As Marija Gimbutas and Merlin Stone noted, there never was a matriarchy. Matrilocality, by contrast, may be seen in a belt across the Bantu southern regions of the African continent. Here's Lara M. Cassidy et al. arguing for its existence in old Prydain.
The Celtic/Volcae Netherlands were in close contact with what's now southern England, including Cornwall. North of that, the Britons tended not to move abroad much. The solution stumbled upon, was to define "wealth" as "this land". A man who wanted wealth and status had to marry the land (as documented in Holy Grail). That meant he had to move abroad. This kept inbreeding low-enough for the locals to survive and not to war upon each other too much. It also avoided the queen's brothers muscling in, to get their own daughters on the throne in place of the queen's... therefore, really their daughters' brothers: the word for that is "avunculate". Instead I think we're looking at anarchosyndicalism, the only "communism" as can possibly work.
The system contrasted with the Gauls and Aquitanians in what's now France. The mainland grew more urban. The weather was better and it has more navigable rivers, plus some of those rivers drained into the Med.
With the Gaulish (or Belgaic?) to-and-fro, it may be that the Celtic of southern Britain had to shift to be more Gaulish, notably taking on the q>p shift of the Greeks (like Oscans did). Cornovia and Cambria, both rather marginal, would have lagged. Roman influence in Gaul sidelined Gaulish, so the southern Britons simply spoke Gaulish Trade Latin. Ireland meanwhile was less tied with the Gaulish/Greek world; when it got Med visitors, the visitors were Latins who never did q>p, so the Irish didn't either.
No comments:
Post a Comment