Megalithic shipping and trade routes

Current topics

Re: Megalithic shipping and trade routes

Postby Rocky » 12:46 pm

Boreades wrote:What we call Celts seem to have split in two streams, one went east into northern India and beyond (see Tocharians). The other stream turned west and became "us", via Zoroastrians, Phoenicians, etc.

The Tocharians are Uzbeks, it's interesting that the tradition of fine carpets is still dominated by the Uzbeks, Afghans and Persians. Not so surprising then to find a link between wool-producing regions in northern France/Belgium and southern England with the Far East. We tend to forget how massive the market was for hanging carpets and woven tapestries. Worth a king's ransom in some cases.
Rocky
 
Posts: 23
Joined: 5:00 pm

Re: Megalithic shipping and trade routes

Postby hvered » 2:28 pm

On the matter of kings' ransoms, it's worth recalling that fortunes were made from the wool trade. The greatest wool-producers in Europe were monks, particularly the Cistercians, originating in eastern France near Dijon, who developed a nexus of monastic properties in central France and Burgundy, the heart of wool production and weaving.

The first Cistercian abbey in England was in Surrey next to the River Wey, then Forde Abbey in Dorset near the A303 which was apparently 'insufficiently fertile' (ha! Cistercians thrived on Yorkshire moors and Welsh uplands). It sounds a bit like Goldilocks and the Three Bears when the daughter house of Bindon Abbey, on the Jurassic coast overlooking Lulworth Cove, was forced to move due to 'hardship' a little east to Wool, a historic bridging point over the River Frome half way between Dorchester and Wareham (Poole) on the south coast. Looking at the map it is clear that monasteries were sited on or near main drovers' roads. Perhaps they also benefited from and/or developed the existing trade routes even with places in far-away Persia.
hvered
 
Posts: 855
Joined: 10:22 pm

Re: Megalithic shipping and trade routes

Postby Boreades » 1:45 pm

By chance, just found this article on 70,000 Celtic coins found in Jersey

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-jersey-19576719

"coins are thought to have been hidden in the island by tribesmen from Gaul trying to keep it from Caesar and his army around 50 BC."

"Neil Mahrer, from Jersey Heritage, has been tasked with separating and cleaning what is thought to be about 70,000 coins - the largest find of its kind. Mr Mahrer said: "We assumed it would be a coin hoard but when I started to clear back the surface I found a piece of silver Celtic jewellery. We have no idea how much jewellery or other material is hidden inside. Virtually no two are exactly the same, they are all of a known type so far from one tribe on the French coast but we can only see about 1% of the coins in it."

That sounds like some of the Veneti escaped north by ship with their most portable high-value items before the naval battle in Quiberon bay. So here's one that went to Jersey. I wonder where else they would have gone?
Boreades
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: 2:35 pm


Re: Megalithic shipping and trade routes

Postby Boreades » 4:29 pm

This
http://www.writer2001.com/cihoards2.htm
gives us some very useful pointers.

"Hoards of coins found in Jersey include coins from the Durotriges (= Dorset and SW Hampshire)... An important Durotriges site, Hengistbury Head, is where the largest concentrations of Coriosolite coins in England were found. "

So both sides of the Channel have coins from the other side, and were trading with each other.

"Hengistbury had been an important port of entry for products from the Roman world, particularly wine. From the dates of amphorae found in that region, we see that Caesar's invasions put an end to Hengistbury's wine trade, and subsequent importation of wine and other goods are primarily found north of the Thames. Cassivelaunos, leader of the British forces and whose stronghold was north of the Thames, surrendered to Caesar in 54 B.C. Whether Cassivelaunos or one of his successors negotiated future trade benefits is difficult to say, but the losers were the Durotriges. "

"The old trade route from Alet in Brittany via the Channel Islands to Hengistbury, although ceasing to provide Britain with wine, still had its uses. Alet had storage facilities for grain - a plentiful commodity in southern Britain, but less so in Brittany, where much of the land was unsuitable. "


Wine going north, and grain going south, until the Romans took over.

"The fortunes of the Durotriges seem to have declined at an alarming rate: their coinage started in gold of a slightly lower standard than British A, and then deteriorated in quality from base gold through silver to billion and finally ending in bronze "

Collapse of the ME in this part of the world.

The pre-war trade route from Alet to Hengistbury included Jersey. Alet came to a violent end in about 15 to 20 AD: the reasons are unclear. The end of Alet possibly signified the end of trade with the Durotriges, which could have forced the final debasement of their currency to that of bronze.
Boreades
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: 2:35 pm

Re: Megalithic shipping and trade routes

Postby hvered » 12:33 am

Boreades wrote:"coins are thought to have been hidden in the island by tribesmen from Gaul trying to keep it from Caesar and his army around 50 BC."

That sounds like some of the Veneti escaped north by ship with their most portable high-value items before the naval battle in Quiberon bay. So here's one that went to Jersey. I wonder where else they would have gone?

Offshore island eh? Jersey may well have been suitable for safe-guarding a large amount of coins, or evading taxes.

The coins were found in a scatter at the Le Châtellier fort, in the road beneath where the main (East) gate had stood.
hvered
 
Posts: 855
Joined: 10:22 pm

Re: Megalithic shipping and trade routes

Postby Boreades » 10:29 am

hvered wrote:
Boreades wrote:"coins are thought to have been hidden in the island by tribesmen from Gaul trying to keep it from Caesar and his army around 50 BC."

That sounds like some of the Veneti escaped north by ship with their most portable high-value items before the naval battle in Quiberon bay. So here's one that went to Jersey. I wonder where else they would have gone?

Offshore island eh? Jersey may well have been suitable for safe-guarding a large amount of coins, or evading taxes.

The coins were found in a scatter at the Le Châtellier fort, in the road beneath where the main (East) gate had stood.


Yes, it's a curious coincidence that Megalithic Trade Hubs (like Jersey and I think the Isle of Man) have that connection. I'm thinking along the lines of Free Ports and tax-free zones. Jersey was a pre-Roman Trade Hub, and clearly handled a lot of coins. Some might say another name for a coin hoard is a Bank. The IoM and CIs are still Banking and Trade Hubs, except the main type of trade now is Finance By Internet. This might be a very good subject for Applied Epistemology.
Boreades
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: 2:35 pm

Re: Megalithic shipping and trade routes

Postby Jools » 11:39 pm

Boreades wrote:
Given the size of the Veneti ships, I'm sure they would have preferred more sheltered and deeper water ports like Falmouth, Fowey, the Tamar, Dartmouth etc. Anyway we know for sure that smaller boats were involved in moving trade goods all along the coast. e.g. the Salcombe shipwreck. That's one that got caught out , perhaps by bad weather when they were trying to catch a tide to meet a Veneti ship along the coast.

Salcombe is a good example of a medieval port (established thirteenth century) at the mouth of an estuary clogged up further inland. There are silted-up creeks and streams that used to be navigable but the estuary or ria is notoriously hazardous on account of a sandbar only exposed at low spring tides.
Jools
 
Posts: 30
Joined: 8:14 am

Re: Megalithic shipping and trade routes

Postby hvered » 11:46 pm

One summer holiday long ago, I learnt to sail in Salcombe (not responsible for that shipwreck)
hvered
 
Posts: 855
Joined: 10:22 pm

Re: Megalithic shipping and trade routes

Postby Boreades » 10:08 pm

hvered wrote:On the matter of kings' ransoms, it's worth recalling that fortunes were made from the wool trade. The greatest wool-producers in Europe were monks, particularly the Cistercians, originating in eastern France near Dijon, who developed a nexus of monastic properties in central France and Burgundy, the heart of wool production and weaving.

The first Cistercian abbey in England was in Surrey next to the River Wey, then Forde Abbey in Dorset near the A303 which was apparently 'insufficiently fertile' (ha! Cistercians thrived on Yorkshire moors and Welsh uplands). It sounds a bit like Goldilocks and the Three Bears when the daughter house of Bindon Abbey, on the Jurassic coast overlooking Lulworth Cove, was forced to move due to 'hardship' a little east to Wool, a historic bridging point over the River Frome half way between Dorchester and Wareham (Poole) on the south coast. Looking at the map it is clear that monasteries were sited on or near main drovers' roads. Perhaps they also benefited from and/or developed the existing trade routes even with places in far-away Persia.


Did their "hardship" also move them closer to mineral wealth as well?
Boreades
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: 2:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Index

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests