What I cannot seem to discover is whether Cogidumnus was a ruler in Sussex
prior to the Roman invasion of AD 43 or whether he only became ruler after
the Romans formerly invaded (historical record).

Can anybody point me towards a scholary reference discussion on this
please?  From what I have noted it seems it was not until the Romans
arrived that Cogidumnus became King [Rex] and the Atrebates were then known
as the Regni or the Regnenses?

However, I may have overlooked something, and secondly if there is no
evidence that Cogidumnus that was a ruler of the locals before the Roman
invasion, it does not mean he was not?  What was the local Roman tendency,
to make a deal with the local chiefs or to replace the local ruler with
their own ruler?


Andy Horton.
History of Shoreham, England

  ><< ( ( ( ' >

A reference to assist  is Barry Cunliffe's book on Fishbourne Roman Palace, (Tempus 1998)  in which on p108 he discusses the two firm pieces of evidence about this ruler.

1. the inscription found in Chichester mentioning Tiberius Claudius [ ]ogidubnus as "rex magnus Brit." the great king of the Britains" permitting the building of a temple.

2.  a passage in Tacitus  (Agricola XIV which reads .."certain states were given to Cogidubnus (he remained faithful down to our own times) according to an old and long accepted Roman tradition of using kings also as instruments for slavery"  (i.e. subjugation of native peoples).  (Tacitus:born  AD56 or 7; died after 117 apparently)

I do not have the reference for the recent argument to spell his name with a T rather than a C, but it seems to have become the accepted spelling.

No one can answer the details of whether Togidubnus was already the local ruler, or whether he was inserted as a puppet ruler. On Saturday night's TV programme which included Fishbourne RP, Barry Cunliffe was suggesting that Togi was likely to have been brought up in Rome, and come back to Britain.

It has long been argued that Togi was quite young at the time of the invasion, because he must have lived & ruled for quite long time subsequently, as inferred by the Tacitus passage, and if indeed it was he who built FRP in its grand style in cAD 75-80, removing earlier buildings in the area.

As to the name of the local political unit - I recall Mark Hassall stating rather firmly the case for one name as opposed to the other at the Roman Invasion conference in Chichester a few years back, but I have forgotten what his argument hinged upon.

Caroline Wells

From: "Caroline Wells" <CarolineWells@talgarth.demon.co.uk>

Sussex Past Discussion group on Yahoo
SUSSEXPAST  Sussex Archaeological Society  EGroup


Hi Andy
Togidubnus has appeared in a number of recent books, most notably in
Manley, J 2001 "AD 43: the Roman invasion of Britain a reassessment". Tempus
Henig, M 2001 "The Heirs of King Verica". Tempus
and (not blowing my own trumpet here, honestly)
Russell, M 2002 "Prehistoric Sussex". Tempus

We don't know an awful lot about Togidubnus (and as you note we are not even sure how to spell his name), but we can be sure that he was influential and that his loyalty to Rome was
rewarded by an increase in power and personal fortune. His additional names Tiberius and Claudius tells us that he a fully paid up member of society, a Roman citizen with all the status
and legal rights that conferred and that his sponsor for citizenship had been the emperor Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus himself. Official Roman recognition extend to
further acknowledging the title of "Great King". Trouble is Togi minted no coins prior to the Roman invasion and he appears in no earlier historical text. He seems to have sprung, quite
literally, out of nowhere, yet he was undoubtedly a powerful and influential man and crucial to Roman plans of conquest.

In my book Prehistoric Sussex (plug plug) I argue that Togidubnus and the historically attested Togodumnus, son of Cunobelinus and prince / king of the Catuvellauni, and who's brother
Caratacus fought an ultimately unsuccessful guerilla campaign against the Romans, were in reality one and the same, Togodumnus defecting to the Roman side shortly after the initial Roman
landings (at Fishbourne). Such a defection, at such a crucial time would have been vital to the Roman cause and would almost certainly have been well rewarded after. Caratacus fights on
alone, Colchester is taken and the emperor Claudius has his victory. Togodumnus / Togidubnus and his people, formerly members of the Catuvellaunian group, were given land and legitimacy
as "the Regni" based in the New Market town of Chichester, an area previously under the influence of another of Cunobelinus' sons, Adminius / Amminius. Identification of Togodumnus with
Tiberius Claudius Togidubnus may also help to explain why he held the title of "Great King in Britain", for this is one the Roman state used when describing his father Cunobelinus. It may
also go some way to explain Tacitus' later caustic statement that king Togidubnus' loyalty was in accordance with Rome's policy of "making even kings their agents in enslaving people" as
Tacitus wrote in praising terms about Caratacus, leader of the British resistance, who remained defiant to the end, whilst his brother Togidubnus, however, lived on in grand and luxurious
splendour in Britain, not because he had bravely defied Rome, but because he had whole heatedly surrendered to them, an act that would not have appealed to Tacitus' view of the noble and
honourable savage.

It's only a point of view!
Hope this helps
From: MilesRussell <mrussell@bournemouth.ac.uk>

visit http://www.sussexpast.co.uk for the latest on Sussex's Past - to unsubscribe from this list send an empty/no message/no signature email to sussexpast-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Imaginative Account
Britarch Letters
Atrebates (with British tribal map)
Roman Invasion of Sussex theory

30 December 2002

I have recently received an email about the Togidubnus new spelling of the chap we all knew of as Cogidubnus until recently. As I chased the references for my correspondent I might as well share them in case anyone would like to know.

 - Cunliffe in his book on Fishbourne gives the lead - which is R S O Tomalin, "Reading a 1st century Roman gold signet ring from Fishbourne, Sussex Archaeological Collections 135 (1997) 127-30; and from that source we read about the 9th century editor and his margin notes. Tomalin references his sources  as:

R M Ogilvie & I A Richmond (no title given) (Oxford University Press 1967) 84-92, further refined by

 C E Murgia "The minor works Tacitus: a study in textual criticism" Classical Philology 72 (1977) 323-43.

Happy New Year
Caroline Wells