|
The historical meaning of this will be
discussed below. Here we note the clear testimony which it
affords to the Romano-British name of the place.
Two conclusions may be drawn from the name. The
plainly Celtic character of ‘Durovernum‘ might be
thought to give a further reason for the belief that the site
was inhabited before the Roman period. But this inference is
by no means inevitable, for the Romans often gave native names
to new foundations of their own. The full form ‘Durovernum
Cantiacorum’ gives better reason for a more interesting
conclusion. Ravennas cites it along with other town-names with
tribal appellations affixed. Their meaning is plain. These
towns were the centres or capitals of their tribes and the
meeting-places of their cantonal magistrates and councils.14
In Roman Gaul such tribal centres were common. There they
almost invariably came to be called by their tribal names.
Thus Durocortorum Remorum was known as Remus or Remis—these
being the accusative and dative of Remi, converted (according
to late Roman fashion) into an indeclinable noun—and the
fact is enshrined in the modern ‘ Reims ‘ with its final s..
In Britain this development did not occur. Though the cantonal
system existed, it was weaker than in Gaul. It has, indeed,
been conjectured that Canterbury may be an example.15
On this theory, Durovernum would have been called
Cantius or Cantiis, and that would have provided the first
syllable of Canterbury. Historically, this is possible.
Phonetically the idea seems out of the question. Cantius or
Cantiis would not yield Canterbury, but something like Kants-
or Kentsbury, while Canterbury has a clear derivation of its
own : it is Cantwara-bvrig, the burh of the Cantwara, and
these Cantwara are the men of Kent, and not of any one city or
village.
When we pass from the name to the place, we
exchange certainty for a host of doubts. The site of
Canterbury has been inhabited continuously for more than
thirteen centuries. Durovernum lies buried beneath the dust
and debris of those many years : the floors of its houses are
8 ft. or 10 ft. underground: its features are dim and hard to
discern. Remains occur freely— here a patch of mosaic or a
broken wall, there a handful of pottery, elsewhere the bones
or ashes of the dead. But they are scattered and sundered
fragments; they form no clear and coherent picture. What time
has thus wrecked man has reduced to greater confusion. The
antiquaries of Canterbury, absorbed perhaps in medieval
interests, have ill-observed and ill-recorded the Roman
remains of their city. At Trier, in Germany, the
Romano-Gaulish Augusta Treverorum, the introduction of
drainage was used many years ago to recover almost the whole
Street plan of the Roman period. At Canterbury a part of the
modern town was drained in 1860—61, and the whole in
1867—68, and on the latter occasion nearly every street and
lane was trenched from 8 ft. to 16 ft. deep. Plentiful traces
of older roads and houses were then uncovered, and many minor
objects found. But the structural remains were not properly
examined, their dates were not fixed, and their relations to
one another were not determined, while the minor objects were
hardly recorded at all. The engineer employed in 1867—68,
Mr. James Pillbrow, sent to the
14 Faussett, Arch.
Journ. xxxii, 373, supposes that Ravennas knew
Canterbury to have become in his time the capital of the
Englishmen of Kent and that he added Cantiacorum to
express that fact. This is out of the question. The phrase
must be interpreted along with its fellows, Calleva Atrebatum,
Venta Belgarum, etc.
15 Baldwin Brown, Arts in
Early England, i, 65 Faussett, Arch. Journ. xxxii,
380. Icinos may be possibly a parallel (V.C.H.
Norfolk, i, 286, 300). |