- Apr 2013
- 11
- Australia
So relatively shortly before Roman forays into S.E. Britain, apparently Belgae and Gaulish peoples had established themselves here. The Cantiaci were described as the most civilised, and presumably the Catuvelauni were quite warlike to be able to assert their dominance over this region, and must have had good technology. They minted coins and dwelt in Oppida.
What, though, is the difference between the Belgae and the Gaulish that settled south east Britain? Elsewhere, the belgae were described as more warlike than even the gauls. Does anyone know if any material evidence has been discovered that shows differences between these two cultures? What about Brigantes, Iceni and Votadini? Who were they ethnically and culturally?
Can we assume that the Silures and Ordovices were an older wave which spoke a similar language but lacked technology? In this way would it be safe to say they were very similar to the Brythonic Pictii?
What, though, is the difference between the Belgae and the Gaulish that settled south east Britain? Elsewhere, the belgae were described as more warlike than even the gauls. Does anyone know if any material evidence has been discovered that shows differences between these two cultures? What about Brigantes, Iceni and Votadini? Who were they ethnically and culturally?
Can we assume that the Silures and Ordovices were an older wave which spoke a similar language but lacked technology? In this way would it be safe to say they were very similar to the Brythonic Pictii?