Bogucki P., Crabtree P. Ancient Europe 8000 B.C.-A.D. 1000: Encyclopedia of the Barbarian World. Volume 2

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

lands and marshes, for example), temples and forti-

ﬁcation walls as well as dwellings were constructed

of wood.

Every Greek city became a center of craft pro-

duction. In Histria and Nymphaeum pottery kilns

were found dating from the mid-sixth century

B.C.;

in Panticapaeum from the end of the century; and

in Chersonesus, Gorgippia, Histria, Phanagoria,

and Sinope from the ﬁfth to the second centuries.

They produced such things as terra-cotta ﬁgurines,

lamps, loom weights, and tableware; in Heraclea,

Sinope, and Chersonesus, amphorae were made as

well. Through the migration of Sinopean potters,

the Greek cities of Colchis began to produce their

own amphorae from the second half of the fourth

century

B.C. From the fourth century, tiles and ar-

chitectural terra-cotta were manufactured in Apol-

lonia Pontica, Chersonesus, Olbia, Tyras, and the

Bosporan cities (on the Kerch and Taman Peninsu-

las). The Bosporan cities and Histria produced sim-

ple painted pottery, which imitated the shapes of

East Greek and Attic pottery.

Nearly every Greek city has left traces of metal-

working. In Panticapaeum, for example, workshops

were found in two areas. The workshops, which

produced iron, bronze, and lead objects (including

weapons), contained numerous moulds, iron ore,

and slags in the remains of furnaces. In Phanagoria,

pottery and metal workshops were situated at the

edge of the city. One produced life-size bronze stat-

ues. Metalworking in the Pontic Greek cities was

based mainly on the use of ingots specially produced

for them, for example, in wooden-steppe Scythia for

the northern Black Sea cities. The same situation

most probably obtained in the other parts of the

Black Sea.

Agriculture was the main economic activity.

Greek cities established their agricultural territories,

called chorai, almost immediately. Their size varied

over time; initially they were small but grew larger

with the appearance of new colonists and the expan-

sion of the cities. In the fourth century

B.C. the

chorai of Olbia and Chersonesus and of the cities of

the Bosporan Kingdom each covered an area of

about 150,000 hectares and contained several hun-

dred settlements. These rural settlements were

sources of agricultural produce for the inhabitants

of the cities. There were several settlements special-

izing entirely in craft production. The wonderfully

preserved chora of Chersonesus in the Crimea is

unique, as is Metapontum in Italy. Chersonesus was

situated in the Heraclean Peninsula, approximately

11,000 hectares of which was divided c. 350

B.C.

into four hundred lots, each with six subdivisions,

to make 2,400 small allotments. They were used

mainly for viticulture and growing fruit trees. About

4,000 hectares along the north coast were the basis

of the earliest allotments. There was a second chora

of Chersonesus in the northwestern Crimea, entire-

ly for grain production.

Trade was one of the principal economic activi-

ties of Greek cities. The main sources for the study

of trade relations are pottery and amphorae. In the

seventh and early sixth centuries

B.C. pottery from

southern Ionia was common throughout the Pontic

region; later it was displaced by pottery from north-

ern Ionia. Goods transported in amphorae came

from Chios, Lesbos, and Clazomenae. The small

quantities of Corinthian and Naucratite goods

probably were brought by Ionian merchants, who

also were responsible, with Aeginetans, for the ap-

pearance of the ﬁrst Archaic Athenian pottery in the

region. In the Classical period Athenian pottery pre-

dominates, on evidence from excavation of the Pon-

tic Greek cities. This pottery probably reﬂects direct

links between them and Athens.

Trade between the Pontic Greek cities and the

local peoples is an extremely important but complex

question. All discussion is based on the ﬁnds of

Greek pottery made in local settlements, some as far

as 500–600 kilometers inland from the Black Sea.

Overall, about 10 percent of known and excavated

local sites, especially for the Classical period, yield

examples, but usually they are few in number (as is

the case, for example, in both the Thracian and Col-

chian hinterlands). At the same time, local elite

tombs each provide several examples of Athenian

painted pottery. Thus, a simple explanation of the

very close trade relationship between Greeks and lo-

cals is no longer tenable.

There are other ways in which pottery could

have reached local settlements, and the small quan-

tity cannot support the argument that the more ex-

amples, the closer and more intense the links. Paint-

ed pottery from elite tombs cannot be viewed only

from the perspective of trade relationships: it is not

known how the locals interpreted the scenes depict-

ed on the painted pottery, which could have been

6: THE EUROPEAN IRON AGE, C. 800 B.C.– A.D. 400

210

ANCIENT EUROPE

a gift from the Greeks and not traded. Furthermore,

the tombs contained jewelry and metal vessels, on

which the local elite was much keener, in far greater

quantities than pottery.

Over time the composition of imports and ex-

ports changed. The best account is found in the

Histories of the Greek historian Polybius (book 4):

As regards necessities, it is an undisputed fact that

the most plentiful supplies and best qualities of cat-

tle and slaves reach us from the countries lying

around the Pontus, while among luxuries, the same

countries furnish us with an abundance of honey,

wax and preserved ﬁsh; from the surplus of our

countries they take olive-oil and every kind of wine.

As for grain, there is give and take—with them

sometimes supplying us when we require it and

sometimes importing it from us.

From the start, the history of the colonies is insepa-

rable from that of the local population. Many ethnic

groups lived around the Black Sea, among whom

the most prominent were the Thracians, Getae,

Scythians, Tauri, Maeotians, Colchians, Marian-

dyni, and Chalybes. From the earliest days of the

colonies, locals formed part of their population. For

the Archaic period not much is known about the re-

lationship between Greeks and local peoples, al-

though it was most probably peaceful until the end

of the sixth century/beginning of the ﬁfth century

B.C. Thereafter, local kingdoms grew up, such as the

Thracian (Odrysian), Colchian, and Scythian. Rela-

tions between these kingdoms and the Greek colo-

nies were at times peaceful and at others hostile. In

about 480

B.C. a phenomenon unique for the whole

Greek world in the Classical period took place: the

Greek cities situated on the Kerch and Taman Pen-

insulas united, to withstand Scythian pressure, in a

single state, known as the Bosporan Kingdom

(whose capital was Panticapaeum). The rulers of

this state were tyrants. Its ﬁnal consolidation was

completed by the middle of the fourth century

B.C.

In character it was akin to the kingdoms that mush-

roomed in the Hellenistic period.

See also Scythians (vol. 2, part 7).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Gorman, Vanessa B. Miletos, the Ornament of Ionia: A Histo-

ry of the City to 400

B.C.E. Ann Arbor: University of

Michigan Press, 2001.

Greaves, Alan M. Miletos: A History. London: Routledge,

2002.

Tsetskhladze, Gocha R. “Greek Penetration of the Black

Sea.” In The Archaeology of Greek Colonisation: Essays

Dedicated to Sir John Boardman. Edited by G. R.

Tsetskhladze and F. De Angelis, pp. 111–136. Oxford:

Oxbow Books, 1994.

———, ed. The Greek Colonisation of the Black Sea Area:

Historical Interpretation of Archaeology. Historia Ein-

zelschriften 121. Stuttgart, Germany: Steiner, 1998.

Tsetskhladze, Gocha R., and J. G. de Boer, eds. The Black

Sea Region in the Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Periods.

Talanta 32/33. Amsterdam: Dutch Archaeological and

Historical Society, 2002.

Tsetskhladze, Gocha R., and A. M. Snodgrass, eds. Greek

Settlements in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black

Sea. BAR International Series, no. 1062. Oxford: Ar-

chaeopress, 2002.

OCHA R. TSETSKHLADZE

GREEK COLONIES IN THE EAST

ANCIENT EUROPE

211

THE EUROPEAN IRON AGE, C. 800 B.C.– A.D. 400

IRON AGE FRANCE

■

FOLLOWED BY FEATURE ESSAY ON:

Gergovia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

■

Modern France formed part of ancient Gaul, inhab-

ited by Celts, Aquitani, Iberians, Ligurians, Belgae,

and Germani. By the time of the Roman conquest

most of these peoples spoke Celtic languages, ex-

cept the non-Indo-European Iberians and probably

the Aquitani and Germani. Although Julius Caesar

and other historians give ﬁrm boundaries between

these groups, one should assume neither that they

were static nor that ancient authors were knowl-

edgeable. On the south coast historical sources

place the boundary between the Ligurians and the

Iberians on the Rhône, whereas linguistic evidence

from inscriptions suggests that it was the Hérault.

Two “grand narratives” have dominated syn-

theses of Iron Age Gaul. The ﬁrst has been the in-

corporation of Gaul into a Mediterranean world sys-

tem, with artistic, political, and economic

innovations; social hierarchization and urbanization

stimulated by trade and Greek colonization; and

eventually, the Roman conquest. The second narra-

tive is cultural-historical, the deﬁnition of the origin

and expansion of the Celts; this viewpoint has come

under heavy attack. For instance, the deﬁnition of

“Celts” as speakers of Celtic languages is a modern

one that cannot be imposed on the ancient world;

other ethnic groups, such as Ligurians, also may

have spoken a Celtic language. Prehistorians also

talk of the “Celticization” of western and southern

France during the Iron Age, though what they

mean is latènization, that is, the adoption of La

Tène art styles, ornamentation, and so on. This view

often ignores the extremely varied nature of the ar-

chaeological record in the different regions, espe-

cially the processes of deposition and discovery. The

correlation between the Celts and a La Tène culture

is no longer sustainable: Iberians in Languedoc and

Germans in Jutland were making La Tène artifacts

with typical decoration.

Central and western France are largely devoid

of burials for the Iron Age. Documentary evidence

warns against making simplistic correlations be-

tween the occurrence of rich burials and wealth.

The king of the Arverni, Luernios, lived in an area

where there are no rich burials until after the Roman

conquest, and in the ﬁfth century the Bituriges do

not have exceptionally rich burials despite the sup-

posed importance of their king Ambigatus. This

bias in archaeology has been overcome in part with

an increased emphasis on settlement archaeology,

stimulated by rescue excavation on major projects

for motorways and railways. Where settlement ar-

chaeology had taken place, it had concentrated on

the defended nucleated hillforts of the south or the

urban oppida of the Late La Tène, but rescue exca-

vation is revealing many small farming settlements

and hamlets. Nonetheless, there are still major voids

212

ANCIENT EUROPE

Selected sites in Iron Age France.

in the records, for instance, settlement evidence in

the Massif Central.

In France two main patterns can be identiﬁed.

In the south, on the littoral plains, settlement and

political development followed a common Mediter-

ranean pattern with the appearance of numerous

small, nucleated settlements, perhaps best described

as “city-states,” with, initially at least, fairly limited

territories. In contrast, the rest of France by the

time of the conquest was occupied by “tribal

states,” much larger territorial entities that only at

a late stage in their development acquired urban set-

tlements (oppida). The boundary between the two

regions lay in the southern foothills of the Massif

Central, which, with the Alps and the Pyrenees,

formed a major barrier between the Mediterranean

and the temperate zones of France but was pierced

by two major routes. There was the Rhône Valley

in the east and the Carcassonne Gap in the west,

though a more central route northward up the

Hérault also was used during the Iron Age.

IRON AGE FRANCE

ANCIENT EUROPE

213

This overview follows the acculturation model

while underlining the regional variations and gaps

in the evidence and the importance of regional vari-

ation. It follows chronological sequence, using the

terminology of central Europe. An Early Hallstatt

and a later La Tène Iron Age are recognized,

though the divisions do not always ﬁt local French

developments particularly well.

THE LATE BRONZE AGE

(C. 1000–750

B.C.

)

The Late Bronze Age in France, as elsewhere in cen-

tral and western Europe, presents two disparate im-

ages. On the one hand, the settlement evidence

often is ephemeral. In the south of France the

wooden houses are small, presumably for nuclear

family units, and settlements are limited and short-

lived, suggesting a shifting pattern based mainly on

hunting and pastoralism, with an agricultural com-

ponent. Over most of France, especially the west

and center, burials are virtually unknown, but where

they do occur, the so-called Urnﬁelds consist of cre-

mation burials that are poor in grave goods—two or

three pots and little else.

In contrast, later research in northern France in

the major river valleys has shown evidence that land-

scapes were highly organized, with linear bounda-

ries formed by alignments of pits. In Britain the

Middle and Late Bronze Ages are characterized by

enclosed settlements, linear boundaries, and large-

scale ﬁeld systems. This pattern probably holds true

for areas of France as well, but unlike Britain, much

of the evidence was destroyed in the land hunger of

the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, which saw

agriculture spreading to even marginal areas of poor

soils and steep slopes. The Late Bronze Age also saw

an increase in hillforts such as Fort-Harrouard

(Eure-et-Loire), with evidence of dense occupation

and industrial activity. Some sites also are known in

the Mediterranean littoral, such as the 19-hectare

Carsac site or the 5.6-hectare site of Cayla de Mail-

hac, both lying on the Carcassonne Gap. Although

the hillfort of Cayla occasionally was abandoned, its

importance is shown in the continuous sequence of

burials around the site, reminiscent of the early

phases of the cities of central and northern Italy or

Greece. As elsewhere, the early burials at Mailhac

have no special signs of wealth. Hoards, in contrast,

can contain bronze armor and other prestige items.

There are no clearly deﬁned trade routes at this

period, except the Atlantic coastal route, where sim-

ilarities of bronze types, such as carps-tongue

swords, show close links between western Iberia,

Brittany, and southeastern Britain. All areas are

characterized by extensive burial of hoards and the

deposition of objects in “watery places,” all indica-

tive of deliberate ritual and ceremonial deposition.

The afﬁliations of central and eastern France are

more with central Europe, and at this time there is

evidence of cross-Alpine trade in prestige goods,

such as decorated bronze vessels.

HALLSTATT C (C. 750–600

B.C.

)

The Iron Age in France formally starts with the ap-

pearance of usable weapons and tools made of iron.

Bronze was not vanquished immediately, however.

Of the two typical sword types of Hallstatt C, the

Gündlingen type is known only in bronze, whereas

the Mindelheim type occurs in both bronze and

iron. The manufacture of long iron swords implies

the mastery of carburization and piling. For France,

the Mindelheim swords imply a central European

route for the introduction of the new technology.

For the south of France, central Italy is a more likely

source; one of the early ﬁnds, from Grand Bassin I

at Mailhac, includes a short “stabbing” dagger,

more in the gladius tradition of the central and

western Mediterranean, which contrasts with the

long “slashing” swords of central Europe.

The Grand Bassin burial also includes an iron

horse harness, indicating a major ideological shift

away from deliberate destruction of wealth in

hoards to a burial context. In these societies it seems

that rich objects were deliberately destroyed or bur-

ied as a demonstration of social power. In Hallstatt

C there is a shift from deposition in rivers or in

hoards on dry land to burials of objects to accompa-

ny the dead. Thus the Grand Bassin burial also in-

cludes an iron horse harness as a symbol of status.

During Hallstatt C, burials in France do not com-

pare in wealth with the contemporaneous wagon

burials in central Europe or Italy, but the construc-

tion of ostentatious burial mounds contrasts with

previous Urnﬁeld practice, as does the wider range

of grave goods, such as bronze vessels, personal or-

naments, and horse harnesses. Most of these burials

are extended inhumations, with marked concentra-

tions across the southern parts of the Massif Central

6: THE EUROPEAN IRON AGE, C. 800 B.C.– A.D. 400

214

ANCIENT EUROPE

and adjacent parts of the Alpine foothills and Jura,

in the Berry, Burgundy, Lorraine, and Alsace. In

eastern France there are female burials with bronze

ornaments (brooches and bracelets), but in central

France contemporary female graves are unknown.

Another feature of these tumulus burials is the

presence of imported Etruscan bronze vessels.

Some, like the bronze cup and incense burner from

Appenwihr in Alsace, came over the Alps via north-

ern Italy, but the south of France also was in direct

contact with central Italy by sea. Several of the Hall-

statt tumuli in the southern Massif Central and the

Alpine foothills contain Etruscan bronze bowls or

jugs. The main recipients of Etruscan goods, how-

ever, were the occupants of the coastal plain, who,

from about 630

B.C., were receiving wine am-

phorae, ceramic tableware (bucchero), and, occa-

sionally, Greek vessels. The trade was concentrated

around the Rhône delta. There are no obvious port

sites, and Etruscan coastal trading is the most likely

mechanism for contact. Phoenician trade had main-

ly bypassed southern France, but some goods, such

as Punic wine amphorae, came up the coast of east-

ern Spain as far north as the Rhône delta, reaching

Languedoc in quantity.

The settlement pattern over much of central

and western Europe changed during Hallstatt C,

with the abandonment of hillforts. Even southern

France was affected, with long-lived sites such as

Cayla de Mailhac and Carsac showing a hiatus of

settlement, though in the case of Mailhac the associ-

ated burial sequence is unbroken. The reasons for

this shift are unclear, and presumably the majority

of the population at that time lived in small farming

settlements.

Hallstatt C thus was a period of considerable

change with the adoption of ironworking, though

initially its impact was more in warfare and prestige

items than in the production of tools, such as axes.

The occurrence in burials in eastern France of

bronze vessels and ﬁne pottery vessels with elabo-

rate painted, stamped, and incised decoration im-

plies a continued interest in feasting. Despite all

these changes, there is no need to postulate a

change in social structure, though the relationship

between the social elites of the Late Bronze Age and

Hallstatt C is unclear; they may simply manifest

themselves in different ways (deposition in burials

rather than hoards). Nonetheless, there are many

blank areas, such as parts of western and northern

France, where traditions were different and burials

do not occur.

HALLSTATT D (C. 600–475

B.C.

)

The major event in sixth-century B.C. France was

the founding of Massalia (Marseille) by Greek colo-

nists from Phocaea in Asia Minor. Its impact was

not immediate, but until the end of the millennium

it played a dominant role, controlling the Rhône

route into central Europe. Secondary colonies se-

cured the coast, with Agatha (present-day Agde) at

the mouth of the Hérault and Emporion (modern-

day Ampurias) commanding the major harbor just

south of the Pyrenees. There may have been an early

Etruscan enclave at Lattes at the mouth of the

Hérault. The sixth century represents continuity,

with Etruscan and Punic imports dominating in the

south but with Greek ceramics, especially Attic

black ﬁgure ware, becoming more common. In

eastern France rich interments continued to be

made but with a shift from the long sword to the

dagger. The exception is central France, in the Berry

and the Massif Central, where male burials disap-

pear and the early phases of Hallstatt D (D1 and

D2) are characterized by female burials with rich

sets of bronze ornaments.

The major changes occurred in the last quarter

of the century, with the rising importance of Mar-

seille. Along the coast many settlements that were

to become major urban centers had been estab-

lished: Saint-Blaise near Marseille, Béziers, and

Montlaurès, the predecessor of Narbonne, all pro-

duced black ﬁgure ware. Wine production was sufﬁ-

ciently well established for it to be exported in dis-

tinctive southern French amphorae. The amphorae

are clear indicators of the trade routes into the inte-

rior, reaching as far as the Heuneburg on the Upper

Danube.

The sixth century was the greatest period of hill-

fort construction from central Europe to Britain,

though the function of the sites varied considerably,

from major centers of trade, production, and politi-

cal power, such as the Heuneburg, to sites brieﬂy

occupied in times of danger. Inland this period was

the height of development of the Fürstensitze, hill-

forts that acted as magnets for foreign trade and

around which rich burials are clustered. The process

started in Hallstatt D1 in southern Germany, with

IRON AGE FRANCE

ANCIENT EUROPE

215

the Heuneburg, Asperg, and the Magdalensberg—

too early for Marseille to be the cause. Develop-

ments in France were later, from about 525

B.C.,

with three identiﬁable centers: Bourges in the Berry,

Vix at the headwaters of the Seine, and the Britzgy-

berg controlling the Belfort Gap, where the

Rhône/Doubs route meets the Rhine.

Only Vix, with its defended hillfort on Mont

Lassois, ﬁts the Fürstensitz model closely. The

Britzgyberg is a defended site with much imported

pottery but no associated rich burials, and Bourges

will be discussed in the next section. There were,

however, other patterns. The lower Saône has pro-

duced rich burials, but they are not clustered at any

particular point. They may well have been serviced

by the site of Bragny-sur-Saône, an open settlement

at the conﬂuence of the Doubs and Saône that not

only was in contact with Marseille but also was im-

porting goods across the Alps from northern Italy.

It was engaged in iron production and seems to

have been a trading emporium rather than a politi-

cal center.

LA TÈNE A (475–380

B.C.

)

For the south, the ﬁfth century represents the cul-

mination of the processes already under way, and by

400

B.C. most of the characteristics of culture up to

and beyond the Roman conquest were in place. In

the sixth century, settlements such as Tamaris, 40

kilometers west of Marseille, were defended with

stone ramparts, with houses built of stone or adobe

on stone foundations. No longer were houses indi-

vidually constructed, but whole settlements were

laid out with terraced single-story and usually sin-

gle-room houses. Most sites are small, between 0.5

and 5 hectares, and may lack features that are associ-

ated with urbanism, such as public buildings or in-

dustrial areas. Some, such as Nîmes, were to develop

into major Roman cities.

Trade was a major activity, and quite commonly

20 to 30 percent of the pottery was imported, espe-

cially from Athens, Corinth, and Asia Minor. Rows

of subterranean silos for grain are regular features of

native sites. Marseille started striking its own coins

at the end of the sixth century, and by the ﬁfth cen-

tury some of the native sites were producing their

own. In contrast, the local metalwork was similar to

that of inland Gaul—La Tène brooches, belt ﬁt-

tings, swords, and other items—even on Iberian set-

tlements, such as Ensérune. Although the houses

give the impression of a relatively egalitarian society,

some individuals were distinguished in death by

richer grave goods, like the man buried on the ram-

parts of the Cayla de Mailhac. Many of the crema-

tions at Ensérune are accompanied by La Tène

swords and Greek and Etruscan vessels.

The immediate zone of impact of the south

seems limited. In the west there are extensive ﬁnds

up the Aude as far as Carcassonne but not into the

upper Garenne; there are no imports in the small

hilltop settlements or burials of the Gironde or the

foothills of the Pyrenees. Up the Hérault route, pot-

tery reached as far as Sévérac-le-Château, but there

is no clear evidence that the gold and silver deposits

of the southern Massif Central were yet being ex-

ploited. Only along the Rhône was penetration

deep, and major settlements developed at Vienne

and Lyon, the latter having buildings with painted

plaster. Finds are absent from the upper Loire, how-

ever, and in the Auvergne only a couple of hilltop

sites, Lijay and Bègue, have produced scraps of Attic

pottery. Even the routes up the Doubs and the

Saône seem to have collapsed in the ﬁfth century,

and most of the Fürstensitze were abandoned. Only

Asperg continued to receive imports, probably over

the Alps, as did Bourges, in the Berry.

Bourges lies at the conﬂuence of the Auron and

the Yèvre, providing a navigable route from central

France to the Atlantic via the Loire. Excavations

under the modern town have produced deposits of

Hallstatt D3 and La Tène A, including one building

with painted plaster. There are areas of intensive oc-

cupation, with several workshops engaged in indus-

trial activity, including the production of bronze

pins with inlays of amber or coral and exceptionally

small, fragile brooches suitable only for the ﬁnest

cloth. There is also black ﬁgure ware as well as Mas-

saliot amphorae, and Bourges has produced more

red ﬁgure ware than the rest of central and western

Europe outside the Mediterranean zone. Associated

burials are not rich, though people may have been

buried under ostentatious mounds and the crema-

tion placed in Etruscan stamnoi, two-handled vases,

or ﬂagons. Generally, gold is absent, though one re-

cently excavated grave had a gold pin.

The wealthiest burials of La Tène A are found

in western Germany along the Moselle (the Huns-

rück-Eifel culture), in Champagne, and in the Ar-

6: THE EUROPEAN IRON AGE, C. 800 B.C.– A.D. 400

216

ANCIENT EUROPE

dennes. In Champagne, in Late Hallstatt D, a large

percentage of the population adopted inhumation,

the women with their bronze jewelry (torcs, brace-

lets, and brooches) and some men with weapons—

in Hallstatt D3 a dagger and in La Tène A spears

and a long sword. Some men and women were bur-

ied with vehicles, normally four-wheeled in Hall-

statt D and two-wheeled in La Tène A, the latter

often with elaborate harnesses decorated in the new

La Tène art style. There is no focus around individ-

ual high-status sites, the majority of the population

living on small farming settlements. The Cham-

pagne burials lack the rich goldwork of the Huns-

rück and have comparatively few imported Mediter-

ranean goods (Etruscan ﬂagons and red ﬁgure ware

bowls as at Somme-Bionne). These objects proba-

bly arrived via the inhabitants of the Hunsrück, who

in turn acquired them from northern Italy via routes

over the Alps.

Champagne and Southwest Germany are seen

as the origin of the La Tène (“Celtic”) art style and

of the La Tène culture, which from the ﬁfth and

fourth centuries spread out in all directions, from

Ireland to Romania. It usually is associated with the

origin and spread of the Celts, and many maps of

the origin of the Gauls who invaded northern Italy

show them coming from this area. This, however,

is based on a disputed reading of the classical

sources. The Roman historian Livy lists the tribes

that took part in the invasions, almost all of them lo-

cated in central France. In his story, Ambigatus,

king of the Bituriges, played a key role, and the ar-

chaeological record, with the preeminence of

Bourges, seems to support this theory. The problem

is that Livy places these events around 600

B.C.,

whereas the Greek historian Polybius and archaeol-

ogy suggest a date of about 400

B.C.

LA TÈNE B–C (380–150

B.C.

)

Within this time span there are thought to have

been two important events. First, by the second

century

B.C., two Celtic tribal entities had appeared

in southern France, the Volcae Tectosages and the

Volcae Arecomici. Their presence is not detectable

in archaeological ﬁnds, and there is no evidence of

cultural or linguistic change; though La Tène–style

metal objects were used and manufactured at sites

such as Lattes, this was nothing new. The general

trend in both Languedoc and Provence was a gener-

al abandonment of lowland sites in favor of small,

defended hilltops.

The second event was the territorial expansion

of Massalia. Because of increasing conﬂict with its

neighbors, the city entered into an alliance with

Rome, which needed a land route across the south

of France. Some sites, such as Saint-Blaise, acquired

Greek-style defenses, and Greek products almost

drove out native products in parts of Provence. The

Ligurians had distinctive religious practices, evi-

denced, for instance, in the stone sculptures of de-

capitated heads at Entremont. These sculptures

probably date to the third century, as does the ritual

site at Roquepertuse, with its portico surmounted

by a bird of prey and with niches for skulls and seat-

ed warriors, possibly “heroes.”

In non-Mediterranean Gaul, the areas with rich

burials of La Tène A are almost devoid of any burials

in La Tène B. Imported Mediterranean goods virtu-

ally disappeared; goldwork also largely vanished. In

northern France, burials of this period were mainly

peripheral to Champagne, in the Paris Basin and

northwestern France, and they included a few vehi-

cle burials. The most exotic ﬁnds also tended to be

peripheral to previous distributions, such as the

gold-plated helmets from the river Seine at Am-

freville (Eure) and from the cave at Agris in the Cha-

rente, both ritual depositions.

In the archaeological record, two new phenom-

ena hint at some sort of state organization. First,

from the third century, ritual sites start appearing,

especially in Northwest France, such as at Gournay-

sur-Aronde and Ribemont-sur-Ancre. Both had

square-ditched enclosures containing religious

structures, such as wooden buildings. Gournay pro-

duced large numbers of mutilated weapons, espe-

cially swords. So did Ribemont, though in lesser

numbers; here there are buildings in which decapi-

tated bodies were displayed, along with heaps of

human femurs. Cult structures also appear on vil-

lage sites, such as at Acy-Romance in Champagne,

which included squatting male burials, probably

human sacriﬁces. Many Roman temples in central

and northern France are producing evidence of

Middle and Late La Tène activity.

The second phenomenon was the appearance of

large, open settlements of proto-urban character. In

France the best documented are Levroux in the

IRON AGE FRANCE

ANCIENT EUROPE

217

Berry and Roanne on the upper Loire, sites of 30

hectares and 10 hectares, respectively, which start

during the early second century

B.C. (La Tène

C1–2). In the fourth century, trade with the Medi-

terranean virtually faded away, but with the founda-

tion of these sites, contact resumes, as evidenced by

the appearance of Massaliot coins and ﬁne Campa-

nian tablewares and wine amphorae from central

Italy. Coinage was adopted, initially high-value gold

staters imitating those of Philip II of Macedon but

later mass-produced cast potin coins, which may

have allowed the development of a monetized mar-

ket economy.

At Aulnat, near Clermont-Ferrand, in the terri-

tory of the Arverni, a complex of sites covering 2 to

3 square kilometers appeared in the late third centu-

B.C. The complex includes cult areas, cemeteries

(though no rich burials), and a high-status area with

goldworking and silver working; coin production;

and iron, glass, and other industries. There was also

massive deposition of Italian wine amphorae. From

the Greek philosopher and historian Posidonius one

hears of Luernios, “the richest man of all Gaul,”

who, in the mid-second century

B.C., became king

of the Arverni because of his largesse to his follow-

ers, “scattering gold and silver” and organizing a

feast of food and wine. Posidonius also records that

the Arverni controlled an area from the Rhône to

the Atlantic, and Aulnat seemed to be the center of

their power.

LA TÈNE D (150–30

B.C.

)

In 125 B.C. Massalia asked for Rome’s aid. By 121

B.C. most of southern France had been conquered,

and an expeditionary force under Bituitos, king of

the Arverni, had been defeated on the River Isère.

Roman power was extended to the headwaters of

the Garenne, and a huge treasure at a sanctuary at

Toulouse was seized; the Rhône route also was se-

cured as far as Lyon and Geneva. Central and west-

ern Gaul was opened up to Italian trade, and the

market was ﬂooded with goods. It has been calcu-

lated that, in the 140 years it was occupied, the con-

tents of a million amphorae were consumed on the

oppidum of Mont Beuvray, some 150 a week.

The defeat of the Arverni may have destabilized

Gaul—by the time Caesar attacked in 58

B.C., the

Aedui and the Sequani were vying for supreme

power in central Gaul, though the Arverni, under

their leader Vercingetorix, were to play the leading

role in the ﬁnal revolt in 52

B.C. The years around

120

B.C., however, saw a major change in the settle-

ment patterns in Gaul and even east of the Rhine,

with the establishment of defended oppida often di-

rectly replacing the open settlements, though in

many areas no urban predecessor can be identiﬁed.

By this time in central and probably northern

France the normal political entity was the tribal

state, usually an oligarchic government of a “sen-

ate” and annual magistrates, but like their Mediter-

ranean counterparts, these states seem to have been

unstable and prone to monarchical takeover.

In Provence and across northern France, burial

evidence became more visible, including rich ones

with increasing quantities of grave goods from the

second century. By the end of the ﬁrst century

B.C.,

the richest graves included Italian ceramics (black

Campanian wares and, later, red Arretine Samian

ware); Italian wine amphorae and bronze vessels;

local ceramics; weapons, such as swords and spurs;

hearth furniture (especially iron ﬁredogs); and high-

ly decorated, bronze-bound wooden buckets,

among other items. These burials were associated

mainly with smaller settlements, and though it is

known that the elite were resident on the oppida,

the related cemeteries at, for instance, Mont Beu-

vray and the Titelberg in Luxembourg do not con-

tain the richest burials.

In southern France after the Roman conquest,

house structures started becoming more complex.

In contrast, from their very foundation, the oppida

included large, farmlike palisade enclosures, and at

Mont Beuvray after 50

B.C. these structures evolved

into palatial stone-built Mediterranean style houses,

with open courtyards, mosaic pavements, hypo-

causts, and running water. The smaller houses in the

artisan areas also were built independently from one

another and were more substantial than their south-

ern counterparts.

The elite were investing in their urban proper-

ties but preferred to be buried on their country es-

tates. Both the burial and the settlement evidence

document increasing disparities of wealth, similar to

what was happening in republican Italy. In Gaul the

major change was the way in which wealth was dis-

played. The huge consumption of wine (and so,

presumably, feasting) continued into the Augustan

period and then fell off as more money was spent on

6: THE EUROPEAN IRON AGE, C. 800 B.C.– A.D. 400

218

ANCIENT EUROPE

private luxury, such as houses, or in the public arena

on public buildings, such as temples and baths in

the towns. In central and northern Gaul, the tribal

states became the Roman unit of administration,

whereas in southern Gaul, the apparently self-

governing towns were too small, and under the re-

forms of Augustus, towns such as Nîmes became the

centers of larger groupings similar to those of the

north. Thus, after centuries of contrasting develop-

ment, under Rome the whole of Gaul began evolv-

ing toward a common model.

See also Hallstatt (vol. 2, part 6); La Tène (vol. 2, part 6);

Oppida (vol. 2, part 6); Iron Age Feasting (vol. 2,

part 6).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brunaux, J.-L. The Celtic Gauls: Gods, Rites, and Sanctu-

aries. London: Seaby, 1988.

———, ed. Les sanctuares celtiques et leurs rapports avec le

monde méditerranéen. Dossiers de Protohistoire 3.

Paris: Éditions Errance, 1991.

Chausserie-Laprée, Jean, ed. Les temps des Gaulois en Pro-

vence. Toulouse, France: Musée Saint-Raymond, 2002.

Collis, J. R. The Celts: Origins, Myths, and Inventions. Lon-

don: Tempus, 2003.

Cunliffe, Barry W. The Ancient Celts. Oxford: Oxford Uni-

versity Press, 1997.

Diepeveen-Jansen, Marian. People, Ideas, and Goods: New

Perspectives on the “Celtic Barbarians” in Western and

Central Europe (500–250

BC). Translated by Christine

Jefferis. Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 7. Amster-

dam: Amsterdam University Press, 2001.

Gailledrat, Éric. Les Ibères de l’Èbre à l’Hérault, VIe–IVe s.

avant J.-C. Monographies d’Archéologie Méditerra-

néenne 1. Lattes, France: Association pour la Recherche

Archéologique en Languedoc Oriental, 1997.

Goudineau, Christian. Regard sur la Gaule. Paris: Éditions

Errance, 1998.

Guichard, Vincent, and Franck Perrin, eds. L’aristocracie

celte à la ﬁn de l’Âge du Fer. Bibracte 5. Glux-en-

Glenne, France: Centre Archéologique Européenne du

Mont Beuvray, 2002.

Guichard, Vincent, S. Sievers, and O. H. Urban, eds. Les

processus d’urbanisation à l’Âge du Fer. Eisenzeitliche

Urbanisationsprozesse. Bibracte 4. Glux-en-Glenne,

France: Centre Archéologique Européenne du Mont

Beuvray, 2000.

Hermary, A., A. Hesnard, and H. Tréziny, eds. Marseille

grecque: La cité phocéenne (600–49 av. J.C.). Paris: Édi-

tions Errance, 1999.

Py, Michel. Les Gaulois du Midi: De la ﬁn de l’Âge de Bronze

á la conquête romaine. Paris: Hachette, 1993.

Roymans, N. Tribal Societies in Northern Gaul: An Anthro-

pological Perspective. Cingula 12. Amsterdam: Universi-

ty of Amsterdam, 1990.

OHN COLLIS

■

GERGOVIA

Between 58 and 53 B.C. Julius Caesar’s conquest of

Gaul had dealt successively with the east, north, and

west of Gaul, but the center had remained virtually

unscathed, especially the Massif Central, the home-

land of the Arverni, the most powerful tribe in Gaul

in the second century

B.C. and still a major force in

the ﬁrst century. Among the Arverni, the leader of

the anti-Roman group was a young noble, Ver-

cingetorix, who attempted a coup d’état during the

winter of 53–52

B.C. but was expelled from the main

town, Gergovia. The setback was short-lived; Ger-

govia was quickly back in Vercingetorix’s hands,

and he started building a coalition with the neigh-

boring tribal states to oppose Rome.

Caesar was in northern Italy, but he moved

swiftly to combat any attack on the Roman province

of Transalpine Gaul. He raised an army and, despite

the fact that it was winter, crossed the Cevennes

into the Auvergne. He moved on to gather his le-

gions, which were in winter quarters around

Agedincum (Sens). With these forces he was able to

take the offensive, capturing the oppida (defended

towns) of Vellaunodunum (Château-Landon),

Cenabum (Orléans), and Avaricum (Bourges).

Sending four legions north under Labienus against

the Parisii, Caesar returned with the remaining six

to attack Gergovia. Vercingetorix had arrived before

him and had installed his troops in and around the

oppidum.

Caesar describes the town as lying on a high,

steep-sided hill, easily accessible only by a col (nar-

row neck of land joining two pieces of high ground)

on the western side. The town was surrounded by

a wall, with a second stone wall 2 meters high half-

way up the slope; the Gallic forces were camped on

the slopes, with garrisons on the neighboring hills.

Caesar captured a poorly defended hill at the foot

of the town and constructed his “large camp”; he

subsequently captured a second hill “facing” the

GERGOVIA

ANCIENT EUROPE

219