Robert Paterson's Blog, page 2

Pictured above, lying 30 feet below the modern street, are the partial ruins of the Imperial Villa, Horti Sallustiani. This was Vespasian's favourite place to stay as Emperor when he was in Rome. Most historians remark on this, even in Roman times, as a sign of how Vespasian wanted to be seen as a "man of the people". But, by piecing together fragments of evidence, I can now see that there is more to this than propaganda. This part of Rome had always been his home and it was also where Caenis, the love of his life lived.

This map of ancient Rome, layered on modern Rome, shows approximately where Vespasian lived as Emperor and where Caenis had her house. She was 5-10 minutes walk away. They were always discrete. The Imperial Villa was also close to the Salarian Gate - look just north of the Gardens and you will see it. This is significant because the Via Salaria was the road to Rieti. Vespasian could go to his country place often without travelling through Rome and he could do so with the least amount of publicity. We know from accounts of his death there, that he had set Rieti up as the country HQ of the Empire. His staff were used to working there.

So far we are on the same page as most accounts. But as I was looking into the early years of his children, I had an aha. Suetonius says that Titus and Domitian were born in a very poor house that just happens to be down the road from the Horti Sallustiani. 

Titus - "was born on the third day before the Kalends of January, in the year memorable for the death of Gaius, in a mean house near the Septizonium1  p323 (Cannot be the one that Severus built near the Palatine as Suetonius died long before then) and in a very small dark room besides; for it still remains and is on exhibition."

Much more likely Vespasian's Domus was here where Suetonius tells us of Domitian's birth  "Domitian was born on the ninth day before the Kalends of November of the year when his father was consul elect and was about to enter on the office in the following month, in a street of the sixth region called "the Pomegranate,"1 in a house which he afterwards converted into a temple of the Flavian family. He is said to have passed the period of his boyhood and his early youth in great poverty and infamy." -

Here are the notes on this location - Various quarters and streets of the city were designated (p339)in this way; cf. ad Capita Bubula, Aug. v; ad Pirum, Mart. 1.117.6. Ad Malum Punicum was a street on the Quirinal hill, probably corresponding with the modern Via delle Quattro Fontane; see Platner, Topography of Rome, p485.

Look for the VI on the map above that shows the area where Domitian is born and you can see that Vespasian's old Roman house, was in the same area as later when he was Emperor. Like many of us, he was a man of habit. He liked the area and wanted to stay there. Here is the modern street - Via delle Quattro Fontane - just down the road from the Horti.

Vespasian's relative poverty was real enough. His marriage to the low status Domitilla proves that. Ironically, I think that Caenis had a lot of money after the death of her mistress, Antonia, who left her extensive property on Egypt that was looked after by the Familia Alexander.

Vespasian's poverty and lower middle class origins were politically useful assets. How could someone like him be seen as a threat to Caligula or Nero? Just as Claudius had played the gibbering idiot and so avoided being seen as a contender, Vespasian, in middle-life, played the role of the poor country yokel. This kept him off the murder roles. 

His poor origins also helped him as Emperor. Here he could play the role of man of the people. 

He made a point of not living in the Palace on the Palatine. To showcase his lowly origins, he made his old house into a museum of humility and, I bet, he kept his country Sabine accent. Titus, secure in his military achievements also played the man of the people. But, I think this rankled Domitian. Unable to share in his older brother's achievements, Domitian proved his status by building grand monuments - principally the vast palace on the Palatine that makes up most of the ruins there today. 

These humble origins came to fruition in the fateful year of 67 AD. When the Judaean Revolt broke out, who was Nero to call upon? The best General in the Empire or stodgy old Vespasian. Both men received messengers from the Praetorian Guard. In the next post, we will see why Vespasian went to Judaea and why Corbulo had to kill himself.

 

This is the reverse side of a gold Aureus in the reign of Vespasian. We see an idealized woman holding a wreath of victory over his head. Is this the only image that we have of Caenis? Who was she? What was the attraction between her and Vespasian? - 

"Thank you Aglaus, thank you," Vespasian embraced, Caenis's steward, "An altar fit for an empress."

"My boys and I will miss her, my lord. She was like a granny to them."

"My boy Titus feels the same," Vespasian sighed , "but sadly not my other son."

"Children, my lord, both a blessing and a curse."

Vespasian smiled ruefully.

The two men were looking at this, the memorial altar for Caenis - found on her property less than a mile away from where Vespasian spent most of his time when in Rome. The altar says that it was put up by her freedman, Aglaus, and his sons. It is a very fine piece and was probably financed by Vespasian who had Aglaus put his name on it. Vespasian was discrete even in death.

Vespasian was not into show, ever. When he was in Rome, he mainly lived here, near the Salaria Gate, the Via Salaria was the road that went to his estate in Rieti. His Villa was located in the Gardens of Sallust, a garden property that had once belonged to Julius Caesar. Caenis lived in her own Villa just across the road from him. The map below gives us an approximation of the locations.

"The emperor Vespasian resided infrequently on the Palatine, spending most of his time at the estate called the Gardens of Sallust, where he would receive anyone who wished to see him, not just the senators.��� He was considered an autocrat only in his care of the public welfare; in all other respects he lived a common life on the level of others."
Dio, History 65.10.4, 11.1

After Vespasian, the Gardens of Sallust became a favourite for many Emperors. Nerva, an old friend of Vespasian, and Domitian's successor, died there. When Vespasian was Emperor, Caenis lived a few minutes walk away on the other side of the road. Typically, Domitian built a vast palace on the Palatine. 

So we know where she lived and where she died as an older woman. What about her early life? What do we know or what can we assume?

Our sources tell us that she was born in the last year or years of Augustus who died in 14 BC. So, on her death, Caenis was maybe 88 years old. She was 23 years older than Vespasian. Before you shudder, here is a modern version of this kind of love. President Macron was 15 when he met his wife, Brigitte, who was then 39 and his drama teacher. Vespasian, probably meets Caenis, when he is 15/16. Caenis would have been 38. This was in or around 24 or 25 AD, before the great events of 31, when Caenis was involved in the Sejanus plot and the death of Livilla and way before the events of 41 and the murder of Caligula.

It is likely that Caenis was still a slave when they first met.

Her name suggests that she came from Thrace from a town called Caenophrurium. See the yellow shape. It's on the way to Byzantium just off the main Roman Road, the Via Egnatia,

Caenophrurium translates as the "stronghold of the Caeni", a Thracian tribe. It is later famous as the place where the Emperor Aurelian is murdered. Thrace plays an ongoing role in Vespasian's life. His first post is in Thrace. His brother, Sabinus becomes a governor there and an Ala of Thracian cavalry go to Britannia with Vespasian. 

When they meet for the first time, Caenis is a slave in the Familia Antonia where she acts as Antonia's private secretary. This is the same role that Narcissus holds for Antonia's son, Claudius. Caenis is exceptionally literate and would have spoken and written perfect Greek and Latin. She is described as having a perfect memory. How would a slave girl gain such an education? How would a slave girl have such presence? How would a slave girl gain the confidence of an aristocrat like Antonia Minor? I suspect that there is a chance that this slave girl was the daughter of a high-status father. For, while aristocratic Roman women could be well educated, no one was going to pick out a slave girl and make that kind of investment. Nor would a woman like Antonia need to have a woman as a close servant. Pallas, who was to become Narcissus rival was also in Antonia's Familia. In the later years of Augustus, Thrace was a problem area with many revolts and rebellions. It is feasible that Caenis might have been enslaved as a result of one of these conflicts.

What would Vespasian and Caenis have seen in each other when they first met in about 24 AD when he was 15 and she 38?

Vespasian had lost his father as a young boy and had been largely brought up by his stern granny, Tertulla. There would have been little love or affection in his childhood. Then he meets this amazing woman, old enough to be his mother. She is single and will never marry. For, as a female slave on her way up, her only chance of true freedom is to stay single until she might be freed. 

Growing up myself in a loveless home, I had no idea what love might be until our wonderful nanny, Fluffy, aged 17 came into our lives. I was then 7. My feelings for her remain strong as ever as I approach my 70's. To find love in these circumstances is an overwhelming and life-changing event. For a young man, whose hormones would have been raging at 15 or 16, it would not take long for feelings of love to shift gears to desire.

How did she respond? My sense is that Caenis was always in control of herself. She would have felt the intensity of Vespasian's feelings for her. He was safe too. First of all he was young, giving her control. Secondly he was of much lower social status than her mistress and so she had control there too. My sense is that Antonia approved as well for the same reasons. Caenis would never do anything that would have lowered herself in the eyes of her mistress and there was no hiding a relationship in the public life that she lived. 

There is another player here as well, Narcissus. He is the constant ally of both Caenis and Vespasian. He too always had his eye on his own interests. So, why did he back this relationship and Vespasian? We cannot know, but we do know that Narcissus was a constant supporter. We know that love was not enough motivation for support in the shark tank that was court life in Rome. I can only imagine that Narcissus and Caenis may have been related. What else, other than blood, would have bound them so tightly and for his entire life?

So what did Caenis see in Vespasian? No woman in Rome could ever have power unless this power was fronted by a man. Livia had the power but she relied on her husband Augustus and later her son Tiberius to be her front. Antonia Minor was the niece of Augustus and the mother of Germanicus. Agrippina over-stepped the mark and sought power for herself. Her son, Nero had her killed. What kind of man would be the front for a slave? We can see that Caenis had ambition. She could help him have career.

In this, Vespasian is an ideal partner. No aristocrat would ever see Caenis as anything more than a bedmate Vespasian's middle class ranking and his lower position as second son, meant that he could partner with a slave. He could never marry a slave, but a well-connected slave like Caenis could help his career and so rise with him.

Her skills in the power games of Rome were soon made clear in 31, when the Familia Antonia exposed Sejanus. In 41, she worked to make Claudius Emperor and so got a legion command for her man. From then on they were committed to each other. With his name made, they could help each other.

So what about Domitilla, Vespasian's wife. How did she fit into this? Domitilla married Vespasian in about 38 AD. Titus was born a year later in 39. They had two more children, Domitilla the Younger born about 45 and the after-thought, Domitian, born in 51, is 12 years younger than his brother. The records do not tell us when Domitilla died but it was before Vespasian became Emperor in 69/70. We know that Titus admired Caenis and that Domitian loathed her. We also know that Domitian was very close to his nanny Phyllis.

This suggests to me that Domitilla died when Domitian was a young boy making Caenis his evil stepmother and Phyllis his refuge. Much more secure, Titus has seen how helpful Caenis has been to his father and to the Familia Flavia. He himself falls madly in love, aged 15, with a women ten years older than himself, Princess Berenice. She becomes the love of his life and plays a critical role during the highlight of his life, his campaigns in Judaea. Titus has sympathy for his father's love. 

Domitilla is not a great match. She is the daughter of a clerk in a colonial town in north Africa and is the mistress of a minor knight when she meets Vespasian. It is a mark of his lowly position at the time that the marries a woman of her background. But he needs children. He could never marry Caenis. Her position as an ex slave made that illegal and even as Emperor, he never pushed this.

In Rome, marriage was rarely a romance. It was a contract based on interests. Vespasian's marriage would have posed no problem for Caenis. Domitilla, who had her respectability restored by the marriage had nothing to complain about either. Caenis's help in getting Vespasian his command of Legio II, helped to increase Domitilla's status. This then led to a triumph, to a consulship and to a governorship. Her son was placed at court as Britannicus's companion. The sources suggest that Caenis and Vespasian were also very discrete so long as Domitilla was alive, only resuming the physical relationship after her death. Domitilla owed Caenis a great deal.

The early reign of Nero was very difficult for the survivors of the Familia Antonia. Their problem was Agrippina, sister of Caligula, whom they had murdered, who returned to court and captured power from Claudius. She murders their patron and puts her boy in the purple. The first thing she does is to kill Narcissus. She then murders Britannicus. Titus is seated next to the prince that night at dinner and is also poisoned. He survives, just.

Caenis and Vespasian have to take a very low profile so long as Agrippina is in power. I suspect that these hard times bring them even closer together. The sources make no mention of Domitilla though this crisis and the near-death of her son. She may well be dead by now meaning that Caenis and Vespasian may have resumed their physical relationship. I would think that the stress that they were under might have made this a source of great comfort.

Signs that both were back are seen in 63 when Nero appointed Vespasian governor of Africa. But then disaster strikes with the great fire of Rome the next year. It appears that Vespasian, who may had had much of his wealth stored in Rome loses it. He has to retreat to the country and take up the Mule business again. 

Ironically, the wealthy partner is now Caenis. We know that she has properties in Egypt that she must have inherited from her mistress Antonia. These would have been managed by the Familia Alexander. It is this relationship that ultimately creates the conditions for Vespasian becoming Emperor. Tiberius Alexander, gives Vespasian his two legions and then goes on to advise Titus as his chief of staff during the Jerusalem campaign that ultimately finances the Flavian regime.

What a story. Could a young slave girl ever imagine that she might be the consort of an Emperor? Could a second son of a minor official from a rural background ever imagine that he might be Emperor? But together, they reach the pinnacle of life in Rome. Why I think that the two figures on the gold Aureus are them. Their little thank you to each other.

 

 

 

The killing of Gaius, Caligula, was the first assassination of an Emperor. I have done my best to explain who might have organized this, Narcissus and Caenis on behalf of the Familia Alexander, but how was it done?

Like all Emperors after him, Caligula was very concerned about assassination and, knowing the power of the Praetorian Guard, surrounded himself with a German bodyguard loyal only to him. How could a killer get close? The answer was that it had to be someone that he trusted and that person had to find a place where the Germans could not intervene.

There was only one place where it may be possible to isolate the Emperor from his guard. This was in the tunnel that led back to the palace under the Palatine. Archeologists think they have found this now. In the tunnel, an insider could isolate the Emperor from his body guard. 

The insider was Cassius Chaerea, a Tribune of the Guard. He was one of a tiny number of Romans allowed in the Emperor's personal space in public. Why he kill Caligula? Who was he and why did he have the trust of the Emperor?

The story goes that Cassius Chaerea had been offended by Caligula's constant teasing about his high voice and by giving him lewd passwords. Hardly I think grounds for the risks of killing the Emperor. I like Robert Graves's idea better. 

The sources say that Chaerea had been a veteran under Augustus. Graves suggests more. For whom do Emperors trust the most? People that they had known as children. What had been the most exciting part of Caligula's childhood? Being dressed up as a legionary and pretending to be a soldier in his father's camp. Who would have looked after him? The answer has to be a soldier. Certainly not either of his parents or his nanny. Then who was Chaerea? Graves thinks that he was this soldier guardian. This makes sense. 

I think that Graves's novelist's eye sees the truth of the matter. He also picks up the prophecy. Caligula was told that he would be killed by a horse. Now what games might a boy play with a soldier? Might Chaerea be "Horsey"?

Graves goes further and suggests that Chaerea was a survivor of the Varus disaster at Teutoburg. I favour this too. For how might Germanicus choose a guardian for his boy? That man had to be special. What could be more special than a survivor of that disaster?

How Chaerea dies offers us a clue for motive. At his execution, Chaerea, asks his executioner if he can use his sword, the one that Chaerea used to kill Caligula. His executioner agrees. This suggests to me that honour is involved.  

Our best source here is Josephus - who is on the inside of the Familia Flavia - and so had the best insight. 

"Now it is reported that Chaerea bore this calamity courageously..... And as a great many men went along with them to see the sight, when Chaerea came to the place, he asked the soldier, who was to be their executioner, whether this office was what he was used to or whether this was the first time of his using his sword in that manner? and desired him to bring him that very sword, with which he himself slew Gaius. So he was happily killed at one stroke."

Chaerea's motive for killing his "boy" must have been a deep one. Deeper than being insulted. There must have been a betrayal by Caligula. Why would he go to his grave so calmly? I think that he was going home to be with his comrades who had died 32 years before.

Today we know a lot more about PTSD. My own grandfather, who spent 3 1/2 years at the front in France in the Great War, killed himself 38 years after the war ended. Many soldiers who have served in our modern wars, kill themselves today, many years after their service. Their survival guilt grows over time and so do their nightmares. Death for them is often a release. Using Chaerea's own sword would not have been a decision of only his executioner. Claudius or Narcissus would have to have agreed. 

Why then did Claudius kill Chaerea if Chaerea was part of the plot? Claudius has to kill Chaerea because an Emperor cannot condone the murder of an Emperor. Chaerea knows this and accepts that this is the price. Why? The answer can only be that for Chaerea, his life was over. All that he had left was his honour.

 

The discovery and acclamation of Claudius by Gratus of the Praetorian Guard after the assassination of Caligula in 41 AD (By Lawrence Alma Tadema)

"Herod Agrippa, the King of Chalcis, my lord," announced Narcissus.

Agrippa prostrated himself before the new Emperor, Claudius.

"Arise, King of Judaea and Samaria," said the Emperor. As Herod stood, Claudius beckoned the new king to his side.

"Well done my old friend," he whispered, "and how is the Alarbach?"

"Well my lord, pleased to be freed from prison and happy to have been of service."

Claudius's accession in 41 was a surprise to everyone, except to the Familia Antonia who I think had engineered the coup. From this moment onwards, until the arrival of Caligula's sister Agrippina at court and in the bed of Claudius, the Familia Antonia was in power. But back in mid 37, all had seemed black for this group.

As the year 37 began, Herod Agrippa had fallen out with Tiberius again and was back in prison. Antonia Minor sent him food parcels. Gaius, "Caligula", Antonia's grandson had been a hostage in Capri. Then, on the 16th of March 37, Tiberius dies. This is a moment of relief for the Familia Antonia. Herod Agrippa, Antonia's favourite, is freed and Gaius makes Antonia, "Augusta" an honour that only Livia had held before. What could go wrong?

What went wrong was that Gaius fell ill. When he recovered, he seemed to have suffered a massive change in personality. Antonia was concerned and intervened with much grand-motherly advice. This outraged the young Emperor who lashed out against her. He then had Gemellus, the only surviving grandchild of Tiberius killed. Antonia was Gemellus' guardian. This was too much for the 72 year old Antonia, who killed herself in protest. 

With Antonia dead and the Emperor mad, it was heads-down time for Vespasian and the two freed people. We can see how low Vespasian was at the time, by his marriage. Vespasian's wife, they married in 37, was called Flavia Domitilla. She came from a minor family that had immigrated to Sabratha, a city in what is now Libya. She had been the mistress of a man called Statilius Capella also from Sabratha. We know nothing of the circumstances of this union but on the surface it does not seem to be much of a match and it points to Vespasian's low status at the time.

Paradoxically, being of low status is a good thing under Caligula. The worst thing that happens to Vespasian is that Caligula has him showered in shit for doing a poor job as the official responsible for cleaning Rome's streets. I think this ability to appear to be just a middle class country bumpkin, is a survival role that he might have learned from the master at subterfuge, Claudius. We see this ability to hide as a bumpkin come to the fore again after Agrippina's pre-eminence, when he retires back to Rieti to run a mule business. Standing out at court in Rome was dangerous and the closer you were to the inner circle the worse the danger became. 

By 41, any important person in Rome was at risk. Caligula lived extravagantly and relied on raiding the wallets and the bedroom of the elite to keep his interests going. The people loved him. He was seen as a character who gave the people a lot of entertainment. But, the elite were terrified. Fortunately, the old Familia Antonia seem outside of this circle of terror. Claudius played the fool brilliantly, Caenis and Narcissus confined themselves to the household and Vespasian adeptly played the poor nobody that he was. But then something happened that meant that they had to act.

Once again, the important Jewish side of Vespasian's life comes to the front. I have introduced you to the Jewish banking family in Alexandria. The Familia Alexander were then among the wealthiest families in the Roman world. The patriarch, Alexander, the Alarbach, was the tax collector of Alexandria. The family had been given the management of Julius and Augustus Caesar's affairs in Egypt. They managed Antonia's Egyptian estates given her by her father and they managed Caenis and Narcissus's Egyptian estates as well. If you recall, they were tightly linked to Herod Agrippa. They had financed his loans and they had married one of their sons, Marcus to Herod's daughter, Berenice. 

The problem for the Familia Antonia and Alexander was this. Spending money like water, Caligula, imprisoned the Alarbach, the Patriarch of the Familia Alexander. Caligula was trying to squeeze the Familia Alexander for money. This was the wrong choice of "victim". As bankers, the Familia Alexander had to protect their name against all threats, especially from Emperors. They would lose everything forever, if any Emperor could think that they were an easy mark. Unlike an aristocratic Roman family, they could not submit. I think that they bank-rolled the regime change.

How do we know that?

If we follow the money, we find the answers. The money comes from the Familia Antonia's greatest ally, the Familia Alexander.

On Caligula's death, Alexander is immediately released by Claudius. Alexander had obviously not paid the ransom. Herod is immediately promoted as King of Judaea. Alexander's eldest son, Tiberius is immediately given a major role in the Roman system of governing Egypt and, a few years later, is made the Procurator of Judaea. We know from Josephus, that it is Herod Agrippa I that negotiates the money deal with the Praetorian Guard. Josephus tells us that each man in the Guard received 5,000 Drachma. The idea that the Gratus of the Guard simply acknowledged Claudius, as an afterthought makes no sense. Gratus must have been part of the plot and making Claudius Emperor was the essential part. We know that money is the key for the Praetorians. Later new Emperors who failed to understand this, such as Galba and Pertinax, did not last long.

The great days for the Familia Antonia begin. By 42, Narcissus is in control of the Imperial Bureaucracy and Caenis has power again. We see proof of this when, in 42, Vespasian is given command of Legio II in Argentoratum or modern Strasbourg. In Egypt, the Familia Alexander expand their power. Claudius's massive improvements to the docks at Ostia help the shipping side of their business and Tiberius is put on track to become the most senior Knight in Rome. In Judaea, Herod Agrippa, has the restored kingdom of his grandfather, Herod the Great. To the victors come the spoils.

In the next interim post I will detail the murder of Caligula before going onto the other pivotal relationship that Vespasian has, Caenis.

 

 

Here is a reconstruction of the main gates at Maiden Castle. If you have been there, it is really impressive and you might wonder how these gates might be breached. Legio II probably made the final assault in less than an hour. No army ever has been so adept at this kind of assault. How could they have done this?

When the hill fort was first excavated by Sir Mortimer Wheeler, he was certain that there had been a major siege and battle here. 40 bodies were found and one has a ballista bolt in his spine. Do you see it? It is the first body and the bolt is labeled. Since then, there has been doubt about the siege. No more bodies have been found and there are no signs of siege works as you find say at Masada.

There are no siege works, though there must be some camps, because this was not a siege but an assault. Those in the fort were contained by their own walls. The Thracian Ala, only had to make regular patrols to keep the lid on and as this was not a siege, there was no need to close off the fort completely.

The only major work would have been to build platforms in front of the gate system for the artillery. With enough height, this could then sweep the gates and the opposing walls making it impossible for the defenders to defend directly. A cache of 20,000 sling stones, from the local beach, was found suggesting that the defenders could not use them. The supporting ballista fire made standing up a suicidal action.

Then the First Cohort of Legio II formed up in Testudo formation and took the inner rings and arrived at the gates where a covered ram could break in in minutes.

Here we come to the smart part of the plan. Vespasian's brief was to secure a safe buffer in the south of Britannia. Because this was an assault and not a siege, the rules of war allowed him to show mercy. The last thing that he needed was an angry local population. By showing that none of their defences, no matter how magnificent, could hold Rome back, he did not have to make unnecessary enemies by slaughtering everyone. The fact that the south was forever quiet after that showed the brilliance of his plan.

I think Wheeler's critics assume a siege. There is no evidence of a siege.  So they assume that Maiden was not taken. But an assault is not a siege and there is evidence of an assault and its success and the mercy shown made the point that needed to be made.

Just to offer a sense of how effective the Romans were at assaults and siege work,  let's consider Masada and Alesia.

The official line in Israel is that Masada was held heroically for three years. Current research suggests that the circumvallation wall, in stone, and the camps were built in maybe a week. That the ramp, built on top of a ridge and using lumber as a binding agent took 8 weeks tops and that the entire operation might have taken 4 months from start to finish.

At Alesia, according to Caesar's Commentaries, about 18 kilometres of 4 metre high fortifications were constructed in about three weeks. This line was followed inwards by two four-and-a-half metre wide ditches, also four-and-a-half metres deep. The farthest from the fortification was filled with water from the surrounding rivers. These fortifications were supplemented with mantraps and deep holes in front of the ditches, and regularly spaced watch towers equipped with Roman artillery.

Caesar ordered the construction of a second line of fortifications, the contravallation, facing outward and encircling his army between it and the first set of walls. The second line was identical to the first in design and extended for 21 kilometres.

Even with modern earth moving equipment, these efforts would take some beating. No army could did like the Roman Army. Remember their routine at the end of every 20 mile march day would be to build an overnight camp, before they had a meal or sleep. In the field this was done in full armour after carrying 70 pounds of kit all day. 

With artillery support, assaulting Maiden's Gates was nothing to the First Cohort.

 

This is "Maiden Castle" - In about 44 AD, Vespasian, while on independent campaign in the south of Britannia, took this fort and many others and so secured the south coast for Rome and a new Kingdom for Cogidubnus. 

It was just before dawn, Cogidubnus' right knee touched Teres's left, as they waited on their horses for the signal. 

"I can't believe it," the Briton said to Teres, the Ala Prefect, "An hour to take this fort?"

"Maybe less, prince, maybe less," Teres replied.

"And with only one cohort?"

"It's enough, and when they break-in, it will be our turn."

Why did Nero select Vespasian as the commander to put down the Judaean Revolt?

Politically, it seemed that Vespasian was a safe choice. As we will see later, few men seemed less ambitious. Vespasian's lack of political ambition made Nero feel safe. On the other hand, Nero knew that Vespasian had the military skills to do the job. His reputation as a soldier and commander still shone brightly.

In his early 30's, Vespasian had commanded one of the four legions during the invasion of Britannia in 43 AD. His was the II Augusta, based in what is now Strasberg. During the campaign, Vespasian played a critical role at the victory at the Battle of Medway in 43 that decisively defeated the Britons. After Medway, in late 43, he was given an independent command to clear the southern coast. In this campaign, he reduced many forts along the south, crushing all opposition and putting Cogidubnus on the throne. He was given a triumph by Claudius on his return and made consul.

How had he gained the skills?

Like most young high-born Romans, aged 18 in 27 AD, Vespasian joined the legions as a Military Tribune. A Military Tribune was a minor staff role supporting the Legate. Young men from aristocratic families usually spent only six months in this role. Lasting only six months and acting as only a messenger, there was no opportunity to learn how to become a soldier. No Emperor wanted to have a possible rival from an influential family who was also a skilled soldier.

But, Vespasian did not spend six months in Thrace. He spent three years. Middle-class men, like Vespasian, were not seen as a potential threat to the Imperial family. If they showed talent, they were encouraged to become professional soldiers. An excellent example of this middle-class option is Pliny, the Elder, a great friend of Vespasian. Pliny served for more than a decade in the Legions, where he learned his trade from Corbulo. Later, Pliny mentored Vespasian's son, Titus. Vespasian's three years in Thrace must have been crucial in developing his high levels of skill as a commander. Unfortunately, we know nothing about what he did there. What then can we assume?

When Vespasian arrived in Thrace in 27 AD, the governor of Moesia, Gaius Poppaeus Sabinus, had been mopping up after a significant revolt in 26. With high levels of unrest, there would have been many opportunities for independent action. Cavalry is the ideal type of unit for this type of work. Vespasian's immediate display of command skills in Britannia suggests that he had an independent command in Thrace. The selection of an Ala of Thracian cavalry for the invasion reinforces this assumption.
We can assume that his reputation in Thrace, known to all then but not to us now, must have played a vital part in why Claudius chose Vespasian in 43. For, as we will see later from his marriage to a compromised woman of a lower rank than even he, Vespasian was not among the social elite. His selection for this important command had to be rooted in his military reputation.

A second factor for being selected for the invasion forces was his relationship with Cogidubnus. It had taken ten years, ten legions and genocide to settle Gaul. Claudius's future as Emperor depended on a quick and lasting victory. So, pacifying the south shore and thus ensuring constant access by sea was critical to this strategy. The plan was to insert Cogidubnus as a client king. Cogidubnus, the son of King Verica of the Atrebates, a southern tribe, was brought up in Italy in the Familia Antonia. In this context, it makes sense for Vespasian to have the prince in his charge and so be given the independent command in the south. The success of this strategy was noted by Tacitus, who remarks, "Some of the states were given to king Cogidubnus, who lived down to our day a most faithful ally." In 60, Cogidubnus holds the south against Boudicca. Later, in 69, when Vespasian put his hat in the ring for Emperor, Cogidubnus holds the south for Vespasian.

But, for all Vespasian's opportunities to learn on the job, I think that he must have been a "natural" soldier. Like a great artist or athlete, he must have had a set of innate skills. There are many such commanders in history. Napoleon's army was full of them. Arthur Currie, the Canadian real estate salesman and commander of the Canadian Corps in the Great War, was another. Such men needed only the briefest exposure to "see" the picture and to know what best to do.

In closing, we still cannot also underestimate the power of Vespasian's ability to win trust and support. The sources tell us that Caenis and Narcissus backed his candidacy for command of Legio II. We also know that, after the campaign, Claudius uniquely rewarded Vespasian. Not only did he give Vespasian a triumph, but also a Consulship and brought Vespasian's son, Titus, to court as a companion for the Emperor's son Britannicus.

Nero chose Vespasian because he was both safe and talented, a rare combination.

But, I think he might have overlooked Vespasian's role in the death of Caligula and the accession of Claudius. More of this in the next post

Loading...

See more here 

In 2014, I decided to write an ongoing history of the Great War, as it affected my family. I envisaged this project lasting the entire period of the war. But by late 2015, the facts and the fate of my central characters revealed much more to me than a simple narrative based on time.

What emerged for me was the answer to two questions that have puzzled me all my life. The first was a broad question, why did the elite in Montreal lose their position in Canada? The usual narrative is that the forces of ethnicity overwhelmed them. At one level this is of course correct. But as I understood the devastation that they suffered as a group in the war, I saw a new truth. By their devotion and their unique close ties to each other, the pain of their immense loss, destroyed them. It destroyed their spirit. What was left in Montreal was a vacuum. 

The second question that was answered for me was a personal one. My own immediate family has suffered greatly since the end of the war. Now I understood why my grandfather killed himself 40 years after the armistice. Now I understood why my own father killed himself. Now I understand the curse that has visited our family ever since 1918. Now I understood the wound that the war gave us as a family.

I knew by the summer of 2015, that I did not need to follow the daily life of my characters for the rest of the war. The core of their experience took place in the spring of 1915. This is when they learned that war was not exciting. This was when they learned how to endure the unendurable. This was when they learned that their only choice was to soldier on. And when I say soldier on, I don't confine myself to the men. What bursts through is the courage and endurance of the women. They are Spartan figures who hold their men to the task while themselves giving their all to the cause. 

And so by making just one book about love and loss, I hope that I have created a work that can help anyone. For whose family has not suffered?

I have therefore written a book from these posts. The task took me another three years. It was not simply a stitching together of my more immediate posting but a true narrative. 

Are boys and girls the same? The evidence tells us not. This post is all about the consequences of this question.

In part I of this series, we examined how sensitive men are to external culture and so to external identity and status. We see that when external culture threatens men's identity and status, they are disabled. In Part II we see how traditional cultures always use external male cultural processes to help men find their natural place in a society. We see then that women complete this process once the man has been initiated in manhood by older men.

Today in Part III we will see how, for the best of reasons, we have unconcsiously set up external cultural processes that take men's identity and status away and so, I think, set men up in conflict with what all of society needs from them.

I see two fallacies at the heart of all of this.

The first fallacy is that men and women, boys and girls are the same. All that is different between us are a few body parts.

The second is that the only part of society that counts is the external workplace.

Today I want to talk about the first new fallacy - that boys and girls, men and women are the same and that the only differences are the result of culture. 

The dogma that guides many "Child Experts" and certainly most public schools is that boys and girls are the same. 

The opposite is the reality. The more that boys are raised as boys should be - invested in their innate nature as males, the better men will be and the better it will be for women.

We start in the crib. 

In the crib, baby boys are attracted to things and baby girls to faces. Males are pulled to the external world and females to the world of personal intimacy. These are the 'Initial Conditions" that govern male and female human development.

This is the essential clue.

Boys tend to be kinetic and face outward. They are attracted to things that have kinetic power such as tractors! It is not because they are stupid. It is the core of being a male.

It is why I can drive into a village in Botswana that had never seen a truck before and have all the boys racing along side screaming with joy, while their sisters look up with disdain at how crazy their brothers are.

It is why Alfie will shove his toy animals off the table while Sophia will sort them all out in order and give them voices.

It is why boys and men don't like to look into each other's eyes. Males prefer shoulder to shoulder. It is why men prefer to do things with each other and not talk. Especially not talk about personal things. They are not shut down. It is just something that does not work for men.

This picture is of men who like each other and who are having fun!

Men are innately tribal. They want to belong to a tribe of men who share a mission with them. Men who follow teams are not mindless thugs, but men who desire to belong to a real tribe but who can only find a fake one in the sad world we live in today.

Men will die for each other - provided they are in the right kind of tribe. Men desire to be given this respsonsibility.

For, one of the deepest needs for men is their need to belong to a group of like minded men. This does not preclude their family and the women in their lives. But it is not a desire to be sneered at. And when men have such a healthy tribal life, all the rest of their life is good too.

So, to fit into the world, boys need to have their place in the world of men. In particular boys have to have a "Tribe". 

Finding your tribe starts with the most important man a boy will ever meet, his father.

Just as we all need a mother (Maybe another series) Every boy needs a man in his life who loves him and who he can look up to. For the kind of man the boy will become will be related to the model that he knows best. For good or for bad. If there is no man, then the boy is lost. He needs a model. Boys learn to be a man by interacting with and copying an adult man who is important for them. 

 It does not have to be his natural father. Just as the mother does not have to be the natural mother.

Boys need to do things with this man. 

Everything that follows stems from this. Doing with others is how a boy/man develops relationships. 

Boys need to interact physically.

Boys love rough play. Here they learn not to be rough but how to control their strength. This is how dogs socialize too. What looks like a fight is a vital part of learning control. It is how all male social animals learn this. When a boy play fights with an older boy or a man, he also learns to trust that older person. He experiences directly that the stronger one is being careful with him. The result is love and trust. He also learns that he too must take care.

Men show their love to each other kinetically.

In adulthood men can rarely tell another man how much they love him. Instead they use ritual violence such as verbal abuse or arm punches. When you hear a man in a bar tell another that he is an asshole and the other laughs and punches the abuser on the the arm - this is a show of affection!

Men settle conflct in teams very quickly. But it usually requires a blowup.

Boys and men settle hierarchy issues quickly and usually with violence, real or symbolic. Once the issue is settled, both sides accept the result and in many cases friendship is the outcome. This may seem odd but any man knows this and most have experienced this. It is the way of all social primates.

For the males in a baboon troop or a chimp tribe, cannot sustain long standing grievances between adult males. The males have to be able to work together. This is how evolution has given social groupings the edge. Men have to get on in close groups. 

If girls need to have a best friend, then boys and men need to have a real tribe.

This is not war play. It is tribal play. It is what all boys for millions of years have done. It is what lion cubs do. They are playing at being a tribe of men who will provide for their tribe and defend it if they have to. They are playing at being a band of brothers. 

The point is not to learn how to use a gun or to an expert in martial arts. It is to play at being men in a tribal group who are on a mission together. The weapons are symbolic. You are not teaching your son to be a mass murderer if he plays with a gun.

What is much more risky is to allow him to be isolated and inside.

Boys need to be in nature.

 

Of all the external environments that affect boys the best, nature is the winner. 

For millions of years, men have had to learn the ways of nature. They are good at this. They innately long for this. It is why many men love hunting. They don't love killing. They love the hunt. They love being immersed in nature. It's why men will fish all day in the rain and maybe catch nothing. It's the flow of being in nature with all your senses alive. But being in nature does not mean that men have to hunt. It means that the outside world speaks to them. The more they are outside as boys, the more they develop correctly. Conversely, the more that they are inside, the worse it is for them.

Nature fascinates boys. I was so lucky that I was allowed to run wild as a boy. I played in the local bomb site in London. I ran all over Accra in Ghana as a boy - killing snakes - making forts - eating food with the local boys - my sister and I were the only white kids in our part of town. I spent a year working and living in the Kalahari desert in my late teens. 

I was not unusual. Most parents gave their boys this liberty then. They did not all go to Africa, but they had this liberty to be outside and not to be supervised. We did not all die. We were not all abducted. I know of not one boy who got off worse than a few broken bones. 

But this is not the world that boys grow up in today. Today we sneer at all of this.

At home, we want boys to be nice and be like, well girls. Don't play roughly. Be quiet. Don't get dirty. Don't climb trees. My son doesn't need a father. It's ok that they spend all day in their room on their mobile. Don't settle your differences. Don't play with guns or bows and arrows. Why can't you play nicely like your sister?

And above all, don't do anything without adult supervision.

And what about school today?

Nothing could be worse for boys than how we organize most schools today. School is all about sitting still and being obedient to someone who sounds like your mother on a bad hair day. Her primary task is control. It has to be because the entire social design is wrong.

And when boys don't like this, we medicate them! We think that there is something wrong with a boy who cannot sit still for 6 hours a day and listen obediently to a woman droning on and being "right". God forbid the boy or girl who asks a real question!

There are better alternatives. This is not how Montessori works. Here children are in a space that is designed for them to do things. It is in the doing that the children learn. What they do is up to them. There is usually a woman in charge but she acts here like a true mother. Her role is to maintain the safe space. She is not a know it all nag.

Here the older kids routinely help the younger ones. Here older kids have authority. It's a TRIBE!

Key is that the "class" is a social setting that includes children of a wide age range. It is their tribe.

There are no formal social structures in badly designed schools. There are no official tribes. And so there is no role for any of the older boys. It's a jungle.

This is what happens in prisons. Instead of tribes there are cliques and gangs. There the winners and the losers. The weak are prey.

Here we see the fatal flaw of most schools and of most work organizations. All is functional and the truly social is squeezed out.

We put only the same ages in the class. This is not tribal. There is no older boy to look up to. Only teachers have any authority. So all the children are infantalized. 

It is easy at this point to throw our hands up and give up. How can we change this?

But it only takes us to see the issue.

What is stopping you from treating your son like a boy at home? Your obedience to a dogma that hurts him and you. You can allow him to be a boy or not. All of that is in your control.

But what can I do about the school you ask?

Here the issue is design and your choice. 

Schools that are designed properly are all about us. I mentioned Montessori. Most private schools in the UK are designed around stable social settings of "Houses". Here is a link to how my old school Harrow works. This structure has nothing to do with money. This is all about design. Any school can do this.

Here is what a small public school did on PEI.

Here is a proposal to make the school bus the Tribe.

It's up to parents to demand what is best for their kids. How schools are designed today is wrong. You can organize to change them.

Is your school designed to affect the students so that they acquire

Social responsibility
Empathy
Resilience
Ability to connect well across the ages and with adults

Where

Excellence - where the definition of excellence is high but you can find status in whatever interests you
Bullying is non existent
The staff and the pupils really care for each other

I bet it isn't. Instead it is designed to do the opposite.

Push the school to find answers. These things don't happen by accident. They don't happen because you would like them to happen. 

The easiest thing to do is to insert a social system. Look to Hogwarts! Have Tribes/Houses. Open up the classes to at least 3 years of age. The one room school did K - 12! Give authority to the older kids. Bring in as many inter house/tribe competitions as you can.

Get the kids outside. Give the kids time for unstructured play outside.

Give the kids unstructured time.

Seek out male teachers for boys betwen 12- 18.

And separate the boys from the girls at 12. Yes have single sex school/

Boys don't do well when they are with girls from 12 - 18. See Part I. Boys need to be with older men to become men themselves and so ready to interact with women. I am not sure that girls get much out of being with boys at that age either. All traditional societies separate teen age boys and girls. What do we know that should change this?

We know this. Boys are socialized by men. When they are ready to be men, then women finish the job.

Women are the final frontier for male development. It is a woman that completes a man and helps make him the best he can be. Not a 15 year old girl who is herself uncertain about herself.

There is the best time for this reconnection of the sexes and it is not aged 16. It is in his twenties when he will have reached as full a development as he can in the world of men. It is also when the girl is a woman who knows who she is and what she needs. It is when a man meets a woman not a boy meets a girl.

Our modern culture has been captured by a number of really dangerous ideas that work against us as a species. They seem to be a product of our bureaucratic and non human industrial time. Boy and girls are the same is the one we have talked about. It does not matter what you eat is another. 

In the next part, I will talk about the worst idea. That is that the real world is the economic world. That this is where there is opportunity or not. That this is where there is equality or not. That ending up with lots of stuff is the aim of a life.

This is the tragic idea of the modern era. And this is where men and women have got truly lost. 

Finding out what life is really about will bring both sexes back into their historic role. For ask yourself this. In what other species are the roles of the sexes confused? In what other species are males such a threat or problem?

 

Related articles

Mass Shootings - Are Men Scum? Part II How do boys grow into men?
Mass Shootings - Acting Out - Are men just scum or is there something deeper going on?
Why our institutions cannot cope - Machines Don't do Complexity
Transformation - How do we get from A to C? - Part 2 - It's Embodiment!
Initiation - What we have lost - An excerpt from my new book - The Zombie Princess

This is the Menin Gate at Ypres where the names of those whose bodies were never identified at the Salient in World War 1 are recorded.  In 2014, I decided to write an ongoing history of the Great War, as it affected my family. I envisaged this project lasting the entire period of the war. But by late 2015, the facts and the fate of my central characters revealed much more to me than a simple narrative based on time.

What emerged for me was the answer to two questions that have puzzled me all my life. The first was a broad question, why did the elite in Montreal lose their position in Canada? The usual narrative is that the forces of ethnicity overwhelmed them. At one level this is of course correct. But as I understood the devastation that they suffered as a group in the war, I saw a new truth. By their devotion and their unique close ties to each other, the pain of their immense loss, destroyed them. It destroyed their spirit. What was left in Montreal was a vacuum. 

The second question that was answered for me was a personal one. My own immediate family has suffered greatly since the end of the war. Now I understood why my grandfather killed himself 40 years after the armistice. Now I understood why my own father killed himself. Now I understand the curse that has visited our family ever since 1918. Now I understood the wound that the war gave us as a family.

I knew by the summer of 2015, that I did not need to follow the daily life of my characters for the rest of the war. The core of their experience took place in the spring of 1915. This is when they learned that war was not exciting. This was when they learned how to endure the unendurable. This was when they learned that their only choice was to soldier on. And when I say soldier on, I don't confine myself to the men. What bursts through is the courage and endurance of the women. They are Spartan figures who hold their men to the task while themselves giving their all to the cause. 

And so by making just one book about love and loss, I hope that I have created a work that can help anyone. For whose family has not suffered?

I have therefore written a book from these posts. The task took me another three years. It was not simply a stitching together of my more immediate posting but a true narrative. 

Called "Noblesse Oblige" I will offer it for free on this site soon in PDF and iBooks format. 

This omnibus of 56 posts takes us from the outbreak of war to the closing of the 2nd Battle of Ypres. Please see them as my working notes. My sketch pad for the book that will be available soon. 

1. The Introduction

2. The First Day

3. Family and Horses

4. The Tribe - the Scots Extended family

5.Valcartier and the First Contingent

6. The last month in Canada

7. Not just soldiers on the move - Dr's and family

8. The Ritz and My Late Aunt Frances - Her obit is here

9. Harold Cooper - Alec's groom

10. Uncle Jimmie and Old Men

11. Gault PPCLI and Women

12. Cousin Martha Allan - Nursing, Emancipation and Women

13. Leaving Canada

14. Sailing to England

15. Arrival in England

16. Meanwhile in France

17. Julia Drummond - Canada's "Mother" sets off

18. Salisbury Plain and Mud

19. Salisbury Plain and the 2nd Brigade CFA

20. Leave and Loneliness - Julia Drummond

21. The PPLCI - The First In France

22. Tipperary - The Girls We Left Behind

23. Why Millions Signed Up

24. The Last Happy Christmas

25. McGill and Montreal's Hospitals Get Ready

26. Ypres - The Crucible

27. Pets No More - Horses

28. Gas - The End of Honour

29. Flu - Did this save my grandfather's life in 1918?

30. The First Division Arrives at St Nazaire

31. The Women's War Begins in London - Lady Drummond

32. March 1915 Prelude to Hell - Part 1 - Apprenticing

33. Faithful unto death - The Relationship with Personal Servants

34. Prelude to Hell - April 1915 - The players take their places

35. 2nd Battle of Ypres Part 1 - The starting positions

36. 2nd Battle of Ypres - Trum Warren

37. 2nd Battle of Ypres - Guy Drummond Dies Saving the Apex

38. Sailing the Atlantic Part 1 - Martha Allan makes the crossing - Aunt M closes up her homes

39. The Gunners - 5th Battery and 2nd Ypres

40. Lusitania Part 1 - The Trip from Montreal to New York

41. Lusitania Part 2 - Frances Stephens and "Baby" John

42. Lusitania Part 3 - Setting Sail

43. John McCrae - The Motives behind In Flanders Fields

44. The Price of Devotion Part 1 - PPCLI May 1915

45. Ypres Update May 4- 8 - The PPCLI Move

46. Henry Yates - Sailing into history

47. Lusitania Part 4 - The Sinking

48. Lusitania Part 5 - The Aftermath

49. The "Pats" - Death of the "Originals" and Birth of a Legend

50. Tragedy and Response - Ypres & the Lusitania

51. Tragedy and Response - Love - "Uncle" Montagu Allan

52. Tragedy and Response - Honour - Hugh Allan

53. Tragedy and Response - Devotion - Henry Yates and Martha Allan

54. Tragedy and Response - Guilt and Loss - George Slingsby

55. Tragedy and Response - Loss, Anger and Honour - Hammie Gault

56. Total War Begins - Post Lusitania and 2nd Ypres

Related articles

World War 1 - The Test - The Canadians and the 2nd Battle of Ypres
World War 1 - Tragedy and Response - Loss, Anger and Honour - Hammie Gault
World War 1 - The "Pats" - Death of the "Originals" and Birth of a Legend
World War 1- The Last Voyage of the Lusitania - A personal story
World War 1- Tragedy and Response - Love - "Uncle" Montagu Allan
World War 1- Tragedy and Response - Ypres & the Lusitania
From Ypres to Syria: why poison gas haunts us still | David Olusoga
World War 1 - Total War Begins - Post Lusitania and 2nd Ypres

This is the Menin Gate at Ypres where the names of those whose bodies were never identified at the Salient are recorded. 

This omnibus of 56 posts takes us from the outbreak of war to the closing of the 2nd Battle of Ypres. In the fall I will publish them all in an eBook, "Noblesse Oblige".

"Noblesse Oblige" will be the first of a 3 book history of the members of the Golden Mile and their experiences in World War 1. 

While these stories only cover only a small part of Canada, I hope that you find that they are universal as well. For every community shared a common experience of sacrifice and loss.

This is a book about people. There are a few chapters about the war to orient us, but most of the book tells the stories of people are caught up in great events and how they change as a result. 

So I do not confine this story only to men and to the front. We will see the enormous contribution that women brought to the effort. We will move from home in Canada, to life in the UK, to the front, to behind the lines, to hospitals, to being on leave, to being a prisoner, to travel, to the sea and sinkings. We will be with our characters in every part of their lives and deaths.

They are a remarkable group of people. I hope that you get to care for them as much as I have.

1. The Introduction

2. The First Day

3. Family and Horses

4. The Tribe - the Scots Extended family

5.Valcartier and the First Contingent

6. The last month in Canada

7. Not just soldiers on the move - Dr's and family

8. The Ritz and My Late Aunt Frances - Her obit is here

9. Harold Cooper - Alec's groom

10. Uncle Jimmie and Old Men

11. Gault PPCLI and Women

12. Cousin Martha Allan - Nursing, Emancipation and Women

13. Leaving Canada

14. Sailing to England

15. Arrival in England

16. Meanwhile in France

17. Julia Drummond - Canada's "Mother" sets off

18. Salisbury Plain and Mud

19. Salisbury Plain and the 2nd Brigade CFA

20. Leave and Loneliness - Julia Drummond

21. The PPLCI - The First In France

22. Tipperary - The Girls We Left Behind

23. Why Millions Signed Up

24. The Last Happy Christmas

25. McGill and Montreal's Hospitals Get Ready

26. Ypres - The Crucible

27. Pets No More - Horses

28. Gas - The End of Honour

29. Flu - Did this save my grandfather's life in 1918?

30. The First Division Arrives at St Nazaire

31. The Women's War Begins in London - Lady Drummond

32. World War 1 - March 1915 Prelude to Hell - Part 1 - Apprenticing

33. World War 1 - Faithful unto death - The Relationship with Personal Servants

34. World War 1 - Prelude to Hell - April 1915 - The players take their places

35. World War 1 - 2nd Battle of Ypres Part 1 - The starting positions

36. World War 1 - 2nd Battle of Ypres - Trum Warren

37. World War 1 - 2nd Battle of Ypres - Guy Drummond Dies Saving the Apex

38. World War 1 - Sailing the Atlantic Part 1 - Martha Allan makes the crossing - Aunt M closes up her homes

39. World War 1 - The Gunners - 5th Battery and 2nd Ypres

40. World War 1 - The Lusitania Part 1 - The Trip from Montreal to New York

41. World War 1 - The Lusitania Part 2 - Frances Stephens and "Baby" John

42. World War 1 - Lusitania Part 3 - Setting Sail

43. World War 1 - John McCrae - The Motives behind In Flanders Fields

44. World War 1 - The Price of Devotion Part 1 - PPCLI May 1915

45. World War 1 - Ypres Update May 4- 8 - The PPCLI Move

46. World War 1 - Henry Yates - Sailing into history

47. World War 1 - The Lusitania Part 4 - The Sinking

48. World War 1 - The Lusitania Part 5 - The Aftermath

49. World War 1 - The "Pats" - Death of the "Originals" and Birth of a Legend

50. World War 1- Tragedy and Response - Ypres & the Lusitania

51. World War 1- Tragedy and Response - Love - "Uncle" Montagu Allan

52. World War 1 - Tragedy and Response - Honour - Hugh Allan

53. World War 1 - Tragedy and Response - Devotion - Henry Yates and Martha Allan

54. World War 1 - Tragedy and Response - Guilt and Loss - George Slingsby

55. World War 1 - Tragedy and Response - Loss, Anger and Honour - Hammie Gault

56. World War 1 - Total War Begins - Post Lusitania and 2nd Ypres

Related articles

World War 1 - The Test - The Canadians and the 2nd Battle of Ypres
World War 1 - Tragedy and Response - Loss, Anger and Honour - Hammie Gault
World War 1 - The "Pats" - Death of the "Originals" and Birth of a Legend
World War 1- The Last Voyage of the Lusitania - A personal story
World War 1- Tragedy and Response - Love - "Uncle" Montagu Allan
World War 1- Tragedy and Response - Ypres & the Lusitania
From Ypres to Syria: why poison gas haunts us still | David Olusoga
World War 1 - Total War Begins - Post Lusitania and 2nd Ypres