Journal articles on the topic 'Conquest of Gaul'

Several recent reconstructions of the social and economic development of non-Mediterranean Gaul afterc. 200 BC have argued for the development of complex societies, characterized by the appearance of centralized political entities with urban – or at least urbanizing – communities. The emergence of such ‘Archaic States’ is often considered as having been restricted to a broad zone running eastward from the Atlantic façade through the northern Massif Central to the Swiss plateau. Five certain such states are usually claimed: Bituriges cubi, Aedui, Arverni, Sequani, Helvetii; and three probable: Pictones, Lemovices and Lingones. The constitutents of this zone were originally recognized by Dr Daphne Nash (1976; 1978a; 1978b; 1981), and her view has since been adopted in Britain by Champion and his collaborators (1984), Bintliff (1984) and, most recently, Cunliffe (1988: figure 38). Essential to the formulation of this hypothesis was a wide-ranging consideration of three domains of protohistoric evidence on Gaul: literary, most conspicuously Julius Caesar’s deBello Gallico; numismatics; and the settlement record of the late La Tène and its more shadowy antecedents. Among more recent commentators, a primary interest in the ‘core–periphery’ relationship (Cunliffe 1988; Rowlands et al. 1987) which existed between the Mediterranean world and Central Gaul is manifest. In a minimal view, this interaction may be envisaged in terms of the consequences of long-distance trade and subsequent military conquest spurring socio-political change. The unspoken by-product of this perspective is that differential development within non-Mediterranean Gaul is simplistically presented in terms of distance-decay from the Mediterranean littoral, with little attention being paid to the effects of physiographic diversity across this landmass.

Julius Caesar was remembered in later times for the unprecedented scale of his military activity. He was also remembered for writing copiously while on campaign. Focusing on the period of Rome's war with Gaul (58––50 BCE), this paper argues that the two activities were interrelated: writing helped to facilitate the Roman conquest of the Gallic peoples. It allowed Caesar to send messages within his own theater of operations, sometimes with distinctive advantages; it helped him stay in touch with Rome, from where he obtained ever more resources; and it helped him, in his Gallic War above all, to turn the story of his scattered campaigns into a coherent narrative of the subjection of a vast territory henceforward to be called ““Gaul.”” The place of epistolography in late Republican politics receives new analysis in the paper, with detailed discussion of the evidence of Cicero.

Abstract In Romans’ view, Caius Julius Caesar was not only a writer, a politician, a triumvir, but also a visionary, a general, a founder and a revolutionary of military art and politics. Through his wars, Caesar brought a new perspective as the creator of a true reform of political and military affairs. A brilliant mind, Caesar made of the military art a political platform, his political consecration being actually his military glory, the war with the Gauls. By inspired military manoeuvres and a well planned strategy, Caesar conquered the entire Gaul, a very large and resourceful territory. The conquest of Gaul gave Caesar the opportunity to conquer Rome, as the sole leader, with a new redoubtable political actor on his side, the army. Alea iacta est and the Rubicon was crossed by the founder of a new political and military power, the empire. The commander of the army, imperator, also becomes the political commander of the Republic, transformed by Caesar into an empire. By the civil war, Caesar accomplished the revolution of military and political affairs, changing the army from an institution of power into a political institution, a government partner of the supreme military leader who became Rome’s too, a fact carried out by his heir, Augustus. Caesar turned the war into a political affair, dominating his political and military opponents through ambition, consistency, intelligence, acumen, charisma, the qualities worthy of a world military leader.

G. Woolf argues that the transformation of the aristocracies of Interior Gaul was not so much caused by the conquest itself as by the fact that from that point in time these aristocracies became involved in the transformations of Roman society following the introduction of the Principate and other subsequent changes in Roman politics (novel ways of elite competition and gaining popularitas). Tacitus discusses these developments at length. In addition, this process took place in a provincial area where outside interference was rare.

G. Woolf argues that the transformation of the aristocracies of Interior Gaul was not so much caused by the conquest itself as by the fact that from that point in time these aristocracies became involved in the transformations of Roman society following the introduction of the Principate and other subsequent changes in Roman politics (novel ways of elite competition and gainingpopularitas). Tacitus discusses these developments at length. In addition, this process took place in a provincial area where outside interference was rare.

The terms “native farm” and “Roman villa,” often contrasted by historians, stem from a long-standing and still-unsettled historiographical debate. In northern Gaul, they particularly evoke the work of Roger Agache, whose aerial surveys showed a landscape populated by large villae that were readily interpreted as great aristocratic estates in contrast to small native settlements. This view became more or less dominant, giving the impression that the Roman conquest swiftly and radically altered the agrarian system of northern Gaul. In spite of many attempts to correct it, the idea of an agricultural economy based on the production of large estates remains widely accepted among historians. This article offers a reminder of how difficult it is to apprehend the complex situation of ancient rural landscapes through the lens of Classical sources. It then goes on to consider the recent contribution of development-led archaeology and the interpretative problems posed by the intermeshing of numerous rural settlements whose size and luxury are not necessarily relevant indicators of productivity.

Jan Slofstra and Greg Woolf have written very stimulating papers about the changing character of societies, and especially of their elites, in Interior Gaul and on the Rhine frontier. The contrast between these two regions provides a valuable arena for considering larger questions of change in Gaul, with emphasis on development of civic society in Central Gaul and of a militarised society on the frontier. I shall first comment on a few of the important issues that these papers raise, then suggest some additional and alternative ways of thinking about the problems. Woolf's discussion of cultural practice shows how this approach can help to focus future research on subjects related directly to the actual changes. His review of expressions of status differences in earlier circumstances, back into the early Iron Age, provides a useful long-term context for considering the changes that accompanied and followed the Roman conquest. The distinction he draws between the mainly public display of elite status in late Iron Age contexts, and more private displays in the Roman period, is important and merits further investigation. In Slofstra's paper, I find the discussion of the relationships between structure and agency very useful in this context. His emphasis on the interplay between the categories power, culture, and identity is highly pertinent. His explication of the differences in Roman policy and native reaction between pre-Augustan and post-Augustan times is instructive. The contrasting patterns he outlines between changes in Central Gaul and those on the Rhine frontier, and the three-level interpretation he presents for understanding the Batavian revolt, are valuable models for formulating future research strategies.

AbstractThe Celtic-speaking town of Lattara (modern Lattes) in Iron Age southern Gaul was an important centre of sustained colonial interaction with Etruscans, Massalian Greeks and Romans from the sixth century B.C. One of the important consequences of these encounters was the introduction of coinage. Through an examination of the archaeological context of coins, I investigate how the use and value of money changed at Lattara after the Roman conquest. Drawing upon several anthropological discussions of money in colonial settings, particularly Jean and John Commaroff's (2006) notion of ‘commensuration’, I suggest that the incorporation of coinage into transaction systems at Lattara was related to its expedience as a standardized form of value, which facilitated exchange between the inhabitants of the town and foreign merchants.

So wrote the Irish American poet John Montague of the great loss of culture under Great Britain's empire, a violent overmapping of identity whose poignant erasure was itself richly preserved in plays, poems, and songs. Nothing of Ireland's past, it seems, was remembered quite so vigorously as its erasure. And because that disappearance has become such a familiar text of loss, in poem, play, and song, I want to evoke that archive of absence for this study of a similar erasure, centuries earlier—not the Irish under English of Brian Friel's Translations, but the Gallic Celts under Rome; not The Dying Gaul whose images of self-slaughter ennobled their extirpation, but those who survived the conquest, the surrendered, widows and children of the slaughtered who grew that grafted tongue, the twice-born who learned to live again as refugees under Roman rule, and adopt foreign ways—to tease out what little remains there are of the theatre's role in that erasure, resistance, and that monumental realignment of identity called “Romanizing.”

ABSTRACTThe publication of the RurLand (Rural Landscape in North-East Gaul) project has provided an opportunity to compare methodologies and results with those of The Rural Settlement of Roman Britain project. Two themes, which draw out the asymmetrical development of settlement in the two regions, are examined: the very different impacts of the Roman conquests of Gaul and of Britain on settlement numbers and settlement continuity, and the development of the agricultural economy and its relationship with the frontiers of Britain and Germany, as reflected in the growth and decline of villa estates in Britain and Gaul.

With their steady series of conquests during the eighth century, adding Alemannia, Frisia, Aquitaine, the Lombard kingdom in northern Italy, Septimania, Bavaria, Saxony, and Brittany to the Frankish heartlands in Gaul, the Carolingians created what Ganshof regarded as an unwieldy empire. Was the Carolingian Church unwieldy too? Recent work, notably that of Janet Nelson, has underlined not only the political ideologies that helped to hold the Frankish realms together, but also the practical institutions and actions of individuals in government and administration. Can the same be done for the Church? Despite the extraordinary diversity of the Carolingian world and its ecclesiastical traditions, can it be described as a unity? What sense of a ‘Frankish Church’ or of ‘Frankish ecclesiastical institutions’ can be detected in the sources?

A obra intitulada Comentarii de Bello Gallico foi produzida por Caio Júlio César durante os seus pro-consulados na Ilíria e na Gália Cisalpina (59-50 A.E.C.) e trata das campanhas por este empreendidas na Gália, com os objetivos de subjugá-la e conquistá-la. Pretendemos analisar no presente artigo de que forma César estrutura sua etnografia da Gália como metonímia da região pelos habitantes e, portanto, excluindo as etnografias da Germania e da Britânia presente no Bello Gallico. Ademais, exploraremos como o autor constrói a imagem de um inimigo ideal ao articular a construção dessa etnografia com o conceito de virtus, criando um oponente valoroso o suficiente que por vezes é passível de comparação com os romanos, mas que ainda assim fora derrotado e conquistado por ele, César.

A la fin du 10e ou dans la première moitié du 11e siècle, un Christ en croix pleure à Orléans, annonçant de la sorte un grand incendie ; d'autres crucifix opèrent des guérisons à Cologne et à Ratisbonne ; on montrait à Autun, là aussi sur un crucifix, une effigie du Christ qui longtemps auparavant s'était inclinée devant un saint moine lui-même élevé au-dessus du sol ; on racontait à Saint-Gall que la Vierge avait jadis guidé la main d'un moine du monastère en train de ciseler son portrait à Metz ; à Châtillonsur- Loire une statue de la Vierge échappe miraculeusement au feu ; et une statue reliquaire comme celle de sainte Foy à Conques multiplie les miracles de toutes sortes.

AbstractFollowing the conquest of Algiers and its surrounding territory by the French army in 1830, officers noted an abundance of standing stones in this region of North Africa. Although they attracted considerably less attention among their cohort than more familiar Roman monuments such as triumphal arches and bridges, these prehistoric remains were similar to formations found in Brittany and other parts of France. The first effort to document these remains occurred in 1863, when Laurent-Charles Féraud, a French army interpreter, recorded thousands of dolmens and stone formations south-west of Constantine. Alleging that these constructions were Gallic, Féraud hypothesized the close affinity of the French, who claimed descent from the ancient Gauls, with the early inhabitants of North Africa. After Féraud's claims met with scepticism among many prehistorians, French scholars argued that these remains were constructed by the ancestors of the Berbers (Kabyles in contemporary parlance), whom they hypothesized had been dominated by a blond race of European origin. Using craniometric statistics of human remains found in the vicinity of the standing stones to propose a genealogy of the Kabyles, French administrators in Algeria thereafter suggested that their mixed origins allowed them to adapt more easily than the Arab population to French colonial governance. This case study at the intersection of prehistoric archaeology, ancient history and craniology exposes how genealogical (and racial) classification made signal contributions to French colonial ideology and policy between the 1860s and 1880s.

AbstractSpecialised ceramics from Gaul were imported into late Iron Age Britain, and their forms copied in native techniques. Roman technology was introduced after the Conquest, and involved changes in paste preparation, surface coating and firing techniques that allowed increases in the scale, standardisation and quality of the production.

The intensity of the Semi-Pelagian controversy in the Gaulish Church of the fifth and sixth centuries The controversy over Augustine’s predestinarian views was transferred to Gaul after the Vandal conquest of Africa. The Pelagian controversy was characterised by the participation of several prominent figures and the convention of seven councils. The question, however, is why the Semi-Pelagian controversy was of such a different character. The answer is to be found in the context of the participants in the debate: the unique charac- ter of the Gaulish Church, the influence from the monasteries and the distinctive political setting of this region. John Cassian, founder of the monasteries of Marseilles, took the view that God’s grace comes as an answer to the beginning of a good will in the human person and the free will in man can either neg- lect or delight in the grace of God. The same sentiments were soon heard from the monastery on the island of Lerins. The reaction to this stance by Prosper of Aquitaine led to the literary involvement of Augustine. For several decades the bishops of Arles and Vienne attempted to raise their city’s ecclesiastical status above the other cities of Southern Gaul – a phenomenon typical of the public life of this region. In 529 Caesarius, former monk of Lerins, of aristocratic descent and bishop of Arles, held a synod at Orange. This synod affirmed a diluted form of the Augustinian position. All the elements of the character of this controversy can be found in the person of Caesarius who was also mainly responsible for the formulation of the canons of this synod.

Salic Law, the most famous of the so-called barbarian leges, was both barbarian and roman. It was made during the 4th century for the Frankish military dependants (dediticii) and their families settled in the Extrema Galliae, the Far Gaul. Its main goal was to eradicate the feud system, unacceptable in the Roman army. It did not succeed in the long run but it gave the Franks the cohesion which allowed them to conquer Gaul, the text turning ultimately into an element of national identity down to the French revolution.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the resultant economic downturn has brought to the forefront the need for expeditious action to create answers for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of this newest human malady. This crisis has crystalized the prioritization of expenditures of resources for medical research, clinical practice and public health measures in combating this deadly virus. The Johns Hopkins School of Public Health Coronavirus Resource Center has counted a total of 46,168,459 cases and 1,196,891 deaths worldwide (November 1, 2020). The data for Ukraine is 407,573 cases and 7,515 deaths. It is now 10 months since the recognition of the worldwide involvement of the SARS-COV-2 virus as the etiologic agent of this pandemic. Although progress has been made, there is still a large gap in our efforts to find a cure and create an effective vaccine for the world population. A corollary lesson is the need for life-long learning and the acceptance of change in everyday practice. Harvard and Ukrainian Catholic University Professor of business management Adrian Slywotzky develops a succinct idea in his book «David Conquers: The Discipline of Asymmetric Victory». He states that David’s sling is a modest investment that results in a giant return. Such is our modest investment in this scholarly medical journal: Proceedings of the Shevchenko Scientific Society. Medical Sciences. We rely heavily on the social media mechanism of «word-of mouth» to promote our journal and its offerings of current medical breakthroughs and findings. Our wide range of interest is underscored by the more than 101 countries from whence our readers query our online journal. This is our modest investment on behalf of our readers to gain current information, an example of our asymmetric battle with the giant coronavirus. In this issue (Vol. 59, No.2 [62]) we inaugurate a video supplement of the proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium “SMARTLION2020’ which took place as a virtual meeting on 29 September 2020. O Danyliak and I Stryjska have collated the sessions related to the coronavirus pandemic. [4] The speakers include: 1. Boris Lushniak, Professor and Dean, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, USA: «A short history of pandemics». 2. Serhuy Souchelnytskyi, Professor at the College of Medicine, Quatar University, Doha, Quatar: «Why is COVID-19 so aggressive? Molecular insights with clinical application». 3. Andriy Cherkas, PhD candidate, Scientist, Sanofi, Frankfurt am Main, Germany: «COVID-19 and diabetes - a dangerous combination». 4. Armen Gasparyan, Associate Professor of Medicine, University of Birmingham, UK and Expert Reviewer of SCOPUS journals: «Infodemic and Misinformation in the COVID-19 era». 5. Oksana Souter, PhD, CEO of Swiss Organic Solutions, Zurich, Switzerland: “The systemic evaluations of proximity tracing app SwissCovid.” Next, S Souchelnytsky discusses the effectiveness of coronavirus testing that relies on the identification of the infrastructure of nucleic acids. This deepens our understanding of the importance of the procedure of detecting, amplifying and sequencing the coronavirus genome. [5] Our knowledge of the etiology, pathogenesis, clinical course and treatment regimens of the coronavirus is evolving and ever changing. Yesterday’s knowledge is superseded by today’s investigations and discoveries. In this light we present the latest case studies of the cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 by N Oryshchyn and Y Ivaniv [6]. M Cherkas et al discuss the critical care management of COVID-19 with emphasis on the MATH+algorithm [7]. PS Gaur et al inform us how to obtain valid information and recognize disinformation in medical research publications as a result of the adaptation of a changing paradigm in research [8]. The advice based on the thinking of Joseph Aoun, taken from his book «Robot-Proof: Higher Education in the Age of Artificia Intelligence» Here he proposes a strategy of how to prepare future scientists in the era of artificial intelligence [9]. In today’s medicine, smart machines and deep learning compete with the thinking of highly educated professionals. It is rare to see a modern era physician without instant access to the latest scientific research and sophisticated electronic devices that rely on algorithms of artificial intelligence to produce that information. Without such machine learning, we would not have the great advances in the diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular, hematologic, oncologic diseases, infertility and many other medical dilemmas. It is critically important to have timely publications that introduce these innovations in medicine to the practitioner. We therefore also present to you the latest information about cardiovascular treatments in Lviv by D Beshley et al [10], and introduce you to the use of robotics in gynecologic surgery by A. Brignoni and O. Mudra [11]. In this era of artificial intelligence and the knowledge that comes to us with lightening speed, we must expect that all research be conducted in an ethical manner. The window to this work is through publications. We summarize a series of webinars held this year by the editorial board of this journal that focused on academic integrity and its reflection through scholarly writing [12]. Their full video is presented too [13]. «The ethical code of researchers» is published as a guide for our scientists on conducting and reporting research in a transparent and ethical fashion [14]. The title page of this publication reflects its contents. The collage “Life, idea, innovation" embodies the interplay of past and present, of history and innovation. At the center, the image of the human heart symbolizes life and self-sacrifice - in all of its aspects. More than a century ago, man devoted himself to science, bequeathing his heart to teach the next generation . The heart pictured is a reflection of the mummified specimen of the human heart found in the Anatomical Museum of the Department of Normal Anatomy, Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University. The history of the creation and development of this museum can be found in a recently published monograph reviewed in this issue by A. Pitukh-Novorolska[15]. The heart on the cover of this journal is the personification of a physician, who lives by the motto "Consumor aliis inserviendo" (Latin: "I am consumed by being nice to others”). How relevant especially now - during the COVID-19 pandemic - when loss of human life is so high. In this crisis, ideas are generated. Many of them are veiled in histograms. They arise not from nothing, but from a scientific basis. It is the sacrifice of scientists that is their source. The latest book by S. Komisarenko reagarding important scientific achievements in biochemistry and immunology leading to the awarding of the Nobel Prize is herewith reviewed by S. Sushelnytsky [16]. Returning to the cover, the number of icons from the heart decreases the further ir goes : some are lost, others scatter and a few create innovation. The final elements of the collage represent the contemporary world. Building on previous sacrifices, ideas and life, innovation is the future. The aortic valve prosthesis for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and the image of the coronary arteries as visualized by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) are among the most recent innovations in cardiology and cardiac surgery. Therefore, they are located next to the heart. Depicting the triad “life, idea, innovation", we invite our readers to enjoy the articles presented in this issue: new ideas for significant innovations. The Editorial Board extents their deep gratitude and thanks to the many colleagues responsible for the the support and advancement of our Journal [17]. We look forward to new ideas and innovations in 2021!

This paper argues that illegitimacy is a concept that relates to almost all of the fundamental ways in which Western society has traditionally organised itself. Sex, family and marriage, and the power of the church and state, are all implicated in the various ways in which society reproduces itself from generation to generation. All employ the concepts of legitimacy and illegitimacy to define what is and what is not permissible. Further, the creation of the illegitimate can occur in more or less legitimate ways; for example, through acts of consent, on the one hand; and force, on the other. This paper uses the study of an English Renaissance text, Shakespeare’s Henry V, to argue that these concepts remain potent ones, regularly invoked as a means of identifying and denouncing perceived threats to the good ordering of the social fabric. In western societies, many of which may be constructed as post-marriage, illegitimate is often applied as a descriptor to unlicensed migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. In countries subject to war and conflict, rape as a war crime is increasingly used by armies to create fractures within the subject community and to undermine the paternity of a cohort of children. In societies where extramarital sex is prohibited, or where rape has been used as a weapon of war, the bastard acts as physical evidence that an unsanctioned act has been committed and the laws of society broken, a “failure in social control” (Laslett, Oosterveen and Smith, 5). This paper explores these themes, using past conceptions of the illegitimate and bastardy as an explanatory concept for problematic aspects of legitimacy in contemporary culture.Bastardy was a particularly important issue in sixteenth and seventeenth century Europe when an individual’s genealogy was a major determining factor of social status, property and identity (MacFarlane). Further, illegitimacy was not necessarily an aspect of a person’s birth. It could become a status into which they were thrust through the use of divorce, for example, as when Henry VIII illegitimised his daughter Mary after annulling his marriage to Mary’s mother, Catherine of Aragon. Alison Findlay’s study of illegitimacy in Renaissance literature lists over 70 portrayals of illegitimacy, or characters threatened with illegitimacy, between 1588 and 1652 (253–257). In addition to illegitimacy at an individual level however, discussions around what constitutes the “illegitimate” figure in terms of its relationship with the family and the wider community, are also applicable to broader concerns over national identity. In work such as Stages of History, Phyllis Rackin dissected images of masculine community present in Shakespeare’s history plays to expose underlying tensions over gender, power and identity. As the study of Henry V indicates in the following discussion, illegitimacy was also a metaphor brought to bear on issues of national as well as personal identity in the early modern era. The image of the nation as a “family” to denote unity and security, both then and now, is rendered complex and problematic by introducing the “illegitimate” into that nation-family image. The rhetoric used in the recent debate over the Scottish independence referendum, and in Australia’s ongoing controversy over “illegitimate” migration, both indicate that the concept of a “national bastard”, an amorphous figure that resists precise definition, remains a potent rhetorical force. Before turning to the detail of Henry V, it is useful to review the use of “illegitimate” in the early modern context. Lacking an established position within a family, a bastard was in danger of being marginalised and deprived of any but the most basic social identity. If acknowledged by a family, the bastard might become a drain on that family’s economic resources, drawing money away from legitimate children and resented accordingly. Such resentment may be reciprocated. In his essay “On Envy” the scientist, author, lawyer and eventually Lord Chancellor of England Francis Bacon explained the destructive impulse of bastardy as follows: “Deformed persons, and eunuchs, and old men, and bastards, are envious. For he that cannot possibly mend his own case will do what he can to impair another’s.” Thus, bastardy becomes a plot device which can be used to explain and to rationalise evil. In early modern English literature, as today, bastardy as a defect of birth is only one meaning for the word. What does “in everything illegitimate” (quoting Shakespeare’s character Thersites in Troilus and Cressida [V.viii.8]) mean for our understanding of both our own society and that of the late sixteenth century? Bastardy is an important ideologeme, in that it is a “unit of meaning through which the ‘social space’ constructs the ideological values of its signs” (Schleiner, 195). In other words, bastardy has an ideological significance that stretches far beyond a question of parental marital status, extending to become a metaphor for national as well as personal loss of identity. Anti-Catholic polemicists of the early sixteenth century accused priests of begetting a generation of bastards that would overthrow English society (Fish, 7). The historian Polydore Vergil was accused of suborning and bastardising English history by plagiarism and book destruction: “making himself father to other men’s works” (Hay, 159). Why is illegitimacy so important and so universal a metaphor? The term “bastard” in its sense of mixture or mongrel has been applied to language, to weaponry, to almost anything that is a distorted but recognisable version of something else. As such, the concept of bastardy lends itself readily to the rhetorical figure of metaphor which, as the sixteenth century writer George Puttenham puts it, is “a kind of wresting of a single word from his owne right signification, to another not so natural, but yet of some affinitie or coueniencie with it” (Puttenham, 178). Later on in The Art of English Poesie, Puttenham uses the word “bastard” to describe something that can best be recognised as being an imperfect version of something else: “This figure [oval] taketh his name of an egge […] and is as it were a bastard or imperfect rounde declining toward a longitude.” (101). “Bastard” as a descriptive term in this context has meaning because it connects the subject of discussion with its original. Michael Neill takes an anthropological approach to the question of why the bastard in early modern drama is almost invariably depicted as monstrous or evil. In “In everything illegitimate: Imagining the Bastard in Renaissance Drama,” Neill argues that bastards are “filthy”, using the term as it is construed by Mary Douglas in her work Purity and Danger. Douglas argues that dirt is defined by being where it should not be, it is “matter in the wrong place, belonging to ‘a residual category, rejected from our normal scheme of classifications,’ a source of fundamental pollution” (134). In this argument the figure of the bastard aligns strongly with the concept of the Other (Said). Arguably, however, the anthropologist Edmund Leach provides a more useful model to understand the associations of hybridity, monstrosity and bastardy. In “Animal Categories and Verbal Abuse”, Leach asserts that our perceptions of the world around us are largely based on binary distinctions; that an object is one thing, and is not another. If an object combines attributes of itself with those of another, the interlapping area will be suppressed so that there may be no hesitation in discerning between them. This repressed area, the area which is neither one thing nor another but “liminal” (40), becomes the object of fear and of fascination: – taboo. It is this liminality that creates anxiety surrounding bastards, as they occupy the repressed, “taboo” area between family and outsiders. In that it is born out of wedlock, the bastard child has no place within the family structure; yet as the child of a family member it cannot be completely relegated to the external world. Michael Neill rightly points out the extent to which the topos of illegitimacy is associated with the disintegration of boundaries and a consequent loss of coherence and identity, arguing that the bastard is “a by-product of the attempt to define and preserve a certain kind of social order” (147). The concept of the liminal figure, however, recognises that while a by-product can be identified and eliminated, a bastard can neither be contained nor excluded. Consequently, the bastard challenges the established order; to be illegitimate, it must retain its connection with the legitimate figure from which it diverges. Thus the illegitimate stands as a permanent threat to the legitimate, a reminder of what the legitimate can become. Bastardy is used by Shakespeare to indicate the fear of loss of national as well as personal identity. Although noted for its triumphalist construction of a hero-king, Henry V is also shot through with uncertainties and fears, fears which are frequently expressed using illegitimacy as a metaphor. Notwithstanding its battle scenes and militarism, it is the lawyers, genealogists and historians who initiate and drive forward the narrative in Henry V (McAlindon, 435). The reward of the battle for Henry is not so much the crown of France as the assurance of his own legitimacy as monarch. The lengthy and legalistic recital of genealogies with which the Archbishop of Canterbury proves to general English satisfaction that their English king Henry holds a better lineal right to the French throne than its current occupant may not be quite as “clear as is the summer sun” (Henry V 1.2.83), but Henry’s question about whether he may “with right and conscience” make his claim to the French throne elicits a succinct response. The churchmen tell Henry that, in order to demonstrate that he is truly the descendant of his royal forefathers, Henry will need to validate that claim. In other words, the legitimacy of Henry’s identity, based on his connection with the past, is predicated on his current behaviour:Gracious lord,Stand for your own; unwind your bloody flag;Look back into your mighty ancestors:Go, my dread lord, to your great-grandsire’s tomb,From whom you claim; invoke his warlike spirit…Awake remembrance of these valiant dead,And with your puissant arm renew their feats:You are their heir, you sit upon their throne,The blood and courage that renowned themRuns in your veins….Your brother kings and monarchs of the earthDo all expect that you should rouse yourselfAs did the former lions of your blood. (Henry V 1.2.122 – 124)These exhortations to Henry are one instance of the importance of genealogy and its immediate connection to personal and national identity. The subject recurs throughout the play as French and English characters both invoke a discourse of legitimacy and illegitimacy to articulate fears of invasion, defeat, and loss of personal and national identity. One particular example of this is the brief scene in which the French royalty allow themselves to contemplate the prospect of defeat at the hands of the English:Fr. King. ‘Tis certain, he hath pass’d the river Somme.Constable. And if he be not fought withal, my lord,Let us not live in France; let us quit all,And give our vineyards to a barbarous people.Dauphin. O Dieu vivant! shall a few sprays of us,The emptying of our fathers’ luxury,Our scions, put in wild and savage stock,Spirt up so suddenly into the clouds,And overlook their grafters?Bourbon. Normans, but bastard Normans, Norman bastards!...Dauphin. By faith and honour,Our madams mock at us, and plainly sayOur mettle is bred out; and they will giveTheir bodies to the lust of English youthTo new-store France with bastard warriors. (Henry V 3.5.1 – 31).Rape and sexual violence pervade the language of Henry V. France itself is constructed as a sexually vulnerable female with “womby vaultages” and a “mistress-court” (2.4.131, 140). In one of his most famous speeches Henry graphically describes the rape and slaughter that accompanies military defeat (3.3). Reading Henry V solely in terms of its association of military conquest with sexual violence, however, runs the risk of overlooking the image of bastards themselves as both the threat and the outcome of national defeat. The lines quoted above exemplify the extent to which illegitimacy was a vital metaphor within early modern discourses of national as well as personal identity. Although the lines are divided between various speakers – the French King, Constable (representing the law), Dauphin (the Crown Prince) and Bourbon (representing the aristocracy) – the images develop smoothly and consistently to express English dominance and French subordination, articulated through images of illegitimacy.The dialogue begins with the most immediate consequence of invasion and of illegitimacy: the loss of property. Legitimacy, illegitimacy and property were so closely associated that a case of bastardy brought to the ecclesiastical court that did not include a civil law suit about land was referred to as a case of “bastardy speciall”, and the association between illegitimacy and property is present in this speech (Cowell, 14). The use of the word “vine” is simultaneously a metonym for France and a metaphor for the family, as in the “family tree”, conflating the themes of family identity and national identity that are both threatened by the virile English forces.As the dialogue develops, the rhetoric becomes more elaborate. The vines which for the Constable (from a legal perspective) represented both France and French families become instead an attempt to depict the English as being of a subordinate breed. The Dauphin’s brief narrative of the English origins refers to the illegitimate William the Conqueror, bastard son of the Duke of Normandy and by designating the English as being descendants of a bastard Frenchman the Dauphin attempts to depict the English nation as originating from a superabundance of French virility; wild offshoots from a true stock. Yet “grafting” one plant to another can create a stronger plant, which is what has happened here. The Dauphin’s metaphors, designed to construct the English as an unruly and illegitimate offshoot of French society, a product of the overflowing French virility, evolve instead into an emblem of a younger, stronger branch which has overtaken its enfeebled origins.In creating this scene, Shakespeare constructs the Frenchmen as being unable to contain the English figuratively, still less literally. The attempts to reduce the English threat by imagining them as “a few sprays”, a product of casual sexual excess, collapses into Bourbon’s incoherent ejaculation: “Normans, but bastard Normans, Norman bastards!” and the Norman bastard dominates the conclusion of the scene. Instead of containing and marginalising the bastard, the metaphoric language creates and acknowledges a threat which cannot be marginalised. The “emptying of luxury” has engendered an uncontrollable illegitimate who will destroy the French nation beyond any hope of recovery, overrunning France with bastards.The scene is fascinating for its use of illegitimacy as a means of articulating fears not only for the past and present but also for the future. The Dauphin’s vision is one of irreversible national and familial disintegration, irreversible because, unlike rape, the French women’s imagined rejection of their French families and embrace of the English conquerors implies a total abandonment of family origins and the willing creation of a new, illegitimate dynasty. Immediately prior to this scene the audience has seen the Dauphin’s fear in action: the French princess Katherine is shown learning to speak English as part of her preparation for giving her body to a “bastard Norman”, a prospect which she anticipates with a frisson of pleasure and humour, as well as fear. This scene, between Katherine and her women, evokes a range of powerful anxieties which appear repeatedly in the drama and texts of the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries: anxieties over personal and national identity, over female chastity and masculine authority, and over continuity between generations. Peter Laslett in The World We Have Lost – Further Explored points out that “the engendering of children on a scale which might threaten the social structure was never, or almost never, a present possibility” (154) at this stage of European history. This being granted, the Dauphin’s depiction of such a “wave” of illegitimates, while it might have no roots in reality, functioned as a powerful image of disorder. Illegitimacy as a threat and as a strategy is not limited to the renaissance, although a study of renaissance texts offers a useful guidebook to the use of illegitimacy as a means of polarising and excluding. Although as previously discussed, for many Western countries, the marital status of one’s parents is probably the least meaningful definition associated with the word “illegitimate”, the concept of the nation as a family remains current in modern political discourse, and illegitimate continues to be a powerful metaphor. During the recent independence referendum in Scotland, David Cameron besought the Scottish people not to “break up the national family”; at the same time, the Scottish Nationalists have been constructed as “ungrateful bastards” for wishing to turn their backs on the national family. As Klocker and Dunne, and later O’Brien and Rowe, have demonstrated, the emotive use of words such as “illegitimate” and “illegal” in Australian political rhetoric concerning migration is of long standing. Given current tensions, it might be timely to call for a further and more detailed study of the way in which the term “illegitimate” continues to be used by politicians and the media to define, demonise and exclude certain types of would-be Australian immigrants from the collective Australian “national family”. Suggestions that persons suspected of engaging with terrorist organisations overseas should be stripped of their Australian passports imply the creation of national bastards in an attempt to distance the Australian community from such threats. But the strategy can never be completely successful. Constructing figures as bastard or the illegitimate remains a method by which the legitimate seeks to define itself, but it also means that the bastard or illegitimate can never be wholly separated or cast out. In one form or another, the bastard is here to stay.ReferencesBeardon, Elizabeth. “Sidney's ‘Mongrell Tragicomedy’ and Anglo-Spanish Exchange in the New Arcadia.” Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies 10 (2010): 29 - 51.Davis, Kingsley. “Illegitimacy and the Social Structure.” American Journal of Sociology 45 (1939).John Cowell. The Interpreter. Cambridge: John Legate, 1607.Greenblatt, Stephen. Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare. 1980. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005.Findlay, Alison. Illegitimate Power: Bastards in Renaissance Drama. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2009.Hay, Denys. Polydore Vergil: Renaissance Historian and Man of Letters. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952.Laslett, Peter. The World We Have Lost - Further Explored. London: Methuen, 1983.Laslett, P., K. Oosterveen, and R. M. Smith, eds. Bastardy and Its Comparative History. London: Edward Arnold, 1980.Leach, Edmund. “Anthropological Aspects of Language: Animal Categories and Verbal Abuse.” E. H. Lennenberg, ed. New Directives in the Study of Language. MIT Press, 1964. 23-63. MacFarlane, Alan. The Origins of English Individualism: The Family Property and Social Transition Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1978.Mclaren, Ann. “Monogamy, Polygamy and the True State: James I’s Rhetoric of Empire.” History of Political Thought 24 (2004): 446 – 480.McAlindon, T. “Testing the New Historicism: “Invisible Bullets” Reconsidered.” Studies in Philology 92 (1995):411 – 438.Neill, Michael. Putting History to the Question: Power, Politics and Society in English Renaissance Drama. New York: Columbia University Press, 2000.Pocock, J.G.A. Virtue, Commerce and History: Essays on English Political Thought and History, Chiefly in the Eighteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Puttenham, George. The Arte of English Poesie. Ed. Gladys Doidge Willcock and Alice Walker. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1936.Reekie, Gail. Measuring Immorality: Social Inquiry and the Problem of Illegitimacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Rowe, Elizabeth, and Erin O’Brien. “Constructions of Asylum Seekers and Refugees in Australian Political Discourse”. In Kelly Richards and Juan Marcellus Tauri, eds., Crime Justice and Social Democracy: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology, 2013.Schleiner, Louise. Tudor and Stuart Women Writers. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994.Shakespeare, William. Henry V in The Norton Shakespeare. Ed. S. Greenblatt, W. Cohen, J.E. Howard, and Katharine Eisaman Maus. New York and London: Norton, 2008.