We have been asked: "How can you practise the religion of a people who
invaded your country and enslaved your ancestors, suppressing their
culture and imposing their own?" (This question is most commonly posed
by certain uninformed kinds of pagan with a shaky appreciation of
British history, often calling themselves 'Druidic' or 'Celtic'). The
answer is a condensed history lesson, covering about a thousand years in
as many words…
Who were the Romans?
Without doubt, there once was a people called 'The Romans', who came
from a place called Rome. The mythical founder of the city, Romulus, is
said by ancient historians to have populated his new settlement by
making it a safe haven for outlaws, runaway slaves, escaped criminals,
and so on. Right from the start, the definition of 'Roman' was a very
inclusive one indeed.
As the city - and its people - grew bigger and stronger, it controlled
more and more territory, both by alliance and conquest. Eventually,
anyone could earn Roman citizenship rights in return for certain
services, provided that they then met the same obligations as any other
citizen of Rome. The city also planted colonies, seed-cities if you
will, elsewhere in the Mediterranean world, a practice common to all the
city-states of the early Classical period. Soon there were Romans all
over the place, people with legal Roman status, living according to
Roman law as well as local custom, who lived and died without ever
seeing Rome, and many who never even mastered the Latin language. There
were even barbarians who pretended to be Roman, but weren't.
The more powerful Roman culture became, and the more it spread, the
more people wanted to be part of it. In material terms, the attraction
of Romanitas ('being Roman') was much the same as being American -or
engaging largely in American culture - today.
During the Late Pre-Roman Iron Age an extensive trade - in ideas as well
as commodities - developed between Britain and the Roman world. Not only
Roman amphorae, but Roman gold and Roman military equipment, turns up in
the burial tumuli of British chieftains dating to before the (so-called)
conquest. At the same time, leaders of the Dobunni, the Iceni, the
Trinovantes and the Atrebates minted their coinage using dies which are
identical to those used under Augustus and Tiberius, with inscriptions
in immaculate Latin. Strabo, writing in the reign of Augustus, states
that visiting British aristocrats in Rome were not uncommon.
One way of getting to be a fully-paid-up Roman, which would pass on to
your descendants, was to join the Roman army. If you weren't already a
citizen you couldn't serve in the legions, the regular heavy infantry,
but you could always enlist in what were called the Auxiliarii - mostly
light infantry and cavalry, drawn originally from states allied to Rome.
If you survived 25 years in one of these units - or did something really
heroic to deserve the award earlier - you would be paid off with a
certificate of Roman citizenship and a grant of land for you and your
family. If you were a barbarian king's son and sent to Rome for your
further education (a thing which Augustus encouraged), you could be
offered the rank of legate and the command of one of these auxiliary
units.
The Romans in Britain
In the Roman army that the Emperor Claudius sent to Britain in 43 CE,
there were at least twice as many of these hopeful non-Romans as there
were Romans. There were Celts from lands as far apart as modern-day
Spain and Bulgaria, there were Greeks, Arabs, North Africans, even by
then a few Germans. All thinking of themselves as Roman - albeit Greek
Romans, Iberian Romans, Arab Romans, and so on.
In the Roman army you worshipped the official gods of Rome when on
parade, but off duty you could practise whatever kind of religion you
liked, to whatever gods you wished. Any religion was OK so long as it
didn't disrespect the official gods of Rome. These diverse gods, from
all over the Empire, including some from Gaul already known to the
Britons, also came to Britain, as many dedications attest. The Roman
army was an incredible melting-pot of beliefs and cultures, mixing
religious beliefs and pouring them into a new mould which was - in a
very vague and general sense - Roman. Rome changed the foreigners, and
then the foreigners changed Rome.
With the Roman army also came another army of tradespeople and other
opportunists, selling goods and services, first to the soldiers, then to
the locals, who themselves were at least as likely to want to trade with
the strangers as to want to kill them. It was not so much a military
invasion as a cultural infusion, which had started over 200 years
earlier when the wine trade to Britain from the Mediterranean was big
business.
So - having deconstructed these people called the Romans, some of whom
were already in Britain before the invasion, let's have a look at what
they did when they arrived in force. Did they enslave those who resisted
them? Of course. Throughout Iron Age Europe, taking slaves was one of
the most profitable aspects of warfare. However, the concept of slavery
in Roman society differed enormously from what is understood by slavery
today, and could actually represent a chance of upward social mobility
denied to the lower classes of traditional, native Celtic society.
Whose ancestors?
Were the native peoples of Britain 'our' ancestors? We are not sure.
Recent genetic research into mitochondrial DNA indicates that at least
some of them probably were on the female side, but it seems silly to
assume that all our forbears exclusively were insular Celts - and just
as ridiculous to claim that all our ancestors were all Germanic, or even
- as we have defined it - all Roman. Unfortunately we still find today
that a disturbing number of pagans mistake ethnicity for culture, and
still deal in erroneous, 19thC. concepts of 'race'. Celts, Romans,
Anglo-Saxons, Jews, are not different races any more than being American
is in itself a racial characteristic. What identifies such peoples is
their participation in a certain kind of cultural pattern, of which
language and belief are a part.
The relative absence of racist values in Roman society is well-
documented, and the adoptive nature of the Roman extended family -
epitomised by Luperca the she-wolf who fostered Romulus and Remus -
indicates strongly that while family ancestry was held to be important,
genetics alone did not determine ancestry. For a Roman, there was only
one race one could belong to - the human race. The thing that mattered
was to be truly, fully human - in other words, as they saw it, Roman. No
human being was debarred from this. Even barbarian slaves became Roman
citizens.
So now, having established that we have no ancestral claim to the
Islands of Britain, that the Romans are as likely to have been our
ancestors as not, that everybody was enslaving everybody else as a part
of normal economic activity and that it wasn't necessarily a bad thing,
only the last part of the question remains: Did the Romans impose their
culture and religion on Britain?
What do you mean, "Roman go home"? I was born here…
We have already indicated that in some respects the material culture of
the Roman world was welcomed by at least some Britons. We know also that
there were some who rejected it - at least, certain aristocrats with a
stake in the old order did, with more to lose in its passing than they
thought they stood to gain from the new - and were able to motivate
their followers to resist it to the death. It is harder to tell whether
the spiritual culture was accepted or rejected in the same way. The
archaeological evidence, such as it is, broadly indicates that in
Western Europe a whole century had to pass - the maximum span of a
lifetime's memory, if you will - before Romanization was fully
established in an annexed territory, and perhaps another century before
this was consolidated in full engagement in the Roman material culture,
centred as it was on the economics of urban living. Economic and
political problems in the Empire - as well as greater cultural
differences with the northern tribes - inhibited this process in the
northern half of Britain, which remained more or less a military zone
until the Empire disintegrated in the 5thC. CE.
But even in the military zone, townships - called vici - grew up around
the military bases and a two-way traffic of cultures and ideas began.
Soldiers married local girls, local lads joined up. Some cult statues of
gods reflect this new relationship: Mercury, for example, is sometimes
shown paired with Rosmerta, a local goddess of whom little is known, but
presumably she and Mercury had a lot in common. Roman citizens dedicated
altars to local gods, non-citizens with Celtic names dedicated altars to
Roman gods.
Throughout the period, cult shrines to local gods seem to have
prospered. Sometimes the god continued to be worshipped there alone,
such as Coventina at Carrawburgh on Hadrian's Wall, and sometimes the
deity's name was paired with a Roman equivalent, as seen in the temple
to Sulis Minerva at Bath. There is no evidence we know of to suggest
that as Roman ways developed in Britain, dedications to local gods
decreased, while those made to imported Roman gods increased. If
anything, the reverse would seem to be true, for the Romans even added
to the local pantheon by naming the Genius Britanniae, the divine spirit
of Britain herself.
So, all things considered, we think that the Roman contribution to the
spiritual life of Britain, presenting people with real spiritual choices
such as we have in today's society, is nothing to regret. We would urge
those who do to reconsider events like Boudicca's uprising, or the
destruction of the Druid sanctuary at Mona, to look at them in a broader
historical context, and consider whether perhaps they were exceptions
that proved the rule. They might also want to think about reading a few
more books, and visiting some museums, to examine primary sources for
evidence.
For Further Reading
CREIGHTON, J, (2000): Coins and Power in Late Iron Age Britain,
Cambridge
CREIGHTON, J, (2001): The Iron Age-Roman Transition, in JAMES S, &
MILLETT, M (eds) Britons and Romans: Advancing an Archaeological Agenda,
CBA Research Report 125
DE LA BEDOYERE G, (1999): Companion to Roman Britain, Stroud
GREEN, M (1983): The Gods of Roman Britain, Aylesbury
HENIG, M (1984): Religion in Roman Britain, London
HENIG, M (1998) Togidubnus and the Roman Liberation, CBA no.37
JAMES, S (1999): The Atlantic Celts: Ancient People or Modern Tradition?,
Oxford
MILLET, M, (1990): The Romanization of Britain: An Essay in
Archaeological Interpretation, Cambridge
PEDDIE, J (1987): Invasion: The Roman Conquest of Britain, New York
RANKIN, D (1996): Celts and the Classical World, London
REECE, R (1998): My Roman Britain, Cotswold Studies 3, Cirencester
WEBSTER, G (1980): The Roman Invasion of Britain, London