RomanArmyTalk
Roman influence in Britain - Printable Version

+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Allies & Enemies of Rome (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Roman influence in Britain (/showthread.php?tid=17831)

Pages: 1 2 3


Roman influence in Britain - eugene - 11-11-2010

Why Angles and Saxons almost completely wiped out Roman influence in Britain?


Re: Roman influence in Britain - Robert Vermaat - 11-11-2010

I was not under the impression that this was the case?


Re: Roman influence in Britain - M. Demetrius - 11-11-2010

It seems that the place names still extant today do not support that theory.


Re: Roman influence in Britain - Vindex - 11-11-2010

New one on me...major thing is the influence on the language I think...

What about the road system...which in turn is mirrored by the later rail and canal systems...

...this thread has the potential to turn into "What have the Romans ever done fro Britain" which I will try to avoid!!


Re: Roman influence in Britain - Ron Andrea - 11-12-2010

Just to drive around England is to be reminded that once--almost two thousand years ago--people built straight roads . . . that are still used today. :wink:


Re: Roman influence in Britain - M. Demetrius - 11-12-2010

And you can't drive far without coming to a town or village named --chester (castrum), which begs the question, "Whose 'fort' was here?" The influence is obvious even to a superficial observer. 8)


Re: Roman influence in Britain - Epictetus - 11-13-2010

Hello. I’m the devil’s advocate. :wink:

I can’t pretend to have any expertise in this area, but I do know that some historians claim little lasting Roman influence in Britain.

One of these is Norman Davies, who according to his dust jacket is Supernumerary Fellow at Wolfson College in Oxford, Fellow of the British Academy and Professor Emeritus of the University of London. Here are some relevant quotes from his 1999 book The Isles.

Quote:[O]ne must face the fact that [Roman Britain] constitutes a passing phase in the history of the Isles and left precious little behind it. Unlike Roman Gaul, which represents one of the formative experiences in the emergence of modern France, Roman Britain left no lasting legacy of note. In the long run, since its achievements were to be almost completely erased by subsequent barbarians, it has less significance in the evolution of the Isles than what its historians are pleased to call ‘the British Background.’ As the Professor of Archaeology at Oxford has dared to write: ‘For nearly four hundred years, Britain was occupied and governed by an alien power. Yet, remarkably, the impact of that long period of rigid control was comparatively slight.’… In retrospect, one can see that the Roman Empire had played as ephemeral a role in the history of the Isles as the Isles had played in the history of the Empire.

If this is so, then why is the history of Rome in Britain so popular? Why is there such a strong identification with the Romans? Davies says:

Quote:All English children are schooled in the knowledge that they live in a land where once the Romans lived… Still more important is the realisation that all those generations of British people (mostly men), who were educated in the classics, were being taught to understand and to sympathise with the Greeks and the Romans… All manner of pressure was brought to bear to ensure that British schoolboys empathised with Rome. From the sixteenth century to the mid-twentieth, every educated person was required to learn Latin… A whole literary genre was devoted to strengthening the bond between modern Britons and Ancient Romans… Historical novels were written to serve exactly the same purpose… At its root…this empathy for Rome was driven by the imperial imperative. The leading imperialists of the modern world saw common cause with the leading imperialists of the ancient world. The British in general, and the English in particular, saw themselves as an imperial race. They had an empire to run, and an imperial establishment to sustain. Educating young men in the traditions of the greatest Empire that had ever reached our shores was an excellent means to an end.

By the way, before I’m virtually tarred and feathered, which I expect is practically certain, please remember the first line in this post. 8)

Note: The Professor of Archaeology at Oxford was Barry Cunliffe in a forword to K. Branigan Roman Britain, 1980, according to the notes.


Re: Roman influence in Britain - Vindex - 11-13-2010

No reason why you should be tarred and feathered for presenting a different point of view, whether you support it or not - it would be boring if we all had the same ideas!

From the second quote I can see where he can get some of his notions ie the education to reflect the running of an Empire, but I think the first quotation is disingenuous to say the least.

Thanks for pointing it out! Big Grin


Re: Roman influence in Britain - M. Demetrius - 11-13-2010

As often is the case, it gets down to how one defines "influence".
Law structure
Language
Place names
Organizational mechanisms
Architecture
Technology

If these items reflect a previous culture to any great degree, I would vote on the side of "Influence? Yes."


Re: Roman influence in Britain - Matthew Amt - 11-13-2010

I'll certainly agree that the NEO-Classical influence was pretty darn heavy! Good point. And while you can argue that direct "Roman influence" eventually faded out in Britain, that's not too different from the rest of Europe. We know that many Roman structures remained in use well into the middle ages, including fortification walls, aquaducts, bath houses, roads, building foundations, etc. You can argue that this all disappeared or was abandoned in Britain, but even in Italy most of the Roman remains are only there because they were converted to other uses or incorporated into other structures. Of course Italy had a LOT more substantial Roman structures in the first place! And it is true that some things like the aquaducts simply continued in use right into the Renaissance.

But places like Germany and France had their own waves of barbarian immigrations, and I'm not sure they maintained much more Roman influence than Britain did, really. I doubt a 13th-century French farmer felt any more of a stirring need to wear a toga when he crossed a Roman stone bridge on his way into town than an English one did! So there's no need to pick on Britain in particular, if we're going to "de-Romanize" things.

Actually, if you want answers, you'd need to do some deep research into Post-Roman, medieval, and Renaissance literature, and see if *they* felt there was Roman influence in their culture or society! We shouldn't just make guesses based on whether they had straight roads or not.

Valete,

Matthew


Re: Roman influence in Britain - authun - 11-13-2010

Quote:Why Angles and Saxons almost completely wiped out Roman influence in Britain?

As you can see, 'influence' is very subjective. Perhaps a better question would be to ask why Britain did not end up like France. Both afterall were former Celtic language speaking and both fell to germanic speaking tribes.

Most of the 'latin' influence in Britain is post 13th century, in the language via French, in the scientific and technological terms and the Victorian love of the neo-classical. It is not directly from the roman period.

Gaul was taken over more or less intact as far as the Church was concerned whereas Britain had a couple of centuries of germanic paganism. Consequently, different values replaced the old ones in Britain whereas in Gaul, despite the different rulers, at least one strong organisation existed across the nation which would promote the former values. In addition, we have the question of how much the general population in Britain bought into the roman way of life. The traders, merchants, craftsmen and estate managers certainly benefitted but much of the population were engaged into something more like enforced labour in roman industries like mining. They may not have been so enthusiastic about their roman way of life.

Other parts of Britain, like Tintagel, did continue with a roman way of life, still importing amphorae from the eastern mediterranean. But, it's still a bit of a mystery why these places faded.

best
authun


Re: Roman influence in Britain - authun - 11-13-2010

Quote:But places like Germany and France had their own waves of barbarian immigrations, and I'm not sure they maintained much more Roman influence than Britain did, really.

The main difference is language. Both Britain and Gaul were celtic speaking but, probably in different degrees, started speaking vulgar latin. The Anglo Saxon language became dominant in Britain whereas in Gaul vulgar latin gave way to old french and not franconian.

My guess is that the Church had a hand in that but it may just be as simple as Britons never really spoke much vulgar latin. If the Vindolanda tablet, 'nasty little Brits' typifies the roman attitude towards the native population, I'm not surprised they never fully bought into the roman way of life.

best
authun


Re: Roman influence in Britain - cagwinn - 11-14-2010

If Roman culture did not have a significant influence in Britain, Englishmen (beyond Crusties) would still be living in huts, dressing in animal skins, and worshiping Wotan, Thunor and Tiw.


Re: Roman influence in Britain - Vindex - 11-14-2010

Quote:If Roman culture did not have a significant influence in Britain, Englishmen (beyond Crusties) would still be living in huts, dressing in animal skins, and worshiping Wotan, Thunor and Tiw.

...but the English speaking World (and a few more besides) have Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday...Tiw, Odin and Thor, no?


And at least the Norman Conquest would have got us out of our mud huts...unless you count wattle and daub (with thatch) which means, yes, some of us still live in mud huts! Big Grin


Re: Roman influence in Britain - authun - 11-14-2010

This is one of the oldest anglo saxon churches in England, built in stone around 670AD:

[url:4tc6u44u]http://www.escombsaxonchurch.com[/url]

It was built using stone from the roman fort at Binchester.

Does that count as roman influence?

best
authun