FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40  
41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   >>  
a mere accident. [Footnote 1: One example is _Sacrillos avot form._, suggesting a bilingual sentence such as we find in some Cornish documents of the period when Cornish was definitely giving way to English. Another example, _Valens avoti_ (Dechelette, _Vases ceramiques_, i. 302), suggests the same stage of development in a different way.] No other Romano-British town has been excavated so extensively or so scientifically as Silchester. None, therefore, has yielded so much evidence. But we have no reason to consider Silchester exceptional in its character. Such scraps as we possess from other sites point to similar Romanization elsewhere. FVR, for instance, recurs on a potsherd from the Romano-British country town at Dorchester in Dorset. A set of tiles dug up in the ruins of a country-house at Plaxtol, in Kent, bear a Roman inscription impressed by a rude wooden stamp (Fig. 6).[1] In short, all the _graffiti_ on potsherds or tiles that are known to me as found in towns or country-houses are equally Roman. Larger inscriptions, cut on stone, have also been found in country-houses. On the whole the general result is clear. Latin was employed freely in the towns of Britain, not only on serious occasions or by the upper classes, but by servants and work-people for the most accidental purposes. It was also used, at least by the upper classes, in the country. Plainly there did not exist in the towns that linguistic gulf between upper class and lower class which can be seen to-day in many cities of eastern Europe, where the employers speak one language and the employed another. On the other hand, it is possible that a different division existed, one which is perhaps in general rarer, but which can, or could, be paralleled in some Slavonic districts of Austria-Hungary. That is, the townsfolk of all ranks and the upper class in the country may have spoken Latin, while the peasantry may have used Celtic. No actual evidence has been discovered to prove this. We may, however, suggest that it is not, in itself, an impossible or even an improbable linguistic division of Roman Britain, even though the province did not contain any such racial differences as those of German, Pole, Ruthene and Rouman which lend so much interest to Austrian towns like Czernowitz. [Footnote 1: _Proc. Soc. Antiq. London_, xxiii. 108; _Eph._ ix. 1290.] [Illustration: FIG. 6. FRAGMENT OF INSCRIBED TILE FROM PLAXTOL AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE INSCRIPTIO
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40  
41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   >>  



Top keywords:

country

 

Britain

 

classes

 

linguistic

 

evidence

 

Silchester

 

employed

 

general

 

houses

 

division


Romano

 

Cornish

 
British
 

Footnote

 

eastern

 
cities
 

employers

 

Europe

 

language

 
London

PLAXTOL

 

INSCRIBED

 

Plainly

 

RECONSTRUCTION

 
FRAGMENT
 

INSCRIPTIO

 

Illustration

 
Czernowitz
 

suggest

 

discovered


peasantry

 

Celtic

 
actual
 

impossible

 

German

 

racial

 

differences

 
improbable
 
province
 

Ruthene


spoken

 

paralleled

 

existed

 

Slavonic

 

districts

 

interest

 

Rouman

 
townsfolk
 

Austria

 

Hungary