The form of writing
employed
by the invaders of Britain was the
Runic alphabet.
Runic alphabet.
Cambridge Medieval History - v1 - Christian Roman Empire and Teutonic Kingdoms
XIII.
## p. 378 (#408) ############################################
378
Roman Britain
(A. D. 300-380
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 shewed, for the first time in
history, how a fleet might detach Britain from its geographical connexion
with the north-western Continent. Twelve centuries passed before this
possibility was again realised.
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 harbour
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 despatched 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 honour 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
:
2
## p. 379 (#409) ############################################
A. D. 380—410]
Roman Britain
379
a
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.
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 defenceless. 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 shews 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 half-
way 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 defence 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 organise the supply of troops. No one went: some persons failed to
a
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
CH, XIIJ.
## p. 380 (#410) ############################################
380
Roman Britain: Saxon Conquest [A. D. 300–446
:
:
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 Aëtius, the Roman minister, in 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 settle-
ments 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 civilisation 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 civilisation 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) A. D. 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 A. D. 420. The same
## p. 381 (#411) ############################################
Roman Britain : Saxon Conquest
381
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 civilisation
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: to-day we
have no certain knowledge of any of them. The Roman speech vanished;
the Romano-British material civilisation, 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 Romanised 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 civilisation had never established itself in its higher forms,
they underwent an intelligible change. The Keltic element, never quite
extinct in those hills and reinforced perhaps by immigrations from
Ireland, reasserted itself afresh. Gradually, the remnants of Roman
civilisation were worn down : the Keltic speech reappeared and, as a
sequel, the Late Keltic art was strong enough to pass on an artistic
legacy to the Middle Ages.
CH. XIII.
## p. 382 (#412) ############################################
382
Bede's account of the Conquest
[4504477
(B)
TEUTONIC CONQUEST OF BRITAIN.
According to Bede, who wrote his Ecclesiastical History about a. d. 731,
the Teutonic invasions of Britain began during the joint reign of Marcian
and Valentinian III, that is, between the years A. D. 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 neighbouring
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 attri-
buted 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
## p. 383 (#413) ############################################
375–630]
Other accounts. Probable date
383
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 aetiological
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 connexion 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
(11. 11. $ 8), 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 connexion in which their name
1 This Chronicle is printed by Mommsen in M. G. H. Tom. IX. He ascribes
its authorship to a monk of the south of France, perhaps of Marseilles, owing to
the commendation of Bishop Proculus contained in it. There are other references
to Britain in this Chronicle, which are apparently original, including a notice of
victories won by Maximus over the Picts and Scots.
CH. XIII.
## p. 384 (#414) ############################################
384
The Invaders. Early notices
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 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
probably occurs also in connexion 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 divergencies 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
name
## p. 385 (#415) ############################################
Language of the Invaders.
Their civilisation
385
other hand the Kentish laws exhibit a marked divergence from those of
the other kingdoms, in respect of the constitution of society, a diver-
gence 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 be 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.
With regard to the state of civilisation 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 shew 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
shews 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 A. D. until late in the Middle Ages. A few early inscriptions
have been found in Germany. In England itself we have scarcely any
C. MED. H. VOL. I. CH. XIII.
25
## p. 386 (#416) ############################################
386
Archaeological and Literary evidence
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 civilisation 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 neighbours. 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.
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
## p. 387 (#417) ############################################
Religion. Calendar. Agriculture
387
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 Bohuslän (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 (corlas, holdas, etc. ) between whom
the land appears to have been partitioned, and although we have no
CH. XIII.
25-2
## p. 388 (#418) ############################################
388
Probable nature and course of the Invasion (552–866
a
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 employ-
ment of large and organised 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, shew 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.
Among the invaders themselves a number of separate kingdoms
## p. 389 (#419) ############################################
552–688] The English kingdoms. Growth of Wessex
389
arose.
It is commonly held that these kingdoms were the outcome of
separate invasions, but no evidence is forthcoming in favour 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 favour 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 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
CH. XIII.
## p. 390 (#420) ############################################
390
The Hwicce. .
Mercia. Deira
[571-615
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 neighbours, 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
## p. 391 (#421) ############################################
547-605] Bernicia and Aethelfrith. Aethelberht of Kent 391
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.
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 recogni-
tion 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 conse-
quences in the history of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, which will be
described in a later chapter of this work.
CH. XIII.
## p. 392 (#422) ############################################
392
CHAPTER XIV.
ITALY AND THE WEST, 410-476.
The process of history in the Western Empire, during the period
which lies between the death of Alaric (410) and the fall of Romulus
Augustulus (476), is towards the establishment of Teutonic kingdoms,
partly displacing and partly embracing the old local administration
within their boundaries, but as a rule remaining in some sort of
nominal connexion with the imperial system itself. In the course of
this process, therefore, the imperial scheme, in which the invading
barbarians take a regular place under the name of foederati, still
survives, along with much of the old provincial machinery, which they
find too useful to be disturbed ; but while much that is old survives,
much is also added which is new. Germanic tribes, with their kings and
their dooms, their moots and their fyrds, settle bodily on the soil, as
new forces in the domain of politics and economics, of religion and of
law. The Latinised provincial pays a new allegiance to the tribal
king: the Roman possessor has to admit the tribesmen as his “guests
on part of his lands; the Catholic priest is forced to reconcile himself to the
Arianism, which these tribes had inherited from the days of Ulfila; and
the Roman jurist, if he can still occupy himself by reducing the Codex
Theodosianus into a Breviarium Alaricianum, must also admit the
entrance of strange Leges Barbarorum into the field of jurisprudence.
This process of history may be said to have entered on its effective
stage in the West with Alaric's invasion of Italy. But it had been
present, as a potentiality and a menace, for many years before Alaric
heard the voice that drew him steadily towards Rome. The frontier-
war along the limes was as old as the second century. The pressure of the
population of the German forests upon the Roman world was so ancient
and inveterate, and so much of that population had in one way or
another entered the Empire for so long a period, that when the barrier
finally broke, the flood came as no cataclysm, but as something which
was almost in the natural order of things. There may have been move-
ments in Central Asia which explain the final breach of the Roman
barriers ; but even without invoking the Huns to our aid, we can see
that at the beginning of the fifth century the Germans would finally
## p. 393 (#423) ############################################
376–476]
The Barbarians and the Empire
393
have passed the limes, and the Romans at last have failed to stem their
advance, owing to the simple operation of causes which had long been
at work on either side. Among the Germans population had grown by
leaps and bounds, while subsistence had increased in less than an arith-
metical ratio; and the necessity of finding a quieta patria, an unthreatened
territory of sufficient size and productivity, with an ancient tradition of
more intensive culture than they had themselves attained, had become
for them a matter of life and death. Among the Romans population
had decayed for century after century, and the land had gone steadily
out of cultivation, until nature herself seemed to have created the
vacuum into which, in time, she inevitably attracted the Germans. The
rush begins with the passage of the Danube by the Goths in 376, and
is continued in the passage of the Rhine by the Vandals, Alans, and
Sueves in 406. A hundred years after the passage of the Danube the
final result of the movement begins to appear in the West. The
praefecture of Gaul now sees in each of its three former dioceses Teutonic
kingdoms established—Saxons and Jutes in the Britains ; Visigoths
(under their great king Euric) in the Seven Provinces of Gaul proper ;
Sueves (along with Visigoths) in the Spains. In the praefecture of Italy
two of the three dioceses are under powerful barbarian rulers: Odovacar
has just made himself king of Italy, and Gaiseric has long been king of
Africa ; while the diocese of Illyricum is still in the melting-pot.
If we regard the movement of events from 410 to 476 internally,
and from a Roman point of view, we shall find in the domestic
politics of the period much that is the natural correlative of the Völker-
wanderung without. Already, in the very beginning of this period, and
indeed long before, the barbarian has settled in every part of the
Empire, and among every class of society. Masses of barbarians have
been attached to the soil as cultivators (inquilini), to fill the gaps in the
population and reclaim the derelict soil: masses, again, have entered the
army, until it has become almost predominantly German. Barbarian
cultivators and soldiers thus formed the basis of the pyramid; but
barbarians might also climb to the apex. Under Theodosius I, who
had made it his policy to cultivate the friendship of the barbarians, the
Frank Arbogast already appears as magister militiae, and attempts, like
Ricimer afterwards, to use his office for the purpose of erecting a puppet
as emperor. He fell before Theodosius in the battle of the Frigidus
(394); but the Vandal Stilicho (to whom he is said to have commended
the care of his children and the defence of the Empire) was the heir of
his position, and Stilicho had for successor Aëtius—the “last of the
Romans,” but also the friend of the Huns—as Aëtius was succeeded in
turn by Ricimer the Sueve. It is these barbaric or semi-barbaric figures,
vested with the office of commander-in-chief of the troops of the West,
which form the landmarks in the history of the fifth century; and we
should be most true to reality if we distinguished the divisions of this
:
CH. XIV.
## p. 394 (#424) ############################################
394
The Magister Militiae
( 395—454
period not by the regna of an Honorius or a Valentinian, but by the
magisteria of Constantius, Aëtius, and Ricimer. These “empire-
"
destroying saviours of the Western Empire” were in reality the prime
ministers of their generation, prime ministers resting not on a parliament
(though they might, like Stilicho, affect to rely on the Senate), but on
their control of a barbarian soldiery. Their power depended, partly on
their influence with this wild force, which the Empire at once needed
and dreaded, partly on the fact that the nominal representatives of
imperial rule were weaklings or boys, whose court was under the influence
of women and eunuchs; but the de facto position which they held was
also sanctioned, since the time of Theodosius, by something of a legal
guarantee. Treating the West, after the battle of the Frigidus, as a
conquered territory, whose main problem was certain to be that of
military defence, Theodosius had left it under the nominal rule of his
son, but under the real government of Stilicho; and in his hands he had
combined the two commands of infantry and cavalry, which in the East
continued to remain distinct. In this position of magister utriusque
militiae (already anticipated for a time by Arbogast), Stilicho, and his
successors who inherited the title, controlled at once the imperial infantry
and cavalry, along with the fleets on seas and on rivers: they supervised
the barbaric settlements within the Empire; and they nominated the
heads of the staffs of subordinate officers. As imperial generalissimo, in
an age of military exigencies, the barbarian magister militiae was the
ultimate sovereign; and the title of patricius, sometimes united with the
name of parens, which in the fifth century came to be applied peculiarly
to the “master of the troops,” proclaimed his sovereignty to the world'.
Dependent upon barbarian troops, and himself often of barbarian
origin, the policy of the “master of the troops” towards the barbarians
outside the pale, who sought to enter the Empire, was bound to be
dubious. Orosius practically accuses Stilicho of complicity with Alaric,
and certainly charges him with the invitation of the Vandals, Alans and
Sueves into Gaul in 406: Aëtius was for years the friend of the Huns :
Ricimer was apparently not averse to inciting the Visigoths to war
against a Roman commander in Gaul. Inevitably, therefore, a Roman
party formed itself in opposition to the master of the troops, a party
curiously uniting within its ranks the senate, the eunuchs of the court,
and some jealous soldier with his followers. The result would be a coup
d'état, such as those of 408 or 454 ; but inevitably a new magister
succeeds to the assassinated Stilicho or Aëtius, and if the struggle still
continues to be waged (as for instance between Anthemius and Ricimer),
its predestined end—the foundation of a kingdom of Italy by some real
1 Priscus, as Freeman noticed in his article on Aëtius and Boniface, speaks of
“ Aëtius and the emperor of the West” as sending an embassy to the Huns-
recognising the de facto sovereignty of the magister militum (Müller, Fragm. Hist.
Graec. iv. p. 85).
## p. 395 (#425) ############################################
395–471]
The Western and Eastern Empires
395
or virtual generalissimo—draws constantly nearer.
In the course of this
struggle religious motives apparently intertwine themselves with the
underlying motive of racial feeling. Stilicho would seem to have stood
for toleration : and a Catholic reaction, headed by the Court, followed
upon his fall, and gave to the episcopate an increase of jurisdiction,
while it banished all enemies of the faith from the imperial service.
Yet Litorius, the lieutenant of Aëtius, put his trust" in the responses of
seers and the monitions of demons” as late as 439: Ricimer, though no
pagan, was an Arian. The extreme orthodoxy of the Court of Ravenna,
contrasted with the dubious faith of the soldiery and its leaders, must
thus have helped to whet the intensity of party strife.
In the period which we are to consider, it would thus appear that
the great feature, from an external point of view, is the occupation of
successive portions of the Western Empire by barbaric kings, of whom
the greatest is Gaiseric, the hero of the last scene of the Wandering
of the Nations, who links by his subtle policy the various enemies of
the Empire into one system of attack; while internally the dominant
factor is the transmutation of the Diocletian autocracy into a quasi-
constitutional monarchy, in which the last members of the Theodosian
house sink into empereurs fainéants, and the commander-in-chief
becomes, as it were, a mayor of the palace. Yet another feature in
external policy is the relation of the Western Emperors to those of the
East, and other features deserving of notice in internal development are
the growth of the Papacy, and the new importance from time to time
assumed by the Senate.
Upon the Eastern Empire the West is again and again forced to
rely. The Eastern Emperors give the West its rulers-Valentinian III,
Anthemius, Nepos; or in any case they give a legitimate title to the
rulers whom the West, in one way or another, has found for itself. Not
only so, but upon occasion they give to the West the succour, which
again and again it is forced to beg in the course of its struggle with the
Vandals. Theoretically, as always, the unity of the Empire persists :
there is still one Empire, with two joint rulers.
## p. 378 (#408) ############################################
378
Roman Britain
(A. D. 300-380
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 shewed, for the first time in
history, how a fleet might detach Britain from its geographical connexion
with the north-western Continent. Twelve centuries passed before this
possibility was again realised.
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 harbour
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 despatched 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 honour 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
:
2
## p. 379 (#409) ############################################
A. D. 380—410]
Roman Britain
379
a
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.
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 defenceless. 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 shews 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 half-
way 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 defence 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 organise the supply of troops. No one went: some persons failed to
a
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
CH, XIIJ.
## p. 380 (#410) ############################################
380
Roman Britain: Saxon Conquest [A. D. 300–446
:
:
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 Aëtius, the Roman minister, in 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 settle-
ments 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 civilisation 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 civilisation 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) A. D. 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 A. D. 420. The same
## p. 381 (#411) ############################################
Roman Britain : Saxon Conquest
381
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 civilisation
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: to-day we
have no certain knowledge of any of them. The Roman speech vanished;
the Romano-British material civilisation, 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 Romanised 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 civilisation had never established itself in its higher forms,
they underwent an intelligible change. The Keltic element, never quite
extinct in those hills and reinforced perhaps by immigrations from
Ireland, reasserted itself afresh. Gradually, the remnants of Roman
civilisation were worn down : the Keltic speech reappeared and, as a
sequel, the Late Keltic art was strong enough to pass on an artistic
legacy to the Middle Ages.
CH. XIII.
## p. 382 (#412) ############################################
382
Bede's account of the Conquest
[4504477
(B)
TEUTONIC CONQUEST OF BRITAIN.
According to Bede, who wrote his Ecclesiastical History about a. d. 731,
the Teutonic invasions of Britain began during the joint reign of Marcian
and Valentinian III, that is, between the years A. D. 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 neighbouring
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 attri-
buted 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
## p. 383 (#413) ############################################
375–630]
Other accounts. Probable date
383
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 aetiological
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 connexion 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
(11. 11. $ 8), 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 connexion in which their name
1 This Chronicle is printed by Mommsen in M. G. H. Tom. IX. He ascribes
its authorship to a monk of the south of France, perhaps of Marseilles, owing to
the commendation of Bishop Proculus contained in it. There are other references
to Britain in this Chronicle, which are apparently original, including a notice of
victories won by Maximus over the Picts and Scots.
CH. XIII.
## p. 384 (#414) ############################################
384
The Invaders. Early notices
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 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
probably occurs also in connexion 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 divergencies 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
name
## p. 385 (#415) ############################################
Language of the Invaders.
Their civilisation
385
other hand the Kentish laws exhibit a marked divergence from those of
the other kingdoms, in respect of the constitution of society, a diver-
gence 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 be 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.
With regard to the state of civilisation 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 shew 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
shews 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 A. D. until late in the Middle Ages. A few early inscriptions
have been found in Germany. In England itself we have scarcely any
C. MED. H. VOL. I. CH. XIII.
25
## p. 386 (#416) ############################################
386
Archaeological and Literary evidence
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 civilisation 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 neighbours. 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.
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
## p. 387 (#417) ############################################
Religion. Calendar. Agriculture
387
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 Bohuslän (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 (corlas, holdas, etc. ) between whom
the land appears to have been partitioned, and although we have no
CH. XIII.
25-2
## p. 388 (#418) ############################################
388
Probable nature and course of the Invasion (552–866
a
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 employ-
ment of large and organised 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, shew 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.
Among the invaders themselves a number of separate kingdoms
## p. 389 (#419) ############################################
552–688] The English kingdoms. Growth of Wessex
389
arose.
It is commonly held that these kingdoms were the outcome of
separate invasions, but no evidence is forthcoming in favour 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 favour 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 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
CH. XIII.
## p. 390 (#420) ############################################
390
The Hwicce. .
Mercia. Deira
[571-615
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 neighbours, 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
## p. 391 (#421) ############################################
547-605] Bernicia and Aethelfrith. Aethelberht of Kent 391
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.
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 recogni-
tion 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 conse-
quences in the history of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, which will be
described in a later chapter of this work.
CH. XIII.
## p. 392 (#422) ############################################
392
CHAPTER XIV.
ITALY AND THE WEST, 410-476.
The process of history in the Western Empire, during the period
which lies between the death of Alaric (410) and the fall of Romulus
Augustulus (476), is towards the establishment of Teutonic kingdoms,
partly displacing and partly embracing the old local administration
within their boundaries, but as a rule remaining in some sort of
nominal connexion with the imperial system itself. In the course of
this process, therefore, the imperial scheme, in which the invading
barbarians take a regular place under the name of foederati, still
survives, along with much of the old provincial machinery, which they
find too useful to be disturbed ; but while much that is old survives,
much is also added which is new. Germanic tribes, with their kings and
their dooms, their moots and their fyrds, settle bodily on the soil, as
new forces in the domain of politics and economics, of religion and of
law. The Latinised provincial pays a new allegiance to the tribal
king: the Roman possessor has to admit the tribesmen as his “guests
on part of his lands; the Catholic priest is forced to reconcile himself to the
Arianism, which these tribes had inherited from the days of Ulfila; and
the Roman jurist, if he can still occupy himself by reducing the Codex
Theodosianus into a Breviarium Alaricianum, must also admit the
entrance of strange Leges Barbarorum into the field of jurisprudence.
This process of history may be said to have entered on its effective
stage in the West with Alaric's invasion of Italy. But it had been
present, as a potentiality and a menace, for many years before Alaric
heard the voice that drew him steadily towards Rome. The frontier-
war along the limes was as old as the second century. The pressure of the
population of the German forests upon the Roman world was so ancient
and inveterate, and so much of that population had in one way or
another entered the Empire for so long a period, that when the barrier
finally broke, the flood came as no cataclysm, but as something which
was almost in the natural order of things. There may have been move-
ments in Central Asia which explain the final breach of the Roman
barriers ; but even without invoking the Huns to our aid, we can see
that at the beginning of the fifth century the Germans would finally
## p. 393 (#423) ############################################
376–476]
The Barbarians and the Empire
393
have passed the limes, and the Romans at last have failed to stem their
advance, owing to the simple operation of causes which had long been
at work on either side. Among the Germans population had grown by
leaps and bounds, while subsistence had increased in less than an arith-
metical ratio; and the necessity of finding a quieta patria, an unthreatened
territory of sufficient size and productivity, with an ancient tradition of
more intensive culture than they had themselves attained, had become
for them a matter of life and death. Among the Romans population
had decayed for century after century, and the land had gone steadily
out of cultivation, until nature herself seemed to have created the
vacuum into which, in time, she inevitably attracted the Germans. The
rush begins with the passage of the Danube by the Goths in 376, and
is continued in the passage of the Rhine by the Vandals, Alans, and
Sueves in 406. A hundred years after the passage of the Danube the
final result of the movement begins to appear in the West. The
praefecture of Gaul now sees in each of its three former dioceses Teutonic
kingdoms established—Saxons and Jutes in the Britains ; Visigoths
(under their great king Euric) in the Seven Provinces of Gaul proper ;
Sueves (along with Visigoths) in the Spains. In the praefecture of Italy
two of the three dioceses are under powerful barbarian rulers: Odovacar
has just made himself king of Italy, and Gaiseric has long been king of
Africa ; while the diocese of Illyricum is still in the melting-pot.
If we regard the movement of events from 410 to 476 internally,
and from a Roman point of view, we shall find in the domestic
politics of the period much that is the natural correlative of the Völker-
wanderung without. Already, in the very beginning of this period, and
indeed long before, the barbarian has settled in every part of the
Empire, and among every class of society. Masses of barbarians have
been attached to the soil as cultivators (inquilini), to fill the gaps in the
population and reclaim the derelict soil: masses, again, have entered the
army, until it has become almost predominantly German. Barbarian
cultivators and soldiers thus formed the basis of the pyramid; but
barbarians might also climb to the apex. Under Theodosius I, who
had made it his policy to cultivate the friendship of the barbarians, the
Frank Arbogast already appears as magister militiae, and attempts, like
Ricimer afterwards, to use his office for the purpose of erecting a puppet
as emperor. He fell before Theodosius in the battle of the Frigidus
(394); but the Vandal Stilicho (to whom he is said to have commended
the care of his children and the defence of the Empire) was the heir of
his position, and Stilicho had for successor Aëtius—the “last of the
Romans,” but also the friend of the Huns—as Aëtius was succeeded in
turn by Ricimer the Sueve. It is these barbaric or semi-barbaric figures,
vested with the office of commander-in-chief of the troops of the West,
which form the landmarks in the history of the fifth century; and we
should be most true to reality if we distinguished the divisions of this
:
CH. XIV.
## p. 394 (#424) ############################################
394
The Magister Militiae
( 395—454
period not by the regna of an Honorius or a Valentinian, but by the
magisteria of Constantius, Aëtius, and Ricimer. These “empire-
"
destroying saviours of the Western Empire” were in reality the prime
ministers of their generation, prime ministers resting not on a parliament
(though they might, like Stilicho, affect to rely on the Senate), but on
their control of a barbarian soldiery. Their power depended, partly on
their influence with this wild force, which the Empire at once needed
and dreaded, partly on the fact that the nominal representatives of
imperial rule were weaklings or boys, whose court was under the influence
of women and eunuchs; but the de facto position which they held was
also sanctioned, since the time of Theodosius, by something of a legal
guarantee. Treating the West, after the battle of the Frigidus, as a
conquered territory, whose main problem was certain to be that of
military defence, Theodosius had left it under the nominal rule of his
son, but under the real government of Stilicho; and in his hands he had
combined the two commands of infantry and cavalry, which in the East
continued to remain distinct. In this position of magister utriusque
militiae (already anticipated for a time by Arbogast), Stilicho, and his
successors who inherited the title, controlled at once the imperial infantry
and cavalry, along with the fleets on seas and on rivers: they supervised
the barbaric settlements within the Empire; and they nominated the
heads of the staffs of subordinate officers. As imperial generalissimo, in
an age of military exigencies, the barbarian magister militiae was the
ultimate sovereign; and the title of patricius, sometimes united with the
name of parens, which in the fifth century came to be applied peculiarly
to the “master of the troops,” proclaimed his sovereignty to the world'.
Dependent upon barbarian troops, and himself often of barbarian
origin, the policy of the “master of the troops” towards the barbarians
outside the pale, who sought to enter the Empire, was bound to be
dubious. Orosius practically accuses Stilicho of complicity with Alaric,
and certainly charges him with the invitation of the Vandals, Alans and
Sueves into Gaul in 406: Aëtius was for years the friend of the Huns :
Ricimer was apparently not averse to inciting the Visigoths to war
against a Roman commander in Gaul. Inevitably, therefore, a Roman
party formed itself in opposition to the master of the troops, a party
curiously uniting within its ranks the senate, the eunuchs of the court,
and some jealous soldier with his followers. The result would be a coup
d'état, such as those of 408 or 454 ; but inevitably a new magister
succeeds to the assassinated Stilicho or Aëtius, and if the struggle still
continues to be waged (as for instance between Anthemius and Ricimer),
its predestined end—the foundation of a kingdom of Italy by some real
1 Priscus, as Freeman noticed in his article on Aëtius and Boniface, speaks of
“ Aëtius and the emperor of the West” as sending an embassy to the Huns-
recognising the de facto sovereignty of the magister militum (Müller, Fragm. Hist.
Graec. iv. p. 85).
## p. 395 (#425) ############################################
395–471]
The Western and Eastern Empires
395
or virtual generalissimo—draws constantly nearer.
In the course of this
struggle religious motives apparently intertwine themselves with the
underlying motive of racial feeling. Stilicho would seem to have stood
for toleration : and a Catholic reaction, headed by the Court, followed
upon his fall, and gave to the episcopate an increase of jurisdiction,
while it banished all enemies of the faith from the imperial service.
Yet Litorius, the lieutenant of Aëtius, put his trust" in the responses of
seers and the monitions of demons” as late as 439: Ricimer, though no
pagan, was an Arian. The extreme orthodoxy of the Court of Ravenna,
contrasted with the dubious faith of the soldiery and its leaders, must
thus have helped to whet the intensity of party strife.
In the period which we are to consider, it would thus appear that
the great feature, from an external point of view, is the occupation of
successive portions of the Western Empire by barbaric kings, of whom
the greatest is Gaiseric, the hero of the last scene of the Wandering
of the Nations, who links by his subtle policy the various enemies of
the Empire into one system of attack; while internally the dominant
factor is the transmutation of the Diocletian autocracy into a quasi-
constitutional monarchy, in which the last members of the Theodosian
house sink into empereurs fainéants, and the commander-in-chief
becomes, as it were, a mayor of the palace. Yet another feature in
external policy is the relation of the Western Emperors to those of the
East, and other features deserving of notice in internal development are
the growth of the Papacy, and the new importance from time to time
assumed by the Senate.
Upon the Eastern Empire the West is again and again forced to
rely. The Eastern Emperors give the West its rulers-Valentinian III,
Anthemius, Nepos; or in any case they give a legitimate title to the
rulers whom the West, in one way or another, has found for itself. Not
only so, but upon occasion they give to the West the succour, which
again and again it is forced to beg in the course of its struggle with the
Vandals. Theoretically, as always, the unity of the Empire persists :
there is still one Empire, with two joint rulers.
