Roman Perceptions Of Britain

[votadini]

I was always amused by the little footnote in Caesar's 'Conquest of Gaul' where he states that the most civilised of the Britons live in Kent! To a rough Northerner like me, we would say that perceptions haven't really changed much in 2000 years!

 

I'm trying to imagine Brigantes with flatcaps and whippets

[Kosmo]

I've read that most of the tin trade was carried thru Gaul to Massalia by greeks. Probably etruscans were also part in this trade in earlier phases.

 

Carthage did not developed serious Atlantic trade routes. Gades/Cadis was small and probably focused on local trade before the First Punic War and I know no other punic settlement north of it on the Atlantic coast.

 

I think that the sea route Gades-Cornwall would be to difficult in dangerous waters and with hostile barbarians for an usual trader. Was tin so valuable to be worth it? Maybe in the Bronze Age, but in the Iron Age? The overland road thru Gaul will be much safer and shorter and could use water transport on rivers. The contacts between the celts on both sides of the Channel would make it even easier.

 

I believe that this story, as the ones with carthaginian sea trade in West Africa and the transsaharian overland rute are exagerations. Contacts, direct or indirect, explorations sure, but large scale trade... I don't think so.

[Northern Neil]

I was always amused by the little footnote in Caesar's 'Conquest of Gaul' where he states that the most civilised of the Britons live in Kent! To a rough Northerner like me, we would say that perceptions haven't really changed much in 2000 years!

 

Civilisation? What have southerners got that we havent? Do they have black puddings, clogs, magnificent victorian industrial archaeology sites, Boddingtons and Hadrian's Wall? NO!! What they have is Eastenders. I rest my case! :beer:

[votadini]

If civilization is the Congestion Charge, increased Council Tax to pay for the Council Tax, an inability to finish Wembley, a terrorist threat, overpriced housing and a high crime rate, I'm going back oop north to my cave in the Cheviots!

[Pertinax]

I've read that most of the tin trade was carried thru Gaul to Massalia by greeks. Probably etruscans were also part in this trade in earlier phases.

 

Carthage did not developed serious Atlantic trade routes. Gades/Cadis was small and probably focused on local trade before the First Punic War and I know no other punic settlement north of it on the Atlantic coast.

 

I think that the sea route Gades-Cornwall would be to difficult in dangerous waters and with hostile barbarians for an usual trader. Was tin so valuable to be worth it? Maybe in the Bronze Age, but in the Iron Age? The overland road thru Gaul will be much safer and shorter and could use water transport on rivers. The contacts between the celts on both sides of the Channel would make it even easier.

 

I believe that this story, as the ones with carthaginian sea trade in West Africa and the transsaharian overland rute are exagerations. Contacts, direct or indirect, explorations sure, but large scale trade... I don't think so.

 

I venture to suggest that any maritime route (within the appropriate sailing season) is by far the easier method of moving bulk produce in the period under discussion, when I reviewed "Britain and the Roman Navy" some time ago I was struck by how (logistically) the Roman campaign hinged on seaborne transportation and the tactical superiority of seaborne interdiction.The most irritating factor is that so few structural works remain as evidence as , like sailing vessels, they are impermanent entities at the mercy of sea level change.

 

I was always amused by the little footnote in Caesar's 'Conquest of Gaul' where he states that the most civilised of the Britons live in Kent! To a rough Northerner like me, we would say that perceptions haven't really changed much in 2000 years!

 

Civilisation? What have southerners got that we havent? Do they have black puddings, clogs, magnificent victorian industrial archaeology sites, Boddingtons and Hadrian's Wall? NO!! What they have is Eastenders. I rest my case! :beer:

 

This is because in the North our Civilisation is of a higher, intellectual , non-quantifiable nature, like our glorious Brigantine forebears.

[The Augusta]

Nice to see all our Northerners rallying here. Join forces, Brigantes and Cornovii - for honour!

 

On a more serious (but off-topic) note, I actually lived and worked in London for two years in the early 80s. There were good parts, obviously, but I was so happy to get back 'home'. And now - whenever I go back down there (and I travel there regularly), the thought of living in the capital again fills me with dread. If Dr. Johnson wants to tell me I'm tired of life, so be it - give me the North any day.

 

I wonder if the Romans' perceptions of the uncivilised northerners changed when Cartimandua handed over Caratacus?

[Gaius Octavius]

So, then, how are the Scots to be accounted? As you know wouldn't pass water over them.

 

[Pertinax]

So, then, how are the Scots to be accounted? As you know wouldn't pass water over them.

 

 

The caledonii and the maetae etc? why that is where Hadrian built a wall to separate Rome from barbary!

[The Augusta]

So, then, how are the Scots to be accounted? As you know wouldn't pass water over them.

 

 

The caledonii and the maetae etc? why that is where Hadrian built a wall to separate Rome from barbary!

 

And as Gaius will know - being a Black Adder fan - what Baldrick believed to be an orange bush moving towards the Romans like the Forest of Dunsinane, was, in fact, The Scots!

[Gaius Octavius]

My Lord :notworthy: and Lady :wub: :

 

Again , as a colonial, would like to know if the Scots are civilized or not!?

 

[Northern Neil]

Again , as a colonial, would like to know if the Scots are civilized or not!?

 

I believe he has a cousin by the name of macadder?

[Gaius Octavius]

Again , as a colonial, would like to know if the Scots are civilized or not!?

 

I believe he has a cousin by the name of macadder?

 

Good grief! I do! Not a very co-operative laddie. Has tight shoes. No wonder why I misbegot him. I wouldn't pass water on him.

 

[edgewaters]

The bogbodies are almost always sacrifices. They were usually bound before being executed and dumped in the bog. Its only the sterile qualities of the mud that preserved the remains.

 

I'd be careful with that! Sacrifice is very difficult to ascertain from mere ritualistic or ceremonial killing. Crucifixion was ritualistic and ceremonial, and so is the gas chamber or the electric chair. To really nail it down, you need a clear indication of religious motivation, discrete from any other possible motivations.

 

Originally the romans thought britain was a mysterious island out on the edge of the known world, possibly inhabited by strange monsters and wild barbarians. They were half right! This view would have persisted even after merchants traded there. In fact, the phoenicians were well acquainted with the place having traded for tin in Cornwall. It was only after Julius Caesar made his two forays there and wrote about it that the romans began waking up to the truth of what brittania was.

 

Oh no ... there was contact prior to Caesar, for certain ... coins of some tribes are being minted in a "Romanic" style with Roman/Hellenic motifs. Britain was important. Before Caesar's landings an argument put forth against any move on Britain was that Rome was taking in more from duties and tarriffs than could possibly be gathered by taxation under occupation. So trade - and therefore contact - must have been quite signifigant.

 

As well, Romans would have been familiar with Pytheas' writings on "Pretannia" which is the etymological root of Britannia. Using Pytheas and Timaeus of Tauromenium as sources, Diodorus writes that inhabitants of the Cornish peninsula "adopted a civilized way of life, because of their interaction with traders".

[Primus Pilus]

Before Caesar's landings an argument put forth against any move on Britain was that Rome was taking in more from duties and tarriffs than could possibly be gathered by taxation under occupation. So trade - and therefore contact - must have been quite signifigant.

 

Its quite likely that one goal of Caesar was simply to cut out the Veneti middle-men and establish the prominence of Rome for that very position. However, I would be more inclined to believe that the trade/tariff profit with Britain would have been more prominent between the Caesarean and Claudian invasions rather than before Caesar.

 

Largely unprovable of course, but it stands to reason that the reduction of large tribal competition on the shipping/naval front would've favored Rome financially.

[edgewaters]

Largely unprovable of course, but it stands to reason that the reduction of large tribal competition on the shipping/naval front would've favored Rome financially.

 

I think so too ... not to mention that controlling England and both sides of the Channel might have other benefits (or the Romans may have imagined other benefits), like easier access to Baltic amber and control of the other major highway for amber (besides the Elbe).