Through historical investigation we have been able to reveal much about the past that may have remained a mystery. Historical investigation involves many different steps to properly conclude a reasonable hypothesis.
The steps required to be taken to complete a historical investigation include:
1. Creating a theory or hypothesis
A historian will create a hypothesis that they wish to test against the evidence. It will be a statement that can be researched by historians and has archaeological and written sources that can be analyzed to come to a conclusion on their hypothesis
2. Collecting evidence
Next the historian will collect all the evidence they can find on the time period and the subject. These can be written or archaeological sources relevant to the time period and subject being investigated. This evidence is to be analysed and put into context.
3. Analyzing the evidence
The evidence found is then analysed to see if it is relevant to the subject being investigated. The evidence needs to be check to spot if it is bias towards a certain society or group to prevent any unreliable information being put into the conclusion.
4. Reach a conclusion
The historian will then continue to form a conclusion from the evidence that was found to be relevant, non-bias and reliable. This conclusion is the historians opinion and not to be considered fact.
This method of historical investigation is commonly used amongst historians. Historians may also require the help of archaeologists. Hurley et al. (2008 pg. 3) states that ???Archaeologists examine the physical remains, called artefacts, include things that have been made or altered by humans.??? This means that archaeologist examine artefacts and anything that was made or altered by humans, this includes buildings tombs jewellery, pottery, pottery, weapons and household objects. The archaeologists are the ones who find the written sources for the historians to study.
The way historical investigation has revealed information about life at the time of Boudicca??™s revolt is through the careful studying of sources and artefacts to come to a conclusion based on what the historians have pieced together from the sources.
The two major sources that were used for this investigation were Dio Cassius and Tacitus who both made accounts on Boudicca and the Celtic society. Both being Roman, they both may contain bias information as the Romans and the Celts were at war. Dio Cassius was a scribe during the time of Boudicca. Cassius was a roman so his writing is bias towards the Celts and he often refers to them as barbarians, as the Romans see them as being less civilized than them. The records written by each of these is vital in creating a conclusion.
Boudicca??™s appearance is described by Dio Cassius (Roman History, LXII.1-2)???In stature she was very tall, in appearance most terrifying, in the glance of her eye most fierce, and her voice was harsh; a great mass of the tawniest hair fell to her hips; around her neck was a large golden necklace; and she wore a tunic of divers colours over which a thick mantle was fastened with a brooch. This was her invariable attire.” This description is an example of a primary source that was used in the historical investigation.
The Celts steadily infiltrated Britain over the course of the centuries between about 500 and 100 B.C. The Celtic people lived in arched timbre huts, with wicker walls and the roofs were made of thatch. The huts were generally gathered in loose hamlets.
The written analysis of women??™s role in ancient Celtic society, as said by Savino (2002), reveals the women of ancient Celtic society had more rights and power than other society??™s women, such as Roman or Greek women. They are allowed in more occupations and can have more freedoms than any other ancient society such as
???to become druids including, priestesses, poets and healers. They were given the right to conduct business without the need of their husband??™s involvement or consent. They were allowed to serve as diplomats and second century scribe Plutarch wrote that there were ancient traditions of Celtic women acting as mediators or in a mediating role in their tribal assemblies.??? (Herberstein, 2010 pg.6)
Celtic women enjoyed the same privileges as men in ancient Britain. Celtic lands were owned jointly between the two partners, and wealth seems to have been based mainly on the size of cattle herd owned. They were technically equal to men, owned property, and could choose their own husbands. They could also be war leaders, as Boudicca (Boadicea) later proved.
The Celts, when they weren??™t fighting, were huge farmers. One of their innovations would be the iron plough. Earlier ploughs had been awkward to use, they were basically a stick with a pointed end harnessed behind two oxen. They were only suitable for ploughing the light high-grounds. The iron ploughs were heavier and were seen as an agricultural revolution, as the made it possible to cultivate the rich valley and lowland soils, but they came with a price, they required a large group of about 8 oxen, so to avoid the difficult task of turning the group, Celtic fields were mad long and narrow, evidence of which can still be found today in Britain (Britain express 1996)
The basic element of Celtic life was a clan, a kind of extended family. The expression ???family??? can be seen as deceptive, as Celts practiced a specific form of raising children, they farmed them out. The children were raised by foster parents were the foster father was often the brother of the birth-mother. Clans were connected very loosely with additional clans to create tribes, each of which had its individual structure and customs and possibly its own religion.
There used to be a written Celtic language, but it began to develop well into Christian times, so much of Celtic history relied on the oral communication of bard and poets who spread their culture. These traditions seemed to be enormously important to the Celts, and much of what he have learned about the Celts and their traditions comes to us today through the old tales and poems that the Celts handed down for generations through their family before eventually being written down. (Britain express 1996)
The Celts loved war with a passion. If there wasn??™t one happening then theyd be the first to start one. They presented themselves as fiercely as possible, often charging into battle entirely naked, dyed blue from top to bottom, and screaming like banshees to terrify their enemies.
They took remarkable pride in their appearance for battle. The golden breastplate and shield was one to be envied on the battlefield and they wore ornamented helmets and trumpets. The Celts were proud users of light chariots in battle. From a chariot that was drawn by two horses, they would hurl spears at an enemy before getting off the horses to try out their heavy slashing swords. They also had an un-thought out habit of dragging families and baggage along to their battles, forming a great mess in their army, which often would lose the battle for them, as Queen Boudicca would later discover to her disappointment. (Britain express 1996)
They often beheaded their opponents in battle to form intimidation and it was seen as a sign of expertise and social standing to have a goodly number of heads to display.
The Celts main downfall was that they could not form a union between the tribes and unite against a common enemy ??“ the Romans. Every tribe looked after its own and this eventually cost them the occupation of Britain. (Britain express 1996)
The historical investigation is a tool of historians used to create conclusions from archaeological and non-archaeological evidence. This information has all been derived from sources, whether they be archaeological or non-archaeological they all are important in an historical investigation to unlock the secrets of history and perhaps provide useful information for the future.
