When most people think of England, or more specifically
the history of England, images of Victorian Britain are conjured, and that's as
far back as is commonly thought of. But the foundation that that incredible era
are often forgotten, with the occasional, strange exception like Stonehenge. Some say that this is due, in part, to the
lack of written records of the time, especially in regards to Britain before
the Roman invasion. But what were the British Isles
like before Julius Caesar set them in his sights? And what was the Roman impact
there after their presence was established? Was there any lasting influence
left on the land or people, and if so, can we see it today?
Archaeology provides the best look into Britain's pre-Roman past, although being a
border colony, Roman-occupied Britain
did not enjoy the same attention to detail in records as some of the
Mediterranean areas. What we do know is that Britain
was home to many rather hospitable forests, ideal for nomadic hunter peoples
like the ones discovered at Star Carrin, Yorkshire.
(Universität Duisburg-Essen, 2012) But there are few
dates that catch the eye of the average archaeologist or historian, save for
important changes like the introduction of farming by immigrants, most likely
from northwestern Europe. This vital change from roaming nomads to agrarians is
also estimated to have coincided with a rise of ritualistic spiritualism, as
discovered in both the Durington Walls dig, and the Windmill Hill dig, in Wiltshire, UK.
(Weatherby, 2012) Some suspect that it was the Celtic Druids who brought much
of this change, and began the work on Stonehenge,
bringing their culture with them. While some may think that saying "Celt
culture" is an oxymoron, the Druidic peoples were surprisingly refined, in
their own way. United by their common belief, usually known simply as Druidism,
the Celts brought art, religion, tools, weapons, and many other improvements to
Britannia, and proved to be a worthy adversary to the Romans, when the Legion
would finally arrive. Little did the Romans know that the fierce Celt warriors
were being led by the eerie, nature-worshipping Druidic priests, who would
begin many confrontations with unsettling rituals, some of which even involved
human sacrifice. (Weatherby, 2012) Also, a recent push in the modern United Kingdom's
academic circles to revive pre-Roman history has uncovered a number of
astounding facts. In a BBC article from 2003, Dr. Francis Pryor, president of
the Council for British Archaeology, claimed that the Romans stymied Celtic
culture, suppressing artistic expression, and even giving a "false
importance" to London:
without the Romans, "the country would have evolved into a better system
of regional hubs." (BBC News, 2003) This push forced many in the historic
and archaeological communities to reevaluate the importance of the Celts in
early British history, and by doing so led to the discovery of a written Druid
language. This language was only used by the ruling religious class, however,
and when the Romans destroyed the last Druidic stronghold of East Anglia in
57 AD, they destroyed the last group capable of deciphering the written
language. However, Gaelic and Breton are both linguistic descendents of this
language, so a lasting, albeit small, legacy lives on. (Weatherby, 2012) (Universität Duisburg-Essen, 2012)
The Romans, however, never actually
conquered Britain.
They arrived in 55 BC, with Julius Caesar intent on teaching Britons not to
interfere with the glorious Roman Empire, since the Britons had been helping
the Gauls – modern day France
– revolt against it. With 12,000 soldiers under his command, Caesar landed
near, but not at, Dover.
He planned to land his ships in the city itself, but scouts had reported native
British soldiers lining the cliffs to repel the invaders. But moving the
landing site a few miles did not do much to help strategically, since the
Britons moved as well, and took the initiative into their own hands. The
defending army stormed into the water to attack the Romans as they exited their
crafts, throwing the Romans into disarray and making quite the impression on
Caesar himself, who wrote "These dangers frightened our soldiers who were
not used to battles of this kind, with the results that they do not show the
same speed and enthusiasm as they usually did in battles on dry land."
(Trueman, 2011) Sheer numbers forced the Britons to withdraw, but not without
inflicting heavy casualties. Realizing he would need a much larger force to be
effective, Caesar returned the next year with 30,000 troops at his disposal,
but despite facing fierce resistance yet again, began to have some minor
successes. He also left his outposts in Gaul
vulnerable, and the Gauls rose up again, forcing Caesar to withdraw his army to
deal with the renewed rebellion. That was the last the British
Isles would see of the Roman Legion for nearly 100 years.
(Trueman, 2011)
After Roman traders and merchants
began to trade with the British tribes, they realized what a prosperous land it
truly was, and in 43 AD, Emperor Claudius picked up where Caesar left
off by ordering a renewed invasion of Britain. The Legion was able to
conquer most of southeastern England,
after a number of the tribes switched their allegiance. (Johnson,
2013) But they would never fully conquer the islands, with local heroes like
Boadicea resisting the Romans wherever they could, and entire groups such as
the Picts and Scots being so fierce, the Romans opted to merely wall them out.
(Weatherby, 2012) But the Romans did leave somewhat of a legacy, mostly in the
careful building of roads, a codified law system, and other Romanized effects,
but when Magnus Maximus revolted against Emperor Gratian in 383 AD, the
end of Roman rule in Britannia was near. It wasn't until the Fourth Century
that the Legion finally began to fully withdraw from Britain, and they left behind some
Romanized Britons, along with some British Romans, with Emperor Honorius
officially telling the cities of Britannia to fend for
them selves in 410 AD. (Williams, 2011)
In short, the Romans made a smashing impact on British
history, yes. But not as much as they would have liked to, and certainly not as
much as in some of the other nations they defeated. The British, Celts, Picts,
Scots and other natives of the British Isles
proved to be more than worthy adversaries for the Roman Legion, never allowing
themselves to be fully overcome, and never giving up resisting the takeover.
Much of pre-Roman culture is lost to us, but a renewed search may lead to the
discovery of even more clues to how and why such ferocious resistance was
encountered, and may dispel the myths that the natives of Britain were
mere savages. But only time will tell, and both the Roman and the Celt legacies
will live on, each in their own way.
References
BBC News (2003, February 21). BBC NEWS | UK | England | Call for pre-Roman
British history in schools. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2786737.stm
Johnson, B. (2013). Roman England, the Roman in
Britain
43 - 410 AD. Retrieved from http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/The-Romans-in-England/
Trueman, C. (2011, February 16). The Romans in Britain. Retrieved from http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/romans_in_britain.htm
Universität Duisburg-Essen (2012, April 10). Pre-Roman
and Roman Britain. Retrieved from http://www.uni-due.de/SHE/SHE_Roman_Britain.htm
Weatherby, E. (2012, September 10). Romanization
of Britain
| Pipe N' Slippers. Retrieved from http://pipenslippers.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/romanization-of-britain/
Williams, P. N. (2011, May 18). Narrative
History of England
- Part 2: The Roman Period. Retrieved from http://www.britannia.com/history/narromhist.html
No comments:
Post a Comment