CLICK ON FIGURES TO ENLARGE
Introduction
Historical evidence
The primary source for the Anglo-Saxon invasion immediately post the Roman departure in the early fifth century AD rests in the Ruin of Britain invective by Gildas, but he gives no dates or whether Brythonic, Gaelic and Cornish were the only languages spoken. Unfortunately corroborative evidence is unreliable since English traditions, probably largely transmitted by word of mouth in poetry, were not written down before the seventh century. Moreover, Bede and the later compiler of the Chronicle incorporated the Gildas story and the latter manuscripts into their writings, which have ever since formed the basis of historical knowledge for these so-called Dark Ages. But troublingly for the historical representation, archaeological investigations covering this period seem to indicate continuity rather than upheaval. Furthermore apparently there are no personal names commemorated in villages (apart from saints'-names) evident in charters, except late from approx 950AD onwards in the few estates coincident with the names of thegns associated with gifts of land and in the Doomsday book. In addition fifty percent or so of modern settlements have a personal prefix element presumed by place-name experts to originally have been a meaningful descriptor of the particular landholder, while most are either now ambiguous or unintelligible, which suggests very time-distant events. Similarly the lack of an adequate explanation of the meanings of the personal pre-fix element for virtually all so-named villages, while in contrast personal names given in later charters can be readily rendered meaningful, casts doubt on the sub-Roman Anglo-Saxon period for the village naming process.
Moreover tentative evidence for spoken ‘Old English’ locked in some specific place-names of the Upper Thames region founded before the Roman occupation has recently been demonstrated.And intiguingly recent language research points to a Scandinavian influence on English constrained to before 350AD and probably after 3600BC.
Context for territorial reorganisation
Social changes largely relate to longstanding economic factors linked to geography and the best places to live and work, which tend to continue unless new places prove more successful or old localities naturally decline. The principal social strata, typically the general peasant population usually stays put, while the prospects of the rulers depend on military strength, commercial wealth and technology. In this context, during the early part of the 1st millennium BC expansionary movements of the Hallstatt and La Tene cultures associated with Keltoi people in central Europe or possibly the Jastorf pre-Roman Iron Age culture spreading out from Schleswig-Holstein around the same time may have provided ready access to better iron weapons and agricultural implements enabling fresh leaders to emerge seeking economic opportunities in Britain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jastorf_culture, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Roman_Iron_Age ) . Thus the historically perceived struggle may lie in a change of elites rather than complete replacement of population. Indeed the British population at the time has been estimated at possibly one million or more; hence total replacement would seem unlikely.
Foreign trade and contacts
Contacts between Britain and the continent reflected by trade were carried on in both directions across the traditional routes of the channel, northern Europe and the western seaways as in previous earlier periods. But after about 400BC trade slowed down markedly along all three routes until around 100BC when normal contacts were again established, and the western route especially reinvigorated. Gallo –Belgic coins originating in the Somme area of France appeared in Kent and Essex probably between 150-100BC (Van Ardsell, Rodwell) which by 40 AD the region of usage extended south of a line drawn from the Wash to Bristol Channel(blue perimeter figure 2).
A marked change in pottery styles arrived at the end of the 5th century represented by angular bowl copies of the La Tene cultures. These are found mostly around the Essex and southern England regions but the mechanism by which these types were introduced into Britain is unclear, a possible folk movement penetrating the Thames or close-trading relations between the two sides of the channel has been suggested(blue script).
Significantly iron working was introduced into eastern Britain around this time from the continent, slingshot warfare also arrived.Little change in pottery styles has been detected in the north during this period, except derivation of Covesea pottery appearing in the Picts region of northeast Scotland around the 6/7th centuries and thought to have originated in northern Europe(blue script).More dramatic is the archaeological evidence for substantial immigration (several thousands of burials found to date) into Britain of the so-called Arras people entering eastern Yorkshire in the 5th century BC, denoted by their markedly different burial goods practices compared to others in that particular region(blue script).
Iron Age Hill forts scenario (i.e. the first millennium BC)
Armed with these tantalising signposts of a possibly more distant invasion event, the Iron Age logically appeared be the place to look. Significantly interpretation of this period by archaeologists is one of aggression, unrest, uncertainty and tension and thus presented a likely candidate for further investigation.
Hill forts archaeology
The archaeology indicates that from early in the first millennium BC, settlements in Britain began to strengthen their defences. Many after the mid millennium were further developed with extensive ditches and ramparts to produce over 2000 so-called Hill forts of various sizes ranging from the many small of less than 0.25 hectare to the massive 30hectares and more, as indicated on the detailed plot seen in ‘Hill forts of Britain’, Figure 1 (Hogg).
Figure 1 Distribution of Hill forts
Hill forts are prevalent in Wales, south and southwest England, and Northumberland/Borders, mainly as clusters in hilly localities e.g. Chilterns, Cotswolds, Downs, Mendips, Malvern Hills, various Moors areas, Peak district and northern uplands etc. Scattered around the forts were enclosed hamlets and homesteads. Similarly with the Midlands and eastern England but the Hill forts are much more widely interspersed. Duns and brochs are more representative of the Scottish Highlands, but not exclusively.The Hill fort distribution pattern thus possibly represents the main centres habitation, as reflected by the major pre-historic tracks which provide interconnecting routes for the predominant Hill fort clusters, notably in the east and south; river and coastal routes being generally available elsewhere.
As illustrated in Figure 2 below most of these types of defence were gradually abandoned within the following time frame:
i)Hill forts in most parts of eastern England north of the Thames up to the Humber went out of use from about 400BC to 100BC.
ii)The Hill forts of Yorkshire probably went earlier.
iii) South of the Thames from Kent to the Solent the abandonment process extended into the 1st century BC, in the final stages characterised by the establishment of specific heavily defended Hill forts possessing massive ramparts, e.g.Danebury, possibly in reaction to the introduction of slingshot as a more effective weapon around this time (Hogg). However most of the major forts in the Dorset/Somerset region survived in to the 1st century AD until dismantled by the Romans
ii)The Hill forts of Yorkshire probably went earlier.
iii) South of the Thames from Kent to the Solent the abandonment process extended into the 1st century BC, in the final stages characterised by the establishment of specific heavily defended Hill forts possessing massive ramparts, e.g.Danebury, possibly in reaction to the introduction of slingshot as a more effective weapon around this time (Hogg). However most of the major forts in the Dorset/Somerset region survived in to the 1st century AD until dismantled by the Romans
iv) A few scattered large oppida developed from Hill forts in southern England during the 1st century BC, some existing into the Roman era(dark blue disc).
v) During the mid 1st century AD the Romans destroyed all the remaining Hill forts in Dorset, Somerset and Devon.
vi) The Romans also probably dismantled any remaining Hill forts southwest of the Severn/Teme river up to the Marches during the 1st century AD but some in Wales survived the Roman era.
vii) The Roman thrust to the north around 70AD opened up east coast and cross Pennine routes to Cumbria and Scotland and the borders Hill forts were slighted.
viii) In the Highlands region the brochs and east coast souterrains along with some Hill forts were abandoned around the 2nd century AD, probably in the wake of the series of Roman campaigns, but many survived the Roman occupation ending around 410 AD.
Figure 2 Sequence of the abandonment of the Hill forts
Burys and worths
Proceeding on the notion that the invasion outlined by Gildas actually occurred the task was to try and identify tangible indications of any protagonists involved in the abandonment sequence preceding the Roman occupation. As noted previously incursions are evidenced by the Arras who consolidated a presence in east Yorkshire preserving their burial practices, others possibly include newcomers responsible for introducing the La Tene pottery by way of the Thames. Perhaps other unidentified Germanic groups also raided these islands early 1st millennium BC, for example north of the Forth-Clyde isthmus a fifth or so of the 260 known Hill forts of that region suffered burning represented by vitrified ramparts, tentatively carbon dated to around this period or a little earlier (Hogg). Place names in the landscape thus seemed a reasonable starting point for identifying the postulated new arrivals.
Importantly in this respect the Germanic language terms ‘bury’ defined by specialists as stronghold/fortified place or watch tower/hill/mound , or Roman period ( see below for discussion of the Roman period)) and the associated ‘worth’ interpreted as enclosed settlement, occurs in over 400 and 300 British towns or villages respectively, mostly in England but not exclusively as shown in Figure 3a. Thus working on the assumption that protection would be required to occupy territory, the ‘bury’ stronghold seemed appropriate for the purpose, while the ‘worths’ could be the first settlements or farms once an area had become reasonably secure.
Unfortunately there is no analysed archaeological evidence to demonstrate that modern-day ‘bury’ towns and villages were strongholds or when first settled. Hence the proposed model is circumstantial, although some have undated man-made mounds (up to approx 30m diameter), for example Chirbury, Rushbury, Beckbury and Oldbury in Shropshire, Hanbury in Staffordshire,Hanbury in Worcestershire, Kingsbury in Warwickshire, Shoeburyness in Essex and Tetbury in Gloucestershire. Similar raised platforms can also be seen in several ‘bury’ villages in other Midlands counties and elsewhere (Hinde).
Since the Hill forts also existed in considerable numbers it was imagined that the forts and ‘burys’ might represent protagonists.
Figure 3a Plot of 'bury' strongholds,enclosed 'worth' settlements and Roman forts(burys)
Encroachment strategy in England
A plot of Hill forts juxtaposed against ‘burys’ and ‘worths’
Figure 3a shows a transposed plot of the positions of the 200 or so largest, most well defended Hill forts ( blue disc) selected from the various clusters juxtaposed against the locations of modern ‘bury/borough/burgh/brough’ strongholds ( red disc) and ‘worth’ enclosed settlements( yellow disc), together with the positions of proposed Roman 'burys'(small magenta disc).
‘Burys’ suffixed with ‘ton’ and similar appendages e.g. Burton, Bury farm etc. were not included unless a nearby bury was not evident.
Extracted from the 'all burys' total of Figure 3a, Figure 3b is a similar plot specifically of 'bury' strongholds
identified by place-name specialists (large red discs listed in Table 1) , plus the few other ‘berie’ settlements given in the Doomsday book or shown on the road map ( small red disc).
Sarisbury,Hants
Table 1 Bury stronghold near a Hill fort and NOT approximately coincident with a Roman fort or station.
To complete the range of settlement type the watchtower/mound/hill ‘burys’ (red discs) are separately illustrated in Figure 3c .The 'worths' are shown sererately in Figure 3d( yellow disc).
Extracted from the 'all burys' total of Figure 3a, Figure 3b is a similar plot specifically of 'bury' strongholds
identified by place-name specialists (large red discs listed in Table 1) , plus the few other ‘berie’ settlements given in the Doomsday book or shown on the road map ( small red disc).
| Wembury,Devon | Modbury,Devon | Bigbury,Devon | Denbury,Devon |
| Woodbury,Devon | Ashbury,Devon | Cookbury,Devon | Thornbury,Devon |
| Kentisbury,Devon | Sidbury,Devon | Membury,Devon | Cadbury,Devon |
| Luxborough,Som | Bury,Som | Kingsbury Ep,Som | Pibsbury,Som |
| Glastonbury,Som | Westbury sub,So | Highbury,Som | Shaftsbury,Dor |
| Netherbury,Dor | Dudsbury,Dor | Ensbury,Dor | Foxbury Hill,Dor |
| Chalbury,Dors | Westbury,Wilts | Heytesbury,Wilts | Tisbury,Wilts |
| Whitsbury,Wilts | Alderbury,Wilts | E Chisenbury,Wilts | Chisbury,Wilts |
| Fosbury,Wilts | Exbury,Hants | Bransbury,Hants | O Bergclere,Hants |
| Holbury,Hants | Timsbury,Hants | Westbury,Hants | Stenbury,IOW |
| Bury,Sus | Shermanbury,Sus | Albury,Sur | Sunbury,Sur |
| Southborough,Kent | Pembury,Kent | Wateringbury,Kent | Oldbury,Kent |
| Canterbury,Kent | Congresbury,Avon | Marksbury,Avon | Almondsbury,Avon |
| Oldbury on Sev,Av | O Sodbury,Avon | Hawkesbury,Avon | Thornbury,Avon |
| Oldbury on H,Av | Tetbury,Gloucs | Yatesbury,Wilts | Ashbury,Wilts |
| Trewsbury,Gloucs | Bibury,Gloucs | Idbury, Ox | Overbury,Worcs |
| Fladbury,Worcs | Chadbury,Worcs | U Snodbury,Worcs | Eastbury,Worcs |
| Charlbury,Ox | Kintbury,Berks | U Bucklebury,Berk | Blewbury,Ox |
| Ramsbury, Wilts | Eastbury,Bucks | Avebury,Wilts | Amesbury,Wilts? |
| Banbury,Ox | Adderbury,Ox | Westbury,Bucks | Albury,Bucks |
| Padbury,Bucks | Soulbury,Bucks | Lathbury,Bucks | Eastbury,MSex |
| Sudbury,MSex | Limbury,Beds | Aldbury,Herts | Cholesbury,Bucks |
| Hertingfordbury,Hts | Albury,Herts | Wallbury,Essex | Little Mashbury,Es |
| Tilbury Grn,Essex | Tollesbury,Essex | Shoebury,Essex | Tilbury,Essex |
| Burstead,Essex | Burrough Gn, Cam | Danbury,Essex | Tenbury W,Worcs |
| Knowbury,Shrops | Onibury,Shrops | Clunbury,Shrops | Lydbury N,Shrops |
| Norbury,Shrops | Owlbury,Shrops | Diddlesbury,Shrops | Rushbury,Shrops |
| Sidbury,Shrops | Pontesbury,Shrops | Shrewsbury,Shrops | Alberbury,Shrops |
| Oldbury,Shrops | Rushbury,Shrops | Cleobury N,Shrops | Beckbury,Shrops |
| Maesbury,Shrops | Norbury,Staffs | Bushbury,Staffs | Oldbury,WMids |
| Hasbury,WMids | Hanbury,Worcs | Hartlebury,Worcs | Burf,Worcs |
| Fockbury,Worcs | Tidbury Gr,Warwks | Birdingbury,Warwks | Kingsbury,Warwks |
| Oldbury,Warwks | Narborough,Leics | Norbury,Ches | Wybunbury,Ches |
| Worthenbury,Flint | Sudbury,Staffs | Tutbury,Staffs | Hanbury,Staffs |
| Dalbury,Derbys | Loughborough,Leics | Blithbury,Staffs | Wimblebury,Staffs |
| Queniborough,Leics | Burrough on H,Leic | Woodborough,Notts | Westborough,Lincs |
| Northbourough,Cam | Bury,Cam | Desborough,NHants | Guilsborough,NHants |
| Oxborough,Nfolk | Ryburgh,Nfolk | Aldborough,Nfolk | Bawburgh,Nfolk |
| Aldeby,Suff | Bury St Ed,Suff | Rumburgh,Suff | Aldeburgh,Suff |
| Grundisburgh,Suff | Bunbury,Ches | Astbury,Ches | Henbury,Ches |
| Bredbury,G Man | Pendlebury,G Man | Bury,G Man | Almondbury,Yorks |
| Worsbrough,Yorks | Horbury,Yorks | Dewsbury,Yorks | Stanbury,Yorks |
| Thornbury,Yorks | Barnburgh,Yorks | Barlborough,Derbys | Mosborough,Derbys |
| Clarborough,Notts | Gainsborough,Lincs | Blyborough,Lincs | Yarburgh,Lincs |
| Ludborough,Lincs | Harbrough,Humb | Stallingborough,Humb | Flixborough,Humb |
| Eggborough,Yorks | Hemingbrough,York | Aldbrough,E Yorks | Bilbrough,Yorks |
| Knaresborough,Yorks | Goldsborough,York | Aldborough,Yorks | Aldbrough,N Yorks |
Table 1 Bury stronghold near a Hill fort and NOT approximately coincident with a Roman fort or station.
To complete the range of settlement type the watchtower/mound/hill ‘burys’ (red discs) are separately illustrated in Figure 3c .The 'worths' are shown sererately in Figure 3d( yellow disc).
The Hill forts positions were obtained from the English Heritage list and county web sites, and the bury and worth locations from a 2.5 inch to the mile road map augmented with www.streetmap.co.uk/, plus identified deserted villages and those given in the Doomsday book.
The plots indicate that for the English lowlands in particular, the 'burys' (and worths) seem to have been placed as follows:
i)Near coastal bridgehead positions and associated environs including transit points.
ii)Near each developed Hill fort 5-10 miles distant, and commonly in pairs, one often being the watchtower type.
ii)Near each developed Hill fort 5-10 miles distant, and commonly in pairs, one often being the watchtower type.
Figure 3d Plot of 'worth' enclosed settlements
Routes of encroachment
The resulting significant ‘bury’ routes as depicted pose a puzzling phenomenon, thus to seek an explanation it was assumed that the builders of the ‘burys’ gained access to land through the process of gradual encroachment. Incursions seemingly spread from Yorkshire, East Anglia and along the south coast (the North and Scotland is discussed more fully below under Roman period) namely:
England and Wales
Circa 500BC to 100BC
i)Probable establishment of settlements in Yorkshire through a Humber bridgehead followed by expansion southwards east of the Trent and maybe also via the Wash(Cambs) moving south/southwest to the Thames through the East Midlands.
ii)Ingress west of the Trent(Yorks) advancing south around the Peak district to South Lancashire and down to the West Midlands reaching just beyond the Severn/Teme rivers.
iii)Into East Anglia from coastal bridgeheads probably at Aldeburgh and Aldeby.
iv)Into Essex and Middlesex from the northern bank of the Thames estuary.
v)South from the London area into Surrey and eastern Kent.
Circa 300BC to 40AD
vi)Multiple developments from river inlets along the south coast from Hampshire to Devon. Sussex may have been penetrated via the River Arun or alternative from north Kent/Surrey). Dorset and Somerset probably remained relatively free of ‘bury’ intrusions until the early Roman period when any remaining Hill forts were dismantled by the Romans post 43AD, notably Maiden Castle, Spetisbury, Hod Hill, South Cadbury and Ilchester along with others. Perhaps only after the Roman departure in the early 5th century was this region again contested, e.g. the short-lived re-occupation of South Cadbury (see discussion on the Roman era below).
vii)The building of ‘burys’ continued west of the Severn/Teme rivers up to the Welsh mountains from the Dee down to the northern border of Herefordshire.
While a similar advance into eastern Worcestershire overcame Bredon just before the Romans arrived mid 1st century AD to dismantle any remaining Marches Hill forts, notably the Malverns(possibly),Croft Ambrey, Credenhill and Sutton Walls. Herefordshire itself appears to have been finally absorbed only during the sub-Roman period, the border ultimately being demarked by Offas dyke.
viii)The final stage of Hill fort development in south-eastern England during the 1st century BC involved the formation of large enclosed oppida ( dark blue disc), some continuing to the Roman occupation, notably:
(a) Salmonsbury, (b)Bagendon, Gloucs
(c) Camulodunum(Colchester), Essex
(d) Winchester, (e) Silchester, Hants
(f) Dyke Hills, (g) Abingdon, Oxon
(h) Wheathampstead, Herts.
(i) Loose, (j) Oldbury and (k) Bigbury, Kent
(l) Selsey, Sussex
All are sited in patches of territory relatively clear of ‘bury’ strongholds and mostly within the area bounded by the use of Gallo-Belgic coinage. Reputedly (h),and possibly (k),(i),(j) were attacked by Caesar in the expedition of 54BC where after nearby settlements were established at pre- Roman Verulamium,Canterbury and Oldbury respectively.
Notably most ‘bury strongholds’ lie on or very close to the natural A and B roads.
Northern England and Scotland
Circa post the 1st century AD
i)Roman campaigns in northern England and Scotland
The Romans quickly dispatched the newly erected fort at Stanwick(Aldbrough) in north Yorkshire around 70AD which then opened up an eastern approach to Northumberland and Scotland together with Pennine routes to Cumbria. Several casters, burghs and caers were subseqently established near Hadrian’s wall and the borders. However the isolated coastal stockades near the Tweed such as Bamburgh could be later as described in the AS Chronicle.
Notably, most of the few ‘burys’ observed in the region either lie on Roman roads or close to forts, such as Newstead and Edinburgh.
The Romans quickly dispatched the newly erected fort at Stanwick(Aldbrough) in north Yorkshire around 70AD which then opened up an eastern approach to Northumberland and Scotland together with Pennine routes to Cumbria. Several casters, burghs and caers were subseqently established near Hadrian’s wall and the borders. However the isolated coastal stockades near the Tweed such as Bamburgh could be later as described in the AS Chronicle.
Notably, most of the few ‘burys’ observed in the region either lie on Roman roads or close to forts, such as Newstead and Edinburgh.
ii)The separate ‘bury’developments along the Scottish coast north of the Firth of Forth possibly emanated from the major forts at Inchtuhil and Carpow, subsequently extended along the northeast Highlands coast could represent plantation farms and settlements or camp followers from the 2nd,3rd and 4th century AD Roman land and sea campaigns or even later. Alternatively however Burghead in the Moray Firth, which is possibly a 4th century Pictish fort or stockade together the nearby Covesea pottery, may indicate an even earlier Scandinavian presence. While the Wick(bay or inlet) and Brough settlements of the NE Highlands, Shetland and Orkney Islands suggests later Viking activity.
Encroachment tactics
Burys
In order for this particular model to logically function, the tactic requires that the ‘bury’ provided shielded protection in advance of establishing ‘worth’ type settlements, thereby facilitating progressive encroachments onto the more fertile lowland areas surrounding the Hill forts, the process of consolidation depending on the local resistance encountered. Presumably more successful economic, military and technological strategies, e.g. sling shot, better swords, agricultural implements, organisation etc. enabled such a process of attrition to very gradually envelop the indigenous chiefdoms. Increasingly restricted to the Hill fort environs their territorial dominance reduced until ultimately socially absorbed and assimilated, tentatively indicated by the dated progress zones illustrated in Figure 2.
Worths
Notably ‘worths’ are particularly scarce near zones of unresolved contested territorial ownership such as Dorset- northern Wiltshire-Somerset region and Cotswolds and the late enclosed oppida or of little interest e.g. west Cornwall, Wales, Cumbria, moorlands, Pennines and Uplands and Highlands of Scotland or alternatively where resistance was possibly ineffective such as north Humberside, or not reached as with Herefordshire(Figure 3d).
Dun,don,den and down places
The English landscape also has a noticeable number of dun,don,down and den places, explained by specialists as settlements near to or on a hill, however 'dun' is also believed to be ultimately related to the the celtic for a fortification. Thus taking care to avoid the related Anglo-Saxon denu(valley) and denn(woodland pasture) terms, the place- names occurring on the road map containing the dun,don,den and down representing a presumed 'hill' are shown plotted in juxtaposition to the Hill forts in Figure 4a, light red disc being the English, cyan the Welsh 'dinas' and light cyan Scottish 'dun' language prefix element identifiers respectively.
Strikingly the 'English' place-name type is always situated near a Hill fort and generally closer than 4 miles distant, and significantly not sited elsewhere. The correlation seems to indicate that the 'don/down' terminology specifically relates to the Hill fort and therefore probably denotes an early settlement established near to the latter.
Since in England and southern Scotland the 'don/down' descriptor element invariably has an English/Anglo-Saxon meaning, the observation probably eliminates the possibility that 'bury' places were named from an association with a nearby Hill fort and actually represent strongholds in their own right serving the distinct function described previously.
Notably the occurence of 'don/down' descriptors along east coast of Scotland, the south Wales coast, Gower peninsula, southern Pembrokeshire and Cornwall are all located in Hill fort territory, which together with the presence of borough/bury places e.g. Solbury close to the Roman road at Haverfordwest (and 'wicks') may indicate the transfer of 'English' speaking farmers planted during the Roman occupation when the Hill forts were probably abandoned by the 'celtic' people of these regions.
Since in England and southern Scotland the 'don/down' descriptor element invariably has an English/Anglo-Saxon meaning, the observation probably eliminates the possibility that 'bury' places were named from an association with a nearby Hill fort and actually represent strongholds in their own right serving the distinct function described previously.
Notably the occurence of 'don/down' descriptors along east coast of Scotland, the south Wales coast, Gower peninsula, southern Pembrokeshire and Cornwall are all located in Hill fort territory, which together with the presence of borough/bury places e.g. Solbury close to the Roman road at Haverfordwest (and 'wicks') may indicate the transfer of 'English' speaking farmers planted during the Roman occupation when the Hill forts were probably abandoned by the 'celtic' people of these regions.
Figure 4a Plot of dun,don,down and den places juxtaposed against Hill forts
Anglo-Saxon burials and cremations
Burials and cremations discovered to date considered to be early Anglo-Saxon(empty black circles in Figure 4b), demonstrate a reasonable visible correlation with bury and worth locations(similarly for 'don/down' places,figure 4a), excepting southwest England which has yet revealed few such finds.
Figure 4b Early Anglo-Saxon burials and cremations(black circles)
Roman period occupation
The Romans arrived in 43AD probably entering via the Solent possibly with the co-operation of some local tribes and also at Richborough in Kent, to establish relatively quickly the occupation illustrated in Figure 5.
Figure 5 Approximate Roman occupation sequence
By the time of withdrawal around 410 AD their presence appears to have had a marked impact on ‘bury’ nomenclature related to the forts built during this period as can be seen in Figures 3 and 6 showing OS Roman Britain superimposed on to the ‘bury’ map:
Roman road cyan lines in Figures 3 and blue lines in Figures 6 and 8
Roman fort (green donut).
Caer ( dark green disc), Fig 8b - Roman town as called by brittonic speakers
Caester’(dark green disc) - Roman town as called by ‘English’ speakers
Roman ‘bury’ ( magenta disc), possibly the ‘English’ or anglicised term applied by traders or similar camp followers to ad-hoc settlements sited near Roman forts and stopping stations along the highways (See further discussion below under place-name issues).
Figure 6 Roman 'bury' forts and pre-Roman 'Ald'bury settlements
Roman 'bury' forts and stopping stations
i) The following Roman ‘bury’ candidates shown on Figure 6 lie approximately coincident with known Roman forts, towns or presumed lost forts expected at possible stopping stations along Roman built highways ( magenta disc):
Probable:
New ‘ bury’ Roman fort nearby Wick or Eccles
Burgh, Suffolk Walton Castle Harwich
Burgh, Sleaford, Lincs Sleaford Scopwick
Burgh Castle,Norfolk Gariannum Wickhampton
Brough,Humber Petuaria
Burgh by Sands,Cumbria Aballava
Drumburgh, Cumbria Concavata
Brough, Cumbria Brough Holwick
Brough, Notts Crocalana
Brough,Peak District Derbys Navio Ecclesall
Burghill, H&W Magnis(Kenchester) Shelwick
Burgh Aylsham,Norfolk Brampton Wickmere
Burgwallis,Yorks Burghwallis Adwick le Street
Bury Barton, West Devon Bury Barton Barwick
Scarborough,Yorks Signal station Wykeham
Goldsborough,Yorks Signal station Runswick
Flamborough Signal station? Butterwick
Newbrough,Nthumb Newbrough Chesterwood
Newburgh, Tayside Scotland Carpow
Newburgh, Tayside Scotland Carpow
Dryburgh, Borders Trimontum ( Newstead) Hawick
Scraesburgh,Borders Cappuck Hawick
Edinburgh,Scotland Cramond Borthwick
Musselburgh,Scotland Inveresk Borthwick
Portbury,Avon Abona(Bristol) Wick St Lawrence
Wendlebury,Oxs Alchester Tingewick
Kingsbury,St Albans, Herts Verulamium Childwick Green
Childwickbury,St Albans Verulamium ditto
Sandridgebury ditto Marshalswick
Gorhambury ditto ditto
Quinbury, Herts Braughing Upwick Green
Risbury, Herefords Blakwardine
Cleobury Mortimer,Shrops Wall Town Duddlewick
Howbury Gt London NOVIOMAGUS E Wickham
Ellenborough Cumbria ALAVNA Ecclesfield
Stanbury Yorks Haworth Kidwick
Glassenbury Kent Cranbrook
Frindsbury Kent DUROBRIVAE Eccles
Ilbury,Oxfds Lower Lea Astwick
Wellingborough,Nhants Irchester Hardwick
Irthlingborough,Nhants Irchester Stanwick
Samlesbury,Lancs Walton le Dale Fishwick
Winsbury,Shrops LEVOBRINTA Hardwick
Thornbury,Shrops LEVOBRINTA Hardwick
Samlesbury,Lancs Walton le Dale Fishwick
Winsbury,Shrops LEVOBRINTA Hardwick
Thornbury,Shrops LEVOBRINTA Hardwick
Pinbury,Gloucs nr Cirencester Wychwood
Marbury nr Northwich,Ches CONDATE Leftwich
Marbury nr Whitchurch,Ches MEDIOLANUM High Wych
Marbury nr Northwich,Ches CONDATE Leftwich
Marbury nr Whitchurch,Ches MEDIOLANUM High Wych
Wrenbury nr Whitchurch, Ches MEDIOLANUM High Wych
Attenborough Derbys Lost WhitwichMasbury, Som Shepton Mallet Ashwick
Melbourn Bury Royston Chiswick End
Breckenbrough,Yorks Catterick Ruswick Manor
Breckenbrough,Yorks Breckenbrough Kepwick
Bilbury,H&W nr Richards Castle Lower Ledwych
Bury,H&W ditto ditto
Baldersbury Hill,Nthumb nr Berwick upon Tweed Cheswick
Winklebury,Hants nr Basingstoke
Hiltingbury,Hants nr Twyford Swanwick
Cranbury, Hants ditto
Highbury, Hants Portchester Southwick
Colbury, Hants ONNA
Midanbury, Hants CLAVSENTUM Swanwick
Little Nobury,Warwks Alcester Lenchwick
Sawbury,H&W Blackwardine Ullingswick
Burfa,H&W Walton Hardwick
Oldbury farm,H&W Worcester Rushwick
Shaftsbury,Dorset Alcester,Dor Wyke
Kimssbury,Gloucs GLEVUM Painswick
Kimssbury,Gloucs GLEVUM Painswick
Dryburgh, D&G Glenlochar
Burghlee,Loth Glencorse Mains Borthwick
Burghlee,Tays Keithock Hedderwick
Burghmuir,Cent VELUNIATE
Burghmuir farm,Strath Cornhill
Henbury Avon Lost NorthwickBurghmuir farm,Strath Cornhill
Hartlebury, Shrops Lost Wyken/Chesterton
Roxburgh,Nthumb Lost Eccles
Burgh St Margaret,Norfolk Lost Bastwick
Burgh St Peter, Norfolk Lost
Burgh le Marsh, Lincs Lost
Burg on Bain, Lincs Lost Kenwick
Newbury, Berks Lost Wickham
Brough Hall, Staffs Lost
Happisburgh,Norfolk Lost Eccleston
Newburgh, Lancs Lost
Newbury, Somerset Lost Astwick
Burrill,Yorks Lost
Carlbury, Durham Lost Stanwick
Bromborough, Mersey Lost Shotwick
Burstall, Suffolk Lost Ipswich
Blythburgh, Norfolk Lost Dunwich, Walberswick
Borough Green,Kent Lost
Borough Green,Kent Lost
Musbury, Devon Sweaton Wyke
Possible:
Aylesbury, Bucks Fleet Marston Hardwick
Salisbury, Wilts Sorvodunum Berwick St James
Peterborough(Burgh),Cambs Dorobtivae Cotterswick
Trewsbury, Gloucs Cirencester Cerneywick
Malmsbury, Wilts White Walls
Maugersbury, Gloucs Bourton Wick Rissington
Henbury, Gloucs Abona(Bristol) Northwick
Poundbury, Dorset Durnovaria(Dorchester) Wyck Regis
Holmbury St Mary, Surrey Roman villa? Rudgwick
Newburgh Priory, Yorks Roman villa?
Wraybury,Berks Pontes Hampton Wick
Sprotbury,S Yorks Danum Adwick on Deane
Washingborough,Lincs Lindum Canwick
Fledborough,Lince Newton on Trent
Bilorough,Notts Broxtowe Calwick
Owslebury,Hants Venta Wickham
Harbury,Warwks Chesterton Priors Hardwick
Ackbury Heath,Staffs Pennocrucium Bloxwich
Thornbury,H&W Tedstone Wafer Wickenford
Washingborough,Lincs Lindum Canwick
Bragbury End Herts Welwyn Haultwick
Stonebury Herts Braughing Upswick
Bilbrough Yorks Tadcaster Osbaldswick
Didsbury Gt Man MAMUCIUM
Quinbury End,NHants LACTODURUM Wicken
Whittlebury Nhants Towcester Wicken
Mosborough Yorks Chesterfield Todwick
Kislingbury Nhants Dustoo Hardwick
Mardleybury,Herts Welwyn Marshalswick
Limbury,Gloucs Glevum Malswick
Limbury,Dors Bridport Wych
Mosborough Yorks Chesterfield Todwick
Kislingbury Nhants Dustoo Hardwick
Mardleybury,Herts Welwyn Marshalswick
Limbury,Gloucs Glevum Malswick
Limbury,Dors Bridport Wych
Melbury Abbass, Dorset Berwick St John
Badbury, Wilts Haydon Wick
South Cadbury, Somerset Wick Champflower
Spetisbury, Dorset Shapwick
Bury,Gt Man Prestwich
Tewkesbury, Gloucs Elmstone Hardwicke
Saintbury, Gloucs Wickhamford
Shawbury, Shrops Wykey
Braceborough, Lincs Hardwick
Tasburgh, Norfolk Hardwick
Attleborough, Norfolk Eccles Road
Narborough, Norfolk Gayton Ashwicken
Wednesbury, West Midlands Smethwick
Pilsbury, Peak district Derbys Parwich
Conksbury,ditto ditto
Ickburgh(Norfolk) Cranwick
Kingsbury,Gt London
Hawkenbury,Kent
Bedgebury/Glassenbury,Kent
Wappenbury,Warwks Warwick
Wellbury, Herts
Kingsbury Episcopi, Devon
Londresborough, Yorks Kilwick
Goldsborough, Yorks Westwick
Billingborough, Lincs Garwick
Mixbury, Oxon Astwick
Wrenbury, Chesh Nantwich
Beningborough, Yorks N Eastwick
Eynesbury, Beds
Sewardstonebury,Gt London
Wormleybury,Herts Eastwick
Youngsbury,Herts Eastwick
Typically, The Bury, Bury farm, Buryfield, Bury Hill etc. when sited approx co-incidental with a Roman fort
Quickbury,Essex High Wych
Hallingbury,Essex High Wych
Daresbury,Chesh Winwick
Aldmanbury,Bloomsbury etc. Londinium Chiswick,Aldwych etc.
Burdon,Burradon (Nthumb) assumed to be references to Hill forts(ie borough-dun)Daresbury,Chesh Winwick
Gunnersbury,Gt Ldn Chiswick
Solbury, Dyfed nr Milford Haven
Bigbury,Devon Weeke
Denbury,Dvon Week
Bury, Devon Week
Highbury,Finsbury,Barnsbury,Lothbury LondiniumAldmanbury,Bloomsbury etc. Londinium Chiswick,Aldwych etc.
Typically, The Bury, Bury farm, Buryfield, Bury Hill etc. when sited approx co-incidental with a Roman fort
Uncertain:
Middlebrough,Clev Ingleby Barwick
Guisborough,Clev
Bradbury,Dur Elwick
Bury,Gt Manch Prestwich
Hollingbury,E Sussex Southwick
Pendlebury,Gt Man Mamucium Prestwich
Newgborough,Anglesey Aberffrew Caergeliog
Pendlebury,Gt Man Mamucium Prestwich
Newgborough,Anglesey Aberffrew Caergeliog
Notably a similar pattern of Roman forts sited along the Roman roads(Sitwell) can for example be seen in France as the chateau,chatel,chatillon villages and in the occupied Germanic territories as 'burg' places. Also many 'burgs' are observed on the known Roman tracks in the northern unoccupied zone.(see addendum below)
ii) A further category occurring at places either coincident or very close to Roman forts identified by the Ald, Al, Old, Little prefix ( orange disc) shown in Figures 3a and 6 may represent ‘burys’ existing before the Roman era which retained their identity on establishment of the nearby new Roman fort (see further discussion under Place-name issues below):
Pre-Roman ‘Old’ bury nearby Roman fort nearest 'wick'
Aldeby, Norfolk Burgh St Peter
Albury, Surrey Lost/Holmbury St Mary Rudgwick
Albury,Oxf Lost or Buildings?
Albury, Herts Braughing/Quinbury Upwick Green
Aldbury,Herts Durocobrivis(Dunstable) or Tring?
Aldborough,Yorks Isurium Hewick
Aldbrough, N Yorks Piercebridge/Carlbury Stanwick
Aldbrough, Humbs Hull(Wike) ? Owstwick and others nearby
Aldborough, Norfolk Brampton/Burgh next Aylsham Wickmere
Aldeburgh, Suffolk Lost Wickham Market
Oldbury,Warks Mandvessedum(Mancetter)
Oldbury, West Mids Metchley or Wednesbury Smethwick
Oldbury, Shrops Lost/Hartlebury Wyken /Chesterton
Oldbury on Hill,Gloucs White Walls/Malmesbury
Oldbury on Severn, Avon Rangeworthy or camp? Northwick
Oldbury, Kent VAGNIASIS or Borough Hill
Oldbury farm, H&W Worcester Rushwick
Oldbury, Kent VAGNIASIS or Borough Hill
Oldbury farm, H&W Worcester Rushwick
Littleborough,Notts Segelocum/Lindum
Littleborough, Lancs Lost/Slack(Camulodunum)
Littlebury, Essex Great Chesterford Wicken Bonhunt
iii) The following ‘bury’ places possess a directional prefix( white disc) in Figure 3a, they are generally located no more than 6 miles or so so from Roman roads and thus some could be Roman period places(orange):
iii) The following ‘bury’ places possess a directional prefix( white disc) in Figure 3a, they are generally located no more than 6 miles or so so from Roman roads and thus some could be Roman period places(orange):
Northborough, Cams
Narborough, Leics
Norbury, Shrops
Norbury nr Marbury, Ches
Norbury nr Stockport, Ches
Norbury nr Stockport, Ches
Norbury, Staffs
Norbury, Gt London
Norbury,Shrops
Southborough, Gt London
Southborough, Kent
Sudborough, Nhants
Sudbury, Derby
Sudbury,Suffolk
Sudbury, Gt London
Eastbury, Berks
Eastbury, Herts
Eastbury,H&W
Eastbury,H&W
Westbury,Wilts
Westbury, Bucks
Westbury, Shrops
Westbury on Severn,Gloucs
Westbury on Trym, Avon
Westbury sub Mendip, Somset
Westborough,Lincs
Tyddyn Norbury,Clwyd Ruthin
iv) In England the following ‘burys’ shown in Figure 3a are situated in Hill fort areas dismantled by the Romans and may be Roman or sub-Roman period ( large magenta disc):
Bury,H&W by Roman ditch Hardwick
Tyddyn Norbury,Clwyd Ruthin
iv) In England the following ‘burys’ shown in Figure 3a are situated in Hill fort areas dismantled by the Romans and may be Roman or sub-Roman period ( large magenta disc):
Bury,H&W by Roman ditch Hardwick
Brobury,H&W Kenchester Shelwick
Glasbury,H&W Clifford
Risbury, H&W Blackwardine Ullingswick
Bredenbury,H&W Blackwardine Ullingswick
Thornbury,H&W Tedstone Wafer Knightwick
Ledbury,H&W Dymock Shelwick
Bosbury,H&W Stretton Grandison Ullingswick
Aconbury,H&W Shelwick
Bamburgh, Nthumb Aconbury,H&W Shelwick
Lesbury, Nthumb
Rothbury, Nthumb
Abbotsbury, Dorset
Winfrith Newburgh,Dorset
In Wales and Scotland
Caers and Gaers supply farm/village/town near a Roman fort
Caers and Gaers supply farm/village/town near a Roman fort
Duns in Scotland ( small cyan) settlement near a Hill fort
Dinas in Wales( small cyan) settlement near a Hill fort
v) Another similar set sited near lines of Roman forts may have arisen after the Roman campaigns in Scotland or later ( large magenta disc):
Dinas in Wales( small cyan) settlement near a Hill fort
Street Dinas(Shrops), possibly an an anglicised Welsh village near the Old Oswestry Hil fort and Wats dyke close to the modern Welsh border. A similar argument could be made for anglicised Dingestow(Mons) and Tenby(Pembs).
v) Another similar set sited near lines of Roman forts may have arisen after the Roman campaigns in Scotland or later ( large magenta disc):
Colinsburgh, Central lowlands
Winchburgh,
Osnaburgh
Salsburgh ?
Newburgh, Highlands( 2 of )
Maryburgh,
Marionburgh,
Maryburgh,
Branderburgh,
Burghead(Pictish ?)
Brough
vi) The isolated examples below may have been part of Alfred’s defences refortified in the 9th century in response to Danish incursions:
Shrewsbury, Shrops
Shaftsbury, Dorset
Chisbury, Wilts
Eddisbury, Ches
Chirbury,Shrops
Eddisbury, Ches
Chirbury,Shrops
Dykes, ditches and Hill fort anomalies in the landscape - see fig 3.(white lines)
i) Devils dyke and the other ditches on the Chilterns near the Essex border seem to delimit between the various directional encroachments from tribes to the north, south and east.
ii) West Wans dyke perhaps served similar purposes on the border between the Dumnoni – Dobunni tribes
iii)East Wans dyke perhaps temporarily protected the Durotriges from Atrabate encroachments. However the dyke stands deep in Atrebate territory and may therefore be much later, indeed its position better favours an Alfredian construction blocking the Danish advances of the 9th century.
iv) Grims/Bokerley dykes and the other smaller dykes to the west in Dorset were possibly built by the Durotriges in an attempt to resist the westward Roman advance of the 1st century AD, especially if Spetisbury can be assumed to be a Roman ‘bury’ located next to Vindocladia.
v)The series of Grims ditches from Woodstock to Henley on Thames are located broadly at the convergence of the Atrabates and advances from the northern tribes.
viii) Bichan ditch on the Norfolk/Lincs border, and Giant’s Hedge dyke in Cornwall, are also illustrated as possible features impacting occupation and settlement. Similarly for Cattrail and Black dykes in Northumberland.
ii) West Wans dyke perhaps served similar purposes on the border between the Dumnoni – Dobunni tribes
iii)East Wans dyke perhaps temporarily protected the Durotriges from Atrabate encroachments. However the dyke stands deep in Atrebate territory and may therefore be much later, indeed its position better favours an Alfredian construction blocking the Danish advances of the 9th century.
iv) Grims/Bokerley dykes and the other smaller dykes to the west in Dorset were possibly built by the Durotriges in an attempt to resist the westward Roman advance of the 1st century AD, especially if Spetisbury can be assumed to be a Roman ‘bury’ located next to Vindocladia.
v)The series of Grims ditches from Woodstock to Henley on Thames are located broadly at the convergence of the Atrabates and advances from the northern tribes.
vi) Offa’s and Wat’s dykes
The so-called Offa’s dyke runs in separate parts from Llanfynydd (Clwyd) to Chepstow(Gwent) and as can be seen in figure 7a the English dioceses (c800 AD) weave along and around the dyke. Since the diocese boundaries with Wales have remained essentially unchanged, the dioceses probably came after the dyke, but if so then the dyke fell very quickly during Offa’s reign (757-796).
Moreover according to work done by Noble(1983), for the section south from Llandrino/Llanymynech Hill fort most parish boundaries have English place names and are cut through by the dyke. Therefore presumably these were laid out after the dyke ceased to function, since it seems unlikely a dissected parish would have existed for long either side of such a large barrier. The northern section of the dyke passes almost exclusively through Welsh place-name villages.
An earlier date for construction, perhaps even Roman, could thus be considered in that the Romans would have had the resources to build such a large feature and the strategic objective of minimising the cost of the military occupation in uneconomic territory and maximising agricultural and other production elsewhere. Notably, the 4th century 'Scriptores Historia Augusta' mentions a Severan wall, circa early 3rd century built of turf and 132 miles long.
In contrast Wat’s dyke runs parallel only a little to the east of Offa’s dyke from near Flint down to immediately south of Maesbury through the Oswestry Hill fort. Recently dated to the 9th century the structure possibly provided a defensive line protecting English place-name settlements just west of the Dee, but apparently only succeeded temporarily as these places today again lie in the Welsh diocese of St Asaph. Significantly territory to the west of Wat's dyke made food renders in the Welsh system, while to the east (English) hidated land was granted.
vii) Similarly the Roman construction of the Antonine and Hadrian walls in the 2nd century AD protected the south with a buffer zone (Figure 3a). By way of conjecture the walls separated (i.e. scotched) the northern parts from other kindred 'bury' people in the south, thus possibly generating the term Scotland- there being no word Scot or Scoti or any derivative in Gaelic. viii) Bichan ditch on the Norfolk/Lincs border, and Giant’s Hedge dyke in Cornwall, are also illustrated as possible features impacting occupation and settlement. Similarly for Cattrail and Black dykes in Northumberland.
Early tribes, kingdoms and dioceses (Fig 7)
After the Romans departed the political entities listed below can be discerned from the flow boundaries of the different zones of apparent control suggested in Figure 3b,namely:
i)British tribes mentioned by the Romans(fig 7b)
ii)Early Dioceses c800AD(blue boundariess in fig 7a)
iii)Anlo-Saxon Kingdoms c600AD(fig 7b)
i)British tribes mentioned by the Romans(fig 7b)
ii)Early Dioceses c800AD(blue boundariess in fig 7a)
iii)Anlo-Saxon Kingdoms c600AD(fig 7b)
Figure 7b Tribes,early Anglo-Saxon kingdoms and dioceses and 'bury' strongholds
Figure 7c Dioceses and 'worth' enclosures
Place-name issues
i)Aldbury-type places
The 'burys' listed above ( orange disc) and depicted in Figures 3a and 6 are either coincident or quite close to a Roman fort, or presumed lost stopping station, hence are more realistically explained as being the term applied by the original occupants of the 'bury' stronhold settlement to differentiate their ‘bury’ from the nearby new Roman fort. Similarly 'bury' with a directional prefix name.
Indeed some Roman forts apparently generated a co-incidental ad-hoc fresh settlement which seemingly acquired anglicised or localised ‘bury’ nomenclature ( magenta disc), while others developed into walled ‘caester’ towns ( dark green disc).In contrast pre-existing 'non-bury' settlements situated near to Roman forts generally seem to have retained their local name e.g. York(wick), Lincoln(don), London, which otherwise presumably ought to be ‘oldbury’ or ‘caester’ by place-naming practice, since all three had coincident Roman forts.
It has been conventionally argued that the 'wickham' settlement represents a homestead sited close to a Roman 'vicus', and therefore would all have arisen at much the same date in the earliest period of large-scale Germanic settlements in the 5th century AD while the 'vicus' still existed. Other forms of 'wick' are then said to have arisen later such as prefix–Wick, Wicken, Weeke,Wyke,Wich etc. fulfilling specialised functions of dairy or barley farm, smithy and so on.However the 'wick' places on the coasts of northern Scotland,SW Wales,Pembrokeshire and Cornwall probably relate to later Viking activity, the term 'wick' in this particular case meaning bay or inlet.
Figure 8a(black disc) illustrates that most farm-type 'Wicks' are set a little away from the main roads, typically within 6 miles of a town or fort and thus more realistically were Roman adhoc 'English' settlements and/or providers of supplies or services as explained in the Wikipedia definition of ‘vicus’ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicus).
Intiguingly a few 'wicks' are evident near Roman forts in south Wales and Scotland.
Notably the positions of the 'wicks' in southeast Devon and Cornwall suggest that some of the 'bury' places(e.g.Bury, Denbury,Bigbury) may be indicative of possible nearby undetected Roman forts.
Notably the positions of the 'wicks' in southeast Devon and Cornwall suggest that some of the 'bury' places(e.g.Bury, Denbury,Bigbury) may be indicative of possible nearby undetected Roman forts.
iii)Eccles-type places
The 50 or so 'eccles' places found on the road map(red disc figure 8a) are generally sited within 4 - 6 miles of a Roman fort, i.e. within convenient walking distance, of which 10 are Eglwys located in Wales, 3 Eglos in Cornwall and 20 Eglis or Eccles in Scotland, the latter mostly in in the lowlands, east and southeast. The remainder are Eccles in England also usually placed near a Roman fort, and rarely by a town (where perhaps the Christian religion was discreetly practiced).
Given the Roman empire formally Christianised in 324AD, the presence of churches in Scotland after the building of the much earlier Antonine and Hadrian separation barriers would suggest subsequent continued occupation. Indeed possible contemporary existence of 'wicks' (supply farms) near forts in this region perhaps lends collaborative evidence.
The 50 or so 'eccles' places found on the road map(red disc figure 8a) are generally sited within 4 - 6 miles of a Roman fort, i.e. within convenient walking distance, of which 10 are Eglwys located in Wales, 3 Eglos in Cornwall and 20 Eglis or Eccles in Scotland, the latter mostly in in the lowlands, east and southeast. The remainder are Eccles in England also usually placed near a Roman fort, and rarely by a town (where perhaps the Christian religion was discreetly practiced).
Given the Roman empire formally Christianised in 324AD, the presence of churches in Scotland after the building of the much earlier Antonine and Hadrian separation barriers would suggest subsequent continued occupation. Indeed possible contemporary existence of 'wicks' (supply farms) near forts in this region perhaps lends collaborative evidence.
Moreover when Christianity formally arrived around the 6/7th century the Latin based 'Eccles' was not (re)adopted, instead the pre-Christian names for places of worship possibly continued, notably the English used the Greek derived term of 'Church', the North and Anglo-Scots chose the 'Kirk'variant (possibly from Greek for circle) and Gaelic Scotland 'K/Cill'(cell), while the Welsh selected 'Llan' for enclosure, similar to the Cornish 'Lann', suggesting that during the Roman occupation religion was probably a Roman phenomenon that may have ceased after departure.
Hence the anglicised ‘eccles’, more commonly with a suffix eg. Eccleston is perhaps indicative of a contemporary Roman period functional relationship with the local community‘ ie. English’ speaking where that particular group was dominant, rather than sub-roman Anglo-Saxon settlements near Romano-British religious establishments. A similar argument may prvail in the 'celtic' held areas.
Hence the anglicised ‘eccles’, more commonly with a suffix eg. Eccleston is perhaps indicative of a contemporary Roman period functional relationship with the local community‘ ie. English’ speaking where that particular group was dominant, rather than sub-roman Anglo-Saxon settlements near Romano-British religious establishments. A similar argument may prvail in the 'celtic' held areas.
Figure 8a Wick- and Eccles- type places
iv) Dinas,Caer/Gaer,Dun in Wales, Cornwall and Scotland
These three descriptors are related to the term for a fortification.A)The ‘Dinas’ places in Wales and Cornwall, and Duns of Scotland (fig 8b) generally occur within clusters of Hill forts and may therefore represent villages and farms established by gaelic Irish settlers near the brythonic celtic Hill forts, probably during the Roman occupation, perhaps in similar fashion to the suggested 'English' don/down immigration.
Figure 8b Dinas, Dun and Down/Don places(farms and villages) near Hill forts in Wales,Cornwall and Scotland
B)The ‘Caer’ and 'Gaer' settlements in Wales ( excluding the various modern Hill fort camp descriptors),and also occasionally evident in southern Scotland and Cornwall, are predominantly located at or near a Roman fort (see figure 8c), ie. less than about 6 miles away, and may thus be supply farmsteads akin to the ‘wick’, 'bury/burgh' and 'chester' places in England, or perhaps even another type of functional relationship with the Roman fort.
Figure 8c Places(farms and villages) possibly having had a relationship with a nearby Roman fort during the Roman occupation of Wales,Cornwall and Scotland
v)Pre-English place-name remnants
Evidence suggests that ‘celtic’ ie. pre-English place names are more prevalent in the west and north of Britain, and also tend to occur in clusters. In this respect analysed data (brown disc) available for the central Midlands shown juxtaposed against Hill forts in Figure 9 tentatively supports the clustering argument. But also significantly such places seem to be mainly sited in the environs of Hill forts, which may indicate that the lowland outreaches were potentially available for more intensive exploitation.
Figure 9 Pre-English place-names in the Central Midlands region
The place- names considered to contain a ‘celtic’ element are the following:
| Penkhall | Walton (4) | Penkridge | Brewood | Penn |
| Morfe | Pensnett | Kinver | Churchill | Dawles |
| Carton | Mamble | Pensax | Worsley | Doverdale |
| Bredon | Comberton (2) | Wyre | Walcot (2) | Crookbarrow |
| Crutch | Warley | Walsall | Barr | Hints |
| Leomonsley | Lichfield | Clownholme | Pentrich | Chevin |
| Cumberhill | Humber | Lime | Breedon | Charnwood |
| Comberford | Mancetter | Coundon | Meon | Crouch |
| Cheadle |
|
|
|
|
By reference to figures 3 and 4 the places (Hill forts/Oppida) likely still in 'celtic' possesion when the Romans arrived were:
West Dorset,Wiltshire and parts of Devon
Cotswolds,
Western Chilterns,
Cambridgeshire,
Colchester region,
Winchester-Silchester-Chichester region,
Central/south Kent
Herefordshire,
Peak district,
Cumbria,
All parts north of the Tyne (or possiblyTees),
Most of Cornwall,
Scotland,
Wales.
While the Roman occupation failed to displace the Brittonic, Cornish and Gaelic languages of the period the proposed encroachment strategy of the ‘bury’ building people in the main gradually replaced the indigenous languages spoken in the English part of the island. Although a difficult phenomenon to interpret a number of language replacement models have been proffered of which:
a) The Elite Dominance model would seem relevant to the Roman phase of occupation. Here a relatively small group of highly organised outside people arrive to militarily and technologically dominate the existing population. Usually succeeding through better central organisation based on rank order, particularly kingship/chiefdom, warrior, priest and craft specialisations, control over basic resources is thereby gained, while the languages may co-exist until one or the other prevails.
In contrast the prolonged territorial encroachment observed by the ‘bury’ builders seems inappropriate to this particular model and other explanations are necessary.
b) Since genetic studies have been unable to detect any large-scale immigration during the Iron Age, modification of the Wave of Advance model such as that demonstrated in parts of the South American colonial experience may provide a more appropriate analogy.
Here possession of a superior technique of exploitation by a few newcomers combined with good organisation is necessary to generate an increase of population with associated intermixing of peoples, which then gradually spreads out over short distances, for example as the next generation seeks additional farmland.
Mathematically maintenance of five people per sq.m (said to be roughly the density for lowland England during the Iron Age) and a doubling of population every generation produces a progressive wave advancing at about 1km per year. Notably the direction and points of travel may vary yet the outcome still results in continuous expansion.
Here possession of a superior technique of exploitation by a few newcomers combined with good organisation is necessary to generate an increase of population with associated intermixing of peoples, which then gradually spreads out over short distances, for example as the next generation seeks additional farmland.
Mathematically maintenance of five people per sq.m (said to be roughly the density for lowland England during the Iron Age) and a doubling of population every generation produces a progressive wave advancing at about 1km per year. Notably the direction and points of travel may vary yet the outcome still results in continuous expansion.
The period of about 300 years proposed for development of the ‘bury’ settlements seems a reasonable approximation to this particular model, with the process of Anglicisation of the language probably well under way when the Romans arrived.
Notably the language of the Peterborough Chronicle becomes recognisable English in the last entries from about 1120AD where it has been suggested that the scribes (monks) probably ceased to be trained formally in Anglo-Saxon language after the Norman Conquest and so exposed their locally spoken Midlands dialect,
A-S perhaps being mainly confined to Essex and south of the Thames as depicted in the proposed tribal flow lies of Figure 3.
Alternative explanations of the evidence
i)Classical historians regard the invasion of Britain as having occurred in the early 5th century AD, and point to Gildas, Bede, the AS Chronicle and the Rivet and Smith brittonic interpretation of Roman period place-names as evidence. However counter arguments have been proposed for the latter by showing how at least some of the Roman place names could have had a previous Germanic language element in their formulation.
Also the necessary strongholds (burys) and nearby enclosed ‘worth’ farms needed by the new settlers presumably seeking access to fertile lowland soils, would hardly have focused on mostly long abandoned empty Hill forts in the upland regions of England, where Hill forts are most prevalent.
And if the ‘burys’ were not strongholds themselves, alternative protection bases to support a post Roman occupation of territory are not readily observed in the landscape.
ii)Other opinion suggests that the supposed invaders named the ‘bury’ strongholds and watch-towers in recognition of nearby Hill forts. But a more satisfactory explanation is provided by the 'dun' (ie.don/down)settlements described above, and significantly also occasionally similarly adopted by the Romans, presumably for the few Hill forts still readily visible in the landscape at that time, e.g.LINDINIS (Ilchester Devon), SORVODUNUM(Old Sarum/Salisbury Wilts), DUNUM(Hod Hill Dorset), CAMULODUNUM( Colchester Essex,and Slack,Yorks), MORIDUNUM(Carmarthen), MARGIDUNUM(Castle Hill, Notts),BRANODUNUM(Brancaster,Norfolk) and VXELODUNUM(Stanwix, Cumbria).
iii)In contrast the archaeological interpretation of the period largely prefers continuity through the Iron to post Roman periods, but then the secondary tier fortifications in the vicinity of a Hill fort(s) adorned with the ‘bury’ or ‘worth’ nomenclature, would imply an indigenous population speaking a Germanic language in a presumed ‘Celtic’ island. Who subsequently clearly acquired little folk memory of the specific names of the Hill forts since none have been retained, other than celtic 'dun' terminology captured in nearby don/down settlements.
Subject to further field evidence identifying more Roman roads and forts or improved archaeology concerning the dating of 'bury'(and 'worth') settlements and the Hill forts , the proposed model is that starting around mid 1st millennium BC the various ‘bury’ encroachment routes illustrated in Fig 3 stemming from the north Midlands/ Yorkshire region and/or the nearby continent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jastorf_culture) represent the approximate pathways taken by various groups of farmer-settlers seeking land for development. The Hill fort chiefdoms having undertaken substantial defensive counter measures by strengthening existing sites and building anew. Subsequently more normal 'don/down' and other settlements were established nearer the deactivated Hill forts.
The period of disruption in Britain is mirrored by destabilisation of conventional foreign trade only normalised again after about 100 BC, just as Roman incursions got underway culminating in the full invasion of 43 AD and subsequent occupation till about 410 AD. During the Roman occupation itself, a substantial proportion Roman forts developed small settlements which acquired 'bury' nomenclature and nearby ancillary ‘wick’(vicus) supply farms, as still reflected in some of the current towns and villages place-names.
Thereafter the centres of tribal and political power broadly observed in Figure 7 re-emerged primed for renewed conflict, only to be finally resolved according to the muddled and confusing historical account given by Gildas and in the early entries of the AS Chronicle, particularly the confused references to Anglo-Saxon, British and Welsh protagonists.
Addendum
(i)Significantly starting earlier, a 'burg' building process was also seemingly underway with the pre-Iron Age movements spreading out from north Germany/Denmark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Roman_Iron_Age). Notably abandonment of the (celtic) Hill forts of Germany between the Rhine and Elbe rivers was almost complete as the Romans arrived to occupy the region south of a line drawn from the Main to Danube rivers just prior to having similarly overcome the Hill forts of France in the 1st century BC.
In this Roman occupied region of Germania a similar pattern to that in Britain of Roman forts sited along the Roman roads(Sitwell) can be seen as 'burg' or 'bourg' places, in addition many 'burgs' are observed on the known Roman tracks in the northern unoccupied zone of Germany reaching the Baltic and further east.
In France these forts are represented by the chateau,chatel,chatillon villages.
In France these forts are represented by the chateau,chatel,chatillon villages.
(ii)Tun,ton,town- most settlement pre/suffixes can be found as equivalents on the nearby continent e.g., ley, stone, stead, ham, bury, field, thorpe, by, bridge, beck, bath, ford,wick, etc. but seemingly not the ubiquitous ton, or town suffix. Perhaps the term was adapted by the early settlers from the celtic 'dun' as essentially meaning an enclosed place.
The following publications provided historical and archaeological context for the preparation of this paper.
Barrow,G.W.S.(2003), The Kingdom of the Scots, Edinburgh University Press, ISBN-10:0748618031
Baugh, A.C. & Cable, T. (1978) A history of the English language, Routledge and Kegan Paul, ISBN071000106
Baugh, A.C. & Cable, T. (1978) A history of the English language, Routledge and Kegan Paul, ISBN071000106
Bede. (1999), The Ecclesiastical History of the English People, Oxford Paperbacks, ISBN-13: 978-0192838667
Burnley, D. (2000), The History of the English Language, Longman, ISBN-13: 978-0582312630
Collis, J. (2003) Celts: Origins, Myths and Inventions, Tempus, ISBN-0-7524-2913-2
Cunliffe, B. (2004), Iron Age Communities in Britain, Routledge, ISBN-13: 978-0415347792
Darvill, T. (1987), Prehistoric Britain, Routledge, ISBN-13: 978-0713451801
Dark, K. (2000) Britain and the End of the Roman Empire, Tempus, ISBN-0-7524-2532-3
Drury, P.J. (1978), The early and middle phases of the Iron Age in Essex, ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/cbaresrep/pdf/034/03406001.pdf
Dyer, J. (1992) Hill forts of England and Wales, Shire, ISBN-0747801800
Forster, P. & Renfrew, R. (Eds) (2006), Phylogenetic Methods and the Prehistory of Languages, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, ISBN-13: 978-1902937335
Gelling, M. (1993), Place names in the landscape, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, ISBN-13: 978-0460860864
Grigg, E. (2006) Dark Age dykes, www.wansdyke21.org.uk/wansdyke/wanart/grigg.htm
Harding,D.W.(2004), The Iron Age in Northern Britain, Routledge,ISBN:0415301505
Harper, M.J. (2006), The history of Britain revealed, Icon Books, ISBN-13: 978-1840467697
Harper, M.J. (2006), The history of Britain revealed, Icon Books, ISBN-13: 978-1840467697
Henson, D. (2006), The Origins of the Anglo-Saxons, Anglo-Saxon Books, ISBN-13: 978-1898281405
Higham, N.J. (Author, Editor) The Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, The Boydall Press, ISBN-13: 978-1843833123
Hinde, T. (1985) The Doomsday Book, Hutchinson, ISBN 091618304
Hogg, A.H.A. (1972) Hill forts, CBA Research Report 9, ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/cbaresrep/pdf/009/00902001.pdf and Hill forts of Britain (1975), Hart-Davis, ISBN-13: 978-0246108357
James, E. (2001), Britain in the First Millennium, Arnold, ISBN 0340586877
Mills, A.D. (2003), A dictionary of British Place-Names, Oxford University Press, ISBN-13: 978-0198527589
Muir, R. (1964), Muir's Historical Atlas Medieval and Modern, Barnes & Noble, ISBN-13: 978-0064950176
Noble,F. (ed.Gelling,M. 1983) Offa’s Dyke reviewed, BAR British Series 114,ISBN 0860542106
Oppenheimer, P. (2007), The Origins of the British: A Genetic Detective Story, Constable and Robinson, ISBN-13: 978-1845294823
Oppenheimer, P. (2007), The Origins of the British: A Genetic Detective Story, Constable and Robinson, ISBN-13: 978-1845294823
Payne, A. & ayne,ACorney, M. & Cunliffe, B. (2007), The Wessex Hill forts Project English Heritage, ISBN-13: 978-1873592854
Pryor, F. (2005), Britain AD: A Quest for Arthur, England and the Anglo-Saxons, Element Books, ISBN-13: 978-0007181872
Renfrew, C. (1990) Archaeology and Language, Cambridge University Press,ISBN-10: 0521386756
Rivet, A.L.F. & Smith, C. (1979), Place Names of Roman, Batsford, ISBN-13: 978-0713420777
Rodwell, W. (1976) Coinage, Oppida and the rise of Belgic power in Britain. In Oppida in Barbarian Europe, ed. Cunliffe, B. and Rowley, T., Oxford.
Roman Britain Historical map and guide (2001 5th edition), Ordinance Survey, ISBN 0-319-29027-1
Room, A. (2003) British Place Names, Penguin, ISBN 0140514538
Roman Britain Historical map and guide (2001 5th edition), Ordinance Survey, ISBN 0-319-29027-1
Room, A. (2003) British Place Names, Penguin, ISBN 0140514538
Sawyer, P.H. (1978), From Roman Britain to Norman England, Methuen Young, ISBN-13: 978-0416716108
Scutt, W. (2007), How long has English been spoken in Britain? www.archaeology.ws
Sitwell, N.H.H. (1981), Roman Roads of Europe, Cassell, ISBN:0304300756
Stenton, F.M. (2001), Anglo-Saxon England, Oxford Paperbacks, ISBN-13: 978-0192801395
Swanton, M. (1998) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, Routledge, ISBN-13: 978-0415921299.
Salway, P. (1984) Roman Britain, Oxford university Press, ISBN 0-19-285143-8
The "Times" Compact History of the World: and The "Times" World Atlas, (2005) Times Books, ISBN-13: 978-0007213542
Thomas, C. (1981) Christianity in Roman Britain to AD 500, Batsford, ISBN 0713414421
Van Arsdell, R.D. (1989) Celtic Coinage of Britain, Spink & Son, ISBN-13: 978-0907605249
Wheeler, Sir M. & Richardson, K.M. (1957) Hill forts of Northern France, Oxford University Press, 200256722
Worthington, M. (2001, 2008) Wat’s dyke. Letters in British Archaeology journal,www.britarch.ac.uk/BA/ba57/letters.html and unpublished papers on Wat's dyke.
www.applied-epistemology.org, some points raised as discussion during the preparation of this paper can be followed in the British History - Hill forts thread.
Comments
Write New Comment ▼
Write New Comment
Sorry! This knol's owner(s) have blocked you from editing, making suggestions, or commenting here.