Uncover why the Anglo-Saxons invaded in this historical exploration. Learn about the real reasons that drove them to conquer new lands and reshape history. Watch now to discover more about this chapter in Anglo-Saxon history.
The majority of what fed the majority was English. You can call all that which was English, British but at the end of the day the food was grown and came from England with some also coming from scotland. About the only item not notiable English was the Cornish Pasty which some say was initially from Devon and later adobted by the Cornish or Cornvalisians. That of course is correct if you factor in the fact that all the agriculture from the North of Northhumbria to Kent and Devon was English. Then again of course much of what was considered English (Saxon or Jutish) was from wider Europian influences. Attempting to think of any food item which was wholly British leaves me struggling to come up with a single item.
There could have also been some "population pressure" from a group of nomadic horsemen coming out of the Russian steppes trying to find better grazing land for their horses and being willing to indulge in some pillage to get it: "This is a good spot for my horses to rest up. What do you mean they're trampling over your wheat field? I really don't care, and if you really object, here's a little taste of my sword. Oops, sorry about that. You seem to have lost your head. Are there any more complaints?"
The Britons were Christian prior to the Anglo Saxon invasion, so if they were leaving a Christian continent they were travelling to a Christian Island..
There may have been some Britons who were. But prior to Emperor Constantine from York, Britannia and the legalisation of Christianity with in the Roman Empire the Christians as you may well know were cruzified or exercuted and persercuted by the Romans. So it does not seem likly that there were Chistians or any significant number of Christians in Britannia up till Emperor Constantine. If there were Christians (We have the legend of Josheph of Aramathia stepping off a ship at Glastonbury (1st Century) Pooltown (Pilton) then they were likely few and far between and kept their heads down as their Christian views would have been in direct opposition with the Roman Mythrasim which was the religeon which most Romans accepted as along with many others all over Europe and the Middle East. But there was a time between the legalisation of Christianity and the arrival of the Angles, Jutes and Saxons when there is some evidence of Christianity in Britannia (Pelagius (c. 355 - c. 420 CE)). But with out more details about people such as (Pelagius (c. 355 - c. 420 CE)) it is impossible to pin him down as a Brit depending on what you are calling a Brit. Pelagius apparanty went to Rome in 380CE so was he a Roman living in Britannia and so he returned to Rome in 380CE or was he a non Roman home grown Brit? IDK.
@@andriesscheper2022 Not necessarily Pagan as Paganism was an offensive term used by barbarouse Christian murderers at the time. The predomanent Religeon at the time was Mythraism and had been for hundreds of years as well as being a principal religeon worshipped by the Romans along with their other polytheistic array of Gods and Godessa. With the legalisation of Christianity in The New Constantinium a purge of the former fathers of what later became Christianity began with the Romans & Christians slaughtering the Mythraean religeons which had been the accepted religion in Britian and through out much of Europe and the Middle East. So Pagan was an insultive term which the heineous murdering Christians and Roman (Romano Christians) used to justify their mass slaughters. Something with would be seen repeated many many times through their blood thirsty centurys of attempted conquest. Those Romano Christians also waged war against any other Christians not of the Roman Christian order referring to them all as heritics. Bloody crusade after bloody crusade went on for centuries till the discovery of the New World and the start of a new bloody perion of murder and robbery and genocide. As with inceitment to justify murder and confiscation of gold by stating the idigionus peoples were barbarians it was truely that the real barbarians were the invader Romano Christians or from about the year 1490CE The Romano Catholic Conquestadors and Spanish inquisition. So the real Pagans were the Christians themselves and not the people, tribes, or countrys they wanted to subugate. That is if any one other than actual pagans were indeed pagans. Most were not. But most seemed to be treated as such. It satisfied the purpose of conquest.
@@MikeGreenwood51 Hello Mike. Thank you for your comment. My own initial comment was largely a discussion point. I will offer some proof of my assertion. Saint Patrick. A Brit. Approximate year of birth 389.
Well that could have been the fact on the comedic side. But my guess is that the lure of the gift of land ownership figured more importantly. The land was seen as good and the reports back home of the goodness of the land was what was recorded as attracting further waves to come over. The tribal leaders in Anglen would have been seen as the chiefs or land owners (managers) as was normal and so the new generation of men (The sons and daughters) would have almost jumpped at the chance to own their own land (Kent) as the favour for the services Vortigen sought. The same happens today often with family units as the sons and daughters attain young adulthood and start to form larger family relationships (Marridges) then they will often seek new homes outside of the original family home.
Not all the Saxons migrated to Britain. What was to become Saxony remained pagan until the Saxons were forcibly converted by Charlemagne/ Karl der Grosse several hundred years after the migration period.
The truth will come out one day! Sutton hoo is not saxon. So much on this isle is misinterpreted. Kolbren mistaken to be Runes because english scholars and historians tell us Kolbren is made up Lmao Saxons were allready in britain at the time of the welsh kings, in sussex. Yet, before britain experienced saxons in number, the british population was almost destroyed. Which is what made it easy for the saxons that came after that event. It is even written about in saxon poetry, the effect on the land and the people. Britain was an open and almost empty land in the latter part of the 6th century. This event affected ireland, europe and the middle east and is recorded in lots of places. I think even Gildas speaks of it, i think in, i am probs wrong, the brittanicum. The real truth of who the welsh and english really are is mindblowing.
@@user-df9wv1gs4w But you are no good to yourself. That is the problem with trying to hold on to a foreign identity for more than a thousand years. Going back even to the first marrige of King Vortigen to the Princess Ryenna (Daughter of Hengest) the children if any most likely would not have survived against the Romano subjection the 5th century Vortigen Britons desired as they wanted over-lordship as Rex Romanum and hence the Arthurian ledgens were born on account of an ancester of Vortigen was a senior Roman. But those Romans were not all coming back. As they said in their reply to the Groans of The Brittan Letter they were with drawing as Rome was under seige. What I mean by 'no good to your self' is the centurys of trying to hold on to your Romano Alien identity. Your separtistisms. IE Not Europian, Not English, Scottish or irish or of any inter-relational marrital Union but always the alien which dates bact to the Romanisation and the fleeing of people (Kelts, Brits, Belgaics) to the western hills outside of the advancing Empire. It was the Romans who named those out side of the Roman Empire Welsch, Walisian, Galisian, Gallileean, Valisian etc. They all meant the same alien. Those not of the Roman empire. They named groups alien all over Europe as well as the Middle East. Guals meant also alien. What good has it done you? It was failing at the time Vortigen called the germanic tribes in. Vortigen was only one tribe of the five who resided in the west hills and as far as I know was the only tribe wanting the Romans to return. Other tribes there fought against Roman rule and Roman slavery (The Silures).
@@MikeGreenwood51 It is all about identity and where the welsh come from, also the english. The roman side of it all is very obscure when compared to what is in welsh txts. Or at least what i have watched and learnt portrays that idea! The english think they know where THEY are from, they do to a point but a crucial element is missing and you dont even know. You were a group that was a part of a much larger tribe, the same as the welsh. Our histories it would seem are intertwined through millenia. Seperate factions of the same people. It is crazy stuff but most accept the standard narrative. Maybe one day things will change but as it stands, nothing will be accepted because on so many levels history would have to be altered.
@@alanbstard4I think the Angels were related to Frisians. But Frisians also married Danes and more specific Jutes. Saxons divided the powerful Frisian empire after Roman times and settled in the coastal areas of North Western Germany. As the Saxons also Frisians were involved in invading Britain, as were the Norsemen and other Vikings later on in Scotland, Ireland and Normandy.
