Cristo Raul.org |
Reading Hall Third Millennium Library |
THE CHRISTIAN ROMAN EMPIRE AND THE FOUNDATION OF THE TEUTONIC KINGDOMSCHAPTER XIIIROMAN BRITAIN
THE character and history of Roman Britain, as of many other Roman
provinces, were predominantly determined by the facts of its geography. To that
cause, or set of causes, more than to any other, we must attribute alike the
Roman desire to conquer the province and the actual stages of the conquest, the
distribution of the troops employed as permanent garrison, the quality and
extent of the Romanized civilization, and, lastly, a great part of the long
series of incidents by which the island was lost to Rome and Roman culture.
Geologically, Britain forms the north-west side of a huge valley which
had its south-east side in northern and central France. Down the centre of this
valley ran two rivers, the one flowing south-west along a bed now covered by
the English Channel, the other flowing north-east through a region now beneath
the German Ocean. From these rivers, the land sloped upwards, south-east to
Vosges, Alps, and Cevennes, north-west to Cornwall, Wales and northern Britain.
The two rivers have long vanished. But the configuration of their valleys has
lasted. Though unquiet seas now divide England from north-western Europe, the
two areas, that were once the two sides of the valleys, still look to each
other. Their lowlands lie opposite; their main rivers flow out into the
intervening sea; their easiest entrances face; each area lies open by nature to
the trade or the brute force of the other; each has its most fertile, most
habitable, and least defensible districts next to those of the other.
Hence comes the peculiar configuration of our island. In south-east
Britain there is little continuous hill-country that rises above the 600 foot
contour line. Instead, wide undulating lowlands, marked by no striking physical
feature and containing little to arrest or even divert the march of ancient
armies or of traders, stretch over all the south and east and midlands. For
hills, we must go north of Trent and Humber or west of Severn and Exe. There we
shall find almost the converse of the south-east. Throughout a large, scattered
region, extending from Cornwall to the Highlands, the land lies mostly above,
and much of it high above, the 600 foot line; its soil and climate are
ill-suited to agriculture; its deep valleys and gorges and wild moors and high
peaks oppose alike the soldier and the citizen. Behind this upland lies the
Atlantic, and an Atlantic which meant of old the reverse of what it does today.
To the ancients, this hill-country was the end of the world; for us—since
Columbus—it is the beginning
Roman
Britain: Conquest [BC 55-A.D. 140
These physical features are reproduced plainly in the early history of
Britain. It was natural that about BC 50-A.D. 50 southern Britain should be occupied by Celtic tribes and even
families which had close kindred in Gaul, and that a lively intercourse should
exist between the two. It was no less natural that, even before Rome had fully
conquered Gaul, Caesar’s troops should be seen in Kent and Middlesex (BC 55-54) and Roman suzerainty extended
over these regions; and when the annexation of Gaul was finally complete, that
of Britain seemed the obvious sequel. The sequel was, indeed, delayed awhile by
political causes. Augustus (BC 43-AD 14) had too much else to do: Tiberius
(14-37) saw no need for it, just as he saw no need for any wars of conquest.
But after 37 it became urgent. Changes in southern Britain had favoured an anti-Roman reaction there and had even perhaps
produced disquiet in northern Gaul; Caligula (37-41) had made some fiasco in
connection with it; when Claudius succeeded, there was need of vigorous action
and, as it chanced, the leading statesmen of the moment favored a forward
policy in many lands. The result was a well-planned and deservedly successful
invasion (AD 43).
The details of the ensuing war of conquest do not here concern us. It is
enough to say that the lowlands offered little resistance. In one part of them,
near the south-east coast, Roman ways had become familiar since Caesar's raids.
In another part—the midlands—the population was then, as now, thin. Nowhere
(despite the theories of Guest and Green) were there physical obstacles likely
to delay the Roman arms. By 47 the invaders had subdued almost all the
lowlands, as far west as Exeter and Shrewsbury and as far north as the Humber.
Then came a pause. The difficulties of the hill-country, the bravery of the
hill-tribes, political circumstances at Rome, combined not indeed to arrest but
seriously to impede advance. But the decade 70-80 saw the final conquest of
Wales and the first subjugation of northern England, and in the years 80-84
Agricola was able to cross the Tyne and the Cheviots and gradually advance into Perthshire. Much of the land which he overran was but
imperfectly subdued and the northern part of it—everything, probably, north of
the Tweed—was abandoned when he was recalled (85). Thirty years later (115-120)
an insurrection shook the whole Roman power in northern Britain, and when
Hadrian had restored order, he established the frontier along a line from Tyne
to Solway, which he fortified by forts and a
continuous wall (about 122-124). Fifteen or twenty years later, about AD 140, his successor Pius, for reasons
not properly recorded, made a fresh advance; he annexed Scotland up to the
narrow isthmus between Forth and Clyde and fortified that with a continuous
wall, a series of forts along it variously estimated at 12 or (more probably)
at 18 or 20, and some outposts along the natural route through the Gap of Stirling to the north-east. This wall was not meant as a
substitute for Hadrian's Wall, but as a defence to the country north of it.
Rome had now reached her furthest permanent north. But the advance was
not long accepted quietly by the natives. Twenty years after Pius had built his
wall, a storm broke loose through all northern Britain from Derbyshire to
Cheviot or beyond (about 158-160). A second storm followed 20 years later
(about 183); the Wall of Pius was then or soon after definitely lost, and
disorder apparently continued till the Emperor Septimius Severus came out in
person (208-211) and rebuilt the Wall of Hadrian to form, with a few outlying
forts, the Roman frontier. With this step ends the series of alternating
organization and revolt which make up the external history of the earlier Roman
Britain. Henceforward the Wall was the boundary until the coming of the
barbarians who ended Roman rule in the island.
AD
85-211] Garrisons
The force which garrisoned this fluctuating frontier and kept the
province quiet consisted of three (till AD 85, of four) legions and an uncertain number of troops of the second grade, the
so-called auxilia, in all perhaps some 35-40,000 men,
mostly heavy infantry. The three legions were disposed in three fortresses, Isca Silurum (Caerleon on Usk, legio II Augusta), Deva (Chester, legio XX Valeria Victrix)
and Eburacum (York, legio VI Victrix): from these centers
detachments (vexillationes)
were sent out to form expeditionary forces, to construct fortifications and
other military works, and generally to meet important but occasional needs.
Outside these three main fortresses, the province was kept quiet and safe by a
network of small forts (castella),
varying in size from two or three to six or seven acres and garrisoned by
auxiliary cohortes (infantry) or alae (cavalry), some 500 and some 1000 strong. These forts were planted along
important roads and at strategic points, 10 or 15 or 20 miles apart. Their
distribution is noteworthy. In the lowlands there were none. During the early
years of the conquest we can, indeed, trace garrisons at one or two places,
such as Cirencester. But, as the conquest advanced, it was seen that the
lowlands needed no force to ensure their peace, and the troops were pushed on
into the hills, beyond Severn and Trent. Eighteen or twenty forts were dotted
about Wales, though many of these seem to have been abandoned in the course of
the second century, as having become superfluous through the growing
pacification of the land. A much larger number can be detected in Derbyshire,
Lancashire, the hill-country of Yorkshire, and northwards as far as Cheviot:
Hadrian's Wall, in particular, was principally defended by a series of such
forts. We cannot, however, give precise statistics of these forts until
exploration has advanced further : it is doubtful not only how far the known
examples provide us with a fairly full list of them, but, still more, to what
extent all the forts were in occupation at the same time and to what extent one
succeeded another.
The troops which garrisoned these military posts were Roman, in the
sense that they not only obeyed the Roman Emperor but were in theory and to a
great extent in practice, even in the later days of Roman Britain, recruited
within the Empire. The legionaries came from Romanized districts in the Western
Empire; the auxiliaries, naturally less civilized to begin with but drilled
into Roman ways and speech, were largely drawn from the Rhine and its neighborhood:
some probably were Celts, like the native Britons, others (as their names on
tombstones and altars prove) were Teutonic in race. To what extent Britons were
enrolled to garrison Britain, is not very clear; certainly, the statement that
British recruits were always sent to the Continent (chiefly to Germany), by way
of precaution, seems on our present evidence to be less sweepingly true than
was formerly supposed.
From the standpoints alike of the ancient Roman statesman and of the
modern Roman historian the military posts and their garrisons formed the
dominant element in Britain. But they have left little permanent mark on the
civilization and character of the island. The ruins of their forts and
fortresses are on our hill-sides. But, Roman as they were, their garrisons did
little to spread Roman culture here. Outside their walls, each of them had a
small or large settlement of womenfolk, traders, perhaps also of time-expired
soldiers wishful to end their days where they had served. But hardly any of
these settlements grew up into towns. York may form an exception: it is a pure
coincidence, due to causes far more recent than the Roman age, that Newcastle,
Manchester, and Cardiff stand on sites once occupied by Roman ‘auxiliary’
forts. Nor do the garrisons appear to have greatly affected the racial
character of the Romano-British population. Even in times of peace, the average
annual discharge of time-expired men, with land-grants or bounties, cannot have
greatly exceeded 1000, and, as we have seen, times of peace were rare in
Britain. Of these discharged soldiers by no means all settled in Britain, and
some of them may have been of Celtic or even of British birth. Whatever German
or other foreign elements passed into the population through the army, cannot
have been greater than that population could easily and naturally absorb
without being seriously affected by them. The true contribution which the army
made to Romano-British civilization was that its upland forts and fortresses
formed a sheltering wall round the peaceful interior regions.
AD.
43-96] History of Romanization
Behind these formidable garrisons, kept safe from barbarian inroads and
in easy contact with the Roman Empire by short sea passages from Rutupiae (Richborough, near
Sandwich in Kent) to Boulogne or from Colchester to the Rhine, stretched the
lowlands of southern, midland, and eastern Britain. Here Roman culture spread
and something approximating to real Romanization took place. The process began
probably before the Claudian invasion of 43. The
native British coinage of the south-eastern tribes and other indications
suggest that, in the 100 years between Julius Caesar and Claudius, Roman ways
and perhaps even Roman speech had found admission to the shores of Britain, and
this infiltration (as I have said) may have made easier the ultimate conquest.
After the conquest, the process continued in two ways. In part it was
definitely aided by the government which established here, as in other
provinces, municipalities peopled by Roman citizens, for the most part
discharged legionaries, and known as coloniae: these, however, were comparatively few in Britain.
Far greater was the automatic movement. Italians flocked to the newly opened
regions—traders, as it seems, rather than the laborers who form the emigrants
from Italy today: how numerous they were, we can hardly tell, but such commercial
emigrations are always more important commercially than for their mere numbers.
Certainly a far more notable movement was the automatic acceptance of Roman
civilization by the British natives.
We can to some extent trace this movement. Quite early in the period AD 43-80, the British town Verulamium, just outside St Albans in Hertfordshire, was
judged to have become sufficiently Romanized to merit the municipal status and
title of municipium (practically equivalent to that of the colonia manned by veteran soldiers). The great revolt of
Boudicca (less correctly called Boadicea) in AD 60 was directed not only against the supremacy of Rome but also
against the spread of Roman civilization, and one incident in it was the
massacre of many thousands of "loyal" natives along with actual
Romans. Romanization, it is plain, had been spreading apace. Nor did this
massacre check it for long. The Flavian period (AD 70-96) saw in Britain, as indeed in
other provinces, a serious development of Roman culture and in particular of
Roman town life, the peculiar gift of Rome to her western provinces. In the
decade AD 70-80, the Britons began,
as Tacitus tells us, to speak Latin and to use Latin dress and the material
fabric of Latin civilized life. Now towns sprang up, such as Silchester (Calleva Atrebatum) and Caerwent (Venta Silurum), laid out on the
model approved by Roman town-planners, furnished with public buildings (forum, basilica, etc.) of Roman style, and filled with houses which were
Roman in their internal fittings (baths, hypocausts, wall-paintings) if not in
ground-plan. Now the baths of Bath (Aquae Sulis) were equipped with civilized buildings suited to
their new visitors: the earliest datable monument there belongs to about 77. Two coloniae also were planted. Hitherto there had only been one, established by Claudius at
Colchester (Camulodunum): now one was added at Lincoln (Lindum) and in 96 a third
at Gloucester (Glevum). A new Civil Judge (legatus iuridicus)
begins to make his appearance beside the regular legatus Augusti pro praetore who was at once commander of the troops and judge of the chief court and
governor of the province, and the appointment is doubtless due to increasing
civil business in the law courts. When Tacitus praises Agricola because he
encouraged the provincials to adopt Roman culture, he praises him for following
the tendency of his age, not for striking out any novel line of his own. It is
probable that by the end of the first century, Roman civilization was laying
firm hold on all the British lowlands.
Subsequent progress was slower, or at least less showy. Little advance
was made beyond the lowlands. Towns and ‘villas’ were rare west of the Severn,
and save in the vale of York they were equally rare
north of the Trent. The uplands remained comparatively unaffected. Their
population, as recent excavations in Cumberland and in Anglesey have shown,
used Roman objects and came to some extent within range of Roman culture. But
it seems impossible to speak of them as fully civilized, even if, in the later
years of the Roman occupation, they did not remain wholly barbarian. In the
lowlands we may ascribe to the second and third centuries the development of
the rural system and the building of farmhouses and country residences
constructed in Roman fashion. It is very difficult to date these houses. But
the evidence of coins seems to show that the end of the third and the first
half of the fourth century were the periods when they were most numerous and
most fully occupied, and when, as we may fairly argue, the countryside of Roman
Britain was most fully permeated with Roman culture. For such a conclusion we
shall have the support of a neighboring parallel in Gaul.
The administration of the civilized part of Britain, while of course
subject to the governor of the whole province, was in effect entrusted to the
local authorities. Each Roman municipium and colonia ruled itself, including a territory which might be
as long and broad as a small English county. Some districts probably belonged
to the Imperial Domains and were ruled by local agents of the Emperor; such,
probably, were the lead-mining districts, as on Mendip or in Derbyshire or Flintshire. The remainder of the
country, by far its largest part, was divided up, as before the Roman conquest,
among the native cantons or tribes, now organized in more or less Roman
fashion: each tribe had its council (ordo) and tribal magistrates and its capital where the
tribal council met. Thus, the tribe or canton of the Silures,
the civitas Silurum, as
it learnt to call itself, had its capital at Venta Silurum, Caerwent (between Chepstow and Newport); there its council met and decreto ordinis, by decree of the council, measures were taken
for the government of the tribal area which probably covered much of Monmouthshire and some of Glamorgan.
This, we know by epigraphic evidence, occurred at Caerwent and we shall not be
rash in assuming, on slighter evidence, that the same system obtained in other
tribal areas in Britain. It is just the system which Rome applied also to the
local government of Gaul north of the Cevennes: it illustrates well the Roman
method of entrusting local government to a restricted form of Home Rule.
Towns
In the social fabric of Romano-British life, the two chief elements were
the town and the country house or ‘villa’. Both are mainly Roman importations.
The Celts do not appear to have reached any definite urban life, either in Gaul
or in Britain, before the coming of the Romans, though they no doubt had, even
in Britain, agglomerations of houses which came near to being towns. But with
the Roman conquest a real town life arose. In part, this was directly created
by the government under the Roman forms of municipium and colonia, noticed
above. Colchester (Camulodunum), Lincoln (Lindum), Gloucester (Glevum),
York (Eburdcum), were coloniae; the first three were
founded in the first century by drafts of time-expired soldiers and the fourth,
York, probably grew out of the ‘civil settlement’ on the west bank of the Ouse which confronted the legionary fortress under the
present Cathedral and its precincts. One town Verulamium (St Albans) was a municipium,
ranking with the four coloniae in privilege and standing but different (as explained above) in origin. All
these five towns attained considerable prosperity, and in particular Camulodunum, Eburacum, and Verulamium, but none can vie with the more splendid
municipalities of other provinces.
Besides them, Roman Britain could show a larger number—some ten or
fifteen, according to the standard adopted—of country-towns which varied much
in size but possessed in their own way the essential features of urban life.
The chief of these seem to be the following: (1) Isurium Brigantum, capital or chef-lieu of the Brigantes, now Aldborough, some twelve miles N.W. of York and the most
northerly Romano-British town properly so called, (2) Ratae,
capital of the Coritani, now Leicester, (3) Viroconium—so best spelt, not Uriconium—capital
of the Cornovii, now Wroxeter, on the Severn, five
miles below Shrewsbury, (4) Corinium, capital of the Dobuni, now Cirencester, (5) Venta Silurum, already mentioned, (6) Isca Dumnoniorum, capital of the Dumnonii,
now Exeter, (7) Durnovaria, capital of the Durotriges, now Dorchester in Dorsetshire,
(8) Venta Belgarum, capital
of the Belgae, now Winchester, (9) Calleva Atrebatum, capital of the Atrebates, close to Silchester, (10) Durovernum Cantiacorum, capital
of the Cantii, now Canterbury, (11) Venta Icenorum, capital of the Iceni, now Caister by Norwich,
and perhaps—for the limits of the list are not easily drawn with rigidity—Chesterford (Roman name unknown) in Essex, Kenchester (Magna) in Herefordshire, Chesterton (Durobrivae?) on the Nen,
Rochester (also Durobrivae) in Kent, and even one or
two which have perhaps less right to inclusion. Many of these town are
indicated by the Ravenna Geographer as holding some special rank and nearly all
are declared by their remains to be the sites of really Romanized town-life.
What exactly their status or government was, has yet to be defined. But it is
fairly probable—especially from the Caerwent monument erected by the ordo civitatis Silurum—that the authorities of town and tribe were
one.
The general fashion of these towns has been revealed to us by
excavations at Silchester and Caerwent. At Silchester, the whole 100 acres
within the walls have been systematically uncovered during the last twenty
years and the buildings studied with especial care. At Caerwent, a smaller area
(39 acres) has been excavated so far as the buildings of the present village
permit. Both show much the same features, with certain differences in detail
which are both natural and instructive: (I) Both have been planned according to the Roman method, which obtained in many parts
of the Empire: that is, the streets run at right angles, so as to form a
chessboard pattern with square plots for the houses. At Silchester, where space
was obviously abundant, the sanctity of the street frontages seems to have been
in general observed: at Caerwent, which is of smaller size and more thickly
crowded with buildings, the street plan has suffered some encroachments, but
not so much as to obliterate its character. (II) Both towns had near their
centre the Town Buildings known as Forum and Basilica. At Silchester the Forum
was a rectangular plot of two acres, with streets running along all its four
sides. It contained a central open court, nearly 140 feet square, surrounded on
three sides by corridors or cloisters with rooms—presumably shops and
lounges—opening into them; on the fourth side was a pillared hall, 270 by 58
feet in floor space, decorated with Corinthian columns, marble lined walls,
statues, and the like, and behind this hall a row of rooms which probably
served as offices for the town authorities and the like. The Caerwent Municipal
Buildings were very similar: so (as far as we can tell from imperfect finds)
were those at Cirencester and Wroxeter. They are indeed examples of a type
which was represented in most large towns of the western Empire and in Italy
itself. (III) Both towns had in addition small temples in different quarters
within the walls and at Silchester a small building close to the Forum is so
similar in every detail to the early Christian church of the western basilican type,
that we can hardly hesitate to call it a church. (IV) Both towns, again, seem
to have had Public Baths: those at Silchester covered an area of 80 by 160 feet
in their earliest form and in later times were much extended. Both again had
more direct provision for amusements. At Silchester an earthen amphitheatre
stood outside the walls: at Caerwent there are traces of the stone walls of one
inside the ramparts. (V) Of dwelling-houses and shops and the like both towns
had naturally no lack. The private houses are built like most of the private
houses in the Celtic part of the Empire, in fashions very dissimilar from
anything at Pompeii or Rome, but are fitted in Roman style with mosaics,
hypocausts, painted wall-plaster, and the like. They are especially noteworthy
as being properly ‘country houses’, brought together to form a town perforce,
and not ‘town houses’ such as could be used to compose regular rows or terraces
or streets. Even the architecture thus declares that the town life of these
cantonal chef-lieux,
though real, was incomplete.
The civilization of the towns appears to have been of the Roman type.
Not only do the buildings declare this: inscriptions, and, in particular,
casual scratchings on tiles or pots which can often
be assigned to the lower classes, prove that Latin was both read and written
and spoken easily in Silchester and Caerwent. Whether Celtic was also known, is
uncertain: here evidence is totally lacking. But it may be observed that if
Celtic was understood, one would expect to meet it, quite as much as Latin, on
casual sgraffiti,
while the total disappearance of a native tongue can be paralleled from
southern Gaul and southern Spain and is not incredible in towns. Nor do the
smaller objects found at Silchester and Caerwent show much survival of the Late
Celtic art which prevailed in Britain in the pre-Roman age and which certainly
survived here and there in the island. But while Romanized, these towns are not
large or rich. It has been calculated that Silchester did not contain more than
eighty houses of decent size, and the industries traceable there—in particular,
some dyers’ furnaces—do not indicate wealth or capital. The Romano-British
towns, it seems, were assimilated to Rome. But they were not powerful enough to
carry their Roman culture through a barbarian conquest or impose it on their
conquerors.
Country
Houses, Villages
From the town we pass to the country. This seems to have been divided up
among estates commonly (though perhaps unscientifically) styled ‘villas’. Of
the residences, etc. which formed the buildings of these estates many examples
survive. Some are as large and luxurious as any Gaulish nobleman's residence on
the other side of the Channel. Others are small houses or even mere farms or
cottages. It is difficult, on our present evidence, to deduce from these houses
the agrarian system to which they belonged, save that it was plainly no mere
slave system. But it is clear from the character of the residences and the
remains in them that they represent the same Romanized civilization as the
towns, while a few chance sgraffiti suggest that Latin was used in some, at least, of
them. A priori, it is not improbable that, while the towns were Romanized, the
countryside remained to some extent Celtic or bilingual. But all that is
certain as yet is that scanty evidence proves some knowledge of Latin. These
country houses were very irregularly distributed over the island. In some
districts they abounded and included splendid mansions: such districts are
north Kent, west Sussex, parts of Hants, of Somerset, of Gloucestershire, of
Lincolnshire. Other districts, notably the midlands of Warwickshire or
Buckinghamshire, contained very few ‘villas’ and indeed, as it seems, very few
inhabitants at all. The Romans probably found these latter districts thinly
peopled and they left them in the same condition.
Besides country houses and farms, the countryside also contained
occasional villages or hamlets inhabited solely by peasants; such have been
excavated in Dorsetshire by the late General
Pitt-Rivers. These villages testify, in their degree, to the spread of Roman
material civilization. However little their inhabitants understood of the
higher aspects of Roman culture, the objects found in them—pottery, brooches,
etc.—are much the same as those of the Romanized towns and "villas"
and are widely different from those of the Celtic villages, such as those
lately excavated near Glastonbury, which belong to the latest pre-Roman age.
The province was, on the whole, well provided with roads, some of them
constructed for military purposes, some obviously connected with the various
towns: whether any of them follow lines laid out by the Britons before AD 43 is more than doubtful. In
describing them, we must put aside all notion of the famous ‘Four Great Roads’
of Saxon times. That category of four roads was a medieval invention, probably
dating from the eleventh or twelfth century antiquaries, and the names of the
roads composing it are Anglo-Saxon names, some of which the inventors of the ‘Four
Road’ plainly did not understand. If we examine the Roman roads actually known
to us, we discern in the English lowlands four main groups of roads radiating
from the natural geographical centre, London, and a fifth group crossing England
from north-east to south-west. The first ran from the Kentish ports and
Canterbury through the populous north Kent to London. The second took the
traveler west by Staines (Pontes) to Silchester and
thence by various branching roads to Winchester, Dorchester, Exeter, to Bath,
to Gloucester and south Wales. A third, known to the English as Watling street, crossed the Midlands by Verulam to Wall near Lichfield (Letocetum),
Wroxeter, Chester (Deva) and mid and north Wales: it also, by a branch from
High Cross (Venonae) gave access to Leicester and
Lincoln. A fourth, running north-east from London, led to Colchester and Caister by Norwich and (as it seems) by a branch through
Cambridge to Lincoln. The fifth group, unconnected with London, compromises two
roads of importance. One, named ‘Fosse’ by the English, ran from Lincoln and
Leicester by High Cross to Cirencester, Bath and Exeter. Another, probably
called Ryknield street by the English, ran from the
north through Sheffield and Derby and Birmingham (of which Derby alone is a
Roman site) to Cirencester and in a fashion duplicated the Fosse. There were
also other roads—such as Akeman street, which crossed
the southern Midlands from near St Albans by way of Alchester (near Bicester) to Cirencester and Bath — which must
be considered as independent of the main scheme. But, judged by the places they
served and by the posts along them, the five groups above indicated seem the
really important roads of southern or non-military Roman Britain.
AD
286-296] Roads, Sea Communications
The road systems of Wales and of the north were military and can best be
understood from a map. In Wales, roads ran along the south and north coasts to Carmarthen and Carnarvon, while a road (Sarn Helen) along the west coast connected the two, and
interior roads—especially one up the Severn from Wroxeter and one down the Usk—connected the forts which guarded the valleys: these
roads, however, need further exploration before they can be fully set out. In
the north, three main routes are visible. One, starting from the legionary
fortress at York, ran north, with various branches, to places on the lower
Tyne, Corbridge, Newcastle (Pons Aelius),
Shields. Another, diverging at Catterick Bridge from
the first, ran over Stainmoor to the Eden valley and
the Roman Wall near Carlisle. A third, starting from the legionary fortress at
Chester (Deva) passed north to the Lake country and by various ramifications
served all that is now Cumberland, Westmorland and west Northumberland. Several
of these roads appear, as it were, in duplicate leading from the same general
starting-point to the same general destination, and no doubt, if we knew
enough, we should find that one of the two routes in question belonged to an
older or a later age than the other.
Communications with the Continent seem to have been conducted chiefly
between the Kentish ports and those of the opposite Gaulish littoral, and in
particular between Rutupiae (Richborough,
just north of Sandwich) and Gessoriacum, otherwise
called Bononia, now Boulogne. There was also not
infrequent intercourse between Colchester and the Rhine estuary, to which we
may ascribe various German products found in Roman Colchester, though not
elsewhere in Roman Britain. On occasion men also reached or left the island by
long sea passages. Troops, it appears, were sometimes shipped direct from Fectio (Vechten, near Utrecht),
the port of the Rhine, to the mouth of the Tyne in Northumberland, while
traders now and then sailed direct from Gaul to Ireland and to British ports on
the Irish Channel. The police of the seas was entrusted to a classis Britannica, which intermittent
references in our authorities show to have existed from the middle of the first
century (that is from the original conquest or soon after) till at least the
end of the third century. Despite its title, the principal station of this
fleet was not in Britain but at Boulogne, and its work was the preservation of
order on either coast of the Straits of Dover. This fleet appears to have been
a police flotilla rather than a naval force, but for once it emerged into the
political importance which fleets often assume. About 286 a Menapian (i.e. probably, Belgian) by name Carausius became commandant, possibly with
extended powers to cope with the increasing piracy; he set himself up as
colleague to the two reigning emperors, Maximian and Diocletian, enlarged his
fleet, allied himself with the sea-robbers, and in 289 actually extorted some
kind of recognition at Rome. But in 293 he was murdered and his successor Allectus was crushed by the Emperor Constantius Chlorus in 296. Carausius was apparently an able man. But
in his aims he differed little from many other pretenders to the throne whom
the later third century produced: his object was not an independent Britain but
a share in the government of the Empire. His special significance is that he
showed, for the first time in history, how a fleet might detach Britain from
its geographical connection with the north-western Continent. Twelve centuries
passed before this possibility was again realized.
AD
300-380
The preceding paragraphs have described the main features of Roman
Britain, civil and military, during the main part of its existence. In the
fourth century, change was plainly imminent. Barbarian sailors, Saxons and others,
began, as we have seen, rather earlier than 300 to issue from the other shores
of the German Ocean and to vex the coasts of Gaul and probably also those of
Britain. Carausius in 286 or 287 was sent to repress them. After his and his
successor's deaths, some change, the nature of which is not yet quite clear,
was made in the classis Britannica, and we now hear hardly
anything more of it. A system of coast defence was established from the Wash to
the Isle of Wight. It consisted of some nine forts, each planted on a harbor
and garrisoned by a regiment of horse or foot. The ‘British Fleet’, so far as
Britain was concerned, may have been divided up amongst these forts or may have
been entirely suspended. But it is difficult to make out (owing to the general obscurity)
whether the change was made in the interests of coast defence or as a
preventive against another Carausius. The new system was known — from the name
of the chief assailant — as the Saxon Shore (Litus Saxonicum).
Whatever the step and whatever the motive, Britain appears for a while
to have escaped the Saxon pillages. During the first years of the fourth
century, it enjoyed indeed considerable prosperity. But no Golden Age lasts
long. Before 350, probably in 343, the Emperor Constans had to cross the Channel
and drive out the raiders—not Saxons only, but Picts from the north and Scots
(Irish) from the north-west. This event opens the first act in the Fall of
Roman Britain (343-383). In 360 further interference was needed and Lupicinus, magister armorum, was sent over from Gaul. Probably he effected little: certainly we read that in 368 all
Britain was in evil plight and Theodosius (father of Theodosius I), Rome's best
general at that time, was dispatched with large forces. He won a complete success.
In 368 he cleared the invading bands out of the south: in 369 he moved north,
restoring towns and forts and limites, including presumably Hadrian’s Wall. So decisive was
his victory that one district—now unfortunately unidentifiable—which he rescued
from the barbarians, was named Valentia in honor of
the then Emperor of the West, Valentinian I. For some years after this Britain
disappears from recorded history, and may be thought to have enjoyed
comparative peace.
Such is the account given us by ancient writers of the period circa
343-383. It sounds as though things were already “about as bad as they could be”.
But a similar tale is told of many other provinces, and yet the Empire
survived. When Ausonius wrote his Mosella in 371, he described the Moselle valley as a rich and fertile and happy countryside.
Britain had no Ausonius. But she can adduce
archaeological evidence, which is often more valuable than literature. The
coins which have been found in Romano-British ‘villas’, ill-recorded as they too
often are, give us a clue. They suggest that some country houses and farms were
destroyed or abandoned as early as 350 or 360, but that more of them remained
occupied till about 385 or even later. It is not surprising to read in Ammianus
that about 360 Britain was able to export corn regularly to northern Germany
and Gaul. The first act in the Fall of Roman Britain contained trouble and
disturbance, no doubt, but few disasters.
AD 380-410
The second act (383 to about 410) brought greater evils and of a new
kind. In 383 an officer of the British army, by birth a Spaniard, by name
Magnus Maximus, proclaimed himself Emperor, crossed with many troops to Gaul
and conquered western Europe: in 387 he seized Italy: in 388 he was overthrown
by the legitimate Emperors. Later British tradition of the sixth century
asserted that his British troops never returned home and that the island was
thus left defenseless. We cannot verify this tradition. But we have proof, both
that Britain was sore pressed and that the central government tried to help it. Claudian alludes to measures taken by Stilicho, prime
minister to the then Emperor Honorius, about 395-8. Archaeological evidence
shows that the coast-fort of Pevensey (Anderida) was repaired under Honorius, and that a fort was
built high on the summit of Peak, overhanging the Yorkshire coast halfway
between Whitby and Scarborough, by an officer of the
same period who is known to have been in Britain a little after 400. These
efforts were in vain. Troops—not necessarily legionaries though Claudian calls them legio—had to be withdrawn for the defense of Italy in 402.
Finally, the Great Raid of barbarians who crossed the Rhine on the winter's
night which divided 406 from 407 and the subsequent barbarian attack on Rome itself
cut Britain off from the Mediterranean. The so-called ‘departure of the Romans’
speedily followed. This departure did not mean any great departure of persons,
Roman or other, from the island. It meant that the central government in Italy
now ceased to send out the usual governors and other high officials and to
organize the supply of troops. No one went: some persons failed to come.
How far the British themselves were responsible for, or even agreeable
to, this sundering of an ancient tie is, even after the latest inquiries, not
very certain. The old idea that Britons and Romans were still two distinct and
hostile racial elements has, of course, been long abandoned by all competent
inquirers—for reasons which the preceding pages will have made evident. But we
have the names of three usurpers who tried to seize the imperial crown in
Britain (406-11), Marcus, Gratian, and Constantine, and it seems that, as
Constantine went off to seek a throne on the Continent, the Britons left to
themselves set up a local autonomy for self-protection. Unfortunately, our
ancient authorities are less clear than could be wished, especially on the
chronology of these events. One thing which seems certain is that Britain did
not conceive herself as breaking loose from the Empire and that in the years to
come the Britons considered themselves ‘Romans’. If we may believe Gildas, they even appealed for help to Aetius, the Roman
minister, in 446.
Saxon
Conquest [AD 300-446
The attacks of the ‘Saxons’ had begun before 300 and though at first
their brunt fell more heavily on the Gaulish than on the British coasts, they
were felt seriously in Britain from about 350 onwards. At first, they were the
attacks of mere pillagers: later, like the later attacks of the barbarians elsewhere,
they became invasions of settlers. When exactly the change took place, is
unknown, nor is it clear what incident gave the stimulus. It seems probable,
however, that the Britons of the early fourth century, harassed by attacks of
all kinds, adopted the common device—even more familiar in that age than in any
other—and set a thief to catch a thief. The man who set is named in the legends Vortigern of Kent; the thieves who were set, are
called Hengest and Horsa.
We need not attach much weight to these names, nor can we hope to fix a precise
date. But the incident is sufficiently well attested and sufficiently probable
to find acceptance, and it obviously occurred early in the fifth century. It
had the natural result. The English, called in to protect, remained to rule:
they formed settlements on the east coast and began the English invasion. But
they began it under conditions altogether different from those which attended
the barbarian conquests on the Continent. The English were more savage and hostile
to civilization than most of the continental invaders; on the other hand, they
were far less overwhelmingly numerous. The Romano-British culture was less
strong and coherent than the civilization of Roman Gaul, but the Britons
themselves—at least those in the hills—were no less ready to fight than the
bravest of the continental provincials. The sequel was naturally different in
the two regions.
The course of the invasion is a matter for English historians. But part
of it depends on Romano-British archaeology. This seems to contradict violently
the chronology which the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle sets out in suspiciously precise
detail. We know that Wroxeter was burnt and we have evidence that the burning
occurred soon after (if indeed it was not before) AD 400. We must treat this evidence cautiously, since not a
fiftieth part of the site has yet been explored. But at Silchester, which has
been all uncovered, the spade has told us that the town was abandoned (not
burnt), and as a limit for the date, we find no coins which need be later than
about AD 420. The same absence of
fifth century coins may be noted on other sites which have been sufficiently
explored to yield trustworthy testimony. It would seem as if the invaders,
entering Britain on its eastern and least defensible side, were able, like the
Romans four centuries earlier, rapidly to sweep over the lowlands, but were not
able to maintain their hold. Thus for several generations this region became a
debatable land, where neither Romano-British city life could safely endure nor
the English take firm hold and settle. In the long confusion, the
Romano-British civilization of the lowlands perished. The towns, burnt or
abandoned, lay waste and empty. Even Durovernum (Canterbury), presumably the capital of Vortigern,
whom the legend mates with a Saxon wife, ceased to exist, and at the healing
springs of Aquae Sulis (Bath) the wild birds built their nests in the marsh which hid the ruins. The
country houses and farms perished even more easily: not one is known in which
we can trace English inhabitants succeeding to British. The old native tribal
areas and the Roman administrative boundaries were alike lost: today we have no
certain knowledge of any of them. The Roman speech vanished; the Romano-British
material civilization, and the house-plans and house-furniture, hypocausts and
mosaics, even the fashions of brooches and pottery, vanished with it. Only the
solid aggeres of the roads remained still in use, and in these, too, there were gaps and
intervals. All else was but the scattered débris of a ruined world.
Meanwhile the Romanized Britons, in losing the lowlands, lost their
towns and all the apparatus of town life. They retired into the hills, to Wales
and to the north—the later Strathclyde—and there, in
a region where Roman civilization had never established itself in its higher
forms, they underwent an intelligible change. The Celtic element, never quite
extinct in those hills and reinforced perhaps by immigrations from Ireland,
reasserted itself afresh. Gradually, the remnants of Roman civilization were
worn down: the Celtic speech reappeared and, as sequel, the Late Celtic art was
strong enough to pass on an artistic legacy to the Middle Ages.
B
TEUTONIC CONQUEST OF BRITAIN.
AD 450-477
According to Bede, who wrote his Ecclesiastical History about AD 731, the Teutonic invasions of
Britain began during the joint reign of Marcian and
Valentinian III, that is, between the years AD 450 and 455. Bede states that the invaders came from three powerful nations,
the Saxons, Angles, and Jutes. From the Jutes came those who occupied Kent and
the Isle of Wight with the adjacent coast of Hampshire, from the Saxons came
the people of Essex, Sussex, and Wessex, and from the Angles the East Anglians, Middle Anglians, and
Northumbrians. He adds that the Saxons were sprung from the Old Saxons and that
the Angles came from a district called Angulus, which
lay between the territories of the Jutes and those of the Saxons, and was said
to be still unoccupied in his day. The leaders of this invasion, according to
Bede, were two brothers named Hengest and Horsa, from
the former of whom the Kentish royal family claimed to be descended. They were
summoned in the first place by the British king Wyrtgeorn (Vortigern) to defend him against the assaults of his
northern foes, and received a reward in territory in return for their
assistance, but a quarrel soon broke out on account of the alleged failure of
the king to redeem his promises. The Saxon Chronicle amplifies Bede's account
by mentioning certain battles, the result of which was to transfer Kent to the
possession of the invaders. Of these events, however, a far more detailed
account is furnished by the Historia Brittonum known by the name of Nennius,
which narrates that the British nobles were treacherously massacred by Hengest
at a conference, and that the king himself was captured and only released on
the cession of certain provinces. After this a heroic resistance was offered to
the invaders by the king's son Vortemir.
The Saxon Chronicle is our only authority for two stories dealing with
the early history of the kingdoms of Sussex and Wessex. The foundation of the
former kingdom is attributed to a certain Aelle, who is said to have landed in
477. This person is mentioned by Bede as the first king who gained a hegemony (imperium) over
the neighboring English kings, though he gives no account of his exploits and
assigns no date for his reign. The foundation of the kingdom of Wessex is
attributed in the Chronicle to a certain Cerdic and his son Cynric, who are
said to have arrived about forty years after Hengest and to have eventually
established their position after a number of conflicts with the Britons. This
story is connected, according to the same authority, with the occupation of the
Isle of Wight, which is said to have been given by Cerdic to his nephews Stuf and Wihtgar (530).
It is difficult to determine how much historical fact underlies these
stories. Little value can be attached to the dates given in the Saxon
Chronicle. It is clear too that we have to deal with an etiological element,
especially in the West Saxon story. Indeed this story is the most suspicious of
the three. In making Cynric the son of Cerdic the account is at variance even
with the genealogy contained in the Chronicle itself, while it is also very
curious that Cerdic, the founder of the kingdom, bears what appears to be a
Welsh name.
The only reference to the invasion which can be regarded as in any way
contemporary occurs in an anonymous Gaulish Chronicle which comes to an end in
the year 452. It is there stated that in 441-2 after many disasters the
provinces of Britain were subdued by the Saxons. This date would appear to be
irreconcilable with that given by Bede for the arrival of Hengest, and the
discrepancy has given rise to a good deal of discussion. Yet another date 428-9
is given by an entry in the Historia Brittonum, the source of which cannot be traced.
The difference in all these cases is of comparatively little moment.
Some scholars however hold that the invasions began at a much earlier time,
during the latter half of the fourth century. The authority of the passage in
the Historia Brittonum which states that the Saxons came in 375 can hardly be upheld. More importance
is perhaps to be attached to the fact that part of the coast of Britain is
called Litus Saxonicum in
the Notitia Dignitatum,
which was drawn up in the early years of the fifth century; as this may
indicate that Saxon settlements had already taken place in this island. Yet if
this be so these Saxons must have been subject to the Roman authorities.
Whether they had any connection with Hengest’s invasion we have no means of determining.
The first reference to the Saxons occurs in a work dating from the middle
of the second century A.D., namely the Geography of Ptolemy, in which they are
said to occupy the neck of the Cimbric Peninsula
(presumably the region which now forms the province of Schleswig), together
with three islands off its west coast. The Angles are mentioned half a century
earlier by Tacitus in his Germania (cap. 40). No precise indication is given of their position, but they are
clearly represented as a maritime people and the connection in which their name
occurs would suggest the Baltic coast, though Tacitus appears to have little
knowledge of that region. Such indications as are given are perfectly
compatible with the traditions of later times, which place the original home of
the Angles on the east coast of Schleswig. To the Jutes we have no reference
earlier than the sixth century.
The
Invaders. Early notices
The Saxons no doubt belonged to the same stock as the Old Saxons of the
Continent. In the fourth century we find this people settled in the district
between the lower Elbe and the Zuiderzee. According to their own traditions
they had come thither by sea, and certainly we have no evidence of their
presence in that region during the first century, when it was well known to the
Romans and frequently traversed by their armies. Whether the Saxons who invaded
Britain came from the peninsula or from the region west of the Elbe cannot be
decided with certainty, but since they appear to have been practically
indistinguishable from the Angles the former alternative seems more probable.
In any case they were a maritime people and their piratical ravages are
frequently mentioned from the close of the third century onwards.
The Angles, on the other hand, are never mentioned by Roman writers from
the time of Tacitus until the sixth century, when they were settled in Britain.
In their case however we have certain heroic traditions which appear to have
been preserved independently both in England and Denmark. These traditions
centre round an old king named Wermund and his son Offa, of whom the latter is
said to have won great glory in a single combat, the scene of which was fixed
by Danish tradition at Rendsburg on the Eider. From him the Mercian royal
family traced their descent, while the royal family of Wessex claimed to derive
their origin from a certain Wig the son of Freawine,
both of whom according to Danish tradition were governors of Schleswig under
the kings above mentioned. The date indicated by the genealogies for the reigns
of these kings is the latter half of the fourth century.
It is a much debated question whether the Jutes who settled in Britain
came from Jutland. In the course of the sixth century we hear twice of a people
of this name which came into conflict with the Franks, probably in western
Germany, but it is by no means impossible that this also was a case of invasion
from Jutland. The same name probably occurs also in connection with the heroic
story of Finn and Hengest, with regard to which our information is
unfortunately very defective.
We have no satisfactory evidence of any linguistic differences between
the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes. The divergences of dialect which appear in our
earliest records are at first only slight and such as may very well have grown
up after the invasion of Britain. The language as a whole must be pronounced
homogeneous, its nearest affinities being with the Frisian dialects. Nor with
regard to customs or institutions have we any evidence of a distinction between
the Angles and Saxons. On the other hand the Kentish laws exhibit a marked
divergence from those of the other kingdoms, in respect of the constitution of
society, a divergence which can scarcely have come into existence subsequent to
the invasion. We have no information with regard to the characteristics of the
Hampshire Jutes.
It may he doubted whether all those who took part in the invasion of
Britain belonged to the three nationalities which we have been discussing. The
attempts made from time to time to trace the presence of settlers belonging to
other peoples cannot be pronounced successful, and when Procopius speaks of
Frisians inhabiting our island together with Angles and Britons it is possible
that he may mean either the Jutes or the Saxons. Yet considering the numbers
which must have been required for such an undertaking, it is highly probable
that the invading forces were augmented by adventurers from all the regions
bordering on the North Sea, perhaps even from districts more remote.
Archaeological
and Literary evidence
With regard to the state of civilization attained by the maritime
Teutonic peoples at the period when these settlements took place, a good deal
of information is afforded by their earliest cemeteries in this country as well
as by others on the opposite side of the North Sea. Amongst the latter perhaps the
most important is that of Borgstedterfeld near Rendsburg, where the remains
found show much affinity to those discovered in this country. Much is also to
be learnt from the great bog-deposits at Thorsbjaerg and Nydam in the east of
Schleswig, the latter of which appears to be only slightly earlier than the
cemetery of Borgstedterfeld. In a district slightly more remote, at Vi in Fyen, a still larger deposit has been found dating from
about the same period. Among the most interesting objects found at Nydam were
two clinker-built boats about seventy feet long which are preserved practically
complete. A very large number of weapons were also found in this and the other
deposits. At Nydam were found 550 spears and 106 swords, a large number of
which bear the marks of Roman provincial workshops. At Vi was discovered a
complete coat of mail containing twenty thousand rings. Fragments of such
articles together with silver and bronze helmets were found at Thorsbjaerg.
This deposit also yielded some articles of clothing in a fair state of
preservation, among them cloaks, coats, long trousers, and shoes. Taken
together the evidence of the various deposits shows conclusively not only that
the warriors of the period were armed in a manner not substantially improved
upon for many centuries afterwards, but also that certain arts, such as that of
weaving, had been carried to a high degree of perfection.
The form of writing employed by the invaders of Britain was the Runic
alphabet. The origin of this is uncertain, but it was widely used by the
inhabitants of Scandinavian countries from perhaps the fourth century AD until late in the Middle Ages. A few
early inscriptions have been found in Germany. In England itself we have
scarcely any inscriptions dating from the first two centuries after the
invasion, but in the seventh century the Mercian kings engraved their coins
with it, and about the same time and perhaps down to the end of the eighth
century it was used on sepulchral monuments in Northumbria as well as on various
small articles found in different parts of the country.
It may be noted that inscriptions in the same alphabet were found in the
deposits at Thorsbjaerg and Nydam and also on one of the two magnificent horns
found at Gallehus in Jutland, which perhaps represent
the highest point reached by the art of the period.
Apart from this archaeological evidence a considerable amount of
information may be derived from the remains of ancient heroic poetry. For
although these poems, as we have them, date only from the seventh century,
there is no reason for supposing that the civilization which they portray
differs substantially from that of a century or two earlier. The weapons and
other articles which they describe appear to be identical in type with those found
in the deposits already mentioned, while the dead are disposed of by cremation,
a practice which apparently went out of use during the sixth century. The poems
are, essentially court works, and scanty as they unfortunately are, they give
us a vivid picture of the court life of the period with which they deal. This
period is substantially that of the Conquest of Britain, namely, from the
fourth to the sixth century, but it is a remarkable fact that these works never
mention Britain itself and very seldom persons of English nationality. The
scene of Beowulf is laid in Denmark
and Sweden and the characters belong to the same regions, while Waldhere is
concerned with the Burgundians and their neighbors. Many of these characters
can be traced in German and Norse literature, and the evidence seems to point
to the existence of a widespread court poetry which we may perhaps almost
describe as international.
Religion.
Calendar. Agriculture
Concerning the religion of the invading peoples little can be stated
with certainty. Almost all that we know of Teutonic mythology comes from
Icelandic sources, and it is difficult to determine how much of this was
peculiar to Iceland and how much was common to Scandinavian countries and to
the Teutonic nations in general. The English evidence unfortunately is
particularly scanty. However there is little doubt that the chief divinity
among the military class was Woden, from whom most of
the royal families claimed to be descended. Thunor,
presumably the Thunder-God, may be traced in many place-names and Ti (Tiw) is found in glosses as a translation of Mars. All
these deities together with Frig have left a record of themselves in the names
of the days of the week. The East Saxon royal family claimed descent from a
certain Seaxneat who appears to have been a divinity.
There is evidence also of belief in elves, valkyries,
and other supernatural beings.
On their forms of worship we have scarcely any more information. In
Northumbria at any rate there seems to have been a special class of priests who
were not allowed to bear arms or to ride except on mares. Sanctuaries are
occasionally mentioned, but we do not know whether these were temples or merely
sacred groves. A number of religious festivals are also recorded by Bede,
especially during the winter months. It may be remarked in passing that the
calendar appears to have been of the ‘modified lunar’ type with an intercalary
month added from time to time. The year is said to have begun approximately, we
must presume—at the winter solstice. There are some indications however which
suggest that at an earlier period it may have begun after the harvest.
There is no doubt that the invading peoples possessed a highly developed
system of agriculture long before they landed in this country. Many
agricultural implements have been found among the bog-deposits in Schleswig.
Representations of ploughing operations occur in
rock-carvings in Bohuslan (Sweden) which date from
the Bronze Age, at least a thousand years earlier than the invasion. All the
ordinary cereals were well known and cultivated, though on the other hand the
system of cultivation followed in this country was probably a continuation of
that which had previously been employed here. There is no evidence that the
heavy plough with eight oxen was used before the invasion by the conquerors.
The water-mill doubtless first became known to them in Britain, and for ages
afterwards it failed to oust the quern. In horticulture the advance made was
very great: the names of practically all vegetables and fruits are derived from
Latin, and though the knowledge of a few of their names may have filtered
through from the Rhine provinces, there can be little doubt that the great bulk
were first acquired in this country.
These considerations bring us to the much disputed question as to what
became of the native population. The insignificance of the British element in
the English language is scarcely explicable unless the invaders came over in
very large numbers. On the other hand, many scholars have probably gone too far
in supposing that the native population was entirely blotted out. British
records say that they were massacred or enslaved. In later times, i.e. in the
eleventh century, the number of slaves in England was not great, but it is not
safe to infer that such was the case four or five centuries earlier. Indeed the
little evidence that we have on this question suggests that in some districts
at least they were a very numerous class. There can be little doubt at all
events that the first invasions were essentially of a military character.
Attempts have been made to trace in various quarters settlements of kindreds especially from the occurrence of place-names with
the suffixes -ingas,
-ingatun,
etc., but the evidence is at best exceedingly ambiguous. Among the
Scandinavians who took part in the great invasion of 866 we can trace various
grades of officials (eorlas, holdas,
etc.) between whom the land appears to have been partitioned, and although we
have no contemporary evidence of what took place in the Saxon invasion, there
is a prima facie probability that a
similar course was followed. To the present writer it seems incredible that so
great an undertaking as the invasion of Britain should have been accomplished
without the employment of large and organized forces. The earliest records we
possess furnish abundant evidence for the existence of a very numerous military
class of different grades, while the provincial government appears to have been
vested in the hands of royal officials and not in popular bodies.
From archaeological evidence and from the character of local
nomenclature we can to a certain extent determine the area occupied by the
invaders at various periods, although very much remains to be done in these
fields of investigation. Thus the practice of cremation is found in early
cemeteries in the valley of the Trent and in various parts of the Thames valley
as far west as Brighthampton in Oxfordshire, but
there is scarcely any evidence for its employment further to the west. In local
nomenclature again changes may be observed thus the proportion of place-names
ending in the suffix -ham to those
ending in the suffix -ton decreases
as we proceed from east to west. So far as the evidence is at present collected
it would seem to indicate that the eastern and south-eastern counties, together
with the banks of the large rivers for some distance inland, show an earlier
type of Saxon nomenclature than the rest of the country. But it is highly
probable that as in the case of the invasion of 866 a much larger area Was
ravaged by the invaders than was actually settled by them at first.
The account of the invasion given by Gildas, vague as it unfortunately
is, points distinctly to the same conclusion. He speaks in the first place of a
time when the country was harried far and wide, when the cities were spoiled,
and the inhabitants slain or enslaved. Then came a time when the natives under Ambrosius Aurelianus began to offer a more effective
resistance, from which time forward war continued with varying success until
the siege of Mons Badonicus. From the time of that
siege until the date when Gildas wrote, the Britons had had no serious trouble
from the invaders, though faction was rife among themselves. Unfortunately he
supplies us with no means of dating the course of events with certainty except
that apparently the period of comparative peace had lasted forty-four years.
The Cambrian Annals date the siege of Mons Badonicus in 518, but they also date in 549 the death of Maelgwn king of Gwynedd who is mentioned by Gildas as alive.
The majority of scholars accept the latter of these dates and reject the
former, placing the date of the siege towards the end of the fifth century. The
evidence of Gildas then on the whole leads us to conclude that the Conquest of
Britain may be divided into two distinct periods. The first occupied some fifty
years from the beginning of the invasion, while the second can hardly have
begun much before the middle of the sixth century.
552-688]
The English kingdoms. Growth of Wessex
Among the invaders themselves a number of separate kingdoms arose. It is
commonly held that these kingdoms were the outcome of separate invasions, but
no evidence is forthcoming in favor of such a view, and it seems at least as
likely that several of them arose out of subsequent divisions, as was the case
after the Scandinavian invasion in the ninth century. The kingdoms which we
find actually existing in our earliest historical records are ten in number:
(1) Kent, (2) Sussex, (3) Essex, (4) Wessex, (5) East Anglia, (6) Mercia, (7)
Hwicce, (8) Deira, (9) Bernicia, (10) Isle of Wight. There are traces also of a
kingdom in the district between Mercia, Middle Anglia, East Anglia, and Essex—perhaps Northamptonshire and Bedfordshire—while from Lindsey
we have what appears to be the genealogy of a royal family. There is no clear
evidence that Middlesex and Surrey were separate kingdoms at any time, though
(if certain disputed charters are genuine) the latter was under a ruler who
styled himself subregulus in the latter part of the seventh century. The balance of probability is in favor
of the view that both these provinces originally formed part of Essex.
We have already mentioned that little value is to be attached to the
dates given for the foundation and early progress of the kingdom of Wessex.
They are apparently quite incompatible with the testimony of Gildas. Moreover
that part of the story which relates to the Isle of Wight is difficult to
reconcile with Bede's account, since it altogether ignores the existence of Jutish settlements in this quarter. According to Bede the
Isle of Wight retained a dynasty of its own until the time of Ceadwalla
(685-688), by whom it was mercilessly ravaged. The Chronicle states, as we have
seen, that the island was given by Cerdic to his nephews Stuf and Wihtgar and barely mentions the devastations of Ceadwalla.
Further, according to Bede, the greater part of the coast of Hampshire was
occupied by Jutes. These likewise are ignored by the Chronicle, which seems to
imply that the West Saxon invasion started from this quarter. In view of these
difficulties some scholars have been inclined to suspect that the annals
dealing with the early part of the West Saxon invasion are entirely of a
fictitious character, and that the West Saxon invaders really spread from a
different quarter, perhaps the valley of the Thames, and at a later date than
that assigned by the Chronicle. It is to be hoped that in the future
archaeological research may throw light on this difficult question.
The
Hwicce. Mercia. Deira [571-615
The difficulties presented by Gildas cease when we reach the middle of
the sixth century. From this time onwards, although we have no means of
checking them, the entries in the Chronicle may be records of real events which
took place approximately at the times assigned to them. The first entry of this
series is the account of a fight between Cynric and the Britons at Salisbury in
552: the second records a similar conflict in 556 at Beranburg,
which has been identified with Barbury Camp near
Swindon. In 560 Cynric is said to have been succeeded by Ceawlin, who in 568
had a successful encounter with Aethelberht king of Kent. In 571 another prince
apparently West Saxon, by name Cuthwulf, fought with the Britons at a place
called Bedcanford, commonly supposed to be Bedford,
and gained possession of Bensington, Aylesbury, Eynsham, and perhaps
Lenborough. If we are to trust this entry it would seem to mean that
Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire were conquered by the West Saxons at this time.
In 577 Ceawlin and another West Saxon prince named Cuthwine are said to have fought against the Britons at Deorham (identified with Dyrham in Gloucestershire) and
gained possession of Bath, Cirencester, and Gloucester.
Ceawlin is the first West Saxon king mentioned by Bede. The same
historian states that he was the first English king after Aelle, whose overlordship (imperium) was recognised by the other kings. We need not
doubt that the records of his victories have some solid foundation. About a
century later we find in the basins of the Severn and Avon, in Gloucestershire,
Worcestershire, and part of Warwickshire, the kingdom of the Hwicce with a
dynasty of its own which lasted down to the time of Offa. This kingdom can
hardly have come into existence before Ceawlin’s successful westward movements, but we have no information as to its origin, as
to the date when it was separated from Wessex, or whether its dynasty was a
branch of the West Saxon royal family.
In the basin of the Trent both north and south of that river lay the
Mercian kingdom, the name of which seems to imply that it grew out of frontier
settlements. Its royal family traced its descent from the ancient kings of
Angel, but we do not know whether the kingdom itself was due to an independent
movement, or whether like that of the Hwicce it was an offshoot from one or more
eastern kingdoms. The first king of whom we have any definite record is a
certain Cearl who flourished early in the seventh
century and married his daughter to the Northumbrian king Edwin. Eventually the
kingdom of Mercia absorbed all its immediate neighbors, Lindsey, Middle Anglia,
and Hwicce, together with parts of Essex and Wessex. In the sixth century
however it was probably of comparatively limited extent. Chester appears to
have remained in possession of the Britons until about the year 615, and it is
scarcely probable that the western districts of the Wreocensaete and Magasaete, corresponding to the present counties
of Shropshire and Herefordshire, were occupied until
still later.
To the north of the Humber we find the two kingdoms of Deira and Bernicia.
Concerning the former, which appears to have coincided with the eastern half of
Yorkshire, we have very little information. The first king of whom we have
record is a certain Aelle who was reigning at the time when Gregory met with
English slave-boys in Rome (585-8). The date given for his reign by the
Chronicle (560-588) cannot be trusted. Eventually this kingdom came into the
hands of the Bernician king Aethelfrith, who married Aelle’s daughter. If we are to believe the account given in the Historia Brittonum that Aethelfrith reigned
twelve years in Deira, the date of this event would be about 605. The western
part of Yorkshire appears to have been known as Elmet and to have remained in British hands until the reign of Edwin
547-605]
Bernicia and Aethelfrith. Aethelberht of Kent
The northernmost kingdom founded by the invaders in Britain was that of
Bernicia. Ida, from whom subsequent kings claimed descent, is said to have
begun to reign in 547. After his death, which took place twelve years later, he
was followed by several of his sons in swift succession. Of these the most
important was Theodric, who according to ancient chronological computation
reigned from about 572 to about 579. The Historia Brittonum relates that he fought against
several British kings, amongst them Urien who appears
in ancient Welsh poetry, and Rhydderch Hen, who as we
know from Adamnan’s Life of St Columba reigned at
Dumbarton. On one occasion the Britons are said to have besieged Theodric in
Lindisfarne. The chief centre of the Bernician kingdom appears to have been
Bamborough, but we have no occasion to suppose that it attained to any great
dimensions or significance until the reign of Aethelfrith. He seems to have
become king in 592-3, and is said by Bede to have harried the Britons more than
any other English prince. The chief exploits for which his name has been handed
down are firstly his encounter with the Dalriadic king Aedan who came against him probably in support
of the Britons in 603, and secondly the massacre of the Britons at Chester
about twelve years later. The former of these events is said to have occurred
at a-place called Degsastan. If this place is rightly
identified with Dawston in Liddesdale,
it would seem that the Bernician kingdom had already extended some distance
into what is now Scotland; but its northern and western boundaries must be
regarded as very uncertain at the time of which we are speaking.
Aethelfrith’s successes had the effect of placing the later Northumbrian kings in a position
of superiority to their southern rivals. At the close of the sixth century
however the chief English ruler was Aethelberht of Kent, whose authority was
recognised by all the more southern kings. The precise nature of the imperium which he
exercised has been much disputed, but we can hardly doubt that it implied some
such recognition of personal overlordship as we find
in later times, for example, in the relations of the northern princes with
Edward the Elder. His power too was sufficient to guarantee a safe conduct to
foreign missionaries as far as the western border of Wessex. He married the
Christian Berhta (Bertha), daughter of the Frankish
prince Chariberht, and shortly before the close of
the century was confronted by Augustine who had been sent to Britain by Gregory
the Great. This event had far-reaching consequences in the history of the
Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, which will be described in a later chapter of this work.
|