History of the Anglo-Saxons, from the Earliest Period to the Norman Conquest: Second EditionMiller, Thomas
Philosophy
History of the Anglo-Saxons, from the Earliest Period to the Norman Conquest: Second Edition
Miller, Thomas
Anglo-Saxons; Great Britain -- History -- Anglo-Saxon period, 449-1066; Great Britain -- History -- To 449
Stuf and Wihtgar next came, both of them Cerdric's kinsmen, and it
seems as if scarcely a favourable wind now blew, without wafting a
fresh fleet of Saxon chiefs to the British coast. They evidently
began to look upon Britain as their own; so many relations came one
after the other and settled down, and never returned, that we can
imagine the only topic of conversation now in Jutland was about
Britain--that houses and lands were at a discount--that everybody was
either purchasing or building ships--that the old crones reaped quite
a harvest in standing upon the headlands and sending prayers after the
vessels, for Jutes, Angles, and Saxons were now all astir; rumours
had flown over the ocean that there were kingdoms for those who dare
venture for them, and that, no matter how distant the descent might
be, so long as the voyager had a drop of Woden's blood in his veins,
there was a crown for him if he could but find followers to fight
for it. Nor had the poor Britons any hope left, for as one died off
there was always another ready to succeed. Cynric followed Cerdric; he
passed away, and Cealwin came--killed two or three British kings, of
whom we know nothing, excepting that one was called Conmail, another
Condidan, and the third Farinmail--added the cities of Gloucester,
Cirencester, and Bristol to his dominions--and finally established the
kingdom of Wessex, which included several counties, beside the Isle
of Wight. But we must not thus hurry over this stirring period, for a
new champion had sprung up amongst the Britons, the king Arthur of old
romance, the hero of poetry and fable, the warrior whose very existence
has, to many, become a matter of doubt. What little we know of any of
the British kings who existed at this period, is almost limited to
the bare mention of their names. A new language had sprung up, and,
excepting among the conquered, there was no one left to record the
deeds of the British heroes, but the Welsh bards; for what sympathy
could the worshippers of Woden have with the warriors who spoke another
language, and followed a creed so different to their own? What should
we have known of the earlier Britons but for Julius Cæsar? Who can
doubt but that the Saxons cared only to chronicle the deeds of their
own countrymen, or who can tell how many records were destroyed by
the misbelieving Danes on a later day? We have more than tradition to
prove the existence of Arthur: he is alluded to by the ancient bards,
and mentioned by them in succession, for as one caught up and carried
forward the Cymric lay of another, so did he allude to warriors of
other days. The Saxons had enough to do to record their own conquests,
and left the Britons to mourn over their own disasters, for what they
remembered with feelings of pride would to the new-comers be a source
of regret; a British victory would but afford them a theme for a dirge,
and the very memory of a hero who had occasionally triumphed over them
would be a source of pain.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account