Arthur and the Round Table (or Celtics, Germans and others)

[erudito]

One of our presenters, Piers, has suggested that the reason feudalism (i.e. the system of service-for-protection) grew out of areas conquered by Germanic peoples, but did not evolve (or really "take") in Celtic areas, was because, in Germanic culture, a warrior could sell his loyalty but Celtic culture not so: it was much more rigidly kin-based.

Comments

Re: Celtic warbands

[erudito]

The problem with impressions is that one takes one's cultural presumptions to them. If the Celtic presumption was the one operating in kin groups (consider the Scottish clans, for example) then the tales would not actually say that, because the audience would just presume it.

The point about the sworn warrior band is that it was a particular elite group, not the warrior norm. Indeed, early on, such sworn warriors were not supposed to survive their leader and were buried with him. The notion of conflicts between kin-loyalty and oath of service only makes sense if such conflicts were "live" -- that is, there were loyalties that mattered beyond kin.

Feudalism never really "took" in the British Celtic fringe, it was typically imposed by Norman arrivals. While stories do pick up on the resources available, the Arthurian tales really are the stand-out melding of the Celtic with the chivalric. Perhaps it is as simple as the British isles were where Celtic survivals were strongest, but I still wonder why those tales particularly became so the stuff of chivalric reworking. If there was less reworking required than with other Celtic tales, that is interesting in itself.