IMmediately upon the marriage of Vortigern with the daughter of Hengist, great numbers of the northern nations, under the inclusive title of Saxons, hastened over to Britain, and the Britons received and paid them as confederates. Vortigern, by the persuasion of his father-in-law, assigned Northumberland for their residence. As their numbers increased, the payment of such fresh supplies grew burdensome to the Britons. They desired the Saxons to depart; and alledged that they were not able to maintain so many more troops than were stipulated by treaty, or were necessary for defence. The Saxons relished their present situation too well to exchange it: they refused to return; so that the Britons were compelled to rouze themselves from every symptom of lethargy, and to assume that glorious spirit of liberty, which, whenever exerted in a proper manner, renders the British nation a powerful, and a happy people. They unanimously rose up in arms against the Saxons, who were joined by the Scots and Picts. Many battles were fought, and great numbers of men were destroyed; woods were burnt, churches were demolished, and whole cities were depopulated. At length, many of the Saxons returned into Germany: Their return was owing to the warm reception which they met with from our ancestors. The Britons might be plundered, but could not be absolutely conquered: they might be forced or betrayed into slavery, but they had native strength sufficient soon to unshackle themselves, and to burst forth again into the plains of liberty. The Britons, as a national body, or as individual men, seldom failed to appear with remarkable lustre under misfortunes and oppressions. In milder times, they were either totally inactive, or impoliticly employed in disputes and animosities among themselves. They were naturally honest, indolent, and unsuspicious; too easily captivated with strangers; too hasty and irresolute, and, consequently, too easily led into danger and disasters. These were some of their earliest, and these will probably be some of their latest characteristics.
Nothing farther can be said with certainty: the latter end of Vortigern’s reign is much obscured amidst fables and idle tales: he is generally described as a man much abandoned to his vices.
His son Vortimer is supposed to have deposed his father, or at least to have commanded the Britons against Hengist, Vortigern, and the Saxons: he is represented as a prince of a more amiable character than Vortigern. He died before his father; and, after his death, Vortigern reassumed the reins of government, and became again one of the chief monarchs of Britain. Hengist still remained king of Kent.
Vortigern was very unacceptable to his subjects: he shewed too great favour and partiality to the Saxons, who, by their cruelties, had rendered themselves exceedingly terrible and odious. Vortigern, finding himself uneasy on his throne, retired with his family into Wales, and was buried at a place in Caernarvonshire, which still bears the name of Vortigern’s Grave.
The clouds of history are no where more obscure than at this period. The antient historians have mixed their narratives with legendary stories: the modern writers have been at the pains to mention those stories; the history is swelled, but the instruction from it is not encreased. The uncertainty of chronology is another most discouraging circumstance: the chronologists differ very widely from each other. Every author who treats of those times, fills his bucket, as he imagines, from the purest fountains; but tacitly endeavours to draw up some water from a different stream than any that has been discovered by his cotemporaries, or his predecessors.
Here it may not be improper to remind ourselves of the civil government that still subsisted among the Britons, since that government will soon be changed into another form.
The whole nation, as by the original constitution, was still divided into principalities. The principalities were very small: the head of each little colony was honoured sometimes, not always, with the pompous title of a king.
Several of these princes had been lately driven out of the kingdom by the outrages of the Saxons; and had been attended by great numbers of their subjects into Armorica. They were received and protected by Aldroen, king of that country: but as soon as they heard that the majority of Saxons were departed towards Germany, many of the British princes, again attended by their subjects, came back, and settled themselves in the districts which they had formerly governed. Ambrosuis Aurelianus was of the number of those who returned. He was king of Wiltshire, and his chief residence was called Urbs Ambrosii: the name of the place (Amesbury) is still in a great measure retained. He was a young prince of Roman descent, and of a most excellent character; warlike, modest, and amiable. As some period must be affixt to his reign, although the beginning and end of it are both very uncertain, let us suppose, from various small glimmerings, if they even may be called glimmerings of probability, that it began in the year 465, and ended in the year 508. In this space of forty-three years the general historical records entirely consist of different battles and sieges between our ancestors and the Saxons, who had left Britain fully determined to return to a more effectual purpose.
The methods which the Saxons took to effect their views of conquest were gradual. From the year 437, Hengist bore the title of king of Kent: he reigned upwards of thirty years, and died, after various struggles with the Britons, in peaceful possession of his throne. He was succeeded by his son Esca; and from him sprung a line of kings amounting, Hengist included, to seventeen. The last of the kings of Kent was Baldred: he was driven out by Egbert, in the year 823.
The Saxons who had been settled in Northumberland, or dispersed in other parts of the kingdom, received continual accessions of strength by the arrival of their countrymen from Germany. These additional troops of supply came in small numbers, but they came often; till, by degrees, the most eminent chieftains appeared, and with them whole armies of followers and dependants.
Such was Ella, a Saxon of great power and dignity among his countrymen. He brought with him his two sons, and a very considerable force. He landed in Sussex in the year 477; and, after much opposition from the Britons, he conquered Sussex, and a great part of Surry. He did not assume the title of king during the life of Hengist, from whom he probably received great assistance in his conquests. He died in the year 514, after a reign of twenty-four years. His territories were called the kingdom of the South Saxons.
The third and next monarchy formed by these invaders, was the kingdom of the West-Saxons. The first of the West Saxon kings was Cerdic: he landed in the year 495. From the very day on which he landed, till the year 519, he was at war with the Britons. In these battles the success was various, and the loss on each side considerable: but Cerdic was constantly reinforced by fresh recruits from Germany. The Britons, who had no such advantages, were at last so effectually conquered, that Cerdic became possessed of a great part of Cornwall, and entirely of Devonshire, Dorsetshire, Wiltshire, Somersetshire, Hampshire, and Berkshire. He died in the year 534, and was succeeded by his son Cenric. The West-Saxon kings were in number seventeen, the last of whom became sole monarch of Britain.
The fourth kingdom of the heptarchy was that of the East-Saxons. The first monarch of that kingdom was Erkenwin. He began his reign in the year 527: he died in the year 560. His territories were Essex, Middlesex, and part of Hertfordshire.
Northumberland was the fifth kingdom of the heptarchy. It contained Lancashire, Yorkshire, the bishopric of Durham, Cumberland, Westmorland, Northumberland, and part of Scotland, as far as the frith of Edinburgh. Ida was the first Saxon king of these provinces. He began his reign in the year 547, and died in the year 559. After his death, the kingdom of Northumberland was otherwise divided.
The sixth was the kingdom of the East-Angles. It contained Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridgeshire, and the isle of Ely. Uffa, the first monarch, began his reign in the year 575: he died in the year 582. This kingdom was united to Mercia in the year 793.
Mercia was the seventh, and the largest division of the Saxon heptarchy. It contained Gloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Leicestershire, Rutlandshire, Northamptonshire, Lincolnshire, Huntingdonshire, Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire, Staffordshire, Shropshire, Nottinghamshire, Cheshire, and part of Hertfordshire. Cridda, the first king, began his reign in the year 582, and died in 593. The fate of these several kingdoms needs not to be particularised: let us return to take a review of the Britons under the reign of Ambrosius.
Many of our historians are of opinion, that Ambrosius is the same person as Natan-leod, who is represented by the antient writers, as the greatest of the British kings. In that point the description answers the dignity of Ambrosius, who, whilst he lived, defended his territories with great magnanimity, and often with success.
Natan-leod was slain in a battle fought against the Saxons, near Charford, in Hampshire, when five thousand Britons were left dead upon the field.
But what shall be said of king Arthur? or at what time shall we suppose that he reigned? since his very existence itself is call’d in question; and since he has unfortunately been celebrated by so many fabulous writers, that his true history can never be known. That he existed is beyond all doubt, and that he reigned is a point which many authors have sufficiently proved: but the actions of this prince, although in themselves brave and glorious, are so outrageously magnified, that the real soldier is lost in the fictitious giant-killer; and the genuine and noble form of the hero is so utterly dissolved, that from a substance, it becomes a shadow. I will endeavour to extract, if possible, some gold from amidst the historical dross of these times. Probability must be my best assistant in the search.
Arthur was nearly related to Ambrosius, Aurelianus, perhaps directly descended from him. The beginning of Arthur’s reign is assigned to the year 514. His coronation to the year 519. His victories over the Saxons are supposed to have been twelve in number; but the Saxons had already fixed themselves too deeply in our island to be rooted out by the strongest hand: nor was Arthur always victorious, otherwise he would scarce have yielded up by a treaty with Cerdic, the counties of Somerset and Southampton; a cession which gave the West Saxons such great power, and such easy opportunities of encreasing their dominions, that in length of time, they absorb’d the rest of the heptarchy, and terminated the entire monarchy of Britain in their own sovereign, king Egbert.
Arthur was a native of South Wales: his memory has been ever held in particular veneration by the Welch. One of the highest mountains in Brecnockshire is called Arthur’s chair, in honour of a prince who was remarkable pre-eminent. The first part of his life was prosperous, the latter end of it was unfortunate. During an expedition to the northern parts of the kingdom, where he was summoned to assist the Britons against the Saxons, he left his patrimonial dominions, which were Cornwall, Devonshire, and Dorsetshire, to the government and care of his nephew Mordred, who proved unfaithful to his trust, and possessed himself of the throne. Arthur returned into Cornwall, attended by a numerous army: an engagement ensued, Mordred was killed in the field of battle, Arthur was desperately wounded, and died soon afterwards, at the age of ninety years, seventy-six of which he had exercised in war. He was buried at Glastenbury, in Somersetshire, and with him was interred the glory of the Britons. Arthur’s death is fixed by all authors, in the year 542.
As I have mentioned the Welch, it may not be improper in this place to give some short account of a people, who have constantly held themselves in a kind of separate and distinct state from the rest of the Britons. In the time of the Romans, the inhabitants of North Wales were called Ordovices, and those of South Wales were called Silures.
The counties of North Wales are Montgomeryshire, Merionethshire, Denbighshire, Flintshire, Carnarvonshire, and the isle of Anglesey.
The counties of South Wales, are Monmouthshire, Brecknockshire, Carmarthenshire, Glamorganshire, Cardiganshire, and Pembrokeshire.
The inhabitants of the forest of Dean, and of Herefordshire, were also called Silures, and those of Shropshire were reckoned among the Ordovices.
The Welch, or Cambrians were never entirely conquered: They had the same advantage as the Caledonians. When they found themselves too hard pressed, they retired within their mountains, and were safe. They were of more generous, and less rapacious dispositions than the Scots: they were an high spirited people, easily provoked, and very sharp in resentment: they were hardy, like all mountaineers, well made, and robust in their persons: they were proud, not vain; fiery, not cruel: they married within their own tribes, and therefore are justly looked upon even to this day, as the truest and most ancient Britons. The Ordovices remained longer than the Silures, in the state of a commonwealth, independant of any single sovereign: but the whole kingdom of Cambria had certainly submitted to a regal government long before the arrival of the Saxons, and even before the departure of the Romans. Their sovereigns were all chosen by the people; but in what manner, I believe, cannot easily be known: and although their names may be enrolled in the records of Wales, their particular histories would be tedious and to no purpose. In the choice of Arthur, the Britons were entirely unanimous: he was an honour to the country where he was born, and a defence to the territories where he resided.
From the departure of the Romans, to the settlement of the Saxons, Christianity, by degrees, and at different periods, had made a considerable progress into various parts of Britain. The first step, and certainly a very wise one, was the establishment of schools, in which the Britons in their earliest time of life were taught the doctrines of religion, and the principles of moral virtues. From such seeds alone must spring every flourishing branch of civil government and order. A school under the conduct and care of Dubricius, is mentioned as one of considerable note in those times, Dubricius was a most religious man, of great abilities, and of indefatigable industry. He was first made bishop of Landaff, and was translated from thence in the year 512, by the authority of a synod, to the archbishoprick of Kaer-leon, or Chester. I mention this circumstance only to shew that the Christian church was then so well established in Britain, as to be divided into sees: and it will be found, upon looking into the voluminous historians of our nation, that monasteries had been erected, synods had been held, and even heresies, particularly those of Arian and Pelagius, had prevailed in Britain long before the perfection of the heptarchy. By the perfection, I mean the division of the kingdom into seven Saxon monarchies.
To give an history of the church, or to enter minutely into the ecclesiastical government, would be a laborious, and a very unprofitable undertaking; neither suitable to the intent of these papers, nor available in any material point whatever. To our happiness, and to our honour be it spoken, we have long ago thrown off the yoke of Rome: we have discovered her pretended miracles, and we have despised her idolatrous vanities. The memorials of her errors need not be minutely specified, unless when they are connected, or interwoven with the systems of the state.
The Saxons were descended from those Germans who are often mentioned by Caesar, and fully described by Tacitus; and who appeared under the denomination of Goths and Vandals, titles dreadful to learning, and all the civil arts of peace! they were a rude, robust, warlike people; and subsisted under a kind of government, to which it would be difficult to appropriate any general name. It was neither oligarchy, monarchy, democracy, nor commonwealth. Tacitus, in his account of the Germans, says, De minoribus rebus principes consultant, de majoribus omnes. Ita tamen, ut ea quoque quorum penes plebem arbitrium est, apud principes pertractentur. ‘The chieftains debated solely upon matters of little consequence: in matters of importance, all the people were consulted; but in such a manner, that whatever was left to the decision of the people had first been digested by the chieftants.’ A little farther, the same historian tells us, Nihil autem neque publicae neque privatae rei nisi armati agunt. ‘They never transact any business, either of a public or a private nature, unless they are armed.’ Such were the aborigines of the Saxons, and from them is derived our Gothic custom of wearing swords in all public places, and in all visits of ceremony, even to our nearest friends and relations.
Whatever system of government might have prevailed among these northern nations, while they remained upon the continent, they were wise enough to perceive that the regal state was most natural, and agreeable to the disposition of the Britons. The first step of Hengist was to make himself king. Six other Saxon chieftains, whose names I have already mentioned, followed his example. The Britons fought often, and fought bravely in defence of their rights and privileges, particularly the liberty of chusing their own kings: they were overpowered by numbers; and time, often the best friend to conquest, inured them to Saxon monarchs, and to Saxon laws. Their own customs were forgotten, and the customs and religion of the conquerors were received. They even lost their name; and, from the Angles, will be called English, as long as the nation shall subsist.
The Saxons apparently laid the foundation of that mighty pillar of our state, a parliament: at least the basis of it seems to have been built upon the Saxon Wittena-Gemot. The column indeed has since been formed and fluted with all the power and skill of architecture; and when a sovereign is properly placed upon the capital, the justness of the several parts, and the exactness and beauty of the proportions will be universally admired, except by those who think the king a superficial ornament. The Wittena-Gemot of the Saxons was an assembly in which all public and private business was transacted. Leagues of alliance and affinity with other nations were there determinately passed: inconveniencies were remedied, and rights were established, and sanctified by law. The assembly was composed of king, lords, and freemen. The debates were concluded by votes, and the numbers were determined by voices, unless when the noise was doubtful, and the majority uncertain: in that case the votes were taken severally.
In the year 596, Augustine the monk, since known by the name of St. Austin, was peremptorily sent into England by Pope Gregory the first, to convert the Saxons from Paganism to Christianity: he was attended by a company of Missionaries, his brethren, of whom he was the chief: they landed in the isle of Thanet, and soon afterwards proceeded to Canterbury, where king Ethelbert and his court then resided. They were received favourably by the king: a part of the city of Canterbury was assigned for their habitation, and they were permitted to preach the gospel throughout the dominion of Kent. Augustine had undertaken the journey unwillingly: he had once absolutely refused it, and had returned back to Rome, frightened at the terrible accounts which were given of our ancestors. Gregory, who had undoubted assurances, that the English were ready to embrace Christianity, spirited up the timorous monk to pursue his intended journey, and the event proved so successful, that before the end of the year, more than ten thousand English were converted. Among these was Ethelbert, king of Kent, who was looked upon as the superior king of the Saxons. In his conversion he was probably influenced by his queen Bertha, a princess of great piety, a daughter of France, and perhaps the only daughter of France who was ever of real advantage to England.
From this period, Christianity, which had been much repulsed, and damped, since the arrival of the Saxons, began to shine out, sometimes in greater, and at other times in lesser degrees of lustre. Many of the Saxon kings were zealous christians: their sons and successors often returned to paganism. But the indefatigable industry of the Romish priests, the dexterity with which they performed their miracles, the natural enthusiasm, doubts, and timid disposition of mankind, were all circumstances that tended, not indeed to introduce the doctrines of Christ, but to establish and encrease the power of the pope, and to inculcate an implicit submission to priests of every degree and order; and most especially to monks. It pleases God to permit us to worship him in all the errors and infirmities of our nature: such is his will, and his will be done!
From the arrival of St. Augustine, to the end of the heptarchy, by the establishment of a single monarch over the whole kingdom of England, is a space of about two hundred and thirty years. Throughout that period we might expect to find many remarkable events in a monarchy, consisting of seven royal branches; but scarce any part of the English history is more sapless and unfruitful. The scenes which heretofore represented civil wars between the native Britons, were now only changed into civil wars between those Britons, and the engrafted Saxons. The ambition and restlessness of the several kings prevented an union in the general system of government. Each monarch strove to extend his territories, and to enlarge his rights. We are at a loss to know in what particulars these rights consisted. If from the materials of history that remain to us, we can form any exact notion of the rules of policy, by which the heptarchy was guided, we may conclude that one of the seven monarchs was superior to the rest: a kind of president to the regal council. All matters of importance, or relative to private property, were to be laid before him; but each of the other kings had an equal right of choice in every single transaction that required approbation or dissent. The principal members of the Wittena-Gemot had no less a right of giving their voices, in points where the general welfare of the nation was included. This seems to have been the Saxon form of government; and it is easy to suppose, that the different prerogatives not only of the several kings, but of the individual members who composed the assembly, might often clash, and give continual occasions for those feuds and contests, which are the principal records that occur to us in all accounts of the heptarchy.
[To be continued.]
PROCEED TO NEXT INSTALLMENT OF ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF GREAT BRITAIN >>