THE WOMEN OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS
To attempt a portrayal of the miseries entailed upon the women of the
Britons by the forays of the barbarians, which followed the withdrawal
of the Romans from the country, would be to rehearse the distresses
which were but usual to warfare at that period of the world's history.
We can pass over the savagery of human passions, inflamed by the
heat of strife, and come to the more congenial and, indeed, the
only important task of considering the life of woman, not under the
exceptional conditions of war, but in the normal state of existence.
Even during the Roman occupancy of the country, the British women had
experienced the terrors of the barbarians. In spite of the massive
wall, the lines of forts, and the system of trenches, by which
that military people had sought to arrest the inroads of the Picts
and Scots, those unconquered tribes of the north often swept with
resistless force far into the peaceful provinces, bringing desolation
into many homes and carrying off the women, to dispose of them in the
slave markets of the continent.
More terrible still had been the descent upon the British coasts
of the piratical Saxon rovers, whose frequent incursions had given
to those tracts that were open to their attacks the significant
appellation of the "Saxon shore." In spite of the measures of the
Romans against these marauding bands from over the seas, they were
a source of continual terror, especially to the women of the coast
settlements, to whom their name was a synonym of all those distresses
which forcible capture and enslavement imply.
When the Roman forces withdrew, a danger that had been occasional and
limited to localities now became a menace to the whole people. The
invasions of the Picts and Scots became so frequent, and their ravages
so dreadful, that the Britons, who for generations had been dependent
upon the arms of the Romans for protection, felt unable to cope alone
with the situation that faced them. In their extremity they hit upon
the expedient of pitting barbarian against barbarian, hoping thus
to gain peace from the northern terror, and at the same time to rid
themselves of the menace of the pirates. To this end the astute sea
rovers were engaged to discipline the northern hordes. But when these
"men without a country" had fulfilled their obligation, they preferred
to remain in the fertile and attractive island rather than return to
their own vast forest stretches and there seek to combat the pressure
that had set in motion the Germanic peoples.
In this way began, in the fifth century, the conquest of Britain by
the Angles, the Jutes, and the Saxons: a conquest as inevitable as
it was beneficial; a conquest so stern as practically to sweep from
existence a whole people, excepting the women, who were spared to
become the slaves of the conquerors, and such of the men as were
needed to fill servile positions. The conquest of a Christian nation
by a pagan one must have resulting justification of the highest
order, if it is not to be stamped as one of the greatest calamities
of history, and such justification is amply afforded by the splendid
history of the English people. In the light of the achievements for
humanity that are presented by the record of the Anglo-Saxon peoples,
we need not take up the lament of a Gildas over the woes of the
Britons.
The impact of the virile peoples of northern Europe against the
serried ranks of soldiery that circled the lines of the great world
empire was the irresistible impulse of civilization to preserve and to
further the march of the race toward the goal that mankind in all its
wholesome periods has felt to be its unalterable destiny. The conquest
of Britain was a part of this great world movement. Its striking
difference as compared with the method and the results of the
barbarian conquests on the continent lay in the fact that the new
nationalities that there arose in the path of the invaders were Latin,
while the England of Anglo-Saxon creation was essentially Teutonic.
Hardly a vestige of the Roman occupancy of the country remains in
language, in literature, in law, in custom, or in race.
The independence of the English people of Roman influence, and British
as well, leads us to connect the customs, habits, and, in a word, the
status and the civilization of their women, not with the antecedent
line of British life, but with the tribes of the German forests.
Some influence was exerted by the British women upon the life of
the Anglo-Saxons, but it was not sufficient to become an influential
factor in the crystallization of the new nation. Some of the surviving
customs, manners, and superstitions of the English women are of
undoubted British origin, and remain as a part of the folklore of the
English race as we know it. There is no question that the life of the
common people was tinctured by superstitious beliefs and magic, which
even Christianity had failed completely to eradicate from the faith of
the British women. And this is true, too, with matters of custom and,
perhaps, of dress.
The status of the female sex among the Anglo-Saxons is well set forth
by Sharon Turner in his _History of the Anglo-Saxons_. He says: "It is
a well-known fact that the female sex were much more highly valued and
more respectfully treated by the barbarous Gothic nations than by the
more polished states of the East. Among the Anglo-Saxons they occupied
the same important and independent rank in society which they now
enjoy."
They were allowed to possess, to inherit, and to transmit landed
property; they shared in all social festivities; they were present at
the Witenagemot; they were permitted to sue and could be sued in the
courts of justice; and their persons, their safety, their liberty, and
their property were protected by express laws.
The dignity and the chastity of the women of the Germanic tribes made
a profound impression on the minds of the Roman writers who had an
opportunity for observing them, and evoked from them the warmest
tributes. They remarked that the Germans were the only barbarians
content with one wife. Here, then, we find that of which we have
not been assured in our prior study of the women of Britain--genuine
monogamous marriages.
Tacitus says: "A strict regard for the sanctity of the matrimonial
state characterizes the Germans and deserves our highest applause.
Among the females, virtue runs no hazard of being offended or
destroyed by the outward objects presented to the senses, or of being
corrupted by such social gayeties as might lead the mind astray.
Severe punishments were ordered in case of infringement of this great
bond of society. Vice is not made the subject of wit or mirth, nor can
the fashion of the age be pleaded in excuse for being corrupt or for
endeavoring to corrupt others. Good customs and manners avail more
among these barbarians than good laws among a more refined people."
Among the Teutons, whom Tacitus thus praises to the discredit of his
own people, there was no room for any question of the elemental
rights of woman, for among them woman was more than loved, she was
reverenced.
As Sharon Turner observes, women were admitted into the councils of
the men; and the high position accorded them is further shown by their
prominence in the more intellectual priestly class. The proportion of
women to men must have been ten to one. Their preponderance in this
influential order assured them of the preservation of the regard in
which their sex was held. Its best security, however, lay in that
instinctive feeling of the equality of the sexes which is fundamental
in the character of the Anglo-Saxon and the Germanic family as a
whole.
We must not suppose that because the women of the Anglo-Saxons had
certain rights and were accorded a certain superstitious reverence,
as specially gifted in divination, they were therefore the objects of
chivalrous devotion and were surrounded by aesthetic associations. The
age was a rude one, and the race was made up of uncouth barbarians.
The female grace of chastity was not the result of high ideals, or
of wise deductions from the sacredness of the family relation in its
bearing upon society; it did not even have its basis in conspicuous
moral motives; but it was a natural characteristic of a people who had
lived under severe conditions which necessitated a constant struggle
for supremacy and relegated all weaknesses of the flesh to a place
of secondary importance. Had this attribute sprung from any of those
considerations which at a later time gave rise to chivalry, there
would be found in the poetry of the time the evidences of a tender
regard for woman; her praise would have been sung in poems of love;
but there is a dearth of love songs in the verses of this period. Love
of a kind there was, but it was too matter-of-fact and practical in
its nature to effloresce into sentimentality.
As marriage is the basal principle of the true family, it will be
proper to begin a consideration of the domestic relations of the
women of the Anglo-Saxons by glancing at the circumstances, the
significance, and the ceremonies of their marriages. When the
Anglo-Saxons had settled in England, the primitive and barbarous
custom of forcibly carrying off a bride had probably been superseded
by the later form of obtaining a bride by purchase. While the woman
seems to have had no choice in the selection of a husband, it is
unreasonable to suppose that she did not hold and express opinions;
nor would it be venturesome to assert that, despite her legal
limitations, her voice in the matter of her marriage was often a
decisive one. When the question was beset with especial difficulties,
to what better umpire could a considerate parent refer the matter than
to the bride herself?
One of the laws regulating the disposition of marriageable maidens
was: "If one buys a maiden, let her be bought with the price, if it
is a fair bargain; but if there is deceit, let him take her home again
and get back the price he paid." This was a sort of marriage with
warranty. But the law of Cnut took a more liberal view of the rights
of the girl; it says: "Neither woman nor maid shall be forced to marry
one who is disliked by her, nor shall she be sold for money, unless
(the bridegroom) gives something of his own free will." By this law
the woman was given the decision of her destiny, and the purchase
price became a free gift. If a woman married below her rank, she was
confronted by the alternatives of losing her freedom or giving up
her husband. As the husband bought his wife, so he might sell her and
their children, though this was rarely done. We need not, however,
condemn too harshly this absolute right that was vested in the head of
a family in the disposition of its members, as it was but a relic of a
usage common to all patriarchal societies, and which passed away with
the clearer view of the sovereignty of self and the claims of society.
Before the marriage proper took place, there were held the ceremonies
of espousal. These consisted of fixing the terms of the union, and
entering upon agreements to be carried into effect after the ceremony.
In later times, the first essential was the free consent of the
persons to be espoused. This was a step toward the right of the female
in the selection of a husband. Early espousals were customarily, but
not invariably, dependent upon the consent of both parties. In some
instances, the parents espoused their children when but seven years of
age. On arriving at ten years of age, either of the parties could in
theory terminate the engagement at will; but if they did so between
the ages of ten and twelve, the parents of the one breaking the
contract were liable to damages. Beyond twelve years, the child as
well as its parents suffered the penalty.
After the parties to the espousal, in the presence of witnessing
members of their respective families, had declared their free consent
to the contract that was to bind them, the bridegroom promised to
treat his betrothed well, "according to God's law and the custom
of society." This declaration of a good purpose was ratified by his
giving a "wed," or security, that he would creditably fulfil his
intentions as expressed. The parents or guardians of the girl received
these assurances in her behalf. The foster-lien was the next important
matter. This was at first paid at the time of the espousal, until
some fathers with attractive daughters found it to be a profitable
investment to have them repeatedly espoused for the sake of the
foster-lien, but without any idea of consummating the espousal. This
practice made these precontracts decidedly unpopular and led to their
being modified by ecclesiastical law that provided for the payment of
the foster-lien after marriage, in case it had been properly secured
at the time of betrothal. When these preliminaries were arranged to
the satisfaction of all concerned, the ceremony itself took place.
This consisted of "handfasting" and the exchange of something, even
if only a kiss, to bind the bargain. Frequently this sentimental
interchange was accompanied on the part of the groom elect by the gift
of an ox, a saddled horse, or other object of value.
This formal engagement was really a part of the marriage and was
regarded as beginning the wedded life. The Church, however, favored
an interval between the espousal and the marriage. The ceremony of
betrothment usually took place in a church. If the man refused or
neglected to complete the espousal within two years, he forfeited the
amount of the foster-lien; if the woman were derelict in this respect,
she was required to repay the foster-lien fourfold--later changed
to twofold. It will be seen by this that "engagements" among the
Anglo-Saxons presumed serious intentions, and that, in a breach of
faith, the woman was held more rigidly to account than the man, whose
fickleness was visited only by forfeiture of the security he had
advanced. The woman was further required to return all the presents
that she had received from her "intended."
The marriage ceremony was much like that of the espousal. The man
and woman avowed publicly their acceptance of each other as wife and
husband. The bridegroom was required to confirm with his pledge
all that he had promised at the espousal, and his friends became
responsible for his due performance. Though by the customs of their
times the young people were deprived of experiencing the delights and
uncertainties of courtship, the girls were not to be denied the joys
of a wedding; and when the circumstances of the groom permitted, the
occasion was marked with gayety, music, feasting, and festivities of
all sorts. The morning after the wedding, the husband, before they
arose, presented to his wife the _morgen gift_. This was a valuable
consideration, and corresponded to the modern marriage settlement.
The terms of the settlement were arranged before the marriage, but
the gift was not actually presented until the marriage had been
consummated.
The rude conduct which accompanies a wedding in rough communities
at the present day, as well as the more innocent but embarrassing
pranks to which any newly wedded couple may be subjected, find their
counterpart in the uncouth conduct and witticisms that were at one
time a part of the experiences of an Anglo-Saxon bride and groom. As
the bride, accompanied by her friends, was conducted to her future
home, where her husband, according to custom, awaited her, the
procession was sometimes saluted by facetious youths with volleys
of filth and refuse of any sort, the especial target of their
maliciousness being the frightened and insulted bride herself. If
the young rowdies could succeed in spoiling her costume, they were
especially satisfied with themselves. Aside from the indignity offered
her, the loss of her costume was always a serious matter to the bride,
as in that time of scanty wardrobes it represented a large part of her
_trousseau_.
The bridegroom, if such indignities were offered to his spouse,
invariably sallied forth with his friends to administer condign
punishment to the "jokers"; and as all freemen in those days carried
arms, bloodshed, bruises, and broken bones resulted. Later, the law
took cognizance of the outrage and suppressed it. But such unpleasant
experiences were not permitted to spoil the marriage festivities;
the bride received the felicitations of her friends and displayed
her gifts--the latter being in evidence at all weddings, because the
making of gifts on the part of relatives was not a thing of choice,
but of compulsion.
Among the convivial Anglo-Saxons the marriage would have been
considered a very tame affair without the accompanying excesses of
unrestrained feasting, drinking, and mirth. The clergyman who had
pronounced the benediction at the nuptials came to the feast with a
company of his clerical friends. The wedding feast lasted for at least
three days, and was a time of gluttony and rioting. On the first day,
the festivities were opened by the clergy rising and singing a psalm
or other religious song. The wandering gleemen, who were always
present at these feasts, then took up the singing; and as they
proceeded, to the clamorous approval of the drunken company, they
became less and less mindful of the proprieties of sentiment and of
action. The bride and groom were not obliged to remain to the end of
the revelry, but might avail themselves of an opportunity to slip out
from the hall. When the company was surfeited with festivities, the
more sober of them formed a procession, with the clergy in the lead,
and with musical attendance conducted the bride and groom to the
nuptial couch. The bed was formally blessed by the priest, the
marriage cup was drunk by the bride and the groom, and then the couple
were left by their friends, who returned to the hall and renewed their
feasting. Even Alfred the Great, good and wise as he was, could not
escape the customs of his times, and was compelled to indulge in such
excesses at his wedding that he never quite recovered from an attack
of illness he suffered in consequence.
Having noticed the rudeness to which the bride was subjected, it is
gratifying to mention a more pleasant bit of waggery that was much
in vogue, and that corresponds more nearly to the wedding pranks of
to-day. One of the symbolic features of the wedding was the touching
by the bridegroom of the forehead of the bride with one of his shoes.
This signified that her father's right in her had passed to her
husband. But when the couple were conducted to their nuptial couch by
the bridal company, it was quite likely, if the bride had a reputation
for shrewishness, that the shoe, which after the ceremony had been
placed on the husband's side of the bed, would be found on the bride's
side--a hint that the general conviction was that the headship of the
family would be found to be vested in the wife. We can see from this
that the custom of throwing an old shoe after a bride to give her
"good luck" really signifies the wish that she may dominate the new
establishment.
The marriage of a girl was signalized by her being thereafter allowed
to bind her hair in folds about her head. Up to that time she wore
her hair loose. This custom, which in earlier days signified a wife's
subjection, came now to denote the high dignity to which she had been
raised; her hair thus arranged was a crown of honor, and every girl
looked eagerly forward to the time when she might wear a _volute_, as
this style of hairdressing was called.
The very practical Anglo-Saxon marriage bargains do not partake much
of the flavor of romance. We find other evidences of the mercenary
motives that pervaded the marriage customs of the time. The idea of
marriage as the purchase of a wife, who in that relation became
the property of her husband, is further indicated by the fact that
unfaithfulness might be condoned by a money payment, the _were_. An
old law says: "If a freeman cohabit with the wife of a freeman, he
must pay the _were_, and obtain another woman with his own money and
lead her to the other." Indeed, the chastity of women was regulated by
a set price, according to their station. If the woman in the case
were of the rank of an earl's wife, the culprit paid a fine of sixty
shillings, and paid to the husband five shillings; if the woman were
unfree or below age, he suffered imprisonment or mutilation. These
citations from the laws of the time are not made to show regulations
of morals, but to illustrate the fact that in the case of free women
offences could be satisfied by a money payment, just as the husband
in the first instance acquired his rights over his wife by such a
payment.
Having considered with some detail the general regard in which women
were held and the customs of marriage, it is now in place to say
something about the methods of dissolving the matrimonial tie. It must
be borne in mind that the period we are describing was one of rapid
development. After the introduction of Christianity the uncouth
barbarians rapidly became civilized, and new laws were constantly
being made to define the rights of individuals in all relations. Thus,
as marriage customs and incidents underwent modification, so did the
circumstances of divorce. At first the husband could, at will, return
his wife to her parents; his power of repudiation was practically
unlimited. But such a condition could not long be brooked, as the
practice was a serious affront to the lady's family. We read in the
romance of Brut that Gwendoline and her friends not only levied war
on King Locrine for repudiating her under the bewitchments of the
beautiful Estrild, but put both the king and his new bride to death.
When Coenwalch grievously insulted Penda, the king of the Mercians, by
putting aside his wife, Penda's sister, that monarch at once declared
war on the West Saxon king. Such grave disorders were incited by this
unjust right of the husband that, largely through the influence of the
clergy, limitations were put upon the practice. Naturally, the first
step was to require cause for the repudiation of a wife. The causes
advanced were usually frivolous or insufficient; but when the bishops
taught that "if a man repudiated his wife, he was not to marry another
in her lifetime, if he wished to be a very good Christian," the custom
became less prevalent, especially as the second wife was punished by
excommunication. The right of repudiation for cause was exercised by
wives as well as husbands. The case of Etheldrythe, the daughter of
Anna, the famous King of East Anglia, as cited by Thrupp, will serve
to illustrate the prevailing conditions of the wedded state. "This
young lady had the misfortune to be very weak and very rich. She
was consequently sought for as a wife, by princes who cared nothing
for her person, and as a nun, by churchmen who cared as little for
her soul. She endeavored to please all parties. She took a vow of
virginity with permission to marry, and married with permission to
observe her vow. Her first husband, Tondebert, Earl of Girvii, who
probably obtained possession of her land, did not trouble himself
about her or her personal property; and on his death, she retired
to Ely. She subsequently married Egfried, a son of the King of
Northumbria, a boy of about thirteen, whose friends desired her
estate. He, also, for some time willingly respected her vow, but
afterward attempted to compel her to do her duty as a wife. She
refused compliance with his wishes, and, having succeeded in escaping
from his kingdom, again took up her residence in a monastery. There,
in defiance of her marriage vow, she emulated the strictest chastity
of the cloister while in the bonds of marriage. The clergy applauded
her conduct, and, no doubt, obtained possession of her estates. The
king took a second wife; and all parties appear to have been satisfied
with what was, in truth, a very discreditable transaction."
After the decline of the right of repudiation, marriage could be
annulled by mutual consent, and the parties were probably permitted
to marry again. Legal divorces were granted for adultery, and what
the clergy called spiritual adultery, which consisted of marriage to
a godfather or a godmother or anyone who was of spiritual kindred, as
such imagined relatives were called. To these causes for divorce were
added idolatry, heresy, schism, heinous crimes, leprosy, and insanity.
If either husband or wife were carried off into slavery, or otherwise
became unfree, or were made a prisoner of war, the other had a right
to remarry after a certain time.
To insure a decent interval between marriages, the law stipulated that
if a widow entered again into wedlock within a year after the death of
her former husband, she should sacrifice the _morgen gift_ and all the
property she had derived from him.
At first, the childless wife had no interest in her husband's
property; at his death, the duty of caring for her reverted to her
own family. If she had children, she was entitled to one-half of his
estate, but this was in the nature of a provision for the children.
But as society improved, the rights of widows came to be recognized.
Women had from the earliest times been permitted to hold and bequeath
property in their own right; the failure to recognize the widow's
interest in her deceased husband's estate arose from her being
regarded as having left her own family circle and identified herself
with that of her husband for his life only; therefore, at his death
she renewed her connection with her own family, who assumed the care
of her. In the case of her children, they, being of his flesh and
blood, had a natural interest in their father's property, while the
wife's relations with her husband were simply contractual. A more just
view prevailed in the time of Cnut, as is shown by one of his laws,
which provided that the widow not only had a right to her settled
property, but, whether she had children or not, was entitled to
one-third of whatever had been acquired jointly by her and her husband
during their married life, "excepting his clothes and his bed." This
law did not abrogate the provision already stated, that the widow
forfeited everything in case she married within a year.
About the time of Cnut's laws giving wider rights to wives in the
matter of property, there was passed a law that recognized the wife's
right to exclusive control of her personal effects. Wardrobes had
become much more extensive, and the law took the view that a woman had
a right to a chest or closet of her own, wherein to keep her clothing,
her jewelry and ornaments, and all the little articles dear to
feminine fancy and personal to their possessor. To this private
receptacle her husband could not have access without her leave. This
curious law, making a real advance in woman's legal status, arose out
of the predatory tendencies of the age.
When a child was born in an Anglo-Saxon household in the earliest
days, the first thought was not, what shall it be named, but, shall it
be put to death? In those rude times, the custom of exposure applied
to the young and to the very old. Life was a continual hardship, and
food was often extremely difficult to procure. Care for the feeble
implies a solicitude for life that was foreign to the experiences
of the men of that day. The weak and the sickly were regarded as
superfluous members of society. If the infant were deformed, or not
wanted for any reason, it was either killed outright, exposed, or sold
into slavery. We like to believe that when the Anglo-Saxons settled
in Britain and found themselves under more comfortable conditions
of living than those to which they had been accustomed in the
inhospitable clime whence they came, with its constant threat of
famine, they discarded this dreadful practice; but customs die slowly,
and, as the parent had absolute rights in the person of his child,
sentiment against the practice required time to become general. The
rugged Teuton, teeming with an overflowing vitality, had not adopted
the modern method of birth restriction as a solution of the problem
of sustenance. There was no Malthus in the forests of Germany to
discourse on the economic effect of an overplus of population and to
awaken inquiry as to the best way to limit the human family within
the bounds of possible sustenance. It was a condition and not a theory
that faced the Teuton, and he met the situation in the only way known
to him. As the problem passed away, the practice went also, though
isolated cases of exposure of infants continued down to the tenth
century.
In the form of exposing children of clouded birth, the practice of
infanticide grew with the lowering of morals; but in the case of
legitimate offspring the custom declined. The Church imposed heavy
penalties on those found guilty of the practice. Fortunately for the
infants so treated, there was a prevailing superstition that to adopt
one of these foundlings brought good luck. The great prevalence of the
crime at some periods is shown by the rewards offered by the different
monarchs to those who would adopt foundlings. All rights in the child
passed to the one who adopted it. The general willingness to adopt
such children led to many abuses. Mothers thus relieved themselves
of the duty of caring for their offspring, while those to whom the
children were committed often looked upon them as so many units of
labor, and made life very hard for them. Homicide was frequently one
of the effects of the baleful practice, and generally occurred under
conditions that made it difficult to fix the guilt.
It is interesting to note, as Gummere points out, that the barbaric
custom of exposing infants "lies at the foundation of the most
exquisite myths--Lohengrin the swan-knight, Arthur the forest
foundling, and that mystic child who in the prelude of our national
epic, _Beowulf_, drifts in his boat, a child of destiny, to the shores
of a kingless land."
Grimm quotes from a Danish ballad, where a mother puts her babe in
a chest, lays with it consecrated salt and candles, and goes to the
waterside:
"Thither she goes along the strand
And pushes the chest so far from land,
Casts the chest so far from shore:
'To Christ the Mighty I give thee o'er;
To the mighty Christ I surrender thee,
For thou hast no longer a mother in me.'"
The custom of exposing illegitimate offspring shows a retrogression
from the standards of rugged chastity which were characteristic of
the earlier period of the Anglo-Saxon settlement in Britain. In those
times, as we have seen, the German women were models of virtue; the
slightest departure from morality was viewed with horror and visited
with severe punishment. If the one guilty of misconduct were married,
she was shorn of her hair, the greatest degradation to which she could
be subjected, and then driven naked from her husband's house, her
own relatives giving their countenance and aid to the husband in thus
banishing her. She was expelled from the village, and not allowed to
return. At a later date, such a woman, married or unmarried, was made
to strangle herself with her own hands; her refusal to do so availed
nothing, as the women of the neighborhood stripped off her garments
to the waist, and then with knives, whips, and stones hunted her from
village to village until death mercifully relieved her from further
torture.
In spite of such harsh penalties, the moral standard could not be
maintained at a high level. It is more than likely that its decline
was due in part to the women whom the Northmen brought with them.
When they touched the shores of Britain, it was often after piratical
voyages that had taken them to the coasts of France, Spain, Italy, and
even Africa. When this was the case, they were always accompanied by
large numbers of female slaves from these countries. Then, too, the
greater part of the British women were reduced to slavery by the
new masters of the country, and none of these were treated with the
consideration for their sex that was accorded the German women. The
repute of the women of the Anglo-Saxons remained unimpaired, excepting
as to particular classes and particular times; the women not of
Anglo-Saxon origin were, perforce, the chief offenders against
morality.
The era of the Danish invasion was a time of almost unbridled license.
Female character could not withstand the tide of immorality that came
in with the new wave of heathen invaders. The women whom the Vikings
brought with them were captives of the lowest grade, ravished from
their homes for the pleasure of their captors on their long sea
voyage. On their arrival they were made slaves of the camp, following
the army wearily in its marches from place to place. This miserable
degradation was forced upon many pure English women by the brutal
lords of the sea. When the invaders settled down to live at peace
with the English, and, by amalgamation, to be absorbed into the larger
race, it was centuries before the country recovered from the blight
of immorality that had fallen upon it; but, with its rare powers of
recuperation, Anglo-Saxon virtue reasserted its principles and caused
its conquerors to subscribe to them.
Before considering the dress, the amusements, and the employments
of the women, a description of the Anglo-Saxon house will serve to
illustrate much of the common life of the women. This was not evolved
from that of the Briton; it marks a departure in the architecture of
the country. Neither the rude houses of the poorer of the Britons nor
the villa of the Roman provincial appealed to the forest nomads, who
were accustomed to light, tentlike structures that could be readily
taken down and erected elsewhere as their changing habitat directed.
The Anglo-Saxon town of the earliest period was only a cluster of
wooden houses--a family centre constantly added to by the increase and
dividing of the household, until the settlement assumed something of
the proportions of a town. Stone was not in favor with the Teutons for
their dwellings. They saw in it the relic of the demigods of a remote
past; stone masonry seemed supernatural, and they called it "the
giants' ancient work." The house of the Teutons was probably a
development of the ancient burrow; as Heyn expresses the process
of its evolution: "Little by little rose the roof of turf, and the
cavern under the house served at last only for winter and the abode
of the women." The summer house of wattles, twigs and branches, bound
together by cords, and with a thatched roof, a rough door, and no
windows, seemed to serve these unsettled people, whose surroundings
abounded with the materials for substantial edifices.
The architecture of the Germans developed rapidly. Soon there was a
substantial hall, or main house, which was the place of gathering and
feasting and the sleeping place of the men. The women slept, and we
may say dwelt, in the bower. Necessary outbuildings were supplied in
abundance. The floor of the hall was of hard earth or of clay, perhaps
particolored, and forming patterns of rude mosaic. It was no uncommon
thing for the rough warrior to ride into the hall, and to stable there
his beloved steed, as will be seen from the following extract from an
English ballad of a later date, which is given us by Professor Child:
"Kyng Estmere he stabled his steede
Soe fayre att the hall-bord;
The froth that came from his brydle bitte
Light in Kyng Bremor's beard."
Rows of benches were commonly placed outside of the hall; the exterior
walls and the roof were painted in striking colors. Huge antlers
fringed the gables; the windows, lacking glass, were placed high up in
the wall, and a hole in the roof sufficed for the escape of smoke.
Such was the early English hall, as it appears to us in the ballads
and stories of the times. The magnificent lace and embroidered
hangings with which were draped the interior walls of the habitations
of the nobility served the double purpose of decoration and protection
from the cold draughts that came in through the numerous crevices.
Even the royal palace of Alfred was so draughty that the candles in
the rooms had to be protected by lanterns. Benches and seats with fine
coverings added comfort and elegance to the hall. In front of these
were placed stools, with richly embroidered coverings, for the feet
of the great ladies. The tables in these Anglo-Saxon homes were often
of great beauty and costliness. In the reign of King Edgar, Earl
Aethelwold possessed a table of silver that was worth three hundred
pounds sterling. Many sorts of candelabra, some of them of exquisite
pattern and workmanship, made of the precious metals and set with
jewels, were used to impart to these old halls the dim light that
in our fancy of the times becomes a feature of the romance of the
knightly homes of older England.
Warm baths were essential to the comfort of the Anglo-Saxon; to be
deprived of them and of a soft bed was one of the severe penances
imposed by the Church. The ladies' bower was perfumed with the scents
and spices of India and the East.
Though the houses still left much to be desired in the way of
architectural features as well as ordinary convenience, the
appointments and furnishings of a home of the later Anglo-Saxon period
showed a keen appreciation of creature comforts.
The law of hospitality opened all doors to the wayfaring freeman. When
he wound his horn in the forest as he approached the hall to protect
himself from being set upon as a marauder, he was welcomed to the warm
fire, the loaded table, and the guest bed, without question. In later
times, the traveller was permitted to remain to the third night. The
guest who came hungry, weary, and dusty to one of these hospitable
homes and received admittance might esteem himself fortunate, for the
women of the time were well versed in the art of wholesome cookery,
and had at hand a plentiful variety of foods. For their meats they
might select from the choice cuts of venison, beef, and lamb, besides
pork, chicken, goat, and hare. Birds and fish afforded greater
variety. Of the latter there were salmon, herring, sturgeons,
flounders, and eels; and of shellfish, crabs, lobsters, and oysters.
Horse flesh was in early use as a comestible, but later became
repugnant to taste, and was discountenanced by the Church in the
latter part of the eighth century.
To the meats was added a variety of warm breads, made of barley meal
and of flour. Eggs, butter, cheese, and curds, with many sorts of
vegetables, were to be found on the tables; while figs, nuts, almonds,
pears, and apples were probably served by the women to the company
as they sat in discourse about the fire, or, stretched at full length
upon the floor, became absorbed in games of chance. For the Germans
were such inveterate gamblers that money, goods, chattels, their
wives, and even their own liberty, were often risked by the casting of
dice.
The women were admitted to seats at the tables with the men, the girls
being engaged in serving the drinks, which were as freely used then
as now. Even after the company were surfeited with food and the tables
were removed, drinking was kept up until the evening.
The costumes of a people are of the greatest worth in revealing to the
student their grade of civilization and their ideals. There can be no
question but that taste in dress is one of the best gauges by which to
determine whether at a particular time the people were serious minded
or frivolous, moral or immoral, swayed by high aspirations or the prey
of indolence and sensuous gratifications. Just as truly can we arrive
at the characteristics of a race or a period by seeing the people
at their play. If we find them given to gladiatorial exhibitions, we
shall not err in concluding that they were a vigorous and war-like
people; if they are found at the bull fight, we may safely adjudge
them to be a brutalized and enervated race. The Anglo-Saxon can safely
be brought to this test. If the dress of the women is a criterion
of morals, then were these people of early England exemplary; if the
games in vogue denote the race characteristics, then were they rude,
but wholesome.
After the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons to Christianity, there
were evidently some changes made in their garb, to indicate their
abjuration of heathenism; for in the Church council of 785 the
complaint was made that "you put on your garments in the manner of
the pagans, whom your fathers expelled from the world; an astonishing
thing, that you should imitate those whose life you always hated."
Change of style in dress was practically unknown among the ladies of
the Anglo-Saxon period of English history. The illuminations of the
old MSS., from which all that is definitely known on the subject is
derived, show that the dress of the women remained practically the
same during the entire period.
The costume of the women can be described with many details. There was
an undergarment, probably made of linen, extending to the feet; it had
sleeves that reached to the wrists and were there gathered tightly
in little plaits. There was an absence of needlework of any sort,
excepting a simple bit of embroidery upon the shoulder. The customary
color of the garment was white. Over this was worn the gown, which
was slightly longer than the undergarment, and reached quite to the
ground. It was bound about the waist by a girdle, by which it was
sometimes caught up and shortened. The sleeves are most frequently
pictured as extending to the wrist, and were worn full. Sometimes,
however, they reached to only the elbow, and in some cases were
wanting altogether. This garment was prettily ornamented with
embroidery, in simple bands of sprigs, diverging from a centre.
Another form of dress that is represented seems to have been an
out-of-doors or travelling costume. It differed from the other in
being of heavier material, possibly of fine woollen goods, and had
sleeves that extended to the knees. It is possible that this was a
winter dress, and the other a summer one.
A mantle was worn about the shoulders. This, likewise, was of a solid
color, usually contrasting with that of the gown. This garment appears
to have been round or oval in shape, with an aperture at one side,
so that when it was put on it hung much further down the back than
in front. The head was covered with a wimple, broad enough to reach
from the top of the forehead to the shoulders, where it was generally
wrapped about the neck in such a way that the ends fell on the bosom.
A less studied, but more tasteful, way to wear it was to have it hang
down on one side as far as the knee; the effect of the contrasting
colors of the wimple, the mantle, and the gown was gratifying to women
of taste. The shoes were black, and of simple style. They resembled
the house slippers worn by women to-day; but besides these low shoes,
which came only to the ankles, other shoes were worn, that reached
higher up the leg and appeared to have been laced much as shoes now
are. Stockings may or may not have been used.
It will be seen from this description of the costume of the
Anglo-Saxon woman that it was modest, complete, and in good taste.
She was, however, proud of her attire, and of the many ornaments that
were worn with it. The ornament in most general use was the fibula,
or brooch. This was of many styles: radiated, bird-shaped, cruciform,
square-shaped, annular, and circular. It was of gold, bronze, or iron,
and showed the greatest delicacy of workmanship. It was worn on the
breast, a little to one side, so as to fasten the mantle. When we
are reminded that the Anglo-Saxons were highly skilled in the art of
dyeing, and that they had perfected the art of gilding leather, we can
readily see that a lady of quality, when dressed in her blue, purple,
or crimson costume of state, her girdle clasped by a finely chased
brooch of gold, whose fellow gleamed in the folds of her mantle, might
have invited comparison, to advantage, with the most stylishly attired
woman of to-day. But when we add to her dress a mantle, not only of
rich colors, but embroidered in ornate design, with heavy threads
of pure gold; massive arm rings of the same precious metal, of
wonderfully beautiful pattern, and fastened about her round white
arm by delicate little chains; and numerous strings of gold, amber,
and glass beads, rich in pattern and cunningly chased, the picture
presented of the Anglo-Saxon woman is altogether pleasing. The
ornaments of the women were not considered as mere matters of
adornment. To the pagan woman, her beads served as a protection
against supernatural foes. When Christianity came in, the beads were
blessed by a pious man and continued to serve the same useful end.
The bronze combs found everywhere in the graves of the time show how
careful the women of the day were to keep in perfect order the long
locks of which they were so proud. From the graves have been recovered
chatelaines, of the fashion of those now in vogue, golden toothpicks,
ear spoons, and tweezers. These ornaments and toilet requisites were
in constant use in life; and in pagan times they were interred with
their owner, that they might still be hers in the other world.
The Anglo-Saxons understood the art of inlaying enamel, and their
colors were remarkably bright and enduring. But the most striking
evidence of proficiency in the jeweller's art was their _cloisonne_
ware. This art of the East was spread by the barbarian invasions
over the whole of Europe; De Baye, in his _Industrial Arts of the
Anglo-Saxons_, calls it "the first aesthetic expression of the Gothic
nations," and says that it was not borrowed, but was adapted from the
East. He describes it as follows: "This _cloisonne_ work, set with
precious stones in a kind of mosaic, and combined at times with
the most delicate filigree, is sufficiently characteristic to be
remarkable in every country where it has left traces." This beautiful
form of art penetrated Kent and the Isle of Wight, where for some
reason it became localized and assumed a particular character. Some of
the fibulae that have been preserved to us, and are to be found in the
art collections of England, are remarkable specimens of this beautiful
craft.
The love of English women for outdoor sports can be traced to
Anglo-Saxon times, and much of the wholesome vigor of the race is
due to those early pastimes. However fond women may have been of fine
ornaments, then as now it was the privilege of the few to possess
them; but the national sports were enjoyed by all. Hunting, hawking,
boating, swimming, fishing, skating, were in great favor with the
people.
In the winter there were many long hours to be whiled away indoors,
and although spinning and weaving the fabrics for the family wear,
as well as their embroidery and lace work, took up much of the time,
the women still had ample leisure to engage with the members of their
households and, perhaps, the passing guests in the many simple games
that delighted them. Chess was in marked favor, and was played in much
the same manner as now. The exchange of witticisms and the guessing of
conundrums added much to the innocent mirth of a household intent on
making the long evenings pass as pleasantly as possible.
There were itinerant purveyors of amusement who were to be found at
every feast and at many family firesides. These were the wandering
minstrels, or gleemen. Although they were welcomed for the
entertainment they furnished, yet as a social class they were
certainly in slight repute. Their forms of entertainment were not
limited to music. They presented a programme that included the
performances of trained animals, tricks of jugglery, feats of magic,
and other exhibitions of skill and daring. Along with the gleemen went
the glee maidens, who were the dancing and acrobatic girls of the day.
Dancing itself was a very rudimentary performance, but the enthusiasm
of the audience was aroused by the acts of tumbling and contortion
that were introduced into it. Convinced that dancing alone could not
account for the bewitchment of Herod by the daughter of his brother
Philip's wife, the translators into the vernacular of that Biblical
circumstance say of Herodias that she "tumbled" before Herod; and the
illuminations in a prayerbook of the time show Herodias in the act of
tumbling, with the assistance of a female attendant.
Slight protection, either from law or custom, was afforded women
of the lower classes from gross insults. Any female was likely to
be stopped on the road and partially or altogether denuded of her
clothing, and then sent on her way with taunts and jeers. But, despite
the coarseness of the Anglo-Saxon times, sentiment finally made Itself
felt for the correction of such manners. The women were responsible
for the diffusion of notions of greater refinement.
While there was little deserving the name of education, and even
reading and writing were the accomplishments of but a small part of
the people, the monastic orders conserved some notion of scholarship.
Unfavorable as were the times to productive thought, scholars of no
mean ability nevertheless flourished, and among men and women alike
there was a desire for learning. To his female scholars the monk
Anghelm dedicated his works: _De Laude Virginitatis_. Certain Saxon
ladies of leisure occupied themselves with the study of Latin, which
they came to read and write with some ease. The literary antecedents
of the brilliant women of the sixteenth century are to be found in
that little group of studious women of the Anglo-Saxons, of whom
the Abbess Eadburga and her pupil Leobgitha, with both of whom Saint
Boniface corresponded in Latin, were the most notable.
The nuns were a class apart. The separation of the monks and the nuns
in the monastic establishments was gradually brought about by Church
regulations and the rules of the orders. By the end of the seventh
century the separate monasteries had effected the separation of the
men and the women, and in the eighth century the erection of double
monasteries was forbidden. Long before this time, however, the
more earnest of the ladies in superintendence of the monasteries
had prohibited the admission of men to the female side of the
establishments, excepting such men as the sainted Cuthbert and the
venerable Bede. These regulations were very strict and almost put an
end to the scandalous allegations about the religious establishments.
The charge that the priests resorted to the monasteries for mistresses
probably had no better foundation than the fact that many of the
priests continued to marry, in spite of the rule of celibacy. Whatever
truth there is in the assertion that kings obtained their mistresses
from the ranks of the nuns must be laid to the civil interference
and claims of jurisdiction over religious institutions. But while the
headship of convents was frequently offered to women of high rank and
low morals, whom it was convenient thus to get rid of, and in this way
certain institutions became debauched, the monastic system itself did
not become corrupt, and there were monasteries of notable purity and
great worth.
The story of Eadburga, the widow of Beorthric, King of Kent,
illustrates the hardships inflicted upon the monasteries, through the
assumption of royal personages to appoint their heads. Eadburga was
a notable beauty, and was renowned as well for her talents and her
ambition. She ruled her husband with a jealous tyranny, removing from
court by false accusation or by poisoning all who stood in her path.
The Earl Worr, a young man of great personal charm, was one of those
who exerted an influence over her husband. On some occasion of public
hospitality she proffered him a cup of poisoned liquor; the king, who
was present, claimed his right of precedence, and, after drinking from
the cup, passed it to the earl, who drained it. Both of them died,
leaving the guilty queen exposed to the wrath of the royal family.
Eadburga fled to the court of Charlemagne, where she was graciously
received, and after a time the king suggested to her that she lay
aside her widow's weeds and become his wife. She showed so little tact
as to say that she would prefer his son. Charlemagne, piqued by her
answer, said that had she expressed a preference for him, it had been
his purpose to give her in marriage to his son; as it was, she should
marry neither of them. She remained at the court until the king,
scandalized by her wicked life, placed her at the head of an excellent
monastery. In this responsible position, Eadburga behaved herself as
badly as ever; and as the result of an amour with a countryman of
low birth, she was expelled from the convent. This widow of a monarch
ended her career as a common beggar in the streets of Pavia.
A very different class from the nuns, but, like them, a distinct class
in the social life of Anglo-Saxon times, were the slaves. The least
amiable trait of the women of the times was their treatment of
servants. Although there were striking instances of kindly and
considerate regard for this class on the part of their mistresses, yet
the slight legal protection afforded them, and the rough, impetuous
natures of the masters, made the existence of the servile class
miserable. It was not unusual for slaves to be scourged to death;
and for comparatively slight offences they were loaded with gyves and
fetters and subjected to all kinds of tortures. On one occasion, the
maidservant of a bellmaker of Winchester was, for a slight offence,
fettered and hung up by the hands and feet all night. The next
morning, after being frightfully beaten, she was again put in fetters.
The following night, she contrived to free herself, and fled for
sanctuary to the tomb of Saint Swithin. This was not an exceptional
instance; it illustrates the severity that was customarily meted out
to serfs.
The queens and other ladies of rank among the Anglo-Saxons included
some who were ornaments to the sex in industry and intelligence as
well as charity. Their influence on politics for good or for evil
was often the result of their position as members of rival houses.
Christianity was often furthered by the alliance of a Christian
princess to a pagan king; Bertha, the daughter of a famous Frankish
king, was in this way instrumental in the introduction of Christianity
into England. Herself a Christian, she married Ethelbert, King of
Kent, on condition that she should be permitted to worship as a
Christian under the guidance of a Frankish bishop named Lindhard. The
condition was observed, and Bertha had her Frankish chaplain with
her at court. She seems not to have made any attempt to convert her
husband; and he never disturbed her in her religion. The pope was
probably informed of the auspiciousness of the outlook for the
introduction of Christianity into the Kentish kingdom, and, being
still under the influence of the impression made upon him by the
flaxen-haired Angles he had seen in the slave markets of Rome before
his elevation to the pontificate, he determined to make good the vow
he had then registered to send missionaries to the land of the boy
slaves. Augustine was selected for the mission, and on arriving, with
his companions, in England, after a great deal of trepidation for
their personal safety, they presented themselves at the court of the
King of Kent Ethelbert received them in the open air, with a great
show of pomp, and gave them his promise to interpose no hindrance
to their missionary endeavors among his people. To Bertha must be
ascribed the credit for the complaisance of her husband and the
opening that was made to restore the Christian faith, which had
perished with the Britons.
Edith, the gentle queen of Edward the Confessor, was noted alike
for her skill with the needle and her conversance with literature.
Ingulf's _History_, though perhaps not authentic, gives us a
delightful picture of the simplicity of her Anglo-Saxon court. "I
often met her," says this writer,--meaning Edith,--"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 hand-maiden, and then sent me
to the royal larder to refresh myself."
Ethelwyn, another royal lady, and a friend of Archbishop Dunstan,
was accustomed to decorate the ecclesiastical vestments, and the art
needlework of herself and her companions became celebrated. On
account of his well-known skill in drawing and designing, Dunstan was
frequently called into the ladies' bower to give his views in such
matters. While they worked, he sometimes regaled them with music from
his harp.
These pleasing views of the character and the employments of the
royal ladies in Anglo-Saxon times, seen in their simple pursuits, are
more agreeable than the stories of those who were engaged in court
intrigues, to relate which would necessitate a history of the
political movements of the day. We shall later have ample opportunity
to see woman as an influence in affairs of thrones and dynasties. For
the present, it will suffice to regard royal woman in the way in which
she is prominently presented to us in Anglo-Saxon annals--as the lady
of refined domesticity.