THE ANGLO-SAXONS
Any one who will look around upon the families of his acquaintance
will observe that family characteristics and resemblances prevail not
only in respect to stature, form, expression of countenance, and other
outward and bodily tokens, but also in regard to the constitutional
temperaments and capacities of the soul. Sometimes we find a group in
which high intellectual powers and great energy of action prevail for
many successive generations, and in all the branches into which the
original stock divides; in other cases, the hereditary tendency is to
gentleness and harmlessness of character, with a full development of
all the feelings and sensibilities of the soul. Others, again, exhibit
congenital tendencies to great physical strength and hardihood, and
to powers of muscular exertion and endurance. These differences,
notwithstanding all the exceptions and irregularities connected with
them, are obviously, where they exist, deeply seated and permanent.
They depend very slightly upon any mere external causes. They have,
on the contrary, their foundation in some hidden principles connected
with the origin of life, and with the mode of its transmission from
parent to offspring, which the researches of philosophers have never
yet been able to explore.
These same constitutional and congenital peculiarities which we see
developing themselves all around us in families, mark, on a greater
scale, the characteristics of the different nations of the earth, and
in a degree much higher still, the several great and distinct races
into which the whole human family seems to be divided. Physiologists
consider that there are five of these great races, whose
characteristics, mental as well as bodily, are distinctly, strongly,
and permanently marked. These characteristics descend by hereditary
succession from father to son, and though education and outward
influences may modify them, they can not essentially change them.
Compare, for example, the Indian and the African races, each of which
has occupied for a thousand years a continent of its own, where they
have been exposed to the same variety of climates, and as far as
possible to the same general outward influences. How entirely diverse
from each other they are, not only in form, color, and other physical
marks, but in all the tendencies and characteristics of the soul! One
can no more be changed into the other, than a wolf, by being tamed and
domesticated, can be made a dog, or a dog, by being driven into the
forests, be transformed into a tiger. The difference is still greater
between either of these races and the Caucasian race. This race might
probably be called the European race, were it not that some Asiatic
and some African nations have sprung from it, as the Persians, the
Ph[oe]nicians, the Egyptians, the Carthaginians, and, in modern times,
the Turks. All the nations of this race, whether European or African,
have been distinguished by the same physical marks in the conformation
of the head and the color of the skin, and still more by those traits
of character--the intellect, the energy, the spirit of determination
and pride--which, far from owing their existence to outward
circumstances, have always, in all ages, made all outward
circumstances bend to them. That there have been some great and noble
specimens of humanity among the African race, for example, no one
can deny; but that there is a marked, and fixed, and permanent
constitutional difference between them and the Caucasian race seems
evident from this fact, that for two thousand years each has held its
own continent, undisturbed, in a great degree, by the rest of mankind;
and while, during all this time, no nation of the one race has risen,
so far as is known, above the very lowest stage of civilization,
there have been more than fifty entirely distinct and independent
civilizations originated and fully developed in the other. For
three thousand years the Caucasian race have continued, under all
circumstances, and in every variety of situation, to exhibit the
same traits and the same indomitable prowess. No calamities, however
great--no desolating wars, no destructive pestilence, no wasting
famine, no night of darkness, however universal and gloomy--has ever
been able to keep them long in degradation or barbarism. There is not
now a barbarous people to be found in the whole race, and there has
not been one for a thousand years.
Nearly all the great exploits, and achievements too, which have
signalized the history of the world, have been performed by this
branch of the human family. They have given celebrity to every age
in which they have lived, and to every country that they have ever
possessed, by some great deed, or discovery, or achievement, which
their intellectual energies have accomplished. As Egyptians, they
built the Pyramids, and reared enormous monoliths, which remain as
perfect now as they were when first completed, thirty centuries ago.
As Ph[oe]nicians, they constructed ships, perfected navigation, and
explored, without compass or chart, every known sea. As Greeks, they
modeled architectural embellishments, and cut sculptures in marble,
and wrote poems and history, which have been ever since the admiration
of the world. As Romans, they carried a complete and perfect military
organization over fifty nations and a hundred millions of people, with
one supreme mistress over all, the ruins of whose splendid palaces and
monuments have not yet passed away. Thus has this race gone on, always
distinguishing itself, by energy, activity, and intellectual power,
wherever it has dwelt, whatever language it has spoken, and in
whatever period of the world it has lived. It has invented printing,
and filled every country that it occupies with permanent records of
the past, accessible to all. It has explored the heavens, and reduced
to precise and exact calculations all the complicated motions there.
It has ransacked the earth, systematized, arranged, and classified the
vast melange of plants, and animals, and mineral products to be found
upon its surface. It makes steam and falling water do more than half
the work necessary for feeding and clothing the human race; and the
howling winds of the ocean, the very emblems of resistless destruction
and terror, it steadily employs in interchanging the products of the
world, and bearing the means of comfort and plenty to every clime.
The Caucasian race has thus, in all ages, and in all the varieties
of condition in which the different branches of it have been placed,
evinced the same great characteristics, marking the existence of
some innate and constant constitutional superiority; and yet, in the
different branches, subordinate differences appear, which are to be
accounted for, perhaps, partly by difference of circumstances, and
partly, perhaps, by similar constitutional diversities--diversities by
which one branch is distinguished from other branches, as the whole
race is from the other races with which we have compared them. Among
these branches, we, Anglo-Saxons ourselves, claim for the Anglo-Saxons
the superiority over all the others.
The Anglo-Saxons commenced their career as pirates and robbers, and as
pirates and robbers of the most desperate and dangerous description.
In fact, the character which the Anglo-Saxons have obtained in modern
times for energy and enterprise, and for desperate daring in their
conflicts with foes, is no recent fame. The progenitors of the present
race were celebrated every where, and every where feared and dreaded,
not only in the days of Alfred, but several centuries before. All the
historians of those days that speak of them at all, describe them as
universally distinguished above their neighbors for their energy and
vehemence of character, their mental and physical superiority, and for
the wild and daring expeditions to which their spirit of enterprise
and activity were continually impelling them. They built vessels, in
which they boldly put forth on the waters of the German Ocean or of
the Baltic Sea on excursions for conquest or plunder. Like their
present posterity on the British isles and on the shores of the
Atlantic, they cared not, in these voyages, whether it was summer or
winter, calm or storm. In fact, they sailed often in tempests
and storms by choice, so as to come upon their enemies the more
unexpectedly.
[Illustration: SAXON MILITARY CHIEF]
They would build small vessels, or rather boats, of osiers, covering
them with skins, and in fleets of these frail floats they would sally
forth among the howling winds and foaming surges of the German Ocean.
On these expeditions, they all embarked as in a common cause, and felt
a common interest. The leaders shared in all the toils and exposures
of the men, and the men took part in the counsels and plans of the
leaders. Their intelligence and activity, and their resistless courage
and ardor, combined with their cool and calculating sagacity, made
them successful in every attempt. If they fought, they conquered; if
they pursued their enemies, they were sure to overtake them; if they
retreated, they were sure to make their escape. They were clothed in
a loose and flowing dress, and wore their hair long and hanging about
their shoulders; and they had the art, as their descendants have now,
of contriving and fabricating arms of such superior construction and
workmanship, as to give them, on this account alone, a great advantage
over all cotemporary nations. There were two other points in which
there was a remarkable similarity between this parent stock in its
rude, early form, and the extended social progeny which represents it
at the present day. One was the extreme strictness of their ideas of
conjugal fidelity, and the stern and rigid severity with which all
violations of female virtue were judged. The woman who violated her
marriage vows was compelled to hang herself. Her body was then burned
in public, and the accomplice of her crime was executed over the
ashes. The other point of resemblance between the ancient Anglo-Saxons
and their modern descendants was their indomitable pride. They could
never endure any thing like _submission_. Though sometimes
overpowered, they were never conquered. Though taken prisoners and
carried captive, the indomitable spirit which animated them could
never be really subdued. The Romans used sometimes to compel their
prisoners to fight as gladiators, to make spectacles for the amusement
of the people of the city. On one occasion, thirty Anglo-Saxons, who
had been taken captive and were reserved for this fate, strangled
themselves rather than submit to this indignity. The whole nation
manifested on all occasions a very unbending and unsubmissive will,
encountering every possible danger and braving every conceivable ill
rather than succumb or submit to any power except such as they had
themselves created for their own ends; and their descendants, whether
in England or America, evince much the same spirit still.
It was the landing of a few boat-loads of these determined and
ferocious barbarians on a small island near the mouth of the Thames,
which constitutes the great event of the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons
in England, which is so celebrated in English history as the epoch
which marks the real and true beginning of British greatness and
power. It is true that the history of England goes back beyond this
period to narrate, as we have done, the events connected with the
contests of the Romans and the aboriginal Britons, and the incursions
and maraudings of the Picts and Scots; but all these aborigines passed
gradually--after the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons--off the stage.
The old stock was wholly displaced. The present monarchy has sprung
entirely from its Anglo-Saxon original; so that all which precedes the
arrival of this new race is introductory and preliminary, like the
history, in this country, of the native American tribes before the
coming of the English Pilgrims. As, therefore, the landing of the
Pilgrims on the Plymouth Rock marks the true commencement of the
history of the American Republic, so that of the Anglo-Saxon
adventurers on the island of Thanet represents and marks the origin
of the British monarchy. The event therefore, stands as a great
and conspicuous landmark, though now dim and distant in the remote
antiquity in which it occurred.
And yet the event, though so wide-reaching and grand in its bearings
and relations, and in the vast consequences which have flowed and
which still continue to flow from it, was apparently a minute and
unimportant circumstance at the time when it occurred. There were only
three vessels at the first arrival. Of their size and character the
accounts vary. Some of these accounts say they contained three hundred
men; others seem to state that the number which arrived at the first
landing was three thousand. This, however, would seem impossible, as
no three vessels built in those days could convey so large a number.
We must suppose, therefore, that that number is meant to include those
who came at several of the earlier expeditions, and which were grouped
by the historian together, or else that several other vessels or
transports accompanied the three, which history has specially
commemorated as the first arriving.
In fact, very little can now be known in respect to the form and
capacity of the vessels in which these half-barbarous navigators
roamed, in those days, over the British seas. Their name, indeed, has
come down to us, and that is nearly all. They were called _cyules_;
though the name is sometimes spelled, in the ancient chronicles,
_ceols_, and in other ways. They were obviously vessels of
considerable capacity and were of such construction and such strength
as to stand the roughest marine exposures. They were accustomed to
brave fearlessly every commotion and to encounter every danger raised
either by winter tempests or summer gales in the restless waters of
the German Ocean.
The names of the commanders who headed the expedition which first
landed have been preserved, and they have acquired, as might have been
expected, a very wide celebrity. They were Hengist and Horsa. Hengist
and Horsa were brothers.
The place where they landed was the island of Thanet. Thanet is a
tract of land at the mouth of the Thames, on the southern side; a sort
of promontory extending into the sea, and forming the cape at the
south side of the estuary made by the mouth of the river. The extreme
point of land is called the North Foreland which, as it is the point
that thousands of vessels, coming out of the Thames, have to round in
proceeding southward on voyages to France, to the Mediterranean, to
the Indies, and to America, is very familiarly known to navigators
throughout the world. The island of Thanet, of which this North
Foreland is the extreme point, ought scarcely to be called an island,
since it forms, in fact, a portion of the main land, being separated
from it only by a narrow creek or stream, which in former ages indeed,
was wide and navigable, but is now nearly choked up and obliterated
by the sands and the sediment, which, after being brought down by the
Thames, are driven into the creek by the surges of the sea.
In the time of Hengist and Horsa the creek was so considerable that
its mouth furnished a sufficient harbor for their vessels. They landed
at a town called Ebbs-fleet, which is now, however, at some distance
inland.
There is some uncertainty in respect to the motive which led Hengist
and Horsa to make their first descent upon the English coast. Whether
they came on one of their customary piratical expeditions, or were
driven on the coast accidentally by stress of weather, or were invited
to come by the British king, can not now be accurately ascertained.
Such parties of Anglo-Saxons had undoubtedly often landed before under
somewhat similar circumstances, and then, after brief incursions into
the interior, had re-embarked on board their ships and sailed away.
In this case, however, there was a certain peculiar and extraordinary
state of things in the political condition of the country in which
they had landed, which resulted in first protracting their stay, and
finally in establishing them so fixedly and permanently in the land,
that they and their followers and descendants soon became the entire
masters of it, and have remained in possession to the present day.
These circumstances were as follows:
The name of the king of Britain at this period was Vortigern. At the
time when the Anglo-Saxons arrived, he and his government were nearly
overwhelmed with the pressure of difficulty and danger arising from
the incursions of the Picts and Scots; and Vortigern, instead of being
aroused to redoubled vigilance and energy by the imminence of the
danger, as Alfred afterward was in similar circumstances, sank
down, as weak minds always do, in despair, and gave himself up to
dissipation and vice--endeavoring, like depraved seamen on a wreck, to
drown his mental distress in animal sensations of pleasure. Such men
are ready to seek relief or rescue from their danger from any quarter
and at any price. Vortigern, instead of looking upon the Anglo-Saxon
intruders as new enemies, conceived the idea of appealing to them for
succor. He offered to convey to them a large tract of territory in the
part of the island where they had landed, on condition of their aiding
him in his contests with his other foes.
Hengist and Horsa acceded to this proposal. They marched their
followers into battle, and defeated Vortigern's enemies. They sent
across the sea to their native land, and invited new adventurers to
join them. Vortigern was greatly pleased with the success of his
expedient. The Picts and Scots were driven back to their fastnesses in
the remote mountains of the north, and the Britons once more possessed
their land in peace, by means of the protection and the aid which
their new confederates afforded them.
In the mean time the Anglo-Saxons were establishing and strengthening
themselves very rapidly in the part of the island which Vortigern had
assigned them--which was, as the reader will understand from what
has already been said in respect to the place of their landing, the
southeastern part--a region which now constitutes the county of Kent.
In addition, too, to the natural increase of their power from the
increase of their numbers and their military force, Hengist contrived,
if the story is true, to swell his own personal influence by means of
a matrimonial alliance which he had the adroitness to effect. He had
a daughter named Rowena. She was very beautiful and accomplished.
Hengist sent for her to come to England. When she had arrived he made
a sumptuous entertainment for King Vortigern, inviting also to it, of
course, many other distinguished guests. In the midst of the feast,
when the king was in the state of high excitement produced on such
temperaments by wine and convivial pleasure, Rowena came in to offer
him more wine. Vortigern was powerfully struck, as Hengist had
anticipated, with her grace and beauty. Learning that she was
Hengist's daughter, he demanded her hand. Hengist at first declined,
but, after sufficiently stimulating the monarch's eagerness by his
pretended opposition, he yielded, and the king became the general's
son-in-law. This is the story which some of the old chroniclers tell.
Modern historians are divided in respect to believing it. Some think
it is fact, others fable.
At all events, the power of Hengist and Horsa gradually increased,
as years passed on, until the Britons began to be alarmed at their
growing strength and multiplying numbers, and to fear lest these new
friends should prove, in the end, more formidable than the terrible
enemies whom they had come to expel. Contentions and then open
quarrels began to occur, and at length both parties prepared for war.
The contest which soon ensued was a terrible struggle, or rather
series of struggles, which continued for two centuries, during which
the Anglo-Saxons were continually gaining ground and the Britons
losing; the mental and physical superiority of the Anglo-Saxon race
giving them with very few exceptions, every where and always the
victory.
There were, occasionally, intervals of peace, and partial and
temporary friendliness. They accuse Hengist of great treachery on one
of these occasions. He invited his son-in-law, King Vortigern, to
a feast, with three hundred of his officers, and then fomenting a
quarrel at the entertainment, the Britons were all killed in the
affray by means of the superior Saxon force which had been provided
for the emergency. Vortigern himself was taken prisoner, and held a
captive until he ransomed himself by ceding three whole provinces
to his captor. Hengist justified this demand by throwing the
responsibility of the feud upon his guests; and it is not, in fact, at
all improbable that they deserved their share of the condemnation.
The famous King Arthur, whose Knights of the Round Table have been so
celebrated in ballads and tales, lived and flourished during these
wars between the Saxons and the Britons. He was a king of the Britons,
and performed wonderful exploits of strength and valor. He was of
prodigious size and muscular power, and of undaunted bravery. He slew
giants, destroyed the most ferocious wild beasts, gained very splendid
victories in the battles that he fought, made long expeditions into
foreign countries, having once gone on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem to
obtain the Holy Cross. His wife was a beautiful lady, the daughter of
a chieftain of Cornwall. Her name was Guenever.[1] On his return from
one of his distant expeditions, he found that his nephew, Medrawd,
had won her affections while he was gone, and a combat ensued in
consequence between him and Medrawd. The combat took place on the
coast of Cornwall. Both parties fell. Arthur was mortally wounded.
They took him from the field into a boat, and carried him along the
coast till they came to a river. They ascended the river till they
came to the town of Glastonbury. They committed the still breathing
body to the care of faithful friends there; but the mortal blow had
been given. The great hero died, and they buried his body in the
Glastonbury churchyard, very deep beneath the surface of the ground,
in order to place it as effectually as possible beyond the reach of
Saxon rage and vengeance. Arthur had been a deadly and implacable foe
to the Saxons. He had fought twelve great pitched battles with them,
in every one of which he had gained the victory. In one of these
battles he had slain, according to the traditional tale, four hundred
and seventy men, in one day, with his own hand.
Five hundred years after his death, King Henry the Second, having
heard from an ancient British bard that Arthur's body lay interred in
the Abbey of Glastonbury, and that the spot was marked by some small
pyramids erected near it, and that the body would be found in a rude
coffin made of a hollowed oak, ordered search to be made. The ballads
and tales which had been then, for several centuries, circulating
throughout England, narrating and praising King Arthur's exploits, had
given him so wide a fame, that great interest was felt in the recovery
and the identification of his remains. The searchers found the
pyramids in the cemetery of the abbey. They dug between them, and came
at length to a stone. Beneath this stone was a leaden cross, with the
inscription in Latin, "HERE LIES BURIED THE BODY OF GREAT KING
ARTHUR." Going down still below this, they came at length, at the
depth of sixteen feet from the surface, to a great coffin, made of the
trunk of an oak tree, and within it was a human skeleton of unusual
size. The skull was very large, and showed marks of ten wounds. Nine
of them were closed by concretions of the bone, indicating that the
wounds by which those contusions or fractures had been made had been
healed while life continued. The tenth fracture remained in a
condition which showed that that had been the mortal wound.
The bones of Arthur's wife were found near those of her husband. The
hair was apparently perfect when found, having all the freshness
and beauty of life; but a monk of the abbey, who was present at the
disinterment, touched it and it crumbled to dust.
Such are the tales which the old chronicles tell of the good King
Arthur, the last and greatest representative of the power of the
ancient British aborigines. It is a curious illustration of the
uncertainty which attends all the early records of national history,
that, notwithstanding all the above particularity respecting the life
and death of Arthur, it is a serious matter of dispute among the
learned in modern times whether any such person ever lived.
[Footnote 1: Spelled sometimes Gwenlyfar and Ginevra.]