> that we have from the late 8th and 9th centuries — the first solid references coming from the Legatine Capitulary of 786 (a report to Pope Hadrian I about 2 British synods, perhaps written by Alcuin), Paul the Deacon (d. 799), and subsequently in the titles of King Alfred. >
-
Show this thread
-
> Of particular note here is an early 8th-century letter to the Pope from Abbot Hwaetberht of Wearmouth and Jarrow (c.716–740s), in the heart of the Anglian kingdom of Northumbria, in which he states his community lay 'in the land of the Saxons' (Saxonia) https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5ZhVAAAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PA67#v=onepage&q&f=false …pic.twitter.com/87ln1WgLjM
3 replies 5 retweets 24 likesShow this thread -
Also possibly relevant in terms of potential earlier 8th-century foreshadowings of late 8th/9thC concepts of an 'Anglo-Saxon' identity are the letters of Boniface (d.752), who considers himself a member of the Angli but also names England as 'transmarine Saxony' (Ep 50, AD 742).
2 replies 5 retweets 21 likesShow this thread -
Likewise, in the early 8th-century Vita Sancti Wilfrithi, written by Stephen at Ripon in 'Anglian' Northumbria, the people of Northumbria/England are collectively called 'Saxons' in chps 19 and 21, but are 'Angles' in chps 6 & 53 >
1 reply 4 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
> Indeed, Wilfred himself is identified as an 'Angle' by the author of his life (chp 6), which would fit with his origins in Anglian Northumbria, but in a letter of Wilfred himself written in 679, the saint describes his country of origin as Saxonia...! (chp 30, Colgrave p.60).
2 replies 4 retweets 19 likesShow this thread -
The Anonymous Life of St Cuthbert — written at Lindisfarne in 'Anglian' Northumbria in c. 699–705 — arguably shows a similar usage, with the 'English' bishops being referred to collectively as 'the bishops of the Saxons' in IV.1 (Colgrave pp. 110–11)...
2 replies 3 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
This seems much more like Anglian and Saxon were considered by some to be interchangeable. Especially since Angulsaxonum etc were never used that frequently even after the introduction of the word.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AdmiralHip
I think that's a fair point! Fascinating, isn't it :) Particularly as we seem to see it even with Pope Gregory (who seems to use both Angli & Saxonia). I do wonder if this occasional variability/interchangeability might not somehow underlie moves towards the combined phrase? :)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
I don’t think there was a collective movement towards the phrase to be honest with you. It’s just never used very much and when it is, it is from a political perspective or from outsiders. Alfred and his grandson may have tried to make it happen but it didn’t, I don’t think.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @caitlinrgreen
If we saw it used more frequently post-Alfred then I would be inclined to agree but Reynolds pointed out how rare it was. There may also be political reasons to shift identities, and it’s important to distinguish how non-English refered to them from their own words for themselves
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I also think we run into how broadly a group might identify as well as an individual choice. Did people call themselves Saxon because perhaps one or both of their parents were from there? Was it based on shifting political tides and environment?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.