I have no idea how well this site is considered, though the author has been referred to before https://historyfirst.com/anglo-saxon-takeover-occurred-400-years-after-legions-left-scientist-says/?fbclid=IwAR0C8BX4fnkjk_A7X_sFujVI5XzkTCTtrH21DBE6HemPq1AbMrRCuEThfVM
Thanks Phil,
another interesting take on the story. Worth a squint although I will heavily refrain from critique based on a short overview by the reviewer....! ;D
also of note that our own President does the foreword in the book and the author has penned a couple of titles we may be familiar with..... :)
Presumably, the move away from using our limited contemporary resources and focussing on the science and the archaeology frees us of the need to have all the usual suspects - Arthur, Ambrosius, Vortigern etc . Be interesting to see what the period specialists say.
Quote from: Holly on Jul 26, 2022, 06:27 AM
Thanks Phil,
another interesting take on the story. Worth a squint although I will heavily refrain from critique based on a short overview by the reviewer....! ;D
Pretty much my thought too. Thanks for bringing it to our attention Phil.
Quote from: Erpingham on Jul 26, 2022, 08:06 AM
Presumably, the move away from using our limited contemporary resources and focussing on the science and the archaeology frees us of the need to have all the usual suspects - Arthur, Ambrosius, Vortigern etc . Be interesting to see what the period specialists say.
It would be dangerous to completely ignore all of the written info pre the 8th C and rely solely on archaeology and DNA analysis, however meticulously analysed. It would be like historians 1500 years from now not having any written records and finding lots of bikes in old river courses and declaring that in the 20th C the main form of transport was the bike or worse still that they were votive offerings to river nymphs
I will obviously get this book and critique it properly though ;D
QuoteIt would be dangerous to completely ignore all of the written info pre the 8th C and rely solely on archaeology and DNA analysis, however meticulously analysed.
While I would agree with you, it is curious that the review makes no mention of the usual central figures, whereas a reviewer would normally leap on what the author has to say about Arthurian matters. This may suggest a lack of emphasis on this area, again unusual. I was reminded of the Scandinavian approach to their later Iron Age, where later stories are downplayed in favour of archaeology. Anyway, the actual book may be a different kettle of fish and I look forward to what our members specialising in this area make of it.
bought on kindle..... :)
Agreed Dave and Anthony.
You can usually get an idea of where the author is coming from by reading the bibliography if the book has one. Mind you that's far from fool proof.
Are you thinking of doing a review Dave?
yes will do a review Stephen....
I'll have a quick look at the biblio
a quick look shows no 'ancient texts' or the usual suspects in the biblio. Also the mentions of things like Vortigern (0), Arthur (4), Gildas (2), Nennius (0), Bede (1), ASC (1) in the whole book shows a dramatic departure from the norm.
Intrigued but not necessarily imbued with high hopes at this point....
Probably the right spirit Dave. looking forward to seeing what you make of it.
While we are on the subject here is a thought. The Irish learned classes expended a great deal of effort bringing the new kings within the remit of the law. The new kings had risen on the loot of Britannia. The effort more or less paid off. Concurrently Christianity was on the rise to dominance. Itself a British import.
I'm beginning to think the same process had already taken place in Britannia with the Church playing the role of the Irish learned classes.
I tend to agree Stephen. Early ascetic leanings gave way to a more prominent positions within society especially with the regard to the anointing of kings post 410AD and all that. Having said that, Britannia was more rooted in the duality of Christianity and secular authority imbued in the power structures before, during and after Roman control
Quote from: Holly on Jul 26, 2022, 09:20 AM
It would be like historians 1500 years from now not having any written records and finding lots of bikes in old river courses and declaring that in the 20th C the main form of transport was the bike or worse still that they were votive offerings to river nymphs
One wonders what they would make of the prams they find in such places? Child sacrifice?
And as to all the shopping trollies... ::)
Quote from: NickHarbud on Jul 26, 2022, 01:50 PM
Quote from: Holly on Jul 26, 2022, 09:20 AM
It would be like historians 1500 years from now not having any written records and finding lots of bikes in old river courses and declaring that in the 20th C the main form of transport was the bike or worse still that they were votive offerings to river nymphs
One wonders what they would make of the prams they find in such places? Child sacrifice?
And as to all the shopping trollies... ::)
chariots to the underworld
Quote from: Holly on Jul 26, 2022, 09:20 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on Jul 26, 2022, 08:06 AM
Presumably, the move away from using our limited contemporary resources and focussing on the science and the archaeology frees us of the need to have all the usual suspects - Arthur, Ambrosius, Vortigern etc . Be interesting to see what the period specialists say.
It would be dangerous to completely ignore all of the written info pre the 8th C and rely solely on archaeology and DNA analysis, however meticulously analysed. It would be like historians 1500 years from now not having any written records and finding lots of bikes in old river courses and declaring that in the 20th C the main form of transport was the bike or worse still that they were votive offerings to river nymphs
It's obviously nonsense, the correct votive offerings to river nymphs are supermarket trolleys
Or curaghs that have sunk and the leather coverings have disintergrated
Quote from: Holly on Jul 26, 2022, 11:11 AM
a quick look shows no 'ancient texts' or the usual suspects in the biblio. Also the mentions of things like Vortigern (0), Arthur (4), Gildas (2), Nennius (0), Bede (1), ASC (1) in the whole book shows a dramatic departure from the norm.
Intrigued but not necessarily imbued with high hopes at this point....
So unencumbered by the usual baggage and the frequent nonsense spouted about it - sounds like a positive recommendation to me.
it can be however I believe a combined approach is best. Done the 1st chapter and erm.....hoping it gets better
Quote from: nikgaukroger on Jul 26, 2022, 07:03 PM
Quote from: Holly on Jul 26, 2022, 11:11 AM
a quick look shows no 'ancient texts' or the usual suspects in the biblio. Also the mentions of things like Vortigern (0), Arthur (4), Gildas (2), Nennius (0), Bede (1), ASC (1) in the whole book shows a dramatic departure from the norm.
Intrigued but not necessarily imbued with high hopes at this point....
So unencumbered by the usual baggage and the frequent nonsense spouted about it - sounds like a positive recommendation to me.
I don't know about that Nick judging from the short review.
"Lambshead said there was no evidence for an Anglo-Saxon invasion, and this would have been beyond the organisational and technological capabilities of 5th and 6th century Germans with only rowing boats for the crossing."
"He infers that population pressure in the 7th and 8th centuries caused the Anglo-Saxons, who had in the meantime developed hierarchical societies with kings and warrior elites, to seize land from the impoverished and less organised Britons."
All seems familiar.
the first chapter is pretty black and white according to the author. There was no invasion/migration event pre 8thC. But rather than say it may have been possible but unlikely or it may have happened in small groupings in areas with low local control, its a no and it just didnt happen at all etc.....
Quote from: Holly on Jul 27, 2022, 12:27 PM
the first chapter is pretty black and white according to the author. There was no invasion/migration event pre 8thC. But rather than say it may have been possible but unlikely or it may have happened in small groupings in areas with low local control, its a no and it just didnt happen at all etc.....
So he goes for an extreme acculturation model? All alien elements in the archaeological assemblage prior to the 8th century are changes in fashion but the population remains British? Interestingly radical. Presumably, he has a rationale for discarding the various textual sources?
there are some interesting observations on highland v lowland areas and the differences culturally and militarily plus a comparison with similar area in Europe at the time. However, the main thrust to lay the context is that invaders didnt possess enough suitable ships/boats to have 'an invasion' and so thats that, the incomers and the British lived side by side and didnt mix till later. Small groupings of people may have arrived bit by bit over the years but this wasnt significant numerically or politically until muuuuuch later.
I will have a read of chapter 2 later :)
Sounds more than a little nonsensical. Why would the Empire build forts along the Channel shores? How come we have the Saxons of Bayeux who come to fight with Aetius?
Cornish gig boats, which are about the same size as an Anglian rowing boat are proppelled by oars and can happily make the trip to France under oars . Actually the emigrants in the Channel are a good example, in a year easily 30,000 of them cross. Do that for ten years and we have 300,000, easily enough to dominate the East coast of Britannia.
Roy
Quote from: Holly on Jul 27, 2022, 01:52 PM
there are some interesting observations on highland v lowland areas and the differences culturally and militarily plus a comparison with similar area in Europe at the time. However, the main thrust to lay the context is that invaders didnt possess enough suitable ships/boats to have 'an invasion' and so thats that, the incomers and the British lived side by side and didnt mix till later. Small groupings of people may have arrived bit by bit over the years but this wasnt significant numerically or politically until muuuuuch later.
I will have a read of chapter 2 later :)
Your updates as you go are appreciated Dave. Thank you.
Quote from: aligern on Jul 27, 2022, 04:06 PM
Sounds more than a little nonsensical. Why would the Empire build forts along the Channel shores? How come we have the Saxons of Bayeux who come to fight with Aetius?
Cornish gig boats, which are about the same size as an Anglian rowing boat are proppelled by oars and can happily make the trip to France under oars . Actually the emigrants in the Channel are a good example, in a year easily 30,000 of them cross. Do that for ten years and we have 300,000, easily enough to dominate the East coast of Britannia.
Roy
Yes, good points Roy. There was also the possibility of hiring bigger Roman Merchant vessels to transport larger contingents.
Quote from: Anton on Jul 27, 2022, 04:16 PM
Quote from: aligern on Jul 27, 2022, 04:06 PM
Sounds more than a little nonsensical. Why would the Empire build forts along the Channel shores? How come we have the Saxons of Bayeux who come to fight with Aetius?
Cornish gig boats, which are about the same size as an Anglian rowing boat are proppelled by oars and can happily make the trip to France under oars . Actually the emigrants in the Channel are a good example, in a year easily 30,000 of them cross. Do that for ten years and we have 300,000, easily enough to dominate the East coast of Britannia.
Roy
Yes, good points Roy. There was also the possibility of hiring bigger Roman Merchant vessels to transport larger contingents.
or nicking them....
Quote from: Holly on Jul 26, 2022, 01:12 PM
I tend to agree Stephen. Early ascetic leanings gave way to a more prominent positions within society especially with the regard to the anointing of kings post 410AD and all that. Having said that, Britannia was more rooted in the duality of Christianity and secular authority imbued in the power structures before, during and after Roman control
I think that is right Dave.
Koch, Charles-Edwards and Dark all envisage a successful mass programme of evangelism. If Koch is right about St. Patrick's floreat it extends into the Old North up to the Firth of Forth and beyond. To the Picts and to Ireland. No small undertaking.
It was a societal re organisation and the building blocks were the tribally inspired civitates.
It interests me is that there are distinct non-Christian elements to Irish and Welsh Law that pre date and survive the process. These persisted, despite the hostility of the clerics from Gildas onwards.
I think of Gildas writing "The island was Roman in name only." and Zozimus telling us the Britons no longer recognised Roman Law reflects this.
I enjoyed re reading E.A Thompson's'82 piece.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/638584?read-now=1&seq=4#page_scan_tab_contents&target=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuanN0b3Iub3Jn
I think he doth protest too much with no migrants.
We know the Alamannic king Chrocus proclaimed Constantine Emperor, we know that Franks served under Carausius and Allectus.
It is unlikely that there were no 'Germanic' infantry serving in Britain under the late Empire.
I am now a 3rd of the way into the book. The author has now decided to treat us to combined analysis of roman Britain from the 1st century onwards relying on.....written records. Surely his approach should be to bin the written stuff as unreliable and just go on the archaeology ::)
Quote from: Holly on Aug 02, 2022, 01:15 PM
Surely his approach should be to bin the written stuff as unreliable and just go on the archaeology ::)
A touch harsh, perhaps? I get the impression, though, that he is not doing what he should be doing and explaining why he relies on some written sources and discards others.
Firmly tongue in cheek..... ;D but I agree that to dismiss sources without too much explanation is odd to say the least
Quote from: Holly on Aug 02, 2022, 01:27 PM
Firmly tongue in cheek..... ;D but I agree that to dismiss sources without too much explanation is odd to say the least
Particularly as he is a retired academic scientist, who ought to be better at handling evidence.
Regardless to say that the subsequent chapters do offer up some good arguments and proposals so all is not lost
Quote from: Holly on Aug 02, 2022, 01:27 PM
Firmly tongue in cheek..... ;D but I agree that to dismiss sources without too much explanation is odd to say the least
There does seem to be a tendency, perhaps especially in this period, of dismissing as hopelessly wrong those sources that you cannot get to fit the story you have decided is the right one. Given the nature of a lot of the sources, this is probably done more easily than in some more respectable and better documented periods ;)
But it does rather smack of being the Academic equivalent of shooting the bearer of bad news
With apologies to Dorothy Parker
Gildas pains you;
Nennius is damp;
Plagiarism stains you;
Archaeology causes cramp.
Literacy criticism is loaded;
Colleagues will taunt;
Arthur is outmoded;
Publish what you want.
Rather apt Jim. :)
Jim
Those Chinese cracker riddles are great...... Did you get them from Wu Rothschild & co......
CarlL (with tongue firmly in cheek)
I found this boo (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Roman-Invasion-Britain-Archaeology-History-ebook/dp/B00MNX1EDO/ref=sr_1_3?crid=14ZDP39H5QFNQ&keywords=birgitta+hoffmann&qid=1659512347&sprefix=birgitta+hoffmann%2Caps%2C73&sr=8-3)k by Birgitta Hoffmann contained quite a good description of what both written sources and archaeology can tell us about Roman Britain and their limitations.
There has been a quite interesting series of podcasts on the History Extra podcast about the end of Roman Britain. Maybe not quite what the book mentioned at the start of this topic is about but could be useful - the penultimate episode has some interesting stuff on isotope analysis and some hints on DNA analysis work.
Google Podcast link to History Extra - https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5hY2FzdC5jb20vcHVibGljL3Nob3dzLzQwM2I4MDNkLTdkMGItNDlhNi1hZTY4LWNiMGEzN2I4Y2Q1Zg?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjJlPy4mKr5AhVJ8BoKHQd4AOQQ9sEGegQIARAS
Link to the episode I mentioned - https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5hY2FzdC5jb20vcHVibGljL3Nob3dzLzQwM2I4MDNkLTdkMGItNDlhNi1hZTY4LWNiMGEzN2I4Y2Q1Zg/episode/NjJkMTJlNTBhZTcwNGUwMDExNjYzNzNl?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwjI75a5mKr5AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQLA
Lots of interesting stuff there Nik. Thank you.
Brilliant thanks
finished the book now. Not as long as I thought it would be. Also more readable than I feared after the first chapter or 2. I will do a write up for Slingshot (probably) and the gist of the summary is that it does throw up some very interesting points and bits of data that dont normally do the rounds in other books on the same subject and period. The majority of the book covers the 'Roman' period with less focus and detail on the pre and post elements. The title of the book therefore feels a little bit engineered to appeal to a wider audience. It reminds me of the old Monty Python sketch that had a David Attenborough-esque character looking for the bricks that the ancients Britons used to build Stonehenge...
In some respects it is too short a book to deal adequately with all of the points that the author raises (some of which are very good points indeed and deserve more in-depth analysis). In other respects the book is too superficial and feels a bit rushed with conclusions that are definitive and not speculative (had to, must have, did etc). There are a lot of recycled ideas and information from other examinations of the period and the area the author really shines a new light is when he deals with genetic markers and population transitions/transplantations/amalgamations.
In summary, people may be of the opinion I didnt like the book. Au contrair Blackadder, I actually found the book really accessible and a pleasure to read. Not dry in the slightest and keeping away from the heavy duty commentaries on secular/religious frictions or wild speculations about battle lists etc was a breath of fresh air. There were some genuinely interesting proposals in the book and some very useful analogies and comparisons employed to make valid points. I would like to have seen a bit more on the post Roman analysis/discourse and some acknowledgement of primary sources as potentially useful (even if believed to be unreliable). Its not perfect but it is up to date and fresh enough in ideas and current thinking to be of use to students and fans of -the period. Just dont expect the usual fare on the subject matter and dont look for post-Roman heroes, there are not there
Very good, I look forward to reading your thoughts on it.
I'll probably reread it to get the extra depth (it normally takes a couple of readings for me to fully explore a book rather than read and miss a few things)
Quote from: Holly on Aug 05, 2022, 07:25 AM
I'll probably reread it to get the extra depth (it normally takes a couple of readings for me to fully explore a book rather than read and miss a few things)
Not just you. I also like to do that.
I am reading The First Kingdom at the minute as a counterpoint to it and then when done will go back to it for a 2nd read