The archaeologist of the Celts
In 1943 the archaeologist Blas Taracena published an article titled Trophy-heads in Celtic Spain , which would become a benchmark. At that time he was excavating in Numancia and the text focuses on the discovery of four human skulls in the underground floor of the so-called room No. 4. They appeared mixed with various materials (charcoal, ceramics and bovine bones), in a disturbed stratigraphy ( perhaps the product of a collapse) and in an apparently domestic building, but of an unclear nature. However, Taracena's interpretation was blunt:they indicated the practice in Celtiberia of a typically Celtic warrior rite of head hunting, which, by extension, demonstrated the ethnic Celtic character of the peninsular interior.
Basically, I was importing into the Hispano-Celtic sphere one of the great themes of French historiography about the Gauls. The so-called rite celtique des têtes coupées It is based on certain Greco-Latin testimonies and a series of archaeological and iconographic finds, fundamentally from the south of France. Simplifying, this label alludes to the warrior custom of cutting off the heads of enemies to be exhibited and preserved as trophies. The lurid appeal of the subject matter and the spectacular nature of the sources on which it was based made it commonplace when dealing with the Gauls and later the Britons, both academically and popularly.
Thus, Taracena, with his interpretation of those Numantine skulls, was linking the Celtiberians with the rest of the European Celts, and he did so in an ideological context (the fascist nationalism of the first Francoism) inclined to reinforce the idea of the Central European kinship of the ancient Hispanics . Whatever its origin, the proposal of that article later took root in the Spanish academy, applying its interpretation and terminology automatically. But, what do we really know about this rite in Hispanic Celtic?
Civilization and beheaders
The celebrity of the theme comes from the classical texts. It was said of several northern peoples (Scythians, Taurus, Germans...), but the best known testimonies are those of Diodorus (V.29.4-5) and Strabo (IV.4.5) who, reproducing Posidonius, told that the Gauls cut off the heads of their enemies to hang them from their horses, nail them to their temples or keep them embalmed in their homes as valuable trophies.
Is there something similar about Hispanics? The most used source is from Diodorus himself, in his account of the cruel looting committed in the Carthaginian assault on Selinunte , Sicily (409 BC) (XIII.57.2-3):
The text is problematic because it attributes those actions to “the barbarians”, a term he used for anyone who was not Greek or Roman; They have traditionally been identified as Hispanics because there were Libyan and Iberian mercenaries in the Carthaginian army. It has even been speculated that they were specifically Celtiberians, but the truth is that there is nothing to be sure.
Something more concrete is the story of Valerio Máximo on the suicide of the inhabitants of Numancia (133 BC), where he recounts that their leader Retogenes, after setting fire to his neighborhood, "placed his drawn sword in the middle and ordered the citizens to fight each other two by two, so that the vanquished was thrown on the burning houses after cutting off his head” (III.2. ext. 7). Here the decapitation is added to the list of atrocities associated with the Numantine sacrifice, such as cannibalism or parricide, a tradition of exaggerations that turned the Hispanic sieges into pure literary rhetoric. Nothing more is said about Hispanics as head cutters, but there are a couple of other references about their love of amputating hands. Strabo (III.3.6) said that the Lusitanians cut off the right hand of prisoners to consecrate it as an offering; just before he spoke of human sacrifice and divination by viscera. Later, Aurelius Victor (De vir . 3.59) recounted that a Numantine father, faced with the dispute between two suitors to marry his daughter, made it a condition to deliver the right hand of an enemy.
The sources, therefore, are brief, scattered and present interpretation problems. In addition, its bias must be taken into account. Classical historiography habitually used the theme of mutilation and decapitation as a degrading topic to stigmatize barbarian peoples and legitimize the superiority of the Greco-Latin civilization. It is no coincidence that it is always associated with other detestable practices, since it served to reinforce the stereotype of the violent and savage Hispanic. This does not mean that they did not reflect true phenomena, but they should be read with caution.
Looking for skulls
Archaeology consolidated the topic when, at the beginning of the 20th century, the South Gallic sanctuaries of Roquepertuse and Entremont were discovered. , designed to expose dozens of heads. With a probable cultural connection, in the northeast of the Iberian Peninsula there is numerous evidence of the exhibition of weapons and skulls embedded in the walls and public buildings of Puig Castellar (Santa Coloma de Gramenet), Puig de Sant Andreu and L'Illa d'en Reixach (Ullastret) (see Archeology and History No. 1:Iberian culture )
And in that inland Iberia to which Taracena was referring? There is nothing like it. Some skull and femur fragments, trimmed and perforated, have been found in Numancia, Uxama (El Burgo de Osma) and Peña del Saco (Fitero), although, like those Numantine skulls, their function and context are unclear . On the contrary, there are several votive deposits. In the castro berón de La Hoya (Laguardia) a small grave with a human cranial vault was found under the floor of an outstanding building along with two ceramic pieces. Likewise, in the Vettona necropolis of La Osera (Chamartín de la Sierra), in its oldest level (4th century BC), there was a human skull fitted with two stones and accompanied by various containers, which has been interpreted as a founding rite of the funerary space. Somewhat further away, in the southwest, is the site of Cerro do Castelo (Garvão) (3rd century BC), an enormous deposit covered by animal bones and ceramic, metal, coral and glass figures; In its center rests a stone urn containing the skull of a woman with signs of having been executed and beheaded, for what appears to be a human sacrifice. Likewise, in the Asturian castros of Chao Samartín (Grandas de Salime) and Noega (Campa Torres) cists with female cranial fragments were found at the foundational level of their walls, which could testify to a consecration of the defenses.
In short, what exists in Indo-European Hispania is, on the one hand, various punctual remains difficult to classify and, on the other, a very specific set of hidden ritual deposits, but nothing that demonstrates the existence of a warrior rite of display of trophy heads.
Interpreting icons
Iconographically, the label of tête coupée it is closely linked with the so-called Celtic head or mask, a schematic motif omnipresent in Europe. In any case, there are Gallic representations of beheadings on coins, reliefs and statues. Likewise, in the Iberian area there are interesting examples, such as the probable severed heads of a falcata from Jumilla or the sculpture of Sant Martí Sarroca.
As for inland Hispania, the iconography has certainly compensated for these shortcomings in the texts and human remains, occupying most of the bibliography. The Celtiberian pieces most linked to this issue are the characteristic batons of command (signa equitum ) and “horseman” fibulae (3rd-1st centuries BC) , projections in bronze of the equestrian elite; several represent human heads under the horse's snout, apparently recreating the exhibition of trophy heads. There are also interesting ceramic examples, especially a funerary urn from Uxama in which there is a frieze of birds alternating with human heads in winged cubicles, which is interpreted as the materialization of the spirit's journey to the Beyond.
Another typical example is the numerous heads stone typical of the Atlantic environment and the western plateau. Very few have appeared in their original location, but two of them did so at the entrances to the castros of A Graña (A Coruña) and San Cebrián de Las (Ourense), a location that has led them to be understood as markers and protectors of boundaries. of the enclave.
Regarding the representations of right hands, the steles of La Vispesa (Binéfar) and El Palao (Alcañiz) are very significant. (2nd-1st centuries BC), where figures of warriors are accompanied by isolated right hands that could constitute the trophies of the represented hero. In addition, of course, many sconces, ornaments and hospitality tesserae are in the shape of a head or hand.
Now then, is any depicted head or hand necessarily a severed head or hand? Certainly this association became automatic, but we must be careful. For example, many stone heads are multiheaded and horned , which suggests that they are supernatural beings. On the other hand, it is perfectly reasonable that many of these icons are purely symbolic, representations of characters or spirits, rather than physical mutilations. Both the head and the hand are universal symbols and there is no single explanation to interpret them, no matter how attractive it may be.
The weight of the stereotype
Since that 1943 article it has been common that, when dealing with the rite of severed heads in Celtiberia, any text was valued as definitive proof (even if it was highly questionable), every skull found was considered a war trophy (although nothing demonstrated that function) and every face in art was interpreted as a decapitation (although it could represent many other things). Basically, the effort to directly transplant a cultural trait from another context to justify a desired ethnic link has been perpetuated. .
If reviewed with a minimum critical spirit, the evidence seems more complicated. It must be understood that, in ancient societies, including the Celtic (but also modern), the human head has strong spiritual connotations derived from the idea that the vital essence of the person resides there and that part of it survives after his death. That is why beheading has been used in so many contexts (initiatory demonstrations, sacrificial rites, punitive acts, political propaganda, war strategy, etc.) and the icon of the head has had infinite meanings. Resorting to the hackneyed cliché of the warrior rite because they are Celts means ignoring a much more diverse world.
These objections to the topic that have been raised, do they mean that the Celtiberians did not cut off heads? Absolutely. It would be rare, since it has been common in all cultures and times. And specifically, did they practice a warrior rite of headhunting? It is possible, but it must be admitted that we do not have enough evidence to consider it something characteristic and generalized. The subject remains open to future findings and interpretations; If history teaches us anything, it is that reality is much more complex than what old stereotypes teach us.