4). Celtic art and celtic storytellers

The eye-catching quality of Celtic art reflects a society which placed great importance on visual displays of its wealth. The style is at its characteristic in the abstract curvilinear patterns used as ornamentation on a wide range of objects. The early Celtic craftsmen established a basic repertoire of attractive decorative patterns. These patterns, although to our modem eyes ‘abstract’ and therefore without obvious meaning, must have provided the ancient Celts with a powerful visual sign of cultural identity: the same patterns аre found throughout the Celtic world.

The remarkable resilience of this decorative style to external change in Celtic culture can be gauged by its survival through time. The unmistakable taut, curving lines of Celtic art can be traced in an unbroken tradition from the eighth century вс with the early 'Hallstatt' culture in eastern Europe. The style appeared in Britain in the third century вс, with the ‘La Tene’ culture and survived some fourteen hundred years through to the Norman conquests. Various chronological changes in the basic style as well as regional variations, have been identified by art historians. The style never completely disappeared from аrtistic production in those areas which retained a strong sense of their Celtic раst. Ireland and Scotland have been particularly successful in reviving the art at different times of their post-Norman history, and nineteenth-and twentieth century metalworkers have continued to find a market for Celtic jewellery designs.

The Celtic craftsmen seem to have left storytelling to the poets, and there is linttle that can be called 'narrative' in Celtic art. In place of the representation of heroic adven­tures found for example in ancient Greek art, the Celtic artists attracted the eye with what were often highly intric­ate interwoven linear forms: these forms range from simple threaded lines through to complex fantasies drawn from the natural world. When human or animal forms do appear, the naturalistic representations of Classical western art are avoided, and nature is interpreted in a strikingly stylized. even distorted manner.

The fantastical and sometimes bizarre forms of this art should be seen in the overall context of Celtic culture. The sheer time and skill involved in creating such complex forms in stone, wood and metal provided the tribal leaders with visible signs of their dominant position in Celtic society. The wealthy men and women who wore and handled those art objects also commissioned the storytellers, and the myths themtelves rely on a similar interweaving of plots and sub-plots to hold the listeners' attention; likewise, mythical narratives are peppered with marvellous incidents and occasional shocks. The mysteries of Druidic religious ritual were at the core of Celtic thought, and this also musnt have affected the artistic tendency to avoid direct images of gods and men.

Our knowledge of the early pagan Celtic poets comes mainly from the recorded observations of their Greek and Roman contemporaries. Diodorus of Sicily, writing in the first century bc, tells us that among the Gallic Celts were 'lyric poets called bards, who accompany their songs with instruments similar to lyres: these songs include praise-poems and satires' (Book V, 31). This suggests that the bards played an important social role: they would be hired to write poems praising their patrons, but also to pour scоrn on the patron's enemies.

The bards referred to by Diodorus did not record their poems in writing as did their classical counterparts, but passed them down from teacher tо pupil in the manner of prehistoric Greek poеtrу. And like these early Greek poets, the bard was considered to be a kind of priest, passing religious mysteries on to future generations. This may account for the many 'unexpiainable' aspects of the myths. Diodorus tells us in the same passage that they 'converse with few words and in riddles, mainly using obscure hints to refer to things and saying one word when they mean another and they tend to use superlatives to boost their own achievements and put down those of others.'

The surviving Celtic myths themselves can also tell us about the status of the poets. In the story of the Dream of Rhonabwy in the Mabinogion, a poet sings a song of praise which can only be understood by other poets. In the medi­eval period there were highly paid and socially respected bards employed in the houses of the surviving Celtic nobility. There were also wandering minstrels who usually received small payments for their songs, but who certainly helped to keep the oral tradition alive by carrying the poems across Britain and Europe. It was in that period also that the fast written versions of the myths were made, although since the scribes were usually monks, the stories wen often Christianized.

Finally there were the storytellers, who since time immemorial have told both heroic myths and folk-tales wher­ever there were people to listen, round the domestic hearth or in a comer of the pub. They still exist in the remoter Celtic areas and their feats of memory are legendary. A fisherman in Barra is recorded as saying that when he was a boy he listened to the same storyteller every night for 15 years and that he hardly ever repeated a story.

The 'high' bardic tradition has survived in the annual Welsh Eisteddfod meetings, but there is also an attempt to revive it in less formal surroundings. The British singer and harpist Robin Williamson performs and records the Celtic hero-tales in spoken and sung poetry to the accom­paniment of his 'Celtic' harp and the Breton artist Alan Stivell similarly recreates the Celtic myths of Britanny. The Celtic storytelling tradition is therefore still very much alive for those who wish to experience it.

(from “An Introduction to Celtic Mythology” by David Bellingham, L.,1990)

Questions:

1. When and where from did the Celts come to Britain?

2. What can you say about their social and political life?

3. What did the ancient Greeks and Romans report about the Celts?

4. What were the main peculiarities of the Celtic Pagan religion:

• beliefs

• priests

• rituals

5. What are the main features of the Celtic art?

6. Name the special features of the Celtic mythology and storytelling.

Unit 2. ROMAN BRITAIN (AD 43-449)

1). ROMAN OCCUPATION

Pre-Reading Task

1. Describe the political and social situation on the British Isles by the time of the Roman Invasion?

2. What did Julius Ceasar report about ancient Celts?

3. What were the Roman interests in Britain?

4. Read the following texts and describe the main changes brought about by the Roman occupation and the British population’s attitudes to those changes?

In the following passage (and further in this book) C+ means – “taken from “The History of the English-Speaking Peoples” by Sir Winston Churchill”

C+In the summer of the Roman year 699, now described as the year 55 before the birth of Christ, the Proconsul of Gaul, Gaius Julius Caesar, turned his gaze upon Britain. To Caesar, the Island now presented, itself as an integral part of his task of subjugating the Northern barbarians to the rule and system of Rome. The land not covered by forest or marsh was verdant and fertile. The climate, though far from genial, was equable and healthy. The natives, though uncouth, had a certain value as slaves for rougher work on the land, in mines, and even about the house. There was talk of a pearl fishery, and also of gold. By 56 BC Caesar had all but conquered Gaul. To stay above the law, he must continue to command, to defend and to conquer. Prosecutions for crimes were rarely pursued against victorious military heroes, thus Caesar remained above the law so long as he continued to conquer. So, Caesar plotted and planned. His power lay in his reputation and his generalship.

Caesar also kept a journal and the following extract describes the Britons he knew about, those in the southern part of the island.

*The inland part of Britain is inhabited by tribes who, according to their own tradition, are native to the island, the coastal parts by tribes that crossed from Belgium for the sake of pillage arid then stayed and started cultivating the land. Of all the people, much the most civilized are those who live in Kent, all of which is close to the sea; the life there is not much different from that in Gaul. Most of the inland peoples do not sow corn; they live on milk and flesh and dress themselves in skins. Notably, all the Britons dye themselves with woad, which produces a blue colour, and is used to give them a more frightening appearance in battle. They wear their hair long, and shave every part of the body except the head and upper lip. Groups of ten or twelve men hold wives in common, especially brothers together, and fathers with sons. But the children born from these groups are considered to belong to the group the woman was originally conducted to.

In Caesar's time the people of Britain were not the English. The English didn't arrive until hundreds of years later. These people were Celts. But historians still argue to this day over the precise definition of a Celt. One thing that is considered certain is that these people had a common language: Celtic. By the time Caesar arrived Celtic place names were so well established that the Romans often simply Romanized them. There were also Druids in pre-Roman Britain and Caesar had very definite views about them.

*The whole Gaulish nation is to a great degree devoted to superstitious rites; and on this account those who are afflicted with several diseases, or who are engaged in battles and dangers, either sacrifice human beings for victims, or vow that they will immolate themselves. These employ Druids as ministers for such sacrifices, because they think that unless the life of man be repaid for the life of man, the will of the immortal gods cannot be appeased.

Tacitus, writing much later, gives an even more alarming picture of the Druids. By this time Caesar's invasion had taken place but the fearful sight of Druids on the island of Anglesey had not been forgotten.

*The enemy was arrayed along the shore in a massive, dense and heavily armed line of battle, but it was a strangely mixed one. Women, dressed in black like the Furies, were thrusting their way about in it, their hair let down and streaming, and they were brandishing flaming torches. Around the enemy host were Druids, uttering prayers and curses, flinging their arms towards the sky. The Roman troops stopped as if their limbs were paralysed. Wounds were received while they stood frozen to the spot by this extraordinary and novel sight.

Britain in the year 55 BC had farms, hamlets and even villages. Hedges and boundaries suggest a form of regular and marked ownership of land and the river valleys were becoming more populated because of organized agriculture. The beginnings of industrial pottery, a common language and what are now called Gallo-Belgic coins suggest that Caesar was right when he said that the people in the lowland areas, broadly what are now called the South East and Midlands, were infiltrated by those from the Continent. Churchill describes Caesar's opinion of the Britons.

C+Caesar saw the Britons as a tougher and coarser branch of the Celtic tribes whom he was subduing in Gaul. With an army of ten legions — less than 50,000 soldiers—he was striving against a brave, warlike race which certainly comprised half a million fighting men. A raid upon Britannia seemed but a minor addition to his toils and risks. But at the seashore new problems arose. There were tides unknown in the Mediterranean; storms beat more often and more fiercely on the coasts.

By August 55 BC Gaius Julius Caesar was camped on the shores of what is now called Boulogne. Across the narrow seaway, the Britons knew he was there and what he was planning. These Britons had fought in Gaul alongside Caesar's men. They knew what he was capable of, and what he might do with that capability. Some of the tribes sent envoys to Caesar; they didn't want to fight. Also, many of the tribes were at war with each other so there was much to gain from making peace with the Roman. But that was for the future. Churchill describes what it was like at the time. There was a full moon.

C+ Caesar sailed at midnight, and with the morning light saw the white cliffs of Dover crowned with armed men. He judged the place 'quite unsuitable for landing on', since it was possible to throw missiles from the cliffs onto the shore. He therefore anchored till the turn of the tide, sailed seven miles farther, and descended upon Albion on the low, shelving beach between Deal and Warmer. But the Britons, observing these movements, kept pace along the coast and were found ready to meet him. The Islanders, with their chariots and horsemen, advanced into the surf to meet the invader. Caesar brought his warships with their catapults and arrow fire upon the British flank. The Romans... leapt from their ships, and, forming as best they could, waded towards the enemy. There was a short, ferocious fight amid the waves, but the Romans reached the shore, and, once arrayed, forced the Britons to flight. Caesar's cavalry had not done so well. They'd tried to get ashore during the first pan of the invasion but the Romans were ignorant of tides and a full moon produces extreme tides.

There was also bad weather. At the first try they were blown far away and their ships were nearly wrecked. By the time they returned, Caesar had camped. As Churchill saw it, the plight of the Romans encouraged the Britons.

C+The Britons had sued for peace after the battle on the beach, but now that they saw the plight of their assailants their hopes revived and they broke off the negotiations. In great numbers they attacked the Roman foragers. But the legion concerned had not neglected precautions, and discipline and armour once again told their tale. It shows how much food there was in the Island that two legions could live for a fortnight off the cornfields close to their camp. The British submitted. Their conqueror imposed only nominal terms. Breaking up many of his ships to repair the rest, he was glad to return with some hostages and captives to the mainland. He never even pretended that his expedition had been a success.

Caesar seems to have achieved two objectives. He now understood what it would take to beat the Britons and establish Roman rule and secondly, his expedition was seen in Rome as a great success. He returned to northern Italy and his men prepared a new fleet of specially designed warships and transports that could be sailed or pulled with great oars. Caesar had, in effect, designed the first landing craft — vessels that could be run right onto the beaches of Britannia and so make it simpler to get stores, men and horses ashore. The following year, 54 bc, Caesar returned to Britain. But the Britons, or some of them, had united under a leader called Cassivellaunus (who may have been the king of the Catuvellauni). The Catuvellauni were the strongest of the southern tribes and had settled in what is now Hertfordshire. They were resilient and inventive, especially in the way they deployed their chariots when fighting. Caesar wrote of the almost magical agility and inventiveness of these wild Britons.

*The manner of fighting from chariots is as follows. First of all they drive in all directions and hurl missiles. When they have worked their way in between the troops of cavalry, they leap down from their chariots and fight on foot. Meanwhile the charioteers retire gradually from the combat, and dispose the chariots in such a fashion that, if the warriors are hard pressed by the host of the enemy, they may have ready means of retirement to their own side.

Cassivellaunus had many enemies. There were other tribes who hated his tribe; there were other leaders who hated him. It is thought that one of these tribes, the Trinovantes who lived in Essex, entered into a pact with Caesar. Other tribes joined this arrangement and so Cassivellaunus now fought Romans in front of him and treachery behind. Eventually peace was negotiated and Britons were taken hostage. But winter was approaching and there was a revolt in Gaul. So Caesar left Britain taking his British prisoners with him.

C+ In a dead calm ‘he set sail late in the evening and brought all the fleet safely to land at dawn'. This time he proclaimed a conquest. Caesar had his triumph, and British captives trod their dreary path at his tail through the streets of Rome.

And that was it. The end of Caesar’s flirtation with Britain. In ten years he would be murdered, and a century would pass before the Emperor Claudius would once more attempt to subjugate the tribes of Britain.

But the time between Caesar's withdrawal in 54 BC and the Roman return in AD 43 was not a dark age for the islanders. From the top of what is now Scotland south to the Kent coast there were more than twenty large tribes. Some of the names became famous. The Iceni in East Anglia, the Catuvellauni in the East Midlands and Essex, the Parisi in Yorkshire, the Silures in Wales and the Brigantes, probably in the Pennines. Strabo, writing in the first century bc in the fourth of his seventeen-volume Geographica, tells us that the Britons exported cattle, hides, grain, slaves, gold and silver and, apparently, hunting dogs. In return, they imported wine and oil and glass. And most of this trade was with the prosperous South East. So, even 2000 years ago, there was a north-south divide in Britain.

Some ninety years after Julius Caesar's departure, the Emperor Claudius was persuaded that it would be politically to his advantage to return to Britain by an exiled Briton. His name was Bericus. Cassius Dio, in his early third-century AD version of Roman history, describes what happened.

* Plautius undertook this campaign, but had difficulty in inducing his army to advance beyond Gaul, for the soldiers were indignant at the thought of carrying on a campaign outside the limits of the known world and would not yield in obedience.Even after l00 years and much trading beyond their shores, these islands were still at the edge of the 'known' world. But the Romans invaded once more and this time they found that the Britons weren't expecting them.

C+The internal situation favoured the invaders. Cunobelinus [Shakespeare's Cymbeline] had established an overlordship over the South East of the Island, with his capital at Colchester. But in his old age dissensions had begun to impair his authority, and on his death the kingdom was ruled jointly by his sons Caractacus and Togodumnus They were not every­where recognized, and they had no time to form a union of the tribal Kingdom before the Roman commander, Plautius, and his legions arrived. Tacitus wrote that although the Britons had many military strengths, they were not a cohesive force.

*Once they owed obedience to kings; now they are distracted between the warring factions of rival chiefs. Indeed nothing has helped us more in fighting against their very powerful nations than their inability to cooperate. It is but seldom that two or three states unite to repel a common danger; thus, fighting in separate groups, all are conquered. But the Britons did fight back. They had learned there wasn't much future in taking on the Romans at their own game. Instead, they hid in the forests and the swamps. And as Cassius Dio wrote, the Romans hadn't bargained on that.

*Plautius had a great deal of trouble in searching them out; but when at last he did find them, he first defeated Caratacus and then Togodumnus. After the flight of these kings, he advanced farther and came to a river. The barbarians thought that the Romans would not be able to cross it without a bridge and bivouacked in rather careless fashion on the opposite bank; but he sent across a detachment of Germans who were accustomed to swim easily in full armour. The following year Claudius joined the Roman legions on the banks of the Thames. Cassius Dio explains what happened after Claudius met up with his troops. *Taking command, and enjoining the barbarians who were gathered at his approach, he defeated them in a battle and captured Camulodunum [Colchester], the capital of Cynobellinus. He deprived the conquered of their arms and handed them to Plautius, bidding him also subjugate the remaining districts. Claudius now hastened back to Rome sending ahead news of his victory. The Senate on learning of his achievement gave him the title of Britannicus and granted him permission to celebrate a triumph. But, Caratacus, or as Churchill and some others called him, Caractacus, resisted.

C+Caractacus escaped to the Welsh border, and, rousing its tribes, maintained an indomitable resistance for more than six years. It was not till ad 50 that he was finally defeated by a new general, Ostorius, the successor of Plautius, who reduced to submission the whole of the more settled regions from the Wash to the Severn. Caractacus, escaping from the ruin of his forces in the West, sought to raise the Brigantes in the North. Their queen however handed him over to the Romans.

No one was to be crusted. But as Tacitus wrote, Caratacus had become a hero and not just amongst his own people.

*His reputation had gone beyond the islands, had spread over the nearest provinces, and was familiar in Italy itself where there was curiosity to see what manner of man it was that had for so many years scorned our power. Then while the king's humble vassals filed past, ornaments and neck rings and prizes won in his foreign wars were borne m parade; next his brothers, wife and daughter were placed on view; finally, he himself. The rest stooped to unworthy entreaties dictated by fear; but on the part of Caratacus not a downcast look nor a word requested pity. Arrived at the tribunal, he spoke as follows: 'Had my lineage and my rank been matched by my moderation in success, I should have entered this city rather as a friend than as a captive. My present lot, if to me a degradation, is to you a glory. If I were dragged before you after surrendering without a blow, there would have been little heard either of my fall or your triumph: punishment of me will be followed by oblivion; but save me alive, and I shall be an everlasting memorial of your clemency.'

He was freed. The Romans struck his chains and those of his family but he was not to return to Britain. Caratacus, or so the chronicles tell us, remained in honourable captivity. Britain had been invaded but the most gruesome slaughter and the conquest was yet to come.

The centre of Roman Britain was Camulodunum, or Colchester. The idea was that Britain, or at least part of it, should become a province within the Roman Empire. But this was difficult to achieve. The Britons were warlike and because there were some twenty-three tribal regions, it was impossible to get overall agreement, or even an understanding, with more than a few of them. The South and the East were the most easily controllable. The Romans had large forces there, they'd set up their capital at Colchester, there were good trade routes through Essex and Kent. The uplands of Britain presented a bigger problem. In ad 54 Claudius died and his stepson, Nero, became emperor. The death of another leader, this one in Britain, left a longer lasting impression upon history and folklore.

C+The king of the East Anglian Iceni had died, 'his widow Boadicea (relished by the learned as Boudicca) was flogged and his daughters out­raged. Boadicea's tribe, at once the most powerful and hitherto the most submissive, was moved to frenzy against the Roman invaders. They flew to arms. Boadicea found herself at the head of a numerous army and nearly all the Britons within reach rallied to her standard. The Romans had no more than 20,000 men in Britain in four legions: two were thirty days' march away on the farther side of Wales, one was not much closer in Gloucester, and the last was 120 miles away, at Lincoln. Churchill describes how Boudicca went for Colchester.

C+There was neither mercy nor hope. Everyone, Roman or Romanized, was massacred and everything destroyed. Meanwhile, the Ninth Legion [the one at Lincoln] was marching to the rescue. The victorious Britons advanced from the sack of Colchester to meet it. By sheer force of numbers they overcame the Roman infantry and slaughtered them to a man, and the Commander, Petilius Cerialis, was content to escape with his cavalry.

But when the Roman, Suetonius, whose job it was to defend London and its people, heard that Boudicca had chased Cerialis towards Lincoln and was now heading south, he abandoned London: he had not the numbers of soldiers he needed. Tacitus, in his Annals, tells us of the consequences of that harsh military decision on London and afterwards on Verulamium, or St Albans as it is now called.

*He [Suetonius] decided to sacrifice the one town to save the general situation. Undeflected by the prayers and the tears of those who begged for his help he gave the signal to move, taking into his column any who could join it. Those [Romans] who were unfit for war because of their sex, or too aged to go, or too fond of the place to leave, were butchered by the enemy [the British]. The same massacre took place at the city of Verulamium, for the barbarian British, happiest when looting and unenthusiastic about real effort, by-passed the forts and the garrisons and headed for the spots where they knew the most undefended booty lay. Something like 70,000 Roman citizens and other friends of Rome died in the places I have mentioned. The British took no prisoners, sold no captives as slaves and went in for none of the usual trading of war. They wasted no time in getting down to the bloody business of hanging, burning and crucifying. It was as if they feared that retribution might catch up with them while their vengeance was only half-complete.

But for the Romans, and the reputation of Suetonius, all was not lost. Reinforced, he marched to the Midlands where Boudicca had amassed 230,000 troops. Suetonius had some 10,000 Romans but, as Tacitus records, that number would be sufficient for the Romans to succeed.

*Selecting a position in a defile closed in behind a wood, and having made sure that there was no enemy but in front, where there was open flat unsuited for ambuscades, he [Suetonius] drew up his legions in dose order, with the light-armed troops on the flanks, while the cavalry was massed at the extremities of the wings.

The Britons were successful against the Romans when they used hit and run tactics. Now, Boudicca was to fight on Roman terms, which was a foolish mistake The Romans were at the top of a slope and they enticed the Britons on. When they came, the Romans launched their javelins, then charged with their legions and cavalry, then forced the Britons back on their carts and their families who were behind them. They slaughtered the cart horses so there was no escape and then massacred the Britons, the ancients, their women, their children.

C+Boadicea poisoned herself. Suetonius now thought only of vengeance, and indeed there was much to repay. Reinforcements of 4000-5000 men were sent by Nero from Germany, and all hostile or suspect tribes were harried with fire and sword. The procurator, Julius Classicianus, whose tombstone is now in the British Museum, pleaded vehemently for the pacification of the warrior bands, who still fought on without seeking truce or mercy, starving; and perishing in the forests and the fens.

Diplomacy took over where military action had not always maintained the peace and the South never again rose against the Romans. There were battles to come, men to the and there were those Britons who preferred death to subjugation. But it was also true that Britain had embarked upon a civilized way of life that would last for 350 years.

The Romans ruled Britain for 500 years and they gave the Britons their first written historical descriptions. They recorded their versions of what was happening and the names of people who were making it happen. But when the Romans left Britain in ad 410, many of those who could write went with them, as did the imperial incentive to keep records, and so there were no further contemporary written accounts of what was going on in Britain for many years.

(from “This Sceptred Isle” by Christopher Lee, L.,1997)