The Provinces of the Roman Empire, from Caesar to Diocletian. v. 1Mommsen, Theodor
History
The Provinces of the Roman Empire, from Caesar to Diocletian. v. 1
Mommsen, Theodor
Roman provinces -- Administration; Rome -- History -- Empire, 30 B.C.-476 A.D.
While in the organising of administration the national character of
the Celts was respected so far as was at all compatible with the
unity of the empire, this was not the case as regards language. Even
if it had been practicable to allow the communities to conduct their
administration in a language, of which the controlling imperial
officials could only in exceptional cases be masters, it undoubtedly
was not the design of the Roman government to erect this barrier
between the rulers and the ruled. Accordingly, among the coins struck
in Gaul under Roman rule, and monuments erected on behalf of any
community, there has been found no demonstrably Celtic inscription.
The use of the language of the country otherwise was not hindered; we
find as well in the southern province as in the northern monuments
with Celtic inscription, written in the former case always with the
Greek,[52] in the latter always with the Latin[53] alphabet; and
probably at least several of the former, certainly all of the latter,
belong to the epoch of Roman rule. The fact that in Gaul, outside
of the towns having Italian rights and the Roman camps, inscribed
monuments occur at all in but small number, is in all probability
to be accounted for mainly by supposing that the language of the
country, treated as dialect, appeared just as unsuited for such
employment as the unfamiliar imperial language, and hence the erection
of memorial-stones did not become generally adopted here as in the
Latinised regions; the Latin probably may at that time in the greater
part of Gaul have had nearly the same position, as it had subsequently
in the earlier Middle ages overagainst the popular language of the
time. The vigorous survival of the national language is most distinctly
shown by the reproduction of the Gallic proper names in Latin, not
seldom with the retention of non-Latin forms of sound. The facts that
spellings like _Lousonna_ and _Boudicca_ with the non-Latin diphthong
_ou_ found their way even into Latin literature, that for the aspirated
dental, the English _th_, there was even employed in Roman writing
a special sign (Ð), that Epadatextorigus is written alongside of
Epasnactus, and Ðirona alongside of Sirona--make it almost a certainty
that the Celtic language, whether in the Roman territory or beyond
it, had in or before this epoch undergone a certain regulation in the
matter of writing, and could already at that time be written as it is
written in the present day.
[Sidenote: Evidences of continued use of Celtic.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account