There are a wide variety of subjects posted on this forum, so I thought I'd add one more to the motley assortment... a glossing over of Teutonic history.
The Teutonic culture is part of a much larger super-culture that is believed to have emerged on the steppes of southern Russia some 6000 - 7000 years ago. This cultural group, dubbed the "Indo-Europeans" by contemporary historians, worshipped a pantheon of gods, the foremost of which was called God (of Heavenly Glory). A less literal rendering is "Skyfather", as seen in Ju-pitar or the Sanskrit Dyauspitar.
The Indo-Europeans tended to be bigger and stronger than there various peers, due to a special digestive enzyme that enabled them to comfortably digest cows milk, and the Cow (an animal form of the Earth Goddess) was generally seen as the Skyfathers consort.
This native pantheon contained many other deities, spirits and ancestors, some of which surivived and/or were passed onto descendent cultures.
While compotent farmers, the I-E way of life revolved around cattle herding, and it was the duty of young men to accompany their herds out into pasture durting the summer months and protect them from wild animals and human raiders.
The I-E's were, like most other forms of men, a warrior peoples, and their national sport was the cattle-/wife-raid... a la the "Native Amercian" horse-raids.
The I-E's were also advanced thinkers/creators and are responsible for such inventions and innovations as the wheel, the cart/chariot, and the doubleheaded stone axe.
At various points through their existence in southern Russia the Earth experienced major warming and cooling trends. Initially, during the coolig trends, many tribes migrated south and east off of the steppes. It is these Eastern Indo-Euopean tribes that are rightly refered to as Aryan, and the name surives both in the ruling caste of the Hindu hierarchy, the arya, and in the name of the nation-state Iran.
Warming trends sent other aspects of the mega-culture north and west. The first wave carried the Teutonic peoples into southern Scandinavia, as well as carrying both the Balts and Slavs into their respective lands.
Another warming trend would later cause another migration, something of a cross- or reverse-migration of Aryans out of the far east, and this migration would leave the second layer of Greek civilization, and carry the tribes of Rome into the Boot, and the Celts into central Europe, c1500 BCE or the Bronze Age.
Elements of I-E culture begin to turn up in southern Scandinavia c.2100 BCE with the arrival of the cart and the doubleheaded stone axe. While some cite mythic clashes of differing tribes of gods to a clash between cultures, and seeks to portray the I-E invader as oppressive and patriarchal, actual physical evidence shows a well nigh seemingless transition in culture... so seemless as to lead some scholars to believe that the I-E tribes of Scandinavia never knew any other homeland. Moreover, the tribe usually identified as representing the I-E invader, ie. the Ese or AEsir, is the losing tribe of gods in the myth, thus severely hampering their ability to oppress the non-I-E. And finally, in the earliest example of Teutonic myth Woden, the Viking Age leader of the AESir, and Frey, the Viking Age leader of the Vanir, are brothers born of the same father and part of the same Heavenly Kindred.
Of course, at this point the Teutonic folk have yet to emerge from the interplay between the I-E culture and peoples and the indigenous Old European peoples they mingled with. It will not be until the Bronze Age that a truly Teutonic culture begins to emerge, as a thing distinct from it's I-E and O-E progenitors.
I'll tackle the Bronze Age, and have much more of note to say, in my next installment.
In my last post I mentioned that the central deity of the Indo-Europeans peoples was named God (of Heavenly Glory/Light). The proto-I-E root is something like dieus. From this root descended such god-names as the Hindu Dyaus, the Persian Sius, the Greek Zeus, the Latin Jovis/Ju-piter, and the Baltic Dewios (sp?). Amongst the Iranians, this root became the root of their native terms for devil and devils, even as amongst all other I-E this root became synonmous with God, god, the gods, and things pertaining to god, as in the Latin deus and the Greek theos.
The earliest recorded Germanic form was Teiw (found on the Negua Helm c.300 BCE; Teutonic word/North Italic script). Other Teutonic forms are the Gothic Tius, the Angl-Saxon Tiu, Tiw, Tio and Tig, the Old High German Zio and Ziu, and the Norse Tyr, amongst others. Other Teutonic words that spring from the same root are the Anglo-Saxon tir (glory), the Old High German ziori (splendour), and the Old Norse tiv (god, hero; plural tivar) and the anachronistic Diar (the gods).
As the Teutonic first knew Tyr, he was a associated with order/measurement (ie. the heavens), right conduct, selfless heroism and the glory that shines down on/eminates from these qualities. His consort was the Cow, called Audhumbla (Nourisher) centuries later in the Viking Age Eddas. As such, there can be little doubt that the cattle-/wife-raid eminated out of the union of these two beings. And as Tyr first appears in historical sources (1st century AD) he is indeed equated with the Roman Mars and hailed as the chief god of war and the founder of a people/culture. It is he who first bore the title Drighten (literally, Master of the Warband, Warlord), which would later be applied to Woden and then, however inappropriately, to Christ.
The Bronze Age was both a heroic age for the emerging Teutonic folk and an age of great prosperity. The differing I-E and O-E cultures co-mingled and blended without great upheaval. The weather in southern Scandinavia was considerably warmer then, and the herds could be left in the pasture all year around. Trade routes were established leading eastward into modern day Russia, and westward into the British Island. And the infant survival rate increased by a factor of 5 in comparison to the Stone Age.
While the various kindreds/clans of Teutonic folk regularly raided each others herds, and killed each other in pursuit of the glory embodied by the greatest herds and the Skyfathers affirmation, it was not regarded as we might regard it today. As certainly as day followed night, a wealthy man was an honourable man, according ot their collective cultural values and hsitorical experience. Moreover, life was plentiful, and the raid WAS their national sport. But the final proof is in the pudding. The related kindreds did NOT fracture and alienate each other, carrying their cultures off in different directions, but continued to develope with great uniformness along same lines. In fact, some have noted that there was greater doctrinal consistency in the elder Germanic beleifs and cultures, than there has has been amongst Christianity and it's orthadox and dogmatic disposition.
Religiously, wit hthe Bronze Age, pictogrpahic rock-carving of a religous nature begin to spring up, all within sight of the sea (originally, anyway). Also, great burial mounds in which the entire kindred buried its dead were raised during this period, reflecting a religious zeal in building, resources, organization and cooperation that would not again be rivalled until the much later Middle Ages and the building of Christian Cathedrals.
While the Teutonic folk had no native sources of gold or silver, great amounts of this was imported, and for the sole purpose of giving it over to religious purposes.
As the Celts moved into Central Europe c.1500, and reestablished contact with their ancient brethren, a strong relationship was formed between these two folk. Despite the clear Eastern I-E elements seen in the Celtic tongues, by the time they emerged onto the historical record (Caesar), they are next to identical in appeance and religious customs to the Teutonic folk, and Roman historians often confused the two cultural groups.
Our first Teutonic Creation myth (found in Cornelius Tacitus' Germania, 1st century AD), tells that the ancient hymns of the Germans celebrated two gods, Tuisto, and his son Mannus, as the progenitors of their folk. Mannus is said to have had three sons, who gave their names to three major segments of the Teutonic peoples (of that Age). Thus, all those Teutonic peoples who lived along the seashore, ie. in southern Scandinavia, were called the Ingaevones, those who dwelt in the interior (of the Continent) were Irminones, and all others were alternately Istaevone (TAcitus) or Isciovones (Pliny).
Now, Tuisto is usually identified by scholars as Tyr, whose name is given to the central God in numerous I-E sprung religions. The god Mannus is usually identified with Heimdall, and his name is cognate to the Indo-Iranian Manu (perhaps the Celtic Mananna Mac Leir) who gave those folks the social hierarchy and the rules of etiquette that goverened the ranks. This is the same gift Heimdall gives in the Viking Age Eddas.
Tyr is generally recognized as being the ruler of the Assembly, while as noted Heimdall governs the hierarchy... two very important aspects in defining any culture, no?
However, if Tyr and Heimdall could be called the chief gods of the Stone Age, the chief god of the Bronze Age was clearly Ingui or Yngvi, whom gave his name to all the Teutonic tribes along the seashore. Yngvi was a god made flesh, whom some sources say ruled over Sweden in ancient times. His reign was defined by great abundance and peace from foreign aggression, and when he died he was not burned but buried in a mound. And it is believed that his body contiued to generate (w)holiness even after death, so the folk took to making offerings at his mound.
It is from this Yngvi that the Swedish Royal House of old called itself the Ynglings, ie. the descendents of Yng... Yng meaning "descended/offshoot of".
In time, Yngvi would take on the title Frey. He is, arguably, the first patently TEUTONIC hero-god of the Teutonic people.
The title Frey juxtaposes that of Drighten and reflects the dual aspects of rulership the early Teutonic folk looked to and viewed as a divine gift. The Warrior-King (Drighten, Drottin) on the one hand, and the Priest-King (Frea, Frey) on the other.
Once again. the Bronze Age was the Heroic/Golden Age of the Teutonic folk... and age of great plenty, little negative change, and relative innocence.
That would all change with the coming of the Iron Age, as three giant women came striding out of Jotunheim and the Golden Age of innocence came to an abrupt end....
The end of the Bronze Age was heralded by two major events. The first is of course, the mastery of iron by the Celts c.500 BCE, and in fact the word iron is a borrowing stemming from a Celtic root.
The second, and more pivotal event was yet another shift in the world's climate that left southern Scandinavia significantly colder and wetter, also beginnig c.500 BCE. This change caused the soil to become more clay-like, reducing harvest-yields, while the herds of cattle could no longer be left in the pasture and now had to be housed in a "barn" attached to the back of the longhouse (in which people lived).
Thus began the great thinning of the herds at the end of roughly October; the blood of which was believed to attract trolls and other wretched and outcast spirits and which thus prompted religious ceremonies to ward or hallow the community vs. such spiritual predators.
While plowing innovations were made in an attempt to counteract the climate change, living conditions became much worse and the existing land could no longer support the burgeoning kindreds within traditional clan boundaries.
Faced with their cultural peers in the Celts, who were armed with iron rather than Bronze, the closely and consciously related Teutonic kindreds began to turn on each other. Thus began the age of genocidal tribal conflicts.
Nevertheless, Tyr did not forsake his people or fail to empathize with the unrighteousness of the situation they found themselves in. Afterall, that god known as Mannus had long ago paved a path from Earth to Heaven, and under the name of Heimdall he continues to steward that pathways function.
Thus did Tyr command that, while the Teutonic folk might have little to choice but to wipe out their sibling kindreds, perhaps even in unrighteous ways, they would by hhis deeming take no glory in the spoils of such combats. No cattle could be taken as testament to victory or honour. Likewise, no gold could be taken, no thralls, no war-gear, nothing. It was all thence forth to be deemed blood-money, stained by the blood of related kindreds.
It was most likely during this age that Odin's cult of worship began to grow and evolve out of an earlier belief in the howling spirit of madness and capital crime called OdhR or Wod (meaning fury/madness/inspiration); part of whom formed the basis of Odhinn (meaning Master of OdhR) and another part of whom likely combined with the belief of the deceitful etin Utgard-Loki to form the Viking Age Loki.
Now, traditionally, Teutonic law, ruled over by Tyr and shape by precedent, had two means of disposing of captial offenders. First, once the guilt of the offender had been established, the will of Tyr was consulted by the tribal priest; likely via the use of lots. If the capital criminal was thus deemed to fit die for it's crimes, the matter was handled in one of two ways based on the nature of the offense. Criminals were hung from a tree, often alongside a wolf, while shames were sunk in a bog.
Odhinn is well known as "Lord of the Gallows", and in the earliest Roman records he is named alongside Tyr as co-ruler of warfare. Loki on the otherhand might be equated with the shameful capital offender and thus called "Lord of the Bog".
So, no longer could wealth be taken as a sure sign of honour and glory. The victorious kindred could have only what they truly need, land, and all else had to be ritually destroyed and then disposed into the bogs as proof that the victor was indeed worthy of their victory.
This historical experience and divine law is in part responsible for the myth that involves the willful yiedling of Tyr's hand to the Fenris Wulf, whom, alongside his father, Loki, embodies death, destruction, greed, and trickery.
Anyway, to the ulitmate glory of the Teutonic folk, it was not long before the they ceased to cannabalize each other, and began to group their extraneous populations up into new tribes and send them forth into the greater world. Some groups, most noteably the Goths, ventured into eastern Europe and won themselves new land there, while others chose instead to test themselves against their iron wielding neighbours, the Celts.
Thus did the Irminonic tribes of the area of modern Germany begin to take shape, named for the god Irmin... a name meaning "Great, Vast" and otherwise associated with Odhinn in the later Eddaic myths.
As Roman record indicates, sometimes Teutonic tribes would ally with Celtic tribes and they would venture forth to take on the invincible Legions of Rome together; eg. Teutons and Cimbri. Of course, by the opening of the common era, The Gauls of modern France and the Britons of Britain had been conqoured by Caesar, while the Teutonic folk had taken over the area of northern Germany, with the Celts either being integrated into the newly rising Irminonic tribes and/or exterminated.
The Romans themselves had taken up the spirit of Imperialism that began in the West with Alexander the Great and his Macedonian Empire. They also utilized the same justification for their conquest. Their logic was thus, as our culture is (technologically) superior to our neighbours, we are in fact helping them by conquoring them. And such hubris has been the justification for Imperial conquest, or any form, ever since.
The Romans Legions were undeniably effective in achieving "world" conquest for the Romans. They had fought the strongest forces in the civilized world and conquored without fail. They had stormed the most unassailable fortresses in the civilized world, and had taken them. They were, for all that the civilized world was concerned, truly invincible.
Nevertheless, the foundation of Imperial Rome was rotten, and both social and cultural decay was rife within it's cities. So much so, that not only did the Empire begin to spawn many an urban salvation cult, one of which was primitive Christianity, but it was also hard pressed to populate it's legions with natives, and so had to rely more-and-more on foreign mercaneries.
In contrast to the extreme alienation found in the cities of the Roman Empire, the tribes of Germany were defined, as most rural and tribal people are, by great commonalities and exceedingly high levels of group solidarity. And the warrior-aristocrats of the tribes of Irmin were more than willing to fill the gaps in Rome's legions.
Such was the case with the warrior-aristocrat called Arminius by the Romans. He hailed from the Irminonic tribe called the Cherusci, and after a tenure of honourable service within the Legions returned home to his people with the knowledge of the strengths and weakness of, not only his own peoples, but of Rome's invincible Legions.
So, after uniting a number of neighbouring tribes into a great confederation, Arminius bided his time. And when Rome did as it was inclined, ie. raid across the Rhine, he led his motley force against 3 Legions. The Romans had the choicest of war-gear, including byrnie and shield, and group-fought as a single entity. In contrast, the Germans had barely an ounce of iron between them, wore no armour, and had a simple wooden shields and javelins (tipped with a tiny bit of iron) for their weapons. And of course, whereas Rome's legions were populated by full-time warriors, the bulk of a Teutonic army was made up of farmers and working men wrapped around a relatively small nucleus of professional fighting men. The Teutonic folk also cultivated a single combatant cultural aesthetic, which may have brought large numbers to the battle field, but which then prompted them to seek out individual warriors and engage in personal combats.
In the murky depths of the forests of Germany however, with soggy ground beneath feat, and heavy rains falling, all advantages were turned to disadvantage for Rome, while all disadvantages became advantages for the Germans. Weighed down in the mud, divided by the trees and underbrush, with no way to form up and thus cover their individual blind-spots, the Roman Legions were slaughtered by the light weight, fast moving individual combatants that made up Arminius' force.
It was an unbelievable victory, won by the "hillbillies" of the civilized world, and which would give the commander of said legions, Varus, nightmares for the rest of his life. Literally, no doubt.
Some believe that Arminius was none other than Irmin or Odhinn made flesh; even as Ingui was recognized in Swedish legend. And in fact, Snorri Sturluson (writer of the Prose Edda) does state that Odhinn first appeared in Germany before spreading into Scandinavia.
In fact, it was over the course of the Iron Age that the runic "alphabet" was formulated/discovered. It was during this age that cremation (a custom associated with both Tyr and Odhinn) began to replace inhumation as the prefered burial practice. And it was during this age, toward the end of it actually, that iron, choice material for implements of war, began to filter into Teutonic hands. And finally, it was during the latter part of the Iron Age that Odhinn's name begins to appear in the geneologies of royalty throughout NW Europe.
So it was that the population/land problems of early Bronze Age were at last alleviated. And by the opening of the next Age, the Migration Age, the dual aspect of leadership recognized by the eary Teutonic folk would be replaced by a single KINGship, which contained aspects of BOTH priestly and martial offices.
As the geneologies of European royalty indicates, this new office of rulership, called the Kingship (King meaning offshoot (-ing) of the kin or related peoples), was at once as sacral as a freyR and empowered with divine gifts, but, unlike the office of the freyR, was not forbidden to take up arms and fight, like a drottin. It was a Heroic Kingship, that inspired like nothing before and established an unprecedented level of solidarity amongst a tribal folk... tribal folk having characteristically high levels of group solidarity to begin with.
That period known as the Migration Age began in the mid-5th century CE, when the mighty Huns began to move into Europe from the East, forcing the Goths into a migration that many historians and scholars credit with the fall of the Roman Empire.
Of course, the truth of the matter defies the conventional notion that the Teutonic peopels were ignorant barbarians, both envious and contemptful of a "higher" culture.
In fact, Rome had begun to fall into the grips of social and cultural decay since the earliest stirrings of it's Imperialistic and materialistic ambitions. The cities of the Empire were growing ever more eclectic and alienated -- with "pagan" or "countrydweller", being used as a slur long before the adoption of Catholicism as the only religion of the Empire -- while the ghettoes of the trade citieis were burgeoning with an ever growing mass of starving, desperate and culturally alienated peoples. These conditions resulted in the spontaneous founding of nuimerous urban salvation cults through the Empire, oner of which was primitive Christianity.
Moreover, the ranks of the once invincible armies of Rome began to be populated more and more by foreign mercanaries, whilst assassination of Emperors soon began to become soemthing of a "national" past-time.
In the end, the Goths took over rulership of the Western Empire, propping it back up on it's feet, and integrating their own culture and beliefs with those of the conquored; as oppose to acting in a manner full of envy and hate and trying to stomp it out and replace with their own.
Likewise, the Salians and Ruparians confederated into the Franks and came into a mutally advantageous union with the "citified" citizens of the abandoned province of Gaul; settling by preference in the countryside, protecting the Gauls by inclination from other migrating tribes, et al., and leaving the city and its material/technical achievements largely to the Gauls and their "Romanized" culture. Thus why the only signs of the Teutonboc tongues left in the languages that takes it name from these protectors, ie. French = Frank, are those pertaining to war and farming.
The Anglii, Saxons, Jutes and Frisians also took over various portions of the abandoned province of Britain. Unlike the dealings between Franks and Gauls however, things went otherwise between the Brits and the Anglo-Saxon warrior-ruralists. As the tales go, boatloads of Frisians were brought to Britain to fend off the Picts... a custom not at all unfamilair to the ancestors of these Frisians during the Roman era. However, after selling their blood and kinsmen in defense of the Brits, A ruler named Vortigern, ad those he represented, decided he couldn't pay them the stipulated fee for services rendered. Thus did Britain become England -- the (new) land of the Anglii -- though even here one will note the prescence of obvious and reminscient Celtic names amongst the various royal houses of the Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy, eg. Caewlin of Wessex, Penda of Mercia, etc. once again suggesting cutlural values toward the conquored that were different from those preconceived based upon the better known Colonial era of more recent history.
In fact, according to Tacitus' Iron Age writings, the Teutonic peoples afforded thralls, ie. dependents, servants, "slaves", the recognititon of being master and lord under the roof of their own modest dwellings and socially frowned upon any man who would beat a thrall... as a general cultural value in which everyone existed in service to or under someone else, and in which general pride and clear recognititon of duty and obligation kept abuse of power in check... for a time.
Tacitus' also noted a religious reluctance in the Teutonic folk of his age not only to take "slaves", but also to become "slaves" on an international market; likely leaving one in a land and amongst a peoples of vastly different appearance culture and beleifs, and in which any native genius one might possess would be drastically undermined.
And while the Migration Age, with it's adoption of southern values, also began to open our ancestors up to the international slave market, it was also the age that gave us much of our heroic legends and poetry. Beowulf, Hrolf Kraki's saga, Waldere/Walter/Waltherius, the Volsung saga, Deitrich of Bern, all stem from the Migration Age.
The true native concept of Kingship, and it's link to divinity, was not the same as that of the Divine Right of so-called "Kings" or Monarchs. The difference can be gleaned in the words King and Monarch themselves. The term "king", which was "cynning" in Anglo-Saxon and "konungR" in Old Norse meant offshoot/offspring " (-ing) of the extended family or related people (cynne, kin, kind, kindness). In contrast, monarch expresses the idea of one overarching all, with none of the homely and comfortable nuance of meaning found in the term "king".
In fact, the opening stanza of the Icelandic Voluspa refers to all pe0ple, high and low, as being Heimdall's kin, while in the Eddiac poem Rigsthula, it is told how Heimdall mingled his blood with EACH of the ranks of the sacral hierarchy (and perhaps lived a life as each; Thrall, Churl, Earl)) but giving special tutelage to only the worthiest of the sons of nobles. In this case, the worthiest of Jarl's (A-S = Earl's) sons was the youngest. His name was Kon, and he became known as Kon the Younger or KonungR, ie, Cynning, King.
Such a designation as "Conversion Age" is a rather overly general and highly relative date that some would even argue we continue to exist in to these day... to various degrees depending upon denomination and individual standing within that denom, of course.
For my purposes here it begins during the Migration Age when the Goths accepted official conversion to the Christian heresy known as Arianism (late 4th/early 5th centuries CE), and ends in the Viking Age with the "official" conversions of Iceland (cusp of the 11th century CE) and the fall of the great golden temple of Uppsala, Sweden (12th century CE).
That is a span of over 800 years that it took to convert the *rulers* of a peoples of a common cultural stock and disposition! And in the face of what various Catholic written "histories" state of entire tribes falling to their knees and forsaking their native, indigenous understanding of the "Godhead" for a foreign understanding, one can hardly deny at the Protestant Reformation happened for a damn good reason.
Essentially, at it's roots, Christianity was a phenom. natural to evolving conditions within the cities of Imperial Rome, particularly the ghettoes; which were filled with a motley crew of starving and huddled masses exhibiting all of the desperation and disease, lack of self-discipline and social acknowledgement seen on the inner-city streets of almost any sizeable Western city in the world. Urban Salvation cults therefore only make sense, as their categorical name implies... in the urbs, the city.
The Teutonic peoples, in contrast, had a strong cultural inclination for the heath, the country. As a tribal peoples they had characteristically high levels of common identifiers (eg. common dress, common values, common history, common vision,, etc.). and enjoyed a superb degree of in-group solidarity. And as tribal people, they had all of the qualities that that the folk of the urbs lacked and which Christianity, amongst others cults, arose to address and attempt to provide for.
So, the Catholicism that was carried to the Teutonic peoples -- basically as a new form of Hellenistic Imperialism cast into a newer and more cunning form --- was not the Catholicsm of the urban mainland, which was meaningless, even laughable to rural Teutonic tribes, and was in fact something more resembling Santeria (sp?). That is, the appropriate or not so appropriate Catholic deity/s and/or saints were forced to substitute for our native deities, but otherwise our religious practices, our spiritual beliefs and perceptions, and our worldview was left, fundamentally, unaltered.
Tactically, various tribal balances of power, were taken advantage of, promising lesser kings alliances with international Rome, its friends and international markets, if they would only take up this luke-cold hybrid of native Teutonic belief and Catholicism. Maybe they would even be made "Emperor" of something or another!
Naturally, this also spurred on better Kings and princes to accept conversion; men and women who would not see their tribe and its honour left in the hands of the "family" screw up, and as a mere result of posturing and brown-nosing bullshit.
This same tactic was used to spur the conversion of lower ranking folk, who were "eagre" to take up the new religion of their beloved leader in order to provide him with fellowship in it and curry favour.
All of this is spelled out in no uncertain terms in Bede's History of the English Nation. Heck, in the Kingdom of Kent, the first Anglo-Saxon kingdom to accept Catholicism, Bede writes of how "droves" of Kentmen accepted the new faith, along with their King, at the turn of the 6th century CE. Nevertheless, roughly 40 years later the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records of how the then reigning King of Kent at last ordered the destruction of all religious images of the heathen deities within his kingdoms... and of how the reaction to this was so strong that two members of the King's own kinsmen were slain in retaliation! And as early Law Codes show, even over 100 years AFTER King Aethelbeorht of Kent's conversion, NEW laws were being drafted prohibitting worship of the native deities. And that was the FIRST and most eagre A-S kingdom to convert... one that had strong ties with the Catholic France and whose culture well-showed the signs of the material benefit of those ties!!
Yep. The multitudes just fell to their knees in praise with the arrival of Augustine on Thanet! A miracle, no?
Heck, even such poems as the Anglo-Saxon Caedmon's Hymn speak, if read in their native language, of the Christian god by such patently heathen titles as Metod (Measurer), Drihten (Warlord), Heaven's Warder, Almighty One, High Thunderer, etc.
And why even bothering mentioning the Reformation as I did above, when we have the Crusades right there at hand. Yep. The Crusades allowed the papacy to essnetially kill two birds with one stone whilse trying to secured to the very hub of the intnernational trade routes, Jerusalem. Either a Muslim died at the hands of mostly heathen Teutonic nobleman still richly steeped in the beliefs and practices, or kill a Teutonic heathen.
This left space for the brown-nosers at home in England or Germany for instance, to get in good with the Churchmen and increase his social standing.
And it was hardly uncommon for many a returning Crusader to be charged with heresy, and murdered as a hereretic before ever arriving back to their homelands.
As one final note; while our ancestors were often cast as being as hateful of Christianity as they were portrayed as being against Imperial Rome, the fact is that their missionaries were treated with great dignity and respect by our native Kings... who apparently were no dumbies and had an inkling of the "gifts" the bald-ones were really bringing. Whatever the motive, this fundamental respect for a foreign folks understanding of the "Divine" was never truly returned.
Indeed, long before the Vikings began to raid and pillage Catholic monasteries, the missionaries produced by those very monasteries were teaming up with Catholic Warlords and pillaging, despoiling and otherwise destroying natural holy spots and hofs (Teutonic temples) throughout NW Europe. These hofs were, like both the famous Hof at Uppsala and the Eddaic descriptions of the "Halls of the Gods", ie. hofs, holysteads, thatched with precious metals like gold and silver. Charlemagne is said to have come away from his destruction of the Irminsul site of hof with a great amount of gold and silver!!
And whatever the material nature of the raids, the fundamental lack of respect for a foreign peoples native and wholesome comprehension of and relationship wit hte divine would set the tone for, note only the wolfish Viking Age, but indeed each age that wouild follow.
Now to move into a couple things in greater detail...
Of all the kings of Anglo-Saxon England it is Penda of Mercia who stands out as foremost in my mind...
Penda came to power during the turbulent age of the heptarchy, when the Anglo-Saxon political landscape was dominated by seven rival kingdoms - Sussex, Wessex, Kent, East Anglia, Northumbria, Mercia, and Essex - each vying for supremacy over the others. Savage wars against the Brits remained common place, especially for Northumbria, and if only to complicate matters further, the cult of Christ had begun to work it's way into Anglo-Saxon society, sped on by the Pope in Rome. By the beginning of Penda's reign it was already well entrenched in the aetheling (royal) house of Kent, had a secure foothold amongst the East Anglian aethelings, and was being championed by the infamous King Edwin of Northumbria. For the common folk this was a time of great confusion and unprecedented blasphemy, during which kings of sacral stock turned their backs on the elder ways and took an active role in their suppression. King AEthelbeorht of Kent, the first Anglo-Saxon king to accept baptism, was renowned for the favour that he showed to his Christian subjects, while the year 627 C.E. found Edwin of Northumbria consenting to a petition to destroy all the major hofs (Germanic temple) and holy steads within Northumbria. In 640 C.E. King Eorcenbeorht of Kent ordered the "destruction of all idols" within his own kingdom. Such acts as these would in time (up to 100 years after Augustine's arrival in Kent!) be followed by the drafting of legislation aimed at driving those who would not take up the new faith into debt, and eventually, thralldom; with the implication being made in later "laws" that nonChristian men should be sold out of the country. Furthermore, the legal penalty for Catholics gathering in armed groups was half the penalty levelled against their "heathen" brethren. While our Catholic-written history preserves little of the folk’s reaction to such wolfish behavior, in the case of Eorcenbeorht the reaction was so strong - two of his kinsmen were slain in retaliation! - that it earned a place in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. And of course, even amongst a folk whom otherwise love their kings, it takes only one white crow. In any event it is against this social, political, and religious background that King Penda shines forth with tirfast (glorious) brilliance. Not only did he succeed in uniting Northern and Southern Mercia, along with virtually all of Northen England, but he was also a magnet for all men, regardless of race, religion, or denomination who yearned for righteousness, equity, and honour in a world gone mad.
It is unfortunate that the lays of this glorious king's line have not survived the centuries, but from the genealogical records we know that it was fathered by the god Woden sometime during the 3rd century C.E. No doubt the opening lay would have been similar to the Rigsthula, and told of how the god of kingship both fathered and educated young Wihtlaeg, the first of the line. And of how this first generation Wodenic aetheling established himself as the foremost of the Angles, thereby instituting the cult of Wodenic kingship. Thanks to the Danish monk Saxo Grammaticus we can safely say that Wihtlaeg's son, Waermund, rose to power during the early 4th century C.E., when the coast of the Roman province of Britain was being harried by the Anglian, Saxon, Frisian, and Jutish forerunners of the "dreaded" vikings. Sometime around 360 C.E., by which time Waermund had grown blind with old age, it is told that a powerful Saxon chieftain sent an envoy to Old Anglia demanding that the kingdom be handed over lest the kings frailty breed lawlessness and provoke foreign aggression. In lieu of this, the King was to produce an heir to decide the fate of Old Anglia in single combat, under Tiw, with the chieftain's own son. As it was, poor Waermund did have a son, a lad of Thunor-like stature and brawn named Offa, but he had always been so quiet, sombre, and dull that few folk deemed him to be worthy of much. As a result of this, Waermund rose to meet the challenge himself, but as old and blind as he was, the envoys merely mocked at him, saying that their chieftain would never engage in so disgraceful a combat. Thus, poor Waermund's heart sunk, but it was at this point that Offa "unlocked his word horde" so to speak, chiding the Saxons, saying,
"It is idle for your lord to covet a kingdom which can rely not only on the service of its ruler, but also on the arms and wisdom of most valiant nobles. Moreover, the King does not lack a son, nor the kingdom an heir. And you are to know that I have decided to face not only the son of your lord in single combat, but also, at the same time, whomsoever he should chose as his shoulder companion out of the boldest of your own folk."
After Waermund had recovered from his initial shock and disbelief, that this had truly been HIS son who had spoken, he asked the lad why he had held his silence for long? Offa replied that until this point he had simply been confident in his fathers might and wisdom. And when Waermund asked why he had challenged two instead of the stipulated one, Offa spoke of the death of the Saxon chieftain Athisl; of how he had been slain unfairly by two Angles in days now gone, and of how this duel would come to counter that old shame. So, while there was some difficulty in finding Offa a coat of mail that would cover his massive frame, and a sword that would not shatter beneath his might, in the end he met the Saxon challenge and was victorious. The tirfast son of Waermund went on to become the King of Old Anglia, and, if not all of Saxony, then at least of the Saxon tribe in question. He also went on to become the most celebrated king of his age. He is mentioned in such Anglo-Saxon poems as Beowulf and Widsith, the latter of which extols Offa's unsurpassed courage, the breadth of his kingdom, and his contribution to that earthwork that would come to be known as the Danevirke.
At this point in history, Penda's ancestry becomes little more than a collection of names. It is believed that Offa's great-grandson Icel was the first of his line with a mind for British soil. Near the end of the 5th century C.E., with the invasion of Britain already well underway, he led his warriors up the river Trent, killing, enslaving, and driving back the Brits as he went, eventually settling in the Trent valley area. His tribe of Angles came to be known as the Mercians, or Boundary Folk, and his dynasty as the Iclings.
For the next three generations it is believed that the Iclings fought as drihtens (warleaders) under the mighty kings of Wessex. Following the battle of Fethanlaeg in 584 C.E. however -- a battle in which the Brits were dealt a crushing defeat -- there was a falling out that gave birth to future Mercian-West Saxon hostilities. It was around this time that Penda was born. In what is believed to have been the fourth year of the reign of King Cearl of Mercia, who was Penda's uncle, the West Saxon King, Ceowulf, began to harry the Mercians. In 600 C.E. however, young Penda met this Ceowulf in battle and put him to flight. As a result, he won for both himself and all of Mercia the Avon valley. However, it is not until 628 C.E. that Penda emerges onto the stage of recorded history. His defeat of King Cyngils of Wessex was the deed that won him the kingship of the Mercians, not to mention Cirencester and all the lands along the lower Severn. This was the price of peace, and it may also reflect the recompense of some loss suffered by the Mercians as a result of Fethanlaeg! In any event, with this acquisition the descendant of Offa laid the foundation for those mixed Anglian and Saxon tribes that would become known as the Hwicce and the Maegonsaeton. And this would also seem as likely a time as any to place Penda's attempt to seal the rift between the Iclings and the Gewisse by taking the West Saxon princess Cynwise as his queen, and betrothing one of his sisters to Cenwalh, son of Cynegils.
Now, as mentioned earlier, Edwin the Oathbreaker had become the champion of Christ by this time, but before I go on, it is worth noting that since the invasion of Britain those Anglians that had settled north of the river Humbre had stood apart from their sibs to the south. They themselves were "originally" of two separate kingdoms, Deira and Bernicia, each with its own aetheling house. The first to unite these kingdoms under a single kindred was the terrible AEthelfrith of Bernicia, who took the Deiran princess Aacha as his queen and drove the rest of her kindred into exile. Amongst those exiles was young Edwin, son of Ida. Of Edwin's exile it is known that, for a time, he found asylum in Northern Wales, but eventually it came to pass that a dispute arose between himself and the Welsh aetheling Cadwallon, who vowed to cut off the Anglians head if ever the crown of cruel Northumbria came to rest upon it! From Wales the son of Ida moved on in his exile, coming to rest in Mercia around 610 C.E. It was during this time that he won the Mercian princess Cwenburh as his betrothed, suggesting, if nothing else, that Edwin was a very impressive young man indeed! Evidently, King Cearl was quite impressed with the Deiran aetheling. And we might even say the same of Cadwallon, though in a round about way! But I wonder, where did the mind of the rising star of the Iclings rest?
In due time Edwin bid farewell to his kind host in Mercia, and moved on in his exile, eventually coming to rest in East Anglia. There he was received with open arms by King Raedwald, who was also the reigning Bretwalda; a "floating" title originally used by the Anglo- Saxons to mark out the most powerful and influential king south of the Humbre. In any event, while Edwin did enjoy the hospitality of this great king for a time, it eventually came to pass that AEthelfrith received good word of his whereabouts. Thus, the King of all Northumbria quickly sent envoys to the Bretwalda, at first kindly requesting, but ultimately demanding under threat of war, that Edwin be handed over. And so it came to pass the Raedwald summoned the East Anglian Witan to decide the doom of their honoured guest. It is said that while the Witan was in session Edwin sat outside in the night where he had a wondrous vision. In this vision he was approached by a tall, uncanny stranger who promised the aetheling relief from his current troubles, victory over his enemies, and fame far exceeding that of any of his line before him. In exchange, Edwin swore that he would hold as foremost the one whose counsels brought all of the above to pass. And so in the mean time the talk had gone against Edwin, and his doom had been all but decided when the historically nameless Queen of East Anglia spoke out; as she was wont to do. In years past she had seen to it that her king kept up the w worship of the native gods/goddesses despite his conversion, and now she chided him for this lack of kingliness! So moved was the Witan by their Queen's eloquence, that they quickly reconsidered and decided, instead, that it would be best to meet AEthelfrith in battle. And so it came to pass that AEthelfrith, who had been unable to muster his full might, was crushed by Raedwald. And soon after, Edwin was hailed as the King of Northumbria.
In the same year as Edwin's return to Northumbria, which was 616 C.E., there was a great collapse in the Christian Church in England. In Essex for instance, the three brother-kings who ruled over those folk drove the missionary Mellitus from their kingdom for failing to show them the same simple courtesy he had shown their father; to break bread with them. Meanwhile, in Kent, the new king initially refused to accept baptism. These events, taking place as they did within the two original Anglo-Christian kingdoms, nearly brought an end to the mission to evangelise the Anglo-Saxons.
Now, not only did the son of Ida manage to hold Northumbria together after his coronation, but he also went on to become the first king north of the Humbre to bear the title Bretwalda! Unfortunately, his vanity to have all of the kings of the heptarchy acknowledge his supremacy led to his betrothal to the Kentish princess AEthelburga, and ultimately, to Edwin's conversion to Roman Catholicism. This in turn led to the suppression of the native beliefs within Northumbria, and one must certainly wonder what the Queen of East Anglia, Edwin's true saviour, would have said about that? Then again, consdiering her dealings with Raedwald on this very issue, we likely already know what she would have said.
Moving right along, while the renowned historian Bede, a Northumbrian himself, makes no mention of the events that led up to the famous battle of Heathfeld in 633 C.E., other sources reveal that Edwin had himself launched a massive invasion into Northern Wales in 632 C.E. As a result of this act of Christian brotherly love, King Cadwallon, who was a Christian himself, vowed to exterminate, not every Anglian in Britain as Geoffrey of Monmouth would have us believe, which would have been far to idle a boast for so eminent a king as Cadwallon, but rather, every Northumbrian in Britain.
Speaking of Geoffrey of Monmouth, he would also have us believe that Penda fell under Cadwallon's power when the Welsh King beat him at the battle of Caer Exon. However, I for one find it quite difficult to believe that Cadwallon, who was still licking his wounds from the beating Edwin had laid on him, was in any shape to force a drihten the calibre of Penda, whose own strength rivalled that of Wessex, into submission. It must not be overlooked that this Icling's prowess as drihten inspired awe amongst his contemporaries, so much so that the Christians attributed his success to the practice of "diabolical arts". Furthermore, overlooking the fact that Geoffrey was writing centuries after the events he was describing, and given the strong relations that we know existed between the Mercians and the Brits by the end of Penda's reign at the latest, I would suggest an alternative explanation. The King of Mercia, both secure in his own might and wise to Cadwallon's, MET with his Welsh peer at Caer Exon. There, after much heated discussion, it was agreed that Cadwallon should lead the raid on Northumbria, due to the woe Edwin had brought upon the Welsh. Furthermore, it should be noted that "Penda" is not exactly the most Anglo- Saxon of names, leading one to suspect that one of his immediate ancestresses was of Welsh stock! This suggests that alliances, and avenues to alliances, already existed, and thus, would seem the safer way to bet. As for Penda's justification for taking part in the raid, no doubt this was quite simple; Edwin's power was ever on the rise, and when he forsook Cwenburh in favour of AEthelburgha that waxing might became a severe threat to the well-being of the Mercians. In any event, this much is for certain, Cadwallon did put an end to Edwin, with the support of Penda, in the year 633 C.E. at Heathfeld. And incidentally, Cadwallon did make good on that promise he had made in his youth!
Soon following the victory at Heathfeld, and after the obligatory pillaging, the Mercian King returned home. He was accompanied by Eadfrith, son of Edwin by Cwenburh, who had thrown himself upon Penda's mercy. Of this aetheling Bede writes that he was "...compelled to submit to Penda, who subsequently, in breach of a solemn oath, put him to death during the reign of Oswald." While something tells me that there was a little more to the matter than what Bede had to say, it is nevertheless true that the aetheling house of Deira was making a rapid advance toward extinction!
As for Cadwallon, he continued on ravaging Northumbria, apparently intent on fulfilling his other legendary vow! He held the field for an entire year, during which time Northumbria fractured back into it's original kingdoms and the worship of the native gods/goddesses was taken up once more. In the summer of 634 C.E. King Osric of Deira, Edwin's kinsman, is said to have had Cadwallon under heavy siege "...in a strong city...", but it nevertheless came to pass that, when Cadwallon had grown tired of his state, he ordered the doors thrown open and fell upon the Deirans with a great fury. Osric and all of his men were utterly destroyed. Later on in the same year King Eanfrith of Bernicia, who was acting upon some very, very poor counsel, rode out with twelve hand picked warriors to seek an audience with Cadwallon and discuss terms of peace! Needless to say perhaps, they were all slain. Near years end however, Oswald of Bernicia, who had bided his time in Kent, hatching devious plots according to Bede with King Eadbeald of Kent, returned to Northumbria. He met Cadwallon at Heofenfeld, and there, the Welsh king’s fyrd was scattered, and his reign of terror brought to an end. The son of AEthelfrith went on to reunite Northumbria, under Irish Catholicism, and then to establish himself as sixth in the line of Bretwaldas.
In the year 635 C.E., Penda, apparently not all that impressed by Oswald's might and authority, once again took to the field; this time against King Ecgric of East Anglia. Unfortunately, Bede tells us nothing of the circumstances that led up to the war. While Offa's offspring most certainly had designs on the Swedish and continental trading routes that lay open to East Anglia, these do not seem to have been an immediate concern. I would suggest that this conflict involved the Middle Angles, who could boast no aetheling house of their own, who were situated between East Anglia and Mercia, and who were clearly under Penda's banner by 652 C.E. at the very latest. It would seem to me that this Ecgric, who had only a weak claim to the East Anglian kingship, made a play for Middle Anglia in an attempt to get out from under the shadow of his predecessor, the devout Sigebeorht, son of Raedwald, and wrack up some "Christian glory" for himself. At this point, the Middle Angles responded by placing themselves under Mercia's protection, leaving little choice but for Penda to go in and teach the East Anglians a lesson in good manners. Thus, Penda launched his first raid into East Anglia. While Ecgric stood in all ways ready to him, the East Anglian fyrd itself refused to fight unless Sigebeorht was brought forth from his monastery to lead them. At length, Sigebeorht had to be physically removed from said monastery and dragged by the East Anglians to the field of battle! At this point the battle was fought, both Ecgric and Sigebeorht were slain, and Penda stood victorious. Curiously enough however, at least to some trains of thought, Penda did not annex East Anglia. Rather, he promptly returned to Mercia, leaving the East Anglians to sort out their own affairs.
In this same year, and no doubt encouraged by Penda's acquisition of Middle Anglia, Oswald made a timely visit to Wessex where King Cynegils was about to accept baptism. The Bretwalda received the West Saxon King from the font, gave him his daughter in marriage, and in doing so struck an alliance with mighty Wessex. In effect, this rendered the Saxon kingdom neutral in regards to both Mercia and Northumbria, and no doubt created a certain aura of suspicion in the mind of old King Penda. Clearly enough, Oswald was not as secure in his station of Bretwalda as Bede would have us believe, and Mercia, so humble in its infancy, had at last come into its own!
And so things remained relatively quiet from this point until 641 C.E., the year in which Oswald launched a massive raid into Mercia. This was the first breach of the Mercian peace since the days of Ceolwulf! The great fyrd of Mercia was mustered and Penda rose to meet Oswald, but Northumbria was strong and its king hell-bent on victory. Nearly overwhelmed, Penda was forced to signal the retreat, with he and his men falling back into Wales. Oswald pursued of course, but when he at last caught up with old Penda, he found himself confronted by a combined Mercian-Welsh force at Maserfeld! And so it was there that Penda put an end to the son of AEthelfrith, cutting off the Northumbrians head and his hands and propping them on stakes for all to see.
Predictably enough, Bede contrasts this image of "heathen" brutality with a pious image of Oswald falling to his knees and praying for the salvation of his warriors just prior to the coup de grace. But in considering the brutality of this act we might also consider that, not only had the Mercian frith been violated for the first time in 41 years once again, and the King forced into retreat, but Penda's younger brother Eowa had also been slain in this fight! As for the severed hands and head, it would seem that Penda considered Oswald a thief, while their display upon stakes would seem to go back to the elder Germanic belief that the punishment for criminal activity should be displayed for all to see.
Following in Oswald's footsteps was his inept brother, Oswui. While Bede credits Oswui with being the next in the line of Bretwaldas, it is at least somewhat curious that Penda dictated the terms of peace between Mercia and Northumbria following the war; taking Ecgfrith, Oswui's youngest son, as a hostage, and betrothing his own daughter Cynburh to Alhfrith, Oswui's eldest. In light of the "warlike heathen" stereotype we might consider the implication here; that Penda desired to bring an end to the rivalry that had began between Mercia and Northumbria during the reign of Edwin. And it goes without saying that he would have extracted oaths to this end as well.
Now, let us take a moment to consider that Mercian expansion into Northumbria, or Wessex for that matter, would have brought with it problems that far exceeded the rewards. The acquisition of East Anglia on the other hand, would not only bring few problems that the Mercians were not already familiar at dealing with, but that open port would also offer a considerable boost to the otherwise modest Mercian economy. So, it is with this in mind that I say, from the get go Oswui was bound and determined to make trouble.
And so it was in the summer of 642 C.E. that Oswui mustered a fyrd, rode out to Maserfeld, and reclaimed his brothers remains; something that good sense would suggest should not have been done, all things considered. As a consequence, Penda launched the first of three raids into Northumbria, ravaging the land and besieging the brother of Oswald in Bamburgh. And lest any wonder about Penda's justification for this raid, it should be noted that both Alhfrith and AEthelwald, the latter of whom was the son of Oswald and Ealdorman (sub-king) of Deira, accompanied the wise old king on this raid! And consider also that, following the raid, the Deirans forsook both Oswui and AEthelwald, and hailed Oswin, last male offspring of the aetheling house of Deira, as their king.
In the year 645 C.E. it came to pass that King Cenwalh of Wessex forsook his Mercian queen, perhaps acting upon the counsel of Oswui himself! In prompt response to this diplomatic act of aggression, King Penda launched a raid into Wessex, defeating the West Saxon fyrd and driving his fellow heathen into exile. Within a year, Cenwalh had found his way into the company of King Anna, who had ruled in East Anglia since the death of Ecgric. There, under Anna's encouragement, Cenwalh accepted baptism.
For the next five years all of Anglo-Saxon England enjoyed a time of peace, and one that not even Cenwalh's return to the West Saxons could breach. In due time however it came to pass that Oswui raised the fyrd in an attempt to oust Oswin and reunite Northumbria under his rule. Lacking confidence in his own might, luckless Oswin is said to have gone into hiding, only to be betrayed by a close friend. From there, Oswui ordered the death of Edwin's kinsman, and the aetheling line of Deira met its end. In spite of this misfortune, the Deirans wanted nothing at all to do with Oswui, and so they proclaimed that their former ealdorman, AEthelwald, would serve as their new king. It might be telling, once again, that the son of Oswald lost no time whatsoever in placing both himself and his folk under the protection of Penda! This meant of course, that Deira was now effectively a part of Mercia, and whatever Oswui might have threatened upon his nephew, it now stood as cause for Penda to lay yet another beating on him. According to Bede, all of Bernicia was ravaged and entire villages laid to waste.
It was either soon after, or perhaps during this raid that Penda was approached by envoys from a number of Brit-Kings, who petitioned his aid in reclaiming a number of precious heirlooms Oswui had extracted as tribute from them. This led to a siege at what is believed to have been Sterling, and while Oswui initially refused to yield up the ransom, he quickly reconsidered when the King of Kings began tearing down a neighbouring village and stacking the debris around the burgh. And so, with Sterling on the verge of being reduced to cinders, the British treasures were handed over and returned to their rightful heirs. It is said that Oswui offered Penda many more treasures beyond those given to the Brits, but that the Icling wanted nothing of them.
In the year 652 C.E. it came to pass that the Middle Saxons, who, like the Middle Angles, had no aetheling house of their own, fell under Mercian influence. This is a rather odd event, and only a vague reference is made to it in one version of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle; of which there are something like 5. This could have been a push towards Essex, which was constantly exherting internal pressures for a return for to the native gods/goddesses, which could also boast the important trading centre of London, and which would eventually fall under Mercian influence during the reign of Wulfhere. More on him later. While the chronicler may have simply confused Middlesex and Middle Anglia, the latter of which we know was awarded to Penda's eldest son Peada in this same year, he may also have simply been more attentive than his fellows. It is possible that Peada somehow made this acquisition. And in a manner that so impressed his father that he awarded his son with the kingship of the Middle Angles. In this regard it is also worth noting that in this same year Oswui persuaded King Sigebeorht the Small of Essex to accept baptism, suggesting that Essex, for some reason, felt itself threatened enough to aline itself with a king who was a proven failure.
Be that as it may, the following year Peada became smitten with the Bernician princess Alhflaed, and asked her father for his consent in the betrothal. Now, not unlike many another Christian, Oswui saw this as at once strictly out of the question, as a useful evangelical tool, and as a useful political tool. So, after his atypical Christian posturing, Oswui conceded to allow the betrothal if Peada would in turn submit to baptism and aid in the spread of Christianity amongst his folk. As we might expect, Peada took the matter up with his father before committing to anything, thus setting the stage for Penda's historic doom;
"I will not forbid the preaching of the Christian faith even amongst the Mercians, if any are willing to hear it, but I shall nevertheless hate and despise those whom I perceive to be without works of faith once they have received the faith of Christ. For they are utterly worthless, those whom scorn to obey the god in whom they trust."
Thus, with Penda's blessing, Christianity was introduced amongst the Middlefolk. Much to Bede's credit, he did not fail to mention the old king's broadmindedness and wisdom in regards to religious matters. While Penda was himself firmly "in the camp" of the native gods/goddesses, it would be foolish to believe that he was ignorant of British Isle Catholicism; a knowledge that he would have picked up from any one of the number of his allies. More than this however, it would seem (via implication) that he had actually built up his own ideas regarding how that faith was to be practiced. And here we get a glimpse of the Icling fulfilling one of his more sacral duties as king; acting as the voice of Heaven and stewarding over the spiritual well being of his folk. In fact, in honour of King Penda one might very well say, "the closer to Mercia, the better the Christian".
In 654 C.E., having earned the respect and gratitude of the exiled East Anglian aetheling, AEthelhere, Penda once again launched a raid into East Anglia. With the death of King Anna, AEthelhere was hailed as king by the East Angles, and he in turn swore his troth to the King of Kings. At long last, Mercia had acquired her "gateway to the world".
In the following year it came to pass that something so stirred the old kings ire that, as Bede relates, he assembled a terrible host and resolved to put an end to Oswui once and for all. As to what, specifically, caused the war we will never know. Bede states only that AEthelhere was responsible and nothing more. Certainly, Oswui was in no position to challenge Penda, although who knows what devious plots he might have been hatching with Wessex, Essex, and/or Kent. On the other hand, given that Offa of Old Anglia had ruled over all the Anglian folk in their Scandinavian days, and with only Bernicia standing between Penda and the elder glory of the Icling line, the idea of a new Anglia may have held some appeal. Whatever the case, AEthelhere was foremost amongst the thirty odd drihtens, of Anglo-Saxon and British, Germanic and Christian, extraction that assembled under the tirfast king’s banner. Ealdorman AEthelwald of Deira was also numbered amongst their ranks, but curiously enough, or perhaps not, Penda released the son of Oswald from his military obligations, and he acted strictly as a guide. The battle was fought in the month of November in a field hard by the now lost Winwaed River. In defiance of the odds, Oswui snatched the victory. Now, it may have been that Bede implicitly exaggerated the overall strength over Penda's force, but in any event, I believe that Woden himself had come to fetch his kinsmen at Winwaed, which may have been the aged kings final battle whatever the outcome. With Penda's death the kingship returned to eaven, the waters of the Winwaed spilled over the land, and the Mercian host was thrown into confusion. AEthelhere and his entire war band followed the King of Kings into death, as did the lion share of the other drihtens. The one notable exception to this was Cadfael of Northern Wales, who may have saved his skin, for as long as it would last, but whose name became synonymous with cowardice...amongst his own countrymen. In contrast, a great ship burial was dedicated to AEthelhere, whose body had been lost in the flood, by his folk in East Anglia. This ship burial has since gone on to be the single greatest archaeological discovery in English history! I am speaking of course of the find at Sutton Hoo.
Following the tragic battle of Winwaed, Oswui annexed Mercia and evangelised it by fire and sword. Although Peada was eventually appointed ealdorman of Southern Mercia by Oswui, it "just kinda happened" that he was murdered by his wife, Oswui's daughter, over the following Easter-tide; at which point Oswui took control of all of Mercia. The Northumbrian held Mercia until 658 C.E., when he was forced out by three Mercian lords who had kept Wulfhere, the younger brother of Peada, in hiding. This Wulfhere grew into a mighty king in his own right, but he lacked his father's high-mindedness and integrity. During his reign, he reconverted the East Saxons, whom had reasserted their native belief for the third and final time, and brought about the conversion of the South Saxons as well. By 658 C.E. the political conversion of Anglo- Saxon England was all but complete.
As for Mercia itself, while but a shadow of what it had been under Penda, it remained a dominant kingdom in the heptarchy up until the death of Offa II in 796 C.E. At this point, Wessex reassumed centre stage, eventually giving birth to that legendary king, Alfred the Great; Penda's true successor. Northumbria on the other hand, went on to become a breeding ground for the ill-mannered and fanatical missionaries whom, in conjunction with the military might of the Carolingians, would bring a bloody end to the worship of the native gods/goddesses upon the continent; unwittingly setting off the Viking Age to boot!
In closing, by the time of Penda's death in 655 C.E. he was not only king of his own Mercia, but also ruled over Hwicce, the Maegonsaeton, the Middle Angles, the Deirans, the Middle Saxons, and the East Angles. Included within his rice were two kings who had willingly entered his service, folk of three different tribes, and two extremely different belief systems, all of whom Penda brought together in harmonious accord. And without resorting to the "throw'em all together and let God sort'em out" mentality of a more "enlightened" era. Add to this Penda's strong alliances with the many Brit- Kings and it must be acknowledge that Penda, more than any other king before him, was truly the Bretwalda. In regards to this magnificent king it could easily be said that what fabled Camelot came to represent in fiction, Penda's Mercia represented in fact.
The continental mission officially began in the year 691 C.E. when the Northumbrian priest Wilibrord set out for Frisia with twelve companions. Before beginning his work, the missionary decided to first pay a visit to to the land of the Franks, where, with the aid of the Pope, he secured the promise of military support from King Clovis II's mayor of the palace, ie. warlord, Pepin II. Thus, began a relationship that would lead not only to the savage conversion of the continental Germanics, but also to the fall of the Merovingian royal line and the invention of the "Christian Kingship". In stark contrast to the Anglo-Saxon mission, which relied upon guile and comprimise as it's chief weapons, the continental mission was a bloody and brutal affair. Despite the fact that, in typical Germanic fashion, the initial missionaries were well received by such noteable men as King Radbod of Frisia and King Ongentheow of Denmark - the latter of whom sent Wilibrord on his way with 30 Danish youths to be educated in the teachings of Christ! - their deeds would quickly earn them the hatred and contempt of Frisian, Saxon, and Dane alike. An illustrative instance; soon after his departure from Denmark a gale drove Wilibrord's ship to ground on an island known as Fositesland. On this island, which was considered a part of Radbod's Frisia, stood a hof (temple), as well as a spring and a herd of cattle that were considered to be weoh-holy (sacrosanct). In spite of warnings, Wilibrord baptized three of the locals he had managed to convert in the spring and then had a number of the cattle slaughtered for a feast.
In 696 C.E. Pope Sergius appointed Wilibrord archbishop of the Frisian nation.
With the death of Pepin II in the year 714 C.E., King Radbod took to the field against the evil Christians; determined to drive them from his kingdom all together. He was met with strong opposition however from Charles "the Hammer" Martel, Pepin's son and successor. In 719 C.E. glorious Radbod passed away and with his death, official conversion was forced upon the Frisians and Utrecht was permanently established as the missions centre.
Over the next three years another Anglo-Saxon missionary, Winfred (aka Boniface), rose to prominence in Wilibrord's service. In 723 C.E. Pope Gregory II himself wrote a letter to Martel in order to bring his attention to the zealous missionary and request that the mayor of the palace guard his life. Later this same year Winfrid returned to Hesse, his primary sphere of evangelical activity, accompanied by a troop of Frankish soldiers. With this assurence, he proceeded to chop down the sacred Thunor (ie. Donar, Thor) Oak at Geismar, and with its fall, the mission began to spread into Saxony like wild fire.
In the year 741 C.E. Charles Martel died, leaving three sons, Carloman, Grifo, and Pepin the Short, as his heirs. In all, Martel is known to have sent troops into Saxony a total of five times in order to loot, burn, and generally terrorize the locals. Winfrid would comment that his missionary gains would've been impossible without the aid of Martel.
Of Martel's sons, Grifo and Carloman, there is little enough to tell. Upon his father's death, Grifo, acting upon the advice of his mother, strove to take possession of all of his fathers holdings. He was defeated and taken captive by his brothers, and remained in their "care" until 747 C.E. when he escaped; fleeing into Saxony in hopes of rallying support for his cause. When Pepin the Short led his army of Franco-Christians into Saxony however, the natives, presumably Westphalian Saxons, handed Grifo over without a fight.
As for Carloman, he invaded Saxony twice, in 743 CE and 744 CE, and both times he forced the submission of a drihten called Theodoric. It is also worth noting that in 746 CE he ordered of the Alemannian nobles to attend an assembly at Connstadt. Now, the Alemannians had been conquored by Clovis I back in that black year 496 CE, but they had been in constant revolt ever since. Carloman had resolved to put an end to this once and for all. So, when the Alemannians arrived at the assembly they quickly found themselves surrounded by Franco-Christian troops in full battle-gear and a slaughter commenced. When all was said and done, not a single Alemannian noble was left alive. The death toll was said to have numbered in the thousands. Soon after this, Carloman was struck by a sudden fit of conscience and decided to retire into a monastery.
Of Pepin the Short there is much more of direct significance to tell. He and Winfrid were very close and over the years since Martel's death the missionary had laboured to strengthen the rather strained relationsship that existed between the Carolingians and the papacy. It was in fact Winfrid who played off Pepin's "Christian right" to be King against the sacral and hereditary right of the Merovingians, and in doing so won for Pepin the support of Pope Zacharias and a majority of Franco-Christian nobles. At the Pope's request an election was held, and Pepin the Short was declared the Christian King of the Franks. Childeric III himself was tonsured and thrown into a monastery even as Winfrid crowned and annointed Pepin, thus instituting the Christian Kingship; or more appropriately, the cult of Monarchal Absolutism/Divine Right of Kings.
Anyway, in hopes of creating at least the illusion of credibility, the Pope awared the new "King" the title of "Patrician of Rome", which is something that he had no legal right to do under Roman legal code. Nevertheless, Pepin responded by making an illegal donation of land to the papacy - lands which would in time grow into the Papal States - and by taking up the Pope's cause against the heretical Lombards; who had been the allies of his father!
After returning to Frisia in 754 CE to continue his evangelical work, Winfrid met his doom at the hands of a mob of thoroughly outraged Frisian churls. Later that same year, Pope Stephen felt it somehow necessary to confirm Pepin's right to the "Kingship" and thus reannointed him. He further conferred the title upon Pepin's sons, Charlemagne and Carloman, and annointed them as well. Finally, in the year 768 CE Pepin the Short died and his kingdom was split between the two brothers. He had led a total of three raids into Saxony and it is worth noting that he forced the Westphalians, who bore the brunt of Frankish "evangelical" efforts, to pay of tribute of 300 horses, as opposed to the 300 cows that the Merovingians had always demanded. This not only marks a shift in emphasis in leadership from the stewarding of one's own folk to the acquisition of greater land and resources, but also reveals the growing importance of the mounted soldier to the Franco-Christian war-machine. By the time of Charlemagne, virtually the entire army was not only mounted, thus allowing for rapid advance and lighting fast battlefield maneuvers, but also capable of fighting from the saddle! The resources needed to train and equip and keep such soldiers constantly in the field was absolutely vast, and over the years of Charlemagne's "enlightened" reign this price would show itself on the common man...the once proud and free Frankish churl, ie. freeman, commoner.
Of Charlmagne and Carloman it could easily be said that there was no love lost between them. It is known that Carloman favoured the Lombards, while Charlemagne was the Pope's lap-dog. In fact, this division of loyalty within the Carolingian house resulted in a familial disaster. Case in point, when Pope Stephen learned that the Queen Mother had arranged a marriage between Charlemagne and the daughter of King Desiderius of Lombardy, which was a good thing, a very good thing, which could bring an end to war, he wrote a letter to the Carolingians in which he scolded them for attempting a union with, as Stephen himself put it, "...that fetid brood of Lombards, a brood harldy human..." As a result of this, Charlemagne refused to hear the advice of his mother forever after. Obviously, this did little to brighten Carloman's disposition toward either his brother or the Pope.
Curiously, in 771 CE Carloman died and, for reasons unknown, his wife felt it necessary to flee to the court of Desiderius. Whatever may have gone on here, this much is certain; with Carloman's death Charlemagne became the sole ruler of Frankland. Nuff said.
Now, with the death of Pepin the Short, the Saxons had taken to driving the vulgar Christian missionaries from their lands; burning their churches to the ground for good measure. Furthermore, they had also stopped paying the annual tribute. As a direct result, Charlemagne vowed at the Worms assembly of 772 CE to subjagate the Saxons, destroy their religion, and convert them to Roman Catholicism.
Up until this point, the Caroligians had "merely" supported the mission, but at Worms, they took charge of it.
Linear Mode
