1 Introduction on to the age
Dr. Debamitra kar
ANGLO-SAXON AGE: AN INTRODUCTION
|
In this chapter you will learn:
|
Preface
It is a common practice to confuse past with history. One may protest and say that history deals with the past and it dwells in the past, it depicts the incidents that has happened long time ago. True, but this is far from being the whole picture. History is a process: it collects, edits, changes, writes, re-writes and interprets all the events that have happened long before we were born. It is a growing organism, a living being. Think of it in this way: we have no way of learning about the past without the help of history; our idea of the past—which may include vital questions like who we were, where we come from, what were our ancestors like—is shaped by history itself. Thus, history is a powerful tool and when used by the powerful people it may change the course of the society.
In the present section our attempt would be to look at the beginnings of the Anglo-Saxon period and relate it to the growth of the indigenous literature of this area. We shall not merely be looking at some important dates and events, and learn the names of kings and queens, but shall try to understand the ethos of the age—think what those people thought and felt, and make an estimate of their culture and philosophy. There are a few impediments to this endeavour: first, at such an early state, it is difficult to distinguish between history and myth; secondly, many old texts are lost and missing. The first problem stems from the fact that the need for recording events of historical importance was felt much later. The earlier men were content with composing songs and lays about their heroes and battles. Such songs were sung by the wandering minstrels or troubadours in the feasts or gatherings. Such compositions coloured the historical truth with the imagination of the chauvinistic minds. Moreover, when these songs were transmitted from generation to generation through the oral medium more changes were made, making it more suitable to the contemporary age. This is true not only about the songs but also about the oral epics which were later written down by the educated men, who would once again change them according to their own taste. Thus, scholars have pointed out the Christian interpolations in pagan literature because the early writers were all men from religious background. Remember, the use of the term „men‟ is not an instance of generic simplification but a historical fact, for education of women was a distant dream in those days.
The second problem that we shall encounter is the loss of texts. It may have many reasons behind it. As we have already seen, written documentation happens much later, thus many texts were already lost by the time they were written. In many cases, the books were burned or lost due to loot and plunder. In those days, book writing was a time consuming and costly matter. There was no printing press, thus, once written the manuscript would be copied by the learned men or scribes, and several manuscripts would be preserved in various abbeys, which also worked as the libraries. Some rich men had the privilege of a personal library but that is a much later development, because in the Anglo-Saxon nobility was mostly composed of the warrior class who did not have the luxury of learning. Mass education was not thought of, and thus the readership was very limited and selective. However, the manuscripts would have various designs in the margins, for the scribes would be deft artists. These designs can also be seen as historical data, for instance, the gospel books that appeared in England around 700 BCE (Lindisfarne Gospels), used motifs that were used to decorate the weapons and jewellery of the warrior elite, whereas, the same books that were produced in other parts of Europe used Romano-Christian symbols as margin designs. This shows the preponderance of the heroic culture in the Anglo-Saxon society even when they were Christianized— a historical reality that has a long-standing impact in the making of the English nation. To go back to our previous argument, one might suggest that loss of texts would definitely be a hurdle in realising the whole picture of Anglo-Saxon literature, and we have to leave much to our imagination and understanding, but if we look at the reasons behind these losses new historical insight might be drawn.
At the very beginning of this section, it has been told that history is a living mechanism, a continuous process. How shall we then read the Anglo-Saxon history? Patrick Wormald writes in his essay titled, „Anglo-Saxon Society and its Literature‟ that “England is the world‟s oldest continuously functioning state, and English is now its most widely spoken language.” (P 19) Taking the cue from him, we shall see how both of these two incidents came into being, i.e., how the English nation was made and how
English was established as its language. You may wonder what is so significant about England being the land of the English-speaking people. History would tell you that the English nation is a melting pot of various tribes and cultures, like Angle, Saxon, Jute, Franks, Gauls, Picts, Scot, Celts, some of whom who were the original inhabitants of the land and others who came from the other side of the ocean for colonising the land at various stages. Every tribe carried its own cultural baggage, but by the end of the 11th century a common English identity was clearly etched out with an efficient political and economic system, and also a well formed vernacular literature, which could help the language and its people survive the onslaughts of French invasion. So first, let us take a look at the historical facts that supported this process of nation building.
Celts and the advent of the Angles, Saxons and Jutes
The coming of the Anglo-Saxons to the British island can be seen as a watershed mark in British history. In the earliest time the island was inhabited by people who belonged to the Celtic group, akin to the Gauls. These people cultivated their lands, and were skilled in weaving, metal works and in making ornaments. Since they did not write their history and depended on bards to memorize and recount their stories, many of their stories cannot be accessed. Historians call them Britons and their language British which is the parent language of the modern day Welsh. At around 55-54 BCE Julius Caesar sent his troops to colonise the land but this attempt was not met with much success. Almost hundred years later emperor Claudius sent another troop of 50,000 men and after much fight the Celts were defeated. (See Map I) The important figures of Celtic defence were Caratacus, who led his tribe for more than six years against the Romans in the mountains of Wales, which was the centre of Druidism, and a tribal queen called Boadicea who destroyed and burned three centres of Roman power: Colchester, St. Albans and London. The Romans could not occupy the northern part of the island (i.e., the modern-day Scotland) as well, which was occupied by Caledonian and Pictish tribes. Around 142 CE the wall of Antoninus and in 180 CE the wall of Hadrain was constructed to demarcate the northern boundary of Roman occupation in the island. The southern part of the entire island was under their rule for next 350 years. (See Map II)
The colonization by the Romans made some important changes in the island. They brought along with them the rule of the law, a much-developed language like the Latin and also better civic life. Fortified towns and fine roads were built to enhance the security of the settlers. The drainage system also improved. Tax on corn was collected from the inhabitants. The largest of the towns were called Londinium which in today‟s London. Also remember that Roman civilisation was town-based while the later day Anglo-Saxons concentrated more in the development of the country-side. The Romans however never lost contact with their own country. The officials and traders went to the British island for a few years of their duty taking their families and households with them and returned home when their tenure was completed. You may compare them with the later day British officials who came to our country for colonisation. They were never many in number.
Towards the end of this second and long rule of the Romans the population was divided unequally into Romans, the Britons who were the children of Roman fathers and Celtic mothers and who followed Roman habits and called themselves Roman-Britons, and Britons who worked as slaves. It was the Roman-Britons who thought themselves to be as good as Romans, suffered the most when the Roman rule ended. The change of fortune of Britain occurred when the Roman army stationed in the island was called back to their own country to fight the barbarians. The northern tribes Picts and Scots (who had arrived in Scotland from Ireland) poured over the Hadrian‟s wall, pirates swelled in the English channel, the condition of the towns deteriorated. The Germanic tribes of Europe acted quickly. Angles, Saxons, Jutes and other tribes from the northern borders of the Roman Empire (modern day Germany and Denmark) came to colonise the country, killing and looting the country. The Britons fled westward towards Wales. (See Maps III and IV).
Several historians have recorded the following events in different manners. However, to present a simpler version of the event it is better to follow what is written by Bede: in 443 CE the Britons went to seek the help of the Romans against the northern tribes but received none for they were busy defending the attack of Attila the Hun on the Roman Empire. The Britons then sought the intervention of the Saxons who gladly accepted this offer. Bede records the names of two important warriors and their men from Jutland who in 449 CE came to fight for the Britons, Hengest and Horsa. At first they fought against the Picts but slowly they started to take possession of the country. In the year 455 CE, Hengest and Horsa fought against the very person who had invited them to the island, Wurtgern or Vortigern; Horsa was slain but his brother Hengest killed Vortigern and took possession of the kingdom of Kent which was populated by the Jutes. Realising the „worthlessness of the Britons and richness of the land‟ more tribes like the Jutes from Jutland, other Saxon tribes, Angles from Schleswig came to the country. Completely overpowered, the Britons fled westwards while these northern tribes divided the island among themselves: Essex, Wessex and Sussex were taken by East, West and South Saxons; Norfolk and Suffolk, which was later combined as East Anglia, by the North and South folks of the Angles and Northumberland by another tribe of the Angles; finally, the Marchmen took possession of the kingdom called Mercia which was on the border of the Briton settlements. Britons were now called Welsh, which in Anglian terms meant strangers, and they were called Saxons or Engles and hence the name English. These seven kingdoms were also known as the „heptarchy‟ and in spite of their similarity in language and culture they fought among themselves for political supremacy.
It is this political strife that indirectly gave rise to a sense of unity in the later days. It so happened that whenever one small kingdom rose to power it exerted a kind of influence on the rest. In those days political power was a dependent on the chief or king‟s martial prowess and charisma. In the period that followed the migration age, when the political powers were consolidating we find the names of such important chiefs who for a brief period of time ruled the politics of the land. First Northumbria and then Mercia rose to power because of their good leadership. Their kings took title of Bretwalda or overlord. King Edwin (617-33), Oswald (634-42) and Oswiu (642-70) of Northumbria and King Offa (757-96) of Mercia were renowned for their exploits and good governance. By 800 CE it was Wessex which dominated the political map. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, which was compiled during the reign of one of the most famous English kings, King Alfred, records that Ecgberht or Egbert, his grandfather and the first king of Wessex who had gradually subdued Kent and Sussex, then Mercia and finally Northumbria and united the English under him. But this must also be borne in the mind that political union always does not necessitate a cultural union of the people. Bede records in his Ecclesiastical History of the English People that King Oswald was first denied burial in a monastery of the kingdom of Lincolnshire for he had once conquered the land. However, this forced political union was ultimately accepted by the people when they were attacked by the Danes or Scandinavians who started to pour in from 787 CE.
King Alfred and the Danish Invasion
The first major English ruler was King Alfred of Wessex, under him and his successors, Angle-cynn (the English people and their territory) became Engla-lond (the land of the English). Alfred became the king in 871 but his reign began in a dismal situation as the Danish invasion of England had already began (in 794 they had plundered the monastery of Jarrow). Though King Alfred faced the most virulent period of the Danish attacks he was determined to set his country free. At first he failed. He tried to bribe the Danes and fight them; still they came in huge numbers, till at last in 878, after seven years of battle, he was defeated at Chippenham, and was obliged to flee to the woods in disguise. Many stories are told about his years of hiding. He once again collected a handful of faithful men and made a desperate effort. This time he succeeded. He gained a complete victory at Edington, near Chippenham, and forced the Danish leader Guthrun to make a treaty at Wedmore. By this treaty Alfred was accepted as the overlord of Wessex, Sussex, Kent, part of Essex, and part of Mercia, while he had to relinquish some other parts of the land to the Danes, known as Danelagh or Danelaw. (See Map V).
Alfred is one of the great rulers of England. He built ships to defend the land against further Danish invasion, reformed the legal system and was a patron of knowledge and learning. He made translations of important theological texts and encouraged the writing of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles which is now an important source of information about the age.
After his death his able son Edward (901-925) and his daughter Ethelfled (also known as the „Lady of Mercia‟) ruled the country well. King Edward conquered some parts of the Danelagh and expanded his kingdom till Northumbria. He declared himself as the „Emperor of Britain‟ ruling over the Danes, English and Welsh.
Rulers who followed King Edward witnessed the gradual downfall of English kingship due to renewed Danish attacks. Athelston (925-940), who had a troubled reign, was followed by Edmund, Edred and Eadwig (or Edwy). Eadwig ruled only for four years and he was remembered for his quarrel with an influential priest called Dunstan. Dunstan became the archbishop of Canterbury during the rule of Edgar I (959-975). Under Edgar, there was sixteen years of peace but unfortunately he was followed by Ethelred the Unready whose thirty-six years of troubled reign made the country more susceptible to the Danish attacks. He also levied a tax called Danegeld to buy them off but his misrule alienated his thanes from him and they joined the Danes instead. Danes were at this time led by a very able king Swegen whose son Cnut came to the English throne in 1016. Thus the two races of Anglo-Saxons and Danes or Scandinavians were joined under his leadership. However the Danish rule was short-lived. Canut‟s two sons proved to be incompetent rulers thus English and Danes sent for the son of Ethelred the Unready, called Edward the Confessor (1042-1066) who was brought up in Normandy. He arrived in England with his retinue of Norman friends, and very soon the English had another enemy to fight with, the Normans, who like the Anglo-Saxons and Danes came to England in search of its rich resources and set up their colonies.
Polity and economy of the Saxons
Let us take a look at the nature of the Anglo-Saxon government. From the very beginning of Anglo-Saxon invasion in 449 CE to 1016, when Canute a Dane was elected by the Witan, England was under the rule of Anglo-Saxon kings. You must understand that this is a long period of time during which any civilisation would grow and develop and become more complex. In case of England the advent of Christianity also initiated a change in the social pattern and power politics. We shall read that history separately in the following sections. In Anglo-Saxon England, at first, the role of the king or chief was much limited in political matters. He had to depend on the faithfulness of his people. Local matters were decided by the assembly of free men—the folk moot—that chose their king or leader. However, at the later stage, this practice changed, and kingship became hereditary but at the beginning there was much democracy in such meetings. Then they set up hundred moots and shire moots for smaller subdivision called hundreds (which was a group of villages) and then shires (which is a group of hundreds). As the kingdoms grew too large for all the freemen to assemble, the place of the folk moot was taken up by the Assembly of Wise Men or Witan. In it sat the „aldermen‟, rulers of the shires, and the „thegns‟ or chiefs of the king‟s bodyguards, the great landowners; after the Church was established the bishops and archbishops also participated in this political assembly. This was indeed a parliament in its rudimentary form. The Witan was powerful for it could not only make or amend laws but also elect or depose kings.
England also prospered under the Saxon kings. Roughly around the seventh century the business and trade improved across the channel and North Sea. England was also an important centre for trade during the Roman rule but now this unprecedented growth was a result of the replacement of the monometallic gold currency with lower value silver coins better suited for everyday business transactions. This helped in the large-scale importation and exportation of common daily products which was previously done only for luxury items. King Offa established monopoly over the coins issued in his name and made huge profits for his kingdom. (See King Offa‟s coins) This economic expansion had its drawback: it tempted the Vikings or Scandinavians to make inroads into the country.
It is a rule of history that every economic change snowballs into a social change. The Anglo-Saxon society used to be a stratified one and the social structure was relatively stable. The law codes reveal that the nobles and the slaves occupied the highest and the lowest rung in the social ladder, respectively, but the middle order was composed of „free men‟. Noble and free status was inherited, and expressed by a wergeld or man-money: it is the amount of money that the killers were supposed to pay to the next of the kin if case of a violent death of the person. The noble-blood obviously cost more than that of the free-men. A slave however had no wergeld though his owner was compensated in case of his death. This sort of compensation shows the prominence of violence, aggression and revenge in Anglo-Saxon society. Ample evidence can be found in the literature of the time: stories of battles, blood-feuds, vengeance bedeck their literature that you are going to read. As the economy prospered the upward social mobilization becomes easier. Any trader who had crossed the sea for three times was promoted to the rank of the Thegn. Archbishop Wulfstan of York lamented that slaves have become their owners‟ masters. This also led to the growth of towns along the English coast and the population increased in them. Thus by the time the Danish invaders came English society was a well-governed, urban-based commercial hub.
Heroic values and its effect on literature
The great migration (Völkerwanderung) of the Germanic tribes to England and the subsequent defeat of the Celtic tribes turned England into a melting pot where people of various cultures and ethnicity were forced to live together. Michael Swanton writes:
Ethnic blurring was a natural consequence of the Völkerwanderung, as nations shifted, driven by economic and political necessities, absorbing and absorbed by others. Archaeological evidences suggest that on the eve of great land-takings, the Anglo-Saxons were already a mixed and mongrel people.
Political competition between the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms may finally have resolved with the forceful geographical unification, but in an era where kingdoms rose and fell in quick succession with the rise and fall of its leader such unity cannot be a long-standing one. Yet, as history would show us that from these seeds of differences some kind of harmony was imagined that gave rise to the concept of a unified English nation. Two different and opposite forces can be responsible for this gradual change in the society. The first is the heroic values that were deeply ingrained in the socio-economic rubric of the post-Migration society in England; the second is definitely the coming of Christianity which at a later stage, worked with the aristocracy to strengthen the power of the king over his territory and created the distinctive British identity. Though the ideology of the heroic society and that of Christianity are mutually exclusive, yet in the history of England both has contributed towards the consolidation of nationhood.
The concept of the heroic society is based on the fundamental principle of the warrior owing loyalty to his master or lord in return for his generous gifts. Such concept of loyalty and rewards can also be found in the later age of feudalism, but in that case all the rewards are land-based. As you have already seen, the free-men of the society enjoyed a greater mobility and they could enrol themselves under any lord or overlord but they have to pledge allegiance to him till death. Thus, the cultural differences got erased as people of different ethnic background would come under an efficient or
powerful lord. They sought for heroic ideals in a man, whom they believed to be greater than all others for his martial prowess and mental attributes. Thus a Danish warrior‟s story of Beowulf becomes the epic of the English people. Again, story of Charlemagne‟s feats or legends of King Arthur (perhaps a Roman-Briton) are all preserved with equal care and enthusiasm. Thus the society was much more lenient in matters of ethnic plurality if, of course, the other side was not a political threat.
Hence, heroic society was dependent on the leadership qualities of a single man. This also speaks of a change in the society that took place on the event of the dissolution of the Roman colonies. As the central authority decayed, the importance of the local leadership, (which was in most of the cases an economically self-sufficient one), rose, which maintained its own military responsibilities through the war-band or comitatus. The dispossessed Irish or Picts or Celtic nobles whoever joined the comitatus enjoyed its fortunes irrespective of their social or racial origins. The only source of allegiance was the loyalty to the lord. Instead of the Empire, he was the one who could save his people from dangers of every sort. Thus, the man who has been rejected by his lord, (you shall get ample evidence of such incidents in the elegiac poetry of the time), had every reason to mourn. In the famous story of Cynewulf and Cyneheard, narrated in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, the former‟s warriors „said that no kinsman was dearer to them than their lord, and they would never serve his slayer‟. The lord on the other hand had to be generous in his rewards to recognise the loyalty of his followers and also confirm his reputation. They would also entertain the poets who whose performance of poetry was a mode of entertainment in which the greatest and the humblest would join and enjoy. The lyre would pass from hand to hand round the hall, another space of public interaction that strengthened their bond as a community, and the entire community shall willingly participate. Thus you shall also encounter the recurrent image of the mead hall and songs in the non-Christian heroic literature of the period.
Advent of Christianity and its Effect on the Social Structure
Christianity came to the island in two phases: first with the early Romans, and its stay and influence were short-lived because of the coming of the Anglo-Saxons who were pagan. In 597 CE Christianity arrived again, through a mission sent by Pope Gregory the Great. This time, the religion spread slowly but consistently and its effect was so overwhelming that when King Offa brought his neighbouring kingdoms under Mercia he proclaimed his right „in the name of Jesus Christ… through whom sovereigns reign and divide the kingdoms of the earth‟. King Alfred also asked the Danish warlord Guthrun to embrace Christianity as a part of the peace treaty of Wedmore.
In the second phase, which we shall look at in some details, Christian missionaries headed by Augustine landed at Ebbsfleet in Kent, the very place where Hengest and Horsa had landed fifty years ago. First the king of Kent, Ethelbert was converted and his kingdom followed his example. Slowly other kingdoms followed, the last person to convert was the King Penda of Mercia, who resisted this religion for thirteen years and it was only after his death in a battle, his followers were converted.
Meanwhile, missionaries of Celtic origin came from Ireland settled in Scotland. In 634 CE St. Aidan, a Scot, came from Iona and set up a monastery in Lindisfarne. It is told that certain practices of these two churches differed from one another. In 664 CE a synod was held at Whitby to consider the matter in which the verdict of King Oswy went in favour of the Roman Church. King Oswy was an important royal figure at that time: he was the king of Northumbria and after defeating Penda in the battle of Winwaed, he had established himself as King of Mercia and called himself a Bretwelda. Thus, his choice had a great importance in the ecclesiastical history of Britain.
The Church was established but was not unified as there were several kingdoms, each having its own church. In 669, Theodore of Tarsus, a Greek monk, who was chosen to be the Archbishop of Canterbury by the Pope, took up the task of unifying the Church. He divided the land into dioceses, gave each bishop his own district to manage, and held national synods. These synods were the occasions when people could unite as the member of a Church and not of different kingdoms.
Apart from giving the sense of a unification and brotherhood, Christianity also changed the lifestyle and philosophy of the people. To a war-torn race, the message of peace was a welcome change. But the Christian philosophy was markedly different from the ideology of the heroic society and we must also understand that Christianisation process was neither easy nor swift. Patrick Wormald writes that „Christianity… made much less progress in the sixth century among the Anglo-Saxons than anywhere else.‟ (P 3) The heroic qualities like beot or assertion was central to Germanic virtue, leading directly to the action which brings lof, the praise of one‟s peers, and dom their esteem. But after Christianisation such things would amount to boasting and self-exhibitionism, a vice. Likewise, Superbia (pride), an essential part of Anglo-Saxon social ethos was unquestionably opposed to the Christian humilitas.
Yet in spite of such differences, the church worked in harmony with the monarch making each other stronger in their acquisition and consilidation of power over the people. The clergy were sympathetic to the rulers in general for a stronger ruler would be more useful for the extension of the kingdom of God on earth. The kings could also use the benefits of an organised church for his administrative work and for furthering his imperialist purpose. Thus, as history proceeds one would find that the kings engaging in just wars (bellum justum) to spread the word of God and the Church defending the king as someone not chosen by his people but sent by God. This change in attitude towards viewing kingship alters the relationship between the governed and the governor, and reverses the structure of the society—the monarchical power becomes independent from the popular will and to disobey the vicarius dei (Christ‟s substitute on earth) or Christus domini (Lord‟s anointed) is as grave as committing a sin. The entente between religion and politics becomes the source of practical power. The old Germanic overlord was now a sacred person demanding not only allegiance or loyalty of his people but material possession and obedience.
„What began as a simple pact of mutual benefit between Church and State at a time of crisis, develops into an increasingly rigid interdependence, ceremonial elaboration and practical power evolving side by side‟. (Swanton 12) This initiated a number of changes in the society: the church and the state got united and created a centre of power and authority, the administration became more centralised, the Folc-land became royal demesne, the older comitatus turned into the landed nobility and the ceorlisc class sank into the Reclinitudes. Laws were no longer made in the folk-moots but by the king and the legal institutions of the state. As the power consolidates, people‟s dependence on land increases, we gradually move from the migratory heroic society to feudal society where the subjects or the vassals are bound to the king in terms of land and law.
Advent of Christianity had a tremendous and long-lasting impact on the field of literature. We shall look at these points again in greater details when we read Christian poetry and prose, but for the time being we shall simply note the most important points. Firstly, since Christianity is a religion of the Book, thus literacy becomes an important social requirement; secondly, the Churches become the seat of learning and preservation of different manuscripts; thirdly, literature graduates from oral to written state; fourthly, there was an increasing need felt to translate the Latin texts to vernacular English for the better understanding of the indigenous clergy, this gave rise to a new body of literature which is distinctly homiletic in purpose; finally, just as the relation between the king and his subjects changed due to Christian influence, likewise, the nature of hero also changes in literature. We no longer have the angry proud slayer of monsters but an ecclesiastically sanctioned hero who fights for the uplift of the poor, widows and orphans, one who is the guardian of the society. War was no longer meant for personal victory but for the social or rather national cause. Hero of Beowulf is metamorphosed into the dreamer of the Dream of the Rood, who is an Anglo-Saxon hero, keen to join in a battle with death and shall honour the Cross as the sign of salvation and proclaim to the world the news of the Second Coming.
| you can view video on Introduction on to the age | |
Reference
- Blair, John. The Anglo-Saxon Age: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1984.
- Swanton, Michael. English Literature Before Chaucer. London and New York: Longman, 1987.
- Toyne, Anthony. English-reader’s History of England. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1971.
- Wormald, Patrick. ‘Anglo-Saxon Society and Its Literature’, in The Cambridge Companion to Old
- English Literature edited by Godden and Lapidge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.