CHAPTER ONE — Aspects of Political and Social Developments in Germania and Scandinavia During the Roman Iron Age
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CHAPTER ONE — Aspects of Political and Social Developments in Germania and Scandinavia during the Roman Iron Age 1.1 Rome & Germania 1.1.1 Early Romano-Germanic Relations It is unclear when a people who may be fairly labelled ‘Germanic’ first appeared. Dates as early as the late Neolithic or early Bronze Ages have been suggested.1 A currently popular theory identifies the earliest Germanic peoples as participants in the Jastorf superculture which emerged c. 500 bc,2 though recent linguistic research on early relations between Finno-Ugric and Germanic languages argues the existence of Bronze-Age Germanic dialects.3 Certainly, however, it may be said that ‘Germanic’ peoples existed by the final centuries bc, when classical authors began to record information about them. A fuller analysis of early Germanic society and Romano-Germanic relations would far outstrip this study’s limits,4 but several important points may be touched upon. For the Germanic peoples, Rome could be both an enemy and an ideal—often both at the same time. The tensions created by such contrasts played an important role in shaping Germanic society and ideology. Conflict marked Romano-Germanic relations from the outset. Between 113 and 101 bc, the Cimbri and Teutones, tribes apparently seeking land on which to settle, proved an alarmingly serious threat to Rome.5 It is unclear whether these tribes 1Lothar Killian, Zum Ursprung der Indogermanen: Forschungen aus Linguistik, Prähistorie und Anthropologie, 2nd edn, Habelt Sachbuch, 3 (Bonn: Habelt, 1988); Lothar Killian, Zum Ursprung der Germanen, Habelt Sachbuch, 4 (Bonn: Habelt, 1988). 2Todd, pp. 10, 26; Mark B. Shchukin, Rome and the Barbarians in Central and Eastern Europe: 1st Century B.C.-1st Century A.D., BAR-IS, 542 (Oxford: BAR, 1989), pp. 31-37, 160-161; Barry Cunliffe, Greeks, Romans, and Barbarians: Spheres of Interaction (London: Batsford, 1988), pp. 33-35. 3Norbert Strade, ‘An Interdisciplinary Approach to the Role of Uralic Hunters and Gatherers in the Ethnohistory of the Early Germanic Area’, in The Roots of Peoples and Languages of Northern Eurasia I, ed. by Kyösti Julku & Kalevi Wiikpp (Turku: Societas historiae Fenno-ugricae, 1998), 168-179; Norbert Strade, ‘Det sydsamiske sprog’, in Möten i gränsland: Samer och germaner i Mellanskandinavien, ed. by Inger Zachrisson, Statens historiska museum: Monographs, 4 (Stockholm: Statens historiska museum, 1997), pp. 175-85; Jorma Koivulehto, ‘Finnland: Sprachliches’, in Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde, ed. by Johannes Hoops, Herbert Jankuhn, and others, 2nd edn (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1968-), ix, ed. by Heinrich Beck (1995), 77-89; A.D. Kylstra, ‘Das älteste Germanisch im Lichte der germanischen Lehnwortforschung’, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik, 21 (1984), 1-7. 4On early Germanic peoples, see Wolfram, The Roman Empire and Its Germanic Peoples; Kent Anderson and Frands Herschend, Germanerna och Rom, Occasional Papers in Archaeology, 13 (Uppsala: Uppsala: Institutionen för arkeologi och antik historia, Uppsala universitet, 1997); Lucien Musset, Les invasions: les vagues germaniques, Nouvelle Clio, 3rd edn (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1994); Todd, The Early Germans; Heiko Steuer, Frühgeschichtliche Sozialstrukturen in Mitteleuropa: Eine Analyse der Auswertungsmethoden des archäologischen Quellenmaterials, Abhandlung der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-Historishe Klasse Dritte Folge, 128 (Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1982); E.A. Thompson, The Early Germans (Oxford: Clarendon, 1965); Reinhard Wenskus, Stammesbildung und Verfassung: das Werden der frühmittelalterlichen Gentes (Cologne: Bohlau, 1961). 5Titius Livius, Titi Livi ab Urbe Condita Libri, ed. by Guilelmus Weissenborn and Mauritius Mueller, Bib. Teub., 4 vols (Leipzig: Teubner, 1926-1930), iv (1930), pp. 224-26 (Books 63, 65, 67, and 68); CHAPTER ONE 2 were Germanic, Celtic, or represented some Celto-Germanic confederation,6 but the Romans certainly classified them with the Germanic peoples they came to know later. The Cimbric Wars had a powerful effect on the Roman psyche, and half-a-century later Julius Caesar wasted no opportunity to remind his readers about those conflicts when he justified military intervention in Gaul (in part) as a response to the threat posed by a Germanic army crossing the Rhine.7 Caesar’s works contain, in fact, the earliest surviving uses of the term Germani.8 For political purposes, Caesar wished to draw a distinction between the Celts, as peoples who could be successfully Romanized, and the Germani, as hopeless barbarians who were to be excluded from the Roman world. In truth, it is difficult to distinguish archaeologically between Celtic and Germanic peoples of the Rhine valley.9 Nevertheless, Caesar’s choice of the Rhine as a frontier seems to have remained a reality in Roman thought until the advent of Augustus’ expansionist policies, and the Rhine frontier would gain added significance after the eventual failure of those policies in Germania. Germania was one of the Augustan Empire’s last acquisitions—and one of its first losses. Between 15 bc and ad 4, all of Germania except the Bohemian plateau (held by the Marcomannic leader Maroboduus) was under direct Roman control.10 That control ended five years later with a Germanic revolt, led by the Cheruscan noble Arminius, and slaughter of three Roman legions in the saltus Teutoburgiensis. The revolt may have been prompted at least partially by the Germanic population’s anger at Romanization’s rapid pace (especially in the matter of taxes).11 Afterwards, Rome made some efforts to Velleius Paterculus, Vellei Paterculi Historiarum ad M. Vinicium consulem libri duo, ed. by W.S. Watt, Bib. Teub. (Leipzig: Teubner, 1988), pp. 20-21, (Book 2, Chapter 12); Flavius Vegetius Renatus, P. Flavii Vegeti Renati Epitoma rei militaris, ed. by Alf Önnerfors, Bib. Teub. (Stuttgart: Teubner, 1995), p. 143-44 (Book iii, Chapter 10); Lucius Annaeus Florus, Epitome libri II, in L. Annaei Flori Epitomae libri II et P. Annii Flori fragmentvm De Vergilio oratore an poeta, ed. by Otto Rossbach, Bib. Teub. (Leipzig: Teubner, 1896), pp. 1-182 (p. 168) (Book i, Chapter 38); Shchukin, p. 35; G. Alfödy, Noricum, trans. by Anthony Birley (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1974), pp. 35-38. 6Gustav Neckel, Germanen und Kelten: Historisch-linguistisch-rassenkundliche Forschungen und Gedanken zur Geisteskrisis, Kultur und Sprache, 6 (Heidelberg: Winter, 1929), p. 24; Rolf Nierhaus, Das swebische Gräberfeld von Diersheim: Studien zur Geschichte der Germanen am Oberrhein vom gallischen Krieg bis zur alamannischen Landnahme, Römisch-germanische Forschungen, 28 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1966), p. 218, n. 133. 7Bellum Gallicum, pp. 13-25 (Book i, Chapters 31-54), 52-59 (Book 4, Chapters 1-19). 8Bellum Gallicum, p. 1 (Book i, Chapter 1). The term Germani is thought to have been first used in Posidonius’ histories, which are known only through their quotation by later authors. Posidonius does not appear to have associated the Cimbri and Teutones with the Germani, though Caesar certainly did; Shchukin, p. 32. 9Cunliffe, p. 117. 10On Romano-Germanic relations in the Augustan Age, see Erich S. Gruen, ‘The Expansion of the Empire under Augustus’, in The Augustan Empire; 43 b.c.-a.d. 69, ed. by Alan K. Bowman, Edward Champlin, and Andrew Lintott, 2nd edn, The Cambridge Ancient History, 10 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 148-97 (pp. 178-88); C. Rüger, ‘Germany’, in The Augustan Empire; 43 b.c.- a.d. 69, ed. by Alan K. Bowman, Edward Champlin, and Andrew Lintott, 2nd edn, The Cambridge Ancient History, 10 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 517-34; C.M. Wells, The German Policy of Augustus: An Examination of the Archaeological Evidence (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), pp. 3-13, 159-61, 237-38. 11Annales, pp. 35-36 (Book 1 Chapter 60); Cassius Dio Cocceianus, Dionis Cassii Cocceiani Historia romana, ed. by Ludovicus Dindorf and Ioannes Melber, Bib. Teub. 5 vols (Leipzig: Teubner, 1890-1928), iii (1928), pp. 228-33 (Book 56, Chapters 18-23); C.M. Wells, pp. 66-67, 154-59, 238-40. CHAPTER ONE 3 reconquer Germania, but these were swiftly abandoned. By 85 ad, limited advances had secured the limes between the Rhine’s and Danube’s headwaters.12 1.1.2. The Emergence of Germanic Identity? Roman authors do not seem to have used the term limes to denote a frontier boundary rather than a line of advance until the reign of Domitian (ad 81-96).13 Like Caesar’s declaration of the Rhine boundary, the late-first-century limes were bureaucratic creations. As noted in µ1.1.1, the Rhine basin’s archaeology shows no firm dividing line between the cultures on either side of the river, a situation emphasising the Rhine’s role as a medium of communication and exchange. C.R. Whittaker stressed the distinction ‘between an administrative borderline and a frontier borderland’ and argued that the apparent line of division formed by the limes should not blind us to the existence of broad frontier zones.14 Yet even though in practice a Romanized zone, perhaps unified in culture and economy, may have existed on either side of the limes, the line drawn by river and wall probably exercised a profound psychological effect. A bureaucratic state sees rivers as readily identifiable landmarks suitable for marking administrative boundaries. Roman authors, such as Tacitus, were often most comfortable identifying frontiers through geographic features, even if in reality the limes ran beyond them. Indeed, there were