposedly destroyed outside of Massilia, Hutton (n. 4), 11 provides bibliography and a brief analysis.
37 While the alliance between the Atrebates and the Romans was not nearly as old as that of the Aedui—the Atrebates had fought alongside the other Belgae at the Battle of the Sabis River in 57 (BGall. 2.16.2, 2.23.1)—Caesar seems to have considered their king, Commius, a close and trusted ally (7.76.1) and worked closely with him in his British campaigns (4.21.7, 4.27.2–3, 4.35.1, 5.22.3), and seems to have rewarded the Atrebates handsomely for their services (7.76.1). For the relationship between the Romans and the Aedui, see n. 17 above.
38 Woolf (n. 31), 230–1. On the notion that Druidism might have been conceived of as the opposite of traditional Roman values, see Woolf (n. 31), 220–2.
39 Most scholars are (rightly) sceptical of the allegations of cannibalism that appear in ethnographies of northern Europeans, but limited evidence of Iron Age cannibalism in Britain has been found at Alveston, Eton College and (debatably) Folly Lane at St. Albans. Aldhouse-Green (n. 3), 75–7 provides a brief discussion of the sites and relevant bibliography.
40 Webster, J., ‘A negotiated syncretism: readings on the development of Romano-Celtic religion’, in D.J. Mattingly (ed.), Dialogues in Roman Imperialism (Portsmouth, 1997), 164–84Google Scholar.
41 The rebellion of Julius Sacrovir of the Aedui and Julius Florus of the Treveri (a Belgic tribe) in a.d. 21 (Tac. Ann. 3.40–7), although short-lived and less successful than the revolts of the 50s b.c., may have involved all sixty-four Gallic provinces and a few German tribes (3.44.1), and this degree of involvement and Sacrovir's pressing into service of the young Gallic nobles at Augustodunum, who, Tacitus tells us, were in the midst of their education (3.43.1), strike some intriguing parallels with Caesar's account of the Druids’ instruction of the youth of Gaul (BGall. 6.14.2–6) and with the involvement of most of Gaul in Vercingetorix's rebellion (7.75.2–4). The famous revolt of the British Iceni in a.d. 61 (Tac. Ann. 14.30–8; Agr. 16) is also loosely associated with Druids, although it mostly seems to have centred around their queen/priestess Boudica.