THE CHAMBER AND ITS FURNITURE.--BEDS AND BED-ROOMS.--INFANCY AND
CHILDHOOD AMONG THE ANGLO-SAXONS.--CHARACTER AND MANNERS OF THE
ANGLO-SAXON LADIES.--THEIR CRUELTY TO THEIR SERVANTS.--THEIR
AMUSEMENTS.--THE GARDEN; LOVE OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS FOR
FLOWERS.--ANGLO-SAXON PUNISHMENTS.--ALMSGIVING.
The bower or chamber, which, as before stated, was, in the original
Saxon mansions, built separate from the hall, was a more private
apartment than the latter, although it was still easy of access. In the
houses of the rich and the noble there were, as may easily be supposed,
several chambers, devoted to the different purposes of the household,
and to the reception of visitors. It was in the chamber that the lord
of the household transacted his private business, and gave his private
audiences. We see by the story of king Edwy that it was considered a
mark of effeminacy to retire from the company in the hall after dinner,
to seek more quiet amusement in the chamber, where the men rejoined
the ladies of the family; yet there are numerous instances which show
that, except on festive occasions, this was a very common practice. In
some cases, where the party was not an ostentatious or public one, the
meal was served in a chamber rather than in the hall. According to the
story of Osbert king of Northumberland and Beorn the buzecarl, as told
by Gaimar, it was in a chamber that Beorn’s lady received the king,
and caused the meal to be served to him which ended in consequences so
fatal to the country. We have very little information relating to the
domestic games and amusements of the Anglo-Saxons. They seem to have
consisted, in a great measure, in music and in telling stories. They
had games of hazard, but we are not acquainted with their character.
Their chief game was named _tæfel_ or _tæfl_, which has been explained
by _dice_ and by _chess_; one name of the article played with,
_tæfl-stan_, a table-_stone_, would suit either interpretation; but
another, _tæfl-mon_, a table-_man_, would seem to indicate a game
resembling our chess.[8] The writers immediately after the conquest
speak of the Saxons as playing at chess, and pretend that they
learnt the game from the Danes. Gaimar, who gives us an interesting
story relating to the deceit practiced upon king Edgar (A.D. 973) by
Ethelwold, when sent to visit the beautiful Elfthrida, daughter of
Orgar of Devonshire, describes the young lady and her noble father as
passing the day at chess.
_Orgar jouout à un eschès,_
_Un giu k’il aprist des Daneis:_
_Od lui jouout Elstruet la bele._
The Ramsey history, published by Gale, describing a bishop’s visit to
court late at night, says that he found the king amusing himself with
similar games.[9] An ecclesiastical canon, enacted under king Edgar,
enjoined that a priest should not be a _tæflere_, or gambler.
[Illustration: _No. 28. Anglo-Saxon Chairs._]
It was not usual, in the middle ages, to possess much furniture, for in
those times of insecurity, anything moveable, which could not easily be
concealed, was never safe from plunderers. Benches, on which several
persons could sit together, and a stool or a chair for a guest of more
consideration, were the only seats. Our word chair is Anglo-Norman,
and the adoption of the name from that language would seem to indicate
that the moveable to which it was applied was unknown to the great mass
of the Anglo-Saxon population of the island. The Anglo-Saxon name for
it was _setl_, a seat, or _stol_; the latter preserved in the modern
word stool. We find chairs of different forms in the illuminations
of Anglo-Saxon manuscripts, but they are always represented as the
seats of persons of high rank and dignity, usually of kings. The two
examples given in the accompanying cut (No. 28), are taken from the
Harleian MS., No. 603, fol. 54, v^o., already referred to in our
preceding chapters. It will be observed that, although very simple in
form, they are both furnished with cushions. The chair in our cut No.
29, taken from Alfric’s translation of Genesis (MS. Cotton. Claudius,
B. iv.), on which a king is seated, is of a different and more
elegant construction. We sometimes find, in the manuscripts, chairs
of fantastic form, which were, perhaps, creations of the artist’s
imagination. Such a one is the singular throne on which king David is
seated with his harp, in our cut No. 30, which is also taken from the
Harleian Manuscript, No. 603 (fol. 68, v^o.). In addition to the seat,
the ladies in the chamber had a _scamel_, or footstool.
[Illustration: _No. 29. A King Seated._]
[Illustration: _No. 30. King David._]
There was a table used in the chamber or bower, which differed
altogether from that used in the hall. It was named _myse_, _disc_
(from the Latin _discus_), and _beod_; all words which convey the
idea of its being round--_beodas_ (in the plural) was the term
applied to the scales of a balance. The Latin phrase, of the 127th
Psalm, _in circuitu mensæ tuæ_, which was evidently understood by the
Anglo-Saxon translators as referring to a round table, is translated
by one, _on ymbhwyrfte mysan thine_, and by another, _in ymbhwyrfte
beodes thines_. If we refer back to the preceding chapter, we shall
see, in the subjects which appear to exhibit a small domestic party
(see cuts No. 15, 19, and 24), that the table is round; and this was
evidently the usual form given among the Anglo-Saxons to the table
used in the chamber or private room. This form has been preserved as
a favourite one in England down to a very recent period, as that of
the parlour-table among the class of society most likely to retain
Anglo-Saxon tastes and sentiments. In the pictures, the round table
is generally represented as supported on three or four legs, though
there are instances in which it was represented with one. In the latter
case, the board of the table probably turned up on a hinge, as in our
old parlour tea-tables; and in the former it was perhaps capable of
being taken off the legs; for there is reason for believing that it was
only laid out when wanted, and that, when no longer in use, it was put
away on one side of the room or in a closet, in the smallest possible
compass.
[Illustration: _No. 31. A Lamp and Stand._]
We have no information to explain to us how the bower or chamber was
warmed. In the hall, it is probable that the fire gave warmth and light
at the same time, although, in the fragment of the Anglo-Saxon poem
relating to the fight at Finnesburg, there is an indistinct intimation
that the hall was sometimes lighted with _horns_, or cressets; but, in
the chamber, during the long evenings of winter, it was necessary to
have an artificial light to enable its occupants to read, or work, or
play. The Anglo-Saxon name for this article, so necessary for domestic
comfort, was _candel_ or _condel_ (our _candle_); and, so general was
the application of this term, that it was even used figuratively as we
now use the word lamp. Thus, the Anglo-Saxon poets spoke of the sun
as _rodores candel_ (the candle of the firmament), _woruld-candel_
(the candle of the world), _heofon-condel_ (the candle of heaven),
_wyn-condel_ (the candle of glory). The candle was, no doubt,
originally a mere mass of fat plastered round a wick (_candel-weoc_),
and stuck upon an upright stick. Hence the instrument on which it
was afterwards supported received the name of _candel-sticca_ or
_candel-stæf_, a candlestick; and the original idea was preserved even
when the candle supporter had many branches, it being then called a
_candel-treow_, or candle-tree. The original arrangement of the stick
was also preserved; for, down to a very recent period, the candle was
not inserted in a socket in the candlestick as at present, but it was
stuck upon a spike. The Anglo-Saxon writers speak of _candel-snytels_,
or snuffers. Other names less used, for a candle or some article for
giving light, were _blacern_ or _blæcern_, which is explained in
glossaries by the Latin _lucerna_, and _thæcela_, the latter signifying
merely a light. It was usual, also, among our Saxon forefathers, as
among ourselves, to speak of the instrument for illumination as merely
_leoht_, a light--“bring me a light.” A candlestick and candle are
represented in one of the cuts in our last chapter (cut No. 19). The
Anglo-Saxons, no doubt, derived the use of lamps from the Romans; and
they were so utterly at a loss for a word to describe this mode of
illumination, that they always called it _leoht-fæt_, a light-vat,
or vessel of light. In our cut (No. 31) we have an Anglo-Saxon lamp,
placed on a candelabrum or stand, exactly in the Roman manner. It will
be remembered that Asser, a writer of somewhat doubtful authenticity,
ascribes to king Alfred the invention of lanterns, as a protection to
the candle, to prevent it from swealing in consequence of the wind
entering through the crevices of the apartments--not a very bright
picture of the comforts of an Anglo-Saxon chamber. The candles were
made of wax as well as tallow. The candlestick was of different
materials. In one instance we find it termed, in Anglo-Saxon, a
_leoht-isern_, literally a light-iron: perhaps this was the term used
for the lamp-stand, as figured in our last cut. In the inventories we
have mention of _ge-bonene candel-sticcan_ (candlesticks of bone), of
silver-gilt candlesticks, and of ornamented candlesticks.
[Illustration: _No. 32. Anglo-Saxon Beds._]
A bed was a usual article of furniture in the bower or chamber;
though there were, no doubt, in large mansions, chambers set apart as
bedrooms, as well as chambers in which there was no bed, or in which
a bed could be made for the occasion. The account given by Gaimar, as
quoted above, of the visit of king Osbert to Beorn’s lady, seems to
imply that the chamber in which the lady gave the king his meal had a
bed in it. The bed itself seems usually to have consisted merely of a
sack (_sæccing_) filled with straw, and laid on a bench or board. Hence
words used commonly to signify the bed itself were _bænce_ (a bench),
and _streow_ (straw): and even in king Alfred’s translation of Bede,
the statement, “he ordered to prepare a bed for him,” is expressed
in Anglo-Saxon by, _he heht him streowne ge-gearwian_, literally, he
ordered to prepare straw for him. All, in fact, that had to be done
when a bed was wanted, was to take the bed-sack out of the _cyst_, or
chest, fill it with fresh straw, and lay it on the bench. In ordinary
houses it is probable that the bench for the bed was placed in a recess
at the side of the room, in the manner we still see in Scotland; and
hence the bed itself was called, among other names, _cota_, a cot;
_cryb_, a crib or stall; and _clif_ or _clyf_, a recess or closet. From
the same circumstance a bedroom was called _bed-clyfa_ or _bed-cleofa_,
and _bed-cofa_, a bed-closet or bed-cove. Our cut (No. 32), taken from
Alfric’s version of Genesis (Claudius, B. iv.), represents beds of
this description. Benches are evidently placed in recesses at the side
of the chamber, with the beds laid upon them, and the recesses are
separated from the rest of the apartment by a curtain, _bed-warft_ or
_hryfte_. The modern word _bedstead_ means, literally, no more than
“a place for a bed;” and it is probable that what we call bedsteads
were then rare, and only possessed by people of rank. Two examples are
given in the annexed cut (No. 33), taken from the Harleian MS., No.
603. Under the head were placed a _bolstar_ and a _pyle_ (pillow),
which were probably also stuffed with straw. The clothes with which
the sleeper was covered, and which appear in the pictures scanty
enough, were _scyte_, a sheet, _bed-felt_, a coverlet, which was
generally of some thicker material, and _bed-reaf_, bed-clothes. We
know from a multitude of authorities, that it was the general custom
of the middle ages to go into bed quite naked. The sketchy character
of the Anglo-Saxon drawings renders it difficult sometimes to judge
of minute details; but, from the accompanying cuts, it appears that
an Anglo-Saxon going into bed, having stripped all his or her clothes
off, first wrapped round his body a sheet, and then drew over him the
coverlet. Sharon Turner has given a list of the articles connected
with the bed, mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon wills and inventories. In
the will of a man we find bed-clothes (_bed-reafes_), with a curtain
(_hyrfte_), and sheet (_hopp-scytan_), and all that thereto belongs;
and he gives to his son the _bed-reafe_, or bed-cloth, and all its
appurtenances. An Anglo-Saxon lady gives to one of her children two
chests and their contents, her best bed-curtain, linen, and all the
clothes belonging to it. To another child she leaves two chests, and
“all the bed-clothes that to one bed belong.” On another occasion we
read of _pulvinar unum de palleo_: not a pillow of straw, as Sharon
Turner very erroneously translates it, but a pillow of a sort of rich
cloth made in the middle ages. A goat-skin bed-covering was sent to an
Anglo-Saxon abbot; and bear-skins are sometimes noticed, as if a part
of bed furniture.
[Illustration: _No. 33. Anglo-Saxon Beds._]
The bed-room, or chamber, and the sitting-room were usually identical;
for we must bear in mind that in the domestic manners of the middle
ages the same idea of privacy was not connected with the sleeping-room
as at the present day. Gaimar has preserved an anecdote of Anglo-Saxon
times curiously illustrative of this point. King Edgar--a second David
in this respect--married the widow of Ethelwold, whom he had murdered
in order to clear his way to her bed. The king and queen were sleeping
in their bed, which is described as surrounded by a rich curtain, made
of a stuff which we cannot easily explain, when Dunstan, uninvited,
but unhindered, entered the chamber to expostulate with them on their
wickedness, and came to the king’s bedside, where he stood over them,
and entered into conversation--
_A Londres ert Edgar li reis;_ _King Edgar was at London;_
_En son lit jut e la raine,_ _He lay in his bed with the queen,_
_Entur els out une curtine_ _Round them was a curtain_
_Delgé, d’un paille escariman._ _Spread, made of scarlet paille._
_Este-vus l’arcevesque Dunstan_ _Behold archbishop Dunstan_
_Très par matin vint en la chambre_ _Came into the chamber very early in
the morning._
_Sur un pecul de vermail lambre_ _On a bed-post of red plank_
_S’est apué cel arcevesque._ _The archbishop leaned._
In the account of the murder of king Ethelbert by the instrumentality
of the queen of king Offa, as it is told by Roger of Wendover, we see
the queen ordering to be prepared for the royal guest, a chamber, which
was adorned for the occasion with sumptuous furniture, as his bed-room.
“Near the king’s bed she caused a seat to be prepared, magnificently
decked, and surrounded with curtains; and underneath it the wicked
woman caused a deep pit to be dug.” Into this pit the king was
precipitated the moment he trusted himself on the treacherous seat. It
is clear from the context that the chamber thus prepared for the king
was a building apart, and that it had only a ground-floor.
It was in the chamber that the child, while an infant, was brought
up by its mother. We have few contemporary notices of the treatment
of children at this early age by the Anglo-Saxons, but probably it
differed little from the general practice of a later period. Towards
the close of the thirteenth century, an Englishman named Walter de
Bibblesworth, who wrote, as a great proportion of English writers
at that day did, in French verse--French as it was then spoken and
written in England--has left us a very curious metrical vocabulary,
compiled in French with interlinear explanations of the words in
English, which commences with man’s infancy. “As soon as the child is
born,” says the author, “it must be swathed; lay it to sleep in its
cradle, and you must have a nurse to rock it to sleep.”
_Kaunt le emfès sera nées,_
_Lors deyt estre maylolez,_
_En soun berz l’enfaunt chochet,_
_De une bercere vus purvoyet,_
_Où par sa norice seyt bercé._
This was the manner in which the new-born infant was treated in all
grades of society. If we turn to one of the more serious romances, we
find it practised among princes and feudal chiefs equally as among the
poor. Thus, when the princess Parise, wandering in the wild woods,
is delivered in the open air, she first wraps her child in a piece
of _sendal_, torn apparently from her rich robe, and then binds, or
swathels, it with a white cloth:--
_La dame le conroie à un pan de cendex,_
_Puis a pris un blanc drap, si a ses fians bendez._
--Parise la Duchesse, p. 76.
When the robbers carry away the child by night, thinking they had
gained some rich booty, they find that they have stolen a newly-born
infant, “all swatheled.”
_Lai troverent l’anffant, trestot anmaloté._--Ibid. p. 80.
This custom of swatheling children in their infancy, though evidently
injurious as well as ridiculous, has prevailed from a very early
period, and is still practised in some parts of Europe. We can hardly
doubt that our Anglo-Saxon forefathers swatheled their children,
although the practice is not very clearly described by any of their
writers. We derive the word itself from the Anglo-Saxon language, in
which _beswethan_ means to swathe or bind, _suethe_ signifies a band
or swathe, and _swethel_ or _swæthil_, a swaddling-band. These words
appear, however, to have been used in a more extensive sense among the
Anglo-Saxons than their representatives in more recent times, and as I
have not met with them applied in this restricted sense in Anglo-Saxon
writers, I should not hastily assume from them that our early Teutonic
forefathers did swathe their new-born children. In an Anglo-Saxon poem
on the birth of Christ, contained in the Exeter Book (p. 45), the poet
speaks of--
_Bearnes gebyrda,_ _The child’s birth,_
_þa he in binne wæs_ _when he in the bin was_
_in cildes hiw_ _in a child’s form_
_claþum biwunden._ _with cloths wound round._
These words refer clearly to the practice of swaddling; and, though
the Anglo-Saxon artist has not here portrayed his object very
distinctly, we can hardly doubt that, in our cut (No. 34), taken from
the Anglo-Saxon manuscript of Cædmon, the child, which its mother is
represented as holding, is intended to be swathed.
[Illustration: _No. 34. Anglo-Saxon Mother and Child._]
The word _bin_, used in the lines of the Anglo-Saxon poem just quoted,
which means a hutch or a manger, has reference, of course, to the
circumstances of the birth of the Saviour, and is not here employed to
signify a cradle. This last word is itself Anglo-Saxon, and has stood
its ground in our language successfully against the influence of the
Anglo-Norman, in which it was called a _bers_ or _bersel_, from the
latter of which is derived the modern French _berçeau_. Another name
for a cradle was _crib_; a poem in the Exeter Book (p. 87) speaks of
_cild geong on crybbe_ (a young child in a cradle). Our cut No. 35,
also taken from the manuscript of Cædmon, represents an Anglo-Saxon
cradle of rather rude construction. The illuminators of a later period
often represent the cradle of elegant form and richly ornamented.
The Anglo-Saxon child appears here also to be swaddled, but it is
still drawn too inaccurately to be decisive on this point. The latter
illuminators were more particular and correct in their delineations,
and leave no doubt of the universal practice of swaddling infants. A
good example is given in our cut No. 36, taken from an illuminated
manuscript of the fourteenth century, of which a copy is given in the
large work of the late M. du Sommerard.
[Illustration: _No. 35. Anglo-Saxon Child in its Cradle._]
There is a very curious paragraph relating to infants in the
Pœnitentiale of Theodore, archbishop of Canterbury, which furnishes
us with a singular picture of early Anglo-Saxon domestic life, for
Theodore flourished in the latter half of the seventh century. It
may be perhaps right to explain that a Pœnitentiale was a code of
ecclesiastical laws directing the proportional degrees of penance for
each particular class and degree of crimes and offences against public
and private morals, and that these laws penetrate to the innermost
recesses of domestic life. The Pœnitentiale of archbishop Theodore
directs that “if a woman place her infant by the hearth, and the man
put water in the cauldron, and it boil over, and the child be scalded
to death, the woman must do penance for her negligence, but the man
is acquitted of blame.”[10] As this accident must have been of very
frequent occurrence to require a particular direction in a code of
laws, it implies great negligence in the Anglo-Saxon mothers, and seems
to show that, commonly, at least at this early period, they had no
cradles for their children, but laid them, swaddled as they were, on
the ground close by the fire, no doubt to keep them warm, and that they
left them in this situation.
[Illustration: _No. 36. Mother and Child._]
We are not informed if there were any fixed period during which the
infant was kept in swaddling-cloths, but probably when it was thought
no longer necessary to keep it in the arms or in the cradle, it was
relieved from its bands, and allowed to crawl about the floor and take
care of itself. Walter de Bibblesworth, the Anglo-Norman writer of the
thirteenth century already quoted, tells us briefly that a child is
left to creep about before it has learnt to go on its feet:--
_Le enfaunt covent de chatouner_
_Avaunt ke sache à pées aler._
When the Anglo-Saxon youth, if a boy, had passed his infancy, he
entered that age which was called _cnithad_ (knighthood), which lasted
from about eight years of age until manhood.
It is very rare that we can catch in history a glimpse of the internal
economy of the Anglo-Saxon household. Enough, however, is told to show
us that the Saxon woman in every class of society possessed those
characteristics which are still considered to be the best traits of
the character of Englishwomen; she was the attentive housewife, the
tender companion, the comforter and consoler of her husband and family,
the virtuous and noble matron. Home was her especial place; for we
are told in a poem in the Exeter Book (p. 337) that, “It beseems a
damsel to be at her board (table); a rambling woman scatters words,
she is often charged with faults, a man thinks of her with contempt,
oft her cheek smites.” In all ranks, from the queen to the peasant,
we find the lady of the household attending to her domestic duties.
In 686, John of Beverley performed a supposed miraculous cure on the
lady of a Yorkshire earl; and the man who narrated the miracle to
Bede the historian, and who dined with John of Beverley at the earl’s
house after the cure, said, “She presented the cup to the bishop
(John) and to me, and continued serving us with drink as she had
begun, till dinner was over.” Domestic duties of this kind were never
considered as degrading, and they were performed with a simplicity
peculiarly characteristic of the age. Bede relates another story of
a miraculous cure performed on an earl’s wife by St. Cuthbert, in
the sequel of which we find the lady going forth from her house to
meet her husband’s visitor, holding the reins while he dismounts, and
conducting him in. The wicked and ambitious queen Elfthrida, when her
step-son king Edward approached her residence, went out in person to
attend upon him, and invite him to enter, and, on his refusal, she
served him with the cup herself, and it was while stooping to take
it that he was treacherously stabbed by one of her attendants. In
their chamber, besides spinning and weaving, the ladies were employed
in needlework and embroidery, and the Saxon ladies were so skilful
in this art, that their work, under the name of English work (_opus
Anglicum_), was celebrated on the continent. We read of a Saxon lady,
named Ethelswitha, who retired with her maidens to a house near Ely,
where her mother was buried, and employed herself and them in making
a rich chasuble for the monks. The four princesses, the sisters of
king Ethelstan, were celebrated for their skill in spinning, weaving,
and embroidering; William of Malmesbury tells us that their father,
king Edward, had educated them “in such wise, that in childhood
they gave their whole attention to letters, and afterwards employed
themselves in the labours of the distaff and the needle.” The reader
will remember in the story of the Saxon queen Osburgha, the mother
of the great Alfred, how she sat in her chamber, surrounded by her
children, and encouraging them in a taste for literature. The ladies,
when thus occupied, were not inaccessible to their friends of either
sex. When Dunstan was a youth, he appears to have been always a welcome
visitor to the ladies in their “bowers,” on account of his skill in
music and in the arts. His contemporary biographer tells us of a noble
lady, named Ethelwynn, who, knowing his skill in drawing and designs,
obtained his assistance for the ornaments of a handsome stole which she
and her women were embroidering. Dunstan is represented as bringing
his harp with him into the apartment of the ladies, and hanging it up
against the wall, that he might have it ready to play to them in the
intervals of their work. Editha, the queen of Edward the Confessor,
was well-known as a skilful needle-woman, and as extensively versed in
literature. Ingulf’s story of his schoolboy-days, if it be true (for
there is considerable doubt of the authenticity of Ingulf’s “History”),
and of his interviews with queen Edith, gives us a curious picture of
the simplicity of an Anglo-Saxon court, even at the latest period of
their monarchy. “I often met her,” he says, “as I came from school, and
then she questioned me about my studies and my verses; and willingly
passing from grammar to logic, she would catch me in the subtleties of
argument. She always gave me two or three pieces of money, which were
counted to me by her handmaiden, and then sent me to the royal larder
to refresh myself.”
Several circumstances arising out of certain rivalries of social
institutions render it somewhat difficult to form an estimate of the
moral character of the Anglo-Saxons. In the first place, before the
introduction of Christianity, marriage was a mere civil institution,
consisted chiefly in a bargain between the father of the lady and the
man who sought her, and was completed with few formalities, except
those of feasting and rejoicing. After the young lady was out of the
control of her parents, the two sexes were on a footing of equality to
each other, and the marriage tie was so little binding, that, in case
of disagreement, it was at the will of either of the married couple
to separate, in which case the relatives or friends of each party
interfered, to see that right was done in the proportional repayment of
marriage money, dowry, &c., and after the separation each party was at
liberty to marry again. This state of things is well illustrated in the
Icelandic story of the Burnt Njal, recently translated by Dr. Dasent,
and it was not abolished by the secular laws, after the conversion of
the Anglo-Saxons to Christianity, marriage still continuing to be, in
fact, a civil institution. But the higher clergy, at least, who were
those who were most strongly inspired with the Romish sentiments,
disapproved entirely of this view of the marriage state, and, although
the Saxon priests appear not to have hesitated in being present at
the second marriages after such separations, they were apparently
forbidden by the ecclesiastical laws from giving their blessing to
them.[11] With such views of the conjugal relations, we cannot be
surprised if the associating together of a man and woman, without the
ceremonies of marriage, was looked upon without disgust; in fact,
this was the case throughout western Europe during the middle ages,
in spite of the doctrines of the church, and the offspring was hardly
considered as dispossessed of legal rights. It would be easy to point
out examples illustrating this state of things. Again, the priesthood
among the unconverted Saxons was probably, as it appears among the
Icelanders in the story of the Burnt Njal just alluded to, a sort of
family possession,[12] the priests themselves being what we should
call family men; so that when the Anglo-Saxon people were Christians,
and no longer pagans, the mass of the clergy, whatever may have been
their sincerity as Christians, could not understand, or, at least,
were unwilling to accept, the new Romish doctrine which required their
celibacy. In both these cases, the Anglo-Saxon ecclesiastical writers,
who are our chief authority on this subject, and were the most bigoted
of the Romish party, speak in terms of exaggerated virulence, on the
score of morality, against practices which the Anglo-Saxon people had
not been used to consider as immoral at all. Thus, we should be led to
believe, from the accounts of these ecclesiastical moralists, that the
Anglo-Saxon clergy were infamous for their incontinence, whereas their
declamations probably mean only that the Anglo-Saxon priests persisted
in having wives and families. The secular laws contain frequent
allusions to the continuance of principles relating to the marriage
state, which were derived from the older period of paganism, and some
of these are extremely curious. Thus, the laws of king Ethelred provide
that a man who seduces another man’s wife, shall make reparation, not
only as in modern times, by paying pecuniary damages, but also by
procuring him another wife! or, in the words of the original, “If a
freeman have been familiar with a freeman’s wife, let him pay for it
with his _wer-gild_ (the money compensation for the killing of a man),
and provide another wife with his own money, and bring her home to the
other.” By a law of king Ine, “if any man buy a wife (that is, if the
bargain with her father has been completed), and the marriage take not
place,” he was required to pay the money, besides other compensation.
And again, by one of Alfred’s laws, it was provided, “If any one
deceive an unbetrothed woman, and sleep with her, let him pay for her,
and have her afterwards to wife; but if the father of the woman will
not give her, let him pay money according to her dowry.” Regulations
relating to the buying of a wife, are found in the Anglo-Saxon laws.
We learn nothing in the facts of history to the discredit of the
Anglo-Saxon character in general. As in other countries, in the same
condition of society, they appear capable of great crimes, and of
equally great acts of goodness and virtue. Generally speaking, their
least amiable trait was the treatment of their servants or slaves;
for this class among the Anglo-Saxons were in a state of absolute
servitude, might be bought and sold, and had no protection in the
law against their masters and mistresses, who, in fact, had power of
life and death over them. We gather from the ecclesiastical canons
that, at least in the earlier periods of Anglo-Saxon history, it was
not unusual for servants to be scourged to death by or by order of
their mistresses. Some of the collections of local miracles, such as
those of St. Swithun, at Winchester (of the tenth century), furnish us
with horrible pictures of the cruel treatment to which female slaves
especially were subjected. For comparatively slight offences they were
loaded with gyves and fetters, and subjected to all kinds of tortures.
Several of these are curiously illustrative of domestic manners. On one
occasion, the maid-servant of Teothic the bell-maker (_campanarius_),
of Winchester, was, for “a slight offence,” placed in iron fetters, and
chained up by the feet and hands all night. Next morning she was taken
out to be frightfully beaten, and she was put again into her bonds;
but in the ensuing night she contrived to make her escape, and fled to
the church to seek sanctuary at the tomb of St. Swithun, for being in
a state of servitude there was no legal protection for her. On another
occasion, a female servant had been stolen from a former master, and
had passed into the possession of another master in Winchester. One
day her former master came to Winchester, and the girl, hearing of
it, went to speak to him. When her mistress heard that she had been
seen to talk with a man from a distant province, she ordered her to
be thrown into fetters, and treated very cruelly. Next day, while the
mistress had gone out on some business, leaving her servant at home
in fetters, the latter made her escape similarly to the sanctuary of
the church. Another servant-girl in Winchester, taking her master’s
clothes to wash in the river, was set upon by thieves, who robbed her
of them. Her master, ascribing the mishap to her own negligence, beat
her very severely, and then put her in fetters, from which she made
her escape like the others. The interesting scene represented in our
cut, No. 37, taken from the Harleian MS., No. 603, fol. 14, v^o., may
be regarded as showing us the scourging of a slave. In a picture in
Alfric’s version of Genesis, the man scourged, instead of being tied by
the feet, is fixed by the body in a cloven post, in a rather singular
manner. The aptness with which the Saxon ladies made use of the scourge
is illustrated by one of William of Malmesbury’s anecdotes, who tells
us that, when king Ethelred was a child, he once so irritated his
mother, that not having a whip, she beat him with some candles, which
were the first thing that fell under her hand, until he was almost
insensible. “On this account he dreaded candles during the rest of his
life, to such a degree that he would never suffer the light of them to
be introduced in his presence!”
[Illustration: _No. 37. Washing and Scourging._]
[Illustration: _No. 38. Hanging._]
The cruelty of the Anglo-Saxon ladies to their servants offers a
contrast to the generally mild character of the punishments inflicted
by the Anglo-Saxon laws. The laws of Ethelred contain the following
injunction, showing how contrary capital punishment is to the spirit of
Anglo-Saxon legislation:--“And the ordinance of our lord, and of his
witan (parliament), is, that Christian men for all too little be not
condemned to death; but in general let mild punishment be decreed, for
the people’s need; and let not for a little God’s handywork and his
own purchase be destroyed, which he dearly bought.” This injunction
is repeated in the laws of Canute. It appears that the usual method
of inflicting death upon criminals was by hanging. Our cut, No. 38,
taken from the illuminations to Alfric’s version of Genesis, represents
an Anglo-Saxon gallows (_galga_), and the rather primitive method of
carrying the last penalty of the law into effect. The early illuminated
manuscripts give us few representations of popular punishments.
The Anglo-Saxon vocabularies enumerate the following implements of
punishment, besides the _galga_, or gallows: fetters (_fæter_, _cops_),
distinguished into foot-fetters and hand-fetters; shackles (_scacul_,
or _sceacul_), which appear to have been used specially for the neck; a
_swipa_, or scourge; _ostig gyrd_, a knotted rod; _tindig_, explained
by the Latin _scorpio_, and meaning apparently a whip with knots or
plummets at the end of thongs, like those used by the charioteers in
the cuts in our next chapter; and an instrument of torture called a
_threpel_, which is explained by the Latin _equuleus_. The following
cut, No. 39, from the Harleian MS., No. 603 (so often quoted), shows
us the stocks, generally placed by the side of the public road at the
entrance to the town. Two other offenders are attached to the columns
of the public building, perhaps a court-house, by apparently a rope
and a chain. The Anglo-Saxon laws prescribe few corporal punishments,
but substitute for them the payment of fines, or compensation-money,
and these are proportioned to the offences with very extraordinary
minuteness. Thus, to select a few examples from the very numerous
list of injuries which may be done to a man’s person,--if any one
struck off an ear, he was to pay twelve shillings, and, if an eye,
fifty shillings; if the nose were cut through, the payment was nine
shillings. “For each of the four front teeth, six shillings; for
the tooth which stands next to them, four shillings; for that which
follows, three shillings; and for all the others, a shilling each.” If
a thumb were struck off, it was valued at twenty shillings. “If the
shooting finger were struck off” (a term which shows how incorrectly
it has been assumed that the Anglo-Saxons were not accustomed to the
bow), the compensation was eight shillings; for the middle finger,
four shillings; for the ring-finger, six shillings; and for the little
finger eleven shillings. The thumb-nail was valued at three shillings;
and the finger-nails at one shilling each.
[Illustration: _No. 39. Anglo-Saxon Punishments._]
We have little information on the secrets of the toilette of the
Anglo-Saxons. We know from many sources that washing and bathing were
frequent practices among them. The use of hot baths they probably
derived from the Romans. The vocabularies give _thermæ_ as the Latin
equivalent. They are not unfrequently mentioned in the ecclesiastical
laws, and in the canons passed in the reign of king Edgar, warm baths
and soft beds are proscribed as domestic luxuries which tended to
effeminacy. If these were really the _thermæ_ of the Romans, it is
perhaps the hostility of the ascetic part of the Romish clergy which
caused them to be discontinued and forgotten. Our cut No. 37 represents
a party at their ablutions. We constantly find among the articles
in the graves of Anglo-Saxon ladies tweezers, which were evidently
intended for eradicating superfluous hairs, a circumstance which
contributes to show that they paid special attention to hair-dressing.
To judge from the colour of the hair in some of the illuminations,
we might be led to suppose that sometimes they stained it. The young
men seem to have been more foppish and vain of their persons than the
ladies, and some of the old chronicles, such as the Ely history, tell
us (which we should hardly have expected) that this was especially a
characteristic of the Danish invaders, who, we are told, “following
the custom of their country, used to comb their hair every day, bathed
every Saturday, often changed their clothes, and used many other such
frivolous means of setting off the beauty of their persons.”[13]
There is every reason for believing that the Anglo-Saxon ladies were
fond of gardens and flowers, and many allusions in the writings of that
period intimate a warm appreciation of the beauties of nature. The
poets not unfrequently take their comparisons from flowers. Thus, in a
poem in the Exeter Book, a pleasant smell is described as being--
_Swecca swetast,_ _Of odours sweetest,_
_swylce on sumeres tid_ _such as in summer’s tide_
_stincað on stowum,_ _fragrance send forth in places,_
_staþelum fæste,_ _fast in their stations,_
_wynnum æfter wongum,_ _joyously o’er the plains,_
_wyrta geblowene_ _blown plants_
_hunig-flowende._ _honey-flowing._--Exeter Book, p. 178.
And one of the poetical riddles in the same collection contains the
lines--
_Ic eom on stence_ _I am in odour_
_strengre þonne ricels,_ _stronger than incense,_
_oþþe rosa sy,_ _or the rose is,_
_on eorþan tyrf_ _which on earth’s turf_
_wynlic weaxeð;_ _pleasant grows;
_ic eom wræstre þonne heo._ _I am more delicate than it._
_þeah þa lilie sy_ _though that the lily be_
_leof mon-cynne,_ _dear to mankind,_
_beorht on blostman,_ _bright in blossom,_
_ic eom betre þonne heo._ _I am better than it._--Exeter Book, p. 423.
So in another of these poems we read--
_Fæger fugla reord,_ _Sweet was the song of birds,_
_folde geblowen,_ _the earth was covered with flowers,_
_geacas gear budon._ _cuckoos announced the year._--Ibid. p. 146.
Before we quit entirely the Saxon hall, and its festivities and
ceremonies, we must mention one circumstance connected with them.
The laws and customs of the Anglo-Saxons earnestly enjoined the duty
of almsgiving, and a multitude of persons partook of the hospitality
of the rich man’s mansion, who were not worthy to be admitted to his
tables. These assembled at meal-times outside the gate of his house,
and it was a custom to lay aside a portion of the provisions to be
distributed among them, with the fragments from the table. In Alfric’s
homily for the second Sunday after Pentecost, the preacher, after
dwelling on the story of Lazarus, who was spurned from the rich man’s
table, appeals to his Anglo-Saxon audience--“many Lazaruses ye have
now lying at your gates, begging for your superfluity.” Bede tells us
of the good king Oswald, that when he was once sitting at dinner, on
Easter-day, with his bishop, having a silver dish full of dainties
before him, as they were just ready to bless the bread, the servant
whose duty it was to relieve the poor, came in on a sudden and told
the king that a great multitude of needy persons from all parts were
sitting in the streets begging some alms of the king. The latter
immediately ordered the provisions set before him to be carried to the
poor, and the dish to be cut in pieces and divided among them. In the
picture of a Saxon house given in our first chapter (p. 15), we see the
lord of the household on a sort of throne at the entrance to his hall,
presiding over the distribution of his charity. This seat, generally
under an arch or canopy, is often represented in the Saxon manuscripts,
and the chief or lord seated under it, distributing justice or
charity. In the accompanying cut, No. 40, taken from the Anglo-Saxon
manuscript of Prudentius, the lady Wisdom is represented seated on
such a throne. It was, perhaps, the _burh-geat-setl_, or seat at the
burh-gate, mentioned as characteristic of the rank of the thane in the
following extract from a treatise on ranks in society, printed with the
Anglo-Saxon laws: “And if a ceorl thrived, so that he had fully five
hides of his own land, church (or perhaps private chapel), and kitchen
(_kycenan_), bell-house, and burh-gate-seat, and special duty in the
king’s hall, then was he thenceforth worthy of the dignity of thane.”
[Illustration: _No. 40. Wisdom on her Throne._]