01-20-2007, 06:43 PM
Quote:Tarbicus:1ymajkhx Wrote:Or were the Saxons under one ruler? (not my area at all but humour me)
It is argued there that the future English kingdoms coalesce out of a myriad of very small groups. This is of course totally opposite to what we are told by the historians of those later kingdoms, who suggest (Anglo-Saxon Chronicle) that most dynasties were a direct continuation of the invasion groups.
Actually, I'm not sure that follows at all. Why would the above two
scenarios necessarily be mutually exclusive? They seem to be exactly
the same, to me. There are an awful lot of different invasion-groups
to begin with, after all. Look at all the king-lists in the ASC and
elsewhere. It wasn't only Angles Saxons & Jutes. We have Swedes in
East Anglia and possibly Norwegians (from the names of kings like
Cerdic of the 'West Saxons' and Winta of the 'Lindsay Angles'). We can guess that, if there really was a large-scale immigration of hundreds of thousands over 150 years, then many smaller kins and tribes would
have arrived here being subservient to more powerful ones, but never
actually got distinguished from the ruling house in that region, before
the full Anglo-Saxon heptarchy took shape.
Ambrosius / Mike
"Feel the fire in your bones."
