By the beginning of the 1st century AD, Rome had established itself as the dominant power on the African coastline. Its authority extended all the way from Tingis (Tangier) in the west to Lepcis Magna (Labdah) in the east, and beyond. Controlling such a large domain brought prosperity to the superpower, for Africa’s Mediterranean coastline was abundant in fertile lands.
Such lands, alongside Roman citizenship, were perfect for Rome to distribute as payment to soldiers at the end of their military careers. Retired servicemen therefore settled in Africa en-masse. With this influx of its own citizens, Rome cleverly strengthened its control over its southern-most possessions. They quickly made Northern Africa their own.
Yet the Romans were not the only people to inhabit this land. Semi-nomadic native tribes co-existed with this power on the fringes of the Sahara. These were the Berber tribes; tribes such as the Garamantes in Tripolitania, the Musulamii and Gaetuli neighbouring the Roman province of Africa Proconsulares, and the Mauri in Mauretania. They preferred to fight lightly-armed and with extreme mobility, the hot climate no friend to slow, heavily armoured units. Truly, these people were the masters of desert warfare.
In 17AD, open hostilities broke out between these two peoples. This revolt likely (although the Roman historian Tacitus claims otherwise) erupted from an extortionate Roman Imperial policy consistent on frontier communities throughout its Empire. This was a policy of heavy taxes, encroachments on local lands, as well as forced recruitment into the army. No wonder that resentment and anger soon gripped the local African tribes. To the west in Mauretania, however, there was a clearer explanation for the outbreak.
At this time, the province of Mauretania was what we would call a client state of Rome. Its King, Juba II, was effectively a pawn of the Empire, ready to serve on command. The Berber tribes in the region, especially the Mauri, knew this. They could not respect such an uninspiring puppet of a leader who realistically had very little authority. Insurgency ensued throughout the province.
For all the above reasons, open hostilities broke out between the Berbers and Rome across Northern Africa. Powerful tribes such as the Musulamii, Mauri and Cinithii united in common purpose. Their unity was down to one man.
Tacfarinas, by Roman standards, was the lowest of the low. He was a former auxiliary soldier turned deserter. Bu to the Berbers he was the leader of the resistance.
Having deserted the Roman army, Tacfarinas returned to his native Musulamii tribe and became one of its chiefs. His knowledge of how the Romans trained and fought was invaluable. Indeed, Tacfarinas even armed some of his soldiers in the heavier Roman manner.
Despite the introduction of these ‘Roman’ units, Tacfarinas realised that his troops could not rival Rome in open battle. He learned this the hard way. Yet the threat he posed to Rome remained serious. Following defeat, these tribes resumed a devastating tactic comprised of raiding, looting and harassing their enemy; guerrilla warfare.
The result of such warfare was devastating: panic and insecurity seized the African provinces. Common people were now in the front line of the war, and at any time their land could be raided and their livelihoods left in tatters.
Roman soldiers were simply not used to such unconventional fighting and suffered heavy losses as a result. Their morale plummeted. To counter the problem, Roman commanders reintroduced decimation.
This was one of Rome’s most severe punishments for poor performing soldiers, where every tenth man of a certain unit was beaten to death by his comrades. The implementation of such a rare and drastic measure to restore discipline shows the serious threat Tacfarinas and his rebels posed.
Down but not out
Finally, in 22AD, the Romans hounded the tribes away from guerrilla tactics and forced them into battle. A decisive Roman victory followed and war, at last, looked to be over. Tacfarinas had other ideas. This desert hydra escaped to