Consistent with the general theme, both Clonycavan Man and Oldcroghan Man met gruesome ends, but their killings were a little more imaginative than simple strangulation. Clonycavan Man was killed by three blows to the head, which split open his skull, and one more blow to the body from an axe before being disembowelled. Oldcroghan Man was bound with bands of hazel, which pierced his upper arms. He was then stabbed in the chest, decapitated and cut in half across his torso. Both men’s nipples had been cut.
This last fact aroused the interest of archaeologists, since in ancient Ireland the practice of sucking a king’s nipples was a gesture of submission. Ned Kelly of the National Museum of Ireland believes these men were either failed kings or failed prospective kings, and mutilation of their nipples meant that they were rendered incapable of kingship.16 Whether or not this theory explains the gruesome deaths of these and several other Irish bog bodies, it seems likely that they were representatives of a social elite rather than common farmers and herders.
We do not know the motivation for these sacrifices. Analogies to animistic societies are simply speculations. We have some idea of Celtic deities, but which, if any, demanded such sacrifice? Were the victims willing or under duress? At the moment, we have to look somewhat dispassionately at these grisly practices and treat them as a fact of Iron Age life, as well as a tremendous source of information, in the same way Ötzi the Iceman continues to provide revelations about his life and death.
Like Ötzi, bog bodies provide a human face, albeit a very atypical one, of Iron Age people in northern Europe. When they invaded Gaul, Britain and Germany, the Romans met peoples with the ideology and values that led them to conduct such sacrificial killings and to consider wetlands and bogs to be places for sacred ceremonies. Although they seem gruesome, the killings were routine practices. Ordinary Iron Age people may have been desensitized to them or regarded them as the price of belonging to the social elite. They are emblematic, however, of a world in which deities and sacrifice were connected with specific landscape features. Such sacralized landscapes must have existed for millennia, but during the High Iron Age they reached the pinnacle of their significance with the addition of humans to the deposition, even if we do not know to what Moloch they were sacrificed.
Water, sacrifice and war booty
Adding credence to the belief that bog bodies were sacrificial victims is the fact that war booty also began to play a role in votive offerings during the Iron Age in southern Scandinavia around the same time. In addition to the sacral nature of wetlands, another barbarian theme, movement across water, comes forth yet again. An early example of this practice is the Hjortspring Boat on the Danish island of Als.
In the small Hjortspring bog, nineteenth-century peat-diggers discovered and damaged a large wooden boat, which was not excavated until the 1920s. Besides boat fragments, archaeologists found several hundred weapons, animal bones and wooden artefacts. Additional excavations in 1987 turned up further pieces of the boat. Radiocarbon dates on the newly found pieces indicated that the Hjortspring Boat dates to 350–300 BC, earlier than expected.17
Stem to stern the boat was 19 metres (62 ft) long, with a bottom plank and two long strakes on each side, extended to form upturned prows. Planks of linden wood make up the hull. The interior was 13 metres (43 ft) long and just under 2 metres (6 ft) wide, with ten crossbeams forming seats. Assuming twenty rowers on the crossbeams, one or two helmsmen and perhaps a lookout, the crew of the Hjortspring Boat probably numbered 22–24 people. They could have carried it easily, and the flat bottom made it possible to arrive on sandy beaches and glide over sandbars. Its overall form echoes the schematic Bronze Age rock carvings from several centuries earlier.
The Hjortspring Boat was not simply abandoned. The objects mark it as a major sacrificial weapon find, the earliest from Denmark. Most were spearheads, 138 of iron and 31 of bone or antler. Some still had broken-off pieces of ash-wood shafts in their sockets. The Hjortspring deposit also contained eleven swords, two of which were deliberately bent. Wooden shields, nearly eighty in all, were oval or rectangular in varying widths, each with a handle at the centre. At one end of the boat, rust prints of many small iron rings represented traces of chain mail, the earliest in Europe. Based on their area, it is estimated that ten to twenty sets of chain mail were deposited with the boat.
The Hjortspring Boat is interpreted as an offering made by victors. It is possible that the boat and weapons were the equipment of a foe, with the assumption that the defeated party arrived in the boat. Klavs Randsborg calculates the number of shields and spears to indicate a force of about eighty fighters.18 If a Hjortspring-type boat could accommodate 20–24 warriors, then the weapons represent the equipment of four boatloads. Violence was a constant threat in the Barbarian World, but now it was necessary to contend with organized raiding parties of heavily armed warriors coming out of the mist, beaching their boats and attacking farmsteads and villages. It seems, however, that the inhabitants of Als were also competent fighters, for these marauders evidently met an unhappy end. It was deemed more important to sacrifice the weapons and equipment rather than retain them for future use, an indication of powerful spiritual forces that governed the lives of people during the High Iron Age.
The oppida
During the last three centuries BC, another wave of settlement agglomeration swept across the Barbarian World. These large sites are called oppida (singular oppidum), a term used by Julius Caesar in De Bello Gallico for fortified centres of native settlement. Oppida are usually located on hilltops, plateaus or other strategic landmarks, although some, like Manching in Bavaria, are on flat ground. Many were built on places already used for ritual gatherings or large open settlements, while others were built on new locations. In some cases, unfortified settlements were abandoned and their inhabitants moved into a new oppidum nearby.
Reconstruction of the Hjortspring Boat at the National Museum in Copenhagen.
From the outside, the oppida were recognized by their fortifications. In western Europe, and as far east as Manching, the ramparts of oppida were built using a technique Caesar called murus Gallicus. Outer stone walls 3–6 m (10–20 ft) apart were tied together with heavy timbers spaced horizontally and vertically. Between the walls, longer timbers running lengthwise with the wall were pinned to the cross-timbers with iron spikes. Finally, the space between the walls and around the timbers was filled with stones and earth. The result was a strong and fireproof rampart, often backed on the inside of the oppidum by an earthen ramp so defenders could reach the top. Gates permitted access to the interior, often leading directly onto main arterial streets.
Wooden shield from Hjortspring.
In addition to a residential function, oppida served as centres for the production of luxury goods and as nodes in trading networks that brought products of Italian workshops and vineyards to temperate Europe. Internal differentiation into neighbourhoods of elites, commoners and industrial zones gave them what some consider an urban character. Large palisaded enclosures were elite farmsteads with large houses and outbuildings, while craftsmen and farmers lived and worked in smaller buildings. Streets defined corridors of movement and gave the oppida internal organization. Oppida also had administrative functions as the centres of tribal polities. Tribute and tolls were collected, mints produced coins and they were seats of governmental and legal bodies.
Archaeologists debate the urban character of oppida. In their combination of residential, market, industrial, administrative and ritual functions, they are clearly different from hillforts. At the same time, their low-density occupations differ from the modern idea of a proper city. Urbanists speak of ‘compact’ and ‘dispersed’ cities, and oppida seem to approach the latter category. Perhaps ‘fortified towns’ is the best characterization for now, reserving the word ‘city’ for larger, higher-density and more persistent forms. Had Caesar not invaded Gaul, many oppida might have become nuclei of cities across western Europe rather than lonely abandoned ramparts
.
Bibracte
Located strategically on the portage between the Saône river (which leads south to the Rhône and the Mediterranean) and the Yonne (draining to the Seine and the English Channel), Bibracte is a classic Gallic oppidum. Today, it is known as Mont Beuvray, a hilltop ringed by two murus Gallicus ramparts. The exterior rampart encloses about 200 hectares (500 acres), while the inner one encircles about 135 hectares (333 acres). The length of these fortifications made them indefensible to attacks at multiple points, so they were mainly for show.
Bibracte was founded in the late second century BC and flourished for most of the first century BC. Specialist manufacturing districts for bronze- and iron-working were situated along the main arterial road. Beyond lay residential precincts. Bibracte was a centre for consumption as well. Fragments of thousands of Italian wine amphorae have been found, and in one spot a road was paved with amphorae shards. Such evidence for wine consumption further documents intensive trade between Rome and Gaul even before the Roman conquest.
Caesar’s campaigns and their aftermath brought Bibracte out of prehistory and into history. Here, Vercingetorix assembled a coalition of tribes and proclaimed their revolt against Rome in 52 BC. After defeating Vercingetorix at Alésia that September, Caesar repaired to Bibracte and spent the winter of 52–51 BC writing his account of the Gallic Wars. He observed the functioning of native society, including its election of a chief magistrate, formation of an assembly and sources of income, such as tolls on traders.
After the middle of the first century BC, there was considerable development of public and private buildings at Bibracte, including Mediterranean-style houses with courtyards and a basilica in the Roman style. A cremation cemetery was located outside the ramparts. Despite this investment, Bibracte declined at the end of the first century BC. Its population moved to Augustodunum, the modern city of Autun, 27 kilometres (17 mi.) away.
Romans meet the Barbarians
From the first century BC onward, it is impossible to discuss the Barbarian World without including the Romans. Not only did Roman armies conquer much of western Europe, but the Roman presence was felt far beyond the Imperial frontiers. The Roman conquest of Gaul and southern Britain transformed the native societies of these areas and caused the Barbarian World to shrink. Barbarians living under Roman rule became part of the Roman World.
The barbarians of Gaul and Britain were already familiar with Romans. A lively trade in luxury Roman goods and wine prospered throughout this region during the final centuries BC, as is evident at Bibracte and other oppida. After the Romans conquered northern Italy during the third century BC, and took control of modern Provence (its name derived from having been a Roman province) in the second century BC, they were not only on the doorstep but already in the foyer of the Barbarian World. Caesar’s forays north starting in 58 BC established Roman military occupation and administrative control in areas already permeated with Roman objects and cultural practices.
Contact and ‘Romanization’
The impact of Roman conquest on the barbarians of western Europe has been debated by scholars. Romans were able to integrate many different peoples into a complex cultural mosaic. From the Roman perspective, as articulated through classical accounts, they exerted a firm civilizing influence over the barbarian natives, who recognized the superiority of Roman artefacts and practices. Another point of view is more anthropological and fits with an interpretation of the archaeological record, in which native elites adopted Roman practices such as living in Roman-style towns and speaking Latin in order to enhance their own positions. Both of these perspectives, however, simplify a very complex blending of Roman and barbarian societies during the final century BC and first centuries AD.
A simple Roman/native binary division did not exist, except on the battlefield during the first years of Roman conquest. Roman military power was real (although not invincible), and with it came Roman cultural domination. Neither was as suffocating as one might infer from traditional accounts. New trends and fashions, along with shifting political and military alignments, evolved in the Roman heartland in Italy and were adopted by Romans and natives in the provinces. Over time, this cultural transfer became a two-way street, with barbarian products and customs and even barbarians themselves incorporated into Roman society. Thus the concept of ‘Romanization’ of native peoples has been largely abandoned in favour of recognition that the interrelationship was much more complicated.
Bibracte (modern Mont Beuvray), reconstruction of gate showing murus Gallicus wall construction.
In territorial conquests familiar from recent centuries, the conquering power decapitates a native hierarchy and imposes its own authority at all levels. The Romans in western Europe could not do this, I suggest, due to the heterarchical structure of High Iron Age society. With multiple lines of authority and leadership in the Barbarian World, all Romans could do was keep the native elites in place and work with them, exerting power through military occupation and parallel Roman officials. This patron–client arrangement worked adequately, so long as natives deferred to Roman Imperial authority and paid their taxes, while continuing to manage their affairs as they had done before the Romans arrived. Client dynasties persisted from one generation to the next, and conflicts and intrigues kept them in check. If necessary, the Romans could pick a winner at the point of a spear.
Romans in Gaul and Britain
Until the middle of the first century BC, the only contacts the Barbarian World had with Mediterranean civilizations were largely in the commercial sphere, or through movement of barbarians southward into areas loosely incorporated into the world of classical urban states. The entrance of Roman armies under Julius Caesar into Gaul north and west of the Alps marked a change in the relationship between barbarians and Mediterranean civilization. No longer did Romans just want to obtain slaves and hides in exchange for wine and luxury goods. They wanted barbarian land.
The story of Caesar’s conquest of Gaul, his forays to Britain and his troubles with natives is well known from not only his own accounts but also the works of other classical authors. These narratives are generally supported by archaeology, which fills in gaps about the societies that Caesar encountered. Oppida play a central role in this story. Roman rule did not transform barbarian societies overnight, but during the next several decades the natives of Gaul adopted Roman ways of life and thus moved from prehistory onto the pages of history.
Although Caesar portrayed his expeditions to Britain in 55 and 54 BC as forays into an unknown world, this was really propaganda designed to make him look daring. Romans had known about Britain for a long time, while the people of Britain had been aware of events to their south, as well as the fact that they could obtain desirable products from Gaul that came from the Mediterranean world.
The rivers Avon and Stour converge on the coast of southern England near a sandstone promontory called Hengistbury Head.19 Hengistbury Head shelters a fine harbour and was a prominent feature spotted easily by a navigator sailing north from Brittany. By the end of the first millennium BC, it had been an established landmark for millennia, since settlement from the Stone Age and Bronze Age is found there.
Around 100 BC, Hengistbury Head’s harbour emerged as a major port-of-trade for goods entering southern Britain from Continental Europe. Coins and pottery found there can be traced to specific sites in the ancient region of Armorica (northern Brittany). Goods that passed through Hengistbury included amphorae of Italian wine, metal objects, glass and figs. These products were exchanged for British products that included grain, silver, gold, copper, iron and probably hides. Iron-bearing rock was mined and smelted at Hengistbury Head itself. Finds at Hengistbury Head show that thriving commercial connections between Continental Europe and the British Isles already existed prior to Caesar’s conquest of Gaul, with products of Mediterranean vineyards and workshops in demand across the English Channel.
Caesar’s brief incursions into southern England in 55 and 54 BC di
srupted the trade network through Hengistbury. The reasons for this are not entirely clear. Instead, the main axis of contact between Continental Europe and Britain shifted east during the second half of the first century BC, from northeastern France and Belgium to Kent and the Thames Estuary.20 Roman merchants set up shop in southeast England, doing business in olive and fish oil, wine, tableware, glass bowls and high-quality metal goods. Along with objects, Gallo-Belgic practices arrived in Britain, including the style of cremation burial used on the European mainland.
For the moment, Britain remained part of the Barbarian World outside Roman military and administrative control. During the late first century BC and the early first century AD, the Romans cultivated barbarian elites in southern England who ruled small tribal states, turning them into client dynasties. Barbarian leaders in political hot water occasionally fled across the Channel to seek Roman protection. Gradually, between 54 BC and AD 43, southern Britain was pulled into the Roman World.
Romans finally arrived as a military force in Britain in the summer of AD 43. Four legions with auxiliary troops probably landed at several points in Kent. By the winter of 43, Romans had secured a foothold in Kent and along the lower Thames by taking control of tribal capitals that later became the Roman towns of Camulodunum (Colchester) and Verulamium (St Albans). Over the following years, Roman forces moved west and north to seize native strongholds like Maiden Castle. Imposing their authority on friendly client kings was straightforward, but elsewhere they met resistance, especially in the west. By AD 49, Roman troops were overseeing mining of silver and lead from the Mendip Hills near the Bristol Channel, and their control of the seas gave them access to harbours along the south coast.
Barbarians Page 11