The route taken by Julius Cæsar in his Invasion of Britain has been discussed so often by learned men, that I can hardly venture to offer to the Society of Antiquaries a new investigation, leading to a conclusion, I believe, differing from all preceding ones, without a preliminary explanation of the reason which leads me to think that a new investigation is admissible. The reason then is simply this: that, in every one of the discussions which I have seen, the investigator has been contented with fixing upon some one indication contained in Cæsar's Account, and shewing that that one indication conforms to his theory, without any regard to the others. A more striking instance of this fault cannot be found than in D'Anville's essay. D'Anville takes a supposed expression of Cæsar's that his length of passage was 30 miles; he finds that the distance from Wissant to the Dover cliffs, increased by Cæsar's 8 miles' run along the coast, agrees with this pretty well; and for this reason and no other he adopts Wissant as the place of departure. But, in a record so uncertain as that of mere numerals, he never inquires whether other manuscripts give a different number of miles; he never critically examines whether the distance (whatever it may be) applies to Cæsar's passage at all; he never attempts to ascertain whether Wissant could possibly be suited to Cæsar's armament; he never even discusses Cæsar's movements before departing and after returning, or offers the slightest proof that Cæsar had ever been near Wissant. Yet on all these points the indications given by Cæsar are numerous, and are as explicit as they very well can be in reference to a country in which scarcely a single name was preserved by any following historian. Rennell, adopting D'Anville's starting-place, Wissant, without question, has attempted to fix Cæsar's place of landing in the neighbourhood of Deal by a solitary reason exactly similar to D'Anville's. Halley, professing himself totally uncertain as to Cæsar's starting-point, has reasoned with great acuteness on the phenomena of the tides as described by Caesar, and has compared them with his own apparently erroneous information; he concludes from these that Deal may probably have been the landing-place, but has not adverted to any other evidence. Yet there are numerous indications given by Caesar in reference to his internal progress in the country which ought to have been considered, at least so far as to shew that they are not inconsistent with the theory adopted. I might apply nearly similar remarks to the reasonings of other writers.

I trust that the Essay which I now offer to the Antiquarian Society will at least be free from the fault which I have pointed out. I have brought together every passage which I can find in Caesar bearing upon the place of his departure, his navigation, the place of his arrival, and his march after arrival. I attach no importance to the accounts of writers posterior to Caesar, for it does not appear that they ever visited the coasts of Gaul, still less the coasts of Britain; and their statements, if in opposition to a clear inference from Cæsar's, must be rejected. So far, however, as I am acquainted with them, they do not in any instance contradict the inference from Cæsar's narration.