[443] Tacit. Ann. xii. c. 31.
[444] “Abury Illustrated,” by W. Long, M.A. Devizes, 1858.
[445] Nor can we omit noticing here a matter which has in former times been much disputed, whether or no there are any coins, clearly British, antecedent to the invasion of Cæsar. On the evidence of all the best MSS. of Cæsar’s Commentaries, especially of a very fine one of the tenth century in the British Museum, we find Cæsar distinctly stating that the Britons “use either brass money or gold money, or instead of money, iron rings, adjusted to a certain weight.” (Cæs. Bell. Gall. v. 10. E. Hawkins’ “Silver Coins of England” (1841), pp. 9-14. Evans’ “Coins of the Ancient Britons,” pp. 18 and 285. Lond. 1864.) It was only about the seventeenth century that the editors of Cæsar, Scaliger leading the way, corrupted this passage and made him assert that only substitutes for money were used by the natives. All the facts are in favour of the MSS., for coins of gold, sometimes of silver, but very rarely of copper, are found in different parts of England, and as is evident to any eye, are in form, fabric, and type, constructed on a model differing essentially from any thing of Roman origin. Indeed, as is well known to numismatists, the original British coins were constructed on Greek models, and, however rude, may be traced back, step by step, to the gold money (staters) of Philip, the father of Alexander the Great. Plenty of coins exist of the time of Cæsar’s second invasion and of Cunobeline, who was alive in the reign of Claudius; the first, in a purely British (i.e., Greek) type, the second, with an obvious imitation of those of the Romans—and perhaps executed, as some have thought, by Roman artists.—Tacit. Annals, xii. 31-36.
[446] Dion. Cass. lx. c. 21.
[447] Strabo, iv. 2.
[448] Strabo, iii. p. 119; ii. p. 190; iv. pp. 279, 318. Diod. Sic. v. s. 22.
[449] Ibid. ii. p. 176; and iv. p. 306.
[450] Ibid. i. p. 132.
[451] Dion. lx. 21.
[452] J. Evans, “Coins of the Ancient Britons,” p. 284, &c. Lond. 1864.