Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:23:14.230Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Central Gaul at the Roman Conquest: conceptions and misconceptions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Ian Ralston
Ian Ralston*
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Edinburgh, 16–20 George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JZ & CNRS UPR AO 178, Laboratoire d'Archéologie, École Normale Supérieure, 45 rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Several recent reconstructions of the social and economic development of non-Mediterranean Gaul after c. 200 BC have argued for the development of complex societies, characterized by the appearance of centralized political entities with urban – or at least urbanizing – communities. The emergence of such ‘Archaic States’ is often considered as having been restricted to a broad zone running eastward from the Atlantic façade through the northern Massif Central to the Swiss plateau. Five certain such states are usually claimed: Bituriges cubi, Aedui, Arverni, Sequani, Helvetii; and three probable: Pictones, Lemovices and Lingones. The constitutents of this zone were originally recognized by Dr Daphne Nash (1976; 1978a; 1978b; 1981), and her view has since been adopted in Britain by Champion and his collaborators (1984), Bintliff (1984) and, most recently, Cunliffe (1988: figure 38). Essential to the formulation of this hypothesis was a wide-ranging consideration of three domains of protohistoric evidence on Gaul: literary, most conspicuously Julius Caesar’s de Bello Gallico; numismatics; and the settlement record of the late La Tène and its more shadowy antecedents. Among more recent commentators, a primary interest in the ‘core–periphery’ relationship (Cunliffe 1988; Rowlands et al. 1987) which existed between the Mediterranean world and Central Gaul is manifest. In a minimal view, this interaction may be envisaged in terms of the consequences of long-distance trade and subsequent military conquest spurring socio-political change. The unspoken by-product of this perspective is that differential development within non-Mediterranean Gaul is simplistically presented in terms of distance-decay from the Mediterranean littoral, with little attention being paid to the effects of physiographic diversity across this landmass.

Type
Special section: Classical matters
Information
Antiquity , Volume 62 , Issue 237 , December 1988 , pp. 786 - 794
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Audouze, F. Blanchet, J.-C. & Brunaux, J.-L.. 1981 L’habitat à l’âge du fer dans la moyenne vallée de l’Oise, in Büchsenschütz, O.E. (ed.), Les structures d’habitat à iâdge du fer en Europe tempérée: l’évolution de l’habitat en Berry, 67–82. Paris: Éditions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.Google Scholar
Bintliff, J 1984 Iron Age Europe in the context of social evolution from the Bronze Age through to historic times, in Bintliff, J. (ed.), European social evolution: archaeological perspectives: 157–226. Bradford: University of Bradford.Google Scholar
Beck, F., Brunaux, J.-L. Büchsenschütz, O.E. Duval, A. Enault, J.-F. Gruel, K. Guillaumet, J.-P. Peyre, C. & St-Aubin, J.-P.. 1987. Les fouilles du Mont Beuvray: rapport biennal, 1984–85, Revue archéologique de l’Est et du Centre-Est 38: 285–300.Google Scholar
Bertin, D & Guillaumet, J.-P.. 1987. Bibracte: ville gauloise sur le Mont Beuvray. Paris: Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication. Guides archéologiques de la France 13.Google Scholar
Brunaux, J.-L., Meniel, P. & Poplin, F.. 1985. Gournay I: Les fouilles sur Je sanctuaire et J’oppidum (1975–84). Amiens. Numéro spécial de la Revue archéologique de Picardie.Google Scholar
BüChsenschütz, O.E. 1984. Structures d’habitats et fortifications de l’âge du fer en France septentrionale. Paris: Société préhistorique française. Mémoires de la Société préhistorique française 18.Google Scholar
BüChsenschütz, O.E. 1988. L’évolution du canton de Levroux d’après les prospections et les sondages archéoiogiques. Tours: Revue archéologique du Centre de la France/Association pour la Défense et l’Étude du Canton de Levroux. Supplément à la Revue Archéologique du Centre de la France, Levroux 1.Google Scholar
Büchsenschütz, O.E. & Ralston, I.B.M.. 1981a. Les fortifications des âges des métaux, Archeologia 154: 24–36.Google Scholar
Büchsenschütz, O.E. & Ralston, I.B.M.. 1981b. Les fortifications de l’âge du fer dans le Centre de la France, Revue archéologique (1981) 1: 45–66.Google Scholar
Büchsenschütz, O.E. & Ralston, I.B.M.. 1986. En relisant la Guerre des Gaules, Revue Aquitania supplément 1: 383–7. Bordeaux: Éditions de la Fédération Aquitania. Actes de la VIII Colloque sur les âges du Fer en France non-Méditerranéenne.Google Scholar
Cahen-Delhaye, A. 1984. Fouilles récentes dans les fortifications de l’âge du fer en Belgique, in Les Celtes en Belgique et dans le Nord de la France: Les fortifications de l’âge du fer. Lille. = Revue du Nord, numéro spécial hors série, 151-67. Actes du VI Colloque de l’Association française de l’Étude de l’Age du Fer.Google Scholar
Champion, T.C., Gamble, C. Shennan, S. & Whittle, A.. 1984. Prehistoric Europe. London: Academic.Google Scholar
Collis, I.E.. 1980. Aulnat and urbanization in France: a second interim report, Archaeological Journal 137: 40–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collis, I.E.. 1984. Oppida: earliest townsnorth of the Alps. Sheffield: University of Sheffield, Department of Prehistory and Archaeology.Google Scholar
Collis, J.R. & Ralston, I.B.M.. 1976 Late la Tene defences, Germania 54: 135–46.Google Scholar
Cotton, M.A. 1957. Muri gallici, in Wheeler, R.E.M. & Richardson, K.M., Hill-forts of northern France: 159–225. London: Society of Antiquaries. Research Report 19.Google Scholar
Crumley, C.L. 1974. Celtic social structure: the generation of archaeologically-testable hypotheses from literary data.. Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology. Anthropology Paper 54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crumley, C.L. & Green, P.R.. 1987. Environmental setting, in Crumley, C.L. & Marquardt, W.H. (ed.), Regional dynamics: Burgundian landscapes in historical perspective: 19–39. San Diego (CA): Academic.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, B.W. 1988. Greeks, Romans and Barbarians: spheres of interaction. London: Batsford.Google Scholar
Déchelette, J. 1904. Les fouilles du Mont Beuvray de. 1897 à 1901. Paris.Google Scholar
Dehn, W. 1960. Einige Bemerkungen zum ‘Murus Gallicus’, Germania 38 43–55.Google Scholar
Déchelette, J. 1969. Noch einmal zum ‘Murus Gallicus’, Germania 47: 165–8.Google Scholar
Démoule, J.-P & Ilett, M.. 1985. First millennium settlement and society in northern France: a case study from the Aisne Valley, in Champion, T.C. & Megaw, J.V.S. (ed.), Settlement and society: aspects of west European prehistory in the first millennium BC: 214–21. Leicester: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
Desbordes, J. 1977. Les origines de la vie urbaine en Limousin: bauche d’un problématique, Revue archéologique du Centre de la France 16: 221–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feachem, R.W. 1966 The hill-forts of northern Britain, in Rivet, A.L.F. (ed.), The Iron Age in northern Britain: 59–87. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, A.R. 1985 The Early State Module: a critical assessment, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 4: 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzpatrick, A. 1985. The distribution of Dressel I amphorae in north-west Europe, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 4: 305–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzpatrick, A. 1987. The structure of a distribution map: problems of sample bias and quantitative studies, Bei Cretariae Romanae Fautorum 25/26: 79–112.Google Scholar
Frey, O.-H. 1984. Die Bedeutung des Gallia Cisalpina für die Entstehung der Oppida-Kultur, in Studien zu Siedlungsfragen der Latènezeit: 1–38. Marburg. Veröffentlichung des Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars, Sonderband 3.Google Scholar
Haggett, P. 1965. Locational analysis in human geography. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Marinval, P. 1988. L’alimentation végétale en France du mésolithique jusqu’à l’âge dufer. Paris: Éditions du CNRS.Google Scholar
Meniel, P. 1987. Chasse et levage chez les Gaulois (450–52 av. J.C.). Paris: Errance.Google Scholar
Nash, D. 1976. The growth of urban society in France, in Cunliffe, B.W. & Rowley, T. (ed.), Oppida: the beginnings of urbanization in temperate Europe: 95–133. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Supplementary Series 11.Google Scholar
Nash, D. 1978a. Territory and state formation in Central Gaul, in Green, D. Haselgrove, C. & Spriggs, M. (ed.), Social organisation and settlement: 455–75. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. International Series 47.Google Scholar
Nash, D. 1978b. Settlement and coinage in Central Gaul c. 200–1 BC. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. International Series 39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nash, D. 1981. Coinage and state development in Central Gaul, in Cunliffe, B.W. (ed.), Coinage and society in Britain and Gaul: some current problems: 10–17. London: Council for British Archaeology. Research Report 38.Google Scholar
Piggott, S. 1965. Ancient Europe. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Ralston, I.B.M. 1981. The use of timber in hill-fort defences in France, in Guilbert, G. (ed.), Hill-Fort studies: essays presented to A.H.A. Hogg: 78–103. Leicester: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
Ralston, I.B.M. 1984. Les caractères de l’habitat la Tene III: les structures urbaines et leurs correspondances avec les entités politiques, in Büchsenschütz, O.E. (ed.), Recherches sur la naissance de l’urbanisation au ler siècle avant J.-C. dans le Centre d’après les nouvelles données archéologiques: 169–98. Levroux: Association pour la Défense et l’Étude du Canton de Levroux.Google Scholar
Ralston, I.B.M. & Büchsenschütz, O.E.. 1975 Late pre-Roman Iron Age forts in Berry, Antiquity 49: 8–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rambaud, M. 1953 [2nd ed., 1966]. L’art de la déformation historique dans les commentaires de César. Paris: Association Guillaume Bude.Google Scholar
Rowlands, M., Larsen, M. & Kristiansen, K. (ed.). 1987. Centre and periphery in the ancient world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sjøberg, G. 1960. The pre-industrial city, past and present. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Stevens, C.E. 1951–2. The ‘Bellum Gallicum’ as a work of propaganda, Latomus: Revue d’Études anciennes 11: 3–18 & 165–79.Google Scholar
Tournaire, J., Büchsenschütz, O.E. Henderson, J. & Collis, J.. 1982. Iron Age coin moulds from France, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 48: 417–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar