Random Coincidences Or: the return of theCelticto Iron Age Britain

Abstract

This paper examines whether there really are fundamental differences between a Celtic model of social organisation and the observations made by J.D. Hill about PRIA social organisation in southern England. Hill's alternative model, which in his opinion seems to be fundamentally at odds with what can be learned from Celtic sources, is characterised by the importance of three main factors. These are the essentially ideological, east-facing orientation of Iron Age houses and enclosed settlements, the ideological boundedness of individual homesteads, and the household as the centre of production. Yet, an examination of the medieval Irish andWelsh literature reveals that these three fundamental characteristics also seem to define the societies described in the Celtic texts. However, while the household is the central independent social and economic unit, the medieval texts also put great emphasis on kinship, with kin-groups fulfilling important, complementary roles for the individual households. It is examined whether a kind of society that is not dominated by either households or kinship, but by both households and kinship, can successfully explain all the archaeological phenomena observable in PRIA Britain, including different ‘hillforts’ possibly fulfilling several different functions. The striking similarities that can be found between the kinds of societies proposed by Hill as inhabiting PRIA Britain and those described in the medieval Irish and Welsh sources force us to consider whether the Celtic should not better be returned to PRIA Britain, and whether the ‘different Iron Ages’ were not that different after all.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.