07-31-2006, 11:07 AM
Hi Vortigern,
Sorry for the delay -- very busy weekend.
(1) Burials
In the Iron Age accompanied inhumation seems to have been the preferred rite in high-status burials which were under tumuli in prominent positions. During the period and extent of Roman rule, unaccompanied inhumation close by villa, vicus or town was normal for some people, for the rich in elaborate mausolea. The poor probably were cremated.
The introduced Germanic burial rites are (i) cremation in distinctive forms of urn and (ii) accompanied (usually) inhumation in separate cemetery areas away from settlements. Usually the settlements are in river valleys while the cemeteries are up on the higher ground. Mound burial does not seem to have been among the earlier rites, but only comes in from ca.600, therefore there is a gap of about 700 years between Lexden and Prittlewell in which little or no mound burial took place.
4. No-one is arguing that the AS are inferior, but their pottery is not of such good quality as the late Roman products. This is because their ability with wood and maybe leather was so good that they did not need ceramics except for particular, traditional purposes i.e. burial containers. Presumably British potters did not forget how to throw a pot on a wheel; but if the potters were no longer there then that would account for the loss of that industry and its skills.
5 Jewellery. Across the Gmc world, women’s adornment carries information about status and ethnicity. Perhaps British women did want to copy Gmc fashions, but the point is: would that be possible/allowed? If wearing a great square-headed brooch showed a certain status and position, then it would be vital to restrict these materials to those who were eligible to wear them.
6 I am not referring to Roman weapons but to Germanic ones -- I am surprised that you don't know what I mean. If you have access to Menghin's Das Schwert im Fruhen Mittealter or Davidson's The Sword in Anglo Saxon England - you will see that Germanic swords are stylistically very different. The same goes for other war gear.
7. Of course it was true that there were incentives to convert to Islam and some of these may have amounted to coercion. If you read what I said in my original post -- I used the word 'conversion' I did not mention force. However, the history of Islam is not without incidences where people were 'encouraged' to convert. Incidentally, the original split between Shia's and Sunni's was extremely bloody -- so I find arguments that matters of doctrine are not important rather unconvincing.
Of course, unlike in England, in places like Algeria, the original language is still alive and well (Berber).
As for English being an easier language to learn I think that you are on weak ground there. Today it may be easier for a German to learn English than Chinese -- but I don't really think that Britons would have found it particularly easy. For a Briton it would have been much easier to continue speaking British!
As for religion, if Britons decided to abandon their old ways and go with AS then where is the continuity? If they revived their old ways, then they did not follow the Gmc religions. Can’t have it both ways.
8) Farming. There is plenty of evidence for villa estates falling into disuse, downsizing of farms, wasteland regenerating, etc. Pryor ignores this and just points to a few villas that stayed in production – all in the west as far as I know. Besides Pryor is not a farmer, I wouldn't attach too much importance to his statements about farming -- people had to eat and the newcomers would have used whatever they could -- they were already experienced farmers -- unlike Pryor. Incidentally, he isn't an early medievalist either -- he is a bronze age specialist who has found his way onto tellevision and been asked to comment on subjects of which he actually knows very little. His interview with Heinrich Harke was emberassing -- Harke is an early medieval specialist but Pryor basically ignored all that he said.
As for your reply to my saying that the AS did not recieve a liberal, multi cultural education -- I can't understand why you think they may have. They lived in a tribal society, their kin were the most important people on earth to them -- outsiders, especially those who spoke a different language and were culturally different were not regarded as belonging to the group -- they may not have even been regarded as people.
“Welshâ€
Sorry for the delay -- very busy weekend.
(1) Burials
In the Iron Age accompanied inhumation seems to have been the preferred rite in high-status burials which were under tumuli in prominent positions. During the period and extent of Roman rule, unaccompanied inhumation close by villa, vicus or town was normal for some people, for the rich in elaborate mausolea. The poor probably were cremated.
The introduced Germanic burial rites are (i) cremation in distinctive forms of urn and (ii) accompanied (usually) inhumation in separate cemetery areas away from settlements. Usually the settlements are in river valleys while the cemeteries are up on the higher ground. Mound burial does not seem to have been among the earlier rites, but only comes in from ca.600, therefore there is a gap of about 700 years between Lexden and Prittlewell in which little or no mound burial took place.
4. No-one is arguing that the AS are inferior, but their pottery is not of such good quality as the late Roman products. This is because their ability with wood and maybe leather was so good that they did not need ceramics except for particular, traditional purposes i.e. burial containers. Presumably British potters did not forget how to throw a pot on a wheel; but if the potters were no longer there then that would account for the loss of that industry and its skills.
5 Jewellery. Across the Gmc world, women’s adornment carries information about status and ethnicity. Perhaps British women did want to copy Gmc fashions, but the point is: would that be possible/allowed? If wearing a great square-headed brooch showed a certain status and position, then it would be vital to restrict these materials to those who were eligible to wear them.
6 I am not referring to Roman weapons but to Germanic ones -- I am surprised that you don't know what I mean. If you have access to Menghin's Das Schwert im Fruhen Mittealter or Davidson's The Sword in Anglo Saxon England - you will see that Germanic swords are stylistically very different. The same goes for other war gear.
7. Of course it was true that there were incentives to convert to Islam and some of these may have amounted to coercion. If you read what I said in my original post -- I used the word 'conversion' I did not mention force. However, the history of Islam is not without incidences where people were 'encouraged' to convert. Incidentally, the original split between Shia's and Sunni's was extremely bloody -- so I find arguments that matters of doctrine are not important rather unconvincing.
Of course, unlike in England, in places like Algeria, the original language is still alive and well (Berber).
As for English being an easier language to learn I think that you are on weak ground there. Today it may be easier for a German to learn English than Chinese -- but I don't really think that Britons would have found it particularly easy. For a Briton it would have been much easier to continue speaking British!
As for religion, if Britons decided to abandon their old ways and go with AS then where is the continuity? If they revived their old ways, then they did not follow the Gmc religions. Can’t have it both ways.
8) Farming. There is plenty of evidence for villa estates falling into disuse, downsizing of farms, wasteland regenerating, etc. Pryor ignores this and just points to a few villas that stayed in production – all in the west as far as I know. Besides Pryor is not a farmer, I wouldn't attach too much importance to his statements about farming -- people had to eat and the newcomers would have used whatever they could -- they were already experienced farmers -- unlike Pryor. Incidentally, he isn't an early medievalist either -- he is a bronze age specialist who has found his way onto tellevision and been asked to comment on subjects of which he actually knows very little. His interview with Heinrich Harke was emberassing -- Harke is an early medieval specialist but Pryor basically ignored all that he said.
As for your reply to my saying that the AS did not recieve a liberal, multi cultural education -- I can't understand why you think they may have. They lived in a tribal society, their kin were the most important people on earth to them -- outsiders, especially those who spoke a different language and were culturally different were not regarded as belonging to the group -- they may not have even been regarded as people.
“Welshâ€
Paul Mortimer
