Peter Wells begins his book by recounting how, in 9 A.D. in the dim light of the dark and damp Teutoburg Forest, barbarians ambushed and destroyed three highly trained, highly motivated, well-equipped Roman Legions - the best soldiers in the ancient world. This begs the question: "Who were these people, and how could they stand up to the Romans in the dark forests in Teutoburg and defeat them in battle?" Wells then proceeds to introduce the barbarians.
The barbarians were the indigenous people of Europe who "were not passive recipients of change brought to them by larger and more complex societies, but were participants in interactions, from initial conquest through the end of imperial domination" (21-22). Peter Wells' premise is that these barbarians, the indigenous people of Europe conquered by Rome during the first century B.C., played a far more significant role than is generally acknowledged in creating the societies of Roman Europe. To bolster his argument, Wells combines knowledge gleaned from ancient writers, such as Polybius, Caesar, Tacitus, and Livy, with extant archaeological and anthropological data. Wells' book contains ample maps and illustrations to help guide the reader.
In a discussion of Late Iron Age, pre-Roman archaeological sites, Wells explains that there are indications that Northern Europe had a dense population (20% of what it is today) that was engaged in a wide range of industry. It is Wells' contention that "these peoples were dynamic and creative, and when the Romans arrived, they represented one more element-albeit a powerful and persuasive one-in the overall pattern of change that the societies were undergoing" (33).
Wells contends that there was wide spread trade before and after Roman conquest. Artifacts with La Tène motifs have been found throughout Europe indicating an exchange of both merchandise and ideas, e.g., several locales incorporated this plant motif into products they manufactured. Other artifacts found in the wealthier, Late Bronze Age burial sites indicate trade with the Mediterranean. Knowledge of the symposia, or drinking ritual of the Greeks, seems to have accompanied the ritual vessels and cups used in the ceremonies. Wells states: "the late prehistoric peoples of temperate Europe, including the groups that Caesar and his armies encountered in Gaul, belonged to dynamic societies in which complex changes were taking place in economy, political organization, and social structure . . . . [there is] evidence for interaction between peoples inhabiting different regions of Europe during the final century B.C. . . . expressed both in the well-equipped elite men's graves and in the everyday fibula forms . . ." (61-62). "The adoption by the indigenous elites . . . of Roman luxury goods, customs, and values, represented the beginning of a process that was to involve all members of their communities in subsequent centuries" (257).
Northern Europeans built large, fortified, hilltop settlements called oppida just prior to the Roman period. These centers were markedly larger settlements than those of earlier periods. Caesar was the first to note them in the textual record (50). Archaeology has revealed that there was a great similarity among the different sites, again indicating communication of ideas. Much of the revealed detritus also indicates trade between these inhabited centers.
These people also had a coin-based economy. "Coinage is a good indicator of the integration of communities in Late Iron Age temperate Europe. The minting of coins coincided with the distribution of the oppida" (53).
Caesar's invasion of Gaul ended the prehistoric Iron Age period of European history. Wells suggests that Rome's direct conquest on Gaul had an indirect impact on European tribes east of the Rhine similar to the impact that the Spanish' conquest of the Aztecs in Central Mexico had on the peripheral Yucatan. The Gallic Wars, according to Wells, disrupted the interdependent economy of Northern Europe to the extent that it brought about the collapse of oppida such as found at Manching.
Wells shifts his attention to the upper Danube. Here the Romans built twenty-eight forts and bases during the reign of Augustus (27 B.C. - 14 A.D.). The principal import of Roman military bases was that they brought "indigenous peoples into direct contact with Roman imperial forces" (90); hence, culminating two centuries of antecedent, superficial contact.
Knowledge of writing was introduced. Celts were commonly using the Latin alphabet by mid first century B.C., and there are instances where Greek had been used earlier. The oldest extant dated use of Latin by a Celtic tribe came near the end of second century B.C. Runes "developed in northern Europe as an indigenous form of writing sometime during the first or second century A.D. . . . Runologists believe that the script was consciously created by individuals intent to devise a system of writing comparable to the Latin alphabet, and that it emerged at that time because of personal contacts with members of Roman literate society" (256).
In chapter five, entitled "Identities and Perceptions," Wells enters into a long, complicated discussion on the origins of the Keltoi and the Germani. Wells believes these identities reflect "indigenous people's responding to Roman categorizations" (120) more than they reflect truly inherent differences between the peoples with whom the Romans had contact. Here Wells defers to cultural anthropologists Jonathon Hill who argues that "tribes" gain identity in response to imperial pressures. Proximity of an imperial power forces indigenous peoples to coalesce into cultural-ethnic bands where none had existed before. These bands, in turn, are ascribed a language, a culture, and territorial boundaries that are artificial and mask the fluidity and diversity of their previous existence. "Tribes" exists so that imperialistic societies can define and manage a people more easily. Conversely, in order for the "tribe" to combat complete subjugation, it must coalesce and accept such an identity. Wells maintains that the origination of the oppida was a reflection of this tribalization process.
Roman activity in Gaul involved political and economic pursuits as well as military. Roman political success in Gaul was in part due to strategic alliances with the aristocracy of certain Gallic tribes. Wells discusses at length the economic impact created by thousands of soldiers being posted along the Rhine, and how civilian settlements, called vici, set up adjacent to the Roman forts. He argues "that frontiers are not boundary lines that can be neatly defined by walls or even by natural features such as rivers. Frontiers are instead zones of interaction, broad areas of land on which peoples that live within the imperial territories interact with peoples living outside them" (126). Acculturation was a two way street. Furthermore, one must be cognizant of one fact: the Roman army was the primary "Romanizing" force, and most of the Legions in these frontier regions were comprised of auxiliaries recruited from the frontier region. Geographically, central and northern Gaul, the Rhineland, and Bavaria came into the realm of the Roman Empire politically and economically, "but culturally to some extent still [remained] outside it . . . . in their language, lifestyle, and material culture many remained barbarians" (94).
After forts, the Romans built towns and cities introducing geometric street patterns. "Military bases and urban centers were the places where changes introduced by Rome were taken up most quickly and most thoroughly. Change in rural settlements was both later and less pervasive" (175). Wells discusses how the adoption of villa, versus the traditional three aisle structures, represents symbolic, affected behavior by the indigenous elite.
"The Roman Empire of which these groups [peoples] were part was cosmopolitan and multiethnic on a large scale. There existed neither `pure' Roman culture, nor any common `provincial Roman' society, but instead a wide variety of amalgamations of different traditions, constantly shifting over time" (189). Wells speaks of shifts in self-identity as indigenous communities responded to the impetus of Roman culture, i.e., shifting from an identity dependent on kinship relationships to one that is dependent on cosmopolitan relationships. Wells attempts to explain first century A.D. Roman European cultural adjustments in terms analogous to how economic globalization in the 21st century has disturbed cultural relationships. He goes on to explain how such changes ignite cultural reaction as peoples seek to define themselves within the parameters of their new relationship. The courses taken by these peoples reflect opportunistic co-option of, fatalistic or realistic adoption of, or rebellion against the new culture or value system in which they found themselves immersed. Wells feels the "Celtic Renaissance" may be a reflection of the social dynamic phenomena of cultural adjustment to Roman domination.
Wells feels that the Roman conquest should not be seen as a metaphorical, cultural light switch that was thrown. The preexisting Iron Age cultural patterns and traditions were not turned-off, and civilized, Roman culture was not turned-on. Wells simply uses common sense, explaining that prehistoric Iron Age culture overlapped Roman culture for several centuries.
"The third century A.D. is regarded as a period of crisis throughout the Roman world that included intense political struggles in Rome . . ." (259). Rome's borders were over run, and the frontier settlements dwindled both in size and number. There was a marked decline in culture and a return to a pre-Roman way of life. The archaeological record, according to Wells, suggests that Rome's frontiers were not overrun in massive, overpowering assaults by barbarians, but rather yielded to successive, small-scale incursions because the frontier was neglected.
In the wake of Roman retreat, the Alamanni, Goths, Franks, Saxons and others returned to their fortified, hilltop settlements. They reestablished their markets and continued to trade. In the vacuum, dynamic, new kingdoms like the Merovingians-not Roman, not tribal; yet both-emerged providing the basis for Charlemagne's empire in the late eighth and early ninth centuries.
I heartily recommend his book to anyone. Peter Wells successfully presents his subject in a very straightforward, common sense manner. I wish he could have included more about Roman ship building along the upper Rhine. I am curious to know what influence, if any, the Romans had on Viking ship building. He convincingly establishes that simple, "indigenous societies have diverse and often little-understood resources that enable them to play determining roles" when immersed in cultural conflict with more complex societies.
