‘Venta Belgarum’

From the 22nd of January untill the 13th of March this year, the Discovery Centre, in Winchester, hosted a very visual, little exhibition in their gallery about the roman times in Britain, called: “The Forgotten Emperor: Battles, Betrayal and Murder in Roman Britain”[1]. I went up the corridor and took a look. It was fascinating. The whole story was explained on comic-book format, which I think it was brilliant. But that made me realised about one thing, I did know absolutely nothing about the roman and pre-roman history of Winchester…Me! A potential historian that has done local history before! It just sounded ridiculous in my head. Therefore, I decided to do some research, and this is what I am going to talk about today: a brief summary of the pre-Roman and Roman history of King Alfred’s City.

Pre-historical Winchester: Iron Age Settlement & Before

Winchester’s wonderful geographical location, in a valley, surrounded by hills, has been attracting settlers since Neolithic times. The settlers probably established themselves at the east, (nowadays the area of Winnal), at the south, (Twyford Down) and around the west hill [2]. Later on, in the Iron Age, the population seems to have move more towards the southerner part of the city. The archaeological evidences point us to the settlement in St. Catherine’s Hill, as well as the area of Oram’s arbour. The location seems ideal: a nice curved hill nearby the river Itchen, fertile land…What else did the people from this age could desire?

Unfortunately, we do not know much more about this period, but we can be sure of one thing. The community that got formed around Winchester was prosper, and this probably was what attracted the later Roman colonists.

The Romans in ‘Venta Belgarum’

Barbara Carpenter-Turner, famous local historian in the county of Hampshire stated in her study that “no one knows when or how the romans first came to Winchester”[3]. On the other hand, Tom Beaumont James supports the idea, based on evidences (archaeological sources I suppose) that they might have arrived to the locality around 50 A.D, occupying first the west bank of the river and the Tufa island[4]. Whenever this happened, the city grew and grew.B ased on what the archaeology from cemeteries tells us, the size of the city would have been of 3-4000 people in the 2nd century AD[5]. In the end, Venta Belgarum become an important market place and administrative centre, as well as a meeting point for people of different cultures and back grounds: romans, britons, and possibly early Saxons[6]. There should have been a forum, several shops and a basilica[7]. It is also known that the city acquired the status of ‘civitas’, presumably after the death of Cogidubnus, who seems like to have been the ruler of the region[8].

There is an interesting cultural issue I would like to discuss about the roman town. It seems likely that a considerable proportion of the population remained pagan. Some burials suggest that the celtic practices were still in use: there have been found several cases of cremation [9]. I do believe that it is likely that both cultures co-existed at the same time. It is well-known that the romans found difficulties to subjugate many provinces with celtic background, like the Gauls, or the Cantabros, in the north of Spain. So it doesn’t sound that shocking the fact that in the area of the Lower Brook Street, in Winchester, there has been found a figure of what seems to be Epona, c.100 AD [10]. Perhaps there was a temple nearby, whether it was pagan, roman, or roman-celtic at the same time, we would never be certain. Nonetheless, the mosaics found in late 19th and mid-20th century, in St.Clements and the Brooks, respectively [11], demonstrate that in any case there was a Roman culture and population settled in here.

This issue of the identity of city’s population and the culture clash has made some people believe that Winchester might have been, in fact Camelot [12], and that Arthur was a local ruler trying to make some opposition against the romans, hence the remaining paganism. I guess that having that wonderful Round Table in our Great Hall does not help to drag them away from their imaginative believes. Although, who knows, perhaps it we own something of the Arthurian legends to our lovely, cosy city.

Either if you are suspicious of the ‘Romannitas’ status of ‘Venta Belgarum’, or a true-believer of the Roman power in this location in the south of Britain, I think we all agree that this was the moment when the importance of the settlement begins.

As we will see in future updates, the city would go through several stages, some of them better, some of them worse, but I am quite sure that this was one of the key moments in its history.

Before I finish, I would like to invite you to see the already mentioned exhibition (if you can track wherever it is now), and, also, to visit the City Museum to contemplate some of the remaining that have been recovered. And also, here there is a link to some sources that mention the place of ‘Venta Belgarum’:

http://www.roman-britain.org/places/venta_belgarum.htm

This is  the link to the city museum:

http://www.winchester.gov.uk/LeisureAndCulture/MuseumsAndGalleries/WinchesterMuseums/CityMuseum/GeneralR.asp?id=SX9452-A781BAF6&cat=8194

Bibliography & References:

1. http://www3.hants.gov.uk/wdc-children-eventdetails?id=91705
2. T.B. James, Winchester: English Heritage Publications (London, 1997) 23
3. B. Carpenter-Turner, Winchester (Southampton, 1980) 5
4. T.B. James, Winchester: English Heritage Publications (London, 1997) 30
5. T.B. James, Winchester: English Heritage Publications (London, 1997) 32
6. B. Carpenter-Turner, Winchester (Southampton, 1980) 4
7. T.B. James, Winchester: English Heritage Publications (London, 1997) 31
8. P. Salway, A History of Roman Britain (Oxford and New York, 1993) 71
9. T.B. James, Winchester: English Heritage Publications (London, 1997) 33-36
10. T.B. James, Winchester: English Heritage Publications (London, 1997) 35
11. B. Carpenter-Turner, Winchester (Southampton, 1980) 6
12. B. Carpenter-Turner, Winchester (Southampton, 1980) 8

The Paris Commune

So for our final delve in to the violence of March’s long and bloody past, we have witnessed Caesar’s murder; the Albigensian crusade; and the natural disasters that have happened in March, all of which have had a great impact on their respective contemporary cultures; history and life today. Now it is time to turn to our final event the La Commune in Paris, France. The Paris Commune is name that was given to the events surrounding the end of the war between France and Prussia and other Germany States and extends to include the massacre that put down the revolutionary movement at the end of May 1871.

Firstly we have to look at the build up to the commune as revolutions, as we know does not occur spontaneously, the events and actions might, but there are usually some underlying factors that ignite the flame of revolution. Since 1870 France, under Napoleon III had been involved in the Franco-Prussian war, the war itself was the combination of ongoing tensions between the two countries that had finally come to fruition over the La ‘revolución gloriosa’, (translation the glorious revolution) in Spain as a result of the deposition of Isabella II and also the controversial Ems Telegram in which Otto Von Bismarck is said to have altered the message from the Prussian leader Wilhelm I to the French ambassador, in order to goad the French into war. Needless to say the telegram had the desired effect and soon enough both countries were at war. The Prussian and German forces were superior and at the battle of Sedan they had captured Napoleon III with the whole of his army. However this didn’t end the war and the 3rd republic declared on the 4th of September they continued the war. With the capture of Paris and ceremonial occupation by the Prussians; the disaster of the war and growing worker discontent the Parisians had enough.

On March 26 1871 after five long, hard months for the Parisians enduring the Prussian siege and also refusing the terms of surrender as negotiated by the national assembly the citizens of Paris voted for self-government. Perhaps one of the earliest examples of class solidarity as the citizens elected their own government with people from various backgrounds with both working and middle class members. The commune mainly wanted the ability to self govern Paris, right that existed in some other French towns and also it was linked to a desire for a more ‘just’ way of dealing with the economy. This ‘just’ economy is suggested to be based upon a socialist ideology.

The Commune continued to run Paris successfully for the next two months. As a governing body it abolishes conscription and the standing army leaving the National Guard as the sole armed force. On April 1st the Commune declares the highest salary received by any member would not exceed 6,000 Francs. In addition the Commune decreed the separation of church and state; with the abolition all state payments for the church; turning all private church property in to national property and finally declaring that religion was a private matter. Along with publically burning the guillotine to large public rejoicing; reorganising the manufacturing factories turning them into co-operative societies, to an extent owned and worked by the workers and abolishing night work for bakers. The changes made show a very socialist, maybe even communist element to the revolutionary government as the majority of the changes seem to be made with the people in mind.

However, where is the violence I hear you cry if March is the month of violence where is it in this case? The answer comes as usual with the bloody end, of the Commune. Known as La Semaine Sanglante, the blood soaked week, 21st -28th May, troops from Versailles finally defeated the commune rebels, massacring them as they went. A weak defence was put up in the west of Paris and grew stronger as the Versailles Army came nearer, before deciding to attack the east of Paris… the workers district. Over the following week workers and civilians were massacred on sight. Some estimates suggest that there was between 17,000- 30,000 fatalities during that week alone, an extremely heavy loss considering that during the French Revolution and Terror approximately 19,000 died within a year and a half. A further 50,000 Communards were arrested after the Communes suppression with some escaping and 4,500-7,000 forcibly exiled to New Caledonia in the South Pacific.

So, the commune was defeated, that is an understatement, it was slaughtered and so ends the violence of March. Given our overall theme I guess it would be hard, for me to end this post on a happy note but I’m going to try. This movement la commune is an example, perhaps a discouraging one, but an example nonetheless of people taking a stand and taking matters into their own hands. Something that we still see today with our own protests which admittedly are a lot less bloody, but it the idea remains, to stand up together and be counted when enough is enough. Ok we may not win all the time, the Commune certainly didn’t, but it lasted two months. So I guess what I’m trying to say is I think it is better to try and fail than to not try at all and in the case of la commune they tried and failed in the battle but perhaps in the war they lasted as a popular example of a popular class movement ‘marching forward to conquer their rights.’

By Sophie

Sources

http://www.paris.org/Kiosque/may01/commune.html

http://www.marxists.org/history/france/paris-commune/timeline.htm

http://www.paris.org/Kiosque/may01/commune.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Commune

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Prussian_War

 

P.S: Again, we would like to thank Josema and Rubyces for the image!

Et tu, Brute?

Everyone knows Julius Caesar. The most famous of emperors and, most importantly, arch-villain extraordinaire in the Asterix comics. He was also an orator and a general, an invader, a high priest and the first man in the Republic to aspire to being King of Rome. Julius Caesar is the layman’s ‘perfect Roman’. Many people think of him as being the greatest ruler Rome had (personally, I think it’s Augustus, but let’s not be picky), and he is famed for having an affair with Cleopatra, invading Britain (twice) and taking his soldiers into the Senate.

What he Is most famous for, though, is being murdered.

Julius Caesar was born to a rich family, groomed to be a senator, maybe even consul one day. His oratory and political skills won him status and promotions through the rigid political system. Also placed in charge of several legions, he conquered Gaul and is well-known for dragging the chieftain Vercingetorix through Rome behind his chariot. It was these achievements that began his rise to power.

He became consul young, helped by the fact that his legions were fiercely loyal to him and the senators were presented with little choice but to raise the hero of Rome to a position more suited to him. It was when he began to claim more and more power for himself that problems arose. The final straw came when he attended the Senate dressed in purple – the colour of kings. The last king of Rome, Tarquin, had been thrown out by the people for his cruelty and there was no way the Roman Republic intended to bow to another ruler like him.

On the 15th of March, Caesar was hailed by a soothsayer as he made his way through to the Theatre of Pompey, and was told that harm would come to him no later than the Ides of March – that very day. Though he laughed this off and continued on his way, Caesar could not avoid the fate awaiting him. A group of senators, led by his protegé Brutus, stabbed him to death in the theatre.

Caesar’s bloody death is undoubtedly one of the best known events in March – one that definitely marks this month as a month of violence. As a general, he was a violent man, leading legions against the ill-trained and ill-equipped people of first Gaul, then Britain. Perhaps we can take some solace in the memory that the British tribes defeated him not once, but twice. However, this does not change the number of lives that were lost at the behest of this man.

Whatever arguments are made about Caesar – most notably the claim that the evidence of his existence is less than that proving the life of Jesus – no one can deny the fact that he is, and will probably always be a key figure in the history of the Western world.

You don’t believe me? Well, I suppose that someone who has lived under a rock their entire life might not know who he is. But I only have one more thing to say about my argument. Something that everyone knows. Something that I feel proves my point that Julius Caesar is a fundamental figure in our history.

‘Veni, vidi, vici’

 

 

(W.U Team Note: we would like to thank you our colaborators Rubén (rubyces) and ‘Josema’ for the production of this awesome art work!!)