sign in sign up
<<
Home , Aedui, Alesia (city), Allobroges, Atrebates, Carnutes, Cenabum

“Celtic” Oppida

John Collis

(Respondent: Greg Woolf)

I will start by stating that I do not believe the sites our discussion. So, what sorts of archaeological feat­ which I am defiling with qualify as “city-states”; ures might we expect for our “city” and “tribal” indeed, in the past I have drawn a contrast between the states? city-states of the Mediterranean littoral and the inland The area with which I am dealing lies mainly “tribal states” of central and northern . However, within central and northern , , and their inclusion within the ambit of this symposium is west of the (Collis [1984a-b], [1995a- useful for two reasons. Firstly, if a class of “city-state” bl). This is the area conquered by in is to be defined, it is necessary to define the character­ 58-51 B.C.. In his Commentaries he refers on istics with reference to what is, or is not, shared with numerous occasions to “oppida”, sites often of urban similar types of simple state or quasi-state formations. character, and apparently all with some form of Secondly, the written documentary sources are some­ defences. Some of the sites he mentions are readily what thin, or even non-existent, for these sites; there­ recognisable as predecessors to Roman and modern fore archaeology must produce much of the data for towns (Fig. 1) - Vesontio (Besançon), Lutetia (Paris),

Fig. 1. Sites mentioned by Caesar in the De Bello Galileo. 230 John Collis

Durocortorum (), and (Bourges) - large size with the Gallic and central European sites while others have been deserted, or failed to develop - (Ulaca is about 80ha). These Spanish sites may start as (Mont Beuvray), (Plateau de Mer- early as the third century B.C. dogne), (Alise-Ste.-Reine). The sites tend to be I prefer not to use ethnic terms such as “Celtic” to large (80-350 ha), though some are smaller, and a describe these sites (cp. Cunliffe 11997]). There were small number are even larger (Fig. 2). They tend to lie “oppida” in northern in an area occupied by the in defensive positions, have large ramparts around , but these sites may well have had more in them, and were generally occupied from the last common with, for instance, Etruscan sites, and so may quarter of the second century B.C. until the early be closer to the concept of the “city-state”. The areas Roman period (20-10 B.C.) or longer. traditionally assigned to the in Spain are Similar sites are found east of the Rhine, in southern far from uniform - some sites seem to confirm to the and central Germany, Austria and the Czech Republic, group I have just defined as “tribal states”, others have but for these sites we have minimal documentary evi­ more the characteristics of city-states (e.g. Lérida). dence, and so we must rely on analogies with the Gal­ We should not prejudge the situation by assuming lic sites. However, some of the central European sites ethnic homogeneity; Greece, after all, had both city- start earlier than those in western Europe, around the states and ethne. middle of the second century B.C. Further east there are related sites in Slovakia and on the Hungarian Plain, for instance Tabán-Gellerthegy at Budapest, or The Sources Zemplin in Slovakia. These sites have a small defend­ We only have contemporary written sources from out­ ed area, but large undefended suburbs. Finally there siders, from writers from the Greek and Roman are analogous sites in central Spain, though the internal worlds; only Caesar can claim to have observed the layout of these sites is rather different (e.g. Úlaca near sites first-hand. was writing two generations Avila). They share the defensive characteristics and later, and leaned heavily on Caesar; the work of Pom-

Fig. 2. Distribution of oppida and tribes in Gaul. “Celtic” Oppida 231 peius Trogus, whose Gallic grandfather accompanied Celtiberi. There is a confusion in the ancient literature Caesar, only survives in abridged form in the late between the terms Galli, Galatae and Celtae, with Roman author Justinus. Other sources are either different authors using the terms in different ways. derived, or are not particularly informative, often The modern usage of “Celts” is different again, being giving only the names of peoples and places, with based purely on language, but this certainly does not little description (e.g. and Posidonius). We agree with the ancient definitions. have no detailed descriptions of constitutions or of Tribal names. These were regularly used as the sites. One or two much later sources can provide snip­ normal expression to describe the tribal states of Gaul, pets of information; Sidonius Apollonaris in the fifth and were apparently used by the natives as well. century A.D. was urging the Arvemi to remember These are the largest political groupings to be found, their history; and information on tribal boundaries with apparently fairly well-defined territorial bound­ may perhaps be gleaned from the boundaries of bish­ aries. They are referred to as civitates or eOvri by the oprics recorded in medieval and later sources. Romans and . On the physical characteristics of the sites, on . These were subgroups of tribes, with their chronology, settlement patterns, trade and industry, own distinct names, e.g. according to , in the fifth we are almost entirely dependent on archaeology. century B.C. one of the pagi of the were called Extensive excavations, giving us usable information the . Only a small number of pagi can be on town layout, with partial plans, are available from identified by name, mainly from Roman inscriptions. about a dozen sites. In the 1950s and 1960s several sites in Czechoslovakia were explored on a large scale, while in southern Germany the massive excava­ Administrative and Political Structures tions at Manching, which have stripped several Inter-tribal links. Four types of formal link are hectares of the site’s 330 ha area, are a major point of recorded by Caesar. reference. Most recently excavations in the Aisne (1) A formal meeting of almost all the tribes of valley have given us partial plans from Condé-sur- Gaul met at Bibracte to choose a leader of the joint Suippe and Villenueve-St.-Germain (Haselgrove force against the Romans; this seems to have been [1995]; Roymans [1990]), and likewise for Levroux without precedent. in central France (Audouze and Büchsenschutz (2) An annual meeting of the in the territory [1991]; Büchsenschütz [1995]; Woolf [1993]). The of the ; its function is unknown. large excavations at Mont Beuvray are providing (3) Intermarriage between the aristocracy of dif­ important information concerning the evolution of a ferent tribes to seal political agreements (e.g. the links major , the ancient Bibracte, into a Roman of the Aeduan with the Helvetian Orge- town, up to its abandonment in favour of the more torix). accessible site of Augustodunum () around 10 (4) Some tribes were “clients” of others. Appar­ B.C. (Goudineau and Peyre [1993]). ently these were small tribes seeking protection rather than tribes who had been defeated (e.g. the Velavii and the Gaballi were clients of the Arvemi); it seems Ethnic Classifications that such supporters would be expected to send armed C>bXov and gens. These terms are used by Greek and assistance in times of warfare, but we do not know Roman authors to signify major groupings of peoples what other arrangements there may have been. - Iberi (Iberians), Galli/Galatae (), , Tribal organisation. Like contemporary states in Britanni. The basis of these groupings seems largely the Mediterranean, the Gallic states were in a state of to be language, but also in part geographical location oscillation between oligarchy and kingship. Ac­ (e.g. on the one hand Germani could live in Gallia but cording to Caesar, the dominant ethos was in favour were still Germani', however, Britanni spoke a lan­ of oligarchy (e.g. Celtillus, the father of Vercingé­ guage similar to Galli, but were not Galli because torix, was killed by the Arvemi for aspiring to the they lived in Britannia). kingship). Livy mentions kings as early as the fifth Ethnic sub-groupings. Caesar records sub-group­ century B.C. (Ambigatus of the Bituriges Cubi), but ings in Gaul (, Aquitani and Celtae), distin­ the earliest contemporary mention is in Posidonius, guished, according to him, by different languages and talking of Luemios and Bituitos, the second-century customs. He claims the Celtae recognised themselves B.C. kings of the (Tierney [I960]). Caesar as Celts, but by the Romans they were termed Galli. imposed kingship on a number of tribes (e.g. Com- We encounter similar groups in Spain, e.g. the mius of the ). 232 John Collis

The constitution of the Aedui was oligarchic, con­ (25%), it would seem that all free adult males had the trolled by a small number of aristocratic families (as right to bear arms. The Gauls were famed for their Caesar tells us was usual in Gaul - he considered the cavalry, and it seems likely that this group formed an majority of the population to be little more than aristocratic elite (spurs turn up in the rich class of slaves). There were some constitutional arrangements burials, such as at Goeblingen- - see Metzler to prevent private individuals or families obtaining [forthcoming]). We also know that there were other too much power: e.g. it was not allowed for a member types of prestige weapons, such as chain mail, and of a family to become (chief magistrate) if a helmets; and also some of the swords are of excep­ living member of the family had already held that tionally high quality, consisting of thin strips of steel office; the position was only held for one year. We welded together, and often etched and stamped to hear of a number of institutions, though we do not show their quality. Even so, normal swords were know if these were normal in most tribes. probably not carried by the rank and file of the army, A “senatus”. Caesar uses this term to most of whom would have probably carried spears describe some sort of controlling body among the and pikes. Thus the army, while reflecting the aristo­ Aedui; it usually met at Bibracte, but he mentions it cratic nature of the society, would also have been sub­ meeting at another oppidum on one occasion, at ject to democratic pressures, as force was certainly Decetia. Other tribes may have had similar bodies, but threatened on occasion, if not used (e.g. Dumnorix’ we do not know its size or how membership was supporters turning up armed at the state auctions of decided. the Aedui). Elected magistrates. Several tribes had magistrates, and in some cases they were elected, but we do not know by whom. One of the magistrates of the Nomenclature had the right to declare war. The names of the tribes were established before the Clientship. The power of individuals was based development of urbanisation in Gaul. Some tribal upon clientship, apparently very similar to that which names were in existence by the third century (e.g. operated in Rome. Ties were strengthened through recorded by Polybius), but later authors such as Livy marriage alliances. name tribes when relating events as early as the fifth Assemblies. The only evidence we have for deci­ century B.C.. Thus, names of tribes and of urban cen­ sion-making assemblies is among the Aedui. It was an tres are not linked in the . In the late Roman annual auction of the right to collect tolls from mer­ period, especially in northern and western Gaul, the chants; Dumnorix controlled it by bringing his sup­ name of the capital was often suppressed in porters along with their weapons. The only other sort favour of the name of the tribe (e.g. Lutetia Parisorum of assembly recorded was the mustering of the troops (Paris), Remorum (Reims), Avaricum for battle; among the Treveri, the last warrior to turn Biturigum (Bourges). This initial lack of linkage of up would be sacrificed to the gods. The order for the the name of the tribe and of the city forms a contrast muster to take place was decided by the magistrate, with the linkage of the names of city-states and that of but there is no evidence that decisions were made by their citizens (Romans, Athenians). the whole army (e.g. agreeing to war).

We hear nothing about citizenship, or even that the Coinage concept existed. The belief that a “warrior aristo­ We do not know who had the right to produce coins, cracy” controlled Gallic society at this time is a or what controls there may have been. Many coins are “Celtic myth” with no historical foundation. We also uninscribed or only bear inscriptions taken from the do not know what the role of the pagi was in terms of coins they imitate (e.g. MALEA from the coins of administration. There is some evidence in the Roman ). Some inscriptions are the names of indi­ period that they had a role in the administration of cult viduals who are mentioned by Caesar as members of and religious activities; it has also been suggested that the aristocracy (Vercingétorix, Epasnactos) rather they may have played a role in the establishment of than as kings. In other cases, especially where two oppida in tribes where there are several such sites. names appear, we may be dealing with magistrates. To judge from the figures quoted by Caesar of the Tribal names are extremely rare, and often the reading numbers of the who took part in the migra­ or interpretation is disputed. Except for the dynastic tion, and the numbers of those who were armed coinage of Britain, names of towns do not appear; this “Celtic” Oppida 233 is another area of contrast with the sites on the hectares (the defended coastal sites of the in Mediterranean coast, be they Greek (e.g. Marseilles) ). Elsewhere oppida can enclose up to 1800 or Iberian or Celtiberian. ha (the Heidengraben bei in southern Germany). We will ignore the smaller coastal and hill­ forts; their size and the nature of the occupation inside Spatial Characteristics them do not suggest they have an urban character. The Tribal boundaries. Though Caesar uses rivers to nature of the larger oppida seems to be quite variable. define the boundaries between the major ethnic At one end of the spectrum are sites such as Mont groups (Belgae, Celtae, Aquitani, Germani), little else Beuvray which have evidence of extensive occupation is recorded of tribal boundaries in the Iron Age. over a considerable period of time. In contrast, some Indeed even the concept may be false if membership sites are only occupied briefly for a generation or less, of the group was through links of genealogy or though the scale of the occupation seems urban-like; clientship rather than through living in a defined terri­ other sites seem never to have had any large-scale tory. The location of the tribes is known mainly occupation, unless it was of a very temporary nature. through the work of Greek geographers such as Strabo In a couple of areas there is a succession of sites of and who assign towns to specific tribes. Cer­ short duration, with a permanent site only being estab­ tain Roman and later place-names (e.g. Fines, lished in the early Roman period; the best examples Iguerande) refer to sites on or near the Roman admin­ are in the Aisne valley (Villeneuve-St.-Germain, istrative boundaries, and we can also use inscribed Pommiers, Soissons), and in the (Corent, Roman milestones in some cases. These administra­ Gondole, Gergovie, Clermont-Ferrand). tive boundaries often remained in use into the Caesar refers to the Helvetii as having 20 oppida', medieval period as the limits of bishoprics. Though archaeology has not been able to locate so many sites we cannot argue in detail in individual cases that Iron in their territory. Some may be concealed beneath Age tribal boundaries, Roman administrative bound­ modem settlements (e.g. sites like Paris and Bourges aries, and those of medieval bishoprics are indeed the are only known because of the documentary evidence same, there is certainly an approximate correlation, we have from Caesar’s accounts), and also there may which gives us at least a feeling for scale. be some mismatch between Caesar’s concept of an No figures are available for tribal areas, but they are oppidum and that of modem archaeologists. Tribes in certainly larger than those quoted for city-states (e.g. which urbanisation had taken place usually had one about 3000 km2). The territory of the Arvemi meas­ pre-eminent site, but there seems to have been great ured roughly 100 by 200 km2, and so at about 20000 variability. At one extreme there may only have been square kilometres was several times the size of the one site with urban characteristics, similar to the city-state, and this excludes the territory of client “solar central place” system described by Carole states. The pagus boundaries are unknown, but they Smith in Japan (Smith [1976]). One example of this is would equate more to the size of a city-state. the Arverni; though other possible defended sites are Settlement hierarchies. Caesar several times uses known in their territory, nothing compares with the a set of terms to denote the settlement hierarchy: central site of Gergovie. In this context it is worth oppidum (town), (village) and aedificium noting that some of these oppida are very much larger (building, farm); occasionally he uses other terms than the Roman towns that succeeded them, and the such as urbs (city) for some of the oppida. The word scale and density of the occupation suggest they sup­ oppidum should indicate some form of defensive site, ported larger populations too; compare the size of the perhaps translating some Gallic term (Jdunon). Strabo Iron Age oppidum of Manching in (330 ha) is less specific; the term he usually uses for the Latin with that of London, the largest city in , oppidum is simply nôXtç. One exception is the site of at about 100 ha. I have suggested that this may be a Bibracte which he describes as a (ppoiptov (strong­ contrast between a primitive monopolistic system in hold, garrison), in contrast to the nôÀtç of Cabillonum which there were no rivals competing with the main (Chalons, the port of the Aedui on the Saône). The site, and more advanced competitive systems with capital of the , Vienna (Vienne), he states secondary sites vying with the primate city (Collis had expanded from a Kcopri (village) to a metropolis. [1984b]). However, there seems to be a variety, as in Archaeologically the sites described by Caesar as the case of the 20 oppida of the Helvetii, and the oppida show great variation, firstly in size, from over Bituriges possessed several densely occupied oppida 300 ha (Mont Beuvray/Bibracte), to only a few (Levroux, Chateaumeillant, Argenton) though Bour- 234 John Collis ges seems to have been the primate city. The Aedui Gorbea and Gran-Aymerich [1991]). These symbolic seem to have had two major settlements: the “capital” aspects of town layout are well documented in histor­ at Bibracte, and the port at Cabillonum. ical societies (e.g. Roman and Etruscan) but are diffi­ The term vicus is assumed to refer to small open cult to identify from purely archaeological data. settlements, mainly of an industrial character. In some There is great variation in the range of types of cases they are contemporary with the oppida (e.g. building found on these sites, but only rarely are strat­ Roanne and Feurs among the Segusiavi - the latter ified sequences found with living surfaces and floors was to become the civitas capital; and Saumeray surviving intact, so the definition of individual build­ among the Carnutes). Often, however, they seem to ings and their functional interpretation (unless there is pre-date the oppida, and were abandoned at the time some distinctive deposition of debris from occupa­ the oppida were founded (Levroux, Aulnat) or dimin­ tion) is even more difficult. However, at Manching, ished in importance (Roanne, Feurs). Their role in a which has produced the greatest range of recognisable “hierarchy” is thus ambiguous. house plans, there is a range of large store houses, In many areas archaeology has failed to identify the bams, and smaller buildings which seem to be used as aedificia referred to by Caesar. Around Clermont-Fer­ workshops (and presumably the dwelling houses of rand sites of this class seem to be abandoned at the the craftspeople as well). Tools help us to identify the time of the founding of the first oppidum, and only range of sometimes very specialised crafts beyond the reappear some time after the Roman conquest. In obvious blacksmiths, carpenters, bronze founders, and Champagne the burial evidence leather workers, potters, etc.; for instance, goldsmiths, indicates that the elite class lived on some of these jewellers, saddlers, and others are clearly represented. sites (Goeblingen-Nospelt, Clemency) rather than in The role of the vici and oppida as centres of produc­ the nearby oppidum (), though they may well tion is not disputed, and workshops are concentrated have moved seasonally between their country estates along the main thoroughfares for traffic, such as the and the town as the centre of power and government. road which ran from the east to the west gate at Manching, or through the main entrance at the Porte du Rebout at Mont Beuvray. Urban Layout More problematic, however, are the so-called “pal­ Most of the oppida represent deliberate foundations isade” enclosures which have been found at a number rather than a gradual evolution. The provision, in most of sites. They consist of areas enclosed by a wooden cases, of a bank and ditch defined the occupation area, fence or stockade, enclosing a number of structures. creating a contrast between what was within, and One particularly large one at Manching, measuring what was without, and also allowing control and sur­ some 75 m2, may, on the evidence of the distribution veillance of the population at the points of entry, at the of horse gear, have had stables along one side. Some gateways. At some sites we can see the expansion, or have a clearly recognisable main dwelling house, and contraction, of the enclosed area, and occasionally, large barns or storehouses up to 40x5m in size. Often especially in central and eastern Europe, occupation the palisade enclosures contain evidence of industrial could take place outside the gates, even developing activity, especially iron working, and from the into extensive suburbs. On some sites in the west, e.g. example at Manching there was a concentration of Mont Beuvray, this space outside the gates was the moulds which are usually interpreted as for the largely reserved for the dead, though in most areas we manufacture of flans for coins. Some see these do not know how the dead were disposed of. enclosures as working farms; others as the residences The defined area was usually given a planned of the elite class, the equivalent of the courtyard layout, with a rectilinear plan as at Condé-sur-Suippe house in Greek and Roman cities (these make their or at the Titelberg. The sites of Villeneuve-St.-Ger­ appearance at Mont Beuvray within a decade or two main and Pommiers were divided into quadrants by after the conquest). Perhaps the two interpretations ditches (or subterranean buildings, depending on the are not mutually exclusive, with the enclosures interpretation), which cut right across the site, pos­ marking the residences of an elite land-owning class, sibly defining different areas of activity, or social but whose lives were not so divorced from the groupings. At Mont Beuvray a monumental stone realities of agricultural and even industrial production basin marks the spot which may have been the base as the elite in the classical world. point from which the settlement was laid out, appar­ With the exception of temple sites (which are, in ently following astronomical alignments (Almagro- fact, rare and generally unpretentious in comparison “Celtic” Oppida 235 with rural temples), no “public” buildings can be Population recognised on pre-conquest sites. The Spanish sites The only figures we have for population sizes comes such as Ulaca are an exception, as here large stone from Caesar, and may well have been exaggerated for structures of apparently cult significance are known. political reasons. The figures that he gives for the Hel- One or two of the buildings at Manching are some­ vetii and their allies who took part in the abortive what larger, or have more massive postholes than the attempt at migration were from documents captured average, but their siting does not suggest any special from the Helvetii after their defeat, and includes all roles. Caesar mentions a “market place” at , classes, combatants and non-combatants. Those who but no special open spaces are known from archae­ bore arms form a quarter of the population (those ology (except, perhaps, the exceptionally wide main excluded include women, children and old people); road at Mont Beuvray). Open spaces where meetings this implies that all male adults were armed. The only could take place presumably existed, but no covered other tribal figures we have for the total population is meeting places, which the weather might demand, for the who brought all the members of the have been found. Public buildings such as fora and tribe into their oppidum-, the numbers relate to those basilicae were usually built, at earliest, three of four sold into slavery. We also have the numbers killed or generations after the Roman conquest. captured at the oppidum of Avaricum but this does not include the whole of the tribe of the Bituriges Cubi.

Tribe total warriors oppidum population reference Helvetii 263,000 65,750 BG 1-29 Tulungi 36,000 9,000 BG 1-29 Latobici 14,000 3,500 BG 1-29 23,000 4,750 BG 1-29 32,000 8,000 BG 1-29 Atuatuci 57,000 unnamed BG 11-33 Bituriges Avaricum 80,000 BG VII-28

Production Some sorts of exploitation were naturally dictated by As already mentioned, there is plentiful evidence of the availability of raw materials - salt production, industrial activity in the oppida. This may take the mining for metals. Activities such as the smelting of form of specialist installations, such as pottery kilns metals took place on the spot, with the finished raw (though these are not common on the major sites), or materials being traded, in the form of ingots of metal, hearths for melting and casting bronze (like the work­ or blocks of salt. Pottery production too was dispersed shop recently excavated at the Porte du Rebout at to where the clay and fuel were available, and some Mont Beuvray where brooches were the main item vici, such as Sissach in Switzerland, became specialist produced). Secondly, there are the tools used for craft pottery centres. But lack of information on the range activities; at Manching the range implies highly spe­ of activities on smaller farming settlements prevents a cialised craftsmen, for instance in the types of full answer to these questions (small-scale iron hammer needed for everything from heavy smithing, smithing, at least, seems widespread). On the other for swords and ploughshares, to fine delicate exam­ hand, there are hints in the distribution of workshop ples for jewellery. Thirdly, there is the discarded activities at Manching that there may have been spe­ debris of manufacture - faulty castings, wasters from cialist groups coming into existence on the oppida, pottery kilns, slags of various kinds, ingots of metal or similar to the guilds that are documented in the glass, or moulds for bronze equipment or coin flans. Roman and medieval worlds. All these demonstrate that the oppida and the vzcz per­ formed a key role in industrial production. Argument, however, continues as to what extent Trade these sites acted as “central places” to supply sur­ Oppida tend not to be located to best exploit the rounding settlements with manufactured goods, or richest agricultural soils; they are located either on had a monopoly over certain types of production. ecological boundaries, or in highland environments 236 John Collis

(e.g. Mont Beuvray). Many are located on or near have been identified, the so-called Fürstensitze, with major rivers, or controlling land routes (e.g. on water­ concentrations of imported Mediterranean goods, a sheds). The implications are that trade was considered defended hilltop which has been interpreted as a more important than the food supply, and that oppida royal residence, and rich burials which supposedly relied on importing much of their food, be it only from indicate a hierarchy of “chieftains” who controlled the a few kilometres away. Given the costs of overland trade and production through a “prestige goods transport of goods and river transport, in comparison economy”. In fact only three sites conform more or to the costs of sea transport, it is unlikely that staples less to the ideal model: the Heuneburg on the upper such as grain were moving long distances, except per­ , the Asperg on the , and Mont Lassois haps for export. on the Seine (Pare [1991]). However, the most exten­ In contrast there is plentiful evidence for the move­ sively researched of this group, around Asperg (Biel ment of luxury goods, most especially wine. Judging [1985]), suggests the reality may be somewhat differ­ by both the documentary evidence, and the huge ent. Unfortunately the itself is inaccess­ quantities of amphorae which turn up in oppida such ible, and the site, if it existed, seems to have been as Corent and Mont Beuvray, this trade was consider­ largely destroyed by medieval and more modem forti­ able. From documentary sources, especially Posido­ fications. Around it there is a cluster of small settle­ nius and Caesar, it would seem that Italian merchants ments, and the rich burials seem to be associated with controlled the movement of these goods. We have evi­ these rather than with the defended site. They also dence from Caesar of Roman merchants resident on produce evidence of industrial activity, e.g. metal­ some oppida (some were killed in uprisings), and epi­ working, and imported goods, suggesting that the cen­ graphic evidence from the Magdalensberg in Austria tral site by no means held a monopoly. The closest for traders resident on the site representing the inter­ parallels for Asperg lie with sites like Proto­ ests of major Roman families. However, we have no Geometric and Geometric Athens. The sites which direct evidence for a class of traders in Gallic society. produce the imports or rich burials lie 100 km or more Coinage, if used for market exchange, was oper­ apart, somewhat more than one would expect under ating mainly at a local level (though individual coins the “city-state” model. Unfortunately we have no could move considerable distances). Long-distance useful documentary evidence in the Greek sources for trade in part relied on exchange of high value metals this period. (gold is mentioned at the Magdalensberg), but espe­ The fifth century B.C. Most of the centres of Hall- cially on credit (see the accounts on the walls of the statt D disappear at the end of the sixth century, cellars at the Magdalensberg), and also on barter. Tolls though imported goods and wealthy burials still con­ were demanded (and paid) for the passage of goods. tinue in central Europe, but in areas adjacent to (espe­ In return, presumably, raw materials and slaves were cially north of) the earlier centres. One centre that the main products traded back to the Mediterranean, a does continue is Bourges; it has imports, but not espe­ situation of Mediterranean dominance more familiar cially wealthy burials. Writing several centuries later, in core/periphery relations than in peer polity inter­ Livy names the Bituriges Cubi under their king Ambi- action. gatus, as the most powerful tribe in Gaul, and as the instigators of the Gallic invasions of northern Italy and central Europe at the end of the fifth century. If Origins we accept Livy’s statment at face value (and there is As previously mentioned, the oppida came into exist­ nothing in their later history to suggest why Livy ence as a result of a process similar to that of syn- might have exaggerated the power of the Bituriges oikism as recorded in Greece. This implies the prior Cubi), then it indicates that the tribal organisation was existence of an organisation capable of making polit­ already in existence then. It had certainly become ical decisions, and with a social and economic system crystallised by the time of Polybius in the third cen­ capable of supporting urbanisation. In this section I tury B.C. wish to explore the background to this process (Collis Fourth-second centuries B.C. The centuries fol­ [1984b], [1995a]). lowing the period of apparently peaceful contact are The sixth century B.C. This is a period when con­ marked by a demise of the trade, and of armed inva­ nections between central France/southem Germany sion of the Mediterranean countries by groups from and the Mediterranean countries reached a high point. central and western Europe. It is a period when, in Certain centres of this trade and social development central Europe, it is difficult to identify any central- “Celtic” Oppida 237 ising features in the archaeological evidence - no (or plateau of Corent encompasses some 75 ha, only half few) wealthy burials, no central places, either defen­ of it was apparently densely occupied, and that in­ sive, ritual, or demographic (Collis [1995b]). The cludes a ritual area. only possible exceptions are two or three cult sites In some areas there is only a partial abandonment where enclosures were constructed, or deposition of the open sites, e.g. among the Segusiavi where starts to take place, perhaps at the beginning of the Roanne and Feurs contract when the oppida of Jœuvre third century (at Gournay-sur-Aronde, or at the and Crêt Châtelard were established. Here the oppida eponymous site of La Tène). With the second century never really develop as urban centres, and it is the this evidence begins to accelerate, with more sites open sites which become major Roman centres. Else­ becoming recognisable, and an increasing amount of where we either know little or nothing about what pre­ deposition, especially of weapons, but also of humans ceded the oppida (e.g. Mont Beuvray) and we can and animals. This continues on, reaching its height in only assume that they were formed through syn­ the period of the oppida. Caesar himself was certainly oikism; or we do not know what the impact was, if aware of the religiosity of the Gauls, and of the depo­ any, on the previous settlements. In Champagne and sition of booty from wars, and of human sacrifice, but in /Luxembourg many settlements did continue. he makes no mention of whether this was happening The re-organisation of the province under Agrippa at a tribal, or at a supra-tribal level. On the basis of the and saw the establishment of a local govern­ number of sites known in Belgic Gaul, Roymans ment based on the tribal civitas, and many Iron Age (1990) has suggested that the organisation of cult settlements (or their successors) evolved into civitas activities may have been organised at the level of the capitals, with their fora, basilicae, and local councils. pagus; on the other hand, the number of human bones that were deposited at Ribemont-sur-Ancre, or the numbers of swords at La Tène or at Gournay, are more Discussion suggestive of a tribal level of activity. There are several features of these “tribal states” In terms of settlements, a small number of sites which seem to contrast with the model of the “city- which are clearly more than small villages or hamlets, state”: start emerging around the end of the third century (1) the tribal territories are larger than those of the (Manching) or at the beginning of the second (Lev- city-state (the latter seem to equate more with the roux, Roanne), and some of these start taking on division of the civitas, the pagusf, (2) the limited urban characteristics, in size and in the range of activ­ figures we have from Caesar for the total populations ities represented. Around Clermont-Ferrand, in the of the tribal states suggest populations, at least for the Auvergne, there is an exceptional concentration of major ones, larger than those of the “city-state” (the sites (perhaps one every 500 m), and one at least of figures we have for client tribes are more similar) (3) these, La Grande Borne, was heavily engaged in pro­ the names of the tribes came into existence long duction, the working of various metals, bone, glass, before the urban sites were established; (4) the tribes etc. It is the period when Luernios, the “richest man in are not named after geographical features (e.g. their all Gaul” according to Posidonius, became king of the towns or territory), rather the reverse; (5) inscriptions Arverni. This is also the period when trade with the on coins generally relate to individuals, not to cities or Mediterranean starts to develop again. tribes; (6) public works, other than cult buildings, The oppida. Only for a small number of areas can bridges, defences, and roads, have not been identified; we say much about the pre-oppidum settlement pat­ (7) the origin of the urban centres resembles more that terns. In some cases we see the direct move of an of synoikism among the ethne rather than the dense entire site to a new defended site a few kilometres cluster of small villages which have been suggested away (Levroux, ), or defences put round an pre­ for sites like Athens, Rome or Veii; (8) the urban sites existing settlement (Manching). However, synoikism in these tribal states seem much larger than is general seems to be the norm, though only in one case can we among city-states; (9) it is perhaps only when city- clearly identify it: in the area around Clermont-Fer­ states start developing empires that they become rand almost all the sites in the plain of the Grande comparable, at least in the ancient world (e.g. Athens, Limagne were abandoned at the time of the founda­ Syracuse, Carthage, Rome). tion of the first oppidum on the hilltop of Corent, There are certain areas of similarity in the institu­ though it is difficult to believe that the whole of the tions found in these different types of “archaic state” population was nucleated on the one site; though the in Europe: (1) there were elected magistrates, who 238 John Collis

were supported by some sort of advisory council; (2) criteria; these can be gleaned from authors such as there were defined rules surrounding the eligibility of Caesar, but which are also reflected in the archaeolog­ candidates for magistracies aimed at preventing ical data. The characteristics of sites in central Europe control by a supreme ruler or family; (3) there was a and central Spain, for which we have less documen­ controlling oligarchy whose power was largely based tary evidence, suggest that they are similar to the on clientship; (4) these states were unstable, and Gallic sites. They contrast with the sites on the oligarchic rule was threatened by tyranny or kingship, Mediterranean littoral of southern France and eastern which could be achieved, for instance, by the display Spain, which are smaller, more homogeneous in their or use of armed power (e.g. Dumnorix), or by a characteristics, and more densely spaced; for some display of wealth and largesse (e.g. Luemios), but sites in eastern Spain, inscriptions on coins suggest these attempts were not always successful (e.g. that some of them at least were city-states. Celtillus); (5) the need for popular support was This raises the interesting question of why the essential if effective armies were to be put into the coastal sites should tend towards the characteristics of field; (6) in Gaul a quarter of the population seems to a “city-state” while those inland tend towards the have borne arms; (7) cult activities may have acted as “tribal state” or “territorial state”. In part this may be a uniting feature bringing together disparate political due to the emulation of Greek and Carthaginian groups (cf. the meetings of the Druids, the Olympic colonial settlements; in part greater self-reliance due Games, the symbolic role of Delos); (8) the state to an orientation towards the sea, in trade and fishing. played an increasingly important role in the con­ In contrast, settlement inland tended to be dispersed struction of temples and in the deposition of rich into smaller non-urban settlements, and defence relied offerings. more on alliances and mutual support along links of The characteristics which might be used by archae­ genealogy and clientship, rather than reliance on a ologists as key features to identify city-states as single defended settlement. Inland, the conditions just against tribal states include: (1) the urban sites in city- did not exist for the development of the typical city- states should show a range of characteristics which state, for instance: the port of trade as an enclave sup­ they share in common (cult buildings; public build­ plying a major empire with goods while keeping for­ ings, including ones used for administration or as­ eign influences at a distance (e.g. Hong Kong, Tyre sembly; a range of different types of private houses and Sidon); political agreement between major including those of the elite and of an artisan and or powers guaranteeing protection and neutrality of a site trading class; a range of facilities for storage and craft lying on their borders (Luxembourg, Danzig); small production); (2) the site should be relatively small in plains bounded by mountains (Athens); a foreign size, though larger and small urban sites can be colony, like the many Greek and Carthaginian en­ expected; (3) the distribution of such sites should be claves in the classical period, on the coast of the fairly dense (e.g. with around 50-60 km between Mediterranean, the Adriatic and the . “nearest neighbours”, and with a limited settlement Perhaps this contrast between inland territorial hierarchy); (4) if coinage exists, though the names of states and coastal city-states, is not confined to the rulers or magistrates may appear, there should be southern Europe, e.g. in north Africa and the northern prominence given either to the name of the city, or its Black Sea. Is it a world-wide phenomenon, and if so, symbolic representations (e.g. the Athenian owl); (5) why? low value coins may be expected to have limited and localised distributions, though high value coins, like the Athenian silver “owls”, may be used for bullion or Bibliography as standards, and have a wide distribution; (6) there I have not quoted the ancient sources in detail. Full references to should be evidence for an ideology, especially among most points made here can be found in Collis (1984b), and an the elite, oriented towards the city, e.g. as the place to update of the archaeology in the articles in Collis (ed.), forth­ coming. be buried, or to invest in the building of their private residences, rather than on country residences. Aidhouse-Green, M. (ed) 1995. 77te Celtic World (London). Almagro-Gorbea, M. & Gran-Aymerich, J. 1991. El Estanque Mon­ umental de Bihracte (Madrid). Conclusions Arnold, B. & Gibson, D.B. (eds.) 1995. Celtic Chiefdom, Celtic State (Cambridge). The sites in central and northern Gaul do not seem to Audouze, F. & Büchsenschütz, O. 1991. Town, Villages and Coun­ conform to the model of the “city-state” on several tryside of Celtic Europe (London). “Celtic” Oppida 239

Büchsenschütz, O. 1995. “The significance of major settlements in Metzler, J. forthcoming. “The Treveri and the Roman Conquest,” in European Iron Age society,” in Arnold & Gibson (eds.) 53-63. J.R. Collis (ed.) forthcoming. Biel, J. 1985. Der Keltenfürst von Hochdorf (). Pare, C. 1991. “Fürstensitze, Celts and the Mediterranean world: Collis, J.R. 1984a. The European Iron Age (London). developments in the West in the 6th and 5th Collis, J.R. 1984b. Oppida: Earliest Towns North of the centuries B.C.,” Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society (Sheffield). 52(2): 183-202. Collis, J.R. 1995a. “The First Towns,” in M. Aidhouse-Green (ed.) Roymans, N. 1990. Tribal Societies in Northern Gaul: An Anthro­ 159-75. pological Perspective (Amsterdam) Cingula 12. Collis, J.R. 1995b. “States without centers? The Middle La Tène Smith, C.A. 1986. “Exchange systems and the spatial distribution period in temperate Europe,” in Arnold & Gibson (eds.) 75-80. of elites: the organisation of stratification in agrarian societies,” Collis, J.R. (ed.) (forthcoming) New Light on Caesar’s Gaul in C.A. Smith (ed.) Regional Analysis (London), 309-74. (Sheffield). Tierney J.J. 1960. “The Celtic Ethnography of Posidonius,” Cunliffe, B.W. 1997. The Ancient Celts (Oxford). Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 60C: 189-275. Green, M.J. (ed.) 1995. The Celtic World (London). Woolf, G. 1993. “Rethinking the Oppida,” Oxford Journal of Goudineau, C. & Peyre, C. 1993. Bihracte et les Eduens: à la Archaeology 12:223-234. découverte d’un peuple gaulois (Paris). Haselgrove, C. 1995. “Late Iron Age society in Britain and north­ east Europe: structural transformation or superficial change?” in Arnold & Gibson (eds.) 80-87.