I tried to stop her. I really
did, but the Estimable Mrs P., when she gets an idea, is an unstoppable force.
I mentioned a few weeks ago the new, non-wargaming history project I have conceived
revolving around the Norman Conquest and the creation of the Domesday Book. And
the said Estimable Mrs P. purchased for me, at eye-watering academic book price
the following weighty tome:
Pickles, T. (2018) Kingship,
Society, and the Church in Anglo-Saxon Yorkshire, Oxford, OUP.
You might object, as I did, that
the book covers nothing about the north of England post-1066. The Estimable Mrs
P. is canny enough, and a good enough historian, to disregard my objections and
buy it for me, as reduced but still exorbitant cost.
One of the things that is true is
that if you start off studying one bit of history, you soon start looking at
another period, the one just before. Thus English Civil War studies inevitably
lead to studies of the 1620’s, and hence to the ‘Golden Age’ of Elizabeth I.
Similarly, studies of the Roman Empire leads back to the Republic, and hence to
Ancient Greece. History is annoyingly continuous, and hence you land up placing
yourself on a continuous spectrum, rather than a discrete age or period.
Anyway, Pickles’ tome is about
what we know and how we can know about the ‘Saxon’ period in medieval history.
On a side note, the term ‘medieval’ seems to have shifted since I was a lad.
Then, it meant 1066 – 1485. Now it means the fall of the Roman Empire in the
West to whenever we deem the Early Modern Period to have sprung into life. The
bit before 1066 was called the Dark Ages (satirised on a Usenet group I used to
read as ‘The Age of Insufficient Light’), when no-one knew what was going on.
Still, history and historiography
move on. Texts are re-analysed for what they might tell us, and archaeology
throws some sorts of light on peoples and their thinking. As interdisciplinary
studies start to gain a bit of traction in the academy (the academy has been
talking about them since the 1980s to my certain knowledge), we get studies
like Pickles’. Text, such as Bede’s History, assorted lives of saints and so
on, can be melded to archaeology of various different sorts (these days, you do
not need to actually dig anything up if you do not wish to) to obtain an idea,
of sorts, as to what was going on.
Here, the focus is on the Kingdoms
of Deira (roughly, probably, from the Humber to the Tees) with side orders of
Northumberland, Elmet, Bernicia (Northumberland before Northumberland), Rheged,
and a few places even more exotically further afield, such as Kent. One of the
things to be remembered, of course, is that while communications could be
slower than today (although anyone waiting for a Microsoft Software Update
might wonder about that) Britain was not isolated from the rest of Europe,
Ireland or anywhere else people went to. It is only a recent spate of ‘Little Englanders’
who think that it was.
Anyway, proto-rant aside, what
interests Pickles is how these post-Roman political entities worked in terms of
kingship and nobility, and how Christianity came to spread among them until it
was the only game in town. His argument, roughly, so far as I can tell (this
is, note, the second book I’ve read on the subject – an amateur would be
streets ahead of me) is that social groups found Christianity would fit among
their contemporary beliefs and that it had some social advantages. The Roman
Empire has, of course, permitted the spread of the faith – if you build roads
then ideas will travel along them in a similar way to today’s ideas, both good and
bad, travelling via Internet – but successive waves of ‘invaders’, whether they
were invited as soldiers, came as pillagers, or somewhere in between, pushed
Christianity across the country, broadly speaking westward.
This is a complex and largely
unknown process, but due to internal politics in some of the polities, among
elite families where succession to the kingship was uncertain (primogenitor had
not really been invented and, even if it had, early death and infant heirs
would have created problems), a fair number of noble people spent some time
abroad, in the more Christian western areas. When they returned they brought
these strange ideas with them and some saw the ideas as an opportunity. Hence a
‘Ecclesiastical Aristocracy’ (Pickles’ term) was born in the second generation
as families realised that control of some of the key church foundations would
give them enhanced social standing and, possibly, control of land gifted to the
monasteries.
Hence you get ‘second generation’
Christian leaders, the most obvious of whom was St Hild of Whitby, and also
conflict between the missionaries from Ireland and Scotland, and those from
Rome via the south of England, the dynasties of which intermarried with the
northern kingdoms. These sorts of conflicts were political in nature – if your
foe favoured the Celts, then you invited the Romans. Politics was not then, and
is not now a zero-sum game –choices are rational.
Anyway, this is a very good book,
even for a less than amateur historian of the period, and it has solved some of
the mysteries of the north, such as whether and why there was a minster model
of church growth, and what happened to the original monasteries such as Whitby,
Hartlepool and Lastingham. In fact, the discussion of why these places landed
up where they did is fascinating in itself, and rather refutes the idea that ‘the
church should keep out of politics’.
Of course, the book asks as many
questions as it answers. I am finding that I have to write a glossary of terms
as I go along, even looking some of them up in online dictionaries for
definitions, although my translation of the Domesday Book itself has a very
useful glossary to boot. And so, finally, I leave you with the question: ‘what
is soke?’
No comments:
Post a Comment