Lower Thames Leap: Fill & Download for Free

Boiling To DeathWikimedia CommonsA slow and agonizing punishment, this method traditionally saw the victim gradually lowered — feet-first — into boiling oil, water, or wax (although uses of boiling wine and molten lead have also been recorded).It seems safe to assume that such a horrendous fate, one of the worst execution methods ever devised, would be reserved for the foulest of murderers, but historical documents refute this.Emperor Nero is said to have dispatched thousands of Christians in this manner, while in the Middle Ages, the main recipients of the punishment were not killers or rapists but coin forgers, particularly in Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. In Britain, meanwhile, King Henry VIII introduced the practice for executing those who used poison to commit murder.Shockingly, the practice is believed to have been carried out as recently as 2002, when the government of Uzbekistan, led by Islam Karimov, was alleged to have tortured several suspected terrorists to death in this manner.The Blood EagleA technique ascribed to ancient Norse warriors, the blood eaglemixed brutality and poetic imagery in a way that only the Vikings could. First, the victim’s back would be hacked open and the skin ripped apart, exposing the spinal column.The ribs would then be snapped from the spine and forcibly bent backwards until they faced outwards from the body, forming a pair of bloody, shattered eagle’s wings. As a horrifying finale, the lungs would then be pulled from the body cavity and coated with stinging salt, causing eventual death by suffocation.The good news for any poor soul who might have suffered this indignity? The agony and blood loss from the initial wounds would probably have caused them to pass out long before the lungs were removed from their bodies.ImpalementMost famously used by Vlad the Impaler, 15th-century ruler of Wallachia (in present-day Romania) and inspiration for Count Dracula, the act of impalement has a long, grim history. While images tend to depict people skewered through the midsection and then held aloft — in a manner that would almost certainly bring about a rapid death — the real process was a much longer, horrifically drawn-out ordeal.Traditionally, the stake would be partially sharpened and planted, point up, in the ground. The victim would then be placed over the spike as it was inserted partway into the rectum or vagina.As their own body weight dragged them further onto the pole, the semi-greased wooden stake would force its way up through their body, piercing organs with an agonizing slowness as it eventually penetrated the entire torso, finally tearing an exit wound through the skin of the shoulder, neck or throat.Wikimedia CommonsThe earliest records of the torture come from 1772 B.C. in Babylon, where King Hammurabi ordered a woman be executed in this way for killing her husband. But its use continued until as recently as the 20th century, when the Ottoman government employed the technique during the Armenian genocide of 1915-1923.According to some accounts, it could take the victim — exposed, bleeding, and writhing in tormented agony — as long as eight whole days to die.KeelhaulingFlickrEngraved depiction of keelhauling. 1898Walking the plank might not be the most pleasant of deaths, but it seems moderately more humane than the other favored maritime punishment of keelhauling.A punishment that often ended in death due to the severity of the wounds sustained (or was simply carried out until the point of death), it saw the victim, legs weighted and suspended from a rope, dropped from the bow of the ship and then rapidly pulled underwater along the length of the hull — and over the keel (the beam that runs longitudinally down the center of the underside of the ship), hence the name — to the stern.Wikimedia CommonsThe keelhauling of the ship’s surgeon of admiral Jan van Nes Lieve Pietersz. Verschuier. 1660 to 1686.If the sailor was still alive, they might be hung from the mast for 15 minutes before going in again. In some cases, the victim would have an oil-soaked sponge — containing a breath of air — stuffed into their mouth to prevent a “merciful” drowning.Employed mostly by the Dutch and the French from the 1500s until it was abolished in 1853, accounts of its use date back as far as Greece in 800 B.C.The Roman CandleWikimedia CommonsMany of the very worst execution methods ever devised involve fire — from burning witches at the stake in medieval Britain to roasting criminals alive in the searing metal insides of the brazen bull in Ancient Greece — but few match the sheer lack of humanity as the Roman Candle.Image Source: RealChurchHistoryA rumored favorite of the mad Roman Emperor Nero, this method saw the subject tied to a stake and smeared with flammable pitch (tree or plant resin), then set ablaze, slowly burning to death from the feet up.Being Hanged, Drawn, And QuarteredLoyset Liédet/ Wikimedia CommonsA prisoner being hanged, drawn, and quartered in France.First recorded in England during the 13th century, this unusually extreme — even for the time — mode of execution was made the statutory punishment for treason in 1351. Though it was intended to be an act of such barbarous severity that no one would ever risk committing a treasonous act, there were nevertheless plenty of recipients over the next 500 years.The process of being hanged, drawn and quartered began with the victim being dragged to the site of execution while strapped to a wooden panel, which was in turn tied to a horse.They would then experience a slow hanging, in which, rather than being dropped to the traditional quick death of a broken neck, they would instead be left to choke horribly as the rope tore up the skin of their throat, their body weight dragging them downwards.National Portrait Library/ Wikimedia CommonsGuy Fawkes being executed for the Gunpowder Plot.Some had the good fortune to die at this stage, including infamous Gunpowder Plot conspirator Guy Fawkes, who ensured a faster death by leaping from the gallows.Once half strangled, the drawing would begin. The victim would be strapped down and then slowly disemboweled, their stomachs sliced open and their intestines and other major organs hacked apart and pulled — “drawn” — from the body.The genitals would often be mutilated and ripped from between their legs. Those unlucky enough to still be alive at this point might witness their organs burned in front of them, before they were finally decapitated.Once death had finally claimed them, the recipient’s body would be carved into four pieces — or “quartered” — and the parts sent to prominent areas of the country as a warning to others.The head would often be taken to the infamous Tower of London, where it would be impaled on a spike and placed on the walls, “for the mockery of London.”Rat TortureImage Source: TumblrAs recently depicted in Game Of Thrones, rat torture is a method ingenious in its disgusting simplicity. In its most basic form, a bucket containing live rats is placed on the exposed torso of the victim, and heat applied to the base of the bucket.The rats, crazy with fear from the heat, tear and gnaw their way into the abdomen of the victim, clawing and ripping through skin, flesh, organs, and intestines in their quest to escape.While associated with Elizabethan England — where the Tower of London was said to have housed a “Dungeon of Rats,” a pitch black room below high water mark that would draw in rats from the River Thames to torment the room’s inhabitants — the practice has been used far more recently.General Pinochet is said to have employed the technique during his dictatorship of Chile (1973-1990), while reports from Argentina during the National Reorganization Process in the late 1970s and early ’80s claimed victims were subjected to a version in which live rats — or sometimes spiders — were inserted into the subject’s body via a tube in the rectum or vagina.Bamboo TortureForcing thin shards of bamboo under the fingernails has long been cited as an interrogation method, but bamboo has been used to creatively — and slowly — execute a person, too. Allegedly used by the Japanese on American prisoners of war, it saw the victim tied down to a frame over a patch of newly sprouting bamboo plants.One of the fastest-growing plants in the world, capable of up to three feet of growth in 24 hours, the sharp-tipped plants would slowly pierce the skin of the victim — and then continue to grow. The end result was death by gradual, continuous, multiple impalements, the equivalent of being dropped on a bed of sharpened stakes in terrible slow motion.FlayingFlaying — better known as “skinning alive” — has a long and grotesque history. Records of the practice exist as far back as the Neo-Assyrian Empire (beginning in 911 B.C.), but it has cropped up in most civilizations at one time or another, including Medieval Europe (where it tended to be used as a punishment for traitors) and in the ritual human sacrifices made by the Aztecs in Mexico (the Aztecs, at least, are believed to have skinned the body after the sacrifice had been made).Various techniques have been utilized in the many different cultures in which flaying has been employed, but the basis remains the same: Slowly, excruciatingly slicing the skin from the body while keeping the victim alive for as long as possible (and when feasible, removing the skin intact).Wikimedia CommonsDeath would normally come as a result of massive blood loss and shock, but in the unfortunate cases where expert flayers were used, the victim could be kept alive in a state of perpetual agony for several days before finally succumbing to their hopelessly infected wounds.ScaphismFor sheer, delirious, nauseating horror, scaphism may be one of the worst execution methods ever devised. Practiced by the Ancient Persians, starting around 500 B.C., it saw the victim placed inside a hollowed-out log or narrow boat, their hands and feet tied to each end.The victim was then forced to ingest a mixture of milk and honey until they uncontrollably voided their bowels, at which point their skin was smeared with more milk and honey before they were left exposed in the sun and surrounded by their own feces and vomit.It was at this point that the insects would descend. Stinging and biting insects like wasps and ants would torture the victim, but worse, others would crawl inside the unprotected orifices of the subject and lay eggs, eating them alive from the inside out.Death would eventually be caused by a combination of exposure and the massive infections caused by both the insects, and the fecal matter smeared into the wounds. One account of such an execution by the Greek historian Plutarch claimed that it took the victim 17 whole days to die.[1]Footnotes[1] The 10 Most Horrifying Execution Methods Ever Devised

LEGIO X EQUESTRISLegio X Equestris, a Roman Legion reviered for its bravery, honor and trust in battle, the Legion itself was levied by Julius Caesar in 61 BC when he was the Governor of Hispania Ulterior. The Tenth was the first legion levied personally by Caesar and was consistently his most trusted. The name Equestris was applied after Caesar mounted legionaries from the Tenth on horses as a ruse in a parley with the German King Ariovistus in 58 BC because he did not trust his Gallic cavalry auxiliaries from the Aedui tribe. Legio X was famous in its day and throughout history, because of its portrayal in Caesar’s Commentaries and the prominent role the Tenth played in his Gallic campaigns. Today, we will look into the famed legion, and explore its major triumphs and victories in order. We will follow its path through the orchards and deserts of Spain, the forests and rivers of Gaul, the fields and woodlands of Britain, the mountains, lakes, and valleys Central Europe, and the sandy plains of Parthia. Let us delve into the subject of glory.FOUNDING -When Gaius Julius Caesar arrived as Governor in the province of Baetica or Hispania Ulterior (modern Andalusia), as it was in 61 BC, he immediately decided to subdue the west and northwest areas (modern day Portugal). He already had two legions based in the province, the 8th and 9th Legions, which had been enlisted by Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus in 65 BC. Caesar needed a third legion for his planned campaign and so he immediately enlisted a new legion, the 10th Legion. Enlisted in blooming of March, the legion took as its emblem the bull, an emblem which proved popular with other legions such as Legio V Alaudae(Larks), Legio XI, Legio XII Victrix, and Legio XIII Gemina.The campaign in the summer of 61 BC was very successful and the 10th Legion showed itself to be brave and loyal to Julius Caesar.GALLIC WARS AND THE INVASION OF BRITAIN -The Tenth played a crucial part in the Gallic Wars, fighting under Caesar in virtually every battle.At the beginning of the Gallic campaign, Caesar brought the 10th legion from Spain (with the 7th, 8th, and 9th legions). Almost immediately, in the summer of 58 BC, the legion fought in two major actions, the Battles of Arar and Bibracte. They played a central part in Caesar's defeat of the Helvetii tribes, preventing their migration from present day Switzerland to western France.Following the defeat of the Helvetii, the leaders of the Gallic tribes petitioned Caesar for his aid against Ariovistus, king of the German Suebi tribe. Prior to battle, Ariovistus suggested a peace conference but insisted that each side should only be accompanied by mounted troops. Ariovistus made this a condition knowing that Caesar's cavalry was composed mainly of Aedian horsemen whose loyalty to Caesar was questionable. Caesar ordered a group of his Gallic auxiliaries to dismount and had legionaries from the 10th ride in their place to accompany him to the peace conference. This incident earned the legion its nickname Equestris (mounted). One of the legionaries jokingly said that Caesar was better than his word: he had promised to make them foot guards, but now they appeared as equestrians.BATTLE OF ARAR -The Helvetii were a tribe that originated from what is now Switzerland. Just prior to the battle with Caesar, they had commenced on a mass migration through Roman Gaul towards the Atlantic coast.At Geneva, the Romans destroyed the wooden bridge across the Rhone and constructed 19 miles of fortifications. The Helvetii tribe tried to migrate by another route, and were crossing the river Arar (Saone) using rafts and boats. Caesar was informed by his scouts and proceeded to engage the Helvetii. Three parts of the Helvetii forces had crossed the river and Caesar routed the fourth part left on his side of the river, killing a great many and driving the rest into the woods. Peace negotiations having failed, the Helvetii resumed their migration with the Romans following close behind. After 15 days of pursuit, Caesar, short of supplies, decided to make a diversion to Bibracte. The Helvetii attacked the Romans but suffered a decisive defeat.The Helvetii Caesar defeated were part of the pagus (sub-tribe) of the Tigurini, which in 107 BC had slain the Consul Lucius Cassius Longinus, as well as the legate Lucius Calpurnius Piso, the grandfather of the Lucius Calpurnius Piso who was the father-in-law of Caesar.BATTLE OF BIBRACTE -After following the migration of the Helvetii and defeating them, Caesar, around June 20, moved towards Bibracte(approximately 18 miles away from their camp) to obtain the supplies promised by his allies, the Aedui. Dumnorix, an Aedui chieftain opposed to the Romans, had been delaying supplies from reaching Caesar's army.Battle -Informed by deserters of Lucius Æmilius, commander of the cavalry, the Helvetii took this occasion to turn and harass Caesar's rear guard.When Caesar observed this, he sent his cavalry to delay the attack. He placed the Seventh (Legio VII Claudia), Eighth (Legio VIII Augusta), Ninth (Legio XI Hispana), and Tenth legion (Legio X Equestris), organized in Roman fashion (triplexes acies, or "triple battle order"), at the foot of a nearby hill, the top of which he occupied himself, along with the Eleventh (Legio XI Claudia) and Twelfth (Legio XII Fulminata) Legion and all his auxiliaries. The baggage train was also assembled near the summit, where it could be guarded by the forces present there.After having driven off Caesar's cavalry and with their own baggage train secured, the Helvetii engaged "In the seventh hour", approximately noon or one o'clock. According to Caesar, his hill-top battle line easily threw back the Helvetii onslaught by using pila. The legions then counterattacked, driving the Helvetii back towards the hill where their baggage train sat.While the legions pursued the Helvetii across the plain in between the hills, the Boii and Tulingi arrived with fifteen thousand men to assist the Helvetii, flanking the Romans on one side. At that point the Helvetii returned to the battle in earnest. When the Tulingi and the Boii started circumventing the Romans, Caesar regrouped his third line to resist the assault of the Boii and Tuligni, keeping his primary and secondary committed to chasing the Helvetii.Into the night -The roar of battle soared into the star pricked sky, Roman Legionaries harshly fought against Celtic warriors in the dark forests and woodlands of southern Gaul, the blinding twilight made it hard to discern friend from foe, yet Caesars men pushed on. The battle lasted many hours into the night until the Romans finally took the Helvetic baggage train, capturing both a daughter and son of Orgetorix. According to Caesar, 130,000 enemy personnel escaped into the night, of which 110,000 survived the retreat.Unable to pursue on account of battle wounds and the time it took to bury the dead, Caesar rested three days before he followed the fleeing Helvetii. These, in turn, had managed to reach the territory of the Lingones within four days of the battle. Caesar warned the Lingones to not assist them, prompting the Helvetii and their allies to finally surrender.Casualities -Caesar claimed that of the 368,000 Helvetii and allies, only 130,000 got away, of whom 110,000 returned home.Orosius, probably drawing on the works of Caesar's general Asinius Pollio, gave an original strength of 157,000 for the barbarians, adding that 47,000 died during the campaign.BATTLE OF THE SABIS - also known as the Battle of the Sambre or the Battle against the Nervians.During the frigid winter of 58-57 BC rumours came to Caesar's ears that the Belgic tribes were forming a union because they feared possible Roman interference in their affairs.The union included the Bellovaci, Suessiones, Nervii, Atrebates, Ambiani, Morini, Menapii, Caleti, Veliocasses, Viromandui, Aduatuci, Condrusi, Eburones, Caeroesi, and Paemani tribes, and was under the leadership of Galba, a king of the Suessiones. These reports provided Caesar with a good pretext for conquering more than Gaul "itself", and for this, he raised two legions in Cisalpine Gaul (XIII and XIV) and convinced the Remi tribe to side with him.In response, the other Belgic and Celtic tribes had attacked Bibrax (the oppidum of the Remi, situated near the Aisne River). Caesar countered by defending the oppidum and winning an action at the Aisne. In the face of this and because of shortage of provisions, the union collapsed and tribal armies retreated to their own lands, with the agreed future intention of coming to the support of any tribe invaded by the Romans. Caesar continued his advance and tribes surrendered one by one. However, four tribes, the Nervii, the Atrebates, the Aduatuci and the Viromandui refused to submit.The Ambiani told Caesar that the Nervii were the most hostile of the Belgae to Roman rule. A fierce and brave tribe, they did not allow the import of luxury items as they believed these had a corrupting effect and probably feared Roman influence. They had no intention of entering peace negotiations with the Roman. Caesar would move on them next.As with all ancient battles, estimates of the forces available to both sides will always be a matter of some speculation. A Roman Legion at this period had a theoretical establishment of some 4,800 fighting men with additional auxiliary forces. Eight Roman legions took part in the battle. It is not known if they were at full strength, but a reasonable estimate might be in the region of 42,000 men.Caesar claims he had earlier received intelligence from the Remi that the various tribes of the Belgae had promised to contribute a total of 300,000 fighting men. According to Caesar the Remi estimates of the men promised by the four tribes now left to oppose Caesar were: 50,000 Nervii, 15,000 Atrebates, 10,000 Veromandui and 19,000 Aduatuci.If these figures were reliable it would mean that Caesar was immediately faced with a maximum of 75,000 men, as the Aduatuci were still en route. Promises are not always kept so it is probable the actual number was smaller than this, though still high enough to outnumber the legionaries.ORDER OF BATTLE -(Battlefield if the "Sabis" matches the River Selle.)(Battlefield if the "Sabis" matches the Sambre.)Traditionally it was believed that the battle was fought on the banks of the river Sambre, near modern Aulnoye-Aymeries, but in 1955 Turquin showed that it was fought on the west bank of the river Selle, near modern Saulzoir.BEFORE THE BATTLE -Caesar's legions had been marching in Nervian territory for three days, following an ancient road.He learnt from prisoners that the Belgae were massing on the far side of the River Sabis, which was about 10 miles (16 km) ahead. The Nervii had persuaded the Atrebates and the Veromandui to support them. The Aduactuci were marching to join them, but they did not arrive in time to take part in the battle. Their non-combatants had moved to a safe area screened by marshes, where an army could not approach.The Belgae had made their preparations and were now waiting for the Romans.Caesar sent forward experienced scouts to choose the next campsite.He learnt from prisoners taken later that sympathisers in the ragtag of surrendered Belgae and other Gauls travelling with the army had gone to the Nervii and reported his disposition of his column. They reported that the individual legionary baggage trains were interspersed between the legions and that it would be easy to cut off the leading legion from the rest and destroy it before any support could reach it. It was believed this would intimidate the Romans into withdrawing. The Nervii, having traditionally always relied on infantry rather than cavalry and had, over the years, developed a technique of building dense, impenetrable hedges of briars and thorns set between young trees as a defence against the raids of surrounding tribes. These would obstruct Caesar’s advance and help the attack. It was agreed that the signal for an attack was to be the appearance of the baggage train behind the first legion.In doing this, the Nervii were intending to use what is recognisable today as the modern army doctrine of force concentration. As will be seen, their plan would be frustrated by Caesar.BATTLE -The campsite was to be laid out on a hill which gently sloped down to the river. On the other side of the river there was another hill directly opposite, similarly sloping. The top of that hill was densely wooded but the lower part was open and sloped down to the river over a distance of 200 paces (roughly 300 metres (330 yd)). The enemy was concealed inside the woods, but a few cavalry pickets could be seen in the open area by the river. The river was very wide but only about three feet (one meter) deep.At some point on his march to the Sabis, Caesar reorganised the column and reverted to his usual tactic of leading his forces with six legions in light marching order. Behind them was the baggage column of the entire army, followed by the newly recruited legions, XIII and XIV. Caesar does not say whether this change was fortuitous or was made in response to the intelligence received. While Caesar's force began to set up camp on the slope running down to the river, his cavalry, together with slingers and archers, was ordered to cross the river to reconnoitre. This developed into a skirmish with the few troops of Belgic cavalry that had been observed on the far side. Caesar describes the enemy cavalry as sallying repeatedly from the woods at the top of the hill and says his cavalry did not dare follow them in when they retreated. He does not elaborate further so it will never be known if the Nervii were trying to entice the skirmishers onto their hidden position or holding them in play on the slopes in preparation for the planned rush.Meanwhile, the legions had started arriving at the camp site and began to build its fortifications. The Belgae, waiting for the baggage train to appear, gradually found themselves faced with not one legion, but six. Their plan of piecemeal destruction had to be abandoned, but they must have believed their numbers more than adequate to deal with their enemy.AMBUSH -As the Roman baggage train came into view, the large Belgic force suddenly charged out of the trees, screaming war cries, and surprised their opponents, overwhelming the Roman cavalry. They crossed the shallow river at full speed and charged up the hill against the legions setting up camp, giving them no time to get into battle formation. It seemed to Caesar that the Nervii came on with incredible speed, all at once pouring out of the trees, charging across the river and overrunning his legionaries.Taken by surprise, Caesar had to rapidly give orders to sound the alarm both by raising the battle-standard and by trumpet, get his men away from construction work, recall the wood-cutting parties and try to get his legions into some semblance of order. There was very little time and much had to be left undone. Two things, though, saved the legions from being immediately routed—firstly, the knowledge and experience of the soldiers (which meant that they could decide for themselves what to do without waiting for orders) and secondly, Caesar had previously ordered all legion commanders to stay with their legions during the setting up of the camp.Caesar went wherever he was needed, giving only essential orders and eventually found himself on the left wing with legion X. Seeing that the enemy were within range of the Romans he gave the order to hurl a volley of pilum. Going to another part of the field, he found his men already fighting. The men had run from their building tasks to fall into ranks but many did not even have time to put on their helmets or take the covers off their shields.(leather cover of the Roman Scutum)The legionaries had no opportunity to group with their own cohorts and instead congregated around the first friendly standard they saw.Caesar states that the hedges were a considerable obstruction to his men during the battle although he does not specify their locations on the field. The woody hilltop of the Roman camp is the one place we can infer their presence.The soldiers of legions X Equestris and IX Triumphalis, on the left flank, having thrown their spears at their Atrebates opponents, charged. They threw the enemy back and drove them into the river, killing many. The Romans crossed the river and found themselves on disadvantageous or uneven ground, but although the Atrebates regrouped and launched a counter-attack, the Romans put them to flight a second time. Further along, in the centre, two legions, XI and VIII, having checked the Viromandui with whom they were engaged, pushed them from the higher ground into the river.However, as these four legions pushed their opponents back, the front and left of the camp was left undefended and a gap opened up in the Roman line. A compact column of Nervii under Boduognatus (the overall commander of the Belgae) rushed through the opening. Part of the column turned to encircle the two legions holding the right flank; the rest continued upwards to attack the higher part of the camp.CRISIS -Meanwhile, the routed Roman cavalry and skirmishers were just straggling into camp when they found themselves face to face with the Nervii – they ran again. Camp followers further up the hill by the camp’s back gate had observed the success of the Romans at the river and came down in the hope of plunder, but noticed the Nervii in the camp and also ran. People accompanying the baggage train just arriving were horrified at the sight before them and panicked as well. Even the usually-dependable Treveri cavalry arriving to support the Romans looked at the seemingly hopeless situation and promptly turned for home to report the disaster.After encouraging legion X, Caesar went to the right wing. Things looked bad. He could see that the men of XII Victrix were crammed so closely together in one mass by their standards that they could not fight effectively. All (six) centurions of the fourth cohort were dead, its standard bearer killed and the standard missing. Of the remaining cohorts, almost all the centurions were either wounded or killed.Baculus, the legion’s primipilus, a fine soldier, had received so many minor and serious wounds that he could barely stand. The Nervii were attacking vigorously from lower ground and pressing at the front and both flanks. Caesar could see some men were shirking and trying to get to the rear; others were slowly ceasing effective resistance. There were no reserves. This was the crisis-point. He took a shield from a soldier at the rear and went to the first line. Calling his centurions by name, he ordered them to have the soldiers advance (signa inferre) and the maniples open up and extend. As he tells it, his arrival brought hope and boosted the soldiers’ morale. Every man was now keen to do well in front of his general. As a result, the enemy assault was checked slightly.RECOVERY -Caesar saw that legion VII nearby was also hard-pressed. He ordered the tribunes to redeploy the two legions to gradually join and fight back to back. This further increased his men’s confidence. By now, the legions escorting the baggage, having received a report of the action, had come on at double pace and the enemy could see them coming over the hill above the camp. Legion X, under the legate Labienus, had overcome the Atrebates, crossed the river and defeated the Belgic reserves. Now they seized the Belgic camp on the wooded hill. From the higher ground, Labienus could see that Caesar’s right wing was in serious trouble. He ordered his men back across the river to attack the Nervii from the rear.Soon legions XIII and XIV joined the fight. Caesar does not detail their actions, but they probably cleared the camp (as it was their nearest target) and went to the right to relieve the pressure on legions XII and VII. This, coupled with the return of legion X, transformed the situation. Seeing the position begin to stabilise, cavalry and skirmishers took heart and, keen to wipe out their earlier shame, started to fight in earnest. The camp followers joined in now that they could see their enemy’s dismay. The entire Roman force was now fully committed.Courage and Honor -At this point of the battle it is clear that Caesar's opposition had little hope of survival. They were being pushed closer and closer into a dense pack that was being surrounded by Caesar's men who were using projectile weapons to pick off their remaining forces. Using peltats (a light infantry man) equipped with slings and javelins and with the help of archers, they unleashed a barrage of missiles at the closely packed Nervii. The last of them fought with ferocity and courage for they were continuing to retaliate with their spears and catching the Romans javelins and throwing them back at them. The Nervii hadn't used any other projectile type weapon except for spears. The Nervii warriors fought to the last, standing on the bodies of their slain comrades, and throwing the Romans’ own spears back at them. Eventually the few remaining Nervii broke and fled the field.Caesar’s opinion of the Nervii was that they had shown great fighting spirit in carrying an attack forward so vigorously on to difficult ground and in continuing to fight stubbornly when the tide of battle turned irretrievably against them.Caesar talks of a grimly inspiring image of the last of the Nervii who were atop a mound of corpses of their own warriors and shouting in defiance towards the Romans, fighting till their last breath.He goes on to say that they had outstanding courage, for they launched a surprise attack, crossed a river up its banks, then rushed on to attack all with a fighting spirit.He glorifies his victory by stating how well his army did without having to be ordered to launch a counter-attack. It was most probable that his soldiers were experienced veterans who were able to hold off their onslaught. Still he mitigated his losses by not including how many casualties he suffered or that they were in serious danger of losing. In his account of this battle in his book "the Conquest of Gaul" he gives his view of what actually happened in the battle but it remains one of the only primary sources during that time. And since it was written by Caesar much is unknown of the Nervii's side of the battle, such as how Bodougnats (the leader of the Nervii) ordered his men into battle.The Tenth Legion effectively proved themselves, further ensuring their trust to Caesar.In the course of his Gallic Wars, Julius Caesar invaded Britain twice: in 55 and 54 BC.In 55 BC Legio X was one of the two legions (together with the VII) which took part in Caesar's first invasion of Britain. It is probable that it also participated in the second invasion in 54 BC.The first invasion, in late summer, was unsuccessful, gaining the Romans little else besides a beachhead on the coast of Kent. The second invasion achieved more: the Romans installed a king, Mandubracius, who was friendly to Rome, and they forced the submission of Mandubracius's rival, Cassivellaunus. No territory was conquered and held for Rome; instead, all Roman-occupied territory was restored to the allied Trinovantes, along with the promised tribute of the other tribes in what is now eastern England.BRITAIN BEFORE CAESAR -Britain had long been known to the classical world as a source of tin. The coastline had been explored by the Greek geographer Pytheas in the 4th century BC, and may have been explored even earlier, in the 5th, by the Carthaginian sailor Himilco. But to many Romans, the island, lying as it did beyond the Ocean at what was to them the edge of the "known world," was a land of great mystery. Some Roman writers even insisted that it did not exist, and dismissed reports of Pytheas's voyage as a hoax.Britain during the reign of Julius Caesar had an Iron Age culture, with an estimated population of between one and four million. Archaeological research shows that its economy was broadly divided into lowland and highland zones. In the lowland southeast, large areas of fertile soil made possible extensive arable farming, and communication developed along trackways, such as the Ickneild Way, the Pilgrim’s Way and the Jurassic way, and navigable rivers such as the Thames. In the highlands, north of the line between Gloucester and Lincoln, arable land was available in only isolated pockets, so pastoralism, supported by garden cultivation, was more common than settled farming, and communication was more difficult. Settlements were generally built on high ground and fortified, but in the southeast, oppida had begun to be established on lower ground, often at river crossings, suggesting that trade was becoming more important. Commercial contact between Britain and the continent had increased since the Roman conquest of Transalpine Gaul in 124 BC, and Italian wine was being imported via the Armorican peninsula, much of it arriving at Henistbury Head in Dorset.Caesar's written account of Britain says that the Belgae of northeastern Gaul had previously conducted raids on Britain, establishing settlements in some of its coastal areas, and that within living memory Diviciacus, king of the Suessiones, had held power in Britain as well as Gaul.British coinage from this period shows a complicated pattern of intrusion. The earliest Gallo-Belgic coins that have been found in Britain date to before 100 BC, perhaps as early as 150 BC, were struck in Gaul, and have been found mainly in Kent. Later coins of a similar type were struck in Britain and are found all along the south coast as far west as Dorset. It appears that Belgic power was concentrated on the southeastern coast, although their influence spread further west and inland, perhaps through chieftains establishing political control over the native population.FIRST INVASION - 55 BCPlanning and Reconnaissance -Strabo says that the Venetic rebellion in 56 BC had been intended to prevent Caesar from travelling to Britain and disrupting their commercial activity, suggesting that the possibility of a British expedition had already been considered by then.In late summer, 55 BC, even though it was late in the campaigning season, Caesar decided to make an expedition to Britain. He summoned merchants who traded with the island, but they were unable or unwilling to give him any useful information about the inhabitants and their military tactics, or about harbours he could use, presumably not wanting to lose their monopoly on cross-channel trade. He sent a tribune, Gaius Volusenus, to scout the coast in a single warship. He probably examined the Kent coast between Hythe and Sandwich, but was unable to land, since he "did not dare leave his ship and entrust himself to the barbarians", and after five days returned to give Caesar what intelligence he had managed to gather.By then, ambassadors from some of the British states, warned by merchants of the impending invasion, had arrived promising their submission. Caesar sent them back, along with his ally Commius, king of the Gallic Atrebates, to use their influence to win over as many other states as possible.He gathered a fleet consisting of eighty transport ships, sufficient to carry two legions (Legio VII and Legio X), and an unknown number of warships under a quaestor, at an unnamed port in the territory of the Morini, almost certainly Portus Itius (Boulogne). Another eighteen transports of cavalry were to sail from a different port, probably Ambleteuse.These ships may have been triremes or biremes, or may have been adapted from Venetic designs Caesar had seen previously, or may even have been requisitioned from the Veneti and other coastal tribes. Clearly in a hurry, Caesar himself left a garrison at the port and set out "at the third watch" – well after midnight – on August 23, with the legions, leaving the cavalry to march to their ships, embark, and join him as soon as possible. In light of later events, this was either a tactical mistake or (along with the fact that the legions came over without baggage or heavy siege gear) confirms the invasion was not intended for complete conquest.LANDING -Caesar initially tried to land at Dubris (Dover), whose natural harbour had presumably been identified by Volusenus as a suitable landing place. However, when he came in sight of shore, the massed forces of the Britons gathered on the overlooking hills and cliffs dissuaded him from landing there, since the cliffs were so close to the shore that javelins could be thrown down from them onto anyone landing there.After waiting there at anchor "until the ninth hour" (about 3pm) waiting for his supply ships from the second port to come up and meanwhile convening a council of war, he ordered his subordinates to act on their own initiative and then sailed the fleet about 7 miles (11 kilometres) along the coast to an open beach. The first level beach area after Dover is at Walmer where a memorial is placed. Recent archaeology by the University of Leicester indicates that the possible landing beach was in Pegwell Bay on the Isle of Kanet, Kent, where artefacts and massive earthworks dating from this period have been exposed, although this area would not have been the first easy landing site seen after Dover. If Caesar had as large a fleet with him as has been suggested, then it is possible that the beaching of ships would have been spread out over a number of miles stretching from Walmer towards Pegwell Bay.Having been tracked all the way along the coast by the British cavalry and chariots, the landing was opposed. To make matters worse, the loaded Roman ships were too low in the water to go close inshore and the troops had to disembark in deep water, all the while attacked by the enemy from the shallows. The troops were reluctant, but according to Caesar's account were led by the aquilifer (standard-bearer, whose name is not provided by Caesar) of the 10th legion who jumped in first as an example, shouting:"Leap, fellow soldiers, unless you wish to betray your eagle to the enemy. I, for my part, will perform my duty to the republic and to my general."The British were eventually driven back with catapultae and slings fired from the warships into the exposed flank of their formation and the Romans managed to land and drive them off. The cavalry, delayed by adverse winds, still had not arrived, so the Britons could not be pursued and finished off, and Caesar could not enjoy what he calls, in his usual self-promoting style, his "accustomed success".Beach Head -The Romans established a camp of which archaeological traces have been found, received ambassadors and had Commius, who had been arrested as soon as he had arrived in Britain, returned to them. Caesar claims he was negotiating from a position of strength and that the British leaders, blaming their attacks on him on the common people, were in only four days awed into giving hostages, some immediately, some as soon as they could be brought from inland, and disbanding their army. However, after his cavalry had come within sight of the beachhead but then been scattered and turned back to Gaul by storms, and with food running short, Caesar, a native of the Mediterranean, was taken by surprise by high British tides and a storm. His beached warships filled with water, and his transports, riding at anchor, were driven against each other. Some ships were wrecked, and many others were rendered unseaworthy by the loss of rigging or other vital equipment, threatening the return journey.Realising this and hoping to keep Caesar in Britain over the winter and thus starve him into submission, the Britons renewed the attack, ambushing one of the legions as it foraged near the Roman camp. The foraging party was relieved by the remainder of the Roman force and the Britons were again driven off, only to regroup after several days of storms with a larger force to attack the Roman camp. This attack was driven off fully, in a bloody rout, with improvised cavalry that Commius had gathered from pro-Roman Britons and a Roman scorched earth policy.Conclusion -The British once again sent ambassadors and Caesar, although he doubled the number of hostages, realised he could not hold out any longer and dared not risk a stormy winter crossing. Caesar had set out late in the campaigning season and the winter was approaching, and so he allowed them to be delivered to him in Gaul, to which he returned with as many of the ships as could be repaired with flotsam from the wrecked ships. Even then, only two tribes felt sufficiently threatened by Caesar to actually send the hostages, and two of his transports were separated from the main body and made landfall elsewhere.Success and Motivation -If the invasion was intended as a full-scale campaign, invasion or occupation, it had failed, and if it is seen as a reconnaissance-in-force or a show of strength to deter further British aid to the Gauls, it had fallen short. Nonetheless, going to Britain beyond the "known world" carried such kudos for a Roman that the Senate decreed a supplicatio (thanksgiving) of twenty days when they received Caesar's report. It is also suggested that this invasion established alliances with British kings in the area which smoothed the later invasion of AD 43.Caesar's pretext for the invasion was that "in almost all the wars with the Gauls succours had been furnished to our enemy from that country". This is plausible, although it may also have been a cover for investigating Britain's mineral resources and economic potential: afterwards, Cicero refers to the disappointing discovery that there was no gold or silver in the island; and Suetonius reports that Caesar was said to have gone to Britain in search of pearls.SECOND INVASION - 54 BCPreperation -A second invasion was planned in the winter of 55–54 for the summer of 54 BC. Cicero wrote letters to his friend Gaius Trebatius Testa and his brother Quintus, both of whom were serving in Caesar's army, expressing his excitement at the prospect. He urged Trebatius to capture him a war chariot, and asked Quintus to write him a description of the island. Trebatius, as it turned out, did not go to Britain, but Quintus did, and wrote him several letters from there – as did Caesar himself.Determined not to make the same mistakes as the previous year, Caesar gathered a larger force than on his previous expedition with five legions as opposed to two, plus two-thousand cavalry, carried in ships which he designed, with experience of Venetic shipbuilding technology, to be more suitable to a beach landing than those used in 55 BC being broader and lower for easier beaching. This time he names Portus Itius as the departure point.Crossing and Landing -Labienus was left at Portus Itius to oversee regular food transports from there to the British beachhead. The military ships were joined by a flotilla of trading ships captained by Romans and provincials from across the empire, and local Gauls, hoping to cash in on the trading opportunities. It seems more likely that the figure Caesar quotes for the fleet (800 ships) include these traders and the troop-transports, rather than the troop-transports alone.Caesar landed at the place he had identified as the best landing-place the previous year. The Britons did not oppose the landing, apparently, as Caesar states, intimidated by the size of the fleet, but equally this may have been a strategic ploy to give them time to gather their forces, or may reflect their lack of concern.Kent Campaign -Upon landing, Caesar left Quintus Atrius in charge of the beach-head and made an immediate night march 12 mi (19 km) inland, where he encountered the British forces at a river crossing, probably somewhere on the River Stour. The Britons attacked but were repulsed, and attempted to regroup at a fortified place in the forests, possibly the Hillfort at Bigbury Wood, Kent. Yet were again defeated and scattered. As it was late in the day and Caesar was unsure of the territory, he called off the pursuit and made camp.However, the next morning, as he prepared to advance further, Caesar received word from Atrius that, once again, his ships at anchor had been dashed against each other in a storm and suffered considerable damage. About forty, he says, were lost. The Romans were unused to Atlantic and Channel tides and storms, but nevertheless, considering the damage he had sustained the previous year, this was poor planning on Caesar's part. However, Caesar may have exaggerated the number of ships wrecked to magnify his own achievement in rescuing the situation.He returned to the coast, recalling the legions that had gone ahead, and immediately set about repairing his fleet. His men worked day and night for approximately ten days, beaching and repairing the ships, and building a fortified camp around them. Word was sent to Labienus to send more ships.Caesar was on the coast on 1 September, from where he wrote a letter to Cicero. News must have reached him at this point of the death of his daughter Julia, as Cicero refrained from replying "on account of his mourning".March Inland -Caesar then returned to the Stour crossing and found the Britons had massed their forces there. Cassivellaunus, a warlord from north of the Thames, had previously been at war with most of the British tribes. He had recently overthrown the king of the powerful Trinovantes and forced his son, Mandubracius, into exile, but now the Britons had appointed him to lead their combined forces. After several indecisive skirmishes, during which a Roman tribune, Quintus Laberius Durus, was killed, the Britons attacked a foraging party of three legions under Gaius Trebonius, but were repulsed and routed by the pursuing Roman cavalry.Cassivellaunus realised he could not defeat Caesar in a pitched battle. Disbanding the majority of his force and relying on the mobility of his 4,000 chariots and superior knowledge of the terrain, he used guerrilla tactics to slow the Roman advance. By the time Caesar reached the Thames, the one fordable place available to him had been fortified with sharpened stakes, both on the shore and under the water, and the far bank was defended. Second Century sources state that Caesar used a large war elephant, which was equipped with armour and carried archers and slingers in its tower, to put the defenders to flight. When this unknown creature entered the river, the Britons and their horses fled and the Roman army crossed over and entered Cassivellaunus' territory.The Trinovantes, whom Caesar describes as the most powerful tribe in the region, and who had recently suffered at Cassivellaunus' hands, sent ambassadors, promising him aid and provisions. Mandubracius, who had accompanied Caesar, was restored as their king, and the Trinovantes provided grain and hostages. Five further tribes, the Cenimani, Segontiaci, Ancalites, Bibroci and Cassi, surrendered to Caesar, and revealed to him the location of Cassivellaunus' stronghold, possibly the hill fort at Wheathampstead, which he proceeded to put under siege.Cassivellaunus sent word to his allies in Kent, Cingetorix, Carvilius, Taximagulus and Segovax, described as the "four kings of Cantium, to stage a diversionary attack on the Roman beach-head to draw Caesar off, but this attack failed, and Cassivellaunus sent ambassadors to negotiate a surrender. Caesar was eager to return to Gaul for the winter due to growing unrest there, and an agreement was mediated by Commius. Cassivellaunus gave hostages, agreed an annual tribute, and undertook not to make war against Mandubracius or the Trinovantes. Caesar wrote to Cicero on 26 September, confirming the result of the campaign, with hostages but no booty taken, and that his army was about to return to Gaul.He then left, leaving not a single Roman soldier in Britain to enforce his settlement. Whether the tribute was ever paid is unknown.AFTERMATH -Commius, Caesar's Atrebatian ally, later switched sides, fighting in Vercingetorix’s rebellion. After a number of unsuccessful engagements with Caesar's forces, he cut his losses and fled to Britain. Sextus Julius Frontinus, in his Strategemata, describes how Commius and his followers, with Caesar in pursuit, boarded their ships. Although the tide was out and the ships still beached, Commius ordered the sails raised. Caesar, still some distance away, assumed the ships were afloat and called off the pursuit.Archaeologist John Creighton believes that this anecdote was a legend, and that Commius was sent to Britain as a friendly king as part of his truce with Mark Antony. Commius established a dynasty in the Hampshire area, known from coins of Gallo-Belgic type. Verica, the king whose exile prompted Claudius’s conquest of AD 43, styled himself a son of Commius.CAESARS CIVIL WAR -At the Battle of Dyrrhachium, Caesar feared Legio X would be outflanked by reinforcements led by Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus and ordered them to retreat. The rest of Caesar's army, seeing Legio X retreating for the first time, broke and fled to their camps. Legio X, seeing the army rout, fled too. After the defeat, Legio X demanded to be decimated for cowardice but Caesar was reluctant and demoted Legio X's standard bearers instead.BATTLE OF DYRRHACHIUM -Caesar did not immediately give chase to Pompey and instead consolidated power in Rome and Italy. He had other problems as well; Pompey had left him with no ships to cross the Adriatic, and Spain had begun to mobilize against Caesar. After gathering the remainder of his forces from Transalpine Gaul he marched into Spain and subdued enough of the country so that it wouldn't intervene during his campaign against Pompey. He then turned his full attention to Pompey.Having only assembled half the needed ships, Caesar decided to take seven available legions across the Adriatic, and to then have the ships travel back to Brundisium, (modern-day Brindisi), and transport the remaining legions once they had arrived at Brundisium. Travel across the Adriatic Sea to Greece would ordinarily be tricky, but was made more so given that it was winter. However, this situation did assist Caesar because the Adriatic was sufficiently treacherous enough to deter the war galleys of Pompey's fleet, commanded by Caesar's former co-consul Marcus Calpurnius Bibulus, at Corfu. As it was winter Bibulus was unprepared and Caesar was able to sail through the blockade easily and form a beachhead at Epirus with the first half of his army. Bibulus, however, was able to block Caesar's attempt to sail his reinforcements stuck at Brundisium. Bibulus died while conducting this blockade and no overall naval commander was appointed by Pompey. At some point Lucius Scrbonius Libo attempted to make the blockade more secure by seizing the island off Brundisium preventing Caesar's reinforcements from sailing anywhere. However, Libo could not sustain this position because of a lack of water.Caesar's blunder had put him in the worst possible position any army could find itself in. His army had no way to resupply from Rome due to the naval blockade, he couldn't resupply locally as Greece was pro-Pompey and closed their gates to Caesar, and his army was only at half strength. So dire was his situation that he made several attempts to discuss peace with Pompey but was refused at every channel. Realizing he was going to have to fight his way out, he attempted another winter blockade run back to Italy to lead his remaining forces to Greece. His luck was not with him and the rough seas and storms forced him back. However, his Master of the Horse Mark Antony fired up his troops and after several attempts evaded Libo's blockade and managed to land at Nympheum (Shengjin) with four more legions. It was now a race against time as both Caesar and Pompey rushed to meet Antony. Although Pompey reached Antony first Caesar was right on his heels and Pompey prudently moved his forces to Dyrrachium to prevent becoming caught between the two forces.THE SIEGE -Dyrrachium was a strong defensive position for Pompey. His back was guarded by the sea, and at his front there were hills that commanded the immediate area. This made an assault on the position nearly impossible. Caesar instead decided to revisit his Gallic Wars play-book and ordered his engineers to build walls and fortifications to pin Pompey against the sea. Pompey responded with walls and fortifications of his own to prevent any further advance. Between these two fortifications a no man's land was created which saw constant skirmishes with little or no gain—similar to the trench warfare of World War I. Caesar held the outlying farmland but it had been picked clean and Pompey, with the sea at his back, was able to be resupplied by ship. However, as the siege wore on, their positions began to change. Pompey found it difficult with the limited land he controlled to create enough fodder for his horses, and other supplies such as fresh water became more and more difficult to maintain. The autumn harvest was approaching and soon Caesar would have enough food to prolong his position. This caused Pompey to become desperate to break out of the siege. By midsummer, though, Pompey had a fortunate stroke of luck. Two Gallic noblemen were caught stealing the pay from auxiliary cavalry under their command, but managed to escape to Pompey. With these two men on his side, Pompey was able to discover the weakest point in Caesar's wall.A section to the south of the lines hadn't yet been completed and it was the only viable target for attack.THE BATTLE -Pompey mounted an attack of six legions against Caesar's line where it joined the sea and where the IX Legion was stationed. Pompey also sent some auxiliaries and light infantry to attack by sea. Heavily outnumbering the Caesarian troops, the Pompeian troops broke through the weakened fortifications, causing the Ninth to pull back from the onslaught with heavy losses. Caesar swiftly reinforced the breach with 4,000 men. Twelve cohorts under Mark Antony then counterattacked, re-securing part of the wall and pushing Pompey's disordered forces back. Although Caesar's counterattack was initially successful, Pompey's forces were simply too numerous. Some days earlier Pompey had occupied a small camp that had been abandoned by Caesar, and enlarged the defences. Caesar responded by sending 33 cohorts to attack this position. Although the attack was initially successful, the Caesarian troops were outnumbered 2-1 and Pompey's troops fought hard. Pompey sent a large force of infantry and 3,000 cavalry to outflank Caesar's right wing. Caesar first ordered his troops on the right to stand firm, but then saw the danger of being outflanked. He ordered a retreat which soon became a panicked and disordered rout. The counterattack on Pompey's camp disintegrated completely. At first Caesar personally tried to stem the retreat, but the fleeing troops did not stop until they reached their own camps. After the failure of the counterattack and considering the losses incurred, Caesar resolved to give up attempting to besiege Pompey and to change the entire strategy of the campaign.AFTERMATH -Pompey ordered a halt, believing that Caesar had been decisively beaten, and also suspecting a trap. According to Plutarch, Caesar remarked on that decision saying, "Today the victory had been the enemy's, had there been any one among them to gain it."Caesar, by various stratagems, managed to retreat south with the remainder of his army and avoided being caught by the pursuing cavalry of Pompey. He sent some of his cohorts to reinforce the garrisons of Apollonia and Oricum, and propelled the bulk of his remaining troops into Thessaly. The Caesarian general Gnaeus Domitius Calvinus and the Pompeian general Scipio Nasica were both in that country with their respective armies, and both Caesar and Pompey then aimed to link up with their corresponding forces in Thessaly. Upon entering Thessaly, Caesar captured the town of Gomphi and regrouped with Domitius, allowing his men to resupply, rest and then move towards Pharsalus, where the decisive battle would soon be fought.Legio X only had one more battle to restore their reputation before they returned to Rome and mutinied for being unpaid.Caesar claimed that, in the course of his conquest of Gaul, the Britons had supported the campaigns of the mainland Gauls against him, with fugitives from among the Gallic Belgae fleeing to Belgic settlements in Britain, and the Veneti of Armorica, who controlled seaborne trade to the island, calling in aid from their British allies to fight for them against Caesar in 56 BC.END OF THE LEGION -In 45 BC the legion was disbanded, and the veterans obtained lands in Narbonne, Southern Gaul.During the civil war that followed Caesar's assassination, the Legio X was reconstituted by Lepidus (winter 44/43), and fought for the triumvirs until the final Battle of Philippi. The veterans obtained lands near Cremona, and an inscription reports that the name of the legion at the time was Veneria, "devoted to Venus", the mythical mother of Gens Julia.The Tenth later followed Mark Antony in Armenia, during his Parthian campaign. During Antony’s Civil War, the legion fought for Mark Antony until the defeat in the Battle of Actium, after which the legion moved into Octavian's army.The veterans settled in Patras. When the legion rebelled under Augustus, it was disbanded, stripped of its Equestris title, and, being populated with soldiers from other legions, renamed X Gemina, yet that it a different story…Thanks for reading, Cheers!

How the plague spread around the British IslesMost historians are willing to agree that the Black Death killed between 30-45% of the population between 1348-50.1317: Great Famine in EnglandMay 1337: Declaration of the Hundred Years War by Edward III.June 1348: Black Death arrives at Melcombe Regis (Weymouth)Aug 1348: Black Death hits BristolSept 1348: Black Death reaches LondonOct 1348: Winchester hit - Edendon's 'Voice in Rama' speechJan 1349: Parliament prorogued on account of the plague.Jan-Feb 1349: Plague spreads into E. Anglia and the Midlands.April 1349: Plague known in Wales.May 1349: Halesowen hit.18th June 1349: Ordinance of Labourers.July 1349: Plague definitely hits Ireland.Autumn 1349: Plague reaches Durham. Scots invade northern England and bring back plague with them.Spring 1350: Massive outbreak of plague in Scotland.Sept 1350: First pestilence dies out.9th Feb 1351: Statute of Labourers.1361-64: Second Pestilence: 'The Plague of Children'.1367: Birth of Richard II in Bordeau.1368-69: Third Pestilence1371-75: Fourth Pestilence (variously dated 1371 or 1373-5)1381: The Peasant RevoltThe plague returned in a series of periodic local and national epidemics. The plague only finally stopped at the end of the Seventeenth century.The first outbreak of plague swept across England in 1348-49. It seems to have travelled across the south in bubonic form during the summer months of 1348, before mutating into the even more frightening pneumonic form with the onset of winter. It hit London in September 1348, and spread into East Anglia all along the coast early during the new year. By spring 1349, it was ravaging Wales and the Midlands, and by late summer, it had made the leap across the Irish Sea and had penetrated the north. The Scots were quick to take advantage of their English neighbours' discomfort, raiding Durham in 1349. Whether they caught the plague by this action, or whether it found its way north via other means, it was taking its revenge on Scotland by 1350.It would be fair to say that the onset of the plague created panic the length and breadth of Britain. One graphic testimony can be found at St Mary's, Ashwell, Hertfordshire, where an anonymous hand has carved a harrowing inscription for the year 1349: The Black Death entered south-western England in Summer 1348 and by all accounts struck Bristol with shocking force. Rumours of a terrible plague sweeping like wildfire across Europe had been rumbling for some time, and it is not surprising that the vibrant trading port of Bristol was the first major town in Britain to be affected, for it had close connections with the continent. Bristol was the second largest city in Britain and was the principal port of entry for the West Country. Within it lived upwards of 10,000 souls, tightly packed together in conditions that were not altogether sanitary.The new Smithfield cemetery was hurriedly opened by the Bishop of London, but became so swamped that a local landowner, Sir Walter Manny, donated land nearby at Spittle Croft for a second cemetery. Excavation of the East Smithfield cemeteries, revealed that the dead were neatly stacked five deep in the mass graves (cf. D. Hawkins, The Black Death and the new London Cemeteries of 1348). London, as the country's largest city, had all the concomitant problems of overcrowding and poor sanitation. The Thames was a polluted mess and cesspits within the city were a constant source of contamination. Attempts to alleviate the sanitation problem were not helped by the Black Death itself. In 1349, the King remonstrated with the town council about the state of the streets. The council replied that it could do nothing on account of the fact that all of its street cleaners had died of the plague.In January 1349, Parliament was prorogued on the grounds that: 'the plague and deadly pestilence had suddenly broken out in the said place and the neighbourhood, and daily increased in severity so that grave fears were entertained for the safety of those coming here at the time.' Two ex-Chancellors and three Archbishops of Canterbury all died in quick succession. A large black slab in the southern cloister of Westminster Abbey probably covers the remains of the Abbot of Westminster and 27 of his monks who were also taken by the plague. It raged in London until spring 1350, and is generally assumed to have killed between one third and one half of the populace.The combination of plague and fear of a Scottish invasion caused such unrest within Durham itself that there were riots on the streets. These fears seem well founded, for the Scots were quick to take advantage of their English neighbours' distress, though they paid a terrible price for their opportunism: The retreating army and its baggage carried the plague home with them in autumn 1349. It seems to have been checked by the Scottish winter, but broke out with renewed virulence in the spring of 1350: Another chronicle, the Book of Pluscarden says that the victims were: 'attacked with inflammation and lingered barely four and twenty hours.' Given the virulence of the plague and the symptoms described, it seems likely that the cold Scottish weather provoked an outbreak of pneumonic plague, with the complication of septicaemia.The plague in Wales and the Marches were as pitiless as elsewhere. At Whitchurch, an inquest into the death of one John le Strange revealed that John had died on 20th August 1349. His oldest son, Fulk, died 2 days before the inquest could be held on 30th August. Before an inquest could be held on Fulk's estate, his brother Humphrey was dead too. John, the third brother, survived to inherit a shattered estate, in which the 3 water mills which belonged to him were assessed at only half their value 'by reason of the want of those grinding, on account of the pestilence.' His land was deemed worthless because all its tenants were dead 'and no-one is willing to hire the land.' The Welsh poet, Jeuan Gethin, paints a vivid picture of the fear the plague engendered in its victims:It is difficult to assess the affect of the plague in Ireland, because of the scarcity of manorial records and other sources. However, it is from Ireland that we get perhaps the most poignant testimony to the effect of the plague: On average, between 30-45% of the general populace died in the Black Death of 1348-50. But in some villages, 80% or 90% of the population died (and in Kilkenny at least, it seems likely that the death-rate was 100%!). A death-rate of 30% is higher than the total British losses in World War I.Nor was 1350 the end of it. Plague recurred! It came back in 1361-64, 1368, 1371, 1373-75, 1390, 1405 and continued into the fifteenth century. Death rates in the later epidemics may have been lower than the Black Death, but the sources reveal a new horror:In 1361 a general mortality oppressed the people. It was called the second pestilence and both rich and poor died, but especially young people and children. (Henry Knighton)In AD 1361 there was a mortality of men, especially adolescents and boys, and as a result it was commonly called the pestilence of boys. (Chronicle of Louth Park Abbey)In 1361 there was a second pestilence within England, which was called the mortality of children. Several people of high birth and a great number of children died.In 1369 there was a third pestilence in England and in several other countries. It was great beyond measure, lasted a long time and was particularly fatal to children.In 1374 the fourth pestilence began in England... In the following year, a large number of Londoners from among the wealthier and more eminent citizens died in the pestilence.In 1378 the fourth pestilence reached York and was particularly fatal to children. (Anonimalle Chronicle)In 1390 a great plague ravaged the country. It especially attacked adolescents and boys, who died in incredible numbers in towns and villages everywhere. (Thomas Walsingham)The message is clear: the plague was hitting the population of England where it hurt most, in its young. Modern research shows that it was entirely possible for the plague to have become both age and gender specific by the 1360s, with profound consequences for the reproductive cycle of the population. By the 1370s, the population of England had been halved and it was not recovering.Most historians are willing to agree that the Black Death killed between 30-45% of the population between 1348-50.