Key Concepts in Medieval Literature

Elizabeth Solopova, Stuart Lee

• Publisher: Bloomsbury Academic
• Year: 2007
• ISBN:
  9781350310339
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Study Aids
• Subtopic: Study Guides

Key Concepts in Medieval Literature introduces students to the major authors, themes and genres of the English Middle Ages. These are discussed in concise focused essays, accompanied by summaries and recommendations for further reading, highlighting the need to see texts in context, both historically and linguistically.

1 Introductory Key Concepts

(a)The Anglo-Saxon Period

Before we begin to discuss Old English literature it is essential to have a basic understanding of the historical events of the period, and the nature of Anglo-Saxon culture. This ‘context-based’ approach is one that is common to medieval literary studies. Linked to the study of the cultural aspects is the need for an understanding of the religion of the period, which, as will become increasingly clear, is essential to the discussions of its poetry and prose. It was, after all, the Christian monks of Anglo-Saxon England that copied, or were actually responsible for the composition of, much of Old English literature and therefore an awareness of the context in which they lived and worked is required.

The term ‘Anglo-Saxon’ is used generically to describe the period of English history from around the mid-5th century when the Angles and others arrived, to the year 1066, the beginning of the Norman Conquest, at which point the rule of England passed to the new invaders. ‘Anglo-Saxon’ is also used to refer to the people who occupied and ruled the land for those 600 years (i.e. the Anglo-Saxons). This apparently neat bracketing of history, however, belies a more complicated story. Britain was obviously inhabited before the Anglo-Saxons came, and these indigenous people were assimilated into Anglo-Saxon England (see below) or were driven to other lands. Moreover, even after the Norman Conquest the country was still predominantly occupied by Anglo-Saxons,¹ but by then they had become subservient to Norman rule. ‘Anglo-Saxon’ is also used occasionally to refer to the language and literature of the period (more so by earlier scholars) but the term ‘Old English’ is favoured now as it conveys the continuity of the language, i.e. from Old English to Middle English to Modern English. However, even this categorisation by chronological period is misleading, and indeed should perhaps be abandoned (see Frantzen, 1990, p. 19) since it breaks up the real ebb and flow of language across time.

The Anglo-Saxons arrived in Britain sometime in the mid-5th century with the collapse of Roman rule. They found there the indigenous Celts (or ‘Brittonic’) and the remnants of Romano-British society. Their original homeland was in the area of modern-day mainland Denmark and northern Germany. Economic necessity² and military ambitions no doubt sparked the migration. However, the legendary tale of a British chief called Vortigern hiring Saxon mercenaries who in turn rebel against him and seize lands, is one which clearly held an attraction for Anglo-Saxon writers themselves.

The early centuries, known as the ‘migration period’, involved gradual influxes and military incursions by people from three main tribes (according to Bede) – the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes; but other evidence points to settlements by other races such as the Franks and Frisians. It would appear the early incursions were on the east and south-east coasts of England. The complexity and chaos of the migration period can only be guessed at, but these warrior tribes eventually began to settle, forming dozens of kingdoms, at first either assimilating the locals or pushing them westwards and northwards to the traditional modern-day Celtic lands of Wales, Scotland, Cornwall, Brittany, and Ireland. The savagery of this period must also be assumed though archaeology has, as yet, failed to produce evidence of mass graves to imply many major pitched battles or genocide. There clearly was some British resistance to these incursions (it is in this period, for example, that the legendary name of Arthur first appears as a leader combating the invaders), but this seems more akin to a lengthy rearguard action, especially successful in delaying the Saxon advance into Cornwall.

Overall, though, the ‘migration period’ poses many questions, which may never be answered. Most crucially, as one scholar suggests, we are completely unclear as to whether this was ‘a huge influx of settlers over the sea from the east’ or ‘a total cultural and ethnic shift whereby the descendants of the Roman-period native population became English’ (Hines, 2004, p. 39).

As the invading tribes battled the indigenous population and fought among themselves, larger kingdoms began to form, so that by the 7th century the famous Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy emerged. This consisted of seven major kingdoms: Northumbria, Mercia, East Anglia, Essex, Kent, Sussex, and Wessex. War between the kingdoms was clearly common, with power bases shifting back and forth; but this was all to change in the 8th century when the first Viking invasions began. The increasing attacks of the Vikings brought many of the kingdoms to their knees and led to a wave of migration from Scandinavia and the subsequent settlement of areas of England by these new invaders (mainly in the north of England). So much so that by the end of the 9th century only the kingdom of Wessex, under King Alfred ‘the Great’ (871–99),³ remained independent. After a series of near catastrophic setbacks Alfred ‘defeated’ the Vikings and began the refortification, re-education, and rebuilding of Wessex. Once the truce he had signed was broken (in which Alfred had ceded northern England to Viking control – the so-called ‘Danelaw’), the king began the reconquest of England, gradually pushing northwards. This was continued by his sons and grandsons so successfully that by the mid-10th century all of England had been reclaimed and came under the single rule of King Athelstan of Wessex (924–39), who properly deserves the title of the first King of England.

With this reconquest came a sense of national unity, and the notion of the Angelcynn (‘race of the English’) as used by Alfred, and Engla lond (‘England’ – a term which came into existence by 1000). Interestingly both were named after the Angles (the race that settled Mercia, Northumbria, and East Anglia) but accepted and adopted by the Saxons. Yet this unity would always be tested, and the rise of the power of the Church at the expense of the nobility (thus leading to a lack of loyalty on the latter’s part), coupled with the now permanent Danish population in the north, weakened national security. This was most evident under the reign of Æthelred the Unready (979–1016), where renewed Viking invasions (more organised and disciplined this time) brought England to defeat, so much so that by 1016 the throne was handed to the Viking king, Cnut (1016–35), becoming part of his wider Scandinavian empire. Although the English regained the throne under Edward the Confessor (1042–66), Anglo-Saxon rule ended in 1066 in a flurry of political intrigue over the right of succession. The successful claim to the throne by William the Conqueror, backed with military might and papal approval, brought the Normans to power after the defeat of Harold at Hastings.

In summary then, the history of Anglo-Saxon England is a complicated story. Yet it is important to take away some key observations:

•the Anglo-Saxons started to migrate to an already occupied Britain in the mid-5th century from the area we now term northern Germany and Denmark;

•according to Bede (see Chapter 2(a) and (d)) they consisted of three tribes – the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes – but we know that other races were also represented;

•it is assumed that originally they continued their warrior tribe structure, but gradually these tribes formed into larger kingdoms, eventually becoming the famous seven kingdoms or Heptarchy;

•Viking attacks in the 8th and 9th centuries nearly destroyed Anglo-Saxon rule, but under Alfred the Great the reconquest began and England was unified in the 10th century under Athelstan;

•Anglo-Saxon rule finally came to an end with the Norman Conquest in 1066.

See also Chapter 1(e), Chapter 2(d), (e), (g), and Chapter 4(k).

Further Reading

Throughout this book we refer to many monographs and series that will reinforce the study of Old English from a literary, linguistic, and historical perspective. For a gentle introduction to the events of the period we recommend Blair (2000), John (1996), the Short Oxford Histories of the British Isles (Charles-Edwards, 2003, and Davies, 2003), and Campbell et al. (1991). If you are interested in the cartography and geographical development of Anglo-Saxon England then see Hill (1981). For more information on Anglo-Saxon society, see Chapter 1(b), (e), (f), and (d).

(b)Anglo-Saxon Society

The legacy of the Anglo-Saxon period (outlined in Chapter 1(a)) was remarkable. Not only did the English language rise to a dominant position as the language of court, and to a certain degree the church, but the boundaries of England as a country and its administrative system were also set. We will touch on these issues many times in this book, but for now it is worth capturing a few of the general points.

The period began with the migration of tribes from mainland Europe to Britain. These small groupings, or war bands, were probably built primarily around family ties and led by war leaders. They survived according to a harsh code, based on violence, feuding, and vengeance. Original settlements in the east and south of the country were basic, with huts made of timber, and wattle and daub, smaller craft huts, and a large – probably communal – hall. This latter building seems to have been a place where the local populace gathered, feasted, and told tales or were told tales by the scop (‘poet’, see Donoghue, 2004a, pp. 24–55). The hall was so important to the people that it became symbolic in their literature of a well-ordered society (for example, various halls, and thus the kingdoms they represent, are contrasted in the heroic poem Beowulf).

As time progressed these tribes grew, and the settlements grew with them. Mergers and conflict gradually saw some of these gain supremacy over their neighbours and thus small kingdoms began to form. These fought each other, and via conquest and political mergers (we assume) formed larger countries until the formation of the Heptarchy. These seven kingdoms were subdivided into shires (many of which survived until their boundaries were restructured in 1974) and these in turn, into smaller land areas called ‘hundreds’ (or ‘wapentakes’ in the Danelaw – an area of northern England controlled by the Danes in the early 10th century).

A kingdom was ruled by a king who was chosen by the group (so not necessarily by succession). Occasionally in this early period kings were recognised as being the dominant power by other kings, hence the term bretwalda or ‘overlord’. Beneath the king were his gesithas or ‘companions’ made up of thegns and ealdormen. These were divided into the duguth – the trusted/proven companions; and the geoguth – the young warriors. The relationship between the king and his nobles, the so-called comitatus, was key to early Anglo-Saxon society and was based on a system of loyalty and reward. Beneath the nobility were the ceorls or freemen, and then finally the slaves. This tightly structured society was based on mutual dependencies and we can detect in their writing a clear fear of exile from the community (see Chapter 2(i), ‘Elegies and Transience’).

The place of women in society is also noteworthy. Although it would be inaccurate to say they enjoyed equal status to men, they were certainly not as disenfranchised as they were in later medieval society (Fell, 1984). In Anglo-Saxon England, for example, they could hold property, bestow it, run joint religious houses, and lead armies into battle.

Eventually, a single nation was formed: England. However, although this was a new nation, often troubled by internal difficulties and external attackers, it was also a country that continually remembered its roots. Bede, for example, called the other Germanic tribes on the Continent gens nostra or ‘our people’, and this is probably linked to the efforts made by Anglo-Saxon missionaries to convert the Germanic tribes on mainland Europe. They were aware also of the mythological beliefs they held in the past, and celebrated many of the ideals that we can assume were prized in their early history, such as heroism, loyalty, the reliance on kinship and family bonds, and the comitatus relationship between the warrior and the lord. All of these hearken back to the original tribal societies and structures. Even when towns and cities emerged and systems of administration more akin to modern society formed, their understanding and fondness for the past was still evident. This is clear in the famous ‘elegies’ where the problems of the present are set against a eulogised the past.

See also Chapter 1(a), (c), (e), (f), and Chapter 2(c), (i) and (j).

Further Reading

For approachable introductions to life in Anglo-Saxon England one should look to Page (1970), and Lacey and Danziger (1999). Pollington (2003) provides a specific study of the hall in Anglo-Saxon society, to which one should add general books on the history and archaeology of the Anglo-Saxons. For a more detailed study of the development of the role of kings, see Chaney (1970), and for an introductory study of the role of women in the period, see Fell (1984), and the notes on feminist criticism in Chapter 4(k).

(c)The Norman Conquest and the Later Medieval Period

Normandy as a principality was founded c.911 when King Charles the Simple of France granted the province to the Scandinavians who settled there in the 9th and 10th centuries. Norse settlers, who gave Normandy its name (e.g. ‘Northmen/Norsemen’), quickly assimilated and became French-speaking. In the 11th century the civilisation in Normandy was essentially French but it had close economic, cultural, and political ties with Anglo-Saxon England. In 1002 King Æthelred the Unready married Emma, daughter of the Duke of Normandy. Throughout Æthelred’s reign England was under threat from Viking invaders, and it was natural for Æthelred to seek an alliance with a strong neighbouring state (Norman ports had also been used safely by the Vikings). Moreover in 1013–14 England was invaded by the Danish king, Swein Forkbeard and his son Cnut, and Æthelred was forced into exile in Normandy. In 1016 Æthelred died, and Cnut led a more successful invasion, becoming the king of all England (after the death of Æthelred’s son Edmund Ironside), which he ruled until 1035. However, in 1042, when the Danish line died out, Edward the Confessor (the son of Emma and Æthelred) became king, so restoring Anglo-Saxon rule. After a 24-year reign he died childless in January 1066.

One of the claimants to the English throne before 1066 was William the Conqueror, Duke of Normandy. He was Emma’s great-nephew and considered himself next in line to the throne after the death of Edward the Confessor. Moreover, Edward was brought up in Normandy where he had lived in exile after Cnut became king, and according to Norman chroniclers promised his throne to William in the event of his childless death.

However, only a few days after Edward’s death his brother-in-law, Harold Godwineson, was crowned King of England. He was the Earl of Essex, and brother of Edith who Edward the Confessor had married in 1045 (probably more down to pressure th...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Halftitle
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• General Editors’ Preface
• List of Abbreviations
• Introduction
• 1 Introductory Key Concepts
• 2 Old English
• 3 Middle English
• 4 Approaches, Theory, and Practice
• Chronology
• References
• Index