Question about Casse

I was looking through wikipedia and noticed that the Cassi page is undergoing something of a rescent edit war. Opinions seem to range from nothing is known of them outside of the mention in Gallic Wars to the detailed migration and alliance building on EB's website. This got me wondering how much of the casse history according to EB is speculation (however educated and it may be) and how much is back up by solid archealogical evidence? Just a note, I am not trying to diss the work of anyone on EB or call them a lier or debate if casse should be a faction. All I am wondering is what are the known facts.

Ah look, a can... wonder what's inside...

Speculation over the Cassi began simply because of the similarity in names with some of the Gaulish tribes whose names ended in -casses and because Cassivellaunus of the Catuvellauni has a name starting with Cassi-. The latter led some people to suggest that he belonged to the Cassi who were possibly one of the septs of the Catuvellauni... however, the Cassi along with four other tribes sided with Caesar and revealed to him how best to attack Cassivellaunus' stronghold - it would have to be explained why they would not only be stabbing their own chief in the back, but also planning to help sack their own capital. Some people, such as Daithi O hOgain in his The Celts: A History, suggested that all the -casses tribes were originally one tribe that split up. The EB team expanded this to include the British Cassi. However, the fact remains that the only solid material that can be found on them is their name and their political stance regarding Caesar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir Edward

I was looking through wikipedia and noticed that the Cassi page is undergoing something of a rescent edit war. Opinions seem to range from nothing is known of them outside of the mention in Gallic Wars to the detailed migration and alliance building on EB's website. This got me wondering how much of the casse history according to EB is speculation (however educated and it may be) and how much is back up by solid archealogical evidence? Just a note, I am not trying to diss the work of anyone on EB or call them a lier or debate if casse should be a faction. All I am wondering is what are the known facts.

---

Good question. The book that Elmetaicos mentioned above, The Celts A History, I have and I highly recommend it. That along with info from other sources, major players, experts in the field (authors such as Anne Ross, Simon James, Peter Ellis, H.D. Rankin, Barry Cunliffe, etc... ), we can get an overall picture and come to a reasonable conclusion on why such a seemingly mysterious and unknown tribe was used in EB.

To further elaborate on what Elmetaicos mentioned, I've provided what the deal is with the Casse from Celts A History, to help further enlighten ~:)



The historic situation (400-300 B.C.):
In northern Gaul, the Cubi tribe was the biggest and perhaps most successful of the Gallic tribes. Later, they were able to assume to impressive name known as the Bituriges ('world kings'). They went into decline sometime in the 4th century, likely from power and pressure caused by up and coming Gallic tribes like the Aedui confederacy who were based in the southeast regions. This left the northern areas of Gaul, where the Cubi/Bituriges once held power, somewhat open for a new power to sweep up what was left and establish itself. Enter the Belgae...



The Belgae ('furious ones')
These extended their power along the northern coast of Gaul along the modern day English channel. They seemed to have crossed the Seine river and make inroads into areas belonging to the Aulerci and their clans, who had contended with the Cubi/Bituriges, and either lost or got the worst of their completion as they were weakened over generations. In modern day Brittany, the Aremorici ('those by the sea') were partly Belgic in their origins. Now, it seems that, despite their initial success at sweeping across areas in northern Gaul without much resistance, the Belgae were set for disaster as it were...



The Aedui (from Aeduos, the 'fiery one')
The Aedui and it's dependants looked to the north as its likely that only within a handful of generations the Belgae tribes had not put down deep roots. The Carnutes ('people of the horned god') seemed to be the most successful. As recorded by Caesar in the Gallic War, they proclaimed their territories the center of Gaul. The Belgae were apparently pushed back towards the east, while others were forced to look abroad for new lands. Some of these went to Britain...



The Casse ('handsome ones') (around 130-100 B.C.)
The Catuellanui/Catuvellauni ('battle superiors') were one of those Belgic groups based along the Seine river in northern Gaul expelled by the growing power of the Aedui, Carnutes, etc... Some of the associated septs/clans of the Catuvelanui that are known to us are the Veliocasses, Biaocasses, Viducasses, Tricasses, and Vadicasses (notice the casse in all their tribal names? This points to a strong common tribal origin and possibly a legendary ancestor named Casses, or 'handsome ones'). Anyway, the Catevellauni group went into Britain and were the most powerful tribe in the south of the island centered at Verulamium. The Iceni (Boudicca's tribe) were not believed to be apart of the Belgic arrivals but were already there, perhaps from earlier Celtic incursions.


I hope this also helps answer you question at least a little bit ~:)