------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcriber’s Note:
This version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects.
Italics are delimited with the ‘_’ character as _italic_. Superscripted
characters are indicated with the ‘^’ (e.g. Serg^t).
Footnotes, which were numbered consecutively on each page, have been
re-sequenced to be unique within the text. They have been repositioned
to follow the paragraph where they are referenced.
Depending on your font, the Tironian shorthand 'et', used in Anglo-Saxon
passages and which resembles '7', may not display properly.
Minor errors, attributable to the printer, have been corrected. Please
see the transcriber’s note at the end of this text for details regarding
the handling of any textual issues encountered during its preparation.
THE
SAXONS IN ENGLAND.
A HISTORY OF
THE ENGLISH COMMONWEALTH
TILL THE PERIOD OF
THE NORMAN CONQUEST.
BY
JOHN MITCHELL KEMBLE, M.A., F.C.P.S.,
MEMBER OF THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AT MUNICH, AND OF THE ROYAL
ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AT BERLIN,
FELLOW OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF HISTORY IN STOCKHOLM, AND OF THE
ROYAL SOCIETY OF HISTORY IN COPENHAGEN,
ETC. ETC. ETC.
-----------------------
“Nobilis et strenua, iuxtaque dotem naturae sagacissima gens Saxonum, ab
antiquis etiam scriptoribus memorata.”
-----------------------
A NEW EDITION, REVISED BY
WALTER DE GRAY BIRCH, F.R.S.L.,
_Senior Assistant of the Department of Manuscripts in the British
Museum, Honorary Librarian of the Royal Society of Literature, Honorary
Secretary of the British Archæological Association, etc._
VOLUME I.
LONDON:
BERNARD QUARITCH, 15 PICCADILLY.
1876.
[Illustration:
PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS,
RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.
]
TO
THE QUEEN’S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY,
THIS HISTORY
OF THE PRINCIPLES WHICH HAVE GIVEN HER EMPIRE
ITS PREEMINENCE
AMONG THE NATIONS OF EUROPE,
IS,
WITH HER GRACIOUS PERMISSION,
INSCRIBED BY
THE MOST HUMBLE AND DEVOTED
OF HER SERVANTS.
PREFACE.
--------------
The following pages contain an account of the principles upon which the
public and political life of our Anglosaxon forefathers was based, and
of the institutions in which those principles were most clearly
manifested. The subject is a grave and solemn one: it is the history of
the childhood of our own age,—the explanation of its manhood.
On every side of us thrones totter, and the deep foundations of society
are convulsed. Shot and shell sweep the streets of capitals which have
long been pointed out as the chosen abodes of order: cavalry and
bayonets cannot control populations whose loyalty has become a proverb
here, whose peace has been made a reproach to our own miscalled
disquiet. Yet the exalted Lady who wields the sceptre of these realms,
sits safe upon her throne, and fearless in the holy circle of her
domestic happiness, secure in the affections of a people whose
institutions have given to them all the blessings of an equal law.
Those institutions they have inherited from a period so distant as to
excite our admiration, and have preserved amidst all vicissitudes with
an enlightened will that must command our gratitude. And with the
blessing of the Almighty, they will long continue to preserve them; for
our customs are founded upon right and justice, and are maintained in a
subjection to His will who hath the hearts of nations as well as of
kings in His rule and governance.
It cannot be without advantage for us to learn how a State so favoured
as our own has set about the great work of constitution, and solved the
problem, of uniting the completest obedience to the law with the
greatest amount of individual freedom. But in the long and chequered
history of our State, there are many distinguishable periods: some more
and some less well known to us. Among those with which we are least
familiar is the oldest period. It seems therefore the duty of those
whose studies have given them a mastery over its details, to place them
as clearly as they can before the eyes of their fellow-citizens.
There have never been wanting men who enjoyed a distinct insight into
the value of our earliest constitutional history. From the days of
Spelman, and Selden and Twisden, even to our own, this country has seen
an unbroken succession of laborious thinkers, who, careless of
self-sacrifice, have devoted themselves to record the facts which were
to be recovered from the darkness of the past, and to connect them with
the progress of our political and municipal laws. But peculiar
advantages over these men, to whom this country owes a large debt of
gratitude, are now enjoyed by ourselves. It is only within eight years
that the “Ancient Laws and Ecclesiastical Institutes” of the Anglosaxons
have been made fully accessible to us[1]: within nine years only,
upwards of fourteen hundred documents containing the grants of kings and
bishops, the settlements of private persons, the conventions of
landlords and tenants, the technical forms of judicial proceedings, have
been placed in our hands[2]; and to this last quarter of a century has
it been given to attain a mastery never before attained over the
language which our Anglosaxon ancestors spoke. To us therefore it more
particularly belongs to perform the duty of illustrating that period,
whose records are furnished to us so much more abundantly than they were
to our predecessors; and it seemed to me that this duty was especially
imposed upon him whom circumstances had made most familiar with the
charters of the Anglosaxons.
Footnote 1:
Ancient Laws and Institutes of England; comprising Laws enacted under
the Anglosaxon Kings from Æðelbirht to Cnut, with an English
translation of the Saxon: the Laws called Edward the Confessor’s; the
Laws of William the Conqueror, and those ascribed to Henry the First;
also Monumenta Ecclesiastica Anglicana, from the seventh to the tenth
century: and the ancient Latin version of the Anglosaxon Laws. With a
copious Glossary, etc. (By B. Thorpe, Esq.). Printed by command of his
late Majesty, King William the Fourth, under the direction of the
Commissioners on the Public Records of the Kingdom. MDCCCXL.
Footnote 2:
Codex Diplomaticus Aevi Saxonici. Opera J. M. Kemble, M.A., vol. i.
London, 1839; vol. ii. 1840; vol. iii. 1845; vol. iv. 1846; vol. v.
1847; vol. vi. 1848. Published by authority of the Historical Society
of England.
The history of our earliest institutions has come down to us in a
fragmentary form: in a similar way has it here been treated,—in
chapters, or rather essays, devoted to each particular principle or
group of facts. But throughout these fragments a system is distinctly
discernible: accordingly the chapters will be found also to follow a
systematic plan.
It is my intention, at a future period, to lay before my countrymen the
continuation of this History, embracing the laws of descent and
purchase, the law of contracts, the forms of judicial process, the
family relations, and the social condition of the Saxons as to
agriculture, commerce, art, science and literature. I believe these
things to be worthy of investigation, from their bearing upon the times
in which we live, much more than from any antiquarian value they may be
supposed to possess. We have a share in the past, and the past yet works
in us; nor can a patriotic citizen better serve his country than by
devoting his energies and his time to record that which is great and
glorious in her history, for the admiration and instruction of her
neighbours.
J. M. K.
London, December 2nd, 1848.
PREFACE
TO THE NEW EDITION.
The original edition of this monumental work having for a long time been
out of print and of enhanced value, a great demand has arisen for the
issue of a new edition; and the welcome opportunity of amending a number
of oversights and typographical errors, and of verifying a large number
of references, has not been neglected. The book itself is of so standard
a character, and was so well digested in the first place, that no
apology is needed for its re-publication now—more than a quarter of a
century after its first appearance.
The principles laid down, the deductions gathered from the array of
recorded facts and examples, are as true and incontrovertible to-day as
they ever were. The work, therefore, does not labour under the
disadvantage of becoming obsolete, inasmuch as the researches which have
since been made in this branch of literary and historical enquiry have
not tended to weaken or destroy, but rather to support and strengthen,
the arguments applied by the author to the gradual unfolding of his
theories of the growth and consolidation of the Anglosaxon Commonwealth,
and the Royal Authority in England.
It is worthy of remembrance that one of the chief authorities for the
views advanced in this History is the celebrated _Codex Diplomaticus_,
the printing of which occupied nine years of the author’s life. The
re-editing of that great work, under new arrangement, with collations,
and incorporation of a large quantity of newly found material, has now
so clearly become a necessity, that steps should be taken to re-publish
the enormous collection of documents relating to Anglosaxon times and
Anglosaxon history.
No one can read the summary of Kemble’s investigations, which is
contained in the concluding chapter to the First Volume, without feeling
bound to acknowledge that its pages contain the heartfelt convictions of
one who has spared no pains to mature his own knowledge of the inner
springs which actuated the conduct of our forefathers’ lives and
advanced their culture, nor failed in his endeavour to impart to his
readers a correct view of these important elements of our own manners
and customs;—in Kemble’s own words, “the history of our childhood, the
explanation of our manhood.”
W. DE G. B.
London,
September 11th, 1876.
CONTENTS.
VOL. I.
--------------
BOOK I.
THE ORIGINAL SETTLEMENT OF THE ANGLOSAXON COMMONWEALTH.
CHAPTER Page
I. Saxon and Welsh Traditions 1
II. The Mark 35
III. The Gá or Scír 72
IV. Landed Possession. The Eðel, Híd, or Alod 88
V. Personal Rank. The Freeman. The Noble 122
VI. The King 137
VII. The Noble by Service 162
VIII. The Unfree. The Serf 185
IX. The Mutual Guarantee. Mægburh. Tithing. Hundred 228
X. Fǽhðe. Wergyld 267
XI. Folcland. Bócland. Lǽnland 289
XII. Heathendom 327
APPENDIX.
A. Marks 449
B. The Híd 487
C. Manumission of Serfs 496
D. Orcy’s Guild at Abbotsbury 511
E. Lǽnland 517
F. Heathendom 523
------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE
SAXONS IN ENGLAND.
------------------------------------
BOOK I.
THE ORIGINAL SETTLEMENT OF THE ANGLO-SAXON COMMONWEALTH.
CHAPTER I.
SAXON AND WELSH TRADITIONS.
Eleven centuries ago, an industrious and conscientious historian,
desiring to give a record of the establishment of his forefathers in
this island, could find no fuller or better account than this: “About
the year of Grace 445-446, the British inhabitants of England, deserted
by the Roman masters who had enervated while they protected them, and
exposed to the ravages of Picts and Scots from the extreme and barbarous
portions of the island, called in the assistance of heathen Saxons from
the continent of Europe. The strangers faithfully performed their task,
and chastised the Northern invaders; then, in scorn of the weakness of
their employers, subjected them in turn to the yoke, and after various
vicissitudes of fortune, established their own power upon the ruins of
Roman and British civilization.” The few details which had reached the
historian taught that the strangers were under the guidance of two
brothers, Hengest and Hors: that their armament was conveyed in three
ships or keels: that it consisted of Jutes, Saxons and Angles: that
their successes stimulated similar adventurers among their countrymen:
and that in process of time their continued migrations were so large and
numerous, as to have reduced Anglia, their original home, to a
desert[3].
-----
Footnote 3:
Beda, Hist. Eccl. i. 14, 15. Gildas, Hist. § 14. Nennius, Hist. § 38.
-----
Such was the tale of the victorious Saxons in the eighth century: at a
later period, the vanquished Britons found a melancholy satisfaction in
adding details which might brand the career of their conquerors with the
stain of disloyalty. According to these hostile authorities, treachery
and fraud prepared and consolidated the Saxon triumph. The wiles of
Hengest’s beautiful daughter[4] subdued the mind of the British ruler; a
murderous violation of the rights of hospitality, which cut off the
chieftains of the Britons at the very table of their hosts, delivered
over the defenceless land to the barbarous invader[5]; and the
miraculous intervention of Germanus, the spells of Merlin and the
prowess of Arthur, or the victorious career of Aurelius Ambrosius,
although they delayed and in part avenged, yet could not prevent the
downfall of their people[6]. Meagre indeed are the accounts which thus
satisfied the most enquiring of our forefathers; yet such as they are,
they were received as the undoubted truth, and appealed to in later
periods as the earliest authentic record of our race. The acuter
criticism of an age less prone to believe, more skilful in the
appreciation of evidence, and familiar with the fleeting forms of
mythical and epical thought, sees in them only a confused mass of
traditions borrowed from the most heterogeneous sources, compacted
rudely and with little ingenuity, and in which the smallest possible
amount of historical truth is involved in a great deal of fable. Yet the
truth which such traditions do nevertheless contain, yields to the
alchemy of our days a golden harvest: if we cannot undoubtingly accept
the details of such legends, they still point out to us at least the
course we must pursue to discover the elements of fact upon which the
Mythus and Epos rest, and guide us to the period and the locality where
these took root and flourished.
-----
Footnote 4:
It is uncertain from the MSS. whether this lady is to be called Rouwen
or Ronwen. The usual English tradition gives her name as Rowena; if
this be accurate, I presume our pagan forefathers knew something of a
divine personage—Hróðwén—possibly a dialectical form of the _great_
and _glorious_ goddess Hréðe; for whom refer to Chapter X. of this
Book.
Footnote 5:
The story of the treacherous murder perpetrated upon the Welsh
chieftains does not claim an English origin. It is related of the
Oldsaxons upon the continent, in connexion with the conquest of the
Thuringians. See Widukind.
Footnote 6:
Conf. Nennius, Hist. 37 _seq._, 46 _seq._ Beda, Hist. Ecc. i. 14, 15.
Gildas, Hist. § 25.
-----
From times beyond the records of history, it is certain that continual
changes were taking place in the position and condition of the various
tribes that peopled the northern districts of Europe. Into this great
basin the successive waves of Keltic, Teutonic and Slavonic migrations
were poured, and here, through hundreds of years, were probably
reproduced convulsions, terminated only by the great outbreak which the
Germans call _the wandering of the nations_. For successive generations,
the tribes, or even portions of tribes, may have moved from place to
place, as the necessities of their circumstances demanded; names may
have appeared, and vanished altogether from the scene; wars, seditions,
conquests, the rise and fall of states, the solemn formation or
dissolution of confederacies, may have filled the ages which intervened
between the first settlement of the Teutons in Germany, and their
appearance in history as dangerous to the quiet of Rome. The heroic
lays[7] may possibly preserve some shadowy traces of these events; but
of all the changes in detail we know nothing: we argue only that nations
possessing in so preeminent a degree as the Germans, the principles, the
arts and institutions of civilization, must have passed through a long
apprenticeship of action and suffering, and have learnt in the rough
school of practice the wisdom they embodied in their lives.
-----
Footnote 7:
The Anglosaxon Traveller’s Song contains a multitude of names which
cannot be found elsewhere. Paulus Diaconus and Jornandes have
evidently used ancient poems as the foundation of their histories. The
lays of the various Germanic cycles still furnish details respecting
Hermanaric, Otachar, Theodoric, Hiltibrant and other heroes of this
troubled period. But the reader who would judge of the fragmentary and
unsatisfactory result of _all_ that the ancient world has recorded of
the new, had better consult that most remarkable work of Zeuss, Die
Deutschen und die Nachbarstämme. Munich, 1837. He will there see how
the profoundest science halts after the reality of ancient ages, and
strives in vain to reduce their manifold falsehood to a truth.
-----
Possessing no written annals, and trusting to the poet the task of the
historian, our forefathers have left but scanty records of their early
condition[8]. Nor did the supercilious or unsuspecting ignorance of
Italy care to enquire into the mode of life and habits of the barbarians
until their strong arms threatened the civilization and the very
existence of the empire itself. Then first, dimly through the twilight
in which the sun of Rome was to set for ever, loomed the Colossus of the
German race, gigantic, terrible, inexplicable; and the vague attempt to
define its awful features came too late to be fully successful. In
Tacitus, the city possessed indeed a thinker worthy of the exalted
theme; but his sketch, though vigorous beyond expectation, is incomplete
in many of the most material points: yet this is the most detailed and
fullest account which we possess, and nearly the only certain source of
information till we arrive at the moment when the invading tribes in
every portion of the empire entered upon their great task of
reconstructing society from its foundations. Slowly, from point to
point, and from time to time, traces are recognized of powerful
struggles, of national movements, of destructive revolutions: but the
definite facts which emerge from the darkness of the first three
centuries are rare and fragmentary.
Footnote 8:
“Celebrant carminibus antiquis, quod unum apud illos memoriae et
annalium genus est.” Tac. Mor. Germ. cap. ii.
Let us confine our attention to that portion of the race which settled
on our own shores.
The testimony of contemporaneous history assures us that about the
middle of the fifth century, a considerable movement took place among
the tribes that inhabited the western coasts of Germany and the islands
of the Baltic sea. Pressed at home by the incursions of restless
neighbours, and the urgency of increasing population, or yielding to the
universal spirit of adventure, Angles, Saxons and Frisians crossed a
little-known and dangerous ocean to seek new settlements in adjacent
lands. Familiar as we are with daring deeds of maritime enterprise, who
have seen our flag float over every sea, and flutter in every breeze
that sweeps over the surface of the earth, we cannot contemplate without
astonishment and admiration, these hardy sailors, swarming on every
point, traversing every ocean, sweeping every æstuary and bay, and
landing on every shore which promised plunder or a temporary rest from
their fatigues. The wealth of Gaul had already attracted fearful
visitations, and the spoils of Roman cultivation had been displayed
before the wondering borderers of the Elbe and Eyder, the prize of past,
and incentive to future activity. Britain, fertile and defenceless,
abounding in the accumulations of a long career of peace, deserted by
its ancient lords, unaccustomed to arms[9], and accustomed to the yoke,
at once invited attack and held out the prospect of a rich reward: and
it is certain that at that period, there took place some extensive
migration of Germans to the shores of England[10]. The expeditions known
to tradition as those of Hengest, Ælli, Cissa, Cerdic and Port, may
therefore have some foundation in fact; and around this meagre nucleus
of truth were grouped the legends which afterwards served to conceal the
poverty and eke out the scanty stock of early history. But I do not
think it at all probable that this was the earliest period at which the
Germans formed settlements in England.
-----
Footnote 9:
This is asserted both by Gildas and Nennius, and it is not in itself
improbable. The Romans did sometimes attempt to disarm the nations
they subdued: thus Probus with the Alamanni. Vopisc. cap. 14.
Malmsbury’s account of the defenceless state of Britain was probably
not exaggerated. He says: “Ita cum tyranni nullum in agris praeter
semibarbaros, nullum in urbibus praeter ventri deditos reliquissent,
Britannia omni patrocinio iuvenilis vigoris viduata, omni exercitio
artium exinanita, conterminarum gentium inhiationi diu obnoxia fuit.”
Gest. Reg. lib. i. § 2.
Footnote 10:
Prosper Tyro, a.d. 441, says, “Theodosii xviii. Britanniae usque ad
hoc tempus variis cladibus eventibusque latae [? laceratae] in
ditionem Saxonum rediguntur.” See also Procop. Bel. Got. iv. 20. The
former of these passages might however be understood without the
assumption of an immigration, which the movements of Attila render
probable.
-----
It is natural to believe that for many centuries a considerable and
active intercourse had prevailed between the southern and eastern shores
of this island, and the western districts of Gaul. The first landing of
Julius Caesar was caused or justified by the assurance that his Gallic
enemies recruited their armies and repaired their losses, by the aid of
their British kinsmen and allies[11]; and the merchants of the coast,
who found a market in Britain, reluctantly furnished him with the
information upon which the plan of his invasion was founded[12]. When
the fortune and the arms of Rome had prevailed over her ill-disciplined
antagonists, and both continent and island were subject to the same
all-embracing rule, it is highly probable that the ancient bonds were
renewed, and that the most familiar intercourse continued to prevail. In
the time of Strabo the products of the island, corn, cattle, gold,
silver and iron, skins, slaves, and a large description of dog, were
exported by the natives, no doubt principally to the neighbouring
coasts, and their commerce with these was sufficient to justify the
imposition of an export and import duty[13]. As early as the time of
Nero, London, though not a colony, was remarkable as a mercantile
station[14], and in all human probability was the great mart of the
Gauls. There cannot be the least doubt that an active communication was
maintained throughout by the Keltic nations on the different sides of
the channel; and similarly, as German tribes gradually advanced along
the lines of the Elbe, the Weser, the Maes and the Rhine, occupying the
countries which lie upon the banks of those rivers, and between them and
the sea, it is reasonable to suppose that some offsets of their great
migrations reached the opposite shores of England[15]. As early as the
second century, Chauci are mentioned among the inhabitants of the
south-east of Ireland[16], and although we have only the name whereby to
identify them with the great Saxon tribe, yet this deserves
consideration when compared with the indisputably Keltic names of the
surrounding races. The Coritavi, who occupied the present counties of
Lincoln, Leicester, Rutland, Northampton, Nottingham and Derby, were
Germans, according to the Welsh tradition itself[17], and the next
following name Κατυευχλανοι, though not certainly German, bears a strong
resemblance to many German formations[18].
Footnote 11:
Bell. Gal. iii. 8. 9; iv. 20.
Footnote 12:
Especially the Veneti: hέτοιμοι γὰρ ἦσαν κωλύειν τὸν εἰς τὴν
βρεττανικὴν πλοῦν, χρώμενοι τῷ ἐμπορίῳ. Strabo, bk. iv. p. 271. Conf.
Bell. Gall. iv. 20.
Footnote 13:
Book iv. p. 278.
Footnote 14:
Tacit. Ann. xiv. 33.
Footnote 15:
Caesar notices the migrations of continental tribes to Britain: he
says, “Britanniae pars interior ab iis incolitur, quos natos in insula
ipsa memoria proditum dicunt; maritima pars ab iis qui praedae ac
belli inferendi causa ex Belgis transierant; qui omnes fere iis
nominibus civitatum adpellantur, quibus orti ex civitatibus eo
pervenerunt, et bello inlato ibi remanserunt, atque agros colere
coeperunt.” Bell. Gall. v. 12.
Footnote 16:
Ptolemy, bk. ii. c. 2. It is true that Ptolemy calls them Καύκοι, but
this mode of spelling is not unexampled, and is found in even so
correct a writer as Strabo. The proper form is Καύχοι. Latin authors
occasionally write Cauci for Chauci, and sometimes even Cauchi: see
Zeuss, Die Deutschen und die Nachbarstämme, p. 138. It is right to add
that Zeuss, whose opinion on such a point is entitled to the highest
consideration, hesitates to include these Καυκοι among Germanic tribes
(p. 199). The Μανάπιοι, placed also by Ptolemy in Ireland, can hardly
be Germans.
Footnote 17:
Ptolemy, bk. ii. c. 3. μεθ’ οὗς Κοριταυοὶ, ἐν οἷς πόλεις, λίνδον,
ῥάγε· εἶτα, Κατυευχλανοὶ, ἐν οἷς πόλεις, σαλῆναι[al. σαλιοῦαι],
οὐρολάνιον. Others have preferred the form Κοριτανοὶ, but the
authority of the best manuscripts, not less than the analogy of the
names Ingaevones, Iscaevones, Chamavi, Batavi, confirms the earlier
reading. According to the Triads, these Coritavi (Coriniaidd) had
migrated from a Teutonic marshland. Thorpe’s Lappenberg, i. 15. The
word is thus in all probability derived from Hor, _lutum_, Horiht,
_lutosus_; equivalent to the “aquosa Fresonum arva.” Vit. Sci. Sturm.
Pertz. ii. 372. “Saxones, gentem oceani, in littoribus et paludibus
inviis sitam.” Oros. vii. 32.
Footnote 18:
Chatuarii, Heaðobeardan, Heaðoræmes. However Catu is a genuine British
prefix.
Without, however, laying more stress upon these facts than they will
fairly warrant, let us proceed to other considerations which render it
probable that a large admixture of German tribes was found in England
long previous to the middle of the fifth century. It appears to me that
the presence of Roman emperors recruiting the forces with which the
throne of the world was to be disputed, from among the hardiest
populations of the continent, must not only have led to the settlement
of Teutonic families in this island, but also to the maintenance, on
their part, of a steady intercourse with their kinsmen who remained
behind. The military colony, moreover, which claimed to be settled upon
good arable land, formed the easiest and most advantageous mode of
pensioning the _emeriti_; and many a successful Caesar may have felt
that his own safety was better secured by portioning his German veterans
in the fruitful valleys of England, than by settling them as doubtful
garrisons in Lombardy or Campania.
The fertile fields which long before had merited the praises of the
first Roman victor, must have offered attractions enough to induce
wandering Saxons and Angles to desert the marshes and islands of the
Elbe, and to call Frisian adventurers over from the sands and salt-pools
of their home. If in the middle of the fifth century Saxons had
established regular settlements at Bayeux[19]; if even before this time
the country about Grannona bore the name of Littus Saxonicum[20], we may
easily believe that at still earlier periods other Saxons had found over
the intervening ocean a way less dangerous and tedious than a march
through the territories of jealous or hostile neighbours, or even than a
coasting voyage along barbarous shores defended by a yet more barbarous
population. A north-east wind would, almost without effort of their own,
have carried their ships from Hêlgoland and the islands of the Elbe, or
from Silt and Romsey[21], to the Wash and the coast of Norfolk. There
seems then every probability that bodies more or less numerous, of
coast-Germans, perhaps actually of Saxons and Angles, had colonized the
eastern shores of England long before the time generally assumed for
their advent[22]. The very exigencies of military service had rendered
this island familiar to the nations of the continent: Batavi, under
their own national chieftains, had earned a share of the Roman glory,
and why not of the Roman land, in Britain[23]? The policy of the Emperor
Marcus Antoninus, at the successful close of the Marcomannic war, had
transplanted to Britain multitudes of Germans, to serve at once as
instruments of Roman power and as hostages for their countrymen on the
frontier of the empire[24]. The remnants of this once powerful
confederation cannot but have left long and lasting traces of their
settlement among us; nor can it be considered at all improbable that
Carausius, when in the year 287, he raised the standard of revolt in
Britain, calculated upon the assistance of the Germans in this country,
as well as that of their allies and brethren on the continent[25].
Nineteen years later the death of Constantius delivered the dignity of
Caesar to his son Constantine: he was solemnly elected to that dignity
in Britain, and among his supporters was Crocus, or as some read Erocus,
an Alamannic king who had accompanied his father from Germany[26]. Still
later, under Valentinian, we find an auxiliary force of Alamanni serving
with the Roman legions here.
Footnote 19:
Saxones Baiocassini. Greg. Turon. v. 27; x. 9.
Footnote 20:
_Grannona in littore Saxonico._ Notit. Imp. Occid. c. 86. Du Chesne
Hist. i. p. 3. The Tótingas, who have left their name to Tooting in
Surrey, are recorded also at Tótingahám in the county of Boulogne.
Leo, Rectitudines singularum personarum, p. 26.
Footnote 21:
Ptolemy calls the islands at the mouth of the Elbe, Σαξόνων νῆσοι
τρεῖς. Zeuss considers these to be Föhr, Silt and Nordstrand. Die
Deutschen, p. 150. Lappenberg sees in them, North Friesland,
Eiderstedt, Nordstrand, Wickingharde and Böcingharde. Thorpe, Lap. i.
87. It seems hardly conceivable that Frisians, who occupied the coast
as early as the time of Caesar, should not have found their way by sea
to Britain, especially when pressed by Roman power: see Tac. Ann.
xiii. 54.
Footnote 22:
Hengest defeated the Picts and Scots at Stamford in Lincolnshire, not
far from the Nene, the Witham and the Welland, upon whose banks it is
nearly certain that there were German settlements. Widukind’s story of
an embassy from the Britons to the Saxons, to entreat aid, is thus
rendered not altogether improbable: but then it must be understood of
Saxons already established in England, and on the very line of march
of the Northern invaders, whom they thus took most effectually in
flank. Compare Geoffry’s story of Vortigern giving Hengest lands in
Lincolnshire, etc.
Footnote 23:
Tac. Hist. iv. 12, about A.D. 69. “Diu Germanicis bellis exerciti; mox
aucta per Britanniam gloria, transmissis illuc cohortibus, quas vetere
instituto, nobilissimi popularium regebant.”
Footnote 24:
Dio. Cas. lxxi. lxxii. Gibbon, Dec. cap. ix. At a later period, Probus
settled Vandals and Burgundians here: Zosimus tells us (Hist. Nov. i.
68): ὅσους δὲ ζῶντας οἷος τε γέγονεν ἑλεῖν, εἰς Βρεττανίαν παρέπεμψεν·
ὃι τὴν νῆσον οἰκήσαντες, ἐπαναστάντος μετὰ ταῦτα τινος, γεγόνασι
βασιλεῖ χρήσιμοι. Procopius even goes so far as to make Belisarius
talk of Goths in Britain, but the context itself proves that this
deserves very little notice. Bell. Got. ii. 6.
Footnote 25:
Carausius was a Menapian: but in the third century the inhabitants of
the Menapian territory were certainly Teutonic. Aurelius Victor calls
him a Batavian: see Gibbon, Dec. cap. xiii. Carausius, and after him
Allectus, maintained a German force here: “Omnes enim illos, ut audio,
campos atque colles non nisi teterrimorum hostium corpora fusa
texerunt. Illa barbara aut imitatione barbariae olim cultu vestis, et
prolixo crine rutilantia, tunc vero pulvere et cruore foedata, et in
diversos situs tracta, sicuti dolorem vulnerum fuerant secuta,
iacuerunt.... Enimvero, Caesar invicte, tanto deorum immortalium tibi
est addicta consensu omnium quidem quos adortus fueris hostium, sed
praecipue internecio Francorum, ut illi quoque milites vestri, qui per
errorem nebulosi, ut paullo ante dixi, maris abiuncti ad oppidum
Londiniense pervenerunt, quidquid ex mercenaria illa multitudine
barbarorum praelio superfuerat, cum direpta civitate, fugam capessere
cogitarent, passim tota urbe confecerint.” Eumen. Paneg. Const. cap.
18, 19.
Footnote 26:
Aurel. Vict. cap. 41. Lappenberg, referring to this fact (Thorpe, i.
47), asks, “May not the name Erocus be a corruption of Ertocus, a
Latinization of the old-Saxon Heritogo, _dux_?” I think not; for an
Alaman would have been called by a high and not low German name,
Herizohho, not Heritogo. I think it much more likely that his name was
Chrohho or Hrôca, a _rook_.
By chronological steps we have now approached the period at which was
compiled the celebrated document entitled ‘Notitia utriusque
imperii’[27]. Even if we place this at the latest admissible date, it is
still at least half a century earlier than the earliest date assigned to
Hengest. Among the important officers of state mentioned therein as
administering the affairs of this island, is the Comes Littoris Saxonici
per Britannias; and his government, which extended from near the present
site of Portsmouth to Wells in Norfolk[28], was supported by various
civil and military establishments, dispersed along the whole sea-board.
The term Littus Saxonicum has been explained to mean rather the coast
visited by, or exposed to the ravages of, the Saxons, than the coast
occupied by them: but against this loose system of philological and
historical interpretation I beg emphatically to protest: it seems to
have arisen merely from the uncritical spirit in which the Saxon and
Welsh traditions have been adopted as ascertained facts, and from the
impossibility of reconciling the account of Beda with the natural sense
of the entry in the Notitia: but there seems no reason whatever for
adopting an exceptional rendering in this case, and as the Littus
Saxonicum on the mainland was that district in which members of the
Saxon confederacy were settled, the Littus Saxonicum per Britannias
unquestionably obtained its name from a similar circumstance[29].
Footnote 27:
Pancirolus would date this important record in A.D. 438. Gibbon,
however, refutes him and places it between 395 and 407. Dec. cap.
xvii. I am inclined to think even this date inaccurate, and that the
Romans did not maintain any such great establishment in Britain, as
that herein described, at so late a period. For even Ammianus tells us
in 364, “Hoc tempore Picti, Saxonesque et Scotti et Attacotti
Britannos aerumnis vexavere continuis,” (Hist. xxvi. 4), which is
hardly consistent with a flourishing state of the Roman civil and
military rule. The actual document we possess may possibly date from
390 or 400, but it refers to the arrangements of an earlier time, and
to an organization of Roman power in more palmy days of their
dominion.
Footnote 28:
The document itself may be consulted in Graevius, vol. vii. The
“littus Saxonicum per Britannias” extended at least from the Portus
Adurni to Branodunum, that is, from the neighbourhood of Portsmouth to
Branchester on the Wash. In both these places there were civil or
military officers under the orders of the Comes littoris Saxonici.
Footnote 29:
Professor Leo, of Halle, has called attention to a remarkable
resemblance between the names of certain places in Kent, and
settlements of the Alamanni upon the Neckar. A few of these, it must
be admitted, are striking, but the majority are only such as might be
expected to arise from similarities of surface and natural features in
any two countries settled by cognate populations, having nearly the
same language, religious rites and civil institutions. Even if the
fact be admitted in the fullest extent, it is still unnecessary to
adopt Dr. Leo’s hypothesis, that the coincidence is due to a double
migration from the shores of the Elbe. Rectitud. sing. person. pp.
100-104. It has been already stated that Constantius was accompanied
to Britain by an Alamannic king; and I cannot doubt that under
Valentinian, a force of Alamanni served in this country. Ammianus
says: “Valentinianus ... in Macriani locum, Bucinobantibus, quae
contra Moguntiacum gens est Alamanna, regem Fraomarium ordinavit: quem
paullo postea, quoniam recens excursus eundem penitus vastaverat
pagum, in Britannos translatum potestate tribuni, Alamannorum
praefecerat numero, multitudine, viribusque ea tempestate florenti.”
Hist. xxix. c. 4. The context renders it impossible that this “numerus
Alamannorum” should have been anything but genuine Germans.
Thus far the object of this rapid sketch has been to show the
improbability of our earliest records being anything more than
ill-understood and confused traditions, accepted without criticism by
our first annalists, and to refute the opinion long entertained by our
chroniclers, that the Germanic settlements in England really date from
the middle of the fifth century. The results at which we have arrived
are far from unimportant; indeed they seem to form the only possible
basis upon which we can ground a consistent and intelligible account of
the manner of the settlements themselves. And, be it remembered, that
the evidence brought forward upon this point are the assertions of
indifferent and impartial witnesses; statesmen, soldiers, men of letters
and philosophers, who merely recorded events of which they had full
means of becoming cognizant, with no object in general save that of
stating facts appertaining to the history of their empire. Moreover, the
accounts they give are probable in themselves and perfectly consistent
with other well-ascertained facts of Roman history. Can the same praise
be awarded to our own meagre national traditions, or to the fuller,
detailed, but palpably uncritical assertions of our conquered
neighbours? I confess that the more I examine this question, the more
completely I am convinced that the received accounts of our migrations,
our subsequent fortunes, and ultimate settlement, are devoid of
historical truth in every detail.
It strikes the enquirer at once with suspicion when he finds the tales
supposed peculiar to his own race and to this island, shared by the
Germanic populations of other lands, and with slight changes of
locality, or trifling variations of detail, recorded as authentic parts
of their history. The readiest belief in fortuitous resemblances and
coincidences gives way before a number of instances whose agreement
defies all the calculation of chances. Thus, when we find Hengest and
Hors approaching the coasts of Kent in three keels, and Ælli effecting a
landing in Sussex with the same number, we are reminded of the Gothic
tradition which carries a migration of Ostrogoths, Visigoths and
Gepidae, also in three vessels, to the mouths of the Vistula, certainly
a spot where we do not readily look for that recurrence to a trinal
calculation, which so peculiarly characterizes the modes of thought of
the Cymri. The murder of the British chieftains by Hengest is told
_totidem verbis_ by Widukind and others, of the Oldsaxons in
Thuringia[30]. Geoffry of Monmouth relates also how Hengest obtained
from the Britons as much land as could be enclosed by an ox-hide; then,
cutting the hide into thongs, enclosed a much larger space than the
grantors intended, on which he erected Thong castle[31]—a tale too
familiar to need illustration, and which runs throughout the mythus of
many nations. Among the Oldsaxons the tradition is in reality the same,
though recorded with a slight variety of detail. In their story, a
lapful of earth is purchased at a dear rate from a Thuringian; the
companions of the Saxon jeer him for his imprudent bargain; but he sows
the purchased earth over a large space of ground, which he claims and,
by the aid of his comrades, ultimately wrests from the Thuringians[32].
Footnote 30:
Widukind in Leibnitz, Rer. Brunsw. i. 73, 74; Repgow, Sachsensp. iii.
44, § 2. It is amusing enough to see how the number of ships increases
as people began to feel the absurdity of bringing over conquering
armies in such very small flotillas.
Footnote 31:
Galf. Monum. H. Brit., vi. 11. Thong castle probably gave a turn to
the story here which the Oldsaxon legend had not. The classical tale
of Dido and Byrsa is well known to every schoolboy. Ragnor Lodbrog
adopted the same artifice, Rag. Lodb. Saga, cap. 19, 20. Nay the
Hindoos declare that we obtained possession of Calcutta by similar
means.
Footnote 32:
Widuk. _in loc. citat._, also Grimm’s Deutsche Sagen, No. 547, 369,
and Deutsche Rechtsalt. p. 90, where several valuable examples are
cited: it is remarkable how many of these are Thuringian.
To the traditional history of the tribes peculiarly belong the
genealogies of their kings, to which it will be necessary to refer
hereafter in a mythological point of view. For the present it is enough
that I call attention to the extraordinary tale of Offa, who occurs at
an early stage of the Mercian table, among the progenitors of the
Mercian kings. This story, as we find it in Matthew Paris’s detailed
account[33], coincides in the minutest particulars with a tale told by
Saxo Grammaticus of a Danish prince bearing the same name[34].
Footnote 33:
Vit. Offae Primi, edited by Wats.
Footnote 34:
Saxo Gramm. bk. iv. p. 59 _seq._
The form itself in which details, which profess to be authentic, have
been preserved, ought to secure us from falling into error. They are
romantic, not historical; and the romance has salient and characteristic
points, not very reconcilable with the variety which marks the authentic
records of fact. For example, the details of a long and doubtful
struggle between the Saxons and the Britons are obviously based upon no
solid foundation; the dates and the events are alike traditional,—the
usual and melancholy consolation of the vanquished. In proportion as we
desert the older and apply to later sources of information, do we meet
with successful wars, triumphant British chieftains, vanquished Saxons,
heroes endowed with supernatural powers and blessed with supernatural
luck. Gildas, Nennius and Beda mention but a few contests, and even
these of a doubtful and suspicious character; Geoffry of Monmouth and
gossipers of his class, on the contrary, are full of wondrous incidents
by flood and field, of details calculated to flatter the pride or
console the sorrows of Keltic auditors: the successes which those who
lived in or near the times described either pass over in modest silence
or vaguely insinuate under sweeping generalities, are impudently related
by this fabler and his copyists with every richness of narration.
According to him the invaders are defeated in every part of the island,
nay even expelled from it; army after army is destroyed, chieftain after
chieftain slain; till he winds up his enormous tissue of fabrications
with the defeat, the capture and execution of a hero whose very
existence becomes problematical when tested by the severe principles of
historical criticism, and who, according to the strict theory of our
times, can hardly be otherwise than enrolled among the gods, through a
godlike or half-godlike form[35].
-----
Footnote 35:
Woden in the _gentile_ form of a horse, Hengest, _equus admissarius_,
the brother of Hors, and father of a line in which names of horses
form a distinguishing part of the royal appellatives. It is hardly
necessary to remind the classical reader of Poseidon in his favourite
shape, the shape in which he contended with Athene and mingled with
Ceres. In these remarks on Geoffry and his sources, I do not mean to
deny the obligation under which the reader of romance has been laid by
him; only to reject everything like historical authority. It is from
the countrymen of Geoffry that we have also gained the marvellous
superstructure of imagination which has supplied the tales of that
time, “when Charlemagne with all his peerage fell by Fontarabia,” and
which is recognised by history in the very short entry, “In quo
proelio Eggihardus regiae mensae praepositus, Anselmus comes palatii,
et Hruodlandus Brittanici limitis praefectus, cum aliis compluribus
interficiuntur.” Einhardi Vita Karoli, § 9. Pertz, ii. 448. Let us be
grateful for the Orlando Innamorato and Furioso, but not make history
of them.
-----
It is no doubt probable that the whole land was not subdued without some
pains in different quarters; that here and there a courageous leader or
a favourable position may have enabled the aborigines to obtain even
temporary successes over the invaders: the new immigrants were not
likely to find land vacant for their occupation among their kinsmen who
had long been settled here, though well-assured of their co-operation in
any attempt to wrest new settlements from the British. But no authentic
record remains of the slow and gradual progress that would have attended
the conquest of a brave and united people, nor is any such consistent
with the accounts the British authors have left of the disorganized and
disarmed condition of the population. A skirmish, carried on by very
small numbers on either side, seems generally to have decided the fate
of a campaign. Steadily from east to west, from south to north, the
sharp axes and long swords of the Teutons hewed their way: wherever
opposition was offered, it ended in the retreat of the aborigines to the
mountains,—fortresses whence it was impossible to dislodge them, and
from which they sometimes descended to attempt a hopeless effort for the
liberty of their country or revenge upon their oppressors. The ruder or
more generous of their number may have preferred exile and the chances
of emigration to subjection at home[36]; but the mass of the people,
accustomed to Roman rule or the oppression of native princes[37],
probably suffered little by a change of masters, and did little to avoid
it. At even a later period an indignant bard could pour out his
patriotic reproaches upon the Loegrians who had condescended to become
Saxons. We learn that at first the condition of the British under the
German rule was fair and easy, and only rendered harsher in punishment
of their unsuccessful attempts at rebellion[38]; and the laws of Ini, a
Westsaxon king, show that in the territories subject to his rule, and
bordering upon the yet British lands, the Welshman occupied the place of
a _perioecian_ rather than a _helot_[39]. Nothing in fact is more
common, or less true, than the exaggerated account of total
exterminations and miserable oppressions, in the traditional literature
of conquered nations; and we may very safely appeal even to the personal
appearance of the peasantry in many parts of England, as evidence how
much Keltic blood was permitted to subsist and even to mingle with that
of the ruling Germans; while the signatures to very early charters
supply us with names assuredly not Teutonic, and therefore probably
borne by persons of Keltic race, occupying positions of dignity at the
courts of Anglosaxon kings[40].
Footnote 36:
Many beyond a doubt found a refuge in Brittany among their brethren
and co-religionists who had long been settled there. Conf. Ermold.
Nigel. bk. iii. v. 11. in Pertz, ii. 490. The Cumbrians and Welsh had
probably been as little subdued by the Romans as they were by the
Saxons.
Footnote 37:
Gildas does not spare the native princes: see Epist. querul. _passim_;
and when every excuse has been made for the exaggerations of an honest
zeal, we must believe the condition of the people to have been bad in
the extreme.
Footnote 38:
“Quorum illi qui Northwallos, id est Aquilonales Britones dicebantur,
parti Westsaxonum regum obvenerant. Illi quondam consuetis servitiis
seduli, diu nil asperum retulere, sed tunc rebellionem meditantes,
Kentuuinus rex tam anxia caede perdomuit, ut nihil ulterius sperarent.
Quare et ultima malorum accessit captivis tributaria functio; ut qui
antea nec solam umbram palpabant libertatis, nunc iugum subiectionis
palam ingemiscerent.” W. Malmsb. Vit. Aldhelmi, Ang. Sac. ii. 14.
Footnote 39:
Leg. Ini, § 32, 33.
Footnote 40:
See a tract of the author’s in the Proceedings of the Archaeological
Institute, 1845, on Anglosaxon names. From some very interesting
papers read by the Rev. R. Garnett before the Philological Society in
1843, 1844, we learn that a considerable proportion of the words which
denote the daily processes of agriculture, domestic life, and
generally indoor and outdoor service, are borrowed by us from the
Keltic. Philolog. Trans, i. 171 _seq._ The amount of Keltic words yet
current in English may of course he accounted for in part, without the
hypothesis of an actual incorporation; but many have unquestionably
been borrowed, and serve to show that a strong Keltic element was
permitted to remain and influence the Saxon. That it did so especially
in local names is not of much importance, as it may be doubted whether
conquest ever succeeded in changing these entirely, in any country.
From what has preceded it will be inferred that I look upon the genuine
details of the German conquests in England as irrevocably lost to us. So
extraordinary a success as the conquest of this island by bands of bold
adventurers from the continent, whose cognate tribes had already come
into fatal collision with not only the Gallic provincials, but even the
levies of the city itself[41], could hardly have passed unnoticed by the
historians of the empire: we have seen however that only Prosper Tyro
and Procopius notice this great event, and that too in terms which by no
means necessarily imply a state of things consistent with the received
accounts. The former only says indefinitely, that _about_ 441, Britain
was finally reduced under the Saxon power; while Procopius clearly shows
how very imperfect, indeed fabulous, an account he had received[42].
Could we trust the accuracy and critical spirit of this writer, whom no
less a man than Gibbon has condescended to call the gravest historian of
his time, we might indeed imagine that we had recovered one fact of our
earliest history, which brought with it all the attractions of romance.
An Angle princess had been betrothed to Radigér, prince of the Varni, a
Teutonic tribe whose seats are subsequently described to have been about
the shores of the Northern Ocean and upon the Rhine, by which alone they
were separated from the Franks[43]. Tempted however partly by motives of
policy, partly perhaps by maxims of heathendom, he deserted his promised
bride and offered his hand to Theodechild, the widow of his father, and
sister of the Austrasian Theodberht[44]. Like the epic heroine
Brynhildr, the deserted lady was not disposed to pass over the affront
thus offered to her charms. With an immense armament she sailed for the
mouth of the Rhine. A victory placed the faithless bridegroom a prisoner
in her power. But desire of revenge gave place to softer emotions, and
the triumphant princess was content to dismiss her rival and compel her
repentant suitor to perform his engagement.
Footnote 41:
I borrow from Hermann Müller’s instructive work, Der Lex Salica und
der Lex Angliorum et Werinorum Alter und Heimat, p. 269, the following
chronological notices of the Franks in their relations to the Roman
empire:—
A.D. 250. Franks, the inhabitants of marshes, become known by their
predatory excursions.
280. Franks, transplanted to Asia, return.
287. Franks occupy Batavia; are expelled.
291. Franks in the Gallic provinces.
306. Constantine chastises the Franks. They enjoy consideration in the
service of Rome.
340. Wars and treaties with the Franks.
356. Julian treats with the Franks on the lower Rhine.
358. He treats with Franks in Toxandria.
359. Salic Franks in Batavia.
395. Stilicho treats with the Franks.
408. The Vandals invading Gaul are defeated by the Franks.
414. War with the Franks.
416. The Franks possess the Rhine-land.
437. Chlojo bursts into Gaul and takes Cambray.
Footnote 42:
Procop. Bel. Got. iv. 20.
Footnote 43:
Ουαρνοι μεν ὑπερ Ιστρον ποταμον ἱδρυνται· διηκουσι δε αχρι τε ες
Ωκεανον τον αρκτωον, και ποταμον Ῥηνον· ὁσπερ αυτους τε διοριζει, και
Φραγγους και ταλλα εθνη, ἁ ταυτη ἱδρυνται. ὁυτοι απαντες, ὁσοι
τοπαλαιον αμφι Ῥηνον ἑκατερωθεν ποταμον ωκηντο, ιδιου μεν τινος
ονοματος ἑκαστοι μετελαγχανον ... επικοινης δε Γερμανοι εκαλουντο
ἁπαντες.... Ουαρνοι δε και Φραγγοι τουτι μονον του Ῥηνου το ὑδωρ
μεταξυ εχουσιν. Bel. Got. iv. 20.
Footnote 44:
Procopius tells us that this was done by the dying father’s advice,
and in consonance with the law of the people. Ῥαδίγερ δὲ ὁ παῖς
ξυνοικιζέσθω τῇ μητρυιᾷ τολοιπὸν τῇ αὐτου, καθάπερ ὁ πάτριος ἡμῖν
ἐφίησι νόμος. Ibid. Conf. Bed. Hist. Eccl. ii. 5.
To deny all historical foundation to this tale would perhaps be carrying
scepticism to an unreasonable extent. Yet the most superficial
examination proves that in all its details, at least, it is devoid of
accuracy. The period during which the events described must be
placed[45], is between the years 534 and 547; and it is very certain
that the Varni were not settled at that time where Procopius has placed
them[46]: on that locality we can only look for Saxons. It is hardly
necessary to say that a fleet of four hundred ships, and an army of one
hundred thousand Angles, led by a woman, are not data upon which we
could implicitly rely in calculating either the political or military
power of any English principality at the commencement of the sixth
century; or that ships capable of carrying two hundred and fifty men
each, had hardly been launched at that time from any port in England.
Still I am not altogether disposed to deny the possibility of predatory
expeditions from the more settled parts of the island, adjoining the
eastern coasts. Gregory of Tours tells us that about the same time as
that assigned to this Angle expedition, Theodoric the Frank, assisted by
Sueves, Saxons and even Bavarians, cruelly devastated the territory of
the Thuringians; and although it would be far more natural to seek these
Saxons in their old settlements upon the continent, we have the
authority of Rudolf or Meginhart, that they were in fact inhabitants of
this island[47].
-----
Footnote 45:
The years 534 and 547 are the extreme terms of Theodberht’s reign. See
Gib. Dec. bk. 38.
Footnote 46:
This fact, which has escaped the accurate, and generally merciless,
criticism of Gibbon, is very clearly proved by Zeuss, Die Deutschen,
etc. pp. 361, 362.
Footnote 47:
The passage is sufficiently important to deserve transcription at
length. “Saxonum gens, sicut tradit antiquitas, ab Anglis Britanniae
incolis egressa, per Oceanum navigans Germaniae litoribus studio et
necessitate quaerendarum sedium appulsa est, in loco qui vocatur
Haduloha, eo tempore quo Thiotricus rex Francorum contra Irminfridum
generum suum, ducem Thuringorum, dimicans, terram eorum ferro vastavit
et igni. Et cum iam duobus proeliis ancipiti pugna incertaque victoria
miserabili suorum cede decertassent, Thiotricus spe vincendi
frustratus, misit legatos ad Saxones, quorum dux erat Hadugoto.
Audivit enim causam adventus eorum, promissisque pro victoria
habitandi sedibus, conduxit eos in adiutorium; quibus secum quasi iam
pro libertate et patria fortiter dimicantibus, superavit adversarios,
vastatisque indigenis et ad internitionem pene deletis, terram eorum
iuxta pollicitationem suam victoribus delegavit. Qui eam sorte
dividentes, cum multi ex eis in bello cecidissent, et pro raritate
eorum tota ab eis occupari non potuit, partem illius, et eam quam
maxime quae respicit orientem, colonis tradebant, singuli pro sorte
sua, sub tributo exercendam. Caetera vero loca ipsi possiderunt.”
Transl. Sci. Alexandri, Pertz, ii. 674. This was written about 863.
Possibly some ancient and now lost epic had recorded the wars of the
Saxon Heaðogeát.
-----
But if such difficulties exist in dealing with the events of periods
which are within the ascertained limits of our chronological system, and
which have received the illustration of contemporary history, what shall
we say of those whereof the time, nay even the locality is unknown? What
account shall we render of those occurrences, which exist for us only in
the confused forms given to them by successive ages; some, mischievously
determined to reduce the abnormal to rule, the extraordinary to order,
as measured by their narrow scheme of analogy? Is it not obvious that to
seek for historic truth in such traditions, is to be guilty of violating
every principle of historic logic? Such was the course pursued by our
early chroniclers, but it is not one that we can be justified in
repeating. In their view no doubt, the annals of the several Saxon
kingdoms did supply points of definite information; but we are now able
to take the measure of their credulity, and to apply severer canons of
criticism to the facts themselves which they believed and recorded. If
it was the tendency and duty of their age to deliver to us the history
that they found, it is the tendency and duty of ours to enquire upon
what foundation that history rests, and what amount of authority it may
justly claim.
The little that Beda could collect at the beginning of the eighth
century, formed the basis of all the subsequent reports. Though not
entirely free from the prejudices of his time, and yielding ready faith
to tales which his frame of mind disposed him willingly to credit, he
seems to have bestowed some pains upon the investigation and critical
appreciation of the materials he collected. But the limits of the object
he had proposed to himself, viz. the ecclesiastical history of the
island, not only imposed upon him the necessity of commencing his
detailed narrative at a comparatively late period[48], but led him to
reject much that may have been well known to him, of our secular
history. The deeds of pagan and barbarous chieftains offered little to
attract his attention or command his sympathies; indeed were little
likely to be objects of interest to those from whom his own information
was generally derived. Beda’s account, copied and recopied both at home
and abroad, was swelled by a few vague data from the regnal annals of
the kings; these were probably increased by a few traditions, ill
understood and ill applied, which belonged exclusively to the epical or
mythological cycles of our own several tribes and races, and the cognate
families of the continent; and finally the whole was elaborated into a
mass of inconsistent fables, on the admission of Cymric or Armorican
tales by Norman writers, who for the most part felt as little interest
in the fate of the Briton as the Saxon, and were as little able to
appreciate the genuine history of the one as of the other race. Thus
Wóden, Bældæg, Geát, Scyld, Sceáf and Beówa gradually found their way
into the royal genealogies; one by one, Brutus, Aurelius Ambrosius,
Uther Pendragon and Arthur, Hengest, Hors and Vortigern, all became
numbered among historical personages; and from heroes of respective epic
poems sunk down into kings and warriors, who lived and fought and died
upon the soil of England.
Footnote 48:
Beda attempts to give some account of the early state of Britain
previous to the arrival of Augustine; a few quotations from Solinus,
Gildas, and a legendary life of St. Germanus, comprise however nearly
the whole of his collections. Either he could find no more
information, or he did not think it worthy of belief. He even speaks
doubtfully of the tale of Hengest. Hist. Eccl. i. 15.
We are ignorant what _fasti_ or mode even of reckoning the revolutions
of seasons prevailed in England, previous to the introduction of
Christianity. We know not how any event before the year 600 was
recorded, or to what period the memory of man extended. There may have
been rare annals: there may have been poems: if such there were they
have perished, and have left no trace behind, unless we are to attribute
to them such scanty notices as the Saxon chronicle adds to Beda’s
account. From such sources however little could have been gained of
accurate information either as to the real internal state, the domestic
progress, or development of a people. The dry, bare entries of the
chronicles in historical periods may supply the means of judging what
sort of annals were likely to exist before the general introduction of
the Roman alphabet and parchment, while, in all probability, runes
supplied the place of letters, and stones, or the _beech_-wood from
which their name is derived, of _books_. Again, the traditions embodied
in the epic, are preeminently those of kings and princes: they are
heroical, devoted to celebrate the divine or half-divine founders of a
race, the fortunes of their warlike descendants, the manners and mode of
life of military adventurers, not the obscure progress, household peace
and orderly habits of the humble husbandman. They are full of feasts and
fighting, shining arms and golden goblets: the gods mingle among men
almost their equals, share in the same pursuits, are animated by the
same passions of love, and jealousy and hatred; or, blending the divine
with the mortal nature, become the founders of races, kingly because
derived from divinity itself. But one race knows little of another or
its traditions, and cares as little for them. Alliances or wars alone
bring them in contact with one another; and the terms of intercourse
between the races will for the most part determine the character under
which foreign heroes shall be admitted into the national epos, or
whether they shall be admitted at all. All history then, which is
founded in any degree upon epical tradition (and national history is
usually more or less so founded) must be to that extent imperfect, if
not inaccurate; only when corrected by the written references of
contemporaneous authors, can we assign any certainty to its records[49].
Let us apply these observations to the early events of Saxon history: of
Kent indeed we have the vague and uncertain notices which I have
mentioned: even more vague and uncertain are those of Sussex and Wessex.
Of the former, we learn that in the year 477, Ælli, with three sons,
Cymen, Wlencing and Cissa, landed in Sussex; that in the year 485 they
defeated the Welsh, and that in 491 they destroyed the population of
Anderida[50]. Not another word is there about Sussex, before the arrival
of Augustine, except a late assertion of the military preeminence of
Ælli among the Saxon chieftains. The events of Wessex are somewhat
better detailed; we learn that in 495 two nobles, Cerdic and Cyneríc,
came to England, and landed at Cerdices ora, where on the same day they
fought a battle: that in 501 they were followed by a noble named Port,
who with his two sons Bieda and Mægla made a forcible landing at
Portsmouth: and that in 508 they gained a great battle over a British
king, whom they slew together with five thousand of his people. In 514
Stuff and Wihtgár, their nephews, brought them a reinforcement of three
ships; in 519 they again defeated the Britons, and established the
kingdom of Wessex. In 527 a new victory is recorded: in 530, the Isle of
Wight was subdued and given to Wihtgár; and in 534, Cerdic died, and was
succeeded by Cyneríc, who reigned twenty-six years[51]. In 544 Wihtgár
died. A victory of Cyneríc in 552 and 556, and Ceawlin’s accession to
the throne of Wessex are next recorded. Wars of the Westsaxon kings are
noted in 568, 571, 577, 584. From 590 to 595 a king of that race named
Ceól is mentioned: in 591 we learn the expulsion of Ceawlin from power:
in 593 the deaths of Ceawlin, Cwichelm and Crida are mentioned, and in
597, the year of Augustine’s arrival, we learn that Ceólwulf ascended
the throne of Wessex.
Footnote 49:
The Homeric poems and those of the Edda are obvious examples: but
nothing can be more instructive than the _history_ which Livy and Saxo
Grammaticus have woven out of similar materials.
Footnote 50:
Sax. Chron. under the respective dates.
Footnote 51:
Cerdic and Cyneríc landed in 495, after forty years Cerdic dies, and
Cyneríc reigns twenty-six more!
Meagre as these details are, they far exceed what is related of
Northumberland, Essex or Eastanglia. In 547 we are told that Ida began
to reign in the first of these kingdoms; and that he was succeeded in
560 by Ælli: that after a reign of _thirty_ years[52], he died in 588
and was succeeded by Æðelríc, who again in 593 was succeeded by
Æðelfrið. This is all we learn of Northumbria; of Mercia, Essex,
Eastanglia, and the innumerable kingdoms that must have been comprised
under these general appellations, we hear not a single word.
-----
Footnote 52:
The chronology is inconsistent throughout, and it is inconceivable
that it should have been otherwise. Beda himself assigns different
dates to the arrival of the Saxons, though it is the æra from which he
frequently reckons.
-----
If this be all that we can now recover of events, a great number of
which must have fallen within the lives of those to whom Augustine
preached, what credit shall we give to the inconsistent accounts of
earlier actions? How shall we supply the almost total want of
information respecting the first settlements? What explanation have we
to give of the alliance between Jutes, Angles and Saxons which preceded
the invasions of England? What knowledge will these records supply of
the real number and quality of the chieftains, the language and blood of
the populations who gradually spread themselves from the Atlantic to the
Frith of Forth; of the remains of Roman cultivation, or the amount of
British power with which they had to contend? of the vicissitudes of
good and evil fortune which visited the independent principalities,
before they were swallowed up in the kingdoms of the heptarchy, or the
extent of the influence which they retained after that event? On all
these several points we are left entirely in the dark; and yet these are
facts which it most imports us to know, if we would comprehend the
growth of a society which endured for at least seven hundred years in
England, and formed the foundation of that in which we live.
Lappenberg has devoted several pages of his elaborate history[53] to an
investigation of the Kentish legends, with a view to demonstrate their
traditional, that is unhistorical, character. He has shown that the best
authorities are inconsistent with one another and with themselves, in
assigning the period of Hengest’s arrival in England. Carefully
comparing the dates of the leading events, as given from the soundest
sources, he has proved beyond a doubt, that all these periods are
calculated upon a mythical number 8, whose multiples recur in every year
assigned. Thus the periods of twenty-four, sixteen, eight and
particularly forty years meet us at every turn; and a somewhat similar
tendency may, I think, be observed in the earlier dates of Westsaxon
history cited in a preceding page. It is also very probable that the
early genealogies of the various Anglosaxon kings were arranged in
series of eight names, including always the great name of Wóden[54].
Footnote 53:
Thorpe’s Lappenb. i. 78 _seq._
Footnote 54:
Beówulf, ii. Postscript to the Preface, xxvii.
The result of all these enquiries is, to guard against plausible details
which can only mislead us. If we endeavour to destroy the credit of
traditions which have long existed, it is only to put something in their
place, inconsistent with them, but of more value: to reduce them to what
they really are, lest their authority should render the truth more
obscure, and its pursuit more difficult than is necessary; but to use
them wherever they seem capable of guiding our researches, and are not
irreconcilable with our other conclusions.
Far less in the fabulous records adopted by historians, than in the
divisions of the land itself, according to the populations that occupied
it, and the rank of their several members, must the truth be sought. The
names of the tribes and families have survived in the localities where
they settled, while their peculiar forms of customary law have become as
it were melted together into one general system; and the national
legends which each of them most probably possessed, have either perished
altogether, or are now to be traced only in proper names which fill up
the genealogies of the royal families[55]. To these local names I shall
return hereafter; they will furnish a strong confirmation of what has
been advanced in this chapter as to the probability of an early and wide
dispersion of Teutonic settlers in Britain.
Footnote 55:
Geát, the eponymus of a race, Geátas, is found in the common genealogy
previous to Wóden; his legend is alluded to in the Codex Exoniensis,
pp. 377, 378, together with those of Ðeódríc, Wéland and Eormanríc.
Witta in the Kentish line is found in the Traveller’s Song, l. 43.
Offa in the Mercian genealogy occurs in the same poem, l. 69, in the
fine epos of Beówulf, and in Saxo Grammaticus. Fin the son of
Folcwalda is one of the heroes of Beówulf. Scyld, Sceáf and Beówa are
found in the same poem, etc. These facts render it probable that many
other, if not all the names in the genealogies were equally derived
from the peculiar national or gentile legends, although the epic poems
in which they were celebrated being now lost, we are unable to point
to them as we have done to others.