this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2023
31 points (97.0% liked)

Explain Like I'm Five

14289 readers
1 users here now

Simplifying Complexity, One Answer at a Time!

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
sabbah@lemmy.world
AradFort@lemmy.world
rikudou@lemmings.world
Don_Dickle@lemmy.world
Rikudou_Sage@lemmy.world
31
How did Celtic culture survive in Wales and Cornwall despite Roman invasion? (self.explainlikeimfive)
submitted 1 year ago by OmegaMouse to c/explainlikeimfive@lemmy.world
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I understand that the Romans were unable to conquer Scotland so they build Hadrian's Wall (which explains the survival of older cultures there). But as far as I know they occupied Wales and Cornwall, so how is it that the Celtic culture (language etc.) survived in those places?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] OmegaMouse 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks for explaining this. So were there many Roman citizens in Britannia, or was it a pretty small ratio of Romans to locals? Did the Roman soldiers give commands to the local elites, who would then tell the locals what to do? And would you say that life changed much for the locals under the new rule?

[โ€“] lvxferre@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

So were there many Roman citizens in Britannia, or was it a pretty small ratio of Romans to locals?

Relevant detail: this changed a lot in 212.

Before that date, Roman citizenship basically implied Roman culture, language and lifestyle; but in that year Caracalla passed an edict granting citizenship to all free men in the Empire, so a lot of non-Latin-speaking locals were to be considered Roman citizens. (And taxed as such).

That said, I'd estimate the ratio of Latin speakers in the province to be 3~6% in the 4th century, based on a few Wikipedia numbers:

  • Roman army, family, dependents: 125k people. Likely 100% Latin speakers. You also get a few bureaucrats but they're numerically insignificant.
  • Urban population: 240k people, including the above. The others were likely a mix of Brittonic and Latin speakers.
  • Total population: 3.6 million people. Unless urban, likely to be Brittonic speakers.

Did the Roman soldiers give commands to the local elites, who would then tell the locals what to do?

Not quite. The army was responsible for the enforcement of the rules, but the ones commanding the local elites and the army were former consuls appointed as governors.

And would you say that life changed much for the locals under the new rule?

I'm not sure at all. But I guess that, for both the slaves and the general working class, there was barely a difference. You still work to the bone, and die an ungrateful death, no matter if you're doing it for the sake of a local tribal chief or for some "imperator" in the middle of nowhere.