No Saxon invasion?

[authun]

According to the British documentary, The Celts - The Complete Epic Saga (2010, 6 episodes total 303 minutes) there is no evidence of any invasion by the Saxons or other Germanics. The farmsteads of SE Britain showed no archaeological evidence of anything except for continuous occupation and the isotopes gathered from skeletal remains of the era show no influx of people from northern Germany or Denmark. They explain the adoption of the English language as a voluntary act by the British to fit in with the people of influence and power. The documentary also states that the Saxon shore forts were not built to repulse invasion because there is no evidence that any of them were ever attacked, rather they were build and used as centers of commerce and trade. The 'myth' of Saxon invasion was perpetrated by historians and writers who lived long after the era.

I posted earlier about the isotopic studies at West Heslerton. You can also add the Oxygen isotope study undertaken by Susan Hughes on the Saxon cemetery at Eastbourne which spanned the period 450-550 AD. 25% of the inhumations came from the Continent and as the cemetary spans 4 generations, with such a high number of immigrants, it is highly likely that the rest are descendents of the original incomers. Also, it must be remembered that cremation was a continental custom, so we don't get isotope results from those. The cremation urns however are distinctly Continental.

I'm not too sure who the programme makers have in mind when they say that Britons adopted the English language as a voluntary act to fit in with the people of influence and power. Where have these people with influence and power come from? Again, it is not just the spoken language. Runes appear, specifically runes using the elder futhark most commonly found in Jutland, in places like Illerup and Nydam. Although evidence of ogham is scant for the roman period, it does exist. The Caistor-by-Norwich astralagus (5th cent.) has an entirely danish runic alphabet using the single cross staved 'h' rather than the double staved 'h' of the later anglo frisian runic alphabet and still contains evidence of proto germanic in the 'eihwaz' rune. Are we to believe that not only did the Britons change their spoken language, but they also changed their written language? In addition, we see the introduction of the Grübenhaus. Whilst it may be believable that Britons adopted new germanic fashions in terms of jewellery etc, language, writing, funeral rites and building are harder to explain away simply as 'fashion'. Maybe the Britons went into decline because they spent too little time growing food and spent too much time reconstructing proto germanic and scratching scandinavian runes on animal bones. I don't believe that a man carving runes on a deer bone fits the image of the people with 'influence and power'.

Whilst it may be true that the shore forts show no sign of attack, the signal stations along the Yorkshire coast certainly do. 13 bodies were thrown down the well at the Huntcliffe signal station. Two bodies were found in the remnants of a fire in another such signal station in Yorkshire. The fort at Malton was sacked and had to be rebuilt and its vicus was raised to the ground. It's quite untrue to claim that there are no signs of violence.


best
authun