Belgae
- the Belgians, a warlike people, of German and Celtic origin, in the north of Gaul, Caes. B. G. 1, 1; 2, 4; Mel. 3, 2, 4; Tac. A. 1, 43; 3, 40; id. H. 4, 17; 4, 76 al.—In sing.: Bel-ga, ae, m., a Belgian, Luc. 1, 426; Claud. Laud. Stil. 1, 226.—
- II Deriv.: Belgĭ-cus, a, um, adj., Belgic: esseda, Verg. G. 3, 204: color, Prop. 2 (3), 18, 26: calami, Plin. 16, 36, 65, § 161: canis, Sil. 10, 80.—Hence, Gallia Belgica, or absol. Belgica, the northern part of Gaul, between the Rhine, Seine, Marne, and the North Sea, inhabited by the Belgians, Plin. 4, 17, 31, § 105; 7, 16, 17, § 76. —Absol., Plin. 15, 25, 30, § 103; Tac. H. 1, 12; 1, 58 al.
BELGAECaesar ( B. G. 1.1) makes the Belgae, by which he means the country of the Belgae, one of the great divisions of Gallia. The Belgae were separated from their southern neighbours the Celtae by the Seineand the Marne(Matrona), a branch of the Seine. Their boundary on the west was the Ocean; on the east and north the lower course of the Rhine. Caesar's Gallia extends as far as the outlets of the Rhine ( B. G. 4.10), and includes the Insula Batavorum [BATAVORUM INSULA] ; but there is a debated point or two about the outlets of the Rhine, which is better discussed elsewhere [RHENUS]. Caesar does not fix the boundary of the Belgae between the source of the Marne and the Rhine; but as the Lingones and the Sequani seem to be the most northern of the Celtae in these parts, the boundary may have run from the source of the Marne along the Côte d'Orand the Faucillesto the Vosges(Vosegus Mons); and the Vosegus was the boundary from the north bank of the Doubs(Dubis) to its termination in the angle formed by the juncture of the Naheand the Rhine, near Bingen, with this exception that the Mediomatrici extended to the Rhine ( B. G. 4.10). The people on the east of the Vosges were Germans, Vangiones, Nemetes, Tribocci, who occupied the plain of Alsace, and perhaps somewhat more. (Tacit. German. 28.) These three tribes, or a part of each, were in the army of Ariovistus. (Caes. B. G. 1.51.) As to the Tribocci at least, their position on the left bank of the Rhine in Caesar's time, is certain. ( B. G. 4.10). Strabo (p. 194) speaks of them as having crossed the Rhine into Gallia,without mentioning the time of this passage. The Nemetes and Vangiones may have settled west of the Rhine after Caesar's time, and this supposition agrees with Caesar's text, who does not mention them in B. G. 4.12, which he should have done, if they had then been on the Gallic side of the Rhine. Caesar's military operations in Gallia did not extend to any part of the country between the Moseland the Rhine. The battle in which he defeated Ariovistus was probably fought in the plain of Alsace, north of Bale; but Caesar certainly advanced no further north in that direction, for it was unnecessary: he finished this German war by driving the Germans into the Rhine.
Caesar gives to a part of the whole country, which lie calls the country of the Belgae, the name of Belgium ( B. G. 5.12, 24, 25); a term which he might form after the fashion of the Roman names, Latium and Samnium. But the reading Belgiois some-what uncertain, for the final o and the s may easily have been confounded in the MSS.; and though the MSS. are in favour of Belgioin 5.12, 25, they are in favour of Belgisin 5.24. The form Belgiooccurs also in Hirtius ( B. G. 8.46, 49, 54), in the common texts. The form Belgium,which would decide the matter, does not occur in the Gallic war. But whether Belgium is a genuine form or not, Caesar uses either Belgium or Belgae, in a limited sense, as well as in the general sense of a third part of Gallia. For in 5.24, where he is describing the position of his troops during the winter of the year B.C. 54--53, he speaks of three legions being quartered in Belgium or among the Belgae, while he mentions others as quartered among the Morini, the Nervii, the Essui, the Remi, the Treviri, and the Eburones, all of whom are Belgae, in the wider sense of the term. The part designated by the term Belgium or Belgae in 5.24, is the country of the Bellovaci (5.46). In Hirtius (8.46, 47) the town of Nemetocenna ( Arras), the chief place of the Atrebates, is placed in Belgium. The position of the Ambiani, between the Bellovaci and the Atrebates, would lead to a probable conclusion that the Ambiani were Belgae; and this is confirmed by a comparison with 5.24, for Caesar placed three legions in Belgium, under three commanders; and though he only mentions the place of one of them as being among the Bellovaci, we may conclude what was the position of the other two from the names of the Ambiani and Atrebates being omitted in the enumeration in 5.24. There was, then, a people, or three peoples, specially named Belgae, whom Caesar places between the Oiseand the upper basin of the Schelde, in the old French provinces of Picardieand Artois. We might be inclined to consider the Caleti as Belgae, from their position between the three Belgic peoples and the sea; and some geographers support this conclusion by a passage in Hirtius (8.6), but this passage would also make us conclude that the Aulerci were Belgae, and that would be false.
In B. G. 2.4, Caesar enumerates the principal peoples in the country of the Belgae in its wider sense, which, besides those above enumerated, were: the Suessiones, who bordered on the Remi; the Menapii in the north, on the lower Maas, and bordering. on the Morini on the south and the Batavi on the north; the Caleti, at the mouth of the Seine;2the Velocasses on the Seine, in the Vexin;the Veromandui, north of the Suessiones, in Vermandois, and the Aduatuci on the Maas, and probably about the confluence of the Maasand Sambre. The Condrusi, Eburones, Caeraesi, and Paemani, who are also mentioned in B. G. 2.4, were called by the general name of Germani. They were all in the basin of the Maas, extending from Tongern, southwards, but chiefly on the east side of the Maas;and the Eburones extended to the Rhine. The Aduatuci were said to be Teutones and Cimbri. ( B. G. 2.29.)
Besides these peoples, there are mentioned by Caesar ( B. G. 5.5) the Meldi, who are not the Meldi on the Seine, but near Bruges, or thereabouts; and the Batavi, in the Insula Batavorum. [BATAVORUM INSULA] The Segni, mentioned in B. G. 6.32 with the Condrusi, were probably Germans, and situated in Namur.The Ambivareti ( B. G. 4.9, 7.90) are of doubtful position. The Mediomatrici, south of the Treviri, were included in Caesar's Belgae; and also the Leuci, south of the Mediomatrici. The Parisii, on the Seine, were Celtae. These are the peoples included in Caesar's Belgae, except some few, such as those mentioned in B. G. 5.39, of whom we know nothing.
This division of Gallia comprehends part of the basin of the Seine, the basin of the Somme, of the Schelde, and of the Maas;and the basin of the Mosel, which belongs to the basin of the Rhine. It is a plain country, and contains no mountain range except the Vosges. The hills that bound the basin of the Moselare inconsiderable elevations. The tract of the Ardennes(the Arduenna Silva), is rugged, but not mountainous. There is also the hilly tract along the Maasbetween Dinantand Liège, and north and east as far as Aix-la-Chapelle. The rest is level, and is a part of the great plain of Northern Europe.
Caesar ( B. G. 1.1) makes the Belgae distinct from the Celtae and Aquitani in usages, political constitution, and language; but little weight is due to this general expression, for it appears that those whom Caesar calls Belgae were not all one people; they had pure Germans among them, and, besides this, they were mixed with Germans. The Remi told Caesar ( B. G. 2.4) that most of the Belgae were of German origin, that they had crossed the Rhine of old, and, being attracted by the fertility of the soil, had settled in the parts about there, and expelled the Galli who were the cultivators of those parts. This is the true meaning of Caesar's text: a story of an ancient invasion from the north and east of the Rhine by Germanic people, of which we have a particular instance in the case of the Batavi [BATAVI]; of the Galli who were disturbed, being at that remote time an agricultural people, and of their being expelled by the Germans. But Caesar's words do not admit any further inference than that these German invaders occupied the parts near the Rhine. The Treviri and Nervii affected a German origin (Tacit. German. 28), which, if it be true, must imply that they had some reason for affecting it; and also that they were not pure Germans, or they might have said so. Strabo (p. 192) makes the Nervii Germans. The fact of Caesar making such a river as the Marnea boundary between Belgic and Celtic peoples, is a proof that he saw some marked distinction between Belgae and Celtae, though there were many points of resemblance. Now, as most of the Belgae were Germans or of German origin, as the Remi believed or said, there must have been some who were not Germans or of German origin; and if we exclude the Menapii, the savage Nervii, and the pure Germans, we cannot affirm that any of the remainder of the Belgae were Germans. The name of the Morini alone is evidence that they are not Germans; for their name is only a variation of the form Armorici.
Within the time of man's memory, when Caesar was in Gallia, Divitiacus, a king of the Suessiones, was the most powerful prince in all Gallia, and had established his authority even in Britain ( B. G. 2.4). Belgae had also passed into Britain, and settled there in the maritime parts ( B. G. 5.12), and they retained the names of the peoples from which they came. The direct historical conclusion from the ancient authorities as to the Belgae, is this: they were a Celtic people, some of whom in Caesar's time were mixed with Germans, without having lost their national characteristics. Caesar, wanting a name under which he could comprehend all the peoples north of the Seine, took the name of Belgae, which seems to have been the general name of a few of the most powerful peoples bordering on the Seine. Strabo (p. 176), who makes a marked distinction between the Aquitani and the rest of the people of Celtica or Gallia Transalpina, states that the rest have the Gallic or Celtic physical characteristics, but that they have not all the same language, some differing a little in tongue, and in their political forms and habits a little; all which expresses as great a degree of uniformity among peoples spread over so large a surface as could by any possibility exist in the state of civilization at that time. Strabo, besides the Commentariiof Caesar, had the work of Posidonius as an authority, who had travelled in Gallia.
When Augustus made a fourfold division of Gallia, B.C. 27, which in fact subsisted before him in Caesar's time,--for the Provincia is a division of Gallia independent of Caesar's threefold division ( B. G. 1.1),--he enlarged Aquitania [AQUITANIA], and he made a division named Lugdunensis, of which Lugdunum ( Lyon) was the capital. Strabo's description of this fourfold division is not clear, and it is best explained by considering the new division of Gallia altogether. [GALLIA.] Strabo, after describing some of the Belgic tribes, says (p. 194), the rest are the peoples of the Paroceanitic Belgae, among whom are the Veneti.The word Paroceanitic is the same as Caesar's Armoric, or the peoples on the sea. He also mentions the Osismi, who were neighbours of the Veneti. This passage has been used to prove (Thierry, Hist. des Gaulois, Introd. ) that these Paroceanitic Belgae, the Veneti and their neighbours, and the Belgae north of the Seine, were two peoples or confederations of the same race; and as the Veneti were Celts, so must the Belgae north of the Seinebe. It might be said that Strabo here uses Belgae in the sense of the extended Belgian division, for he clearly means to say that this division comprehended some part of the country between the Loireand the Seine, the western part at least. But his account of the divisions of Gallia is so confused that it cannot be relied on, nor does it agree with that of Pliny. It is certain, however, that some changes were made in the divisions of Gallia between the time of Augustus and the time of Pliny. [GALLIA.]
[G.L]BELGAE, A Britishpopulation, is first mentioned under the name of Belgae by Ptolemy (Ptol. 2.3.28). Caesar's notice extends only to the fact of the interior of the island being inhabited by those who are recorded to have been born in the island itself; whereas the sea-coast is the occupancy of immigrants from the country of the Belgae, brought over for the sake of either war or plunder. All these are called by names nearly the same as those of the states they came from--names which they have retained in the country upon which they made war, and in the land whereon they settled.( B. G. 5.12.)
How far do Caesar and Ptolemy notice the same population? Ptolemy's locality, though the exact extent of the area is doubtful, is, to a certain degree, very definitely fixed. The Belgae lay to the south of the Dobuni, whose chief town was Corineum ( Cirencester). They also lay to the east and north of the Durotriges of Dor -setshire. Venta ( Winchester) was one of the towns, and Aquae Sulis ( Bath) another. Calleva ( Silehester) was notone of them: on the contrary, it belonged to the Attrebatii. This coincides nearly with the county of Wilts, parts of Somerset and Hants being also included. It must be observed that the Belgae of Ptolemy agree with those of Caesar only in belonging to the southern part of Britain. They are chiefly an inland population, and touch the sea only on the south and west; not on the east, or the part more especially opposite Belgium. It must also be observed that Wilts is the county where the monumental remains of the ancient occupants of Britain are at once the most numerous and characteristic.
But the Belgic area of Britain may be carried further eastwards by considering the Attrebatii as a Belgic population; in which case Belgaeis a generic term, and Attrebatii the specific name of one of the divisions it includes; and by admitting the evidence of Richard of Cirencester we may go further still. [BIBROCI.] To this line of criticism,however, it may be objected, that it is as little warranted by the text of Caesar as by that of Ptolemy.
The Belgae of Caesar require Kentand Sussexas their locality: those of Ptolemy, Wiltsand Somerset. The reconciliation of these different conditions has been attempted. An extension westward between the times of the two writers has given one hypothesis. But this is beset with difficulties. To say nothing about the extent to which the time in question was the epoch of conquests almost exclusively Roman, the reasons for believing the sourcesof Ptolemy to have been earlier than the time of Caesar are cogent.
In the mind of the present writer, the fact that Ptolemy's authorities dealt with was the existence in Britain of localities belonging to populations called Belgae and Attrebatii; a fact known to Caesar also. Another fact known to Caesar was, the existence of Belgic immigrants along the shores of Kentand Sussex. Between these there is as little necessary connection as there is between the settlements of the modern Germans in London, and the existence of German geographical names in -sted,--hurst,&c., in Kent. But there isan apparent one; and this either Caesar or his authorities assumed. Belgae and Attrebates he found in Kent, just as men from Delmen-horstmay probably be found at present; and populations called Belgae and Attrebates he heard of in parts not very distant just as men of Gould-hurstor Mid-hurstmay be heard of now. He connected the two as nine ethnologists out of ten, with equally limited data, would have done,--logically, but erroneously.
The professed Keltic scholar may carry the criticism further, and probably explain the occurrence of the names in question--and others like them--upon the principle just suggested. He may succeed in showing that the forms Belg-and Attrebat-, have a geographical or political signification. The first is one of importance. The same, or a similar, combination of sounds occurs in Blatum Bulg-ium, a station north of the Solway ; in the Numerus A-bul-corum stationed at Anderida; and in the famous Fir-bolgsof Ireland. Two observations apply to these last. Like the Attacotti [ATTACOTTI], they occur only in the fabulous portion of Irish history. Like the--libetin such words as quod-libet, quibus-libet, the Bolgis unflected, the fir-only being declined--so that the forms are Fir-Bolg (Belgae), Feroib-Bolg (Belgis). This is against the word being a true proper name. Lastly, it should be added, that, though the word Belgaein Britain is not generic, it is so in Gaul, where there is no such population as that of the Belgae, except so far as it is Nervian, Attrebatian, Menapian, &c.
That the Belgae of Britain were in the same ethnological category with the Belgae of Gaul, no more follows from the identity of name, than it follows that Cambro-Briton and Italian belong to the same family, because each is called Welsh. The truer evidence is of a more indirect nature, and lies in the fact of the Britannic Belgaebeing in the same category with the rest of the Britons, the rest of the Britons being as the Gauls, and the Gauls as the continental Belgae. That the first and last of these three propositions has been doubted is well known; in other words, it is well known that good writers have looked upon the Belgae as Germans. The GallicBelgae, however, rather than the Britannic, are the tribes with whom this question rests. All that need be said here is, that of the three Belgic towns mentioned by Ptolemy (Ischalis, Aquae Sulis, and Venta), none is Germanic in name, whilst one is Latin, and the third eminently British, as may be seen by comparing the VentaSilurum and the VentaIcenorum with the VentaBelgarum.
[R.G.L]See Gallia.