Romans and Barbarians: Four Views From the Empire's Edge Read Online Free PDF

grim likenesses, rough-hewn
    From crudest timber. They said the ground
    Groaned, yews yawed backwards then reared up again;
    And from boughs not burning, light glowed weirdly.
    Snakes twined and slithered round bare branches.
    Here worshippers, fearing to worship, left
    The place to the gods … 13
    Both Celts and Germans had earlier marched on Italy ( c. 390 and 100 BC ); events so bitterly remembered that one may speak of a chronic fear of the transalpine tribes, ensuring that Romans would not feel safe until northern Italy – and ultimately most of western Europe – were under control. The struggle to ingest the Celtic world had already taken two centuries and by the reign of Augustus only the British Isles lay outside the empire. Its most dramatic step, Caesar’s eight-year war against Gaul, had brought Rome close to her other northern adversary, the Germans. At the time this narrative begins Augustus had reached a crossroads. Should the eagles venture the Channel against the still free Britons; or the Rhine against Germany? His choice of the latter alternative is the starting point of the second Episode.
    Proud, powerful and turbulent, the Celts had equalled – even exceeded – Mediterranean norms in several aspects of technology and artistic expression. But in the more telling areas of cohesion, discipline and organization they were a step behind; sufficient to make them losers in almost every clash with the Roman army. Owing in part to geographical position, they were the chief victims of expansion; and of their wide areas or settlement of influence, only the Scottish Highlands and Ireland would in the end escape Rome’s grasp.
    How did the Celts fare under Roman rule? Though it was not imperial policy to extirpate the languages or customs of conquered peoples, a four or five-century occupation inevitably diluted native ways. La Tène art withered on contact as its patrons, former Gaulish princes, became Roman provincial nobodies. It would be replaced by empire-wide, melting-pot standards of artistic expression, with neither barbarian vigour nor Mediterranean maturity. On the other hand, peace, improved roads, new markets, urban growth and service in the imperial armed forces all contributed to a stability and prosperity unknown before the conquest.
    In the face of Roman aggression the relatively advanced state of the Celtic and related peoples had told against them. Their lands, more developed than the German, boasted better drainage, greater woodland clearance, higher standards of grain production and transportation; all of which provided a sounder basis for conquest than the forest and swamp of central Europe. Furthermore, the Celts were victims of their own braggadocio. An impassioned sense of honour obliged them to seek battle. This was a fatal flaw, for the Roman army was at its best in set-piece encounters. By contrast the Germans surrendered readily and regrouped stealthily. They were masters of hit and run. Despite the stupendous hillforts and an array of armament which dwarfed the German arsenal, German resistance would be the more successful.
    By contrast, the Germanic legacy in art, artifacts and fortifications is smaller. In stone building it is especially slight. There were no towns. Villages were of semi-sunken huts: wooden, thatched, windowless and chimneyless; plus occasional timber longhouses, with family at one end and animals at the other. Farming included tillage and animal husbandry, but its scope was subsistence and its method often slash and burn. Barley was the leading staple.
    Fighting was largely on foot. Weaponry was light, with spears and shields more common than swords, and helmets or body armour rare. Germany’s vast iron deposits had barely been scratched. Pottery was hand-made, while the Celtic was wheel-made. Standards in woodwork, leatherwork and textiles were relatively high. Population was considerable but concentrated in valleys between large