The Gods of the Celts E-Book

Miranda Aldhouse Green

• Herausgeber: The History Press
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2011

Seitenzahl: 375

Beschreibung

The presence of gods was felt in every corner of the Celtic world, and influenced all areas of life in Celtic society. This fascinating book delves into these corners to examine all aspects of the gods, ritual customs, cult objects and sacred places of the ancient Celtic peoples. Miranda Green introduces the Celts and the evidence that they left behind, placing them in their geographical and chronological context, and continues on to look at Celtic cults of the sun and sky, animals and animism, mother goddesses, water gods and healers, as well as examining the influence of religion on war, death and fertility. Embracing the whole of the Celtic world from Ireland to Australia, and covering from 500 BC to AD 400, this is a rewarding overview of the evidence for Celtic religions, beliefs and practices which uses modern scholarship to bring a mysterious and captivating part of European history to life.

Leseprobe

THE GODS OF

THE CELTS

Dedication

For Stephen: to remind him of chthonic monsters, ram-horned snakes and famous pigs.

THE GODS OF

THE CELTS

MIRANDA GREEN

Front cover: The Battersea Shield, Iron Age 350-50 BC (British Museum).

First published in 1986

This edition first published in 2011

The History Press

The Mill, Brimscombe Port

Stroud, Gloucestershire, GL5 2QG

www.thehistorypress.co.uk

This ebook edition first published in 2011

All rights reserved

© Miranda Green 1986, 2004, 2011

The right of Miranda Green, to be identified as the Author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

This ebook is copyright material and must not be copied, reproduced, transferred, distributed, leased, licensed or publicly performed or used in any way except as specifically permitted in writing by the publishers, as allowed under the terms and conditions under which it was purchased or as strictly permitted by applicable copyright law. Any unauthorised distribution or use of this text may be a direct infringement of the author’s and publisher’s rights, and those responsible may be liable in law accordingly.

EPUB ISBN 978 0 7524 6811 2

MOBI ISBN 978 0 7524 6812 9

Original typesetting by The History Press

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

Prologue

1  The Celts and Religion

2  Cults of Sun and Sky

3  Fertility and the Mother-Goddesses

4  War, Death and the Underworld

5  Water-Gods and Healers

6  Animals and Animism

7  Symbolism and Imagery in Celtic Cult Expression

Bibliography

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I should like to express my gratitude to the following individuals:

Dr Stephen Green, for reading and commenting upon the book in draft and for his constant encouragement and Mrs Sharon Moyle, for typing the first draft of the manuscript. I am grateful for help in providing individual illustrations to John Dent, Archaeology Unit, Humberside County Council; Professor Barry Cunliffe, Institute of Archaeology, Oxford, and Keith Parfitt, Dover Archaeological Group.

I wish to thank the staff of the following museums for their help and for permission to publish their material: Cambridge, University Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology; Cardiff, National Museum of Wales; Carlisle Museum; Chester, Grosvenor Museum; Cirencester, Corinium Museum; Colchester and Essex Museum; Dorset County Museum; London, Trustees of the British Museum; Museum of London; Netherhall Collection, Maryport; Newcastle, University Museum of Antiquities; Nottingham University Museum; Peterborough City Museum; Sheffield City Museum; Torquay Museum.

PROLOGUE

Introducing the Celts

The Celts had no tradition of written records and therefore cannot identify themselves to us directly. They are known either archaeologically or through the writing of literate Mediterranean societies. The Celts or Keltoi (in the Greek) were first defined as such by the Greeks before 500 BC. The very earliest reference is in an account of coastal travel from Spain and southern France which is quoted by one Rufus Avienus, proconsul of Africa, in a coastal survey (Ora Maritima). Around 500 BC Celts are again mentioned by Hecataeus of Miletus. Some sixty years later, Herodotus in his Histories talked of the source of the Danube being in the territory of the Celts and stated also that these people were almost the most westerly of all Europeans.

The origin of the peoples called ‘Celts’ by classical writers has long been the subject of speculation and controversy. But it seems irrefutable that somehow, this group of peoples, whose language and material culture contained sufficient unity to be identifiable to their neighbours, had their roots in the later Bronze Age cultures of Europe. However, the Celts – whether in Britain or mainland Europe – did not suddenly appear from a specific place as the result of a single event but, rather, were people who had become ‘Celtic’ by accretion in process of time. No one culture or time should be sought as the immediate source of Celtic beginnings. Indeed it could be argued that it is futile to enquire when the Celts first appeared since the people recognised as such by Graeco-Roman authors were in fact the lineal descendants of generations stretching back as far as the Neolithic farmers of the fifth–fourth millennium BC. The process of ‘celticisation’ should thus be seen as a gradual phenomenon. The classical world, as evidenced by its writers, used the term ‘Celts’ to refer to the ‘barbarian’ peoples who occupied much of North-West and Central Europe. It should be realised that this term, perhaps carelessly applied (and at times misapplied) was employed to describe a multitude of tribes of differing ethnic traditions and varying customs. Nevertheless, as long as this is understood, it is a useful generalisation. Archaeological research has demonstrated that by the fifth century BC large tracts of Europe – from Britain to the Black Sea, and from North Italy and Yugoslavia to Belgium – shared a number of elements. By the fourth century BC the Celts were regarded by their Mediterranean neighbours as one of the four great peripheral nations of the known world. Rapid expansion took Celtic tribes into Italy around 400 BC and in 387 Rome itself was defeated. In 279 BC a group of Celts entered Greece and plundered the sacred site of Delphi; in 278 a splinter group established themselves in Asia Minor (Galatia). Whilst it is impossible to speak of a nation of Celts, processes of trade and exchange, folk-movement and convergent evolution, caused the peoples inhabiting barbarian, non-Mediterranean Europe to develop a degree of cultural homogeneity. It was this which was acknowledged by Graeco-Roman authors and which caused them to use ‘Celts’ as a unifying term. If one speaks entirely archaeologically, it is thus possible to state that Iron Age Celts originated in Central and West Central Europe.

In order to place the Celts in their prehistoric context, it is necessary to look briefly backwards beyond the recognisable emergence of the Celtic world. The later Bronze Age ‘Urnfield’ culture, commencing circa 1300 BC was roughly coincident with the decline of Mycenaean power. In Central Europe new burial rites may be observed at this time, consisting of large-scale cremation-burial in flat cemeteries (giving rise to the term ‘Urnfield’). Their very widespread occurrence around the close of the second millennium BC provides a phenomenon sufficiently coherent for some scholars to equate Urnfield peoples with proto-Celts. This European later Bronze Age is of interest in the present context for two main reasons. One is that the spread of cremation-rites suggests changes in belief about death and the afterlife. Secondly the culture is characterised in material/technological terms by the new ability of bronzesmiths to manipulate bronze into sheets to make such large items as vessels and shields. The vessels were frequently decorated with figural and abstract designs and, along with other paraphernalia, appear to reflect a more mature religious symbolism and more unified methods of religious expression. This prolific sheet-bronze production suggests also both a relatively settled time of prosperous trading and sophisticated organisation of trade-routes. The use of sheet metal vessels (sometimes mounted on wagons) in religious ritual is interesting for, by about 1200–1100 BC, we know that wetter conditions prevailed and it is suggested that this climatic change may be reflected in the water-cults possibly represented by such containers.

The reasons for the rise of the Urnfield people may be sought in the economic turmoil and folk movement, emanating partly from the east, from the region of the Black Sea: such concretions of power as the Hittite and Mycenaean Empires crumbled, giving rise to a consequent diminution of external demand on local European mineral resources. In parallel, skills were being developed by Central and East European metalsmiths. In the eighth century BC the Dorian invasions of Greece ushered in, for the first time in Central Europe, the use of horses for riding rather than merely for traction: this may mark the beginning of pastoral nomadism in Europe. The horse was certainly a symbol of an aristocratic warrior-elite, which was the main feature of later Celtic society. Riding brought with it the rich metal paraphernalia which would naturally accompany such a practice, The new wealth of Central Europe during the early first millennium BC was based partly on metal and partly on salt-mining. Piggott would see the development of Central European sheet metalworking as having association with an early wine-trade with the Mediterranean world. Certainly by the eighth century there was an expansion of peoples from their original Urnfield homelands to what would become the Celtic world incorporating, for example, Italy, the Balkans, France and Iberia.

By about 700 BC new cultural elements may be observed. New metal types associated with horse-harness are present, the distribution of which suggests raiding parties moving rapidly from one region to another. The new material culture is called ‘Hallstatt’ after the type-site in the Salzkammergut of the Hallein/Salzburg area of Austria. Ironworking on a large scale comes in for the first time in this period. The metal was known and utilised as an exotic material before this date but by the end of the eighth century BC iron was commonplace in continental Europe and, somewhat later – by about 600 BC – in Britain and Ireland. The Hallstatt culture is characterised in Central Europe by rich inhumation burial, in wooden mortuary houses under earthen barrows or mounds, with four-wheeled wagons or carts, sometimes partly dismantled. The grave evidence suggests a warrior-elite with members of the ruling class (men and women) elaborately buried. The frequent presence of not two but three sets of horse-trappings in such graves suggests the possible representation not only of the wagon-team but also of the chieftain’s own charger. From the seventh century the main item traded from the Mediterranean to the Celtic world seems to have been wine – reflected archaeologically by wine-vessel imports. The main trade the other way would certainly have included salt.

In about 500 BC the centres of power appear to have shifted north and west to the Rhineland and Marne. There is still evidence for the presence of the warrior-aristocracy, but now the burial-rite of the elite generally consisted of two-wheeled vehicle-burial, reflecting the use of a light chariot or cart. Warrior-accoutrements abound in the archaeological record, as do luxury objects often decorated for the first time with specifically Celtic art-designs. The La Tène, as this first truly Celtic culture is called (after the type-site of La Tène in Switzerland), is characterised also by the presence for the first time of what may be termed proto-towns – large sprawling fortified settlements, permanently settled hillforts or oppida, like Danebury in Britain, Alesia in France, Manching in Bavaria or the Dürrnberg in Austria. These oppida were scattered across the whole of the Celtic world from Iberia to Galatia.

We have reached the point where classical sources and archaeology converge on the Celtic peoples of the later first millennium BC and may now look in more detail at the kind of society represented by this evidence, a society basically heroic, strictly hierarchical, based on kingship and with a martial aristocracy. The evidence of archaeology, classical written sources and some of the early Irish material gives us a fairly detailed picture of swaggering heroes continually fighting and proving their ferocity and valour to their peers; squabbling over who should have the champion’s portion of pork (traditionally this went to the best warrior, along with the right to carve the chief carcase of the feast). Feasting is evidenced archaeologically in Britain: at Danebury, cauldron-hooks and spits are recorded together with remains of joints in midden deposits. The accoutrements of such warriors were spears, a long iron sword and body-covering shield and, above all, a war-chariot. Cattle-rearing (and raiding) would have been the main occupation in Ireland at least, with cattle the staple form of wealth, along with metal treasure; the unit of value was the cow. Irish sources tell us of kings and subkings, nobles and lesser nobles, freemen (landowners, priests, artists/craftsmen) and serfs. The basic unit of social structure was the derbfine or extended family, groups of these making up the tuath or tribe. Kings and sub-kings were bound to each other by oaths of allegiance; and clientdom or vasselage was an important form of relationship between higher and lower social classes. Certainly by the last few centuries BC the Celts had established a deeply stratified social structure in which craftsmen and religious specialists had their place. It is suggested that this may have been stimulated partly by long-distance trade and exposure to the wealth of the classical world which could have brought about a shift from inherited to achieved status. This increase in markets may have facilitated the client-patron relationship between the lower echelons of society and the aristocracy. Kinship-links may have weakened and political ties may have become stronger. We have hints, indeed, that the hierarchical nature of barbarian society had its roots further back in prehistory. We have already seen a warrior-elite at the very end of the Bronze Age, and Burgess would see the deepening of social stratification as early as the later second millennium BC. The client-patron relationship is especially important within the context of Celtic art. This is the main medium through which we are able to study Celtic religious expression certainly in the La Tène and Romano-Celtic periods. In the first place, in a heroic society, the aristocracy would stimulate wealth in the form of metalwork, and give it away as part of the important host-guest relationship between people of equal rank. For the most part, Iron Age Celtic art, and predominantly metalwork, was an aristocratic phenomenon and this obviously distorts any picture gained from it concerning expressions of religious belief. Craftsmen themselves would frequently have been peripatetic, serving a number of patrons at one time and this, together with the hoarding of items for gift-exchange, means that art-transmission from area to area was fluid. It is necessary, within this context, to realise that whilst peasants may have reflected continuity over a long period, aristocratic art-ideas and traditions may quickly and easily have been transmitted over long distances within Europe. One further thing should be said at this stage: there are two main schools of thought concerning the nature of Celtic art. The first view, represented by Megaw is that Celtic art is basically religious. The second, argued by Powell is that it was essentially decorative and that whatever symbolic implications there may be, embellishment is the prime concern. We shall examine the function of Celtic art later, in Chapter One.

A final point needs to be made concerning the nature of our evidence for the religion and gods of the Celtic peoples. By the last two centuries BC, if not somewhat before, Celtic society was localised and fragmented. This is demonstrated by the lack of any unifying style among later Celtic art, including coin-design. Interestingly for us, it is the very divergent nature of god-representation which in the Romano-Celtic period is such an essential feature of Celtic religion.

ONE

THE CELTS AND RELIGION

THE NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE

The nature of our information about the Celts and their religion comes from a number of different sources, all of which have to be treated with a degree of caution, for reasons which will become apparent. The evidence is composed first of contemporary literature written, however, not by the Celts themselves who had no tradition of a written language, but by their Mediterranean neighbours. Second, there is archaeological material pertaining to the pre-Roman (which I term ‘free Celtic’) and Romano-Celtic world. Third, there exist vernacular written sources in Irish and Welsh. The problem is that none of these sources comes under the category of direct information. That would only be the case if the Celts had written in detail about themselves. Every piece of Graeco-Roman and vernacular literature is in a very real sense second-hand: first, because comments were made by an alien people far removed in cultural terms from the object of their remarks; second, because the post-Roman literature is separated spatially and temporally from the Celts of the later first millennium BC and the Roman period. The evidence of archaeology is at best incomplete and ambiguous; at worst, it is misleading and confusing. The survival (or lack of it) of the evidence is one problem; its interpretation is another. As Piggott so rightly points out there is great difficulty in interpreting – especially in the area of religious beliefs – by archaeology alone; any attempt at an explanation of Celtic religion must at best be extremely speculative – a construction rather than a reconstruction.

The evidence of archaeology for the prehistoric Celtic period (roughly sixth–first century BC depending on geography and the timing of the Roman conquests) may be divided into that of cult-sites including votive/ritual deposits and evidence of sacrifice, and shrines and natural features; burial rites; and iconography, including pre-Roman coins. During the Romano-Celtic period, evidence is augmented by inscriptions, an increasing number of substantial religious structures and a vastly increased iconography – mainly in stone. Sometimes archaeological and written sources are in concert but frequently they conflict, as we will see later, and this makes for difficulties. Of the different kinds of archaeological evidence, some may be more unequivocal in terms of religious interpretation than others. Inferences may be made about cult activity on the ground in the form of suggested shrines and votive deposits – but since we have no dedications to the gods in the free Celtic period, we can only argue as to the likelihood of ritual function from the seemingly irrational nature of such material. For instance, we may infer that some later Bronze Age hoards may have a ritual purpose, perhaps because the contents have been deliberately and carefully laid out, as at Appleby, Lincs. or because there is evidence of ritual breakage. Similarly, it is possible to infer that certain structures, as occur in such pre-Roman fortified settlements as Danebury, Maiden Castle and South Cadbury, may be sanctuaries, since they do not fit into any patterns of secular activity.

Iconography in Celtic art likewise conveys ambiguity in terms of purpose. In some instances, like the few pieces of Hallstatt or La Tène-period, figure-sculpture from Württemberg and the Rhineland, it is fairly evident that religous personages are being represented. But where, as on most pieces of Celtic metalwork, human or animal figures are part of an overall decorative design, it is much less easy to be sure of anything other than ornamentation. It is worthwhile here to look in slightly more detail at Celtic art and iconography to examine the forms in which possible evidence for deity-representation are present. Figural bronzework of a possible religious character occurs, in non-Mediterranean Europe, in the later homelands of the Celts, from at least the later second millennium BC. The Danish Trundholm ‘sunchariot’ (strictly speaking outside our geographical area) with its solar disc and horse-team, dates to around 1300 BC. From the twelfth century BC, small in-the-round bronze water-birds appear in Central Europe and seem to possess some form of talismanic significance. In the later Urnfield period repeated motifs on sheet-bronze include aquatic birds, sun and ship-symbols in association. Early Celtic art really begins with the rich burials of the Hallstatt trader-knights. Birds, horses and cattle appear on bronzework; and one may point to the unique gold bowl from Altstetten, Zürich, which may be a cult-vessel decorated with sun, crescent-moon and beasts. La Tène metalwork is predominantly decorative as we have seen but it is a matter of opinion as to whether the, sometimes grotesque, faces which peer out from abstract and stylised foliage-designs on bracelets, like the gold one from Rodenbach with flowing Celtic moustache, or the bronze example from la Charne, Troyes have any religious significance. Megaw argues that La Tène art employs iconography which endows even the simplest items with symbolism (Megaw 1970, 38). Whilst Britain is less oriented towards humans and animals in its art, the later La Tène material is more definitely representative, both in insular and continental contexts. In Denmark, Celtic cauldrons from Brå and Rynkeby, were both probably votive offerings and quite possibly originally the possessions of priests. The latter dates to the first century BC and is ornamented with a human head and ox-heads. Buckets like those from Aylesford, Swarling and Marlborough bear human heads which presumably have symbolic significance. The Witham Shield depicted a boar-motif, albeit stylised but unmistakably an isolated boar-figure. The iron fire-dogs found in tombs of the immediately pre-Roman period, like those from Barton, Cambs., bear unequivocal bull-motifs. On the Continent, figural bronzework becomes relatively common in the immediate pre-Roman period: boar-figurines are plentiful, illustrated by the large example from Neuvy-en-Sullias; and human bronze figures are not unknown – as for instance the cross-legged god from Bouray. Before we leave metalwork, we should look briefly at pre-Roman Celtic coinage, since this sometimes portrays figural representations. Allen argues that such items may well have a symbolic function simply because their primary purpose was as largesse and as a gauge of wealth. He rightly points out that in terms of an art-form, coins stand apart from the mainstream because of limitations imposed both by size and mass-production; indeed, from the middle La Tène period, coins were issued by the million. What is of especial interest is the tracing of iconographic links between coins and other Celtic religious art. An example of this is the coins of the Aulerci Eburovices of the Evreux region whose motifs link closely with the sculpture of man and boar from Euffigneix. The coins show a boar-motif superimposed on the neck of an anthropomorphic representation and the stone depicts a torced human figure with a boar carved along its torso. (Allen 1976a and 1980).

Pre-Roman Celtic stone iconography is rare. Two main continental clusters exist – an early group in Germany and a somewhat later set (fourth–second century BC) far away in Provence. One of the earliest Celtic figures is from a late Hallstatt tumulus at Hirschlanden, north-west of Stuttgart, where, possibly originally positioned at the summit of the mound, is a huge sandstone figure dating to the end of the sixth century BC and wearing a helmet, torc, belt and dagger. Also from Germany are a janiform (double-faced) pillar from Holzerlingen, whose heads are horned, and stone heads from Heidelberg and in relief on the Pfalzfeld Pillar. From further east comes a moustached, very Celtic-looking head from Mšecké Žehrovice in Czechoslovakia.

The southern French material is especially interesting partly in the amount and variety of sculpture present, but also in the fact that a number of cultural/ethnic forces were at work. Fortified oppida in this area belonged to Celtic tribes having associations on the one hand with the Ligurians of south-eastern France and with Greek colonists from Marseilles, on the other. There was certainly Greek influence in the establishment of built shrines and in the use of stone depictions, but the style and content of the iconography is undeniably Celtic. For purposes of this introductory survey it will be sufficient to look briefly at two key sites – Entremont and Roquepertuse. Entremont was the capital of the Saluvii, sacked by Rome in 123 BC. The shrine stood on the highest ground and possessed limestone pillars with incised carvings of human heads, and other sculptures mostly again associated with disembodied heads. At the cliff-sanctuary of Roquepertuse, located not far away, three stone pillars formed the portal to the shrine. These columns had niches containing human skulls, and a great stone bird stood poised on the cross-beam. Squatting warriors, one bearing a Celtic torc, and a Janus-head held in the beak of a huge bird, are among the repertoire of this southern Gaulish mountain-temple. It is probable that most of the sculptures in the Provençal group date from the fourth–second centuries BC, with a floruit perhaps during the third century.

In pre-Roman Celtic iconography of the La Tène period as a whole, figure-sculpture is usually relatively simple and human and animal forms are subservient to the overall design especially in metalwork, as in the Waldalgesheim bronzes but also exemplified by the Pfalzfeld stone pillar where human heads present a fluid, stylised appearance entirely in keeping with the surrounding scrollwork pattern. A representative style did not fully develop until the period of Roman rule which stimulated figural portrayal, albeit largely ignoring the ‘heavy hand of Roman classicism’. Romano-Celtic stone iconography, influenced by Roman art-formulae but exhibiting religious forms and themes alien to the Mediterranean world, demonstrates that before the conquest there must have existed local and tribal gods, each with a name (four hundred different Celtic gods are named on Romano-Celtic inscriptions) and each with specific qualities. Indeed, some non Graeco-Roman symbols appearing in the Roman period are known before – for example the horned head exhibited on the Holzerlingen sculpture, and the emphasis on human heads and animals. We will see in later chapters that isolation of iconographic types during the Romano-Celtic period is one of the best ways of classifying cult-objects, even though this must necessarily contain an element of arbitrariness.

Before we leave iconography, the use of wooden sculptures should be mentioned. Pre-Roman figure-carving seems sparse indeed when we look at the medium of stone. But the chance survival in water-logged conditions, as at the Seine sanctuary near Dijon, shows that there was a tradition of pre-Roman figure-sculpture not confined to the few stone pieces mentioned. This is of particular note when we consider the passage of Lucan where the presence of wooden effigies to the gods in a Gaulish sanctuary is specifically mentioned.

The Evidence of Literature

As commented upon above, two kinds of literary record exist for the Celtic world. Graeco-Roman and vernacular Celtic. The Celtic world and its customs – including religion – was discussed and described in varying detail in writings of Mediterranean authors, the main ones being Caesar, Strabo, Pomponius Mela, Pliny, Athenaeus, Tacitus, Dio Cassius, Diodorus Siculus, Ammianus Marcellinus and Lucan. Four of these writers base their evidence (acknowledged or unacknowledged) upon earlier but lost writings of Posidonius: Strabo (63 BC–AD 21), Diodorus (writing circa 60–30 BC), Caesar (in the mid-first century BC) and Athenaeus (circaAD 200). These writers are in general more useful and detailed about Druids and ritual than about the gods themselves. For instance, Caesar speaks as if the Celts’ deities were identical with those of Rome and gives them Roman names, whilst Lucan (second century AD) talks of three Celtic gods – Esus, Teutates and Taranis – as if they were really important, a suggestion not supported by epigraphy which names these gods very infrequently. Classical writers have to be used with caution; they are biased by what interested them, by choice or chance of recording and by cultural separation, ignorance and consequential misinterpretation. Caesar on the Druids, for instance, must be seen in the light of his deliberate embellishment of an alien priesthood for politico-propaganda purposes. However, most Celtic ritual, alien though it was in detail, was explicable to the Roman mind, for Mediterranean peoples too were fettered by the concepts of correct and contractual appeasement and propitiation. Only weird and obscene rites – head-hunting, human sacrifice, divination by ritual murder – were curious and distasteful enough to be commented upon in detail. Where classical writers are particularly valuable is precisely in areas where their evidence marries with archaeological data: for instance both demonstrate the existence of human sacrifice and of head-collection. With deities themselves there is less comfort. The vast wealth of iconographic evidence for Celtic gods during the Romano-Celtic period is a subject upon which Graeco-Roman authors are vitually silent.

The other major body of literature is itself Celtic, so it does not suffer the cultural alienation of classical sources. However, it brings with it its own set of problems based partly on temporal separation and partly on its being specific to the fringes of the Celtic world during the thousand years (fifth century BC–fourth century AD) of pagan celticism. As we have seen, there are no indigenous literary references to the La Tène or even the Roman period. There is a danger even where Gaulish archaeological evidence appears to match the insular data since the two types of source are separated by at least several centuries in recording. The Irish evidence may sometimes be specific to Ireland: for example, the religious festivals of Samain and Beltine are related to stock-rearing and pastoralism, not necessarily relevant to lowland Britain and Gaul. We have to bear such constraints in mind when assessing the vernacular material. When Britain and Gaul were under Roman rule, Ireland possessed a heroic society, basically prehistoric-Celtic in terms of developmental stage, whose exploits are discussed in ballads and poems of which the earliest began to be written down sometime in the eighth century AD. For our purposes the group of prose tales known as the Ulster Cycle is of most use. These describe in epic form a series of events pertaining to a specifically Homeric-type heroic, aristocratic, warlike and hierarchical society. Jackson sees this as definitely related to Iron Age Ireland, though Champion wonders if these tales might not be conscious imitation of Homer in early Christian times. Archaism is evident both in the political status of Ulster and in the political structure, customs and material culture described, which all apparently belong to a period some centuries earlier than the time at which they were first written down. The stories centre around the King of Ulster and his followers at a time when Ulster was a large and powerful kingdom with its capital at Emain Macha near Armagh and whose over-king was Conchobar. The opponents of Ulster were the Confederacy of the rest of Ireland led by Ailill of Connaught and his warlike and dominant queen Medb. The main activities appear to have been fighting, cattle-raiding and feasting. The proof that the background to these tales was earlier than the introduction of Christianity in the fifth century AD is based on a number of arguments. By the fifth century, the whole political framework of Ireland had altered: by now Ulster was much smaller and insignificant, its greatness having been smashed by the family of Niall (who died in about AD 404). Thus events in the Ulster Cycle are arguably older than this change. Likewise, though Christianity was established in the fifth century, the heroes in the stories swear not by God but by the gods of their tribes. Jackson dates the formulation of the body of narrative material recorded around the third or fourth century AD embodying tradition going back perhaps to the second century BC; thus the Ulster Cycle would describe events in late La Tène Ireland. But doubt has recently been cast on this terminus post quem for Celtic culture to Ireland. Champion argues that the society described could date much earlier than the second century BC.

Other Irish and indeed Welsh sources must be acknowledged, though their value for the period in question must be minimised by their lateness in compilation and by their very nature. References to religion and mythology in later Celtic literature cannot safely be used to illuminate a subject which is essentially pre-Christian and a part of prehistoric Europe. But it is true, nevertheless, that however late the manuscripts (mostly eleventh–twelfth century AD) they do contain a vast amount of non- and therefore pre-Christian material. For example, many deities occur in the Irish sources – such as Nuadu and Lug – who can be traced also in the Romano-Celtic record (Nuadu may well be the Nodens of Romano-Celtic Britain, and Lug’s name is enshrined in various town-names, like Lugdunum (Lyon) and Luguvalium (Carlisle). The later Irish material exists in such works as the ‘Book of Invasions’, the ‘History of Races’, and the Fionn Cyle, all of twelfth century date. Wales also had a Celtic oral tradition which was rich but poorly documented for the early period. Of the extant tales, the four Branches of the Mabinogi, of late eleventh century date, and the Tale of Culhwch and Olwen are perhaps of greatest interest. But though, for example, the Druids of Caesar and other classical writers play a large role in these late literary works, it is evident that medieval Irish and Welsh antiquarians/historians were fairly ignorant of the actual beliefs of the people about whom they wrote. If we look closely at these works, mythology abounds but there is little tangible evidence for religion apart from the names of certain gods. The message of this medieval Celtic literary material, then, is ‘examine with interest but use with extreme caution’ any possible direct link with the later first millennium BC and the early centuries AD.

These similarities between the archaeological and literary records (both Graeco-Roman and Irish) should be highlighted, since the links do strengthen the authenticity of each, and serve also to counteract the Ireland-specific constraints mentioned earlier. Some similarities between the sources are very significant indeed. The aristocratic society itself, with its hierarchical division into nobles, free landowners and landless men; the system of clientship; the pugnacity, boldness and vanity of the champions are all recorded by classical and later Celtic writers; and the importance of feasting, of pork and otherworld banquets is borne out archaeologically as well. Comments on clothing and weaponry tally and above all the use of the war-chariot is faithfully recorded in all three sources. More important for our purposes, classical and Celtic writers agree on the three learned classes of Druids, Vates and Bards, and on the ritual of headhunting – the latter being also corroborated archaeologically.

Lastly, in assessing our sources of evidence, we should glance at epigraphy, a group of data relevant only to the Romano-Celtic phase (roughly first century AD onwards). Though god-names were inscribed on monuments through the Roman tradition, they very frequently allude to specifically Celtic god-names and it would be implausible to imagine that these names did not exist orally before Roman influence on Celtic lands.

THE NATURE OF CELTIC RELIGIONS

We have looked already at the character of the Celts and their society and at the type of evidence used to construct a picture of religious beliefs and practices. In this section, I wish to touch very briefly on the essence of Celtic religion as projected by this evidence. Detail is unnecessary at this stage since succeeding chapters will examine the most prominent themes at some length. Here my aim is to introduce the kind of religion with which we shall be concerned, and to set the scene by surveying the types of context within which cults were enacted.

RELIGIOUS SITES

Let us first look at places of worship, whether built sanctuaries or natural loci consecrati. It is generally considered that the Celts did not normally construct permanent, roofed temples. Certainly, except for the curious Provençal shrines stone-built sanctuaries are rare in the pre-Roman Celtic world. However, there is a steadily increasing body of evidence for wooden temples preceding Roman examples both in Britain and on the continent. One of the most interesting insular shrines is Frilford in Oxfordshire. In the Roman period, there were two contiguous buildings here – a circular structure and a shrine of Romano-Celtic type (with rectangular cella and surrounding portico). Beneath both of these, there were Iron Age sanctuaries, a round one under the Romano-Celtic temple and a structure represented by a penannular ditch under the rotunda. The evidence for the former as a ritual site is circumstantial, but inside the penannular ditch were six postholes associated with the votive offerings of a ploughshare (perhaps a foundation-deposit) and a miniature sword and shield. Frilford is important because of its specific Iron Age evidence for cult-activity, and in the presence of two contiguous, perhaps complementary, sanctuaries in both the pre-Roman and Roman periods. That Frilford may have been a cult-centre of some significance, at least in the Roman period, is supported by recent field-surveys which have revealed the presence of a small Roman town with an amphitheatre situated close to and perhaps actually within the temple-precinct. The Romano-Celtic shrine at Worth, Kent, was probably also preceded by an Iron Age temple, for pre-Roman material beneath the cella included three Iron Age model shields. At Muntham Court, Sussex, the circular Romano-British temple, which was associated with a cult-well and with evidence of a healing cult, may have had a free Celtic precursor represented by Iron Age pits and postholes. At Haddenham, Cambs., where there was cult-activity from the Bronze Age to the Roman era, a Romano-British shrine first built in the first or second century AD overlay Bronze Age cremations in a barrow, the Roman temenos embracing the barrow itself. Adjacent to this was an Iron Age penannular ditched enclosure. The Roman shrine was associated particularly with cult-activity involving sheep or goat sacrifices. Hayling Island was a pre-Roman shrine with a sacred enclosure surrounding a circular building which may or may not – like Frilford – have been roofed. A central pit possibly held a ritual stone or post. Here the cult-activity was concentrated not on the temple itself but on the outer temenos, where votive deposits of metalwork – including martial gear and cart or chariot-equipment – were offered to the gods, much of the material being first ritually damaged. Many so-called Iron Age shrines have been defined as such simply because they cannot readily be explained in terms of secular function. Small buildings in a number of hillforts are thus interpreted: such is the case at Danebury and South Cadbury where Alcock stresses that the Iron Age town was not only important as a centre for trade and industry but that ‘the focal point of the whole settlement was religious’. At Maiden Castle the only certain religious evidence for a late Iron Age circular building is an infant-burial just outside the door, but it lay under a late Roman round building and near to a Romano-Celtic shrine, and so its context is ambiguous.

There are continental parallels to these British Celtic shrines. In Austria, St Margarethen-am-Silberberg may be compared with the Frilford sanctuaries; the Romano-Celtic temple of St Germain-les-Rocheux (Côte d’Or) had an Iron Age predecessor; and, in the Marne region, small Iron Age shrines were associated with Celtic cemeteries. The evidence for enclosed temple-buildings should not be overstressed. Many rites were performed in the open air, not necessarily involving buildings at all. It is significant that where structures are present, they rarely occupy the central position within the temenos. Thus at Hayling, though there was a building, the main rites seem to have taken place outside. It is important too to realise that in the Iron Age there were few ‘purpose-built’ shrines and Henig rightly points out that the sacred buildings at Hayling and Maiden Castle were little more than large huts, and perhaps served as no more than a focus – rather like a stone, pit or tree. One exception to this is at Heathrow where, in the fourth century BC, a building with cella and portico appears to anticipate the much later and ‘mass-produced’ Romano-Celtic shrine-type. It should be remembered also that although temples following the fairly rigid architectural schema of concentric squares, circles or polygons, to define inner cella and outer ambulatory, predominated in Romano-Celtic western Europe, yet simple circular and rectangular temples – such as those at Brigstock, Muntham and Frilford – were built and used right through the Roman period.

Thus, the important role played by open-air enclosures, as opposed to roofed structures, should not be underestimated. The Frilford shrines may have been open to the sky, and there may have been several other small British sacred enclosures. On the Continent, the pre-Roman trend was towards large communal ritual open-air sites. The enclosures at Aulnay-aux-Planches (Marne) and Libeniče (Czech) are strikingly alike though widely separated in space and time (the French site dates to the tenth century BC and Libeniče to the third century BC). Both consist of sub-rectangular enclosures three hundred feet long containing evidence for possibly sacrificial human and animal burials. The Czech site contained the remains of two burnt upright timbers once adorned with neck-rings, as if they represented images of gods. Two German enclosures, the Goldberg and Goloring, both probably of sixth century BC date, follow an essentially similar pattern: the latter contained a huge central post, evidence of a similar cult-focus to those of Libeniče and Hayling, and perhaps symbolic of a sacred tree or column.

Ritual shafts or pits (discussed in detail in Chapter Four) may likewise have represented man-made foci of worship. In Britain the emphasis seems to have been on late Iron Age south-eastern Britain, but Bronze Age examples at Wilsford and Swanwick indicate the presence of a long-standing tradition. In Germany, certain enclosures or viereckshanzen, dating to the late La Tène if not earlier, contain shafts which were foci of cult-activity: at Holzhausen an enclosure contained three shafts: one, eight metres deep, with a wooden pole at the bottom surrounded by traces of flesh and blood, echoing an almost identical occurrence at Swanwick much earlier, at about 1000 BC. The inference at both places is that a human sacrifice may have been tied to the stake and offered to a deity, perhaps of the Underworld.

Actual cult-offerings at pre-Roman shrines are sparse compared with Roman evidence, and this is what makes the interpretation of free Celtic cult-sites sometimes ambiguous. Human and animal sacrifices are sometimes suggested, as at Cadbury, Aulnay and Maiden Castle; model objects, so common in Romano-British shrines appear at Frilford and Worth; and deposits of metalwork were offered at Hayling. Celtic gold coins were consecrated to the deities of Harlow and at Hayling coins were covered with gold to present a glittering show to the god. Perhaps some of the most curious offerings are those of an ‘antiquarian’ nature: a tradition was established in pre-Roman sanctuaries in Britain and Europe where Neolithic axes were offered to Celtic divinities. An additional practice in Gaulish shrines was ritually to smash these axes, and both here and in Britain, the implements were collected for votive purposes both by free and subsequent Romano-Celtic devotees.

Apart from deliberately constructed sanctuaries, the Celts made great use of natural topographical features. The Celtic word ‘nemeton’ denoting a sacred grove may be traced in derivation form in Celtic place-names from Britain (Aquae Arnemetiae at Buxton for example) and Spain to Galatia in Asia Minor (Drunemeton). The Irish for ‘nemeton’ is fidnemed. A number of classical authors, too, refer to sacred groves. Strabo speaks of the reunification of three Galatian tribes in a grove of sacred oaks, at Drunemeton for the purpose of discussion on government matters. Tacitus speaks of the forest-clearings of Anglesey as the last Druid stronghold against Rome. Dio Cassius refers to a sacred wood where human sacrifices to a war-goddess Andraste were carried out and Lucan refers to grim sacred woods in southern Gaul, which were sprinkled with human blood. It is possible that in some instances the term ‘nemeton’ may have been used loosely as synonymous with ‘sanctuary’. Later commentaries on Lucan say that the Druids worshipped gods in woods without the use of temples. Romano-Celtic epigraphy informs us that deities dwelt in natural features such as mountains, rivers and springs. Allied to this, the archaeological evidence for votive deposits points to the offering of precious objects, frequently of a martial nature, to gods associated with the ground or underworld (Chapter Four) or with water (Chapter Five). It is interesting in the context of aquatic and warrior offerings that such practices are endorsed by Graeco-Roman authors on the Celts. Strabo mentions the treasure of gold ingots at the sacred lake belonging to the Volcae Tectosages at Toulouse in 106 BC; and Caesar remarks on dedications of weapons and booty heaped on the ground in honour of the god of the winning side; the sanctity of the hoard was such that it was left unmolested and did not need to be guarded.

THE SANCTITY OF NATURAL FEATURES

The preceding discussion of shrines and sanctuaries leads logically to examination of a very significant trait in Celtic religion, that is the endowment with sanctity of natural features – a river, spring, lake, tree, mountain or simply a particular valley or habitat. The gods were everywhere, and this is expressed during the Romano-Celtic period by god-names which betray this territorial association. The same kind of worship is found in rural Italy during this time, culminating in the relatively sophisticated Roman Genius loci