Before the Romans came to Britain and annexed it into their Empire, ancient Britain was home to some of the most interesting kingdoms, or tribes in the Celtic world. These Celts occupied different areas of Britain, Wales and Scotland, each having their own distinct heritage and traditions.
When looking at Celtic tribes, either in Britain or anywhere else in Europe, it is important to stress that the word Celtic is an umbrella term; it refers to a group of people who speak a Celtic language, which is descended from the Indo-European family language branch. These ‘Celts’, found throughout British Isles and Europe, all shared a common origin, not only in language, but culture and blood. In this then, the Celtic people are only referred to as ‘Celtic’ by modern standards and would not have called themselves Celtic.
There are no records as to what these ancient people called themselves. The term ‘Britains’ and the naming of their lands ‘Britannia’ were what the Romans referred to these tribes. It is quite possible that the people, instead of calling themselves Britains or Celts, would have called themselves after the tribes they belonged to. Academically speaking, it is more appropriate to refer to these ancient people as Late Iron Age people.
There were around 20 major distinct tribes throughout the island of Britannia, although there were smaller tribes who had similar characteristics with these larger groups.
The Atrebates were one of these major tribes, the extent of their land occupation in parts of West Sussex, Surrey, Hampshire, Berkshire and north east Wiltshire in southern England. We know from excavations that their occupations were at Selsey and Silchester, this capitol being called Calleva Atrebatvm.
One of our most key sources of information on the Atrebates comes from the Romans. When Caesar invaded Britain, he made note of the people he found there. “The sea coast is peopled by the Belgians, drawn thither by the love of war and plunder. These people, coming from different parts of their parent country and settling in Britain, still retain the name of the states from which they emigrated”.
The Atrebates were a tribe that migrated from Belgium, but we should be wary of taking Caesar’s account as literal truth; Caesar saw Britain as a land full of people from Belgium who was very different, and less civilized, than the people he had met throughout Gaul on his way to Britain.
One important Atrebate was Comius, a chief of this tribe. There are accounts that Caesar sent him to Britain ahead of him, intending to use him as an ambassador to the people due to the influence he had. From this, and other reliable archaeological sources, there are possibilities that there were a tribe of Atrebates in Britain before Comius was sent by Caesar.
They were considered to be the most civilized of the tribes and this is probably due to the fact that they supported Roman rule and had a succession of tribal leaders who were loyal to Rome, including Tincommius, Eppillus and Verica. However, by 25 CE, the Atrebates were under constant pressure from the Catuvellauni, until they were able to subjugate the entire Atrebate lands. Indeed, one tribal ruler, probably Verica, was forced to seek refuge with Claudius, the Roman emperor who finally brought Britannia under Roman rule.
Another ancient tribe of Britain were the Cornovii. These were a people whose territory was located in modern day Shropshire and Wroxeter, with their capitol named Viroconivm Cornovirovm. Like with many Late Iron Age British people, we rely on much of our information on these tribes comes from Roman sources. One source places the tribe, with its towns Deva and Viroconium, immediately east of the Ordovices of North and Central Wales, another gives among his list of towns the barbarous form Utriconion Cornoninnorum. Older scholars have called the tribe Cornavii but more recent scholars, however, have preferred the form Cornovii. In addition to this, the former scholar mentions Cornavii in the north of Scotland, and it is possible that there was such a tribe name in Western Gaul (cf. the later name of Brittany Cornouailles).
It seems that there were no major towns or centres among the Cornovii until the beginnings of Roman rule, which the tribe complied with almost immediately. From this it seems as though they were a pastoral life. Once the Romans arrived and set up a permanent military presence in Britain, the Cornovii provided the Romans with the regiment Notitia Dignitatum who served the north west of Britain.
With the coming of the Romans, the Cornovii built up their towns with Roman influence, including the construction of a Roman bath house and a forum. Their capitol at Wroxeter was said to have been destroyed in the second century CE but it has been suggested, and widely accepted amongst scholars, that it wasn’t destroyed until the time of Marcus Aurelius.
Another Late Iron Age tribe in Britain were the Dumnonii who were located in modern Devon and Cornwall. Their capitol was called Isca Dvmnoniorvm.
The Dumnonii are a tribe with a long history which can be traced back to the Bronze Age but it wasn’t until later that they were named Dumnonii. Indeed, early Irish accounts call them the Fir Domnann, and it has been suggested that there was a mass migration from Cornwall to Ireland, introducing bronze metal working to Ireland. One reason supporting this belief is the fact that scholars are aware of extensive trade between Ireland and the mainland at this time.
According to scholars, there were two parts to the Dumnonii tribe, the Northern Dumnonii and the Southern Dumnonii. From an inscription in Latin, we know the name of one of the kings of the Northern Dumnonii, Nudos Liberalis. Looking at the religion of this tribe, “the material fact is that Welsh kings of Northern extraction bore the name and shared the attributes of the god Nudd. They are thus strictly analogous to the Irish kings that were named after the god Nuada. To complete the parallel, it should be shown that Nudd, like Nuada, was at once a sky-god connected with the sun and a water-god connected with a river”.
Looking at what is commonly known as ‘Celtic’ tribes in Britain, we have to be aware that most of our information comes from Roman sources. Because of this, we have to be extremely wary about taking the Roman information at face value. This is because Roman historians and authors presented these tribes in a negative light, to create a distinction between the Roman way of life (which was considered civilized) and the Celtic way of life (who were seen as barbarians and un-civilized).
In recent decades, archaeologists have started to understand more about the lives of the Iron Age people and study their own distinct cultures and the impact they had on Britain. Despite the annexation of each of the British tribes, they deserve our attention away from the Roman invaders to be viewed for the fascinating people they undoubtedly were.
Bibliography:
Atkinson, Donald (1924) Civitas Cornoviorum, The Classical Review, Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Classical Review.
Cook, Arthur Bernard (1906) The European Sky-God. IV. The Celts, Folklore, Taylor & Francis Ltd on behalf of Folklore Enterprises Ltd.
Crawfurd, John (1867) On Caesar’s Account of Britain and Its Inhabitants to Ethnology, Transactions of the Ethnological Society of London, Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland.
Geary, James A. (1933) The Early Irish Race, The Scientific Monthly, American Society for the Advancement of Science.
Hind, J. G. F. (1977) The ‘Genounian’ Part of Britain, Britannia, The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies.
Powell, T. G. E. (1948) Celtic Origins: A Stage in the Enquiry, The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland.
Power, Patrick (1927) The Problem of the Celts, Studies: An Irish Quarterly Review, Irish Province of the Society of Jesus.
Stevenson, W. H. (1899) The Beginnings of Wessex, The English Historical Review, Oxford University Press.
Showing posts with label ancient history. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ancient history. Show all posts
Monday, January 24, 2011
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
A Brief History of Egyptian Hieroglyphs
The ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs are one of the recognised systems of writing in the world. They are the doorway into ancient Egypt and have come to fascinate us all on their own. For centuries these hieroglyphs were unreadable to us until a French scholar, Pierre-Francois Champollion, made the remarkable discovery of how to decipher them, enabling us to bring the ancient writings back to to life again.
Hieroglyphs were first used to record the Egyptian language at least 5,000 years ago and it is still argued amongst archaeologists whether Egyptian hieroglyphs or the ancient cuneiform script (found in Iraq) are the earliest examples of writing. In recent years, this argument has been swayed to the side of the hieroglyphs, due to new archaeological evidence.
Despite the fact that there were many different dialects up and down the River Nile, the ancient Egyptian language was the only language written in hieroglyphs. It lasted for over 4,000 years and underwent many different changes.
The language, and subsequently the hieroglyphs, is divided into various states – Old Egyptian was spoken before 3,000 BCE and at this time, the hieroglyphs used consist of simple lists and labels. This period lasted for 500 years.
Middle Egyptian (also called Classical Egyptian) was spoken from 2100 BCE for 500 years. From 1600 BCE Late Egyptian replaced the Middle Egyptian, although the previous language was used right up until the Roman period.
Around 650 BCE, Late Egyptian developed into the writing system which is known as demotic, which dervives from the ancient Greek word meaning ‘popular’. After Alexander the Great conquered Egypt, Greek became the official language and both demotic and Greek were spoken alongside each other. The final phase of the Egyptian language was Coptic which emerged around 100 CE which simply means ‘Egyptian’.
The languages that were spoken in ancient Egypt are important into understanding the history of the hieroglyphs. The written system was much slower to develop than the oral language. Despite the transition of spoken Old Egyptian to Middle Egyptian, the hieroglyphs continued to be used as the formal language for funerary, monumental and religious inscriptions.
It is the hieroglyphs from the Middle Egyptian language that is mostly studied today. “Among the more striking characteristics of hieroglyphic writing is the separateness or discreteness of its elements. In the first place, the phonetic and ideographic components are usually presented as individual signs; secondly, if the constituent parts of the signs sometimes combine di-verse elements or points of view, they are generally fitted together in an appropriate fashion, even if it does not always respect the nature of whatever is represented”.
During the Archaic Period emblematic writings of names are particularly characteristic of the early First Dynasty. One of the features of hieroglyphs at this time is the first sign of combining phonetic and ideographic composites. In the Old Kingdom, there are many examples of closed composites where “identification of a structure is framed by its walls”.
The hieroglyphs branched out into another form of writing, known as hieratic. This cursive or ‘flowing’ handwriting developed around 2600 BCE and was used as a quicker means of writing when needed as hieroglyphs was too burdensome for everyday use.
This style of writing also changed over the centuries and it is these changes which help scholars estimate when a particular text was written. They were used by a reed pen and ink written mostly on papyrus, but also on pieces of broken pottery. Because hieratic is a simplified version of hieroglyphs, it is quite possible to translate and convert it into its hieroglyphic sense characters.
It was hieratic which later developed into demotic. This type of writing in no way resembles the hieroglyphs and so cannot be used to convert hieroglyphs to study the ancient texts. It replaced hieratic around 650 BCE, and used extensively for business purposes.
It was also used by reed pen, ink and papyrus, but also came to be used on monument inscriptions because very few people at this time could understand hieroglyphs. Consequently, the famous Rosetta Stone was erected in three different languages. Demotic began to be used less and less as the years went on and the last known inscription was carved in 452 CE at Philae.
Hieroglyphs themselves began to die out during the Roman period when the last pharaoh, Queen Cleopatra VII committed suicide. At this time, the hieroglyphs were mainly used by scribes in the temples and did not continue when the Roman Christians closed down the pagan temples. The last dated hieroglyphic inscription was at Philae, dated on 24th August 394 CE.
After this, Coptic was the only means in which to record the oral language of the Egyptians. The skills that were needed to read, write and understand the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs were lost until 1822, when Pierre-Francois Champollion unlocked the means to understand them once again.
Bibliography:
Fischer, Henry G. (1977) The Evolution of Composite Hieroglyphs in Ancient Egypt, Metropolitan Museum Hournal, The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Hieroglyphs were first used to record the Egyptian language at least 5,000 years ago and it is still argued amongst archaeologists whether Egyptian hieroglyphs or the ancient cuneiform script (found in Iraq) are the earliest examples of writing. In recent years, this argument has been swayed to the side of the hieroglyphs, due to new archaeological evidence.
Despite the fact that there were many different dialects up and down the River Nile, the ancient Egyptian language was the only language written in hieroglyphs. It lasted for over 4,000 years and underwent many different changes.
The language, and subsequently the hieroglyphs, is divided into various states – Old Egyptian was spoken before 3,000 BCE and at this time, the hieroglyphs used consist of simple lists and labels. This period lasted for 500 years.
Middle Egyptian (also called Classical Egyptian) was spoken from 2100 BCE for 500 years. From 1600 BCE Late Egyptian replaced the Middle Egyptian, although the previous language was used right up until the Roman period.
Around 650 BCE, Late Egyptian developed into the writing system which is known as demotic, which dervives from the ancient Greek word meaning ‘popular’. After Alexander the Great conquered Egypt, Greek became the official language and both demotic and Greek were spoken alongside each other. The final phase of the Egyptian language was Coptic which emerged around 100 CE which simply means ‘Egyptian’.
The languages that were spoken in ancient Egypt are important into understanding the history of the hieroglyphs. The written system was much slower to develop than the oral language. Despite the transition of spoken Old Egyptian to Middle Egyptian, the hieroglyphs continued to be used as the formal language for funerary, monumental and religious inscriptions.
It is the hieroglyphs from the Middle Egyptian language that is mostly studied today. “Among the more striking characteristics of hieroglyphic writing is the separateness or discreteness of its elements. In the first place, the phonetic and ideographic components are usually presented as individual signs; secondly, if the constituent parts of the signs sometimes combine di-verse elements or points of view, they are generally fitted together in an appropriate fashion, even if it does not always respect the nature of whatever is represented”.
During the Archaic Period emblematic writings of names are particularly characteristic of the early First Dynasty. One of the features of hieroglyphs at this time is the first sign of combining phonetic and ideographic composites. In the Old Kingdom, there are many examples of closed composites where “identification of a structure is framed by its walls”.
The hieroglyphs branched out into another form of writing, known as hieratic. This cursive or ‘flowing’ handwriting developed around 2600 BCE and was used as a quicker means of writing when needed as hieroglyphs was too burdensome for everyday use.
This style of writing also changed over the centuries and it is these changes which help scholars estimate when a particular text was written. They were used by a reed pen and ink written mostly on papyrus, but also on pieces of broken pottery. Because hieratic is a simplified version of hieroglyphs, it is quite possible to translate and convert it into its hieroglyphic sense characters.
It was hieratic which later developed into demotic. This type of writing in no way resembles the hieroglyphs and so cannot be used to convert hieroglyphs to study the ancient texts. It replaced hieratic around 650 BCE, and used extensively for business purposes.
It was also used by reed pen, ink and papyrus, but also came to be used on monument inscriptions because very few people at this time could understand hieroglyphs. Consequently, the famous Rosetta Stone was erected in three different languages. Demotic began to be used less and less as the years went on and the last known inscription was carved in 452 CE at Philae.
Hieroglyphs themselves began to die out during the Roman period when the last pharaoh, Queen Cleopatra VII committed suicide. At this time, the hieroglyphs were mainly used by scribes in the temples and did not continue when the Roman Christians closed down the pagan temples. The last dated hieroglyphic inscription was at Philae, dated on 24th August 394 CE.
After this, Coptic was the only means in which to record the oral language of the Egyptians. The skills that were needed to read, write and understand the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs were lost until 1822, when Pierre-Francois Champollion unlocked the means to understand them once again.
Bibliography:
Fischer, Henry G. (1977) The Evolution of Composite Hieroglyphs in Ancient Egypt, Metropolitan Museum Hournal, The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Monday, January 17, 2011
A Brief History of Ancient Sparta
Sparta was a major city-state in ancient Greece, located on the southern part of the Peloponnese. The history of Sparta has fascinated scholars and non-academics for many years, especially in regards to their military prowess.
To understand the history of Sparta, one must first understand her people and their social system. Her history is fundamentally based on the class struggle between the helots and the Perioikoi, who were two of the three classes.
The helots’ social status is not expressed adequately by any contemporary phrase, but ‘state-serf’ it probably the closest that comes to mind. Either way, the helots’ made up the majority of the Spartan population, but ultimately remained the property of the state (Talbert, p.23), although the State could release them when it so desired. Scholars are still in debate as to what social and community life they had, but it is generally accepted among academics that they could hold property in their own right and practice marriage.
The Perioikoi were a higher class than the helots’ and it is generally accepted among scholars that they devoted themselves to trade and industry. They were dependant on agriculture as the basis of their lots, which the helots’ worked on for them. V. Ehrenberg writes: "The common view that the Perioikoi carried the burden of trade and crafts must, to a large extent, be modified. Sparta's foreign trade was small, crafts were mainly domestic and dependent on helot labour. The perioikoi were 'yeomen' who naturally went in for some local crafts and petty business" (Ridley, p.282-283).
The Spartiates were the ruling class of Sparta. Elite Spartiates not only avidly sought monetary enrichment through political activity and dealt in terms of coined money abroad, but they maintained stocks of precious metals (in coins and bullion) hidden within their oikoi (Figueira, p.67). As the controllers of most assets in the local economy, the Spartiates had the most to gain from greater efficiency among their sources for goods and services.
From the age of seven the Spartan male was directed in a group with others of his age-class and was thrown into a painstaking discipline of a comprehensive state education, as well as a process of socialization.
We can see the general attitude between the Perioikoi and the helots’ through the writings of Myron of Eleutherae, an Athenian sculptor. He states that "they impose on the helots every kind of insulting work which leads to total degradation. For they made it a requirement that each should wear a dogskin cap and be dressed in leather as well as receive a fixed number of lashes annually - without reference to any offence - so that they should never forget to behave like slaves. Moreover, if the physical well-being of any surpassed the usual appearance of slaves, they prescribed a death sentence and also a penalty for owners who failed to curb those putting on weight” (Talbert, p.36). There are several other examples which convey this same general feeling between the two class systems.
We know that the helots’ served in the army in various capacities from archaeological and literary sources. The first reliable source comes from the 5th century BCE when the helots’ accompanied King Cleomenes’ against Argos in 494 BCE and then again at the battle of Thermopylae in 480 against the Persians. It has even been mentioned by later Greek writers that helots or ex-helots were appointed as military governors abroad (Talbert, p.26).
Sparta had a duel government system – both a military oligarchy and a monarchy rolled into one, and was able to keep its monarchy unlike city-states such as Athens. The two kings of Sparta, from the Agiad and Eurypontids families, were believed to have been descended from the legendary Hercules. Between the two kings and the 28 nobles who had completed their military duties, they made the political decisions for the state.
The decline and fall of Sparta were due to several reasons - the tensions and inequalities between the Spartiate group, the pursuit of foreign overambitious policies and a devastating earthquake all contributed, leading to the disestablishment of the state in 195 BCE.
Bibliography:
Cartledge, Paul (1977) Hoplites and Heroes: Sparta’s Contributions to the Technique of Ancient Warfare, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
Figueira, Thomas J. (2003) Xenelasia and Social Control in Classical Sparta, The Classical Quartley, Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
Ridley, R. T. (1974) The economic Activities of the Perioikoi, Mnemosyne, BRILL.
Talbert, Richard J. A. (1989) The Role of the Helots in the Class Struggle at Sparta, Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschicht, Franz Steiner Verlag.
To understand the history of Sparta, one must first understand her people and their social system. Her history is fundamentally based on the class struggle between the helots and the Perioikoi, who were two of the three classes.
The helots’ social status is not expressed adequately by any contemporary phrase, but ‘state-serf’ it probably the closest that comes to mind. Either way, the helots’ made up the majority of the Spartan population, but ultimately remained the property of the state (Talbert, p.23), although the State could release them when it so desired. Scholars are still in debate as to what social and community life they had, but it is generally accepted among academics that they could hold property in their own right and practice marriage.
The Perioikoi were a higher class than the helots’ and it is generally accepted among scholars that they devoted themselves to trade and industry. They were dependant on agriculture as the basis of their lots, which the helots’ worked on for them. V. Ehrenberg writes: "The common view that the Perioikoi carried the burden of trade and crafts must, to a large extent, be modified. Sparta's foreign trade was small, crafts were mainly domestic and dependent on helot labour. The perioikoi were 'yeomen' who naturally went in for some local crafts and petty business" (Ridley, p.282-283).
The Spartiates were the ruling class of Sparta. Elite Spartiates not only avidly sought monetary enrichment through political activity and dealt in terms of coined money abroad, but they maintained stocks of precious metals (in coins and bullion) hidden within their oikoi (Figueira, p.67). As the controllers of most assets in the local economy, the Spartiates had the most to gain from greater efficiency among their sources for goods and services.
From the age of seven the Spartan male was directed in a group with others of his age-class and was thrown into a painstaking discipline of a comprehensive state education, as well as a process of socialization.
We can see the general attitude between the Perioikoi and the helots’ through the writings of Myron of Eleutherae, an Athenian sculptor. He states that "they impose on the helots every kind of insulting work which leads to total degradation. For they made it a requirement that each should wear a dogskin cap and be dressed in leather as well as receive a fixed number of lashes annually - without reference to any offence - so that they should never forget to behave like slaves. Moreover, if the physical well-being of any surpassed the usual appearance of slaves, they prescribed a death sentence and also a penalty for owners who failed to curb those putting on weight” (Talbert, p.36). There are several other examples which convey this same general feeling between the two class systems.
We know that the helots’ served in the army in various capacities from archaeological and literary sources. The first reliable source comes from the 5th century BCE when the helots’ accompanied King Cleomenes’ against Argos in 494 BCE and then again at the battle of Thermopylae in 480 against the Persians. It has even been mentioned by later Greek writers that helots or ex-helots were appointed as military governors abroad (Talbert, p.26).
Sparta had a duel government system – both a military oligarchy and a monarchy rolled into one, and was able to keep its monarchy unlike city-states such as Athens. The two kings of Sparta, from the Agiad and Eurypontids families, were believed to have been descended from the legendary Hercules. Between the two kings and the 28 nobles who had completed their military duties, they made the political decisions for the state.
The decline and fall of Sparta were due to several reasons - the tensions and inequalities between the Spartiate group, the pursuit of foreign overambitious policies and a devastating earthquake all contributed, leading to the disestablishment of the state in 195 BCE.
Bibliography:
Cartledge, Paul (1977) Hoplites and Heroes: Sparta’s Contributions to the Technique of Ancient Warfare, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
Figueira, Thomas J. (2003) Xenelasia and Social Control in Classical Sparta, The Classical Quartley, Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
Ridley, R. T. (1974) The economic Activities of the Perioikoi, Mnemosyne, BRILL.
Talbert, Richard J. A. (1989) The Role of the Helots in the Class Struggle at Sparta, Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschicht, Franz Steiner Verlag.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)